The tides...tell me how are the tides generated on a Flat Earth?
You are correct, but he did not ask for proof, he asked for a way to prove it through some sort of experiment. Also if the earth was flat, tides could be caused my many things, such as the gravitational pull of the moon, the rotation of the earth would still cause tides. Just something to think about.
There's an established experiment that been repeated and the results confirmed. The experiment involves two telescopes pointing at the same star. One telescope is filled with water to slow the speed of light. The result is that no adjustment to the angle of the "aquascope" is required to keep the target star in view and centered.
This experiment was first performed by
George Biddell Airy in 1871 and proves without a reasonable doubt that the Earth is stationary and motionless; the stars orbit above.
So no, the Earth's rotation doesn't cause the tides; Earth doesn't rotate.
Reference:
Proceedings of the Royal Society of London
Airy, G. B. (1871). "On the Supposed Alteration in the Amount of Astronomical Aberration of Light, Produced by the Passage of the Light through a Considerable Thickness of Refracting Medium"
George Biddell Airy
Proc. R. Soc. Lond. 1871 20, 35-39, published 1
January 1871
http://rspl.royalsocietypublishing.org/content/20/130-138/35.full.pdfWhat is subject to reasonable doubt is your (false) interpretation of this experiment. The only thing the experiment shows is there is no aether drag. That's it. What others have argued is that it's proof of a *geocentric* Earth, not a flat one, although this interpretation is also flawed.
So...
1) The experiment shows there is no aether drag (true).
2) The experiment, no matter how you spin it, says nothing about the shape of the earth.
3) One could make the (flawed) interpretation that the Earth is geocentric and that the aether doesn't move with respect to the earth. The problem with this interpretation is that it fails to explain stellar abberation. To explain stellar abberation in this case, every single star would need it's own unique formula for determining the amount of abberation we observe.
...Or, instead, we posit the earth isn't geocentric and that it moves, which then perfectly explains all observable stellar abberation. It's the simpler (and correct) explanation.