Hey, this debate's about to start, but in case you didn't know, it's also available on our modern debate podcast right now. In case you want to listen to it on the go, here is that debate right now. Hey everybody, tonight we're debating Flat Earth versus Globerth and we are starting right now. With Tjum's opening statement on behalf of the globe, Tom, thanks for being with us. The floor is all yours. Thanks, James. Thanks, Nathan, for being here. Appreciate the opportunity as always. So we know for a fact the world is a globe because we've been to space and we can see it, but that of course doesn't convince the Flat Earthers because they want something that they themselves can confirm, which we can also provide because there's this thing called radar. Radar is this magical technology that we've invented that can tell distances and speeds and locations and sizes of things that are far away. And the way it does that is it bounces radio waves, emits them from an emitter, and it hits something and then it bounces back and we just literally count the time it takes to go from the object that bounces off to the receiver and back. And we know how far away it is and what shape it is based off of how the radio waves bounce off of the thing. And guess what? We can do this with things in space too, like you yourself can go buy a ham radio and if you spend enough money you can buy one that can bounce radio signals off the moon. You can communicate with people on the other side of the planet by bouncing radio signals off of the moon. We know exactly how far the way the moon is, 280 something thousand I think was the number, miles exactly as said by, oh we've got an echo there, exactly as said by NASA, which means it's in space like there's no dome there. We know for effect there's no dome there because nothing the radio waves don't bounce off it. It does bounce off the moon, doesn't bounce off anything behind the moon, doesn't bounce off anything in any direction that is not the moon. So we know it's 280,000 miles away or whatever the number is. So we can measure the size of the moon, the shape of the moon, the distance of the moon, we know it's in space. We know that the radio waves don't still hear an echo. Are you hearing it too James? Yes I am. Nathan you don't have the watch page on do you? Thank you. No I'm not watching but I'll go on mute for you. Yeah it might be just my volume coming through his mic, his speakers and being heard by his mic because of waves. Gotcha. So yeah so we can know that the moon is in space, we know it's up there, we know the distances, all the things NASA says are correct, we can bounce radio waves off it, not a problem. So we know all of these facts that we as individuals can confirm that what NASA says is correct. The speed of light for example, we can also measure the speed of light because that's literally what radio waves are as they're using the radio waves which move at the speed of light to measure things and we can prove this. It's very simple. We did this in the 1800s, the 1700s, the 1900s and pretty much every other 100 because it's really easy to do and so we can measure lots of different things using these radio waves that you yourself can go build in your backyard to communicate with people on the other side of the planet and you can know where they're located because they can tell you or you could build one for your friend's house and your house and then calculate the distance and the shape of the planets by communicating with them and the direction you have to point the waves and the way they reflect and how they communicate with other people you can triangulate the the directions so we know the world is a globe and you yourself can prove this any human being can prove this which is why flurfs are so dumb because anyone can prove this anyone anyone can just build their own mechanism of a radio a ham radio if you build a powerful enough one you can bounce radio signals off the moon you can know where it is you know how far away it is and if you rent the the really really big ones you can bounce radio signals off the sun too so we know how far away that is now big that is so this stuff is really easy to do it's really easy to confirm anybody can go build these things and demonstrate that yes in fact the world is round the moon is 280 whatever how many thousands of miles away it is a big ball in space and you can bounce radio waves off it and get back to earth to talk to people on the other side of the planet all this stuff is easy that is the most simplest way to demonstrate the world is in fact round and it is irrefutable and flurfs have no idea what they're talking about now include there thank you very much tom for that opening statement we are going to kick it over to nathan for his opening as well want to let you know though folks if it's your first time here at modern day debate we are a neutral platform hosting debates on science religion and politics and so if you haven't yet hit that subscribe button as we have many more juicy upcoming debates for example dr michael brown christian apologist will be taking on apostate profit next month on june 9th you don't want to miss it so do hit that subscribe button and that notification bell nathan thanks for being here the floor is all yours you're on mute james i want to thank you for having me on again i really appreciate it t jump thanks for joining us uh shout out destiny clothing for the shirt and the tin foil hat factory for the hat i really appreciate that guys so starting it off with an honest man when proven to be wrong must either admit that he is wrong or he no longer remains to be an honest man the truth is incontrovertible church hall was famous for saying this malice will try and attack it calling me flurfs were too dumb to figure it out and ignorance will try and deride it but in the end there it is so i never wanted to be a flat earth ladies and gentlemen i laughed at the idea of the earth being flat when it was introduced to me and uh then a mentor of mine who someone who's really intelligent was looking into it for seven months and it almost dropped the phone when he told me that because he was so intelligent i thought there's no way this guy could be looking into flat earth for seven months and here i am five years later i ran a research group with 150 000 people where we asked globers to post first hand evidence that the earth is a spinning ball in space t jump had no first hand evidence he said we could build you could build you haven't done it and he acts like it's so easy to just go build things in your backyard and bounce radar waves off the moon well if it's so easy bro how come you haven't done it to confirm your model yet so on top of that massive amounts of ostracism being a flat earth earth as you saw here in t jumps opening but also i don't want all the world governments lying to me about the shape of the earth i mean that's kind of weird right that's spooky but uh facts are facts now let's look at the facts we'll start with fluid statics fluid statics are large bodies of water at rest the study of them fluid dynamics is bodies of water in motion so when you look at body of water at rest the surface of the body of water is flat and horizontal to the container requires a container a spinning ball is not a container every time you put water on a ball and spin it the water flies off that's observable that's reality okay that's repeatable that's testable that's science so also you have to hold a compass flat for it to work the suez canal has zero locks zero um curvature and it's over 100 miles you've got the Statue of Liberty being observed from over 60 miles ladies and gentlemen we see way too far the horizon is flat even phd astrophysicist neil de grass tyson will tell you there is no curve at 128 000 feet now for years i had to hear globers say have you ever been on an airplane and i'm not kidding i was at disney world one time and a guy said you can see the curve from your hotel just go up to about the eighth floor now if the mainstream scientist phd astrophysicist that run observatories and have six million followers on twitter say you can't see curve from 128 000 feet and it's a fisheye lens curving the picture and all you see in the picture is new mexico well not only does that red bull jump prove the earth's flat and not curving but the earth didn't rotate under felix bomb gardener when he ascended for three hours this is another point i have the earth's not rotating i'll get to that in a second because we have more proof the earth is flat specular reflections the incident angle of the light matches the reflection angle of the light if you go to a house of mirrors at a circus anytime there is distortion or curvature in the surface of a mirror there will be some sort of distortion in the image okay now that's actually how they make glass they actually melt the molten metal on top of or the molten glass on top of molten metal because all liquids at rest are flat that's also another way they get the bubbles to rise out of the mirrors and the glass but i'm gonna have to check gyroscopes keep their rigidity in space ladies and gentlemen we would not use gyroscopes in an airplane to fly level if a gyroscope was curving around a ball airplanes admit in their faa documents that the earth's flat non-rotating and they do not account for gravity vector now i don't know if you want to talk to a pilot who believes ursa ball and never tested it great but the people who train the pilots the federal aviation administration says the earth is flat non-rotating and they negate a gravity vector on top of that you've got microwave repeaters and last but not least we've got the black some black swan if the ursa ball curving in all directions the horizon would be approximately 1.225 times the square root of the observer's height and feet problem is we've done observations at one foot where the horizon is over 10 miles out now that would necessitate that the earth's radius is about the size of the orbital path of the moon 250 000 miles ladies and gentlemen so the globe earth has been falsified already i'm i'm honestly here as a favor to james doing this debate so on top of that earth doesn't move ladies and gentlemen period doesn't move mainstream science asserts the earth has a choreolus and objects in the air experience earth rotating under them now i don't know if you've ever seen a hummingbird or a helicopter a hot air balloon a drone a ball you throw in the air or maybe a golf ball you hit off the t the earth does not rotate under anything so the earth does not rotate they lie plain and simple again the fas earth the earth is non-rotating that's why we don't have drastically difference journey times when traveling west to east as opposed traveling east to west i thought about this when i was a kid i would go visit my dad in ohio and it would be four hours to get there and four hours to get back and i thought that's weird they told me the earth was spinning turns out they lie on top of that ladies and gentlemen can have gas pressure without a container high pressure systems move towards low pressure systems it's called the second law of thermodynamics if it didn't happen all the time it wouldn't be a law now if you put your hand on a hot stove it will burn you 100 out of 100 times if you pop a car tire and the tire has air in it that air is going to escape into the space around the tire 100 out of 100 times okay it's the second law of thermodynamics so you cannot have gas pressure which we are all breathing at the moment 14.7 psi at the surface without the necessary antecedent of a container of some sort now very convenient for me not so much for t-jump the sky is a map and a clock we've got 88 constellations Polaris never moves we can do astro or archaeology which i've actually filmed myself i went to the georgia guide stones about three months ago go check out be the change before that channel disappears it's got two strikes and they deleted my last channel Nathan Thompson and they deleted the official flat earth and globe discussion so this topic's being heavily censored hats off to james for still continuing with the topic really appreciate it so um also another proof the sky's a map and a clock and we don't orbit around the sun ladies and gentlemen at 66600 miles an hour is that you can lay on your back january first observe the stars six months later lay on your back in the same place at night and observe the stars now let's pretend for a second that my head is the sun right so night time would be over there towards the kitchen okay now six months later the globe would be on this side of the sun and night time would be over there towards the neighbor's house if that was happening you would not observe the same stars every six months i talked about it in my speech in Dallas if anyone needs it email me flatter flyers at gmail.com i love you guys on top of that tjump said we know we've been to space then he talks about radar systems he's never built then he says we can do this with things in space then he assumes the moon is in space which i find hilarious because he kept repeating over and over we can trust everything nasa says well oops tjump i don't know if you knew this but nasa claims that the moon isn't in space it's in earth's atmosphere they just said that not joking so you can google it right now on your little oyster clam couch and check it out because everything you said in your opener just got destroyed by your priest nasa who asserts the moon is not in space so you're not bouncing anything off the moon and confirming one space is real or any of that is a total joke bro on top of that he kept saying you yourself can build but never did and then he called flurfs done and then he said anyone can build one again just keep repeating yourself so that was pretty boring that's going to close my opener looking forward to the question and an answer or back in four you got it thank you very much and with that we're going to jump into the open conversation folks want to let you know though our guests are linked in the description we do appreciate our guests and as always we want to ask you 99.9 percent of you do a fantastic job and we appreciate that and want to say thank you for attacking the arguments instead of the person so with that gentlemen the floor is all yours well actually i have one of these so i have done it personally which is debunks all of nathan what nathan said yeah yeah i go to a college where we do we do this kind of stuff all the time you go to a college okay so the college did it you didn't do it in your backyard no who do you think builds them it's they give us money and we then use the money to buy parts and then we put the parts together like lego pieces we build them oh my god we do it we do it nathan and you can too this is really easy it's called a ham radio do you know what a ham radio is maybe it's a little bit of feedback i'll give you a chance to respond nathan but there's a little bit of feedback i'm hearing so yeah a little bit go ahead nathan if you want to respond yeah you said it's across everything nasa says tjohn no i didn't say that i said we could confirm many of the things nasa says ourselves that's what i said no in your opener you said everything nasa tells us is true no i didn't say that i said i confirm no i said we could confirm many of the things nathan listen listen to the words so i said we can confirm many of the things nasa says we can't confirm everything because we don't have a Hubble telescope so we can prove many of the things they're saying is true it doesn't mean the other things are false nathan tjohn did you know nasa claims the moon is in earth's atmosphere yes on the very edge which is still technically a part of space no on the edge show me the edge in in in the edge so yes the atmosphere contains different layers you know like if you pour smoke like it's heavy water smoke out it falls and the heavier gases they sit in the bottom and then the lighter gases sit on the top like just here on earth we can do this tasked with gases you have any kind of gas and if the gas is heavier or denser it goes to the bottom of the gases and the lighter gases go on the top of the gases that's the atmosphere just a bunch of gas sitting on top of each other you said tjohn that we could do this with things in space and then talked about space can you stop interrupting me please uh well i'm curious what did i say one thing is we do have feedback so i think nathan if you're willing to kind of sit back in your seat the way you presented your opening statement that might help because there's for some reason i can't tell where it's coming from but it might be your how close you are to the mic i'm not sure and james i think it's the fact that his speakers on his laptop are projecting the sound and his microphone on his laptop is picking up the sound i don't think it has to do with his location i've done every debate this way every single debate on the channel i've done this exact same way next we'll go into whatever issue you wanted to address nathan but or i should say nathan continue on and and he interrupts me go ahead yeah what i wanted to say was we can do this with things in space is what tjump said and then he said we bounce the radar off the moon now tjump did you know nasa says the moon is not in space no they don't it's in earth's atmosphere no they don't that's atmosphere yes they do the atmosphere is space in space yes we earth the whole thing is in space the fact that it's in a part of the atmosphere doesn't make it not space to space isn't completely devoid of everything there are particles in space we'll move on ladies and we'll move on ladies and gentlemen go ahead google what nasa says because they just debunked everything tjump said where we actually it's my turn it's my turn it's my turn you're gonna run again let's let's let's let let's let nathan finish his point or no he did he asked the question i answered the question so we're gonna give gonna give nathan a chance to finish his sentence i think he was mid-sentence and then i promise we'll come right back to you tom nathan what were you gonna say yeah so nasa asserts the moon isn't in space tjump said we could bounce radar off things in space and then says he bounces off the moon which nasa says isn't even in space gotcha all right thank you we'll kick it over to tom and at least a couple of minutes uh yes so the the moon is in space yes that is it is also in the atmosphere those are not contradictory things this is not hard nathan just doesn't understand um astrophysics not a problem so the moon's also in the solar system too wow oof contradiction no so again my question was how does radar work nathan can we bounce radar off things is radar a pretty accurate tool we can use here on earth the moon is in space but it's also in earth's atmosphere is that what you're saying tjump yeah it's also in the solar system can you answer my question nathan how does radar work you understand that space is a vacuum and the atmosphere is pressurized so how are you saying that the atmosphere is space and space is the atmosphere and moon is in space and the moon is in earth's atmosphere that doesn't make any sense the space has to do with a certain density of the atmosphere if there's a low enough density then you're in space and the low enough density of the atmosphere at that rate is space so space is a total vacuum space is not a 100 vacuum it's just not not the case nathan it's enough of a vacuum and there is enough of a vacuum in that area to call it space so yes it is still space all right ladies and gentlemen you heard it here first the moon is in space but it's also in earth's atmosphere tjump is the horizon the geometric curve of the earth i don't care i want you to answer my question you haven't answered you don't care you want me to answer your question what's your question yeah so can is radar an accurate thing does it bounce off things i don't know i've never used radar okay so is the earth curve geometric horizon or no no idea you don't know if the earth curve is a geometric horizon tjump have you ever heard that boats go over the curve of the earth okay so um what does that have to do with my argument am i opening okay well we're debating whether the earth is a globe or it's flat tjump and i well if the earth was a globe then boats would go over the geometric curve which would be at 1.225 times the square root of the observer's height and feet is the horizon the geometric curve of the earth tjump remember nathan remember nathan i had the positive position here that's why you had me go first you specifically said tom is holding the positive that the world is a globe which means you have to address my arguments not the other way around nathan so address my arguments does radar work do planes use radar can you build a radar is a ham radio a real thing that anyone can build in the backyard for less than a thousand dollars is that a thing right is that a thing nathan do those exist yes radar is real tjump i don't specialize in radar so is it okay if we move on to another topic no it's not all you want to talk about with radar if you have no data for no evidence any photographic evidence you literally just said you can test it it confirms earth's a globe i'm trying to get to the nitty gritty is the horizon that we see where the sky meets the earth the curve of the earth tjump and you said i don't care i don't care if it was in your argument i'm asking you if the horizon is the curve of the earth this is back and forth tjump you know how that works right yeah so i presented an argument okay great it's the horizon the geometric curve of the earth wait so i presented an argument that proves the world is round i didn't say anything about the horizon i don't care about the horizon because i can prove it in this way i don't need to prove it in every way so in this way with radio we can prove the world is globe hundred percent now if you don't understand radio that's fine you can't contest the argument now if you want a video i can provide you a video uh bouncing radio saying bouncing radio off the moon guide video okay here we go we got videos bouncing radio off the moon hackaday here we go ham radio just how to do it hold on there's videos of king kong climbing the statue of liberty with a girl in his hand bro so you got a video that makes it real you asked for a video i gave you a video i'll give you a video you you're not showing me you doing anything tjump do you ever get off your clam couch no i live on the clam you said you did it where's the evidence of you doing it tjump if this is what we're going to talk about and you don't want to talk about the horizon because you're scared of the horizon so so nathan i presented an argument or evidence that the world proves the world is round so if you can't refute that evidence then i have won the debate i've proved the world is round tjump saying i don't have video of me doing it personally like i can get video of me doing it personally is that what you would require if i have video of me doing personally does that mean i win because i can i can get it you don't show anything period but please don't interrupt me okay tjump i'm asking you i'm telling you i'm not radar specialist never use radar apparently you're a radar specialist it proves us to go great i'm a dumb flirt let's move on to maybe the horizon when we look at the horizon tjump is that the curve of the earth yes or no wait a minute so so remember i have the positive position here so so i present evidence and you have to counter that evidence so if you're just admitting that i'm right around moderator are we just gonna go around around once i have to be fair nathan we gotta we gotta go around nathan we do have to get tom as well nathan you're interrupting me now nathan we do have to give him a chance to finish i promise we'll come right back to you for a couple minutes as well so nathan as you said in the beginning you're the one who said tjump's going first because he's holding the positive positions so how debate works is the positive position presents evidence and you have to address that evidence if you say i'm ignorant of the topic and have no idea that means you can't counter the evidence and my evidence wins this holds so you would have to present some reason to think that my evidence is false saying i haven't presented it i can present it to you there are plenty of youtube videos and guides that literally explain this and if you want i can make a recording of myself doing this at the university too that's easy to produce um so that's what you need i can i can easily provide that but you haven't actually addressed my evidence are you are you saying that it's false because you haven't seen me do it are you are you saying i'm lying or or that all of these youtube videos every single one of them is lying and every one of these guys that you can build yourself are lying is that your argument nathan because if it's not and these are true then your worldview is proven false so so why do you think this evidence doesn't prove your worldview false we'll give you a couple of minutes to respond even yeah can we see the evidence tjump yes this is going to prove the earth a globe yes that's what the debate's about right your flat or is the earth a globe great yes so so here it is if james could you pull it up and show it on screen and bouncing radio signals off the moon uh just it's the first youtube image you should come up with i want to prove the earth uh so so radar works by you bounce the radio signals off things and it gives you the shape size speed location of the things and you can bounce radio signals off of a mirror like the moon and then have it come back and hit the earth and it'll tell you the size and the shape and the distance of the earth too so you do you don't know what radio is in general right yeah but you're bouncing off the moon and then you tell me it tells you the shape of the earth yes so so if you bounce radio signals off one thing and hits another thing it can then bounces off that other thing too and so it can tell you the size of that thing too okay so you're bouncing off the moon then bouncing off the earth and then and then catching the radar and and that's what you're doing yes so there's these things called multiple radar stations all over the world and you can send signals between them like you can bounce it off the moon and then it goes back and talks to them and then they can send the signal and it bounces off the moon and comes back to you and you can send the signal to the moon and it bounces back to yourself so yes you can literally measure the shape of the earth by bouncing radio signals off the moon into yourself that is that is the thing yes it's like radar it's like two ships bouncing radar off of an island you can you yes it's called triangulation all right let's see the evidence can james did you did you find the video bouncing radio signals off the moon so it is a challenge what i'm doing is it is hard for me to pull this up without the stream buffering if you are able to pull it up on your side tom and share your screen that makes it easier for me okay james can you find my evidence for me please is your whole argument bro yeah that's my whole argument james james do a google search because that's literally the evidence uh sure um let's see oh wait want to remind you folks in the meantime our guests are linked in the description and we are excited for many juicy upcoming debates and that screen share is ready right now so here's a guide of the guys teaching you how to bounce radio signals off the moon with exactly the metrics and how to do it the equipment to build it here's their device they build it in front of you and they bounce it off things and talk to people with this thing and they can measure the distance to the moon and back very simply this is super easy anybody can do this this is not like super expensive equipment this is stuff you can do with car batteries and it's a computer uh parts and super easy so they bounce the signals off the moon somewhere around the end so they this is they do it they get the numbers back on their computer thing right there so in that they did in fact bounce the radio signals off the moon with the time it takes how far the moon away is 20 250 000 miles they got the numbers right whoo they did it they proved it that that's the moon is 250 000 miles away it is the correct size and shape and they communicated with people on the other side of the planet and got the numbers right so they know the planet is round two this is really really simple stuff anybody can do this you can build this in your backyard it costs less than 10 grand go for it there you go you got your proof Nathan somebody literally did this well if anyone was actually impressed by that t-jump obviously hasn't tested the earth himself or done any of this he just keep saying you can do it where was the evidence ursa gloam in that video bro was the numbers so how radio signals work wait Nathan so slow down so how a radio signal works is it bounces a signal it sends a signal out it hits an object and it comes back and then a computer gives you a number and the number tells you how far away the object is what the speed of the object is uh where the signal is coming from those kinds of things so it the evidence is the numbers Nathan that's how science works it's not like they're going to show you a picture of everything what they do is they show you the numbers the math because that's what science is it's math and the math is the evidence so yes this is literally bouncing radio signals off of the moon so we know exactly how far away it is we know exactly the size and shape of it we know exactly where the signals are going and we can transmit and receive signals and triangulate the shape of the earth doing this this is very simple like what which part of this isn't making sense to you i'm not getting it tjump what were the numbers what were the exact numbers like i i could go back and check them like what why do you need to know the exact this is supposed to be your proof this is super easy to do anyone can do this and you don't know the numbers why would i need to know the numbers to to build a ham radio and to bounce signals off the moon like you want the exact numbers that you should get when you build this like this is not hard to find i thought this was your evidence tjump what was the numbers that prove the earth is a globe bro like you have dude probably 400 people watching surely you've got some numbers no i don't need any numbers that's not how arguments work you don't need numbers nathan like you can do the numbers on your own i'm literally telling you how to do the experiment for yourself to find the numbers yourself i don't need to give you the exact numbers like who cares what the numbers are i'm literally telling you here's exactly how you prove the earth is round it's easy to do you can do it in your backyard you can do all the math yourself and find the numbers and you're going to get the results that the world is round like i don't need to provide you the numbers nathan i just gave you the entire method and how to prove the world is round for yourself like is there's there a problem with that method nathan that do radio waves not work does triangulation not work where is the problem in this in this chain of reasoning nathan go ahead okay are you asking questions because you ask like 10 questions at once and and i don't know when you're done so are you done sure great moderator are you familiar with what a burden of proof reversal fallacy is you're asking me yes are you familiar with a burden of proof reversal fallacy i don't i think people often is over like overuse the term fallacy and it's not what i'm into but i i understand like flipping the burden of proof like okay so when he says you can do the test that is a perfect poster child stereotype example for burden of proof reversal fallacy where t-jump and he blindly believes people on youtube he doesn't have any of the numbers for hasn't verified it and then tells me nay it's super easy it costs less than ten thousand dollars you can go do it as if everyone just has under ten thousand dollars laying around to go shoot radar waves off the moon and somehow confirm earth's a glow that i mean are we going to spend the entire day on radar that he hasn't tested or can we move to a topic that i've tested for the last five years well i have tested it's i told you before this is something i have done i don't have if you want i can make a youtube video of doing it too but remember the reason i'm using this example is because the flurfs i don't mean that as a pejorative if it is i apologize the the flat earthers claim that they want an example of something that they themselves can do so i'm giving you an example of something you yourself can do because that's what you asked for in every single debate you want something that you can do so i'm giving you something that you can do that's relatively cheap you can rent one for a lot less than ten thousand if you need money you can ask uh reds rhetoric he will give you the money to test this for yourself um so this so the reason i'm giving you something that you can do is because that's what you ask for in every debate nathan i'm not i'm not trying to shift the burden of proof here i've given you the evidence i've given you the methodology i've given you the external evidence the videos where you can literally see the calculations and how they do this themselves they have it available uh but that's not what you care about you never care about those things because you don't trust them you want something you can test yourself and that's what i provided you called a burden of proof reversal fallacy you can't show me any evidence of you testing it you keep saying how easy it is for everyone to test it and you can go do it literally a burden of proof reversal fallacy so we're going to move on from that burden of proof reversal fallacy that t-jump doesn't know the numbers for because i can't test it live in front of 400 people for you to confirm with the moon that the floor we walk on is curving in all directions so we're going to move on to the next topic t-jump are you ready uh i didn't present any other evidence so i don't know why you're bringing up other evidence like you have to refute what i said like if there is right because because i did remember i'm the one bringing up the positive place as you said in my intro you said t-jump's doing the opening because he has the positive position that the earth is round so i presented my evidence the earth is round you saying you don't like that isn't a counter argument so you'd have to show there's some philosophical error in the methodology i used here saying that i didn't present the numbers reg reticus present the numbers to you number of times you don't accept the numbers so it's a waste of time for me to present the numbers to you but what i can do is i can tell you how you can test this for yourself which is literally what you ask for in every video so unless you can show there's some philosophical problem with using radar to measure the distance of the moon and then to triangulate the size of the earth and the shape of the earth if you think that's impossible or you think there's some kind of problem with that then that would be a good counter argument to present if radar works exactly how we think radar works and we can use radar off the moon which is demonstrably true then it's pretty easy to know you could calculate the shape of the earth doing this because it's it's how radar works like do you think radar doesn't work can you hear us nathan are you done bro what i think he said okay he just keeps asking me if i do if i don't think radar works james j tolin who has 20 000 subscribers said he became a flat earther looking at data from radar because he was getting information working for the government that that would debunk the globe model guys very sensitive information he literally like couldn't even put on his youtube but so radar doesn't prove you live on a globe you have no evidence first you said you didn't know the numbers you didn't need to give them to me then you said red rhetoric has given him to me numerous times i just dismissed the numbers okay so you don't know the numbers so don't say i dismissed the numbers i'm asking you what the numbers are and you still haven't given any numbers you say you can go do the test i don't know if you know this t-jump but we're in the middle of the debate with like 400 people watching i'm not just going to go build a $10,000 radar system in the backyard for the next three days while everyone's waiting on the debate so james can we move to another topic please i'm over otherwise i'm done i'm done if you guys want to move to another topic we can well again my topic so my argument isn't about the numbers it's about the philosophical methodology here are you saying that radar doesn't work is it if radar works if we can bounce radar off the moon let's give him a chance and we'll talk about that later we we can switch into the other topic but i do want to give him a chance to finish this and then we can move on to the next one if you want so so my argument is is that if radar works in the way that we know it works and if we can bounce radar off the moon and if triangulation works we can then use those three things to calculate the shape of the earth accurately and we've done so here's a method that you can test it too the question is is do you think any of those methodologies radar bouncing radar off the moon or triangulation or any of those false or any of those because if they're not then we've already proven that the world is round and you can confirm this yourself so the question is is do you think any of those are false yes or no james are we moving on to the next topic now i'd like you to answer the question then sure i've already answered it 10 times james are we moving on to the next topic now this is not your turn to talk to you jump if you don't want to answer that's okay we can go to the next time i'm not moving forward into the radar works you haven't given us any numbers that prove bouncing radar off the moon proves the surface of earth curves in all directions so since this is a flat first globe debate i'd like to talk after 45 minutes about the surface of earth can we talk about the surface of earth james wait so my question was is it's not t-jumps not your turn hold on all right so hold on Nathan Nathan quiet so uh tom he asked for your numbers if you don't have the numbers that's what his response is apparently so well he answered the first part of my question so i asked if radar works he said yes that's great i'm happy with that can we bounce radar off the moon if he doesn't know that's fine too and does triangulation work so those are the three parts of my question i want those are the last two or the things i'm looking for can we bounce radar off the moon or does he think we can't and does triangulation radar triangulation work those are the two things i'm looking for here it's literally broken record so next topic james that's up to you yeah great i want to talk about the surface of earth because he asserts it's curving in all directions and when i was young they said boats go over the curve of the earth now i have a very simple question for you doesn't take a ten thousand dollar thing in the backyard that you don't have any you don't have any numbers for is the horizon the curve of the earth yes or no i don't know what that means is the horizon the curve of the earth those are two different things the horizon is where the the atmosphere in the sky meets the earth when you can see it the curve of the earth is something significantly more complicated than that okay so what you're saying is when we look at the horizon that's not the geometric curve of the earth right it's just your eyes it's the way your eyes interpret stuff excellent boats don't go over the curve excellent so jen uh can i ask why stars twinkle on the heliocentric model stars twinkle yeah why do they is twinkle on the heliocentric model you know what do you mean by twinkle i mean when you look at them they're twinkling twinkle twinkle little star have you ever heard of that song you mean like getting getting brighter and dimmer that's is that what you mean by twinkle you don't know what twinkle means do i need to look up the definition of twinkle for you live in front of 400 please i would appreciate what do you mean by twinkle is that just no problem i'll get you the definition so so is that what you mean that it's just getting brighter and dimmer is that what you mean by twinkle i'll get you the definition t-jump so there's no confusion here okay okay define twinkle for t-jump okay it's shine with a gleam that varies repeatedly between bright and faint so t-jump i'll ask again why do stars twinkle on your model lots of different reasons some of them uh change density and so the amount of energy they're releasing is increasing and decreasing some of them get blocked by gas clouds so it decreases the amount of light that they receive some of them get blocked by like eclipses like when the moon passes in front of the sun it becomes dimmer there's lots of different reasons okay so did you know that mainstream science asserts its turbulence in the atmos that would be one of the reasons yes different air densities couldn't block amounts of the light yeah excellent excellent t-jump so turbulence in the atmos causes lights in the distance to flicker or twinkle right yes all right great how come jupiter doesn't twinkle jupiter isn't emitting light jupiter isn't emitting light i mean when i look at it with my p1000 it sure looks like the light is the iss emitting light because the iss doesn't twinkle it's the sun emitting light because the sun definitely doesn't twinkle t-jump the sun does twinkle like when the moon comes in front of it it dims and when it moves away from it it brightens that's what twinkle means the reason that stars are so far away the twinkle is barely noticeable is because of how far away they are uh jupiter does twinkle in the fact that yes things pass in front of it and decrease the amount of brightness that it emits or reflects from the sun and so it does decrease in brightness jupiter does twinkle but not like something doesn't pass in front of the entire thing to make it look like it's dimming enough for you to notice it can you show me the sun twinkling yes it's called an eclipse that's the sun being blocked by the moon okay i don't know if you know this but every night the stars twinkle all the time if the sun twinkles you don't need the moon to block it in order for it to twinkle so can you come in sun twinkling during show me twinkling during eclipse when is it twinkle during eclipse i watch the eclipses so the definition of twinkle you just read is that there are changes in brightness and intensity of the light when the sun is blocked by the moon that's a change in brightness and intensity of the lights that would be twinkling that's the same kind of twinkling yep but t-jump we already asserted that turbulence in the atmos causes the twinkling of the stars now the atmos is always moving around above your head it's an homogenous and anisotropic it's always changing and moving in all directions so why doesn't the sun twinkle all the time because you asserted earlier things twinkle because of turbulent atmos above our head well the sun always has turbulent atmos between you and it uh you don't even think about the turbulent atmos okay introducing the eclipse is a new reason no i started i started with that so i started with there's lots of reasons literally what i said first there are lots of reasons and then you brought up the turbulence which is one reason too so if there is something with not a lot of light and different air densities can reflect the not a lot of light very easily it can make it twinkle yes so like a flashlight in the distance if you get fog or something it'll make the flashlight look like it's going to twinkle if you have a big lighthouse a lot of fog isn't going to make it look like it's going to twinkle because it's not enough to reflect enough of a light to dim it so that your eyes don't see it anymore so it's just pretty simple like there's not as much light coming from stars and so it takes less to cause them to dim there's a lot of light coming from the sun so it takes more to cause it to dim okay great so uh you know what local light illumination is uh nope okay when you see a city off in the distance at night the entire horizon isn't illuminated there's a local light illumination if you ever drive to vegas at night you can see vegas all lit up it doesn't light up the entire horizon now i'm curious to jump when we observe a sunset does the sun light up the entire horizon or is the light from the sun small and localized like las vegas uh the entire horizon i would imagine oh really the entire horizon is lit up after the sun sets after that's interesting after the sunset or during the sunset you think the sun illuminates the entire horizon left to right equally are you serious have you ever looked at the sunset bro do you ever leave that couch yes so the the sunset is literally the the the the leave the shadow of the sun where it stops emitting light is the entire point of the horizon so obviously like where you're standing could affect the shape of the sunset like if you're standing on the horizon you could actually watch it move like the shadow could come and pass you so so but it would if you were standing perpendicular to it yeah it would light up the whole horizon okay well that's not what we observe anyone can observe that it's a local light illumination similar to vegas off in the distance when the sun sets it doesn't illuminate the entire horizon the sun is not bigger than earth it's small and localized that's why we have corpuscular rays teacher i'm curious are sun rays parallel are they converging uh what do you mean when the sun rays hit the earth are they parallel to one another or are they converging it's it's a wave it's light so they're waves their waves are they traveling in straight lines parallel to one another like aerostophanies said with his well experiment waves or are they converging so so they're waves they don't wave on traveling straight line yes okay so light from the sun is not parallel aerostophanies didn't prove the earth's above that we're saying i have no idea what you're asking because he says they were parallel aerostophanies asserted sun rays are parallel okay what is i don't understand how this is relevant to the topic like what why why are you saying that like yes he allegedly measured go ahead he allegedly measured the earth two thousand years ago you haven't heard of aerostophanies yes what is what does this have to do with light being a wave or a particle you're the one talking about waves and particles bro i just asked you if they're parallel or converging t-jump and you keep changing the topic diverting rambling asking 10 questions at a time without stopping and letting me answer and then interrupting me really bro good job i haven't asked any questions yet i don't think so what by parallel and converging what i interpret you to mean is that like are they straight lines like particles or do they converge like waves and interact with each other and so that's that's how i interpreted the question did you mean something different by that question did you just say are they straight lines like particles particles are straight lines particles moving straight lines like if you have just a particle there's just like a rock and you throw it it can travel in a straight line in space yes rock is a particle rock is an object made of particles if you take a single particle okay listen real carefully okay when the song comes on to earth do the rays go like this or do they go like this they go like this parallel this is parallel right parallel to one another or do the sun rays go like this not parallel intersecting converging it's a it's a wave like if you drop a rock in water and you see it it's wave so i don't understand your question so light light is a wave are the waves parallel or are they converging i don't know what that i don't know how you could have parallel waves i don't understand what that means it's like water if you drop i don't understand what i know you're saying there so hold on there's too much interrupting too much interrupting all right so so we're gonna have tom a chance to respond a minute or two and then we'll do the same for you nathan so whether or not light is a wave or a particle doesn't change the effectiveness of aerosol in these experiments so i don't know i don't know why you think that matters i don't i'm not following what you're saying here you just keep saying is lights converging or parallel and then somehow assuming that this matters to the aerosol in these tests i just don't think you understand how light works it's a wave it doesn't it's it's like water it moves everywhere so i don't understand how like did you explain your connection to aerosol in the light being straight or parallel thing i don't i don't get it i know you don't get it audience i want you to get this okay i'm asking t jump if the rays from the sun go like this and are parallel or if they go like this and are converging and we've spent like five minutes on it and he's still confused okay so we'll just move on did you know uh how hot's the thermosphere according to your religion outside uh layer of the sun above the sun that it's hotter than the surface of the sun the thermosphere you don't know what that is nope what is the thermosphere it's hotter than the surface of the sun what is the thermosphere is that you're asking the layer of the outside of the sun is that what it is or is this according to your religion we have a earth the air allegedly layers out okay and we have something called the thermosphere i was asking you if you know how hot it is in the thermosphere fahrenheit or celsius either one works nope no idea what what is the temperature okay roughly 4 000 degrees fahrenheit so do you were talking about we can send satellites anyone can do this we have satellites in space do you know what metals the for that satellites aluminum that's one of them good guess and steel you don't know any other ones well titanium gold gold copper so do you know the melting temperature for aluminum t jump 100 and something do you know the melting temperature for aluminum 100 and something the melting temperature for aluminum is 100 and something degrees celsius yeah i think so are you serious is that not right what is what is the melting temperature for okay great well you just told you're breaking up i can't i think it's a lot higher than that but t jump t jump you did the thermosphere is 4 000 degrees they can't send metal that melts at 100 and something degrees celsius through a 4 000 degree medium uh yeah so so they do it during the when this planet is blocking the rays from the sun so it's not that hot so you're saying they launch them at night so the thermosphere is not hot yeah so it's only hot if it's being exposed to radiation to the sun if it's not being exposed from the sun it's not hot so they go to the areas that are not hot where it's being blocked by the electromagnetic radiation from the earth the electromagnetic field yes did you know that thermosphere is a layer of earth's atmosphere did you know that and it goes all the way around the earth sure it has different temperatures different okay and it's a specific it's a specific temperature it ranges from like 3000 to 4000 degrees uh no so so if like if the sun is being blocked by the earth then the temperature drops significantly t jump you didn't even know what the temperature was bro sure i asked you and you didn't even know sure but i know the temperature is caused by the sun yes heat heat is generated by the sun heat sun emits heat sun heats things up if blocked by the sun gets cooled down very simple very simple right t jump okay i got a very simple question for you when you move away from a fire which is hot does it get hotter or colder colder colder right excellent now the sun's above our heads when you fly in an airplane you're between the sun and someone on the ground right t jump sure okay let's say it's roughly 900 degrees on the ground do you have any idea how cold it is in the airplane uh very cold around very cold now interesting t jump you just told me when you move away from a fire it gets colder and that the sun is hot but the airplane moved closer to the sun and the airplane got cold yes do you notice a contradiction there t jump or do i need to explain it nope there's yeah it's a big contradiction no no because heat is maintained when it hits something and warms something up there's this thing called the ground which gets heated up like an oven and so like if you're in an oven and you're close to the thing that's trapping all the heat it's going to be hot like the fire so the fire is actually like the ground because it's absorbing the heat the atmosphere there's nothing there to get hot so that's nothing there to radiate heat so it's cold okay you just said there's nothing in the atmosphere i don't know if you notice but the atmosphere is full gas um so that definitely can heat up yeah you agree gas can heat up right t jump yeah okay great so gas in the gas gas heat up like cement cement makes things harder so the sun hits cement cement heats up like an oven and it stores the heat and air does not store the heat it's a very bad conductor for heat so cement is hotter than gases when it's exposed to the sun okay but t jump you just told me when you move away from heat it gets colder yes unless there is something trapping the heat like cement which is going to make it hotter so if you hear something trapping the heat it'll be warm and if you're not near something trapping the heat it will be cold so cement traps heat so if you're near the ground it's warm go ahead so you're saying that the heat comes from the ground not the sun yes the rays come from the sun and then the sun the rays hit the earth and then the earth stores the heat so it traps the heat it gets heated up whereas the air does not get heated up as much and so it's easier to store the heat in the cement and the ground which can maintain the heat and so it's warmer on the ground than it is high in the air because the air doesn't have anything to store the heat oh interesting because you said earlier that the sun was hot and then i asked you when you move away from something that's hot do you get hotter or colder and you said colder then when i said when you go on the airplane how hot or cold is it and you said very cold when it's 100 degrees on the surface of the earth t-jump i find that very interesting it kind of sounds like you're agreeing with me that that the heat isn't actually coming from the sun it's coming from the earth so so if you put a rock in a fire it gets hot right and then if you take the rock out and put it over to the side it's still hot so if you walk from the fire to the rock you'll actually get colder because you're moving away from the fire and you'll get hotter because you're moving closer to the rock because there's another source of heat it's it's trapped the heat from the fire so if you're moving away from the fire you get colder but then you move closer to the rock you get hotter so if the big rock is floating in space and it's hot and you move away from the hot rock it gets colder even though you're moving tiny tiny bit closer to the fire are you done yes all right cool have you heard of Ken Wheeler mr magnetism he's got 200 000 subs no okay well he did a test with the flur do you know what flur is no okay pizza picks up a heat signature like kind of a terminator when he looks through his gosses he can pick up heat signatures and tell them bad guys are like behind walls and behind bushes and stuff um so check this out t-jump he tested moonlight with a flur which picks up a heat signature and verified now this guy's a globehead he verified moonlight is measurably cold colder than the shade did you know that uh no yeah i've tested it too you can do it for 30 bucks with a laser thermometer moonlight's measurably four to ten degrees colder than the sun depending on how what time of year it is how close it is and like what phase it's in um so yeah you should test that sometime cold moonlight i don't i don't know what that even means so okay do you know what a sun analyzes nope don't don't understand how well your previous argument is in any way relevant to anything we've said so far so so let's say that this this like it's dumb to say that the moonlight itself is colder no the moonlight itself is not colder the moonlight is just light and it can heat things up if it has energy and if it doesn't have energy it can't heat things up so but it's obviously gonna heat things up more than the shade is for sure so but i don't understand how this is relevant to anything i said or that you've said at all you just you just said it's gonna heat things up more than the shade and i just told you the shade is hotter than the moonlight moonlight is cold you could test it with the flur which you didn't even know what it was or you could do a laser thermometer which i've done it's 30 you have no idea what you're talking about let's move on to sun analyzer you know what a sun analyzes no let's move on to what this has to do with the topic you just said that the shade is going to be colder than the moonlight it's the opposite you haven't tested i was just letting you know you should go test it do you know what it's not the only way i'm still still not seeing how this is relevant to the topic is this just random fact week like would you like some random fact that you don't know anything because i had plenty of them what is this okay let me let me clue you in on why this is relevant let me clue you in real quick please you're confused again so on your model the moon allegedly 2160 miles in diameter which is six times six times 60 observe from the earth which has a circumference in statute miles of 21600 which is six times six times 600 they say that ball which back in the old testament was a false god they used to sacrifice children too they say that ball in space is reflecting sunlight now we just talked forever about how hot the sun is and how it heats things up and that it's not actually the the sun that's hot but the rays hit the concrete and heat the concrete up right well if the rays are hitting the moon and heating the moon up moonlight wouldn't be measurably cold you could test it with a flur or a laser thermometer ken wheeler's a globehead and he verified this for us i've also tested it myself it was on my old youtube channel that got deleted if i find the video i'll make sure i get it right back up i'll probably just do the test again that probably easier but yeah do you understand how t-jump are you not confused nope because this was pretty much pretty easily explained on google like you can find that yeah air contains heat it measures heat more than the light itself does like i don't understand why this is relevant to the earth being a globe or flat like yes this is an explained phenomenon that we know about in science that's very easy to explain what does this have to do with that's right you're still confused so we'll move on you know what i think you're still confused t-jump i tried to explain i'm still confused because you haven't explained how this is anyway relevant to the world being flat like i've already disproved your argument like you can't in any way address the evidence i presented which proves the world is around and that you yourself can test to show the world is around and you're just bringing up random facts that don't have anything to do with the topic like okay well that was a cool burden of proof reversal fallacy again telling me i can go test your evidence why are you talking in the middle of me talking bro again well there's no such thing as a burden of proof reversal fallacy there's a burden of proof fallacy as i think is what you mean to say t-jump do you know what a sunny aniline is nope no you don't okay well if you track the sun for a year it makes a loop a figure eight loop it's actually got a smaller loop in the north and a larger loop in the south and the points in the north are not equidistant to the points in the south now the reason that is is because we live on a flat earth with the sun rotating around polar center moving between the tropics alternating every six months that's why we have seasons that's why we have sun anilimas that's why the fauna in the forest drastically different in the north than it is in the south in the south it's pretty much just ice and penguins in the north that's where the reindeer are you get trees and all sorts of other vegetation and plants and animal life not happening in Antarctica also on average Antarctica is 50 degrees colder than the north now if we were tilted 23.4 which you subtract that from 90 it's 66.6 we're alone at all tilted in space the heat would distribute rather evenly 93 million miles away from the sun that's so hot according to t-jump but we would also have equal fauna and flora on each side and pretty much the same temperature variations but we don't i'm sorry you didn't know what a san anilima was t-jump did you have any other arguments we could go over yeah mostly what you just said is just delusional like there's a magnetic field around the earth which changes the way the sun heats the earth so obviously it's not going to heat equally that's that's dumb um but anyway that still doesn't in any way disprove my evidence that does prove the world is round with radio waves like anyone can do this you're making a bunch of nonsense arguments so again like i've presented evidence you just you're ignorant of it you can't you're not an expert so you if you don't understand it that's up to you i you should go research and understand it since it proves your world be false and you bring up random facts that don't in any way have anything to do with what i said isn't evident against what i said and yeah i literally explained all these things to you so if you don't understand them that's your problem like i don't care like yeah my magnetic radiation magnetic fields explains the differences in heats of certain areas of the earth very simple not hard to understand yes moving further away from a fire gets colder unless you're moving closer to a rock which is hotter very simple to understand like none of this is really complicated and none of it in any way is evidence for the world being flat and none of it refutes the proof that i gave that the world is round so i don't know why you're bringing any of this random stuff up it's like random dictionary facts like okay yeah i know you're confused all right well let's just move on a question to answer because t jumps too confused have a conversation with we can jump into the q and a and folks we also want to remind you that our guests are linked to the description we appreciate our guests and as always want to ask that you would attack the arguments instead of the person which 99.9 of you i have to give you a high five for doing that so well already and we're going to jump into those questions right now so thank you very much this question coming in from two moments since we have the 12 hour stream today it's hard for me to see like where the new questions come in and where the old questions are out or i should say from the last debate stop so this one coming in from timothy brice says t jump plus nathan equals epic thanks james appreciate that our pleasure bubblegum gun says let's see we got that one tim prior thanks for your question said all right i'm going to play a game we got that one that was from the last debate hold on there sam harris's bulldog thanks for your super chat side great win for t jump eliminative versus eliminative versus reductive materialism what are your thoughts t jump i'm really curious about your opinion on this topic i don't really have a position on a limited versus reduction of materialism like i think that it's pretty much up to the person it's just a philosophical position i think that until you make testable predictions one way the other it's just kind of philosophical meandering i prefer reductionism because it's worked more scientifically um but i don't think like we can we should eliminate like consciousness right eliminate the idea that consciousness just doesn't exist and it's a misconception of some kind so gotcha i don't i wouldn't say that i have a strong position one way or the other jordan gerard thanks for your question says my daughter calls you poopy jump is that an inside joke can i can i get that on my shirt next up tim prior thank you very much says i like how he says we say flat earthers are too dumb to figure it out like it's an insult but flat earthers claim billions and all of science are too dumb to figure it out nathan response no it's not true at all dude lots of people are waking up i've been sharing flat earth for five years when i used to go out and do activism one out of a hundred people would even listened to what the hell i'm saying now it's like one in five people one in ten people are already flat earth there's my buddy trevor went out in miami first eight people he shared flat earth with already knew the earth was flat so i don't know what that guy's talking about me at all gotcha this one coming in from k-124 says nathan please explain the data from satellite oceanography it clearly shows the oceans are not flat please try better than saying cool story well that is a cool story but we have abyssal planes which cover half the ocean seafloor and i don't know why we're talking about the seafloor when the surface of the ocean is not curving in any directions we have frozen lakes specular reflections so as can now we can see the statue of liberty from 60 miles away i mean did you hear the opener bro come on this one coming in from pancake of destiny says your fellow flat earther proved the rotation of the earth nathan why do you disagree hashtag thanks bob well that's interesting that like it's 2021 and globers think the only evidence of a rotating earth came from a flat earther who's still a flat earther and they didn't detect or measure earth rotating they actually detected light deviation now sagmac who invented the sagmac interferometer that's why his names in the sagmac interferometer he said it was actually the vortex of the ether causing the deviation in the light now if you're gonna claim you know more than the guy who invented the interferometer that's a cool story bro but i'm gonna go with sagmac also bob doesn't claim he proved rotation bob knows what's up you're literally just making stuff up and you're scientifically illiterate this one from kango24 says nathan and by the way we do want to both in both directions we want to ask that the audience as well as the speakers you nathan and tom not insult each other kango24 says nathan please give a detailed explanation of what electromagnetic wake is please try better than quote google is your friend brah yeah of course well they um this is in relation to why hurricane spin in opposite directions now all you got to do is like take a beer that shot foam on the top and you pour it down the side of your glass and the foam will spin in opposite directions it's a property of fluid dynamics now as the sun traverses around the equator above the equator between the tropics it obviously affects particles in the air and the ground heats it up so there would be sort of a wake behind the sun similar to how when a boat is traveling through water and one side of the wake goes to the left and the other side of the wake goes to the right now hopefully you're happy with that and all you globe heads that don't understand electromagnetic wakes can stop asking me about it this one coming in from tim priors says imagine that no flat earth proof once again just talking about the globe and cherry picking quotes from people that don't claim that the earth is flat nathan any thoughts i don't know if you missed the opener but we had the statue of liberty visible from 60 miles out we have a geographic range table from the us coast guard the f a a states which is why we use gyroscopes they keep their rigidity in space that their planes are flying level over a non-rotating earth you can look at a specular reflection you can look at laser observations but ladies and gentlemen globers don't want evidence or facts they just want to blindly believe someone else did the science you can do it too which was she jumps entire argument this entire debate a burden of proof reversal for some youtube video he wanted james to pull up next up sleepy dan says yes we experience coriolis coriolis effect affects all the time it's called wind that's when the air moves at a different speed slash direction than the earth i don't know that person's confused about what coriolis is uh they don't it's not the wind okay just so you know next up tim prier says kind of like the floorboard of your car does not move under a drone if you flew one inside of it oh that let me read yeah if the car is not moving the drone also doesn't move so that works on both models not never close question the answer says there is still no curvature measured anywhere ever t-jump your thoughts there's curvature measured in lots of places the surface of the ocean curves proven the bottom of the ocean curves the surface of the earth curves we can measure curvature in pretty much everywhere you just have to use real equipment and real members and not make up members got you this one coming in from tim prier says except that our star charts have shown polaris to move nathan they say love how he's been told this but keeps repeating the same stuff what are you talking about bro i went and filmed polaris through a hole in the george guidestones which they built 40 years ago and and the stars still line up to the pyramids which were built 2000 years ago orions built so you have no clue what you're talking about bro you're just making stuff up our star charts our religious doctrine our paper says look polaris moves no it doesn't i've been doing time lapses for five years stationary to all the other stars which are also constellations don't forget according to your religion all the stars move so you have to deny not only polaris is stationary but that we have constellations so welcome to the clown world that's the globe earth this one room kango 24 says so nathan cannot use the genetic fallacy as t-jump has done stuff earth's atmosphere is not adjacent to a vacuum we have a gradient moderator where that gradient ends it would be adjacent to a vacuum and you can demonstrate that it's literally just a dumb belief that you have not only has nasa been caught thousands of times faking space it violates the second law of thermodynamics but the sky is a map and a clock polaris astro archaeology 88 constellations i mean you want to blindly believe that we're blasting through the milky way universe at a half million miles an hour while gravity pulls everything together and you can't prove that we have stellar parallax it's constellations and a pole star that lines up with rocks in georgia i mean give me a break guys you just got to have eyes to see and ears to hear honestly the truth isn't for everyone it's just people who have eyes to see and ears to hear so this one coming in from tim prier says that's a lie nasa does not say the moon is in our atmosphere they say the same of our atmosphere reaches to the moon stop cherry picking the article and read the whole thing nathan all right i'll look it up james go ahead on the next question this next question coming in from question the answers says this is for you tom 6.3 million dollars a day and 265 thousand dollars an hour nasa gets from us that alone is disgusting anyone who stops ridiculing and seeks truth sees this uh not really so scientific institutions should get more money from us the what's disgusting is the fact that CEOs and companies get significantly more than that like nasa only gets like two percent of the federal budget or something very small so a point two percent point two percent of the federal budget so it's really not like we should give more money to science because that's why everything works if we were using flat earth logic we would still be in the stone age so the whole point here is that we should be giving money to science and it's disgusting that we don't give more not that we are giving some to it the batman says okay yeah that's i think that one's just trolling not gonna read that tim prier says claims the earth is flat has not measured it himself and shown the measurements what a hypocrite so much for you must do it yourself argument yeah i'm done at the salt and sea the salt flats in utah i tested at chicago it was on my old channel it just got deleted sorry i'm battling censorship and then also i tested in florida from 12 foot observer height i saw water hitting the shore of the ocean five miles out when the horizon should be four miles out so dude you just don't even know what you're talking about i have better evidence than the stuff i've done like specular reflections gyroscopes keep the rigidity in space the way they make glasses according to fluid statics you just have to redefine level and say level means curve when the definition of level is free of bans curse and irregularities synonyms are flat plumb flush straight so you don't even have straight on your model no wonder so many glovers can't figure out whether they like boys or girls it's very apparent next up k-04 says let's see tim prier says except oh we got that and we got this one soldier science says nathan please claim this ten dollars from modern day debate only if you invest it into your first chair of vac q not nasa but the rocket lab merge stock cool story bro hey james can we share my screen real quick sure great so to the globe fundings say the earth's atmosphere doesn't extend beyond the moon well here from the esa earth's atmosphere stretches out to the moon earth's atmosphere stretches out to the moon and beyond that's the esa european space agency guys space dot com surprise earth's atmosphere extends far beyond the moon physics dot orc earth's atmosphere stretches out to the moon and beyond newsweek earth's atmosphere extends far beyond the moon so in the opener go back and watch it when t-jump says we can bounce radar off things in space like the moon he has no freaking clue what he's talking about period gotcha and moving on to this next question do appreciate it coming in from k-04 says nathan t-jump is correct a simple google search debunks the last five years of your claims not particularly addressing a uh argument of yours but bubblegum gun says nathan if earth is flat as is water why not make a tower one mile high use a large telescope and spot europe nathan just change it's human to be wrong i don't know what that guy's talking about because j tolin takes infrared way harder than one mile up he gets in airplanes and he can observe over a thousand miles from the airplane so again shout out j tolin go check him out that guy has no idea what he's talking about again google search so sad next up question the answer says the radio signals work on a flat earth to fact t-jump what they say that the radio signals work on a flat earth just as well fact no so triangulation literally doesn't work so as nathan said in his intro he said that the moon was not 250,000 miles away that's ridiculous based off of what he said and you can literally bounce radio waves off the moon and just count the time it takes and you can know it's 250,000 miles away so it doesn't work on any of the flat earth models demonstrably and you can also use triangulation to show the world's round using it it can't be explained on the flat earth unless you use magic leprechauns or something you got it this one coming in from josh wainer says nathan you were any research group of 125,000 people yet have no basic knowledge if radar i just said i'm not a specialist i'm not an expert at radar uh the largest radar system in russia that my buddy went on tour there and the lady giving the tour says you can hit the east coast of the us with this they do that bouncing the radar waves off the sky if you think ursa ball literally just said if you believe ursa ball that's how they do it they just bounce it off a non-existent barrier in the sky and then it goes down to the us now i'm sorry but they're just traveling laterally that's how the radar waves work got you on this one coming coming in from mike bill ars says did nathan find out what an electromagnetic wake is yet nathan google it will wait they want to know if you can define electromagnetic wake you already did that like 10 questions ago tim priors says where's the evidence of you physically measuring earth is flat nathan where is it where is it where is it yeah if you watch the clown world tour when i was in florida i was 12 feet off the ground and i saw water splashing against the shore 4.9 miles out well according to the globe earth which says we're 24,901 miles in circumference you do the math for the geometric horizon that would be 1.225 times the square root of the observer's height and feet should have been four miles out so just go watch the video bro saw my clown world tour video and i've done it in like nine states for the last five years like you guys just refuse to test it and even if i showed you just be like refraction it's just refraction you just it's the cloudiness and the molecules particles in the atmosphere lifting up the image which i don't know if you guys know this but when there's stuff in the air it's it's harder to see you don't see farther that's an inversion of reality just like everything with them they don't know what's up and what's down because up is according it's down according to people in australia and downs up according to people in america for people in australia it's literally an upside down world they've inverted everything i just wanted to add real quick i found nasa's definition of space which is 12 miles below the carmen line 62 miles above sea level which means the moon is in space next up thank you very much for your question this one coming in from tim prier says where's the evidence nope we got that michael dresden says all right i guess technically they're not personally attacking they say t jump with the reversal of burden of proof fallacy yes so there is no such thing as the reversal of burden of proof fallacy there is a burden of proof fallacy which is when you're reversing the burden of proof but there's no such thing as a reversing the burden of proof fallacy that's not a thing i think nathan's just confused on the terminology there so there is a burden of proof fallacy which is when you're changing the burden of proof that you have to say that the other person has to prove you wrong or whatever and that is a burden of proof fallacy and i was not doing that i was literally just providing the method that has already been demonstrated with a video where they have demonstrated it and so that is the real evidence why i've met my burden of proof and then i also said you can do this too that was kind of the point here is that because nathan and the flood earthers always say we want something we can do here is an example of this so it's not a burden of proof fallacy i've i've met it by already providing the examples gotcha and thank you very much for your question mic billar says nat why are you always so mad calm down it's just a youtube discussion bra you'll be alright bra i don't know if i seem mad i don't know i wasn't i just think it's goofy how glovers have to redefine flat and say it means curved and redefine level and say it means curved because that's literally what mctoon did in his argument with my friend flatter day saints t jump will literally say the moon's in space but then say the moon's in the atmosphere also like at the same time in the same breath so it's just kind of frustrating when you're just debating liars like blatant liars that contradict the can't say two sentences without the second one contradicting the first it's pathetic next up thank you very much for your question coming in from mic billar's we've got that one this one coming in from tim priers says flatterers are trying to convince people that billions and all of science are wrong that they're the only one smart enough to figure it out burden of proof is always on them yeah cool and you can go outside and test yourself everything i've talked about fluid statics we see too far the statute of liberties to us canals specular reflections i don't know if you guys have ever seen a reflection off a body of water but if you do get back to me and let me know if you think it's curving that's funny juicy tim priers says nathan and all flat earthers demand proof that earth is a globe when all the information is at their fingertips simply asked for measurements of flatness and you'll hear crickets nathan is this true no i already talked about the black swan uh the fact that we see too far specular reflections a geographic range table from the u.s coast guard the f a a says they fly over flat non-rotating earths i've seen chicago skyline which should have been completely hidden from new buffalo 49 miles away so i mean at glass how they make glass what are you talking about you guys don't listen to anything this is sad mike billard says nathan did you steal the p 1000 what is a p 1000 uh p 1000 is a handy camera but no i mean i don't really steal anything never got charged for stealing anything don't have a record of stealing anything no one has any evidence i've ever stolen anything honestly everything i need the creator freely gives me um as long as i try and do his will some one says bless is a man who walks not in the path of the unrighteous who doesn't stand with sinners or sit with the scornful um he'll be like a tree planted by the waters he will bear forth fruit in its season but it will not be so for the unjust their lives going to be full of calamity so yeah i mean i've had two p 900s and a p 1000 been a full-time flat earther for like two years um it's pretty cool i like what i do so got one there's still a camera andrew ruse says nathan fally fallacy this fallacy that reverse user reverse underhand forward eyelid leg bone fallacy listening and so they uh they don't approve of you your use of the word fallacy i think now mike billard says i want to see james twinkle i don't know what that means but mike billard says also nathan polaris declines one degree for every 111 kilometers south that you go this is a necessary and sufficient or i mean this is necessary and sufficient for a globe prove it wrong and we'll believe you well that's a perfect spoken like a true glober will believe you well i don't know if you knew this glober but things also descend towards the horizon as they move away from you on a flat earth i don't know if you've ever been on a really long street and looked at the street lights but the street lights in the distance appear smaller and lower than the street lights that are right next to you and above your head so congratulations welcome to flat earth gotcha and kaleb badfaith says t-jump isn't nathan right about stars twinkling because of turbulence in the atmosphere especially after you factor in alden's number uh alden's number isn't a real thing but technically yes there much of this twinkling in the stars is caused by air density changes in the atmosphere that is true it's not the only reason there's lots of other reasons next up k-04 says twinkle twinkle little star how i wonder what you are you are a big ball of hydrogen moderator then tim prior says have you measured the earth yourself nathan have you have you have you have you other people have done it have you hold on one second have you done it yourself have you done it yourself nathan's entire argument okay cool can we screen share again yeah great as light from a star races through our atmosphere which is a big question of fallacy gas has no inherent shape it bounces and bumps through the different layers bending the light before you see it since hot and cold layers of air keep moving the bending of light changes to which causes star's appearance to wobble or twinkle now none of that is the moon moving in front of things none of that is lots of reasons star twinkle ladies and gentlemen there is one reason according to globe earth priests that star's twinkle it's turbulence in our atmosphere now i don't know if you guys know it's the sun the well not any more than the moon's inner atmosphere but well then the iss good so what holds the uh gas to earth's atmosphere the gas to earth's surface t jump gravity oh really did you know in the iss they experience almost zero gravity because they're in space um but the moon is not in space it's in our atmosphere it extends far beyond the moon did you see all those articles i just quoted and pointed out five minutes i just i just put up the nasa definition of space which is 12 miles below the carbon line which is 62 miles above the surface of sea level which is space so that's even though that's also a part of the atmosphere it's also a part of space which is also a part of the solar system so so those aren't contradictions uh nathan you can be in the atmosphere and still be in space those are not the contradictory terms a part of the year's atmosphere is in space yes yeah but the people in the iss experience zero gravity they float around and they show you how the microphone spins with zero gravity but you just said that the atmosphere is held to earth by gravity yeah and the atmosphere extends beyond the moon yeah so they experience near zero gravity they don't experience zero gravity near zero gravity and so so they're slightly pulled towards the earth or slightly pulled towards the sun how's it work to jump right they're slightly pulled looks really like they're floating which is why the iss it has to orbit the earth because it's pulled towards the earth and if it didn't orbit it would just fall straight in oh yes they do experience gravity so there's gravity on the iss they're not free floating there there is gravity on the iss but it's not enough to cause them to be pulled towards the ground of the iss oh okay so it's negligible it's enough to hold the gas to earth surface but not pull down astronauts which have way more mass than gas particles right uh yeah so so it's it can hold things that are lighter in from further away because there's less gravity so if something's further away it takes less gravity to hold it if it's lighter if it's heavier it takes more gravity to hold it so if holding air in at a long distance is very easy because it's very light so the lighter it is easier it is to hold in with gravity because it takes less force gravity's not a force even according to your religion no gravity is literally one of the four fundamental forces it was superseded by Einstein he says it was the bending of spacetime in a pseudo pseudo-rimonian spacetime bro made up imaginary so gravity is the curvature of spacetime those are both forces i don't understand what your problem here is oh okay the curving of spacetime how do you curve spacetime t-jump space is nothing and time is a concept so you're telling me you curve a nothing concept no no space is a physical thing spacetime is a physical thing it exists it is a single kind of thing and there are different ways to manipulate it like there are with any fields like the electromagnetic field or the strong field yes spacetime so space has no physical properties you know that right uh what's spacetime is a physical thing yes has no physical properties it bends it's space the vacuum of space what physical properties does the vacuum of space have so spacetime is one thing space is just a generic human term to refer to the things outside of our atmosphere or close to the edge of our atmosphere spacetime is the actual thing that causes gravity it's the actual thing that exists and it is a physical thing so type in is spacetime physical so adding the word time which is a concept makes space a vacuum physical no no adding the the word time to the word space to make it a single word spacetime it's physical okay t-jump right on bro yeah it's forbs any more questions go down to the science ones that are right below you oh the science yeah wikipedia is your alma mater right here spacetime i was going to the one above that the physics the physics exchange so yeah it does the wikipedia says it's a mix physical phenomenon too so yeah that spacetime is a physical law yes four vectors and a physical not physical yeah go for go for it is spacetime really not physical it doesn't sound like it's going to help your argument oh let's find out because this is saying it's really not great do you know this is literally just a concept it was what it never been verified never been observed spacetime bending yes it is okay where do you observe spacetime uh you observe a bending by looking at the light curvature around galaxies so you observe spacetime by looking at light curvature from galaxies that that's not looking at spacetime that's looking at light curvature from galaxies you're asserting it's because of spacetime so you don't ever actually observe spacetime you just see things and assert that the cause of spacetime yeah so you see what spacetime does to things that's how you see spacetime so like i literally can't see you no we can so like i see you because i can see the light reflect off your electrons does that mean i'm seeing not you am i not seeing you no i'm seeing you because the thing that makes you have causes an effect which has a demonstrable result which i can observe so so i'm seeing you just like i'm seeing spacetime when i see the curvature of light passing through it do you see like her if you're like that is the dumbest crap i've ever heard i see you the light bouncing off you so that means spacetime is real because i see you like cool story tjump do we have any more questions shames because i was done debating this guy like an hour ago i actually started celebrating in my mind that i didn't have to talk to him anymore we do have more questions and want to say thank you very much for those questions so hang in there let's see we have this one from two seconds this is loading for me so i'm going to read one of the more recent ones that just potsel listen nathan potsel says nathan did you allude to how glass is made proving the earth is flat slash disproves globe earth if so how does it yeah so the glass or the mirrors that they're making they melt it on molten metal and that's not only how they make them flat on both sides but how they get all the bubbles to rise up out of the glass so fluid studies that's how they make them flat because fluids at rest are flat that's why i'm a flat earth gotcha and tim prior coming strong says i want to debate nathan but in our debate i'm going to demand the same evidence for flat earth that he demands for the globe he brings up the globe once he loses cool story you want to debate me i want to go on a date with supermodels cool story nobody cares next up af katie says so it sounds like you don't want to debate him or you do who is him i don't know that guy no i don't want to debate him if he wants to debate me he can pay my fees 250 bucks and if straight up af katie says nathan what is the motive for a flat earth conspiracy why are all the governments in on it well unfortunately i'm not one of the people lying to you like tjamp i'm one of the people telling the truth that the earth is flat and stationary so like why they would lie i'm not sure maybe it's because they're collecting 52 million dollars a day with nasa i mean 52 million dollars a day that seems like a pretty good reason to lie but maybe it's deeper maybe they're trying to convince you that god isn't real that genesis one isn't true then they can create schism in the church divide the christians divide and conquer has always been their plan but hey i don't know i'm just speculating i'm not one of the people lying to you and stealing 52 million dollars a day got you this one coming in from tim prieru says ha ha nathan says he blindly believes people on youtube which is the entire reason flat earth exists because it started off as a joke on youtube i've been testing for five years literally the only people here blindly blaming people on youtube are my opponent who asked you to look up a video on youtube because he doesn't have any evidence next up such projection this one coming in from question the answer says gyroscopes hold rigidity in space globe busted fact super sticker banned for life and nathan's tinder date says nathan do you want your air pods and apple pencil back you left them here in florida uh who's your tinder date oh thanks man super well which one i don't know apple pencil next up shane's armor thanks for your question says okay looking for more serious questions tim prier says none none none none none none uh or oh it's not uh not uh not uh i don't remember did you say not tonight a thing i don't know but this one coming in from do appreciate your question Tim Pryor says, Nathan, where are your numbers? Where's the math showing your measurements, like you asked for, from Tom? Earth is flat? What about your double standard? Yeah, it's okay. So we've done laser tests at Salt and Sea, 17 miles. There should be about 200 feet of curve. The Chicago skyline is visible from the other side of Lake Michigan. So that should be completely hidden. We also caught from Kenosha on infrared, the Chicago skyline, which was 59 miles away, and we were roughly one or 200 feet above the ground, because we just got above the tree line. So, guys, I mean, I got to pull up all my videos and just talk about all that. Or I can just talk about fluid settings. The surface of water is level and horizontal to its container. Lobers have to redefine the word level and say it doesn't mean what it means, flat. It means curve.  Gotcha. And Sheephol's Phoenix says, no one in Flat Earth can explain what cast the shadow onto the moon during the recent total lunar eclipse. Can Nathan explain, if not the Earth, then what did cast the shadow onto the moon during the eclipse?  What you can't predict, eclipse is on a heliocentric model because they say the redness caused on the moon because everyone knows shadows are dark. They got to have an explanation for why the moon is glowing red. And you're asking me about the shadow, which is glowing red. Okay, they say the light bends around the Earth and refracts through the atmosphere. We'll have news for you ladies and gentlemen, the atmosphere changes hour to hour and day to day. You would never be able to predict eclipses months in advance on a heliocentric model. Newsflash, they don't. They use the Soros cycle. You could check out NASA's website. They admit they use the Soros cycle on their website, which was hijacked from Flat Earther. So I don't need to explain anything about eclipses. You need to explain why you think shadows are red and they can predict eclipses months in advance. That's goofy, that's dumb. And why it changed directions. Many eclipses, did the Earth change directions in the middle of an eclipse? No. Next up. How do you explain that in your mind? So what caused the shadow on the moon?  This is question and answer T-Jump. If no one has questions for you, then you got to keep quiet. Well, but to be fair, that that was their original question. They said, what casts the shadow onto the moon during the recent learning eclipse? If not, the Earth, what did do it? So they're asking like, do you have an alternative that they're looking for? Yeah, it's not a shadow. Duh, that's the hijacked the Soros cycle. NASA admits it's a Soros cycle. You can't predict on the eclipses. You reject the shadow altogether so you don't give an explanation for the shadow because you don't understand the shadow. I don't understand that I reject anything. It's not I reject anything. I've tested the moon. Moonlight is measurably cold. It is its own light source. There are no shadows on the moon. Gotcha. I was just saying that you don't concede that there was a shadow. I wasn't saying you necessarily rejected it, but Andrew Rao says whenever Nathan is stumped, he always says with a pause, are you done? Then proceeds to know he's screwed, but we'll say it's some sort of, we'll say it's some sort of begging the question fallacy or something. Nathan, is this true? Is this your strategy? No, we're gonna have to let the audience decide. And Tim Pryor says, oh great, Nathan got that. Is the horizon the curve of the earth bug? No, Nathan. The horizon is not the curve of the earth. It is caused by the curve only. Oh, Nathan, one sec. He said the horizon is not the curve of the earth. It is caused by the curve. Only you guys think we claim it is the curve, Nathan. Okay, cool story. No question for me, wants to talk. You don't have any sort of disagreement with this? Or I'm sorry, well, let us know if this is your view. Is this your view that namely, do you claim that the horizon, is the horizon the curve of the earth? Do you claim that the horizon is the curve of the earth? Well, that's what he, that's what the question you asked me earlier in the beginning is the horizon, the curve of the earth, which I think is what he was implying that they are the same. Gotcha. That's what your model says. Let's go over the curve. Let's go over the horizon. The horizon is the curve of the earth. Okay, and this one from Andrew Rouse. Is it Rousse or Rouse? Let me know, friend. Andrew says, Nathan, if you've done 10,000 debates, you would have done one debate every day for nearly 30 years. So you must be making that up. Were you debating when you were two? No, the thing is is that I don't have like scheduled hour long debates. Sometimes I'll just debate people in person. Like I ran into a NASA employee at the airport, completely shattered him in a debate. I ran into PhD Danny Faulkner, asked him some questions about his heliocentric model. He wouldn't even answer. I talked to Aaron Ron here for like 15 minutes and he ran away. So obviously I can do multiple debates. It's more than one in a day if people are just running away from questions. So. Gotcha. This one coming in from Kango24 says, Nathan, as a truth seeker, aren't you keen to go and do T-Jump radar experiment? It's non-experiment. It's man-made. Experiments are observations in nature and then you manipulate the cause to determine the effect. So everything he said was non-experiment at all whatsoever. And whoever asked that question doesn't know what science is. You are scientifically illiterate. All right, Nathan, we want you to refrain from calling people scientifically illiterate because I have been to be fair, Nathan. I have been telling people that we won't read their super chat if it's an insult. You have to do the same in terms of not insulting the people that do send in a question. Next, Tim Pryor says, Nathan, are you going to give proof of flat earth or are you just going to keep talking about the globe? Nathan. I gotta be real careful. I don't call someone scientifically illiterate and make James upset again because people don't know what experiments are, James. I have to educate them. So they are illiterate to the top. Next up, let's see. For some reason, that seems a little bit more innocuous than scientifically illiterate. But John W says, can you send the link again for any items we need to fund and know about? Oh yeah, thanks. I will send the link for the crowd fund. I'll drop that in the chat now, also in the description. Southboundpachetererm says, I'm a flat earther but T-Jump hands down one that debate. You got a fan out there, Tom. And Tim Pryor says, appreciate it. It says, why is Nathan only one not too expected to give any evidence of his claim in the same demand that he expects his opponent to? Nathan, is this true? Is there a double standard here? Nine three, go rewatch the video. Next up, JC93013 says, Nathan, is that an Aztec calendar behind you on the wall or something like it? I'm just wondering. No, it's way cooler than that. That's really beautiful. Did you make that? Next up. No, I didn't. No, I'm Rax. Is it actually like a calendar, like the Mayan calendar? Is it just a face of the sun? I got it, cool. That's really beautiful, Nathan. And Kango24 says, Nathan as a truth seeker. Oh, we got that one. RevElation says, if the story was in the frigid atmosphere, would it be a cooler story? Nathan, bro. Yeah, there are cooler stories and there are cooler stories. That was a good pun. That was kind of boring. It was a good dad joke. Shane Sommer, let's see, says, Tom's chair claims another one. And question the answer says, we measured the curve where T-jump with what? Get real. I'll measure it with lots of different things. What do you want to know about it? We can measure it with light. We can measure it with radio waves. We can measure it with sound waves. We can measure it with the visuals. We can literally go to space and see it, even though Nathan doesn't believe that. We can measure it with tons of different things. Vibrations in the earth. We can measure it with vibrations in the earth, earthquakes. Like pick your force. We can measure the curvature of the earth with it. Gotcha. And this one coming in from Nathan R. says, Mr. Thompson, the moon is either a hologram or a spiritual manifestation. Why do you keep talking as though it's a solid object? I don't think it's a solid object or know that it's a solid object. So I just know that moonlight is gold and sunlight is hot. Moonlight is putrefying. Sunlight is preserving. That's how you make beef jerky. Also, sunlight dries things. Moonlight, it's the reason you have dew on your grass in the morning. And moonlight is not even golden yellow like the sun. It's bluish-silver. So they're not the same thing at all whatsoever. They're separate and unique. Gotcha. And thank you very much for this question coming in from Tim Pryor says, Nathan doesn't understand. Heat transfer. Touch an oven when it's on and you get burnt. Stick your hand in that same oven without touching anything. You don't get burnt. Class over. Nathan, is there some sort of, did you talk about heat transfer I'm trying to remember when you did? Pryor, he said if you move away from a fire source, you get colder. That's the part of the conversation. Yeah. And then we talked about how you move closer to the sun and it gets colder, which is opposite to what T-Jump just said. Remember? Nope. So if you're standing next to an oven. Hold on. You've got to let him respond. So if you're standing next to an oven and you move further away from the oven, it gets colder. But even if you're moving closer to the sun, so you're getting closer to the sun, it's being colder because you're moving further away from the oven. Next up, thank you very much for your question. Let's see. Or to be fair, Nathan, that Super Chat was originally directed toward you. So if you want the last word, I'll give it to you. Yeah, T-Jump just said you move away from the Earth. The Earth is the oven. So he doesn't come from the sun. It comes from the Earth. Cool story, bro. You said earlier in the debate, the sun was hot. You just debunked it yourself. Next question, James. John Gerard. Jordan Gerard, thanks for your question, said Nathan and Wotan together versus Vosh and Jangle's. Come on. Well, that might happen. I don't know. But Podzel, thanks for your question. Says Nathan, did you allude to how glass is made? Proving the Earth is flat. Or disproving the globe Earth? If so, how does glass being made that way help you? We already answered this question, James. You want me to answer it again? Just briefly, I think they might have come in late. Yeah, they melt the glass on top of molten metal. And that not only makes the glass flat, but makes it free of bubbles. There you go. But I think that people are curious if you could draw together the threads or kind of connect the dots for them and how that suggests a flat Earth. All fluids at rest, the surface is level and horizontal to its container. So when you melt the metal, it flattens out. You put the glass on top. It flattens out. When you go to the ocean, look at the water. There's not a ton of waves. It's flat. Frozen lakes, flat. Airplane level flight, flat. According to the FAA, target generation facility, flat, non-rotating, not accounting for gravity. I mean, there's over 40 NASA and Air Force and documents where they tell you the Earth is flat, it's not rotating. But they show you cartoons before every universal pictures movie and you go, that's where I live. Cool story. No, the Truman Show was literally a true man show.  Everyone around you is an actor. Don't trust politicians. Don't trust journalists. Don't trust mainstream scientists. They're all goopals. Gotcha, and thank you very much for your question. This one coming in from Marshall the Meat Puppet says, why did you tell Aaron that you had a map and model? Nathan, do you have one now they're asking? And why did you tell Nathan and Aaron that you did? Hey, James, do you want to answer that question? Because I was very clear with you that I didn't have a map and a model when you asked me. Do you remember when you called me and said, Aaron, I want a map and a model. And I said, those are straw man arguments. I never claim a map or claim a model. Large bodies of water don't curve. We have no Coriolis effect, which mainstream science asserts that we do. You can't have gas pressure without a container. Aaron didn't want to talk about any of the evidence or science that refutes his model. You just wanted to straw man an argument claiming I claimed to have a map and a model, which I never did. You clearly remember that, James. I said I don't have a map and I don't have a model. No, I don't. I actually thought you said that you did have a, at least I don't remember the map part. I thought you said you had a model, but I would have to go back and look at the emails. But thank you very much for your question. John W. says, sorry TJ, sorry TJ Trump. I should do this as I can do it myself, but so happy I do not need to. Tom, is that a friend? Someone you know? Nope. What's his name? What was his name? John W. Don't recognize it. Next, but thank you, John W. And Lockbeard says, blasphemer, Ken Wheeler destroys flat earth like a god. Nathan, is this true? Do you know this Ken Wheeler fellow? Yeah, it proved moonlight's cold, which debunks the whole religion. That's one of the reasons I started looking into flat earth. I was like, what? Moonlight's cold? That wouldn't work on the heliocentric model, but hey, we're at about two hours, James. This is getting pretty boring. We do have more questions, Nathan. You can hang in there. We don't have that many more. I would say maybe another half hour. Can you bear with us? Cool, let's do it. This one coming in from Sidger Frato-Straubio said, I've heard a lot of philosophers of science conclude science doesn't answer anything. Is this true? Does T-jump, despite your use in philosophical arguments? Maybe he means with absolute certainty. Science doesn't answer anything with absolute certainty, but it doesn't need to. Still gives answers, just fine. Next up, Locke, we got that one. Philosopher Tiger says, planets round, Earth round, Nathan wrong. Gotcha, and the Batman says, Nathan, W-Y-T. Oh, what do you think of the recent fraud among Glober YouTubers? I don't know what he's talking about. Next up, Mike Billar says, Tom, you gotta do some more research, dude, don't make up reasons if you don't know the answer. ISS International Space Station is in free fall, not zero G. Right, I said that. I said it, gravity still applies to it. It's near zero G because it's not as affected as gravity as it would be on the ground level, which is why they have to put it in orbit because if it was stationary, it would fall straight to Earth because it is affected by gravity. So I literally, I said that. Gotcha, thank you very much for your question. Coming in from Eric Vinicius Gomez Almeida. Thank you. Says, Nathan said, Earth isn't spinning because of balloons. If you throw a ball upwards, inside a moving car, it'll fall straight down. Inertia, first law, Nathan. If you throw a ball upward inside a car that's not moving, it also comes straight down. That's not an argument for globe. It works on both models. I'm sorry to inform you of that. Get back to me next week. Gotcha, this next question coming in from Tim Pryor. Says, we got that one. Silver Harlow, thanks for your question. Said, adding the word cleaner, which is a kind of thing to the word vacuum is an empty space, which is, sorry, butchered that. Silver said, adding the word cleaner, which is a kind of thing to the word vacuum, which is an empty space, changes it to an object you can use to clean the rug. Not analogous to vacuum space. Person's just trolling it. Next up, Bubble Gum Gun says, gravity is measurement of time bending into space. Gravity is a measurement of the curvature of space time. Gotcha, Nathan, are you in agreement? Space has no physical properties, times a concept. If you think you can bend that, you're not gonna say it, James. Silly. Next up, Silver Harlow says, that's part of your scientifically literate, your numb nuts. If you think nothing and time causes things to happen, okay? Literally devoid of any type of wisdom, original thought process, or free thinking whatsoever.  Next up, Gunning Kruger. Silver Harlow says, that's how compound words work. The combination has a separate meaning, which can be a different kind of thing than the parts themselves. That's referring to the vacuum cleaner. No, I think it's about when he brought up the word space, like he showed the picture of the word space, and I said, it's space time, because the word space refers to something differently than space time. Space time is a specific thing in physics. I think that's what it was referencing. Gotcha, Nathan, what are your thoughts? So adding time, which is a concept to a vacuum devoid of physical properties, makes it curve things. Cool story, bro.  I don't think, I think the point was that the words together aren't literally just taking the individual words and what those individual words mean and just smishing them together. I think the two words put together mean a physical thing that actually exists. It's not just taking the concept of space and the concept of time, and just taking those two concepts and just smushing them together like it does with the words. The words when put together mean a specific kind of thing in physics represented by the Lambda equation in general special relativity, which is a physical force. It's not the concepts of space and time. Those are different things. Next up, unless you have thoughts on that, Nathan. Silver Harlow says, we got that. Bubblegum Gun says, God says the earth is a globe. Flat earthers are CIA. Are you working for any sort of government agency like CIA, NASA, Nathan? Gotcha, and this one coming in from, do appreciate your question. We don't have too many more, Nathan. We're almost there. You look a little bit, you look tired almost, but this is coming in from philosopher, Tiger. It's been five years, dude.  Five years of, James, can you look up a YouTube video? Thomas, he's making fun of you. Next up. Irony is beautiful, I love it. Philosopher Tiger says, Nathan, I understand you may be convinced that the earth is flat. Thank you for taking the time to debate. You are wrong. Minecraft globe is the truth. Nathan? I think it was supposed to be a playful one. I don't know what Minecraft globe is. Is that the game? Pancake of Destiny says, T-Jump's facial expressions won the debate. It's a fact. Tim Pryor, thanks for your question, says, that's a lie, Bob did it three times. Even isolated the gyroscope, still picked up the drift. Nathan, I think it's about your friend Bob. The drift, the deviation in light. Yeah, it's a deviation in light. So you can do it a hundred times. The deviation will be in the light. Sagnac, who invented the interferometer. Not Bob, Bob didn't invent the interferometer. The guy who made the technology said it was the vortex of the ether.  Gotcha. There's no ether.  No one's even talking to you right now. Is there another question? Wait, one sec. Is Minecraft globe a game like Minecraft?  I think it's just a joke that's like saying that there's a globe in the Minecraft world or something that's not really flat. So like in Minecraft, everything is flat. It's just a flat plane. But he's saying that in the game, the real world is in the game is actually a globe. It's not really flat. I think. This is how funny Glovers are. Next up, Sigefredo Sarabias says, Nathan, how is moonlight colder? Where do you draw the line of temperature of a shadow at night and the moonlight without a sun that would obviously heat? Okay, I don't know if you've ever been out during the full moon, but there's an obvious difference or discrepancy where the shade is and where the moonlight is. So if you test where the moonlight is, it's cold. If you test where the shade is, that's hot. That's actually the opposite of what happens when the sun's out. So if light from the moon was being reflected by the sun, then the sunlight would be hot, not cold. Moonlight is cold, not hot. They're obviously two different lights. That's why the moon is blue or silver. Dude, I just went over all this. Like they keep asking the same questions over and over, James.  Like how they get super boring? No, Eric Vinicius Gomez-Almaida says, Nathan, can you show us any math on how far we're supposed to see on a flat earth? Provide a formula that would match flat earth model but not the globe. How far we can see? Well, I can tell you how far we should see on a globe. It would be 1.22 times the square root of the observer's height and feet. And we see way too far. For example, the black swan, 10 times farther than that, that would make the radius of the earth equal to the orbital path of the moon. We actually falsified the radius of the earth. Earth's not a globe, 24,901 miles around. Cheers. Gotcha, this one coming in from. Tim Pryor says, I've done an essay on Egypt. No, the stars do not line up with the pyramids anymore. Cool story, bro. Okay, cool. I just, just at the Georgia Gatsons and the Polaris did line up with the hole they drilled in it and they made that 40 years ago. I haven't been to Egypt and confirmed it. So I don't know, maybe you're right. But Polaris definitely matches up. I confirmed that. And you probably haven't confirmed anything about what you're talking about. You're literally just saying it because that's the globe religion, ladies and gentlemen. I found an article that says that it doesn't match up anymore. Question the answers says, T-Jump, what, with what device can you detect curve? Any of the devices to measure any of the forces that you want, I would say pick the ham radio waves that I actually presented in the YouTube video. Ham radio waves can be used to balance radio signals off the moon and detect the curve. That's the easiest and cheapest one that anyone can afford to do in their home to do this. Very simple. Gotcha, this one coming in from. Tim Pryor says, okay, you tested it. Where's the measurements and the numbers? Saying you tested the salt flats doesn't mean anything, Nathan. Yeah, okay, cool story. My YouTube got deleted, guys. I had 850 videos that just got erased with 20,000 subscribers. Like what are you talking about? Of course I have videos that were gone. I didn't have like an external hard drive with all my videos packed up on like over the last five years. So sorry, I'm sure they're out there. Andrew Rouse, thanks for your question, said Nathan, why is there a pressure gradient? It's rouse, or rouse like house. Thank you for letting me know that Andrew, Andrew Rouse. Yeah, because there's heat being introduced. So obviously that makes the gas an homogenous and isotropic because there's energy being introduced. It's not a static system. It's a dynamic system. You just have to go look up what that means. Next up, Mike Bilars says 15 PSI on the Earth's surface. Five PSI on top of Mount Everest. Extrapolate, please, for both T-Jump and Nathan. What was the question? We have a new chance to respond. He talks about how the earth is gradient. Yeah, no problem. He was wondering about the gradient, which was literally the last question I answered. Necessary antecedent to any pressure whatsoever as a container. Welcome to flat earth pressure gradient guy. Go ahead, T-Jump. What was the question? Question was, and I quote, 15 PSI on the Earth's surface. Five PSI on top of Mount Everest. Extrapolate, please, in parentheses, for both to respond to. Yeah, so the density of the air gets lighter as you go higher because there's less stuff pushing on it to compress it because there's less oxygen above it. And so caused by gravity, that means that the pressure, PSI will go down the higher in the atmosphere you go until it reaches zero and you're in space. Gotcha, and thank you very much for your question. This one coming in from, do appreciate it. Philosopher Tiger says, thank you for understanding my joke, T-Jump. Nathan, are you sure you're not part of the CIA, though? Nathan, are you secretly a brilliant spy from the CIA? Nathan, no sense of humor. All right, Mike Billar says, Nathan's, oh, let's see, let's see, looking for more questions. Tim Pryor says, yep, still try to pick the article. Funny how Nathan didn't read the part where it says the distance to the moon. Nathan, is that true? Did you not read that part? I guess I didn't. Yeah, the article we pulled up about the moon being in the atmosphere, I think it's the one that he's talking about. Oh, well, I guess that means the moon's a ball on the Earth's a ball then because that article said how far the moon was. That's a good one. Wow. This is what it's devolving into. Tim Pryor says, those are words, not measurements, Nathan. Nathan, they're words, not measurements. Tim Pryor says, what do you think? He's wrong. Okay, well, so you, okay. Well, we, you're quite the intellectual over there. All right, so next up, I've teasing you, I've teasing you. This one coming in from, we've got maybe one more. I saw a standard question that I picked out a chat and let's see, this one coming in from Colossus says, will Nathan team up with G-Man again? Maybe I like G-Man, he was cool. You got it, and Silver Harlow says, maybe G-Man and Nathan pairing up again. Silver Harlow says, yes, I meant, quote, space time, unquote, is like, quote, vacuum cleaner, unquote. The compound word or phrase means something different than the parts. Nathan? Okay, like that was like, that person like literally made another super chat about their other super chat talking about a vacuum cleaner. But are you trying to understand their point, Nathan? Are they talking about vacuum cleaner? Yeah, but nonetheless, if it's an analog, that's true, like that is, you know, it illustrates a principle well, then it's an analogy, it's an analogy, big deal. So are you trying to understand it? I've seen a vacuum cleaner, I've never seen space time. Okay, I guess you're, why you disagree? And, oh, that other question, this one coming in from, this is interesting, because no, I wanna press you on this question. This one was asked already, but someone else asked it as a standard question as well. What's the motivation for a globe earth conspiracy? I think you had mentioned that they get paid an incredible amount of money. Like, but I think they're not clear on like, why would they get paid significantly less if they just admitted that it was a flatter? Like, it just seems like an arbitrary difference.  So now they could never go back and say, oh, we were wrong this whole time, it's actually been flat, because they'd lose all their funding. Is that what you were saying, Nathan? No, they stole all the money. It's not funding, they are thieves. They stole all the money. It's not that we got it wrong and the earth is flat. You wouldn't have a space agency unless you're on a ball in space. So the entire thing was a fraud. They stole trillions of dollars from the American people.  It's ridiculous. Enjoy the matrix. You know, truth isn't for everyone. So the motivation, I think I get it. So I think his motivation is that the reason they invented the globe theory was because by doing that, they could get funding from the government to make NASA. Is that? No, my answer is I'm not lying to you.  Go ask them.  So you want me to like conjure, I don't have like a crystal ball that I could just rub. It's like, why are the elite telling us earth's a globe? Oh look, it's this, okay? Go figure it out for yourself, bro. Maybe they're gonna launch an alien invasion and you don't get aliens on a flat earth because we live in a dome firmament. So maybe the reason they lied hasn't even happened yet. And you're over here going, why would they lie? Tell me why they lie. And it hasn't even happened yet. So just take a chill pill on the why they would lie. Who cares? They lied, get over it. When you meet one of the top 1% of the 1% who's lying to you about the earth, ask them. Why are you lying to me about the shape of the earth? I don't know for sure, but I know $52 million a day is a pretty good reason to lie. Just so I understand, right? And I'm being sincere. I'm not being like facetious because I didn't know that this is like, so would you take the position that the earth isn't in space, that it is like kind of like on the ultimate foundation of reality that it's not extended in space? The space is a vacuum. It violates the second law of thermodynamics. We wouldn't have gas pressure on earth if the space was a vacuum that they tell us is, which is why there's hundreds, if not thousands of videos of NASA faking space with harnesses, green screens, wires, hairspray, augmented reality, bubbles in the pool. One of the astronauts actually said he was drowning during a live feed. Now, I don't know if you know this, but space is a vacuum. You shouldn't drown in space, okay? And I asked three different NASA employees why that happened. I got three different answers. One said spit, one said it was sweat, and another one said it was a malfunction in the soup. So they can't literally keep their life straight at all. Some astronauts say you can't see stars in space. Some astronauts say you can see stars in space and planets and moons and Magellanic clouds. Astronauts can't get their story straight. There's only 550 of them. Like how pathetic is that? So yes, space is fake, James. On the flat earth, the sky's a firmament and above that would be heaven. Gosh, Tim Pryor says that didn't show numbers for those measurements, namely when they had asked about numbers. And they said, I want numbers, Nathan. Numbers isn't what you demanded. I think they're saying like you asked the same from Tom. I gave plenty of numbers. Black Swan, we observed from 10 miles out the horizon, should be 1.225 times, those are numbers. 1.225 times the square root of the observer's height and feet. So if it's one, that's another number, then you would multiply it by one. That's another number. So we take 1.225, another number, multiply it by one. Another number, you have a horizon at 1.225 miles out. We've observed it at over 10. 10, that's another number, miles out. We falsified the globe model with numbers and I gave them to you just now. Welcome to Flatter. Gotcha. This one from Revelation. Last one that I have here in the list says, is the candy horizon is where your eye line meets the end of the fruit rollup? Next up, wanna say thank you so much to our guests. We really do appreciate them folks. As always, we wanna encourage you to attack the arguments instead of the person. And folks, this is the last debate of our 12 hour stream. I don't know if you guys know this. If you scroll back on the timer, my dear friends, you will see that if you go all the way back to the very start, that was 10 hours and 39 minutes ago. As our first debate was on veganism, it was a tag team debate. Then we had a debate on Black Lives Matter. Then we had a debate on whether or not there's evidence for intelligent design. So folks, if you have not already enjoyed this whole stream, highly encourage you to do so, as this has been a huge group effort in terms of all the debaters who were thankful for coming on the show in order to make this happen. And wanna encourage you, hey folks, we are pumped about this future. As I'm going to just mention this really quick folks, we are thrilled. We're at 90% for the fundraiser that you see on the far right side of the screen. We are absolutely thrilled and we want to encourage you if you have not already done so, I am going to throw the crowdfund link in the description. We have gotten up to where we're almost at the end folks. We only have six days left and we're at 90%, which is absolutely phenomenal. So I do want you to check this out. It is going to be absolutely epic. The crowdfund. I am putting in the old live chat. And so we absolutely want to encourage you to join in that crowdfund with us as we are going to get that remaining 10% and make this debate that you were seeing in the bottom right of your screen between Christian apologist, Dr. Kenny Rhodes and Matt Billahunty as they will be debating on June 5th and we are going to make it happen folks. So wanna encourage you to join in that crowdfund with us. You give as little as a dollar if you want and that helps us take bigger risks in terms of getting bigger headliner debates as we are striving to build this channel and provide a neutral playing field for everybody to make their case. So thank you one last time, Tom and Nathan. I'll be back in just a moment folks with a post credit scene, but wanna say again, Tom and Nathan, it's been a pleasure to have you. Thanks guys. Thank you for coming up. Absolutely. Thank you guys and folks as mentioned, I'll be back in just a moment. So stick around.