Be Reasonable: Episode #055 – Darren Nesbitt

Joining Marsh for this episode is musician and Flat Earth proponent, Darren Nesbitt.

  1. #1 by Richard on September 5, 2018 - 07:37

    Darren Nesbitt
    The reason you won’t feel any motion when on planet earth is that there is essentially no acceleration in the earth’s spin. It is in contact motion at a constant velocity. Unlike a train, car or aircraft it is not accelerating or braking, so no motion is ‘felt’. Unlike a train on a track, a car on a road or an aircraft through undulations in the air, earth is spinning in the smooth void of space. No bumps, no change in velocity (acceleration) and hence no motion felt.
    Your theory is nothing more than a theory based on the gaps in your knowledge.

  2. #2 by Rob on September 5, 2018 - 12:41

    At 41:00, talking about the Earth’s surface dragging the atmosphere with it: “If that was true, you wouldn’t be able to throw a ball through air. The air would go along with the ball.”
    Air does “go along with the ball” – air at the ball’s surface sticks to the ball and travels with it. It’s called the “boundary layer”. Boundary layers are incredibly important in aerodynamics and affect things like drag. For example, see

  3. #3 by Rob on September 5, 2018 - 13:22

    At 49:00: “How they [Apollo astronauts] went to the toilet?”
    Oh, ask and ye shall find. For weeing, they used condom-like cuffs connected to bags.

    For pooing, they used these adhesive arse bags.

    NASA did later hold a competition to design a better toilet solution, as crapping in plastic bags wasn’t considered a desirable solution for long duration space flights.

  4. #4 by Jerry on September 5, 2018 - 22:27

    Re: The football. The ball definitely does drag the air around with it, and that’s how you can curve a ball when throwing it. The problem with trying to do the experiment with the ball is that the ball itself doesn’t have enough gravity to pull the air towards it to make enough of an atmosphere to show the effect. If you put the ball in a wind tunnel and spin it, it’ll drag the air around but it won’t do the “perfect” dragging because the whole thing is embedded in more air further away. You could put the ball in a near vacuum, but then you wouldn’t have enough air near the ball to see any effect because the ball’s gravity is too weak.

    I liked the bit where he said there are literally no photos of the Earth from space then a bit later claimed that they were faked. Also the reason that there are literally no experiments which show that the Earth is moving through space is because the concept is meaningless – motion only has meaning relative to something else. There are loads of experiments which show the Earth moving relative to other things.

  5. #5 by Malcolm on September 6, 2018 - 00:14

    That took me what, 10 seconds on google.

    Mr Nesbit doesn’t strike me as an honest broker. Investigating doesn’t me looking at the things you want to see and ignoring the things you don’t.

  6. #6 by Patrick M on September 6, 2018 - 02:16

    Richard :
    earth is spinning in the smooth void of space. No bumps, no change in velocity (acceleration) and hence no motion felt.

    I thought the reason you didn’t feel the Earth’s spin was the same reason you don’t tend to feel your clothes or your socks all the time. There’s a sensation that your mind just sort of blocks out because paying attention to the sensation causes more detrimental stress than ignoring it so you basically feel other motion, but not the motion you evolved on.

    There’s no one born and raised their entire life on a living moving train that never stops. So of course you don’t get that acclimated.

    Maybe we’re both saying the same thing but in different ways. I don’t know if I’m helping or hurting lol.

  7. #7 by Patrick M on September 6, 2018 - 02:22

    So if you want to, say prove whether the earth is flat or not, you could do what these people did. Go Pro, GPS attached, weather balloon, go through hours worth of footage, find out once and for all.

  8. #8 by Chris on September 7, 2018 - 01:25

    Oh good grief. I have been on trips and we had family visits, so I am very far behind on podcasts. This is going to wait in the queue for a while until I feel like laughing/screaming at another person without any understanding of basic freshman physics.

    Inertia is a real thing.

  9. #9 by Chris on September 7, 2018 - 03:18

    Newton’s first law is the “Law of Inertia”:

    So the first law is stated (from that link): “An object at rest stays at rest and an object in motion stays in motion with the same speed and in the same direction unless acted upon by an unbalanced force.”

    This is why Earth’s atmosphere travels with the spin of the planet’s rotation. This is actually high school physics.

  10. #10 by Matthew on September 7, 2018 - 03:20

    “Have you ever seen a rock reflect light..”

    I mean that is generally how sight works.

    “” it glows.”

    I’m guessing Darren has never been caving. Different rocks have different albedo some one them do appear like the moon when they reflect light while being surrounded by empty cave.

  11. #11 by Nick on September 7, 2018 - 14:24

    Aside from the origin of April Fools Day not being anywhere as clear cut as he claimed, there’s a slight false equivalency with disagreements on what day is arbitrarily chosen for the start of a new year, an essentially man-made concept (and we still have people adhering to different calendars), and a provable and fixed shape of something.

    And saying spring makes sense as the start of year because that’s when everything starts heating up and life begins again – yeah, if you live in the UK! Otherwise, April as a start of the new year makes about as much sense as January 1. In fact, if the seasons WERE the same everywhere in the world, that could well indicate a flat earth. As it is…

  12. #12 by Jerry on September 8, 2018 - 11:01

    The reason you don’t feel the spin of the Earth is because the acceleration needed to make you go in a circle is towards the centre, which is the direction of gravity. The only thing you would feel is that gravity is very, very slightly less than it would be if the Earth weren’t spinning. Since you can’t compare the two, you don’t feel anything.

  13. #13 by Linda on September 8, 2018 - 21:21

    It’s a shame Marsh didn’t ask Darren WHY everybody is lying about the shape of the earth.

  14. #14 by Peter on September 13, 2018 - 01:16

    Linda :
    It’s a shame Marsh didn’t ask Darren WHY everybody is lying about the shape of the earth.

    I wish he’d pressed Nesbitt a little more with his unsubstantiated, uninformed statements. He can’t find a rock that reflects light? The Principle was an excellent movie? I do admire the interviewer’s patience. But he did let Nesbitt hang himself when using the bible as supporting evidence.

  15. #15 by Keith on September 30, 2018 - 03:01

    One of the few problems that Nesbitt gets into right off the bat is mentioning Copernicus’ notion of heliocentrism and the mainstream. One could say that the mainstream, up until Copernicus, was the Ptolemaic system or geocentrism that was dominant for about 1500 years. So Copernicus was the radical here. Galileo and Kepler were both Copernicians and after Kepler computed new, more accurate Rudolphine tables of planetary motions, this increasingly convinced 17th century astronomers that the heliocentric model was correct. But everyone knew that the Earth was a globe and this goes back to the ancient Greeks.

  16. #17 by Keith on September 30, 2018 - 04:32

    Flat earthers have no explanation for this. The best flat earth crusher I’ve encountered was presented by youtuber, GreaterSapien. He stated that no matter where you live on earth and no matter what time of day or year it is, the sun’s apparent motion through the sky subtends an angle of 15 deg per hour. This is the basis behind sun dials. If the tiny ball sun was ‘orbiting around the north pole’ at about 3,000 miles (4830 km) above the flat earth’s surface on the equator for a single observer for instance, this tiny sun would have to constantly change its velocity from when it is overhead to way off ‘near the horizon’ to maintain the 15 deg/hour position change in the sky. And I’m not entirely sure if one could even do this using just change of velocity. But to a second observer located say, 90 degrees on the equatorial circle away from the first observer, the sun would not traverse the sky at 15 deg/hr. Additionally, any other observer located anywhere on the flat earth other than the first observer for that matter would measure inconsistent, changing angles per hour. (We are assuming the tiny sun is ‘orbiting’ at a constant velocity. If it wasn’t, then it would have to have several different velocities at the same time for different observers.) So there would be no consistency in the angular amount this tiny sun would traverse in one hour; nor move with a single constant velocity. But on a spherical earth, everyone would experience the same apparent motion of the sun arcing across the sky at 15 deg per hour no matter what time of day.

  17. #18 by Keith on September 30, 2018 - 04:44

    The Coriolis force by battleship gunners is discussed in Marion’s mechanics book. The relevant paragraph is quoted here:

    “During the naval engagement near the Falkland Islands which occurred early in World War I, the British gunners were surprised to see their accurately aimed salvos falling 100 yards to the left of the German ships. The designers of the sighting mechanisms were well aware of the Coriolis deflection and had carefully taken this into account, but they apparently were under the impression that all sea battles took place near 50 degrees N latitude and never near 50 degrees S latitude. The British shots, therefore, fell at a distance from the targets equal to twice the Coriolis deflection.” (Classical Dynamics of Particles and Systems, Second Edition — by Jerry B. Marion, Academic Press, Inc., 1970, p.346 fn.)

  18. #19 by Keith on September 30, 2018 - 04:51

    Nesbitt’s ‘pizzabox’ flat Earth is mostly worse a model than the pizza flat Earth. His model has the sun at about 3000 miles up I presume, popping in from one end of a corner of the box to popping out from the opposite corner!

  19. #20 by Keith on September 30, 2018 - 05:07

    This idea that we should be skeptical about absolutely everything becomes a self-referential process that then applies to anything the person who states this extreme skeptical position says. So we should be even more skeptical when someone comes up with a model of the Earth that is like a pizzabox that can’t explain anything as to how celestial objects move, why objects fall, the motion of the sun and moon, gravity, how the pizzabox Earth formed, the extreme age of the Earth and it’s geologic past, and everything done by all the space agencies, universities and observatories related to space and our universe.

  20. #21 by Keith on September 30, 2018 - 05:17

  21. #22 by Keith on September 30, 2018 - 05:22

    Note that the official naval records are looked at as being authentic (in the Vietnam war case) but then previously, we should distrust everything the government or any of their related agencies are saying. You can’t have it both ways Nesbitt.

  22. #23 by Keith on September 30, 2018 - 05:34

    The Earth is moving because we can detect parallax and we can detect the anisotropy (slight redshift and blueshift) of the cosmic background radiation which is the radiation left over from the big bang. This anisotropy has to be first subtracted from the CMB data before a CMB map is constructed. We also have Foucault’s pendulum. There is also a difference in siderial time and solar time. Tides.

  23. #24 by Keith on September 30, 2018 - 05:50

    Every single image taken by thousands of amateur astronomers and astrophotographers worldwide are REAL images taken of all the celestial objects in the night sky from the northern and southern yes, hemispheres. They may process them but it is no different than what we do to enhance some images we take with our smartphones for example. To say that all the images taken by NASA are nothing but paintings?!? illustrates the height of Nesbitt’s ignorance. Go out and buy any astro magazine and there are sections that show the best images by countless different astrophotographers. Or check out their many websites. I think he’s stuck deep down in the rabbit hole somewhere.

  24. #25 by Bill Hillary on October 8, 2018 - 16:58

    Never mind the GPS arguments. Nesbitt suggests all surveyors are cadastral surveyors, not so. Back in the day, geodetic surveys were carried out using triangulation nets. If you read the angles of a large triangle (kms. per leg) you find they add up to more than 180 degrees. This is called spherical excess and is proportional to the area of the triangle on the sphere(oid). Everest calculated the height of the mountain bearing his name and had to account for the amount his instrument was affected by the mass of the mountains, above and below horizon. Long before NASA’s conspiracy. Sorry, Mr. Nesbitt, but you are NOT and independent thinker nor researcher. And I conclude you may not be very smart. First of these podcasts I’ve tried, I’ll try one more but…that one was a bit of a waste of time.

  25. #26 by Rob on October 10, 2018 - 09:46

    Darren seemed to have much in common with other conspiracy theorists. When finding something he doesn’t understand, instead of looking to basic physics or engineering and learning something, he believes it’s a hole in science itself. This podcast had example after example of this tendency. The whole mobile phone mast thing for example: he doesn’t understand how mobile phones work (fair enough, I suspect many people don’t), but instead of reading up on it and learning, he assumes that his knowledge is as far as one can go, and there must be something funny going on. Equally, his belief that the shadow on a phased moon is a solid line is entirely based on viewing it with the naked eye – if he just looked through a telescope then he’d see the shadows changing across the craters and mountains. In this sense, his beliefs are entirely founded on a particular combination of ignorance and arrogance.

    Closely related to this was his dismissal of science that he doesn’t understand. For example, recent Neutrino experiments that show particles going through the Earth he dismissed as just ‘numbers on a screen’. GPS again, just clever maths trickery.

    Following on from the above, I’d be really interested to take Darren step by step through a few simple proofs that the earth is round. For example, trigonometry on the positions of the sun, moon and stars show the earth’s spherical nature quite clearly. Of course, if he doesn’t understand trigonometry you’d have to derive that from primary school maths, but again, that’s quite simple to do step by step. Much like creationists, Darren believes in a ‘them and us’ view of science, rather than accepting that all science is just logical steps building on very basic observations and calculations.

  26. #27 by Rob on October 10, 2018 - 10:20

    Richard :
    Darren Nesbitt
    The reason you won’t feel any motion when on planet earth is that there is essentially no acceleration in the earth’s spin. It is in contact motion at a constant velocity. Unlike a train, car or aircraft it is not accelerating or braking, so no motion is ‘felt’. Unlike a train on a track, a car on a road or an aircraft through undulations in the air, earth is spinning in the smooth void of space. No bumps, no change in velocity (acceleration) and hence no motion felt.
    Your theory is nothing more than a theory based on the gaps in your knowledge.

    Yes. Basically, there’s no such thing as feeling constant speed motion – we can only detect accelerations (bumps, corners, shaking, climbing, descending etc). This is very basic Newtonian mechanics.

    We do actually experience a tiny acceleration on Earth, because the earth spins and that gives us a constant centripetal acceleration. However, constant acceleration is another special case (see Einstein’s ‘Equivalence Principle’), because constant acceleration is indistinguishable (and in our case combined with) gravity.

    That said, the fact that we’re rotating on a sphere can actually be detected – it’s called the Coriolis effect and is what’s responsible for most of the macro weather patterns on earth.

  27. #28 by Kernan Coleman on October 16, 2018 - 23:25

    This guy was perhaps the most maddening of all of these maddening people. His ability to think critically seems nonexistent. He can’t seem to grasp the simplest explanations for the earth being an incontrovertible globe. There are many experiments that prove it and he just says “no there aren’t.” Infuriating.

  28. #29 by daz nez on June 16, 2019 - 12:01

    1. richard – ‘The reason you won’t feel any motion when on planet earth is that there is essentially no acceleration in the earth’s spin. It is in contact motion at a constant velocity.’

    i presume you meant constant? either way it is not, it changes direction all the time, not only as it orbits the sun but as the sun orbits the galaxy and the galaxy through the universe, as well as its own rotation. even at this level, are you saying the earth is a perfectly smooth ball, and doesn’t have mountain ranges and other surface features which would also make the motion non-constant?

    2. rob – thanks for that, always willing to learn more. question – why is there no constant pressure drag on the earth’s atmosphere as it rotates at 1038mph at the equator, and at its different speeds at different latitudes? wouldn’t this constant pressure differential mean all the atmosphere would drift towards the poles? also, if there is tectonic drift, how come all of the plates aren’t heading towards the equator due to centrifugal force, and not as the theory posits, heading away from the equator? isn’t that counter-intuitive?

    3. rob again – thanks. no waste storage space seems to have been designed into the lem. did they leave it on the moon?

    4. jerry – shouldn’t the atmosphere spin faster and faster the higher up you go? do airplanes/ high alt balloons/ astronots in the hoax iss take that into account?

    there are NO photographs of earth in space. every image is a composite or admitted by nasa to be photoshopped. there is no video of the earth rotating in space that is a simple video recording, rather than cgi. every single one is cgi. find one that’s real (10 minutes’ worth would do) and the game is over. the fact i couldn’t find any was a damning accusation on the ball earth after this many decades of ‘space technology.’

    ‘There are loads of experiments which show the Earth moving relative to other things.’ lol – thus proving by itself there is no hard evidence the earth itself is moving – the experiments could well (and in fact are) simply proving the heavens and the atmosphere are in motion, but not as a result of any movement of terra firma.

    5. malcolm – took me 3 minutes to see the cut. 1:26 where the boosters separate – the film also judders every time in what is obviously ham-fisted editing. after this interruption, the ‘rocket burn’ is clearly cgi if you watch it for a few seconds, and compare it with that before the cut.
    sorry pal, you knwo they have video editing and advanced graphics capabilities right? obviously this is not them, but it had you fooled for a short while.

    6. patrick – shouldn’t the atmospheric and ground spin feel different at different latitudes? shouldn’t it be a known thing that airplanes have to adjust for the greater spin as they approach the equator? no, everything acts as if it’s perfectly stationary, because it is.

    and 7. indeed people have patrick, i’ll see that and raise you:

(will not be published)