The Earth is flat... now what?

For me, that photo with Moon's Dark Side looks pretty surreal. I can't describe why. Or it's the moon a bit flattened or something else...

Quote from: Resistance.is.Futile on July 07, 2017, 07:00:48 PM

Come on be reasonable that footage is not acceptable I've seen better on the 1960s startrek.

You can't explain the big bang which is the start of your space science.

The problem is not that we cannot explain you something. The problem is that you will not understand anything.

No

You have the words understand and believe mixed up.

Quote from: neutrino on July 07, 2017, 11:19:29 PM

Quote from: Resistance.is.Futile on July 07, 2017, 07:00:48 PM

Come on be reasonable that footage is not acceptable I've seen better on the 1960s startrek.

You can't explain the big bang which is the start of your space science.

The problem is not that we cannot explain you something. The problem is that you will not understand anything.

No

You have the words understand and believe mixed up.

Milions in the UK watched the moon landings and there is a large UK industry designing and building satellites.

Quote from: Resistance.is.Futile on July 07, 2017, 07:00:48 PM

Quote from: rabinoz on July 07, 2017, 06:31:08 PM

Quote from: Resistance.is.Futile on July 07, 2017, 05:58:54 PM

Just as I said there is no footage of the spinning Globe from the 2002 blue marble perspective.

We are in 2017 that's not acceptable you must watch that and understand why people are sceptical ?

There is simply no way to take convincing video of the slowly rotating earth from fast moving satellites.
Even the geostationary satellites are not stationary in space, they orbit over the equator once per sidereal day.

But the EPIC camera on DSCOVR is orbiting the sun at the same angular rate as the earth, so can get this sort of thing.

DSCOVR EPIC observing Earth, SciNews

Or

Dark side of the moon passing over Earth: Captured by NASA's EPIC camera, The Cosmos News

Just proves how gullible we are. 

But we can explain:
sunrises and sunsets, you can't!
sunrise and sunset times and directions, you can't!
southern hemisphere distances, you can't!
24 hour daylight everywhere south of the Antarctic Circle, you can't!
six month sunlight at the South Pole from Sep 21 to Mar 21, you can't!
lunar phases, you can't!
lunar eclipses, you can't!
dawn sunlight shining up under clouds, you can't!
etc, etc, ad infinitum.

Get with the strength, get with the Heliocentric Globe, the only model that works!

Now''s the time for  Duthcy  to put his spoke in.

Is that image fron the playstation 2 or playstation 3 it's definitely not from the playstation 4.

How would I know? I have never played PlayStation 2, PlayStation 3 or PlayStation 4. Unlike you, I stick to reality.

As I have said so many times, all you are capable of doing is ridiculing - you can never offer anything constructive!

Quote from: Resistance.is.Futile

Don't you think that with the millions of sceptics that it's time for another manned space flight to the Moon to put this to rest.

Why bother? How would it put anything to rest. The early moon landing were broadcast live, the path of the space-craft often tracked by amateur astronomers and radio signals tracked by radio amateurs.

A kid like you was not around at the time to know these things first hand.

NASA has been to the moon plenty of times and has thousands of genuine photos taken on "real high quality film cameras".
And you still don't believe it!

Why would you believe another mission?
You even refuse to believe that the ISS is real, when is can be seen by anybody and has been photographed by ordinary cameras and by professionals with high power telescopes.

No, there are those so totally indoctrinated that they cannot believe anything that goes against the teachings at your Flat Earth temple of YouTube.
It's commonly called brainwashing and you are one of the best examples we have seen.
We have solid reasons for what we believe, all you have are doctrines you parrot from YouTube.
When asked for evidence, all you do is to grab another video out the trash can.

Quote from: Resistance.is.Futile

If North Korea Claimed they had been to the Moon and shown us simliar footage to what I've just been shown on here in the last few hours would they be believed?

The answer is NO

So what? I would depend entirely what the evidence was. The USA and many other nations could track any spacecraft much of the distance.

Quote from: Resistance.is.Futile

Come on be reasonable that footage is not acceptable I've seen better on the 1960s startrek.

Maybe because NASA use real-life photographs, StarTrek can use studio effects.

Quote from: Resistance.is.Futile

You can't explain the big bang which is the start of your space science.

Why, "the big bang" is not my problem, and why is it part of my "space science".
I am concerned here only with the Heliocentric Globe and that was well accepted and fitted astronomical observation long before there were any ideas about any "Big Bang".
But do you, since you claim not to be religious, have better theories about the "beginning"?

But we can explain:
      sunrises and sunsets, you can't!
      sunrise and sunset times and directions, you can't!
      southern hemisphere distances, you can't!
      24 hour daylight everywhere south of the Antarctic Circle, you can't!
      six month sunlight at the South Pole from Sep 21 to Mar 21, you can't!
      lunar phases, you can't!
      lunar eclipses, you can't!
      dawn sunlight shining up under clouds, you can't!
etc, etc, ad infinitum.

So whatever you try to disprove, you've got explanations of nothing !

Quote from: rabinoz on July 07, 2017, 08:12:48 PM

How would I know? I have never played PlayStation 2, PlayStation 3 or PlayStation 4. Unlike you, I stick to reality.

Rabinoz, the graphics in a modern computer game (assuming that your computer specs are up to date), vastly surpasses all the cgi that NASA has presented till now.
It is a revelation to me why you still think that dark moon crossing the earth is real.......you simply do not now what todays cgi look like in gaming.
So please catch up with reality and then compare with NASA's attempts and you will feel betrayed just like modern people who keep up with the latest developments in computer graphics.
Now i also understand your inabilty to discern a real live performance from a tricky mix (ISS+earthband)
Maybe you aren't into popmusic and gaming, no problem here, but in both cases you would have noticed right away what cheap marketing crap NASA is serving the general public.
Thanks for sharing, it helps me a lot to understand what your current position towards NASA and their cgi is.

Quote

Why bother? How would it put anything to rest. The early moon landing were broadcast live, the path of the space-craft often tracked by amateur astronomers and radio signals tracked by radio amateurs.

The first 1969 moon landings were prerecorded on a big screen and the internaional tv stations could record the prerecorded film displayed........no live event whatsoever.
The ''radio amatures'' is such a lame excuse,.....even the Russians couldn't really track Apollo and had to beg the Brittains for the latest info on the US new frequencies.
You know little about Apollo so it seems,........do some research and things aren't that obvious as the official storyline.
Do you really think some people ruined their lives out of attention seeking ?
People genuinely found many flaws and absurdities in the Apollo story and footage and felt it was their human duty to inform the general public.
It is people like you that make me loose believe in humanity, people so easily indoctrinated and controlled by official storylines and supposed ''scientific peer reviews''.

If you have any instinct left to think outside the box as an independent induvidual, start with the Apollo hoax. Everyone who gives it a real and honest chance will encounter so many irregularities that you will finally doubt some parts of the official story.....a good beginning.

Frenat where art thou ? 

Thank you Dutchy

Yet again you have been proven to be a  " LIAR " RAB ; it would seem the truth is the first casualty when it comes to defending your Strange Heliocentric Religion but don't worry I forgive you.

Come back and play and as a genuine Man I give you my word I will not call you a liar again even though it is true.

It's just no fun without you 

Yet again you have been proven to be a  " LIAR " RAB ; it would seem the truth is the first casualty when it comes to defending your Strange Heliocentric Religion but don't worry I forgive you.

Come back and play and as a genuine Man I give you my word I will not call you a liar again even though it is true.

It's just no fun without you 

Please read: High Altitude Amateur Weather Balloon proves Flat Earth « Reply #58 on: Today at 10:21:52 AM »

You mean, zero that you have seen? Because there are literally hundreds of thousands. Unless of course, your opinion is that any image that shows a globe 'must be fake'.

That is the central flat Earth cultist mantra; "If I see evidence that I am wrong, then that evidence is faked because I cannot be wrong."

With thinking like that, you can believe in whatever you want and just close your mind to any evidence that contradicts or challenges you.

Quote from: markjo on July 08, 2017, 07:27:06 AM

Quote from: dutchy on July 08, 2017, 06:45:37 AM

Quote from: rabinoz on July 07, 2017, 08:12:48 PM

How would I know? I have never played PlayStation 2, PlayStation 3 or PlayStation 4. Unlike you, I stick to reality.

Rabinoz, the graphics in a modern computer game (assuming that your computer specs are up to date), vastly surpasses all the cgi that NASA has presented till now.
It is a revelation to me why you still think that dark moon crossing the earth is real.......you simply do not now what todays cgi look like in gaming.

If it looks so fake to you, then please tell us what thee far side of the moon passing in front of the earth should look like from space.

I don't know, but here's a liitle comparison.

First is an artist rendering with recently discovered Kepler in mind
https://media.wired.com/photos/59325dddaef9a462de982356/master/w_2000,c_limit/kepler186f.jpg

Here is a ''real photo'' from the same NASA department presenting the darkside of the moon crossing earth
Kepler looks better doesn't it
https://s-media-cache-ak0.pinimg.com/736x/3b/0e/8a/3b0e8a0390739b08163c508e6f17ad32.jpg

And here is a high altitude picture from earth.

http://ryanallanca.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/08/Balloon1.jpg
I'm from the Netherlands, country of the ''Dutch masters''.Rembrandt was the master of light.
The reflection of real sunlight is the most difficult to fake....now look to that high altitude balloon photo and compare with the other two.
...reality looks very different markjo...doesn't it ?

So you're pretty much telling me that you wouldn't recognize a real picture of the far side of the moon passing in front of earth if you saw one.

Good to know.

Quote from: dutchy on July 08, 2017, 08:13:01 AM

Quote from: markjo on July 08, 2017, 07:27:06 AM

Quote from: dutchy on July 08, 2017, 06:45:37 AM

Quote from: rabinoz on July 07, 2017, 08:12:48 PM

How would I know? I have never played PlayStation 2, PlayStation 3 or PlayStation 4. Unlike you, I stick to reality.

Rabinoz, the graphics in a modern computer game (assuming that your computer specs are up to date), vastly surpasses all the cgi that NASA has presented till now.
It is a revelation to me why you still think that dark moon crossing the earth is real.......you simply do not now what todays cgi look like in gaming.

If it looks so fake to you, then please tell us what thee far side of the moon passing in front of the earth should look like from space.

I don't know, but here's a liitle comparison.

First is an artist rendering with recently discovered Kepler in mind
https://media.wired.com/photos/59325dddaef9a462de982356/master/w_2000,c_limit/kepler186f.jpg

Here is a ''real photo'' from the same NASA department presenting the darkside of the moon crossing earth
Kepler looks better doesn't it
https://s-media-cache-ak0.pinimg.com/736x/3b/0e/8a/3b0e8a0390739b08163c508e6f17ad32.jpg

And here is a high altitude picture from earth.

http://ryanallanca.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/08/Balloon1.jpg
I'm from the Netherlands, country of the ''Dutch masters''.Rembrandt was the master of light.
The reflection of real sunlight is the most difficult to fake....now look to that high altitude balloon photo and compare with the other two.
...reality looks very different markjo...doesn't it ?

So you're pretty much telling me that you wouldn't recognize a real picture of the far side of the moon passing in front of earth if you saw one.

Good to know.

@markjo and rabinoz

I know it is all fun rediculing flatearthers and all

But i have gathered two indeniable facts that neither of you could explain at all.

1 The ISS show where they clearly pretend to play together between a cosmic guitar hero and  fullblown band+ choir on earth.
The initial little communication 100% proofs they tried to pass this of as a live event.
Through my expertise in recording, sound design and music in general i have proved beyond a shadow of a doubt what easy to detect fakery was going on on multiple levels.

2 All cgi from the intire globe recorded in outerspace is 100% fake.
I was raised in a musical and artistic family ( my mother was a science of arts master) and where we lived, musea were present in each and every city in a very small area.
I can understand that in such barbaric culture as the USA , tv was far more appreciated than art.
How to mimick light in paintings is what sets apart amatures from the Dutch masters.

On a real photo from high altitude you can almost feel the warmth of the reflecting sunlight ( the one i presented a page before) .
Anyone who has ever done something in painting or photography immediatly recognises that ALL blue marmble footage is faked from scratch.
Not one single part of a real photo was implemented.
Everything is done from scratch using a computer model that uses high altitude photo's as a reference , not as part of the end result.
I understand that rabinoz can't discern such thing, because he still lives in the dark ages of computer graphics, not knowing the possibilities of game consoles like playstation.

Only a handfull of AMERICAN NASA employees between 1969 and 1972 have gone beyond low earth orbit.
All cgi from outerspace is computer generated solely.
Even the amount of fraudulent micro gravity moves and tricks in the ISS is absolutely staggering.

Since when has cosmology become such a faithbased 'science' ?
It is a fairytail told by a couple of NASA employees who are the ONLY ones who have been to outerspace.
They have been caught lying many, many times about seeing stars or not and their overall impression doesn't look trustworthy at all during interviews...... and this is mildly put.

Instaed of asking for a flatearth map, i would look over your shoulder and see where the very foundations of your little cosmic fairytale were laid.
Hardly anyone can or could verify outerspace,....   we have fullblown cgi fakery and a handfull of lying astronauts to rely on.
I think your problems are much deeper than ours, ... in fact i can't think of something right now where such a low number of induviduals had such a great impact on the whole mindset of humanity...... must have made a couple of cult leaders very jealous.....

@markjo and rabinoz
But i have gathered two indeniable facts that neither of you could explain at all.

1 The ISS show where they clearly pretend to play together between a cosmic guitar hero and  fullblown band+ choir on earth.
The initial little communication 100% proofs they tried to pass this of as a live event.
Through my expertise in recording, sound design and music in general i have proved beyond a shadow of a doubt what easy to detect fakery was going on on multiple levels.

I know you think you are the "expertise in recording, sound design and music in general", but just because you say it can't be done proves nothing at all.
I suggested one way, but there maybe other explanations that even a self-confessed genius such as the know-it-all-dutchy does not know.

But, most important of all, exactly what did NASA officially claim? Did NASA really claim all that you are accusing them of.

2 All cgi from the intire globe recorded in outerspace is 100% fake.
I was raised in a musical and artistic family ( my mother was a science of arts master) and where we lived, musea were present in each and every city in a very small area.
I can understand that in such barbaric culture as the USA , tv was far more appreciated than art.
How to mimick light in paintings is what sets apart amatures from the Dutch masters.

So you claim, for no other reason that,  it doesn't look right!    When we're you last in space to know?

On a real photo from high altitude you can almost feel the warmth of the reflecting sunlight ( the one i presented a page before) .
Anyone who has ever done something in painting or photography immediatly recognises that ALL blue marmble footage is faked from scratch.

No "ALL Blue marmble footage Marble photos" are NOT faked and you have not shown that any are faked.
NASA announced that one was a composite image made from Low Earth Orbit scans, that does not make it a fake!
But, be consistent, if Low Earth Orbit scans can be made, that proves that satellites are possible and real!

So now your evidence boils down to  it doesn't feel right! 

Not one single part of a real photo was implemented.
Everything is done from scratch using a computer model that uses high altitude photo's as a reference , not as part of the end result.
I understand that rabinoz can't discern such thing, because he still lives in the dark ages of computer graphics, not knowing the possibilities of game consoles like playstation.

I know that now it is quite possible to generate realistic images, so what?.
Just being possible does not mean anything at all!

Sure you claim it is fake, because it doesn't look right, but I ask again, when we're you last in space to know exactly what it should look like?
If you haven't, you must admit that you are simply imagining what you think it should look like - in other words everything you say is totally coloured by your irrational hatred OF NASA.

But, you are totally illogical here (irrational hatred will do that).
NASA has far more money that you to produce realistic images if they were so inclined.
The mere fact that they are NOT what you imagine they should look like is really evidence that they are quite genuine.

You make silly claims like "they are not as good as PlayStation". Don't you think that NASA, with all the resources they have, could easily make these photos look as good as PlayStation.
But they DO NOT, because they are real photographs, not PlayStation images nor paintings by Dutch master.

Only a handfull of AMERICAN NASA employees between 1969 and 1972 have gone beyond low earth orbit.

So, you admit that "a handfull of AMERICAN NASA employees between 1969 and 1972 have gone beyond low earth orbit".
If that is true, why do you have a problem with the ISS,  it's in Low Earth Orbit?

All cgi from outerspace is computer generated solely.
Even the amount of fraudulent micro gravity moves and tricks in the ISS is absolutely staggering.

All in you opinion, because you think it does not look and feel right  .
How do YOU know what it should look and feel like?
Your NASAphobic would never let you know what it should look and feel like.

If they have gone beyond low earth orbit, as you claimed, why this problem with what is done in the ISS.

Since when has cosmology become such a faithbased 'science' ?

Who is talking about "cosmology"? What has that to do with any of this stuff.

It is a fairytail told by a couple of NASA employees who are the ONLY ones who have been to outerspace.

What are you talking about? I think your NASAphoba has made you totally irrational.
These "couple of NASA employees" have nothing at all to do with cosmology!
But, let's get your numbers straight, twenty-four left Earth's orbit and a total of 536 have been in space, three only sub-orbital.

They have been caught lying many, many times about seeing stars or not and their overall impression doesn't look trustworthy at all during interviews...... and this is mildly put.

In your opinion, but have you ever seen the stars in space in a bright environment.
Eyes adapt to the bright light just as cameras have to.
Eyes do have a much wider dynamic range than most cameras, but the simple fact is that in full sun light on the moon or elsewhere there is not much chance of the human eye or a camera seeing incredibly dim stars.

So all of your objections boil down to:
If the self-confessed know-it-all dutchy cannot do something, it is impossible.
If the self-confessed know-it-all dutchy thinks itdoes not seem right or thinks itdoes not feel right it must be fake.

That is exactly what is wrong with most flat esrthers, they go purely be what their biased mind think looks or feels wrong.

Instaed of asking for a flatearth map, i would look over your shoulder and see where the very foundations of your little cosmic fairytale were laid.

The foundations of the Heliocentric Globe were laid quite logically, but strangely, back in the Babylonian days.
Strangely, because those Babylonian's believed in a flat earth.

But here is not the place to go through the history of the Heliocentric Globe.

Hardly anyone can or could verify outerspace,....   we have fullblown cgi fakery and a handfull of lying astronauts to rely on.
I think your problems are much deeper than ours, ... in fact i can't think of something right now where such a low number of induviduals had such a great impact on the whole mindset of humanity...... must have made a couple of cult leaders very jealous.....

Your uncontrollable NASAphobia is showing!
And neither has "verify outerspace"!

But, what are you raving about with "must have made a couple of cult leaders very jealous"?
We don't have "cult leaders", but it seems some flat earthers certainly have, hanging onto the words Some certainly have no answers of their own, but just post a YouTube video, that they themselves cannot understand.
You of course, do not fall into this category, you never have any answers about any workable flat earth model!


Now here I must apologise, but I am forced to "make fun of flat earthers", because it is the only explanation I have for what I see.
The only reason you and other flat earthers are such  NASAphobics/i] is that you are not smart enough to understand all the massive evidence for the Heliocentric Globe that exist quite apart from any "pretty pictures from space".

I accepted that the earth was a Globe well before there was any thought of exploring space.

Only a handfull of AMERICAN NASA employees between 1969 and 1972 have gone beyond low earth orbit.

Considering the population of the United States of America, this is completely factual!

A "handful" of Americans made it all the way to the moon!


They took some great photographs!

Quote from: Resistance.is.Futile on July 08, 2017, 02:00:22 PM

Yet again you have been proven to be a  " LIAR " RAB ; it would seem the truth is the first casualty when it comes to defending your Strange Heliocentric Religion but don't worry I forgive you.

Come back and play and as a genuine Man I give you my word I will not call you a liar again even though it is true.

It's just no fun without you 

I demand an immediate apology for your slanderous accusations.

Please read: High Altitude Amateur Weather Balloon proves Flat Earth « Reply #58 on: Today at 10:21:52 AM »

Don't push it.

I have nothing to apologise for.

You last post was interesting you now claim the foundations of your religion where laid in Babylon a couple of days ago it was Greece.

Make your mind up.

Quote from: markjo on June 10, 2017, 06:17:31 PM

Quote from: gotham on June 10, 2017, 04:29:31 PM

I do empathize with science types that will struggle with their realization of proper Earth shape. They are so comfortable with the pretend world they currently believe in. Suffice it to say it is not their fault and we all know why and how they came to their belief.

How do you tell geodetic scientists who have spent their entire professional careers studying the shape and workings of the earth that everything that they know is wrong?

My first reaction is that they have not been exposed to enough FET.  Since the onset of the round Earth movement, FET has been forced into the background. 

If we can get FET into educational systems, geodetic scientists will have the opportunity to arrive at proper Earth shape identification and would gladly allow themselves a different professional classification. .   

If FET had any actual science behind it, any actual evidence for or was able to explain any real world phenomenon, aside from the earth looks flat, you might have a chance at that.  But it meets none of these criteria.

I know you think you are the "expertise in recording, sound design and music in general", but just because you say it can't be done proves nothing at all.
I suggested one way, but there maybe other explanations that even a self-confessed genius such as the know-it-all-dutchy does not know.

But, most important of all, exactly what did NASA officially claim? Did NASA really claim all that you are accusing them of.

It must be hard to swallow all the NASA nonsense,...and not without any psychological dangers !!
But because you are one of my fellow breathren i will give it another shot.
The actual sound you hear on the video i showed is a studio production.
How can i tell ?
Because all frequencies of the large group of instrumentalists + choir are carefully edited, panned, equalised and finalised with effects.
A studio engineer has macthed all levels accordingly added a little compression and that is what you hear.
Sorry to know you are soniccally deaf or simply are a payed liar that is hired to mock and deny such obvious facts in live.

Even a child agrees that the initial conversation indicates a dual musical performance between earth and the ISS ...LIVE.
Sorry to know that you don't understand communication between human beings or are a payed liar that is hired to mock and deny such obvious facts in live.

So you claim, for no other reason that,  it doesn't look right!    When we're you last in space to know?

Why don't you envy persons who CAN see the difference between real recorded reflected sunlight and an artificial attempt by computers.
When did you loose this quite common human ability.......was it taken from you in the church of scientism ?

No "ALL Blue marmble footage Marble photos" are NOT faked and you have not shown that any are faked.
NASA announced that one was a composite image made from Low Earth Orbit scans, that does not make it a fake!
But, be consistent, if Low Earth Orbit scans can be made, that proves that satellites are possible and real!

So now your evidence boils down to  it doesn't feel right! 

You explain very good why this is fake !!!!
It pretends an intire shot of earth, while in reality scans and extensive photoshop were used to show off a blue marble.
You probably have a whole garage full of ''tell sell'' products that work absolutely stunning on tv, but in reality not so......
Because it was on tv and it worked ...so it must be true.
Because NASA said it used scans and photoshop it must be true

Sure you claim it is fake, because it doesn't look right, but I ask again, when we're you last in space to know exactly what it should look like?

A photo where i can detect the REAL sun's reflections, not some poor cgi attempt.
Again i feel sorry that it is so hard to distinguish the photos i showed and compare reality with cgi....i think it's quite doable.

If you haven't, you must admit that you are simply imagining what you think it should look like - in other words everything you say is totally coloured by your irrational hatred OF NASA.

Everything you deny is because NASA has put a spell on you,......that's not my fault now is it ?

But, you are totally illogical here (irrational hatred will do that).
NASA has far more money that you to produce realistic images if they were so inclined.

Or maybe, just maybe NASA cannot take a picture of earth and the moon from a million miles out.......never thought of that, have you ?

The mere fact that they are NOT what you imagine they should look like is really evidence that they are quite genuine.

So next time NASA shows some fucking    aliens it must be true, because who am i to think about how that looks like.....
''Handing over all my unique human authorities to a proven fraudulent organisation'' at work....boy you are really something special.

You make silly claims like "they are not as good as PlayStation". Don't you think that NASA, with all the resources they have, could easily make these photos look as good as PlayStation.
But they DO NOT, because they are real photographs, not PlayStation images nor paintings by Dutch master.

What is it...NASA has huge resources when it suits you but extremely limited resources when it doesn't (like going back to the moon  )
Could you give me a list what their resources can do or can't.
Till now they can't go to the moon and can't take a real picture from earth in outerspace.....
To jail with the financial management i would say.....

So, you admit that "a handfull of AMERICAN NASA employees between 1969 and 1972 have gone beyond low earth orbit".
If that is true, why do you have a problem with the ISS,  it's in Low Earth Orbit?

''A handfull'' is a figure of speach (learned from frenat when you want to bend things your way)
It is intended to mock ALL space related achievements that are false one way or the other.

Who is talking about "cosmology"? What has that to do with any of this stuff.

Everything...your spinning ball is a product of it.....
Or is there a slim possibilty we live on a non spinning ball ? Is that what you believe ?
All things related between a spinning earth, the solar system, the milkyway, the big bang comes in one package........

What are you talking about? I think your NASAphoba has made you totally irrational.
These "couple of NASA employees" have nothing at all to do with cosmology!
But, let's get your numbers straight, twenty-four left Earth's orbit and a total of 536 have been in space, three only sub-orbital.

See my reply before this quote

In your opinion, but have you ever seen the stars in space in a bright environment.
Eyes adapt to the bright light just as cameras have to.
Eyes do have a much wider dynamic range than most cameras, but the simple fact is that in full sun light on the moon or elsewhere there is not much chance of the human eye or a camera seeing incredibly dim stars.

But Edgar Mitchell and Neil Armstrong had both different views in cislunar space, in the same vehicle, same tools, same journey.
Armstrong said it was all pitch black besides the moon
Mitchell said the stars were so bright he was drawn to Buhdism by the almost spritual sighting.

Confronted by a reported in Great Brittain Edgar Mitchell said he sticked with his version and didn't want to comment on Neil's different storyline.
Then of course Eddie became angree.

It's totally absurd that you do not know this and yet accusing me for telling the truth.

So all of your objections boil down to:
If the self-confessed know-it-all dutchy cannot do something, it is impossible.
If the self-confessed know-it-all dutchy thinks itdoes not seem right or thinks itdoes not feel right it must be fake.

That is exactly what is wrong with most flat esrthers, they go purely be what their biased mind think looks or feels wrong.

I hope your reading skills do improve.

And i will not reply to the rest of your gibberish....only if you insist of course.....

Dutchy admits that Americans have been beyond low Earth orbit!

....but only a "handful"!



As I suspected, he believes none of the crap he is spouting, but rather is a very determined, angry troll.

Your flat Earth cult is false!

Dutchy admits that Americans have been beyond low Earth orbit!

....but only a "handful"!



As I suspected, he believes none of the crap he is spouting, but rather is a very determined, angry troll.

Your flat Earth cult is false!

I know that.... ''not the brightest people'', religious freaks, tramps and co crossed the ''big puddle'' to live in the USA, but that doesn't mean you have to show it off everytime you reply.

I know it is all fun rediculing flatearthers and all

I imagine that it's almost as fun as you have ridiculing RE'ers.

But i have gathered two indeniable facts that neither of you could explain at all.

I've been here long enough to realize that there are no facts that FE'ers can't deny.

1 The ISS show where they clearly pretend to play together between a cosmic guitar hero and  fullblown band+ choir on earth.
The initial little communication 100% proofs they tried to pass this of as a live event.
Through my expertise in recording, sound design and music in general i have proved beyond a shadow of a doubt what easy to detect fakery was going on on multiple levels.

I'll admit that I'm no expert in recording, but it seems easy enough to me to have the ISS transmit the performance down and then have everyone else on the ground sync up to that.

2 All cgi from the intire globe recorded in outerspace is 100% fake.

Does that include pictures from weather satellites?  How about military spy satellites?

On a real photo from high altitude you can almost feel the warmth of the reflecting sunlight ( the one i presented a page before) .

So you think that photos taken from the vacuum of space should have the same feel as photos taken from within the atmosphere?

Anyone who has ever done something in painting or photography immediatly recognises that ALL blue marmble footage is faked from scratch.
Not one single part of a real photo was implemented.

I've learned a few things about photography over the years and I see no issues with the Apollo 17 blue marble.

All cgi from outerspace is computer generated solely.

Ummm... Yeah.  That's pretty much the definition of CGI.

Even the amount of fraudulent micro gravity moves and tricks in the ISS is absolutely staggering.

Have you ever spent any time in a microgravity environment?

Since when has cosmology become such a faithbased 'science' ?

I can't say for sure, but I'd guess pretty much since the beginning of religion.

It is a fairytail told by a couple of NASA employees who are the ONLY ones who have been to outerspace.

Are you sure that you know what cosmology means?

Instaed of asking for a flatearth map, i would look over your shoulder and see where the very foundations of your little cosmic fairytale were laid.

That's the problem with FE'ers.  It isn't enough to prove RET wrong, you also have to prove that FET is right.  Presenting a coherent FE model that explains observations at least as well as the RE model would be a good place to start.

Hardly anyone can or could verify outerspace,....   we have fullblown cgi fakery and a handfull of lying astronauts to rely on.

Did you know that more people have been to the moon than to the bottom of the Marianas Trench?  Why is no one questioning that alleged achievement?

I think your problems are much deeper than ours, ... in fact i can't think of something right now where such a low number of induviduals had such a great impact on the whole mindset of humanity...... must have made a couple of cult leaders very jealous.....

Seriously, I don't think that you understand the number of different and well established earth sciences that rely directly on the shape of the earth being correct in order to work.  Geodesy would probably be at the top of that list.

It's time you Heliocentrics gave it up!

Only the most stupid and gullable believe your images and fairy tales.

No matter how long your post is all its good for is decent bedtime reading.

Yawn

 

It's time you Heliocentrics gave it up!

Only the most stupid and gullable believe your images and fairy tales.

No matter how long your post is all its good for is decent bedtime reading.

Yawn

 

Like I said, you are no more than a pathetic little small minded troll, you certainly do NOT believe any of this flat earth crap.

It's time you Heliocentrics gave it up!

Only the most stupid and gullable believe your images and fairy tales.

No matter how long your post is all its good for is decent bedtime reading.

Yawn

 

Here's some more bed-time reading.

Quote from: Resistance.is.Futile on July 08, 2017, 02:00:22 PM

Yet again you have been proven to be a  " LIAR " RAB ; it would seem the truth is the first casualty when it comes to defending your Strange Heliocentric Religion but don't worry I forgive you.

YOU HAVE plenty to apologise for. I do not take kindly to being FALSELY called a LIAR!

I demand an immediate apology for your slanderous accusations.

Please read: High Altitude Amateur Weather Balloon proves Flat Earth « Reply #58 on: Today at 10:21:52 AM »

Quote from: Resistance.is.Futile on July 09, 2017, 11:25:18 AM

It's time you Heliocentrics gave it up!

Only the most stupid and gullable believe your images and fairy tales.

No matter how long your post is all its good for is decent bedtime reading.

Yawn

 

Here's some more bed-time reading.

Quote from: rabinoz on July 08, 2017, 05:30:07 PM

Quote from: Resistance.is.Futile on July 08, 2017, 02:00:22 PM

Yet again you have been proven to be a  " LIAR " RAB ; it would seem the truth is the first casualty when it comes to defending your Strange Heliocentric Religion but don't worry I forgive you.

YOU HAVE plenty to apologise for. I do not take kindly to being FALSELY called a LIAR!

I demand an immediate apology for your slanderous accusations.

Please read: High Altitude Amateur Weather Balloon proves Flat Earth « Reply #58 on: Today at 10:21:52 AM »

 

Here's another video you might like.



Hope you enjoy it.

 

Dutchy I just to address the part about the iss/music video.  You seem to be saying that you cannot record audio, master it, then play it back and have someone else record another part.  Actually, it sort of felt like you were throwing a lot of audio language around without really understanding it.

It's time you Heliocentrics gave it up!

Only the most stupid and gullable believe your images and fairy tales.

Speaking of fairy tales, how do the sun and moon keep from crashing down to the flat earth again?

NASA did a lot of research before the moon missions. As a result, they

• chose a translunar injection trajectory that was far "south" of the equatorial plane to avoid the worst of the radiation,
• determined that the type of radiation (largely particulate, not gamma radiation) was easily blocked by light materials that were part of the spacecraft's structure anyway and
• fitted the spacecraft  and crew with radiation monitors to ensure that their calculations were correct.

There's a lot more detail in CLAVIUS ENVIRONMENT, Radiation and the Van Allen Belts.

And here are a few quotes from that article:

Claim: There is too much radiation in outer space for manned space travel.

This general charge is usually made by people who don't understand very much at all about radiation. After witnessing the horrors of Hiroshima and Nagasaki and the tragedy of Chernobyl it is not surprising that the idea of radiation should elicit an intuitively fearful reaction. But when you understand the different types of radiation and what can be done about them, it becomes a manageable problem to avoid radiation exposure.

Claim: It doesn't matter how difficult or expensive it might have been to falsify the lunar landings. Since it was absolutely impossible to solve the radiation problem, the landings had to have been faked.

This is a common method of argument that attempts to prove something that can't be proven, by disproving something else. In this case the reader is compelled to accept the conspiracy theory and all its attendant problems and improbabilities, simply on the basis that no matter how difficult, absurd, or far-fetched a particular proposition may be, if it's the only alternative to something clearly impossible then it must -- somehow -- have come to pass. This false dilemma is aimed at pushing the reader past healthy skepticism and into a frame of mind where the absurd seems plausible.

Claim: The Van Allen belts are full of deadly radiation, and anyone passing through them would be fried.

Needless to say, this is a very simplistic statement. Yes, there is deadly radiation in the Van Allen belts, but the nature of that radiation was known to the Apollo engineers and they were able to make suitable preparations. The principle danger of the Van Allen belts is high-energy protons, which are not that difficult to shield against. And the Apollo navigators plotted a course through the thinnest parts of the belts and arranged for the spacecraft to pass through them quickly, limiting the exposure.

The Van Allen belts span only about forty degrees of earth's latitude -- twenty degrees above and below the magnetic equator. The diagrams of Apollo's translunar trajectory printed in various press releases are not entirely accurate. They tend to show only a two-dimensional version of the actual trajectory. The actual trajectory was three-dimensional. The highly technical reports of Apollo, accessible to but not generally understood by the public, give the three-dimensional details of the translunar trajectory.

Each mission flew a slightly different trajectory in order to access its landing site, but the orbital inclination of the translunar coast trajectory was always in the neighborhood of 30°. Stated another way, the geometric plane containing the translunar trajectory was inclined to the earth's equator by about 30°. A spacecraft following that trajectory would bypass all but the edges of the Van Allen belts.

This is not to dispute that passage through the Van Allen belts would be dangerous. But NASA conducted a series of experiments designed to investigate the nature of the Van Allen belts, culminating in the repeated traversal of the Southern Atlantic Magnetic Anomaly (an intense, low-hanging patch of Van Allen belt) by the Gemini 10 astronauts.

Put simply:
1) NASA had done much study of the Van Allen Belts before the mission. All the information we have on the comes from NASA!

2) The radiation is mainly charged particles, which unlike gamma radiation, requires relatively little lightweight shielding.

3) The trajectories were chosen to minimise the time in the VABs.

well flat erfers aren't interested in evidence. If they were, they wouldn't be flat erfers. And also there is a lot of unchecked parroting in the FE cult - in fact, a cult does not welcome or encourage critical thought.