I have time and time again been surprised at how the indoctrinated round earther will ignore the content of what we say and instead hinge on the facts and details. Yesterday I came across an interesting passage that I think fits this situation as well as can be hoped.
Reproduced from
The Essential Tao, Thomas Cleary
Chien Wu said to Lien Shu, "I heard statements from Chieh Yu that are grandiose but have no point, going on without referring back. I was amazed at how his talk is endless as a river, very much out of the ordinary, remote from human sense."
Lien Shu asked, "What did he say?"
Chien Wu replied, "He said that there are spiritual people living on a certain mountain; their skin is like ice or snow, they are as delicate and graceful as virgins. They don't eat grain, but sip the wind and drink the dew. Mounted on the energy of the clouds, driving flying dragons, they travel beyond the four seas. Their spirits quiet, they prevent diseases and cause the yearly crops to ripen. I think this is crazy, and I don't believe it."
Lien Shu said, "Indeed, the blind have no way to see coloring, the deaf have no way to hear music. Blindness and deafness are not only physical conditions; they also exist in knowledge.
"These statements are like a maiden in bloom. As to the virtue of those people, they unite all beings into one. Society seeks when there is chaos, but who would go to all the trouble of national politics? Those people are invulnerable; they do not drown even in massive floods, they are not hot even in scorching droughts. The fact is that even their grime, their husk, could be used to mold the likes of great kings such as Tao and Shun. Who among them would willingly be concerned with things?"
Aside from the main point, the symptom is present in Chien Wu here understandably missing the intended level of abstraction. This ties in of course also with the idea that certain types of knowledge, whatever temporary name one puts on them, are by nature beyond communication. I happen to disagree with this - there is a model that can tie the ineffable to an "effable-enough" state. Furthermore, I disagree that this is their belief - had they not thought this as incorrect, little of what exists concerning these ineffables|effables would have been written down in the first place. This is a subtle paradox|order.
Just getting people to suspend disbelief long enough to give the work its many leveled purpose is often a feat in and of itself.