Comments by "T Brown" (@tbrown3356) on "LADbible Stories" channel.

  1.  @RABIDJOCK  And all maps are flat. And they work to get people to destinations. So welcome to flat Earth!!!
    2
  2.  @RABIDJOCK  Your argument was earth is a sphere because you thought the sun goes down because it goes below the horizon. I provided you with evidence that the horizon is not earth curvature because the geometry doesn't match with the claimed earth radius. I explained to you even how as the sun departs it appears lower and lower in the sky until leaving your visual limit. As the sun arrives and moves towards you it raises in the sky based on your perspective. You didn't acknowledge if you understood but just moved onto a new question.
    2
  3.  @RABIDJOCK  Debunked video. Lol. If the horizon is earth curve then the distance to the horizon can be no more than 1.23 times the square root of the observer's height. At 1 foot height seeing the horizon over 10 miles away proves that the horizon is not geometric and can't be the curvature of the earth. That's the end of the globe.
    2
  4.  @RABIDJOCK  And here's a video showing you the sun simply moving away from you. https://youtu.be/t1bQuhIEUgI
    2
  5.  @RABIDJOCK  Stop jumping all over the place and stick with one argument. Your argument was sunsets proving the spherical earth. Address the argument about there being no geometric horizon. And address my perspective argument.
    2
  6.  @RABIDJOCK  If you don't want to address the DEBUNKING of your argument then have a great day!
    2
  7.  @rip5905  1. Sun leaves your limited visual angle. 2. Just because the sun leaves your limited visual angle, doesn't mean it's traveled a great distance. We don't know the actual size or actual distance to the sun, so it's kinda dumb to predict what it should do just based on your limited visual angles. 3. Sun leaves your limited visual angle then it's night. Sun arrives in your limited visual angle then it's day. 4. Not sure what seeing satellites in the sky proves. I've also never looked up and saw one, but so what. That doesn't mean they are in space (2nd law of thermodynamics violation) or orbiting earth. You gotta prove earth is a sphere that can be orbited first, not just assume seeing an object in the sky is proof.
    2
  8.  @DrFreakishfreak  It should not require you to do research. It's basic knowledge right? Lol. Seeing what you believe are spheres through a telescope proves what? Satellites are not taking pictures of Earth because they are claimed to be in a region violating natural and gas laws. So are you telling me that without the belief in outerspace you don't have any proof that we live on a sphere? So then there is no proof because natural and gas laws debunk outerspace.
    2
  9. George Musser PhD Astrophysics Dr. Georgy: “We can, We do, We must, consider Newtonian Gravity as a force. Now that doesn’t really mean it is one, but we don’t necessarily have to work on the REALLY IS level.” https://youtu.be/SK9-gYCKKqA Dr. Georgy: “Gravity is NOT A FORCE but you can think of it as A FORCE“. https://youtu.be/SK9-gYCKKqA
    2
  10.  @beelzzebub  Can't answer the devastating question can you? Lol.
    2
  11.  @beelzzebub  There is no scientific community. Science is a method. You either use the scientific method or not. Heliocentrism is a religion that people are free to believe in. I'm not trying to make people give up their religion. Just don't claim it's science. And don't call people morons for not following your Heliocentrism model/religion.
    2
  12.  @beelzzebub  You just had your model destroyed and went through stages of grief. You started off with denial, then anger, bargaining and some more anger. Now you're right back to denial. I thought you might get to sadness and eventually acceptance. Lol. You're not ready to give up your religion yet. 😂😂😂😂😂😂
    2
  13.  @7c233  And you believe that the air is tethered to the ground. 😂😂😂😂😂😂. "When set in motion, freely moving objects, including AIR [ Atmosphere ] and WATER masses [ Clouds/Water Vapor ], move in straight paths while the Earth continues to     *ROTATE INDEPENDENTLY*" Segar, Douglas A; Introduction to Ocean Sciences, 2nd Edition: Critical Concept Reminders — CC.12 The Coriolis Effect (pp. 313, 314, 323, 324), ISBN: 978-0-393-92629-3, 2007. http://www.wwnorton.com/college/geo/oceansci/cc/cc12.html That means the air is NOT tethered to the ground you moron. The air is freely moving. The air is gas. Gas has no bonds. It's not a liquid or solid you nutcase. Lol. So a helicopter going straight up would have the earth rotating underneath. Destinations would come to it. But that doesn't happen does it? Earth is stationary.
    2
  14. The so called scientist didn't provide any science. Lol.
    2
  15.  @_RobBanks  day/night, seasons, time zones? Yes all of those things happen on our flat plane.
    2
  16.  @outoftime7740  You are having too much fun destroying these globies on here. They'll be having nightmares about this. Lol. I'm enjoying it though. KrisP chicken still asking about boats over the horizon in 2020. Lol. And he thinks he can see forever. Superman vision. 😂😂😂😂😂😂
    2
  17.  @rectilprojectil1069  KrisP if you keep west you'll make a circle. If you keep east you'll make a circle. Lol. Sorry Out Of Time. I had to get him. I'm sure you're tired of answering dumb questions. Lol.
    2
  18. Newton believed there was a pull between objects that was relative to the mass of objects. We now know that the earth is flat and stationary, so that would make Newton categorically wrong. Even in your own model gravity is no longer defined as a force but rather the bending of concepts (space time). Lol.
    2
  19.  @theodiscusgaming3909  You don't know it. I do. The earth is flat and stationary and there is no need for any imaginary forces to hold together a heliocentrism model. So in reality Newton was categorically wrong. And you just admitted that in your own model he was wrong. Now define gravity and tell me where it is observed in nature.
    2
  20. That was a great point. Why should we assume we are moving?
    1
  21.  @stratfreak76  Why are you talking about a car which is actually moving. I asked why we should assume the earth is moving. Lol. Go ahead and tell me about other things that actually move. It still doesn't prove the Earth is moving. That's just an assumption.
    1
  22.  @stratfreak76  So do you have any evidence that the earth is moving or you want to talk about cars moving? 😂😂😂😂😂😂
    1
  23.  @stratfreak76  So you are going to talk about cars moving. Lol. The debate is about earth moving. Lol. We don't observe or experience this, so if you are going to tell me we are moving then you need to prove it. Talking about moving cars is not proving the Earth is moving.
    1
  24.  @stratfreak76  Furthermore the comment was made in response to the pseudoscientist bringing up Occam's Razor (if there are a given set of explanations, the simplest one is most likely correct). So the simplest explanation to not feeling earth is moving is that it's not moving. You missed the point and have lost your credibility.
    1
  25. Newton was wrong and his concept was replaced in 1915 by Einstein.
    1
  26. Earth's not a planet. It's the stationary flat dry land we live on.
    1
  27. Trump believes in the globe and has a space force. Lol. You should love him.
    1
  28. Flat Earth society is set up to deceive people into believing that this is what flat Earth is. It's not. Google Nathan Oakley 1980 for real arguments.
    1
  29.  Samael Levithan  You are correct. There is no magical force holding us down. The current rhetoric is actually space time being warped by mass and gravity not being a force. Warping concepts. Lol.
    1
  30. Flat Earth is not a theory. The earth is flat and stationary. And yes governments are lying to people. And satanists do worship Satan. If you don't believe in God then you are a child of Satan.
    1
  31. "Excelsior College › owl Ad Hominem Fallacy - Excelsior College OWL Ad Hominem Fallacy. Ad hominem means “against the man,” and this type of fallacy is sometimes called name calling or the personal attack fallacy. This type of fallacy occurs when someone attacks the person instead of attacking his or her argument."
    1
  32. Go easy on the old guy. Lol.
    1
  33.  @globestrikeback1888  It's just a simulation.
    1
  34.  @globestrikeback1888  No, Google Earth is a simulation. Lol.
    1
  35.  @globestrikeback1888  We don't live on a sphere so it's pointless to use sphere trigonometry. Lol.
    1
  36.  @globestrikeback1888  What you do is babble on about navigation systems. Not realizing that they all depict a flat map to guide people around. Nobody ever has to account for curvature. And your claim that the only way to accurately find the distance between destinations is using spherical trigonometry is not true. Distances can be measured.
    1
  37.  @globestrikeback1888  Lastly, heading is begging the question of a sphere because it assumes true north which refers to earth being on an axis. I've had this conversation with you before, but you continue to be deceptive.
    1
  38.  @globestrikeback1888  When you say heading you will change the actual direction the person is traveling to the assumed globehead direction which is based on traveling over a sphere. But in reality you are traveling level over a plane and never down a ball. I know the trick you are using buddy. Lol.
    1
  39.  @globestrikeback1888  Definitions exposing your trick: "Heading is typically based on compass directions, so 0° (or 360°) indicates a direction toward true North, 90° indicates a direction toward true East, 180° is true South, and 270° is true West."  Wikipedia › wiki › Heading_(navig... Heading (navigation) - Wikipedia
    1
  40.  @globestrikeback1888  "true north noun north according to the earth's axis, not magnetic north." "compass readings vary from 7.9° to 6.7° west of true north"
    1
  41.  @globestrikeback1888  Do you see how you are committing a begging the question fallacy where your arguments premises "heading, true north" assume the truth of the conclusion (ie. earth is a sphere)? If I don't accept "heading" or "true north" can you tell me what directions I would need to travel? This would mean using magnetic north only to determine directions. So when you say traveling north, you are actually talking about magnetic north. And south will be just away from magnetic north not down a sphere. I guarantee you it won't be traveling over a sphere but rather the plane that is our reality. Lol.
    1
  42.  @globestrikeback1888  That's the assumption. Earth's flat so there's no need for declination. In reality magnetic north is the correct north. Don't you find it funny how your model always needs corrections or adjustments to be made. Compasses work fine on our flat plane.
    1
  43.  @globestrikeback1888  I posted the definition for "heading." You can't argue with the definition. Lol.
    1
  44.  @globestrikeback1888  Without using heading you are not able to perform your deception. You're like a magician who has had his trick exposed. There's nothing left for you to argue about. Continuing to try to do your trick is pathetic. Lol.
    1
  45.  @globestrikeback1888  Sorry buddy but you are guilty of model reification. The map is not the terrain. You're changing directions and trying to make reality conform to your model. Lol. But at the same time holding onto a belief that your model always works. If that were true you wouldn't need declination and need to deny compasses. Lol. You also would not need deceptive words like heading to make believe you're on a sphere.
    1
  46.  @globestrikeback1888  People can identify north 2 ways. There's the north star Polaris. And then there's magnetic north. Earth has no poles, so claiming a geographic north is a begging the question fallacy. You have to prove we are on a sphere first before claiming a geographic north (North Pole). So if you don't accept the magnetic north, then you only have the north star. You don't get to turn directions away from magnetic north and the north star into true north ( ie. south down a ball).
    1
  47. So earth drifted (turned) underneath a gyro. Great, well it should also turn underneath a drone helicopter or airplane. A helicopter or drone could hover and have destinations come to them. A flight from Charlotte NC to Los Angeles California would take an hour and a half. But those things don't happen so perhaps the drone didn't prove drift as is claimed.
    1
  48.  @cgeyye9916  If the earth didn't turn underneath the gyro, then there's no 15 degree per hour drift (earth turning). Make up your mind. Is there drift or no drift? Conservation of momentum is arguing that there's no drift (earth turn) underneath objects. So no proof earth turns then.
    1
  49.  @cgeyye9916  You're holding 2 beliefs simultaneously. You believe the gyro shows earth drift (turn) underneath but then you are saying conservation of momentum which means no drift (turn). If earth doesn't drift (turn) underneath objects then you have no proof it drifts (turns). Check out the website below where Neil Degrasse Tyson is explaining that earth turned underneath a ball helping a field goal go in. Because if the earth turned then that would be what happens. You're arguing conservation of momentum which is no earth turn. https://www.nfl.com/news/neil-degrasse-tyson-earth-s-rotation-helped-cincy-win-0ap3000000555398
    1
  50.  @cgeyye9916  I just need you to pick your poison. Are you arguing that earth doesn't drift underneath objects or that there is drift? Either way you lose.
    1