Just because I don’t believe some fake video of a rocket supposedly stopping in the firmament, I deny that the firmament exists? Really?  

Do you believe earth is covered by the firmament and that the sun moon and stars are in the dome of the firmament as scripture and the Fathers of the Church teach?

Just because I don’t believe some fake video of a rocket supposedly stopping in the firmament, I deny that the firmament exists? 

What fake rocket video?  This video was from the GoFast 2014 team that hold the record for highest and fastest amateur rocket.  So they faked it?  When they're not Flat Earthers.  This is the type of dishonesty that I can't stand.  You gratuitously say it's fake without even looking into it.  That video is very real.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Civilian_Space_eXploration_Team

Miser, here is a picture of the lake I posted about. It was photographed with my phone, so it’s not perfect. But I know it is real because I was the one who did it:

What does this show?  I don't understand.

https://schismatic-home-aloner.com/50-reasons-earth-not-flat/

Right out of the gate, the Narrator (not one of the Dimond Brothers) is mischaracterizing "Zeteticism".  He's lying that the Zetetic approach does not seek to test or falsify the conclusions.  Zeteticism is in fact the restatement of the scientific method, that you draw hypotheses and conclusions from actual observations and not mathematical fantasy.  That's precisely the same criticism that Tesla would later have about modern science.  But there are only a small handful of FEs, mostly from the 18th cetury, who even claim to be "Zetetic".  Most just look at evidence and don't have any particular scientific philosophy.

Then he spends about 3-4 minutes on personal attacks against FEs, most of which are either irrelevant to the question of FE or distortions.  I'll just pick this distortion here, where he claims that DuBay is endorsing Fɾҽҽmαsσɳɾყ.


DuBay is NOT endorsing Fɾҽҽmαsσɳɾყ.  Anybody with a gradeschool education and who's not intellectually dishonest realizes that he's ATTACKING Tyson for being a Freemason as a parody response to Tyson's quote just above it.  This dishonest and intellectually-challenged narrator claims that here DuBay "endorsed this sect".  And this was RIGHT after he cited DuBay as asserting that it was Freemasons who are keeping the FE secret.  DuBay has regularly attacked the Masons ... and also Jews.  Narrator also criticizes Dubay for dressing like a woman one time (he was doing that to MOCK a woman who was putting out anti-FE videos ... he has a girlfriend).  He criticizes one guy because he's also an actor and appeared in some immodest/impure video.

So then, after 4 minutes of worthless and stupid personal attacks, he rattles off a list of things without any proof whatsoever:

1) quotes Ptolemy that earth is a sphere ( so? )

2) attacks Azimuthal Equidistant map, saying that you can make an Azimuthal map from any point on earth.  So?  I've already gone through and explained where all of the other Azimuthal projections badly distort anything that's past about 1/3 of the earth's surface from the center point, whereas the North Pole AE map does not badly distort the Southern Hemisphere (with Australia being a point of contention)

3) mentions the Sydney to Santiago flight from Quantas and claims that it would not work on a FE map (without proof ... just says it)

4) that there are stations on Antarctica and that THEY "vouch for the fact that" Antarctica is 11,000 in circuмference  (it's actually about 9,900)

5) cites one guy's claim to have circuмnavigated Antarctica in 102 days and asserts that this would required travelling 27 knots per hour (vs. the single-hull speed record of 20), so asserts that this was done about 30% faster that it would have been possible on a Flat Earth.  Narrator refuses to take into account that this would only be if the guy was directly hugging the ice wall, which is highly unlikely, and the brief video clip he showed had him out in open sea without any sign of Antarctica.  Narrator doesn't realize that on a Flat Map, with Antarctica as the outer perimeter, if you're a certain distance away from Antarctica, that massively decreases the length of the circuit.  So one would have to look at what he meant by "circuмnavigating".  Now, if Antartica were 9,900 (Globe) vs 78,000 in "circuмference" (wrong word for FE), this guy would have only travelled 99 miles per day, which equates to 4 MPH over 24 hours.  [Knots and Miles are very close 1 to 1.15].  So this guy really moved at 4 MPH when these boats can move at 20 MPH?  Assuming the guy REALLY did it and didn't make it up (it's been proven that the first two or three guys who claimed to make it to the North Pole actually lied about it).

So, I looked up Fyodor Konyukhov's route when allegedly "circuмnavigating" Antarctica (after I wrote the above).  Here you go --


He didn't circuмnavigate squat.  He was skimming just south of the continents, which merely ASSUMES circuмnavigation of Antarctica based on a Globe model assumption.  That would have shaved a very significant amount off the 78,000 mile perimeter of Antarctica (I'm not sure I buy his number ... I think it's more like 60K), putting it well within the reach of the 102 days it took him to do it.  And then of course, I'm guessing he rode on some very favorable currents that would have significantly increased his speed.  I doubt he would have chosen to move against the currents.  So this one too is an epic fail with no actual analysis from the narrator.  As I said, alternative, if he circuмnavigated 9,900 miles, would be that he was moving 4MPH ... which is ridiculous.  He could proably do 100 miles in 4-5 hours tops.  So this actually gets flipped into evidence FOR Flat Earth.  Of course, on a Globe, being this far North of the Antarctic would have ADDED to his circuмference (vs. SUBTRACTING on the FE map), so it wold have been faster than 4MPH, but still, what, no more than 6-7 MPH, which is still ridiculous.  People can run that fast as a matter of course (Usain Bolt hit 27 MPH during his short sprints).  Marathon runners sustain about 10-12 MPH for the entire 26 miles.  And yet Fyodor couldn't keep pace in a boat with some guy running a marathon?  Captain Cook logged over 60,000 miles when he tried to "circuмnavigate" Antarctica.  At 20 MPH, the 9,900-mile circuмference could be done in 21 days and would not have required 102.  Multiply both these numbers by 5 and you get roughtly 102 days for 50,000 miles, which can be accounted for by the fact that he was actually sailing beneath tips of South America and Australia (and also appears to have cut some corners when cutting through the Pacific) ... and not close to the Antarctic ice wall.

So the Globe model would have had this Fyodor crawling through the water at 4-6 MPH (humans can walk up to 4 MPH).  Can you even go that slow if you tried when riding currents?  Whereas, travelling at 20 MPH (more like it for a boat, and probably more due to currents), he could have covered about 50,000 miles in 102 days.  And, given how far "North" of Antarctica he actually was, that probably just about the right distance for the FE model.  You could say, "Well, maybe he made stops."  This was a race, so I'm sure he minimized stops.  But if he went 20MPH for 4 hours a day (out of 24) and stopped for an average of 20 hours per day, he could have covered the circuмference of Antarctica in the 102 days.  So he stopped that much, 20 hours per day out of 24?  I'd be all about setting a speed record and would try to knock it out in 22 (instead of wasting 102 lolygagging around).

6) then he mentions an overland crossing of Antarctica ... but as FEs have shown, they simply cut across a corner of Antarctica and did not actually cross it.  Nobody's actually crossed it where the came down from Australia, crossed Antarctica, and could then take a boat from there to South America.  That kind of crossing has never happened.

7) he points to the fact that tourists can travel to Antarctica on cruise ships.  So?  They always just take them to the same place just south of the tip of South America.  It's not like they let the tourists just go wherever they want.

8) 24-hour sun.  That's never been proven, just asserted as fact.  The two videos out there purportedly showing it were exposed as obvious fakes (I dealt with that earlier).

9) This next one is even more absurd.  He says, "There are 3 poles, geographic, magnetic, and ceremonial.  The fact that lines of longitude converge on a geographic pole proves that the earth is a globe" (as he shows a globe earth map).  Says who?  That's the whole point of contention.  Narrator of this article is clearly not a highly intelligent individual.

10) It gets better.  You see, cities in the Southern Hemisphere have longer days in the Summer which would be "impossible on a Flat Earth".    [Only if you beg the question, buddy, which you're clearly doing here in every other point you've made.]

11) Things (sun, sun-dials, stars) move counter-clockwise in north and counter-clockwise in South.  Clearly this man has not studied the FE model or this subject in general AT ALL, where this makes sense if the sun and moon travel between the tropics (which they actually do).

12) A solar eclipse only covers part of the earth and not the entire earth in darkness because "the sun is much bigger than the moon".  He's got to be joking on this one, right?  Even the Globers don't argue this.  It all has to do with the proportions and the angles between the different objects.    While the sun is (alleged to be) much bigger than the sun, it's also allegedly so far way that by the time we see it here, it's the same size as the moon.  In both cases the reason the entire earth isn't darkened has more to do with the distance of the earth from the object casting the shadow, and the size of the object casting the shadow, distances between the two objects, etc. ... where you could work out the math in either case.

That's all I have time for (about 8 minutes in), but the Dimonds need to remove this video if they have any self-respect and don't want to come across at total morons.  I'll assume that these first 12 or so are his BEST proofs, so I probably won't waste my time on the rest of it.

Garbage.  Waves and humidity and refraction are all factors.  There are lots of photos of Toronto across the Lake that show way too much of the buildings.  So the debate is which are real and which are the result of some aberration.  I had an entire thread devoted to analyzing the arguments pro and con.

Either all the FE ones are caused by refaraction or the ones taken by the Globers are caused by waves, refraction, humidity, atmospheric conditions.  Those are your choices.  But I'm sick of the "look, here's one picture ... proof" horsecrap.

FEs have conducted laser experiments, and have taken all the measurements, have performed them in cold conditions with very low humidity where refraction is nearly impossible, AND ... the kicker ... have conducted TWO-WAY laser experiments where the lasers were pointing on opposite directions and just a few feet apart.  If refraction bends light down in one direction, you'd need a continually increasing density gradient in that direction.  But then from the other direction would have a continually decreasing density gradient, and the laser would "refract" up and not be visible.  Lasers were seen in both directions.  This experiment was conducted by Dr. John D, who holds a PhD in specctrometry, and who livestreamed the experiment from both sides, announced it beforehand, invited observers, took measurements of temperature and humidity at the ground level and then every couple feet above it, not only at the end points, but at point in between.

You believe what you want to believe and you're not being intellectually honest and examining the question with an open mind.

Do you really believe that a 5 foot wave can hide a 60 foot tree?

Do you really believe that any proFE video on YouTube should be taken as fact until it is proven false?

So, Captain Cook logged 60,000 miles when he "circuмnavigated" Antarctica.

As I demonstrated above, the circuмnavigation distance would vary between 52,000 (if hugging the southern tips of the South Hemisphere continents) to 72,000 miles if hugging the Antarctic coastline.  So Captain Cook's 60,000 pretty much cuts the difference in half.

Cook took 3 years on average for each voyage, and even when he was going "around" Antarctica, he wasn't super close for most of the journey, and was actually closer to the 50 degree point.  On a globe, that would be somewhere between 11,000 - 16,000 miles in circuмference.  Even if you added in a generous amount for his meandering, this doesn't come close to explaining the additional 44,000 miles he logged on top of the 16,000 or so you would have had on a Globe.

On a globe, the 50 degree latitutde south would required 16,000 for circuмnavigation, whereas the coast of Antarctica closer to 10,000 - 11,000.  One should be able to cover those distances somewhere between 20-30 days, not 102.  So the 102 days it took Fyodor to make the journey is more consistent with FE than GE.

That guy above was going far too fast.  Fyodor would have been going closer to this speed --

Flat Earth +1

When they attempt to αssαssιnαtҽ a man -- and fail -- it makes one look into just how good that man is, that they tried to kill him!
It backfires.

Likewise these attempts at intellectual assassination of a theory/concept like Flat Earth. They tried, they tried hard, and they failed. Makes me respect Flat Earth more than if they hadn't bothered in the first place!

Consistently, the problem with Globe Earth arguments is that they beg the question and make assumptions, then apply confirmation bias to the evidence.  RARELY do I see any of them do the math or study the question.  Here the guy just found this number of 78,000 (which is wrong for a circuмnavigation), then failed to look up Fyodor's route, which had him going along the 50-the degree south latitutde, and that would on an FE map cut the distance down to 52,000 (from his assumed 78,000).  So Fyodor did 52,000 in 102 days, which is more than doable at only about 80% of the record long-distance / sustained speeds for monohull boats (a number this guy also got wrong ... didn't actually look it up?).  Fastest sprint speeds for these boats approach 40 MPH.  Conversely, on a globe, the distance would have been 16,000 miles, which would have reduced Fydor to travelling at the speed of a senior citizen out for a morning speedwalk.

At the end of the day, God made the earth what it is.  Whether He made it flat or a globe doesn't really impact my salvation or my faith, etc.  If someone had solid evidence of a globe or a solid argument, I am all ears.  Just as I was initially a Glober but then started to look with an open mind, I will accept any evidence presented with a open mind.  But there's just SO much dishonesty, sloppiness, confirmation bias, etc. from the Globe side that it gets me really frustrated.  I would not be angry if I were refuted and had to change my mind and agree that we live on a Globe.  I am not clinging to FE for that reason.  But please present some GOOD arguments, and I'm open to it.  That one guy above made a 20-minute video exposing a bunch of fraud from the Globers (that was obvious fraud with clear evidence of it ... where they were caught red-handed).  There's so much obvious clear-cut fraud from NASA.  They're clearly lying about or hiding SOMEthing.  They don't have battleships and fighter planes down in Antarctica to protect a few penguins.