It's not just a matter of seeing a 24 hour sun in Antarctica. Your model has to explain everything else all at once. Explain why you see a 24 hour sun in Antarctica while simultaneously there's 24 hours of darkness in the Arctic. Then you have to explain why the opposite happens when the Arctic experiences a 24 hour sun while simultaneously Antarctica experiences 24 hours of darkness. Also clarify what we're looking at in your model. Because it looks like if you're standing on Antarctica in your model you'd be facing north as you watch the sun do circles in the sky. If that's the case that's not what happens in Antarctica. In Antarctica the sun circles around you so at some point you're going to have to be facing south to see it.
When there is 24 hour darkness in the Arctic, the sun is too far from the centre (the North) so it’s light doesn’t reach these certain arctic territories. Vice versa when there’s 24 hour darkness in the south.
@@newborderssounds3832 do you not realize how that makes no sense at all? Jeran, Witsit and everyone are in Antarctica witnessing a 24 hour sun. They flew south from Chile to get to Antarctica. So imagine you're there standing in Antarctica south of Chile on the AE map. The sun is doing circles above flat earth so imagine the sun is now on the opposite side of the earth near Australia. How can you say the Arctic is too far away to get sunlight when at that point you're even further away from the sun yet you can still see the sun? Remember you're in Antarctica south of Chile and the sun is on the opposite side of the earth which means the Arctic is in between you and the sun but somehow you can see the sun but no one in the Arctic can.
It's easy to understand. The Earth is a complex device designed to simulate people living on a rotating ball that orbits a far away source of light. The device is so complicated, it even simulates a moon orbiting the Earth Machine. There are also simulations of other "planets" that orbit that "star." We can prove this because, the Earth simulation exactly matches what you would see on a planet orbiting a star when "up" is away from the center of the "planet" and down is the center. If this is not a vast, complex machine simulating life on a ball in space, why does it look exactly like life on a ball in space?
They’re not even conspiracy theorist anymore. They’re literally insane… years it was you can’t go to the Antarctic to prove the sun if you tried you’ll get turned around by military or killed now that that’s not the case it’s time to go back to the drawing boards of bull shit .. the way I see it is flat earth Dave owes I say the three flat earthers a bitcoin a piece
@@KingdomInContext yea let me know when you are thinking. I’m new to the whole screen share on live podcast, so it’s probably best if you are prepared to share the videos for us to discuss.
Look out, here's Sean Griffin, who prophesied that the TFE trip wouldn't be allowed to go ahead. That confirms he is a false prophet (liar), and he ought to remove himself from any ministry purporting to represent God's kingdom,. and repent.
so to clarify you believe the sun is OUTSIDE of the dome? can you do a split camera of that, one pointing at the reflection of the sun and another camera pointing at your flashlight, and observer on earth would see both would they not?
The sun is not outside of the dome! In the firmament is not outside the firmament. "And God set them in the firmament of the heaven to give light upon the earth," Genesis 1:17 KJV
This is so stupid. The distortion. The fact that its a reflection off the container. It wouldn't appear as something that's circling around you. LOL. Utter garbage attempt at debunking. Its almost comical if it weren't so moronic.
When you show the stars on the ceiling later in your video a time lapse would produce oval shaped star trails. That is not what we see in reality. In reality any of those stars can be tracked with an Equatorial mount polar aligned to Latitude. You can't do that in your model. This was the most obvious flaw I noticed right away. Did you miss it? But please try again, debunking FE models in 2 seconds is no challenge at all.
Jeran did a 360 degree rotation showing how the 24-hour sun in Antarctica. With your model, we are only looking towards the north. I'm just looking for facts and asking questions.
"It works perfectly" was the cringiest overstatement of the century! Whom are you trying to convince with a setup in which your torch doesn't follow any rules, produces sometimes two or three reflections and could be seen everywhere on your imaginary flat earth plane? That doesn't fit reality in the least whilst the globe model is understandable to every school child and used by scientists, navigators and surveyors successfully for 2300 years?
I would argue that not every school child truly understands the globe model, as it often contradicts what we directly observe on Earth. Many children have questions, but unfortunately, we are taught from a very young age to accept this model without question, leading us to defer to authority rather than think critically. The essence of scientific discussion is to test, repeat, and draw objective conclusions. It also requires us to examine theories carefully and evaluate their validity. However, the heliocentric model has been widely accepted without undergoing the level of scrutiny it truly deserves-until now.
You showed it circling a small part of this flat Earth model. Your source did not light up the entire outer rim of your model. I don't understand how it worked then.
@@negatorxx That is the whole thing with flerfers. They don't actually understand anything being said or demonstrated so even if something being shown or said doesn't make sense they can interpret it in a way that does make sense in their mind if they want to believe so
@@RascalKyng Or how about you just accept the reality that everything that you call a "lie, CGI, paid actors, etc etc" are anything but, and the earth is in fact a globe. Why is that so hard?
@@paulslund1 I did accept it, for the majority of my life. ALSO, it is only one outlier data point...(24hr sun) FE has too many proofs. ... Consider the possibility that no one is born this way, they are indoctrinated to heilocentrism... Once you disarm yourself, and let your guard down, you absorb the clues that nature of world is not what you were told. Example: Did you learn about Central Banking in public school, debt based income tax recovery (why we have an income tax?)... ?
This explains nothing. Moving a flashlight back and forth on a dome proves nothing. This does not show the sun moving 360 degrees, all the way around the observer. The Sun does not appear to move in the way you showcased, from anywhere on Earth. Not to mention, this doesn't explain why, simultaneously, it is perpetually dark near the North pole. If there's ever a model which perfectly explains everything we can observe, with the precision and accuracy of the globe and heliocentric model, I'd genuinely love to see it. Good luck with this stuff man. I won't believe you for a second, but it's an interesting topic to look at.
But that apparent counterclockwise motion is ON the dome If you were in Antartica it would ALWAYS be south of you as you have not reached the dome's edge. This is not what is observed
exactly. Funny they think this explains it. lol. The sun wouldn't circle 360 around you like is observed. Kind of crazy how all the proponents of this in here can't understand that.
What a terrible bunch of nonsense. When the sun they actually see in antarctica is just a reflection on that dome, an observer in antarctica would see this sun always make a loop or an ellipse in a southern direction, from south east to south to south west and back again to south. It never could be seen near the horizon in the north, because there would be no dome north of antarctica (except the dome at the other side of flat earth, tenthousands of kilometers away behind the north pole). It doesn´t work. And when this sun they see in antarctica is just a reflection of another light source, why can´t they see this original light source in antarctica? At the beginning of the video this light is clearly visible at the top of the dome. It just disappears because the camera zooms in onto the reflection. But in reality, the original light source would clearly be visible, when looking up or to the north from antarctica. Flat earthers must be really desperate by grasping those thin straws and by inventing such ridiculous travesty of real science and physics. By the way, the stars rotate counterclockwise around the north pole, observed from the northern hemisphere, but when you cross the equator, the direction changes to clockwise around another axis of rotation in the south. Your model does not reflect to this observable fact and flat earth can´t explain this. On the globe, this change of directions is not only possible but necessary and is perfectly explained by the globe model. The second axis of rotation is the south pole, of course. Nothing of this one could observe in nature can be explained by a flat earth model. I don´t understand the reason(s), why people cling so hard on this delusional fantasy.
So awesome that you're making these videos. Your 24 hour sun model is getting more and more precise and accurate. It definitely works on the flat model. Very awesome work!
@@Flat_Works yep it’s only gonna get more refined with time. I can’t wait to fabricate the large 5’x5’ toroidal shaped dome with a mimic superfluid. Hopefully my budget allows for it soon enough.
@@josephhanvey5891 YOU KNOW, it is a reflection still? AND your sun is OUTSIDE FE dome? The reflection CAN BE AND WILL BE tested live... And FE req is the sun INSIDE the dome, so do NOT WORK :)
@AnunnakiAaron That's a bit ironic coming from someone who im assuming believes in a model that has zero physical demonstrations of an observer's perspective of the 24 hours sun, and is completely faith based on numbers, theories, and computer simulations. One model has dozens of physical demonstrations supporting the 24 hour sun, one model has zero. I'm assuming you believe in that model that has zero? Seems pretty illogical in regards to empiricism and demonstrable reality. Sounds like someone is butt hurt they have a model that cannot physically demonstrate anything, and makes fun of the model that does. Have fun with your faith based space fantasy.
Can you improve your model so it shows 24h sun _and_ how half the earth is litt up, simulating day/night elsewhere? About the star trail, how about simulating the south celestial pole as seen as from south america, south africa and australia? The bigger question, is the a super fluid ceiling IRL between the sun and earth? If not.....
There is indeed, as explained by Antonio Subirats in his The Book of The Sun, chapter 6, in which he explains that electricity materializes itself in the form of a black super fluid we call the Van Allan Radiation Belts.
As a fe'er I don't see how this works. You have to have a model 'man' standing at one point on your ice wall surrounding the earth, and then show exactly what he sees in a 24 hour period.
So there's a sun outside of the dome that makes a reflection inside the dome? What about all those other reflections that were bouncing off the glass? Where are they in the real dome? Where's the dome though? Why is there complete darkness in Arctic. What force is directing the light in such an angle? So many questions that lead to nowhere.
@@MikeSmith-rj3bu the sun we all see, is always apparent, and provides heat. We never see the physical sun… we see an apparent position that presents itself as a physical position. The Sun in Antarctica is the same Sun we all see there is no difference. It’s only 24 hours when the source is projecting, refracting, or reflecting past the equatorial circuit southwards. Again we don’t see the physical source we see the apparent representation of that in our sky above us. That apparent view varies relative to the observer location, and time of year.
@ we always see an apparent sun no matter where we are. Shadows as those seen on sun dials aren’t in your favor either, so your question is based in ignorance of sundials, shadows, and how that is evidence against the wobbly, water covered, space pear.
The temperature at Union Glacier today is -9 C at noon and -11 C at midnight, when the "real" flat earth sun is on the opposite side of the North Pole, just off the west coast of Australia, to be precise. How can the "apparent" sun provide as much heat as the "real" sun?
@@netromrep6325 the idea would be that you are always contending with an apparent sun, no matter where you see the sun, anywhere in the world. If you are seeing it, then the rays are warming the atmosphere. The real sun position is irrelevant, and it may not even be within this enclosure at all, but in another layer of the firmament. It's sort of like burning an ant with a magnifying glass using sunlight. The ant sees an "apparent" sun through the magnifying glass, but it is still certainly hot enough to burn it even if it isn't the real sun.
@@negatorxx How do you know that there is a different sun, when you have never seen it? So, the "apparent" sun is heating the atmosphere. How come the atmosphere at 35,000 feet is minus 50 degrees C, while the atmosphere at the earth's surface is 25 degrees C?? The heat burning the ant comes from an "apparent" sun, and not from a real sun. Why don't we feel any heat from the real sun? The real sun's position is irrelevant. How do you navigate by an "apparent" sun? "The idea would be...." I see, it's pure fantasy. Ok. That sorted out.
@@seanamodeo36 Good thoughts. The "apparent" sun would explain that the angle of the sun-rays through clouds never match up in various locations. YHWH's creation is vastly more complex than we think...
You have to make these terms very clear. Are you basing this on the Gleason map? Because that's what got the FE community into hot water in the first place. That map is a globe Earth projection map, meaning it's a globe Earth map pressed down flat onto a piece of paper, so you don't have to carry around a globe. Anyway, on the map, Capricorn does the widest arc around the map and would mean the Arctic would see the sun too, which we know it doesn't in winter. So, are you saying that you're pointing the light at Capricorn, but it's doing a much smaller circle because it's going through the water? I know this is difficult because I've done these types of videos too. It's hard to be clear. But, what are you really saying? Thanks.
If that's the position of the sun, what causes it to disappear from half the world at any given time? In that plane, it would be visible to the entire earth
If only you globe clowns would apply the same logic to your religion. Why doesn't the inverse square law for light apply to the 93 million mile away sun? Even worse, why doesn't it apply to the moon light?
@-kepha8828 you don't really want me to, do you? Admit that your view of this won't change no matter what flaws in this you are shown. You would have already looked into this and figured it out. It's not that hard.
@JeepinReefer406 for the 2nd time, you try to sound smart, while not wanting to give away the fact that you are clueless. You purposely add nothing to the conversation because you know nothing. This pattern will continue because you are not smart
@@ChrisSmedley that’s what y’all always bring up. How many times will I have to say this. We don’t have an accurate map because we don’t have the technology that nasa does to create one which keeps us from predicting things
You need a camera inside the dome, at a location roughly equivalent to Union Glacier. Then, as you move your simulated sun around in some circle that matches the actual measurable position of the sun above specific locations through a "day", the camera inside the dome must rotate through 360deg, looking horizontally across the surface to follow this image you seem to be managing withn a reflection. Your model at this point demonstrates nothing, and the reflection of a light moving back and forth across the view is not at all like the documented movement of the sun in Antarctica.
But we need to model the apparent southern circle all around the south from observers at every point south. You said the sun moves with the observer, yes, but not every point in antarctica, or does it?
It doesn't. And with this setup, you cannot track the sun 1) using a single axis of rotation 2) 15 degree per hour all day long, from anywhere on Earth. The reason this seems to barely work is because he is situated from a location that this *barely works*, it doesn't, and doesn't show the original sun image creating that secondary reflection. It would be funny if he wasn't serious about it.
@hesido The only funny thing is globers always being that confident when we havent even shown the perfect model, but u already know that 15° arent possible. When we model a real globe in scale with the sun the daylight Times dont work all the time..are you as critical there too?
@@hesido why we shouldnt track the sun with one axis..joe hasnt even shown a Perspective from inside. And even then you would need a Camera smaler than nm to have it in scale and to see the azimuthal view. Such small cams dont exist. But crepuscular rays are proof we see azimuthally
@@kevinsamuelbo No, daylight times work all the time, no problems at all. The illumination pattern of Earth is calculated by ray casting from sun position onto a sphere. Also 15 degree is indeed what we see, sun or any distant sky object can be tracked using a single axis of rotation, 15 degree per hour, from any location on Earth. So I don't know where you get that 15 degree doesn't work on Globe thing from. It sure doesn't work on a FE, and it sure doesn't work here in this example.
@@kevinsamuelbo "why we shouldnt track the sun with one axis..joe hasnt even shown a Perspective from inside. And even then you would need a Camera smaler than nm to have it in scale and to see the azimuthal view. Such small cams dont exist." First, if you think no one can prepare this in scale with a camera, you could still model it in 3d with ray casting, we can model light behaviour very accurately, including reflections. Second, no, from inside the dome, you won't be able to track the sun image using single axis of rotation, as this is a local object circling above. You can, again, try to model this but you will see no object circling around can be tracked like that from anywhere other than the center of the rotation.
There are bases all around Antarctica which are tens of thousands of mikes apart on flat earth. So how does everyone at every station see the sun at the same time in the same direction?
@JustPretend-r5n The earth is measurably flat. Nothing to do with the sky. Water at rest does not curve. The firmament is like glass and curved. The light of all heavenly bodies travels through it. There is rotation and anti-rotation of the heavenly bodies as they are projected through the firmament. Joseph will discuss it more in detail when he talks with Sean. The 24 hour sun at both poles is demonstrable. Flat earthers admit that they don't know everything, and are looking for truth. Globers on the other hand, are confined to their specific model.
Here is what we currently know. From the north, we see the moon rising from left to right, but in the south of Australia, they see the moon rising from right to left. We see a six like in Australia when it rises and a nine when it sets. Sunrise and sunset just the same way. There is no 24 hour sun circling above the horizon in the south. We view it from inside a dome firmament above instead of looking at a physical object in the sky. So the sun and moon we see are the apparent sun and moon and not a physical object.
Joe - can't help but notice all these views are showing the vantange point of a deep space cosmonaut. Can you show us that these observations match our real-world ones from the ground, from inside the dome? For example - from a camera set anywhere in the Antarctica part of the map, can we observe 1. An apparent sun doing 360° counter-clockwise circles around the camera, and 2. No additional apparent sun at the same time?
I love how you said that we as flat earthers have the room to go back to the drawing board while the globers do not have e that luxury. So very true!! Brilliant work you are doing! Thank you 🙏🏼 RIP globe
@luckyhaskins69 No. Every observed phenomenon is easily explained with the globe and science. You can't even provide a single flat map showing the entire Earth AND the correct distances in scale. That should be easy if the Earth is flat, like a piece of paper, but you can't do it. I can easily measure and show correct positions and scale distances on an educational globe with a drawing compass because a globe is an exactly scaled model of the Earth. And yes, there is a 24-hour Sun in Antarctica, unless witsit is lying. (Like usual)
"we as flat earthers have the room to go back to the drawing board while the gloabers do not have that luxury" are you really bragging about not having a functioning model that explains everything, like the globe model?
Is the sun below the firmament in your model like the bible says? There has to be somewhere on the earth where switching from the apparent sun to the source real sun...someone would see two suns if this was true right?
In Antarctic right now they are watching the ONE sun circle above them all day and night. ONE sun.. no "switching" of the sun for any type of nonsensical projection or other nonsense. Why would you believe this?
You realize that the 24h sun in antartica circles overhead, meaning at times you would be looking south to see the sun. Plus there is no way a local sun on a flat earth high enough to be easily seen thousands of miles appart could ever get anywhere near the horizon no matter where you are.
Flat earth doesn't need to work in your globe model because your globe doesn't exist. Your globe doesn't work in realty. Dome ⌒ + Water ꕀꕀꕀꕀꕀ = ⌓ model -------------------------------FL/\T E/\RTH ...water above and below. Shape of flat earth is self evident : FLAT PLANE SHAPE with a CONTAINER for gas pressure no such thing as atmo-spheres or balls of air without a container, the concept of curved space and time is asinine we experience a stationary flat horizontal plane shaped earth , we walk perpendicular to a STATIONARY HORIZONTAL PLANE SHAPED EARTH.. The globe cartoon is not a reality based model. BS globe predictions ....once upon a time 🧭📐⚖🔭⌓ = flat earth... The globe religion places earth in the cosmos and then depends on bs math claims, cartoons, pseudo science, fairy tale physics and blind faith and censorship. No measured curve, no motion around a curve, no radius, no measured light speed, no open vacuum, no gravity, no big bang cosmic evolution , no billions of years, NO GLOBE MODEL or MAP measured curve There is no experiment to prove the globe. You can't prove globe physics, they don't exist.
@@luckyhaskins69 🧭📐⚖🔭⌓ = flat earth No measured earth motion around a fake curve = NO GRAVITY .....NO GLOBE Large bodies of calm water at rest prove there is no EARTH MOTION over a FAKE CURVE. And that fact proves there is no GRAVITY and NO GLOBE. The globe religion places earth in the cosmos and then depends on bs math claims, cartoons, pseudo science, fairy tale physics and blind faith and censorship. No measured curve, no motion around a curve, no radius, no measured light speed, no open vacuum, no gravity, no big bang cosmic evolution , no billions of years, NO GLOBE MODEL or MAP measured curve There is no experiment to prove the globe. You can't prove globe physics, they don't exist.
Grasping at more and more complicated models to try and prove a flat earth, when a very simple model proves the globe seems like a lot of wasted effort.
@@Manshara2012 respectfully there is absolutely nothing simple about the wobbly, water covered, space pear, and it falsifies itself in tons of areas regarding real science and observed reality. Cognitive dissonance sucks my friend… every Flat Earther experienced it before breaking free from the brainwashing.
@josephhanvey5891 well, I appreciate the reply. My university studies in physics (granted this was 20+ years ago) helped with understanding a lot of how nature seems to work. Even though gravity is considered the weakest of the four fundamental forces, it certainly is powerful enough to create a lot of the spherical (not always perfect spheres) shapes we see in nature. I think of Earth in space as similar to an air or soap bubble, just on a much larger scale, as gravity pulls all of these things into the most compact shape possible.
@@Manshara2012 Well your degree is in vain as all they taught you was satanic pagan pseudoscience that can't be tested, measured, or observed. You cannot obtain an elevation angle on a globe. Impossible. A sphere is convex which means there is not one straight line on it. For an elevation angle you require a flat baseline of 90 degrees to properly measure it. Large bodies of water at rest lay flat and level. You cannot have gas pressure adjacent to a vacuum without a container. That literally goes against the second law of thermodynamics. Without the manmade theory of "gravity" your model falls apart. And what gravity are we talking here? Newtonian or Einsteinian? Mass attracting mass? Or the bending and warping of space time? It's all one big satanic joke which you are blindly parroting sadly.
Something else!!!! If the object the FTE group saw in the sky was the ACTUAL sun…..think of the heat it would be shining down on Antarctica…..it would be impossible for it to remain unmelted continuously!!!!
@@deborahhuber8527 That would be true on the flat earth, under the round earth model when scaled appropriately the sun is an astronomical distance from the planet. "The diameter of the Earth is about 7,917 miles (12,742 kilometers), so if we were to line up Earths end-to-end, it would take about 11,720 Earths to span the average distance from Earth to the Sun." So the sun is only about 0.0001% closer to the closest edge of the planet vs poles of the planet. People just don't grasp the scale of things because of the cute animations with over sized objects. If the sun and earth were a mile apart, the sun would only be about 200 feet across, while the earth is only 1 foot across. That's the scales we are talking.
@kosgoth how do you get a pressurised gas system in a vacuum without a container? At the same time a mosquito can fly and you get a light breeze ? Judgement day will come before you can answer that
@@a.i9347 Gravity. It's why there is a pressure gradient. More stuff on top, being pulled down by gravity. It's why the air is less dense higher up, and under water there is more pressure, more stuff on top of you the deeper you go.
So, do you think that in winter in the north, the sun stays up for 24 hours and can be seen from any point in Antarctica (which encircles the entire globe)? That doesn’t make sense; it would require more than just a simple reflection.
@@pierreboissonneault I don’t know who Flatzoid is, nor am I seeking his approval or anyone’s for that matter. Truth will win out in the end, and that’s all that matters.
@ the flat earth is the working model used for everything, so we already had a working model. I’m simply demonstrating that in a physical representation using the assumptions our model operates under. By doing so I accurately convey visually what we see visually in reality. Sad that globe proponents have pounded their chest for years demanding a physical model from FE, and when one is presented that is capable of demonstrating the phenomenon that they claim can only work on a globe the best rebuttal is… nuh uhh!!! The globe doesn’t have a physical model that can do that… it only has cartoons. Cartoons are not a physical model, so on those grounds alone my model is far superior to the globe.
@@josephhanvey5891 Except your "model" doesn't demonstrate the phenomena we experience. Why do you guys think you are smarter than all the physicists, geologists, astrophysicist, aeronautics engineers, etc, etc, etc.. from around the world.. Not to mention all the 80 space agencies from 80 different countries from around the globe.. You aren't. But thanks for playing.
Take me up on my wager that thousands of flerfs have run from. $10,000 I can prove a globe. I will fly to wherever you are with my survey equipment, lasers and other toys. We will put the money in an online escrow and get an attorney to write up a contract. Loser also pays winners expenses. Come on .. let’s do this
Hi Joseph, I am new to your channel and I love this so much. I am hoping you can elaborate on the 24 hour light in the far south and were you saying that there would be a 24 hour visible sun down there? I am anxiously waiting for the data from the expedition that is going on down there right now. Thanks, Theresa
@@theresaleskinen6433 I’ve got several other videos about this particular topic here. Maybe those will answer your questions. However it’s my opinion that the sky system of our level earth enclosed universe predicts a 24 hour circling sun is low on the horizon for 360 degrees around the observers far enough south no matter where the observer is. Multiple observers located at antipodal positions would all see it simultaneously, only its position would vary relative to each locations time zone. Hopefully that helps.
@RachelHiner at roughly 3:21 I zoom out and you can see the apparent sun for the north. In southern winter one would have to face that direction to even see the sun, as opposed to southern summer when the rotation demonstrated would be seen. In southern winter in Antarctica the sun is not seen. To clarify what you see at 3:21 to like 3:38 would never be seen by someone on the ground at anytime. Our realm is way too vast. One has to remember true visual scale when contemplating this.
@@josephhanvey5891 I was just curious if in the model you created when you demonstrate the sun circling the northern tropic is the sun not visible in antartica or is there still an apparent sun visible. I am just so curious about everything! 😆
@ nope from my testing the model so far in southern winter there is still an apparent sun for the south but they must be facing north to see it. I’ve got a lot of refining/modifications to do to the model, and tons more testing to do, but everything seems to be accounted for correctly currently. I suspect that it will only become more precise and understandable as I develop it further.
I was watching on my phone earlier so I blamed it on that, but no: This video is like 8 blurry pixels. I can see that something is in some sense "going in a circle", but I can't see anything clearly enough to understand the nature or relative location of this circling motion.
Interesting you are using the moon map. Is it going counter clockwise? Bc they said it was when they were down there. One more thing, I remember flat earth Dave was showing experiments during the solar eclipse explaining it with something covering a projection of the sun. Very interesting!
Great work! Keep it up. We're not sure what the FE model looks like without adequate funding or support, but this makes some sense to ehat we see, but we do know the globe narrative is false.
This is ridiculous. How do meteorites get through the dome? 8 countries have sent probes to Venus and mars, how did these probes get through the dome? Show the moon phases as well. What makes the sun move in this model?
Not pointless, great info for us. It will hurt a lot of innocent people in my opinion because humans are so gullible, but that is how the system works.
have you seen how arrows change directions when seen through a glass of water? if there was water inside a double dome.... youd get the direction reversal easy... if we do see double or triple suns, it is because light is only seen on matter, thus there are multiple layers the suns light hits for us to show double suns. light refracts on every solid barrier.... so multiple glass windows, multiple suns.... if you had two domes, you would see two suns reflexes... maybe yuo can use a clock mechanic, hanging a light from the clock above the firmament. creating a circular path for the suns light. or a train track perhaps....
Your “model” would mean 24 hour sunlight around the entire earth. It does not demonstrate how there can be 24 hour sunlight and darkness at the same time.
@@pyratellamarecordingstudio1062 speaking for every flat earther is not only strange but extremely arrogant. I’ve been a flat earther for a long time now, and can put you in touch with 10’s of thousands of FE’s that believe a 24 hour sun is absolutely possible. On top of that real science tries to demonstrate how things work within the assumptions of any theory/model, so your question is one born of cognitive dissonance. Regardless no globe proponent can continue to claim it’s impossible on FE, as it has been clearly demonstrated within our model.
flat earthers have known since the late 1800's about the antartic Sun. You have fallen for a psyop and have been lied to. We have all been lied to about everything. It is time to wake up.
Because that’s what they’re going to see there this weekend and this explains it. The globers are going to think it’s the sun and brag about how they were right when it’s just a reflection.
@pyratellamarecordingstudio1062 a glober pretending to know what we discuss okay bro. It's been years where the community split over one side not believing in the AE map and the other defending it. So no, you again don't know what you're talking about.
@@kevinsamuelbo so you think the southern celestial hemisphere is just a reflection of the north celestial hemisphere, that is a optical illusion unique to each observers location?
Yeah but you're missing one critical point!! In the Arctic you see the 24-hour sun go behind you from whatever position you are stationed whereas in this demonstration the 24-hour sun is directly in front of you at all times which is impossible if the Earth is a ball so if this is what was recorded in Antarctica then it further proves a flat plain
@@ChrisSmedley slow down there Einstein, this is still possible if the Sun that they see with their eyes is an apparent Sun reflecting off the dome which heliosexuals deny exist. This model just needs to be tweaked to give a different perspective
Not sure I get this. If I’m on the opposite side of Antarctica where your sun is I can see it circling around me too? Your model seems way too complex. I think God made it much simpler like we observe it and also so water sticks to it (gravity) causes he’s just that awesome. Anyone can do a flat disk with a dome.
Biblical cosmology can still work with a globe .. it does not insult the Bible. Also, while I am not a Flat Earther I DO respect HOW you are attempting to rebut the Antarctica data using (at least) some sort of demonstratable method. Others are just hurling insults and very unsettling words.
As expected, Flerfkind are reinventing their model. @You can clearly see...' no, I can't. Long range navigation is totally dependent on the Earth being a globe.
Now please show us that your model allows this reflection to be tracked by a single axis of rotation that is polar aligned to Latitude and moving at a steady 15 degrees per hour for 24 hours. The model must show no elevation change when viewed from 90 South during a full rotation and a variance of 20 degrees from Solar Noon to Solar Midnight when viewed from 80S When you try this you will understand why your model fails. Better luck next time.
It's not just a matter of seeing a 24 hour sun in Antarctica. Your model has to explain everything else all at once. Explain why you see a 24 hour sun in Antarctica while simultaneously there's 24 hours of darkness in the Arctic. Then you have to explain why the opposite happens when the Arctic experiences a 24 hour sun while simultaneously Antarctica experiences 24 hours of darkness.
Also clarify what we're looking at in your model. Because it looks like if you're standing on Antarctica in your model you'd be facing north as you watch the sun do circles in the sky. If that's the case that's not what happens in Antarctica. In Antarctica the sun circles around you so at some point you're going to have to be facing south to see it.
When there is 24 hour darkness in the Arctic, the sun is too far from the centre (the North) so it’s light doesn’t reach these certain arctic territories. Vice versa when there’s 24 hour darkness in the south.
@@newborderssounds3832 do you not realize how that makes no sense at all?
Jeran, Witsit and everyone are in Antarctica witnessing a 24 hour sun. They flew south from Chile to get to Antarctica. So imagine you're there standing in Antarctica south of Chile on the AE map. The sun is doing circles above flat earth so imagine the sun is now on the opposite side of the earth near Australia. How can you say the Arctic is too far away to get sunlight when at that point you're even further away from the sun yet you can still see the sun?
Remember you're in Antarctica south of Chile and the sun is on the opposite side of the earth which means the Arctic is in between you and the sun but somehow you can see the sun but no one in the Arctic can.
@@newborderssounds3832 also to add on to that, the summer in the southern hemisphere is the 24hr cycle for Antarctica
It's easy to understand. The Earth is a complex device designed to simulate people living on a rotating ball that orbits a far away source of light. The device is so complicated, it even simulates a moon orbiting the Earth Machine. There are also simulations of other "planets" that orbit that "star." We can prove this because, the Earth simulation exactly matches what you would see on a planet orbiting a star when "up" is away from the center of the "planet" and down is the center.
If this is not a vast, complex machine simulating life on a ball in space, why does it look exactly like life on a ball in space?
They’re not even conspiracy theorist anymore. They’re literally insane… years it was you can’t go to the Antarctic to prove the sun if you tried you’ll get turned around by military or killed now that that’s not the case it’s time to go back to the drawing boards of bull shit .. the way I see it is flat earth Dave owes I say the three flat earthers a bitcoin a piece
According to your own model in the video there should be a 24 hour sun everywhere.
Triggered?
ffs learn perspective you goof
According to your model the ground is curving and we are hurling through space ... with no evidence
@@Zeteticx well i would think being in space seeing the earth curve in space taking photos of such thing would be evidence but yk thats just me
@@keysmusicyoutube Belief is necessary in any religion!
Hi, Joseph. Would you be willing to come on the channel and show this demonstration and talk about it a bit?
@@KingdomInContext yea let me know when you are thinking. I’m new to the whole screen share on live podcast, so it’s probably best if you are prepared to share the videos for us to discuss.
@@josephhanvey5891 AWESOME!!!!! This is so exciting!!!!
Give it a rest, man. Stop making the Bible wrong. This doesn't match at all.
Look out, here's Sean Griffin, who prophesied that the TFE trip wouldn't be allowed to go ahead. That confirms he is a false prophet (liar), and he ought to remove himself from any ministry purporting to represent God's kingdom,. and repent.
@@markghannatas LOL saying I didn't think the trip would happen isn't a prophecy. Learn to walk in love,brother.
so to clarify you believe the sun is OUTSIDE of the dome?
can you do a split camera of that, one pointing at the reflection of the sun and another camera pointing at your flashlight, and observer on earth would see both would they not?
Yes...
It's an apparent light you're seeing as the sun, it's not even actually there.. so where else would it be
The sun is not outside of the dome! In the firmament is not outside the firmament.
"And God set them in the firmament of the heaven to give light upon the earth," Genesis 1:17 KJV
This is so stupid. The distortion. The fact that its a reflection off the container. It wouldn't appear as something that's circling around you. LOL. Utter garbage attempt at debunking. Its almost comical if it weren't so moronic.
Wait! 1) The sun is under or over the dome? 2) The others places of the "antarctic circle" can see the sun 24 hs. too...
Well, it depends on what obervable reality they need to explain away. The sun moves in/out depending on what they're trying to "explain".
When you show the stars on the ceiling later in your video a time lapse would produce oval shaped star trails. That is not what we see in reality.
In reality any of those stars can be tracked with an Equatorial mount polar aligned to Latitude. You can't do that in your model.
This was the most obvious flaw I noticed right away. Did you miss it?
But please try again, debunking FE models in 2 seconds is no challenge at all.
Careful, dont talk to much science, they dont like that. They are trying way to hard to debunk the guys in antarctica right now.
@@vashstampede4939 I can’t believe that ppl still fall for this nonsense 😂
That's going to be my new comeback whenever I don't have an answer: "that's just not understanding the vastness of the realm".
Jeran did a 360 degree rotation showing how the 24-hour sun in Antarctica. With your model, we are only looking towards the north. I'm just looking for facts and asking questions.
"It works perfectly" was the cringiest overstatement of the century! Whom are you trying to convince with a setup in which your torch doesn't follow any rules, produces sometimes two or three reflections and could be seen everywhere on your imaginary flat earth plane?
That doesn't fit reality in the least whilst the globe model is understandable to every school child and used by scientists, navigators and surveyors successfully for 2300 years?
I would argue that not every school child truly understands the globe model, as it often contradicts what we directly observe on Earth. Many children have questions, but unfortunately, we are taught from a very young age to accept this model without question, leading us to defer to authority rather than think critically.
The essence of scientific discussion is to test, repeat, and draw objective conclusions. It also requires us to examine theories carefully and evaluate their validity. However, the heliocentric model has been widely accepted without undergoing the level of scrutiny it truly deserves-until now.
You showed it circling a small part of this flat Earth model. Your source did not light up the entire outer rim of your model. I don't understand how it worked then.
This would mean you see 2 suns at some locations..Edit: not even some, all.
He literally explained why you wouldn’t but ok
@@psysurreal8513 he literally just rambled about nonsense and you guys are all buying it.
@@negatorxxthis is the biggest bs I’ve seen so far. And they lift him like he is a super hero. 😂😂😂 such nonsense!
@@psysurreal8513 Yes, you need to zoom in so the "upper" sun is cropped out.
@@negatorxx That is the whole thing with flerfers. They don't actually understand anything being said or demonstrated so even if something being shown or said doesn't make sense they can interpret it in a way that does make sense in their mind if they want to believe so
Your apparent explanation would mean that the sun would never set at all, all year round.
lol yes. And some god has to fiddle around with a torch all the time.
Thank goodness you’re doing all of these videos. Helps so much.
Oops, Joseph 😁
I’m here because of you. 😊
Agreed. FE is going to need a more tangible substitute, now that the Gleason Map has been ruled out (mostly).
@@RascalKyng Or how about you just accept the reality that everything that you call a "lie, CGI, paid actors, etc etc" are anything but, and the earth is in fact a globe.
Why is that so hard?
@@paulslund1
I did accept it, for the majority of my life.
ALSO, it is only one outlier data point...(24hr sun)
FE has too many proofs.
...
Consider the possibility that no one is born this way, they are indoctrinated to heilocentrism...
Once you disarm yourself, and let your guard down, you absorb the clues that nature of world is not what you were told.
Example: Did you learn about Central Banking in public school, debt based income tax recovery (why we have an income tax?)... ?
This explains nothing. Moving a flashlight back and forth on a dome proves nothing. This does not show the sun moving 360 degrees, all the way around the observer. The Sun does not appear to move in the way you showcased, from anywhere on Earth. Not to mention, this doesn't explain why, simultaneously, it is perpetually dark near the North pole.
If there's ever a model which perfectly explains everything we can observe, with the precision and accuracy of the globe and heliocentric model, I'd genuinely love to see it. Good luck with this stuff man. I won't believe you for a second, but it's an interesting topic to look at.
But that apparent counterclockwise motion is ON the dome If you were in Antartica it would ALWAYS be south of you as you have not reached the dome's edge. This is not what is observed
exactly. Funny they think this explains it. lol. The sun wouldn't circle 360 around you like is observed. Kind of crazy how all the proponents of this in here can't understand that.
SHH! It doesn't need to replicate what we see in reality EXACTLY! They just need something, some sort of thread of hope to give them.
You’ve got to explain how McMurdo station AND Union glacier both are seeing a 24 hour sun
What a terrible bunch of nonsense. When the sun they actually see in antarctica is just a reflection on that dome, an observer in antarctica would see this sun always make a loop or an ellipse in a southern direction, from south east to south to south west and back again to south. It never could be seen near the horizon in the north, because there would be no dome north of antarctica (except the dome at the other side of flat earth, tenthousands of kilometers away behind the north pole). It doesn´t work.
And when this sun they see in antarctica is just a reflection of another light source, why can´t they see this original light source in antarctica? At the beginning of the video this light is clearly visible at the top of the dome. It just disappears because the camera zooms in onto the reflection. But in reality, the original light source would clearly be visible, when looking up or to the north from antarctica.
Flat earthers must be really desperate by grasping those thin straws and by inventing such ridiculous travesty of real science and physics.
By the way, the stars rotate counterclockwise around the north pole, observed from the northern hemisphere, but when you cross the equator, the direction changes to clockwise around another axis of rotation in the south. Your model does not reflect to this observable fact and flat earth can´t explain this. On the globe, this change of directions is not only possible but necessary and is perfectly explained by the globe model. The second axis of rotation is the south pole, of course.
Nothing of this one could observe in nature can be explained by a flat earth model.
I don´t understand the reason(s), why people cling so hard on this delusional fantasy.
Doesn’t matter you could take them into space and orbit the earth a few times. They’ll say something else.
@@johnsnows3464 The clowns already did that....and they sent us Fake Pictures and Jokers walking on the moon! LOL
So what changes in Jun to cause no sun at all?
So awesome that you're making these videos. Your 24 hour sun model is getting more and more precise and accurate. It definitely works on the flat model. Very awesome work!
@@Flat_Works yep it’s only gonna get more refined with time. I can’t wait to fabricate the large 5’x5’ toroidal shaped dome with a mimic superfluid. Hopefully my budget allows for it soon enough.
@@josephhanvey5891 YOU KNOW, it is a reflection still? AND your sun is OUTSIDE FE dome? The reflection CAN BE AND WILL BE tested live... And FE req is the sun INSIDE the dome, so do NOT WORK :)
The only thing awesome about this is how many really dumb people believe what he's saying and think its legit and makes sense.
@AnunnakiAaron That's a bit ironic coming from someone who im assuming believes in a model that has zero physical demonstrations of an observer's perspective of the 24 hours sun, and is completely faith based on numbers, theories, and computer simulations. One model has dozens of physical demonstrations supporting the 24 hour sun, one model has zero. I'm assuming you believe in that model that has zero? Seems pretty illogical in regards to empiricism and demonstrable reality.
Sounds like someone is butt hurt they have a model that cannot physically demonstrate anything, and makes fun of the model that does. Have fun with your faith based space fantasy.
@@AnunnakiAarone perché insulti,…perché sono stupide,..e perché chi sta costruendo questo è stupido ?…..
Sei tu IGNORANTE.!.
The 24-hours Sun is supposed to appear to circle around you, not in front of you as demonstrated in this video. Am I missing something?
You're not the one missing something
Can you improve your model so it shows 24h sun _and_ how half the earth is litt up, simulating day/night elsewhere?
About the star trail, how about simulating the south celestial pole as seen as from south america, south africa and australia?
The bigger question, is the a super fluid ceiling IRL between the sun and earth? If not.....
There is indeed, as explained by Antonio Subirats in his The Book of The Sun, chapter 6, in which he explains that electricity materializes itself in the form of a black super fluid we call the Van Allan Radiation Belts.
@@VitorDamasceno-q3f The Van Allen Belts are ionized gas particles not dense enough to be a fluid.
I seriously doubt they bent light that much.
As a fe'er I don't see how this works. You have to have a model 'man' standing at one point on your ice wall surrounding the earth, and then show exactly what he sees in a 24 hour period.
So there's a sun outside of the dome that makes a reflection inside the dome? What about all those other reflections that were bouncing off the glass? Where are they in the real dome? Where's the dome though? Why is there complete darkness in Arctic. What force is directing the light in such an angle? So many questions that lead to nowhere.
Interesting.
Is the sun at Antarctica apparent? If so, how can it provide heat?
Why isnt it always 24 hours?
Thank you.
@@MikeSmith-rj3bu the sun we all see, is always apparent, and provides heat. We never see the physical sun… we see an apparent position that presents itself as a physical position.
The Sun in Antarctica is the same Sun we all see there is no difference.
It’s only 24 hours when the source is projecting, refracting, or reflecting past the equatorial circuit southwards. Again we don’t see the physical source we see the apparent representation of that in our sky above us. That apparent view varies relative to the observer location, and time of year.
Uhhh, no...
@@josephhanvey5891how does an apparent sun provide heat?
how does a apearent sun create shadows that mach exactly a globe, but no flat earth?
@ we always see an apparent sun no matter where we are.
Shadows as those seen on sun dials aren’t in your favor either, so your question is based in ignorance of sundials, shadows, and how that is evidence against the wobbly, water covered, space pear.
Can we see this demonstration not zoomed in so far that we can't tell what we are looking at?
I like this. The angles at 1:50 are almost exactly what they're going to see at Union Glacier too.
The temperature at Union Glacier today is -9 C at noon and -11 C at midnight, when the "real" flat earth sun is on the opposite side of the North Pole, just off the west coast of Australia, to be precise.
How can the "apparent" sun provide as much heat as the "real" sun?
@@netromrep6325 the idea would be that you are always contending with an apparent sun, no matter where you see the sun, anywhere in the world. If you are seeing it, then the rays are warming the atmosphere. The real sun position is irrelevant, and it may not even be within this enclosure at all, but in another layer of the firmament. It's sort of like burning an ant with a magnifying glass using sunlight. The ant sees an "apparent" sun through the magnifying glass, but it is still certainly hot enough to burn it even if it isn't the real sun.
how in the world did you measure angles from this lol
@@negatorxx
How do you know that there is a different sun, when you have never seen it?
So, the "apparent" sun is heating the atmosphere. How come the atmosphere at 35,000 feet is minus 50 degrees C, while the atmosphere at the earth's surface is 25 degrees C??
The heat burning the ant comes from an "apparent" sun, and not from a real sun. Why don't we feel any heat from the real sun?
The real sun's position is irrelevant. How do you navigate by an "apparent" sun?
"The idea would be...." I see, it's pure fantasy. Ok. That sorted out.
@@seanamodeo36 Good thoughts. The "apparent" sun would explain that the angle of the sun-rays through clouds never match up in various locations. YHWH's creation is vastly more complex than we think...
You have to make these terms very clear. Are you basing this on the Gleason map? Because that's what got the FE community into hot water in the first place. That map is a globe Earth projection map, meaning it's a globe Earth map pressed down flat onto a piece of paper, so you don't have to carry around a globe.
Anyway, on the map, Capricorn does the widest arc around the map and would mean the Arctic would see the sun too, which we know it doesn't in winter.
So, are you saying that you're pointing the light at Capricorn, but it's doing a much smaller circle because it's going through the water?
I know this is difficult because I've done these types of videos too. It's hard to be clear. But, what are you really saying?
Thanks.
If that's the position of the sun, what causes it to disappear from half the world at any given time? In that plane, it would be visible to the entire earth
If only you globe clowns would apply the same logic to your religion. Why doesn't the inverse square law for light apply to the 93 million mile away sun? Even worse, why doesn't it apply to the moon light?
If you don't see the problems with this, there is no help for you.
Please, enlighten us with your knowledge. . . 🤣🤣🤣🤣
@-kepha8828 you don't really want me to, do you? Admit that your view of this won't change no matter what flaws in this you are shown. You would have already looked into this and figured it out. It's not that hard.
@JeepinReefer406 for the 2nd time, you try to sound smart, while not wanting to give away the fact that you are clueless. You purposely add nothing to the conversation because you know nothing. This pattern will continue because you are not smart
My man... Just take the L already.
And flat earth lives on! TFE didn’t end the debate!
desperate are you, lol
Are you an insane person though. Do you understand that the reflections would cause more than one sun image?
This model is wrong on so many levels. Let's see it predict an eclipse.
@@hesido buddy no it wouldn’t. See you don’t understand basic science just like me, I’ve just got more common sense
@@ChrisSmedley that’s what y’all always bring up. How many times will I have to say this. We don’t have an accurate map because we don’t have the technology that nasa does to create one which keeps us from predicting things
Can we use AI for a little man perspective inside the dome looking at the arc and anti arc perspective then do a fly-by zoom out of the dome
You need a camera inside the dome, at a location roughly equivalent to Union Glacier. Then, as you move your simulated sun around in some circle that matches the actual measurable position of the sun above specific locations through a "day", the camera inside the dome must rotate through 360deg, looking horizontally across the surface to follow this image you seem to be managing withn a reflection. Your model at this point demonstrates nothing, and the reflection of a light moving back and forth across the view is not at all like the documented movement of the sun in Antarctica.
Hey. What happens when the sun is on the inner circuit in the south? Is there no apparent sun? Just some daylight etc using your model there?
Great chatting with you today! We would love to interview you on our podcast, Strange World.
@@DJ_CURIOUS I’m down to come on it with you all whenever you have time available. I’m pretty open for the next month and a half.
Hi DJ! I was just posting that Patricia should interview him. Or all of you in Strange World. That would be cool! 👍🙂
Cheers
Great idea!
But we need to model the apparent southern circle all around the south from observers at every point south. You said the sun moves with the observer, yes, but not every point in antarctica, or does it?
It doesn't. And with this setup, you cannot track the sun 1) using a single axis of rotation 2) 15 degree per hour all day long, from anywhere on Earth. The reason this seems to barely work is because he is situated from a location that this *barely works*, it doesn't, and doesn't show the original sun image creating that secondary reflection. It would be funny if he wasn't serious about it.
@hesido The only funny thing is globers always being that confident when we havent even shown the perfect model, but u already know that 15° arent possible. When we model a real globe in scale with the sun the daylight Times dont work all the time..are you as critical there too?
@@hesido why we shouldnt track the sun with one axis..joe hasnt even shown a Perspective from inside. And even then you would need a Camera smaler than nm to have it in scale and to see the azimuthal view. Such small cams dont exist. But crepuscular rays are proof we see azimuthally
@@kevinsamuelbo No, daylight times work all the time, no problems at all. The illumination pattern of Earth is calculated by ray casting from sun position onto a sphere. Also 15 degree is indeed what we see, sun or any distant sky object can be tracked using a single axis of rotation, 15 degree per hour, from any location on Earth. So I don't know where you get that 15 degree doesn't work on Globe thing from. It sure doesn't work on a FE, and it sure doesn't work here in this example.
@@kevinsamuelbo "why we shouldnt track the sun with one axis..joe hasnt even shown a Perspective from inside. And even then you would need a Camera smaler than nm to have it in scale and to see the azimuthal view. Such small cams dont exist." First, if you think no one can prepare this in scale with a camera, you could still model it in 3d with ray casting, we can model light behaviour very accurately, including reflections.
Second, no, from inside the dome, you won't be able to track the sun image using single axis of rotation, as this is a local object circling above. You can, again, try to model this but you will see no object circling around can be tracked like that from anywhere other than the center of the rotation.
When you get the 24 hour sun does night and day behave as it should in the north?
No.
Someone want to put some money into this so we can fit a person under a huge dome like this? It would be bulletproof!
Have you experimented with a shallower in relation to breadth dome? Less like a hemisphere, but more like a contact lens?
I would love it if you could make a list with pricing of all the items you used and where you got them so we could replicate. 😎
replicate idiocy... lol. That's funny
@AnunnakiAaron Says the idiot who is a globber, trolls flat earth channels, and cannot replicate the heliocentric model. 🤣🤣
There are bases all around Antarctica which are tens of thousands of mikes apart on flat earth. So how does everyone at every station see the sun at the same time in the same direction?
Oh dear. So much wrong with this 🤦♂️
Yup. Kind of mind blowing how many people are thinking this is a good explanation. lol. All the distortion among so many other things.
at what southern latitude does it change to that perspective?
According to Jeran, the sun travels in the opposite direction in Antarctica. Does your model show that too?
This is sad.
A grown man pretends the earth is flat.
And another grown man looks at the sky to determine the shape of the ground beneath his feet.
Oooh. That’s clever.
The earth must be flat so.
But how do two celestial poles work in the terrarium?
🤣🤣🤣🤣😂😂😂😅😅😅
@JustPretend-r5n The earth is measurably flat. Nothing to do with the sky. Water at rest does not curve.
The firmament is like glass and curved. The light of all heavenly bodies travels through it. There is rotation and anti-rotation of the heavenly bodies as they are projected through the firmament. Joseph will discuss it more in detail when he talks with Sean. The 24 hour sun at both poles is demonstrable. Flat earthers admit that they don't know everything, and are looking for truth. Globers on the other hand, are confined to their specific model.
what about the light?
Here is what we currently know.
From the north, we see the moon rising from left to right, but in the south of Australia, they see the moon rising from right to left. We see a six like in Australia when it rises and a nine when it sets. Sunrise and sunset just the same way. There is no 24 hour sun circling above the horizon in the south.
We view it from inside a dome firmament above instead of looking at a physical object in the sky. So the sun and moon we see are the apparent sun and moon and not a physical object.
@@kg6lcr go to antarctica then and see it for yourself
Joe - can't help but notice all these views are showing the vantange point of a deep space cosmonaut.
Can you show us that these observations match our real-world ones from the ground, from inside the dome?
For example - from a camera set anywhere in the Antarctica part of the map, can we observe 1. An apparent sun doing 360° counter-clockwise circles around the camera, and 2. No additional apparent sun at the same time?
You already suspect it can not be done. Rightfully so.
There are too many things wrong with this thesis.
This is so awesome! Amazing work you are doing there! Thank you so much 🙏! 😊❤
How does the globe model explain 24 hr darkness in the arctic??
And where is south celestial pole?
I love how you said that we as flat earthers have the room to go back to the drawing board while the globers do not have e that luxury. So very true!! Brilliant work you are doing! Thank you 🙏🏼 RIP globe
Globers don't NEED that luxury.
Everything works perfectly already.
@@jimsmith7212 lol.. yes, the propaganda works perfectly
@luckyhaskins69
No.
Every observed phenomenon is easily explained with the globe and science.
You can't even provide a single flat map showing the entire Earth AND the correct distances in scale.
That should be easy if the Earth is flat, like a piece of paper, but you can't do it.
I can easily measure and show correct positions and scale distances on an educational globe with a drawing compass because a globe is an exactly scaled model of the Earth.
And yes, there is a 24-hour Sun in Antarctica, unless witsit is lying.
(Like usual)
@@luckyhaskins69 The math*
"we as flat earthers have the room to go back to the drawing board while the gloabers do not have that luxury" are you really bragging about not having a functioning model that explains everything, like the globe model?
Is the sun below the firmament in your model like the bible says? There has to be somewhere on the earth where switching from the apparent sun to the source real sun...someone would see two suns if this was true right?
In Antarctic right now they are watching the ONE sun circle above them all day and night. ONE sun.. no "switching" of the sun for any type of nonsensical projection or other nonsense. Why would you believe this?
Please stop bull sh!tting to people scammer. 😢
You realize that the 24h sun in antartica circles overhead, meaning at times you would be looking south to see the sun. Plus there is no way a local sun on a flat earth high enough to be easily seen thousands of miles appart could ever get anywhere near the horizon no matter where you are.
FYI Stars at the equator move east-west at 90 degrees with the horizon. Where is that on your model.
so youre just going to ignore the sunspots lol stop wasting your time
Isn't the sun meant to be inside the dome, just floating around up there ?
Yes, it changes depending on the kind of explanation needed
Thank you Jonathan. I am grateful your work is being noticed. It helps to comprehend what and how we see.
LOL
How come I don't have a 24hr sun in australia?
The flat earth concept doesn't work in the real world
Flat earth doesn't need to work in your globe model because your globe doesn't exist. Your globe doesn't work in realty. Dome ⌒ + Water ꕀꕀꕀꕀꕀ = ⌓ model -------------------------------FL/\T E/\RTH ...water above and below.
Shape of flat earth is self evident : FLAT PLANE SHAPE with a CONTAINER for gas pressure
no such thing as atmo-spheres or balls of air without a container, the concept of curved space and time is asinine
we experience a stationary flat horizontal plane shaped earth , we walk perpendicular to a STATIONARY HORIZONTAL PLANE SHAPED EARTH..
The globe cartoon is not a reality based model.
BS globe predictions ....once upon a time
🧭📐⚖🔭⌓ = flat earth...
The globe religion places earth in the cosmos and then depends on bs math claims, cartoons, pseudo science, fairy tale physics and blind faith and censorship.
No measured curve, no motion around a curve, no radius, no measured light speed, no open vacuum, no gravity, no big bang cosmic evolution , no billions of years, NO GLOBE MODEL or MAP measured curve
There is no experiment to prove the globe. You can't prove globe physics, they don't exist.
go outside- it works perfectly
@@WHAT-bz6hp you forget mockery on your list of globe dependencies. otherwise, spot on great comment
@@luckyhaskins69 🧭📐⚖🔭⌓ = flat earth
No measured earth motion around a fake curve = NO GRAVITY .....NO GLOBE
Large bodies of calm water at rest prove there is no EARTH MOTION over a FAKE CURVE. And that fact proves there is no GRAVITY and NO GLOBE.
The globe religion places earth in the cosmos and then depends on bs math claims, cartoons, pseudo science, fairy tale physics and blind faith and censorship.
No measured curve, no motion around a curve, no radius, no measured light speed, no open vacuum, no gravity, no big bang cosmic evolution , no billions of years, NO GLOBE MODEL or MAP measured curve
There is no experiment to prove the globe. You can't prove globe physics, they don't exist.
Grasping at more and more complicated models to try and prove a flat earth, when a very simple model proves the globe seems like a lot of wasted effort.
@@Manshara2012 respectfully there is absolutely nothing simple about the wobbly, water covered, space pear, and it falsifies itself in tons of areas regarding real science and observed reality.
Cognitive dissonance sucks my friend… every Flat Earther experienced it before breaking free from the brainwashing.
@josephhanvey5891 well, I appreciate the reply. My university studies in physics (granted this was 20+ years ago) helped with understanding a lot of how nature seems to work. Even though gravity is considered the weakest of the four fundamental forces, it certainly is powerful enough to create a lot of the spherical (not always perfect spheres) shapes we see in nature. I think of Earth in space as similar to an air or soap bubble, just on a much larger scale, as gravity pulls all of these things into the most compact shape possible.
@@Manshara2012 Well your degree is in vain as all they taught you was satanic pagan pseudoscience that can't be tested, measured, or observed. You cannot obtain an elevation angle on a globe. Impossible. A sphere is convex which means there is not one straight line on it. For an elevation angle you require a flat baseline of 90 degrees to properly measure it. Large bodies of water at rest lay flat and level. You cannot have gas pressure adjacent to a vacuum without a container. That literally goes against the second law of thermodynamics. Without the manmade theory of "gravity" your model falls apart. And what gravity are we talking here? Newtonian or Einsteinian? Mass attracting mass? Or the bending and warping of space time? It's all one big satanic joke which you are blindly parroting sadly.
@@Manshara2012 very cool beliefs. antiquated , but cool fairy tales . We all fell for it. Time to start over bud.
@@Manshara2012are you really saying the earth is a sphere because bubbles? Is that what physics studies says? Lol globers are something else.
How does an illusion power solar panels?
Nobody knows how solar panels work not even the people that build them
This ALSO explains why some people seem to see more than one sun in the sky sometimes when it’s not camera flare. FASCINATING!!!
Something else!!!! If the object the FTE group saw in the sky was the ACTUAL sun…..think of the heat it would be shining down on Antarctica…..it would be impossible for it to remain unmelted continuously!!!!
@@deborahhuber8527 🤣🤣 Oh wait.. were you serious with that comment?
@@deborahhuber8527 That would be true on the flat earth, under the round earth model when scaled appropriately the sun is an astronomical distance from the planet.
"The diameter of the Earth is about 7,917 miles (12,742 kilometers), so if we were to line up Earths end-to-end, it would take about 11,720 Earths to span the average distance from Earth to the Sun."
So the sun is only about 0.0001% closer to the closest edge of the planet vs poles of the planet. People just don't grasp the scale of things because of the cute animations with over sized objects.
If the sun and earth were a mile apart, the sun would only be about 200 feet across, while the earth is only 1 foot across. That's the scales we are talking.
@kosgoth how do you get a pressurised gas system in a vacuum without a container? At the same time a mosquito can fly and you get a light breeze ? Judgement day will come before you can answer that
@@a.i9347 Gravity. It's why there is a pressure gradient. More stuff on top, being pulled down by gravity. It's why the air is less dense higher up, and under water there is more pressure, more stuff on top of you the deeper you go.
Except no one gets there own "apparent sun".
So, do you think that in winter in the north, the sun stays up for 24 hours and can be seen from any point in Antarctica (which encircles the entire globe)? That doesn’t make sense; it would require more than just a simple reflection.
I don't want to sound like George Carlin, but what's the difference between a fluid and a super fluid?
Super fluid comes from unicorn tears. 😂
HAHAHAHAH, TFE makes you come up with all kind of contraptions. I got a goalpost manufacturing business if you need new goalposts :D
This is getting so sad and pathetic now
Make your model approved by the flerf community, Flatzoid dais that you don't have a model
@@pierreboissonneault I don’t know who Flatzoid is, nor am I seeking his approval or anyone’s for that matter. Truth will win out in the end, and that’s all that matters.
@@josephhanvey5891 I don’t know who Flatzoid
A question: Is what you show is a flat earth working model ?
@ the flat earth is the working model used for everything, so we already had a working model. I’m simply demonstrating that in a physical representation using the assumptions our model operates under. By doing so I accurately convey visually what we see visually in reality.
Sad that globe proponents have pounded their chest for years demanding a physical model from FE, and when one is presented that is capable of demonstrating the phenomenon that they claim can only work on a globe the best rebuttal is… nuh uhh!!!
The globe doesn’t have a physical model that can do that… it only has cartoons. Cartoons are not a physical model, so on those grounds alone my model is far superior to the globe.
@@josephhanvey5891 Show your working flat earth model
@@josephhanvey5891 Except your "model" doesn't demonstrate the phenomena we experience.
Why do you guys think you are smarter than all the physicists, geologists, astrophysicist, aeronautics engineers, etc, etc, etc.. from around the world.. Not to mention all the 80 space agencies from 80 different countries from around the globe.. You aren't. But thanks for playing.
So the apparent sun would be a reflection?
Take me up on my wager that thousands of flerfs have run from. $10,000 I can prove a globe. I will fly to wherever you are with my survey equipment, lasers and other toys. We will put the money in an online escrow and get an attorney to write up a contract. Loser also pays winners expenses. Come on .. let’s do this
Hi Joseph, I am new to your channel and I love this so much. I am hoping you can elaborate on the 24 hour light in the far south and were you saying that there would be a 24 hour visible sun down there? I am anxiously waiting for the data from the expedition that is going on down there right now. Thanks, Theresa
@@theresaleskinen6433 I’ve got several other videos about this particular topic here. Maybe those will answer your questions.
However it’s my opinion that the sky system of our level earth enclosed universe predicts a 24 hour circling sun is low on the horizon for 360 degrees around the observers far enough south no matter where the observer is.
Multiple observers located at antipodal positions would all see it simultaneously, only its position would vary relative to each locations time zone.
Hopefully that helps.
Where is there no 24h sun in your model?
This is great, brother. Really neat model.
Can you show what the sun looks like in the south when the sun is circling in the north during southern winter?
@RachelHiner at roughly 3:21 I zoom out and you can see the apparent sun for the north.
In southern winter one would have to face that direction to even see the sun, as opposed to southern summer when the rotation demonstrated would be seen. In southern winter in Antarctica the sun is not seen.
To clarify what you see at 3:21 to like 3:38 would never be seen by someone on the ground at anytime. Our realm is way too vast. One has to remember true visual scale when contemplating this.
@@josephhanvey5891 I was just curious if in the model you created when you demonstrate the sun circling the northern tropic is the sun not visible in antartica or is there still an apparent sun visible. I am just so curious about everything! 😆
@ nope from my testing the model so far in southern winter there is still an apparent sun for the south but they must be facing north to see it.
I’ve got a lot of refining/modifications to do to the model, and tons more testing to do, but everything seems to be accounted for correctly currently. I suspect that it will only become more precise and understandable as I develop it further.
@@josephhanvey5891…your “stars” are moving in the wrong direction. By the way…our real sun can’t just hide behind a camera. This is nonsense.
Someone help this man get a bigger model!
I was watching on my phone earlier so I blamed it on that, but no: This video is like 8 blurry pixels. I can see that something is in some sense "going in a circle", but I can't see anything clearly enough to understand the nature or relative location of this circling motion.
Interesting you are using the moon map. Is it going counter clockwise? Bc they said it was when they were down there.
One more thing, I remember flat earth Dave was showing experiments during the solar eclipse explaining it with something covering a projection of the sun. Very interesting!
Great work! Keep it up. We're not sure what the FE model looks like without adequate funding or support, but this makes some sense to ehat we see, but we do know the globe narrative is false.
This is ridiculous. How do meteorites get through the dome? 8 countries have sent probes to Venus and mars, how did these probes get through the dome? Show the moon phases as well. What makes the sun move in this model?
So the Antarctic expedition this weekend December 2024 is pointless?
@@MichaelJerkson nope it’s gonna be great data for us.
Not pointless, great info for us. It will hurt a lot of innocent people in my opinion because humans are so gullible, but that is how the system works.
have you seen how arrows change directions when seen through a glass of water? if there was water inside a double dome.... youd get the direction reversal easy...
if we do see double or triple suns, it is because light is only seen on matter, thus there are multiple layers the suns light hits for us to show double suns.
light refracts on every solid barrier.... so multiple glass windows, multiple suns.... if you had two domes, you would see two suns reflexes...
maybe yuo can use a clock mechanic, hanging a light from the clock above the firmament. creating a circular path for the suns light. or a train track perhaps....
The 'throne room' in the 'heavenly' realm is not physical. It's spiritual in the heavenly realm.
Your “model” would mean 24 hour sunlight around the entire earth. It does not demonstrate how there can be 24 hour sunlight and darkness at the same time.
Why are you trying to figure out 24 hour sun on flat earth? No flat earther has ever thought that could happen. Very strange
@@pyratellamarecordingstudio1062 speaking for every flat earther is not only strange but extremely arrogant.
I’ve been a flat earther for a long time now, and can put you in touch with 10’s of thousands of FE’s that believe a 24 hour sun is absolutely possible.
On top of that real science tries to demonstrate how things work within the assumptions of any theory/model, so your question is one born of cognitive dissonance.
Regardless no globe proponent can continue to claim it’s impossible on FE, as it has been clearly demonstrated within our model.
@@josephhanvey5891 no, nobody thought that before this year. It’s insane
flat earthers have known since the late 1800's about the antartic Sun. You have fallen for a psyop and have been lied to.
We have all been lied to about everything. It is time to wake up.
Because that’s what they’re going to see there this weekend and this explains it. The globers are going to think it’s the sun and brag about how they were right when it’s just a reflection.
@pyratellamarecordingstudio1062 a glober pretending to know what we discuss okay bro. It's been years where the community split over one side not believing in the AE map and the other defending it. So no, you again don't know what you're talking about.
Do you know who Lindsay the Australian guy is by chance m?
Groundbreaking work. That really is a working model!
That's hilarious
A model needs math. Produce the math.
@@peronkop The maths already exists. Nothing changes. Perspective is the imaginary curve.
Well, it is a model. "Working".....ehhhhh.....depends how you define it.
@@KevinKiejko Well, the globe doesn't work. There's no curve on the earth and there are many other reasons,
what bible verses are you using to make this model?
Wow 🤩 this is very cool 👍
I see 2 "suns" in your demonstration yet you deny it
I cant see how far behind our head the southern sun circles, is it enough to circle around our head completely? Maybe Film from a lower angle
No, this has absolutely nothing to do with reality Kevin
We need an inside Camera angle Joe. @Ichdu check his star video you see two opposing Rotations
@@kevinsamuelbo so you think the southern celestial hemisphere is just a reflection of the north celestial hemisphere, that is a optical illusion unique to each observers location?
The sun is not optical. It provides heat and light.
Yeah but you're missing one critical point!! In the Arctic you see the 24-hour sun go behind you from whatever position you are stationed whereas in this demonstration the 24-hour sun is directly in front of you at all times which is impossible if the Earth is a ball so if this is what was recorded in Antarctica then it further proves a flat plain
Interesting. Some good points
@questfortruth9239 it's 100% possible if its a ball that rotates and is tilted at 23 degrees.
Which it is.
@@ChrisSmedley slow down there Einstein, this is still possible if the Sun that they see with their eyes is an apparent Sun reflecting off the dome which heliosexuals deny exist. This model just needs to be tweaked to give a different perspective
Not sure I get this. If I’m on the opposite side of Antarctica where your sun is I can see it circling around me too? Your model seems way too complex. I think God made it much simpler like we observe it and also so water sticks to it (gravity) causes he’s just that awesome. Anyone can do a flat disk with a dome.
Can you do Book of Enoch? All those mentions of gates for the sun different times of the year. It sounds complicated to me.
Biblical cosmology can still work with a globe .. it does not insult the Bible. Also, while I am not a Flat Earther I DO respect HOW you are attempting to rebut the Antarctica data using (at least) some sort of demonstratable method. Others are just hurling insults and very unsettling words.
As expected, Flerfkind are reinventing their model. @You can clearly see...' no, I can't. Long range navigation is totally dependent on the Earth being a globe.
Oh... You're serious 😳
Now please show us that your model allows this reflection to be tracked by a single axis of rotation that is polar aligned to Latitude and moving at a steady 15 degrees per hour for 24 hours.
The model must show no elevation change when viewed from 90 South during a full rotation and a variance of 20 degrees from Solar Noon to Solar Midnight when viewed from 80S
When you try this you will understand why your model fails.
Better luck next time.
No luck for him, but his crowd seems to like this because they don't understand it.
THIS! If they were forced to make their models represent what we see in reality, they would be cooked.