So where are the links to the documents?
Links to the docs are in the video description.
I was wondering when these references would show up here.
I'm unconvinced due to the breadth of the conspiracy that might exist for this to be accurate, and the lack of regulation of said conspiracy to allow these things to slip through the cracks after so long with no leaks.
My guess is that an engineer used a "close enough" model to ease the mathematics; after all, the flat earth is a more elegant model and the extra layers of round earth nonsense add nothing operationally. This is indeed evidence for a flat earth - as even NASA engineers choose to use our model, not knowing they have been duped.
You know what's disappointing about this is that you and Skiba know better. I fully expect the likes of Plat to latch on to this because of the mere mention of the word "flat", but you guys have been around this stuff long enough to know it's totally an exercise in disingenuous cherry picking.
For one, these docs have been declassified forever and pop up every now and again when some noob comes along and starts salivating over what they think is a smoking gun.
For two, if you actually read the documents, in context, rather than listen to Skiba get all hot and bothered, you'll immediately come to understand why they even reference a flat non-rotating earth.
And for three, flat earthers think that NASA is stating quite publicly that the earth is actually flat and stationary and all the while they claim NASA are liars. Strange irony in there.
But back to my main point about disappointment and context, take one of the papers regarding the SR-71 as an example. In it, it states, which is similar to the other papers cited:
"DIGITAL PERFORMANCE SIMULATION DESCRIPTION
Maneuver options include constant Mach and airspeed climbs, level accelerations, and constant g pushovers or pull-ups...
The DPS equations of motion use four assumptions that simplify the program while maintaining its fidelity for most maneuvers and applications: point-mass modeling, nonturbulent atmosphere, zero side forces, and a nonrotating Earth. The primary advantages of using the DPS over a piloted real-time simulator are that it is much easier to modify the aerodynamic and propulsion data tables, and the DPS easily allows back-to-back comparisons of vehicle performance using a maneuver flown exactly the same in each case de- spite a varying vehicle configuration."The maneuvers being modeled have nothing to do with the shape of the earth, earth's orbit around the sun, the moon's orbit around earth, etc., Much like they also exclude from the model atmospheric turbulence and side forces.
By your argument NASA is also claiming there is no such thing as wind.It just makes for cleaner, faster, easier modeling to not include things that aren't relevant to the effort being examined.
So yeah, it's disappointing that these more learned FEr's who know full well the context and even the science and purpose behind these documents to feed them to their more ignorant followers as genuine 'evidence' of anything. It's sad more than anything else.