I'd certainly be interested in being challenged by an argument or two, but in no way do I have 6 hours to spend listening to the whole case.
I did skip ahead in it and listened about the canal experiment in which a boat traveled 6 miles down a straight canal and was visible from the starting location the whole way. I would say to that that the water was not "standing water" as video footage clearly shows the water flowing, and water always flows from higher ground to lower ground, and therefore, the surface of the water at the start of its origin will always be higher than the place it flows to (or it would not flow there). This could effectively mean the man conducting the experiment in the canal water was at a higher altitude than the boat was 6 miles away. In effect, the water surface may well have been more or less flat over that distance.
I'm assuming the experiment was actually conducted and expected drop in altitude was as claimed.
I think clearly, if the earth was flat, there would certainly be much more ample evidence of it which simply does not exist, such as a photo from an airline cruising at 35,000 feet on a very clear day that shows things much farther away than is possible with a round earth.
I think clearly, if the earth was flat, there would certainly be much more ample evidence of it which simply does not exist,
I have viewed numerous "flat earth" videos and my opinion is similar to yours in the opposite. I found that the "ball shaped" earth and "gravity" lacked ample evidence to allow for a satisfactory or definitive conclusion. My interest in this subject was more about the "firmament" spoken of in Biblical texts (and many other ancient texts/cultures) and described as a sort of dome over the earth. If this firmament exists is it impenetrable ? [The ridiculous number of high atmosphere atomic bombs exploded in the late 50's gives me pause to inquire, why allegedly intelligent scientists from the U.S. and Russia would allow this at all].
I also thought it strange, if true, that not even one image exists of earth that have resulted from an astronaut simply turning the camera 180 degrees (while outside of the space station) to show the ball earth.
All of NASA's images are computer generated or artist renditions which bothers me and when I think about the moon missions and the possibility that they were faked. Did we really have the technology necessary to communicate with a mission that had landed on the moon some 238,000 miles away ?
Some here will know the name "Renee from North Carolina" a caller on talk radio programs (that annoys me to no end, and called me a "flesh peddler"). She called in to "The Power Hour" and reported that she had seen the actual "Moon Lander" and couldn't believe that it was even possible that this piece of junk ever landed on the moon.
For me, a Bible believer, the ever expanding universe and the notion that the earth is a speck of dust lost in the immensity of the universe deprives humanity of a special place in God's creation. This idea makes mankind itself insignificant and the result of an accident. It immediately allows for the BIG BANG THEORY and causes people to ignore the mathematical perfection of creation or the world we can actually see for ourselves.
I have questions now about a subject that I hadn't considered before and consider it now primarily because the official story as related to mankind has so often been false, that I no longer trust "anything" that oozes out of the television or is promoted by the Vatican or the governments of the world.
I do think that humanity is being degraded and the sanctity of life is losing importance because people think they don't matter which I believe ultimately leads to many believing that NOTHING MATTERS.
I have concluded for myself that our existence on this wonderful earth whether a ball or flat is nearly miraculous even though at times it is disrupted by events we have a difficult time understanding.
I skipped ahead in it about 15 minutes and he's talking about how you should be able to pull out a compass on the south pole and see the compass be confused as all directions are north to the compass.
Apparently, this guy who's leading the flat earth movement has no idea that no one, except perhaps him, teaches that the geographic north and south poles are aligned with the magnetic north & south poles. Aviation maps, which I have worked with, clearly display the deviation of magnetic north and polar north, which varies across the globe. The magnetic north pole is, last I checked, somewhere near the Hudson Bay in Canada, but it does move a few miles each year. It is not aligned with the polar north pole.
This is not rocket science. While this Eric guy is free to challenge what conventional science says about the magnetic poles, the fact that he does not know what conventional science says about the magnetic poles is inexcusable. He's either a socio-psychopath or a shiester.
Be very careful with what you accept as true from this guy.
But if you yourself cannot respond to challenges and debate this position you've taken, and all you can do is post links to videos, then it shows you are not thinking rationally about this, that instead you are merely accepting what you are being told from one side of this issue, and not the other.
If you are going to accept the flat earth arguments and want to spread that argument around, you do need to take responsibility for it and answer the challenges directly. Otherwise you are simply acting as a lemming.
And while I'm willing to debate a thinking person, I won't waste my time trying to debate a lemming.