Comments by "Flook D" (@flookd5516) on "The 10 Things That All Flat Earthers Say" video.

  1. Another idiot who can’t understand how masks & vaccines work….
    17
  2. And hence used to describe a force that gives weight to objects.
    16
  3. A scientific theory is a comprehensive explanation for a natural phenomenon that is well-substantiated by extensive observation and experimentation. It is not a guess or hunch; that is the vernacular meaning of theory. What do you think the valid FE ideas are?
    15
  4. Numbers seem to be an anathema to FEers; they make claims of knowing the Real Physics but assiduously avoid involving numbers.
    14
  5. Example?
    13
  6. Lies such as what? We’re talking about a few atoms/molecules per cubic metre and a body with insufficient gravitational force to counter the kinetic energy those atoms/molecules have.
    12
  7. Motion of the sun, horizons, angle to Polaris matching latitude, constellations changing with latitude & season, two celestial poles and lunar eclipses always having circular shadows. All verifiable by anybody & everybody.
    12
  8.  @petertovin1274 ​​⁠​​⁠”government funded money” No, grants are not bids for government contracts to arrive at desired conclusions. If you wish to criticise the funding of science then first take the trouble to find out the funding mechanisms. FE research is inept: poorly designed, ignoring key factors, employing the wrong maths and carefully ignoring what would disprove their claims. And, yes, we have gone through it over and over and over and over ad infinitum. FE’ers have repeatedly been told that the FE can be disproved by looking up and tracking sun, moon & stars. It has been explained to them why it would contradict a FE but that doesn’t faze them. Demonstrating the Earth to be a globe specifically takes more effort but is not difficult if you are willing to either travel or collaborate with others; they aren’t interested. None can provide a plausible explanation for a totally pointless conspiracy flawlessly run by millions of people for 2500 years but they readily believe it. What evidence would you accept?
    12
  9. Gravity is neither irresistible nor the only force.
    11
  10. Be specific.
    11
  11. What FE arguments do you find convincing? Take the trouble to give a few.
    11
  12. The Suez Canal is level, not flat, it remains at the same elevation about the globe's surface from beginning to end. "there is a treaty of 197 countries " You're confusing the UN with the Antarctic Treaty; that has 52 signatories and contains no clause forbidding travel below the 66th parallel. If you wish to disagree then step up the plate and be the first FE'er to say which clause. There are plane flights to the south pole; how far south of 66 degrees do you wish to go? Vacuum's don't have force; there is nothing in a vacuum to generate force. The kinetic forces in gases means they would tend to expand; the expansion is countered by gravity, resulting in decreasing pressure with increasing altitude. Be the first to explain how you would get that phenomenon inside a dome with no gravity.
    11
  13. How does water observe its environment, make decisions and move itself?
    10
  14. Divide 360 by 25,000.
    10
  15. You mean like the way railway tracks diverge as they approach you?
    10
  16. Same as railway lines meeting up.
    10
  17. Put on some soft gloves before you start or the face palming will give you a black eye.
    9
  18.  @jdog2901 How did NASA fool the ancient Greeks?
    9
  19. They routinely seem to visualise in the range of a 25 mile circumference. One actually quoted what he expected to see on a globe that would require a 3.4 mile circumference; he didn’t think it differed significantly from 25,000 miles.
    9
  20. Still waiting on the FE'er explanation for the Cavendish experiment.
    9
  21. Rivers from high elevation to low elevation, not north to south.
    9
  22. Lies such as what?
    9
  23. In relativity gravity is an apparent force, like centrifugal force is. It doesn’t mean gravity doesn’t exist.
    9
  24. It’s funny how FE’ers keep repeating the 10 Things.
    9
  25. He made a video in his astronomy section that explained how we know the Earth is a globe; he had of deluge of FE’ers and got sick of answering the same questions over and over.
    9
  26. Whether it is a force or an apparent force is immaterial to the FE claim; gravity exists.
    8
  27. Which country did Sputnik come from?
    8
  28. Elevation =/= curvature.
    8
  29.  @Altt Ignorance & incredulity coupled with the desire to feel special.
    8
  30.  @petroleumalley  Legititmate critcisms such as what?
    8
  31. Not a bad attempt but actual FEers usually deny that other celestial objects are just shapeless lights.
    8
  32. What are you saying it has been replaced with?
    8
  33. Walther Jimenez He is smarter than most. People can believe what they wish but if they wish to claim their beliefs are the truth they need to be able demonstrate that. FE’ers spout the same inanities repeatedly; this video explains why they are inanities, not profound truths rewriting modern science.
    8
  34. You don’t know it is wrong; as with any form of encyclopedia the accuracy isn’t flawless and from that you assume everything must be wrong. Two very different things.
    8
  35. The diehards have chained themselves to the cave wall (and, ironically, some of them claim to be the people outside the cave) but many ate just standing and looking. The latter people are open to demonstration that they are gawping at shadows. If we don’t then ultimately the bulk of the populace will be living in Platonic caves.
    8
  36. If you wish to win then you need to tackle Prof Dave’s subsequent videos.
    8
  37. Darn - all those places that I haven't visited and I learn I can't go because I haven't been for them to exist in the first place...
    8
  38. There's this thing called gravity that acts on the gas, countering the movement of the gas.
    8
  39.  @petertovin1274 ​​⁠”can you prove gravity” You can reproduce the Cavendish experiment for yourself. Weight is a result of gravity acting on mass while density is not a force and certainly doesn’t have direction. Still waiting on a valid FE’er explanation for how that could work. “Sideways” attraction between masses. Variation in gravity between altitudes.
    8
  40. One of you needs to produce evidence & explanations, not just keep repeating the same ignorant & incredulous claims. Do you want to try?
    8
  41. Do you understand that more than one factor can apply at any given time? That gravity is not an irresistible force?
    7
  42. The deviation is tiny; it’s practically a perfect sphere.
    7
  43.  @christinafox7514 Either someone posing as a polit or a pilot being sarcastic or humurous. Since there are no FE maps nor a means to navigate on a FE it is extremely unlikely that the folks who have to navigate planes are FE’ers doing so.
    7
  44. @Markath47 He means that he learned more about science while finding out why FE'era are wrong.
    7
  45.  @Dav96487 Depends on your rate of digging and how long you can sustain it.
    7
  46. You didn’t learn the properties of solids, liquids & gases? Whether gravity is a force or an apparent force is irrelevant to the question of whether gravity exists. It’s the FE’ers who can’t grasp how curvature is measured. Most seem unaware there are 360 degrees in a circle.
    7
  47. A sports drink in the US and it’s reference to theJonestown massacre where hundreds of people knowingly drank a poisoned drink because the cult leader told them to. Look up “drinking the kool-aid” or Jonestown massacre.
    7
  48. You can see the sun rising & setting.
    7
  49. Because the Earth is spherical not cylindrical.
    7
  50. They’re no banned; the algorithms were altered to downgrade misinformation in searches. The folks measuring canals ignore the effect of elevation & refraction and those beaming lasers across lakes ignore beam divergence, refraction and leveling error. The mentality is that not bothering to confounding factors magically nullifies their effect.
    7
  51. You haven’t actually said what it is that you think is wrong.
    7
  52.  @Yaywayable  Most FE'ers do seem quite abusive, either starting with or quickly falling back on disparagement regardless of the replies they receive.
    7
  53. When he first released this video FE’ers were attempting to refute it by repeating the points he had just debunked. That’s the level of thinking FE’ers are capable of.
    7
  54. Well...rotating once per day 😊
    7
  55. Scientific theory is a comprehensive explanation for a natural phenomenon that is well-substantiated by extensive experimentation and observation. It is not a guess or hunch; that is the vernacular meaning of theory.
    7
  56. Attraction on a FE woukd be towards the central point with down thus being at an angle to the ground rather than perpendicular to it. Their main argument is that they can’t sense it though that criterion doesn’t stop them accepting that radio works.
    7
  57.  @chocobo7954 He’s quite aware. He used buoyancy rather than buoyant force because FE’ers would see only the word force and take it was acknowledging density & buoyancy are correct.
    7
  58. Then rebut what he says.
    7
  59. What about it?
    7
  60.  @dia2149  Motion of the sun, horizons, angle to Polaris matching latitude, constellations changing with latitude, two celestial poles and lunar eclipses always having a circular shadow - all indicative of a globe, all incompatible with a FE and we are still waiting on your fabled explanations on how you think they would work on a FE. Meanwhile I asked you what convinces you that your are living on a FE and you aren't answering. Why not try it? If you feel it to be so conclusive then why the reluctance?
    7
  61. His previous two videos were for that but FE’ers aren’t open to evidence & explanations. They just kept putting forward the same canards so this video laid into them.
    7
  62.  @Joshuaballsack  I take it you don’t remember science classes where the meaning of scientific theory was explained to you. Clue: it’s not the vernacular meaning of theory. You don’t need to know the cause of anything to be aware something exists. People were being killed by lightning long before electricity was discovered.
    6
  63. Condensation of what exactly? What does terra-forming Mars have to with with demonstrating FE?
    6
  64.  @homelesszaya6711  Do you understand the difference between small and large? The deviation from a perfect sphere is too small to be obvious in a picture. Earth’s radius is 3,900 miles; oblation reduces it by 10 miles, not the 1000 miles you are envisaging.
    6
  65. Infinite area would mean infinite mass and thus infinite gravity.
    6
  66. There's nothing in the vacuum to do the sucking. There are molecules in the higher pressure region that will push an object.
    6
  67. Whether it is a force (Newton) or an apparent force (relativistic) is immaterial to the argument; it exists and FE'er deny that it does. Some are trolling, some are serious.
    6
  68.  @homelesszaya6711  Do you understand that more than one force can act simultaneously?
    6
  69.  @sissy-_-fnyc She was referring to his conduct as President, not legitimacy about the election.
    6
  70.  @petroleumalley Maybe that’s the problem 😊
    6
  71. Ideas that FE’ers keep repeating, endlessly repeating. I’m glad you can see the idiocy of the claims but they can’t.
    6
  72. How would a theological disagreement have any relevance to science?
    6
  73.  @savedbygrace8337 Try looking up what Admiral actually said, not just repeating other people’s ideas of what they woukd have liked him to have said. Byrd was exploring (taking risks as he did so) not flying a regular air route.
    6
  74. It was and still is a byword for dumb. Some moneygrubbers realised there was money to be made from the gullible by peddling the idea to people who had grown suspicious of anything official.
    6
  75. Relativity means there is no way to distinguish whether you, Earth or both are moving, not that it just gotta be the Earth that is moving. That gravity is an apparent force in relativity does not mean the gravitational effect (gravity) doesn’t exist.
    6
  76. More that FE'ers can't agree on any details other than "it's just gotta be flat". "they are not FE proves at all" Until one of you provides this definitive list of proofs that you all claim to possess we are obliged to work with what each of you do produce. "there are so many evidences FEer have pointed out to denounce globe earth model" Well, none really but the point of this video was discussing FE'ers reasoning powers or lack thereof, not any of the FE models per se. Many FE'ers do think water levels itself and not in response to any force acting upon it. We are still waiting on the FE explanation for how water can form a level surface; "just does" doesn't cut it. "why laser or telephoto cameras can see across the long distance of earth" Because how far you can see is dependent on a combination of curvature, elevation & atmospheric refraction, not on curvature alone. Still waiting on the FE'er explanation for how viewing distance increases with elevation. "yet can not detect the claimed horizon drop" The drop is only a few degrees and that is not something that would leap out at the naked eye. When drop is actually measured it is evidently present. That FE'ers accept only eyeballing is your limitation. "8in/mi square for estimate the approximate drop of earth" There's novel - a FE'er who is aware it is an approximation. "free earth curvature calculator to get accurate earth drop by distance" Some calculate only geometric drop, others take into account elevation & refraction to calculate hidden drop & refracted hidden drop, which is what you actually see. "the distant object across the lakes or seas that completely defy the globe with the accurate ball earth surface drop numbers" They fit what is calculated when curvature, elevation & atmospheric refraction are accounted for. You choose to use only the ones that calculate just geometric drop because you are either dumb or ingenuous. "You are intentional to fight against the FE facts" We're still waiting on these FE facts. You just keep coming out with the above. "people who understand how you were manipulating the facts" Such as? And "just gotta be" is not a valid explanation. "Why not you explain the powered momemtum gyro on gimbal even spins for hours will not register the earth daily 360degree rotation?" It does if the gyroscope has minimal friction and has sufficient momentum to adequately counter what friction does exist; most don't. Laser gyroscopes are frictionless; they always demonstrate 15 degrees per hour rotation. Still waiting on the FE'er explanation for why that occurs. All you've done is come out with various canards. If you wish us to work with the Real Evidence, Real Model, Real Physics etc then you need to produce them.
    6
  77. You miss the point; many people don’t know the difference between the scientific and vernacular meaings of theory and assume that the theory of X means X is just an idea somebody had.
    6
  78. An election for President comes down to a choice between two candidates on the ballot paper. Holding your nose and selecting who you consider the least worst is not joining a cult or being brainwashed. What you said is symptomatic of the polarisation in the US; you have no sense of anything existing between the poles.
    6
  79.  @rechoice9010  You think everybody should arrive at different conclusions from common evidence?
    6
  80. Explain how density acts a force and ehh in a consistent explain how Cavendish demonstrated the existence of gravity 160 years before NASA was founded. Explain where you think 8”/mile^2 takes into account elevation and refraction. Explain how you think water observes it’s environment, makes decisions and moves it self. Explain what you think is in a vacuum to do the sucking. Explain why there is decreasing air pressure with increasing altitude. How many revolutions does the globe make per day?
    6
  81. We shouldn’t point out the gaping holes or admonish FE’ers for wilfully ignoring them?
    6
  82.  @mateinroblox Unfortunately FE’ers frequently make this assertion without any thought as to how water would do it without external influence.
    6
  83.  @TheBlueskyson  Check the recent debate between him and Prof Dave.
    6
  84. 🥃 Note: 70% covered by water, not 70% water by volume.
    6
  85. Try actually producing your facts and logic.
    6
  86. Himawari-8, Elektro-L & EPIC are collectively taking several shots per hour, all immediately downloadable. Blue Marble & Earthrise are single-frame shots on film.
    6
  87. It’s a matter of context. He made a video in his astronomy section about how we know the Earth is a globe and received a deluge of FE comments that relied on the above assertions. He got tired of correcting them and made this video.
    6
  88. We’re talking people who find a millenia-old, totally pointless conspiracy more plausible than the notion that they’re being hoodwinked by a conman on YT.
    6
  89. You need to consider yourself extremely intelligent; not the same thing.
    6
  90. “Use your brain please” Watch Prof Dave’s next video (10 Challenges), use your brain and answer them.
    6
  91.  @thesun4688  He didn't ask any questions aside from a single rhetorical one. Am I supposed to be psychic?
    6
  92. It's more that the <insert favourite bogeymen> are solely responsible.
    6
  93. You’re conflating fact, opinion & belief.
    6
  94.  @phathokum1855  There's no reason you shouldn't be answering me then. Try rebutting what he said.
    6
  95. Durwood2k The moving upwards idea was dumped years ago, essentially because it was readily demonstrable that the Earth would have to be accelerating, not a constant velocity, and would reach lightspeed after a year. “Density is a force” has been the main claim for some years and many now seem to be subscribing to the Law of Just Does.
    6
  96. Volcanoes don’t release jam? 🤔
    6
  97. Stand at the border between Ireland and Northetn Ireland and you can see the UK quite clearly 😊 I believe there is actually a place in NI where it is possible to see Scotland.
    5
  98. It’s a difference of applying thought & reasoning to arrive at conclusions rather than simply looking for something to support a presumed belief. Most FE’ers are looking to reinforce a fundamentalist religious outlook or are simply wanting to boost there self-esteem by being in a minority that sees what the majority don’t. They are incapable of providing plausible explanations for what we observe or provide a predictive model; they just keep asserting the canards Prof Dave debunks.
    5
  99.  @philaypeephilippotter6532  Logically that means popcorn has the power to reveal God, be the magic key to get through the impenetrable dome and is an antidote to mind control 😊
    5
  100. Unless something prevents it from doing so like gravity pulling it towards Earth.
    5
  101.  @Alkis05  Don’t give them ideas; numbers aren’t their strong suite and they will simply argue 1xg is infinite gravity because it is continuous rather than any grasp of the difference between 1 and infinite.
    5
  102. Jesse Diaz It will give you a parabola, not a circle.
    5
  103. The elliptical orbit does not cause seasons.
    5
  104. Mph is a linear velocity; 1000mph is reference to the tangential velocity, not the rotation.
    5
  105. You cant see it from below the equator. The angle to Polaris measurably matches latitude; it is below the horizon there. All they have to do is look.
    5
  106. Big lad Or the Law of Just Does.
    5
  107. You realise that FE was disproved purely from observation 2500 years ago? Whether an astronaut is in space or not bears no relevance to that discussion.
    5
  108. They claim that water flattens itself ("finds its own level") but won't explain why drops, waterfalls & meniscus aren't flat.
    5
  109. The trouble is that many people think they can ignore the science and summarily dismiss results they don't like based on bugger all knowledge of the particular subject. If you have multiple specialists in agreement on a subject then it is reasonable to "believe the science" in the sense of accepting their informed conclusions.
    5
  110. The vernacular and the scientifuc uses; in science there is only one definition.
    5
  111.  @rechoice9010  Most people arise at similar conclusions; why do you think everybody's conclusion should be different? Why should everybody arrive at different conclusions from measuring the shape of the same object?
    5
  112. Watch #10 again.
    5
  113.  @TheRealWattLife  Why not try saying where you think Prof Dave was wring in this video?
    5
  114.  @TheRealWattLife  The rate of downwards acceleration is measurable and testable.
    5
  115. Have you ever figured out why your grocery bill differs from week to week?
    5
  116.  @woodand  "Respect is earned by conduct or achievements" And their achievements are claiming that reality is wrong for reasons they can't explain, claiming they have a working FE map that none of them can produce and denying anything that conflicts with what they would like to believe. What is there to respect?
    5
  117.  @Nikioko  Look up Poe’s Law. You wouldn’t be the first to equate north & south with high & low.
    5
  118. It’s been explained to them umpteen times by umpteen people why they are wrong yet they keep repeating the same claims and hailing themselves as thinkers. It becomes difficult to remain polite.
    5
  119. Lunar phases are due to the relative orientation of the sun, moon & Earth; as the moon orbits the Earth you see a varying proportion of the sunlit side of the moon. Nothign is casting a shadow on the moon; you're looking at the part that is turned away from the sun.
    5
  120. Try refuting him.
    5
  121. John Challeen It’s for the benefit of those looking down the rabbit hole rather than those who’ve leapt down it
    5
  122. Many of the questions asked on here arise from willful ignorance; they’ve been given the answer multiple times (often even in the same thread) and are easy to google but they aren’t interested in knowing the answer, hence the lack of patience. Genuine questions are different; we progress by asking questions & sharing knowledge and most regulars would be happy to answer them.
    5
  123. Rotation is simply change in angle over time usually expressed as rad/sec or revolutions per minute. It isn’t measured as distance over time; that is linear velocity. Some people talk of Earth rotating at 1000mph because that sounds really fast when it’s actually a sedate one revolution per day and try to compare that to the circumference of a merry-go-round to give the impression of being even faster.
    5
  124. The tangential velocity at the equator is 1041 mph. The rotational velocity everywhere is one revolution per day.
    5
  125. Which is why it gets used as a rule of thumb by land surveyors. It still produces a parabola, not a circle, and it does not calculate how far you can see.
    5
  126. You can’t see radio waves; does your TV not work?
    5
  127. You won't have to kick them out; they'll open the airlock themselves to prove there is no vacuum outside :-)
    5
  128.  @yan-amar  It’s a recurring quote from FE’ers trying to bolster their assertion that gravity doesn’t exist.
    5
  129. FE’ers’ favourite explanation is “ask somebody else”. None of them can provide meaningful answers.
    5
  130. Mikey Tyson And no still no explanation how they identify pictures as fake.
    5
  131.  @skeleton7972  Let me guess - the four words are "The Earth is Flat" and you have no notion those words convey sweet FA about FE claims?
    5
  132.  @a_diamond  No; to normal people reference to sea-level means mean sea-level, not tides.
    5
  133. Gender & sex are different things.
    5
  134. Seems normal for FE’ers. They think gravity being continuous means it’s irresistible. They prattle on about perspective but have real problems with size & distance.
    5
  135. How do inanimate objects seek anything?
    5
  136. Some confuse north-south as higher & lower elevations, others conflate elevation & curvature.
    5
  137. Michaelson & Morley and Airy failed to find evidence of luminiferous aether; explain why you think no evidence proves something. Sagnac's observations are explained by relativity. How difficult is it for you people to understand that photographs can be taken from different heights? That there isn't some magical height from which all space photos are taken? Piccard, Cook, Ross & Byrd are all misquoted by FE'ers. Why don't you actually find out what they said?
    5
  138. See his debate with David Weiss.
    5
  139. AwesomeJWiz The world is 25,000 miles in circumference. That means 0.0144 degrees curvature per mile; not something that jumps out at you.
    5
  140. His original video was in his astronomy section and laid out how we know the Earth is round. He was bombarded by FE’ers pushing these errors. Their response to this video frequently included repeating these claims. What do you envisage the “flat Earthers’ experience” to be?
    5
  141. Do you want answers?
    5
  142. Try refuting what Dave said.
    4
  143. 1. They're fooling you to fool you. 2. To hide an omnipotent, omnipresent god by ...means.... 3. To take economic benefit of the inaccessible lands beyond the unsurmountable ice-wall and impenetrable dome. 4. To control your mind by...means....
    4
  144. Having explained to a FE'er how you can calculate the angle to Polaris from different points on a FE using trigonometry I get a handwaving claim of maths being different in the real world.
    4
  145.  @homelesszaya6711  Do you understand what percentage means? If you're looking at a picture of an object 7,900 miles across then a 10 mile oblation at the pole would be less than 1 pixel difference. Just because you think 10 miles is a long way does not mean it remains prominent regardless of the scale of the object being considered. Did you learn about ratios and scale in school? WGS84 (World Geodetic System) is the measured shape of Earth down to about a cubic metre. The GPS system uses WGS84 for calculating the co-ordinates & distance it sends you. Land surveyors made the earlier model from the the 19th century onwards. Since space flight was developed, satellite geodesy has become the norm, relying on radio communications and radar to measure distances. "if a walls out if plum u can see it" Only when the distortion reaches the point where your eye can distinguish it and your eyes are not very sensitive when it comes to gauging distances. Not being able to readily observe something with your eyes does not mean it doesn't exist. It's why we rely on instruments for accurate measurements, not eyeballing. Ian was essentially asking if you understood the concept of shape. Regardless of what something is made of, a sphere is a sphere. It doesn't matter whether the sphere is Earth, basketball, golf ball or pool ball, it's a sphere. That you can't see the distortion of a basketball sitting on the ground does not mean there is no distortion; the distortion is not automatically gross enough for you to perceive. That is true for all spheres. Tyson referred to pear-shaped while talking about the slight bulge of the southern hemisphere. The distortion is even less than the polar oblation. He did not literally mean it resembles a pear, just used the term to convey where the distortion was. "I'm skeptical of all I learned as a child in school . Its all just regurgitating what u have been taught" Scepticism is wanting to know the basis for an assertion, not blowing it off as "regurgitation". The science you learn in school is the very basics; it's so long established that it can be taught as simple facts with demonstrations for your benefit. Only when you reach university level does it become important to know the exact basis for something. "I see far to many indescrepincies in the "science" " You not knowing or understanding something means precisely that; it is not a profound revelation that nobody knows or understands something or that there has been a colossal screw-up that nobody has noticed. "it's all just insult and banter" Everybody has pointed out the scale of the oblation relative to the Earth's radius. That you miss the point does not mean people are failing to answer your question, just that you aren't understanding what is said. Do remember that you are telling us that 10 is a large proportion of 3900. If you have questions then ask (politely) but be prepared to listen to the answers. If you don't understand something then say just that and ask for clarification; don't start telling other people that they don't know what they are talking about.
    4
  146. “Surely they would have the tech to zoom in enough” No.
    4
  147. Phones existed, radio existed and a signal can be relayed through both media. The last part seems really difficult for some people to grasp.
    4
  148. I wonder if Dave would like to make a list of FE counter-arguments? "I can easily refute it but I'm not going to." "It's all wrong but I can't say how exactly." "Watch this video that relies on the errors you just described." "We don't make any of those claims." "Open your eyes." "The Bible says it's flat." Any others? Then again he'd just be accumulating flak on a third video....
    4
  149.  @dovski3161  He’s addressing FE’ers who have a limited grasp of terms. Buoyancy describes the action of something floating; buoyant force is the calculable force involved. He used buoyancy in place of buoyant force otherwise FE’ers would simply latch on the word force and assume he was agreeing that density is a force. FE’ers have no grasp of gravitational force being proportional to mass. To them it is either huge or zero. As I said, if the Earth was flat then gravity woukd reshape it as it has every other planet. Assuming Earth was magically able to resist this then the direction of down would vary across the surface, becoming increasingly oblique with distance from the centre.
    4
  150. The accelerating disc has been largely dropped; they finally twigged that a FE would approach light speed within a year. Gravity measurably decreases with increasing elevation and centrifugal force partially counters gravity the nearer you get to the equator; FE’ers explain neither.
    4
  151. BlackDuke07 You’re claiming the Earth is flat; the onus is on you to prove that, preferably without using the screwed up FE logic Prof Dave just described.
    4
  152. Hypotheses die off because they are disproved. The FE was disproved 2500 years ago and we are still waiting on FE’ers to produce their claimed evidence, FE us not a science.
    4
  153. The logic is not for the benefit of the unpersuadable but those who are curious about the subject.
    4
  154. This is the third video he made on the subject and was as polite as you wish in the first two. He was met with a lot of vitriol and these claims being endlessly repeated by “thinkers” despite the obvious fallacies. Most people’s patience would be stretched.
    4
  155. "a mass say in a bucket" Use the diameter of the bucket to calculate the degrees of curvature across the surface then think about why you can't see it.. (360 degrees in a circle). "Earth spins at about 1670 kilometers per hour " Which is the tangential velocity. The rotational velocity is once per day, half the speed of a clock's hour hand. "water running up hill is just an allusion there's many roads the same" Running south to north is not uphill. Uphill woudl be from a lower elevation to a higher elevation and elevation is not curvature. "how is it that you can see the moon in Americas sky at night and at the same time see it in the day time in Australia?" Because it is 259,000 miles away.
    4
  156. a productive use of my time | Socratic irony When provided with the requested explanations & evidence that the Earth is a globe and why it can’t be flat, in what way are people “wanting the truth” in refusing to listen?
    4
  157.  @GilTheKing-yx7gz  The sun rising & setting disproves FE; it doesn't need anybody to arrange it.
    4
  158. A law is a description of a natural phenomenon; it offers no explanation as to how the phenomenon occurs. Law if gravity notes the relationship between attraction, mass and distance. Theory of gravity is an explanation for why the attraction occurs. A fact is simply a nugget of information, eg, if you let go of an steel ball it falls. A hypothesis is a proposed explanation for an action & result, from which predictions can be made and the hypothesis tested. Most will be disproved; science is largely a process of elimination. Over time multiple hypotheses become combined as lines of enquiry converge. That leads to an overarching theory which will be accepted as a working explanation once people are satisfied that it is comprehensive, accurately predictive and no alternatives are viable. It does not change to a law; theory & law are quite different things.
    4
  159. Capt'Wes Starwind It’s OK; he didn’t mention the sealions.
    4
  160. Mark Twain.
    4
  161.  @black97iä  Try Greater Sapien; he's been working through the 200 Proofs.
    4
  162.  @spadesandaces4543  All but the most illiterate use full stops to make sentences clear.
    4
  163.  @savedbygrace8337 False dichotomy; you’re assuming there can only be intense thunderstorms or still air.
    4
  164. FE’ers have had multiple people explain what is wrong with their reasoning but keep repeating it. This response to this video was to repeat the comments again. It’s not arrogance; it’s irritation at the willful stupidity.
    4
  165. He had been on the receiving end of FE vitriol for months for making his astronomy course video that explained how we know the Earth is a sphere. Most of the FE slam-dunk "evidence" is covered in the above 10 points; their reasoning is superficial at best and reliant on ignorance & incredulity, not actual thought. Their response is more vitriol and repeating these points for the two years since, not actually refuting them. They are not pleasant or intelligent people to deal with.
    4
  166.  @reddishtykes  If they were banned or censored then the videos & their parent channels would no longer exist on YT.
    4
  167.  @dillpickle2132  Something along the lines of “that’s not important, you need to open your eyes”.
    4
  168. How does density act as a force and why in a consistent direction? You think you know the answer so try answering.
    4
  169. The molecule H2O is usually called water regardless of its physical state.
    4
  170.  @DamianMealor FEers do it just above the water because the refraction is maximised, enabling to see further. It’s why Rowbotham made his sighting lying on the iced over canal while Wallace used bridges for his sighting point.
    4
  171. Tesla never said he thought gravity didn’t exist. Explain why objects fall inside a Faraday cage.
    4
  172. Any of the ten would be a novelty.
    4
  173. "The Bible refers to the Earth being flat in certain passages" The OT predates the ancient Greeks; it was still assumed that the Earth was flat and that is sometimes reflected in the phrasing used when referring to the world but it does not teach anything about the shape of the Earth. By the time the NT was written the Earth was accepted to be a sphere (at least by the educated); there is no teaching from Jesus saying otherwise.
    4
  174.  @TheRealWattLife His next video in the series.
    4
  175.  @josephprettner6696  That went over your head, didn't it? Where lasers have been used to "prove" there is no curvature the effects of divergence & refraction have been ignored. Even the divergence alone means the beam is so wide at the receiving end there is no way to demonstrate whether or not there is a drop.
    4
  176. As well as automatically denying gravity they have great difficulty in understanding that more than factor can act simultaneously. This is aimed at the wilfully dumb.
    4
  177. Pressure on a scale. If you know the strength of the location’s gravity then mass can be derived from weight. Density is the ratio of mass to unit volume. Density does not determine mass.
    4
  178. Everest is 5.5 miles high; the Earth’s radius is 3,900 miles. The variation in elevation has no significant effect upon its shape. Oblation reduces the radius by about 10 miles.
    4
  179.  @Machodave2020  The only jagged bit would be mountains which means elevation. Are you saying there is a bite out of Earth (like the Apple logo) that They are hushing up?
    4
  180.  @Eaglez27  Not so open your brains fall out. Motion of the sun, horizons, two celestial poles and constellations varying with latitude, lunar eclipses; that’s how the ancient Greeks deduced the Earth was a sphere. Still waiting on the FE explanations.
    4
  181. Any air in the airlock would expand into the vacuum, the air that is behind you pushing you out of the airlock. If the airlock already has the same pressure as outside then you don’t move.
    4
  182. Ethan P No, pushed. That is why I used the verb pushed and described what would be pushing you.
    4
  183. How does water observe its environment, make decisions and move itself?
    4
  184. Centrifugal force at the equator (where it will be the strongest) is less than 0.3% the strength of gravity.
    4
  185.  @benfran8011 To reproduce any experiment you need to possess the methodology; your description is too indeterminate and doesn’t cover the possible variables.
    4
  186. All it would require to disprove it would be a FE’er who understood the science, rather than thinks he understands it.
    4
  187.  @thesun4688  Katrina is a female name; do you mean her questions? I answered them; do I need to clarify something for you?
    4
  188. Mean sea level is a fixed height used for reference.
    4
  189.  @a_diamond  There ate mo links appearing in your OP. You’re able to see them because you posted the comment but nobody else can. Be it tides or flooding, without those links you appear to be saying sea level (as a reference point) changes with tides or sporadic flooding rather climate change causing a long term change in physical sea levels.
    4
  190.  @calvinzundel5725  "mysteriously all the data from that trip disappeared" No, eventually telemetry tapes became technologically outdated and were replaced. In the days of CDs, DVDs, flash drives, hard drives, SSD and the cloud the concept of data being transferable is apparently beyond the grasp of some people who transfer data when they read their text & email. Some tapes still exist with one piece of equipment in the world capable of reading them; the set of tapes that contained the recording of the EVA was found to have been erased or mislabelled. Two different facts. "all pics of earth from space are cgi" We're still waiting for someone to provide an explanation of how they are identifying CGI. "I'm sure there is something beyond the wall" What wall? Still no evidence to indicate such a wall exists. "why else would every country in the world sign an agreement to not allow private exploration of antiartica?" No such treaty exists. There is a treaty agreeing to no territorial claims or development in Antarctica, but nothing that prevents private exploration. Two people finished solo expeditions across Antarctica just a few months ago. "I don't know how high the firmament is" We're still waiting on someone to provide evidence of such a firmament. All we ever get are assertions that all tests with nuclear weapons that weren't at ground-level just gotta have been trying to crack the dome regardless of the height varying from 2000 ft to 200 miles. Try asking yourself why you can't rebut the video.
    4
  191.  @metanoian965  All aircraft use the globe map which is definitely spherical. We are still waiting on FE’ers to produce a usable FE map.
    4
  192.  @metanoian965  I told you how the Earth was deduced to be a sphere with readily observable data. What do you think the problem is exactly?
    4
  193. At the time smoking was not known to cause cancer; the death rate from as yet uncontrolled diseases kept cancer a rarity. The benefit was seen to be in the relaxation and mental clarity that came from nicotine intake. Context is important.
    4
  194. Dreamer ofDreams In science those ideas have to be backed by evidence and a rationale. When FE’ers require observable reality to be wrong to support the validity of an idea that they can’t provide rational reasoning why do you consider their ideas to have equal validity?
    4
  195. Either they don’t exist or are just lights.
    4
  196. Check out his videos under Recent Uploads.
    4
  197.  @andrewjohn8742  What does Dawkins say that you consider dogmatic?
    4
  198. Scale. The stars are 10’s to 1000’s light years away. The difference in position from the Earth’s orbit is apparent only with instruments. Since everything is moving in the same general direction (rotation around the centre of the galaxy) there is no obvious change in stars’ positions in a human lifetime, just small changes over 10,000 years.
    4
  199. They conflate elevation and curvature. Their frame of reference is a flat plane; they see curvature as a hill on that plane and assume sea level to be parallel to it.
    4
  200. It’s more gor the benefit of those who are wondering if there is any validity to FE’er claims. There’s also morbid humour in watching FE’ers who think repeating the claims somehow invalidates Prof Dave’s critique.
    4
  201.  @dia2149  You don't find it strange that you all "know" but that none of you can say why except by quoting debunked claims? Why don'y you try debunking what Prof Dave said? Have a go at his 10 Challenges?
    4
  202. So Newton discovered a force and because he put a name to it that makrs the force itself made up? The formula calculates the attractive force between two masses.
    4
  203. Do you want to say what these more convincing points are? FE'ers are deeply reluctant to do so.
    4
  204.  @noblecyborg-savage The ballast tanks or the oil spill dispersant sprayer?
    4
  205. They keep claiming perspective makes things disappear from the bottom up but always decline to explain how they think that could happen.
    4
  206.  @JustDorkyMe17  Open-minded is the willingness to listen to and consider alternative ideas; when the ideas are ignorant BS it is not close-minded to say so. They get made fun of because they reject anything that contradicts what they want to believe, not matter how obvious or demonstrable, are happy to accept self-contradictory notions without questions and are eager to demonstrate their lack of understanding of subject. Some One has just claimed Newton refuted gravity with no understanding of what Newton was saying or what refute actually means and has given you the names of conmen as reliable sources. "almost everyone gets information about anything from youtube" Indeed. However the information being on YT does not make it automatically right, insightful or revelatory; if somebody has any sense they check the reliability of the source. If it's out of step with those with expertise then it far more likely to be wrong rather than right. "shown me some pretty convincing evidence towards flat earth" If you want to give an example I'm sure people will be happy to explain.
    4
  207. As in no deviation to the left or right; the trajectory would be arced as it is for every projectile.
    4
  208. Lies to what end?
    4
  209.  @Thanos777. What do you expect to happen from inertia as the Earth rotates?
    4
  210. ​ @Thanos777.  Frisbees say otherwise; without rotational inertia they would be pointless. What force do you think is being applied to the frisbee to keep it spinning mid-air? A scientific theory is an explained for a natural phenomenon that is well-substantiated by extensive observation & experimentation. It is not a guess or hunch; that is the vernacular meaning of theory. The moon causes tides; it does not cause the seas to exist in the first place. What do you expect the moon to do to clouds and why? You need to provide evidence of electromagnetic attraction being a substitute for gravity. 1666km/h is a linear velocity. Nothing rotates in a straight line. Try again. That you can't make sense of multiple frames of reference or distinguish between linear & rotational motion is your problem, not the globe's. When there is air, there is air pressure. Air has mass; it is susceptible to gravity whether you like it or not. Why would you expect to feel motion when your body has no means to feel it? What do you think we do in labs? Linear inertia does not magically preclude rotational inertia. You still haven't answered my original question: what do you expect to happen from inertia as the Earth rotates? Nor have you produced any explanation for horizons, motion of the sun & stars, angle to Polaris matching latitude, visible constellations changing with latitude & season and lunar eclipses having a circular shadow, Why can't FEers do it?
    4
  211. Why would a meniscus preclude water curving around a globe?
    4
  212.  @Staniele  Numbers are important; they aren’t limited to “nothing” and “huge”.
    3
  213. Supposedly perspective. When the cowboys ride off into the sunset they appear smaller but fully visible while the sun remains the same size and disappears from the bottom. Apparently this is exactly the same effect though with no explanation as to why it looks different.
    3
  214.  @christinafox7514  The ancient Greeks deduced that the Earth was a globe from the motion of the sun, horizons, angle to Polaris matching latitude, constellations changing with season and latitude, two celestial poles and lunar eclipses having circular shadows. All that is verifiable by anybody willing to observe. An explanation for observable reality that is based on ignoring observable reality in favour of selective interpretation and logical jumps to support a presupposed conclusion is not going to arrive at a valid explanation for observable reality. Explanations need to be comprehensive and predictive, not reliant on people turning a blind eye to what doesn’t fit. Do bear in mind that human knowledge increases with time, as does our understanding of reality. The ancient Hebrews were typical of mankind at that time: very limited in their knowledge & understanding, not at some pinnacle of insight.
    3
  215. Not for long.... 😊
    3
  216. The only formula they have is 8”/mile^2 and they don’t even realise that it is parabolic. They certainly have their cult gurus whose utterings are smoke & mirrors and regarded as revelatory but there is no unity among the different subgroups & gurus (unless you are a FE’er in which case your particular perception is the unified idea).
    3
  217. First point is buoyancy, not a variation in gravity due to an object’s density. More than one force can act on an object at a time.
    3
  218. They deny it occurs or simply ignore the question.
    3
  219. It means raise or lift.
    3
  220.  @homelesszaya6711  Gravity is both a law and theory. Laws describe a phenomenon (the attraction between two bodies is proportional to the product of their masses and inversely proportional to the square if the separating distance) while the theory explains why this is so (curvature of space-time and how it occurs).
    3
  221. How many cameras do you think would be operating in the area around the Pentagon at that time?
    3
  222. Whether it is a force or an apparent force is irrelevant to the subject: it exists.
    3
  223. Generally speaking they’re staunch Republican. Columbus was trying to find a westwards route to India and was adamant the globe was significantly smaller than it is, putting India within sailing distance. The notion he was tryinv to prove the world was a story apoended later to make him look good.
    3
  224. The cyclic model isn't taught as fact nor is it mindlessly accepted as fact; it's a possible model that is essentially based on the application of maths to the observed physics in the universe.. It is formulated by people who know what they are talking about and has been vetted by equally qualified people. It is not pulled out of somebody's arse. Theory in that context means a model that explains what we observe, not that it has been proven.
    3
  225.  @oneslap01  Scientism is the belief that science can also answer questions that are outside science, eg, philosophical, purely personal opinion. It is not the reasonable assumption that colleagues in other branches of science are competent people.
    3
  226. “We don’t say that; we say <repeat 10 things>.”
    3
  227. For some reason I see an orang utan shaking a finger.... 🙂
    3
  228. "if a vacuum don't suck how does it clean my floor" Higher pressure airs flows towards regions of lower pressure; the lower pressure does not suck. Your vacuum (when working) reduces the pressure inside; the air in the room flows towards that region, some of it passing through the carpet and pulling up the grot as it does so.
    3
  229.  @Mark-Stone  It indicates satire.
    3
  230. No, they’re serious. That the sun apparently moves across the sky at 15 degrees is not a paradigm; it is readily measurable.
    3
  231.  @michaelmoore1697  So I’ve been telling FE’ers but they insist “vacuums suck”. They aren’t interested in physics.
    3
  232. MrSpongejoe You need to move to the Illuminati; 6% and two extra days leave.
    3
  233. Matthew Renaud Can’t FE’ers understand the difference between 70% surface area and 70% volume?
    3
  234. https://www.popsci.com/10-ways-you-can-prove-earth-is-round/ You can prove curvature with sticks & shadows. Have you considered trying it rather than just swallowing the Kool-aid the FE gurus give you?
    3
  235. It is to some; a few are in it to make money from those who believe in anything that differs from authority.
    3
  236. jason hounsell In the Age of Information it isn’t difficult to find methods: https://www.popsci.com/10-ways-you-can-prove-earth-is-round/ However many of them seem to think they should automatically have the answers in their heads simply because someone knows it, leading to their argument that their ignorance is proof nobody knows.
    3
  237. Yiu could adk questions like: What happens if I throw the ball horizontally? What does theory mean in science? What is the proof of gravity’s existence? What direction is the mechanical force propelling the ball & plane in?
    3
  238. It’s not a choice between everything & nothing nor are information sources automatically limited to one source.
    3
  239. Do you think each country should have different arithmetic or scientific formula. Very few people have myocarditis. Millions died of Covid. Which do you prefer?
    3
  240. You realise that more than one force can act simultaneously?
    3
  241. Roel Tonzo The water in the table top is pulled down by the Earth. What do you propose is pulling the water off the Earth?
    3
  242. It’s the giant turtle rubbing his back :-)
    3
  243. For their brain to have shape they would need to have a brain to begin with.
    3
  244.  @Mathew247  "you then admit that that object is in fact past the horizon" Obviously everything went over the top of your head.
    3
  245. I eoyld guess you’ve been listening to the delusional Globe is a Hoax if you’re claiming accepting the Earth is globe gives the government total mind control.
    3
  246. All goes quiet again....
    3
  247. It was a common assumption prior to the Greek philosophers. Shenton got it from Rowbotham, mid 19th century, who went on a religious anti-science bender.
    3
  248. Check the nature films dealing with penguins.
    3
  249. Start with his original video in his astronomy section and progress from there.
    3
  250. The numbers on this video have tapered off with time.
    3
  251. The key word is pushed.
    3
  252. No, Eratosthenes used that method to measure the curvature. That it was a globe was deduced from the motion of the sun, horizons, angle to Polaris matching latitude, constellations changing with latitude and lunar eclipses.
    3
  253. I had one agree it was a directional aerial and pointed up into the sky but still swore it was aiming for a cell phone tower at ground level.
    3
  254. Insults but not refutation.
    3
  255. oirvine209 If you mean FE’ers being unable to comprehend the difference then it’s a matter of using a flat line as a default; they see the curve as elevation above a flat Earth rather than separate two separate factors on a sphere.
    3
  256. Unfortunately they believe that simply espousing a different opinion means they are “thinkers” and automatically right regardless of experimental evidence to the contrary.
    3
  257. Karen Lynn You think bowling balls and feathers are magnetic?
    3
  258. Deltayquaza Curvature and elevation are different things. How smooth it rough the surface is has no bearing on the underlying curvature.
    3
  259. PiggySandwich 21 The ancient Greeks determined it around 500BC and a spherical Earth was the centre of the Ptolemaic universe accepted by the educated people in Europe.
    3
  260. The ancient Greeks deduced it from the motion of the sun, horizons, angle to Polaris matching latitude, constellations changing with latitude, two celestial poles and lunar eclipses always having a circular shadow; all indicative of a globe, all disproving a FE and all verifiable by anybody. Since then the Earth has been fully mapped and measured, the accurate worldwide maps enabling reliable long distance trade and travel. In recent decades satellites have photographed it from every angle. One particular satellite (the ISS) is visible from ground level as it orbits according to a predictable timetable. FE’ers explanation is a powered balloon travelling at 1000’s mph without refueling for >20 years while totally unaffected by weather conditions, though it usually needs explaining to them why their balloon has those requirements since they never thought it out for themselves.
    3
  261. Either they deny telescopes exist, claim they are all controlled by NASA (even homemade ones) or believe they can get the “true” images by not focussing.
    3
  262. The shape of the Earth is not opinion but fact. If FE'er said nothing then their beliefs would be inconsequential but they are running around telling people that ignorance is knowledge and that beliefs outweigh evidence.
    3
  263. Or just tell them breathing being a necessity of life is just indoctrination and post a picture of somebody standing in a vacuum chamber as proof you don't need air.
    3
  264. They repeatedly ask how a bird can fly but an ocean can't. Simply pointing out that birds have wings doesn't make something click in their heads; pointing out the ocean doesn't have wings seems to reinforce the message that wings are necessary for flight.
    3
  265. Truth Seeker Smart people who went against the grain and turned out to be right are remembered; the vast majority are forgotten cranks. If you want to challenge something then you need to understand the subject and you need evidence. Dismissing something as “mainstream” is just a way some people use to avoid having to consider the existing evidence.
    3
  266.  @toprocks3612  Where is it possible to look up something that you all refuse to supply?
    3
  267.  @toprocks3612  It's nowhere to be found. You claim you know what it is and where it is but mysteriously (like every other FE'er) you won't say anything. Why should I find you convincing?
    3
  268. He’s already been through the friendly approach and had to put with insults and wilful stupidity from people who consider themselves insightful geniuses.
    3
  269. Traceable signal to, on & from the moon, detectable equipment left there and verifiable material brought back.
    3
  270. What a surprise: he hasn't come back...
    3
  271. Everest is about 5.5 miles high, the Mariana Trench about 20 miles; the Earth's radius is 3900 miles. The surface features are too small relatively speaking to make a noticeable difference to the shape.
    3
  272. Filing was done by hand then, not by computer, and with the sheer volume of material things did get lost. Somewhere along the line things became mixed and the wrong tapes went in the box that went to the Smithsonian who subsequently mislaid the box during various reorganization’s at some point over the succeeding decades. An absolute bummer but it doesn’t require a conspiracy to explain it.
    3
  273. A few millenia ago. The shift from geocentric to heliocentric system is the more recent change but both had a spherical Earth.
    3
  274. What is implausible about a sore loser who for several years has believed elections are rigged (despite actually winning) from trying to fiddle results in his favour?
    3
  275. It's a matter of convention so there is clear communication between people rather than an actual up & down. Maps are drawn with north at the top for the same reason.
    3
  276. Other way around.
    3
  277. Let me guess - reference to 60,000 miles and a “wall of ice”?
    3
  278. Which blood cells?
    3
  279. At far fetched ideas that turn out to be right. It doesn’t mean far fetched ideas are automatically right (the vast majority aren’t) or that (in the case of FE) observable reality is wrong.
    3
  280. Try reproducing Wallace’s Bedford Canal Experiment.
    3
  281. Is your reasoning that if a vacuum doesn't suck then it must blow? Can you explain how you arrive at this belief?
    3
  282.  @beachlife4704 Relativity says all objects are in motion and, unless acted upon by a force, their path will follow the curvature in spacetime, ie, their straight path is warped.
    3
  283.  @beachlife4704  It maintains a straight path throughout.
    3
  284. Don’t malign wombles!
    3
  285.  @philaypeephilippotter6532  If you simply point out that (most) birds can fly because they have wings they’re still flummoxed about how birds fly and oceans don’t.
    3
  286. He used the dictionary definition. While buoyancy is directly dependent on gravity FE’er see it as completely separate and would have read it as verification that density & buoyancy are opposing forces.
    3
  287. Ray Opeongo And GPS is reliant on the Doppler shift of the satellite signal, something you won’t get from stationary towers.
    3
  288. The beams that diverge with distance and can be refracted like all other light?
    3
  289. The others are dependent on garbled logic and lack of understanding; they don’t need evidence to disprove.
    3
  290. https://www.popsci.com/10-ways-you-can-prove-earth-is-round/ Proof of a round Earth is easy to obtain. We’re still waiting on FE’ers to produce any.
    3
  291. CJM10 Yet you can’t answer my question. What do you think his explanation was?
    3
  292. What is there to debate?
    3
  293. What’s his explanation for how density can act as a force and why in a consistent direction?
    3
  294. Direct attraction between two masses would be a direct force while the result of motion through space-time that has been distorted by the two masses is an apparent force; either way it exists. Most of space is an almost total vacuum. If the occasional pieces of matter like stars & planets were distributed equally in space it would still be an almost total vacuum.
    3
  295.  @kostandinkruti5779  Whether gravity is a force or an apparent force is irrelevant to the point: FE’ers deny it exists at all.
    3
  296. Strong =/= irresistible. The water moves according to the sun of the forces applied to it. Noticeable tides arise because the water in deep seas is moving towards shallow beaches. Lakes are relatively shallow and there is a less perceivable effect. Rivers are smaller still.
    3
  297. Try it with three points.
    3
  298.  @supr3me652  Nowhere in the atmosphere is there air pressure immediately adjacent to a vacuum. The pressure at ground level gradually diminishes with increasing altitude until it reaches zero. The pressure gradient is shallow enough for gravity to be the sufficient counterforce to expansion.
    3
  299.  @JohnnyB719  One at a time? Wouldn’t it be easy to debunk the underlying premise that 8” per mile squared calculates how far you should see and thus debunk all in one fell swoop?
    3
  300. VITA kyo Not so much rejecting as pointing out where the hoaxers are screwing up, eg, assuming 1g gravity, the presence of an atmosphere and bugger all knowledge on how rockets work or light intensity. There were traceable signals to, on & from the moon, detectable equipment left there are verifiable material brought back. You need to account for that and hand waving is not a valid explanation.
    3
  301.  @nebtheweb8885 Flip a coin on the two possibilities 😊
    3
  302. If he said buoyant force then FE’er thinking would have stopped at that point (charitably assuming there was any to begin with) and they would declare density & buoyancy to be proven forces.
    3
  303.  @averyhaferman3474  Its a strawman argument. Down is towards the centre of Earth not to a mystical plane “below” the south pole.
    3
  304. Qwilla Qwilla What not try refuting what Prof Dave said rather than simply state there is a dome that nobody can find evidence for. I’m curious: when you climb a staircase do you think you are going forwards or upwards? Gravity was demonstrated by the Cavendish, an experiment reproduced countless times since with similar results. https://www.popsci.com/10-ways-you-can-prove-earth-is-round/
    3
  305.  @brainmog825  I ask because there are repeatedly people who say there are major problems with the globe but, when asked, rarely say what they think those problems are and when they do it boils down to a lack of understanding. As with any lab experiment the Cavendish experiment reduced the situation to one variable (the distance between the pairs of spheres); no other source of gravity (and no other force) would have an appreciable effect due to size and distance. Exiting a lab does not change the laws of physics. The existence of a multifactorial system is not going to change the laws of physics. None of that is going to compromise the mapping of a globe. All you are doing is calling a multifactorial system "Mythematics" because you don't see how a correct answer can be arrived at. If you think it doesn't work then you need to demonstrate that it doesn't, not fall back on "I don't see how.".
    3
  306.  @metanoian965  I tell FE’ers how it was deduced to be a globe; 2500 years on the whole of mankind is still waiting for you to divulge your explanations. Do you want to try? Wallace, Bedford Canal Experiment. How many times in how many ways by how many people does curvature need to be demonstrated to satisfy you that it has been demonstrated?
    3
  307.  @enhaxed7839  That’s not the DK effect; it sound more like a problem with self-esteem (real self-esteem, not the airy-fairy self-confidence burble).
    3
  308. Richard Tinker https://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Morton%27s_demon Though the description is aimed at creationists it is applicable to anybody who is chasing anti-reality beliefs.
    3
  309. 1000mph is the linear (tangential) velocity; rotational velocity is one revolution per day.
    3
  310. Density is a force, magnetism, electrostatic attraction, spontaneous motion, droppity, just does - take your pick since none of them work.
    3
  311. The ancient Greeks deduced the Earth was a globe from the motion of the sun (every observer sees a constant angular diameter & velocity), horizons, angle to Polaris matching latitude, constellations changing with latitude, two celestial poles and lunar eclipses always having a circular shadow. You could try those. They might bring up atmospheric lensing which requires microdroplets to form stable coherent structures to act as lenses with just the right strength & alignment, seemingly on a personal basis. Their thought processes jump from lensing to personal with no thought how it could occur.
    3
  312. Rejean Freeman Because it is also moving “sideways” and you have a net result of it circling the Earth. More than one factor can act simultaneously.
    3
  313. Apparently the unidirectional aerials pointing up into the sky are aimed at radio towers at ground level; the FE’er who told me couldn’t see the inherent contradiction.
    3
  314.  @mattdixon748  Try coming up with a video in which wires are actually visible as opposed to an arrow & "there's just gotta to be one here". Eratosthenes experiment is not the only evidence the ancient Greeks had; lunar eclipses being perpetually round is th eone that comes to mind. If you repeat Eratosthenes experiments with at least three stakes you'll see why it wouldn't support a small sun close to a flat earth.
    3
  315.  @Aflove45  The shape of the Earth is a fact and facts are not subject to opinion. It’s not open minded or insightful to espouse that is repeatedly disproven conjecture is a fact; it is willfully stupid. When someone chooses to act stupid they be regarded accordingly.
    3
  316. Buren Productions pulled his comment rather than giving us the revelatory list he promised? Something happened on the drive home?
    3
  317. Gravity is attraction between masses; you & the Earth are pulled together, almost completely by Earth pulling on you (far greater mass). Earth also pulls on the gas molecules making up the atmosphere, since they too are mass; the air above you will create some pressure downwards but not too much. Fine scales do have to be recalibrated if used in a vacuum for that reason. The atmosphere does not need a container. There is a balance between gravitational attraction and gas expansion leading to atmospheric pressure gradually decreasing with increasing altitude. At no point is there an abrupt drop is air pressure that would require a physical barrier.
    3
  318.  @hypercaneaurastopalan1503  Dum is a misspelling of dumb; I gather it can be used sarcastically to accentuate just how dumb. Unfortunately when there are frequent misspellings (particularly from FE'ers for some reason) it doesn't come across as a deliberate misspelling.
    3
  319. It allows for 5-6ft off the ground (human height) but assumes no variation in elevation across the surface (or refraction); essentially that the Earth is a perfectly smooth, airless sphere. It’s that variation in elevation (and increasing refraction) that limits it to a few miles.
    3
  320. 🥃
    3
  321. I wish they couldn’t delete their comments when they depart.
    3
  322. Suq Madic If he considers YT to be a solid source of information then Dave’s videos would be appropriate.
    3
  323. The conspiracies you list rely on gross simplification, eg, influence being portrayed as control.
    3
  324. The people who put pen to paper wrote according to what they believed and understood. As OMG GMO says, they believed bats were birds and whales were fish. Christians are not lining up to demand bats & whales be classified as that.
    3
  325. Sort by newest first.
    3
  326. Nickcalling You realise that when all Dubay did was reiterate the claims that Dave debunked in this video then the rebuttal you want is at the top of this webpage?
    3
  327. Regardless of whether it is a force or an apparent force it exists.
    3
  328. You are holding a 1kg ball, standing on another ball with 1 billion times the gravitational pull and you think the water making a beeline for the billion-fold influence is proof the water isn't in the slightest attracted by that influence.
    3
  329. Because the shortest routes between the three southern continents is essentially following the same latitude. Check his playlists.
    3
  330. An equation used by land surveyors as a rule of thumb for curvature that would exist in their viewing range. While a parabolic curve it has similar enough curvature at a short distance to be useful to them.
    3
  331. Richard Kev They think it calculates how far they should able to see; they have problems with multiple factors and tend to ignore elevation and atmospheric refraction.
    3
  332. Traceable signal to, on and from the moon, detectable equipment left there and verifiable material brought back.
    3
  333.  @Thanos777. Why not explain what you think makes something fall? You can reproduce the Cavendish experiment for yourself. The ancient Greeks deduced that the Earth was a globe by looking & thinking: horizons, motion of the sun & stars, angle to Polaris matching latitude, visible constellations changing with latitude & season and lunar eclipses having a circular shadow. 2500 years on we are still waiting for Flat Earthers to explain of it.
    3
  334.  @Thanos777.  Unless acted upon by a force. You denying the force exists does not stop the force acting. There is also rotational inertia; an object will keep rotating unless acted upon by a force. Thete is also no absolute frame of reference; you assuming there is does not create one nor force all movement to be relative the same frame of reference.
    3
  335.  @Thanos777.  Cavendish experiment, 1798, reproduced countless times with similar results. We’re still waiting on denialists to produce their explanation.
    3
  336. Teri Ross The basic requirement of free thinking is thinking, not espousing ideas contrary to accepted knowledge.
    3
  337. For the trees FE’ers are forever demanding experiments be done as if it would be novel, rather than routine.
    3
  338. How is the FE supposed to be toroidal yet flat?
    3
  339. You can get browser extensions that show the dislike count.
    3
  340. If you take two aspirin then your headache disappears. If you take 200 then you likely die. Is aspirin effective or harmful?
    3
  341. Figured it: I've been blocked. Is it bad that I can't comment on the idiocy or good that I (politely) irritated the owner with knowledge?
    2
  342. Which way up are the thumbs? 😊
    2
  343.  @omarkos54  We’re talking about people who haven’t figured out that density not being a force means it isn’t a force.
    2
  344. Jesse Tow Perhaps you can come up with this accurate FE map? So many of you claim to have it but nobody seems willing to produce it.
    2
  345. john koebel Those aren’t the correct numbers, just the ones parroted by FE’ers and the actual numbers were determined well before NASA existed.
    2
  346. john koebel Let me get this straight: 1. The Greeks & Romans used planetary names provided by NASA? 2. You have evidence of a dome? 3. Operation Fishbowl proves said dome is a 2000ft-20miles high? 4. Byrd not only found an ice wall he never mentioned but managed to measure the land area beyond it? 5. The booming tourist trade and solo crossings are proof nobody is allowed to go Antarctica?
    2
  347. Jesse Tow The Van Allen belts are not impenetrable. Nobody has claimed to have landed on the sun. There is no evidence of a firmament. Nobody is banned from going to Antarctica; two people made solo crossings earlier this year. You think God modified the day to fit our use of 24hrs per day? You need a reflective surface, like a water droplet, for a rainbow, not a mirror. You can see your face in quiet water and you can get a rainbow from a CD without requiring a mirror.
    2
  348.  @bobbyelee6163  Accusations is all FE'ers can ever come up with. Try countering Dave's points directly.
    2
  349. I usually refer to them as gurus; they makes asinine pronouncements and FE'ers fawn over their "wisdom".
    2
  350. Destroying Flat Earth without using science Part 3.
    2
  351. You realise you hear the bottom line, not the work behind it?
    2
  352.  @trentbrocato3254  There’s been about 270,000 scientific research articles about Covid-19 of which 25,000 cover every aspect of the vaccines. The media covers very little of it, giving you the generalised & simplified version plus bottom-line. Side-effects are not being ignored but on balance they are safe & effective.
    2
  353. Idiot or Poe?
    2
  354.  @homelesszaya6711  WGS84. You think a 0.3% difference would leap out at you like a 30% difference? If so then why do you think that?
    2
  355.  @homelesszaya6711  That’s the difference between law & theory in science whether you like it or not. A scientific theory is a comprehensive explanation for a natural phenomenon that is well substantiated by extensive observation & experimentation. It is not a hunch or guess, that is the vernacular meaning of theory.
    2
  356.  @homelesszaya6711  You’re asking for a textbook answer while complaining textbook answers are just regurgitation?
    2
  357.  @homelesszaya6711  That reads as gibberish; try again.
    2
  358. Ray Opeongo I can’t remember where & when O read it but there was one that ran along the lines of “When I reached 16 I realised how dumb my parents were. By the time I reached 18 they’d picked up a few things and by 21 it was amazing how much they had learned.” 😊
    2
  359. You’re making the mistake of perceiving the Earth’s curvature as a hill on an otherwise horizontal baseline.
    2
  360. Try watching the video before commenting.
    2
  361. Jacob LM Smart? You can buy antique globes but they think the world has only thought to have been round since NASA was formed in 1959. They think information can only come from a government simply because their own learning was in school? That a government has total control over everybody’s actions & thoughts except (mysteriously) on YouTube?
    2
  362. Little antennae for intermolecular radio signalling 😊
    2
  363.  @SpidermanandJeny  "and one you seem to like quite a bit" Where did I give any personal opinion of it? "There is not one bit of direct evidence for it, there is evidence against it" What evidence against it? Why do you think there is no evidence for the dynamics of the universe? "answer how did we all get here" The question is whether the universe will expand for ever or will the expansion reverse? "at some point you reach a universe that doesn't have a prior universe" Why? "There is absolutely no answer that observation and rigorous testing could give to this question" It is theoretical physics. It is maths based. What do you understand model to mean?
    2
  364. How does water observe its environment, make decisions and move itself?
    2
  365. Scientific theories are comprehensive explanations thoroughly backed by extensive evidence and as high as yet can get in science. They are not to be confused with the vernacular meaning of theory, i.e., hunch or guess. Gravity indisputably exists. In Newtonian physics it is direct attraction between masses; while it remain an accurate means to predict what occurs around us, that has been replaced with the more comprehensive relativity that sees it as an effect of the warping of space-time by gravitational fields. While the warping is demonstrable we don't, as John says, know the full mechanism by which that occurs.
    2
  366. Garland Parks That map doesn’t match measured distances. There are no magnets of that shape. There’s no evidence of a dome. There is no evidence of such an electromagnetic field. You still have explained two celestial poles. A curved lens does not curve images. Nobody has yet explained how they identify an image as CGI beyond “they just gotta be”.
    2
  367.  @ericb3157 Are clouds the source of daylight now?
    2
  368.  @ironase1822  Weather aside, the atmosphere rotates at the same rate as Earth (one revolution per day).
    2
  369.  @ironase1822  Why exactly would a 2.2 mile shot be impossible on a globe?
    2
  370. Sort by newest first. They frequently delete themselves once they realise they're making fools of themselves.
    2
  371. João Lercas It’s a little closer to the sun during northern hemisphere winter since the Earth has an elliptical orbit but the difference is relatively small.
    2
  372. João Lercas Thanks, I understand your explanation.
    2
  373. They don’t understand the difference between elevation abd curvature, simoly seeing both as elevation above a (mental) horizontal baseline.
    2
  374. Organise a boat race with a FE’er :-)
    2
  375. That vacuum cleaners suck is obviously a joke; that vacuum (zero pressure) sucks is a routine FE’er claim.
    2
  376. The Earth is so large that gravity would crush it into a sphere like all the other planets.
    2
  377. That’s an eye-opener. Catching a car with wings was canny.
    2
  378. It’s a rule of thumb that would describe the Earth’s surface curvature (not how far you can see) over short distances; while a parabola rather than a circle it was useful to land surveyors.
    2
  379. The key phrases is “presented with enough of it”. Odd results do happen, incorrect conclusions can be drawn. You can’t rewrite something established on minimal evidence when that can arise by chance or error.
    2
  380.  @petspro3453  I swear I can hear cries of "Woah, profound, man" when I look at his comments section.
    2
  381.  @rockkraken4548  FE'ers insist that gravity does not exist and that the water acts entirely of its own accord, which would require water to observe its environment, make decisions and move itself. Their thought processes stop early on and they never consider what would be required for water to level itself. Language is not precise but science needs to be, hence the difference between what you and OMG GMO mean. Whether or not there is gravity without the water is similar to the falling tree in an empty forest; the gravitational field would always be present regardless of the existence of a second body but gravity is the effect of that field on the water.
    2
  382.  @Expedient_Mensch  You never said it; FE’ers are forever claiming that is the reason for seasons in a globe which us why if is in the video.
    2
  383. Or in terms of umbrellas, don’t put up things that don’t matter 😊
    2
  384. redddlord Except that the curvature is readily demonstrable; if they can’t accept then that’s their problem.
    2
  385. And Obelix was definitely round....
    2
  386. contemplate How do you think density would act as a force? What would cause an “up & down”? Why would the direction of “up & down” change between locations?
    2
  387. contemplate “why don’t you tell me what the drop off is at 18 miles” From what elevation? It’s been pointed out to you a few times that the geometric curve is not the same as how far you can see; elevation and refraction have to be taken into account for the latter.
    2
  388.  @Mathew247  Your eyes would be at sea level if you were bobbing in the water. Standing on a beach your eyes would be at least several feet above sea-level. Exact elevation is necessary in determining how far you can see. You've been asked a few times how much much of the ship was hidden. There seems to be some discrepancy with your possible viewing distance and ye distance you are giving. "Seeing something with the naked eye and also zooming in and out with your camera is NOT a change in the story" Actually it is whether you intended it or not. Many people come claiming an object is hidden when they actually mean it has become too small to be seen with the naked eye. https://www.metabunk.org/curve/ There is a diagram at the bottom of the page that you need to look at. "Pets Pro says you can see 100 miles. Do you all agree? Is that mathematically possible or is it really because there's no curvature?" Depends on your elevation and the atmospheric conditions. On a clear day from the top of a good size mountain, no problem.
    2
  389.  @Mathew247  How tall is the ferry? The 2nd & 3rd sites don't take elevation in to account, something that has been pointed out to you repeatedly. The first site (David Senesac) actually discusses the point but you've jumped to the table at the end without any understanding of what he said.
    2
  390.  @Mathew247  "tell me at what distance I shouldn't see the boat regardless of its height" Height is a key part of the calculation. The sea-level you are envisaging (standing on the shoreline) still places your eyes about 5ft above sea-level and you are ignoring refraction; about 166ft would hidden at 20 miles, depending on the exact refraction. Across water the refraction would increase meaning less than 166ft hidden.
    2
  391.  @Mathew247  An obvious demonstration of refraction is dipping a stick into a pond; the submerged part appears to have a different angle to the rest but it is neither fuzzy nor inverted.
    2
  392. They have their gurus whose words are accepted as absolute truth with no or superficial thought. Reality is explained to them and they will deny observable reality rather than question the gurus.
    2
  393.  @daddy3982  Not completely different constellations unless making a direct comparison between north & south poles.
    2
  394. He was sitting inside it and the fatal accident was due to the landing parachute failing to deploy (it had worked previously).
    2
  395. Halunka Records To add to Big Poops comment, an object’s gravity is proportional to its mass, not one fixed strength for any and every object. That does seem a common misconception.
    2
  396. I suspect I would have spent my free time heaving over the side 😊
    2
  397. It’s don’t think rather than think differently.
    2
  398. Simon Wachon You need something to stop the gas moving from higher to lower pressure; force can do that. Try making an accurate FE map from the distances you have.
    2
  399.  @simonwachon6723  Asking questions and pointing out facts is attacking you? What's your technique for identifying CGI? How was CGI achieved before CGI was invented? Straight forward questions. Surely you can answer them?
    2
  400. Koysii ™ Their hypothesis was constant velocity until it dawned on them that they needed acceleration if anything was to move “down”. Then it became constant acceleration but for that they needed an explanation for what provided the force and the accumulative velocity. Now they’re onto density being a force (unexplained) and the Law of Just Does. They still haven’t disproven gravity.
    2
  401. Unfortunately they do. They can’t grasp that a ball in their hand while standing on a planet is not the equivalent of a planet and assume there is a top & bottom.
    2
  402. Some are doing it for money: there's revenue in selling books and making videos. If you had found yourself answering the same few questions asked over and over and over and over by people who can't think, you too would sound frustrated.
    2
  403.  @fredrick119  One hopes but in this subject who knows….
    2
  404.  @daftwulli6145  Some of them have trouble grasping arithmetic…
    2
  405. Liquids have surface tension, gases don’t.
    2
  406. 1. <crickets> 2. To fool us. 3. To hide God. 4. To have sole access to the inaccessible land/continents beyond the impenetrable dome.
    2
  407. Laurent Drozin What powers the acceleration? Check Samuel Rowbotham. He’s the root of today’s FEism. Essentially he saw science as impinging on religion’s authority and went off on an “it’s all wrong” bender. While many of today’s FE’ers are simply into anything counter-authority much of it is still Rowbotham’s philosophy.
    2
  408. They rely on the big number 1000mph equating to a g force with zeros after it.
    2
  409. wong Oh for some magic potion.... 😊
    2
  410. Let me guess - you think nobody but FE’ers has ever ever EVER looked to see whether his postulate is correct?
    2
  411. southboundtraveler It doesn’t calculate how far you should be able to see. That requires the inclusion of elevation and atmospheric refraction
    2
  412.  @thesaltyspacecowboy8531  The Cambrian explosion was 15-25 million years in length, not instant.
    2
  413.  @thesaltyspacecowboy8531  20 million years is relatively rapid on the evolutionary scale but it is not instantaneous. In a world where there are niches to be filled you would expect there to be relatively rapid change; it doesn't present a problem. There are transitional fossils; you're just making the usual error of interpreting a transitional fossil to mean two gaps to be filled.
    2
  414.  @thesaltyspacecowboy8531  Hypothesis to theory because of accumulating evidence supporting such a conclusion and eliminating viable alternatives. If evidence shows up that indicates the law is incorrect then that needs to be checked. Einstein is credited with formulating special & general relativity; he built on existing work, other people have built on and modified his and accumulated the experimental evidence that supports and fails to disprove the model. Science is a collaborative effort; Newton said something to the effect that he saw things by standing on the shoulders of giants, ie, his predecessors' work.
    2
  415. The most sensible is that they’re fooling you to fool you which is at least plausible for a minor prank. Alternatively it’s to hide an omnipresent, omnipotent God by unclarified means, to take economic control of the inaccessible lands beyond the impenetrable dome and insurmountable ice-wall by….means….. or to establish total mind control by….means….
    2
  416. More than one force can act simultaneously and an object's motion is the result of the net interaction of those forces.
    2
  417. Etienne Pienaar What distance is there between ground level and space? Is it substantially greater than the distance across a gas valve?
    2
  418. ExtraWokeRedRum What do you think is wrong exactly and why? You profess to be questioning things and have a better handle in the subject than us do demonstrate that. Enlighten us.
    2
  419. The original “they’re fooling you to fool you” at least had a motive though it didn’t explain the effort & expense necessary. That was replaced by hiding God by encouraging sun worship, economic control of the inaccessible lands beyond the dome & ice-wall and (one person) to establish total mind control by unspecified means.
    2
  420. He made two previous videos that are as polite as you wish. The FE’er response to each was and still is endless repetition of the claims he goes over in this video.
    2
  421. Look at either Walter Bislins calculator or the one at https://www.metabunk.org/curve/ Too many of the others only consider curvature of the surface, not how far you can see which is dependent on other factors too.
    2
  422. Ray Opeongo The gods will fix it 😊
    2
  423.  @spadesandaces4543  Punctuation would help if you wish to be understood. Water sticks to Earth because of gravitational attraction between Earth & water.
    2
  424.  @willardwayne3  I take it that the thought has never occurred to you that we both make use of the information and add to it and would notice if it didn't work? How do you think your computer or phone enables you to place your messages if the technology used is all wrong?
    2
  425. YT has certain restrictions; as long as the videos (or the author) don’t contravene those then there is no reason to take them down. They have altered their search algorithms recently to disfavour FE videos.
    2
  426. It is not a hunch or guess; that is the vernacular meaning of the word. Why is it the people who are profess to be thinking and asking questions never to think to ask what the definition of a scientific theory is?
    2
  427.  @mlj_the_shield  Daylight doesn’t come from the sun would you believe?
    2
  428. Eratosthenes calculated the size of Earth fairly well; the area is now fully mapped. Where is this extra land?
    2
  429.  @oscarmudd6579  I take it that you have no concept of the passage of time?
    2
  430. Given that we selectively breed animals & vegetables it was quite logical at the time. It lacked knowledge of the biological complexities involved in gene numbers & expression.
    2
  431.  @truthseeker4879  So who is the mysterious "they" and how do "they" exert such fantastical control over information world-wide? You're given the equation F = (G x m1 x m2) / r^2 and can't figure out r, m1, m2 all affect F? "if mass equals the power of the pull of gravity" Weight, not mass. "the sun gravity don’t suck up all the planets in the solar system" If the planets weren't moving then the sun would; orbits are the net effect of the planets' motions and the sun's gravity. You're exhibiting the usual failing point of being unable to understand more than one factor at a time. "stupid to take mainstream anything at it word" Everybody that has verified it has mysteriously become part of this mainstream? Do you think "they" are manipulating the behaviour of objects to make it appear gravity exists?
    2
  432. Truth Seeker Would you accept such a film (Earth to ISS) as genuine?
    2
  433.  @toprocks3612  Im assuming you mean that you’re a Real FE’er? Do you wish to divulge the Real Evidence?
    2
  434. Hervis Daubeny You could try refuting the points Dave made.
    2
  435.  @lucjannastalek9978  Vacuum is the near or total absence of matter. If there is no matter in a vacuum then there is nothing there to do the sucking. Many people take the vernacular term "vacuum sucks" as a scientific basis for a vacuum to be exerting an effort rather than the matter being pushed into a vacuum by the pressure difference. This leads to various assertions where space is seen as a super-duper force that should rip the atmosphere away from Earth.
    2
  436. Reason Rules Unfortunately some people can be that stupid, the desire to be part of a select minority who can see a “great truth” overriding their ability to actually think. Some are con-artists our to make money, many are the trolls you describe but a good proportion are dumb clucks who believe it.
    2
  437. Why isn’t the mystery force exerting any effect currently?
    2
  438.  @aanobikdutta4444  "How can I? I mean, I don't know man" I told you earlier how it was deduced the Earth was a sphere, all of which you can observe for yourself. It requires observation and thought, nothing more.
    2
  439. Apparently there is this “easily found” El Dorado of videos containing such proofs though no FEers can remember where or what any of the content actually is.
    2
  440. Scott Meyer Presumably with a fiendish security system...
    2
  441. ericb31 While they were hunting for the videos there was still one machine capable of reading the tapes; it was due to be scrapped but was kept in operation to enable the hunt. The located tapes were blank.
    2
  442. See his later videos on the subject 😊
    2
  443.  @proph9916  Clouds consist of microdroplets that are small enough for buoyancy to be a significant effect.
    2
  444.  @proph9916  Unfortunately we get a lot of Aha! questions on here.
    2
  445. You have to first find the IQ to test it 😊
    2
  446.  @seamusflannery3374  As in too self-evident to be worth explaining; it can (normally) be taken as read that everybody already knows & understands it. Including it in an explanation would be adding trivia.
    2
  447.  @shadowstar7388  You’re presuming a purpose to the event then hailing the event as evidence of a purpose.
    2
  448.  @shadowstar7388  Swearing at the rice could well add some sputum to it. It needs to be done without taking the lids off.
    2
  449. Can you give us the juicy details? 🤔
    2
  450. The oblation is a slight flattening at the poles, not a gross distortion.
    2
  451. Philip Grooms Reproducing results is what is required to check the results are correct. Oblation is 0.3%, not the 30% you’re visualising.
    2
  452. When two masses attract one another they move in opposite directions. What do you think happens?
    2
  453. 2000 thumbs down yet the only "rebuttal" I've read essentially repeated one of the FE claims covered in the video.
    2
  454. Relative to what?
    2
  455.  @drfaustens4504  Unfortunately you are doing a good job of mimicking FE’ers.
    2
  456. Americans love conspiracy theories generally.
    2
  457. Try climbing out of your rabbit hole.
    2
  458. The moon orbits the Earth and you can’t figure out how it would be on the sunwards side part of the time?
    2
  459. Try showing her this video and its successors.
    2
  460. Perhaps you could enlighten us on what these “strong arguments” are?
    2
  461. Scale is definitely not their strong point.
    2
  462. Must be the B-side; we don’t see an arm moving across the sky.
    2
  463.  @toprocks3612  Nothing in the treaty forbids travel to Antarctica. Do any of you actually bother checking it?
    2
  464. Perhaps there’s a gremlin in your computer selecting videos for you? 😊
    2
  465. It’s aimed at people looking down the rabbit hole rather than those who’ve fallen down it.
    2
  466.  @theredlumas2 He’s joking.
    2
  467.  @ronnietexan  It’s a subject where face-palming assertions by FE’ers are common.
    2
  468.  @IFS  Thanks.
    2
  469.  @ericb3157  They're spherical, they're flat, they're just lights, they don't exist. FE'ers are agreed that they are agreed on details but they aren't agreed on what it is they're agreed upon.
    2
  470. You haven’t checked any to see what was actually said, just unquestioningly accepted the content of a Youtube video.
    2
  471.  @redude08  Poe’s Law. The wachier the subject the more difficult it is to recognise satire.
    2
  472.  @TheBlueskyson  Unable to supply any counter-arguments is holding his own how exactly?
    2
  473.  @TheBlueskyson  I can’t find a point at which he does go into the theory of spectroscopy. Could you supply a time point.
    2
  474.  @TheBlueskyson  So what is the benefit of running around misleading people?
    2
  475.  @TheBlueskyson  Idea rather than a theory and a poor idea at that.
    2
  476.  @cryptojoecoin5480  Why would you fly off exactly?
    2
  477. What do you think would pull it off?
    2
  478. Put another way, the satellite is moving rapidly sideways while gravity pull sit directly down; at the right sideways speed the net result is a curve around the Earth. The ISS has an orbital time of about 90min which would mean a change of about 0.07 degrees per second. Regardless of the speed of the ISS, it's not a rate of change that jumps out at you.
    2
  479.  @jarrod4203 It’s a common misconception. The Coriolis force is real but requires a large area to be apparent.
    2
  480.  @josephprettner6696  It can be difficult to tell who's serious :-)
    2
  481. Free speech does not mean that what you say can’t be criticized or questioned, just that no unreasonable restrictions be placed upon what you can say.
    2
  482.  @Ian-gk7ne  Definitely spherical.
    2
  483. Try rebutting it.
    2
  484. How did explain density acting as a force and why it would do so in a consistent direction?
    2
  485. He originally released a video in his astronomy series that explained how we know the Earth isn't flat. The FE response was vitriolic and what reasoning they did provide is pretty much covered by this video.
    2
  486. Prove it yourself https://www.popsci.com/10-ways-you-can-prove-earth-is-round/
    2
  487. NebTheWeb You might want to correct the “density is directional” bit 😊
    2
  488.  @TahaJelani  It wouldn’t be flat over a large area, just level.
    2
  489.  @zodiacleo5865  In science we debate the evidence; we are still waiting for FE'ers to provide any evidence to debate.
    2
  490. What’s your technique for identifying fake photos?
    2
  491. King Veteran How does the sun retain a constant angular diameter and angular velocity through the course of the day?
    2
  492. You’re confusing theory and hypothesis; a hypothesis is an untested or incompletely tested idea, a scientific theory a comprehensive explanation for a natural phenomenon that is well-substantiated by extensive experimentation and observation. That there is much we don’t know does not make what we do know wrong.
    2
  493. Tii Fit Wellness Over the course of over 2 millennia we have Earth’s shape mapped to the square meter. All competent research finds curvature. We have satellites in orbit taking pictures several times an hour. What’s your reasoning for concluding it might just be flat and it’s all a huge coincidence that people find curvature all the time?
    2
  494.  @Bobshinglebottom  Subjects like this depend on empirical data not subjective observations.
    2
  495. eric Sandersfield Moving upwards at a constant velocity would not explain why a falling object accelerates. If they try to argue a FE accelerated upwards at 9.8m/s^2 then they teach light speed within a year. Most now try to argue density makes objects fall though can’t explain (or understand the necessity of explaining) how density could act as a force and why in a consistent direction.
    2
  496.  @philaypeephilippotter6532  That’s unusual; most people only go back to 4-5 years old.
    2
  497. The moon orbits the Earth over the course of 28 days; it spends half the orbit on the sunwards side of Earth.
    2
  498.  @philaypeephilippotter6532  Few of the ones who have gone down the rabbit hole; those who were simply looking down it are more amenable to reason.
    2
  499. If it was really density then both should have risen slowly upwards, the stick slower than the stone. Air pressure declined with increasing altitude so there is slightly density above them.
    2
  500. millertas Columbus thought the globe was much smaller than concluded and believed it feasible to sail directly westwards to India rather than around Africa. Hence his discovery of the West Indies.
    2
  501. This is the third video he made on the subject, the first being educational and the second a reply to some FE criticism, both polite in content. This is a response to the vitriolic FE counter-arguments to both which were heavily reliant on selective observation and poor reasoning.
    2
  502.  @Matuse  The Illuminati’s strings are being pulled by the Luminati 😊
    2
  503. Unfortunately neither do they.
    2
  504.  @dracodragon74  I usually see the narrator going "there's just gotta be a harness there" because they don't understand how objects move in a microgravity environment. There's one video that's over 40min continuous motion through all the modules on the ISS and I haven't see any explanation as to how harnesses would carry somebody through the junctions. You are aware that Nasa is not the only space agency? They weren't even the first. "green n blue screens" When there is a prominent white grid on said blue screen do you really think it would act as a filming blue screen? If so, explain how.
    2
  505.  @ericb3157  Possibly he means Santa's Grotto? All those elves have to live somewhere :-)
    2
  506. The ancient Greeks hadn't realised out how much friction can reduce velocity (air resistance in the case of an arrow). From their perception an object required the application of force to keep moving; an arrow slowed and a rolling wheel gradually came to a halt because they wasn't being continuously propelled. Do remember that they didn't have stopwatches or a means of making fine measurements. Fire an arrow horizontally and it falls vertically due to gravity and slows horizontally as it encounters air resistance. Firing it an angle complicates matters since its velocity is reduced by both air resistance & gravity. Aristotle believed the Earth to be a sphere, not flat. The ancient Greeks were the people who first deduced it was a sphere. In common with all humans until recently, they assumed that we were at the centre of the universe that consisted only what they could see. A spherical Earth was the centrepoint of the subsequent Ptolemiac model until Copernicus precipitated the shift from a geocentric to a heliocentric system. The modern FE movement originated in mid-19th century Britain when Samuel Rowbotham went on a religious anti-science bender.
    2
  507. orion wilson Cavendish experiment does it by measuring the attraction between objects.
    2
  508. VITA kyo How do you think flying over the lunar landing sites would be physically possible?
    2
  509. Traceable signal to, on and from the moon, detectable equipment left there and verifiable material brought back.
    2
  510. YT has a problem compiling all the comments from different servers before a timeout; they do note how many exist, hence the discrepancies.
    2
  511. Little sign of anything going in though.
    2
  512.  @NoeLPZC  Most people wouldn’t be able to tell you how the Earth was determined to be round; they are aware it was determined long ago, that we have accurate maps & satellites and routinely observe horizons and the sun rising & setting. People denying all that (particular the sun's motion) and claiming a pointless global conspiracy running faultlessly for centuries or millennia are going to be dismissed as idiots.
    2
  513.  @NoeLPZC  While you may interpret it that way it can also read as FE'ers assuming that nobody has ever checked that the Earth is a globe, an accusation that they frequently make. I've asked umpteen of them what they think we do in labs since they apparently think that science is entirely untested assertions and FE'ers are novel in performing experiments. It is reasonable to assume that if something is regarded as well-established then it has actually been established; the probability of that being false is low to essentially zero. It isn't feasible for everybody to double-check everything that is known; when something is broadly accepted as true then is a good starting point. Someone wishing to challenge accepted knowledge does not need to have done proper research if they wish to produce a plausible alternative. Nobody checked what Cliff Clavin expounded on in Cheers; he was simply viewed as the in-house entertainment.
    2
  514. Got Ghost That’s a change in the search algorithms. Do you have evidence if channels being removed for posting FE videos?
    2
  515.  @rhetoricalquestion6009 YT algorithm. Which are visible to whom varies and is probably to do with server timeouts.
    2
  516. aunt jenifer Both are fluids but liquids & gases have different properties.
    2
  517. 13:37-13:42
    2
  518. There's a difference between liquid and gas.
    2
  519. Try refuting what he says.
    2
  520. It would require upwards acceleration and would approach light speed within a year. Momentum keeps planets moving, not force. There’s nothing in a vacuum to create the resistance that would slow them down.
    2
  521. I think three have tried and at least two of them subsequently deleted the OP.
    2
  522. The 8"/mile^2 was a rule of thumb used by land surveyors prior to the invention of calculators. Zetetic anything is deciding what conclusion you want to arrive at then designing experiments that can be interpreted as supporting your desired conclusion. Science relies in disproving hypotheses (rather than supporting them) to try to avoid unintentionally committing such logical errors.
    2
  523.  @CaptWesStarwind  Darn - evidently I'm too polite :-(
    2
  524.  @zoominmonkey278  FE’ers are pretty vitriolic and are aggressive denialists; it’s easier for them to be abusive than actually explain anything. I’m happy to explain something to anybody who is actually curious but your diehard FE’ers are not open to facts, evidence & reasoning. Pointing out their willful stupidity is a reasonable point.
    2
  525.  @victorfinberg8595  YT edits out links when you post a comment; some YT links do survive. They don’t alter your text.
    2
  526. Droplets, waterfalls, meniscus...,
    2
  527.  @markshirey3190  Given a 25,000 mile circumference how many degrees curvature per mile would you expect to find?
    2
  528. They rotate in the course of the night and which stars you can see each night changes with the course of the year. There is a slow gradual change in the relative position of stars but, aside from a few, that isn’t perceptible to the eye.
    2
  529. Attraction is towards the centre of gravity; the angle of pull relative to the ground would vary as you moved across a FE. They have no explanation for why the sun & moon stay up, circle above a FE and vary the size of the circle.
    2
  530.  @isikgorkem  You have Master's thesis on optics but haven't figured out how to divide 360 by 25,000?
    2
  531. I wish it was as frequent as every day; answering questions wouldn’t be so repetitive. 😊
    2
  532. S n Why not?
    2
  533. When you tell them that birds can fly because they have wings, FE'ers just don't make the mental connections as to why the ocean doesn't fly; it has to be pointed out to many of them that oceans don't have wings.
    2
  534. Their heavy cogitations perhaps.
    2
  535.  @rejeanfreeman3094  Like the moon progressing across the sky day by day? Why does the camera need to be on the moon? How many revolutions per day would you expect to see the Earth turning?
    2
  536. Professor Dave Explains If you seek something you don’t necessarily find it, eg, car keys. I assume he was explaining how multiple factors affect how the water moves.
    2
  537. Homer sapiens has a certain ring to it...
    2
  538. herman se german The ancient Greeks determined that the Earth was a sphere; the Ptolemaic system (100AD) was based on a central, spherical Earth.
    2
  539.  @hermansegerman2803  The church objected to the notion of a heliocentric system, not the shape of the Earth; that it was a sphere was accepted. I'm not lecturing; the problem is that many people believe that the concept of a globe has only been around a few centuries or even just decades and that maps & navigation worked fine before then.
    2
  540.  @tomoth77  Sex is biological, gender is psychological & sociological.
    2
  541.  @tomoth77  Your OP was not about linguistics. That gender is used in linguistics does not preclude its use elsewhere, eg, psychology & sociology.
    2
  542.  @tomoth77  I have a 1903 edition of Chambers 20th Century Dictionary; it clearly specifies two meanings: Gender, n. kind especially with regards to sex; (gram.) the distinction of nouns according to sex. You need to get a comprehensive dictionary.
    2
  543.  @tomoth77  Your brain skipped over the first of the two definitions?
    2
  544. There's lunar phases & lunar eclipses. The former is the relative orientation of the moon's unlit side as it orbits Earth, the latter is when the sun, Earth & moon are in alignment and the Earth's shadow crosses the moon. FE'er don't have an explanation for the latter and can't explain why the cycle for the former takes 28 days rather than 24hrs.
    2
  545. Are you asking the cats to push things off?
    2
  546. Ignore what I wrote - I thought I was watching a different video.
    2
  547.  @petroleumalley  Nobody wanted to risk their equipment on the first flight, they needed a cargo and sticking in a car with cameras was good publicity. There were unoccupied seats in the car which perhaps could have been put to use :-)
    2
  548. pauly hart It’s unusual for a FE’er to come up with something novel. I’ve been countering the same points over and over and over for a few years. They just keep repeating what they heard on a YouTube video even when the fallacy is explained to them and evidence provided to back that.
    2
  549. That they can observe that day in, day out (literally) is not sufficient to convince them that they are observing that.
    2
  550. jack mack There’s no common orientation of the molecules.
    2
  551.  @buffalobear2641  These claims are brought up time & time again by the FE gurus. What intelligent FE arguments do you think exist?
    2
  552. Buffalo Bear 8”/mile^2 and “water can’t curve” are probably the two most frequently made assertions by FE’ers. How the heck could you not notice?
    2
  553. Buffalo Bear You would sound better if you produced some of these well-founded assertions. I have yet to find any but FE’ers keep claiming they exist. It seems to be working maps & models: many assertions they exist but nobody ever produces one.
    2
  554. FE’ers have no concept of how far away the clouds would have to be.
    2
  555. Antonio Petersen The gravity pulling it downwards is in equilibrium with the very gradual pressure gradient. Neither is an irresistible force.
    2
  556. Motion of the sun.
    2
  557.  @hypercaneaurastopalan1503  Dumb rather than dum.
    2
  558. That Weird Kid From High School There are gullible people who believe it, others who make money from it and some trolls that just like stirring trouble. To most people it is a meme for stupidity because it requires ignoring proof in favour of implausible conjecture. Discussions on YouTube generally cover the first group of people.
    2
  559. Jimbo Conn The picture says observer height 1ft rather than observer elevation 1ft. It wouldn’t be the first to overlook where the observer was standing.
    2
  560. It’s an apparent force like centrifugal force. However FEers think “gravity is not a force” means “gravity doesn’t exist”.
    2
  561. Shelton Curtis Closed ecosystem; you need artificial life support to travel outside it. Try asking questions instead if jumping to conclusions and lecturing people.
    2
  562. FE’ers assume curvature and viewing distance are calculated from the same formula.
    2
  563. Very low light intensity. Most isn’t reflected by the moon’s surface and what is reflected towards us has spread before it reaches Earth.
    2
  564. MrClobbertime They seem to have great difficulty distinguishing velocity from acceleration. I do hope they don’t have driving licences.
    2
  565.  @noblecyborg-savage So it was the ballast tanks you saw…. Why not just say so?
    2
  566. They seem to visualise it as 25-250 miles in circumference.
    2
  567. The probability that everybody has been brainwashed into thinking the sun rises & sets every day is.... remote. A plausible mechanism by which an entire world population can be brainwashed would be a start when somebody claims this has occurred. The inability of the "awoke" to answer questions and their frequent use of "see my guru" when pressed for explanations does not generate confidence in their professed clear thinking.
    2
  568.  @JustDorkyMe17  I check the information. I check the reliability of the sources. Assuming that I don't is a common accusation from FE'ers who apparently do neither. I did ask you what the "convincing evidence towards flat earth" was. Are you going to say?
    2
  569. Unfortunately they understand that to mean that gravity doesn’t exist.
    2
  570.  @mickalinjezerx7104  “Nothing in the Bible contradicts itself” Who went to dress Jesus’s body and what did they encounter?
    2
  571. Try getting a globe (not a flat projection) and pull a piece of string tight between those locations.
    2
  572. Everything is distant anc moving in the same general direction as the sun as the galaxy as a whole rotates. Change takes 10,000 years to be apparent to the unaided eye.
    2
  573. CraftTheSky Your English is very good and, I’m sorry to say, better than many native speakers.
    2
  574.  @teriross-bares7153  Explain your thinking for concluding their own "knowledge" is correct. Does it begin and end with "Does it differ from accepted knowledge? If yes then must be right."? Do you bother to do anything to check on the veracity of the knowledge?
    2
  575. Teri Ross Your “free thinkers” don’t bother to consider the question “How much curvature would be apparent at this altitude if the world is 25,000 miles in circumference?” Too much thought for them.
    2
  576. RakaZet You’d rapidly be banned and your comments disappear.
    2
  577. Sam Hall Try explaining what you think he has wrong.
    2
  578. ​ @samhall3591  Do you know what the markings on a ruler are for? When Kaku, Krauss & Tyson are what? Polar diameter = 7900 miles Equatorial diameter = 7926 miles. That is a 26 mile, 0.3% difference. Numbers and scale do seem to be very difficult concepts for some people to grasp, but hopefully you might understand that 0.3% =/= the 30% that you are visualising. What do you think we do in labs exactly? Tesla had no problem with gravity and from hs comments it appears he didn't understand what relativity was. He also died in 1943 and this is 2020; we've had a century to experiment and confirm relativity. Why do you think it is impossible to take a picture of an object at 53 million light-years distance? Do you think light disappears after a short distance or do you think a camera has a fixed range?
    2
  579. They believe they already have a universal model, each thinking their personal variation being that model.
    2
  580. He made an earlier video on his astronomy section describing how we knew the Earth was a globe. He got tired of answering the same dumb canards and made this one.
    2
  581.  @yasministryheals  It’s a public forum; anybody can comment. Currently YT is having trouble ensuring comments appear and remain visible to all viewers.
    1
  582.  @yasministryheals  The only way to tell if there are missing rather than deleted comments is to count the number of comments in the thread and compare it to the stated number; invisible comments are still counted. Most are currently invisible rather than deleted.
    1
  583. If someone is blocking you from commenting are you apparently able to still do so but nobody is seeing your comments?
    1
  584. Garry Cislowski You mean intensity rather than density.
    1
  585. Most seem to be conmen, a few genuine; there’s money to be made selling snakeoil The Truth.
    1
  586. FE’ers claim gravity doesn’t exist, that the effect is just density & buoyancy. Mention buoyant force and they assume he’s saying there notion is correct. It is a darn sight easier to make a statement that 8” per mile squared is wrong then try and get across to FE’ers the differences about curvature, geometric curve, hidden drop and refracted hidden drop.
    1
  587. john koebel You think Newton & Cavendish worked for NASA?
    1
  588.  @MrEvo1999  You mean the FE gurus sold you ignorance & incredulity as fact? Let me guess - the horizon is perspective, density makes things fall and nobody’s found 8”/mile^2 curvature?
    1
  589. Launch ramps and a minimum speed limit?
    1
  590.  @rhetoricalquestion6009  Checking the details it seems to be an urban legend; the bridge was finished ahead of schedule. Recent repairs for hurricane damage has cost millions.
    1
  591.  @stylesrj  Just Sheldon, but he also looks down on everyone 😊
    1
  592. Try dividing 360 degrees by 25,000 miles.
    1
  593. Check the rest of his channel and the playlists.
    1
  594.  @Sir720x2 It’s an assumption that in millenia of civilisation nobody has actually thought to check the shape.
    1
  595. ?
    1
  596. It’s like centrifugal force; it’s not a force in its own right but the situation applies the amount of force to an object, eg, drop a brick on your foot and there will be a forceful impact on it.
    1
  597.  @homelesszaya6711  You're arguing that something being in a text book means it has never been done. "I ask questions, so I'm uneducated" You're only asking rhetorical questions. It's reasonable to ask how we know something and what the evidence for it is; it isn't reasonable to summarily dismiss the answers. "I challenge your spewing whaty u learned as ultimate truth" You want the technique for the measuring the speed of light to be demonstrated right here in front of you in a text box? "u rest on your intelligence that was garnered by reading other peoples work" You're arguing that everybody human has to independently reproduce all the scientific work of centuries before you will be satisfied there is evidence for the accepted answers. You do realise how much information we are talking about? Even with decades of working in a research lab I'm only directly carrying out a tiny fraction of all that has been done in my field alone. Recording what has been done so information can be distributed is the only way humans are going to learn. "tell me I'm uneducated" You started off by arguing 10 miles was a large proportion of 3,900 miles. If you wish to hail yourself as a free thinker then there is an obligation to actually think, not just run around telling people how much of a thinker you are. If you think there is something incorrect about a scientific conclusion then you need to state what you think is wrong. "do u believe we have a way to measure the speed of light ? With proof besides the equation relevant to it ? When distance and time between 2 points is the relative speed , correct? But the equation is based off a vacuum correct ? How can u tell me how fast a laser goes a kilometer without a pulse ? U woukd need 2 "clocks" to measure correct based off the stationary clock in theory? (Clock being a time keeping unit not house clock ) 313 thousand kilometers a second is the theory correct? Based on the "round trip" measurement." You seem to have a jumble of ideas in there. The velocity is measured through a round trip (and one clock) and averaged on the assumption that the speed of light will not vary between the two directions. If you think there is sound reason to believe the speed does vary between directions then you need to give it, not airily wave your hand and say you're a free thinker. You wouldn't try one way because of the relativity problem; the clocks would be out of sync. It isn't necessary to stipulate you don't mean house clocks; that falls under the bloody obvious. "how fast a laser goes a kilometer without a pulse ?" doesn't make sense as a question.
    1
  598.  @homelesszaya6711  I can parse grammatical errors without problem; your comment is gibberish.
    1
  599.  @homelesszaya6711  WGS84 is the product of the measurements; I ran you through how the measurements were made. Satellites are nearer 10ft across. When the distances between stars are measured in light years what makes you think galaxies are 100ft across? We see back in time, not into the future; light takes time to travel from object to observer.
    1
  600.  @homelesszaya6711  You can measure the Earth’s size& shape with as little as sticks & shadows; it doesn’t require hi-tech. If you wish accuracy to the cm error range then you will need hi-tech. Have you not realised that your arguments are based in ignorance & incredulity, not free thinking?
    1
  601.  @homelesszaya6711  That's what you're arguing; you need to reword your comment if that's not what you mean. The essential requirement for free-thinking is the ability & willingness to actually think.
    1
  602.  @homelesszaya6711  You aren’t thinking beyond the superficial; your comments are based on incredulity, some of them are unintelligible, you’re demanding answers but can’t comprehend that we are quite capable of knowledge & comprehension and you seem unwilling to ask anybody with the first hand knowledge that you are demanding. Your level of reasoning is similar to FE’ers, eg, spheres having common geometrical properties and 10 is a dignuficant proportion of 3900. Now you can’t figure out that you’re by far the most prolific poster on the thread.
    1
  603.  @homelesszaya6711  "who ever mentioned the future" You did, i.e., "oh but we can see billions of light years into the future and gasses from distant galaxies?" "Etc hiw we measure the speed if light with only 1 constant as tine source when clearly we need 2" Using reflectors. You still haven't given a good reason why you think the speed of light would vary over different directions. "then science can't even agree on the date" It took time to finish the voyages and compile the data. No real-time communication & computers in the 18th century. "wasn't it in the 3rd century? Hellenistic astronomy.?" No. Eratosthenes estimated the circumference of the Earth; he didn't map it. "it's clear u have no clue when oriented in lies when confronted with rebuttal" You have yet to produce any rebuttals.
    1
  604.  @homelesszaya6711  "rhetorical in the fact it's moving faster away from us than we can see" What is moving away from us faster than we can see?
    1
  605.  @homelesszaya6711  There are abundant galaxies in the region we can see so what exactly are you talking about? In the absence of high velocities & large masses Newtonian physics is a fair approximation of relativity. Newton envisaged a force acting between masses; using that for calculations produces accurate results in the absence of high velocities and extremely large masses. It is long accepted that gravity is actually due to space-time curvature so it's not clear what your complaint is. You're the one who has been screaming about a constant; I haven't raised it. I'm asking the thinker what his reasoning is for light having varying velocities depending on the direction it is moving in. As far as I'm aware nobody (apart form yourself) has found reason to believe that it would vary according to direction but you are saying there is reason; I want to hear your reason. "So I'll ask u is space time measured around earth, does it bend ? Does it go straight around ? Or does it bend wirh gravitational rotations and stay a constant?" As Victor said, that's gibberish.
    1
  606.  @homelesszaya6711  Non sequitor. Answer the questions asked.
    1
  607.  @homelesszaya6711  I answered your questions and asked you to explain your reasoning; ignoring me and jumping onto another subject is a non-sequitur. Explain you reasoning and we might progress. What discrepancies? "also did u use the words "fair approximation " THATS FACTUAL SCIENCE ....??????" When the difference between the two is too small to have an impact on what is being done then it is a waste of time & effort to use the more complex maths. Do you use pi to an infinite number of places in your calculations? "so can time change with gravity" Yes & no; depends on the observer's position relative to the gravity source.
    1
  608.  @homelesszaya6711  "Is gravity based on the observer or the actions ?" You're bellyaching about not being able to use two clocks when measuring the speed of light and you can't figure out what I'm referring to? One axiom would be the speed of light in a vacuum being constant; I've asked you at least twice to explain why you think it would vary and you haven't answered. Your belly-aching is based on the axiom that it varies but you can't provide any basis for that assumption other than airy claims of being a free-thinker. Meanwhile everything works just as it would be expected if it was constant. Do your magic free thinking and tell us what your evidence is. You have the opportunity to initiate a paradigm shift; reveal your evidence and you will be seen as the new Einstein.
    1
  609.  @homelesszaya6711  "I don't have the answer" Then is it really wise for you to be saying everybody has it wrong? The speed of light is measured, not estimated. Mean values are not estimates. Axioms are not estimates. Axioms exist in science; we're discussing one. Unlike religion, there has to be good reason for the axiom. Nobody, yourself included, can come up with evidence or reason why the speed of light in vacuum would vary. Since everything we observe works exactly as predicted with a constant light speed there is no reason to doubt the axiom. Since measurements of light speed in a reflected system always return the same mean value there is no good reason to doubt the axiom. That is why it is considered self-evident. If you wish to doubt the axiom then you need to come up with good reason to do so. Airy claims of free-thinking is not good reason.
    1
  610.  @homelesszaya6711  Another non sequitur. Science advances by formulating hypotheses and testing them. No hypotheses, no research.
    1
  611.  @homelesszaya6711  You haven't demonstrated any holes; you just keep bellyaching about axioms as if they were holes. As you said yourself, axioms are considered self-evident. Now you're back to asserting they've just gotta be wrong. "Estimations and approximations isn't fact " Which is why we measure things. Averages are not estimations & approximations. Learn the difference. You agree hypotheses are needed for advancement but you don't like us formulating hypotheses? How do you think we can arrive at facts other than by testing hypotheses? Are you going to tell me you don't know that either?
    1
  612.  @homelesszaya6711  Non sequitur.
    1
  613.  @homelesszaya6711  Estimation & approximation are not methods in science for taking measurements. I assume you are referring to the mean measurement of the speed of light as estimation & approximation; average values are neither. Once again you are claiming you have evidence that the speed of light in vacuum varies. Stop whinging about being a free thinker and produce this evidence.
    1
  614.  @homelesszaya6711  Do you use pi to an infinite number of places?
    1
  615.  @homelesszaya6711  You’re expecting instant replies?
    1
  616.  @homelesszaya6711  Unless you use pi to an infinite number of places you will only get an approximate answer. You’re demanding absolute precision so how decimal places do you use pi to?
    1
  617.  @homelesszaya6711  You’re a contrarian on a gish-gallop with minimal understanding of science and an inability to stick to the subject.
    1
  618.  @homelesszaya6711  No, I could see you weren’t interested in answers, had no grasp of the distinction between hypothesis & theory and were just frog-hopping from subject to subject thinking you had gotcha points. It was pointless to continue.
    1
  619.  @gutenbird  Yet none of them can any more than they can explain the sun staying up, its motion and observable location.
    1
  620.  @gutenbird  As Stylesrj said, they make assertions about balloons and cell phone towers but can't explain how either could actually work. Their entire thinking is very superficial: cell phone towers generate signals therefore all signals come from cell phone towers and no thought given to the necessity of their presence, range and direction.
    1
  621.  @HarbingerOfBattle Check Poe’s law. It’s difficult to recognise satire in the loonier subjects.
    1
  622.  @HarbingerOfBattle  More a matter of best guess than assuming it serious.
    1
  623. Refer to buoyant force and FE’ers would just see it as vindication of their density/buoyancy claims.
    1
  624.  @ichbinwiederda100  While the video is entertaining it is principally aimed at the FE’ers that were plaguing Dave; the explanations had to be pitched at a level most could understand. It wasn’t intended as an educational video for his physics series.
    1
  625. 1. If the same applied to a FE then the direction of gravity would become increasingly oblique the further away from the North Pole you moved. 2. 8"/mile^2 describes a parabola. That should be a clue that it doesn't describe a circle. How far you can see is dependent not only the Earth's curvature but your elevation and the atmospheric refraction; that they are not included in the calculation should be a further clue it isn't correct. 3. Demonstrating curved water and explaining how it can curve to someone claiming water can't curve is irrelevant how exactly? 4. The atmosphere declines in pressure with increasing altitude; it's why planes are equipped with oxygen masks. You won't find such a decline in a sealed vessel. Assuming that it could then the vessel of the size you are envisaging is tiny compared to the distance the atmospheric pressure declines over. Scale is so difficult for some people to grasp. 5a. Attraction is about 0.5% less at the equator and multiple factors affect the flow of clouds. You're making the usual mistake of assuming any difference must be profound. 5b. Why do you think the gyroscope would flip? 6. Ignoring screwed up experiments is not ignoring facts. 7. The engine cut off and the car carried on moving forwards? 8. We do see different stars winter & summer. Hunter-gatherers noticed that. 9. https://arxiv.org/ You realise we publish the work we do complete with methodology & data? 10. And you're coming out with the usual ignorant twaddle.
    1
  626. @Jack Dorney Don't worry - happens to us all.
    1
  627. They can't figure out how birds fly and when it's pointed out to them that birds have wings they don't make the association between wings & flight. Pointing out that oceans don't fly because they lack wings seems to have more mental impact.
    1
  628. Unfortunately, anything you do provide them with they ignore, deny or simply forget. I often have to answer the same question twice in a thread, sometimes three times. Read this article: https://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Morton%27s_demon
    1
  629. He’s mocking people who are willfully ignorant.
    1
  630. Advocating a FE is pretty much the pinnacle for proselytising willful ignorance and denial of observable reality. If this was accepted then we would be back to living in caves within a few generations when nobody knows how to repair or build the equipment we use in the course of our daily lives.
    1
  631.  @qua_xor3348  Ratio?
    1
  632. The association between wings and flight isn’t obvious to FE’ers.
    1
  633. ​ @Damageincorpor8d  When somebody starts off their comment "I'm not a flat earther but..." and then launches into a critique of someone's character rather than the evidence presented, experience on here is that they are indeed a FE'er, something which quickly becomes apparent. It's no presumptive; it's a reasonable prediction. I wouldn't say FE'ers could be described as sceptics. What thought they have put into the subject is cursory at best, they haven't considered there could be something they don't know or understand (conspiracies aside) and there is persistent belief that espousing a "different" opinion somehow makes them right regardless of the lack of evidence and coherent argument. Everybody's patience is stretched. Many of these FE'ers have simply repeated some of the above 10 claims, others rapidly fall back on insults and some repeatedly demand an explanation they have already been repeatedly given. Umpteen claim to have a working model or conclusive evidence, can't provide either and are get abusive because their word isn't taken for it. The depth of their thinking is typically their brains fusing out at the notion of more than 1 or 2 factors in a problem or failing to see the glaring contradictions in their claims. In terms of talking down to people, some of them really need something explained to them Ladybird fashion.
    1
  634.  @Damageincorpor8d  You thought it unreasonable that someone would assume you were a FE'er simply from your OP; I was pointing out that your OP was the same as many FE'ers', where what criticism is offered is personal with no attempt at refutation of what was said. I suspect that you don't have much experience with them.
    1
  635.  @amazingj4173  It used to be that we were supposed to be polite to people and respect was something to be earned. I'm happy to be polite and I'm happy to inform people but should I really respect opinions that are self-evidently incorrect?
    1
  636. Motion of the sun, horizons, angle to Polaris and two celestial poles were how it was originally deduced. Magellan is the guy first credited with circumnavigating the Earth. There have been umpteen circumnavigational flights including several transpolar circumnavigations. Still doesn’t satisfy them.
    1
  637. Example?
    1
  638. Albert Einstein You may want to amend the “they” in your original post. It can be read more than one way.
    1
  639. He confused inauguration with impeachment or did I miss something? What did he think someone could do to be impeached for in that time frame?
    1
  640. It’s Flat https://www.popsci.com/10-ways-you-can-prove-earth-is-round/ Perhaps you can explain why you think the results don’t demonstrate a globe.
    1
  641. Which country are you from? I suspect the majority of FE’ers on English-speaking media are American. Many are so distrustful of government that they don’t stop to consider when, how abd by whom something was determined, just assume it’s government propaganda.
    1
  642. Eric VandenAvond The elephants do that. The turtle supports the elephants.
    1
  643.  @yasir5422  10cm to 1m would be a 10 fold change; Earth’s elliptical orbit gives a 0.01 fold change. Not equivalent.
    1
  644.  @Matuse  The notion (originally) is that the Earth goes through a cycle of swelling & shrinking, I think as a hypothesis for tectonic plate shift.
    1
  645.  @dovski3161  He’s not writing a physics textbook. He made a video aimed at people who can’t make an association between birds having wings and birds being able to fly. So again, had he mentioned the word force while discussing density & buoyancy it would have simply been seen as vindication their notion was correct.
    1
  646.  @stylesrj Possibly he’s referring to the LibDem political party in Britain though his comment still doesn’t make sense.
    1
  647. Dalek Supreme Difficult as it is for you to comprehend, more than one force can act simultaneously. When the buoyancy from the medium exceeds gravity then the object rises.
    1
  648. The gravitational attraction is the same but the centrifugal force is greater with the result that the NET attraction is less. It is why scales are calibrated according to location before use. A scientific theory is not a hunch or guess; that is the vernacular meaning of theory.
    1
  649. My understanding is that the original Hebrew word approximates to "roundness" and says nothing of whether it is a disc or a sphere. It also refers to the four corners of the Earth which would imply a square. It's more a case of people trying to read in significance rather than the Bible making any statement on the subject.
    1
  650. dos 7 Try explaining exactly what you think is wrong with the points he made.
    1
  651. The sun wouldn’t rise or set at all on a FE.
    1
  652.  @kaihoffmann2011 Again, gravity is neither irresistible nor the only force.
    1
  653. It would need to observe its environment, make a decision and move itself. How do you think it could do that?
    1
  654.  @gordyoung7205 You’re 1” tall?
    1
  655.  @danielrinobravo  You mean does the motion of the Earth influence how an object falls?
    1
  656.  @homelesszaya6711  You realise that science progresses by formulating hypotheses and testing them?
    1
  657.  @homelesszaya6711  You seem to have a garbled notion of science terminology.
    1
  658.  @homelesszaya6711  "I mean we need atoms" Not for the Big Bang. "but only millions old" 14.5 billion years. "we also know what happens inside a black hole" You've spent most of the thread railing against theoretical physics. "never address the clownish nonsense we followed as "methods" or "laws"" As I said earlier, you have a garbled understanding of science terminology and no interest in answers.
    1
  659. redddlord 1. Having demonstrated the Earth’s curvature, that gravity is always perpendicular to the surface disproves a universal down.
    1
  660. 4 If you’re trying to calculate centrifugal force then you need the radius and rotational speed.
    1
  661. redddlord 5 & 6. Cavendish experiment.
    1
  662. It’s obvious to most but there are some who can’t or won’t think and learn.
    1
  663.  @warmachineuk  Depends on who you are asking for evidence; ask them and you are called sheep.
    1
  664. Depends on the quality of your vacuum :-)
    1
  665. Christopher Gielink No, it’s the result of dealing with FE’ers convinced they have insight that totally rewrites the universe as we know it despite the fact they can’t answer any questions or know how the globe was proved.
    1
  666. SpareUmbrella Drop the sentence about magical aether and spell Jesus correctly and you would be indistinguishable from a FE’er rant.
    1
  667.  @ChristianIce  And they’re usually plugged in while sucking 😊
    1
  668.  @ganj-ratandtheholloman4328  Gravity's existence is a fact; the law is a description of the effect, the theory is how it works. You don't need to know how something works for it to exist or be used.
    1
  669. contemplate We’ve been explaining why you should be able to see it but you seem unable to handle the concept of multiple factors and instead rely on incorrect tables. Your entire line of reasoning is that you can see a ferry that a table says you shouldn’t therefore there just gotta be a huge worldwide conspiracy running for 2000+ years when you simply should be querying the accuracy of the table.
    1
  670.  @where578 Unfortunately there are people who think anything that differs from the “official narrative” is automatically right.
    1
  671. The original claim was that they get a kick out of fooling you; that at least was a plausible if pointless end goal. Since then it has shifted to hiding God (apparently heliocentric = sun worship), taking economic advantage of lands beyond the insurmountable ice-wall & impenetrable dome or establishing total mind control (1 proponent).
    1
  672. Uniform elevation, not lack of curvature.
    1
  673. You didn’t look through his playlists?
    1
  674.  @simonwachon6723  "you mean like distances to the Horizon?" No, as in distance between cities.
    1
  675. Simon Wachon The atmosphere gradually declines in pressure with increasing altitude. When you drop an object does it plummet to the ground or very slowly rise upwards? Are the distances between cities known? It’s a simple question and you’re claiming to be well informed so answer the question.
    1
  676. Simon Wachon Explain your basis for only one variable to act at a time and why you think constant values are inherently variable. We might get somewhere if your underlying reasoning was clear.
    1
  677.  @simonwachon6723  If a factor is present then it has an effect on the object; it has an effect even if it is not the dominant effect, e.g., gravity does not magically cut off when you life an object and the conservation of momentum is not magivally cancelled when a plane turns its engines on. Pressure inside a container would be constant. You aren't going to get a pressure gradient when the only factor is pressure and it is in a sealed space. You need to explain how you think that could happen. It doesn't matter whether gravity is a direct force or the result of space-time curvature by a gravitational field; gravity is a factor and a factor that gets weaker with increasing distance from the planet. A balance of pressure and declining gravity on a planetary scale will produce a pressure gradient. The ISS has been in visible orbit for 20+ years. We are still awaiting a good explanation from conspiracy buffs as to how it can be achieved. So far we've had a plane that doesn't run out of fuel, isn't affected by the ambient weather and piloted by people who are unaware of what they are doing; a balloon that is propelled by nothing, remained aloft for 20 years longer than the usual lifetime of a balloon and is also unaffected by weather; a worldwide network of projectors that nobody can find projecting an image onto something, that have never gone on the blink in 20+ years, that are unaffected by cloud cover and (like the planes) staffed by people who are unaware of what they are doing; a chip with a mini-projector secretly built into every telescope worldwide. Do you want to try coming up with one? "for there to be a ball Earth the horizon needs to be a physical edge" Why does there need to be a physical edge? "Are you going with Newton who didn’t want his name ascribed to Gravity" Then why would he publish and stick his name on the Principia? He expressed disquiet because he couldn't explain what gravity was, only the effect that it had.
    1
  678. Why would objects thrown upwards fall at all? They would be moving faster than the Earth.
    1
  679. This is aimed at people who have difficulty understanding two forces can act simultaneously and think buoyancy proves density is the downwards force.
    1
  680. Tell them it’s an antivaccine.
    1
  681. Other possibilities are that the <insert boogeymen> are fooling you to fool you. Alternatively believing in a globe gives the <insert boogeymen> total mind control over you.
    1
  682. Asher Weinerman That radius is a factor in calculating each force does not mean it is the only factor.
    1
  683.  @luke_4252 Definitely still are purple 🥕 though I find there isn’t an emoji of them 😊
    1
  684. They’re opening their minds to the other possibilities rather than simply accepting what They tell them, which they know just gotta be wrong for obvious reasons they never elucidate. I think that is the right blurgle.
    1
  685. Pets Pro I’m stuck here because the Tardis rental hasn’t shown up yet 😊
    1
  686. If the water forms a sphere then there is a surface for surface tension to occur at.
    1
  687. A glycol is not automatically toxic simply because ethylene glycol is. That something tastes sweet does not mean it can or will be used as a sweetener regardless of toxicity. “Big sugar” arose as a consequence of fat reduction in foods, not a cause.
    1
  688. Sort by newest first. YouTube’s algorithms were tweaked to downgrade misinformation rather than supply the misinformed with more of the same.
    1
  689. Adam Ciacelli There’s no boundary between vacuum and atmosphere, just a gradual increase in pressure from essentially zero to 1atm. Consequently there is no abrupt change in the medium an object is travelling through. A gas doesn’t form any boundary layer. In a container the container itself is the boundary. With the Apollo craft, only the Command Module returned to Earth. Though the heat shields took a beating most of the craft was jettisoned at different points to reduce mass and make efficient use of fuel. Another common mistake is reading 10^-x as -10^x or assuming the difference between orders of magnitude equals the arithmetic difference.
    1
  690.  @miloszforman6270  You weren’t “shadow banned”; you were blocked. You could see your comments because you posted them; they were sitting in your comment history. Nobody else worldwide would see your comments. The current problem seems entirely random.
    1
  691.  @miloszforman6270  I should have been clearer; Im referring to YT’s current problem.
    1
  692. Lunar eclipses are caused by the Earth’s shadow. Lunar phases are due to the moon’s orbit changing how much of the sunlit side that we can be see.
    1
  693. @I BREATHE AIR Why not try refuting what he says rather than throwing insults?
    1
  694. Look up the cartoon science news cycle.
    1
  695.  @codacode3623  You’re equating the globe to sasquatch?
    1
  696. You’re asking why you don’t see a globe with a 25 mile circumference on a globe with a 25,000 mile circumference.
    1
  697.  @rhetoricalquestion6009  Is it worth refuting them?
    1
  698.  @victorfinberg8595  Most of their videos seem to be an hour long. 🙄I left a comment on the "water isn't hydrogen & oxygen" video; we'll see how long it lasts.
    1
  699. TYCHO DishTV had a real-time camera mounted on one of its satellites for a few years.
    1
  700. drz Rowbotham didn’t bother correcting for refraction. How many times does that need to be demonstrated to satisfy you that it has been demonstrated?
    1
  701. They did. It eventually dawned on them whyit wouldn’t work.
    1
  702. About 20cm.
    1
  703. That would be the aether that nobody has evidence of?
    1
  704.  Joeseph Smith  Your evidence for luminiferous aether is the Bible?
    1
  705.  Joeseph Smith  The context is luminiferous aether, the hypothetical substance that was thought to exist beyond the atmosphere and thought necessary for the transmission of light through airless space.
    1
  706.  Joeseph Smith  No, I understand language. Aether was thought necessary for the propagation of EM waves, including radio. Though its existence was disproved it still gets referred to in radio broadcasting. It does not mean air.
    1
  707. The Earth was deduced to be a sphere around 500BC, long before the RC church came into existence. They accepted the Ptolemaic model as reality.
    1
  708.  @thesaltyspacecowboy8531  I commented because your OP was incorrect. Theories do not become laws; they are two quite different things.
    1
  709.  @thesaltyspacecowboy8531  With regards to your assertion about theory & hypothesis, don't teach your grandmother to suck eggs.
    1
  710.  @thesaltyspacecowboy8531  The soft body forms are not so readily preserved in fossils; that there are far fewer does not mean they were absent. If you think they were introduced artificially then you need to build a case to support that, not simply assert as a valid alternative. "I dont know why I kept saying precambrian" I typed the same thing.
    1
  711.  @thesaltyspacecowboy8531  The law of gravity describes attraction as being proportional to the product of the two masses and inversely proportional to the square of the separating distance; it offers no explanation why such attraction occurs. The theory of gravity (space-time distortion) is why the attraction occurs. Law & theory are two distinct things; one is not a progression of the other.
    1
  712.  @thesaltyspacecowboy8531  Speculation is not evidence.
    1
  713. @Yuri DeKhed I’ve posted half a comment accidentally by simply brushing the send icon while tapping.
    1
  714. https://www.popsci.com/10-ways-you-can-prove-earth-is-round/
    1
  715.  @belgoblax1596  If he had referred to buoyant force rather than buoyancy then the FE'er brain would have stopped thinking at "buoyant force" and proclaimed it as proof that buoyancy & density are forces that make objects rise & fall rather than gravity.
    1
  716.  @mdew24 Your comment wasn’t removed; YT systems can’t compile the comments fast enough abd some are essentially invisible to some people.
    1
  717. Assuming it was possible for the Earth to remain as a disc, attraction is towards the centre which would result in the angle of down becoming increasingly oblique with distance from the centre of the plain to the edge.
    1
  718. wABEK Gravity is not an irresistible force.
    1
  719.  @williambarringer6513 Youve forgotten to consider the height of the mountain itself.
    1
  720. No way to know who’s genuine in their incredulity on YouTube. However some people don’t think beyond the inferred notion that gravity is irresistible; no further consideration is given to how birds fly or we stand upright.
    1
  721. Anadaere A scientific theory is a comprehensive explanation for a natural phenomenon that is well-substantiated by extensive experimentation and observation. It is not a guess; that is the vernacular meaning of theory.
    1
  722.  @spadesandaces4543  If you wish to communicate an idea clearly then you need use punctuation not rely on the willingness of other people to decipher what you have written. I can analyse bad text far better than most but it still takes longer to do so than you adding a fee extra key strokes.
    1
  723.  @spadesandaces4543  The top percentile doesn't fall in the average range.
    1
  724. Troy Wright These day’s it’s just convention, like putting north at the top of the map. It helps if everyone is working from the same page.
    1
  725. The Bible doesn’t give any model for the shape of the Earth. It was a common assumption at the time the OT was written that the Earth was flat and that is reflected in some phrasing; that is the root of the erroneous claim that the Bible says the Earth is flat.
    1
  726. Francois Beauregard That the Earth was a sphere was determined by the Greek philosophers around 500BC. The Vatican has always accepted that; their beef at the time was with the notion of a heliocentric universe rather than geocentric one.
    1
  727. 😊
    1
  728. Shane Sommer There’s nothing to indicate your moniker is your genuine name so why should I assume that it is?
    1
  729. Shane Sommer It’s just gotta be your real name simply because you said it is?
    1
  730.  @shanesommer  So you say.
    1
  731.  @aihuazeng7747  Or not and. The definition points out different meanings according to the context. Look up “dictionary definition of scientific theory”. Most dictionaries (including the above) fail to note that scientific theories are evidence-based and have been found to be reliable.
    1
  732. No big teeth and beady eyes?
    1
  733.  @dervillager8038  Humour but relevant.
    1
  734. How many degrees curvature do you think would need to be included in each rail section?
    1
  735. There are people who can't make the association between wings & flight.
    1
  736.  @oscarmudd6579  How would the elites know?
    1
  737.  @oscarmudd6579  And so?
    1
  738.  @oscarmudd6579  None of which answers my questions.
    1
  739. bustonio Exactly what?
    1
  740. Lattrodon The focal point of Earth’s gravity is the centre of Earth. How do you think that would pull Earth to a flattened disc?
    1
  741.  @JWJBS  What motivates you to believe in something that is repeatedly and thoroughly debunked?
    1
  742. The conmen make money rather being directly paid; sales of books & videos, revenue from YT videos with high viewing/subscriber numbers and so on.
    1
  743.  @MsChristicain  Mition if the sun, horizons, angle to Polaris matching latitude, two celestial poles, constellations changing with latitude - you can check all that first hand.
    1
  744.  @toprocks3612  So by seek and ye shall find you actually mean people should just unquestioningly believe.
    1
  745. Why do you think we have labs?
    1
  746. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aerodynamics
    1
  747. Whether it is a force or an apparent force is immaterial: either way it exists.
    1
  748. Kevin Dillard Given a 25,000 mile circumference, how many degrees curvature per mile would you expect to be observable?
    1
  749. Like everything else - it “just does” 😊
    1
  750. To be exact the poison was dissolved in the Flav-R-Aid 😊I think it’s a matter of Kool-Aid having a better ring to it when telling the story.
    1
  751.  @morgoth173  One told me that; he couldn't explain why people didn't fall out of the flaming pools.
    1
  752. As in surface of a perfect sphere. Say sea level to these people and they can’t think beyond flat.
    1
  753. Dedication.
    1
  754. Whether it is an actual or apparent force, the problem is satisfying FE’ers that it exists. They interpret the differentiation as meaning there is disagreement about its existence.
    1
  755.  @zichenghan7585  A scientific law is a mathematical description of the relationship between certain factors; a scientific theory is why that relationship exists. Gravity is both a law and a theory. The vernacular meaning of theory is a guess; quite different from a comprehensive explanation backed by evidence.
    1
  756. There’s geometric drop ehoch is dependent solely on curvature, hidden drop which depends on curvature & elevation and tefracted hidden drop which is determined by a combination of curvature, elevation & atmospheric refraction. It depends on which is relevant to your purpose.
    1
  757.  @stephanhaak50  "That also fits better with the visible dimensions." What visible dimensions are you referring to? How big it appears to you?
    1
  758.  @aanobikdutta4444  Will that change the shape of the planet?
    1
  759.  @aanobikdutta4444  The ancient Greeks deduced the shape of the Earth 2500 years ago from the motion of the sun, horizons, angle to Polaris matching latitude, constellations changing with latitude, two celestial poles and lunar eclipses having circular shadows. ANybody can verify those things if they wish. Still waiting on FE'er explanations for all those, still waiting on their explanations for how the mysterious They are manipulating those details and still waiting on their explanation for how NASA was influencing the ancient Greeks. "Need something new." Again - will that change the shape of the planet?
    1
  760.  @aanobikdutta4444  It will continue moving in a straight line unless acted upon.
    1
  761. Declared brain-dead 2500 years ago. It was disinterred mid-19th century when Rowbotham went on a religious anti-science bender.
    1
  762. It’s aimed at those people looking down the rabbit-hole rather than those who have leapt down it.
    1
  763. The only reply I've had to that question is "they (unspecified) like fooling people".
    1
  764.  @_Fruity  It is the kind of statement that FE'ers make since their only concept of numbers is "nothing" and "huge".
    1
  765. You didn’t turn into a superhero?
    1
  766.  @Azoria4  The question has been asked many times before and always leads to assertions that gravity doesn’t exist. Few people ask such questions without assuming that they have spotted something that overthrows physics as we know it.
    1
  767. Very hard. I’ve had prolonged conversations with some FE’ers that went nowhere because they don’t see a problem with gaps & contradictions.
    1
  768. 37rainman How far you see depends on curvature, elevation and atmospheric refraction but FE’er brains usually can’t think beyond one variable at a time; they stick with the 8” rule.
    1
  769. If somebody calls themselves critical theorist then it’s unlikely they practice critical thinking; much of their “insight” is simply “I don’t see how...” with little comprehension of how much other people know. Science is dependent on reproducible evidence; everything has to be backed by experimentation and/or observation. Scientism is where somebody simply treats the word “science” as a hallowed label to justify what they are claiming. The great majority of people using the term scientism have no comprehension that science is evidence-based.
    1
  770. C S P There’s ignorant and there’s wilfully ignorant. The people making the claims have had all those assertions disproved repeatedly and all questions answered but continue to repeat them. The same people ask the same questions over and over, receive consistent comprehensive answers and are still convinced they aren’t getting answers. You’d be testy with them.
    1
  771. Jake Johnson What about 52 live penguins?
    1
  772. Asad Khan Religious for some, anti-establishment for others and a few making money out of both. We’re still waiting on any proof.
    1
  773.  @AsadKhan-ei1ez  As in waiting for their proof that the Earth is flat; they simply refuse to acknowledge proof that the Earth is a globe and would probably still do so if taken into space. "How come they are able to tell us about what molecules are present in the the objects billions of miles away" Spectroscopy; how different molecules affect the light that comes from that direction. It's essentially the same principles as spectrophotometers used in labs.
    1
  774.  @bernie9728  Reread what I wrote.
    1
  775. The Jannko That would be a “downward” force that coincidentally changes direction to match the Earth’s centre?
    1
  776. Mostly native-born Americans. You are aware that many of us are in the US making up the shortfall in scientists?
    1
  777. Pop, pop, problem solved....
    1
  778. Esdras Nunez Just curious as to what the full story is 😊
    1
  779.  @dionysusmccvi  He was quite specific how little the oblation was. You find numbers confusing?
    1
  780.  @kalaiamudhan3394  If he had said buoyant force rather than buoyancy then FE’ers would have concluded that he was agreeing density was a force.
    1
  781. Missouri Bear Why would a vacuum stop a satellite operating? How would balloons maintain a constant motion in the atmosphere for years?
    1
  782.  @drfaustens4504  What makes you think there is a universal up?
    1
  783. The human genome codes for about 25,000 genes and each particular cell type will draw on different combinations of genes; there is no discrete areas of the genome set aside for a particular cell types. About a third of the genome will be expressed in the brain cell types but few are specific to the brain. The sequence for each gene will vary slightly between individuals; it's the combination of variants that makes us individuals rather than clones. Few of those variants will have a detrimental effect. The existence of variants in the population means there will be better species adaption to changes in the environment. While there are hereditary diseases they are all due to a small difference in coding in one specific gene, not multiple genes or the majority of genes. There is no massive problem throughout the genome. Mutations are rare and they would have to occur in the gametocytes to be passed on to the next generation. Most mutations will lead to cell death before the gametes can be produced; those that do get passed on may be detrimental, benign or even beneficial. It's the gradual, selective accumulation of mutations that provides the variation within a species that enables the species to adapt. It's not going to cause degradation of a species in normal circumstances.
    1
  784.  @lieutenantdan1413  Which is why I used the term. Human society is very protective and combined with intelligence could be detrimental in that some less desirable genetic traits become well-established, e.g., the chances of hemophiliacs having kids is much greater than a century ago. In terms of some massive degradation of the species, that is something that would take far longer than a few centuries or millenia. Diseases don't selectively kill people because of susceptible genes but how well a particular person's is able to resist the severity of that particular infection at that particular; it comes down to chance. not genes. Vaccines are not going to undermine the human genome. The psychological and environmental stresses of industrialisation & urbanisation are the main exacerbater of mental illness and some of the prevalent illnesses in the 1st world, not bad genes. In most ways, the 1st world population is healthier.
    1
  785.  @gastronomist  How do you explain anything to a denialist?
    1
  786.  @gastronomist  How would you convince somebody that the sun rises & sets? They’ve seen it happening all their lives abd are denying it.
    1
  787. you know You witnessed the collapse of WTC7?
    1
  788. Their claims may or may not add weight to the argument :-)
    1
  789. Check his original educational video in his astronomy section. He received a barrage of insults & claims from FEers, this being the result.
    1
  790. I wouldn’t describe it as healthy; they don’t see anything suspicious in denying observable reality. Look up Morton’s demon on Rational Wiki.
    1
  791. FE’ers ignore the accuracy of the leveling, beam divergence and atmospheric refraction. They have go be accounted for if you wish to obtain accurate measurements. Ignoring them does not magically nullify the effects.
    1
  792. Gravity and magnetism are two different things.
    1
  793. Worse - the people who believe it are the ones who also harp on about personal observation being paramount.
    1
  794.  @toprocks3612  Produce a copy of the Real Antarctica Treaty.
    1
  795.  @toprocks3612  Then produce the Treaty that forbids travel to Antarctica.
    1
  796.  @toprocks3612  If it already exists then you should have no problems producing a copy.
    1
  797. Garth Henderson I’m asking for your underlying reason for asking that question.
    1
  798. Scott Meyer The vacuum cleaner fan pumps air out to create the lower pressure inside.
    1
  799. I'm currently arguing elsewhere with yet another FE'er who claims density is a force.
    1
  800. The surface is 70% covered by water, not 70% of volume.
    1
  801.  @doctorofskillz2932  I saw the joke but I also saw the error. Unfortunately the joke has been used a number of times before.
    1
  802. As in sunlight warms things and moonlight cools things; no explanation ever provided as to how such light could exist. Many claim the moon is its own light source and want a way to argue that moonlight can’t be reflected sunlight.
    1
  803.  @natehill8069  Chilling moonshine perhaps? 😊
    1
  804. It flows from a high elevation to a low elevation. Elevation is not synonymous with curvature; it is the variation in how far a surface point is from the centre of Earth.
    1
  805.  @TheBlueskyson  And demonstrates he doesn't really know about spectroscopy or how it is used. It is no limited to gases (I use it for liquids) and only requires containment in a lab to block the ambient light; observatories are set up in the darkest parts of the country to minimise light pollution. Ideally it is down from space to totally reduce ambient light and atmosphere but more practically (continually upgrading & repairing equipment) done at high altitude. He doesn't raise any aspect of the scientific theory that underlies spectroscopy. Do you want to explain how gravity works on a FE without collapsing it into a sphere? If you want to avoid what you aren't familiar with then explain how the sun maintains a constant angular diameter & velocity regardless of the observer's position, how it rises & sets without coming with 20 degrees of the horizon, how the angle to Polaris matches latitude and how there are two celestial poles. FE'ers keep telling me it is explained on a FE but none of you seem willing to divulge these explanations. Why not? If you want people to be convinced by your explanations how do you expect to do it with producing them?
    1
  806. Scott Meyer No gravity and a little spring in your step... 😊
    1
  807. Heather Dayvis The drug laws don’t apply to natural treatments and plenty of companies are making a profit from it. Why don’t they try some double blind studies?
    1
  808. Heather Dayvis The FDA rule is that anything advertised as a substance to cure, treat or prevent a disease is classed as a drug and is obliged to undergo the same testing procedures. It’s not a matter of patent law and the purity required of a drug is higher than that of the products you get in the supermarket.
    1
  809.  @Ben-mk9ig  Stargate One typo?
    1
  810. You highlight a common problem of FE'ers; they have no concept of scale or, apparently, of simple arithmetic. 360 degrees / (25,000 miles * 5280ft/mile) = 0.0000027 degrees curvature across the top of a 1ft diameter bucket.
    1
  811.  @Scott88347  "there is no gravity in space right?" Depends on how far away from any mass that you are. It doesn't magically stop in a vacuum if that is what you are thinking.
    1
  812.  @Scott88347  Start here https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gravitational_field and good luck. The technical terms are outside my branch of science. :-)
    1
  813. HappyPappy Repeat Eratosthenes experiment with three or more sticks and you get a curved Earth and distant sun. With a 25,000 mile circumference, how many degrees curvature per mile would you expect to be observable? Lake Michigan is 50 miles across between which two points?
    1
  814. Michael Miyashiro You think illogical arguments have validity?
    1
  815.  @saydimiyashiro  Density acting as a force; they see a factor and ascribe in appropriate properties to it. Cars don't overtake on the double yellow lines therefore the yellow lines just gotta be controlling the cars' steering. (I assume we are talking of similar road markings since they do differ between countries.)
    1
  816. Michael Miyashiro We’ve been validating the Earth being a globe for over 2000 years down to the point of WGS84 having measured the contours down to the square meter. What more would you like?
    1
  817. Jake Arnesen You also need to take atmospheric refraction into account, particularly when looking over water. That’s why FE videos make such a fuss about seeing boats & islands.
    1
  818. Pre 500 BC rather. The ancient Greeks determined the Earth was a sphere.
    1
  819. zelzmiy What’s your explanation for how density can act as a force and why in a consistent direction?
    1
  820. Try to get him to watch this one.
    1
  821. “I don’t understand how it works” and “I understand it doesn’t work” are two quite different things.
    1
  822. The Mandalorian One lot complains that things don’t change in science, the other lot complains that things do change.
    1
  823. You can't think?
    1
  824. Looks like aaaaaaaaaaaaa etc disappeared.
    1
  825.  @zodiacleo5865  Why would you expect a significant difference when Earth, plane & atmosphere are all rotating eastwards?
    1
  826.  @zodiacleo5865  Your velocity relative to the plane is 3mph.
    1
  827.  @zodiacleo5865  If stationary on the tarmac then 0mph relative to Earth’s surface, one revolution per day relative to the Earth’s centre. If moving northwards at 200mph then 200mph northwards relative to Earth’s surface, 0mph eastwards relative to Earth’s surface and one revolution eastwards per day relative to the Earth’s core. If moving 200mph eastwards then 200mph eastwards relative to Earth’s surface, 0mph northwards relative to Earth’s surface and greater than one revolution per day relative to the Earth’s centre (exact number depends on latitude). If you walk up & down the plane’s aisle then you move at +/- 3mph relative to the plane regardless of how fast the plane is moving relative to the Earth. What do you think the problem is exactly?
    1
  828.  @zodiacleo5865  The plane would be moving at, say, 300 mph eastwards relative to the Earth’s for LA to NYC and 300mph westwards relative to the Earth’s surface for NYC to LA. Why exactly do you expect there to be a difference?
    1
  829.  @zodiacleo5865  A plane sitting on the tarmac has eastwards momentum. It retains that momentum when it takes off in the same way a thrown ball keeps moving when it breaks contact with your hand. The plane’s engines modify the plane’s momentum, leading to a difference in speed relative to the Earth.
    1
  830.  @zodiacleo5865  The engines reduce the eastwards momentum; the Earth continues rotating at the same speed (one revolution per day) and thd plane a little longer. Winds aside, the atmosphere & Earth continue rotating eastwards at the same velocity regardless of what the plane is doing. The planes engines modify the momentum that the plane has.
    1
  831. 1337 Gaming HQ Move it well away from the ball you are standing on.
    1
  832. larryconcepts If you are going to make a long post then a space between paragraphs helps for reading, especially from a phone.
    1
  833. Anything that relies on the Law of Just Does to explain how it works.
    1
  834.  @mrbowtieguy  So what’s your technique for identifying CGI?
    1
  835. Mika Beck Possibly they were arguing that the shortest route on a globe would be to follow the lines of latitude, which would actually be a very round about route. The shortest route is across the Arctic Circle.
    1
  836. King Veteran I asked a simple enough question; why no answer?
    1
  837. Tii Fit Wellness A lot of ignorance & incredulity mixed in with a lot of conspiracy theory. If you think there is a good reason to believe the Earth is flat then produce it.
    1
  838. All you need is a plausible explanation for how water observes its environment, makes decisions and moves itself.
    1
  839. Robert “I’m pretty sure water finds its own level” A common statement with FE’ers with no explanation ever forthcoming as to how water could do this independently.
    1
  840. Cullantaylorr He was saying that nothing has absolute certainty which differs considerably from saying there is reasonable doubt as to the outcome. When the probability of winning three lotteries in a row is more likely than a predicted outcome not occurring then only a fool would think there was reasonable doubt about the outcome.
    1
  841. Cullantaylorr Maths is descriptive not prescriptive. A law court is trying to reconstruct a specific event and eye witnesses are known to be unreliable.
    1
  842.  @idonthaveideasformyhandle Only if you’re walking on the water 😊 How far you can see is partially determined by how high above the water your eyes are. Even onboard a yacht puts you several feet upwards.
    1
  843. chinuchun We’re still waiting on an explanation for how believing in a globe would give big brother control over someone’s mind.
    1
  844.  @chinuchun  That I realise; I was simply pointing out that none of the people who claim a globe enables BB to control your mind ever explain how they think that works.
    1
  845. eric Sandersfield My exasperation is with them, not you 😊
    1
  846. Theres no persuading those down the rabbit hole but you can reach those are wondering if there is anything in FE.
    1
  847. Whether it is a force or an apparent force is irrelevant; the FE assertion is that it doesn’t exist, actual or apparent.
    1
  848.  @davidmescher2526  Obviously Red Bull nicked their idea form the real source :-)
    1
  849.  @mdew24 Do they include any explanation for how sun & moon remain airbourne, move or why they would move in a circle? Any explanation for a spherical sun lighting limited, missshapen areas?
    1
  850.  @mdew24  The trouble is that nobody can say what those explanations are or explain the conflicts with observable reality.
    1
  851. SuperDadsBaby Combined forces would be insufficient to guard the FE Antarctic. Since penguins are the abundant animal life there, the running joke is heavily penguins patrolling the coast line.
    1
  852.  @boterlettersukkel  All convinced that they are the only observer.
    1
  853. Which would result in the higher pressure below pushing them upwards.
    1
  854. ⁠ @ericb3157 Where are you looking for peer-reviewed papers?
    1
  855.  @cjmatthiasakamatt8174  The texts have been copied multiple times, it has been translated multiple times (not serially) but not rewritten multiple times.
    1
  856. Jesse Tow How big are the reflectors you are looking for? How far away are they?
    1
  857. In what way does the absence of a creator defy science and logic? Be specific.
    1
  858. Micah AP Are you arguing for the existence of a watchmaker or that the Big Bang can’t have come from nothing?
    1
  859. Shot!
    1
  860. He made a video about it a while ago. "Destroying Flat Earth Without Using Science - Part 2: The Stars" The diehards still aren't convinced.
    1
  861. Mention it and they think it’s evidence that gravity doesn’t exist.
    1
  862.  @supr3me652  Scale. You’re visualising a relatively small container but the decline in atmospheric pressure occurs over 10’s of miles. You do not need to have a significant drop per foot to gradually decline to zero. As long as the pressure drop over a given distance is sufficiently small to be counterable by gravity then the atmosphere stays put. No mystery, nothing inexplicable.
    1
  863. It asked for my opinion on Trump.
    1
  864. Earth's mass generally rather than just the kernel. In Newtonian physics gravity is described as a direct attractive force between two masses while relativity has mass generating a gravitational field that warps space-time, the result being gravity as an apparent force. The former is easier to visualise and gives accurate predictions.
    1
  865.  @vitakyo982  The Apollo landing sites were at sea. Why do you think it impossible for an object moving vertically to collide with another object moving horizontally?
    1
  866. For a comment to be made at 16:30 requires the existence of over 16 min of video preceding it.
    1
  867.  @stuartgray5877  The total would drop. It’s apparent from discussions that some people can see them while others can’t.
    1
  868.  @stuartgray5877  When the user is blocked by the channel owner; all the user’s comments “disappear”. YT has had a problem for several months where comments are disappearing from some people’s feeds but not all; some people can still see a specific comment, some can’t. That indicates the comment has not been deleted or the user blocked, just a server error.
    1
  869. The algorithms changed recently resulting in conspiracy & idiocy videos being disfavoured. They can be generally described as science just gotta be wrong, I can see too far, why can’t I see the curvature of a 25 mile circumference and/or God is great therefore the Earth is flat.
    1
  870. Why would a lead ball & a feather falling at the same speed disprove gravity?
    1
  871. If you simply point out that a bird has wings then, like the bird, the point go straight over their heads.
    1
  872. Unsane Bear Observer elevation, atmospheric refraction and FE’ers using the wrong maths to begin with.
    1
  873. Brain Mog What issues do you have with the globe?
    1
  874. Brain Mog So the issue is that you don’t understand how net force could be calculated rather than any specific problem with demonstrating curvature?
    1
  875. UraStr Regardless of the shape, the view would become increasingly indistinct with distance due to impurities in the air , eg, rain, dust. On a FE there wouldn’t be a horizon and we would be able to see much further but the view withdrew become too hazy over 1000’s miles.
    1
  876. It's per mile squared, not per square mile, i.e., (8" * miles)^2. It's a parabolic equation that (for relatively short distances) produces similar numbers to surface curvature on a sphere. It does not calculate who far we can see; curvature is only one factor in that calculation.
    1
  877.  @poohbear01x48  1. Nobody is measuring distance in square miles. 2. Sorry, my error. Read it as 8" * (# miles)^2. One mile would give you an 8" drop, 2 miles as 8" * 4 = 32" etc. It's a parabolic equation that was used by land surveyors in pre-calculator days; it is good approximation for surface curvature on a sphere over the distances they work at. It is not intended to be the definitive formula but a rule of thumb.
    1
  878. What is a fake telescope?
    1
  879.  @skeleton7972  Operation Fishbowl was a series of high altitude nuclear tests, ranging from 20 miles to 200n miles over one location and produce spherical clouds. Still waiting on FE'er to explain what height they think the dome is at that point and why the clouds weren't the slightest bit affected by the impenetrable dome. Still waiting on any evidence of Project Bluebean.
    1
  880. You're in it?
    1
  881. jessr smithson I think you mean people should be applying scepticism rather than slipping into cynicism?
    1
  882. Because it is easier to understand than trigonometry and reasonably accurate for the distance viewable to the eye, ie, it’s convenient.
    1
  883. Occam’s razor is simply to start with simplest hypothesis; it makes no presumption of what could be right.
    1
  884.  @studiomatYt  Do you mean how do spacecraft keep up with the Earth as it orbits the sun?
    1
  885.  @victorfinberg8595  It removes non-YT links, keeping the discussion internal. Some YT links seem to get lost though I cant say why.
    1
  886.  @victorfinberg8595  I see the YT link at the end of your comment. You can check by logging out of your account and looking at the comment as an anonymous user.
    1
  887.  @Matuse  Another guy says it's red and gullible people insist it's both blue & red because they differ from the silver everyone normal sees.
    1
  888.  ⴼⵓⵛⴽ ⴽⴰⵔⴻⵏⵙ When someone says water doesn’t curve I hear the theme from the Old Spice ads.
    1
  889.  ⴼⵓⵛⴽ ⴽⴰⵔⴻⵏⵙ  Suddenly I feel old... The Old Spice ads used to contain a surfer with a particular classical theme as the accompanying music. Iconic 30 years ago. Edit: Carmina Burana
    1
  890. Not all them claim there’s a dome though their explanations are no better.
    1
  891. Your brain has flat-lined? :-)
    1
  892.  @alexc9434  You can't be struck by lightning if you don't know what lightning is?
    1
  893.  @alexc9434  I was using your logic.
    1
  894. Like this one? https://www.pinterest.co.uk/pin/511932682621134663/
    1
  895. SpaceFish And yet globe maps were being manufactured for centuries before NASA’s existence. Are you one if the people that believe they are into time-travel?
    1
  896. Barbarella’s brother?
    1
  897.  @NinjaMonkeyPrime  Use a high speed camera and capture the droplets in flight?
    1
  898. NinjaMonkeyPrime Shockjng waste of good coffee though 😊
    1
  899.  @chaic4211  Upwards at a constant velocity became upwards at a constant acceleration which has tecently become absolutely stationary.
    1
  900. I first learned it when I was 11-12.
    1
  901.  @angrydoodle8919  Depends which country and school system you are in.
    1
  902.  @ophilia  England.
    1
  903. It’s aimed at people who are looking down the rabbit hole rather than leapt down it. It serves its purpose.
    1
  904.  @victorfinberg8595  If the comments were deleted then I would not expect the “X replies” to differ from what is visible; they would no longer be there to counted. I favour Ian’s explanations.
    1
  905.  @victorfinberg8595  It’s not illegal to have a delusion; being deluded may be a defence if you commit a criminal act while under a delusion (eg paranoia) though that csn lead to mandatory psychiatric counselling or sectioning. Most I think are just wanting to feel “in the know” or it’s a means of expressing distrust of what they don’t understand. Ironically the latter are willing to trust a nobody on the internet spouting debunked garbage just to balance the suspicion there is mass misinformation in society. Check Morton’s demon, particularly on a wiki that is rational (weblinks disappear).
    1
  906. Good luck.
    1
  907. They do seem to have stopped making comments that ran along the lines of “You’re wrong - what we really say is what you just said!!!” so maybe something is getting through.
    1
  908. Or simply because they get a kick out of fooling people.
    1
  909. It is possible but unusual for a river to travel up an incline for at least a short way due to the momentum of the flow.
    1
  910. kieran james https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eratosthenes
    1
  911. jafar nazir The people looking down the rabbit hole rather than those who’ve jumped down it.
    1
  912. Michele Mcguire What’s your proof that gravity doesn’t exist?
    1
  913. Don’t hold your breath. One FE’er was shown a scale model of Earth, moon and the distance between and was still adamant that the moon should be filling the sky.
    1
  914. All mass has gravity regardless of size; Cavendish demonstrated attraction between lead balls. Planets have enough gravity to force rounding.
    1
  915. If everybody is pointing directly upwards and the directions aren't parallel then how do you conclude the Earth is flat?
    1
  916. John Miklas How many times do circumpolar flights need to be done to satisfy you one has been done?
    1
  917. It’s the belief that science and only science can provide answers for every question regardless of the nature of the question.
    1
  918. MrSpongejoe It would be better if there was variety in the claims. 😊
    1
  919.  @funnymannotfunny Check Poe’s law and corollary thereof.
    1
  920.  @piadas804  Look up the Metabunk Curve Calculator or Walter Bislins calculator.
    1
  921.  @Aflove45  You’re using the invective that you claim I am using; do you approve of it or not? Anybody can espouse any opinion but there is no requirement they should receive no criticism. If the claim is dumb then it is everybody else’s right to say so and why. As has been pointed out to you repeatedly, FE’ers are not “free thinkers” but willfully ignorant. They advocate avoiding science as indoctrination though expect the technology around them to continue working. It’s been explained to them countless times how they can readily determine the shape of the Earth for themselves but they refuse to listen, preferring to simply deny observable reality in favour of “thinking different”, apparently in the further belief that different = right. Do you consider 2+2=4 to be a matter of opinion?
    1
  922.  @Aflove45  I would note, incidentally, that this particular video deals with the logical fallacies used by the “thinkers”. Do you think a logical fallacy is a matter of opinion?
    1
  923.  @testerwulf3357  Amazing ignorance for people who prattle on about perspective.
    1
  924. Some do, some don't. They really are people who believe the Earth to be flat for fundamentalist religious reasons. Others are simply paranoid, believe anything & everything to be a lie and hence at grasp at anything different as The Truth. Some are just trolls, a few are simply out to make money from the gullible.
    1
  925. David M “Experiments” in which they ignore all the variables other than what they’re interested in.
    1
  926. DogTag93 I think he got it from “Frozen” and specifically the song “Let It Go”; the ice palace she builds has a roof of “frozen fractals”.
    1
  927. How much oblation would you expect to see in an image and why?
    1
  928. Do you expect the spirit level to change and , if so, why?
    1
  929.  @larrywestra9305  Usually when people suggest looking at D Marble they haven't realised he's dumb cluck and it has to be explained to them how gravity & spirit levels work.
    1
  930. "They find issues with the originals" Not usually. The original experiments tend to be very narrow and limited; statistically is possible to get results with a wide margin of error or simply fluke results. As the topic is expanded upon the accumulating data from larger & wider experiments give a better indication of how accurate the original results were.
    1
  931.  @stephendavies8607  What is applying the pressure?
    1
  932.  @stephendavies8607  The dark matter is believed to exist in the periphery of galaxies and dark energy to have no interaction with matter.
    1
  933. I don’t think so. Water expands below 4C so I would expect the forming ice would absorb it.
    1
  934. jack mack Surface tension is part of the intermolecular attraction in all liquids. The slight polarity of water molecules means the attraction is stronger than most.
    1
  935.  @FlatEarthKiller  Well, vanishing line. No surprisingly they can’t explain how a point would appear as a line, or who it doesn’t temain in the centre of your vision if you tilt your head or why it why would appear at few miles rather than an infinite distance or how it could make something disappear from the bottom up.
    1
  936. You'll be looking a long time. There are plenty who think they are being scientific but they make the mistakes (or similar) that Dave just went through.
    1
  937. No.
    1
  938.  @ParanormalEncyclopedia  Unfortunately not; you're parodying people who believe they have a depth of insight on reality that would fuse Einstein's brain.
    1
  939. Search by newest comments first.
    1
  940. I don't think FE'ers are capable of thinking that far back.
    1
  941. Their conmen gurus online.
    1
  942.  @gutenbird  You realise that there are only so many hours in a day?
    1
  943.  @gutenbird  If second, third & fourth opinions from different mechanics tell you the same things then it's far more probable that is indeed what is wrong with your car rather than a conspiracy controlling the mechanics. When there is consensus among scientists it is similarly unlikely that there is a conspiracy to fool you. (If you're thinking of saying it then, no, government-funded does not mean we get instructions on what results to arrive at or that politicians are dictating what can be done.)
    1
  944.  @adamrickett8865 But is the information accurate?
    1
  945. No missing pieces in the middle.
    1
  946.  @Adrian-10  Use height & distances and viewing angle to construct a right-angle triangle and check what a FE predicts.
    1
  947.  @Adrian-10  Everybody is taught in school about calculating angles & distances with right-angle triangles but some people can't seem to grasp the information is applicable outside the classroom. Two distant FE'ers are able to use that trigonometry to calculate the height of the FE sun but they never do; they don't seem to realise that it can be done. Similarly you can use the claimed heights (plural), derived solely from single FE'ers eyeballing the sun and guessing, to calculate how low an angle the FE sun would actually sink at sunset (nowhere near the horizon).
    1
  948.  @Adrian-10  I wasn't (intentionally) inferring you were a FE'er, just speaking of their lack of though and application.
    1
  949.  @Krugis  Not even basic like triangles & sohcahtoa?
    1
  950. Venus.
    1
  951. Dillon Wren That Venus currently has high temperatures does not mean it always did; indications are that it once was much cooler. There is water in its atmosphere that would have been liquid then. If he wants a planet with water then he doesn’t have to look far.
    1
  952. ApolloandWarrior _ Canute was trying to prove he couldn’t hold the tide back; I hope the kid was in the same frame of mind.
    1
  953. They’re quite agreed that they are flat/spherical/amorphous.
    1
  954.  @batboylives  You think that the existence of language means reality doesn’t exist?
    1
  955.  @batboylives  You think interviews on television are the sum total of scientific output?
    1
  956. https://www.jstor.org/stable/106988
    1
  957. You’re confusing the scientific meaning with the vernacular.
    1
  958. corslyn Why would acceleration giving 1xg crush you?
    1
  959. How far you can be see is determined by curvature, elevation and atmospheric refraction. FE’ers can’t think beyond curvature. With some unusual atmospheric conditions mirages occur temporarily enabling people to see further than normal. FE’ers can’t comprehend that.
    1
  960.  @vincentmcardell8183  Be novel and say what those flaws are.
    1
  961.  @vincentmcardell8183  You explain why you think that either A. Atmospheric refraction doesn’t exist Or B. Why you think atmospheric refraction wouldn’t affect how far we can see.
    1
  962.  @vincentmcardell8183  Explain how you think the distance seen from the same location varies?
    1
  963.  @vincentmcardell8183  None of which answers my question. In terms of the motion of the Earth it is the application of Occam’s Razor. If the Earth is in motion then there are no motions of other bodies that have to be accounted for by unknown phenomena. If somebody wishes to postulate these unknown phenomena are determining what we see then they need to provide a hypothesis for what they are otherwise it remains a purely philosophical discussion. If you wish to postulate that atmospheric refraction is not responsible for the variation we observe then the onus is on you to provide a reasonable hypothesis, not on other people to go looking for a undefined cause that nobody has yet found.
    1
  964.  @vincentmcardell8183  Which still doesn’t answer my question. We’re in the wrong forum for this discussion. This one is frequented by FE’ers who conclude any limitation to a scientific theory (however correct it may be philosophically) as sound reason to dismiss any theory they don’t like and assert their own must be right regardless of how madcap, readily disprovable or vague it is. Current alternatives to atmospheric refraction are “something else” and “atmospheric lensing” (requiring microdroplets to form lenses surrounding and peculiar to each individual). That is why people here seem dogmatic.
    1
  965.  @gdplayer1062  Ellipsoid but oblate spheroid is a better description. Either way, the deviation from a perfect sphere is so minute that it’s a moot point when discussing the difference between sphere & plane.
    1
  966. Explanation rather than conjecture; the latter would refer specifically to hypotheses.
    1
  967.  @Clarityandwisdom33  There aren't any FE models per se to examine, just multiple assertions that are mutually incompatible and frequently don't predict observable reality, the sun setting while never passing 20 degrees above the horizon. They make claims of a universal down, ignoring the experiments that demonstrate gravity acting horizontally between two masses. They don't find it necessary to explain how the sun & moon remain above a FE (or move). The best they can ever come up with is objects spontaneously accelerating downwards for no apparent reason (except for sun & moon and helium balloons for reasons never specified); some are adamant there is no force involved though they won't explain why a falling weight could have a forceful impact on their toe. In terms of a universe, if everything observable of world is acting by the same set of physics constants there is no coherent reason to assume Earth would be magically different.
    1
  968.  @Clarityandwisdom33  "what flat earthers need is video proof" Which they would promptly dismiss as fake because it just gotta be.
    1
  969. Specific gravity is the ratio of the density of one substance compared to the density of a standard; nothing to do with gravitational force and better called relative density to avoid confusion. Both are derived from the Latin for weight.
    1
  970.  @harpo3196  That relates to your OP how..?
    1
  971. Anthony Harper Your confusing local gravity with specific gravity; that is why I said it’s better to use the term relative density when referring to the latter to avoid this confusion.
    1
  972. bodean2000 The space shuttle needed to finish in orbit, moving parallel to the Earth’s surface. Since making a right angle turn is not practical or fuel efficient, changing direction in the upper atmosphere from straight up to an arc is the most practical route.
    1
  973.  @JustDorkyMe17  The questions have been answered for me. “How is this possible?” is a reasonable question; basing a conclusion on personally not knowing the answer is not. When the answers to both questions are readily available online and FE’ers keep insisting there are no answers then I can say with reasonable certainty that they don’t check for answers.
    1
  974. Jim Jimery Humour. Meanwhile https://gisgeography.com/wgs84-world-geodetic-system/
    1
  975.  @mickalinjezerx7104  The question is whether a falling tree makes a noise if there is nobody to observe it.
    1
  976.  @ericb3157  Murder rather than kill. The folks of those times had (to us) strange ideas as to what was justifiable killing.
    1
  977. Heinrich Bosch So what are the errors?
    1
  978. What prompts an animate substance to look for something and how does it go about it?
    1
  979. Depends which holographic projection you’re looking at 😊
    1
  980. Conservation of momentum; the plane on the ground moves eastwards with the Earth & atmosphere. It retains that momentum when it takes off, the same way a thrown ball continues moving when it breaks contact with your hand.
    1
  981. That something is unfalsifiable does not make it true.
    1
  982. The Earth has a constant gravity at its surface; how strong the attraction is with an object depends on the object’s mass with the result that the greater the objects mass, the more it weighs.
    1
  983. Teri Ross Youte not going to think about what Nathan said?
    1
  984.  @ProfessorDaveExplains  It would satisfy those who are peering down the rabbit hole but those who've jumped down it are are not fazed when you point out conflicts with observable reality and aren't susceptible to being prompted to consider the simple questions that they should have asked in the first place.
    1
  985. Different radiation and the point is actually no space-based missiles.
    1
  986. Because they keep coming up with the same claims, repeatedly have the fallacies pointed out to them and keep making those claims. https://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Morton%27s_demon
    1
  987. Another box....
    1