The Flat Earth Society
Flat Earth Discussion Boards => Flat Earth Community => Topic started by: AATW on May 17, 2024, 11:43:50 AM
-
I think this is the right place for this.
Are you aware of The Final Experiment?
https://www.the-final-experiment.com/
The aim is to send one globe earther and one flat earther to Antarctica to observe the 24 hour sun - which would be an issue for the monopole model. Or, if it doesn't occur would be an issue for the globe.
They have invited high profile people from both sides to participate - I didn't actually see anyone from here on the list, I think they're mostly going for YouTubers.
They say they're going to provide the funding for one person from each side, but others can join at their own expense - it was something like $30,000, so not cheap.
Any thoughts on this? Would any of you have liked to be invited or would be interested in going? Do you think this is a good experiment? If you observed the 24 hour sun in Antarctica would that change your mind about FE or would it just steer you towards a different FE model like the bi-polar one?
-
Dunno about this, AATW. Yes, the ultimate experiment in theory, but the website makes Jeran look like George Lucas by comparison; no pages at all except a bunch of You-Tube links. If this thing gets as far as the equator I'll eat my tinfoil hat.
-
Dunno about this, AATW. Yes, the ultimate experiment in theory, but the website makes Jeran look like George Lucas by comparison; no pages at all except a bunch of You-Tube links. If this thing gets as far as the equator I'll eat my tinfoil hat.
I saw an interview the bloke behind this did with FTFE. He sounded pretty serious. Agree the website isn't great though. One to keep an eye on.
-
I saw an interview the bloke behind this did with FTFE.
Ah, truly a duo of titans then. A guy whose entire livelihood relies on insisting that the Earth is round and calling his detractors idiots validated this other guy. Yes, quite, indubitably.
You watch too much YouTube. Seriously.
The aim is to send one globe earther and one flat earther to Antarctica to observe the 24 hour sun - which would be an issue for the monopole model.
It wouldn't, though. It's only an issue for the YouTubers' understanding of FE. It's an extremely low bar to set, and one that can be met without wasting a ton of donation money. Like, yeah, those guys are gonna see the Sun for an entire day, and it's gonna accomplish nothing.
Now, what would be interesting is to see how much money they embezzle out of the scheme 👀
Any thoughts on this? Would any of you have liked to be invited or would be interested in going?
I wouldn't go (entirely pointless, we already know the outcome), but I would love to offer independent scrutiny of their finances. I am openly sceptical, perhaps verging on hostile, so if they can open their books to me and get an admission that I saw no irregularities, that would surely boost their credibility. Well, within the limitations of how much credibility a faux-experiment with a predetermined outcome can have.
-
Oh, and for the sake of clarity: it's also very telling that the only people the YouTube channel refers to as potential FE'ers to be involved are known grifters with a financial incentive. Let's be blunt: this is a scam on both sides, and we should all be better than giving them any time out of our days.
-
It's on the internet, and you suspect its a scam? Have you no faith in human kindness?
I'm truly shocked by your cynicism, Pete. Shocked.
-
Yeah, I know, there's probably a deeper underlying issue here. Why wouldn't I trust these upstanding people, especially after they publicly disclosed their financial incentives? It just doesn't make sense.
-
You watch too much YouTube. Seriously.
This is certainly true, although I don't actually watch that much FE stuff on there.
I quite like Dave McKeegan, I've gone off SciManDan. Don't watch much of anyone else.
It wouldn't, though. It's only an issue for the YouTubers' understanding of FE.
Well, firstly I'd note that there is no FE authority. The basis of this being chosen as the experiment was FE YouTubers agreeing that this observation would be problematic for FE.
So they might not understand your version of FET, but they would presumably say the same about you not understanding their version. Who is the authority here?
Secondly, I'd be interested how a 24 hours sun rotating in one direction around the observer at or near the Northern pole, and in the other direction at or near the Southern pole would work in the Monopole model. There's some stuff on the Wiki with light shining through a glass dome but I don't think that would actually explain this. The Bi-polar model may explain it better but creates a load of other issues in terms of how the sun moves and how that would match observations.
It's an extremely low bar to set, and one that can be met without wasting a ton of donation money. Like, yeah, those guys are gonna see the Sun for an entire day, and it's gonna accomplish nothing.
I vaguely agree it won't achieve anything - my gut feel is the YouTubers who are conceding that this would be an issue for (their version of) FE would not actually concede the point if they made the observations, because cognitive dissonance.
Now, what would be interesting is to see how much money they embezzle out of the scheme
The finances are interesting and unclear to me. Maybe the answer is in one of their YouTube videos but how this is being financed is unclear to me. There's no "Donate" button on the website, or if there is I couldn't see it. Maybe there's something about it in one of the videos but I'm not sure how they're raising the money. I agree that some scrutiny of that is appropriate.
-
Well, firstly I'd note that there is no FE authority. The basis of this being chosen as the experiment was FE YouTubers agreeing that this observation would be problematic for FE.
Yeah, I'm just suggesting that that's a critical flaw in the decision-making process, without claiming to be an authority myself. They'll run their experiment, they'll reach their conclusion (we both agree what it will be), and... what happens then?
The grifters on YouTube continue grifting - ceasing was never an option. Earnest FE'ers continue being FE'ers - after all, the experiment doesn't attempt to address anything meaningful. RE'ers are gonna strut around like pigeons and repeatedly proclaim victory (unchanged from the norm). So... what are we dropping $60k+ on here, exactly? And where is it coming from?
Right now, this has all the markings of an attempt at embezzlement. That is why I'm against it. Otherwise, I don't care what the YT crowd do - they don't affect real FE'ers in any way.
There's some stuff on the Wiki with light shining through a glass dome but I don't think that would actually explain this.
People get confused by the glass dome, I get that. As a visualisation, it has the same problem as trying to use a massively scaled-down ball to demonstrate gravity. The scaled-down FE model makes adjustments (replacing the atmolayer with a glass dome) to make it visually equivalent to the real efects of EA combined with internal reflection.
Of course, I'm entirely guessing as to what your objection might be here - but that's usually what it is.
That said - a small side point of objection here: that particular aspect of the model has a lot of tractions with groups other than ours, even ones that think we're FBI shills or whatever. Even comes up among the Twitter anti-vax deep-south crazies. The claim that they spoke to multiple FE'ers and nobody pointed this out to them is extremely suspicious to me.
I vaguely agree it won't achieve anything - my gut feel is the YouTubers who are conceding that this would be an issue for (their version of) FE would not actually concede the point if they made the observations, because cognitive dissonance.
Or because they're grifters with a financial incentive.
Mind you, the same goes for the RE'ers.
FTFE, the only participant so far, previously had some of his accounts blocked after some nasties porn-bombed him during a livestream. He immediately started crying for donations, explaining that he's disabled and that if the revenue from his online persona runs dry, he'd be left without a means to live. He's probably stuck with his "stupidity bad, i am very smart" schtick for the rest of his life.
-
Yeah, I'm just suggesting that that's a critical flaw in the decision-making process, without claiming to be an authority myself. They'll run their experiment, they'll reach their conclusion (we both agree what it will be), and... what happens then?
Well, I guess what happens is either the YouTubers concede the point and stop being flat earthers - they're the ones who agreed this observation would be a problem for their version of FE. Or, more likely, they don't and are exposed as grifters. I think either outcome is potentially useful. And I don't think this experiment is a bad one. It's an expected result in RE, it's not in (some versions of) FE - to the point that I've seen FE people deny the 24 hour sun in Antarctica occurs.
And I guess the point is who should this bloke have approached? Who is the authority in FE? Is it fair to say there isn't one? Your whole philosophy seems to be "don't ask me, you make your own observations and figure it out for yourself". While I think people should be encouraged to check things for themselves - which they are, throughout science classes you do experiments and make observations - you seem to have a "every man for himself" philosophy which I would suggest is why there seems to be so little consensus in the FE community. Not that I even know what "FE community" really means. You are sneering at YouTube FE'ers, questioning their sincerity. Don't some of them call you "controlled opposition"? It all feels a bit Judean People's Front vs the People's Front of Judea, from the outside.
And where is it coming from?
This is a good question but as I said I couldn't see a "donate" button on the website. So why it could be an attempt at embezzlement, it's very unclear who they are embezzling from if so.
People get confused by the glass dome, I get that. As a visualisation, it has the same problem as trying to use a massively scaled-down ball to demonstrate gravity. The scaled-down FE model makes adjustments (replacing the atmolayer with a glass dome) to make it visually equivalent to the real efects of EA combined with internal reflection.
I guess the issue is it doesn't seem to be a particularly good model of the reality. There are a couple of videos on the Wiki. One he shines a torch through the glass dome and from certain angles it illuminates half the "earth". But is a torch a good representation of a sun which shines in all directions? Is solid glass a reasonable approximation for the atmolayer in terms of the way light through the medium. And isn't the FE sun inside where the dome is and above and circling the earth - he seems to have to shine the light more from the side to get the effect. I get it's just a model, I'm just not sure how valid it is.
In the second video it claims to show how stars could rotate in different directions, but no rotation is actually shown, just a static shot - which does admittedly look like how star trails may look near the equator but they're not shown rotating.
In terms of the 24 hour sun at Antarctica, I'm struggling to visualise how that would work. In the monopole model:
(https://i.ibb.co/VJBpm7r/24-Hour-Sun.jpg)
So A is the north pole, the sun circles it. When it's going round the red circle then it can't be seen because of EA. Fine.
When it's going round the yellow circle it can be seen at all times and goes in a circle. Also fine.
But if you're at B or C then the red circle is your summer. I can't see how that circular route would be seen from those points going in the opposite direction to the circle it's actually tracing. A common FE approach to that has been to simply deny it occurs at all. You seem to be saying it could but I can't see how that would actually work.
The bi-polar model may solve that but it seems to me it would introduce a load of other problems in terms of matching observations.
-
Or, more likely, they don't and are exposed as grifters.
We already know they're grifters. They've been exposed mutliple times. Nothing changed. What makes this time special? How is a couple of RE'ers embezzling investing $60k going to change anything here? Please, be as specific as you can. I'd be fascinated to learn what the endgame here is!
In the meantime, no matter how much you try to idealise your friends here, they're going to accomplish very little here, other than personally get richer. They're not even swiping at FE.
And I guess the point is who should this bloke have approached?
Earnest FE'ers. There are plenty of them, and plenty of places to find them. Plenty of RE'ers who know where to find them, including some of the ones involved in the "experiment". The reason they chose not to utilise that ability? Well, I already told you my suspicions. I guess you could ask them? :)
Who is the authority in FE?
You keep clinging to this idea that there needs to be an "authority" in an expressly anti-authoritative movement. Demanding to speak to the general manager of anarchists. I can only wish you the best of luck with that, or point out that not all collectives adhere to your colonialist mindset.
Once you get serious about this, you could maybe try a different approach.
You are sneering at YouTube FE'ers, questioning their sincerity. Don't some of them call you "controlled opposition"? It all feels a bit Judean People's Front vs the People's Front of Judea, from the outside.
Does it, though? Are you really that stupid? Or are you just making a point because you think it makes you sound profound? After all, you already repeatedly voiced your opinions on people's sincerity here. Are you really going to pretend it's all up in the air now that it's convenient for you to do so? Do you think you'll be taken seriously if you do that?
Would you like me to start fishing out the stupidest people RE has to offer and pointing out that "welp, it's not like there's an authority on RE, so we should just treat these people as equal to everyone else 🤷♀️"? Let's face it - you would be very quick to decry it unfair.
But is a torch a good representation of a sun which shines in all directions?
Yes, once you consider EA and scale.
Is solid glass a reasonable approximation for the atmolayer in terms of the way light through the medium.
Yes, once you consider EA and scale.
And isn't the FE sun inside where the dome is and above and circling the earth - he seems to have to shine the light more from the side to get the effect.
Indeterminate.
In terms of the 24 hour sun at Antarctica, I'm struggling to visualise how that would work.
That's what the glass dome model is for - visualisation. You already saw it. You're perfectly capable of recalling that visualisation.
-
It would be nice if more experiments were performed on Antarcica. However, some here will recall the last trip to Antarctica experiment turned out to be a scam perpetuated by the RE'ers organizing it. People paid a lot of money to go and the organization just disappeared with the money.
See this video: CANCELED! Polar Explorer Event Fraud!
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ec4-oe4mW6I
In this case for "The Final Experiment" they say that they welcome guests and if you want to go then to contact them to find out how much it will be. There are some rumors that they want $30K or something of that nature.
-
How is a couple of RE'ers embezzling investing $60k going to change anything here? Please, be as specific as you can. I'd be fascinated to learn what the endgame here is!
I've already outlined a couple of things that could happen. Neither would actually change much in the grand scheme of things, I never claimed it would.
In the meantime, no matter how much you try to idealise your friends here, they're going to accomplish very little here, other than personally get richer.
Friends? I don't know any of these people, nor do I have much opinion of them. I was asking for your opinion.
Although how will they get richer? I can't see any way to donate to this. You may be right about this, but their financing is not at all clear.
Earnest FE'ers. There are plenty of them, and plenty of places to find them.
And how does one determine who the earnest ones are? I'm not super convinced you lot are earnest.
You keep clinging to this idea that there needs to be an "authority" in an expressly anti-authoritative movement.
I guess the point is there is no FE model about which there is consensus. YouTubers this bloke is engaging with are saying a 24 hour sun in Antarctica would be an issue for their FE model, which is the basis on which he picked that experiment. You're saying it's not an issue for your model. Well OK. Which model is right? It's a similar question to the above, who are the earnest ones and how does anyone tell?
RE doesn't have "an authority" either but there is a lot more consensus in mainstream science - about the basic stuff at least. No-one is debating how many poles there are, for example. Your Wiki outlines the monopole model in the FAQ but there's also a page about the bi-polar model. There's no debate about the layout of the continents or what Antarctica is.
Does it, though?
Yes. You've got two groups of FE people both claiming that they are the "real" FE'ers and the other group aren't. You're calling them grifters, they're calling you controlled opposition. Who is right? How does anyone tell? I have my doubts about you lot, or certainly some of you. I have my doubts about them too.
Would you like me to start fishing out the stupidest people RE has to offer and pointing out that "welp, it's not like there's an authority on RE, so we should just treat these people as equal to everyone else 🤷♀️"? Let's face it - you would be very quick to decry it unfair.
There is a difference. Most people don't even regard themselves as REers. I don't really. I'm not a Round Earther any more than I'm a water is wet-er. Most people believe the earth is a globe because that's what they were taught and don't really think about it, or need to. So sure, some very stupid people believe in RE but couldn't explain why. If you're a FE'er then by definition you have thought about it and come to a different view. It's more reasonable to ask a FE'er to explain how the earth can be flat and how all the technologies which (it is claimed) require a globe earth work than it is to ask the random man in the street how the earth can be rotating at 1,000mph at the equator without us feeling it.
That's what the glass dome model is for - visualisation. You already saw it. You're perfectly capable of recalling that visualisation.
I don't know what this means. None of the glass dome videos on the Wiki show a 24 hour sun going in a circle around Antarctica.
-
In this case for "The Final Experiment" they say that they welcome guests and if you want to go then to contact them to find out how much it will be. There are some rumors that they want $30K or something of that nature.
The company they're using charge $30k for the trip, yes. It's unclear whether they're asking you to pay them the money to pass on to that company. If so then I'd agree that's pretty fishy, but I don't know that's the case.
-
I think this is the right place for this.
Are you aware of The Final Experiment?
https://www.the-final-experiment.com/
The aim is to send one globe earther and one flat earther to Antarctica to observe the 24 hour sun - which would be an issue for the monopole model. Or, if it doesn't occur would be an issue for the globe.
They have invited high profile people from both sides to participate - I didn't actually see anyone from here on the list, I think they're mostly going for YouTubers.
They say they're going to provide the funding for one person from each side, but others can join at their own expense - it was something like $30,000, so not cheap.
Any thoughts on this? Would any of you have liked to be invited or would be interested in going? Do you think this is a good experiment? If you observed the 24 hour sun in Antarctica would that change your mind about FE or would it just steer you towards a different FE model like the bi-polar one?
Have you not learned anything?
Do you really think that an observational experiment in Antarctica (24 hours sunlight) is going to end up moving the needle or changing anyone's mind either way (for those that are globe earth believers vs. those that are flat earth believers?)
The TFES wiki already provides a possible explanation for 24 hours sunlight in Antarctica via possible light patterns as demonstrated by the YouTube video showing the desktop experiment. If 24 hours is reported back, this may likely be (one of) the possible explanations you will receive.
-
It would be nice if more experiments were performed on Antarcica. However, some here will recall the last trip to Antarctica experiment turned out to be a scam perpetuated by the RE'ers organizing it. People paid a lot of money to go and the organization just disappeared with the money.
Well, it looks like this one is happening for real (assuming you don't think that the whole thing is being green screened).
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=E1vXwAT6P5k
-
Well whaddya know, they actually got to Antarctica and apparently no-one has been scammed. Lots of interesting footage of the Union Glacier site and the sun blazing away 24 hours a day from both globe and FE participants. Some people took "do your own research" seriously and it's been fascinating.
-
Dunno about this, AATW. Yes, the ultimate experiment in theory, but the website makes Jeran look like George Lucas by comparison; no pages at all except a bunch of You-Tube links. If this thing gets as far as the equator I'll eat my tinfoil hat.
Would you like chips with that hat?
I'll be honest, I'm a little surprised it happened too, but it has. It'll be interesting to see if it actually changes anyone's mind.
-
Antarctica is warmer than previously thought, uh?
-
Warmer than who previously thought? The Wiki?
Sun's been shining since September and, judging by their dress and demeanour, there's little wind-chill at the mo.
-
Warmer than who previously thought? The Wiki?
Sun's been shining since September and, judging by their dress and demeanour, there's little wind-chill at the mo.
No gloves...no facial coverings... at least a -24 F wind chill according to their own website.
I don't think so.
I want to see their permits and a complete log of everything they filed in order to make the trip.
You cannot travel south of the 60th without a permit.
-
Antarctica is warmer than previously thought, uh?
I'm not sure what you mean or what you're getting at. Antarctica is a continent. It's larger than the US. There's a range of climates, obviously it's colder in some places than in others.
https://www.bas.ac.uk/about/antarctica/geography/weather/temperatures/
Around the coasts of Antarctica, temperatures are generally close to freezing in the summer (December-February) months, or even slightly positive in the northern part of the Antarctic Peninsula.
During winter, monthly mean temperatures at coastal stations are between -10°C and -30°C but temperatures may briefly rise towards freezing when winter storms bring warm air towards the Antarctic coast.
Conditions on the high interior plateau are much colder as a result of its higher elevation, higher latitude and greater distance from the ocean. Here, summer temperatures struggle to get above -20°C and monthly means fall below -60°C in winter.
-
You cannot travel south of the 60th without a permit.
https://www.gov.uk/guidance/visits-to-antarctica-how-to-apply-for-a-permit
It is also unlikely that you will need a permit if you are a passenger on an organised visit to Antarctica, as your tour operator would usually arrange this. However you should confirm this with them before travelling. Contact the Polar Regions Department if you are unsure.
I'm not sure what your point is here. You can't travel to India without a visa, you need to apply for one. Travel to many countries involves some form of visa or other document.
-
Dave McKeegan's timelapse of the 24 hour sun.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=in0B1OQG3-M
-
You cannot travel south of the 60th without a permit.
Why? South of 60deg includes ocean. Need a permit for the ocean; from whom? And it's an organised trip, check their website.
Weather. Look at the video; what makes you think there's a windchill? Specifically look at the video around 5.54, see the idle blades on the drone hanging loose, not flying out at 90 degrees. I think you live in the northern States, you know very well that there are calm sunny days when you can stand around in casual clothing in sub-zero temperature.
And why didn't they just suit-up if that would support the intended illusion? They could have done the whole mime-walking-into-wind thing for additional effect.
-
My point is you cannot travel south of the 60th if you do not have a permit. If their trip was facilitated by an organization having the permits, that is one thing.
The video shows the speaker without gloves in a sub-zero environment and another participant with no hat.
A time-lapse? Really? Got a chance to put the whole thing to bed, and two people couldn't stay up to do the whole 24-hour thing live?
Gimme a break.
-
You cannot travel south of the 60th without a permit.
Why? South of 60deg includes ocean. Need a permit for the ocean; from whom? And it's an organised trip, check their website.
Weather. Look at the video; what makes you think there's a windchill? Specifically look at the video around 5.54, see the idle blades on the drone hanging loose, not flying out at 90 degrees. I think you live in the northern States, you know very well that there are calm sunny days when you can stand around in casual clothing in sub-zero temperature.
And why didn't they just suit-up if that would support the intended illusion? They could have done the whole mime-walking-into-wind thing for additional effect.
Take the wind chill thing up with their own website and the NWS windchill calculator.
-
A time-lapse? Really? Got a chance to put the whole thing to bed, and two people couldn't stay up to do the whole 24-hour thing live?
Why would a real time video be more compelling? And why do you find a timelapse suspicious?
-
New Year's Eve celebrations are more noteworthy if you actually witness the entire thing, instead of retiring at 23:59:59, amirite?
-
New Year's Eve celebrations are more noteworthy if you actually witness the entire thing, instead of retiring at 23:59:59, amirite?
What a weird comparison. In your scenario you are missing the main celebration at midnight. Nothing is being missed here.
This is an event which, by definition, takes place over 24 hours. A timelapse is a good and obvious way to show that just as slow-mo is a good way to show events which happen too quickly to be easily discerned. I'm not clear what your issue is here.
-
Take the wind chill thing up with their own website and the NWS windchill calculator.
Can't comment on the weather when they did the video, but METAR currently (17 Dec, 16.30 UTC) for the Union Glacier runway (ICAO code SCGC) is temperature -8C and wind of 5 knots. That gives a wind-chill of -13C (that's got to be in the plus-fahrenheits); comfortably in the NWS chart for at least 30 minutes exposure before risking frostbite. But you do the math.
I certainly don't see a problem with removing gloves and facewear in order to operate equipment and narrate a 15-minute video in those conditions.
-
The discussions here seem typical for this site. The most significant subject, the 24-hour visible sun in Antartica, seems secondary to the discussion about the perceived temperatures and winds at the site. Perhaps the underlying intent is to start a rumor that the whole event was being staged somewhere else and not in Antartica? In that case the flat earth believers also at the site would have to be taking part. There were some other misconceptions being tossed around as well. No, you don't have to have a permit to be South of 60 degrees South Latitude if you are on a ship. You could easily be in international waters, and you don't need a specific permit for that. But yes, you will have to have some kind of a permit if you wish to go ashore in Antartica. Why not wait for the reports to come back from the experiment's participants to see what they have to say? Maybe there was insufficient controls placed on the experiment? Perhaps there is a video showing continuous second to second coverage of the entire 24-hour period where the sun was above the horizon, but who would really spend all that time watching it second by second, and what would be the advantage of that over a much shorter time lapse video? Will the flat earth participants verify the validity of the videos after they return, or will they have some other problems or questions? I think those would be more relevant subjects for discussions.
-
Bottom line is this.
The video proves nothing regarding the shape of the earth.
-
Bottom line is this.
The video proves nothing regarding the shape of the earth.
Can you explain how the 24 hour sun shown in that video would work on a flat earth?
-
Bottom line is this.
The video proves nothing regarding the shape of the earth.
Can you explain how the 24 hour sun shown in that video would work on a flat earth?
I believe it has something to do with a dimensional dome and reflectivity.
-
apparently no-one has been scammed.
What makes you think that? As far as I can tell, the opposite happened - known FE grifters teamed up with known RE grifters to get a free holiday and steal a lot of money from fans - all in the name of an "experiment" that FE and RE agreed would produce a consistent outcome long in advance - and you knew this, since you read this thread before posting in it.
So, given that your statement contradicts your own knowledge, one must ask: are you just dim, or are you sinisterly dishonest? "Both" is an option, of course.
Can you explain how the 24 hour sun shown in that video would work on a flat earth?
I don't know if A69 can, but I do know you can - you've been here for these conversations, and your memory isn't THAT bad yet. In a critical failure scenario, you could have just scrolled up, which you inevitably would do... so, what gives?
-
Pete's intervention has merit and, if it is a scam, I take my aluminum hat off to them for enterprise.
On that basis, I'm temporarily suspending the eat-the-hat thing. It's currently marinading in a red-wine reduction pending further debate and a concensus.
-
Also, while we're creaming our figurative pantaloons over an "experiment" whose outcome no one ever disagreed about, it's a good time to review the analysis of the scammers' finances. Of course, we still don't know much - that's scamming 101 - but we do know some things.
For example, we can now see a funding breakdown (https://www.the-final-experiment.com/antarctica-bound) of individual attendees.
(https://i.imgur.com/izEANnd.png)
We can see that 5 people have been "accepted" for a "free trip", which appear to be paid by the TFE guy that nobody has ever heard about. The TFE guy confirmed that, in Jeran's example, he'd be willing to cover all costs up to and exceeding $45k, including Jeran's clothes. (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xjhcm47piI8) Where did this money come from? Haha, don't ask silly questions, teehee! (We all know where it came from; cope and seethe)
What's more interesting is that 5 of the RE'ers have been openly crowd-funded (https://www.the-final-experiment.com/faqs). If we take a very conservative estimate of $160k (which would cover just the AL&E rates, ignoring all other costs), that's $160k that's been taken from YouTube RE fanatics for precisely nothing. If you feel ethically comfortable with this, well, that's on you. Now, imagine if someone looked into how much money actually went into these fundraisers. Gosh, wouldn't that be fun?!
-
I kind of wish that this Flat Earther got an invitation to go to Antarctica to observe the 24 hours of sunlight.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1QEPfOdgwoY
-
It's been fascinating watching the footage from Antarctica: now that the trip has ended there should be more bandwidth-hungry content to enjoy or fulminate at. What's also fascinating is the reactions from both sides, globe and FE, to the expedition, to the videos, to the experiments, to the very idea of going to Antarctica for real. I was interested in Jeran's remarks in his last livestream before leaving for Punta Arenas to head home – he doesn't seem to have enjoyed Antarctica as a destination. There's an undeniable bit of homesickness too.
I've seen a lot in people's comments to gasp, shake head at or just laugh. This thread has its place in the panoply of reactions and opinions from all parties: not as funny as I've seen, not such full-strength seething and coping, and nowhere near as outlandish as some, but a fairly interesting sample all the same. It should be fun to watch what develops, here and elsewhere.
-
It should be fun to watch what develops, here and elsewhere.
You may be in the wrong community then. It is a different Flat Earth community which says the Midnight Sun is impossible. This community has always accepted the Midnight Sun in its models and portrays several mechanisms in its materials, which relay that the Antarctic midnight sun has been in Flat Earth models since at least the 1920's. Even in the classic Monopole model, the magnifying dome demonstration for the seasons appears to make a midnight sun (https://wiki.tfes.org/Southern_Hemisphere#Seasonal_Daylight_Patterns).
It's also plausible that our official celestial model for Flat Earth, the EA Model (https://wiki.tfes.org/Electromagnetic_Acceleration), could be extended predict a midnight sun. If the light of the sun actually takes the shape of something similar to the closed loops of magnetic field flux lines, it could be that the earth is interrupting the natural path of the Sun's light and that the rays on a larger scale could loop around and appear to be coming from the opposite direction to a distant observer.
If we take one of the upwardly bending light diagrams in the link above and simply extend the loop of one of the rays which intersect with the earth, it loops around and appears to be coming from an opposite direction.
(https://i.imgur.com/C5iU0QW.png)
This isn't new, and I have my own questions about the particulars of how this dipole shape would appear, but the above appears to demonstrate that a midnight Sun is not an impossibility in current constructs.
-
It's good to see that every prediction I've made in May turned out to be exactly correct. Imagine how much real-world good these guys could have done with the money instead.
-
It's good to see that every prediction I've made in May turned out to be exactly correct. Imagine how much real-world good these guys could have done with the money instead.
You aren't unique or special in your prediction that this Antarctic trip would not end up really moving the needle in terms of RE theory or FE theory, and that a conspiracy or a scam would be assigned as a reason to invalidate the experience.
I predicted the same in this thread on June 1 and I believe most RE'ers and FE'ers knew the same would happen.
With respect to Tom continuing to bring up the desktop magnifying dome experiment (in his above recent post) to explain how a 24 hour sun could be visible at any location on the flat Earth Antarctic ice wall ring, this continues to be a very sloppy conclusion or use of evidence. As I've said before, our atmosphere isn't made of solid glass and so using a solid piece of magnifying glass to simulate our atmosphere is by no means a valid approach. As I've also said before, it would be like a Round Earther launching a model rocket in their backyard and saying that such a "desktop" experiment can be used to explain how rockets work in a vacuum. I'm intrigued as to why there continues to be such a low bar or standard in the use of this magnifying dome.
-
It's good to see that every prediction I've made in May turned out to be exactly correct.
You aren't unique or special...I predicted the same in this thread on June 1 and I believe most RE'ers and FE'ers knew the same would happen.
So, you didn't really predict anything.
You just wrote, "I agree with Pete," and thought that agreement (not a prediction) was an EARTh-SHAKING PRONOUNCEMENT, worthy of another post.
-
It looks like at least one of the flat earthers has wised up after his trip to Antartica.
https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/technology/flat-earth-youtuber-admits-mistake-after-trip-to-antarctica/ar-AA1wdgmr?ocid=msedgntp&pc=U531&cvid=2f464ac6c6fe460fa2b66903f8cf103a&ei=10 (https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/technology/flat-earth-youtuber-admits-mistake-after-trip-to-antarctica/ar-AA1wdgmr?ocid=msedgntp&pc=U531&cvid=2f464ac6c6fe460fa2b66903f8cf103a&ei=10)
Perhaps he can use this publicity to enhance his flat earth channel and stack up even more viewers.
Now the flat earth community will have to concoct an even more comprehensive bendy light theory to explain what was seen and documented. Maybe this site will have to bring back the dome. That should be interesting. I can see the next 'final experiment' where someone organizes a trip to space. Of course, that has already been done but there wasn't any real flat earth involvement. Just look up the trip taken by Dude Perfect who now is an official astronaut. Who should be nominated for such a trip?
-
It's good to see that every prediction I've made in May turned out to be exactly correct.
You aren't unique or special...I predicted the same in this thread on June 1 and I believe most RE'ers and FE'ers knew the same would happen.
So, you didn't really predict anything.
You just wrote, "I agree with Pete," and thought that agreement (not a prediction) was an EARTh-SHAKING PRONOUNCEMENT, worthy of another post.
Looks like Action80 didn't read my post from Page 1, dated June 1.
Looks like Action80 is also creating "quotes" and then assigning them to members that never said such "quotes."
But, I guess this could have been predicted of Action80 as well.
-
It's good to see that every prediction I've made in May turned out to be exactly correct.
You aren't unique or special...I predicted the same in this thread on June 1 and I believe most RE'ers and FE'ers knew the same would happen.
So, you didn't really predict anything.
You just wrote, "I agree with Pete," and thought that agreement (not a prediction) was an EARTh-SHAKING PRONOUNCEMENT, worthy of another post.
Looks like Action80 didn't read my post from Page 1, dated June 1.
I would absolutely love to. Why don't you link it and see if the link shows a post made on this thread on June 1, 2024.
Looks like Action80 is also creating "quotes" and then assigning them to members that never said such "quotes."
But, I guess this could have been predicted of Action80 as well.
I quoted direct posts made in this very thread.
I made no alterations to any of the language contained in those posts.
You are just a big liar.
-
It's good to see that every prediction I've made in May turned out to be exactly correct.
You aren't unique or special...I predicted the same in this thread on June 1 and I believe most RE'ers and FE'ers knew the same would happen.
So, you didn't really predict anything.
You just wrote, "I agree with Pete," and thought that agreement (not a prediction) was an EARTh-SHAKING PRONOUNCEMENT, worthy of another post.
Looks like Action80 didn't read my post from Page 1, dated June 1.
I would absolutely love to. Why don't you link it and see if the link shows a post made on this thread on June 1, 2024.
Looks like Action80 is also creating "quotes" and then assigning them to members that never said such "quotes."
But, I guess this could have been predicted of Action80 as well.
I quoted direct posts made in this very thread.
I made no alterations to any of the language contained in those posts.
You are just a big liar.
- Go to Reply #14 of this thread. My post date is June 1, 2024.
- You indeed created the quote "I agree with Pete" and then attributed it to me by replying to me: "You just wrote "I agree with Pete"."
-
It should be fun to watch what develops, here and elsewhere.
You may be in the wrong community then. It is a different Flat Earth community which says the Midnight Sun is impossible. This community has always accepted the Midnight Sun in its models and portrays several mechanisms in its materials, which relay that the Antarctic midnight sun has been in Flat Earth models since at least the 1920's. Even in the classic Monopole model, the magnifying dome demonstration for the seasons appears to make a midnight sun (https://wiki.tfes.org/Southern_Hemisphere#Seasonal_Daylight_Patterns).
It's also plausible that our official celestial model for Flat Earth, the EA Model (https://wiki.tfes.org/Electromagnetic_Acceleration), could be extended predict a midnight sun. If the light of the sun actually takes the shape of something similar to the closed loops of magnetic field flux lines, it could be that the earth is interrupting the natural path of the Sun's light and that the rays on a larger scale could loop around and appear to be coming from the opposite direction to a distant observer.
If we take one of the upwardly bending light diagrams in the link above and simply extend the loop of one of the rays which intersect with the earth, it loops around and appears to be coming from an opposite direction.
(https://i.imgur.com/C5iU0QW.png)
This isn't new, and I have my own questions about the particulars of how this dipole shape would appear, but the above appears to demonstrate that a midnight Sun is not an impossibility in current constructs.
Thank you for the sketch, but it doesn't appear to have uploaded completely – there are no annotations to explain what we're looking at, where an observer would be or where the sun is.
-
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TQbdVCfNGqY
-
You indeed created the quote "I agree with Pete" and then attributed it to me by replying to me: "You just wrote "I agree with Pete"."
It's so funny how obsessed you are with quote fixing. It's part of the old web forum culture, and it's nowhere neat as sinister as you describe it. You had so much time to learn how this place works, but, throughout so many years, across so many alts, you just can't let go of like 3 things.
You aren't unique or special in your prediction that this Antarctic trip would not end up really moving the needle in terms of RE theory or FE theory
And? How does that affect anyone I or anyone else has said here?
-
When mahogany writes, "I predicted the same thing in this thread on June 1," in response to Pete, he really isn't saying, "I agree with Pete."
Jesus, you can't make this stuff up!
-
You indeed created the quote "I agree with Pete" and then attributed it to me by replying to me: "You just wrote "I agree with Pete"."
It's so funny how obsessed you are with quote fixing. It's part of the old web forum culture, and it's nowhere neat as sinister as you describe it. You had so much time to learn how this place works, but, throughout so many years, across so many alts, you just can't let go of like 3 things.
You aren't unique or special in your prediction that this Antarctic trip would not end up really moving the needle in terms of RE theory or FE theory
And? How does that affect anyone I or anyone else has said here?
Old web forum culture... love that one.
-
What makes you think that? As far as I can tell, the opposite happened - known FE grifters teamed up with known RE grifters to get a free holiday and steal a lot of money from fans
Some places were paid for. Which is what was stated from the start - not clear where that money came from, but I've seen no evidence of any impropriety. Other places have been crowdfunded but that isn't "stealing". If someone sets up a fundraiser for a holiday and people want to contribute then that's their business. Obviously in this case the reason wasn't just a holiday, it was to do certain experiments and those experiments have now been done. If people thought that those experiments were pointless then they didn't have to contribute. And if the trip didn't happen at all and people just ran off with the money then I'd agree that was fraudulent, but the trip did happen.
all in the name of an "experiment" that FE and RE agreed would produce a consistent outcome long in advance
This isn't true. The experiment was specifically picked because FE and RE did NOT agree on the outcome.
You and other people on here may not have disputed it but you aren't the FE authority - you've already said there isn't one. The FE people they were engaging with claimed there was no 24 hour sun in Antarctica, that's why that experiment was chosen. You may regard those FE people as grifters but...you said you're not the authority. Jeranism has already said he didn't expect the outcome - you may regard him as one of the grifters but he's been quoted on here before.
I don't know if A69 can, but I do know you can - you've been here for these conversations, and your memory isn't THAT bad yet. In a critical failure scenario, you could have just scrolled up, which you inevitably would do... so, what gives?
I've never seen an explanation that I find satisfactory. You said something above about "the real effects of EA combined with internal reflection" but that's too vague for me to really understand what you think is goingon. There's Tom's diagram above which I don't begin to understand. In the bi-polar model the sun could orbit the north pole for 6 months and then the south pole for 6 months. That at least makes sense to me, but it would cause a load of other problems in terms of where the sun appears in different places. In the monopole model I don't understand how it could work. I'm happy to be educated if you have a detailed explanation.
-
Nobody here could ever really explain things enough to satisfy you, AATW.
It is not that multiple people haven't tried.
The wiki diagram for EA is pretty compelling.
-
Nobody here could ever really explain things enough to satisfy you, AATW.
It is not that multiple people haven't tried.
The explanations are always so vague. The best/worst example being Celestial Gravitation. The Wiki page about it literally just says that it might be a thing.
The wiki diagram for EA is pretty compelling.
Do you mean the one at the top of this page?
https://wiki.tfes.org/Electromagnetic_Acceleration
I don't know if it's "compelling" - it's certainly clear. And sure, it's the best explanation for sunset on a FE I've seen, you can have that.
But it doesn't help that further down the page you have the moon tilt illusion "explained" by EA when
a) It's an optical illusion and easy to prove it is, I have done that myself and
b) The diagram shows the light bending downwards in a shape like a rainbow - that's the opposite of what EA hypotheses.
And then you have the "Approximation" section which has an equation which has no derivation shown and which contains an unknown constant. It's not a well formed theory it is, at best, a hypothesis. And it is one which does a decent job of explaining sunset but if it can also explain a 24 hour sun in Antarctica then I have yet to understand how.
-
I've seen no evidence of any impropriety.
If only your standards were this low for the tribe you don't like...
Other places have been crowdfunded but that isn't "stealing". If someone sets up a fundraiser for a holiday and people want to contribute then that's their business.
I guess we'll have to agree to disagree there. And I'm not gonna hide this - to me, that makes you morally reprehensible. I'm sure you're devastated by that.
They were selling this trip to a dedicated fandom with the promise of finally delivering the "smoking gun" that will, once and for all, shut up those evil Flat Earthers. In reality, they went on a fancy holiday and made further money from the YT videos and exposure. The reality contradicts the promise, and we knew from the beginning that this would be the case - that's about as fraudulent as things get. It's completely predatory, and your only response is one of victim-blaming: "Well, if they're happy being scammed, then what's the problem? If they didn't want to get scammed, they just wouldn't pay up! :D"
Yuck.
This isn't true. The experiment was specifically picked because FE and RE did NOT agree on the outcome.
You and other people on here may not have disputed it but you aren't the FE authority - you've already said there isn't one. The FE people they were engaging with claimed there was no 24 hour sun in Antarctica, that's why that experiment was chosen. You may regard those FE people as grifters but...you said you're not the authority. Jeranism has already said he didn't expect the outcome - you may regard him as one of the grifters but he's been quoted on here before.
I despise the fact that you recycle old arguments like this, and just completely ignore any past disucssion on the same subject. Do you suffer from memory loss? We've gone through this loop so many times.
Extreme tl;dr version: if you wanna count these people as part of the FE camp, then I'm gonna start counting idiots who mix up velocity and acceleration as part of the RE camp.
After all, they're RE'ers just like you! There's just no gosh darn way to tell who's who! We must immediately solicit ₹1,00,00,000 to figure out if acceleration and velocity are the same thing or not. After all, some RE'ers think they are! Surely, this is the debate to end all debates!!!!11!!
I've never seen an explanation that I find satisfactory.
Right, but your personal satisfaction is not the litmus test here. I've never seen a RE model that I find satisfactory, either.
You did know, from day 0, that no true ScotsFE'er would find the results of this experiment to be valuable, and that's because you know that we expected the same outcome as you. You might not understand why that is, but that doesn't necessitate flying a bunch of grifters to Antarctica.
I'm happy to be educated if you have a detailed explanation.
Sorry, but you've firmly convinced me that that would be a waste of my time. You're just going to ask the same questions in 2 months time and insist that the conversation never happened, or that you didn't find it convincing. For all intents and purposes, you're a stochastic parrot.
The best/worst example being Celestial Gravitation. The Wiki page about it literally just says that it might be a thing.
Again - stochastic parrot. We've had this conversation before. You know what "gravitation" is, because you made it through compulsory education. Observations suggest that celestial bodies (you know what those are, right?) exhibit gravitation. It's that simple, and that's why the page is that simple. Could it be expanded? Probably, to questionable benefit. Is that high on the priority list? Of course not.
-
But it doesn't help that further down the page you have the moon tilt illusion "explained" by EA when
Now you're just being dishonest. There's a pretty comprehensive page (https://wiki.tfes.org/Moon_Tilt_Illusion) on this subject, which you blatantly haven't read. You looked at ONE illustration, didn't understand why it's there, and went "well duh that don't explain things."
It's an optical illusion and easy to prove it is, I have done that myself
It also has a supplemental page (https://wiki.tfes.org/Moon_Tilt_Illusion_Supplement) discussing your exact objection. Of course, you haven't read that either. You're entirely disinterested in learning anything, you just want to keep saying the same three things on repeat, for whatever reason.
Are you starting to realise why no one takes your content requests seriously? Why would we write new pages, just for you, if you won't even bother reading them?
-
It should be fun to watch what develops, here and elsewhere.
You may be in the wrong community then. It is a different Flat Earth community which says the Midnight Sun is impossible. This community has always accepted the Midnight Sun in its models and portrays several mechanisms in its materials, which relay that the Antarctic midnight sun has been in Flat Earth models since at least the 1920's. Even in the classic Monopole model, the magnifying dome demonstration for the seasons appears to make a midnight sun (https://wiki.tfes.org/Southern_Hemisphere#Seasonal_Daylight_Patterns).
It's also plausible that our official celestial model for Flat Earth, the EA Model (https://wiki.tfes.org/Electromagnetic_Acceleration), could be extended predict a midnight sun. If the light of the sun actually takes the shape of something similar to the closed loops of magnetic field flux lines, it could be that the earth is interrupting the natural path of the Sun's light and that the rays on a larger scale could loop around and appear to be coming from the opposite direction to a distant observer.
If we take one of the upwardly bending light diagrams in the link above and simply extend the loop of one of the rays which intersect with the earth, it loops around and appears to be coming from an opposite direction.
(https://i.imgur.com/C5iU0QW.png)
This isn't new, and I have my own questions about the particulars of how this dipole shape would appear, but the above appears to demonstrate that a midnight Sun is not an impossibility in current constructs.
As previously mentioned, the Magnifying Dome Demonstration is a poor and inaccurate representation of our Earth's atmosphere. It's a desktop demonstration that uses a solid piece of magnifying glass as an attempt to pass off how sunlight patterns could behave; but we know that our Earth's atmosphere isn't made of a solid piece of magnifying glass. Seems like you're lowering the FE bar in a big way as an attempt to have a theory. It would be as if a Round Earther launched a model rocket in their backyard and then posted a YouTube video claiming the experiment as evidence of rocket engines working (propelling) in a vacuum and when questioned about it's accuracy saying that it's just a desktop model.
There seems to be so much going on with Electromagnetic Acceleration, closed loops of magnetic field flux lines, and the earth interrupting the natural path of the Sun's light where the rays on a larger scale are looping around and appear to be coming from the opposite direction to a distant observer that I think it would be worthwhile for the authors of TFES Wiki to update the basic animation model with an updated animation model. The updated animation model could show how this theory works, from season to season, and how an observer in Antarctica would appears to be seeing 24 hours of the Sun.
The updated animation should also include the the tracking of the Moon and it's path from season to season.
I think that if the authors updated the animation model in this respect and also added it within the EA description that it could be a good visual aid.
-
mahogany, not once in this quoted explanation did Tom mention a dome of solid glass extending entirely to the surface of a flat earth plane.
You do not need to keep repeating this strawman in thread after thread.
-
mahogany, not once in this quoted explanation did Tom mention a dome of solid glass extending entirely to the surface of a flat earth plane.
You do not need to keep repeating this strawman in thread after thread.
Here you go:
- This is a YouTube video that Tom has referenced before in another thread and refers to it again in his above post as "the magnifying dome demonstration."
- The model in the YouTube video that Tom references uses a solid piece of magnifying glass extending entirely to the surface of a flat earth plane.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rrL1IVMr0CU
-
What does that thread have to do with this thread?
-
Now, add scale. Also, take this garbage out of this thread and put it where it belongs.
-
I've seen no evidence of any impropriety.
If only your standards were this low for the tribe you don't like...
I don't know what that means. And for the record I don't particularly like or dislike any "tribe", there are individuals on both sides I dislike. For example, I do like how Professor Dave Explains...explains, but he's a condescending dick and that makes him quite unlikeable.
I can't pretend to have looked into this in any detail. I don't know where the money came from to fund the 1 FE and 1 RE place which were prepaid. But me not knowing that isn't evidence of fraud, or evidence against it. I wouldn't even know how to investigate that. The crowdfunding places are clearer, so let's come on to that.
Other places have been crowdfunded but that isn't "stealing". If someone sets up a fundraiser for a holiday and people want to contribute then that's their business.
I guess we'll have to agree to disagree there.
If I set up a crowdfunding page and say "I'd like a lovely holiday please, could you pay for it kthxpls?" then I'd expect people to tell me to sod off. But if people did want to pay for me then...well, that's up to them, isn't it? That's what crowdfunding is, what's to agree with or disagree about there?
And I'm not gonna hide this - to me, that makes you morally reprehensible. I'm sure you're devastated by that.
I'm completely consolable.
But your assertion about my morality seems to be based on the idea that I think it's OK to scam people by lying about what I'm crowdfunding for - but I don't think that. To continue my example above, if I said I wanted one last holiday because I'm terminally ill and then it transpires I'm fine and just wanted a holiday then I'd agree, that would be morally reprehensible. So I guess the point of disagreement is whether people have been lied to.
They were selling this trip to a dedicated fandom with the promise of finally delivering the "smoking gun" that will, once and for all, shut up those evil Flat Earthers.
This is more or less true, but you're leaving out a fair bit of context which is that the experiment was chosen specifically because FE and RE disagreed about what the outcome would be. Now, YOU may not disagree about it but (all together now) you aren't the FE authority. Because as you tell me repeatedly, there isn't one. And I think that's part of the issue here. The FE "tribe" are not a single group with coherent beliefs. You view this as a scam because to you this is a a waste of time and money and you know what the outcome of the experiment will be anyway. But the FE people they were speaking to did NOT agree about the outcome of the experiment, Jeranism has already admitted the results were not what he was expecting.
your only response is one of victim-blaming: "Well, if they're happy being scammed, then what's the problem? If they didn't want to get scammed, they just wouldn't pay up!
Being scammed is in the eye of the beholder. Your claim is that people have been scammed. But for that to be true people would have had to be lied to about what was going to happen. If people had raised money for a trip to Antarctica and then gone to the Bahamas for an all expenses paid holiday then that would be a scam. Or if people had gone to Antarctica for the experience and to take photos of penguins and hadn't done the experiments they said they were going to do then that would be a scam. But none of that happened. They said they were crowdfunding to go to Antarctica and observe the 24 hour sun and that's exactly what they did. I think people were pretty clear about what they were contributing to. Where's the scam?
At worst, I'd agree that it was over-stated that this would end all FE debate, that was never going to happen. But, again, the experiment was chosen because RE and (some) FE people disagreed about the outcome. The fundamental issue is that there is no set of coherent FE beliefs - is a consequence of there being no FE Authority.
Extreme tl;dr version: if you wanna count these people as part of the FE camp, then I'm gonna start counting idiots who mix up velocity and acceleration as part of the RE camp.
We have had this conversation before so I'll just reply like I have before
It's a false equivalence. The shape of the earth is an established fact, most people are taught it and believe it and many don't really understand much science and don't need to in their daily lives. Most people believe a load of stuff without really understanding it or thinking about it too hard. To be a flat earther you must surely have looked in to the matter in some depth and are therefore a de facto FE expert.
You did know, from day 0, that no true ScotsFE'er would find the results of this experiment to be valuable, and that's because you know that we expected the same outcome as you. You might not understand why that is, but that doesn't necessitate flying a bunch of grifters to Antarctica.
I knew from day 0 that this would not end all RE/FE debate, but I didn't think it had no value as an experiment because I have seen some FE people - including on here - claiming that the 24 hour sun in Antarctica doesn't happen. I honestly don't know who the "true" FE people are. I've never been entirely convinced that you lot are serious about it. What I see is a lot of People's Front of Judea and Judean People's Front sects, all claiming that they are the "real" FE people and the others are grifters or controlled opposition etc. Again, you are not the FE Authority, why should I believe you when you say that others aren't the real ones?
Sorry, but you've firmly convinced me that that would be a waste of my time.
This is quite a common tactic of yours, to claim that you really do have a good explanation for <something>, pinky-promise, but I wouldn't be interested in hearing it. It's all a bit "I definitely have a girlfriend but she goes to a different school, you wouldn't know her". It's not really the way to convince me that you are serious about FE.
I have ploughed my way through the pages about the moon tilt illusion, the first one starts:
"If the light travels in straight lines and the Sun illuminates the Moon then it is expected that the Moon's illuminated portion should always point at the Sun. The Moon Tilt Illusion is a phenomenon in which the lit portion of the Moon unexpectedly points away from the Sun"
It's a strong start given that the Moon Tilt Illusion is an optical illusion. There's a clue in the name. When the illusion occurs the lit portion APPEARS to point away from the sun, but it actually doesn't. I have verified this to my own satisfaction.
The initial page is a very long explanation for why EA predicts a phenomenon which doesn't actually occur (again, illusion). The supplemental page is a box set of not understanding that the fact a straight line perpendicular to the terminator on the moon intersects the sun is proof that the illusion is just that, an optical illusion. Which actually shows that EA doesn't exist if you think about it, because it "predicts" something which doesn't actually occur, it merely appears to and it's trivial to demonstrate that.
You berate me for conversations going round and round but the above has been explained on multiple occasions and yet the same topics keep coming up:
https://forum.tfes.org/index.php?topic=17742.msg234260#msg234260
https://forum.tfes.org/index.php?topic=19030.0
You have an opportunity to move these conversations on but you always say I wouldn't be interested in your explanations. And then you lament that the conversations go round and round. They only do so because you refuse to advance them, *shrug*
-
The only final experiment:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4V7Z0SZftl0
(https://i.imgur.com/DtIZXUO.png)
Yes - the globe-defending zealots are very afraid and it shows, through this completely unrelated observation being labeled "the final experiment" by them. All while ignoring the true final experiment above-which they will never perform.
-
(https://i.imgur.com/DtIZXUO.png)
Level is not the same as flat. On a round earth, the level structure would follow the curvature of the earth at a constant height.
-
I don't know what that means.
Jesus, you don't have to admit that. That should be the kind of stuff I accuse you of, but which I can't quite prove.
And for the record I don't particularly like or dislike any "tribe"
I'm sorry, you have YEARS of actions here which speak SO MUCH louder than words. This conversation just makes it worse - we've got an open-and-shut case of some YouTubers doing unsightly stuff. It would be very easy for an honest person to say "yea, these guys are kinda whack", but you're not capable of doing that. Partially because you're not capable of criticising a RE'er, and partially because you never read their crowdfunding pages. You need to understand that, with this sort of track record, no one with a serious interest in debate will show you any good will on this account.
I can't pretend to have looked into this in any detail. I don't know where the money came from to fund the 1 FE and 1 RE place which were prepaid.
Indeed. You also don't know how many people were paid for (it's 5 not counting the organiser, so arguably 6; not 2). So, given how little you know, why the fuck are you still talking?
But me not knowing that isn't evidence of fraud, or evidence against it. I wouldn't even know how to investigate that.
It's simple. It's well within public interest to see the financials here. You should be able to just ask. Will you?
If I set up a crowdfunding page and say "I'd like a lovely holiday please, could you pay for it kthxpls?" then I'd expect people to tell me to sod off. But if people did want to pay for me then...well, that's up to them, isn't it? That's what crowdfunding is, what's to agree with or disagree about there?
As with most intentionally dishonest arguments, the issue lies in the premise, which I bolded for your convenience. However, you know you're not arguing in good faith, so how about we don't waste ach other's time?
But your assertion about my morality seems to be based on the idea that I think it's OK to scam people by lying about what I'm crowdfunding for - but I don't think that.
Well, then you'll just gosh darn have to read what's been advertised, rather than imagining it. I made a mistake of assuming thaty you wouldn't defend pitches you haven't read, but I guess you're not just evil - you're evil and incorrigibly stupid. After all, the crowdfunders were very clear about what they're getting money for - and it's not "holidayz plx":
Flattys have claimed for over 150 years that the sun in Antarctica NEVER circles 360 degrees overhead all day. This is because it would destroy the idea of pizzaland. Testing their own claims is an excellent way to settle the question using their own claim. So I'm going there with some flattys to see what happens.
If the Sun is visible for 24 hours, then this will prove that the flat Earth proponents are mistaken. [...] Other things of value to the discussion of the shape of the Earth will be the flight I will be taking across the South Pacific (a flight that is impossible on a flat Earth), and various other experiments related to the unique location.
Following the youtube link in this GoFundMe you will find an experiment put together to try to end this debate once and for all.
The Final Experiment is to educatate the flat earth/globe earth community with actual video evidence from the location of that is ANTARCTICA!
This journey is more than just observing a natural wonder; it's a quest to seek truth through firsthand experience. Some believe that such a phenomenon shouldn't occur under certain world models, and witnessing it ourselves could provide valuable insights. But I don't intend to stop there. During this Final Experiment event, I plan to conduct a series of thorough tests and experiments to explore various questions about our world.
They were consistent in their claims. If you're as independent as you claim, you will find no difficulty in acknowledging that. But you will find difficulty in it, because speaking out against grifers in your tribe is beyond your moral capacity.
FE and RE disagreed about what the outcome would be. Now, YOU may not disagree about it but (all together now) you aren't the FE authority. Because as you tell me repeatedly, there isn't one.
This isn't the gotcha you think it is. RE doesn't have a central authority, either. Indeed, it is the hallmark of the scientific method that Bazza down the pub might be able to shake up the scientific consensus at any moment if he brings the right evidence to the table. There are no material differences here - you just don't like one side of the debate, so you twist my words to mean something they don't. You are a thoroughly dishonest person. That's all there is to it.
Being scammed is in the eye of the beholder. Your claim is that people have been scammed. But for that to be true people would have had to be lied to about what was going to happen.
Luckily, I showed that to be the case through my quotes above. More importantly, the fact that you never even tried reading what the scammers said before claiming you've seen no evidence is telling. Yeah, no fucking shit you've seen no evidence - you went out of your way not to look at it.
It's a false equivalence. The shape of the earth is an established fact, most people are taught it and believe it and many don't really understand much science and don't need to in their daily lives. Most people believe a load of stuff without really understanding it or thinking about it too hard. To be a flat earther you must surely have looked in to the matter in some depth and are therefore a de facto FE expert.
Wow, way to double down on a double standard. No, you absolutely don't need to be an FE expert to argue for FE on the Internet. Hell, even you could do it! There's literally nothing stopping you, right now, from making pro-FE arguments. Now, the acutal FE'ers might call you slurs for it, but ga-hyuk, they're nOt AuThOrItAtIvE.
Again, you are not the FE Authority, why should I believe you when you say that others aren't the real ones?
For the same reason you disregard the folks that don't understand the difference between speed and acceleration. Neither side has an official authority that gets to say what goes. We reject nonsensical fringe arguments not based on their popularity or authoritative appeal, but on their merit.
to claim that you really do have a good explanation for <something>, pinky-promise, but I wouldn't be interested in hearing it
I didn't claim that. FE is riddled with holes and inconsisitencies, and this happens to be one of them - we have a partial explanation, one that's easily accesible to you, and it has issues, but you don't know what those issues are. All that information is available to you, but you're not interested in it - so I have to do both the jobs of the FE and RE proponent. It's kinda sad that only one of us is interested in critically evaluating both models.
You can't exactly spend the better part of a decade here establishing your bad will and then expecting people to take you seriously. You need to either assume a new identity (I won't rat you out, I promise), or accept that it will take you multiple years of non-deplorable behaviour to redeem yourself. Until then, you're simply not worth anyone's engagement, so you won't see any engagement from anyone.
-
I'm sorry, you have YEARS of actions here which speak SO MUCH louder than words.
I've been scathing of some of the RE drive-by idiots who come here occasionally too. There are individuals I don't like on both sides. As a "tribe" - I think FE (by which I don't just mean people on here) are misguided and largely ignorant of science. A lot of them are more to be pitied than scorned. And you'll note my tone on here has softened a lot since I first joined this board.
we've got an open-and-shut case of some YouTubers doing unsightly stuff.
I disagree. You described yourself at the beginning of this as "verging on hostile" towards it, you're not neutral or being objective.
Once again you are conflating someone disagreeing with you with them being dishonest. You do this a lot, you're so certain in your position you don't seem to be able to entertain the notion that there are other points of view. If I don't immediately come round to your position then I must be being dishonest - no, I just don't agree with you.
Partially because you're not capable of criticising a RE'er
A strange thing to write in response to a post in which I made my feelings about Professor Dave Explains pretty clear.
While we're here, I quite liked SciManDan in the beginning but he can also be a dick and his "debunks" are pretty lazy
and partially because you never read their crowdfunding pages.
Yes I have. I looked at them before responding above.
MCToon is correct - flatties HAVE claimed that. Maybe not all of them, but it's definitely been claimed. Again, that was the basis for choosing this as the experiment.
Critial Think is clearly talking about the "flat Earth proponents" who claimed the 24 hour sun an Antarctica doesn't happen.
GlobeyMcGlobeface - I agree he is massively overstating things if he thinks it will end FE debate, I already said that isn't going to happen. But he does say "try to", so I'd argue he's covered himself there and he says that's why the experiment was put together, which it was.
George Demitropoulos/Kosho - Not clear what your issue is there
They were consistent in their claims. If you're as independent as you claim, you will find no difficulty in acknowledging that.
I do acknowledge that. But their claims were they were going to go to Antarctica to do experiments including observing the 24 hour sun.
And that's exactly what they did. And, again, that experiment was chosen because some FE people agreed it would be a useful way of discriminating between their FE model and the globe one.
RE doesn't have a central authority, either.
It doesn't, but there is consensus about the shape of the earth, how many poles there are and that there is a 24 hour sun in Antarctica.
You are a thoroughly dishonest person. That's all there is to it.
I'm actually not. I refer the honourable gentleman to my comments above you conflating someone not immediately coming round to your point of view with them being dishonest. Your level of cynicism extends to not even believing me about why I chose my original username. Interestingly, you persist in that despite me explaining that your thesis - that it's a reference to that joke - makes zero sense as "around" can apply to a flat or globe earth and "the world" doesn't imply any particular shape.
No, you absolutely don't need to be an FE expert to argue for FE on the Internet.
I suppose that's true, but if you're going to set up a FE messageboard or YouTube channel then aren't you setting yourself up as a de-facto FE expert. You're claiming you know better than all mainstream scientists. With RE it's much clearer what an expert is - there's a clear education path, clear textbooks to look at and so on.
We reject nonsensical fringe arguments not based on their popularity or authoritative appeal, but on their merit.
I don't think the rejection of a 24 hour sun in Antarctica or that Antarctica is actually a wall around the edge of the flat earth is a fringe FE belief. That model is still claimed to be the most common one in your Wiki.
It's kinda sad that only one of us is interested in critically evaluating both models.
My issue is I don't regard both models as equally valid. I'm a bit of a Charlie Church but I'm also fairly scientifically literate. So I don't regard young earth creationism as equivalent to the more established scientific evidence of an old earth and evolution. I have my own thoughts on how to reconcile that with early Genesis which I won't go into here. But I don't regard young earth creationism as something worth looking in to seriously when there's such a huge amount of evidence showing it can't be true - there are ice cores which go back orders of magnitude longer than when some people claim the earth was created. And so on. New models come along when they are better than the old one and my observations of FE are that it's significantly worse than the globe earth one in terms of it's ability to explain and predict things.
That said, I have consistently given you props for EA and UA. I don't think they're right but I've always acknowledged they're much better explanations for observations than some of the utter horseshit you see on YouTube.
You can't exactly spend the better part of a decade here establishing your bad will and then expecting people to take you seriously. You need to either assume a new identity (I won't rat you out, I promise), or accept that it will take you multiple years of non-deplorable behaviour to redeem yourself. Until then, you're simply not worth anyone's engagement, so you won't see any engagement from anyone.
I think assuming a new identity would be futile, my posting style wouldn't really be different so I think it would be immediately obvious who it was. I appreciate the offer though. I would argue that my attitude has softened significantly since I first came here and that has led to better relations with other posters more recently. I would ask you to consider the thought that me disagreeing with you isn't dishonesty.
While we're here, and in an attempt to get things on a more cordial footing, if you were to design a "final experiment" then what would it be? I don't think it's possible to design one which would really end all debate but is there one which in your mind would help to distinguish between the two models?
-
While we're here, and in an attempt to get things on a more cordial footing, if you were to design a "final experiment" then what would it be? I don't think it's possible to design one which would really end all debate but is there one which in your mind would help to distinguish between the two models?
Was asking the same question to myself; I believe the outcome (no matter what experiment is designed - even sending FE'ers to space to orbit the Earth to observe Earth's curvature or shape) will be similar to "The Final Experiment" in that it will be labelled a scam, fakery done in a studio, or that the FE participants were grifters.
I also don't believe the majority of self-proclaimed FE'ers sincerely believe that the Earth is flat. Instead I believe that flat earth provides them with an avenue of expressing their contempt--disdain--skepticism with things like science, institutions, government agencies, or that which they might not fully understand.
-
I also don't believe the majority of self-proclaimed FE'ers sincerely believe that the Earth is flat. Instead I believe that flat earth provides them with an avenue of expressing their contempt--disdain--skepticism with things like science, institutions, government agencies, or that which they might not fully understand.
Perhaps there was some initial contempt and/or disdain for science & government at the start for a few of the flat earthers but the ones who jumped all in it also became a career opportunity. I think it’s a bit strange, but you must admire their entrepreneurial spirit. What’s even stranger is that the round earth community is indirectly helping them out. Controversy is the needed thing to keep things going. The ‘final experiment’ did fan those flames a bit and will ultimately help their cause. Some of the more popular flat earth deniers probably are doing OK for themselves as well. My hat is off to both sides in that aspect. I did take a look at the 'Behind The Curve' movie and you can see that the flat earth stars seem to really enjoy their lifestyle. They can be self-employed and discuss their side of the earth's shape and make a living doing so. The more they can promote controversy the better things will be for them. Both sides need their 'fan boys' for support and to keep websites, like this one active. Both sides need each other to keep things going. The 'Final Experiment' kind of reminds me of a bull fight. The bull needs a matador, and the matador needs a bull. Ole!
-
A time-lapse? Really? Got a chance to put the whole thing to bed, and two people couldn't stay up to do the whole 24-hour thing live?
Gimme a break.
By the way, I just watched a video about this and they did film a 25 hour real-time video of the 24 hour sun which they are looking at making available.
The issues with that are the camera they used for it records video in 30 minutes chunks and the files are very big so putting them together into a single video has been a challenge.
That has now been done but they're now coming up against a couple of YouTube limitations - apparently videos can only be 12 hours long and file size has to be under 256Gb, which even half of it wouldn't be.
So they're just working round those things before making it available.
Honestly, I'm not sure I would bother watching it as I don't think it would add much to what I've always seen, but if you're sceptical of the timelapse for whatever reason then maybe you'd be interested in the real time version when it is released.
-
I am not really that interested in watching it either, given the information I am now aware of concerning entire sets allowing for 360o shooting.
-
Fine. I just thought I'd mention it as you were complaining about it being a timelapse, for reasons I still don't entirely understand.
-
Well, I would think the reason would have been obvious, but I will explain further.
Sessions for such momentous events as DJ's broadcasting realize that extended airplay draw the most attention and make a more earnest attempt at drawing attention.
-
This is a 360° view; you can turn your camera and/or phone in all directions and watch in 360°.
This is a 10 hour (of 24 hour) continuous shot (I believe additional video's to be released to show the remaining 14 hours)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Gv4nUyTQcVw&t=1376s