DEBATE: Flat Vs Globe | Nathan Thompson & Angel Vs Dr. Blitz & Mark Reid | Podcast
03:49:41 Share

If your player scores the longest touchdown of the week, you'll win a share of the $250K.

BetMGM and GameSense remind you to play responsibly. See BetMGM.com for terms. 21 plus only. This U.S. promotional offer is not available in Mississippi, New York, Nevada, Ontario, or Puerto Rico. Gambling problem? Call 1-800-GAMBLER. Available in the U.S. For New York, call 877-8-HOPE-NY or text HOPE-NY-467369. For Arizona, 1-800-NEXT-STEP. For Massachusetts, 1-800-327-5050.

Iowa 1-800-BETS-OFF for Puerto Rico 1-800-981-0023, subject to eligibility requirements. Rewards are unrestricted bonus dollars that expire in seven days in partnership with Kansas Crossing Casino and Hotel. Save on Cox Internet when you add Cox Mobile and get fiber-powered internet at home and unbeatable 5G reliability on the go. So whether you're playing a game at home or attending one live,

You can do more without spending more. Learn how to save at Cox.com slash internet. Cox Internet is connected to the premises via coaxial cable. Cox Mobile runs on the network with unbeatable 5G reliability as measured by UCLA LLC in the U.S. to H2023. Results may vary, not an endorsement of the restrictions apply.

All right, we're ready to roll. Welcome to Modern Day Debate. I'm your host, Ryan. Tonight, we are going to be debating flat versus globe, earth. And to get us started, we have Angel on the floor. So Angel, thanks for coming back to Modern Day Debate. The floor is yours for up to six minutes. All right. Thanks for having me. I just put together a video for my intro, which I will share. And yep, here it comes. Up and running. Do you see my screen? Yeah, I

If the Earth were spinning, then it would be also accelerating. However, if you ask an astrophysicist, how come we don't feel the motion of the Earth? They'll tell you because the Earth is going at a constant rate. However, the Earth is turning and therefore accelerating even in the globe paradigm. It's like being in a train that is turning. You feel the train turning. Now, what's funny is the globe paradigm claims that you would feel the acceleration or deceleration if the Earth was speeding up or slowing down.

And it does claim that it speeds up and slows down, yet we still don't feel it. The Earth in the globe paradigm is on an elliptical orbit around the Sun, which means it has to speed up and slow down. So the Earth is supposedly turning 1,037 miles an hour at the equator, orbiting at 66,000 miles an hour around the Sun in circular paths, but we don't feel the motion. The reason we don't feel the motion is because we're not moving at all, we are stationary.

The globe claims to have a Coriolis effect, which means the Earth rotates underneath objects in the atmosphere. PhD astrophysicist Neil deGrasse Tyson said the Earth rotated underneath a football, so um, let's play it their way. If the Earth does indeed rotate underneath objects in the atmosphere, if we were technically to put a plane at the equator flying east, which is the same direction as the Earth is spinning,

but the plane is going only 500 miles an hour when the Earth is spinning 1,037 miles an hour. In reality, the plane will just move over the Earth like the Earth is stationary. But in their model, technically, the plane should lag behind and not be going anywhere because the plane is moving slower than the Earth is spinning. Do you believe in Coriolis? Does the Earth have Coriolis? Absolutely. Oh, where?

What do you mean where? It happens everywhere on the Earth. It just depends on the direction that you throw things in. Where's everywhere? Whole globe. Let's put a plane at the equator and we're going to fly with the rotation of the Earth. We set the airspeed to be 500 miles per hour, so roughly half what the Earth rotates in an hour. Right. Airspeed. Sure. Yep. So does the plane moonwalk backwards now because it's going slower than the Earth?

No, but it's moving at 500 miles per hour airspeed, right? And the airspeed is roughly the same as ground speed. Let's throw a 180 with the plane, go against the rotation of the Earth. Again, if your airspeed is 500 miles per hour, then your ground speed will be approximately 500 miles per hour. So in other words, the Earth relative to the plane is stationary, right?

Please say it. When I land a plane on a north to south runway at the equator, do I have to chase the runway sideways? Again, you're moving relative to the air and the air is roughly stationary relative to the ground. So in other words, you're describing the earth as stationary right now. FAA trains pilots to assume a flat, non-rotating earth and to ignore a gravity vector, even in the simulations that they use, because the earth is flat and non-rotating.

Here are several clips of pilots I've debated that admit they don't adjust for curvature and don't need to nose down. In straight and level flight, stick a bowling ball down the aisle. It will roll to the back of the plane. That's because the plane in level flight actually flies about two degrees nose up. Yeah, it's pitch attitude, but yeah. Maintains rigidity in space, right? So if you were to tilt the plane up, down, roll, it would show up on the attitude indicator, right? Mm-hmm. Okay. So if you were to fly from the North Pole or, you know, to say Australia to the South under here, would your attitude indicator be upside down?

No, it wouldn't. Welcome to Flat Earth. Do you adjust for curvature every minute when flying 500 miles per hour? See, again, it's more convoluted. Yeah, I know. But it's hard explaining this to somebody that's never been, like, that doesn't know basic flight instruments. It's very, like... Says the guy who I just told you what rigid in space is. Yeah, again, but it's, again, I've been a commercial pilot. I may have learned that in my private pilot book, but I'm saying we don't, like, I'm saying rigid in space. Do you adjust nose down around a globe?

every minute when you fly at 500 miles per hour no welcome to flat earth how often do you have to adjust for the curvature of the earth you don't have to adjust does the aircraft ever need to dip its nose down to account for curvature no level curves level curves if you're flying a plane perfectly straight level you're saying you never dip the nose down why would you not end up in space because you follow the red line you're flying level the same elevation above the ground right so then the plane's nose dips down

Not relative to the ground, no. So then you fly up in space. When you fly, you start off with the North Pole like this. When I come over here, that is still level. Look at the nose.

No, the nose isn't dipping. It doesn't have anything to do with where the nose is. In order to make that red line over the globe there, you have to curve the line, right, to draw it, yeah? All right, turn the globe sideways. No, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no,

You're a stupid dumbass. I'm already sick of this discussion. I've been to 72,000 feet. I've seen it with my own eyes. I'm really not interested in what you think. This is 120,000 feet, so this is no curve. This is higher than what you're claiming. What's 120,000 feet? This image you're seeing on screen, sir. It's 7,000 miles. This is 120,000 feet on screen right now, sir. You didn't see curvature from your height that you just said.

so my question to you is if you're flying from the left side of this red line to the right side of this red line are you flying around a curve one minute left that's that's probably yes i don't know how wide that line is that's the longest silence i've ever heard on a flatter debate thank you i appreciate that we'll clip that when you maintain the same altitude around a globe is this line curved

The line curves because we're taking into consideration the curvature of the earth. We take it down. We do not need to nose down at all. What? So how come you don't gain altitude? All right, angels.

Here are some separate observations showing that the horizon has been debunked and that we see too far. This first one is from an 8 foot observer height. The horizon should be 3.4 miles away, which is in front of both these oil rigs, but you can see that the horizon is clearly behind both. We all know this one, this entire skyline should be below the curvature of the Earth at 57 miles. And here's Montecinto from Nevi, Italy. From 139 miles away, the entire mountainous region should be below the curvature of the Earth by 1,000.

875 feet. Yeah, that's all. Thank you. All right. Well, thank you so much for your introduction there, Angel. I will remind our audience, well, firstly, I'll say a big welcome to our live audience. Quite a few of you hanging out there, I see already. We're going to keep the screen share up as I see Nathan is getting ready to start his presentation. So we are going to kick over to that. But yes, if this is your first time at Modern Day Debate, we are a neutral platform hosting debates on science, politics, religion. We hope you all feel welcome here at Modern Day Debate. And I'll remind everybody that we

are going to do super chats at the end of the discussion. So if you have a question, you want to grow one of our speakers on screen, or if you just want to say, hey, I think you did a great job. That's great. Let's try to keep it as civil as we can. Yeah, and try to keep yourselves kind in the comments there. But with that, we're going to hand it over to Nathan Thompson for up to six minutes for your introduction. So Nathan, welcome back to Modern Day Debate. And the floor is all yours.

Thanks so much, Ryan. Happy to be here. Thanks for moderating. I appreciate that. Thanks to the interlocutors and Angel for being here. Go follow Angels of Light on TikTok. He's one of the best content creators on there. Real quick, I want to thank all my Patreons. You guys keep me going. I want to thank all the TikTok people hosting live debates, including Dip, Shape Commander, Professor Rekia. Go check out those channels. There's always debates 24-7 on TikTok.

People sharing info with me. Thank you. I appreciate that. I've learned so much from you guys. People who put me up in their house while I've done over 300 Flat Earth meetups and met over 5,000 Flat Earthers. I love you guys. Thank you. You've been great hosts. Also, the Tinfoil Hat Factory. Thanks for all the support. Flat Earth, Sun, Moon, and Clock, Zodiac Clock app.

David Wise, thanks for all your help. My referral code is NEO if you guys want to download the app. You guys, the creator set me free. I've been on this journey almost 10 years, testing the earth, doing my own observations, meetups. And I just want to say prayers do come true, but it might cost you your globe dreams. That's for sure. And dreams last for so long, guys. Even after they're gone. That's why we deal with these emotional damaged glovers.

So it's all right. It's just something we got to deal with. On top of that, I've already debated Blitz. I want you guys to know none of the TikTokers know the cosmology they've been taught as well as they think. 99% of Glovers on TikTok, and you will see this if you get on there, don't know how much the Earth should curve over one mile. That's a problem because that's what they're there to defend. I've already debated Blitz. The video is on my YouTube channel, Be the Change One Word. At the three-minute mark, I ask them, what are the three constituent parts of a scientific experiment

he didn't know. So the science communicators that admit they're paid to disseminate science on social media don't know the first thing about science. They're scientifically illiterate and I'm sorry to say that, but the truth is incontrovertible. Malice will attack it. Ignorance will try and deride it. In the end, there it is.

Also on top of that, you can lead these globers to flat water. You cannot make them think critically about the shape of the earth. I've been sharing this for 10 years. We've got to say less to more people. If you need flyers, I have Bible and science flyers. Hit me up, flatearthflyers at gmail.com. On top of that, Psalm 2, if you're a Bible believer, says the kings of the earth have waged war with the creator.

And this is what that globe religion looks like. This is where the shape shifting monkeys come from the big bang theory. And so if you're not with all that, you're really going to enjoy this debate in this presentation. Now, real quick, let's laugh at those plans. Does the earth spin? Well, if it's spun, there's two ways that would affect the atmosphere. Either the atmosphere would move with the earth or the atmosphere would move separately from the earth.

Globers on TikTok think the atmosphere moves with the Earth, even though that's not what mainstream science claims. We're going to debunk that real quick. The atmosphere moving as one cohesive body is not even how fluid dynamics work. Fluid dynamics are not super glued to the Earth. They're not rigid. They're not connected to the Earth's surface. So the higher layers, not only would they have to travel faster to keep up with the surface of the Earth, you got to just deny fluid dynamics and everything we see in nature, like with this blender, right?

This is what we see. This is what we should experience standing at the equator. You should look east and catch bugs with your mouth like this guy in the video right here. We do not see that happening. Mainstream science treats the earth as an inertial reference frame. You can look up Newtonian physics or Maxwell's equations to verify that. Also satellites, communication, and navigation. It's all ECEM, Earth-Centered Earth Fixed.

So if someone tells you 1,040 miles per hour is just a walk in the park, don't believe them. They're lying to you. Cover the eclipse real quick from 2017. It goes from the west to the east. It's also a 90-mile-wide shadow. If you go to the SolarWalk software, and I don't have the time to go through this, the eclipse goes from the east to the west, the wrong direction, in the shadow of the moon, which is 6 times 6 times 60 miles in diameter. It's 2,160 miles. Should cover almost the entire...

United States from coast to coast and all 12 eclipses do that. Also for orbiting around the sun, we would see a different night sky every six months. We don't see that. You could look this up on Stell Vision or this is Stellarium. The Glovers love that one. Outer space is fake. It violates natural law. You can't have gas pressure without a container. It's in the definition for gas pressure. It's defined as the molecules pressing against the walls of the container. So not only is outer space fake,

There's problems with mainstream cosmology and outer space. They've got Hubble tension problems, Mercury problems, horizon problems, three body problems, collateral damage problems, and the it's a cartoon problem. But if you map them out over a flat Earth, they make perfect geometric shapes following magnetic field lines exactly what we would expect.

Here's how much curvature we should see if we were on a globe. This is math. This is objective. You can verify this on the Earth Curve Calculator websites they give online. You can do it yourself, Pythagorean theorem, AutoCAD, Cegida. These are numbers. Numbers don't lie. People lie. That's what we're up against. So is the horizon physical and geometric? We were told when we were six to eight years old that boats go over the curvature of the Earth at the horizon. Well, here's a book on perspective, The Art of Perspective by Phil Metzger.

says we're all pretty familiar with what the horizon is. Nope, Glover's on TikTok, have no idea what it is. But it says in the railroad picture, you can see where the flat land meets the sky. That imaginary line where the sky meets the land is the horizon. So it's not physical geometric earth curve. If it was for a one foot observer, it should be 1.2 miles away. This bottom picture, we call it the black swan, 9.4 miles on this platform on the left. And the horizon is above and behind that platform.

So the Glovers are cooked. They don't have a radius value anymore. That means you can throw gravity out the window, orbital mechanics out the window, the speed at which the Earth rotates out the window, distance to the Sun out the window, and the cartoon globe religion in the trash. So here we got Chicago from 39 miles away. I've done this observation at 49 miles. Joshua Nowicki did it at 57 miles. According to the Glovers,

eight inches of curve per mile squared while the tallest building here is 1350 feet. How long? 10 seconds. No wait, I didn't get a one minute warning? Oh well I mean yeah we're down to the last 10 but if you want to take... Lighthouses, infrared, let me get 30 seconds real quick. Infrared, the sun setting behind the Kanagoo Mountains, world record photography, land surveyors assume the earth is flat, microwave engineers assume it's flat, this is laser tests that we've done,

I wanted to explain the eclipses are predicted on the sorrow cycle. NASA uses the sorrow cycle to predict eclipses. And that was developed by the Babylonians 2000 years ago. Here's a star trail video I took at the Georgia Guidestones. And these are what real stars look like. I've asked hundreds of people what these are. Nobody knows what they are. These are stars. This is what stars look like. I love you guys. Thanks for having me on modern day debate. I'm done. All right. Thank you. All right. Just a little bit over, but that's okay. We can give it back to the other side. Uh,

I can give it, I can take it. That's totally fine. Thank you so much, Nathan, for the introduction there. Sorry to speed things up a little bit there. But yeah, that was six minutes. So, well, six and a half. So yeah, if you guys take that little extra time, that's totally fine. We've got super chats already flying in. Our audience is already highly engaged. Mark Reed is now sharing his screen. Oh my, I got to stay right on that screen share tonight, fellas. You know how it is for a Flat vs. Globe debate. I'll be fighting for that screen share button. All right, so...

Mark Reid is going to do his up to six minute intro. So thanks for coming back, Mark Reid. The floor is yours. Sure. Just before I start, I just want to point out that Nathan required us to send our arguments ahead of time, like ahead of time, and we'd only stick to those arguments. He's already violated that. So the liar, in fact, is Nathan Thompson, who wants us to sort of do something, we do it, and then as

like total hypocrites do, completely changed the rules of the engagement. So I'd like that to be noted, that he isn't actually sticking to the rules of the debate that he demanded, of course, because, well, he's a child and he's a liar. So I thought sort of...

bearing false witness was a sin, Nathan. I'm really strange that you would like to go to hell or whatever. So yeah, that's funny. Anyway, just to point out Nathan's lies and deceptions for you all, we're not the ones deceiving, he is. But here we go, flat out debate, let's go. Okay, and just one second, I've got a, is it up on the screen? Yep, it is on the screen. It's been on there for, yeah, you still have five minutes.

It is on the screen. Okay, just one second. Yeah, cool. All right. So first off, I'm going to be talking about circumpolar star rotation. This is basically a nail in the coffin of flat Earth. They can't explain it. So this is the rotation of the northern hemisphere going counterclockwise. This is sort of towards the North Pole, and it goes counterclockwise. Now, in the South Pole, it actually...

goes clockwise and flat earthers cannot explain this. Now they try to say, Hey, if you look from a different perspective, it will look different. Now the problem with that, and this is how the globe explains that they basically say, Hey, in the Northern hemisphere, it's counterclockwise. When you go to the Southern hemisphere, all of the stars are going in the same direction. It goes clockwise. It very easily explained. And just keep in mind, this shows the stars rotating. These in fact, the earth rotating that is causing this effect.

Andrew Mashman: So the problem with saying I from a different perspective. Andrew Mashman: Like we will see it change rotation is that in order to change that rotation to the opposite to get the mirror view, you have to be on the other side of the plane of rotation so around the axis and if you imagine the blades of this fan being the plane of rotation that.

circular movement will only be reversed if you go to the other side of the fan. So my question for the flat earthers is how did they get to the other side of the stars in order to reverse the rotation of the stars? And I'd like them to explain that and explain why it actually reverses rotation in the north and southern hemisphere, because we've got, it's been well documented, we can do this. Now, the next

Next bit, I do want to thank Nathan for this because he actually gave me the evidence for a globe earth and that is the journeys of Captain Cook in our last debate. So thanks, Nathan, really appreciate it. So basically, the focus I want to make is the part of his leg on the second journey of Captain Cook around Antarctica. So at about...

18th of January 1773 he hit near Antarctica and then moved his way over with a massive detour you can see there over to New Zealand south of Africa to New Zealand so how did they get there with

within 10 weeks is my question. So, you know, hit their 25th of March, roughly around 10 weeks, you know, that covered about one third the circumference of Antarctica. Now on your flat pizza that they believe, this is what you would see 10 weeks to get from South of Africa on

all the way over to New Zealand, one third the circumference of the flat earth. This was in a sailing ship. I strewn difficult waters with deviations and the crew stopping for water. By comparison, the blue line is the Mayflower.

It's the sailing ship that took the colonists to the New World. That took 10 weeks, which is incredible that sort of those two journeys in sailing ships are equivalent. I'd like them to be able to explain that. Maybe they had a motorboat on the sailing ship to go to New Zealand. Maybe they had an outboard on the back of it. I'm not sure what their explanation for that one's going to be. But if you don't believe that Captain Cook went...

you can book the trip yourself. This is interesting because you can book a trip to do this circumnavigation. Oh, this one is New Zealand to South America. So it's totally different between Africa to New Zealand. This is New Zealand to enter. And do notice that day six is sailing, plus another three is four days sailing, plus another three is seven days sailing, and then another couple of days of sailing. So it's basically a week to get from New Zealand

to South America. How do they explain this and how do they explain that anyone can sign up for one of these? This also matches what we see with aeroplanes, where aeroplanes going across the polar caps or across Antarctica can make it in record time

because of winds or something. I don't know how that works. But if you can go and do this yourself, and the question is, why haven't they done it themselves? I mean, we have them going to Antarctica on the final experiment, or at least they refuse to because, you know, it's only a couple that will actually do it. So maybe we can talk about why they won't go to Antarctica because you can book this trip yourself. So why not?

And that'll do for my presentation. Thank you. All right, you got it. So with 38 seconds still left on the timer there, I'll just cede that over to your partner. Thank you so much, Mark Reed. I started the poll in the live chat. I got your message there, Hannah, and that live chat was really flying there, guys. So thanks for all the interest. We really appreciate it. So classic Ryan's hosting modern day debate poll.

I think I told you guys last time that this came from my friend who was asking me about, oh, you're hosting a flat versus globe debate. And he was on his way out and he was like, everybody knows that the earth is a loaf of bread. And then he left and it was just very strange. So I always include that in the poll for the people that don't play by the rules. So the earth is flat right now at 35%, a globe at 53%, and then a loaf of bread trailing at 12%. Oh, no. No.

All right. Well, that's okay. Six minutes on the floor. Over to you, Dr. Blitz. Thanks, everybody, for being here. We're having a lot of fun.

Hi, I'm Blitz. I have a doctorate in mathematical physics. And before we get started, I just want everybody to appreciate the absurdity of this debate. It's like arguing whether water is wet or the sky is blue. So while Mark later is going to present easy practical ways to demonstrate that the Earth is a globe, like sailing around Antarctica, I'm going to show that taking the flat Earth claim seriously not only comes at a very high price, but it also demands that you throw out centuries of established knowledge, something no sane person should ever consider doing.

See, amongst many, there are two key beliefs that flat earthers have to hold in order to maintain their delusion. First, they have to believe that sunsets are just optical illusions, results of perspectives, that the sun doesn't actually go below the horizon, it just gets too far away. Second, they have to believe that gravity is not real. If it did, a flat earth wouldn't be stable and the moon and sun couldn't circle above our heads like a stage trick. The trouble is, both of these claims rely on rejecting two of the most well-understood parts of modern physics, electromagnetism and gravity.

And actual scientists, you know, the people that actually do their own research, have confirmed that these phenomena are real using statistically sound experimental methods and data analysis. In other words, my side brings centuries of rigor and their side brings wishful thinking. So let's get into it. Electromagnetism, as established by Maxwell in the 19th century and confirmed by Hertz and Faraday and others,

Isn't conjecture. It's a robust framework that science has developed for over 150 years. Maxwell's equations were the starting point and the ensuing 150 years of rigorous experimentation and theoretical refinement have validated these ideas time and again. Today we have quantum electrodynamics, the most precisely tested theory in all of science, with predictions confirmed to an accuracy of parts in a billion with a B.

Within this framework, light travels in straight lines until it encounters a medium with a different refractive index, at which point Snell's Law applies. No amount of hand-waving about perspective can circumvent that simple fact that if an object like the sun is above the horizon line, it should remain visible. Pretending that it just gets too far away is a direct contradiction of electromagnetic theory and observed reality.

And then there's gravity. A flat earther can't believe it exists, whether in the form of mass attracting mass in the Newtonian sense or as the curvature of space-time in the Einsteinian sense. Otherwise, their flat earth would literally collapse. But our understanding of gravity has withstood more than a century of experimental tests, many of which can be performed in a laboratory.

As far back as the mid 20th century, experiments confirmed gravitational redshift predictions with around 99% accuracy, and numerous additional tests over the decades have only strengthened these results. The Flat Earth model can't accommodate this. If gravity works as described by modern physics, the flat world would collapse or never form in the first place.

Flat Earth proponents might attempt to explain gravity away by invoking electrostatics or density. But electrostatics is well understood. Neutral metals, for example, do not exert electrostatic forces on other objects, and it is straightforward to determine electrical neutrality. Density, meanwhile, is just mass divided by volume.

It doesn't have a direction. The fact that we can show two small gold spheres attracting each other gravitationally in highly controlled environments leaves no room for such simplistic non-explanations. Dismissing gravity means discarding well-established physics that engineers rely on daily. And gravity electromagnetism are just two of many lines of evidence that a spherical Earth is the only model that holds up to scrutiny.

Both the Sagnac effect and the Compton generator prove the rotation of the Earth. We can detect the sun at midnight using neutrinos, demonstrating it lies beneath our feet at that time. None of these phenomena fit into a flat Earth narrative. Indeed, to sustain that narrative, one must reject effectively all of physics and engineering from the past 300 years. But I suspect that they won't address any of it. Because why would they? If they did, they would just demonstrate to the audience that they're woefully ignorant of basic scientific facts.

At the end of the day, the modern world is based on a strong understanding of the laws of physics. If you accept flat earth, you have to throw all of that away. Radio towers? Magic. Starlink internet? Conspiracy. The Burj Khalifa? Just an accident. Medical particle accelerators? Fake.

Somehow, all of modern society is built on one big misunderstanding, right? No, every piece of electronics and civil engineering that exists in modern society relies on our understanding of physics. And you can't have your cake and eat it too. If our understanding of physics is good enough to build smartphones, GPS systems, and particle accelerators, then the Earth is a globe. There's no other option. So to my flat-earth friends here, the burden of proof is high, and it's on you.

can you reconcile the centuries of experimental evidence with a flat earth or do you throw that evidence away in favor of it looks flat to me and just as a postscript

keep in mind that while i and my colleague here can cite actual conducted science that supports our claims you'll never see well-documented statistically sound experimental evidence for a flat earth and you know why because there's no such thing as a flat earth scientist they will present no alternative models with quantitative predictions they will do no statistical analysis and they will cite no rigorous scientific experiments only one of the sides of this argument can claim to have done all of those and that's my side

So I'll leave you with this: why don't my opponents have letters after their names? Maybe it's because it's easier to grip on the internet than it is to do the hard work of figuring out how the world works.

Spicy. Everybody's having a spicy hot take tonight. It's going to be interesting to keep this tame, guys. So we're going to do our best to remain respectful because, like I say, there's been a lot of shade thrown in those intros, guys. It's going to be fun. So if you haven't already gotten a question in, definitely pop it into the old Super Chat. I'll also remind our audience with some quick announcements

housekeeping that if you like what you're hearing from any of our speakers, we are going to link all of them in our description, even if you're watching a podcast right now. But I will remind our podcast listeners, if you want to ask a question and engage with the speakers on screen, you got to subscribe to the Modern Day Debate YouTube channel so you don't miss these live events. All right, let's get right into that open discussion. I'm going to hand it back over there to Nathan and Angel to respond to some of what they just heard. And Nathan,

yeah, let's have fun and, uh, let's try to keep it civil and, uh, yeah, whenever you're ready. 30 seconds. I got a couple notes real quick and then we'll pass the angel. If you guys want to attack any of the thing I'm saying, it's fine, but, uh,

Blitz literally just talked for six minutes and didn't show a single damn thing. Just want to point that out. The sidereal day destroys your argument about star trails because the stars move faster than the sun, Mark. You said maybe they had a motor, but the Ross Sea cruise is 21 days, not 11. You could look that up. This was not a debate about sunsets or gravity, which was all motor mouth Blitz talked about for the entire six minutes without showing anything. He said we are ignorant of scientific facts, but I have on my channel a debate with Blitz

where he didn't know what a scientific experiment was while also claiming he's paid to disseminate science online. So thanks for snatching your wig off there. You said radio towers, magic. Actually, Guillermo Marconi sent a radio transmission 2,000 miles in the early 1900s. And you guys just said it's bouncing off a magical layer in the sky that they invented after that. But NATO uses the same type of microwave technology to send 99.9% accurate transmissions 515 miles.

and so it's not atmosphere you guys just making stuff up also we could bounce stuff off the dome if we had to but they shoot the uh electromagnetic energy horizontally across the surface of the earth just like the sps radar system sps 55 that goes over 100 miles search and rescue naval system for boats so you guys are cooked and these people want to take you to hell angel and i want to take you to heaven listen to what we have to say this is all cartoons just say no cheers

Yeah, so Mark Reed, you said in the south, star trails go clockwise. Are you in Australia, buddy? Yes. Okay, if we face north, which way do the stars go? Counterclockwise or clockwise? I can't see the northern circumpolar stars. I asked you, if we do a star trail facing north, which way do the stars rotate?

kind of clockwise. I mean, they're basically going over because I can't see them. All I see is them from going one way to the other. But that way, hang on. Well, let me answer. Don't just interrupt me. I'm answering you. So as you go further north, right? As you go further north, they're going from right to left.

Okay, and then as you go further, you can see them going anti-clockwise. So I can only see the top of that rotation, and the top of that rotation is going anti-clockwise. Yeah, so they do go different directions when you face different ways then. That's not what you said before.

Yeah, so you debunked yourself there. No, no, no. No, no, what I said is that... No, no, no, let me finish, let me finish. What I said is that when you look at something that is rotating, the only way to make it go the other direction is to look at it from the other direction. That's what you are doing when you are looking at it looking north. That's exactly what you're doing. You just said facing north, it's going counterclockwise in the south. Mm-hmm.

So then you turn around, face south. No, I didn't. It's going clockwise. Okay, which way did the stars go? No, I said it was going clockwise in the south. You can't even keep track of this. You're wrong, buddy. You don't know how it works. Let's let Dr. Blitz in here so everybody's had a chance, I think, to make their peace. Really? If you are on mute, just as a quick reminder just to our panel here, if you are on mute and I do...

Hit the thing to take you off view, just hold on a second. I want to give the floor to Dr Blitz because he hasn't said anything, but if you are on mute and I give you the request to come off view... Well, we'd like to respond to some of their points as well because they- you said we could.

For sure. But yeah, just pick that moment when you're ready to come in. Like I say, I'll just cue you guys up, but Dr. Blitz, I know you, you put your hand up there, so I want to let you in. Go ahead. Oh, I mean, I, you know, it's fine. So just, just as a few serious points that are probably worth addressing. So first, I mean, if Nathan, if you, if you want, I can cite the papers. I have all the references if you want to see them, but you know, I'm, I'm a, I'm more of a lecturer. I don't, I don't put together silly videos. So, you know, yeah.

I know that's just not my style, but I can share the screen and I can show you the references if you want the references for various experiments. I'm happy to do that. I have them available.

I think that there's just a few points that are probably worth addressing. Angel, I think that your complaints about the plane moving 500 miles east versus 500 miles west, I think it's just confusing this idea of relative motion. I mean, if you're in a car and you're traveling at 70 miles per hour and you throw a baseball forward, it's moving at maybe at 30 miles per hour forward. It's moving at 30 miles per hour forward relative to you, but 100 miles per hour relative to the ground. If you throw it backwards and moving, it's still moving backwards 30 miles per hour relative to you, but...

But, you know, 40 miles per hour relative to the ground. This is just a failure to understand relative motion, which is understandable. Relative motion is tricky. And it took, you know, 5,000 years of human history to figure it out. It really wasn't until Galileo that we really understood it.

One other thing that I want to address, um, from Nathan, um... If it could be right quick, just so we don't get too much on the table. But I know Nathan threw out a bit too, so go ahead. No, no, I think Nathan got to talk without... True, true. So I'm just saying, like, last ten seconds there, Dr. Blitz, if you don't mind, then let's hand it over. Yeah, okay, so just one other thing is, Nathan, I would just like you to explain to me what Hubble tension, the Mercury problem, and the three-body problem are. That'd be useful.

So you want me to explain the three-body problem? I want you to explain what the Hubble tension is, what the Mercury problem is, and what the three-body problem are. And tell me why that's a failure for cosmology. I think that'd be useful. Yeah, people could simply Google this stuff. I'll start with the three-body problem. The three-body problem is a video game where you assume the Earth is a ball when you can't find curvature. You assume that's spinning when they can't actually test that. Blitz just told us it's like you're in a car that's moving, but you throw things up and the Earth doesn't move underneath things. So he denied Coriolis there. Pay attention.

I was referring to a car moving in a straight line. Can I finish? Sure, go ahead. Could you take no splits, maybe, just the same way I did? And then when I'm done, you get a chance to respond. This is how the debate works, sir.

So, throwing a ball up in a car and it coming straight back down is a denial of Coriolis. Neil deGrasse Tyson says on his Twitter that the Earth rotates under a field goal. That would be Coriolis. That would be the Earth moving separately from objects in the atmosphere. That's what we should see if the Earth was rotating 1,037 miles an hour, which is almost twice the speed of sound.

on top of that, you claimed experiments. We're not here to talk about science. We're not here to talk about doing experiments. The shape of the earth is observation, something you haven't shown a single thing, a single evidence for. I showed infrared. I showed Chicago. I showed the...

We have high-altitude footage, so you're cooked, Blitz. We have all the evidence. You're just talking. And we're not here to talk about science or experiments or gravity or the sun setting or star trails. That's you guys waving a white flag in the air and admitting you don't have any proof of curvature. We're here to talk about curvature. Do you guys want to talk about curvature now or no? Because the three-body problem is a video game.

where you assume it's fall, can't prove curvature. You assume it's spinning, that can't be magic. Assume gravitational orbits.

Hold on, I'm almost done explaining the video game and then you guys can respond. Take all the time you want. I'll go on mute. What we're going to do is we're going to do two minute back and forth because it seems like that's about the unpack time. So two minutes on the floor. I got two timers on the screen for our audience to see. I'm sorry you can't see it, but I'll let you know when you got 10 seconds left. So try to be fair to your partners as well, Mark, Dr. Blitz, and also Nathan. You can give me 30 seconds. 30 seconds over to you.

First off, it's hilarious that Nathan brought up the sort of black swan kind of thing because we've got the picture and I'll just share it now just so we can see how sort of silly it is. We can see the black swan with another day that there isn't refraction and that sort of shows that hey, it's not

like refraction actually pays a part. So he's got to explain why on different days with different refractive indexes, we have two different things basically. So we've got...

We've got that under lock. We know what refraction is. We know how it works. It's not a problem. This idea that they don't understand inertial frames of reference, that is 100% true. They absolutely don't. It's not so much like if you are in a train and throw a ball up, it's going to move with you. And there's even videos of people jumping on trampolines by being hauled by cars, and they're just jumping absolutely fine. So that isn't a problem at all. The

you know, there's so much to go through. The bouncing off ionosphere, we're aware that we can do that. That's absolutely useful in some cases. And, you know, this whole idea of sort of, you know, it's a video game kind of thing. Well, you know, it

You've got to explain how we've managed to get all of the progress and stuff that has come out of. I don't know why he's talking about fluid dynamics when talking about the atmosphere. It's kind of weird. Why fluid dynamics? All right. I want to reserve some time here for Dr. Blitz. So go ahead, Dr. Blitz. Yeah, so I'll be quick. So first...

You're absolutely right, Nathan, that when you throw a ball up in a moving car, the Coriolis effect would be relevant. However, we can calculate it, and it would be negligible, not measurable in a car. It's a very, very small effect, and you know this. Second, I can't believe you said that we're not talking about science. I guess you just admitted that science doesn't play a part in the flat-earth belief. But third, you didn't actually address any of my points. The three-body problem is not a video game about spinning whatever. The three-body problem is about, it's a mathematical problem about describing three interacting systems that are...

That's time. I have to haircut you off there just for the sake of being fair. Alright, so back over to the other side, two minutes on the floor. Alright, if you're in a car that's not moving and you throw a ball up, it's the same thing. You get the same result. And also using an enclosed system. So thank you for approving the firmament. Also, I want to share my screen because I want to show a separate observation of the black spawn. Sure thing. Real quick.

Angel, I need about 30 seconds bro. Alright, I'll let you know when you got 30 seconds. So here is, from an 8 foot observer, the horizon should be 3.4 miles away, but it's past 10.1 miles.

So the horizon is not a physical geometric location. You can't go out to the park and see a hill blocking something and then go there one day and the hill that's blocking that object is going to be behind it. But that's what you're claiming if you're going to claim your physical hill that blocks boats has moved physically behind another physical object here. That's what we're seeing here. The horizon is not a physical location. It's the apparent location where the sky meets the ground. Thank you.

Yeah, I went over that in my intro, how it's an imaginary line. It should be 1.2 miles away, and it's past 9.5. On top of that, they're trying to invoke refraction. Refraction refers specifically to the bending of light as it moves from one medium to another, causing a change in direction. That happens at a specific angle. These guys are invoking a bend.

So light doesn't bend. Blitz said it travels in straight lines. So on top of that, what we have in our atmosphere is distortion. When you're looking over long distances, the light is attenuating, which means it's being absorbed or reflected by the atmosphere. The four main things that cause that are water vapor, carbon dioxide, oxygen, and ozone.

And yeah, we're not talking about science. We're talking about the shape of the earth. You don't need to do science on the shape of a ball. If you hand a child a ball, they don't need to conduct experiments and formulate hypotheses to determine if it's a ball. They could look at the curvature of the ball and determine it's a ball, or they could see that it's not curved. It's not a ball. That's not science. Again, you're snatching your own wig off. All right. Over to you, Dr. Blitz.

So just I'll be quick and then go ahead, Mark. So first, you still haven't addressed the three things that I asked you to address, the Hubble tension, the mercury problem, and the three body problem. You haven't been able to adequately explain those. Second, the refraction of light doesn't only happen when a medium changes. It happens when the index of refraction changes. You misquoted me. I said that light travels in a straight line except when the index of refraction is changing. That's explicitly what I said. I can pull up the quote. And

And in a medium like air with changing temperature and changing density at different altitudes, the index of refraction is changing quite regularly. This is basic intro level physics. We teach this to 18-year-olds. You should pick up a book sometime.

Yeah, and so I just want to point out that Nathan didn't actually address the problem that I asked him to, which was why are we getting different pictures on different days? They just ignore it and move on because it's a problem. So they just completely ignored that and said, well, we don't have to do it because refraction isn't a thing. So what causes two pictures to have two different... Like the apparent horizon is at two different places of the same thing. They haven't addressed it in the slightest. And sort of the whole idea that sort of...

the, you know, it blocks them and stuff. Well, no, it's in, and the light doesn't bend, it's refracted. Like, I'm not sure if you understand what refraction and the angle of refraction means. And yes, two different densities of air can cause that refraction. We're very aware of that. That's why your picture that you think is such good is so wavy and distorted. It's refraction.

All right. Still 30 seconds if you want to finish up there. So there is something interesting to be said. Like, look, we can explain why things like sunsets happen on a globe earth. They can't explain it on a flat earth. We can explain things like why do the stars move in a certain way that they do on a globe earth. They can't explain it on a flat earth. Basically, they just say it looks flat. That's the entire argument that they have. So why can't they actually address any of the empirical claims that we can quantitatively predict? Yeah.

All right, let's hand it on over. There's only five seconds left on the timer. So two minutes on the floor. Nathan, you want to jump in there? And I know Angel wants to too, so go ahead. Let me go in here first, Angel. So he wants me to talk about the Hubble tension problem, the Mercury problem, and the horizon problem. But we're here to talk about the shape of the Earth. No wonder you want to talk about that stuff. You want to talk about anything. You brought them up. Can I finish?

Hold on. It's their time. I'm so sorry. I have to put you on mute. You could just mute up until Ryan passes you the mic. That's not how this is going to work. I thought it would be a back and forth, but apparently he's on mute. So if you can just figure it, I couldn't even finish. Let's try to get back into it. He's on mute. Yeah, I couldn't even finish explaining the three body problem and how it's a video game and go through all the assumptions because I got interrupted by the other side. And then you came in and said, we're going to go to two minutes and passed it to Mark.

I didn't even get to finish that. But we're not here to talk about space. It's a cartoon globe religion. Okay, we're here to talk about curvature and lack of curvature. So the horizon is not physical or geometric, Mark. When you pull up pictures of the horizon changing that debunks your globe religion, you need a physical geometric horizon that boats go over. Refraction doesn't change the size of your globe. Okay, so if we had a horizon at 1.2 miles,

the light would come towards us from everything we're seeing and it would all be refracted with the horizon at 1.2 miles. Am I short on time, Ryan? You got one minute. All right, cool. So it would all be refracted. So refraction doesn't change the size of your globe religion. At nine and a half miles, the physical geometric horizon would make the radius value of the Earth 240,000 miles. Mainstream science says the radius value is 4,000 miles.

So that includes the gravity formula has the radius in it, orbital mechanics, the distance to the sun, the speed at which the earth rotates. Your entire religion falls apart like a house of cards. When we look at the horizon and it's not 1.2 miles away, it's not 2.2 miles away, it's not 3.2, 4.2, 5.2, 6.2, 7.2, 8.2 miles away. It's past nine and a half miles.

and your globe religion is a cartoon. Thanks for playing. Angel, anything else? Five seconds.

Five seconds? Wow. I'm sorry, he hit it all the time. Night your time. What can I say? Crepuscular rays don't bend and they're going through a density gradient. Also, I could show you a boat that I pulled back into view over the horizon. All right, well, we'll give you the next two. We'll give you the next two just because, yeah, you did take a minute and 50 there. So let's hit it to the other side. So I'm not here to police anybody.

As far as the behavior, I'm just going to keep the time. Like I say, it's going to be up to our audience to make of what they see on screen. It's not up to me. So we're going to hand it back to Mark Reed and Dr. Blitz. Two minutes on the floor.

Yeah, so Nathan isn't actually saying anything. He's just sort of calling it a globe religion. He didn't explain the three-body problem. He just straw-manned it because that's all he's got is just straw-manning other people's issues. That's actually a known problem in physics. It's not any kind of video game, as he says. This is just sophistry. That's all it is. That's all he's doing. It's all he knows. So...

You know, when we know that when we increase elevation, that horizon changes. So nobody is saying that it is absolutely a physical thing that's always in the same place. We know as the differences in, say, the variables change, that that can look further or closer away, depending on your position.

You're sort of acting like it's this fixed brick wall that has to be in the same place at all times, but that is entirely dependent on where you are and how the light is behaving. So no, nobody is saying that. I'll send it to Blitz.

Oh, just one more thing. Sorry, Blitz, just one more thing. This is not curvature of the Earth debate. This is flat versus globe. So for a start, understand what the debate is about, Nathan. 50 seconds left. Understand it. Yeah, so first, I just want to bring up, like, the only reason I was asking you to explain those things is because you brought them up. If you don't want to talk about them, don't bring them up, otherwise you're going to get challenged on them, and you'll get roasted on too because you don't know anything about cosmology. Second, refraction doesn't change the size of the Earth.

What it does and what you'll see in Walter, I think it's Walter Bisson's calculator, you'll see that the radius of the Earth number changes. What you're seeing is it changes how big the Earth would have to be if there wasn't an atmosphere. The actual size of the Earth is obviously not changing. What it's doing is it's changing the effective size of the Earth, which is just how it would look if there was no atmosphere. But there is atmosphere, which is why the Earth looks, why you're able to see things further away than you would otherwise expect to if there were no atmosphere causing refraction.

Now, importantly, I would like to ask both Flat Earthers, why is it that we can see the sun through the ground with neutrinos? Oh, well, five seconds. You wrapped it up. Ari, over to you. Yeah, let's... Angel started a screen share. So, yeah, Angel, you're going to get the better half of this minute here. Well, these two minutes. So go ahead. There's clearly no boat visible on the horizon. And I'm going to zoom it back in. This is physical curvature, right, guys? Uh-oh.

So there's the boat, there's the buoy. The buoy appears lower than the boat, but on a globe religion, the horizon's supposed to be curving down and away as you zoom in, but it keeps rising up because it's flat. So there's the boat. There's another example here. It's all these boats that are still there. They haven't gone over a curve. You can clearly see that. Also, I want to know why is it... Oh, sorry. That is a still...

Why is it that airplanes and pilots do not adjust for curvature? I showed you guys multiple videos of different pilots I've debated all admitting they do not need to adjust for curvature. If the Earth is a spinning globe, how come they don't have to adjust for curvature? Why do they treat it flat and stationary? Angel, can I jump in?

A Blitz just asked why we could see neutrinos from the sun through the earth. That's a simple Google search. Can we see neutrinos? No, we cannot see neutrinos. So I would look that up. Also, you said we know it's not physical and geometric. Your global religion claimed the horizon was physical and geometric. If it's changing hour to hour and day to day from 1.2 to nine and a half miles, which if you go to Walter Bissons Earth Curve Calculator and you invoke standard refraction, the horizon goes from 1.2 to 1.34 miles.

So refraction has to be invoked to an imaginary number to where if you guys had strong enough optics, you could literally see your ass from around the globe. And we've done that. We've got the videos on 7 Club's page on TikTok. It's ridiculous. This Walter Bisland's Earth curve calculator is a joke at best. All right. Well, you had 10 seconds left on the floor, but we'll hand it on over two minutes. Yeah, as you say, we'll hand it on back up.

Could we go into an open discussion? We did go into an open discussion, yeah, but we are doing two-minute timers back and forth just to keep it open. They're literally going to ignore the beaten potatoes. I'm going to address exactly what you're saying right now, Angel. The reason why you couldn't see that boat was because it was too small, not because it was behind the horizon. It's the same reason why you couldn't see the buoy, even though the buoy obviously wasn't on the horizon. You could see the other thing.

Because it was bigger. You can only see the bottom. Hold on. Is there two minutes? I'll have to. Because it was obviously too big. Sorry about that. Why can't you ever zoom back in a cruise ship? Why is it always just a tiny little boat?

Second, Nathan, obviously, obviously I didn't mean see with our eyes. Everybody, okay, maybe not everybody knows what neutrinos are, but obviously I didn't mean see with our eyes. I mean see with scientific instruments. And we can detect them through the ground. In fact, the spectacular proof of concept for neutrino detectors.

But you should address that. That's an important point. Yeah, Mark, if you want to continue. Yeah, I'd just like to add, it's weird that you don't understand the perspective. You're saying that the boats are rising up when you're sort of zooming in on them. It's really weird. Like, do you not understand that as things get further away, they appear to rise? Like, I don't understand what you mean by that.

It's so weird. And then you're showing boats, which half of them are hidden below the horizon, which you haven't explained either, because as much as you zoom in, it doesn't bring those back. So zoom in and bring back the bottoms of the boats. Like you're just showing it getting bigger. I mean, I don't know why I got to explain this. When you zoom in on something, you can see it. When your angular resolution can't distinguish that boat from the water at a distance. It's wild that you don't understand this.

Alright, let's hand it back to the other side with that time left on the floor. Still have 30 seconds, but we'll hand it back over. Can I actually address the... Because I know they're going to want me to address the plane thing. Alright, you've got 20 seconds. You don't have to manually adjust. Most planes will automatically fly themselves, basically. But even if they didn't, there's an effect called... There's a phenomenon in aerodynamics where the

center of lift or the center of drag is in a different location from the center of mass. And so what happens is, suppose for a minute that the earth was a globe, and the plane was flying, and then it ended up vertical. Well, because the location of the center of drag and the center of lift being different from the center of mass, that would cause a torque which would cause it to rotate back into the plane over which it's flying, right? Like this is just like it's standard Newtonian mechanics and aerodynamics. Alright, we'll give the other side 10 extra seconds. So go ahead, Angel or Nathan, when you're ready.

Yeah, he said it's too small to see. That's our argument. It's not going over the curvature. He also said they rise up, not go down. That's our argument. Your globe religion curves down in all directions because you think you live on a cartoon ball. So if the ground is appearing to rise up and the sky is appearing to ramp down and those lines of convergence are parallel, welcome to flat Earth. Google, do parallel lines curve? No, they don't.

On top of that, foreshortening can make things disappear bottom first. Atmospheric refraction or atmospheric magnification or lensing can make things disappear bottom first. Angular resolution limits can make things disappear bottom first. At the vanishing point or the imaginary line called the horizon.

So you guys are cooked. You guys have hijacked optics. And that was a few hundred years ago and said we live on a ball. It's 2024 now. Going into 2025, we have infrared cameras. I've got one right here. We've got P1000 cameras. I've got one right here. We've got lasers. We've got mirror reflection tests. Land surveying assumes it's flat for 100 square miles. You guys are absolutely asking us how we can not see neutrinos under the earth coming from the sun. Absolutely cooked. One minute.

- Mike, if you wanna add on there, Angel? - I wanna share and I wanna know, I wanna know, 'cause the pitch data shows that there's no adjustment for curvature. How do you have a positive pitch over a horizon that's curving down and away from you? You have to change the orientation of the nose to account for that. It doesn't happen. Also, I wanted to show them this diagram. - Still have 30 seconds. - I showed you multiple pilots admitting they do not nose down

How do you go from the North Pole to the equator without nosing down? Can you please explain that to me? How does that happen? And how does it not show up on the pitch data? They're literally flying a straight line in the air like this. This is why you never feel the plane moving in straight-level flight, because it's just doing a straight line in the air. The Earth is parallel to the ground, so they're not adjusting for anything because there is no curvature.

All right, let's end the screen share there. Thank you so much. Oh, you're quick with that. I appreciate it, Angel. Let's hand it back over to the other side. Two minutes. Yeah, so I'll be quick, Mark, I promise. So angular resolution doesn't make things disappear bottom first. You can prove it with mathematics if you want, but I doubt you will. Also, if you think that we hijacked optics, please explain how under your view of optics,

Alex Blanche: Take sunsets happen and under and under hours it doesn't because it absolutely does. Alex Blanche: You also can't answer the answer the neutrino point which is funny that's why you're dismissing it. Alex Blanche: And addressing angel we didn't you don't need to adjust manually you don't use us manually because a we have flight computers and be the air will do it for you, that was my whole conversation about this whole Center drag being different from the Center of mass. Alex Blanche: The arrow by a torque to the to the plane second I don't care about pilots pilots aren't math aren't mathematicians there this.

Just because they can fly a plane doesn't mean they know how it works. Third, pitches relative to the gravitational force downwards, if you remain nearly parallel, it won't show a change in pitch. All you have to do is make sure that you maintain approximately level flight and you can still curve around the Earth. And as long as you're a tangent to the surface of the Earth, it will still show that your pitch hasn't changed at all.

Yeah, I was going to say that one of the pilots, I mean, all of them laughed at you. One of them was showing it with a sort of a plane on a stand saying, hey, if the pitch is perpendicular to the centre of mass, then just keeping the pitch exactly the same will follow the curve of the Earth. And this is what you don't understand. The altitude doesn't change and that's what he's showing you. But what I think is interesting is that you're sort of bombarding us with your questions. When are we going to get to out?

Like, when are we going to get to how do you explain how people can go easily around Antarctica? How do you explain that on your pizza world? How do you explain that 10 weeks got Captain Cook from Africa to New Zealand and the Mayflower took the same time? How do you explain that?

Well, if we have time, maybe before we go into Q&A, we'll do a little cross-examination for both sides. But yeah, let's pop you guys off the mute there, and we're going to hand it back over to the other side. Sorry, we did run out of time. So sorry. It's hard time on this one, just to be fair. Can I take this one, bro? All right, excellent. Can I get the big screen, please? I'm going to share a couple videos about the sun, because this guy will not stop talking about the sun. He thinks we're falling backwards 1,000 miles an hour at the equator when we watch a sunset. Whoa.

Here's a time lapse of the sunset shrinking into a little dot. If you line this bar up with the marine horizon, it shrinks above the marine horizon and disappears into a little dot above the marine horizon. I've got videos of the moon doing this and the stars doing that. On top of that, here's a sunset. This is the Canigou Mountains.

Those are 9,000 feet tall. According to the globe math and the globe religion, there should be 12,380 feet of curvature drop tangent from your feet, making this completely obstructed due to the curvature of the earth. This is 163 miles. Also, the sunset, you could demonstrate it on a flat surface.

So I don't know why you're talking about this. Also, it shrinks in angular size with a solar filter. That wouldn't happen if it was 93 million miles away. I've confirmed that. Angels confirm that. I'm always asking Globers, I'll give you $50 if you have a solar filter on TikTok. I still got the $50 in my pocket because they don't test this stuff themselves. If you look at crepuscular rays that converge to a central point, only way to demonstrate that is with three things. 50 seconds. Local light, obstruction, and

and particulates in the air. The green flash proves the sun's above the horizon. Local light illumination. You guys are cooked. The sunset-- - Let me go, Nathan. Let me go. - 35. - I'm gonna show the sunsets I've got. So I want you to explain how with the solar filter, the sun changes angular size. I really wanna know. This is my first one, and I even rotated it to show that it wouldn't change its size. - I got you, buddy. I see you, Nathan, no worries.

These guys never mute up, so I'm the only one muting up and then I can't unmute myself. Well, don't do it unless, I was going to say, just don't worry about it. As long as you know you can follow the two-minute timer, we'll just stay right on track. It's no worries. You don't have to worry about it. I'm not going to be able to explain this, Angel. We've got all the evidence. We've been the only ones in the big box showing any evidence. These guys have cartoons in their background. It's a total joke. They're waving a white flag in the air. We are a time bomb. Thanks for playing. Are they out of time or are they just self-taught?

Well, they were out of time, but I did take up a couple seconds there to explain the situation here. So go ahead there, Mark. I'm going to give you two minutes there. Okay, go ahead. No, no, go ahead, Blitz. Yeah, so just a brief point regarding the planes. Planes decrease in altitude while nose up. Just an important point to reference. You can decrease in altitude while your nose is up. You can go down in altitude while your nose is down. Or you can go up in altitude while your nose is down. Direction doesn't necessarily have anything to do with the direction that you're flying. That's just the direction of the airfoils that matter. Second...

Yes, it is true that the sun shrinks just a little bit when you have a solar filter. It shrinks vertically rather than horizontally, and that's just because of refraction. It shrinks by about 10%, depending on how hazy the day is. But importantly, if it was shrinking because it was getting too far away and then disappearing, it would shrink to a point, not to 10% smaller than it is at noon. This is just not how perspective works. If you were on a flat Earth and it was getting very, very far away, so far away that you couldn't see it, then it would...

it would shrink to an actual point, not just 10% smaller than it usually is. Also, the Kanagoo observation is consistent with a globe, just use standard refraction and you can plug it into any Walter Bisling calculator and you'll get it that it's totally consistent. And the green flashes means that the sun is low. What? What, Nathan? What? I'm done.

I don't know what he was talking about with that. And I think it's weird that you're sort of showing that the sun is actually setting on your little experiment there with the candle kind of thing. You're pulling the sun down behind a horizon. I don't know why that should prove to be a flat Earth.

you know i don't know why they should prove flat earth and the so what we're seeing is is there is a tiny tiny change but what we're not seeing is the sun getting smaller and disappearing yeah i mean i know you love your toys nathan um we're not seeing the sun getting smaller and disappearing like what you've actually showed is the sun being obstructed by something not it getting smaller and disappearing so you've actually just debunked yourselves angel i'm sorry

How does the sun change stars? Hold on, 10 seconds left. Hold on, we've all seen sunsets. We've all seen when the sun is half visible. Why can't you see the bottom half of the sun? Why isn't it just shrinking to a point? Alright, over to you, Angel. Two minutes back on the floor.

Nathan did show you a video of a sun shrieking to a point, but you just totally ignored that. How does a sun shriek sound? Shut up. Hold on, hold on. So sorry, we gotta put you guys on mute. We're gonna reclaim time. Thank you. That's just how we're running things right now. So, two minutes back on the floor. Go ahead there, Angel.

How does the sun change size on a globe model if you're only you're moving less than 1% away as you tilt over backwards and watch sunset? The sun should not even change 1%. I got upwards of 23%. We've got upwards of 40% from people with solar filters. That's impossible on your globe religion. You can say no all you want. We've got the videos I'll show you. So also the plane thing.

if the plane is not adjusting for Earth curvature or Earth rotation, they're treating the Earth as flat and stationary. That's why they don't adjust for curvature because it's not there. I literally debated a guy the other day, an aerospace engineer who literally admitted it. I asked him because he couldn't tell me. How much do planes adjust for curvature? They can't tell me because it never happens.

Okay? They'd never adjust for Earth rotation. If you were to land north to south on a runway at the equator, you'd have to chase the runway sideways 460 meters. That's how fast it's moving according to your religion. That never happens. They'd never adjust for Coriolis Earth rotation because the Earth is flat and stationary.

All right, one minute over to you, Nathan, if you want to comment there. Yeah, of course. He said it would shrink 10%. That would mean we would have to get further-- we would move 10 million miles closer or further from the sun for it to change 10% in angular size. It only changes on a flat Earth because on the globe religion,

we're 93 million miles away from the sun falling backwards a thousand miles an hour as we watch the sunset it's not moving away from us um to change its angular size it's the illusion that you're fa that the sun is setting and it's actually you falling backwards a thousand miles an hour to bring up

bring up what angel said about the airplane flight they have a attitude indicator it uses a gyroscope the gyroscope keeps its rigidity in space it's surrounded by a gimbal base if we are flying around a globe the gimbal base would change its orientation relative to the gyroscope which keeps its rigidity in space we don't observe that the pitch data shows they fly straight and level with an upper pitch the entire duration of the flight that's time when they land the gimbal base is

in the exact position it was when they took off. I got to cut you off there. So two minutes on the floor over to you fellas. I just asked you to come off the mute there. Oh, sorry. I accidentally popped you back on mute. Dr. Blood's eyes. I was clicking stuff. All right, go ahead. It's okay. It's okay. I forgive you. So by the way, the change in the, the, the change in the size of the sun happens vertically. Like that's, that's where you see it the most. You see the biggest change vertically. Yeah. I mean, that's exactly what angel showed and that can happen solely due to refraction because that's where we see that the change in density of the air it's near the

The change in density of the air happens vertically rather than horizontally. By the way, also if they're flying manually, adjusting for turbulence is a bigger effect than adjusting for curvature. And all they're doing is trying to maintain level flight. They're trying to maintain tangent to the Earth. And so what that means is that they will adjust whatever is, and they will do whatever is necessary to make sure that their nose is pointing in the correct direction. And if the Earth is curving under them, they will do that. And by the way, auto-leveling gyroscopes do, they are reset quite regularly. So I don't know why you think otherwise.

all right over to you margaret ring laser gyroscopes already show the the drift on the earth which is only 15 degrees per hour it's not huge like this is a thing like they're just sort of trying to make it sound all all impressive no it's because when the sun is setting it goes through a lot more atmosphere than when it is actually above us because when when it is setting it that's why it goes red color because it actually has to go through a lot more atmosphere to get to us but i just want to point out how they just completely dodged the antarctica thing

Like they're just dodging. They won't actually answer it. Point blank, I asked them to address. And of course, all we got is sophistry and they're cooked and stuff, but they can't answer it. It's just incredible how they run and expect nobody to notice. Why won't you answer this? 30 seconds left. Also, I'd like to ask, do they not think that the Coriolis effect is real? Because that's something that you can just measure in like a laboratory.

That'd be good if they could... And then we could talk about Compton Generators or something like that. That'd be cool. Alright, two minutes on the floor there, fellas. I'm going to ask you to come off the mute and...

Well, let's get back to it. So two minutes on the floor whenever you're ready. Let me go real quick. Angel, it's not that we don't think the Coriolis effect is real. It's that you don't think the Coriolis effect is real. You said if you're traveling in a car and you throw something up, it comes right back down. Well, that would be no Coriolis split. So not only do we know the Earth is not spinning and there's no Coriolis effect, you just have a booga booga hocus pocus space religion. But

You admit yourself the Earth has no Coriolis and you demonstrated that by putting someone in a container, which the globe doesn't have a container. We're in a vacuum of outer space. We allegedly traveled to the moon on Blitz. So I don't know why you're invoking a container around your globe. You don't have a container around your globe. So what are we talking about here? On top of that, Angels, go ahead. Yeah, I want to know, right? I want you to address this Blitz.

If I lick off a healing balloon, it doesn't experience a Coriolis effect, right? So if I have our helicopter, the world record is 50 hours, over 50 hours. It rotated with the Earth, right? You can inject if you'd like. He's asking a question. Sorry, can you repeat that last bit? The hovering helicopter rotated with the Earth, right, for 50 hours? So...

You're just talking about hovering? The Coriolis effect is when there's motion relative to the thing that's rotating. No, it's not. No, it's not. If I lick off a helium balloon, it's gaining more radius on the Earth that you believe it's turning? Yeah, the helium balloon will experience the Coriolis effect, actually. Really?

Yeah. So if I let go of a healing balloon at the equator, is it going to deviate 460 meters a second? That's not how the Coriolis effect works. I mean, we can look at the math and we can work out what the actual force is if you want to. Will it experience a Coriolis? It will, yeah. The Coriolis effect is m omega cross v. It will. Yeah, we can look at

All right, let's let Angel have his time. So he wants to, like I said, this is still his time. So he gets to respond. That's fine. So the hovering helicopter hovered for 50 hours.

50 hours, okay, and it rotated with the earth. Angel, he said in the car, you throw the ball up, it comes right back down. Now he's saying that... To be clear, I was simplifying it. Hold on, hold on. Hold on, hold on. We'll give you 10 seconds, and then we've got to pass the ball because you guys have had... Yeah, there's been a few injections. So yeah, where there was a bit of cross-examination. I think it would be fun to go into cross-examination, but I want to let all our speakers have a chance to get a drink of water and take a bathroom break.

We got two minutes left. So at the end of this 10 seconds, you'll be bouncing it back to the other side. Then we'll be taking a break and coming back and I'll be giving you the ball. So 10 seconds on the floor there, Nathan, if you can. I just want to point out to the audience because Blitz just cooked himself. He said you throw a ball up in a car, it comes right back down. Now he's saying the earth rotates under a hot air balloon and you can calculate it. But everyone knows...

Helicopters, hot air balloons, planes don't have drastically different journey times east to west, west to east. It's all based on jet streams and trade winds, not the earth rotating under your feet. All right. Let's get another straw man.

All right, two minutes on the floor. I just need to reply because so, so, okay. Yes. I will absolutely admit I was oversimplifying in the car example because I was trying to convey a point of relative motion. If you want, we could absolutely talk about the Coriolis effect in that case. Let's say that you were driving north of the equator, then there'd be no Coriolis effect. And then you could actually experience this directly and you wouldn't have to worry about that. Second, I wasn't talking about a hot air balloon hovering and experience a Coriolis effect. I was addressing Angel's example where you release a helium balloon.

A helium balloon traveling straight up, as long as you're not at the North or South Pole, will experience Coriolis effect. That's something that you could in principle measure, but I imagine that the wind would probably wash it out. You don't need a container for the Coriolis effect. I don't know what Nathan's talking about there. The point is, is it seems like you guys don't believe in the Coriolis effect, and this is easily measurable with just a Compton generator.

And I just want to point out that they said that, oh, it's not us that don't believe in the Corollas effect. And then they're questioning its existence. And I do want to point out again that they still, again, like I keep asking this question, how they explain the circumnavigation of Antarctica, and they're just ignoring it. They absolutely have zero answers. And I just want to point that out again, that these guys are just dodging and dodging and dodging.

So now that we found out what they can't explain, let's also get them to explain antipodal flight routes, flight routes that go over Antarctica and over the northern hemisphere. How does that work on a flat Earth? Why is the Auckland to the Madrid flight route the same as others on the flat Earth? I can see that, you know, angels furiously Googling. 30 seconds.

I mean, yeah, looking stuff up during the debate is fine. Oh, yeah, yeah, I just think it's funny. Yeah, no, that's totally cool, especially if you're wanting to clarify. You've got 20 seconds, and then we're going to have a little break. So we have 30 seconds. I guess what would be great to be addressed is we all agree that the coriolis effect is a measurable thing, I think.

How does that happen? And then why is it that Captain Cook was able to travel around Antarctica so quickly? Those would be two great things for you guys to address. And we can address whatever questions you have. All right, so I'm going to set another 40-minute timer. It does seem like we want to dig some more. I thought we were going Q&A after an hour, bro. Well, I was going to say, well, we can set another 20 minutes if you want to do another 20 open convo. I mean, I'm done, bro. These guys are reality-denying anti-flatterers who haven't shown a single proof

Are you running, Nathan? Asking us an hour into the debate, Ryan, to explain a circumnavigation of Antarctica and flight routes, and now we're talking about Coriolis. You guys are really running. Nathan, you had that ahead of the debate. I said that to you ahead of the debate. You should have been prepared for it. You had that information. Just hold on there, Mark. I'm just going to put everybody on mute for just two seconds because I do want to potentially unpack a little bit more. It's totally fine, I think, to unpack a

little bit more I don't want to just jump into the Q&A right away if you have the time to continue unpacking I think that would be of use and I don't think it doesn't seem to me that Angel's gotten answers to all the questions that he might have wanted to ask as well I'm not sure yeah okay but either way if you guys wanted to like I say take 10 minutes we can wrap up what we have here and then we'll jump into the Q&A but I did want to give you a chance to like I say step away and

you know if you need to grab yourself a drink you know take a bathroom break that's totally fine i know that these things can take a while so uh but i will say we're not gonna uh rush through the q a for sure we're gonna try to give everybody a shot to answer so uh nathan's taking a break there uh if either of you wanna yep you wanna step out that's totally fine mark and angel i guess yeah you wanna hang out with me for two seconds i'll just talk to the audience that's totally cool we'll wait for your uh speakers to get back

Yeah, everybody's hanging out on mute. So let me just ask you guys to unmute. All right. So you asked about circumnavigation around Antarctica. In Antarctica, does the compass point north? In Antarctica, does the compass point north? Where in Antarctica are you?

In Australia, does the compass point north? The compass always points north. Okay, great. Okay, great. Let me rephrase. If you put them next to a big magnetic rock, they'll point towards the rock, of course. But like, absent that, they'll point north. Yeah, right. That's what all compasses do. So in the south, they point north, right? Can you see my screen? Can you see my screen? So in the south, you'd also have to, if you're going east or west, that's a circle on a globe or a flat earth. So you'd have to correct north in the south, right?

Okay. So then you're turning right to go west, right? If you're correcting north. Welcome to flat earth. On the flat earth, yeah, that's what you'd have to do, right? Welcome to flat earth. That's not my question! That's not even my question! You've just debunked the globe by saying you have to turn right when going west on the earth. On a flat earth you have to turn right. On a flat earth, yeah. So on a globe, when you go west, which way do you have to turn?

To go north? If you're traveling west, you just follow west, right? Which is clockwise. We're going to spend a lot of time on questions. So my question is... All right, we're not cutting off other people. Hold on. You're not cutting off other people. I said 10-minute timer. We'll get to the Q&A. No, all right.

We're going to have a little back and forth. Angel's sharing his screen, asking questions. I think it's fair. Like I said, we wanted to do two rounds. In fact, I wanted to do an extra, as I mentioned halfway through, some cross-examination, you know, five minutes per person to do a cross-examination since you all wanted to ask each other questions. So, yeah, but Angel, I want to give you back the floor here and let you continue with what you have on screen. So, Mark, in the south, does the compass correct north?

In the south, does the compass correct north? I don't even know what you mean by that. So you don't know what circumnavigation is. You're saying we can't answer it. I do. I do. Hang on, hang on, hang on. Here's the thing. Here's the thing. I answered your question, right? So my question is, why are you, Andrew, Mike,

question. Why are you not running away? Let's give Mark 15 seconds. No, no, no. You are not addressing my question. My question is about route times, not about anything to do with a compass. And yes, you turn right on a globe to go north. That's because north, west is if you're facing north, west is left. I mean, I don't understand what you're talking about. West. So now you can correct south on a globe to go west. What? Look, it's on screen.

Yeah, and to go north you turn right. Look at the boat! To turn north you go, you turn right. What don't you understand? If the compass is pointing north, and you go west and it's correcting north, you'd have to turn this way. Not this way. No, that boat has to turn 90 degrees right to be facing north from a present location, is that correct?

Okay. Do you see my diagram? No, answer my question. Answer my question. Don't run. Answer my question. You're running. You're running. No, I'm not, because mine was the original question. How do you explain 10 weeks circumnavigating Antarctica and 10 weeks for the Mayflower to go from London to the west, the east coast of the United States? Because you're changing the question. So you're the one that's running. Answer my question.

Don't make up your own. No, Angel, I'm not going to allow this. You have to answer my question. I'm trying to. Don't make up your own. All right, all right. Let's be very clear. Let's be very clear. So just one second there, Angel. Let's be very clear, Mark Reed. Let's state your question, and then I want to give Angel a chance to respond. He's already asked it. I can answer it. Okay, all right. As long as you know the question and you... Well, you don't have to ask me anything to answer it, Angel. Go for it. They have circumpolar winds there that go like 60 miles.

Did you take that into account? Circumpolar winds. Did you take into account the circumpolar winds? Yes. No, you didn't. So that is... Yes, yes, I did. How fast did they go? How fast did they go? What, their rate of knots of a sailing ship? Yeah, how fast were the circumpolar winds? How fast were the circumpolar winds? About 80 kilometres, I believe. 80 kilometres. Can you show that, please? Can you show me that? Can I show you wind?

Can you show me the evidence that they took me to a camp? No, no, no. You don't have to ask me any questions to answer mine. This is your claim. Answer the question. I just did. This is your claim. Answer the question. Why are you asking me questions? You're dodging again. Just answer the question. This is your claim.

You said I'm not answering any more questions from Angel until he answers mine. Tough. I just did. All right. We've hit an impasse there, fellas. We've hit an impasse. All right. You guys are both going to hang out on the mute for two seconds. If you can't just take a second to just let me jump in here and say, guys, just chill for two seconds. Nathan, I'm going to ask you to come off mute if you want to come back on the video. Like I say, we've got a lot of questions here from these two, but they seem to have hit an impasse. If you, Dr. Blitz, would like to add on while Nathan gets himself back on camera.

I'd just like to, you know, get an explanation for the Coriolis effect, which is, like, measurable in the laboratory. Over to you, Nathan. Yep, ready for the Q&A, bro. Well past the one-hour debate time. Didn't know this was going to be a two-hour debate with a long Q&A. We have 1,400 people in the chat. There's lots of questions. Oh, yeah. I'd like to spend...

I know the majority of questions are going to be for me and myself. Running. To be fair, you were warned by James that we were going to have a lot of questions. This could be drug out. No, no, I'm happy to answer your questions. And by me multiple times. So let's go into Q&A. I'm not opposed to going into Q&A. We're not getting an answer. That's fine. But it is going to take – Nathan's not wrong. This is going to take a little bit of time, and I don't want to rush through it.

I really want to stress that, that I want to give you all a chance to unpack here in the Q&A. So let's try not to rush too much. And I'll cue you to come off mute. You just decide when you'd like to come off mute. Go ahead there, Dr. Blitz.

to be clear nobody's going to answer none of the flat earthers are going to be able to explain the Coriolis fact we're not going to do meta before we get to the show that's fine we're just not addressing it that's fine I guess you deny Coriolis I literally don't do I need

Do I need to put you guys? All right. All right. If I'm going to ask questions, I don't want to put you guys on mute before I ask questions. I get it. You guys are torn. It seems like, yeah, you guys want to talk, but you also want to ask these questions. Honestly, yeah. Like I say, Nathan wants to get into the Q&A. I think it's good to get into the audience questions. You guys are the huge lifeblood of the channel. I see you there, Nathan. You want to say something? You're off mute.

Just want to say, can we do closing arguments before we move into the Q&A? I generally wait till the end for closing arguments, unless you do need to step out. If there's a reason that you need to leave, feel free to say, hey, Ryan, I want my one minute. I'm going to excuse myself. That's totally fine if you run out of time. But like I said, we're not going to rush through the Q&A for any reason for that matter. So let's get right to it.

Thank you, everybody. Thanks to our panel for having this lively discussion. It's been a lot of fun. We're heading into some...

new debate territory for sure as far as this conversation is concerned. We're going to be having Will Duffy back on for sure, so stay tuned for that. Alex O'Connor is going to be on with both the NEC leads, so that's going to be interesting for his debut debate. But let's get into that super chat everybody. Super chats I should say. Yeah, if you have a question for any of our speakers, go to our super chat section, put it into a super chat. We're going to ask it live and

And let's get right to it. Ryan Hesterman says, flat Earth, how is the sun itself completely visible for 14.5 hours in Melbourne in December, but on 5.5 hours in Finland? Look at your map. It doesn't work.

All right. So I will-- Go ahead. This will explain the seasons, the 24-hour day, the alternating seasons for the north and south, the sun analema. The sun's path around the equator expands and contracts, alternating every six months. That's what we've observed for thousands of years. That's why they call it the sea suns, because we see the sun rise, and then we see it dip towards the horizon.

And it works like a clock. The wheel on the sky keeps on turning. Even Einstein admits you can explain everything in the sky with this kinematic equivalence on a geocentric model. They did for thousands of years with the Ptolemaic model. They had the Antikythera mechanism, the astrolabe, the sextant, the dioptera, which was pretty much land surveying device for ancient times.

They were figuring out the sky. They lined up giant megalithic structures with the sky. The sky is a map and a clock, 88 constellations rotating in reverent obedience around Polaris. Angel? Can I respond, or are we doing both sides? Yeah, we'll do some back and forth, because there are a lot of questions, but we'll try to entertain a little bit of back and forth, but let's keep it to 30 seconds if we can.

Yeah, so I would just posit that Nathan has no idea what kinematic equivalence is, and when Einstein is referring to any sort of geocentric model, he's obviously referring to a globe at the center of the cosmos, not a flat Earth. You're gonna need curvature for that, buddy. Yeah, a globe has curvature. Yeah, there's other things that are problems under that.

sort of flat earth model according to Einstein he's talking about sort of as Dr. Blitz said he's talking about whether it's in the center of the universe or not he's not talking about the shape of it because there's all kinds of things like I mean Einstein believed in gravity so like what you know you're quoting somebody who absolutely can I finish or are you just going to jump in yeah I'm going to call out your fallacy all or nothing thank you all or nothing fallacy yeah do you know what that is yeah I do

Great. So you just did it. Yeah, and you're using appeal to authority. So the important point about kinematic equivalence... We've got to move through these questions, guys. The important point about kinematic equivalence is that it says that the shapes of things don't change, just the positions and motions of things change. So what Einstein was saying is that the Earth is a globe, but you could view it as at the center or you could view it as moving about the Sun. It's the same either way. But the shapes don't change, it's just the motions and positions that can be changed.

- All right, what's going on, Nathan? - We get closing arguments, right? 'Cause the question was for us. So Einstein's theory of relativity that from a purely kinematic motion-based perspective, it's mathematically possible to describe the universe using a geocentric model with Earth at the center with appropriate calculations. So thanks for playing. - You know what geocentric means. - We get the closing argument. - Yeah, we will move to the next question. - Yeah, I was interrupted. I don't see why I don't interrupt you. Why should I bother not interrupting you?

Well, there's been a lot of interruptions. But I will say, we're not going to rush through the Q&A. No, cry more. Hold on. I love it. Cry more. All right. But I will say, Nathan, I'm not going to rush through the Q&A. So, yeah, we're not going to do what we did last time where we were saying, can we just get through the Q&A? There's lots of questions. If you need to excuse yourself, I've already let you know, you can excuse yourself, ask me for a minute, and you're free to go. All right?

Fair enough. All right, let's ask the next question. Megan Marie, Angel. Geocentric doesn't mean flat. Hey, come on. Help me out, buddy. Megan Marie, Angel, why can't you articulate your own arguments instead of playing a video for your intro? The video you proved you can't understand simple concepts. I play the video because I like to pack a lot of things into it and actually speed up my voice and make it all clean and cut, precise, like very presentable and easy to understand. That's why.

Did you have anything to add there, Nathan? Nope, next question. Alright, well I will let the other side respond if they want to, and then let Angel... My only response is, Nathan, Nathan, Nathan, just like, if you have to leave, just leave. Don't rush this, okay? You signed up for this.

Yeah. And, and sort of, you're talking about the meta now by saying next question. So I don't, you know, do you guys have anything to say to what angel just said? Don't worry about what Nathan's doing right now. Yeah. I'll pass. That's fine. All right. Let's carry on with the, uh, the Q and a, but yeah, I do. I would prefer it if you could, like I say, engage. So the angel could have the last word on, uh,

your engagement there, but it does seem like we're all getting caught up in the meta. So it happens every once in a while. Thanks, everybody. Smash the like button if you haven't already. We have a lot of fun here at Modern Day Debate. Vincent Shatwell.

I'm not going to say anything. That's probably his real name, but I just... Anyway, can you explain to me why we don't have a solar eclipse every month when every 28 days the sun and moon cross paths? That's why we call it a new moon. Where does this moon go when that happens?

Yeah, yeah. So the sun or the moon doesn't orbit the earth in exactly the same plane as the earth orbits the sun. The moon orbits on an incline. So it's going like this. So when the sun would be between the earth and the moon, sometimes it's below, sometimes it's above. The only way that you can get a solar eclipse is when it's exactly lined up. And that's when you get a solar eclipse. That's why it's kind of rare. It doesn't happen all the time. All right. Any thoughts on the other side? Yeah. The moon appears higher and lower than the moon's between the tropics every 28 days. So yeah, it overlaps.

Yeah, but it doesn't always overlap when it's between the Earth and the Sun. So yes, it does. You're right. It does. Every 28 days, it goes around. But the place where it actually intersects the line connecting the Earth and the Sun, that changes month to month. And so that's why you're not going to get a solar eclipse every month. And even the moon doesn't end the limit as well. Angel, bro.

Please, bro, I'm begging you. Can we end the debate? Nathan, just leave. If you don't want to be here, just leave. I was talking. All right, yeah, if you do want to do a one-minute closing and back out, that's totally fine, Nathan, like I said, but we do have lots of questions, so, like, this is what... We got Blitz answering the flat Earth questions, bro. Well, we just had a back and forth. That was a question for me. Yeah, this is... That was a question for him. Oh, they asked why we don't have a solar eclipse every month. That's a flat Earth question. No, no, they asked... Yeah, they asked why we don't have a solar eclipse each month if both the sun and the moon are rotating around...

you know, the sky or whatever. So the sun, the sun rotates around it. All right. All right. This is, this is what I'll do. This is what I'll do. All right. We got lots of questions. From the perspective of a flat earther, you don't understand English, do you? Either way, either way. Google what you guys think. Let's just be for flat earth.

Let's just say I want to give you a one-minute closing. So we're not allowed questions now. That's great. Hold on. Good one. I do want to say, like I say, if you do want to say a one-minute closing, I want to give you that opportunity. But if this keeps up, then I'll excuse you myself. Like I don't want to keep this up. If Angel wants to actually answer these questions and gauge back and forth and you want to just say let's get out of here, I will give you your one minute. I'm trying to be fair to you. But if you just want to sit there and say I want to leave, I want to leave.

I'm giving you the opportunity. I haven't said once I want to leave. You're just making shit up, host. All right, then why are you trying to push us through the Q&A? Because this is not... Are you out of time? The Q&A part. Are you out of time? I was just explaining to my partner that we're going to spend four hours in the Q&A if we go back and forth during the Q&A. Because look at the questions, bro. The super chats are still rolling in. There are all sorts of super chats. I want to leave. Let's go. Let's get to the questions.

Alright, let's ask the next question. Nathan Thompson, what is the cosine of 60 degrees? Next question. Doesn't have anything to do with the shape of the Earth. Please, thank you. Can you try and answer? I did send in a super chat.

Fair enough. The answer is a half. I will be fair. I don't usually take pop quizzes. The answer is one half. I don't take pop quizzes generally myself for math questions. But yeah, thanks if we can answer the question. That's great. There you go, JSSTiger. Bitter truth. Planes fly straight. They actually follow a curved path that conforms to the Earth's curvature. Flat Earth. Mark. Flat Earth slash Mark both answer.

Well, we'll let everybody. So yeah, Bitter Truth wants to ask, "flat side planes fly straight" in quotations, they actually follow a curved path that conforms to the Earth's curvature. According to the pitch data, they fly a straight line, you're correct. And the plane does not gain altitude because it's just flying parallel to the Earth's surface, that's why it's called an airplane, flies over a motionless plane. There's no adjustment for curvature needed. That's not why it's called an airplane. It's called an airplane because of the airfoils, because of the shape of the wings.

Because the wings are planes That's how it gets its lift And you just said parallel It's called plane flying Correct

What are you talking about? I don't even know what you're talking about. So the perpendicular to the Earth is basically following the curvature because at any point perpendicular to the Earth is perpendicular to the center of mass or where gravity is pulling towards. So all it has to do is keep that pitch level and that will always conform to the curve because as you go around the curve, that perpendicular will still point to the center of the Earth.

A pilot even showed them this with a model plane and they still didn't understand it bafflingly. And plus the altimeter won't change. As you can see, the stand on the plane was exactly the same height. Altimeter doesn't change. That's fine. Let's let them close this one out. So Nathan Angel, let's close this one out and move on. So on a flat Earth, it's exactly the same thing. That's why they treat the Earth as flat and stationary. It's the same thing on a flat Earth. All right. Shano says, Ryan, did you know your drink is a loaf of bread?

Half a loaf of bread because I've only had two tall boys. Thank you, Sean. But I was going to say, I actually looked it up halfway through the debate, the average calorie count in a beer. So, yeah, a thousand and a loaf of bread. Man, I could go for one right now.

Well, yeah, no, I've got a whole bunch here, but I'm going to behave myself to the best of my ability. They're light ones. They're baby beers, right? I've got to behave. They're really in the morning for me. Oh, yeah, yeah. Do you happen to be in California? I could use a few. No, I'm way far away. I'm in Nova Scotia. Bitter Truth is asking a question to Nathan. Nathan, what is electromagnetic energy? Where does it form and by what? Explain in detail.

Electromagnetic energy. I mean, I'd like to get to the shape of the earth questions. Angel, do you want to take the electromagnetic question? Because that's not like my area of expertise. I'm a global debunker. So I'm here to talk about your religion. Yeah, I mean, the sun gives off electromagnetic energy and we can see that. What? All of electromagnetic energy. What is your area of expertise, Nathan?

Debunking the globe religion. I've done it for 10 years. Oh, okay. Oh, that's just sad. Alright, Calabrese says, "Is the horizon the curve of the Earth, Globies?" The horizon is an apparent effect that happens to a geometric phenomenon. Right. So it's not a location where birds go over. It's not geometric. You just debunked the globe. Did you listen to what I said? Yes. You made our point.

It's an apparent effect that happens to a geometric phenomenon. So there's something geometric there. And then as a result of, you know, atmospheric effects and elevation and things like that, the apparent effect may or may not be different from the geometric effect. So the physical hill in the black swan moves behind another physical object. Those are all apparent. They're not physically...

There's not like a physical hill of water. There's not a physical hill of water. Because it's equidistant from the center of the earth, approximately. Except waves. Alright, let's move on to the next one. Bitter Truth says... Oh, that was... Yeah, that was Bitter Truth. Thanks for that. Let's see. Kavanaugh Amix says, Flat Earthers fear southern hemisphere flights. What's that all about?

- No, we don't. - Yeah, we're terrified. Next question. I'm so scared I don't wanna answer the question. Next question.

I think I usually just... Oh, the FAA trains pilots on a flat non-rotating Earth. We've already gone over pitch data. We talked about the attitude indicator. It doesn't adjust for curvature. It's not drastic different journey times east to west and west to east. So airplane, not air curve, flights that the FAA trains pilots... Atmosphere, not atmosphere. Hold on one second. The question was for flat Earthers. I was almost done. We'll let you respond, Dr. Blitz. Let's finish up there, Nathan. We'll let them respond in like 30 seconds or so.

Yeah, the question was for me. Thank you so much, host. Really appreciate it. You're very welcome. So we've already talked about airplane flights. So I don't know why you're bringing it up. We extensively went over it. Angel brought up the pitch data. They're not curving around a globe. You can test the floor yourself. Stop pretending airplane flights. Prove it's a cartoon. All right.

So did we have any response right quick from the other side? And then if you want to close it out, that's great. They didn't extensively go over it. They extensively avoided it is what they did. And they sort of appeal to winds for the planes and the boats, which doesn't explain why the cruise that I pointed out that you can take today isn't a sailboat. So the winds don't actually help. Maybe the winds give that a push as well. It's kind of ridiculous. The whole thing about this sort of...

you know, atmosphere. Ten seconds. It's a sphere. Gotcha. Sorry, go ahead, please. Sorry, we gotta let Nathan and Angel close this one out. Yeah, um, you think that air takes on spherical shapes? Air doesn't take on shapes. It takes on the shape of the container. Which is a sphere, because it's above a globe. That was our closing, sir.

So did you have anything to say in response to that, or do you want to just carry on? The sphere doesn't have a container around it, though. That's your problem. All right, let's carry on. Thank you, Angel, for closing that one out. So LJ says, for $4.99, gun bullets go 2,000 miles per hour, and rockets travel at 17,500 miles per hour. How can the supposed human in the ships take dumps while going eight times the speed of flying bullets?

Yeah, because velocity is relative accelerationism. When a rocket is traveling at 17,500 miles an hour, well, it's not really a rocket. When a spacecraft is traveling that fast as it's orbiting the Earth,

its velocity is roughly constant. In fact, it's in free fall, so there's no measured acceleration at all. If you're just traveling straight forward at 5,000 miles an hour, you're not going to feel anything. It'd be like you're in a bullet train. It's only when you accelerate or decelerate that you feel things. When you turn, that you feel things. If you're just traveling, you're not going to feel anything. Yeah, I like how it...

The metals melt in 1 to 2,000 degrees, but the thermosphere is allegedly 4,000 degrees. The ISS is allegedly moving 4.9 miles a second. That's 2,000 miles an hour faster than the fastest ICBM. And glovers are going to pretend they put people in a rocket, travel faster than the fastest ICBM, dock to a space shuttle orbiting around the Earth every 90 minutes in a medium that's 4,000 degrees so that they can play with freaking water and make coffee from their coffee.

hard solid fecal matter. So the whole business with the thermosphere is kind of funny. So and I actually have a video on this. So go check that out. Freak out. But really, really what's going on is what what matters when you're talking about trying to melt something due to high temperatures is it matters the both the temperature and the heat capacity of the thing that has that temperature. So for example, if you stuck your hand in boiling water, 212 degrees Fahrenheit, your hand would

would be horribly burnt. But if you stuck your hand in an oven that's 400 degrees Fahrenheit, your hand will be fine. And it's because the air doesn't hold nearly as much heat as the water does. Similarly, the thermosphere holds a billion times less heat than the air in your oven does. So it doesn't matter if it's 2000 degrees Fahrenheit or whatever it is, it's not going to melt anything.

Okay. And I'd like to address the whole idea of inertial frames of reference. Like they don't understand that it's not the velocity that is the problem. It's changes in velocity. So if you have that missile going at that rate and you stopped it all of a sudden, it would absolutely break apart. Absolutely. But when it is maintaining that speed, it doesn't feel the speed. We pointed this out again and again and again. Like when you're on a train, you don't feel it. You know, we've pointed this out all the time. Let's put a bow on that one. Thank you so much. Yeah, we got lots of questions.

So I'm just going to scroll back on up. Thank you to our live chat. Keep those questions coming in. We appreciate it. There's all kinds of interesting avenues we might get into and maybe some more room for some, like I say, more unpacking. So if you have a question for any of our speakers, get it into our live chat now. We are asking them live.

live on Modern Day Debate, so thank you so much. Bitter Truth says, Nathan, why South Pole stars move... All right, so there's a lack of punctuation here, so let me just read this right quick. Nathan, why are South Pole stars moving clockwise, but from the South Pole, they're moving counterclockwise?

Yeah, why are they moving clockwise? But from the South Pole, they are moving counterclockwise. Is a proof of Earth is a sphere or Earth rotation? Sorry, there's some typos and very little punctuation. I'm sorry, I got it. Hang on, you're fine. Okay, you got it. All right, go for it.

so star trials are not a good argument for you globers because the sidereal day moves faster than the solar day it's 23 hours 56 minutes the solar day is 24 hours so the stars if they're further away and according to parallax things that move are closer move faster we should see the sun moving faster than the stars not the stars moving faster than the sun unless on the heliocentric model they're going to move the stars in front of the sun which they do weird stuff like that all the time on top of that

All stars move east to west. So the stars don't change direction in the southern hemisphere. They all move east to west on the globe religion and on flat earth reality. So I don't know why you're pretending they're moving different directions in different hemispheres. Back to Einstein, he said you could explain everything in the sky on a geocentric model. They did for 1400 years with the Ptolemaic model and stars don't intersect the marine horizon. They fade away and vanish off in the distance, just like you'd expect them to on a flat stationary earth. Angel, did I miss anything?

Yeah, I mean, I'm in the south. If I do a star trail facing north, they rotate kind of clockwise, just like you're looking at Polaris. So it depends which way you face. If I turn around, they're going to go clockwise. If someone in the north turns around, faces 180 degrees away from Polaris, they're going to appear to go clockwise. So they all rotate the same direction. I like them apples and globies.

Yeah, that doesn't work on a flat Earth because like when you look south from Australia as well, you see the point due south. When you look in Africa, you see the point due south. You always see the point due south and that doesn't work on a flat Earth map. It absolutely doesn't work. The sidereal day is because the Earth is orbiting around the sun. So you basically just debunked yourself on the sidereal day because that's why it occurs is because of the orbit of

the sun. So, you know, why does the sidereal day occur? Explain it maybe. Sorry, go ahead, Liz. Yeah, yeah. The other thing is, again, this is a misunderstanding of kinematic equivalence and a misunderstanding of geocentrism. If you could explain to me what kinematic equivalence is, I'd Venmo you $10 right now without Googling it. I'm sure you can't though. The whole point about kinematic equivalence, kinematics is about motion. It's about position. And kinematic equivalence is just that the motion that's

The position is relevant, that you can describe equivalently the Earth as a spherical ball in the center with everything moving around it, or as the Earth orbiting the sun with the sun orbiting the center of the galaxy. Those are kinematically equivalent. Geocentrism, the original geocentrism, not your geocentrism, is what happens when you have an Earth that's a globe in the center with all the planets and all the stars moving around it.

All right, final thoughts there. Hold on, Mark Reed. We're going to do final thoughts for Nathan or Angel with this question, and then we're going to carry on. So Nathan, Angel, do you have anything to say before we ask the next question? Yeah, I've got to get my $10 on Venmo. I already read the definition of the kinematic equivalence, but it's Einstein stating that you can explain the motion of the celestial bodies kinematically, which means motion-based, on a geocentric Earth.

So that was the Ptolemaic model for 1400 years. They predicted eclipses, transits of planets, all that good stuff. Look up the Prague clock. It's 610 years old. They didn't know a darn thing about gravity and it still works to this day. So thanks for playing.

let's ask the next question there guys thank you so much to our panel for participating in the debate and sticking out for the live chat here there's lots of questions and uh we're gonna hammer them guys so thank you so much to our live chat for being so engaged uh it's been a lot of fun it's been a juicy a spicy one if you will uh despite the timer you know that sometimes still happens uh even though you have a timer so beach lover says nathan and angels destroyed the two globe donuts

Oh, man, I'm hungry now. All right, so... I like donuts. Yeah, nothing wrong with donuts. I mean, what's... Yeah, I mean, yeah, whatever. But apparently you are one. So I guess that makes you delicious. You are the one you eat. Oh, man. All right, thanks, Angel. Let's see here. Robert Canetster says, how can the platform have intellectual integrity if they're neutral on Flat Earth topic?

It's almost like a question for me. What's going on here? I mean, we want to be able to platform people that have different views. And as I said earlier, you know, whether it's going against status quo or whatever it may be, or even if it's something that you're like, hey, you know, this is something that we're digging out of the woodworks. You know, and I'm not saying that's for tonight, but I'm just saying that it is important to make sure that we have a modern day representation of the arguments on the table. Otherwise, they'll get away from you.

Right? You want to debate with 20-year-old arguments and 20-year-old clips, that's up to you. But we wanted to hear what people are saying today on these topics. Okay? So I hope that makes sense. Big Daddy Globe says, Nathan, will there be a 24-hour sun in Antarctica?

No. When they modeled the sun in Abu Dhabi, they spent millions of dollars doing it, and the billionaires built it. They modeled the sun arcing away from the observer in the south and arcing around the observer in the north. That's why it's called the Arctic and the Antarctic, or the antithesis of what you see in the north. And they do celestial navigation in arc degrees, arc seconds, and arc minutes.

So it arcs around the observer in the north. You actually have a 24 hour day up there. There's 11 locations. If you Google it, where do we see a 24 hour sun? And that's why they're still trying to wave their white flag because they can't prove curvature and talk about the sky and going to Antarctica next month because they don't have any proof of curvature. It's been debunked. The club's a cartoon. They're hanging on by a string.

So Nathan, when it happens, are you going to change your mind when they view 24-Hour Sun on a Dark Dakota Month? It's literally the only question I just answered. Yeah, I know. You said no. Clean your ears out, Blitz. Let's let Dr. Blitz respond there, Nathan. Let's let him answer what you just said. Nathan, you said that it doesn't happen. And so when it does happen, will you change your mind?

No, because you can look at time lapses from Antarctica, they already have them, and they cut footage like 12 to 10 hours every day. They're not going to cut it this time. You're going to be hearing it from flat earthers when they're going in a circle. We should have seen it already, and they already faked it twice anyway, so why should we believe anything that comes from that? So you're saying that the flat earthers that are going are going to fake the footage, so

that so they can continue the globe conspiracy or whatever you know that's not what I was no what are you saying so if the flat earthers come back and say look we've got footage and this is a 24-hour sun yes that there is a sun there what what how will you respond to that

There's no curvature. I debunked it for 10 years. Not talking to you, Nathan. I'm talking to Angel. It's not going to change the shape of the floor. I've gone out in reality and proven that there's no curve. It's not going to change the shape of the floor. So you're just going to say, hey, that happens on a flat earth. Is that your contention?

Okay. Yeah. I think, I think you got your answer to that question. Uh, we are going to ask the questions from the live chat. So I'm not going to let you ask too many questions there. So Daryl Frost says modern day debate, which is better at Gibson or Fender. That one's just for me. Once again, uh, Gibson SG, Gibson SG with P90s for me, uh, which is what I'm equipping my Gibson with right now. I've also got a Gibson junior with P90s, but, um, I, big Fender fan, big Kramer fan, anything with a whammy bar, uh,

is a lot of fun too. Bigsby's, you got it. So, uh, you, you hit Ryan on his favorite thing, guitar. Yeah.

Yes, I have an original Floyd Rose, 1983 Kramer, made in Japan. It's beautiful. Anyways, let's see here before the live chat goes off saying, nobody cares about your music life. Beach Lover says, it'd be a real shame if we all got along for one second on something unrelated, right? All right, Beach Lover says, Enoch of TikTok and angels underscore of underscore light cooking globies daily. So you can find Angel at that link there.

there's your clip. Hopefully I did it right. All right. So even stalking, even, even stalking. That sounds really bizarre. What are you doing in your spare time? Fifth super chat. Thanks. Two flirts. What evidence of the globe would change your mind? It's funny. Now, how now that the final experiment is happening, happening, you're changing the goalposts and saying the 24 hour sun proves nothing desperate. They say, so you have anything to say to he is stalking. Yeah.

What would change my mind is seeing curvature that we don't see. It's simple. When a pilot tells me they're just for curvature, and he could show proof of that, I'll believe it. But there's no curvature. So if someone offers you a free space flight, would you take that? If it goes high enough to be able to see the curvature of Earth? It would be a flat circle, even on the globe religion, so you don't even know your own model. You could see left-right curvature if you're sufficiently high. How high?

I mean, you can see it with a camera at around 35,000 feet and you have to plug it into some photo manipulation software to shrink down the horizontal. But yeah, you can do that. And I can send you a reference for that if you want. So you have to compress it to see curvature. Wow. Well, yeah, to make it more dramatic. But it's still there. If it wasn't curved, then no amount of compression would make it curved. Oh my goodness.

All right. Let's ask that next question there. It sounds like you guys are having too much fun with that one. So thank you so much to our live chat. You guys are keeping it really entertaining. So Dr. Tapioca Weasel, we'll have to host you again here soon. Mark, are you so fine? They say you so fine. And he says, Ryan, you too. Oh, I didn't even shave. My favorite Weasel. All right. We love the love chats there. It says love, Nate's hate. So...

Oh, love Nate's hat. Sorry. Yeah, loves Nate's hat. Honestly, we were all talking about that before the debate started. It's really good. It's a great hat. Yeah. You can get these at the Tinfoil Hat Factory. That's my buddy Paul. You can find him on Spotify. He just dropped five new songs about truth. His name is P.Cees. S-E-I-Z-E. If anyone knows Paul, please leave that in the chat. P.Cees on Spotify. New music.

World premiere. There you go. Well, there you know if you want to get that hat. Since you shouted it out there, Dr. Tapioca Weasel. There you go. Hey, another clip for you, right? It all works out at the end of the day. Megan Marie, Angel, where is the bottom of the boat?

It's in the water. The bottom of the boat's in the water. I zoomed all the way in and you can see the boat in the water, on top of the water. The boat isn't ice skating, just so you know.

You have to take the boat out of the water to see the bottom of the boat. Holy shit. Should I show that video again? I think the point is... Why are there never examples of zooming in a cruise ship? There is. Can you link that to me, Angel? I've done it on my TikTok. Can you just...

Tag me in it or something. So, yeah, when the bottom, when the top of the ship is not visible over the horizon, has it gone over the curvature of the earth? It is obstructed by the horizon. All right. For a cruise ship, that's, yeah. Is that the geometric curvature of the earth? We've already been over this. The horizon is a part of the fact that it happens to a geometric phenomenon. All right, let's go to the next question. Angel wants to go to the next question. That one was for Angel, so I think that's fair. We expounded on that one. Thank you so much to our panel. Big Daddy Globe, uh,

We're not going to read that one, but he's not too pleased with you, Nathan, to say the least. I have a lot of pet globers on TikTok, and they showed up for the debate. So thanks, Brian. No worries. Well, I won't be going that one. That's a little bit weird. Sorry, Big Daddy Globe. There's certain boundaries, okay? So just behave. Excuse me. LJ asks, what's the proof of Jupiter's mass, size, and gravity?

Do you want to start that one Dr. Blitz or Mark? Yeah, so I mean like a lot of things it's inferred from other data that we have. So we can measure distances by measuring timings, by measuring angles, by measuring parallax.

From there, we can, like, for example, if we know how far away something is, then we can infer how big it is based off of how far away it is and how big it is in our telescope. That's one way to infer size. Then we can infer mass by things like measuring the makeup of the substance by using spectroscopy. If we know what a thing is made out of, so we know how much, like, it's made of hydrogen, then we know it's less heavy. If we know it's lead, it's very heavy. And we know its size, then we can infer its mass. And we can also infer things about its mass from the orbital rate of

the moons that go around Jupiter. There's a lot of things going into this, but this is an inference. This is not something that can be directly observed because we're not at Jupiter putting it on a scale. We use inference. Any thoughts on the other side? I told you you might appreciate a little rebuttal. Go ahead if you want there, Nathan or Angel.

face is fake it violates natural law it's all a cartoon these guys backgrounds are cartoons they didn't show any observable evidence of curvature thanks for playing hey i want to thanks host for that that's a cool robot i swear yeah that's just sophistry again all we've got is something like you could you could actually you could actually answer what i said but you know

Yeah, well, the Sun and Moon appear the same size, but there's definitely different sizes, right? Right, right, because they're different distances away. And you can actually measure the distance to the Moon using parallax on the Earth. In fact, that was the first, I think one of the first ways it was done, I don't know the historics, but you can measure the distance to the Moon by just measuring the position of the Moon in New York and the position of the Moon in LA, comparing those positions, using the known distance from LA to New York, and then calculating using trigonometry.

Just stack the rulers. Just all the way to the moon, guys. Cool story. Alright, no worries. My wife and her friend just got back from the bar there. They're having a good time and I'm training the Chromecast for a joint, apparently. Oh my goodness, I'm just the worst delinquent that you could have found for this, I swear. Oh, no, yeah. Be careful you put yourself on mute there. But no, I got a little bit of a... I'm just admitting to you, I have a bit of a distraction in the...

I mean, setting off Ryan so that we can unmute ourselves. Is there a way to do that? Because we're not in the back and forth anymore. As long as we can all participate and try to make room for each other, I will allow participants to unmute themselves. See how the screens got all messed up there live chat? That's because I allowed it. Look at that. I'm taking a risk here, but I'm asking you guys to do your best to behave. Go ahead, Angel. I was just going to say, so you can triangulate to the moon and determine its distance.

So if you triangle it into the sun the same way, the sun is also the same distance because they appear the same size. All right, we got a thumbs up. All right, let's carry on to the next one. Thank you so much, guys. Yeah, everybody's tucked them away in the room there. I'm sorry, wait, I didn't get a test answer, Angel's thing, and that was my question.

Ah, true enough. Okay, alright, fine. 30 seconds if we can keep it going. Sorry, I did answer but I was muted. So the Sun does not experience the same parallax that the Moon does. You can test this. If you measure the positions of the Sun from different places, it'll appear like it'll seem like it moves less than the Moon does, and that's because the Moon is closer, in the same way that the trees, when you're driving on a highway, move more because they're closer than the mountains in the distance. It's actually very difficult to measure the parallax of the Sun because it's so far away. That's why they had to use more sophisticated methods,

like the transit of Venus. All right, that is time there. So let's ask the next question from Bitter Truth. Nathan, oh, we already asked that one, sorry. There's been a little bit of skipping around just because there's been a few super chats that are just a little too hot. But yeah, once again, big apologies, Big Daddy Globe. I won't be reading that one, but I will get to yours, NASA.

whatever your name was in the live chat there. I'll get to it, don't worry. LJ says, car has a roof, the spinning ball is supposedly open. This is for Dr. Blitz and Mark Reed. Yeah, I mean, there's gravity keeping the air in. There is a force keeping it in. I don't know what they want. I guess gravity. Yeah, none of the gas laws have anything about gravity in them. And you have to have a container. Look up Boyle's law, I think. Sorry, Bernoulli's law.

All right, let's ask the next question. Bitter Truth says, Nathan and your partner's educational background, please. It's a personal question. You can just say no. I work in the CGI department at NASA. I'm a scuba diver on the ISS.

I see Spin says, Angel, do you have evidence? Do you have some of these just are missing some keywords, guys, to really make them flow. Angel, do you have evidence of the filter you used on the video in Blitz slash Mark Lee debate? Was it in fact a solar filter? I'd love to get the specs. It's an ND 1 million. I've actually got it. Yeah. Yeah. Right here.

I don't see through it. So yeah, ND 1 million, solid problem. Alright, there you go, you got it. I never got a re- I will never get a rebuttal for how I get size change and how we get size change upwards of 40%. I did explain it, Angel. I explained it today. First it doesn't change size on the globe and that's proof, and now it does change size 40% and that's fine. Vertically. Because of refraction, that's expected. I turned the image.

it did and it didn't change horizontally yes it did yeah it did all right well this one's for you dr blitzy says uh this is lj sorry he says having a degree only proves you can memorize books

um so that might be so this is funny because this just shows that people don't know what a phd is so maybe that's the case for a bachelor's degree or for a high school diploma or whatever where all you just need to do is pass tests in fact and maybe even a master's degree maybe but in order to get a phd you actually have to be published you have to do original research and advance the field i am published in like 11 journals internationally um i wrote five papers this year all of which are now published or are

Two are published, three are currently under review. This is just part of the field. What was the thesis? It was on conformal hypersurface geometry. All right, you got it. Everybody's kind of getting into their history a little bit there and what they do. That's kind of fun.

Mark, you want to chime in? What do you do? I know everybody else has kind of gotten a chance. Do you want to chime in for a second? Yeah, no, my background is sort of network communications, integrated systems. Nobody asked, Mark. Thanks. Thanks, Ryan. Look, I am nowhere near as qualified as Dr. Blitz to be talking on the subject. He is a physicist. I'm certainly not. I don't pretend to be. All I can do is point to others' research.

But what I am good at doing is actually dealing with, you know, whiners and complainers. So, yeah, it's great. Right. I was just picking there. Obviously, I asked. So, I mean, like, I guess that makes me nobody. Oh, man. All right. Kruxall says, flat, you can't grasp a relative motion, but you claim to have an answer to the shape of the earth. Can you just admit you are scientifically illiterate and move on?

Anything to say to Kukza? Science doesn't deal with shapes of the earth or shapes of things. So I'm not scientifically illiterate. You just preview it. It absolutely does. Like there's absolutely a science in measuring. It's like, there's a whole field. There's a whole field called general relativity, which is a scientific field, which deals with shapes and distances and angles.

Yeah, and do you understand how the shapes of viruses and stuff affect their actions on biology? Like, of course we deal with shapes. What are you talking about? Anything to say on the other side? You're both doing the finger thing now. Oh my goodness. Okay. All right. JSS Tiger says to Nathan Thompson, what would the sun look like if it was half obstructed at sunset instead of setting due to perspective?

I just pulled a video up where it disappeared above the horizon. Do you want to do that real quick for the audience? I mean, you don't have to. I don't want to put you on the spot. Yeah, of course. I'll welcome you to screen share if you have it ready. Thank you. Hey, Juan. You can line this bar up.

with the horizon see the water level there the imaginary line where the ground appears to ramp up when it should be ramping down due to curvature and the sky appears to ramp down due to optics not because the earth is curving downward in all directions and we zoom this forward and we'll see two things local light illumination oops i still need the bar

Local light illumination. If that thing is a thousand times bigger than the earth and we had parallel sun. At Fry's, an annual boost membership just got even better. Now you can choose from Disney Plus with ads, Hulu with ads, or ESPN Plus on us when you sign up. Plus, enjoy unlimited free delivery, double fuel points, exclusive offers, and free items. Sign up for a boost membership today. It's an easier way to save, including new streaming options to relax with.

While we deliver your groceries. Fries, fresh for everyone. Restrictions apply. See site for details. ...rays coming from the sun. It would illuminate the entire horizon evenly. Instead, it appears like a city light off in the distance. I don't know if you've ever driven to Las Vegas, but that's what it looks like. A city off in the distance. Because the sun is small and local, you can prove this with crepuscular rays, the UV light index.

is focused between the tropics and we're going to see it start to get oh yeah it's just a little dot pull out your magnifying glass what about the very end it hasn't disappeared yet yeah into a little dot see that

No, we can still see it. You can still see it at the end. Yeah, you can still see it, bro. It's daytime. No, I mean, it's obviously dimmer because it's foggy. But Nathan, I mean, like, look, we've all seen sunsets when it's not foggy, right? We've all seen, like, the sun halfway obstructed. Let's go back to the main screen. Where does it go? That's the question. Like, sure, you can watch the sunset when it's foggy and it'll look like that's happening because the horizon is obstructed by the thick haze. But, like...

What about when it's not? It merges with the apparent horizon. Well, just before our turn is over, I just want to also add that no solar filter was left on that, and it seems like it's been zoomed out excessively. You're just sort of relying on it getting dimmer in cloudy or foggy weather. But we could see that it was half obstructed there. Why? Because it merges with the apparent horizon, which is a horizontal line.

And you've got fall shortening also. So things in the foreground can block things, big things, in the distance because they're shrinking angular size. So you can block your whole city out with a little wave. Angel, how high do you think the sun is above the earth? I don't know, I haven't measured it. 50 miles? 50 miles? 5 miles? I have no idea. Can we agree that's more than 5 miles because that's how high planes fly?

The Sun and the Moon's position, size, and speed are... Wait, okay, so to be clear, do you think that planes fly higher or lower than the Sun? To be clear, we can do the Super Chat. I'll answer your question. Okay, Nathan. If you want to avoid the question, that's fine. But geometry, basic, basic ray optics says that, sorry, the waves aren't going to obstruct the Sun.

Alright, let's ask that next question. Bob says, Flat Side Got... Oh, he's not really asking the question. He's just saying, Flat Side Got Cooked. Thanks for playing. Welcome to Globe Earth. So triggered. Alright, well, Bob, there's not too much to engage with there, but you had your moment, alright? I gave you your moment. That's right, you duck and get under my green screen.

person. Alright, Shovelhead Steve, flurfs equals lies equals poop emoji. Thanks Shovelhead Steve, another one we can't really engage with, but you had your moment, and that's fun. Alright, let's see, a couple other ones, let's just go through a couple ones that aren't really going to offer too much for the discussion, let's see.

And then we'll get back to some that do. Just give you guys some headspace. Big Daddy Globe says, Flurfs, Flatsoid said yesterday you can model a donkey earth and make it worth and try to defend it. This is why no one takes your side seriously. Well, Flatsoid's not here, Big Daddy Globe, so we're not going to be asking questions to Flatsoid. NASA Security Force says, Nathan, what does it feel like to be an idiot?

Okay, NASA security force. You're not making friends tonight. He says, I don't know and I'm curious. It must be blissful to be that stupid. Ryan props for being a great mod. Well, a great mod would let you know, NASA, that, uh,

Yeah, you're not going to be changing hearts with that attitude any day soon. All right. Let's see. Beach Lover once again gives you a shout out. Enoch of TikTok and Angels of Light are brilliant. Angels underscore of underscore light are brilliant. So I want to get that right. See if your call out's correct. We are going to tag all of our speakers in the description. We are answering super chats. If you...

If this is your first time at Modern Day Debate, this is what we do at the end of the debate. We always do our super chat. So if you have a question for any of our speakers, you want to grill somebody on screen, we are taking those questions right now. JSS Tiger says, Nathan's son blocked by the mountain is self-destruction of flat earth. Hilarious fail.

Once again, more of a statement. We're going to try to move into more of the questions. And I will apologize to our panel that I'm just going to try to move some of these out here so we can get into some of the meat of it all. Let's see. JSS Tiger asked earlier, though, this might be a bit more, to Nathan Thompson, what would the sun look like if it was half obstructed at sunset instead of setting due to perspective? Rudy did that one.

Did we oh sorry sorry yeah some of these some of these do read out very similarly so you got to remind me every once in a while Yeah, no, I'd send in a five dollar super chat said flat earthers will forever be insane and I'm so thankful They're so insufferable in mannerisms reflects their childish beliefs lmao There you go. Noah. You got your moment of fame bleak Oh says

Plains, mountains, their altitudes relative to the ground or sea level. You're getting hearts from Nathan. He loves the haters. All right. Plains, mountains, their altitude relative to the ground or sea level, which automatically aligns them with Earth's curvature. Sea level aligns with Earth's curvature. Riveting. Riveting. Thanks for playing.

Oh, we thought something else out, or we'll move through. Yeah, yeah, level is perpendicular to the pull of gravity, so it's perpendicular to the centre of mass of the Earth, which always will point towards the centre, so as you go around the curvature of the Earth, it will constantly change to be towards the centre, and I don't see what's so hard about this. Flat is curved. Flat and level aren't the same thing. They're not the same thing.

I can have a book that's flat on an angle. It's not level, but it is flat. Thank you. So level is curve. Flat and level are the same thing. You know this, Angel. Let's move on from there, fellas. We'll maybe be able to unpack a bit more on another day. But let's ask the next question. Natty Mo says, planes don't adjust for curve because they balance forces. That's the fifth Super Chat for Natty Mo. Thank you so much.

Planes don't adjust for curvature because there is no curvature to adjust for. That's why the pilots treat the Earth as a flat stationary plane. They don't account for curvature. You cannot adjust for curvature because the plane would actually not generate lift. It needs to have a positive attitude to generate lift. If the plane has a negative attitude, it won't be able to generate lift. So if it's curving around a globe, it won't actually generate lift. Why would it need to have a negative attitude in order to go around the curve?

All it needs to do is maintain a slight angle above the tangent of the Earth. If we have a straight, if we have a road and it's curving like this in the distance, right? It's curving, but we're only going to drive straight on the road. We're going to deviate off the road, right?

Is it a hill or is it like a turn? A road on the ground. A road on the ground is going like this, curving left. A road on the ground. We're going straight on the road. Yeah, yeah, okay. So the direction... Will we deviate off the road if we just do a straight line? Yeah, surely.

But that doesn't happen on the Earth. Angel, the direction of the car affects the direction of the motion of the vehicle, obviously. However, as you well know, a plane can point upwards while decreasing in altitude. So the direction that the plane is pointing doesn't need to affect the direction that it's moving. Further proving my point that they don't adjust for curvature. That's how a plane lands, you know its nose is pointed up, right?

That further proves my point, thank you. So if it was pointed up, why isn't it going up? Why isn't it going off into space? That's to generate lift. It's to have a positive attitude. So it could go around the curve while maintaining a proper point of notice. Nathan, your body is loud even when you're not. What's going on over there? I know you want to hurry it up. Is this a debate still, bro? Let's answer the questions, please. Nathan, you're allowed to leave. I'm talking? Crab Baby Blitz? Mr. Twitch? Nathan.

Is this where we break down? You're the one that's crying, Nathan. That's the thing. Is this where we start to break? I want to answer all the questions. I'm here for the audience. I know you guys are reality deniers. You didn't have any evidence of reality at all during this debate. We had all the evidence. Thanks for playing. Bye.

I'm having fun. I just, I just want to know, you know, like I said, I see you doing this. I'm just, I'm just letting you know that even if I put him on mute, he's got, he's, he's got that loud body vibes, right? He goes from here to there. Right. So, uh, let's ask those questions, uh, guys, for sure. Uh, we do have all kinds, but, I do appreciate the panel going through it and, uh, uh,

Having a good time being in good spirits taking your super chats with grace You know we appreciate that Megan Marie says great job tonight Ryan earth equals bread equals Flurf equals poop emoji again my goodness. What's with you guys? Thanks, Megan Marie Ask some questions, please With that being said I'm gonna go check our

panel live chat uh poll just let me see right quick where we're sitting so there has been quite a shift we got 16 for that loaf of bread so that's just the trolls they the people that aren't playing by the rules 30 for flat and then 55 for a globe and that's with almost 2 000 votes

So we've got a lot of interest right now in what you guys are putting down. A thousand people are still hanging out. So I'm going to end the poll. We're going to do who did you find the most compelling on the panel tonight? And let's ask a question I pulled out of our live chat, actually, just out of a plea of goodwill.

and it was from Minecraft Player. They wanted to ask, let's keep this one quick, just out of respect for the people that did pay money for Super Chat, to the Flat Earthers, do I need to believe the Earth is flat to go to heaven? No, you don't. You don't need to believe the Earth is flat to know it's flat either. You can test it yourself. Next question.

Alright, let's move right along and thank you so much. Yeah, we've got lots of questions that will keep us on track and all kinds that will derail us. So let's get through some of those. Simone Allen said, kindly like the stream slash video. Yes, do like it. That would be great. Smash the like button. Do that. Share it out in the spaces that you like having these debates.

Yeah, we have a lot of fun. Megan Maurice, yeah, she's not a fan of yours, Nathan. She said, Nathan, why are you so scared? Don't run away. Well, Nathan's not going anywhere from the looks of things. We're moving through the super chats. Once again, we're having a good time, so don't worry about it, guys. We like having fun. That's all it's all about. Dr. Blitz, explain pendulous veins on a gyroscope.

Sorry, I don't even know what a pendulous vane is. I'm not an aircraft mechanic, so if somebody has a good explanation, I've never heard that phrase before. Yeah, I don't. Does anybody have any help here? No?

There's nothing to do with the warplane. Yeah, it keeps the gyroscope more rigid in space, so it actually doesn't help their argument. So the internet, like, I don't know if this is true, but the internet is telling me, because I'm not an aircraft person, pendulous vanes are a system of air holes and vanes in an attitude indicator that keep a gyroscope upright using gravity. Make of that what you will. No, using vacuums.

Well, thanks for unpacking a little bit there, Angel, and helping out our super chatter there. So Pookie says, Earth is flat. Tell your mom before I do. All right. Wait, what did you say about my mama, Ryan?

Tell your mom before I do. That's what he said. That's an inside joke. I was doing activism on the Las Vegas Strip, and I said what he just said, and some guy got in my face and then went and told the police that I told him to tell his mom the earth is flat before Pookie does. I got it all on video. It's on my TikTok. It's freaking hilarious. Oh, man. I feel like I'm getting purposely hit with clips here, guys. Glovers are melting. You're having fun. That's all that matters. NASA Security Force says...

Yeah, we already read that one. Maybe that's the same one. I'm just going to double check. We'll come back to it. Balthazar, sorry, you know, been doing my Bible stuff, guys. Balthazar says, flying along a great circle arc is very similar to riding a surfboard over a wave. The physical number of particles of air under the wing decrease as you go tangentially, and the plane flies a curve.

Not according to the pitch data. Not according to, test it yourself, the floor is flat. Stop pretending, airplane. How do you think the pitch data data, sorry I'm not British, or I don't know where you're from, Angel. How do you think the pitch data, how do you think it takes the message? How do you think it takes the data? Like what mechanism do you think it uses to take the data? Attitude indicator. Using? A gyroscope. A gyroscope that is level with what?

The horizon. The tangent. So like, if the Earth is a globe, it would measure the same thing.

So now the gyroscape's not rigid in space, is what you're saying. Specifically, they have to use, apparently, they have to use these pendulous vanes to account for that. That's exactly what they're talking about. Not all planes have pendulous vanes. Pendulous vanes were invented 25 years after that. It's indicated to fallacy to even claim them. Next question. You better stop talking because you don't know what you're talking about. You already admitted that. Now you're Googling it, trying to ad hoc explanations. And we've done our research, so I would just...

I didn't know what they were. That's why I said apparently. Let's move on there, fellas. Bob says, Nathan, show the sun vanishing to a point. Angel showed it setting but changing size slightly. Which is it?

it depends on atmospheric conditions what's going on yeah so but it wouldn't change at all if we were on a globe religion it would get bigger because when lights go through denser mediums which is what we have towards earth's surface when the sun is setting it would appear larger but instead it shrinks 20 to 40 debunking the global religion on top of that we have the uv light index corpuscular rays and the local light illumination from the sun above the horizon so thanks for that

Yeah, well for a stark crepuscular ray, it's not parallel. You can see that in a railroad track that appears to me. They're not, you know, they'll never meet. That's fine.

And the crepuscular rays are going down towards the ground, not your eyes, so it's not convergent. Can I talk or are you just going to... Let's let Mark respond because Mark has had some time over there to stew about what he's been hearing. So go ahead, Mark. Yeah, and so one thing I've noticed is when they always point to this changing size, they never use a solar filter. It never happens. It's just this kind of... You know, I don't know why the sun could be brighter. Excuse me, are you okay there? Yeah.

Yeah, okay. Can you shut up? So why should it get brighter going through more of a medium? I'd love them to explain that. Why, if going through atmosphere, I mean, it basically is the reason why that the light turns red. Why should it get brighter going through a thicker atmosphere or more atmosphere? Why is that? He said it gets larger due to lensing. What are you trying to show there, Nathan? You didn't even...

Didn't even hear what he said. Why should we get larger? I'm trying to show the sun shrinking in angular size with the solar filter, just like the video I showed you where it shrinks without a solar filter because that's what it does. You know what? You guys should go test it yourself. You know what? I'm going to show mine again because this guy just cooked himself. I didn't use the solar filter. I used the ND1 million, buddy.

No, I was referring to Nathan's video, thanks. But, you know, you can... Okay, no, you were referring to my video. No, no, no. You showed a video without a solar filter, like Nathan did. I did. Me? Really? I didn't say you. I didn't say you. I said I'm referring to Nathan's video. We did both. So what are you crying about what I did for? We did both of them. So stop crying. Next question.

All right, now I want to know. Stop trying, Nathan. If you want to go, just go. Just one second, hold on. You're sitting there being childish. Hold on, hold on, hold on. Get a little flag and wave it. Wait, wait, wait, one second, hold on. We already wheeled all that in. We've got Angel sharing the screen here, so let's just try to keep on track. This sunset did not even intersect the horizon. I didn't even let it touch the horizon. Now, did the sun change size? Did the sun change size, Mark?

It may have like contorted a small amount like 10 tender. Where's the 60% change in size? Please show me that I never I never said 60 Yeah, you said 60% I said 20 where is that no show it to me show it to me. I need a 40 That's definitely like 5 or 10 20 but that's not 20% show me the 20% though. Try me This one. So this one got you want to wrap it up in?

Yeah, why won't you show it setting? I don't know why you're trying to entice the other speaker to leave. We got lots of super chats. Did the sound change size?

Mark, did the sun change size? - Wrap it up. - Hold on. - Okay, if you want to go to the next question, that's fine. Like I said, maybe I'm misinterpreting there, but yeah. Let's go to the next question. - Can I ask a question? - We already explained that it marginally changes size. - Super chat, Wade. - That it's not-- - It's not a super chat. - Nathan, it seems like you don't actually want to have a conversation about this, which is fine. - We already had the conversation. You lost the debate. - Oh, cry more, Nathan. Wow, listen to him squeal. It's incredible. Just go, run. That's what you want to do.

So this is the guy who said that the sundae doesn't change size and I didn't use a solar filter. He's just lying. I was referring to Nathan's video. No, you're referring to me. No, no, no. Let me answer. You're accusing me. So he already explained it changes 10%. You said 20%. That's clearly a lie. Everyone knows you're lying. They can see it themselves. It's not 20% to 30% as you claim. I can show you the count of pixels. No, excuse me. I'm talking now. Oh, no, excuse me. So you can basically...

See that you are lying about that and I was referring to Nathan's video of the Sun setting where he just doesn't use a solar filter because he doesn't want to see the truth so Angel I'm actually genuinely curious. This isn't asked in bad faith. So you have the two different videos of the sunset, right? Why are the size differences different between the two videos? Why isn't why isn't it shrinking by the same amount in both times under your worldview?

Because one of them didn't touch the horizon, and they're different length videos. One was much longer, one was shorter. So I mean like, is this something that, like you still have this footage right? So presumably you could compare the size shrinkage in both foot, in both videos over the same amount of time, and see if they're the same. I suspect that they wouldn't be, because it looks like the second video was a lot more hazy. How does the sun change size on a globe model? 23% on 20?

apparently the same way that it does for you angel that's a non sequitur bro listen to what he's saying listen to his argument it's a non-sequitur the sun changes angular size we count the pixels 20 to 40 percent no marks you're making up that we said 60 we never said that look so all i'm asking is why it changes why it changes by a different amount don't don't misinterpret me i'm just asking why it changes by different amounts on different days

dr twitch the question was for us we've gone back and forth for about a minute now are we doing that i'm sorry are we are we doing name calling now yeah you did what i did no i didn't what did what do we call you your interest in the interest

I said that you're scientifically illiterate, which is true, but it's not name-calling. Alright, we're getting in the weeds. Alright, I let it go for too long. See how that goes. Don't maybe take off those permissions to unmute yourself, guys. You've been doing so good.

Ever since then. But, yeah, thanks, guys. Let's undo the screen share. I just want to make one point. Just want to wrap it up. No, let's move on. Come on. We've heard enough from this guy, seriously. No, I didn't. This guy called me a liar. To be fair, Mark, if you're...

I don't want to be unfair to what we're seeing on screen. So, Angel, you want to wrap up what you got here. This guy called me a liar. This guy called me a liar that I didn't use a solar filter, whatever. It's on screen, 23% change that I personally got, and we've got upwards of 40% from other people. I'll let Mark respond when you've wrapped up at this point, just to be fair, okay?

Yeah, so I wasn't talking about you specifically. Hold on, Mark. I want to give Angel the floor. I want to let him make his point so that he... I thought he'd finish. Yeah, I want him to lay it out on the table, make sure that he's got it all there. I think he was just, like I say, making an example for the audience. So go ahead, Angel. Yeah, so how does that work on a globe model? Oh my gosh, Angel. When you're not walking, when the sun doesn't move. Mark. Seeing as you called me a liar, yeah.

Yeah, so I'd like to be able to respond unanswered. So when I said basically they never use solar filters, I was talking generally about flat earthers, not you specifically. You've got to understand not everything is about you, Angel. So, you know, you can wag your fingers and cry all you want. That's fine. You generally, flat earthers never use solar filters. And that's what I said. Now, as for the

change of size, basically it's atmospheric conditions. As we've explained multiple times already, and for some reason you are so hard of hearing or ignorant enough not to be able to get that through your head. So this is just going over old territory. And

well, just playing with your toys and, you know, having a paddy about something that I said generally about flat earthers. I wasn't, I was actually referring to Nathan's video. So I wasn't referring to yours. Oh, right. So you can't, anyway, go.

I already said we explained it with atmosphere. Are you deaf? Is there something wrong with your hearing? Oh, I meant to Angel if you want to- That was not- 40% now! First it's 20, then it's 30, now it's 40! Do we hear 60? Going what? Going to- Do we hear 60, ladies and gentlemen? Is there a 60 out there? 23% change. 23% now! Oh, it's back to 23! Okay. So just to be clear, under the Flat Earth worldview, it should decrease in size to zero if it's actually fading away due to perspective. Yes, correct.

Correct. Alright. How do you know that? We're a little more than halfway. Angel, please. Can you stop asking them questions, bro? Please. I'm begging you. Hold on. Like, once again, Nathan, if you need to go, are you in a hurry? Are you in a hurry? No, we have questions from the audience. We do have questions from the audience. And the questions... Are you responding to Ryan? No, you are responding to me and I just put you on mute.

If they want to ask questions to each other, that's totally fine. That's the point of the Q&A is to try to spur on more discussion. That's awesome. I've given you the permission to take yourselves off mute. It's been really interesting. It's been fun. I want to be able to unpack with the audience. But like I said, yeah, you're berating your partner now, and that's not going to work out. I didn't berate him. I asked him to please stop asking the donuts questions because we already did that during the debate where we cooked them.

- Oh, we're donuts now, are we? - Next question.

Can we stop the insults? Let's go to the next question there. Icy Spin. Nathan, can you remind us... Ryan, can we stop the insults, please? Like, seriously, what is this? Well, let's just try to behave on both sides. But like I said, it's going to play out in the eye of the public's fear if people think it's bad. Yeah, I just don't like bogans calling me names. Yeah, I was going to say, if people think that, you know, what's happening on screen is fair... You are a bogan, Nathan. What are you doing? I mean, I'm trying to respond. I hear you. Now I've got to put you on mute. My God. Anyway...

If people in our live chat don't think that the person on screen is being very compelling or that they're behaving poorly, it's going to play out in the eye of the public sphere. Like I said, I don't want to police you guys directly on what you're saying. I just want to make sure that we're staying on point and...

Yeah, just following some of the timelines here. But yeah, I do want to allow for some back and forth as well, Nathan. So Nathan, if you're in a hurry, you know, like I said, we go for hours sometimes for these debates. But if you want to wrap things up more quickly, I'll give you a minute as soon as you're ready for it. Just let me know. All right.

It's been two and a half hours. How many more questions we got? We've got, we're only halfway. So if you need to jet out, let's get going, bro. No, no, no, no, no, not, not, not necessarily. Let's just do me a favor. Angel, please. Thank you. I, I, I'm not sure what you mean by angel. Thank you. Like I'm,

No, just next question. Just get on with the question. Okay, let's carry on. I just don't understand what this is all about. MM84Angel, will you give up the flat earth nonsense when you see the 24-hour sun in Antarctica? No. All right, let's ask the next one where that was direct. Megan Marie Nathan... Yeah, we already read that one, sorry. Natty Mo says, flatties, will MC Toon's compass work in Antarctica?

oh no we'll see what happens next question and why don't make a prediction and then you could use that prediction to verify your model if your model is true and it makes a good prediction that would be verification if your if your model is false and the prediction comes if the prediction doesn't come true then it would be evidence against your model why not just do something i i guess the question is should it work under your model is the question i can't make a prediction i left my crystal ball at my beach house so next question

Well, you say you've got a model and you're claiming the size of the shape of the Earth, then you should be able to tell us whether something should work in the South Pole or not.

I'll take the closing argument since the question was for me. Science starts with observation. It's called the scientific method, Donuts. So it's not just conjuring up what you think will happen somewhere you've never been and then wondering what strangers are going to report about it. What a waste of time, bro. So hold on. So was that your closing argument? Are we going to be letting you go, Nathan, so that we can continue through the Q&A without you saying next question every –

Like a couple of minutes. Look, I almost slipped there, guys. I almost let out my true self there. I almost said it. I almost just said some bad language because God damn it. We're trying to ask the questions. Not you, Ryan. No, I'm saying like you're driving me half crazy here. You're driving me half crazy trying to rush through the questions. Like I said, I love asking the questions. It's for the audience. That's why we have these debates. You're...

Trying to rush through the questions. It's not kind to our audience. So if you want to go, you can go. If you're done. He said he was done. No, are you done as in you're going to go? Or are you done as a next question? Bro, I'm here for the questions. The whole reason I do this show. Let's get going. Okay. All right. Then stop rushing the questions.

Like, ask me again, and I'm going to boot your ass out. That's how it's going to go. I'm fucking sick of it. I heard the Canadian word. Natty Moe, all right? Yeah, I swear. I swear, all right? Natty Moe. Flatties, will MC Tunes, Compass Work of the Antarctic, we asked that one. You're throwing me the, I swear. Aorta says, yo, guys, I got flyers. Come grab some.

I do have flyers, Bible and science flyers. Email me, flatearthflyers at gmail.com. I've sent out probably 15 packages this week. More flyers than I've ever mailed out. Flat Earth is exploding. Met three Flat Earthers before my 9 o'clock walk the other day with Gio. So they're everywhere now. Used to take me forever to find them. So cheers. We are waking people up. Everyone's doing their job. Like and share the live. Yeah, you shouldn't be getting science flyers from Nathan. I hear you hang out at schools in Hand about Nathan. Is that true?

Alright, let's move on to the next question. We've already... Yeah, that's it. No, no, no, thank you. Jonathan Gendler says, "Can each side please explain the Coriolis effect?" Yeah, it doesn't rotate, so there is no Coriolis effect. When you let go of a healing balloon, there's no deviation. Yeah, so the Coriolis effect is just what happens when you have different parts of a thing moving at different rates. So, for example, a good way to visualize this is like a carousel. Like, if you throw a ball on a carousel,

because the inside is moving more slowly than the outside it will appear to curve because in order for it from your perspective sitting on the carousel in order for it to appear to move in a straight line it has to move faster sorry slower over the part that's moving more slowly it's the same reason on a globe the equator is moving more quickly than say the 45 degree latitude

Yeah, though I will say the Earth is moving way, way slower than a carousel. Very, very slow. So a carousel, like if you rotated a carousel 15 degrees per hour, then you're seeing the speed of the Earth. Actually, can I show my screen really quick, James? Not James, Ryan. Yeah, no worries. Everybody has had a chance, so go for it. Yeah, yeah, yeah. Okay, one sec. Let me just pull up the... There's just a really good GIF that explains this pretty well. Let me just see it. Give me one second to find it.

Yeah, here we go. I have so many tabs open. Okay, here we go. So it's just this part on the right. Let me just open this up. It's just this, as long as it plays. So see the bottom one? It looks like it takes a closed path. That's what it would look like if you were sitting on the carousel. But from the top one's perspective, it's just moving in a straight line. That's all the Coriolis effect is. It's an apparent deviation, and we don't see that on the app.

We do, and we can measure it using something like a Compton generator, which you should look up. A hot air balloon. So, thanks for playing. This can be measured in a laboratory. Any other thoughts on the other side? Do you have anything to say there, Angel, before we move into the next question? No, that's it. Alright, let's see...

brutally honest as explained tectonic plate shift due to two continental drift or pressure when you have a disc earth with outer edge Why aren't all shifting plates not pushed to or over the edge because there's no resistance there?

So different minerals resonate at different frequencies. So if you have quartz and stuff underneath the earth and the sun and the stars are introducing electromagnetic energy to the earth and all those things are underground, which would add pressure to earth's surface. Now you have vibration and pressure. Things could heat up. Things could be moving. Everything is constantly seeking equilibrium. You have to think of reality in terms of frequency.

energy, and nature. Then you can get rid of this gravity nonsense. It's all relative density. Everything's equaling out. Things are following the path of least resistance. And Angel, what'd I miss? Yeah, everything's just seeking equilibrium and they're tectonic plates, right? And they go for many, many miles. They're not curvy. Yeah, they're plates. Plates are flat. Nathan, you misquoted Tesla. You misquoted Tesla, by the way.

Alright, let's move to the next question. And mxxd, yes, you sure were here for that, buddy. Let's carry on. Oh man, it's been a lot of fun. Let's see. All kinds of questions. I have skipped around a bit, so it's not nearly as intimidating as it might look for some of our mods who can see it. Because I have asked a few just that are out to lunch and not really going to help us out. So, Gal Carlos says, how high is the sun in the sky? To both.

Never measured it. Next question. About 93 million miles, give or take a million miles or two, depending on the time of year. Cool story. All right. Do you have anything to say there, Angel? I didn't hear you. No, I never measured it. I don't think you can measure it because we see the apparent location on both models immediately. All right. Any thoughts there, Mark? Yeah, it's just weird that they don't know. Like, we just don't know. All right. EconoNike says, panels are muffins cake.

Okay, I'm not sure what that's all about. Oh, two, three more Super Chats flying in. You guys are having too much fun with this. Jonathan Gendler. Brian, I'm sorry to interrupt. One of my channel, somebody in my chat has said that you missed a $5 Super Chat by ICSpin.

I will get to it. Don't worry. I've been moving around. I don't know. I'm just relaying it. Sure. No worries. Thanks for that. Jonathan Gendler says, Flat Bros, go raise $450,000 for the Virgin Galactic seat. I'm on it. Thanks. Wow. All right. Authentic G. He's an authentic G, guys. We can't mess around with this one. If the horizon is apparent, then it's not due to curvature. Okay.

Well, no, it's an apparent effect occurring to a geometric phenomenon, right? Like, you can have, like, imagine that the Earth was actually a sphere. The atmosphere could distort the location of where the horizon would appear to be, even though there's actually a geometric horizon there, right? That's all that's happening. This isn't hard to understand.

Nathan, that was a question to me. You don't have to do this. It's fine, Nathan. You can chill. That happens with optics all the time. Like you might see a mirage that has like a shimmering water where water is not. It doesn't mean the ground isn't there. It's just an optical effect. Just because an optical effect is there doesn't mean that there isn't something physical behind it.

All right, let's keep on going. So good job, excuse me, good job Blitzmark. How do flat earthers explain photos of the backside of the moon or deep space missions? Space violates natural law. You can't have a vacuum without a container. You can't have a gas pressure gradient without a container. They're saying they're existing together and they're not equalizing. So that violates natural law.

Yeah, NASA admits it's force over area. If you don't have force, you don't have gas pressure. If you don't have area, you don't have gas pressure. I just want to add space is a cartoon. Test the earth yourself. Cheers. There is force, gravity. There is area, the earth. Pressure. Yeah, you can measure pressure wherever you don't need. It doesn't need to be in a container.

Alright, Icy Spin says... Sorry, go ahead. The pressure gradient only exists because it's gravity. If it was just a container, it was equalized. Alright, Icy Spin says, Nathan, can you remind us of your conversation about X, Y, and Koff's Z-axis that you and the late, great Bob Nodal had in secrecy? 15 degrees? Question mark?

Yeah, the ring laser gyroscope measures light and the light has a preferred direction. It's an ethereal wind and that energy is coming from the sky. The sky is moving at 15 degrees an hour, roughly. And so that's what we're measuring. And yeah. Yeah. Sagnak, who invented the technology of the ring laser gyro, said it was the vortex of the ether that it was measuring.

- Can you demonstrate this ethereal wind and its effect on lasers, please? Can you demonstrate that? - Also Dayton Miller and Wang proved like with that hundreds of thousands of measurements that it changes during the time of the year, changes with altitude, changes during eclipses. There's also the ELISA effect which changes the Foucault pendulum during eclipses because that's also another effect of our rotating electromagnetic field which would not happen on a cartoon globe religion. They would lose all magnetism.

Can you tell me how many... Almost done, Twitch. Yeah, almost done, Nathan. Can you tell me how many components the electromagnetic field has? 666. Can I finish? No, you're wrong. But, I mean, just keep spouting nonsense that you don't know anything about. That's fine. Oh, okay. Well, that's the math on the rest of your globe religion, so I thought I'd get that one right. Darn. Okay, so, yeah. Space is a cartoon. Test the Earth yourself. Thanks for playing.

I love how they just ignore my question about demonstrating the ethereal wind that blows through the ring laser gyroscope somehow. Yeah, good one. Maybe it's the same wind that powers the ships at like sort of incredible speeds, maybe. Well, hopefully that was the chat. Same wind coming out of their asses.

Yeah, I'm sorry. I'm sorry. I'm not going to swear. Hopefully that was the chat that I missed, ICSpin. If you have another one that I might have missed, well, I'll get there. I'll keep looking around, make sure I didn't miss anything. You can always let me know in the live chat too, even though I've got to keep pretty focused here. Let's see. Jonathan Gendler says, yeah, we got that one, Jonathan.

see what i said i gotta stay focused charles we just keep doing that you need an assistant oh man yeah somebody to queue me up that would be great yeah oh man ah that would be lovely yeah you guys are getting big time there's so much there's so much to keep track of you know and just just keeping things flowing on screen is enough uh let alone just kind of like rooting through making sure that people are friendly but that's where uh you know it's really nice that we have our mods hannah mxxd have been hanging out in the live chat we really appreciate you guys

And MXXD is right. I apologize for my poor language. I will get deported for that. I don't know what came over me. All right. Blake says, it's not Canadian-like, you know? Blake says, question, why don't, this might be a similar one or just, no, I think that's the same one. Sorry. John, Globers built all the cool stuff we have to enjoy on this earth. Flat earthers just say Globers are wrong. What have flat earthers done for society?

Mad airplanes that check out the rock was built 610 years ago It still works to this day and they didn't know anything about gravity and they didn't pretend they were on a cartoon tilted globe spinning through space twerking the mumble rap can I uh Really

connection on my phone really quick you guys just live in la la land as long as you're playing you said that flat earth has got planes like who are everyone's like the people flat earth is the people that believe that the earth is flat and to the best of my knowledge you know wright brothers were not flat earthers they

Everyone's a flat earther. Oh, so because you assume everybody's a flat earther, you can say that flat earthers did everything. This is sophistry. This is nonsense. This is just saying, hey, I'm right because I'm right. Congratulations. You have made a spurious argument. Congratulations. Yeah, that's why planes don't address the curvature, like you admit.

- All right, let's get into that next super chat. I see another one came in from Vincent there. You guys are really active in live chat. I wanna once again remind our over a thousand audience watching right now, smash that like button, boost us up in the algorithm.

Not, but sorry. I was pulling something up. Tell the people to like the scream. Ryan, can I show something really quick? You could grab a pen and take notes while the host is talking. Well, we might circle around to what you may want to inject there, but I will have to push it forward for now. Sorry. This was about what we were talking about. I was just looking for the photo. Oh, you wanted to... Oh, right. I did say you could put up the photo. You can show the audience, but I can't guarantee that you're going to get a chance to expound.

It's just a photo of a painting from around the same time the Prague clock was built and it has globes in it. All right. Well, thank you so much. We'll have to move on. Gravity says Island Guy has seen the curvature of the earth while saving a litter of kittens from a raging river. Who wouldn't save kittens?

Monsters. All right, Nathan, drop the attitude with Ryan. Nobody cares. Nobody gives. Nobody gives a damn. Anyway, all right, it's just you're triggering me because you're using lyrics. Let's see. John says, yeah, we got that one. Ali, yeah. Mark, it's not a rock that stays there all the time. That's literally what the geometrical horizon is.

That's quoting you, Mark. So they're saying, Mark says it's not a rock that stays there all the time. That's literally what the geometrical horizon is. Can you expound on what this rock is? What are they talking about? Does anybody know? The hill that blocks boats that you call curvature. The hill that blocks boats? Not a hill. Yeah, not a hill. So it's not a geometric location, then? That's what he's trying to say.

Well, the curvature is a geometric phenomenon. The horizon is just an apparent effect of that geometric phenomenon. Well, Elie Yer did follow up and say, "Mark, not about just the curve. It's about Flat Earth versus Globe Earth. Does Mark himself talk?" This is very serious. There's a lot of stammering.

Yeah, I'm not sure, Elie Meir, what you're trying to do with these chats. They're very strangely worded. If you have a question, though, if you can word it into a question and not this analysis. Yeah, maybe he thinks I should have talked more. Yeah, I can talk a lot. I sort of, you know, wanted Dr. Blitz to talk as well, but I think I've done enough talking. I don't think I, you know, took a back seat in this one.

I don't know what you're talking about. Yeah, shushy shushy. No, I'm just picking. Mark, it's great to have you back on the show. And I must admit, I may not have talked because the Flat Earthers didn't actually address my points so much. They just sort of evaded and ducked and dodged away from the things that I brought up. So, you know. All right. First super chat on our stream from Austin Chestnut says, explain the relative upside down moon on the Southern Hemisphere.

Yep, no problem. You draw a six on the sky or the ground, and you walk around it, and it magically, because you're on a ball, turns into a nine. Just kidding. You're just changing your orientation to the sky. The sky is a map and a clock.

It's been there for thousands of years. They used it to celestial navigate. They did astroarchaeology, lining giant megalithic buildings up with the sky. I went to the Georgia Guidestones and Polaris was in a little tiny hole drilled through like four feet of stone. And on those stones it talked about decreasing the world pop to 500 million, and then they tore the stones down. So interesting fact about the Georgia Guidestones.

Polaris even moves on a daily basis over the course of one night. It just moves about a few arc seconds because it's quite close to 90 degrees. Not exactly 90 degrees, but quite close. But we can actually measure the change in position of Polaris over the course of years. It moves about 1/70th of a degree per year. So over the course of 40 years, it would move less than one degree, which is smaller than the size of the hole that the Georgia Guidestones had in it. So you wouldn't have expected it to leave, but you're not interested in that data at all.

Yeah, and a long time ago, the North Star wasn't Polaris. It was Vega, I think it was. So it absolutely moves. Okay, let's go forward. Max V says, Floriffs have not answered any questions, honestly, because they honestly, if they were honest, they'd admit they were grifters taking advantage of uneducated people. Thanks for playing. Oh, hi, Mark, they say. Oh, hi, Mark. Oh, hi, Mark.

Yeah. Way to do that. I did not. I did not hit her. Okay. Oh, hi, Mop. All right. That's enough room references. All right. NASA Security Force, I am going to read your super chat, but I don't think we're going to engage with it. Nathan, you got owned. Thanks for playing. You baby back. Bad words. I pay for this just so you have to hear the truth for once. You are without intellect. Thanks, NASA Security Force. I love you.

We you want to respond? I I know you love the haters, but you can go ahead all my tech lovers out there all the hate you guys send out you guys promote flat earth more than you know You guys have made me like almost famous on the internet and when this explodes and people find out that we've been lied to about the shape of the earth There's a reason nobody's gonna know your name Cheers your infamous night and infamous is the way you're looking for me. I

Cry for me, Argentina. All right. So this person named Wouter Q. Van Belleghem, very long name on YouTube. They're not a fan of yours, so you might want to say something to them in response to this. They say, Angel and Nathan, did you ever hear from anybody that you are arrogant, reacting as children, not even listening, laughing when you do not understand stuff? Why do you even bother with these debates? Do you want to say something to Wouter?

No, no, we were the ones showing all the evidence. I mean, I showed the horizon not being a geometric location, I showed the boat coming back into view over the horizon, which they're calling geometric curvature. I mean, I showed all the evidence. We were putting things on the screen. I showed the sun shrinking in angular size, which had never happened on the globe. To be fair, I did offer to show you any citations, any data, any evidence that you wanted, you just weren't interested.

So, you know, back up the claims that I made. Next one coming in from Gravity. Here, we'll go back to our main screen there for our audience. There's been a lot of screen sharing. You know how it is for a Flat vs. Globe debate. Hey, smash the like button. It's been juicy. It's been fun. It always is expected to be. And let's keep it going. Gravity says, Island guy has seen the curvature. Oh, we already read that. Johnny Orville says, to Flat Earth.

Why can't we see further than the horizon on clear, calm, high visibility days? Why is the horizon not as far as the eye can see? Alright, I gotta buy a book to teach these Globert cupcakes what the horizon is, but if you read this book, The Art of Perspective, it tells you the horizon is an imaginary line, and it's where the ground, the flat land, is what it says in this book, appears to meet the sky. And then there's a vanishing point. Now it details what the vanishing point is with a definition.

We're receding parallel lines. Google do parallel lines curve. Google will tell you no. So that's a globe debunk right there. What's the name of that book, Nathan? I just want to look it up. Almost done, Twitch. Can you just tell me the name of the book?

Yeah, when I'm done, Twitch. Can I finish reading? Please just let me know. The vanishing point is where receding parallel lines that debunk the global religion meet or vanish. The word vanish means to completely disappear. That's also a simple Google search. In one point perspective, there is only one vanishing point. So things wouldn't disappear multiple times. This is The Art of Perspective by Phil Metzger. Thanks for playing.

Alright, Angel of Elevation, let's see, Marks. Sorry, I did want to respond because, yeah, so. Alright, we can keep it to round 15. Yeah, yeah, yeah. So that's a book for artists, not a book for scientists. I don't care what an artist says about the shape of the Earth insofar as we can actually measure and take data for things. Why not use a science book rather than an art book?

I'll tell you why, if I could, since the question was for me. That's, uh, the shape of the Earth is in science. So we're just talking and describing about what we're seeing in reality. You just have to observe the curve, or not observe the curve. The problem is, you have level 10 globe goggles on, you don't test the Earth, you have a cartoon in your background, and you didn't show a single shred of evidence this entire debate. Thanks for playing. Alright, just, uh, bear with me here on the second. Alright, cool.

Angel or angle of elevation mark as since you claim moon orbits once a month What's your excuse for lunar? Analema that occurs every month Is that the Sort of impossible eclipse kind of thing or what are you talking about? That's all right next question mark doesn't know what you're talking about We do oh the an lemur is the the figure eight thing yeah, I

Maybe. I don't know. Why don't you Google it? So an analemma generally happens when you have an orbit that's not elliptical, when you have an orbit that's inclined. So if there is a lunar analemma, which I've never heard before, but if there is one, that would be because the Earth, the moon's orbit is inclined by five degrees and its orbit is not perfectly circular. It's slightly elliptical. The inclination is called lunar libration. It has nothing to do with the figure eight pattern. But thanks for playing. You guys know about your model. That's OK. OK. Whatever you say, buddy.

Yeah. You're right. That's why we won the debate. I mean, it's not. Look, Nathan, nobody that's won a debate has to tell people they did. That's just coping. I know. You're right. I don't have to. I just did. I chose to. No, tell me again. Tell me again. I love hearing it. Please. Hit me, baby, one more time. Stop singing like Backstreet Boys songs to me. Glovers are weird.

Did you just seriously do that? Did you just seriously try to gaslight? That's... what are you doing? Waiting for Ryan to show up so I can answer more questions from the audience. What are you... I'm watching somebody sing to themselves and then blame somebody else. It's kind of wild.

Don't cry for me, Argentine. Are you okay? Welcome back, Ryan. All right, I see you. Good to see you. Yeah, yeah. I hear you. Every once in a while, bladder nature calls. You see how it goes. All right, Angel, you wanted me to take you off mute there, buddy, so you want to respond, I imagine, to some of what you just said there, or what's going on? No worries. Muckery didn't know what the NLM was. No worries. All right. Let me turn off my speakers before we get feedback there. But luckily, we have a physicist with us, which is great.

I described what the analemma is, but... No, you described vibration. Five degrees, moon's apparent. No, that causes the tilt in the orbit. I'll tell you. Yeah, the tilt in the orbit causes the analemma. It's so easy to use the washroom with that in the background. I'm just picking, guys. You guys have been great. But yeah, no, I was trying to be quick there. Ryan, can I respond?

You want to respond to what? Okay. We have a sun analema and a lunar amalema. He just said that it's caused by the tilt of the Earth, but the moon... Yeah, and the non... It's not the tilt of the Earth. Hold on. He wants to have a chance to respond. He's misquoting me. He's misquoting me. What do you want me to do? We'll let you respond. Can you wait till I'm done, Twitch? Hey, can you avoid name-calling, or should I just start calling you mean names, too? Like, we can do that. Please do. You literally Twitched during my debate with you. That's your name forever and ever and ever is Dr. Twitch. Go watch my debate with you. Okay, Bogan. Just settle down.

Okay? You start twitching and admit that you twitched. Look, Bogan, just settle down. Stop it. Bogan. It doesn't seem like we're going to be able to get into... Alright. Just hold your head. Hey, Baldilocks. Baldilocks, just calm down. What?

Have some more fluoride water. Have some more fluoride water. You seem a bit triggered. I'm good, Potato. I don't know. It just seems like I'm... Oh, man. All right. Here we go. Here we go. We're going around the panel. Mute, mute, mute, mute, mute. That's a great time. I love that. You guys are all having a fun time. That's good. It's wild. Every once in a while here on these panels, I swear, you know, we got to just go right out to the weeds. And it's totally fine. It's modern day debate. It's live. It's uncensored. It's uncensored.

That's what we're here for. Our audience is tuned in. I hope you're having as much fun as I am, guys. This has been definitely an interesting debate. I've once again removed the ability to take yourselves off mute. You asked for the good graces of Rai, and now that's right. I've submitted my all power again. All right, let's ask those questions. We're going to try to keep it reeled in there a little bit, guys.

Thanks again to our live chat, though. This has been really fun. I'm going to start that new poll right after I read this super chat. NASA Security Forces, Nathan. Oh, man. See, I was going to say that wrong. No, you're going to pick on me, NASA. Ptolemiac. Ptolemiac? The P is silent. Genius. But I totally would have said Ptolemiac. Okay? So, oh, man. Go ahead if you'd like to respond there, Nathan.

Yeah, I just want to say the Ptolemaic model was, I call it, I don't care what I call it. The thing is, I'm always corrected by Globers. They're like, that's not how you say it. Because I do my own research. So when I read these words on the internet, I say them how they look and how I read them. I don't sit in a classroom and listen to some professor tell me what everything is.

I do my own research. I'm putting things together on my own. That's why I have a Silicon Moon theory and I have a really good pin video on my TikTok about how I think the dome is gold and pretty interesting stuff. Ask one of these Globers if they've ever came up with anything on their own. - Yeah, I'm published in like 10 journals.

You've never done a piece of research yourself if you've ever done a piece of independent research in your life. They put my paper in a book. Literally, wait, no, no. So I have to be super, super clear here. Research is not just reading and listening to what other people say. Research is when you actually come up with your own ideas, test them, model them, whatever, and then submit them to the world. Research is not just watching YouTube videos, dumbass. Sorry, language.

Blitz, how many times have you tested the Earth yourself with high power optics? How many times have you been on National Geographic Blitz? I don't know the camera, I've tested the shape of the Earth. Oh man, we're having a... We're having a... Oh wait, you just said... ...pig-stream contest, guys. What's going on? You've never tested the shape of the Earth. You've never tested the shape of the Earth. With all steps. With cameras. I don't have a high power camera. I've done it in other ways. How many times have you been to space? Space is fake. Space doesn't exist. Look at your background. So you haven't been. So you haven't been. You have a cartoon. Oh. And you're asking if we've been there?

Your cartoon? Are you serious? Crazy, bro. Next question. So what? It's a picture. Everyone knows it's a picture. Are you okay? Is your brain working? What am I asking? I don't know why I would ask that. That's incredible. Angle of elevation. Angle of elevation has a question there. That's like saying, hey, you've seen a cartoon of a roadrunner, so roadrunners aren't real. Hold on a second there, Mark. Here's your logic.

We got a next question there, Mark. I don't want to put you on mute there. Angle of Elevation says, if we don't see 24-hour sun, will they leave DeColte? D-A for DeColte. We'll see you next month. Next question. They'll just say because gravity or refraction.

No, no, that would absolutely be a problem for the... Yeah, it would be a problem. We already debunked their globe, so they're already denying it. So what are you going to say? Oh, so now it's like, well, they'll come up with some kind of excuse and we're saying, no, that would absolutely be a horrendous problem for the globe model. Yes, that would debunk the globe model. Well, yeah, it's called Antarctica. It arcs away. Yeah.

Even the name implies that it arcs away. The Arctic is where bears are. Antarctic is where there are not bears. That's what that means. You really need to learn etymology, like where words come from. You don't just put your own spin on it. Didn't you know an airplane is called an airplane because it flies over the horizontal plane of the Earth? You think an airplane is called an airplane because it's based on the planet Earth? It's not called an aeroplane, by the way.

Depends on what your dialect in English is. Yeah. All right. Sunflower asks, Flurfs, even if the 24-hour sun doesn't prove the Earth is a globe, can't you admit that it's harder to reconcile on a flat Earth than on a globe? We'll see next month. Next question. You have no clue, yeah? I mean, we'll see.

I agree with that statement. You do not have a clue. Yep. I agree. Yeah. I mean, they've already faked it twice. So why should we believe anything? No, you're clueless. No, but you're clueless. I got it. I got it. I'm clueless. I'm clueless. All right. Jarski says, can flurfs answer Mark's claims now? Oh yeah. Which one? I did. I did.

So one of my claims was about the circumnavigation of Antarctica. Is it still your contention that the cruise that you can book today uses high winds to increase their speed around Antarctica? Oh, not just that. I actually got a text message about this. Well, I was asking Angel. Go for it. Yeah, no problem. Don't worry, I will. I'm his partner in this debate, so if I want to respond instead of him... Oh, cry more, Nathan. So the Antarctic circumpolar current... Are you done?

- No. - Let me know when you're done. - Yeah, I'm done now. - Okay, thank you. The Antarctic Circumpolar Current, ACC, is the world's largest and strongest current flowing clockwise around Antarctica. Thanks for playing. - Yeah, that's what I mentioned before. - Can you go both directions around Antarctica? - Yes, you can. - You got a super chat to ask questions, Blitz. That's what the debate was for. - Yeah, so if you can go both directions, in one direction, it should take way longer than the other direction. So that'd be a good test of your hypothesis.

You should go test it, but you don't test anything. That's why the yacht race, they take the same... Nathan, I've done a trillion times more experiments than you have. We're not ones claiming that the figures that we've been given are wrong. So we're not doubting these captains are actually circumnavigating it on a globe, which is what they're claiming. You're the ones that are actually challenging it. You should go out and test it and prove that you're actually correct.

Go watch my YouTube. You didn't know what I'm talking about. I don't watch trash on YouTube, thanks. I'm not talking to you. I'm talking to the audience. Blitz said he's done more experiments than me and he didn't know what an experiment was when I asked him on his livestream. I mean, I didn't know what Google told you an experiment was. We do our own things. We have a scientific method that we follow. We do our own things. We just make up our own scientific methods. In science, we actually follow the scientific method instead of just whatever Google tells you. And you said in that debate the independent variable doesn't have to be the cause. Are you still sticking with that, Blitz?

I don't think I said that. Yeah, you did. The independent variable, like if the independent variable doesn't affect it, then it's not a cause though. That's definitely true. Yeah, you said it could be a correlating factor, not a cause. It could be. All right, I'm jumping on this one, guys. Dale asks, Dr. BS, is that how you inferred the sun is 400 times the size and 400 times the distance away from Earth and then the moon?

I think they're asking about the claims I made about Jupiter and how we infer the size, mass, and distance. No, no, no. So the whole business with the size of the sun is that we first needed to figure out...

sorry with the size of the moon we can we can figure out the size of the moon using parallax to figure out the size of the sun is a lot more tricky you have to use or what was what was originally done was using something called the transit of venus so you can see venus crossing the disk of the sun and by timing the amount of time it takes for venus to cross the sun from two different locations you can actually use trigonometry to figure out how far away uh the sun is it's it's not so complicated but it's enough that it would require a diagram or two to actually explain

All right. Let's carry on. Thank you so much to our audience for those super chats. Once again, pound the crap out of that like button, everybody. Boost us up in the algorithm. We really appreciate it. That's right. Yeah. Everybody on screen. Yes. Do the like dance or whatever you do. Right. I don't know what it is. Jonathan Gettler. What's going on, Nathan?

I was just saying tap the like button. Oh, yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Okay. Yeah. Yeah. Good. Good. Good. Okay. All right. I thought you were trying to get my attention there for a second. All right. So Tiffany in the PNW says, I have Nathan's flyer. It is a police exhibit. I'm not sure. I'm not sure what they're. Oh, they got it from the evidence room when I was arrested for, from a public sidewalk telling children the earth is flat. And then they falsely arrest me and drop the charges. So.

You mean yelling incoherently? All right, we're not going to... I said large bodies of water do not curve. We're not going to go into any of that there, fellas. I think that's just... Incoherently. All right, for good manners, let's just carry on. Guy Foreigner says, Angel, from November to March, in the southern countries, the sun rises in southeast. This is completely impossible on the flat earth, a so-called model. Please explain.

I'll take it lines of convergence come from the right and move towards the center So as the Sun is coming towards you or away from you due to perspective It'll move slightly left or slightly right Globers trying to tribute cardinal directions to perspective Because they don't understand how their eyes work also on the globe religion the Sun doesn't move south of the Tropic of Capricorn And on a flat earth the Sun doesn't move south of the tropics Capricorn

So you're asking us to explain something that doesn't even happen on your cartoon globe religion because you don't know your cartoon globe religion. It does happen on the globe. It does happen on the globe. Can I finish?

No, no, you're good, Nathan. You were done. Okay, so the sun does go past the Tropic of Capricorn on the globe religion? No, of course it doesn't, but it still appears to rise from the southeast. It rises from the southeast. It doesn't require it to go south of the Tropic of Capricorn on the globe model because the Earth is a sphere, and so the angle will appear to be to the south because the Earth is tilted.

All right. Last next question, I think, is the good idea. Thank you so much. There's lots of questions, guys, and they just keep flying in. The audience, every time you guys say blah, the minute you open up your mouth, they are just flying. Ryan, is there any way to go to just whoever the question's for? Is there any way to do that? Because we are at three hours now.

I think that's all right. At three hours, I think it's pretty good to try to speed things up a little bit. So that's why I always ask people to get their super chats in early. Yeah, I definitely do move it to one side responses if it gets a little bit too late. So let's do exactly that. One minute timers going back and forth now. Hold on. I'm just doing the wrong timer apparently because I had two going this debate because I am a madman.

I stayed like another hour or two to do this all night forever. All right. Well, we'll do one minute back and forth between both. Oh, not back and forth. Sorry. One minute for each side to answer these questions. So, Mark Reed, I'd love to debate you on network technologies that allowed live streaming the moon landing. CCIE 62940. One minute on the floor.

Sure, yeah. I mean, my email address is there. I've had a lot of people, you know, sort of want to debate me and then suddenly they evaporate when I actually accept. So sure, yeah. If you want it on Modern Day Debate, though, it's got to go through James, not me. It's not up to me. But if you do want to debate on my channel, sure, bring it on. No problem at all. Oh yeah, you can always message me too. But I am much more...

What's the word? Lazy when it comes to booking them. James is the big booker of the debates, and then I like to host them. So we're quite the team when it comes to that. So Gal Carlos says...

Yeah, we are we read that one guy I was skipping around a little bit so I do it please excuse me here just because there was some insult ones and I wanted to make sure that we Had a few in amongst them so Charles William of Pemberton says is there an experiment that can measure a large sheet of ice that bends down 360 degrees of the observer measurements on experiments measurements measurements, so that guy scientifically illiterate whoever that was

Well, actually, it can be an experiment if you make a prediction about whether what the movement's going to be. Just to remind you, we're not going to do back and forths. Yeah, I'm sorry. So if they wrap it up. Yeah, I see you, Angel. Sorry about that. Yeah, we'll get you off mute there. So you got 45 seconds if you want to respond.

No, I'm all good. I just, yeah, I was on mute. All right, no worries. I think everybody's going to respect the timer here. Let's see. So one minute per side for these questions, unless they specifically say for both. Econo Nike says, no, but seriously, panel, are muffins cake or something else? It's cake in my opinion. Tacos or sandwiches?

Well, to be honest with you, I think that it depends on the sugar content. Maybe not. That's a good question. I'll have to think about that. It's cake. It's all the same stuff. It's the same thing. Anyway, all right.

digitally I mean yeah as somebody who's made many muffins and many cakes with their kids yeah it's all the same stuff alright digitally forged designs says I have shown Angel's son not shrinking by 23% and only by 5% vertically video on TT under helping flat earthers one minute there just for you Angel yep

So I showed Helping Flat Earthers personally the actual video and he refused to answer if the sun changed size or not because I showed him that personally on my live stream. Also, even 5% would debunk the globe because it's not even moving 1% further away when it sets.

I think it's .00004%. So that's how much the sun is moving away from the Earth when we roll backwards on the globe religion 1,000 miles an hour to watch the sunset. So how are we getting a 5% change in size if we're rolling backwards causing a .00004% change in size? We've answered this so many times. Yeah. Cool story. Yeah. Refraction. Next question. All right. General E. Shady says...

This is, once again, generally shady. As I read this comment, I'm not going to entertain it, but Nathan, where's your brains derp? Okay, I'm just going to cap it at that, okay? Sparta says, Mark, are you even Australian? Your insults are flimsier than a fraternity's weekly soggy biscuit gatherings. Please have a crack at a proper insult. Oh, my. I

I think I'm doing all right, thanks. Yeah, no, I'm definitely Australian. There's no doubt. I am very aware of where I am. Thank you. All right. Let's see. Flat Earth, local sun is part of your model. If final experiment proves 24-hour sun, how can we have a regular solar cycle in America? Are we going to answer this question like five times? Yeah. I can't see your finger now, Nathan. You're not on camera, so I didn't know.

I wasn't sure what the question really meant. No worries. There you go. Now I know. See, I figured it out. Spark344 says, in response to the flurvers you're done in Kruger effect personified, you just don't realize it and it's hilarious. Did you want to say anything to Spark344? Yeah, you can go ahead, Tess.

Dunning-Kruber would be we don't know things. And like everyone I talked to on TikTok, 99% of them don't know anything about curvature. I asked them what's the difference between big G and little g. They don't know. I asked them the formula for gravity. They don't know. I asked them the coefficient for gravity. They don't know. I asked them deflection for Cavendish. They don't know. I asked them the second law of thermodynamics, mass employee. They don't know. I mean, what are we talking about here?

We're not Dunning-Kruger. You guys are running Dunning-Kruger. You guys are projecting. Go learn your curve formula. Did you just, did you say, hold on, we're going to, we're going to keep it to the one side as we were before. That was kind of a challenge though, Ryan, like he's calling us it. So you don't understand what Dunning-Kruger is. It's that you think you know something and you're wrong.

All right. Well, we will carry on. I understand why you feel that might be pointed, but he was responding to the audience member here. So Balthazar says, why can't you see the bear constellation from south of the equator? Almost like it's related to Antarctica from Arctos, Greek for bear. On a flat model, you should be able to see both night skies. Somebody's screen sharing. That's Nathan Thompson. Go ahead there, Nathan.

Thank you. Appreciate that Ryan you're doing a great job just want to let you know that. So this would be the Flat Earth. It's a it's model, but it's not perfect. So just explained we have a celestial dome around us if you move the observers latitude north, you're going to see different stars which you could click here.

it'll put stars on the dome and you'll see that they rotate from the right to the left and if you turn around the observer you'll see that they rotate from the left to the right so this explains a lot of things you can explain the 24-hour light in the north the 24-hour darkness in the north so right now in the north darkness you move it around 24 hours then you change the position of the sun you move it around 24 hours it'll

It all works. It's been working for thousands of years. That's how they built the Antikythera mechanism, the Prog Clock, the Astrolabe, the Sextant. It's flat, guys. Thanks for playing. Can I share my screen real quick? Nope. We're moving on to the next question, Quitch. We are going to try to keep it to the one side, so sorry. They're Dr. Blitz. Just because we are... We're going to be well into tomorrow. That's fine.

We will have to... Hold on, hold on. Like I said, we do have to let this play out in the eye of the public sphere. So if we do have more questions for them, it's up to them to either raise their sword or hang themselves. So we need to try to continue on. CJ Lamoro says, Angel, what was the ND of the filter you used? 1,000,000.

Alright, John says flat earth spent 15,000 on gyro predicting a zero degree drift for flat earth and 15 degree an hour for the globe So what drift did they actually measure can flat earthers remind us?

Yeah, no problem. Bob actually didn't know that Sagnac, the guy who invented the technology for the interferometer, said it was the vortex of the ether prior to making those comments on the Netflix documentary Behind the Curve, where they hijacked what he said and then attributed it to earth rotation, which would, one, debunk Einstein, so flat earth or debunk Einstein. He says you can't optically measure the rotation of the earth. It's all relative. That's what the theory of relativity is all about for producers.

the netflix documentary that you blindly believe in didn't understand this you got to look into the lorenz contraction and how they explained away all of these friendships that they measured with the light so thanks for playing uh angel do you have anything to add before move on to the next question you're in there relativity is going to give me cancer i'm sorry bro their evidence is a flat earther debunked the globe

Yeah, let's carry on there guys. Johnny orbital says I sent a super chat in about an hour ago not asked yet Johnny orbital

If it was just one of those ones that were really vitriolic, I may not have asked it. Well, let me just scroll up. I'm scrolling up. We're doing this in real time. I'll even share my screen so you can see. I'm looking legit. Ryan, a good idea. Is there a way to anyone can email you or tag you and say, hey, this was my question. It was missed earlier because we've been kind of skipping around. I don't know if that will help you. Well, sometimes people put in super chats and then they –

Well, sometimes people will just say I put in a super chat, but I'm sure that he's – I don't see anything here. I'll double check after I ask the next one, okay? I'll do you a good service. No worries. All right. So Matthew Keene says, what's the SCQ? What is the SCQ? Angel, you know?

I never heard of it. I don't know. NASA Security Force says, Nathan, I've heard proof. You'll find out. Just wait until it's shown. For years, you guys are worse than Q. Thanks for playing, B. Wow. The SCQ is apparently a questionnaire for children who have autism. So...

Alright, let's keep going. Nathan, I need a toilet cleaner. You're a great fit. You're hired. I don't know how you could ascertain that, but let's just carry on. Alright, gee.

I don't know. You don't know who has arthritic, you know, wrists, you know, Nate, that might not be Nathan's jam. Just crappy. Super. It was really crappy. Yeah. You got, Oh man, we got all the puns guys. We got puns for days. Spart three 44 says, uh, we read that one. Thank you. General E shady. Uh,

Another insult. Just carry on. Brutally honest. It says caution at feds, flat earth derangement syndrome. That's for feds. I don't, I don't know how that's like a super potent thing, but yeah, if you want to go ahead and. I mean, it just seems like there are people who spend their lives like Nathan over here. I don't actually know what Angel's day job is, but Nathan definitely spends his life obsessing over the flat earth. This is something I do like a few hours a week.

I mean, who has the derangement syndrome? I don't know, man. Yeah, the other few hours you spent... I'm sorry, that was a question. That was for us, excuse me. We can move on. Thanks, Nathan. Thanks a ton. I'll weave it in later, then. I do think it's for both, to be fair, but... Alright, so, back to me.

Thanks, Ryan. I really appreciate that. You're so welcome. You spend the other half of your time hating on the creator and pretending you're a shapeshifting Pokemon on a cartoon-tilted spinning ball that exploded from nothing. So, yeah, you spend a few hours a week here hating on Flat Earth and denying reality and a few hours there hating on a creator who loves you and sent his only son for you, but you're just delusional glober. Thanks for playing. Yeah.

i got your chat johnny orbital to flat earth why can we see further than horizon on clear calm visibility days why is the horizon not as far as the eye can see we did ask this one johnny orbital so any unpacking on this it's fine yeah i mean we do see too far but we don't see uh forever because you've got an at most look through which make things opaque over distance also things shrink in angular size

So even a large country would be so far away that you wouldn't be able to resolve it. Right? So that's the reason things move forever. I apologize. Yes. Johnny orbital if you missed the chat there, but we did ask that super chat. Maybe go back in the conversation. Maybe it was a bit quick.

But we have been moving through some of them a bit quicker than others. So, yeah, just keep an eye out for that. It's been really interesting. We're coming up on four hours. So, yeah, let's try to move. Dr. Tapioca Weasel, thank you so much for that chat there. We did read that. Daniel Smith says, Flat Earthers, please explain Sigma Octanus. Oh, we already did that. We did that. You sure? Okay. My God. I think you might have asked that one before. Luke Patterson says,

Yeah, let's move on from the other ones there. Bob of Circumpolar. Circumpolar, welcome to the globe Earth. Wow. Plain welcome to Flutters.

This is what I get for jumping around with those super chats. See, I wanted to get some of those insults out of the way. It never works out for me, guys. Just never works out for me. I always just get just lost in some of the very similar super chats. So thanks to our panel for being patient with me here as I, I try to just get some of those, uh, unobjective ones out of the way. You guys know who you are in the live chat. You're not helping us out here. Okay. Luke Patterson, uh,

Thank you. Meg Ellen says, Nathan, making up fantasy nonsense about reality isn't research. Thank you, Meg Ellen. We're going to move on. Okay. So,

Let's see here. Ali Year has another question here. Let's hope this one has a bit more to it there, Ali Year. It does look so. Is a long-distance radio frequency test, it bounces off the ionosphere for long distances before it hits the target. Does it bounce once or is it more of a back and forth between the ground and it?

They came up with that excuse after Marconi, but also we've got radio waves, like, sorry, the SPS-55, which... I don't think that was a question for you. Well, let's let him respond, and we'll bounce it, okay? Let's just be fair. So, Angel, let's take 15, and then Doctor, if you want to... Because they don't think that happens, right? But that's fine. All right, 15 seconds. Yeah, I mean, we do have the SPS-55...

which is usually mounted 100 feet observer height and it goes 118 miles, right, so and it can't attenuate through water it's a search and rescue radio line of sight transmission and yeah, they bounce off of it Yeah, they bounce it off a base station actually it goes from base station to ship, it's ship-ship communication So to answer the actual question rather than just mumble wildly generally as far as I understand

It's called sky wave transmission radio waves. These bounce off of the ionosphere, and while they technically can bounce off the ground, they don't usually. That's why they don't use sky wave transmission to go all the way around the Earth, because it'd have to bounce repeatedly. But it does go much further than line of sight for that reason. And the more that you bounce a signal, it basically, you lose clarity on that signal. You lose a clean signal. So yeah, it is possible. And the chip

communications that you're talking about. Yeah, it's ship to ship, but it actually gets sent back to a base tower on a huge mountain and then back out to the ship. I'm very aware of that one. I'll give you the last word on that one since we haven't had a lot for the globe side tonight. Kevcroft says, do the flat earthers have a photo of the sun changing angular size that's not just before sunset? Throughout the day, it stays constant. I didn't get to respond to that question. Yeah, I showed it. I mean, I showed the sun setting.

Hold on, let's let Angel respond to the question I just asked. Let's let Angel respond. Yeah, when I did the sunset that I showed, when I even moved it and showed that it was changing in all directions, I didn't let it intersect the horizon at all. So yeah, the sun does change size with the solar filter. Can you put a link to that solar filter in the chat? Just link to the specifications. I would really like to have a look at it.

All right. Can I get 15 seconds on that last question, Ryan? Oh, the one prior? I do like to move on, but you know me. I'm a sucker for helping people out. Go ahead, 15. He said, thank you, Ryan. He said, we don't think that happens. That's not the case. I mean, you could easily bounce signals off the firmament. So claiming it bounces off the ionosphere is something they invented after Marconi sent a 2,000-mile transmission is ridiculous.

But they aim the SPS-55 horizontally. They don't aim it at the sky to reach the boats. And the Army assumes flat non-rotating Earth when they propagate electromagnetic energy over it. So thanks for playing. Oh, man, Dr. Blitz has learned your trick. He knows what to do. No, I'm just saying. It's just picking. If you want to come back on your camera, that's great. So onomatopoeia.

Help me out here. Onomatopoeic? I can't do that. See, I need words to be separated. My brain just does not work that way. Nice job tonight, Ryan. For both. Oh, nice job. Thank you. You know, I don't get too much love every once in a while. It's nice to see. You know, it's not always the easiest job, despite what you might think, trying to host the debates, set up the debates. But admittedly, James sets them up more so, and I host them.

More so. Yeah, I just want to say guys like the behind the scenes stuff is a lot of work, dude. So give these guys credit like them be a member of this channel if you enjoy what they're doing support what they're doing because if you don't support what you like it goes away. Like they just have a way of just kind of getting rid of things that aren't being supported. But yeah, you guys do a great job.

I appreciate that. Nobody is. I'm not perfect either. Yeah, no, it is. It is definitely. It's a new thing. It's a trial by fire. We've got our own vision. We're not sitting here trying to engage in journalism. We're just trying to get the ideas out on the table, everybody, and make sure that it's as –

You know as palatable as we can make it and make sure that you understand what it is that the people are Putting on the table and if you don't like it, then it is what it is You know, there's there's there's no blaming me at the end of the day That's that's what I'd like to see anyways, you know, maybe some people will but we don't want that type of cope We don't want you to say, you know The moderators ask questions and push the conversation in a way that you know made somebody look a certain way It's just not our flavor. So I definitely hit the like button. We appreciate that

that benji boodles said i videoed a star last night with a nikon 950 and saw ryan i read this one when you were gone bro just so you know i was trying to kind of help you out when you were gone we read this one i know you you were you were you were co-modding were you yeah i was ryan what's the results on the poll i'm curious can i ask

Oh, yeah, yeah. We can flick back over to the poll. I am... Yeah, we're a little clunky style tonight, guys, especially where we had a dropout. So I appreciate the speakers just kind of rolling along with it and just going with the flow. It's been interesting. What is... Sorry. Who was the most compelling on the panel tonight? All right. So...

In second place, we have Nathan Thompson at 20%. All right. Angel is coming in at 10%. Mark Reed, 16%. And then 54% for Dr. Blitz. There you go. Yeah, I would agree, actually. When did you show? He didn't even show his screen. He didn't show a single thing.

He didn't share his screen. So maybe you guys stop screen sharing. Maybe this is the lesson. This is coping. Here's the lesson, Mark. Here's the lesson, Mark, Nathan and Angel. Don't screen share so much. Make it easier on me. The audience loves it. No, honestly, I don't think that's honestly what's going on here. You know, it just depends on who's tuned in tonight and who's enjoying the debate. So don't take it personally, but...

But do, you know, if it creates comedy, but not if it creates harsh feelings. We want to make sure that it's fun. If we were trying to win a popularity contest, Ryan, we wouldn't be flat earthers.

Oh, look, you know, I'm not surprised that a physicist would be able to explain the Earth the best out of any other set. That just surprises me in no way. Hey, Mark, you be quiet. I beat you in the 12th. Yeah, you got dominated. Nathan, be quiet. You guys didn't even make... I got more than both of you guys. This is why I should have read the points. We're going to do that. It was 14 to 20. It didn't show anything. Apparently, I didn't need to. It would be more compelling than you guys. That's how gullible globers are. That's my whole point. Yeah. SPART 344. Wow. Yeah. That's crazy. That's my whole point.

Is that okay, Ethan? Are you feeling insecure or something? You've got to kind of, you know, talk yourself up. It's just projecting, Monk. Don't cry for it. Oh, really? What the data says, bro. But I know you guys don't like numbers. Yeah, well. I love numbers. That's how I debunk your global legend. Should curve 8 inches per mile squared or 0.66. Sorry, what's cosine of 60 degrees? You god haters.

Yeah, yeah. 1.5. 1.5. It's like 1.5. It's 1/2. I didn't say 1.5. He said 1/2. Okay, now tell me, what's the sign of 60 degrees? Yeah bro, I saw the super chat, I looked up the answer and when the question rolled through I decided not to answer it because it has nothing to do with the shape of the Earth. This is not a pop quiz. This is just another knife and ten. You just don't want numbers. You hate numbers. Create attention. Hey Blitz.

So, uh, yeah, we'll have to push through a few. So once again, you got our email there. If we didn't get a chance to read your super chat, uh, we do have to push through some of the ones that are just repeats of things that we've already asked. So Kev Krav, Megal, uh, they were the next ones we do have to push through. We've already asked questions very akin to this. So, uh, if you didn't get it out of the super chats before tag me in the next debate or, uh,

you know, with a chat and I'll ask them for free or, uh, you can email modern day debate at gmail.com. Uh, if, uh, if you really don't want to just support the channel, I mean, you know, like if I missed a super chat, I mean like, you know, you can always just support the channel. That's great. But, uh, uh, but yeah, we do appreciate the, the, the people that aren't too, uh, too butthurt about all that. All right. So, uh,

Let's see. Benji Boodle says, I video... We read that one, sorry. Just got to scroll down a bit more. Awaken Minds, Dr. Blitz, what instrument was used to measure gravity? How can I purchase such an instrument? Did we do that one too? We've already done that. Absolutely. I swear. I swear. Some of these just are so similar. And there's so many of them. It's killing me, guys. All right. Now...

Like I say, I won't skip around anymore. I swear. NASA security force. LIGO is four kilometers long. It's flat and level. Why do two balls on each placed at both ends roll to the center? That last one I didn't actually read. It's just the same question. That's a really good question. Do you guys know the answer, Angel, Nathan? I'll scroll now. It's level.

But, because it's so long, it points roughly down, meaning that if you drew a line on the surface of the Earth, it would go towards, it has to go underneath in a tunnel. So actually, the gravitational gradient is towards the center. No, no, no, but it's actually, like a laser passes through. A laser passes through, but a ball rolls down on either side. Does the laser go straight? Yeah.

Well that debunks your religion, thanks for playing. Yeah. Wait, why would a ball roll down if it's line of sight, straight, laser? I said laser. It is a laser. The ball rolls towards the middle. So it's concave. No, if it's concave, how does the laser go straight? Alright, next question. Alright.

They don't have an answer, it's okay. They don't understand. I could draw a diagram. You said the laser goes straight. The laser goes straight through the tunnel. Correct. Deepong Ticklehead, thank you. The laser goes straight, the ball rolls down through the tunnel. Why does the ball roll down through the tunnel? If the Earth is flat. You tell me. Gravity. Because gravity is pulling it towards the centre because the Earth is a globe!

Oh my gosh. I could show you a diagram if you want. Would that help? Next question. Dr. Tapioca Weasel says, Ryan, I feel like you should luxurate in your competence. And then you mark cuz. What do you want me to expound about open debate? At least you read the insults for me and the insults for you, Ryan. I appreciate that. It's all good. We like it.

Oh, man, that's fine. But no, I can talk about the importance of open debate if you'd like, Dr. Tapp. That's fine. But yeah, let's just carry on. Hashi856 says, what predictions do a flat Earth model make? I think we've had a similar question, but that could be experimentally verified and differ from the globe model. What experiment can you cite?

So the prediction is that the horizon will be 1.2 miles away for a one-foot observer, and we measure it over 9.5 miles, and when you invoke standard refraction, it goes from 1.22 to 1.34, so you have to invoke imaginary theoretical amounts of refraction to explain away the observations where we see too far. Don't you think that refraction is really... And also...

And also from an 8 foot it would be 3.4 miles away, but it was past 10.1. Again, we both use refraction in our worldviews, right? We're using one side at a time, bro. That's fine, Nathan. Refraction requires two mediums. It requires a change in refractive index. You know this. We're looking horizontally, there's no change. Vertically, there's a change in refractive index. And we're looking horizontally, so you just need to know the total. The light moves vertically, Angel.

We're looking horizontally. The light can go up, the light can go down, depending on where the light source is originating from, Angel. Angel, you know this. Alright, Beach Lover, let's go. Ryan, this question was for us.

If you want to just close this one out, we'll carry on. Yeah, yeah. He's saying the light goes up from a building over long distances. If it went up, we'd see it. It has to be moving horizontally. There's no different medium stacked vertically over long distances. The air stacks horizontally. It layers up. That's why you glovers always talk about a pressure gradient that attenuates as you go up, even though you have the ozone layer debunking that. Go ahead, Ryan. Thanks for letting me go.

No worries. Yeah, we'll go back to our main screen. These screen shares, I tell you, they can just be out to lunch sometimes, guys. Once again, hit that like button. We're working hard here at Modern Day Debate. You're right, Mark. I really would appreciate a producer. That would be a whole lot of fun to keep this all in order every once in a while.

Because you guys have so many questions, and like I say, sometimes I try to sift through them, and they're so similar. Or, honestly, they're just not even worth engaging sometimes, because you guys really just want to be vitriolic. And that's okay, too. Maybe I'll come back post-stream, and we'll have some fun. Roland says, put an hour clock on the ceiling, and no matter how you look at it, the rotation doesn't change. Explain this, flurfs.

Yeah, so if the ceiling fan curved all the way around you, like the stars actually appear to dip to the horizon due to perspective, they would go the opposite direction when you face up. Not how the south circumpolar star rotation looks though. Alright, last thought there Angel if you want, or we'll move on. Yeah, so the point that it converges to is due to eyesight as well, and also if you look at the side of...

rig magnet ferrocell and then look at how it actually wraps around, it creates that effect as well. And also, yeah, due to perspective.

All right, let's carry on the grumpy old mechanic. And I do apologize to the globe side. We haven't had as many questions for you, for your side. I've tried to give you some bouncing back and forth, but trying to move through these, you know, in this timeframe is yeah. I appreciate your patience. There's there's been a lot. I'm going to give you guys a chance to respond to these last three. We're going to bounce it. Okay. Just going to let our panel know we're going to completely go through aside. Fair enough.

flick this thing around. All right. The Grumpy Old Mechanic says, why does every university library have hundreds of feet of shelf space doveted to astronomy and astrophysics?

I think everybody can talk on that. Astronomy, astrophysics, and cosmology is not science because you can't science the sky. So you can't have an independent variable that you use a researcher manipulate to determine the cause of your effect. So all you can do with the sky is observe and declare correlation is in causation. That's not science. Pretending you can science the sky is like snatching your own wig off and calling yourself a pseudoscientist. Thanks for playing. Yeah, I've

seen Venus myself, I've seen stars myself, my high power optics. What does that prove? They don't even look solid to me at all. I'm curious of like Nathan as like a

Like an AI, because he always seems to end his phrases in the same code words. But anyway, I promise I'll respond. Yeah, so, I mean, like, look, who are we to doubt Nathan as the arbiter of what is science rather than the actual scientists themselves? I mean, like, look, there are things called observational sciences and there are experimental sciences. Astronomy is an example of an observational science. That said...

There are experimental aspects to astronomy where you can use, for example, different optics. If you want to measure different things, you can predict, for example, if I change my optics so that it absorbs this kind of frequency, what will I observe? And that can align or not align with your predictions. And that's a way that you can control an independent variable. Furthermore, you can use as your independent variable the things that you're looking at.

If I say I predict that when I look at a part of the sky that has a low density of microwave background radiation, that I will see fewer galaxies. And then you go and you look in a part of the sky that has a less dense area of the cosmic microwave background radiation, and there are fewer galaxies there, that's a prediction that's come true. You can use correlating factors to become your independent variables.

I'll just quickly add that sort of over the course of our history, like all of these scientific foundations are backing it up and they produced a ton of research on all kinds of myriad of things from medicines to, you know, things to make our lives better, computers, internet. There's a million things that they've produced. And Nathan wants to come in and say, no, they're all wrong. I'm right. But what has Flat Earth actually produced in the way of scientific research at all?

All right, let's close her out there, guys. Let's carry on to the next one. I do want to give... I talked for five seconds, Nathan. It's ridiculous, man. Yeah, I would say let's let Mark have the closings on these last few here. I'll let you guys start them, and we'll let Mark close them. Or Dr. Blitz, just because, like I say, we did have a lot of questions for you guys, so you did get most of the talking time. Ellie here says the frequency they used was below...

30 mHz. It would get observed by ionosphere, not bounce. Explain that. Absorb. That's actually a question for us, and that's a pretty fair characterization. What's really happening when you have gases reflecting light or electromagnetic radiation off of them, what they're really doing is absorbing and re-emitting. So that is a thing that happens, yeah, absolutely. Did you have anything to add there, Mark?

Nope, I'm good. Okay, that's great because we are just about to the end of our Super Chats. On the last couple, I thought we were going both sides. Well, we were, but I was going to let them close it out. So that one was for them. If you want to get through, that's one thing. But if you want to respond, I think that's fine and then we'll let them close it. Yeah, can I share screen real quick? Yeah, sure. Thank you.

Because documentation always beats conversation. Here's a 515 mile NATO microwave transmission. Produce flat earth. We're going to scroll forward to Marconi's 2,000 mile radio transmission. Here's the SOSIS program that detected subs over 2,000 miles away. Marconi was back here. I think I skipped it. Yeah, here it is. Gilead ER Marconi. Documentation is a video? Disproved detraction. We've told him that-- could I finish, guys? You can respond.

So he disproved detractors who told him the curvature of Earth would limit transmission to 200 miles or less, which is still ridiculous because if we had a radar horizon caused by the physical geometric horizon, a 50-foot tower would have a radar horizon at like 10 miles out. You wouldn't have a 200-mile radar horizon. This electromagnetic energy, like Blitz described earlier, travels in straight lines. And we have Army documents that state that

that electromagnetic energy is propagating over a flat earth with constant permittivity. So I'll scroll forward in this. There's all sorts of evidence in this. 10 seconds. This is on my TikTok. Make sure you check it out. This isn't relevant. Can we go to the question rather than just random stuff that he wants to throw up?

This is random stuff and 31 mile observation. Yeah, yeah, it's not related to the question night Let's move on like I said, we're on the screen share there But we will let this play out in the sphere of the public eye so it wasn't on the horizon We were supposed to finish closing. Yeah

Yes, so let's, we'll let you finish the closing there. Yeah. Yeah, I mean, the next question, the like, yes, people didn't under when Marconi was making his first transmission, people didn't understand ionospheric bounces, like, which is the phrase that we use for absorption and reemission, like Marconi thought that it would happen, I guess. And so he did it and it happened. And then we were like, Oh, I guess this is the thing that happens. Okay.

they didn't know the ionosphere existed before okay uh yeah so i mean in in the early 1900s i would not be surprised if they didn't know it if they didn't know it existed and then you can run tests and figure out how it existed hey i'm sorry i'm sorry i thought i thought i was i was supposed to closing it out yeah i mean you can go up you can just measure it you can just like

see what happens, you can just do these kinds of experiments yourself if you want. But I guess you're not interested in actual data. And this is a sort of a fallacy point because we didn't know about penicillin as well when we discovered that. It doesn't mean we made it up. Just because somebody discovers something, you don't just say, "Well, they made it up." No, this is just your faith-based bias just discounting anything that you don't want to believe.

All right. That's basically it. Let's get to the next super chat. So this super chatter wanted to help me out with their name. I thank you so much. As I told you before, my autism just does not read.

Words that long. That's crazy to me. All right, so it says it sounds like onomatopoeia phobic. Onomatopoeia phobic. I'll work on it, okay? I'll work on it, okay? Dr. B, can you briefly summarize what topic you have published on most recent or favorite? Oh, where's your audio?

You're on. Blitz, you're muted. It's not me. Sorry. Yeah, yeah, no, that was my end. I have a mute on my mic. Yeah, so the thing I published most recently, or at least I submitted for publication, we submitted it yesterday, was a cosmology paper. So we're discussing the Big Bounce and how there's this thing called, sorry, the Big Freeze, which is this idea in cosmology that some people have. And the paper that we wrote shows that this is not a stable configuration of a cosmological solution when you have something called holographic dark energy.

Generally, I read about conformal submanifold invariance. That's what I did my thesis on. That's what I was at a conference for. That's one of my favorite things to talk about, but it's a lot more mathematical, a lot less physics. Nathan, you know you look stupid when you do that, right?

He looks like a crazy person. He's allowed to do what he wants while he's on the camera. Like I said, we'll let our audience decide how they feel about what's going on on screen. NASA Security Force says LIGO. It's flat and level. One ball at each end rolls to center. Both sides explain how it affects Cavendish. Thanks for playing, bro. How does LIGO affect Cavendish? Angel, have you ever heard this?

Alright, well we'll hand it to Mark and Dr. Blitz. Do you want to... LIGO, it's flat and level. I mean, I've heard of those things, but don't know how that correlates. So LIGO is level and flat in this case, in the sense that a laser beam passes from one end to the other directly, it's not being bent.

However, in order to do this, because the earth is curved, it actually has to go under the earth. Well, slightly has to go under the surface of the earth or rather be slightly. Slightly depending on which part of the leg or has to be slightly lower to the ground because of the way that the earth shape is. So, like, imagine that you have, like, two things sticking up and there's a straight line connecting them. The ground between.

the bar connecting the two rods is going to be smaller and so you're actually going to have it kind of is downwards in the sense of gravitational gradient so a ball can roll even though a laser can pass directly between the two. Do you have any evidence for that or no? This is in the design documents for LIGO if you want. Yeah, the ball rolling actually is the evidence.

They did adjust for curvature, yeah, when building it. That's exactly what they had to do. They do adjust for curvature in all kinds of architectural designs. They have to adjust for curvature in tunnels. They have to adjust for curvature in large buildings. They have to adjust for curvature all over the place. Bridges, they adjust for curvature. Tons of surveyors, engineers, they're all aware they have to adjust for the curvature of the Earth. You guys are the only ones that don't think they do. Wow.

I'm giving you the last word there, Mark. I'm giving Mark the last word just because he hasn't gotten it nearly enough throughout the debate. Guys, you've got questions for Mark? You know, oh, Dr. Blitz has started sharing a screen. What's going on? I thought we were going to move on. I'm sorry. This is a LIGO engineering document. It specifically says, Wow.

Then they ignore it. They ignore it on plane... They ignore it on plane surveying.

So you're just dodging back to planes? Okay, good one. No, planes serve. That's not what I said. You're not paying attention. He doesn't even listen, this guy. I know, right? So, let's see. IC Spin says, thanks, Bob. It's called a non sequitur, mate. That's what it's called. Alright, let's move into the next question. IC Spin says, thanks, Bob. R.I.P. Okay, thanks, IC Spin. Aliera says, what? No answer? Wow. Wow.

All right, Alier follows up with that one says no tower Intermediators just at line of sight 700 miles plus less than 10 mil Hertz Your guess is as good as mine as mine gents at this point

My brain is goo. No? You can't help me out? Okay. Let's see. Joom's last Super Chat. We're going to go into closing statements. Oh my god, yes. My goodness. Last Super Chat and we will let our speakers do their closing. I think our speakers are well and ready to go after four hours, guys. They've rocked a really long stream.

Let's get to your chapter, Jooms. A submarine horizon is ocean floor and it rises apparently bottom of a boat is... Sorry, apparently bottom of a boat is above so it must come down to eye level. Flat logic first and then real. Yeah, if they're on the ocean floor it would appear to ramp up. Why does it appear to ramp up if it's supposed to be curving down and away? I don't know.

all right just going to remind some of the people in our live chat just to behave themselves i will unequivocally do timeouts if you say things that are just out to lunch behave yourself over there in our live chat so uh we're gonna do our closings there everybody so thank you to our speakers thank you to our live chat for all of the awesome questions

Let's see here. Yeah, we've got still over a thousand people watching even with the crash We still have a thousand people watching which means that we should be well over a thousand likes You guys have thumbs don't you or you know skin that generates heat? I would hope so so you know hit that like button I've done it with my nose before so that's proof that you can do it, too

Unless there's something wrong with you. In which case, don't judge me. Touchscreens don't use heat, by the way. Okay, well, whatever happens with my nose, okay? If you have skin, okay? It's skin. In fact, cat paws can activate touchscreens, too. Oh, man, I've been corrected. Have there been touchscreens that are heat-activated, or is that just a myth? They're either resistive or they're capacitive. Never heat-activated.

Okay. All right. I appreciate that because, yeah, I don't know some things, I swear, about most things. So let's see on our panel. By StylusWorks.

Oh, cool. Well, I mean, on new phones, I imagine. I always felt like the old tech was like that. So I thought I was making a dated reference, but I stand corrected, I do believe. So who's the most compelling on the panel tonight? We have a 20% for Nathan Thompson. We have 10% for Angel, 18% for Mark Reed. So, Dr. Blitz, you have absolutely blown out...

Blown out our poll there at 52%. Uh, second place with Nathan Thompson. So, gold and silver there, fellas. That's fun. Have we been through this already? Well, we're just rechecking it. I feel like I've got deja vu. Okay. We're rechecking it. You did another poll? Okay, cool. It's not another poll. It's just, uh, when I checked it the first time, we were at, like, 250 votes. Now we're almost to 600. Yeah, no worries. All right, fantastic. All right. So, let's do those closings, guys. So, uh, let's start with, uh,

Yeah, I'm just trying to remember who went first and go with the reverse order. That's how I go it. So Dr. Blitz would be the first to go for the closing. Yeah, so there's not a whole lot to say. I mean...

Suffice it to say there were a lot of questions that went unanswered by both Mark and myself We still don't have an answer for why we observe effects of the Coriolis effect How you were able to circumnavigate Antarctica in both directions even though there's this circumpolar winds Lots of questions unanswered, no predictions, no models ever provided by either Angel or Nathan And we'll probably never get them because flat earthers don't do science

They just say it looks flat, and therefore it must be flat. That's all I have. All right, over to you, Mark. Read one minute on the floor your thoughts on tonight's discussion, where everybody can find you. Actually, before I do close, over to Mark. Do you want to let everybody know where they can find you there, DrBlitz? Yeah, so I have a TikTok account. That's where I do most of my content.

I post science content, try to do daily, but I've been quite busy lately. It's at Blitz PhD. You can also look for just Dr. Blitz. So pretty easy to find. I also have a YouTube channel, same name. You can follow me on Blue Sky on Instagram, although I never post there. So yeah, at Blitz PhD or Dr. Blitz, you'll find me at all the social medias.

All right. Well, thank you so much for coming out to Modern Day Debate. I appreciate it. It was a great joy to host you. Hopefully you'll be back again for more juicy debates on Modern Day Debate. Mark Reed, up to one minute on the floor.

Yeah, so I agree with Dr. Blitz. We asked a lot of questions and none of them we got sufficient answers for. And most of them were just sort of horrible misinterpretations of physics or science and can be very easily countered with what we see around us. Like, you know, the thing that you should be dragged backwards by the earth or you're being...

thrown about by the earth and it's very easily counted by throwing up a ball and moving its inertial frame of reference, things like that. But I think the most telling thing was when asking about that circumnavigation of Antarctica, they just would not answer the question, tried to get away from it, absolutely dodged up, dipped and just ran complete

They didn't want to answer it because they have to appeal to very specific currents and get this, very specific currents. Well, actually, their answer first was the wind, right? It was the wind blowing these ships exactly as they needed to in order to attain these fantastical speeds. But then after they get challenged on it, how do the motor ones do? They immediately shift, and that's all they do. They shift to something else. And in this case, it's these very specific channels that apparently nobody's ever measured. So, yeah, just...

spent four hours absolutely ridiculous we spent four hours here bro if he has more stuff no i'm fine i'm done i'm done i'd like to hear it i'm done i'd like more time we've been here four hours no i don't think so i don't think so all right dr blitz has already been let's just keep it as we are getting yeah let's let's get to bed there fellas i mean yeah it's almost two o'clock my time i swear uh you know i i need to hit the hey honestly my internal clock is so messed up by now

It's fine. Nathan, you were the second first to go, so one minute on the floor. Thanks, Ryan. At TheRealNathanThompson on TikTok, FlatEarthFlyers at gmail.com. And if you want one of my thumbnails, there's 500 Flat Earth books, over 100 videos, 1,000 memes, astrophotography, Tesla files, hidden books from scripture. It's worth getting. Ask anyone who has it.

Blitz said, not a whole lot to say. I guess gravity's got its ton. Mark and Blitz both cried about unanswered questions. Well, asking questions in 2024 is kind of ridiculous. You guys think we're dumb and we deny reality. You should have been showing proof the whole time. Respond to evidence.

uh not nonsense that we respond to evidence not nonsensical non-sequiturs so asking us about trips around antarctica that you didn't take you don't have any video from you don't have any evidence of is a non-sequitur we don't even need to respond to that so on top of that uh crying about asking flat earth yeah on you blitz you'd be a great flat earther one day mark not so much if you need uh

Flyers let me know we want to get you to heaven these guys want to send you to hell keep that in mind Blitz spends half his time hating on God on social media and admits he gets paid to communicate science I'm the other half time by the gov interesting the creator loves you you can test everything we said yourself Land surveyors don't adjust for curvature so when these donuts lines as a just for curvature over bridges and buildings They're lying if you think it's spinning you're drunk if you think it's tilting you're drinking too much. That's all right Sorry, Nathan. We do have to cut you off

All right. You heard him. If, uh, if you believe all that stuff, you're high. I don't know what I'm doing right now. No, I'm just, I'm just joking around guys. Uh, you know, I'm in Canada. It's fine. You know, there's no, there's no quandary here. Thank you so much to our panel, uh, for coming out and having the debate. We have one last closing statement from angel, our first speaker on the panel. So, uh, if you enjoyed tonight's debate, if you missed the beginning, go back to the beginning of this debate. It was a lot of fun. Um,

Yeah, we did have to go into muted rounds, which might not be as fun for some of you, but we did get to definitely have some interesting back and forth, maybe a little less wild than some of the debates that we've had the last few days where

where we haven't gotten as much on the table maybe so it's up to you to decide that's why we do what we do angel one minute on the floor thanks so much for being at modern day debate again we appreciate you yep uh no problem so airplanes yep like i said and like the pilots admit they don't adjust for curvature because they don't need to the earth is flat and stationary i showed evidence for the local sun changing size with the solar filter nd1 million i

I showed evidence that we see too far. The horizon's not a geometric location where birds go over. It is an apparent location with the sky meets the ground and it changes day to day, hour to hour. There's videos you can look up with the horizon changing up and down. Like the earth isn't breathing in and out. It's a location where it's apparent and we see too far. So in the Chicago skyline, I've really wanted to bring up more evidence, but we had this stupid two minute each and I couldn't bring up anything.

uh but we see too far the chicago skyline is just sitting there on a clear day when we actually do see the chicago skyline with the superior mirage it doesn't look anything like it it's very hazy unclear all the math has been done we take into account the height observer height everything we shouldn't be able to see any of the buildings i have all these other observations yeah so if you want to see any of my content angels of light on tick tock i have the sunsets i have all proof that we see too far and everything thank you

See, this is why I don't leave my preamp up, everybody. All right, well, thank you so much, Angel, for your closing statement. We appreciate you coming out to Modern Day Debate. It's been a lot of fun. We really, like I say, appreciate these debates, especially leading up to such an epic event as it might appear to most people on screen. The final experiment, we're going to be having more debates regarding that subject. So if either of the speakers, any of the speakers on screen right now want to have debates regarding what's going on with that subject,

Nathan's giving us a no-no. He does not approve, it seems, of the final experiment. Well, Nathan, I know people that want to debate you on that, so definitely stay tuned for that to our live audience. That's something that we will definitely visit if that's a possibility in the future. In the meantime, hit that like button, subscribe to Modern Day Debate. We appreciate you. I'm going to get my silly butt to bed.

And once again, thank you to our panel. Thanks, Ryan. Thanks, Blair and Mark. Appreciate it, guys. Thank you. Cheers. Have a good day.

Then place an anytime touchdown wager of $10 or more on the player of your choice up to one player per game.

If your player scores the longest touchdown of the week, you'll win a share of the $250K. BetMGM and GameSense remind you to play responsibly. See BetMGM.com for terms. 21 plus only. This U.S. promotional offer is not available in Mississippi, New York, Nevada, Ontario, or Puerto Rico. Gambling problem? Call 1-800-GAMBLER. Available in the U.S. For New York, call 877-8HOPE-NY or text HOPE-NY 467369. For Arizona, 1-800-NEXTSTEP. For Massachusetts, 1-800-327-5050.

At Fry's, an annual boost membership just got even better. Now you can choose from Disney Plus with ads, Whoopi, and Disney Plus with ads.

We'll be right back.