Nasa

  • 76 Replies
  • 11438 Views
Re: Nasa
« Reply #30 on: September 05, 2018, 03:51:36 AM »
@christianne - i'm here for the same reason, just not doing it for school, just for me.
Still can't understand how someone who has ever flown(hope i get the word correct, my english not so good yetti) can believe in flat earth. View from 12 km above is already a bit rounded. Not to mention Stratos project with Felix Baumgartner and the view from 40km. Not to mention sattelite imaging and TV and GPS and Glonass and Galileo. Not to mention ISS live feeds. Not to mention dots on the sky just appearing and disappearing. Not to mention - you get the point.
So far i've got a guess that about 20% of flatearthers people are not right in the head(sorry wise, it just seems that way - not meant as an insult), about 60% have insufficient knowledge so they actually can or want to believe it despite all possible evidence, and the rest just wants to have some fun.

@Didymus - if by OKB you mean Открытое акционерное общество „Энергия“ им. С. П. Королёва than how did they not prove and demonstrate? I think that despite some losses like Souyz 11 they did a hell of a job - at least people who died there knew the risks and did it voluntarily. First manmade object in space sure does count as someting in my world. Please provide an explanation and proof that humanity gained nothing, GPS like systems are useless, and space program is not benefiting humankind at all. By your point of view the defense of allies in WW2 was meaningless - would it be better if we all spoke german?

@dutchy - arachnophobe can discuss spiders at great lengths. Just does not want to encounter them live. Seen that done that. They are ugly. They are incredibly problematic to get closer. Any arachnid i encounter dies horrible death from afar or gets sucked by vacuum cleaner. Still don't run away with screams just from talking about them or looking at them. Yes, i know they are mostly harmless, actually useful - just can't explain it to my brain the moment when one is crawling on me.
So if you read more pro nasa and moon hoax articles than most, seen all the evidence there is about space and did fly in airplane 10km+ above groung and still believe that - one has to ask you why? Why do you still believe that there is noone in space, flat earth, ice wall, cold moonlight? Just the view from airplane has to convince you about the round shape. Or laser range measurement - they got it on almost every technical college- you can aim at the moon where they left mirrors and measure the distance yourself. 

Re: Nasa
« Reply #31 on: September 05, 2018, 09:05:59 AM »
Everything NASA presents is love-potion for their enthousiastic and motivated supporters.
Likewise when people wake up after a  spell of all- encompassing passion with the 'wrong' person , reality kicks in when the unmasking process starts.

We are here to help those still marvelling over 1969 studio fakery that keep drinking NASA's love-potion till this very date.
I consider it as a form of addiction that needs ongoing treatment.
Luckily even the worst cases around stick to the flatearth forum environment.
It means they are still in a meaningfull sphere of influence they could benefit from in the long therm.
People really shouldn't underestimate the deep and  cognitive dissonance that globelings and NASA believers have to endure while participating at the flatearth forums in a very personal and emotional way.

Of course they will not tell their family, friends and bosses that they spend so much time over at a place a normal 'glober' would totally ignore.
I hope it is an outcry towards a painfull 'coming out'.
Some people need more time to finally dismiss NASA and the globe.
I have little hope for most globers, but our fellow forum members who spend so much time over at the flatearth forum are in the middle of a process that could take a while....and could be worthwhile in the end.

Right.  Two things you like to talk about NASA and what drives us “Globers” (aka near enough everyone on the planet)

But I’m curious if you are even a flat earther, since you never even attempt to address anything else?

?

dutchy

  • 2366
Re: Nasa
« Reply #32 on: September 05, 2018, 11:41:57 PM »
Experiments on the moon.

What was that all about ?
Moon gravity ? ..... yes the only explanations for the ‘action’ at display in the grainy footage.    ::)
How could i be so careless and why did i avoid the simple math derived from this uhhhh moon circomstancial evidence on film ? ;D

And you still wonder how hard it was/is to fool the masses with a fake moon mission.
Piss easy..... which this video and the comment section below on youtube reveal once again in all it’s biased glory in the light of ignorance.
How on earth can people believe that grainy film counts for anything when that same film has so many glaring holes against the ‘ moon’ claims in other places defying any realistic explanation ?

Next time you’ll show the ‘hammer and feather’ experiment ......please do not.....

?

dutchy

  • 2366
Re: Nasa
« Reply #33 on: September 06, 2018, 12:14:01 AM »
Everything NASA presents is love-potion for their enthousiastic and motivated supporters.
Likewise when people wake up after a  spell of all- encompassing passion with the 'wrong' person , reality kicks in when the unmasking process starts.

We are here to help those still marvelling over 1969 studio fakery that keep drinking NASA's love-potion till this very date.
I consider it as a form of addiction that needs ongoing treatment.
Luckily even the worst cases around stick to the flatearth forum environment.
It means they are still in a meaningfull sphere of influence they could benefit from in the long therm.
People really shouldn't underestimate the deep and  cognitive dissonance that globelings and NASA believers have to endure while participating at the flatearth forums in a very personal and emotional way.

Of course they will not tell their family, friends and bosses that they spend so much time over at a place a normal 'glober' would totally ignore.
I hope it is an outcry towards a painfull 'coming out'.
Some people need more time to finally dismiss NASA and the globe.
I have little hope for most globers, but our fellow forum members who spend so much time over at the flatearth forum are in the middle of a process that could take a while....and could be worthwhile in the end.

Right.  Two things you like to talk about NASA and what drives us “Globers” (aka near enough everyone on the planet)

But I’m curious if you are even a flat earther, since you never even attempt to address anything else?
Last friday i was near the beach during a party i attended for my eldest sister and brother in law who were married for 40 years.
It was a beautifull day with extreem visibilty all around.
I went with my brother for a walk near the beach and he told me how the ability of farsight is decreasing with the newly computer screen focussed generation.
I have never told him directly about my flatearth convictions so i agreed that people rarely ‘see’ what’s really out there.
I asked him to look at the cities in the far distance and the visible windmills in the sea that are only visible under the right conditions (23km away from the coast)
Then i told him about ‘flatearth’ awakenings on the www and the curvature calculator that immidiatly show huge discrepancies when adding height numbers, (even adding refraction)  and what a person actually sees....
His reaction was understandable..... laughing away such notion of a flatearth immidiatly.
But i saw how he took interrest for the first time looking at the windmills some 23 km outside the coastline and why not a huge portion was obscured by the earth curving away from the point of observation.

We did not continue our conversation, but people should really go outside and for fuck sakes start observing instead of reasoning away what is in front of them an no camera is really able to catch in all it’s essence.
Nobody i know really feels the sun is 150.000.000 km away when undergoing the heat and nearby experience.
Of course modern men has completely ruined the natural ability to discern and replaced it with false science , numbers and math that completely kill the experience of men in relation to creation.

During last friday it was so obvious that we do not live on a globe according to the current math.
I am really puzzled why so many people are still sleeping.
The moment you ask an average person on the beach on such an extreme clear day why building and windmill’ bottoms in the distance stretching over tens of km aren’t obscured they realise for the first time that they do not really look around as if being on a globe.

People all look around as if the earth is completely flat...... only to realise something is wrong with that when someone points out there model that doesn’t allow for windmills in the distance (23 km) that look just as expected without being halfway over an horizon as tne current globe demands !!
« Last Edit: September 06, 2018, 12:19:45 AM by dutchy »

Re: Nasa
« Reply #34 on: September 06, 2018, 01:45:40 AM »
@christianne - i'm here for the same reason, just not doing it for school, just for me.
Still can't understand how someone who has ever flown(hope i get the word correct, my english not so good yetti) can believe in flat earth. View from 12 km above is already a bit rounded. Not to mention Stratos project with Felix Baumgartner and the view from 40km. Not to mention sattelite imaging and TV and GPS and Glonass and Galileo. Not to mention ISS live feeds. Not to mention dots on the sky just appearing and disappearing. Not to mention - you get the point.
So far i've got a guess that about 20% of flatearthers people are not right in the head(sorry wise, it just seems that way - not meant as an insult), about 60% have insufficient knowledge so they actually can or want to believe it despite all possible evidence, and the rest just wants to have some fun.

@Didymus - if by OKB you mean Открытое акционерное общество „Энергия“ им. С. П. Королёва than how did they not prove and demonstrate? I think that despite some losses like Souyz 11 they did a hell of a job - at least people who died there knew the risks and did it voluntarily. First manmade object in space sure does count as someting in my world. Please provide an explanation and proof that humanity gained nothing, GPS like systems are useless, and space program is not benefiting humankind at all. By your point of view the defense of allies in WW2 was meaningless - would it be better if we all spoke german?

@dutchy - arachnophobe can discuss spiders at great lengths. Just does not want to encounter them live. Seen that done that. They are ugly. They are incredibly problematic to get closer. Any arachnid i encounter dies horrible death from afar or gets sucked by vacuum cleaner. Still don't run away with screams just from talking about them or looking at them. Yes, i know they are mostly harmless, actually useful - just can't explain it to my brain the moment when one is crawling on me.
So if you read more pro nasa and moon hoax articles than most, seen all the evidence there is about space and did fly in airplane 10km+ above groung and still believe that - one has to ask you why? Why do you still believe that there is noone in space, flat earth, ice wall, cold moonlight? Just the view from airplane has to convince you about the round shape. Or laser range measurement - they got it on almost every technical college- you can aim at the moon where they left mirrors and measure the distance yourself.

Xxdx. Nowhere in my post was I trying to suggest that anything about the space programmes are meaningless, Unless like Dutchy, you insist they are faked. I would not be so disrespectful of the human sacrifice.
Or does he just insist that the NASA one is faked. It's hard to tell, because that is all he bangs on about.
The point, and Dutchy refuses to address this, is what part do the failures play in the conspiracy?

Re: Nasa
« Reply #35 on: September 06, 2018, 03:15:49 AM »
What's all this "windmills at 23km" business? The earth doesn't curve noticeably enoigh at 23km.

Find yourself a high mountain overlooking a seaside suburb, looking straight out to sea, Dutchy. Dust off your telescope, (that is, if you believe in telescopes) and spend some time looking at the horizon.

What you are carrying on with is flat out wrong.


Re: Nasa
« Reply #36 on: September 06, 2018, 03:18:23 AM »
As for NASA, 400, 000 employees could not have kept it secret any of their program was faked. Alcohol is a truth drug as well as a good way to unwind from stress. NASA employees would have consumed copious amounts of alcohol in ther downtime.

Re: Nasa
« Reply #37 on: September 06, 2018, 04:46:58 AM »
Xxdx. Nowhere in my post was I trying to suggest that anything about the space programmes are meaningless, Unless like Dutchy, you insist they are faked. I would not be so disrespectful of the human sacrifice.
Or does he just insist that the NASA one is faked. It's hard to tell, because that is all he bangs on about.
The point, and Dutchy refuses to address this, is what part do the failures play in the conspiracy?
Sorry, misinterpreted your post. I humbly apologize for that.
Don't worry, i'm actually a space fan. Would love to take a jump up there one day, just doubt i'll ever be rich enough before i'm too old for 10g acceleration.

Re: Nasa
« Reply #38 on: September 06, 2018, 01:46:49 PM »
Xxdx. Nowhere in my post was I trying to suggest that anything about the space programmes are meaningless, Unless like Dutchy, you insist they are faked. I would not be so disrespectful of the human sacrifice.
Or does he just insist that the NASA one is faked. It's hard to tell, because that is all he bangs on about.
The point, and Dutchy refuses to address this, is what part do the failures play in the conspiracy?
Sorry, misinterpreted your post. I humbly apologize for that.
Don't worry, i'm actually a space fan. Would love to take a jump up there one day, just doubt i'll ever be rich enough before i'm too old for 10g acceleration.
It’s all good. I was being a bit sarcastic. Dutchy made me do it...

*

rabinoz

  • 26528
  • Real Earth Believer
Re: Nasa
« Reply #39 on: September 06, 2018, 04:56:01 PM »
Nobody i know really feels the sun is 150.000.000 km away when undergoing the heat and nearby experience.
I don't know what this has to do with the topic, NASA, but:

You claim that can feel the difference between a sun 5000 km above the earth as claimed by most flat-earthers and the 150.000.000 km claimed by these  ;) terrible globers ;).

For a bit more on how high the sun seems to be have a look an: The edge of the earth « Message by rabinoz on February 07, 2018, 06:08:47 AM »
So is your sun "in the trees of Golden Gate Park, San Francisco", "in the clouds above this Scottish Loch" or where?

Or maybe it's sinking into the shallow water of the Gulf of Carpentaria in northern Australia?

Sun near setting at Weipa
               

Sunset at Weipa
Any brilliant ideas that fit all these observations?

*

sokarul

  • 19303
  • Extra Racist
Re: Nasa
« Reply #40 on: September 06, 2018, 05:08:09 PM »
Experiments on the moon.

What was that all about ?
Moon gravity ? ..... yes the only explanations for the ‘action’ at display in the grainy footage.    ::)
How could i be so careless and why did i avoid the simple math derived from this uhhhh moon circomstancial evidence on film ? ;D

And you still wonder how hard it was/is to fool the masses with a fake moon mission.
Piss easy..... which this video and the comment section below on youtube reveal once again in all it’s biased glory in the light of ignorance.
How on earth can people believe that grainy film counts for anything when that same film has so many glaring holes against the ‘ moon’ claims in other places defying any realistic explanation ?

Next time you’ll show the ‘hammer and feather’ experiment ......please do not.....
Textbook example of a “rebuttal” when you are completely defeated. Notice you you didn’t even try to debunk One single piece of the video?
ANNIHILATOR OF  SHIFTER

It's no slur if it's fact.

?

dutchy

  • 2366
Re: Nasa
« Reply #41 on: September 07, 2018, 02:06:48 AM »
Textbook example of a “rebuttal” when you are completely defeated. Notice you you didn’t even try to debunk One single piece of the video?
Textbook example of indoctrination.
You claim (on NASA’s behave) that ‘you & co’ went to the moon and some film scenery is supposedly irrefutable proof of that outlandish claim.
No...... only a handfull of AMERICAN astronauts have supposedly been to the moon.....not you , not any of the 400.000 employees or anyone on the entire earth for that matter.
Apart from few American astronauts at work between 1969 and 1972 not a single person has verified their claims.

So what do you have ?
Some footage ( luckily not destroyed by a NASA marketing chief on steroids who demanded to delete thousends of original data tapes to create some empty space out of a financial perspective  :o ;D)....... that cannot be faked ???
Is that what you claim ?
Like poor mister SG Collins alias the ‘lightguy’ who claimed that the techniques to fake the moonlandings on film weren’t around in 1969......??

I don’t have to look to your sorrow Disney/Hollywood ’moon landing’  that deceived the general public.
That’s how they (among other things) tricked you & co.
You can marvel all day long all you want.
But for me the testimonies of real humans like the astronauts tell so much more.
I have gone to great lengths to show that those evil astronauts were lying every single moment they ‘shared’ their experience of the moon environment with the general public started with the very first post Apollo 11 interview.
A professional linguist examined the Neil Armstrong/Patrick Moore interviews recently and came to the conclusion that every single thing Neil Armstrongs says is a clear cut indication he wasn’t part of the moon experience he claims to have undergone personally.

But you can look all you want to the pictures and conclude whatever you want......




*

rabinoz

  • 26528
  • Real Earth Believer
Re: Nasa
« Reply #42 on: September 07, 2018, 03:26:08 AM »
Textbook example of a “rebuttal” when you are completely defeated. Notice you you didn’t even try to debunk One single piece of the video?
Textbook example of indoctrination.
You claim (on NASA’s behave) that ‘you & co’ went to the moon and some film scenery is supposedly irrefutable proof of that outlandish claim.
No...... only a handfull of AMERICAN astronauts have supposedly been to the moon.....not you , not any of the 400.000 employees or anyone on the entire earth for that matter.
Apart from few American astronauts at work between 1969 and 1972 not a single person has verified their claims.
I'll ignore your usual argument using ridicule - it's a worthless argument rechnique and you just make yourself look ignorant.

But you claim that "not a single person has verified their claims" except, if course for a few little details like this.
 ;D Stand by for copy-pasta! ;D
Quote from: Barry Vacker
Apollo Moon Landings: Pseudoscience and 6 Reasons Why There Was No NASA Hoax

1. 842 pounds of Moon Rocks
The astronauts on the six Apollo missions retrieved 842 pounds of moon rocks that were brought to Earth and shared with scientists around the world. If the rocks were from our planet and not from the moon, the scientists would surely have realized that and called NASA on its trickery. NASA still loans out sample moon rocks to educators and scientists from around the world. Could they all be in on the hoax across 50 years?
More in: Apollo Moon Landings: Pseudoscience and 6 Reasons Why There Was No NASA Hoax
Not that this will have the slightest impact of our favourite ::) NASAphobe ::)!

 ;D And don't bother wasting our time with fairy tales about a hunk of pertrified wood ;D!

PS:  ;) Have you worked out high the sun is yet? In the trees, at the top of the clouds over Scotland of 5000 km ;)? I'm waiting!

?

dutchy

  • 2366
Re: Nasa
« Reply #43 on: September 07, 2018, 07:27:55 AM »
Textbook example of a “rebuttal” when you are completely defeated. Notice you you didn’t even try to debunk One single piece of the video?
Textbook example of indoctrination.
You claim (on NASA’s behave) that ‘you & co’ went to the moon and some film scenery is supposedly irrefutable proof of that outlandish claim.
No...... only a handfull of AMERICAN astronauts have supposedly been to the moon.....not you , not any of the 400.000 employees or anyone on the entire earth for that matter.
Apart from few American astronauts at work between 1969 and 1972 not a single person has verified their claims.
I'll ignore your usual argument using ridicule - it's a worthless argument rechnique and you just make yourself look ignorant.
As i have told you recently you should, instead of repetative copy pasting, try to use your brain in a more rewarding way.
As i have clearly pointed out you completely failed to grasp the definition of a ‘phobia’ in relation towards my anti NASA posts.
And now you seem lost when grasping to understand the meaning of  ‘ridicule’.
Sure in some posts i use ‘ridicule’, but not in the above example you quoted.
As if NASA holds some strange belief i ridicule, or as if NASA is an insecure teenager that undergoes my scorn as the school bully.
No..... NASA is a mighty institute founded by billions of taxpayer’s dollars that also harbored many Masonic characters and former Nazi’s.
Above all they claim something no one on earth has done or will do in the near future, accompagnied with false testmonies ( Edgar Mitchell’s ten times brighter and numerous stars in cislunar space)  excuses made up ( lost and destroyed technologies) and much, much more.
It is NASA who lies, cheats and stole billions of dollars in the process and laugh in our faces from day one.

You really should ask a dictionary coming X-mas under the tree, because in our conversations i strongly object against your loose interpretation of certain remarks in my direction.
Quote
But you claim that "not a single person has verified their claims" except, if course for a few little details like this.
 ;D Stand by for copy-pasta! ;D
Quote from: Barry Vacker
Apollo Moon Landings: Pseudoscience and 6 Reasons Why There Was No NASA Hoax

1. 842 pounds of Moon Rocks
The astronauts on the six Apollo missions retrieved 842 pounds of moon rocks that were brought to Earth and shared with scientists around the world. If the rocks were from our planet and not from the moon, the scientists would surely have realized that and called NASA on its trickery. NASA still loans out sample moon rocks to educators and scientists from around the world. Could they all be in on the hoax across 50 years?
More in: Apollo Moon Landings: Pseudoscience and 6 Reasons Why There Was No NASA Hoax
Not that this will have the slightest impact of our favourite ::) NASAphobe ::)!

 ;D And don't bother wasting our time with fairy tales about a hunk of pertrified wood ;D!
I confess..... it is very, very tempting to use lots of ridicule directed to you, but let me try to be civilised....
In order to compare real moonrocks with rocks from earth one has to obtain a rock from the moon as reference.
Has any scientist gathered a rock from the moon by him/herself ?
Who gave them rocks labeled as ‘moonrocks’ ?
Did any scientist went to the Southpole to gather some desolate ‘moonrock’ just in case ?.. Werner von Braun surely did in the years prior to Apollo 11 .
How do scientist determine the differences between rocks from the desolated Southpole and the moon when they went to neither place ?

Bottom line, likewise with all the supposed ‘moonlanding proof ’..... there is nothing to compare at all.
We cannot compare the footage with studio fakery, because the former has been labeled  ‘genuine’ without anyone able to test it at the very claimed scenery.
All explanations are derived from NASA and updated during the last decades.
For every possible error an explanation was given.
But that has nothing to do with proof whatsoever !!
We cannot examine rocks from a certain place and determine it’s precise location where it was obtained..... because we nor all our colleagues or anyone apart from a handfull never went to that specific place and therefor cannot exclude other options.....

A scientist is a mere mortal man or women,..... not some ‘god’ rabinoz....
And a labcoat is nothing more than material derived from nature.
Don’t let them have such a permanent spell on you.


Re: Nasa
« Reply #44 on: September 07, 2018, 07:45:34 AM »
You're not a god either yet you pontificate that things are one way without a working model. Science is the opposite from that. All scientists do is provide models, they are happy for them to be proved inadequate and replaced by better models. However a theory without a working model is worthless and to claim it to be the true state of affairs in those circumstances a nonsense.

?

dutchy

  • 2366
Re: Nasa
« Reply #45 on: September 07, 2018, 08:05:08 AM »
You're not a god either yet you pontificate that things are one way without a working model. Science is the opposite from that. All scientists do is provide models, they are happy for them to be proved inadequate and replaced by better models. However a theory without a working model is worthless and to claim it to be the true state of affairs in those circumstances a nonsense.
I don’t have to proof or show a working model if i believe that ‘earth’s shape’ is only secondary to much more important things.
However i live in a timeframe where certain ‘scientific’ convictions are shoved down our throat with severe consequences for the induvidual .
The big bang, the  heliocentric model and macro evolution have downgraded human life into nihilistic accidental coincidental events that have no specific meaning or goal that we can observe or measure with the tools of ‘science’.
In such reality the meaning of life itself becomes under attack.
Who could possbly claim any real value in the current hypothetical scientific models ?
Simply because there isn’t and no measuring stick is known by the ‘scientific community’ to measure such value’s and most is dismissed as non scientic elobarations of the human psyche anyway.

Most cosmos related scientific claims go against what we observe and feel as an indvidual (spinning on a daily basis and thrown into the vastness of deep space by record braking speeds while spiralling all over the place).
I prefer to stick to the default observations i at least can confirm myself (flatearth).
« Last Edit: September 07, 2018, 08:08:05 AM by dutchy »

Re: Nasa
« Reply #46 on: September 07, 2018, 09:18:12 AM »
Dutchy, I don't think it's at all nihilistic to operate at the highest level of Human endeavor, nor understand how you confirm to yourself that we are living in some kind of goldfish bowl, or how that is supposed to be more meaningful.

I do, however agree with this part:

 ‘...Earth’s shape’ is only secondary to much more important things.

In which case, why are you here?

Here on this forum, I mean. I'm not getting all existential.
« Last Edit: September 07, 2018, 09:20:52 AM by Didymus »

*

markjo

  • Content Nazi
  • The Elder Ones
  • 42529
Re: Nasa
« Reply #47 on: September 07, 2018, 09:43:20 AM »
Most cosmos related scientific claims go against what we observe and feel as an indvidual (spinning on a daily basis and thrown into the vastness of deep space by record braking speeds while spiralling all over the place).
I prefer to stick to the default observations i at least can confirm myself (flatearth).
Hey Dutchy, did you know that if you actually do the math, then you would know that you feel exactly the effects that RET predicts that you should feel on a spinning ball being "thrown into the vastness of deep space by record braking speeds while spiralling all over the place"?  In other words, not nearly as much as those big, scary numbers might have you think.
Science is what happens when preconception meets verification.
Quote from: Robosteve
Besides, perhaps FET is a conspiracy too.
Quote from: bullhorn
It is just the way it is, you understanding it doesn't concern me.

?

dutchy

  • 2366
Re: Nasa
« Reply #48 on: September 07, 2018, 09:45:48 AM »
 :-*
Dutchy, I don't think it's at all nihilistic to operate at the highest level of Human endeavor, nor how you confirm to yourself that we are living in some kind of goldfish bowl, or how that is supposed to be more meaningfull.
I have never made any claim or suggestion about a dome/goldfish bowl or endless plane during my stay at this forum.
I must disagree with 'highest level of Human endeavor' , certainly when it comes to explorations.
Have you forgotten how certain human endeavor and curiousity has ruined many cultures in the past, killed or enslaved millions of induvidials, stole local natural resources till this very day ?
As a consequences of our endavours to sail the seven seas , we face a consumer's culture that throws around every thinkable product around the seven seas for some financial margins.....
We are steadily distroying earth in the process !
The moment we can bring human endeavour to the hypothetical cosmos is the moment the cosmos is doomed.
The whole consequences of the current cosmological model is that it has created a species of indifference without it's equall.
Listen to Lauwrence Krauss to understand what kind of 'human progress' he seeks.
Quote

I do, however agree with this part:

 ‘...Earth’s shape’ is only secondary to much more important things.

In which case, why are you here?

Here on this forum, I mean. I'm not getting all existential.
To discuss things and mostly read what others have to say.....
It's very interresting at times .
But returning to the spinning globe has been fully excluded in my personal opinion.
I believe in a flatearth with heavenly bodies with totally different properties, dimensions and behaviour than what is claimed by current science.
But before i share what i believe it has to gain substance...... i have no need to preach another take on 'earth's shape'.


?

dutchy

  • 2366
Re: Nasa
« Reply #49 on: September 07, 2018, 09:48:03 AM »
Most cosmos related scientific claims go against what we observe and feel as an indvidual (spinning on a daily basis and thrown into the vastness of deep space by record braking speeds while spiralling all over the place).
I prefer to stick to the default observations i at least can confirm myself (flatearth).
Hey Dutchy, did you know that if you actually do the math, then you would know that you feel exactly the effects that RET predicts that you should feel on a spinning ball being "thrown into the vastness of deep space by record braking speeds while spiralling all over the place"?  In other words, not nearly as much as those big, scary numbers might have you think.
I must say that is very convenient for those who claim the abnormal speeds we are dealing with on a daily basis.  ;D ;D

I am fully aware about the explanations,..... but thanks anyway !

*

markjo

  • Content Nazi
  • The Elder Ones
  • 42529
Re: Nasa
« Reply #50 on: September 07, 2018, 10:14:25 AM »
Most cosmos related scientific claims go against what we observe and feel as an indvidual (spinning on a daily basis and thrown into the vastness of deep space by record braking speeds while spiralling all over the place).
I prefer to stick to the default observations i at least can confirm myself (flatearth).
Hey Dutchy, did you know that if you actually do the math, then you would know that you feel exactly the effects that RET predicts that you should feel on a spinning ball being "thrown into the vastness of deep space by record braking speeds while spiralling all over the place"?  In other words, not nearly as much as those big, scary numbers might have you think.
I must say that is very convenient for those who claim the abnormal speeds we are dealing with on a daily basis.  ;D ;D
If they're "speeds we are dealing with on a daily basis" then they're normal speeds.  Abnormal speeds would be speeds that we don't deal with on a daily basis.

I am fully aware about the explanations,..... but thanks anyway !
If you're fully aware, then perhaps you can try to explain your objections with something other than incredulity.
« Last Edit: September 07, 2018, 10:30:56 AM by markjo »
Science is what happens when preconception meets verification.
Quote from: Robosteve
Besides, perhaps FET is a conspiracy too.
Quote from: bullhorn
It is just the way it is, you understanding it doesn't concern me.

*

Crutchwater

  • 2151
  • Stop Indoctrinating me!
Re: Nasa
« Reply #51 on: September 07, 2018, 11:00:51 AM »
"It doesn't look right"

~dutchy
I will always be Here To Laugh At You.

?

dutchy

  • 2366
Re: Nasa
« Reply #52 on: September 07, 2018, 11:20:58 AM »

*

Crutchwater

  • 2151
  • Stop Indoctrinating me!
Re: Nasa
« Reply #53 on: September 07, 2018, 12:26:21 PM »
"It doesn't look right"

~dutchy
Thank you !!

Trouble is, you have no idea what it SHOULD look like!
I will always be Here To Laugh At You.

Re: Nasa
« Reply #54 on: September 07, 2018, 01:32:20 PM »
Most cosmos related scientific claims go against what we observe and feel as an indvidual (spinning on a daily basis and thrown into the vastness of deep space by record braking speeds while spiralling all over the place).

What records do you think those speeds are breaking? How do you know what the record speed for a celestial object is?

Quote
I prefer to stick to the default observations i at least can confirm myself (flatearth).

How have you confirmed for yourself that the earth is flat? How does that conclusion work when explaining other observations you can make for yourself, or do you just choose to ignore those?
"Everyone is entitled to his own opinion, but not to his own facts." - Daniel Patrick Moynihan

?

dutchy

  • 2366
Re: Nasa
« Reply #55 on: September 07, 2018, 01:51:24 PM »
Most cosmos related scientific claims go against what we observe and feel as an indvidual (spinning on a daily basis and thrown into the vastness of deep space by record braking speeds while spiralling all over the place).

What records do you think those speeds are breaking? How do you know what the record speed for a celestial object is?
In your model each moment the universe accelerates/expands so that the velocity at which a distant galaxy is receding from the observer is continuously increasing with time.
Thus every day a new record.... every nano second a new record  ::)
Quote
How have you confirmed for yourself that the earth is flat? How does that conclusion work when explaining other observations you can make for yourself, or do you just choose to ignore those?
The absence of a curvature measuring tool not based on sight or any form of secondary observation is telling.
F....k we can measure gravitational waves the size 1/1000 of a proton’s diameter, but the billion times bigger curvature drop is to difficult to measure with spot on accuracy.
Then all sorts of arguments and poor excuses are brought to the table, while fact remains we have never measured any curvature.

My personal life near the beach has totally confirmed something is completely off with the current curvature math.
Inserted many numbers into the curvature calculator that should have had a different result compared to what i could see in the far distance along the extremely long and flat beach in the Netherlands where i happen to live.
No water of a lake to insert a magic superiour mirage to explaiin away what we should not see.
But a long flat beach with dunes and cities streching out in the distance.
Here the magic ‘superiour mirage’ does not work because i can view step by step along the coast untill the furthest visual point.
« Last Edit: September 07, 2018, 01:56:35 PM by dutchy »

*

rabinoz

  • 26528
  • Real Earth Believer
Re: Nasa
« Reply #56 on: September 07, 2018, 01:55:46 PM »
As i have told you recently you should, instead of repetative copy pasting, try to use your brain in a more rewarding way.
I couldn't care less what you've told me but you post entirely your baseless opinion whereas I don't pretend to have all the answers.

Quote from: dutchy
As i have clearly pointed out you completely failed to grasp the definition of a ‘phobia’ in relation towards my anti NASA posts.
And now you seem lost when grasping to understand the meaning of  ‘ridicule’.
Sure in some posts i use ‘ridicule’, but not in the above example you quoted.
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
I confess..... it is very, very tempting to use lots of ridicule directed to you, but let me try to be civilised....
In order to compare real moonrocks with rocks from earth one has to obtain a rock from the moon as reference.
Has any scientist gathered a rock from the moon by him/herself ?
Who gave them rocks labeled as ‘moonrocks’ ?
NASA!
Quote from: dutchy
Did any scientist went to the Southpole to gather some desolate ‘moonrock’ just in case ?..
YES! Well at least meteorites have been studied for as long as they have been known to be meteorites, so certainly scientists know their properties, do you?
Quote from: dutchy
Werner von Braun surely did in the years prior to Apollo 11 .
How do scientist determine the differences between rocks from the desolated Southpole and the moon when they went to neither place ?
Easily! Moon rocks do not have many of the features of meteorites and moon rocks do have a structure consistent with their expected environment.

But I couldn't care less about convincing you - I don't pretend to be that smart!

PS:  ;) Have you worked out high the sun is yet? In the trees, at the top of the clouds over Scotland of 5000 km ;)? I'm waiting!

*

rabinoz

  • 26528
  • Real Earth Believer
Re: Nasa
« Reply #57 on: September 07, 2018, 01:57:26 PM »
:-*
Dutchy, I don't think it's at all nihilistic to operate at the highest level of Human endeavor, nor how you confirm to yourself that we are living in some kind of goldfish bowl, or how that is supposed to be more meaningfull.
I have never made any claim or suggestion about a dome/goldfish bowl or endless plane during my stay at this forum.
I must disagree with 'highest level of Human endeavor' , certainly when it comes to explorations.
Have you forgotten how certain human endeavor and curiousity has ruined many cultures in the past, killed or enslaved millions of induvidials, stole local natural resources till this very day ?
None of which is even slightly relevant to the question of the shape or movement of the earth.

Quote from: dutchy
As a consequences of our endavours to sail the seven seas , we face a consumer's culture that throws around every thinkable product around the seven seas for some financial margins.....
We are steadily distroying earth in the process !
None of which is even slightly relevant to the question of the shape or movement of the earth.

Quote from: dutchy
The moment we can bring human endeavour to the hypothetical cosmos is the moment the cosmos is doomed.
The whole consequences of the current cosmological model is that it has created a species of indifference without it's equall.
Listen to Lauwrence Krauss to understand what kind of 'human progress' he seeks.
Quote

I do, however agree with this part:
 ‘...Earth’s shape’ is only secondary to much more important things.
In which case, why are you here?
Here on this forum, I mean. I'm not getting all existential.
To discuss things and mostly read what others have to say.....
It's very interresting at times .
But returning to the spinning globe has been fully excluded in my personal opinion.
I believe in a flatearth with heavenly bodies with totally different properties, dimensions and behaviour than what is claimed by current science.
Surely the question of the shape of the earth, its properties and those of the heavenly bodies has nothing to do with human behaviour.

Quote from: dutchy
But before i share what i believe it has to gain substance...... i have no need to preach another take on 'earth's shape'.
Well, why do you post your totally baseless opinions on the shape of the earth forum on a flat earth site?

 ;D Next episode of copy-pasta: ;D
Quote from: Barry Vacker
Apollo Moon Landings: Pseudoscience and 6 Reasons Why There Was No NASA Hoax

2. The Soviet Union Knew Apollo 11 Happened
The United States and former Soviet Union were in a “space race” to get to the moon first, supposedly to show the superiority of their socioeconomic systems. The Soviet Union easily tracked the Apollo spacecraft to the moon with its telecommunications satellites and picked up both the Apollo radio transmissions to Mission Control and all of the television broadcasts. The Soviets possessed such technologies because they too sent spacecraft to the moon in the 1960s (sans cosmonauts). If NASA didn’t really send astronauts to the moon, the Soviet Union would have certainly known and taken the opportunity to embarrass the United States on the “world stage” at the height of the Cold War. The possibility of the Soviets going along with such a hoax is far below zero (lower than the winter temperatures in Siberia!). Moscow’s Pravda newspaper even acknowledged the Apollo 11 moon landing with a front-page story.

News story of Apollo 11 moon landing. Pravda, July 22, 1969.
More in: Apollo Moon Landings: Pseudoscience and 6 Reasons Why There Was No NASA Hoax

PS:  ;) Have you worked out high the sun is yet? In the trees, at the top of the clouds over Scotland of 5000 km ;)? I'm waiting!

?

dutchy

  • 2366
Re: Nasa
« Reply #58 on: September 07, 2018, 02:39:30 PM »
;D Next episode of copy-pasta: ;D
Quote from: Barry Vacker
Apollo Moon Landings: Pseudoscience and 6 Reasons Why There Was No NASA Hoax

2. The Soviet Union Knew Apollo 11 Happened
The United States and former Soviet Union were in a “space race” to get to the moon first, supposedly to show the superiority of their socioeconomic systems. The Soviet Union easily tracked the Apollo spacecraft to the moon with its telecommunications satellites and picked up both the Apollo radio transmissions to Mission Control and all of the television broadcasts. The Soviets possessed such technologies because they too sent spacecraft to the moon in the 1960s (sans cosmonauts). If NASA didn’t really send astronauts to the moon, the Soviet Union would have certainly known and taken the opportunity to embarrass the United States on the “world stage” at the height of the Cold War. The possibility of the Soviets going along with such a hoax is far below zero (lower than the winter temperatures in Siberia!). Moscow’s Pravda newspaper even acknowledged the Apollo 11 moon landing with a front-page story.

News story of Apollo 11 moon landing. Pravda, July 22, 1969.
More in: Apollo Moon Landings: Pseudoscience and 6 Reasons Why There Was No NASA Hoax
Just simply copy pasting any info is damaging for your critical thinking skills.
Thank you for providing such a generous amount of proof for this assertion,.... althaugh it also pains me to see how much you are willing to go to believe articles on the www without any form of critic whatsoever.

Your Moonlanding propaganda article has failed to mention the truth !!!
The Russians mentioned the successfull American moon landings in a small article on page three.
PAGE THREE....that is nowhere near a ''front-page'' article.
Why do i know these details ? Because i did study the moonlandings and despite you calling me mister ''know it all'' it is quite telling that i happen to know these important details and you obviously don't !
Question is why did your copy paste trash deliberately lie about this ?
Why spread fake news ?

To highlight the point that the Russians were humble enough to print the moonlandings on the front page of their main state controlled newspaper
The second lie in that article is that the Russians could easily pick up the transmissions, ....but the USA transmitted on a frequency not known by the Russians.
They even went to the secret service of Great Brittain months prior to the first launch to find out more about the Apollo transmissions.
I won't provide any details, because it is totally lost on you, but you've outdone yourself this time rabinoz....copy pasting an article with so much trash and untruths in it.
I am baffled by it really.......

A totallitarian system always denies the victories of the enemy.
Even if the enemy has come on top it will be denied till the last breath (Americans in front of the gates of Bagdad featuring Mohammed Saeed al-Sahaf take on reality).
The most logical thing was that the Russians cried faul in front of the world...
"'look the Americans betrayed the world in their movie studio's where they produce their filt and lies''
That would be in line with how the Russians perceived and reacted upon the western identity and achievements.
Did you never read at what bizare lengths the Warschau pact propaganda concerning the western word reached ?

Printing the moonlandings as fact of the enemy is the most illogical thing to do during that period in Russia.
Question is why did they ? And why on page three ?
Quote
PS:  ;) Have you worked out high the sun is yet? In the trees, at the top of the clouds over Scotland of 5000 km ;)? I'm waiting!
You cannot measure the distance to the sun nor locate it's real place in the heavens.
You can observe the sun from earth in a very local and unique way that does not reveal the sun's true location or substance in the heavens above.
And it is exactly the way it should be from a biblical point of view !
« Last Edit: September 07, 2018, 02:56:14 PM by dutchy »

Re: Nasa
« Reply #59 on: September 07, 2018, 06:55:06 PM »
Most cosmos related scientific claims go against what we observe and feel as an indvidual (spinning on a daily basis and thrown into the vastness of deep space by record braking speeds while spiralling all over the place).

What records do you think those speeds are breaking? How do you know what the record speed for a celestial object is?
In your model each moment the universe accelerates/expands so that the velocity at which a distant galaxy is receding from the observer is continuously increasing with time.

Thus every day a new record.... every nano second a new record  ::)

Are you referring to the recent hypothesis that the expansion of the universe is accelerating? That has support in current cosmology based on some new data, but, whether true or not, what does it have to do with the shape of the earth?

Are you taking personal umbrage to the idea that the universe is so vast that we're an insignificant part of it? Tough. That can be hard (and humbling) to accept, but all reliable evidence says it's true, regardless of the change in rate of expansion of the universe.

Quote
Quote
How have you confirmed for yourself that the earth is flat? How does that conclusion work when explaining other observations you can make for yourself, or do you just choose to ignore those?
The absence of a curvature measuring tool not based on sight or any form of secondary observation is telling.
F....k we can measure gravitational waves the size 1/1000 of a proton’s diameter, but the billion times bigger curvature drop is to difficult to measure with spot on accuracy.
Then all sorts of arguments and poor excuses are brought to the table, while fact remains we have never measured any curvature.

None of this is correct. Geodetic surveys confirm this all the time. Never heard of it?  Look up geodetic surveying.

Quote
My personal life near the beach has totally confirmed something is completely off with the current curvature math.
Inserted many numbers into the curvature calculator that should have had a different result compared to what i could see in the far distance along the extremely long and flat beach in the Netherlands where i happen to live.

I can plug made-up numbers into calculators and come up with answers that mean nothing all day long, too. If you plug wrong numbers into a calculator the answer it returns will be wrong.

Quote
No water of a lake to insert a magic superiour mirage to explaiin away what we should not see.
But a long flat beach with dunes and cities streching out in the distance.

Why do you think you need water to have atmospheric refraction?

Quote
Here the magic ‘superiour mirage’ does not work because i can view step by step along the coast untill the furthest visual point.

To make complete predictions of atmospheric refraction, you'd need complete knowledge of atmospheric conditions between the observation point and the object sighted. To make accurate estimates of atmospheric refraction you need accurate estimates of atmospheric conditions between the observation point and the object sighted. If you don't even have estimates of actual conditions, and know what they mean, you're just guessing.

No magic needed, but you're just guessing, and reliable estimates need more than that. 
"Everyone is entitled to his own opinion, but not to his own facts." - Daniel Patrick Moynihan