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

  1.  @yorubapryor5884  And 8”/mile^2 is not the equation for curvature or how far you can see; that is why FE’ers are so keen to use it as such.
    3
  2. You don’t base your arguments in personal eyeballing?
    3
  3. 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 observable by anybody, all indicative of a globe and all contradictory to a FE. Please explain how you think The Government can manipulate the sun & stars and to what end they been found this flawlessly since man first looked up.
    3
  4. You can state with reasonable certainty that the soup will be edible if you open the tin.
    3
  5. "they come up with very complicated theories" If only; it's only ever a few superficial assertions with no attempt at explaining the arising contradictions, e.g., how the sun always has a circular appearance despite the lampshade.
    3
  6. It woukd like identical to what we see. On a FE the sun BBC wiukd be visible 24hrs a day, never coming with 20 degrees of the “plane” and exhibiting a variable angular velocity & diameter. We are still waiting for FE’ers to reconcile their predictions with observable reality. Do you want to try?
    3
  7.  @hansborne4929  Why don’t you just explain?
    3
  8.  @hansborne4929  I see the motion of the sun, moon & stars. Why don’t FEers explain how they can move that way on a FE?
    3
  9.  @JasonsMove  Your gurus told you that are what is used; it is repeatedly pointed out to you that it isn’t and why it isn’t. None of you are willing to explain how it is supposed to work, just keep maintaining one variable is adequate to cover three variables and that a parabolic equation describes a circle. Why are you all so afraid to reveal the Real Maths?
    3
  10. The curvature is all around you. However the circumference is 25,000 miles, not the 25 miles you’re envisaging. It’s what predated “density force”.
    3
  11. Evidence?
    3
  12.  @williamparisi5901  The glare is reduced. When the angular diameter is measured then it stays constant. You’re conflating two things.
    3
  13. Depends on which one of them you ask.
    3
  14.  @martinlukas3945  Our genes are carried in DNA.
    3
  15. The deviation from a perfect sphere is minute though I realise that you consider numbers to be ideas being imposed upon you.
    3
  16.  @JasonsMove  Explain how 0.5<100 is an equation and why you consider it bs?
    3
  17. Let me guess - if it differs from established knowledge then it just gotta be objective truth?
    3
  18. It’s what FE’ers used to claim. I hadn’t noticed much objectivity among FE’ers; you cheerfully ignore or deny what you don’t want to be true.
    3
  19. Are you aware that scientists are individuals?
    3
  20.  @remi4378  The problem is when the scepticism is just cynicism with people assuming any research must be corrupt unless proven otherwise. That seems to be the predominant attitude even though people have never checked how funding is allocated. Governments have some degree of control over what a government body will publish. Generally speaking they don’t have the power to control what businesses & academia publish. What exactly were you referring to? If any piece of research is ignored then it is far more likely that it us seen as poor or anomalous rather than some colossal conspiracy controlling all information.
    3
  21.  @Trig-mm4rt  All your questions are getting answered so don’t whine that people aren’t. You are avoiding answering those put to you; stop projecting your inability on others.
    3
  22.  @Trig-mm4rt  Difference in the passage of time on Earth compared to the ISS. You’re referring to time dilation; relativity is why beyond your ability to understand given you can’t wrap your head around basic maths & physics. Spacetime is not some kind of gel “holding the sun up” but relative coordinates for x, y, z & t There is no universal up & down in the universe and therefore no top & bottom. Object keep moving because of conservation of moment, the same reason a thrown ball continues to move when it leaves your hand. Try learning basic maths & physics before pontificating.
    3
  23. Traceable signal to, on & from the moon, detectable equipment left there and verifiable material brought back.
    3
  24.  @bobweiram6321  You can’t stick it in the main slot any more and it possesses a nearly useless capacity. Saturn V technology holds data on how to build a launcher that size; the materials used are outdated, the operating system was largely mechanical (little in the way of electronics), the components were hand built, and the people assembling Saturn & Apollo are dead or retired. Couple that with many contractors having disposed of 50-60 year old records, meaning many components would gave to be designed from scratch. Assuming you did succeed you would have launcher & craft inadequate fir the purpose of building a base in the moon. Best approach - take the knowledge gained from the Apollo programme and design a new launcher for the purpose.
    3
  25.  @bobweiram6321  I would note that you haven’t answered most of my questions.
    3
  26. Produce one if the textbooks teaching that the Earth is flat. That gravity is due to the Earth moving upwards predates the FES.
    3
  27.  @KangenAlec  The guy who professes to be well-educated in FE doesn't know there was an acceleration model? Why doesn't that surprise me?
    3
  28.  @flyingfishnet  The astronauts were inside an aluminium hulled spacecraft lined with carbon fibre insulation and their water tanks, all low atomic mass elements best capable of absorbing the particle radiation in the VAB. Dosage to the astronauts was the equivalent of two X-rays.
    3
  29.  @flyingfishnet  There’s always this assumption by conspiracy theorists that they are the only people with detailed knowledge of the subject and they never seem bothered when you point out what they are missing, eg, asking about the tensile properties of metals. I have yet to be supplied with evidence for Apollo or 9/11 that doesn’t rely on cherry-picking, selective interpretation and, quite frankly, willful ignorance. Asking questions is sensible; starting with pre-determined conclusions and not questioning sources is not sensible.
    3
  30. "There is never a point that it starts to bend" Waterfalls, raindrops, meniscus. Given as 25,000 circumference, how many degrees curvature per mile would you expect to find?
    3
  31. Most subscribe to the mystery density force. Those who prefer electrostatic potential have yet to build an anti-gravity device to take advantage of electrostatic repulsion.
    3
  32.  @tnaplastic2182  Gravity is an integral part the equation for buoyancy. Why do you think it is there? In Newtonian physics gravity is a force, in relativity it’s the effect of space-time curvature. Either way it demonstrably exists and affects objects.
    3
  33.  @efgtest  “Can you confirm all the facts” The motion if the sun, horizons, angle to Polaris matching latitude, constellations changing with latitude & season, two celestial poles and lunar eclipses having circular shadows? What makes you think they aren’t confirmable? The unwillingness of FE’ers to do so?
    3
  34.  @efgtest  After reading your long reply to Tatone Mio you're evidently one of those people who regards their own ignorance as wondrous insight.
    3
  35.  @efgtest  The shape of Earth is factual, not a matter of opinion. Are you saying your opinion of Airy’s intent is just as informed as his?
    3
  36.  @Hei1Bao4  They were published; the journalists had usually heard from university press releases about the papers. Some people just seemed to think newspapers were where we publish.
    3
  37. They don’t actually measure the distance, don’t account for divergence of the laser beam or accurately determine how level to begin with and it was done at 1ft to maximise the effect of refraction. Written protocols are preferred in science because you have to account for every relevant detail, not skip over them.
    3
  38.  @skylermoody7771  I’ll second what Titone said. The Black Swan photo shows a shimmery image of an object thatcant normally be seen from that vantage point; it’s a mirage. None if you can ever explain why they can’t see something that they think (weather aside) is always visible.
    3
  39.  @scotthadley92  The ancient Greeks deduced the Earth was a sphere from the motion of the sun, horizons and the angle to Polaris matching latitude. Those plus two celestial poles and constellations changing with latitude are verifiable by any Tom, Dick or Harry and all are incompatible with a FE. Dubay's counter-argument is "don't look up".
    3
  40.  @pwilliams8051  Angle of incidence. Still waiting on your explanation for how the FE sun works.
    3
  41. The fundamental requirement of any explanation is that it explains, something that seems to escape FE’ers. Since FE’ers “explanations” (on the occasions they are actually provided at all) don’t match the observations they are not explanations.
    3
  42. In science nothing is decided on one piece of evidence since errors & flukes occur. If someone wishes to claim a massive conspiracy whereby all evidence emanates from some secret cabal that magically directly control all information then the onus is on them to demonstrate how that could be so.
    3
  43.  @DD-mu5me  Motion of the sun, constellations changing with season & latitude, angle to Polaris matching latitude, two celestial poles, horizons, phases of the moon, lunar eclipses; observations that can be made by anybody and 2500 years on we are still waiting forr FE explanations.
    3
  44. Motion of the sun, horizons, angle to Polaris matching latitude, two celestial poles, constellations changing with latitude, circular shadows on lunar eclipses - explain who you think is manipulating them all to fool us?
    3
  45.  @RT-oc6iu  Why haven’t you answered my question?
    3
  46.  @RT-oc6iu  Another FE’er who can’t answer but remains convinced he knows the answers. You need an ego check.
    3
  47.  @KangenAlec  No, FE'ers just can't understand a diagram consisting of a circle and radial arrows.
    3
  48. Himawari-8, Elektro-L and EPIC collectively download several pictures per hour to the web.
    3
  49.  @JimSmithInChiapas ​​⁠​⁠Jim, you find the evidence overwhelming because you want there to have been a cover-up. In our conversation you were coming across as a MAGA/Fox News watcher.
    3
  50. “I get what they see” Then perhaps yiu can articulate what they see because they certainly can’t.
    3