I love conversations like this, thanx 
I never said the firmament was flat, but I bet NASA knows if it's dome shaped or flat. We can bounce radio signals off of it afterall. NASA tells us that the iono-"sphere" is a bunch of electrically-charged ions or something iirc. Even if there was a layer of pure helium up there, do you believe that we could bounce radio signals off of that? To bounce a radio signal off of something (I am a licensed HAM btw) it needs to be dense enough to get useful data back from it, but voice calls..? I wouldn't be so sure about that. That (and Operation Fishbowl, Operation Highjump, etc) is what makes me believe that whatever is up there is solid (just as the bible describes ~200 times). Many political figures too have referred to our "glass ceiling" and many astronauts are on camera saying that we have never been out of "low earth orbit".
I'm not a Christian either as I stated, I prefer to go by what my senses tell me along with the scientific method (testable, observable, measurable and repeatable).
One thing that I have noticed about the Christians and the globe believers alike is that whenever we hit the point of cognitive dissonance, science goes right out the window. Christians will say "it was God's will" or "it was a miracle". Globe believers will say "because of gravity".
"God's will" and miracles are not science. I'm sorry Christians, but that is just how I feel. Who were the many bibles written by? Men. What do men with power usually want? The pastor at my church when I was a kid referred to us as his "flock". WTF? How insulting. I do agree though that this realm in which we dwell was created by an intelligence that as of now we do not fully understand yet. The apocalypse will reveal all though (by definition) and seems to be happening as we speak.
Gravity is still a theory. As a matter of fact, they admit that gravity is comprised of over 95% dark matter and dark energy. That's 2 more theories on top of your theory. Sooo, density, buoyancy and the electrostatic force don't explain why things fall downwards or rise up to the equilibrium/medium that surrounds them? okaaaay
"the only answer is the raw math, equations, and data itself"
Exactly. This is what I was trying to explain earlier, that if the base equation does not have proven facts/laws in each of the variables of the equation, then that equation will never yield a fact or law, and all equations based on that will also be incorrect.
Speaking of men with power, Julius and Augustus Caesar even changed the names of the months in their "honor". The gregorian calendar is a ridiculous mess. I suggest we go back to the 28 day and 13 months just like the sky clock gives us.
"they have to assume that millions of people who are doing science are lying whilst keeping the conspiracy silent" & "He views these institutions as liars"
One word: compartmentalization - They're not all lying imo, they have just been duped like the rest of us. Quadrillions of people can be wrong, given a long enough timeline. The controllers control the narrative, the peer review results, the guy's who count the votes, the college "degrees", the "license" that those authorities may or may not grant you, etc...
Don't even get me started on govern-ment and corpse-orations etc. Just because a mob of people (ie: demo-cracy), or the School "Board" says what the facts are, doesn't make it so. I love etymology. Anyway, the dangers of groupthink don't even need to be discussed here.
"Galileo, Copernicus"...
How do we know that they even existed at all? Weren't the Rockefellers the controllers of that curriculum that we all had to read in school? Their Foundation stamp is found everywhere in academia.
"you need to prove yourself through exams and then by publishing papers that your peers review"
Again, written and approved by whom?
I could care less about their white lab coats, degrees, licenses, accolades, political position, wealth, reviews, title, etc. For things that matter to me, like where we came from, why we are here, etc, I want the facts, based on the scientific method, where every variable in the equation can be proven. Proper research requires facts that we can prove together again and again.
How then, if radio signal pings and lasers were not used, then how did they measure the distance to the sun from the earth. Magical spaceship star trek "probes" is not a proper scientific answer.
A bunch of gases came together because of "gravity" (from chaos to order? ie: impossible in nature) and formed a burning ball of gas in a void/vacuum and creates magical gravitational forces that pull things in to form ball shapes in a flat "egg" pattern across unfathomable distances whereby nothing exploded into something and created everything. Sorry, but there's way too many impossibilities with that belief imo.
Why would I want to subject myself to all this? Being called a flat-tard, flat-head, idiot, moron, science-denier and all that bs. This is what started me on that rabbit hole of our existence.. Their "lunar lander". They flew to the moon in this tweaker hut? If NASA lied about this monstrosity, maybe they lie to us about some other things too. This piece of sh!t looks like it was built by some kindergartners...
RE: The Inverse Square Law of Light