I don't know, planes are pretty big. That scale from the video looks pretty accurate, planes are the size of the entire Middle Eastern region, aren't they?
Scale? Phhh!👅 You think anything mathematical is logical to them? They think water can't bend.. 😂 Tear drops of hysteria and rain drops laugh at their theory.
I actually considered starting a CZcams channel as a "flat earther" who keeps failing. I'd even get my wife in on the act by having her interrupt me during my videos and telling me what a loser I am. But flat earthers have done all these things already, so now it's old hat.
You'd get sick of having to do so many takes, as I bet you couldn't say that flerf garbage without laughing in the middle of it... "...and it would require bendy PSI (giggle), crap, take 52..."
You can also do it if you have the patience to keep doing for a couple of hours. You just need enough willpower and motivation. So I think eaten water with a fork is actually easier then arguing with a flat earther.
And there's alota self made field tests to "prove" their theory. But all the time their tests prove the world to be round. And they blame it on nonexistent Sci-Fi tech that stopped it.
My hypothesis is that Ben will ignore this video, delete his own video and finds something else to misinterpret or misunderstand to mislead his audience.
They never seem to understand scale or gravity. They'll pour water on a basketball and say "see?" However, they seem blissfully ignorant to the fact that their "experiment" is still bound by the gravitational pull of the planet they are on. They just want things to be simple, so that they don't look so stupid.
Nah, this assumes an undeserved level of competence heretofore unseen in any flerf. Nobody _blunders their way_ into proving the Earth isn't flat mor than flerfs. Do kids these days know who Mr. Magoo is?
Wait if they flew towards the moon they should see a noticeable change in angular size even if it's too far to fly to. It would still be "local" enough to notice if true.
Reminds me of The Simpsons episode, where Bart is in the well, and when they finally dig down to free him (Thank you Sting and the canary that died of natural causes), when they need to get out of the hole, Wiggum realizes "Dig up, stupid!"
@@tonyflatearther you realize that a theory is the highest level of understanding a certain topic...? Theory is what englobes equations, laws, principles, etc. Just leaving this here...
I'm a pilot and I will just say a aircraft in flight is always in motion and controls are always being made to maintain a level flight, the tiny amount of earth curvature is being accounted for by the simple fact that altitude will change over time but autopilot or the pilot itself will counteract it because the autopilot is set to a altitude and it does that by changing the pitch/nose up or down, Even with no control input aircraft will not fly in a perfect straight line it will deviate because of turbulence or changing air currents and also changes to weight distribution of fuel and passengers, If you watch some videos of a boeing aircraft in cruise you may notice a wheel spinning frequently that is a trim wheel which changes the pitch of the aircraft to maintain a level flight set via autopilot
I tried to demonstrate this with FlightGear, years ago, deliberately flying within a layer of heavy turbulence, but the amount of work it took to keep that plane's altitude and heading something near intended wasn't really obvious from watching the controls on the screen.
Even if we grant literally every aspect of the flerfs argument and ignore all other problems with it then planes still wouldn’t _have_ to nose down since altitude can also be adjusted by changing speed, thus changing how much lift the wings generate.
Even without autopilot, and just holding the trim steady, eventually the plane is going to start going down because there's not enough air for the required lift to maintain that heading. It's not like boats are not at risk of floating into space if they don't "tilt the nose down" all the time.
Also, if the plane were to fly "straight", i.e. increasing altitude as the Earth curves away, it would be moving into less dense layers of atmosphere. This reduction in air density would decrease the lift on the wings, causing the plane to lose altitude until it achieves an equilibrium again, which would leave it at exactly the same altitude it was before. (This assumes all other factors, including air speed, remain constant, which they don't, of course. But I'm just trying to isolate the relevant variable.)
Professor Dave pointed out a perfect counter to the plane argument: on the flat earth, a plane would have to be constantly banking right if flying east to west, or constantly left if flying west to east. And the bank would have to be more pronounced the farther north you go. No constant banking, no flat earth.
I think that would be true on either model of the earth, less turning on a globe to follow a line of latitude. The straight flightpath would be a great circle route connecting the departure and destination on the line of latitude. Not that they comprehend the whole great circle navigation thing anyway... but they have a friend who's a pilot and says its all bs XD
@@vanessacherche6393 "I think that would be true on either model of the earth" - no. The shortest path between 2 points on the surface of a sphere is a great-circle. And one defining characteristics of great-circle is that they have NO curvature to the left or right when travelling. The only curvature observed when following them is downwards.
@@ABaumstumpf 'And one defining characteristics of great-circle is that they have NO curvature to the left or right when travelling' - Well, OP stipulated travelling east to west, which is a path on a parallel. Those are not great circles, except for the equator. Exactly how much they would have to bank at a given latitude is different on a flat and a globe Earth, but banking is necessary on both.
@tzvikrasner6073 --It's better said that the aircraft would have to _turn_ constantly while traveling East to West on a flat Earth, rather than "bank." Strictly speaking, an aircraft can turn without banking (and vice versa).
Don’t blame the internet. People have always been stupid. In the past they thought the world was flat, we killed people for religious beliefs, we called alchemists witches and burnt them at the stake, we sacrificed people to goddesses that didn’t exist. We’re killing our environment while knowing we’re killing our environment. I mean look at today, we have unnecessary wars over things that shouldn’t be a problem at all like who lives where and who gets along with who. We’re just a dumb self destructive species😂🤷🏿♂️…we’ve always been dumb as a collective.
"Social media gives legions of idiots the right to speak when they once only spoke at a bar after a glass of wine, without harming the community ... but now they have the same right to speak as a Nobel Prize winner. It's the invasion of the idiots" Umberto Eco
Using that same logic if we lived on a giant space pizza would you have to continually bank left or right depending on direction traveled to stay on a latitudinal line? That seems like a test they could do.
I had a conversation with him about it, and i predict this will not convince him. Was thinking about teaching him Blender to make his own model to test it...
"If we lived on a globe it's axiomatic" Firstly, planes land nose up, so no, it is not 'axiomatic'. Secondly, if we lived in a world where our airplanes were maybe 2,000 km long, the 'nose-dipping' might be a thing, but scale has always escaped flerfs.
The other day I had a flerf arguing with me on Facebook, and I knew he was a Taboo viewer when he threw the word "axiomatic" into his word salad. It was almost as funny as "spectroscopy needs a container".😂
@timolynch149 --It's not a matter of scale. No aircraft, regardless of size, would have to dip its nose in level flight over the Earth. Its nose would remain at a constant altitude, meaning no downward movement (i.e. "dip") at all.
At 3:40 ... sure sounds like a clear case of him admitting flat Earth is bullshit without him actually saying flat Earth is bullshit. But he wants to continue lying for the few dollars it nets him anyway
@@ConspiracyToonzsadly yes. Apparently I'm a paid shill for NASA. I hope I'm being paid a good amount, but I have no idea who to contact to find out where this money is.
@@ReValveiT_01 Wolfie's presentations are all excellent, and always delivered in a calm voice - even as he shreds some flat earth claim. He has explained that he used to be a flight instructor. If ever I wanted to get a pilot's licence, he would be my first choice for an instructor.... however that is a past occupation for him., and I am too old anyway
In his email, Ben said this: "I highly doubt that I can have an intelligent conversation with an honest and objective person." I agree with his hypothesis here.
Visible at 3:30, this is a portion of a diatribe about TC's biases. Technically you've removed the qualifier and emotional consequence sections, which is highly prone to misquotes. However, the qualifier boils down to "if you don't buy my narrative unquestioningly" (which no objective person would) and the consequence is immaterial, so the meaning remains rather accurate - and ironic.
So by the FE logic if on a globe a plane must “nose down” to maintain altitude, well if we follow that logic on a flat earth a plane must always bank to the left or Right to maintain a east or west heading. If they says that’s not the case the next question is what is the force that keeps the plane level and on the same heading on the FE?
So anything that debunks him is a "mystery"? Hey you can't get out of that one that easily. The Southern Star Trails completely DESTROY his pancake fantasy. What he REFUSES to realise is that it's not a mystery for a globe so the world is a globe. That simple!
I think that would be true on either model of the earth, less turning on a globe to follow a line of latitude. The straight flightpath would be a great circle route connecting the departure and destination on the line of latitude. Not that they comprehend the whole great circle navigation thing anyway... but they have a friend who's a pilot and says its all bs XD
@@Sonshine70sNo, no, no. The north pole is up, not the equator. If you fly Oz to Europe, your ears "pop" all the way because you are going up all the way. By the way, why is it that your ear's "pop" when you drive up a mountain? What would happen if you could keep driving higher and higher? A mystery, I guess.
Strange isn't it? Flerfs love to use aviation examples so frequently to "prove" the Earth is Flat... When not one commercial pilot can be found, who agrees with them. Nor can they claim a single commercial ocean navigator is a Flerf.
The flerfs are slipping up. This is not the only example. Hilariously, Flatzoid debunked himself in his recent "Dare You" stream at 1:44:15 by mentioning that the summer sunlight times for his bother in Cape Town were about an hour longer than for him (Flatzy) further north and thus closer to the tropic. His response about this was just to say "weird", without realising the significace of this debunking not only the flat earth, but their claim that the sun sets by going too far away to see. PS. You may want to point this out to him in your debate with him tonight.
@@GeistView I've pointed that out to flerfers before. They really don't like it, especially if you go step by step: Where does the sun go at night? It goes too far away to see. Where are the stars? In the firmament. That's further than the sun, right? Then they run away or try to change the subject to vaccines or something.
My favorite example of this was the UK CZcamsr Tigerdan925. He accidentally proved the earth wasn't flat across several videos and was willing to admit that he could no longer say the earth was flat. (Though he hadn't determined that it was a globe) Sadly he got bullied off the Internet by other flat earthers and deleted his videos from his channel.
Someone claiming clouds are mountains hits me close to home. I live in Indiana. The closest mountains to us are the Appalachians. When I was in 7th grade I was riding the bus to school as the sun was rising, and one of my cousins was awestruck by the mountains on the horizon behind which the sun was rising... He couldn't get over how amazing it looked. Those "mountains" were clouds. I was completely baffled.
I saw something very like that a couple of years ago. I would have sworn that the there were ranges of high hills off in the distance ahead of me as I was driving more or less straight east at sunrise. It was quite impressive. As it happens, where I live east takes me to flat lands. Were I facing west I'd see real mountains which are pretty close. Very soon now the tops of the mountains will be sparkling white with fresh snow.
This makes me think, if you asked a flerf to draw a circle. They'd draw a square, hexagon, polygon etc. As a constant curve is beyond their comprehension...
The idea of continuity is a pretty mind-boggling idea to begin with, in all fairness. Most of us just accept it and move on without realizing just how weird it is
Which is funny since by technical definitions as i learned back in my old technical Drawing classes in high-school a curve/circle is just made up of an extremely large series of points... so a circle is more or less a polygon with an infinite number of sides. Its still a constant curve despite that fact though as you say. I just dont understand how they cant recognize that since the plane is constantly fighting gravity to maintain a specific altitude the plane will naturally follow the curve as long as it maintains said altitude. When changing altitude, for a while it either 'dips' into or away from the curve, if it continues to change altitude either up or down it either ends up in space or hits the ground dependant on how long it applies those changes (and yeah i know atmosphere and lack thereof etc would preclude a plane reaching space lol)... but it all comes down to that old interaction with gravity in the end... oh yeah i forgot, they don't think gravity is a thing. Convenient for their argument i guess.
They have a comeback for that too, these flat headed flat Earthers Say that "The atmo"SPHERE" is very thick and dense with Particulate matter, hence why you can't do that" OR they'll say "its due to pollution!"
Pilot here, though not commercial. The pilot does NOT need to ever nose down to keep going around the globe, that happens automatically, and not by autopilot, but this thing called gravity, which we might as well think of as a string going from the center of the earth to the center of gravity of the aircraft, so you never need to nose down due to the earth being a globe, you do need to nose down and up at times, but due to changes in wind, speed, and heat (thermals), not the ground falling away.
That's what Einstein's theory of general relativity is all about. Masses (like the Earth) curve spacetime and things (like planes) within that "gravity well" travel straight lines through that curved spacetime. Does Ben think that light itself goes "nose down" to curve around a black hole?
@@socalminstrel Those Flat Earthers probably can't conceive of a black hole or any of the other mysteries of the universe. And don't get them started on their inability to look at historical research data and the math and do without altering it to suit their fixed ideas. If it doesn't fit they'll do their best to debunk it
What I don’t understand about Flat Earthers is that they believe the world is flat, but the moon (and most celestial objects) is a ball. ONLY the Earth is flat. Baffling.
...nah usually if you press them on it, they'll say "We don't know what the moon is..." some think it's a "projection" or a "light"...whatever tf that means! ...I'm no flerf, btw! I've just listened to their silly crap long enough to know
@@billymanilli Just remind them of that Wisconson cheese thief. You think he's storing all the cheese in space in order to cause the Great Cheese Shortage, that's why the government has an underground warehous of ancient cheddar from the Great Depression or even older to combat the problem
😂😂😂 some of us believe the Sun & Moon are flat also, Earth is flat, you thought Earth was a globe? 😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂 Do you feel like an insignificant descendent of curious George? 🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣 You ignorant gullible people are so fkn hilarious
@@akinokusami3623 How would you be able to tell the Sun & Moon aren't flat too? they look like spheres so they must be spheres huh? 🤣🤣 They could be flat & round
A flat earther posting globe evidence? What a shock! It's never happe... Oh who are we kidding, it's all they do. Gotta love it. Also gotta lie to flerf.
Now we need some software that would assign the various pieces of globe earth evidence to a 3 dimensional coordinate system and track their movements as they passed over Bens head.
I really, really hate the 'turn the nose down' argument. Airplanes don't have to turn their nose down to compensate for the curvature of the globe for the same reason you don't have to turn down the nose of your car when you crest a hill. The balance of forces involved do that for you.
in my discussions with flat earthers over the last 12 years.. I've come to realize that scale is an issue.. they really don't get scale.. the nose down plane trope would make sense.. if the earth were actually the size in their diagram.. but since the aircraft is like a bacteria on a basketball.. the land is very very flat. I did some calculations at one point.. to counter this photo of a flat horizon nonsense.. the curve at ant level is so gradual to capture it on a digital camera.. it would have to be a 200MP camera.. and the deviation would be plus/minus ONE PIXEL. So in that context... how do you 'point the nose down'.. when just the act of staying at some altitude will do that unnoticeable.. the earth is big. :P Oh another thing that seems to be completely beyond the capacity is the idea that if you take a sphere.. and draw a horizon line on it.. turns out.. a circle is a flat shape. :P one can only see curvature easily from viewer to horizon.. not laterally. grade 5 geometry is a bitch.
That's not actually correct. Any plane new enough to have instrumentation runs the same calculations used to determine strike or dip in geology and makes automated adjustments during flight. If you need to equate it to something a car does, cruise control would be a better analogy. In order to maintain a particular seed, the computer increases/decreases fuel supply depending on RPMs of the engine. Similarly, planes read and respond to altitude with minor adjustments. In short, it's not that those compensations don't take place, it's that every 5 year-old for the last hundred years has known we would need them, so we've long-since programmed computers to do it for us.
@@vaeshethblade931 I appreciate the correction. Either way, the point stands that the correction is simply a part of normal aeronautic navigation, and, given the size of the planet, the amount of 'dip' one would experience is negligible.
It's less escaping it, and more just utilizing a high enough level of motion so that it's essentially falling in a direction other than towards the ground. Gravity's always a constant, but with enough force, it's possible to resist or use it to one's advantage.@@miamimonk216
8:40 can we just pause and appreciate the absolute breathtaking beauty of the sky during that timelapse?! My god, to think how much technology goes into a vessel that allows us to go into space and yet we are on this biological spaceship flying through the universe all along. The milkyway is just so gorgeous! Great footage!
The more you speak the truth about existence, the less popular it is. This is my experience, anyway. You are right, and in fact, everyday miracles seem to bore the jaded "moral majority". But who cares? We can see the beauty and mystery of life, and they are always welcome to join if they want. Each night, I look out of the giant windscreen of Spaceship Earth and am in awe! ✌️💓
I always love the plane needing to tilt down to adjust for the curve. They can’t grasp that level will always be relative to your location on earth due to gravity. “This is your captain speaking, buckle up we’re approaching the curve of the earth.
Not just gravity, but air pressure from the relative altitude above the ground. The higher you go, the thinner the air, and thus, less lift. The aircraft can't continue to "climb" when going straight )per the FEers) because the air would thin out so less lift, and of course the pull of gravity would keep it at a constant altitude above the ground.
"Downwards" seems to be a such difficult concept for FE:s, doesn't it. In school, my physics teacher use a pvc pipe, a string, and a weight to demonstrate "conservation of angular momentum". I am sure this is done by most teachers around the world. Except perhaps in the USA? Threading the string through the pipe, tying the weight to one end of the string, he then held the unweighted end of the string in one hand, the pipe at the same end with his other hand, and started to make a circular movment with the other (weight side) end of the pipe. As anyone can imagine, the weight started to wizz around, and by letting out or pulling in the string, the velocity of the weight could be changed . Conservation of angular momentum demonstrated. He then expanded the scope of the lesson by asking : "What do you think that _down_ is, for that weight?" The question make me realise that "downwards" is quite the conditional concept. For the weight wizzing around the end of that pipe, "down" was in the direction of the string towards the end of the pipe. This regardless of the apparent "down" from my point if view. Or as it is also said, regardless of my frame of reference. It also gave me an idea of what gravity is. In this experience represented by the teacher's hold on the string. Eventhough we can't _see_ the string that transfer the gravitational force, it is undeniably there.
The aircraft 'dipping of the nose' argument always makes me laugh because they never bother to account for the left/right corrections which would be necessary to fly east/west on a flat earth.
@@artizzy2k2k I suppose that's what happens when you don't think gravity exists. But I wanna know, how come they don't have to tilt right/left every mile when flying east/west at the equator, in order to not end up at the ice wall.
@@Okijuben Your almost making the same scale mistake they do. If we made a flat earth model in a computer program that was too scale, whatever the hell that means, lets just ignore the southern hemisphere like Flerfs do, but if the equator on the flat earth map was the same size as the circumference of earth, if you were a passenger in a plane flying directly east west along that equator you would not notice the tiny adjustments that were being made to maintain the East/west heading around this 40,000 km circle. They would need to be made, about a degree of heading every 110 km or so, but that's change on a scale that humans can't really recognize without instrumentation. It would, of course, become more noticeable the closer you get to the center/North Pole.
I think I've done four or five different video's on the "dipping the nose" foolishness' but these guys are incredibly resilient. The entire concept of CG and center of lift goes completely over their heads (pun intended). They clearly don't grasp the gravity of the situation (yep - another pun). Keep up the good fight Toon!
The adjustments needed just to cope with phugoid and short period dynamic modes are an order of magnitude larger than those "needed" for the curvature. In leveled flight, one can see constant pitch adjustments 10x bigger than what flerfies "demand". Yet, they are the percentile 1 of the IQ histogram
@@pedromega4 Totally agree. Autopilots (or their human analog) are constantly making small adjustments to stay within the tolerances ATC give us. Phugoid oscillations are quite normal - even with planes that have excellent pitch stability. All these guys need to take an introductory flight and find out how it really works rather than making wild guesses based on no experience at all.
I super appreciate that you do not denigrate, rather accept the academic challenge genuinely. I think this is the best way to keep "their" mind open, and also you serve as a wonderful example for anyone approaching the task of discussing a potentially emotional topic with someone sincere but misinformed. Great presentation!
To add to the conversation, Google Earth Pro shows the sky, AFAIK, somewhat accurately (as it is not really hard to implement), desktop version has a time feature that can roughly replicate the features of this flight, the flat earther scrubs through the path with set time and does not use that feature, leading to his wrong conclusion.
When aircraft are on landing approach, they normally do so nose-up & dropping in altitude -- combined with changes in thrust. Curiously, the flerfs haven't yet realized what insight this provides for why aircraft don't "need to drop the nose" for level flight over a spherical planet. In fact, our planet could be a giga-space-Frisbee, cube, pyramid, dodecahedron or sphere, the aerodynamic performance of the aircraft dictates where & how it can fly within a given layer of the atmosphere.
*"When aircraft are on landing approach, they normally do so nose-up..."* Minor correction: On approach, the plane shouldn't be nose up. You don't apply back pressure to the controls and bring the nose up until you're nearly on the ground. In small aircraft, you pull your power back at "tree-top height" and then "flare" by pulling back on the yoke and lifting the nose. The same principle applies to all planes, but the specifics of when and where you cut power and flare varies.
That slightly nose-up attitude is emblematic of swept-wing jet aircraft at low speeds, with lift enhancing devices (flaps) deployed. They need the lift enhancing devices to prevent stalling, but also need to sink at a steady rate. Otherwise this type of plane would "float" and not touch down in time. Propeller planes with straight wings can approach more nose-down, because the propeller itself adds significant drag, so there's less need to pitch up to keep speed in check. A prop can be feathered to produce the desired thrust, while a jet keeps making thrust at flight idle. It's a completely different dynamic.
In descent nose is down and power is off this makes the aircraft fly down with same angle of attack relative to direction of travel. You the pitch up to land you need to stop the wing producing lift and slow as much as possible hence nose up on landing. In flight aircarft stays level because its balanced. No pilot input required.
I was an operations specialist second class in the Navy I worked in the combat information center and along with the navigation of the ship we also had to plot routes for the firing of weapons and guess what's one of the things we always had to take into account when doing our job. we are spinning on the globe
That's awesome. I have several instruction manuals for artillery and large guns on WWII era ships here: mctoon.net/coriolis-artillery/ I am always looking for more references from military for including rotation of the earth. If you have any, I would love to add to the list: mctoon@Mctoon.net
I commend you for your tolerance in dealing with idiots and plain outright stupidity. I once personally rejected a new acquaintance as a friend after finding he was a flat-earther.
Yea I would do the same , worked with a guy …. I was laughing about a debate I had with one . He looks at me and says well it is flat …. I’m like dude , you well , just look up , look at the sun , what shape is it ? He literally said , well how do we truly know what shape it is … like man , look up . He then said , being round doesn’t mean it a sphere …. I then proceeded to laugh at him with another coworker … didn’t like each other much after that … what a numbskull
@AG-qi9xl not really being a shallow friend. It's absurd and it is funny. Apparently you and that other guy doesn't know that true friends make fun of each other all of the time. When you are dumb as a flat earther, there is no reasoning with them. They don't even look anymore and that's why they get dumber.
I went to Maldives last year and Polaris was exactly where it would be in the sky if earth is a globe. It doesn't matter to the flerfers though, they just say it doesn't contradict them and run away when you ask them to explain why.
Last year i saw orion in the sky amd tried to identify other stars using a star chart - but it was a northern hemisphere POV chart so it only worked after i looked at it upside down. Pretty fun, i managed to spot Rigel and Aldebaran.
It’s very funny how making any flat earth stuff work or even believing in it you are playing reality of not just hard mode, but the nightmare mode you unlock after beating the game at least once. Flat earth makes everything so ABSURDLY complex when things are complicated enough already, but for no reason.
What an absolute fail. He just assumed Google Earth models star positions and didn't bother to check? Or is he so dishonest he felt comfortable lying to his audience and just hoped they wouldn't notice he didn't put the date in anywhere? Nice of him to attempt an analysis, but of course he didn't have a clue where to actually start.
From my experiments with this exact time lapse video, it appears that Google Earth does position the starry sky correctly when it has access to date and time information. In the KML file I downloaded from FlightAware, there are timestamps and positions of the aircraft. Google Earth does use those timestamps to orient the sky. In the Pro version (what you install on your computer) you can go to View->Explore->Sky and and get the full sky view, with planets etc. You can also download and display the path of various space craft and comets etc. via KML files.
He used google not to show the exact position of the stars, just to show that travelling such distances in a globe you must notice clear changes in the sky . It seems flat earthers are not the only ones that love misinterpretations.
here's a great idea for flerfs: get the dreaded laser gyroscope on board of an airplane and measure the angular change over a long distance flight. measure the exact time it took in hours and multiply by 15° subtract the result from the angular change of the flight if flying against the spin of the earth and add it if flying with the spin of the earth (there's a 50/50 chance I've mixed up the directions) 😅
I'm an archer, I hate that when I fire my arrow, I initially have to run after the arrow and keep pointing its nose down so it doesn't fly off into space. Once its momentum starts to reduce, thankfully gravity thanks over...because I'm exhausted by then.
Airplanes trim their controls. The reference for that trim is sideways straight, no roll, and vertically level (ie constant height). This means that they will nose down ever so slightly, but it is neglible compared to other causes of need for trim, such as current weight distribution, air pressure, speed, gyroscopic effects from engines and so on. Trimming is just something the pilot does to make the plane flight on course when there is no control input, and he does it with the ground as reference.
I've been saying this since the first time I heard a flerf make this asinine claim. If you haven't engaged an autopilot / flight controller and you haven't trimmed the plane, you will continually make minor control inputs to maintain heading, speed and altitude. The amount of control input required to "nose down" to stay at a constant altitude is so miniscule no one (including the pilot) will even notice the plane's incredibly minor change in attitude. Of course, if flerfing morons could think, they wouldn't be flerfing morons.
@@frocat5163 -- _"The amount of control input required to "nose down" to stay at a constant altitude is so miniscule..."_ Actually, it's non-existent. A pilot must correct for many real-world factors that perturb a level flightpath, but no control input is required for the Earth's curvature specifically, and the level-flying aircraft doesn't "nose down" anyway. The level-flying aircraft does indeed rotate about its own lateral axis as it follows the Earth's curvature in proportion, but that is not a downward movement.
Dear Flat Earther. The road surface of the Golden Gate bridge is poured LEVEL with the superstructure truss underneath. When cars drive over the bridge they don't need to dip DOWN to go over the curve. If they don't change lanes then they are driving STRAIGHT as they go over the curve. A cars frame in the center is tangent to the curve. A truck bed is FLAT in relation to the curve. It's also TANGENT to the curve. Placing a carpenter square against a up/ down railing at the north enf at a given height from the road will give you a 90deg angle. A carpenter level done the same at the south end will also give a 90deg angle but both ends 90deg will not be on the same plane. Even though both are at the same height from the road surface and both are at 90deg. Glad I could clarify Geometry for you.
I'm sure the day a globe earth video is debunked they would.. Although to be fair, I don't think the human race will exist for that long, so there would be no one to delete the video..
Flat earthers: "If Earth was a globe, planes would need to dip their nose downwards on a globe" No flat earther ever: "If Earth was flat, planes would need to constantly turn left when flying eastwards, even on the equator or the southern whatever-they-call-the-hemisphere"
I just want to know what the hell the sun is hiding behind at night. How high was that plane flying? Yet I still can't see the sun. Shouldn't I always be able to see the sun on a flat earth? Yet at night there's not even the slightest hint of the Sun being in the sky. What's it hiding behind?
Gotta love TC always getting caught. I've been arguing with a dedicated flerf named Roberttozzi for over a month now on the wales picture. I pointed him to sableagle's video which outlines the proper headings and also uses pixel measurements showing it's a cloud. The guy has been gish galloping me using every line in the flerf script.
It's kind of appropriate, in a strange way. The natural sciences do not set axioms; mathematics does. Axioms represent core truths that don't trace back to reasoning and measurements; they're the foundation that logic expands upon. To a flat earther, the flat earth is axiomatic and therefore unquestionable, the precise opposite of empiric science. If aeroplanes "nose dropping" were axiomatic, the Earth had to get out of the way because airplanes can't stop turning down - which would be quite the remarkable spooky action at a distance, as they're not in contact, and we don't have records of the Earth drastically changing shape when aerodynamic flight was invented.
He should have given up when he saw the rotation to the right, totally expected on a Globe and Totally Impossible on a flat-earth with a dome. But no, he continued to sink deeper and deeper in his attempt to prove his hypothesis.
You know what they say, it takes years to build a stellar reputation but only seconds to ruin it. Its in danger of losing its 'ivey' league status if this keeps up.
See if you can get mctoon to pay you out the 10k. here is calculations obtained to measure earth to sun via sextant sextant measures the altitude of celestial objects example the sun When you look into the sextant you will see 1 the horizon 2 you will see a movable arm which changes the angle to the celestial body measured. the light from the sun will reflect off a mirror the image of the sun will be brought down to the horizon. by manipulating the lever arm it will obtain the altitude of the sun. the sun is always between tropic of Capricorn and tropic of cancer. which is approximately 3000 miles. diameter approximately 32 miles this is where round earth measurements vary trying to get the sun smaller by moving further away. once you calculate the diameter of the sun 1 minute of arc on the sextant represents a nautical mile. 1 arc minute is 1/60th of a degree and represents a nautical mile. once you have collected your arc minutes. you can than do the calculation to find the suns altitude. Suns diameter is approximately 32 miles of arc minutes =s 32 miles in diameter. using the sextant and basic trigonometry this is approximately 3000 miles away. here is a 3 minute video that explains how sextants measure celestial objects czcams.com/video/x3jypIZMmeo/video.html&si=EnSIkaIECMiOmarE
The fact that he deleted the videos settles any question of whether he knows he's lying or not. If he were actually convinced, those videos would stay up. He only has cause to remove the videos if he knows he's lying. He's destroying the evidence that proves he's wrong. People who think they're right don't destroy evidence they're right. Next!
I forgot who did the video originally, but the calculations were made showing exactly how much of an adjustment a pilot would actually have to make to account for curvature and there were a lot of zeroes after the decimal (fractions upon fractions of a centimeter on an airplane yoke).
If the earth is flat & there is a tupperware lid on top of pizza earth to contain all the air, then pressure at sea level = pressure at 33,000 feet so passengers in planes should be fine flying without pressurisation right? But how come planes need to be pressurised at that altitude? I'd love to hear from flerfs on that.
"Planes have to constantly tilt downwards and they don't" Well on a flat earth they have to constantly turn left or right in order to not fly off the disk....
Altimeter readings are based on barometric pressure outside the plane (along with a couple agreed-upon aviataion conevtentions). That pressure is always minutely changing even at the same altitude above sea level. To keep a constant altitude, a pilot of autopilot woul need to make conastant minute adjustments up and down -- but the net sum of those ajustments will result in the orientation of the plane matching the curved earth.
He continually does the flerf's favourite, once proved wrong, do a full reset and continue being wrong. Not willing or able to acknowledge they were wrong, just plough on with the lies.
14:22 I think there's a misspeaking here. The position of the south celestial pole is south, slightly to the left, not west. The camera was aimed (azimuthal) west of south (by about 34 degrees). In the overlaid celestial coordinate system, west is nearly vertical (downwards, clockwise) in most of the picture, while azimuthal west is to the right (matching the direction above horizontal), with due west at the celestial equator, labelled with all zeros.
...Taboo is very good at being intellectually dishonest. His gullible sheeple do not notice.
Před 11 měsíci+4
I don't understand the height adjustment argument. If you take a small toy car, and put it on a big ball, and roll it a little, you don't need to adjust the angle of the car... the physics will do for you naturally. On the other hand, if the earth was flat, to be able to follow the routes the planes flight, you would have to constantly adjust the direction of the plane, and always turn to the left or to the right. So, seen from the cockpit, the horizon should always be slightly tilted. Is this the case? I don't know, I'm not a pilot.
Having been fortunate enough to be in the cockpit a few times - no, there is no bank angle. And the two major daytime flights were close enough to south -> north and east ->west. While I was not looking for evidence on this nonsense, as the internet had not yet given a voice to these morons, I was an enthusiast keenly aware of the aeroplane's behaviour.
Taboo Conspiracy, aka Kermit the flerf. Acknowledgement to Creaky Blinder. The airplane dipping its nose or it will fly off in to space is still my most favourite flerf argument because it just exposes how dumb they are and have absolutely no idea how airplanes fly. I can see how honest Kermit is, he has blocked all 3 of my youtube accounts, that speaks volumes.
The aircraft attitude adjustment is called "trim." Once the trim is set, the aircraft stays at the set altitude. Some aircraft allow the aerodynamic forces to be trimmed in all three axes. The simplest control system on an aircraft allows trim to be set by either the position of the horizontal stabilizer on the tail, or trim tabs that are incorporated into the horizontal stabilizer. Once the aircraft is trimmed, it will stay at the set altitude without any further control input.
I love how flerfs are still so ignorant of the basic principles of aviation that they think the only way to reduce altitude is by nosing down. Not only is that not the only way, it’s not even the preferred way. Ideally, a pilot will descend in a safe, controlled manner by _throttling down_ because it is more controllable and far less likely to induce motion sickness. It also makes it easier to maintain heading while descending.
Ah, but MCToon! He wants measurements from instruments aboard the plane! And then he'll want the pilots to swear on a bible or something. And then he'll want a video from space showing the plane traveling around the ball. And then he'll want a handheld demonstration of gravity visualized with the solar system. And then he'll want a room sized demonstration of quantum fields. And then...
Expecting an aircraft to have the pilot needing to make noticeable nose down or tail up tweaks for "curvature correction" amongst all the minor control movements for wind etc, is disappointingly unsurprising.
Ben also doesn't understand that airplanes aren't as big as the country of Saudi Arabia
Im sure he also believes a mosuito flies diving down because of the curvature, no incoherence here lol.
I don't know, planes are pretty big. That scale from the video looks pretty accurate, planes are the size of the entire Middle Eastern region, aren't they?
I think all the words after the the 4th one are redundant!
Scale?
Phhh!👅
You think anything mathematical is logical to them?
They think water can't bend.. 😂
Tear drops of hysteria and rain drops laugh at their theory.
@@MadDragon75 I don't think anything is logical to them. Thanks for asking
I actually considered starting a CZcams channel as a "flat earther" who keeps failing. I'd even get my wife in on the act by having her interrupt me during my videos and telling me what a loser I am. But flat earthers have done all these things already, so now it's old hat.
Poor CC. Must be tough being him. Even his wife thinks he's an idiot. Hope she finds someone better.
It’s impossible to parody a flat earther without sounding exactly like one.
The stars would follow the path Ben thinks if the flight lasted a few seconds.
Analogy: Concord could make the sun rise in the west.
You'd get sick of having to do so many takes, as I bet you couldn't say that flerf garbage without laughing in the middle of it...
"...and it would require bendy PSI (giggle), crap, take 52..."
@@emaginet I'm convinced that his wife is the reason he's started doing videos in his vehicles, lol
Arguing with flerfs is like trying to eat water with a fork.
You can eat water with a fork if you freeze the water first.
Then it’s not water it’s ice, water in a different form but not water@@Turambar3791
@@Turambar3791 Forks are all CGI.
@@Turambar3791 u also can finish ur argument with flerfs if u freeze them first
You can also do it if you have the patience to keep doing for a couple of hours. You just need enough willpower and motivation. So I think eaten water with a fork is actually easier then arguing with a flat earther.
It's funny that there are zero photographs of a flat earth, only illustrations.
And there's alota self made field tests to "prove" their theory. But all the time their tests prove the world to be round. And they blame it on nonexistent Sci-Fi tech that stopped it.
That goes for globe too, though...Not sure what that proves
@@iHoPStA There are hundreds of photos proving the earth is not flat. I think that kinda makes flat earth null and void.
@@antonywilson4539 You believe the Blue Marble CGI that's Hilarious 🤪 NASA Lies about Everything
LOL
My hypothesis is that Ben will ignore this video, delete his own video and finds something else to misinterpret or misunderstand to mislead his audience.
and repeat, repeat, repeat, repeat....
@@prasaite
Something, something, definition of insanity tied to needless repetition, something, something.
Hey, he's a trump worshipper & is allowed to be that stupid 😂😂😂
They are crazy. Stuck in a new believe system that limit there growth. They are stuck in the matrix
Seven months and it's still up. I'm surprised.
I didn’t realize that airplanes are 600 miles long You learn something new every day
Like all flerfs that mention this argument, they picture something like a diecast model airplane flying round a basketball. 😅
You would spend more time traveling to and from your seat than the actual flight takes.
And yet the seats are still so cramped. air travel is such a scam!
"Honey I've got to go the Plane is boarding, I'll sent you a text in 3 hours when I get to my seat..."
It’s only the size of the Sinai peninsula
Flat earthers. know enough to ask questions and be curious. Don't know enough to understand any of the answers.
HAHAHAHA
Perfect example of the Dunning-Kruger effect.
They refuse to listen to the answers.
I don't know how to tell them that we already got the answers decades ago. What they question is what 5 years old ask.
i have flat earthers as coworkers. it's painful to listen to them
Flat earthers all seem to suffer from the Dunning-Kruger effect. They also completely underestimate how big the earth is.
They never seem to understand scale or gravity. They'll pour water on a basketball and say "see?" However, they seem blissfully ignorant to the fact that their "experiment" is still bound by the gravitational pull of the planet they are on. They just want things to be simple, so that they don't look so stupid.
Noone proves the globe better than a flat earther.
Nah, this assumes an undeserved level of competence heretofore unseen in any flerf.
Nobody _blunders their way_ into proving the Earth isn't flat mor than flerfs. Do kids these days know who Mr. Magoo is?
"thanks Bob'
They actually help us to learn more about the globe! 😅
Besides actual experts. Flerfs are just so obsessive that they find things average people won't look for.
Its because they are doing indirect proofs (geometry concept) without being aware of it
He deserves a Nobel prize for solving the rocket problem "have you tried pointing your plane up?"
Wait if they flew towards the moon they should see a noticeable change in angular size even if it's too far to fly to. It would still be "local" enough to notice if true.
@@nebulanAt the very least it should appear that the angle from which they are viewing the moon is changing, which it doesn’t
😂
Reminds me of The Simpsons episode, where Bart is in the well, and when they finally dig down to free him (Thank you Sting and the canary that died of natural causes), when they need to get out of the hole, Wiggum realizes "Dig up, stupid!"
If that was possible, the Wright Brothers would have gone into space!
Ask a flat earther in Australia to take a photo of Polaris. Wonder how that would work out.
They deny existance of Australia.
That's just a weird mystery.
There is a reason there are few Australian flat earthers
""Polaris is cgi"" they'd say
Take the photo in day time..
Navigators living hundreds of years ago would be shaking their heads at flat earthers and their "theories".
😂😂😂 you got theories, we got facts
@@tonyflatearther you realize that a theory is the highest level of understanding a certain topic...? Theory is what englobes equations, laws, principles, etc.
Just leaving this here...
@@PauBas94 what ever you want to believe that helps you sleep at night
@@PauBas94 the only space nasa has ever explored is the massive empty space between your ears glerf princess
I'm a pilot and I will just say a aircraft in flight is always in motion and controls are always being made to maintain a level flight, the tiny amount of earth curvature is being accounted for by the simple fact that altitude will change over time but autopilot or the pilot itself will counteract it because the autopilot is set to a altitude and it does that by changing the pitch/nose up or down, Even with no control input aircraft will not fly in a perfect straight line it will deviate because of turbulence or changing air currents and also changes to weight distribution of fuel and passengers, If you watch some videos of a boeing aircraft in cruise you may notice a wheel spinning frequently that is a trim wheel which changes the pitch of the aircraft to maintain a level flight set via autopilot
I tried to demonstrate this with FlightGear, years ago, deliberately flying within a layer of heavy turbulence, but the amount of work it took to keep that plane's altitude and heading something near intended wasn't really obvious from watching the controls on the screen.
And in a controlled environment, a plane will always fly level on average with no adjustments. Flerfers can't understand air density and thrust LOL
Even if we grant literally every aspect of the flerfs argument and ignore all other problems with it then planes still wouldn’t _have_ to nose down since altitude can also be adjusted by changing speed, thus changing how much lift the wings generate.
Even without autopilot, and just holding the trim steady, eventually the plane is going to start going down because there's not enough air for the required lift to maintain that heading. It's not like boats are not at risk of floating into space if they don't "tilt the nose down" all the time.
Also, if the plane were to fly "straight", i.e. increasing altitude as the Earth curves away, it would be moving into less dense layers of atmosphere. This reduction in air density would decrease the lift on the wings, causing the plane to lose altitude until it achieves an equilibrium again, which would leave it at exactly the same altitude it was before.
(This assumes all other factors, including air speed, remain constant, which they don't, of course. But I'm just trying to isolate the relevant variable.)
Professor Dave pointed out a perfect counter to the plane argument: on the flat earth, a plane would have to be constantly banking right if flying east to west, or constantly left if flying west to east. And the bank would have to be more pronounced the farther north you go. No constant banking, no flat earth.
That's the same reason they don't comprehend how the flight path, when modeled on a map, is an arc and not a straight line.
I think that would be true on either model of the earth, less turning on a globe to follow a line of latitude. The straight flightpath would be a great circle route connecting the departure and destination on the line of latitude. Not that they comprehend the whole great circle navigation thing anyway... but they have a friend who's a pilot and says its all bs XD
@@vanessacherche6393 "I think that would be true on either model of the earth" - no.
The shortest path between 2 points on the surface of a sphere is a great-circle. And one defining characteristics of great-circle is that they have NO curvature to the left or right when travelling. The only curvature observed when following them is downwards.
@@ABaumstumpf 'And one defining characteristics of great-circle is that they have NO curvature to the left or right when travelling'
- Well, OP stipulated travelling east to west, which is a path on a parallel. Those are not great circles, except for the equator. Exactly how much they would have to bank at a given latitude is different on a flat and a globe Earth, but banking is necessary on both.
@tzvikrasner6073 --It's better said that the aircraft would have to _turn_ constantly while traveling East to West on a flat Earth, rather than "bank." Strictly speaking, an aircraft can turn without banking (and vice versa).
I love that we're calling the firmament a Tupperware lid now, brilliant
Yes, but does it make a "brrrrp" sound when it's removed from the container?😅😮😊😂
I'm sure TW will sue you for using their brand name 😂
I object to this profusely, it’s an insult to Tupperware.
@@jack_jack_attack Flerfs probably think the atmosphere would go sssssssssssssssss. :,D
Keeps the flat earth 🌍 nice and fresh .
The unintended consequences of the internet and "social" media is catastrophic to society.
Don’t blame the internet. People have always been stupid. In the past they thought the world was flat, we killed people for religious beliefs, we called alchemists witches and burnt them at the stake, we sacrificed people to goddesses that didn’t exist. We’re killing our environment while knowing we’re killing our environment. I mean look at today, we have unnecessary wars over things that shouldn’t be a problem at all like who lives where and who gets along with who. We’re just a dumb self destructive species😂🤷🏿♂️…we’ve always been dumb as a collective.
"Social media gives legions of idiots the right to speak when they once only spoke at a bar after a glass of wine, without harming the community ... but now they have the same right to speak as a Nobel Prize winner. It's the invasion of the idiots"
Umberto Eco
I'm not sure the consequences are unintentional.
Oh man, you used math and science. Now he is going to be extra confused.
Using that same logic if we lived on a giant space pizza would you have to continually bank left or right depending on direction traveled to stay on a latitudinal line? That seems like a test they could do.
There is no "space" The firmament divides the water from the water. No one gets through the firmament. You are living in fantasy NASA TV CGI land.
"I'll accept your evidence, but only under the condition that it might help prove what I already believe." What a joke.
If you tell a pilot that the earth is flat, they will only respond after laughing at you.
There have been pilots who have confirmed the earth is flat, but they have to be careful, as their career depends on maintaining the myth.
@@2Malachi Yes, it's hard to fly planes when you're correctly an unemployed flerf pile it.
@@2Malachi coincidently, none of those people were actually pilots, just imaginary friends living in your hollow skull.
Will Ben be honest and violate the axiom: "gotta lie to flerf"?
I had a conversation with him about it, and i predict this will not convince him. Was thinking about teaching him Blender to make his own model to test it...
@@oledhaeseleer Better to teach him geometry.
My guess is ............ no.
The first law of Flerf is absolute
I predict he will not be honest and follow The zeroth law of flerf: gotta lie to flerf.
"If we lived on a globe it's axiomatic"
Firstly, planes land nose up, so no, it is not 'axiomatic'.
Secondly, if we lived in a world where our airplanes were maybe 2,000 km long, the 'nose-dipping' might be a thing, but scale has always escaped flerfs.
Nose dipping relative to what? A reference point out in space?
@@scott_meyer they struggle with the concept of up....
Yes scale evades them by hiding behind truth.
The other day I had a flerf arguing with me on Facebook, and I knew he was a Taboo viewer when he threw the word "axiomatic" into his word salad. It was almost as funny as "spectroscopy needs a container".😂
@timolynch149 --It's not a matter of scale. No aircraft, regardless of size, would have to dip its nose in level flight over the Earth. Its nose would remain at a constant altitude, meaning no downward movement (i.e. "dip") at all.
At 3:40 ... sure sounds like a clear case of him admitting flat Earth is bullshit without him actually saying flat Earth is bullshit. But he wants to continue lying for the few dollars it nets him anyway
same as MSM right? satan is looser, he has lost. $mammon$ is in charge.
Trying to talk sense into a flat earther is like trying to push smoke up a cat's arse with a knitting needle.
LMFAOOOO HOW DOES THIS HAVE NO LIKES, THIS IS HILARIOUS
The voice of experience.
@@ConspiracyToonzsadly yes. Apparently I'm a paid shill for NASA. I hope I'm being paid a good amount, but I have no idea who to contact to find out where this money is.
The “dipping” of the nose of planes have been debunked by Wolfie using the HUD display of his plane!
Just about every flerf claim has been debunked by Wolfie at some point!
Yeah, but that’s no match for a flerf’s “but muh conspiracy” argument…
@@John.0z I stumbled on a Wolfie video a while back and sat there, slack jawed the entire time. When I was done I watched it again. He's amazing.
@@ReValveiT_01 Wolfie's presentations are all excellent, and always delivered in a calm voice - even as he shreds some flat earth claim.
He has explained that he used to be a flight instructor. If ever I wanted to get a pilot's licence, he would be my first choice for an instructor.... however that is a past occupation for him., and I am too old anyway
In his email, Ben said this:
"I highly doubt that I can have an intelligent conversation with an honest and objective person."
I agree with his hypothesis here.
Visible at 3:30, this is a portion of a diatribe about TC's biases. Technically you've removed the qualifier and emotional consequence sections, which is highly prone to misquotes. However, the qualifier boils down to "if you don't buy my narrative unquestioningly" (which no objective person would) and the consequence is immaterial, so the meaning remains rather accurate - and ironic.
So by the FE logic if on a globe a plane must “nose down” to maintain altitude, well if we follow that logic on a flat earth a plane must always bank to the left or Right to maintain a east or west heading. If they says that’s not the case the next question is what is the force that keeps the plane level and on the same heading on the FE?
Haha, that's such a great argument, wish I'd thought of that myself 😆
So anything that debunks him is a "mystery"? Hey you can't get out of that one that easily. The Southern Star Trails completely DESTROY his pancake fantasy. What he REFUSES to realise is that it's not a mystery for a globe so the world is a globe. That simple!
@@Sonshine70sLol.
I think that would be true on either model of the earth, less turning on a globe to follow a line of latitude. The straight flightpath would be a great circle route connecting the departure and destination on the line of latitude. Not that they comprehend the whole great circle navigation thing anyway... but they have a friend who's a pilot and says its all bs XD
@@Sonshine70sNo, no, no. The north pole is up, not the equator. If you fly Oz to Europe, your ears "pop" all the way because you are going up all the way.
By the way, why is it that your ear's "pop" when you drive up a mountain? What would happen if you could keep driving higher and higher? A mystery, I guess.
Strange isn't it? Flerfs love to use aviation examples so frequently to "prove" the Earth is Flat... When not one commercial pilot can be found, who agrees with them. Nor can they claim a single commercial ocean navigator is a Flerf.
I will never get bored of that "oops" meme 😁
Good old Nigel Cheesy Hands 😄
I was just about to say the same thing.
… oops
The flerfs are slipping up. This is not the only example. Hilariously, Flatzoid debunked himself in his recent "Dare You" stream at 1:44:15 by mentioning that the summer sunlight times for his bother in Cape Town were about an hour longer than for him (Flatzy) further north and thus closer to the tropic. His response about this was just to say "weird", without realising the significace of this debunking not only the flat earth, but their claim that the sun sets by going too far away to see.
PS. You may want to point this out to him in your debate with him tonight.
"Sets because it's too far away to see" but then Flerfs forget we can see stars that are according to their model are magnitudes much farther away.
@@GeistView I've pointed that out to flerfers before. They really don't like it, especially if you go step by step: Where does the sun go at night? It goes too far away to see. Where are the stars? In the firmament. That's further than the sun, right? Then they run away or try to change the subject to vaccines or something.
“Too far away to see” have they never seen a sunset? The Sun goes below the horizon, it doesn’t shrink until it disappears.
Another mistery
This is all these water heads have. Losers gonna lose.
My favorite example of this was the UK CZcamsr Tigerdan925.
He accidentally proved the earth wasn't flat across several videos and was willing to admit that he could no longer say the earth was flat. (Though he hadn't determined that it was a globe)
Sadly he got bullied off the Internet by other flat earthers and deleted his videos from his channel.
Was he trying to make a map?
@@greenfloatingtoad Maybe. There was one flerfer who stumbled upon making a map and failed to map antarctica, which did it for him.
It is a cult.
If the Earth were flat, it would be a paradise for cartographers, wouldn't it?
Yes, a map that doesn't distort when it is printed would be a dream.
Won't someone think of the Mercator Projection?
Someone claiming clouds are mountains hits me close to home. I live in Indiana. The closest mountains to us are the Appalachians. When I was in 7th grade I was riding the bus to school as the sun was rising, and one of my cousins was awestruck by the mountains on the horizon behind which the sun was rising... He couldn't get over how amazing it looked. Those "mountains" were clouds. I was completely baffled.
I remember his 'Alps' claim. You only had to look at a larger version of the image, to see his 'Alps' were obviously clouds and not that far away.
I saw something very like that a couple of years ago. I would have sworn that the there were ranges of high hills off in the distance ahead of me as I was driving more or less straight east at sunrise. It was quite impressive. As it happens, where I live east takes me to flat lands. Were I facing west I'd see real mountains which are pretty close. Very soon now the tops of the mountains will be sparkling white with fresh snow.
Oops 😂
"Oh no! Giant flying sheep!"
"...Those are clouds."
"NOOOOOOO!"
He wrote flat earthers “blaze new ground” while using Stone Age science! 😂hilarious
This makes me think, if you asked a flerf to draw a circle. They'd draw a square, hexagon, polygon etc. As a constant curve is beyond their comprehension...
You seem to have gotten to the crux of the problem.
@@matchrocket1702Jesus got there first, I believe.
@@SloverOfTeuth 😂
The idea of continuity is a pretty mind-boggling idea to begin with, in all fairness. Most of us just accept it and move on without realizing just how weird it is
Which is funny since by technical definitions as i learned back in my old technical Drawing classes in high-school a curve/circle is just made up of an extremely large series of points... so a circle is more or less a polygon with an infinite number of sides.
Its still a constant curve despite that fact though as you say. I just dont understand how they cant recognize that since the plane is constantly fighting gravity to maintain a specific altitude the plane will naturally follow the curve as long as it maintains said altitude. When changing altitude, for a while it either 'dips' into or away from the curve, if it continues to change altitude either up or down it either ends up in space or hits the ground dependant on how long it applies those changes (and yeah i know atmosphere and lack thereof etc would preclude a plane reaching space lol)... but it all comes down to that old interaction with gravity in the end... oh yeah i forgot, they don't think gravity is a thing. Convenient for their argument i guess.
if the earth was flat I should be able to see the tallest mountains from one side of the earth to the other with a telescope.
They have a comeback for that too, these flat headed flat Earthers Say that "The atmo"SPHERE" is very thick and dense with Particulate matter, hence why you can't do that" OR they'll say "its due to pollution!"
Doctors: There’s nothing beyond brain death.
Flerfs: Hold my beer.
They all know it for a fact... they're living proof that human beings can walk, talk, breathe, and act even AFTER brain death!
Pilot here, though not commercial. The pilot does NOT need to ever nose down to keep going around the globe, that happens automatically, and not by autopilot, but this thing called gravity, which we might as well think of as a string going from the center of the earth to the center of gravity of the aircraft, so you never need to nose down due to the earth being a globe, you do need to nose down and up at times, but due to changes in wind, speed, and heat (thermals), not the ground falling away.
_"...you do need to nose down and up at times, but due to changes in wind, speed, and heat (thermals), not the ground falling away."_
Well said.
That's what Einstein's theory of general relativity is all about. Masses (like the Earth) curve spacetime and things (like planes) within that "gravity well" travel straight lines through that curved spacetime. Does Ben think that light itself goes "nose down" to curve around a black hole?
@@socalminstrel Those Flat Earthers probably can't conceive of a black hole or any of the other mysteries of the universe. And don't get them started on their inability to look at historical research data and the math and do without altering it to suit their fixed ideas.
If it doesn't fit they'll do their best to debunk it
Ouch, so he prooved curvature and rotation. Classic flerf move!
What I don’t understand about Flat Earthers is that they believe the world is flat, but the moon (and most celestial objects) is a ball. ONLY the Earth is flat. Baffling.
...nah
usually if you press them on it, they'll say "We don't know what the moon is..."
some think it's a "projection" or a "light"...whatever tf that means!
...I'm no flerf, btw! I've just listened to their silly crap long enough to know
@@billymanilli Just remind them of that Wisconson cheese thief. You think he's storing all the cheese in space in order to cause the Great Cheese Shortage, that's why the government has an underground warehous of ancient cheddar from the Great Depression or even older to combat the problem
😂😂😂 some of us believe the Sun & Moon are flat also, Earth is flat, you thought Earth was a globe? 😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂 Do you feel like an insignificant descendent of curious George? 🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣 You ignorant gullible people are so fkn hilarious
They just can't believe that they are not special.
@@akinokusami3623 How would you be able to tell the Sun & Moon aren't flat too? they look like spheres so they must be spheres huh? 🤣🤣 They could be flat & round
A flat earther posting globe evidence? What a shock! It's never happe... Oh who are we kidding, it's all they do. Gotta love it. Also gotta lie to flerf.
Interesting!
The first law of Flerf is unbroken
15° per hour drift, YEAH !
As a programmer, that's some really nice software by your friend!
Now we need some software that would assign the various pieces of globe earth evidence to a 3 dimensional coordinate system and track their movements as they passed over Bens head.
I really, really hate the 'turn the nose down' argument. Airplanes don't have to turn their nose down to compensate for the curvature of the globe for the same reason you don't have to turn down the nose of your car when you crest a hill. The balance of forces involved do that for you.
in my discussions with flat earthers over the last 12 years.. I've come to realize that scale is an issue.. they really don't get scale.. the nose down plane trope would make sense.. if the earth were actually the size in their diagram.. but since the aircraft is like a bacteria on a basketball.. the land is very very flat. I did some calculations at one point.. to counter this photo of a flat horizon nonsense.. the curve at ant level is so gradual to capture it on a digital camera.. it would have to be a 200MP camera.. and the deviation would be plus/minus ONE PIXEL. So in that context... how do you 'point the nose down'.. when just the act of staying at some altitude will do that unnoticeable.. the earth is big. :P Oh another thing that seems to be completely beyond the capacity is the idea that if you take a sphere.. and draw a horizon line on it.. turns out.. a circle is a flat shape. :P one can only see curvature easily from viewer to horizon.. not laterally. grade 5 geometry is a bitch.
That's not actually correct. Any plane new enough to have instrumentation runs the same calculations used to determine strike or dip in geology and makes automated adjustments during flight. If you need to equate it to something a car does, cruise control would be a better analogy. In order to maintain a particular seed, the computer increases/decreases fuel supply depending on RPMs of the engine. Similarly, planes read and respond to altitude with minor adjustments. In short, it's not that those compensations don't take place, it's that every 5 year-old for the last hundred years has known we would need them, so we've long-since programmed computers to do it for us.
@@vaeshethblade931 I appreciate the correction. Either way, the point stands that the correction is simply a part of normal aeronautic navigation, and, given the size of the planet, the amount of 'dip' one would experience is negligible.
Lol thats a terrible analogy...a car is on a road that goes up and down ..a plane is flying....so a pla e cannot escape gravity is what u r saying.
It's less escaping it, and more just utilizing a high enough level of motion so that it's essentially falling in a direction other than towards the ground. Gravity's always a constant, but with enough force, it's possible to resist or use it to one's advantage.@@miamimonk216
8:40 can we just pause and appreciate the absolute breathtaking beauty of the sky during that timelapse?! My god, to think how much technology goes into a vessel that allows us to go into space and yet we are on this biological spaceship flying through the universe all along. The milkyway is just so gorgeous! Great footage!
The more you speak the truth about existence, the less popular it is. This is my experience, anyway. You are right, and in fact, everyday miracles seem to bore the jaded "moral majority". But who cares? We can see the beauty and mystery of life, and they are always welcome to join if they want. Each night, I look out of the giant windscreen of Spaceship Earth and am in awe! ✌️💓
@@That_Freedom_Guy cherish the small things that end up being pretty big and significant if they weren't so in tune.
@@oBseSsIoNPC Absolutely. 👍
it truly is beautiful
It literally wasn't even anything to look at.
I always love the plane needing to tilt down to adjust for the curve. They can’t grasp that level will always be relative to your location on earth due to gravity.
“This is your captain speaking, buckle up we’re approaching the curve of the earth.
Not just gravity, but air pressure from the relative altitude above the ground. The higher you go, the thinner the air, and thus, less lift. The aircraft can't continue to "climb" when going straight )per the FEers) because the air would thin out so less lift, and of course the pull of gravity would keep it at a constant altitude above the ground.
"Downwards" seems to be a such difficult concept for FE:s, doesn't it.
In school, my physics teacher use a pvc pipe, a string, and a weight to demonstrate "conservation of angular momentum".
I am sure this is done by most teachers around the world. Except perhaps in the USA?
Threading the string through the pipe, tying the weight to one end of the string, he then held the unweighted end of the
string in one hand, the pipe at the same end with his other hand, and started to make a circular movment with the other
(weight side) end of the pipe. As anyone can imagine, the weight started to wizz around, and by letting out or pulling in
the string, the velocity of the weight could be changed . Conservation of angular momentum demonstrated.
He then expanded the scope of the lesson by asking : "What do you think that _down_ is, for that weight?"
The question make me realise that "downwards" is quite the conditional concept. For the weight wizzing around the end
of that pipe, "down" was in the direction of the string towards the end of the pipe. This regardless of the apparent "down"
from my point if view. Or as it is also said, regardless of my frame of reference. It also gave me an idea of what gravity is.
In this experience represented by the teacher's hold on the string. Eventhough we can't _see_ the string that transfer the
gravitational force, it is undeniably there.
One of the stars he chose isn't even a star, but the star cluster M7...
The aircraft 'dipping of the nose' argument always makes me laugh because they never bother to account for the left/right corrections which would be necessary to fly east/west on a flat earth.
They must think you'll fly into space if you don't dip down
@@artizzy2k2k I suppose that's what happens when you don't think gravity exists. But I wanna know, how come they don't have to tilt right/left every mile when flying east/west at the equator, in order to not end up at the ice wall.
@@Okijuben plot convenience
@@Okijuben Also, on Flerfia, all directions are south--even due north.
@@Okijuben Your almost making the same scale mistake they do. If we made a flat earth model in a computer program that was too scale, whatever the hell that means, lets just ignore the southern hemisphere like Flerfs do, but if the equator on the flat earth map was the same size as the circumference of earth, if you were a passenger in a plane flying directly east west along that equator you would not notice the tiny adjustments that were being made to maintain the East/west heading around this 40,000 km circle. They would need to be made, about a degree of heading every 110 km or so, but that's change on a scale that humans can't really recognize without instrumentation. It would, of course, become more noticeable the closer you get to the center/North Pole.
I think I've done four or five different video's on the "dipping the nose" foolishness' but these guys are incredibly resilient. The entire concept of CG and center of lift goes completely over their heads (pun intended). They clearly don't grasp the gravity of the situation (yep - another pun). Keep up the good fight Toon!
Also, the aircraft is flying through a dynamic atmosphere and therefore needs constant attitude adjustment.
@@grahvis
Flerfs all need an attitude adjustment.
The adjustments needed just to cope with phugoid and short period dynamic modes are an order of magnitude larger than those "needed" for the curvature. In leveled flight, one can see constant pitch adjustments 10x bigger than what flerfies "demand". Yet, they are the percentile 1 of the IQ histogram
@@pedromega4 Totally agree. Autopilots (or their human analog) are constantly making small adjustments to stay within the tolerances ATC give us. Phugoid oscillations are quite normal - even with planes that have excellent pitch stability. All these guys need to take an introductory flight and find out how it really works rather than making wild guesses based on no experience at all.
Heavy stuff ...
I super appreciate that you do not denigrate, rather accept the academic challenge genuinely. I think this is the best way to keep "their" mind open, and also you serve as a wonderful example for anyone approaching the task of discussing a potentially emotional topic with someone sincere but misinformed. Great presentation!
"Cosmic tupperware lid"...😅...does it come with a lifetime guarantee?
Quite a conspiracy that manages to include every pilot ever. Bravo flerps.
To add to the conversation, Google Earth Pro shows the sky, AFAIK, somewhat accurately (as it is not really hard to implement), desktop version has a time feature that can roughly replicate the features of this flight, the flat earther scrubs through the path with set time and does not use that feature, leading to his wrong conclusion.
It's a law of flerfdom that all flat Earth proofs are just misunderstood globe Earth proofs.
How many times are they going to do this before they come to the understanding?
This is one of my favorites, thinking planes would ascend into space.
oh, you again, hi
i think my favorite is about the rockets, that they couldn't go to space (because FEs don't even know how spaceflight really works)
predictions on Ben's response: he'll either be confused by this elaborate evidence or he understands and lies about it... as usual 😂
No, he'll just say "you are wrong" and claim that is sufficient "evidence". That's how flerfs do it.😂
7:10 ...a dirt pizza with a Tupperware lid...😂
When aircraft are on landing approach, they normally do so nose-up & dropping in altitude -- combined with changes in thrust. Curiously, the flerfs haven't yet realized what insight this provides for why aircraft don't "need to drop the nose" for level flight over a spherical planet. In fact, our planet could be a giga-space-Frisbee, cube, pyramid, dodecahedron or sphere, the aerodynamic performance of the aircraft dictates where & how it can fly within a given layer of the atmosphere.
*"When aircraft are on landing approach, they normally do so nose-up..."*
Minor correction: On approach, the plane shouldn't be nose up. You don't apply back pressure to the controls and bring the nose up until you're nearly on the ground. In small aircraft, you pull your power back at "tree-top height" and then "flare" by pulling back on the yoke and lifting the nose. The same principle applies to all planes, but the specifics of when and where you cut power and flare varies.
That slightly nose-up attitude is emblematic of swept-wing jet aircraft at low speeds, with lift enhancing devices (flaps) deployed. They need the lift enhancing devices to prevent stalling, but also need to sink at a steady rate. Otherwise this type of plane would "float" and not touch down in time. Propeller planes with straight wings can approach more nose-down, because the propeller itself adds significant drag, so there's less need to pitch up to keep speed in check. A prop can be feathered to produce the desired thrust, while a jet keeps making thrust at flight idle. It's a completely different dynamic.
In descent nose is down and power is off this makes the aircraft fly down with same angle of attack relative to direction of travel. You the pitch up to land you need to stop the wing producing lift and slow as much as possible hence nose up on landing. In flight aircarft stays level because its balanced. No pilot input required.
I was an operations specialist second class in the Navy I worked in the combat information center and along with the navigation of the ship we also had to plot routes for the firing of weapons and guess what's one of the things we always had to take into account when doing our job. we are spinning on the globe
That's awesome. I have several instruction manuals for artillery and large guns on WWII era ships here:
mctoon.net/coriolis-artillery/
I am always looking for more references from military for including rotation of the earth. If you have any, I would love to add to the list: mctoon@Mctoon.net
@@ConspiracyToonz I left the military in 2001 so my memory of exactly what you're looking for is a bit short and buried under years of smoking herb
I too was an Operations Specialist and I keep telling these FE idiots to do a study on radar propagation.
@@fishs777 OS2 uss john s. McCain greetings fellow specialist.ive learned there are a few things you can't teach and stupid is one of them.
@@fishs777Please explain that.
I commend you for your tolerance in dealing with idiots and plain outright stupidity. I once personally rejected a new acquaintance as a friend after finding he was a flat-earther.
Yea I would do the same , worked with a guy …. I was laughing about a debate I had with one . He looks at me and says well it is flat ….
I’m like dude , you well , just look up , look at the sun , what shape is it ?
He literally said , well how do we truly know what shape it is … like man , look up .
He then said , being round doesn’t mean it a sphere ….
I then proceeded to laugh at him with another coworker … didn’t like each other much after that … what a numbskull
He's lucky. You sound like a very shallow friend.
@AG-qi9xl not really being a shallow friend. It's absurd and it is funny. Apparently you and that other guy doesn't know that true friends make fun of each other all of the time. When you are dumb as a flat earther, there is no reasoning with them. They don't even look anymore and that's why they get dumber.
I have been to Brazil and I can say for sure that yes, the stars and constellations are "Upside down". Boom! Globe confirmed.
I went to Maldives last year and Polaris was exactly where it would be in the sky if earth is a globe. It doesn't matter to the flerfers though, they just say it doesn't contradict them and run away when you ask them to explain why.
Last year i saw orion in the sky amd tried to identify other stars using a star chart - but it was a northern hemisphere POV chart so it only worked after i looked at it upside down. Pretty fun, i managed to spot Rigel and Aldebaran.
I live in New Zealand. Same. (Oh yeah, I've seen flat earthers claim my whole country is impossible to exist btw)
I love when somebody explains in a calm way to flatearthers that they are utterly wrong...
@@dr.faustus922 what ?
@@dr.faustus922 I award you no points, and may your imaginary friend have mercy on your conciousness.
It’s very funny how making any flat earth stuff work or even believing in it you are playing reality of not just hard mode, but the nightmare mode you unlock after beating the game at least once. Flat earth makes everything so ABSURDLY complex when things are complicated enough already, but for no reason.
What an absolute fail. He just assumed Google Earth models star positions and didn't bother to check? Or is he so dishonest he felt comfortable lying to his audience and just hoped they wouldn't notice he didn't put the date in anywhere? Nice of him to attempt an analysis, but of course he didn't have a clue where to actually start.
From my experiments with this exact time lapse video, it appears that Google Earth does position the starry sky correctly when it has access to date and time information. In the KML file I downloaded from FlightAware, there are timestamps and positions of the aircraft. Google Earth does use those timestamps to orient the sky. In the Pro version (what you install on your computer) you can go to View->Explore->Sky and and get the full sky view, with planets etc. You can also download and display the path of various space craft and comets etc. via KML files.
He used google not to show the exact position of the stars, just to show that travelling such distances in a globe you must notice clear changes in the sky . It seems flat earthers are not the only ones that love misinterpretations.
This Baboon Conspiracy guy gives me a pain.
The baboons object to that implied comparison.
here's a great idea for flerfs: get the dreaded laser gyroscope on board of an airplane and measure the angular change over a long distance flight.
measure the exact time it took in hours and multiply by 15°
subtract the result from the angular change of the flight if flying against the spin of the earth and add it if flying with the spin of the earth (there's a 50/50 chance I've mixed up the directions) 😅
There is a 100% chance you have lost all Flerfers when you told them to multiply 2 measured values.
Thanks Bob.
@@ABaumstumpf oof now that you mention that, I go to agree 😅
I'm an archer, I hate that when I fire my arrow, I initially have to run after the arrow and keep pointing its nose down so it doesn't fly off into space. Once its momentum starts to reduce, thankfully gravity thanks over...because I'm exhausted by then.
Airplanes trim their controls. The reference for that trim is sideways straight, no roll, and vertically level (ie constant height). This means that they will nose down ever so slightly, but it is neglible compared to other causes of need for trim, such as current weight distribution, air pressure, speed, gyroscopic effects from engines and so on. Trimming is just something the pilot does to make the plane flight on course when there is no control input, and he does it with the ground as reference.
I've been saying this since the first time I heard a flerf make this asinine claim. If you haven't engaged an autopilot / flight controller and you haven't trimmed the plane, you will continually make minor control inputs to maintain heading, speed and altitude. The amount of control input required to "nose down" to stay at a constant altitude is so miniscule no one (including the pilot) will even notice the plane's incredibly minor change in attitude.
Of course, if flerfing morons could think, they wouldn't be flerfing morons.
Wolfie has been explaining this to flat earthers for years. They'll never get it.
@@frocat5163 -- _"The amount of control input required to "nose down" to stay at a constant altitude is so miniscule..."_
Actually, it's non-existent. A pilot must correct for many real-world factors that perturb a level flightpath, but no control input is required for the Earth's curvature specifically, and the level-flying aircraft doesn't "nose down" anyway. The level-flying aircraft does indeed rotate about its own lateral axis as it follows the Earth's curvature in proportion, but that is not a downward movement.
@@cardinalRG Maybe you should reread and understand what I actually posted...
@@frocat5163 --I quoted you _verbatim,_ and responded to that excerpt explicitly. What has you confused, friend?
Dear Flat Earther.
The road surface of the Golden Gate bridge is poured LEVEL with the superstructure truss underneath. When cars drive over the bridge they don't need to dip DOWN to go over the curve. If they don't change lanes then they are driving STRAIGHT as they go over the curve. A cars frame in the center is tangent to the curve. A truck bed is FLAT in relation to the curve. It's also TANGENT to the curve. Placing a carpenter square against a up/ down railing at the north enf at a given height from the road will give you a 90deg angle. A carpenter level done the same at the south end will also give a 90deg angle but both ends 90deg will not be on the same plane. Even though both are at the same height from the road surface and both are at 90deg.
Glad I could clarify Geometry for you.
Funny how globers don't have to delete videos because they've been debunked
I'm sure the day a globe earth video is debunked they would..
Although to be fair, I don't think the human race will exist for that long, so there would be no one to delete the video..
Because the Earth is a globe, so we don't have to delete our videos.
Flat earthers: "If Earth was a globe, planes would need to dip their nose downwards on a globe"
No flat earther ever: "If Earth was flat, planes would need to constantly turn left when flying eastwards, even on the equator or the southern whatever-they-call-the-hemisphere"
I just want to know what the hell the sun is hiding behind at night. How high was that plane flying? Yet I still can't see the sun.
Shouldn't I always be able to see the sun on a flat earth? Yet at night there's not even the slightest hint of the Sun being in the sky. What's it hiding behind?
They claim the sunlight is out of range.
Yet we still see the other stars.
God switches it off
@@burtpanzerlmao God get a better gpu, the render distance sux
Gotta love TC always getting caught. I've been arguing with a dedicated flerf named Roberttozzi for over a month now on the wales picture. I pointed him to sableagle's video which outlines the proper headings and also uses pixel measurements showing it's a cloud. The guy has been gish galloping me using every line in the flerf script.
Ben: ''It's axiomatic...'' A flat earther talking about axioms, yeah, right.
Flerfs love to use pseudoaxioms: "accept this as universally true, because I can't prove it."
It's kind of appropriate, in a strange way. The natural sciences do not set axioms; mathematics does. Axioms represent core truths that don't trace back to reasoning and measurements; they're the foundation that logic expands upon. To a flat earther, the flat earth is axiomatic and therefore unquestionable, the precise opposite of empiric science. If aeroplanes "nose dropping" were axiomatic, the Earth had to get out of the way because airplanes can't stop turning down - which would be quite the remarkable spooky action at a distance, as they're not in contact, and we don't have records of the Earth drastically changing shape when aerodynamic flight was invented.
He should have given up when he saw the rotation to the right, totally expected on a Globe and Totally Impossible on a flat-earth with a dome. But no, he continued to sink deeper and deeper in his attempt to prove his hypothesis.
You know what they say, it takes years to build a stellar reputation but only seconds to ruin it. Its in danger of losing its 'ivey' league status if this keeps up.
MC Toon correcting those Flerf charlatans with ease, ooops LOL.
See if you can get mctoon to pay you out the 10k.
here is calculations obtained to measure earth to sun via sextant
sextant measures the altitude of celestial objects example the sun
When you look into the sextant you will see 1 the horizon 2 you will see a movable arm which changes the angle to the celestial body measured. the light from the sun will reflect off a mirror
the image of the sun will be brought down to the horizon. by manipulating the lever arm it will obtain the altitude of the sun.
the sun is always between tropic of Capricorn and tropic of cancer. which is approximately 3000 miles. diameter approximately 32 miles
this is where round earth measurements vary trying to get the sun smaller by moving further away.
once you calculate the diameter of the sun
1 minute of arc on the sextant represents a nautical mile. 1 arc minute is 1/60th of a degree and represents a nautical mile.
once you have collected your arc minutes. you can than do the calculation to find the suns altitude.
Suns diameter is approximately 32 miles of arc minutes =s 32 miles in diameter.
using the sextant and basic trigonometry this is approximately 3000 miles away.
here is a 3 minute video that explains how sextants measure celestial objects
czcams.com/video/x3jypIZMmeo/video.html&si=EnSIkaIECMiOmarE
I love how the begining of the video clearly shows the stars rising.
An airplane flying off out of earth is hilarious. 🤣😂
The fact that he deleted the videos settles any question of whether he knows he's lying or not. If he were actually convinced, those videos would stay up. He only has cause to remove the videos if he knows he's lying. He's destroying the evidence that proves he's wrong. People who think they're right don't destroy evidence they're right.
Next!
He deleted it, at the request of the original poster.
I forgot who did the video originally, but the calculations were made showing exactly how much of an adjustment a pilot would actually have to make to account for curvature and there were a lot of zeroes after the decimal (fractions upon fractions of a centimeter on an airplane yoke).
If the earth is flat & there is a tupperware lid on top of pizza earth to contain all the air, then pressure at sea level = pressure at 33,000 feet so passengers in planes should be fine flying without pressurisation right? But how come planes need to be pressurised at that altitude? I'd love to hear from flerfs on that.
It's lighter air many various gases rise up hence the firmament.
NASA has these guys by the balllss
@@gulfy09 HAHAHA
"Planes have to constantly tilt downwards and they don't"
Well on a flat earth they have to constantly turn left or right in order to not fly off the disk....
Altimeter readings are based on barometric pressure outside the plane (along with a couple agreed-upon aviataion conevtentions). That pressure is always minutely changing even at the same altitude above sea level. To keep a constant altitude, a pilot of autopilot woul need to make conastant minute adjustments up and down -- but the net sum of those ajustments will result in the orientation of the plane matching the curved earth.
He continually does the flerf's favourite, once proved wrong, do a full reset and continue being wrong. Not willing or able to acknowledge they were wrong, just plough on with the lies.
At 5:00 why does Taboo use Google Earth, a globe, to prove flat earth? Thanks Ben!
because it aint real its cg man !
14:22 I think there's a misspeaking here. The position of the south celestial pole is south, slightly to the left, not west. The camera was aimed (azimuthal) west of south (by about 34 degrees). In the overlaid celestial coordinate system, west is nearly vertical (downwards, clockwise) in most of the picture, while azimuthal west is to the right (matching the direction above horizontal), with due west at the celestial equator, labelled with all zeros.
Good catch.
A planes nose doesn’t dip. The plane just maintains altitude.
In Taboo's «recreation» of the flight, he neglected the passage of time, and thus, the rotation. Oops !
...Taboo is very good at being intellectually dishonest. His gullible sheeple do not notice.
I don't understand the height adjustment argument. If you take a small toy car, and put it on a big ball, and roll it a little, you don't need to adjust the angle of the car... the physics will do for you naturally.
On the other hand, if the earth was flat, to be able to follow the routes the planes flight, you would have to constantly adjust the direction of the plane, and always turn to the left or to the right. So, seen from the cockpit, the horizon should always be slightly tilted. Is this the case? I don't know, I'm not a pilot.
Having been fortunate enough to be in the cockpit a few times - no, there is no bank angle. And the two major daytime flights were close enough to south -> north and east ->west.
While I was not looking for evidence on this nonsense, as the internet had not yet given a voice to these morons, I was an enthusiast keenly aware of the aeroplane's behaviour.
Taboo Conspiracy, aka Kermit the flerf. Acknowledgement to Creaky Blinder.
The airplane dipping its nose or it will fly off in to space is still my most favourite flerf argument because it just exposes how dumb they are and have absolutely no idea how airplanes fly.
I can see how honest Kermit is, he has blocked all 3 of my youtube accounts, that speaks volumes.
What _does_ keep planes from just flying off into space? GRAVITY! czcams.com/video/G91IU8cFJ7o/video.html
Every flat eather failed to appreciate the size of the earth, and most of their nonsense came from just that.
The aircraft attitude adjustment is called "trim." Once the trim is set, the aircraft stays at the set altitude. Some aircraft allow the aerodynamic forces to be trimmed in all three axes. The simplest control system on an aircraft allows trim to be set by either the position of the horizontal stabilizer on the tail, or trim tabs that are incorporated into the horizontal stabilizer. Once the aircraft is trimmed, it will stay at the set altitude without any further control input.
I love how flerfs are still so ignorant of the basic principles of aviation that they think the only way to reduce altitude is by nosing down. Not only is that not the only way, it’s not even the preferred way. Ideally, a pilot will descend in a safe, controlled manner by _throttling down_ because it is more controllable and far less likely to induce motion sickness. It also makes it easier to maintain heading while descending.
Well, when submarines want to go deeper they point their nose down, so ...
Oh, wait, hang on a minute ...
guy's yt description probably says "flat eathers all around the globe"
Ah, but MCToon! He wants measurements from instruments aboard the plane! And then he'll want the pilots to swear on a bible or something. And then he'll want a video from space showing the plane traveling around the ball. And then he'll want a handheld demonstration of gravity visualized with the solar system. And then he'll want a room sized demonstration of quantum fields. And then...
Ben knows the earth is not flat, if he admits that earth is not flat then how he can get audience 😂 that’s the real reality
The Altimeter is the Aircraft Cockpit Instrument that keeps the Aircraft in Level Flight and at the Same Altitude throughout a Flight!
Expecting an aircraft to have the pilot needing to make noticeable nose down or tail up tweaks for "curvature correction" amongst all the minor control movements for wind etc, is disappointingly unsurprising.
Flat earthers really forget the earth is constantly in rotation