Experiment ideas to prove Denpressure?

No they don't fall at the same rate and you know it.

Evidently these two objects do.




Based off your modeling and personally experience with den pressure delusion, what rates should they fall at? 

If you haven't seen Sceptimatic's evidence for denpressure, you just need to pay better attention.

You people do refuse to listen.

Me?  It’s you people.

Oh boy, we are now at “it’s you people”….

😂😂😂😂😂😂

i think more to the "you people" he means those who are spazzes.
you're a spaz.
and you don't listen.

i think more to the "you people" he means those who are spazzes.
you're a spaz.
and you don't listen.

I don’t listen?

It’s a known and proven fact if you make air resistance negligible by using similar shaped objects of different densities that have enough mass to make buoyancy negligible.

Like this..




They fall at the same rate.

What does basic science denier sceptimatic post with an attempt of belittling and changing the argument through false authority.

No they don't fall at the same rate and you know it.

you're a spaz.

Hmmm.   What’s the title and topic of this thread?

How many posts in this thread by sceptimatic where the individual tries to derail and change the topic of this thread?  Vs posts by the individual where the individual activity pursues the opening topic? 

Quote from: Smoke Machine on August 22, 2023, 11:44:21 PM

If you haven't seen Sceptimatic's evidence for denpressure, you just need to pay better attention.

Quote from: sceptimatic on August 23, 2023, 12:21:12 AM

You people do refuse to listen.

Me?  It’s you people.

Oh boy, we are now at “it’s you people”….

😂😂😂😂😂😂

Mouth off, ears on and eyes on.

It's really about time you started listening, don't you think? Try to focus, or if you have ADHD, take your Ritalin or other meds, then try to focus. It's not that hard. You'd be surprised what you can achieve if you put a little effort in and put your mind to it. Now, can you please try?

You're the sicko who wants to refer to Sceptimatic's alternate Earth theory as a "fuck lair." Pretty sick if you ask me, but each to their own. I mean, I guess you're right in that your own dungeon is an enclosed system of depravity, and you see Sceptimatic's idea as a world of enclosed debauchery. Fair enough.

Just ease up on the verbal Diahorea which with you is always overflowing, not data. Hence why I sometimes call you diahoreaoverflow2022.

So, you honestly can't see all of Sceptimatic's evidence for denpressure? Is it invisible to you, or have you had a male look? Please tell us you have spectacles to drive a motor car? Maybe if you put those spectacles on, you can finally see all the denpressure evidence you've been missing out on?

It's not documented, it's basically your mindset and that of others.

You mean it is reality, which you reject like you reject so much of reality.

I have and I've done many.

No, you haven't.
The best you ever get is just making up crap to pretend your delusional garbage magically matches what is expected with gravity and the rest of mainstream science.

Less resistance against the dense mass.

Again, notice how you are appealing to the dense mass, as if the MASS is trying to go down.
Not that it is being pushed down by the air, but as if something else is trying to make it go down.

meaning the dense mass of any object within will still be squeezed down against less resistance to that mass.

You mean squeezed up, as you are yet to provide any explanation of how it is squeezed down?

But notice, the air pressure is less, that means all pushes should be less. That includes your magical push down, as well as the push up.
So why should it go faster?
The logical result would be a lesser overall force.
And that is what is observed, with the upwards buoyant force decreasing.

Again, you just baselessly assert your delusional BS works, with no explanation of how.

It's basically molecularly spring-loaded at all times and that release against below resistance overcomes that resistance by that spring release at all times until a foundation is hit that offers more resistance to the object in order to stop it.

Again, the "spring-loading" is greater below.
That means it is pushed up.

If you'd paid some attention you'd grasp some but you absolutely do not know one thing.

Simple denser mass molecular stacking keeps less dense molecules above from pushing them out of the way unless there was a higher force employed to offer a push through.

And why only above?
Why doesn't this work in every direction?

I'm sure you've had a jar with many different densities of grains within where you can shake it and see the layers take their form based on their dense mass, right?

You mean due to gravity?
This is not an explanation.
This a restatement of the observation you cannot explain.

Same questions in a different format.

That is basically all you are getting.
The same question which you never answer.
How does the air magically push things down?
The pressure is greater below so it should push things up.
Try actually addressing it.
Tell us how the lower pressure air above magically overcomes the higher pressure air below.

There is no gravity.

And is that just your baseless worthless opinion, or is it you stating this as a fact?
Try being honest.

yet you people argue for it as if you're experts and yet can offer nothing other than things fall.

We offer plenty more than that, including how it interacts with air pressure. Clearly demonstrating a need for a downwards force proportional to mass.
But there are also things like the Cavendish experiment, which you then just lie about and claim that your air magically produces the exact results expected with gravity, without any explanation of how.

As I said before so so so so many times. The stacking of atmospheric layers is more dense to less dense which is the reason we survive and the reason why the atmosphere can hold for our survival.

Which is just restating the observation you cannot explain.
You have no explanation at all for why it is like this.

You just have to pay attention to why

Then try explaining why.

Air resistance is never negligible. As I said above there is always a displacement

Go learn what negligible means.

and it's basically a squeeze down against lesser resistance

Stop repeating the same lie.
It is a "squeeze down" against a HIGHER resistance trying to "squeeze up".

If the resistance is less the dense mass will overcome it more.

There you go appealing to mass again, as if it is the mass, not the air, moving things down.
Again, if the air is pushing the object down, then the air being less means there is less force pushing it down.

But if we go back to reality, with gravity acting directly on the mass, then the force moving it down is the same, the force due to gravity, and the upwards buoyant force and the force from air resistance is less due to less air.

If you think it is the air, then stop appealing to mass as if gravity is pulling the mass down.

However, the more you have a go at me the more I explain

No, you don't. You just ignore what is said and claim that your garbage works with no explanation at all.

I'm sure you can expplain this, right?

It is really quite trivially.
The light moves around the ring, at a constant speed. But as the ring is turning, this means the path moving with the ring is longer as it has to go past its starting point, while the path going against the ring is shorter as it hits the detector before the starting point.
This creates a phase difference directly proportional to the angular velocity of the rotating ring.

Measure the velocity, do some math, and you get the rate of rotation.

These are incredibly simple things to understand. But you want to pretend people are just blindly accepting what others say. Because you need to pretend that as otherwise you would need to admit you are full of shit.

I'm sure you'll offer copy and paste as if you actually know.
That is the beauty of arguing with you. I know you rely on simply looking up your answers and that makes me smile.

You mean we have reality backing us up, and we provide consistent explanations, explanations which are consistent with reality.
This doesn't demonstrate that we are looking things up or copying and pasting or not understanding.
It indicates we understand reality.

Can you provide any argument against it, or just pathetic dismissal?

I'm sure you can't explain this without copy and paste, right?

Again, it is trivial.
But why?
Just what is wrong with seeing the explanations of others?
Again, you are just rejecting reality because other people accept it.

If we said grass was green, would you just reject that as copy-paste, and boldly proclaim the grass is purple?
Because that is your level of insanity right now.

They don't.

And now you just resort to straight out wilful rejection of reality.

Like anything. A ship in the sea at the theoretical horizon line to a person on the beach but if you climb a little elevation and look out you see that same ship much closer from the theoretical horizon line and not on it.

Why not be honest?
The horizon has moved away.
Just like you would expect for a RE.
And nothing like what you would expect for a FE.

There is nothing theoretical about this horizon line. It is a real physical boundary, just like the edge of a table.

Either way, you lose more and more light back to your eyes.

Because something is obstructing the view.
It isn't the bottom is just magically vanishing into a blur.
It is the object is appearing to sink into Earth and having the view to the base obstructed by Earth.

So this quite conclusively demonstrates Earth is round.

Pretty simple really and in no way it offers a spinning globe, except in the fiction books.

You mean except reality, and books describing reality; which you just dismiss as fiction.

Or is fiction another word you just lie about the meaning of?
After all, you sure to be describing reality every time you discuss fiction.

Those who have the tools can predict and it isn't anything to do with a spinning globe and space suns and such..

Except simple things, like predicting the angle to the sun.

No they don't fall at the same rate and you know it.

They do when air resistance is negligible.

Simple atmospheric displacement and resistance as I've consistently told you.

So, nothing. As you have repeatedly failed to explain how the air magically pushes down.

Feel free to object to anything. You do this as a default to anyone so nothing is a surprise with you or your brother.

No, I don't just object to anything.
I object to BS. Like all the BS you are spouting.

Every time you ignore it, and just dismiss my post like you have now, you are just further demonstrating your dishonesty.

Again, it truly is quite simple.
The air pressure is higher below an object than above an object.
That means the push up from below is greater than the push down from above.
This means the object should rise due to the air.

No amount of BS will save you from this.
This is an inescapable fact which kills your delusional BS.
Yet you will not even attempt to discuss it, because you know it kills your BS.

You know it clearly demonstrates beyond any doubt that there needs to be an additional force likely based upon mass.

You people do refuse to listen. You refuse to try and udnerstand my side and that's clear and also your prerogative.

You are confusing listening and understanding; with mindlessly accepting delusional BS.

We do listen. We do try to understand.
You just refuse to try to explain anything.

There's no cop-out from my side.

Except you continually refusing to explain, and instead resorting to insults like the above.
You saying we don't listen or try to understand; rather than attempting to provide an explanation; is a cop-out.

If you weren't looking for cop-outs, you would clearly discuss how air pressure means objects should be pushed up by the air.

You certainly don't know but the storybooks offer you a belief system that smothers you in a comfort blanket among like-minded peers who basically police each other to toe the party line.

You mean our books about reality offer a description of reality which actually works to explain reality and allows to predict things; but makes the universe too big and scary for you so you reject it at all costs.

My statements are always this in terms of my alternate Earth.

No, they aren't.
You repeatedly assert pure BS as if that is actually what is happening on Earth.
At best, you are claiming this is what you think happens in reality.

What this would require your statements to be is an admission that is entirely your fantasy with no connection to reality; not simply your opinion about reality, but actually a fantasy.
So say in your FANTASY gravity doesn't exist and Earth is flat and things are pushed down by magical air.
But you have no idea how any of reality works.

I ask people to accept that I have alternate ideas and if they want to understand it then they would need to try and do the jigsaw.

And then when they do the jigsaw and realise it doesn't work at all, you insult them.
Again, be honest. You don't want people to understand or do the jigsaw. You want them to blindly accept without thinking.

That's because nobody has come up with anything that offers anything more logical to me.

You have been provided with plenty of arguments which show there needs to be a downwards force based upon mass.
I have even provided you with the idea of an aether wind which interacts with mass directly trying to drag it down, as a force entirely separate from the air.

Importantly, this gives you the downwards force you need and would allow you to explain so much; without needing to accept gravity (other than the possibility of people calling that aether wind gravity).
This would even allow just this aether wind to be the downwards force without a general force of attraction between mass (but then it wouldn't explain the cavendish experiment).

But you reject it, without any reason at all.

You want to pretend the air is everything, so the air is needed for everything, so there can't be space, so there can't be satellites with cameras, so there can't be pictures of Earth from space, clearly showing it is round.

Conversely, understand it from our side.
We have a model that works. We may not know all the details, but the model works and can be used to describe reality, and is backed up by evidence.
You are trying to replace this with a model which doesn't work at all and which has no evidence supporting it.

I never offer anything as fact

Consider the following claims, are they merely your baseless worthless opinion, or is it a statement of fact?
The Earth is not a spinning globe.
Gravity does not exist.
There is no such thing as pull.
Everything is push on push.
The RE model is nonsense.

Can you honestly admit that each of these claims of yours is just your baseless worthless opinion and should never be taken as a fact?
Or do you actually put these forwards as facts?

The global Earth is nonsense

Again, is that your worthless opinion?
If so, qualify it as that.

If not, and you are asserting this as a fact, that it is the exact kind of BS we are objecting to.

including myself until I had the mind to question it and realise how duped I was.

Yet all you really did was realise you didn't understand; so you rejected it, at all costs, never thinking again.

and those people have my utmost internet forum respect for their name and tried arguments against the party line.

So you respect people for continued dishonesty?

Already added so many times.

Only when you are repeatedly pushed to provide evidence; after boldly presenting them as if they are facts.

So, you honestly can't see all of Sceptimatic's evidence for denpressure?

What evidence would that be? Demonstrable by what experiment.

Sceptimatic posts only make sense in the context the individual lives in a protective membrane isolated from the outside reality, or is just a plain old T R O L L, troll. 

Quote from: Smoke Machine on August 23, 2023, 02:54:35 PM

So, you honestly can't see all of Sceptimatic's evidence for denpressure?

What evidence would that be? Demonstrable by what experiment.

Sceptimatic posts only make sense in the context the individual lives in a protective membrane isolated from the outside reality, or is just a plain old T R O L L, troll.

Lol!! So, you're saying you've been trolled by Sceptimatic? He gave you incredibly good advice to find something else to do with your time instead of obsess over every word he posts. Are you up to a thousand hours this year, reading and replying to Sceptimatic's posts? You couldn't have spent that time doing overtime in the meth lab you work in? If you had, you'd be at least $50,000 better off.

I haven't been trolled by him. I seem to be able to have reasonable dialogues with him. I know where he stands and he knows where I stand.

Look at Jackfrostyballs though! Jack pulls out the triple reply in a row against poor ol Sceptimatic. The ol wham, bam, thank-you ma'am, and still doesn't succeed.

I haven't been trolled by him.

Anyone who has replied to the individual to give sceptimatic the attention they want has been tolled.

 sceptimatic‘s endgame isn’t to put anything together that makes sense.  It’s the attention it generates.  I do think sceptimatic is pridefull enough that he/she is aggravated there are no new converts.

I think may flat earther’s for addicted to the attention flat earth generated at its latest peek a few years ago.  Now the fade is UFO’s.  The ones riding the coattails of the crazy flat earth, especially the ones that don’t believe space travel is possible, are really very much obsolete.

And you.  You admitted to playing good cop / bad cop if memory serves correctly.  Your role whatever is isn’t one of sincerity.  Is this a new form of attention for the once class clown that no longer has no class?

 

Quote from: Smoke Machine link=topic=91690.msg2409369#m

I haven't been trolled by him.

Anyone who has replied to the individual to give sceptimatic the attention they want has been tolled.

 sceptimatic‘s endgame isn’t to put anything together that makes sense.  It’s the attention it generates.  I do think sceptimatic is pridefull enough that he/she is aggravated there are no new converts.

I think may flat earther’s for addicted to the attention flat earth generated at its latest peek a few years ago.  Now the fade is UFO’s.  The ones riding the coattails of the crazy flat earth, especially the ones that don’t believe space travel is possible, are really very much obsolete.

And you.  You admitted to playing good cop / bad cop if memory serves correctly.  Your role whatever is isn’t one of sincerity.  Is this a new form of attention for the once class clown that no longer has no class?

Lighten up. Why so serious? If I'm going to correspond with anyone who has diametrically different views to me on a fundamental concept, I'm naturally going to have some fun with it, and also try to learn as much as I can about the person and the idea. You have to see that denpressure is an outgrowth of his cell Earth hypothesis that he can't escape from. Right?

I already understand everything there is for me to know about densepressure.

I see that moron Gusch the douchebag, has given some form of evidence at a congressional hearing, that the United States has crashed flying saucers and dead alien beings. He is either the most gullible buffoon on the planet or yet another scam artist. He plays the buffoon with such ease, I'm thinking the former, but I could be wrong. I hope he gets arrested.

There are no crashed Ufos, are there, Sceptimatic?

There are no crashed Ufos, are there, Sceptimatic?

There may well be but the letters UFO are, to us, unidentified flying objects.
As for crashed one's..maybe.

However, if they are non-human built then in my mind they are from somewhere else on Earth, and likely certain humans will know all about it.

As for outer spacecraft and aliens....well, most people know my mindset on that.
We are merely sheep in the field with our boundaries. We are fed the basics and generally just go with the flock.


The storytellers can offer up so much truth and lies and a mixture of truths and lies, that basically have us all arguing the toss over so many ideas of what this or that may be.

As for outer spacecraft and aliens....well, most people know my mindset on that.
We are merely sheep in the field with our boundaries. We are fed the basics and generally just go with the flock.

You mean there are literally other planets/worlds outside your imagination.  Outside earth’s atmosphere is the sun radiating and sending charge particles into the magnetic field created by a spinning spherical earth. Comets that travel about and between the planets and pivot around the sun. Some of the comets don’t make it.  Planets like Jupiter and Saturn that have their own moons.  Asteroids and meteorites.  Radar surveys of the moon and Venus from earth.

In your delusion why would earth be the only “cell”, what is in the space between other “earth cells”.  Why wouldn’t the “earth cells” in your delusion expand and contact changing the density of everything in our own “earth cell”.  🤔

However,

Still can’t come up with an experiment huh. See you’re still here to troll. 

Quote from: sceptimatic on August 24, 2023, 05:01:42 AM

However,

Still can’t come up with an experiment huh. See you’re still here to troll.

Honestly. Any chance of you lightening up sometime before the end of this century?

Do you carry on like this, whenever you meet someone who has a different idea to you? Does everybody you meet, have to bring their ideas and opinions in line with yours?

I don't get it. Why are you so sore? In Sceptimatic's mind, you're the troll. In my mind too, you're the troll. I mean, this is the flat earth society, and here you are, using ad hominem attacks and sealioning your hardest to try and convert an alternate globe Earth believer and any flat earther whose path you cross. This was always going to be the most likely outcome. You've got some ego if you really thought you'd win Sceptimatic over with your science prowess.

Honestly. Any chance of you lightening up sometime before the end of this century?

Why?  Flat earther’s want to push because I’ve been halfway around a spherical earth and back.  And on both sides of the equator I’m a “sheep” because I don’t buy into the FE lie.  Oh the irony and hypocrisy. 

You want to play “nice” when flat earther’s want to use false authority and accusations people believe in a spherical earth because they don’t question but are indoctrinated.  When flat earth itself is the lie.  Yah, piss on that. 

I’ve tried to be nice and just get lectured with smugness because I don’t believe in the flat earth lie. 

Quote from: Smoke Machine on August 24, 2023, 06:30:35 AM

Honestly. Any chance of you lightening up sometime before the end of this century?

Why?  Flat earther’s want to push because I’ve been halfway around a spherical earth and back.  And on both sides of the equator I’m a “sheep” because I don’t buy into the FE lie.  Oh the irony and hypocrisy. 

You want to play “nice” when flat earther’s want to use false authority and accusations people believe in a spherical earth because they don’t question but are indoctrinated.  When flat earth itself is the lie.  Yah, piss on that.

You can choose to engage or choose to disengage.

It would make no difference if you were an astronaut presently on board the international space station. You would never be able to prove anything to Sceptimatic. He has to find out for himself.

You can lead a horse to water, but you can't make it drink.

M
You can choose to engage or choose to disengage.

And Flat Earther’s can choose to make it about open truthful debate concerning the nature of reality, or choose to make it into propaganda for their flat earth cult. 

Quote from: sceptimatic on August 24, 2023, 05:01:42 AM

As for outer spacecraft and aliens....well, most people know my mindset on that.
We are merely sheep in the field with our boundaries. We are fed the basics and generally just go with the flock.

You mean there are literally other planets/worlds outside your imagination.  Outside earth’s atmosphere is the sun radiating and sending charge particles into the magnetic field created by a spinning spherical earth. Comets that travel about and between the planets and pivot around the sun. Some of the comets don’t make it.  Planets like Jupiter and Saturn that have their own moons.  Asteroids and meteorites.  Radar surveys of the moon and Venus from earth.

In your delusion why would earth be the only “cell”, what is in the space between other “earth cells”.  Why wouldn’t the “earth cells” in your delusion expand and contact changing the density of everything in our own “earth cell”.  🤔

This just goes to show you pay absolutely no attention to anything.
Surely this has to be on purpose because if it's not there are only two other scenarios. One is a computer robot and the other begins with A.

This just goes to show you pay absolutely no attention to anything.
Surely this has to be on purpose because if it's not there are only two other scenarios. One is a computer robot and the other begins with A.

I just like looking at the moon and other natural phenomena.



What do you pay attention to? 

you pay absolutely no attention to anything.

Strange.  Anyone “paying attention” knows a bit about my interests, hobbies, personal experiences, a glimpse at what I do for a living. Sort’a frames up how I use reality. And even document it.

sceptimatic, when your not trolling, what are your interests, hobbies, and experiences to give context how you navigate the actual physical word.  The no shit will kill your reality.  I once experienced severe heat exhaustion because I went for a too long of a hike by myself with not enough water.  How do you use the physical world outside posting for your personal amusement.  Sports?  The bottom of a bottle?  Hunting?  The end of a needle?  Helping little old ladies cross the street? 

Quote from: sceptimatic on August 24, 2023, 08:02:01 AM

This just goes to show you pay absolutely no attention to anything.
Surely this has to be on purpose because if it's not there are only two other scenarios. One is a computer robot and the other begins with A.

I just like looking at the moon and other natural phenomena.



What do you pay attention to?

You have no real clue about what you're looking at other than what you're told you're looking at.
That's basically it, so paying attention to what you see means nothing other than accepting what someone else says.

That could be a holographic image from Earth, not from your space. You can obviously deny this and go with the majority flow of the storyline but you do not physically know the reality.

Quote from: sceptimatic on August 24, 2023, 08:02:01 AM

you pay absolutely no attention to anything.

Strange.  Anyone “paying attention” knows a bit about my interests, hobbies, personal experiences, a glimpse at what I do for a living. Sort’a frames up how I use reality. And even document it.

If you've offered up your interests and what you do for work and whatnot in another thread then I've never taken notice of it.
I've likely taken no notice of the many threads you participate in so it likely is me paying absolutely no attention to those threads.
We each pick and choose what peaks our interest and your major interest has been in this and other denpressure threads in which you've basically taken little to no notice of anything said, other than what you offer.

sceptimatic, when your not trolling, what are your interests, hobbies, and experiences to give context how you navigate the actual physical word.

There's no trolling from me but weak people like yourself generally use this as some kind of argument in your favour when you can't batter me into submission, even when you come team-handed.

As for my hobbies and whatnot, I'll let you decide on what they are as I see you are speculating below so I'll answer those.

The no shit will kill your reality.

My reality exists whatever your thoughts are.

  I once experienced severe heat exhaustion because I went for a too long of a hike by myself with not enough water.

Then you're not very smart, are you?

How do you use the physical world outside posting for your personal amusement.

Like anyone else would. You just navigate life as is, for how long you get to navigate it.

  Sports?

Yes.

The bottom of a bottle?

No.

  Hunting?

No.

The end of a needle?

No.

  Helping little old ladies cross the street?

If the opportunity arose then absolutely if the need was there. Would you?

Quote from: DataOverFlow2022 on August 24, 2023, 08:41:36 AM

Quote from: sceptimatic on August 24, 2023, 08:02:01 AM

This just goes to show you pay absolutely no attention to anything.
Surely this has to be on purpose because if it's not there are only two other scenarios. One is a computer robot and the other begins with A.

I just like looking at the moon and other natural phenomena.



What do you pay attention to?

You have no real clue about what you're looking at other than what you're told you're looking at.
That's basically it, so paying attention to what you see means nothing other than accepting what someone else says.

That could be a holographic image from Earth, not from your space. You can obviously deny this and go with the majority flow of the storyline but you do not physically know the reality.

I’m looking at an image I captured while looking at the moon with my telescope that gives every indication of a 3D object from the way it reflects the sun’s light to the shadowing of the object. 

Everything from the broadcasting from man made satellites in orbit around the moon.  To the moon can be surveyed by radar.  Shortwave radio waves can be bounced off the moon.

To the way the moon physically blocks stars and planets from view as it passes in front of them.

To the way the moon blocks the sun and it’s radiation during a solar eclipse creating a shadow.

To the way earth’s shadow falls on the moon during a lunar eclipse.

To the way the moon’s mass effect’s earth’s rotation and tides of the ocean’s.

With you having ZERO PROOF it’s a fucking projection from anywhere.

My reality exists whatever your thoughts are.

No.  That’s has nothing with how your interests interact with reality.

Like reality is a ping pong ball and a steel ball drop at the same rate in this instance.



Something demonstrated and experienced by thousands of students in the most basic of physics classes ever year. 

 You can obviously deny this and go with the majority flow of the storyline but you do not physically know the reality.

Like you telling people with no proof helium is created by oxygen, nitrogen, argon, CO2 as atmospheric pressure is reduced, and your false assertion that helium is a renewable resource. 

I’m looking at an image I captured while looking at the moon with my telescope that gives every indication of a 3D object from the way it reflects the sun’s light to the shadowing of the object. 

You said it yourself. You're looking at an image.

And you can believe there's every indication of it being a 3d object but you cannot prove it to be so. You rely on stories told.

Any hologram can offer 2d into 3d and you have no clue whether your moon is just that but the evidence is there that it is just an image projection from Earth.

There's a reason why you're told your moon only shows one face. It just requires people to think objectively rather than subjectively.

Everything from the broadcasting from man made satellites in orbit around the moon.

You have no clue where those broadcasts come from when you're told they come from so-called space satellites. You simply believe the stories and you can't argue any different.

  To the moon can be surveyed by radar.

From what you're told.

Shortwave radio waves can be bounced off the moon.

Again, from what you're told, nothing more.

To the way the moon physically blocks stars and planets from view as it passes in front of them.

Any hologram can block out other holograms if the source projections cross over others.

To the way the moon blocks the sun and it’s radiation during a solar eclipse creating a shadow.

As above.

To the way earth’s shadow falls on the moon during a lunar eclipse.

Only by what you're told. You do not know it to be Earth's shadow, you simply rely on being told this is a truth.

To the way the moon’s mass effect’s earth’s rotation and tides of the ocean’s.

Again, this is only what you're told and you use it as your argument based on no physical knowledge of any of it.

With you having ZERO PROOF it’s a fucking projection from anywhere.

I agree I have zero proof but I believe there's plenty of evidence to show they are projections from Earth and I gave you one simple one with your moon projection.


There is no proof of burning suns in a vacuum nor gaseous planets or rock-like planets just floating/spinning in a vacuum, except for the adherence to the stories by severe brainwashing through schooling from young to old.