Appearance of Moon Debunks Flat Earth with a 30-60-90 Triangle 

Thanks! Sent it to one of your cousins who has friends that argue about this ALL the time!

Yes it is. You just pranked a lot of people with a false dilemma fallacy.

Do you still teach at Biola University?

Here's a serious question: have you ever considered showing off one of your math pranks on America's Got Talent? They'd love to see that!

Hi sir

No shit.

Holy shot how did you know

Still clowning

Yup but 3 years later

Thanks. Glad you like it. I usually stay away from the word proof and say things like "provides strong evidence" instead. I think "proof" belongs in mathematics and logic.

@@MatthewWeathers too bad flat earthers claim 'math isn't reality'... 🙄...

No it’s not. He answered the question in the video: if the moon is not a physical object, we cannot assume to understand it from the surface. The reason NASA faked the moon landings is so peasants like you don’t freak out and have an existential crisis when you learn the truth. I’m sure you’re happy with them spending a few hundred billion of your tax dollars along the way. Millions of impoverished children? Worth it!

@@jacksonrelaxin3425 learn the truth?? The actual truth is that flat-earthers are weak minded gullible silly children with a silly belief. It's sad really, endless information at their fingertips and they just lie and deny it, soooo many things a flat-earther can do themselves that can ONLY point to one logical conclusion, but they lie and deny it to hold a childish fantasy. They have no choice but to makeup crazy claims like "the moon is a projection or its not a physical object" to try and make their ridiculous reality work, all while not knowing the first thing on how a projection works, or providing any evidence that it's not physical. Just throw out hundreds and hundreds of years of research and knowledge to say "yup its not physical" and dodging simple questions like, how can a non physical object produce it's own light? How can a non physical object cast shadows on its self? How can a non physical object block light from other objects?? But sure skip all the important parts and get hung up on NASA funding 🤦‍♂️🤦‍♂️🤦‍♂️

@@MatthewWeathers Try drawing an equilateral pentagon, a five sided polygon. Try drawing an equilateral decagon, a 10 sided polygon. Now try drawing a 100 sided polygon, and a thousand sided polygon (of course no one can’t, refer to google 😂). You’d come to a point where the figure looks like a circle, but from what you know, it isn’t. Try doing that in 3 dimension. Draw a figure with about, let’s say a 1000 or maybe even 10,000 faces (at this point it isn’t a perfect sphere but from our POV, it would look like a sphere) so more the number of faces (or sides, if in 2d), more stretched is the angles between the faces (sides in 2d). Remember me saying how it looks like a sphere from our POV? Now if we zoom in further, we can see that it is actually made up of a 10,000 faces. But the angles formed by any two faces will be extremely close to 180 degrees. In the same way, the scale of a human being compared the the scale of the sphere we’re living on, of course everything looks flat to OUR VIEW (because we all are living on the faces). *but then how are we not able to view or feel the places where the faces meet and form an angle?* Because the angles are EXTREMELYYYYYYY close to 180 degrees, near 180 but not 180. I’m just a highschool freshman, and not some physics/math professor like you or something. If you find a flaw in this logic of mine, PLEASEEEEE reply and say how I was wrong. I’d like to know so I can correct my mistakes 😊

@Vatro Skok Observable reality shows you have no brain.

@Vatro Skok That's not an emotional reaction, that's an observation. We can't see your brain therefore it doesn't exist. I just played you at your own game. The earth isn't flat. Denying logic and reason won't take you to heaven, it'll take you to hell. Human beings live an average of 70 years. 70 years is a long enough time for someone to wake up out of their brainwashing. If you die as a flat earther, you died as a brainwashed individual incapable of using basic reason. You only want to believe in a flat earth because you think you're special. You're not special, you're not woke, you're not enlightened. Enlightened people are able to publish research papers, proper studies, and build models. You have no model. Liars will burn in hell.

@Vatro Skok thats your balls m8

Yes there are many people that know the earth is flat and stationary. It just gets old telling heliocentrism zealots about it. 😂😂😂

@Vatro Skok Eric Dubay has been refuted. His very first point was as anti-science as it gets. You're not enlightened, you're not woke, you're not special. You don't have a flat earth model. You brainwashed yourself as a child to blindly believe in bad Bible interpretations. You don't have a flat earth model, if you did, you'd be able to tell us when the next solar eclipse would occur.

Thanks! I'm excited to pass that 500k mark.

@@MatthewWeathers yay! hes happy!

@@jaydon.2833 this is so wholesome and yes if the best professor in the world is happy so am i

@@MatthewWeathers A COLLAB WOULD BE EPIC! But just in general: Collabs make Channels grow, and we all want you to grow! So can you make a Collab with Sci Man Dan and/or Professor Dave? I mean, we all want to get done with Flat-Earth once and for all and those 2 are Trophys on that 'Debunking'-Field.

@@MatthewWeathers A COLLAB WOULD BE EPIC! But just in general: Collabs make Channels grow, and we all want you to grow! So can you make a Collab with Sci Man Dan and/or Professor Dave? I mean, we all want to get done with Flat-Earth once and for all and those 2 are Trophys on that 'Debunking'-Field.

Lol

We are not in outer space on a ball. :)

@@JamesHawkeRU-vid you're right, we are on a giant slice of pizza inside the sun

@@JamesHawkeRU-vid Ah yes, I love living on a Boar Vessel, 600-500 BC, Etruscan, Ceramic.

Guys did you know that the earth isn’t real? WAKE UP!!

Girl your chest is as flat as your ego.

@Normal Person no you are wrong the earth is actually dinosaur shaped

@@CygnusTheSilly no it is actually a bean

@@silly_lil_guy you're wrong it is a dinosaur

Nobody gave you an answer because your questions are kinda dumb. I had also dumb questions before so I am ready to answer to you if you will act as an adult and really want to find the truth.

If the moon were flat too would that distort its observable size?

You're right. If the Moon were flat, it seems like it would appear as an oval / an ellipse sometimes. But it always appears circular.

@@MatthewWeathers It doesn't prove earth is sphere.moon rotates every 25 hours that's why it looks different from different locations.

Haha people should not disagree with me or it's not valid

I also did. She said "i stand by what i believe and i wont change my opinion no matter what i see". Her reasoning was if it was round you would always be walking downhill and if you went to the bottom of the earth you would be upside-down

Well, that different view would only be present if you presume the moon is spherical, but I think these flat earth weirdos don't believe that either.

My silly hobby is to recommend science-channel to people in science-comment-sections. May I?

Yes i give you permission

Yes, that's another good reason. Thanks for the suggestion. I decided to keep things as simple as possible for this video, and just talk about the apparent altitude above the horizon.

“Cheeeeeese, Gromit!” “Don’t forget the crackers!”

I thought it was stop motion animation

Glad you enjoyed it!

Flat earthers

There called RU-vid dislike bots...

Yeah bc the earth is flat duh

@@zsalim2871 it ain't

Duolingo please don't kill me

You should try using some background music too, I'm not sure what type of music would fit but that would be up to you :)

Maybe so. I was thinking about it at some point, but then forgot about the idea. I may try it out, and see if it works for the video. Thanks for the reminder.

Thanks. I like doing these kinds of interesting videos. They don't get as many views, but that's okay, I like making those videos. And I'm always open to topic suggestions.

@@MatthewWeathers You could try something in relation to the U.S. Election this year, maybe? Just don't state which party is a better option for controversy reasons You could try doing more space stuff too :D (Or make some sort of series about debunking myths/conspiracies?)

He's still pranking people with this nonsense about the moon. He got heliocentrism zealots to believe that the moon doesn't have to change size if the ground is curving, but only if it's flat. I guess once you believe the ground is a magical spinning ball everything just works out. 🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣

I feel you fam

Yes, that's a good point. I tried to keep this video to one specific topic. Maybe I will make a video about that some day. This face is one of the main reasons that Ex-Flat Earther "Seektruth Speaktruth" changed his mind. See Conspiracy Catz' interview of him at: ru-vid.com/video/%D0%B2%D0%B8%D0%B4%D0%B5%D0%BE-Dr6_A9ATORs.html

Simple. Glue a clock on your ceiling. Do pictures. What do you see?

You might be the first one watching from there! I have never been, but it looks like a beautiful city, and I hope I can visit some day.

@@MatthewWeathers it's indeed. But which city is not? Anyway, hope to have you around soon after all this craziness is over.

I like that phrase. I haven't heard of it, or of Jack before.

@@MatthewWeathers Some of his clips are on yt. He did a 5 minute weekly astronomy update on PBS for 3 decades, telling you things happening in the sky that week & where to 'look up'. The music coming into the program is synonymous with him.

Really? The Flat Earthers I know* say "once you go flat, you never go back." But I've always thought that you can't maintain those beliefs for more than a few years. *I say "I know"... but not IRL, just people online.

That's some rare insult

Thank you. I'm glad you liked some of the other videos, too.

Good point. I know that they don't like the word "gravity," but I decided to use it anyway, since it accurately describes what mainstream scientists say.

My silly hobby is to recommend science-channel to people in science-comment-sections. May I?

@@slevinchannel7589 Sure

@@lakers4life71 Cool! Uhm... let me think... let me think... Ok, i just list some and you tell me if you know them (which tells me more about your taste): -Veritasium. -Sci Man Dan! -Illuminaughtii. -Tier-Zoo. -Michio Kaku. -Kozmo. -Hbomberguy. -Legal Eagle.

@@lakers4life71 Oh, and 'Oversimplified'.

@@slevinchannel7589 I’ve watched all of them expect for kaku and kozmo

I understand Euclidean geometry.

Thank you. Yes, feel free to share it in German. (And I would be interested in seeing it, if you have a link.)

@@MatthewWeathers ru-vid.com/video/%D0%B2%D0%B8%D0%B4%D0%B5%D0%BE-8b0p5Qly5to.html Interest in all that flat earth stuff has decreased significantly in the past year due to well made video posts like yours.

I think you're right. One example isn't enough to convince someone. But every bit of evidence may help build a cumulative case against Flat Earth for someone. So I'm doing my part, trying to provide evidence.

@@MatthewWeathers I cannot but agree with you. And I guess my despair is coming from their effortless attempts to not understand or to stop believing it's a NASA conspiracy. I once thought the easiest way to prove it, to someone staying in +3 UT area, is to make a video call to a friend in Australia +11 UT, I guess, and observe the sky over there to compare. Well, he seemed kind of convinced until we hung up and then literally asked " what if the NASA has manipulated the phone call and it's not even a live phone call to start with"... I guess this is where I gave up 😅

@@MatthewWeathers Well this was not evidence. You just asserted your belief about what a light in the sky should do without providing any actual evidence about that light in the sky. Such as how you know the actual size, actual distance, actual path, or what the moon actually is. Then you claimed that if the ground were curving then none of the claims you made about what the moon should do applied. Is a curving ground somehow magic? 🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣

@@alsadekalkhayer7007 Please explain you Australia sky claim more.

@@tbrown3356let's try something new, why don't you try explaining your view, and how it would explain mobile phones network or satellite TV receiver or even flight routs

This video uses a false dilemma fallacy where you are presented with an either or choice, when in reality there are more possibilities. Matthew argued that either the moon shrinks it's angular size in half or the angles we see the moon above the horizon (visible line where the sky APPEARS to meet the ground) can only be caused by earth curvature. What he didn't tell you is that the angles we see to the moon is not the actual angles to the moon. So they don't give you an actual distance to the moon to determine what the not actual size of the moon should shrink to. And the horizon is not a physical location but parallel lines appearing to converge with distance till you get that visible line where the sky APPEARS to meet the ground. So here's what he is actually saying. When the moon is at an apparent (not actual) angle above your visual limit (horizon) in a city vs appearing above a person in a different city it should have shrunk it's angular (not actual) size by half because the (apparent) not actual angle assumes an apparent (not actual) difference in distance. If it doesn't do what Matthew assumes it must based on his apparent (not actual) observations then earth is not flat. 🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣

@@tbrown3356 what about gravity? is the earth just always moving up? and then why is it moving up? is it moving up because of gravity? but if that as the case, then its kinda hypocritical. honestly ive never heard a different theory for how gravity works so yeah

@@countingdays856 There are no effects in nature where the multiple concepts of gravity are needed. You're asking me to explain your concepts that are not physical. What have you observed in nature that you believe needs an explanation that you are assuming can only be explained by your concepts of gravity?

@@tbrown3356 i was asking your way of understanding it, if you think mine is wrong. just tell me why the rain goes down and not up

@@countingdays856 He doesn’t know.

I feel bad for the people who haven’t been able to see through the deception yet. This guy is saying logical things based on what he believes to be true. Belief is the the clawed hand that’s holding this dude back. You have 200 proofs to debunk guy.... better get busy. Somebody lend this guy a Nikon P900, and the trig for the earth curve, and let’s see what he comes back with. What we have here is a “hear say” argument based on incorrect “beliefs” based on scientism. Sorry. People if you’re mad that the ball earth lie is falling apart go ahead and drag your feet. It’s only going to get more painful. Millions are awake now...

I'd be curious to hear your explanation about the specific observation I mentioned in the video (i.e. that the Moon appears the same size in those two cities, but different angles of elevation.) How would that be possible on any type of Flat Earth?

@@stenzeliron6818 Those 200 “proofs” were themselves debunked over the last few years. Do you have a favorite? I’ll knock it down for you.

@@MatthewWeathers two people in a big room are looking to a huge mirror. In the mirror they see the reflection of a sealing light. Enough simple professor? Haven't Dave explained you everything and brought enough evidence? You can accept his challenge and win 3 bitcoins if you have any measurable and repeatable evidence of the spinning globe. What stop you?

Look in the sky. At that moment in time, everyone in Guatemala city saw the Moon directly overhead, and everyone in Montevideo could see the Moon at an angle elevation of 30 degrees. (You can also look it up on TimeAndDate.com, if you trust their charts. I don't see any reason not to trust their charts, they've been accurate every time I've verified it.)

You say the the different angle of appearance of the moon is due to the curve of the earth and not the distance between the two locations; but, how are you determining that. Why are you ruling out distance and visual perspective?

Why the angles to the moon are not actual angles? And why is that important that the horzon is a not a physical location?

@@tojassargaja2085 If you put your finger in front of your face it appears to be bigger than the tree down the road. Of course it's not and of course visual angles are not actual angles. If you are assuming the actual distance to the moon using triangulation, you need actual angles. His argument is that the moon should shrink it's not actual size by half because based on the angles people see the moon in the sky. But visual perspective angles are not actual angles therefore he has no idea how far away the moon actually is to declare what it should do in angular size. And the Heliocentrism model declares that the horizon is physical earth curve. So when he is saying the moon appears in one city at an angle above the horizon, he is not getting that the horizon is a non physical line created by perspective. The farther something goes away from you the closer it gets to your horizon (visual limit) which is about 3 miles away with no telescope or camera zoom. So a moon that slightly moves can appear to have traveled far based on your perspective but not to the degree that it would drastically change it's angular size. The sky is very very big and your vision is very limited. There's no Earth curvature causing the visual angles to the moon. It's called visual angles. Look it up. This video was just another pathetic attempt to hijack real perspective effects for imaginary earth curvature.

​@@tbrown3356 I think you are a bit overcomplicated this. The moon 30 degree over the horizon means that if you draw a line towards the horizon and another line towards the center of the moon and you measure the angle between these 2 lines you get 30 degree angle. It is an actual angle and it doesnt matter how far the horizon or the moon is, only the direction is enough to measure this angle. "His argument is that the moon should shrink it's not actual size by half because based on the angles people see the moon in the sky. " We dont know the actual size, but we know it should be smaller if its furter away and bigger if its closer. But the moon is always the same size even if you view it from different locations. And if you have a location where the moon is directly over head, from any other location you should get a smaller moon. And as you said "if you put your finger in front of your face it appears to be bigger than the tree down the road" and if you move your finger away its angular size get smaller and smaller. The angle of the moon from the horizon doesnt affected by how far the moon is or the horizon, only the angular size of the moon changes if its far or close. "So a moon that slightly moves can appear to have traveled far based on your perspective but not to the degree that it would drastically change it's angular size" Not true, you can actully know how far the moon is if you view it from 2 location at the same time. If the earth is flat you can measure an the angle between the horizon and the center of the moon at these 2 locations, and if you also know the distance between the 2 locations. You can draw the triangle. And figure out the distance. And it will show you that the moon is really close on a flat earth. And the angular size change is drastic, in a flat earth, but it never happens because the moon is always the same size. I made a quick calculation how big the difference shoud be: i picked 2 locations: Lisbon and Budapest, the distance between them is 2469 km, and at 12:00 the moon is 19 degree from the horizon in Budapest and 28 degree at Lisbon, so it means if the earth would be flat the moon is 1099Km from Lisbon and 1585 Km from Budapest. What do you think how bigger the Moon should appear if its 1.5 times closer to one location than to another?

@@tojassargaja2085 Drawing a line towards a non physical line is not proof of anything. The line is your visual limit not earth curve. You don't know if the moon is actually closer or farther away from you and how much. So you can't determine how much it should shrink it's not actual size. I explained very well to you that triangulation doesn't work when you're using angles that are not actual. You just bypassed this and still declared that you can use triangulation. 🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣

@@tojassargaja2085 I can only conclude that you realize now how silly this argument is but because earth curve can't be proven, you need to still try to claim that visual angles are earth curvature. If earth were really a spinning ball would you need to hijack perspective effects?

That may be. However, it does seem to be an actual, physical object. And if it is, that's enough to say that the Earth is not flat.

@@MatthewWeathers we don't need moon to answer that question. it's way better to do some experiments on Earth itself

@@MatthewWeathers My dog sees me and thinks himself human. My dog is therefore human?

@@9725913in1 What? That applies for the flat earth theory too. (Example) Out of 100 studies 99 will say the earth is round and 1 will say its flat and you guys will beleive that one study

@@iioic6867 people love exxagerating claims, if a test shows the answer that is basically always the same, but that one time it is just slightly different, braindead people will try to just ignore all other test attempts which have shown other result

Maybe I should have said "...cause a lot of controversy among people who are likely to watch it." Just take a looks through the other comments to see what I mean. Yes, obviously it's not causing any real controversy among serious, well-informed people who know science. It's only a tiny fraction of people who actually believe the Earth is flat (in the US and elsewhere... this has nothing to do with the USA specifically.)

@@MatthewWeathers Thanks for the answer. Here in Germany, I have never heard about anyone claiming the earth to be flat. And we do not only have bright minds here, that's for sure. But they appear to focus on other topics. I clearly do not think, that Americans in average are less clever than people of other nations. As I understand, the flat earth movement appears to be more some sort of power play on who has a say in defining what to think and teach. Would you tend to agree on this view?

Yes, I think you're right. I believe someone who says the Earth is flat is motivated by several psychological and sociological factors more than just physical evidence. And as the old joke goes: "The Flat Earth society had members all around the globe." (Real FE people aren't a part of that society.) In sure there are a few FE people in Germany. But I'd also say every society had their own unique mix of conspiracy theories.

Your brain doesnt work right

Your brain is fake

Are you talking about sun dogs? Optical effect.

My silly hobby is to recommend science-channel to people in science-comment-sections. May I?

Thanks.

Your welcome sir. I never been a flat earther but seeing your videos makes it easier to understand how things really work. I really enjoy

No it doesn't. Earth is flat

Try going some thousands of miles away and you'll note the difference 👍

When you look at the light bulb from 6 feet away it appears a certain angular size. If you move to a point 12 feet away, the angular size will be half as big. Try it. Hold your fist out in front of you at arm's length, and see if the light bulb changes size relative to your fist as you move.

@@MatthewWeathers That same angular size change would also apply to the spinning ball earth correct?

Well said. It baffles me how all these so called smart people can't seem to grasp how perspective works. They keep looking up at the sky and confusing themselves.

@@MatthewWeathers If that we're case, you should also have also pointed out from what height all those moon photos were taken, was it from level ground or mountains or from buildings, and keeping in mind that all four cities you mentioned are all different heights above sea level and are all thousands of miles away from each other. The EARTH is an immovable flat plane with level ground valleys and mountains but none the less it's not a spinning globe with tilts nor spinning in a non existent space in the middle of the universe at 1000 mile per hr!

But ntg happened , I just lost my wifi 😑

I'd be curious to know what your answer is to the question I asked about the Moon in this video? Why doesn't the Moon appear twice as big from one city compared to another city, if it's twice as far?

And "ignore all the evidence right in front of me."

Yes, it's the same with the Sun. I decided to talk about the Moon, since it's easier to observe directly, by looking at it. And you can easily see that it's always pretty close to the same size.

The actual size, actual distance, actual path, and actually what the sun is, is also not known. Heliocentrism has no evidence about any of the lights in the sky to make claims about what they should do. The only thing we know is that these lights follow the same patterns continually above us.

@CAVEMAN'S REVENGE I'm not theorizing anything. Just correcting false claims made here.

@@tbrown3356 " I'm not theorizing anything." No, your just talking complete crap.

2022 and you still have nothing except cartoons.

By "90 degrees" I just mean the angle of the Moon to the horizon. In other words, at that moment in time, the Moon appears directly overhead in Guatemala City. And for "30 degrees," that means that the angle between the Moon and the horizon is 30 degrees at the same moment in time in Montevideo.

He believes visual angles are actual angles. And he believes that the horizon is physical Earth curvature. So he thinks that he's getting an actual distance of the Moon using triangulation with non-actual angles. In reality The horizon is not a physical location that you can draw a line to because it's just caused by perspective. And the angles he sees the Moon at are not actual angles. So none of this makes any sense at all. He doesn't know how far away the Moon is to determine how much it should shrink in angular size.

Matthew is asking in this video what is creating the visual angles not realizing that vision comes with angles. The moon appears to drop in the sky because of visual angles which can be summarized with the word perspective. Matthew thinks that the moon dropping in the sky is caused by Earth curvature. 😂😂😂😂😂

@@MatthewWeathers to determine angle mathematically you could use geometry for sure. AAS, SAS, ASA...?

@@tbrown3356 Physicists know better than to do that, are you sure? I didn't see any mathematics so I was thinking maybe he's using perspective?

Your welcome for reminding

Does the Moon follow the Law of Perspective? Because in the diagram I showed, it's twice as far from Montevideo as from Guatemala City. Why doesn't it appear half the size?

P-brane understands very little about our physical world, such as centrifugal force. See my first two videos.

Thanks for your feedback. This video describes strong evidence that the direction of "down" in Montevideo and the direction of "down" in Guatemala City are not parallel. So it's specifically about the Earth being flat between those two cities. You're correct that there is a scientific explanation for how the Moon could appear different sizes if the Earth were flat. But my point is that it never does. The Moon always appears the same exact size, no matter where in the world you are. So that's evidence against the Flat Earth. Regarding the concave model: hardly anyone believes in that model, so I didn't mention it. But I think viewing the Moon from THREE different cities simultaneously would debunk a concave model.

Because digital images are easier to get these days. Almost all cameras are digital cameras. And we have plenty of those. Just take a look at epic.gsfc.nasa.gov/ for some recent images.

The bottom of the triangle is a straight line if the Earth is flat. (And that causes a problem, so that's why I think the Earth isn't flat.)

@@MatthewWeathersthe bottom of all triangles are flat, pal. you can't even get an angle on your presupposed ball, therefore you don't live on one. Triangles don't have curved sides. A sextant can't work on a ball. It's an impossibility. Celestial navigation is impossible on a ball. Sorry to burst your globe delusion. But thanks for agreeing you need straight lines for a triangle. Let us know how you can draw one to the horizon if you live on a ball. Hint: you can't. The cognitive dissonance that you're experiencing right now is common among the fundamentalist religious zealots that defend the spinning water ball theory.

@@JQ-zu4iv you missed his point. The triangle would be flat along the ground, only if the earth were flat. You can still measure the true distance between two points on the globe, the Straightest line would not be along in the ground. Lajes Portugal is the exact opposite end of the globe from Sydney Australia. So for purposes of a right triangle, the distance between the two would not be the circumference of the earth, but Twice the radiius.

@@elymayer4860 "the Straightest line would not be along in the ground." What would you propose to draw that "straightest line" to? The line that isn't along the ground... What are you looking at and drawing that line to, to establish the bottom of your triangle?

@@JQ-zu4iv this was all explained quite clearly. I’ll try again. Take a basketball. Draw a red dot on the valve. Draw another red dot on the spot exactly opposite of the valve. You can use those two red dots as two points in a right triangle. Distance is not the distance among the surface of the ball. The distance between the two dots is the diameter.

Thanks! I finally have 500k

Thanks for the clarification. I should have mentioned that. I was using that thumbnail just to illustrate that the idea exists, not to say that he believes it.

@@MatthewWeathers I didn't think that you did mean it that way, but I wasn't sure. But just incase somebody else took it that way. Ya know? 😁

True. But if the Earth is a globe and the Moon is 230,000+ miles away, a difference of a couple thousand miles between those cities won't make much a difference.

@@MatthewWeathers It will if the moon is a lot closer and smaller than they say. This is much more probable and realistic.