200 Proofs Earth is Not a Spinning Ball

[EricTheCat]

I'm glad you find it humerous. I don't think you're on the payroll. That leaves only one conclusion, however...

What conclusion does that leave?

To be clear, I find it funny if you think any of us are on the payroll. Others have accused me of that before and I get a kick out of it every time for some reason.

 

[DodgebyDave]

What is this vacuum of which you speak? There are no areas of

I find this really funny:

I need to ask NASA where my check is.

That's all. No offence intended but if you really believe I am on the payroll I find that really funny.

I paid the devil to be here

 

[newmisty]

What conclusion does that leave?

To be clear, I find it funny if you think any of us are on the payroll. Others have accused me of that before and I get a kick out of it every time for some reason.

If you can't beat them with facts beat them with false accusations dreamed up by an uninformed (ignorant) mind.

 

[arminius]

What conclusion does that leave?

Cognitive ability.

Welp, looks like the trolls are gathering here to gang up. I'm done here.

 

[EricTheCat]

Cognitive ability.

I shall try to do better.

 

[newmisty]

I shall try to do better.

Don't hurt yourself brother!

 

[Joe King]

And exactly WHERE are those tiny whisps located... far, far, far from the Karmen line, even the moon. IOW there are many, many atoms that extend out to the moon....

So? You seem to think there's a absolute point of division between atmosphere and space. The atmosphere merely gets thinner and thinner the higher above the surface one goes.

The Karmen line is just the approx point above which, the air is thin enough that planes can no longer fly.

The astronauts were never on the moon. Period.

In your opinion, maybe.

1) Despite nearly all scientists in the field believing the Van Allen belts would be fatal for humans in a tin can, no one suffered any ill effects so the Van allen belts are not dangerous.

Ok, but that was before they tried. Ie: they were wrong.

2) Even though the temperatures on the moon are agreed by scientists to be 260-414 in the sunlight, since the unshielded film and cameras survived the temperature must not have been so hot

Again, it takes time for heating to occur. It doesn't instantly get that the moment Sun's light hits an object. You can prove that yourself by setting something in the Sunshine, and then measuring its temperature and plotting it on a graph.

3) Even though Armstrong nearly died in the one attempt to "fly" the lander on earth, since we know 6 Apollo missions successfully landed on the moon, then they must have mastered how to land the landers, or it wasn't as hard as we thought.

It wasn't designed for use in Earth's atmosphere nor gravity.

4) Even though the shadows and lack of stars makes no sense, since the astronots swear by it, it must be true.

The reason stars are not visible in pics and vids is because if the exposure settings on the camera were set to the stars light,, everything they are actually trying to take pics of on the Moon would be over exposed.

If you know anything about photography, and took a moment to think before jumping to conclusions, you could have figured that out.

As for the shadows, you obviously aren't correctly able to interpret what you are seeing.
...but coming from someone who has already demonstrated a woeful lack of understanding, I'm not surprised.

5) Even though no one has gone past 280 miles from the earth, since the Apollo astronots claimed to have gone 120,000 miles each way, we know they were outliers and did.

There hasn't been any reason to.

6) Even though there's no atmosphere on the moon, since we hear the astronots hammering in the flag, there must have been a way sound travelled in a vacuum defying all laws of physics.

Got an un-doctored vid showing that?

I specify un-doctored, as the flat Earth/Moon hoax folks are well known for misrepresenting things.

7) Even though the grainy film of the astronots looks like it was filmed in a kids basement, we know the astronots went to the moon so the footage is real.

The vid was taken @10 frames per second, so it should have looked as it did. What was seen on TV was from a camera filming the live feed.

8) Even though there's no atmosphere on earth, but the flag they planted is waving like a 20 mph wind is behind it, it must mean there's a breeze on the moon.

Because of inertia and the lack of any atmospheric drag, things move differently in a vacuum.

9) Even though there was a cold war going on with our greatest enemy, there's no way the govt would ever lie to us for ra ra go US propaganda, so the moon landings couldn't have been propaganda.

Yep, and those cold war foes, among others, tracked Apollo 11 all the way to the Moon and back. Why would they lie in support of their biggest enemy?

This is a shocker...but isn't there even a slight light bulb moment in your brain Joe where you think, perhaps the simpler explanation is that they are liars and never left LEO?

A light bulb moment is what you need.

It's absurd to think that a pressurized atmosphere can exist adjacent to an infinite vacuum without being contained by some sort of barrier.

How so? Are you a "gravity isn't real" guy too?

It's what NASA does. Lie and deceive.

"The stars were brilliant and lit up the Lunar sky"

"You can't see the stars from the surface of the moon"

The contradictions are embarrassing.

Can't see 'em in pics. See my answer to Goldie above.

domineering ridicule

That'd be what comes from your side of this discussion. All I started out doing was answering questions about it.
...and then the name calling started when you guys couldn't counter what I was sayin'.

good common sense advice

...would be to quit watching flat Earth vids on youtube. Lol

Cognitive ability.

Welp, looks like the trolls are gathering here to gang up. I'm done here.

Yea, run away like a loser, instead of actually defending your idiotic claims with logic and common sense arguments.

 

[RebelYell]

As it happens I'm pretty sure we did go to the moon. In the 1970s there was a TV show called "The Clangers" about some creatures who communicated amongst themselves with whistles amongst other noises and they lived on another planet. This TV series was clearly filmed on location on this other planet because that's where clangers live, and the cameramen must have been right there on the planet to operate the cameras to make the TV series - because that's where Clangers live.

Here's a still from one of the episodes showing some of the Clangers on their planet.

So if we were already filming TV shows on other planets in the 1970s, I think it's pretty clear we could have easily gone to the moon in the 1960s.

You can find a full list of episodes here: https://www.imdb.com/title/tt0065282/

Explain that one, silly flat earthers! You can't. You have been dunked on!

UPDATE. I just checked and the earliest episodes of this show, filmed by human cameramen on another planet, were made in 1969! This proves beyond a shadow of doubt that we had the technology to go to the moon.

 

[Bottom Feeder]

I haven't seen any attempt at humor recently in this thread...

Here ya go brother arminius

As it happens I'm pretty sure we did go to the moon. In the 1970s there was a TV show called "The Clangers" about some creatures who communicated amongst themselves with whistles amongst other noises and they lived on another planet. This TV series was clearly filmed on location on this other planet because that's where clangers live, and the cameramen must have been right there on the planet to operate the cameras to make the TV series - because that's where Clangers live.

Here's a still from one of the episodes showing some of the Clangers on their planet.

View attachment 258382

So if we were already filming TV shows on other planets in the 1970s, I think it's pretty clear we could have easily gone to the moon in the 1960s.

You can find a full list of episodes here: https://www.imdb.com/title/tt0065282/

Explain that one, silly flat earthers! You can't. You have been dunked on!

UPDATE. I just checked and the earliest episodes of this show, filmed by human cameramen on another planet, were made in 1969! This proves beyond a shadow of doubt that we had the technology to go to the moon.

 

[Bottom Feeder]

BTW — that temperature thingy...

If vacuum (or near-vacuum) can impart a temperature increase, why would a sun shield bee needed by the Webb Telescope?

Webb has to operate within a few degrees of absolute zero, a feat made possible by a fragile five-layer sunshade that deployed flawlessly shortly after launch.

Since then, the mirrors and instruments have cooled down to around 390 degrees below zero Fahrenheit

CBSnews

Maybe this is just bullshitt from NASA also, eh?
— There is no Web Space Telescope.

BF

 

[goldielox1]

Maybe this is just bullshitt from NASA also, eh?
— There is no Web Space Telescope.

BF

Wouldn't surprise me. The onus on them is to prove that anything they say is real. With their track record of lies and disinformation, they've got a big hill to climb for me to believe anything they say.

 

[Avalon]

Wouldn't surprise me. The onus on them is to prove that anything they say is real. With their track record of lies and disinformation, they've got a big hill to climb for me to believe anything they say.

At last we agree on something.

 

[TAEZZAR]

Joe, just so we're clear, you believe that temperature doesn't exist in a vacuum? Your claim is because the moon has no atmosphere, the film is not really at 260-414? So what temperature is it then?

Electron Beam Welding is an older technology. I was involved in it in the early 1960's.
It is welding in a vacuum. After extensive welding, I could immediately pick it out of the vacuum chamber & hold in my hand. The welded item was NOT hot, but after just 30 seconds, in atmosphere, it started to heat, rapidly, to a normal, just welded, temperature .

 

[Avalon]

I had to see what all the fuss was about so I watched a documentary on the flat earth. It was interesting and I saw some compelling arguments. I was not sold on flat earth but one part did intrigue me. That was there is hidden land especially in Antarctica.

 

[DodgebyDave]

What is this vacuum of which you speak?

As there is no such thing. Just like with heat(calories) there is hot and less hot.

There is pressure and less pressure

Never mind still no edge

The onus is on you. Prove the edge.

With the amount of lies told be the flats it would be a tall order indeed to come up with anything that I would believe

 

[goldielox1]

Here's a fun one for Joe and his moonies to explain to us.

This is from official nasa pictures from Apollo 17.

https://history.nasa.gov/alsj/a17/AS17-141-21608HR.jpg

Click on the astronots helmet to zoom in. You can see a person in the reflection that isn't in a space suit. Was that an alien that doesn't need oxygen to breathe or?

 

[TAEZZAR]

That was there is hidden land especially in Antarctica.

I have known about that for many years. It is also claimed to be a secret place for Hitler & for Aliens !

 

[TAEZZAR]

Here's a fun one for Joe and his moonies to explain to us.

This is from official nasa pictures from Apollo 17.

https://history.nasa.gov/alsj/a17/AS17-141-21608HR.jpg

Click on the astronots helmet to zoom in. You can see a person in the reflection that isn't in a space suit. Was that an alien that doesn't need oxygen to breathe or?

WTF is he/she/it doing there ?

 

[Avalon]

I have known about that for many years. It is also claimed to be a secret place for Hitler & for Aliens !

I seem to recall a book where Admiral Perry talked about it... I'm going to find it

 

[Joe King]

I had to see what all the fuss was about so I watched a documentary on the flat earth. It was interesting and I saw some compelling arguments. I was not sold on flat earth but one part did intrigue me. That was there is hidden land especially in Antarctica.

Be careful, much of their interesting and compelling arguments are based on half truths or are outright mis-representations. Ie: lies.
....and they just love showing pics of one thing, but labeled as something else.

Bottom line, the ones pushing flat Earth employ deception and lies as their primary tools.

 

[Avalon]

Be careful, much of their interesting and compelling arguments are based on half truths or are outright mis-representations. Ie: lies.
....and they just love showing pics of one thing, but labeled as something else.

Bottom line, the ones pushing flat Earth employ deception and lies as their primary tools.

yeah but its interesting.. I don't see myself converting to a flat earther but by listening it opened up the whole world of what goes on at Antarctica. I like to hear all points of view. Honestly at this time in history nothing would surprise me and I am beginning to wonder if we will learn the truth about much of anything.

 

[Joe King]

by listening it opened up the whole world of what goes on at Antarctica.

Whatever is going on in Antarctia, I can assure you that it ain't "going on" due to the Earth being flat.

 

[Avalon]

Whatever is going on in Antarctia, I can assure you that it ain't "going on" due to the Earth being flat.

 

[Silvergun]

Bottom line, the ones pushing flat Earth employ deception and lies as their primary tools.

Does NASA employ deception and lies? Why?

Whatever is going on in Antarctia, I can assure you that it ain't "going on" due to the Earth being flat.

Very convincing. Whats your take on the reflection from the NASA helmet?

Lying about the shape of the earth would be a good way to hide land. You're more obsessed with "flat" then supposive "flat earthers" this thread is about the official story being B.S. (where have you heard that before?) as you cant measure curve from what I have seen so far. No one knows what the shape is besides what NASA tells, thats why this is such a debated topic. You aren't leaving earth (physically anyway)

Hiding land, hiding the creator, hiding the afterlife, etc. This is why there is so much push for "ancient aliens", thats the only thing that could explain it right it couldn't be homo denisovans. Look outward toward the sky not inward, dont dig and use arceology to unlock the past, just focus on space and colonizing space. The elongated skulls arent from head bindings...well.. except for the rich posers that wished they were. They left foot prints all over and taught the ancients many things including geo-polymers. The Smithsonian doesn't want you to know that.

 

[Joe King]

WTF is he/she/it doing there ?

It's just the reflection of the other astronaut. In this case, Harrison Schmitt.

Their visors on the helmets were curved. Have you ever looked at a convexly curved reflective surface? If so, you'll probably have noticed your own reflection in it will be tangent to the angle you are standing.

In other words, that figure seen in the reflection is precisely where the person who took the pic, was standing. Ie: it is the person who took the photo.

Otherwise, if one thinks that reflection is of some other third person, they need to explain why whoever took the pic is not seen in the reflection.

 

[DodgebyDave]

Is there something sinister going on in Antarctica?

 

[Joe King]

Lying about the shape of the earth would be a good way to hide land.

Anyone with an Ocean-going boat could prove that Antarctica is not a perimeter around the edge of the Earth. If it were, it'd be a tens of thousands of miles long journey to sail around it.
.....and it's just not that many miles in size.

Very convincing. Whats your take on the reflection from the NASA helmet?

Already posted on it.

as you cant measure curve from what I have seen so far.

The heck you can't.

Here is that pic of Chicago that clearly shows water of Lake Michigan blocking the view of the lower portion of the city's skyline.

In case you don't remember, it's the pic I posted the last time you tried to say there is no evidence of curvature, and that your only response to was to ignore it and quit posting in this thread for awhile.

Right there is proof of curvature.
The amount of the view of downtown Chicago is exactly the amount that would be blocked by the Earth's surface curving down and away from the location the pic was taken.

 

[Joe King]

Is there something sinister going on in Antarctica?

Yea. It's where the flat Earthers hold their flat Earth convention every year to discuss which of their previously busted arguments they'll dust off for next years discussions.

 

[Joe King]

yeah but its interesting.. I don't see myself converting to a flat earther

Keep in mind that every full blown flat Earther said the same thing after watching their first flat Earth vid too. Lol

 

[goldielox1]

It's just the reflection of the other astronaut. In this case, Harrison Schmitt.

Their visors on the helmets were curved. Have you ever looked at a convexly curved reflective surface? If so, you'll probably have noticed your own reflection in it will be tangent to the angle you are standing.

In other words, that figure seen in the reflection is precisely where the person who took the pic, was standing. Ie: it is the person who took the photo.

Otherwise, if one thinks that reflection is of some other third person, they need to explain why whoever took the pic is not seen in the reflection.

LOL Only problem is where is his camera, backpack, space suit? How did he take the picture without his camera fastened to his chest? Why are his pants dark? His top is white but his pants are dark. LOL

I could show you the picture on "mars" from NASA with the groundhog too, but when you'e this brain washed, you'll explain everything away.

 

[Avalon]

Keep in mind that every full blown flat Earther said the same thing after watching their first flat Earth vid too. Lol

If I became a flat earther it would not be the most bizarre conspiracy I believe in.

 

[Joe King]

LOL Only problem is where is his camera, backpack, space suit? How did he take the picture without his camera fastened to his chest? Why are his pants dark? His top is white but his pants are dark. LOL

Relative to Cernan he's standing at an angle, and his legs are shadowed.

If you truly think that it's not Schmitt, where in that reflection is the photographer?

A curved reflective surface such as the visor is, shows the the entire area in the reflection, yet only one other person can be seen. How can that person not be the photographer?

Why is the person in question centered in the reflection at the same point that a reflection of the photographer should be visible?
...but that by your theory, is not visible?

 

[Joe King]

If I became a flat earther it would not be the most bizarre conspiracy I believe in.

With all these type of topics, falsification is the true litmus test.

There can be a laundry list of questionable things about a particular topic that might suggest that the theory is true, but all it takes to prove that it is not true, is for any one of the claims to be shown to be wrong.


For example, the flat Earthers insist there is no evidence of curvature, yet it is clearly visible in that pic I posted.
Btw, that pic used to be used by flat Earthers as proof of there being no curvature.
That is, until I used the distinctive shape of Wilis Tower to prove them wrong. Now they will not even acknowledge that pic, because it so obviously proves them wrong.

The horizon created by water that they always like to point out as seeking its own level, clearly blocks part of the view.
They can't explain that, so they do the same as they do with anything else that dis-proves their wacked out claims. They ignore it.


Edited to add: hard core flat Earh beliefs either cause people to acquire selective blindness, brain damage, or just a willingness to deceive others for their own perverted sense of amusement.

 

[TAEZZAR]

yeah but its interesting.. I don't see myself converting to a flat earther but by listening it opened up the whole world of what goes on at Antarctica. I like to hear all points of view. Honestly at this time in history nothing would surprise me and I am beginning to wonder if we will learn the truth about much of anything.

History is written by the winners/controllers !!!

 

[TAEZZAR]

I seem to recall a book where Admiral Perry talked about it... I'm going to find it

Like this one ??
https://www.amazon.com/Hitler-ANTAR...11A7DEOA&revisionId=a3ee39ed&format=1&depth=1

 

[Avalon]

Like this one ??
https://www.amazon.com/Hitler-ANTAR...11A7DEOA&revisionId=a3ee39ed&format=1&depth=1

Check this out. This is a trip on the woo-train I want to take. :)
The Master tells him that there “is a dark time coming” but that:

“You, my son, (said the Master), “will live through the storm. You will preserve the fragrance of our history and add to it a touch of your own mind. Beyond that, my vision weakens … but I see in the great distance a new world starting in the ruins … But in hopefulness, seeking it’s lost and legendary treasures, and they will all be here, my son, hidden behind the mountains under the blue moon, preserved as if by a miracle…”

Now, lets compare that with what, according to “The Secret Diary of Admiral Richard Evelyn Byrd,” was a meeting between The Admiral and the “Master” of the Arianni:

“Yes, my son,” replied the Master, “the dark ages that will come for your race will cover the Earth like a pall, but I believe that some of your race will live through the storm, beyond that I cannot say. We see a great distance a new world stirring from the ruins of your race, seeking its lost and legendary treasures, and they will be here my son, safe in our keeping…”

The Missing Secret Diary of Admiral Byrd - Fact or Fiction?

 

[newmisty]

So? You seem to think there's a absolute point of division between atmosphere and space. The atmosphere merely gets thinner and thinner the higher above the surface one goes.

The Karmen line is just the approx point above which, the air is thin enough that planes can no longer fly.



In your opinion, maybe.


Ok, but that was before they tried. Ie: they were wrong.



Again, it takes time for heating to occur. It doesn't instantly get that the moment Sun's light hits an object. You can prove that yourself by setting something in the Sunshine, and then measuring its temperature and plotting it on a graph.



It wasn't designed for use in Earth's atmosphere nor gravity.



The reason stars are not visible in pics and vids is because if the exposure settings on the camera were set to the stars light,, everything they are actually trying to take pics of on the Moon would be over exposed.

If you know anything about photography, and took a moment to think before jumping to conclusions, you could have figured that out.

As for the shadows, you obviously aren't correctly able to interpret what you are seeing.
...but coming from someone who has already demonstrated a woeful lack of understanding, I'm not surprised.



There hasn't been any reason to.


Got an un-doctored vid showing that?

I specify un-doctored, as the flat Earth/Moon hoax folks are well known for misrepresenting things.



The vid was taken @10 frames per second, so it should have looked as it did. What was seen on TV was from a camera filming the live feed.



Because of inertia and the lack of any atmospheric drag, things move differently in a vacuum.


Yep, and those cold war foes, among others, tracked Apollo 11 all the way to the Moon and back. Why would they lie in support of their biggest enemy?


A light bulb moment is what you need.



How so? Are you a "gravity isn't real" guy too?



Can't see 'em in pics. See my answer to Goldie above.



That'd be what comes from your side of this discussion. All I started out doing was answering questions about it.
...and then the name calling started when you guys couldn't counter what I was sayin'.



...would be to quit watching flat Earth vids on youtube. Lol


Yea, run away like a loser, instead of actually defending your idiotic claims with logic and common sense arguments.

This is what happens when you bring a spitball straw to a gun battle.

 

[newmisty]

With all these type of topics, falsification is the true litmus test.

There can be a laundry list of questionable things about a particular topic that might suggest that the theory is true, but all it takes to prove that it is not true, is for any one of the claims to be shown to be wrong.


For example, the flat Earthers insist there is no evidence of curvature, yet it is clearly visible in that pic I posted.
Btw, that pic used to be used by flat Earthers as proof of there being no curvature.
That is, until I used the distinctive shape of Wilis Tower to prove them wrong. Now they will not even acknowledge that pic, because it so obviously proves them wrong.

The horizon created by water that they always like to point out as seeking its own level, clearly blocks part of the view.
They can't explain that, so they do the same as they do with anything else that dis-proves their wacked out claims. They ignore it.


Edited to add: hard core flat Earh beliefs either cause people to acquire selective blindness, brain damage, or just a willingness to deceive others for their own perverted sense of amusement.

Flat Earther- denies factual evidence claiming we've been lied to since birth to believe in fake science.

Also Flat Earther- uses very same science thought to be fake as foundation of their argument

 

[DodgebyDave]

remeber Eric Von Daniken? He was full of shit too

 

[BarnacleBob]

Braveheart on TikTok

Braveheart's short video with ♬ origineel geluid

vm.tiktok.com