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

  1.  @stevebrightmore4937  Depends on what you define as "genuine good research". The internet is full of non experts, con men and trolls, spreading a lot of misinformation. You have to be VERY careful you're not just being taken on a ride by bias researchers, showing you only what they want you to see and hiding the rest of the details that refute their claims. There is no system of peer review on YouTube or any social media, so it makes it pretty easy to make up bullshit and sell it as truth. I fear that people are being misled by con men, some who are intentionally misleading people, others who are just so deep in their own personal bias, that they can't see how they're wrong. So be careful out there, don't let bias and paranoid lead your thinking, it will strip you of your better reasoning. Remember to turn that skeptical lens around sometime and question the claims made by Flat Earth, don't just listen to them blindly, question them with the same zeal you now question the mainstream with, it's the only way to remain objective. That being said, have you looked at the Globe side of the debate at all? Are you aware of the main channels that are providing the counter arguments and evidence to the Flat Earth claims? I have been looking at this argument for a little over 3 years now, is there any arguments you are still on the fence with, that you require a little more insight with? I might be able to provide some help. I don't claim to know everything, but I do know this particular subject quite well at this point, so feel free to ask. Anyway, point is, stay sharp and never turn off that skeptical lens, don't follow this movement blindly, question it as well.
    2
  2. You can always spot some liars easily, they put truth in their username.
    2
  3. Could care less what shape the planet is, not much any of us can do about it...but we’re not just going to ignore how bad the FE science and arguments are, sorry. You don’t have a working model, nothing that’s actually used in any applied science today, so you don’t really have anything...just paranoid speculations and junk science. And it’s no surprise to me that none of you are experts in any actual scientific fields of study. So don’t get mad at us for not falling for the same scam you did.
    2
  4. Not impossible at all, stop listening blindly to con men feed you bullshit information and bad math.
    2
  5. Limits of photography. When capturing an image with clarity, you have to set the exposure low enough so the light doesn’t blur out the final image. Setting the exposure low, means you’re essentially filtering out light, so the stars will not be seen because they’re not bright enough. Had they cranked up the exposure, then the surface of the Moon would have been a big white blur. They didn’t go there to photograph stars, they went to experience the moon, so they had to keep exposure settings low if they wanted to film it properly. Same issue occurs when photographing Earth from space.
    2
  6. The purpose of this video was not to prove either position, it was merely just to discuss the psychology of a group of people...that's it. It was pretty apparent from the title what to expect here. If you are still looking for proofs, then this video wasn't made for you, it's mostly for those of us who have already concluded that Flat Earth is a scam on the internet perpetuated by paranoid village idiots, and now we'd like to talk about how and why these people fall into these rabbit holes of misinformation.
    2
  7. It doesn’t, it’s an inconclusive experiment, that doesn’t verify or falsify either model. The trouble is, many in flat Earth still actually believe it does verify their model...but they’re ignoring the physics of gravity. It’s a bad experiment, that doesn’t isolate its variables to make it conclusive. That’s why Johnny shared it, to illustrate the kinds of people we’re dealing with...people who are not thinking objectively, instead blinded by confirmation bias.
    2
  8. We can’t do anything with junk science, it slows progress and innovation, so we’re just fact checking and correcting misinformation. Obvious bullshit should never be allowed to just fester unchecked or unchallenged.
    2
  9.  @aceneto9386  You do not need to go to space, to deduce the shape of the Earth. Just a basic understanding of geometry and a few simple observations is all you need. Here’s what’s sad…for some reason people will believe a stranger online, tell them the Earth is flat, and they’ll believe them completely without question, while meanwhile millions of pilots and sailors around the world are navigating the surface every single day, with extreme precision, using a system of navigation built around the knowledge that Earth is a sphere. Do you need an accurate map to find a destination? Yes, of course you do…so how exactly do you think these people do their jobs, if they don’t have accurate knowledge of the scale and dimensions of the Earth in which they navigate? Stop being so gullible…maybe people should pull their dumb faces away from their phone or computer, long enough to go outside and experience the real world, or open a book.
    2
  10. So you think science is lying to you about light refraction? Well, nice thing about science, is that it’s often super easy to repeat and verify for yourself. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5lmmzvzz_Xs&t
    2
  11. ZACH Yes, people make mistakes, that’s why we have peer review. Of course that refraction demonstration I shared isn’t representative of the ocean...it’s merely to prove that light does indeed refract and it’s caused by changes in air density. Once you know that for certain, then the bullshit argument from Flat Earth saying “refraction isn’t real” becomes a real eye roller. Then it becomes pretty apparent, which side is ignoring variables. Science knows enough about refraction today, that we can actually calculate it, all we require is the refraction index for that day. Here’s a pretty in depth discussion breaking down the math for refraction https://www.metabunk.org/threads/simulating-atmospheric-refraction.7881/. And here’s an depth recreation of the famous Bedford Level experiment, only this time done across 10 km of frozen lake. http://walter.bislins.ch/bloge/index.asp?page=The+Rainy+Lake+Experiment Just scroll down to the second half of this report, where they focus on refraction...and let me know if they ignored any variables. Science is doing it’s best for people...it’s layman who are not actually paying attention, just making a lot of assumptions about science. Science isn’t sure about a lot of things...but the true shape of the Earth, is not one of them.
    2
  12. ZACH Yes, it takes about 70 miles to arc 1 degree of difference on Earth. It’s just much too small of an angle to make any noticeable difference.
    2
  13.  @dominiccharvet546  No, the real trouble is that you're a layman, misunderstanding a LOT about science...not just the concepts it teaches but also the language and the way it operates as well. This leads you to a lot of false conclusions, you don't really know much about science, so you misunderstand it often. That's really all I've seen occur from Flat Earth so far...and it's a real problem. Everything in physics that is verified and labelled under theory, is proven through experimentation and observation...it's not just numbers on a paper, nothing graduates from hypothesis into theory until it has been verified with evidence and then peer reviewed. Everything can be explained and verified to you if you actually take the time to review it. The real trouble is many people don't bother to look at these experiments and attempt at understanding them, so instead they just make empty claims that they don't exist...or they just make this common gem of an argument "it's just a theory". Which just forfeits you from conversation the moment you make that argument...cause it proves to us you don't know the difference between a scientific theory and a regular theory. Real science isn't easy...it requires a LOT of effort from you, a lot more care and diligence and it requires you remove all bias to seek objective truth only. Theoretical science is just the sketching phase of science...it's where they draw up the blueprints for future experimentation. I don't think I need to explain to you how important blueprints are for building a house...why would you think they don't require a step like that in science? Tesla was an experimental scientist and an inventor, who felt that every scientist should get their hands dirty and do some experimentation from time to time, rather then just theorize...and he's right, they should. But he was doing just as much math as anyone else...he was a mathematical genius, but he wasn't funded by any university, he did everything himself, so he had no choice but to do the experiments himself...though he preferred it that way, he was a jack of all trades. Theoretical scientists don't generally get paid to do experiments...so they typically don't. Experimental scientists do...they are the next step after drawing up what the math says is possible. After that, it's up to experimental scientists to verify it further...nothing goes past hypothesis in science until it has been verified...so theoretical scientists are not verifying scientific concepts, they're just using math to help us probe deeper into what is possible. If you understand that the universe functions on mathematical principles, then you can use that language of the universe to help unravel its secrets...that's all they're doing, using another tool to their advantage. You people would ask that they stop........but WHY!?! Because it doesn't make sense to you and that not knowing terrifies you? It's just incredible to me. Anyway, is there any physics in general you would like to know more about? I might be able to help you with some answers. Use your video you shared for example, pick a proof in there you feel currently that is indisputable and I'll see if I can falsify it and help you with the physics that they're misunderstanding.
    2
  14.  @dominiccharvet546  I will say this much for right now, it's not that Flat Earth doesn't ask great questions, they are the exact same questions scientists once asked on their path to learning more, so they are GREAT questions. The trouble is that Flat Earth holds their questions up as proof, rather then seeking the answers. It's just odd to me really, especially in the information age. I think Flat Earth focuses a bit to much on attempting to falsify our model, which is great and all, that's what science is all about is falsifcation, but focusing so hard on our model lead you to forget to pay attention to your own model...which can't even explain a sunset last I checked. A better question to ask, is why are there two hemispheres? With their own stars, constellations and celestial rotation? These are things the Globe answers with ease, while the Flat Earth does not. I am a bit busy currently, but I can share this with you. https://drajmarsh.bitbucket.io/earthsun.html It's a very interesting simulation of the Globe that can help you to visualize some of your questions for why the stars don't appear to move during a rotation, it also explains the seasons by showing you how the angle of the Sun moves the direct solar path of the Sun from tropic of Capricorn to Cancer and back again. So play around with it sometime, flip it upside down so you're facing the poles and hit play, it'll rotate the stars for you.
    2
  15.  @dominiccharvet546  "Why is it we can see farther than we should be able to on the ocean? " The short answer, we don't, we see exactly as far as we're supposed too. Flat Earth lies about the details or performs bad math or both...then some people don't bother to question things further to see if the information is accurate, it's pretty simple. The long answer, well, first of all, how far do you think you should be able to see and what math were you using to verify it? A big problem with Flat Earth that I've come across, is that they use the wrong math a lot. A basic rule of thumb in mathematics, always make sure you're using the correct formulas for the proper jobs, or you will risk reaching a false conclusion. So it's simple really, use the wrong math and you will reach a false conclusion. So how far do you think you should be able to see and what information are you getting? It's very easy to lie about how far we see...a person can just shoot a number out, tell you we shouldn't see that far and then unless you question him directly on his math and details, how are you supposed to know he's even telling the truth? Two things you need to make sure you're getting right with long distance observations, you need to make sure you're using the proper math and you need to make sure the details you're receiving are actually accurate. 8 inches per mile squared is the worst offender in flat Earth...this is not the correct math to use for making long distance observations. It does not derive a figure for your line of sight, or for what is hidden from your line of sight due to horizon and curvature...it is missing many key variables that you require to help you discern that. But flat Earth blindly listens to this math anyway...even though it's wrong and it has successfully roped in a lot of people now, who didn't bother to look at it closer to see how it works. 8 inches per mile squared is a basic parabolic equation, it's not for calculating curvature on a sphere...it's only really good for about 100 miles and then it stops being accurate. As I said prior, it doesn't derive a figure for your actual line of sight either, all it's doing is measuring a drop from a tangent line at surface....which means the numbers it gives you are only accurate, if your eye rests at sea level...which is of course NEVER the case. You always look down at horizon and as you go higher in elevation, your horizon extends as your line of sight extends. 8 inches per mile squared does not include a variable for height of the observer....so it is the wrong math completely. I've seen some other formulas that do a slightly better job, but they still ignore certain variables, such as refraction. Yes...you need to include a variable for atmosphere refraction. Here's a quick experiment that verify's why. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5lmmzvzz_Xs Refraction is real, it does occur in our atmosphere and yes it does change what see at distances, especially over large bodies of water. It works by increasing the density of the air, which refracts light down, which raises objects behind a curve up. The demonstration I shared makes it pretty clear...this can't be ignored. To do so is being bias. We know enough about refraction today, that we can accurately calculate it. So you have to make sure you're using the correct math that includes all the variables and doesn't ignore the ones you don't like. Here's a great calculator I have found that is quite accurate, calculating a geometric curvature and a standard refraction curvature. https://www.metabunk.org/curve/ And here's a forum discussion breaking down the math in greater detail. https://www.metabunk.org/threads/earths-curve-calculator.9654/ Basically, use the wrong math and you will reach a false conclusion, it's pretty simple. What's odd to me, is that Flat Earthers don't seem to ever bother to check their math...they just listen blindly to people sharing the same bullshit formulas and they just nod and agree that they're accurate and never check them for accuracy...it's incredible. The other thing you have to be careful of, getting the proper details. You need to make sure the distances are correct, the height of the observer is correct, the location, etc...it's very easy to fudge the numbers, if you have the wrong details...and it's VERY easy for people to lie online and just give you bullshit numbers. It happens a lot. So when you ask me "How come we see further then we should?" well give me an example, what did you see that convinced you we see to far and what were the detals, then I can go through the observation with you, cause I can pretty much guarantee you either did the math wrong or the person lied to you about the details of what you're seeing. So you have to VERY careful with this one...the trouble is I don't feel that people are and that's how they fall for this one. A better question to ask, why do the bottoms of objects disappear first at distance? I've seen photos of distant mountain ranges and people will ask why we can still see them at hundreds of miles...then they'll completely ignore that the pictures were taken from several hundred feet elevation, that the mountain peaks drop from eye level the further they are and that you're only observing the very peaks, that THOUSANDS of feet are missing from the base of those mountains, every single time. How does thousands of feet go missing, if the Earth is flat? That's a much better question to ask. Here's a few great observations for you if you think we're really seeing to far. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NKQI18jr8Oc&t=28s https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=J_Idg1MA10k https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RK93TfSYeQU http://walter.bislins.ch/bloge/index.asp?page=Flat%2DEarth%3A+Finding+the+curvature+of+the+Earth http://walter.bislins.ch/bloge/index.asp?page=The+Rainy+Lake+Experiment
    2
  16.  @dominiccharvet546  "I have studied both sides for over three years now and have never seen a real picture of earth from space." 3 years and you've never seen a real picture from space? Have you really been looking? Is your search bar broken or something? Here's a great archive of images from the various Apollo missions. https://www.flickr.com/photos/projectapolloarchive/albums There are thousands of images archived here, just one of many places online that archives these photos. There are hundreds of pictures of the Earth in here, you just browse through these sometime and then let me know if you feel these are fake or not. I think the Apollo 16 photos are some of the clearest, so take a look at some of their photos found here. https://www.flickr.com/photos/projectapolloarchive/albums/72157656739898544 If you think they are fake, then tell me how you verified that. Tell me the method you used to reach that conclusion. These are high resolution images, so click on a few Earth images sometime and blow them up as big as they will go and then analyze them closer. I am an artist for a living, to my trained eye, I have yet to find a single brush stroke, paint blotch, or flaw in these photos, which is present in ALL photo realistic paintings. There is no such thing as a 100% photo realistic painting...most people are not aware of that, cause they are not artists. There is always a flaw and a trained eye can spot them easily. So to my eye, these all look VERY legit, but feel free to let me know what you see. No, you wanna know what I think....you're paranoid and you're allowing people online to feed that paranoia. You've been looking at only ONE side of the argument, I can tell...because you're still asking the same questions they ask, that have answers. Had you actually looked at the Globe side of the debate, you'd know the answers to these questions by now. The true Globe proponents are out there, they're just not easy to find compared to the Flat Earth con men that have made it their life's obsession to feed you more of this misinformation on the daily. They're not as invested in this mess, so they don't get as many hits, so they are harder to find. Let's get down to it. Look outside....do you REALLY honestly believe, that all of this amazing technology could exist, but scientists can't figure out something as trivial as the true shape of the planet? You REALLY believe that? At the end of the day....NOTHING out in the real world uses a Flat Earth model in its framework, from navigation, to communication, to science and technology, to infrastructure. Navigation being a big one, nobody is out there right now navigating the world using a Flat Earth model. It should be pretty common sense, but you can not hope to find a destination, if you do not have an accurate map to help you. If we were navigating around a Flat Earth, while using a Global geometry...people would be getting lost every single day. Pilots, ship captains, military personnel and rescue crews, these people rely on our knowledge of the shape and scale of our planet to be accurate, in order to do their jobs. There are two equal hemispheres, and we travel along great circle routes...this would not occur on a Flat Earth. Just watch some videos from an actual pilot who's spent a lot of time in this mess. https://www.youtube.com/user/Wolfie6020 This guy is an example of some of the bigger names of the Globe Earth proponents on YouTube. When it comes to navigation and knowledge on flight charts, flight paths, the actual working mechanics of an airplane, this guy is quite knowledgeable. If you've really been looking at both sides of this argument, then you'd have found this channel by now. Just give it a look over sometime, lots of great videos making TONS of observations of his own, focusing a lot on world navigation. His videos on plotting flight paths are some of the more interesting, especially the challenge serious when he was asked to plot three 90 degree angles, that return back to starting location....which would be impossible on a Flat Earth, because a triangle can not have 90 degree angles on a flat surface....but a Globe can. He was successful in mapping this on THREE separate trials, using THREE different flight charting methods. And he's not the only one who has also done this. The simple fact is, those are real flight paths, he's charting on real flight charts that actual pilots use. If you can plot these charts, then you can fly them...and so if you can plot three 90 degree turns, tracing a triangle and returning back to starting location...then the Earth is a sphere. It's the only shape that can achieve this. Here's that series for you to have a look, it's quite interesting, it was a long back and forth between him and the guy issuing the challenge, documenting first hand how arrogant Flat Earthers can be....he did his challenge several times over, and still he refused to believe it. That's not thinking rationally...that's just good ol' fashioned denial. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-FJG65nbUO8 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=d4Fi-86uSqs https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JU6oEOjk6Yk https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9_qP-r0asww https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OVp_yJgSwfA https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ScJ4QW7gAlw Flat Earth is just a paranoid fever dream man. They're filling your head with some bullshit, which is just designed to make you doubt your fellow man. I can keep answering your questions for you if you're still interested. I do enjoy the discussion...but after 3 years of looking for myself, I have now concluded that Flat Earth is a scam and it's getting harder for me lately to have patience with people. It's just incredible to me what these people have actually convinced other people of...and even more shocking that they'll then turn around and use a computer, accessing a massive online network, sending information instantly over WiFi signals...and then they'll tell us that scientists don't really know things? Like holy fuck...that's arrogant. You have to consider the possibility that paranoia and bias are leading you more then rational thought, it's fine to question what you're told, but do you ever turn that lens around on Flat Earth and question them? I'm sure you did at first, but do you still? I have successfully falsified pretty much every claim made by Flat Earth, so I have concluded now, that it is a scam. I can keep going and help you out with things if you'd like some further insight, I do enjoy the civil discussion.
    2
  17. By the looks of that train wreck of a sentence...you could use a lot more school.
    2
  18. Well, then you've just described your bias to us. You're not actually looking for truth, you're only looking for the information that confirms a bias you WANT to be true. Science doesn't operate that way, it doesn't care about what you WANT to be true. So this is not an argument, it just confirms that you have a very strong bias, that leads your thought processes. Aside from that, how does a massive universe diminish God in anyway? That version of God is truly powerful...having created an IMMENSELY vast universe that we can NEVER fully grasp or ever hope to explore and fully experience. That to me is a truly all powerful God...your version built what exactly, a small terrarium? You really think that's more impressive? No, what you have trouble with is the possibility that YOU are not special...which means you're likely a narcissist who only thinks about himself. It's a very real possibility that YOU have to come to grips with I'm afraid. It doesn't mean you don't matter though, of course you do, nothing matters more in this universe then life! If you really think about it, the universe couldn't exist at all without life to experience it. In a way, you create the universe with your 5 senses, if you couldn't touch, see, hear, taste or smell...then nothing would really exist, cause if you can't experience it in anyway, then how would it exist? Consciousness creates the universe as much as the universe created you...so that means you are VERY special, you're apart of it all, because the universe really doesn't exist if there's no life to experience it...it would just be a waste of time without life. For a lot of us, this is actually very humbling. That's how many scientists look at it, though actually, most scientists are actually theists like yourself...not the other way around. They have no trouble marrying the concept of their religion, with the current knowledge of the world. Science doesn't work to destroy the concept of God, it likely never will either. It just works to figure out how this reality operates at the mechanical level, nothing more. If you can't figure out how to make the most of this life you have currently, then that's your problem...science really doesn't care. You are not special, but at the same time, you're the most important thing that has ever happened. I know that's a bit fucky to grasp, but for a lot of us, it's quite humbling.
    2
  19.  @JavierGarcia-pg4zg  NASA didn't prove the world was round...we figured that out LONG before NASA ever came around. All they did was take the first photographs that HELPED to further verify the Globe. It's a body of knowledge that makes up the entire Globe model, pulling from thousands of different fields of study, compiling thousands of years of near countless research. NASA isn't the sole reason why we believe the Earth is a globe, they're just one of the many contributors. You yourself can verify the shape of the planet by yourself in your own back yard, with a few simple observations. Just observe any sunset, then try and make sense of that on a Flat Earth. That barely scratches the surface though, but it's not something that can be taken lightly either. Aside from that, nothing in the modern world today uses a Flat Earth model, from navigation, to communication, to science, engineering and infrastructure...it's all built on the foundations of a Globe model. Many of these would not work or continue to function, if the Earth were in fact Flat but was using a Globe model system to operate. Navigation being the biggest one that would fall apart...should be pretty common sense, but you can't hope to find a destination, without an accurate map. If our Maps are not accurate...then people would be getting lost every single day and large scale navigation would fall apart. There are no ship captains, pilots, military personnel, or rescue crews, that use a Flat Earth model to navigate the world with. That's for a good reason. All Flat Earth is doing, is making people paranoid by sowing the seeds of doubt in them. It's easy online to spread misinformation, just bullshit and share half truths, with a bias narrative attached. Snake oil sellers of old WISH they could have reached as many people as we can today! There are people out there that take real joy from fucking with you so they WILL lie to you. YouTube has no system for checks and balances, no peer review system that weeds out these con men, so they're free to spread misinformation freely. So you have to be very careful who you get your information from. I know their arguments sound convincing on the surface...but don't just listen to them blindly. Question Flat Earth just as much as you now question the mainstream. If you are then great, and it's fine if you are still reaching the opposite conclusion. As much as it might annoy some of us, we can't force you to believe anything you don't want to, as hard as we try, and you shouldn't be mocked for having your own opinion. So don't get me wrong, I'm not trying to mock or discourage you, it's perfectly logical to question what you're told. Just be careful where you get your information from, that's all I ask of people.
    2
  20.  @sandragriffiths2441  Ya…no, you do not require the government to tell you what shape the Earth is. If YOU don’t personally know how to verify the Earth is spherical, it’s because of YOUR own ignorance and lack of knowledge and experience…don’t be so quick to assume that just because YOU don’t know something, it means everyone else doesn’t either. Learn to navigate…you won’t think the Earth is flat after that lesson. Plenty of video tutorials online to get you started.
    2
  21. Because the poles of Earth are more squashed than the equator which is slightly wider…so it’s accurate. Oblate SPHEROID….if all you paid attention too was “flattened at the poles”, then you’re not looking at every detail, you got tunnel vision.
    2
  22. Nope, you can verify the shape of the surface with just a few simple observations, using only a basic understanding of physics and geometry. To say you can’t, is just an ignorant excuse flatties would have you believe.
    2
  23. Buoyancy...you just described the physics of buoyancy, which is directly caused by the downward force of gravity...which is physics 101. Ever noticed that things still fall in a vacuum chamber? No displacement occurring there, just straight down, towards surface, no matter the material dropped. The question is what causes that motion? A force is required for all motion, that's also basic physics. Guess what causes the displacement of matter that occurs in buoyancy? The downward force that pulls denser matter to lowest potential energy. If nothing is pulling that matter down and putting into motion, then how would it push anything out of the way? If nothing is putting it in motion, then how exactly does displacement occur? But go ahead genius, derive me a new working equation for buoyancy that engineers can actually use in the real world, to help them design thing such as ships and ballast tanks, derive an equation that does not use gravity as a variable. Here's the current formula for buoyancy; Fb=Vpg. Go ahead and remove gravity...see how useful it becomes. Funny how you guys pay attention to the constellations...yet completely seem to forget that the South Hemisphere has it's own stars, its own constellations, its own axis of rotation, around its own pole star, Sigma Octantis. Wonder why that always seems to slip your mind? 🤔 Then you'll talk about physics as if you're the experts....yet completely forget about the laws of motion, namely conservation of momentum. There's nothing in all of physics that's more established and well understood, then the laws of motion...you wanna talk about Physics 101, it's the first thing you learn in physics. Yet you can't seem to understand how a plane lands on a moving surface....jeez dude, maybe go back to school and learn some PHYSICS?! You're one to talk about "brainwashing" and "indoctrination"...YOU ARE RELIGIOUS! A bible was fed to you since birth and now you believe it all on faith alone, no evidence necessary or required, it's all just true and that's that...cause a book told you it was? And you're gonna lecture us on brainwashing? You have to stand in AWE, of the masters of bullshit and brainwashing, that is all religion. Nothing has robbed humanity of its common sense and better reasoning, more than religion. Quite frankly, I'm tired of pretending Flat Earthers are not anything but stupid. You guys are absolutely delusional. Get back to us when you have a working model that can actually be used in ANY field of applied science. Until then, it's just another online hoax that some suckers fell for.
    2
  24.  @richardhislop9928  Doesn’t answer at all for the motion, why it’s always in the same direction, why its rate of acceleration is always 9.8m/s^2…you’re not answering for anything, just denying a basic fundamental law of physical reality, that nothing is put into motion without a force first putting it into motion. Last I checked, falling is a motion. The whole point of science is to figure out HOW things work…all you’ve done is stated the obvious, that things fall. Great job…but HOW and WHY? Can’t achieve much if we’re just gonna be lazy and never dig deeper into the functions of reality. I have no problem with people questioning consensus and challenging established science, go ahead, that’s encouraged in science. The trouble is your conclusions are flawed as shit, and it doesn’t take much thought or effort to see how. So we’re just calling out your obvious errors. So why should any of us just blindly agree with you, if we see right through your bullshit? No, what you’re asking of us is to NOT think for ourselves, that’s what you’re really asking. Welp, whine all you want, but we’re not just gonna roll over and accept information without question. So tough titty. Again, get back to us when you have a working model. Let us know when you’re able to put it to actual use, in inventing and innovating new technologies. Until then, save your empty babbling.
    2
  25.  @richardhislop9928  Still not answering for the why or the how. Why does matter orientate in the directions it does? How does it fall? Your best answer so far is “somehow”. Well great…if only science could do anything with “somehow”. I’ll give you a further answer, denser matter has more inertia, meaning it’s harder to move by kinetic impacts/forces, so as it’s pulled down by force of gravity to occupy the lowest spaces first, it easily pushes the less dense matter with less inertia out of the way, up in the exact opposite direction of gravity’s pull, because it doesn’t have enough inertia of its own to effect the downward motion of much denser matter, but the dense matter sure does, so it will occupy lowest position first. That’s why buoyancy is always in the same vectors, but opposite direction, of gravity….it’s gravity that causes the effect of buoyancy in the first place, it doesn’t occur without it. The downward force, is what starts the displacement, causing a chain reaction of motion. This is proven in countless experiments of buoyancy, from dropping things in vacuum, to putting density columns in zero g environments, or free fall. And it’s applied science…that’s why the downward acceleration of gravity (9.8m/s^2) is a variable in buoyancy equations. It’s no coincidence that this downward acceleration measurement works when applied in buoyancy equations…it’s because they’re directly linked, part of the same chain reaction of events. If it wasn’t, then the equation (Fb=Vpg) would not work when applied. And either way, you’re babbling on about a lot of physics you only seem to know bits and pieces about…but none of that changes the fact that we’ve measured the Earth, millions of pilots and sailors navigate its surface every single day, it is undoubtedly a sphere. Do you really think they could plot accurate navigation routes around Earth, with precise accuracy, if they didn’t know the true shape and scale, of the surface they navigate? 🤷‍♂️ Does your personal misunderstandings of physics, change anything about the applied science of navigation? No, it doesn’t…it’s basically just a sleight of hand trick, keep us occupied on the physics that can be juggled and misinterpreted, while more obvious evidence is ignored…but you’re really just fooling yourselves. Flat Earth is an online hoax, it always has been. You need to get a better bullshit filter…or at the very least, conduct your questioning with a less snarky attitude. You come here with a holier than thow attitude, you’re just inviting the same response in kind. Wouldn’t you rather have a civil conversation, rather than all this dick waving? You flash that ego around, it just gets other egos involved in a negative way…it’s not very productive. We’re thinking for ourselves too, so don’t claim or assume we’re not…if we weren’t, then you’d be having a much easier time here.
    2
  26. Nah , I don’t think I’m gonna do that.
    2
  27. 60 miles eh…got a source for that bullshit you just expected everyone to believe without question? So you think the laser targeting came from the ship itself? Interesting…ever heard of “painting the target”? Which typically takes place from a man out in the field with a laser, or these days a drone that’s out in the field, or an aircraft much closer to the object being targeted. Sounds like you made a lot of assumptions in your conclusion, before really researching any of it. Lasers also have a problem with refraction (bending in atmosphere) and diffraction (scattering in atmosphere)…two things that no laser can overcome. So lasers actually become very unreliable at great distances, they do not actually travel perfectly straight and tangent through atmosphere, as most seem to assume they do. So for that reason, laser targeting over long distances is typically not done from the ship gunner/artillery/aircraft itself…curvature is also a reason for this. Research laser refraction and diffraction sometime, it’s basic physics, easily verified. While you’re at it, research laser targeting…cause you’re sure making a lot of assumptions.
    2
  28. Gravity...and the fact that space does not suck. You're confusing the definition of vacuum here, space is not like a household vacuum cleaner that produces a suction, there is no suction in space. If you look up the definition for vacuum, the first definition is "a space completely void of matter", that's what is meant by vacuum in the context of space. It is jsut an empty space...that is all. Since space does not generate suction, there is nothing trying to suck our atmosphere off...but ya now what force does exist? Gravity, that attracts all matter towards the center of gravity, in our case Earth. Gravity is what keeps our oxygen and our atmosphere contained. There is of course entropy, but what people seem to forget is that entropy can be slowed. You do it all the time, any time you use a thermos to keep your coffee hot. Our Earth does the same thing with gravity keeping entropy contained, slowing it down and keeping atmosphere from being lost due to entropy. It still does occur and it will eventually win in the end, it always does...but it's going to take a VERY long time. Gravity contains atmosphere and it slows the process of entropy as well, essentially keeping it contained. So this is yet another reason why Flat Earth fights so hard to deny gravity. It's a real problem for their model. But let's look at it another way, we've sent weather balloons to the fringes of our atmosphere and brought back pressure readings of near perfect vacuum...so where was the barrier? We've taken photos from these heights and there is clearly black space above our blue atmosphere below, so again...where is this barrier? It is a physical tangible medium isn't it? So why haven't we interacted with it yet? Why haven't we bounced or refracted lasers or radar off of it yet? Why haven't we hit it with anything yet? See the issue? We have not found any evidence for this "container"...but we have found tons of evidence for gravity. So what would you like science to conclude? Would you prefer they ignore the evidence and follow bias instead?
    2
  29. Same level, meaning topographically speaking, they are both the same distance from center of Earth, they are at equipotential distance from center...please look up the word equipotential. Words in the English language take on new meaning, given the context they are used in. In geometry and topography, level does not necessarily mean flat and tangent. There is no smoking gun here...just a group of people who misunderstand a lot about the world, but think they don't.
    2
  30. Eric Dubay is a lying con artist and a Nazi sympathizer who spreads hate propaganda and misinformation...not a guy anyone should admire. If he's really gone, then good riddance.
    2
  31. You can make anything seem "reasonable", if you just repeat it often enough, and speculate endlessly, taking advantage of the gaps in peoples knowledge and playing to their fears and paranoias...most people are to lazy to challenge it, they'll eventually break psychologically. That's why Propaganda is so damn effective. But evidence is what matters in the end when it comes to science and the evidence says otherwise, so it's just nonsense.
    2
  32. Wow, I had no idea my laptop, the internet (and all technology really) came into being by what other people "feel". Didn't realize the laws of physical reality were different for everybody, but you've sure opened my eyes.
    2
  33. There are thousands of real pictures of Earth...is your search bar not working or something? Here's an archive of the thousands of photos taken during the various Apollo missions. https://www.flickr.com/photos/projectapolloarchive/albums You will find hundreds of photos of Earth here and in high resolution. If you think these are faked, feel free to tell me how you reached that conclusion. What method did you use to verify these are faked photos? We understand that it's difficult to discern CGI from real imagery today, but this is no reason to throw away your better reasoning in favor of paranoia. In most cases Flat Earth doesn't appear to put in much effort to verify if these are faked...they just assume they are right out of the gate before even looking at them. Flat Earth won't share these types of photos with you, they purposefully go looking for only the imagery that looks off to them...well take a look at some of the photos in this archive I have shared and then tell me if you think these look faked. They are in incredibly high resolution, so click on a few of them and blow them up to see if you can spot any irregularities. I'm an artist for a living...and to my trained eye, I have yet to spot a single brush stroke, paint blotch, or flaw of any kind that is present in every photo realistic painting upon closer inspection. So let me know how you think they faked these.
    2
  34. I would take survey data with a grain of salt. You forget which generation basically invented trolling...I very much doubt the majority of that 34% was taking the survey seriously. In my experience chatting with hundreds of Flat Earthers over the last 4 years, the very large majority were boomers/Gen Xers...most of them even bragged about it, as if being older should impress anyone. Just take a moment sometime to check out some videos from a few of the FE conventions that have happened last few years...just look around the audience that attends these conventions, then pay attention to how many of them are younger adults...you won’t find very many.
    2
  35.  @matt261102  Ah, very good then. xD Probably a good sign to get some sleep.
    2
  36. Well, you probably believed the words of some stranger online without question, who was preaching about Flat Earth, so what makes you think you weren’t just deceived by conmen? Why believe the words of strangers online, who have most likely never contributed to any field of science or engineering? 🤷‍♂️ Why so quick to trust people who have never demonstrated that they actually know what they’re talking about? Also, it’s not “see curvature every 8 miles”, it’s “8 inches of curvature squared every mile”, big difference…though that’s not even quite accurate, just another half truth Flat Earth uses to con people. As for curvature, here’s some basic geometry demonstrated for you https://youtu.be/U8Vz9r2yWO8. The closer you are to the surface of a sphere, the flatter it appears, so you can’t be so quick to assume that it’s flat, just because it looks flat.
    2
  37. No it is not, fact.
    2
  38. I wish everyone approached investigation with the same care, patience and rational mindset...but sadly, instead what we get is a lot of people who are just not as diligent, who sink right into the quick sand of confirmation bias, dazzled by the misinformation, simply because it's quicker, easier and adds fuel to their growing paranoia.
    2
  39. Observe one sunset, then realize how impossible that is on a flat Earth. Or, learn to navigate like an old sailor, and ask yourself why they have to use geodetic conversions to properly complete their routes. Actually...the entire craft of navigation is built on the conclusion that Earth is a sphere, from measuring the angle of Polaris to the horizon to help find your latitude and thus triangulate your position, to being able to circumnavigate, to there being two equally sized hemispheres, the list goes on. Anyone who’s spent time actually navigating the Earth, knows for absolute certain that it’s a sphere. Because it should be pretty common sense, that if people are going to navigate successfully, they’re going to need an accurate map/model to help them do that. And since there’s millions of people out there doing that right now, finding their destinations with perfect precision, while using globe coordinates to help them do it...it’s pretty easy to realize that flat Earth is just an Internet hoax.
    2
  40. Which explains how religions stick around for so long as well…boy isn’t human psychology great!? Like an abusive relationship you cling too cause “I’ve already invested so much time though…I can’t give up now.”
    2
  41. False, Earth’s rotation has been detected and measured in several different ways. From ring laser gyros and Foucault Pendulums experiments that do detect it, to the gyro compass which uses Earth’s rotation as part of its function, to Coriolis effect which is well documented and is exactly what we’d expect to see occur on a rotating sphere. Ignorance of the science is not an argument and it changes nothing. No, neither Einstein or Tesla said that. Only Flat Earth peddles density and buoyancy, no actual scientists say or believe that nonsense, just layman online who were successfully conned by huxters. Einstein determined that gravity isn’t technically a force by the regular definition, just motion through curved space time, doesn’t mean he was saying it doesn’t exist. It still behaves as a force from our perspective, so it can still be treated as such, Einstein made that pretty clear. Tesla disagreed with Einsteins conclusion of General Relativity, but understand that in his time, the science wasn’t yet conclusive, there was still room for argument. Genius does not imply a person can never be wrong, people need to really stop thinking it does. There is a small nugget of truth here though, density causes space time to curve, so in a way, density does cause the effect of gravity. Though it’s still an attractive motion we observe between two masses, so that attraction needs a name, makes it easier to know what is being discussed. Denying a very obvious motion of nature, just to win an argument, not a very sound strategy to reaching objective truth. Density is just a property of matter, that is already defined as how much mass occupies a certain volume of space, so it can’t be both a force and a state of matter, doesn’t fit the definition. Gravity is the name we give that downward motion, buoyancy is the upward motion. Buoyancy however, does not occur without gravity. The downward acceleration of matter is the direct cause of density displacement, which causes buoyancy. FE is just trying desperately to rewrite physics to fit what they want to be true. That’s not science, it’s confirmation bias. It’s akin to ramming a puzzle piece into place, even though it clearly doesn’t fit.
    2
  42. Well, you do realize there’s more variables there that kind of matter right? It’s not just the distance you need to consider, how tall is the object you’re viewing? How high is observation point? You do realize you can see further the higher you go, right? So what’s your observer height? These variables matter, as do many more that flat Earth will have you ignore, such as atmospheric refraction, which is going to effect what you see as well. As for radar, do some research on radio propagation. It’s basically the ability that certain bands of radio wave have, where they can actually be bounced off our atmosphere to extend their range. It’s pretty neat science, so worth researching.
    2
  43.  @KangenAlec  So a vaccine takes time to distribute, nobody is taking it at the same time, meanwhile people who have taken it are dying in droves, numbers that would be impossible to hide...don’t ya think people would stop taking it pretty much immediately after that? It’s not as simple as you think, that is a dumb strategy...people would be demanding the ring leaders heads on a pike, after a scandal like that. On top of that, many people won’t take it, cause they’re paranoid...so these paranoid people are all that’s left? Why would any ruling class want these paranoid people to be the only ones left? They wouldn’t, these are the first people they’d want gone, they’d want only the people who comply, to be around...so you’d make sure the virus is real and the vaccine works...kull the heard of these recklessly paranoid people, and then they look like heroes instead of murderers at the same time. Far better strategy. But it’s more likely, the internet has created these boogeymen, and you fell for the hysteria...it doesn’t really exist. Either way, YOU can’t even figure out the Earth isn’t flat, so no reason to trust your judgment on anything.
    2
  44.  @emeraldamb4771  ​​⁠​⁠ The title of the video is “WHY people think the Earth is flat”. Where in that title does it say this was intended as a debunk? 🤷‍♂️ This isn’t a science channel, Johnny is an independent journalist, he’s just delving into the ideology of Flat Earth, not so much the science. But the point of repeating that experiment was meant as a joke…and jokes aren’t as funny if you have to explain them, but I’ll explain it anyway. It’s an inconclusive experiment, it ignores gravity physics entirely, so it’s not a valid experiment, but many Flat Earthers don’t understand how it’s flawed. But anyone with even a basic understanding of physics (so most people) can almost immediately realize how it’s stupid…you can’t use a spirit level to determine Earth’s surface shape, any more than you can use a compass to determine the shape of a magnet. It will follow the force of gravity…rendering it impossible to determine Earth’s shape, using that tool. So repeating the experiment was done as a jab at them…but it also helps make a point, and it fits with the main theme of the video. A big reason people become Flat Earthers, is because they’re stupid. This was a nice way of pointing it out, without directly saying it…he was being polite, through subtle mockery. That’s the point. This video is not a debunk, it’s putting a lens on the people who fall for this shit.
    2
  45. Well, since you'd be under the Moon looking at it from that perspective, you'd actually see the back as well as the front (if the by front we mean the side that faces the Sun), so it would technically never be a full moon from your perspective. But still...same problem, the flat Earth model doesn't match reality, so it's fucked. Which is why Flat Earth fights so hard to convince people that the Moon generates its own light, cause they know how flawed this is...at least, some of them do. But either way, they have zero proof of this "self illuminating Moon", that for some reason fits the Moon phases of the heliocentric model perfectly...but no need to pay attention to that. xD Flat Earth survives on ignorance.
    2
  46. Because the point of this video wasn’t to debunk or prove anything, it was just to analyze a particular movement and give an outsider opinion on their philosophy and psychology, focusing primarily on why they believe what they believe. It’s an opinion piece, not a science lecture.
    2
  47.  @evanoverzet921  Sorry, but I wasn’t responding to you, my comment was addressed to the original commenter. Everyone who responds to the comment gets pinged by anyone responding to the main comment.
    2
  48. Except they do...pretty often in fact.
    2
  49. As was already mentioned, refraction is basic physics, it’s well documented and studied, it’s very real. I’m sure you’re aware of it’s effect, you’ve gone swimming before I’m sure, so I’m sure you’re aware that objects under the water appear in a slightly different location than they actually are, that’s due to light refraction. That shimmering effect off a hot road in the summer, that’s light refraction. Mirages, light refraction. This is common knowledge for any scientist, surveyor, sailor, etc…refraction will effect what you see at distances, so it must always be factored. I get that it’s not common knowledge for many in the general public, but you live in the information age…you could search it anytime, and learn all about it, even see some simple experiments that verify it. For a great demonstration, look up the Rainy Lake experiment sometime, has a whole section on refraction with some great video demonstrations and photos. It’s great that Robotham (Parallax) was doing his own experiments, but that doesn’t automatically mean he was doing it correctly and without errors. This is why we have peer review in science, because errors are actually pretty common in experimentation, often takes a different set of eyes to catch them, because we all (unfortunately) have our own cognitive biases, and limitations in knowledge and experience.
    2
  50.  @shahmielhakim1510  So if it renders, then the coding exists...so the destination technically exists, right? Listen, it’s well understood in philosophy that really the only thing you can be certain of is that YOU exist; “I think, therefore I am”. But so what? A person can go crazy thinking in nihilism, robs you of truly enjoying the only life you can be certain of. Get out and travel, you’ll be glad you did...believe it’s just “rendered” all you want, doesn’t really matter, if it’s there when you get there, then it exists within time and space. And if it un-renders when you’re gone, then it still exists in time and in a memory...so it still technically exists. It’s a waste of time worrying about existence in nihilistic terms, might as well just enjoy it. I mean, technically, your five senses create your reality for you...so technically YOU create the universe, just as much as it creates you...so technically, life has never been anything but a simulation, doesn’t mean it’s not real...you’re experiencing it, aren’t you? Even a simulation exists physically in the form of coding and experienced through your physical sense of vision...so it technically exists. Best to just make the most of it. But...what do I know, I’m just a bot programmed for optimism. 🦾🤖
    2