Comments by "Yazzam X" (@yazzamx6380) on "The Guardian" channel.

  1. That's because flat Earth believers are very easily manipulated by others and therefore are easy targets for flat Earth theorists :-|
    8
  2. So firmament dome or no firmament dome? More lands and seas beyond the claimed wall of ice? Gravity or no gravity? Flat sun and moon or globe sun and moon? Pillars or no pillars? Rahu and Ketu or just the moon during eclipses?
    5
  3. Yep, there are globe knowers and flat Earth believers :-)
    5
  4.  @corysamoila  - Yet another one who can't offer any counter arguments :-)
    5
  5. Putting aside the fact that it's rather easy to prove the Earth is a globe, please state what shape you consider the Earth to be and explain why you 'know' that.
    4
  6.  @rajarammarni2306  - You are using false logic to make your arguments, something that ANYONE can do, but try focusing on the FACTS and hence make your arguments based upon FACTS please. That is, don't say what can or cannot be done according to you and your beliefs, say what can be proven and explain why. Go into detail. For example, please go to ABOUT on my CHL and read my short proof regarding the shape of the Earth.
    4
  7. Wrong. Next? :-)
    3
  8.  @ebonytruthhh  - In other words, just make it up as you go along :-)
    3
  9. Sure, a creator so weak that others can hide it? R i g h t Now raise your hand until it's level with your eyes. So which part of that means flat? :-)
    3
  10.  @corysamoila  - Thank you for proving sense is not common, since even a kid could understand that bringing your hand up until it's level with your eyes means your hand is at the same HEIGHT as your eyes. How can you not know that? :-) It has nothing to do with your hand being flat kid. What next? You hang a painting on a wall and your friend says "it's not level", and so instead of rotating the painting until the bottom corners are at the same height are you REALLY going to ask your friend "What do you mean it's not flat?" :-D
    3
  11.  @rajarammarni2306  - Once again you prove my point perfectly. I have presented you with evidence of the Earth being a globe that YOU can directly TEST YOURSELF :-) Go ahead and test it. See if you can be the first globe Earth denier to find two locations on Earth where the distance measured on the globe is different to the distance measured in the real world. I'm waiting, so less of the cowardice replies from you and more of the evidence I asked you for :-)
    3
  12.  @rajarammarni2306  - If someone tried to project the map of the Earth around a cube then it would be distorted, and hence it would take you no time to find two locations on that cube where the distance measured DOESN'T match the real world distance, proving the Earth is not a cube. If someone tried to project the map of the Earth around a pyramid then it would be distorted, and hence it would take you no time to find two locations on that pyramid where the distance measured DOESN'T match the real world distance, proving the Earth is not a pyramid. If someone tried to project the map of the Earth around a cylinder then it would be distorted, and hence it would take you no time to find two locations on that cylinder where the distance measured DOESN'T match the real world distance, proving the Earth is not a cylinder.
    3
  13.  @rajarammarni2306  - Likewise if someone tried to project the map of the Earth onto a flat disk then it would be distorted, and hence it would take you no time to find two locations on that flat disk where the distance measured DOESN'T match the real world distance, proving the Earth is not a flat disk. So again, the point is, I have presented that proof to globe Earth deniers for YEARS and yet none of you have ever provided two locations that would debunk my proof. So what's taking you ALL so long? :-)
    3
  14.  @alcrooks9095  - Your argument in this thread to someone mentioning the ancients Greeks was "So you were around back in the time of the ancient Greeks. no you weren't" And regarding Christian churches you said to me "so we know you weren't around 2000 years ago." So were you around back in the time of the early 1900s? No you weren't :-)
    3
  15.  @alcrooks9095  - Therefore by your own argument you can't make any claims about that period in time because you were not there, and therefore your claim is null and void by your own admission. But the flat Earth theorists who were around at that time prove I was right and you were wrong. It's as simple as that :-)
    3
  16.  @alcrooks9095  - As expected you couldn't offer a single publication before the early 1900s that supports your little claim, whereas I debunked your claim with the books of flat Earth theorists. And look for the famous satirical illustration from 1805 (yes, published 219 years ago) called "The plumb-pudding in danger", which features Napoleon Bonaparte and William Pitt carving up the Earth. So tell me, what shape is the Earth in that illustration please? :-)
    3
  17.  @alcrooks9095  - Eric Dubay, you know the guy who brought flat Earth to modern audiences, did so by referencing flat Earth books published 100-150 years ago, where in his "200 proofs" eBook and his 2014 Flat Earth book he CONSTANTLY quotes from ALL the books I listed except the one by Gleason (he probably hadn't read at the time). Therefore for flat Earth theorists like Eric Dubay they are all TRUSTED SOURCES of information.
    3
  18.  @alcrooks9095  - Your claim and I quote "The world wasn't a globe until the early 1900s" originated from flat Earth believers, where I've debated several who have made that claim over the years. So name your exact source for that information, so that I can see the evidence that your source presented. No more excuses please :-)
    3
  19.  @alcrooks9095  - If you have no source, then you have no evidence, and therefore your claim was made up by the flat Earth theorists/believers you listened to and believed without question.
    3
  20.  @alcrooks9095  - You said "yes Eric Dubay I'm familiar. He's a flat Earther just like you." The fact that you can now only resort to childish games proves you have no counter arguments. So thanks for conceding :-) You started this thread with a claim about a time in history long before we were born and yet 2 weeks later you still cannot provide ONE piece of evidence to support your little claim. In contract, I presented actual evidence proving the Earth as a globe was universally accepted long before your claim, and I could have provided significantly more. Simply put, there's no point in history when any modern nation believed the Earth is flat. So case closed, since you never really opened it :-)
    3
  21.  @alcrooks9095  - A very quick skim through your reply shows you still have no evidence to offer here to support your claim. Present your evidence please, I'm waiting. Why is that still a problem for you after over 2 weeks? The answer is simple... because you have no evidence to offer :-)
    3
  22.  @alcrooks9095  - So still no evidence from you to support your early 1900s claim, making your claim null and void. But thanks for taking part :-)
    3
  23. Explain exactly what you mean J Mc, because I suspect you're just blindly believing whatever certain flat Earth theorists told you :-|
    2
  24.  @corysamoila  - So to prove me wrong, flat Earth believers need to; (a) Present two locations on Earth for which the distance measured on a globe of the Earth is different to the distance measured in the real world, where the margin of error doesn't explain the discrepancy, or (b) Present a flat map of the whole Earth which is to scale and has no distortion, meaning we can work out any distance on Earth just by measuring it on the flat map and then multiply that measurement by the scale (just like our flat town/city maps). I'd accept either (a) or (b), but both would be even better. Any takers? :-)
    2
  25.  @alcrooks9095  - And what about Christian churches? For around 2000 years Christian churches have only ever said the Earth is a globe :-)
    2
  26.  @alcrooks9095  - Look up for example the Christian symbol since the middle ages called the "Globus Cruciger", featuring a cross on top of a ball, representing Christ's dominion over the globe Earth.
    2
  27.  @alcrooks9095  - Christian1ty with its globe Earth was the largest religion centuries before the early 1900s and hence the biggest cultural influence worldwide :-)
    2
  28.  @alcrooks9095  - The only difference was, Christian churches and the ancient Greeks and Romans believed in a stationary globe Earth, but a globe just the same!
    2
  29.  @alcrooks9095  0 You said "so we know you weren't around 2000 years ago" And you were? :-) Remember, you said and I quote "The world wasn't a globe until the early 1900s" So lets listen to those who were around before then, the flat Earth theorists.
    2
  30.  @alcrooks9095  - Here's some of my flat Earth books; Zetetic Astronomy, 1865 by Samuel Birley Rowbotham 100 Proofs That the Earth Is Not a Globe, 1885 by William M Carpenter Zetetic Cosmogony, 1899 by Thomas Winship Terra firma - The Earth is not a Planet, 1901 by David Wardlaw Scott
    2
  31.  @alcrooks9095  - And also Gleason's flat Earth book from 1893. So if your claims were true then; Why would those books even exist before the 1900s? Why do the authors of those books complain about schools and universities teaching the Earth is a globe for centuries? Why do some of those authors mention being taught the Earth is a globe when they were kids in school? Why are all those flat Earth authors challenging the consensus that the Earth is a globe? So were those authors not around before the 1900s? Are all those flat Earth theorists and more |ying about the time then were alive and you were not? :-)
    2
  32.  @alcrooks9095  - Why do you run away from the fact that I proved on this video about flat Earth that all flat Earth theorists born before the early 1900s said the consensus for centuries is that the Earth is a globe, and therefore their books were to prove the consensus wrong :-)
    2
  33.  @alcrooks9095  - In other words, the very same people born before the early 1900s who should have agreed with you, i.e. flat Earth theorists, all say you're wrong. So case closed :-)
    2
  34.  @alcrooks9095  - Thank you for proving you haven't read any of the books. Those flat Earth authors who lived before the early 1900s confirm the Earth being a globe was the worldwide consensus in science, schools, universities, media, governments, institutions and so on. That's why they wrote their books. In other words, they all prove you wrong.
    2
  35.  @alcrooks9095  - And again, either those flat Earth theorists are |ying about the consensus over the shape of the Earth despite being alive before the early 1900s, or you're completely wrong. So please quote from just ONE publication before the Early 1900s that supports your easily debunked claim :-)
    2
  36.  @alcrooks9095  - And to illustrate my point further, here's a quote from the start of Thomas Winship's 1899 flat Earth book; "... the world-wide and almost universally-believed h0ax that we are living on a whirling sea-earth globe, revolving faster than a cannon-ball travels..."
    2
  37.  @alcrooks9095  - So according to Thomas, the Earth being a globe was a world-wide and almost universally believed h0ax, hence debunking your claim. So I'm still waiting for this case to be reopened with actual evidence from you :-)
    2
  38.  @Carl-mw3ft  - So if it's so easy, then you must have an undistorted and accurate flat map of a flat Earth that you can direct us all towards, right? In other words, where can we find a flat map that is a scaled-down and correctly proportioned representation of your flat Earth Carl?
    2
  39. ​ @Carl-mw3ft  - Hence you confirm I was right, thanks :-)
    2
  40. And yet here you are Michael happy to use the products of science to post your reply for people you've never met to read. So when exactly are you going to cast your technology aside? You know, the products only made possible thanks to 'the science' :-)
    2
  41. Er, don't you mean the South Pole rather than the North Pole, since the South Pole is in Antarctica?
    2
  42.  @efwefwef6975  - Why would the magnetic North Pole be more important to you than true North Pole that your flat Earth theorists claim to be the actual center of the Earth? And you do know that there's no land at the North Pole, only thick floating ice? And you do know that (if you can afford the high price then) you can book onto a trip to the North Pole? And you do know that the magnetic North Pole is not stationary, it drifts from year to year, sometimes by up to 40 miles?
    2
  43.  @alexbereczki2832  - You said"And why would they guard it with the army and treaties ?" What do you believe is being guarded by army and treaties?
    1
  44.  @corysamoila  - You continue to prove my point :-) I know for a fact that the Earth is a globe from the evidence, not from what I've been told. For example, go to the About part of my CHNL and READ my short proof of the Earth being a globe. See if you can succeed where all others have failed by being the FIRST flat Earth believer to find a problem and hence debunk it. No excuses please :-)
    1
  45.  @corysamoila  - In other words you cannot debunk my proof?
    1
  46.  @corysamoila  - And can you explain the following? ibbDOTcoDIVIDE0qxN86n ^^^ Change DOT and DIVIDE to the obvious to make the link work :-)
    1
  47.  @corysamoila  - You said "The map for the Earth is made already." In other words you effectively admit you cannot present two locations on a globe of the Earth that doesn't match the distance measured in the real world, meaning the map wrapped around a globe is NOT distorted, and therefore the Earth being a globe is proven. You also admit you cannot present a flat map of the entire Earth which is NOT distorted, and therefore proving the Earth is not flat. Thank you :-)
    1
  48.  @corysamoila  - You said "the horizon rises with the observers point of view. It does not fall. The surface of Earth becomes smaller the higher we go." Replace DOT and SLASH as required for the links; isDOTgdSLASHOh43q2 isDOTgdSLASHtIYWm6 Why didn't you know that? :-) You said "lol you cannot see 1000 miles without some sort of high powered binoculars" Then why would a limited eye view of less than 1000 miles to the horizon cause it to rise to eye level instead of dropping with altitude as observed?
    1
  49. ​ @corysamoila  - You said "depends on the distance of the target or object and the angle of the eyes" Then present your figures here please. Hence it's such a dumb claim, because a flat Earth would not cause the horizon to rise to eye level, it will only result in the horizon dropping SLOWER in comparison to a globe Earth for a any given altitude. In other words, the horizon would still drop with altitude on a flat Earth, just now at the same rate as on a globe Earth. Still, I'm pleased to add you to my endless list of flat Earth believers who couldn't debunk my globe Earth proof :-)
    1
  50.  @corysamoila  - Perhaps you could be the first flat Earth believer worldwide who can present a video or photograph of the horizon being at the same level as the water in a bottle when at high altitude, as demonstrated in my link? It's strange how no flat Earth believer has ever done that to prove their horizon claim. Surely flat Earth believers fly too? ;-)
    1