"What tests have you done?"
"These ones"
"I'm not going to read the answer to your question."
Not quite, more like this:
"What tests"
"Read my sig"
"Can you provide an example?"
"YOUR LAZIE I WIN!!!!"
His sig does not contain tests and proofs. It contains links to a bunch of crap.
It sounds like you are the one copping out. I count count the number of times I've been asked to support my argument, I support it by citing a book (most of which are available here, due to Daniel's hard work, or on tfes due to the hard work done by them downloading files to reupload them) or a site and the round earther is just too lazy to open a book cover. I'm sure it would be easy to attack many of narcberry's threads.
No, you are the one copping out.
You typically cite the entire book, apparently expecting the RE to then go through the entire book and find what allegedly backs you up, which either isn't there at all, or is pure garbage.
The books you cite are typically with so many flaws it isn't funny.