Everybody today we are debating Flat Earth and we are starting right now. Ladies and gentlemen, thrilled to have you here for this epic debate on the shape of the earth. It's going to be a fun one, folks. Very exciting stuff. Well, I'll let you know if it's your first time here. Consider hitting that subscribe button as you've got a lot more debates coming up. So for example, on the bottom right of your screen you will see none other than David Wood and Matt Dillahunty as they will be debating in person. You will be at the Atheist Experience Studio filming their debate on the foundations of morality, whether that be God or secular humanism, it's going to be epic, folks. And also, if you haven't heard, if you're tuning in because you love T-Jump, the guy that you see on the right, he's also got an upcoming debate that's going to be epic. That is, on the bottom right of your screen, Tom Jump versus his father, Steve McCrae. It's going to be, it's like a family dynasty, it's going to be dramatic. Father versus son, we are very excited for that one as well. But anyway, folks, we are excited for tonight's debate. It's going to be a lot of fun. Very flexible, basically eight minute opening statements or so from each speaker with Billy, our Flat Earth guest going first. Then Tom with a short opening statement as well and an open conversation. If you have a question during that conversation, feel free to fire it into the old live chat. If you tag me with an at modern day debate, that makes it easier for me to not miss it. Also, just so you know, both of these gentlemen, I have put their links in the description. So that way, if you're listening, you're like, hmm, I want more of that. Well, good news.  So with that, Steve or I should say Billy, as I had mentioned, is going to go first. So thanks so much for being with us for the first time, Billy. I don't know if everybody knows, but for Billy, it's actually daytime as he is far across the globe.  So thank you, Billy, for being here. Hi, James. Glad to hear. Glad to have you here. Thank you. I'm just going to ignore this screen because I've got a bit of a delay, so I just don't want to get put off by the screen. Yeah. Thanks for having me here and who would have thought that in 2020 we would be talking about the shape of the earth. We all thought this was solved many years ago, obviously, and that's why a lot of us get rather triggered when we hear this topic, you know. Yeah, glad to be here and I see MC2 and just made a comment about, you know, you need something like eight grade science. It's pretty cool. Good comment. And isn't that just the typical rhetoric we hear when we first hear about this discussion and a lot of people continue with it. I've invited people from around the world in a new experiment or an event that I've put together called Test the Curve Day 2020. What that's about is I'm trying to encourage people on the 21st of the 22nd of March coming in about, you know, 10 days time to get out and test the curve on their own, do their own experiments. As I said, we all thought this topic was solved many, many millennia ago you'll hear people say it was solved two and a half thousand years ago. Funny enough, they didn't even have the technology to prove it. And here we are now with advanced technologies that we're getting varying results to what they had.  And that's why we're here. Because those assumptions are made obviously influence many other assumptions along the way. Many other calculations have continued based on an R value, a radius of this earth. And I may look for about five years now and I can't find this radius. So I'm keen to have a discussion with Tom and see if he can prove that the earth is spherical and I can go back to my old life and be a ball earther and I'll join your camp. You prove it. I'll join your camp. I write a new book and I'll, you know, I'll be the biggest advocate on your side. So I want to, I'm going to let Tom go for it now and now it's not eight minutes. That's all right. That's cool. Yep. As much as you want to use or as little as you want to use, thanks so much for that, Bill. Right. I will. Glad to have you here. And so same thing for Tom. He doesn't have to use the whole eight minutes as he usually doesn't. But if he wants, it's up to him. Thanks for being here as well, Tom. Yeah, thanks for having me on. Yeah, we know the world is a globe because we can see it. We literally bend his face and we can just turn around and look. We have pictures and satellites and we can take a telescope and we can look and see the satellites that take the pictures and we can see the pictures from those satellites and confirm that they're real and we can see the International Space Station so we know it's there and we can see all the satellites that the different countries have sent. We know they're there and it's pretty ridiculous to think that every single country is in on some grand scheme to hide the fact that the world is actually flat for no reason.  So if there was actually some like one fact that they could all get right and be like superior over all the others, like if China could say, oh, the world is flat and they would be more right than America, they do it. But they didn't because it's not. The Russians were the first ones to send the first object to space, which was Sputnik. And the Russians and Americans just hate each other. So if the Americans could just say, no, the world's actually flat. And so Sputnik was a lie. They would have done that.  They wanted to beat the Russians in every single way. But they didn't because it's not. I mean, we can we can demonstrate it's clearly there is space and clearly the world is round. All of the math works. The way to send satellites to space requires that it's a globe Earth. And to get into orbit requires it's a globe Earth and all the math required works for the globe Earth model. And all of the communication time between the satellites and space to Earth are on globe Earth math and general relativity and they work. And there are no alternatives like the alternative. Alternative, whatever you want to propose just doesn't work. Only the globe math works to get these satellites into space to get the calculations to work for the communication of the satellites for calculation for objects in space and where they're going to go and how fast they're going to travel. All of that is just all globe Earth math and general relativity, special relativity, Newtonian mechanics, those kinds of things. It's all just the globe model that works. There isn't an alternative. If you wanted to say that the flat Earth was a valid alternative, you'd have to create an alternative kind of mathematics that can do everything that the globe models can do as well or better, which can't. Which is a problem. And then you need to make novel testable predictions to show that if my model is correct, then we can predict this new thing that no one knows yet that the globe Earthers don't predict. And then only we can and we get it right and they don't. That's how science works. It's all about novel test predictions. Everybody has a hypothesis. The one that can make novel testable predictions is the one that's right. The globe Earth has done that numerous times over and over and over again, which is why we know it's right. And the fact that we can literally see it. So we have pretty resoundingly solid evidence that the world is a globe, like absolute certainty kind of levels. It's like rejecting evolution or rejecting that germs cause disease or rejecting that atoms create radiation. All of these are just facts of reality. We know them with absolute certainty. So yeah, we know for a fact the world is a globe, but there's no contesting that at all. Gotcha. Thanks so much for that, Tom. We will now get into open discussion mode. As I can tell Billy is licking his chops. He's excited to address some of those points. Thanks so much to the fours of yours. Big time. I wish I counted the amount of times he said we, Tom. You kept saying we've been to space. Excuse me. We've done this. We've done that. Who's we? We mean we. And then you went to China and Russia. These guys, yeah, they all hate each other. So why do they trust each other and hate each other at the same time? Why do the Americans trust Russia to take them to the International Space Station after NASA shut down their space shuttle missions? And now they pay them $80 million per passenger per each weight, right? So you are trusting your biggest adversary to take you to space and now you're sharing information with them. And come on, we'll go back to the 60s. Do you know that the 60s were the most untrusted era in time? Your president at that time, Nixon, was the most untrusted president of ever. You have all time, I should say, ever. Right? And now we're going back to, and that's why I'm doing tests of curve day. I'll let you speak, so don't do that. You said Nixon was the most untrusted president. No, second most untrusted president. All right, yeah, let's do a poll on that. There are many. Gee, have there been any trusted ones? This is what we should really be asking. That's the question. And that's why I'm doing tests of curve day. Yeah, are we going to really go back and trust the Russians in the 1960s? You weren't even born, man. Neither was I. Actually, I was born in 1970. So anything before the first moon mission, I didn't see if that. Do you really think they went to the moon as that song goes? Do you really think they went to the moon? America, yes. America, yes. What about China a few years ago? Yes, probably. Probably, have you seen that footage? No, I haven't researched at all. You've got to research that, mate. And that's why I've done five years of research on this. And I was very defensive against this. I didn't want it to be this. I don't want it to be this, man. And you ask, why wouldn't they come out and tell us? That's the biggest question. That's philosophy. That's a big cycle. That's the biggest question of all. Let's not do that one. Let's take it step by step. So we're talking about China. We're talking about Russia and America, and that they proved it. But it went before that. You've got to go back about 2 and 1 half thousand years ago when Aristotle was around. And even other great guys at the time who were postulating because they wanted it to be a ball, a lot of them, mate. If you look at that, do you know about the carbola? And the way atoms, they devised atoms two and a half thousand years ago. And you talked about Newtonian mechanics, but we know that that's all wrong. We know that's wrong now. Now they're going to quantum theories, and quantum is taken right over. And we're working out if they're not mechanics. These orbits are not mechanics. Go and watch some videos into this holographic theory. And I reckon you'd resonate quite well with them because it could work well with their being evolution or a non-creator. And this could be a holographic universe, which is what a lot of scientists are talking about now. So if it's a holograph, how is it a ball? And more to the point, where's the curve? Where's the curve, man? Have you gone? Where do you live, Tom? How far from the ocean do you live? Minnesota, about 5,500 miles. Yeah, you're in the middle of the country. I live 700 meters from the beach, which is something like 1,000 feet.  So Melbourne, Australia, if you look up Melbourne, and the Port Phillip Bay in Melbourne, it's one of the largest inland bays in the world. Like 2,000 feet, right? 2,100 feet, about 700 meters. Yeah, oh, sorry, 700 meters, yeah, I should have said it. Times three, 2100 feet.  That's all it is. It's a two-minute drive. So sorry, I said 700 meters, you're right, 2100 feet. All right, so yeah, I'm not really following much of what you said. Like, Newtonian mechanics was just less accurate than general and special relativity and quantum mechanics. Relatively blued away, man. Let's not go there. Let's not do that, because that's not what the debate is about. No, no, that's the point. Let's talk about curvature, and whether you've seen the curvature of the Earth, or whether you've seen curvature. That's right, that's right, but I'm not following how anything you said has anything to do with the curvature. I brought up Newtonian mechanics because you brought up Newton earlier, and you know how Newton devised the r-value in his formula? Do you know where he got that from? Math? He didn't, yeah, and you don't get it from, he assumed it from Aretasthenics. Likewise, did Cavendish. These guys didn't go and test the curvature of the Earth and prove what their predecessors had done and their experiments that they had done. That's wrong, that's not how you science. Actually, you can't go and reproduce every experiment, but when you know that your predecessors didn't have the equipment, nor did they have a telescope, because the telescope wasn't invented to like 1492 by Hans Lippersche. So how the heck did they trust their, trust these Greeks anyway? Really, they trusted Greeks with their math two and a half thousand years ago, and their observation with sticks and shadows, which apparently is gonna be reproduced in a couple of ways. No, we made a testable prediction. So what we do is we create a hypothesis, then we make a prediction, we say if this hypothesis is correct, here's the prediction here, here's what the results are going to be.  If we got the prediction wrong, we'd be like, oh, they were wrong, so we need to make new math. But because they consistently got it right, every prediction we made was right, right, right, right. Then Newton was like, oh, yeah, these guys math, it's right because we can keep making these predictions that keep being correct over and over and over again. So that's why Newton used those math because they work. That's how science works, is that you make predictions, and if those predictions are correct, then whatever the starting hypothesis was, that's a good reason to accept it. So that's why- That's cool. I like what you said. I liked that, Tom, I'm sorry to interrupt. I noticed someone said, really keeps interrupting. Please feel free. If you've got a word to say halfway through my sentence, just say that word. Don't go and take over the whole. But sometimes we need to interject, and that's what dialogue is about. It actually means the ology in Greek. Two words, two people conversing with one another, and I don't want to sit here in a monologue type environment. So if you want to say something, get it in there. But when you said, if, he said, if, he said, if the math was correct, if, if, and that's a big thing, what if it's not? And what if we've been using all these false assumptions all the way? And that's why we're here. That's why we're here going, hey, we thought we live on a ball. And what if they, along the way, you know, the question is why, and why wouldn't they tell us? But we'll get there, don't worry. All in good time. But what if it's wrong? If the math was wrong, then we wouldn't be able to make predictions. That's how we know it's not wrong. Sorry to interrupt. There's lots of them. So Newton was explaining all kinds of things about the rotation of the planets. He created an entire model of calculus based on explaining how the orbits of the planets around the sun and all of his predictions were correct related to that model. He didn't even know the distance of the sun. Just to be sure that we for sure get the, to hear the rest from Tom. Well, that's right. He didn't, there's lots of things he didn't know, which means the fact that he got them right, so much more amazing. The fact that he knew so little and he could get so much right with that and so little is really good evidence that everything he was using is correct. That's why it was accepted. So he didn't actually need to know everything that would actually make it less impressive. The fact that he only knew a little bit and just had the math to base his predictions on and got them right every single time is really good evidence that everything he was using was correct, not incorrect. However, Einstein's theory of relativity totally debunks his theory of gravity. So which gravity we're gonna, yeah, it does actually, man, you can use an attorney for gravity for a few things, but you can't, it doesn't answer, it's not the be all. And that's why Einstein came around to come up with his theory. No, this is, I'm sorry to interrupt, but this is why I said Newtonian mechanics isn't wrong, it's just less accurate. So it's like if you can gauge the distance of like how far away that baseball is to within one meter or something, that's not wrong. It's only just right within error range of one meter. Whereas Newtonian mechanics, that's what Newtonian mechanics was, whereas general relativity could gauge it in between like with one inch. So it's just more accurate, it isn't wrong. Newtonian predictions were not wrong. They were just less accurate than general relativity's predictions, which are also right. So general relativity didn't overthrow Newtonian mechanics, it's just more accurate in certain cases. We still use Newtonian mechanics for everything in every world, every day life. It's not like it stopped being right. It's still right. We just, we can't use it when we're trying to get down to the 0.0001 degree of accuracy, which is what we need general special relativity for. But they're both right still. Do you know how far Newton thought the distance of the sub was? Nope. Does it matter? Nope. Why? Because he's a reverse engineer, the math, can't you? What? And that's what he said, he said the same. He said, I care not whether the distance of the sun is three, 13 or 26 million miles away or something like that. It matters not. The math still works out the same. But it's actually 96 million. Well, that's a perihelion, an aphelion, 99 or something. So the math still works, but whatever. Yeah, that's something that you actually can't prove yourself. So that's why test the curve day is in order. Test the curve day means that you can go out and do this. And let's refer, because there are now over 200 million flat earthers around the world, 11 or 12 million in Brazil alone. That's concerning, don't you reckon? Not particularly. I mean, I think there are billions of people who believe very silly things. I mean, there are billions of Christians. So I'm not particularly concerned that there are lots of people who believe silly things. But I'm not, again, following your point. The reason that the distance of the sun doesn't matter is because you can do the math regardless of the distance of the sun. It doesn't make a difference. It doesn't, it's not that the equations are the same and the results are the same regardless of the distance of the sun. It's the fact that you can do the math regardless of the distance of the sun. So you get different answers depending on how far away the sun is. He didn't have the facts at age 23. He died without the facts, right? He died because he was an alchemist. I think he used to drink mercury. Pretty smart guy, huh? He thought he could make gold. Again, he totally didn't follow. He drank mercury by 23. And then he used, and then going back, I read a scene, he didn't even know the distance of the sun when he did the stick and shadow experiment. And if we go back to that one, that one's a beauty because, you know, you get some people, the stick and shadow experiment. It wasn't even done with sticks and shadows. It was done, Carl Sagan said it was done with obelisks. Some other guy said it was a combination of obelisks and sticks and wells and, you know, which one is a, is that a good experiment? If I said, I drove a thousand miles and I did it in two hours, well, how'd you do that? Oh yeah, one day I said I'd use a Ferrari. Next day I said I'd use the Porsche. And next day I used the friggin', you know. It was. But Karen, which one is it? It was done multiple times. Combination of the few. I don't know, it was done multiple times over a long period for many different people with obelisks, yes, with wells, yes, with sticks, yes. That's not the story, Tom. It's one man. No, that's not the story. It was done in one particular way. You have to Google it to find out which one it was. But it wasn't, it's not like a vast array of possibilities. You did it in one way. No, that's not the story. I thought it was that too. I thought that was the way too. I thought that was the case too. You should do it. How much research have you done on this topic? You know, I want to see both sides, not one side, both sides. Both sides? I'm not sure what you mean. Like, I've done research into cosmology and astrophysics and physics and theoretical physics and all kinds of things related to how physics works, which I mean, that's just the globe Earth or side. So I know the world is a globe for a fact. It's the only option. Like, you can't do physics without all of the man. You can't do physics. Yes, you can, man. You can't even do a reticent in his experiment. You can do that based on a localized sum or a distance sum. Neil deGrasse Tyson said that. He actually said that with his own words. Right, right. I grant that. You can't do physics, like astrophysics and cosmology and the actual modern physics. You can't do that with flat Earth models at all. You can do nothing. You're right. You can't without astrophysics, because I just saw an article yesterday that said, they found 8.8 habitable planets in the Milky Way. 8.8 billion. That's one for each person.  Is that true? That's an estimate. It's astrophysics, isn't it? We've only found about 5,000 to 6,000 that we can verify. That's an article just yesterday. 8.8 billion planets. That's an estimate based off of the 5,000 to 6,000 we've actually found that are within the habitable zone. And then we estimate based off of the ones we have found. Wait, wait, it's a very select group. No, no, it's human beings. The entire collection of human beings, we have found like 5,000 to 6,000 habitable planets in the habitable zone of other stars that could support life. And based off of that in the level, the area of search that we can access, if we expand that to the level of the galaxy, we get this number. We haven't actually found that. It's just math, isn't it? You just expand things. You just go, based on this, it couldn't be that. And these guys, really, do you really believe all of that? Come on. I used to do this well one day. You believe it all. We haven't been there. We haven't been there. We haven't been back to the moon. We can't even get past the Van Allen radiation belts. But you reckon they can work all this out and they've done all this? It's fine. Let's go. Let's get our heads out of the clouds. Let's get back onto Earth, right? Let's test the Earth. What have you done to test the curve of the Earth? Should be proven. Should be done at school. Everyone should be doing. Everyone should know how to test the curve. Should be given. Should be given. If we know how many stars there are in the sky, how many planets we can live on right now in the sky, let's test this Earth. Why are people doing the same thing? They shouldn't. The way we test hypothesis, as we say, if our hypothesis is true, we make predictions. And if those predictions are correct, that confirms the hypothesis. And what if they're not correct then, Tom? Then the hypothesis is wrong. So if we get it. Yes, exactly. Because we could say further than we could. Have you said what the long? No. So that's false. So that's immediately false. Anything you explain on Earth is already fully explained by the globe model. That's done. You can go bother the physicists. How does it explain? So we know there's an easier way to know that the globe Earth is right, because all of the math and physics created by globe Earth math works. And there is no alternative. So everything explained in physics is explained by globe Earth math. And it works. And it makes predictions which are correct every single time. And there is no alternative. It's just that simple. If you create an alternative that can do it, go for it. But you have it. Just saying that, oh, well, we can explain all the stuff we see in a different way does nothing to help your hypothesis. All of that is explained on the globe Earth model completely without any failure. No one has any problem with that. So saying that, oh, well, we can see farther because of, well, we shouldn't be able to see that far. But we can, because the refraction of light or whatever, we have no problem with this. There is nothing we see on Earth that has any problem for the globe model at all. No observation on Earth causes any problem for the globe model at all. It's all fully explained by the globe model. So none of the challenges you bring are relevant to the globe model at all. It's like, yeah, we already knew all this.  We already knew and we already explained like 100 years ago. We, again, we explained 100 years ago. We, we human, we human, we human, we human, we human. I'm not doing away from 100 years ago. I'm doing it now. I go every day, every second day of the week with my pain management camera.  And we test stuff, man. You know how far this could see? 83 times zoom. 83 times, man.  Go and get one, go and do some, I need to go and say refraction of light, which you're telling me. When I see things, they're not really there. They're behind the curve. When I see a man at the end of the street, he's not really there. Even though I know that ground is perfectly level, he's not really standing at the end of the street when I zoom in with that camera. No, he's behind the curve of the Earth. You know how ridiculous that is? This camera could zoom 60, 100 kilometers. We could see what, do you know what the world record long distance photo is? No. No. 440 kilometers. 273 miles. Google it. Why haven't you, why don't you know this? Why would I need to know this? Why shouldn't you? Because it's all groundbreaking stuff. It just happened a couple of years ago. None of that, none of that is groundbreaking. It's groundbreaking, man. It's groundbreaking. It is groundbreaking. That's why I won the world record. Rather than give world records to non-groundbreaking stuff to them. Yes, they do. There's a world record for most hot dogs eaten. There's a world record for most ground breaking, man. So no one else has done it. You do it. So none of that is groundbreaking at all. Like you can get photos from very far away. If you get on top of a mountain and you just take a photo from a really long distance, you'll be able to see very far. But none of that is groundbreaking. So all of that is perfectly explained by the global model. None of that does anything to challenge the global model. It's good. What you said about the guy standing on the end of the street not really being there. I mean, it depends on how far away he is on the speed of light. So when we look up at the stars, what we're seeing is where they were billions of years ago. And so they're not there anymore. Many of the stars we see in the night sky have already died and died. Oh, they died. I know. I know that's what they say. I know that story, man. It's a cool story.  These stars died for you. The stars in your left hand are different from the stars in your right hand. Have you ever seen any of the stuff? You've got to do both sides. That's why I'm here. Like, I'm not here to debate. I'm not even going to convince you. I've seen some of your videos. You've said that debating with atheists on whether the word atheist is right or wrong. Like, you're getting too atheistic, arguing each other over a word that actually means all this is relevant. So again, like we can prove how are the stars of the sky relevant? How is the sky to test the curve? So let's test the predictions. It's all about testable predictions. Like when you say when we have to compare the evidence of both sides, there is only one kind of evidence and that's testable predictions. It doesn't matter if you can post-talk, explain other stuff we already know. The only kind of evidence that exists for anything is testable predictions. So you have to say if my theory is correct, I can make a prediction about something we don't know yet. Do a test to confirm that and say, oh, I was right about this. Flat Earthers can't do that. You've done that for nothing ever. That's true. I agree with what you're saying. It's about testing stuff. So what test did Newton do? Like calculating the rates of the planets of rotation. That's what we're talking about. With this pen, did he calculate with this here? I'll calculate. I'll calculate. Then he looked at him and he's like, yes, okay, so I calculated. And he looked at him with what? With what? How? Up to the age of 23. He didn't even live long enough, man. 23 year olds, what did you do by 23? You can see the planets with your naked eye. You don't need a telescope.   No, you use the math to do the prediction and then you can confirm it with the naked eye. So I'm not sure what difficulty you're having with that one, but again, the flat earth. It's the BS behind it.  Our prediction suggests that based on our current technology, because Newton didn't even, Newton didn't even consider electromagnetism or any other aspect. Static, yeah, or anything. Why is this relevant? Why is this relevant? We can confirm all of these equations today. It matters now that we know we're living in a retro magnet. If you have a retro magnet, the universe matches quite a lot. So go back to the argument. The argument was is that evidence is testable predictions. Newton made testable predictions. He confirmed them, but if you don't want to believe that, that's fine. We can confirm them today and say, yep, he was right. 1,000 miles, nothing. Absolutely nothing. Like all of that is perfectly explained under the global model by the way, how we know physics. So there's none of that in any way conflicts with the global model. You just don't understand physics. It's a spinning ball then and it'll always be a nothing. There's nothing that anyone could show you. There's nothing anyone that could show you to change your mind. There is, there is absolutely. What is it? What is it? Oh, hold on one sec, guys. One sec. One sec, guys, we so sorry. We lost the connection. It just all of a sudden dropped. Damn. Yeah, I have no idea. People can't hear us right now? No, they can't right now. I'm trying to figure out. I'm trying to figure out.  Whatever, I don't get it. Calm down a second, I'm trying to problem solve. So, we're- Is your mobile hotspot? Is that still on? I switched it over to the computer internet, the internet here in the building. So that's not what it is anymore. I don't know where, like, I just don't know where we are. So let me, we might have to restart. So, well, I mean, your first 34 minutes is fine. We just, okay. So it looks like we are started on another stream. And I will go. So, folks, thanks for sticking with us. We can see you there in the live chat. We see about 45, 54 now. So, sorry about that, folks. I have no idea what just happened. That was weird. So, we are so back and so glad that you are with us if you're watching in the live chat. Very embarrassing. Okay, so with that, gentlemen, I can go back and look up those old super chat. So, folks, if you sent a super chat, don't worry. I will pull those up and we'll ask those during the Q&A. And with that, where were we before I interrupted you guys? Thanks so much for your patience. And really was saying that there was nothing that could convince me that the world was flat, something like that. No, I asked you, is there anything that could convince you that your model is flawed or needs? Yes, absolutely. Just novel testable prediction. So, for example, if you believe in the firmament, like I don't know what your particular model of the Flat Earth is. I haven't seen it, man. Like, do you believe that the Antarctica, the South Pole goes all the way around the world? I have never seen, you know, I've seen as much like what can we know about that? There needs to be, I believe if there's water on, if the water, the water on itself needs to be contained. So there needs to be some type of containment.  Have we seen massive ice walls? I've seen videos of it. I've seen them, have you? No. No, you should do some research on it, man. Go and look at them. They're massive walls of ice. Admiral Richard Byrd climbed these walls of ice during Operation High Jump. They took thousands of men down there, thousands of, 1300 ships, please, 13 planes. I don't know, look at the numbers. I've actually read it about in my book. I should know them off the top of my head. But they've done this. I know about it. I've seen they had to climb. They called it Operation High Jump because they had to get from their boats up to this ice wall and then go beyond. And he said there was more land. More land to be found. Ice is floats on the top of the water, so there can't be an ice wall that contains the water because the water would go underneath it. So that's like the South Pole is just a block of ice. The North Pole is a land, I think. Maybe it's the other way around, I don't remember. You're right. I agree that if there was ice, it would go all the way into the border. We know ice floats, so there'd have to be a point where you would be able to go under this ice wall and keep going. Maybe that, if you've got a submarine, you could keep going and pop up into the one of the other little ponds. We don't know. We don't go there. I can't do that, Tom. I don't know about the ice wall. I can't go there. I'm just a man in Melbourne. How am I going to go to the ice wall? Where have you been? You haven't even gone out and test the curve of the earth in your own land, let alone test the ice wall or the firmament. Well, I mean, every test I do is going to be conformed to exactly what the geocentric model stuff is going to show, just like every test you do conforms exactly to what the geocentric model shows. That's what you should do. You should be going and testing that formula, actually. Testing what you're testing that formula. Testing whether water is level over vast distances. Well, we have. That's already been demonstrated. Everything, every observation and every test on the face of the earth has always 100% conformed to exactly what the geocentric math has expected it to do. And so testing it now. Did you say the geocentric? That's what I'm going. That's my side, man. I'm geocentric. You're heliocentric. Heliocentric, yeah. So I'm helping you here. So yeah, I still got that. You can become a geocentric. You're going to become a geocentric eventually, because that's what I did as well. It's geocentric. And that's what you're documentary called the principle. Sorry to interrupt you again. Watch a documentary called the principle. And you'll love it, man. Even the best scientists in the world. Yep.  Just to be sure that Tom gets a response there. I appreciate your passion, though. We like that. And so, Tom, just to be sure you got a chance to respond there. I get fired up. So again, if you want to provide evidence for the geocentric model of the Flutter, if you can't just look at stuff we've already seen and already explained and try to explain it in a different way, you have to do something new. So every observation we can make just by looking at the ocean or looking at taking photos from long distances or infrared testing or whatever, all of that's been done. We already know all of the answers you're going to get from that. You could just ask the scientists and ask them what you're going to get. And they're going to tell you and they're going to be right 100% of the time. They already know all of this. So just saying that you can explain it using a different analysis and say that theirs is wrong for some reason, which is not, doesn't do anything to help your case. We've already done all these tests everywhere in the world. We know they're right. You need something new. Like if we could, you asked if there was anything that could convince me of the geocentric model or the Flutter model, if you buy a plane ticket to the South Pole, which anyone can do, like any human being can buy a plane ticket to there just like they can do anywhere else in the world. And you find this ice wall, that would be great evidence. Find me the edge of the world, essentially. That's great evidence, but no one's ever done that. I've never seen a Flutter or go to the South Pole. Anybody can do this. Like anybody can just buy a ticket to the South Pole. It's pretty easy. And just rent a truck and just drive wherever you want. No one's going to stop you, but they don't. No one ever go. That would be the greatest evidence for the Flutter. Just find the firmament. Just find the giant invisible wall going up into space that no one can get past. Poof, you've got this amazing evidence for the Flutter. But no one's done that. No Flutter. There's never gone to the South Pole because it's just another continent of ice, just like every other one. There's nothing special about it. There's no blockade holding the water in it. Just holds itself to the surface of the Earth because it's a globe just like all the other planets that we see hold gas to their surface. So yes, there are definitely things that could convince me the world is flat. Go find the firmament. That would be great evidence. So far you want me to go to the ice wall and find the firmament. Let me explain the ice wall which you said is all ice. Sorry, the Antarctica, which is a continent of all ice. It's not. Google it. There's land there. You'll see mountain peaks when they melt. There's actually mountains. There's land in Antarctica. It's not all ice like we would like to believe. Our model is, our model, the things you know, I've got to talk the same stuff, mate. I've got to talk the same stuff at school as you. I know what you're saying about this. Antarctica is supposed to be at the bottom of the wall. Billy's back. Thanks so much, Billy. So sorry, Billy. It was my fault, Billy. I'm so sorry about that. Promise that one. I blame Tom, but it won't happen again. Yeah, cool, cool. I think where I got cut off, we're talking about Antarctica and, you know, and the firmament. And that's just like way beyond what anyone can prove. Can you prove the Val Allen radiation belts, Tom? I bet you can't. Can you prove what's at the core of this spinning ball? You can't. No one's even... How? Testable predictions. You can make multiple testable predictions. How? You can predict that if there is, if it's made of whatever composition you want, then you can make a prediction about what the field that it creates is going to be like. And you can make a prediction that if there is a different planet with a different composition, it'll make a different field. And that'll have a different effect on the kinds of radiation it'll allow through. So we can, we can definitely show those things. Yes. But we've only drilled eight miles down into the earth. We don't need to. We don't need to actually see it. We don't need to directly see it. The weather here, the weather channel makes certain predictions all the time. They're always wrong, man. Yes, that's why we don't trust them. If they're right... That's why we don't trust them. And these are the same people that may have, you know, scientists make other predictions. No, no. The weather people, the meteorologists, are not the same as the... You can't go to the core of the earth and I can't go to the edge of the earth. Well, I don't need to either. I don't need to go to the edge of the earth. Like you said, the edge of the earth. I don't think you've researched this topic enough for you to say edge of the earth. You're assuming that, what is it? The earth is a flat, earth is a disc flying through space that a cat's going to push things off the edge. Is that what you're assuming? I have no idea what you're saying. That's why I wanted you to go first. I don't think that. I think that the earth is an infinite plane. I think it's... I don't know what it is, actually. I don't know what it is, but what I do know is that we don't live on a spinning ball. And how would you prove that we do yourself?  Novel testable predictions. I'd use the math that they use and show that it works. They use, not they. Now, how would you start from day one to prove you live on a spinning ball? Let's say you woke up. This debate was not... It was never even discussed where we live.  What test would you do? You'd wake up and go, am I... It feels stationary. I'm not moving. Yeah, well, that would be a terrible move.  So anyone who does that is dumb. So, because we know there's better methodologies out there. So if we just woke up like in a tribe, in an uneducated tribe in the middle of Indonesia, yes, we should probably not do anything they're doing because that's not gonna get us anywhere. What we should do is look at the modern technology of the past 2000 years of how we've gone from that level of technology to skyscrapers and planes and telephones and cell phones and cameras and stuff and use that methodology. Because that methodology works. They're different. That's different. You know, when you're talking about physical, materialistic things that you can prove, you know, like building, we know someone built that building. Like the plane, like the globe. But that's different to theoretical science. That's different to theoretical science, isn't it? Well, nothing in physics isn't theoretical science. Unless it's theoretical physics. So no, the globe isn't theoretical. It's proven. It's physics. It's theoretical. You went from the very start. The one of the first things you said is photos from Earth from space. Photos of Earth from space. They're questionable. You know that. No photo would be a photo if not real photos. Physics isn't based off photos. Physics, you started the discussion. I've got it written down here. You said we about 23 times. Then you said China, Russia, satellites. Satellites can't be all predictions we make for orbital mechanics. And satellites can't be done. Have you seen the balloon satellites? No, there's no balloon. No, no. So, you know, I should write down the amount of nos that you said on that you haven't researched, man. Yeah, because I don't need to. Again, the only thing I need is testable predictions. So I can say. Yeah, I know. I know. That's all I need.  And I'm Greek, right? I loved the heliocentric model. I could tell you inside out. And did you know when Yuta made his predictions, he didn't realize that the Sun was also orbiting through the universe at 500,000 miles an hour plus all these other, they didn't know that, man. They didn't know. They thought the Sun was in the center. They called it heliocentric. And we went around the Sun. Well, now we know it's doing this and all these other. Why are you saying this? Like, why do you think this is relevant? Because you're going based on predictions that these guys were wrong, man. Newton would have. And they were not wrong. They were like, why do you think it's made them wrong? Like they only made predictions about the solar system and their predictions about the solar system were right. Their predictions about the solar system in relation to the galaxy. Well, they didn't make any in that sense at all. They all reversed engineers that off the tunnel system.  Reverse engineers, what? The heliocentric model was reverse engineered. They just looked at what was happening. They reversed the numbers, but you could do it. Fred Hoyle said the same. You've got to do your research on the topic, Tom, with an open mind. When do you think reverse engineered means? It means you could either say that we're spinning right now and that's what's creating the Sun to appear to be moving over the sky. Or you could say that I am stationary and the Sun is moving. You could do the math on both models. You could either say the Earth is spinning 1,000 miles an hour. Or you could say the Sun is moving across the sky 1,000 miles an hour. And you could do the math on both models. You can. So that was not how the heliocentric model was made, funny enough. No, it was, heliocentric model was made based off of actual testable predictions that we could see in the universe that better explained reality. Testable predictions. Testable is a very testing. What's that testing? How do they test it? Newton didn't conduct any tests. It's really, really simple. It's really, really simple. And it's pernicus. No tests whatsoever. Yes, they did. Yes, they did. You looked at the sky, that's an observation, not a test. No, a test is as you look at the sky, then you do the math and make a prediction about when you look at the sky in the future, what are you going to see? And if you wait in the future and then you see that, that's a confirmed prediction. Confirmed. Done, dusted.  It doesn't matter how you came up with them.  You could just roll a magic eight ball and say, You can't do that, Tom. Yes, you can. I'm sorry, man. I can't. This is basic how science works. If you try to keep up, you can't just make a prediction when you go in New York. You'll never get there. You'll just die halfway, man. You're going to see, you're going to make some, I don't know what you're saying. So how predictions work is that you make up a methodology. Doesn't matter what it is. You could say magic pixie leprechauns told you in your sleep, that's perfectly fine. And if you use magic pixie leprechauns told me that in year 2020, there's going to be an asteroid that comes by the earth and we confirm that. That's a confirmed prediction. That's evidence of magic pixie leprechauns. How you came to that methodology doesn't matter. Going into Q&A in just a few minutes. Life doesn't matter. That's a classic. All that matters is, is the testable prediction confirmed? That's evidence. That's how evidence works. Confirmed and how would you, you know, to what level confirmed and that's it done, doesn't it? So even if people come and question it, it can't be questioned. It's confirmed. You confirmed that I'm done. Right, so if it's confirmed, then what you need to do to overthrow that is you need to make a better prediction. You have to go in your future. We are, man. That's what we're doing. That's what we're trying to advance. You've never made any. Sorry? The flatterers have never made any. Like, where are you predicting? We're predicting that, okay, we predict that water is level over vast distances. Okay, we've proven that false. We predict that perspective plays a major importance to how we view things in our universe, in our, in the sky, in our life. What? So perspective is how we view things. A perspective ramp. So what you just said is perspective, which is how we view things. So how we view things is really important to how we view things in the universe. Is that what you just said? Definitely how we view things looking down the street, or even when we see a boat disappearing over the horizon. I agree. Have you looked into the black swan? Have you seen all that stuff? The geomation horizon? To the apparent horizon? Have you seen the problem? Have you seen the problem that's occurring? There is no problem. So there is no problem. There is no problem. So the Earth curvature math and the geometric horizon that we've been told is, according to our height at sea level, it works fine, you're saying? Yes, everything in the geosurgeoning world. And you've got to listen to some of the, the globe Earth is actually saying it's wrong. The globe Earth is saying it's wrong. Tom, they're calling it the apparent horizon now. They're saying there is no geometric horizon, it's apparent. And it can change, depending on the conditions of the day. That means it's not, that means it's not geometric. That means it's not physical. That's a real problem. Like what were you talking about? If you're looking at an object. So this is pretty easy. Like when you have a gas and the gas is heated, then it expands and it'll cause less refraction. And if it's cooled, it'll compress and it'll cause more refraction, which is determined by the time of day because the time of day means that the sun is putting light on those gases causing them to heat up or cool down. So the apparent horizon is caused by the time of day by physics, all just physics we already know about of the weight at which the molecules heat up or cool down. So yes, the globe model is correct on that one. We've already seen that. Did Aristotle know this when he made his predictions? No, but he didn't make any predictions about this.  No, he didn't. He didn't even know about refraction alike, did they? Right. We're about reticentes. Did the reticentes know about these bearing conditions in the atmosphere? They didn't know about altitude. Sorry? He didn't need to. Like none of that was a part of his prediction. He didn't need to. But now I need to. Now I need to. When I'm viewing things further, you're saying atmospheric conditions and the gases can create distortion on the things we're seeing. I get what you're saying. I'm not saying you need to know that. I'm not saying that the globe model has already explained all of that. We already know all of this. Like you trying to explain it in a different way. We've got to see. Try and remember. I think that we started, I think, with Billy. So let's wrap up with there. Tom has had the last word technically. So thanks so much, folks. It's a wild one. It's always hard to stop. I don't know. It's like, because there's always got to be somebody with the last word. So thanks for your patience on that. And we're going to jump into the questions, folks.  If you're hanging with us, you are hanging with us. You're going to see this debate. You're the only persons who are seeing it live and who will see it in the next week, because it's going to take me a week to edit this one and put it back up in a single debate compacted with these three pieces. But thanks so much, Steven Steen, for your super chat, you sicko. He says, Tom's a strange relationship with his dad. Must watch. And he's right, folks. If you haven't seen on the bottom right of your screen, Tom Jump and Steve McCrae, his father, will be debating in person, live, from Los Angeles on March 17th. It's going to be a lot of fun. Thanks so much. Also, Kang, 024, for your super chat. He said, for 300 bucks, you can buy a weather balloon kit from here. Stratoflights.com, and just see the shape of the earth for yourself. Well, I didn't say which shape it was, so I guess we can keep going. Thanks so much, Steven Steen, for your other super chat. He says, there simply exists some, quote, unknown natural, unquote, flat earth math that explains everything better than the, quote, globe of the gaps, quote, math from Tom Jump, checkmate, flat earth. Tom, what are your thoughts? Totally impossible. Like, we get all via the matrix, and the world is actually flat. And then they're right, like, damn, they got us. The world's actually flat, but we're just on the matrix. And so it's all a lie when we look around. It's no, no. Gotcha. Thanks so much, by the way. Hannah Anderson and Philip and Cody Davis, for your super chats, which just came in. We will be coming up on those pretty quick. Thanks so much, Justinian, for your super chat. As he said, Billy, can you go outside? Actually, Justinian, that might be a Justine.  Billy, can you go outside at night and see Polaris? No. Thanks so much. Appreciate it. K-024, thanks for your super chat. They said, there are hundreds of uncut videos of amateur weather balloon flights that go high enough to see the Earth's curve. Is that to me? Yes. Oh, cool. Because there are many other balloons that show that it's flat. And when you watch some of these high-altitude balloons, you'll notice that they use a fisheye lens, which as it takes off from the ground, it's already got curvature. It's got curvature from the ground, that ground six feet high. Then when you get to 100,000 feet and you'll see the balloon starts leveling, wow. It'll go from a convex to a concave. Sorry, concave to convex. Because of the cap, then it levels out, you'll see flat. So that's what got me thinking, I have to do all this as well. I employ everyone to go and watch video hours and hours of videos. Don't just watch a five-minute video of some school kids launching a high-altitude balloon and you take that as gospel. Gotcha. Thanks so much. Pap and Bala, we'll get to your super chat soon. Just saw that fly in. And also thanks to Cody Davis and Robert Summers. We're gonna get to those soon. But first, Kang, we got that one. Okay, Plain Truth. Tom Jump's brother, flat Earth friend of Billy Zigg. Billy, do you know Plain Truth? I do, yeah, I do know Plain Truth, yeah, definitely. Flat Earthers stick together. I know Plain Truth. Is it, you guys seem pretty tight. The flat Earth community, like flat Earthers got each other's back. Is that fair to say? We have become tight. And even though we don't agree on, you know, if there's a firm and every aspect, we don't even agree on a map. Like, no, we don't have a map. You guys can't agree on a map either because all the ball Earth maps are wrong as well. But yes, we do have a tight community and I've met some fabulous people. From both camps, actually, not just flat Earthers, from both camps. I don't really, I don't care what you think anymore. I just like people to be humane, yeah, anyway. You got it. Thanks so much, appreciate it. And T, or the Plain Truth says, T Jump, please provide a citation that a prediction of an unknown phenomenon is a requirement to validate a hypothesis, not rhetoric, provide a citation. Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy, The Methodology of Science. Gotcha, thanks so much for that. K-024, thanks for your super chat. Who says, in Billy's five years of research, did he not look at the sunset or a sunrise? Billy, what are your thoughts? Are you convinced by that? Every day, every day, of course. You know, a very easy observation one can do. Of course, I've looked at the sunset in summer. What sort of question is that anyway? Okay, when the sun rises, it's not even that warm. You'll notice when the sun gets to zenith, that's when the real heat kicks in. When it moves over and it sets again, the warmth is leaving. That proves the sun is local and not 93 million miles away. The same goes with visual. You can look at the sun when it's at sunrise. You can look at the sun at sunset, but try looking at the sun, I don't recommend this. You can't look at the sun at zenith when it's right above you because it'll blind you, it's closer to you. So as it's leaving you over the distance, it's causing perspective issue, isn't it?  And exactly what appears when an airplane is coming from the horizon and overhead and disappearing again, it's doing this over you. And you can prove that, look down a hallway and you get the same effect. If you stand in the middle of a long hallway, stand in the middle, look that way, you get your ramp that way, look that way. So we've got to understand how our eyes work first before we know what's happening with a sun setting over the horizon. Thank you. Good question, by the way. It's a very common one. Thanks so much. And Steven Steen, thanks for your super chat. Let's see, he says, Billy might be more alpha than James, get him. That's very nice. I'm a little bit threatened. Billy is quite alpha, but thanks, plain truth, for your super chat. Another one for Tom Jump, his arch nemesis. He says, Tom, provide one primary citation for your claims on sticks, wells, and other, what else again? Citation, please. Well, what was the name of the guy who did the test? Eratosthenes. What do you spell that? E-R-A-T-O-S-T-H-E-N-E-S. Gotcha. Thanks so much. If Google needs a correction. Yeah, I mean, if you just Google it, and you can find all of the references. Yeah, I know, we've done that, though. That's all, you know, like. We just wanted a reference, but here, that's a reference. The funny thing is that if you really do your, keep that screen up when we finish the chat. Do some research on it, Tom. I think you'll like the topic. It's very interesting. I knew about this experiment before Flat Earth. I didn't know what the guy's name was, but I knew about it. I knew that someone had measured the circumference of the Earth to 10% of its current value. That was known, you know, we've known that for a while. Right? Gotcha. Thanks so much. Appreciate that. And next up, let's see. What was I, I was just going to read something else. Oh, yes, actually, now I know what it was. Thanks so much. Saw your super chat come through, Philip A, and we're going to get to that pretty soon here. Thanks so much for your super chat from, BeBallForLife, who says Neil deGrasse Tyson also says the Earth is not effing flat. Gotcha. Billy says that Neil deGrasse Tyson should get his book, The Elusive Curve. Get the book. Got you. On Amazon. Thank you, Ranger Man 9404. Thanks for your super chat. Who says, did he say Isaac Newton died at 23? According to Google, he was born in 1643 and died in 1727, which would make him 84 years old. Yeah, it was a Copernicus, sorry. One of them. That was young dog. Thanks for, appreciate your authenticity. Next up, Goku Sun, thanks for your super chat. Says Billy, why is it always the ocean being used for disproving the curve? Why not just use land? You could use land, actually, if you want. But what I find with that, ocean does a very, okay, Tom brought up refraction of light before. That means that we have this distortion in the atmosphere. So what we need is a physical body, something physical we can measure with. And I believe water is level over vast distances. And that's what we're finding. The natural physics of water does that. Tom likes physics. Look at hydrostatics of water, fluid dynamics, fluid mechanics. It suggests that water lays level at rest or flat. And then we get ebb and flow in oceans and lakes. But that's why I like to go to the ocean because it's only 700 meters away, as I said, 2000 feet. And I've actually planning to go and do some long distance observations over land. You get varying conditions because over water you've got salt evaporation. You've got all these moisture, mist and conditions that are affecting. So yeah, I do want to get out and do some land. And I've done that. I've driven across Australia. I've seen long distances.  You bet. Thanks so much. And also thanks, Steve1758. We're going to get to your super chat soon. Appreciate you sending that in.  You have Isaac Newton to thank. I love it. And I want to apologize. Maybe I did misquote Isaac Newton dying at that age. You know, that could have been misinformation. When I'm wrong, I'll say I'm wrong. So sorry. Gotcha. Thanks so much. Appreciate that. Be ball for life. Thanks for your super chat who says, Flat Earther. We see too far. Or they're saying like the Flat Earther says, we see too far. The Globerther says, why can't you see Polaris from Australia? The Flat Earther says, it's too far for us to see. It's very, I can, can I explain that? Gotcha. I'll explain how it's within a, you know, how I explained it in my book. So imagine you've got the largest warehouse on earth.  You're standing in the center of this warehouse.  And you can call that light Polaris. Now, if you went to the very furthest point of that building, it looked up, you're not going to say Polaris, obviously. Even if you looked over Yonder, your angular resolution of perspective is going to limit your ability to see it. Now, if we assume the sun is 93 million miles away, yeah, you could say, well, the sun is far. Surely we could see it. But if we're doing that, the sun is going to be there. There. Or where is it? And there are instances with the sun where Polaris is being seen below the equator, which doesn't make sense on a spinning ball. Gotcha. That's my explanation. That's the only way I can get my head around why I can't see Polaris. And why you guys can't see our stars as well. Yeah. Thank you very much. And sorry, I was distracted trying to keep myself on track. Thanks up. Thanks so much. Let's see, we got that one. Okay, great. Captain Crunch, thanks for your super chat. He is the twin perverted brother of Steven Steen. He says, I'll leave Steven Steen for you. Thank you. Maybe that was for Tom. Must have been for Tom. Thanks for your super chat. Perspective Detective, who says, to both south of the equator, stars appear to revolve around the celestial south pole. Same as northern stars around Polaris. How is this possible on a flat earth? Does he mean the way they rotate? Yeah, the stars in the north pole rotate clockwise and the stars in the south pole rotate clockwise. If you get a wheel, a bicycle wheel, lay it down flat, spin it. Pretend that you're on this side of the wheel. Create an equator on that wheel. Stand on one side, you view it that way. It's gonna change. Your perspective is everything. I love that word. It's a new word because I had to realize this world where I live on relies on a lot of what my eyes are seeing as well. Yeah, you've got to trust. We're told not to trust our senses. We're told not to trust the motion that you wouldn't feel the earth spinning. You wouldn't, anyway. Sorry, I hope I answered that. No problem. I totally did not follow that at all. So if we look up in the north pole, they rotate clockwise.  Now, if we're on a flat earth, that would mean like half the flat earth is rotating one way and half of it's rotating the other way. Like they're on the mini disks on the bigger disk or something. And when you're talking about how the stars rotate and you're using a camera to capture that as well, you're talking about various optics. Optical illusions are going to occur as well. I don't know. I don't know how that works, man. I don't know. What about when you're on an equator? When you're on the equator on a ball and you're here, you should be seeing stars do that, yeah? You should be seeing them spin on both, do you? And if you consider that there's a firmament in the sky, which there's a CIA document that actually 1956 or something like that that talks about flat earth and firmament in the one document. And on the one page, they actually, I'll send you the link if you want, I can link it right here. They consider that there's a firmament back then. I don't know why we can't, but I don't know. I don't have all the answers actually. Yeah, we do actually on the equator, we see stars rotating on both sides. Yeah, and that can happen if you get a dome, if you get a dome and there's actually good videos out there. Tom, there's videos out there that show, and to anyone else, you probably won't be able to find them. But they actually show demonstration where the stars can work like that on a flat model too. So do the stars prove that we're standing on the ground that we're on? Do you know what's happening up there? You gotta go pretty quick to the next question. Let's do it. Let's wrap it up, yeah, anyway. Next up. I don't know. There's another one for me, I don't know. Gotcha. Thanks so much, appreciate it. Oh, it must be K-O24. Thanks for your super chat. Said question for Billy, is the vast amount of satellite survey data that Google Maps constructed with fake? With fake, is that the last? Oh, I see what they're saying. They're saying, is the vast amount of satellite survey data that Google Maps is constructed with fake data? Or, yeah, you get it? No, I think it's got some relevance to it. Of course, we're using it at a strict level again around, so it can't be that fake. What are they using? Are they using a distant satellite, which is 20,000 miles in the sky, to get this data? No, I don't believe so. I think it's all localized, fairly, you know, they're satellite balloon that we have seen. You can actually prove that in Google Tells you they're running projects, Google Loons, which is all balloon-based technology. And there's actually videos that show you how they quick release it. They can launch these every 15 minutes in the sky. 15 minutes, they're all automated, fully automated. You want your balloons in the sky, you can watch the videos yourself. So when you zoom out of Google, zoom out on Google Maps and it starts showing the ball, that's BS, it's cartoon, anyway. Gotcha, thanks so much. Appreciate your super chat from GokuSun, who said, Billy, have you done the math? On what aspect? I'm not sure. The math of... Billy's done all of it, okay? Sorry, James, what was that? I said, Billy's done all of it, okay? I don't, I'm teasing, I have no idea. No, okay, Billy says he hasn't done all of it, but he's made it. No, no way, I'm too young to have done it all, man. That's true, that's a good point. You need to live many lifetimes to work out this, but you know, and if you don't know, you're getting hand-me-down information, like, well, Newton's Copernicus Kepler, it just went on. It's hand-me-down, they didn't go and do the experiment, anyway. You got it, thanks so much for that. Appreciate it, next up, Michael W. Robel, thanks for your super chat, who says, first says Newton died at 84. Ask Billy if he has ever... They said, ask Billy if he's ever been to the sea and watched city skylines in tall mountains disappear and reappear over the horizon. Disappear and reappear, yes. I've even seen small sailboats. If you don't visit my channel, Billy's Ig on YouTube, you'll see just two weeks ago, there was a sailboat well over the horizon, got the P900 out and brought that sailboat right back in. It was a small sailboat as well.  And yeah, the other day, perfect conditions. You could see the Yuyan Mountains in its entirety. And even beyond, there were mountains behind that, which I'm trying to work out, which ones they were. But mate, I'm saying, we're saying, I wouldn't be doing this if a, you know, it's not a popular, it's not a popularity concept thing to be a flat earth, and we don't do this for popularity, I'm telling you that. We do this because we're found something and we're trying to share this information. We're actually asking you guys to go and do your own research as you keep hearing. Don't trust me. Don't worry about me. Don't trust Copernicus and these ancient dudes. Go and do your own research. And that's what Tom, I hope, is gonna do when he's heard all these new names and he's got this new information he's gonna get out and do some research where he feels a bit better. Nope, I'm just gonna go with what math works. They're math works. You'll never change your mind then. Well, no, you just have to get better math. If the government's, you know, 10, 15, so when they realize, okay, society can accept this and now look, we better tell them because the whole world knows the earth is flat. They're like a billion people that know the tipping point has happened. What are you gonna do?  We thought society wasn't ready for a cultural, you know, massive cultural change. You got it? Great, yeah, I don't care what the government says.  All I care about is the testable predictions and the testable predictions only work for the global model, so that's the only one I'm gonna believe. And where do they come from? These predictions come from the government, don't they? No, they come from scientists. Who funds the scientists? Anyway, we might go there, we'll do this another time. Yeah, Tom. Think about who funds this. Okay, thanks so much. Pap and Bala, thanks for your super chat. They say, why can I see the moon in the middle of the day, Billy? Good question. Why can you see the moon in the middle of the day on the globe, birth model? If you look at it, and you, what, you study that for the next 12 months. And that's what I do, I do like, I did many months, seven months of, like, observations before I even wanted to say flat earth to my family. I went and I started observing things. That if you're at school and you drew the sun and the moon and the sky at the same time, right next to each other, the teacher would say that's incorrect because they can't do that, but they actually do. And if you look at the angular position of the highlight of the moon when it's occurring, it doesn't make sense, mate. It doesn't make sense. So anyway. Thanks so much. And let's see. If I just go, just a little bit more. And we're seeing, there are many anomalies because right now you're getting people from around the world, taking snapshot photos at the same time, simultaneously around the world and showing the moon in the sky that doesn't work on the globe. So people from Melbourne and Arizona taking photos of the moon at the same time, which, mate, this is groundbreaking stuff. No one's done this before. Gotcha. Thanks so much. Appreciate it. And Hannah Anderson, they're never gonna let this go, poor Billy. Hannah said, why did Billy lie when he said Newton died? He was 80, 80.23. Oh, Hannah. I think she's trolling you. I don't know. I don't know. Whatever, yeah, they'll play, you know. I love that you own it. That people like that, Billy. I really, you know, that's why if I'm wrong, man, when I'm wrong, I'll tell you I'm wrong. That's why it's, sorry, I apologize, didn't I? Straight away, so. We love having you here, Billy. We really do. We honestly. I love hanging, James. That's it. I appreciate that. And Phillip, thanks for your super chat who said, Billy, do you think that other planets and the moon are flat? I think if they're rounder, there's no relevance to whether we're round, you know. If the light in the sky on my ceiling is round, it doesn't mean the floor is round. So that could be round.  I was up till about five in the morning, you know, I did a red eye. Then I got a few hours sleep for this. And yeah, it looks very cool. But so do objects in water. You can put a flat object in water and it distorts. And are the planets, I don't know what they are, man. I don't know what they are. I've got a telescope, got a P900 out. I look at them and they're amazing. That's all I know. They're amazing. Gotcha. Thank you very much. Twinkle, twinkle, little star, how I wonder what you are. That's what I'm gonna say. Appreciate that. And Andrew Handelsman as well as Steve1758 and Sarah Pease herself, also named known as Beta Sarah. Thanks for your super chats. We'll be getting to those in just a second. But first, Philip, thanks for yours. Well, we just asked that actually embarrassing. Cody Davis, thanks for your super chat. He asked, Zigg, do you understand the longest picture is only 0.01% of Earth's circumference?  Is that really a question? Is that how we measure things with 0.01s now? Do we really, is that really a question? Gotcha. Do you realize that that distance is well behind the given Earth curvature math? And there's about nine kilometers of missing curvature, man. So you go do that research, pump it through several calculators. At best, you're gonna get about three to four kilometers of missing bulge. And that's if you use the metabolic calculator. If you use the generic calculator, you get about nine kilometers. And then you've got a factor in refraction of whether the Guinness World Record actually hands out world records for optical illusions, because that's what you would be saying. But they've actually handed out a world record for a long distance photo, point to point. And if you look at it, it actually goes over a part of some bay in Europe where there's level water across for at least 100 kilometers. So you've got land, they're on an elevated point, of course, and they're viewing an elevated point. But even so, factor all the elevation points and you do the math. Now trust me, do the math, because I got you to the wrong. So that was to me. Thanks for that. And also thanks so much for that super chats or those super chats that came in from Oralore and Ranger Man, we will be getting to those shortly. Appreciate that. And let's see, Cody Davis though, thanks for your super chat. Let's see, no, we asked that one, sorry about that. Robert Summers, thanks for your super chat. Asked, how would the flat earth model predict tides? Predict tides? Okay, the current tidal model doesn't work anyway. We've always thought that the tides are caused by the moon passing or the gravitational pull of the moon.  And if you factor in the water, the salt water in particular, the ocean waters has got salt in it. And that salt creates an electromagnetic pull and an ebb and a flow when there's a lot to learn. Yeah, there's a lot to learn. And these guys, the ancients who predicted that, you know, the oceans were and the tides were caused by the moon. It was old school stuff. Man, they didn't even have any tests for it. They didn't even travel the world. They didn't even have points of reference around the world where other people were actually conducting simultaneous experiments to ascertain this. Got you. It's a very interesting topic. Think about it. Think about the way trusting people who conducted a test, like a Ranistinian conducted a test in Egypt. We trust that, even though it wasn't tested anywhere else in the world. Cool, no worries. Thanks for the question. It was a good one. I like it. Appreciate that. Let's see. Appreciate your, let's see, super chat from, let's see. Got, just seeing some of my harassment on Twitter. How do I get harassed as a moderator? Like, I don't, I mean, don't get me wrong. I really do. Like, I get so much, I get, like, I'm honestly so encouraged by so much of the positive I get. Like, it's seriously like really encourages me. So much of it's positive.  I don't even take a position. But thanks so much. Let's see, Robert Summers, we got that one. Philip A, thanks for your super chat. They said, why can you not see Polaris, Billy? Oh, I don't know. Now, I explained that before. They just go back and it's a perspective.  Let's, yeah. Do you want me to explain it again? For the, oh, I don't mind actually. No? You can. It's okay. It's just that it was really short and busy. It's just that we've got a lot of questions to go through still too. Oh, wait, you can answer that one. I wasn't serious. Which one, sorry? That last one. Polaris? Yes. Yeah, I believe it's because of, you know, perspective and angular resolution. As I said before, imagine being in the largest warehouse on earth. You're standing in the center of that warehouse. You look up, you see a light above you. That's Polaris. You walk to the very, very edge of that building. You look up, Polaris won't be there. You have to look over this way to see it. And if you're talking about grand scale here, guys, grand scale, closest stars to what we've been told they are, you know, just use that to mold, to fashion another possibility, right? Gotcha. Doesn't mean you live in a bulb just because you can see a star. It doesn't mean that. Appreciate that. Let's see, Steve1758. Thanks for your super chat. They say, Billy, no black swan, just a gold-plated turkey. That's a good one. I like it. Space monkey7777. Appreciate your super chat. They said, so Zigg can't answer a lot, but knows it's not round. How does that work? Also, how do you accept all the other stuff physics provides like computers, Billy? That's a good one. Computers aren't all built by scientists, man. Phones aren't all built by engineers. There's a team of designers. So no white guy in a white coat is building this stuff. The guys in garages that started these companies that work scientists. So let's scrap that one. That's just silly. What was the first part of the question? Wait a minute, because that's the same of all of science. It was all done by loser guys in the garage want to just discover stuff. That's the exact same for science and for computers. So we can't use that, really. Kenya, can you say, I've invented stuff. I'm not a scientist.  No. No. So what was the first part of the question there, James? Because it was too prompt. It was. Let's see. It was. So Zigg can't answer a lot of questions, but knows it's not round. How does that work, Billy? And same with Todd. He can't answer a lot of the questions. He doesn't know about it, but he thinks it's worth. So yeah, I don't know everything, and I would be the first to admit it. I don't know everything about this world. I haven't even traveled everywhere. How would I know everything? I'll be the first to admit it. But you guys think you live on a spinning ball, but you don't have the answers either. So how far is the sun? Do you know about perihelion and aphelion? I could keep going on and on. I bet you your model will get broken down just as quick, because you don't know either. But whether you'll admit it is another thing, and that's what you've got to get to. Pride, when pride gets in the way of knowledge, you're a goner.  Yeah, Tom. All right. Thanks for the question. Andrew Handelsman, thanks for your super chat. Ask Billy, why people lie about the earth being round? Why would they lie? I don't know if it's a... Why would they lie? So I hear a common claim. Why do all the scientists lie? I don't think they all lie. I don't even think they know all the math. I know friends who were scientists. They didn't know the math. They're now discovering things that I'm teaching them, that I'm showing them. Isn't that funny that they are scientists and I'm showing them stuff? I've got friends who were pilots who thought they were flying over a ball. Now when they look at it, they go, hmm, very interesting information. Why would they lie? Why wouldn't they... So why would they lie or why wouldn't they tell us? Sorry, James, I should have paid more attention. Gotcha. No, which one? Sorry, James. So I can answer the question for the... Hold on one sec. I'm like catching up. You wanted to know what the last one said? Yeah. Did they ask why would they lie or why wouldn't they tell us? They asked, why do people lie about it? Why do they lie about it? I don't think it's a specific why do people lie about it? I think it's a certain group of people who probably just won't tell us because we can't handle the truth. Like Tom, so Tom is one of those people. Maybe? No, I reckon he'll handle it. I reckon he'll be cool with it. We just can't handle the fact that the world is flat and just destroy everything. Like, oh, actually, no saying to his kids. It doesn't destroy everything. Everything's a big thing. I don't think it's gonna destroy that much. I don't think it's gonna change the way we drive and work. We still have to do a lot of things. It's just gonna give us a... I think it'll give us a better perspective of where we live. It'll give us a better... It'll give us... You know what it'll do for us? It'll make us to never trust other people for what they say again. Like, if the government shows us... Like on TV here, when they show us the news, man, and even a bet you where you live, they show you a weather report, a ball, and they put satellite on top, but it's clearly a cartoon. And if you trust that, that's fine. You can do that. Yeah. Yeah, the government is super concerned that we trust it. That's definitely... Really? It's what the whole world government means. The word government means to control minds. Government is control and mentor is mind. So the whole world government, the word government in essence means mind control. Yeah, I suppose you know what I'm saying. Of course they care what they think, what you think.  Andrew Handelsman, thanks for your super chat. He asked Billy... Oh, we've heard that. Steve1758, thanks for your super chat. They said, Billy explain Aurora Australis, Aurora Borealis on a flat earth with a small close sun. There's some sort of discharge happening in the atmosphere. I've looked a little bit into this, but not a great deal because I don't really know. But I know we have noble gases in the sky. You've got neon, xenon, argon. There's five, I can't remember the rest, the other two, but they react, they react in different ways. So that's what I think is happening. Got you? Explain it on a ball. Yeah, anyway.  Very sassy who says, why would you lie about Newton? I trusted you. Oralore. I'm so sorry. Oh man. I'm gonna put this one down real quick. Oralore, thanks for your super chat. You're right. They're just, they're nasty. I just, I tell you. Oralore, they say for Billy, why is the moon upside down in the Southern hemisphere as compared to the Northern hemisphere? Cool. So if you get someone, if you put a number six on your ceiling, guess I want to stand over here. So if someone's standing the other side, one's gonna be saying a six, one's gonna be saying a nine. And that's clearly what's happening. And the moon rotates through the night as well. Don't watch it. It's amazing. Oh, that's super interesting. I like it. Amazing. Thanks so much for your super chat. Let's see. Ranger man 9404. They say that nursery rhyme is the extent of Billy's astronomy knowledge. Oh, come on. I love that Billy laughs. I just love. I have other, hapty, dunked, he sat on the wall. I've got some other ones. Come on, I've got better ones than that.  I love it. I love it. This is great. It's fun. Sexy Calzone. Thanks for your super chat.  Let's see. Billy is high on life. Okay. And ketamine. But Andrew Handelsman. Thanks for your super chat. I don't hang out with Brian Cox. I think there's a photo of him online with him snorting some of that stuff. And just laugh for me, man. It's too early in the day as well. That's funny. I like it. Appreciate that. It's much fun. And appreciate Andrew Handelsman. Thanks for your super chat.  Oh, Carl, leave Tom alone. Tom! I think they're trolling. I don't know for sure. But, I'm still wondering he said the moon rotates. When does the moon rotate? Oh, watch it. Watch it, mate. Watch it. It's perfectly still. No, no, no, no, no. It actually rotates as it traverses the sky, Tom. Watch it, mate. No, I don't. I'm telling you, go out. Okay, it doesn't. Sure. Now you're wrong. Anyway, it doesn't. I've seen it happen. I watch it through the night doing that. But you're saying it doesn't. That's cool. Yeah, Tom. Yeah, it doesn't do it. This is stuff the heliocentric model didn't teach you, Tom. Same with me. I had to learn a lot of this stuff and go, hang on, when I was a kid, they told me that eclipses were cause because of the shadow of Earth's shadow reflecting onto the moon. We know that's wrong now. They've changed the model all the way. So from 1970 or I'm going to school in the 70s, so from there to now, the models changed. Things are changing. They're evolving. The heliocentric model has changed. It was, like I said, they thought we were doing this, but now we're doing this massive sideways pulling. The sun's going that way and we're actually doing this. And you know, sorry, we're doing this while this is happening and there's all these other four, five orbital motions. And if you look at the math behind it, it's crazy math. Anyway, it does happen. Look at it, Tom, yeah. Yeah. The moon rotates. Appreciate that. And let's see, appreciate next Super Chat coming in from Papin Bala. And also thanks, Cody Davis, for your Super Chat. We're going to get right to that. But Papin Bala first said, what will Tom and his father debate on March 17th? So glad you asked, Papin Bala. It's going to be a great one, a terrific debate. As you see on the bottom right of your screen, Tom will be confronting his father. This is truly the umpire strikes back, folks. It's going to be a lot of fun. Tom and Steve are going to debate several things. First, they're going to debate. Wait, what? Sorry, sorry to interrupt, Tom, is that your dad, Steve McCray? Is that the guy with the goatee or? So we're not related. James just makes up a deal. Okay, cool, cool. Sorry, man, how should we get? Oh, let's see. But I mean, they kind of are... I'll learn to never trust you again. It's like symbolic. Like, I love it. It's like the government taught me to say that. Next up, we have, let's see, what was it? Love your playful sense of humor. Good man. Let's see, what was it? Okay, so Tom Jump and Steve McCray, they'll be debating, one, the definition of atheism, which they have notoriously disagreed on. Second, they're going to be debating, oh yeah, we're going there, Tom. There's no going back. We're going to debate Tom's epistemic criteria for knowing whether or not Kyle was guilty of stealing the non-secretary show from Steve, because that was something they discussed before and Tom was like, they have to have a trial and a judge to know anything and Kyle has to be found guilty by the whole jury. Otherwise, that's the only way you can know knowledge. Innocent until proven guilty in a court of law, just basic law. Oh, really? Is that how you know that the earth is a globe, Tom? Okay. Is that a law? Now, let's see. Well, there was a court case in America that was brought up. Zen Garcia, he gets on, I can't remember the complainant, but Zen had a 10 or $20,000 bet to prove that the earth's a spinning ball. This guy, Microsoft engineer, took him on. He actually went to court and the court ruled there was not enough evidence for a spinning ball. How's that, eh? Very interesting. Sounds like bull crap, I think. That was just last year, man. Look at that.  Yeah, Tom. All right, next up. Yeah, Tom. Ah! Let's see. Oh, Laura, we're here to get to your super chat. Thanks for that, friend. First up, oh, yeah. So anyway, those two topics, well, for sure to talk definition of atheism, Steve also might challenge some of Tom's other views so I don't know for sure if we'll get to the Kyle Curtis thing. By the way, something spooky has happened. I'm not joking about this. I'm dead serious. So if you know of the non sequitur show, I have no idea what I'm, all I know is that last time I peaked, the pictures on the channel have been changed. So the banner has been changed and the avatar, rather than it being the nun, it changed some guy with a pipe. He's smoking a pipe. So interesting, I don't know what Kyle, if Kyle's trolling Steve with that, poor Steve, but interestingly, just kind of spooky that that changed all of a sudden, like a couple of days ago. So Cody Davis, thanks for your super chat. Who said, I'm now convinced it's flat, Zig's brain. I don't get it. I mean, okay. I mean, I think I get it. Yeah, it was Cody. I thought it was flat brain.  Oh yeah, good one. That was some good science there, wasn't it? Did he actually waste money for that? Did he waste his own money to say that? Why didn't he send me a private message on that? You put a quarter in Billy, he's coming after you. Okay. Or Laura, thanks for your super chat. Who says, thanks for your great non-answer about why the moon is upside down, Billy. Thanks for your great non-answer. They're coming at you. Why is the moon upside down for you, man? Well, how does it work on a heliocentric model? Why does it rotate through the night? And why does the same face of the moon? Everyone, regardless to where you are on this ball, you've seen the same face of the moon. No one has ever seen the dark, the far side of the moon. It's not the dark side. We used to call it the dark side. Now it's the far side, no one's ever seen it. Apparently China landed on there recently. Go look at their footage. If you believe it or not, you believe there's a guy who's gonna bring you presents at Christmas time and a little bunny brings you Easter eggs. Yeah, Tom Silver is that. Anyway, go ahead, thanks so much. Love teasing you, Tom. You're great, buddy. All right, let's see. Well, we got to lower, thanks for that. We had one last super chat that just fired in. Appreciate it from SpaceMonkey77777, who said, today is all built on theories in physics, like phones and GPS. Same physics says the Earth is round. You cannot accept it. Picky much. So I think they're saying, like, hey, you're picking and choosing. Then they say, the universe has no obligation to be simple for you to understand it, Billy. Oh, is that from Neil deGrasse Tyson's comment? He didn't make this guy didn't make that up. And round, let's talk about round. Before we get into discussing the shape of the Earth, what do we work out? Objects first. Round is does not define a spherical object. I can go around and round my neighborhood. Doesn't mean there's a ball, okay? So let's use spherical instead of round because flat Earth is round too. It's got some roundish border around it. And when you stand even on a flat plane field and you look around you. So let's think about what we're saying when we're saying round. Round does not mean spherical, everyone. Gotcha. Let's see. You didn't need to waste your money on me for that one. Next up, let's see. Sassy Billy. We, I thought I saw just one more last thing come in. That's it folks. I wanna say thanks so much for hanging out with us. This is a special edition of modern day debate.  You are one of the faithful.  How embarrassing. I haven't seen that since on Tom's channel. So we appreciate you hanging with us folks that you stuck with us. It's always fun. I honestly hate saying goodbye. I honestly just wish I could hang out here all night. And Phil Bunny, that is the kindest thing. If you'd be willing to like put it together for me because honestly, right now I'm dying folks. I'm behind on emails. If you've sent me an email requesting a debate, I'm trying to catch up. I'm working on my doctorate and I'm teaching a couple of classes and I'm honestly like, oh my gosh. I'm honestly like hanging in there right now. It's just so busy. But don't worry folks. We're gonna make it. It's gonna be terrific. In fact, if you haven't seen it, as I mentioned, live tour coming up this in one week. Less than a week. We are going to be together with Tom and his father as you'll see on the bottom right. That's gonna be exactly, well less than now just barely by a few hours. Less than one week from today. Also, less than one week, only six days away, David Wood and Matt Dillahunty we have scheduled two debate. That's going to be super exciting. Thanks so much for that. And next up, appreciate. Goku-san, thanks for your super chat.  Yes, that's true. But I was trying out something special. I was experimenting and it was embarrassing. But thanks so much. And someone's asked what if I'm getting my doctorate as a gynecologist. No, that's funny. And let's see.   Matt has a terrific face. I don't think he, you know, but you have to give it. I didn't make the thumbnail. I actually, Taylor made it. And I think it looks great. Matt looks great. By the way, you have to give credit to Matt no matter whether you be Christian Atheist. Matt looks great. He's in great shape. So happy for him on that. And we can get a more contemporary picture of Matt for the next thumbnail. We don't know for sure. We're working out the format. It's been a little bit more challenging than I expected to figure out the format. And I don't blame it. You know that we want the debaters to enjoy the format to the maximal possible level. And so I don't blame the debaters for wanting to kind of negotiate the best format. So that's in the works. But also want to say thanks so much to our speakers. Couldn't thank them enough. This channel runs on an excellent speakers like these guys who have hung out with us tonight. Thanks so much, Billy and Tom Jump. Thank you, James. Thanks, Tom. It's been great. Yeah, thanks. I'm going to go take a nap now. Yeah, you do that, man. I hope you're better soon. Our pleasure. Hope you feel better, Tom. And bottom right, Destiny versus Vosh. This might be the biggest live stream we have that's coming up in one week as well. That's going to be crazy, you guys. That honestly, all of these debates are going to be terrific. And I haven't mentioned it. But let's see. David Wood will be debating Samuel Masson on whether or not Christians can mock and criticize unbelievers and their beliefs. What do you think, Billy? Is it possible? Is it acceptable? Oh, sorry. So that again, Christians. That's OK. It's just whether or not Christians can mock and criticize unbelievers and their views. I don't think that's right. Mocking, especially Christians should be mocking. Yeah, Tom. All right. So that with that, I'm just teasing. Somebody in the live chat was like, why is James so mean to Tom? I love Tom. He's terrific. Look at him. He wants to go to sleep. We got to let him go to sleep. Thanks, everybody, for being here. We love these speakers. There are links in the description, folks. Check them out. Have a great night. Keeps up to date on the reasons.