The earth is flat and we never went to the moon

[DFT_Dave]

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

Sent from my Pixel XL using TheologyOnline mobile app

You didn't have a mention your personal stuff to begin with. You don't really add anything substantial to this debate. You only want to antagonize with needless quips that waste my time. I know you drive and text so I suggest you play music or listen to the radio and move on.

--Dave

 

[Nathon Detroit]

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

On a flat earth model this is impossible for the same reason that two parallel lines do not eventually intersect off in the distance. With a true flat model all objects above the horizon line could never fall below the horizon no matter how far away they get from your view unless there were rise in the horizon line (such as a mountain).

As a graphic artist and 3-D illustrator I have worked with every type of perspective grid imaginable and what you are saying is flat out wrong.

You could take my word on it as a subject matter expert or believe some conspiracy theorist on the internet. :idunno:

 

[DFT_Dave]

On a flat earth model this is impossible for the same reason that two parallel lines do not eventually intersect off in the distance. With a true flat model all objects above the horizon line could never fall below the horizon no matter how far away they get from your view unless there were rise in the horizon line (such as a mountain).

As a graphic artist and 3-D illustrator I have worked with every type of perspective grid imaginable and what you are saying is flat our wrong.

You could take my word on it as a subject matter expert or believe some conspiracy theorist on the internet. :idunno:

There is a difference between what we can see and what is actually there in this case. The earth does not actually rise before us either as it seems too. But I get your point, it's a good one and I will work on it, thanks.

If you took the time to see some of the video you would know that many, not all, of what you call, "conspiracy theorists" are guys like me and you

--Dave

 

[CabinetMaker]

How is that thread on "Falling apples" going???

--Dave

Better than yours.

 

[CabinetMaker]

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

NASA has much better cameras than Nikon P900 so NASA is far more likely to provide better photographic evidence.

 

[chair]

I think everybody owes an apology here.
Dave- you owe an apology to everybody else on this thread, for wasting their time on this unreasonable theory. If you actually believe this theory- then you owe an apology to yourself as well.

Everybody else here owes Dave an apology for taking his idea as seriously as we have. We are only encouraging his unreasonable thinking. We also owe ourselves an apology for wasting our own time on this.


Chair

 

[Clete]

I think everybody owes an apology here.
Dave- you owe an apology to everybody else on this thread, for wasting their time on this unreasonable theory. If you actually believe this theory- then you owe an apology to yourself as well.

Everybody else here owes Dave an apology for taking his idea as seriously as we have. We are only encouraging his unreasonable thinking. We also owe ourselves an apology for wasting our own time on this.


Chair

Don't say stupid things.

Dave's been totally honest and up front with what he's been doing from the beginning.

 

[Clete]

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

It seems that the U.N and NASA are the modern day guardians of the conspiracy to prevent the flatness of the Earth from getting out. Neither of those organizations are even a hundred years old yet. Who guarded the conspiracy before the U.N. and NASA?

And just how would the U.N prevent someone from exploring Antarctica? They'd have to patrol 65,000+ miles of ocean to prevent it. Just how is that accomplished?

Also, there's a big problem with the flat-earther map. The further you get from the center of the flat-earther map, the more the distances are stretched away from reality and yet flat-earthers claim that the distances are the same - but there's just no way that they can be. The real distance between the east and west coast of Australia is about 2300 miles but would be more like 5500 (more than twice as far) on the flat-earther disk version of the planet. This assumes that distances from the north pole (i.e. center) remain the same on both models. The distance cannot be both 2300 miles and 5500 miles. Only one of them is right and the other disproves their respective model. Guess which is which?

These and other arguments are presented (somewhat rudely) in the following video...
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JgY8zNZ35uw

 

[Right Divider]

Only by 1950 did our government actually see the flat earth from high altitude from air craft capable of going beyond low earth orbit.

How can you even use the term "orbit"?

In your model, a "low earth orbit" does not exist!

 

[DFT_Dave]

NASA has much better cameras than Nikon P900 so NASA is far more likely to provide better photographic evidence.

The new Nikon P900 is one of the most powerful video cameras for consumers on the market, and not badly priced. It has 83x optical zoom, Galileo's telescope was 14x, I think he would have loved to have had the P900. I will be buying or borrowing a telescope and do some basic tests for curvature and perspective here in Brooklyn when it warms up.

If you did not see the video of the stars I posted then you did not see the big difference between what NASA is showing us and what these cameras are showing us. As pictures the stars seem blurred to you because there is alot of movement of the light coming from the stars that surprises every one.

--Dave

 

[DFT_Dave]

I think everybody owes an apology here.
Dave- you owe an apology to everybody else on this thread, for wasting their time on this unreasonable theory. If you actually believe this theory- then you owe an apology to yourself as well.

Everybody else here owes Dave an apology for taking his idea as seriously as we have. We are only encouraging his unreasonable thinking. We also owe ourselves an apology for wasting our own time on this.


Chair

Love is so blind!!!

--Dave :hetro: Flat Earth

 

[DFT_Dave]

It seems that the U.N and NASA are the modern day guardians of the conspiracy to prevent the flatness of the Earth from getting out. Neither of those organizations are even a hundred years old yet. Who guarded the conspiracy before the U.N. and NASA?

And just how would the U.N prevent someone from exploring Antarctica? They'd have to patrol 65,000+ miles of ocean to prevent it. Just how is that accomplished?

Also, there's a big problem with the flat-earther map. The further you get from the center of the flat-earther map, the more the distances are stretched away from reality and yet flat-earthers claim that the distances are the same - but there's just no way that they can be. The real distance between the east and west coast of Australia is about 2300 miles but would be more like 5500 (more than twice as far) on the flat-earther disk version of the planet. This assumes that distances from the north pole (i.e. center) remain the same on both models. The distance cannot be both 2300 miles and 5500 miles. Only one of them is right and the other disproves their respective model. Guess which is which?

These and other arguments are presented (somewhat rudely) in the following video...
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JgY8zNZ35uw

It's not that hard a secret to keep when for 99.99% of our history no had gotten high enough to see it is actually flat (Piccard in 1930), and when only 0.0001% of the people who ever exited have supposedly seen a spinning globe from space.

Very few people go to Antarctica because...so it's not hard to spot any one trying.

No one believes there is an 100% accurate map of the earth that exists.

Maps That Prove You Don't Really Know Earth

--Dave

 

[DFT_Dave]

FLAT EARTH Clues Part 3 - Map Makers

--Dave

 

[DFT_Dave]

Flat Earth: 1892 Map Explained

--Dave

 

[Clete]

It's not that hard a secret to keep when for 99.99% of our history no had gotten high enough to see it is actually flat (Piccard in 1930), and when only 0.0001% of the people who ever exited have supposedly seen a spinning globe from space.

Very few people go to Antarctica because...so it's not hard to spot any one trying.

No one believes there is an 100% accurate map of the earth that exists.

Maps That Prove You Don't Really Know Earth

--Dave

Dave, Australia is not 5500 miles across as it would have to be if the flat earth map was even close to being accurate.

The distortion problems with map projections go away if the Earth is flat!

 

[Clete]

Flat Earth: 1892 Map Explained

--Dave

DAVID! I'm sick to death of the freakin' videos! Just explain it for crying out loud!

 

[Clete]

I promise to never watch another flat earth video so long as this thread is active.

They are ALL wastes of time and just come off as laziness to even post them.

If you want to debate this then you are going to have to debate it. I'm not debating YouTube anymore - period.

 

[DFT_Dave]

Why are we changing maps? (from The West Wing)

Must see!! This from the TV show, West Wing, is very funny and makes a great point.

--Dave

 

[DFT_Dave]

I promise to never watch another flat earth video so long as this thread is active.

They are ALL wastes of time and just come off as laziness to even post them.

If you want to debate this then you are going to have to debate it. I'm not debating YouTube anymore - period.

They are short and to the point. Video is acceptable evidence for what is a physical visual argument. We are not just dealing with theories here.

Relax, get some pop corn and a soda and enjoy. I watch all posted videos. A photo is worth a thousand words, you've heard that, right?

We all have grown up with all kings of video and visual aids about globe earth and moon landings, so why get all upset about a little flat earth video to compare with???

Your objection is not reasonable.

--Dave

 

[DFT_Dave]

DAVID! I'm sick to death of the freakin' videos! Just explain it for crying out loud!

I already did, when I said, "No one believes there is an 100% accurate map of the earth that exists."

You had to like the Brenda Lee apology, right? That was down right funny. I want this thread to be enjoyable as well as informative. At least see the West Wing clip, it's good.

--Dave