I'm not as stupid as you seem to think I am.
No - I wouldn't use the word 'stupid'; albeit, the word 'pride' could possibly be in-the-mix somewhere...
You are not listening.
You are not "lending yourself to learning" so that you may understand it better.
Whether or not you choose to believe that any of it is true is a different matter altogether.
He is
not playing games; rather, he is trying to help you understand how it works in the
Flat Earth model.
Stop trying to understand Flat Earth from a Ball Earth point of view.
The Flat Earth model is not based on the Ball Earth model. It is a totally separate model.
The Flat Earth model does not depend on the Ball Earth model. It stands on its own.
Stop trying to understand Flat Earth from a Ball Earth point of view.
To understand it properly, you must look at it from a Flat Earth point-of-view.
Anyone can travel in circles, even in a small space. That doesn't equal going east or west in a straight line.
Neither is it [straight] in the Ball Earth model - unless you disregard the curvature
under the line.
(a
truly 'straight line' = "end up in outer space" - right?)
Of course, it is okay to do this on a map - in which case, we would be talking about a
geographic straight line.
In the image below, the 'X' at the center would be the 'North Pole'. Every point on the circle is 'South' from/of there.
In the
Flat Earth model, East-West at a particular location is in reality a tangent point of a circle.
The distance from that location to the 'North Pole' is the radius of the circle.