Seeking Danang's best proof of the dome

  • 10 Replies
  • 2466 Views
Seeking Danang's best proof of the dome
« on: March 23, 2019, 06:44:04 AM »
Flat earth has transparent dome(s). It's been proven with various experiments: by rockets, baloons, photograpghs etc.

Danang,

What would you consider the top one, two, or three strongest proofs that the earth has a transparent dome?
I'm assuming that since you say "it's been proven" that you have some pretty strong proofs, definitely more than just an M.S. Clue.

If anyone else also has something they consider the single best proof of a dome I'd be interested in hearing that as well.

Thanks!


*

Danang

  • 5807
  • Everything will be "Phew" in its time :')
Re: Seeking Danang's best proof of the dome
« Reply #1 on: March 23, 2019, 07:32:04 AM »
Okay dude, there are multiple rocket experiments with similar occurings, e.g. hitting a solid body.



By baloon, the physical appearance of the dome was captured.



You too can take picture of the sky and then zoom the picture in. There will be decorative images.

So far... there have never been a single vertical path of space crafts / rockets except Challenger and flatearth experimental rockets.
Vertical path means hitting a solid transparent wall called "dome".
• South Pole Centered FE Map AKA Phew FE Map
• Downwards Universal Deceleration.

Phew's Silicon Valley: https://gwebanget.home.blog/

Re: Seeking Danang's best proof of the dome
« Reply #2 on: March 23, 2019, 08:27:00 AM »
Thank you friend, I'm assuming that since I asked for your 3 best ones and you provided 3, that these are the 3 best ones!


Okay dude, there are multiple rocket experiments with similar occurings, e.g. hitting a solid body.


Ok, this rocket went to 73 miles high -- 385,440ft high -- before it hit the dome. But the balloon went only to 112,995ft when it hit the dome. ok whatever.

But just think about that gofast rocket for a minute: It was going many times the speed of sound, and it hits the dome and is instantly stopped, and yet no damage?
If it'd slammed into a hard dome at many times the speed of sound, it would have been smashed to dust.
You might say it's a soft dome, but no matter, a tremendous amount of kinetic energy and speed was very quickly stopped.
The fact is that it takes extreme force to accelerate or deaccelerate something to multiple times the speed of sound  in a fraction of a second: That force would have totally destroyed the rocket and the cameras.

And even if it didn't destroy the rocket, an impact like that would have certainly sent it cartwheeling.

Does it strike you at all odd that the rocket simply stops and continues to rotate slowly?
The makers of the rocket claim that it had a "yoyo" despin mechanism on it to make it stop spinning so it could deploy it's payload in an orderly fashion.
Did you hear the "Zip" sound of the cable unwinding during despin?

And if you pause it at 1:46 and frame-step with the comma or period keys, you can actually see the yoyo despin cable go flying away from the rocket:


And if you read the description of the *very* video you linked to, the guy has a link to a followup video he posted where he literally debunks his own claims and explains the yoyo despin mechanism:




Quote
By baloon, the physical appearance of the dome was captured.


I'm afraid the appearance of the dome was just how the curved earth and it's atmosphere looks through a gopro at 113k feet.
Or were you talking about when the sun hit the lens at a funny angle and caused an orange bursting pattern? Again, lenses do that when illuminated with a bright off-axis light.

But maybe I missed something? Could you provide a timestamp or a screenshot of the exact part that shows the dome?

You can pause the video then right click and choose "Copy video URL at current time" or you can also pause it and use the period and comma keys to move forward or backwards frame by frame.

Quote
You too can take picture of the sky and then zoom the picture in. There will be decorative images.
I've taken plenty of pictures of the sky then zoomed in. There's no decorative images.
The only thing I've seen is slight random variation in the individual pixels called pixel noise, but that's a function of the camera and not the sky. That pattern is different for every shot because it's random, and it's also the same size regardless of zoom. So it's not a pattern in the sky, it's a random "pattern" in the camera.
Have you done this yourself? Please post a photo. Upload it here: https://imgur.com/upload and share the URL with us.
Quote
So far... there have never been a single vertical path of space crafts / rockets except Challenger and flatearth experimental rockets.
Vertical path means hitting a solid transparent wall called "dome".
Well now wait a second. You don't know that there haven't been. You can't prove the non-existence of something unless you know all there is to know.

In any case, if this is your best proofs, and it's not even close to proof, then I don't think it's intellectually honest to say that the dome has been proved.

The GoFast rocket clearly did not hit anything. It clearly just executed a despin maneuver.
The balloon didn't show aything except how our earth looks from 113k feet.
And the decorative patterns in the sky are not decorative and are not in the sky.

Any other next-best evidence I can dismantle for you today?

Any other dome-believers who I can help?

And by the way, I am helping you. When you post a video that the author of has already debunked, you are showing that you don't have a clue.
By showing you the flaws in your arguments, I can help you make better arguments so that you can actually make a convincing case without looking so silly!

Thanks again, much appreciated.

*

Heavenly Breeze

  • 447
  • Pegasus from Gaul
Re: Seeking Danang's best proof of the dome
« Reply #3 on: March 23, 2019, 10:32:15 AM »
The dome is a bullshit .. I do not believe in the ball. And after such statements about the dome - and in a flat land, too ... The world is different. How? Everything is written in the Bible ...
The earth believes, because magic exists!

Re: Seeking Danang's best proof of the dome
« Reply #4 on: March 23, 2019, 12:45:43 PM »
Everything is written in the Bible ...
well yes but it also states that we should kill all Gay People
the Bible is a good Book, but you shouldn't/can't accept/do everything in it Word for Word

*

JackBlack

  • 23739
Re: Seeking Danang's best proof of the dome
« Reply #5 on: March 23, 2019, 01:21:01 PM »
Okay dude, there are multiple rocket experiments with similar occurings, e.g. hitting a solid body.
No. This experiment is clearly not hitting a solid body.
If it did it would have disintegrated.
Here is an example of effectively a rocket hitting a solid body:


Notice how there isn't much jet left over?

These occurrences have been explained repeatedly. They are de-spin mechanism, nothing more.
It stops the rocket spinning. It doesn't stop it moving upwards.

By baloon, the physical appearance of the dome was captured.
You mean it floats up and pops.
There was no dome there.

You too can take picture of the sky and then zoom the picture in. There will be decorative images.
Do you mean the stars? If so, there is no dome required for that.

So far... there have never been a single vertical path of space crafts / rockets except Challenger and flatearth experimental rockets.
That's because most space-craft don't want to just go up. They want to orbit a RE. When trying to go onto a highway, do you drive perpendicular to it until you are on it, then slam on the breaks, turn 90 degrees and start accelerating?

The dome is a bullshit .. I do not believe in the ball. And after such statements about the dome - and in a flat land, too ... The world is different. How? Everything is written in the Bible ...
Lots of things are written in the Bible, the vast majority of which are  wrong.
No sane person would go to the Bible to try and figure out how the world works.

Re: Seeking Danang's best proof of the dome
« Reply #6 on: March 23, 2019, 07:36:03 PM »
Dear experienced flat earthers,
Can you see the dilemma I'm in having been introduced to flat earth mere months ago when there are so many flat earthers strongly making claims like a dome and using completely shoddy evidence?
It is quite clear that entirely unproved claims are touted as well proved based on extremely faulty reasoning, maybe even complete lack of reason.
How would I or any new flat earther  correctly tell the difference between a valid honest flat-earth-proved-claim and a claim that's as bunk as those 3 given above as proofs of a dome?

This is further complicated by the fact that I personally performed the cavendish experiment, and it showed what appeared to be gravity.
Do you know how many times I've heard that terrestrial-terrestrial gravity doesn't exist?
I did the water level test at 50ft and 2240ft. The horizon does *not* rise to eyelevel at either level -- not even close, but do you know how many times I've heard that it does?
I pointed a theodolite at a 2 mile high mountain that's 87 miles away from me. It measured very close to 4810 feet too low after compensating for terrestrial atmospheric refraction. (Globe predicts 5046 missing feet, so I got an error of 236ft, or a 2% error - not bad using a vintage theodolite from 87 miles away.)
Do you know how many times I've heard that mountains appear too high on the horizon for the earth to be curved at 8 inches per mile squared?
I went to the beach and looked at a city across 20 miles of water. At around observer=15ft, I could start to see the tops of the sky scrapers. Had to get 50ft up to see whole sky scrapers -- and they are all on a hill.
Do you know how many times I've heard that you can see the beach across 20 miles of water? Not even close. Not even at observer=50 AMSL. (Above Mean(average) Sea Level)

I've asked for the best proofs of a flat earth and the best so far I've heard is "if you go to the beach and look out, it looks flat." Of course that doesn't disprove a globe either because if you do the math, even on a globe it would look flat.

Then there's major discrepancies - like the sun rising and setting not even close to where it should on a flat earth, and even the fact that it rises and sets as if it's sliding behind the horizon, and nobody can explain to me how that is even possible on a flat earth. 

Can you see why any thinking person in my situation would have a very difficult time with accepting that the earth is flat?

I'm seriously trying to give it a fair shake. I  honestly don't care what shape the earth is, whatever shape it is will be great and I'll look for ways to work that for the benefit of mankind.
But so many things disprove flat and nothing proves it as best as I can tell.

Am I just misguided or is flat earth really only a thing for people who can't honestly look at reality and perform measurements?

If I'm the type of person who really tries to find the truth, is flat earth something that just isn't gong to pan out?

It would make my friend so extremely happy if you could convince me the earth is flat. I'm trying to give it every chance. But it's obviously a rough road.

Thank you kindly for your advice.

Re: Seeking Danang's best proof of the dome
« Reply #7 on: March 25, 2019, 03:54:59 PM »
At least a dome handles the problem of all the air leaking away better than the edge wall theory.

Also, if there's a snowstorm, from the outside we'd look like a snow globe, which is nice.
The Universal Accelerator is a constant farce.

Flattery will get you nowhere.

From the FAQ - "In general, we at the Flat Earth Society do not lend much credibility to photographic evidence."

Re: Seeking Danang's best proof of the dome
« Reply #8 on: March 25, 2019, 05:02:12 PM »
Okay dude, there are multiple rocket experiments with similar occurings, e.g. hitting a solid body.
No. This experiment is clearly not hitting a solid body.
If it did it would have disintegrated.
Here is an example of effectively a rocket hitting a solid body:


Notice how there isn't much jet left over?

These occurrences have been explained repeatedly. They are de-spin mechanism, nothing more.
It stops the rocket spinning. It doesn't stop it moving upwards.

Hahah
Same logic when a kid says i dont need to where a seat belt in the car, ill just out my hands out and stop myself on the chair in front.

Re: Seeking Danang's best proof of the dome
« Reply #9 on: March 25, 2019, 05:03:51 PM »
Okay dude, there are multiple rocket experiments with similar occurings, e.g. hitting a solid body.
No. This experiment is clearly not hitting a solid body.
If it did it would have disintegrated.
Here is an example of effectively a rocket hitting a solid body:


Notice how there isn't much jet left over?

These occurrences have been explained repeatedly. They are de-spin mechanism, nothing more.
It stops the rocket spinning. It doesn't stop it moving upwards.

Hahah
Same logic when a kid says i dont need to where a seat belt in the car, ill just out my hands out and stop myself on the chair in front.

Or wehres scepti with his hoizrontal is completely different than vertical argument and Vertical plumb stops dead argument?

*

Bullwinkle

  • The Elder Ones
  • 21053
  • Standard Idiot
Re: Seeking Danang's best proof of the dome
« Reply #10 on: April 01, 2019, 10:07:40 AM »

Do you know how many times I've heard that terrestrial-terrestrial gravity doesn't exist?

no



The horizon does *not* rise to eyelevel at either level -- not even close, but do you know how many times I've heard that it does?

no



Do you know how many times I've heard that you can see the beach across 20 miles of water?

no