Using the Bible as a scientific tool is beyond absurd. The Bible is here to help us, humans, understand God's law and sacrifice, not to understand God's creations.

Do you think the entire universe was created in true 6 Earth-days? What about all the carbon dating that tells us some stuff are millions or billions or years old, you think that's God tricking us and trying to make us believe something wrong? No, that doesn't add up, cause God can't lie, so he wouldn't make something purely to trick us into the wrong direction.

If the Earth is flat, why would they say circles anyway, among any other shape possible? Why not square? Ellipsis? Any form of any polygon ever? Why just say "circle"? In ancient times, where a word like "Sphere" may not exist because it's "too mathematical" for the time (exactly how terms like "factorial" or "root" didn't exist at the time), circle would be a decent way to describe the Earth if it was actually spherical.

"the horizon would constantly drop as you ascended" That implies 2 different things:

• Either the Earth is finite, and thus, you should be able to see the entire Earth at once. But if it says "you only see the horizon no matter how far you go", that means you don't see the entire Earth, or else there would be no more horizon. Thus, this argument is completely wrong.

• Either the Earth is infinite, which raises many many other questions and is completely incoherent with anything we've observed so far.

I'm open to ideas that the Earth may be something else that what we've been told, but so far, all the flat-Earthers arguments fall short very quickly. If you want to prove me it's flat, use actual mathematical tools like holonomy. I'll wait until then.

Using the Bible as a scientific tool is beyond absurd. The Bible is here to help us, human, understand God's law and sacrifice, not to understand God's creations.

Do you think the entire universe was created in true 6 Earth-days? What about all the carbon dating that tells us some stuff are millions or billions or years old, you think that's God tricking us and trying to make us believe something wrong? No, that doesn't add up, cause God can't lie, so he wouldn't make something purely to trick us into the wrong direction.

If the Earth is flat, why would they say circles anyway, among any other shape possible? Why not square? Ellipsis? Any form of any polygon ever? Why just say "circle"? In ancient times, where a word like "Sphere" may not exist because it's "too mathematical" for the time (exactly how terms like "factorial" or "root" didn't exist at the time), circle would be a decent way to describe the Earth if it was actually spherical.

"the horizon would constantly drop as you ascended" That implies 2 different things:

• Either the Earth is finite, and thus, you should be able to see the entire Earth at once. But if it says "you only see the horizon no matter how far you go", that means you don't see the entire Earth, or else there would be no more horizon. Thus, this argument is completely wrong.

• Either the Earth is infinite, which raises many many other questions and is completely incoherent with anything we've observed so far.

I'm open to ideas that the Earth may be something else that what we've been told, but so far, all the flat-Earthers arguments fall short very quickly. If you want to prove me it's flat, use actual mathematical tools like holonomy. I'll wait until then.

Using the Bible as a scientific tool is beyond absurd. The Bible is here to help us, human, understand God's law and sacrifice, not to understand God's creations.

Do you think the entire universe was created in true 6 Earth-days? What about all the carbon dating that tells us some stuff are millions or billions or years old, you think that's God tricking us and trying to make us believe something wrong? No, that doesn't add up, cause God can't lie, so he wouldn't make something purely to trick us into the wrong direction.

If the Earth is flat, why would they say circles anyway, among any other shape possible? Why not square? Ellipsis? Any form of any polygon ever? Why just say "circle"? In ancient times, where a word like "Sphere" may not exist because it's "too mathematical" for the time (exactly how terms like "factorial" or "root" didn't exist at the time), circle would be a decent way to describe the Earth if it was actually spherical.

"the horizon would constantly drop as you ascended" That implies 2 different things:

• Either the Earth is finite, and thus, you should be able to see the entire Earth at once. But if it says "you only see the horizon", that means you don't see the entire Earth, or else there would be no more horizon. Thus, this argument is completely wrong.

• Either the Earth is infinite, which raises many many other questions and is completely incoherent with anything we've observed so far.

I'm open to ideas that the Earth may be something else that what we've been told, but so far, all the flat-Earthers arguments fall short very quickly. If you want to prove me it's flat, use actual mathematical tools like holonomy. I'll wait until then, and

Using the Bible as a scientific tool is beyond absurd. The Bible is here to help us, human, understand God's law and sacrifice, not to understand God's creations.

Do you think the entire universe was created in true 6 Earth-days? What about all the carbon dating that tells us some stuff are millions or billions or years old, you think that's God tricking us and trying to make us believe something wrong? No, that doesn't add up, cause God can't lie, so he wouldn't make something purely to trick us into the wrong direction.

If the Earth is flat, why would they say circles anyway, among any other shape possible? Why not square? Ellipsis? Any form of any polygon ever? Why just say "circle"? In ancient times, where a word like "Sphere" may not exist because it's "too mathematical" for the time (exactly how terms like "factorial" or "root" didn't exist at the time), circle would be a decent way to describe the Earth, even if it was actually spherical.

"the horizon would constantly drop as you ascended" That implies 2 different things:

• Either the Earth is finite, and thus, you should be able to see the entire Earth at once. But if it says "you only see the horizon", that means you don't see the entire Earth, or else there would be no more horizon. Thus, this argument is completely wrong.

• Either the Earth is infinite, which raises many many other questions and is completely incoherent with anything we've observed so far.

I'm open to ideas that the Earth may be something else that what we've been told, but so far, all the flat-Earthers arguments fall short very quickly. If you want to prove me it's flat, use actual mathematical tools like holonomy. I'll wait until then, and