Hi Flat Earthers this is Zack.
And this is Karen B
A while ago Neil deGrasse Tyson came back
with another video to debunk the Flat Earthers.
Usually when somebody tells you to give them
a proof about something, naturally you give
them your best proof.
So what is his best proof?
So tell me Neil, is the earth flat?
We a have video from space of the rotating
spherical earth, the earth is round
So you heard it yourself, proof Number 1,
we have video of earth from space, the earth
is round.
What we wanna know now is what video he is
talking about.
We looked for videos of earth from space on
their own website and we got nothing. We looked
it up in Google and we couldn’t find it.
Maybe you can help us find a video of earth
from space. A real one. The only thing that
we could find was Videos of earth from the
ISS that show a small part of the earth. So
that must be what he meant. So Mr. Neil, if
these are not the videos you were talking
about, you can send us the links with all
the necessary details that we may need.
Let’s take a look at one of the ISS videos.
Technically the ISS cannot see the entire
earth, so they just see a little part of it.
Is that how big the earth is? How can a little
part of earth prove the shape of the earth?
Is it because it turns around it so fast,
or does a little arch prove the shape of the
earth. What if the arch is just a lens effect
like this picture? Or this one? The angle
of a 14mm lens is 106 degrees, so with that
lens they can see around 1154 km… But wide
lenses are curved like a go pro camera. Whenever
you use a wide lens, you usually see curved
lines.
And what if the ISS videos are nothing but
CGI? It doesn’t look real at all. Do you
think it’s hard to fake? Here is a zero
budget video made by Steve Torrence. He could
have made a better CGI than NASA if he spent
more time on it, so his only budget is time.
Is there any footage of earth from space?
Is there a 24h video of earth from space?
Most of the ISS videos are cut for connectivity
reasons which is obviously a lie because their
connection is always good when they live stream
from the inside of the ISS. So they cannot
give us very long videos because we will know
that they are lying. We will know that the
clouds are fake because they cannot have them
on the correct position all the time. They
know that we will catch them lying so they
will never do this unless they discover a
new way to fake it.
By the way, one day we asked a Spanish Astronaut,
Pedro Duque, to take a Cat and a Bird and
an Insect with him to space to see how they
will move in zero gravity, and guess what!
the Astronaut deleted the comment right away.
Here is a proof.
Hello Pedro, can you take to space a little
bird and an insect and a kitty to see how
they will react without gravity? I don’t
understand why we still don’t have a video
with animals in space. Is it too hard to make
them act like you guys do?
So what are they afraid of? Why didn’t they
take insects and birds or cats with them to
space long time ago? I think we should attack
them with comments like that and see what
they will tell us. What do you think?
Let’s move to his next proof.
What’s what’s odd is, there’re people
who think the earth is flat, right, but recognize
that the moon is round, Murcury, Venus, Mars,
Jupiter, Saturn, Uranus, Neptune and the sun
are all spheres but earth is flat, that’s
not, something doesn’t square here
This is the typical question that most people
ask when you tell them that the earth is flat.
They imagine it like a disc in space with
all those planets around it. They keep the
same Globe Model and they just change the
shape of the earth. This is why their next
question is always ‘’where is the edge?’’
Or ‘’Why don’t you go find the edge
of the earth?’’
Dear Globe Earth Believers, we love you, but
when we say that the earth is flat, we do
not mean that the earth is a flying disc and
water is falling out of the edge. Please stop
imagining the earth like that.
What we mean is that the earth is the basement
of the universe. And the universe is not what
you think it is. So some Flat Earthers believe
that the earth is an infinite plane and the
stars and the planets are circling above it.
And some believe that it’s a closed system
with a dome on it and that it’s impossible
to go through it... And other flat earth researchers
believe other things based on their knowledge
and experiments there are too many theories.
To sum it up, none of us know the real shape
of the entire earth as an object, but WE ALL
agree that it’s flat from the surface that
we live on. Because we can prove it from earth
itself. And almost all Flat Earthers believe
that stars and planets are just little lights
in the sky. Not as big and far as NASA says.
So when you say that if all planets are round
then the earth cannot be flat, then you are
considering the earth as a planet too, and
that is not what we say or think. So that
is a false claim in the first place, this
is exactly like saying if all these pool balls
are spherical then the pool table must be
spherical too. You must unlearn what you have
learned and if you still have the same question
in your head, then here is something curious
for you to think about.
How do we know that the moon is a sphere?
Have we ever seen the other side of it? NO!
I will let my friend Karen B show you a little
demonstration.
When something is round and too far away from
you, you cannot say what shape it is. It can
be a flat plate, it can be oblate, it can
be concave, it can be a sphere. You just can’t
tell.
Here are 4 objects, they all look round right?
But are they all spheres? How would we know?
What if I told you that there is only one
object that is not spherical? Can you tell
what it is? Can you tell me how you knew it?
How would we even know the distance? I can
tell you that they are 100 feet away, and
you will believe it, but they can only be
a few inches away.
And I can tell you that they are 10 meters
in diameter but they could be only 5cm in
diameter. You can never know using your camera.
Please look at them carefully…
Here is the only object that is not spherical
here, here it is, I bet you thought it would
be another one.
but it will blow your mind if I tell you that
this second object is also not spherical and
it’s flat.
And it will blow your mind even more if I
tell you that this third object is concave.
But how about this one? This is the only spherical
object. We could have an oblate object and
you would think it’s spherical as well.
So looking at something round does not mean
it’s a sphere. Have you ever seen the moon
rotating in the sky? You have always seen
one side of it. Which makes it impossible
for anyone to say the moon is spherical, however,
using the word round is correct, a plate is
also round.
Look at this moon right here, does it look
round? yes, does it look like a sphere? Yes.
Is it really a sphere? Let’s find out…
Well, it’s not. It’s flat. You got tricked
again.
Please bear in mind that there is no refraction
between the camera and the moon image, imagine
if you are looking at this image from under
water.
You would not only have a problem of determining
the shape or distance of it, but you will
also have a problem with determining the position
of it. Because refraction changes the position
of anything.
So how do we know the shape of the moon? We
will have to go to it. So who went to the
moon? NASA, or Other space agencies?
Who told you the moon is a sphere? NASA…
NASA and other space agencies have been caught
lying many times. How can we trust liars?
If you think that they really went to the
moon, then you need to do some good research
before watching this video. All moon landings
are staged and only a gullible person believes
them. How did they even know that the moon
is something they could walk on to send people
to it?
How can they go to the moon if at that time
the distance to it was unconfirmed?
How can they succeed at everything in their
first try? Why didn’t they go back?
Oh right, they lost the technology and it’s
a painful process to build it again. It´s
not me who´s saying this, check this out
I’d go to the moon in a nanosecond, but
the problem is we don’t have the technology
to do that anymore, we used to, but we em…
destroyed that technology, and no… it’s
a painful process to build it back again.
NASA are you telling us that you get that
incredible budget to hire a bunch of lazy
people?
Painful process? Seriously?
So we believe that the moon is a Sphere just
because the government told us so. Like the
government never lied to you about anything
and whatever they say is true.
We are now arguing about the moon because
they supposedly have been to it, but if we
talk about other planets, we will see that
they just assumed they are spheres, they didn’t
even go to them. They just looked at them
through a telescope and told you an imaginary
distance because it matched some triangulations
and they just told you that they are spherical
without even going there, and guess what!
You just believed it without a question. We
don’t blame you though. We all thought that
they were telling the truth until we started
to see the lies then we woke up. (I see dead
people) But they are now trying to spread
false information to make the flat Earthers
look so stupid so nobody can take us seriously.
And you have to be very careful with that.
If this is your first flat earth video, please
don’t make it the last.
Neil said something beautiful in this video
though, let me show it to you.
If you’re gonna say something and you think
what you’re saying is true, then no matter
how obvious you think it is that it’s true,
you should still test it, it could be something
fooling you in one way or another.
Globe Believers? Have you ever tested the
Globe? No. but we have. NASA, have you ever
tested the Globe? You have not. You said you
shoot a powerful laser to a mirror you left
on the moon and it comes back to earth and
this is how you know the distance to the moon.
Now if you really do that, and I am sure that
you don’t, then why don’t you shoot that
laser parallel to the ground and show us the
curvature. Science says that gravity bends
the light? So with that being said, your laser
would hit the ground somewhere, or it would
turn around the earth like this and hit you
from behind. Why don’t you do this demonstration
and leave the laser like that for years until
we all know that the laser is really bending
around the Globe, but hey shoot it towards
the south please. Is it so hard for you to
do? Don’t you have the money to do so? I
guess you already have the laser, so all you
have to do is put it parallel to the ground.
It shouldn’t cost you any money at all.
If you are running out of ideas, you can come
to us and we will give you all the ideas that
you need to prove the shape of the earth from
earth. See those that realize that we don’t
live on a ball are trying to collaborate with
you.
OK, let’s move to his third proof
If you wanna say the earth is flat, then em…
for example, Lunar Eclipses (Oh) what´s a
lunar eclipse! If your face is the brilliant
sun,
-Thank you-
-hehe-
And this is earth, and the moon is over here,
the sun is always earth´s shadow into space.
it’s always there no matter what –right-
obviously, ok? It’s such a shadow –it’s
a shadow- the moon – is shining on blackness
–yeah- a shadow in darkness – so, so the
moon occasionally passes through that shadow.
And if you see the shape of earth’s shadow
on the moon, it is always round, always round.
If earth was flat, sometimes you’d get like
a flat shadow. Right-
We’ve never seen a flat shadow –right-
in fact it is a segment of an arc of a circle
no matter the orientation of the moon and
the sun. And the only thing that makes a perfectly
circular shadow, would be something that’s
perfectly circular? No, perfectly spherical.
–spherical – right –
So the only thing that makes a perfect circle
shadow every single time is a perfect sphere
– right-
Okay? No matter what angle, and where as a
disc it would only make a perfect circle if
you lined it that way. And then you have to
look at the face of the disc in order to get
the circle. Any other angle you get some – the
Greeks knew this- right- all the Lunar Eclipses
had, they said oh my gosh, we must be in around
earth, this is thousands of years before Columbus-
before Columbus- exactly-
So Neil deGrasse Tyson is trying to tell us
that if you see a shadow on any object in
the sky, it means that it’s the earth’s
shadow, and that of course proves the shape
of the earth. If the shadow is round, then
the earth is a sphere and if it´s flat then
the earth is flat..
Thank you Neil, I didn’t know your best
proofs would be that ridiculous.
We actually talked about this before but we
will explain it a bit more now.
Please Karen B, show them some demonstrations.
First off, we never said that the flat earth
can go between the moon and the sun. So the
shadow you see on the moon is not the earth’s
shadow. And it could be anything else, it
could be a shadow that is coming from the
moon itself. Why do we even call it a shadow?
What if there is light in the center of the
moon that turns around and around.
What if there is another object that is eclipsing
the moon like in the solar eclipse when the
moon eclipses the sun Mr. Neil. Why does it
have to be the earth? Because it matches the
calculations of the globe model?
So if we make different calculations that
match with reality, can we just assume that
our model is the truth? Why don’t we have
a FULL video from space when this eclipse
happens Mr. Neil? Where are these videos?
We can’t find them in your website or in
any other website. We only find cartoons,
is that how you prove something scientifically?
With calculations and cartoons?
Come on Neil, we thought you were smarter
than that.
Look how ridiculous your claim is… Even
if we assume that the earth is like this,
and the moon is a ball, then the shadow might
look curved as well, even if you orientate
the flat disc like this, the shadow will always
be curved. It will only be flat on a flat
surface.
Well it can also look flat on a ball if you
look at it from a certain position. But the
earth is supposedly 4 times bigger than then
moon, so from one latitude or longitude line
you will be able to see the flat shadow but
from the rest of the globe earth you will
see a curved shadow.
But again, this is not even what we say Mr.
Neil. We are just playing with your theories.
OMG Neil, I am so disappointed.
Anyway, let’s move to the fourth proof
So now the earth is round, how big is earth.
You might wanna check for that.
There’s a famous experiment conducted by
Eratosthenes, Tosthenes, Eratosthenes, Tosthenes,
and the two cities in the old world and one
of them, they knew that at 12:00noon on a
particular day of the year, that the sun was
directly overhead and you can see the bottom
of a well. –okay- You don’t run around
looking at the bottom of wells, no, do you
not, because the light doesn’t take, it’s
just that, doesn’t get down there, doesn’t
get down it. How can we use this observation
to see if earth’s surface is curved, we
needed another well, turns out we can’t
see the bottom o both wells at the same time,
what might explain this? There’re two possible
explanations. First we could have a flat earth
with the Sun that’s small and close by so
that the light hits the second well at an
angle or second we could have a curved earth
with a Sun that’s big an far away so that
all the light comes in parallel but only one
well at a time is lit all the way to the bottom.
Turns out with just two wells there’s enough
wiggle room for both explanations to fit our
observations. Eratosthenes only had two wells,
but what if he added a third? With a third
well it doesn’t matter where the sun is,
no flat earth model, can explain the angles
of all three shadows.
But the spherical model explains it all. All
three angles with ease. And to do this experiment
you got to measure the angles, Greeks had
the angles – yeah- in fact geometry translates
to earth measurement.
Well here comes a new thing. This is a new
claim from Globe Believers. Thank you Neil.
I am glad you finally considered our theory.
So you are saying that Eratosthenes should
have at least used three wells to confirm
the shape of the earth, but why didn’t he
do it? Was it so hard to do?
Anyway, he did it or not, he is already debunked.
Here is a video that I made before you even
made this interview to debunk Eratosthenes’
Method. Check it out and tell me if the flat
earth model still doesn’t work.
Zack’s experiment in fact proved that Eratosthenes’
experiments required a second look. There
are at least two possible ways to make the
angles of elevation work. The first possible
way is what the globe model is, a curved land
and parallel sunrays. And the second possible
way is a flat land and a curved sky and refracted
sunrays. Eratosthenes chose the first option
without considering the effect of the atmosphere.
Like the atmosphere didn’t exist at that
time. Now modern science agrees that the atmosphere
works as a lens but in the meantime, it agrees
with Eratosthenes experiment. These are two
very different ways of thinking and we cannot
have it both ways. If science agrees that
refraction changes the sun’s position, then
science is admitting that there is no way
they can triangulate the sun from earth. Therefore,
the distance to the sun and the size of it
should remain unknown. Now if we go back to
Zack’s experiment, we will see that he made
the math that Eratosthenes used to prove his
theory work on a flat land as well. And all
he did was consider the effect of the atmosphere.
So he put some nails on a flat table just
to measure the angles of elevation the same
way Eratosthenes did, and he added a concave
lens considering that the Atmosphere works
as a concave lens, he did the same math and
got a circumference of a ball, so if Eratosthenes
was a small person on that table that cannot
see the lens that is representing the atmosphere,
he would think that the flat table he is standing
on is actually a globe… Because his math
is based on that the light rays being parallel.
You cannot make assumptions and build the
entire model based on that same assumption.
So there you go, Neil! The angles of elevation
can work on a flat land if we include the
atmosphere or let’s just say refraction
to our math. How can you ignore the atmosphere’s
effect Mr. Neil?
Oh! I can’t summarize it better. Thank you
brother.
So by just adding a concave lens above the
flat earth it made all angles of elevation
work perfectly just like they work on the
globe, but now you are going to say that there
is no dome above us, but I am not even saying
that there is a dome, I am just saying that
the atmosphere could be working like the concave
lens. Of course you will say that the atmosphere
bends the light downwards and you will give
me an example by shooting the laser through
water, but the atmosphere is NOT like water
and you should already know that.
So we did long distance laser tests to see
how refraction works on the air and we discovered
that it bends the light upwards instead of
downwards, so we HAVE proved with EXPERIMENTS
that the atmosphere can bend the light upwards
which means that the sun light can be bent
in the opposite direction like I showed in
this experiment. And that will make the Flat
Earth Model important, because you assume
that when the apparent sun is above the horizon
line, the real sun is already below it. But
our experiments proved the opposite. And that
is a big problem for your model. but you will
ignore it and answer me with more assumptions.
Many people may not understand what I am talking
about here, but I am sure you understand it
very well Neil. If the atmosphere bends the
light upwards, you got a serious with the
entire globe model the apparent sun that you
claim it’s above the real sun during sunset
or sunrise, now it would be below the real
sun and hehe that means your entire model
is debunked.
Now we just showed you that there is a scientific
explanation that explains that. What else
you gonna say?
Let’s move to the fifth proof.
So one last thing that should be obvious,
okay, if you pay attention and think about
it. If you send a ship to the horizon, eventually
I begins to disappear until it’s no longer
visible beyond your horizon –right- and
you should ask yourself, what kind of surface
would produce that result? If it’s con…
Ocean has a ramp, haha. Like a parking lot,
it has an elevator, it’s like going down.
Seafarers knew this. And so what… however
flat they would have imagined the earth to
be, they couldn’t have accepted to be completely
flat. Because otherwise you would not see
the ship – okay-
So ships disappear behind the horizon line.
What kind of surface would produce that result?
Well, a cylindrical surface makes more sense
in this case Mr. Neil.
Because the horizon looks flat from right
to left. What would happen if that ship turns
90 degrees left or right? If we were on a
ball, what would happen? I know you would
say that our view vision is like a circle
around us but that would still work better
on a cylindrical surface.
Well I guess Rob Skiba has a good explanation
for this.
here is the other issue,
People who think that the ships are disappearing
over the curve in 3 – 4 -5 miles distance,
it’s got to work both ways, I mean, if we
were on a ball then when the ship is going
away from you, on the, let’s say the Z axis.
Going, you know, from you to, point away from
you, and it’s rolling over the ball in 3
to 5 miles, then you should have the same
exact effect looking left or right on the
X axis. You should be seeing the ships rolling
up to the top of a ball and rolling down on
the lateral X axis, you know, I mean if it’s
on a ball it’s gotta work both ways, away
from you and side to side. We never see that
though. Go to the beach and do a panoramic
shot, and put a parallel line over it and
from end to end this is a lot more than just
5 miles. There is no perceived curvature here.
None. Flat as a pancake. In fact, these are
some pictures I took on the beach at Malibu
California. I went from there, way up to the
mountain. This is about Prepadime University
and looked down, this is gotta be, probably,
close to a hundred miles, left to right. Distance
to the horizon line, it’s gotta be, you
know, quite a bit there. Put a parallel line
over it. Flat, so you can’t have it both
way, you can’t say ships are rolling over
the ball on the Z axis, without having the
same exact perception on the X axis, ok, going
back to this picture right here, showing the
perception differences when you zooming in
and out. Here is another shot right here at
this both. Came into view, zooming out. Zooming
out, zooming out, and it rose higher on the
horizon, see when I zoomed in on him, there
was all this space right here from the bottom
of the boat to the horizon. And when it’s
further away, that distance shrinks, so our
eyes start to play tricks on us, now to better
illustrate this I created this little animation
right here. And this represents about a mile
worth of ocean. So when you’re looking you
can see the difference and how each of these
ships, gets, looks like it’s higher and
higher up on the water level, now that's on
flat water. No waves at all. Now let’s look
at the same animation, I created same waves.
Not higher than the height of the camera,
in fact, a few times that you see the camera
go right through the waves, the waves height
was about as high as the camera. Which was
just a little bit above water. Ok, so let’s
look at the same exact animation, this time
with some waves. Ok. There’s wave, wave,
wave, wave, ok, over the distance here, the
cumulative effect of the waves, obscures the
hull of ships. That’s just what happens
with perspective. As the ships get higher
and higher up on the horizon as you get further
and further away, and you have the compounding
of the waves over that distance, it is really
easy to see how they end up with the illusion
of ships going over a ball, when it has nothing
to do with that at all. This is a flat plain.
And here is a… two pictures side by side,
flat water with no waves and with waves.
Not to mention that if that ship stops where
you can’t see it anymore, and wait until
the weather clears up, you will be able to
see it again. And I am not gonna mention those
who bring ships back into view with a telescope
or with a Nikon p900, because I got a different
opinion about that.
Final proof of Neil,
Also if I just tell you, Chuck walk due east,
okay right, and don’t ever stop. Right,
I just turn around my chair and face this
way and eventually you’re gonna come back,
and you’ll probably be about a 150 years
old cuz I am no Forrest Gump that is that
long it would take me to run the earth.
Well this is not even a proof Mr. Neil. But
I will let our friend Dave Weiss or DITRH
explain it because no explains it better than
him, David Please, go ahead.
Here is a model of the Flat Earth map, Neil.
It could be wrong, it could be right, we do
not know yet, because we simply don’t have
your budget. What is important to us right
now is that earth is obviously and measurably
flat.
So let me show you how your proof of a ball
can also work on a flat earth, here is the
Magnetic Field where all the compasses point
to. If you go east or west and follow your
compass on a globe you will end up going on
the same latitude line, and the same happens
on a flat earth. So here is how.
As you can see here, the compass is pointing
to this magnet in the center which represents
the magnetic north pole. As I move west, you
will notice that the needle that points to
the north is also moving, pointing towards
the magnet and that keeps me on the same latitude
line. So if I keep going, I will come back
to the same place from the East. So your proof
is not really a proof because it works on
a ball and on a flat earth as well. It would
have been a problem to us if you’d said
that if you go south or north you come back
to the same position, but you know for sure
Neil that doing that in real life is not possible.
There is no plane that does that and that
is because going south will take you somewhere
else. Somewhere we do not know anything about.
you make planes fly around the entire earth
to reach their destination when there is a
very easy short cut that everyone will enjoy,
even the passengers. But there is no plane
that does that, WHY? I thought we were on
a globe. Are you afraid that the pilots will
get dizzy? Or is it too cold up there? Or
there is something hidden there that you don’t
know us to know about?
So, Mr. Tyson, don’t tell us that this video
of yours is just an off-the-cuff interview
and you didn’t prepare the points you made.
because obviously the video has been edited
and anyone can notice that due to the cuts
that were made, not to mention the pre-recorded
voice over on the animations. So it is easy
to see that you put some time and effort into
this funny show. Just give us some answers.
And you are more than welcome to debate anyone
of us whenever you please. Don’t try to
debate B.O.B, Kyrie Irving, Tila Taquila or
anyone else from the mainstream media. Debate
a real Flat Earther and let’s find out if
you can make one of us look stupid, I don’t
think you have it in you. Let’s see how
brave you really are.
Zack we’re done.
Uh ok
