Flerfs are the embodiment of the phrase, "Don't confuse me with facts because my mind is already made up." Great video.

@ghrey8282

Жыл бұрын

Exactly.

@danquaylesitsspeltpotatoe8307

Жыл бұрын

Who needs facts when you can have a baseless belief in magical pixies and the BuyBull?

@chrisantoniou4366

Жыл бұрын

Mind? WHAT mind?

@micheal49

Жыл бұрын

Just wait... any day now we'll get a flerfer claiming that geometry is fake! A hoax! A humbug! A lie! whargarbl

@kenchristie9214

Жыл бұрын

It is no surprise the flerf community is mostly christian.

Ham radio operators have been bouncing radio off of the Moon long before the reflectors were placed. The results aren't as accurate, but the round trip delay conforms to the known distance.

@AWildBard

Жыл бұрын

wow, I've never heard that before, very interesting

@sneakyfox4651

Жыл бұрын

Yes, the shorter the EM wavelength, the higher the resolution (accuracy), but also the shorter range. However, the range is also dependant on amplitude.

@therealzilch

Жыл бұрын

It might also be pointed out that Hipparchus measured the distance to the Moon pretty accurately in around 140 BC. edit: I originally said Aristarchus. I'm always getting them mixed up. Sorry.

@bretttrommler756

Жыл бұрын

Amatuer radio operators in Austria bounced a radio signal off the moon back in the late 1940's and came up with about 238,000 miles. Pretty accurate for the time.

@RegebroRepairs

Жыл бұрын

That's the thing, even if you assume every single scientist are lying to you about every single science, you can STILL easily confirm that the earth is a globe using nothing but your eyes and your brain on a trip to the seaside. And then you can basically start from there and confirm Newtonian science from the ground up, step by step by yourself. 17th century science didn't have lasers and reflectors or radio to bounce things off, and they STILL figured these things out. They built tools to observe the sky by themselves.

A version of this video was uploaded earlier, but with an error in one of the graphics. The correct calculations were made, but it caused confusion, so I corrected it.

@HYEOL

Жыл бұрын

"Err and err and err again, but less and less and less." Piet Hein

@klobiforpresident2254

Жыл бұрын

That explains why I had a "this video has been removed" error last time. Cheers!

@colormedubious4747

Жыл бұрын

Therefore, I am re-uploading my upvote.

@Kualinar

Жыл бұрын

You made an error, owned it and corrected it. By contrast, whenever a flerf make an error, he'll deny it, call you a chill or a troll for finding it, and double down.

@skateboardingjesus4006

Жыл бұрын

Flat Earthers are the epitome of fine, upstanding and honest people, with extensive academic backgrounds. And another thin.... ...Unnngh..... .....I can't keep it up. It's like trying to hold back vomit.

Another super cool thing, if you've an amateur radio license, you can use a fairly powerful transmitter to bounce a signal off the moon and receive it back again. Using the time delay between transmission and reception, you can get a fairly accurate calculation for the distance from your station to the moon. I used a Yaesu HT, an amplifier and a home-made parabolic antenna and got a time real close to about two and a half seconds.

@dogwalker666

Жыл бұрын

I use this all the time with flattards, When we did it we got 2540mS, But now we have flattards that pretend we can't measure the speed of light, sigh.

@bobsurface908

Жыл бұрын

Hey - I mentioned that today in the comments. I used a Yagi and an oscilloscope and got within couple hundred miles in the early 1990s.

@thegrumpyoldmechanic6245

Жыл бұрын

@@dogwalker666 a flattard could measure the speed of like with hardware store materials using the Fizeau method. (It would be hard.)

@whichgodofthousandsmeansno5306

Жыл бұрын

@@thegrumpyoldmechanic6245 Flatards don't want to know the speed of light.

@marklapointe2791

10 ай бұрын

Lmao. Anything that powerful is not in amatuer hands. Another you have to believe. I dony have the time. But a brief sesrch shows that high powered satellte dishes we will never have access to achieved this.

I can imagine a flat earther turning up and saying "Well you used algebra, so we *know* you're wrong"

@freddan6fly

Жыл бұрын

If you use flerf-speak it translates to "Nuh-uh".

@unnamedenemy9

Жыл бұрын

oh, they do that. I've argued with more than a few of them when I've been bored and they will *literally* dismiss when someone uses math because they claim it's meaningless. Flerfs are genuinely the stupidest things on the planet.

@robertadsett5273

Жыл бұрын

“Mathemagics”

@Martymer81

Жыл бұрын

Yup, sounds about right.

@levelearthhanifa9121

Жыл бұрын

@@Martymer81 You deleted my response?

Missed you glad to see your becoming active again .

Missed you! Good to see you back!

Awesome, a Martymer video! And not just that, a FLERFPRATT! The day is made better.

Excellent! Great to see you again.

On the topic of the sun and moon, I'm amazed you didn't bring up how light from them can somehow magically go longer distances in certain directions and fade out in others(on the flat "model"). I don't get why more people never point that out.

@unnamedenemy9

Жыл бұрын

I had a flat Earther show me a graphic of how much of the Earth was covered in sunlight on the summer solstice with this same pattern of dispersion, crowing about how this was impossible on a globe Earth despite the fact that it's *exactly* what you would expect to see on a globe and is *actually* impossible on a flat surface. Flat Earthers are literally too stupid to even understand the things they claim.

@kaliban4758

Жыл бұрын

people do flerfs just ignore

@ruledbysaturn

Жыл бұрын

@@kaliban4758 Lol. Don't be such a clown. The science is settled isn't it? Videos like this are mocking you. Poor fool.

@kaliban4758

Жыл бұрын

@@ruledbysaturn hahaha, you think im a flerf

@algladyou

Жыл бұрын

What i dont get it is how do they explain the moon dead on straight by looking at it facing you when setting. And supposedly, it's facing someone when rising. 😅😅

I thought I am a prophet who predicted the content of this video until I've read your explanation below. Happy Solstice! 🌜☀

it is trully a christmas gift. a new martymer video!

Excellent and clear, I don't think this could be made any simpler or clearer. Thank you.

One of my favorite teachers decided to claim Flat Earth is a thing she belives in, she challenged us to dispute her. I did showed her some bullshit she said two days later. Doing this gave you a massive bonus to tests. Every ten points you got you got 1 bonus point (a 50 is now a 55 a 100 is now a 110) and I just love that. It is the soul of science. Stop trusting what you hear.

@I_dreamed_my_name_was_Brandon

8 ай бұрын

I dont understand this comment. However, I'd appreciate it if you give me a single example of some "bullshit" you called her out on.

@n0etic_f0x

8 ай бұрын

@@I_dreamed_my_name_was_Brandon just asking why we can visit both poles and circumnavigating the world north to south.

Just found your channel, new member here, keep up the good work, greetings from Californa.

Awesome to see you again.

My highschool graduation paper (gymnasiearbet) talked a lot about this. I used somewhat different methods such as using the moon instead of of Venus and using Kepler's laws to get the distance to the moon and then using that and observing the angel when the moon is half shaded to get the distance to the sun. Of course we had to use the general formula which ment we had to get the mass of earth which required us to test for earth radius through Eratosthenes' experiment and gravitational constant through cavendish' experiment.

@WalterBislin

Жыл бұрын

We can calculate the distance to the moon using only 3 parameters measured on earth and using Newtons laws of motion and gravitation: the gravitational acceleration on the surface of the earth (g = 9.806 m/s^2), the radius of the earth (R = 6,371 km) and the sidereal orbital period of the moon (T = 27.3 d). Then using the following equation we get: d = ( g * R^2 * T^2 / (4 * pi^2) )^(1/3) = 383,000 km The accepted values are between 362,600 km and 405,400 km, semi major axis 384399 km (the moons orbit is elliptical). Not bad.

@whichgodofthousandsmeansno5306

Жыл бұрын

@@WalterBislin Flerfs can't use these techniques because rather then put in the work to actually learn anything, they just say everything is fake.

I haven't been in school for a couple years now, thank you for re-teaching me basic trigeonometry! I don't know how this slipped away, even though I absolutely loved math.

@TheModdedwarfare3

Жыл бұрын

Use it or lose it. School especially in the us is about retaining information exactly long enough to pass standardized tests instead of real foundational learning and critical thinking skills and it definitely shows in general populace.

@whichgodofthousandsmeansno5306

Жыл бұрын

Well if you don't use trig in your day to day life it seems natural to forget the formulas. I probably forgot 90% of what I learned in high school and college even being in the electronics industry including satellite radio technology.

I love how high school math is all you need to prove these distances, yet I have yet to see one flerf who can understand junior high level math. Even in America, where the quality of education is for the most part lower than other 1st world countries, a person still needs to take at the very least geometry, advanced algebra, and trigonometry to graduate. Yet most high school graduates here don't even seem to know what math is used for, even at these relatively remedial levels.

I remember doing my own thing 'investigating' and refuting flat earth theory, and it was the angles of light from the sun that just absolutely couldn't be reconciled no matter which way you cut it. I have found FLERFs think any flaw can be erased by screaming the word 'perspective'.

@bobsurface908

Жыл бұрын

They also don't understand that "refraction is the reason the photos of the seas are curved" is bunk because refraction curves things UPwards, not DOWNwards. If "Earth curve" photos were due to refraction, it would show the Earth curving up - now down!

@FlatEnough

Жыл бұрын

"angles of light from the Sun"? What is the Sun?

HE’S BACK

I really love your videos!

I know it's tough but wish you'd upload regularly. Loved your content.

Thankyou sir. It's a sad state of affairs that people are _still_ caught up in the flerfer cult, but here we are. Thankyou for your continuing contrabution to the education & enlightenment of the wilfully ignorant

You lost all the flat earthers when you said, "Hello everyone". But the rest of us intellectuals thoroughly enjoyed your factual scientific analysis.

You're back! Make more videos!! We need more hits against "Spirit Science."

This is the predicted flat earth response to this video: "Nuh uh!!!!"

@jogmas12

Ай бұрын

This already a one sided argument and globalist are always going to win because they naturally assume the sun to be millions of miles away and is 765,000 miles in diameter. An absolute exercise in futility

Aye Martymer81!!! I haven't seen you in soo long, I remember the fantastic (but obnoxious) "spirit science" series, thank you for taking in the tumultuous tortures for making it. Hope you and your family are well, take care, and happy new year!!

@klobiforpresident2254

Жыл бұрын

I nothing else WDPLASS gave us animated Marty.

@Martymer81

Жыл бұрын

WDPLASS 36 is in the works.

@AnaseSkyrider

Жыл бұрын

His SS series helped me during my teens as I grew out of my new age tween phase. Always a treat to see him rip apart Jordan's nonsense after being lied into following all his 'educational' works so religiously for a few years.

@JosephKeenanisme

Жыл бұрын

Dude, my friend and me still use the term "Space Jews". However we made them into the people who cause every light to turn red on your way to work. Whenever conspiracy assholes say international bankers, new world order, lizard people, or anything else it's usually just dog whistle for the jews :(. It's pure parody. "Do you have a white square phone charger?" "yeah" "It's over here" "Damned space jews!"

@levelearthhanifa9121

Жыл бұрын

Can you make an update video admitting you were wrong about this test and admit you didn't have a full understanding on the topic and also delete this video as its misleading. This will determine your honesty. Otherwise I will assume you are either arrogant or part of the deception.

Nice. For the readers, there are multiple ways for the Moon, once you have eliminated flat as a possibility. The one I used was: 1. Use a ball held at arms length by the Moon in the day time and observe that the two are illuminated the same. That indicates the Sun's rays are hitting them about parallel. That indicates the Sun is much much much further away than the Moon. When the Sun or Moon are overhead, move 69 Miles away and that puts them 1 degree off of overhead. On a flat Earth that puts them both about 4000 Miles up which is clearly wrong. 2. Use the fact of the Solar eclipse being annular occasionally to conclude the amount the Moon's shadow on the Earth shrinks is about 1 Moon diameter. 3. Use Lunar eclipses to estimate the size of the Earth's shadow compared to the Moon. The Earth shadow's penumbra is rather annoying for this. 4. Combine 2 & 3 to get the Moon's diameter is a little over 1/4 the Earth's diameter. 5. Measure the Earth using Eratosthenes' method, or Al-Biruni's, or the size of 1 arc minute (1 Nautical Mile) or whatever way you want to get an R value. 6. Use the angular size of the Moon, about 0.5 degrees, to get the ratio of diameter to distance = 1:115. 7. Multiply the calculated Moon's diameter by 115 to get the approximate distance. The Sun's distance is many multiples of the Moon's distance as shown in step 1. I didn't bother trying to get a figure for it as the various attempts over the centuries demonstrates the difficulty. Also this was for my own curiosity over how difficult measuring the Moon was, not testing flat / globe. I used the bearing to the Sun at 6 hours after local solar noon on the Equinox for that.

Great video! Excellent work!

welcome back again

We all live in an earth shaped submarine, an earth shaped submarine, an earth shaped submarine.

I hope Martymer 81 is back on publicating regularely.

@Martymer81

Жыл бұрын

I hope so, but I don't want to make a promise I can't keep.

@MrDanAng1

Жыл бұрын

@@Martymer81 I'll keep my fingers crossed, because magic always work so well! 😉

@billytaylor6604

Жыл бұрын

@@Martymer81 We really miss your Stuff, you and CHL need to start killing it again.

Do flers travel? I have lived on different continents. I have travelled between hemispheres and all timeones from Vanuatu through Mauritius, Europe/Africa, North America and Hawaii. It's impossible for me to be a fler based on my own personal observations. Timezones and stars for a start.

@stultusvenator3233

Жыл бұрын

That is because you live in reality and have a brain Sir, something flerfs do not.

@chrisantoniou4366

Жыл бұрын

Generally speaking, flat Earthers raely "travel" beyond their parents' basements.

I enjoyed the video, I have one comment I’d like to make. The best way to convince someone they might of got something wrong it’s not by insults and derogatory terms, it’s by presenting your findings!

@A_J502

Жыл бұрын

The issue is flat earth religion zealots will claim anything contradicting their beliefs is fake. They don’t address the contrary evidence because they believe the evidence isn’t evidence at all and therefore not worth addressing. This is one reason why there are so many FER debunking videos; they address the so called evidence the FER converts present.

Now, my dad isn't a Flerf, but I keep telling him, we left Mirrors on the Moon... we bounce lasers off them all the time... But he doesn't want to listen to science... so hard talking to people that can't get a basic understanding of high school science

@scott_meyer

Жыл бұрын

The Russians placed one on the back of a lander. So they can be there without men stepping foot on the Moon.

@mikefochtman7164

Жыл бұрын

@@scott_meyer Yes, this is so true. A lot of times when someone says "Laser reflector on the moon proves man was there", I want to scream. Yes, I believe in the Apollo missions, I'm old enough to have watched them live on TV. But a reflector on the moon is only proof that we have the ability to put stuff there, it doesn't prove that man walked there.

@scott_meyer

Жыл бұрын

@mikefochtman7164 There are 5. Two placed by the USSR and 3 by Apollo missions.

@mikefochtman7164

Жыл бұрын

@@scott_meyer Good to know, thanks.

@scott_meyer

Жыл бұрын

@@mikefochtman7164 kzread.info/dash/bejne/ZKaT0LpsmNjPYZM.html

Excellent video!!!! Second time just as good!!!!

I've asked flat earthers so many times to use their model to predict ANYTHING, like an eclipse, transit or retrograde of a planet. Nobody every takes me up on it, either knowing they can't do it and their model will fail - or they lack the math skills to even do it. I made a series of slides showing simple triangulation with a "stationary" star like Polaris to show how different locations on a flat earth will yield very different results, including it being visible below the equator. But fixing its distance to 3,000km or whatever will result in angles that do NOT match the angle above the horizon it would be seen from various locations. All my efforts were in vain and they lost interest mid-presentation. They aren't interested in facts, either in producing them themselves, or listening to someone else present them (to disprove their model).

@bjornfeuerbacher5514

6 күн бұрын

It's already enough to ask them where the star Sigma Octantis is located on their dome - they will never even try to answer that. :D

Honestly I think a thing that can go easily undervalued is how cool it is you can measure the distance to the sun using another planet and just math. Although not flawless, the idea kind of speaks to the power of basic math used in creative ways. It reminds me alot of measuring the size of the earth with simple shadows. Here is hope it sparks some minds.

@lenlennox1432

Жыл бұрын

that would not be a measurement, it'd be a calculation ;) Besides, you have to presume that earth is the same size as Venus to come to this 'Calculation'. lol

Great video, meticulously done.

Fun tidbit, the 'parsec' is a measure of distance related to the 'parallax' shift of one arc-second. Astronomers use parallax shift in a lot of measurements.

Did I hear correctly that you’re from Sweden? Dude your accent is perfect!

brilliant analysis!!!

Great video!

Awesome video. I doubt it will do much good to the flerf community since they can't seem to recognize there are differences between an isoceles triangle, a right angle triangle and an equilateral triangle, but here's hoping. Lift, Pee, Flush still brings a chuckle every time I think about it.🤣

Captain James Cook's first voyage to Australia was to establish an observatory at Tahiti in order to record the transit of Venus (passing between the earth and the sun), on 3 June 1769.

@whichgodofthousandsmeansno5306

Жыл бұрын

500 years ago the FIRST of many circumnavigations of the earth was accomplished. That meant proof the earth is a globe regardless of anyone's retarded beliefs. And here we are, 500 fricking years later a still a bunch of kooks never got the memo that the debate is over. No edge, dome or ice wall. Full stop.

Merry flatmas!

I live in South Africa but I don't trust my ability to help you with measurements, astronomy isn't my field lol But it really is true that flerfs don't believe in mathematics. A flerf who claimed to be a surveyor once asked me why, during a long-distance resection (a measurement done in stages) where the longest leg of the measurement equals two miles, he doesn't need to allow for curvature in terms of the distance which the rod leans away from him. (Of course it's still necessary to account for drop, but he had a convoluted way of ignoring this.) Using basic high school trigonometry, which I was terrible at in school by the way, I demonstrated that the amount by which the rod would lean away from him is within the margin of error for laser sighting equipment at that distance. I showed him the formula that I used to calculate this. He claimed that this is "complicated math" and that he chooses not to believe it because it's not something that you can "directly measure." BASIC TRIGONOMETRY. "Too complicated" for someone who calls himself a surveyor. Incredible.

@stultusvenator3233

Жыл бұрын

That is incredible, I thought and have seen a vid showing large/tall building design incorporates curvature calculations, surely surveys must know or be taught this?

@wolfieinu

Жыл бұрын

@@stultusvenator3233 You'd think so. The lateral deflection due to curvature definitely will show up at the height of a skyscraper, but not at the height of a surveying rod used to measure horizontal distance. I honestly don't believe the dude's story about being a surveyor, because I knew more about surveying than him and I'd only done some undergrad course work and practicals in surveying as part of my qualification in Geoinformatics, which is a closely related but not identical job. That said, if he's just the guy who goes out and plants the rod at the actual surveyor's direction, maybe he considers himself one while having zero actual qualifications. Or he's getting apprenticed into the job without doing any theory. Who knows.

@bobsurface908

Жыл бұрын

Like every bridge stanchion on a bridge over a few hundred yards long leaning away from each other isn't a simple proof. He's a liar, or a very poor surveyor. Imagine him trying to explain why/how bridge stanchions over to - say - Anglesey or Wales to Bristol lean away from each other on a flat Earth.

@wolfieinu

Жыл бұрын

@@bobsurface908 I assume he thinks that since the 2m rod doesn't lean away to a distance that his rangefinder can detect, the bridge support doesn't either, or that it's an illusion somehow I mean flerfs have already invented a new law of perspective whereby ships can vanish behind a flat surface somehow, so I wouldn't put it past them to ignore the evidence of their own eyes once again in this case, while accusing everyone else of doing this

I love what you do and will watch every one of these, but has mathematics, science or facts ever swayed a flat earther? I don't think they get to be flat earthers by being overly susceptible to logic and evidence. Keep up the good fight, regardless.

@garethdean6382

Жыл бұрын

These aren't for FEs, they're for the naive people hearing FE arguments for the first time and going 'I guess that sounds plausible.' You've got to stop them going down that rabbit hole.

@Martymer81

Жыл бұрын

@@garethdean6382 Bingo.

@Kyeudo

Жыл бұрын

I can generally shut up a flat earther in a KZread comments section using stuff I learned here and from CoolHardLogic.

You said flerfs are orders of magnitude out, but you have to remember, they have no idea what orders of magnitude are - remember the guy who thought 10^-17 was a negative number? 🤣

I’m reading Off The Edge by Kelly Weill which goes into the origins of the modern belief in a flat earth. Fascinating and comprehensive is how I would rate it. Cons and grifters are a regular part of humanity and when you pair that with a fundamentalist religious audience you get an unassailable connection-nothing can break it. Therefore this phenomenon will never go away.

@John.0z

Жыл бұрын

I like the use of the Crimso ITCOTCK cover art as your icon. 🙂 I assume you know of Toyah's YT site, with Fripp in most of the videos?

@lreadlResurrected

Жыл бұрын

@@John.0z TY. Been using it since I joined in about 2005. I haven't seen his site but will definitely give it a look. Cheers.

@John.0z

Жыл бұрын

@@lreadlResurrected I find it almost alarming to watch Fripp being a really funny fellow, and obviously having a LOT of fun with his wife. In all the live music videos, and album photos he is *so serious* that you get a different impression of him.

The best case scenario is flerfs will learn how "Linköping" is pronounced (swedish will not stop surprising me).

@laurentdrozin812

Жыл бұрын

I would not be surprised if a few of them actually live in Linköping.

Flerfer said to me that the Sun is only 2500 ft above sea level, trouble when I go to a taller mountain behind my home, it's still way up there in the sky hahahaha

@dogwalker666

Жыл бұрын

Wow glad that's not true, I live at 1000 feet, and have been to the top of Ben Nevis multiple times that is 4,400 feet and the Sun was still 93 million miles above me, Flattards say some stupid things.

@bobsurface908

Жыл бұрын

I also love when they try to say crepuscular rays lead back to the Sun and show it's height, and I triangulated it back on one pic to about 25000ft - but they didn't like that, as it put a couple of contrails about 15000ft ABOVE the Sun, so...

This is the first of your videos I have seen - but I have thought a good way to demonstrate that the Earth is not flat is to simply work Eratosthenes with 3 points along a north-south line, instead of 2. If the Earth is flat, simple geometry will tell you the height of the sun, and it will be the same no matter which of the 3 possible pairs of observation you use. But - if you cannot generate a consistent 'height' for the sun from the observations, then either the Earth is not flat, or you must jump through some hoops to explain why the observations don't match (yes - I know, FLERFs will immediately jump to some nonsense about refraction that, without actually making any calculations, they will assume fixes all of their problems...) Anyways - some very nice explanations of measuring solar-system distances using parallax from Earth observations. My first thought was that you were going to use stellar parallax to destroy the 'stars are dots on the celestial sphere that holds the air in' theory.

If you can be bothered, it is easy to calculate the precise height the flat earth sun must be at any point in the year. You just use the distance it travels in one hour and its angular velocity of 15 degrees per hour. If you do the calculations, you find not only is it supposed to travel between the Tropics, but must also dramatically change its height. If it changes its height, it must also change its size to maintain its angular size.

@bobsurface908

Жыл бұрын

Also, it much change speed dramatically throughout the day to continue at 15 degrees per hour...but it must only change speed for YOU. The people a few hundred miles away should see it moving slowly when you see it moving the fastest at sunrise/set. It's nonsense - the Sun and Moon can't move different physical speeds in one place than another, and at their fastest speeds in YOUR location while the slowest in another!

What cools the air inside the dome, we have a nuclear furnace spinning around and no place to vent.

@nilz91

Жыл бұрын

flatard priests claim Earth is flat with a dome, carried on the back of the turtle, using its fart as the vent,,,,

Happy new years from cape town south africa

2:10 We have the oposite cathet (d/2) and are trying to find r (adjacent cathet), in that case we use the tangent tan α = OC/AC tan p/2 = (d/2)/r Multiply both sides by r, divide both sides by tan p/2 and we get: r = (d/2)/tan(p/2)

@origamiswami6272

Жыл бұрын

What happened to the tan in the final equation?

@rodaguj5718

Жыл бұрын

@@origamiswami6272 oh yeah right, thank you for pointing it out, I divided both sides by tan p/2 but forgot to actually write tan it lol

@FlatEnough

Жыл бұрын

@@rodaguj5718 you also forgot to acknowledge that all this is based on the assumption that Venus is a solid sphere the size of the Earth, that angles are obtained from a level plane, that all scaling is done on the assumption of "a space orbit" as assumed by Kepler, that G is a thing, and that the thermodynamic violation that you call "space" (the ludicrous notion that the sky is a vacuum) physically exists. You only scribble numbers on a paper, and all you see are lights on the sky, and play with astronomy software. Get off your high horse already.

Thanks !

Is there a way to find out when Venus is at greatest elongation without looking the date up?

6:07 i was wondering why you uploaded this again. Now i know.

It is great to have rationality, logic and real science back! Thank you for pursuing this series. I am guessing that things are more than a bit unsettled with the Russian aggression going on. Happy holiday time and stay safe.

@lenlennox1432

Жыл бұрын

'real science' lol - all you have is mathematical calculations based upon assumptions, ie assuming earth is the same size as Venus

A fairer and more thorough treatment would first establish that the stars are essentially an infinitely distant backdrop at the scales considered here. The flerf will invoke a nearby dome of stars to 'explain' the small parallactic shift of the slightly nearer Sun and Moon as seen against it. Which invites us to address the foundational matter of deconvolving their derived nearness as 'fitting' a flat Earth from the real effect of the spherical Earth. Without first driving this crucial matter home into the flerf's brain, all else cannot possibly register there.

@bobsurface908

Жыл бұрын

Nah. I just start with HAM radio being able to be detected reflecting off the moon, and measured with a simple stopwatch. Then move to parallax with stars once you have a known distance to prove stars are essentially infinite distance. After that, it's a simple step to work out the angle between the Sun and Moon when the Moon is at first or last quarter, since it MUST be at 90 degrees to the Sun, and then you can work out the distance of the leg from you to the Sun with the measured angle between the Sun and Moon, and the known leg to the Moon. If Aristarchus had access to HAM radio, his work would have been even easier to work out the distance to the Sun!

@UnsilentedStorms

6 ай бұрын

@@bobsurface908 Aristarchus is heavily misrepresented as a heliocentrist, but he didn't believe in the heliocentric model, at all.. after an encounter with pagans who worshipped the sun but believed in geocentricism, he joked claiming they should be worshiping the earth instead. and then entertained what it would look like for a heliocentric system to work-- so his idea was in pure irony of turning logic on its head, which hilariously now- we live in that dark age, where all people have been confused with morality and science twisted on its head to spew lies.

Thanks for the video :)

Brian's Logic (his channel's name) has a new claim involving the sun and moon that I think you'll find .... entertaining.

On an equinox, at Solar noon, on the equator, the sun is directly above (90 degrees elevation). At any latitude, the elevation to the sun is 90 minus the latitude. Try a simple test on the equinoxes. The angle between vertical down to the sun at solar noon is equal to your latitude. That’s valid at all latitudes. Only on a spherical earth is that possible.

You can't hit a target far away without adding the curve of the earth.

Hell, you can measure the distance to the Moon with an oscilloscope and a decent HAM radio setup with a good directional high-gain antenna. I measured it in west London using a local HAM's setup in the early 1990s. I was within a couple hundred miles of the accepted value easily.

I was literally 🤣rolling on my couch laughing🤣 at "lift, pee, flush!" In fairness, though, not all flerfers can manage even that much. I once let a flerfer use my bathroom, and he didn't even bother lifting the seat to pee, nor did he wipe the seat off afterwards! And the moral of the story is, "Don't expect too much from those poor, befuddled flerfers, or you'll end up being very disappointed!"🤣

@chrisantoniou4366

Жыл бұрын

Consider yourself lucky he knew the difference between a toilet seat and a sofa.

@whichgodofthousandsmeansno5306

Жыл бұрын

At least you met a flerf in real life. I never have so I don't know what it feels like to punch someone in the face.

@That70sGuitarist

Жыл бұрын

@@whichgodofthousandsmeansno5306 Trust me, punching people in the face/head is vastly overrated and, worse, is often ineffective. The head is mostly made of dense bone, so you're liable to end up with broken knuckles that way. (Take it from me, that's no fun at all.) You're much better off going after the solar plexus, since that can temporarily paralyse their respiratory system. If your opponent can't breathe, they can't put up much of a fight.😉 If you absolutely *have* to punch someone in the face, I recommend aiming for their nose with a downward strike. The nose is mostly made of cartilage, and a good shot there can cause anything from respiratory difficulties to obscured vision from watering eyes.😉 Or better yet, don't punch anyone at all. Instead of hating Flerfers, we should pity them. After all, being pitied is far more demeaning to the human psyche than taking a beating!🤣

Spent the last couple of days writing a skyshader with a correct seasonal sky based on geo-location for a computer game. The levels of inverse thinking you have to mentally work thru to make the projection work out for a sky that's actually a dome ontop of a flat earth; It ensures anyone capable of formulating how such a projection would work is trolling you if they claim that's how reality operates. The few true believers out there who's not too simple to understand the implications of their own claims will be people who are mentally unwell. No amount of evidence is gonna convince someone like that, not given how much evidence they've already chosen to ignore in order to arrive where they're at.

Great video. Have a sub!

Kinda hard to debunk all these conspiracy theories if every person has a seemingly different version of the same topic.

@A_J502

Жыл бұрын

That’s what makes flat earth a religion; based more on faith than facts.

Thanks for sharing. 😉👌🏻

I love the math you used and I love that you called out flerfs immediately following the math. Flerfies have to DENY MATH. lol. Too funny and how absurd. Good job my fellow earthling.

@Globeisahoaxx

Жыл бұрын

Theory don’t matter. Need physical proof. Globe ain’t gone one

@CNCmachiningisfun

Жыл бұрын

@@Globeisahoaxx Get a clue!

@gdmathguy

Жыл бұрын

@@CNCmachiningisfun he's a troll, never ever respond to him again

@gdmathguy

Жыл бұрын

@@Globeisahoaxx Here I go reporting you on another video :)

@CNCmachiningisfun

Жыл бұрын

@@gdmathguy It is a shame that googleTube supports those trolls, while censoring those who would correct them.

Any news from Jordan?

I like, that you use astronomy software (Stellarium or CdC?) to demonstrate this. As an astrophotographer I use Stellarium and CdC on a regular basis. The fact, that you can plan sessions to photograph the planets, stars, moon, the sun and DSOs is anything anyone will ever need to see instantly, that the world is, as we say it is. A spheroid earth in a heliocentric model, etc. Both software suits use real orbital mechanics math to calculate the position of stars, planets, the moon and the sun. You can even dowlnoad CdC and check the math yourself. Then go outside and see, how the math and predictions of the software, based on the real globe earth and the real shape of the solar system and stellar objects, are reflected in reality. I've always said: the moment a flerf can give me a software, that can predict the positions of stars based on a flat earth model, I will be checking that model. Since noone can ever do it (because this is not possible with a flat earth "model"): check mate flerfs.

@Globeisahoaxx

Жыл бұрын

FE is just a movement exposing globe lies. You can try Edward Hendrie book Greatest Lie on Earth and see if that helps

@christoph4977

Жыл бұрын

@@Globeisahoaxx If you want to comment on my post do so and don't promote garbage.

@sineout9294

Жыл бұрын

@@Globeisahoaxx You didn't grasp the significance of what he said there. Many of the websites and programs that provide to-the-minute accurate predictions of sun, moon, planets, stars and satellite movements are based on open source software - Stellarium for one. Which means knowledgeable people can examine the source and confirm that the algorithms match and are based on the standard model. The fact that they work means the standard model HAS to be correct. But flat earth has nothing to match it. Fact is, if you think anyone can hide the shape of the earth you have no idea of how science works, because all science is effectively open source. The evidence is available to everyone and nothing is accepted without deep scrutiny. "They" can no more hide the true shape of the earth than they can hide the true boiling point of water. The lie is the flat earth and you've been duped.

You can do this using sticks and shadows.

The funniest thing about flat earthers is, when they use the term "globe". Flat earthers say that there are millions of people around the globe that believe the earth is flat🤣.

@Globeisahoaxx

Жыл бұрын

Who told you that

@HugoFilho.

Жыл бұрын

@@Globeisahoaxx" the Flat Earth Society has members all around the GLOBE" Souce: Flat Earth Society

@Romanperro

Жыл бұрын

@@HugoFilho. Flat Earth Society is controlled opposition, which i can not prove, but statements like this actually show the weird direction they are taking. there is some truth, and some very weird and wrong stuff. There are no "THE" flat earthers.

How do you determine the parallax from two pictures? It seems like you’d need to know the distance to the moon already to get that angle. Like how was that 1.42 degree parallax determined just from two images superimposed

@meusana3681

Жыл бұрын

sadly this channel isn't for introduction purposes, if you don't understand parallax please go watch one of the million videos explaining it already.

@Teezus99

Жыл бұрын

@@meusana3681 can you link me to any? Unfortunately I am a beginner to astrophotography. I know that angle is related to the camera focal length, but as an engineer, I’m interested in the derivation of the equations used

@whichgodofthousandsmeansno5306

Жыл бұрын

@@Teezus99 "parallax"

Gmorning man

I did the same calculation using Stellarium. I found a value of 372762 km for the distance Earth-Moon. Not bad... Fun fact: If the earth was flat, then the distance Earth-Moon would be even greater because d is greater on a flat surface !

I wish I could see the deer in the headlights look flerfs will have after watching this video. 😂

I love the flerfers snow globes.

It's one thing they don't believe in the shape and arrangmenet of the universe, they don't believe in way more fundamental things like Newtonian physics and measurement.

good job mate, very nice sci work i wont say who but you are 10 times better then him.

If the sun and moon were no higher than 5000km above the Earth’s surface, they would be proportionately small objects with a diameter of roughly 44km (back of envelope calculation). If this small size had been true, any observer would see the moon & sun radically change in apparent diameter as they crossed the sky. As no radical change in apparent diameter is noted, the moon & sun must be much further away, and much larger, than the flat Earth model suggests.

@jasmijnariel

Жыл бұрын

Ofcourse... just another piece of BS they cant explain

@clemstevenson

Жыл бұрын

@@jasmijnariel They can even explain basic visual contradictions. There's also the problem of the apparent size of constellations, which remain the same at any point in the night sky.

@whichgodofthousandsmeansno5306

Жыл бұрын

Flatmosferic flensing.

@clemstevenson

Жыл бұрын

@@whichgodofthousandsmeansno5306 Of Course!

I hope ypu are not late to the party. Like your videos.

You clearly know your opponents well. They would absolutely dismiss this as you trying to confuse them with scientology.

Hi from Cape Town, South Africa 🇿🇦 If you need an image of the sky from my side of the world, just send me a message. Always enjoy your videos, thank you for making them.

I'm guessing flerfers (love it) don't believe in the speed of causality (light) as being the fastest anything can go, since even if we were to use the young earth model (i imagine most flerfers are religious as well) the constant acceleration would today put earth at traveling somewhere between 300,000 and 1,000,000 times the speed of light.

@Kyeudo

Жыл бұрын

Most don't adhere to the constant acceleration model. Most go with the "sun is am spotlight and gravity is am magnets and density" 'model'

@Mandelbrot_Set

Жыл бұрын

You don't need to go faster than the speed of light for it feel like a constant one gee acceleration because of time dilation.

One simple fact disproves the flat Earth model presented in this video: On the night of a full moon, the moon is full for every location on Earth. If you look at the flat Earth model, it postulates that the sun and moon travel in a circle around the north pole, with the moon always near the equator. For an example, let's take a full moon at midnight in London. On the flat Earth "map", this would place the moon over Central Africa (about over the Democratic Republic of the Congo) with the sun on the opposite side of the world (over the Pacific, a bit south-east of Hawai'i). Thus, a full moon shows in London. However, according to the flat Earth "model", at the same time, people in Morocco (northwest of the Congo) would see a 3/4 moon with the lit portion on the left, people in Iran (northeast of the Congo) would see a 3/4 moon with the lit portion on the right, people in South Africa (south of the Congo) would see a new moon or just a sliver, and people in the Congo would be looking straight up and see the moon's south pole at a half moon. This does not happen in the real world. The flat Earth model cannot depict a full moon all over the world on the same night as happens in the real world. Thus, the flat Earth model is invalid. In addition, this flat Earth model cannot depict a full moon visible to anyone near or south of the equator, yet they see a full moon every 28 days.

Could you please clarify, because I might have missed something.. You used software for your Sweden/South Africa example, but you managed to find photos taken at the exact same time from Sweden and Tokyo for your second example? Is that not the same software? Either way, how would software that assumes a globe earth in space alongside planetary and celestial movement be at all reliable for pointing out the flaws of a flat earth? It's literally written in its code to function the entirely opposite way. Also, I'll admit that the maths of this video went over my head, it's far from my area of expertise so be patient with me. Is there any chance any of these calculations could work for a flat earth if you alter your assumption/hypothesis? Like, for example, the classic Eritosthenes experiment with the shadows prove both a globe and a flat earth depending on your hypothesis; for the sake of perpetuating heliocentrism, this experiment suddenly became unequivocal proof of a globe. Point being, the results of a calculation or simulation or w/e, could just as well mean several outcomes

@bass-dc9175

Жыл бұрын

"Is there any chance any of these calculations could work for a flat earth if you alter your assumption/hypothesis? " No. Because the values given by the software, while being based on calculations on a round earth, match reality. In the calculation: The value of a distance of 10.200km is used for a flat earth. The surface distance. The angle is the angle we observe in real life. So the calculated distance of 411000km is assuming a flat earth. And 367000 is assuming a round earth. How do we know the round earth value is the correct one? Simple. If we introduce a third person, we can calculate the distance again. The value will stay the same for the model that is correct, within a small margin of error ofcourse. New distane 7000km (Flat) and 6648km (round) The observed paralax angle is 1.037°. So lets plug in the values: r[flat] = 7000 / tan(1.037) = 386718 r(round) = 6650 / tan(1.037) = 367288 So on the flat earth, the moon would be simultaneously 411000km and 387000km away from the same position. I think we can both agree that this is impossible. But on the round earth model: The moon is ruffly 367000km away from the same spot in both measurements. And yes: The same can be done with the Eritosthenes experiment you mentioned. Add a 3rd person at another distance away and take measurements. If you try to calculate the distance to the sun, you will face the same problem. The sun has to be in 2 positions at once on a flat earth, because the calculated angle ignores the curvature. But if you take in the curvature of the earth, then suddenly both measurements show the same value. The formular itself does not assume a flat or round earth. It works fine for both. But if you plug in real world values: Only the model which is true will show a consistant result. And that is: The earth is round.

@JnK69

Жыл бұрын

@@bass-dc9175 I appreciate the detailed answer, thank you for not showing a patronizing tone and whatnot. Can I ask some follow up questions though? 1. Do we know that the measurements given to us about the ball earth are accurate? Without blind faith in having other people tell you the correct size, we can verify how big Earth is? 2. Similarly, do we really have an accurate enough model of the flat earth at this moment to be able to punch in definitive numbers in a calculation? Not just the size of it but also the inclusion of the firmament and its potential properties, the moon as a disk-shaped plasma phenomenon rather than a spherical object etc. So many assumptions need to be made to dismiss the flat earth possibility. You say the numbers "match reality" but is this something you've verified for yourself? That statement, to me, sounds rather arrogant. Can you see where I'm coming from?

@justynpryce

Жыл бұрын

@JnK69 I don't have the energy to answer your questions but I will say generally when you have to add features that just happen to make everything look like it follows the gravitational model even though it doesn't, then everything just gets pretty inconsistent. Sure, if the earth is flat then maybe the firmament just has properties that make it look like there is parallax completely in line with a gravitational model, but that'd be odd. Sometimes you just have to sit and ask yourself, what governs the motion of all celestial bodies? We found that a gravitational model (a single force law), explains the motion of all the planets, moons, asteroids, and comets within the solar system with extremely little variation from observation. It explains how their sizes and brightnesses change over time and even the dynamics of objects on the surface or in the atmosphere of planets. Now the firmament can just make it look like this, but I don't understand why God would try to trick us into believing there's gravity if there isn't. If it's flat I'd imagine he'd just make sure everyone knows it's flat by making it a bit more straightforward, like having the sun and moon go around in circles or something without weird light effects that make the parallax weird.

@bass-dc9175

Жыл бұрын

@@JnK69 "Do we know that the measurements given to us about the ball earth are accurate?" Yes because we can perform the measurements ourself. "Without blind faith in having other people tell you the correct size, we can verify how big Earth is?" Yes, multiple methods allow us to do so. Most require two people to perform measurements at the same time, some require 3, others can be done solo. "Similarly, do we really have an accurate enough model of the flat earth at this moment to be able to punch in definitive numbers in a calculation?" No, there currently is no coherent singular model for a flat earth. However: the calculations rely on none. Only real life measurements are taken into account. Predictions made by the calculations for the flat earth only rely on the flat earth demanding an earth to be flat, which is a given for all flat earth models. Or to put it more simple: The calculations do not rely on any singular model. They apply to all versions of a flat earth. "Not just the size of it but also the inclusion of the firmament and its potential properties, the moon as a disk-shaped plasma phenomenon rather than a spherical object etc. So many assumptions need to be made to dismiss the flat earth possibility." We can exclude a few of these. 1) A moon that is a plasma phenomenon would not cast shadows or be able to have shadows on itself. Any moon model which gives of light can be dismissed offhand because they make shadows on itself impossible. 2) A disk moon is similarly impossible, since two persons far enough would see the moon as either a round object or an elipsis. The moon has readily observable properties which are only consistant with a spherical object that does not emit light. 3) Firmament models that require a distortion to compensate for the inconsistancies detailed in Reponse [1]. Such distortions that shift the position of the moon would also shift the position of stars, which does not happen. Additionally such distortions would cause the shape to change based on the angle of deflection. As detailed in 2) we do not see that. "You say the numbers "match reality" but is this something you've verified for yourself?" Yes. With the help of 2 friends. One in Italy and one in Nigeria.

@JnK69

Жыл бұрын

@@justynpryce When it comes to the theory of gravity, we didn't find anything. It was created to give the illusion of a space in which the planets and stars move. The whole idea of a solar system and galaxies falls apart without it. I agree that it's difficult to argue for the flat earth since we really don't know what the stars and planets are, we can just assert what they aren't (that being balls of rock and gas in a giant void) and looking closely at the stars we can see that they are dancing lights and not giant nuclear fusion gas balls (look up sonoluminescence). I wholeheartedly subscribe to the idea that this is a simulation, backed by recent advances in the field of quantum physics. As such, it would need a creator, call it God or a programmer or coder, it's all the same. It would also go beyond everything we know and can apply logic to, much like how NPCs in a video game could never point out where we "the player" exist. From our perspective, it's just a monitor that separates us, for them we exist in an entirely different dimension. In a computer game, you only create the bare minimum to sell a visual idea, be it mountains in the background with no solidity to them or a building you can't enter with nothing in it. I really feel we need to start evaluating the nature of earth from that perspective, that anything outside of humanity's collective sphere of influence (we can't see, hear or in any way observe further) need not be rendered. Just black void with us in a terrarium, with a highly sophisticated clock mechanism in the heavens.

Thanks for this awesome vid showing some solid science, sadly the extreme naivete of the average flerf is not going to get a bit of it.

Nathan Oakley 1980 flat earth debate channel, sent me to your channel. He has "allegedly" debunked this particular video. Is there any chance you could do a video to counter his very interesting points that appear to debunk the method you used to measure the distance to the sun.

@djthunderfoot1879

Жыл бұрын

kzread.infoQxmpdRj8pcg?feature=share Here is the link to Nathan Oakley 1980 debunking your video

What an amazing industry the flat earth and flat earth debunkers have created. I wish I had thought of it.

@Globeisahoaxx

Жыл бұрын

One wonders why there are so many debunkers. Maybe because the liars are in panic mode?

There isn't a single flat earth model. A different model is created depending on what question is being explored. There is no requirement that the different models should be consistent with each other.

@Globeisahoaxx

Жыл бұрын

There is one. It’s called Not a Globe

@JimSmithInChiapas2

Жыл бұрын

You're invited to show how to apply any version of "Flat Earth physics" to the simple problem that I present in my video.

@JimSmithInChiapas2

Жыл бұрын

_"A different model is created depending on what question is being explored."_ In other words, you just make up incoherent drivel extemporaneously. Which goes a long way toward explaining why -- despite the supposed superiority of your approach -- no Flat Earther has contributed anything to scientific advancement in over a century.

@pyotrberia9741

Жыл бұрын

@@JimSmithInChiapas2 , Correct.

Well new friend here, from, Durban, South Africa

Always remember flerfs can't count to 11 with shoes on!

the dome is 26,400 feet tall, the air pressure is 14.7 psi or 2110 lbs per sqr ft a cubic foot of air weighs .08 lbs, since the atmosphere is encapsulated in a dome and gravity doesnt exist, the pressure is consistant from bottom to top ( 14.7 psi everywhere) since the air weighs .08 lbs per cf and a sqr ft has 2110 lbs force we divide 2110 by .08 is 26,400 feet of altitude, since the sun and moon are inside the dome and planes are capable of flying 30,000 to 36,000 feet up planes should be able to land on the moon. Mt. Everest is 29,000 feet tall. I wonder if any of the people climbing Mt. Everest saw the dome on the way up? Also, since the air pressure is 14.7 everywhere ( remember no gravity no pressure gradient ) altimeters on plane would always read 0 feet no matter how hi inside the dome they went. Also, a straight line road running E/W or W/E can not be made on a flat earth since all the lines of latitude curve, but a road can be made to be straight on a globe running E/W or W/E.

Thank you , you keep me alive and kcicking