It's not Wally, it's Bert.

Thanks (I suspect you said Wally by mistake, but just in case, I’m Bert)

Or have we stumbled onto a hidden conspiracy. Wally and Bert are the same person! There’s no evidence both have been in the same room at the same time proving they’re different people. Flat earth confirmed. I’m kidding, obviously.

It shouldn’t be hard if it really was flat… yet, here we are, and all they have are things contradicting other things. For that reason, it’s nice to keep them flerf tears flowing.

I’ve seen those claims and even some demonstrations but if it doesn’t match observations, it’s wrong. FE is not stupid if it can be modelled, but rejecting the only model that does match observations is. You say my representation is wrong, ok fine. Come up with a flat earth model that is capable of making predictions and I’ll represent it.

...What version of flat earth? ...There are many versions of flat earth, many of them say, "we don't make claims, while yet making many claims." ...Put the various flat earth versions together and come up with some consistency! Can't misrepresent that which does not a have a definitive model. ...I looked up 'coffee cup caustic" There appears to be reflections. High altitude footage shows one Sun, no reflections off a dome of any kind. Also, if there was 'reflections' happening, tall mountains would be showing some sort of reflections off of the dome. ...There is one Sun for our Earth. And there are no reflections off of the dome. The movement path of the 24 hour Antarctica Sun is opposite of the 24 hour Arctic Sun. That doesn't work on a flat planed earth with its sun moving left-to-right around the north pole. ...Papa Flerf Eric Dubay, DITRH and many others have made definitive 'claims' about Antarctica. Now many flerfs want to make excuses, move the goal posts and come up with 'reasons' that don't hold to observations. Sounds like, so far, Jeranism is the only Papa flerf trying to put forth some intellectual honesty for this experiment. (By the firmament in the Bible translated means sky, vast space, expanse. Not a rigid dome.)

...There is no evidence of 'coffee cup caustics'. High altitude footage shows no coffee cup caustic lighting effects on Earth's surface. No reflections off of the Dome. High altitude footage shows one Sun. Particular camera lenses show some lens flare effects, but that is not coffee cup caustics. ...There are many versions of flat earth. They all have various claims. Can't misrepresent something that has no definitive model. And the various flat earth models lack proper quantitative science to go with the claims and beliefs.

The Antarctica Sun and star movement path being opposite of the Arctic Sun and stars is still a problem for flat earth claims. ...Changing direction or location on the flat planed earth does not change the counter-clockwise movement path of the Sun and stars 'appearing' to do the opposite because you are near the perimeter of the flat planed earth. ...A smaller scale experiment can be done using a Domed Sports Stadium to demonstrate one star movement path over a flat planed earth. ...Place a light source at middle-top of the stadium dome to represent Polaris. The sporting field would represent a flat planed earth surface. ...Now move some light points counter-clockwise around domed sports stadium's version of Polaris. ...No matter where you position yourself on the sporting field and your observing direction, the points of light would move in a counter-clockwise direction. ...You literally have to change the observer(s) orientation. Two observers on a spherical Globe surface, with two separate hemispheres, accomplishes the clockwise/counter-clockwise dichotomy. ...On a flat planed earth surface, the observer literally has to stand on their head to observer the counter-clockwise/clockwise dichotomy.

Coffee cup caustics are not observed. High altitude footage does not show any evidence of coffee cup caustics lighting effects on Earth's surface, no observations of reflections off of the sides of the Dome. High altitude footage shows only one Sun. Particular camera lenses show lens flare effects, but that is not coffee cup caustics. ...Flat earth has many claimed versions. There is no definitive flat earth model. Difficult to misrepresent flat earth claims when there is no definitive model. Flat earth models lack proper quantitative science to back up the claims/beliefs/hypothesis.

Thanks for offering to help. I can't go back right now to remind myself what that link was but my email address is available in my about tab. I did start trying to do this back in the day but put this project on the back burner for other priorities, wanting to bring it back out from time to time. I only got as far as looking up the equations for a pendulum swing and put those in a spreadsheet, so if you can dig up the other forces such as Coriolis, etc, that would be great. My guess is, we need pendulum vectors, Coriolis vectors, even a formula to convert a perfect sphere latitude to an oblate sphere (i.e. my latitude measuring local star declinations very likely won't match precisely my distance from pole to equator and would affect the the angle towards the center of mass). A few of those factors could probably push simulation predictions down into the 8th or higher decimal place.

@@bertrickles15 So, I've found the original link you had. So, I'm not a programmer computery guy, so I'm just curious if you know how to model differential equations in code? It would certainly take a bit of rigor to make these formulas work for an oblate spheroid as it completely changes the coordinate system that's used, but it is possible.

During a 24 hour sun, yes.

Sorry, no penguins this time.

Possibly an update to my update is in order? I’ll take another look at the area provided. The math should be similar to see what the elevation angle is for what a different location would be.

I wanted to put a LOT of penguins with assault rifles and borg like headgear but I didn’t want to spend weeks doing photoshop.

@@bertrickles15 lets make some so you can add any time you want

@@SwaaallaFE sounds like an idea. I think I’ll give the spec for the file in a day or so and let anyone provide submissions… Edit: it’s a glorified equirectangular PNG with the sky part as transparent… nice and big if you want to see lots of detail, but not TOO big.

🐧🐧🐧

If you're at the poles, the altitude will be constant over every 24-hour period (ignoring tiny changes in the sun's declination over that time). But I agree otherwise and that definition should be true on a flat or globe Earth.

not just the equinox, it's any time of the year.

Absolutely.

No problem, I even have more on the way but it will take time to put together.

@@bertrickles15 can't wait!

I know, I know… the mental gymnastics they are doing now since the experiment was proposed are quite dizzying to watch. Their way out of the midnight sun south of you over there problem is they think it’s a reflection off the dome… or something. I’d say trying to convince them is futile at this point.

@@bertrickles15 ....but they will have a chance to put some graffiti on the dome where it meets the ice!

Thank you ever so kindly. Seriously, ever since some pointy haired boss decided to turn youtube into a cash cow that relies on monetizable videos they messed up the recommendation algorithm so bad, it it’s not click bait or has 100k + followers, it’s not worth them recommending and channels stagnate quickly, making the situation worse.

I am following. I wish you success in your endeavour, would wish you all the best to end the debate yet the possibility it won’t is always too real. I even had an idea that could possibly make it more robust and could hopefully demonstrate authenticity of the location. When I make a video about it, I’ll let you know.

@@bertrickles15 perfect, thanks!

Why thank you. It was only possible by finding a reasonably accurate model that others derived for me for all the various things. I settled on RA/DEC as the native coordinate system and transform accordingly, depending on purpose. The trick I first had to solve was converting RA/DEC to x/y coordinates for the overlay. Although that part wasn’t overly complicated I did hack it up quite badly in my prototype (this) app and implemented a "good enough" solution. It’s probably not overly efficient but it gets the job done.

@@bertrickles15 I know a bit of programming, and I know a bit about geometry. Repeat with Earth shape and a bit of computer graphics. But you take it to a whole new level! 😎

@@FlatEarthMath kind words. Sometimes just working away at something with a set goal until you accomplish it can do wonders.

And therein lies the problem of social media. Somebody posts something that makes no sense and they can still find others to fall for it… maybe these short videos can go on things like TikTok, etc. Anyway, the FE map doesn’t really solve any practical problems, yet, the flerfs swear by it.

Thanks.

Thanks. I look forward to your take on all this

Ditto

I can do better. I can give you a copy of the original video files. If you’re willing to wait a few days, I can make you even more globe videos centered at different locations (let me know lat/lon coords below). You can say things in your own style and address any point you want. I still have the primary source images and the computer will do all the lifting.

@bertrickles15 Ok that's perfect. I'll let you know.

@@Earthislife1031 The animations I made already are on my KZbin videos hard drive and should be available for as long as it lasts. However, I'm curious if you still want me to make you new animations from different locations on the globe projection (that I didn't render already). I'm thinking of deleting the source files from my hard drive. It's taking up a good 25GB.

@bertrickles15 if you could make ones showing these specific flights on a flat earth and on a globe, that would be awesome. QFA27- Sydney to Santiago QFA28- Santiago to Sydney QFA63- Sydney to Johannesburg QFA64- Johannesburg to Sydney QFA65- Perth to Johannesburg QFA66- Johannesburg to Perth LA800- Awkland to Santiago LA895- Santiago to Melbourne

@@Earthislife1031 Sure, no problem. I'll see how I can get those flights highlighted on flightradar24... Otherwise, what I can do is get the rendered Mercator map from flightaware, along with its route data. I can then animate from there which might be nice..... I can trickle some animation videos your way in the coming weeks until we find a format that works with what you want to do and once that happens, I should be able to blast through those flights fairly quickly. For now I will reclaim that disk space by deleting the 24 hours worth of cropped images and if you don't mind, send me an email (available from my profile page) or send me a DM on twitter/x (@qbertblue). I'll keep you updated with things as they happen and send you links to a spot on my google drive where you can grab the animations.

On the one hand, yes, on the other, they will give all sorts of excuses like “it’s just a light in the sky and don’t ask so many questions”.

That done entirely from the playback of the flightradar24.com site. I can animate for different projections but tracking specific flights is not so easy. I’d have to recreate the view that was captured with their dataset that they don’t make readily available.

Thanks.

Even computer displays are flat. The code must be flat too.

Thanks. I have about 30 (or 50?) KZbin music library tracks downloaded at the ready to pick from. I went with some of the lesser picked ones this time.

@@bertrickles15 Interesting! That was an enjoyable experience watching aircraft flying great circle routes around the globe.

Yes you can use a flat earth and trigonometry to calculate the actual heights of mountains as well. So earth is measured flat. Good job.

@@TB-xx8vj It's all a question of scale. IF the Earth is curved, and the surface "drops" at 8" for every mile, then to observe a mountain from a mile away, there would only be 8" of drop, something that even very good standard surveying equipment would most likely miss. IF, on the other hand, the Earth were flat, it would be no surprise then to get a very similar measurement result. Curved or flat, the tools simply wouldn't be accurate enough to pick up that 8" difference. Using typical vision based surveying equipment, the old school theodolites and such that were used when the mountains of the USA were first surveyed in the 19th century, and which continued in common use up until the early 1990s, you simply wouldn't have accurate enough tools to detect curvature over a 1mile distance, by measuring the height of a mountain. Using the satellite based GPS based equipment we have now, we can be much more accurate, which is why the official heights of so many mountains have been revised over the last 30 years.

@@fepeerreview3150 earth is so biggie it's measured flat. Gotcha.

I agree. For the most part, I try to ignore them, but every so often I decide to address them directly. Sadly I forget the lesson I learned earlier and I need to be reminded. For this go-around, I made these two videos just to whip up a couple of flerfs and laugh at their antics. The pendulum is about to swing back the other way.

@@bertrickles15 Keep doing what you're doing! I enjoy every minute of it. I do it too. I just try to keep in mind that I'm only going to put my time into it if it's something that truly interests me on its own merits. And yes, it's fun to point and laugh a bit at times as well.

Riley, we never heard so much BS in one comment as in this one!

"For the simple-minded confused about haversine formula" That would be YOU. Finally got something right.

@josleys Not Riley. Show some respect.

@@TB-xx8vj "Not Riley. Show some respect." HA! LMAO!!! YOU have clearly demonstrated over time you deserve NONE!

@@TB-xx8vj Why?

Nope. 1:21 He used a Haversine formula distance calculation, not that it matters at the distance he was working on.

@0LoneTech 00:40 timestamp. Is that a horizontal baseline and a right triangle 📐? Yes.

No, but your dishonesty is clear and I am not going to humour it further.

​@0LoneTech that is not a horizontal baseline at timestamp 00:40? That is not a right triangle 📐? You are a liar.

Come on, show us that you can do actual quantitative math, and not just some random qualitative claims: by how many pixels would that axis at 0:40 dip over the distance shown in that graph?