Thank you friend, I'm assuming that since I asked for your 3 best ones and you provided 3, that these are the 3 best ones!
Okay dude, there are multiple rocket experiments with similar occurings, e.g. hitting a solid body.
Ok, this rocket went to 73 miles high -- 385,440ft high -- before it hit the dome. But the balloon went only to 112,995ft when it hit the dome. ok whatever.
But just think about that gofast rocket for a minute: It was going many times the speed of sound, and it hits the dome and is instantly stopped, and yet no damage?
If it'd slammed into a hard dome at many times the speed of sound, it would have been smashed to dust.
You might say it's a soft dome, but no matter, a tremendous amount of kinetic energy and speed was very quickly stopped.
The fact is that it takes extreme force to accelerate or deaccelerate something to multiple times the speed of sound in a fraction of a second: That force would have totally destroyed the rocket and the cameras.
And even if it didn't destroy the rocket, an impact like that would have certainly sent it cartwheeling.
Does it strike you at all odd that the rocket simply stops and continues to rotate slowly?
The makers of the rocket claim that it had a "yoyo" despin mechanism on it to make it stop spinning so it could deploy it's payload in an orderly fashion.
Did you hear the "Zip" sound of the cable unwinding during despin?
And if you pause it at 1:46 and frame-step with the comma or period keys, you can actually see the yoyo despin cable go flying away from the rocket:

And if you read the description of the *very* video you linked to, the guy has a link to a followup video he posted where he literally debunks his own claims and explains the yoyo despin mechanism:
By baloon, the physical appearance of the dome was captured.
I'm afraid the appearance of the dome was just how the curved earth and it's atmosphere looks through a gopro at 113k feet.
Or were you talking about when the sun hit the lens at a funny angle and caused an orange bursting pattern? Again, lenses do that when illuminated with a bright off-axis light.
But maybe I missed something? Could you provide a timestamp or a screenshot of the exact part that shows the dome?
You can pause the video then right click and choose "Copy video URL at current time" or you can also pause it and use the period and comma keys to move forward or backwards frame by frame.
You too can take picture of the sky and then zoom the picture in. There will be decorative images.
I've taken plenty of pictures of the sky then zoomed in. There's no decorative images.
The only thing I've seen is slight random variation in the individual pixels called pixel noise, but that's a function of the camera and not the sky. That pattern is different for every shot because it's random, and it's also the same size regardless of zoom. So it's not a pattern in the sky, it's a random "pattern" in the camera.
Have you done this yourself? Please post a photo. Upload it here:
https://imgur.com/upload and share the URL with us.
So far... there have never been a single vertical path of space crafts / rockets except Challenger and flatearth experimental rockets.
Vertical path means hitting a solid transparent wall called "dome".
Well now wait a second. You don't know that there haven't been. You can't prove the non-existence of something unless you know all there is to know.
In any case, if this is your best proofs, and it's not even close to proof, then I don't think it's intellectually honest to say that the dome has been proved.
The GoFast rocket clearly did not hit anything. It clearly just executed a despin maneuver.
The balloon didn't show aything except how our earth looks from 113k feet.
And the decorative patterns in the sky are not decorative and are not in the sky.
Any other next-best evidence I can dismantle for you today?
Any other dome-believers who I can help?
And by the way, I am helping you. When you post a video that the author of has already debunked, you are showing that you don't have a clue.
By showing you the flaws in your arguments, I can help you make better arguments so that you can actually make a convincing case without looking so silly!
Thanks again, much appreciated.