This is Dave's third installment in this series. I want to state for the record:

1. Dave is on to something here. These "AI models" accurately parrot based on their training data. These ARE the arguments you could have with any glober.

2. EXCEPT the LLM won't lose patience, get personally emotional and offended, devolve into name calling, rage quit, etc. Again, Dave is really onto something here.

3. These LLMs will throw ALL THE BEST ARGUMENTS from the Globe model at him. Viewers will see how Dave minces them all like a ninja wielding a katana sword. They will know who won.

4. In short, these LLM arguments are like debates, only better! All the downsides of debates (length, diversions, emotions getting involved, moderators needing to step in, etc. etc.) are done away with! This is debating in 2025, and it's a vast improvement in my opinion!

5. Dave might be Jєωιѕн, but he's no fool about this one topic. He obviously has a good brain in his head.

Yeah, this one is very well done.

This pressure gradient crap is totally made up to befuddle people that otherwise spot the problem.

Let's take the very top layer of said gradient.  What's above it (according to globe model)?  Vacuum.  What's below it.  Earth + some atmosphere.  So somehow that atmosphere adds such an additional force of gravity vs. the earth alone that this top layer of the gradient is now bound whereas if it were down near the surface it's not bound?  Gravity is related to mass, so the additional mass added by the atmosphere below the top layer of said gradient would be an incredibly small fraction of a percent vs. the gravity cause by earth's mass alone.

So the top layer of the gradient would instantly peel off.

Then the next layer becomes the top layer.  It would peel off.  Rinse repeat.  Atmosphere is gone.

Dr. John D demontrated all this.  He also demonstrated that the next thing that would happen is that any water at the bottom of this system (he put water on the bottom of the vacuum chamber) would similarly expand until it turned into gas, and then the gas expanded out also, resulting in the liquid also evaporating out due to the pressure differential.

This is 100% bunk, and they know it.

Now, again, I've even tried to help the globers out with ideas.  Maybe you could claim that some atomic force is causing things to adhere, or an electromagnetic force, or perhaps there's a flow or pressure of ether causing a similar effect as a container.  All of these may be posited as valid hypotheses and then can be confirmed or falsified by experimentation.  THAT is the scientific method.  But regurgitating an explanation that's easily falsifiable just out of desperation and because it's part of the scientific narrative, that's 100% ANTI-scientific method, and they have the temerity to accuse the FEs of being ouf of step with "science".

I've said something similar about other FE observations.  Once you make the observation that things can be seen to far, don't make up BS that's been falsified, like "refraction" ... but come up with something else.  Again I've given them suggestions.  Hypothesize that the globe is at least 10x bigger than what modern science tells us.  Hypothesize that electromagnetic fields around the earth (due to the earth's electromagnetic field) bend light exactly around the contours of the globe.  Hypothesize that a flow of ether bends the light around the earth.  Lots of things you can hypothesize but then pursue with experimentation either to confirm or to falsify.  Once falsified, you either modify your hypothesis and experiment again or you come up with a new hypothesis.  But stop regurgitation the "refraction" nonsense out of sheer desperation.

You don't see that Dave is being deceitful trying to set up a trap for his opponent? It's a common enough practice even among Christians debating the differences between their denominations. This may not be the best example, but I think you'll understand what I'm getting at. Someone may nail down the teaching of Romans Ch 13 that we must obey authority, and resisting it means we resist God and will go to hell. Then they say how can you resist such and such authority (Pope, diocesan clergy, civil authorities, ect) at all? Then you'll be like "but, but, but". No you said Scripture has such and such authority, and the Church teaches obedience just like Romans 13.

Dave is actually biasing himself against what may be the truth before asking the particular question, whether just to get views and praise from his audience or because his is of bad will, who knows. It's like he's trying to harden his heart before being confronted with the truth.



There are a variety of forces, some large, some very small. In any circuмstance we will normally encounter, the forces involved with gas pressure equalization is going to dominate since it is far greater than the effect of gravity.

1 liter (think a quart jar) of water weighs 6lbs, 1 liter of air weight 1.3 grams (the weight of a small paperclip). 1 liter of air in the size of a quart jar (excluding the weight of an actual quart jar) sitting in your hand will exert about 0.003 pounds per square inch of pressure on your hand. The air pressure around you is almost 14.7psi compared to a vacuum which is 0psi. What is 0.003psi compared to 14.7psi?

14.7psi at sea level, but why? Why does air pressure decrease with altitude? The air has mass. Anything with mass is affected by gravity. If you don't want to believe in gravity, call it what you like, but things with mass do fall towards the ground if no stronger force is pushing them away. Air does have mass, demonstrated by the fact that its movement affects other objects with mass, and that cold air (denser) can be observed to fall while warm air (less dense) rises. We know that when you stack things, the whole lot gets heavier. Stack ten 20lb weights, and the whole stack exerts 200lbs on whatever it is stacked on. The weight on top only presses down with 20lbs on the other nine weights below it. It's the same with air. The air above weighs down on the air below with the weight of the air increasing as the stack of air is taller.

How to imagine air sticking to a globe earth in the vacuum of space:
Imagine a big empty vacuum chamber. Then imagine a jar of air is opened in this vacuum chamber, and imagine this air is dyed yellow and somehow made to be attracted to a magnet like steel. So now it looks like a cloud of yellow smoke rushed out of the jar and evenly distributes itself in the vacuum chamber. What happens if you put a strong magnet in the middle of the vacuum chamber? The yellow magnetic air molecules would rush toward the magnet making a cloud of yellow around it.

If you have ever played with magnets, they will pick up many small nails or paperclips, but the nails furthest from the magnet are attracted weakly, while those touching the magnet are very strongly held there. The cloud of yellow air around the magnet would do something similar, collecting more densely immediately around, while less densely further away.

What makes air rush into a vacuum? Vacuums (low pressure) don't actually suck, rather things are always blown into a vacuum or a lower pressure zone by pressure. Air particles jiggle around and bump into each other pushing each other away. This is temperature. Absolute zero temperature would in theory mean that no atoms jiggle around at all, therefore no pressure caused by the gas trying to push itself to spread out.

Gas pressure is caused by gas particles colliding. If gas particles do not collide, like when they are spread out in a vacuum, then nothing is pushing them around, so gravity can attract them in a general direction. As gas particles congregate around a source of gravity, they will get so close to each other as to start colliding. Any particles that get bounced away from the gravity source by the other particles will either crash into many more air particles attracted by gravity, or none at all and eventually start falling back toward the source of gravity. With the majority of the particles trying to move toward the source of gravity, the sum of the forces will be in that direction, causing the particles closer to the source of gravity to be under the weight of those above. This makes for a very dense layer near the ground, and a very spread out low density layer above.

This is what we observe, because people have trouble breathing above 2-3 miles altitude, while airplanes can fly up to around 15 miles high, balloons up to 25 miles, and there's still air (though very little) extending more than triple that. Most of the air, the air of high pressure, is contained in a small fraction of the total altitude that the atmosphere extends above the surface. This demonstrates how weak gravity is compared to the force of air particles colliding with each other, and that with enough low density air held in by gravity, the air below it gets all the more concentrated and doesn't just rush out into a vacuum.

There are a variety of forces, some large, some very small. In any circuмstance we will normally encounter, the forces involved with gas pressure equalization is going to dominate since it is far greater than the effect of gravity.

Just an exercise in creative writing, where because you've already decided that the scientific establishment is correct, and you launch into some narrative of sepculation about how/why this might work.

Years ago I clicked on some youtube videos featuring several of the top big brain astrophysicists. 
They all seem to have an obsession with black holes and constantly regurgitate the same "facts" about
these objects that nobody can prove even exist. It's a field which is populated with probably the biggest
charlatans in the world.
They have some cushy job at a university and go on Joe Rogan regularly and talk about string theory and spaghettification and the multiverse and the big bang and the event horizon and if it weren't for the letters
behind their name they would be locked up in a madhouse. They make even the most ridiculous scientology
beliefs about Xenu sound reasonable. 
Yet, they get grants, got to conferences around the world, book deals, speaking engagements
and it's nothing but theory.

Even Kaku had to admit that there's never been in the history of science a bigger mistmatch between theory and observation than with the current state of cosmology.  Why?  Because they made up their cosmology to further their atheistic agenda.  Latest thing is that they made up "dark matter" as a last gasp effort to salvage it.

I forgot to add dark matter. The very idea that the Big Bang is taken as gospel truth is enough to know we live in clown world. First there was nothing then it exploded into everything. Then out of that formed a volcanic rocky planet that somewhat got covered with 2/3 of water which came from asteroids LOL

Lad. Even if teh earth was 1000x bigger that doesn’t answer the fact that water is completely level, and if people want too say that there must be some point where the numbers fluctuate I’d like to remind them that earth cannot be so much bigger than they say it is because we compare the size of the earth relative to ours, the earth couldn’t be 1000x bigger because of its resistive size to us as can be obviously measured and how we can circuмnavigate. The earth must be flat

Yes, Lad has repeated that many times. I understand what he's saying. He's saying "at least try; come up with an explanation that makes some sense". But immediately I keep shooting down his "larger earth" hypothesis, because where is all the extra land? We know how long it takes to go around the earth (which can be done on a flat earth BTW -- East to West is merely a circle on the plate. North is in the middle of the plate. Any of the edges is the south "pole". Incidentally, the disc-shape magnet is something we can actually observe in nature. Any speaker has such a magnet.)

Not to mention gravity would be ridiculous if earth was even 2X as big, in their paradigm. You do realize mass and gravity are closely related, in their system.

But yes, the fact that water is always flat, without the slightest measured curvature anywhere, not even over hundreds of miles, should really make you stop and think. Tests have been done over lakes with laser levels. Flat earth confirmed.

Water is incapable of curving or bending. And no, a single drop doesn't count. In a single drop, surface tension dominates. Talking about water drops when we're talking about bodies of water is the scientific equivalent of a sophism.