How to Completely Fail at Debunking the Moon!

[@billkennedy6761]

There was the experiment where the 'scientist' yelled at a frog, "JUMP" and it did. After chopping off a limb, the scientist once again yelled "JUMP" but the frog did not leap that far. After chopping each limb, the frog jumped less distance than before. Once the final limb was chopped, the frog didn't move. Conclusion...Frogs with no limbs can not hear.

[@shayanmoosavi9139]

LOL good one😂😂😂

[@LeatherNeck1833]

Funny AF!!!

[@seanmichael8202]

Haha

[@kellyfowler6426]

Oh man, I haven't heard this one in ages. I think my dad was the one who told it to me.

[@The_Absolute_Dog]

@ So watermelons are masculine!

[@icelandman5432]

Odd, I was told it was a ball long before NASA ever came into existence. I remember my father showing the Earth was a globe when I was 7. We lived right by the sea. Down at sea level we watched sunset, then ran up the beach across the road, up the stairs to my bedroom and watched the sunset again! A powerful lesson which has never left me! Thanks SciManDan for this debunking video! great work as always!

[@colbornfarms4849]

You sure because that would make you a minimum of 63 But you said at age 7 So now we at a minimum age of 70 if we add your age at the time Plus long before nasa came into existence so since that’s somewhat arbitrary I’ll randomly pick ten years as long before That makes you 80 plus NASA was formed in 1958 So either your mistaken or you look a whole lot younger than your years would suggest

[@macro3751]

@@colbornfarms4849 that's perfectly plausible honestly my late great grandfather was 96 with a face of 70, so this guy could very well be 70-80 and look as well as he does.

[@Cara.314]

@@macro3751 ya, i've seen people who look 85 but are only 65, and i've seen people who look 65 but are 85. also, picture could be older.

[@macro3751]

@@Cara.314 it's all a matter of taking care of one's health if you live a truly healthy life, you'll usually look younger plus, a bit of good genetics also helps lol

[@DreadEnder]

@@colbornfarms4849 I think he meant that the moon came into existence before nasa

[@Captain_Pudding]

It's amazing how consistently flat earthers are outright incapable of processing three dimensional space.

[@josephhartley8887]

flat earthers? more like flat minders

[@jakejohnson6954]

Ive never even seen one flat earth experiment that doesnt prove that earth is round or even work at all

[@KrzysiuNet]

I wonder when they would start to claim all objects are just 2D sprites. Or maybe some already do? Logically it's not far from flat earth and it can be "proven" by same methods. Also top secret NASA documents which nobody has seen, but random YT idiot. These are the best sources.

[@TheHertzWeb]

I don't get the obsession with NASA. Do these guys realise there's over 70 space agencies 13 of which have launch capability that aren't NASA?

[@DLxDaemon]

That's because it doesn't exist.... ROFL pls understand, I say this sarcastically

[@davethepak]

"the angles don't match" "no big deal" Wow, those two statements really summarize the entire flat earth movement. They ignore any form of science or critical thinking; period.

[@spacexsays3227]

LieManDan spends so much time attacking Fla Earth......maybe this is why...kzbin.info/www/bejne/fqCmqqysh8x9fck

[@rowanfernsler9725]

SpaceX says doubt

[@PaulSchober]

@@spacexsays3227 Here is a simple test anyone can do in their backyard. It's what Thriveandsurvive should have done. kzbin.info/www/bejne/ooe9ZKedeqqLmbc

[@agnosticulster6594]

@spacex I just watched that vid. There's forty minutes of my life I'll never get back! What a load of shit! You say you've done the math and studied the subject and gathered the evidence? Wise up! All you have done is show your self up as an ignorant fool! Explain the following on a flat earth! Star rotation. Seasons. Sun rise sun set. The vanishing point of the horizon. And the list goes on and on and on! As for all the scientist people who say the earth is flat? Name one! Just one.

[@r4vr4c]

I left a comment on a video saying Himwari 8 disproves flat Earth every 10 minutes. A flat Earther comes at me demanding I show them the government paperwork to prove it then demands where I live then calls me all sorts of stuff like I'm a piece of shit then its I'm harassing him and its bordering on criminal. Like WTF?

[@jugglerjim01]

I'm disappointed, when he first showed the Doppler radar ball I honestly thought he was going to claim it was the moon model in for repairs lol

[@james4582]

Ohhhh that’s good. Lmao

[@clivedavis6859]

Good one Juggler Jim01. This is priceless. Had a very good laugh.

[@truu-dl8rp]

lol

[@garypellerin5576]

They needed to repaint the craters.

[@Catalin-Stefan]

I expected the line "well if they can to this then why they can't do it at a bigger scale".

[@Nick-lv6ii]

as an art major, this is painful because it is something that is taught in 7th grade art class in public school. this is such a fundamental to creating realistic scenes in art, you don't need to go to higher education to learn it. it is simply a matter of putting a dot on paper, taking a ruler and drawing straight lines to map out perspective and light. holy shit this hurts.

[@luil9793]

“Doing these observations and coming up with the WRONG conclusions” this basically sums up flat earthers

[@loweexpectations3222]

I like how Rich fancies himself as some sort of scientist when he doesn't even have a basic understanding of the laws of physics.

[@WilbertLek]

And the other "gods-believers".

[@andycapp9063]

It's like listening to a five year old explain his shadow!

[@DeadEyeJedi]

The thing is, if you _tell_ them they have the 'wrong' answer they usually respond with something like 'wrong from what you've been indoctrinated to believe!!11!1', rather than consider that the logic involved in making their conclusion is flawed. Mr T&S is a great example of being so excited by the results that he jumps to the conclusion that he _wanted_ rather than considering all the variables, as SciManDan says in the video. It's the 'Cold Fusion' fallacy all over again. It's funny how he claims to be 'doing Science' and then ignores almost every Scientific practice that is designed to _prevent_ this kind of erroneous outcome...

[@christianege4989]

They are not wrong. The are right in order to fit into their fantasy

[@yummyzoot]

I love that he uses a doppler radar in his presentation... One of the "useful range" limiting factors of radar is the.....Curvature of the Earth...

[@kenbee1957]

😅

[@escutus]

That was my first thought.

[@viperbyte6402]

@RV_Six Oh man! That’s just too ironic! Nice! 😅

[@Druby442]

But that's how "real" science works . Post a crap load of videos that completely debunk your theory and then mindlessly continue to argue for that very theory .

[@BATTIS94]

"Look at this picture. The shadow is different... See? Look at it again! I'm gonna zoom on it so It's clear. You see? The shadow is different... I'm gonna draw a line over it so you understand: The shadow is different" JESUS CHRIST! I GET IT, MR THRIVE! You don't have to show me the same picture 300 times! Flat earthers spend more time explaining the same picture than actually trying to understand what the picture shows.

[@LongdownConker]

Ikr! 😂 🤣 🤣

[@57thorns]

That last part is very easy, because they spend _zero_ time understanding anything.

[@bobbybooshay8641]

Good thing NASA had those projectors up and running before man started recording history.

[@shayanmoosavi9139]

I know right? I need that cool time machine.

[@DrunkenUFOPilot]

Way back then, NASA hired all the smartest cavemen. That left only the dimwits in the general population, whose descendants became flat earthers.

[@hazardous458]

Bobby Booshay Another theory. Flat earthers broke into Area 51 and used a time machine to go back to the dawn of man. Then they made religions and taught cavemen that the earth is flat.

[@shayanmoosavi9139]

@@hazardous458 nah, they're too stupid for that. They'd get lost because they can't navigate (you know, it requires a globe to do it ACCURATELY.)

[@TruthNerds]

Atlantis = NASA lit(t)

[@danieltheghost23]

So he knows the earth reflects light, but somehow.. the moon doesn’t?

[@paisley4092]

@ well, not invisible but just black.

[@yddub1212]

@ Not quite, they'd either be invisible, or as black as midnight. But fine point.

[@arcticwolf1133]

@@yddub1212 the echo lol

[@yddub1212]

@@arcticwolf1133 Forgive me, I don't read.

[@arcticwolf1133]

@@yddub1212 all good lol

[@johne.christensen7147]

As a photographer he’s hurting my brain.

[@nemo9864]

Angles don't exist. (Sarcasm)

[@KrzysiuNet]

So you probably know ISO stands for Infrared Structure Observation, ASA for Always See Anomalies, DIN for Doubt it, Nadia (Nadia was a Russian girl who knew The Truth™ and they sent her msg to be quiet) and GOST is a Russian answer - "Guys, obviously! Silence's Top!". Noise reveals true structure of the universe. The ISO rating stands for level of universe vibration in micromorons/s. Default values, available in cameras, reveals nothing cool, but try 107 mm/s (example: i.imgur.com/MIPY5q1.jpg). The bigger rating, the more interesting stuff to see, so bigger values tend to have higher gaps. [cheers from insect photographer]

[@DLxDaemon]

I don't think it's just photographers, I think everyone's brain is scrambled watching this attempt to prove the flat earth... or maybe our brains are hurting from excessive laughter.

[@gipugly]

poor man

[@wpasieczny]

I thought the same thing, but as an artist.

[@kiaraleeuw]

"The moon is self illuminated" yet only half lights up. As if it is a ball which is illuminated by an external object

[@l3dcobra120]

Well that's because uhh, the magic lunar filament in the moon-bulb can only be lit up on one side because there's a solar power-outage... yep, that's it.

[@grilledcheeseandsoup1652]

Dang maintenance still hasn't been by to change the bulb! We've put that request in centuries ago.

[@XtreeM_FaiL]

JaccoVis The other half of the cheese is harvested. The "shadow of the moon" is actually where there are no cheese. No cheese, no self lumination.

[@IvanSensei88]

It has craters on it.. and these craters create shadows, so it's like only CERTAIN portions of the moon gets lit up at different times to PERFECTLY simulate shadows that the sun would cause it it was the source that illuminates it. And lunar eclipses is probably just NASA restarting the moon for maintenance, to replace broken led ligtbulbs with new ones. They've been doing that since antiquity, duh.. And also NASA has never been to the moon too. Logic!

[@truu-dl8rp]

Thats because, a lunar tick keeps hitting the phase switch.

[@renemunkthalund3581]

9:13 "My artwork can't go 3D". Dude, your entire sense of geometry can't go 3D.

[@davidoliphant8986]

Only 'cos his brain... err.. cell can't cope in 2D...

[@markbyrd7710]

Thought the same thing... Haha this video being a great example. "Why ball in front of me not look like other ball in front of me??" can't comprehend that the angle is different.. And when someone mentions different angles, he thinks they mean the camera is tilted... *facepalm*

[@HatstandTuesday]

If they understood geometry, they wouldn't be flatheads.

[@renemunkthalund3581]

I honestly think he must have a limited spatial awareness. (not saying that all people with little spatial awareness would make claims like this. For that you need arrogance and dunning krüger effect on top.)

[@accountlol7409]

Oof size: large

[@Blackreaper777]

You got to love the persistence. They do these experiments, don't know what they should expect, cannot understand the results, come up with completely wrong conclusions each and every time, but they continue on undeterred.

[@Tyrian3k]

"The first thing I noticed was that the angles don't match." Could that be the result of you looking at those two objects from different angles? I know that's a radical idea, but it might just be the thing you're looking for.

[@Wordavee1]

A later video shows Mike admitting he was wrong. kzbin.info/www/bejne/fau6q357ZsSqZ80

[@NothingXemnas]

@@Wordavee1 Wait, he didn't see this obvious mistake on the spot and needed another video to point out what we had seen? wtf

[@seraphina985]

Wait so if you look at things from two different angles, an angle mismatch shall we say that somehow means the angles don't match that's just stunning news. Well that is unless you understand the slightest thing about Geometry or English.

[@sad-pt7xd]

No no no that has NOTHING to do with it

[@andysmith1996]

@@Wordavee1 That's Mike Boll, not Mr Thrive and Survive. And Boll still insists it's only correlation.

[@luciano_trivelli]

Flat earther: The moon has it's own light * proceeds to show half of the moon*

[@xen0bia]

Exactly. If the Moon was emitting light 1) you wouldn't be able to see its surface, even less so the shadows cast by mountains and craters, 2) you would be seeing the entirety of the moon at all times. What does he think is hiding half of the "moonlight" in this instance? There's clearly nothing between the Earht and the Moon to obstruct the light... So what gives? But I don't expect these flattards to give this too much thought, they'd sprain their brain (the little that's left of it) trying to, so they'll just say it's refraction or something...

[@True_Christian]

​@@xen0bia Your post is absolutely nonsensical. The moon *doesn't have* any "mountains" or "craters." It's a luminary, not a rock.

[@xen0bia]

@@True_Christian Ok boomer.

[@True_Christian]

​@@xen0bia I'm not a boomer, but so what if I was. What would your comment prove? Perhaps that millennials like yourself are ageist, ignorant, and/or mentally incompetent, the latter two of which things are the only possible explanations for why you disbelieve & deny the truth of God's Word and instead put your faith in ungodly propagandists for Satan like Dan & NASA.

[@caffe1n8ed]

@@True_Christian This a troll right? xD

[@RossM3838]

Believing that they know something that no one else does gives them a bit of a psychological boost.

[@HeroicVigilant]

They hoist perspective up on a huge pedestal as the answer to the sun and the moon for stuff like flat earth and horizons, then proceed to fail at a real perspective observation. Ironic

[@KainaX122]

No, irony would entail that it is something unexpected This massive fail by a flerf is completely to be expected

[@DamonMacready]

It struck me too. It's hilarious how they use perspective as a religious mantra, then completely failing to understand perspective when it smacks them directly in the face!

[@grahvis]

Flat earth 'perspective' is spelled M A G I C.

[@jameswhittingham8027]

Exactly. Ideally you need a perpective pedestal at ground level.

[@WilbertLek]

It's just like "gods-believers" going "CUNT TEXT! CUNT TEXT!!!"

[@KyleDB150]

Imagine not being able to visualise 3d space, must be hard, I feel for them

[@grouchymax6451]

3D blindness...

[@bitcoinweasel9274]

It's hard to visualize 3D space, when you think space is a conspiracy by NASA.

[@SpaceCadet2569]

Dan. I received some serious props from my 14 y old girl. I told her that I watch SciManDan and she replied “ Mum you are kidding, that is so cool”. Apparently there are a group of 14 year olds who “love” your channel. Thanks for the great content and the street cred.

[@uphollandlatic]

“Cant go 3D, not with my skill.” Never met a Flat Earther who could do 3D.

[@darkyboode3239]

Flat Earthers always go 2D.

[@heatshield]

Yeah that was pretty hilarious. I figured out how to make an outline of a section of the surface of a sphere and put it where I wanted it thirty years ago on equipment that could barely run a moving screensaver.

[@XtreeM_FaiL]

DarkyBoode32 Only the advanced ones. Most do only 1D.

[@peterpoop7760]

FE 3D: Dumb Dumber Dumbest

[@Forest_Fifer]

Never met a flerf who even understands 3d.

[@tysondog843]

A Flat Earther said to me "I don't believe we went to the moon, no one could explain how it could be done." I said "I don’t have the time or the crayons to explain this to you."

[@teebosaurusyou]

Sidewalk chalk may be helpful.

[@r3gret2079]

Lmao

[@MegaNumberXIII]

I would have explained it in a way his pea-brain could comprehend. "Rocket spit fire and go woosh for very long time till men reach moon".....Like for real? "No one can explain how it could be done" or he just refused to listen to his teachers when they DID explain?

[@123cp8]

Actually there are lots and lots and LOTS of people that can explain exactly how it was done. As a starting point, about 400,000 people were originally involved with the moon shots…

[@DarlockAhe]

"I'm not high enough" Oh, I'm sure you're.... more then enough.

[@peterpoop7760]

"I'm not high enough" Well, smoke another one.

[@OsborneCox.69.420]

*than enough

[@roby.3428]

I'm not... not enough for this shit.

[@carl6149]

🎵 Roll another one, just like the other one 🎶 🎶 Don’t Bogart that joint my friend, pass it over to me. 🎶

[@Cornwall1888]

“Debunking the moon” shouldn’t even be a phrase 😂😂

[@michaelnewton1754]

What if the moon is discovered to be conscious, and starts pedaling crazy conspiracy claims?

[@sad-pt7xd]

They also “debunked” gravity

[@MaxxMcGeePrivate]

Debunking reality!

[@Kyrelel]

@@michaelnewton1754 pedaling!?

[@icelandman5432]

Don't you mean Phase?!!!

[@mp4986]

I notice they didn't zoom in completely on the moon either, as you'd be able to see the complete moon if the camera is good enough.

[@Electru522]

You don't even need a good camera. If it's clear enough, you can see the outline of the moon during twilight hours with your naked eye.

[@arthurgraton7165]

@@Electru522 Pretty sure that was a jab at their classic "boats don't go below the horizon" argument.

[@accountlol7409]

@@arthurgraton7165 never heard that one before

[@frankowalker4662]

Another thing that bothers me, if the moon radiates it's own light then why does it have phases ? Shouldn't it always be a full moon ?

[@lmechb3305]

09:43 ‘the light is reflecting off the earth’. Hang on a minute....

[@seretkeena]

That's what I said! So according to Flerfers, the Earth is reflective, but the moon can't be? What kind of physics are they using, I wonder!

[@SDfighter1]

@@seretkeena Forget physics. Are they using basic logic?

[@darrenbee4955]

@@seretkeena and did he not just debunk half the moon landing hoax arguments? I mean, don't they say you shouldn't be able to see the astronaut in shadow?

[@humanbeing1429]

@@darrenbee4955 yes he did debunk himself and the astronaut and shadow thing. Lol. Flerfs are known for doing that often

[@humanbeing1429]

Earth reflecting back the light will surely affect the shadow cast on the Doppler ball so if he can admit to one thing and deny the same thing at the same time, he is a total nutcase.

[@Sgt_SealCluber]

"Underside of doppler ball is not completely dark because of light bouncing off the earth." Wait did he just debunk the "Moon Truthers" on the lander photo? 😁

[@invisiblekincajou]

but.. but.. THATS TUTALLY IMPASSIBLE!

[@thedarkknight1971]

Check out Michael at Vsauce his video from a couple of years back on this subject... kzbin.info/www/bejne/j2PKhYagpKp4rsU

[@swayjaayy5495]

Exactly

[@Sam-vf5uc]

9:57 You actually do get that with a tennis ball. The roughness of the surface makes it harder to tell, but it does gradually get darker as the angle between the point being measured and the light source is more oblique. And if you look closely at the moon you see the cutoff between light and dark isn't sharp either (even in the photo shown by Mr. T&S, though it's made more difficult with the atmosphere in the way). Hence the moon does demonstrate exactly what we would expect a ball to do.

[@paullefevre8684]

Yes, and good point. However, what you don't get on either a tennis ball or the moon is specular reflection. The "hot spot" he's going on about. Because the surfaces are rough, and so won't produce specular reflection, which requires a very smooth surface. I wrote 3D modeling/rendering programs for years. They all handle specular and diffuse reflections differently, and depending on the properties of the reflecting object's surface. :)

[@matthewalmond12]

"isn't it amazing how we are actually the ones doing the science" as if there isn't millions of scientists going to work every day

[@UnstablePax]

My number 1 complaint about these idiots. Along with the "Why can't NASA prove a globe earth?" (They, and other space agencies, do that everyday). It is just ridoncolous statements, made by people who wish to be more special than they are.

[@ericpode6095]

And all the amateur astronomer's around the world doing useful observations every day.

[@sad-pt7xd]

Paxxlee KZbin videos are more reliable than people who dedicated their lived to science

[@Sileff]

Unfortunately the number that are actively researching space is much smaller. "The worldwide community of professional astronomers is only about 10,000; most are located in the us (with about 1,000 in the UK and 250 in Australia)." - astronomy.stackexchange.com

[@smashexentertainment676]

Conclusion should be: when you view two different objects, on a severely different distance from each other, from a very different angle, lit by the single light source - they don't match. Hmm.. interesting.

[@WilbertLek]

Same as with the "perspective" of a "gods-believer". When you look at reality from their "perspective" it doesn't match...

[@bigrob966]

@Dr Dimpy Rambo take two baseballs. Place one on the ground in your back yard. Hold the other one above your head. Note the difference in shadow on two balls viewed from a different angle illuminated from a point source of light. The end.

[@christianege4989]

@Dr Dimpy Rambo No, he told you how what experiment you have to do in order to prove it.

[@notamoron2246]

@Dr Dimpy Rambo Mr Shrivel and wither did that already.

[@Coastfog]

I just checked the reflection on my left ass cheek and it doesn't match the right one. Now the people in the park asked me to leave, and I think it's because they don't want to see the truth of Flat Arse.

[@ImagImages]

Me, standing on the road, looking at the shadow of a fencepost on the far side of the road: "The shadow is going away from me!" Me, turning around, facing the sun and looking at the shadow of a fencepost on the OTHER side of the road: "OMG, the shadow is going a different direction! It's coming TOWARDS me!....Proof!"

[@patrickfox-roberts7528]

🤣🤣🤣

[@GriffinPilgrim]

"I totally have the definitive proof, just wait, I'll show it to you! ...soon, totally gonna happen..."

[@davidhollyfield5148]

My question to Mr. T & S would be what is causing the shadow on the moon if it is self shining? I've never seen a shadow on a lit light bulb.

[@Ozzpot]

I missed the memo too David, but we're not allowed to question their assertions, apparently. Not allowed to ask how a self-illuminating moon has a shadow on it. Not allowed to ask why the Sun appears to set below the horizon each evening, rather than shrinking into the distance. Not allowed to ask how the Sun and Moon can ever be in alignment from the point of view of an observer on Earth. Not allowed to ask how they magically float on their circular path above us rather than crashing to the ground. Not allowed to ask why the distance to the horizon is a function of observer height above ground. Not allowed to ask how differing daylight times in different seasons and locations work on a flat disc. Not allowed to ask why the night sky is different in the southern hemisphere, having a different point of, and direction of, rotation, when they claim it is a single celestial hemisphere. Not allowed to ask what the firmament is even made of, and how it is illuminated with stars in such a dynamic and observer-relative way. Not allowed to ask for photographic evidence of this firmament, or the ice wall to which it is supposedly fixed. You get the idea. Not allowed to question anything, not yet. It is always their turn to question us. Hopefully our turn will come soon, because I sense a defensive collapse that will put these cretinous children well and truly to bed.

[@ElementofKindness]

That's the problem with nutjobs like this. There are literally dozens of holes in their theories, that it is utterly exhausting to address them all, and if you do try, they just make an argument that opens more incorrect claims to be debunked, or talk in circles back to the original bad theory.

[@sleepydan9818]

His own picture contradicts his claims at 7:51 "..and then here is the ultimate, no-doubt-about-it, in-your-face proof that the moon is SELF-LUMINATED..." while showing the moon HALF CONCEALED BY SHADOW.

[@JSSTyger]

The moon has to save energy and only cast its light where absolutely necessary.

[@davidhollyfield5148]

@@sleepydan9818 Yep. Just soooo stooopid or so arrogant that they never stop to question their own 'findings', because they're already convinced they're right. And then they have the audacity to claim they're doing science!

[@MrAlpacabreeder]

It’s hilarious that he thinks the banding caused by his graphics card are real as he draws arcs to show where they are. Also, I dare him to hold up two ping pong balls up at the location of the moon and at the location of the radar dome and explain why the shadows are different even though he knows for a fact that they are both illuminated by the same sun. I suppose he thinks soccer balls don’t really exist because when you look at them from different angles they look different.

[@oledhaeseleer]

After observing the two ping pong balls, he would just be chearing that he proved that the sun is local! Impossible to have two shadows that different with a sun 93 million miles away!

[@whitedo1]

That would undoubtedly be informative. Of course to put a golf ball at the position of the moon would require a 380,000 Km (one way) trip in a rocket and in doing so he would learn quite a bit.

[@andrewstoll4548]

I'm dying to know how a light source can have a shadow on it??

[@nalim27]

Easy answer .... if you have anither light with much more intensity. Then it will cast shadows on object that is emits its own light

[@Bociukaz]

Because NASA invest billions to do that :)

[@mattjohns3394]

Chinese second quality cob leds have dull spots. Maybe that's what the moon uses?

[@neptunites]

nalim27 Absolutely not true and you can try this at home. Try lighting a lighter and then shine a flashlight on it. No shadows whatsoever

[@mesertuga]

"the moon is producing it own light source" the picture only shows 50% light moon. I guess it's electrical bill was too big to be 100% "Science observation"

[@clivedavis6859]

But it is much brighter at night. I guess it is busy recharging during the day and only runs on quarter power.

[@sad-pt7xd]

the things you have to make up to be a flat earther lol

[@RobertEmery]

@@clivedavis6859 so the moon is solar powered? Hmm 🤔

[@Sileff]

I thought the same thing at the beginning of the video. If the moon is self-illuminating then why is only half of it lit? They don't even mention that at all.

[@generalkweizr7091]

The moon is on low battery and the NASA illuminati satanists forgot to charge it Checkmate globies

[@Adrian_Finn]

The biggest reason the moon doesn't have a hot spot is not only because of the reflective properties or lack thereof, but because of the inverse square law, this is something we learn in photography when using lights/strobes. The intensity of the light falls off with the square of the distance, put more simply the light falls off very quickly close to the light source but falls off more gradually as the distance increases meaning the difference in brightness at the surface on the moon closest to us compared to the edge of the moon would be negligible. The best way I can describe this is in a real case scenario and relate it to the moon. If I photograph a group of people, say a group of three, with a single strobe (analogous to the sun) and have them stood one behind the other close to the light source, the one in front of the group will be properly exposed (if of course I set the light to expose correctly for that person) but the person behind will be less well exposed and the person behind him will be underexposed, if however I place the whole group further away from the light source the whole group will be properly exposed from front to back, now imagine the moon...

[@anserbauer309]

I'd accuse you of always going for the low-hanging fruit; but let's face it..... when you bonsai a fruit-tree in a flat dish and cap it in tinfoil, there's not gonna be much else to pick. Good job- again.

[@Nails077]

There is indeed no other fruit, except for those rotting on the ground.

[@ZS-bg7jo]

/r/new sentence there...

[@MrCornelius61]

I still don't understand what he's "thriving on", but I finally understood what he "survives": life without a brain

[@DenverStarkey]

love how it's always "nasa tells you" , and not say oh 3000 years of astronomical observations.

[@MrHat.]

Or all the other space agencies

[@DenverStarkey]

@@MrHat. yeah but I think you kinda missed my main point Which was sort of how space agencies and NASA in particular is only about 60 years old. While mankind has known for several thousands of years that the moon exist and is a sphere. We didn't need a space travel program to tell us

[@LongdownConker]

I'm guessing they have no idea about Pythagoras and Aristotle lol

[@jtwee6590]

@@LongdownConker the programming languages?

[@LongdownConker]

no lol, the Greek philosophers

[@thomasarcanine]

This takes the term "lunacy" a whole new level... a very low one, by his standards...

[@stevecampbell9670]

Lunacy. I see what you did there.

[@ColinLittley]

HI Dan Mike Ball did do a second observation as per the way sensible people suggested he did it and got up close to the radar and had a ball on a stick and guess what he retracted his statement about it. As yet My Lies and connives has yet to put out a retraction.

[@EdwardHowton]

How long did it take Thrive to go postal and accuse him of being a NASA shill and selling out? Nutjobs always eat each other alive eventually.

[@Wordavee1]

kzbin.info/www/bejne/fau6q357ZsSqZ80

[@andysmith1996]

Well, he didn't completely retract it because he's still denying that this shows the sun caused the shadow on the moon and the Doppler radar. He just admits there's a correlation.

[@programorprogrammed]

@@Wordavee1 This needs to be pinned

[@tma2001]

@@andysmith1996 why am I not surprised - he would of deleted it out of embarrassment otherwise. As another debunker likes to say in his strong Aussie accent: "Whyyy do I even have to even explain this?" Mr Boll(ard) really is as thick as a post!

[@kevinfidler6287]

He's doing the science, his video comments section is actually a peer review for the most part, but he doesn't get it. That is not how science is supposed to work. It must stand up to heavy ridicule for it to be accepted as true. Further, if the Moon actually created its own light; wouldn't it appear to be a full Moon ALL the time??

[@yasyasmarangoz3577]

😂

[@RedWurm]

I'm guessing the moon also has a magic lampshade like the sun?

[@yasyasmarangoz3577]

@@RedWurm ?

[@kevinfidler6287]

@@yasyasmarangoz3577 he's joking. The flat earth model shows the sun and moon projecting light independently as if they are flashlights or have lamp shades. This is more ridiculous than 1st century philosophy. At least they had an excuse for being so inaccurate.

[@yasyasmarangoz3577]

@@kevinfidler6287 Oh ok

[@SonnyKnutson]

"My artwork can't go 3d, not with my skill" That kind of sums up why he is a flat Earther xD

[@ColinRixon]

If he could do 3d, he'd understand his viewing angles better.

[@rjdrakon2492]

Mr Thrive and Survive - taking "How stupid can you be?" as a personal challenge.

[@MrKiwi1960]

"We are the ones doing the science"... hmmm... is that what you call it? Well, good luck with that then.

[@timurf6392]

Thrive and survive. This going to be... Jeran: "Interesting".

[@DoctaOsiris]

Personally I'd have chosen the word "amusing" but Jeran's quote never fails either 🤣

[@counterscam6547]

shouldn't that vid be on april 1st? I think he got the date wrong.

[@nixutps]

No wonder. Flat earthers are known for getting everything else wrong too.

[@jackclarke1220]

For anyone who believes in the Flat Earth, everyday is April Fools.

[@sad-pt7xd]

Flat earthers live on a different time zone so maybe

[@Ag8MrE]

I love that picture of the full moon at 10:35 that clearly shows it is a ball. The texture gradients and the distortion of the circular craters becoming more and more oval/elliptical the further away from the center.

[@pratikparmar8709]

I love how in his hd image of moon, we can clearly see those craters and their shadows..

[@ShadeFC]

Cracked me up when you said it's been a month without the 2nd observation, no intellectual honesty with this guy to just say we did it and we were wrong, nope it's scrap that and try to find something else that fits my narrative.

[@Eunha1311]

i honestly think that those people are mad at themself not being more relevant in the human history especially now where it is harder to get a complete break through in science or anything else. They feel useless and want to be important and relevant in our society :)

[@shadoudirges]

Kinda par for the course for flat earthers, half-ass something that they don't understand and then when the real work needs to be done they pretend that it either already has been done, that they don't need to do it, or that it doesn't exist and move on to their next half-baked idea.

[@cjdennis149]

My first thought was to walk around the Doppler radar globe and see how the shadow constantly changes depending on your viewing angle!

[@VirtuelleWeltenMitKhan]

right? I think they are a) trolling b) in for the money c) both

[@deemcgann1695]

@@VirtuelleWeltenMitKhanno they’re just genuinely stupid half the time

[@VirtuelleWeltenMitKhan]

@@deemcgann1695 But you can just hold your fist up and look at the shadows. Almost no one can be that stupid if you can check for shadows within seconds yourself.

[@deemcgann1695]

@@VirtuelleWeltenMitKhan you’d be surprised at how many extra chromosomes these flerfers have

[@Pickers1997]

if the moon is self illuminating then *WHY IS HALF OF IT IN SHADOW*

[@lidbass]

Obviously because the NASA scientists have painted one half of it. With very long ladders. At night, so nobody could see.

[@KoaBosk]

Well you see the Moon is actually Hollow and it is like a giant lamp shade. And there's a giant rotating black screen inside that rotates that gives you the different phases of the moon. Because God is all-knowing all-powerful and cannot build an actual working universe. *satire*

[@ForbiddenFate]

We aren't prepared for that

[@brandonclick5911]

@@lidbass wait didn't they say moon landing was fake and we have never been to space?

[@KoaBosk]

@@brandonclick5911 well there's a dome over top of the Flat Earth. And if the sun and the moon are within that Dome than technically there is no space. So therefore the moon landing could be real. If there is a Dome and the Sun and the Moon are outside of that Dome then yeah there would be no way to get to it.

[@NightSkyJeff]

9:45 - Rich admits that Earthshine is a thing! That's a minor victory, I suppose.

[@joeshmoe7967]

I laughed out loud when he said that. Dufous he is such

[@doofismannfred4778]

@@joeshmoe7967 Hey. I resemble that remark.

[@pix9087]

This one is a classic. I love that both spheres shadow match, but he doesn't understand logic or prespective.

[@rob250185]

If the moon is self illuminating then surely we’d see the whole of the moon all of the time? 🤦🏻‍♂️

[@carultch]

If we could see with infrared, we could see the non-illuminated side of the moon.

[@Kyrelel]

Not if it was an internal light with a reflector

[@generalkweizr7091]

The moon is on low battery and the NASA illuminati satanists forgot to charge it Checkmate globers

[@wolftaker4721]

Flat earther: the moon is fake! Another flat earther: the moon is a object and we dont know it's form. And another flat earther: there is no moon. Well decide what moon you have

[@yddub1212]

Hey, deciding on a single moon is for globetards.

[@chazking8137]

Everyone knows the moon is the turtle's egg (the turtle we are all on top of). Pffffff c'mon globetards and flattards >:)

[@TheSp0kesman]

It’s a battle station... and it’s FULLY OPERATIONAL.

[@quikee9195]

flerfer: "The moon produces its own light!" same flerer, moments later: "We don't know anything about the Moon"

[@martialme84]

*its

[@TheNightshotBR]

How can he see this image 10:22 and STILL think the moon is self iluminated? It baffles me. lol he should change his video title title to "Two balls, same sun, two angles and one idiot".

[@leanpilar]

on the top of the moon, it's visible some shadows of the craters of self eliminated surface... make sense

[@AlmightyRandomFish]

Flerfers literally have no concept of 3 dimensions! Thanks Dan, that was a real chuckler!

[@mrunlucky4085]

if the moon eluminated itself y would the moon have phases? if it was its own light wouldnt u always see a full moon everyday?

[@tommieklund267]

Moon is actually made from cheese, but there's tons of light bulbs inside - that's why it's luminous! Everyone knows that.

[@mrunlucky4085]

@@tommieklund267 hahaha

[@clivedavis6859]

They would probably say it is like an LED screen and the pixels can be controlled to be on or off.

[@andystokes8702]

The truly bizarre thing is how the moon goes from new moon where only a tiny sliver is lit through full moon where the entire surface is lit then back to almost none of it lit every 28 days or so. I wonder what process there could be that would cause this to keep happening on such a regular time scale?

[@mrunlucky4085]

@@clivedavis6859 i rlly wouldnt doubt that

[@swayjaayy5495]

Also for this to be an exact comparison, the doppler would have to be in a completely dark room as well. Theres light reflecting off of many things causing it to be more illuminated.

[@kennymartin5976]

"they're upset, and that's a good sign, isn't it?" Well, no. If you upset someone, the proper and mature thing to do is to ask them what you did to upset them, and to see if you can work it out. Though maybe asking for maturity from flat earthers is a little too much

[@darkyboode3239]

He hates them, which is why he thinks it’s good to upset them.

[@EdwardHowton]

Or to put it succinctly, someone will get pretty angry with you if you shit on their carpet, that doesn't mean you did a good thing by pulling your pants down and squatting in the livingroom.

[@muralist_]

I can't imagine why something like this would be upsetting.

[@SnakeMan448]

People get upset for a variety of reasons. "Because they know the other person is right" is pretty much not a reason.

[@Judokast36]

It's alot like the whole #MAGA thing. It's not the argument itself they are looking to debate, but they want to "win" by eventually throwing so much bullshit at you, you get frustrated or pissed, and then they play victimhood and can say they "won" the argument.

[@vacantspace333]

That awkward moment when your body exists in 3 dimensions but your brain is in 2D

[@deemcgann1695]

I love how he uses a radar sphere, of which it’s very function proves a globe earth, to prove a flat earth

[@wifjackk]

"Has a conclusion" "looks for evidence to for fill conclusion" "fails miserably"

[@antaresmc4407]

Makes its own movie so his failed evidence explains (yet not demonstrate/fill) his conclusion Dont search for evidence of the movie just say "its obvious" "I know" or "we all know"

[@theturtlemoves3014]

Has a conclusion? or found one in an economy box of corn flakes? (10 to collect)

[@yddub1212]

"A...15 degree...per hour drift."

[@sharkcraft8568]

More of this: Has a conclusion Looks for evidence supporting that remade conclution and ignoring 100% of the evidence that doesn't And then says it's science

[@lewisjones7153]

I love how confident he is 😂hilarious

[@darkyboode3239]

Lewis Jones Because he didn’t look at the angle properly.

[@PiscotV]

Yes, that is one of the properties a flat earther should have. Apart from arrogance, lack of education, hypocrisy, lying, cherry picking.

[@MrMturko44]

Everyone: Earth is a globe Flatearther: draws one eyed smiley face on doppler radar

[@purple3018]

Astronomer thousands of years ago: uses advanced math and calculations to almost perfectly calculate the size of the earth and how far away from the sun it is Flat Earthers: draws a one-eyed smiley face on a doppler radar

[@MrJackhammer]

"We are the ones doing the science!" Hahahaha

[@mikeplace9125]

"my art work can't go 3D" Neither can your thinking 😂😂

[@Lee0297556]

Netflix should bring out a reality show where flat earthers get to attend physics classes in schools and if one of them can disprove an experiment that is performed in class they win a free trip to Antarctica to see it for themselves. I personally think it would be hilarious

[@stevierv22]

Flerfs remind me of the IT Crowd line that Roy said on the phone: I'm sorry, are you from the past?

[@ollieb9875]

In this box, Jen, is... *THE INTERNET*

[@robertlinke2666]

@@ollieb9875 don't drop it

[@MrDaewen]

Awesome reference!! Love The IT Crowd.

[@saiyanshoup1381]

He has been weighed, he has been measured, and he has been found wanting. What an absolute knob of a human being.

[@dan_iel_efs]

He also ignored about the surrounding surfaces reflection. The moon is "floating", surrounded by dark. If you can put some surface behind it, it will reflect some light at the back side.

[@ironhammer500]

I love it when they zoom in, if the moon makes its own light, why is there visible dark spots on the moon? I guess those LEDs in those parts of the moon must be broken.

[@YashRanaIITkgp]

@Peep Eater Lol you debunked yourself. The moon reflects light,and doesn't produce light therefore shadows are produced. On the other hand the sky you see( after scattering and all from the atmosphere) is mostly empty. You can't see empty space no matter how much light you put. Moon is a solid object, sky is the containment chamber ( simplified down for you to understand)

[@kallewirsch2263]

@Peep Eater Actually they are not darker. Quite contrary, with the naked eye we often can see parts of the moon which are in shadow with respect to the sun. The important point is "with respect to the sun". Just because they are in shadow with respect to the sun, this does not mean that they do not receive light at all. Just like the moon reflects light, so does earth. The non sun-light illuminated parts receive their light from earth and thus are not completely pitch black. It is called "earthshine" and is well known. A camera most of the time does not recognize this, because the exposure automatic does what it is designed to do: to give an overall good picture and the parts of the moon which are illuminated by earth only are too dark. The color dynamic is not good enough to make it prominent. A naked eye does better, especially in the days around new moon, when only a small part of the moon is illuminated by the sun (as seen from earth). But a camera can show it alsp: One needs to crank up the exposure time manually ond voila: there it is. Of course the rest of the picture is hopelessly overexposed, but the earth lit part of the moon is perfectly visible.

[@teebosaurusyou]

@@kallewirsch2263 I believe you can also mess with this by using photo editing software, where you crank up the contrast (or ??) and suddenly the things that 'weren't there' are visual.

[@kallewirsch2263]

@@teebosaurusyou Could be. It depends on the sensitivite of the image sensor, the optics and how the exposure automatic weights things in the image. Different cameras use different strategies. Eg. my old Leica R3 could be switched between 2 modes. There was integral mode, which took the whole image into account, and then there was portrait mode, where the automatic valued the image center more then the surrounding (because usually in a portrait the face is in the middle and you want to see that face even if the environment gets slightly over- or underexposed). In any case: shooting a pile of coal in a dark tunnel, while at the same time the whole mountain should be properly epxosed in bright daylight is asking for a hell of dynamic range of the image sensor.

[@stuartking84able]

Also bless him he thinks angle just means the tilt of the camera and not his position in 3d space.

[@id10t98]

wait, 3 d what?

[@stuartking84able]

@@id10t98 space. Which doesn't exist.😉

[@accountlol7409]

@@stuartking84able sorry he was a flerf he can’t perceive more than 2 dimensions

[@theslavscav]

Kudos for that guy for at least acknowledging reflected light. I expected him to completely gloss over secondary bounces after his "amount of ball lit" argument.

[@bennybooboo6789]

"Doing these observations and coming up with the WRONG conclusions" They're doing it backwards, they're coming up with a conclusion first then doing observations, the wrong ones, to try match the conclusion. Plus if the moon WAS self illuminating it would be a full moon ALL THE TIME

[@yddub1212]

Unfortunately it wouldn't assuredly be a full moon all of the time. But it'd have to adjust it's illumination pattern autonomously for no reason if not.

[@MrGamecatCanaveral]

@@yddub1212 why wouldn't it be a full moon all the time?

[@yddub1212]

@@MrGamecatCanaveral If the moon were self luminating (it isn't, I'm not arguing that), that wouldn't quite guarantee that the illumination is all or nothing. Sections of the moon could come "on" while other sections stay dark, making for partial illumination patterns (imagine a dimmer switch or some LED lights flashing in a pattern). Flat earthers who believe in a self lit moon basically have to believe that's what's taking place, which is just one more bizarre flaw in the whole flat earth narrative.

[@agnosticulster6594]

Oddly enough that's exactly the thought I had seconds before I read your comment. If the moon was a light source of would be a full moon all the time. It would have to be? Or am I just putting too much thought in to this?

[@MrGamecatCanaveral]

@@yddub1212 I get that. That's why I don't get their idea that it's self illuminating. It would be a full moon all the time but that's not what we see. So they come up with some stupid theory.

[@Big_E_Soul_Fragment]

The moon is brighter than Mr. Thrive & Survive.

[@patrlim]

Specifically the dark side

[@truu-dl8rp]

A burned out flashlight bulb is brighter than that idiot.

[@andystokes8702]

Even during a total eclipse.

[@kenbee1957]

Ooof

[@timothymarchant9079]

When someone spends this much time telling you you're wrong *in the preamble* You can be sure you need to turn your scepticism up to the maximum. Protip for any flerfs reading; when you carry out an observation you must consider ALL reasonable explanations for the phenomenon BEFORE you hypothesise! *Not just the one or more hypotheses you happen to like!* *Not the first hypothesis that pops into your head!*

[@theultimatereductionist7592]

Amen!

[@stevecampbell9670]

"Maybe they realized that they were wrong." Haha. Good one Dan.

[@MisterFarce]

Diminished brightness is what I feel I've experienced whilst watching this video. Thanks again, Dan. Stay safe and healthy mate

[@danielvass4638]

"when the sun was actually quite low in the sky" Hmmmmm........ So the sun is not just going away from you, like most of the flat earth models?

[@richardhanck972]

Hey hey hey... only one ad hoc explanation can apply at once. Dem's da rules.

[@petermcglone135]

Thanks for your channel Dan, my son who passed away on saturday introduced me to ur flat earth fridays etc. We had a lot of laughs watching your videos. Keep up the good work.

[@Babayaga-pf5dt]

Very sorry to hear about your son, Peter. Just a message from another dad.

[@freenarative]

Pans right... tilts up..."we are looking at the same angle!". Just say to him "hold a ball up so it blocks out the moon. Then, THEN the angles are the same and then the shadows are the same!"

[@yuho4141]

Angles are but shadows will not because the moon is so far away that it comes into factor but yea agreed

[@ElementofKindness]

HOW DARE YOU ATTEMPT A RATIONAL DEMONSTRATION

[@ReinoGoo]

@@yuho4141 With that kind of precision the shape of the moon is a factor.

[@yuho4141]

Reino Göransson fair enough

[@Apollorion]

freenarative, "hold a ball up so it blocks out the moon. Then, THEN the angles are the same and then the shadows are the same!"

[@peanuts2105]

Elephant in the room here: what powers the moon's internal light? Fairy dust or slow motion nuclear fusion ignited by Pixies

[@skeletonwar4445]

The secret underground factories run by the Bogdanoff-Brothers

[@Heroltz998]

It's the helium that's inside of it.

[@daveb6722]

It's woo woo power.

[@ShawnNac]

Magic!

[@lidbass]

What did they do in the years when the Pixies had split up? Did Black Francis do it all alone?

[@llolipoplizard3604]

I guess these guys have never watched a night NASCAR race during the summer. They get really nice clear footage of the moon especially when its full. Clear bright and REAL moon!

[@Chimp_6]

"Not with my skill" - Mr Thrive & Survive - EXACTLY!

[@davesutherland9165]

If the moon isn't reflecting light but instead has it's own light source, why are you only seeing half the moon in the video?

[@goodtrollofthewest2757]

Apparently the Illuminati control it...🤣

[@alwaysmeepin9609]

You know what I’m making a new theory, EVERYTHING IS A LIE UNKESS ELON MUSK BELIEVES IT, BECAUSE ELON MUSK IS GOD.

[@HappyHippieGaymer]

Good Troll Of The West that illuminate! Really impressive that they have had such advanced tech sense before recorded history.

[@jtwee6590]

cause the moon gets to choose how lit it is!

[@simplekid4328]

Thats the moon letting you know its on low battery

[@dtrezy5223]

Most of the time I don't think Mr thrive and survive knows what he's talking about.

[@roygrafton6322]

Only most???

[@dtrezy5223]

@@roygrafton6322 I didn't think that the word most would be taken literally but ok I'll change it he never knows what he's talking about.

[@its1110]

Anyone who thinks aeroplanes run on compressed air is full-on bonkified. Him, Oakley, and QE are 3 voices I can not stand to hear. Pete Shea is 4th. Grrr...

[@RobertEmery]

Other times he is sleeping.

[@bazzauk2020]

8:44 when the sun was low in the sky, i thought the sun was always the same level with a flat earth?

[@spacexsays3227]

It's a globe....watch......kzbin.info/www/bejne/fqCmqqysh8x9fck

[@SETIFilm]

Still has comments turned off. Says something interesting about the content.

[@tiberiu_nicolae]

The transition between dark and light is also affected by the source of the light. In the case of the moon it's the sun, a far away source with parallel rays of light. In the case of the doppler radar, it's the sun PLUS the reflected light from the earth all around it which gives it a diffuse lightning smoothing the transition.

[@cearnicus]

MT&S: _"We're the one doing the science"_ Okay, you owe me a new keyboard.

[@harishthethird]

"A career out of misunderstanding..." I've seen that before here

[@Toasty_93]

This all boils down to the fact that flerfs can't grasp the concepts of perspective, scale and the simple fact that objects are 3D.

[@TitanicTruths]

"My art cant go 3D, not with my skill". Never a more true statement from a flat earther lol. The real world is 3D, theirs cant go that way.

[@davidlazarus67]

Their science cannot be done with their skill either. Yet they think they can.

[@davidlazarus67]

Harry M Yes it is embarrassing to be that dumb. While I am not especially skilled at science I do not think I am bright enough to overturn centuries of science. Though since I don’t actually believe the earth is flat the opportunities to show such ignorance are few and far between.

[@marvinko6610]

Bless this guy. This isbasically like a 7 year old child thinking they are smarter than their teacher, because in their head 2+5*2= 14 and not 12.

[@MuttFitness]

You mean 210

[@yasyasmarangoz3577]

Yes

[@The_Absolute_Dog]

I think you mean 27

[@MuttFitness]

@@The_Absolute_Dog I see my mistake now

[@TazPessle]

Nah they'd start with an answer then try solving for '+' and '*', throw up their hands because they can't and say maths is fake.

[@unclecreepy4073]

“We’re the only one doing science. We’re the ones observing things” Ppppssst, that’s not science.

[@wpasieczny]

Yep. Observing != understanding.

[@accountlol7409]

I can’t _observe_ Gatorade giving me electrolytes so it doesn’t give electrolytes

[@chickenman297]

Cant' go 3D huh? Well I did. Back when Mr Sensible was debunking this, I wrote a simple shader in Unity and applied it to 2 spheres. The shader was written to colour the spheres white where they face the light source and black where they don't thus colouring half the sphere white and the other half black. I made one of the spheres huge and far away while the other was small and close. When the two spheres were aligned in the view port, they looked identical while when they weren't aligned, they looked different. TAS is debunked. Scimandan, if you would like the Unity project associated with this graphical demonstration, I would be glad to supply it (Unity is free to use so long as you don't make more than $100k).

[@southerndruid3391]

Unity ftw. Lol did the same before I read the comment.

[@mneri]

But why flatearthers get everything so wrong? Literally everything.

[@yasyasmarangoz3577]

Otherwise their flat earth would not work.

[@flexydex8754]

Thats not what literally means

[@yasyasmarangoz3577]

@@flexydex8754 actually you're right

[@twig8523]

Because they're working backwards, from a stating punt that is waaay more ridiculous & baseless than the preconceived notion "we love on a flat earth" most are starting from a young earth creationist Christian conspiracy theory that's much like Satanist-Illuminati Qanon delusion. All this faulty pseudo-scuence is really just the tip of the iceberg

[@MikeL21101987]

my guess from personal experience (was myself part of a conspiracy-group years ago. Let's just say it was a phase...) would be that many of them need this "knowledge" to feel special and boost their self-esteem. Sad but I can't explain otherwise, why they rage like mad-lads if you try to explain basic things to them that contradict this believe. Dunning-Kruger-effect is therefore strong on them