figure it out differences at the helicentric model doesn't actually back up with evidence they they pretend it's definitive so i you know there you go this one from coconut cream pie no question i think they just wanted to hear me read their name this one from kango 4 4 says ash akashi kaikyo bridge plants burge califa shanghai tower taipei 101 petronas towers in malaysia i think that is one world trade center kingdom center the shard all of these buildings take the curvature of the earth into account witsit you're wrong uh you can see further when you go higher on a flat earth nathan already explained that and if you think there's a ball there's no reason to misrepresent basic things like that that that's kind of sketchy so you can see further sorry that's what he's talking about is like the burge califa you can see the sunset when you're higher when you're higher you can see no you were saying that we're built taking the curvature of the earth into account vertical buildings don't account for the curvature of the earth when they're parallel with each other but to be fair i like they didn't give a citation so i like it is just their word against austin's level z or level with z says two versus two is too many people debating please do one versus one thanks for that feedback run boston bear says austin knows his stuff on this topic that's why he can talk to professionals in all fields without drama we have been lied to it's time to come together in truth science will also benefit well i'll give you a chance to mark and uh david i would guess you'd disagree yeah there's there's no reason why why you'd be lied to and the evidence is absolutely overwhelming like you have to come up with these sort of ad hoc rationalizations like aether and magic and all this kind of stuff in order to explain all of this away the i mean i also note that witsa didn't explain why the um circumfo the rotation happens there's no explanatory power to what he's saying well there is for the the earth and there's no reason why um i do want to keep it a good day to people yeah yeah sure there's no reason why why would be lied to about this is absolutely zero reasons this one from jack hardgrave says to both sides why is it when i look at the stars in australia i see the southern cross and other constellations but when i look up in the u.s where i live now i see completely different ones we'll start with the flat side uh depending on where you're standing on the ground you're gonna have such a sky available to you uh so if you're in the north you're going to see and you're at 45 degrees you're going to see polaris at 45 degrees as you move south the sky that is your zenith the star that's directly above you is going to start to move so as that moves with you that zenith is your center point of your sky available everything is going to shift with you i believe that's the same on both models but that's different stars are available because it's where you're standing on the ground just like if you look up and you have like popcorn on your ceiling the popcorn piece that's above you if you move to another location in your room you're gonna have another piece of popcorn above you the globe side what are your thoughts david look ready go ahead david yeah there's a problem with that because those other stars are rotating and apparently the the don't i the only trick is i don't get me wrong but technically they want they answer from the globe side well how you would explain why they see the different constellations i don't want to get into the rebuttals of questions just because we have so many we've got to get through so maybe once we got through like a good chunk of them and make good time but in the but in the meanwhile i want you if you can respond to their question directly i mean it's because you're seeing you're seeing it from a spherical uh a spherical body you're you're standing on a spherical earth and it it fits you should you know mark showed the animated diagram i mean it's it's just too clear it's too it's it's ockham's razor i don't know what else to say you've got it iron horse says dear globes says how do you how do weather systems rotate on the spot and move the rotation of the earth 200 mile per hour winds are destructive yet still air is a thousand miles per hour yeah so as i've told iron horse again and again and again there's inertial reference frame so anything in motion will remain in motion um anything still will remain still until another force is acted upon it so the the idea that that oh well the earth is spinning but the the air should stay where it is the air is sort of moving with the earth um if he's asking why winds form its convection basically so i don't know what he's talking about with that one and it's been moving for millions of years so it's not like it started yesterday and there's this big shift of a thousand miles there's no acceleration of a thousand miles that we have to take into account in answer his question that was a direct answer this one coming from upside down guy says my hamster ham de grass tyson believes his hamster wheel proves earth as a sphere even though it looks flat how high does ham de grass tyson need to go from his cage to see earth curve how high do you have to go to see earth curve is is there actually like a standard answer from each side on this like how many feet or miles i think so i mean basically uh neil grass tyson famously said you can't see earth's curvature for a certain distance up but what he was talking about is just observation with the naked eye if you actually do some precise measurements you can actually see it like if you um basically squeeze the frame for instance and you can you can see the curvature so we can observe the curvature from from a sort of a fair way up it's been observed from weather balloons high altitude weather balloons and things like that using flat lenses um but i mean a hamster wheel is tiny i'm not sure what that's got to do anything sorry david how many feet david you know no no i i don't need to say anything here you guys good yeah all right and then austin and uh nathan is there uh well i suppose you guys would say you'd never see the curvature because it's flat this one coming in from chris wagner says bangerang witsit this one from kango four four such is like one of my favorite phrases by the way says with your in-depth knowledge of quantum mechanics can you please explain a sunset bangerang yeah i just explained a sunset okay if you can't understand uh the sun on a plane i don't know what to do for you it reaches a limited perspective moving away from you on a plane and actually i don't even claim a physical actual position we've actually mapped it out it seems to be like a magnet magnetic toroidal position but either one works once it's beyond your vanishing point it's vanished no it's not how vanishing points work sorry i don't know that's not how they work i okay i'm sure it'll come up in another question i hate doing this but i just want to keep moving because we're there although i otherwise a lot of people will be unhappy so this one coconut cream pie strikes again says her witsit for major scientific claims you need a model that can make testable falsifiable and correct predictions otherwise the claim is worthless i can't i ask can the flat earth model predict weather yeah of course like you can map it out as a method projection but what's so funny bro is like models aren't like this all-encompassing thing there isn't a globe model that explains everything right like you have a globe model to try to explain this for example you have the geomagnetic field that's the dynamo model it's called the geodynamo model that's a specific model to try to explain a specific phenomena which is convection currents coming from a molten iron core with nickel and iron spinning and causing magnetic field which is completely off you have the south Atlantic anomalies 25 percent weaker when it should be symmetry in the north and the south and like with the other problems my point is that you have different models for different phenomena we can explain all kinds of phenomena with the flat earth right we have models for all kinds of stuff like the magnetic field where it's better there the data matches so you guys should stop saying the model thing it doesn't make any sense it's like oh well if we can't explain one thing on the flat earth the flat earth model is debunked but if we can't explain 500 things on the globe earth well that's just the part of the model that science is working on like try to try to be consistent this from from displace gamer says is there a firmament is it the same distance from the ground to the top of all points why do you not see refraction as light moves past the firmament in the upward direction that a globe or can anyone answer or i think assuming you believe like austin or nathan might believe in the front i think they're saying assuming a ferment is it the same distance from the ground to the top of all points to the firmament i assume yes and then they say why do you not see refraction as light moves past the firmament in the upward direction um you got so uh so like we as far as the firmament does it come down uh you know a thousand miles into the anartica track or does it come down way further out we don't really know like the the shape of it as far as like the the dome is to it or like how how much curvature to the dome that there is of the sky and and what exactly it's made out of um i would say these things are have some uh on some not quite understood uh frontiers but we we on either model where you see that star is i mean that's you know the star right above you if i look at polaris it's there and it has to be explained why it's there and been there for a very long time on on both models some claim that it's the same height like as in flat some claim it's like a dome that it would be different heights so like we don't have to make claims we can't verify alternate kek says fact if the world was flat then if you obtained a high enough altitude you could use a telescope to view any country on the earth demonstrate proof i don't know if they mean proof that he's wrong or proof of the flat earth but we'll give you a chance to respond nathan and austin one book you should read is this right here which is geometries of visual space by mark wagner and he explains that the way that we perceive visual space is actually non euclidean and curved which is why railroads although intangible reality are parallel they appear to converge we actually view visual space in in curved visual space that's how we view it so of course you wouldn't see it it would converge down through a singular point and that's how the eyes work hence them being curved um and so we reach the limit of perspective also you have something called the attenuation of light so you have a perspective limit and attenuation of light you would not see forever and it's incredibly ignorant ignorant position you can see so far and things shrink oh sorry you're right uh so yeah things as things get further away they shrink and then if you are going to try to look at something say uh on the other side of the ocean uh you're going to uh run into things like um debris in the atmosphere like dust you're also going to get water vapor magnification when you zoom in on something you're crowding out everything around it to make that thing you're looking at appear bigger so that magnification is going to wash out everything as well so it'd be like trying to look across uh the ocean but i'm going to hold like an inch of dust in front of your lens as well and this one solid opaque dust so this one from tango four four says witsit this sounds a lot like a last quite or a question from a few questions ago it's not it's slightly different they say given your in-depth knowledge of instead of quantum physics relativity and special relativity can you explain the sunset reach a limit of perspective man you're like seven years behind bro alternate kek says you can use the world of warcraft to simulate a flat earth and it clearly demonstrates a flat earth model which looks nothing like the sphere reality wow all right i think i what you say to that uh so like if i have a flat surface here like as far as like models going everything this could be a flat surface and if i say that this is the uh the pole uh you can you know i can walk in a circle and model how you can circumnavigate on on a flat surface so uh it depends on if you have like um a square and just top down left right or if you put the the center attracting attractive point in the center and then you can can go around it so yeah i don't know it's a they they use a flat model because it's our intuitive senses things are flat all video games and everything use flat earths and except for like no man's sky and all that stuff but the flat is intuitive easy to model off of and build off of um but models are like that right there with that example was a model so models there are flat models spherical models and stuff so you got it this one from zarax zara zaren says florist why do you say einstein approves of the earth the ether when all quotes of him disprove the ether please give quotes okay i'll easily give you a quote right now so it would have been more correct if i had limited myself in my earlier publications to emphasizing only the non-existence of an ether velocity instead of arguing the total non-existence of the ether where i can see that with the word ether we say nothing else in that space has to be viewed as a carry of physical properties albert einstein in a letter to hendrick lorenz in 1919 he also said it would have been more corrected by the limit of myself to start that the word ether has changed its meaning many times in development of science at the moment it no longer stands for a medium built up of particles its story by no means finished is continued by the theory of relativity albert einstein the evolution of physics 1938 thanks for playing this one from hate stairs says florist gas equally fills the volume of a container why isn't air pressure evenly distributed vertically and why is there a pressure gradient so uh gas is considered a fluid just like a liquid they're two separate phases of matter but they are both considered fluid and fluids do separate out by density so denser particles will settle at the bottom this atmosphere down here at most or at mo is is denser than as you go up um and but you do have to have a container for this medium to form if you look at density towers of like different fluids um like water honey corn maple syrup and all that stuff it has to be in a container gases as well they will sort out into density tower essentially and uh and and you get the least pressure at the top you got it dave hinkle says globers please provide direct measure of earth's curvature over a body of water clearly showing the 66 foot drop in elevation yeah that that isn't how earth curvature is actually calculated so you can you can calculate earth curvature very easily um but it's not just a matter of distance equals drop because they're also is the height of the observer to take into account there's refractive index take into account there's a lot of things take into account look geodetic survey does that all the time like it they they do take the curvature of um um the earth when they're doing geodetic survey so these measurements are made all the time just because you don't you know see the surveyors actually do large enough areas to take the the curvature into account doesn't mean they're not doing geodetic surveys this one coming in from do appreciate your question nick a piercing scathing criticism for you david says for david are you aware that the way you act and your inability to describe your examples and defend your model actually in all caps does a disservice to the globe model and pushes people to the flatter side let's see so he spoke of a vanishing point and how I hope I guess because the word vanishing is in there they have presumed that objects can go so far away that you you'll never be able to see them not even telescope well those stars that are on your dome are apparently further away than that and we see them and what a vanishing point is supposed to explain and I guess you guys have misunderstood is that it means that objects that are a particular distance apart as you get farther and further away they are so close together that you cannot discern them they're you know essentially a point and that is why they call it a vanishing point it's not because objects can never be seen beyond a certain distance and your flat earth stars prove it this one coming in from do appreciate it christopher custom says flat earthers did did you understand mark explanation for looking farther if you did you would be able to see the edge or past the ice wall globe w perfect time to like address what david's saying and answer the question okay so we actually see we have curved retinas so we see a euclidean plane geometry earth and non euclidean hyperbolic curved visual space that we have curved retinas this again is why we have tangible reality parallel railroads they converge so whenever he's saying oh well no that when you look at the sky is different well I explain it's also combined with atmosphere conditions that acts as like an additional lens right so that additional lens on top of what we're seeing is exaggerating that curved visual space effect which creates a convergence into a limit of perspective well documented easily provable you got it essentially you to have you have the ground going up and the sky going down and then once you get to that point that the sky would keep going if the ground wasn't there going down in your vision and the ground would keep going up but they they cancel each other out so if you try to see anything beyond on the ground that sky is going to essentially create that blockage and it's going to it's going to take priority and cut off anything beyond that point and the stars don't have a thick atmosphere when you look up they have it ends out as you go up right you got it this one coming in from do appreciate your question Zara Zarin says flurfs the globes quote unquote showed scientific papers I think they mean by globes oh yeah they say you showed hand drawn pictures which is more accurate none of them showed scientific papers he showed CGI animations and like uh what the stars right beside the globe as if it's like an accurate depiction uh there's tons of listen man everyone is under the assumption that the earth is a ball in a heliocentric model right so all the scientists are trying to explain within that paradigm like they're like oh magnetic field let me explain it within the globe earth and it's not working but they assume the globe so that doesn't prove it and if we invoke them as hostile witnesses because we have to correct misunderstandings of the globe like no actually the magnetic field doesn't work here's all the discrepancies that doesn't mean that we have to claim that they think the earth is flat isn't we have to believe everything that they believe that's a fundamental like elementary fallacy okay so we we can't invoke a ton of papers as it wouldn't even be accepted I know physicists that have proposed geocentric papers that are flawless and irrefutable and they're not published okay so there's actually a philosophical bias in science you can't propose something that goes against mainstream cosmological model and this is a fact and we have proof that they accepted the geocentric paper saw that the math was perfect found out he was a geocentrist and turned down his future papers it's provable it's on record this one right I can actually attest to that with my my biology teacher saying that I can't propose a paper that gets submitted for peer review I have to become a degreed practicing scientist in the field doing research and then go through all of these steps science is not an open thing it is essentially a barrier when the experiments and results themselves should be able to shut down anyone just trying to pitch some wool nice this one from squid super hunk says a lively Saturday night debate always especially enjoy enjoy getting to hear mark do his thing you got a fan out there mark upside down guy says here you go again my hamster kytham Jenner is transgendered and identifies as a fish kytham Jenner wants to swim the mississippi river how is it possible that long rivers are able to flow one direction over the curve mark you want me to try this easy one yeah go ahead yeah go ahead yeah yeah okay so uh the the force of gravity is not is not linear it's there's a point there's a center point and so as you're moving along the surface of the earth what's pulling at you is tangent to your to where you're standing to the center of the earth at that moment so it's not that you started over here and grab is going there and then the curve is curving down and then it's still it's still this way it's there's a point down here and wherever you are from that center point on earth is was pulling directly down from that spot where you stand you got it this one coming in from do appreciate your question anthony chicante says god bless you james for being brave enough to host latter debates thanks for your kind words says it's a controversial subject and all sorts of hate can come your way for even considering a debatable topic god bless you bro thanks so much for your kind words we don't get too much hate although there are some people are like why are we having flat earth again but anyways ours are in thanks to your super jack questions as nathan please explain the motion of stars in northern and southern hemisphere scientific uh so the stars that they they move east to west and so actually i can hop in so mark had had said in the beginning he had said if you are standing uh at the bottom of uh say the big differ and you see it going this way but then this person over here is seeing it go this way um that's all depending on on where you're standing that person uh is going to always see going east east to west uh for the stars and it also does go uh so then if you are standing at the equator that the stars are going to go straight east and then head straight west so you get those straight lines and then if you're looking south it flips because now the equator is is behind you this way so everything is still going east to west but the the the direction that it appears to us is is flipped you got it thank you equator sorry can i just can i just point out that's not what i was saying that it looks different to a different observer what i'm saying or what i was saying is that the circumpolar rotation if your flat earth paradigm is true it's like half of it is not going east to west it's going west to east because the only reason we say it's going east to west is because under that circumpolar rotation we're looking past the south pole and saying oh well the stars going in the other direction is reversed but that paradigm doesn't exist on a flat earth because you're not looking past the south pole if you look in the opposite direction of a six in a nine or so and they flip and of course we can show with the container over top of the constituent circles on a plane you actually get that same exact effect in the south where you have convergence and again walter bizlin shows it mapped out every single square inch of the earth is mapped out exactly how the stars work i answered this at the beginning of the debate that that doesn't explain it at all there you go just without that south pole rotation it doesn't explain i do like it's called a azimuthal grid of vision azimuthal grid of vision and it causes a personal perception of convergence look it up why is the equate why would the equator gotta be relevant we do have to keep moving we just have so many questions we're making good time so like we we may get to that point this one from tons says david has only a basic understanding of anything he talks about even if austin is wrong which he isn't david wouldn't understand him anyways go ahead david now's your chance oh my god i hope i don't make a fool of myself here um so um the guy the guy rolls the motion the x y motion of the guy was because it's not just the z motion that shows the drift but there's the x and y motion and those x and y motions correspond to your position along the earth you know like on the surface you know relative to to that that's where the drift comes from so there's a problem the the rate of the drift on the x and y coordinates is consistent from the north pole if you're on the flatter just imagine on the flatter it's consistent from the north pole to the equator but then it it's like it's less of a drift when you account for how much distance you have to go around that flatter on the southern hemisphere it's like for every mile of x this this loss and and why this loss is you're going around the the flat curve of a of a particular uh uh longitude i'm sorry latitude you're losing like dozens of miles by the time you get to like the southern parts of australia okay so there's one thing the other thing is that um the stars that are closer i'm sorry the stars that are shown on the horizon are still further away than these flatter arguments about the vanishing point i can still see stars on the horizon and those stars are much further than any point on a flatter model and last thing is you guys speak about how the eye has some kind of dynamics that causes you to see things curve downward well that's an that's only an optical effect that's not a physical effect it's not a magnetic effect it's an optical effect so i should be able to turn upside down right stand on my head and i should see all that sky go up and see all that land go up as well you don't understand it there's no explanation that you can give that is coherence i'm unpacking your incoherent explanations and yes sometimes it can sound if sir yes go ahead do your eye do your act it's fine this one we must i can't respond to whatever i've got to move forward i hate to do it but this one from displace gamer says can all speakers explain the difference between magic and science then give a short explanation on how the earth was formed just curious yeah i mean i can grab that so difference in magic and science is that science is a process that is followed a methodology for finding out in a reliable robust rigorous way what the physical properties of the reality actually are it's not a perfect methodology i don't think there is a perfect methodology but it is the best methodology we have so far to demonstrate what is actually true and what is not under a scientific explanation the formation of the earth was basically elements a nutrition disc of elements heavy elements coming together making the core of the earth by the light elements under the effect of gravity made the earth what it is the moon we believe is when they another planetoid hit the surface lot dislodging a chunk so all of this has got a lot of science behind it and that methodology is sort of the inductive process that we go through so so fairy tale i said it was inductive process all right let's just magic is the fairy tale that's the fairy tale keeping it on the question oh yeah this is a fairy tale that the earth on the question we have to keep it on the question otherwise they're going to go on forever and that's what i'm saying they're saying that the earth is formed out of the dust particles from the sun and they replaced genesis with a new creation story and that's the current consensus i never said sun we have to keep moving gentlemen okay so i thought i thought you said keep it on the question good everybody gets a chance for answering this question directly like in other words the person is asking difference between magic and science oh i think that uh science is something that it's an empirical process where you you make an observation you form a hypothesis you can set up an experiment with given observational definitions you are able to carry out procedures get a result and then you draw your conclusions you should be able to hand someone those procedures that you did and then they can recreate the experiment with the same conditions you should get the same result and then you are able to kind of confirm things especially with isolated variables you can do controls and variables as far as magic i think that's something that people do to maybe for entertainment at a party or something but i'd like to calm people but magic i think there's other types of magic as well but i don't know if we want to get into like some darker stuff like Crowley magic and all that so let's just i'll go there if anyone wants to but anybody else that's good i must have missed the question the difference in science and magic like yeah science is empirical testable it's outside of philosophical bias personal opinions you just go figure out what it is you know then you accept it what it is and try to understand it uh philosophical bias of the Copernica principle that the earth has no special place or let me come up with how i think everything came from nothing and all this stuff that's not science uh that's basically invoking magic uh theoretical magic right so that's what i would claim it as long as i can even tie the two together specifically so anything else on anybody want to add anything on how the earth was formed that wasn't already said by your teammate cool it was intelligently designed but yeah i i believe i believe that a creator i i believe jesus put this earth here so by magic james you asked how it was created right roughly speaking and in the super abbreviated way right and so not who created it but how it was created so i could say god created the earth through the natural processes that has been agreed upon by conventional science no one agrees on that who made it we just asked how it was made no one agrees on how the earth was made it doesn't matter they asked us a question i'm answering it this one coming in from nick says mark what makes the focalt pendulum different from large crane cables and why aren't those moving all around when not in use um so what makes it different than large crane cables well the focal pendulum depends on a specific weight that is attached to it and it shows the drift um there's a lot of things which um affect cranes like for instance the wind will affect cranes all kinds of things will affect cranes what you've got to remember is that um the focal pendulum if you put that out in the open with wind around and things like that or other variables affecting it it probably won't work um so we put it inside in a place where we eliminate these things i'm affecting it and cranes are designed to try to not be affected by external forces but you know crane operators will tell you when they go up in the crane it moves a lot in comparison to say wind and and environmental factors the the 15 degree hour per drift even though it is there as i said time and time again it's a very weak force right it's not like wind blowing at the crane and it's shattering all over the place it's a very weak force um that is impacted on the crane you got it this one coming in from by the way you guys all recently heard about the us shooting down that UFO right yeah but wait was it mark earlier i think you heard the one that said okay that's right so we've talked about this already yeah no no my whole point my whole point was you're talking about the balloon right like like um oh i think there was something different because they there was a balloon and then there's a second UFO yeah that was well it's unidentified so but it was you know identify it first and then then come at me james are unidentified as in definitely aliens this is okay whatever it is just we don't have to attack one another right all people if the government has made a people were all people if we just choose to not hurt one another there would be no hurting this one from i'm on bulb at that absolutely yeah and i want to hurt anybody all right and i love your take on science like beautiful perfect definition of science too so it was there yeah i think that was just a moment that was nice and photon bread says mad props to nathan and mark for coming prepared to have a good faith debate david and witsett just came to banter and ruins any real debate i'm gonna be honest from my perspective man like i was trying to keep it on point at the beginning of the debate like we were like specific to the subjects and i feel like people were just talking with like seven different subjects past each other and so i was trying to bring it down and point out the fallacies which is the only way to have a logically coherent debate so um that that's honestly what my motivation was unfortunately witsett i saw that coming from you quite a bit yeah i think i think um from my perspective witsett kind of derailed the conversation a lot we're trying to talk about things it's going into these fallacies which weren't actually true and sort of just just i'll give you a chance to going back to meta arguments and stuff it just give you a chance to defend yourself austin and then we got to move the next one notice how i i'll just say you notice how i accounted for my behavior and i tried to explain where i was coming from and they both just took it as an opportunity to talk about me so i thought soak it in tons said would you allow austin to speak we've tried to allow him to speak let's see the other one is we had another one timothy p southwick says a drone programmed to y'alls believed curvature calculations is physical evidence i don't know who that's for though i think that's the flat earth i mean i'm aware that i program drones to go higher and they see sort of curvature and stuff and bring objects back into focus see curvature in stuff well i mean they they basically observe curvature by they have a a point um the drone flies higher the point the the object comes back into frame then it goes lower it can't see it is that what they're talking about they're probably talking about it's okay it's okay but you know how to figure out what the question is like right right in your model you don't see curvature from the height that if you want to if you want to go on about it like if you know what the question is about tell us okay i said that to you a couple times earlier what's it just just go ahead and say it i'm literally trying to uh in your model of course the curvature the curvature can't be observed from the height of a drone uh he's probably trying to say the same very rudimentary point which is since we go higher we see further which proves the globe but again on a flat earth if you go higher you see further this one coming in from tons says not trying to be rude to nathan but i'm here to listen to austin smoke these guys would you allow austin to do that please he's barely said anything i think nathan did great this place you did good nathan you're really good brother it needed to be you know you could take both of them on by yourself so that's kind of how this conversation with your hands tied behind your back we're all trying to get an understanding of our natural world right we're all being scientists right now we're trying to have discussion um bring reasons and and determine what we observe i think everyone here is trying to be as scientific as possible which it could probably talk more if he didn't you know leave the debate and wander off or just you know submit that no consideration you guys kept running over me so i stepped away yeah this one coming in from do appreciate it i do want to say hopefully hope you know folks whether you're a flat earth or globe earth or all of the terms of endearment that they call each other globes and flurfs we hope you feel welcome we really are glad that you're here folks and want to say this one coming in from displace gamer says flat earthers why do you weigh less quote unquote inside an airplane in the air then compare to quote unquote inside a house on the ground this is a why question to be clear in other words like why what's the reason for that additional forces reasonable well what's the answer then what's the answer so so for one if you're claiming altitude for one if i don't want to interrupt mark he's about to explain so if you're claiming altitude well we have a question what's it can i answer yeah please let me know about how gravity gets the weaker away from the center of mass oh yeah you got it i know your religion simple but my point is actually you have additional forces coming from the sky you have a centrifugal translation of motion you guys assumed i was talking about the plan that was your mishap and of course you also have electric gradient going up 100 volts per meter increasing as you go up and that's why we actually have a difference and the gravitational anomalies show that the the measurements from the distance to the radius actually don't match that yeah weight distribution so that's a that's a globe problem this one coming in from do appreciate it tons says oh we got that one timmy vp southwake strikes again says a drone programmed we got that one this one from polarity says nathan what are your dependent and independent variables for testing and concluding the ethers existence yeah like again i'm sorry good uh so dependent and independent dependent independent variables for determining the ether um i would say that you can set up light and send it through a splitter and then it'll return back to a detector and show maybe a slight drift slight interference pattern which might have something to do with linear light going against a vortex curve ether so that might give you that that slight variance um you can also take like a vacuum chamber right and like it would take everything out of the vacuum and we see like electromagnetic fluctuations and energy pop into the vacuum so the independent variable would be the vacuum itself for manipulating the vacuum itself and it shows that there's not just nothing there right so the dependent variable you know is is the observable phenomena of there being electromagnetic fluctuations within a vacuum of the chasmer effect with non-conductive plates and you're having the independent variable of the vacuum you manipulated that environment to remove the air and you still have a disproportionate amount of electromagnetic energy which is why we know there's something other than space and time even according to mainstream academic the ether has to permeate that vacuum environment and it allows those things to be in that environment exactly this one coming in from do you appreciate your question coconut cream pie says so because somebody says ether exists therefore it exists that's an appeal to authority beyond quotes are there peer-reviewed articles on ether i had a said that because this person says the ether exists the ether exists that would be an appeal to authority because this guy's an authority he says that it must be true that isn't what happened in context at all he said and i quote no one no scientists quote unquote say that there's neither so i corrected him by showing him very top tier physicist specifically saying there is an ether the evidence for the ether is a logical antecedent of the fact that the vacuum has been proven to not be newtonian emptiness there's energy there that isn't predicted by particle physics with the amount of air there and there must be something else sustaining that electromagnetic energy that's the evidence and to to throw it back i could also say that i'm skeptical of spacetime and i i would like a piece of fabric because i can't you know i can't hold on to that that fabric i'd like to have a piece in my hand if i are suit to make well i mean i mean i was brought up so i should get to respond to that the question wasn't actually that they asked a peer-reviewed papers which i asked for as well which you didn't actually provide so i assume the answer is no there is no peer-reviewed papers on your aether there is literally hundreds of them can you can you can you reference three here i'll stop my yeah yeah the quantum the quantum fluid quantum field theory has about 20 in the chat in the chat yeah yeah sure absolutely also polarity sorry i missed part of your question they were the one that asked you nathan about independent and dependent variables and they also then had a follow-up question so in regards to the ether they said and regarding the ether like what effect does it have on anything so the ether would have something to do or it has an interaction with with light and potentially some magnet there seems to be like an electromagnetism connection so it could have something to do with magnetism as well but the the main interaction with the ether would be lights and then however the like with the alias effect with the full called pendulum affecting the swing and getting it to rotate at different speeds even going backwards that could have something to do with an alignment of the the moon and sun which are both their own independent lights charged i believe again the sky is a very frontier area so it's a lot of hypothesis and conjecture but i i do believe that these two interacting forces cause some sort of other effect within the ether but it's very frontier you got it and this question coming in just to mention sorry james just quickly i just looked at the paper that you sent in it appears that the word ether does not exist yeah there we go yeah it's i know if i said it i was going to be called a liar where's ether there's no mention of i bet if you guys don't respond you'll book you've never read the paper you just search the word ether and you think you've proven me wrong yeah the author explained specifically it's a modern version of an ether which is acts like a fluid like acro medium you can also read the next two papers one from harvard which specifically says ether you can actually you can read this second paper as well as specifically says either's and i'm about to drop about 15 more so thanks for playing no no wait wait there hang on a second you said that this mentioned the ether it doesn't mention ether at all just because you're equating a phenomenon to ether doesn't mean that that's what they're talking about the author of the paper said that earlier the author of the paper said it's a kid you said you'd provide a paper with it it doesn't have there's two right there there's one from harvard right there in the chat yeah well click on the one from harvard why are you going to do that uh the ether the ether what what is being discussed nowadays as an ether has nothing to do like mark said nothing to do with how it was described in plan my understanding is that they are they are in a sense um what is it when you kind of go out and be wrong the scientists are colloquially using the word almost tongue-in-cheek now to describe virtual particles that's my understanding of how well you're wrong now for usual but there is nothing about the ether being used as a way to describe okay let me read this the ether invented by isaac newton make a 15 degree for our dream the ether invented by isaac newton which by the way most globers don't know that isaac newton said gravity cannot exist without a medium and that would have to be an act of god that's the stupidest thing i've ever heard and no man with competent faculty of thinking would ever think that any proposed an ether theory i guess they've got to teach you that in physics class anyway the ether invented by isaac newton reinvent the ether invented by isaac newton reinvented by james clerk maxwell this is the stuff that fills up the empty space of the universe discredited and discarded by einstein the ether is now making reinvented me why are you interrupting it it's just a couple because you just said reinvented you know what that means yeah you're distracting again um what's it you're just wasting your time all right i'm gonna try i used to interrupt i'm sorry but it is oh you're interrupting because you know i'm interrupting by saying you're wasting time because then both sides will start to do that where they're like well you're just wasting time you're beveling i'm gonna interrupt you like don't pull a t-jump so we're gonna go let's go to rich p says watching what you see they get then they get away with this shutting it to the audience you just hear them be wrong i'm gonna read it i'm gonna read it so this is the end of this i'm gonna read it so this discredited and discarded by einstein the ether is now making a nixonian comeback it's really the vacuum but burdened by theoretical ghostly particles leon letterman god particle as the universe is the answer what is the question 2006 says the ether's making a nixonian car come back even though istein tried to get rid of it thanks for playing james if i did that would you have kicked me out of this place by now if you would have done what what he just did finished what i was interrupted saying no you had plenty you had already shown the links you had already made your point and you're sitting up here wasting our time because as you're just wasting time right now no he said let's move on and you're like no let me go over it again and because it's not fair to let you guys interrupt me and then just move past the point that happened 50 times in this debate so we have to i i do want to get to people's questions rather than so this is rich p says watching witsett debate is worth every penny amazing i wish i had half of his skill you have a fan on there as well witsett this one from ja ja manico i didn't see a question attached let me know in the live chat if you want to ask a question in the normal chat and we can read it as a super chat because it's in the super chat list question the answer says just some paper for you james thanks for your support appreciate that and this one from coconut cream pie says did we read this one they say so because somebody says ether exists therefore it exists that's an appeal to authority okay thanks yeah and that was a straw man i'll see then this one coming in for let's see tim prior good to see you again says so let me get this straight you claim you can bring boats back into view after going over the horizon with zooming but not the sun that makes no sense this is why we laugh so the uh boats going over the horizon uh back in ancient greek times when they would say oh we see this boat disappearing a bottom up good eyes by the way to be able to see that you see a boat disappearing bottom up and then you say okay it's disappeared behind curvature and once flat art kind of started taking off people were zooming in on these boats and bringing them back but the the boat is not disappeared behind a vanishing point the sun has three miles of ground uh and and thousands of miles of sky and then once they converge once anything goes past that convergence point you can't bring it back no matter what no matter what zoom you're gonna you're gonna apply you're only gonna zoom in what is in front of like looking at it this way what is in front of this cross section you're only you can only magnify anything in front of that anything behind that is gone you would have to move forward to then push this back um and that's or or go up an elevation to push it back and how many miles away do you have to be for that effect to occur just throw out a number for the sun to disappear or you just for what you're stating to occur how many miles away does an object have to be on the ground or in sky give a range choose both either one uh don't they say we can say see three miles uh at the or well you can see further if you zoom in with your eye that's my question that wasn't my question mark do you want to jump in i feel like i'm going to get myself in more trouble i just have a funny feeling as when i when i get them like they're they're they're in a contradiction i tend to somehow slip into a trouble so i i was checking out these papers by wits it was from 1950 there's no you're not here 1976 like it's just a joke the once from 1999 and once from harvard harvard i just now proposed that there's no okay the biometric ether theory the vacuum ether theory loop quantum gravity fuzzy space time theory are all modern ether theories and they don't call it aether that's the funny they literally do it's called biometric ether theory i just posed a leader i just posed the paper yeah okay well i'll check out that one it has a lot more in between you and the sun versus the boat but once they do go beyond that that vanishing point where that where everything is is um the angular resolution is so small that that nothing can can bring it back right that things should be able to bring it back because when something passes on the vanishing point when we zoom into it it comes back into our site that's how telescopes that's how focus like that's how zoom works um and when we when we do think see things vanishing into the vanishing point my for instance if you got you know in australia here you got really long roads that are perfectly flat kind of thing when you see something vanishing into that vanish point it does not vanish from the bottom up there is no um there is no force or no no um something that makes makes that car vanish from the tires going up it just it just gets smaller and smaller and shrinks with perspectives right but it doesn't or it doesn't impact me the right but it doesn't overwater you can give a fractive effects that that causes them up disappearance and temperature variation water has a high heat specificity versus land so there's a greater temperature difference between the water and the land so this can cause the temperature variation which can give you bottom up disappearance but if you're over land where temperature is a lot more consistent uh you're not going to get that variation in temperature which will cause you give you more opportunity to see things shrink with perspective rather than but yet bottom up but yet over land you'll see stuff bottom up disappear as if over a curvature it can it can happen yeah all the way up there's a temperature can vary 2018 cornell university vacuum solutions in the einstein ether theory 2018 cornell university what page what paragraph it's the old paper that's the title of the paper oh this is a new link that you put up yeah yeah cornell university a new link that you put up okay emerging no yeah the other one was paul de rock you don't know that is but emerging emerging gravity theory spacetime foam theory not just list a few of them off so the audience can look them up emergent gravity theory spacetime foam theory causal dynamical tram triangulation theories non-communicative geometry theory relational block world theory quantum graphidity theory and that's again biometric either theory vacuum ether theory luke and quantum gravity yeah why would you not mention two or three and leave it at that what was the point if you could you said there's none so we'll just name seven no i said that your your first links didn't suit now you're showing a list and that list doesn't lead us to be right within that article that you no no i'm already there there's nothing in that article that will justify your position that the ether explains why the earth appears to rotate when it doesn't david is it possible that maybe there were some things about modern ether theories you didn't know and you could research and learn them and maybe you didn't know about them is that yeah and it's possible that there are things about ether theory that do not agree with what you're saying did you ever consider that that's possible yeah sure there are many different possibilities all right yeah there you go so now we go back to the original thing was just that you postulate claims and then mark was doing even more of an effort to find it than i was and he still couldn't find it now you throw up a fourth link that's just a list and you're trying to rely on that list to be sufficient to say that it describes in a such a manner to prove your point that the earth is flat or that the earth is not rotate the link is not a list uh just so you know i can't drop links in the chat but it's just put it all right brah all right wait a time now get out of what we have to do is um i forgot what i was gonna say but let's go to the next question large mouth bear says thank you ballers for making a few more flat earthers today david you are objectively lame you should give this be nice not not there's okay that's not true they say mark nathan you're really nice right now don't worry mark they're gonna be you you're gonna see that they're it's gonna plan this is unconquerable they say they've got words for you as well mark but i'm gonna skip i'm gonna skip that because they say wait sit wait you want to hear the insult to mark david is that it oh he insulted me hey i want to hear the insults to mark come on okay as long as you're up for it much better at this and i am you guys have got tough skin so you're you know they say mark where is it where my eyes lost it mark your dome is the only globe here hey they love your bald head very sexy like stone cold i wear it like it is all right it's it's just more confirmation that's a two r squared bro large mouth bear they also said wits it and nathan crushed it tim prier says we think we got this one let's let me get you claim uh bring boats yep we got that one tim prier strikes again he says no you just regurgitate what you're told you always claim flat earth with no measurements measurements means numbers which none of you have i think they're saying none of you as a new flat earthers all plain survey data ignores any notion of the curvature of the earth and you literally makes up to 100 square mile measurements using plain survey horizontal level points and that's how we do basic engineering for all trades you also have the full light experiment that's four points of distance that are measured out and then you can observe all of those lights over water which is 70 percent or so of the surface or however much uh is it's it's they're all planar horizontal linear flat uh over water um and those are four data points at at you know five six seven eight miles out grow to one rebuttals are not permitted to change we have to proceed right it just refracts everywhere perfectly we get it your your position is not original are we allowed i'm sorry james are we allowed to rebutter no your answer is refraction we get it okay let me think about that i i would like to say i'm skeptical of a refraction claim being able to make that four light experiment any glober that wants to recreate that four light experiment you to scale and isolate the variable of refraction to show linear spaced lights that are exponentially refracted to all just appear even magically no just right to appear even and linear and horizontal please do show that to me because i think that does show the planarity of the surface characteristic surface of water is planar all right all right so um what's really where the service oh i'm sorry really pithy short and sweet i need to have more questions 90 degree angles are used on surveys to ascertain distances and that's what required the earth to have curvature as the angles would not meet if the earth was flat 90 degree angles require curvature what are you talking about in order for the order for the points to meet my friend in order for the points to get an exact curvature of the oh just ignore plain survey and then yeah i addressed that in my opener if you had a listen that is calculative assumption of geodetic optics observations high-depping optical observations yeah this was my word solid slow it down we can do yours yeah yeah so geodetic survey is taken to the count the curvature of the earth and they make accurate measurements of the earth all the time and geodetic engineering takes in the curvature of the earth in order to do engineering projects all the time name one just because witless is in ignorant of this doesn't mean that it is actually name one they've been mentioned before somebody sent a post in with all of them and you're like no they don't do that i'm going for buildings when they actually do name one the royal academy of surveyors that's not an engineering project i'm not gonna entertain your you don't know you just man can i explain this so fast give me 17 seconds no no no no no 13 seconds 12 seconds okay geodetic surveying assumes the sphere it's a calculated assumption of sphericity based on optical observations and it doesn't always match the globe in fact if you get within 85 percent it's considered a success and a weighted mean where you throw out the observations that don't match because the radius would be too big mark he debunked himself but he thinks you didn't see it he said based upon optical observations isn't that how we uh whoops answer yeah slip this one right there buddy we got to move forward this one coming in from coconut cream pie says read my chats it's just my name thank you for that polarity says wits it you're too smart to believe in what you say you know the sun doesn't shrink to a point the ceiling six becomes a nine but it doesn't change rotation yeah like okay it's an optical effect based on the azimuthal grid of vision we have an arc of vision with hyperbolic geometry of visual space i get that these are some terms that aren't familiar to people it doesn't make it word salad you see how i i was going to say i was literally going to say i was going to say what mark was going to say i know that these terms aren't normal to people right hyperbolic visual space it doesn't mean it's word salad you all have google let's go look it up man i had to read yeah and i in the thing about it is it learn new things in life it's okay wits it it's not dependent on your your like how you're standing you could stand upside down you can stand in any orientation if what you were saying is true see why are you rolling your eyes though that doesn't make sense the eyes are a circle dude they'd be the same upside and down up and down but no no no down is relative to where no down is relative to to where you're looking so you're looking you're looking straight ahead down is relative like looking down to your feet and to your legs if you're standing upside down you're standing upside down then that same angle will point upward towards the sky if that were true this is me once again trying to unpack your nonsense and you're recognizing the contradiction and i have to explain it in a way that is consistent but it has to be dumbed down to your level so you're using and you're memorizing memorizing concepts and then you go into the concepts but you're trying to shoehorn your flatter interpretation into them hyperbolic visual geometry can be proven and i'm not not not not in that way i have to go to the next one there are just so many questions we have to keep going this one from Tim Pryor says flatter there should not be allowed to say the word science no scientist or any field of science backs up their beliefs if you mentioned science then you're using globe knowledge come up with your own stuff the sorrow cycle which science does talk a lot about predictions the sorrow cycle was derived using a flat earth culture the chaldeans that they were a flat culture so a lot of this stuff does actually start with the flat earth assumptions from our past and then we build off of it and then there's reverse engineering that goes on to try to ascribe things to a globe but the the flat earth is able to make predictions and be scientific we can use density and electromagnetism and these types of forces thermodynamics these are all in in junction with a flat earth and and work cohesively with flat on a flat earth yeah i know many physicists and engineers that are true earthers just a lot jay says with it and nathan why don't you guys reproduce the mage to experiment by mr sensible and send a camera attached to a balloon to see the curve we're actually currently sending up a balloon much higher than that so like 33 34 kilometers and our 33 34 miles actually like so like just over 30 miles with an infrared camera and a specific camera to see the stars that apparently nasa can never see when they go to space will be making long distance infrared observations from over 30 miles up and yeah you guys will just even with infrared you'll say it's a fraction so for sure you'll say it's a fraction but we we literally are we literally are doing a better version of that experiment our observation this one i mean flat earth has got a fine history of debunking themselves we'll wait for your you know this one i was creative it this one coming in and thanks from coconut mockumentary hit piece but just say phrases like robots coconut cream pie says what model do meteorologists use flat or globe oh wait we get meteorologists use ag that's so funny you asked that thank you for asking they actually use weather balloon data which actually is over a flat surface that's why when they took the weather balloon data to put it onto the globe earth the blue marble they had to stitch the flat map data together to wrap it around a ball we actually that's why when you watch the news it's on a flat map projection for a local area we actually get 99 percent of our weather data way more efficiently even from mainstream academia claims that we don't get them from satellites we get them from weather data on a flat surface so that's that kind of backfired i think nasa military also nasa the number one user of helium consumer of helium for all the balloons that they have you have the the tower ground towers that they use that's all just like i was i didn't get to show it here but i like underground sea cables use a flat water diagram in their cross sections and showing that stuff but it's all uh using flat towers flat maps if you were going to drive across the united states you'd use a flat map and whether that they show on the tv is on a flat map until they scale back and try to show you canada in the us of mexico all at once and then sky sky scion says and we can't take any more questions folks sorry we're gonna just read the rest and then we've got to let these guys go because it's getting late sky scion says david and mark do you concede relativity says you cannot prove the orbit of the earth from the earth and that everything on earth occurs as if the earth is at reset okay so we can we can prove the orbit of the earth through the uh parallax motions of the stars like that's not something that is hard to prove um we we can also prove it by the way that the um the the stars are obscured by the sun at certain points there's there's no problem proving the orbit of the earth i don't understand why you would make that claim because i'm saying but when i was here with it thanks mate cheers just yeah settle down um and as far as sort of saying everything appears to be flat yeah uh our eyes are imperfect and what appears to be the case i might appear to see a mirage but we know that's not really water when we see it and observational data we can gather um upon doing further investigation shows that it's not water so this whole idea of what you see is what you get from optical illusions and stuff that is an incredibly poor argument because we know that the eyes can be tricked by multiple different optical effects that's not an argument they asked you if you agree that relativity says everything occurs on the earth as if the earth is at rest sorry that was the question and then eyesight said but when i was a student i saw that experiments of this kind had already been made in particular by our compatriot michelson he proved that one does not notice anything on earth that it moves but that everything takes place on earth as if the earth is in a state of rest yes what what is it because of the inertial frames of reference we've been okay because everything appears stationary well i mean if you're just gonna hand wave away after asking a question which is why bother answering the question so if everything is in the same inertial frame of reference everything is moving with the earth on the earth then we yes we can consider it stationary but in fact it is not stationary and from the parallax motions of the stars we know that it's not stationary i just talked to a professional astronomer three days ago he said parallax doesn't prove the world you know what your appeals to us already mean absolutely nothing which is somehow a question a rare question it was you know this is a thing which it has to have the last word every year are you guys got it you guys got it you don't understand relativity it's okay we must go wrong there it is good job was it this one from bush bush doh key says today's scientists have substituted mathematics for experiments and they wander off through the equation after equation and eventually build a structure which has no relation to reality quote nicola tesla who was that addressed to you guys uh probably are you gonna not interrupt this time with it when hold my breath yeah mark i'm not even gonna try to address the question so i'm just i'm just gonna listen oh okay um yeah so um mathematical models can be incredibly useful and yeah i mean it doesn't doesn't really uh substitute for um experiments but in some way we've got to make models that can then formulate experiments of what we're trying to do and what we're trying to prove without mathematics it's almost impossible there are models that that rely on math sure but um you know this whole idea of well because we are trending or we're using maths to describe these things then we've just thrown science out the window is just completely incorrect and i don't think nicola tesla was correct about that i really don't um there there has to be some mathematical modeling of your um your um what i'm doing queries yeah still yeah it has to has to be there in order to make um to to well it's not just that but you've got to yeah go sorry i want to let you finish up i just want to shortly we have to move on no no you've got to quantify things in order to carry out those experiments you have to mark this one i hate to do it but we do have to keep moving we've got just so many so um michael lion says yeah we have this because if you lived on a ball the horizon would dip down the higher you go why is it on a plane at 35 000 feet the horizon is at eye level it's observably level it's not it's not let me let me do this one it is not the thing is your your concept of eye level and level you're confusing that with your sense of balance and i and i've brought this up many times anything that you look at your direct line of sight that is your eye level at that moment okay so i can look at the horizon from 35 000 feet and i'm looking at it and it's at eye level but as i stand and i would have to zoom in because from such a far distance the elevation from let's say uh 10 stories from far off in the distance that 10 story elevation is like a teeny tiny you know two millimeter distance from the ground on the horizon so the eye level that's parallel to that location is still going to appear to be essentially where the horizon is anyway i know that you guys understood me witson and nathan so nathan don't even act like i mean witson don't even act like you didn't this one coming in from do appreciate your question michael lion says if we got that one isle of hager says for both most roads always go downward that's clear empiricism sorry no flatness the sun doesn't fly away at evening either it just goes down amazing if you look at a road if you were driving down the or through the desert and you were looking forward at a road and you're on like the highway watch out for highway hypnosis by the way um but if you're going down the highway you're going to see that road it's going to go up to your horizon that's not like roads going down like that that's a visual of a road going upward um i mean if you're on a hill that's going down and you're going down the hill it's going to go down but roads can also appear to go up that's not how the curvature works though when you're observing it the curvature is observed the curvature is not observed you can't see what's beyond the curvature you know i'm saying that it's like it doesn't even make sense what you're saying unless there's like refraction or increased elevation or something right right but even still there's more curvature beyond that so yeah and curved from where you are on a ball everything would be curving away from you curving down right yeah so you're standing from a height no no no you're standing from a height six feet eight feet or whatever it is in the car not in the car even though that height may seem minuscule compared to the you know the vastness of the earth there's still enough of that distance that that point from where you're standing to the horizon is why it's appearing to go up it's going up because you're standing this tall and you're looking at a at a road that is still level to the ground like where your feet is you you're saying that the the the visual the curvature is outpacing the curve of the earth up to that horizon up to the up to that horizon it is what's the glow oh yeah yeah okay how did you miss that this one yeah you missed that i feel like you just oh no i i agree that would be the explanation because you can't have something go up if the earth is curving around you would have to say that your your vision is is dominating over it's it's taking precedence over the the actual physical curve no your perspective is giving you that and your height yeah your height is only your height only right because if you were to put your eyes down to the ground you wouldn't see any of that road going up all right moving on me either that says we sit railroad analogy fails if you go high enough you can see the parts of the rails that disappear at ground level just like earth but even if you go high enough there's then you extend how many it's much of the railroad you see and at the limit they still converge so that literally just supports my point and it supports that you see it over flat you know euclidean plane geometry with hyperbolic non-euclidean visual space and just to clarify tesla didn't say that math is no good if you ever read tesla he put he supported everything ever did with math he said they substitute experiments for math and then in the end they wander off through equations so much they have no relation to reality he didn't say no math but uh yeah anyway yeah the the railroad still converge as you go higher that supports my point this one coming in from do appreciate your question don't math for that aether affecting vision there with ever said that cool straw man to rotate this one coming in do appreciate your question from coconut cream pie says with it stop spamming fallacies show predictions we have all kinds of predictions like for example on the flat earth on a plain earth the earth is actually the inertial plane or the block domain wall through the magnetic field right which all magnetic fields have and therefore the magnetic field is going to get slightly weaker as you go further out south well that's exactly what we observe on the earth the stuff uh magnetic field in the south shows that it's significantly weaker than in the north up to 30 percent weaker and on the globe it actually predicts symmetry with the dynamo model of a magnetic field just google it right you'll see that it's supposed to be symmetrical but it's not it's weaker in the south which works perfect so that works with the math flat earth prediction there's thousands of things like that that you guys are pretty cool the uh magnetic declination in the south right oh yeah it's just all over the place the south doesn't work on the globe but all this one from this place an atlantic anomaly uh this place gamer says one day prompt should be quote a positive claim for flat earth i don't know what that means this one from zarrzarin says witzit einstein dis approved and dis acknowledged the ether in 1906 fact is there any fact you can give from this century without gish galloping yeah first of all einstein later said he misspoke when he disregarded the ether we already read that you should have listened and he also said its story by no means finishes continued by the relativity theory in that space without ether is unthinkable and i just dropped the core now university uh ether postulation in theory from 2018 i actually listed about 10 of them from this century just a few minutes ago in the debate so you got it i don't ever refer to the way the earth moves though or the shape of the earth he was he was disagreeing and challenging that an ether is even considered to be possible in mainstream science and he's objectively wrong and ignorant on the subject who who mark no he didn't he said no scientists think there's an ether it was disproven no no mark mark no i'm saying you're conflating the the ether from back when einstein disapproved of it with what they're calling ether now and a lot of your papers say we visualize this as ether not that it is the same thing but we we're using this word and a lot of them are saying that but you don't want people to know that you want the difference exactly the same what's the difference but what the question is is how now is that ether if you could just not interrupt me for a second just lie so much it's so hard um well i mean you lie as well you're you're an just absolute trash liar so even what all right come on we gotta keep on wow wits it you are terrible um the the the whole point is that they're using that word because it's familiar but you don't want people to know that you want it to be seen as exactly the same thing but what you won't answer is how the ether is actually doing anything anywhere you're just using it as a crutch like magic to explain all the things that are inconvenient for you but never actually explain what this ether is doing and how it is doing it i can't explain it all but the problem is when i do it you will say it's word salad and you'll say i'm just making stuff up and you'll dismiss it and then call media interruption a media interruption you need to have for it let's get lost in a chance don't make me trigger so i i can say it's actually a background medium right and so just like sagnac said who invented or discovered the sagnac effect which is what gyroscopes are used and calibrated and engineered with he said it was a vortexual pattern within the ether that we're detecting the drift of and that's what the sagnac effect is and that's what we engineer ring laser gyroscopes with which detect that directly in connection with the 15 degree per hour sidereal rotation which isn't perfectly 15 degrees actually i can go even more into it as i said it's actually viscous continuous beyond comprehension and that throwing the infinitesimal prodigious worlds of velocity and manifests as matter electrostatics is the ether under strain i can do it again is the ether in motion do you say i can't describe it i can describe it and you're going to say no but what you're describing is not indicated in the papers that you cited this coming in from alternate right access to globe and flat side nothing you said are in those papers with it right so in those papers it's like it's like because you're a liar you're again you're just a liar you you claim that these papers support you and when they don't you just basically refer to the ether that was a while ago and then conflate it with the sort of quantum mechanics that they're using today it's a lie you're a liar no that's a straw man i never said that i it's not please stop i never said that these papers support what i just said i said specifically bring them up as evidence oh that's great i want to give them a chance to respond hold on oh they don't support me but i'm gonna present them anyway you gotta give them a chance to respond specifically i said there are many competing theories of an ether and i said i have my own understanding you said i can't make any claims about how it works and i specifically claim i i can i think that tesla was very correct except that light does not permeate the ether it's an excitation or perturbation or disturbance within the ether itself and it is illumination that is conflated into light that is actually modality the ether and everything is in fact that everything is unified under electromagnetic theory within a vortex and a torpedo pattern around that and that's how everything works so yeah i have my own theory there are competing theories you said that science doesn't talk about an ether i showed it it describes exactly what the old ether is and it says the word ether it says we can't unify it with relativity though because we can't explain it thanks for playing but that had nothing to do with it it doesn't describe it as a we got that's a lie alternate kek says to globe and flats do we have the ability to measure the distance to planets using arm amateur telescopes can we measure between continents as well i think you would need to assume size and distance and what you're looking at speed of light there's also parallax there's also um parallax is explained on a stationary oh i gave a chance thank you but it wasn't yeah it wasn't about gosh see you just did it so could you repeat the question all right stop names all right uh ozzie and talk said all those articles presume the earth is a sphere none believe that the earth is flat this is just a red herring yeah which is not to you guys right yeah so i the good thing that if you understood basic logic you would know that you can invoke evidence or a paper without believing every single thing that the paper says or that the person believes if you think that you have to believe every single thing that someone says and whatever whatever uh richard dockins thinks you must believe mark that your new belief whatever that's not how it works okay that's called an all or nothing fallacy it's like sub third grade you can invoke what someone says you can invoke paper you can invoke an experiment you can invoke evidence without invoking everything that the person believes outside of the specific thing you're invoking and you can evoke hostile witnesses never said that but what you're doing is basically taking the paper responding to the superchase excuse me i do want to excuse me you do bring up my name directly to me so you're taking out what you want you're cherry picking dumping the conclusions which is what you love to do and then just cherry pick exactly what you want out of it and say it supports you it's very very known tactic no cherry picking is whenever if i if i left it in context it would contradict what i say meaning if i say Einstein said the earth appears to be a rest but actually he told the truth for the first time see so this is uh you you have to censor me because you know i'm just gonna all right David come on it's getting bad again really fast so cherry picking is if i said look Einstein said that the earth always appears if it is rest but if you went and read it in context it would say but it doesn't always appear like it's a rest it has to contradict what you're saying i'm saying Einstein said it always appears as if it's a rest not that he thought it was a rest not that he thought it was flat so when you say Einstein didn't think the earth was stationary he didn't think the earth was flat your own sources contradicts you that's a red herring fallacy and a strawman fallacy okay it's very simple this one coming in from pick out what you want from a paper bands banna says why does the wait actually i want to give before we go to that one alternate kek i feel like i accidentally set short sighted them they said to the globe earth and flat earth side do we have the ability to measure the distance of planets using amateur telescopes is can we get a yes or a no or an i don't know from everybody yeah make a bunch of assumptions like at the same time though let's go from left to right austin yes no or i don't know uh no now without a bunch of assumptions what about nathan i'd say no as well i mean you're just looking at at something you maybe have to have like a measuring device i don't think you can you don't have to measure other things and have other things detectors and everything but no i'm gonna say no how about mark yeah not accurately but yeah there are other methods of defending distance to planets and then how about david yes with other tools that are are using conjunction with them and then can we measure between continents as well if you feel like your answer didn't already imply the answer to this feel free to give an answer to this on whether or not we can can we measure between continents as well it's very difficult to measure distances in water especially in the southern hemisphere quote unquote anybody else you could maybe i mean like if you really wanted to like nitpick it you could look at a landmark on land and then measure okay that's so far away and then you go to that landmark and then look out at another landmark and say it's that far away you know scoot your way across a continent something like that but i don't think that's what he was asking himself well i mean with with the power of telescopes we should be able to see from one continent like south america too um uh asia but we can't and that's because the earth is well and there's an infinitely through an atmosphere opacity any others yeah okay this one from banna says why does the globe side really i think they mean rely so heavily on presupposed theories isn't there a question that doesn't involve the earth already assumed as a globe well what other shapes could possibly be like coherent let's say it's a cube if it was a cube then you would get to a certain distance and then you'd see a 90 degree drop off so it can't be that same thing with a triangle or any other shape that has a sharp uh change in the um the perimeter so you're left with shapes that are you know spiritual or something like that right you know so the curve that we see all along our vast earth is consistent we don't see certain areas that have a more striking slope than others you got it you know that's it you got it and might as well tell you a couple of quick housekeeping things folks in particular all of our guests are linked in the description box below and that includes at the podcast if you didn't know we don't just call modern day debate a podcast in the sense that it's like a podcast but on youtube but we actually have our own podcast so it's all of these debates that are on youtube we put them on the podcast it's a hundred percent ad free so if you're like hey uh you know i don't like youtube's ads or whatever it is and it has all the intro music cutouts if you don't like that it you know it's a very good experience it's been popular a lot of people have enjoyed it so if you can find us on like spotify apple podcast all of these podcast apps and the reason i bring that up is because you can also find witsits and nathan's and marx and david's links in the description box there as well or at least if they have a link at the moment because some of the guests links uh some of the guests don't currently have a link if you are watching live right now and you're like wait the guests don't have a link in the description box you just have to refresh the page because i put them in after the debate started so pardon my delay on that but want to say thanks for all of your questions folks it's been a true pleasure we appreciate our guests so i want to say one last thank you witsit nathan marx and david it's been a true true pleasure uh thank you james and thank you everyone for participating i'm just a quick question james are they doing a discord after show and i know if they're they're gonna do that or not i have no idea man i'm sorry i uh we do have a modern day debate discord as well so guys if you folks out there if you didn't know that that is true highly encourage you to check it out and also last but not least as i mentioned earlier modern day debate does have a tiktok account and i have pinned our tiktok i think it's at the top of the chat right now it's certainly at the top of the description box and i highly encourage you if you have not yet followed our tiktok and you have a tiktok account what are you waiting for and the reason i say that is because once we had a thousand followers we will be able to put these streams with these gentlemen for example out on tiktok so more people will hear them make their case and so that our neutral platform can expand as we try to give everybody their fair shot to make their case on a level playing field so one last thank you to our guests though it's been a true pleasure to have you guys can we just guys can we get like a closing word like just a minute to just i can give you 60 seconds each okay excuse me um so i thank you everybody for following along honest open mind inquiring science is wonderful thank you james for for hosting this and everyone for for being here having this discussion um james is going to have his next podcast about uh is christian christianity rational and i just really y'all if if the earth is flat the the 666 tilt 666 curvature to the earth 666 falling around the sun continuous orbit bottom pit around fire all that stuff the the people that are in power y'all the the the washington monument the bar cause there's a lot of sixes and stuff in places and these people are willing to use leaf of course to determine policy instead of words i think this is a lot about the human condition we're either special center of creation over animals and animals do all sorts of things including take one another down i think there's a lot of importance to this topic so um thank you james thank you everyone for uh for this discussion and then people as well following along so my pleasure anybody else otherwise thank you i think he crushed it it's been a true pleasure so i want to say thanks thanks folks for watching we appreciate all your questions and want to let you know as always we hope you feel welcome no matter what walk of life you're from flat earth globe earth banana shaped earth you name it we're glad that you're here i'll be back in just a moment with a post credit scene letting you know about upcoming debates it's gonna be a short and sweet one because i'm super tired but i want to say thank you to our guests you guys have so much energy i i've pulled away so thank you guys we'll be right back folks stick around amazing my dear friends want to say thanks so much for being here let me load zoom back up and then i'm going to take five minutes and then i if that i'm going to say uh want to say folks we're thrilled to have you here thanks for all of your support if you haven't yet hit that like button seriously that really does help it's a small thing for you to hit that like button so you're probably like meh what's the difference but it does mean a lot to us at modern a debate as we really do want to expand this neutral platform it is a goal of ours we are unashamed about the fact that we're like yeah we want to grow because we think we are providing value on youtube we think that we're providing something that's you could say not only value but values based in the sense that our values are quite clear we want liberty we want freedom we believe that our debaters were free from their first breath and we want to keep it that way we want to give everybody a fair shot to make their case on a level playing field that's our goal on modern day debate we want things to be equal that's why we at modern day debate have neutral moderation where everybody gets their fair shot as well as that leads into our second value because a lot of people say oh james it's but it's so dangerous you you know if you let this position on or this person on it's irresponsible i'm one of the d platforming crew and james you're so bad you're so bad and it's true i'm a very bad man but nonetheless i've got to tell you there's a reason for it in it you could say corresponds or grows from is a downstream consequence from the fact that we as our second value value competition we think there's a value two competition in particular we believe that if you let a thousand flowers bloom there will be a natural selection of ideas in particular the best ideas will win out and the worst ideas will fall by the wayside the cream will rise to the top and this competition will be a good thing because there will be refining in particular if there are dangerous views or dangerous individuals it's good that we host them on modern day debate because on a neutral platform they'll be exposed by the other debater that they're going against and that's a good thing believe me if some people are like oh well james like you should like jump in and also expose them and it's like well but that doesn't really make it look like they've lost the debate in a like a genuine way because it's like well if you lose because the moderator also jumps in or if the channel is like oh we take a hard stance against this position we think it's inappropriate even though we platform and it's like well it doesn't seem as if for example frank exposes the dangerous view as if it's like a legitimate win anymore because it's kind of like oh well it's a platform that like openly admits that they're biased against the view that just got crushed and so you know it's almost like if the refs were fixed in a football game you'd be like well it doesn't seem like a genuine win you'd want an asterisk next to their name if they won with biased refs in their pocket so in the same way like this channel has to be genuinely neutral for a debate to be a genuine win so in other words like yeah we're like hey we're fully neutral we don't we're not like hey we take the flat earth position or hey we take the the globe earth position or hey we're you know we take it's purely like hey the debaters come on to make their case we only have debates here on modern day debate there are no position videos where I come on and say hey you know my position is that you know flat earth or globe earth is wrong or oh man those flat earthers or those globe earthers totally blew it they were so bad no no no no no no no no come on youtube deserves a better class of debate channel and that and we're going to give it to them we have big aspirations folks this channel though I am grateful that we have hit what is it 93,000 I think it's like 93,500 we hit today which is huge so like just in the last 24 hours it want to say thank you guys for subscribing seriously your support means more than you know and I've got to tell you we're thankful for it and at the same simultaneously like simultaneously we're excited about the future because we believe that our story is just beginning we are actually small now compared to what we're going to become we are going to continue to expand because that's what people want we've found we've recognized it we've found that modern day today it's expanding people are saying like hey this is cool like I want to come on your channel people are reaching out to us now and sometimes they're even people with major followings people are getting on board and so we're excited about that as we continue to pick up momentum and want to say though thanks for being with us I want to say hello to a few of you in the old live chat and then I've got to go but I want to say t daytrooper gw thanks for coming by true tech glad to have you here tie dot tie d4l glad you came by Joe the toe good to see you again as well as into the break thanks for coming by thanks for your support and good to see you iron horse you wily coyote thanks for coming good bye god guns and glory thanks for being with us into the break as well as lauren kalfi thanks for dropping in am i saying it right let me know eric william may glad to have you with with us tj davis glad to have you here truly and good to see you again sam paedro happy to have you with us as well as master optics glad you're here robert page good to see you again into the break good to have you dylan moats happy you're here mary thanks for being here says best debate channel thanks mary that means more than you know and s camel good to see you here ryan roberts glad you're with us what a world happy that you were here tie let's see hillside glad to have you here thanks for your kind words seriously that means a lot as well as holy someone you got a lot of people in chat tonight thanks for being with us folks good to have you here charlie and anchor in the veil thanks for dropping in solo and gully glad you're with us true tech happy to have you here batman good to see you huge fan of your movies also thanks for coming in miss sweet thanks for your kind words as james i appreciate you so much these debates are so great and some of my favorite entertainment get some sleep by much love thanks so much for that miss sweet totally appreciate it as well as amanda good to see you says love and appreciate you james thanks for that support that means a lot really does thanks for helping us scope out our next spot for our next in person conference this spring folks if you didn't know we do have in person conferences they're called debate con it's a debate conference in other words and we are excited about that as we are pumped to bring debates in person again or it's a fun thing we love doing it escamble good to see you here says i miss steven seen you and me both thanks for that snap trap good to have you here thanks for your kind words that really does encourage me it means a lot want to go or uh i want to say i got to go but thanks for being here jj hemp crete bear glad you came by splatter ivxx thanks for dropping in thanks for saying hello christoph good to see you elaine i'm glad you're here as well as lauren kaff and tj trusty and jf and gods let's see see into the break glad you're here let's see let's see glad you're here lrn news thanks for coming by and want to say thanks for all your guys support it's a busy time as you know but i've got to run because i'm excited to pop in and say hello and and then let you guys go and i want to say thanks for all your support though we love you guys you make this fun we're excited about this upcoming debate you can see at the bottom right of your screen it's going to be huge you don't want to miss it so hit that subscribe button and if you're already subscribed check if you hit that notification bell for all debates because that will make sure that you're going to see that notification for this big upcoming debate on wednesday between steward and arin you don't want to miss it want to say thanks for all your love and support you guys we'll see you at the next one and keep sifting out the reasonable from the unreasonable amazing as i said my dear friends thanks for all your support one last reminder about that tick tock link at the top of the description box and pinned at the top of the chat if you do have tick tock means a lot if you help support us by following us as we're excited to be able to expand and livestream our debates over there as well as for us it's really just about the exposure we really are excited that hey more people can learn about this neutral platform so if you haven't yet please do click that tick tock link and follow us there as once we get to a thousand followers we'll be able to unlock that live streaming feature so thank you guys love you guys have a great rest of your night