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?

9,275 posts in this topic

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

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!


Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.


Sign In Now