-There is no complete picture of Antarctica from the concept of outer space.
-There is still no actual pictures of the earth in its complete and alleged globular shape from the concept of outer space.
-There is no visual proof of earth curvature, only conceptual mathematics.
-There is no proof of gravity beyond theoretical equations.
-There is no proof for the proposed size of the sun and the moon, their alleged distances from earth, and whether they are physical bodies or something beyond our understanding of celestial mechanics and chemical/geological composition.
There is proof for density and buoyancy which can completely explain all phenomena that gravity attempts to do.
There is visual proof for a farther horizon than the globular mathematics dictate possible.
There is proof that the celestial poles are generating magnetic fields and rotating their surrounding stars around the earth.
There is visual and measurable proof that the sun and the moon are not what we are told, specifically with their paths, size, and distance.
There is no "ice wall" like a frozen rim but rather a vast expanse that does not have a known boundary.
We already went over the linguistics of the firmament, and you said you were going to talk with your Bishop about it. The word in ancient Hebrew did not translate to expanse but a barrier. For the sake of making shorter posts I will just reference anyone to re-read earlier parts of this thread if they want a lesson in languages.
It is not beyond absurd, it is a legitimate debate. If you cannot see how human-contrived control systems are affecting our reasoning, then I don't know how to explain it to you otherwise. Only a willing soul can truly break free of all of these layers of deceit.
Errors according to what, Newtonian Mechanics? I am waiting for someone to break down my wrongs and not just reference some alternative model that says otherwise without proving anything.
-Compasses do not point into the ground, they must be held flat and level to receive a proper magnetic bearing. So any video you post that posits a compass "pointing into the ground" is incorrect. Again these people think they understand magnetism but they do not. The behavior of compasses are be governed by the local magnetic field. Near the celestial poles, the magnetic field lines may become more vertical, causing the compass needle to dip downward. This would occur regardless of whether the Earth is flat or spherical. The downward dip of the compass needle near the celestial poles is a result of the orientation of the local magnetic field lines, not the shape of the Earth itself. So essentially one a cannot use a compass to prove the shape of the Earth and it is not a valid argument for either.
-The idea of circumnavigation from north to south means a complete revolution around a globular earth that bypasses both poles and returns to the point of origin along that north-south route. It has not been done. All sea-bound circumnavigation efforts were around major continents and had a consistent path of hugging the land so they could stop port to port to restock.
What you think is a false premise is due to your understanding of only one framework.
The idea that something is better understood if it is simpler is something I have been arguing for, and it goes against all the layers of advanced mathematical models that Newtonian physics and its offshoots gives to us. I invite you again to read Ebenezer Breach's 20 reasons against Newtonianism, specifically point ten which you are agreeing with completely here, something you "dismissed" the other day because you believed an earlier premise to be false:
"10. Because the primitive idea of simplicity is a just one, founded in nature and adopted in reason, the real objective true science should be to make the laws of nature simple, sublime, and self-evident to the people. The Creator would not direct to a bright consideration of His works, knowing that they were inconsiderable and unapproachable, except by the very learned, who have mystified them by their outrageous mathematical calculations, General Draison rightly accuses scientific professors of arrogant and ignorant exclusiveness."
So essentially the same logic can be said for your premises, because some of them are false, therefore the rest of them are false. I don't say this. I am open to investigating any and everything one would ask of this subject because no truth fears to be scrutinized.
Why do you want to dismiss everything without investigating it and only rely on the sources that claim they've done something without offering any actual proofs or explanations? I've already debunked one flat-earth model here myself, one that real snake oil salesman are peddling to people curious about the truth, but that doesn't mean that the concept is ridiculous because there are all these people claiming they have traipsed across Antarctica when our own instruments and methods are capable of great errors, and there are a slew of other unknowns about Antarctica.
The stars tell many things that the earth does not. The inclusion of the celestial magnetic fields, which extends to the sun and the moon (though they are almost an entirely separate subject from the stars because of the specific roles God made them for) could very well situate Antarctica surrounded by water, but that doesn't mean that there is nothing beyond it, whether that be a barrier or a wall or a vast expanse that man has not passed. There is no honest independent non-governmental non-controlled experiments and proofs done on Antarctica. Yes they are lying, and I think this is where we diverge. I do not see proofs from any of these institutions, they only beget more questions with their endeavors.
For rest there is Mastercard.