[Dither]

The documentary is launching in one hour, 

I'm really apprehensive now after reading this thread.
Does it specify on the website if its free?

[AATW]

I have not been to many magic shows which have a disclaimer "Everything you are about to see is fake" before the show starts. The audience is led to believe that something physically impossible happened. At no point are we told "it was all fake." It is an entire industry based on lies.

Yes. And as I said I've never been to the cinema or theatre and before the film or play seen a disclaimer.
"Everything you are about to see is fake. The people are only acting".
Did you come out of Jurassic Park thinking "Shit! Dinosaurs are alive again! Run for the hills!"?
Do you think that if you fit a Flux Capacitor to a DeLorean and drive at 88mph you can go back in time and meet Rowbotham?
I suspect not. You know that films and plays are fictional.
You know, I hope, that magic shows are too. They are called magic TRICKS. There is a clue in the name.

Why is it okay to lie to children?

Ever heard of Santa Claus? I don't know how to break this to you, Tom...
Kids have a sense of wonder and imagination, they probably do believe magic tricks are real like they believe Santa comes down their chimney every 25th December and brings them presents. At some point they grow up and start to learn how the world really works but it is nice, till a certain age, to let children retain some wonder at things.

Since lies and deception are perfectly okay in your book - where is the line between good lie and bad lie? They are all just magicians with different backstories. What makes a magical backstory acceptable and unacceptable?

Most stage magicians don't have a "back story". Very few make claims to have actual "powers". Anyone who does should be treated with suspicion.
Especially if they are claiming to use their "powers" to exploit the gullible and vulnerable rather than just to entertain.

[Tumeni]

The documentary is launching in one hour, 

Over 8  hours to go according to countdown on the website; I type this at 00.24 UTC/GMT

[Pete Svarrior]

Tom - given your strong moral stance on lying to children are you going to add something to the Wiki about Santa Claus not being real either?

Why would he do that? Does the Wiki contain any mentions of Santa Claus that need rectifying?

[Edgar Alan Hoe]

Tom - given your strong moral stance on lying to children are you going to add something to the Wiki about Santa Claus not being real either?

Why would he do that? Does the Wiki contain any mentions of Santa Claus that need rectifying?

Really? That's it?

Your contribution to the thread is to fact check a sarcastic comment?

What's the point of that?

[Tumeni]

It's up on their website and YouTube now

First two minutes are title sequence with clips from elsewhere, and can be skipped
'Experiments with boats' starts at 5mins
'Experiments with long-range telescopes' starts at 12mins

90 mins total.

That's as far as I've got. I'm tempted to jump to 85 mins for the conclusion and summary

[Dither]

I really liked the documentary, found it convincing.
I would show this to others who are considering FET.
I'm sure the Roundies will assess each argument and put their own spin on it, (as they do)  but for myself as a FEer,  I am happy with how this doco went and I'm having a great day today. 

[pablozablo]

Tom - given your strong moral stance on lying to children are you going to add something to the Wiki about Santa Claus not being real either?

Why would he do that? Does the Wiki contain any mentions of Santa Claus that need rectifying?

I naively thought I would make a light-hearted comment that would illustrate the utter nonsense of Tom's chosen position of failing to see the difference between the legitimate and innocent presentation of magic as entertainment and that of fraudulent exploitation presented as the supernatural. Sorry if it went over your head, Puck.

[Tom Bishop]

I was able to watch it. I give it a C. I liked some of the experiments. I liked some of their new approaches and new types of tests. I consider that a contribution, even if we can't trust their results because of the UFO stuff.

I didn't like the long build up. I did not really understand what their new theory of gravity was, or really any of their new theories after the experiments segment. Hard to understand at times.

The unknown continent to the "greater north" sounded interesting. It reminds me of a book written by someone who was involved with long range US Navy flights which allegedly found new land masses to the "North of the North Pole".

[Tumeni]

I was able to watch it. I give it a C.

On a scale of  ....

A to E ?
A to Z ?

Come on, now - we don't know the educational conventions in your locale unless you tell us ...

[Edgar Alan Hoe]

Just the usual misunderstanding and/or misrepresenting of physical phenomena.

No better or worse than the hundreds of other silly FE YouTube videos out there, but with a bit of their own spin so they can take ownership of it (as you'd expect from someone with Urandirs apparent history).

I'm trying to research the 'engineers and researchers' used but as everyone is listed as 'cast' in the credits it's s bit hard.

Funny wording that... 'Cast' - what you'd expect from a film with actors rather than a documentary...

[Tumeni]

I haven't watched any of it yet, but if the final conclusion, based on the title, is that we are on a convex Earth, then why aren't FEers denying it?

Surely the two are mutually exclusive? If it's flat, it can't be convex, and vice versa?

[Edgar Alan Hoe]

I haven't watched any of it yet, but if the final conclusion, based on the title, is that we are on a convex Earth, then why aren't FEers denying it?

Surely the two are mutually exclusive? If it's flat, it can't be convex, and vice versa?

It's nonsense. It is flat earth, but without a dome, heliocentric and with satellites being held up by electro magnetism - oh, and with a childrens pool bolted on to the side with a separate continent in it 😂

From what I can tell from YouTube allot of the denser FE'ers out there appear to be getting drawn in by it. Which is a good thing as far as I'm concerned.

[Edgar Alan Hoe]

Can anyone tell me why they are trying to find curvature in a body of water relative to see level?

A lake would not show any curvature relative to sea level whether the earth is flat without gravity or round with gravity. What we observe would be the same.

Or am I missing something, because I would have thought the engineers and physicists they have advising them would surely have pointed that out.

[JL]

I'm sure this whole film is one big hoax. Remember, next sunday is april fool's day!
The film director, Urandir Fernandes de Oliveira, (initials UFO?) is into the paranormal and an ufologist. Look him up!
The scientists presented: There is no record of them. If, as the voice over claims, they are scientists,they should have a webpage at their institution, or there should be references to their articles, but using their names and searching, there is nothing to be found.
Just look up "Mauro Dias, Geographer cartographer". No results of this "famous" Geographer and Cartographer!
OK maybe Helo Bagda gama, the famous Geologist then? No results either.....
Well maybe Paulo Cesar Parra the Civil engineer then? No results at all!
So Carlos Fabiano the world famous Astronomer will give us some results, but NO!
OK but Eduardo Della Santa will be there to find.... Oh no! Not again no way to find them at all!
The stupid "documentary" makers forgot to give their characters a life outside the "documentary", no Facebook pace, no Twitter account, no reference to their work, nothing at all!

Also, no self-respecting scientist would claim that the atmosphere has a refractive index equal to that of glass, like they do somewhere in the film.

 Which would indicate one of 2 things:
 1. They have not published… anything, which would then indicate the finds are not scientific.
 Or 2: They do not exist.

Looking at their picture of the Earth as a giant toilet bowl may well be a good indication of a hoax also!

[StinkyOne]

It's funny that some people are still taking this seriously. Talk about confirmation bias. Maybe he made the Earth convex with his paranormal powers? Satellites held up with electro-magnetism??? Sigh, the world is getting dumber by the day.

[inquisitive]

I was able to watch it. I give it a C. I liked some of the experiments. I liked some of their new approaches and new types of tests. I consider that a contribution, even if we can't trust their results because of the UFO stuff.

I didn't like the long build up. I did not really understand what their new theory of gravity was, or really any of their new theories after the experiments segment. Hard to understand at times.

The unknown continent to the "greater north" sounded interesting. It reminds me of a book written by someone who was involved with long range US Navy flights which allegedly found new land masses to the "North of the North Pole".

North of the North Pole? What did their GPS receiver show?

[Tom Bishop]

The unknown continent to the "greater north" sounded interesting. It reminds me of a book written by someone who was involved with long range US Navy flights which allegedly found new land masses to the "North of the North Pole".

North of the North Pole? What did their GPS receiver show?

I don't know what their navigational instruments said. I haven't looked into the claims too closely. If you are interested in the matter, here is the source of the book which explains more:



Worlds Beyond the Poles
By F Amadeo Giannini

Online version here: https://archive.org/embed/f_amadeo_giannini-worlds_beyond_the_poles.o

An easier to read version: http://worldsbeyondthepolesbygiannini.blogspot.com/

Summary:

"On January 13 1956 a US Navy air unit penetrated to the extent of 2300 
miles beyond the assumed South Pole of the earth. That flight was always
over land, water and ice.

Since December 12, 1928 US Navy Polar expeditions have determined the
existence of indeterminable land extent beyond both pole points, out of
bounds of the assumed 'isolated globe' Earth as postulated by the
Copernican Theory of 1543."

[inquisitive]

The unknown continent to the "greater north" sounded interesting. It reminds me of a book written by someone who was involved with long range US Navy flights which allegedly found new land masses to the "North of the North Pole".

North of the North Pole? What did their GPS receiver show?

I don't know what their navigational instruments said. I haven't looked into the claims too closely. If you are interested in the matter, here is the source of the book which explains more:



Worlds Beyond the Poles
By F Amadeo Giannini

Online version here: https://archive.org/embed/f_amadeo_giannini-worlds_beyond_the_poles.o

An easier to read version: http://worldsbeyondthepolesbygiannini.blogspot.com/

Summary:

"On January 13 1956 a US Navy air unit penetrated to the extent of 2300 
miles beyond the assumed South Pole of the earth. That flight was always
over land, water and ice.

Since December 12, 1928 US Navy Polar expeditions have determined the
existence of indeterminable land extent beyond both pole points, out of
bounds of the assumed 'isolated globe' Earth as postulated by the
Copernican Theory of 1543."

Yet not confirmed by current observations.  Again, do you agree WGS-84 is correct?

[Tom Bishop]

Yet not confirmed by current observations.  Again, do you agree WGS-84 is correct?

Current observations? Are you paying attention? Whether true or false, a claim of observation was made yesterday.