The earth is flat and we never went to the moon
- Thread starter DFT_Dave
- Start date
- Status
Dave, you should pay attention to this paragraph, if anything:
"To the Claim that NASA Can't Be Trusted:*The flat-earth community can find out directly, for themselves, that the Earth is a sphere rotating on its axis. How? Well, assuming that at least some flat-earthers are not destitute, they can pool their resources and*buy a ticket*to send one of their own, as a civilian tourist, into space. Then, having the word of someone perhaps they can trust, they can learn the truth (and stop embarassing themselves). So:
- Flat-earthers, chip in some money,*buy a ticket, and send one of your "experts" to the space station.
- Don't trust USA/NASA? Well,*ten other nations, even North Korea, and the European Union, ALL go to space!
- Don't trust governments? Well, twenty*private companies*fly into space, like Virgin Galactic, Blue Origin, & SpaceX.
- Don't trust the view from the space station? Well,*soon enough, you can*buy a ticket*to the moon."
Sent from my Pixel XL using TheologyOnline mobile app
In summary here are 5 moon landing contradictions
1. No moon dust located on lunar module pads yet astronauts are seen kicking up lots of dust.
2. Well defined foot prints would suggest moisture on moistless moon surface.
3. Well defined foot prints on surface with granny particles of dust or sand like surface that would fill back into them leaving no definition.
4. Shadows on many photos at different angles that are inconsistent with single light source but consistent with staged lighting .
5. Back lighting of astronauts in shaded areas inconsistent with single light source but consistent with staged lighting.
There are more but these are the obvious ones.
--Dave
1. No moon dust located on lunar module pads yet astronauts are seen kicking up lots of dust.
2. Well defined foot prints would suggest moisture on moistless moon surface.
3. Well defined foot prints on surface with granny particles of dust or sand like surface that would fill back into them leaving no definition.
4. Shadows on many photos at different angles that are inconsistent with single light source but consistent with staged lighting .
5. Back lighting of astronauts in shaded areas inconsistent with single light source but consistent with staged lighting.
There are more but these are the obvious ones.
--Dave
Dave, you are a willfully ignorant fool.
1. Has already been answered on this thread, but since it does not fit your perception of reality, you reject it without considering it.
2. - 5. See the Mythbusters video I just posted.
Sent from my Pixel XL using TheologyOnline mobile app
Eye Direction and Lying
http://www.blifaloo.com/info/lies_eyes.php
View attachment 25093
Can Neil Armstrong pass this lie detection test?
Watch and see this 12 min test.
--Dave
http://www.blifaloo.com/info/lies_eyes.php
View attachment 25093
Can Neil Armstrong pass this lie detection test?
Watch and see this 12 min test.
--Dave
What all this has to do with the lunar landing is beyond me. Except that it deflects an uncomfortable post without having to deal with it.
I watched the myth busters and was simply not persuaded. The foot print test sided with my view.
--Dave
Matthew 5:22
whoever says, ‘You fool!’ will be liable to the hell of fire. "
--Dave
..and yet again. Dodging, not answering.
I'm the one who stared this tread, not you. I proposed a viewing of a few videos which you and others have consistently "dodged".
Did you bother to look at the last video I posted and comment on it?
You're the dodger not me. I'm leading this thread not you.
--Dave
In the first "6 min" this video proves it's two main points.
The horizon is completely flat 360 degrees to the observer regardless of altitude which would not be possible on a globe earth.
The natural physics of water is to seek and maintain it's own level. The curvature of the earth is 8 inches to the mile multiplied by the square of the distance. A six mile standing body of water would dip 6 feet on either end from the center. No such curve has ever been show to exist any where on earth. All bodies of water at this distance and more have been show to be level.
--Dave
The horizon is completely flat 360 degrees to the observer regardless of altitude which would not be possible on a globe earth.
The natural physics of water is to seek and maintain it's own level. The curvature of the earth is 8 inches to the mile multiplied by the square of the distance. A six mile standing body of water would dip 6 feet on either end from the center. No such curve has ever been show to exist any where on earth. All bodies of water at this distance and more have been show to be level.
--Dave
Take two aspirin, watch 6 min of the video I just posted and then comment. This thread is not only a theoretical proposition, visual evidence is required.
And yes video can be altered. You can decide for yourself who you think is faking their videos, NASA or flat earthers. But you cannot make an unbiased decision unless you view each side. You must view the evidence presented by those who propose the earth is flat along with those who propose it is a globe.
Every one knows why earth is considered a globe but very few know why there is a growing movement that says it is flat. I decided to take a look for myself about a year ago and was very surprised by the empirical evidence that supports a flat earth.
Don't be afraid, this won't kill you.
--Dave
I ain't scared!
I watched the video
1. False! I have flown in military aircraft an have seen the curvature. This alone makes the video unconvincing.
2. The model claims that rivers could flow uphill if the earth was a spinning ball---false. This does not take into account the law of gravity.
The run the claims by real fast, some them are false.
3. Airplane pilots stay on the level because of atmospheric density and the law of gravity.
I gave up on the video because it tries to confuse the listener with a slurry of words. This is psuedoscience. Because it is the book and a video does not make it true.
This is a brain dead theory.
1. False! I have flown in military aircraft an have seen the curvature. This alone makes the video unconvincing.
2. The model claims that rivers could flow uphill if the earth was a spinning ball---false. This does not take into account the law of gravity.
The run the claims by real fast, some them are false.
3. Airplane pilots stay on the level because of atmospheric density and the law of gravity.
I gave up on the video because it tries to confuse the listener with a slurry of words. This is psuedoscience. Because it is the book and a video does not make it true.
This is a brain dead theory.
- Status