I refer to one of the FAQs that states that there exists a conspiracy among world governments to say that the Earth is round when the earth is actually flat, and the most favoured theory is financial gain.
But why would'nt the world goverments receive financial gain if all had been the other way round - that actually the earth was round but the world governments were conspiring that the Earth is flat - they would have earned $$ too in this way...
So why did the world governments choose to form a conspiracy that the earth is round instead of that the earth is flat, since both conspiracies would earn them financial gain?
By the way.. I'm still not decided to believe if the earth is flat or round. Convince me! Thanks
It didn't happen quite like that. The culprits behind this conspiracy are not the governments themselves, but the major space agencies tasked with exploring space. It didn't take long for them to realize that space exploration was doomed to failure, given how the UA would always eliminate all their fuel, no matter how high they went. Admitting this to their bosses would have resulted in their funding being scrapped and their careers ruined. So, they simply made some stuff up and embezzled the majority of their funding for their personal profit.
Were they able to figure out that their failure to explore space was due to the Earth being flat? Possibly. However, telling the public that the Earth was flat would obviously have caused bombshells in the scientific community, and the UA would no doubt be discovered eventually as attention was focused on space exploration. By telling people lies that they already knew-those of RE-would guarantee that they could continue stealing money.
The first successful launch of a US satellite was made 8 months before NASA was created. This theory makes no sense. The US government would have known because the launch would not have been successful.
But it only went into LEO, which could be covered by the UA field that surrounds the earth. It's not until you attempt to go past the field that space flight becomes completely impossible according to FE.
And does it makes sense to you Raven that once you leave the field UA doesn't affect you like it does the sun, moon, planets, entire universe? There is no explanation why it doesn't. Truth be told, there is no reason sustained space flight isn't possible with this theory.
Let me try to explain it:
Look, if you are accelerating at a constant 100 MPH, how fast will you be going in 2 hours? Now, throw something out the window. It no longer has the benefits of your accumulated speed and falls behind, even if you bring it up to 100 MPH.
The same thing will happen to a craft. But, we are talking about speeds approaching the speed of light. The craft will be left so far behind that it could never catch up.
You could fly away from the earth in a craft. But you could never return, making sustained space flight impossible.
Can't remember who, but one of the guys did all the math to prove that the Saturn V could have traveled 3000 miles and made it to the moon. You could probably find it if you searched, I'll look later if I can.
I still don't get it though. There is a measurable fluctuation in gravitational influence that FE says is due to the pull of the stars, sun, moon, planets and other heavenly bodies. That is measurable right here on earth as you move around the surface. My thoughts are that if you have enough thrust to get high enough the influence of the stars gets greater and greater, so it is possible to achieve escape velocity on the FE model. FE holds on to this assumption that it isn't possible because it doesn't want to deal with the mountain of evidence available if it admits that space flight is possible.
Anyway, I think I'm derailing the thread. This question has never been answered to my satisfaction. It is never explained why the influence of the stars, heavenly bodies, UA will not affect the shuttle the same way it does every other body in the universe.