Our website is made possible by displaying online advertisements to our visitors.

Please consider supporting us by disabling your ad blocker.
grav

NASA says earth is round. Where's the proof?

8,892 posts in this topic

Why do you believe the world is round and orbits the sun in the Milky Way galaxy?

Because you were taught the heliocentric model in school? Yes, that is the answer.

So why are you looking at this thread? If you consider yourself to be a true Critical Thinker, which the CIA calls Conspiracy Theory, then you will put aside your indoctrination by the education system and you will look at the arguments put forth in the following pages. Please do not condemn the idea before you have examined it with an open mind.

Here are

10 reasons to disprove the spherical model of earth and the heliocentric system (needs commonly-observed examples for some points).

 

1. Curvature. Spherical trigonometry dictates that the globe should exhibit a curve of 8 inches per mile squared. No experiments on land or water have ever proven this math to be accurate. On the contrary, with proper telephoto lenses, objects can be detected far beyond the expected curvature. Example: Photos of Chicago from across Lake Michigan.

2. Atmosphere vs space vacuum. Space theoretically begins 62 miles above the earth’s surface, at the Karman Line. The laws of physics say that a vacuum can not exist next to an atmosphere. Without a barrier to separate the two areas, the atmosphere would instantly escape into the hard vacuum of space. Example: open a tank of compressed air; the oxygen or other gases inside the tank will rush outside to achieve equilibrium of air pressure. A vacuum cannot exist next to the atmosphere.

3. Water. Liquid water always seeks its own level. Gravity, which is really the function of density (weight) of objects over distances, cannot cause oceans to curve around the globe. Sea level must be consistent throughout the world. Water, in other words, can not curve. Example: the Pacific Ocean, sea level.

4. Centrifugal force. If earth rotated at 1000 mph at the equator, nothing could withstand being thrown off of it along a curved or tangential path. Gravity (density) is the weakest force in the universe, unable to overcome the extreme speed of rotation. Examples include insects, clouds, smoke, other low density-objects which rise above the earth despite the alleged gravity and centrifugal force. Example: merry-go-rounds.

5. Authorities.  Professionals in many fields --pilots, engineers, surveyors, gunners, artillerymen, radar operators, etc. -- do not account for curvature in any manner. Example: surveyors never adjust for earth curvature when they design canals, causeway bridges, railroad lines.

6 Moon and sun. Both objects appear to the eye to be the same size, though the moon is around 238,000 miles away and the sun is 93 million miles distant. Sunlight beams deny the claim that rays enter earth’s atmosphere in parallel beams. Using simple geometry, one can determine that the triangular pattern results in a distance of only 3000 miles above. The moon emits a cooling light which illuminates only the clouds which are near it, not those that are further away. Example: sunlight beaming rays through clouds (crepuscular rays) form a triangle with a base of less than 8,000 miles miles

7. Constellations. Star patterns have not altered appreciably in human history. Considering speeds of celestial objects which travel billions of miles per year in multiple directions, as well as earth’s own rotation, revolution around the sun, following the sun through the universe, we should observe some changes in as little as 6 months (stellar parallax). But no such changes have been seen in 6000 years. Example: Orion, Polaris  in the same locations for millennia.

8. Airplane travel. Flights to and from countries in the southern hemisphere always pass over countries in the north, even though they could refuel in places along a direct route. When plotted on the flat earth map, the planes show that they follow a straight line. Example: flights between South America, Africa, Australia.. 

9. No Sensation of movement. If earth actually rotated and revolved around the sun at 67,000 mph, we should hear sonic booms and be swept away by winds far beyond hurricane strength.       Examples: quiet, calm days, east-to-west winds

10. Photographs of earth from space. There are no legitimate pictures or videos of earth.  All pictorial evidence is computer-generated, as are almost all photos of celestial objects. NASA even says that these photographs were created to “match people’s expectations.”   Other evident fakery from space agencies, including the ISS and the Space Shuttle, further supports the argument that our ideas about space are entirely faked. Examples: below

 

Compare the size of earth as seen from the moon in these 2 images

1. far side moon transit

 

2. Astronaut Schmitt holding a flag on the moon, Apollo 17

 

 

 

 

 

 

EDIT: Additional information provided by Rothbard. Please research before you engage in debate. Thanks!

  • Flat Earth Arguments (from page 6)
Spoiler

Flat Earth Arguments

Point 1. The ISS is Fake.  You can supposedly see the ISS (moving at 17,150 mph 249 miles above the ground) with binoculars and there is extensive footage of astronauts allegedly playing in zero gravity of space on what appears as a space station.  Are we only looking at green screens, underwater ISS models, a U-2 spy plane (NASA has one) with hologram technology, parabolic zero gravity flights, movie special effects, cables, etc.?  This point is certainly debatable and worth discussing.

Point 2. Total Lack of Pictures of the Earth from Space. There are only a few alleged actual photos of the Earth from space showing the entire globe, primarily the dubious photo of Apollo 17 and the new “SEXY” photo with many peculiarities.  Dozens of years and only 1-2 “good” but very problematic photographs of the entire Earth - NASA is not being truthful.

Point 3. The Space Shuttle was Not a Space Craft.  You can watch clear footage of the Space Shuttle’s jet engines powering down after it supposedly “glided” to the ground.  The Space Shuttle seems to be nothing more than a superficially decorated jet that never reached space.  What blasted off from Cape Canaveral?  Apparently, an empty model that was discarded in the sea.  It appears that the Challenger Disaster astronauts are alive and well (wasn’t it coincidental that you just happened to be watching that takeoff).

Point 4. The Phases of the Moon Every 6 Months Do Not Evince Movement of the Earth around the Sun. It seems that the eight phases of the moon should be reversed at opposite times of the year because the Earth is at opposite sides of the solar system while the Sun remains roughly in the middle.  This point needs more exploration.  

Point 5. No Viewable Curvature Even 20 Miles above the Earth.  Some mistaken individuals claim that you can see curvature from airplanes - that’s just nonsense - they’re looking through a curved window.  Furthermore, it appears as though the horizon is flat even 20 miles above the ground.  Spherical Earth theorists answer that the 20 miles up isn’t enough to see curvature; in other words, only NASA and other government space agencies have witnessed the actual curvature of the Earth.  That’s disconcerting and should cause any reasonable person to re-examine their childhood programming.  

Point 6. The Horizon Remains Flat and at Eye Level No Matter How High You Go Up.  It seems that the horizon should lower from eye level as you go up - this never happens and always remains at eye or camera level.  

Point 7. No Change of Speed from the North Pole Versus the Equator. For example, if you were in northern Alaska, the rotation of the Earth would be much slower (approx. 300 mph) than the rotation of the Earth at the Equator (approx. 1,025 mph); yet no one feels any change of speed when they travel from northern Alaska to the equator.  Don’t you feel the difference in speed in a train when you’re moving at 30 mph and then accelerate to 100 mph?  Is it too gradual of a change?  I don’t know.

Point 8. The Sun Is Much Closer than 93 Million Miles and Can Even Produce a Hot Spot.  You must see the video of the balloon up 20 miles that shows what appears as a hot spot on the clouds caused by the Sun.  Spherical Earth theorists counter that it’s just a reflection; however, it doesn’t look like a reflection to me.  Add on the fact, that others have used trigonometry to calculate the distance of the Sun as much closer than 93 million miles (e.g., approx. 3,000 miles).  

Point 9. No Lowering of Atmosphere Speeds as You Reach Higher Levels When Fluid Dynamics Principles Dictate Otherwise. Imagine a model of the spherical Earth being placed in a swimming pool and begins spinning at speeds near 1,000 mph. The water would begin spinning around the sphere as well. However, the speed of the water would never be uniform. The water closer to the sphere would move much faster than the water further away and look like a whirlpool with the Earth as the center of the whirlpool.  We see no evidence of this on Earth.  For example, a volcanic eruption should not shoot straight up, it should initially travel straight up and then always veer west.  Similarly, skydivers (and weather balloons) should end up hundreds of miles away west of their targets.  Ball earthers say that the entire atmosphere keeps up with the ground uniformly - that absolutely makes no sense to me and smells like BS.

Point 10. The Atmosphere Speed Near Space Would Be Even Faster than the Ground if the Atmosphere Were Somehow Connected to the Earth.  Similar to Point 9, this point is meant to illustrate the fact that ball earthers claim that the atmosphere near space is keeping up with the ground below it.  The ISS is supposedly 249 miles up and moving at 17,150 mph.  The atmosphere goes up approximately 300 miles and should be moving even faster above the 249 miles mark.  Once a space ship exits the atmosphere, his speed would immediately drop to 0 mph.  Did our astronauts ever take that into consideration?  It doesn’t appear so.

Point 11. Many Photos of Objects that Should Appear Below the Horizon.  Play with this curvature calculator:  http://dizzib.github.io/earth/curve-calc/index.html.  There are photographs and video of city skylines and objects 50+ miles away (an entire city would be well below the horizon).  Spherical Earth theorists counter that the effect is caused by refraction and looming. Flat earth theorists counter that "refraction," "mirages" and "looming" are convenient excuses that just so happen to create an appearance of a flat earth.  What a coincidence?

Point 12. Seeing a Full Moon During Near Noon Should Be Impossible. Why? Because the sun is well behind the moon and directly behind it.

Point 13. The Deliberate Use of Fisheye Lenses to Make the Earth Appear Round.  Try raising the flat Earth debate with anyone and he or she will immediately post a video of a weather balloon (or the Red Bull jumper Felix Baumgartner and other GoPro videos) which at first glance show a curved Earth.  The problem - it’s without doubt a fisheye lens - meaning the curvature is a result of the camera only - this is easy to prove but HIGHLY ignored by the spherical Earth side.  Do they intentionally use the fisheye lens to manipulate us?  I think the answer may be yes.

Point 14. The Polaris Problem.  No movement of Polaris yet the Earth is traveling (along with the entire Solar System) at hundreds of thousands of mph in varying directions.  I know Polaris is supposed to be 433.8 light years away, but no movement whatsoever over a hundred years.  I guarantee that the 433.8 light years theory was deliberately created to solve this problem.  In other words, the inconceivable distances were only mathematically designed to meet the requirements of a spherical model blasting through space.  

Point 15. The Bedford Level Experiment (also the Bishop Experiment and others).  Of course, everyone mainstream says that Samuel Rowbotham was mistaken, but then you add in Point 11 and you begin seeing that Rowbotham was probably onto something because his flat Earth results are being repeated even now by Jeranism (YouTube) and others.

Point 16. The South Pole Problem - No Time Lapse Photos Showing a Circular Pattern of Stars as Shown at the North Pole. There seem to be no video of individuals over the south pole with compasses going crazy.  Of course there are several photos of the southern circular pattern with Sigma Octantis in the middle but they are very few and maybe dubious.  One problem with the flat Earth is the spherical claim that there are days with 24 hours of sunlight in Antarctica.  Is it true?  This Point requires more investigation.  

Point 17. The Apollo 17 and New “SEXY” Photos of the Earth are Fake. The Apollo 17 photo and all other photos of the Earth show the Earth as a perfect sphere; however, NASA says that the Earth is not a perfect sphere but an oblate spheroid.  Also, the land sizes in the Apollo 17 photo (and every other alleged photo) are entirely incorrect. They should more closely follow the Peters Projection Map (http://www.petersmap.com/) not the Mercator Projection Map that we are all familiar with (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mercator_projection). Finally, the Apollo 17 photo shows too much detail when the colors should appear more washed out due to the atmosphere.

Point 18. The Thermosphere (up to 3,632° F) is Too Hot to Support Satellites, ISS, and Hubble.  Does the vacuum of space make these extreme temperatures meaningless?  Well, until the head of NASA crawls into its large vacuum chamber with a blast furnace sitting two feet above his face cranked up to its maximum and sits there for a period of 10 minutes, I refuse to believe this BS excuse and so should you.

Point 19. The Atmosphere Does Not Escape into the Vacuum of Space.  Ever watch the movies and see what happens when they open the door to space?  Shouldn’t that happen to our atmosphere?  Is gravity that powerful?  If it is, why doesn’t the moon pull the atmosphere away with its gravity if it can pull the oceans?  Also, why doesn’t the gravitational pull of the moon have an effect on balloons and flights etc. way up in the air if it has the ability to substantially affect our oceans?  Doesn’t make sense to me but what do I know.

Point 20. The Sun Produces Non-Parallel Rays and the Moon Only Lights Up Surrounding Clouds.  Ever notice Sun rays pointed in many directions?  Ever notice how the moon lights up only the clouds nearby and not the ones further away?  Is the Sun really 93 million miles away and the Moon 234,000 miles away?  Is it just refraction?  

Point 21. Admiral Byrd and Captain Cook.  Admiral Byrd was a well-respected naval officer, aviator, and explorer who explored Antarctica and had a remarkable story that does not fit the establishment’s story. Captain Cook’s exploration of the coast of Antarctica and a never ending ice wall is very intriguing and makes no sense under the spherical model.  

Point 22. The Gravity Problem. We are told that gravity keeps us from being flung from the Earth as it rotates at nearly 1,000 mph. However, the speed of the Earth's rotation is admittedly much less at the poles than at the equator. Accordingly, gravity would have to be stronger at the equator and a weight should weigh many times more at the North Pole than it would at the Equator. There is no change.  Does gravity even exist, it’s not like it can be created in a lab?

Point 23. Railroad and Bridge Engineers Do Not Account for Changes in Curvature.

Point 24. No Hot Spot on the Moon. Take a globe and shine a light on it and the side closest to the light will be brighter than the other parts of the globe. However, the moon's light is uniform.

Point 25. The Sun and Time Problem.  Here’s the problem, if the Earth rotates 360 degrees every day, then every 6 months night and day should be opposite.  The well-educated spherical theorists argue that the Earth rotates just a little more than 360 degrees so that the time remains the same.  However, isn’t it strange that the Earth rotates just a little more than 360 degrees so that our time always remain consistent, i.e., so that night and day never switch?  I think it's very strange and sounds like a convenient excuse to maintain a failing model.  

Point 26. The Lunar Eclipse Problem. At the rate of speed the Earth travels around the Sun (18.5 miles/sec.), it would be impossible for a Lunar Eclipse to last longer than a few milliseconds.  Also, how does the Lunar Eclipse produce a reddish shadow?  This needs more investigation.  Remember, just because NASA has an answer, it doesn’t mean it’s true.  

Point 27. The Selenelion (Horizontal Eclipse) Problem. Atmospheric refraction? Yeah, right.

Point 28. The Antarctica and Flight Problem. Touring the depths of Antarctica is generally prohibited by treaty. No commercial flights are ever taken across the whole of Antarctica. There is only minor exploring of the outside of Antarctica without government approval.  Gotta save the penguins (is this why we love penguins?).  Furthermore, non-stop flights over long distances below the equator are almost non-existent.  However, there is a Qantas flight between Santiago and Sydney which doesn’t fit the prevailing flat Earth models.  Questions worth investigating.

Point 29. Solar Analemma Proves the Flat Earth.  The Solar Analemma seems strange under the spherical model but looks right under the flat Earth model.

Point 30. Round Trips on Airplanes Between Cities Would Produce Unequal Times.  Similarly, canons fired straight in the air end up with cannon balls that fall right back down on the cannons even though the Earth is rotating east up to 1,000 mph.  Spherical artists argue that it's similar to playing ball in a train but ignore the fact that the car is closed - i.e., does the Earth have a dome that seals it? This also is similar to the wind problem, how does wind (and storms) flow the opposite direction of a ball that is pulling an atmosphere with it at 1,000 mph?  The sphercists have their counterarguments but do they make sense to you?

Point 31. The Airy's Failed Experiment.  An experiment that can be repeated and keeps showing that the Earth is not moving.  

Point 32. Pilots Don't Have to Tip the Nose of the Plane to Account for Curvature.  After just 50 miles, a pilot would have to tip his nose 1,667 feet to account for the curvature.  All pilots confirm that no pilot accounts for curvature by tipping the plane’s nose.  So gravity must somehow keep the plane from having to tip its nose?  Make sense to you or do you smell the BS without dipping your nose?

Point 33. Moonlight is Cooler. A property that is inconsistent with the claim that the moon reflects sunlight.  Experiments keep showing that moonlight is cold (i.e., it’s colder in the moonlight than in the shadow of the moonlight).  That’s fascinating regardless of the debate but it favors the flat Earth model and is entirely ignored by mainstream science.

Point 34. Very Little Experimentation Proves the Spherical Earth. There are few experiments that prove the earth is moving, spinning, rotating or that it's a sphere (e.g., Eratosthanes).  Seems like the proof would be easy but here we are.

Point 35. The Seasons Problem. The sun is 93 million miles away and yet a minor tilt of the Earth produces seasons.  Make sense to you?  Not to me.  

Point 36. The Arctic Nights Problem. There would be no Arctic nights lasting more than 12 hours under the parallel rays of the Sun.

Point 37. Lunar Phases Should Change at Different Globe Vantage Points.  The moon can't look the same from the Northern and Southern hemispheres of the Earth.  I’m no moon watcher so this could use some development.

Point 38. Water is Always Flat and Cannot be Curved.  Let’s see some curved water.

Point 39. No Commercial Ventures in Antarctica Ever.  I’m sure you believe that our treaty system would prevent the largest most powerful corporations of the world from raping Antarctica?

Point 40. Tall Objects Far Away Only Appear Vertical.  Find a single photograph of a crane or other tall straight object that appears at an angle caused by being on a titled sphere.  

Point 41. Time Lapse Video of the Sun Proves the Flat Earth.  These time lapse videos are showing a sun that looks like it gets larger as it approaches and smaller as it moves away, and they even make the Sun (and moon) look very close.  Check out p-brane’s channel on YouTube.

Point 42. No To and Fro Zigzag of the Sun During the Midnight Sun in the Arctic.  Makes no sense under the spherical model and remains unchallenged by the sphericists.

Point 43. No Huge Change Between Winter and Summer Constellations.  The Sun remains in the middle and should block out half the constellations every 6 months.  This doesn’t happen.  I’m still thinking about this one and could use others’ input.  

Point 44. No Sound of the Earth's rotation at 1,000 mph and No Bulge of Ocean Water Around the Equator Due to Centripetal Force.  I dismissed this argument at first, but think about, should a spin of 1,000 mph cause the Earth to constantly creak and moan.  Furthermore, like a merry-go-round, shouldn’t there be a bulge in the oceans at the equator?

Point 45. Artillery and Naval Gunners Do Not Account for Curvature for Unseen Objects.  Gunners confirm that they never take curvature into consideration.  Pretty strange IMHO.

Point 46.  Ships Don’t Disappear Because of Curvature.  The hull of the ships disappear as a result of perspective (i.e., the water ramps up to your eye level).  The rest of the ship disappears in the atmosphere - this can be confirmed by watching several videos.  

Point 47.  Jet Streams.  Jet streams on the spherical model are wild and all over the map.  Put them on a flat Earth map and they appear just right.  

  • Flat Earth Websites and YouTube Channels
Spoiler

Flat Earth Websites and YouTube Channels Worth Checking Out:

http://aplanetruth.info/flat-plane-earth-videos/
http://www.atlanteanconspiracy.com/
http://ifers.boards.net/
http://www.theflatearthsociety.org/ (Controlled opposition?)
http://www.waykiwayki.com/
https://www.youtube.com/user/ericdubay77/videos (Eric Dubay)
https://www.youtube.com/channel/UC3Xjdiu...vfg/videos (DITRH)
https://www.youtube.com/user/dmurphy25/videos (DMurphy25)
https://www.youtube.com/user/TheNASAchannel/videos (Math Powerland)
https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCS_FY5m...ExQ/videos (Jeranism)
https://www.youtube.com/user/Crrow777/videos (Crrow777)
https://www.youtube.com/user/TheMorgile/videos (The Morgile)
https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCOtL7oT...cqA/videos (John Le Bon)
https://www.youtube.com/user/markksargent/videos (Mark Sargent)
https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCxjjbu4...Tzg/videos (TETs Truth Tube)
https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCam2d5C...7CA/videos (WakeTheSheeple)
https://www.youtube.com/user/yourmajezty/videos (Stars are Souls/YourMajezty)
https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCp97MYj...xsg/videos (Yoda's Conspiracy Channel)
https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCE5KlML...04g/videos (A Plane Truth)
https://www.youtube.com/user/Rorycoopervids/videos (My Perspective/Rory Cooper)
https://www.youtube.com/user/waykiwayki/videos (Waykiwayki)
https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCSjm5Bs...euA/videos (Matrix Decode)
https://www.youtube.com/user/Russianvids/videos (RussianVids)
https://www.youtube.com/user/MrThriveAndSurvive/videos (Mr Thrive and Survive)
https://www.youtube.com/channel/UC0XiBEx...Z9A/videos (GeoShifter)
https://www.youtube.com/channel/UC7pHE0P...CqQ/videos (p-brane)
https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCe7FBDn...rjg/videos (Zetetic Flat Earth)
https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCkaUL_t...kSg/videos (Nuke Hoax)
Books to purchase:

 

  •  Spherical Earth Arguments that Counter Flat Earth Arguments
Spoiler

Spherical Earth Arguments

 

Counterpoint 1. The Eclipses of the Moon and Sun Show a Perfect Circle. Eclipses are impossible under the flat Earth model.

Counterpoint 2. Some Flight Times Would Be Much Longer Across a Flat Earth. Via Qantas Airlines, one can fly from Santiago, Chile to Sydney, Australia in under 13 hours.  That’s impossible under the flat Earth model.  

Counterpoint 3. Universities and Astronomers - Thousands that Should Know. With respect to the fake moon landings, universities and astronomers had no independent way to verify the veracity of the moon landings. However, there are thousands that have the independent ability to verify whether the Earth is spherical and have the equipment to do so. Sure, many would keep their mouths shut to avoid ridicule, but some wouldn't and we don't see any respected scientists coming out in support of the flat Earth.

Counterpoint 4. Other Events in Space Predicted Accurately (e.g., Asteroids, Sun Flares, etc.). How could NASA accurately predict so many celestial events if we were on a flat Earth?

Counterpoint 5. Other spherical objects in space and in nature generally evince that the Earth is spherical. Of course, any object you look through with a telescope is only 2 dimensional. However, you can see the rings around Saturn which would indicate that Saturn is spherical.

Counterpoint 6. GPS, Satellites, Google Earth, Radar, etc. Evince a Spherical Earth.

Counterpoint 7. Ballistic Engineers, Snipers, Radio Engineers, et al. Take the Movement of the Earth, the Coriolis Effect, and Curvature into Consideration in all of their Calculations.

Counterpoint 8. Thousands Have Circumnavigated the Globe (and some Antarctica, e.g., Jon Sanders)

Counterpoint 9. The Coriolis Effect. For example, cyclones and hurricanes rotate opposite directions depending on the Northern and Southern Hemispheres.

Counterpoint 10. The Southern Pole Star - Sigma Octantis.

Counterpoint 11. You Can See the ISS from Earth with Binoculars.

Counterpoint 12. No Witnesses of the Edge.

Counterpoint 13. SOHO (Solar and Heliospheric Observatory (a satellite that studies the Sun 24 hours a day, 365 days a year without interruptions), SDO (the Solar Dynamics Observatory Satellite), STEREO (Solar TErrestrial RElations Observatory), and Others of the Heliophysics System Observatory (HSO), etc. all prove the spherical Earth.

Counterpoint 14. Others Cited by Wikipedia (not very compelling in my humble opinion). See http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Spherical_Earth. "1. When at sea it is possible to see high mountains or elevated lights in the distance before lower-lying ground and the mast of a boat before the hull. It is also possible to see further by climbing higher in the ship, or, when on land, on high cliffs. 2. The sun is lower in the sky as you travel away from the tropics. For example, when traveling northward, stars such as Polaris, the north star, are higher in the sky, whereas other bright stars such as Canopus, visible in Egypt, disappear from the sky. 3. The length of daylight varies more between summer and winter the farther you are from the equator. 4. The earth throws a circular shadow on the moon during a lunar eclipse. 5. The times reported for lunar eclipses (which are seen simultaneously) are many hours later in the east (e.g. India) than in the west (e.g. Europe). Local times are confirmed later by travel using chronometers and telegraphic communication. 6. When you travel far south, to Ethiopia or India, the sun throws a shadow south at certain times of the year. Even farther (e.g. Argentina) and the shadow is always in the south. 7. It is possible to circumnavigate the world; that is, to travel around the world and return to where you started. 8. Travelers who circumnavigate the earth observe the gain or loss of a day relative to those who did not. 9. An artificial satellite can circle the earth continuously and even be geostationary. 10. The earth appears as a disc on photographs taken from space, regardless of the vantage point."

Counterpoint 15. If there was a flat Earth, then you should be able to see the Sun (and other very distant land objects) with a telescope even at nighttime.

Counterpoint 16. Under the flat Earth model, the sun would gradually shrink in size as it approaches the horizon. Maybe the sun would disappear behind haze and atmosphere, but it would disappear gradually as the sun approaches the size of a point. It wouldn't be sliced from the bottom up as we witness daily.

Counterpoint 17. If you created a flat Earth model by using a table and a small light tracking over the table, even with an atmosphere, light would be nearly visible across the entire table. Why don't we witness that in real life?

Counterpoint 18. Under the flat Earth model, the moon and sun would change sizes as they moved closer and further away.

Counterpoint 19. The sun and moon, which are farther away than ships on the ocean, do not disappear at the horizon supposedly due to atmospheric distortion.

Counterpoint 20. Under the flat Earth model, the sun should not be able to illuminate clouds from BELOW at sun set/rise but this happens often.

Counterpoint 21. There are two tidal peaks/troughs every 24 hours which is impossible under the flat earth model.

Counterpoint 22. The Aurora Australis behaves the same as the Aurora Borealis. That would indicate the south pole is similar to the north pole.

Counterpoint 23. Southern hemisphere hurricanes (cyclones) rotate in the opposite direction to northern hemisphere ones. Like a mirror image?

Counterpoint 24. Weather patterns, trade winds, jet streams circulate variously in West-East and East West directions. The weather in my region runs west to east. Near the equator and poles it runs east to west. Makes no sense if the Earth isn't spinning.

Counterpoint 25. The Foucault Pendulum Proves the Earth is Rotating.

Counterpoint 26. In summer, the Sun rises DUE EAST and sets DUE WEST. But under the flat Earth model (with it's spinning sun and moon) place the sun North East at sunrise and North West at sunset.  Other angles are incorrect.

Counterpoint 27. Every summer, there are 24-hour days of sunlight in Antarctica that is not explained by the flat Earth model.

Counterpoint 28. Plate tectonics explains how the continents once fit together nicely, which is not addressed by the flat Earth model.

Counterpoint 29. If the north pole was concentrated at a point and the south pole was spread over a wide area, you'd be able to measure a gradual decline in magnetic field strength as you travel from north to south. That doesn't happen.

Counterpoint 30.  All Movements of the Stars, Sun, Planets, and Moon Evince a Spherical Earth.

Counterpoint 31.  There are commercial flights, cruises, excursions, and treks into Antarctica disproving the flat Earth.

Counterpoint 32.  Ships selling into the distance disappear behind the curvature.  Countless sailors have witnessed the same.

  • 200 Proofs Earth Is Not a Spinning Ball, by Eric Dubay
Spoiler

✦ Exposing the Global Conspiracy from Atlantis to Zion

 

Monday, August 3, 2015

200 Proofs Earth is Not a Spinning Ball


Please download, read and share my new FREE ebook:

200 Proofs Earth is Not a Spinning Ball! PDF 

This 35 page ebook full of photographs and diagrams is the perfect tool to help spark conversation and awaken your friends and family to the mother of all conspiracies.  Please make copies, print, distribute, re-upload and do everything you can to get this most important information out to the masses!

Download from the link above or read the entire thing online below:


1) The horizon always appears perfectly flat 360 degrees around the observer regardless of altitude. All amateur balloon, rocket, plane and drone footage show a completely flat horizon over 20+ miles high. Only NASA and other government “space agencies” show curvature in their fake CGI photos/videos.

 

 2) The horizon always rises to the eye level of the observer as altitude is gained, so you never have to look down to see it. If Earth were in fact a globe, no matter how large, as you ascended the horizon would stay fixed and the observer / camera would have to tilt looking down further and further to see it.

 

 

 

 3) The natural physics of water is to find and maintain its level. If Earth were a giant sphere tilted, wobbling and hurdling through infinite space then truly flat, consistently level surfaces would not exist here. But since Earth is in fact an extended flat plane, this fundamental physical property of fluids finding and remaining level is consistent with experience and common sense.

 

 

 

4) Rivers run down to sea-level finding the easiest course, North, South, East, West and all other intermediary directions over the Earth at the same time. If Earth were truly a spinning ball then many of these rivers would be impossibly flowing uphill, for example the Mississippi in its 3000 miles would have to ascend 11 miles before reaching the Gulf of Mexico.

5) One portion of the Nile River flows for a thousand miles with a fall of only one foot. Parts of the West African Congo, according to the supposed inclination and movement of the ball-Earth, would be sometimes running uphill and sometimes down. This would also be the case for the Parana, Paraguay and other long rivers.

 

 


6) If Earth were a ball 25,000 miles in circumference as NASA and modern astronomy claim, spherical trigonometry dictates the surface of all standing water must curve downward an easily measurable 8 inches per mile multiplied by the square of the distance. This means along a 6 mile channel of standing water, the Earth would dip 6 feet on either end from the central peak. Every time such experiments have been conducted, however, standing water has proven to be perfectly level.

 

 

 

 

7) Surveyors, engineers and architects are never required to factor the supposed curvature of the Earth into their projects. Canals, railways, bridges and tunnels for example are always cut and laid horizontally, often over hundreds of miles without any allowance for curvature.

8) The Suez Canal connecting the Mediterranean with the Red Sea is 100 miles long without any locks making the water an uninterrupted continuation of the two seas. When constructed, the Earth’s supposed curvature was not taken into account, it was dug along a horizontal datum line 26 feet below sea-level, passing through several lakes from one sea to the other, with the datum line and water’s surface running perfectly parallel over the 100 miles.

 

 

 

9) Engineer, W. Winckler was published in the Earth Review regarding the Earth’s supposed curvature, stating, “As an engineer of many years standing, I saw that this absurd allowance is only permitted in school books. No engineer would dream of allowing anything of the kind. I have projected many miles of railways and many more of canals and the allowance has not even been thought of, much less allowed for. This allowance for curvature means this - that it is 8” for the first mile of a canal, and increasing at the ratio by the square of the distance in miles; thus a small navigable canal for boats, say 30 miles long, will have, by the above rule an allowance for curvature of 600 feet. Think of that and then please credit engineers as not being quite such fools. Nothing of the sort is allowed. We no more think of allowing 600 feet for a line of 30 miles of railway or canal, than of wasting our time trying to square the circle”

 

 

 

10) The London and Northwestern Railway forms a straight line 180 miles long between London and Liverpool. The railroad’s highest point, midway at Birmingham station, is only 240 feet above sea-level. If the world were actually a globe, however, curving 8 inches per mile squared, the 180 mile stretch of rail would form an arc with the center point at Birmingham raising over a mile, a full 5,400 feet above London and Liverpool.

 

 

 

11) A surveyor and engineer of thirty years published in the Birmingham Weekly Mercury stated, “I am thoroughly acquainted with the theory and practice of civil engineering. However bigoted some of our professors may be in the theory of surveying according to the prescribed rules, yet it is well known amongst us that such theoretical measurements are INCAPABLE OF ANY PRACTICAL ILLUSTRATION. All our locomotives are designed to run on what may be regarded as TRUE LEVELS or FLATS. There are, of course, partial inclines or gradients here and there, but they are always accurately defined and must be carefully traversed. But anything approaching to eight inches in the mile, increasing as the square of the distance, COULD NOT BE WORKED BY ANY ENGINE THAT WAS EVER YET CONSTRUCTED. Taking one station with another all over England and Scotland, it may be stated that all the platforms are ON THE SAME RELATIVE LEVEL. The distance between Eastern and Western coasts of England may be set down as 300 miles. If the prescribed curvature was indeed as represented, the central stations at Rugby or Warwick ought to be close upon three miles higher than a chord drawn from the two extremities. If such was the case there is not a driver or stoker within the Kingdom that would be found to take charge of the train. We can only laugh at those of your readers who seriously give us credit for such venturesome exploits, as running trains round spherical curves. Horizontal curves on levels are dangerous enough, vertical curves would be a thousand times worse, and with our rolling stock constructed as at present physically impossible.”

 

 

 

12) The Manchester Ship Canal Company published in the Earth Review stated, “It is customary in Railway and Canal constructions for all levels to be referred to a datum which is nominally horizontal and is so shown on all sections. It is not the practice in laying out Public Works to make allowances for the curvature of the earth

13) In a 19th century French experiment by M. M. Biot and Arago a powerful lamp with good reflectors was placed on the summit of Desierto las Palmas in Spain and able to be seen all the way from Camprey on the Island of Iviza. Since the elevation of the two points were identical and the distance between covered nearly 100 miles, if Earth were a ball 25,000 miles in circumference, the light should have been more than 6600 feet, a mile and a quarter, below the line of sight!

14) The Lieutenant-Colonel Portlock experiment used oxy-hydrogen Drummond’s lights and heliostats to reflect the sun’s rays across stations set up across 108 miles of St. George’s Channel. If the Earth were actually a ball 25,000 miles in circumference, Portlock’s light should have remained hidden under a mile and a half of curvature.


15) If the Earth were truly a sphere 25,000 miles in circumference, airplane pilots would have to constantly correct their altitudes downwards so as to not fly straight off into “outer space;” a pilot wishing to simply maintain their altitude at a typical cruising speed of 500 mph, would have to constantly dip their nose downwards and descend 2,777 feet (over half a mile) every minute! Otherwise, without compensation, in one hour’s time the pilot would find themselves 31.5 miles higher than expected.

 


16) The experiment known as “Airy’s Failure” proved that the stars move relative to a stationary Earth and not the other way around. By first filling a telescope with water to slow down the speed of light inside, then calculating the tilt necessary to get the starlight directly down the tube, Airy failed to prove the heliocentric theory since the starlight was already coming in the correct angle with no change necessary, and instead proved the geocentric model correct.

 


17) “Olber’s Paradox” states that if there were billions of stars which are suns the night sky would be filled completely with light. As Edgar Allen Poe said, “Were the succession of stars endless, then the background of the sky would present us a uniform luminosity, since there could exist absolutely no point, in all that background, at which would not exist a star.” In fact Olber’s “Paradox” is no more a paradox than George Airy’s experiment was a “failure.” Both are actually excellent refutations of the heliocentric spinning ball model.

 

18) The Michelson-Morley and Sagnac experiments attempted to measure the change in speed of light due to Earth’s assumed motion through space. After measuring in every possible different direction in various locations they failed to detect any significant change whatsoever, again proving the stationary geocentric model.

 


19) Tycho Brahe famously argued against the heliocentric theory in his time, positing that if the Earth revolved around the Sun, the change in relative position of the stars after 6 months orbital motion could not fail to be seen. He argued that the stars should seem to separate as we approach and come together as we recede. In actual fact, however, after 190,000,000 miles of supposed orbit around the Sun, not a single inch of parallax can be detected in the stars, proving we have not moved at all.

20) If Earth were truly constantly spinning Eastwards at over 1000mph, vertically-fired cannonballs and other projectiles should fall significantly due west. In actual fact, however, whenever this has been tested, vertically-fired cannonballs shoot upwards an average of 14 seconds ascending, 14 seconds descending, and fall back to the ground no more than 2 feet away from the cannon, often directly back into the muzzle

 


21) If the Earth were truly constantly spinning Eastwards at over 1000mph, helicopters and hot-air balloons should be able to simply hover over the surface of the Earth and wait for their destinations to come to them!

 

 

22) If Earth were truly constantly spinning Eastwards at over 1000mph, during the Red Bull stratosphere dive, Felix Baumgartner, spending 3 hours ascending over New Mexico, should have landed 2500 miles West into the Pacific Ocean but instead landed a few dozen miles East of the take-off point.

23) Ball-believers often claim “gravity” magically and inexplicably drags the entire lower-atmosphere of the Earth in perfect synchronization up to some undetermined height where this progressively faster spinning atmosphere gives way to the non-spinning, non-gravitized, non-atmosphere of infinite vacuum space. Such non-sensical theories are debunked, however, by rain, fireworks, birds, bugs, clouds, smoke, planes and projectiles all of which would behave very differently if both the ball-Earth and its atmosphere were constantly spinning Eastwards at 1000mph.

 

 

24) If Earth and its atmosphere were constantly spinning eastwards over 1000mph then North/South facing cannons should establish a control while East-firing cannonballs should fall significantly farther than all others while West-firing cannonballs should fall significantly closer. In actual fact, however, regardless of which direction cannons are fired, the distance covered is always the same.

25) If Earth and its atmosphere were constantly spinning eastwards over 1000mph, then the average commercial airliner traveling 500mph should never be able to reach its Eastward destinations before they come speeding up from behind! Likewise Westward destinations should be arrived at thrice the speed, but this is not the case.

26) Quoting “Heaven and Earth” by Gabrielle Henriet, “If flying had been invented at the time of Copernicus, there is no doubt that he would have soon realized that his contention regarding the rotation of the earth was wrong, on account of the relation existing between the speed of an aircraft and that of the earth’s rotation. If the earth rotates, as it is said, at 1,000 miles an hour, and a plane flies in the same direction at only 500 miles, it is obvious that its place of destination will be farther removed every minute. On the other hand, if flying took place in the direction opposite to that of the rotation, a distance of 1,500 miles would be covered in one hour, instead of 500, since the speed of the rotation is to be added to that of the plane. It could also be pointed out that such a flying speed of 1,000 miles an hour, which is supposed to be that of the earth’s rotation, has recently been achieved, so that an aircraft flying at this rate in the same direction as that of the rotation could not cover any ground at all. It would remain suspended in mid-air over the spot from which it took off, since both speeds are equal.”

27) If Earth and its atmosphere were constantly spinning Eastwards over 1000mph, landing airplanes on such fast-moving runways which face all manner of directions North, South, East, West and otherwise would be practically impossible, yet in reality such fictional concerns are completely negligible.

 

 

28) If the Earth and its atmosphere were constantly spinning Eastwards over 1000mph, then clouds, wind and weather patterns could not casually and unpredictably go every which way, with clouds often travelling in opposing directions at varying altitudes simultaneously.

29) If the Earth and its atmosphere were constantly spinning Eastwards over 1000mph, this should somewhere somehow be seen, heard, felt or measured by someone, yet no one in history has ever experienced this alleged Eastward motion; meanwhile, however, we can hear, feel and experimentally measure even the slightest Westward breeze.

 

 


30) In his book “South Sea Voyages,” Arctic and Antarctic explorer Sir James Clarke Ross, described his experience on the night of November 27th, 1839 and his conclusion that the Earth must be motionless: “The sky being very clear … it enabled us to observe the higher stratum of clouds to be moving in an exactly opposite direction to that of the wind--a circumstance which is frequently recorded in our meteorological journal both in the north-east and south-east trades, and has also often been observed by former voyagers. Captain Basil Hall witnessed it from the summit of the Peak of Teneriffe; and Count Strzelechi, on ascending the volcanic mountain of Kiranea, in Owhyhee, reached at 4000 feet an elevation above that of the trade wind, and experienced the influence of an opposite current of air of a different hygrometric and thermometric condition … Count Strzelechi further informed me of the following seemingly anomalous circumstance--that at the height of 6000 feet he found the current of air blowing at right angles to both the lower strata, also of a different hygrometric and thermometric condition, but warmer than the inter-stratum. Such a state of the atmosphere is compatible only with the fact which other evidence has demonstrated, that the earth is at rest."

 

 

For more information about our Flat Earth read “The Flat Earth Conspiracy” by Eric Dubay and visit:

http://www.AtlanteanConspiracy.com
http://www.ifers.boards.net

Edited by grav
additional information
3 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

We need to understand the theory or at least inquire about the things that we do not understand how they work in a flat earth..

So, Grav, - contrary to the accepted norm could you explain the optical "illusion" when flying in an airplane at 34,000 feet?  Why is the horizon seemingly spherical if looked at over a long distance?

If it were so that the earth is indeed flat there are certain things which I would like explained.  How would the seasons / day night work? If the earth is flat, are all other celestial bodies also flat?  If not, why would earth be flat and the rest not? If it is indeed flat what happens when I reach the end of the flatness?  If we are "on top" what is underneath this flat piece of rock?  Surely if the earth was flat and a tall object came toward you you would see the whole object and not just the tip thereof and progressively more and more of the object.

Is it only NASA who maintain that the earth is indeed spherical?  Were there not any evidence before the existence of NASSA.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

We need to understand the theory or at least inquire about the things that we do not understand how they work in a flat earth..

So, Grav, - contrary to the accepted norm could you explain the optical "illusion" when flying in an airplane at 34,000 feet?  Why is the horizon seemingly spherical if looked at over a long distance?

If it were so that the earth is indeed flat there are certain things which I would like explained.  How would the seasons / day night work? If the earth is flat, are all other celestial bodies also flat?  If not, why would earth be flat and the rest not? If it is indeed flat what happens when I reach the end of the flatness?  If we are "on top" what is underneath this flat piece of rock?  Surely if the earth was flat and a tall object came toward you you would see the whole object and not just the tip thereof and progressively more and more of the object.

Is it only NASA who maintain that the earth is indeed spherical?  Were there not any evidence before the existence of NASA. 

 

Please, I'll ask all the questions. You guys are supposed to find the answers! :smile:

NASA is the arbiter of physics and astrophysics. The agency and all other "authorities" make the laws and break them when they see fit. Like the sun. One day they say it`s a nuclear furnace and the next day it's an electrical capacitor. Or something else, like their string theory and dark matter and black holes. In other words, NASA represents Status Quo Science. The agency was formed when Nazi scientists were "paper-clipped" at the end of WWII.

Did you watch the video, FA? What impressed me the most was the fact that light from the sun must come down in parallel straight waves, just as light from any source. It cannot beam down in pretty angles through the clouds. 

You asked about the horizon too. The term actually describes an optical illusion that results from our natural perspective. It is also explained in the video. When our line of sight A meets the surface of the ground B, the two lines intersect at a vanishing point beyond which we can not see. That vanishing point must be a perfect circle all around us, because A and B remain the same in all directions.

If the earth is round, it should be impossible to see objects miles away if the ground curves downward. For some funny reason, I can't find exact formulas for the drop. Estimates run from 8 to 11 inches for the first mile, more inches per mile in a progressive algorithm. Sorry for the big type. Tablets are touchy and a bother to correct.

I'll post one example in a separate post following this one.

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

First, DarkKnight's giant could be a big flat dude inside a flat earth. 

Next, here is an experiment I'd like to repeat in California on Monterrey Bay. Round-earth theory should make it impossible.

The Bishop Experiment

California Monterey Bay is a relatively long bay that sits next to the Pacific Ocean. The exact distance between the extremes of the Monterey Bay, Lovers Point in Pacific Grove and Lighthouse State Beach in Santa Cruz, is 33.4 statute miles. See this map.

On a very clear and chilly day it is possible to see Lighthouse Beach from Lovers Point and vice versa. With a good telescope, laying down on the stomach at the edge of the shore on the Lovers Point beach 20 inches above the sea level it is possible to see people at the waters edge on the adjacent beach 33 miles away near the lighthouse. The entire beach is visible down to the water splashing upon the shore. Upon looking into the telescope I can see children running in and out of the water, splashing and playing. I can see people sun bathing at the shore and teenagers merrily throwing Frisbees to one another. I can see runners jogging along the water's edge with their dogs. From my vantage point the entire beach is visible.

IF the earth is a globe, and is 24,900 English statute miles in circumference, the surface of all standing water must have a certain degree of convexity--every part must be an arc of a circle. From the summit of any such arc there will exist a curvature or declination of 8 inches in the first statute mile. In the second mile the fall will be 32 inches; in the third mile, 72 inches, or 6 feet, as shown in this chart. Ergo; looking at the opposite beach 30 miles away there should be a bulge of water over 600 feet tall blocking my view. There isn't.

Suppose that the earth is a sphere with a radius of 3,963 miles. If you are at a point P on the earth's surface and move tangent to the surface a distance of 1 mile then you can form a right angled triangle as in the diagram.

Looking over a distance of 1 mile, we can use the theorem of Pythagoras:

a2 = 3,9632 + 12 = 15,705,370

and when we square root that figure we get a = 3,963.000126 miles

Thus your position is 3,963.000126 - 3,963 = 0.000126 miles above the surface of the earth.

0.000126 miles = 12 in * 5,280 ft * 0.000126 mi = 7.98 inches

Hence after one mile the earth drops approximately 8 inches.

Ergo, looking across 30 miles the Pythagorean theorem becomes:

a2 = 39632 +302 = 15,706,269

and when we square root that figure we get a = 3,963.113549 miles

Thus your position is 3,963.113549 - 3,963 = 0.113549 miles above the surface of the earth

0.113549 miles = 5,280 ft * 0.113549 mi = 599.53872 feet

Hence after 30 miles the earth drops approximately 600 feet.

There are a number of different methods to calculate the drop of the Round Earth. Go ahead and look some up try a few out. You will find that the drop while looking over 30 miles is on the order of 600 feet.

http://wiki.tfes.org/Experimental_Evidence

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Where does this nonsenical diseased thinking come from? Why must humans constantly devolve into madness? FLAT and Earth do not go in the same sentence. End. MOVE ON PLEASE FOR THE LOVE OF THE SHAPES AND THE SPHERICAL, OVAL EGG SHAPED WONDERS OF COSMIC CREATIVE DESIGN.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Where does this nonsenical diseased thinking come from? Why must humans constantly devolve into madness? FLAT and Earth do not go in the same sentence. End. MOVE ON PLEASE FOR THE LOVE OF THE SHAPES AND THE SPHERICAL, OVAL EGG SHAPED WONDERS OF COSMIC CREATIVE DESIGN.

Neo, where do you think you are, Kansas? This is a real conspiracy site, not a place for idle chit-chat and sucking up to authority figures such as NASA.

You believe in some cosmic creative design based on faith. Fine, knock yourself out. I have presented factual information, which you have chosen to ignore since you don't argue with specific points. Please look before leaping to conclusions. That, or don't upset yourself by participating in this nonsensical diseased thread.:biggrin:

 Proverbs 18:13

He that answereth a matter before he heareth it, it is folly and shame unto him.

3 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I've looked at most of the arguments and videos and find it curious that round earthers use the same mathematic formulas brought forth by the very proponents of 500 years ago or going back to Aristotle. You can't prove round earth without the theory of gravity. Where are all the geniuses today since Einstein? All we have is Stephen Hawking who warns us against using the LHC at CERN. Except for modern conveniences and sanitation, we're no better off today (or smarter) than we were 500 years ago. All those satellites and we still have GWEN towers? Maybe satellites don't exist.

If you look closely at all the videos and images from NASA, it's obvious they are nothing more than CGI. That is more than enough to be suspicious of the shape of the planet....if we are even living on a planet, Hey look, I'm spinning!! Water sticks to the globe, how cool is that.

2 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I've looked at most of the arguments and videos and find it curious that round earthers use the same mathematic formulas brought forth by the very proponents of 500 years ago or going back to Aristotle. You can't prove round earth without the theory of gravity. Where are all the geniuses today since Einstein? All we have is Stephen Hawking who warns us against using the LHC at CERN. Except for modern conveniences and sanitation, we're no better off today (or smarter) than we were 500 years ago. All those satellites and we still have GWEN towers? Maybe satellites don't exist.

If you look closely at all the videos and images from NASA, it's obvious they are nothing more than CGI. That is more than enough to be suspicious of the shape of the planet....if we are even living on a planet, Hey look, I'm spinning!! Water sticks to the globe, how cool is that.

 

"we're no better off today (or smarter) than we were 500 years ago. All those satellites and we still have GWEN towers?"

The only point I will disagree with is that I think we're not as smart as our ancestors. Devices do all the thinking for many people. Just ask the average high school grad for the square root of 25, to find China on a world map, or, Heaven forbid, to write a coherent paragraph!!! Prepare to be disappointed.

I had to look up GWEN towers (thanks), being more familiar with other names like HAARP, EMP, ELF, and other silent sound systems of mind control and spying on us citizens.

One of the reasons I consider the possibility  of the holograph-earth or holograph-universe -- is the moon wave that several people have recorded. The planet Saturn, which satanists worship, may be involved in the process, as it emits radio frequencies beyond the usual spectra. I also see us as inhabitants in an ant farm, an old sci-fi plot like we used to see on The Twilight Zone. And we can't get out of our cage. How high can we go? Not far at all.

 

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Y are you saying flat earth.... seen this on metabunk, and they did picture of that bridge.  how it would curve the bridge... Maybe you've stumbled into the matrix realization. or stumbled into free energy world or hologram realization.  btw check metabunk they have the formulas you want I think

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It's good to always be skeptical but I'm sorry, Grav, you're on a wild goose chase with this concept.  I watched the first video you posted.  I literally face-palmed all the way through it (not because of what I may have been told by anyone, but because of what I know by virtue of logic and reason.)  The author of the video clearly knows little about geometry, physics, technology and astronomy and does not apply sufficient logic, reason and common sense.  Yes, I can explain each of his claims very easily and point out the massive holes in his logic!  I would spend the time to do so, but it's not convenient for me right now.

In the meantime, I will eave you with this guy's response (upon which I could expand much if I spend the time to do so.)

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
You are commenting as a guest. If you have an account, please sign in.
Reply to this topic...

×   You have pasted content with formatting.   Restore formatting

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead


Our website is made possible by displaying online advertisements to our visitors.

Please consider supporting us by disabling your ad blocker.