Debunking 'Flat Earth Debunked' Videos

The following presentation is a response to "Professor" Dave's popular "10 Things All Flat Earthers Say" video that globe believers constantly share as if it's some home-run for heliocentrism. If you see anyone posting his video, please be sure to share this debunking with them for me.

If you're a flat-Earther or have searched the topic using YouTube's ridiculously biased algorithm, or allowed YouTube's auto-play feature to recommend your next video, or tried to send an Eric Dubay video to one of your globe-indoctrinated friends, you and they will likely have come across a "debunking" video by one of YouTube's most pushed globe propagandists, SciManDan.

In the following presentation the President of the International Flat Earth Research Society Eric Dubay debunks NASA's Assistant Director for Science Communication Michelle Thaller's top "proofs" that Earth is a spinning ball.

-Think that the Earth is flat its not okay!
-Ok...sorry...than i think its a sphere...
-Good boy!
I dont know who was the target group of this video, but i have a feeling that it was pretty contraproductive.

In the following presentation the President of the International Flat Earth Research Society Eric Dubay debunks astrophysicist Neil DeGrasse Tyson's top "proofs" that Earth is a spinning ball.

I have a genuine question, I started posting flay earth material on twitter and got attacked by loads of trolls and some of the stuff I don't know how to answer, on the point of gravity not existing and everything falling or rising depending on their relevant density how would you answer this?

I'm rubbish at mathematics myself, but had I any questions I'd not ask the general public as they are still in the matrix and would default to solving the problem by mainstream maths and science. For your problem, I'd say learn density and boyancy from the books and leave it at that. Basically trust your own eyes and gut and see how different objects fall in your kitchen. You've prooved it yourself.

In the following presentation International Flat Earth Research Society president Eric Dubay debunks science communicator Sabine Hossenfelder's video "Flat Earth Science: Wrong but not Stupid."

EugeneHKrabs wrote:I'm rubbish at mathematics myself, but had I any questions I'd not ask the general public as they are still in the matrix and would default to solving the problem by mainstream maths and science. For your problem, I'd say learn density and boyancy from the books and leave it at that. Basically trust your own eyes and gut and see how different objects fall in your kitchen. You've prooved it yourself.

Math- I believe- is not quite so complicated as it seems. You ‘basically’ only have 2 parameters from which to conduct all operations: Addition and Subtraction. Note that multiplication is a form of Addition and division is a form of Subtraction. (And we all know how to multiply and divide).

In more complicated equations, a great roadmap is PEMDAS. It tells you where to start solving the equation and in what particular order to proceed.
That is- Parenthesis , Exponents, Multiplication, Division, Addition, and lastly Subtration. Solve in that order. Parse out what’s going on in parenthesis firstly, then do exponents, and continue as such.

Where the gnomes and wizards of AstroPsy try to get you is in odd and cryptic symbols they often liberally scatter throughout complex intimidating-appearing equations. These, however, almost invariably represent some type of “constant” or another, and thus one only need know what the shorthand symbols are representing and plug in the relevant numbers for those symbols. For ln and log and other things we have graphing calculators and software at the ready.

I have not much training in mathematics beyond college-level calculus, but I’ve been able to work out several of their more hocus-pocus formatted equations with a little bit of patience.

This is actually one of their tricks, the idea being that “only 15 people in the world can understand this equation therefore Earth is a Sphere”. I should note Standford University’s mathematics department developed a formula for which you can hang an elephant in suspension over the edge of a cliff with a single blade of grass, tho we all - hopefully - realize in the physical world this is an attempt in futility (a quick cursory search on Google cannot bring up the study, but you might have better luck).

Admin wrote:

This chick looks SUPER freaked-out in the vid. Like she knows something.

In the following presentation astronomer Dr. Stuart Clark's video "An Astronomer Responds to Flat Earth Theory" is refuted and debunked by the president of the International Flat Earth Research Society.

In the following video head of the International Flat Earth Research Society and fellow rapper Eric Dubay responds to flat Earth criticisms and arguments made by Ludacris.

Admin wrote:

In the following video head of the International Flat Earth Research Society and fellow rapper Eric Dubay responds to flat Earth criticisms and arguments made by Ludacris.

Even he doesn't sound like he believes in the argument he's making. Its as if someone gave him the task of making that video and he reluctantly went along with it.

The formula he is using refers to small g which is the acceleration of supposed gravity at sea level and not the big G which is referred to as the gravitational constant. They can call it gravitational Constant or you can call it whatever you want, before the supposed gravity was discovered the rate at which things fall through the air could still be calculated regardless. So in this formula just replace g, with 9.8m/s2 and call it acceleration through air.
So gravity is still not required to explain why certain things float, fall, rise throught the air, it's all density relative to the media surrounding it.

AaronWat03 wrote:I have a genuine question, I started posting flay earth material on twitter and got attacked by loads of trolls and some of the stuff I don't know how to answer, on the point of gravity not existing and everything falling or rising depending on their relevant density how would you answer this?

In the following presentation head of the International Flat Earth Research Society responds and corrects several misconceptions and falsehoods in Buzzfeed Multiplier's video "The Flat Earth Theory Explained."

I think we should never stop posting and showing pictures of the flat earth as often or more often than how much we see their globe earth everywhere. If I had the resources, I'd put a flat earth map on every cereal box, milk carton and soda can, with link to websites that genuinely debunk the globe format. Use familiarity and curiosity as a tool to create awareness and reinforcement of the real image of the earth, like how they always flash the globe everywhere.

What is this guy saying? my English kinda sucks



A globe fanatic send me that.. like is some kind of proof

John wrote:What is this guy saying? my English kinda sucks



A globe fanatic send me that.. like is some kind of proof

The typical nonsense, ridicule, marginalize, and misrepresent flat earth and real flat earthers. A real land surveyor was my brothers friend and tried telling me when i was brainwashed that he didn't measure enough curvature for the the earth to be a ball. He didn't say anything about flat earth he simply told me doing his job he never encountered enough curvature.

One of the most common alleged proofs quoted for the spherical Earth theory is the Eratosthenes sticks and shadows experiment. Many people may remember NASA spokesman Carl Sagan presenting this experiment by using a map of Egypt with two obelisks attached and showing their resulting shadows. The story goes that around 250 B.C. a Greek mathematician and philosopher named Eratosthenes noted that at noon during the Summer Solstice in Syene, the Sun cast no shadow and the rays could reach straight to the bottom of his well, yet meanwhile in Alexandria a vertically standing metal rod cast a significant shadow. Eratosthenes, Carl Sagan, and other globe proponents reason that this result is impossible on a flat Earth. To quote Carl Sagan, "If at a certain moment each stick casts no shadow at all, that is perfectly easy to understand provided the Earth is flat. If the shadow at Syene is a certain length, and the shadow at Alexandria is the same length, that also makes sense on a flat Earth. But how could it be, Eratosthenes asked, that at the same instant there was no shadow at Syene and a very substantial shadow at Alexandria? The only answer (he claimed) was that the surface of the Earth is curved." After reaching this conclusion, Eratosthenes then famously factored the length of the two shadows with his assumed distance to the Sun and recorded a measurement of the globe Earth's circumference close to what heliocentrist astronomers still use today.

The fact of the matter is, however, that Eratosthenes, Sagan, and others are simply incorrect in their assumption that this would only be possible on a curved Earth. In reality, the exact same results occur on a flat Earth with a local Sun. Eratosthenes’ calculations were made assuming the Sun to be millions of miles away so that its rays would fall perfectly parallel even in points as divergent as Syene and Alexandria. Anyone familiar with the phenomenon known as crepuscular rays, however, knows full well that the Sun's rays simply do NOT fall perfectly parallel, especially at such distant points, rendering the entire argument moot. Furthermore, using sextants and plane trigonometry, by measuring the Sun’s angle at two points on Earth simultaneously and factoring their distance from each other, the Pythagorean theorum reveals that the Sun is NOT millions of miles away, but instead less than a few thousand. High altitude balloon footage has also filmed lighting hot-spots on clouds further proving the Sun to be local and acting as a spotlight. Therefore if globe believers wish to be honest, they must admit it is their faulty assumption that only a distant Sun with parallel rays could produce such results which has led to their faulty conclusion of a curved Earth, because Flat Earthers have always maintained that the Sun was local, and the very existence of crepuscular rays render the entire experiment invalid.

Admin wrote:

One of the most common alleged proofs quoted for the spherical Earth theory is the Eratosthenes sticks and shadows experiment.  Many people may remember NASA spokesman Carl Sagan presenting this experiment by using a map of Egypt with two obelisks attached and showing their resulting shadows.  The story goes that around 250 B.C. a Greek mathematician and philosopher named Eratosthenes noted that at noon during the Summer Solstice in Syene, the Sun cast no shadow and the rays could reach straight to the bottom of his well, yet meanwhile in Alexandria a vertically standing metal rod cast a significant shadow.  Eratosthenes, Carl Sagan, and other globe proponents reason that this result is impossible on a flat Earth.  To quote Carl Sagan, "If at a certain moment each stick casts no shadow at all, that is perfectly easy to understand provided the Earth is flat.  If the shadow at Syene is a certain length, and the shadow at Alexandria is the same length, that also makes sense on a flat Earth.  But how could it be, Eratosthenes asked, that at the same instant there was no shadow at Syene and a very substantial shadow at Alexandria?  The only answer (he claimed) was that the surface of the Earth is curved."  After reaching this conclusion, Eratosthenes then famously factored the length of the two shadows with his assumed distance to the Sun and recorded a measurement of the globe Earth's circumference close to what heliocentrist astronomers still use today.  

The fact of the matter is, however, that Eratosthenes, Sagan, and others are simply incorrect in their assumption that this would only be possible on a curved Earth.  In reality, the exact same results occur on a flat Earth with a local Sun.  Eratosthenes’ calculations were made assuming the Sun to be millions of miles away so that its rays would fall perfectly parallel even in points as divergent as Syene and Alexandria.  Anyone familiar with the phenomenon known as crepuscular rays, however, knows full well that the Sun's rays simply do NOT fall perfectly parallel, especially at such distant points, rendering the entire argument moot.  Furthermore, using sextants and plane trigonometry, by measuring the Sun’s angle at two points on Earth simultaneously and factoring their distance from each other, the Pythagorean theorum reveals that the Sun is NOT millions of miles away, but instead less than a few thousand.  High altitude balloon footage has also filmed lighting hot-spots on clouds further proving the Sun to be local and acting as a spotlight.  Therefore if globe believers wish to be honest, they must admit it is their faulty assumption that only a distant Sun with parallel rays could produce such results which has led to their faulty conclusion of a curved Earth, because Flat Earthers have always maintained that the Sun was local, and the very existence of crepuscular rays render the entire experiment invalid.

Also, and I'm not being funny here.

Does anyone explain how wassiname was able to know the state of both shadows at the same time 500 miles apart?

They didn't have phones. Did he arrange with a mate or something and get together later with drawings?

How in the world was it done? Or am I being really stupid.

The Lake Pontchartrain Bridge Shows Earth's Curvature?



There are several photographs and videos of the Louisiana Lake Pontchartrain causeway and transmission lines showing what globe enthusiasts claim to be visual proof of the curvature of the Earth. In the footage, the bridge and transmission lines, when viewed from a certain angle and height, appear to curve downward as they tend toward the horizon, and this apparent curvature is claimed to be proof of the globe...

Why are There No Photographs of the Flat Earth?



One of the more bizarre and confusing questions frequently asked by globe believers is, "why are there no photographs showing a Flat Earth?" What they mean by this is why are there no photographs taken from "outer-space" which show the entire flat Earth in one frame similar to how NASA images show the entire globe Earth? To begin with, we do not pretend to know how far our Earth plane extends outwards, whether it terminates with an edge, some kind of barrier, or reaches out into infinity, so when globe believers ask this question they are making an assumption that the flat Earth is just some object floating in space similar to the way NASA presents the globe. There are many cartoon depictions of such silly flat Earth's floating in space put out by the farcical gate-keepers at The Flat Earth Society and others, but these images do not represent the claims of genuine globe skeptics. We simply posit that through objective and empirical means the Earth is demonstrably a stationary level plane devoid of any curvature which proves the prevailing globe Earth theory to be scientifically impossible...

Eric since we do not have photos of the flat earth from a super far away perspective. Why is the circle model the "go to model"? Because I've just discovered another model and I really would like you to watch the video I saw and provide feedback on it thanks. About the earth continents laying like a square Mercator map still flat plane. The sun and moon motioning above and entering portal doors which repeat the cycle east to west like Pacman game.

mickey0997 wrote:Eric since we do not have photos of the flat earth from a super far away perspective. Why is the circle model the "go to model"? Because I've just discovered another model and I really would like you to watch the video I saw and provide feedback on it thanks. About the earth continents laying like a square Mercator map still flat plane. The sun and moon motioning above and entering portal doors which repeat the cycle east to west like Pacman game.

I'd be interested in seeing that too.