It's true St. Thomas extracted from Aristotle, and was able to dodge nearly all of the poisonous Gnostic arrows, but not all.  St. Thomas credited Aristotle with proving earth to be a globe because he trusted Aristotle, relying on him as the source, and not Scripture.  Without the compass of truth, even the greatest men can find themselves towed under the Gnostic wave.  I have another video for you that you are going to love even more.  It connects more dots about truth than you'll ever imagine existed, and its entirely Catholic.  It helps address your own weaknesses which is great, but also, keep flat earth in mind as you listen because without even knowing it, this priest proves the modern science globe false.  It is just over an hour, but 100% necessary as the information just keeps on coming. Let me know what you think.    
   

I watched the entire video. Is it Fr. Ripperger that's speaking? The subject matter seems to be something that he'd discuss.
A few thoughts on the video. First, Father talks about the traditional levels of Truth, and explains each. He emphasizes that the traditional understanding of Truth is hierarchical:
1. God as highest truth
2. Ontological truth
3. Logical truth
4. Truthfulness

He then talks about the Sciences as being distinguished by the level of truth being sought - the higher the truth, the higher the science, and they correct the ones that are lower, and provide principles for them. He says that a small mistake in the foundation leads to bigger problems later, and that a small error in the premise leads to bigger problems in the conclusion.
He says that the hierarchy of sciences are thus:

1.Theology - study of highest truth...God....using divine revelation
2.Theoretical science
       -Metaphysics (philosophy including psychology)
       -Physics
       -Mathematics
3. Practical sciences (doing something)
       -Politics
       -Ethics
       -Logic
4. Productive science: making, building, art, poetry

All that are lower borrow from those above, i.e., engineering needs physics, poetry and music need mathematics, etc.

He says that these truths are object based.

-Truth is vertical in that it seeks to elevate man's mind upward to the Creator.
-Clear, ordered, hierarchical and object based.
-is of the rational part of man.
-is unchanging and permanent in that it depends on the essences that God placed in things from the beginning
-is humble - we accept it.

Father now describes the new understanding of truth which comes from Modernity and the Enlightenment. Rene Descartes - the father of modern philosophy - rightly perceived that all truths are linked to one another, but he built his system on man's rational powers alone..."I think, therefore I am." Descartes effectively made Man arbiter of all things true and false. Immanuel Kant, being influenced by Descartes, said...."Have courage to use your own understanding." The motto of the enlightenment. Man is his own supreme guide.

He then goes on to describe how the new truth involves motions/becoming. Newton spoke of motion, the laws of physics, everything is in motion. Darwin spoke of natural selection and evolution, while Hegel and Marx used a notion of a dialectic. So the key  is..."becoming." Nothing is this way is made by God; it's still "becoming."

He then describes the Hegelian dialectic, which also involves a continual "becoming."

Perhaps the most interesting thing that Father mentions is that the Natural Sciences are now in charge:

-Hierarchy of sciences breaks down
-Math and physics and other natural sciences will tell us what is true and what to believe
-The motto of the 1933 Chicago Century of Progress World's Fair:
"Science finds, industry applies, Man conforms."

Father says at the end..."Unless we get back to a proper ordered, God centered understanding of Truth, in a hierarchical way, these trials will only continue."

He then goes on to describe how the new truth involves motions/becoming. Newton spoke of motion, the laws of physics, everything is in motion. Darwin spoke of natural selection and evolution, while Hegel and Marx used a notion of a dialectic. So the key  is..."becoming." Nothing is this way is made by God; it's still "becoming."


This "becoming" is incredibly telling because it shows modern science mirrors those false ideas promoted by the hierarchy of the Church: Science is now the physical basis for, and promotes the notion of "becoming", of changing reality, of relative truth, and even malleable doctrine. The moving globe of modern science makes possible all evolution from the physical point of view, which as your quote shows, insists on change.  Change has become the essential ingredient that fundamentally undermines both physical and spiritual reality.  

Vertical truth, that is, truth received from God, is not tolerated in man-based science, because  it is unchangeable. And because it leaves us answerable to God.  For modern man, a peer to peer truth makes possible new scientific doctrines capable of change.  This slippery slope is secured by the moving globe, and the theory of evolutionary change depends on it.  With our new moving foundation having replaced a fixed foundation, this now puts the idea of vertical truth (God) in question because Scripture is proven inaccurate.  Man's science quietly provides tangible proof that God doesn't exist.  Modern man instead believes and worships a new god...himself.  Man has discarded truth in science, once protected by Scripture and Tradition (things moderns don't even understand) and gave the authority to himself to make change a necessity so that absolute truth really no longer exists. Spherical earth fills in the blanks because, on the ball, trajectory and direction are not absolute--they change.  North South East and West are relative because earth is a ball.  Without beginning or end.  Man just agrees with himself exactly where these places happen to be, today.  Man agrees up is up depending on the individual and where he's at.  Level isn't level because its actually a curve.  And people BELIEVE these things because science says so.  There can be nothing "true" on a spherical foundation, but that's ok for modern man because science tells us everything's relative. "True" is subject to what man thinks it is. Down is relative on a sphere where man is content to live upside down compared to other people, yet he still stands up.  No problem.  Science says so.  Man has decided that it's perfectly ok to grade God's truth on the curve. Man, by way of science, has become the god of his own changeable and directionless world.  He accepts nothing from God about his world, because he has become enlightened beyond the fixed rules he refuses to live by.  Now, if man's internal compass is this messed up physically speaking, what pray tell does that do to him spiritually speaking?  

It would be impossible to show all the connections truth reveals about our metaphysical world. All the things you listed about the video, by way of reflection, reveal way more when carefully considered.  Naturally it would...it's all about Truth!  Seems its the kind of video you have to listen to more than once in order to actually absorb all there is in it.  Great note-taking by the way.  

 

Happenby shows she understands the philosophical ramifications of globe earth, where Neil and Jaynek clearly do not.


Globe earth (i.e. "science") shows the Bible to be wrong therefore God does not exist.

The Bible is not wrong.


t

Yes, SB, they clearly do not.  However, they'll answer, "Scripture isn't wrong, it just doesn't say anything about the shape of the earth".  But can any reasonable Catholic insist that is the case when they study Scripture for themselves? Scripture describes a flat earth, with its roof held up by 'pillars', "supports" "mountains", that earth sits below heaven, is fixed, is a foundation, is the floor that sits under a dome, is like a tent, is situated above hell, has a face, has boundaries beyond the seas, has breadth, with land mass encircled by the seas like a compass, has four corners, has windows to let in the rain water above the firmament, has wind storehouses at the four corners, is an expanse, can be seen to its ends from high places, and more... this all reflects the unchangeable vertical truth. These descriptions are expounded upon by the Fathers of the Church.  Flat fixed geocentric earth was widely understood as revealed truth because Scripture says it in so many ways. Wiki explains how well people understood what Scripture was saying:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Genesis_creation_narrative
The cosmos created in Genesis 1 bears a striking resemblance to the Tabernacle in Exodus 35–40, which was the prototype of the Temple in Jerusalem and the focus of priestly worship of Yahweh; for this reason, and because other Middle Eastern creation stories also climax with the construction of a temple/house for the creator-god, Genesis 1 can be interpreted as a description of the construction of the cosmos as God's house, for which the Temple in Jerusalem served as the earthly representative.[31]

Wiki also explains that in 1584, Giordano Bruno proposed a cosmology without firmament: an infinite universe in which the stars are actually suns with their own planetary systems.

What do we know about Bruno?

Giordano Bruno (/dʒɔːrˈdɑːnoʊ ˈbruːnoʊ/; Italian: [dʒorˈdaːno ˈbruːno]; Latin: Iordanus Brunus Nolanus; 1548 – 17 February 1600), born Filippo Bruno, was an Italian Dominican friar, philosopher, mathematician, poet, and cosmological theorist.^[3] He is known for his cosmological theories, which conceptually extended the then-novel Copernican model. He proposed that the stars were just distant suns surrounded by their own exoplanets and raised the possibility that these planets could even foster life of their own (a philosophical position known as cosmic pluralism). He also insisted that the universe is in fact infinite and could have no celestial body at its "center". Starting in 1593, Bruno was tried for heresy by the Roman Inquisition on charges of denial of several core Catholic doctrines, including eternal damnation, the Trinity, the divinity of Christ, the virginity of Mary, and transubstantiation.

Wiki makes a claim that Bruno is

• 3.2 A martyr of science     Awww. Bruno challenged unchangeable truth, dared promote false cosmology and sublime doctrines of the Church.  He died for CHANGE, at the hands of the Church, a 'martyr' of science.  Oh the irony.   Looks like we can thank Bruno for alien invasions, too.

Wiki shows how change took a foothold in science:
The word "firmament" is used to translate rāqîaʿ (רָקִ֫יעַ‬), a word used in Biblical Hebrew. It is derived from the root raqqəʿ (רָקַע), meaning "to beat or spread out thinly", e.g., the process of making a dish by hammering thin a lump of metal.^[5][6]
Like most ancient peoples, the Hebrews believed the sky was a solid dome with the Sun, Moon, planets and stars embedded in it
The Copernican Revolution of the 16th century led to reconsideration of these matters. In 1554, John Calvin proposed that "firmament" be interpreted as clouds.^[12] "He who would learn astronomy and other recondite arts, let him go elsewhere," wrote Calvin.^[12] "As it became a theologian, [Moses] had to respect us rather than the stars," Calvin wrote. Calvin's doctrine of accommodation allowed Protestants to accept the findings of science without rejecting the authority of scripture.

Calvin's "doctrine of accommodation" is the Protestant explanation for CHANGE in science.  With the Protestant heresy booming at the time, this concept spread like wildfire. It's true that many Protestants remained loyal to Scripture and ignored Calvin's change of the meaning of Scripture.  To their credit of course.  Sadly, those were the Cafeteria Catholics of their time, who remained loyal to some truth, but not others, by denying other unchangeable truths Scripture teaches, like Christ's perfect sacrifice whereby He feeds his sheep with His Flesh and that He established One, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic Church.

Like with flat earth, Scripture doesn't specifically say One, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic as marks of the Church, yet it is truth drawn from Scripture.  These marks are like the pillars of the foundation of the Church, likened to the pillars and foundation of earth.


More Wiki:
The idea that the earth was a sphere was developed by the Greeks in the 6th century BCE, and by the 3rd century BCE this was generally accepted by educated Romans and Greeks and even by some Jєωs.^[56] The author of Revelation, however, assumed a flat earth in 7:1.^{[57  
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Biblical_cosmology#cite_note-FOOTNOTEDahlGauvin200017-56}

Ah, yes, the four winds at the four corners.  St. John knew earth is not a globe.

This religious accommodation has been adopted by Catholic prelates in the interest of bringing about world peace by the works of man and One World Religion.  Thanks in part, to the science of change and accommodation.  And Catholics wonder where Bergoglio came from.  He is merely the manifestation of their own silent apostasy from which they need to awaken.

Wiki admits it if you understand the problem of "change".  

The divinity of Christ, who is believed to be fully man and yet fully God, shows how the Godhead has accommodated itself to human minds and experience. Many Christians, especially those from a Reformed background, see in the person and work of Christ not only the supreme form of accommodation, but the centre and reason for it as well.


While many Christians debate the meaning of Christ's death and resurrection, Christians who proclaim a substitution-based theology of atonement believe that Jesus died on the cross for the sins of the world as an atoning sin-substitute, and that his resurrection from the dead brings new life to all who have faith in him. This message, common in evangelical churches, is also considered as a form of accommodation when it is proclaimed publicly.

Through the corporate imbibing (consuming) of the wine and the bread, God is able to commune with his people in a special and unique way – not in terms of transubstantiation, but within the participants of the whole ceremony.


Naturally, not in terms of real transubstantiation, because that is an unchangeable doctrine of the Catholic Church, and does not fit the accommodation/change principle that allows for some doctrine, not others.  Also, that particular doctrine is too absolute.  It must be adapted to the experience of man.  So, if you want to believe Jesus is present, in some Protestant churches, you can.  But you don't have to.  They aren't even claiming it's Jesus. But you can believe it if you want.  Even in the Catholic Church.  For now.  Marriage permanent?  Not anymore.    Accommodation.  Change.  Evolution.  Courtesy of, and supported by, science falsely so-called.  

.
He says that a small mistake in the foundation leads to bigger problems later, and that a small error in the premise leads to bigger problems in the conclusion.

He says that the hierarchy of sciences are thus:
...

2. Theoretical science
      -Metaphysics (philosophy including psychology)
      -Physics
      -Mathematics
.

Did you miss number one from the above list? I'll remind you: the first item on the list, and the most important, is "Theology." It's the study of the highest truth....God...using Divine Revelation. The higher Truths are to inform the lower truths. Notice that "Theoretical Science" is second, not first on the list, as such, it should be informed by Divine Revelation. How is the globe earth informed by Divine Revelation?

Do you disagree that the globe earth model originally comes from pagan/gnostic sources? 

.
The model of the earth as a spheroid comes to us from direct personal measurement and specific empirical observation of reality.
.
Even without any historical reference, anyone today with a telescope and simple measuring tools can observe the sphericity of earth.
.
There are numerous ways to do that, and I have mentioned some of them in previous posts which you no doubt must have seen.
.
Here is another example which I don't think I had mentioned previously:
.
.
An observer of the heavens located in Sydney, facing south, looks UP and sees the Southern Cross in the night sky, close to dawn.
Another observer, in Johannesburg, facing south, looks UP at the same moment (in late evening) and sees the same stars.
.
Question:
What do these two observers notice about the position of the same constellation at the same moment of time?
Answer:
They see the Southern Cross at opposite sides of the sky, if one sees it in the eastern sky, then the other sees it in the western sky.
.
But they're both on earth, they're both looking UP at the same Southern Cross, and it is at the same time (in different time zones).
.
The question for you, and for ALL FLAT-EARTHERS is this: 
How can you explain this fact, using any flat-earth model you choose?
Because no matter how you slice it, these observers would be looking in very different directions off the "flat" earth.
They would be looking in very different directions but they are both seeing the same Southern Cross. 
How can this be possible? IOW this is what is meant by "empirical observation."
.
BTW this phenomenon is readily and simply explained and understood using a spherical earth model.
The two observers are seeing the Southern Cross from nearly opposite sides of the Southern Hemisphere, on the globe.
Their orientation is nearly opposite to each other and this explains why the same stars appear to be in nearly opposite positions.
.
This same test can be done from any two locations in the Southern Hemisphere separated by 120 or more degrees of longitude.

Go ahead and tell me what it is then (mistake in the premise). I know about the part where Father mentioned a mistake in the premise.

.
It seems you are willing to hear what I have to say, and then...

You of course (I assume) want to say that the mistake has to do with a flat earth, is that correct? Or is it something else?

.
Immediately you presume that IT'S ALWAYS ABOUT FLAT EARTH. This knee-jerk apprehension of yours is rather unsettling.
All of reality does not hinge on whether the earth is spherical or "flat."
.

Because at least the flat earth lines up with the vertical and hierarchical idea of truth, in that it depends on revelation. The globe earth does not. And if mathematics (on which the globe earth depends) is to be informed by revelation, then you'll have to show how that works.

.
In case there was any doubt, you just proved me correct. All you care about is the shape of the earth. You stake your whole reason for existing on whether the earth is "flat" or not, and you make it such a fundamental principle that nothing could be real to you EXCEPT that the earth be "flat" as you have repeatedly stated.
.
So there is nothing to discuss, apparently.
You're behaving just like a trapped, wild animal, terrified of everything because its reality is upset and it can't run away.
.
You're presuming that your flat-earthism is a matter of DIVINE REVELATION and therefore nothing that challenges this ideological construct could possibly be real. You have put yourself into a Shangri-La dreamland, from which there is no escape. Are you aware that Immanuel Kant, David Hume, Friederich Nietzsche and Karl Marx (along with others) likewise put themselves into a dead-end ideological construct out of which there was no possibility of egress?

He then goes on to describe how the new truth involves motions/becoming. Newton spoke of motion, the laws of physics, everything is in motion. Darwin spoke of natural selection and evolution, while Hegel and Marx used a notion of a dialectic. So the key  is..."becoming." Nothing is this way is made by God; it's still "becoming."


This "becoming" is incredibly telling because it shows modern science mirrors those false ideas promoted by the hierarchy of the Church: Science is now the physical basis for, and promotes the notion of "becoming", of changing reality, of relative truth, and even malleable doctrine. The moving globe of modern science makes possible all evolution from the physical point of view, which as your quote shows, insists on change.  Change has become the essential ingredient that fundamentally undermines both physical and spiritual reality.  

Vertical truth, that is, truth received from God, is not tolerated in man-based science, because  it is unchangeable. And because it leaves us answerable to God.  For modern man, a peer to peer truth makes possible new scientific doctrines capable of change.  This slippery slope is secured by the moving globe, and the theory of evolutionary change depends on it.  With our new moving foundation having replaced a fixed foundation, this now puts the idea of vertical truth (God) in question because Scripture is proven inaccurate.  Man's science quietly provides tangible proof that God doesn't exist.  Modern man instead believes and worships a new god...himself.  Man has discarded truth in science, once protected by Scripture and Tradition (things moderns don't even understand) and gave the authority to himself to make change a necessity so that absolute truth really no longer exists. Spherical earth fills in the blanks because, on the ball, trajectory and direction are not absolute--they change.  North South East and West are relative because earth is a ball.  Without beginning or end.  Man just agrees with himself exactly where these places happen to be, today.  Man agrees up is up depending on the individual and where he's at.  Level isn't level because its actually a curve.  And people BELIEVE these things because science says so.  There can be nothing "true" on a spherical foundation, but that's ok for modern man because science tells us everything's relative. "True" is subject to what man thinks it is. Down is relative on a sphere where man is content to live upside down compared to other people, yet he still stands up.  No problem.  Science says so.  Man has decided that it's perfectly ok to grade God's truth on the curve. Man, by way of science, has become the god of his own changeable and directionless world.  He accepts nothing from God about his world, because he has become enlightened beyond the fixed rules he refuses to live by.  Now, if man's internal compass is this messed up physically speaking, what pray tell does that do to him spiritually speaking?  

It would be impossible to show all the connections truth reveals about our metaphysical world. All the things you listed about the video, by way of reflection, reveal way more when carefully considered.  Naturally it would...it's all about Truth!  Seems its the kind of video you have to listen to more than once in order to actually absorb all there is in it.  Great note-taking by the way.  

 

Very good thoughts above, regarding modern science, vs. God's truth.

I agree that man has, as is pointed out in the above post, "by the way of science, become the god of his own changeable and directionless world; and that he accepts nothing from God about his world, because he has become enlightened beyond the fixed rules he refuses to live by." Well said.

That's modern man, definitely. And the globe earth is the foundation of it. We are insignificant when compared to that vast expanse of space, of which the "globe earth" is just a tiny and insignificant speck.

If I have time, there's more I'd like to address regarding that excellent video.