Flat Earthers Butcher Perspective
HTML-код
- Опубликовано: 25 ноя 2024
- To try everything Brilliant has to offer-free-for a full 30 days, visit brilliant.org/... . You’ll also get 20% off an annual premium subscription.
PATREON: / davemckeegan
Please consider supporting the channel by making purchases through my Amazon affiliates: geni.us/Affiliate
This video was sponsored by Brilliant
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
Music by Bensound.com
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
#globe #science #flatearth #perspective
To try everything Brilliant has to offer-free-for a full 30 days, visit brilliant.org/DaveMcKeegan . You’ll also get 20% off an annual premium subscription.
Do Brilliant have an app tailored for flat Earthers, conspiracy nuts and general Woo merchants? They could call it "Not Particularly Brilliant, for room temperature IQs"?
there might be a video that you might be interested in, its called
PROOF of Flat Earth - Chicago Skyline Is Not a Mirage! Lies & Lunacy of Globe Theory Shredded! (R.S)
@@skateboardingjesus4006 Do you love Epstein and P.Diddle?🌝
Here’s proof they say of firmament off CIA website. Scroll to Photographic observation of spectral intensity of the firmament. www.cia.gov/readingroom/document/cia-rdp86-00513r000206630013-0
@@Whosurdaddy71 Wow, that was stupid.
So, to flat earthers, the object in the background decreses in size but the wave does not?
Correct.
Sad but true
Haha! One sentence shows how silly they are!
Yes because the waves are in a different frequency than objects. Simple science.
Not even that. To us, a Flearth's 3-ft wave grows to over 250 ft and somehow doesn't swamp or capsize the ship.
Good catch!
The real reason flerfs don't like your diagrams because they make it too easy for everyone to see that flat earth is completely wrong and silly.
It's actually really telling that they criticise diagrams for being "out of scale" when scale literally does not change anything that the diagram is showing.
When you learn any kind of physics, you very quickly learn that certain things don't have to be accurate and can be exaggerated to get the point across. The fact Flerfers don't know this shows that they never even received basic lessons in physics or math.
@@h.a.9880 But when flat earthers do make a diagram it is out of scale, with cruise ships shrinking down to the size of a person.
@@h.a.9880 It's not really a matter of not knowing . . . it's a matter of not wanting it to be true, and latching onto any sort of nonsense that "explains" it away.
@@jpdemer5did u have a test to show water indefinitely bending underneath objects ill wait? It's big for your model
Its not even a topic up for debate... Yet you are here.
Leave it to flat Earthers to complain about your simplified diagrams, while they over-complexify simple concepts like perspective and orthographic views.
they are unable to explain the topic in simplified terms which means they dont understand it^^
It's so simple, a diagram isn't needed.
I'm 6ft tall, even with my toes in the water, on a flat earth, that 3ft wave will always be below my eye-line.
The middle of a, lets say 30ft tall ship will likewise always be above my eye line.
These two facts remain true at any distance from me.
Something that's always below my eyeline cannot cover something above my eyeline
@@TheBaldrickkon a flat earth, that is 😅
@@TheBaldrickk this is a good response... if it weren't for the fact thay flat earthers believe in the horizon "rises" to eye-level, thus all objects bellow your eyeline will "rise" to/with the horizon. Equally, the horizon must lower to eye level, and thus all objects above your eye level, must lower to/with the horizon to your eye level.
??? Some missing mystery step here--a little bit of magic.
And voilà! A little wave will obscure a big ship.
Remember that flat earthers don't have to prove HOW this happens, they just have to show you it must because _we sees_ it.
do they know what "orthographic" means?
They don't like the simplified diagrams, because their conspiracy theory requires extreme complexity to confuse their simple-minded followers
NUH-UH certainly is as complex as complexity gets by flerf standards.
@@realtsarbomba True, but they do come up with some interesting mental gymnastics to explain away obvious globe proof
@@croycamaro Given how dim they are the complex arguments always puzzle me. Then again I realise part way through their word salad that they have zero clue what they are on about.
@@ShizukuSeiji I like to say it's a Caesar salad made from 15 varieties of iceburg lettuce; a lot of stuff mixed together with no substance and 37 obvious holes.
What is so complex about mile squared x 8 inches
Its so crazy that you're pretty much telling adults that if you're taller then something in front of you then you can see over it
Flerfs can't think in 3D. Perspective is just one of the many aspects of 3D that they get wrong.
@@SuperDavidEFcan't think in 3D, can't figure out item A relative to item B, and no understanding of how the scientific method works.
@@5peciesunkn0wn Yup.
@@SuperDavidEF
The diagrams are 2D and they don't understand those, either. They can't think in 2D, they can't think in 3D, they just can't think in general.
Or I guess, they refuse to.
Flat earth Dave is exactly right. Y'all just don't get it. Earth is flat. Hate to break it to you people but you're not spinning 1000mph.....think about it. Seriously, think about it. You really believe this?!?!?!
I love the pencil test. "Put a pencil on top of another pencil, and you can't see beyond it."
Congratulations. You just created the "ship" in your experiment since none of the smaller waves (the pencils closer to you) are blocking the top of the 2-high pencil stack that is representing the ship.
It also wouldn't have blocked all the more distant pens as the camera was too high for that.
Flerf Dave will never possess the self awareness to notice.
He didn't actually demonstrate that the pencil on top of another pencil blocks the view of all pencils beyond it. That would only happen if the camera was lower than the top of the 2nd pencil.
This may help you: Explaining How Waves, Swells & Tides Hide the Bottoms of Boats/City Skylines to the Globe Faithful Taboo Conspiracy
A small wave can hide a whole boat.
@@liftingtheveil8361 Taboo Conspiracy thanks you for being an unquestioning, gullible and subservient coward.
Ironically the flerfers managed to prove the Earth is a globe once again. 🤦♂😂
Flerfers are the best globetards and they just don't know it.
I always debunk globe earth with water though so the game continues hahah😂
@@InscentiveAdvice Great, show the FE model that demonstrates 24 hrs of Sun in Antarctica. But at the same time make sure it demonstrates how on the 3rd of December, Sunrise in Melbourne Australia is viewed at 119 degrees Southwest, the Sun at midday is viewed at 48 degrees Northeast at 68 degrees altitude. And on the same date, Sunrise in Tokyo Japan is viewed at 117 degrees Southwest, the Sun at midday is viewed at 88 degrees South and 32 degrees in altitude. And, Sunrise in Anchorage Alaska is viewed at 139 degrees Southeast, the Sun at midday is viewed at 169 degrees South and 6 degrees in altitude...
Where's the FE model that matches the Observed, Recorded and Verifiable reality?
@@InscentiveAdvice There are models of a spinning globe Earth with water sticking to them. Some of these models are public art installations. No water flying off. Your move. 😂
Sun spots change in orientation throughout a whole day easily disproves a globe, two photos 24 hours apart also disproved a globe where sun spots on the left went up and sun spots on the right went down with a central tilt as the sun circled the next day in a spiral.
While driving in Montana I noticed that, even though the area was extremely flat, I couldn't see the bottoms of distant mountains. I was perplexed (not really) then, now I know it was because there was a 3 foot tall wave in the way.
Yeah, right. Montana doesn't exist. That's why the government won't let anybody go there.
@@EBDavis111 wait... did I say Montana? I meant Wyoming or Utah or... crap
@@ekimnosettamthe FEDs are coming for you! (Flat Earth Defense)
@@5peciesunkn0wn have you seen their navigation skills? I am not too concerned.
@@ekimnosettam given all they've got is circular logic, yeah, they aren't going anywhere fast.
If they understood basic geometry, they wouldn't believe in a flat earth.
Imagine spending your life on Earth as Flat Earth Dave does, waking up every day and deliberately trying to con people into buying an app that's based on a lie. So shameful. How could you live with yourself?
He knows he lost long ago, so it's either delusion, or he's so desperate for money he has to keep peddling the lie and won't stop, ever. Literally any other job would be more honest. What a waste of the time he's been given.
If there is stupid people to con, there is always someone to con them. Unfortunately there is no fix for stupidity, so there is an inexhaustible source of idiots to con.
@@jaketzi8816 It is also true that there is an inexhaustible supply of people prepared to do the conning! I think they have to be rather unusual psychologically. Most of us are unable to do some form of harm to others - but they can. And, as with FE Dave, they keep doing it.
Is he app fraudulent? "obtained, done by, or involving deception"
To be honest, FlatEarth Dave is not rly a flat earther, he just likes praying on gullible and uneducated people so he cant sell his flat earth app and get views on the internet. He has been caught many times lying and faking "flat earth evidence" and deliberately lying.
@@Hunter-NG Seeing as it's peddling a flat earth idea, and doesn't comport to reality, of course it involves deliberate deception. If in any doubt about this, go read DIRTH's responses in the App store reviews when people call him out on this.
I used to be an angry man, then I practised my self control and found an inner balance and a sense of peace. Fluffers are in danger of undoing half a lifetime's work on my mindfulness.
A fluffer is a different threat to self-control than a flerfer 😳
I used to be a calm man until I found out about flerfs. I would recommend avoiding the subject if you already tend to anger.
@@10Neon they all suck.
I know exactly what you’re saying. For me it’s not just FLERFs but also young earth creationists.
because you don't observe reality, sun spots change in orientation from "sunrise to sunset" easily disproves a rotating globe by the way they change relative to the observer.
The ship shrinking is what makes this gold, they really can't comprehend perspective, amazing!
Yes! Now I understand what they meant all along! OMG, they're so dumb they are not even able to explain this correctly. For example, when flerfers say "you didn't account for perspective" they mean to shrink in size whatever is drawn far away!!!
How can they be so deluded?
It took me far too long to eventually realize that flat earthers simply do not understand how perspective works. They are all Father Dougall in that skit.
ruclips.net/video/O5ocaUoXlrU/видео.html
Distant objects getting smaller in an orthographic view is hilarious. Its counter to the singular purpose of an orthographic perspective XD
"pssst" hey, the dude doesn't know what "orthographic" means.
If I remember art, that is one where distant trees and close trees have the same linear size.
Flatearthers trying to mix perspective-based effects into an ortogonal side view is just sad man
Flerfers gonna flerf
Forget perspective, that's just basic object permanence! The ship isn't actually shrinking, dude. It's like that Father Ted joke: ruclips.net/video/MMiKyfd6hA0/видео.html&ab_channel=Channel4Entertainment
What’s funny is that he compressed the wave much less than the ship:) If the wave is 10% of the ship close by, then it is 10% of the ship far away too. But somehow it became the same size as the ship.
@@juzoli really interesting things we want to disappear shrink, but things that obscure them grow. Almost like they turn into a giant hump in the way ... hey wait a minute
No, orthogonal lines go down from above the horizon and up from below the horizon as your line of sight extends away from you.
Now I understand why it's impossible to get to Antarctica - the ships shrink!
cold does that...
🤣
That's why I get a headache on Antarctic cruises. I keep wackin' my head on the ceiling.
Attempts to cross the Ice Wall thwarted by that most tyrannical of laws: Special Relativity!
@@KSparks80 lol
So the approach is: When I do not know much about how something works, then do not simplify it until it is understandable, complicate it until no one understands it and cannot quickly debunk it because of all the useless nonsense that is thrown in - then I can fall back to that what I want to believe.
kinda, the thing is they don't believe it themselves, they know it's a grift and its easy money.
it's just a reheated version of creationism america passed over in the fifties due to its nazi connections.
hence, one side says science ended before darwin and cant explain what a kind is and the other says it ended before einstein and can't explain, anything.
Welcome to religion.
so what he's saying is that the three foot high wave obscures the ship from a 6 foot tall viewer, because the ship actually shrinks to less than three feet tall. sucks for the passengers on the ship.
It's Dave's fault for using a cruise to Lilliput as an example.
Next flat Earth documentary: Honey I shrunk the cruise ship
@@DaveMcKeeganbetter than some of the movies that get made over here.
@@DaveMcKeegan Can I suggest "Honey I sent all the flerfers up on a failed SpaceX launch"?
You would see one person left, standing and waving on a dinghy in the middle of the ocean.😂
"orthographic diagrams are easy to understand." which is why the guy who fears the truth doesn't like them.
The problem is that they dont understand rebuttals. Someone thinks up a story, gets absolutely rejected, none of the flerfs understand why it is wrong, and so they keep peddling the story because they think it sounds good.
U must watch flat earth debunk vids...which r fake.
@InscentiveAdvice and yet no one has been able to provide rebuttals for the rebuttals.
All you have is "I don't understand anything you said so it must be fake".
That's called personal incredulity 🫠
@@bheemasena2383 it's already blocking my comments to protect u hahaha.
@InscentiveAdvice why would the truth need protection from fantasy? Why would facts need protection from conjecture?
It doesn't. No one needs protection from you and your fantasy world.
No, you get likely get blocked because your sheer ignorance is unsightly.
@@InscentiveAdvice Nah, that's just RUclips being a crappy service. They block my responses to flat earthers all the time, so if you think it's because you are spewing the truth so they are hiding it, then by your logic my arguments against flat earth are the truth too which is why RUclips blocks them.
Interestingly, the same phenomenon of things disappearing from the bottom up also happens in land, with tall buildings seen from a distance, and with mountains.
Land waves?
Yes, land waves or as science calls them _Graboids._
@@realtsarbomba Dunno, i reckon it needs something more like a Sandworm.
I have this crazy theory that the world's surface is curved... I think that would explain it, though the world would have to be really REALLY big.
Aren't land waves called hills?
Landsharks! Watch out!
😁✌️🌎⚓
Amazing how flat earthers are trying to prove a point by setting up a test that doesnt present the problem in question at all.
That happens when you have no clue what you are doing.
They have to, because if they did an experiment that presented the problem correctly, it would confirm that earth cannot be flat, and that would make them cry.
Once again I must point out that WAVES F'ING MOVE. The ship wouldn't be covered consistently and constantly even if this was in any way accurate.
It takes the wave a long time to move all the way to the ship, though. And when it reaches the ship, another wave is already shortly behind it, taking over its role. So, to the contrary, the ship WOULD be covered consistently and constantly by some wave, up to the height of the top of those waves.
@@renedekker9806 Yes, so wouldn't cause bottom up obstruction with distance.
@@renedekker9806 You have waves that go OUT to the ocean where you're from? And somehow go out in a straight line to every ship in view simultaneously? Weird world you live in.
I mean technically between you and the ship there might be multiple waves. So waves could abscure ships and they actually do for small boats. It is just that a large ship would require large waves to obscure a ship. For a wave to ever obscure an entire ship, bigger than itself, it would already have to be bigger than the observer or at least his eye level.
The issue here is that this would already require 5-6 foot waves for an observer standing directly at the coast. However ships dissappear in pretty much the same way regardless where you are. And if big waves would be the cause for ships not being visible you would run into another issue. They would only not be visible if the waves are large near you. In reality waves are much larger out in the ocean than near the coast. How often do you have a 5 foot wave directly in front of you at the beach? Basically never.
So I don't see the issue with the movement of the waves, because waves are periodic and you would have plenty of them between you and the ship, so they would permanently cover some part of the ship, the bigger issue is the size those waves would need to have. And again if you watch a boat about the same size of the waves you can actually see that the waves hide more of that boat shortly before lifting it up. Which is what you would expect.
You can think about it the way you think about hiding. If you hide behind an object you usually hide directly behind that object. In theory you would also be hidden if you stay 100m behind that object in line of sight with the observer, but if you hide far behind an object it would only require very little movement by the observer to see you, while it would require you a lot of movement to stay hidden.
@@renedekker9806 That assumes two things:
- many similar-sized waves - which is not at all common. The "7th wave" is a real phenomenon, caused by "constructive" combining smaller waves - typically two wave systems from slightly different directions. However, it is not just that a higher wave forms in a regular pattern, implicit in that observation is the "destructive" combining between the big waves. The result being a series, seen at any fixed point, of very low waves, in between the big ones. The effect varies along the wave fronts as well. Oceani waves systems are complex.
For this case, there are a series of waves of varying sizes as the normal condition over large bodies of water.
- to present a common apparently raised water height, that the waves are passing fairly directly between the observer and the ship. Most commonly, the waves are passing at some angle between the two, and often they would be seen passing _along_ the side of the ship, not obscuring it at all.
I would conclude that your claim is based on cherry-picking a single situation, and trying to generalise it to all cases.
So, ships Disappear due to waves, well if the wave is big enough the wave can make a ship Disappear, though when this happens the crew also Disappear too and the ship is usually never seen again. (Edmund Fitzgerald, Derbyshire, Andrea Gail for example)
Or, oddly enough, the buoyancy of the water raises the ship to the crest of the wave as it moves past the ship, thus making it visible again.
"the only thing flerfs have to fear is sphere itself"
traditional
Why do they not understand that if your eye/camera is higher than an object you can always see over it. An obstruction lower than the eye line can only obstruct things lower than the obstruction
So David Weiss says a six foot person has to look down to see the ground regardless of the distance. How does he square that with flat earthers claim that the horizon always rises to eye level? It always rises to eye level, but you always have to look down to see it?
Nobody debunks flat earth better than flat earthers.
Now, now, you're expecting flat earthers to be consistent. That's never going to happen!
If the flat earthers keep grasping at straws, they won't have anything left to construct their straw man.
False. They're becoming their straw man.
Are you even able to steel man the flat earth?
I think the funniest, and sometimes maddening, part of Dave's channel is that he's not an expert on many things he talks about. He's an expert on photography because that's what he knows, and he's able to use that knowledge to demonstrate many points, but otherwise he's simply forced to do research. And even with the simplest research given, he is not only still able to EASILY come across results that represent reality (and he demonstrates it, too), but he also continually shows how the arguments and demonstrations of a flat earther don't support reality. Yet people still continue to fall for the lies of the flat earth.
Yep, that's pretty much it. If the "do your own research" crowd was capable of doing even the slightest research they wouldn't be flerfs/\.
@@briansomething5987 "Do your own research" has always meant "I don't know, but I'm going to pretend like I do, then hide so you can't confront me later".
Fascinating how flatearthdave didn't notice that his pencils didn't look compressed when viewed from the side.
Did anyone else notice that the wave in Flat Earth Dave’s example unexplainably becomes four and a half miles long on his “scale”?
"One last time... these cows are small... but the ones outside... are FAR AWAY."
Flerfs just don't get it
That would be an ecumenical matter.
No, they don't.
More and more I come to believe flat earthers just can't understand the 3 dimensional world or grasp how we view. They can't understand the most simple concepts when it comes to seeing things from another view or vantage. Every argument, every "experiment", every reason for why they believe flat earth seems to be an inability to understand 3 dimensional space.
"It's not gonna be a 30 meter high wave on Blackpool Beach because someone might have noticed" got me laughing out loud.
Imagine reaching adulthood and still struggling to understand that we can see over things that we are higher than.
Flerfs don't need to imagine.
On a flat earth, a wave of 3 feet can never block more than 3 feet, but flat earthers always keep trying and changing arguments.
Unbelievable that concepts obvious to children has to be explained to flerfs, over and over again.
Have you ever actually looked at flat earth content?
Because it takes an adult to convince themselves an abstract concept overpowers physical observation.
The amazing thing is they are going on so much about waves, but one thing they fail to consider is waves are not still, so that would mean that the obscured part will chage constantly lol
I saw that ridiculous "side-view" graph and seriously thought for a second flat earthers were going to argue objects _literally_ shrink as they move away from an observer. Why would they even include that visual, having the ship jpg literally reduce in size as it moves further from the observer is like they were trying to show people their arguments held no water.
I've seen this "side view" representation of "perspective" before from Flat-Earthers. They'll show a "front" view with the perspective lines "converging" at the horizon, then they'll show a side view, which is supposed to show the same lines, and have them converge also, rather than remain parallel to each other as they should. Unfortunately, there are enough people out there who simply can't visualize how this actually works and who are taken in by it. It is these people that are the target. A scammer never has to be successful at scamming everyone. It only takes a few that buy in to make it worthwhile to continue.
Well, they actually want to say that, while the Earth is flat, our universe is non-euclidian, so lines aren't parallel and thus converge. This is also why perspective lines aren't parallel. Only they cannot put this transcendental knowledge together.
If only they knew...
Welcome to "Flerfspective".
I fear a bigger problem. Photographic perspective appears to have messed with people's sense of the world. Normally you can tell if something is small and close or large and far away by making head movements. You can also use convergence and focus cues. Its like how living in indoor spaces changes the kind of optical illusions we see vs someone living mostly outdoors.
Another example is "mirrors swap left and right" when they only swap the normal to their plane. This is obvious if using absolute position refrences.
Sometimes I feel really dull because of my dyslexia but then I watch your videos and realise I’m not actually that bad in comparison to some of these conspiracy theorists
Dyslexia is not an intelligence thing. It is more like colour blindness... you aren't dumb that you can't see colours, you just can't actually see them!
So you can't see when a letter is flipped... nothing to do with how clever you are either.
One of my children is this way. She uses technology to help and has people check her work. She is attending university now on scholarship and usually gets grades in the low nineties. She has 100 percent in one of her courses!
You wrote this perfectly fine, I highly doubt you are dyslexic. You are just fishing for likes
@@Pooki2024dyslexia doesn't make you unable to use spell check
@redwiltshire1816 I also struggle with dyslexia. I would still wager that you or I still have way more going on, cognitively, than any of these flerfs.
@@Pooki2024 Those of us with dyslexia can spell and read and write, we just make mistakes sometimes. Spell checker helps too. You will not know someone is dyslexic just based on their online comments.
Here's the thing... waves move. They aren't just stationary buldges of water just sitting there. So if it is just waves blocking the bottom view of ships, then on days or nights with no moon or very low tide, with no waves, you could bring back an entire ship no matter the distance.
You can't do this, because it's not waves.
And it is not a single tsunami wave.
Waves are not alone, they are a "field" and a rhythmical energy oscillation. The water does not even move sideways (much), just bobs up and down. It is the energy that is passed on.
It is hilarious. They fabulate a static wave bulge into existence - a static bulge, like the bulge caused by the earth curvature?
Oddball: "Man, stop it with those negative waves"
So much for their favorite line of "water finds its own level" here, eh? Suddenly the water needs to form random bulges above the rest of the water to cover up ships in the distance.
Flerfs have invented these bulges with land too before this. When diagramming their interpretation of what they think their opponents believe in, they draw two sections of perfectly flat ground 1 mile apart from each other with a thousand mile tall hill poking up between them.
Hmm, question... What do flerfs think causes tides? It can't be the moon, right? Because whatever their model looks like exactly, the flat earth's moon just doesn't move like the real moon does.
When you're close to a tall object and want to see the top, you look up.
On a flat erf, at which point you look down to see the top when the object is far away?
It feels like the flat erf is spherical.
Heheh.. "erf"
It never fails to impress me how often these flat Earth guys prove themselves wrong in their own explanations but are too married to their own misunderstandings they can't see it. Literally every single explanation of flat Earth proves itself wrong. These guys stand so proudly explaining how they misunderstand what they're looking at. You can't script that kind of comedy.
Your dog probably knows more about the earth than the flat earthers, after listening to you talk about it.
I think the dog knew more about the Earth than flat earthers before he even became Dave's best buddy. I mean come on "Cuddles, food, walkies, poop!" Thats 100% more constructive than anything any flerfer ever thought.
Via simple Pavlovian training, Rusty can now recall to mind various laws of optics merely by having his ears scratched!
@@ShizukuSeijiliterally every globe account is a bot account or a video gamer in moms basement hHahahahha
@@InscentiveAdvice and literally every flerfer is an idiot. So is the man making these videos a bot or a video gamer? How about the vast majority of people in the world who know the Earth is a globe? Try asking people on the street if they think the Earth is flat and watch how many laugh at you.
@@InscentiveAdvice Rarely do those accounts have any content.
I like how if they wanted, they could write a basic simulation of all of these concepts using opengl or in an existing game engine, but instead they struggle to understand primary school geometry and claim facts are flying over people's heads.
A 250 ft wave is necessary to obscure a 250 ft ship. That is called a tsunami, Flearths.
The convoluted nonsense they have to adhoc together to explain the most basic observations never gets old.
I think whats worse is, for any given argument they ALWAYS have an answer, but at no point do they ever seem to try to get all their answers to fit together into a cohesive model, its so frustrating to see them jump from rebuttal to rebuttal but never notice that the solution for X problem and the solution for Y problem are incompatible with each other
That’s called word salad with Dunning Kruger dressing. And it’s as funny as it is tasty
@@jeffcapes They have been failing at this for decades now - never stringing their "explanations" into a coherent whole.
It would just be sad if the flat earth lot did not include so many obvious con-artists, and therefore so many people being conned out of their money.
@@allgrainbrewer10 I can't agree with you on the flavour, but as entertainment value its got a Michelin star
@@jeffcapes And if you explained this they'd have another nonsense irrelevant rebuttal for that too lol
Flerf logic: Ship far away gets smaller....3ft wave far away stays big and ends up bigger than said ship....
Closer to the horizon you get, the more information becomes compressed. The ocean always has waves. It's not just one wave, but a series of waves. There is always one wave that follows up with another. All those waves NEAR the horizon are very close to your line of sight. A larger boat that continues past that point will only get smaller and smaller and will become blocked by that area of waving. Unlike in his graphic, he doesn't show the boat appearing to get smaller. As was stressed several times, the waves alone are only one factor here but that's all he focuses on. Maybe you should ask Dave again why he complained about tiny bumps on the hallway floor blocking a much taller flashlight. 🤔
@@Unlisted111complete nonsense, again. No matter how "compressed" things get, things below your line of sight NEVER block things above your line of sight.
@@Unlisted111
Got any photos of your flat earth?
@briansomething5987 - you do realize Dave bitched about tiny bumps on a hallway floor blocking a much taller flashlight? You should keep up.
@@Unlisted111you do realize that in that moronic "demonstation" both the light and the camera were on the floor, don't you? If we were talking about a 3 ft wave blocking a 3 foot boat when we were laying on the ground you would have a point. But, you know, gottalietoflerf
it is an observable fact that ships dissolve in contact with seawater the further away they are from the observer. Since the bottom of the ship is in contact with the sea water it disappears from the bottom up. However, when the ship is nearer to the observer the ship un-disolves and the bottom reappears. Not sure how this explains wind turbines though.
okay why sea water? Because the same observations can be made on ground and regular water.
@@iveneverseensuchbehaviorin5367seriously?
@@iveneverseensuchbehaviorin5367 Yes, it doesn't involve dissolving but is more likely to be the bottom of objects de-compiling due to distance from the observer, and is an unexplained Quantum effect causing atoms to temporarily phase out of existence. This reverses when the distance reduces. This is more believable than some of the explanations of the sun setting on a flat earth promoted by flerfs.
🤯
@@iveneverseensuchbehaviorin5367 Simple. Ships don't dissove on land, but wind turbines do. They dissolve as you go far away to rest, and then when they need to keep appearances they undissolve, springing back up to show you they are hard workers.
A very quite day on the Mediterranean sea the waves are only a couple of centimetres high, but ships still disappear behind the horizon. End of debunk.
Also, waves flatten out! The ships should disappear and appear...
@@Loki- Good point.
This reminded me of some observation I made about 5 years ago in Auckland New Zealand. I went a location at an altitude of about 400m and took some photographs as the sun rose. To the East about 57km away is the highest peak in the region at 688m so nearly 300m higher than my location. I was using a plastic tube filled with alcohol as a spirit level attached to 2 tripods and the level set to camera lens centre. The mountain peak in the distance appeared lower than the far end of my level.
I know others have shown similar setups many times, but it really is a very simple demonstration that we aren't on a flat plane. Even if we were to consider refraction, it would only make the distant object appear higher since the light from it would be bending down so the observer would have to look up to see it.
Love how the doggie's like, "Dad, dad! Forget the flerfers, I need strokes!!"
I'm guessing flerfs have never been out at sea so far that they can't see land at all.
Gotta leave mummies basement to do that. And no flerf has escaped from that gravity well.
@@allgrainbrewer10 True! But wasn't there a flat earth cruise a few years ago?
@@scottplumer3668 Was it a round the globe cruise?
I've given up on science long ago, I'm only here for the dog.
Rusty is a wonderful dog.
@@0LoneTech it's sure is.
Given up on spelling too, apparently.
Without the dog he wouldn't have viewers. Wonder if he will debate Eric Dubay.
@@derp8575 You weren't satisfied with merely being wrong, had to be a weird rude arse about it too...
Flat earth Dave reminds me of the guys that sold us weed in high school. They were good at telling us we got a good “count” in our bag of weed. Then we got home and found a few small pebbles in the bag. Not a great analogy, but there are some similarities.
It's the _WATER MOUNTAINS_
b b b but water always finds it's "level" 🙃
@@rasmodeus1 As with many FE "-isms", that one is close but incomplete and they draw the wrong conclusions from it.
It's absolutely nuts that, with all the problems we face, someone like Dave has to spend his time defending the obvious...we are doomed.
Time and time again we see that the only way to make it work the way they claim it does is by cheating.
Yup. Like when Fa11zoid PHYSICALLY lowered the height of Polaris to force a constant 60nm per degree to work on Flatopia. Gotta lie to flerf.
@@ReValveiT_01 And he used the same excuse. He has to account for ‘perspective’ in the diagram. They all love their buzz words don’t they.
Of course because that’s all they are doing they assume that’s what things like gravity are.
I really love your demonstrations, even your scaled down examples work well.
As someone who is programming a 3d graphics engine as a hobby, and as such has some good understanding about perspective, it hurts so much to see these wrong diagrams by these flat earthers.
How is this flerfer Dave even relevant anymore?
Prof Dave DESTROYED HIM already.
And don't anyone cry about how MEAN Prof Dave was.
Flef Dave deserves all the derision he gets.
But... thanks for your vid today, Dave.
Somehow he still has over 100k followers.. 🙁
@@horisview
Yes, but how many are Globers who need to know when the next comedy show is uploaded ? 😁
@@horisview I'd say at least a fourth are normal people ("globers") who use their videos as content source to explain basic logic (and the video themselves as examples of flaws in logic) to everybody else on the internet.
@@Urban_SpacemanDo u have any vids where we can see u? How come all glober accounts r bot accounts?
@@InscentiveAdvice curiously most flattard accounts I visit also have no content or even a human created profile name so the accusation of being a bot applies equally well there too. My channel has no content because i don't create any.
Haha, they're literally Father Dougal in the Father Ted Cows clip!
Father Ted: OK, so once again... these are small but the ones out there are far away!
Oh right, Ted! But do they have a spider-baby?
The very first video I ever watched about Flat Earth 4 years ago had me pull up that Father Dougal quote, and nothing has changed. They still get confused by the size of things.
@@ziploc2000 "They still get confused by the size of things."
The main one being how big a 9,000 mile diameter globe is and how flat it looks when you stand at sea level on it.
Whats this "a 6 ft man is always looking down", I thought "the horizon always rises to eye-level"?
flerfspective is time-variable
No two flerf explanations are too likely to fit together...
so, basically, flat-earthers believe there are permanent waves popping up between people and ships. They never go away, but always stay between the viewer and the ship.
Flat earthers dont believe anything other than the earth isnt a globe.
Can't wait for the dribbling eejits to turn up all pretending they went to art school and know how perspective works..
Another thing is hills; if you drive to the hill the background would disappear bottom to top until you get to the top of the hill then the background would appear the reverse top to bottom.
Can they even get ANYTHING right?...any less brain power used and they forget to breathe...
Reminds me of a certain joke about a tape player saying "breath in, breath out" over and over again.
They sure can! And when they do, they realize that the Earth isn't flat and become the target of ire, courtesy of their former peers.
@@randomnpc445 but then, are they flat-earthers anymore?
Flerf1: "Ughhh! Curses, their science and logical thinking have thwarted our attacks once again!"
Flerf2: "What do we do? We're defenseless against a power that immense!"
Flerf1: "We still have one final chance... and they have forced my hand! I have to use 'that' technique."
Flerf2: "W-what?! You don't mean...?!"
Flerf1: "Yes, the ultimate power move; "Nu-Uh!". And after I've used it, we will block the accursed Globers on all platforms! No matter what they throw at us, their attacks will never pierce the mighty walls of Echo Chamber! Our victory is assured!"
Nu-uh, and the allmighty, allnightly "flerf reset"
I've been banned from countless flat earth channels for simply bringing up problems with their model. For a group of people who constantly tell you to question everything and hate censorship, it's quite odd behaviour.
I'm old enough to imagine these Flerf1 and Flerf2 guys to be wimpy villains of Batman and Robin.
"Wham!"..."Punch!"..."Pow!"
Stay tuned next week (for another Flerf-destroying video from Dave)...same Bat-time...same Bat-channel! 😁✌️🌎⚓
@@joerichardson4325 🤣 "get the....flerf..repellant spray!!"
@alvin2021 Same here. I think I simply pose logical questions regarding their flat hypothesis, that they suddenly realize they have no answer for. Their only possible response is a shadow ban.
l love how they used to say that you could see the ships no matter how far they are and we cant see them only bc our cameras are fish lenses, but now here they are trying to show how it could work in a flat earth. lm actually amazed how this creatures are alive with such small brains.
Flat Earthers: "The ship gets smaller and smaller because of distance"
Also Flat Earthers: "The sun is close and orbiting above the earth but doesn't get smaller for... reasons"
So we've known for quite some time that they don't have one single unified model. Then we've figured that they can't explain seasons and day/night on the same model. And now they can't even explain 2 simple observations using one (their) logic. Brillant.
Every time you post a video, i feel better and better about my intellegence. Thanks, Dave.
Easier way to debunk the wave theory: if waves were the cause, the ship would keep appearing-dissapearing, for obvious reasons.
The funniest thing about this entire three foot wave argument is that waves are not consistent. They're literally called waves for a reason. Even IF this argument was true, the ships would be appearing and disappearing constantly as the waves rise and fall. Plus, they act as if the ocean is the only place where you can see a horizon. Have you ever been to a salt flat that goes of for many, many miles? There are no waves there, but if you drive a car miles away, it will slowly disappear below the horizon.
They claim that salt flats prove the Earth is flat...
You've fabulous patience!
The calculator he's got on screen that gave him the 3ft figure literally says "above the eyeline"
It bothers me that they think waves wouldn't move out of the way, making this argument stupid even if it worked somehow
It's almost as if rather than a transient wave blocking the view, it's something more permanent, like, oh, I don't know, the curvature of the earth. They can't see for looking.
The only clever thing about flat earthers is their channel names.
The flat earth pencil example is really good. It shows that if you are above a flat plane looking out to sea you could clearly see 30 ships lined up at equal distances and none of them would obstruct the view of the other ships. However, if one of the ships is far out and twice as tall as the other ships it would block the view of the ships behind it. So a wave out there would have to be twice as tall as the ship. Have flat earthers ever been to a beach? On vacation I’ve seen massive ships far in the distance disappear behind a small yacht. Perspective. Also the ships no matter their size disappear bottom up. Only possible on a globe.
U really think earth is a ball?
@@InscentiveAdvice The Earth is not a "ball", it's a Globe, Spheroid.
This has been measured, tested, observed and recorded.
There is No Flat Earth World map that's Not a projection of the Globe with distance scale that matches known Navigation.
There is No Flat Earth Model without constant contradictions that can be used to make accurate predictions with.
There is No experiment that can be repeated, where the variables are accounted for, that demonstrates the Earth is flat, Not a globe.
You reject measured, tested, observed and recorded evidence, because you aren't looking for facts, or the truth, but are looking to defend your Faith even if it includes being dishonest.
He thinks a 3ft wave is taller than a full sized ship when the ship is VERY far away.
To be fair, this is the least wrong flerfs have ever been about perspective. They still aren't in the same galaxy as the correct application, but they're getting closer!
Rob Skiba was VERY good at that. He was studied, professional christian apologist that had specialized in the subspecies christian flat earthers.
He built up good-looking demonstrations, made reasonable assumptions, made reasonable things and even measured and calculated so that you really had to watch out where he smuggled in his trick, some wrong assumptions, wrong value or whatever.
That then was just left for a while untouched, to let it settle, that you do not question it, accept it as "will probably be OK".
And 5 or 10 minutes later he jumped back to this point, and then exploited it into total madness.
He was really good. No one remotely comparable remained.
The skilfullness of his trickery for the relatively recent flattardia lets me wonder how perfected the 2000-year-refined trickery for christian apologism is...
And then he kills himself by refusing to accept Covid as something real.
Like Flat Earth Focker. Or Meat Loaf.
Do these people not understand that waves aren’t stationary? How big does a wave need to be if it can permanently hide an aircraft carrier in the middle of the ocean with an observer height of 60 feet?
Higher than approx 30' swells! I posted on here about my experience in 1987 onboard the USS Nimitz crossing The Horn/Drakes Passage in wintertime. Worst sailing weather in the world!
Also, I haven't seen any comments about how the waves actually lift the ships, instead of playing hide-and-seek/peekaboo with them.
😁✌️🌎👻
Now my face is sore from seeing DITHR's miles getting closer together in his side-on view. What a numpty!
*TRH, i think it stands for Deep Inside The Rabbit Hole.
@@irrelevant_noobOh, I thought it was to do with him ditherering around the truth 😄
I would love to a fly on the wall when a flat earther says, “Oh shit! (I’ve been living a lie)” But we know that almost never happens. You can’t take the Forrest out of a Gump.
I am extremely glad that you put everything in understandable terms because attempting to Wrap my head around how a flat Earther thinks actively gives me a headache because I can't figure out what they're trying to say,
It’s fascinating to me that flat earthers all judge things from the perspective that they are 6 feet tall.
Only 14.5% of males are 6 feet tall, or more.
It strikes me that flat earthers are quite insecure, which is why they all assume that they are at least 6 feet in height.
It’s hilarious.
There’s nothing wrong with being smaller than 6 feet. That is most of the world.
Dave had his stuff shrinking into THE SURFACE not the eye line. That lets him sneak in some drop on a flat Earth.
His "we see in perspective view" is such an old con line flerfs have long used to blatently add perspective compression meaning the compression is doubled. Dave's use of it to shrink the distance and so justify an even quicker compression is new to me. I wonder where he got it from.
Wait, waves move. When I'm out on the ocean, the waves around me are moving, never standing still. So if a wave is blocking the view to the ship, all you would need to do is wait and eventually the wave will move out of the way.
Why can’t I see Paris from the UK? Are three foot high waves obstructing it? 😂
I can't see NYC or Chicago from Colorado either. Even from the top of Mount Elbert with a telescope. It must be the 3 foot tall dust waves.
No, but there are a bunch of French men waving EU flags and making rude remarks about English coconuts at the French channel coast, just to piss off the brexiteers. With all the air turbulence generated by the flags Paris becomes too hazy to see. 😜
Boats get smaller with distance but waves don't. Okay then.
Unlike cows of course
I have a background in engineering and technical drawing, and without seeing pictures or doodling diagrams, it is completely obvious, that on a flat earth, a 6ft person will ALWAYS be looking down on a 3ft wave, no matter how far away it is. If that line of sight is always downwards, then the wave can’t possibly obscure anything bigger than itself beyond it; it doesn’t matter where the wave is, it doesn’t matter where the object is. It would only be possible on a curved surface where the wave effectively shortens the distance to the horizon (the wave BECOMES the horizon). Only one option can be correct; 3ft wave obscures 250ft ship, or, the earth is flat. It can’t be both; pick one.
I think flat earthers believe that things actually get smaller when they move away from you. Most children develop an understanding that this is not the case when they are 3-5 years old, but it's still a level of critical thinking that's too advanced for flat earthers.
I'd just like to remind everyone that these people are dedicating their entire lives to being wrong, it's really mind-blowing when you think about it.
It would be if they had minds to be blown.
I don't know how people can misunderstand such simple concepts, yet be so confident and patronizing to everyone that does. Dave McKeegan is doing an amazing job of balancing the dumb, with such concise explanations. Well done! 👍
It’s because they don’t want to understand. They only look for confirmation bias for their worldview. Any amount of actual understanding would demolish that worldview.
Then there are the grifters like Weiss, Jeran, Dubay, etc. that prey on the ignorant and gullibility of their followers. They give plausible sounding explanations that their followers accept because they never look into it more.
DIRT is a fraudster he makes his living from this.
Challenge to flerfs. How big would a wave have to be to appear 3ft tall 5 miles away like DIRTH shows?
People's feet are different size, so the answer is 3ft.
Are you daring to introduce concepts like angular size here? If so that's an unutterably dastardly move.
@@ShizukuSeiji Yeah. Like how could waves have angles, when the water is flat?
The Flat Earther "perspective" argument is a Reification Fallacy, and in DIRTHs case, also a Texas Sharpshooter Fallacy.
It's not based on the physical size of a/the object (Ship) its based on how its drawn/ shown.
Because the closer object is drawn/ depicted LARGER it will obstruct the SMALLRR drawn/ depicted object bottom up.
This is what is meant when a Flat Earther says... "perspective".
7:28 The transition from the still frame of don't sphere the truth's video to the wider view of the diagram was beautifully executed. Bravo, Dave!
Well ,......ships operate under Maritime Law , so a Flerf under Common Law would just say "I do not consent ! " , problem solved !
Are you talking about the flerf, or the FLERF, which is the legal corporation representing the flerf while he's traveling in a conveyance, not sailing in a ship? Or something!
The Living Sovereign Flerf all rights reserved UCC 1-308 ( probly ! )@@PeteC62
Oh god that is so funny. Combining flat earthers and sovereign citizens.
They are both equally deluded , stupid , and just plain wrong !
@@Fred2-123
@@Fred2-123 tragically Sov Shits are much more dangerous than flerfs.
"Natural undulation" obstructing ANY kind of object for ANY observer (height) is already in the comment to Fig. 85 of Samuel Rowbotham's 1885 book.
He simply postulates that a fitting wave bulge exists for EVERY observation.
Usually waves are not alone, but are a pattern.
You have the parameters obscured height, object distance, observer height - from that you can calculate the height of the wave bulge for various differences
When you do a continuous observation, you will be able to see where the crest of the wave bulge is - when the ship starts to disappear. and slowly wanders down the far slope of the wave bulge Continually, not bobbing up and down over multiple crests.
Problem is that with different observer heights, the points where the ship starts to disappear is different - that would mean there are multiple wave bulges in different distances. And while for a lower observation point the ship already wanders DOWN "its" near bulge, it still moves UP the more distant bulge behind it then will disappear for the higher observation point. And still up another bulge for an even higher observation point.
Would there really be one single continuous wave bulge - or the bulge of the curvature of the globe?
Flerfs say “The wave obscures the ship but magnification brings it back into view.”