They've lied to the world about the stars

Quote from: Smoke Machine on November 11, 2024, 05:28:02 PM

Good lord are you never not active on this forum? Seven minutes for your reply, to my message typed at like 2am.

Welcome to the world of time zones.

Quote from: Smoke Machine on November 11, 2024, 05:28:02 PM

The poll is for everybody.here, because it concerns everybody here. It is for me, but is more for you.

It is not for me at all.

Again, truth is not decided by popular vote.
I can look at my environment, and see it clearly isn't flat.
No poll is going to change that.
If you want to change it, you need to go flatten my local environment, removing all the elevation changes.

Quote from: Smoke Machine on November 11, 2024, 05:28:02 PM

Denial is something not just suffered by flat earthers as you are about to learn.

I already know that. Just look at you and how heavily you are in denial.

Think of this as an intervention. Naturally because you are so massively in denial, you will declare there is nothing wrong with you. You think you are normal and everybody around you sees the Earth exactly as you do.

It occurs to me, that in the 15 years you have been actively debating flat earthers, you really have no idea how they can argue the earth around them is flat and thereby the entire earth is also flat. You cannot even see or fathom their argument, can you?

That revelation alone, aside from blowing my mind, illustrates the extremity of your denial.

It makes sense that surrounding yourself with people also suffering extreme denial, gives you comfort, and in fact are your tribe.

You have never sat at your dinner table to eat from a flat plate upon your flat table, and the plate which there are mountains of meat, potato and pumpkin, and valleys of beans and peas with seas of gravy, and thought, this is how the flat earther sees the Earth, have you?

Think of this as an intervention.

Like an intervention trying to get someone who rarely drinks to get completely drunk every night?

It certainly isn't a good one.
I see it more like trying to "pray the gay away", where you are trying to force your own ridiculous BS onto others.

Naturally because you are so massively in denial, you will declare there is nothing wrong with you.

Again, the one in denial here is you.
And you are so far in denial, you can't tell and just project onto others.
Just like the FEers you love.

It occurs to me, that in the 15 years you have been actively debating flat earthers, you really have no idea how they can argue the earth around them is flat and thereby the entire earth is also flat. You cannot even see or fathom their argument, can you?

I do understand. They ignore reality.
Some on this site are a great example, where they took a picture of mountains terrain and drew a straight line over the top, with no real connection to the picture, and claimed it had a perfectly flat and level horizon.

That revelation alone, aside from blowing my mind, illustrates the extremity of your denial.
It makes sense that surrounding yourself with people also suffering extreme denial, gives you comfort, and in fact are your tribe.

And more projection.

You have never sat at your dinner table to eat from a flat plate upon your flat table, and the plate which there are mountains of meat, potato and pumpkin, and valleys of beans and peas with seas of gravy, and thought, this is how the flat earther sees the Earth, have you?

It is more like if they had a large cake with an irregular top, and just imagined slicing the top off to produce a perfectly flat surface.
They aren't appealing to a shape that is there. They are appealing to a shape they want to be there.

Quote from: turbonium2 on November 11, 2024, 02:48:09 AM

It looks like a blur covering the black sky, as it blurs the clear air during the light of day.

i.e. you can't tell if the area surrounding the star is blurred or not?

Quote from: turbonium2 on November 11, 2024, 02:48:09 AM

And it doesn’t leave a star clear to see with details and rapid rotation, in day or night skies, either.

Again, go look at the plane in the heat haze, with "details" created by the heat haze, including those in rapid rotation, with the position changing frame by frame?

Quote from: turbonium2 on November 11, 2024, 02:48:09 AM

How does your magical effect create such details out of nothing, make them look like the same details while changing their positions every split second, while it always blurs out trucks barely seen as trucks on Earth?

Again, it is the same for both.
The distinction is you are focusing on the entire truck while ignore the "details" produced by the heat haze, while for the star you focus on the "details" and ignore the star.

It is the same.

Quote from: turbonium2 on November 11, 2024, 02:48:09 AM

Have you ever seen a heat haze occur around a plane? Or near a plane even?

Yes. I even provided a video, where it appeared the skin had a bunch of ripples on it which were spinning around.
Producing similar results to that in your crappy videos of stars.

Quote from: turbonium2 on November 11, 2024, 02:48:09 AM

you can’t even find one occurring over 30000 feet

Are any of your videos from over 30000 feet?
If not, that is entirely pointless to bring up.

Everything is blurry from the heat haze, it’s not only the plane or the truck, and both of them are hardly seen AS a plane or truck, through all the dense boggy air.

Effects blur the air, blur objects within that air, beyond that air, too. 

Effects never sharpen objects or show details of objects, or cause them to appear in motion, and clearly seen as motion too.

And the most indisputable thing effects don’t do, never can do, never will do, that you should have already known they never do, because your example doesn’t do it either…

That effects, all effects, your heat haze effect included, act out and die off, they are temporary, momentary effects, that’s why we call them effects. Something that happens out of the normal or usual state. A blip, from the normal state.

A fog happens one morning, goes away by noon, or stays for a few days, and then vanishes.

Why would you keep showing a temporary heat haze effect?

You’re trying to claim an eternally acting effect causes Saturn to appear in eternal motion, various motion less or more, slight motion, etc. which is not the same motion  in every video.

You claim it’s different motion in the videos, showing it’s caused by changes of an effect, but that would be an eternally acting out effect, a level more or less acting out, or the same level, is your eternal effect which does NOT exist at all in the real world.

A heat haze isn’t still acting out on that plane or truck, if they were still there, still motionless, as in the videos!

Is the heat haze still there?

Is it hiding there, or slightly acting out there, always present in some form? 

A non-seen heat haze effect is ever-present and exists there forever, but rarely acts out at all, but it’s still there?

Every fog exists over the entire Earth, but rarely acts out all over Earth at any one time, but fog is all over Earth.

Effects cover the Earth, ever present, never seen a lot, but always there over the entire Earth.

Good one

Everything is blurry from the heat haze, it’s not only the plane or the truck, and both of them are hardly seen AS a plane or truck, through all the dense boggy air.

Just like the star.
And that "blurryness" also creates fake features, like the video of the plane, where parts of the skin appear to shimmer and move around.

Again, you are focusing on the entire truck/plane/whatever to say it is blurry, while ignoring the "features" that are produced from the haze; while for the star you focus purely on those "features".

Effects never sharpen objects or show details of objects, or cause them to appear in motion, and clearly seen as motion too.

Your crap is not clearly seen as motion. It is seen as a view through a turbulent atmosphere.

No, they don't sharpen objects, they create additional fake details, from the turbulence.

That effects, all effects, your heat haze effect included, act out and die off, they are temporary

We have been over this.
They are not. What happens is they change in magnitude.

If they were temporary, you would have provided a video of an object 1 m wide viewed through 10 km of sea level atmosphere showing no distortion at all.
But you can't.

You can't even find footage of the moon, showing at high magnification with no distortion.

The atmosphere is NEVER perfectly still.

It is trivial to make the effect insignificant by looking at an object with a large enough angular size or through a small enough amount of atmosphere.
But we are talking about an absolutely tiny angular size, through a very large amount of atmosphere.

that’s why we call them effects.

You have also had that refuted as BS.

For example, the blue of the sky is an effect.
Objects falling is an effect.

We call it an effect, because it is an effect.
Something which is caused by something else.

You’re trying to claim an eternally acting effect causes Saturn to appear in eternal motion

No. YOU are trying to claim it is appearing in motion.
Again, sane people recognise atmospheric turbulence.

is your eternal effect which does NOT exist at all in the real world.

The existence of heat hazes refute you.

A heat haze isn’t still acting out on that plane or truck, if they were still there, still motionless, as in the videos!

Aren't they?
So you have footage of that truck viewed through 10 km of atmosphere, zoomed in on a 1 m wide portion of it, showing no distortion at all?

There’s far less atmosphere upward than along the Earths surface. That’s where heat hazes occur, and all other effects occur. Not high up in air. There’s less air higher up, no effects of air higher up.

Your huge effects excuse is crap, proven as crap, shown every day as crap. Most air is near the surface, most effects of air are near the surface. Facts that you can’t twist into bs excuses.

Why do you think they put telescopes and observatories on higher ground? Because there’s less air, less distortion of air, less effects of air.

What about the millions of miles higher up? More like a few hundred feet up to Saturn, and no bs effect excuse, let alone an eternally acting effect.

Trying the same old effect excuse is all you have, but it’s ridiculous and gets worse all the time.

Holding up surface effects like a heat haze only make your claim worse, not better. 

There’s far less atmosphere upward than along the Earths surface.

Which is why I said 10 km, rather than 100 km.

Your huge effects excuse is crap, proven as crap, shown every day as crap.

You keep saying that crap, but never provide any proof.
Meanwhile, all sane people recognise it quite easily as not an excuse, but reality, something you hate.

Most air is near the surface, most effects of air are near the surface. Facts that you can’t twist into bs excuses.

Facts which don't help your BS at all.

Again, these observations you are appealing to are from the ground, not space. So you are still looking through loads of air.
Do you have footage from space? No.
Do you even have footage from very high altitude? No.
And again, it isn't that most effects are near the surface, it is that they are more significant near the surface.

Why do you think they put telescopes and observatories on higher ground? Because there’s less air, less distortion of air, less effects of air.

And notice the words you use:
"LESS distortion".
It doesn't magically vanish. It still happens.

What about the millions of miles higher up?

Where is your footage from a million miles up?
You are still viewing Saturn through the air, so the air can still distort the view.

Trying the same old effect excuse is all you have

You mean continually explaining why you are wrong, with you entirely incapable of providing anything to refute it; instead appealing to pathetic crap like saying Saturn isn't in the atmosphere, as if that magically means the light going from Saturn to us doesn't pass through the atmosphere.

You can see multiple distinct belts through 200 year old scrapped telescopes, but not with telescopes today that are superior in every way to that crap.

It’s nice that they scrapped your telescope long ago, it’d be fun to see through it now!

The best telescope we have today, using their 200x magnification, would show squat of Saturn.

It’s only 200 years without seeing multiple distinct belts on Saturn, let alone seeing parallel edges on one of those belts and a distinct feature at one position on its other sides edges, and seeing that feature at other positions over time, and they didn’t make any of that bs up at all, I’m sure it’s blurred out by the iPhone camera!

A ball Earth isn’t curving down, it’s still seen from 30 miles above the ball, thanks to perspective flattening the curve out like a pancake, who knew?

Air is referred to as seeing conditions, visibility conditions,  of an object we are viewing or trying to view through telescopes.

You cannot plug in your own definitions to that, say it means there’s magical effects when they say poor seeing conditions or an out of focus camera.

We all know what it means. How clear we can see the object at the time, and nothing else.

Do you know WHY we call it seeing conditions as a value?

Because conditions make objects harder or clearer to see at any given moment.

The objects are blurrier and hard to see in poor seeing conditions, clearer and sharper to see in excellent conditions.

It doesn’t mean there’s an effect that makes Saturn look like it’s in rapid constant rotation. Or that it’s got multiple distinct belts but rarely ever seen through antique scrapped metal instruments we replaced as junk long ago in excellent seeing conditions.

As a moron, it might. But it’s simply if it’s seen clearly or blurry at the time.

Blurs are what effects do, they hamper our view of objects, like your heat haze does, but not nearly that bad for stars and Saturn.

Cling tight to your excuses, you’ll need every one of them in future. You’re fighting a lost cause for a pack of scumbag liars, but you already know that. God doesn’t want any excuses, he knows the truth already, you just haven’t found that out yet, my shortsighted insecure friend. Good luck to you, but don’t bet on it
 

You can see multiple distinct belts through 200 year old scrapped telescopes, but not with telescopes today that are superior in every way to that crap.

How many times are you planning on repeating this crap?
You have NOTHING to indicate they are superior in every way.

The best telescope we have today, using their 200x magnification, would show squat of Saturn.

Based on what?

Air is referred to as seeing conditions, visibility conditions,  of an object we are viewing or trying to view through telescopes.

Yes, where these conditions distort the view.

You are the one trying to lie about what these terms mean.

As a moron, it might. But it’s simply if it’s seen clearly or blurry at the time.

So it might for you?

Blurs are what effects do, they hamper our view of objects, like your heat haze does, but not nearly that bad for stars and Saturn.

They DISTORT the view, in a variety of ways.
They don't simply make it blurring as if it is a lower resolution image.
As the videos of the heat have already shown.

Cling tight to your excuses, you’ll need every one of them in future. You’re fighting a lost cause for a pack of scumbag liars, but you already know that. God doesn’t want any excuses, he knows the truth already, you just haven’t found that out yet, my shortsighted insecure friend. Good luck to you, but don’t bet on it

No, I'm fighting against a pack of scumbag liars, including you.

So tell me what you mean it ‘distorts’ our view of objects? 

It means to obscure, to blur, to smudge, the air within an area, objects within that area, and beyond that area.

It is the same thing, a blur or a haze or a smudge or a fog or smog or mist.

All are the same result, they make whatever is there hard to see, not possible to see at all, etc.

Each one is a distortion of our view, obscuring of our view, blurs are also a distortion.

Enough of that bs, let’s move along now.

You’ve already admitted we have a superior telescope on video showing Saturn, so stop the bs about something we both know is true, that we’ve taken videos of Saturn through a vastly superior telescope than your non-existent scrapped junk, you can’t even use for an argument, but you think you can, for some reason!

Saturn did not show multiple distinct belts on it, so any honest person would accept it as evidence, supporting that no multiple distinct belts are found on Saturn. And an honest person would also have seen that all other videos confirm no distinct belts on Saturn.

If all the evidence supports the same thing, an honest person would know it’s the most likely conclusion to make.

No honest person would claim all of it isn’t evidence, and say NASA has real images from space as evidence. Because it’s all just bs claims they make, without a shred of valid evidence.

Unlike all our videos are, all are independent sources not connected to any others, and are easy to confirm as valid by anyone with a telescope, if they want to.

Nobody here can say space exists. All the ones who say they’ve been in space are NASA cronies or shills, as if they’d say space is bs, they are linked to NASA in every way but having a job at NASA!

NASA is the agency built to spread lies and fake ‘space’ as really true, so obviously they support the lies of astronomers as being true, just as they did with lies about Saturn back 200 years ago. It’s funny they did talk about it, like nobody has ever studied Saturn since then, compared their own findings to theirs, refine them, add on to it, etc.

That’s what actual science does, in all cases, it further studies things earlier studied, refine and advance them.

Especially when it’s a science that uses instruments, which always advance and improve.

Don’t you see how it’s nonsense when NASA says they sent a probe out to Saturn and timed its rotation more accurately than ever before, and found that their results are close to what they found 200 years ago?

Why wouldn’t they have continued studying and timing its rotation after that?

Sure they would have, everything is, and was, and will be studied further, with better instruments and technologies at hand.

They don’t further study something fake, which was never studied or false reports.

What you believe is this far superior telescope which showed nothing of multiple distinct belts, while showing just one large darker area within the orbs middle, same as the others do, in various degrees of quality, which would normally be considered as supporting evidence, but not when it’s about Saturn, or stars, that’s different, it’s all not evidence in those cases!

Your evidence is that a few videos show the moon appear to wobble, for a second or two, maybe 10 seconds or so, within a few videos, while seen motionless for most of the time.  As in, if it was motion, or no motion, it was for a moment, and motionless most of the time, even in those videos.

After we’ve seen the moon for countless hours and centuries, by eye and instrument, we’ve always seen it motionless, so much that there is no debate that it is normally seen as motionless.

It may be in some sort of long term motion it has, every hundred years, or becomes in motion in future, but not as it is today.

Again, you show examples of how every effect of atmosphere acts out momentarily, and vanishes away after that.

They are not acting out permanently or eternally. Not still there, and hiding out of sight, and act out later on, or eternally acting out in various degrees…

Obviously, that is what you must claim is happening, that all stars and Saturn always appear to be in motion due to a  permanently acting effect, or effects, because if you don’t claim that nonsense is true, it means they really ARE in motion, as we see them in all the time.

Except you show effects are momentary, confirming my argument is true.
 


 
 

So tell me what you mean it ‘distorts’ our view of objects?

Do you not understand basic English?

It means to transform in some way.

All are the same result, they make whatever is there hard to see, not possible to see at all, etc.

And can do so by making other features.

Enough of that bs, let’s move along now.

No one is forcing you to continue with this BS.

You’ve already admitted we have a superior telescope on video showing Saturn

A superior telescope, with a shit camera that was repeatedly trying to autofocus isn't going to help you.

Saturn did not show multiple distinct belts on it

And honest people understand why that doesn't help your case.

If all the evidence supports the same thing, an honest person would know it’s the most likely conclusion to make.
No honest person would claim all of it isn’t evidence, and say NASA has real images from space as evidence.

And yet again you show just how desperate you are.

Why not try it honestly?
If all the evidence you will accept supports what you want it to, while you ignore the evidence that shows you are wrong.

Unlike all our videos are, all are independent sources not connected to any others, and are easy to confirm as valid by anyone with a telescope, if they want to.

And you clearly don't want to, because you know it isn't valid.

Nobody here can say space exists.

Yes they can, by simple extrapolation of the pressure gradient.

NASA is the agency built to spread lies and fake ‘space’ as really true

No, that is just your BS claim, which you also can't support.

That’s what actual science does, in all cases, it further studies things earlier studied, refine and advance them.

Which is why people sent probes.

Why wouldn’t they have continued studying and timing its rotation after that?

Who says they didn't?
Yet again you appeal to your own wilful ignorance.

Your evidence is that a few videos show the moon appear to wobble

No, every video I have found that shows it in high enough magnification.

while seen motionless for most of the time.

Again, try it honestly.

Seen as apparently motionless when you aren't magnified enough.

Again, do you have a single video of the moon with enough magnification, not showing any distortion?

Again, you show examples of how every effect of atmosphere acts out momentarily, and vanishes away after that.

No, I show how they vary in magnitude.

They are not acting out permanently or eternally.

Again, that requires the air to be perfectly still.

And again, you could easily justify that BS of yours by showing a video of an object that is 1 m wide viewed through 10 km of sea level atmosphere.

But you don't, because you know it will refute you.

NASA isn’t a reliable or valid or independent or unbiased source of any evidence, they are the ones who claim space exists and we flew humans to the moon and walked on the moon and returned to Earth again, and did it six times over a four year period, over 45 years ago, and haven’t done it since, and can’t do it anymore, because nobody knows how it was done over 45 years ago with far less technology than today.

One of the first astronauts, Gus Grissom, was told by NASA he will become immortal as the first man to walk on the moon.

He went to a large hangar with a fake moon surface on it, and a fake lunar lander on the fake surface.

I’m sure they told him it was to simulate the real surface on the moon, and that the wires attached to his spacesuit were to simulate the real moon gravity.

We all know about him saying how can we get to the moon if we can’t even get our radios to work on Earth.

The world will eventually see he did much much more than that. He’s the only true hero astronaut, who died for the truth being revealed to the world, and it will be revealed one day. 

NASA isn’t a reliable or valid or independent or unbiased source of any evidence

They are to any sane person.
Especially when there are multiple space agencies.

They certainly aren't the astronomers from the past.

You just group them all together and dismiss them.
Simply because they don't agree with your delusional BS, you dismiss them as biased and invalid.

If you want to go down this path of pure insanity, then anyone who is a FEer who says space isn't real isn't a valid unbiased source.
Anyone who says the stars are close, or that you can see features on them are not valid unbiased sources.

Now stop running off on pathetic tangents.
Can you provide actual evidence for your claims which actually supports your claims; or can you only lie and make excuses?

Can you go capture footage of a 1 m wide object through 10 km of sea level atmosphere showing it appearing perfectly still?

Can you even provide footage of the moon zoomed in to a comparable level to the footage of Saturn, showing no distortion of the moon?

Quote from: turbonium2 on November 17, 2024, 01:28:12 AM

NASA isn’t a reliable or valid or independent or unbiased source of any evidence

They are to any sane person.
Especially when there are multiple space agencies.

They certainly aren't the astronomers from the past.

You just group them all together and dismiss them.
Simply because they don't agree with your delusional BS, you dismiss them as biased and invalid.

If you want to go down this path of pure insanity, then anyone who is a FEer who says space isn't real isn't a valid unbiased source.
Anyone who says the stars are close, or that you can see features on them are not valid unbiased sources.

Now stop running off on pathetic tangents.
Can you provide actual evidence for your claims which actually supports your claims; or can you only lie and make excuses?

Can you go capture footage of a 1 m wide object through 10 km of sea level atmosphere showing it appearing perfectly still?

Can you even provide footage of the moon zoomed in to a comparable level to the footage of Saturn, showing no distortion of the moon?

NASA is a ‘reliable source’ to people who don’t use their own brains and see there’s no independent sources that can validate any of their bs claims.

When they call themselves ‘space’ agencies, they are using a made up story about a non-existent endless area above Earth, same as all of them do.

You think if the US and USSR were mortal enemies in a so-called ‘space race’, that somehow is won by getting to the moon first, as if your endless space ends at the moon, they would shake hands and say let’s go to ‘space’ together in a joint mission?

That’s like Hitler comes out of his bunker, surrounded by Allied troops, and surrenders, then America and Britain invite his Nazis to explore the  Marianas Trench in a newly developed submarine with 20 foot steel walls, because the oceans of Earth are the worlds to see and enjoy.

They’ve played us as mindless morons. They first tell us the USSR is an evil Communist empire who craves to rule the world and destroy our freedoms, say we are in a race to be first in ‘space’, after the USSR supposedly already went into soace with Sputnik, which nobody even has a clue WOULD be space.

No, space is getting to the moon first, not into space first. Okay then, everyone says, let’s get to the moon first and win the race to space!

And then America gets to the moon and wins the Space Race!

The USSR admits defeat, and America tells them no bad feelings, let’s go into space together now!

That’s your other space agencies who are independent, right?

People who saw them go into ‘space’ together should have said WTF are you doing? You told us they’re evil Commies who want to destroy America? We’ve gone to war in Korea and Vietnam and killed Commies and they’ve killed us, and now you are friends with each other?

They’d say no, we aren’t friends on Earth, but we are all friends in space!

This proves they are all one group, not evil enemies. If you can’t see that you’re blind and delusional

They announce astronomers have discovered new galaxies and black holes and planets which may hold life on them. They show us images of colorized points of light, say that’s a new galaxy, show us a big black area with points of light around it, and say that’s a black hole we just discovered a gazillion miles away.

All these are amazing new discoveries, right? Seeing an entirely unknown galaxy would be a giant leap up from seeing a new species of earthworm or ant, and when we discover ancient cities buried below sand, we all can see those ancient cities in images and IN PERSON, and know it’s not complete bs they made up, right?

So after they show us images of new galaxies and black holes never known to exist until then, they should let us SEE those newly discovered galaxies and black holes through their own telescopes which they claim to have seen them through.

Space isn’t any different than anything else is. If they uncover ancient cities buried below sand, we can go there and SEE those ancient cites ourselves, to know they exist.

When scientists first discovered single cells amoebas and muticelled parameciums through microscopes, we also saw them through microscopes later on, right?

Microscopic life forms aren’t exclusively seen by microbiologists who don’t let us buy our own microscopes to see them ourselves.

Telescopes are the same as microscopes, only one sees objects closer than by eye, and the other sees objects that are too small to see by eye.

When a microbiologist discovers a microbe of under .00000mm in size with a powerful electron microscope, everyone else will eventually have seen that microbe through their own instruments, or can buy the same instrument as theirs and see the microbe themselves, if they want to, if they want proof of that microbe as real.

When they claimed to see such things on Saturn 200 years ago, we had no telescopes they did. Now that we DO have such telescopes to see Saturn and find out their claims are bs, they have telescopes and claim to see new galaxies and black holes through them, and we again don’t have such telescopes they do.

Wouldn’t they see Saturns multiple distinct rings through these new telescopes after 200 years anymore? It’s like they saw everything on Saturn that exists, and there’s nothing else to see until a ‘space orobe’ is sent out to Saturn!

Sure we could’ve seen Saturn closer and clearer over the past  200 years, but we didn’t bother to, it’s all been seen already back then. We waited until we made ‘space probes’ and sent them to Saturn to see how accurate their data was back then, and it was very accurate indeed!

NASA is a ‘reliable source’ to people who don’t use their own brains

No, NASA is a reliable source to people who do use their brains.
To people like you who refuse, of course it will be dismissed as not-reliable because it doesn't match your delusional fantasy.

They certainly aren't the astronomers. They are independent of them.

When they call themselves ‘space’ agencies

What else would you expect an agency that studies space to call themselves.

I guess you think microbiologists are not reliable sources for microbiology.

They’ve played us as mindless morons.

No. YOU have been played as a mindless moron. And you are still playing that part.

They announce astronomers have discovered new galaxies

And you are free to launch a very large telescope into space and verify those claims.

Your wilful ignorance will not make your BS true.

they should let us SEE those newly discovered galaxies and black holes through their own telescopes which they claim to have seen them through.

A lot of them come from Hubble.
Other than them providing the images, just how do you plan on having them let you see through it?

But no. Even you admitted you would not let others see through your telescope.

Why should they allow everyone to waste their precious telescope time?
How many people should they allow?
How long should they allow it?

Lets say they give every person on Earth just 1 minute to look at this new discovery.
That equates to roughly 8 billion minutes, or 253 years.

So you want them to waste 253 years of telescope time, just so scum like you can say it's fake anyway.

If you want to verify it, get your own.

Space isn’t any different than anything else is. If they uncover ancient cities buried below sand, we can go there and SEE those ancient cites ourselves, to know they exist.

No, you can't. Archaeologists will prevent you from going in and fucking up the site.
In fact, there is already a great example of this, Chauvet Cave.
It has some quite significant historical importance. The public is not permitted to enter it to ensure its preservation.
Instead, a fake cave has been made which has copied the details from that cave.

or can buy the same instrument as theirs and see the microbe themselves, if they want to, if they want proof of that microbe as real.

And you can do the same with telescopes. But you don't want to.

What you are doing now is more akin to rejecting a claim obtained through an electron microscope, because you can't see it through your shitty $10 telescope with 10000x digital zoom.

When they claimed to see such things on Saturn 200 years ago, we had no telescopes they did.

Because you didn't want them.
And you still don't and appeal to inferior telescopes, or shitty footage from a continually autofocusing iphone.

Sure we could’ve seen Saturn closer and clearer over the past  200 years, but we didn’t bother to

Again, are you sure?
Or are you just appealing to your wilful ignorance?

Remember how I already provided links to papers on Saturn between those dates?

NASA is a ‘reliable source’ to people who don’t use their own brains and see there’s no independent sources that can validate any of their bs claims.

NASA is a reliable source to people who are not conspiracy theorists.  If you want to independently validate some of their claims, then go to one of the space tourism companies and book a space flight.  Just don't whine about the price because there have been a number of people who have spent the money and made the trip.
https://www.revfine.com/space-tourism/

They announce astronomers have discovered new galaxies and black holes and planets which may hold life on them. They show us images of colorized points of light, say that’s a new galaxy, show us a big black area with points of light around it, and say that’s a black hole we just discovered a gazillion miles away.

All these are amazing new discoveries, right? Seeing an entirely unknown galaxy would be a giant leap up from seeing a new species of earthworm or ant, and when we discover ancient cities buried below sand, we all can see those ancient cities in images and IN PERSON, and know it’s not complete bs they made up, right?

So after they show us images of new galaxies and black holes never known to exist until then, they should let us SEE those newly discovered galaxies and black holes through their own telescopes which they claim to have seen them through.

Space isn’t any different than anything else is. If they uncover ancient cities buried below sand, we can go there and SEE those ancient cites ourselves, to know they exist.

When scientists first discovered single cells amoebas and muticelled parameciums through microscopes, we also saw them through microscopes later on, right?

Microscopic life forms aren’t exclusively seen by microbiologists who don’t let us buy our own microscopes to see them ourselves.

Telescopes are the same as microscopes, only one sees objects closer than by eye, and the other sees objects that are too small to see by eye.

When a microbiologist discovers a microbe of under .00000mm in size with a powerful electron microscope, everyone else will eventually have seen that microbe through their own instruments, or can buy the same instrument as theirs and see the microbe themselves, if they want to, if they want proof of that microbe as real.

When they claimed to see such things on Saturn 200 years ago, we had no telescopes they did. Now that we DO have such telescopes to see Saturn and find out their claims are bs, they have telescopes and claim to see new galaxies and black holes through them, and we again don’t have such telescopes they do.

Wouldn’t they see Saturns multiple distinct rings through these new telescopes after 200 years anymore? It’s like they saw everything on Saturn that exists, and there’s nothing else to see until a ‘space orobe’ is sent out to Saturn!

Sure we could’ve seen Saturn closer and clearer over the past  200 years, but we didn’t bother to, it’s all been seen already back then. We waited until we made ‘space probes’ and sent them to Saturn to see how accurate their data was back then, and it was very accurate indeed!

Why are you so fucking hung up on Saturn?

Go to an observatory and see Saturn for yourself through a powerful telescope, and stop whining that nobody will let you see it.

You haven't proved anybody has lied, but you have proved the depths a fucked in the head flat earther, will stoop to, to keep a corpse on life support, like this Saturn argument of yours.

You should be more concerned with space matters closer to home. The International space station and the fact that Hollywood  actor Tom Cruise still plans to film his next movie in outer space, should be dominating that feeble flat earth, pee sized brain of yours.

Your Saturn argument is dead and stone cold. Stop continuing to fuck it. Move on.

No, you don’t understand the whole problem here.

It’s not just NASA, not just every astronomer, not just one or two specific groups, not just those groups related to ‘space’ as such a thing.

It’s about claims made without being validated or confirmed as true by other sources, who are independent and not connected to those who made the claims, who can personally find out and witness what they have claimed to be seen, etc.

Every claim, everyone who has ever made any claim about ‘space’, in any issue related to ‘space’, has never allowed others to validate or confirm their claims, not because they cannot be validated or confirmed, but being not permitted or allowed to be validated or confirmed by those who made these claims of ‘space’.

Astronomers claimed and still make claims about seeing things in ‘space’, through their own telescopes, for centuries, and we never have seen through their telescopes, nor could buy the same telescopes they had or have, except for one, the greatest telescope on Earth, 150 years ago.

Under specific conditions, which promote space and astronomy, selecting those groups, it’s not open to everyone or anyone who can afford it.

To one, that is given the chance to see Saturn up close through this telescope, they’d all want to film it, of course.

Why haven’t any of them, or anyone at NASA, the Kings Of All Knowing Things of Space, ever shown Saturn on a video, or any other ‘planets’?

Because after we’ve filmed Saturn, since a few years ago, to now, it’s been amazing to see it, which explains why they’ve never shown Saturn on any videos.

Unless you want to believe Saturn has always been seen as completely motionless, over such a period of time, except they filmed the moon, so it’s why they’ve shown no videos of Saturn, then.

If you really believe they saw multiple distinct belts on Saturn back then, why haven’t they ever taken a video of it through that telescope, taken images of it through that telescope, and after they’ve never done squat, why do we finally see it’s NOT motionless at all?

If they always saw it motionless, that’s what we’d always see too, or most of the time anyway.

But we’ve NEVER once seen it motionless.

This telescope showed the same thing as the others did, no multiple distinct belts on Saturn were seen at all, just one large area in the middle of the orb, moving rapidly at its edges.

Even though it’s not entirely clear or sharply defined, that is mostly due to its rapid motion, same as taking a video of any object rapidly in rotation would appear with a blurriness to it in some degree.

If the blur is from an effect of atmosphere, then the individual frames of the videos are all blurry too.

But when individual frames of Saturn videos are seen, they aren’t all a blur. The features can be seen sharply, not blurred out.

Your plane or that video with the truck are blurred out in every frame of the videos, which shows it’s an effect causing it.

Look at the frames of that star I showed you before.

It shows details on it, sharp details that are in every frame, in different positions and shapes every one or two frames.

That’s not possible with any effects of atmosphere, that’s the star itself we see here.

It’s stunning and unlike anything we know of on Earth, that’s for sure.

The stars are amazing to see, nothing like them exists on Earth, but when those loathsome liars told us they’re all just tiny points of light to see from Earth, hiding their telescopes from us to see through, making up a bs ‘method’ of how to ‘magnify’ the stars, even though they told us we cannot magnify them as anything but tiny points of light, they told us we must use this special method to magnify them!

Use our special method and magnify the tiny points of light into slightly bigger and rounder points of light!   

But you said we can’t magnify the stars. And then told us we must use a special method to magnify the stars.

Magnifying a tiny point of light of an object a trillion miles away, that you have no clue about at all, yet you know it is perfectly round, and they’re all perfectly round!!!

Every star is trillions of miles away, we cannot ever see them up close, cannot see anything of them, just as tiny points of light, but they know they’re all perfectly round in shape, somehow!

No, you don’t understand the whole problem here.

I do understand the problem quite well.

You are DESPERATE to pretend Earth is flat. So you need to group together everyone that shows it isn't, to pretend there is a massive conspiracy involving so many people it isn't funny, all to pretend your delusional BS is true.
But even the crap you are appealing to now doesn't help you, for reasons already explained.
Even if you show these astronomers lied, that still doesn't magically make Saturn close. The parallax to it still demonstrates it is incredibly far away and your flat fantasy doesn't work.

But you don't care about any of that, because you have deluded yourself into believing that if you can show a single lie, that means it all must be wrong; so if NASA says grass is green, then clearly it isn't.

It’s about claims made without being validated or confirmed as true by other sources, who are independent and not connected to those who made the claims, who can personally find out and witness what they have claimed to be seen, etc.

No, it is about you wilfully rejecting claims, and making no attempt to validate them, all to pretend space is fake.

Every claim, everyone who has ever made any claim about ‘space’, in any issue related to ‘space’, has never allowed others to validate or confirm their claims

No one is stopping you.
Plenty get validated on a day to day basis, with things like GPS, and observations.
No one is stopping you from making an observation of the ISS, right where it is meant to be.
No one is stopping from getting a group of people together to go make observations from multiple locations to try to determine where it actually is.

And there are plenty of groups which have gone into space or put things into space, and track objects in space.

Astronomers claimed and still make claims about seeing things in ‘space’, through their own telescopes

And no one was stopping people from getting their own.
You could make one yourself, or you can now pay people to make them for you.
No one is stopping you.
Stop appealing to your wilful ignorance.

They are under no obligation to give everyone a view through their telescope.

Like I said earlier, just a tiny bit of time for each person equates to years spent.

To one, that is given the chance to see Saturn up close through this telescope, they’d all want to film it, of course.

Why?
What is the point?
Only a complete idiot would waste the opportunity of seeing it through their own eyes to instead just get crappy footage of it.

Why haven’t any of them, or anyone at NASA, the Kings Of All Knowing Things of Space, ever shown Saturn on a video, or any other ‘planets’?

Because they are more interested in getting a high quality image.

Just consider how insane your position is.
The idea that this better footage will show Saturn as motionless. Yet instead of taking advantage of that to take a picture to get a nice high quality image, you want them to go and take a video.

That would be as stupid as going to a famous work of art, setting up a camera on a tripod, and then just taking a video.

What is the video going to show?
What scientific merit is there to obtaining it?
NONE!

To those honest who will accept reality, there is already plenty of evidence regarding the motion of Saturn.
To dishonest conspiracy nuts like you, that video would not be enough. You will still just dismiss it as fake.

So again, WHAT IS THE POINT?

You want them to waste time collecting completely useless crap.
Why?

motionless

You have had that crap refuted countless times.
Give it up unless you want to go back and defend it.

This telescope showed the same thing as the others did

No, they have shown drastically different levels of distortion, indicating these poor quality telescopes or poor quality video, are suffering from significant distortion of the view, and that what you are seeing is NOT what Saturn would actually look like through their telescopes.

moving rapidly

You are yet to justify your claim of any actual motion of Saturn.
Again, the differences in the footage clearly indicate there is significant distortion affecting the view.

Your plane or that video with the truck are blurred out in every frame of the videos, which shows it’s an effect causing it.

Just like Saturn, and the stars.
The OBJECT is distorted and not clear to see, but the distortions can create illusory features which can appear sharp.

It shows details on it

Just like the plane.
The videos of Saturn and the stars and the planes are all quite alike.

The only part which is special is the black background.

when those loathsome liars

The lithesome liar here is you.
Still blatantly lying about what has been presented to you.

making up a bs ‘method’ of how to ‘magnify’ the stars

No, using the exact same method as used for other objects.

There is no magical special method.
You keep claiming this BS, yet provide nothing to justify it.

Every star is trillions of miles away, we cannot ever see them up close, cannot see anything of them, just as tiny points of light, but they know they’re all perfectly round in shape, somehow!

Not perfectly round. But it is by understanding what they are.


Now again, do you have any evidence to justify your insane cliams?

Every claim, everyone who has ever made any claim about ‘space’, in any issue related to ‘space’, has never allowed others to validate or confirm their claims, not because they cannot be validated or confirmed, but being not permitted or allowed to be validated or confirmed by those who made these claims of ‘space’.

Who, not related 'space', do you suppose would be qualified to validate or confirm those claims?

The reason most people accept the ball Earth story, the endless universe story, moon landing story, floating around in space story, and all the rest of these stories, is because everyone was told these stories were all true stories since our childhood, and ever since then, for over 300 years or so.

If they first came to realize, from measurements and seeing things up closer, etc. that the Earth was not flat, over its surface, but curved on its surface, as a massive ball….

Why would they bleat it out to the whole world like it would matter as very important information to our daily lives?

It’s very ironic ball Earthers say the flat Earth isn’t based on science or evidence or proof, while hiding real evidence and faking their own ‘evidence’ for everything in their story is all they do, have done, will ever do in future.

Lies are very hard to protect, more so in future, and always fail in the end. The end is near, for their story.

Why would they bleat it out to the whole world like it would matter as very important information to our daily lives?

If your day to day job involves flying aircraft of sailing ship over vast distances, then the knowing  the correct size, shape and layout of the earth is pretty important information.

It’s very ironic ball Earthers say the flat Earth isn’t based on science or evidence or proof, while hiding real evidence and faking their own ‘evidence’ for everything in their story is all they do, have done, will ever do in future.

A massive conspiracy to hide the true shape of the earth dating back to the Ancient Greeks is pretty tough sell, given the scale of modern international trade and shipping.

It’s the easiest thing to prove, and that’s why they are scared we will prove it beyond any doubt at all.

When we’ve seen rockets flying near clouds, below clouds, through clouds, this has shown us what their true altitudes are at those times of flight.

They don’t put a fake ‘instrument panel’ on those videos, only the ones without clouds in them, for obvious reasons.

That’s a clue to what’s really going on with rockets.

Proving it is to simply launch rockets straight upward, magnify them close as possible from many instruments on the ground, and see what happens to them soon afterwards.

Put cameras on the rockets, of course, and on the ground, and magnify them all the way up…

They’ve now tried to fake ‘black space’ when we see the blue skies above rockets!

The rockets may look like they’re below blue skies, but now look from the rocket camera, pointing to the black of endless ‘space’!!

How can the rocket point out to black space when we can see it’s all just blue skies above it?

Blue skies seen clearly above the rockets, that the rockets block out from being BELOW the blue skies!

No, they say, the rocket is ABOVE the blue skies we see it is below the blue and blocking it from being below the blue, it’s an illusion of being below the blue, blocking out the blue is also an illusion!


 

How can the rocket point out to black space when we can see it’s all just blue skies above it?

Why did passengers on the Concorde see dark skies when crossing the ocean?

They never think of using magnification for their rockets, somehow!

I’m sure they’ve filmed rockets with magnification, right?

But you’ll say they probably did, but the footage was lousy, or blurry, and every one ever filmed was lousy and that’s why we’ve never seen a close up of rockets on videos ever at all!!

You’ve excused everything they’ve not shown us, excused NASA never showing us any videos of stars or Saturn up close as being not worth doing at all, excused all OUR videos of stars and Saturn showing them in detail and in motion as all caused by a made up ‘effect’ that doesn’t exist in Hollywood movies because it would look so ridiculous, even in a Hulk or Superman movie! 

Maybe Lex Luther invented your super-duper effect? It fits in nicely!

Quote from: turbonium2 on November 29, 2024, 08:45:06 PM

How can the rocket point out to black space when we can see it’s all just blue skies above it?

Why did passengers on the Concorde see dark skies when crossing the ocean?

Umm, see where the clouds are?

What altitude are clouds at, in general?

Seen clouds from a plane before?

Not near ‘outer space’, sorry to say!

Skies do turn dark as the Sun moves away, and become brighter as the Sun approaches us. Who knew?

They never think of using magnification for their rockets, somehow!

I’m sure they’ve filmed rockets with magnification, right?

Of course they have, but magnification has its limits.

But you’ll say they probably did, but the footage was lousy, or blurry, and every one ever filmed was lousy and that’s why we’ve never seen a close up of rockets on videos ever at all!!

Unless you can tell NASA to get a 32K resolution, infinite magnification zoom lens, this is probably about as good as the ground video gets:

[/quote]