Prove it's real. That's the issue. It is common knowledge that no actual image of earth from far enough up in space to see the ball exists and suddenly you found one?
The earth is flat and we never went to the moon--Part II
- Thread starter DFT_Dave
- Start date
- Status
A test that is off by 14 feet is not "less than precise" it's a complete miscalculation that people like Hawking are not supposed to make, which is why they used him, or his voice. The error is so bad that we can only assume a deliberate attempt to deceive since incompetence could not be Hawkings.
Perspective and atmospheric conditions determine what we see and cannot see in the distance over water. A curved earth would be confirmed by ships, buildings, trees (even a helicopter) slanted away from viewer. Everything, as far away as we can view them with telescope and camera are still perpendicular to a straight horizon and flat plane.
Even when you see pictures of cityscapes with a bottom hidden by water, once you measure and locate the ground level it is always up and not way below eye level which confirms a plane and negates a downward curve away from viewer.
--Dave
I probably have more knowledge collectively on all three cosmologies and the philosophies and theologies that came with them than any other person here.
Not to mention that this thread has generated more posts and information from all sides on the subject of cosmology than one could have imagined at the start.
Even if one thinks flat earth to be misinformation or the absolutely wrong model of our universe it is still historical and an accepted theory by many today. That we never went to the moon is a no brainer in my opinion for reasons that have nothing to do with flat earth.
I never said I no nothing about computer graphics since I was a professional graphic artist. The clouds in question are the ones along the edge that follow the curved, and too clearly defined, land area as it meets the ocean on the left side of the continent.
But the main objection with any new picture of earth from space is that it is always different in obvious ways from all the others, as all of them differ from one another.
Earth from space :rotfl:
--Dave
P.S. Think I worry about my rep and my rank? :nightall:
I think you're doing a great job Dave !!! Much better than I ever could. Their frustration is showing.
This is nonsense, and you know it. You throw in a pseudo-scientific term "perspective", which doesn't mean what you pretend it means, in order to make your lie look based on some real theory.
By the way- from the other side of the bay, when on the ground- I can see the mountain.
But you still aren't factoring in the narrator. Watch what happens if I include his photograph:
See now?
Stuart
Everything you can see in the distance is perpendicular, the horizon comes up to your eye level as it does on a plane.
Nothing in the distance is slanted away from you or sinks down below your eye level as it would on a curved earth.
--Dave
Go back and look closely and you should be able to see the narrator effect clearly.--Dave
Sheesh.
Stuart
Here's the narrator effect in action:
Mr. O'Neal, the narrator in this case, is pictured in front of a horizon that is clearly photoshopped, as demonstrated by the difference between the appearance of he horizon in the photo and the words coming out of his mouth.
Clear as day.
Stuart
Mr. O'Neal, the narrator in this case, is pictured in front of a horizon that is clearly photoshopped, as demonstrated by the difference between the appearance of he horizon in the photo and the words coming out of his mouth.
Clear as day.
Stuart
Disconcerting, isn't it?
[MENTION=7053]SaulToPaul[/MENTION] -- Flat earth proven false.
"So there." -- St. John W the Great
Edit: regarding slant- at a distance of 110 km, the slant would be 1 degree away from you. Not exactly noticeable.
Regarding things sinking below eye level:
You have never watched a sunrise or sunset?
Dave- you are heavily invested in this nonsense idea, and can't admit you are wrong. You are lying to yourself. over and over again.
I'll come back once in a while and remind you of that
have a nice day!
Last edited:
It makes all the difference in the world.
I can't believe you are just ignoring the well-characterised narrator effect. This calls into question everything you have posted in this thread.
Stuart
Here's Andrew Flintoff, who is the narrator this time:
He is explaining to the BBC Test Match Special commentators that when those condensation trails in the sky behind him go pink at sunset along with those wispy clouds, it is not because of any 'sunset', but because NASA has banks of red coloured lights around the earth that simulate the sunset conspiracy.
We can see this time that the narration of the words coming out of his mouth coincides perfectly with a completely consistent explanation of the conspiracy mechanism, another excellent demonstration of the narrator effect.
Stuart
He is explaining to the BBC Test Match Special commentators that when those condensation trails in the sky behind him go pink at sunset along with those wispy clouds, it is not because of any 'sunset', but because NASA has banks of red coloured lights around the earth that simulate the sunset conspiracy.
We can see this time that the narration of the words coming out of his mouth coincides perfectly with a completely consistent explanation of the conspiracy mechanism, another excellent demonstration of the narrator effect.
Stuart
Here's Kyrie Irving giving a narrative:
He is telling us about his early years in Australia, during which NASA and the Australian government conspired to tell young children that they lived in something they called the 'Southern Hemisphere', highlighting the callous disregard for basic human rights evident in the actions perpetrated by both, even to this day. Being situated in the Southern Hemisphere is still the policy of the Australian government.
His brutal treatment at the hands of the Australians is entirely synchronised with the precision of the narration emerging from his vocal apparatus, demonstrating again the narrator effect.
Stuart
He is telling us about his early years in Australia, during which NASA and the Australian government conspired to tell young children that they lived in something they called the 'Southern Hemisphere', highlighting the callous disregard for basic human rights evident in the actions perpetrated by both, even to this day. Being situated in the Southern Hemisphere is still the policy of the Australian government.
His brutal treatment at the hands of the Australians is entirely synchronised with the precision of the narration emerging from his vocal apparatus, demonstrating again the narrator effect.
Stuart
The video presentation in it's facts are wrong. Argue to the error not to the one making the error.
This error of not knowing that at the distance of 6 miles and viewer elevation of 3 feet the blocked area would be 10 feet, not 24 feet, is inexcusable for the person doing the narrating and the organization conducting the test.
--Dave
PS Either they are incompetent or they did it with intent to deceive. I doubt they are incompetent.
Do you realize that everything you have said here is completely wrong. Take this comment: "A curved earth would be confirmed by ships, buildings, trees (even a helicopter) slanted away from viewer. Everything, as far away as we can view them with telescope and camera are still perpendicular to a straight horizon and flat plane." When you are looking a distant buildings the angle between the building and the horizon will ALWAYS be 90°. Since the building would be slanted AWAY from you, you would not be able to see that. We can measure it. It has been confirmed that the suspension towers on the Golden Gate Bridge to actually "slant" away from each other. Not bu much, about 1-13/16", but they do.
Your claim of 14' of error in the helicopter experiment is also wrong because you are not using the 8" of drop per mile correctly. 8" per mile is measured from a line drawn perpendicular to the radius of the Earth. When you look at how you must actually deal with the curvature of the Earth, you get a very different result. Since the person who did experiment did not do the math for both the 8"/mile and the actual method for dealing with the Earth's curvature his experiment is fraudulent. It's to bad really, If he had been honest in his efforts it would have actually been a very interesting experiment.
This things are why you are not taken seriously. The amount of math and science that you must ignore and claim as false is so great that you lose credibility. You make no effort to explain gravity, many simply deny that it exists. You cannot explain why to things with identical densities have different weights. You cannot explain sunrises and sunsets. Odds are extremely high that you will not respond to the specific points about the errors in your statement that I pointed out above.
Uh.... there are literally thousands of images of the earth from space.
You live in fantasy land.
You are the one with the insane theory. The burden of proof is on you to prove all these images have been faked for some unknown reason.
- Status