Put a flat earthier into space

[Nukehasslefan]

That leads to a lot of questions to address your idea of conspiracy. First of all, why?

Second, so you see a very vague similarity to a cartoon character in one image from a mission? What about all the other images? Why would they do this? If it is a billion pound industry, why would they risk bringing the whole thing down? Why even pretend to send a mission in the first place? Why do all the other images appear normal?

What about all the other missions which have taken images of other solar system objects and don't see this so called mockery? Why just this one image from one planet?

The only other one I can think of is the famous rabbit on the moon. Is this image on the left a fake too?

Logon or register to see this image

The human brain is very good at trying to match shapes, with animals in the clouds being a famous known phenomena. I believe clouds are real, god only knows what you think about them.

Of course, I agree. We can make shapes out of anything and many things do look like objects and animals. Even people.
Anyone is obviously free to look at the pluto pictures and deduce what you say if they think it's just a coincidence.

I see it for a lot more than that but that won't surprise you just as much as it doesn't surprise me that you'd not see anything untoward.Then, lets for a minute assume that space and the dwarf planet pluto is real and we could send a probe there. With a camera at a suitable distance, why could we not see it in plain sight? Surely that is the most logical thing to assume.

On earth we are used to seeing things in plain sight, getting to more detail and looking bigger as we get closer. Like above, we can see the moon in plain sight, why not something else if it were closer or we were closer to it?

Ok let's apply logic to what we are told.
A sun that bathes Earth at 93 million miles, as we're told.
Pluto uses our sun even though it's 3.7 billion miles away, as we're also told.
Pluto is lit up like a beacon. Surely the probes camera flash didn't do that, right?
So we're left to our sun doing it. Make sense?
Of course it doesn't but in the story books it can make sense to anyone that sees it on the fact shelf instead of the fiction shelf where it belongs.

But let's look at the components of this supposed probe.
PCB's would have to be used and a whole host of other stuff in this probe story.
We all know what happens to pcb's (printed circuit boards) if they aren't allowed to cool.
How do they cool?
We use fans in atmosphere but so called space offers none of that. It offers a vacuum as we're consistently told.
We get told " ohhh it's radiation of heat into the vacuum."
Come on, think about it. It's massively contradictory.

People struggle to get a signal a few dozen miles away at times and yet we're supposed to believe this probe just recharges in a vacuum by using our sun as the source?
It's easy to make anyone believe anything if they cannot prove it and are also shackled by monumental peer pressure to follow the narrative.

The probe never give up. Why would it? Why does your phone or car keep going for as long as it does? Because you give it a suitable sized power source. If you are sending a probe into the furthest reaches of the solar system, why not give it a power source that will last, rather than a cheap mobile phone battery? If you are spending all that money, you design it to last. "Oh sorry, we forgot to charge the space probe and just picked up a battery of eBay. Sorry about the rocket and all that".

A power source that needs consistent recharging.

On earth, what do we do with radio signals to combat natural interference? We increase power, we increase size of the receiving dish and we also increase the resilience in the signal. Wireless networking is a great example, we use it every day, but the signals are all bouncing off all sorts of objects, going through walls etc. So we use a technique called tokenisation. A single byte of data is converted into tokens with a specific binary pattern. These tokens are much larger than the data being sent and with mathematical (I know that hated word again) algorithms, you can detect not only that something has changed, what what has changed and self-correct. So long as the data corruption is not too great it works. Clearly there is a threshold where it stops working but it allows for a lot of data corruption. It does mean over wireless, the actual amount of data transmitted is huge compared to what you think you send (e.g. 100 bytes text is a lot more than 8x100 bits) Why would that not work from deep regions of space? Satellites send signals through the atmosphere all the time. Why would this not work from other space probes?

No medium is the logical answer.

Imagine an animal in the vacuum of space. Animals have internal pressure equal to the usual external pressure on the surface of the earth and as a result the two balance out and we don't get crushed or burst. In a vacuum that internal pressure would be greater so while a lot of the components of our bodies would do ok, blood cells, lungs, ear drums, sinuses etc, anywhere with air cavities, would expand rapidly and burst.

All cells would expand into the extreme low pressure, not just ear drums and what not.

(Though the boiling point of water changes due to pressure. In a low pressure environment this is lower than body temperature, so the inside of your mouth, the linings of your lungs and your eye balls would boil and essentially cook before you really started to worry about the fact your ear drums have just burst and your lungs are exploding through your chest. In the interests of safety, I strongly recommend you don't do this).

The so called boiling is the massive expansion of matter/molecules for want of words and meanings.
The difference between boiling in dense conditions like sea level and in an extreme low pressure environment is chalk and cheese in terms of heat transfer from it being felt by us.
The high pressure boiling will burn us. The low pressure boiling will do the opposite and basically render our cells as dormant after mass expansion.

So circuit boards. What are they made of? I'm not sure what the ones used in space probes use, but likely some glass fibre based resin. Components are made of silicon and various types of metal, with glass lenses. No air cavities, no moisture. So the question should be, why would a circuit board not survive or function in a vacuum (actually near vacuum)?

Ask yourself what would happen to your computer if you took the fan out of it and offered it no venting?
The components would heat up and burn out.
In your extreme low pressure of space you are offered nothing to vent and no fan to work.
Your components would simply heat up consistently and burn out in short order.

The reality would likely be different if we want to go right down the rabbit hole and simple understand that in that environment, (which wouldn't actually be one) nothing would exist to do anything....but let's deal with what the storytellers sell us.

You claim to have done numerous experiments (details yet to be revealed) with evacuation chambers. Can you provide any evidence of circuit boards not working in a near vacuum?

I could but it would involve making a video in the place that holds a big enough chamber for evacuation of pressure.
However I have no need nor reason to offer it to you but I will offer you the chance to go and test it yourself. I'm sure you'll have all the equipment for this, right?

Anyone who is in possession of the equipment and who is unbiased...go and test it out.

What happens to them? Do they just explode at certain low pressures? Have you repeated this yourself?

Cease to operate.

Again, a lot of waffle saying "this doesn't match my personal expectations so conspiracy.

Basically they not only don't match, a lot of it is gunk. In my opinion.

I have some doubts about how this would work, so rather than think about it, millions are out to trick me and it is all a lie". But when you take the time to just scratch into the detail (yes, another hated word) then actually, why not?

What detail?

ok then. why do you think your questioning is so right compared to the richness of the species' learned knowledge over thousands of years?

I don't.

 

[DaveH]

Of course, I agree. We can make shapes out of anything and many things do look like objects and animals. Even people.
Anyone is obviously free to look at the pluto pictures and deduce what you say if they think it's just a coincidence.

I see it for a lot more than that but that won't surprise you just as much as it doesn't surprise me that you'd not see anything untoward.Then, lets for a minute assume that space and the dwarf planet pluto is real and we could send a probe there. With a camera at a suitable distance, why could we not see it in plain sight? Surely that is the most logical thing to assume.



Ok let's apply logic to what we are told.
A sun that bathes Earth at 93 million miles, as we're told.
Pluto uses our sun even though it's 3.7 billion miles away, as we're also told.
Pluto is lit up like a beacon. Surely the probes camera flash didn't do that, right?
So we're left to our sun doing it. Make sense?
Of course it doesn't but in the story books it can make sense to anyone that sees it on the fact shelf instead of the fiction shelf where it belongs.

But let's look at the components of this supposed probe.
PCB's would have to be used and a whole host of other stuff in this probe story.
We all know what happens to pcb's (printed circuit boards) if they aren't allowed to cool.
How do they cool?
We use fans in atmosphere but so called space offers none of that. It offers a vacuum as we're consistently told.
We get told " ohhh it's radiation of heat into the vacuum."
Come on, think about it. It's massively contradictory.

People struggle to get a signal a few dozen miles away at times and yet we're supposed to believe this probe just recharges in a vacuum by using our sun as the source?
It's easy to make anyone believe anything if they cannot prove it and are also shackled by monumental peer pressure to follow the narrative.



A power source that needs consistent recharging.

No medium is the logical answer.

All cells would expand into the extreme low pressure, not just ear drums and what not.




The so called boiling is the massive expansion of matter/molecules for want of words and meanings.
The difference between boiling in dense conditions like sea level and in an extreme low pressure environment is chalk and cheese in terms of heat transfer from it being felt by us.
The high pressure boiling will burn us. The low pressure boiling will do the opposite and basically render our cells as dormant after mass expansion.

Ask yourself what would happen to your computer if you took the fan out of it and offered it no venting?
The components would heat up and burn out.
In your extreme low pressure of space you are offered nothing to vent and no fan to work.
Your components would simply heat up consistently and burn out in short order.

The reality would likely be different if we want to go right down the rabbit hole and simple understand that in that environment, (which wouldn't actually be one) nothing would exist to do anything....but let's deal with what the storytellers sell us.



I could but it would involve making a video in the place that holds a big enough chamber for evacuation of pressure.
However I have no need nor reason to offer it to you but I will offer you the chance to go and test it yourself. I'm sure you'll have all the equipment for this, right?

Anyone who is in possession of the equipment and who is unbiased...go and test it out.

Cease to operate.

Basically they not only don't match, a lot of it is gunk. In my opinion.

What detail?

I don't.

Wow, a lot of paranoid drivel.

I can only be arsed to pick on one point. In the same post you say that pluto is too far away from the sun to receive heat and light and then you worry about circuits overheating in the cold vacuum of the furthest reaches of the solar system. Then you say that everything you hear is contradictory. Just look at your own post, which is it.

Comets are made of ice. Neptune and Uranus are known as ice giants. The rings of Saturn are formed by ice being ejected by some of its moons. Think about that one for a while.

Also, if you are worried about Pluto looking too bright, have a read up about low light photography and techniques used.

You ask good questions, but the problem with you and other conspiracy theorists is you ask those question and then pull the answers out of your arse, claim the universe is wrong because anything else you hear doesn't match those answers and claim conspiracy because millions of people for many generations don't conform to something you just made up.

 

[Nukehasslefan]

You don't want proof. Anything that doesn't conform to your musings you dismiss out of hand as not proof.

No.
Anything that doesn't offer proof or begs questions will not be readily believed.

If anything you hear doesn't conform to dome logic you shout lie.

Your words not mine.

Whether you want to admit it or not you're basically claiming that billions of people are lying to us on a daily basis and have been for thousands of years.....why....who knows.

Nope. Millions or billions of people can easily follow a narrative without knowing the truth.
Religion is testament to that so why not many other things?

The comparison to God you've brought up many times to somehow mirror scientific understanding as both been stories shows how warped your reasoning is.

It's not warped. It is logical reasoning.
You don't seem to be able to argue it.

 

[payne]

No.
Anything that doesn't offer proof or begs questions will not be readily believed.

Your words not mine.


Nope. Millions or billions of people can easily follow a narrative without knowing the truth.
Religion is testament to that so why not many other things?

It's not warped. It is logical reasoning.
You don't seem to be able to argue it.

yeah!

 

[The Snockerty Friddle]

Anything that doesn't offer proof or begs questions will not be readily believed.

Apart from your own home-grown world view which offers nothing but questions and zero proof.

 

[Nukehasslefan]

Wow, a lot of paranoid drivel.

In your opinion.

I can only be arsed to pick on one point. In the same post you say that pluto is too far away from the sun to receive heat and light and then you worry about circuits overheating in the cold vacuum of the furthest reaches of the solar system. Then you say that everything you hear is contradictory. Just look at your own post, which is it.

Of course it's massively contradictory if you look at it as me actually saying it but you've likely (deliberately) overlooked the parts where I regularly mention about " as we're told" and " so called" and "apparently" and all kinds of words to ensure people don't get mixed up. It seems you manage it regularly but I'll forgive you for it.

Comets are made of ice. Neptune and Uranus are known as ice giants. The rings of Saturn are formed by ice being ejected by some of its moons. Think about that one for a while.

I don't need to think about it.
I don't recognise planets whether they're said to be rock or gas or ice.
I do guess that we have a potential ice dome with regular droplets of ice from it creating friction as it's squeezed through the upper atmosphere.

Also, if you are worried about Pluto looking too bright, have a read up about low light photography and techniques used.

I'm not worried about something that does not exist as we're told. But I will argue against the absurdity of it in terms of what's shown and told to us.

You ask good questions, but the problem with you and other conspiracy theorists is you ask those question and then pull the answers out of your arse,

I may just well be doing that because I don't know the truth of what Earth is in its entirety or what's really external to it....but I'm 100% sure it's not what we're told.

claim the universe is wrong because anything else you hear doesn't match those answers and claim conspiracy because millions of people for many generations don't conform to something you just made up.

The universe is inside the cell we are in. That's it as far as I'm concerned.
What is external to this Earth cell is anyone's guess.
My guess is many more like ours which we will never likely ever see unless somehow some magical machine can tunnel out into the next one.
Chances of that are zero....but what do I know? I can only guess based on the speculative info at hand, which may only be the tip of the iceberg.

Apart from your own home-grown world view which offers nothing but questions and zero proof.

And it's a good job I never offer it as proof then, unlike the nonsensical global Earth and all the garbage thrown out to make it work for the story.

 

[The Snockerty Friddle]

And it's a good job I never offer it as proof then, unlike the nonsensical global Earth and all the garbage thrown out to make it work for the story.

The point being, you readily believe it.
"Anything that doesn't offer proof or begs questions will not be readily believed."

 

[Nukehasslefan]

The point being, you readily believe it.

Believe what?

"Anything that doesn't offer proof or begs questions will not be readily believed."

I'm not offering proof to myself. I'm looking for proof.
I believe in what I'm doing.
When I have proof I'll offer it as I have with water level killing the global spinning Earth stone dead on just two words.
An experiment that any person can observe, test and repeat.

 

[payne]

The point being, you readily believe it.
"Anything that doesn't offer proof or begs questions will not be readily believed."

he uses nonsensical to describe reality but not for his own musings.

 

[The Snockerty Friddle]

Believe what?

I'm not offering proof to myself. I'm looking for proof.
I believe in what I'm doing.
When I have proof I'll offer it as I have with water level killing the global spinning Earth stone dead on just two words.
An experiment that any person can observe, test and repeat.

Utter bollocks.

"Believe what?" You presumably believe everything you say about your non-global Earth yet have no proof whatsoever. Your water level shite is exactly that, it's shite and easily proved to be so in an experiment that can be repeated and tested as often as you like without ever coming to the conclusion you have chosen to put your faith into.
You're not questioning anything. Your mind is made up and as closed as any religious type.

 

[Nukehasslefan]

Utter bollocks.

"Believe what?" You presumably believe everything you say about your non-global Earth yet have no proof whatsoever. Your water level shite is exactly that, it's shite and easily proved to be so in an experiment that can be repeated and tested as often as you like without ever coming to the conclusion you have chosen to put your faith into.
You're not questioning anything. Your mind is made up and as closed as any religious type.

It's all about a person asking themselves a big question.
Does water conform to a container or does it work well when poured onto a spinning ball.

I know the real answer and so do many many people.
The problem we have here is in people do not want to go against a set narrative for fear of ridicule.
Mainstream teachings propose a spinning ball is much better to hold water which has no issue with curving.


It doesn't seem to matter to people that they can observe, test and repeat the water in any container experiment being legitimate and water poured onto a ball being nothing more than a floor full of water.

Each to their own.

 

[zwartekat]

I think he may be on to something, actually. Pluto the planet was discovered in February 1930 and Pluto the dog turned up for the first time a mere 6 months later. Some might say that the dog was given the name in honour of the recently discovered planet but it's much more likely that 'controllers' thought they'd have a laugh and put a Pluto shape in place on the planet / 'point of light' before unleashng (pun intended) the cartoon on the world. They even put a Pluto the dog shape on the moon although no-one knows why they did that so the 'narrative' has always just brushed it off as the kind of vague outline you get from an uneven so-called surface or a so-called crater.

Using my 'free mind' I have also found what looks suspiciously like an outline of Freddie Mercury's moustache on the so-called planet closest to the so-called sun. The piss-taking bastards!

 

[DaveH]

I think he may be on to something, actually. Pluto the planet was discovered in February 1930 and Pluto the dog turned up for the first time a mere 6 months later. Some might say that the dog was given the name in honour of the recently discovered planet but it's much more likely that 'controllers' thought they'd have a laugh and put a Pluto shape in place on the planet / 'point of light' before unleashng (pun intended) the cartoon on the world. They even put a Pluto the dog shape on the moon although no-one knows why they did that so the 'narrative' has always just brushed it off as the kind of vague outline you get from an uneven so-called surface or a so-called crater.

Using my 'free mind' I have also found what looks suspiciously like an outline of Freddie Mercury's moustache on the so-called planet closest to the so-called sun. The piss-taking bastards!

Now google Mimas, one of the moons of Saturn and then google Death Star. Coincidence?

 

[payne]

Now google Mimas, one of the moons of Saturn and then google Death Star. Coincidence?

I'm convinced now!

Class how the dome projector can make the lights look so 3d

 

[zwartekat]

Now google Mimas, one of the moons of Saturn and then google Death Star. Coincidence?

No coincidence, Mr Closed Mind.

Get back to your 'narrative'.

 

[Nobby]

The thing that blows my mind is that if the world isn't a globe, the sheer number of people that have had to be trusted, throughout history, to not let that fact leak. The consequences for mankind of letting the truth out must be terrifying, else someone of noble spirit would have been willing to sacrifice themselves to expose this.

The people entrusted with policing this must be almost omnipotent and yet they are happy to let people like @Nukehasslefan pick away at the cover up without any consequences.

Now to me that is unbelievable

 

[DaveH]

No coincidence, Mr Closed Mind.

Get back to your 'narrative'.

I've not even got started yet. What about this one? A so called giant horse head just floating in space? Who do NASA think they are kidding with photos like this?:

Logon or register to see this image

 

[taipeisafc]

Ask yourself what would happen to your computer if you took the fan out of it and offered it no venting?
The components would heat up and burn out.
In your extreme low pressure of space you are offered nothing to vent and no fan to work.
Your components would simply heat up consistently and burn out in short order.

The reality would likely be different if we want to go right down the rabbit hole and simple understand that in that environment, (which wouldn't actually be one) nothing would exist to do anything....but let's deal with what the storytellers sell us.

I picked your biggest piece of drivel from your moronic post (it wasnt easy) you have no clue a fan simply increases the rate of cooling by driving air over the heat sink. Put a computer outside in winter and you dont need a fan you clueless gonk. Learn something about heat transfer before spouting drivel you plank

 

[The Snockerty Friddle]

It's all about a person asking themselves a big question.
Does water conform to a container or does it work well when poured onto a spinning ball.

I know the real answer and so do many many people.
The problem we have here is in people do not want to go against a set narrative for fear of ridicule.
Mainstream teachings propose a spinning ball is much better to hold water which has no issue with curving.


It doesn't seem to matter to people that they can observe, test and repeat the water in any container experiment being legitimate and water poured onto a ball being nothing more than a floor full of water.

Each to their own.

But pouring water onto a ball is never going to replicate the oceans on Earth unless you do the experiment in space so is not a valid experiment. You could be shown video of people who can and did do the experiment, but you wont accept it as real because it conflicts with your preconcieved idea of what should happen.
As for fear of ridicule... really? Would we still be with our chosen teams after all these years if we feared ridicule? Would we be posting on the capital of piss-taking?

 

[DaveH]

I picked your biggest piece of drivel from your moronic post (it wasnt easy) you have no clue a fan simply increases the rate of cooling by driving air over the heat sink. Put a computer outside in winter and you dont need a fan you clueless gonk. Learn something about heat transfer before spouting drivel you plank

The daftest thing is the "but why, but why, I don't understand, therefore lies and conspiracy".

If only there was a massive electronic information source where you can look these things up and compare multiple sources of information and apply that to multiple space crafts. If all are saying a similar thing and some of the design specs are online, without any professional engineers saying "Hang on a minute...." then either it is all a really good lie with lots of people in on it or there is a good chance the information is reliable. It if it one person with a facebook post it is probably not. There is literally loads of information about thermal design of space craft.

He also claims above that a probe would need a recharge, I assume because I said it is not like a mobile phone that lasts a day or two, so he immediately went for the opposite "you are wrong" stance. Longer space missions have used nuclear power sources for years. A quite pleasing line I found was "New Horizons is powered by a radioisotope thermoelectric generator (RTG), which produces electricity from the heat emitted by the radioactive decay of plutonium-238.". There you go, RTG made it possible. Go Roger.

I think the Voyager probes are amongst mankind's greatest achievements, now beyond the recognised boundary of the solar system and still going, but are getting low on power. They used a similar RTG power source.

To the nutter: Yes I know you will post lies lies and I'm a fool for following a story and star wars isn't real blah blah. Save yourself the bother, adults are talking now.