Great points about the Nile. As a Geography teacher, I have to have the talk about where “North” is, because many people think “North = Up” so when we learn about rivers like the Nile they don’t think it flows “uphill”. I explain that it is subjected to local gravity, and the fact it flows northward overall doesn’t mean anything for the shape of the Earth. Then we talk about how we know the Earth is spherical, and why some people think it’s flat. On the one hand, it feels strange to have to talk about flat Earthers, but on the other hand, it is good for them to know about why things are true and how we can know a claim is true or false.
I think the problem was he has decided that sea level is flat so if the river has the same RL for a thousand miles or whatever the earth has to be flat. As opposed to being the same distance above where water would spread out to if the sea just covered the earth.
Beautifully stated. I was once a child myself, many Moons ago. And misinformation was everywhere. Learning how to differentiate between Fact and Stupid was not always easy. Teachers like yourself were vital in developing the skills needed. Thank you for playing your part.
With kids, that's cute. The West Wing had a small B-story skit about... I forget what they called it. Northern hemisphere narcissism? Something like that. Those of us in the Northern hemisphere are biased towards thinking North is 'up' from early childhood, not because it's ever explicitly stated, but just by osmosis and implication. With an "adult" like Dubay who thinks the laws of physics can be turned on like a switch if astronomers "apply it" causing world-shattering catastrophes is not cute. It's not endearing. It's exhibit A in a crimes against humanity trial against the politicians who underfund mental healthcare
I wonder whether there is a difference in understanding that north isn't upwards depending on where one lives. In the USA the most famous rivers indeed seem to end up going south. However, in northern Europe many rivers end up north, because: big mountains in the middle.
They want to make their mundane lives seem significant in the grand scheme of history by thinking that they uncovered some hidden truth. Their lives, like everyone else, will be mundane and insignificant in history
"Ughhh I just used inches" (Stick 2022) Couldn't agree more. It was fine 500 years ago when you're measuring the distance between fence posts, but not today when you're creating a 5nm silicone chip.
The semiconductor industry converted from English to metric when I first started designing integrated circuits in 1976. I still had a fab that used 3 mil critical dimensions but quickly moved to 6 microns. The wafer diameters stayed in inches for longer but those were never exact dimensions anyway. Fun fact: I actually designed and fabricated the simplest possible IC, two transistors and two terminals, a photo Darlington, used as a receiver in an opto-coupler (nVidia now produces an IC with 56 billion transistors).
Or the sun. if its high enough above the earth to illuminate half the world, then it should be perfectly visible at all times, wont shed light all the time of course.
Even thousands of years ago we knew the earth was round. Greek scholars not only knew the earth was round but also gave a near perfect calculation of its circumference (only wrong because they thought it was a perfect sphere and we now know it bulges at the equator). That was just over 2000 years ago.
Depends. He could have a 3D brain within a 2D body and we only see part of it within his 2D plane, similar to how we can only perceive part of fourdimensional objects at the same time in our 3D perception.
He’s literally just reading the FE book Zetetic Astronomy: Earth Not a Globe by Samuel Rowbotham from 1865. Notice the archaic vocabulary. E.g. “thoroughly humbugged“ ha ha. 3:16
"Nature is never absurd, monstrous, nor ridiculous..." How has this man gone his entire life without seeing one of those articles/videos on creatures that are exactly those things??
It's how words work.. Words are human invention, words are not discovered. Therefore _"absurd, monstrous, nor ridiculous"_ only relates to humans' experience, these are only used by humans who have insufficient experience with whatever situation they're using these words for. Otherwise they'd literally say, "yawn, boring! Yeah that always happens.. Noob." Or lack self awareness so completely they might suggest the world is chock full of commonly produced, _"articles/videos on creatures that are exactly those,"_ showing that _"absurd, monstrous, nor ridiculous"_ is super common and therefore cannot be _"absurd, monstrous, nor ridiculous."_
It's sort of a deepity, isn't it? One of Dennett's concepts about something that is either profound but false or trivially true, to explain it poorly. "Nature is never absurd" is true by definition. Any living thing, even extremophiles, is completely normal. You might even say 'natural'. True, but utterly pointless. Tardigrades and all the other 'monstrous' things on Earth render the "profound" interpretation false, though. Neither of which serve the fuckwit at all. But as a deepity? It's just vague enough to fool complete idiots. Classic bait and switch.
The giant squid would be what I would call monstrous, the giraffe with its stupidly long neck I would call absurd, The aye aye I would call ridiculous.
Flat earthers have said that GPS works either with land based towers or with hot air balloons. It's pathetic the kind of rationalisations they come up with.
All flerfwads have a threshold with the number of questions you can ask them before they eventually just fling their poo at you as a distraction, then run away making smooth-brains noises. The threshold for most of them is one.
When I asked a FE how can GPS work in a plane, at high-altitude, over the ocean; he shared a map of transoceanic Internet cables, then claimed that the GPS was detecting these cables to estimate your position...
He had another video I was commenting on once where he supposedly proved that satellites were just suspended in weather balloons. He deleted any comments or threads that debunked his claim.
Finally someone else pointed out the thing I've been wondering for a long time. Flat earthers often claim an airplane would need to constantly point the nose down to not fly off into space. I have always wondered how they explain circumnavigation by air. Wouldn't you need to constantly turn on a flat earth? Or would they just say the flight path would be a series of straight lines? If that's the case, then the distances wouldn't make any sense.
I’ve thought of that too and have heard their comical response. Many flatters have stated that the planes make such a large and gradual turn on the flat earth map that it’s too subtle to notice by the pilots… Yet those same flatters think the nose problem of constantly pointing down at the same rate of their turning excuse would be actually noticeable. The hypocrisy. Lol
I think half the the morons simply believe that airplanes take off, reach cruising altitude, and then hit the brakes so the disk can 'spin' under it. The other half are incapable of misusing their brains even to that degree and don't think at all.
It's the same with antartica - circumnavigating it while logging distance and time is sufficient to debunk their ridiculous "model". And given it is done in western direction it requires to correct the course to the left while according to the flatheads' "model" time and distance wouldn't add up and a course correction to the right would be required. It doesn't make any sense. Any surveyor knows that a sufficiently large triangel's angles on earth's surface add up to _more than 180°_ which wouldn't be possible on a flat earth. It necessarily implies a two-dimensional triangle which always has to have an angle sum of 180° - any deviation proves "non-flatness". It's primary school knowledge and can be tested easily. I lack the words to sufficiently express how stupid these people are. Words don't do justice to this.
You can also try Cool Hard Logic's World of Batshit series. One of the videos (all are worth watching) deals with flight. Actually, planes end up in 3 of the current 10, but it's the middle one ("Gravity" iirc) which explains why planes work as they do.
The other issues with the planes on a flat earth. They do not line up with flight patterns and flight times on a flat earth. the distances between two places on a flat earth would be unable to be flown in one distance, or would be to short of a distance in other places.
So we've gone from 100 reasons why the Earth is flat to just 50 now. This means while our understanding of the universe is expanding, the FE's knowledge is decreasing. Yeah, that seems about right.
There's only one 'reason' the Earth is flat: What is it compared to, that is less flat? Actually, everything a human is ever likely to encounter is less 'flat' than the average of the surface of Earth..
Basically, every mariner since ancient times (talking ancient Greece, Egypt and Phoenicia) has used a round earth concept to navigate. They might not have known they were doing it or might not have been able to express it and prove it, but they EXPERIENCED it, daily. I mean, it's why the crow's nest is on the ship's tallest mast and why lighthouses are REALLY tall. If earth was flat, why would anyone expend that kind of resources and energy to get those specific results?
Ah, ha! The Earth is flat because some guy penned a phrase in thousands-years-old book implying its flatness! Now I get it. Thanks for the enlightenment, Eric.
I miss the times before the Internet, the humans seemed much more intelligent, overall... Nowadays I seriously doupt, that there is intelligent life in our solar system.
@@FrikInCasualMode the only difference, is despite the accessibility of the information we have today, people must actually be dumber to believe this crap today.
I suppose it's mildly interesting. But still, anyone dumb enough to believe the earth is flat probably isn't worth responding to. There's simply no way to change their minds.
Dubay's statement that we've been using stars to navigate for centuries and the stars have never moved is somewhat fallacious. We have navigated with the stars for at least a couple of millennia. However, we also know that they have moved during that time. We have recorded these positions since antiquity with increasing accuracy. In modern astronomy we state positions at a given point in time which are referred to as Epochs. The current epoch we reference from is J2000. This is the positions of the stars on the vernal equinox in the year 2000. It is an important time stamp as the point in time is determined by where Sol crosses the equator at noon and also dictates the prime meridian. J2000 records Polaris at a Right Ascension of 2h 31m 51s and Declination of around +89° 15' 51", currently it has an RA 2h 59m 26s, +89° 21' 25"... that a small change in the space of 22 years. Older catalogues exist, but with less accuracy. At the time of Brahe and Kepler we have a recorded angular separation between the northern celestial pole and Polaris at around 3° 50'... even this basic knowledge shows that in the last four centuries it has moved more that 3° closer to the celestial pole. If we go back to Ptolemy's catalogue then he is placing Kochab as the closest bright star to the celestial pole, something which is recorded by other observers from the era. Although the position was not accurately recorded we can used the current angular separation between Polaris and Kochab to destroy this claim as the two stars are approximately 16°34' apart. That's a lot of motion for something that stays in a fixed position! If you tried to get a fix on your position from a catalogue from 200 years ago you could be off by as much as a couple of degrees... that's an error of around 120Nm without even considering proper motion of the stars. But then most flat Earthers don't look deep into astronomy further than getting out of focus pictures on their P900 (maybe they should "do their own research" into the Bahtinov mask.) Although most just hand wave it away because they know full well that astronomy buried any notion of the flat Earth over 2500 years ago, either that or they are just too cognitively challenged to begin to understand what our observations of the night sky actually mean to the shape of the Earth and it's motion.
The precession of the equinoxes has been known since at least Hipparchus' time 2200 years ago. They had access to even older Babylonian astronomical records in addition to Greek astronomers of a hundred years prior. Ptolemy was building upon Hipparchus. Indeed, it is largely because of him that we know of Hipparchus. It isn't really even beyond the grasp of a single human's memory since it advances about 1 degree in a human lifetime (~71.5 yr).
@@Markle2k Defenders of the disc really have no clue when it comes to well.. pretty much everything. Astronomy is one of my favourite hobbies. I've been hooked since Halley's Comet was last visible and I'd love to see its next journey through the inner solar system in 2061... but it is unlikely with my past lifestyle that I will make that observation. Oddly enough 1986 was the same year that I met my first flat Earther. Their basic arguments haven't really changed, however, they have become more delusional and comedic. The latest attempt with trying to claim that the sextant only works on a flat Earth has been full on comedy, especially the strawman where they insist that it uses triangulation... How would that even work? They keep going on about needing a flat adjacent, even though the point of celestial navigation is to find the distance to the star's GP. If they used trig to solve for the adjacent they would need the angle and the opposite... Yet the distance to the star above the surface is not even mentioned in navigation almanacs as they are not needed when using lateration. It is also a little unfortunate for them that we happen to be at the vernal equinox at the moment. I've been pointing out that with measuring Sol's elevation the angle, either taken from zenith or acquired from the Eratosthenes method will enable them to pinpoint there latitude at local noon. This is single point lateration. No referencing the horizon is used, and unless they are into arctic exploration Sol is not going to close enough to the horizon for any serious amount of refraction. If they the know at what time GMT/UTC this occurs for them they will also be able to determine their longitude. The most hilarious part of my most recent exchanges is that they chose to comment on post on the The Sky at Night magazine's Facebook page... which as you can guess is frequented by quite a few amateur astronomers. I'm not certain if the flat Earthers are trolls or just cognitively challenged... although where they have posted suggests that more likely to be the later, or even both!
6:55 For the same reason we don't sense any pitching of the plane to compensate for the curve of the Earth - the Earth is really big and the amount of correction needed would be negligible compared to corrections due to air currents. A more appropriate question would be why circumnavigating around the Tropic of Cancer takes exactly the same time as circumnavigating around the Tropic of Capricorn. On the flat Earth, the Tropic of Capricorn would be a far larger circle than the Tropic of Cancer.
Much like driving a vehicle, you make those micro adjustments to keep the car on the road. Things like roads being curved slightly, or having grooves from years of driving on the road. you just get used to it and don't think about it,
@@ZakisHereNow No, it wouldn't. The corrections from air currents would be greater and hide any corrections due to the shape of the planet. The Earth is really, really, really big and the corrections to maintain level flight are really, really, really, small. Altitude/heading changes due to air currents are much more pronounced.
@@MrGrumblier it would… that’s how math works. All those corrections would be noticed and could be canceled out. But if you have to turn, (if earth were flat) it MUST add up to at least 360 degrees. If you pick a latitude line, and stay on it, it would pick up the deviation and correction, canceling out. But again, a 360 degree turn MUST be accomplished.
@@ZakisHereNow Except there is no way to compensate for the larger, more random, corrections cause by the air currents that occur constantly. The deviations are not so much changes in direction as the craft being bodily moved off course. I honestly don't think it would be possible to factor out those corrections. A far easier test would be to fly along the Tropic of Cancer then the Tropic of Capricorn and compare the flight times. On a globe, the times would be nearly identical while on a flat Earth, the Tropic of Capricorn would take considerably longer.
I think you mistook him saying the Nile is flat for a long way with him saying it has the same height above sea level for a long way, there isn’t anywhere on earth where the land is actually flat for that great a distance (it would be at least one huge mountain). However there are heaps of places where it is all the same height above sea level for long distances. 🧐Sea level is curved.
Also worth noting that OUR North Star was not the same North Star used by ancient Greece 2500 years ago. The procession of the Earth is slow, but that was long enough ago to shift which way the North Pole points enough that a different star was the closest to true North. And it was less accurate than the current North Star. Not quite as close to true North. So you need to account for that when looking at ancient navigation.
So, he believes that the world is flat because ancient maps are flat…. Does he also believe that he was born flat, because his baby pictures are flat???…. What a joke.
If someone brings up 'The Ancients knew' I am going to point blank tell them to say what they would call Airplanes. Or the Internet. Or Videos. Edit: I'm not saying they were dumb! I'm saying they didn't know everything, and half the arguments these flatearthers use when referring to the ancients is that they knew everything.
That's not a great point. It's better to ask "how did they know?" The ancient greeks for example were very skilled in geometry and already knew that the Earth is a globe probably from observations like "sinking" ships and lunar eclipses.
@@tarmairon431 That's not exactly the point I was making. I was trying to point out that these guys want to say 'The Ancients knew X' as if they're the be all end all of knowledge and wisdom. It's like going back to Napoleon and asking him about aerial combat strategies. He might have insight once you explain it to you, but it would be a completely foreign concept to him.
@@starblade8450 Interesting tangent. Napoleon was actually aware of the concept of using balloons for observation. General Jean-Baptiste Jourdan did it at the Battle of Fleurus in 1794.
"Nature is never absurd, monstrous nor ridiculous, nor... unnecessary" There's a channel called Casual Geographic that will show how fond nature seems to be of all of that. Nature's a mess. A drunk, high and depressed mess. The more you see of nature, the more therapy you need.
Professor Stick, I’m really glad that channels like your’s are around. Not only are your videos both educational and highly enjoyable, but I need a break from politics for awhile
I gave up on that myth decades ago after meeting some more fundamentalist christians. Their minds were closed, and they are totally convinced that anything other that their belief is not just wrong, but that the person who said it is a bad person.
@@John.0z Yes, the egomania present in their theology is extremely dangerous. I call it the 'My God Fallacy'. The delusion of certainty in their theology.
@@thomasridley8675 As several other have said - it is that sense of infallibility that combines with other things that is *really* dangerous. When you combine that sense with politics history tells us that the result is always a very bad place to be even a little bit different to what the religion deems acceptable.
@@John.0z Religion has no room for individuality. Telling everyone that they must live in the box they built for them. That's a very dangerous mindset.
Just going by the title: Don't you mean "The Flatter the Earth the Smoother the Brain?" I mean, it's an insult either way. Koalas have very smooth brains, and it is said if you give them a plate of eucalyptus leaves, which they eat, they won't know what to do with them. (edit) Give a Flat Earther a fact, and they don't know what to do with it.
I am pretty sure Koalas are not that limited. They are well-evolved to a slow lifestyle to cope with the toxins in the only food they can or will eat. But they can still smell the right leaves, no matter how they are presented.
@@John.0z Just to let you know, I am aware, and comparing flat earthers to them is an insult to the koalas. Yes koalas are in trouble and I would love to see them preserved. So don't get my idea wrong here. I put this in much the same category that calling a woman a female dog is in insult to the female dogs. Most female dogs I've met are better than the people who act badly enough to get called that. I'm pretty sure you know the kind of person I mean. Your comment is very on point, and I appreciate it.
@@StarSong936 Ok Daniel. I hear you. :-) I tend to be a bit defensive about Koalas - we humans have done so much harm to the species over the centuries. They seem just to be taken just as "cute" by so many people. But they are vulnerable to all the things we humans have brought to this land. Especially since the bushfires they need all the support we can give them.
@@John.0z I agree with you. Hope you understand this was meant euphemistically and not how I feel about them myself. We have done much damage, especially since the advent of the industrial age. We do tend to be blind to the damage we are causing to our ecology. My current thinking is, we won't take action until it is too late. If it is not too late already. If we wipe ourselves out, I hope the next one will be wiser than we are. Probably that will be the cockroaches. If you've ever seen the TV series "Andromeda" there was on episode where a crew member Tyr said "At the end of the universe, I expect 3 survivors. Me, the cockroaches, and Dyland Hunt (the ships captain) trying to save the cockroaches."
@@StarSong936 Daniel, in my darker times I fear we, as a species, will not change enough to affect the rate of climate change. I look at places like Ukraine, Afghanistan, a lot of the middle east, and here in Australia, and all I see is people focussed on their (petty) lives as they are right now. And I have to admit that my life as an old man is pretty petty now. There is so little appreciation for how much change is necessary to reverse the damage we have made. There is next to no appreciation for how what we are doing in our day to day existence is continuing the damage. I was introduced to this in the '70s; but have been near enough to powerless to even effect my life enough to make more than a trivial difference. Modern western society is set up to abuse the ecosystem. Less developed countries take huge offence when western countries try to tell them not to go down that path... and who can blame them when the people in those western counties mostly have such comfortable lives. Plus, there are just so many humans now! The huge problem with our extinction is that so many thousands of other species will precede us in this doom. Maybe even the cockroaches will be killed off? 😞
Here is one thing i don't understand about the flat model and going from east to west or vice versa. By what his model showed us technically doing a full loop of the flat earth isn't them going from east to west, rather your going in all directions. Because every direction north, east, south and west are straight parallel lines. So with that basic understanding in direction, how can they say doing a 360° loop is only going in 2 directions when your not. By that model he would go from east to east east north to north east to north north east to north to north north west and so on. Am i right or am i missing something?
1:18 This makes me want to create a bunch of content debunking the flat earth that just looks as things like mountains and says, "I can see the curve so it must not be flat!"
Well in order to answer the satellite question flat earthers would need to believe satalites are more than just weather balloons which they don’t and since space doesn’t exist to them as well they never go high enough in the atmosphere to where the balloons pop and I’m sure they also don’t know about how helium seeps through rubber and eventually deflates so it never does
Way to many flatard believe that there is something like an universal down direction. Bad news for them, there is no universal down. Down is always local and, on the surface of the Earth, toward it's centre of mass. I like how that footage at 3:00 have been «corrected» to remove the curve of the horizon, just to have it curve upward when it passes right thru the very centre of the field of view.
Can someone explain why when Flat Earthers make videos, that they must speak in a low smug voice? With Professor Stick speaks he does not use a low smug voice.
@8:56, I am so damn tired of Flerfers trying to "debunk" THIS model of the heliocentric model. The sun does NOT move perpendicular to the orbit of the planets. The moon does NOT orbit the Earth perpendicular to the orbit of Earth. This is such a stupid strawman, it is really sad.
Eric DuBore always sounds so cocky and arrogant! Either he's just trolling or intellectually dishonest. Either way he sounds ignorant! How can one be so confident in his own stupidity?
Never mind 19, let's get back to those flat charts which are actually various projections of a sphere because an actual globe of similar scale would be a tad unwieldy (especially on old sailing ships, which were famously cramped). Of course, it would be a simple linear scaling if the planet was flat, so why don't you have a flat Earth map Erik?
Dammit Professor Stick. Why did you use inches for a measurement smaller than an inch? I would've understood centimeters or millimeters better for the sake of precision.
I’m very curious what is required for a earth to actually be flat excluding gravity (cause if included, no known material can withstand the ridiculous forces to maintain a constant shape).
I love it when flat earthers say that stars never move... And then, in this case, use ANCIENT PEOPLE as evidence. I don't think they realised that ancient people have mapped the stars, and they look different from today, since they ya know... changed.
A recent tictok from the equator in Uganda demonstrating the Coriolis effect, on how water drain in the exact equator, north and south hemispheres. I love to hear what explanation the flat earthers would make up, for sh1ts and giggles
Have you ever checked out mudfossil University? It's a channel that tries to prove that mountains and other geological structures are fossils of "pre-flood" giants and dragons. I'd love to hear your take on his video Keep up the good work Amazing content as usual
Veritasium said massive objects bend space time, so people in orbit are on a straight line path but the path is curved by space time. If matter bends space time how do we know earth isn't just a box or a flat disc rounded out by space time?
The simplest idea I have to debunk the flat earth. Why can I not see the sun during the night, but I can see the moon during the day? if the sun was rotating around the earth, lighting up half the earth. Then it should be visible at all times on a flat earth, I should be able to in the middle of the night, look up and see the sun as a distant speck. Instead I see the sun go below the horizon.
@@FelixBat Of course. However the go-to solution is to _redefine_ physics and invent *new* types of perspective etc. Or, I know, even cooler, redefine _S C I E N C E !!!_ call scientists "preachers," of this religion called *scientism,* and so on _ad nauseam_
@@FelixBat Yes. The rhetoric is also used by Theist vs Atheist. Anything that is "just" a religion can be dismissed as being "not factual." So theists (YECs) will just say "nah, atheism is just a religion". "Science is just a religion." "Globe earth is just a religion". lol
Urgh, again with the stars’ positions. Yes, they do slowly shift over the millennia. The constellations we see today are different from those used and charted by ancient people. We can still use them for navigation, because the position change is negligible within a single person’s lifespan.
One day, if we are lucky, we'll live inside a hollow planet and people will live on the inner side of the shell, and then we'll have hollow-earthers, who will say that there's nothing outside earth and all the universe is inside the hollow planet.
If space travel becomes more common and the average person can go into space I’m sure flat earthers will keep denying earth being a sphere because they will believe whatever they want to believe even if they deny reality
All flerfs would have to do is circumnavigate the globe in a plane at different latitudes. Start at 50N stay on the latitude and go around the globe. Then go to 0, the equator, stay on that latitude and go around. Then go to 50S stay on that latitude, go around. Did your trip get longer each time? = flat earth. Did it get longer the second time, then shorter again the third time? = globe Hmm… wonder why they haven’t done this considering so many of them are “commercial pilots.”
0:52 So in the end what the curvature is on: Uyuni Salt Flats (Bolivia's Salt Flats) is it smaller or larger - more pronounced or standard? What good joke!!!
Literally just ask this guy how Solar and Lunar eclipses work on a flat earth. The sun and moon always being apart is essential to Half the world being night and day for a flat earth which is impossible to support on a flat earth.
With the nile, he is not understanding the difference between elevation and the curve of the earth.
Great points about the Nile. As a Geography teacher, I have to have the talk about where “North” is, because many people think “North = Up” so when we learn about rivers like the Nile they don’t think it flows “uphill”. I explain that it is subjected to local gravity, and the fact it flows northward overall doesn’t mean anything for the shape of the Earth. Then we talk about how we know the Earth is spherical, and why some people think it’s flat.
On the one hand, it feels strange to have to talk about flat Earthers, but on the other hand, it is good for them to know about why things are true and how we can know a claim is true or false.
I think the problem was he has decided that sea level is flat so if the river has the same RL for a thousand miles or whatever the earth has to be flat. As opposed to being the same distance above where water would spread out to if the sea just covered the earth.
Beautifully stated. I was once a child myself, many Moons ago. And misinformation was everywhere. Learning how to differentiate between Fact and Stupid was not always easy. Teachers like yourself were vital in developing the skills needed. Thank you for playing your part.
With kids, that's cute. The West Wing had a small B-story skit about... I forget what they called it. Northern hemisphere narcissism? Something like that. Those of us in the Northern hemisphere are biased towards thinking North is 'up' from early childhood, not because it's ever explicitly stated, but just by osmosis and implication.
With an "adult" like Dubay who thinks the laws of physics can be turned on like a switch if astronomers "apply it" causing world-shattering catastrophes is not cute. It's not endearing. It's exhibit A in a crimes against humanity trial against the politicians who underfund mental healthcare
I wonder whether there is a difference in understanding that north isn't upwards depending on where one lives. In the USA the most famous rivers indeed seem to end up going south. However, in northern Europe many rivers end up north, because: big mountains in the middle.
@@Schmidtelpunkt most people (especially flatties) don’t take that much notice of the geography around them.
Flat earth conspiracies are fascinating. It's one of the only conspiracies that can be completely disproven and yet, people still believe it
Even the flat earthers who personally and conclusively disproved it still believe it, that's the fascinating part.
They want to make their mundane lives seem significant in the grand scheme of history by thinking that they uncovered some hidden truth. Their lives, like everyone else, will be mundane and insignificant in history
@@reanimationeas342 that is definitely the best explanation. Did William Shatner cry because of the beauty or because of the lie?
It's the beauty obviously, but some would argue for sure.
@@MrRolnicek „Thanx, Bob.“ 😉
"Ughhh I just used inches" (Stick 2022)
Couldn't agree more. It was fine 500 years ago when you're measuring the distance between fence posts, but not today when you're creating a 5nm silicone chip.
The semiconductor industry converted from English to metric when I first started designing integrated circuits in 1976. I still had a fab that used 3 mil critical dimensions but quickly moved to 6 microns. The wafer diameters stayed in inches for longer but those were never exact dimensions anyway. Fun fact: I actually designed and fabricated the simplest possible IC, two transistors and two terminals, a photo Darlington, used as a receiver in an opto-coupler (nVidia now produces an IC with 56 billion transistors).
I should be able to see every ship on the ocean with a telescope from on top of a mast if the Earth were flat.
Yet... I can't.
PeRsPeCtIvE!
Eric Dubious and his cult always ignore that fact.
Or the sun. if its high enough above the earth to illuminate half the world, then it should be perfectly visible at all times, wont shed light all the time of course.
@@MountSilky252 Flerspective!
Even thousands of years ago we knew the earth was round. Greek scholars not only knew the earth was round but also gave a near perfect calculation of its circumference (only wrong because they thought it was a perfect sphere and we now know it bulges at the equator). That was just over 2000 years ago.
And all they had was horses to travel the distances, and sticks in the ground to measure the shadows.
@@MyAramil the greeks were absolute chads
Don't insult yourself, as a stickman you have a flat brain and even you know the Earth is round.
Because his entire body is flat?
Depends. He could have a 3D brain within a 2D body and we only see part of it within his 2D plane, similar to how we can only perceive part of fourdimensional objects at the same time in our 3D perception.
The converse isn't true, flat earth equals flat brain but having a flat brain doesn't make you believe flat earth
Information encoded in a 3d space can be represented with only it's surface area (the holographic principle) so his brain could be as good as ours.
He’s literally just reading the FE book Zetetic Astronomy: Earth Not a Globe by Samuel Rowbotham from 1865. Notice the archaic vocabulary. E.g. “thoroughly humbugged“ ha ha. 3:16
Yes Eric Dubious based his whole grift from Rowbotham, right down to the errors.
Ah, yes, a cult leader. DEFINITELY a trustworthy person. No red flags there, no siree.
"Nature is never absurd, monstrous, nor ridiculous..."
How has this man gone his entire life without seeing one of those articles/videos on creatures that are exactly those things??
Hasn't seen a platypus before
It's how words work..
Words are human invention, words are not discovered.
Therefore _"absurd, monstrous, nor ridiculous"_ only relates to humans' experience, these are only used by humans who have insufficient experience with whatever situation they're using these words for.
Otherwise they'd literally say, "yawn, boring! Yeah that always happens.. Noob."
Or lack self awareness so completely they might suggest the world is chock full of commonly produced, _"articles/videos on creatures that are exactly those,"_ showing that _"absurd, monstrous, nor ridiculous"_ is super common and therefore cannot be _"absurd, monstrous, nor ridiculous."_
It's sort of a deepity, isn't it? One of Dennett's concepts about something that is either profound but false or trivially true, to explain it poorly.
"Nature is never absurd" is true by definition. Any living thing, even extremophiles, is completely normal. You might even say 'natural'. True, but utterly pointless. Tardigrades and all the other 'monstrous' things on Earth render the "profound" interpretation false, though.
Neither of which serve the fuckwit at all. But as a deepity? It's just vague enough to fool complete idiots. Classic bait and switch.
Wasps fucking exist.
The giant squid would be what I would call monstrous, the giraffe with its stupidly long neck I would call absurd, The aye aye I would call ridiculous.
Flat earthers have said that GPS works either with land based towers or with hot air balloons. It's pathetic the kind of rationalisations they come up with.
Yea hot air balloons resting against the firmament. Yet we can't see those massive balloons. Lol smdh
All flerfwads have a threshold with the number of questions you can ask them before they eventually just fling their poo at you as a distraction, then run away making smooth-brains noises.
The threshold for most of them is one.
When I asked a FE how can GPS work in a plane, at high-altitude, over the ocean; he shared a map of transoceanic Internet cables, then claimed that the GPS was detecting these cables to estimate your position...
He had another video I was commenting on once where he supposedly proved that satellites were just suspended in weather balloons.
He deleted any comments or threads that debunked his claim.
@@FelixBat That's probably because you're relentless. It's great, and you know as well as I, the flerfwits always buckle. Always.
Finally someone else pointed out the thing I've been wondering for a long time. Flat earthers often claim an airplane would need to constantly point the nose down to not fly off into space. I have always wondered how they explain circumnavigation by air. Wouldn't you need to constantly turn on a flat earth? Or would they just say the flight path would be a series of straight lines? If that's the case, then the distances wouldn't make any sense.
I’ve thought of that too and have heard their comical response. Many flatters have stated that the planes make such a large and gradual turn on the flat earth map that it’s too subtle to notice by the pilots… Yet those same flatters think the nose problem of constantly pointing down at the same rate of their turning excuse would be actually noticeable. The hypocrisy. Lol
I think half the the morons simply believe that airplanes take off, reach cruising altitude, and then hit the brakes so the disk can 'spin' under it.
The other half are incapable of misusing their brains even to that degree and don't think at all.
It's the same with antartica - circumnavigating it while logging distance and time is sufficient to debunk their ridiculous "model".
And given it is done in western direction it requires to correct the course to the left while according to the flatheads' "model" time and distance wouldn't add up and a course correction to the right would be required.
It doesn't make any sense.
Any surveyor knows that a sufficiently large triangel's angles on earth's surface add up to _more than 180°_ which wouldn't be possible on a flat earth. It necessarily implies a two-dimensional triangle which always has to have an angle sum of 180° - any deviation proves "non-flatness". It's primary school knowledge and can be tested easily.
I lack the words to sufficiently express how stupid these people are. Words don't do justice to this.
You can also try Cool Hard Logic's World of Batshit series. One of the videos (all are worth watching) deals with flight. Actually, planes end up in 3 of the current 10, but it's the middle one ("Gravity" iirc) which explains why planes work as they do.
The other issues with the planes on a flat earth. They do not line up with flight patterns and flight times on a flat earth. the distances between two places on a flat earth would be unable to be flown in one distance, or would be to short of a distance in other places.
So we've gone from 100 reasons why the Earth is flat to just 50 now. This means while our understanding of the universe is expanding, the FE's knowledge is decreasing.
Yeah, that seems about right.
There's only one 'reason' the Earth is flat: What is it compared to, that is less flat?
Actually, everything a human is ever likely to encounter is less 'flat' than the average of the surface of Earth..
@@Dr.JustIsWrong what the fuck?
"FE knowledge" is still at zero. It's never "proof for flat", but always "reasons why I deny science".
You're actually incorrect.
Claiming that the knowledge of flat Earthers is decreasing implies that it was a non-zero amount to begin with.
@@EdwardHowton Well... It can start at zero and decrease. That mean that their actual knowledge is negative.
Mariners will not trust artificial globes*
Magellan: Am I a joke to you??
Basically, every mariner since ancient times (talking ancient Greece, Egypt and Phoenicia) has used a round earth concept to navigate. They might not have known they were doing it or might not have been able to express it and prove it, but they EXPERIENCED it, daily.
I mean, it's why the crow's nest is on the ship's tallest mast and why lighthouses are REALLY tall. If earth was flat, why would anyone expend that kind of resources and energy to get those specific results?
@@lyravain6304 It's a communist plot, of course.
Ah, ha! The Earth is flat because some guy penned a phrase in thousands-years-old book implying its flatness! Now I get it. Thanks for the enlightenment, Eric.
I miss the times before the Internet, the humans seemed much more intelligent, overall... Nowadays I seriously doupt, that there is intelligent life in our solar system.
Flat Earth bullcrap started in XIX century. There was never shortage of human ignorance or outright stupidity.
@@FrikInCasualMode the only difference, is despite the accessibility of the information we have today, people must actually be dumber to believe this crap today.
its not that there are more ignorant people, it's just that they have a platform to share their ignorance now lmao
Yes, there is intelligent life, even here on Earth: my dog
@@ThomasMarxJeetKuneDoIFO they get to let it out of their brains because of internet anonymity.
Of course the Earth is flat or else it would fall off the turtle's back.
Keep going after the flat earthers. It's always entertaining.
I suppose it's mildly interesting. But still, anyone dumb enough to believe the earth is flat probably isn't worth responding to. There's simply no way to change their minds.
@@jacksonheathen2092 Maybe, but mockery and derision has its place.
I'm glad to see you're still on a war against flat earthers
Not so much. Those people really aren't worth arguing with.
Dubay's statement that we've been using stars to navigate for centuries and the stars have never moved is somewhat fallacious. We have navigated with the stars for at least a couple of millennia. However, we also know that they have moved during that time. We have recorded these positions since antiquity with increasing accuracy. In modern astronomy we state positions at a given point in time which are referred to as Epochs. The current epoch we reference from is J2000. This is the positions of the stars on the vernal equinox in the year 2000. It is an important time stamp as the point in time is determined by where Sol crosses the equator at noon and also dictates the prime meridian. J2000 records Polaris at a Right Ascension of 2h 31m 51s and Declination of around +89° 15' 51", currently it has an RA 2h 59m 26s, +89° 21' 25"... that a small change in the space of 22 years. Older catalogues exist, but with less accuracy. At the time of Brahe and Kepler we have a recorded angular separation between the northern celestial pole and Polaris at around 3° 50'... even this basic knowledge shows that in the last four centuries it has moved more that 3° closer to the celestial pole. If we go back to Ptolemy's catalogue then he is placing Kochab as the closest bright star to the celestial pole, something which is recorded by other observers from the era. Although the position was not accurately recorded we can used the current angular separation between Polaris and Kochab to destroy this claim as the two stars are approximately 16°34' apart. That's a lot of motion for something that stays in a fixed position! If you tried to get a fix on your position from a catalogue from 200 years ago you could be off by as much as a couple of degrees... that's an error of around 120Nm without even considering proper motion of the stars. But then most flat Earthers don't look deep into astronomy further than getting out of focus pictures on their P900 (maybe they should "do their own research" into the Bahtinov mask.) Although most just hand wave it away because they know full well that astronomy buried any notion of the flat Earth over 2500 years ago, either that or they are just too cognitively challenged to begin to understand what our observations of the night sky actually mean to the shape of the Earth and it's motion.
The precession of the equinoxes has been known since at least Hipparchus' time 2200 years ago. They had access to even older Babylonian astronomical records in addition to Greek astronomers of a hundred years prior. Ptolemy was building upon Hipparchus. Indeed, it is largely because of him that we know of Hipparchus. It isn't really even beyond the grasp of a single human's memory since it advances about 1 degree in a human lifetime (~71.5 yr).
@@Markle2k Defenders of the disc really have no clue when it comes to well.. pretty much everything. Astronomy is one of my favourite hobbies. I've been hooked since Halley's Comet was last visible and I'd love to see its next journey through the inner solar system in 2061... but it is unlikely with my past lifestyle that I will make that observation. Oddly enough 1986 was the same year that I met my first flat Earther. Their basic arguments haven't really changed, however, they have become more delusional and comedic.
The latest attempt with trying to claim that the sextant only works on a flat Earth has been full on comedy, especially the strawman where they insist that it uses triangulation... How would that even work? They keep going on about needing a flat adjacent, even though the point of celestial navigation is to find the distance to the star's GP. If they used trig to solve for the adjacent they would need the angle and the opposite... Yet the distance to the star above the surface is not even mentioned in navigation almanacs as they are not needed when using lateration.
It is also a little unfortunate for them that we happen to be at the vernal equinox at the moment. I've been pointing out that with measuring Sol's elevation the angle, either taken from zenith or acquired from the Eratosthenes method will enable them to pinpoint there latitude at local noon. This is single point lateration. No referencing the horizon is used, and unless they are into arctic exploration Sol is not going to close enough to the horizon for any serious amount of refraction. If they the know at what time GMT/UTC this occurs for them they will also be able to determine their longitude. The most hilarious part of my most recent exchanges is that they chose to comment on post on the The Sky at Night magazine's Facebook page... which as you can guess is frequented by quite a few amateur astronomers. I'm not certain if the flat Earthers are trolls or just cognitively challenged... although where they have posted suggests that more likely to be the later, or even both!
6:55 For the same reason we don't sense any pitching of the plane to compensate for the curve of the Earth - the Earth is really big and the amount of correction needed would be negligible compared to corrections due to air currents. A more appropriate question would be why circumnavigating around the Tropic of Cancer takes exactly the same time as circumnavigating around the Tropic of Capricorn. On the flat Earth, the Tropic of Capricorn would be a far larger circle than the Tropic of Cancer.
Much like driving a vehicle, you make those micro adjustments to keep the car on the road. Things like roads being curved slightly, or having grooves from years of driving on the road. you just get used to it and don't think about it,
So install a laser level and gyro on the stick. It would be minuscule but detectable.
@@ZakisHereNow No, it wouldn't. The corrections from air currents would be greater and hide any corrections due to the shape of the planet. The Earth is really, really, really big and the corrections to maintain level flight are really, really, really, small. Altitude/heading changes due to air currents are much more pronounced.
@@MrGrumblier it would… that’s how math works. All those corrections would be noticed and could be canceled out. But if you have to turn, (if earth were flat) it MUST add up to at least 360 degrees. If you pick a latitude line, and stay on it, it would pick up the deviation and correction, canceling out. But again, a 360 degree turn MUST be accomplished.
@@ZakisHereNow Except there is no way to compensate for the larger, more random, corrections cause by the air currents that occur constantly. The deviations are not so much changes in direction as the craft being bodily moved off course. I honestly don't think it would be possible to factor out those corrections. A far easier test would be to fly along the Tropic of Cancer then the Tropic of Capricorn and compare the flight times. On a globe, the times would be nearly identical while on a flat Earth, the Tropic of Capricorn would take considerably longer.
2:05 you can literally see the earth's curve
True enough. I've seen it myself standing on a cliff over the ocean.
"How exactly do they think this works?" Objection! The premise that flerfs think is not in evidence!
I'd argue the flatter the earth the smoother the brain.
I think you mistook him saying the Nile is flat for a long way with him saying it has the same height above sea level for a long way, there isn’t anywhere on earth where the land is actually flat for that great a distance (it would be at least one huge mountain). However there are heaps of places where it is all the same height above sea level for long distances. 🧐Sea level is curved.
I always wonder how Flerfers are trying to explain Starlink...
The same as all satellites and space stations. High-altitude balloons.
Also worth noting that OUR North Star was not the same North Star used by ancient Greece 2500 years ago. The procession of the Earth is slow, but that was long enough ago to shift which way the North Pole points enough that a different star was the closest to true North. And it was less accurate than the current North Star. Not quite as close to true North. So you need to account for that when looking at ancient navigation.
So, he believes that the world is flat because ancient maps are flat…. Does he also believe that he was born flat, because his baby pictures are flat???…. What a joke.
If someone brings up 'The Ancients knew' I am going to point blank tell them to say what they would call Airplanes. Or the Internet. Or Videos.
Edit: I'm not saying they were dumb! I'm saying they didn't know everything, and half the arguments these flatearthers use when referring to the ancients is that they knew everything.
That's not a great point. It's better to ask "how did they know?" The ancient greeks for example were very skilled in geometry and already knew that the Earth is a globe probably from observations like "sinking" ships and lunar eclipses.
@@tarmairon431 That's not exactly the point I was making. I was trying to point out that these guys want to say 'The Ancients knew X' as if they're the be all end all of knowledge and wisdom.
It's like going back to Napoleon and asking him about aerial combat strategies. He might have insight once you explain it to you, but it would be a completely foreign concept to him.
@@starblade8450 That's not an equivalent situation at all, because the shape of the Earth wasn't a foreign concept even in ancient times.
@@starblade8450 Interesting tangent. Napoleon was actually aware of the concept of using balloons for observation. General Jean-Baptiste Jourdan did it at the Battle of Fleurus in 1794.
@@nonna_sof5889 Did not actually know that. Cool.
Someone should tell that flatbrain that Copernicus was a church sponsored researcher...
"Nature is never absurd, monstrous nor ridiculous, nor... unnecessary"
There's a channel called Casual Geographic that will show how fond nature seems to be of all of that.
Nature's a mess. A drunk, high and depressed mess. The more you see of nature, the more therapy you need.
Professor Stick,
I’m really glad that channels like your’s are around. Not only are your videos both educational and highly enjoyable, but I need a break from politics for awhile
Lately I am having trouble supporting this intelligent species myth we have going. 🙄
I gave up on that myth decades ago after meeting some more fundamentalist christians. Their minds were closed, and they are totally convinced that anything other that their belief is not just wrong, but that the person who said it is a bad person.
@@John.0z
Yes, the egomania present in their theology is extremely dangerous.
I call it the 'My God Fallacy'. The delusion of certainty in their theology.
@@thomasridley8675 As several other have said - it is that sense of infallibility that combines with other things that is *really* dangerous.
When you combine that sense with politics history tells us that the result is always a very bad place to be even a little bit different to what the religion deems acceptable.
@@John.0z
Religion has no room for individuality. Telling everyone that they must live in the box they built for them. That's a very dangerous mindset.
@@thomasridley8675 Yep!
I long for the day when the entire globe do away with imperial units and move to sensible metric.
Oh thats why our brains are slightly oval
Just going by the title: Don't you mean "The Flatter the Earth the Smoother the Brain?" I mean, it's an insult either way. Koalas have very smooth brains, and it is said if you give them a plate of eucalyptus leaves, which they eat, they won't know what to do with them.
(edit) Give a Flat Earther a fact, and they don't know what to do with it.
I am pretty sure Koalas are not that limited. They are well-evolved to a slow lifestyle to cope with the toxins in the only food they can or will eat. But they can still smell the right leaves, no matter how they are presented.
@@John.0z Just to let you know, I am aware, and comparing flat earthers to them is an insult to the koalas. Yes koalas are in trouble and I would love to see them preserved. So don't get my idea wrong here.
I put this in much the same category that calling a woman a female dog is in insult to the female dogs. Most female dogs I've met are better than the people who act badly enough to get called that. I'm pretty sure you know the kind of person I mean.
Your comment is very on point, and I appreciate it.
@@StarSong936 Ok Daniel. I hear you. :-)
I tend to be a bit defensive about Koalas - we humans have done so much harm to the species over the centuries.
They seem just to be taken just as "cute" by so many people. But they are vulnerable to all the things we humans have brought to this land. Especially since the bushfires they need all the support we can give them.
@@John.0z I agree with you. Hope you understand this was meant euphemistically and not how I feel about them myself. We have done much damage, especially since the advent of the industrial age. We do tend to be blind to the damage we are causing to our ecology. My current thinking is, we won't take action until it is too late. If it is not too late already. If we wipe ourselves out, I hope the next one will be wiser than we are. Probably that will be the cockroaches.
If you've ever seen the TV series "Andromeda" there was on episode where a crew member Tyr said "At the end of the universe, I expect 3 survivors. Me, the cockroaches, and Dyland Hunt (the ships captain) trying to save the cockroaches."
@@StarSong936 Daniel, in my darker times I fear we, as a species, will not change enough to affect the rate of climate change.
I look at places like Ukraine, Afghanistan, a lot of the middle east, and here in Australia, and all I see is people focussed on their (petty) lives as they are right now. And I have to admit that my life as an old man is pretty petty now. There is so little appreciation for how much change is necessary to reverse the damage we have made. There is next to no appreciation for how what we are doing in our day to day existence is continuing the damage.
I was introduced to this in the '70s; but have been near enough to powerless to even effect my life enough to make more than a trivial difference. Modern western society is set up to abuse the ecosystem. Less developed countries take huge offence when western countries try to tell them not to go down that path... and who can blame them when the people in those western counties mostly have such comfortable lives. Plus, there are just so many humans now!
The huge problem with our extinction is that so many thousands of other species will precede us in this doom. Maybe even the cockroaches will be killed off? 😞
Ah yes, flat earthers.... providing opportunities for drinking games during the pandemic
Ever think some people weren't just born the way they are but worked at it? In this case he had his brain starched and ironed.
Here is one thing i don't understand about the flat model and going from east to west or vice versa.
By what his model showed us technically doing a full loop of the flat earth isn't them going from east to west, rather your going in all directions. Because every direction north, east, south and west are straight parallel lines. So with that basic understanding in direction, how can they say doing a 360° loop is only going in 2 directions when your not.
By that model he would go from east to east east north to north east to north north east to north to north north west and so on.
Am i right or am i missing something?
Finally! Part two! I couldn’t take the suspense!
1:18 This makes me want to create a bunch of content debunking the flat earth that just looks as things like mountains and says, "I can see the curve so it must not be flat!"
Well in order to answer the satellite question flat earthers would need to believe satalites are more than just weather balloons which they don’t and since space doesn’t exist to them as well they never go high enough in the atmosphere to where the balloons pop and I’m sure they also don’t know about how helium seeps through rubber and eventually deflates so it never does
IIRC Earth is much smoother than a bowling ball if a bowling ball was the size of the planet
Yes indeed
Way to many flatard believe that there is something like an universal down direction. Bad news for them, there is no universal down. Down is always local and, on the surface of the Earth, toward it's centre of mass.
I like how that footage at 3:00 have been «corrected» to remove the curve of the horizon, just to have it curve upward when it passes right thru the very centre of the field of view.
what a thumbnail. squished professor stick is just what i needed to see today
people need to realize gravity is centered to the center of the earth and not the south pole.
Mess with the Professor, you get the Stick!
Can someone explain why when Flat Earthers make videos, that they must speak in a low smug voice? With Professor Stick speaks he does not use a low smug voice.
The Nile is important for flat earthers because that is what all flat earthers do...
@8:56, I am so damn tired of Flerfers trying to "debunk" THIS model of the heliocentric model. The sun does NOT move perpendicular to the orbit of the planets. The moon does NOT orbit the Earth perpendicular to the orbit of Earth. This is such a stupid strawman, it is really sad.
How can you listen to this unemotional voice? Even if he was presenting facts I couldn't stay awake.
Eric DuBore always sounds so cocky and arrogant! Either he's just trolling or intellectually dishonest. Either way he sounds ignorant!
How can one be so confident in his own stupidity?
He knows he is lying but he gets money for his BS.
@@boterlettersukkel And people believe this con man! Then they deserve to be called stupid and get made fun of!
Yes Eric Dubious is a conman and neo NTZ.
@@boterlettersukkel I wonder how much money does he get off of gullible fools?
5:12 So the earth is flat because people thought we life in a snow globe surrounded by water?
And more of Eric's strawman arguments misunderstandings of the globe. I expect nothing more.
Never mind 19, let's get back to those flat charts which are actually various projections of a sphere because an actual globe of similar scale would be a tad unwieldy (especially on old sailing ships, which were famously cramped). Of course, it would be a simple linear scaling if the planet was flat, so why don't you have a flat Earth map Erik?
hmm,covering more flat brainers.. i like it!
"Nature is never absurd". Has he never seen a duck's reproductive organs?
I am into astronomy & have been for decades.... The sun progressing through the zodiac throughout the year is 1 of the ways I know we orbit it
Dammit Professor Stick. Why did you use inches for a measurement smaller than an inch? I would've understood centimeters or millimeters better for the sake of precision.
Ask flath-earthers why it gets hotter the more you go down, bet 50 bucks they cant answer or give an answer like "a force field"
This is supposed to be advanced flat earth, yet he immediately goes in for "north is uphill"
Couldn't get through to the end. Dubay's arrogance, and reliance on religion, is too much.
I’m very curious what is required for a earth to actually be flat excluding gravity (cause if included, no known material can withstand the ridiculous forces to maintain a constant shape).
No street cred for this guy at all.
Thanks for the video :)
I love it when flat earthers say that stars never move... And then, in this case, use ANCIENT PEOPLE as evidence. I don't think they realised that ancient people have mapped the stars, and they look different from today, since they ya know... changed.
A recent tictok from the equator in Uganda demonstrating the Coriolis effect, on how water drain in the exact equator, north and south hemispheres. I love to hear what explanation the flat earthers would make up, for sh1ts and giggles
Unfortunately that's an urban myth, However Flattards haven't figured that out yet.
I tried but could't make sense of that diagram at 01:58
It's just too much flat earth nonsense first thing in the morning!
Have you ever checked out mudfossil University? It's a channel that tries to prove that mountains and other geological structures are fossils of "pre-flood" giants and dragons. I'd love to hear your take on his video
Keep up the good work
Amazing content as usual
definitely id love to see him cover that
Anyone else have watch videos at 2x speed when Eric is in it?
If the earth is a drum, I hope it's a wicked cool floor tom played by rock god Neal Peart.
ah.. Erch... hehehehehehehe.. goes off his tree when you chip him
Veritasium said massive objects bend space time, so people in orbit are on a straight line path but the path is curved by space time. If matter bends space time how do we know earth isn't just a box or a flat disc rounded out by space time?
The simplest idea I have to debunk the flat earth. Why can I not see the sun during the night, but I can see the moon during the day? if the sun was rotating around the earth, lighting up half the earth. Then it should be visible at all times on a flat earth, I should be able to in the middle of the night, look up and see the sun as a distant speck. Instead I see the sun go below the horizon.
I'm quite sure if the earth were flat we would *NOT* be able to see Mt Everest in most part of the world. _Light scattering_ will easily prevent this.
@@FelixBat Of course. However the go-to solution is to _redefine_ physics and invent *new* types of perspective etc. Or, I know, even cooler, redefine _S C I E N C E !!!_ call scientists "preachers," of this religion called *scientism,* and so on _ad nauseam_
@@FelixBat Yes. The rhetoric is also used by Theist vs Atheist. Anything that is "just" a religion can be dismissed as being "not factual." So theists (YECs) will just say "nah, atheism is just a religion". "Science is just a religion." "Globe earth is just a religion". lol
Urgh, again with the stars’ positions.
Yes, they do slowly shift over the millennia. The constellations we see today are different from those used and charted by ancient people.
We can still use them for navigation, because the position change is negligible within a single person’s lifespan.
@professor Stick I believe most flat earthers think that satellites are held up by weather balloons
Professor stick be looking kind of *thicc*
One day, if we are lucky, we'll live inside a hollow planet and people will live on the inner side of the shell, and then we'll have hollow-earthers, who will say that there's nothing outside earth and all the universe is inside the hollow planet.
If space travel becomes more common and the average person can go into space I’m sure flat earthers will keep denying earth being a sphere because they will believe whatever they want to believe even if they deny reality
There have been circumnavigations north to south. How he's just straight up lying.
Not on the ocean. He's being disingenuous because, in his worldview, Antarctica is a rim of rock and ice.
He always is. Nr. 1 from his "famous" book is an unfounded assertion. Nr. 2 is an obvious falsehood.
Gotta lie to flerf.
Ever use a siphon? As long as the end is below the beginning it keeps siphoning- same for rivers
The siphon requires a closed tube to allow creation of negative pressure. A river does not have a closed top, so is not a siphon.
Professor Stick,
From my experience nearly all flat Earthers are also creationists, so it makes sense that atheist flat Earthers would be rare.
He's losing it. You can tell by the emotion in his voice. Much more tremble than usual.
I'm pretty sure he confused astrologer and astronomer on his last point
Thanks for sharing those cool quotes from historical figures. Oh wait, you want to use those as proof of a flat earth? XD
Our expectations for you were low, but HOLY FUCK
13 has a point tho.. I studied astronomy and got sucidal at times🤷🏻♂️
I love it when flerfs debate science and use religion as evidence. Because that's what scientists do, back their claims up by beliefs.
Did he really just argue that the earth must be flat because that is what ancient people thought? Like "I'm as smart as a cave man, actually."
Solid and stationary earth? How Aristotelian.
But ancient Hebrews knew all, it is in the bible... By Grabthar's hammer, what an agrument.
Good video
So Flerfers are in denial about the Nile? We should throw them in it...
All flerfs would have to do is circumnavigate the globe in a plane at different latitudes. Start at 50N stay on the latitude and go around the globe. Then go to 0, the equator, stay on that latitude and go around. Then go to 50S stay on that latitude, go around. Did your trip get longer each time? = flat earth. Did it get longer the second time, then shorter again the third time? = globe
Hmm… wonder why they haven’t done this considering so many of them are “commercial pilots.”
3:01 nature is never monstrous?!??!?! HAS HE *HEARD* OF AUSTRALIA
0:52
So in the end what the curvature is on:
Uyuni Salt Flats (Bolivia's Salt Flats)
is it smaller or larger - more pronounced or standard?
What good joke!!!
Did he actually say humbugged?!
Literally just ask this guy how Solar and Lunar eclipses work on a flat earth. The sun and moon always being apart is essential to Half the world being night and day for a flat earth which is impossible to support on a flat earth.
Inches? why not use banana scale? 😅
Clearly they took the satellites up in balloons and mounted them to the glass dome.