You wanting to put stress on a number that you want to not be true still does nothing for any argument you are trying to make.
No. I am putting stress on:
SAME REGION..
I've been very clear about that.
Again, you can try to teach me about things such as comets, but sorry I was taught that when I was around 4 years old.
So, let's see if we can sum up this conversation so far.
A video showing 10 reasons we know the Earth is round is provided. You immediately latch onto the pictures point and make a claim that doesn't even fit that loch ness and nonsense must be true then.
When that point was refuted, you latch onto the number 'millions' of pictures of Earth from space. You did not to count partial pictures of Earth so you asked for whole pictures of the Earth, specifically 10 because you had already found 5. Someone gave you the link to the DSCOVR:EPIC site where multiple pictures of the full Earth are taken every day and you can go to the gallery for even more pictures - more than 10. You want to know why the Moon is not visible from all the pictures. You were told why.
There was an argument at some point that composites were not pictures. You were given an explanation on why they were.
We have moved on to objects in the universe being round and why there is no reason for Earth to be any different. You latch onto the estimate on how many stars are in the observable universe. You do not like the number. You do not like the procedure they used. Points that do not refute that there are an incredible number of objects in the universe and that they are all round in nature.
You say that you simply do not subscribe to mainstream science, but everything you bring up suggests that you do not subscribe to science at all... You say that you are educated, but you show a lack of understanding about science and the scientific method. Science is not about someone saying "this is what I discovered. It is a fact", it's about someone saying "this is what I discovered. This is the procedure I used. These are my calculations. Feel free to retest to see if I am correct." Why do you think that science papers tell you the procedures to their experiments? Why do you think you were told the method to the estimate in the article you linked? To invite others to view their methodology and retest/reobserve and/or recalculate their findings.
Do you actually want to get back on topic and try to refute the fact that the Earth is round? Or do you simply want to keep nitpicking points that do not lend itself to a rational discussion?