Allegedly Dave vs Particle Physicist - Flat Earth debate
(m.youtube.com)
You're viewing a single comment thread. View all comments, or full comment thread.
Comments (11)
sorted by:
Copying and pasting your retarded post does not change the fact that you have no clue what you are saying. Once an object is over 5 Km away, you will no longer see the full height of the object. The bottom will start to be cut off because of the curve of the earth. Get this one simple fact through your thick skull.
In other words, from any shore, while standing at sea level, show me the waterline of any ship or tower or marker that can be proven to be greater than 5Km away.
I'll spare you the bother. You can't.
I’m literally staring at a distant landmark 18 kms away and I can see all of it
But you’re telling me what I’m literally looking at is a lie
Do you see why I might not be convinced
People get so triggered by the idea of a flat earth. I haven’t looked into it much & only know a little about it — so I’m not a believer. But I’m also not intimidated or appalled by people who believe it’s flat. I’m very open-minded & I like thought experiments.
Regarding the experiment with a boat at sea that disappears at the horizon but can be “brought back” with binoculars — I do think you’re correct about that. I’m not sure why that is, or under what circumstances it’s possible, but i have seen it done. I think 5 km is just over 3 miles, and 18 km is a bit over 11 miles — correct me if I’m wrong.
I listened to about half the interview & couldn’t take it anymore. I feel like the science guy was having a bad day or something. I also suspect he was at a disadvantage because of the language barrier, as he seemed to be confused by certain terminology, or perhaps was thrown off by Dave’s accent / pronunciation. Is there any debates you’re aware of in which both sides are solidly represented?
One thing from the debate that, as I recall, the science guy mentioned is inaccurate measurements. I have also wondered about that: The possibility that distances are not accurate, and the possibility that even the accepted circumstance of the earth is not correct. If the earth’s circumference was significantly bigger than known, perhaps that would explain the boat experiment — however, I also question our ability to even calculate curvature in terms of distance and slope, because, according to Neil DeGrasse Tyson, earth is pear-shaped….. so…. if that’s true, then we have no way to accurately calculate this stuff. Right?
I’m not aware of any debates where both sides are represented, unfortunately
When Neil degrasse Tyson was on Joe rogan podcast, Joe brought up the fact that Neil was supposed to debate Eric Dubay on joes podcast but Neil won’t do it
Joe went on to say the problem is YouTube videos and someone who speaks well and uses big words will provide so called proofs and the average person will drink it up but if an expert were there to stop them along the way and say hey wait a second that’s wrong and here’s why
Neil or any of the rest of them can’t debate any real flat earther like an Eric Dubay because they would be exposed right away
No one looks into flat earth for real and goes back to the globe
They’ve used the accepted circumference of the earth for hundreds of years and there are supposedly thousands of satellites up in the sky and so that would mean that none of them are showing us that the dimensions are wrong
All of the so called pictures of earth, etc
Even if the earth were ten times larger than it is but a globe, the evidence provided to disprove the globe still works
Everything points to flat non rotating plane
Some stuff can work on both a globe and flat model, for sure
Some stuff is flat only
Nothing is globe only
Prove it or shut up.