I Must Really Hate Myself

Yesterday, I argued on Twitter with a Flat Earther.

I’ve decided that I must truly hate myself.

Now, in the interest of fairness, here is the video that dragged me into the conversation, when one of my Twitter supporters asked me to address the stupidity that was running rampant.

I watched the video in full and noticed one thing conspicuously absent from the discussion. I have very little interest in critiquing the claims one by one, because the guy making this video had to reject a great deal of science and evidence in order to even make this video; it would be the very definition of pointless to attempt to direct him back to that evidence and science. However, there was one thing that shatters the Flat Earth Hypothesis:

The Coriolis Effect.


For those who aren’t aware, the Coriolis Effect is basically this: an object moving vertically above Earth’s surface will appear to shift laterally and to the west. It’s not hard to understand why. If the Earth is a sphere that is spinning around, then shooting an arrow from the equator to the north will cause it to drift to the west/left–the earth continues spinning, and the arrow is detached from that spin. In actuality, the arrow flew perfectly straight (assuming perfect aerodynamics) and did not veer to the west; the Earth continued spinning counter-clockwise (when viewed with the north pole at the top).


The next time you’re riding in a school bus, flip a coin in the air a few inches. Freely detached, the acceleration of the coin instantly starts decreasing, the very moment it is no longer attached to your hand (and thus being pulled along, just as you are, by the bus). If you flipped the coin at the very front of the bus, then it will land somewhere behind you, because the bus continued its acceleration forward, while the coin instantaneously began to slow its forward momentum. This is the same thing that causes the Coriolis Effect: the Earth continues to spin, but the arrow’s horizontal momentum instantly stops the moment that it is released.

no coriolis

Prior to this, I’d invited Flat Earth City to my podcast to discuss his views with me. I did this in a friendly way and made it clear that I was not inviting him to debate, but to discuss. There would be disagreement, of course, but I was not inviting him on to be unfair or disrespectful. Shortly after this, he declined and posted this. Honestly, if he’d posted this earlier, I would never have invited him onto my show. Why would I? Anyone who would dispute the very existence of the Coriolis Effect (using fireworks to do it, what?) has no place on my show.

The Coriolis Effect is a documented fact. Moreover, it is one that is readily observable.

He went on to post this ridiculous thing:



The irony is that this picture is exactly what you’d expect to see if the Earth was curved. Notice the atmospheric haze outlined in red:

2That is of the utmost significance, and this handy little image shows us exactly why:


Notice how much more atmosphere Mr. Green is seeing? Mr. Green is literally seeing more atmosphere in the far distance than is Mr. Red.


This is why the atmosphere is so incredibly thick in the far distance, and the mountaintops in the distance are perfect parallels to the tree in our own little image. In the midst of that extra-thick atmosphere that appears to be a fog because the person is literally looking through <some percentage that could easily be calculated if I cared to> more atmosphere, the distant mountaintops can be seen, thanks to the added height.

Please note that none of this would be the case if the Earth was flat:


If the Earth was flat, one would not be able to see further by gaining height. If the Earth was flat, one would not have to peer through “more atmosphere” to look at distant objects when one gains elevation. The reality is that the very image Flat Earth City posted is undeniable proof that the Earth is round.

If the Earth was flat, then the ground itself would be visible at the base of the mountains, just as Mr. Green in “Flat” above can see the bottom of the tree easily. But it isn’t visible. The mountaintops in the distance rise out of a haze of atmosphere, not the ground. How could that possibly be the case if the Earth was flat? What we are literally seeing in this image is the very distant edge of the Earth as it “goes around the curve” and we can no longer see it, just as Mr. Green can’t see Point B here:


Instead, it would look to Mr. Green that the top of the tree is rising out of the air itself, with the ground stopping a good distance away from the tree. And *gasp*! That’s exactly what we see in Flat Earth City’s image!


Mountains rising out of the atmosphere. This is the “evidence” he has that the Earth is flat: things that are, in fact, unequivocal proof that the Earth is round. How can they say there is no curvature when the ground in the image literally disappears into the atmosphere before the horizon itself? Hey, dude:


That red line.

That’s the curvature of the Earth. Right there in your picture.

Share your thoughts...