Should Flat-Earthers be debated or ignored?

[no one]

They should be launched into orbit, this way they can ignored and they can choke on their regurgitated nonsense. End of debate

[Fake Messiah]

They should be persecuted and executed; just as an experiment to see if that persecution would draw more people to join in the forbidden religion.

[Alan V]

You can't have a good-faith debate with liars.

[Get off my lawn]

I have "debated" flat earthers online for some time now, and I think there are several sides to the story:
1. You can argue that obvious horse manure like flat earth is a waste of time to get into, and is only good for entertainment and to kill time. The believers will believe no matter how much you pound them with facts and science and reasoning and logic. Whenever they are met with convincing arguments, they will just deny the facts, the science, the arguments, and the logic, and will introduce inane homebrew physics and logic that has nothing to do with reality.
2. Arguing with flat earthers can be considered an exercise in self control and patience, as well as practicing your argumentation and debating skills. I use flat earth discussions as a test bed to improve my own argumentation, and to find angles of attack that more efficiently expose the bullcrap for what it is.
3. When arguing with flat earthers, my main goal is not really to convince the flat earthers that they are wrong. That is almost impossible. Instead, my real audience are the silent crowd. Those who sit on the fence and don't quite know what to believe, and/or are looking for more information on the subject. These people can be reached with facts and rational arguments, and if even just one person can be educated enough to steer away from the flat earth conspiracy lunacy, it is all worth it.
4. Bullshit needs to be exposed for what it is. It will not be exposed if it is just given the silent treatment.
5. When countering the arguments the woo woo crowd present, I am forced to read up on the subject. And I like learning new things, and to brush up on old knowledge. So in that sense it is worth it.

The same goes for creationists, religionists, believers in alternative medicine, conspiracy theorists, and other nuts.

[Gawdzilla Sama]

Don't bother with the believers, address the beliefs.

[John 6IX Breezy]

There is a school of thought that says we should engage with Flat-Earthers in order to bring these conversations out into the open and not push FEers to the "fringes" of society, so to sepak.

There is another idea that these people are holding fixed beliefs that will never change in the fact of evidence or reason.

After having very few, but intense, interactions ith flat-earthers, I've ultimately decided that these conversations are not worth having. I think that some people are prone to conspiracy and will shout conspiracy no matter what happens, where it happens or who is involved. I think having some sort of ominous group to blame for the bad things that happen in the world gives some people a strange sense of comfort.

What do you guys think and why?

In my option you should always have discussions with anyone that's willing to have them. It prevents you from becoming stuck in your way of thinking and can expose misconceptions you may have about the world. For example, I had no idea most images of the Earth are just composites if it weren't for flat-earthers. Had I dismissed them as ignorant I would have prevented myself from learning an important bit of information.

I also think it's wrong to generalize individuals. Just because you've had two conversations that led nowhere does not mean the third one shouldn't be had. It's a failed heuristic that should be disposed of when recognized.

[Gawdzilla Sama]

Sorry, but I don't spend much time with idiots.

[Anomalocaris]

There is a school of thought that says we should engage with Flat-Earthers in order to bring these conversations out into the open and not push FEers to the "fringes" of society, so to sepak.

There is another idea that these people are holding fixed beliefs that will never change in the fact of evidence or reason.

After having very few, but intense, interactions ith flat-earthers, I've ultimately decided that these conversations are not worth having. I think that some people are prone to conspiracy and will shout conspiracy no matter what happens, where it happens or who is involved. I think having some sort of ominous group to blame for the bad things that happen in the world gives some people a strange sense of comfort.

What do you guys think and why?

In my option you should always have discussions with anyone that's willing to have them. It prevents you from becoming stuck in your way of thinking and can expose misconceptions you may have about the world. For example, I had no idea most images of the Earth are just composites if it weren't for flat-earthers. Had I dismissed them as ignorant I would have prevented myself from learning an important bit of information.

I also think it's wrong to generalize individuals. Just because you've had two conversations that led nowhere does not mean the third one shouldn't be had. It's a failed heuristic that should be disposed of when recognized.

That's because listening to any other idiot will increase your intelligence.   That is not the case with most of us.

[downbeatplumb]

There is a school of thought that says we should engage with Flat-Earthers in order to bring these conversations out into the open and not push FEers to the "fringes" of society, so to sepak.

There is another idea that these people are holding fixed beliefs that will never change in the fact of evidence or reason.

After having very few, but intense, interactions ith flat-earthers, I've ultimately decided that these conversations are not worth having. I think that some people are prone to conspiracy and will shout conspiracy no matter what happens, where it happens or who is involved. I think having some sort of ominous group to blame for the bad things that happen in the world gives some people a strange sense of comfort.

What do you guys think and why?

In my option you should always have discussions with anyone that's willing to have them. It prevents you from becoming stuck in your way of thinking and can expose misconceptions you may have about the world. For example, I had no idea most images of the Earth are just composites if it weren't for flat-earthers. Had I dismissed them as ignorant I would have prevented myself from learning an important bit of information.

I also think it's wrong to generalize individuals. Just because you've had two conversations that led nowhere does not mean the third one shouldn't be had. It's a failed heuristic that should be disposed of when recognized.

Flat earthers can be safely discounted as ignorant because they are.

Have you even heard their "best" argument, the there is no such thing as bendy water argument. I kid you not.

[Anomalocaris]

In my option you should always have discussions with anyone that's willing to have them. It prevents you from becoming stuck in your way of thinking and can expose misconceptions you may have about the world. For example, I had no idea most images of the Earth are just composites if it weren't for flat-earthers. Had I dismissed them as ignorant I would have prevented myself from learning an important bit of information.

I also think it's wrong to generalize individuals. Just because you've had two conversations that led nowhere does not mean the third one shouldn't be had. It's a failed heuristic that should be disposed of when recognized.

Flat earthers can be safely discounted as ignorant because they are.

Have you even heard their "best" argument, the there is no such thing as bendy water argument. I kid you not.

A Christian who wants to discuss creationism with intelligent and educated people can't very well acknowledge that there can exist some "argument" might be so stupid that they have literally nothing to offer.