1. Flight patterns disagree with you.
When did a few lines badly drawn on a google map count as a fight pattern? ALso, the question about the apparent massive difference in the size of Australia (among other southern countries) was raised. Do you have an answer? Or is everyone in Australia in on it too somehow?
2. Foucault’s pendulums do not uniformly swing in any one direction.
No, they uniformly swing and rotate in a manner determined by their position on the rotating Earth.
Sometimes they rotate clockwise and sometimes counter-clockwise
Yes, and the direction is connected to their location for a good reason.
sometimes they fail to rotate
Any set up along the equator will not rotate. This is as expected.
The behavior of the pendulum actually depends on 1) the initial force beginning its swing
The pendulum is set swinging by deflecting it and then releasing it. The initial force is the acceleration of gravity. Or are you suggesting that every pendulum is actually started from rest by hitting it to knock it off vertical?
2) the ball-and-socket joint used which most-readily facilitates circular motion over any other.
Who says it has to be a ball and socket joint? A piece of thread secured at one end will also allow rotation, no ball and socket joint needed. But since the attachment only
facilitates the rotation, what actually causes it in the first place in your view?
3. Tycho Brahe famously argued against the heliocentric theory in his time, positing that if the Earth revolved around the Sun, the change in relative position of the stars after 6 months orbital motion could not fail to be seen. He argued that the stars should seem to separate as we approach and come together as we recede. In actual fact, however, after 190,000,000 miles of supposed orbit around the Sun, not a single inch of parallax can be detected in the stars, proving we have not moved at all.
Or that the stars are much further away than he believed. If you believe a failure to detect something means it does not exist then you have no understanding of either science or logical reasoning, which makes you claim to be a 'degreed engineer' even more dubious than it already is. Since when did absence of evidence equate to evidence of absence?
Oh, and parallax is not measured in inches.
4. Time-lapse photography shows the Moon itself turns clockwise like a wheel as it circles over and around the Earth. You can find pictures of the Moon at 360 degrees of various inclination from all over the Earth simply depending on where and when the picture was taken.
And you really can't see that a global Earth would produce this same observation?
Did you also know that the moon and the sun are the same size in the sky but we are TOLD that the sun is really far enough away that it just so happens it appears to be the same size as the moon?
And you find this laughable why, exactly?
5. The natural physics of water is to find and maintain its level. If Earth were a giant sphere tilted, wobbling and hurdling through infinite space then truly flat, consistently level surfaces would not exist here.
Over what scale are you determining 'level-ness'? If you go down to the molecular level there truly are no flat surfaces.
6. If “gravity” is credited with being a force strong enough to curve the massive expanse of oceans around a globular Earth, it would be impossible for fish and other creatures to swim through such forcefully held water.
Why? Explain that in terms of the behaviour of water molecules under pressure, or do you not believe in water molecules either?
How does gravity affect an objects ability to sink or float in water?
You never learned that in school? Really? Density, bouyancy, etc. are all alien concepts to you and you can't see how gravity would have any influence?
7. A spinning object will create a force called centrifugal force.
No it won't. There is no such thing as centrifugal force. What is perceived as an outward force is inertia against the constant acceleration of being pulled in a circular motion against an object's natural tendency to keep going in a straight line.
How does this magical gravity hold everything on a sphere (globe earth) where the speed is not constant depending upon your location?
If one force is much greater than the other this will not be a problem. Guess what? Gravity on a mass the size of Earth is easily enough to overcome the inertia of an object on the surface being 'spun' at one revolution every 24 hours.
In fact I should weigh the least at the equator as that is the max velocity I would experience on a rotating globe earth.
You do, but since the difference is less than the average variation of your bodyweight over the course of time, you won't notice it. Other, less variable, masses have been weighed at different locations on the Earth and do indeed weigh less at the equator than near the poles.
The above explanations are why I keep stating that the globe earth is a religion based on faith and not observational facts. We see one thing but are TOLD to believe another.
Wrong. I have seen plenty of things that lead me to conclude a spherical Earth. I do not accept it on blind faith.
