Refuting the Flat-Earth theory

[FlatAssembler]

Why do you think you know better about what Flat-Earthers might find convincing than somebody who used to be a Flat-Earther? I used to be a Flat-Earther. I know how they think probably better than you do.

Right, Flat Earth Theory is not a "theory", it's a bunch of ad-hoc hypotheses, often contradictory.

Every single line of evidence - without exception - indicates that the Earth is a globe. I don’t have to know any Flatties or have been one myself to grasp that anyone who rejects such a preponderance of evidence  has a mental block that prevents them from accepting it. I also don’t know any serial killers, but I feel comfortable in saying they have a disregard for human life.

If you know it’s not a theory, why did you call it one? 

Boru

But Flat-Earthers think they have evidence. Some "evidence" they cite is:
1) If the Earth were round, the horizon would appear to fall as we climb. But it's always at our eye level.
2) If the ships disappearing over the horizon were caused by the Earth being round, ships would appear to lean as they pass over the horizon, and they do not. They appear to stay straight.
3) If ships disappearing over the horizon were caused by the Earth being round, they would not reappear when we look at them with a telescope. But there are reports of them reappearing (most notably, the Bedford Level Experiment).
4) If the Sun were 150'000'000 kilometers up in the sky, the crepuscular rays would seem parallel. But they do not, they appear as though they come from some source only a few thousand killometers up in the sky. (This "evidence" probably makes the most sense.)
5) The Round Earth Theory incorrectly predicts sunrise and sunset at various places.
I am sure you can find more, but this is enough to give you the basic idea.

I call it a theory for the same reason I would call the String Theory a theory. Because it's called that way, not because it is.