# Mistakes I made on my Joe Rogan Experience Flat Earth Episode

Discussion in 'Flat Earth' started by Mick West, May 14, 2017.

Tags:

During the course of my two hour talk with Joe Rogan on the Flat Earth theory, I made a few mistakes. Fact checkers have pointed out some of these to me, and I'll post corrections here to all the mistakes I'm aware of. I'd give timestamps to the video if that's also pointed out.

Mistake #1
I said:
Here I'm referring to the longest straight road in America, ND-46, seen here in red:

It's an interesting road because it's nearly perfectly straight (there's a few very minor deviations, but then it gets back on track). It's actually laid out following a line of latitude, so if you were to draw a great circle (red) from the start to the end it would deviate from the road (green line just below the red line).

In the middle of the road this deviation is about 2290 feet:

So obviously I was wrong about "maybe ten feet". The only thing I can think of is that I'd been looking at much shorter roads, thinking about if there was some practical demonstration people could do by driving.

However, the basic point I was making is still perfectly valid - the road is curved, and yet it looks straight. In fact the road is curved under a flat Earth model too, as it follows a line of latitude - yet it still looks perfectly straight.

Thanks to Eric Dubay for pointing this out.

Mistake #2

I said that the footage of zero-g gymnastics in the interior of Skylab was in a space that was too big to fit in any plane at the time, even the Beluga. In fact that Skylab module would (and did) fit inside the Super Guppy
https://www.nasa.gov/centers/marsha...-skylab-mockup-to-california-sept-1-1967.html

However the Super Guppy would be incapable of performing the Parabolic maneuvers needed for zero-g for more than a few seconds at once - and quite possibly would be impossible entirely.

Also the cargo space is not long enough to fit the full length of Skylab.

Last edited: May 17, 2017
• Like x 5
• Informative x 1
2. ### Z.W. WolfSenior Member

FE believers say that a circumnavigation of the flat earth would simply mean going in a circle around the north pole by keeping a constant east or west heading. The compass would continue to point north throughout the circular path. You would follow a (flat earth) line of latitude.

They also say that a plane on a globe earth would constantly have to "put the nose down" to follow the curve. But on a flat earth a plane following a line of latitude would constantly have to be banking left or right to follow the circular line of latitude. The farther north you are, the tighter the circle.

So by this logic, driving this road, you would constantly have to be turning left or right. Of course on a sphere earth, if this road follows a line of latitude rather than a great circle, it's also true that the road is curved left or right. So in either case - flat earth or sphere earth - the vehicle you're driving must turn to the left or right during your trip.

But by how much? What about scale? Would you notice? What about the small constant corrections you have to make while steering a car in the real world?

Last edited: May 15, 2017
3. ### deirdreModeratorStaff Member

I've got (sphere earth) 169.8 feet in the 3 miles* our eyes can see while driving. Think I did the math right.

I don't know how big the FE allegedly is.

*that's based on if your eyes are 6 feet above the ground.

Last edited: May 15, 2017
• Like x 1

Matches Google Earth. Red line is straight (great circle)

If I use the FE route simulator in the approximate location, you see a similar effect. Here yellow = the road straight line, Green = great circle, Red = Flat Earth Straight line. So the FE curve would be even more, and it still looks straight.

• Informative x 2
• Like x 1
5. ### RorySenior Member

I'm gonna say Mistake #1 was not making a joke back when Joe did his opening "Round Earth Shill three dollars a month" routine.

6. ### deirdreModeratorStaff Member

you mean like "huh. They pay me 223 mill a year. You must really suck at your job".

• Like x 1
7. ### omaehamoushindeiruNew Member

This is not so much a mistake but rather something you should have worded more carefully:
At 59:45, you said

I am pretty sure flat earthers would take this as you admitting that ships do not really disappear behind the horizon and all you'd have to do is zoom in some more to make them re-appear. Which is ironic because you were probably trying to say the exact opposite, which is that ships really disappear behind the horizon and that flat earthers often post incorrect experiments (youtube videos) where ships area clearly not behind the horizon but just so small that they become invisible to the naked eye.

EDIT: Man, I should have finished the video before posting. At 1:51:35 the problem is clarified.

Last edited: May 21, 2017

Yeah, it's a bit of tricky thing to convey, especially without picture. Planes sometimes appear to have no windows for the same reason you can't see small boats that are near the horizon - they are very small in the image, smaller than the resolution of the camera or the effective resolution of your eye. Zooming in (or using binoculars or a telescope) makes the image larger, so it makes the features like the plane's windows or a small boat larger.

This misunderstanding is partially hard to debunk because it's so hard to believe they are actually serious. Look at this image:

It makes no sense if you know the slightest thing about vision, but it's possibly an understandable mistake - like a child wondering why the moon is following them through the trees. What's very hard to understand is why any would persist with this misconception after it has been explained to them. So it's very hard to take them seriously.

9. ### RorySenior Member

While not related to the point Mick was making above, that 'football field image' is also amusing as it: a) neglects to factor in the slope football fields have; and b) says nothing about the angle of the camera lens, or where it is in relation to the grass.

10. ### Amber RobotMember

Furthermore, it implies the "horizon" is only a couple of dozen yards away at most.

11. ### deirdreModeratorStaff Member

yea the guy in yellow near the endzone (99% sure field in FE video/above pics is Brookhaven High School, MS) is about 40 yards away and i can still see his feet. so i dont think distance cuts off people's feet. in the video he takes 110 steps and he's disappeared up to his shorts.

Last edited: May 22, 2017
12. ### RorySenior Member

A good, obvious point I can't believe I didn't go straight to - I've played in goal enough times to know that the players at the other end of the field haven't disappeared from the waist down!

PS If Mick thinks this is all off-topic to the OP - it's probably just a testament to the absence of mistakes on Joe Rogan!

Last edited: May 22, 2017
• Funny x 2
13. ### EnricksMember

I don't get why the guy disappears behind the grass. Is there a steep slope where they took the photos?

14. ### deirdreModeratorStaff Member

I wouldn't say "steep", he takes 110 steps on a sloped football field and disappears up to his shorts. The video is attached to my post 2 above yours.

http://vd.hudl.com/tdw/ykk/27565e11-a019-4e99-87af-5b988d65b59e/093-xqax_Full.jpg

15. ### EnricksMember

Last edited: Jul 22, 2017
16. ### ChewSenior Member

The guy in the video made the mistake of assuming that football fields are flat. They are not flat; they are elevated in the middle to allow rain to drain from the field.

• Informative x 1
17. ### EnricksMember

Sorry, I'm not american, so I know next to nothing about football. Basically football fields are elevated in the middle and sloped all around, so even towards the goal?