> Hickson’s work is not alone in that collection, but it certainly stands out for its spectacular inaccuracy and the high degree of hubris it displays. Today’s, Hickson’s view (and his prideful certainty) that the earth is quite close to the sun, is considered almost laughable. Indeed, it may even sit aside other erroneous theories such as that old view that the earth is flat. However, what makes Hickson’s views more easily criticized is that he was working in a time with access to more data and better scientific equipment to avoid such erroneous conclusions. Further, Hickson was indeed overly prideful when he wrote his work and it makes his own inaccuracy all the much more ironic. He had proclaimed that his work would dethrone the great ‘kings’ of the field. However, their reigns were left solidly in tact and rather than sitting atop his own throne, he is considered to have no relevance in the field (aside from being a footnote example of faulty findings).

> As a modern reader, with sometimes limited time, you may wonder if you should put forth the effort to read Kings Dethroned. In many cases, yes you should make the time. The book is iconic for putting forth erroneous information and it does highlight the hubris of a man who thought he had it all figured out. If you are in the field of science, why not read a book that will broaden your understanding for the field and the scope of its history. Hickson’s work should not just be a footnote of inaccuracy, it should be considered as a work that does have a place in the history of the development of the field of astronomy. When you read the book King’s Dethroned, you may find yourself sometimes feeling astonished at Hickson’s thought processes, conclusions, and written statements. Read it as a bit of scientific history. Read it as a source of entertainment. Read it so you have some fun trivia to share at parties. Finally, read it as a warning against exercising any similar levels of hubris in your own scientific work.

It is not surprising that flat earthers consider Gerrard Hickson, the overconfident, arrogant, blundering idiot that he was, to be their godfather.

Im sorry, i missed any of the evidence in that monologue

Evidence of what?

You posted a video.

I addressed the video.

You gave me a personal attack, then linked to a debunked book.

Now you ask me for evidence of some kind.

I posted a friends debate stream because i was being nice

Perhaps you need to learn how to communicate.

A friend?

I suppose it doesn't matter which one was your friend.

But I was under the impression that you wanted folks to see the content of said stream, then comment and discuss it.

Was I mistaken?

Ahh yes that video. It presented evidence. Did you watch it?

https://youtu.be/BwCMj5Yiqtg

Given the fact that I commented on the first 25 minutes of the video, then transcribed at least several additional minutes of the video, that would indeed be evidence that I watched at least 30+ minutes of the video.

Did you miss the part where I typed words here?

or did you simply launch into your personal attack without even reading what I had written?

Your tone is so disgruntled i probably missed it.

My apologies. Nearly all of my above posts from just a few minutes ago only apply to the video between Sean G and Travis.

Regarding the video you originally posted and just reposted a few minutes ago, I have only skipped through it , watching approximately 2-3 minutes of it so far.

I have still only been able to view a few minutes of this above video between minutes 1 through 6.

So far, pointing out that a test might have been flawed would only prove that a test might have been flawed.

Regarding the power line masts going across Lake Pontchartrain:
(the pic below is an animated gif.)

👆 CGI rendering of the power line masts that follow the curvature of the earth, over the top of a picture taken.

Looks like a damn near perfect example of proof of earth's curvature.

Here is a pretty good earth curvature calculator, in case you didn't see it already:

https://physicsstuff.000webhostapp.com/

(enable Java and click ENGLISH, unless you also write Cyrillic)

I have no idea what that helicopter disappearing below the horizon business is all about, and I'm not going to dissect it. I don't consider much of anything coming from the Discovery Channel to not include some percentage of bullshit, either accidentally or intentionally.

Next, how difficult can it be to find 24 hour time-lapse footage of the sun never going down in Antarctica?

False premise comes to mind.

Instead of using broken time-lapse footage of Antarctica, claiming that because the footage is broken, that means the sun must go down, why not just find unbroken footage?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aKhvQbHX4jk

That took me less than 30 seconds to find that video, and less than 4 minutes to witness at least two full 24 hour, unbroken turns of the sun. The sun doesn't go down in Antarctica, during parts of the year.

On the other side of the globe, in Alaska's northernmost village, Barrow, far above the Arctic Circle, the sun doesn't set for 84 days.

Also notice that the shadows in the Antarctica Midnight Sun 24-Hour Time Lapse video are all very long or very, very long.

Lastly, using a Netflix movie from 2013 as proof that the sun doesn't go down, based solely on their choice of when to splice the loop is a problem.