The below video proves that NASA creates fake video, or could it be explained again by refraction...
(http://)
Try your best you Flat Earthers deniers to disprove this video.
“You won't see clouds moving because of parallax.”
“As for your "moon doesn't rotate around the axis", well that's because the moon's rotational period is 27 days. So over 5 hours, the moon would've rotated less than 4%.”
Quote“You won't see clouds moving because of parallax.”
Parallax - the effect whereby the position or direction of an object appears to differ when viewed from different positions.
But in our case, parallax does not apply because the object don’t appear to move but remain stationary. Maybe it is due to light refraction?Quote“As for your "moon doesn't rotate around the axis", well that's because the moon's rotational period is 27 days. So over 5 hours, the moon would've rotated less than 4%.”
Wrong, we have been told that the Moon rotates with perfect synchronization with the earth’s rotation. It is clear in the video that we see the Earth rotating, which is 238,000 miles further away from the moon, so why don’t we see the moon to rotate which is closer to the camera???
Because NASA makes fake videos, and very bad ones at that…
The below video proves that NASA creates fake video, or could it be explained again by refraction...No, this video just proves that FEers are dishonest and need to blatantly lie about things to pretend they are right.
(http://)
Try your best you Flat Earthers deniers to disprove this video.
Wrong, we have been told that the Moon rotates with perfect synchronization with the earth’s rotation.No. It rotates in synchronisation with its orbit, not with Earth.
That statement doesn't make any sense. It's wishful thinking that you could find such blatant errors from an organization the you say had been faking space pictures for nearly seven decades? Not likely.Quote“You won't see clouds moving because of parallax.”
Parallax - the effect whereby the position or direction of an object appears to differ when viewed from different positions.
But in our case, parallax does not apply because the object don’t appear to move but remain stationary. Maybe it is due to light refraction?Quote“As for your "moon doesn't rotate around the axis", well that's because the moon's rotational period is 27 days. So over 5 hours, the moon would've rotated less than 4%.”
Wrong, we have been told that the Moon rotates with perfect synchronization with the earth’s rotation. It is clear in the video that we see the Earth rotating, which is 238,000 miles further away from the moon, so why don’t we see the moon to rotate which is closer to the camera???
Because NASA makes fake videos, and very bad ones at that…
Wrong, we have been told that the Moon rotates with perfect synchronization with the earth’s rotation. It is clear in the video that we see the Earth rotating, which is 238,000 miles further away from the moon, so why don’t we see the moon to rotate which is closer to the camera???Oh goodness. What a fundamental misinterpretation of tidal locking. Tidal locking, which is what you and the video are trying to come to grasps with, is the phenomenon where an object's orbital period matches its rotational period. So, the moons orbit of 28 days matches it's rotation of 28 days. As such, from earth we only see one side of the moon. This has nothing to do with the earth's rotation, so what you see in the video is as expected. Dumb dumb dumb flat earthers.
Yes, parallax relative to Earth's surface. How much of a shift would you expect at those distances? It wouldn't even be a couple pixels even if we assume the speed of those clouds is 60+mph.
And the moon's rotation isn't in "perfect synchronization with the earth’s rotation". Nobody says that. How fast the earth rotates has nothing to do with why we only see 1 side of the moon. The moon's orbital period is the same as it's rotational period, that's why we get 1 side facing us.
Wrong, we see in other satellite videos of the clouds passing whole states, look at time 1:55 in the video and you will see the clouds moving.With very different time scales, and also different size scales.
You can’t have it both ways. The Fake Moon Video has the earth with a diameter of 870 pixels with no cloud movement and the other video has the earth with a diameter of 640 pixels with cloud movement. The smaller pixel earth video you are able to detect cloud movement, and thus for the larger pixel video, you would have no problem to detect it cloud motion. The Earth is 1.36 times larger, but they did not think to add cloud animation to their fake videos.But in the larger one you also get a lot more of Earth shown so what is the apparent size of the distance?
But NASA has fucked up big time with its animation.Nope. You fucked up big time with your analysis.
Earth Diameter = 12,742 KmRight.
Moons Diameter = 3,474 Km
Ratio = 3,474/12,742 = 27.3%
In Video
Earths Diameter = 870 pixels
Moon Diameter = 324 pixels
Ratio = 324 / 870 = 37.2%
The Moon in the animation is 10% bigger than the measurement that NASA has told us that the Moon is.
You mean where it says our moon's motions (plural, referring to the orbit and rotation) are in sync, indicating that the moon's rotation is in sync with its orbit?QuoteAnd the moon's rotation isn't in "perfect synchronization with the earth’s rotation". Nobody says that. How fast the earth rotates has nothing to do with why we only see 1 side of the moon. The moon's orbital period is the same as it's rotational period, that's why we get 1 side facing us.
Wrong, take a look at the video times of
2:22 – 2:30 and 3:31 – 3:35
No, this video just proves that FEers are dishonest and need to blatantly lie about things to pretend they are right.
You are showing 2 completely different scales, both in terms of time and size.
You are also ignoring the fact that Earth moving makes it harder to tell.
In the 5 hours (I'm just going to accept that, not even bothering to check it):
Earth, with a rotational period of 24 hours, or a angular velocity or 15 degrees an hour, will rotate 75 degrees. Quite a lot. On the other hand, the moon, with a period of roughly 29 days, or an angular velocity of roughly 12 degrees a day or 0.5 degrees an hour, will rotate roughly roughly 2.5 degrees.
Also, while your shape remains the same, the 3 points you use do not.
In the first image (yellow shape), the top left corner at the lower right of a feature, the rightmost point is at the bottom of another and then the lower left point is at the bottom of yet another, near the left side.
In the second image, this has changed. You are now at higher up at the top left, the right point has moved significantly left and up, and the lower left point has moved right and up.
Then in the final image, the top left point is now on the top left of the feature, the right most point is some distance away from the feature and the lower left point is at the top left.
So while the shape you drew remained the same, the points of the moon it is mapping are completely different.
No. It rotates in synchronisation with its orbit, not with Earth.
You are the one making fake videos, not NASA.
That statement doesn't make any sense. It's wishful thinking that you could find such blatant errors from an organization the you say had been faking space pictures for nearly seven decades? Not likely.
NASA has made the MOON 10% bigger than what it really is. NASA is the dishonest, not me!!!No, reality made it closer to EPIC than Earth, resulting it it appearing larger.
Read my previous replyThey don't address the issue.
You don’t know what you are taking about. The number that you have given 29 days is the time needed to have the Moon rotate around the earth, not around its axis.No, I do know what I am talking about. Those 2 values are the same as it is tidally locked. It's orbital period (the time taken to orbit Earth), is the same as its rotational period (the time taken to rotate around its axis).
Why should it?QuoteAlso, while your shape remains the same, the 3 points you use do not.
In the first image (yellow shape), the top left corner at the lower right of a feature, the rightmost point is at the bottom of another and then the lower left point is at the bottom of yet another, near the left side.
In the second image, this has changed. You are now at higher up at the top left, the right point has moved significantly left and up, and the lower left point has moved right and up.
Then in the final image, the top left point is now on the top left of the feature, the right most point is some distance away from the feature and the lower left point is at the top left.
So while the shape you drew remained the same, the points of the moon it is mapping are completely different.
If all this that you are saying is true, then the same should apply to the Earth, BUT IT DOES NOT.
It rotates in synchronisation with its orbit with respect to Earth, so we have been told. Look at my pervious comment.You mean where you spouted ignorant crap and ignored what was said?
Wrong, NASA makes very fake videos…Nope. But you do.
To MicroBetaQuoteThat statement doesn't make any sense. It's wishful thinking that you could find such blatant errors from an organization the you say had been faking space pictures for nearly seven decades? Not likely.
NASA has fucked up big time with its animation.
Earth Diameter = 12,742 Km
Moons Diameter = 3,474 Km
Ratio = 3,474/12,742 = 27.3%
In Video
Earths Diameter = 870 pixels
Moon Diameter = 324 pixels
Ratio = 324 / 870 = 37.2%
The Moon in the animation is 10% bigger than the measurement that NASA has told us that the Moon is.
What is this formula of , for optics?It is for measuring the angles of things based upon their size, and it relates to optics as cameras do not measure distance, they measure angles.
2*atan(diameter/distance)
The below video proves that NASA creates fake video, or could it be explained again by refraction...No, this video just proves that FEers are dishonest and need to blatantly lie about things to pretend they are right.
(http://)
Try your best you Flat Earthers deniers to disprove this video.
Ok Jack Good point now answer him/her this. Has Nasa or the U.S. Government or as far as that matters any Government in the world "Ever" lied to its citizens?
It only took me 10 minutes to make this video and in my fake video of the earth, the clouds also move independent from the earth. A more believable video than what trash that NASA puts out.
onebigmonkey, I lost you in what you were trying to say.You understand that just because it might be possible to fake something isn't proof that it has been faked.
Are you saying that NASA does make better animation videos than me>
The below video proves that NASA creates fake video, or could it be explained again by refraction...
(http://)
Try your best you Flat Earthers deniers to disprove this video.
Field of view that EPIC sees
The EPIC instrument has a field of view (FOV) of 0.62 degrees, which is sufficient to image the entire Earth, which has a nominal size of 0.5 degrees. Because of the tilted (Lissajous) orbit about the L‐1 point, the apparent angular size of the Earth changes during the 6-month orbital period from 0.45 to 0.53 degrees.
You understand that just because it might be possible to fake something isn't proof that it has been faked.
Obviously FE'ers don't understand (or choose to ignore) the implications of the EPIC camera's field of view, its million mile distance from the earth and the size of the moon's orbit around the earth.
Field of view that EPIC sees
The EPIC instrument has a field of view (FOV) of 0.62 degrees, which is sufficient to image the entire Earth, which has a nominal size of 0.5 degrees. Because of the tilted (Lissajous) orbit about the L‐1 point, the apparent angular size of the Earth changes during the 6-month orbital period from 0.45 to 0.53 degrees.
That's true. But there is no evidence it is fake. Every objection you have raised has been answered.QuoteYou understand that just because it might be possible to fake something isn't proof that it has been faked.
Yes, but just because you see something in video does not mean that it is real either!!!
That's true. But there is no evidence it is fake. Every objection you have raised has been answered.
QuoteThat's true. But there is no evidence it is fake. Every objection you have raised has been answered.
No it has not. The video clearly shows the clouds, but it does not show any movement on their part.
The animation clearly show the rotation of the earth, but their is no rotation of the moon, which means that from the earth facing the Moon, they would see a different side of the Moon, than what we actually see.
You have proven nothing, except trying hard to debunk everything that goes against your agenda. This is not science but a religion on your part.
No, each of those things were addressed, you just didn't like the answers because they went against your baseless beliefs.QuoteThat's true. But there is no evidence it is fake. Every objection you have raised has been answered.
No it has not. The video clearly shows the clouds, but it does not show any movement on their part.
The animation clearly show the rotation of the earth, but their is no rotation of the moon, which means that from the earth facing the Moon, they would see a different side of the Moon, than what we actually see.
You have proven nothing, except trying hard to debunk everything that goes against your agenda. This is not science but a religion on your part.
So you've just stated that the moon doesn't rotate. Surely that means that the same face of the moon is still facing the earth.....
No, each of those things were addressed, you just didn't like the answers because they went against your baseless beliefs.
I've made no mention of god at all. It is the height of arrogance for you to assume you know my spiritual beliefs.QuoteSo you've just stated that the moon doesn't rotate. Surely that means that the same face of the moon is still facing the earth.....
If the earth is a sphere and not a flat plane, the moon has to rotate in order to see the same side all over the earth as it is stated in the time 2:12QuoteNo, each of those things were addressed, you just didn't like the answers because they went against your baseless beliefs.
Maybe this can help you
In the beginning God created the heaven and the earth. And the earth was without form, and void; and darkness was upon the face of the deep. And the Spirit of God moved upon the face of the waters. And God said, Let there be light: and there was light.
In a few words it talks about the creation of time, space, matter and energy, in a time when everybody believed that the earth always existed without ever having a beginning.
Like it or not, God created the Earth, he owns it, he makes the rules and he will judge us once we die.
Bottom line, you will never, ever find out when you die that their was not a God, but me on the other hand, when I die, I will neve , ever find out that their was never a God.
Who will be the real loser at the end, not me!!!
I've made no mention of god at all. It is the height of arrogance for you to assume you know my spiritual beliefs.
This is not science but a religion on your part.
I don't recall saying that, nevertheless it says nothing about my spiritual beliefs. You have zero idea what I believe.QuoteI've made no mention of god at all. It is the height of arrogance for you to assume you know my spiritual beliefs.
But you have in an indirect way when you statedQuoteThis is not science but a religion on your part.
My religion is God, and thus I responded in a manner that I thought was proper. If talking about God and final Judgment makes you feel uncomfortable, I can understand that, but the truth to be told, No Christian can believe in a heliocentric hypothesis and Jesus. Maybe this can be a new thread in the religious section.
Maybe this can help you
In the beginning God created the heaven and the earth. And the earth was without form, and void; and darkness was upon the face of the deep. And the Spirit of God moved upon the face of the waters. And God said, Let there be light: and there was light.
In a few words it talks about the creation of time, space, matter and energy, in a time when everybody believed that the earth always existed without ever having a beginning.
Like it or not, God created the Earth, he owns it, he makes the rules and he will judge us once we die.
You have zero idea what I believe.
And like it or not those words say nothing about the shape of the Earth.
So now are you saying the earth is round but stationary?QuoteYou have zero idea what I believe.
And I don’t care!QuoteAnd like it or not those words say nothing about the shape of the Earth.
But latter on it states that the sun, moon and starts moves around the earth which had been also proven by the Airy's Failure Experiment. Know if you combine that experiment with the Michelson-Morley Experiment and the Sagnac’s experiment, then it validates what the bible states as being true, that everything revolves around the earth and that we are stationary.
So now are you saying the earth is round but stationary?
That book you worship was written by men!
Bottom line, I could have made the same video in after effects and claim that it was real.
It only took me 10 minutes to make this video and in my fake video of the earth, the clouds also move independent from the earth. A more believable video than what trash that NASA puts out.No, it is far less believable. The clouds are moving way to fast and the massive difference in brightness of the stars and Earth should render it either impossible to see the stars or have Earth be so bright you can't see any detail.
OK, in this 0.45 degrees view, I can clearly distinguish the clouds and the trails that they have. What I can’t see in these clearly distinguished cloud, the movement of them.Yet I pointed out that they are changing, and you just ignored it.
This is nothing more than an animation that cost millions of dollars to the American tax payer.Prove it.
No it has not. The video clearly shows the clouds, but it does not show any movement on their part.No. That's not true, you have baselessly asserted that yet failed to back it up.
The animation clearly show the rotation of the earth, but their is no rotation of the moon, which means that from the earth facing the Moon, they would see a different side of the Moon, than what we actually see.
Like it or not, God created the Earth, he owns it, he makes the rules and he will judge us once we die.That is just your baseless delusional beliefs.
Bottom line, you will never, ever find out when you die that their was not a God, but me on the other hand, when I die, I will neve , ever find out that their was never a God.No, but you might find out that there is a different god that you pissed off and that your god was fake.
Who will be the real loser at the end, not me!!!Only for one specific case. In general, you are far more likely to lose than me.
But latter on it states that the sun, moon and starts moves around the earth which had been also proven by the Airy's Failure Experiment.No it wasn't. Airy's failure was just a complete failure which was unable to conclude anything.
Know if you combine that experiment with the Michelson-Morley Experiment and the Sagnac’s experiment, then it validates what the bible states as being true, that everything revolves around the earth and that we are stationary.No it doesn't. Airy's failure was based upon prior observations, which showed in an aether model, Earth was moving relative to this aether.
So your "absolute proof of NASA's fake videos" as changed into "I can make a fake one"
No, it is far less believable. The clouds are moving way to fast and the massive difference in brightness of the stars and Earth should render it either impossible to see the stars or have Earth be so bright you can't see any detail.
But the more important point is you can receive the images directly from EPIC.
Yet I pointed out that they are changing, and you just ignored it.
Prove it.
No. That's not true, you have baselessly asserted that yet failed to back it up.
This has been addressed and it has been pointed out that the clouds are actually moving. It was also pointed out that your attempt to show no rotation of the moon was pure BS.
So no, it is you that has proven nothing.Any intelligent human will agree with me, that is those that are not blind beleivers that NASA never lied. It’s like CNN, just because CNN said that Trump colluded with Russia, it must be true….
That is just your baseless delusional beliefs.And that we evolved from a rock is not a delusional belief….
No, but you might find out that there is a different god that you pissed off and that your god was fake.
Airy's failure was just a complete failure which was unable to conclude anything.
No it doesn't. Airy's failure was based upon prior observations, which showed in an aether model, Earth was moving relative to this aether.
This result is also shown by Sagnac's experiment. However, neither of these could show if the aether is stationary and Earth is moving through it or if Earth is stationary and the aether is moving around us.
The Michelson-Morley experiment however showed Earth to be stationary relative to the aether.
This produced a direct contradiction showing that the aether model was wrong.
Again, you being able to fake it is not absolute proof of NASA's fake videos.QuoteSo your "absolute proof of NASA's fake videos" as changed into "I can make a fake one"
If I can make fake videos with a zero budget, then how many can NASA make with a $20 billion budget…
If you were only so observant of NASA’s fake videos…Which fake videos would that be? You are yet to show any.
NO, you receive images directly from a server, not the satellite. If I upload this video on a server but create days of footage, you too could download it and believe to be real…No, you can receive them straight from the satellite if you have a receiver for it. You don't need to get it from the server.
Only if you can prove it, including stating the uncertainty of it.QuoteYet I pointed out that they are changing, and you just ignored it.May I point out that the cloud remain stationary relative to the Earth.
Yes, it does to some extent, and not a single bit of it indicates it is fake.QuoteProve it.The animation speaks for its self…
No you are baselessly asserted that yet failed to back it up that the clouds are moving.Except I did back it up, pointing out where they do move. That figure of 8, starts complete, yet ends up with a section of the bottom missing.
Any intelligent human will agree with me, that is those that are not blind beleivers that NASA never lied. It’s like CNN, just because CNN said that Trump colluded with Russia, it must be true….No they wont. Any intelligent human that actually analyses your claims will see them to be pure bullshit.
Who is claiming we evolved from a rock?QuoteThat is just your baseless delusional beliefs.And that we evolved from a rock is not a delusional belief….
But there will be a GOD, which you deny!!!!!!Who cares?
No, it was a complete failure because it failed to prove anything as the reasoning behind it was fundamentally flawed.QuoteAiry's failure was just a complete failure which was unable to conclude anything.Yes, it has a complete failure for the Heliocentric worshipers, because it destroyed their religion!!!
It concluded that the stars revolve around the Earth and that we are stationary.No it didn't.
No, it assumed there was an aether. It didn't prove that there was one.QuoteNo it doesn't. Airy's failure was based upon prior observations, which showed in an aether model, Earth was moving relative to this aether.But it proves that there is aether, which Einstein dismissed, so Einstein equation is wrong, since these experiment prove that aether excists.
This result is also shown by Sagnac's experiment. However, neither of these could show if the aether is stationary and Earth is moving through it or if Earth is stationary and the aether is moving around us.
No it didn't.QuoteThe Michelson-Morley experiment however showed Earth to be stationary relative to the aether.Wrong, the Michelson-Morley experiment had only two conclusions, either
This produced a direct contradiction showing that the aether model was wrong.
1) The Earth is stationary with the presence of Aether
2) Or the Earth is in motion and there is NO Aether.
The Sagnac's experiment proved that there is Aether, therefore the Earth has to be stationary.No, it didn't.
Bottom line, Einstein was wrong, just like the scientist that believed that the Piltdown Man was real….No, bottom line: THERE IS NO AETHER!
Again, you being able to fake it is not absolute proof of NASA's fake videos.
Which fake videos would that be? You are yet to show any.
No, you can receive them straight from the satellite if you have a receiver for it.
Only if you can prove it
So if you are going to claim it is fake, PROVE IT!If NASA taxes my tax dollars, they have to prove that their video are real. Let them place their images in HD on the internet to let very body examine them…
Who is claiming we evolved from a rock?
InFlatEarth: which year, month, day and hour of the Earth from space is your video suppose to show?It was on February 30, 2017 at 7am Walt Disney time
Also, which light band(s), and how many hours is the video suppose to span?
But you said sun, moon etc revolved around the earth. Which could explain a lot of observable phenomenon. However earth being flat and such things just floating over does not.QuoteSo now are you saying the earth is round but stationary?
There is a big difference between a sphere and a circle, just like there is a difference between a rod and a ball.
The earth is on a flat plane.
On this plate plane there is a circle which the earth is located in.
The plane is stationary and over the circle there is a dome that all objects that emit light are under the dome.
Above the dome there is water.
Time only exist in the Dome. Outside the dome, there is no such thing as time.
However earth being flat and such things just floating over does not.
None of that changes the fact that your model does not fit observable facts.QuoteHowever earth being flat and such things just floating over does not.
read the bible
Earth has a Dome (Firmament)
Genesis 1:6 - And God said, Let there be a firmament in the midst of the waters, and let it divide the waters from the waters.
Isaiah 13:13 - Therefore I will shake the heavens, and the earth shall remove out of her place, in the wrath of the Lord of hosts, and in the day of his fierce anger.
Isaiah 24:18 - And it shall come to pass, that he who fleeth from the noise of the fear shall fall into the pit; and he that cometh up out of the midst of the pit shall be taken in the snare: for the windows from on high are open, and the foundations of the earth do shake.
Isaiah 44:24 - Thus saith the Lord, thy redeemer, and he that formed thee from the womb, I am the Lord that maketh all things; that stretcheth forth the heavens alone; that spreadeth abroad the earth by myself;
Psalm 18:9 - He bowed the heavens also, and came down: and darkness was under his feet.
2 Samuel 22:10 - He bowed the heavens also, and came down; and darkness was under his feet.
Earth is on Pillars
1 Samuel 2:8 - He raiseth up the poor out of the dust, and lifteth up the beggar from the dunghill, to set them among princes, and to make them inherit the throne of glory: for the pillars of the earth are the Lord's, and he hath set the world upon them.
Job 9:6 - Which shaketh the earth out of her place, and the pillars thereof tremble.
Psalm 75:3 - The earth and all the inhabitants thereof are dissolved: I bear up the pillars of it. Selah.
The Earth is Still
1 Chronicles 16:30 - Fear before him, all the earth: the world also shall be stable, that it be not moved.
Psalm 93:1 - The Lord reigneth, he is clothed with majesty; the Lord is clothed with strength, wherewith he hath girded himself: the world also is stablished, that it cannot be moved.
Psalm 96:10 - Say among the heathen that the Lord reigneth: the world also shall be established that it shall not be moved: he shall judge the people righteously.
Earth Has Four Corners
Isaiah 11:12 - And he shall set up an ensign for the nations, and shall assemble the outcasts of Israel, and gather together the dispersed of Judah from the four corners of the earth.
Revelation 7:1 - And after these things I saw four angels standing on the four corners of the earth, holding the four winds of the earth, that the wind should not blow on the earth, nor on the sea, nor on any tree.
Revelation 20:8 - And shall go out to deceive the nations which are in the four quarters of the earth, Gog, and Magog, to gather them together to battle: the number of whom is as the sand of the sea.
Earth has Four Winds
Jeremiah 49:36 - And upon Elam will I bring the four winds from the four quarters of heaven, and will scatter them toward all those winds; and there shall be no nation whither the outcasts of Elam shall not come.
Daniel 7:2 - Daniel spake and said, I saw in my vision by night, and, behold, the four winds of the heaven strove upon the great sea.
Matthew 24:31 - And he shall send his angels with a great sound of a trumpet, and they shall gather together his elect from the four winds, from one end of heaven to the other.
Revelation 7:1 - And after these things I saw four angels standing on the four corners of the earth, holding the four winds of the earth, that the wind should not blow on the earth, nor on the sea, nor on any tree.
Height, Depth, Length & Width
Job 11:8 - It is as high as heaven; what canst thou do? deeper than hell; what canst thou know?
Job 11:9 - The measure thereof is longer than the earth, and broader than the sea
Day & Night
Job 26:10 - He hath compassed the waters with bounds, until the day and night come to an end.
I don't care.QuoteAgain, you being able to fake it is not absolute proof of NASA's fake videos.But it does not mean that every video you see on the TV and the Internet is real also…
The ones with the use of Green screensHow about you stick to the topic at hand rather than trying to run away to a different one and show a different bit of ignorance?
Yes, you can. The transmitter doesn't need to be all that strong as it isn't omnidirectional.QuoteNo, you can receive them straight from the satellite if you have a receiver for it.You mean to tell me I can get a signal from a satellite that is over 1,5 million km away…
How strong is the transmitter in order to make that distance…
No you didn't.QuoteOnly if you can prove itAlready done that…
No they don't.QuoteSo if you are going to claim it is fake, PROVE IT!If NASA taxes my tax dollars, they have to prove that their video are real. Let them place their images in HD on the internet to let very body examine them…
Yes, I have heard of evolution. It doesn't start with a rock.QuoteWho is claiming we evolved from a rock?Hello there, have you heard of evolution, because if we did not evolve from a rock, then we had a creator and thus GOD!!!!
See, this information is needed to verify it.QuoteInFlatEarth: which year, month, day and hour of the Earth from space is your video suppose to show?It was on February 30, 2017 at 7am Walt Disney timeQuoteAlso, which light band(s), and how many hours is the video suppose to span?Oh I don’t know, but whatever you tell me I will agree with you…
read the bibleSo read a book filled with bullshit which contradicts reality. How is that meant to help your case?
What is this formula of , for optics?A little common sense helps, but I've noted that "common sense" is in very short supply around here.
2*atan(diameter/distance)
Bottom line, I could have made the same video in after effects and claim that it was real.Bottom line. You bombed out big time in your "Absolute proof of NASA’s fake videos" and aren't man enough to admit it!
Does your common sense tell you that this bitch didn't perm her hair? ???So you are still attacking characters with "this bitch" and "conformist retards".
(http://i.imgur.com/eZ3ppBX.jpg)
You conformist retards are a veritable cancer.
Does your common sense tell you that this bitch didn't perm her hair? ???I don't particularly care what she did to her hair. It is irrelevant to the topic at hand, which is the gif/video made by combining images from EPIC.
(http://i.imgur.com/eZ3ppBX.jpg)
You conformist retards are a veritable cancer.
Yay another hypocrite. I know this time you are using cherry picked verses to try to claim it says the Earth is flat. There are also many that could easily be shown to say the Earth is round too. Although I do not do that cherry picking thing with the Bible, I read ALL of it and actually pay attention to the message it conveys, rather than single words and verses.
He is just trying to set up the science is a religion argument again.
These people who come in here spouting bible verses and trying to say that if the bible says it is this certain way, then all observations must match what the bible says are just delusional lost children who are leading themselves even further away. Religion requires faith. Faith in religious terms require there to be very little to no evidence for and alot of evidence against the premise of that faith. If there was a ton of evidence to support it, it would not be faith.
Science is not faith, it is based off conclusions from evidence and the search for more evidence and questions.
Religion is faith, it is based off of an emotional need for answers to the currently unanswerable. To be a true test of faith, it requires that you cannot provide evidence, even better if all evidence points away.
Religion is irrational, science is rational.
They are two different things, almost opposites. Some idiots will take this to mean religion is good and science is evil, this is not what that means. Religion houses both good and evil by itself.
I think that may be one reason many pretend religious people hate science so much. They really do not have any faith so they attack what they perceive as evil.
They cannot make that connection that it is their own failure of faith.
InFlatEarth: which year, month, day and hour of the Earth from space is your video suppose to show?
Also, which light band(s), and how many hours is the video suppose to span?
How many hours does it span?
How many pictures were taken?
No you are baselessly asserted that yet failed to back it up that the clouds are moving.
No you are baselessly asserted that yet failed to back it up that the clouds are moving.
I already posted proof that you are wrong. Did you miss it? Let me post it again:
(http://i63.tinypic.com/23itszr.jpg)
The bible is not a religious book, the bible is a HISTORICAL bookIt is a religious book. It is only a historical book in the sense that it is all.
Your continued childish crap just further shows your video to be a fake, and an easily noticed fake.How many hours does it span?
How many pictures were taken?
It just took 11 seconds and their were just 330 photos taken in this video. You know, now that I think about it, it must have been a UFO. Maybe ET family members coming to him after ET called Home
I see clouds rotatingWell thanks for finally admitting the clouds are moving, unlike your prior claims.
The bible is not a religious book, the bible is a HISTORICAL bookIt is a religious book. It is only a historical book in the sense that it is all.
It is almost entirely full of myth and BS.
It is not an accurate historical account.Your continued childish crap just further shows your video to be a fake, and an easily noticed fake.How many hours does it span?
How many pictures were taken?
It just took 11 seconds and their were just 330 photos taken in this video. You know, now that I think about it, it must have been a UFO. Maybe ET family members coming to him after ET called Home
So you aren't even close to showing that it it is possible to fake a video like the one from NASA.I see clouds rotatingWell thanks for finally admitting the clouds are moving, unlike your prior claims.
QuoteThat book you worship was written by men!
I worship GOD, not a historical book that timelines GOD’s work.
What book do you worship, the one’s that taught about the Piltdown Man as being true…
QuoteThat book you worship was written by men!
I worship GOD, not a historical book that timelines GOD’s work.
What book do you worship, the one’s that taught about the Piltdown Man as being true…
god is also an invention of Man
It was because of science that piltdown man was proven wrong.QuoteThat book you worship was written by men!
I worship GOD, not a historical book that timelines GOD’s work.
What book do you worship, the one’s that taught about the Piltdown Man as being true…
god is also an invention of Man
All of your scientist are like the one that discovered Piltdown Man, and most importantly they were stupid enough to believe it!!!
Let me how stupid must you be to believe in a lie?
It was because of science that piltdown man was proven wrong.QuoteThat book you worship was written by men!
I worship GOD, not a historical book that timelines GOD’s work.
What book do you worship, the one’s that taught about the Piltdown Man as being true…
god is also an invention of Man
All of your scientist are like the one that discovered Piltdown Man, and most importantly they were stupid enough to believe it!!!
Let me how stupid must you be to believe in a lie?
I don't believe you ever answered my questions about your biblical references.
The one I remember off the top of my head was you said the earth was a circle the you said it had 4 corners. Which is it?It was because of science that piltdown man was proven wrong.QuoteThat book you worship was written by men!
I worship GOD, not a historical book that timelines GOD’s work.
What book do you worship, the one’s that taught about the Piltdown Man as being true…
god is also an invention of Man
All of your scientist are like the one that discovered Piltdown Man, and most importantly they were stupid enough to believe it!!!
Let me how stupid must you be to believe in a lie?
I don't believe you ever answered my questions about your biblical references.
Do you mean about these biblical references?
https://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=71376.0
https://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=71377.0
https://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=71378.0
https://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=71379.0
https://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=71380.0
https://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=71381.0
As for your claim that the Bible is "entirely full of myth and BS", I pressent to you all the science that I was able to fine it.So once again you ignore the topic at hand and resort to delusional religious BS.
As for the movement of the clouds, that was not on the video that NASA present with the dark side of the moon.Yes it was.
The one I remember off the top of my head was you said the earth was a circle the you said it had 4 corners. Which is it?It was because of science that piltdown man was proven wrong.QuoteThat book you worship was written by men!
I worship GOD, not a historical book that timelines GOD’s work.
What book do you worship, the one’s that taught about the Piltdown Man as being true…
god is also an invention of Man
All of your scientist are like the one that discovered Piltdown Man, and most importantly they were stupid enough to believe it!!!
Let me how stupid must you be to believe in a lie?
I don't believe you ever answered my questions about your biblical references.
Do you mean about these biblical references?
https://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=71376.0
https://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=71377.0
https://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=71378.0
https://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=71379.0
https://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=71380.0
https://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=71381.0
Edit: I remembered another one. You said the earth was on pillars. What are the pillars on or is one of those its turtles all the way down situations?
As for your claim that the Bible is "entirely full of myth and BS", I pressent to you all the science that I was able to fine it.So once again you ignore the topic at hand and resort to delusional religious BS.
And no, you don't have science. You have vague crap which you try and manipulate into matching science. Try again.As for the movement of the clouds, that was not on the video that NASA present with the dark side of the moon.Yes it was.
Go check.
When I respond to you statement and give you proof, you say that I ignore the topic, that great strategy.You haven't given proof.
And as for the manipulate into matching science, excuse me, when did scientist know that light can be separate and how old is the bible...Quite some time ago.
True science looks in the bible to get ideas and then tries to explain then why it is so...No it doesn't.
When I respond to you statement and give you proof, you say that I ignore the topic, that great strategy.You haven't given proof.
And again, the topic is the video/collection of photos you claim are fake and claim to have absolute proof that they are fake.And as for the manipulate into matching science, excuse me, when did scientist know that light can be separate and how old is the bible...Quite some time ago.
Who cares?True science looks in the bible to get ideas and then tries to explain then why it is so...No it doesn't.
That is religion, where you try to manipulate reality to match the model.
True science looks at reality.
Where does the Bible explain GPS?As for your claim that the Bible is "entirely full of myth and BS", I pressent to you all the science that I was able to fine it.So once again you ignore the topic at hand and resort to delusional religious BS.
And no, you don't have science. You have vague crap which you try and manipulate into matching science. Try again.As for the movement of the clouds, that was not on the video that NASA present with the dark side of the moon.Yes it was.
Go check.
When I respond to you statement and give you proof, you say that I ignore the topic, that great strategy.
And as for the manipulate into matching science, excuse me, when did scientist know that light can be separate and how old is the bible...
True science looks in the bible to get ideas and then tries to explain then why it is so...
Did the discover of Piltdown Man have to prove that it was real, or was it the obligation of his fellow scientist to disprove him?Does the person claiming to have ABSOLUTE PROOF need to provide this and show they do, or do other people need to prove him wrong?
NASA has to prove that it is real, by posting all photos in raw form of the event on their website so people can validate it or disprove it!!!They already did.
But was light discovered that it bends in AD or BC, because the old testament was written in BC!!!You mean optics?
Don't you know that all major discovers in the 17th, 18th centuries were first given the idea from the bible?Did you know that claim is pure bullshit?
As for the movement of the clouds, that was not on the video that NASA present with the dark side of the moon.
NASA has to prove that it is real, by posting all photos in raw form of the event on their website so people can validate it or disprove it!!!
So the Bible lied when it said it was a circle.The one I remember off the top of my head was you said the earth was a circle the you said it had 4 corners. Which is it?It was because of science that piltdown man was proven wrong.QuoteThat book you worship was written by men!
I worship GOD, not a historical book that timelines GOD’s work.
What book do you worship, the one’s that taught about the Piltdown Man as being true…
god is also an invention of Man
All of your scientist are like the one that discovered Piltdown Man, and most importantly they were stupid enough to believe it!!!
Let me how stupid must you be to believe in a lie?
I don't believe you ever answered my questions about your biblical references.
Do you mean about these biblical references?
https://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=71376.0
https://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=71377.0
https://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=71378.0
https://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=71379.0
https://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=71380.0
https://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=71381.0
Edit: I remembered another one. You said the earth was on pillars. What are the pillars on or is one of those its turtles all the way down situations?
(http://www.theflatearthsociety.org/home/application/files/thumbnails/small/8614/6142/9161/02_Orlando-Ferguson-flat-earth-map.jpg)
Where does the Bible explain GPS?As for your claim that the Bible is "entirely full of myth and BS", I pressent to you all the science that I was able to fine it.So once again you ignore the topic at hand and resort to delusional religious BS.
And no, you don't have science. You have vague crap which you try and manipulate into matching science. Try again.As for the movement of the clouds, that was not on the video that NASA present with the dark side of the moon.Yes it was.
Go check.
When I respond to you statement and give you proof, you say that I ignore the topic, that great strategy.
And as for the manipulate into matching science, excuse me, when did scientist know that light can be separate and how old is the bible...
True science looks in the bible to get ideas and then tries to explain then why it is so...
Does science claim to know? NO!The same way that science can explain where all the matter before the Big Bang came from...True science looks in the bible to get ideas and then tries to explain then why it is so...Where does the Bible explain GPS?
He presented the numerical data in the plots. I say that the accuracy displayed there can not be achieved with his equipment.I am actually curious in your honest answer InFlatEarth. If you guys want more, here is the matlab code I used to "analyze" the data:
I would expect the precision of the results to be of order 5-10%, but this is just a rough guess and definitely depends on the used method.
As he wants to determine a 0.25% difference (at most), I would want an accuracy at this order of magnitude.
But please be honest with youself: Do you really think the obtained data with only 0.5% deviation can be obtained with an iphone 7 video camera and a person jumping?
fake = zeros(1,100);
fake(1:100) = 9.807;
fluc = rand([2 100]);
fluc2 = (fluc-0.5)./1000;
data = fluc2+9.807
trial = 1:1:100;
figure(1)
plot(trial,data(1,:),'b-o')
title('New York State');
xlabel('Trial Number');
ylabel('Acceleration of Gravity');
hold on
plot(trial,fake,'r');
legend('Measured Values','Average');
figure(2)
plot(trial,data(2,:),'b-o')
title('Indonesia');
xlabel('Trial Number');
ylabel('Acceleration of Gravity');
hold on
plot(trial,fake,'r');
legend('Measured Values','Average');
I apologize to the people who put effort into showing me the flaws in my "methods". I did learn about the existence of a gravimeter from you guys though. InFlatEarth, I appreciate you defending me, but your defenses don't really make any sense. I did graduate from GW but I have not been a PhD student for two years. In truth, I just graduated College and am starting my PhD at CMU this fall. In the words of my favorite cartoon character ever, "I just got bored. Everybody out." ... JimmyTheCrab probably gets that reference ;)
QuoteHowever earth being flat and such things just floating over does not.
read the bible
Earth has a Dome (Firmament)
Genesis 1:6 - And God said, Let there be a firmament in the midst of the waters, and let it divide the waters from the waters.
Isaiah 13:13 - Therefore I will shake the heavens, and the earth shall remove out of her place, in the wrath of the Lord of hosts, and in the day of his fierce anger.
Isaiah 24:18 - And it shall come to pass, that he who fleeth from the noise of the fear shall fall into the pit; and he that cometh up out of the midst of the pit shall be taken in the snare: for the windows from on high are open, and the foundations of the earth do shake.
Isaiah 44:24 - Thus saith the Lord, thy redeemer, and he that formed thee from the womb, I am the Lord that maketh all things; that stretcheth forth the heavens alone; that spreadeth abroad the earth by myself;
Psalm 18:9 - He bowed the heavens also, and came down: and darkness was under his feet.
2 Samuel 22:10 - He bowed the heavens also, and came down; and darkness was under his feet.
Earth is on Pillars
1 Samuel 2:8 - He raiseth up the poor out of the dust, and lifteth up the beggar from the dunghill, to set them among princes, and to make them inherit the throne of glory: for the pillars of the earth are the Lord's, and he hath set the world upon them.
Job 9:6 - Which shaketh the earth out of her place, and the pillars thereof tremble.
Psalm 75:3 - The earth and all the inhabitants thereof are dissolved: I bear up the pillars of it. Selah.
The Earth is Still
1 Chronicles 16:30 - Fear before him, all the earth: the world also shall be stable, that it be not moved.
Psalm 93:1 - The Lord reigneth, he is clothed with majesty; the Lord is clothed with strength, wherewith he hath girded himself: the world also is stablished, that it cannot be moved.
Psalm 96:10 - Say among the heathen that the Lord reigneth: the world also shall be established that it shall not be moved: he shall judge the people righteously.
Earth Has Four Corners
Isaiah 11:12 - And he shall set up an ensign for the nations, and shall assemble the outcasts of Israel, and gather together the dispersed of Judah from the four corners of the earth.
Revelation 7:1 - And after these things I saw four angels standing on the four corners of the earth, holding the four winds of the earth, that the wind should not blow on the earth, nor on the sea, nor on any tree.
Revelation 20:8 - And shall go out to deceive the nations which are in the four quarters of the earth, Gog, and Magog, to gather them together to battle: the number of whom is as the sand of the sea.
Earth has Four Winds
Jeremiah 49:36 - And upon Elam will I bring the four winds from the four quarters of heaven, and will scatter them toward all those winds; and there shall be no nation whither the outcasts of Elam shall not come.
Daniel 7:2 - Daniel spake and said, I saw in my vision by night, and, behold, the four winds of the heaven strove upon the great sea.
Matthew 24:31 - And he shall send his angels with a great sound of a trumpet, and they shall gather together his elect from the four winds, from one end of heaven to the other.
Revelation 7:1 - And after these things I saw four angels standing on the four corners of the earth, holding the four winds of the earth, that the wind should not blow on the earth, nor on the sea, nor on any tree.
Height, Depth, Length & Width
Job 11:8 - It is as high as heaven; what canst thou do? deeper than hell; what canst thou know?
Job 11:9 - The measure thereof is longer than the earth, and broader than the sea
Day & Night
Job 26:10 - He hath compassed the waters with bounds, until the day and night come to an end.
He is just trying to set up the science is a religion argument again.
These people who come in here spouting bible verses and trying to say that if the bible says it is this certain way, then all observations must match what the bible says are just delusional lost children who are leading themselves even further away. Religion requires faith. Faith in religious terms require there to be very little to no evidence for and alot of evidence against the premise of that faith. If there was a ton of evidence to support it, it would not be faith.
Science is not faith, it is based off conclusions from evidence and the search for more evidence and questions.
Religion is faith, it is based off of an emotional need for answers to the currently unanswerable. To be a true test of faith, it requires that you cannot provide evidence, even better if all evidence points away.
Religion is irrational, science is rational.
They are two different things, almost opposites. Some idiots will take this to mean religion is good and science is evil, this is not what that means. Religion houses both good and evil by itself.
I think that may be one reason many pretend religious people hate science so much. They really do not have any faith so they attack what they perceive as evil.
They cannot make that connection that it is their own failure of faith.
The bible is not a religious book, the bible is a HISTORICAL book
PNG format: https://epic.gsfc.nasa.gov/When I respond to you statement and give you proof, you say that I ignore the topic, that great strategy.You haven't given proof.
And again, the topic is the video/collection of photos you claim are fake and claim to have absolute proof that they are fake.And as for the manipulate into matching science, excuse me, when did scientist know that light can be separate and how old is the bible...Quite some time ago.
Who cares?True science looks in the bible to get ideas and then tries to explain then why it is so...No it doesn't.
That is religion, where you try to manipulate reality to match the model.
True science looks at reality.
Did the discover of Piltdown Man have to prove that it was real, or was it the obligation of his fellow scientist to disprove him?
NASA has to prove that it is real, by posting all photos in raw form of the event on their website so people can validate it or disprove it!!!
But was light discovered that it bends in AD or BC, because the old testament was written in BC!!!
Don't you know that all major discovers in the 17th, 18th centuries were first given the idea from the bible?
True science looks at reality. yes, but we don't have true science today. We have science that has an agenda, like CNN, the Russians did it!!!!
They have the Piltdown Man syndrome, as long as it goes with our narrative, we will believe that it is true.
Does science claim to know? NO!The same way that science can explain where all the matter before the Big Bang came from...True science looks in the bible to get ideas and then tries to explain then why it is so...Where does the Bible explain GPS?
On the other hand, you are saying true science comes from the Bible.
Does GPS come from the Bible? NO! but it is true science which is used daily by loads of people.
It has been proven that you will vehemently argue the side of ANY COMPLETELY MADE UP evidence as long as it appears to support Flat Earth.
You argued that a posters proof was correct. He then admitted it was a hoax.
Sorry, you can't change that, it happened.
Don't bother trying to engage me in a debate, I'm just here to point out it is a waste of time debating with you because you knowingly talk crap.
You argued that a posters proof was correct. He then admitted it was a hoax.
He presented the numerical data in the plots. I say that the accuracy displayed there can not be achieved with his equipment.I am actually curious in your honest answer InFlatEarth. If you guys want more, here is the matlab code I used to "analyze" the data:
I would expect the precision of the results to be of order 5-10%, but this is just a rough guess and definitely depends on the used method.
As he wants to determine a 0.25% difference (at most), I would want an accuracy at this order of magnitude.
But please be honest with youself: Do you really think the obtained data with only 0.5% deviation can be obtained with an iphone 7 video camera and a person jumping?
fake = zeros(1,100);
fake(1:100) = 9.807;
fluc = rand([2 100]);
fluc2 = (fluc-0.5)./1000;
data = fluc2+9.807
trial = 1:1:100;
figure(1)
plot(trial,data(1,:),'b-o')
title('New York State');
xlabel('Trial Number');
ylabel('Acceleration of Gravity');
hold on
plot(trial,fake,'r');
legend('Measured Values','Average');
figure(2)
plot(trial,data(2,:),'b-o')
title('Indonesia');
xlabel('Trial Number');
ylabel('Acceleration of Gravity');
hold on
plot(trial,fake,'r');
legend('Measured Values','Average');
I apologize to the people who put effort into showing me the flaws in my "methods". I did learn about the existence of a gravimeter from you guys though. InFlatEarth, I appreciate you defending me, but your defenses don't really make any sense. I did graduate from GW but I have not been a PhD student for two years. In truth, I just graduated College and am starting my PhD at CMU this fall. In the words of my favorite cartoon character ever, "I just got bored. Everybody out." ... JimmyTheCrab probably gets that reference ;)
Absolute proof that you are wasting your own and other people's time because you simply are not as intelligent as you think.
If you don't know that matter came from, then you have a religion and not a science.No we don't.
You BELIEVE, that it somehow was formed.No. I accept that it exists, not that it was formed.
BELIEVE is the key word.Are you aware knowledge is a subset of belief?
Scientist knows, religion BELIEVE's in something that they can't explain.
Have you seen 200 entries?Not the entries themselves, but the code used to generate them:
fluc = rand([2 100]);
fluc2 = (fluc-0.5)./1000;
data = fluc2+9.807
trial = 1:1:100;
figure(1)
plot(trial,data(1,:),'b-o')
[snip]
figure(2)
plot(trial,data(2,:),'b-o')You supported his argument, he admitted he made it up and it's bullS.
Game over. Say whatever makes you feel better.
No, that was something I asked for in my first post.You supported his argument, he admitted he made it up and it's bullS.
Game over. Say whatever makes you feel better.
i supported in examining his data, yes.
Something that you never even asked for, but immediately attacked.
And everything you have stated about the shape of the earth and about what the Bible says is your belief. Nothing more. It isn't scienceDoes science claim to know? NO!The same way that science can explain where all the matter before the Big Bang came from...True science looks in the bible to get ideas and then tries to explain then why it is so...Where does the Bible explain GPS?
On the other hand, you are saying true science comes from the Bible.
Does GPS come from the Bible? NO! but it is true science which is used daily by loads of people.
If you don't know that matter came from, then you have a religion and not a science.
You BELIEVE, that it somehow was formed.
BELIEVE is the key word.
Scientist knows, religion BELIEVE's in something that they can't explain.
Thank you to proving my point that your science is a religion!!!
This is the last post that I will do in this thread.Good, you can stop spouting your lies then.
I present to you 3 images from the fake NASA video which shows NO Cloud movement on Earth.PURE BULLSHIT!!!
As you can see, the landmass of Mexico, the clouds are in the exact same position as a time span of 5 hours.
If this is not convincing enough evidence, then it only proves that either you are paid to post misinorfation on this forum or you will believe anything that goes with the heliocentric Hypothesis.It sure is convincing that you need to blatantly reject reality to pretend that Earth is flat.
(https://image.ibb.co/f1P14k/Clouds_1.jpg) (https://imgbb.com/) (https://image.ibb.co/meNojk/Clouds_2.jpg) (https://imgbb.com/) (https://image.ibb.co/nEGEPk/Clouds_3.jpg) (https://imgbb.com/)What about that section to the left of the arrow head?
We will talk again in a different thread, byeGood riddance to bad garbage.
This is the last post that I will do in this thread.Your set of images doesn't span 5 hours.
I present to you 3 images from the fake NASA video which shows NO Cloud movement on Earth.
As you can see, the landmass of Mexico, the clouds are in the exact same position as a time span of 5 hours.
If this is not convincing enough evidence, then it only proves that either you are paid to post misinorfation on this forum or you will believe anything that goes with the heliocentric Hypothesis.
(https://image.ibb.co/f1P14k/Clouds_1.jpg) (https://imgbb.com/) (https://image.ibb.co/meNojk/Clouds_2.jpg) (https://imgbb.com/) (https://image.ibb.co/nEGEPk/Clouds_3.jpg) (https://imgbb.com/)
We will talk again in a different thread, bye
You can CLEARLY see there has been movement in the three pictures you posted!