Eddie Bravo Debunks Nukes on Infowars

[Jonas Schäfer]

3rd People use geometry Euclidean Geometry to measure the world... but they use a not real geometry to explain round Earth... THINK ABOUT THAT

I think you misunderstood what this video was about. They were not explaining anything about the structure of the earth nor were they talking about measuring it.
The topic was the spherical geometry you get when trying to describe the properties of the surface of a circle crudely said as seen by a being that has no understanding of the third dimension and lives on it's surface.
So basically spherical geometry is needed to explain the measured distances and angles for a flat earth (for small areas euclidean geometry remains a good approximation).
When looking at it in three dimensional space you realize it is a sphere in euclidean space.

Also it is actually possible that our universe isn't flat (follows euclidean geometry) but curved meaning euclidean geometry would be the "not real" one.
(This is general relativity so if you really wanna understand what this means be prepared to spend a good amount of time on researching an understanding it as the mathematics behind it is quite complex.
Our current estimates make it extremely likely that our universe is indeed flat though.)
*Edit: removed embedded video from quote

[LuT]

I think you misunderstood what this video was about. They were not explaining anything about the structure of the earth nor were they talking about measuring it.
The topic was the spherical geometry you get when trying to describe the properties of the surface of a circle crudely said as seen by a being that has no understanding of the third dimension and lives on it's surface.
So basically spherical geometry is needed to explain the measured distances and angles for a flat earth (for small areas euclidean geometry remains a good approximation).
When looking at it in three dimensional space you realize it is a sphere in euclidean space.

Also it is actually possible that our universe isn't flat (follows euclidean geometry) but curved meaning euclidean geometry would be the "not real" one.
(This is general relativity so if you really wanna understand what this means be prepared to spend a good amount of time on researching an understanding it as the mathematics behind it is quite complex.
Our current estimates make it extremely likely that our universe is indeed flat though.)
*Edit: removed embedded video from quote

Exactly, we have to use NOT REAL geometry to explain something that everybody holds true ;D aint that funny?

I don't remember calling you an idiot, I was insinuating that our culture is headed toward an Idiocracy, but your posts are very hard to follow and often make no sense. I am assuming that English is not your first language. If I were able to understand your language I'm sure I would understand you better.

Yeah , sry about that im doing my all to express my self so you can understand.

[LuT]

Jonas Schäfer , Michael Steinmetz

Not to mention they ( todays scientist ) use quantum physics to explain the stars that are 13 bilion star lightyears or what ever in that way... that quantum physics is pure guesswork.

[Jonas Schäfer]

You misunderstood again, the spherical "not real" geometry is needed to describe a flat earth.
A round earth works perfectly fine in euclidean geometry.

And I cannot really make sense of you second comment, but there is no quantum physics involved in determining the age of stars, don't know where you got that from. Stars a macroscopic objects ad are thus usually not described with quantum physics but using general relativity or often times even just Newtonian mechanics.

If you really doubt those things go pick up a few books in higher maths as well as physics and go ahead and solve the equations yourself. If you really find a noteworthy error I assure you a Nobel Prize is yours, but don't think a lot of people haven't tried.

Also quantum physics is not guesswork but follows a rigorous mathematical model. Yes it involves probabilities, but that doesn't mean it's guesswork.

[maxmarkov]

Reality and nature are quite complex and learning the stuff you need to understand them requires time and dedication.

It's much easier to listen to some random, pseudo-intellectual on Youtube and be fooled by his nonsense.

[LuT]

You misunderstood again, the spherical "not real" geometry is needed to describe a flat earth.
A round earth works perfectly fine in euclidean geometry.

And I cannot really make sense of you second comment, but there is no quantum physics involved in determining the age of stars, don't know where you got that from. Stars a macroscopic objects ad are thus usually not described with quantum physics but using general relativity or often times even just Newtonian mechanics.

If you really doubt those things go pick up a few books in higher maths as well as physics and go ahead and solve the equations yourself. If you really find a noteworthy error I assure you a Nobel Prize is yours, but don't think a lot of people haven't tried.

Also quantum physics is not guesswork but follows a rigorous mathematical model. Yes it involves probabilities, but that doesn't mean it's guesswork.

Thats not true , the video says they projected a sphere on to a plane , cus euclidean geometry is 2d ... and then they use a NOT REAL geometry to explain further , a round Earth.

On your second point im a bachelor in applied mathematics ( just a final exam short hah ) and math is just a language like english or spanish it puts together definitions and for robots its easier to process and its super hard for regular people.
In essence its just the study of flow in space ( n dimensional space ) . By definition from wiki "Mathematics (from Greek μάθημα máthēma, “knowledge, study, learning”) " Meaning the study of life using numbers to talk

And Nobel Prize is not give for math

My point about quantum physics is that almost everything that is 13 billion something away is guess work.
With like you said A LOT OF MATH to make sure it confuses people.

[Jonas Schäfer]

Sorry but I'm not buying that you're majoring in maths while using words like real and not real to describe geometries or saying something like euclidean geometry being 2d.

Where did you get the notion that they used spherical geometry to explain a round earth and why is it "not real", please pinpoint me to where in the video it was brought up, I don't understand what might be interpreted that way. And either way just because somebody said something in a youtube video doesn't mean it has to be true, same goes for posts (including this one, how meta is that ) one sees in forums or on social media.

I know what math is. I'm a physics undergraduate, but thanks for quoting Wikipedia and then making up your own definition around it (to be fair, the concept of maths as a language is widespread and actually somewhat fitting imo).

I thought it obvious that I was referring to a nobel prize in physics as we were talking about the geometries in the context of a "flat earth" and arising problems when considering the observed data.

You're looking for the word light-year if i'm not mistaken LuT, and quantum physics has nothing to do with something being distant away. Also claiming something that basically IS the subject you're studying to be nothing more than guesswork is quite odd to me.

If you're just an elaborate troll, hats off though^^

Reality and nature are quite complex and learning the stuff you need to understand them requires time and dedication.

It's much easier to listen to some random, pseudo-intellectual on Youtube and be fooled by his nonsense.

I couldn't agree more, science is about a lot more than fancy vocabulary.

[LuT]

Sorry but I'm not buying that you're majoring in maths while using words like real and not real to describe geometries or saying something like euclidean geometry being 2d.

Where did you get the notion that they used spherical geometry to explain a round earth and why is it "not real", please pinpoint me to where in the video it was brought up, I don't understand what might be interpreted that way. And either way just because somebody said something in a youtube video doesn't mean it has to be true, same goes for posts (including this one, how meta is that ) one sees in forums or on social media.

I know what math is. I'm a physics undergraduate, but thanks for quoting Wikipedia and then making up your own definition around it (to be fair, the concept of maths as a language is widespread and actually somewhat fitting imo).

I thought it obvious that I was referring to a nobel prize in physics as we were talking about the geometries in the context of a "flat earth" and arising problems when considering the observed data.

You're looking for the word light-year if i'm not mistaken LuT, and quantum physics has nothing to do with something being distant away. Also claiming something that basically IS the subject you're studying to be nothing more than guesswork is quite odd to me.

If you're just an elaborate troll, hats off though^^



I couldn't agree more, science is about a lot more than fancy vocabulary.

Exaclty. ;D

Where did you get the notion that they used spherical geometry to explain a round earth and why is it "not real", please pinpoint me to where in the video it was brought up, I don't understand what might be interpreted that way. And either way just because somebody said something in a youtube video doesn't mean it has to be true, same goes for posts (including this one, how meta is that ) one sees in forums or on social media.

ALL THE VIDEOS haha or IN ALL of the video , thats what they are doing .

[Craig Murray]

I could not agree more! I find it quite disturbing that our brightest minds are ignored in favor of Youtube Flakes and Con-men who are neither vetted or subject to peer review. Instead of standing on the shoulders of Giants, they choose to crouch in their shadows while denying their existence.

I agree. But on the other hand academia is often corrupted, arrogant, and intolerant of new ideas. It's not hard to understand people's skepticism of mainstream academic theories.

Sometimes you don't even need much educational background, you just need logic and critical thinking to compare theories and understand which makes the most sense. For example, want to know if the Earth is flat? Sail around Antarctica. If the Earth is flat it's going to take a really long time, and you'll travel more distance than if you circumnavigate the globe.

Here is another way to reason about it. There are direct flights from Santiago Chili to New Zealand, Ackland Airport. That trip on a flat Earth would travel over the North Pole, since those two cities are on opposite sides of the Disk. That flight takes 12 and a half hours. Yet another flight from Ackland Airport to Quatar takes 17 hours. How is that possible on a Flat Earth? Look at the Flat Earth map.... that second flight should take less time, yet it's 5 hours longer. Does that make sense? Now look at a Globe and it makes perfect sense. You can continue to do this, looking at direct flights and flight times between cities all around the world and you will find, contrary to what some youtube videos might suggest, that the Earth must be a sphere for those flight times to make any sense.

And you can go on... wake up early in LA and call your buddy in New York and have him tell you when the sun comes up. Now start thinking about how the sun, and the seasons, would work on a flat Earth. You'll have a hard time finding a way for any of that to make any sense at all. If the Sun comes up over the horizon, and the Earth is flat, Day and Night should happen at the same times of day, everywhere on Earth. The Sun rises up from the side of the disk and everyone on earth observes it.... Then study the globe, all of a sudden time of day and seasons make perfect sense.

And you can go on, and on, and on. Critical thinking is a powerful tool if you develop it.

[maxmarkov]

How is that possible on a Flat Earth?

Secret, governmental teleportation technology left over by ancient alien civilizations. And Bigfoot.