Oh of course it has. Your "proofs" for a flat earth are absurd.
These proofs (this list is by no means exhaustive) have been mentioned here in this thread, but in case you want to review them all in one place:
Top10 Proofs the Earth is not Flat
http://www.smarterthanthat.com/astronomy/top-10-ways-to-know-the-earth-is-not-flat/
1. During a lunar eclipse, the shadow of the earth on the moon is circular, and it requires the sun to be behind the earth.
Look up "selenehelion". One occurred on Dec 10, 2011, but they have occurred quite a number of times through history. These are when a lunar eclipse occurs at the same time the sun is above the horizon. Impossible according to the ball-Earth theory of lunar eclipses, invalidating your "proof 1".
2 and 3. The sailor up in the crows nest can spot land before those down in the deck because he can see farther over the edge of the horizon, and the mast of a ship is seen from the shore AFTER the ship has disappeared beyond the horizon.
Perspective is the reason for this phenomena. When two objects are close together, especially where one is much larger than the other (as the ocean is larger than the ship), the smaller will appear blur into the larger. If this phenomena were truly due to the ship travelling over a spherical horizon on a ball-Earth, a telescope would not be able to bring the ship back into view (light travels in straight lines). As a telescope can bring the ship back into view, the phenomena is due to perspective, rather than any pupported curvature of Earth. "Proof 2" invalidated.
People can see further the higher they are, due to perspective. Essentially, objects on Earth will blend into the background at the same angle to the eye. But if the height of the eye is increased, the angle will occur at a greater distance toward the horizon, and hence one can see further. If Earth were a sphere, the maximum distance one could see can be calculated, based on the pupported curvature of Earth. At sea, many lighthouses can be seen at distances exceeding this horizon limit, disproving the theory the Earth is a globe. "Proof 3" invalidated.
4. Varying star constellations.
The stars never appear to cross each other. Even if they were as far away as alleged, if Earth were travelling the huge distances alleged around the sun, the change in angle would likely change the appearance of star constellations, if some stars were closer than others (due to parallax). As this does not happen, the reasonable conclusion is that stars are approximately the same distance from Earth, in a shell-like layer (e.g. firmament). "Proof 4" invalidated.
5. Two stick upright in the ground produce different shadows rather than the same shadow.
Simple trignometry. This phenomena would apply whether the Earth is flat or a ball. Incidently, the same trignometry giving the different length shadows can be used to prove the sun is quite close - in the order of hundreds of kilometers away. "Proof 5" invalidated.
6. a. Planes can travel far in ANY direction and not fall off.
Incorrect. Planes can travel East and West, and not fall off. Think of East and West as counterclockwise, and clockwise, around a plate (North is plate centre, South is outward toward the edge). No plane has ever travelled South and come up "on the other side". When planes travel at altitude, if Earth were a globe, the pilots would continually be adjusting the nose of the plane downward to prevent the plane going into space (if Earth were a giant ball). Pilots don't ever do this, and planes never end up in space as a result of pilots not doing this, because Earth is flat. "Proof 6a" invalidated.
b. Riding in a plane, one can see the curvature of the horizon.
Even on a ball-Earth, one could not "see" the curvature of the horizon, as light does not travel around corners. The "curvature" many allege they see on planes etc. is due to psychology (expecting to see it), and the shape of the windows (or the fish eye lenses of cameras for drones, balloons etc.) Mathematically, even if Earth were a ball, one would need to be so far from Earth as to require looking down to see it (i.e. it couldn't be seen simply by looking level out a plane window, which is all that is required to see the horizon on a plane). "Proof 6b" invalidated.
7. We know from telescope use that other planets are spherical. It would be absurd to assume that our own planet were any different.
Earth is not a planet. "Planet" means wanderer. The planets move. The Earth does not. An analogy of the logic used here is thus: "I went to the zoo, and visited the orangutan enclosure. All I could see were orangutans. Ergo, I must be an orangutan". "Proof 7" invalidated.
8. "The sun and flat/spherical Earth: If the sun was a “spotlight” (very directionally located so that light only shines on a specific location) and the world was flat, we would have seen the sun even if it didn’t shine on top of us (as you can see in the drawing below). The same way you can see the light coming out of a spotlight on a stage in the theater, even though you – the crowd – are in the dark. The only way to create two distinctly separate timezones, where there is complete darkness in one while there’s light in the other, is if the world is spherical."
A long tunnel with a light at the end disproves this theory. Eventually, if the tunnel is long enough, the light will totally disappear. "Proof 8" invalidated. I concede that there are not satisfactory Flat Earth theory answers to all questions about the motion of the Heavenly bodies, same as there are not satisfactory Ball Earth theory answers to the motion of the Heavenly bodies (e.g. refer to question 1). This doesn't mean a flat Earth can't be proved - just that the motions of the Heavenly bodies can't always be well explained... yet.
9. Center of Gravity. If the earth were flat, gravity would be pulling you towards the center of the plane, NOT straight down. The fact that we are pulled straight down speaks to a sphere.
If Earth were a ball, spinning around the sun, the theory of gravity has it that Earth would be accelerating approximately 5mm/sec toward the sun. An acceleration of this magnitude can be felt and measured. Why cannot the pupported acceleration of Earth's orbit around the sun be felt by man, or measured by his instruments?
Many people who accept flat Earth theory believe the theory of gravity to be unnecessary. That is, dense objects sink, less dense objects float. This alone makes this objection to Flat Earth theory invald. "Proof 9" invalidated.
10. Pictures from space, and manned missions into space.
By NASA, caught out 1963 for hoaxing the moon landing (not to mention the murder of the initial astronauts comprising the Moon Hoax team who weren't afraid to publicly embarrass NASA, or the murder of the man who was going to testify to Congress about their fakery). What justification do you have for ever trusting such an organisation again?
Honorabled mentions:
* Biruni calculated the circumference of the earth from triangulation.
A circle is flat, and has a circumference. The same triangulation you are happy to accept "proves" the Earth has a circumference, also proves the sun to be several hundred kilometers away.
* The Bedford Level Experiment was done to prove that the Earth was FLAT. It was repeated numerous times, proving every time that the earth was a sphere.
Actually, no. It was only "proved" a sphere by the cad (and probable Mason) Alfred Russel Wallace, who deliberately used incorrect measurements (and a totally different method) for his experiment. Everyone else who has performed the Bedford level experiment (more times than Alfred) came to the conclusion the Earth (if not the Bedford canal) is flat.
