DDO Tier Tournament 2-Flat Earth Theory vs Spherical Earth Theory

Thanks to Wylted for his argument.Like him, I will be using this round solely for rebuttals.I am also debating on my phone, right now, and will not be able to insert pictures into my argument...R1) Falling OffMy opponent claims that if the Earth were spherical, people would fall off of it. This is obviously false... the force known as gravity keeps us from falling off by creating a strong attraction between us and the Earth.In order to avoid to possibility of my opponent rejecting the existence of Gravity in order to rebut this contention, I will go ahead and provide some evidence for it:- the Universal Law of Gravitation, as set out by Newton, accurately predicts planetary movements as well as the motions of objects on Earth without error, showing that there really is an attractive force between all objects (http://www.physicsclassroom.com...)- we have observed light bending around the sun during solar eclipses, in accordance with Einstein's Theory of General Relativity (the idea that gravity is caused by the curvature of spacetime around massive objects) (http://edn.com...)- we have recently discovered the existence of gravitational waves, which, in addition to proving that a Big Bang happened, almost 100% confirms that gravity exists and has to do with the curvature of spacetime, as predicted by General Relativity (http://www.theguardian.com...)R2) Bedford Level ExperimentThe results of this experiment directly contradict my C2 (regarding the general observation that boats appear to "sink" as the "go over" the horizon on a spherical earth), claiming that departing ships fade off into the distance in accordance with flat earth theory.Thus, it is necessary to look at sources, here, in order to decide which set of results to accept...The Bedford Level experiment was designed and first carried out by the *president of the Flat Earth society*, Samuel Rowbotham . This is obviously a problem, seeing that there would obviously be some biases and preconceived notions involved that could very likely affect the results of the experiment.In addition, the same experiment has been carried out afterwards by different people with exactly opposite results, with the experimenters noticing the sinking effect instead(source: http://www.theflatearthsociety.org... Level Experiment)Given this potential for inaccurate results and the dissonance between experimental repetitions, it is highly probable that the few instances a Flat Earth was indicated by the experiment, it was a result of the natural problems with human perception (e.g. the propensity for seeing what you want to see) or external interferences. Meanwhile, the sinking ship effect was first witnessed by Aristotle, and has been observed so many times since then, that it has almost become "common knowledge" to humanity, no longer questioned even by those who have not noticed it personally.It is clearly evident that the common observation of the sinking ship effect is a more reliable determinant of the Earth's shape than an experiment carried out by a couple of flat earthers. R3) From a PlaneMy opponent cites a single picture of the Earth's surface from a plane, observes that it looks flat, and thus concludes that the Earth is flat.First of all, upon closer inspection, it can be observed that there IS actually a slight curvature noticeable in the photograph he has cited...And anyways, what my opponent is doing is akin to claiming a soccer ball is flat by looking at it from a few millimeters away; the human field of vision at lower altitudes is miniscule compared to the size of Earth, so any present curvature is virtually negligible to us. However, from a higher altitude, our field of vision is significantly extended and we become capable of observing a noticeable curvature of the Earth's surface.Pictures can be found here: http://thulescientific.com...First hand accounts can be found here: http://www.airliners.net...R4) Isle of WightMy opponent claims that because the horizon appears to be completely straight and horizontal from a cliff top, the Earth is flat. However, this contention suffers the same problems as the previous contention... our field of vision even from moderately high places is too small to see our gigantic planet's curvature. One would have to go much, much higher in order to expand their field of vision to the point that they can see it (see R3 links).R5) SurveyorsThis contention proves nothing. As I showed in R3/R4, the Earth's curvature is virtually negligible to us due to our incredibly tiny relative size, and that applies to our infrastructure as well, simply due to the sheer size of our planet. Obviously, since the curvature has no effect on us, surveyors do not take it into consideration... R6) Plumb BobsMy opponent does not provide the necessary elaboration for this contention to be valid.. there is no logical connection shown between the use of plumb bobs and the effect he is referencing.He cannot simply link a 26-minute documentary and expect me or the readers to watch the whole thing just to understand his point...R6.5) Miscellaneous Points...My opponent's points here are completely based on appeals to the the simplicity of a Flat Earth model. However, I must point out that simplicity should NOT determine what we accept as true. If simplicity was a valid indicator of truth, then atoms would be tiny spheres like Democritus theorized millennia ago, rather than the crazy mess of quantum weirdness and sub-atomic nuclear particles that modern physics speaks of.The Flat Earth model offering a simpler explanation for certain phenomena is not a good reason to believe in a flat Earth. All I have to do is show that the Spherical Earth has equally plausible explanations for the phenomena Pro cites in order to render this contention invalid. Compasses- a compass needle DOES point to both the North and South poles at the same time... compass makers merely make it so that only the side of the needle attracted to the north has mobility, meaning that we only see that north side moving around to align itself, when in reality, the south side is also simultaneously aligning itself with south pole (but we don"t see it because it is attached to the compass's center).Oceans- gravity is not a "magical force"; it is the effect of spacetime curving around the Earth, holding the ocean to the Earth's surface. Just because Pro feels that the Flat Earth provides a "better" explanation does not render this explanation invalid.This contention does not prove a Flat Earth over a Spherical Earth any more than the presence of animals proves Evolution over Creationism.R7) SeasonsMy opponent claims that on a Spherical Earth, the Sun is directly above the equator four times a year, when it is really only above the equator twice a year (i.e. equinoxes).He also claims that on a Spherical Earth, the ice caps would completely shift every year.However, neither of these assertions are widely accepted, and the only evidence he attempt to provides for them is a Youtube video.... which no longer exists... (click the link for proof...)So... this entire contention can be rejected since it is based completely on bare assertions.R8) Earth's Rotation My opponent claims that since the rotation of the Earth is faster than the speed of sound, people in the east wouldn't be able to hear sound.This is factually inaccurate. Thanks to gravity, when the Earth rotates, EVERYTHING on it moves along with it, *including* us and the air that sound travels through, meaning that the movements of the Earth, Solar System, and Milky Way have no effect at all on the movements of sound waves.R9-11) Geocentric ModelIn all three of these contentions, my opponent puts forth evidence for the Geocentric Model. However, this is completely non-topical... the debate at hand is about the shape of the Earth; not the orientation of the cosmos. The original geocentric model as proposed by Ptolemy actually included a Spherical Earth! (http://patrick.maher1.net... - pg. 8)Proving that the universe is geocentric does nothing to refute the rotundity of the Earth.CONCLUSIONAll my opponent's contentions have been refuted; none of them prove that the Earth is flat. Some of them even point towards a Round Earth...Back to you, Wylted! :D