No bullhorn, this isn't underlying criticism, this is a direct criticism, and all the other posts I've seen have directly attacked your "inability to substantiate my proofs", because frankly that's what logical arguments are all about.
I mentioned before that I am working against a curve that doesn’t allow for anything but scientific proofs.
Actually, we don't want scientific proofs, we want logical proofs, if I can disprove what you say simply by finding the logical holes in it (ie: circular logic) it's wrong, regardless of what "proofs" you were tying to present.
You don't seem to understand that the point of our arguments are to disprove the flat earth theory, to do that, we attack the flaws in your points, if you can't defend the, you're wrong, and you loose the argument. Simple as that. That is how an argument works, not your childish "You just don't agree with me because you're unwilling to accept my ideas". That's flawed cause and effect; I'd be perfectly willing to consider your ideas if you could somehow postulate them in a way that they weren't full holes.
I have attempted on many occasions to state facts, put as I lay down the evidence I am bombarded by people who say that the evidence is not relevant or that its not worthy of consideration.
Maybe because the evidence
isn't relevent and it isn't worthy of consideratio because, as I mentioned above, it's full of logical holes. Try reasoning from first principles, I won't have a problem then.
For example I stated that the flat-earther’s believe that an Ice wall 150 feet tall is at the edge of the world. I have shown how that wall would be able to exist for many many years without failure. Pressure in the ocean would allow for this to happen. You guys might say that I haven’t shown that one even exists.
Bullhorn, maybe if you actually read the posts rather than skimming enough to realize we disagree with you, and then creating your own reasons for why we disagree with you.
Yes, you did show us all of that (except for stating that pressure in the ocean would allow for this, you stated that the fact that pressure is present in science proved your theory), but this ice wall is
out of the water, meaning the water couldn't put pressure on it.
You guys might say that I haven’t shown that one even exists
Yeah, that's because you haven't.
I will say that in a flat earth it is the only thing that can account for the water containment.
So if I were to, say, disprove the existance of an ice wall, you'd revoke your beliefs of a flat earth? Guess what? We have.
The fact that you don't understand the basic tennants of how an argument operated makes me question why you should be allowed to attempt to argue.
Again bullhorn, all you've done is bitch and whine about how you're misunderstood, rather than make any valid points. My god, you're emo aren't you?!?! So please bullhorn, make valid points or shut up and go cut yourself in a corner.