Put a flat earthier into space


Or something along the lines of "you see what you see but none of that proves we are standing on a spinning globe"
I don't think he has any capacity for analysis or actual thinking, just what he watches and repeats from youtube
was expecting the planetarium response to be honest.

Every time you can show that what you observe exactly matches a 3d model, or I demonstrate something changing like the storms of Jupiter, then he talks about video projectors in planetariums. Good response. A very good video projector could show all this, could show the rotating sky and could make the southern hemisphere rotate the opposite way. It makes a lot of things work. It also still fails in how you can see the southern cross in every direction but north, but you can't have everything.

But it opens up a new question. Why is there a video screen hidden in the middle of the earth projecting an image exactly like you would see if we lived in a 3d universe. It is perfectly designed to trick us by behaving exactly like objects in a circular motion would do. This points to a sinister intelligence at work. And in that you have taken the leap from science and the sum of human knowledge, to all that being lies, to seeing a conspiracy and finding another 'truth', to putting your faith into something made up and then coming to the natural conclusion that you need some powerful intelligent made up entity who has designed something really complicated and like the world leaders, also want to trick us.

In general humans have gone from god/spririt/magic -> science and knowledge. This completes the circle by bring in a god type figure, only not a good god, a god that wants to fool us and keep us from knowing. Keep digging in the various flat earth conspiracies and you find that not only do the followers behave like it is a religion, taking away all critical thinking and analysis, but actually it is a religion with a god. Only they don't name or always acknowledge the god and certainly don't worship it. But it is there, supporting the conspiracy and using magical powers to make all the unexplained things work, which is right back where we started in neolithic times or before.
 
was expecting the planetarium response to be honest.

Every time you can show that what you observe exactly matches a 3d model, or I demonstrate something changing like the storms of Jupiter, then he talks about video projectors in planetariums. Good response. A very good video projector could show all this, could show the rotating sky and could make the southern hemisphere rotate the opposite way. It makes a lot of things work. It also still fails in how you can see the southern cross in every direction but north, but you can't have everything.

But it opens up a new question. Why is there a video screen hidden in the middle of the earth projecting an image exactly like you would see if we lived in a 3d universe. It is perfectly designed to trick us by behaving exactly like objects in a circular motion would do. This points to a sinister intelligence at work. And in that you have taken the leap from science and the sum of human knowledge, to all that being lies, to seeing a conspiracy and finding another 'truth', to putting your faith into something made up and then coming to the natural conclusion that you need some powerful intelligent made up entity who has designed something really complicated and like the world leaders, also want to trick us.

In general humans have gone from god/spririt/magic -> science and knowledge. This completes the circle by bring in a god type figure, only not a good god, a god that wants to fool us and keep us from knowing. Keep digging in the various flat earth conspiracies and you find that not only do the followers behave like it is a religion, taking away all critical thinking and analysis, but actually it is a religion with a god. Only they don't name or always acknowledge the god and certainly don't worship it. But it is there, supporting the conspiracy and using magical powers to make all the unexplained things work, which is right back where we started in neolithic times or before.
Exactly plus he moved a little from saying it was all just natural reflections from an energy source to now saying "someone" may be putting false crafts up there, obviously the same someone who keeps editing the projector, the same projector that belongs where "no creature or machine could ever reach" so who changes the projector?
 
Why is this movement in decades for some comets and far less for others?
It depends on the size and rate of disintegration in terms of what part of the higher atmosphere it's caught up in and where.

If we go back to the sink analogy and think of ice moving around the outer and farther in towards the centre you'll get different rates of movement and disintegration.

Think of it crudely on those lines.

What generates this energy and why is it in a regular predictable cycle?
Can you elaborate on this because I'm not sure if you're asking what generates the sun's energy or what?
How can some of these droplets stay in the sky on an apparent slow moving path for weeks, months or I think Hale-Bopp was over a year?
As above.
How come observations of most comets suggest a parabolic orbit and if you extrapolate that orbit you can calculate precisely where it will appear in the sky? If that is not what is happening, it is a staggering coincidence the maths works every single time.
Give me an example of a comet in parabolic orbit.
 
Exactly plus he moved a little from saying it was all just natural reflections from an energy source to now saying "someone" may be putting false crafts up there, obviously the same someone who keeps editing the projector, the same projector that belongs where "no creature or machine could ever reach" so who changes the projector?

And how can the projector work if it's that cold.

And how come there are rivers of gold and silver? It would have to be very hot there for this to happen.

And why precious metals not rivers of iron and lead? Sounds like the sort of thing a child would invent.
 
Exactly plus he moved a little from saying it was all just natural reflections from an energy source to now saying "someone" may be putting false crafts up there, obviously the same someone who keeps editing the projector, the same projector that belongs where "no creature or machine could ever reach" so who changes the projector?
No, I haven't moved from anything. I've always said it.
The issue here is in you getting mixed up by marrying both up to the same thing.
 
No, I haven't moved from anything. I've always said it.
The issue here is in you getting mixed up by marrying both up to the same thing.
Because none of your musings actually link up.
One looks like being ridiculed so you move the goalposts.
OK so who updates the projector to show things that we can predict.
If the planets are natural reflections how do you explain the facts that @DaveH explained very eloquently and simply earlier, we can observe moons going behind planets, that includes you and me not just "them"
 
Because none of your musings actually link up.
They link up perfectly well for me.
One looks like being ridiculed so you move the goalposts.
Nah, I don't. If you don't get it then fair enough.
OK so who updates the projector to show things that we can predict.
The central projector is natural.
What man/woman(?) puts into the sky aside from that can be argued as to what it is and this is where we're at.
If the planets are natural reflections how do you explain the facts that @DaveH explained very eloquently and simply earlier, we can observe moons going behind planets, that includes you and me not just "them"
If things are happening in the center that is projected outwards then what you see projected into the sky will be what's going on from the centre.
Slowly but surely we're being offered more and more holographic inventions that offer all kinds of scenarios. What Earth can produce on a large scale we can replicate on a small scale, in my opinion.
 
If things are happening in the center that is projected outwards then what you see projected into the sky will be what's going on from the centre.
Slowly but surely we're being offered more and more holographic inventions that offer all kinds of scenarios. What Earth can produce on a large scale we can replicate on a small scale, in my opinion.
No but if we can predict when certain objects will arrive by using maths and science how does the projector know when to show them?
Nobody can predict when the dome is going to melt and drop off as nobody can see it.
 
It depends on the size and rate of disintegration in terms of what part of the higher atmosphere it's caught up in and where.

If we go back to the sink analogy and think of ice moving around the outer and farther in towards the centre you'll get different rates of movement and disintegration.

Think of it crudely on those lines.


Can you elaborate on this because I'm not sure if you're asking what generates the sun's energy or what?

As above.

Give me an example of a comet in parabolic orbit.
Without any details "just inner earth energy" seems like a cop out. You seem to be suggesting that some ice breaks off and just hangs there in the higher atmosphere in exactly the same way that bricks don't. Other things fall. Why? I think you really need a mechanism.

Almost all observed comets follow a parabolic curve, but if you want a list:
They link up perfectly well for me.

Nah, I don't. If you don't get it then fair enough.

The central projector is natural.
What man/woman(?) puts into the sky aside from that can be argued as to what it is and this is where we're at.

If things are happening in the center that is projected outwards then what you see projected into the sky will be what's going on from the centre.
Slowly but surely we're being offered more and more holographic inventions that offer all kinds of scenarios. What Earth can produce on a large scale we can replicate on a small scale, in my opinion.
Does that not suggest as I said above that the centre is actually some sort of really complex video screen, precisely mimicking the surface of planets, moons in orbit of them etc?
 
Last edited:
Give me an example.

Seeing the actual clear dome, no, but seeing icicles form from it over time then falling would be seen and predicted.
How can we predict it if we can't see it?
Who has a picture of an image of the dome wall with these icicles on, surely someone with the same ideas as you and a decent telescope could produce one.

And for the first line it's all on here, do your own research, open your mind.
 
Without any details "just inner earth energy" seems like a cop out. You seem to be suggesting that some ice breaks off and just hangs there in the higher atmosphere in exactly the same way that bricks don't. Other things fall. Why? I think you really need a mechanism.
I offered it before but it seems to have been overlooked.

I'll explain once again.
Molecules below are broken down and are pushed up or squeezed up due to them becoming less dense.
As they take their place in the stacked layers they eventually become almost dormant due to near full breakdown and inability to vibrate, meaning they basically freeze and form a dome as the last layered mass, which we can look at as a sort of frozen hydrogen/helium and the likes.
As the energy reflection passes over the hydrogen is agitated due to a massive push of other molecules into that area which is constantly splitting or peeling (think of the gobstopper analogy) which creates a mass of different dense vibrations up there that we would have as much denser melting down here in terms of formation of icicles as the energy passes over and the refreeze happens, until the icicle becomes too much of a mass for the layers it is in and it breaks off.

Once it breaks off it takes its place among the gases and fluids up there and is carried by the stream or the vortex (think back to the sink analogy) depending on the make-up of the icicle and where it breaks off, depends on the actual rate of fall of travel distance around the dome.
Almost all observed comets follow a parabolic curve, but if you want a list:
I wanted some verification of a parabolic curve because a parabolic curve would make no sense on a spinning globe.
 
How can we predict it if we can't see it?
By change in reflection as it grows up to a point of breaking and disintegrating and creating glowing friction of gases.



Who has a picture of an image of the dome wall with these icicles on, surely someone with the same ideas as you and a decent telescope could produce one.
There is a reason telescopes are on mountains and such.

And for the first line it's all on here, do your own research, open your mind.
I'm fine.
WTF has the spinning globe got to do with comets?
Aren't you supposedly watching them from a spinning globe point of view?
Aren't you supposedly spinning at near or over 1000 mph whilst looking up at the sky?

To me is has nothing to do with it but to you, it has everything to do with that mindset.
 
Last edited:
I offered it before but it seems to have been overlooked.

I'll explain once again.
Molecules below are broken down and are pushed up or squeezed up due to them becoming less dense.
As they take their place in the stacked layers they eventually become almost dormant due to near full breakdown and inability to vibrate, meaning they basically freeze and form a dome as the last layered mass, which we can look at as a sort of frozen hydrogen/helium and the likes.
As the energy reflection passes over the hydrogen is agitated due to a massive push of other molecules into that area which is constantly splitting or peeling (think of the gobstopper analogy) which creates a mass of different dense vibrations up there that we would have as much denser melting down here in terms of formation of icicles as the energy passes over and the refreeze happens, until the icicle becomes too much of a mass for the layers it is in and it breaks off.

Once it breaks off it takes its place among the gases and fluids up there and is carried by the stream or the vortex (think back to the sink analogy) depending on the make-up of the icicle and where it breaks off, depends on the actual rate of fall of travel distance around the dome.
So molecules of hydrogen and helium break down and just hang there, glowing high in the sky for months?

Why do they always seem to have a core and a tail, that tail increases as it approaches the sun and why does it always point away from the sun?
I wanted some verification of a parabolic curve because a parabolic curve would make no sense on a spinning globe.
Glad to have provided.

I must get round to knocking up a simulation of those observations of polaris on an alternate shaped earth. I'll try to do that this weekend.
 
But nobody predicts them by looking at breaking icicles, why does nobody have images of these as they are building up to breaking point?
We're told the Earth is a spinning globe with planets strewn about a space vacuum and also big fiery balls are strewn all over at a distance that is just inconceivable to measure in miles so have to be measured in light years and so on and so on.
Why would anyone want to offer icicles hanging from a dome when the stories told are based on all of that and much more??
 
Hydrogen and helium are squeezed up by denser gas molecules below (i have noticed he has added vibration in now) then freeze and become much denser but dont fall.
 

Back
Top