Plochá Země a pseudověda
Summary
TLDRThe transcript discusses the debate over whether the Earth is flat or round, questioning scientific claims and challenging mainstream explanations. It critiques how science has changed explanations about the Earth's curvature over time, claiming that earlier 'proofs,' such as boats disappearing over the horizon, have been debunked by modern technology. It contrasts 'pseudo-science' with real science, emphasizing that science should be based on testable and repeatable experiments. The discussion also touches on how science can become dogmatic, pushing certain narratives, and explores concepts like the Earth's shape, centrifugal force, and how they affect weight and perception.
Takeaways
- 🌍 Extraordinary claims require extraordinary proof, like proving the Earth is round.
- 🔬 Science involves testing claims, and you can test the shape of the Earth yourself.
- 🛥️ The disappearance of boats over the horizon was once attributed to Earth's curvature, but using binoculars and cameras reveals them again, challenging this assumption.
- 👁️ Observations of the horizon are not consistent with the traditional explanation of the Earth's curve blocking distant objects.
- ❓ Science is built on questioning and testing hypotheses, and science should always be open to scrutiny.
- 📏 The Earth is not a perfect sphere; it's an oblate spheroid and slightly pear-shaped, with different measurements at the equator and poles.
- ⚖️ People weigh less at the equator due to the centrifugal force of Earth's spin, but this cancels out with gravity, so weight remains the same.
- 🌀 If Earth spun faster, centrifugal forces would cause people at the equator to become weightless, and the planet would flatten into a disc.
- 🌪️ The discussion contrasts the differences between science as a method of inquiry and dogma, warning against uncritical belief in scientific authority.
- 🎓 Peer review is critiqued as sometimes blocking innovation, with a call to trust science but also to critically assess its methods and conclusions.
Q & A
What is the central claim of the speaker regarding the shape of the Earth?
-The speaker argues against the conventional belief that the Earth is round and promotes the idea that it may be flat, challenging widely accepted scientific claims.
How does the speaker address the traditional explanation of the horizon and disappearing ships?
-The speaker critiques the traditional explanation that ships disappear over the horizon due to the curvature of the Earth. They claim that using binoculars or cameras like the P900/P1000 can bring the ship back into view, suggesting the disappearance is not due to Earth's curvature.
What is the speaker's view on the evolution of scientific explanations about the Earth's curvature?
-The speaker suggests that the explanation for Earth's curvature has changed over time. Initially, the disappearing ships were attributed to the Earth's curve, but later explanations invoked atmospheric bending of light, which the speaker believes is a shift in the narrative.
What does the speaker mean by the term 'pseudo-science'?
-According to the speaker, pseudo-science refers to claims that cannot be tested or replicated. They contrast this with real science, which involves forming hypotheses and conducting repeatable experiments.
How does the speaker view the concept of 'peer review' in science?
-The speaker criticizes peer review, arguing that it doesn't align with the scientific method. They claim that peer review often acts as 'peer injunction,' where peers can block work without necessarily engaging in scientific debate or testing.
What is the speaker's critique regarding the explanation of Earth's rotation and its effect on weight?
-The speaker explains how scientists claim that Earth's rotation causes people to weigh slightly less at the equator due to centrifugal force. However, they highlight that this is counterbalanced by the Earth’s gravitational pull, making the overall difference negligible.
What argument does the speaker provide about the changing explanations for Earth's shape?
-The speaker notes that the description of Earth's shape has evolved from being a perfect sphere to an oblate spheroid, and even to a pear-shaped spheroid, suggesting inconsistency in scientific explanations.
What is the speaker’s position on the relationship between science and questioning?
-The speaker emphasizes that real science is built on asking questions, forming hypotheses, and testing them. They argue that suppressing questions or labeling certain topics as undebatable is a form of dogma, not science.
How does the speaker challenge the idea that scientific debate on the shape of the Earth is over?
-The speaker disputes the claim that the debate about the Earth being round is settled, arguing that new observations and challenges from the flat Earth perspective have forced changes in the scientific explanation.
What is the speaker’s view on the trustworthiness of modern science?
-The speaker expresses skepticism towards modern science, suggesting that it has become more about control and corporate propaganda than genuine inquiry. They argue that the trust in science has significantly decreased due to this shift.
Outlines
🌍 Exploring the Science Behind Earth’s Shape
This paragraph delves into the scientific principle that 'extraordinary claims require extraordinary proof.' The speaker explores the idea of testing the shape of the Earth, explaining that while science allows for such tests, observations such as boats disappearing on the horizon don’t support the traditional claim of Earth's curvature. Instead, modern tools like binoculars and high-zoom cameras reveal that boats reappear upon zooming in, suggesting that previous assumptions about the Earth's curvature might be flawed.
❓ Challenging Flat Earth Claims and Scientific Evolution
This paragraph focuses on how claims about the globe Earth have changed over time due to the persistence of flat Earth proponents. The speaker notes that initial explanations, such as the Earth's curve being responsible for objects disappearing beyond the horizon, have evolved with time, particularly in response to questions and challenges posed by flat Earth believers. The speaker argues that when science is tested and questioned, it should yield consistent answers, and laments that explanations regarding the Earth's curvature have shifted.
🔬 Science vs. Pseudoscience and the Role of Inquiry
Here, the speaker draws a distinction between real science and pseudoscience, highlighting the importance of testing and replicating scientific claims. Emphasizing that science begins with questions and hypotheses, the speaker argues that untestable claims belong to pseudoscience. The debate over Earth's shape is framed as a conflict between scientific inquiry and dogma, with concerns about the suppression of questioning within mainstream science.
🌐 The Pear-Shaped Earth and Its Implications
This paragraph explains how Earth is not a perfect sphere, but rather an oblate spheroid, bulging slightly below the equator. The speaker discusses how gravity and centrifugal forces interact to affect weight at different latitudes. Specifically, they note that people weigh slightly less at the equator due to the Earth's spin. Additionally, if Earth were to spin faster, it would flatten into a pancake shape, leading to weightlessness at the equator.
Mindmap
Keywords
💡Science
💡Pseudoscience
💡Horizon
💡Curvature
💡Flat Earth
💡Atmosphere
💡Geode
💡Oblate Spheroid
💡Centrifugal Force
💡Dogma
Highlights
Extraordinary claims require extraordinary proof, as emphasized in science.
The debate on whether the world is flat or round is an example of science testing claims through observation.
Observations like the horizon and disappearing ships challenge traditional claims about Earth's curvature.
The use of binoculars and advanced cameras like the p900 and p1000 can bring back ships that disappear beyond the horizon, raising doubts about Earth's curvature.
The speaker argues that shifting explanations about the curvature of the Earth, such as atmospheric bending, reflect inconsistency in mainstream science.
Science should remain consistent and rely on testable claims, not on shifting explanations that evolve over time.
The speaker challenges the idea that the Earth’s horizon demonstrates its curvature, asserting that such claims have evolved under pressure from Flat Earth proponents.
The difference between pseudoscience and regular science lies in the ability to test and replicate results.
Science is built on questions, forming hypotheses, and testing those hypotheses through experimentation.
Peer review is criticized for being a barrier to alternative scientific ideas, described as 'peer injunction' which allows established figures to block new ideas.
The Earth is not a perfect sphere; it's an oblate spheroid with a slight bulge below the equator.
Gravity and centrifugal forces work together on Earth’s surface, but their effects cancel out at the equator and poles, making weight distribution balanced.
If Earth spun much faster, centrifugal forces could make people weightless at the equator, creating a pancake-shaped Earth.
Science should remain a method of inquiry, constantly testing and revising knowledge, rather than becoming a dogmatic belief system.
The speaker highlights the importance of trust in science, arguing that it’s diminishing due to dogmatic approaches rather than inquiry-based methods.
Transcripts
for
review
we have a saying in science
extraordinary claims require
extraordinary proof so I am now going to
make a wild way out extraordinary Clan
the world is
round so the process of testing claims
World is Flat the world is round is what
we call science and you can go out and
test this stuff for yourself which is
the beauty of Fe now this is what we see
when we look out at what is referred to
as the
Horizon this is just a time lapse
throughout a
day we see the horizons constantly
moving now we know that this this is not
an actual position that we're seeing
right this can't be the Leading Edge of
a sphere physically blocking things in
the distance the Earth is not shrinking
and expanding throughout the day the
rising just an apparent location this
proves it as does any observation the
way this started was people started
making observations and they realized it
wasn't adding up it wasn't matching the
predictions of the globe and what we
were told was it's not okay to say that
the Earth is flat it's not okay that
Earth is so stupid it's been disproven
thousands of years ago and it was
disproven because a couple people stuck
sticks in the ground and people just
looked out and saw boats disappear the
farther away a boat is the more the
bottom of the boat will disappear and
you'll basically just see the Mast of
the boat see the bottom of the ship is
gone now we can see Midway up and then
the whole thing disappears Beyond Your
Horizon and that's because the boat is
actually going over the horizon that's
Cur that wouldn't happen if if the Earth
were
flat well what did we do we went out and
we looked at the boats sure enough they
disappeared then we pulled out our
barnoculars we could see the boat again
and then it would disappear then we
could pull out p900 or p1000 and see the
boat again what does that prove it
proves that if you were to make the
erroneous assumption that when it
initially disappeared to the naked eye
it was due to curvature of the earth you
would be patently wrong right
objectively incorrect isn't the case
whether you think it's the the case when
of believe it's the case you heard it
was the case it's just provably not the
case everyone can go and check it
important to remember what the first
claim was okay we you can go out and see
the curve of the earth we were then
shown pictures over the ocean right and
we were like they were saying That's the
curve of the earth look how the the
bottom of the buildings are missing look
how the boat goes we're looking at the
curve of the Earth the actual position
of the curve of the earth Horizon is the
curve of the earth okay so that's what
we were told and I want you to pay
attention to how this conversation has
progressed and just use a little bit of
wisdom pattern recognition and discer
realize that when someone is telling the
truth they are going to stay consistent
they're going to remain consistent
someone that is representing something
untrue have to constantly shuck and Jive
and update and change the position
dumping is cemented in supposedly
verified for thousands of years this
should never be the case I have a memory
I'm not a broken sheep I'm not a
goldfish they told me that the the boat
goes over the curb and that's why you
can only see the mask and all that they
gave me one lie
and then I said well I can see it now I
can zoom it in oh the light bent so it
never was the curve then when I was a
kid you never said the [ __ ] light
bent you said that that was the curve
well now oh so in the 1990s you didn't
know so show me where you guys learned
that it wasn't a curve that it's
actually because the light bends
position updated to oh well you never
see the actual curve of the Earth
because there's an atmosphere on the
earth you're there's never a time you
can look at over the Earth and there be
no atmosphere so of course it's always
the parent position and it moves around
well that's not what you first told us
you first told us stupid Flur you can go
out and just prove the Earth of ball by
looking at the Horizon that's the curve
of the earth and it blocks things in the
distance because it's a physical tangle
geometric
location okay so that has changed the
stupid flat earthers have made the
entire interpretation and understanding
of the globe Earth evolve and change
that's just a fact right regardless of
what you think of the earth what I just
said as a fact and speak volumes and not
every body can be a robot polisher now
if you have a claim that can't be tested
that's what we call pseudo science the
difference between pseudo science and
regular science is whether or not you
can test what is science people don't
know what science is or how and why it
works science is built on questions
everything here began with questions if
anything is scientific you should be
able to question it and someone would
give you an answer boldest question the
scientists have dared to ask
it's only through asking questions
forming hypotheses and testing those
hypotheses that we know what's real is
the earth flat or round it's not okay to
say that the Earth is flat this is some
sort of strange denial I don't know
where it comes from the boldest question
the scientists have dared to ask
apparently this is something that we're
debating I I have no idea why the
boldest question the scientists have
dared to ask and it's not okay the
boldest question the scientists have
dared to ask the difference between
pseudo science and regular science is
whether or not you can test it as in if
it's true you can replicate that
experiment and you'll get the same
result uh you know you cannot recreate
the speed that we're going to on the
ground it's we're much faster than a
speed of a bullet bullets move so fast
that they can't be seen with the naked
eye uh no a dynamic or aerothermal test
facility can recreate the conditions um
that we will see something that could
never be accomplished in a laboratory
here on Earth that's what we call
pseudoscience okay so I have not debated
anybody about this my feeling is that I
won't debate the science when you debate
the science cuz the science has already
been debated in in in the scientific
system it asked you to debate one them
Flat Earth guys no I don't I can't no we
talked about it and we were going to
have them on Skype no energy to fight
all of that I just teach people so how
to think train your mind that is
something that should not be debated
does not belong in front of an audience
getting debated you're not supposed to
question the science that's not science
that's Dogma that's corporate propaganda
that is
totalitarian shov down your throat so
hard you can't breathe there's a
conflict between science as a belief
system and science as a method of
inquiry which is about finding out what
we don't know through systematic inquiry
the experimental method hypothesis and
so on 500 years of of modern science it
was much more more about gaining control
than about anything else science is an
asset we have the scientists agreed upon
the debate is over and the science is in
We Own the science and we think that the
world you know should know it that's how
science Works exact opposite of science
need science sign has such an important
role if because it distinguishes between
believing and knowing science delusion
is the uncritical belief in these dogmas
in them not as beliefs but as truths The
Cult of science coming out of a
university with a master's degree or a
PhD you take them into the field and
they they literally don't believe
anything and this is a peer reviewed
paper it's the only thing they accept a
scientific system of peer-reviewed
papers that's how science determines
what is Right peer review has nothing to
do with scientific method we got along
fine without peer review isn't even peer
rreview it's something called peer
injunction where your peers can stop you
without shorting you I'm happy to bet
against you in all sorts of things that
you're doing and if you win and I Lose
I'm on an unbounded negative experience
but if I block you and I won't short you
that's saying that I think you're
dangerous because it's too dangerous to
say to go
short and the idea that we're handing
old people and established people and
and very politically Savvy people
the ability to block you without
shorting you is unforgivable I think
it's pathetic to kill ourselves because
of stupidity science not everybody can
be a robot polisher what it is actually
is a pagan faith and it's killing people
so we need signs and that's why really
we need trust in signs that trust is
decreasing tremendously and that should
worry us something I've been wrong about
for decades no
no
no so this is Earth as we've been taught
to think of it right from childhood
right now Earth
bulges we have about 5 miles
wider
mhm across the equator than we are pole
to pole okay not only that a slight
detail we are we are wider just below
the equator than at the equator we're
not a perfect sphere it's a spheroid
it's an oblate spheroid okay and we're
slightly wider below the Equator so
we're a pear-shaped oblate spheroid
gotcha okay all right pearshaped I
calculated this okay okay we can measure
it and we know all right so I was spent
my whole life saying if it's trying to
fling you off the Earth he
but the force of gravity is resisting
back by what force is it trying to fling
you off that upward centrifugal force
subtracts from the gravitational force
that the Earth is trying to put on you
it
subtracts okay so truck what do you
weigh here Here and Now 192 I'll give
you the 190 lb okay okay so if you do
the math you run to Ecuador you will not
be 190 lb you'll be like 18 5 lb what
that's how significant it is there are
pounds less that you weigh for living on
the equator than for living anywhere
else simply because the spinning Earth
is trying to fling you
off nice yes yes it's it's significant
that's wrong uhoh here's the deal it
turns out everywhere on the geode mhm
you weigh exactly the same what it turns
out
that while you are closer to the Center
of the Earth there's less Mass pulling
on you these two you know principles if
you want to call them they cancel out
yes yes they exactly cancel the fact
that you have the whole earth pulling on
you yet we're spinning right okay so you
have all the mass of the Earth but the
spinning so that makes you weigh more
but then your spinning that makes you
weigh a little less plus the Earth is a
little wider so that makes you weigh a
little less okay all of that you put it
together put it together it comes out in
the wash compared to your weight on the
PO the pole wow guess who's not moving
sideways at all has no sideways velocity
it's Santa Claus on the North Pole so if
you weigh Santa Claus on the North Pole
that is his authentic Earth weight oh
sweet okay which is only 322
lb so Santa's fat behind can walk down
to the equator exactly the same exactly
the same thing wow check this out you
ready okay
if the Earth spins faster if it spins
once in 90 minutes instead of once in 24
hours then the centrifical forces will
be so
great that you weigh nothing on the
equator you'll just float you just float
however Earth won't keep its spherical
shape it will become a pancake yes yes
this is the fun part oh my gosh okay so
the Earth will start flattening
as it flattens the
equator gets wider and wider and wider
to and you are weightless out there if
Earth becomes this huge disc what
happens to the North and South Poles
well they just become where you put the
record pole yes exactly
that's they're just a spindle just a
spindle right they're right there in the
middle right therefore how much do you
weigh you don't weigh anything so
everybody still still weighs the same
that's pretty wild it's wild except
you're floating out there you're
floating out here but no matter where
you are you weigh the same you weigh the
same which is zero because on the poles
there's no Mass between you right and
the center of the earth cuz you are at
the center of the earth cuz you flatten
to a pancake so there you go flat
earthers not everybody can be a robot
[Music]
polisher I'm that's so cool really cool
so clearly Earth can't be moving we of
course we're not rotating either
everything is moving around us so it
wasn't just our ego that supported the
idea that we're in the center of all
things CER at the center of all it's not
just what's happening with our ego it
kind of made sense when you thought
about it when you thought about it when
you thought about it think about
it think about it okay
Ver Más Videos Relacionados
I F*CKING LOVE SCIENCE SMV (soy music video)
UP TALKS | Interaction of Science, Technology and Society Through Time
KUHN VS POPPER | Paradigm | Falsification
STS Module 1 - Introduction to Science Technology and Society Lecture Video
Il rapporto tra scienza e inclusione con Adrian Fartade - Audi We Generation S5E3
Christianity - God and the Scientists
5.0 / 5 (0 votes)