Response to Globebusters - The Earth Still Isn't Flat

hey everyone this is gonna be a pretty different video from what I normally post if you're from the Flat Earth realm you know what this is about if you're one of my regular viewers I'll fill you in as quickly as possible last week I posted video about how we know the earth isn't flat this was really just to reinforce and contextualized some lessons from earlier in my astronomy playlist I figured I'd get a few trolls nothing major but instead the entirety of the Flat Earth community descended upon it with a vengeance the YouTube channel globe Busters informed me that they were going to be deconstructing my video in their weekly live stream and they invited me to check it out I didn't really know what to expect I thought there'd be some degree of dialogue or exchange there definitely wasn't everything they were saying I was discrediting in real time and they were acknowledging none of it on top of that they were extremely rude to me so I had to respond simply as a point of honor and that's this so let's begin I'll start with the only valid criticism you had of me and that is that I misrepresented your model and didn't research it enough you're right I didn't look up almost anything you believed but now that you've told me so many of the things that you do believe even better let's go through how all of them are wrong since I botched your model so horribly let's go straight to yours this is the one you showed me to explain the seasons it attempts to account for the temperature differential throughout the year but I'm sorry it's not compatible with observation here's why these are the two tropics I don't know what you think these circumference azar but it's safe to say that this one is smaller than this one if that's the case one of two things must be true option one this object maneuvers the inner path in a shorter amount of time than it maneuvers the outer path which would make summer shorter than winter it's not option two it moves much slower up here and much faster down here so that all of the circles take the same amount of time that would mean the Sun moves through the sky at different speeds throughout the year it doesn't so sorry this model doesn't work now let's go to the one you showed me for night and day we all know that precisely half the earth is experiencing day and the other half is experiencing night at any given time so your model must reflect that and this one does but at the cost of being even remotely reasonable you've got the Sun illuminating half this surface with an arbitrary and rigidly straight line down the middle how does this work how does light leave this object and travel one distance to stop here and travel some totally different distance to stop over here you guys love to talk about refraction and such things so please explain how that works and that's not the only problem here you've got the Sun and Moon always opposite each other well sometimes we can see the Sun and Moon at the same time how does that work what is an eclipse when in this model does the moon get under the Sun to block it how do they get on opposite sides of the earth for a lunar eclipse if the Sun is very very close and is also the source of all our heat why doesn't it get hotter when you go up towards it in elevation none of it works we've barely even started but let's review we are trying to explain just two phenomena seasons and night and day to do this you have two different models both of which are incompatible with observation but furthermore they are incompatible with each other why can't you even attempt to explain both of these phenomena at the same time going back to your day and night model it's weird because you said that the Sun moves between the tropics why isn't that shown here because if you did show that you'd also have to change something about how far the light reaches which would make this already absurd graphic even more absurd then if we go back to the one for the seasons why can't you show the dark half and light half while showing this it's deliberately not shown because it would be obviously inconsistent therein lies the problem with the Flat Earth model you don't have one you can't even explain two phenomena with the same model the globe model has no problem doing this this ball spins so the half facing the Sun is day and the other half is night as it goes around the Sun the hemisphere receiving more direct sunlight experiences summer the one with less experiences winter that's right sorry to burst your bubble it doesn't correlate with the distance from the Sun sunlight shining directly on the ground more energy per square mile hotter sunlight at an angle to the ground same amount of energy distributed around a greater area cooler and there it is both the seasons and day and night are explained immaculately and go figure simultaneously honestly I could stop right here if you were to respond to this with anything other than a model that can explain at least those first two observations simultaneously your viewers should find that very indicative of the fact that you don't have one but while we're here let's go through a few dozen more key points given that we're on the subject of models let's hit the one you use for your explanation of the Coriolis effect you can kind of draw a clockwise orbit Bob in the middle there and you can see how that this would cause there you go you know if the Sun and Moon are moving in this and you know they're diamagnetic and pushing water causing tides and then you've also got these winds that and storms that would you know have to be what the Sun and Moon would cause would have to be how you haven't explained anything so the Sun pushes water to get the air currents and the moon pulls water to get the tides also does the Sun push the atmosphere in one direction to the right and magically in the other direction to the left what about storm rotation which is what this whole thing was about you've made no attempt to even put the Sun and Moon in there and physically explain anything you just say words relating to electromagnetism in hand wave it away no Dave we're not trying to claim that it's all caused by magnetism my god you extrapolate stuff that is just utterly ridiculous we never said that and they are electromagnetic phenomenon like we have been claiming for a long time electromagnetic electromagnetic electromagnetic like we have been claiming for a long time and another thing here guys even if we grant you this magnetic magic that you're looking for it's still inconsistent with your model here's why the line going through the middle of the screen if you picture the Sun traveling from the right side of the screen to the left it would create those same wind pattern above and below it sorry didn't you say that the Sun moves from tropic to tropic in that case the boundary that divides the direction of storm rotation would also move from tropic to tropic it doesn't storm rotation doesn't vary by the time of year also why wouldn't compasses follow the Sun through the sky also why wouldn't storms speed up during the day while near the Sun and slow down at night when the Sun is away also if you're claiming these southern winds are so incredibly fast how is that possible if they're the furthest away from the source of the effect none of it makes sense in actuality the Coriolis effect is just the result of basic physics relating to rotating bodies that's why the Equator is the dividing line pretty simple don't you think which makes a whole lot more sense than the Coriolis effect you know being the reason in the heliocentric on the ball earth for storms going in opposite sides of the equator in fact that is just silly when you think about that that makes no sense whatsoever it's ridiculous Wow very convincing counter-argument let's move on astronomy and astrophysics and all of that this day these aren't even real Sciences ok now you obviously are going to claim that they are but the reason that they're not real Sciences is because the only thing that you can do is observe them you cannot test them you cannot do anything to be interactive with them you cannot generate hypotheses or experiments or anything like that all you can do is simply observe sorry guys that's dead wrong there are hundreds of examples I could choose but I'll use this one in the 19th century we noticed irregularities in the orbit of Uranus we realized these irregularities could be explained if there was another planet perturbing its orbit by gravitational influence we did some math and predicted that there should be another planet in a particular place we looked in that place and what do you know there it was you can't get any more empirical than that do some math make a prediction the prediction is verified the discovery of Neptune is a great example that corroborates Newtonian gravitational theory and demonstrates that astronomy is empirical science just like any other it's not surprising that you don't understand this because this is one of many instances that you demonstrate yourselves to be exemplars of the dunning-kruger effect this is where you're absolutely minimal experience has lured you into believing that you have expertise in a particular field where in reality you are essentially incompetent it is a cognitive bias that will be demonstrated many more times in this video now let's move on to another category there are about a thousand flat earth gotchas that all amount to an inability to understand conservation of momentum these are your helicopters and planes arguments let's see which ones you're guilty of yeah absolutely like if you're doing an Olympic say long jump event I would always opt you jump from east to west because you know where you're going to land should be racing towards you know when you jump off the earth or take off from the earth you retain the momentum imparted upon you by the rotation of the earth this has nothing to do with the atmosphere it's also very easy to prove stand on the back of a moving truck jump up what happens do you fly back off the truck at 30 miles an hour no you land right back where you started even though the truck has moved forward while you were in the air why because in the air you retain the forward momentum of the truck when you jump off the earth or take off from the earth the same thing applies and of course the globe earthers are going to say while you have your momentum that's lent to you by the earth that you know spinning East and you're going to retain that momentum forever and the same thing applies to airline flights yeah you got it so are we good here but if you do a test on a train or like you said on a plane and just simply jog from the front of a moving train to the rear and maybe time yourself or just observe you know and then do the same thing running or jogging to the front of the moving train I've done this myself I promise you that you'll find that it is much easier to run from the front of the Train to the rear that's your test pretty tough to reproduce don't you think here's an idea what if it was harder to jog to the front of the train because the train was speeding up slightly try it again when the train is slowing down I bet your results will change sorry this is not a valid experiment 25-mile target from the New Jersey has a flight time of 90 seconds so you're aiming 90 degrees from the ship straight to the equator to hit that lighthouse and it takes 90 seconds for the bullet to get there problem is in 90 seconds at the equator the earth moves 25 miles so it takes 90 seconds for the bullet to get from the ship to the lighthouse but in that 90 seconds the lighthouse moves 25 miles so you're gonna miss it by 25 miles here's the funny part you so thoroughly don't understand conservation of momentum that when you presented this whole bit to me it was supposed to have something to do with the Coriolis effect but like I said this basic fact of physics has nothing to do with the atmosphere the boat and the bullet and lighthouse are all moving around the earth together and the bullet will continue with the same momentum that the boat has once it leaves the gun again super easy to prove get back on that moving truck this time bring a friend and pass a ball back and forth you will observe that the ball does not fly off the back of the truck when it leaves your hands instead you will be passing it precisely as you would expect if you were just standing on the ground another way of expressing this is that you - and the ball and the truck constitute an inertial reference frame this is another thing that you guys have a really hard time with so let's go through that - here is a much more accurate depiction in the heliocentric model of what our solar system is actually doing now where is Kepler's laws in this particular model Dave there this the mathematics for this are not being taken into account this graphic is stupid the blue trails don't exist or mean anything and the solar system is not a vortex all the motion happens within a plane and we see that plane in the sky it's called the ecliptic where all the planets live but more importantly what you're trying to imply is that be the solar system is moving through the galaxy this should change all the laws of physics it doesn't here's why let's do another experiment drop a ball and see how long it takes to hit the ground now let's get back on that truck move at a constant velocity relative to the ground and do it again we get the same thing now get on a plane and do it again the plane is moving much faster but you still get the same result each of these is an inertial reference frame the laws of physics are exactly the same in every inertial reference frame so the results of this experiment are the same in each of these frames no matter what speed it is moving relative to something else that's because all motion is relative to something else so I'm sorry it doesn't matter how fast the solar system is moving relative to the center of the Milky Way or how fast the Milky Way is moving relative to some other galaxy there is no absolute motion there is only relative motion and these big numbers that you're throwing out for shock value are irrelevant to what you're saying we can treat the solar system as an inertial reference frame and the physics works just fine learn about inertia reference frames I knew you were gonna say that yeah we're gonna show you all about a nurse all reference frames day will you though inertial reference frames aren't gonna cut it these are absolute motions that they're telling us that they're going I told you there's no such thing as absolute motion yeah there's no such things absolute motion I love this this is so great yeah there isn't I'm sorry if you don't understand that it's not my problem if science is telling us that we're going at all these velocities then okay then you know you're telling science that it that it's not true [Applause] okay let's shift gears and come back down to earth you guys have a lot to say here especially regarding the stars in the night sky because the Stars have never changed in all of recorded history all of millennia nothing has ever changed false take the North Star right now it's Polaris in the time of the ancient Egyptians it was another star called Thuban which is documented in a few thousand years it'll be a different one still the procession is extremely slow any thoughts so over 18 years we should have seen a misalignment between our axis of rotation allegedly and phalaris yeah you can just not with the naked eye the change is very tiny now the globe earth proponents say there used to be a different North Star 6000 years ago and there will be another new North Star and another 6,000 years but that's just kicking the can out so far that nobody can observe it in the future I mean we're all gonna be long gone in 6,000 years I'm sorry that astronomical phenomena don't conform to your lifespan it doesn't make them fake also if this was all made up why make up this part why deliberately introduced the problem of the precession of the rotational axis if it's not needed for anything it makes no sense then comes this bit about the personal Dome at all the stars we can see and the Stars lower to our to the horizon at the edge of that circle of a 12,000 diameter circle so as you move this dome of stars moves with you or your dome of vision we could deconstruct the absurdity of this idea for 10 hours but I'll just say one thing you can use the words perspective and refraction all you want but that's all conjecture unless you can build a physical model that predicts the position in the sky of any star for any person anywhere in the world do that and then we'll talk staying on the earth let's check out this bizarre tangent you took into ecology at 65 degrees north latitude Iceland thrives with eight and seventy native plant species and abundant animal life compare this to Georgia Island which despite being a whole 11 degrees closer to the equator than Iceland at 54 degrees south latitude is nearly devoid of any Eco culture having only a measly 18 native plant species and virtually no animal life there are no animals on this one island therefore the earth is flat got it sorry guys there's a lot more to ecology and climate than just latitude again easy to prove what's the hottest place on earth Death Valley California notice that it is nowhere near the equator take a look at the distribution of biomes around the world there is some correlation with latitude but it's not perfect pick a latitude and see it desert over here a rainforest over there and all sorts of things and finally the thing with the animals is just stupid the distribution of animal species is subject to an incredible set of variables that are irrelevant to this discussion so you're saying what does the what does animals and pole each have to do with it Dave well everything really when you think about it [Applause] all you can really assume is that the continent of Antarctica should be super cold and yeah it is it's right on the South Pole as it happens you had lots to say about Antarctica as well namely because it's the super-secret edge base fortress whatever and no one can go there if there's so few of them and all of them by the way our Mason's right or royal family or something like that but the average Joe can't go down there sure only Freemasons can go there or all of these people guys just Google Antarctica cruise literally anyone can go there and they do so every day sure only to certain spots but Antarctica is a huge frozen barren wasteland no tourists would want to traverse it of course you believe that we're not allowed because why was it NASA is guarding it no Dave NASA is not guarding it NASA is an American government agency it is guarded by the combined military force of all the parties to the Antarctic Treaty and how do they guard it where's the budget for it have you ever heard of a black budget project babe probably not because you believe that the government is legitimate in every way shape and form have you ever heard of radar Dave where you don't have to have people walking guards they could see ships they can see planes coming in it's really quite easy Dave but here's your ignorance shining through buddy oh I'm so sorry okay the combined military if many nations is guarding it except we can't see any military personnel or any military ships or any military buildings or any evidence for that whatsoever got it and also we can't sail anywhere near there you will find out why people are not allowed down there it's because the Antarctic Treaty okay so what's that let's take a look so these are the countries that you say have their military there now what does it say no military bases got it no nuclear bombs got it I don't know looks pretty riveting but I don't see anything about getting shot down on site if you approach it in a boat even if you insist that no one is allowed below a sir parallel what's stopping you from getting in a ship and sailing around the world directly on that parallel time it and compare it to what a round earth expects that sounds like a pretty good experiment let's move on to gravity this one's a big problem for you guys because if the earth isn't round then gravity doesn't make any sense and there's no reason for objects to fall towards the ground let's see what you've come up with you know what goes up must come down is absolutely a thing here in reality nobody's arguing that but as you said the cause of that on the spinning ball earth theory is the mass of the earth warping physical space and non-physical time space-time one thing so I'm really not sure how you can bend a time but maybe that's just because I'm a stupid flat earther [Applause] [Music] [Applause] but here's the thing first of all you can't demonstrate in reality that mass attracts mass there's no sort of experiment or data or test that you can do false this was done with the Cavendish experiment all the way back in the 18th century long before NASA in Pals and the I'll goodness what was his name the the stupid balls in the shed experiment whatever Cavendish the Cavendish experiment certainly notwithstanding but there's no evidence to suggest that mass attracts mass uh all you did was name the experiment that does the thing you're asking for and then proceeded to say nothing about it physics undergrads do this experiment all over the world all the time if you think it's invalid explain why but of course professor Dave will come back and say oh it's done every day and colleges everywhere um yeah okay whatever and it certainly is not done the way that Cavendish did it looks pretty similar to me also why should it matter your mantra is do your own research you seem to think that science students are just told what to believe shouldn't you be encouraging them to do these classic experiments for themselves so that they can verify what was it again um do you guys you guys know what the the idea behind cap dish was right to measure the mass mass of the earth wrong the purpose of the Cavendish experiment was to calculate the gravitational constant G we knew these two masses and the distance between them so measuring the force of attraction allowed us to calculate G once we knew G we were then able to calculate the mass of the earth but that's just an application of this knowledge funny how they always go to that so really all we have here is you guys talking incorrectly about an experiment and then offering no basis whatsoever for why you think it's invalid let's see what other problems you have with gravity and if the earth if you assume that the earth is a spinning ball what you would expect is that objects that are on the surface of the spinning ball would be would tend to be propelled away from the center due to centrifugal force and so gravity is a necessity in the ball earth theory to counteract that force and assure that objects are stuck to the sides of the spinning sphere Wow an actual legitimate question yes there is a centrifugal force due to Earth's rotation it's quite easy to calculate let's look at this force at the equator where its greatest in general F equals MA and for this force F equals MV squared over R so let's solve for this acceleration term plugging in velocity and the radius of the earth and that's the value as you can see acceleration due to gravity is much bigger so we don't have to worry about flying away but anyway attacking gravity isn't going to help you much because you still need to explain why things fall down in your model most flat earthers site terms like density and buoyancy which is beyond ignorant since those are really just saying gravity again denser objects experience a stronger gravitational attraction if you take away gravity there is nothing about density that is relevant to this issue it remains that any downward acceleration will require a downward force you seem to realize at least this so which force did you settle on you know correct me if I'm wrong Bob but this is what I believe this is a bit of conjecture but it makes a lot of sense to that in order for density and buoyancy to dictate what is going to go up and what is going to go down you do have to have a tendency for higher density objects to fall and relatively high lower density objects liquids and gases to rise and it really does seem feasible that that downward tendency of higher density objects is the static electric charge of the earth that is measurable there's no theory behind that I think it's a hundred but it's a hundred volts per meter an altitude of static electric charge and so there is definitely a feasible explanation for what goes up must come down on flat earth wonderful electromagnetism a real force and your favorite force to sight when you can't account for something just as with the Coriolis effect you don't actually explain anything you just say electromagnetism and leave it at that sorry guys that's not going to cut it we need math we need predictions we need demonstrations materials can be paramagnetic or diamagnetic or ferromagnetic shouldn't these interact with this force differently and fall at different rates what about neutral particles versus charged particles what about the value of the acceleration we observe for falling bodies 9.8 meters per second squared isn't there some math you can do to derive that isn't there anything you can do to demonstrate the validity of this what did you call it this is a bit of conjecture if this is a bit of conjecture it's a lot of conjecture let's see where you take this which did a piece on spider ballooning and proving that spider ballooning does not take place by air currents blowing the silk around but rather the spider is able to change the electrostatic bias of the silk strand that they are casting and then are essentially acting as an anti-gravitational device so a spider does a thing therefore gravity is electromagnetism got it sorry your spider anecdote isn't going to cut it what else you got well you flashed this graphic for a while so let's freeze it and take a look whoo little dipoles well being chemistry inclined this looks to me just like the intermolecular force known as dispersion this is already well understood and does occur between all atoms and molecules and it is attractive but sorry this can't explain gravity if these are attractive interactions between these particles this arrow on the left pointing down can just as well point up and this graphic is meaningless gravity is the only way to explain the motion we see on earth but of course you say but again it's all horse manure because gravity is neither caused by mass attracting mass nor is it caused by space and time bending in two pockets and then having things fall into it yes gravity is both of those things all mass warps space-time therefore all mass attracts all other mass if you can't understand that that's not my problem you can even show evidence in a lab for how this works they just it goes in one ear and out the other and they claim that you don't understand science yeah we we at us that doesn't understand science that's laughable [Applause] the irony is that you so thoroughly don't understand gravity that you decide to show me an entire PBS Studios clip that presents some physics in an oversimplified manner to insist that this fake upwards acceleration vector is somehow a massive scandal now you say you don't believe this and that's fine but you probably should because it's the only way you're gonna get stuff to stick to the ground falling objects accelerate towards the ground at 9.8 meters per second squared that's an indisputable observation if you can't get that through a force pulling things down then you could get that by accelerating the surface up and actually that would take care of it no Einstein no 10-minute PBS tangent needed but you say you don't like it so let's move on especially if you're a believer in relativity then certainly you know that there's no way to know if there's no you said there's no direct motion or I mean there's no fixed motion but clearly if that's the case then how could you ever say that the earth goes around the Sun it makes no sense that if there's no you can't come up with that then it's the same you know somebody's standing on the Sun would see the earth going around it and somebody's standing on the earth would see the Sun going around it uh yeah that's the sound of science at play no that's the sound of a man with a worldview who is refusing to go by observations and instead would rather make something up like the expanding universe that exploded from nothing at the big bang and continues to fly out at crazy speeds you know past the speed of light just insane yeah sounds pretty zany but the Big Bang cosmological model is very well substantiated by empirical evidence recession velocities of galaxies suggest a particular age for the universe and the detection of the cosmic microwave background radiation that originated during the recombination era corroborates that age yeah and let's not forget that even in modern day experiments that have been recently done in the last decade like the cosmic microwave background experiment and measurements right what did it find it found that the earth was at the center of all of that cosmic microwave background oh no right Wow no this radiation detected in the 60s is of extreme isotropy me it looks the same everywhere and it has absolutely nothing to do with what you're talking about at all google it and see but I think you know that I think you're borrowing the term to make an unrelated claim and are hoping that your viewers won't look into it there are no direct measurements of dark matter for crying out loud in fact mainstream physics right now at this point has all but completely debunked it so you are so far behind the curve Dave you don't even know what the hell you're talking about dude I mean oh my god yeah they're basically looking there and saying oh there's a bunch of stuff missing here and then he's saying that that is direct evidence no guys astronomers don't just say their stuff missing here therefore dark matter you may think that because you read a blog post that oversimplifies the concept for a layperson and you've convinced yourself that you understand it better than scientists but in actuality the people that know dark matter is there and are trying to figure out what it is right papers that look like this since you have zero formal training in astrophysics if this looks too complicated for you to understand that's not my problem you can't even demonstrate a gravitational wave other than if you want to take Neil deGrasse Tyson going onstage and dropping a microphone and calling that gravity and you can sit here and say we don't understand this Dave but you would be quite wrong because we have lectured on this many times about exactly how it does work and how it is quite impossible then you have n Stein's model of gravity which of course is theoretically the bending of space and time uh-huh again something that is not demonstrable is only theoretical is only mathematical you have no proof of it whatsoever and it is just stupid okay it makes no sense and it's a big lie and I'm sorry but you're never going to be able to prove it because there is no proof for it no matter what's your mathematical equation say Dave okay sorry general relativity is one of the most corroborated theories in the history of science the model predicts the perihelion precession of mercury with extreme precision we can see gravitational lensing all over the universe with magnitudes that align with the cumulative masses the light is bending around relativistic time-delay and radar signal travel time near the Sun but once again if you don't understand any of that that's not my problem so that's the bulk of it but let's quickly hit some of your miscellaneous points people talk about the Santiago to Sydney flights well you if you go into them with understanding that there are winds aloft and these patterns are travelling these these wind currents are traveling in these patterns especially towards the southern edge and they are their velocities are extremely high that go up to you know 199 km/h or you know 136 km/h and you add these velocities on to the aircraft flight speed which gives you a higher ground speed then all of a sudden these distances are not so impossible to believe and they make a lot more sense on the flat earth this thing with the flights you used to say there were no direct flights in the southern hemisphere now you're admitting there are so because they have to go so far on your model you explain it with these 200 kilometer an hour winds which is hurricane speeds also just find the flights online here are several I found in about 30 seconds they go one way and then return the other direction in pretty close to the same time so I just don't know what you're talking about here the flights are consistent with around earth or the you know the whole nonsense about Aristophanes measuring that the earth was a sphere and knew its exact size and stuff and 275 BC but it then took 1,800 years until somebody's gotten a boat and said let's go west that's totally irrelevant sailing across oceans was very treacherous back then the statement is also patently false Vikings were going west hundreds of years before the other European explorers the only thing that is obvious is the earth is obviously an observably flat you look out you never see any curve you see flat doesn't matter how high you go if you send a balloon all the way up to 120,000 feet there is no curvature right except for that if you take the original source for the video footage you show and skip around a little we can see that Allen's effect is causing the horizon to literally invert depending on where it is in the frame it can look flat it can even become concave and it certainly can look round so when you only show the flat part what do we call that now we know that there is bendy light and it's not just the atmosphere the earth has a magnetic field the magnetic fields can indeed perturb and Bend the path of light no it can't try and demonstrate it which is not earth rotation Dave in fact it's it's quite easy to prove that it's the energy of the heavens and of the ether the luminaire per se for either energy of the heavens that's the most pseudo scientific term I've ever heard the entire periodic table is quantum calculations and it works we use it to do chemistry you have no clue what you're talking about the periodic table is not mathematics but you have to go off and sound like you're some sort of smartypants by using big words like quantum calculations I am sure that to you quantum calculations sound like very big words but to grown up real chemists they're real things that are done every day and I'm sorry I dunno what I'm talking about I studied chemistry I've done chemistry I taught chemistry and because of that I understand that quantum mechanical calculations allowed us to discern the shapes and relative energies of atomic orbitals that electrons inhabit within an atom these electron configurations are what give elements their properties and it is what is responsible for the periodicity that makes the periodic table what it is this fundamental understanding allows us to predict the properties of certain compounds and therefore build new materials that are inside your computer and your smartphone that you use everyday these calculations also predict things like spectral lines which connects chemistry beautifully to astronomy because it allows us to look at the light from an object and know what it's made of that's how we know the Sun and the stars are made of the same stuff but once again if you don't understand that it's not my problem well he's doing what he was told to do right doing what he's told to do which is to read the you know the curriculum the lesson plan the you know the educational programming no guys myself and other teachers of undergraduate and graduate-level material make our own curricula when I taught I taught what I pleased we were all indoctrinated by the same educational curriculum the same system also not true every country has its own educational system and some are better than others in America we have public and private institutions the latter of which are not federally funded the idea that everyone is getting the exact same education especially the brainwash e-1 that you're implying is just not true furthermore science is not doctrine as much as you pretend it is even as early as high school students do experiments to determine how things work they take a stopwatch and a pendulum or a ramp or whatever rudimentary apparatus they take some measurements and they personally derive the equations that science already knows students are not handed their worldview like a Bible they actively create it as they go through undergraduate and graduate programs doing empirical science making predictions thinking critically and innovating all the new technology that even you get to enjoy if you had studied science in a formal setting you'd know that and finally let's touch on the conspiracy factor seems like a lot of people would have to be in on this no I don't even think that the majority of people who work at NASA are in on it you know the guys that are designing satellites and designing the Rovers and stuff I'm very confident that they believe what they're inventing is going up into space but that's that's it they you know that's plausible deniability and then what what happens every day as people carry out their fake missions and receive full salary do thousands of people just sit in an empty room and stare at the wall like George Costanza and the Penske file it's not just NASA all scientists if literally all the physics is wrong what do physicists do or geologists do they just hide on a pile of coats everyday for 50 years who pays for that we could go all day and the globe busters like all prominent flat-earthers have an endless list of talking points but that endless list is nothing more than a distraction from one simple fact there is no flat earth model you have no unifying model to point to let's quickly review why how does light reach half the plane and not the other half pretty funny huh I want to try and answer the question clearly refraction comes into play here as well so the sunlight is not going to shine forever in all directions when it you know when it hits the atmosphere it's going to be bent or perturbed in a varying directions but that's a very very simple one to answer if it's so simple to answer where's the illustration I bet I know and it's a closed Sun and yeah so it allows it to keep its light on only about half the plane at a time what was that only about half the plane and only about half the plane at a time no guys it must be exactly half the plane because exactly half the world is day and half is night at any given time I'll give you one more chance to do anything beyond just listing random terminology come up with a mechanism for why light dissipates appropriately atmosphere there there mister the air the inverse square law you know light dissipates you know by that alone it's pretty obvious why you just say a few words and giggle to yourself because there is no way you're going to explain this line with the inverse square law and I would love to see you try sorry but this model works much better as Earth rotates it's daytime when facing the Sun and nighttime when facing away from the Sun no yeah and what was your complaint about the seasons again but you know we've got nearly 400 earth diameters that we are closer to the Sun at least then the northern hemisphere in the wintertime what you're saying is irrelevant and you know it's irrelevant that's why you specified northern hemisphere in order to sound so confused because you know that in the southern hemisphere in July it's cold and in January it's warm which correlates with the change in distance that you're citing so you know that distance can't have anything to do with it but you say it anyway and what was your model for the seasons again well this still doesn't work because the seasons are all the same length and the Sun always travels through the sky the same speed but once again a much bigger problem is that you don't even try to put these two models together you don't show the path of the Sun changing on this one like you say it's supposed to and you don't show the Sun illuminating precisely half the earth on this one like you know it's supposed to you just can't put these two together and because you can't do that there is no such thing as the Flat Earth model which is kind of a huge problem for you now you know very well that I called you out on this before what was your response the sheer fact that each phenomenon requires its own independent explanation makes it unscientific if we invent aluminium unlike some food for thought before we wrap up let's see what you had to say about medicine of course you've got these Western medicine that just basically masks symptoms or covers up your symptoms so there is so much evidence at this point that shows that vaccines are extremely harmful they have been proven unequivocally and linked to autism so if you think that's okay to just send your children to these doctors and let them poke them you know I don't know how many shots that kids get nowadays it's like seventy or something ridiculous it's pretty pretty scary [Music] [Applause] [Music] [Applause] this is really how I justify having gotten involved in this at all if someone wants to believe the earth is flat I don't care but as you have demonstrated conspiratorial thinking makes people susceptible to other conspiracy theories like the anti-vaccine movement which is a public health risk it endanger x' other people but that's a debate for another time so that's it to my regular viewers I hope you got a kick out of this to any flat-earthers watching if you seek the truth as you claim you need a coherent model a single physical working model that explains everything around us at the same time because everything is happening at the same time and you need to be demanding this model from the people you're following and finally to the globe busters I don't know you I don't know what motivates you you might believe the things that you say you might be deliberately manipulating your followers to earn money and feel special I can't be sure you can respond to this video or not I don't care I'm definitely not going to be making any more of these because I have much better things to do and I'm going to get back to doing those things now to anyone who made it to the end thanks for watching take it easy

Channel: Professor Dave Explains

Views: 378,065

Rating: 4.316246 out of 5

Keywords: flat earth, is the earth flat, flat earth model, flat earth society, globebusters, professor dave, debunk, debunking video, conspiracy, how do we know the earth is round, cavendish, einstein, gravity, antarctica

Id: JDy95_eNPzM

Length: 45min 13sec (2713 seconds)

Published: Wed May 22 2019

Reddit Comments

[u/kingbane2]

there's no need to bust globebusters. they busted themselves when they got sent that laser gyroscope and used it. then they found that it proved the world was round, so they made up extra excuses as to why that wasn't the case, my favorite was the gyroscope is detecting the sky rotating! not the earth!

[u/kissimurra]

Don’t think I have ever watch a 45 minute video on reddit before. This was both fun and scary at the same time.

[u/UthinkUcanBanMe]

Savage

[u/hammerjam]

Stop. Engaging. Flat. Earthers.

They have already jumped off the deep end of sound thought. No rational, logical, fact-based, observable, testable, and/or provable experiment or presentation will ever be enough to convince them. Engagement only gives them what they seek which is attention and something to resist. That resistance and attention will only embolden them.

[u/UthinkUcanBanMe]

Remember the flat earther that bet money and no one could make 3 right angle turns and end up back at the same location and was proven wrong?