 Hey everybody, tonight we are debating Flat Earth versus Globe Earth and we are starting right now. Ladies and gentlemen, thrilled to have you here for this most epic debate. This is going to be a great time. Wanna let you know if it's your first time here at Modern Day Debate, we are a neutral platform and our goal is to host the fairest of debates on politics, science and religion and wanna let you know, no matter what walk of life you come from folks, we are thrilled to have you here. We hope you feel welcome and also if you love juicy debates, controversial topics, if you're sick in the mind like us, wanna let you know we have plenty more of these debates to come and so consider hitting that subscribe button if you'd like reminders of future debates like this. So very excited to get into it. What we are going to do is we're going to have Nathan go first and he's going to have about five to 10 minutes. It's flexible depending on what the speaker wants to use of that time. Then we will have Aaron going with his kind of opening statement or position speech and then we will have the 50 to 60 minutes or so of open dialogue as well as roughly 30 minutes of Q and A. So wanna say if you happen to have a question, feel free to tag me in the live chat with at Modern Day Debate. Makes it easier for me to find every question in there and Super Chat is also an option in which case it'll bump your question to the top of the list. We really appreciate that support and so with that, very excited to wanna first introduce our guests. Really special guys. This is one that we were like, oh my goodness, it's actually happening, unbelievable. So I have linked both of the speakers in the description. If you'd like to hear more from them folks, I highly encourage you, you can click on those links, very convenient. And so first wanna just say, hey, welcome back Nathan. It's been a while and thanks so much for being with us. If you wanna share, what could people expect to find at your link? Well, on my channel, you'll find just about everything under the sun. And I mean that literally, but it's an emphasis on Flat Earth activism and biblical cosmology. So cruise on over there. Please subscribe if you're not already subscribed. Thanks for having me on your channel, James. I'm a Patreon. I think this is what, maybe my 10th or 12th debate. So I appreciate you having me here again. And I look forward to it tonight. So thank you. Absolutely, thanks so much. And very excited to introduce Aaron Raugh, who is as glad to have you back. Aaron had several legendary ones now. So we're excited for this. Wanna let you know folks, his link is in that description box down below as well. And he should like to hear more. And so thanks for coming back, Aaron. And if you'd be willing to share, what people could expect to find at your link. That was a great opportunity. Thanks so much. Oh, I think we might have you, let's see. Yep, I'm good. I'm a full-time activist. And so, I mean, I do this all day. And this is my only means of income. So I need all the support I can get. Patreon.com forward slash A-R-O-N-R-A. Thank you very much. You bet. Thanks so much to our guests. We will kick it into opening statement mode. And so Nathan Thompson, I have the clock set for you. The floor is all yours. Thank you, James. I do wanna thank Aaron for being here. I appreciate that. I also wanna thank the chat for being here, giving me your time in your ear. Anyone who super chats the channel, I will answer all those questions later on when we get there. I promise you I'll stay for hours answering questions. Also, anyone who shares the show, big shout out to you. I'm a firm believer that sharing is caring and it will be a good show tonight. Just so you guys know before we got started, Aaron refused to go first, even though all the textbooks, all the mainstream science, all the Hollywood movies depict a globe model. We give $50 million a day to NASA to depict the globe model, but for some reason he had a problem going first. And he mentioned that all his income is based on his activism. So if he was wrong about this guys, that would have a serious effect on his income. And I feel bad that you have to defend the heliocentric model, Aaron, because you're gonna lose this debate. I've debated maybe 10,000 people. I looked for debates you've done online. I could not find one. I did find a video, however, where a glober came on your channel, crying about how he lost a lawsuit in court because he could not prove the Earth's a globe. I see you shaking your head, yes, I saw that video. So I've debated NASA employees, PhD astrophysicists, land surveyors who for 20 years have been land surveying and don't know how much Earth should curve downward tangent to our feet. I think that's embarrassing. But here's why it's noble for me to beat Aaron in the debate tonight, guys, because he's gonna learn more from losing this debate than he would from winning, okay? People always mistake me as a flat Earth idiot, that's fine, because we learn from our mistakes, guys. Love is patient and kind. It's not jealous, boastful, proud or rude, does not demand its own way, is not irritated, keeps no record of anything anyone ever does wrong. It does not rejoice in lies, but rejoices in the truth. Love never gives up, never loses faith, is always hopeful and endures all things. And Aaron, I do love you. You are made in the image of God, buddy. So I feel bad that you're wrong and I'm gonna have to demolish you in this debate. I tried to do some research, find out your positions. You didn't have any debates, but you did have a discussion with Jaren from Jarenism where you asserted a bottom-up fallacy. Apparently you don't know things disappear bottom up on a flat surface too. You think things disappearing bottom first is empirical proof of Earth curve. I thought that was funny. You strawman a model approximately a dozen times, which is a hat-trick fallacy. So strawman, then you're begging the question and you're also doing a reification fallacy because it's not empirical evidence, it's not science, it's a model. So reification fallacy, begging the question and a strawman, hat-trick fallacy all in one. You are like the Wayne Gretzky of proving Earth is a globe, Aaron. You also said would the sun be out all day on a flat Earth? Now apparently you don't understand, sometimes the sun is out all day in the North. Now it disappears due to perspective, angular resolution limits, atmospheric magnification, disappears bottom first because that's how things disappear on a flat surface. But if you increase in altitude, the sun and the moon, which I've done this observation myself on my channel, they disappear into small dots above the horizon, Aaron. So that would not work on a heliocentric model with the sun and moon being the size and the distance that they are. Now you guys assert that the sun and moon setting is proof that we're on a spinning ball, but they don't even intersect the marine horizon. I've also done a test myself. Stars do not intersect the marine horizon. So another test I've done is the green flash. I've observed the sun setting where the top of the sun turns green for a moment. Now if the sun was going below the horizon, the red, orange, yellow color spectrum inverts similar to the prism on the front of the Pink Floyd album, the red, the orange, the yellow are above the green, the purple and the blue. But when the light is coming from above a prism, the green is above the red, orange, yellow spectrum. I've also taken a real video footage of stars that I can show you. Also hundreds of star trails and just numerous observations, you couldn't find anything of the sort on Orange Channel. I don't even know why he's here debating this. I don't think he's qualified. But just so you guys know, science has been hijacked. Ever since we were little kids, they taught us science is an empirical method. When we do science, we prove things. The very next day you walk into school and they say, look, you're on a spinning tilted ball in space with a molten iron core hotter than the surface of the sun and you're moving 20 million miles a day through the galaxy. Because it's science, right? And that's what we're all taught as little kids. The problem is that that's been hijacked. Science has been hijacked. It is an empirical method for proving the cause of an effect, but there is no science to support the heliocentric model. We'll get into that in a second. Now real quick, could I share my screen, James? Great, thank you. So I'm just going to share the whole desktop. First thing I want to talk about is how far can we see, ladies and gentlemen? If the Earth is a globe, 24,901 miles around as the heliocentric model would assert, there would be downward curve tangent to your feet in all directions. Now, for example, this is a famous photo Joshua Newicki took from the other side of Chicago. I've been to the lake. I've done this observation, not from Joshua Newicki, but from New Buffalo, which is approximately 10 miles shorter, but he actually got a clearer picture than I could on that day. And they said that because it was so clear on this day, on the news, that this was a mirage. Now they want you to believe when it's clear and you can see really far, that's distortion, that's miraging, but when things can't be seen, that's Earth curve. Now that is the opposite of any logical thinking, period. But next, you have all these lighthouses, ladies and gentlemen, should be obscured by 329 feet over here in France, visibility 28 miles away, okay? Should be obscured, there's multiple. I can show you San Jacinto right here. Now, glovers would say, oh, look, you can't see it in this picture, but the problem is once you flip on the infrared, you can see much farther. So the first argument the Earth isn't a globe is that we see far. The second argument the Earth isn't a globe is called specular reflections. So a specular reflection means a reflection of light where the angle of reflected light equals the angle of incident light, but on the opposite side of the surface normal, it occurs on mirrors, for example. Now, I don't know if you guys know how mirrors are made, but they use molten metal, they melt the liquid glass on top, that's how they get bubbles to float to the top and also mirrors and glass are perfectly flat. It's a property of fluid statics. When large bodies of water are at rest, they lay level and horizontal to the container. So first argument, Earth's not a globe. Second argument, do we spin 1,039 miles an hour? That's what heliocentric model asserts at the equator. We spin, it's the cause of day and night and we're moving approximately 1,039, 1,040 miles an hour. Problem with this, how would a spinning Earth affect our atmosphere? It's two options, guys. It would either move as one cohesive synchronized body, which is what I've heard Aaron say in his discussion with Jaren, wasn't a debate, was a discussion, but he says the atmosphere moves with the Earth, which is denying mainstream science. It's denying what Neil deGrasse Tyson asserts, denying what we were taught as kids, which is that the Earth moves under sniper bullets, the Earth moves under a SAGNAC interferometer. Bob proved it on Netflix, but the problem with that, guys, is if the Earth moves under those, it would have to move under everything else. And if the atmosphere moves with the Earth, well, there's a problem with that. That's not how fluid dynamics work, okay? The atmosphere, this is what mainstream science doesn't even say happens, but I just wanna cover it because it was Aaron's position earlier. If the atmosphere moves with the Earth, that would necessitate that the atmosphere goes faster and faster, the more you increase in altitude. Now, great, there is no force that would cause things to increase in velocity as they increase in altitude, because he's asserting that as a hotter balloon or a helicopter or a drone, an insect, smoke from a volcano, as it goes up in the air, it's traveling faster and faster to maintain its tangential vector above the Earth. Now, that is crazy, because that's not how fluid dynamics work, but two, that's not even what mainstream science teaches. So we really could move on from this over to the blender effect, which is what his religion teaches. We have an atmospheric blender. There would be a drag in the atmosphere. Things would move separately from the surface of the Earth. This is why Neil deGrasse Tyson asserts Earth moves under a field goal from his Twitter with six million followers. So you've got five miles per hour at the park, it's fun, 60 miles per hour, intense, you could lose your lunch. Iron will assert 1,040 miles per hour on a spinning ball, it's just a walk in the park, you feel nothing unless you're drunk. Finishing up my last argument, could the atmosphere even exist without a physical container, guys? So you have an infinite vacuum of space next to our pressurized atmosphere. This is a violation of entropy, it's a violation of second law of thermodynamics. It's like asking, can a tire rim have air pressure around it without a tire? Wow, in a vacuum. So those are my arguments, the Earth's not spinning, it's not a ball and we don't live in space. So thanks so much for the time, I really appreciate it. We are going to kick it over to Aaron for his opening as well. And so thanks so much everybody, for your questions on the live chat, we will try to get to as many questions as humanly possible, we do appreciate your support. So thanks so much for that. Nathan, I'm gonna pull you out of screen share, there you go, all set. And now switching it back over to the dialogue box. So Aaron, thanks so much, the floor is all yours. Thank you. I agreed to have this debate on the condition that my opponent provide a written explanation of the Flat Earth model and that he provide a map of his pizza planet. And he gave me the map which we'll have fun with shortly but he couldn't provide a model because there isn't one nor can there be because there is no reality to the position he's espousing. Instead, he sent me a video of one of his prior presentations wherein he made fun of rational people asking to see his model. So he knows he should have one and that he doesn't or else he would have sent it to me. So he pretends that science doesn't have a model either but yes, we certainly do several of them and they all concord with each other. Although he didn't meet the minimum criteria to have a debate, I opted to do it anyway and use that fact as a point in my favor because in his presentation, he demonstrated profound ignorance which we'll get to in our interaction that reveals that he has not investigated his position any further than concocting pseudoscience apologetics just like any other religious fundamentalist science denialist would. William Lane Craig is often touted to be the best of the Christian apologists and if he's the best they've got then you gotta wonder how it is that Christianity still exists. Among the many things he got wrong is this. He said, should a conflict arise between the witness of the Holy Spirit to the fundamental truth of the Christian faith and beliefs based on the arguments and evidence, then it is the former which must take precedence over the latter. In other words, take the word of the fairy tale over the fact. That is a grossly dishonest position which all religious apologetics necessarily must be. I've known so many believers who say that the Bible is the only source of truth in our world let everything else be a lie, meaning that they're gonna make believe the man made mythology even when it is disproved or impossible and they will never admit when they're wrong. Jeremiah 8.8 warns us that the lying pen of the scribes has made it into a lie. Yet believers hold to that lie and dismiss the actual factual truth as if that was the lie. The truth is what the facts are, not whatever else we might rather make believe instead. But have you noticed that everyone who calls themselves a truther holds to a host of incredible conspiracy theories they can't show the truth though because we live in a post-truth world where our identities are too often determined by whatever we pretend. If it's a religious belief then it becomes who you are and you will not be reasoned out of it. Faith doesn't allow that maybe we're wrong in whole or impart and that maybe what the sacred fables say isn't necessarily the truth and that you shouldn't believe them all without question, reservation or reason, nor is there any way to find the truth because we're told that we have to believe in the lie that the tall tales of imaginative storytellers take precedence over the cold hard facts that stand against them. In that mindset, the truth doesn't matter anyway who cares about finding out what's really true and how it works. It's much more fun and popular nowadays to question reality as my opponent himself put it using those exact words. So the one of believers pretend that wisdom is foolish and only the fools are wise as if every ignorant opinion is just as valid if not more so than one informed by demonstrable expertise with predictive theory to back it up. If your position has no working model and makes no uniquely supportive predictions cannot be falsified because it just denies all contradictory data and can only be defended by apologetics then by definition it is only a belief and not scientific in any respect. Faith has defense mechanisms to justify belief without sufficient reason and defend belief against all reason. And those defense mechanisms are very often logical fallacies arguments that are logically invalid. Every logical fallacy has been used as an argument for God and every argument for God is a logical fallacy. For example, one that is ubiquitous throughout religion is question begging the circular argument routing back to an assumed conclusion where you simply don't question what you believe because you believe it. The argument from ignorance is the notion that something should be considered true until proven false which often involves another fallacy shifting the burden of proof which always comes up in religious debates. You can't prove there's no God but the burden of proof is on the one making the positive claim. Positive claims require positive evidence and what is a verse asserted without evidence may be dismissed without evidence. Personal incredulity is another logical fallacy that I don't understand it therefore it can't be true and that accounts for much of my opponent's argument and we'll get to that shortly too. Remember that arguments are not evidence especially not when they're logically invalid. If you combine the arguments from ignorance and incredulity with question begging you get the God of the gaps. The erroneous assumption that whatever you think science cannot explain somehow becomes proof of God. That's what flat earth belief is all about. If you can convince yourself that the earth is flat just like the Bible says then science can't explain the flat earth. That's why the science deniers can't produce a model for it. They don't want one either because they think that unexplained means explained by God magic, excuse me, miracles, same thing. Another fallacy that commonly comes up in religious arguments is that is false equivalence combining projection and to quote we to establish the illusion that you're just as bad as we are and we're just as good as you are. And that's when the religious position claims to be scientific and pretends that science is based on faith. As if any interest, possession, or opinion that you hold for any logically valid or factually indicative reason can be diminished and dismissed as just another religion. And therefore just as bad as those who pretend that their faith is based on evidence. So they call evolution and ism and they repeat the lie that scientific theories are religious beliefs. That's not true because every religion that is universally accepted as such by both adherents and critics is a faith-based belief system which posits the notion that a supernatural essence itself somehow survives the death of the physical body to continue on in some other form. Absolutely none of that applies to any scientific theories like heliocentricity and geosphoricity as compared to the empty void where flat earth theory would be if there was any truth to their position. But they can't explain how anything works. Why is the shadow of the earth on the moon always consistent with a sphere and not a disk? Why is everything we see in space obviously a sphere? Do you really think that Jupiter is smaller than the moon? And what holds the moon up if it cannot orbit the planet the way we know it really does? 250 years before our current calendar, Eritostanese devised an ingenious way to determine the sphericity of the earth and to calculate its diameter. But we're gonna pretend that that didn't happen as if it can't be duplicated. It's not like we could put a GoPro on a weather balloon and see the curvature of the earth. Well, somebody actually did do that but we're gonna pretend that they didn't because we live in a world where fantasy is presented as reality and reality is dismissed as fake news. The greatest achievement in American history is the greatest achievement in human history but we're just gonna ignore that too and pretend that we never went to the moon as if we don't have satellites we can look up and see and predict when they'll be where. So we know they're there and what they are. Galileo and Kepler also worked out mathematical model showing that the sun had to be at the center of the solar system and not the earth. But we're gonna ignore all that too. The Sir Isaac Newton's theory of gravity has been tested and demonstrated experimentally but it had one critical flaw being that it couldn't account for the orbit of Mercury around the sun. Einstein's theory of relativity could address that and it was effectively proven twice once by observing stars behind the sun via gravitational lensing during the solar eclipse in 1919 and again with a confirmation of gravity waves or gravitational waves in 2016. But we're gonna pretend that gravity doesn't exist and that the stars are all smaller than the moon and even though every astronomer knows better and can show how they know that. But it doesn't matter how many planets we plant probes on nor how many extra solar planets we discover because we're gonna pretend that it's all a grand unified conspiracy of every government working together to conceal the secret truth that there is no outer space and that faith is that earth is just a flat map divided into four quadrants spread out on a disc shaped stool erected on columns and covered by a giant crystal dome. Just like it says in our favorite folklore written by ignorant primitives before they knew better and all of that can be disproved so easily but not when you really, really wanna believe. Thanks so much, Aaron. We will kick it into open discussion mode. So we will see how far we get. I'm confident this can be civil. And so thanks so much, gentlemen. The floor is all yours. I would have thought it would be civil too except to be opened up by insulting me. Aaron, I'm sorry, you felt insulted. I just said you were gonna lose the debate and so far your opening was a bunch of gishgalloping and rhetoric about how the earth can't be a globe. We know it's, or earth can't be flat. We know it's a globe for a thousand years because of sticks and shadows. Now, you are familiar with Neil. And photographs from space and moonwalking and a space station currently in orbit around the planet but you just ignore everything. We just, all the things that we can give you. Can we go over all these one by one, Aaron? Before you get triggered, please. I know, take a drink, get drunk. I've been warned that you were going to try to enrage me that you were that type. So but don't worry, I'm dealt with your type many times. So it's not gonna happen. My type, the kind who asked for evidence because you didn't support it and bring any in your... The type who tries to inflame his opponent. It's all right, Aaron. Let's move straight to question and answer for me and you back and forth. Okay, good. What holds the moon up? What holds the moon up? Yeah. Okay, so the moon has to be held up, Aaron. Yeah. You beg the question that something has to hold the moon up now on your model. Well in your model, in your attempt at a model, which doesn't work so it isn't a model, but yeah, you have a moon and a sun that both stay suspended over the earth somehow. Now, we know in the gravity model, heliosyntricity, geospiricity and gravity and relativity and all that, we understand how these things work. But... Oh, you don't, Aaron. Well, yeah, we do. Why doesn't the balance of the... The balance of how orbits... Aaron. How orbits are maintained, so you don't need to hold up the moon. Okay, so let me get this right. Aaron, in your story. The moon would come down on a flatter, but with gravity and everything in space, it just maintains a perfect orbit, right, Aaron? The moon stays, it locked in a gravitational tug. So, technically it's not actually orbiting the earth, but I'm not gonna get into that right now. The moon and the earth are orbiting, in a sense, each other. They're held by this gravitational pull, and there's already motion. So it's gonna keep up perpetually. But in your attempt at a model, it's not that way. You have this giant orb, weighing however many tons you want it to be, that's just suspended and moving slowly over the planet. So you've got this big disk. You're gonna assume the moon has weight, you're gonna assume the moon has weight, and that it's physical, and then ask why it doesn't fall down on a flatter. Well, let me tell you, Aaron. Why do other things fall down if the moon doesn't? I know you've got a sense for me, because that's what YouTube and all your controllers do that push your mainstream rhetoric. Controlers? You've got to answer me, okay? So please, if you're gonna cross with me, Aaron, let me talk, in case you're censoring me. What do you mean by controllers? You're censoring me, Aaron. You're not letting me talk. Well, you're lying about me. I'm not going to let that happen. What did I lie about you? I don't have controllers. Oh. I don't have a religion. The people who told you earth is a spinning ball because you haven't tested it, Aaron. Aaron, I have tested it. I have tested it. Where were you? Yes, I have. I've been all over the world. Look at your map. Look at your globe. Okay, so your tests are looking at my map. What's that? Your tests are looking at my map. And being at various places on it, yes. Oh, okay. So looking at your polar projection map. So traveling. There's so much wrong with that. Aaron's test to prove earth is a spinning globe is that he's been places. Yep. Cool story, Aaron. Let's get specific about that. Let's get specific about that. So let's look at your polar projection map. Look at Australia on your polar projection. We're moving, we're transferring, you're bouncing around topics. We're going right to a topic, a specific topic. You asked for, let's do it. So let's look at the specific. Look at your polar projection map. One second. I hate to interrupt. I hate to interrupt. It's your map. It's your, you want to put. I hate doing this. So right now I hate it. You guys, you're on mute. So they can't hear you. It's just through OBS. And so just for a moment, just to kind of jump back on track is, maybe there's something we can do in terms of kind of covering one topic and then jumping over to the other. So is there, so. You have a problem with that? It's the map you gave me. My first question, James, is he just going to keep rambling on with another topic? He asked me why the moon. It's not another. It's the same topic. Why the moon doesn't fall towards you. You said I didn't prove you. I didn't test the model because he got to ask the first question. I think it's if we go back and forth. Let's let's let's humor Aaron on this one. Then we'll we'll humor you. We'll wait. No, no, no, no, no, no. I want to stay on the first topic. James asked me why the moon doesn't fall towards Earth. Now he's talking about my map. OK, we'll talk about that one first. He'll like cover his first question. All right. The sun and the moon are locked in the firmament. They would not be falling towards Earth. They're not physical objects and their gravity is not real. Hot air balloons and helium balloons go up, Aaron. So what now? Can I ask you a question? So you're saying the moon is the moon is not real? No, I did not say the moon is fake, Aaron. You said it's you said it's not a physical object. Pull the hair back. OK, so you said it's not a physical object. These kids, what does that mean to you? And that doesn't necessitate that it has to be a physical object. OK, now is gas. Well, it's an imaginary object that if it's not physical. No, it's not imaginary. OK, what's the option? Will you agree that solids? It's either made of matter and energy or it's made of imagination. Which one is it? Well, is plasma a thing? Yeah, it's matter. Yeah, great, great. So is it a is the moon a physical thing or is it an imaginary claims about what the moon is? You do, Aaron. I'm asking you. How does asking a question to claim? I heard you, Aaron. And why don't you give me an answer about what the moon is you do? You said the moon is not a physical thing and neither is the sun. Well, I said you're going to assume it. No, I'm asking you the question. That means I don't assume. I don't straw man either because I ask questions and then I listen to the answer. You're going to ask me again what the moon is? Exactly, what is the moon? You said it's not physical. Are you ready to recieve that and decide to base physical? You got to stop talking if you're going to ask me what the moon is. So for the fourth time, Aaron, take a big gulp. I don't know what the moon is. You assert it's a physical object in space vacuum. Now, is it my turn to ask a question? Didn't answer the first one. You asked why it doesn't fall to Earth, it's in the firmament. You said you're challenging me for not testing a model. I did. Moderator. And you refused to hear how I did that. Moderator, is it my turn to ask a question or not? Because I answered this question. The moon doesn't fall to Earth because it's in the firmament. Can I ask a question now? Yeah, there is no firmament. They just gave no description. He said it's imaginary, but it's not imaginary. It's real, but it's not real. And then he doesn't know what it is, but it's locked in a giant dome that we know isn't there because he denies all the evidence that it isn't there. But he's going to challenge me that I haven't tested it when I did. All right. You've got to be better than this. You said you debated 10,000 people, and you don't know any better than that. Aaron, you're triggered. I know your religion's falling apart. Take a big gulp, buddy. I don't have a religion. But I do hate when people lie to me and tell me that I do. Being against religion is not a religion. Being against faith is not a faith. I wish you guys would get that, but you understand that you can't defend your religious position. So you have to pretend that every other position is religious too. It's not. My position is based on science, which means that I have predictive models and that it can be falsified. Yours can't be. Yours makes no predictions, has no evidence. It can't be falsified. Yours is a religious belief. Mine is not. I can demonstrate that mine is not using your model. Can I ask a question now? I know you're triggered. Take a big gulp, Aaron. It's gonna get better. I'm not triggered. Don't be ridiculous. Matt James, moderator, please. Hello. Can I ask a question now? Yeah, we're waiting for you. Go ahead. You're telling Aaron he's triggered. Go ahead and ask your question. Yeah, he's lying about how I'm triggered and lying about how I have a religion and all of that. If that's all he can do, why did you platform this guy? Aaron, do you have any scientific evidence of the R value? Of the who? Of the R value for your heliocentric religion. I don't have a religion. All right. And if you keep lying about me, then I don't have any other reason to be here. If your only way of debating is to lie about your opponent, then there's no point in it. Now, no, I don't intend to argue from physics at all. I have a whole other arguments that I can bring up against your model on how I have tested it. And if you'd like to hear about those, I can go into those. Well, Aaron, I define religion as a set of beliefs, not based on empirical evidence, but based on the doctrine of man. Now you talk about capital error. I don't have that either. Why are you interrupting me, moderator? I'm sorry, I don't have that either. Okay. I don't have that. I don't have any religion. Why don't we fix the fault in your perception and accept I don't have a religion. We do want to get- Stop lying about me. So we can continue. What was the argument that you wanted to give, Nathan? Wait, I presented a question. Does he have any evidence of the R value? No, I told him I wasn't gonna argue from point of physics, that I had other arguments for this. So when I ask a question, do you have any evidence of the R value? You're just gonna- Yes, I do have evidence, but it's not that. I don't have evidence from physics. I'm not gonna argue from physics. I'm not a physicist. I'm gonna argue from other points. Look at your evidence, Aaron. What? Are you just gonna concede? You don't have any evidence? Next topic? No, I have evidence, and I'm trying to present it, but you keep stopping me. Oh, wait, I'm sorry. I'm you. This might be an opportunity. I think we did do a question earlier. I can't remember. I think it was maybe, Aaron mentioned- That was interrupting him, James. He was gonna give evidence for the R value. Yes, and again, I said, I'm not gonna argue mathematics or physics. I'm gonna argue other arguments, and I would like to present them, but he doesn't wanna hear those because they involve his model. Falsifying his model is not what he's about. He's not going to allow that. So you can't answer my question if you have any evidence for the R value? No, I don't have any evidence for the R value. I'm not gonna argue from physics or mathematics. I have other arguments. We can just get rid of that one. Do you wanna ask me a question, Aaron? Yes, well, no. I wanted to give you the evidence that I had given you before. When you lied about me again by saying that I never tested your model when I did. So look at your map. Look at your global, your polar projection map. Look at Australia. Do you see it? I asked for evidence that you went out, observed a globe. Yeah, I'm giving you that evidence. Or I'm trying to give you that evidence. I'm having this trouble. I'm trying to give you a look at it and you're trying not to see it. So, Aaron, let me be very clear. Once you're head toward the map. All right, let me be very clear. Look at your map. Let me be very clear. I don't have a map. Moderator. You don't have a map. All right, general, one second, one second. What I wanna do is if we just reset. So let's go back to maybe a new topic that we hadn't covered. You're gonna have kind of this back and forth instead. The reason I asked for the map is because I'm going to use the map against him. I don't have a map. And he can't, yes, you do. You gave it to me. I asked you to forward me two things. The model, which you couldn't cough up because there isn't one. There would be if your shit was real, but it isn't so you can't get a model. And the other one was a map. And you did give me some Instagram thing which included the map. So you're using a polar projection map. You're not. So you gave me neither a model nor a map. Okay, you meet neither of the criteria. Draw a manning a model. Oh, you're gonna leave? James, I set up the criteria that you have to produce both. You're gonna leave. You have to produce a model and a map. And I said that if he failed to produce either one of them. Why are you here? Then he would not meet the criteria. Why are you here? So now he's saying that he, I was gonna allow, I was gonna allow that I can get him to describe his model using his map. He won't do that. Now he's telling me that he won't even, he won't even side with the map he sent me. No, he's got nothing. He meets the mid, he failed the minimum criteria. I agreed, I would not come on this show unless he produced both. He's produced neither. I'm gone. I have nothing. I have nothing. You have nothing. That's correct. If you don't have a model that shows predictions that you can verify, then you've got butt kiss. Nothing. It's a revocation policy. Look how triggered you are. So can we talk about science, Aran? Why can't we talk about in critical episodes? I can, but I've made this arrangement with James. I put minimum criteria on here. This Jackass failed both. Do we, Nathan, would it be fair? Would you concede that you don't have those things? Or would you actually argue? I already told him. I don't subscribe to a model. He does. I don't subscribe to a gas either. I'm not a cartographer. Those are not my arguments that I have a map. My arguments are the earth doesn't curve, it doesn't spin, and we can't have gas pressure without a container. Now Aran, if you don't wanna talk about any of my points, I'm happy to answer any questions you have. You have to have a point first. You have to have both a model and a map. You have neither. You have nothing. Falsification is independent of replacement. Sorry, you have to have something to falsify. You presented nothing. Your model that says we spent 1,040 miles an hour. I can prove that using your map, and I can show that, but you're not going to because you came here unprepared, sir. You can prove we spent my flat stationary map. Yep. Oh, well, that's a cool story. How close to prove that we rotate? Why don't we, is there anything from the opening that you guys from either opening did actually- Justin, he accused me of one of his previous presentations of being a Coriolis denier while expressing how he does not know what the fuck Coriolis is. And it's amazing that his description was so goddamn and ignorant, yet he was criticizing me and saying that I was a denialist because he doesn't know what the fuck it is. Well, Aron, you call yourself a science communicator. Why don't you communicate for the audience? Communicate the science. Okay, this is the one thing I'm doing. What Coriolis- It's the one thing I'll do. Why are you interrupting me again? Why can't you just exercise the impulse control? Maybe drink a little more, Aron. Excuse me. Okay, wait for me to finish speaking. No. Yep. That would be great, Aron. I'm not going to platform this guy and say, okay, science communicator. I can't see him with any of the minimum criteria. Why don't you- I was going to defend the Coriolis explanation because this guy clearly doesn't know what the hell it is. After debating some supposedly 10,000 people, citing the Coriolis many, many times and he doesn't know what the fuck it is. No, I'm not platforming this asshole anymore. He came with nothing and you were supposed to guarantee that he would have both or I'm out. And now he's saying that the thing he sent me, he didn't send me and he's not going to stand by it. No, fuck him. I just didn't say it was a guy for me. He's got nothing falsifiable. He's got nothing testable. We've literally got nothing to talk about. Well, you're the one running away. I still have to talk about second law of thermodynamics and the Coriolis. The fuck you know about that? Now you're interrupting me. Okay, hold on. So I know your trigger. It's- So why don't we do this? Why don't we do this? All he can do then is insult me. One second, gentlemen. And lie about me. And that's it. He doesn't have a model. He doesn't have a map. He doesn't have anything falsifiable. All he can do is the argument from incredulity where he tries to show how he doesn't understand something so that he thinks he can put me on the defensive. No, if he's gonna be arguing a scientific position, and this is not a religious position, like he lies to make it up to me, it's a scientific position, which means he has to bring a theory that accounts for all of the data better. And that theory had better been able to make predictions that we can verify. He's got nothing. So he's literally nothing to talk about. We have nothing to debate about. We, Nathan, just to be sure that I understand. So the two things that Aaron had mentioned, wanting to discuss, is it, would you say that you do have those things? To be fair, it is a flat versus globe type of debate. So like, James, they don't have a model. They don't have a map to show us either. That's accurate. Yes, we do. Oh, you do. You've seen globes. We all have globes. I can look up Google Earth right now and show you a globe. I know you got it. In fact, in this discussion, I'd intended to do that when I was going to show you several giant gaping holes in the map that you sent me, which you now deny that you sent me. So if you give me nothing that we can test, we literally have nothing to say. So we're done. I don't deny that I sent you it. I said it's not accurate. I said I can't guarantee. So you're not going to stand by your own basis. The basis for your position. The basis for my position is you got to pay attention. All right, listen. I know you're going to rob me. I know. We've already discussed this. The only basis you have is the argument from incriminating where you get to explain how you don't understand how real science works. Okay. Man, you can't participate in real science either. I'm done. I'm out. All right, hold on. Pardon my interruption. So is that if we, why don't we do this? We've done this before. Thanks to Vosh versus Sargon. Sometimes we switch into like two or three minute intervals. And so that's something that I think will help keep this orderly. Commanding that I have all of this information for whatever field he wants to argue, but he doesn't have anything falsifiable on his own. He doesn't have anything where we can show that his doesn't work. The moon is not physical and it's stuck to a firmament that doesn't exist. And I don't know anything about it. And I don't have a map and I don't have a model. And I don't know what the fuck I'm talking about. My head is up my own ass, but you're triggered because you have a beer in front of you. Fuck you. You are triggered, Aaron. Please just take a deep breath. I want to use your science communicator. Yeah, I am. And then you were not. You're a religious anthropologist. And that's all you are. You've been erupting me. I think where we're just erupting off topic. You just keep erupting, basically. We're going to drift off more than that. Let's come back, so. I was in the middle of talking. Hold on, one second, one second. Hold on a second. Hold on, guys. I'm so sorry that I had to mute you just to try to get, that we can't, nobody, nobody can hear you. Hi, it's Matt. Fuck you. Bring it on. I'm gone. Bring it on, thank God. One more. You're a science communicator to find Corey Oles. OK, well, we will read through the questions we have for Nathan. Let's see. So we will start. Let me just pull the picture in here. And so I want to say thanks for your questions, folks. I think Aaron had to go to a party. So he has left us, but we hope he's well. I hope he's not upset. We really do like Aaron. He is passionate, to say the least. And so maybe we'll have him come back if he checks back into the Zoom link. Otherwise, I'm sure you have plenty of questions for Nathan. We can jump into those right now, as I know you want them read. So let me just pull those up. Let me take a minute, because I was a little bit surprised. But I want to say thanks so much for all of your questions, folks. I want to also say, if it's your first time here, consider hitting that Subscribe button as we have many more debates to come. We are very excited, folks, about many debates, including not too far away. We are excited about one that will be, we are thinking, hopefully, assuming everything goes right with travel and safety, is that we are hoping to host in-person debates. Again, starting in the new year. So it'll be a little while yet, but we are planning that out. And so especially in the summer, we're thinking things will be settled down. So with that, I want to say thanks so much for your, we'll start with the super chat from. Hey, James, since Aaron's not even here to be drunk and laugh how they all think they're spitting space monkeys, can we just skip all the insults and go directly to the content and the questions with substance? I will, indeed, try to get all the questions that have substance, and I will tame the ones that are unruly. So thanks so much for your question. This one comes in from Carl Sagan, who sends a super sticker. Thank you for your support, Carl Sagan. Really do appreciate it. Carl Sagan also said, are in raw, if I send you a book, would you read it if I paid you to read it? Is that acceptable to you? Well, let's see. You might have to email him that question. And so one thing I do want to warn you folks, if there's a question for Aaron that is meant to that he would want to give a legitimate answer to, namely, it's challenging his model, those I'm probably going to skip just because there's obviously no Aaron here. So we don't want to drill him with a hard question when he's not able to respond. So David P. Neff, thanks for your question, said question for Aaron. OK. So let's see. Braxton Hicks, thanks for your question, said, Natalie, what's with your dirty windows? About time to clean those windows, Nathan. But I'm just teasing. I'll be honest, this house has five bedrooms and two acres in the backyard. I just don't have time to take care of everything and walk GEO and run the group and do my activism and edit videos and mail out flyers. So, you know, and if I could find a cleaning service, I'd trust. They're tremendous windows, Nathan. It's OK. And let's see. You'll see though, James, I got an email from Bite the Flat Earth a couple of nights ago and he called me homeless. I debated him on your channel with these windows in the background seven months ago. And he's still, Glogers are so delusional. All right, we're going to go to the next question. Thanks for your question. Mariah Vegeta, thanks for your question, says, thank you, James, for the early birthday present. I didn't know I needed. Thanks so much. Says, awesome showing, R&Raw, smacking down this fluff. Yeah, that was quite the smack. Next up, I appreciate your question. David P. Neff says, question for Nathan. I can only imagine the email I'm going to get from R&F. You know, it's hard to please everybody. And so no hard feelings. We hope R&R is doing well and we do appreciate them. David P. Neff says, question for Nathan. Are you for real or are you a Poe? I've been testing Earth myself for five years. I've also memorized over 150 proofs. Alphabetically, the Earth is not a spinning globe. They're all on my channel. You have no real pictures of the Earth from space. Are you for real? Gotcha. And thanks so much. This question comes from Carl Sagan. Thanks for your other super sticker. Appreciate it. Siligin Holland, thanks for your question. Said, get to the effing point, Natalie. I don't know when that was, but hopefully we got there for you, Siligin. And next, Hank says, thanks for your question. Said, does this, let's see, marionette. I can't remember what that word means. I think it means maybe somebody who like holds to a certain doctrine. I can't remember. But says, know that even Ken Ham thinks that he's deluded. And will he ever stop shouting? I think they're. That's a literal perfect example argument from authority fallacy. He's not even someone who reaches the shape of the Earth. I do it full time for the last five years. And you're going to say, oh, Ken Ham thinks you're dumb. So you're wrong. OK, cool freaking story, bro. Gosh. Gotcha. And thanks for your question. This one comes in from Siligin. Oh, we got that one. Pilgrim says, behind the curve, demonstrate two experiments. I always pronounce this wrong. Gyroscope. Gyroscope. And the sticks and lasers, they ignore the results that prove the Earth is round. Why? OK, so that's funny, he says that. Because the gyroscope argument has nothing to do with the Earth being round. It has to do with the Earth rotating. Now, another word for a ring laser gyroscope is a SAGNAC interferometer. SAGNAC himself said, he said he observed interference effect. It turns out to be the optical vortex due to the motion of the system with respect to the ether. So the guy who developed the technology for the interferometer for the gyroscope said it was not Earth rotation. It was the rotation of the ether. So that's a cool story. If you guys want to believe Earth rotates under gyroscope, why doesn't it rotate under balls you throw near, hotter balloons, planes, insects, helicopters, smoke, it doesn't rotate under anything. So it just rotates under a gyroscope on Netflix. And so cool story. That's a unique religion. Next, thanks for your question. This one comes in from Spark344, a regular here. Glad to see you, Spark. It says, for Aaron, let's see. Can you please comment on, let's see. And they said, they asked, Aaron, is Nathan an imitator of Kent Hovind? And they said, also, can I suggest that Aaron try Gilden Drac Belgian beer? It is delicious and is over 10.5%. I don't imitate Kent Hovind. What are you talking about? Gotcha, thanks for that. And level 314, thanks so much for your generous super chat. We really do appreciate it. And so they said, the sun does intersect the ocean when it sets over it. The time it sets or rises is directly related to altitude. Here is the model and experiment I've done which demonstrates it. Can you provide a model for this phenomena on flat Earth? And then they share a YouTube link. So this is, folks, if you're watching live right now or later on, that super chat is still at the top of the page. So if you'd like to see that link, you can actually click on the link within the super chat and you'll be able to go straight to that person's video. Nathan, if you wanna answer their question though, it's all yours. So multiple reasons, guys, that I know for a fact the sun's not going below our butt when it sets at night or comes up in the morning. Now, this is an observation I did of the moon in Denver. I went up a couple thousand feet, already a mile high in Denver and observed the sun, or sorry, guys, this is the moon shrinking into a little dot above the horizon. Now, other reasons that we know the sun is always above us is sun rays always come down into your house. I don't care if your house is on a very tall mountain at sunset, the sun rays do not come up through the window and splash onto the ceiling of your room. They're always thrown down, okay? So it's just an optical illusion that the sun is going below your feet due to perspective, glare, things get larger as they go through a denser medium. And of course, as things get farther and farther away in the atmosphere, hundreds of miles, they're going through a more dense medium. So it's gonna appear larger unless you increase in elevation. And I talked about a green flash in my opener, it's another great proof that the sun, even at sunset, is above the horizon, not below the horizon. Thank you so much. Thank you, Sam Bruner, for your super chat. Didn't see a question in there. Let me know in the live chat if you got one. Otherwise, better yet, email me, and that way I for sure won't miss it, Sam. And let's see, zero combs, thanks for your questions. So Nathan believes what a book the Bible is telling him to believe with no proof, but rejects science that gives him tangible evidence? Prove God exists. I didn't bring up God or the Bible in my opener. It was not my argument at all. That's all Aaron ranted about in his opener. I don't know if he was reading from the wrong script. Maybe he's debating Kent Hoven next week or something, but I'm the flat earth guy, not religious book told me this. Large bodies of water do not curve. We are not rotating 1,000 miles an hour and you can't have gas pressure next to a vacuum. So space is fake. But he brought up in his opener, faith and the Bible and talked about the Holy Spirit. And he says, oh, you got to take this fairy tale is true. Guys, none of those were my arguments. I had three arguments and he left before we could even get to the third one and admitted and conceded. He didn't have any proof of the R value. So good times, good questions. Thanks for your question. This one comes in from Gentle on James. Says, Aaron raw is my favorite atheist and Disney villain. Glad you appreciate our and let's see. We appreciate Syed Ahmad's question, which is they asked Aaron, does it hurt when you talk to Nathan? I'm sure I don't want to speculate what he would have said. So Zacuz, thanks for your question says, Nathan, does the earth rotate at one revolution per day? Otherwise known as 15 degrees per hour. Thanks, Bob. I just spun in my chair faster than the earth, by the way. Yeah, I know the earth doesn't rotate at all. I know they keep saying thanks, Bob, because James, check this out. Prior to us going on Netflix and behind the curve, these glovers didn't have any proof the earth rotates. They needed flat earthers to actually go out there and do things then they could affirm the consequent, which is a fallacy. If P then Q, P happens so Q. Oh, look, we have drift. If we have drift, the earth is rotating. We see drift, so the earth is rotating. You don't have a variable that you manipulate or an observation in nature. So gyroscopes are not science. Anyone thinking they are is scientifically illiterate. Next, thanks for your question. This one comes in from, you guessed it, the Blade Runner 001 said, Arryn is frustrated with Nathan. I would guess you were right. And, let's see, let me have another one. Raven Zero says, oh my gosh, Arryn is awesome. And then let's see, we have another one. This one comes in from your buddy, Witsit, Getsit. Austin says, I can prove that using your map. And then says, I'm dead. I'm confused. But, thank you for your question. This one comes in from Mike Billers, who says, Nathan Thompson, the moon is not a physical object. Assertion, now prove it. I said, I don't know what it is, guys. It doesn't have to be physical. It could just be a luminary or light, but we know because it doesn't have a specular highlight that it's not a ball reflecting light. Balls reflecting light have something called a specular highlight. I'll share my screen real quick, James, because I had a window ready for this. So, we know, these are all the links for the debate, specular highlight. Right here, balls reflecting light have a specular highlight. And during a full moon, the luminosity or light from the moon is uniform. There is no specular highlight. And when NASA makes fake photos of the earth, they'll even put a little specular highlight on the earth, because if the earth was a ball reflecting light, it would have a specular highlight. That's how I know the moon is not a ball reflecting light. So, thanks for letting me share that, James. Gotcha. Next, thanks for your question. This one comes in from Carl Sagan with yet another super sticker. Appreciate the support. And UnicornLaserize says, hey, Aaron, come on, man. Thanks for that. And yeah, what an interesting week this week has been, folks. Kango24, thanks for your question, said, question for Nathan, does being a science denier also mean you have to be a clown? Or were you already a clown when you believed the earth was a globe? Yeah, well, at least he knows that I believed it was a globe. Now that I don't believe it's a globe, I know the earth is flat. No, I've never had to wear big shoes or put on a red nose. I've never been a clown once, but I don't know. So thanks for the question. Thank you. And the Patriot University PhD says, are in raw, why haven't you released a new batch of your beer to the public? The masses want to know. Well, he's linked in the description, if you wanna ask him. He, I'm sure, I know he's an enthusiast, so I bet you'll get an answer. Whitsit gets it, thanks for your question, said, let's see. Oh, pardon my, Whitsit, let's see. Yeah, given that Aaron's gone, I don't wanna mention anything when he's not here to defend himself. So let me know, Whitsit, if you'd like a refund for your super chat. Then Jordan Smith, thanks for your question, said prediction. Nathan will give three points full of understandings with no evidence. He'll play with toys. He won't answer questions and deflect. Not true. I mean, I answered everything he had to say. He asked me why the moon doesn't fall down as if that's some sort of proof. The earth is a spinning ball, guys, and his entire intro was religion rhetoric. I think he was reading from the wrong script, didn't know where he was, or what this debate was about. So, go back, rewatch it. Next, thank you for your question. This one comes in from Jordan Smith, says, oh, we got that one. Vincent Dohn, thanks for your question, and said, Nathan, define a gish gallop. Yeah, it's all over the place. He's not sticking to one point. Gotcha, and thanks for your question. This one, we appreciate this one comes in from, zero combs, says, why do all flaties answer questions with a question? Not true. Not every question. Next up. For example, does the earth rotate under things? Well, he could say yes or no. Well, that's what his religion asserts. So, if the earth doesn't rotate under things, you need to go read your religion book and find out why you think it doesn't rotate under things. That's not a question. Just telling you to go read your own textbooks, your religious scriptures. Thanks so much. This one comes from Vincent Dohn, says, oh, no, he just read that. Sorry, folks, I did not. I'm a little bit at a sleep deficit, so I'm a little bit off today. Vincent Dohn this time says, Nathan, describe your understanding of fallacies. Yeah, of course. I just did a video last night on about 15 fallacies that globers use. Also, I was taking notes on them today and last night. So, you've got fallacy composition, division, gambler's fallacy, cupopi, strawman, ad hominem, genetic fallacy. Over the last four years, this is all I've seen from Globe Earthers in the official Flatok and Globe discussion. You would not believe how happy I am that Facebook censored our group, deleted 140,000 members from the official Flatok and Globe discussion. Now we just have a Flat Earth group and we don't talk to globers and I sleep better at night like a baby. And this is their argument. Nathan deleted his group to throw a pity party. Do I look like I'm crying? No, not sad at all. Gotcha, thanks for your question. This one comes in from Kango24, says, it's fascinating watching a quote unquote debate between an ignorant, arrogant clown and R and raw. No, poor guy. Next up, thank you for your, Nathan. Oh, Nathan, let's see. Carl Sagan thinks you're a super sticker. You gotta love the super stickers. Appreciate that support. Mike Billar, thanks for your question, said, Nathan, the moon is not a physical object. Assertion, now prove it. I'm 99% sure I've read that already. It's all good. I'll read about it. Then, thanks for your question. This one comes in from Alex Stein, AKA Conspiracy Castle, very sassy young man, says, Nathan is crushing it in this debate. Well, you've got a fan out there, Nathan. Alex Stein's got your back. And Pilgrim, thanks for your question, said, what's holding the firmament up? Please answer with the scientific model and not God. I just want to shout out Alex Stein, go follow Conspiracy Castle. I'm a fan of him also, so that feeling is mutual. But I just want you to know, I didn't create the earth, okay? I've got a three and a half pound brain. I take up about six feet of space on this realm. So I haven't been to the edge. I don't know what's outside of the dome. I don't know how God made the dome and held it up. All I know is we're not on a spinning tilted pair with molten iron core hotter than the surface of the sun, traveling 20 million miles that way every single day. That's weird. Gotcha. And thanks for your question. This one comes in from, which it gets, it says you've objectively triggered, you're objectively triggered. Okay, I think that was for trying to taunt Aaron. Okay, we got Peter or Petter, Flenberg. It says, darn you're good, Aaron, how's your cat? I didn't know he had a cat, I love cats. Jordyn Smith, thanks for your question said, Nathan West went all Kanye on Mark Swift, pretty narcissistic to make someone's time about you. Then again, that was your largest scam group. I don't even know what he's talking about. Gotcha. And Vincent Done, thanks for being a good sport, Nathan, I know we read pretty much everything. It says, blessed are you when men curse you or bow you and speak all kinds of evil against you, falsely for my name's sake, rejoice for great is your reward in heaven. So I'm throwing a party when you got, you think this has gotten old? Okay, I've heard this back in 2015. You're the same old song, Glovers. You're all boring, predictable and redundant. Let's, we can insult the audience later. Next up, thanks for your question. This one comes in from Vincent Dones. As Nathan, can you define a scientific model? Yeah, scientific model is a concept that explains some sort of, it's not, you guys, Glovers don't have a model either with ever expanding space, water and people sticking to the bottom of a spinning tilted ball flying through the universe. So you guys got to stop straw manning about a model, stop begging the question, never claim to have a model. And also it's a reification fallacy because you have no proof scientific or empirical observations for the globe. You have to, you need reification fallacies. You just want concepts. You just want to look at concepts. You don't want to look at the evidence. You don't want to look at the science. You are science deniers and reality deniers. Congratulations, Glovers. Next up, thank you for your question. This one comes in from Mike Billar's says, what do you mean he doesn't have a model? Look at all those words he has written on his notepad papers. They're just teasing you. Okay, thanks for your question. Jordan Smith says, oh, we read that one already. And thanks for your question, Robert Summers. Robert Summers says, Aaron states specifically that he doesn't want to argue from physics because he isn't a physicist and Nathan acts like he just won the whole debate. When he just said the moon isn't physical. If he doesn't have any physics to support the heliocentric model, what is he doing here in this debate? Because he just straw man a bunch of religious stuff said I believe a book when that was none of my introduction at all whatsoever. So cool story, guys. You guys are funny. Next up, thanks for your question. This one comes in from Weitzit Gitzit says, I can prove that, we got that one. Twad Wasil thinks for your question says, no evidence for our value equals no evidence of globe. Vincent Doan thinks for your question says, Nate, you can deny the globe, but if it isn't a globe, you need to prove it is flat without a model. It can be concave, square or anything else. Falsification is independent of replacement. If I falsify your globe, I don't need to replace it with another model. Gotcha. And Mr. Wilford, thanks for your question, said screeching for moderator when your opponent clarifies his position equals, what does small S-M-O-L-P-P mean? Is this some like the slang the young kids are using nowadays? I don't know that one to be honest with you. Mike Bill Ars, thanks for your question says, sounds to me like James did not screen these interlocutors angry face. Reference to Darth Dawkins. By the way, a lot of you didn't know, Darth Dawkins is Nathan's dad. So pretty crazy, small world. I made that up. Okay, Mike Bill Ars, thanks for your question, said sounds to me. Did you say, no, it was the same one. Okay, Billy Zeg, let's see. Thanks for your super chat. Let's see, it says, it says, Aaron has left the building. This is true. We hope he's well though. Raven zero, thanks for your super chat. Oh, we got that one already. They said, Aaron is awesome. Robert Summers, thanks for your other question, said, why did you send him a map if you weren't going to stand by it? Nothing but a grifter. He just wanted to clout chase and put his name next to Aaron's. Okay, I didn't ask for this debate. James, you called me asked to do this debate. I honestly didn't wanna send him that. When you called me and asked me to send him a map in a model, what did I say, James? It's a straw man argument. Didn't I say that? Yeah, I didn't wanna send it to him. And then I tried to clarify, I don't subscribe to maps for models. Apparently he showed up lost, hasn't watched any of my videos. When I've gone through it. You got super triggered. You were as triggered as Tioga. And thanks, we love you too, I hope you're doing well. So earth first space, or earth first space later. You know that person? Says, LOL globe model has a fake continent at the bottom. Next, thanks for your question, said Jordan Smith says, Nathan lost, let's see, Nathan after losing his group, went straight to his buddy, Josh, who he partied with. Nathan, what was Josh can, let's see, I don't really need to get into that. Let's see, Aaron Rorvick. Didn't know you were a partier, Nathan. Aaron Rorvick, thanks for your question says, this is how you handle a flur for R and U demand. Then a Blade Runner, 0001. Thanks for your question, said Aaron. Raw is frustrated with Nathan. I think that's probably accurate. Henrik, thank you for your question says, Aaron Raw, let's see, is as untriggered as I have ever seen him stop deflecting Natalie. It's Natalia, by the way. Gotcha, thank you. For your super sticker, Carl Sagan, amazing. Thanks for your support, really does mean a lot. And we're not stopping there, we have more. So thanks for your question from WhitsittGidsit, just came in and then I've got to work to my, where you were on the list. On the way, Whitsitt says, Nathan isn't it odd. The pseudoscience community, let's see. They said, isn't it odd that Aaron would leave, they said, falsification is independent of replacement. Thank you for that. And thanks for your question, this one comes in from, Jane Doe, thanks so much. Says moderator, moderator, moderator. I think they're impersonating you. That's fine, I just needed some moderation. You wouldn't let me talk, you kept interrupting me every time and asking me questions and then interrupting me. You must keep going. Jordan Smith says, Nathan, let's see. Oh, is that that fellow you partied with? Arden Warwick, let's see. Thanks for your super chat, Henrik Simonsen says, Arden Raw is, I already read that, sorry folks. A little bit off today. Oh, we just caught up to where we were. Carl Sagan, thank you for yet another super sticker. The super sticker machine, appreciate it. Bruce Wayne, thanks for your question. Says, well done to Arden. Arden, you got a fan out there if you're listening. Andrew Handelsman, thanks for your question, said, Nathan, are you accompanying me to the Round Earth Convention again this year? I don't take lovers. Next up, thanks for your question. Unicorn laser eyes says, poor Arden, bless his heart. I don't know what that means. Next, thanks for your question. Let's see. Rick's world, glad to see you back. Says, Nathan, Earth is a globe, I win. I'm sorry. Next, thanks for your super chat, said, Vincent Dean says, no reason to debate anyone with no evidence other than uh, uh, so I approve of him, let's see. Let's see, I'll, let's see, I won't tell you what this is. Whoa, Wotan is in the house folks, if you miss Wotan. Feel free to uh, let us know, and so we uh, we know he's a controversial fellow. He is here, he's in the building asking. He says, Arden claims not to be a physicist. Let's see, uh, I don't want to, forgive me friend, I just want to be sure that I don't want to like ask a question where Arden's not able to answer it, because I don't want to like, in a way gang up on him by when he doesn't get a chance to respond. Carl Sagan, thanks for your question, said enjoying your Patreon tonight. Thank you for everything you do. Thanks so much. That can't be our Patreon, because ours is pretty like a doll, but we're working on it folks. Want to let you know, basically the way that it's going to work is we are also, we're changing our tears up and so some of our live events, we are going to, we're gonna, we're gonna go for some big fish this summer. Lord willing, it's, you know, we don't know for sure, but that's the plan. We are hoping to have some monstrous debates. Maybe people like Jordan Peterson, like this, we're talking big time. And to do that, we will have to fundraise and so want to let you know, if you are a patron, you will not have to pay for any of those very occasional, very rare live streams that we basically would be asking people to put in a bit through Kickstarter to help us cover the fees for the speakers. James Crow, thanks for your question, said Nathan equals Dunny Kruger effect. Nathan, is this true? No. Gotcha, thanks for your questions. This from Syed Ahmad. Thanks for your question says, Natalie, what is the best way to prevent a Facebook group? Let's see. They want to know what the story is about your Facebook group. Was it, was it Mark? I heard it's Mark Zuckerberg personally. He wanted to flip the switch or push the button to delete your group. Is this true? I wish that's a good rumor, but nope, nobody emailed me and said, hey, you're a loser. We're deleting your cloud earth group. I got no email, no contact. It was just gone. You guys sucked. All right. Beta, just kidding, totally kidding. I'm seriously sorry, man. We want to remind you our guests are linked in the description and they're not betas. I can assure you. Thanks for your question. Slurry dude says, thanks for being a good support, Nathan. I appreciate it. Slurry dude says, Nathan, can you give the full second law of thermodynamics? Yeah, well, the scientific description talks about in a perfect isolated system, the number of microstates constantly decreases. So, but really how you apply that guys is if you puncture a tire, the gas from inside goes out. If you put your hand on a hot stove, the heat from the hot stove moves into your hand. If the earth's core was hotter and then the surface of the sun, it would burn the rubber on your nikes, okay? So that's basically what entropy, the second law of thermodynamics is, order moving towards disorder, high pressure systems moving towards low pressure system, high energy systems moving towards low energy systems. But there's a real scientific definition with microstates and isolated systems, but there are no isolated systems in nature that we know or can demonstrate with. So really then you could straw man argument and say, oh, well, there are no isolated. So, oh, what? The second law of thermodynamics doesn't exist. Okay, cool story, Glover. Gotcha. And thanks for your question. This one comes in from, Sillian Holland says, Natalie, are you still believing that meat rots in moonlight? Moon has opposite effect than the sun. That's like saying, do you still believe the sun preserves meat with sunlight? Yeah, of course. That's how they used to make deep jerky back in the day before they had the dehumidifiers, whatever they're using now. But you can actually decay things in the moonlight. The moonlight's measurably cold, putrefying sunlight's hot pyrophosphorescent. It's actually germicidal too. It's why you don't have to go out and clean your deck and stuff because it's naturally germicidal. So they are just totally opposite. That's where yin and yang come from. Guys, the yin and yang is the sun and the moon, light and dark, orbiting around polar center. Don't buy into this duality crap. It's all new age. Gotcha. Good question. Thanks for your question. This one comes in from Darren Helgand. Helgamel? Let me know if I mispronounced it, friend. Says Nathan, what is an isolated system in reference to thermal dynamics? Yeah, it doesn't lose heat or energy or matter. It cannot escape an isolated system. A closed system can lose energy. You know, actually I gotta brush up on it. I don't know everything, guys. I'll be honest. I don't know everything, okay? So isolated system can't lose heat or energy. It's contained. So that's what an isolated system is. Thank you, Ann. Thank you, Cillian Holland, for your other questions. Said, hey James, can we get an evolution debate with Aaron and Natalie? That would be epic. I do agree. I don't know. Hopefully we haven't burned a bridge with Aaron tonight. We would love to host that, that'd be fun. Robert Summers, thanks for your questions. Please show us why the sunlight would be coming up in your window at any point in the same globe model. In the globe model is what I meant to say. Yeah, of course. He says the sun isn't actually rising. Yeah, isolated system is a physical system so far removed from any other system it does not interact with them. A closed system doesn't lose heat or energy. Sorry, I had to brush up on that. James, I was reading what that was all about because I want to learn all this stuff. I want to know it all. What was that question? I'm sorry. The sun, oh, the rays coming up in your house. Guys, if you're on a globe, the sun goes below your butt on the globe when it sets and when it rises it comes up from above your butt. Now, if those rays were actually below you, they would not come down into your house at sunrise or sunset. They would be coming laterally or up, depending on if you're on a high hill, but on a high mountain, the rays should be coming up above the horizon, being thrown onto the ceiling of your house. That never happens, just simple proofs. The earth is not a spinning ball right there for you, ladies and gentlemen. Gotcha, and thank you for your question. This one comes in from Mac HD who says, Nathan, why did you show the flat earth map if it's not accurate? I was just showing him how sunrises, sunsets, the seasons work, what the sun and lemas all about. Basically give him an idea what we think's going on with the earth, but apparently, you know, that wasn't good enough. He had no proof of the R value. He didn't want to talk about Coriolis. He just said, I don't know what it is. Then he rage quit and we didn't get to talk about how space is fake. What a bummer. Next up. Robert Summers, thanks for your question, says, please show us why the sunlight would be coming up in your, oh yes, that already, sorry. And thanks for your question. This one is from level 314, says, Nathan, the video I posted does show a model for calculating the R value. Are you willing to do the experiment? And then they also shared a new link this time. Okay, so we're gonna calculate the R value now when it's already been asserted that we've known what it is for thousands of years because we have a physical geometric edge, but we falsified the physical geometric edge with the black swan. The horizon is over 10 miles past the oil platforms and should be one, two, three miles out. So you can't pretend the horizon is the physical geometric edge of the ball because it is not, we falsified it. Gotcha, thanks so much for your question. Mike Billar says, Nathan, why was your map you sent to R and not accurate? I mean, besides not being a globe. I don't claim to have an accurate map. I'm not a photographer. He acts like, oh, if you don't have a model, you don't have any arguments. No, we see too far. The second law of thermodynamics is real. You can have gas pressure next to a vacuum and the earth does not rotate. So I had arguments. He just wanted to run away because he didn't want to talk about the science, claimed to not know physics, doesn't have any data and honestly, ranted about religion first. We must keep going. That's all right. Diane Smith, thanks for your questions. For someone who whipped out a flat earth model from his desk, looks like Nathan had the map slash model asked for. He just knows it doesn't work. No, I just don't claim it's accurate. I haven't verified it. I have verified earth doesn't curve and earth doesn't spin. Can we talk about that? Because glovers don't have any proof that the earth doesn't spin. Trippy box, thanks for your question. Said, hey, I don't have any formal credentials but sound logic. Can I debate Nathan sometime? We'll see. I'm open to it depending on the topic and depending on if Nathan's up to it, obviously. Next, thanks for your question. Sheephol's Phoenix, thank you. Says, make us wait for that weak sauce for weeks. You were asked to bring two things for the debate. You had one job. You knew it would get wrecked quick. I was not asked to bring those to debate. He asked for them prior to the debate because he hasn't looked into flat earth more than 10 seconds of laughing at it. So sorry, guys, you're misinformed. You're ignorant. I was not required to bring anything to this debate. I had three arguments, but he ran away before we could cover all of them. Next, Sheephol's Phoenix. Appreciate it, Sheephol's Phoenix. Oh, we just read that. Silian Holland says, Natalie, how can a light make its own shadow moon? Well, you're assuming that the dark spots on the moon are shadows. It just, that's, you're begging the question to faculty. I don't assume that there are shadows on the moon. There are lit and unlit portions. And I didn't make the sky, guys. Sorry, go watch my video on Soros Cycle today. I uploaded it today if you wanna know how lunar eclipses are explained. We broke it all down. We got it all figured out now, so thank you. Next up, thanks for your question. This one comes from, Sheephol's Phoenix says, make us wait for what? Oh, we got that. Silian Holland, Eric Thompson, thanks for your question. Said, these globers are godless and heavy religion in NASA, but don't have, let's see, it's not even addressing. Okay, so we're gonna move to the next one, but thanks, Convick Games. Thanks so much, says, why is it that flat earthers never want to defend their flat earth? That's what I'm here doing, Bozo. Next, Ron Esquira, thanks for your question. Said, Nathan, giving your following, are you planning to raise the money for an Antarctica expedition to prove your assertion of the ice wall? I didn't say ice wall once in this argument. I don't know, maybe you're hallucinating or imagining things, but I didn't bring up ice wall and I don't wanna go to Antarctica. It's freezing cold there and I can't find any good vegan food on Yelp. Gotcha, and thanks so many, two seconds. No worries, I'm in no rush, James. I'm happy to be here. Thanks for the questions, guys. I really do like sharing, so. Henrik Simonsen, thanks for your question. Said, respect to R&Raw. Let's see, Eric Aluvium, appreciate it. Said, ask Captain Hammerball if he has been banned. What's Hammerball? Well, I do applied neuroscience. I've been studying it for about 10 years and one of my methodologies for getting taller and increasing brain function, increasing metabolism is I improve my hand-eye coordination. One of the ways I do that is bouncing balls off of hammers thousands of times a day. You serious? Yeah, yeah, you haven't seen that before? Come on, don't bullcrap me. No, yeah, well, we are electrical beings, right? And so Dr. Sebe and Bruce Lee said strength is the signal. It's not a muscle. And so if you can grow the signal, the highway for moving the energy, a natural byproduct is dense bones, dense muscles, dense ligaments, and they actually add cells to- We'll come back to this later. Part of my interruption. Next up, let's see. Driven balance, appreciate your question. So Nathan, if there is a drone, a dome, wouldn't the pressure be equal throughout it? So why is there a pressure gradient as we increase in altitude? Yeah, we wouldn't have a pressure and gradient if the sun and moon turned off, but we have the sun and the moon orbiting around polar center, introducing energy to the earth. Also we have air being produced at the surface with plants and trees and stuff. So obviously the more dense particles in the air are gonna go towards the bottom. You've got hydrogen, high helium, lithium, beryllium, boron, carbon, nitrogen, oxygen, fluorine. So they all separate into different density layers, but that's being mixed up by the sun and the moon. So we have an atmosphere that's inhomogeneous and anisotropic. Everything's different in all directions and moving around. It's not a static system like a car tire which doesn't have heat being introduced. It's just all uniform air pressure inside. So hope that answers your question. Gotcha, thanks for your question. This one comes in from Mira Vegeta, or Mariah Vegeta says, Nathan, my daughter would like you to explain Earth's magnetic field. FYI, I'm in your Facebook group. Try to find me. Cool, so Earth's electromagnetic field, I think it has something to do with the Earth. Look up galvanic cells and the sun and the moon being like an anode and a cathode. Introducing some sort of toroidal field into the Earth, which is where the electromagnetism comes from. I'm not the biggest expert on electromagnetism, but I do know mainstream science has never duplicated a dynamo threshold. So a molten iron core would have molten metal that would lose its curry point at around 800 degrees. We would not have compasses or an electromagnetic field on a spinning tilted ball with a molten iron core. Gotcha, thanks so much. The Chad says, so Nathan doesn't know what Earth is, but he knows what it isn't. I know exactly what you guys say Earth is, a ball tilted in space orbiting the sun 66,600 miles an hour, curving in all directions, 0.666 feet per mile squared, tilted from the horizontal equator 66.6 degrees, while big G is 6.67 and the speed of knots. All right, we'll talk about your big G later, but we get the point. Jennifer Helms, thanks for your super chat. Let me know, email me if you wanna add a question to it. Carl Sagan thanks for your question said, to Nathan, can you give a series of refuting cool hard logic episodes or questions to Flat Earthers? No, that sounds boring. Next, thanks for your question says, from the Chad, says, so Nathan doesn't know what the, we got that. Eric Thompson thanks for your question says, Nathan can you please explain how Flat Earth proves God the creator, love you brother. Yeah, of course. So Flat Earthers shows that we're not insignificant, that Earth is all there is. Genesis one makes way more sense now when you understand the sun and the moon are lights created, the sun's not 400 times bigger than the moon and 400 times farther away and we're not blasting through space, it says the sky is for signs and seasons. So obviously there is a creator and he's dynamic and detailed and he says that he loves you and he sent his son to die for you on the cross. So research that too, John 316. Gotcha, thanks for your question. This one comes in from, D. Green says, Nathan of the moon is a luminary. How does it have shadows on its surface during the full moon? There are no shadows on the surface of a full moon. It's entirely lit in uniform, which was my argument earlier, it doesn't have a specular highlight. So it's not reflecting light. Also moonlight is cold, you can test that. So it cannot be sunlight. Gotcha, thanks for your question. This one comes in from Jennifer Helms says, we love you, Nathan. I love you too, Jen. D. Green, thanks for your question says, Nathan of the moon is, I'm so sorry, sleepd up of a Shiba-Doo-Zoo-Bah, Ka-Fee-Fee. Let's see, can you explain how flat earth? Then question from QA Mom, says Nathan, why do you quote scripture and then call Glober's knowledge and Glober knowers religious? Isn't that hypocrisy or do you use the Bible for your own agenda? No, none of my arguments are religious based guys, walk outside, test earth yourself, verify what I'm saying is true or not true. So far all the Globers I talked to don't do that. So I don't know, we can just move on from the religious thing. I know you guys hate God, but you also deny the truth and God says I am the truth. I'm just here trying to share the truth with you guys. Gotcha. Let's see. We got stupid whore energy is in the house. I just saw her in the chat talking about one of her favorite hobbies, but I think we'll get to a question from her shortly. This one comes in from Matthew Needifer says, how does a flat earth concept support tidal waves? Okay. That's like asking why do we put milk in our cereal cake? So sometimes the water goes up, sometimes it goes down. That does not mean it's curving downward in all directions. It's a non sequitur. You wanna know how tides work, predictable, electromagnetism, water is diamagnetic, sun and moon move around. And earth also magnetism, most people think of it as an attraction force, but there's also a repelling force. And I talk about how tides work in this book right here in more detail. If you guys wanna grab it, it's called crushing conceptualism in modern Christianity. And they quote me directly from the group. So. Gotcha. And thank you so much for your question from Whitsitt Gitzitz as Nathan isn't it odd. See, oh, we read that one already. And two seconds. Oh yeah, we did read that already, but we're almost caught up, I think. And so wanna take this moment to remind you folks, we are very excited as we'll have a juicy controversial debate tomorrow. So hopefully we'll see you here for that. If you have not heard, somehow, you've been living in a cave on Mars with your fingers in your ears. We are on podcast. We encourage you to check us out and rate us if it's a value to you. We're learning how to do podcast stuff. It's frankly pretty new to me. So thanks so much for your patience and feedback. And this one comes in. This is a super chat from Sean Powell. I don't know if that's what their name is supposed to be or not. But they said, great job, Nathan. Keep up the great work, Aaron. Let's see is, let's see. That guy bugged me for three months to make a Patreon, James. That's hot. And then they said moon rocks were petrified wood. He don't know what is either. Thanks for your question, Matt Nelson says, Nathan, learn what fallacies actually are. Oh dude, how crazy is that, right? When I said Sean asked me to create a Patreon, but that second I got an email and I have a new $5 Patreon. So shout out to this guy, just Joe D. Whoever that is, thank you so much. And Sean, for convincing me to start a Patreon. For three months, I didn't wanna do it. Not doing it for the money. I just want people to know the truth. But I appreciate the support. Amazing. And next up, Robert Summers, thanks for your question, said hides behind not needing replacement, but goes on and on about how he knows empirically the world is flat. Ow, ow, ow. Yeah, laugh it up, lovers. We'll see who's laughing in the end, won't we? Gotcha. And thanks for your question. This one's from Cillian Holland says, Natalie, let's see. How does it feel with another flurf? Nasty guy. Next, Sarah Duke, or Sarah and Dave Strebe. Thanks for your question, said, Nathan, please explain the diverging equatorial, star, trail, star, tails. This is good, guys. This is good, right? On the spinning ball religion, right? He's asking me why, at the equator, the stars split off into separate directions and start going separate directions. So he thinks that when you're in the south, the sun sets in the east, but when you're in the north, the sun sets in the west. He thinks the whole sky just splits and starts rotating different directions. That's hilarious. What you're seeing is not actual, it's apparent. So it can happen on both models. It's not really happening. And star trails prove a flat stationary earth. A lot of people came to the flat earth looking at star trails for the first time and going, that doesn't make any sense if we're blasting through space and orbiting around the sun because all you see is the circular motion of the stars orbiting polar center, 86 constellations since the beginning of time. The sky is a map and a clock. You are not blasting through space. Next up, thanks for your question. This one comes in from, Robert Semmers says, hide behind not needing replacement, but goes on and on about how he knows empirically the world is flat, L-O-L. Yeah, there's certain things that are independent of replacement, but I know we don't live on a spinning ball. I presented evidence for that. We see too far and you have specular reflections. Maybe you guys weren't paying attention in my opener, but I have arguments for what I'm saying, okay? It's not just that you're wrong, which you are wrong. Go ahead, James. Gotcha, and thanks so much for your question. This one comes in from Matt Nelson, who says, Nathan, we got that one already, and Sarah, I think we did, yeah. Jordan Smith, thanks for your question. Said, I hope this becomes a trend and people stop giving Nathan a platform. He does the same routine every single time. One day Flurfs will see his BS. He's acting like I wanted to come on here and talk to that guy. I think he looks like a bat eater who lives in a cave. We'll talk about bats later, but thanks for your question. Daniel Knight, if you had a question you wanted to attach to that super chat, send me an email at moderndatabate at gmail.com. Jordan Smith, thanks for your question. Said, I hope this, oh, we got that one already. Darren Helgimo, thanks for your question. Let me know if I mispronounced it. Said, since the Earth is not an isolated system, why wouldn't the atmosphere be able to overcome the pressure difference of space due to gravity? Well, gravity's not real. You're begging the question by assuming gravity is real. Then you're begging the question by assuming space is real. When it's not, it's all cartoon. So cool story, Glober, like all you got is fallacies. You guys got to grow up. It's 2020 and we're almost in 2021. Next up, thanks for your question. Vincent Dones has so explained shadows from below on Mount Rainier. Shadows from below on Mount Rainier? No, now all that is is the mountains above the clouds and it's blocking the light from reflecting off the bottom of the clouds. So not going up on the clouds, Globers. Otherwise the light would go up into your house when you're on the mountain and it doesn't. Do you guys understand how you debunk yourselves with your own goofy, gotcha questions? If the light went up on Mount Rainier, then if you're on Mount Rainier with a house, the light will go up into your house. That doesn't happen. Snap out of it. Gotcha. And thanks so much for your question, very sassy. This one, let's see. Sillian Holland says, so if I leave meat outside the door in Alaska at night, will it be rotten meat the next morning? Seriously? Well, it depends on the magnitude of the moon. Depends on if it's cloudy or not out, guys. So there's lots of influence. I want to do this test, I do. I just been so busy with everything else, but I'll get to it, I promise, I promise guys, I will. Next up, Brian Cornell, thanks for your question, said, flat earthers do not have to prove anything. Here's what we know, globes curve the earth does not. Therefore, earth is not a globe. I went to flattoberfest with Brian, he's awesome. He's one of my best friends. Honey is that. And stupid horror energy strikes again. She's in the house, she is ready to rumble. She says, quote unquote, vacuum of space isn't quote unquote next to earth's atmosphere. The further we go from the earth's surface, the thinner the atmosphere you, the further the atmosphere gets until it is nonexistent. Yeah, okay. So you have no barrier. So you have a violation of second law of thermodynamics. That is a really cool story. Next, TJ Snape, thanks for your question, says, why not bet it all, Nathan? Can get in a boat and sail to the south on a live stream, show us all how it goes, find the wall, unless you're a coward. Oh my gosh, my buddy Marty went to Antarctica. He had an icebreaker with a million pounds of steel in the front of the boat, and they would crush through walls of ice, two stories tall, James, as tall as two-story house, thick of ice. And they want me to just like what, jump in my tugboat and head down to Antarctica to what, show them it's really cold down there, or what, go look for an edge, or what, get turned around by the treaty. I mean, you guys are goofy, you go do it. Why don't you go to Antarctica? Why don't you go find the earth curve, email me, and then I'll be a glober, we can all sing that the news is real and the government loves us. Next up, level 314. Thanks for your question, said, Nathan, are you willing to debate someone who does have multiple ways to calculate our value, or are you only willing to do that with Aaron, who has no method? If you're not a NASA employee or a PhD, you can pay my fee and I will debate you. Email me, flattersflyers.gmail.com. Next question, Cillian Holland says, James, we've talked about this Cillian thing, it's with a hard C. Oh, you're right. So Cillian Holland, I'm so sorry, this whole time I've been butchering it. Cillian Holland also said, applied neuroscience, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha. Yeah, fair enough, cool story. Next, thanks for your question, Gabriel K says, what I learned in the past years, both can be right and wrong. We all have an agenda and YouTube is a good platform for that. It's just entertainment. Cool, sorry, yeah, just here to entertain, yeah, I'm obviously just juggling and doing tricks for you guys, just trying to entertain. Gotcha, and thanks for your question. This one comes in from Gabriel K who says, we just read that, sorry. Carl Sagan, thanks for your question, says, all my love and respect, James, sorry. Well, thank you for your kind words and no reason to be sorry, I don't think you did anything. They said, Carl Sagan also said, if you're looking for a book, please get the best that money can't buy by Jack Fresco. Thanks for that, and Michael Krezia, appreciate your question, says, what are some basic tenants that you did when you first began testing Earth? Yeah, I saw someone in the chat freaking out that I said cold moonlight. That was one of the first tests I did, because I figured if moonlight is cold, it can't be hot sunlight reflecting off the moon. So I got a $30 laser thermometer, did that test, figured I had a six to eight degree difference during a super moon. I also did long distance observations with my P900, which I upgraded to a P1000, started doing star trails. Also star trails don't intersect the marine horizon. Then I went and observed the green flash myself and we did infrared from a helicopter. That's not really something you could do, but yeah, done it all. That's a good place to start though, get a P900, P1000, go out, try and find the curve. Very juicy, and thanks so much for your question. This one comes in from Michael Krezia. Oh, just got that, sorry. Vincent Doan, thanks for your question said, your point on stars is a straw man, Nathan. They are different constellations entirely. How does someone in South Africa see the same constellation at dawn as someone in Argentina or Australia at dusk? Yeah, that's very easy, guys. Set up a camera, take a time lapse of the sky. The sky is moving. So sometimes it's above Africa. Sometimes it's above Australia. Sometimes it's above South America. Not proven on the globe. Next, thanks for your question. The Laid Runner 0001 says, sorry I've already asked, but if the moon was made of barbecue ribs, would you eat it? That's a funny reference to an old SNL skit. I like that a lot. Next, Daniel Knight, thanks for your question said, Nathan. How can any of your data show the earth is flat when the overwhelming majority of what is visible is not flat. Only the surface of the ocean and some dry lake beds are flat. Only the surface of the ocean is flat, guys. Did you hear what that glober said? He said, guys, how do you think the earth's flat? It's only 70% of the earth, only 70% of the oceans that are flat. Oh, cool story. Can you maybe draw on like a bar napkin? 70% of a globe being flat water. I'd love to see that cartoon drawing. That'd be hilarious. Very sassy. And thanks for your question. This one comes in from, let me just reload here, folks. I think we've caught, we're close to being caught up. And if I'm like jerking around, I promise I'm not on drugs. The reason that my head is jerking is that I'm like, I'm a little bit sleep deprived, but promise I'm okay. And so I know that I probably look a little bit funky tonight, just letting you know I'm all right. Thanks for your question. This one comes in from Kylian Holland. Thanks so much, Ed. I effing love you, James. That means a lot, Kylian. It really does. I appreciate it. That's really kind of you. And we appreciate you. And so I want to say thanks so much, folks, for hanging out with us. If you love juicy debates, if you're sick in the head, like us, you love controversy, well hit that subscribe button as we have many more to come. Also, if you loved this debate and you thought, hey, that was a great use of my time, then please do hit that like. And also, maybe you're triggered though. Maybe you're like, man, this sucked. And you're like, I'm so triggered. Well, please take it out on that dislike button. Hey, let us know that can guide us because that's something we can use as feedback in terms of knowing what to instead do. And so thanks so much for your super chat. TJ Snape. Amazing says, yes, Nathan, getting turned around by the wall patrol on stream would be very convincing. Also, if we did it, you'd just crap your pants and say we lied. No, not at all. I mean, if you guys had video footage and recorded it, I'd check it out. I mean, I don't just think everyone's lying. If you have no incentive to lie, I don't think you're lying for no reason. But if you get $50 million a day of tax money and you've got harnesses and hairspray and wires and CGI glitches, yeah, I'm gonna think you're lying. Gotcha. And next up, thank you so much for your super chat. This one comes in from, you guessed it. Vincent Donne said, dusk and dawn can be the same time and the same constellation or the moon being upside down in the Southern hemisphere. James, draw a six on your ceiling and walk to the other side of the room. Now, does that prove you're on a ball if the six becomes a nine? No. Next question. You got it. And thanks for your question. Let's see. Ha. Lil-Lili Ajah says, going through soy withdrawals again. I totally am. You have no idea. And then thanks for your kind words. Simply secular said, thanks for trying to make something worthwhile out of this dumpster fire, especially when exhausted. Thanks for your encouragement. That really does mean a lot. The positivity, we love it, folks. We have all sorts of, believe it or not, it's crazy, folks, because it's like, James, are you serious? You have haters at this channel? Like some people don't like moderated bait? So we do. We have some people, one person, by the way, even in my own department, tried to go out of their way to stop our channel. A professor. So, some people, you know, but McKelsen, Interferometer, thanks for your support. And so they say, smash the dislike because this was a disaster. I agree. If you don't like something, you better smash that dislike. The joke's on you because it counts just as well as a like click. So thanks so much and, Carl Sagan, thanks for your super chat. Your super sticker of the cutest, I think that's like, a dog with, is it, are they wearing the Japan flag or is that more like a, I'm trying to think of what reference that is. Next, thanks for your super chat from Jane Doses. James, you're amazing. But I think you watch too much JLP. That's possible. Let's see. Oh, wall going up. I just love that phrase. He just makes you laugh. And, but yeah. Oh man. We hope JLP is doing well. We hope to have him back again too. So, yes, we totally appreciate it. Thanks so much for your kind words. Appreciate everybody in the chat. Willmar Kaster says, beta's. And stupid horror energy said, I'm a beta. You really shouldn't beat yourself up like that stupid horror energy. Very sad. James W, thanks for your super chat said Sunday. Me and Amy on modern day debate versus Smokey and Maddox. Oh yeah. It's happening. It's going to be epic. We're excited about it. Thanks James W for mentioning that. I'm behind on thumbnails, so I haven't gotten to make a thumbnail yet. But I'm definitely planning. And so, let's see. Jose J.G., my main man. Always, we love it. When even our critics tune in, I'm flattered. Jose J.G., are you a parody account? I like it. It's funny. And then next up, thanks for your super chat says, Earth first space later. That's their name said. How do we film Venus at night? Or Mercury, they're allegedly inside Earth's orbit towards the sun. So, you wouldn't see him at night. Not to mention Mercury is only 3,000 miles wide according to angular resolution limit. It would be 10 times too small to see. Gotcha. And thanks so much. Let me just double check who got everybody. Not an alpha male. And thanks for your, I think we're all caught up. And so, yeah, we do appreciate it. Yes, we love Aaron. And I'm serious about that. I've got no hard feelings. We do hope he's doing well. As you know, he left early. I think it was like, I made it up. He wasn't really going to a party. I think you guys knew I was joking. But thanks so much. We appreciate your, you have a dog? Oh, I just saw it in the live chat. Somebody, Bevan Riley said, nice doggo. And I was like, I don't have one. But yeah, that is a nice doggo. Oh, is it a boy or a girl? He's a boy, he has GEO. That's so cute. He looks very pleasant. And thanks so much. Appreciate your question. This one comes in from, you guessed it, F.E. News. Flatter's News says, was Aaron's evidence for the globe going to be saying not flat equals globe? I don't think so to defend him, given that he's not here. I'm trying to humor your super chat. He said, also a model is not science, science is observation and experimentation. And then they suggest the globe has none. And thanks so much, Lily, Aja for saying, please get some sleep. We love you, bud. Appreciate that. That means a lot. And let's see. Yeah, we honestly, we appreciate you guys so much. One thing that helps this channel grow a lot. There are two things. One, we actually like when people do aftershows. And a lot of people don't know this, but secretly I like it when people get triggered by us and slam us, because it's free publicity. I know that sounds very Machiavellian, but it's like, I can't remember. It was like, I can't remember his name. It was like the Soy Rhino or something. A fellow on Twitter was just totally trashing us. And I was like, you know what I ever noticed? I don't ever say anything back because I don't want to discourage them. So I don't want to be mean back because I just want to let them do it. And if I interrupt them, it might slow it down or like stop them. So we secretly like it when people trash us. It's kind of like, if you guys ever, so sorry to change this subject, but you guys ever seen the, like you ever listened to the story of like Vince McMahon and the WWE, like is that they like loved when people would criticize. And so people would criticize Vince McMahon and like, oh, this is so bad. And I feel like we're sometimes a little bit of the black sheep in, you know, kind of like the, I feel like sometimes this could be my, my, I feel like there are some people that don't kind of think of us as like I said, a black sheep and so. But yeah, we totally appreciate it. Let's see. We appreciate you guys. Thanks so much. But seriously, I'm not joking. Do feel free to hit that, that dislike button. All the engagement helps. And so we do appreciate that. And whatever it is, like or dislike, as long as it's authentic, that's my suggestion. Earth first space later. Thanks for Super Chat said. Selenillion equals globe death. Selenillion eclipses, that's where the sun and the moon are both visible to a single observer and the moon is eclipse. Now the globe Earth model says that it's in between the sun and the moon causing the eclipse, but that can't be the case. If a single observer can see both the sun and the moon above the horizon at the same time. So that's a Selenillion eclipses. It is a tongue twister James. Next up, Daniel Knight. Thanks for your question says. Nathan, does water in a bowl find its own level? Just because water finds its own level is no indication that the Earth is flat. You're violating the law of non-contradiction there. If the surface of Earth is mostly water and the surface of water is flat, the Earth is flat. Done. Gotcha, very sassy. And Killian Holland, thanks for your, I've been calling you silly in this whole time and thank you for your patience, seriously. And let's see. Thanks, Killian Holland says. Nathan, please tell me you're feeding that dog normal food and not vegan food. A dog that size needs a lot of protein. I haven't had him eat once since I've had him for two years. He's super healthy. My neighbor has the same kind of dog takes from the vet every six months because he's full of worms and parasites and stuff because he feeds a mistake every night. Also, if it's animal abuse to feed dogs that size, vegan food, why do they sell vegan food at PetSmart and PetCo? Like, do you guys have make no sense at all? Like that would be animal abuse to have dog food that doesn't contain dead animals if he needed dead animals. Do you feed the dog soy lint? No, he doesn't eat really any soy. He got organic, halo vegan dog food. So it's not GMO potatoes and rice and stuff like that. But, and then I feed him leftovers from everything I eat, lentils all the time. The oldest dog I've ever lived, lived on lentils, not dead animal carcass. So research that. Thanks so much, JP, who says, Nathan for president, F the negative demons, bro. And Fred Durst, so honored you would hang out. Am I remembering Fred Durst is the name of the lead singer, Limp Bizkit? Put it all for the nookie, yeah, with Christina Aguilera. Sweet red cap says, hey Natalie, we're so honored to have you here, Fred. I'm a huge Limp Bizkit fan. I'm just kidding, you remember it. So it's not the real Fred Durst, I'm sure. It was funny, like Unirock recently, there was like some stream where somebody, I don't know, somebody was impersonating William Shatner, like Captain Kirk. And I think he like passed it off as real. And I don't know, it was, I gotta kick out of it. Cause then William Shatner on Twitter, someone told William Shatner on Twitter and he was like, what? Who's doing this? But Fred Durst says, hey Natalie, how's your new Facebook group going? You have a new one, right? Yeah, we got a new one. We've already got 2,500 people in there. Gotcha. And so yes, we totally appreciate it. Yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah, let's see. But yeah, I always love just reading you guys in chat. We love you guys. Thanks so much for hanging out here. Seriously. Stupid horror energy says shop smart, shop smart. Thank you, appreciate that. And then yeah, let's see. James W says, we'll use 100% of the Super Chat revenue to purchase soy-based products. Please be generous, betas, that's true. I love my soy. I almost had a soy overdose today. That's why I'm so twitchy. And let's see, thanks so much though. We are going to wrap up. I want to say thanks so much, everybody. We really do appreciate you. We, for real, we do like RN. And so we hope things are OK with RN. And so we hope you had a good rest of his night. Isn't this crazy too, by the way? This election, three days. Nathan, are you going to run for president someday? I'm going to run out of this country one day. That's what I'm going to do. This place is a joke, bro. Do you think Biden's anywhere close to Trump? You're delusional. And I'm not even a Trump supporter. I just know 80, 20, 90, 10 support Trump. And the news is lying to you, hardcore. This election was one of the biggest hopes we've seen all year, but not the biggest. That's for sure. Gotcha. And thanks so much, though. Thanks Randolph Richardson, and we need critical thinking. And no, I'm not Canadian. I grew up in Wisconsin. And I lived in Minnesota for a long time. So I live near the Canadian border. So you are hearing the Northern United States accent. But yeah, so thank you so much, folks. We hope to see you tomorrow. As we said, that'll be a juicy one. Then Sunday, haven't made the thumbnail yet, working on it. It's going to be James W. and Amy versus Maddox, who nobody triggers like Maddox. He's very good at triggering people. He and Smokey will be partnering to trigger people together. And so thanks so much for your question. This one comes from, or is it? Let's see. That dog is going to die. That's what they said. Kylian Hollins says that dog is going to die very young. UA Whole vegan food is available because of your rent to buy politicians. No, James, I just did a video with Geo. He's been vegan for two years. He ran seven miles in 40 minutes. And a couple of them were four minute miles. And at the end of it, he was still ready to keep going. So you guys are goofy. If you think animals need to eat dead animals, no, not true. They're not all carnivores, humans. You can tell all the proofs right here in your mouth. You were not designed to eat dead animal carcass. You don't have claws for catching animals. So we have massive heart disease, massive heart attacks, massive high cholesterol, high blood pressure, hypertension. It's all stimulating from your diet, guys. Have fun with that. Yeah, well, that's very interesting. And so, yeah, thanks so much, folks. I hate saying goodbye because I just like being here. I just like hanging in. Yeah, I don't mind hanging with you too, James. I think you're cool. I get hot with you sometimes. I'm sorry. I don't mean to be rude to you ever. You're right. Aaron asked for his map. I got mad at you. I was like, you tell that. Sorry, bro. I have a feeling I know of a guy who would be up for debating you. Someone who his name came up as he said he might be willing to debate a flat earther after the election. And so I'm going to reach out to him and we'll see if that happens. And so let's see. Carnivorous Ape says, tell Nathan, you should buy a rabbit if you want a vegan pet. They're goofy. Cool story. But, yeah, thanks so much, everybody. We hope you have a great rest of your night. Hit that like or dislike button as long as it's authentic. Otherwise, don't hit it unless you mean it, OK? But, yeah, thanks so much. OK, no. Oh, vegan. I hear the chat's all triggered. They're all goofy. Such a nasty guy. All right, but thanks so much, folks. I hope you have a great, great rest of your Friday. Look at that Nathan fellow. He's the character. Thanks so much, folks. Take care. I'll see you tomorrow.