[Atmoplane]

After browsing through the site I have noticed that photographs and videos are not accepted as reliable evidence because easily editable.

Considering this, if there was to be reliable and acceptable evidence of the earth not being flat, what form would that evidence need to have?

Of course if someone would be sent themselves in a spaceship to see the Earth from afar with their own eyes, I suspect they would accept whatever shape it appears to have as its true shape. Or would they?

Would a round earther seeing a flat earth find some kind of explanation describing how something is making him see the earth flat even though it's round?

And conversely would a flat earther seeing a round earth find some kind of explanation describing how something is making him see the earth round even though it's flat?

Would they propose that the windows are not really windows? Let's assume they would have been given time to inspect the spaceship in detail before boarding it.

And of course it won't be possible to send every human in a spaceship for them to see the Earth from afar with their own eyes. And since images and videos are not considered reliable evidence, what form would the evidence need to have to convince everyone without a doubt of the true shape of our world?

Whatever evidence exists for any claimed shape of Earth, it is obviously not convincing everyone, because some people are supporting different versions of its shape (e.g. flat or spherical).
But certainly if you put a cube and perfect ball side by side, everyone would be able to tell the cube is a cube and the ball is a ball, there would be no debate about it. Can the same level of observational evidence that makes us all capable of distinguishing a cube from a ball be conceived to determine the shape of the Earth? What form would you expect that evidence to have?

I am not asking for a specific evidence supporting any one shape of the Earth. I am asking what form you think the evidence should have to convince everyone 100% and easily that the shape of the Earth is any one given shape.

[wRadion]

I don't want to be pessimist, but if there were one, there would be no reason to believe in the flat earth theory.

Everything that supports the round earth theory is either
- refutable by the flat-earthers, through relevant arguments, such as : "I don't believe you", "You don't have any proof" or (the gold one) "This is some nice opinions you have here"
- or explainable in the flat earth model using vague scientific facts, through relevant arguments, such as : "We don't know how it works yet", "We can't explain it yet" or (the gold one) "This uses physics and science that are beyond the current knowledge we have"

This is my experience with flat-earthers so far.

[jimbob]

After browsing through the site I have noticed that photographs and videos are not accepted as reliable evidence because easily editable.

Considering this, if there was to be reliable and acceptable evidence of the earth not being flat, what form would that evidence need to have?

Of course if someone would be sent themselves in a spaceship to see the Earth from afar with their own eyes, I suspect they would accept whatever shape it appears to have as its true shape. Or would they?

Would a round earther seeing a flat earth find some kind of explanation describing how something is making him see the earth flat even though it's round?

And conversely would a flat earther seeing a round earth find some kind of explanation describing how something is making him see the earth round even though it's flat?

Would they propose that the windows are not really windows? Let's assume they would have been given time to inspect the spaceship in detail before boarding it.

And of course it won't be possible to send every human in a spaceship for them to see the Earth from afar with their own eyes. And since images and videos are not considered reliable evidence, what form would the evidence need to have to convince everyone without a doubt of the true shape of our world?

Whatever evidence exists for any claimed shape of Earth, it is obviously not convincing everyone, because some people are supporting different versions of its shape (e.g. flat or spherical).
But certainly if you put a cube and perfect ball side by side, everyone would be able to tell the cube is a cube and the ball is a ball, there would be no debate about it. Can the same level of observational evidence that makes us all capable of distinguishing a cube from a ball be conceived to determine the shape of the Earth? What form would you expect that evidence to have?

I am not asking for a specific evidence supporting any one shape of the Earth. I am asking what form you think the evidence should have to convince everyone 100% and easily that the shape of the Earth is any one given shape.

This post and the fact no FE have responded to it shows that there is very little point to there being a Flat Earth debate discussion group since no Flat Earther can offer up a single example of a piece of evidence that would convince them the earth isnt flat. Yet to believe the Earth is flat obviously meant that they accepted some form of proof or evidence that was instrumental in them deciding the earth was flat. It would be logical to say that the type of evidence that made them decide the earth was flat would also be a "type" of evidence that they would accept in proof that the earth was round....which proves them to be illogical.
I have already stated, My next door neighbour is a friend of Tim Peake (The astronaught), they went to school together, served in the military together and are still good friends (he is a rank above Tim). If Tim had been paid off or threatened, he would know. I saw a photo he took, the Earth was round in this picture. Would this picture suffice? I doubt it.
Also notice that FE are very quick to abandon any discussion thread that leads them away from there beliefs. So I lay down the challenge, Tom, Pete etc please comment about this post, point out holes in the theory, why it wouldnt be acceptable, that it is all rubbish.....anything just comment.