Flat Earther Fails Miserably to Debunk the Globe
HTML-код
- Опубликовано: 9 сен 2024
- Flat Out Truth thinks they can explain why people in the Southern Hemisphere can't see Polaris. The trouble is, his explanation is poor. Watch to find out just how poor it is. Enjoy...
Thanks for watching.
Here is the SciManDan website. Please do check it out: scimandan.co.uk/
Dan's opinions shared in this video are supported by verified facts (whether scientific or general) and they should be treated as just that: opinions. All critique and humour are addressed to the words and actions of individuals and not to the individuals themselves, under the Act of Free Speech.
'You can't see Polaris from the South because you can't see Polaris' ... Got it!
Rusty knows better😅
Just wait till the flat earhter's learn about Sigma Octantis, and how you can get circular stare trails around it like you can with Polaris. also how would they explain 2 people in Australia, one in Sydney, one in Perth, both facing their south, while both be looking at Sigma Octantis while looking to their south at the same time, yet facing different directions to each other on their FE map
It's because you used the wrong lens. 😅
Just kidding. Looking forward to your next video. 😊
You guys are meant to seek truth and preach truth and yet don’t maintain intellectual honesty.
Deceivers like you and Dan are disgusting.
You know full well a good explanation for why Polaris cannot be viewed and yet you don’t give that explanation because you do not speak truth you deceive.
I almost spit my coffee all over during his flashlight demonstration, as he clearly points the flashlight downward to try to fake his point.
Yup! Dishonest and cowardly.
It never ceases to amaze me how little these people understand pretty much anything, but tries to explain everything
using 5 year old logic😂😂😂😂😂
Its adorable isn't it?
They know absolutely nothing, with 100% confidence. 😂
Cause all they have is their "friend" common sense. Any one can immediately see it doesn't make sense but for them it's the winning point.
I looked at his channel its all about God
The streetlights are on, but nobody's home.
I don’t understand how the dude says “if you use a good enough telescope you can always bring it back into view,” but then says you can never see Polaris from the “Southern sky” because it’s too far away. HOMIE YOU JUST SAID ALL YOU NEED IS A GOOD ENOUGH TELESCOPE. So go on then, pull out your telescope from the southern hemisphere and bring Polaris back into view!! This is legitimately one of the most obvious contradictions in a flat earth argument I’ve ever seen, and I’ve seen plenty..
Ah yes, but you're forgetting about perspective. You know, that magic thing that means you're wrong for... reasons.
"Perspective" really is the flat earther's catch-all "a wizard did it" argument, isn't it?
Yes. The nature of perspective is not fully understood by many people and completely (perhaps deliberately) misunderstood by flat earthers. They claim that perspective causes distant objects to disappear - progressively from the bottom up. In reality there is no "down" to perspective as it is rotationally symmetrical.
One of their magic words, just like density and bouancy are to explain away their "alternative" for gravity..
Or maybe we are all suffering from the Mandalia Effect and "thought we were taught the world was a sphere"
@@pbehlerI need mandella my way into some money
And another thing they don't understand at all.
I asked Mark Sargent the same 'Why is there only one North pole, but infinite South poles?' He replied 'there is no South, it's just a weaker North.' Amazing. He thinks he has discovered a monopole. WTF?
Should ask him How do you navigate then, LOL
Mark Sargent is a monopole.
He probably doesn’t even realize how scientifically monumental finding a monopole would be.
"There is no south, just a weaker north"...
Wow
That's the limpest word salad yet
His mama needs to spank him for being so incredibly STUPID 😂
I love the way he claimed his spot light had disappeared when it clearly hadn't.
That demo was the nail in the coffin that this guy is knowingly lying. He turns it to point at the floor at @6:13 It's Gigantor palming a lighter all over again.
@@RustyWalker oh my god he is!
Yep!
@@RustyWalker Like CC with his Venus imaging ... when he almost got Venus into focus, correctly showing its gibbous phase, he quickly defocused the image.
Additionally, it’s a poor representation of someone standing about 6 feet above the surface watching an object that’s allegedly a few thousand miles high move a few thousand miles away. The camera is probably several times higher up than the flashlight.
Come to think of it, the light should be at about a 45 degree angle relative to that camera
Did he try to block the light from the flashlight by pointing it into the ground to try to confirm his point?
He did and it still didn't disappear!
@@cambridgemart2075 absolutely comical
"You can't see the sun at night because it rotates out of your view"
"You can bring the sun back into view if you zoom in far enough"
So how does night even happen?! 😆 Gotta love flerfs' circular logic.
One can bring back the sun into view by zooming, but no zoom is strong enough to bring Polaris into view from the Southern hemisphere. Got it.
He broke both legs doing those mental gymnastics.
He doesn't have a leg to stand on.
I enjoy their apparent theory that light travels a certain distance and then just shrugs and gives up
The "Pratchett" theory of light 😅
I think it's more like they think vision occurs at the object rather than in the eye.
Tired light is a class of hypothetical redshift mechanisms that was proposed as an alternative explanation for the redshift-distance relationship. This is no longer consider valid.
Their attempts at replacing the horizon are always one of three things: Magic light, magic eyes or magic air. You are describing the light that gets plum tuckered out. I ask them if it falls to the ground when that happens. Can I catch it in a bucket?
I am amused by how the light decides to travel farther to eyes that are at a higher elevation....😂
In their Flatopian "model" the stars are all stuck on the inside of their mythical "dome" and the sun is floating around inside the dome. This means that when I look at a sunset and see stars RIGHT ON THE HORIZON where the sun "went too far away to see", I can still see the tiny dull stars that are further away, yet I can't see that massive bright ball that's actually closer to me.
Ladies and gents: Flerf physics.
Well, that's actually a very good counter argument. But then they come with something like "nobody knows what stars are, and the moon is an illuminati, and nobody knows how high the sun and the moon are, and how far away the dome is (but rockets bounce off of it, but we have no idea how high this would be)" … and on and on it goes. I still don't know what these people really think (or if it can be called thinking, let alone reasoning).
@@c.augustin The vast majority of flerfs claim that the stars are lights on the "firmament", and that the sun and moon are circling around inside the "firmament". Of course, ask them for evidence of this and they will instantly claim that they "claim nothing", but they totally do.
This is a good point but they don't actually have a coherent theory so they just change it whenever it's convenient for them. If you say this to them they'll just say that the sun is actually outside the dome, or (my personal favorite) that everyone has their own personal dome, however the hell that's supposed to work.
You forgot that this all happens atop of a giant turtle’s back that is swimming through the aether.
Ask them why the stars revolve in the opposite direction in the southern hemisphere, be prepared with plenty of aspirin.
His sun argument tells me everything I need to know about the level of knowledge of flat earthers. It really does.
I honestly don't think they know how to make an argument, or how to express something scientifically significant or meaningful. It's precisely because they can't recognise when something of substance is being said that they are so suspicious of real (even very basic) science, and reject it.
He doesn’t even need fancy science to test if someone in South America can see the sun over North America. He just needs to FaceTime somebody in South America.
This might make your day I have a college friend who’s believed in flat earth no matter what anyone told him, but I directed him to your Chanel in June and when I saw him last week he thanked me for showing him your Chanel as he can finally see how much an idiot he made himself out to be 😮
Holy hell... Some of them can be saved after all. Way to go man, you did a good thing. Gives me a bit of hope haha.
A college person with such low levels of reasoning ?
Wow, college really is in decline these days
@@censortube3778
gender studies major.
@@johnqpublic7608 not shore he didn’t finish after his scholarship ran out, he works in a steel mill now days
Imagine being as thick as a brick and then earnestly setting about demonstrating to the entire world just how brickishly thick you really are.
It is adorable how they run with that "glare sunset" again and again.
One should tell them "When this is true, set your P900 at medium zoom, watch how the sun sets, and when the last bit of the circle has definitely disappeared, THEN zoom out and pull the sun back up over the horizon and make it visible again. Should be no problem for you, or?"
They could bring the sun back into view if they watched it set from the base of a tall building and then took a quick ride to the top in a lift (elevator). I've heard that you can even see the sun set twice just by watching it while lying down on the beach and then standing up.
it's always a giveaway to me that they're just lying and have never tested anything themselves when I hear them say you can just bring things back into view.
I used to live near the ocean and I was able to watch ships disappear *with a telescope.* There's no amount of zoom that can make an object come back.
@@unnamedenemy9 Normal people of moderate mental capacity know that it's not about zooming in on something already gone over the horizon - flerfs just don't care about reality.
Love that graphic from Professor Dave with the three people on the flat disc all looking different directions but seeing the same stars. Truly one of those flerf destroying moments.
I thought I recognized that…
Everything he says proves the globe. Is he a double agent?
At 4:50, he doesn't even need to wait for 1 am. If he can bring it back just 5 minutes after sunset (without gaining altitude) I'd concede.
5:36 I can see all the street lights descending with a plane to the airport. Also, you can’t see street lights some blocks away because some friggin houses are blocking it. Same with our earth blocking our view to Polaris from the southern hemisphere.
Or just going up a few floors on a tall building, or on a hill overlooking a town. It's amazing how one can suddenly see all these "too far away to see" streetlights.
So I can see Polaris in the UK as it's 1938 trillion miles away but in Australia it's 1938 trillion and about 10,000 miles so that's too far. Got it.
This is the same community that sometimes claim the human eye can only see 3 miles.
@@mjjoe76tell them how high planes fly
What amazes me, is that a pre-school toddler can have such a deep voice🤔
Helium ….😮
Chewing tobacco is a snack in some primary schools, apparently.
It's what happens when the toddlers brain remains a toddler, whilst the rest of his body grows up to adulthood. The resultant mismatch has a rather nasty tendency to either turn you into a conspiracy theorist or Donald Trump. Or both, actually.
Big balls?
Voice changing software.
I wish he would then explain why Polaris is lower in the sky the closer you get to the equator.
Not only that, but almost exactly matches your latitude.
Polaris gets tired if you look at it too long...
@@chrisantoniou4366 that's a great explanation!
The very simple reason is "perspective buoyancy induced refractive electromagnetic convergence reciprocity failure". Everyone knows that.
@@coolcat23what salad dressing would you recommend with their word salad? 🥗😄
If the Earth was so Flat the sun would be visible at all times. It would not go “too far away to see”. Look at all the stars that are farther away but still visibly still shining their light to us. Love it when Flat Earthers show the sun shinning a conical light like a shaded torch beam.
The fantasy world that the flerfs live in just boggles the mind !!! ROFL
As an amateur astrophotographer, it physically hurts me watching him try to use stars as evidence when they're probably one of the most intuitive evidences against flat earth
The most beautiful proof for a globe earth are telescope mounts, especially alt-az german mounts. Once aligned with polaris, it can track the CIRCULAR movement of the stars with ONE axis! This would be impossible if we were not on a spherical rotating body...just beautiful
He "knows", he "believes".
What he doesn't do is _understand."_
Especially with the southern hemisphere as they tend to make that the outer section… how do they think people in the southern hemisphere all see the southern cross?
@@moxbroker And more fundamentally, how can he explain the stars rotating around a different celestial pole here in the southern hemisphere? You can watch the rotation just like in the north, just without a polaris equivalent at it’s centre. And it rotates clockwise in the south, and anticlockwise in the north. I imagine there’re some baroque attempts to explain it, but it’s clearly best explained by a globe spinning.
I totally agree. This whole globe Earth is a pain in my butt. Just the fact that I won't ever see certain deep sky objects because of my location (unless I move to the southern hem) or the fact that certain planets are only available to be seen during certain months of the year and certain times of the night. And don't get me started on those pesky moons casting shadows on Jupiter for hours when you photography it.
And next, flat earthers should explain why the constellation Crux (also called Southern Cross) can be seen in South Africa, Australia, New Zealand, Chile and Argentina at the same time but not in the Northern Hemisphere
And by projecting the long axis 4.5 times always point south.
and not just at the same time, but *all* by looking south -- which using the azimuthal equidistant map idiots like Flat Out Truth use would actually be three different directions.
That's easy... it's because of perspective 😂
I was told by a flerf that the stars are reflected off the dome so all people in the south can see the Southern Cross. Must be some sort of magical mirror.
@@j.hueston4370 uuh that mental gymnastics are off scale :D
my mom is a flat earther and i must say thank you for you aid in keeping me well equipped with counter arguments
I'm so sorry for your loss.
Put yourself up for adoption
im 20 now lol its fine she just combines her religious beliefs with her distrust of the government as her evidence. her argument always breaks down when i get specific and she resorts to "stop getting mad" or "so you dont believe in god?"
@@user-rl4cg5mx7t
@@clipsdaily101 best avoid the subject. She’s still your mum, and hopefully she’ll come around of her own accord.
Pay her a trip to Ushuaia, Argentina, close to December 21 (summer solstice in southern hemisphere). Boat trips being the antarctic polar circle will allow her to witness the midnight sun in the southern hemisphere
I lost it at the street light analogy. He's a grown adult, using an explanation a 10-year old could debunk in seconds. Why are they all so utterly dense?
I've recently had several amusing conversations with flerfs where I asked them to explain the south celestial pole on a flat earth. The lengths they'll go to deny this simple fact is hilarious.
I even had one guy accept a bet where I'd travel to the southern hemisphere to the make such a recording myself (became apparently all the existing recordings don't count), only to back out when I insisted we put the money in escrow first.
And, of course, it makes you wonder why no flerf has gone south of the equator to film the southern stars speeding by, circling a point to the distant north. If the earth actually were flat, this would be completely undeniable proof. Yet they never do it. It's almost as if they know they're wrong. 🤔
Honestly, the amount of mental gymnastics Flat Earthers will do just to avoid admitting the Earth is indeed round, is amazing.
a globe - not round. Their earth "modell" is also round - at least some of the models... sometimes... ah, forget it - it doesn't matter 😅
So much so I think it's all a massive joke
Occam's Razor but backwards. Because they have their Flat Earth concept as the starting point of all their logic, they have to make increasingly complicated alternate explanations to any fact that makes sense on a Globe Earth but not on a flat one. This is also why there is no one agreed upon unified Flat Earth theory. If you use logic and try to fit multiple of these convoluted explanations, they will fail to work in the same model. Globe Earth (reality) works together and makes sense, Flerfers have a hundred conflicting theories that all explain some random thing, but not the other proof that works on a Globe.
@@Asko83 It really is because they all have some sort of mental disorder. Look up "whole object recognition". They will never admit, that their theories are conflicting. The reason behind that reasoning is that they are - like all kids under 5 years - locked in serious black and white thinking. People are either only good or only bad. Things are either only white only black. There is no in between.
But because you never can explain the world with all its complex aspects and correlations with that disability, it is perfectly normal to "split" things. So, if someone or something doesn't fit the "good" or "white" bucket, it is no problem to quickly put them into the "bad" or "black" bucket within a few minutes.
This is why everything in their mental models is so inconsistent, but they honestly cannot sense that. They will never admit that something doesn't fit or is conflicting. No problem, just adjust the buckets in which those conflicting things are.
This is also one of the underlying problem of borderline personality disorder or narcissism. People in relationship with such disabled ones think that they are getting "gaslighted" by their disabled partner. Reality is always getting twisted by those people, until you are not sure anymore what really has happened in the past. It is obvious that this doesn't happen intentionally, but is simply a symptom of missing "whole object recognition".
I've thought about that a lot.
Too wild and fantastical to think it's a sphere, so instead they explain it in a way that violates every law of physics and reads more like a Lord Of The Rings script and then say THAT is much more believable.
People are not born that stupid. They have to work really hard for it!
Practice makes perfect
So "Flat Out Truth" explains pretty much EVERYTHING with "perspective" and "too far away". There's this little issue, though, with why the stars appear to rotate in opposite directions on separate hemisphere and also why we can observe a celestial equator.
Looks like the dome rotates in different directions and can't be seen from everywhere because it's too far away. Or perspective probably. Or magic. It's really really simple.
@@billyturner1784 Yeah.. maybe he could have trotted out the "personal dome".
Among all the many, many issues flerfs have when it comes to trying to explain how their "model" fits reality, the fact that they can explain every phenomenon and how it works on a flat earth in isolation but as soon as it needs to work in conjunction with other things and how it can predict anything it doesn't hold up. At best you'll get a "we don't know yet" or some special pleading, mostly it's either crickets or distractions.
and why the moon looks upside down
@@RustyWalker Oh yeah, I forgot about that little gem. I'm sure it's perspective which I also blame for my underseasoned lunch
I love how easy it is to explain for the sphere shape... yet for the flat earth there's some mental gymnastics required to somehow claim you can't see it... despite claiming they can "bring the sun back"
Odd that he didn't wait until the sun set completely before zooming in on it. I wonder what would happen if he did that.
How can we expect him to believe in a spherical earth when he has never been taught how to say curvature correctly.
Oooh fair point 🤔😉😂
You have to use an Aussie accent for correct pronunciation… 😜
You beat me to it.
They are curvature intolerant.
I noticed that too. Half the time he was saying “curvachee.” The other half it was something like “curvaturavachee.”
"Science will tell you.." Yep, pesky science and its annoying accuracy.😄
Why cant the observatories down here in Australia see polaris? We have some pretty big telescopes.
We can't see it because the label on the star chart doesn't say *sᴉɹɐloԀ*
Well clearly they must be paid off by NASA, or otherwise be part of the Great Conspiracy... which by now must necessarily include an utterly massive chunk of the planet's population. You'd think all us conspiracy members would just openly take over already, we have more than enough people by now surely.
Hah! You don't have a Nikon P900!
@@billyturner1784 I think only flat earthers buy the P900
@@johncoops6897 😅
The reveal that you can see the same sun from north and south america, and indeed africa, and indeed austrailia was very well written.
Wait, wait, wait... I thought the stars were stuck in the firmament. So how is Polaris "too far away"?
I’m confused, North Pole? If the earth is flat, then it would be the Central Pole? I’ve never heard any flat earthers call it the Central Pole.
The Hub. As in hub-wards and rim-wards rather than north and south.
If the flat earth is an unmoving, infinite plane then what is the significance of the North Pole? Answer: it’s where Santa lives!
That’s great👍🏻
There is a great series on YT called What If, they had a segment „what if the earth was really flat“ that’s worth a watch.
They can't really talk about it too much because you can only tell what's the center of a flat plane if you know where the edge is.
they keep going off "ZOOMING" to bring their boat back in view
but never STAY on that boat zoomed in
that boat will STILL disappear bottom up
I just love his demonstration where the ‘sun’ remains visible throughout
yeah, that was very helpful of him!
These folks with their ignorance and arrogance. Thanks Dan.
He thinks darkness prevents bright lights from being seen.
Darkness is the absence of light. lomgic /s
This is the guy who still owes Wolfie and MCToon $100,000 each.
Nah that’s Flat Out Hero.
The more they talk, the more convinced I am of the sphere. 😁
Flat Earth is the easiest to debunk by just keeping asking questions they can not answer... Some of them will go very angry, some will talk themself into a corner they never will get out of and most of them just rage-quit....
I'd love to hear his definition of "perspective," which seems to mean "field of view." I wonder if it's in any dictionary. Oh, and his "explanation" didn't address why Polaris's elevation decreases as you go south until at the equator it is at the horizon.
His "explanation" didn't address _anything_.
These types don't have a great vocabulary, and believe words carry inherent meaning that one can simply intuit. "If I have to explain it to you, you clearly don't understand!" These folks regard words as gluons - elementary particles that cannot be further explained.
I came here to say that.
@@AndyCutright I've had that said to me in a different context. My reaction is "When I don't understand is exactly when you do have to explain it!"
"You cannot see polaris from the southern hemisphere because its so far away"
The just cannot grasp the scale of all this can they, the extra distance polaris would be away from someone in the southern hemisphere to someone in the nothern hemisphere would have to be absolutely miniscule as a percentage.
But they don't accept that the stars are as far away as they actually are. They claim that they are much closer and much smaller so, by their logic, the relative distance to Polaris from the northern hemisphere and the southern would be significant. I'm still not sure how it could be significant enough to make it invisible from the south even with a very powerful telescope of how that explains it getting closer to the horizon and finally dipping below it as you travel south, but they can never explain everything with one model.
Hard to believe so many of this 'communuty' have not just been hit by but battered by the stoopid stick..🤦♂️
Apparently flat earth exists because "can't SEE the curve" but Polaris can't be seen down here in Australia yet we're the wrong one?
You could go out with Iron Horse in these days and tell him
"Look, the sun now rises and sets about 12 degrees SOUTH of due east and west, and is in the north at noon.
How is that, on the flat earth the sun MUST be ALWAYS to the north of Australia, and MUST circle a complete circle in 24 hours.
At sunrise and sunset the sun MUST be physically more that 45 degrees NORTH of our location when we see its light (dis)appearing south of due east/west.
How and why does the light bend around about 60 degrees in the horizontal plane to appear where we see it?
What did God intend with that? (as Iron Horse is a christian literalist)"
Iron Horse would have his eyes closed, finggers in his ears and sing Lalala...
Australia is a "floating island" or " unknown land area that move to different locations" according to the flerps. They cant explain how and why the australians dont fall off the earth since they are on the bottom.. they "should" fall off like the water does on a ball..
No flerp so far have got a good explanation how all bruce^s in australia manage to avoid falling off the earth.. their water experiments show that all bruce^s should have fallen off the earth a long time ago..
There must be a star which is close to the southern pole (I don't know which) and visible only in the southern hemisphere, therefore visible ONLY around the edge of their flat world map, not the centre. How would they explain that? Magic perspective again?
@@gdclemoBasically, yes. They invent increasingly bizarre mechanisms to try and explain why the southern stars can't be seen.
Considering that one of the flat-Earth subsets is "Australia isn't real" you're lucky that he even acknowledges your existence.
The moment Flat Out Truth starts talking anyone from the southern hemisphere can immediately recognise that they're about to get talked down to by someone who doesn't live in the southern hemisphere and has probably never attempted any astronomical observations from south of the equator.
And of course, isn't it super weird that a Nikon P950 can't zoom in far enough to see Polaris from the southern hemisphere?
I remember my first day in the southern hemisphere, visiting Sydney, and in Hyde Park I saw the waxing gibbous moon rising...and it was indeed upside down relative to the horizon. So I sketched out on the hotel stationery how that works on a globe starting at about 45 degrees north until Sydney's latitude, and it made perfect sense. It's been years now and I still can't figure out how that would work on a flat earth.
He hasn't attempted any proper astronomical observations at all.
@@RustyWalker Why would he need to? His armchair astronomy is all he requires!
@@ZahaqielFor sure he makes this shit up as he goes, it must sound really good in his mind.
Him talking about "hemisphere", "equator", and "degrees north and south" is so funny.
Yeah, it's the "indoctrination", for sure. They can't even come up with proper terms for their "model" since it just makes no sense and the more concrete terms they would use, the easier it would be to disprove it. Though they like to keep it vague. Flatzoid has reached master level on that as he essentially states in debates now: "I make no claims"
How can a flat earthers talk about South of the equator, does not that infer a globe? Then he goes on about the southern hemisphere. A hemisphere is half a globe. Flat earth logic, no knowledge but knows everythink
@@chrisdeeley3775 Wel, he explained it in the beginning that he will be using those terms because then everybody knows what he's talking about. Though that was my main critique that they can't come up with descriptive terminology for their own model.
@@Bunny99s He said "Southern sky". What does South mean on a flat Earth?
@@petergaskin1811 On a flat earth "South" is conveniently every direction. Except Polaris. Polaris is North, where you can't see it.
You know they have zero evidence when they say "Think about it like this...".
love the way he says Australia is actually in the southern sky.
"Goes out of perspective"... what a fancy way of saying "goes behind the horizon" :)
Do they think that light arrives with a timestamp? Do our eyes check the timestamp to decide if they want to see it? Do our eyes say, "Nope, this light is too old. I'm not seeing that!"
It's more like they think that vision is happening at a distance. That is at the object that we are seeing.
That's the only explanation that I can figure out.
They don't get that vision happens in our eyes.
Maybe the photons make a conscious decision to only travel a few miles, then call it a day.
light from Polaris is ~450 years (plusminus some) old already. light from Betelgeuse is even older
@@rivenoakOlder still, actually. I read somewhere that photons take several thousand years to get from the core of a star to the surface, due to bouncing around the inner dense layers!
Amazing. Every single word the flerf just spoke was wrong.
how was "wanted" (0:47) wrong tho? Sure, the earlier "good", "morning", and "everyone" were arguably wrong, but still... EVERY word? 🧐
I love how they always say, “it’s really, really simple.” 😂 yet, here we are.
I saw a video pop up on my Reels on FB claiming that Polaris' fixed position in the sky while the other stars circle around it DISPROVES the Globe. Still trying to wrap my head around that one...
“As big and as bright as the sun is, you can’t see it when it’s dark!” Omg 😆 he’s so close.
I laughed when you said "bloody big planet in the way"
I was having a chat with a flatearther. He tried to tell me that Polaris was a fixed point of light and didn't ever move. Well let me tell you, it certainly does. When you polar align your telescope mount you have to adjust your alignment every time
And the newer reticles have year circles to account for axial procession.
I've tried to argue against them saying this but it doesn't go anywhere, they will just say you're wrong and start spewing every talking point they have
It pisses me off when he says something "just goes out of your perspective". This man has no idea what perspective means. He uses that word like it means that something just magically becomes invisible if it's too far away... like our vision has a limit and then things just "poof" stop to be visible. Which is ridiculous! Imagine if light just got tired after travelling for a while and decide to seize existing.. would be pretty damn cold on earth..
So by moving a few thousand km away, Polaris, the STAR, gets too far away and we cant see it anymore. Genius.
Great content. Free education for all flat earthers. They don't know how lucky they are, the fact you are willing to teach them for free. What a world we live in
I edited my comment and it got rid of my like from SciManDan savage.
Free education that is simply wasted on all flerfs as they don't want to learn anything. Such a shame.
Flat Earth "debates" always end up being physics lessons with a belligerent, stubborn student.
I propose a change from "What a world we live in" to "What a globe we live on" to annoy them.
@@Lleanlleawrg true but then we will be the same as them, if not worse, intellectually scoring cheap points on the slow kids in school
_„If you are in South America, can you see the sun over Canada?“_ - Yeah buddy! Absolutely!
Other than that, your own argument should tell you, that even day and night don’t make any sense on a flat earth.
the flat earth map is a big joke.. a parody.
Correct.
My daughter was just in Buenos Aires, and she saw the same sun as I did in California. What idiots these people are!
@@lokelaufeyson9931 I used to think that, but .. some of these people actually firmly believe that they are right and everyone else across all of history has been lying to them in some massive international conspiracy. I suppose he thinks that wars between countries are just staged to make it look like they're not actually cooperating to protect the ice wall and perpetrate the "hoax".
"Look at the sun with a telescope". Ultra high IQ.
His IQ seems to be burned away when he did that.....
i think its a good idea, let all flerps look at the sun with a high quality telescope. It sounds great. It will give them the proof they need to prove the flat earth and to you flerps, trust me bros.
Its the only way to get your proof.
Maybe it´s possible when the sunlight is tired and not excited enough to burn your eyes?? Rgr
Didn't you see the flattard's video where he stared with naked eye at the 2017 eclipse?
@@borano2031 yea, if you are lucky and look at the sun fromt he right distance the light have burned itself out so much so you can look at the sun with a telescope.. its only to contact the master engineer of flat earth and ask him to move the plate away a bit right?
I'm always surprised that these people can say the sun, moon, or starts do not set with a straight face. Just freaking go outside when the full moon is rising, you will see it rise from below the horizon. How can the same people constantly say 'looks flat, must be flat' or 'doesn't feel like we're moving, must be stationary' deny things everyone has seen?
Especially when it pops up from the horizon at its NORMAL FULL SIZE lmao. Same thing with setting; their argument would require that the sun and moon (more observably with the moon as it’s not too bright to look at), should gradually grow smaller and smaller around the horizon as it “leaves your perspective.” Meanwhile, we can all go outside and watch the full size moon just go below the horizon without getting any smaller. If anything it appears to be bigger around the horizon.
@@aaronmckone8973 Not to metion star trails are circles. If the earth were flat they would be eliptical to never cross the horizon. And the elipse would be more exagerated the further south you go.
They use the word perspective to explain the sun and moon getting farther away out of our sight without knowing how perspective actually works.
@@Power5 But... they don't get smaller. I get the stunts they pull with lense flares with the sun, but that doesn't work with the moon.
Love how he says the sun leaves your perspective... normally things shrink to a dot when they do that.
4.35. Love how he zooms in on a boat that is clearly in front of the horizon and claims he brought it back into view.
I predicted his answer was going to be perspective.
Which is funny, because flat earth perspective lets you see Polaris from anywhere on earth. He should work harder on the "limited light" therory.
I love how they cherry pick scientific papers that they think helps them and bound them around like it's their new bible, yet reject the papers that don't help them.
Everyone has their own biases, due to upbringing, experience, acquired knowledge; they aren't positive or negative in and unto themselves. It's when those biases are applied to, and in spite of, observed and measurable reality that they become negative. Claims need proof behind them to make them facts.
His channel name should be Flat Out Unsupported Claims.
That one who published their "bible" is a secret flat earther 😂..... the rest are written by ... what do they call it, Shills .. don't ya know
"Mainstream Science" is the one that always gets me!
My favorite expression for that is "they use the literature like a drunk uses a lamppost - more for support than illumination."
Should they actually read those papers, they'll find that they all disprove the holy wafer.
I'm from the UK but I have friends and relatives who live in Australia and New Zealand.
The first time that I went there I put my deck-chair into a sunny spot in the garden.
Before long I was in the shadow of the house :(
The Sun still rises in the East and sets in the West but at midday it's in the North.
This is an experiment that anybody could do but flerfs seem to be allergic to spending money :(
I've been to both Australia and Canada. In each country I saw a very different night sky. I've long wondered how flatties would explain this. Now I know.
I'm still a globie.
I've found a word that I think explains something and I'm going to use it repeatedly without ever explaining what it means.
"Today a flat earther is going to explain why" and totally fall flat on his face in the process.
Face palm protection ready.
Needed heavier protection.
Should use p900 to draw the north star closer to the southern hemisphere.
An overwhelming reason for not allowing flat-earthers to reproduce.
When I first heard about flat-earthers, I assumed that it was a tongue-in-cheek thing and they were pretending to believe that for laughs. I am dumbfounded that they really believe the earth to be flat.
They also know globe is a lie. Get educated
😂@@Globeisahoaxx
It's so annoying how they just don't understand that "too small to see with the naked eye", is not the same as it disappearing over the horizon.
Microbes are too small to see with the naked eye - but they exist.
Does FOT also deny the existence of microbes?
Today's news from flat earth: You can't see a flashlight that's three meters away.
But you can see Terry kneeling behind it .. and his hand holding it pointing straight down at the floor the lying git.
Flat earther fails to debunk the globe.
Well, that's a switch.
yea, we all know that the earth is a massive cube with 7 sides.. the flerps is wrong
A switch from them debunking the flat earth? He did that as well.
@@lokelaufeyson9931WHAT!?!? 7 SID....BLASPHEMY! THE FLAT EARTHS SHAPE WAS SCIENTIFICALLY PROVEN YEARS BEYOND A DOUBT AND.....what?
Of course I know what it looks like! It's yall followers of scientiscm that don't kno...Show it to you?, the hells that supposed to mean? Do your own research. You expect us to carry you! Hmph...show you...who do they think they are
4:36 ..... That boat is clearly NOT over the horizon ! 🤦♂
Bloody big earth in the way! 🤣😂
Classic!!
At this point, wouldn't it just be easier for flat earthers to claim that everything south of the equator is a hoax and doesn't exist? It doesn't make any less sense than this 'explanation'.
Buddy, did you miss out on the time they denied that Australia existed? Don't put it past them to deny a whole hemisphere just to make their belief fit.
Well, I live in Sydney and have never seen Polaris. Nobody has proved polaris exists therefore it doesn't. I reckon the whole of the Northern hemisphere is a conspiracy. 😊
This is definitely a tenable hypothesis, at least compared with flat earth.
I feel like some of them did try that at one point. They also claimed flights in the Southern Hemisphere didn’t exist. Some of them still lie about those.
I love the way he says "its really really simple". He does this to make you feel stupid for not understand his dumb explanation.
Polaris not being visible from southern hemisphere doesn't prove a globe but it completely disproves flat. What simpletons they are and what astounding misunderstanding of reality they have.
...There is no 'prove' with science. Proofs are for mathematics.
...Polaris not being visible from most of the southern hemisphere is possible 'evidence' that there is Earth's surface obstructing the observation.
So lampposts disappearing from sight a mile away or so prove that in a mile, the claimed obscured part is more than the height of the lampposts?
@@ComeJesusChrist "So lampposts disappearing from sight a mile away or so prove that in a mile, the claimed obscured part is more than the height of the lampposts?"
No, they prove that the spatial resolution of the (human!) eye is too low to resolve a thin pole a mile away. Funnily though their lights "reappear" at night. Magic, I say, magic. Or was it "perspective"?
@@qwertzundefinedapfel3830 It’s strange that now you globers claim that it is ‘spatial resolution’, which was simply just the claimed curvature before that never added up. It seems that you make it up as you go along.
@@ComeJesusChrist
"It’s strange that now you globers claim that it is ‘spatial resolution’, which was simply just the claimed curvature before that never added up."
Spatial resolution has *nothing* to do with the curvature of the earth but is a property of the human eyeball. The first hides things because there is a bloody big planet in the way of the line of sight, the second "hides" things from vision because they get too small once the resolution is not high enough to see them. And while the second issue can indeed be mitigated by a telescope or the infamous Nikon P1000 (or ex. a microscope in the case of microbes) no amount of zoom will bring something back into sight once its hidden behind the earth.
"It seems that you make it up as you go along."
No need to "make something up", buddy. Just simple physics.
I was waiting for the man to say something about the Dukes. He’s got the voice for it!
Oh! His answer was like stretching a rubber band as far as it can go, before it snaps to get this one!
i love how the best way to debunk them is to just make them try to explain what they mean or talking about
Thing is, flerfs usually misunderstand something about the globe model, misrepresent it and then say therefore flat earth. It's quite rare for them to present positive proof for the flat earth.
Like in many cases this explanation was misusing a word ("perspective") over and over and over.
Just ask them what exactly is "perspective" and how it obscures objects high *above* flat plane. Then watch them flounder.
They literally debunk themselves all the time, take any one explanation of their flat earth and combine it with another and it falls apart
its bad when a theory cant survive 1-3 hard questions.. It only show what kind of "quality and evidence requirements" the person who believe it have.
So im not too far out if i would claim that a flerp would believe me if i told them that the fart they smell came from the walls.. when we are 2 in the room and i release it.
Or the AC maybe?! .. according to my proof i haven't released it, im innocent.
Its always the dog that is guilty, everyone know that O.o
Oh, feeling left out of this one. Us poor Aussies hate missing out on a good laugh
"It's dark where you are."
I died.
Yeah, this alone shows how little he understands...
Imagine what would happen if he were to turn all that effort expended on the mental gymnastics required to prove the unprovable on something productive instead. The mind boggles!
I honestly did not think anybody out there thought the earth was flat. I’m stunned. Anyhow, thank you for taking the time for setting the record straight.
Have you searched YT and filter for channel?
What about flat earth groups and pages on FB, IG, TKTK
"We can bring the ship back by looking through a telescope"
Yeah because the ship isn't that far away yet. It "disappeared" because at that distance it seems so tiny it's smaller than your resolution.
However, even with infinite zoom and resolution, the ship would eventually disappear if it kept going away, and you'd probably notice that the last thing you'd see is the top of it's mast appearing to .. well, from his point of view "sink into the ocean" i guess he'd say.
He was also using a wide angle setting on his P900 the boat would still have been visible with his eyes.
@@dogwalker666 He doesn't really seem like the guy who'd go do his own experiments.
@@Lleanlleawrg it's obviously stolen video, Plus he said telescope when its obvious a low end zoom camera.
You can show how wrong he is by a simple thought experiment.
You take an 8x10 camera with its standard lens of 300mm and take a photo of a ship partially hidden by the horizon and make a print.
You then crop the negative down to the size of a 35mm negative and make another print.
If he was correct, you would now have two prints made from the same negative, one showing a half hidden ship and the other the full ship.
Obviously an impossibility.
> _"(...) it seems so tiny it's smaller than your resolution."_
I'm afraid he was trying to make the point that the same applies to stars: that they're not enormous and very far away but are overgrown lightbulbs o_0. Then again - that's basically a recapitulation of Terry Pratchett's magnum opus as bona-fide astrophysics... minus the elephants and the turtle, possibly...
Nothing like underestimating how far human eyes can actually see
There's actually no limit. No matter how far way something is, as long as it is big enough and emits sufficient light for that light to reach our eyes we can see it.
The important point is that "seeing" itself is a passive thing. You orient your eye towards something you want to see and light from an object may or may not reach your eye. If it does, you can see it, if it doesn't, you don't. Though how sensitive the eyes / cameras are to light depends on the contrast. If you have something really bright next to something dim, you would not see the dim object. However when it's dark, the relative brightness of dim objects is enough to see them
@@Bunny99s
The important thing is that it occurs in our eyes not at the object. I really think they don't understand that part.
@@Bunny99s That explains why if you stand an astrophysicist next to a flat earther you would not see the flat earther because it is much dimmer than the astrophysicist. It is only when the astrophysicist moves away that the flat earther becomes visible and then only just.
Well Polaris is 323 light years away...but this clown will probably claim its only a few miles...
He didn't think that through AT All 🤣
... any of it ...
You're the only real flat earth debunker that regularly posts videos.
They're so entertaining to watch and help to stop misinformation from spreading to those that don't know any better.
How are these people able to function in modern society?