Failzoid is still crying about how us sane folk perform practical celestial navigation, yet STILL, neither he or any single one of his Flatopian inhabitants has even attempted to do it, even with TEN GRAND on the table from MCToon. As you say, how anyone can be taken in by these clowns is utterly mind boggling.
So, the guy who has never actually done celestial navigation, who thinks that trigonometry is involved when he converts an angle into a distance without using sine, cosine or tangent, who utterly fails to understand the implications of the fact that we apply a number of corrections to a measured angle in order to derive an angle to an imaginary horizontal says that Protothad, someone who has actually done celestial navigation, is an idiot.
Don't forget he's also one of those who refuse to submit anything to MC Toon's $10k sextant challenge. The funniest thing about Flatzoid is that recently he always states that he doesn't have a model and he doesn't make any claims, so people can not challenge him on his nonsense. Something is really wrong with this world. People are just turning insane and it doesn't stop at politicians all around the globe. Some people have their mind bended that puts the space around a black hole to shame. A black hole bends space time in a consitent and predictable way. Flat-earthers distort reality in unthinkable ways. Have you seen Flatzoids diagram how much the light of the sun bends in relation to the distance according to his "model"? It's essentially an 1/x curve. Though I highly doubt he even understands what that means ^^.
Yep, I believe Dave McKeegan will be ripping him a new one soon. Shawn Hawkins did a live earlier proving him wrong. Still, his minions are nothing but loyal. 🤷♂
I have to laugh, you show quite clearly that the sextant angle has to be corrected for index error and dip. This is because (as anyone that actual performs celestial navigation will agree), the sextant does NOT measure the angle between the celestial object and horizontal. Flatzoid just doesn't get that tiny detail. It measures from celestial object to the horizon, and as any glober can tell you, the horizon does NOT RISE UP TO EYE LEVEL. After you make those corrections (and refraction as well), you have the angle to horizontal. Another nice demonstration Petey, keep up the great work.
Thanks so much Mike. The other thing I want him and Brian's Logic to take away is the how the circle can be created. They swear blind it's not a real circle. Proto Thad shown a slide on one of his videos of the sphere being sliced with a plane. It's just so simple and neat. How they deny it is just beyond me. They need to think where the 60nm/° actually comes from. Thanks again for keeping an eye on me, 😋
@@Petey194 since the flerfs need their visual demonstrations just take a glass and put the open end over a globe model to show how circles of equal altitude work. If they don't get it after that then they have no hope.
What you have said is correct. I would add though that just holding the sextant level oftentimes gives me measurements to within 30 arc minutes. I sight a star, pull it down to what I judge to be level, fire up Stellarium and compare my measured altitude with what Stellarium states. Stellarium also gives the true azimuth. Brilliant app.
If flatzoid actually understood anything, he'd explain why the measurements made were wrong. But he doesn't explain, because he doesn't understand. Instead he lashes out, like a petulant child.
And the thing that will really boil his pish is that WE DO NOT USE circles of equal altitude to obtain a fix by celestial navigation. At least, not in the way shown using massive model globes, and huge pairs of compasses. It's handy to have a computer to draw suitable maps that can have circles drawn on them, but that's not how it was done in the 19th Century. Hell, when I did my YO practical in 1980, even a scientific calculator was a rare, expensive luxury. The 'Circle of equal altitude' is implicit in the Marcq St Hilaire method, which is the method generally taught & used since before WW II, but actually uses solutions to the PZX spherical triangle equations. A fix can be obtained with about half a page of calculations, & plotted on a sheet of A4 graph paper [ I used to use old school physics notebooks ]. To use 'CoEA' on a chart would require charts the size of several double bed sheets, & a chart table the size of a snooker table. In the 19th Century, there were a plethora of methods in use, including at least one that calculated a position in lat & long, directly, as 2 values, no circles or even segments of circles required. The 'Circle of Equal Altitude' is a handy, easy to explain & understand example that can be shown to people, but it really has no place in celestial navigation. ['The HippyNavigator'. Yachtmaster Ocean ]
Thanks Marc. I very much appreciate it. I'm going to start working on converting that globe map to the regular 2d grid. Maybe once I've done that, I'll try doing a fix on flat earth 😋
I get a kick out of it every time someone asks flatzoid to demonstrate it and figure out a location it's just word salad and deflection because he can't do it. Oh outside of the one time he actually tried and was like 600 km off and yet somehow still tried to claim he got it.
Good stuff ! The truly disturbing part is that there are enough fools alive today actually dumb enough to pay Flatzoid's internet bill just for telling lies.
Thanks 😋 It's great learning from you and others who actually do CelNav and it's a bonus exposing the Flatzoids of this world. Thank you for doing it! Really looking forward to whatever you do next!
Who has ever used a Mercator projection map to to perform a celestial fix? Rob Durham's predicate is that celestial navigation is somehow done on a Mercator projection and then mapped to a sphere, which is not the case. The circles on a sphere are circles - on a sphere. If you want to map that to a Mercator projection you are going to wind up with non-circles on the projection.
It really is game over but he doesn't let anything get in the way of his delusion does he 😆 The last clip also makes me laugh too. I did loop it a few times, lol.
Flatzoid becoming even more unhinged because he knows he can't do the maths to actually defend his position. What position is that? I don't know, he can't navigate to it
Well he is in the camp that says that any math that shows he’s wrong is just a trick and part of the coverup. It’s nice to hold a position that basically says if I’m wrong it’s part of ‘them’ isn’t it.
Flatzoid will never understand that those swirly curvy lines on timeanddate's Day and Night map, showing the sun's terminator and the -6º -12º and -18º twilight boundaries, are actually circles of equal altitude for the sun. Flatzoid, why are circles of equal altitude never _actual_ circles when drawn on any flat map? (Except on an AE map generated on the GP of whatever celestial body you're interested in, of course...)
Oh, and Rob Durham's idea that circles of equal altitude are teardrop-shaped on the globe gave me a really good laugh months ago. No wonder he has comments turned off on his channel, he can't even see drawing circles on a Mercator projection and mapping these back to a globe couldn't possibly distort them, could it? No, no, no, that's just umpozzible, couldn't be just couldn't, your IgNobel Prize is in the post. 😂😂😂😂
I first saw Rob Durham's video in one of Bitchell's FE school videos. A long time ago. Checking out Rob's channel, I noticed that comments were deactivated back then already.
@@0LoneTech nope, they haven’t an earthly what these are, far less what to do with them. Durham would surely have used them otherwise, instead of drawing circles on a Mercator map.
Flatzoid, like most flerfs, loves to tell us things, including that we are wrong, but NEVER provides calculations of any kind to prove it. His comments at "word salad alert" are a prime example - telling us how things should or shouldn't be done, but not brave (or intelligent) enough to give us an example with actual calculations.
Yep, like most flerfs, he refuses to be pinned down too. He'll answer questions with more questions. Pinning him down means he can be held to his own words. He has zero credibility. Notice he hasn't responded at all to this video. Nor has any of his regulars made an appearance. It's very telling. Where are all the flerfs? 🤷
He can recite "SOH CAH TOA" _ad barfium._ That's about his limit. And of course he incessantly insists that triangles are involved in celestial navigation. Did you see him on Toon's channel where he though the use of Greek capital delta in a document about celestial nav meant that triangles are involved because a footnote explained the delta "triangle symbol?"
Flatzoid and Rob D. should draw circle of equal altitude on mercator projection for both Polar stars, Flatzoid for S. Octantis, of course. This would be... interesting.
Well it’s all about sewing doubt. They draw a circle on a map that gets more distorted the closer you get to the north or south and then put it back onto the globe. They know full well what is going to happen.
I got 42° 49' 00.28" N 87° 39' 18.07" W , and I can provide the method of calculation too. I'd like to see Flatzoid applying his own method from his word salad, and get similar results. But he won't be applying anything, at most he will be just lieing.
In his video, (linked in description but you don't need to click it 😆), he was helped by Roohif to get a fix on a flat earth and he was 544km off. He called that a success! Only Flatzoid 🤭
@@Petey194 my software was 750km off at one time, until I realized the bug and fixed it. That distance error means if I'm in Europe, my position can be three countries further than I think. Now I only have 3.6 km error for that particular measurement. I still call this a partial result, not a success.
Sure np. It's linked in the description. I've just edited to allow you to open the menu and settings. I wouldn't worry about it being a bit closer. I've set this up to automatically centre the observer in that cocked hat triangle but you'll notice I fiddled with it to where I thought was best, given the shape of that triangle. Try looking at the observers coordinates when I first clicked the preset. It won't be far from yours. 👍
@@Petey194 I just take the average of the coordinates of the three intersection points. Depending on the shape of the crooked hat, I'm all kinds of wrong :) That's one thing I want to improve in my software.
@@TakacsJanos Yep it's so easy for a human to detect where the centre of 3 overlapping circles is. Not so easy to automate. The bit of programming for that is in the settings / scripting section of the table.
A Pointless Video to convince Flatties, but a great mental exercise for me, learning more and more about Navigation Tools and principles. The old Greek method of verbally denouncing fools in public works a treat.
I think you're right. There are few proper "truthers" out there right now asking questions but yeah, for the majority of them, it's pointless. Yep, for me too, I get to learn new stuff and ways to present it. Cheers!
@@Petey194 A "truther" by definition is somebody who is purposely seeking out alternative answers to the general consensus, whether they are "true" or not is immaterial to them. They are nothing more than contrarians, all of them.
Failzoid should also learn celestial navigation. He doesn't understand anything about CN but that doesn't stop him from posting the dumbest videos about it.
Now, where you‘ve gone wrong, Petey, is using mathematics and logic. What you should have done is wail like a condescending toddler, like Flatzoid……(Seriously, good work, Petey.)
In the given conversation between "F" (Flatzoid), "RD" (Rational Debater), "P" (Proto Thad), and "PJ" (Puzzled Junior), we can identify several logical fallacies and points of contention. Here, I'll provide an analysis that not only highlights the logical fallacies but also dissects the argument's flaws and underlying assumptions: 1. **Ad Hominem (Personal Attack)**: Flatzoid's response includes multiple instances of ad hominem attacks, calling others "stupid" and "morons." This is a clear logical fallacy that avoids addressing the actual arguments made. 2. **Straw Man Fallacy**: Flatzoid misrepresents RD's argument by claiming that he is trying to prove a spherical Earth. RD's argument is about demonstrating a practical method, not proving the Earth's shape. 3. **Appeal to Ridicule**: Flatzoid ridicules RD's method without providing any substantive counterarguments. Ridicule doesn't disprove an argument. 4. **Non-Sequitur**: Flatzoid's response includes statements like "This what gives the co-altitude angle, correct?" and "This is how idiotic these people are." These statements are not logically connected to the main argument being discussed. 5. **Red Herring**: Flatzoid introduces unrelated ideas about measuring angles and the concept of a hypotenuse. This diverts attention from the main point being made by RD. 6. **Appeal to Ignorance**: Flatzoid seems to imply that because RD's argument doesn't fit his understanding, it must be wrong. This is an appeal to ignorance, as a lack of understanding doesn't disprove an argument. 7. **False Dichotomy**: Flatzoid sets up a false dichotomy by implying that one must either accept his view or be an "idiot." This oversimplifies a complex topic. 8. **Hasty Generalization**: Flatzoid generalizes and insults everyone who doesn't share his perspective, assuming they are all "morons." This is an unjustified generalization. 9. **Appeal to Emotion**: Flatzoid's emotional language, such as calling RD's argument a "big fat marker pen" demonstration, doesn't address the argument's validity but rather appeals to emotions. 10. **Ad Ignorantiam**: Flatzoid claims that Proto Thad's method is "idiotic," but he doesn't provide any substantive evidence or counterarguments to support his claim. 11. **Begging the Question**: Flatzoid seems to assume the Earth is flat throughout his argument without providing any evidence or addressing the contrary evidence presented by RD. 12. **Circular Reasoning**: Flatzoid asserts that a horizontal baseline is what defines celestial sphere arc length without providing a valid argument or evidence for this assertion. 13. **Anecdotal Evidence**: Flatzoid relies on personal anecdotes and opinions rather than presenting objective evidence to support his claims. 14. **Cherry-Picking**: Flatzoid focuses on one aspect of RD's argument (the hypotenuse) and dismisses the rest, ignoring the comprehensive methodology RD used. 15. **Appeal to Authority**: Flatzoid makes strong statements without providing any relevant expertise or evidence to support his claims. 16. **Special Pleading**: Flatzoid rejects RD's argument without offering an alternative method or explanation for how circles of equal altitude could work on a flat Earth. 17. **Ad Baculum (Appeal to Force)**: Flatzoid uses aggressive language, such as calling others "stupid" and "morons," which can be seen as an attempt to intimidate or silence opposing views. 18. **Confirmation Bias**: Flatzoid seems to have a strong preconceived bias towards a flat Earth model and dismisses any evidence or arguments that contradict this bias. In conclusion, the conversation is riddled with logical fallacies, ad hominem attacks, and a lack of substantive counterarguments. It's essential to engage in constructive, evidence-based discussions when debating complex topics like the shape of the Earth, rather than resorting to fallacious reasoning and personal attacks.
Wasn't it Flatzoid who said something like getting within 600 nautical miles was pretty good? Accuracy was much better than that when the Board of Longitude put up the twenty thousand pound prize (equiv to over three million pounds today) for a method for finding longitude within 30 nautical miles. Lesser prizes were offered for lesser accuracy, 10k for sixty NM. Limitations to nav accuracy at the time cost too many lives, ships and their cargo.
@@d614gakadoug9 Really, the problem of longitude is a problem of time - but getting within 60 nm is basically within 1 degree on the Earth's surface - that is quite doable!
@@Phylaetra It is quite doable now, but in the early 18th century when the Board of Longitude was established it wasn't. It was John Harrison's marine clock that changed things. He had to put up a hell of fight to collect the prize and even then it wasn't the prize as such. Without the intervention of the king he would likely have never collected his due.
@@Petey194 Just got around to watching it! 'do you think i am a charlatan and a fraud?' No D and no I. 80% voted yes! 🤣🤣🤣 Globers are keeping his channel alive!😁
Notice how Flatzoid doesn't do the problem using numbers to get a result. He just talks and thinks he knows what he is talking about. The proof would be by actually doing problems.
I'd bet dimes to donuts that most of the popular FE youtubers already know the earth isn't flat. But without their channels, they'd sink back into obscurity, so they'll do anything to defend their bread & butter. The insults are just a distraction from the fact that he has no intelligent reply. Like the other FE youtubers, he's banking on the assumed lack of knowledge among his core viewers.
I've had more than my fill of Flatzoid. I hope he is allowed to disappear into obscurity. I've seen a lot of people express this sentiment. At some future point clips could be used in a "Remember this idiot?" context.
Наверное это 100-я серия какой то длинной дискуссии, понять о чем говорит автор сходу не получилось ( Может быть кто то, кто смотрел предыдущие серии пояснит - автор действительно считает, что проводя локальные измерения в одной точке можно определить глобальные характеристики многообразия?
@@Petey194 Безусловно! Но речь, конечно, идет только о широте и долготе, никакого 3D, вроде расстояния до "центра" Земли или чего то аналогичного метод не подразумевает?
@@ПавелКуликов-м9м Вы можете ввести любое значение радиуса, и будут возвращены те же широта и долгота. Это работает, потому что мир подобен сфере. Я не знаю, что еще сказать. 👍
@@Petey194 я вряд ли смогу Вас в чем либо убедить в формате комментов youtube, но все же обдумайте такие соображения: 1. Если формулы дают один и тот же результат для любого радиуса, может быть этот радиус можно из них исключить, или он там все же отсутствует изначально? 2. Что будет с этими формулами, если какой нибудь плоскоземелец случайно подставит в них практически бесконечный (очень большой) радиус, не сможет ли он утверждать, что сфера с бесконечным радиусом неотличима от плоскости? 3. Если Вы исходите из того, что "мир подобен сфере", и собираетесь это же доказать - не есть ли это idem per idem, "закольцованное доказательство"?
@@ПавелКуликов-м9м There are other factors at play. We know the radius because it has been measured. Watch the my last video on the haversine formula. We can compute the distance between two points on a sphere. If we can use the radius to get a distance then we can also use the distance to get a radius.
Failzoid fails at reality again. Anyone surprised ? He get it wrong about celestial navigation. He get the horizon wrong. He get planar geometry wrong. And don't even think of spherical geometry. He can't triangle. He also can't angle. He's totally wrong about the distances to the Sun, and, it's even worst for the stars. He get fooled with simple perspective. Failzoid calling someone an idiot ? Sorry, Failzoid, but you must stop projecting.
Flatzoid. Consistently incorrect on every single point and yet his fluffers agree no matter what tripe emerges from his gob. He usually coddles a hasty retort in another stupefying video but I think, on this occasion, he'll be conspicuous by his absence. His word salads are chucklesome though. Its like a bingo machine with random words on the balls popping up randomly. Bloody hilarious.
@@marcg1686He's a deluded lunkhead. I don't even think he's ever seen a sunset over an ocean let alone navigate a ship to a destination. Not within 544km anyways.
"He is taking the measurement from a flat plane, and just _giving it a duplication to say it's on a sphere."_ It's permissible to be bamboozled by science and math, but it is unacceptable to lack the ability to express the ideas and pictures you have in your head any better than that *↑↑↑* hot mess. I expect better from 12 year old, let alone an adult who wants to argue physics and geometry.
@@Petey194 The personal dome is what they think is a get out jail free card. They know that the celestial sphere is a thing and they think it lets them take it away from us. They know we have a toy that they have to use do they try to say our tool is really theirs so when used they can feign victory hoping no one calls them on it.
Fartzoid doesn't have the first idea how any of this works. None of them do. It's enough for the idiots that watch his channel for him to make some nonsense up and say it in a stupid voice. As far as they're concerned, mocking a scientist is the same as winning the arguement.
Why do people waste time debating flat-earthers. Just let them rot away in their own little world of ignorance. It's not like arguing the science of climate change with deniers - there is an ultimate goal there of fixing the planet.
Its important to have someone explaining how things actually work so that people who might fall into the flat earth thinking will have proper explanations instead of word salads etc. If no one is debunking this nonsense, people might go "oh well I guess its flat then." Also, it makes the content creators money. Whats better than getting paid by debunking stupidity? If I had good speaking skills, a bit more patience to study stuff and some video editing skills, I would totally change my daily job of fixing cars to sitting in a comfy studio and recording videos.
ua-cam.com/users/postUgkx9K2ek7wk9pKUBzvrUhNjBwr1zV0aa5DP
Failzoid is still crying about how us sane folk perform practical celestial navigation, yet STILL, neither he or any single one of his Flatopian inhabitants has even attempted to do it, even with TEN GRAND on the table from MCToon.
As you say, how anyone can be taken in by these clowns is utterly mind boggling.
So, the guy who has never actually done celestial navigation, who thinks that trigonometry is involved when he converts an angle into a distance without using sine, cosine or tangent, who utterly fails to understand the implications of the fact that we apply a number of corrections to a measured angle in order to derive an angle to an imaginary horizontal says that Protothad, someone who has actually done celestial navigation, is an idiot.
That's our Failzoid.
Don't forget he's also one of those who refuse to submit anything to MC Toon's $10k sextant challenge. The funniest thing about Flatzoid is that recently he always states that he doesn't have a model and he doesn't make any claims, so people can not challenge him on his nonsense.
Something is really wrong with this world. People are just turning insane and it doesn't stop at politicians all around the globe. Some people have their mind bended that puts the space around a black hole to shame. A black hole bends space time in a consitent and predictable way. Flat-earthers distort reality in unthinkable ways. Have you seen Flatzoids diagram how much the light of the sun bends in relation to the distance according to his "model"? It's essentially an 1/x curve. Though I highly doubt he even understands what that means ^^.
It now appears that Flatzoid has moved on from getting everything wrong about celestial navigation to getting everything wrong about photography.
Yep, I believe Dave McKeegan will be ripping him a new one soon. Shawn Hawkins did a live earlier proving him wrong. Still, his minions are nothing but loyal. 🤷♂
@@Petey194 Yeah, half of those "minions" are paid sock puppet's.
i thinks thats what called progress in the flerf world.
@@Petey194 grifters have got to grift just as flerfs have got to lie.
He's working his way through the list until he reaches his end goal: The point where he's wrong about absolutely everything, everywhere, all at once!
I have to laugh, you show quite clearly that the sextant angle has to be corrected for index error and dip. This is because (as anyone that actual performs celestial navigation will agree), the sextant does NOT measure the angle between the celestial object and horizontal. Flatzoid just doesn't get that tiny detail. It measures from celestial object to the horizon, and as any glober can tell you, the horizon does NOT RISE UP TO EYE LEVEL. After you make those corrections (and refraction as well), you have the angle to horizontal.
Another nice demonstration Petey, keep up the great work.
Thanks so much Mike. The other thing I want him and Brian's Logic to take away is the how the circle can be created. They swear blind it's not a real circle. Proto Thad shown a slide on one of his videos of the sphere being sliced with a plane. It's just so simple and neat. How they deny it is just beyond me. They need to think where the 60nm/° actually comes from. Thanks again for keeping an eye on me, 😋
@@Petey194 since the flerfs need their visual demonstrations just take a glass and put the open end over a globe model to show how circles of equal altitude work. If they don't get it after that then they have no hope.
Yep, I'm sure it was Wolfie6020 that put a wine glass ona ball in one of his vids.
@@Requiem4aDr3Am "If they don't get it after that then they have no hope."
They won't, and there isn't.
What you have said is correct. I would add though that just holding the sextant level oftentimes gives me measurements to within 30 arc minutes.
I sight a star, pull it down to what I judge to be level, fire up Stellarium and compare my measured altitude with what Stellarium states. Stellarium also gives the true azimuth. Brilliant app.
Outstanding demo! I'm envious of your GeoGebra skills.
Thanks very much indeed. Much appreciated. I've started a playlist with some tutorials. I'll try to add to it periodically. 👍
If flatzoid actually understood anything, he'd explain why the measurements made were wrong.
But he doesn't explain, because he doesn't understand. Instead he lashes out, like a petulant child.
And the thing that will really boil his pish is that WE DO NOT USE circles of equal altitude to obtain a fix by celestial navigation. At least, not in the way shown using massive model globes, and huge pairs of compasses. It's handy to have a computer to draw suitable maps that can have circles drawn on them, but that's not how it was done in the 19th Century. Hell, when I did my YO practical in 1980, even a scientific calculator was a rare, expensive luxury. The 'Circle of equal altitude' is implicit in the Marcq St Hilaire method, which is the method generally taught & used since before WW II, but actually uses solutions to the PZX spherical triangle equations. A fix can be obtained with about half a page of calculations, & plotted on a sheet of A4 graph paper [ I used to use old school physics notebooks ]. To use 'CoEA' on a chart would require charts the size of several double bed sheets, & a chart table the size of a snooker table.
In the 19th Century, there were a plethora of methods in use, including at least one that calculated a position in lat & long, directly, as 2 values, no circles or even segments of circles required.
The 'Circle of Equal Altitude' is a handy, easy to explain & understand example that can be shown to people, but it really has no place in celestial navigation.
['The HippyNavigator'. Yachtmaster Ocean ]
Omg, that was glorious. 3D poetry!
Nicely done, Petey👍
Full on Putzoid destruction.🤣🤣🤣
Thanks Marc. I very much appreciate it. I'm going to start working on converting that globe map to the regular 2d grid. Maybe once I've done that, I'll try doing a fix on flat earth 😋
I get a kick out of it every time someone asks flatzoid to demonstrate it and figure out a location it's just word salad and deflection because he can't do it. Oh outside of the one time he actually tried and was like 600 km off and yet somehow still tried to claim he got it.
Good stuff ! The truly disturbing part is that there are enough fools alive today actually dumb enough to pay Flatzoid's internet bill just for telling lies.
Try and convince them to give it to me instead. My internet contract ends in 2 wks and I guarentee they'll put their prices up! 😂
@@Petey194 lol ... good bet
Excellent video!
Love the "do something with an angle" comment
😆
You can run circles around Flatzoid and he would still think they are flat.
Just put a drinking glass on a globe. Boom, instant circle of equal altitude demonstrated on a globe.
Failzoid still won't get it.
Not getting it is one of Putzoid's specialities. The guy is a complete m0ron.
He won’t get it because he doesn’t want to get it. Everything he does is misdirection to avoid the topic at all costs.
Excellent video. I originally did that lighthouse position fix for a class I taught... Maybe a flat earther will learn something from it someday.😊
Thanks 😋 It's great learning from you and others who actually do CelNav and it's a bonus exposing the Flatzoids of this world. Thank you for doing it! Really looking forward to whatever you do next!
Who has ever used a Mercator projection map to to perform a celestial fix? Rob Durham's predicate is that celestial navigation is somehow done on a Mercator projection and then mapped to a sphere, which is not the case. The circles on a sphere are circles - on a sphere. If you want to map that to a Mercator projection you are going to wind up with non-circles on the projection.
The cheeky clip at the very end with Flatzoid's expression of total copium and denial is priceless lol
It really is game over but he doesn't let anything get in the way of his delusion does he 😆 The last clip also makes me laugh too. I did loop it a few times, lol.
You're well aware you're the king - doesn't need repeating all the time 😂😂 Just giving some algorithmic love with a like and share.
hehe, 😛 thanks very much Roohif. 🤩
Flatzoid becoming even more unhinged because he knows he can't do the maths to actually defend his position. What position is that? I don't know, he can't navigate to it
Well he is in the camp that says that any math that shows he’s wrong is just a trick and part of the coverup. It’s nice to hold a position that basically says if I’m wrong it’s part of ‘them’ isn’t it.
Flatzoid will never understand that those swirly curvy lines on timeanddate's Day and Night map, showing the sun's terminator and the -6º -12º and -18º twilight boundaries, are actually circles of equal altitude for the sun. Flatzoid, why are circles of equal altitude never _actual_ circles when drawn on any flat map?
(Except on an AE map generated on the GP of whatever celestial body you're interested in, of course...)
Oh, and Rob Durham's idea that circles of equal altitude are teardrop-shaped on the globe gave me a really good laugh months ago. No wonder he has comments turned off on his channel, he can't even see drawing circles on a Mercator projection and mapping these back to a globe couldn't possibly distort them, could it? No, no, no, that's just umpozzible, couldn't be just couldn't, your IgNobel Prize is in the post. 😂😂😂😂
But he sounds so convincing he can't possibly be wrong. 🤔 🤣🤣🤣
I first saw Rob Durham's video in one of Bitchell's FE school videos. A long time ago. Checking out Rob's channel, I noticed that comments were deactivated back then already.
Did they attempt to invert Tissot's indicatrices?
@@0LoneTech nope, they haven’t an earthly what these are, far less what to do with them. Durham would surely have used them otherwise, instead of drawing circles on a Mercator map.
Those eyes are so manic at the end. Id-ee-ut!
lmao! 🤣
Sometimes I think he has painted too many cars without wearing his respirator.
Or his caps are lead-lined 😆
Flatzoid, like most flerfs, loves to tell us things, including that we are wrong, but NEVER provides calculations of any kind to prove it. His comments at "word salad alert" are a prime example - telling us how things should or shouldn't be done, but not brave (or intelligent) enough to give us an example with actual calculations.
Yep, like most flerfs, he refuses to be pinned down too. He'll answer questions with more questions. Pinning him down means he can be held to his own words. He has zero credibility. Notice he hasn't responded at all to this video. Nor has any of his regulars made an appearance. It's very telling. Where are all the flerfs? 🤷
He can recite "SOH CAH TOA" _ad barfium._ That's about his limit. And of course he incessantly insists that triangles are involved in celestial navigation.
Did you see him on Toon's channel where he though the use of Greek capital delta in a document about celestial nav meant that triangles are involved because a footnote explained the delta "triangle symbol?"
Flatzoid and Rob D. should draw circle of equal altitude on mercator projection for both Polar stars, Flatzoid for S. Octantis, of course. This would be... interesting.
Well it’s all about sewing doubt. They draw a circle on a map that gets more distorted the closer you get to the north or south and then put it back onto the globe. They know full well what is going to happen.
This is unfair! You use demonstrable examples.....
If you put a sextant in Failzoid's and a chimpanzee's hand. My money is on the chimp being able to hold it correctly and use it before Failzoid.
The Chimp likely knows that there is 90º in a right angle, NOT 60, just for starters.
I got 42° 49' 00.28" N 87° 39' 18.07" W , and I can provide the method of calculation too.
I'd like to see Flatzoid applying his own method from his word salad, and get similar results. But he won't be applying anything, at most he will be just lieing.
In his video, (linked in description but you don't need to click it 😆), he was helped by Roohif to get a fix on a flat earth and he was 544km off. He called that a success! Only Flatzoid 🤭
@@Petey194 my software was 750km off at one time, until I realized the bug and fixed it. That distance error means if I'm in Europe, my position can be three countries further than I think. Now I only have 3.6 km error for that particular measurement. I still call this a partial result, not a success.
Flatzoid’s only attempt at CN using his method put him 544km away from his true position, yet he claimed a victory none the less.
GeoGebra? If it’s not Paint with a scribble worthy of a nursery school picture pinned to the fridge, it means nothing…
😆
@Petey194 is it possible to look at the source code of your script? Your location fix is 2.5 miles closer, and it's bothering me. :)
Sure np. It's linked in the description. I've just edited to allow you to open the menu and settings. I wouldn't worry about it being a bit closer. I've set this up to automatically centre the observer in that cocked hat triangle but you'll notice I fiddled with it to where I thought was best, given the shape of that triangle. Try looking at the observers coordinates when I first clicked the preset. It won't be far from yours. 👍
@@Petey194 I just take the average of the coordinates of the three intersection points. Depending on the shape of the crooked hat, I'm all kinds of wrong :) That's one thing I want to improve in my software.
@@TakacsJanos Yep it's so easy for a human to detect where the centre of 3 overlapping circles is. Not so easy to automate. The bit of programming for that is in the settings / scripting section of the table.
A Pointless Video to convince Flatties, but a great mental exercise for me, learning more and more about Navigation Tools and principles.
The old Greek method of verbally denouncing fools in public works a treat.
I think you're right. There are few proper "truthers" out there right now asking questions but yeah, for the majority of them, it's pointless. Yep, for me too, I get to learn new stuff and ways to present it. Cheers!
@@Petey194 A "truther" by definition is somebody who is purposely seeking out alternative answers to the general consensus, whether they are "true" or not is immaterial to them. They are nothing more than contrarians, all of them.
Nice work.
Quite enjoyed the graphics there! You do realize, of course, you are preaching to the choir. 😂
😁
Nice! Good look with your channel!
Appreciate it. Thanks!
I should learn celestial navigation... It's the one type of navigation I know almost nothing about.
Failzoid should also learn celestial navigation. He doesn't understand anything about CN but that doesn't stop him from posting the dumbest videos about it.
Now, where you‘ve gone wrong, Petey, is using mathematics and logic. What you should have done is wail like a condescending toddler, like Flatzoid……(Seriously, good work, Petey.)
Haha. 😆Thanks very much. Appreciate it.
Teardrop Explodes - geographically, if not temporarily relevant.
Noted that Rob Durham's video has comments disabled.
Well that’s because he knows he’s cheating. He plotted the circles from a Mercator map back onto a globe because he knows that distortion will happen.
In the given conversation between "F" (Flatzoid), "RD" (Rational Debater), "P" (Proto Thad), and "PJ" (Puzzled Junior), we can identify several logical fallacies and points of contention. Here, I'll provide an analysis that not only highlights the logical fallacies but also dissects the argument's flaws and underlying assumptions:
1. **Ad Hominem (Personal Attack)**: Flatzoid's response includes multiple instances of ad hominem attacks, calling others "stupid" and "morons." This is a clear logical fallacy that avoids addressing the actual arguments made.
2. **Straw Man Fallacy**: Flatzoid misrepresents RD's argument by claiming that he is trying to prove a spherical Earth. RD's argument is about demonstrating a practical method, not proving the Earth's shape.
3. **Appeal to Ridicule**: Flatzoid ridicules RD's method without providing any substantive counterarguments. Ridicule doesn't disprove an argument.
4. **Non-Sequitur**: Flatzoid's response includes statements like "This what gives the co-altitude angle, correct?" and "This is how idiotic these people are." These statements are not logically connected to the main argument being discussed.
5. **Red Herring**: Flatzoid introduces unrelated ideas about measuring angles and the concept of a hypotenuse. This diverts attention from the main point being made by RD.
6. **Appeal to Ignorance**: Flatzoid seems to imply that because RD's argument doesn't fit his understanding, it must be wrong. This is an appeal to ignorance, as a lack of understanding doesn't disprove an argument.
7. **False Dichotomy**: Flatzoid sets up a false dichotomy by implying that one must either accept his view or be an "idiot." This oversimplifies a complex topic.
8. **Hasty Generalization**: Flatzoid generalizes and insults everyone who doesn't share his perspective, assuming they are all "morons." This is an unjustified generalization.
9. **Appeal to Emotion**: Flatzoid's emotional language, such as calling RD's argument a "big fat marker pen" demonstration, doesn't address the argument's validity but rather appeals to emotions.
10. **Ad Ignorantiam**: Flatzoid claims that Proto Thad's method is "idiotic," but he doesn't provide any substantive evidence or counterarguments to support his claim.
11. **Begging the Question**: Flatzoid seems to assume the Earth is flat throughout his argument without providing any evidence or addressing the contrary evidence presented by RD.
12. **Circular Reasoning**: Flatzoid asserts that a horizontal baseline is what defines celestial sphere arc length without providing a valid argument or evidence for this assertion.
13. **Anecdotal Evidence**: Flatzoid relies on personal anecdotes and opinions rather than presenting objective evidence to support his claims.
14. **Cherry-Picking**: Flatzoid focuses on one aspect of RD's argument (the hypotenuse) and dismisses the rest, ignoring the comprehensive methodology RD used.
15. **Appeal to Authority**: Flatzoid makes strong statements without providing any relevant expertise or evidence to support his claims.
16. **Special Pleading**: Flatzoid rejects RD's argument without offering an alternative method or explanation for how circles of equal altitude could work on a flat Earth.
17. **Ad Baculum (Appeal to Force)**: Flatzoid uses aggressive language, such as calling others "stupid" and "morons," which can be seen as an attempt to intimidate or silence opposing views.
18. **Confirmation Bias**: Flatzoid seems to have a strong preconceived bias towards a flat Earth model and dismisses any evidence or arguments that contradict this bias.
In conclusion, the conversation is riddled with logical fallacies, ad hominem attacks, and a lack of substantive counterarguments. It's essential to engage in constructive, evidence-based discussions when debating complex topics like the shape of the Earth, rather than resorting to fallacious reasoning and personal attacks.
Well - I guess it's good he isn't a sailor...
It would certainly be good for lifeboat manufacturers.
Wasn't it Flatzoid who said something like getting within 600 nautical miles was pretty good?
Accuracy was much better than that when the Board of Longitude put up the twenty thousand pound prize (equiv to over three million pounds today) for a method for finding longitude within 30 nautical miles. Lesser prizes were offered for lesser accuracy, 10k for sixty NM. Limitations to nav accuracy at the time cost too many lives, ships and their cargo.
@@d614gakadoug9 Really, the problem of longitude is a problem of time - but getting within 60 nm is basically within 1 degree on the Earth's surface - that is quite doable!
@@Phylaetra
It is quite doable now, but in the early 18th century when the Board of Longitude was established it wasn't. It was John Harrison's marine clock that changed things. He had to put up a hell of fight to collect the prize and even then it wasn't the prize as such. Without the intervention of the king he would likely have never collected his due.
I've probably watched this half a dozen times by now. Seeing Putzoid in melt down at the end is priceless. 😅
'You are a idiot'.😂
haha, the one thing nobody has picked up on yet is the Poll right at the beginning! 🤣🤣
We all know how he loves to rig his polls! 😋
@@Petey194 Just got around to watching it!
'do you think i am a charlatan and a fraud?'
No D and no I. 80% voted yes! 🤣🤣🤣
Globers are keeping his channel alive!😁
Notice how Flatzoid doesn't do the problem using numbers to get a result.
He just talks and thinks he knows what he is talking about.
The proof would be by actually doing problems.
He's a master of word salad and his minions lap it all up. ua-cam.com/users/postUgkx9K2ek7wk9pKUBzvrUhNjBwr1zV0aa5DP ;o)
He loves doubling down. He only cares about sounding right and just keeps playing QE and NO parrot like a good boy.
It appears that the UA-cam gods have smiled apon me tonight.
I'd bet dimes to donuts that most of the popular FE youtubers already know the earth isn't flat. But without their channels, they'd sink back into obscurity, so they'll do anything to defend their bread & butter. The insults are just a distraction from the fact that he has no intelligent reply. Like the other FE youtubers, he's banking on the assumed lack of knowledge among his core viewers.
Of course flatzoid doesn't understand he can't do math. Most of all spherical geometry.
Flatzoid is nothing more than a dishonest contarian. It is pointless to argue with him.
Yep, I agree. I hope that people who follow him who are actually searching for some truth will watch and take something from it.
@@Petey194 thanks for the reply. I wish FTFE would stop giving Flatzoid a platform.
I've had more than my fill of Flatzoid. I hope he is allowed to disappear into obscurity. I've seen a lot of people express this sentiment.
At some future point clips could be used in a "Remember this idiot?" context.
Наверное это 100-я серия какой то длинной дискуссии, понять о чем говорит автор сходу не получилось (
Может быть кто то, кто смотрел предыдущие серии пояснит - автор действительно считает, что проводя локальные измерения в одной точке можно определить глобальные характеристики многообразия?
Небесная навигация работает путем измерения углов звезд или планет. Вы можете использовать эти углы, чтобы определить свое местоположение.
@@Petey194 Безусловно! Но речь, конечно, идет только о широте и долготе, никакого 3D, вроде расстояния до "центра" Земли или чего то аналогичного метод не подразумевает?
@@ПавелКуликов-м9м Вы можете ввести любое значение радиуса, и будут возвращены те же широта и долгота. Это работает, потому что мир подобен сфере. Я не знаю, что еще сказать. 👍
@@Petey194 я вряд ли смогу Вас в чем либо убедить в формате комментов youtube, но все же обдумайте такие соображения:
1. Если формулы дают один и тот же результат для любого радиуса, может быть этот радиус можно из них исключить, или он там все же отсутствует изначально?
2. Что будет с этими формулами, если какой нибудь плоскоземелец случайно подставит в них практически бесконечный (очень большой) радиус, не сможет ли он утверждать, что сфера с бесконечным радиусом неотличима от плоскости?
3. Если Вы исходите из того, что "мир подобен сфере", и собираетесь это же доказать - не есть ли это idem per idem, "закольцованное доказательство"?
@@ПавелКуликов-м9м There are other factors at play. We know the radius because it has been measured. Watch the my last video on the haversine formula. We can compute the distance between two points on a sphere. If we can use the radius to get a distance then we can also use the distance to get a radius.
The moment you put numbers on the screen! It all went over Flatzoids head! 😂😂😂 dude can’t even do simple algebra!
Flerfs can't math to do it themselves
Failzoid fails at reality again. Anyone surprised ?
He get it wrong about celestial navigation. He get the horizon wrong. He get planar geometry wrong. And don't even think of spherical geometry. He can't triangle. He also can't angle. He's totally wrong about the distances to the Sun, and, it's even worst for the stars. He get fooled with simple perspective.
Failzoid calling someone an idiot ? Sorry, Failzoid, but you must stop projecting.
Ouch. Fai11zoid gets a little tetchy when his ignorance is shown for what it is.
Flatzoid. Consistently incorrect on every single point and yet his fluffers agree no matter what tripe emerges from his gob. He usually coddles a hasty retort in another stupefying video but I think, on this occasion, he'll be conspicuous by his absence. His word salads are chucklesome though. Its like a bingo machine with random words on the balls popping up randomly. Bloody hilarious.
I wouldn't be so sure. I think he may attempt a debunk. It'll be mindless garbage, that's a given.
@@marcg1686He's a deluded lunkhead. I don't even think he's ever seen a sunset over an ocean let alone navigate a ship to a destination. Not within 544km anyways.
Well that’s because, like the rest, I
if you disagree he blocks you.
"He is taking the measurement from a flat plane, and just _giving it a duplication to say it's on a sphere."_
It's permissible to be bamboozled by science and math, but it is unacceptable to lack the ability to express the ideas and pictures you have in your head any better than that *↑↑↑* hot mess. I expect better from 12 year old, let alone an adult who wants to argue physics and geometry.
He's invested so much in his personal bubble theory that there's no going back now. This might be a future video I'll do. 😀
@@Petey194 The personal dome is what they think is a get out jail free card. They know that the celestial sphere is a thing and they think it lets them take it away from us. They know we have a toy that they have to use do they try to say our tool is really theirs so when used they can feign victory hoping no one calls them on it.
Fartzoid doesn't have the first idea how any of this works. None of them do. It's enough for the idiots that watch his channel for him to make some nonsense up and say it in a stupid voice. As far as they're concerned, mocking a scientist is the same as winning the arguement.
Nothing a flatoid says makes any sense whatsoever!
Why do people waste time debating flat-earthers. Just let them rot away in their own little world of ignorance. It's not like arguing the science of climate change with deniers - there is an ultimate goal there of fixing the planet.
Its important to have someone explaining how things actually work so that people who might fall into the flat earth thinking will have proper explanations instead of word salads etc. If no one is debunking this nonsense, people might go "oh well I guess its flat then."
Also, it makes the content creators money. Whats better than getting paid by debunking stupidity? If I had good speaking skills, a bit more patience to study stuff and some video editing skills, I would totally change my daily job of fixing cars to sitting in a comfy studio and recording videos.
Because lies and dishonesty cannot go unchallenged.
@@itseperkele181 Do you have any evidence that any flat-earther has had their opinion swayed by an online argument?
@@ReValveiT_01 Yes it can. Arguments empower these people. Take away their power by ignoring them.
@@godfreypigott Ranty, STST. I've no doubt others too.
Flatzoid is such a nitwit!
poor flatzoid