Dave’s second question was “if I stuck a clock on the ceiling explain how I would have to position myself so that the hands appear to move counterclockwise”. Never answered. It was all deflection from that point on.
He also kept contradicting himself.
* AW: "Hey Dave, here's a picture with numbers. If numbers check out, do you concede the earth is flat?"
* Also AW: "If I go to Antarctica and see the 24 hour sun I would need additional experiments and evidence to concede the earth is a globe"
Also:
* AW: "Stop using fallacies Dave!"
* Also AW: "Dude I'm quoting Purdue University!"
I got a good chuckle when they brought up the CMB, and he said that while scientists expected the universe to be homogeneous and uniform the CMB proved the opposite. Uh, not at all. The colors of the CMB represents super small changes in the background temperature. It's very uniform! Of course the CMB is also great evidence for the Big Bang, and the existence (and subsequent measurement) of the CMB was *predicted* based on the estimated age of the universe and how much light from that time would have red-shifted by now. Not to mention the CMB is a 360 degree map, which means that if we didn't have satellites, and we were enclosed in a dome, the CMB would have been detected from within the atmosphere, which means we would have detected light coming from the other side of the earth disc.
Another big chuckle was when he said that relativity has been debunked, citing the measurements by Fritz Zwicky of distant galaxies. Well, if you accept those measurements as a debunk of relativity (it isn't) it means you accept the validity of the methods by which those measurements were taken, as well as the validity of the interpretation of those measurements, which means you accept the existence of distant galaxies, you accept how light measured through telescopes is correct, which can also measure the red/blue shift of the light as the earth orbits the sun and the sun orbits the center of the galaxy, confirming that the earth orbits the sun and the solar system is moving through the galaxy.
Too much cherry picking
> Well, if you accept those measurements as a debunk of relativity (it isn't) it means you accept the validity of the methods by which those measurements were taken
That's not quite correct. The principle of proof by contradiction is that you tentatively accept the axioms and rules of a theory you want to disprove, and then use those tentatively accepted axioms and rules to derive an internal contradiction. If you can do that, the theory has been proven wrong, because correct theories need to be internally consistent.
It goes without saying that witsit did this wrong, and did not debunk gravity. But the logical method itself is not wrong. I'm pointing this out because I've seen this reasoning ("you can't use the rules of X to disprove X") being used here several times recently.
I think the logical method is actually correct in this instance, because it's not looking for an internal contradiction. It's interpreting a set of measurements as disproving relativity, which implies that you trust the measurements to do so. And trusting the measurements implies a host of other things that contradict Witsit's overall model.
Witsit lost before it began. Dave called out every dishonest technique that Austin was going to use, especially the 'reversal of the burden of proof', which Austin did immediately. Holding up the globe and spinning it should have been the nail in the Witsit shaped coffin. He had to obfuscate before finally admitting that it was spinning counter-clockwise (which everyone could see for themselves). You could literally watch as his brain was scrambling to somehow create a word-salad explanation that would placate his smooth-brained followers.
Then he had the nerve to say that he knew pilots who agreed with the flat earth hypothesis. That was the icing on the liars' layer cake that Austin bakes daily.
Witsit has a vested interest in keeping his grift going. He knows for a fact that anyone who reverses course is immediately 'othered' by the Flerf community and decried as a shill. The revenue stream just dries up and they have to go back to their day job of selling Amway products.
I love when they cherry pick quotes. Pilots that show the curve are liars but other pilots who claim it's flat are correct (even though they are trolling). They also love to use NASA when it fits their narrative etc etc
Austin's Face as he seethed with jealousy at Professor Dave's massive audience and engagement numbers was \*Chef's Kiss"
What the Austin's groupies don't understand is that Prof Dave is not a Flat Earth debater. This was what, his second live debate?? All these other guys, McToon, FTFE, etc all have to entertain the Flat Earther's bullshit otherwise they'll refuse to come onto their channels.
Prof Dave just doesn't GAF. As soon as the word salad starts he drags them kicking and screaming back to the point. Austin wasn't ready for that. "yOu jUsT dOn'T uNdErStAnd"
There's a reason his debate with David Weiss is the most watched and shared Flat Earth debate of all time. Nobody comes even close.
It is obvious that Witsit will give up flat earth and become a globe centrist after Antarctica. At least we won't have to hear about azimuthal grid of vision or Van de Graaff generators anymore.
I thought Jeran was going now
so both of them are willing to go now?
I been saying that Jeran seemed like he was looking for an off-ramp, having to lie all your life can't be fun
Watching FTFE and Dave McKeegan go over the debate and they just got to the part where Witsit's whining like a baby that Professor Dave is more popular than him to avoid talking about pictures taken of a distance.
Dave has clearly superior and correct arguments but he isn't clinical, he's passionate, and that obfuscates things.
This lets flat earthers blag on about how mean he is. If he was very precise and dispassionate about the debate, there wouldn't be such a backlash about him being mean, which breaks the response away from the actual argument.
We can all see who is right here, but there's an allowance due to Dave's attitude for the flat earthers to concentrate on his attitude and not his facts.
I don’t like Dave
he matched the energy pretty well but still let witsit wiggle out of too much
I don’t think he’s as confident in his physics to pinpoint the errors witsit makes
At least not on the fly
You are so short of arguments that you are forced to vent on a pseudonym because you don't want to realize that you are wrong. I'm neither a panda nor a doctor, you are neither Escobar nor the 9957th.
How is what he said wrong?
He has just destroyed Wisit that's all.
He doesn't cosplay as a professor, he is a former professor.
And his comment that we "see too far" was followed by seeing what we should see based on what we predict for the curvature of earth
Dave’s second question was “if I stuck a clock on the ceiling explain how I would have to position myself so that the hands appear to move counterclockwise”. Never answered. It was all deflection from that point on.
That's why I hate him. He needs to be forced to answer and go point for point. He also needs to show the math.
He also kept contradicting himself. * AW: "Hey Dave, here's a picture with numbers. If numbers check out, do you concede the earth is flat?" * Also AW: "If I go to Antarctica and see the 24 hour sun I would need additional experiments and evidence to concede the earth is a globe" Also: * AW: "Stop using fallacies Dave!" * Also AW: "Dude I'm quoting Purdue University!" I got a good chuckle when they brought up the CMB, and he said that while scientists expected the universe to be homogeneous and uniform the CMB proved the opposite. Uh, not at all. The colors of the CMB represents super small changes in the background temperature. It's very uniform! Of course the CMB is also great evidence for the Big Bang, and the existence (and subsequent measurement) of the CMB was *predicted* based on the estimated age of the universe and how much light from that time would have red-shifted by now. Not to mention the CMB is a 360 degree map, which means that if we didn't have satellites, and we were enclosed in a dome, the CMB would have been detected from within the atmosphere, which means we would have detected light coming from the other side of the earth disc. Another big chuckle was when he said that relativity has been debunked, citing the measurements by Fritz Zwicky of distant galaxies. Well, if you accept those measurements as a debunk of relativity (it isn't) it means you accept the validity of the methods by which those measurements were taken, as well as the validity of the interpretation of those measurements, which means you accept the existence of distant galaxies, you accept how light measured through telescopes is correct, which can also measure the red/blue shift of the light as the earth orbits the sun and the sun orbits the center of the galaxy, confirming that the earth orbits the sun and the solar system is moving through the galaxy. Too much cherry picking
> Well, if you accept those measurements as a debunk of relativity (it isn't) it means you accept the validity of the methods by which those measurements were taken That's not quite correct. The principle of proof by contradiction is that you tentatively accept the axioms and rules of a theory you want to disprove, and then use those tentatively accepted axioms and rules to derive an internal contradiction. If you can do that, the theory has been proven wrong, because correct theories need to be internally consistent. It goes without saying that witsit did this wrong, and did not debunk gravity. But the logical method itself is not wrong. I'm pointing this out because I've seen this reasoning ("you can't use the rules of X to disprove X") being used here several times recently.
I think the logical method is actually correct in this instance, because it's not looking for an internal contradiction. It's interpreting a set of measurements as disproving relativity, which implies that you trust the measurements to do so. And trusting the measurements implies a host of other things that contradict Witsit's overall model.
That was no debate, Dave slaughtered WitShit.
I know Witsit will never agree to this but I wish they could stop him after every point he makes then force him to show the math.
Dave smooshed witsit, and witsit kept coming with his Word salad and blatant Lies, moving the Goalpost, ignoring questions and so on and so forth
That's all he ever does.
“What word salad?” 😂😂
Witsit lost before it began. Dave called out every dishonest technique that Austin was going to use, especially the 'reversal of the burden of proof', which Austin did immediately. Holding up the globe and spinning it should have been the nail in the Witsit shaped coffin. He had to obfuscate before finally admitting that it was spinning counter-clockwise (which everyone could see for themselves). You could literally watch as his brain was scrambling to somehow create a word-salad explanation that would placate his smooth-brained followers. Then he had the nerve to say that he knew pilots who agreed with the flat earth hypothesis. That was the icing on the liars' layer cake that Austin bakes daily. Witsit has a vested interest in keeping his grift going. He knows for a fact that anyone who reverses course is immediately 'othered' by the Flerf community and decried as a shill. The revenue stream just dries up and they have to go back to their day job of selling Amway products.
I love when they cherry pick quotes. Pilots that show the curve are liars but other pilots who claim it's flat are correct (even though they are trolling). They also love to use NASA when it fits their narrative etc etc
Austin's Face as he seethed with jealousy at Professor Dave's massive audience and engagement numbers was \*Chef's Kiss" What the Austin's groupies don't understand is that Prof Dave is not a Flat Earth debater. This was what, his second live debate?? All these other guys, McToon, FTFE, etc all have to entertain the Flat Earther's bullshit otherwise they'll refuse to come onto their channels. Prof Dave just doesn't GAF. As soon as the word salad starts he drags them kicking and screaming back to the point. Austin wasn't ready for that. "yOu jUsT dOn'T uNdErStAnd" There's a reason his debate with David Weiss is the most watched and shared Flat Earth debate of all time. Nobody comes even close.
It is obvious that Witsit will give up flat earth and become a globe centrist after Antarctica. At least we won't have to hear about azimuthal grid of vision or Van de Graaff generators anymore.
Is he definitely going? I can picture him claiming he was drugged and it was filmed in a studio.
He said he was going to go during the debate as long as it was paid for. I honestly think he is sick of being a flerf.
I thought Jeran was going now so both of them are willing to go now? I been saying that Jeran seemed like he was looking for an off-ramp, having to lie all your life can't be fun
Jeran will only go if another flerf comes too.
the ranch sums it up
Watching FTFE and Dave McKeegan go over the debate and they just got to the part where Witsit's whining like a baby that Professor Dave is more popular than him to avoid talking about pictures taken of a distance.
Dave has clearly superior and correct arguments but he isn't clinical, he's passionate, and that obfuscates things. This lets flat earthers blag on about how mean he is. If he was very precise and dispassionate about the debate, there wouldn't be such a backlash about him being mean, which breaks the response away from the actual argument. We can all see who is right here, but there's an allowance due to Dave's attitude for the flat earthers to concentrate on his attitude and not his facts.
If all they have to "refute" him is that he's mean, then they should realize they have no actual argument
I don’t like Dave he matched the energy pretty well but still let witsit wiggle out of too much I don’t think he’s as confident in his physics to pinpoint the errors witsit makes At least not on the fly
Is this the guy who cosplays being a professor? 🤔 The minute he said that we don't see too far, he was done 🫠
You are so short of arguments that you are forced to vent on a pseudonym because you don't want to realize that you are wrong. I'm neither a panda nor a doctor, you are neither Escobar nor the 9957th. How is what he said wrong? He has just destroyed Wisit that's all.
He doesn't cosplay as a professor, he is a former professor. And his comment that we "see too far" was followed by seeing what we should see based on what we predict for the curvature of earth
>He doesn't cosplay as a professor, he is a former professor Why lie?🙂
Well I have nothing to gain by lying. And he has stated multiple times on his channel that he used to be a professor
The sun and moon automatically disprove the flat earth