A normal person wouldn't have been able to conceive what the significance of the shadows meant. A preacher would've attributed it to whatever god he worshiped. But Eratosthenes was a scientist. What a beautiful statement!
If you are a truth seeker, search "Truth Contest" in Google and click on the 1st result, then open The Present and read what it says. Everyone needs to see this. The Present will turn this world right-side up if it reaches enough people. You will see what I mean when you read the first page.
Only brainless people are atheists. No man says "god does not exist" or "there is no god" except for one who is obsessed with saying that. He is simply mad at god. The world is still waiting for the first atheist wise, all atheists up to date have been unsuccessful on life. God exists, and atheists better repent immidiately.
@anticorncob6 A smart atheist will not say "god does not exist" because that is a declarative statement, just as "there is a god" is also a declarative statement. A smart atheist would say "no evidence exists to support the proposition of a God, so I will not believe". You are confusing two different things, and you also make huge assumptions about a group of people that in most instances, are probably far above your intellectual level.
@Foreverclever87 Atheism is like a religion in that atheists declare there is no god, end of story. What you are referring to sounds more like Agnosticism, which is a lack of belief in anything since the truth of religious or atheist views is unknowable. I think most people who call themselves atheists are actually agnostic.
@sairus002 Nope. You misunderstand everything. Atheists do not "declare" there is no god, because as I stated that is a DECLARATIVE STATEMENT. Got it? Atheism etymologically means "without-God", and most usually takes the form of an individual LACKING a belief of God, not AFFIRMING the lack of an existence of a God. You also don't understand agnosticism. Agnosticism is not about belief, but evidence. You can be a theist or an atheist and still be agnostic. Learn the terms, and respond.
@Foreverclever87 Atheism, first line in Wikipedia: "Atheism is, in a broad sense, the rejection of belief in the existence of deities.[1] In a narrower sense, atheism is specifically the position that there are no deities."
Agnosticism, first line in Wikipedia: "Agnosticism is the view that the truth value of certain claims—especially claims about the existence or non-existence of any deity, but also other religious and metaphysical claims—is unknown or unknowable."
@sairus002 And that is why you should not look to wikipedia for your half-assed information. Your teachers must love you /s
Maybe if you read a real book on the history of philosophy, you'll discover that actual atheism is simply an assertion that "I do not BELIEVE that there is a god because no sufficient evidence exists for that claim." Not, "I BELIEVE no god exists." That being said, I am clearly an agnostic atheist, because those are compatible. I still think you do not grasp this.
@Foreverclever87 Same definition of atheism is in Websters dictionary. I trust info from Wikipedia more than info from pompous jackasses on YouTube. Only reason I replied in the first place is because you're a know-it-all prick flaming people for their "misinformed" statements. So believe what you want. I don't give a shit what you think.
@sairus002 What I'm telling you is do not look for a deep description and analysis of a complex subject in a fucking dictionary. Besides, you're the fucking idiot who believes in a god in the first place, so I'm currently arguing with a person with an imaginary friend. I don't know why I would expect you to grasp something in the least bit complex. So, fuck you and your imaginary friend. The funny thing about pompous jackasses is they are usually correct, which is why you don't like them.
@Foreverclever87 HAHA wow . First of all, I see any religion as the most asinine thing in existence so your assertion that I believe in any god is laughably false. As I said, I only replied because you're a prick flaming and insulting people for what they say, instead of being mature and ignoring it or at least being diplomatic. You start flame wars because you're a self-superior arrogant shit. I don't give a damn how you define what. You're just an asshole and I'm calling you out on it.
@Foreverclever87 I am a homosexual agnostic and your simply being an arrogant elitist bullshiter, holding the fact that ppl believe in god over them and calling them thus less educated just shows how fucking arrogant you are, back the fuck down, you have challenged an agnostic, webster, and fucking wikipedia, you are wrong, you are ignorant, and you and your small dick need to go elsewhere and think of how ludicrous you are being.
@Squirtsoda56 Congrats, you take it in the ass. I don't care about your sexuality. When the fuck did that come up? And yes, there is a demonstrable correlation between educated individuals, particularly scientists, and atheism. So, I'm not exactly making a huge leap of faith to posit that you are, in fact, dumber because you believe in something that cannot be proven, something that has not one single shred of evidence to back it up. Also, if you saw my dick you'd probably want to suck it.
@Squirtsoda56 What's fucked is this started out with you saying "god exists, and atheists better repent". You are the one who is making a definitive claim, I am the one saying I do not know that a god does not exist but since no evidence exists to support the hypothesis of a god, then I myself do not believe that a god exists because I would have zero evidence to support my claim. Also, Carl Sagan is an atheist and he was not "unsuccessful at life", and he was also a very wise man.
@Foreverclever87 Type out the links by the way, they don't paste correctly. The words get scrambled when you try to go to the URL. Specifically, in the Stanford link, delete and retype /entries/ and in the second link, retype /atheist
It would be a lot simpler if YouTube just allowed URLs.
@Foreverclever87 What the hell are you smoking dude? Are you really that stupid, you thought the original guy that you commented on is speaking right now? Wow. There was a guy talking about god and being quite ignorant, then you commented on his post, then sairus002 commented on your post, and finally after a few confrontations i commented on your post. The reason I know this is I went back in the posts, and i can see why u got confused but you have already stated u are smarter than anyone so y?
@Squirtsoda56 Yes, sorry I got confused regarding which theistic moron was responding to me because after a while of this I just stopped looking at the names. And there is no chance I said I'm smarter than anyone. Very educated people and scientists tend to be atheist, which is what I said. Hence, Sagan. Corncob said what ignorant judgmental shit he did, and I don't give a fuck enough to go back because this is fucking youtube and I wrote that comment a month ago.
@Foreverclever87 You say we're morons yet you don't even know what atheism is. Seriously, do some research. You're just embarrassing yourself, especially saying we're theistic. I started this argument to call you out on you're bullshit ignorance regarding you correcting someone who wasn't wrong in his use of the term. No one here is talking down atheism, just you and your misunderstanding of it.
@sairus002 corncob did say atheists better repent. He is thus a moron. That is where this began. I then correctly stated that a smart atheist will not make a declarative statement regarding the existence of god but will not believe in a god because no evidence exists. What is so fucking difficult about this you can't get through your head?
@Foreverclever87 "A smart atheist will not say "god does not exist" because that is a declarative statement" This is entirely not true. "‘Atheism’ means the negation of theism, the denial of the existence of God." - As stated in Stanford encyclopedia of philosophy. You're just wrong. Why cant you get that through your head? I would have just ignored it if you didn't go and insult his intelligence in the process. You were just being immature. Learn from this, instead of claiming we're all stupid.
@Foreverclever87 Corncob was being stupid saying that. You aren't wrong saying that atheists don't deny god, but you aren't right either. The term atheist is so widely misused that "skeptical atheist" and all that has become common accepted meaning. However you are absolutely 100% wrong in saying I misunderstand it. Agnostic atheist, is a total contradiction. They aren't compatible. You can call yourself whatever you wish, but in proper context, you are not atheist at all. You are agnostic.
@sairus002 They are compatible. Look up atheistic agnosticism, or the reverse. They are not total contradictions and they are in fact compatible. It simply means you do not believe in a said deity but also hold that absolute knowledge of said deity is logically impossible to determine. That being said, I feel the same way Dawkins does when he says: "I am agnostic only to the extent that I am agnostic about fairies at the bottom of the garden."
@Foreverclever87 Through improper but accepted definition yes, they are compatible. My point was you shouldn't go flaming people and calling them stupid when in fact, they understand the terms and their meanings perfectly. Like I said, you aren't wrong in calling yourself these things, but you aren't right either.
@Foreverclever87 On another note, you have been extremely hostile and condescending towards anyone religious. You say you have an open mind, so try to understand it from an objective point of view. People who believe in something aren't automatically stupid. Religion provides comfort to people who need answers to questions that cant be answered by science. Some people NEED to believe in something. That doesn't make them stupid. Let those who believe in something live in their blissful ignorance.
@sairus002 I am hostile toward willful ignorance and credulity. I have an open mind, but not so open my brain falls out of my skull. If you believe something with no evidence supporting it, I think you have a form of a mental disorder that stems from an inability to deal rationally with the world. Also, I can't let them live in "blissful ignorance" because they usually must to go out and "spread the word" about their faith. The happiness of credulity is a cheap and dangerous quality.
@Foreverclever87 You see religion in black and white. Not all of them are zealous freaks that try to shove their beliefs down everyone's throat. Those are the morons, the minority. Some are very private with their beliefs and just use religion as a moral compass. I come from a very religious family. I'm agnostic and they accept me despite that. It's not fair to judge them all the same. being hostile and acting like that makes you no better than the zealots.
@sairus002 Except my hostility is the opposite from that of religious zealots because my hostility is only the reaction to the spectacular lack of thought and critical thinking openly displayed by the zealots. Not all theists are religious, and not all religious people are zealots, but they all maintain a level of cognitive dissonance that is just sad to witness. I am hostile against those who use religion to fight against things like abortion and scientific research, like the republicans.
@Foreverclever87 I agree with that, but you are so general about it. I don't know what country you're in but I'm assuming US since you mentioned republicans. 86% of the US population follow some religion. Clearly they don't all fall under that category you're referring, yet you seem so quick to judge religious groups as a whole.
@sairus002 I'm in Canada but I'm a duel citizen. I am currently studying new religious movements (NRM's) and I would never bunch them into the same category. They do, however, tend to display striking similarities regarding preying on the emotional side of humans, while making claims that overtly cross the lines of determinable science. And, usually when humans fight fervently against anything new that can aid our species, it's because they think they have god on their side. That is my beef.
@Foreverclever87 Take Hinduism as a perfect example. It's part of their beliefs that they DON'T spread it, rather let those who need guidance seek it out. The world would probably have a lot less corruption and crime if more people believed in their system of Karma. I think we can agree, hardcore Christians are the problem, not religion itself.
@sairus002 I agree about buddhism, but I fundamentally disagree about christianity. I agree with Christopher Hitchens' take on the issue, in that the religious texts say what they say. The problem is the religion, not the zealots. The zealots are simply following the prescriptions listed in the bible, whereas the "normal" christians are cherry picking what they want to follow or reject because they want to believe something warm and fuzzy but are not actually bigoted like the zealots.
@Foreverclever87 Religion in itself isn't a problem. It depends on the religion and how it is meant to be followed. I disagree entirely with Christianity too. As for the "cherry pickers", those are the ones I say, let them believe what they want. If they find happiness in it, who are we to interfere? As long as they don't get in your way about it, why does it matter? Why are they deserving of hostility? Not everyone can take solace in science alone. Being different, doesn't make them bad people.
@sairus002 Religion is the belief that there is a god that tells you what to do. Since there is no evidence or indication a god does exist, humans fill that gap of telling you what to do. The problem with that is that humans are fallible and subject to coercion. By shaming those who believe in something with no proof, it will hopefully raise the human intellectual level to the point where people don't abjectly follow a "holy man". If they keep it to themselves, ok. Most don't, though.
@Foreverclever87 Humans filling that gap isn't always bad. Though most of the time it is. Most religions are immoral but science is amoral. Humans will always have huge ambitions when it comes to understanding things. A religion with proper guidelines could mean a better world all around. Scientific research is often the cause (directly or indirectly) of massive economic and environmental damage, as well as massive suffering and many lost lives, humans or otherwise, all for rapid advancement.
@sairus002 Can you give me examples of the damage? I agree, but I think about it differently. I think human greed causes the damage, it just so happens that humans have incredible access to machines and energy and so are able to fulfill their greed in new and inventive ways. But it can also work opposite of that. Look at Tesla, for example.
@Foreverclever87 You're right. It's not science itself that causes the damage but rather how we apply our findings and how we acquire our data, which is all governed by human greed and lust for rapid advancement
@Foreverclever87 I'm getting kind of off topic, but my point is, religion shouldn't be shamed when science doesn't have much more of a positive outcome. What needs to change are the religions that are being followed; the ones oppress those who don't accept indoctrination and obey. If the whole world was Buddhist or Hindu, sure we would be more primitive, but, although not perfect, there would be much less needless suffering, death and poverty.
@sairus002 that's not off topic. I see what you're saying. I've thought about this a lot, actually. I wonder about the nihilism of Nietzsche and how the problem of nihilism would be solved if all religions somehow vanished tomorrow. It's a good question, and one I have not found a coherent answer to yet. But about science not offering much of a positive outcome, what do you mean? All modern medical science and technology was unlocked with scientific research, so how is that not positive?
@Foreverclever87 Those medical advancements come at great cost. I suppose you may think I'm weird for saying this, but I don't think the ends justify the means when It comes to medical tech. I don't think any research should be made if it involves painful deaths of hundreds of living things in order to get those results. Honestly, I'd rather die from cancer than to benefit from that suffering. I'm sensitive to these things. The research should be done a different way, even if it takes longer.
@sairus002 Are you referring to experiments done to animals? Doesn't that constitute a rather small portion of what we would call "experimental science"? What about everything else? Oh, and I don't disagree with you about experiments on animals.
@Foreverclever87 As for other technologies and sciences, it always leads to commercialization, which leads to chemical waste in the waters, pollution in the air, and more land taken from wildlife. Science in itself isn't negative I suppose, but in this corporate driven society people's ambitions cause them to throw morality out the window in the name of faster advancement and profit.
@sairus002 question for you. Are you familiar with any of the "new atheists"? (Hitchens, Dawkins, Harris, Dennit) What is your opinion of them? do you like them, dislike them, have ambiguous feelings, or something else?
@Foreverclever87 I have heard some of Dawkins, but I pay more attention to theoretical physics and cosmology than philosophy, so I'm not too familiar with these guys.
The Thing is that this would not have been conclusive prove that the Earth is round. The absence of a shadow in one place and a very definite shadow elsewhere can be explained if the Sun is close enough to the Earth (which could have been the case for all Eratosthenes knew) so that it's rays were divergent and not parallel
In the library in Alexandria they were doing research to discover the size of the earth, theorizing atoms, and recording the history of our society. 800 years later early Muslims burn the library to the ground. Today a few people doubt the earth is round.
The erosion of knowledge by organized religion is a terrible thing.
@TheBuddhaPunk they are both brilliant scientists, however they study very different fields of science. So, it is hard to compare them simply by saying one is better. Carl Sagan is better at explaining things though.
@CRISNCHIPS12398 I cant explain it to you in a youtube comment very well but its really simple geometry. If you 'draw a line' from the tip of the stick casting the shadow to the tip of the shadow, and measure the angle that that makes -- that angle is the same as the one that you would find between the sticks if they went all the way to the center of the earth.
@annoyingweirdo By finding the degrees between two points. 7º is a 50th of the circumference of the full earth. the distance between the two points was 800km. 800*50 = 40,000km=circumference of Earth
Astronomers in particular and science in general do not know what they say. The historical answer concerning the universe have it in the video: "Orbit of the Sun and orbits of Venus" but do not want to take notice. Insist on maintaining the falsehood of all mankind for 30 paltry pieces of silver ...
I disagree to the idea that scyence and God are self-excludent... If you believe the Universe had a begining, you could place God in that begining... And if you believe in evolution, you could insert here the belief that there's some sort of Divne Goal to be reached in the long term. Maybe it's not Christianism but it could be still a sort of religion.
Yes he is sexy, and I think sexy men are more likely to be awesome men too.
The ugly men will spend their whole lives hating themselves and the world so much that they will never have a chance to become awesome in any aspect of life.
@Glitch385: What about Stephen Hawking? He's ugly, dribbles alot, talks through an electronic voice box but also comes up with great ideas. He is awesome.
BTW, could you do this experiment with Ron Jeremie's cock? Would it cast a shadow like an obelisk?
weird how this guy calculates the circumference of the earth 800 years b4 mohammed came along, yet muslims are so impressed by the 'miraculous' iron falling out of the sky which was mentioned in the qurap because NO ONE COULD HAVE KNOWN THIS 1400 YEARS AGO!!! LIKE ZOOOOMGGG! ALL PRAISE BE TO ALLAH LALALALALALLALA
@eddie2042 what makes it even funnier, is that the reason the muslim scholars knew the earth was round, was BECAUSE of erotosthenes. alot of the writing you see in the quran and hadith is actually taken from greek and roman scholars. after the collapse of the roman empire, their vast scientific and medical knowledge was lost to the west, but alot of it was maintained by the east.
@Ilikenuman Oh do tell Mr young and oh so clever zionist. history is always written by the winners. You do know who or rather what is behind it all anyway don't ya Toto? Trust that it had nothing to do with religion or black magic or tin foil hats or space cadets nor is it for the benefit of perverts such as yourself trying to get you jollies at other peoples expense. Methink St Augustine said it best far better than anything old greek anyway. What say you pussy?
@Ilikenuman Pure bullshit I am merely trolling you back EH Owen Baby? Yeaterday you proved to all you supported Mr Baconfat and his associates and their malice against my family and I. anyone can visit your zionist hero's blog and see what side of the fence you are truly on pervert. Just type in bacont53 into a search engine to see some of you evil pal's published work. "By their fruits ye shall know them" as your malevolent hero loves to quote
MrBaconfat is my hero? I thought Obama was my hero...
god you just cant keep your stupid conspiracy theories straight can you?
youre such a joke, no wonder the police never take you seriously.
anyway, youre 57 years old. And youre "trolling" people on the internet. Why dont you get a fuckin job, why dont you start taking responsibility for the family you abandoned?
@Ilikenuman Yesterday you chastised me because I did not answer you quickly Mr Baconfat and Obama are every evil perverted zionist's favorite heroeo Tell me pervert how many of Obama's close advisers have duel Israeli citizenship? You have done nothing in your life except harass people on the internet Anyone can Google my name and see that I am for real on the otherhand you live in fear that people will find out who you truly are EH pussy?
@Ilikenuman That is slander which is crime in Canada and England the ower of this channel should be careful of what he publishes because he can be charged with the same crime. I have run for public office four times and have sued many lawyers etc. You should NOT support the malice of and nameless troll who attacked you as well CORRECT? BTW the RCMP know I alread saved this web page.
@DavidRaymondAmos IShitInDeansYomica? He never attacked me, he just spoke to me an told me all about how he knows you and why your life is such a bitch.
and its only slander if its untrue. but the kind of things youve been saying to me about catholic priests, licking arseholes and being fucked by joe biden. I have to say, there are good reasons to suspect you may be a closet pedophile. I cant prove it, but theres good reason to believe it.
@Ilikenuman Calling me pedo is slander Sexually harassing my family are certainly crimes and were published by you in my channel. You support people who threatened to kill them FYI I posted on my channel an old vid of yours from Ning You certainly seem to have some tendencies of an diddled child It is aften the case a child who was abused grows up to be an abuser and the words in your comments and blog tell me you are one very sick puppy
the video from Ning is also on my youtube channel aswell you daft twatt. I put it on youtube AND ning.
It even has the same video name on my youtube channel. What a great investigator you would make. and anyway, all you had to do is type ilikenuman into google and youll find my ning profile. Its not like you had to dig deep.
And its not slander because you clearly ARE a pedo.
And i didnt harass your kids so you fail again : )
This comment has received too many negative votesshow
carl sagan, another socialist atheist, cant help but lie and hide true scientists. they dotn want to argue, they just want to kill free speech. WE ARE SICK OF THE DEMOCRAPS, WE ARE GOING TO SUCCEED FROM THE UNION
You're going to secede from the union? Who is we?
Carl Sagan's been dead for decades, you know. So why the insane diatribe?
By the way, you jack-booted fascist, there isn't anything unAmerican about being an atheist. In this nation, freedom to practice any belief -- or lack thereof -- is guaranteed by the constitution.
Of course, we all know how you Repugnantklans feel about the Constitution: You'd like to cancel it in favor of Jesus-based theocracy.
holy crap what are the chances I watch a video that some one else at my school watched and see their comment. I know chadbro but who is willford brimley (diabetus101)?
we watched this in school today :P thanks a lot,, now we hae to write two paragraphs on it! jk jk HELLO PEOPLE IN MY CLASS WHO R WATCHING THIS!!!! (mrs. Recard's class)
Write about how Carl dwells and slowly goes over the story up until he gets to the actual way the circumference was found, at which point he skims over it the way a magician uses slight of hand. At 5:13 he starts with a word that might be "from" but you can't tell: "errhbb the observed difference in the shadow lengths the distance between Alex. and Cyene had to be about 7 degrees along the surface of the earth...". What's this business about parallel light? What do you really learn from this?
What you might want to realize is that this is a history lesson, not a math lesson. Your learning that Greeks new the Earth's size, and shape, 300 years before Christ was supposedly born. If this interests you, pick up a geometry book and figure out how you would solve the math problem yourself. If it doesn't, then take the lesson that society forgets a great deal of what individuals learn and hold dear.
I actually agree... but when is Cosmos not touted as science education? It's not. It's just an exercise in saying, "science is neat" but, like most "science education" for the public, it can't even be bothered to mention something as simple as equivalent angles. You don't have to pore through a text book to get it. There's a zillion videos that do it in a few seconds. I'm not saying Carl was doing it on purpose. I think he was unknowingly, like so many others, mistaking platitudes for education.
There should be someone willing to repeat Eratosthenes' experience themselves. For example, some High School in Texas could have a project like sending a crew of students to Tamaulipas, Mexico in June 21 to check the shadows at the height of theTropic of Cancer, while a second crew would be calculating the lenght of the shadows back in Texas... Then they would exchange datas by internet and each crew would do their own calculations, then compare that... It would be a cool school project!
The second one, forming a triangle between side b: stick, itself, side c, the projected shadow in the ground, and side a; a line between upper stick end, and end of shadow, farther from base. Make a drawing. You notice that the side "a' and the first stick are perfectly paralel. Conclusion; the difference of angles between these two sticks equals the angle between side "b' and "a"
Yes - watch the segment between 4.40 and 6.00 again - Eratosthenese's (premises) were made using sound scientific calculations. In particular pay attention to the part where he explains the (imagination) of the length of the sticks travelling all the way to the centre of the earth..(he already thought the earth might be round) - now all he had to do was get some poor guy to walk the distance between the two points in order to get the (approximate) distance - EASY!!! lol
Well, he still had to make the hypothesis that the earth was round. Unless if he repeated this experience from the North pole to the South wich i doubt he did.
This comment has received too many negative votesshow
You can`t build a life on Science. It changes every hour. People need immovable truths in their lives not weather-veil tennents. Build your life upon a Christian rock not the sands of Science.
Science is a self correcting mechanism. It's been around since man could think.
Of course science is always changing that is the beauty of it. Science is not just changing it corrects it self. Science is a truth only it does not use a capital letter like religions do. Science explains how things work.
Science brings medical and technology advancements.
Do you believe we could of had you tube if nobody questioned and tested authority's claim's
"Science is a self correcting mechanism. It's been around since man could think" - Chill
Science is an off-shoot of ASTROLOGY you nit-witt. The most paganistic, heathenistic and Satanic of practices.Man! WTF are they teaching you at school for cryin out loud!
Science is an epistemological method, the empirical observational methodology was an off-shoot of what the greeks called natural philosophy, Aristotle records the first system of empirical science as systematic method for making epistemological claims.
Science is not simply a collection of observations, it is a philosophical school of thought that relies upon metaphysical axioms.
This comment has received too many negative votesshow
Science does in fact prove God's existence. By no means, however, is the Judeo-Christian god the One and True. The God of Abraham has opinions and takes actions, therefore it has position. Something with position is inherently subjective and finite. By asserting that God has preferences, you are degrading and offending God's holy and perfect nature. Only by being supremely indifferent can God be supremely existent. If you still want your god to have opinions, then admit he is finite and limited.
Dude, science has no business whatsoever in matters of governance, morality, values or any such crucial matters of human existence. Dude, science changes with every issue of "Nature" for Pete´s sake!!!
Science has no business in matters of human existence?
Dude when you go to the doctor it's science that helps him cure you. Although he may not be able to brings things back from the dead, like for example, your brain, it's still a fact that science has everything to do with human existence.
"Of course science is always changing that is the beauty of it." - Chill
Thats why I said "go play with your test tubes junior". Science has no business whatsoever in matters of human governance,morality, values or any such crucial matters of human existence.
Actually science plays a very important role in the government were I'm from anyway. Religion Is kept out of the government religion is just regarded as a belief system. Science is crucial for advancement, to try and end world hunger,try and find a way to be a peaceful society, cure desiese. Thanks to science you live a comfortable life drink safe drinking water and it is the reason why were talking now. Without it we would be in the dark ages
"Science has no business whatsoever in matters of human governance, morality, values or any such crucial matters of human existence."
I would counter that science provides data that is relevant to such issues and allows one to make more informed decisions when deliberating within these contexts, for example global climate change, this issue can manifest itself in all the areas you listed.
And yet you assert that scientific data is irrelevant?
This comment has received too many negative votesshow
"greeks had the most advanced civilization" - thepop
Yeah dude, that`s why Aristotle considered women an order above cattle. The only advanced thing about Pagan Hellenicism is how close they were to the Mediterranean. Period. They got totally PWNED by Christianity.
It's easy to dismiss an entire era of thought with a glib reference to some ancient value we recognize as backwards today. While the Greeks may not have been the most advanced civilization, their contributions to philosophy and the sciences were vast.
Anyone else find this absolutely beautiful?
"But Eratosthenes was a scientist."
A normal person wouldn't have been able to conceive what the significance of the shadows meant. A preacher would've attributed it to whatever god he worshiped. But Eratosthenes was a scientist. What a beautiful statement!
mchandler2112 1 hour ago
this man...has wonderful hair...
jakemorris111 3 days ago
Amazing!
MIDNAq1LINK 2 months ago
7 dislikes? 7 people want the world to be flat again.
gino88 3 months ago
Alpha as fuck
hoveringsombrero818 4 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
If you are a truth seeker, search "Truth Contest" in Google and click on the 1st result, then open The Present and read what it says. Everyone needs to see this. The Present will turn this world right-side up if it reaches enough people. You will see what I mean when you read the first page.
truthseeker7676 4 months ago
Only brainless people are atheists. No man says "god does not exist" or "there is no god" except for one who is obsessed with saying that. He is simply mad at god. The world is still waiting for the first atheist wise, all atheists up to date have been unsuccessful on life. God exists, and atheists better repent immidiately.
anticorncob6 4 months ago
@anticorncob6 A smart atheist will not say "god does not exist" because that is a declarative statement, just as "there is a god" is also a declarative statement. A smart atheist would say "no evidence exists to support the proposition of a God, so I will not believe". You are confusing two different things, and you also make huge assumptions about a group of people that in most instances, are probably far above your intellectual level.
Foreverclever87 4 months ago
@Foreverclever87 Oh yeah, I was trolling. I'm actually atheist. I've decided to move my stupid comments to a different account.
anticorncob6 4 months ago
@Foreverclever87 Atheism is like a religion in that atheists declare there is no god, end of story. What you are referring to sounds more like Agnosticism, which is a lack of belief in anything since the truth of religious or atheist views is unknowable. I think most people who call themselves atheists are actually agnostic.
sairus002 3 months ago
@sairus002 Nope. You misunderstand everything. Atheists do not "declare" there is no god, because as I stated that is a DECLARATIVE STATEMENT. Got it? Atheism etymologically means "without-God", and most usually takes the form of an individual LACKING a belief of God, not AFFIRMING the lack of an existence of a God. You also don't understand agnosticism. Agnosticism is not about belief, but evidence. You can be a theist or an atheist and still be agnostic. Learn the terms, and respond.
Foreverclever87 3 months ago
@Foreverclever87 Atheism, first line in Wikipedia: "Atheism is, in a broad sense, the rejection of belief in the existence of deities.[1] In a narrower sense, atheism is specifically the position that there are no deities."
Agnosticism, first line in Wikipedia: "Agnosticism is the view that the truth value of certain claims—especially claims about the existence or non-existence of any deity, but also other religious and metaphysical claims—is unknown or unknowable."
I understand fine.
sairus002 3 months ago
@sairus002 And that is why you should not look to wikipedia for your half-assed information. Your teachers must love you /s
Maybe if you read a real book on the history of philosophy, you'll discover that actual atheism is simply an assertion that "I do not BELIEVE that there is a god because no sufficient evidence exists for that claim." Not, "I BELIEVE no god exists." That being said, I am clearly an agnostic atheist, because those are compatible. I still think you do not grasp this.
Foreverclever87 3 months ago
@Foreverclever87 Same definition of atheism is in Websters dictionary. I trust info from Wikipedia more than info from pompous jackasses on YouTube. Only reason I replied in the first place is because you're a know-it-all prick flaming people for their "misinformed" statements. So believe what you want. I don't give a shit what you think.
sairus002 3 months ago
@sairus002 What I'm telling you is do not look for a deep description and analysis of a complex subject in a fucking dictionary. Besides, you're the fucking idiot who believes in a god in the first place, so I'm currently arguing with a person with an imaginary friend. I don't know why I would expect you to grasp something in the least bit complex. So, fuck you and your imaginary friend. The funny thing about pompous jackasses is they are usually correct, which is why you don't like them.
Foreverclever87 3 months ago
@Foreverclever87 HAHA wow . First of all, I see any religion as the most asinine thing in existence so your assertion that I believe in any god is laughably false. As I said, I only replied because you're a prick flaming and insulting people for what they say, instead of being mature and ignoring it or at least being diplomatic. You start flame wars because you're a self-superior arrogant shit. I don't give a damn how you define what. You're just an asshole and I'm calling you out on it.
sairus002 3 months ago
@Foreverclever87 I am a homosexual agnostic and your simply being an arrogant elitist bullshiter, holding the fact that ppl believe in god over them and calling them thus less educated just shows how fucking arrogant you are, back the fuck down, you have challenged an agnostic, webster, and fucking wikipedia, you are wrong, you are ignorant, and you and your small dick need to go elsewhere and think of how ludicrous you are being.
Squirtsoda56 3 months ago
@Squirtsoda56 Congrats, you take it in the ass. I don't care about your sexuality. When the fuck did that come up? And yes, there is a demonstrable correlation between educated individuals, particularly scientists, and atheism. So, I'm not exactly making a huge leap of faith to posit that you are, in fact, dumber because you believe in something that cannot be proven, something that has not one single shred of evidence to back it up. Also, if you saw my dick you'd probably want to suck it.
Foreverclever87 3 months ago
@Squirtsoda56 What's fucked is this started out with you saying "god exists, and atheists better repent". You are the one who is making a definitive claim, I am the one saying I do not know that a god does not exist but since no evidence exists to support the hypothesis of a god, then I myself do not believe that a god exists because I would have zero evidence to support my claim. Also, Carl Sagan is an atheist and he was not "unsuccessful at life", and he was also a very wise man.
Foreverclever87 3 months ago
@Foreverclever87 When did he ever say "god exists, and atheists better repent"? You do know you're talking to more than one person, right?
sairus002 3 months ago
@Foreverclever87 Here, I got a couple of references for you. First being the Stanford encyclopedia of philosophy:
platoDOTstanfordDOTeduSLASHentriesSLASHatheism-agnosticismSLASH#1
It solidifies my position. As for your definition to atheism, that's a common misuse of the term. Info on that here
religioustoleranceDOTorgSLASHatheistDOThtm
Damn URL filter.
All I was getting at is that your words are used contrary to their definition, yet you ridicule people for using them in proper context.
sairus002 3 months ago
@Foreverclever87 Type out the links by the way, they don't paste correctly. The words get scrambled when you try to go to the URL. Specifically, in the Stanford link, delete and retype /entries/ and in the second link, retype /atheist
It would be a lot simpler if YouTube just allowed URLs.
sairus002 3 months ago
@Foreverclever87 What the hell are you smoking dude? Are you really that stupid, you thought the original guy that you commented on is speaking right now? Wow. There was a guy talking about god and being quite ignorant, then you commented on his post, then sairus002 commented on your post, and finally after a few confrontations i commented on your post. The reason I know this is I went back in the posts, and i can see why u got confused but you have already stated u are smarter than anyone so y?
Squirtsoda56 3 months ago
@Squirtsoda56 Yes, sorry I got confused regarding which theistic moron was responding to me because after a while of this I just stopped looking at the names. And there is no chance I said I'm smarter than anyone. Very educated people and scientists tend to be atheist, which is what I said. Hence, Sagan. Corncob said what ignorant judgmental shit he did, and I don't give a fuck enough to go back because this is fucking youtube and I wrote that comment a month ago.
Foreverclever87 3 months ago
@Foreverclever87 You say we're morons yet you don't even know what atheism is. Seriously, do some research. You're just embarrassing yourself, especially saying we're theistic. I started this argument to call you out on you're bullshit ignorance regarding you correcting someone who wasn't wrong in his use of the term. No one here is talking down atheism, just you and your misunderstanding of it.
sairus002 3 months ago
@sairus002 corncob did say atheists better repent. He is thus a moron. That is where this began. I then correctly stated that a smart atheist will not make a declarative statement regarding the existence of god but will not believe in a god because no evidence exists. What is so fucking difficult about this you can't get through your head?
Foreverclever87 3 months ago
@Foreverclever87 "A smart atheist will not say "god does not exist" because that is a declarative statement" This is entirely not true. "‘Atheism’ means the negation of theism, the denial of the existence of God." - As stated in Stanford encyclopedia of philosophy. You're just wrong. Why cant you get that through your head? I would have just ignored it if you didn't go and insult his intelligence in the process. You were just being immature. Learn from this, instead of claiming we're all stupid.
sairus002 3 months ago
@Foreverclever87 Corncob was being stupid saying that. You aren't wrong saying that atheists don't deny god, but you aren't right either. The term atheist is so widely misused that "skeptical atheist" and all that has become common accepted meaning. However you are absolutely 100% wrong in saying I misunderstand it. Agnostic atheist, is a total contradiction. They aren't compatible. You can call yourself whatever you wish, but in proper context, you are not atheist at all. You are agnostic.
sairus002 3 months ago
@sairus002 They are compatible. Look up atheistic agnosticism, or the reverse. They are not total contradictions and they are in fact compatible. It simply means you do not believe in a said deity but also hold that absolute knowledge of said deity is logically impossible to determine. That being said, I feel the same way Dawkins does when he says: "I am agnostic only to the extent that I am agnostic about fairies at the bottom of the garden."
Foreverclever87 3 months ago
@Foreverclever87 Through improper but accepted definition yes, they are compatible. My point was you shouldn't go flaming people and calling them stupid when in fact, they understand the terms and their meanings perfectly. Like I said, you aren't wrong in calling yourself these things, but you aren't right either.
sairus002 3 months ago
@Foreverclever87 On another note, you have been extremely hostile and condescending towards anyone religious. You say you have an open mind, so try to understand it from an objective point of view. People who believe in something aren't automatically stupid. Religion provides comfort to people who need answers to questions that cant be answered by science. Some people NEED to believe in something. That doesn't make them stupid. Let those who believe in something live in their blissful ignorance.
sairus002 3 months ago
@sairus002 I am hostile toward willful ignorance and credulity. I have an open mind, but not so open my brain falls out of my skull. If you believe something with no evidence supporting it, I think you have a form of a mental disorder that stems from an inability to deal rationally with the world. Also, I can't let them live in "blissful ignorance" because they usually must to go out and "spread the word" about their faith. The happiness of credulity is a cheap and dangerous quality.
Foreverclever87 3 months ago
@Foreverclever87 You see religion in black and white. Not all of them are zealous freaks that try to shove their beliefs down everyone's throat. Those are the morons, the minority. Some are very private with their beliefs and just use religion as a moral compass. I come from a very religious family. I'm agnostic and they accept me despite that. It's not fair to judge them all the same. being hostile and acting like that makes you no better than the zealots.
sairus002 3 months ago
@sairus002 Except my hostility is the opposite from that of religious zealots because my hostility is only the reaction to the spectacular lack of thought and critical thinking openly displayed by the zealots. Not all theists are religious, and not all religious people are zealots, but they all maintain a level of cognitive dissonance that is just sad to witness. I am hostile against those who use religion to fight against things like abortion and scientific research, like the republicans.
Foreverclever87 3 months ago
@Foreverclever87 I agree with that, but you are so general about it. I don't know what country you're in but I'm assuming US since you mentioned republicans. 86% of the US population follow some religion. Clearly they don't all fall under that category you're referring, yet you seem so quick to judge religious groups as a whole.
sairus002 3 months ago
@sairus002 I'm in Canada but I'm a duel citizen. I am currently studying new religious movements (NRM's) and I would never bunch them into the same category. They do, however, tend to display striking similarities regarding preying on the emotional side of humans, while making claims that overtly cross the lines of determinable science. And, usually when humans fight fervently against anything new that can aid our species, it's because they think they have god on their side. That is my beef.
Foreverclever87 3 months ago
@Foreverclever87 Take Hinduism as a perfect example. It's part of their beliefs that they DON'T spread it, rather let those who need guidance seek it out. The world would probably have a lot less corruption and crime if more people believed in their system of Karma. I think we can agree, hardcore Christians are the problem, not religion itself.
sairus002 3 months ago
@sairus002 I agree about buddhism, but I fundamentally disagree about christianity. I agree with Christopher Hitchens' take on the issue, in that the religious texts say what they say. The problem is the religion, not the zealots. The zealots are simply following the prescriptions listed in the bible, whereas the "normal" christians are cherry picking what they want to follow or reject because they want to believe something warm and fuzzy but are not actually bigoted like the zealots.
Foreverclever87 3 months ago
@Foreverclever87 Religion in itself isn't a problem. It depends on the religion and how it is meant to be followed. I disagree entirely with Christianity too. As for the "cherry pickers", those are the ones I say, let them believe what they want. If they find happiness in it, who are we to interfere? As long as they don't get in your way about it, why does it matter? Why are they deserving of hostility? Not everyone can take solace in science alone. Being different, doesn't make them bad people.
sairus002 3 months ago
@sairus002 Religion is the belief that there is a god that tells you what to do. Since there is no evidence or indication a god does exist, humans fill that gap of telling you what to do. The problem with that is that humans are fallible and subject to coercion. By shaming those who believe in something with no proof, it will hopefully raise the human intellectual level to the point where people don't abjectly follow a "holy man". If they keep it to themselves, ok. Most don't, though.
Foreverclever87 3 months ago
@Foreverclever87 Humans filling that gap isn't always bad. Though most of the time it is. Most religions are immoral but science is amoral. Humans will always have huge ambitions when it comes to understanding things. A religion with proper guidelines could mean a better world all around. Scientific research is often the cause (directly or indirectly) of massive economic and environmental damage, as well as massive suffering and many lost lives, humans or otherwise, all for rapid advancement.
sairus002 3 months ago
@sairus002 Can you give me examples of the damage? I agree, but I think about it differently. I think human greed causes the damage, it just so happens that humans have incredible access to machines and energy and so are able to fulfill their greed in new and inventive ways. But it can also work opposite of that. Look at Tesla, for example.
Foreverclever87 3 months ago
@Foreverclever87 You're right. It's not science itself that causes the damage but rather how we apply our findings and how we acquire our data, which is all governed by human greed and lust for rapid advancement
sairus002 3 months ago
@Foreverclever87 I'm getting kind of off topic, but my point is, religion shouldn't be shamed when science doesn't have much more of a positive outcome. What needs to change are the religions that are being followed; the ones oppress those who don't accept indoctrination and obey. If the whole world was Buddhist or Hindu, sure we would be more primitive, but, although not perfect, there would be much less needless suffering, death and poverty.
sairus002 3 months ago
@sairus002 that's not off topic. I see what you're saying. I've thought about this a lot, actually. I wonder about the nihilism of Nietzsche and how the problem of nihilism would be solved if all religions somehow vanished tomorrow. It's a good question, and one I have not found a coherent answer to yet. But about science not offering much of a positive outcome, what do you mean? All modern medical science and technology was unlocked with scientific research, so how is that not positive?
Foreverclever87 3 months ago
@Foreverclever87 Those medical advancements come at great cost. I suppose you may think I'm weird for saying this, but I don't think the ends justify the means when It comes to medical tech. I don't think any research should be made if it involves painful deaths of hundreds of living things in order to get those results. Honestly, I'd rather die from cancer than to benefit from that suffering. I'm sensitive to these things. The research should be done a different way, even if it takes longer.
sairus002 3 months ago
@sairus002 Are you referring to experiments done to animals? Doesn't that constitute a rather small portion of what we would call "experimental science"? What about everything else? Oh, and I don't disagree with you about experiments on animals.
Foreverclever87 3 months ago
@Foreverclever87 Pretty much every advancement in the medical field involves cruel experiments. My other reply has my views on other technologies
sairus002 3 months ago
@sairus002 ah yes, I see it now.
Foreverclever87 3 months ago
@Foreverclever87 As for other technologies and sciences, it always leads to commercialization, which leads to chemical waste in the waters, pollution in the air, and more land taken from wildlife. Science in itself isn't negative I suppose, but in this corporate driven society people's ambitions cause them to throw morality out the window in the name of faster advancement and profit.
sairus002 3 months ago
@sairus002 question for you. Are you familiar with any of the "new atheists"? (Hitchens, Dawkins, Harris, Dennit) What is your opinion of them? do you like them, dislike them, have ambiguous feelings, or something else?
Foreverclever87 3 months ago
@Foreverclever87 I have heard some of Dawkins, but I pay more attention to theoretical physics and cosmology than philosophy, so I'm not too familiar with these guys.
sairus002 3 months ago
I like showing this video to the flat Earth society morons. They get mad at me.
Thycid 4 months ago 2
The Thing is that this would not have been conclusive prove that the Earth is round. The absence of a shadow in one place and a very definite shadow elsewhere can be explained if the Sun is close enough to the Earth (which could have been the case for all Eratosthenes knew) so that it's rays were divergent and not parallel
gerrymoran1 7 months ago
In the library in Alexandria they were doing research to discover the size of the earth, theorizing atoms, and recording the history of our society. 800 years later early Muslims burn the library to the ground. Today a few people doubt the earth is round.
The erosion of knowledge by organized religion is a terrible thing.
Casanuda 7 months ago
this dude likes it in the butt
polskapolska1818 8 months ago
"thumbs up if you knew about carl sagan before this because you saw the family guy episode..."
That comment made me lose my faith in humanity
MrJohnthedoe 8 months ago 14
those eyebrows should have temples dedicated to them.
chelseamuse72 8 months ago
thumbs up if you knew about carl sagan before this because you saw the family guy episode...
Espeo92 8 months ago
I didnt even know who this jackass was till college humor made a parody of him :s
MilkeyCocoa 8 months ago
@MilkeyCocoa Thats because you're a moron.
jwhyte67 8 months ago
@jwhyte67 um no? i just have better things to do than to watching a jackass talk about his wetdream theories.
MilkeyCocoa 8 months ago
@MilkeyCocoa Wow. How can someone suck so much ass... Douche nozzle.
hardcoded 4 months ago
@hardcoded cool story nerd
MilkeyCocoa 4 months ago
it scared the shit out of me when he said alexandria because i live in alexandria :O
Goronixz 8 months ago
david attenborough > carl sagan
TheBuddhaPunk 8 months ago
@TheBuddhaPunk they are both brilliant scientists, however they study very different fields of science. So, it is hard to compare them simply by saying one is better. Carl Sagan is better at explaining things though.
RypeMango 8 months ago 2
Does anyone else get an Agent Smith vibe from Sagan?
Thycid 8 months ago 4
fuck you college humor fags... dont disrespect carl with your blasphemy!
colinprprpr 8 months ago
thumbs up if college humor brought you here...
Elijah101112cool 8 months ago 18
Billions and Billions and Billions.... of views.....
idgarad 10 months ago 4
Just posted this vid on a flat earth society page...They got mad at me...
Thycid 10 months ago 4
@Thycid
There's a flat earth society on YT? How do they explain internet packets bouncing off of satellites?
SaganAppreciationSoc 8 months ago
@SaganAppreciationSoc Mystical wizards deliver each packet individually using spells and potions
Thycid 8 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
Why don't you all learn to spell?
sowasi 11 months ago
Why don't you all learn to spell
sowasi 11 months ago
I'm just having a hard time understanding how did he observed the casted shadows at the exact same time in both places.
Mixarenan 11 months ago
@Mixarenan Since they already had a calendar of 365 days, what was stopping him from being one place one year and another the next? :)
EndlessMomentsPhotog 10 months ago
i dont get how these ppl were even thinking that wat back then lol then we had to figure everything out again, human civilisation is curious lol
DominikWidomski 1 year ago
@DominikWidomski thats when religion took a firm grip on society
D4K0T4375 1 year ago
Wonderfully explained!
287robot 1 year ago
wow, he reminds me of a male gay teacher that once hit on me. grose...
omgtkseth 1 year ago
@omgtkseth You should feel lucky to have met a person who even superficially resembles Carl Sagan.
Pilaf1984 1 year ago
@Pilaf1984 omg, you wouldnt be saying that if a carl sagan imitator tried to kiss your neck and grab your ass...
omgtkseth 1 year ago
Science rules
Rebazar 1 year ago
How did he actually figure out the angle at which both the cities intersected.
CRISNCHIPS12398 1 year ago
@CRISNCHIPS12398 I cant explain it to you in a youtube comment very well but its really simple geometry. If you 'draw a line' from the tip of the stick casting the shadow to the tip of the shadow, and measure the angle that that makes -- that angle is the same as the one that you would find between the sticks if they went all the way to the center of the earth.
akaMouse 1 year ago
Whooo!! Smart... :) He HIRED a man to do the walking haha... why didn't he do it himself...jokes
Kazashka88 1 year ago
How exactly did he calculate the angle from the observed difference in shadow length? I'm curious.
annoyingweirdo 1 year ago
@annoyingweirdo By finding the degrees between two points. 7º is a 50th of the circumference of the full earth. the distance between the two points was 800km. 800*50 = 40,000km=circumference of Earth
senasis 1 year ago
@senasis I know that part. I mean how did you they the degrees between the two points.
annoyingweirdo 1 year ago
Astronomers in particular and science in general do not know what they say. The historical answer concerning the universe have it in the video: "Orbit of the Sun and orbits of Venus" but do not want to take notice. Insist on maintaining the falsehood of all mankind for 30 paltry pieces of silver ...
antonio80975 1 year ago
i dont get how he knew to times that 800km by 50. where did he get the 7 degrees from ? was it from the differences in length of the shadows?
gymgymgymgym 1 year ago
I disagree to the idea that scyence and God are self-excludent... If you believe the Universe had a begining, you could place God in that begining... And if you believe in evolution, you could insert here the belief that there's some sort of Divne Goal to be reached in the long term. Maybe it's not Christianism but it could be still a sort of religion.
Glitch385 1 year ago
Yes he is sexy, and I think sexy men are more likely to be awesome men too.
The ugly men will spend their whole lives hating themselves and the world so much that they will never have a chance to become awesome in any aspect of life.
Glitch385 1 year ago
@Glitch385: What about Stephen Hawking? He's ugly, dribbles alot, talks through an electronic voice box but also comes up with great ideas. He is awesome.
BTW, could you do this experiment with Ron Jeremie's cock? Would it cast a shadow like an obelisk?
eduardoisland 1 year ago
when carl talked he talked like he was speaking to a friend...
MoopyHedgehog 2 years ago 6
weird how this guy calculates the circumference of the earth 800 years b4 mohammed came along, yet muslims are so impressed by the 'miraculous' iron falling out of the sky which was mentioned in the qurap because NO ONE COULD HAVE KNOWN THIS 1400 YEARS AGO!!! LIKE ZOOOOMGGG! ALL PRAISE BE TO ALLAH LALALALALALLALA
dumbasses...
eddie2042 2 years ago
@eddie2042 what makes it even funnier, is that the reason the muslim scholars knew the earth was round, was BECAUSE of erotosthenes. alot of the writing you see in the quran and hadith is actually taken from greek and roman scholars. after the collapse of the roman empire, their vast scientific and medical knowledge was lost to the west, but alot of it was maintained by the east.
Ilikenuman 2 years ago
@Ilikenuman Oh do tell Mr young and oh so clever zionist. history is always written by the winners. You do know who or rather what is behind it all anyway don't ya Toto? Trust that it had nothing to do with religion or black magic or tin foil hats or space cadets nor is it for the benefit of perverts such as yourself trying to get you jollies at other peoples expense. Methink St Augustine said it best far better than anything old greek anyway. What say you pussy?
DavidRaymondAmos 1 year ago
@DavidRaymondAmos
what say i?
I say youre a pathetic old fuck whos stooped to responding to comments from months ago because he has no other weapon against me.
and im not a zionist, im pro palestine.
Ilikenuman 1 year ago
@Ilikenuman Pure bullshit I am merely trolling you back EH Owen Baby? Yeaterday you proved to all you supported Mr Baconfat and his associates and their malice against my family and I. anyone can visit your zionist hero's blog and see what side of the fence you are truly on pervert. Just type in bacont53 into a search engine to see some of you evil pal's published work. "By their fruits ye shall know them" as your malevolent hero loves to quote
DavidRaymondAmos 1 year ago
@DavidRaymondAmos
MrBaconfat is my hero? I thought Obama was my hero...
god you just cant keep your stupid conspiracy theories straight can you?
youre such a joke, no wonder the police never take you seriously.
anyway, youre 57 years old. And youre "trolling" people on the internet. Why dont you get a fuckin job, why dont you start taking responsibility for the family you abandoned?
Ilikenuman 1 year ago
@Ilikenuman Yesterday you chastised me because I did not answer you quickly Mr Baconfat and Obama are every evil perverted zionist's favorite heroeo Tell me pervert how many of Obama's close advisers have duel Israeli citizenship? You have done nothing in your life except harass people on the internet Anyone can Google my name and see that I am for real on the otherhand you live in fear that people will find out who you truly are EH pussy?
DavidRaymondAmos 1 year ago
@DavidRaymondAmos and anyone can google your name on the internet and get their I.P address found by your pedophile ass.
Ilikenuman 1 year ago
@Ilikenuman That is slander which is crime in Canada and England the ower of this channel should be careful of what he publishes because he can be charged with the same crime. I have run for public office four times and have sued many lawyers etc. You should NOT support the malice of and nameless troll who attacked you as well CORRECT? BTW the RCMP know I alread saved this web page.
DavidRaymondAmos 1 year ago
@DavidRaymondAmos IShitInDeansYomica? He never attacked me, he just spoke to me an told me all about how he knows you and why your life is such a bitch.
and its only slander if its untrue. but the kind of things youve been saying to me about catholic priests, licking arseholes and being fucked by joe biden. I have to say, there are good reasons to suspect you may be a closet pedophile. I cant prove it, but theres good reason to believe it.
anyway, stay away from the schools pedo : )
Ilikenuman 1 year ago
@Ilikenuman Calling me pedo is slander Sexually harassing my family are certainly crimes and were published by you in my channel. You support people who threatened to kill them FYI I posted on my channel an old vid of yours from Ning You certainly seem to have some tendencies of an diddled child It is aften the case a child who was abused grows up to be an abuser and the words in your comments and blog tell me you are one very sick puppy
DavidRaymondAmos 1 year ago
@DavidRaymondAmos
the video from Ning is also on my youtube channel aswell you daft twatt. I put it on youtube AND ning.
It even has the same video name on my youtube channel. What a great investigator you would make. and anyway, all you had to do is type ilikenuman into google and youll find my ning profile. Its not like you had to dig deep.
And its not slander because you clearly ARE a pedo.
And i didnt harass your kids so you fail again : )
Ilikenuman 1 year ago
@DavidRaymondAmos We are well aware of your totalitarian, socialist European/Canadian laws.
Kujien 1 year ago
@Kujien No more than I. However what is your point?
DavidRaymondAmos 1 year ago
@eddie2042 Carl Sagan, peace be upon him is awesome. May an earthquake of stampeding goats strike fear in your heart.
GorterPoss 1 year ago
Carl Sagan? More like Carl Awesome!
Rambowjo2 2 years ago 60
@Rambowjo2 yeah Sagan translates to awesome in marsian :D
mehigh2marsiansky 1 year ago
This comment has received too many negative votes show
carl sagan, another socialist atheist, cant help but lie and hide true scientists. they dotn want to argue, they just want to kill free speech. WE ARE SICK OF THE DEMOCRAPS, WE ARE GOING TO SUCCEED FROM THE UNION
WAKE UP AMERICA
MAdk1p 2 years ago
Cool trolling.
ScottishDuckHunter 2 years ago 4
too obvious, c'mon now
KQKyle 2 years ago
You're going to secede from the union? Who is we?
Carl Sagan's been dead for decades, you know. So why the insane diatribe?
By the way, you jack-booted fascist, there isn't anything unAmerican about being an atheist. In this nation, freedom to practice any belief -- or lack thereof -- is guaranteed by the constitution.
Of course, we all know how you Repugnantklans feel about the Constitution: You'd like to cancel it in favor of Jesus-based theocracy.
Good luck, goofball. Get a life.
bapyou 2 years ago 3
@MAdk1p
Um... I think you mean "secede"?
Anyway, as a socialist atheist myself, I'm all for free speech more than happy to argue so, before you "succeed from the union"...
What exactly is your point?
PS: I know Sagan is an atheist but...what exactly do you consider a "socialist"?
Diosibundo 1 year ago
Woot!! physics 1 adv. FCS!!
Diabetus101 2 years ago
holy crap what are the chances I watch a video that some one else at my school watched and see their comment. I know chadbro but who is willford brimley (diabetus101)?
Twilegend40 2 years ago
Go Phoenix! FCS! w00t!
chadbro97 2 years ago
Eratosthenes is a smart ass
Sagargang4567 2 years ago 3
we watched this in school today :P thanks a lot,, now we hae to write two paragraphs on it! jk jk HELLO PEOPLE IN MY CLASS WHO R WATCHING THIS!!!! (mrs. Recard's class)
19twister19 2 years ago 4
I freaken hate this project i am doing it right now. :)
Sagargang4567 2 years ago
Write about how Carl dwells and slowly goes over the story up until he gets to the actual way the circumference was found, at which point he skims over it the way a magician uses slight of hand. At 5:13 he starts with a word that might be "from" but you can't tell: "errhbb the observed difference in the shadow lengths the distance between Alex. and Cyene had to be about 7 degrees along the surface of the earth...". What's this business about parallel light? What do you really learn from this?
prayfertrey 2 years ago
What you might want to realize is that this is a history lesson, not a math lesson. Your learning that Greeks new the Earth's size, and shape, 300 years before Christ was supposedly born. If this interests you, pick up a geometry book and figure out how you would solve the math problem yourself. If it doesn't, then take the lesson that society forgets a great deal of what individuals learn and hold dear.
mazertmj 2 years ago 4
I actually agree... but when is Cosmos not touted as science education? It's not. It's just an exercise in saying, "science is neat" but, like most "science education" for the public, it can't even be bothered to mention something as simple as equivalent angles. You don't have to pore through a text book to get it. There's a zillion videos that do it in a few seconds. I'm not saying Carl was doing it on purpose. I think he was unknowingly, like so many others, mistaking platitudes for education.
prayfertrey 2 years ago
There should be someone willing to repeat Eratosthenes' experience themselves. For example, some High School in Texas could have a project like sending a crew of students to Tamaulipas, Mexico in June 21 to check the shadows at the height of theTropic of Cancer, while a second crew would be calculating the lenght of the shadows back in Texas... Then they would exchange datas by internet and each crew would do their own calculations, then compare that... It would be a cool school project!
Glitch385 1 year ago
isnt it 40,000,000 km ._.
Bloodscalpr 2 years ago
No, that would be ridiculous.
DragonRomer 2 years ago
Roger That.
Zat12oichi 2 years ago
So simple, but i never would have thought of it!
Cytozone 2 years ago 2
This is so genius and profound.
PTurchan1 2 years ago 5
Carl Sagan is the best.
theperfectionist 2 years ago 5
bet that guy is a keen walker , i mean 800km is quite a distance lol, probably get quite few blisters at the end!! :P
maxim900 2 years ago 2
Eratosthenes must have been THE man!
AsG1989 2 years ago 7
Can anyone explain me how Eratosthenes calculated the 7 degrees fact? Cause i didnt understand.
cHeSsMaNgr 2 years ago
Imagine the first stick. No shadows at all.
The second one, forming a triangle between side b: stick, itself, side c, the projected shadow in the ground, and side a; a line between upper stick end, and end of shadow, farther from base. Make a drawing. You notice that the side "a' and the first stick are perfectly paralel. Conclusion; the difference of angles between these two sticks equals the angle between side "b' and "a"
igehring 2 years ago
QED =]
EdEditz 2 years ago
great answer
ODBastardW 2 years ago
great answer!
ODBastardW 2 years ago
Yes - watch the segment between 4.40 and 6.00 again - Eratosthenese's (premises) were made using sound scientific calculations. In particular pay attention to the part where he explains the (imagination) of the length of the sticks travelling all the way to the centre of the earth..(he already thought the earth might be round) - now all he had to do was get some poor guy to walk the distance between the two points in order to get the (approximate) distance - EASY!!! lol
ALSNEDDON 2 years ago
Excellent.
CARL SAGAN is an inspiration for all people in the world.
mohfoz77 2 years ago 3
Carl Sagan was the MAN
atypicalcalifornian 2 years ago 6
can't agree more..
brainthiest 2 years ago 2
Great Show from over 25 years ago! At the time the most wached PBS program.
njmike38 2 years ago
Well, he still had to make the hypothesis that the earth was round. Unless if he repeated this experience from the North pole to the South wich i doubt he did.
vivEnergy 3 years ago
This comment has received too many negative votes show
You can`t build a life on Science. It changes every hour. People need immovable truths in their lives not weather-veil tennents. Build your life upon a Christian rock not the sands of Science.
RideMyBMW 3 years ago
This comment has received too many negative votes show
"People need immovable truths in their lives not weather-veil TENETS"
RideMyBMW 3 years ago
Which form of Christianity may I ask?
Science is a self correcting mechanism. It's been around since man could think.
Of course science is always changing that is the beauty of it. Science is not just changing it corrects it self. Science is a truth only it does not use a capital letter like religions do. Science explains how things work.
Science brings medical and technology advancements.
Do you believe we could of had you tube if nobody questioned and tested authority's claim's
Chill197 3 years ago
"Science is a self correcting mechanism. It's been around since man could think" - Chill
Science is an off-shoot of ASTROLOGY you nit-witt. The most paganistic, heathenistic and Satanic of practices.Man! WTF are they teaching you at school for cryin out loud!
RideMyBMW 3 years ago
"Science is an off-shoot of ASTROLOGY"
False.
Science is an epistemological method, the empirical observational methodology was an off-shoot of what the greeks called natural philosophy, Aristotle records the first system of empirical science as systematic method for making epistemological claims.
Science is not simply a collection of observations, it is a philosophical school of thought that relies upon metaphysical axioms.
mtheoryrules 3 years ago
This has been flagged as spam show
"Science is an epistemological method" - mth
Sure, but its roots lie in Astrology. Thats a fact dude...
RideMyBMW 3 years ago
This comment has received too many negative votes show
Science does in fact prove God's existence. By no means, however, is the Judeo-Christian god the One and True. The God of Abraham has opinions and takes actions, therefore it has position. Something with position is inherently subjective and finite. By asserting that God has preferences, you are degrading and offending God's holy and perfect nature. Only by being supremely indifferent can God be supremely existent. If you still want your god to have opinions, then admit he is finite and limited.
JacksRevelation 2 years ago
lol you're funny
VidsforJer 3 years ago
This has been flagged as spam show
"lol you're funny " - Vids
Dude, science has no business whatsoever in matters of governance, morality, values or any such crucial matters of human existence. Dude, science changes with every issue of "Nature" for Pete´s sake!!!
RideMyBMW 2 years ago
Science has no business in matters of human existence?
Dude when you go to the doctor it's science that helps him cure you. Although he may not be able to brings things back from the dead, like for example, your brain, it's still a fact that science has everything to do with human existence.
celticlofts 2 years ago 11
"Of course science is always changing that is the beauty of it." - Chill
Thats why I said "go play with your test tubes junior". Science has no business whatsoever in matters of human governance,morality, values or any such crucial matters of human existence.
RideMyBMW 3 years ago
Actually science plays a very important role in the government were I'm from anyway. Religion Is kept out of the government religion is just regarded as a belief system. Science is crucial for advancement, to try and end world hunger,try and find a way to be a peaceful society, cure desiese. Thanks to science you live a comfortable life drink safe drinking water and it is the reason why were talking now. Without it we would be in the dark ages
Chill197 3 years ago
Are you joking. You must have had a very poor education. You say that science is satanic well then satanic must be good.
But I cant believe there is some one like you.
Do you believe the world is flat and is in the center of the universe
Chill197 3 years ago
"well then satanic must be good" - Chill
My pastor was right, serpents are indeed subtle.
RideMyBMW 3 years ago
I get it now your joking
I thought you were crazy there for a second
Chill197 3 years ago
"well then satanic must be good" - Chill 197
Ask the right questions and sooner or later you`ll draw out the puss and filth.
RideMyBMW 3 years ago
so you rely are crazy.
Why if you hate science so much do you use it's products.
Satan can read scripture to if it serves his purpose
Chill197 3 years ago
Have you read the bible it's not the best place to base your morals on. Incest, Child abuse,genocide,slavery and the list can go on.
You mentioned your pastor your not lovers are you
Chill197 3 years ago 4
"Science has no business whatsoever in matters of human governance, morality, values or any such crucial matters of human existence."
I would counter that science provides data that is relevant to such issues and allows one to make more informed decisions when deliberating within these contexts, for example global climate change, this issue can manifest itself in all the areas you listed.
And yet you assert that scientific data is irrelevant?
Sorry I disagree.
mtheoryrules 3 years ago
the 'mekansm of AntiKythira' already shows that Greeks where 1800 years ahead of their time.
SteliosRulez 3 years ago
Does anyone know the title of the music beginning at 2:00 ???
makedonas86 3 years ago
This comment has received too many negative votes show
"greeks had the most advanced civilization" - thepop
Yeah dude, that`s why Aristotle considered women an order above cattle. The only advanced thing about Pagan Hellenicism is how close they were to the Mediterranean. Period. They got totally PWNED by Christianity.
RideMyBMW 3 years ago
It's easy to dismiss an entire era of thought with a glib reference to some ancient value we recognize as backwards today. While the Greeks may not have been the most advanced civilization, their contributions to philosophy and the sciences were vast.
Joerexia 3 years ago 4