Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 12

Thread: The Big Flat Hollow Globe (2019) Documentary

  1. #1

    Default The Big Flat Hollow Globe (2019) Documentary

    The Big Flat Hollow Globe
    <span style="color: rgb(23, 23, 23); font-family: Roboto, &quot;Open Sans&quot;, Helvetica, sans-serif; font-size: 17.96px;">

    During the long history
    of the world there have been a lot of different theories on the true nature of our world. From the Hollow Earth of the ancient Celts and Nords to the Flat Earth of the Bible and Homer. Even contemporary scientists have proposed alternatives to the popular narrative such as Edmund Halley, and Leonhard Euler. However NASA and the secular elites only allow for one truth to exist.

  2. Default

    OMFG no. This is not an appropriate place to propagate your conspiracy theories.

  3. #3

    Default

    Regardless of what you think of the movies opinion it should not be censored that is just silly. Also I am on here just to get feed back on my brand new video projects just like everyone else the subject of the video is irrelevant. Btw for the future censoring opinions you do not like makes them stronger because weather you like it or not you are admit that you can't challenge them with arguments.

  4. Default

    I'm not censoring you, I'm giving you well deserved ridicule. If you don't want to be ridiculed then don't be ridiculous. I can easily debunk your claims but I'm not going to do it here. I'll leave that to Sci Man Dan, whom you already know about because you've got his picture on your thumbnail.

    https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCRt...9wSLsQLQ3XOAeA

    By the way, your production is generic and boring.

  5. #5

    Default

    Thank you, that's all I wanted. Constructive criticism. I agree I have a lot I could improve as far as production.

  6. #6
    Join Date
    Mar 2005
    Posts
    4,230
    Blog Entries
    2

    Default

    Okay, constructive criticism.

    Firstly it is not a documentary, it is an opinion piece. It is giving an opinion, not facts, there is a difference. You are taking ridiculous theories and presenting them as though they should be taken seriously. It needs humour. If you're going to present daft theories such as the hollow earth or flat earth, then there's no point in pretending to take them seriously. If you do take them seriously... then you need to increase your medication.

    As for the visuals... I'm afraid it is not very exciting or interesting. That's a polite way of saying it's boring. It need more "ooomph". You've got these wonderful nutty theories which are crying out for a bit of fun, but it never happens.
    Or, if you're showing these theories as worthy of thought, then you have to follow them through and show how science later debunked them.

    The voice-over lacks depth. I don't mean in content but in tone. The tone is "thin" lacking in bass. He is not a good speaker unfortunately. V.O. (or voice-over) speakers are a particular breed and it is very skilled. We have a couple on this forum who are excellent, but it is not something everyone can do.
    He sounds like he is distant from the microphone, so we don't feel connected to him, we hear the audio distance.

    Also he is talking complete bollocks.

    So, if you are trying to show how these bonkers theories are out there, you've done it in a flat and hollow way. (See what I did there?) and if you believe these "theories" then you've made a boring video which isn't going to keep anyone's attention long enough to be convinced.

  7. Default

    I'll just sign on to Rob's assessment. He covered everything relevant, and he did it better than I did.

  8. #8

    Default

    This does feel like a lot of modern documentaries in that the field is sadly starting to become a means of indoctrination as opposed to well-researched presentations on a topic.

    From a video production stand point:
    Look at your pacing, most of this is machine-gunned at the audience. You need story telling, some breaks, careful accentuation of key points being made that will tie in later in the story.

    The music should change with the story telling. Here it probably wasn't obvious to you where to make a music change since you didn't really approach this as storytelling, so it becomes monotone, droning and seemingly leading to a predictable outcome.

    You also have to introduce video footage in your presentation. What you have right now is essentially a narrated slideshow.


    From the point of the story, and addressing the idea of "the documentary":
    Do you want to indoctrinate people, or do you want to further human knowledge? Because if you want to push your ideas onto others regardless of how seriously wrong you might be, then go read a book by Rupert Murdoch or Roger Ailes and learn to lie convincingly.

    If however, what you mean to make is an actual documentary that expands people's knowledge on a subject, then you have to realize there's a tremendous burden of accuracy. You have to be seriously right before you engage in an suggestive exploration of a topic.

    Start here: It is nearly impossible to be completely objective. When the story is being told by a human, the human can only understand what its mind understands, so 100% neutral objectivity is a pipe dream even for the most experienced of journalists. The best we (humans) can do is aim to have a comparatively high mastery of a subject before we take the podium to tell people we have the answers, and to question ourselves deeply as we complete that journey. Your story is expected to thread the fabric of your theory, stitching the right premises to justify all the conclusions you are driving at. In short, you have to be right. Not think you are right, not pretend really hard that you are right. To the best of your abilities and to an exacting standard, you have to be actually right, demonstrably right, beyond logic's reproach.


    On this you are nowhere near that standard. Nowhere near it. Just for context, there's a line in your story that puts a spotlight to the whole thing:
    "his work in the field is never mentioned and perpetually kept out of textbooks"

    Certainly. When we are able to determine that something is incorrect, we stop trying to teach it to children. Any theory that is incorrect loses support of peers, drops from the culture and struggles to make it to textbooks. People make mistakes. Even Einstein got a few wrong, and those are not in the textbooks anymore.


    There's one key to your puzzle that I offer with the best of intentions. Study logic, tautology and logical fallacies. I think you have the energy and determination to get this stuff right, but you are working without tools. For instance, the entire first 7 mins of your presentation (as far as I watched) are easily dismissed by 101 level of logical fallacies:
    https://kreativcopywriting.com/10-lo...ies-know-spot/

    Bandwagon fallacy - if I keep droning on about 15 people that think the same thing I think, then I must be right. You went as far back as Homer, thousands of years back to a point in history when we could barely read and write, to point out that one of the apes that lived in that time agreed with you. How does that make you right? You have to realize it's just nonsense. It can be somewhat convincing to some, but convincing someone with nonsense is not the same as having showed them a fact.

    When you reach for a fallacy to make an argument, it just completely nullifies what you are doing. You may not realize it, but anyone that knows logic knows your argument was nonsense the moment you started. I'll trade you 15 wrong people in history for one guy that is actually right. A better documentary would have spent those 7 minutes setting up a context of how the mechanics of the earth work, why people would be confused, and who are those that demonstrably, and relatably, are correct. Then you bring out an accomplished physicist, say someone that built an launched a satellite orbiting the earth, and you use that to demonstrate how orbiting works, the challenges of keeping something in orbit, and the advanced science that enables us to do it.

    Except you can't do that. Because the people on your side of the argument, as you put it yourself, are (easily) demonstrably wrong, and those wrong ideas have been buried along the case for Nessie.

    So rule #1: Never allow yourself to make logical errors in your argument. How could you possibly be right if your argument is false to begin with?

    Then rule #2: If you haven't found a true conclusion, have the courage to keep searching.

    These 2 rules alone will take you places.

    Keep an open mind and accept that you are not meant to be right from the beginning.
    But it is demanded of you that you are right by the end.
    So embark on the research like an adventure, to find the actual truth, to test your preconceived ideas against evidence and logic (actual logic: tautology, fallacies). Once you meet that standards you will probably be ready to make a documentary, and it probably won't be what you thought from the beginning because the journey revealed new truths to you that you couldn't have known when you first imagined the subject before doing the research.

    In short: Quest for honest truth, measure against logic, and be ready to discard any ideas you had before they were tested.

    And honestly, my best advice: dig that inquisitive mind of yours into logical fallacies. Being actually right will pay huge dividends for the rest of your life, and you have the raw talent for it if you choose to pursue it:
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_fallacies
    Last edited by jochicago; 04-04-2019 at 03:29 AM.

  9. #9

    Default

    One more, honestly not for me but to help you make sense of the gaping holes in your argument, of which there are so so many:

    You: "Any fool can tell you that if the earth was spinning at 1000 miles per hr, all structures ever built would be blown away"

    I would expect that same fool to tell me that if your body could move at 600 miles per/hr it would tear apart in the air. Except that 600mph is the speed at which we fly commercially. Have you seen a plane? You drink a soda, fiddle with your phone, try to keep the kids from getting bored. Nobody is getting blown away or torn apart. At most shaken just a bit when there's turbulence. Honestly, plane tickets start at like $100, test this for yourself.

    It is going to blow your mind to know that the Conchord flies at around 1400 mph, 40% faster than "blown away" speed. Commercial flight, people drinking wine and chatting about TV shows.

    Reality is far less about conspiracies and more about realms of science that you are sorely unfamiliar with.

  10. Default

    I think in your next video you should debunk GPS.

Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast

Similar Threads

  1. Faith In Money (Documentary 2019)
    By theog in forum User Videos
    Replies: 1
    Last Post: 01-19-2019, 12:57 PM
  2. PF 2019 - just watch
    By JanPetr in forum User Videos
    Replies: 3
    Last Post: 01-03-2019, 01:37 AM
  3. Hollow-sounding
    By fcpBob in forum Sound Recording and Audio Editing
    Replies: 8
    Last Post: 09-07-2007, 09:48 PM
  4. Hollow echoing sound, can I fix?
    By rgrebby in forum Sound Recording and Audio Editing
    Replies: 4
    Last Post: 06-26-2007, 11:04 AM
  5. Hollow Point - Episode 2
    By Marshall in forum User Videos
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 08-09-2005, 04:18 PM

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •