Comments by "Flook D" (@flookd5516) on "The Guardian" channel.

  1. Ingo Kreh You aren’t open minded to the idea that anything can be true. You’re so open minded to conspiracies you can’t think of the obvious.
    212
  2. ego smack sequel You’re confusing elevation with curvature.
    23
  3. ego smack sequel The plane remains at the altitude with constant air pressure needed to keep in level flight at the speed it is travelling. It is irrelevant whether the Earth is round or flat.
    18
  4. ego smack sequel Long distance land surveyors need to factor in curvature. That surveyors for a building site do not (too little curvature for the distance covered) is not evidence long distance surveyors don’t need to.
    17
  5. Dorcas Winter Observation. The lunar eclipse always produced a circular eclipse and the sun & moon moved in a cyclical pattern with no variation in size and speed. They used the varying length of shadows at different latitudes to calculate approximate values for the diameter of Earth (close) and the distance to the sun (way off).
    16
  6. ego smack sequel 8” per mile squared describes a parabola not a circle. You’re ignoring observer elevation and atmospheric fraction. You’re still confusing elevation with curvature.
    15
  7. In 15 years of looking for the truth he hasn't considered whether 8"/mile^2 is the right equation.
    12
  8. B Me Unless it is refracted by the medium it is passing through.
    8
  9. ego smack sequel A plane will stay at the altitude where the air pressure provides the lift to maintain level flight at the speed it is travelling; it’s irrelevant whether the Earth is curved or flat.
    8
  10. ​ @vanessaruiz4705  There would be minerals in rainwater (and animal fur) if humans didn't and never had existed. Simply finding tracing of a mineral in rainwater is meaningless in itself; how much is there and has it markedly changed is what is relevant. How they came to change is relevant questions to ask; assuming conspiracies for mass poisoning is not. It would help if you could use correct names for elements; it's unlikely bohrium contaminates anything.
    8
  11. Håkan Pettersson BS like how your computer works?
    7
  12.  @hakan8997  You're saying the science used to design & build it are BS, yet it runs well enough for you to be on here saying it can't be possible.
    7
  13. No, they see the curvature expected from a 25,000 mile circumference rather than that of a 250 mile one.
    6
  14. BertleMcGertle I point out the multitude of conflicting beliefs on the FE model and you assume I haven’t looked into FE. That’s the poor level of reasoning that has people believing in a FE.
    6
  15. BertleMcGertle I made an observation not presented an argument.
    6
  16. How do they hide the motion of the sun?
    6
  17. Glitchy The quotation mark you refer to is the symbol for inch.
    5
  18. Mara Ram If you look hard enough you’ll find something regardless of whether it is there or not.
    5
  19.  @vanessaruiz4705  I passed no comment on anyone's expertise; don't criticise what I didn't say in the first place. Yes, there are people who are experts on such matters; there are also many self-declared experts who don't know what they are doing and it is necessary to distinguish between the two. Standing on a soapbox does not make someone right or competent. Finding something that is going to be there in the first place is not finding evidence of pollution; as I said, one should be looking for changes that can't be explained by nature and forming plausible hypotheses that can be tested, e.g., inadequate filtering during incineration. Jumping to a conclusion there's a nefarious plot by evil bogeymen to mass poison people for no apparent purpose is not an appropriate starting point.
    5
  20.  @jackmurphy563  You may not be lying deliberately but you are repeating a lie. A boat can become too small to see with the naked eye well before it reaches the horizon; telescope or binoculars will bring it back into view. Once it goes over the horizon nothing will bring it back into view (try it with the sun if you don't believe me).
    5
  21. Dubay’s videos are indeed b.s.
    5
  22. YourThoughtsBetrayYou You’re quoting an experiment from Convex Earth as evidence the Earth is flat?
    5
  23. I hadn’t noticed they were dedicating so much time.
    5
  24. Be novel and actually produce this evidence you all claim to possess. Explain his The retains a constant angular diameter and angular velocity through the course of the day and rises & sets if it doesn’t come within 10-20 degrees of the horizon.
    5
  25. Pat Moynahan which only happens when sun & moon are on opposite horizons and atmospheric conditions provides the refraction to make both appear a few degrees higher than they actually are. I realise that handling two variables simultaneously is probably beyond your mental capacity but that is the simple explanation.
    5
  26. Rust Jones In 15 years Dave has not thought to ask whether he is using the correct maths. That’s the depth of thought of these smart people. People who really are smart start by asking what the evidence, not concluding their personal ignorance is the epitome of human knowledge.
    5
  27. A lot of people who keep being told the Earth is flat by people who can’t provide valid evidence, cant explain how a FE could work or explain why the evidence for a globe is wrong while being adamant they know the answers.
    4
  28. supercat380 Several taken every hour. Look up EPIC, Himawari-8 and Elektro-L.
    4
  29.  @breal9014  People used stones tools before metal ones and for far longer. Do you think stone tools are better?
    4
  30.  @aliali-xx9ru  Given a 25,000 mile circumference sphere, how many degrees curvature per mile would you expect to find?
    4
  31. Ladles of gravy Michaelson & Morley used the known motion of the Earth to look for evidence of the hypothetical aether. They found no evidence the aether existed. This is not evidence of no motion. Einstein’s comment relates to the behaviour of light, not the absence of motion.
    4
  32. Traceable signal to, on and from the moon, detectable equipment left there, verifiable material brought back and the landing sites recently photographed.
    4
  33. Jeffery Poage Two people made solo crossings earlier this year.
    4
  34. People don’t find the curvature they expect to find. It reveals that they are incapable of doing the arithmetic for accurate predictions. Not finding evidence of a 25 mile circumference is not evidence against a 25,000 mile circumference.
    4
  35.  @aliali-xx9ru  What is so magical about Youtube that an all-controlling government can't touch it?
    4
  36. And spinning in two opposites directions while they are doing it.
    4
  37. Initially started to try to prevent science disproving biblical beliefs, later support from pranksters and most recently by people seeking to make money out of the gullible.
    4
  38. Same mass, different weight. Variation in the gravitational field is minimal and is down to the deviation away from a perfect sphere and the extent of the centrifugal force depending on the latitude.
    4
  39.  @tysonrinker5958  Weblinks disappear on this channel. You’ll need to explain it yourself or give something like the title of the video. I would note that “See my guru” is one of the standard replies, the gurus never providing the explanation.
    4
  40. Sure. Every time we provide the proof you simply claim you’re being deceived and demand we provide the proof we just gave you.
    4
  41.  @stevenmatthews1308  You mean if you do something wrong and it doesn't work this somehow disproves the results when done correctly? It would be really nice of FE'ers could come up with examples where they actually understand what they were doing. "Statue of Liberty" Check out the geography around New York and explain how the Statue of Liberty could be visible at that distance.
    4
  42. EARL SERIO A scientific theory is based on extensive experimentation & observation resulting in explanations that fully cover details. They are not guesses or hunches; that is the vernacular meaning of the word.
    4
  43. Joshua Gutierrez Somebody agonizing over whether 2+2 really equals four is not looking for answers, just being dumb. Pretty much the same for people seriously considering a flat Earth. You can’t prove something in science; you can compile a model that is consistent with the available evidence and support it by eliminating alternatives through experimentation & observation. The miasma theory and Ptolemaic system both fitted the known facts; they were displaced as conflicting evidence was collected. If you want to disprove something then you need to obtain evidence to support that assertion; ignorance and botched experiments are not that evidence.
    4
  44. Mike Boyd Considerable difference.
    4
  45. generalmax Yet the Antarctica Treaty says nothing about visitors to Antarctica being banned. Try reading it.
    4
  46. The Earth was demonstrated to be a globe by the ancient Greeks; a global Earth was the centre of the Ptolemaic geocentric system that you refer to. Copernicus initiated a shift to a geocentric system, not a change in opinion of Earth's shape.
    4
  47. You wouldn’t come out though (bar gymnastics en route) your feet would still approach the exit hole first. Friction with the air as you fell would reduce your momentum; having passed the centre of the Earth and now having gravity pulling you backwards you wouldn’t have sufficient momentum to reach the exit hole. You would start falling back and end up oscillating backwards & forwards around the centre.
    3
  48.  @Jason_Disbury  "pseudoscience theories and Cartoon images" Dismissing what you don't understand as pseudoscience and regarding explanatory diagrams as cartoons speaks volumes of your attitude.
    3
  49.  @Jason_Disbury  Nobody's debunked it. There are a lot of people who can't grasp there can be more than cause for an effect. A boat can become too small to be seen with the naked eye long before it reaches the horizon; that can be brought back into view with a telescope. A boat passes completely from view when it passes over the horizon; no amount of zooming will bring it back into view. The obvious means for testing would be tracking a large object like the sun and bring that back from over the horizon; no takers yet. Then we pass on to the people who can't grasp elevations of observer & object and atmospheric refraction have roles. This is critical thinking: asking what is involved in making an observation,
    3
  50. Douglas Tibbitts We like measuring & comparing things and understand when we’re dealing with absolute & relative values. You can lower pressure but you can’t take it to absolute zero; what passes for a vacuum depends on what is required so it is used as a relative term.
    3