Certainty requires evidence,
Sure.
The appreciation of evidence requires intelligence and integrity, in my opinion. There is no sense throwing pearls before swine.
You can't at one point say that there's a lot of uncertainties and that your standpoint changes every six months, and then at the same time day it's certain the earth is flat.
Yes, I can because the true form of the earthly is certainly not a globe.
What do you expect? Everything else is fun speculation. Even you are having fun. This discussion is about the dome.
As of right now, I am willing to bet $100 that you know you are lying. Unfortunately, I doubt you would be able to offer proof either way.
You really do not see how what you are saying is a contradiction?
Correct if I interpreted what you wrote is wrong, but this is how I understood it.
You are open to new ideas, theories and evidence except any that do not conform to prove the Earth is flat.
What if God created the universe and that is what he governs with us in it. The limit we can travel is not our atmosphere but out into the cosmos.
What if his design is a spherical Earth orbited by a spherical moon with both orbiting a spherical sun?
What if the Firmament, dome or what ever you believe is further out then you think it is? Maybe it is at the edge of our solar system? Galaxy? Universe?
If you are not willing to accept the above possibilities IMHO you are also not willing to look at evidence that suggest your view of the reality of a flat earth is wrong. There is plenty of compelling evidence that suggest the world is round.
Off the top of my head:
Lunar eclipses. Explained away by some FE'ers by saying the moon maybe self-illuminating, a reflection, protection with no evidence, math, data, experiments that can be replicated to at least prove the possibility exist.
How I can see things when I climb the mast on my boat that someone on the deck can not.
Why is it dark some places and light in others? On a flat Earth I should be able to see the sun all the time. Which gets explained away by saying light can not travel as far as we think it can. Again with no data or evidence this maybe true. Drawing from my experience with sailing there are rules how far navigation lights can be seen depending on type and size of the vessel. There are different lights designed to meet these standards. Which means there is data and test that can be done to determine how far a way a light source can be seen. Where is the data that at least suggest I should not be able to see the sun from a certain distance?
How can I and sailors for hundreds of years successfully use celestial navigation? The math is based on a round Earth, it would not work on a flat model.
Why are the length of shadows different for same size objects at the same time of day that are not located with in a certain distance to each other. A very easy thing to test. Get two people, two sticks the same size, have each person at a different location 50 to 100 miles apart. Measure the shadows at the same time. You then have more evidence the Earth is round.
Look at other planets through a telescope. Observe one of them over time. Keep track of the moons orbiting them and the planets location in the sky. Why if other planets are round with moons orbiting them would Earth be different? Why would planets like Mars move in a different direction at certain times? It suggests that the Earth's orbit is closer to the sun and Mars is orbiting a further out. More evidence that can be easily observed with a moderately priced telescope. If people around 300 BC could make these observations so can you or anybody else.
Why can certain stars/constellations not be seen from certain parts of the planet? With a FE model they should be visible all the time. Which means like the sun evidence to suggest the reason needs to be presented. One explanation for this is the curvature of the Earth. Very easy to observe evidence that suggest the Earth is round.
Why do I not going flying off into space or hit the Firmament/dome when I jump up? On the RE model there is gravity preventing this. It can be measured, the value can be used by engineers in different fields to design things with predictable results. What is the FE model's force keeping me from hitting the dome? Can it be measured? Can I design and build things taking it into account and have them work reliably and with predictable results? Why discount this evidence?
Giving my opinion again, but if you do not at least take into consideration the above and accept that without answers to these things(some easily observed) without producing evidence you need to accept the fact the Earth may be round.