The earth is flat and we never went to the moon

[Nathon Detroit]

Because the ground and oceans are solid and liquid that that we cannot see through that blocks it at the bottom where as the sky is the atmosphere that we can see through. Ships and sky lines over water are also cut off at the bottom behind the "wall" of the horizon created by our viewing the ground or water rise up before us (although flat) and block what is behind it. Only when something is high enough and large enough, like the sun, to get above that line do we see it.

--Dave

Dave earlier you stated that the reason we don't see the sun at night is because it's too far away for our eyes to see. But now you are saying we can still see partial objects as they fade into the distance. Like half of the sun is too far to see but the other half of it isn't???

Do you honestly believe what you are saying??

Because if so... you are a moron.

 

[DFT_Dave]

Oh really?

So these images are faked?

https://goo.gl/photos/gZt2EhxYcipFCwxf9



Watch the video Clete posted that addresses that argument, and stop making it until you do.

Sent from my Pixel XL using TheologyOnline mobile app

Yes, absolutely! NASA fakes everything.

--Dave

 

[DFT_Dave]

More videos where the object you're viewing is either out of focus or the camera pointed at it is not powerful enough to render the image in high enough quality.

Sent from my Pixel XL using TheologyOnline mobile app

Not really, they speak for themselves, watch the video and see.

--Dave

 

[DFT_Dave]

Dave earlier you stated that the reason we don't see the sun at night is because it's too far away for our eyes to see. But now you are saying we can still see partial objects as they fade into the distance. Like half of the sun is too far to see but the other half of it isn't???

Do you honestly believe what you are saying??

Because if so... you are a moron.

Those are not inconsistent statements. We can see moving objects until they are too far away to see.

--Dave

 

[Nathon Detroit]

Those are not inconsistent statements. We can see moving objects until they are too far away to see.

--Dave

Uh.... nice try Dave.... why could you see half of the object (say the sun) but not the other half?

 

[JudgeRightly]

Yes, absolutely! NASA fakes everything.

--Dave

Again, WHY?

What reason do they have to fake it, and HOW?

Sent from my Pixel XL using TheologyOnline mobile app

 

[DFT_Dave]

Seems no one wants to comment on the videos I posted. There are clear contradictions in the videos, NASA vs Nikon P900. We all can agree that some one is faking it, but only by comparing both sides can we really know who.

--Dave

 

[DFT_Dave]

Uh.... nice try Dave.... why could you see half of the object (say the sun) but not the other half?

The horizon line, as I have already explained, perspective vs curvature.

--Dave

 

[JudgeRightly]

Seems no one wants to comment on the videos I posted. There are clear contradictions in the videos, NASA vs Nikon P900. We all can agree that some one is faking it, but only by comparing both sides can we really know who.

--Dave

Again, I make the point of which group would have the equipment to take the photos. You? (it is your Nikon, right?) Or an organization with a huge budget that can afford the equipment that can take such long distance photos at high resolution?

Sent from my Pixel XL using TheologyOnline mobile app

 

[Nathon Detroit]

The horizon line, as I have already explained, perspective vs curvature.

--Dave

Dave the perspective grid that you posted shows that fixed objects would never go under the horizon line no matter how far away they are.

When you get caught up in a false premise even your own arguments battle against you.

This should be a giant red flag for you.

 

[DFT_Dave]

Again, WHY?

What reason do they have to fake it, and HOW?

Sent from my Pixel XL using TheologyOnline mobile app

Only by 1950 did our government actually see the flat earth from high altitude from air craft capable of going beyond low earth orbit. Imagine what would have happened if they announced the truth to the world at that time. NASA was formed to manage and control all space exploration and after Admiral Bird discovered the truth about Antarctica a treaty was made to keep everyone from exploring it independently as well.

We willingly and openly imagine the universe with other beings and people from other planets, etc. But just imagine what would happen if it became clear that the earth is flat and we have never been to the moon. What would happen? Think about that.

--Dave

 

[JudgeRightly]

Only by 1950 did our government actually see the flat earth from high altitude from air craft capable of going beyond low earth orbit. Imagine what would have happened if they announced the truth to the world at that time. NASA was formed to manage and control all space exploration and after Admiral Bird discovered the truth about Antarctica a treaty was made to keep everyone from exploring it independently as well.

We willingly and openly imagine the universe with other beings and people from other planets, etc. But just imagine what would happen if it became clear that the earth is flat and we have never been to the moon. What would happen? Think about that.

--Dave

If we're going to focus on what ifs, let's talk about the "what if Dave is wrong about everything he's talking about" question.

Sent from my Pixel XL using TheologyOnline mobile app

 

[DFT_Dave]

Again, I make the point of which group would have the equipment to take the photos. You? (it is your Nikon, right?) Or an organization with a huge budget that can afford the equipment that can take such long distance photos at high resolution?

Sent from my Pixel XL using TheologyOnline mobile app

The ones with the most money have the most to lose and be better equipped to make a fake presentation.

--Dave

 

[JudgeRightly]

The ones with the most money have the most to lose and be better equipped to make a fake presentation.

--Dave

Or, perhaps they're actually using it for what they say they're using the money for. Again, it comes back to a conspiracy that is impossible to maintain.

Sent from my Pixel XL using TheologyOnline mobile app

 

[DFT_Dave]

Dave the perspective grid that you posted shows that fixed objects would never go under the horizon line no matter how far away they are.

When you get caught up in a false premise even your own arguments battle against you.

This should be a giant red flag for you.

There is a distant point at which the ground beneath us can only appear to rise up so far. That point is at our eye level. Then things, large enough, can appear beyond that point but the bottom, that part that is blocked by the horizon line created by eye level will not be visible. There are a number of videos that show this. I'll find them and post them later.

Perspective vs curvature. Let every one compare the two points of view and decide for themselves.

--Dave

 

[DFT_Dave]

If we're going to focus on what ifs, let's talk about the "what if Dave is wrong about everything he's talking about" question.

Sent from my Pixel XL using TheologyOnline mobile app

No, lets think about if flat earth is correct. What then???

--Dave

 

[JudgeRightly]

There is a distant point at which the ground beneath us can only appear to rise up so far. That point is at our eye level. Then things, large enough, can appear beyond that point but the bottom, that part that is blocked by the horizon line created by eye level will not be visible. There are a number of videos that show this. I'll find them and post them later.

Perspective vs curvature. Let every one compare the two points of view and decide for themselves.

--Dave

https://youtu.be/Txvw-2buFTI

Dave, I just came across this video. Perhaps you can explain the details in it.

Sent from my Pixel XL using TheologyOnline mobile app

 

[JudgeRightly]

No, lets think about if flat earth is correct. What then???

--Dave

Actually, I don't think you understand what I'm getting at.

Can you even consider the possibility that you could be wrong? Could you comprehend that? Think for a moment about that and what it entails, how what you've taught is damaging to society.

Sent from my Pixel XL using TheologyOnline mobile app

 

[DFT_Dave]

Actually, I don't think you understand what I'm getting at.

Can you even consider the possibility that you could be wrong? Could you comprehend that? Think for a moment about that and what it entails, how what you've taught is damaging to society.

Sent from my Pixel XL using TheologyOnline mobile app

Think of what it means to not let there be debate and not let people make up there own minds.

Think of how much more boring your life would be if you did not have this thread to get you excited.

Don't text while driving or during funerals, the former is careless the later is heartless.

--Dave

 

[JudgeRightly]

Don't text while driving or during funerals, the former is careless the later is heartless.

--Dave

I think you should stay out of my personal life, thank you very much.

Sent from my Pixel XL using TheologyOnline mobile app