Team,
Many Greetings!
The question I have is this,
NASA, must have a "Dark Room" a team of researchers ++ inventing this shit up -- then through the media and other resources the fake data gets disbursed around the media whores and then disseminated to the Networks and tabloids.
Who is this organization ? Please do not say NASA, as they get the feeds from JPL and other sources too! There HAS to be a subsidiary to NASA that creates all this stuff up.
Not all the scientists around the world are fake......they are being fed the same crap as we are but to a different degree, as they have internal processes and contacts which would provide them greater access to either real data or fake.
I am also a believer of a Flat Earth team, but that takes "Science" back a step or two as "Relevance of Religion" resumes. We are special to be created on this Earth, bring forth the truth,
Rich
I think its well enough done that folks don't know they are even helping in such an effort. Take Mr. Blue Marble. He thinks he's taking legitimate satellite data and stitching it together to show a round earth despite it appearing flat from the data.
Where's you evidence, prove that the raw image data shows that the earth is flat.
Well, he certainly did say so:
The hard part was creating a flat map of the Earth’s surface with four months’ of satellite data. Reto Stockli, now at the Swiss Federal Office of Meteorology and Climatology, did much of this work. Then we wrapped the flat map around a ball. My part was integrating the surface, clouds, and oceans to match people’s expectations of how Earth looks from space.
Clearly he was handed down a flat map. His part was to make the "data" match "people's expectations." Not to display accurate data but to play graphic designer and make a pleasing ad. I don't know where this nonsense saying the data shows its flat comes from. I never claimed any such thing. Data is only defined by its context. It can equally well show its flat or round. You act like there would be a noticeable difference in the empirical data. I think its far more likely people will start realizing the empirical data can evidence both sides of the argument. So certainly the evidence will support whichever theory its framed within.
Aside, Why work inwardly, create ourselves bottlenecks, and downwardly - if instead we could function like a net of modular knowledge.
When Galileo and Copernicus pushed the round earth myth, did they have an empirical difference? No, Galileo's thought experiments and dialogues showed more often than not the data is out the window. Its about the paradigm shift. Galileo's work was about as Einstein put it kinda like 'explanation, not accuracy." Certainly, much of Einstein's work followed similar suit.
Otherwise... what a small universe we live in. Might as well stop here, and say we know everything.