BigPete
Striker
Weyyyyy
Na he won't believe in the chemical reaction required.
All just made up shit to fool us..
-
The forum upgrades are now largely complete.
Please read this thread for more details.
New user registrations are currently disabled.
Put a flat earthier into space
- Thread starter southstander
- Start date
Na he won't believe in the chemical reaction required.
All just made up shit to fool us..
Sounds like ffs
BigPete
Striker
Cgi windowsf***ing hell is this lunatic still going
Can we not send him into space…. Then just leave him there?
Nukehasslefan
Winger
Of course you are. You were brought up with it; why wouldn't you.
I know 100% it's not a spinning globe. Ask why and we go on the roundabout again.
nahwee
Winger
Last edited:
Roman maroni
Midfield
You keep on saying that you know 100% that it's not a spinning globe, you don't know shit mate, you just keep spouting utter drivel which has no place in scientific fact, everything you say has been debunked time and time again yet you continue with your bullshit,you are a prime example of Dunning Kruger if ever there was one.
Nukehasslefan
Winger
That's fine you know it is not a globe but you are unable or unwilling to share the evidence to support that knowledge
DaveH
Striker
I was looking at this image of the moon this morning:
and I started asking myself these questions
Do I believe this image is real? Yes
Does this section of it actually look like a big rock ball? Yes, though that is just my perception
If you shine a light on a ball from the side while in darkness, would one side be really light gradually fading into darkness like in this picture? Yes (bottom left to top right)
If you put 3d features on that ball would you see shadows of mountains going from left to right and can we see that here? Yes
If you had craters on that ball, would the left side be dark and in shadow while the right side would be brighter catching the light? Yes
Is that the same effect as we see here? Yes
If you drew circles all over that ball, would those close to what we see as the edge from our viewing angle look elliptical while those more towards the middle appear circular? Yes
Do the craters in this image show the same behavior? Yes
If you slam a heavy object into something solid but loose to some degree like sand, soil, flour etc, does it give circular crater patters that match these? Yes
Does this look anything like the sun? No, but the sun is really bright, perhaps too bright to see the features we can see here
Ok how can we see activity on the sun? We could look at 'The Sun Now' and 'Sunspots' at
Is this real of faked data, how can we tell? Real, the sunspots image is a 99.x% white light filter image and you can buy special filtering foil for about £25 to make filters for telescopes, binoculars or just the naked eye, I have done this and the sunspots NASA claim always match 100% (though today is a particularly bland day sunspot wise and it is cloudy here today, but other days have matched)
What about 'The Sun Now', is this real? These use various filters like hydrogen-alpha to really peer into the surface of the sun showing only certain wavelengths. Large storms on this image match sunspots, but HA solar telescopes are really expensive, about (£4k) and beyond my spending. However many people have them and taken similar images from home, this 'crowd sourcing' from the general public has never spotted any issues.
So we can trust the data, do features on the sun with most of the blinding glare filtered out ever match features such as these on the moon? No
Does light hitting a parabolic curve/dome split into two, giving a primary and secondary reflection? No
Does a circle of light hitting a parabolic dome ever present a reflection elsewhere on the dome that is a different shape, e.g. a circle to a crescent? No
Does a circle of light hitting a parabolic dome ever present a reflection elsewhere where the other reflection shows completely different features? No
Does a circle reflecting off anything ever give two reflections where one is a completely different image? No, though this could be achieved with white light hitting a prism in such a way to split the light and the second is passed through a translucent image e.g. a projector slide and produce a different image elsewhere.
Is it likely that a floating prism and projector slide is up there somewhere doing this? No
Is it then likely that the moon is a secondary reflection of the sun or some sort of hologram projected into space from earth? No, what a mental question
Does the moon behave exactly like a solid cratered object would in space? Yes, and we can simulate this on earth to check, see above
So if the moon was a fake projection/hologram has it been faked in the exact way to behave like a ball of rock? Yes
Could the only reason for this be that it was designed to fool us if faked? Probably, but could be a coincidence
Is the most likely explanation that the moon is real and it is crazy to even ask this question? Yes
If it were otherwise and was a fake, would this fact need a coverup involving millions of people spread over a long long time? Yes
Is believing so many are out to get you a sure sign of paranoia? Yes
Do those who believe otherwise really need some help? Absolutely yes
My exercise in critical thinking this morning after looking at a single lunar image. Feel free to poke holes in my thought process.
You answered my question with a question of your own and I think given the great details myself and many others have gone through to explain experiments, maths and physics, you should really answer this one with a yes or no. And if no, expand on how you really measured the lack of curve. If you whole argument lies on 'water level', I think after 321 pages, how we measure water level really is key to this who many months long thread.
Logon or register to see this image
and I started asking myself these questions
Do I believe this image is real? Yes
Does this section of it actually look like a big rock ball? Yes, though that is just my perception
If you shine a light on a ball from the side while in darkness, would one side be really light gradually fading into darkness like in this picture? Yes (bottom left to top right)
If you put 3d features on that ball would you see shadows of mountains going from left to right and can we see that here? Yes
If you had craters on that ball, would the left side be dark and in shadow while the right side would be brighter catching the light? Yes
Is that the same effect as we see here? Yes
If you drew circles all over that ball, would those close to what we see as the edge from our viewing angle look elliptical while those more towards the middle appear circular? Yes
Do the craters in this image show the same behavior? Yes
If you slam a heavy object into something solid but loose to some degree like sand, soil, flour etc, does it give circular crater patters that match these? Yes
Does this look anything like the sun? No, but the sun is really bright, perhaps too bright to see the features we can see here
Ok how can we see activity on the sun? We could look at 'The Sun Now' and 'Sunspots' at
You must be logged on to see external links
Is this real of faked data, how can we tell? Real, the sunspots image is a 99.x% white light filter image and you can buy special filtering foil for about £25 to make filters for telescopes, binoculars or just the naked eye, I have done this and the sunspots NASA claim always match 100% (though today is a particularly bland day sunspot wise and it is cloudy here today, but other days have matched)
What about 'The Sun Now', is this real? These use various filters like hydrogen-alpha to really peer into the surface of the sun showing only certain wavelengths. Large storms on this image match sunspots, but HA solar telescopes are really expensive, about (£4k) and beyond my spending. However many people have them and taken similar images from home, this 'crowd sourcing' from the general public has never spotted any issues.
So we can trust the data, do features on the sun with most of the blinding glare filtered out ever match features such as these on the moon? No
Does light hitting a parabolic curve/dome split into two, giving a primary and secondary reflection? No
Does a circle of light hitting a parabolic dome ever present a reflection elsewhere on the dome that is a different shape, e.g. a circle to a crescent? No
Does a circle of light hitting a parabolic dome ever present a reflection elsewhere where the other reflection shows completely different features? No
Does a circle reflecting off anything ever give two reflections where one is a completely different image? No, though this could be achieved with white light hitting a prism in such a way to split the light and the second is passed through a translucent image e.g. a projector slide and produce a different image elsewhere.
Is it likely that a floating prism and projector slide is up there somewhere doing this? No
Is it then likely that the moon is a secondary reflection of the sun or some sort of hologram projected into space from earth? No, what a mental question
Does the moon behave exactly like a solid cratered object would in space? Yes, and we can simulate this on earth to check, see above
So if the moon was a fake projection/hologram has it been faked in the exact way to behave like a ball of rock? Yes
Could the only reason for this be that it was designed to fool us if faked? Probably, but could be a coincidence
Is the most likely explanation that the moon is real and it is crazy to even ask this question? Yes
If it were otherwise and was a fake, would this fact need a coverup involving millions of people spread over a long long time? Yes
Is believing so many are out to get you a sure sign of paranoia? Yes
Do those who believe otherwise really need some help? Absolutely yes
My exercise in critical thinking this morning after looking at a single lunar image. Feel free to poke holes in my thought process.
Are you confirming that you have not done an experiment and you have just looked into the distance, rubbed your chin and said flat?
You answered my question with a question of your own and I think given the great details myself and many others have gone through to explain experiments, maths and physics, you should really answer this one with a yes or no. And if no, expand on how you really measured the lack of curve. If you whole argument lies on 'water level', I think after 321 pages, how we measure water level really is key to this who many months long thread.
Last edited:
Water level
Roman maroni
Midfield
You're a complete and utter moron.
So that's your answer CGI and SFX, no explanation why it can't happen, just nu uh can't happen, you're a buffoon.
Last edited:
Nukehasslefan
Winger
I'd hazard a guess you did some.
Nope. I'm saying your education is based on indoctrination. You are examined solely on what was place into your head and the better you regurgitate it the better your marks and the better looking CV you can add to to gain a place of work.
I absolutely do.
We're all parrots. Mimics. You don't understand maths or physics so you just dent everything rather than admit you're too thick to understand it all. Then you parrot the flat earth society's lies because it makes more sense to your feeble brain.
I'd say that about you.
I formed my opinion after realising the stories told were absolute utter bull.
You seem to have plenty to say.
Have a real good think about that.
Nukehasslefan said I'm sure you can explain then.
Ok, I'll await your explanation.
Last edited:
The same as we all await yours for every theory you have put forward with no justification or back up. You go first…
Nukehasslefan
Winger
You could if it existed.f***ing hell is this lunatic still going
Can we not send him into space…. Then just leave him there?
Nothing's been proven from your side and nothing has been debunked.
The Dunning Kruger effect gets used a lot.
I wonder who it applies to.
Last edited:
Roman maroni
Midfield
For someone that hasn't got a clue what they're talking about your a condescending prick.
Nukehasslefan
Winger
Water level as one instance.
