It is endlessly entertaining to watch modern flerfs 'move the goalposts', deny prior comments or disavow the AE map as a flat Earth map, all because of a contemporary Antarctic expedition.
Man, this Flatzoid oke is an embarrassment to South Africa. Of course it is an experiment - they are changing their observation position (the controlled, independent variable) to observe how the path of the sun through the sky is affected (the dependent variable), and comparing if or how that differs from what is predicted. He sounds like some of our politicians, arguing for the sake of hearing their own voice and sounding smart, trying to baffle the listener with technical jargon, but without applying any sort of critical thinking, or even common sense for that matter, to the subject.
Some major issues with Flatzoid's logic is that he believes that dishonesty is "evidence", lies are "facts", etc. Anyone can lie to back up their claims but, despite his reasoning, those lies don't make those claims accurate or factual.
Just a few days ago I was curious about how much of the suns spectrum was in the IR and turns out it's almost gone by 3 microns. So, I think the heat you feel from direct sun is from the visible part of the spectrum so you can indeed see it.
Several months before TFE actually took place I prepared & distributed a set of calculated predictions for the apparent size, azimuth, and altitude of the sun, at hourly intervals, during one 24 hr period, for both the globe and a flat earth with a form similar to the Gleason /Christopher image. I proposed taking these measurements using a simple opto-mechanical device, like a sextant [ no electronic jiggery -pokery ]. I wrote out the hypothesis concisely, stating that, from our past observations, we should be capable of predicting the observable position & motion of the sun at any future date. The independent variable was time - the date & time of the observations. I know that flerfs don't like this. In their schoolboy Socratic debating society logic, you must be able to 'manipulate' the independent variable, and because we cannot make time go backwards, stand still, or even go forwards faster at will, then we cannot 'manipulate' time. But time IS a variable, the universe is different between now, and NOW. The simple act of selecting when to take measurements is a manipulation. The 2 sets of predictions I generated are markedly different. Observations could only agree with one set. I didn't claim that I could PROVE either a globe, or a flat disc. But, one, or both, models would be falsified. The flat earth model I employed was not explicitly the Gleason /Christopher map. There was no need to identify any land mass, apart from the location of Union Glacier. It did include all of the claims generally made by flerfs: The earth is flat. The north pole is central. Meridians spread out radially from the central north pole. One meridian is selected to be 'zero', for identifying other meridians by angular measurement. Distance along each meridian is measured to be 60 nautical miles [ 69.1 statute miles, 111 kilometres ] for each degree away from the NP. The sun orbits on a circular path, directly above [90 + 23 ] x 60 nautical miles from the north pole in late December. The Sun is 3000 miles above the surface. The sun is 30 miles in diameter. Only the last two are debatable criteria in the model that flerfs have put forward in the past. I was very happy to recalculate for any change to these that they should require. I have not seen, or heard any of these data points yet, amidst all of the excitement about time lapses of 24 hour suns & sunspots. I will be extremely p*ssed if such data does not emerge in time, as it would be a golden opportunity squandered, at great cost in both man hours & dollars.
Hypothesis: a twenty four Sun can be seen depending only on latitude and day of year (unless clouds and nearby hills obscures view). The dependent variable, seeing twenty four hour Sun, and independent variables, latitude and day of year, have just been described. Set the independent variables by moving to various latitudes and waiting for days of year. Flatzoid is misrepresenting the cause of the Sun's path with the dependent variables. Just because humans can't change the natural laws themselves doesn't we can't manipulate circumstances to achieve an effect.
Since flatzoid is so adept at using a dictionary then how does he then explain flat earth not being in there yet a globe earth is, does the dictionary then become a lie? Cant have it both ways flatzoid
"dear YT... the more of these videos you recommend, the more i am inclined to become a flerfer despite my deeply ingrained beliefs... you never recommend me any flerfer videos... i detect some type of bias afoot..."
Question is, are his objections to Flatzoid's arguments valid? It appears they are. Flatzoid is not making a good case. Being a flatearther beats being a nuclear scientist on unreliability. Ever noticed that flat Earth gurus never do anything better than globies? No better eclipses predictions, nor weather forecasts, nor maps, nor surveys, nor climate models, nor earthquake predictions. Neither any actual evidence for flat Earth that can resist scrutiny.
It is endlessly entertaining to watch modern flerfs 'move the goalposts', deny prior comments or disavow the AE map as a flat Earth map, all because of a contemporary Antarctic expedition.
Amazing how an easy observation can turn into something more like a lawsuit over contract law than logic to flat earthers.
Man, this Flatzoid oke is an embarrassment to South Africa. Of course it is an experiment - they are changing their observation position (the controlled, independent variable) to observe how the path of the sun through the sky is affected (the dependent variable), and comparing if or how that differs from what is predicted. He sounds like some of our politicians, arguing for the sake of hearing their own voice and sounding smart, trying to baffle the listener with technical jargon, but without applying any sort of critical thinking, or even common sense for that matter, to the subject.
He's so desperate. Dude is coping hard. That green screen rant said it all for me. These guys are just not interested in truth
Being so afraid of being fooled, that they preemptively fool themselfs.
The independent variable was the latitude of the observation!
Some major issues with Flatzoid's logic is that he believes that dishonesty is "evidence", lies are "facts", etc. Anyone can lie to back up their claims but, despite his reasoning, those lies don't make those claims accurate or factual.
Mind you he was coping this hard BEFORE they arrived at Antarctica. Comical
Just a few days ago I was curious about how much of the suns spectrum was in the IR and turns out it's almost gone by 3 microns. So, I think the heat you feel from direct sun is from the visible part of the spectrum so you can indeed see it.
Several months before TFE actually took place I prepared & distributed a set of calculated predictions for the apparent size, azimuth, and altitude of the sun, at hourly intervals, during one 24 hr period, for both the globe and a flat earth with a form similar to the Gleason /Christopher image. I proposed taking these measurements using a simple opto-mechanical device, like a sextant [ no electronic jiggery -pokery ].
I wrote out the hypothesis concisely, stating that, from our past observations, we should be capable of predicting the observable position & motion of the sun at any future date. The independent variable was time - the date & time of the observations. I know that flerfs don't like this. In their schoolboy Socratic debating society logic, you must be able to 'manipulate' the independent variable, and because we cannot make time go backwards, stand still, or even go forwards faster at will, then we cannot 'manipulate' time. But time IS a variable, the universe is different between now, and NOW. The simple act of selecting when to take measurements is a manipulation.
The 2 sets of predictions I generated are markedly different. Observations could only agree with one set. I didn't claim that I could PROVE either a globe, or a flat disc. But, one, or both, models would be falsified.
The flat earth model I employed was not explicitly the Gleason /Christopher map. There was no need to identify any land mass, apart from the location of Union Glacier. It did include all of the claims generally made by flerfs: The earth is flat. The north pole is central. Meridians spread out radially from the central north pole. One meridian is selected to be 'zero', for identifying other meridians by angular measurement. Distance along each meridian is measured to be 60 nautical miles [ 69.1 statute miles, 111 kilometres ] for each degree away from the NP. The sun orbits on a circular path, directly above [90 + 23 ] x 60 nautical miles from the north pole in late December. The Sun is 3000 miles above the surface. The sun is 30 miles in diameter. Only the last two are debatable criteria in the model that flerfs have put forward in the past. I was very happy to recalculate for any change to these that they should require.
I have not seen, or heard any of these data points yet, amidst all of the excitement about time lapses of 24 hour suns & sunspots. I will be extremely p*ssed if such data does not emerge in time, as it would be a golden opportunity squandered, at great cost in both man hours & dollars.
Hypothesis: a twenty four Sun can be seen depending only on latitude and day of year (unless clouds and nearby hills obscures view). The dependent variable, seeing twenty four hour Sun, and independent variables, latitude and day of year, have just been described. Set the independent variables by moving to various latitudes and waiting for days of year. Flatzoid is misrepresenting the cause of the Sun's path with the dependent variables. Just because humans can't change the natural laws themselves doesn't we can't manipulate circumstances to achieve an effect.
What was Will Duffy’s response?
Since flatzoid is so adept at using a dictionary then how does he then explain flat earth not being in there yet a globe earth is, does the dictionary then become a lie? Cant have it both ways flatzoid
Spinning,tilted waterball 1000mph spin🤪
Flat Earther Logic: "If I cannot comprehend it and I am confused by it, it cannot be true."
"dear YT... the more of these videos you recommend, the more i am inclined to become a flerfer despite my deeply ingrained beliefs... you never recommend me any flerfer videos... i detect some type of bias afoot..."
But im assuming you had no issue with "the final experiment" though..
Why would anyone have an issue with it?
@4seiken-594 "experiment"..
ur a real nuclear physicist but ur whole channel is based on flat earth... . weird man
Question is, are his objections to Flatzoid's arguments valid? It appears they are. Flatzoid is not making a good case.
Being a flatearther beats being a nuclear scientist on unreliability. Ever noticed that flat Earth gurus never do anything better than globies? No better eclipses predictions, nor weather forecasts, nor maps, nor surveys, nor climate models, nor earthquake predictions. Neither any actual evidence for flat Earth that can resist scrutiny.