Flat Earth (Pro) vs Spherical Earth (Con)

Lemme guess, another one of those globe-Earthers who just stumbled upon the flat Earth thinking they'll easily win a debate? 1. Argument 1. NASA admitting to faking images, debunking the "independent alternatives" A common "proof" for a globe that I see is "NASA images". For the Earth to be flat, obviously, NASA images have to be faked. And NASA images have been debunked in many ways. https://hebrewsisraelitesvsthereds.files.wordpress.com... Notice here the major discrepancy? We notice the continents shrinking, growing, changing color, etc. And copied and pasted clouds https://archive.is... We also have NASA directly admitting to faking images https://www.nasa.gov... In this article, we have him directly saying the last real images of the Earth were the moon landings and the blue marble. "The last time anyone took a photograph from above low Earth orbit that showed an entire hemisphere (one side of a globe) was in 1972 during Apollo 17." When called out for this, globe-Earthers tend to turn to airplane curvature or sometimes, the red bull freefall. https://archive.is... https://photos.google.com... Argument 2. The Chicago Skyline It is one of the most compelling arguments that convinced me into a flat Earth. According to the globe model, this should be impossible and Chicago should instead disappear over the horizon but this is not the case. The common explanation is that this is just a mirage, but if you have actually seen a mirage you will know this is not true. https://gyazo.com... Argument 3. No curvature We are widely told we can see curvature at 35,000 feet. However, there are a number of images showing that this is not the case. 80K Feet (15.15 Miles): https://i.imgur.com... 121K Feet (22.91 Miles) and 317K Feet (60.03 Miles): https://photos.google.com... 4. Flight patterns There are many flight patterns that make no sense on a sphere, but they do on a flat earth. First off lets look at antarctica. As we know, these routes do not exist: http://imgur.com... We are told that we do not go on these routes because it is too cold, and that the planes instruments would freeze, but we are also told that we have gone to places much more frigid than anything expirenced on Earth. So, why shouldn't planes be able to take shorter routes over Antarctica? The "explanation" about planes instruments freezing is more of an excuse than an explanation. https://planetruthblog.files.wordpress.com... https://planetruthblog.files.wordpress.com... Then look at this. On a ball earth, during a flight to Johannesburg to Perth, it should be a straight shot over the ocean and we should be able to land for refueling in Mauritus or Madagascar. But instead, most flights will stop in Dubai, Hong Kong, or Malaysia. It should also be a straight shot over the atlantic to go to Johannesburg to Sao Paulo, but many flights instead make a re-feuling in London, which would be impossible on a spherical Earth. 5. Proving the geocentric sun. This video and afterwards. Oh and theres also an extension to my 80K/121K/317K Feet argument. I do NOT expect my opponent to respond to each of these, but to see a response to atleast 1 of them would be nice. It'll do with me. YW.