Be Reasonable: Episode #038 – Mark Sargent

Joining Marsh this episode is Mark Sargent, author of Flat Earth Clues and owner of the website

  1. #1 by Rob on January 19, 2017 - 16:18

    A bit of gish galloping here, and lots of “that doesn’t make sense so flat earth”

    I’m not convinced, it would be interesting to fact check Mark’s comments on this podcast if someone has time!

  2. #2 by Jo La on January 20, 2017 - 03:11

    That video about going through the Van Allen belts is about testing the equipment as modern equipment is a lot more complex and easier to damage. You can watch it. That’s what it’s about. Not sure why they think we can’t go past it with shielding. They don’t even know what radiation is without the same science that tells them it’s there. I’m surprised they aren’t “radiation deniers” also.

    This was hard to listen to as I served in the military with a flat Earther. Talking to them does nothing. You have to drag them to testing. They are that entrenched.

  3. #3 by Jerry on January 20, 2017 - 13:00

    I’ve spent my career writing cartography software so it was a disappointment to discover that I’ve wasted my life.

    I liked the way that whenever Marsh pointed out something that contradicted what Mark had just said, Mark would just say “Yes, that’s right” and carry right on.

  4. #4 by Jeff A on January 20, 2017 - 16:19

    At 34min Mark states “the capsules should have been irradiated […] and contaminated to the point where you would never put them in the Smithsonian”
    Why do people think being exposed to radiation makes things radioactive?

    The Apollo capsules were going approx 24,791 mph. So passing through 60 thousand miles thick expanse in 3hrs. That ignores that they didn’t even go through the worst parts and the capsule does shield them to some degree as they are made from matter.

  5. #5 by Chris on January 20, 2017 - 17:57

    Cool moon light? The reflection of sunlight from the moon is too weak to heat much of anything. The teeny tiny temp difference is variations in wind currents, and the difference in the cooling of the ground (like water holding more heat than rocks).

    “NASA started everything.”

    Does this guy even know about Sputnik and how the Russians were blowing past the USA in the late 1950s and early 1960s? I just finished reading Rise of the Rocket Girls by Nathalia Holt.

    Oh, wow. I am only half way through. It was bad enough when he started by telling Marsh to look at the evidence on teh internets (intentional typo). Then claiming there are no photos of astronauts outside, other satellites… etc. He is cherry picking.

  6. #6 by Chris on January 20, 2017 - 18:09

    Oooh… the danger of radiation from the sun and the Van Allen Belts. According to the book I just finished the reason the moon landings did not really endanger the astronauts was because they were not there for very long.

    The International Space Station is inside the Van Allen Belt:

    Still not finished… but if I can do a quick Google to disprove some of his “evidence”, I suspect he will not let information that does not conform to his beliefs into his welded shut skull. Well, he did start the interview by saying he was gullible enough to believe conspiracy theories.

  7. #7 by Artoo45 on January 20, 2017 - 21:05

    He kept acknowledging that “space” existed and then said we’re in some kind of dome. And then there comes the question of questions: “why?” Why do this? Science experiment? Zoo? Prison? As someone who once believed all manner of nonsense and thought I knew better than, well, everyone, I understand his zeal all too well. May he have the same bracing awakening that I did.

  8. #8 by Dustin on January 20, 2017 - 22:34

    In response to the reliance on NASA: Eratosthenes demonstrated not only the general shape but a pretty accurate measurement of the size of the Earth over two millennia ago. This is just one of many pieces of evidence that predates NASA.
    Also, it seems the majority of his points are just an argument from ignorance. Even if we accept his problems with the current model, it doesn’t make a flat earth true by default.

  9. #9 by astrotimer on January 21, 2017 - 08:03

    You have a lot more patience than I do, the entire time I had may face in my palm.

  10. #10 by Simon on January 21, 2017 - 13:54

    If he’d only just answered one question! JUST ONE!!!! As Rob said, Gish galloped right the way through. Love the fact he still believes in all the conspiracy theories except the ones that don’t “Dovetail” with flat earth. They’re fake now. Keep up the good work Marsh.

  11. #11 by Christopher Paul Svanefalk on January 21, 2017 - 14:51

    I could not finish this. It was such a gish-gallop of insanity that it eventually became impossible to endure.

  12. #12 by Casey on January 21, 2017 - 22:35

    I know a few things about temperature sensing and am needing to correct some points made by people who claim the moon produces cool light:

    First, these types of IR sensors do not tell you the temperature of the thing the laser pointer is touching. The laser is just a guide. See this picture:
    This is also why you cant just point the thing at the moon.

    I don’t know how they are taking their temperature, but if they are using an IR temperature sensor they need to be taking into consideration the emissivity of the object. This basically means that dull objects are able to absorb and radiate heat much better than shiny objects. This is why the big IR heaters in Home Depot are a dull black and high R value insulation is shiny. Hopefully they are at least taking a reading off the same substrait.

    I suspect what they are actually seeing with these cold moon temperature readings is the temperature of the earth. If the ground was being warmed by the sun all day, and it is now midnight, the ground could still be warmer than the air around it. Because of this, if you have two precision temperature sensors it would be reasonable for the covered one to be reading warmer, even without a moon.

    Also, the last time I heard somebody make this claim I took my Flir One thermal camera and took a picture of the moon. If the moon was indeed emitting cold light then one would expect the moon to appear cooler than ambient in the sky. Below is the picture I took.

  13. #13 by Rob H on January 22, 2017 - 13:45

    NASA’s ‘Orion: Trial By Fire’ video, which he claims says “We’re testing it unmanned because we don’t know how to get past the Van Allen belts”, doesn’t say that. It says they’re testing the effects of the belts on the spacecraft electronics, and that the craft has shielding to protect astronauts. Video is here:

  14. #14 by Rob H on January 22, 2017 - 13:52

    He says the space race and Cold War weren’t real, and secretly the Soviets and USA were “hand in hand, militarising space”. This seems odd, because a moment earlier he was saying space isn’t real.

  15. #15 by Rob H on January 22, 2017 - 14:08

    Makes you wonder, though; why *would* the world’s greatest explorer spend decades obsessively probing a vast unmapped inhospitable continent which was tantalisingly untouched by human eyes? It just doesn’t make any sense for an explorer to behave like that.

  16. #16 by Dave E on January 23, 2017 - 12:08

    Why doesn’t the UK have a space program?

    WIGAN has a space program (sort of):

  17. #17 by Jason on January 23, 2017 - 17:29

    Finished the episode this morning, and then opened up my Google news feed to see this:

    Full-disk images of Earth being taken every 15 min, plus a tangential reference to a satellite being taken offline after being hit with a space rock (something Mr. Sergant insists we never hear about for some suspicious reason).

  18. #18 by Émile Jetzer on January 24, 2017 - 14:17

    For cool full disc pictures of Earth, there’s always the DSCOVR satellite: &

    <s>But that’s from NASA, so entirely unreliable</s>

  19. #19 by Émile Jetzer on January 24, 2017 - 14:18

    Fantastic moment:

    – You can guess who that was… @_o
    – Go on ¬¬
    – Nazi Germany. O.O
    – Of course. -_-

  20. #20 by Kit Hadley-Day on February 6, 2017 - 08:28

    What staggered me was going straight from flat eartherism into cold war denial, america and Russia where not really in conflict, they were just pretending to preserve the globe earth theory. That is some weapons grade madness

  21. #21 by Logan on February 8, 2017 - 03:57

    Is his name is misspelled in the title/description? Should it be “Mark Sargent” rather than “Mark Sergant”?

    (Just started a google quest to see if Mr Sargent ever talks to someone with an astronomy background who actually can’t answer his questions…)

  22. #22 by PW on February 18, 2017 - 00:07

    Let’s turn one of the examples around since boats aren’t very tall objects and it’s hard to see the “curve” effect lost in ocean swells.
    I’m in a boat headed out to sea and I look back to the coastline with hills then very tall mountains beyond. So when I see the coastline then hills “drop below the horizon” before the mountains eventually disappear (and reappear in the reverse order on the way back to port) that is what exactly?

  23. #23 by JDS on March 3, 2017 - 01:46

    This was intensely frustrating to listen to. I do not understand how Marsh was so calm and patient, and didn’t just keep interrupting with “WTF you talkin’ ’bout, Willis?”

    The craziest thing to me about this is that there are actually quite simple experiments you can do yourself to demonstrate a curved earth. I mean, the ancient Greeks understood this. They didn’t have lasers or aircraft or GPS. They were even able to get a reasonable measurement of the size of the globe using nothing but careful measurements and trigonometry.

    But the biggest thing to me is WHY? He didn’t give a compelling reason why any shadow government or overlord race would want to hide thus from everyone. Nor did he give a compelling reason why some alien race would go through the trouble of making this place. And his reasons for the US government to cover this up are just bonkers. When Marsh pointed out that the new requirements for science from this discovery could spawn growth industries, he just glossed over that.


  24. #24 by Kevin Howell on March 8, 2017 - 12:02

    Basically all comes out in the last 6 mins – Lapsed church goer, intelligent design, higher powers than us, conscience, Atlantis, Pyramids . . .

  25. #25 by Rosalie Brown on March 11, 2017 - 12:55

    I was very interested to hear this fellow talk because I find the whole idea of a flat earth ludicrous. I enjoyed hearing his thoughts. What I was disappointed in was that there seemed to be no ‘vigorous’ questioning of his unfounded assertions. An interesting comment left on one flat earth video was that if you start at the North Pole and go south for x miles, then west for x miles, then north for x miles, one winds up back at the North Pole. If one does that on a flat surface one winds up having traversed 3 sides of a square. All that’s needed is to ask some very basic questions and do a little ‘walk about’ and the whole thing would be cleared up. I’m afraid this program seems more of a venue to just let people talk about their wacky beliefs. While I find that interesting, you shouldn’t say how your going to ‘question’ their assertions if you don’t.

  26. #26 by whitewool on May 27, 2017 - 16:14

    This guy might not be what he seems… “As you can see, there are people who believe me!!!! Also, we’re talking, about what im saying and you are listening!!! So I must be right!!! In some way at least!! Don’t you see?” A direct appeal to cognitive dissonance. “Look at yourself, your talking to me, your making an effort – so u must somehow believe me don’t you?” That is manipulation and i think he knows it.

    You might have found yourself a narcissist – not just somebody with an odd believe system. Pretty sure the “i didn’t make money of it” is a simple lie.

    I think that’s often the problem with you skeptics =) You don’t give psychology enough credit. You assume, the people you’re trying to argue with, are interested in truth and could be convinced by logic.
    However many of leading conspiracy theorists are actually rather obvious narcissists. Their followers often are desperate or mentally-lazy people that will believe anything that provides some meaning, group-identity and/or hope. Anything that protects them from the critical know-it-all’s.

    But the leading cultists -> They usually don’t care about truth at all. It matters so little in their world, they don’t even really understand what it is. Truth to a narcissist is just: “What i can see, and information that helps me manipulate others”. They are the truth – whats in their way is a lie. If u cannot mirror the views and feelings of others like a narcissist, reality beyond your own head has little importance.

    Science is a threat to their power, to their reality. As well as religions they don’t control. Both could potentially turn people against them, providing sources of authority that contradicts them or makes the lying harder.
    So they usually advocate conspiracy-theories and believe systems that work with circular, traditional or emotional arguments. Trump is one of the best examples.

    I think (and i don’t know) to beat the “alternative fact factories” what people would need is: Less stress, more time, more community, more self-esteem and less fear.
    Arguing and explaining things is always more than important! And also always a good thing! But it can only do so much at some point.
    A workfare-do-everything-yourself-environment builds up constant stress. Global-concurrence paired with individual responsibility builds social anxiety. Terrorism and war build fear. All that makes people panic, overreact, unable to think clearly and bad decisions.

  27. #27 by whitewool on May 27, 2017 - 16:18

    If u cannot mirror the views and feelings of others reality beyond your own head has little importance. (narcissists can’t do that, they don’t feel empathy or at least very little or it)

(will not be published)