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

  1.  @KangenAlec  Motion of the sun, horizons, angle to Polaris, two celestial poles; all indicate the Earth is s globe. Sux months on we’re still waiting for your explanation of how all that is compatible with FE. What’s the problem?
    2
  2.  @Globeisahoax  So you keep saying but you never explain why observable reality indicates a globe and not a FE? What’s so difficult that you can’t answer?
    2
  3.  @Globehoax  You’re avoiding the question again. Why is that?
    2
  4. They tend to visualise a 25 mile circumference rather than 25,000.
    2
  5.  @KangenAlec  Replying to someone’s comments is not trolling.
    2
  6.  @mohdadeeb1829  They generally visualise it as 25-250 miles in circumference.
    2
  7. What would make the water fall off a globe?
    2
  8.  @marcopiturca788  Their "explanation" is an invisible, undetectable object that magically becomes opaque at just the right time to give the appearance of a lunar eclipse and screw the necessity of matching observed area & times to their "explanation".
    2
  9. Gradual coalescence of matter over the course of 100 million years; there's no obligation for it to be instant. There isn't any evidence of a young Earth; "how else is this possible?" is incredulity, not evidence. There are no holes in the theory of evolution and, no, Darein did not try to renounce the theory.
    2
  10.  @KangenAlec  You consider measurement to be pseudoscience?
    2
  11.  @davedefrost2174  How did the they compensate for refraction, divergence and leveling error and determine the test distance?
    2
  12.  @NuriMCBE  He can't answer any questions or explain anything, just incessantly posts "It's flat! It's flat!".
    2
  13.  @boterlettersukkel  Most likely; he's been posting continuously for a few months and, despite the repetition, his story has changed over time. If he isn't then he needs a gold star for developing his stupidity.
    2
  14.  @ayejay4477  How did it achieve CGI before CGI existed?
    2
  15. ?
    2
  16. "If they can’t know anything for certain then they can be wrong about everything they claim to know" Extremely unlikely and the onus is on you need to provide evidence they is wrong. "Could be = just gotta be" is not a valid argument.
    2
  17.  @KangenAlec  Then why do you ignore the truth?
    2
  18.  @KangenAlec  If it follows scientific principles then it is scientific. When FE’ers ignore variables, use the wrong maths and think they can deal with both by ignoring them then it is pseudoscience.
    2
  19.  @KangenAlec  Still no explanation from FE’ers for theCavendish experiment.
    2
  20. I’ve been asking them how the FE sun rises & sets without coming within 20 degrees of the horizon or how it maintains a constant angular velocity & diameter through the day for every observer.
    2
  21.  @jbignJesus  Explain how this mind control is supposed to work?
    2
  22. "how does water stick to a spinning globe" By the Earth's gravity being stronger then the centrifugal force. Even at the equator where the centrifugal force will be the strongest, it's about 0.5% that of gravity. "There is no conclusive evidence for me" Motion of the sun, horizons, angle to Polaris and two celestial poles are all observable. We also have maps then able intercontinental flights without anybody getting lost. (If only they worked with luggage...)
    2
  23.  @rogerlane474  That's a hypothesis, not a theory. "They're all continually changing" Hypotheses, not theories.
    2
  24.  @rogerlane474  That nothing can be measured with total exactitude does not mean anything is immeasurable. The only people who claim masks should have the same efficacy as biosuits are the denialists. Why do so many Americans believe NASA is the only space agency?
    2
  25.  @KangenAlec  You believe the fakery exists therefore...
    2
  26.  @Globehoax  Still waiting on your explanation for how the ISS could be faked with a balloon.
    2
  27.  @Walterthefriendly  You can reach the point where doubt about a scientific theory is unreasonable; when you have to fall back on the possibility of an undetectable omnipotent entity manipulating reality to fool you it means you can't think of any rational reason why the theory could be wrong. There have been over 500 astronauts who observed Earth from orbit (some even further away); are you arguing there is no evidence of direct observation unless you personally have observed it? If so, what is special about you? You can't observe radio waves directly yet you have no qualms about their existence. You buy tinned food without disbelief about the contents. You will be in little doubt that you have a brain even though you have never seen it. The shape of the Earth can and has been observed indirectly; there is no reasonable doubt about its shape.
    2
  28.  @siddharthnandi3995  He doesn’t answer questions Orr seems, just interjects claims.
    2
  29. Yes but they insist the signal comes from cell towers, even in the the middle of oceans.
    2
  30.  @Globeisahoax  Really? You can’t produce any evidence at all to back FE but are quite convinced it is flat.
    2
  31.  @Globeisahoax  Still waiting on your evidence...
    2
  32.  @Globeisahoax  You still haven’t said what you’ve dine to measure the distance to the sun or explained how it maintains a constant angular velocity & diameter. You’re supposed to be the msn with the answers so why a year long silence?
    2
  33. We're talking about a measurable, observable shape, not an explanation for a phenomenon. The idea that it could be a huge mistake is not plausible. That you don't know or understand the evidence for the age of the universe etc does not cast doubt on that evidence and the conclusions from it nor is it indicative that the evidence doesn't exist. Ignorance is not knowledge. Nobody is banned from Antarctica. There is no hidden clause in the Antarctica Treaty banning people.
    2
  34. ​ @zachariah1990  We have done the research; here's nothing stopping you going to Antarctica on your own. That it is easier to go with a tour operator (they have the equipment and know-how to get from place to place) does not mean you can;t go on your own. You're conflating scientific hypothesis and theory. Scientific theories are well-substantiated and rarely wrong. Hypotheses have different degrees of substantiation (science is always ongoing) and are more likely to be wrong. Evidence is always accumulating (science is always ongoing); that evidence is eventually found that disproves an existing hypothesis does not mean it was always known - science is always ongoing.
    2
  35.  @KangenAlec  You still haven’t explained why the observable motion of the sun differs from FE.
    2
  36. Explain a how single frame shots on an analogue camera were edited?
    2
  37.  @unoriginal_name4576  Lack of evidence of such.
    2
  38.  @KangenAlec  How do you think they were controlling the ancient Greeks? How do you think they control shadows?
    2
  39. EPIC, Elektro-L & Himawari-8 collectively take several pictures per hour, all readily accessible. It doesn’t satisfy them for reasons they can’t say.
    2
  40.  @warmachineuk  A very misshapen area rather than a circle though (unsurprisingly) none can explain how.
    2
  41.  @eddy2fast260  Russell’s teapot. The onus is on you to provide evidence of something’s existence.
    2
  42. Explain the lunar rocks verified by geologists the world round.
    2
  43. The video has been heavily edited, hence the abrupt cuts. You cant criticise the scientists for what is missing in the final video.
    2
  44.  @samar5846  How many people do you get to see outside social media?
    2
  45. Blame Jubilee - the video has been heavily edited to make it balanced. A one-way flow of evidence doesn’t fit with a middle-ground concept.
    2
  46.  @KangenAlec  How did they achieve a vacuum in a studio?
    2
  47.  @jarvasjames3149  The Gleason azimuthal projection is a globe projected into a flat surface and thus grossly distorted. It aims for all North-South distances to be evenly proportioned but inevitably creates distortion elsewhere, particularly the further south you go. FE’ers think flights make stopovers that you don’t notice and that it doesn’t matter whether you can see land or sea below you.
    2
  48. Gyroscopes & Foucault pendulum demonstrate the Earth is rotating; stellar parallax indicates it is moving through space as it orbits the sun. How many times by how many people does it need to be done to satisfy that it has been done? Geodesics has the shape of the spherical Earth measured down the square meter; how many times by how many people do the measurements needs to be taken to satisfy that they have been taken? No scientific experiments have demonstrated the Earth is motionless (no, Micahelson-MOrley, Airy & SAgnac did not demonstrate lack of motion) and all experiments to measure curvature that took into account all factors failed to find curvature (no, you can't ignore interfering factors).
    2
  49. FE’ers seem to visualise the Earth as far smaller than in actuality and assume a plane would readily get high enough to view & photograph a distinctly curved horizon.
    2
  50. Science is evidence-based, not a religion.
    2