There was an interesting article some time ago: https://jameshfisher.com/2019/01/20/my-parents-are-flat-eart..., which casted the human perspective on the problem: at the root, believing a conspiracy theory gives self-importance to the believer, and it's, in a way, "fun".
Considering this perspective, this phenomenon belongs to the class of problems whose easy angle of attack is the technical (rational, in this case), and the difficult one is the human.
I'd argue that if one thinks that a flat earther is metaphorically a brick wall, and consequently a fool, opposing technical arguments against it is equally as foolish. It's actually the other side of the coin: yelling arguments to a wall is the mirrored human problem, in my opinion.
In conclusion, I think it would be more productive to think more about why this belief is appealing to people (and why it's spreading), rather than proving it's false.
If it stresses you out, ignore flat Earthers. I did the opposite and got a flat Earth poster to troll my coworkers, but that may not be appropriate where you work.
We can achieve something. Just not this.
edit: Me being one of them. I have a hazy understanding of focal meditation (whether breath, clock ticking, whatever) and what it's supposed to accomplish. Other types of meditation are absolutely confusing to me. E.g. "visualization" - visualize what, for how long, how clear is it supposed to be, what are the benefits?
edit2: You are focusing on "push back", I am focusing on what the original poster said - meditation needs to be better defined.
I really liked the way one Zen Buddhist put it: just sit. Don't think about something else, don't focus on passing thoughts, and don't push away passing thoughts, but you may observe them. The point of having a focal point (breath, a fixed point in front of you, an unfixed point) is mostly to give you something that's not distracting to focus on when you get distracted by a passing thought. That same master gave very specific guidelines on posture and whatnot, but at the same time he said to not worry about doing things wrong, they're just there to help you stay comfortable during a meditation session.
If you really want to give it a try, find a comfy position (not laying down, you might fall asleep), focus on something (feeling of your breath, an uninteresting point in front of you, etc), and try to avoid focusing on anything else, returning to the point you picked when you inevitably fail. It's surprisingly difficult, and you immediately get goals (sit for X minutes without distractions). If you like, pick up a book (I liked Zen Mind, Beginner's Mind), or better yet, go to a class, but that's really not necessary to just get started.
I'm sad that Android: Netrunner (also by Garfield) has been discontinued, since I'd really like something like that with a nice digital client since it's fairly easy to get a complete collection.
I quit because I just don't have the time to keep up with the pace of expansions, and if you don't have top tier cards, you'll probably lose. I like the gameplay, but not the collection aspect, especially since the trading aspect is dead online.
I'm in a country that has banned all unnecessary movement, traffic/pedestrian accidents have dropped dramatically, it has saved magnitudes more from dying than from covid-19.
Logically, all movement be banned then? Keen to hear a rationalisation for 10 traffic lives vs 1 contagious virus life.
10 people have died in 3 months since the virus was first tested here. 1500 have died on the roads. I'm interested in the sort of person who would stand up and decree one life worth more than others. Please justify the logic behind such selections.
That being said, there's a lot we can do without infringing on freedoms too much. I think South Korea has a good model for handling disease spread, and The Netherlands has a good model for encouraging cycling and protecting cyclists from cars, both of which lead to lower vehicular deaths. Both countries were able to improve things without significantly disrupting society.
Yeah, maybe tens of thousands of people will die a few years before they would normally die without drastic measures, but the cost to save those lives doesn't seem to be worth it.