John le Bon gives a couple of Ballers a chance, and they don’t do much to convince.
Their numbers seem to add up (to them) and their shadow measurements of right angled triangles make sense to me when they explain lines of latitude. I heard repeated that the only way these numbers work is if the Earth is a ball.
Maths aside, why can we get a verifiable picture of this ball from way up? Explain the nonsense around Antarctica. Cosines and tangents don’t explain those anomalies.
Join Matrix Decode, David Weiss and host John le Bon for another installment of the Ball Earth Skeptic Roundtable. This is a special episode featuring three ball earthers who will be given a fair chance to argue for and defend their ball earth beliefs. Joining us first will be Critical Unity. Later in the show we will be joined by Reds Rhetoric (plus one).
The two ‘brains’ seemed to set-out to bombard us with maths.
I was a little disappointed that John didn’t get much of a chance to make his case with them; he let them bang on for ages and then he handed over to Matrix.
Matrix is alright, but he’s a guy I’ve listened to making a determined case for Judy Wood’s research.
Was he our very best ‘brain’ here, at this point?
He started by accusing Ziller of presenting a ‘strawman’. This clearly got Ziller’s goat as he then proceeded to accuse Matrix of presenting ‘a strawman’ with just about every point he made.
There were so many ‘strawmen’ flying about, it was a bit mad. Ziller even got to the point of making an impassioned plea to presumably the whole world, to just agree with him that the point Matrix had just made ‘was a strawman‘.
Ziller proved himself unable to have an intelligent conversation.
Ziller is a professional shill..!
Here is a couple of good videos that gives some pretty good evidence that the earth is a sphere.
The Earth Is Flat, Rory Cooper Says So! Part I: The Polaris Conundrum.
Interesting and informative stuff from Ziller, despite the fake sardonic laughter and the condescending tone.
He is THE debunker, by all accounts, after all. Here he addresses the issue of the horizon and the Bedford Level experiment.
My interest in the shape of things and our perspective, was piqued by The Bedford Level experiment and it’s apparently accepted results. I had the impression that it had proved that we can see perfectly straight over 6 miles and that Science had admitted it, with the caveat that it was due to refraction.
Ziller seems to mock this notion here, as he tells how the thing Rowbotham didn’t do was have ‘controls’ and that a clever scientist came along and added a control, half way. This marker was seen to rise and therefore curvature was proved.
This, if true, would say a lot to me.
It would answer my main question regarding the dastardly word ‘flat’ when talking about what our model really is.
And it is presumably fairly easily repeated.
But surely Rowbotham used controls at every mile didn’t he … ? Ziller says he didn’t.