Comments by "" (@dirkardostevergreen4827) on "3 proofs that debunk flat-Earth theory | NASA's Michelle Thaller | Big Think" video.

  1. TargusCrimbus "There are absolute dead zones in the southern oceans" Where? Prove it. "I live at the edge of a national park where satellite phones do not work" Again, prove it. Anyone can make claims.
    8
  2. Malcom X on the contrary there are plenty of ways to prove the earth is a sphere beyond any reasonable doubt and no proof whatsoever that it’s flat. Seems like you haven’t “done your research”.
    3
  3. GlobeKrusha "how do you test celestial poles? Through pictures on the net. Have you ever been to the Poles to actually verify such claim" It might be an idea to know what you're talking about before you start reeling off daft questions. A celestial pole is the point in the sky around which all stars appear to rotate. It's not a physical location on Earth. There are two celestial poles - one due north in the northern hemisphere, one due south in the southern hemisphere. This in itself is a very clear indication that the flat earth model - which has only one point of rotation - is obviously not a representation of reality. What Lyle is saying about the vertical height of each celestial pole matching your latitude mathematically only works on a globe. Whether you want to accept it or not, it proves that Earth is a sphere. By rights this should settle the debate but of course flat earthers are typically immune to any proof put before them and I imagine you will be no different. However, if you're open to it, this website explains it quite well : http://debunkingflatearth.blogspot.com/
    2
  4. flacofuerte7 according to the giant space pizza model, the sun should change size quite dramatically. A solar filter will show beyond any doubt that no such change occurs, meaning that the sun isn’t close to us. No ifs, no buts, no bullshit about perspective or atmospheric lensing because some dumb fuck told you the atmosphere works like a giant fresnel lens. The simple fact is, the sun stays the same size and moves across the sky at a consistent rate of 15 degrees per hour because it’s far away and the earth is rotating.
    2
  5. The dimensions that you have given dictate that it would noticeably increase in size as it approaches then shrink as it moves away. This doesn't happen. End of story.
    2
  6. Videos recorded without a solar filter mean nothing. There is nothing you can say that will make you right about this. The fact that the sun remains the same size and traverses the sky at a consistent rate means the flat earth model is wrong. It's as simple as that.
    2
  7. Molecular cloaking hahaha. Is it perspective? Is it atmospheric lensing? Is it molecular cloaking? Who knows with you nufty's, you just keep making shit up! Maybe it's just what it looks like, objects disappearing beneath the horizon, ie. what you would expect if Earth was curved. Yes, a lunar eclipse is caused by Earth's shadow on the moon. Is there a problem there? Oh hang on, yes there is a problem - according to the magical space pizza theory lunar eclipses shouldn't happen. That's right, I forgot, flat earthers haven't figured out an explanation for that one!
    2
  8. What assumptions am I making?
    1
  9. "Boats do not vanish over a curved horizon" Yeah they do. "every new moon is a lunar eclipse according to this" No astronomer would say that. "Pro-pagan——da" I see what you did there. You're super clever.
    1
  10. Murphy James you have no explanation for a lunar eclipse, it’s more an inconvenience than a waste of your time. To think a lunar eclipse is anything other than earth’s shadow on the moon, given that it only ever occurs during a full moon, is a sign of delusional thinking.
    1