Comments by "" (@dirkardostevergreen4827) on "Johnny Harris" channel.

  1.  @pauladams5083  For calling you an imbecile? Well I apologize if I caused offence but seriously, Phuket Word?? Come on man, the guy is an utter moron! But if ending this discussion because you're unable to respond to my last point is what you need to do to conveniently bow out then so be it. I totally understand that it's something you're never going to be able to give a rational explanation for.
    2
  2. Spot the obvious troll ...
    2
  3. 1000 miles huh? Where did you pluck that figure from I wonder?
    2
  4. Coffin Man yes his videos would be remarkable if it wasn’t for the fact that he misidentifies land marks. So your 1200 miles is based on faulty information. But hey, if you want to believe complete nonsense then good for you - don’t let me stop you from being an idiot.
    2
  5. Well firstly you don't have to see Earth from space to ascertain it's shape. To name just one method, Earth has been measured in it's entirety as evidenced by the proliferation of international travel and those known distances will only conform a sphere. This is something anyone can check for themselves. There are other methods as well but that is probably the most obvious one. As for whether we have been to space - this evidence you speak of, are you sure it's evidence or just people speculating? If you're going to confidently assert that it's a lie then you need some pretty solid proof to back that up and personally I've never seen anything even remotely resembling that.
    2
  6. Don Corleone well yes you are telling lies. Whether knowingly or not, you are. You can see Polaris for a few degrees latitude south of the equator if you gain altitude but eventually it goes below the horizon. I often hear flat earthers claiming that it can be seen from the Tropic if Capricorn - that’s all good and well but if there is no documented evidence of this then it can be dismissed as bullshit. Which is what I’m doing here. I’m saying you’re a bullshitter. The existence of the southern celestial pole very much eliminated any possibility of your fantasy space pizza being reality. Just saying it works or I haven’t looked into it is really quite pathetic. On your fantasy model you have all stars rotating around Polaris over the North Pole. Is this not the case? So how can everyone below the equator see stars rotating around a different point to the south? Which flat earth model explains this?
    2
  7.  @Globeisahoax  <— ladies and gentlemen, I present to you The King of the Idiots
    2
  8.  @chiefdvm1671  I'm not convinced KangenAlec is a person. I think it's a bot programmed to write endless amounts of bollocks.
    2
  9.  @randyschissler5791  It's like trying to explain something to a brick wall only a brick wall would be more intelligent
    2
  10. The same could be said for any latitude either side of the equator, doesn’t have to be 45 degrees, so long as they are roughly the same coordinates then the flight times will be roughly the same on a globe earth, becoming exponentially further as you move away from the equator. A good example is Atlanta to Los Angeles vs Sydney to Perth, all sitting around 33 degrees. Yes, you are absolutely right. However I have tried making this point many times only to be met with attempts to change the subject or just crickets.
    2
  11. Unfortunately your “overwhelming evidence” is just you being gullible and believing whatever you’re told. Even if the Bible did say Earth was flat (which it doesn’t) why would you use a 2000 year old book as a science manual. If your car stops working would you take it to a mechanic or would you consult the Bible to see what it might have to say on the matter?
    2
  12. iB McFly you’re an idiot. Why can’t I see Polaris from Australia?
    2
  13. iB McFly um yeah, the app on her phone is not giving her correct information. She even says in the video comments that she is facing south - how can someone face south and see Polaris?? Obviously she is seeing the southern celestial pole and doesn’t have a f$&king clue what she is talking about - a bit like you. If this is what you call “research” then I feel bad for you.
    2
  14.  @Globeisahoax  <— oh look the village idiot is back
    2
  15.  @KangenAlec  <— look kids, it’s an idiot!
    2
  16. It's obviously not even remotely true. Anyone who believes that is phenomenally daft.
    2
  17. With no internet
    2
  18.  @KangenAlec  <— harbours gay fantasies for Rob Skiba. It’s ok, just come out and admit it.
    2
  19.  @Globeishoax  so that would be no evidence whatsoever then. Cool.
    2
  20. "Please wake up and research what flat earthers really say." Or don't. Save your brain cells and watch cat videos instead. At least cats are real.
    2
  21. Matthew Poole you see those two planets either side of sunset or sunrise, just as you would expect. As for “NASA faking everything”, just because you saw it on a YouTube video doesn’t mean it’s true. All those “space is fake” videos are beyond stupid. Just idiotic, speculative nonsense.
    2
  22.  @reeyonarya1522  We have already measured earth in it's entirety - this data is used every day for navigation. We know it's a sphere, there is no doubt about that. Don't be a dumb dumb and accept reality.
    2
  23.  @reeyonarya1522  and?
    2
  24. Or it could be something to do with the overwhelming evidence of it being a sphere vs the complete absence of evidence for it being flat.
    2
  25. Such as?
    2
  26. I hope this is satire ...
    2
  27. Oh come on, flat earthers are mostly rude, petulant morons. Stop making them out to be learned sages. They’re not. They are disrespectful f&$kwits by and large.
    2
  28. zor zor <— another idiot who doesn’t understand what a scientific theory is
    2
  29. Flat earth videos are all still there, they are just not promoted by YouTube’s search algorithm. Which is fair enough given that they are full of lies and misinformation. As for your sun and moon observations. Did you observe them growing as they approached and then appearing to shrink and slow down as they moved away? No? Then they’re not local objects whizzing around above your head. It’s not that hard to figure out.
    2
  30.  @Gimo76  "Yes I do see both change sizes as they come and go" That's interesting given this has never been observed by any astronomer ever. Were you under the influence of anything at the time? "So, how do you explain them being in the clouds in front of and behind?" I don't need to explain that as it's never been proven. Don't you think it's more likely that the camera's inability to process bright objects is causing an illusion? "If it is 8” per square mile for the curve to show then we should see this imaginary curve." We do. Have you never seen a large object appear to sink below the horizon the further you get away from it? Do you have a rational explanation for this that isn't "perspective because reasons" or repeating nonsense about zoom lenses bringing them back? "If we were actually going 60,000 miles an hour how are we not all blown off our planet" I'm sorry but that's a really dumb question.
    2
  31. Frankie and Benjy Mouse I think you might be wasting your efforts with this one.
    2
  32. @Paul Rodney ”Bogus huh Lol..Prove it, Prove or debunk me that im wrong?" Yes bogus. If something is below the horizon zooming in on it isn't going to bring it back into view. That's ridiculous and there is zero evidence to support that nonsense claim. I don't need to debunk it. You made the claim - you prove it! You can't because it's complete nonsense and you know it! "you wouldn't be needing for me to answer the flaws if you looked it up yourself before talking junk here..There is enough info out there to get all sorts of flaws, son" Firstly, I'm not your son. Secondly, it's very obvious at this point that you've got nothing so you're resorting to the usual flat earth tactic of saying "the information is out there, you need to do the research". It gets a bit old. "Other polish Cosmonat is Miroslaw Hermaszewski" Yes I'm familiar with that interview. He says it's flat and then he smirks. He's obviously joking. And also, in the same interview he also talks about seeing the Earth as round - which you would know if you "did your research". At any rate, a youtube clip of someone saying Earth is flat is not evidence. Evidence would come in the form of a working flat earth map or a working flat earth model. Lets not pretend that either of those things exist! It would come in the form of a rational explanation as to why we have two celestial poles. Or how the sun rises east everywhere on Earth during an equinox. Or why Polaris can only be seen north of the equator. Or why the sun never changes size and traverses the sky consistently at 15 degrees per hour. You know - explaining how all these things that clearly point to Earth being a sphere orbiting the sun can be explained by a flat earth model. And the truth is you can't explain any of these things without ridiculous word salads and gish gallops. So lets stop pretending that you have anything valid to say here. Flat earth is demonstrably complete nonsense and has no relevance in the real world apart from being something to laugh at.
    2
  33.  @paulrodney4433  "You are turning my words and you know it..You just dont want to embarrass yourself my not explaining yourself or defending your words" Am I though? This is what you said - "They say if you dont see a ship anymore in the distance in the seas, where its been proven time and again that when you zoom in with P900 cameras, you see the ship again at a very long distance.. " To me that says a ship doesn't go below the horizon, it just goes out of view (ie. zooming in on it will bring it back). Is that not what you meant? Because the only other way to read that is that you're saying zooming in on a ship makes it bigger which isn't exactly ground breaking information is it? Let's call a spade a spade and just admit that you've been called out on repeating a very blatant lie. "Like i said, P900 have focus in on objects waaay beyond the scientist curve calculations" So you say. I'd say you're doing what all flat earthers do and conveniently ignoring atmospheric refraction. "i can tell want your last say out of pride and ego so ill let you have the last say, how bout that?" Ok thankyou. I very much enjoyed destroying your argument. Have a nice day :)
    2
  34. Are you seriously asking that?
    2
  35.  @alkivari9491  I'm embarrassed for you
    2
  36.  @alkivari9491  Water, or any liquid for that matter, will be drawn to the center of Earth's mass by gravity. It's as simple as that. In other words it will flow from a higher altitude to a lower altitude and altitude is simply height above sea level.
    2
  37.  @alkivari9491  It's not that hard to understand.
    2
  38.  @alkivari9491  It's really quite simple. You have one point which is a higher elevation above sea level and another point with is a lower elevation. Water will flow from the higher to the lower elevation. Eventually it will end up at sea which, no surprise here, is at sea level. Which part of this is confusing to you?
    2
  39.  @alkivari9491  sigh
    2
  40. Al Kivari well thankfully scientific consensus doesn’t care what you think
    2
  41. Flat earth videos haven’t been deleted off YouTube, Google merely altered their search algorithm so that videos with misleading content don’t show up. I have yet to come across any flat earth video that has “reasonable” things to say! In fact I’d go as far as to say that flat earthers are the antithesis of reasonable. They are either willingly lying for personal gain, woefully stupid or mentally ill.
    2
  42. Around 2,500 years actually
    2
  43. Juan De La Suerte they do go over the horizon. This is a basic observation that anyone can do. And no, zooming in on them won’t “bring them back” - that’s just a ridiculous lie that flat earthers like to repeat ad nauseam.
    2
  44. Evidence?
    2
  45. People just like arguing
    2
  46. T Brown you have no idea what you’re talking about. Stop embarrassing yourself.
    2
  47.  @Globeisahoax  there is no such thing as a working flat earth map so you’re asking the impossible.
    2
  48. Samuel Rowbotham AKA Parallax
    2
  49.  @KangenAlec  <— hasn’t read the Antarctic Treaty, has no idea what he is talking about
    2
  50. Richard Howlett lol ok mate. Bye now.
    2