Comments by "Flook D" (@flookd5516) on "Sabine Hossenfelder" channel.

  1. Why does everybody need to be of different opinions? Do we need 8 billion individual answers for 2+2?
    5
  2. Created mid-19th century by Samuel Rowbotham who was on a religious anti-science bender. There’s been some form of Flat Earth Society since then. The recent interest was due to con artists making money from social media algorithms that concentrated on supplying “more of the same”; they could earn revenue from traffic to their pages.
    5
  3. Every day you can watch the sun rise over the horizon, watch it cross the sky maintaining a constant angular diameter and angular velocity, watch it set below the horizon and then you start typing comments about how you see the sun grow & shrink, cross the sky at differing angular velocities and not come within 20 degrees of the horizon.
    5
  4. Motion of the sun, horizons, angle to Polaris, two celestial poles: who do you think is paying them off and how?
    5
  5. Have you considered listening to the answers?
    5
  6. It was deduced by ancient Greeks whose special equipment was eyes and brains. Leviathan was about politics so check the quote. Scientists don’t just give conclusions; we publish methods & data so that our work can be reproduced by others.
    5
  7. ​ @StephenJelinek  "refraction bends the subject image around the curve into our view" It bends the light coming form the object. Refraction occurs with atmospheric density decreasing with altitude. Mirages arise when there are abrupt change in density between different layers, ie., the weather a cold wet layer in. How a mirage appears depends on the exact layering at that moment; since there is movement of air in the atmosphere (winds) the image wobbles. "5 x 5 =25 x .6667 = 16.6667' of curvature" It really passed you by, didn't it? Quote: How far you can see is determined by curvature, elevation & refraction. All factors have to be accounted for in calculations. You can't ignore factors and expect to be using the right equation. You can't ignore elevation & refraction and expect to get an accurate prediction of where the horizon is. "I'm only interested in curvature" is not going to magically nullify the effects of elevation & refraction. Making a prediction requires that you use all relevant factors. Devising an experiment means you need to take into account all factors. You can't make testable predictions by ignoring key factors. If you want to test how gar you cases then you need to make accurate calculations for your predictions. Elevation & refraction have to be included - is that clear? Do I need to say it again and in how many different ways? "Go ahead trust NASA and all the CGI they feed us" NASA is not the only space agency. Blue Marble (1972) was shot on a single frame of film, long before CGI; just how difficult is it for you to check that? None of you seem to understand what CGI actually is and none of you have been able to say what your technique is for identifying. Why don't you try? "If the earth spins at 1000 mph?" Measurably so. "Orbits the sun at 66,000 mph?" Measurably so. "speeds that are beyond our comprehension" Certainly yours.... "we do not experience a single one of these motions" Because the body is sensitive to acceleration, not motion. We deduce motion from what we observe around us, not directly sense it. "You think we could hang a plumb bob over a mark on the floor, put a 24/7 camera on it and measure some kind of motion." Foucult's pendulum. Not surprisingly, you underestimate that factors need to be taken into account. You are not a Great Witness. Your thoughts & observations are not the definitive factors determining reality, just your self-centredness. Why would an omnipotent Dei require a Servus exactly?
    5
  8. So what do you believe exactly?
    5
  9. What’s your technique for identifying CGI?
    5
  10. What does Dubay say that hasn't been debunked countless times?
    5
  11. FE'ers can't agree upon a model and none of you can explain beyond the superficial how you favoured models work. If you have a working model then be novel and produce it. In the meantime don't criticise people for not knowing what none of you have produced.
    5
  12. Try 10 Things All Flatesrthers Say
    5
  13. Atmospheric pressure declines with increasing altitude; at no point is there 1 atm pressure adjacent to 0 atm pressure. Airliners have to be pressurised to enable the passengers to breathe and they don't fly through any solid barrier to reach their cruising altitude. "If they refuse to answer the question then I know they are legit" Why? From the context it's evident what you are asking about. The answer is not a mystery.
    5
  14. Meniscus. Given a sphere with a 25,000 mile circumference, how many degrees curvature per mile would you expect to find? Still waiting on any evidence for the Earth being flat.
    5
  15. The trouble is that none of you divulge what the Real Model is so we have to work with FEers do say about FE.
    5
  16. This gets tedious… Selenhelion eclipses occur when (from the observer’s perspective) the sun & moon are on opposite horizons and there is sufficient refraction to apparently elevate each. We don’t, hence the signs of the Zodiac. We do polar constellations the year round because they have inclination greater than the Earth’s tilt. We do possess two celestial poles and visible constellations vary with latitude, both contradictory to FE. A photograph taken from a mountain top of the tip of another mountain projecting above the horizon. FE predicts you could get a picture of the whole mountain from low ground 600-700 miles away. Where are these photos? How much is hidden behind thd horizon (which can’t exist in a FE) is determined by curvature, elevation & atmospheric refraction, not by curvature alone. By the transmitters being set at high elevation. Again, what is hidden behind the horizon is determined by curvature, elevation and atmospheric refraction, not by curvature alone. You’ve been expertly fooled by FE gurus.
    5
  17. Modern vaccines have been used since the 1950’s and the anti mob have yet to produce any evidence of mass death or injury that they claim for every vaccine. Several diseases have come close to eradication thanks to vaccines. Total eradication is difficult; every time it’s close anti-vaccine idiots frantically start panic mongering mass death and sterilisation programmes. Apparently you feel millions of deaths is preferable.
    5
  18. You take into account with navigation. Engineering & building over long distances take it into account. Level =/= flat (open a dictionary). A scientific theory is an evidence-based explanation for a phenomenon, not a hunch the phenomenon exists. Have you considered asking questions rather than making statements?
    5
  19. I take it you didn’t actually watch the video.
    5
  20. How does the sun maintain a constant angular diameter and angular velocity through the course of the day and rise & set without coming within 20 degrees of the horizon?
    5
  21.  @mev680  Obviously the joke went over your head. If nobody knows anything then how do you conclude that your original diatribe is correct?
    5
  22. Cavendish experiment, 1798.
    5
  23. That would be the app that has the sun rising & setting in the wrong direction while FE'ers are also claiming that the sun doesn't rise & set?
    5
  24. Lied to by whom exactly? Who fooled Galileo? What’s your explanation fir the ISS visibly passing overhead on schedule for 20 years?
    5
  25. ​ @hershelpogue1745  "Curiosity pushes me to notice that our sun shouldn't be that close in proximity" What's your reasoning for this being evidence that the sun has close proximity? "Our shadows should only move either left to right, or up, and down" Why? The compass direction to the sun changes with the course of the day as does the sun's inclination. "Their is no solar system chart showing the sun with a pivot that would regularly have the direction of our shadows a circular n, e,s,w angle. Are you assuming the Earth to be cylindrical rather than spherical? "a very big box make sure no light get in" What makes you think the light will not be reflected from the sides of the box? That is the key presumption for your torch in a box experiment.
    5
  26.  @florim7554  The boiling point of a liquid is dependent on the gas pressure, not gravity. Gravity itself is not an irresistible force, just a persistent force, ie, continuously present. If the kinetic energy of the individual molecules is sufficient to separate from the liquids then it will evaporate and form a new atmosphere; gravity is countering the pressure that would otherwise cause complete dispersion of the gas.
    5
  27.  @florim7554  As I said, gravity would be countering the pressure that causes the expansion. With the current atmosphere there is a decline in pressure with increasing altitude; that gradient is in equilibrium with gravity.
    5
  28. ​ @florim7554  Are you being deliberately obtuse? Gravitational attraction occurs between two objects, e.g., Earth & you, which means it has the attraction between two objects has direction; that means if you step off the top of building the attraction and subsequent acceleration is always downwards. Winds are due to local variations in the atmosphere's pressure, mostly caused by variations in thermal energy output from the Earth's surface. The input of energy does not mean or require gravity that has to shut off temporarily since there is no limit on how many factors can contribute to a system simultaneously; no factor you may wish to bring in is going to alter the gravitational attraction between two object, merely alter the net result.
    5
  29.  @florim7554  There are phone apps that will calculate the time the ISS passes overhead at your location; on a clear night it can be seen passing across the sky. With a good telescope the outline can be made out.
    5
  30. That would be the Real Evidence that you all know, all want everybody to hear but that none of you are prepared to divulge? How do two celestial poles work on a FE?
    5
  31. There is more to altitude than simply “ground level” and “high up”. The FE sun wouldn’t rise & set, there wouldn’t be a horizon for it to rise & set behind and it would have a variable angular diameter & velocity through the course of the day. The stars would not vary with season & latitude and there would not be two celestial poles. We’ve been waiting for the FEer explanations for 2500 years; do you wish to divulge them?
    5
  32. Because it exists and can't be ignored. Rowbotham took his observations by lying on the ice in the frozen Canal, ignoring both the existence of refraction and the fact that immediately above the ice surface would have a greater refractive index. Wallace used long poles so his observations were at bridge height (index much lower) and placed the horizon further away (less refractive effect for the distance observed); he was looking to see if the poles were in a direct vertical alignment and they weren't.
    5
  33. By detecting light reflected from a very large object.
    5
  34. How much testing does a vaccine need to go through to qualify as having been tested?
    5
  35. The Earth is a physical object with a measurable shape to it; it has been measured to the cubic metre and is photographed again & again several times an hour. What do you think can be reinterpreted?
    5
  36. She’s out of date, not lying; the FE accelerating upwards was the favoured explanation until recently.
    5
  37.  @mikaelw4758  Yet none of you can explain how density makes anything move at all, much less in a consistent direction. None of you can explain why you think a bird and an ocean have the same mass or why wings have nothing to do with flight. The ancient cultures assumed the Earth to be flat; they did nothing to demonstrate it. Dubay has explained zilch; try giving me his explanation for how density can act as a force or why birds & oceans have the same mass. The Earth accelerating upwards came from Rowbotham in the 19th century.
    5
  38. The atmosphere moves with the Earth; how difficult is that to comprehend?
    5
  39. Achievable with small variations in elevation and dependent on which floor your window is on.
    5
  40. Until recently upwards acceleration was the favoured explanation. That has been displaced by density being a force or (in your claim) spontaneous motion but we are still waiting on FE’ers to provide explanations for how either could work.
    5
  41. They assumed the Earth to be flat; they did nothing to determine that it was. The ancient Greeks deduced the shape from horizons, motion of the sun and the stars changing in position with latitude. Still waiting on plausible FE explanations.
    5
  42. Motion of the sun, horizons and the angle to stars changing with latitude is how the ancient Greeks figured it out. The first you can do with a vertical stick in the back garden, marking off a 15 degree per hour change in angle in the direction of the shadow. It will take some travel but the same stick & shadow in multiple distant locations can be used to demonstrate & measure curvature. With travel between hemispheres you can also observe two celestial poles.
    5
  43. Prof Dave goes through point by point explaining why they are wrong and how we know the correct answers. There are plenty others who do stick with ridicule. Sabine is discussing where FE’er reasoning processes are erroneous, not tackling their claims.
    5
  44. There’s a difference between questioning and denying.
    5
  45. What deeper & more compelling arguments? “So-called science” is responsible for yiu bring able to communicate on here. We repeatedly check & recheck facts with multiple methods, taking into account every factor, concentrating on disproving what is wrong. FE is readily disprovable so what are your compelling arguments?
    5
  46.  @jordanemede  "nobody knows that for sure." Why haven't any of you tried measuring the distance with trigonometry? "We can certainly see WAY too far" Only when you use the wrong maths and ignore elevation & atmospheric refraction to estimate a horizon that is much closer in actuality. Calculate it correctly and lo & behold, the observable horizon is in the right place. We are still waiting on a FE'er to zoom a "half-sunk" ship back into full view or, better still, zoom the set sun back into view. Do you want to try? You realise David Weiss is a conman?
    5
  47.  @jordanemede  Ignoring elevation is not evidence of a FE either but it doesn't stop any of you. If you don't know the shape then why are you plugging David' Weiss's channel and his app? Still waiting on these measurements proving it is flat. Kansas is lacking variation in elevation, not curvature, but FE'ers are generally so obsessed with starting from a horizontal line you're incapable of understanding the difference. Laser gyroscopes demonstrate rotation, stellar parallax demonstrates orbit. Still waiting on the FE'er explanations for them and I can bet you wont provide explanations either. It seems no matter how many times it is explained to FE'ers you just can't comprehend that measurements over water means refraction distorts the light. Motion of the sun, horizons, angle to Polaris matching latitude, constellations changing with latitude, two celestial poles and lunar eclipses - all indicative of a globe, contradictory to a FE and none explained by FE'ers. I've sure you'll wave your hand and declare the answers known but you too will fail to say what they are.
    5
  48.  @RickarooCarew  You're posting on a public forum not sending a private communication; anybody can chime in.
    5
  49. It’s more in the interest of people looking down the rabbit hole than trying to persuade those living in them.
    5
  50. How does water observe its environment, make decisions and move itself? Why does atmospheric pressure decrease with increasing altitude if it remains constant?
    5