Well aren't we taught that the earth is tilted on its axis?

yes

So in the globe earth model wouldn't one hemisphere have more sunlight and heat than the other regardless of the equator?

yes, i believe it does

Also if the earth is an oblate spheroid, wouldn't the part of the globe that jets out further be closest to the sun?

yes, i believe it does

One last thing: wouldn't the sun rays heat be kinda negligible between the northern and southern hemisphere since we are so far away and apparently receive the rays at a similar angle and intensity?

which is why there is relatively little temperature difference - even between the poles vs the equator.

this seems pretty complete:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=adzx547ptck

You believe a lie and you won't think.

True or False: 1 + 1 = 2

...waiting...

Draining would be more dependent on differences between sinks.

agreed, the difference is very slight.

that coriolois effect is just unscientific nonsense

define: unscientific

spiller: you can't - i win

There's no one scientific, peer reviewed experiment that can support coriolis

prove it

spoiler: you can't! i win

you already referenced that video.

go to minute 3:00

https://youtu.be/xnbs1s8DKVs?t=188

the narrator says the stars rotating left to right (south pole) / right to left (north pole) is an optical illusion.

i thought you guys didn't believe in optical illusions - you know the whole horizon thing ? now suddenly you believe in optical illusions again ?

#fail

Just a normal person

prove it

No, there is another explaination.

then it's not "the equator".

if it's another explanation, then you are talking about something else - you'll need to make-up another word for your version of the imaginary line the divides the Earth in half.

"equator" is already taken.

also "inches" "days" and "watts" -- all taken. you'll need different words to describe length, time and energy, respectively.

At the equator there is zero spin.

and there you have it folks... zero spin at the equator, but magically the rest of the planet spins.

riiiiiiiiiiiight

You can't even consider what 8 inches per mile squared means.

correct - i don't need to ... you're not going to convince me that general physics is wrong because of "8 inches per mile".

Your poor fragile ego,

lol... yes... it's MY ego that's frigile. good call, hector.

It divides the earth equally,

C+

the equator is the horizontal that is closest to the sun, while the arctics are the furthest from the sun - because it's a globe.

it's warmer at the equator than it is at the arctics - because it's a globe.

here's the counter-evidence ... since you really seem to need it:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aDorTBEhEtk

#itsaglobe

hohooho... noice

you dont really think that do you?

yes :)

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aDorTBEhEtk

#touche

point taken: he speaks in such coded vagary, it's kinda difficult to know wtf he is even saying sometimes ;)

do not consistently spin in any one direction!

sure, you can force a counter-gravitational vortex.

but obviously i am not talking about that - isn't that right, dingleberry ?

along those lines yea...

#justsayin

maybe there is a different reason for the different spin of water for the earth above and below the equator.

define: equator

I'm convinced the overwhelming majority of "flat earthers" are just trolling,

paid to troll

i.e., shilling

lol, yes - i'm thin-skinned - because I can't handle "flat earth" :)

when all else fails, insult them? was that part of your training?

try calling me a #cockroach next - lol ;)

ok ok... let me make sure i understand your insult:

i'm thin-skinned because I can't handle "flat earth".

it's not because flat earth is fucking retarded. no no... it's because i am thin skinned hahahahaha lol... you guys are entertaining - i'll give you that... לחיים :)

The video is not intended to convince you.

lol... ok, trail blazer.

I just said many times.

saying it over and over again doesn't make it true.

pussy

show me proof that it is fake

/touché!