An expedition called “The Final Experiment” (TFE) was sent to Antarctica in December 2024 with the stated objective of proving there is a 24-hour sun in Antarctica. The hope of the expedition leader, Will Duffy, was that establishing that there is a 24-hour sun in Antarctica would disprove the flat earth and in turn prove the earth is a spinning globe. A team of flat earth shills and globe proponents allegedly succeeded in proving there is a 24-hour sun in Antarctica. The news of TFE allegedly proving that there was a 24-hour sun in Antarctica was broadcast worldwide. But it turns out that TFE was a hoax. Evidence has surfaced that the video proof produced by TFE was riddled with computer-generated graphics and other video special effects.
The evidence is clear. TFE is a massive hoax. The TFE group wants to shut me up in the worst way. They are desperate. First Jeran and now MCToon have doxed me and called on me to be fired. Indeed, Jeran has said in an email to me that was chock full of profane invectives that he is going to call who he thinks is my employer and demand that I be fired. This is the shrill call of miserable wretches who have been caught red-handed cheating. They are striking back to cover their fraud.
Jeran Campanella’s performance was sorely lacking. For the most part, Jeran hurled invectives and profanity at me. MCToon is not much better. But MCToon has a particular vehemence to his hatred of flat earthers. He thinks “flat earth is a science-denying cult.” He believes it is harmful to believe in a flat earth because belief in a flat earth ruins peoples’ ability to think critically. MCToon thinks that after a couple of years flat earthers “lack all ability at critical thinking.” He asks rhetorically, “what’s the harm in flat earth?” He answers: “It ruins families.” He then goes on a harangue where he states that people who believe in flat earth are not normal; they lack the ability to have normal interpersonal relationships.
MCToon characterizes flat earth not as an alternative theory of science but rather a differing religious belief where the heretics must be rooted out and the idea of flat earth must be quashed because it is harmful to society. MCToon sounds more like a religious priest than a scientist. Anyone who disagrees with the spherical earth is a heretic doing damage to families and society. They must be excommunicated from society. He has called for me to be fired.
That is the very sentiment expressed by National Geographic, during a documentary on those who believe in a flat earth. It seemed that the point of the documentary, which was stated repeatedly by the commentator and the orthodox scientific experts interviewed, was that belief in a flat earth is a dangerous threat to science and society. For example, during the video, the commentator (Mariana van Zeller) interviewed flat-earther, Mark Sargent, who explained that very powerful interests who rule the world from behind the scenes are responsible for the heliocentric myth. Van Zeller responded by saying: “This is for me where I think it gets really dangerous because we are going back to the dark ages. You’re essentially perpetuating ignorance by denying science. You know there is a real-life implication in all of this.” Van Zeller repeated the ominous warning of danger with the following closing remark in the documentary. “Thousands of years of empirical scientific evidence is now being dismissed as a mere conspiracy, and that’s where I think it really starts getting dangerous for all of us.” Van Zeller carefully chose the word “dangerous.”
Incidentally, the National Geographic documentary was exposed as yet another fraudulent attempt to discredit the flat earth.
Dear Reader, understand that when the media and people masquerading as “scientists” like MCToon condition people to believe that it is dangerous to our civilization to believe that the world is flat, the next step is to call for something to be done to address that danger. Such danger cannot be allowed to exist without being mitigated. A danger is a serious threat of harm, destruction, or even death. As such, the perceived danger could call for extreme measures to mitigate it.
It seems that the mainstream media is promoting the theme that information about the flat earth is “dangerous.” They start with the premise that believing in a flat earth is insane. For example, National Post offers this opinion of those who think that world is flat: “This lunatic fringe is inflexible, tireless and cannot be persuaded by evidence or reason.” Once the media establishes that it is batty to believe in a flat earth, they then apply a patina of dangerousness on that edifice of mental derangement.
People like MCToon and Jeran are every bit like the communist apparatchik who rat out neighbors for reward. They have learned to love Big Brother and anyone who disagrees with Big Brother has committed the thought crime of “wrongthink.” They are Big Brother’s obedient lap dogs to point out “wrongthinkers.” Every YouTube broadcast they do is chock full of invectives, threats, and ad hominem attacks. They do not have true science to support their argument. Their only strategy is to beat down their adversary by trying to bring shame and approbation upon them. They have learned the devil’s method to go after the pride of man.
For all that is in the world, the lust of the flesh, and the lust of the eyes, and the pride of life, is not of the Father, but is of the world. 1 John 2:16.
But they don’t understand that those with the unction of the Holy Spirit are not moved by pride. And so their strategy will not work with Christians who put on the whole armor of God because Christian soldiers understand that we wrestle not against flesh and blood.
Put on the whole armour of God, that ye may be able to stand against the wiles of the devil. For we wrestle not against flesh and blood, but against principalities, against powers, against the rulers of the darkness of this world, against spiritual wickedness in high places. (Ephesians 6:11-12)
MCToon made much ado about how he invited me to his show. I would not have accepted his invitation had I known of it anyway. Why would I appear on a show when I know that the primary purpose would be to dox me? And I was correct. That is exactly what he did. But MCToon made doubly certain that I would not show up. He sent the initial invitation with no Zoom link via email at 5:07 p.m. on the day of the show, which I did not see. And then, he sent the link for the Zoom call via email at 11:08 p.m. after his show had begun and I had gone to bed. I know it was after the show had begun because he announced at the 4:55 mark of his show that he was shooting me the email so I could join the show. Presumably, it was the 11:08 p.m. email containing the Zoom link. He then berated me on air for not Zoom calling to his show.
MCToon made great fanfare about how he was going to rebut my evidence. He tried to defend Anthony Powell’s video. He rambled on unconvincingly trying to explain how the mountain in the opening scene of Powell’s video suddenly changed its appearance within seconds. I won’t try to explain MCToon’s babbling nonsense; you can watch his video and see for yourselves.
He then said that Powell’s video proved the globe and disproved the flat earth because the sun appeared first in the southern sky. I could not believe my ears. He must think his audience is dense. The whole point of my articles was that the sun in Powell’s video is CGI. MCToon is pretending that I have not made that argument when he knows otherwise. I made the point that Powell’s video shows a fake sun making a phony 360-degree path. The Powell sun is CGI. MCToon did not address my evidence that the sun in the southern sky in the video is fake. I showed how the sun in the video did not behave as the actual sun would behave. He ignored that and pretended that everyone agreed that the sun in Powell’s video was real and thus the sun starting in the south meant the earth is a globe.
You can see CGI glitches in Anthony Powell’s infamous fake depiction of a 24-hour in Antarctica during his documentary film. You can see Powell’s shenanigans begin at the 17:30 mark in his documentary. Powell’s video has been exposed as a phony depiction of a 24-hour sun. Below are a series of screenshots from Powell’s video. MCToon, as did Jeran, stayed clear of those screenshots. I have placed a red circle around the circumference of the sun so that you can perceive more clearly the CGI glitch. You can see the CGI sun engulfing the lamp pole in sunlight in image 1. But the software is not able to adjust for the sun going behind the light pole accurately and we see in image 2 the very thin light pole completely blocking the sun. There is only a sliver of light across the thin width of the pole. A moment later the sun appears in image 3 on the other side of the pole to again engulf the lamp pole in sunlight. The sun then approaches the light itself in image 4. The software has the sun engulfing the light in sunlight. But in image 5 we see another strange anomaly where the sun is being blocked by a clear lamp cover and a translucent light bulb. The computer software was unable to distinguish between clear objects, translucent objects, and opaque objects. It treated the clear lamp and its translucent bulb as if they were opaque and instructed it to block the sun. Finally, in image 6, we see the CGI sun emerging from behind the clear lamp. These unnatural actions by the sun are telltale signs of CGI. Why use CGI to fake a 24 sun in Antarctica? They must fake it because the earth is not a spinning globe. A spinning globe requires a 24-hour sun in Antarctica. But the earth is flat and stationary. Notably, Anthony Powell served as a technical advisor for The Final Experiment.
I originally claimed that the change in orientation of the cloud in the sky in Jeran’s video was evidence of CGI. MCToon argued that the change in the orientation of the cloud in Jeran’s video is explained by lens barrel distortion. I have examined that issue, and I cannot refute what he has said. The cloud could be CGI, but because it can be explained by lens barrel distortion, I can no longer claim that the change in the orientation of the cloud in Jeran’s video proves it was CGI. I believe that CGI was used during TFE, and there is strong evidence that CGI was used, but the behavior of that cloud can be explained by lens barrel distortion.
MCToon offers a $100,000 challenge wager, whereby he would travel to Antarctica with any flat earther. If there were a 24-hour sun then he would win $100,000 from the flat earther; and if there was not a 24-hour sun, the flat earther would win $100,000 from him. Each person would incur his own travel expenses ($40,000). The problem with MCToon’s challenge is that it assumes clear skies in Antarctica. He has made no mention of the possibility of an overcast sky. Why would anyone enter into a wager that would cost $40,000 just to participate when the stated competition cannot be guaranteed to even happen? It is not rational. It would be like betting on who could fly a kite the highest when the location for the competition is known to often have no wind. But the parties must incur $40,000 non-refundable travel expenses to get there to find out. MCToon’s challenge is irrational.
We already know that the TFE crowd are cheaters; there is no way I would advise anyone to accept MCToon’s challenge. It is a bluff, you would be wasting your time, and MCToon simply cannot be trusted. This kind of thing has been done before. Trusting flat earthers have been hoodwinked in wagers by devilish schemers before. I explain in my book, The Sphere of Influence, how, in 1870, Alfred Russel Wallace swindled John Hampden out of 500 English pounds in a wager about whether the Bedford Canal would be flat. It was all a clever flim-flam.
This is a bluff by MCToon. But he claims he is sincere. To ensure nobody accepts his wager, he insults any potential participants by saying he would not sit near them on the plane or stay in the same hotel because such a disgusting person who would accept his challenge is a “piece of crap.” He said once he sees the sun in Antarctica the other person can “hitchhike to the South Pole, I don’t care. Go find a crevasse and jump in it.” MCToon is not a nice man. He does not truly want anyone to accept his offer. His offer is just a lying gambit to shut down debate about the flat earth.
We know that the TFE group was not concerned about clear skies in 2024. How could they be so sure there would be clear skies? The answer is that the fix was in. As I have demonstrated, TFE planned from the beginning to use video special effects to fake the 24-hour sun in Antarctica.
Natural science is the establishment of the cause of naturally occurring phenomena through using the scientific method. It does not apply to the geometric shape or aspect of earth; for that, you need measurements.
what is your point??? “Science” says the earth is 25,000 miles in circumference with curvature drop at 8 inches per mile square.
What you are talking about is pseudoscience. Pseudoscience is any body of knowledge purported to be scientific or supported by science but which fails to comply with the scientific method. In other words, calling something “science” doesn’t make it science. There is no scientific evidence that the earth is flat or a globe; it’s a category error.
You make no sense and sound ignorant. There is PLENTY of scientific evidence that the Earth is flat. Amateur balloon footage at 120,000+ feet, No-fish eye lense, camera panning in 360 degrees, horizon still at eye LEVEL and NO curvature.
Water- the greatest proof of a flat plane. Large bodies of water need a container and always lays Flat (called Sea Level). Water always finds and seeks its LEVEL. This is real “science” which is observable, testable,and repeatable.
God’s Word also teaches in Genesis 1 we live an enclosed system with waters above and waters below and the waters are compassed with bounds.
You still have no point to make because psuedo-science says the earth is 25,000 miles in circumference,with an 8 inch per mile square curvature drop and yet we see something total different with amateur balloon footage.
Naturally observed phenomenon: Horizon at 120,000+ feet. What’s the hypothesis?
Naturally observed phenomenon: Water lying level. What’s the hypothesis?
I am aware of what the Scriptures say about earth. I can prove that we live in an enclosed system because of the fact that we are breathing pressurized gas, and gas pressure requires a container as a prerequisite.
> You still have no point to make because psuedo-science says the earth is 25,000 miles in circumference,with an 8 inch per mile square curvature drop and yet we see something total different with amateur balloon footage.
I said that natural science does not apply to the geometric shape or aspect of earth. You tried to rebut that by saying that “’Science’ says the earth is 25,000 miles in circumference with curvature drop at 8 inches per mile square,” which I then called out as pseudoscience. You have now acknowledged my point that it was pseudoscience.
The fact that we have a horizon is a flat earth proof.
“A horizontal line is one which runs left-to-right across the page. In geometry, a horizontal line is one which runs from left to right across the page. It comes from the word ‘horizon’, in the sense that horizontal lines are parallel to the horizon. The horizon is horizontal” https://www.mathopenref.com/horizontal.html.
“A horizontal line is a straight line that is parallel to the horizon or the ground. It has zero slope.”
https://www.cuemath.com/geometry/horizontal-line/
The horizon is only exactly at your eye level when it is at sea level. As you rise in altitude, your eye level is above surface level. The horizon does rise with altitude, but because you are above surface level, you consequently will see slightly more of the sky than of the ground.
Water does lie level in its containment, and this can be measured.
Neither of these has anything to do with natural science and the scientific method. Again, natural science is an empirical method for establishing the cause of naturally occurring phenomena.
You’re trying to sound intelligent with your funny “hypothesis” and your “natural science and the scientific method” talk, but at the end of the day, The Earth can be observed as a Circular, enclosed, stationary, flat plane.
Your ad hominem attack and non-sequitur fallacy have been dismissed.
Have a nice day 🙂
LOL The Earth is a circular, enclosed, stationary, flat plane which you CAN BE Observed, tested, and repeated. This is called true SCIENCE, retard!
You think you’re funny, but you’re only making an idiot out of yourself. At the end the day, The Earth is flat and stationary. God’s word teaches it and we have evidence visually for it that you seem to be really dumbed down about. Take your ” hypothesis” and shove it!
The Earth is indeed obviously and measurably flat. Observations and measurements are NOT natural science.
“The scientific method **__REQUIRES__** that a hypothesis be ruled out or modified if its predictions are clearly and repeatedly incompatible with **EXPERIMENTAL TESTS**. Further, no matter how elegant a theory is, __its predictions __MUST AGREE__ with **EXPERIMENTAL** results__ if we are to believe that it is a valid description of nature. In physics, as in every **EXPERIMENTAL** science, **”EXPERIMENT IS SUPREME”** and **__EXPERIMENTAL Verification__** of hypothetical predictions is **__ABSOLUTELY NECESSARY__**.”
rochester edu
“__Scientific Hypothesis__ – a special kind of **__PREDICTION__** that forecasts how the __INDEPENDENT VARIABLE__ will affect the __DEPENDENT VARIABLE__.”
colostate edu (archived)
“**__Hypothesis__** :
The hypothesis should also contain a **__PREDICTION__** about its verifiability. For example, if the HYPOTHESIS is true, then (1) should happen when (2) is manipulated.
The first blank (1) is the **__DEPENDENT VARIABLE__** (it depends on what you are doing in the second blank) and the second blank (2) is the **__INDEPENDENT VARIABLE__** (you manipulate it to get a reaction). There should be no other variables in the experiment that may affect the dependent variable.”
McLelland, Christine V: The Nature of Science and The Scientific Method; The Geological Society of America
geosociety org
“The scientist applies his/her present knowledge to **__PREDICT__** the effect of the __independent variable__ on the __dependent variable__. The **__PREDICTION__** is a statement of the expected results of the __EXPERIMENT__ based on the __HYPOTHESIS__. The prediction is often an “if/then statement.”
psu edu
“Cosmology may look like a science, **__BUT IT ISN’T A SCIENCE__** . … A basic tenet of science is that you can do repeatable **EXPERIMENTS**, and **__YOU CAN’T DO THAT in Cosmology__**.”
Gunn, J., cited in: Cho, Adrian, A singular conundrum: How odd is our universe? Science 3171848–1850, 2007.
I removed the links from the citations because otherwise it takes a long time for these comments to be approved by moderation. Let me know if you want them.
Pseudoscience: Any body of knowledge purported to be scientific or supported by science but which fails to comply with the scientific method.
Your ad hominem attacks, non-sequitur fallacies, projection, and scientific illiteracy have been noted.
Bub bye now! 🙂
“You have not presented any scientific evidence, nor have you admitted that you were wrong.”
Amateur balloon footage showing no curvature is scientific evidence of flat earth. You truely are an IDIOT! And No, you don’t believe God’s Word, it’s obvious, so you play “strawman fallacies” as your arguements in your stupid verbage because you’ve been defeated. I’m convinced now I’m just really talking with a globetard reprobate at this point.
Scientific evidence REQUIRES that a hypothesis is tested by an experiment.
“The scientific method **__REQUIRES__** that a hypothesis be ruled out or modified if its predictions are clearly and repeatedly incompatible with **EXPERIMENTAL TESTS**. Further, no matter how elegant a theory is, __its predictions __MUST AGREE__ with **EXPERIMENTAL** results__ if we are to believe that it is a valid description of nature. In physics, as in every **EXPERIMENTAL** science, **”EXPERIMENT IS SUPREME”** and **__EXPERIMENTAL Verification__** of hypothetical predictions is **__ABSOLUTELY NECESSARY__**.”
rochester edu
> Amateur balloon footage showing no curvature is scientific evidence of flat earth.
This is a baseless assertion.
What was the hypothesis? Let’s see if you present it.
> You truely are an IDIOT! And No, you don’t believe God’s Word, it’s obvious, so you play “strawman fallacies” as your arguements in your stupid verbage because you’ve been defeated. I’m convinced now I’m just really talking with a globetard reprobate at this point.
Nice projection.
Amatuer balloon footage is a TEST…you moron! It showed that there is NO CURVATURE. You’re either an idiot or an AI BOT
> Amatuer balloon footage is a TEST
It’s not a ‘scientific’ test, though.
Experiment: “Once the hypothesis has been established, it is time to TEST IT. The process of experimentation is what sets science apart from other disciplines, and it leads to discoveries every day. An EXPERIMENT is designed to PROVE or DISPROVE the Hypothesis. If your prediction is correct, you will not be able to reject the hypothesis.”
McLelland, Christine V: The Nature of Science and The Scientific Method; The Geological Society of America
Despite claiming several times that there was scientific evidence that the Earth is flat, you still have not presented even a scientific hypothesis, which is a prerequisite for scientific evidence.
Pseudoscience is any body of knowledge purported to be scientific or supported by science but which fails to comply with the scientific method. If you claim that something is scientific evidence, but it did not go through the scientific method, then it is pseudoscience.
The horizon itself IS EVIDENCE that the Earth is flat. However, it’s not ‘scientific’ evidence, because it did not go through the scientific method. It’s a category error to try to apply the scientific method to anything outside of cause and effect relationships in nature.
It is not possible to use natural science to prove the Earth is flat (as it is a category error). However, if you claim that you have scientific evidence of something, then you need to present evidence of your claim lest it remain a baseless assertion.
Again, I am not claiming that something has to have scientific validity in order to be a fact. For example, 1+1=2 is a fact while there is nothing scientific about it.
Please either present scientific evidence (a hypothesis and experiment) that the Earth is flat or admit that you were wrong.
Kind regards.
> Amatuer balloon footage is a TEST It’s not a ‘scientific’ test, though.”
YES IT IS..YOU RETARD! The equipment itself uses SCIENTIFIC measures and a visual presence that shows that there is NO CURVATURE! You don’t believe or know anything as you sound just like a glober arguing for their globe model seeking “man’s hypothesis” for some kind of proof. Your comments are full of uncertainty as you seem to want to deny your own senses by calling upon your own “science” to prove what exists. Amatuer balloon footage and P1000 Zoom camera’s are all “scientific” instruments used to TEST visually, which both clearly show there is no curvature. Goodbye retard!
You claimed that the footage from a balloon was a scientific test. However, you did not provide any evidence for that claim (what the hypothesis and experiment were). Repeating your baseless assertion that it is scientific evidence will not change the fact that it is only a baseless assertion.
> You don’t believe or know anything as you sound just like a glober arguing for their globe model seeking “man’s hypothesis” for some kind of proof. Your comments are full of uncertainty as you seem to want to deny your own senses by calling upon your own “science” to prove what exists.
Nice projection.
> Amatuer balloon footage and P1000 Zoom camera’s are all “scientific” instruments used to TEST visually, which both clearly show there is no curvature.
What was the scientific hypothesis for **your claimed scientific test**? What were the experiment results?
Yes, the Earth is flat and stationary. I’ve been saying that from the beginning. You really have no point to make, while you pretend to be “more intelligent” than others. I don’t need a “hypotheses” when I can just go to the Word of God for proof of a flat plane. What’s your “hypotheses” to Isaiah 40:21-22? Or are you gonna respond to that like a retard as well?
” Have ye not known? have ye not heard? hath it not been told you from the beginning? have ye not understood from the foundations of the earth?
It is he that sitteth upon the circle of the earth, and the inhabitants thereof are as grasshoppers; that stretcheth out the heavens as a curtain, and spreadeth them out as a tent to dwell in:”
> You really have no point to make, while you pretend to be “more intelligent” than others.
Projection detected.
> I don’t need a “hypotheses” when I can just go to the Word of God for proof of a flat plane.
That’s because natural science and the scientific method do not apply to the geometric aspect of Earth.
> What’s your “hypotheses” to Isaiah 40:21-22?
The scientific method is not applicable to Isaiah 40:21-22. I did not claim that it was science, so I do not need to provide a hypothesis. Do you get it?
> Or are you gonna respond to that like a retard as well?
Your loaded question has been discarded.
I don’t need your “hypothesis”. You sound stupid and are trying to sound smart. Flat Earth can be observed, tested, and repeated. True science is defined as observable, testable, and repeatable. God’s Word teaches a GEOCENTRIC Creation, which is the final authority in any discussion against any “scientific method”. Apparently, you don’t really understand. You claim to be on board with God’s circular, enclosed, stationary flat plane, then stop with your silly “hypothesis” talk. We can observe high altitude balloon footage showing a flat horizon that shows NO CURVATURE against their curvature of 8 inches per mile square formula. What more does it have to be explained to you?
The scientific method is not applicable to the geometric aspect of Earth.
> True science is defined as observable, testable, and repeatable.
“**Physics**, and **NATURAL SCIENCE** in general, is a reasonable enterprise **BASED ON VALID __EXPERIMENTAL EVIDENCE__**, criticism, and rational discussion. It provides us with knowledge of the Physical World, and it is **EXPERIMENT that provides the evidence that grounds this knowledge.**”
stanford edu
“The Scientific Method “__DISTINGUISHES SCIENCE__” from other forms of explanation because of its __REQUIREMENT__ of **’__SYSTEMATIC EXPERIMENTATION__’**.”
rochester edu
The __FINAL ARBITER__ of __TRUTH__ in ‘Science’ is **EXPERIMENT !!**
SEE Lewars, EG: Computational Chemistry — Introduction to the theory and application of Molecular and Quantum Mechanics; Third Edition 2016, p. 5.
I was NOT the one who claimed that there was ‘scientific’ evidence that the Earth was flat; YOU were (after I explained to you why there wasn’t any). I asked you for your hypotheses, and you didn’t have any. It wasn’t unreasonable of me to ask that of you, because you were the one who made a claim that there was “PLENTY of scientific evidence that the Earth is flat.”
> You sound stupid and are trying to sound smart.
> Apparently, you don’t really understand.
You should learn what projection is in psychology, because you’re exposing yourself.
At the end of the day, RETARD! The Earth is a circular, enclosed, stationary flat plane. God’s Word teaches it and it CAN BE OBSERVED with our own eyes. You really are dumb!
My original comment was:
> Natural science is the establishment of the cause of naturally occurring phenomena through using the scientific method. It does not apply to the geometric shape or aspect of earth; for that, you need measurements.
I suggest that you go back and reread. YOU were the one who claimed that there was “PLENTY of scientific evidence that the Earth is flat.” You were wrong, and instead of being humble and admitting it after I educated you on what science is, you decided to project your ignorance and stupidity onto me.
The Earth is indeed obviously and measurably flat. Observations and measurements are NOT natural science. The scientific method is NOT applicable to the geometric aspect of Earth.
You DO NOT need to provide a hypothesis or experiment if you didn’t claim that you have scientific evidence for something.
I hope you can figure this out. Have a nice day.
We DO have scientific evidence for a circular, enclosed, stationary, flat plane…IDIOT!
Here is one for you (using “science” and their own gadgets) to expose their lies! https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Bv9TK8ETE0E
Your video contained an observation. It did not go through the scientific method. It did not contain a scientific hypothesis and experiment.
Because you claimed that “we” “DO have scientific evidence for a circular, enclosed, stationary, flat plane,” what was the hypothesis? Remember that you didn’t just claim to have EVIDENCE, you claimed to have **__SCIENTIFIC__** evidence. Natural science requires that you use the scientific method. Believing that something is scientific won’t make it scientific, no matter how confused you are.
“The scientific method **__REQUIRES__** that a hypothesis be ruled out or modified if its predictions are clearly and repeatedly incompatible with **EXPERIMENTAL TESTS**. Further, no matter how elegant a theory is, __its predictions __MUST AGREE__ with **EXPERIMENTAL** results__ if we are to believe that it is a valid description of nature. In physics, as in every **EXPERIMENTAL** science, **”EXPERIMENT IS SUPREME”** and **__EXPERIMENTAL Verification__** of hypothetical predictions is **__ABSOLUTELY NECESSARY__**.”
rochester edu
“**__Hypothesis__** :
The hypothesis should also contain a **__PREDICTION__** about its verifiability. For example, if the HYPOTHESIS is true, then (1) should happen when (2) is manipulated.
The first blank (1) is the **__DEPENDENT VARIABLE__** (it depends on what you are doing in the second blank) and the second blank (2) is the **__INDEPENDENT VARIABLE__** (you manipulate it to get a reaction). There should be no other variables in the experiment that may affect the dependent variable.”
McLelland, Christine V: The Nature of Science and The Scientific Method; The Geological Society of America
geosociety org
Pseudoscience: Any body of knowledge purported to be scientific or supported by science but which fails to comply with the scientific method.
So in other words, you don’t really believe God’s Word. You want some “scientific method” to prove the existence of God’s created earth described in scripture, while yet your own eyes (and senses) can actually see it. You actually sound like a globetard trying so hard to prove a globe. You make NO SENSE at all! You don’t need some “scientific method” when the evidence sits right in front of you! TARD!
> So in other words, you don’t really believe God’s Word.
That is not true.
> You want some “scientific method” to prove the existence of God’s created earth described in scripture, while yet your own eyes (and senses) can actually see it.
That is also not true. I’ve told you that the scientific method is not applicable to the geometric aspect of Earth, and that observations and measurements are not science. I’ve also told you that the scientific method is not applicable to the Scriptures. I asked for the hypothesis of YOUR claimed scientific evidence.
YOU were the one who claimed (more than once) to have ‘scientific’ evidence of the Earth being flat — not me. This was after I explained why there wasn’t any.
The Earth is obviously and measurably flat. Measurements of something being flat is EVIDENCE that it’s flat. However, it’s NOT ‘scientific’ evidence that it’s flat. To be perfectly clear, I am not claiming that something has to have scientific validity in order to be a fact. For example, 1+1=2 is a fact, but there is nothing scientific about it.
Scientific evidence REQUIRES that a hypothesis is tested by an experiment. You have not presented a hypothesis. Natural science is the establishment of the cause of naturally occurring phenomena through using the scientific method. It’s a category error to try to apply the scientific method to something outside of cause and effect relationships. You can’t use natural science to prove that your kitchen floor is flat or that 1+1=2. Do you understand?
Are you going to admit that there is no ‘scientific’ evidence of the earth being flat?
We don’t need a “hypotheses” to proof the earth is flat. You’re pretending to be smart with your unreadable verbage when in reality you are ignoring what true Science is defined…. as “OBSERVABLE” (we can see and observe the earth is flat and stationary)….”TESTABLE”…the amateur high altitude balloon footage is one of MANY tests that have been done to show the earth is flat and stationary (while we can see a flat horizon with the sun and moon that are LOCAL lights in the sky)…”REPEATABLE”….this high altitude balloon footage (120,000+ feet) has been done many, many times…..this is called SCIENCE you GOOFBALL! Honestly, you seem to me as someone who doesn’t truely believes the earth is flat.
> We don’t need a “hypotheses” to proof the earth is flat.
That’s correct! If you recall my FIRST comment:
“Natural science is the establishment of the cause of naturally occurring phenomena through using the scientific method. It does not apply to the geometric shape or aspect of earth; for that, you need measurements.”
On the other hand, ‘scientific’ evidence ABSOLUTELY REQUIRES that a hypothesis is tested by an experiment. YOU have claimed more than once that there was “scientific evidence” of the Earth being flat. You have NOT presented a hypothesis, nor have you admitted to being wrong.
> You’re pretending to be smart with your unreadable verbage when in reality you are ignoring what true Science is defined
Projection detected.
“**Physics**, and **NATURAL SCIENCE** in general, is a reasonable enterprise **BASED ON VALID __EXPERIMENTAL EVIDENCE__**, criticism, and rational discussion. It provides us with knowledge of the Physical World, and it is **EXPERIMENT that provides the evidence that grounds this knowledge.**”
stanford edu
“The Scientific Method “__DISTINGUISHES SCIENCE__” from other forms of explanation because of its __REQUIREMENT__ of **’__SYSTEMATIC EXPERIMENTATION__’**.”
rochester edu
The __FINAL ARBITER__ of __TRUTH__ in ‘Science’ is **EXPERIMENT !!**
SEE Lewars, EG: Computational Chemistry — Introduction to the theory and application of Molecular and Quantum Mechanics; Third Edition 2016, p. 5.
Pseudoscience is any body of knowledge purported to be scientific or supported by science but which fails to comply with the scientific method. (That’s what you’ve presented.)
> Honestly, you seem to me as someone who doesn’t truely believes the earth is flat.
You are correct that I do not “believe” (accept without evidence) that the Earth is flat; I KNOW that it is because that’s how it’s observed and measured.
I believe (and that God’s Word teaches) a circular,enclosed, stationary, flat plane which is the FINAL Authority over your ridiculous Hypothesis. God’s Word tells you that it is enclosed and stationary which starts in Genesis 1, but you need more “evidence” so you can write more retardum. You don’t believe GOD at all and you can’t “KNOW” something of GOD unless GOD spiritually grants it to you.
1 Corinthians 2:14 “But the natural man receiveth not the things of the Spirit of God: for they are foolishness unto him: neither can he know them, because they are spiritually discerned.”
The evidence is given is God’s Word, as one who believes GOD (which you apparently don’t) I take God’s Word over some man talking about a “Hypothesis” for proof of what the scriptures proclaim.
> over your ridiculous Hypothesis
My hypothesis? I didn’t present one.
> God’s Word tells you that it is enclosed and stationary which starts in Genesis 1, but you need more “evidence” so you can write more retardum.
Straw man fallacy. (+ more projection?)
> You don’t believe GOD at all
> one who believes GOD (which you apparently don’t)
More straw man fallacies.
You claimed that there was “PLENTY of scientific evidence that the Earth is flat.” You have not presented any scientific evidence, nor have you admitted that you were wrong.
What will they try next time ? They are getting more desperate every day. I am looking at a fairly new Bit-chute channel called “Planet Blue” who’s creator calls for extreme measures to eradicate all flat earthers !
I personally know that the Bible my source of my authority says there are two luminaries in the sky and stars the rest is satanic inspired bullshit no more God is not to be mocked thank you