Why care if the earth is flat?

They’re all edited and faked scenes put into them.

They removed the original video of it, and put in edited crap versions of it.

Are you aware of that? Did you see the original video they showed online? It was the only one they showed for years at first.

These versions still show the same first part we saw in the original, except they took out the view from ground now.

Why would they do that? Hmm, I think I know why, it’s easy to figure out.

The original video showed when the rocket hit the Firmament and floated there, like their versions do.

Except the original video showed the ground below the rocket for much longer than these versions do.

It showed the rocket slowing down more and more until it stopped moving at all, and we saw the same ground as still below the rocket. They took that part out for their versions, and put in ‘space’ scenes instead with a curved Earth ball in it!

If you ever see the original video somewhere, you’ll see it’s like I described here.

I’m sure that some people downloaded the original video. I hope it’s put online again sometime. Maybe it is, but I’ve yet to find it so fat.

They’re all edited and faked scenes put into them.

i.e. after WHAT YOU PROVIDED shows you are wrong, you are now desperate to dismiss it as fake.

They removed the original video of it, and put in edited crap versions of it.

PROVE IT!
Stop just asserting the same pathetic BS.

What is more likely? That every piece of footage from it has been edited in the same way to produce the same results and show the same upwards motion, with all the original footage entirely removed with you unable to provide it; or YOU ARE WRONG, you saw a crappy video where a dishonest conman claims that it hit the dome, simply because it stopped spinning so fast and that was all it took for you to think it stopped, but then when examined more closesly it only stops spinning, but you deny it because you are desperate for your delusional fantasy to be true.

Are you aware of that? Did you see the original video they showed online?

Yes, and the rocket continued to go up.

These versions still show the same first part we saw in the original, except they took out the view from ground now.

You mean the version cherry picked by dishonest FEers to lie to everyone and claim it hit a firmament?

Why would they do that? Oh to pretend there is a firmament when they have absolutely no evidence of it.

The original video showed when the rocket hit the Firmament and floated there, like their versions do.

PROVE IT!
Stop just asserting delusional BS and start justifying your claims.

Because so far, you have NOTHING to justify your BS.

You’ve never had any proof of anything at all, so what makes you an expert on proof?

An expert on lack of proof, perhaps, but not on having any of it.

The proof is from NASA to you!

Not any blue seen below that rocket? Strange, it should be seen by that point!

Where did the blue go? It must be hiding somewhere!

You’ve never had any proof of anything at all, so what makes you an expert on proof?

I have had plenty of proof from the RE side.

Just no proof from FEers.

Now stop just repeating pathetic BS, and start trying to defend it.

Again, all the evidence shows no firmament.
You have NOTHING to indicate it exists except a shitty old book full of so much BS it isn't funny.

Not any blue seen below that rocket? Strange, it should be seen by that point!

Where did the blue go? It must be hiding somewhere!

And have you actually bothered checking?
Do you know what the white balance was for the camera? Do you know if it auto adjusts?
Do you even have a reference for the ground from up close?

No.
You are just desperate so you make up whatever BS you need and pretend it is true.

Have you ever seen a rocket fly up at high speed from the ground into the air straight up from a video taken on the ground, from start to finish?

And if you have, did they shoot it with magnification as it got higher and higher up?

I’ve never seen it, only cuts put in of a close up in the clips.

That’s what’s very odd about this, among the many others.

Everyone knows that a rocket flies up and looks ever smaller on the surface.

What would you want to do when filming a rocket, with any camera or instrument? You’d want to magnify it, with your instruments!

And use more than one instrument to film it, by other people taking videos of it.

Even if it loses sight of the rocket, it can be back in view again afterwards in close up footage. 

Any idiot would film it with magnification, why wouldn’t it be done that way?

I’m quite sure they have filmed it with magnication, who wouldn’t do that?

But why wouldn’t they show it on their videos of rockets is the question here.

What are they hiding from us, not showing it in close up?

It’s nice that they show us a view from the rockets, but why don’t they ever show us the view from the ground magnifying on rockets iflying upward?

It’s not that they’d not film them getting ever smaller without any magnification, it’s that they would film it with magnification and never show it to us that’s fishy as hell!

The rocket is what you’re there for, what you’re going to film, you’d want to film it as close as possible with magnification. How logical is that?

That’s what’s very odd about this, among the many others.

That isn't odd at all.
If you want to capture the entire flight upwards, you would likely want to capture it with different cameras, where some are set up beforehand to see further away objects much better and others are set to see closer ones better.
You wouldn't try to use the same camera for all.

Even then, most people are more concerned about what the rocket sees than what you see of the rocket on the ground.

What would you want to do when filming a rocket, with any camera or instrument? You’d want to magnify it, with your instruments!
And use more than one instrument to film it, by other people taking videos of it.

i.e. use multiple instruments, and then combine it for the best footage.
i.e. the very thing you said was odd.

And magnification is not magic.
They can't just keep zooming in and seeing it.

What are they hiding from us, not showing it in close up?

Nothing.
You are desperate for them to be hiding something so you claim they are.

If you think they are, why haven't you gone filmed a rocket with as much magnification as you can manage?

it’s that they would film it with magnification and never show it to us that’s fishy as hell!

So your fantasy with no basis in reality.

There’s absolutely no reason for not filming it with magnification. It’s common sense, we all film things in the distance with magnification. Why wouldn’t we? It’s better to see closer than tiny and hard to even see at all!

Saying they’d want the view from the rocket, not from ground and nagnifiied, is ridiculously stupid.

If the rocket goes wonky by then, or any problem happens, it might not show up on rocket cameras, and only seen from ground, up to the bottom area of it.

You’d look like a complete idiot if you said ‘we didn’t care about filming it from the ground, close up’

It’d be great if we had, we’d see what went wrong or might have anyway!

You think up the stupidest, far fetched excuses again and again.

It’s the only way your story can exist at all, as a complete fairy tale in bizarro land! A land where nothing they do makes sense!

Your saying that everything we see thats in ‘space’, like the moon you believe is 240000 miles in the blackness of space,
would be seen under our blue skies above Earth?

Exactly how could the moon be seen under and blocking out the blue skies above Earth, if it were 240000 miles beyond our blue skies in the blackness of ‘space’?

When we see that even the moon isn’t above our blue skies, yet actually is blocking our skies, the moon can only be underneath our blue skies, lower than our blue skies,,and certainly not in your made up ‘black of space’ 24000 miles away and beyond our blue skies.

Worthless and absurd excuses are all you have, and it’s been trashed

When you see the moon during the day, does it look loke its behind a blue filter?

How about compared to at night?

There’s absolutely no reason for not filming it with magnification.

There is if you would need to spend a hell of a lot of money on a camera to get the magnification you want.
People do film it, and magnify it, but only to the limit of their equipment.

Saying they’d want the view from the rocket, not from ground and nagnifiied, is ridiculously stupid.

Why?
Cameras on the rocket, being much closer, and able to be placed to watch key parts of the rocket provide a much better view than a view from the ground.

If the rocket goes wonky by then, or any problem happens, it might not show up on rocket cameras, and only seen from ground, up to the bottom area of it.

And conversely, it might not show on the cameras from the ground and instead only be seen from the cameras on the rocket.

You think up the stupidest, far fetched excuses again and again.

No, I leave that kind of "thinking" to you.

Your saying that everything we see thats in ‘space’, like the moon you believe is 240000 miles in the blackness of space,
would be seen under our blue skies above Earth?

No, I don't.
YOU say that. With no basis at all.
We see it THROUGH the blue skies.

Exactly how could the moon be seen under and blocking out the blue skies above Earth

It isn't, as already shown.
It is seen THROUGH the blue sky, with a noticeable tint on it because of viewing through the blue sky.

And again, space is not some black opaque object.
That black is merely the absence of light.

Worthless and absurd excuses are all you have, and it’s been trashed

There you go projecting again.
Your lies have been shown to be BS repeatedly. Yet you keep on making them.

A thought experiment to show the moon doesn't have to be in the atmosphere is very simple:

Boil a pot of water, and place a person across from you 15 feet away. As the vapor rises, your friend will be obscured, despite being well away from the steam. Same principle applies. Please turbo, for the love of god, no one is forcing you to say stupid shit.

A thought experiment to show the moon doesn't have to be in the atmosphere is very simple:

Boil a pot of water, and place a person across from you 15 feet away. As the vapor rises, your friend will be obscured, despite being well away from the steam. Same principle applies. Please turbo, for the love of god, no one is forcing you to say stupid shit.

He's just inadvertently prove himself wrong like all the other "definitive" experiments they do that proves the earth round.


He's like a compulsive liar except he compulsively spreads misinformation.

Avoiding straight forward questions is his MO.

Then rants no one will debate him properly...

Your saying that everything we see thats in ‘space’, like the moon you believe is 240000 miles in the blackness of space,
would be seen under our blue skies above Earth?

Exactly how could the moon be seen under and blocking out the blue skies above Earth, if it were 240000 miles beyond our blue skies in the blackness of ‘space’?

When we see that even the moon isn’t above our blue skies, yet actually is blocking our skies, the moon can only be underneath our blue skies, lower than our blue skies,,and certainly not in your made up ‘black of space’ 24000 miles away and beyond our blue skies.

Worthless and absurd excuses are all you have, and it’s been trashed

Is there something you aren't telling us?

Do you have evidence of a plane or rocket going behind the moon without leaving Earth's atmosphere? Or a hot air balloon? Or a bird?

Or perhaps you think the moon is a flat disc magnetically stuck to the ceiling of the dome, and slides all over the shop? Or maybe you think the dome is just a big curved led television screen like in a planetarium, or in the silly movie, "The Truman Show", and the moon, sun, and stars just a movie overhead?

The entire moon would be seen through the blue skies, not block out the whole blue with its white surface in front of the blue skies.

Have you ever noticed that only certain areas are bluish tinted in daylight?

They’re the very same smoother areas we see as darker in shade than the rest of the surface at night!

Why would the same smoothed areas look bluish in daylight, but darker than elsewhere at night?

Because those areas are so thin, we can see through them to blue skies in daylight, and dark skies at night.

They are translucent areas of the moon, and it’s thicker elsewhere on the surface of the moon.

Why would the same smoothed areas look bluish in daylight, but darker than elsewhere at night?

Simple.  Because there is no earthshine at night to illuminate the moon.

The entire moon would be seen through the blue skies, not block out the whole blue with its white surface in front of the blue skies.

Have you ever noticed that only certain areas are bluish tinted in daylight?

They’re the very same smoother areas we see as darker in shade than the rest of the surface at night!

Why would the same smoothed areas look bluish in daylight, but darker than elsewhere at night?

Because those areas are so thin, we can see through them to blue skies in daylight, and dark skies at night.

They are translucent areas of the moon, and it’s thicker elsewhere on the surface of the moon.

If the moon is transparent, how can it's brightness light up the Earth at night, especially during a full moon, so brightly it is almost like daylight?

If it were transparent as you propose, it couldn't also be emitting or reflecting that much light, and wouldn't be visible during daylight, as the sun's brightness would wash it out.

Ofcourse, the sheeple or indoctrinated explanation as you would refer to it as, is the moon is reflecting sunlight.

The next time you see the sun and moon in the same daylight sky, imagine both are balls in the sky with the sun illuminating the moon. You will see the part of the moon in shadow is always facing away from the sun, demonstrating the sun is more than likely, shining on the moon.

Quote from: turbonium2 on December 21, 2024, 12:32:57 AM

The entire moon would be seen through the blue skies, not block out the whole blue with its white surface in front of the blue skies.

Have you ever noticed that only certain areas are bluish tinted in daylight?

They’re the very same smoother areas we see as darker in shade than the rest of the surface at night!

Why would the same smoothed areas look bluish in daylight, but darker than elsewhere at night?

Because those areas are so thin, we can see through them to blue skies in daylight, and dark skies at night.

They are translucent areas of the moon, and it’s thicker elsewhere on the surface of the moon.

If the moon is transparent, how can it's brightness light up the Earth at night, especially during a full moon, so brightly it is almost like daylight?

If it were transparent as you propose, it couldn't also be emitting or reflecting that much light, and wouldn't be visible during daylight, as the sun's brightness would wash it out.

Ofcourse, the sheeple or indoctrinated explanation as you would refer to it as, is the moon is reflecting sunlight.

The next time you see the sun and moon in the same daylight sky, imagine both are balls in the sky with the sun illuminating the moon. You will see the part of the moon in shadow is always facing away from the sun, demonstrating the sun is more than likely, shining on the moon.

I said the moon appears to be partially translucent in those areas, but not elsewhere, the majority of the surface.

Translucent means it is partially seen through, but not entirely, which is transparent. Drapes are usually translucent to a larger degree, bath curtains are usually more translucent.

Light from the moon is certainly originating from the moon itself, based on several reasons, which show it cannot possibly be a reflection of sunlight.

In daylight, sunlight hits the waters within the firmament, or the sky to most people, either one isn’t  relevant to this…


The sunlight makes our sky appear blue, only it’s not air turning blue, it is the waters above the sky which look blue.

If the moon was much further away from Earth than the skies, and the moon reflects sunlight, when behind it, somehow, or beside it at a distance, an equally amazing trick…..

Why would the moon be almost as bright as the blue skies, or even brighter at dawn? How could moonlight be a reflection of sunlight, at dawn, when skies are still dark, but the moon is bright?

You believe the air is seen blue, or blue within the air. But the moon is bright all night, and is still bright before dawn, after dawn, in dim skies.

The only time our skies look blue, is in full sunlight, while dimmer blue or dark when it’s not full.

And yes, the moon is indeed casting its own light, and it certainly is strong enough when full to brighten up the surface, reflect off our lakes and oceans, while the Sun is still far in the distance over Earth. 

Hours later on, the moon - still seen -has moved over in the daylight skies, as the Sun moves in from the other side.

Yet those areas of the moon still appear blue, while the skies are a brighter blue behind and around the moon.

They claim the moon is far away, within the black of ‘space’, and always is in blackness, never in sunlight or brighter at all. 

But there’s no sunlight or the Sun seen behind the moon or alongside the moon, nor anywhere seen at all. If the Sun was on the opposite side of us, then sunlight would hit through the skies above Earth before hitting the moons surface, beyond our skies. Which would make the skies blue as in daylight, but it’s clearly not.


The blue cannot be in the skies, which it’s not, it’s from the waters of the Firnament.

The blue cannot be in the skies, which it’s not, it’s from the waters of the Firnament.

Is the fishing any good in the waters of the firmament?

I guess we’ll know if we can fish on top of the firmament waters, when we go there later on. 

I don’t go fishing anymore, so I don’t care either way!

I guess we’ll know if we can fish on top of the firmament waters, when we go there later on. 

Sounds like a great idea for a field trip experiment to confirm the existence of the firmament.  Maybe the folks that set up the trip to Antarctica for the 24 hour sun experiment can help you set it up.

Quote from: Smoke Machine on December 21, 2024, 12:00:59 PM

Quote from: turbonium2 on December 21, 2024, 12:32:57 AM

The entire moon would be seen through the blue skies, not block out the whole blue with its white surface in front of the blue skies.

Have you ever noticed that only certain areas are bluish tinted in daylight?

They’re the very same smoother areas we see as darker in shade than the rest of the surface at night!

Why would the same smoothed areas look bluish in daylight, but darker than elsewhere at night?

Because those areas are so thin, we can see through them to blue skies in daylight, and dark skies at night.

They are translucent areas of the moon, and it’s thicker elsewhere on the surface of the moon.

If the moon is transparent, how can it's brightness light up the Earth at night, especially during a full moon, so brightly it is almost like daylight?

If it were transparent as you propose, it couldn't also be emitting or reflecting that much light, and wouldn't be visible during daylight, as the sun's brightness would wash it out.

Ofcourse, the sheeple or indoctrinated explanation as you would refer to it as, is the moon is reflecting sunlight.

The next time you see the sun and moon in the same daylight sky, imagine both are balls in the sky with the sun illuminating the moon. You will see the part of the moon in shadow is always facing away from the sun, demonstrating the sun is more than likely, shining on the moon.

I said the moon appears to be partially translucent in those areas, but not elsewhere, the majority of the surface.

Translucent means it is partially seen through, but not entirely, which is transparent. Drapes are usually translucent to a larger degree, bath curtains are usually more translucent.

Light from the moon is certainly originating from the moon itself, based on several reasons, which show it cannot possibly be a reflection of sunlight.

In daylight, sunlight hits the waters within the firmament, or the sky to most people, either one isn’t  relevant to this…


The sunlight makes our sky appear blue, only it’s not air turning blue, it is the waters above the sky which look blue.

If the moon was much further away from Earth than the skies, and the moon reflects sunlight, when behind it, somehow, or beside it at a distance, an equally amazing trick…..

Why would the moon be almost as bright as the blue skies, or even brighter at dawn? How could moonlight be a reflection of sunlight, at dawn, when skies are still dark, but the moon is bright?

You believe the air is seen blue, or blue within the air. But the moon is bright all night, and is still bright before dawn, after dawn, in dim skies.

The only time our skies look blue, is in full sunlight, while dimmer blue or dark when it’s not full.

And yes, the moon is indeed casting its own light, and it certainly is strong enough when full to brighten up the surface, reflect off our lakes and oceans, while the Sun is still far in the distance over Earth. 

Hours later on, the moon - still seen -has moved over in the daylight skies, as the Sun moves in from the other side.

Yet those areas of the moon still appear blue, while the skies are a brighter blue behind and around the moon.

They claim the moon is far away, within the black of ‘space’, and always is in blackness, never in sunlight or brighter at all. 

But there’s no sunlight or the Sun seen behind the moon or alongside the moon, nor anywhere seen at all. If the Sun was on the opposite side of us, then sunlight would hit through the skies above Earth before hitting the moons surface, beyond our skies. Which would make the skies blue as in daylight, but it’s clearly not.


The blue cannot be in the skies, which it’s not, it’s from the waters of the Firnament.

Still, how can the moon be partially translucent like the drapes in your loungeroom and also casting it's own light? Do your loungeroom curtains cast light into your loungeroom, or is it sunlight shining through the curtains doing that?

You're the one telling the story.

Perhaps DreamWorks got their inspiration for their logo from your ideas? You know the one, where the boy is sitting on the crescent moon with his fishing rod, fishing in the deep blue of the sky?

I guess we’ll know if we can fish on top of the firmament waters, when we go there later on. 

I don’t go fishing anymore, so I don’t care either way!

Thw firmament came down during noahs time.

The entire moon would be seen through the blue skies

i.e. exactly what is seen.

Have you ever noticed that only certain areas are bluish tinted in daylight?

No. As already shown. The entire moon is tinted blue.
The brighter parts of the moon have a less significant change in their colour, but are still tinted blue.

Repeating these same refuted lies just shows your dishonesty and desperation.

Why would the same smoothed areas look bluish in daylight, but darker than elsewhere at night?

Because they are reflecting less light towards Earth, they appear darker.
This also means that the blue from the atmosphere is more significant.

If you would like a simple test you can do at home, it is like if you had 1 L of white paint vs 100 ml of white paint, with the same 10 ml of blue paint mixed in. One will be a much bluer blue.

You could even try it with a variable brightness white light and a blue light.

Because those areas are so thin, we can see through them to blue skies in daylight

Yet no stars are visible through it. In fact, the only thing (if we accept your BS) that we see through them is the blue sky.
It sure makes more sense for it to be opaque and the blue is in front.

You also seem to be quite happy accepting the moon is translucent, with NOTHING to support that, yet seem completely incapable of accepting the fact that the sky is translucent.

Light from the moon is certainly originating from the moon itself, based on several reasons, which show it cannot possibly be a reflection of sunlight.

Yet you provide none of those reasons.
There is NOTHING indicating the light from the moon is coming from the moon itself rather than it merely being a reflection of the sun. But there is plenty that shows it is reflecting the light of the sun, like the phases and the shadows in craters.

The sunlight makes our sky appear blue, only it’s not air turning blue, it is the waters above the sky which look blue.

No, it is the air scattering that light, appearing blue at angles away from the sun, and redder when passing through a lot of atmosphere close to the sun (i.e. sunset).

If the moon was much further away from Earth than the skies, and the moon reflects sunlight, when behind it, somehow, or beside it at a distance, an equally amazing trick…..

Just what do you think is amazing here?

Why would the moon be almost as bright as the blue skies, or even brighter at dawn?

Because the air only scatters a small portion of the light while the moon reflects a lot.
Not hard to understand.

How could moonlight be a reflection of sunlight, at dawn, when skies are still dark, but the moon is bright?

Because the moon is higher than the atmosphere, so it can be out of Earth's shadow while the atmosphere above you still is.
Again, trivial to understand.

The only time our skies look blue, is in full sunlight, while dimmer blue or dark when it’s not full.

As if it is the light from the sun scattering in the air causing that blue appearance.

Yet those areas of the moon still appear blue, while the skies are a brighter blue behind and around the moon.

No, they are a bluer but darker blue around the moon.

They claim the moon is far away, within the black of ‘space’, and always is in blackness, never in sunlight or brighter at all.

Pure BS.

But there’s no sunlight or the Sun seen behind the moon or alongside the moon, nor anywhere seen at all. If the Sun was on the opposite side of us, then sunlight would hit through the skies above Earth before hitting the moons surface, beyond our skies. Which would make the skies blue as in daylight, but it’s clearly not.

Do you not understand how shadows work?

Why don't you try drawing it out?

There is absolutely nothing blue within the air.

Where does almost all of the air exist?

Between the Earths surface and up to 40000 feet altitude, is over 85% of the air above Earth.

Except when we look down through 85% of the air, it is entirely clear, nothing at all is blue, or tinted blue, or slightly blue.

Those who claim it is often tinted blue, with images of some tinting of a blue, are edited with a blue put into images.

Anyone who’s seen the ground below from a plane knows it’s completely clear, never a blue is seen at all.

Do you really think showing bs edited images or videos with blue added to them is going to fool anyone it’s trur!

Look at videos from rockets showing the ground below,

Until lately, before they put blue into them, the air was always clear. We always see it’s clear from planes.

It’s entirely clear through 85% of the air. It’s always blue above planes, far above planes. From that altitude, we can see, we have taken many images, showing the blue is still much higher than we are in planes at high altitudes.

Even their rockets which they claim are up in ‘space’ show the air is clear through to the ground below.

It’s proven and seen to be entirely clear.

That’s why when they recently started to put in a blue layer atounf ball Earth images and videos all the time, when most images didn’t have as blue layer for years before, it looks stupid now.

Why would there be a blue layer wrapped around Earth on its edge, like a frosting or glow, and we always see the skies as blue, supposedly, but there’s nothing of a blue seen through the whole sky, when it’s seen in the opposite direction?

That’s all the air seen as entirely clear through it, and there is obviously nothing in the air which is blue.

Their fake claim works only in one direction, the problem is that it doesn’t work in the opposite direction. That’s how we know the sky or air aren’t blue, it’s clear. 85% of air is seen clear from planes. Their videos show it’s clear from’soace’

If the moon is seen within the blue, from 24000 miles away in ‘space’, I’m sure we’d see the blue in Earths air from ‘space’ too!

Near Earth in space, the air isn’t blue at all, it’s clear. But the moon that’s 240000 miles away in space is seen within blue ‘skies’


Duh, seems good to me!

There is absolutely nothing blue within the air.

Again, then why does all the evidence show otherwise?
You continually assert there is none, yet provide nothing to back up your claims.
Conversely, I have provided videos which show a blue tint to the atmosphere, and we have the moon, clearly showing the blue.

Between the Earths surface and up to 40000 feet altitude, is over 85% of the air above Earth.

No, it is closer to 80%

Except when we look down through 85% of the air, it is entirely clear, nothing at all is blue, or tinted blue, or slightly blue.

PROVE IT!
Stop just asserting the same pathetic BS.
You have NOTHING to justify your claim.

Those who claim it is often tinted blue, with images of some tinting of a blue, are edited with a blue put into images.

Based on what? You not wanting that to be reality?

Anyone who’s seen the ground below from a plane knows it’s completely clear, never a blue is seen at all.

No, those who have honestly thought about it will see a blue tint, but it is hard with all the light from Earth.
Considering people couldn't even agree on the colour of a dress, do you really think that argument holds any weight at all?

Do you really think showing bs edited images or videos with blue added to them is going to fool anyone it’s trur!

Do you mean do I really think a lying POS like you would ever accept unaltered images and videos which clearly show you are a lying POS? Of course not.

Look at videos from rockets showing the ground below

And try to actually measure the colour, and see what it is.

Until lately, before they put blue into them, the air was always clear. We always see it’s clear from planes.

Again, PROVE IT!

You keep asserting the same pathetic BS, but provide nothing to justify it.

It’s proven and seen to be entirely clear.

WHERE?

That’s why when they recently started to put in a blue layer atounf ball Earth images and videos all the time, when most images didn’t have as blue layer for years before, it looks stupid now.

Again, where?
You just keep asserting pure BS with no justification at all.

Why would there be a blue layer wrapped around Earth on its edge, like a frosting or glow, and we always see the skies as blue, supposedly, but there’s nothing of a blue seen through the whole sky, when it’s seen in the opposite direction?

Which just turns the entire thing a slight tint of blue. Quite difficult to see with the much brighter light behind, as already explained to you.
And then you have the issue of colour balancing the photos.

Their fake claim works only in one direction, the problem is that it doesn’t work in the opposite direction.

Nothing fake about it.
And again, it is really simple.
You take no light and add a small amount of blue light to it, and it appears blue.
You take a massive amount of coloured light and add a small amount of blue to it, and you barely change the colour.

Quite simple.

But again, do you know what really kills your delusional BS?
A sunset.
Why isn't the sky blue then?

Your BS can't explain it, or needs to appeal to more BS.
But the RE model explains it just fine.

If the moon is seen within the blue, from 24000 miles away in ‘space’, I’m sure we’d see the blue in Earths air from ‘space’ too!

The difference there is that the moon isn't very colourful, so it is easy to notice the blue.
It is much harder to notice blue on top of a blue ocean, a green forest, brown deserts and so on.

And no, the moon is not seen WITHIN the blue sky. It is seen THROUGH the blue sky.
Again, already explained to you but you just keep on repeating the same BS.

There is absolutely nothing blue within the air.

How many times do we have to tell you that the blue comes from the way that sunlight scatters as it travels through the atmosphere?  Seriously, is there a number?

There is absolutely nothing blue within the air.

Where does almost all of the air exist?

Between the Earths surface and up to 40000 feet altitude, is over 85% of the air above Earth.

Except when we look down through 85% of the air, it is entirely clear, nothing at all is blue, or tinted blue, or slightly blue.

Those who claim it is often tinted blue, with images of some tinting of a blue, are edited with a blue put into images.

Anyone who’s seen the ground below from a plane knows it’s completely clear, never a blue is seen at all.

Do you really think showing bs edited images or videos with blue added to them is going to fool anyone it’s trur!

Look at videos from rockets showing the ground below,

Until lately, before they put blue into them, the air was always clear. We always see it’s clear from planes.

It’s entirely clear through 85% of the air. It’s always blue above planes, far above planes. From that altitude, we can see, we have taken many images, showing the blue is still much higher than we are in planes at high altitudes.

Even their rockets which they claim are up in ‘space’ show the air is clear through to the ground below.

It’s proven and seen to be entirely clear.

That’s why when they recently started to put in a blue layer atounf ball Earth images and videos all the time, when most images didn’t have as blue layer for years before, it looks stupid now.

Why would there be a blue layer wrapped around Earth on its edge, like a frosting or glow, and we always see the skies as blue, supposedly, but there’s nothing of a blue seen through the whole sky, when it’s seen in the opposite direction?

That’s all the air seen as entirely clear through it, and there is obviously nothing in the air which is blue.

Their fake claim works only in one direction, the problem is that it doesn’t work in the opposite direction. That’s how we know the sky or air aren’t blue, it’s clear. 85% of air is seen clear from planes. Their videos show it’s clear from’soace’

If the moon is seen within the blue, from 24000 miles away in ‘space’, I’m sure we’d see the blue in Earths air from ‘space’ too!

Near Earth in space, the air isn’t blue at all, it’s clear. But the moon that’s 240000 miles away in space is seen within blue ‘skies’


Duh, seems good to me!

It seems good until you climb a mountain during daytime and look at distant mountains and see that the farther away a mountain is, the more blue it is. All photographers know this, and most landscape artists as well.

More air between objects in sunlight, equals more blue they appear, Turbonium.