Havent really gotten past that, why cant gravity work in both?

So? No one knows how it works, why cant it work with flat?

Eh it's an honest question.

Dew collects and rises through precipitation.

I guess the dew point outside drops far enough where water vapor turns to water and clings to the closest available surface

Sex is biological. Gender is a construct

Gender isnt biological. It's a made up social construct.

No, biological sex means precisely sex.

Yes, it's a descriptor made by society to categorize.

People can and do identify opposite of their biological sex, hence the need for gender.

There is the male and female sex, with about 2% of the population having a disorder or medical condition. None of that has anything to do with gender.

Yes actually we do. Language evolves with society.

A true intersex can identify how they want but generally only one of their reproductive systems functions, but most are sterile.

So to answer your question, most intersex ID as female because that's the part that produces the gametes to procreate.

You can be xx, xxx, xy, there are like 30 something possibilities

You cant say the intersex or DSDs dont exist.

They arent typical but they exist

You can be scientifically accurate and still think gender ID is bonkers, but it is real to some people, so you adapt.

Transgnnderendered

https://youtu.be/GE_USPTmYXM
So cool.

You can see the rocket going into orbit. It's pretty beautiful.

Sky gives way to space once you leave the atmos.

What is an impossible sight distance?

Saw a video of someone modeling the earth flat vs curved and curved is the only one that matched up.

With 200km+ distances

No it was pretty cool.

https://youtu.be/RK93TfSYeQU

Educational

Do you really believe the earth is flat or do you just not believe its round cuz of refraction?

Why does that matter.

https://flatearthinsanity.blogspot.com/2017/11/pic-gaspard-3880mgrand-ferrand-2758m.html?m=1

Just found a link that explains it in detail.

Tldr refraction

It's still the same shot

You keep saying that but I dont think you know what it means

I already showed you a link debunking the refraction being the best fit on a globe earth.

Infrared refracts like other spectrum light.

Point is it isnt a proof of anything.

I can show you a lunar eclipse and say its proof of a sphere earth

The goal is proving the globe, seems relevant to me.

Other than a bad understanding of refraction of light at far distances what else do you have? That's not what you solely base your reality on is it

Selenelion is another ultra rare atmospheric phenomena

https://www.space.com/27338-total-lunar-eclipse-rare-sunrise-selenelion.html

Notice globe isnt afraid of it, it's a known quantifiable optic.

But please do tell how we cast a round shadow on the moon and somehow arent a sphere.

Your inability to grasp how atmospheric phenomena work is showing

It's a lie = his proof

https://science.howstuffworks.com/lunar-eclipse.htm

Maybe you need to read up

Round shadow = must be cast from a sphere unless you are saying its not the earths shadow.

I brought up the subject rofl

It's been observed repeatedly to be a shadow. This isnt in question.

So how does shadow starting from the top or bottom debunk a shadow cast? They pass their ecliptic plane either directly or indirectly. Its why you have partial and full eclipses. We also know it's a shadow of earth because we can calculate and predict future events with our information. You cant do that if you are wrong.

Still thinking, so far you're just proving it is what it is - a measurable phenomena

Your scale is too small. Its not impossible

You are saying your personal incredulity superceded observed science.

Give me a light source that isnt a flashlight and I will, oh wait there is one outside we can use.

Apparently it is. Especially since your "theory" doesn't explain what it is if not a shadow

You cant honestly think a flashlight with a radial light source can simulate the sun?

Does my tennis ball have an atmosphere to cast umbras?

Observed and predictable > just think about it

Still haven't said what it is if not a shadow

Its like you dance around the topic instead of giving refuting theories.

Fact is curved shadow = sphere earth. That's geometry.

It is a shadow, measurable, testable predictable.

He can't debate it, can only claim its somehow not a shadow, even though we have an established light source (sol) with 2 objects that line up on the ecliptic for a measurable and predictable event

Lol their ecliptic isnt lined up for an eclipse? You realize its called the ecliptic because that's how you have eclipses right?

Eclipse. Ecliptic plane. The plane eclipses happen on.