Wanted to share this amazing amount of research for all of the new Anons here. This huge compliation is a road map of the people and organizations we are dealing with. I cannot verify if every single image is "true", however this is to help expand your thinking into what others, or these societies believe for the most part. Let me know your thoughts. Just keep scrolling and scrolling. There is a LOT information here and could take you a month + to truely dive into it all. Not sure who made this, but huge thanks to them!
https://throughthelookingglassnews.wordpress.com/2017/11/24/q-anon-learn-to-read-the-map/
I have had many debates with flat earthers because I've been scientifically minded before I decided to become an engineer, and there are explanations as to why the earth might appear flat while it's actually an imperfect sphere, and it was just obvious to me that flat earthers were simply fundamentally misunderstanding the science involved as it scales up to a global scale.
In my work, it's always been assumed as true but irrelevant (I've not worked on any project of sufficient scale for it to be a factor regardless). So, not so long ago there was a thread that was stickied for a day, and I thought it would be the typical discussion where issues like refraction and fluid dynamics covered almost all issues... this one went in a different direction, where I was challenged to suspend disbelief. Among the links was one that was "20 proofs of flat earth," it starts and from 1-5 was relatively simple explanations, but then 6-9 effectively debunk the explanation I would have used. Then, once issues like how even the longest bridges are surveyed relative to sea level and no adjustment was made for any curvature, the airplane emergency landing scenarios.
Then, looking at the UN logo, why did they decide to use the "flat earth map" of a topographical map with the North pole at the center?
Further, reading that even Einstein and the other prominent scientists that one would appeal towards have either commented that stationary earth with a rotating sun vs stationary earth with everything else moving is really only a philosophical distinction that could never be proven from any planetary experiment, or outright rejected stationary earth because it would force the implication that the earth is special.
It really is a mind-fuck to consider, I do still believe the issue is pushed so hard to discredit the topic to normies, even if there seem to be some legitimate merits that can't be explained away so simply. The hardest to accept is the implications if it was true; that the sun and moon are local phenomenons and not distant objects are the biggest examples I can think of at the moment.