I love how you continue to use this statement as if it's a point in your favor, when in reality it not only doesn't make sense, but it's totally irrelevant.
If a blind person were studying nature, what would they be able to teach you about how the world looks? If a deaf person were studying nature, how would they be able to teach you about how the world sounds? There exists more to reality than what you can sense with your eyes and ears. You are denying this basic fact. We know human hearing is limited in the frequencies it can detect because we can detect extreme frequencies with tools. We know certain other animals can detect them as well, because we observe their reactions to them (or in some cases, they utilize them for communication or navigation). We know human sight is limited in the frequencies it can detect, because we can detect other parts of the light spectrum with tools. We know radio waves exist even though we can't see or hear or smell them. We know magnetism exists—not because we "sense" magnetic fields, but because we observe the effects they have. We discovered that microorganisms exist well before we had the means to image them. But that's just "trust me bro" science, right? So you must still believe in miasmas because you can't actually see bacteria and viruses, right?
Its not that something can't be real if it can't be directly observed with our senses. Its that with the globe earth we literally can't observe or experience any aspect of it. And the only way to demonstrate the various aspects of a globe earth you must imploy fallacious reasoning and 2nd hand theories that also can't be observed or experienced.
Were moving in 3 separate directions at astronomical speeds but can't feel any of it. We can't ever see a curve. Were supposed to be sideways and upside down in various parts of the world but no one can tell. All the luminaries are millions of miles away but appear local. The Sun is 400x bigger than the Moon but appear to roughly the same size because the Sun just happens to be 400x further away. And on and on I could go.
And in order to demonstrate how these things could be happening despite our exact opposite observations and experience you have to create an endless amount of other unobservable theories and ideas. Things like gravity. Black holes. Dark matter. Contraction. Refraction. Bending of space and time. Magnetic Declination. Ect.
So yes, just because we can't directly observe or experience something doesn't mean its not true. But when you must employ fallacious reasoning and an ever expanding amout of unobservable and unverifiable supporting theories in order to demonstrate your claim it at the very least ceases to be scientific. And in the case of the globe it because downright silly.
You seem to put so much faith in human senses, and yet you completely ignore humanity's greatest gift, which is its intelligence. You do this for...no particular reason. I find it amusing, because a lot of people who think like you also happen to be religious. Their religion often tells them that human beings are different than animals. Above them. And yet you deny them that. You would clip the proverbial wings of humanity, because intelligence and what it brings us frightens and confuses you. You would choose instead to view people as a set of eyes and ears, a nose and a mouth. A creature of primordial instinct and nothing else.
Human intelligence, or rather human reasoning, is a great and powerful tool. However its also a double edge sword. Humans can use reason to convince themselves of the most absurd ideas. Man can use his own reason to convince himself hes a women for example. He can convince himself that slavery is good as another example. He can also use reason to convince himself that the world randomly created its and that he's flying through space at 800,000mph.
You also reject your own "direct senses and observations", because if you've ever watched the Sun rise and set, or the Earth's shadow fall on the moon, you'd see that the Earth not only is obviously not flat, but couldn't possibly be flat. Because if it were flat, the entirety of the planet would experience daylight and nighttime all at once. We know this because this is how sunlight works—it's omnidirectional, like a lightbulb. If it were unidirectional like a flashlight, as claimed by flat-earthers, how could you ever observe an illuminated moon at night? How could the Earth ever cast a shadow on the moon unless the Sun were behind the Earth? How could portions of the Earth be in perpetual daylight or nighttime during the solstices with the proposed flat-Earth solar path?
Huh? Have you ever heard of the Inverse Square Law? The whole qorld would not be lit up at once. The Artic circle would experience 24 hrs of sunlight during the summer solstice due to the sun making a small circle around the north pole. And the believe is that moon is not a rock floating through space reflecting sunlight but rather it is its own independent light source going through its own phases.
There are answers to most questions you could throw out there. Perhaps there are questions the flat earth model couldn't answer but that's true for the globe model as well.
But do you know why I have no respect for you? Because you're a fraud. You don't actually believe the things you espouse to be true. You believe in some science and technology; just not all of it. You draw a line in the sand, except its an arbitrary line that moves whenever you find it convenient. The screen you're looking at right now is made up of technology you can't see, and (I hazard to guess) don't even remotely comprehend. But I don't see you posting on here saying transistors and logic gates don't exist. You don't see the radio waves that are transmitting the bullshit you spew onto the Internet, but you don't come on here saying how radio waves and transmitters and receivers don't exist.
As I explained earlier there is a difference between science that can be demonstrated, observed, experienced, applied, or employed vs theoretical trust me bro science no one can ever verify. Stop trying to lump every piece of human understand, technology, and ingenuity along with religious, cooky theories into one big bucket called science that must all be accepted or rejected in totality. That's silly. "If you believe in computers you must also believe dark matter. Durp"
In actual fact, your entire belief system is based off one thing—your individual ignorance. Anything you understand, you believe is real. Anything you don't understand, you believe is fake. Anything you don't understand but rely on, you make an exception for. That's not special, and it's not really even a belief system—it's just basic arrogance. And it's an unfortunate case of arrogance, because you've paired it with a tremendous level of stupidity.
The pathetic part is that you talk about "trust me bro" science, but when pressed about the specifics of flat-earth stupidity, you make an appeal to authority (actually there's an ice wall around the Earth, I've just never seen it, et cetera...). Or you straight up refuse to answer the questions (What part of Antarctica is in perpetual daylight during the summer solstice again?). You don't "trust" the entirety of humanity's collective scientific community...instead you just trust some retard on YouTube who can't prove his observations.
It's absolutely no different from any other conspiracy theory. It appeals to you because you feel inadequate. You don't understand science, and your ego can't handle it. So instead of admitting you're not as well-equipped intellectually, you simply disbelieve in science. Problem solved, and your ego stays intact. Believing in flat-earth, just like believing the anti-vax and anti-climate change bullshit, gives you the chance to stick it to all those actual smart people.
100% projection.
