Those search engines / a little flat earth evidence

Mark Sargents youtube channel comes up 66th on the list of returns for flat earth. Does that not strike you guys as a conspiracy/coverup?

that's some amazing detective work.
I think you've cracked it.
Do you have a wall in your house with photos of zuckerberg-nasa-"them" all connected with strings of yarn?
maybe post that as it would help us piece together this conspiracy.

Quote from: faded mike on April 08, 2020, 07:53:59 PM

Mark Sargents youtube channel comes up 66th on the list of returns for flat earth. Does that not strike you guys as a conspiracy/coverup?

that's some amazing detective work.
I think you've cracked it.
Do you have a wall in your house with photos of zuckerberg-nasa-"them" all connected with strings of yarn?
maybe post that as it would help us piece together this conspiracy.

What I'd like to know is why I can search on YouTube (not Google) for exactly "flat earth mark sargent" and this is the first entry:
markksargent 85.4K subscribers • 1,693 videos

But Mark Sargent calls his YouTube channel not "Mark Sargent" but "markksargent" and if I search Google for that, I get:

twitter.com › hashtag › markksargent
#markksargent hashtag on Twitter

See Tweets about #markksargent on Twitter. See what people are saying and join the conversation.

Mark Sargents youtube channel comes up 66th on the list of returns for flat earth. Does that not strike you guys as a conspiracy/coverup?

Or trying to refine search result to produce useful or reliable information rather than false nonsense backed up by nothing.
That doesn't mean it is a conspiracy or coverup.

Hoax research is being covered up as you should know

Hoax research is being covered up as you should know

Really?
There seems to be plenty on the flat-Earth hoax that you and many others try to foist on the world.

Hers is todays list. Notice the first few videos are in order from more to less views. This is not the norm for my search r4eturns, but there are no instructions i can find anywhere on how to porperly use the various functions on youtube. 

returns fro moon landing hoax

The Moon landing at 50: Debunking the conspiracy theories
The Telegraph
10 months ago575,619 views
It was one of mankind's greatest achievements, but 50 years since man first walked on the moon conspiracy theories that it was ...
 3:56

Was the Moon Landing FAKE? | COLOSSAL MYSTERIES | Learn #withme
DreamWorksTV by Peacock Kids
11 months ago447,820 views
Learn #withme
Did humankind really land on the Moon, or is there any chance it could have been faked?

Images used under ...
 5:57

Stanley Kubrick Moon Landing Conspiracy
CineFix
6 years ago346,192 views
John Doe investigates the rumor that Stanley Kubrick helped NASA fake the moon landing in 1969. Subscribe ...
 2:14

Exposed: Apollo 11 Moon landing conspiracy theories | Just The FAQs
USA TODAY
11 months ago255,812 views
Astronauts Neil Armstrong and Buzz Aldrin took the first steps on the moon, or did they? We explain one of the most talked ...
 3:48

5 famous moon landing conspiracy theories debunked
Global News
10 months ago115,263 views
How is the flag waving on the moon? Why aren't there any stars in Apollo photos? We debunk these moon landing conspiracy ...
 16:33

Ask an Expert: Apollo and the So-Called Moon-Landing Hoax
Smithsonian National Air and Space Museum
10 years ago135,428 views
Dr. Roger Launius, curator in the National Air and Space Museum's Space History Division and alleged "conspirator", discusses ...
 6:39

Moon landing conspiracy DEBUNKED (again) | What The Future
CNET
1 year ago211,614 views
Nvidia's new GPU debunks moon landing conspiracies all over again. Plus, a fire truck concept that could be crazy enough to ...
 12:38

GMM S6 • E25
Did We Really Land On The Moon?
Good Mythical Morning
5 years ago2,394,851 views
We look at some interesting theories about the moon landing. GMM #507! Good Mythical MORE: ...
 9:53

Debunking Lunar Landing Conspiracies with Maxwell and VXGI
NVIDIA
5 years ago1,665,571 views
Explore the truth behind the iconic Buzz Aldrin moon landing photo. See how modern graphics innovations can shed new light on ...
 4:43

QI | QI Versus Moon Landing Conspiracies
QI
10 months ago1,075,485 views
Follow QI on Twitter ▷ http://twitter.com/qikipedia Follow QI on Facebook ▷ http://facebook.com/officialQI Follow QI on Instagram ...
 4:37

Andy Borowitz: Were The Moon Landing Conspiracy Theories Faked? | Now It All Makes Sense
RETRO REPORT
7 months ago34,416 views
50 years after Apollo 11, New Yorker magazine humorist Andy Borowitz looks at the evolution of the myth that the moon landing ...
CC
 6:05

Was the Moon Landing Faked? | This Morning
This Morning
1 year ago1,455,410 views
Subscribe now for more! http://bit.ly/1JM41yF We're joined by Martin Kenny, who believes the landings were faked, and Dr Sarah ...
 2:27

Many still convinced moon landing was a hoax
CityNews Toronto
10 months ago42,372 views
It was one small step for man, one giant leap for mankind, but not everyone believes the moon landing actually happened.
 6:06

Space experts react to the Apollo 11 Moon landings
nature video
10 months ago82,748 views
Half a century ago, a human set foot on the moon for the first time. Nature invited three experts to rewatch the highlights of the ...
CC
 4:04

Was the moon landing faked - Mythbusters
Discovery UK
9 years ago1,588,289 views
More than 40 years on conspiracy theories still abound that the moon landing was a hoax. Mythbusters take a look at some of ...
 19:41

Who Started the Moon Landing Hoax Conspiracy Theory?
Today I Found Out
1 year ago1,603,340 views
Check out Squarespace! http://squarespace.com/brainfood If you happen to like our videos and have a few bucks to spare to ...
CC
 11:29

Was the Moon Landing faked? | Big Questions with Neil deGrasse Tyson
Penguin Books UK
6 months ago2,637,538 views
Neil deGrasse Tyson joined us to answer our biggest questions on climate change, God, AI and more. Order your copy of Letters ...
 1:23:31

Apollo 11 Press Conference
Motherboard
9 years ago753,548 views
1 Hour 14 Minutes - Apollo 11 Post Flight Press Conference. Read more at Motherboard.tv.
 25:02

"You all know the moon landing was fake." | PROPS Episode 14
Yahoo! Sports
1 year ago16,887 views
Will Gronk ever play defense again? Will Mark Sanchez ever be allowed to play football again? And is Steph Curry our new top ...
 6:48

The Faux Documentary That 'Proves' Kubrick Faked the Moon Landing
VICE
3 years ago613,428 views
VICE sits down with director Matt Johnson and his team to discuss their faux-documentary, Operation Avalanche, moon-landing ...
CC
 6:39

Moon landing conspiracy DEBUNKED (again) | What The Future
CNET
1 year ago211,614 views
Nvidia's new GPU debunks moon landing conspiracies all over again. Plus, a fire truck concept that could be crazy enough to ...
 4:37

Andy Borowitz: Were The Moon Landing Conspiracy Theories Faked? | Now It All Makes Sense
RETRO REPORT
7 months ago34,416 views
50 years after Apollo 11, New Yorker magazine humorist Andy Borowitz looks at the evolution of the myth that the moon landing ...
CC
 9:53

Debunking Lunar Landing Conspiracies with Maxwell and VXGI
NVIDIA
5 years ago1,665,571 views
Explore the truth behind the iconic Buzz Aldrin moon landing photo. See how modern graphics innovations can shed new light on ...
 25:02

"You all know the moon landing was fake." | PROPS Episode 14
Yahoo! Sports
1 year ago16,887 views
Will Gronk ever play defense again? Will Mark Sanchez ever be allowed to play football again? And is Steph Curry our new top ...
 19:41

Who Started the Moon Landing Hoax Conspiracy Theory?
Today I Found Out
1 year ago1,603,340 views
Check out Squarespace! http://squarespace.com/brainfood If you happen to like our videos and have a few bucks to spare to ...
CC
 2:27

Many still convinced moon landing was a hoax
CityNews Toronto
10 months ago42,372 views
It was one small step for man, one giant leap for mankind, but not everyone believes the moon landing actually happened.
 6:06

Space experts react to the Apollo 11 Moon landings
nature video
10 months ago82,748 views
Half a century ago, a human set foot on the moon for the first time. Nature invited three experts to rewatch the highlights of the ...
CC
 8:29

True Stories about the Apollo 11 Moon Landing
CNET
10 months ago76,712 views
Fifty years ago, Apollo 11 began its voyage into American history. And if you've ever had questions about it - we have 5 answers ...



and for "moon hoax"

The Moon landing at 50: Debunking the conspiracy theories
The Telegraph
10 months ago575,619 views
It was one of mankind's greatest achievements, but 50 years since man first walked on the moon conspiracy theories that it was ...
 3:56

Was the Moon Landing FAKE? | COLOSSAL MYSTERIES | Learn #withme
DreamWorksTV by Peacock Kids
11 months ago447,820 views
Learn #withme
Did humankind really land on the Moon, or is there any chance it could have been faked?

Images used under ...
 5:57

Stanley Kubrick Moon Landing Conspiracy
CineFix
6 years ago346,192 views
John Doe investigates the rumor that Stanley Kubrick helped NASA fake the moon landing in 1969. Subscribe ...
 4:43

QI | QI Versus Moon Landing Conspiracies
QI
10 months ago1,075,485 views
Follow QI on Twitter ▷ http://twitter.com/qikipedia Follow QI on Facebook ▷ http://facebook.com/officialQI Follow QI on Instagram ...
 2:14

Exposed: Apollo 11 Moon landing conspiracy theories | Just The FAQs
USA TODAY
11 months ago255,812 views
Astronauts Neil Armstrong and Buzz Aldrin took the first steps on the moon, or did they? We explain one of the most talked ...
 3:48

5 famous moon landing conspiracy theories debunked
Global News
10 months ago115,263 views
How is the flag waving on the moon? Why aren't there any stars in Apollo photos? We debunk these moon landing conspiracy ...
 16:33

Ask an Expert: Apollo and the So-Called Moon-Landing Hoax
Smithsonian National Air and Space Museum
10 years ago135,428 views
Dr. Roger Launius, curator in the National Air and Space Museum's Space History Division and alleged "conspirator", discusses ...
 6:48

The Faux Documentary That 'Proves' Kubrick Faked the Moon Landing
VICE
3 years ago613,428 views
VICE sits down with director Matt Johnson and his team to discuss their faux-documentary, Operation Avalanche, moon-landing ...
 6:05

Was the Moon Landing Faked? | This Morning
This Morning
1 year ago1,455,410 views
Subscribe now for more! http://bit.ly/1JM41yF We're joined by Martin Kenny, who believes the landings were faked, and Dr Sarah ...
 11:29

Was the Moon Landing faked? | Big Questions with Neil deGrasse Tyson
Penguin Books UK
6 months ago2,637,538 views
Neil deGrasse Tyson joined us to answer our biggest questions on climate change, God, AI and more. Order your copy of Letters ...
 4:04

Was the moon landing faked - Mythbusters
Discovery UK
9 years ago1,588,289 views
More than 40 years on conspiracy theories still abound that the moon landing was a hoax. Mythbusters take a look at some of ...
 4:06

Where Are the Lost Apollo 11 Moon Landing Tapes?
Mashable
10 months ago19,425 views
In 1969, we changed the world forever and landed on the moon. But the original video proof has since disappeared. Where did it ...

I mean , thx youtube, for "giving everyone a voice", but stick to that. Oh and were watching your suspicious activity.... its kindof suspicious.

Before youtube cut me off - just kidding -  my browser is no longer supported, i spent an hour looking for instructions on how to use youtube - found nothing. NO INSTRUCTIoNS

If anyone could confirm this for me i would appreciate it. My understanding is that noweher are there instructions for basic operation of youtube.

edit: on the youtube site

It occurred to Me a while back that there were "top comments", and then it occurred to me that there was no instructions on how it works, or written rules about the top comment designation.

Before youtube cut me off - just kidding -  my browser is no longer supported, i spent an hour looking for instructions on how to use youtube - found nothing. NO INSTRUCTIoNS

If anyone could confirm this for me i would appreciate it. My understanding is that noweher are there instructions for basic operation of youtube.

It occurred to Me a while back that thee were "top comments", and then it occurred to me that there was no instructions on how it works, or written rules about the top comment designation.

Instructions for what?

Google search: 'youtube top comments description'

Response:

What are top comments on YouTube?
A top comment on YouTube is a comment that has received the most thumbs ups. This is another way to get you popular on YouTube, aside from your videos.

Elapsed time to find answer: 5 seconds

Quote from: faded mike on June 30, 2020, 02:09:05 PM

Before youtube cut me off - just kidding -  my browser is no longer supported, i spent an hour looking for instructions on how to use youtube - found nothing. NO INSTRUCTIoNS

If anyone could confirm this for me i would appreciate it. My understanding is that noweher are there instructions for basic operation of youtube.

It occurred to Me a while back that thee were "top comments", and then it occurred to me that there was no instructions on how it works, or written rules about the top comment designation.

Instructions for what?

Google search: 'youtube top comments description'

Response:

What are top comments on YouTube?
A top comment on YouTube is a comment that has received the most thumbs ups. This is another way to get you popular on YouTube, aside from your videos.

Elapsed time to find answer: 5 seconds

No man. theirs something wrong with that. i just found out google and youtube were related. they don't say on the website type your questions in the google search engine. They're giving  you the reigns to lower the bar.

Quote from: Stash on June 30, 2020, 02:19:25 PM

Quote from: faded mike on June 30, 2020, 02:09:05 PM

Before youtube cut me off - just kidding -  my browser is no longer supported, i spent an hour looking for instructions on how to use youtube - found nothing. NO INSTRUCTIoNS

If anyone could confirm this for me i would appreciate it. My understanding is that noweher are there instructions for basic operation of youtube.

It occurred to Me a while back that thee were "top comments", and then it occurred to me that there was no instructions on how it works, or written rules about the top comment designation.

Instructions for what?

Google search: 'youtube top comments description'

Response:

What are top comments on YouTube?
A top comment on YouTube is a comment that has received the most thumbs ups. This is another way to get you popular on YouTube, aside from your videos.

Elapsed time to find answer: 5 seconds

No man. theirs something wrong with that. i just found out google and youtube were related.

You just now discovered this? Google bought YT in 2006 - 14 years ago. Where have you been?

they don't say on the website type your questions in the google search engine. They're giving  you the reigns to lower the bar.

I have no idea what your issue is. What's the problem?

oh Man, you don't know what my issue is.

oh Man, you don't know what my issue is.

Correct, I have no idea. You're just now realizing that google has owned YT for 14 years and for some reason you don't know how to search on google. Yeah, I'm mystified as to what your problem is.

Hahaha    he also has an expired broswer.
Wtf browser is that?

So what, idon't have the time to learn all about computers to fix mine. Look at what you guys do here. you think if the earth were really spherical and we were left to ftry and have these conversations without this constant interference, we woulld not come to the correct conclusions on our own?

I reserve my right to like youtube.

So what, idon't have the time to learn all about computers to fix mine. Look at what you guys do here. you think if the earth were really spherical and we were left to ftry and have these conversations without this constant interference, we woulld not come to the correct conclusions on our own?

Heres your problem
You dont have to figure everyhring out yourself from scratch.
The earth was figured out a long time ago.
If you have an office job you have a it guy coukdve set up your computer.
Plenty of people could give you basic advice on just about anyhing.

Ok, so i just started watching "flat earth clues". In it Mark Sargent said they already started teaching the globe long before they had any visual proof. So it must be mathematical/ concepts in geometry. However, I underwstand "Mach's Principal" to state that a globe or circular earth would appear the same as far as the movments of the heavans, after adjusting heights and sizes.

This taken with the consideration of other potent secrets i have investigated and found that their are other more logicail and complete answers to describe phenomenon or go undescribed - conveniently left out of the mainstream. So i doubt the narrative/ mainstream/textbook answers, hence i am investigsting the flat earth. Although i am not saying all science is fake - obviously somehow alot of our science works everyday.

In short i have no doubt they are hiding things from our view, but if it's as grand a deception as the flat earth, we should probably be researching it/ doin investigation..

Not that criticsim couldn't help.

So what, idon't have the time to learn all about computers to fix mine. Look at what you guys do here. you think if the earth were really spherical and we were left to ftry and have these conversations without this constant interference, we woulld not come to the correct conclusions on our own?

Firstly, for your computer problems, you have told us nothing of what you have which makes it difficult.
I assume your problem is youtube now relies purely upon HTML 5 video. This is supported in so many browsers it isn't funny. Are you trying to access it using internet explorer on a windows XP computer?
If so, that is very much out of date.

As for figuring everything out, look at just how long it has taken science to get where it is. It has taken thousands of years.
Do you really think you and buddies are good enough, to discard all of science and build it back up again within a life time?
To have any chance at all, that would have to be pretty much all you do for your entire life.

The other issue is that "leaving you to yourselves" isn't just leaving you as a group of people searching for the truth of the shape of Earth and if it is spinning. It is also leaving you with con men who pretend Earth is flat for their own reasons and those who religiously adhere to Earth being flat regardless of what the evidence shows, people who will happily lie about evidence to pretend Earth can't be round or pretend it must be flat.

In it Mark Sargent said

See, this is the problem.
Not "Mark Sargent provided evidence showing this", instead we have "Mark Sargent said". Guess what? Mark Sargent saying something doesn't make it true.
He would even say now that we don't have visual proof of Earth being round, even though there is plenty.

However, I underwstand "Mach's Principal" to state that a globe or circular earth would appear the same as far as the movments of the heavans, after adjusting heights and sizes.

I think you misunderstand.
Mach's principle is saying that someone on a merry go round is just as correct in saying that they and the merry go round are stationary with the entire universe rotating around them.
It is nothing more than a poor attempt to keep Earth fixed.
There is no justification at all for why the universe spinning around you should produce such an effect as if you were on a spinning platform, nor any justification for why you should be fixed.

This taken with the consideration of other potent secrets i have investigated and found that their are other more logicail and complete answers to describe phenomenon or go undescribed - conveniently left out of the mainstream.

Are you sure?
Are you sure there isn't some other big issue that these "more logical and complete answers" don't actually address?

if it's as grand a deception as the flat earth, we should probably be researching it/ doin investigation..

Then do it honestly, and fairly. If you aren't going to trust RE sources, don't trust FE sources either.
Find out what each model would predict (and why), and then if they are different, test them.
See if your test is actually good enough to distinguish between them and, if so, it if it clearly indicates one way or the other.

Ok, so i just started watching "flat earth clues". In it Mark Sargent said they already started teaching the globe long before they had any visual proof.

By visual proof Mark Sargent seems to mean only photographs from space. He ignores the couple of thousands of years of accumulated evidence before then.

Mark Sargent's "flat earth clues" are nothing more than deception and omissions bordering on outright lies from start to finish.

Try looking at Bob the Science Guy's "Flat Earth Clueless- Mark Sargent" as well and see how much Mark Sargent leaves out.

Mark Sargent Indoctrination by Bob the Science Guy

So it must be mathematical/ concepts in geometry.

Only if you believe Mark Sargent and ignore the bits he skips over.
For example, he claims that there are no direct flights from Sydney, Australia, to Santiago, Chile, but his "searching" is simply deception!
He looks only for the cheapest flights and not non-stop flights so he "intentionally doesn't find" the flights.

However, I underwstand "Mach's Principal" to state that a globe or circular earth would appear the same as far as the movments of the heavans, after adjusting heights and sizes.

In other words you do not understand "Mach's Principle". It has nothing to do with the shape of the Earth.
It claims, incorrectly, that there is no way to know whether inertial forces are due to an object's acceleration or the acceleration of the whole Universe.

But "Mach's Principle" is simply not tenable because absolute acceleration can be measured.
In particular angular acceleration can be and is measured very accurately - the angluar velocity of the rotating Earth is regulared measured very precisely.

This taken with the consideration of other potent secrets i have investigated and found that their are other more logicail and complete answers to describe phenomenon or go undescribed - conveniently left out of the mainstream.

What "phenomena or go undescribed - conveniently left out of the mainstream"? Please tell!

So i doubt the narrative/ mainstream/textbook answers, hence i am investigsting the flat earth. Although i am not saying all science is fake - obviously somehow alot of our science works everyday.

In short i have no doubt they are hiding things from our view, but if it's as grand a deception as the flat earth, we should probably be researching it/ doin investigation..

Exactly who "are hiding things from our view", what would they be hiding and why would "they" be hiding anything?
What would be the point of this "grand deception"?

Quote from: faded mike on July 01, 2020, 02:05:03 PM

Ok, so i just started watching "flat earth clues". In it Mark Sargent said they already started teaching the globe long before they had any visual proof.

By visual proof Mark Sargent seems to mean only photographs from space. He ignores the couple of thousands of years of accumulated evidence before then.

Mark Sargent's "flat earth clues" are nothing more than deception and omissions bordering on outright lies from start to finish.

Try looking at Bob the Science Guy's "Flat Earth Clueless- Mark Sargent" as well and see how much Mark Sargent leaves out.

Mark Sargent Indoctrination by Bob the Science Guy

Quote from: faded mike

So it must be mathematical/ concepts in geometry.

Only if you believe Mark Sargent and ignore the bits he skips over.
For example, he claims that there are no direct flights from Sydney, Australia, to Santiago, Chile, but his "searching" is simply deception!
He looks only for the cheapest flights and not non-stop flights so he "intentionally doesn't find" the flights.

Quote from: faded mike

However, I underwstand "Mach's Principal" to state that a globe or circular earth would appear the same as far as the movments of the heavans, after adjusting heights and sizes.

In other words you do not understand "Mach's Principle". It has nothing to do with the shape of the Earth.
It claims, incorrectly, that there is no way to know whether inertial forces are due to an object's acceleration or the acceleration of the whole Universe.

But "Mach's Principle" is simply not tenable because absolute acceleration can be measured.
In particular angular acceleration can be and is measured very accurately - the angluar velocity of the rotating Earth is regulared measured very precisely.

Quote from: faded mike

This taken with the consideration of other potent secrets i have investigated and found that their are other more logicail and complete answers to describe phenomenon or go undescribed - conveniently left out of the mainstream.

What "phenomena or go undescribed - conveniently left out of the mainstream"? Please tell!

Quote from: faded mike

So i doubt the narrative/ mainstream/textbook answers, hence i am investigsting the flat earth. Although i am not saying all science is fake - obviously somehow alot of our science works everyday.

In short i have no doubt they are hiding things from our view, but if it's as grand a deception as the flat earth, we should probably be researching it/ doin investigation..

Exactly who "are hiding things from our view", what would they be hiding and why would "they" be hiding anything?
What would be the point of this "grand deception"?

Ive examined this "boat going over the horizon" -

you can see that even when thse boat is supposedly mostly over the horizon - you can still see that the top part of the mast - which has a measurement of 1/6 of the boats height incorporated into the size of the mast above alittle crossbar - tou can see that the boat is distorted by the mirage stretching the part just below the mat crossbar - so that all you can see is a strecthed out top part of the ship obscurring the bottom paart - appearing to be only the top part of the ship - all beit the wrong size - when really the size of the undistorted reamining part of the mast with crossbar at top is still 1/6 of the whole ship bottom is just enveloped in mirage.
You say Mark Sargent leaves a lot out - Well if you look at it in terms of givving a bit of the flat side of the story, then there is really something to consider in what he says. Supposing what you say about him leaving out a lot is true

Ive examined this "boat going over the horizon" -

you can see that even when thse boat is supposedly mostly over the horizon - you can still see that the top part of the mast - which has a measurement of 1/6 of the boats height incorporated into the size of the mast above alittle crossbar - tou can see that the boat is distorted by the mirage stretching the part just below the mat crossbar - so that all you can see is a strecthed out top part of the ship obscurring the bottom paart - appearing to be only the top part of the ship - all beit the wrong size - when really the size of the undistorted reamining part of the mast with crossbar at top is still 1/6 of the whole ship bottom is just enveloped in mirage.
You say Mark Sargent leaves a lot out - Well if you look at it in terms of givving a bit of the flat side of the story, then there is really something to consider in what he says. Supposing what you say about him leaving out a lot is true

Sure.  Light is bent to various degrees by terrestrial refraction, which tends to be most prominent over water.  It’s well understood and the same physics that cameras and eyes use.

But if you accept that this happens, then you also need to accept that it’s a probable   explanation for all the examples of flat earth videos claiming to “see further than they should”.  At best best, there’s a lot of edge cases that are inclusive.

So without all the pictures looking out to sea with Nikon P900s, what actual evidence do flat earthers have?  And how does that compare to all the evidence they can’t explain?  eg. the positions and movements of the sun, moon, stars and planets.

you can see that even when thse boat is supposedly mostly over the horizon - you can still see that the top part of the mast - which has a measurement of 1/6 of the boats height incorporated into the size of the mast above alittle crossbar - tou can see that the boat is distorted by the mirage stretching the part just below the mat crossbar - so that all you can see is a strecthed out top part of the ship obscurring the bottom paart - appearing to be only the top part of the ship - all beit the wrong size - when really the size of the undistorted reamining part of the mast with crossbar at top is still 1/6 of the whole ship bottom is just enveloped in mirage.
You say Mark Sargent leaves a lot out - Well if you look at it in terms of givving a bit of the flat side of the story, then there is really something to consider in what he says. Supposing what you say about him leaving out a lot is true

Except it actually isn't.

Looking at the image at the start (from watching the video on a 1080p monitor):

The top section of the mast is 52 px.
The height of the ship to the mirror line is 361 px, and the height to the water line is 391 px.
This gives us the ship being 6.9 times the height of the top of the mast if you go the mirror line and 7.5 times if you go to the water line.
Looking at this zoomed in version slightly later:

We get factors of 7.0 and 7.5, using the lines they have drawn.

So nothing like the 1/6th they claim.

This dishonesty is even more apparent if you actually watch the claim, where they claim the top of the mast is 1/6th of the boat, while the entire mast (which is clearly more than 2 times the height of the top part) is only 1/3rd.
They get away with it by using "approximately", ignoring what those approximations do.

Later on they provide this image:

And claim that 1/3rd is mast and 2/3rds are boat.
But looking at the actual pixels, the mast is ~23 px (it is very blury so hard to get exact), while the boat is ~27 (and that is going to the water line rather than the mirror line they continually want to use).
So nothing like the 1/3rd they claim, instead it is a much larger portion.

Near the end they provide us with this image:

Notice that the top orange line is drawn BELOW the actual top of the mast, meaning the numbers calculated from it will exaggerate the height of the mast.
But using that, the mast is 37px, and the distance to the mirror line is 194. That gives us a factor of 5.2.
If instead we use the top of the mast, we get a factor of 4.5.
But the more important part is the extra bar that sticks out the side, which cannot easily be seen. By shifting that up or down you could get almost any ratio you want.
Based upon this image from slightly earlier:

The spreader bar is lower than what they used.
Using that image I get heights of 69 and 202 px, giving a ratio of 2.9. It is nothing like the 1/7th at the start.

The video is just using lots of approximations and hoping no one actually bothers to check.

I will certainly consider this and add it too the databank. The final image you showed did indeed look like the bottom of the ship was sinking below the horizon. But i'm curious if you have done or know people doing the math to measure this, like maybe the rate of sinking could probably be gleaned from this or many vids - does this ever show the correct curvature - is this more less understood refraction? And i'll just add that things look pretty blurry and it could be that she can "eyeball" it better than most - your thoughts?

Unless you quite accurately know the speed of the ship, and have a clear day without significant distortion, you are unlikely to be able to calculate the expected amount hidden due to the curvature.

Yes, lots of the images are quite blurly, but there is simply no justification for her claim of 1/6th. Especially not at the start when it is quite obviously not that.

But also the top of the post/mast may be blurry, resulting in lower top of post resulting in closer to 1/6 ratio...?

I've made a discovery, i've cracked the code. to find flat earth videos using duck duck go, if youtube fails you, which doesn't work very well to begin with searchiing flat earth stuff(?), simply go to ddg, and search "mathematical proof of the globe earth" and choose videos.

Voila, you get your flat earth videos....

I've made a discovery, i've cracked the code. to find flat earth videos using duck duck go, if youtube fails you, which doesn't work very well to begin with searchiing flat earth stuff(?), simply go to ddg, and search "mathematical proof of the globe earth" and choose videos.

Voila, you get your flat earth videos....

Sounds like Duck Duck Go has the problem you say Google and YouTube does, only the other way round.

Conspiracy?

I've made a discovery, i've cracked the code. to find flat earth videos using duck duck go, if youtube fails you, which doesn't work very well to begin with searchiing flat earth stuff(?), simply go to ddg, and search "mathematical proof of the globe earth" and choose videos.

Voila, you get your flat earth videos....

Good stuff!
Find one video that debunks the ball and post a link.