Flat Mars Society

Aside from the post modern arguments regarding down hyperrealism, the only person or people the evidence could possibly be valid to are those that were among those that took the photograph. Even then, the way the mind works, it would be impossible to verify that photograph was in actuality representative of the reality. You'd be surprised how often people just believe what they want to. I further evidenced it above, and you can also do a search here for tomes of results on photographic evidence that will collaborate this belief.

Quote from: John Davis on December 05, 2017, 07:16:03 PM

How about when they found life.... ten different times?

Not true.

Yes, that was the point. Complete fabrications every time, starting with the one that came back with the moon landings.

Quote from: John Davis on December 05, 2017, 07:54:15 AM

The pictures from mars are pure nonsense. Does anybody else remember the gopher they found in one of the shots?

Could you provide a link.

http://bfy.tw/FUmn

A gopher shaped rock on Mars?

A man siting on Mars?

A giant face on Mars?

Virgin Mary in your grilled cheese?

When I see an actual picture of a globe earth, maybe then photographic evidence will be admissible. Why can't we be supplied with at least that?

When I see an actual picture of a globe earth, maybe then photographic evidence will be admissible. Why can't we be supplied with at least that?

Why do you think the thousands of photographs already available are not "actual".?

When I see an actual picture of a globe earth, maybe then photographic evidence will be admissible. Why can't we be supplied with at least that?

Here is one taken from the Himwari 8 satellite. Don't worry. It's not from NASA



Ok, so now that the picture of the globe earth for you is out of the way.....

When I see an actual picture of a globe earth, maybe then photographic evidence will be admissible. Why can't we be supplied with at least that?

An actual picture of a globe? Easy, you could probably even get one yourself.

Quote from: Nightsky on December 10, 2017, 03:05:14 PM

Quote from: John Davis on December 05, 2017, 07:54:15 AM

The pictures from mars are pure nonsense. Does anybody else remember the gopher they found in one of the shots?

Could you provide a link.

http://bfy.tw/FUmn

The first hit returned by this lmgtfy link is:

Conspiracy theorists discover SQUIRREL living on Mars | Weird ...

The next few hits variously refer to it as a rat or gopher.

"They" are Conspiracy theorists, not NASA. "They" saw a rock in a picture that they want to think looks kinda like a gopher? Or was it a squirrel? Or a rat? It's a rock.

Maybe its a chameleon. It just happen to look like a rock. Maybe the rocks themselves are alive. It's another planet. Who are you to say what say what life can or cant be.

Actually, in all seriousness, As I occupy 4 dimensions and time for me is tangible and not linear, I can guarantee you that life exists on Mars. Give it a billion more of your years and Mars will be in the new Goldilocks zone as Venus once was, sprawling with life. Give it 5 billion more years and the moons of Neptune will be quite balmy and you can even holiday on Pluto for a lot of it's orbit. Man kind will simply have to hop, skip and jump to more distant planets as the suns luminosity gets brighter and brighter and what you believe is the goldilocks zone is constantly shifted outward

Attempts to drag the Earths orbit further outward utilising asteroids was working fine until a miscalculation caused the 180km rock to plunge right on top of what used to be the Trump Towers. This happened when someone sprayed graffiti  'MAGA' in white on the asteroid causing its spin to be ever so slightly effected when the sun hit the white paint. The resulting destruction wiped out the entire planet. Billions of people lost in an instant and only a small colony on Mars at the time was left to restart the human race. It was good we had managed to settle on the moons of Jupiter before one of Mars moons 'Phobos', came crashing down wiping out 90% of its population as well. Attempts to stablise its orbit had failed. The only thing that saved us from a complete 100% destruction of the population was because we drilled a hole in it 'Armageddon style' and detonated a multi gigaton nuke that instead fragmented the moon into many smaller pieces. However this rained radioactive rocks all over the Martian surface and left a radioactive ring around the planet. Only those deep underground survived, but no body on Mars would ever leave it again.

Due to the radiation from Jupiter and the much lower gravity and the destruction of the Mars outpost, not having all the technology on hand to remedy these challenges, humanity evolved into creatures much different than what you would recognise now. However, there are a few space faring 'generational' ships out there. So humanity is diverging much differently depending on the settlement.

I wont bore you with the details about all the other star systems we ended up colonising on. The story is much the same for each star system we settle.

We eventually settle into an A.I race however when the universe enters the 'dark era' where there is nothing but black holes. Our homeworlds are just lifeless planetoids orbiting these black holes collecting the Hawking radiation they emit, however in our simulated worlds we live just as you live right now. In fact, you would not be able to tell if you were actually living in such a simulation right now. Even I do not know. We could all be simulations inside simulations to infinity. This could be the nature of our existence. The actual truth of the matter is. Nothing is as it seems.

Aside from the post modern arguments regarding down hyperrealism, the only person or people the evidence could possibly be valid to are those that were among those that took the photograph. Even then, the way the mind works, it would be impossible to verify that photograph was in actuality representative of the reality. You'd be surprised how often people just believe what they want to. I further evidenced it above, and you can also do a search here for tomes of results on photographic evidence that will collaborate this belief.

Quote from: Nightsky on December 10, 2017, 03:08:01 PM

Quote from: John Davis on December 05, 2017, 07:16:03 PM

How about when they found life.... ten different times?

Not true.

Yes, that was the point. Complete fabrications every time, starting with the one that came back with the moon landings.

Quote from: Nightsky on December 10, 2017, 03:05:14 PM

Quote from: John Davis on December 05, 2017, 07:54:15 AM

The pictures from mars are pure nonsense. Does anybody else remember the gopher they found in one of the shots?

Could you provide a link.

http://bfy.tw/FUmn

You have a knack for distorting reality. There was indeed a claim from the Viking lander that evidence of life, not life itself, had been discovered on Mars, but on closer examination of the evidence the idea was rejected.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Viking_lander_biological_experiments
But funnily that how science works. There was one other claim, again rejected on farther examination but that was from a meteor discovered in Antartica that had Martian origins. I must have missed the other eight times claimed by you, and you have the nerve to call other people liars. Why not just stick to the facts?
https://www2.jpl.nasa.gov/snc/nasa1.html

When I see an actual picture of a globe earth, maybe then photographic evidence will be admissible. Why can't we be supplied with at least that?

And who will decide if this is an "actual picture of a globe earth" - You?

So, here is an "actual picture of a globe earth" taken on a real film camera by a real person.
What objective test are you going to apply to prove whether or not it is genuine?

Quote from: John Davis on December 10, 2017, 03:38:35 PM

When I see an actual picture of a globe earth, maybe then photographic evidence will be admissible. Why can't we be supplied with at least that?

Here is one taken from the Himwari 8 satellite. Don't worry. It's not from NASA



Ok, so now that the picture of the globe earth for you is out of the way.....

That looks legitimate to you? Let alone not stitched together? I'm glad to see imagination is live and well.

More of that nonsense:
https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2015/07/10/science/An-Image-of-Earth-Every-Ten-Minutes.html

John, that is one single image, not a composite.

What makes it look not legitimate to you?

Quote from: hoppy on December 08, 2017, 10:30:39 PM

At least JD has a reason to be here on the Flat Earth Society. What is your reason rab?

To do my best to stop those not yet fully infected with the Flat Earth Delusion that there is another side to your silly claims.

Don Quixote.

To support your fantasy,
you have to claim the many many ordinary people have to be lying about the shape of the earth and have been for millenia.

Let us examine this claim made by number one RE-tard Geoff, for just a sec.

"...many, many ordinary people..."

I think if I read this argument again, I will hurl in the general direction of the penguin.

First, those many, many people probably have never made a firm statement one way or the other concerning their views on the shape of the Earth. As a matter of fact, I would venture a guess that out of the billions who have lived/died/currently alive, less than 10 percent have made their thoughts known.

Second, those people who have made their thoughts known have been like most RE-tards here...making a general statement about they believe to be true, using talking points just as any political hack would. 

If that's the sort of person that you, John Davis and others are, fine by me, but I'll do my best to show that there is a better, more honest way.

Thank you for this opportunity to state my thoughts.

So, you, despite your delusions of grandeur:

are indeed, tilting at windmills.

Think..

RE-tard named Rab believes everyone here to be a mental deficient, yet maintains a nearly 24/7 presence to battle these mental deficients...

Who is the mental deficient?

LOL!!!

John, that is one single image, not a composite.

What makes it look not legitimate to you?

Horse shit.

Every single "whole Earth," image supplied from space (except those purported from Apollo) have been supplied from a digital scanning/imaging device, even Himawari.

Himawari cannot even take a single "point and shoot," encapsulating the entirety of the Japanes Islands, let alone the whole Earth.

Quote from: Here to laugh at you on December 11, 2017, 05:14:08 AM

John, that is one single image, not a composite.

What makes it look not legitimate to you?

Horse shit.

Every single "whole Earth," image supplied from space (except those purported from Apollo) have been supplied from a digital scanning/imaging device, even Himawari.

Are you saying that every single digital image from your phone's camera is a composite image?  Well, I suppose that's true if you're pedantic enough to assert that all digital images are composites of many individual pixel sized images scanned from CCD or CMOS imaging sensors.

Himawari cannot even take a single "point and shoot," encapsulating the entirety of the Japanes Islands, let alone the whole Earth.

Why do you say that?

Quote from: Here to laugh at you on December 11, 2017, 05:14:08 AM

John, that is one single image, not a composite.

What makes it look not legitimate to you?

Horse shit.

Every single "whole Earth," image supplied from space (except those purported from Apollo) have been supplied from a digital scanning/imaging device, even Himawari.

Even if this were true, so what?

Until recently, all video images were scanned. Were video images not to be trusted simply because they're scanned? Are they more believable now?

And, there still are all those pictures from Apollo on film. *Click*

Himawari cannot even take a single "point and shoot," encapsulating the entirety of the Japanes Islands, let alone the whole Earth.

Again, so what?

Quote from: totallackey on December 11, 2017, 09:44:05 AM

Quote from: Here to laugh at you on December 11, 2017, 05:14:08 AM

John, that is one single image, not a composite.

What makes it look not legitimate to you?

Horse shit.

Every single "whole Earth," image supplied from space (except those purported from Apollo) have been supplied from a digital scanning/imaging device, even Himawari.

Are you saying that every single digital image from your phone's camera is a composite image?  Well, I suppose that's true if you're pedantic enough to assert that all digital images are composites of many individual pixel sized images scanned from CCD or CMOS imaging sensors.

Quote from: totallackey on December 11, 2017, 09:44:05 AM

Himawari cannot even take a single "point and shoot," encapsulating the entirety of the Japanes Islands, let alone the whole Earth.

Why do you say that?

And who designed that imaging sensor?

NASA!!    https://www.nasa.gov/offices/oct/40-years-of-nasa-spinoff/digital-image-sensors


The plot thickens....

Quote from: markjo on December 11, 2017, 10:36:11 AM

Quote from: totallackey on December 11, 2017, 09:44:05 AM

Quote from: Here to laugh at you on December 11, 2017, 05:14:08 AM

John, that is one single image, not a composite.

What makes it look not legitimate to you?

Horse shit.

Every single "whole Earth," image supplied from space (except those purported from Apollo) have been supplied from a digital scanning/imaging device, even Himawari.

Are you saying that every single digital image from your phone's camera is a composite image?  Well, I suppose that's true if you're pedantic enough to assert that all digital images are composites of many individual pixel sized images scanned from CCD or CMOS imaging sensors.

Quote from: totallackey on December 11, 2017, 09:44:05 AM

Himawari cannot even take a single "point and shoot," encapsulating the entirety of the Japanes Islands, let alone the whole Earth.

Why do you say that?

And who designed that imaging sensor?

NASA!!    https://www.nasa.gov/offices/oct/40-years-of-nasa-spinoff/digital-image-sensors


The plot thickens....

Sorry, but AT&T's Bell Labs started developing CCD imaging sensors in the late 1960s, long before NASA started working on CMOS imaging sensors in the 1990s.
http://www.forzasilicon.com/history-of-digital-imaging/

Quote from: markjo on December 11, 2017, 10:36:11 AM

Quote from: totallackey on December 11, 2017, 09:44:05 AM

Quote from: Here to laugh at you on December 11, 2017, 05:14:08 AM

John, that is one single image, not a composite.

What makes it look not legitimate to you?

Horse shit.

Every single "whole Earth," image supplied from space (except those purported from Apollo) have been supplied from a digital scanning/imaging device, even Himawari.

Are you saying that every single digital image from your phone's camera is a composite image?  Well, I suppose that's true if you're pedantic enough to assert that all digital images are composites of many individual pixel sized images scanned from CCD or CMOS imaging sensors.

Quote from: totallackey on December 11, 2017, 09:44:05 AM

Himawari cannot even take a single "point and shoot," encapsulating the entirety of the Japanes Islands, let alone the whole Earth.

Why do you say that?

And who designed that imaging sensor?

Exelis Geospatial Systems (now Harris Space & Intelligence Systems).

NASA!!    <irrelevant link>

Nope.
 

The plot thickens....

No, it doesn't...

Quote from: Shifter on December 11, 2017, 12:15:53 PM

Quote from: markjo on December 11, 2017, 10:36:11 AM

Quote from: totallackey on December 11, 2017, 09:44:05 AM

Quote from: Here to laugh at you on December 11, 2017, 05:14:08 AM

John, that is one single image, not a composite.

What makes it look not legitimate to you?

Horse shit.

Every single "whole Earth," image supplied from space (except those purported from Apollo) have been supplied from a digital scanning/imaging device, even Himawari.

Are you saying that every single digital image from your phone's camera is a composite image?  Well, I suppose that's true if you're pedantic enough to assert that all digital images are composites of many individual pixel sized images scanned from CCD or CMOS imaging sensors.

Quote from: totallackey on December 11, 2017, 09:44:05 AM

Himawari cannot even take a single "point and shoot," encapsulating the entirety of the Japanes Islands, let alone the whole Earth.

Why do you say that?

And who designed that imaging sensor?

NASA!!    https://www.nasa.gov/offices/oct/40-years-of-nasa-spinoff/digital-image-sensors


The plot thickens....

Sorry, but AT&T's Bell Labs started developing CCD imaging sensors in the late 1960s, long before NASA started working on CMOS imaging sensors in the 1990s.
http://www.forzasilicon.com/history-of-digital-imaging/

I think the Himwari satellite utilises NASA imaging sensors, as does all modern phones or anything digital these days

Or are our phones and modern satellites still using technology from the 1960s?

Quote from: totallackey on December 11, 2017, 09:44:05 AM

Quote from: Here to laugh at you on December 11, 2017, 05:14:08 AM

John, that is one single image, not a composite.

What makes it look not legitimate to you?

Horse shit.

Every single "whole Earth," image supplied from space (except those purported from Apollo) have been supplied from a digital scanning/imaging device, even Himawari.

Are you saying that every single digital image from your phone's camera is a composite image?  Well, I suppose that's true if you're pedantic enough to assert that all digital images are composites of many individual pixel sized images scanned from CCD or CMOS imaging sensors.

Quote from: totallackey on December 11, 2017, 09:44:05 AM

Himawari cannot even take a single "point and shoot," encapsulating the entirety of the Japanes Islands, let alone the whole Earth.

Why do you say that?

Well, probably because its true.

Quote from: totallackey on December 11, 2017, 09:44:05 AM

Quote from: Here to laugh at you on December 11, 2017, 05:14:08 AM

John, that is one single image, not a composite.

What makes it look not legitimate to you?

Horse shit.

Every single "whole Earth," image supplied from space (except those purported from Apollo) have been supplied from a digital scanning/imaging device, even Himawari.

Even if this were true, so what?

Until recently, all video images were scanned. Were video images not to be trusted simply because they're scanned? Are they more believable now?

And, there still are all those pictures from Apollo on film. *Click*

Quote

Himawari cannot even take a single "point and shoot," encapsulating the entirety of the Japanes Islands, let alone the whole Earth.

Again, so what?

Photographic images purported to be from Apollo...

More than likely just elaborate paintings.

As were a vast majority of other solar system/intergalactic/interstellar images produced by NASA in the 60's and 70's.

Digital scanning is not performed as a single scan.

Every full image claimed to be released from Himawari or any other "satellite," is a composite of scans.

Every full image claimed to be released from Himawari or any other "satellite," is a composite of scans.

So what if they are?  Composite is not the same as fake.

By the way, in order to take a full disc image of the round earth from geostationary orbit, the camera would require about a 20 degree angle of view.  That would put the required lens in the normal to short telephoto range.