Stew Peters 15-minute Flat Earth Segment

[Shawn Henry]

The Stew Peters Show actually did an entire segment about the Flat Earth.

They brought on Flat Earther David Weiss who offered 3000 ounces of Silver to anyone who could bring a single globe earth proof.

Never did I think a big network would give this the time of day. Hats off to the Stew crew because they'll for sure take some heat for this one. The host of that particular segment said he would like to create more content and have Dave back on bi-weekly.

Any takers on the silver?

https://www.stewpeters.com/video/2022/1 ... arth-lies/

[Jonesy]

A guy who believes in flat earth, yet believes aliens from outer space are “actually, scientifically impossible”. I don’t know, I really appreciate guys who question everything, but that never-ending rabbit hole goes down too deep sometimes. That’s a giant of a mess to unravel. Some of the videos on his site are terrible, just throwing out assertions all over the place without much reference and leaving the watcher to pick up the pieces. And some of the references he chooses are questionable. The thing is, is he going off the spirit of faith, or the spirit of questioning everything? I think it’s the latter. I did think the video he has about Elon was interesting.

[h_p]

The question is what would he actually accept as proof? If a person can make up a conspiracy theory of unlimited size and scope based on no evidence whatsoever to disregard all evidence, can anything actually be proven?

Serious question.

[Atrasado]

The Stew Peters Show actually did an entire segment about the Flat Earth.

They brought on Flat Earther David Weiss who offered 3000 ounces of Silver to anyone who could bring a single globe earth proof.

Never did I think a big network would give this the time of day. Hats off to the Stew crew because they'll for sure take some heat for this one. The host of that particular segment said he would like to create more content and have Dave back on bi-weekly.

Any takers on the silver?

https://www.stewpeters.com/video/2022/1 ... arth-lies/

How about Magellan? How about satellites? How about the Rutan Voyager? How about the shot from the World View test balloon in 2015 which clearly shows the curvature of the earth? I know, to a true believer, none of those things count. They were all faked in order to trick us. But, to me they count.

[Shawn Henry]

How about Magellan? How about satellites? How about the Rutan Voyager? How about the shot from the World View test balloon in 2015 which clearly shows the curvature of the earth? I know, to a true believer, none of those things count. They were all faked in order to trick us. But, to me they count.

We are simply told claims and told history. Stories and claims don't make reality. High altitude footage taken with a fisheye lens with curve an image. Apply a correction to the fisheye lens and the image is straight. The Felix Baumgartner RedBull jump was higher and is shows flatness. Ask yourself, what do you truly know for yourself.

[BenMcCrea]

[h_p]

I'm guessing using an actual flight map to prove it won't be sufficient.

[Allison]

Are you pointing out that the fish eye lens is distorting the horizon? Not everyone will recognize that.

Start watching at 1:00 and see how the curve bends as the horizon move ms away from the center of the screen. But then look at 0:47 and you see a very flat horizon line outside of the open hatch.

Shawn was right that this jump proves flatness. Or, are we to believe that New Mexico occupied 1/8 of the globe that day?

[h_p]

Are you pointing out that the fish eye lens is distorting the horizon? Not everyone will recognize that.

Start watching at 1:00 and see how the curve bends as the horizon move ms away from the center of the screen. But then look at 0:47 and you see a very flat horizon line outside of the open hatch.

Shawn was right that this jump proves flatness. Or, are we to believe that New Mexico occupied 1/8 of the globe that day?

I don't see how it could prove flatness. The small portion of the horizon that's visible from the 0:47 shot probably isn't enough to see anything conclusive at 128k feet. Maybe if you were a few thousand miles higher. But yeah, that shot is definitely not from a fish-eye lense, at least. I'd really like to know at what height you should expect to start seeing curvature. What little I googled said around 60k feet, but that's with the naked eye where you can see a LOT more of the horizon, and even then, I wouldn't expect that to show much.

But the outside shots were clearly distorted, and is 100% not even evidence, much less proof, of a round earth. Globers need to stop using this kind of crappy evidence to prove their position.

[Allison]

Are you pointing out that the fish eye lens is distorting the horizon? Not everyone will recognize that.

Start watching at 1:00 and see how the curve bends as the horizon move ms away from the center of the screen. But then look at 0:47 and you see a very flat horizon line outside of the open hatch.

Shawn was right that this jump proves flatness. Or, are we to believe that New Mexico occupied 1/8 of the globe that day?

I don't see how it could prove flatness. The small portion of the horizon that's visible from the 0:47 shot probably isn't enough to see anything conclusive at 128k feet. Maybe if you were a few thousand miles higher. But yeah, that shot is definitely not from a fish-eye lense, at least. I'd really like to know at what height you should expect to start seeing curvature. What little I googled said around 60k feet, but that's with the naked eye where you can see a LOT more of the horizon, and even then, I wouldn't expect that to show much.

But the outside shots were clearly distorted, and is 100% not even evidence, much less proof, of a round earth. Globers need to stop using this kind of crappy evidence to prove their position.

I propose that in an imaginary balloon ride as high as we want to go, the horizon would constantly be expanding, and whether a pizza or a basketball, the edge would look round, in that sense. Right? But traveling away from a ball, eventually we would expect to see the horizon falling away from view. My husband, whose primary career has been in electro-optics, has said that he is not sure we would have depth perception at such tremendous distances. So just my thought: maybe we would see some shadowing as we keep ascending over a ball.

Hope I am explaining this okay, but even while rising over a pizza shape, the horizon would presumably appear round until we got high enough to see the true outer edge.

[Jonesy]

Are you pointing out that the fish eye lens is distorting the horizon? Not everyone will recognize that.

Start watching at 1:00 and see how the curve bends as the horizon move ms away from the center of the screen. But then look at 0:47 and you see a very flat horizon line outside of the open hatch.

Shawn was right that this jump proves flatness. Or, are we to believe that New Mexico occupied 1/8 of the globe that day?

I don't see how it could prove flatness. The small portion of the horizon that's visible from the 0:47 shot probably isn't enough to see anything conclusive at 128k feet. Maybe if you were a few thousand miles higher. But yeah, that shot is definitely not from a fish-eye lense, at least. I'd really like to know at what height you should expect to start seeing curvature. What little I googled said around 60k feet, but that's with the naked eye where you can see a LOT more of the horizon, and even then, I wouldn't expect that to show much.

But the outside shots were clearly distorted, and is 100% not even evidence, much less proof, of a round earth. Globers need to stop using this kind of crappy evidence to prove their position.

Scale 24 miles (128k feet) on a globe and you realize it’s not much (diameter of earth is ~8k miles; ~25k mile circumference). Someone needs to find a really big globe (100 ft diameter?) that they can stick their head out of and measure the point of their eyeball where they’re satisfied at seeing a curvature. I think it would be scaled to at least 100 miles high to feel pretty good about seeing curvature.

[Jonesy]

Are you pointing out that the fish eye lens is distorting the horizon? Not everyone will recognize that.

Start watching at 1:00 and see how the curve bends as the horizon move ms away from the center of the screen. But then look at 0:47 and you see a very flat horizon line outside of the open hatch.

Shawn was right that this jump proves flatness. Or, are we to believe that New Mexico occupied 1/8 of the globe that day?

I don't see how it could prove flatness. The small portion of the horizon that's visible from the 0:47 shot probably isn't enough to see anything conclusive at 128k feet. Maybe if you were a few thousand miles higher. But yeah, that shot is definitely not from a fish-eye lense, at least. I'd really like to know at what height you should expect to start seeing curvature. What little I googled said around 60k feet, but that's with the naked eye where you can see a LOT more of the horizon, and even then, I wouldn't expect that to show much.

But the outside shots were clearly distorted, and is 100% not even evidence, much less proof, of a round earth. Globers need to stop using this kind of crappy evidence to prove their position.

I propose that in an imaginary balloon ride as high as we want to go, the horizon would constantly be expanding, and whether a pizza or a basketball, the edge would look round, in that sense. Right? But traveling away from a ball, eventually we would expect to see the horizon falling away from view. My husband, whose primary career has been in electro-optics, has said that he is not sure we would have depth perception at such tremendous distances. So just my thought: maybe we would see some shadowing as we keep ascending over a ball.

Hope I am explaining this okay, but even while rising over a pizza shape, the horizon would presumably appear round until we got high enough to see the true outer edge.

Oh, geez. That’s a good point. In that case, to satisfy people who believe in flat earth, you’re going to need to see a lot of land to ensure it fits the globe model. So, I think 1k miles is needed.

[h_p]

I propose that in an imaginary balloon ride as high as we want to go, the horizon would constantly be expanding, and whether a pizza or a basketball, the edge would look round, in that sense. Right? But traveling away from a ball, eventually we would expect to see the horizon falling away from view. My husband, whose primary career has been in electro-optics, has said that he is not sure we would have depth perception at such tremendous distances. So just my thought: maybe we would see some shadowing as we keep ascending over a ball.

Hope I am explaining this okay, but even while rising over a pizza shape, the horizon would presumably appear round until we got high enough to see the true outer edge.

Yeah, I think I understand what you're saying. And yes, I agree with your husband, depth perception does dramatically drop off the further away things are. In fact, being able to judge how far away something is is actually dependent on other factors that our brain uses to compare it to things it's already familiar with, such as relative size and atmospheric distortion.

Anyways, whatever line or curve you see looking out to the distance is going to be a perceived edge between the sky and the ground, right? So here's how I imagine it...

In my mind's eye, as I'm getting higher and higher, I would be able to see pizza everywhere until I get high enough to see the crust. Whatever is obstructing my view of the crust (pepperonis and cheese clumps) would make the roundness or flatness inconclusive. But once I get above all the obstructions, I can now see as far as light would travel. The distance would be dependent on haze, brightness, etc. Let's assume things are super clear and I can see all the way to the crust. In that case, yes, I'd definitely see a curve since the pizza is round, though flat. But I can see all the pizza all the way to the crust at this point, as soon as I'm above the cheese. The higher I get, the less foreshortening I see, and the objects on the pizza become clearer until they, too, get too far away to distinguish.

On a basketball, as I get above all the little bumps, I'll see a horizon. The higher I get, the more of the ball I'll be able to see. Is it an edge I see, or just the ball sloping away? Hard to tell. At some point (no idea when), the curve of the ball becomes apparent. Basically, the radius of what is in my view increases until I can see the entire top half of the ball.

This is just a thought experiment and is by no means intended as proof of anything either way.

[Bronco73idi]

The Stew Peters Show actually did an entire segment about the Flat Earth.

They brought on Flat Earther David Weiss who offered 3000 ounces of Silver to anyone who could bring a single globe earth proof.

Never did I think a big network would give this the time of day. Hats off to the Stew crew because they'll for sure take some heat for this one. The host of that particular segment said he would like to create more content and have Dave back on bi-weekly.

Any takers on the silver?

https://www.stewpeters.com/video/2022/1 ... arth-lies/

How about Magellan? How about satellites? How about the Rutan Voyager? How about the shot from the World View test balloon in 2015 which clearly shows the curvature of the earth? I know, to a true believer, none of those things count. They were all faked in order to trick us. But, to me they count.

How about a lunar eclipse… personally I wouldn’t trust anything a flat earther told me.

18 Come now, and let us reason together, saith the Lord: though your sins be as scarlet, they shall be as white as snow; though they be red like crimson, they shall be as wool.

They can’t see with their own eyes that the earth is eclipsing the moon then how can they sit down at the table to reason (understand) the lord’s words?

[Joan7]

I found this video of the Go Fast Rocket pretty compelling. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=001IXnp0ogc Watch the takeoff from the onboard camera. In just a bit, that rocket ran into something! Stopped it cold. Then, watch it fall. As it spins, you see a mostly flat horizon on earth again and again. That is when I started to research in the scriptures. There is a firmament above the earth.

[h_p]

I found this video of the Go Fast Rocket pretty compelling. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=001IXnp0ogc Watch the takeoff from the onboard camera. In just a bit, that rocket ran into something! Stopped it cold. Then, watch it fall. As it spins, you see a mostly flat horizon on earth again and again. That is when I started to research in the scriptures. There is a firmament above the earth.

Something definitely stopped its spinning, if that's what you're referring to. It's not as obvious that something stopped its upward travel, though. It's a little hard to imagine that a rocket moving so fast could hit a surface, stopping it cold, yet still be intact AND still facing the same way.

[Allison]

I found this video of the Go Fast Rocket pretty compelling. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=001IXnp0ogc Watch the takeoff from the onboard camera. In just a bit, that rocket ran into something! Stopped it cold. Then, watch it fall. As it spins, you see a mostly flat horizon on earth again and again. That is when I started to research in the scriptures. There is a firmament above the earth.

Something definitely stopped its spinning, if that's what you're referring to. It's not as obvious that something stopped its upward travel, though. It's a little hard to imagine that a rocket moving so fast could hit a surface, stopping it cold, yet still be intact AND still facing the same way.

Unless we don’t understand the nature of what it hit. If this is the video I am thinking of, don’t we even hear a THUNK?

[h_p]

Unless we don’t understand the nature of what it hit. If this is the video I am thinking of, don’t we even hear a THUNK?

I'm not rocket person by any means, and not offering this as proof of anything for the particular rocket. But there's apparently something called a "yo-yo de-spin" mechanism" used on amateur rockets to slow down their spinning. It's pretty simple, and could be an explanation for the thunk and stuff:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sWS2Sl5iG0g
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5ZqbjQ9ASc8

[Allison]

Unless we don’t understand the nature of what it hit. If this is the video I am thinking of, don’t we even hear a THUNK?

I'm not rocket person by any means, and not offering this as proof of anything for the particular rocket. But there's apparently something called a "yo-yo de-spin" mechanism" used on amateur rockets to slow down their spinning. It's pretty simple, and could be an explanation for the thunk and stuff:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sWS2Sl5iG0g
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5ZqbjQ9ASc8

You could be right, and that’s why we dropped it long ago, mainly because we have no way of knowing for sure.

[BeNotDeceived]

Unless we don’t understand the nature of what it hit. If this is the video I am thinking of, don’t we even hear a THUNK?

I'm not rocket person by any means, and not offering this as proof of anything for the particular rocket. But there's apparently something called a "yo-yo de-spin" mechanism" used on amateur rockets to slow down their spinning. It's pretty simple, and could be an explanation for the thunk and stuff:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sWS2Sl5iG0g
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5ZqbjQ9ASc8

Rocket People Rule.

[Letfreedumbring]

We are simply told claims and told history. Stories and claims don't make reality. High altitude footage taken with a fisheye lens will curve an image. Apply a correction to the fisheye lens and the image is straight. The Felix Baumgartner RedBull jump was higher and is shows flatness. Ask yourself, what do you truly know for yourself.

Why would so many people fake such a monumental lie that could be so easily disproven? That doesn't make any sense. Why do you want to waste your time on this and not make the world a better place?

Now if you will excuse me I need to go for my monthly covid shot.

[Shawn Henry]

We are simply told claims and told history. Stories and claims don't make reality. High altitude footage taken with a fisheye lens will curve an image. Apply a correction to the fisheye lens and the image is straight. The Felix Baumgartner RedBull jump was higher and is shows flatness. Ask yourself, what do you truly know for yourself.

Why would so many people fake such a monumental lie that could be so easily disproven? That doesn't make any sense. Why do you want to waste your time on this and not make the world a better place?

Now if you will excuse me I need to go for my monthly covid shot.

The battle for our minds. That's the eternal battle.

There's not too much more valuable knowledge that knowing when you are being lied too and how see the falsehoods mixed into the truth.

Knowledge of a flat earth would give us proof that someone put us here and atheism wouldn't really be all that possible.

[Bronco73idi]

We are simply told claims and told history. Stories and claims don't make reality. High altitude footage taken with a fisheye lens will curve an image. Apply a correction to the fisheye lens and the image is straight. The Felix Baumgartner RedBull jump was higher and is shows flatness. Ask yourself, what do you truly know for yourself.

Why would so many people fake such a monumental lie that could be so easily disproven? That doesn't make any sense. Why do you want to waste your time on this and not make the world a better place?

Now if you will excuse me I need to go for my monthly covid shot.

https://skyandtelescope.org/observing/h ... ing-sites/

Good site to seemingly landings from the Hubble telescope point of view.

Probably fake with all Hubble’s images.

[davedan]

foucault pendulum

[Shawn Henry]

This 10-minute Info Wars video is a lot better than David Weiss' performance on the Stew Peters show. Well worth your time.