Questions about the Earth

[servant]

Did science or the bible first note that the earth hangs on nothing?

Did science or the bible first note that the earth was a circle and not flat?

[Trump]

In fact religious people are happy with the Bing Bang Model, .." that's what I've been saying, thank you.

Exactly. )

The current model of the Universe: Big Bang, Gravity, Oblate Spheroid Earth leaves room for a Creator. In fact the Bing Bang model was first proposed by a believer in a Creator: a priest and it’s defended with passion by the defenders of religion, themselves believers in a Creator.

So your reason for the conspiracy: Flat Earth would prove a Creator is render moot.
Therefore there is no reason to have a conspiracy. Got it?!!!

Yes sir I got it, only let me see if I understand it correctly?
So a Priest of the Catholic Church invented the Big-Bang theory so people would understand that God is not some wizard with a magic wand poofing things like the earth and man into existence from nothing, instead God created the Big Bang theory to allow a quantum particle appear out of nothing, explode, and through unsupervised, unplanned chaotic chance do all the creation? is this what you mean?

But this doesn't make sense because a Flat Earth would require a Creator with intelligence, not a Grand Wizard poofing quantum particles from nothing, and waiting to see what happens?

I wasn't talking about the 1986 Challenger fake accident, I was pointing out that all the other rocket launches that they claim made it into space, yet they turn, and dive into the oceans.

Here two video that shows a rocked going into space, showing the separation at 1:07:

Please look from time 0:50, to time 6:21 , specifically the circle around the camera to hide the flat earth, and mimic a globe which never changes in size as it is going up, and up.
Then at 6:24 you can easily see the little glitch where they switch over to the CGI-animation earth-from-space video.

Look at the shadows, and the multiple lighting sources on the rocket? Are you guys still using the 1968 video cameras? Because it is terrible, like it was in '68, which is why they didn't allow the media a direct hook up to what NASA was supposedly receiving, but had them stand back and film the moon landing off a screen projection which was in B&W.
Hundreds of billions of dollars and this is what we get?

Another one from European Space Agency.


No dome. No turn. No dome and other nonsense.

Again, please stop. Look at times 2:07 and 2:08 the glitch where they switch from actual earth camera view, to CGI prerecorded (video recording 2-666-33) CGI Earth-from-space view.
Also look at the right screen, going up, up, up, till time 2:01 ooops, what happened? Now its falling, yet the left camera continues to shows the green-screen CGI movie.

Like I said, until about 8 months ago, I would never have noticed these things. But now that our eyes have been opened, these are laughable. Movies far outdo NASA Movie Studios. We Flat Earthers are insulted by these poorly made stunts that NASA shamelessly throws at us!

You still don't get it, all, .. yes all NASA pictures of satellites "in space" are fake. The satellites themselves are real mock satellites, no different than the Millennium Falcon is. but them being in space is fake.
I can't show you what a real satellite in space would look like because there never was any in space. Space doesn't exist.

Even you or I could create much better images than these.

Why? Because NASA doesn't worry about the garbage they put out, since there is no one either on Earth (man loves to be deceived, is why we love movies), nor in Heaven that can, or will oppose them. Even God holds back in order to fulfill Scripture:

So again no evidence, just you saying it’s CGI and some bible verses.
For the last time this is a debate forum. I have shown you the rules.
Claims require evidence.
Opinions are not evidence.
If you don’t have any evidence to demonstrate this image is CGI please drop the claim.

Oh boy, just look at the lighting? What is that blue outline? The dark ball is the Earth I suppose, so the blue outline must be the sun. OK then, what is illuminating the satellite?
Also, they put stars almost right down to the bright blueish outline!

I shown you this before, please watch:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OmcwW-8CC6E

time 0:21 is almost hilarious, Astronaut Don looks at Astronaut Mike to see what he will say, then parrots the same thing.
Please watch the whole video so I don't have to repeat myself.

OK, I see you noticed me trying to avoid this complex mathematics, and yes, I understand the very basic concept of trigonometry, that's as far as I can go. But something like this, well, I have to admit is way above and beyond my level of comprehension, simply put; it's way over my head!

I mean who but NASA quantum theorists/mathematicians could eyeball the ISS flying through space at 1,310,000 feet above their heads, traveling at 17,150.0000000000000000 (16 decimals as you have in that trig example) mph to get h=5.118 6853221011731 to the accuracy of +- .0000000000000370 inches? That's 16 digits passed the decimal point accuracy, so you got me there, my trig-eyes are not that good as they used to be.
Well, if we are going with 16 digits passed the decimal point accuracy, yes, I have a lot of questions and need a lot of NASA-level help.

1) is the ISS traveling with, or against the rotation of the earth, because I would have to figure out the latitude me and my friend is standing on, and either add or subtract from the 17,150.000 mph speed of the ISS.

2) I read somewhere that light travels at 186,282 feet per second, so to get 16 digit passed the decimal point accuracy, I would have to know how many miles/feet/inches the ISS actually traveled before its light hit my eyeballs.

3) I don't see any of the relativistic effects calculated in your diagram, like time dilation and length contraction? At 16 digit below the decimal point accuracy, even at these low speeds, these would matter. Look how our GPS is solely dependent on the speed of light.

4) is the triangle in the diagram a 3-D triangle? If it is, what is the actual distance for (d1), and which direction does that line go because that would be another triangle that has to be calculated out.

5) communication between observer1 and observer2 is done how, smoke signal, phone? When do I start the atomic-clock from the time the ISS passes right over the other observers head?

6) does the ISS pass right over his head and will travel exactly over my head (d2) position is extremely important, or like I asked about (d1) will it travel at some distance from one or both of us because the farther the ISS is, the slower it will 'look' to our eyes, would throw off everything especially at 16 digit accuracy.

7) But most importantly, when me and my FE buddy look up, how do we know the ISS we see is not a hologram flashed across our chem-trailed sky?

Man this is plain geometry. Trigonometry in the Right Triangle.
If you can’t figure this out there is no point.
It’s clear you know nothing of plain geometry or spacial geometry and trigonometry. This is basic stuff I did back in 8th Grade.

Ask a friend who knows math to confirm that the math is solid.
Or you could take time and learn some math. This is not difficult stuff.
Any argument you make against it it’s an argument from ignorance and therefore invalid.

Yes, it is plain geometry and trig, about two observers 'looking' at a UFO that can be a hologram as I've shown you videos of, and this supposed ISS (we are told) is 1,310,000 feet up in space flying like a speeding bullet, and were supposed to eyeball it in to fit in with your trig problem?
I had my doubts, but you proved that you did work for NASA, since you just throw some meaningless trig at us and expect us to accept it as an explanation to what we are told we see, which is not what we see, you see?

OK, I'll ask you again; how is the Foucault Pendulum supposed to swing if it was on Gods immovable stationary Earth? If you can show me that for comparison, I will build a Pendulum.

You keep avoiding the question.
I said your Globe Earth does a lot more than just spin on its axis, it's supposedly spinning, twirling, orbiting the sun, swirling through the Milky Way, which is also expanding away from all the other galaxies (except Andromeda),
By the way, why don't they have two identical Foucault Pendulums next to each other?

Man the 10th time.
If the Earth were flat the Foucault Pendulum wouldn’t precess, it would just swing through the same arc over and over, never tracing out any different path than the one it started on.

And for the 10th time, "How do you know this?"
Your Earth never stopped spinning, turning, twirling and swirling, so how would you know what it would do on Gods Flat Earth?
Again, the Earth is flat because of all the observations that honest scientists, engineers, pilots, railroad builders, ship captains and I myself have made, and this is what the Foucault Pendulum is doing, it is what it supposed to do, and does something different each time you throw it into another spin.

But since it precess, change his swinging path, change the arc; therefore it points to a rotating Earth. Therefore the “immovable stationary Earth nonsense� is debunked. Plain and simple.
Build a pendulum or two identical next to each other and do the experiment.

Me build it? I asked why don't NASA build two Pendulums next to each other, they're the ones with the hundreds of billions of dollars!

Actually, I will get the message out to see if someone out there with money who could professionally build two identical Pendulums, so we could see just how much variation we get between the two?

“Why, is that NASA approved? You know, like you're not allowed to visit Chernobyl for the day with your own top-of-the-line Geiger counter, instead you are to use one of theirs, the cheap Russian one? “

Dude, Inertial Aerosystems is private company, part of the ETLG group of companies, is a value added distributor of high technology sensors and systems to the Aerospace, Defence, Offshore and Industrial markets.
You and you friends FE have no excuse.
Buy one of these non-mechanical gyroscopes and test it out.

"Aerospace, Defence, Offshore and Industrial markets" .. thank you, so it's NASA approved. That's what I asked you?

There is no 'private space company', only NASA subsidiaries to take in more money from us.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QrWVDtQgf28

[alexxcJRO]

Yes sir I got it, only let me see if I understand it correctly?
So a Priest of the Catholic Church invented the Big-Bang theory so people would understand that God is not some wizard with a magic wand poofing things like the earth and man into existence from nothing, instead God created the Big Bang theory to allow a quantum particle appear out of nothing, explode, and through unsupervised, unplanned chaotic chance do all the creation? is this what you mean?

But this doesn't make sense because a Flat Earth would require a Creator with intelligence, not a Grand Wizard poofing quantum particles from nothing, and waiting to see what happens? ]

You said the reason for the conspiracy is that a Flath Earth would prove a Creator.
Seeing i refuted that now your saying Flath Earth would prove a Inteligent Creator.
Moving the goalpost again. Pfff.
The people that believe that the Bing Bang model lends support to a Creator also
believe in Inteligent Design. Therefore in a Inteligent Designer, Creator.

Therefore your done.

Observation: Like i said even the most fundamentalist of Christians believe the Earth is not flat. They also believe in Inteligent Design.
https://answersingenesis.org/intelligent-design/

I had my doubts, but you proved that you did work for NASA, since you just throw some meaningless trig at us and expect us to accept it as an explanation to what we are told we see, which is not what we see, you see? ]

How can you say it's meaningless when you can't understand nothing.
You cannot make a comparison or an analysis of something you can't understand.
Any argument you make against it it’s an argument from ignorance and therefore invalid.
Until you study some plain geometry and Right Triangle trigonometry you can't talk about it. Capich?!!!

And for the 10th time, "How do you know this?"
Your Earth never stopped spinning, turning, twirling and swirling, so how would you know what it would do on Gods Flat Earth?

The pendulum deviation is just due to the rotation of the setup in space (angular velocity relative to an inertial frame).

There would not be any angular velocity on a static Flat Earth. Therefore we would not have any deviation which means the pendulum would just swing through the same arc over and over.
Since we have deviation therefore "The Flat Earth nonsense" is debunked.

Me build it? I asked why don't NASA build two Pendulums next to each other, they're the ones with the hundreds of billions of dollars!

Man i already supply a way to do it and it is not expensive.

All you need is
-cloth or canvas sack;
-fine, dry sand;
-large garbage bag ; \
-nail ;
-nylon cord, 13 feet (4 meters) long ;
-tall stable structure, such as a 12-to-15 foot (3.7-to-4.6 meter) ladder or swing set;
-tape;

Here again how to do it:
http://home.howstuffworks.com/home-impr ... ld-pendulu...

"Aerospace, Defence, Offshore and Industrial markets" .. thank you, so it's NASA approved. That's what I asked you?

There is no 'private space company', only NASA subsidiaries to take in more money from us.

Nonsense.
It says clearly "Inertial Aerosystems, part of the ETLG group of companies, is a value added distributor of high technology sensors and systems to the Aerospace, Defence, Offshore and Industrial markets." These markets could be from any country around the world.
http://www.inertial.co.uk

Here more details.
https://beta.companieshouse.gov.uk/company/04550474

Then at 6:24 you can easily see the little glitch where they switch over to the CGI-animation earth-from-space video.

Nonsense.
There are multiple gliches at 1:01, 1:19. So what, they switched back and forth to CGI?
Why would they switch back and forth before you can even see the form of the Earth? Common that does not make any sense.

Also a glich does prove a video is CGI. That would imply the every video in the world that has a glich in them is CGI in part; which is bonkers.

Again, please stop. Look at times 2:07 and 2:08 the glitch where they switch from actual earth camera view, to CGI prerecorded (video recording 2-666-33) CGI Earth-from-space view.
Also look at the right screen, going up, up, up, till time 2:01 ooops, what happened? Now its falling, yet the left camera continues to shows the green-screen CGI movie.

It's not falling. It's still going up. They just change to a different camera.

I shown you this before, please watch:


time 0:21 is almost hilarious, Astronaut Don looks at Astronaut Mike to see what he will say, then parrots the same thing.
Please watch the whole video so I don't have to repeat myself.

I already explained this:

Cameras in space are set to focus on the brighter objects like the earth, the iss, the sun and so on.... An image focused on a bright object like a planet or moon won’t have a long enough exposure to see stars clearly. This is why you don't see stars in the Nasa live cam for example. The same apply when they take a picture.
What you are doing here is taking footages of astronauts out of their context.
Neil armstrong couldn't see stars when he was on moon surface , because the surface is way too bright when the sun shine on it. If he were on the dark side he would have seen the stars with no difficulty.

Oh boy, just look at the lighting? What is that blue outline? The dark ball is the Earth I suppose, so the blue outline must be the sun. OK then, what is illuminating the satellite?
Also, they put stars almost right down to the bright blueish outline!

On the right we see the glowing nighttime lights of an aurora.
On the left where we see the blue it's day because the atmosphere looks blue when hit by sunlight.

Q: Why would the ISS do not get any light from the sun in that position?

[Trump]

Yes sir I got it, only let me see if I understand it correctly?
So a Priest of the Catholic Church invented the Big-Bang theory so people would understand that God is not some wizard with a magic wand poofing things like the earth and man into existence from nothing, instead God created the Big Bang theory to allow a quantum particle appear out of nothing, explode, and through unsupervised, unplanned chaotic chance do all the creation? is this what you mean?

But this doesn't make sense because a Flat Earth would require a Creator with intelligence, not a Grand Wizard poofing quantum particles from nothing, and waiting to see what happens? ]

You said the reason for the conspiracy is that a Flath Earth would prove a Creator.
Seeing i refuted that now your saying Flath Earth would prove a Inteligent Creator.
Moving the goalpost again. Pfff.

You refuted that?

The people that believe that the Bing Bang model lends support to a Creator also
believe in Inteligent Design. Therefore in a Inteligent Designer, Creator.

Therefore your done.

so I am done, I can go now, thank you.

Observation: Like i said even the most fundamentalist of Christians believe the Earth is not flat. They also believe in Inteligent Design.
https://answersingenesis.org/intelligent-design/

Like I said, the Christians created the Big Bang theory, and yes, they believe in creators and gods. Like CERN, from the looks of it they obviously worship Shiva, Durga, and their son Gravity, through whom the imaginary "universe" was created. None of this has anything to do with the Bible, and our Creator and His creation mentioned in there which I refer to.
If you call me Christian, hopefully you are not comparing me to the 'religion', but to those early Believers who at Antioch were first called Christian.

I had my doubts, but you proved that you did work for NASA, since you just throw some meaningless trig at us and expect us to accept it as an explanation to what we are told we see, which is not what we see, you see? ]

How can you say it's meaningless when you can't understand nothing.

You cannot make a comparison or an analysis of something you can't understand.
Any argument you make against it it’s an argument from ignorance and therefore invalid.
Until you study some plain geometry and Right Triangle trigonometry you can't talk about it. Capich?!!!

First you have to give me something real to observe.

Here are some Right Triangle trigonometry for ya;

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=v3-COiN26Zc

See if the math works on that?

And for the 10th time, "How do you know this?"
Your Earth never stopped spinning, turning, twirling and swirling, so how would you know what it would do on Gods Flat Earth?

The pendulum deviation is just due to the rotation of the setup in space (angular velocity relative to an inertial frame).

There would not be any angular velocity on a static Flat Earth. Therefore we would not have any deviation which means the pendulum would just swing through the same arc over and over.
Since we have deviation therefore "The Flat Earth nonsense" is debunked.

What you see is exactly what the Pendulum does on our Flat Earth. Now why don't you NASA scientists go from your ISS, and land on that alternate-reality Earth that's spinning, and twirling through space in Dr. Hawking's parallel universe, build a Foucault Pendulum, and see what it will do there? And film it in High Res CGI and bring it back down to this here stationary Flat Earth?

Me build it? I asked why don't NASA build two Pendulums next to each other, they're the ones with the hundreds of billions of dollars!

Man i already supply a way to do it and it is not expensive.

All you need is
-cloth or canvas sack;
-fine, dry sand;
-large garbage bag ; \
-nail ;
-nylon cord, 13 feet (4 meters) long ;
-tall stable structure, such as a 12-to-15 foot (3.7-to-4.6 meter) ladder or swing set;
-tape;

Here again how to do it:
http://home.howstuffworks.com/home-impr ... ld-pendulu...

Again, why build a cheap one, when we already have a real nice one in France?
And you keep avoiding to answer; why don't they build two and place it next to each other for comparison?

"Aerospace, Defence, Offshore and Industrial markets" .. thank you, so it's NASA approved. That's what I asked you?

There is no 'private space company', only NASA subsidiaries to take in more money from us.

Nonsense.
It says clearly "Inertial Aerosystems, part of the ETLG group of companies, is a value added distributor of high technology sensors and systems to the Aerospace, Defence, Offshore and Industrial markets." These markets could be from any country around the world.
http://www.inertial.co.uk

Here more details.
https://beta.companieshouse.gov.uk/company/04550474

And, .. so what are you getting at? I already have all I need to verify that the Earth is Flat and stationary, and that the stars rotate around us. Have you heard of Airy's Failure?
Isn't it funny how any theory that opposes the Big-Banged flying through space vacuum theory is labeled as a failure? Just imagine living the rest of your life marked as a failure for getting a wrong conclusion on your science experiment?
How many scientists have made bad predictions, are they among the "Failures" like Airy?
Just like when anyone mentions the Flat Earth, right away they are attacked and mocked. Is that to encourage our children to be scientific minded, or is it mind control, like this?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=W1DKcbOI3ts&t=133s
time 1:51 and on is just unbelievable to the extent they will go to brainwash our children!

Then at 6:24 you can easily see the little glitch where they switch over to the CGI-animation earth-from-space video.

Nonsense.
There are multiple gliches at 1:01, 1:19. So what, they switched back and forth to CGI?
Why would they switch back and forth before you can even see the form of the Earth? Common that does not make any sense.

Also a glich does prove a video is CGI. That would imply the every video in the world that has a glich in them is CGI in part; which is bonkers.

Yes, just like the ISS news feeds, especially to school children (get them when they're young, when their brain is like a sponge) switching between hanging on cables/green-screen, and the Zero-G ISS plane. But now they are switching over to Augmented-V.R., it saves money and having to ride the vomit-comet Zero-G ISS plane.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=V-Y6CvkEHvc

Again, please stop. Look at times 2:07 and 2:08 the glitch where they switch from actual earth camera view, to CGI prerecorded (video recording 2-666-33) CGI Earth-from-space view.
Also look at the right screen, going up, up, up, till time 2:01 ooops, what happened? Now its falling, yet the left camera continues to shows the green-screen CGI movie.

It's not falling. It's still going up. They just change to a different camera.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HQfzwFloVqA

I shown you this before, please watch:


time 0:21 is almost hilarious, Astronaut Don looks at Astronaut Mike to see what he will say, then parrots the same thing.
Please watch the whole video so I don't have to repeat myself.

I already explained this:

Cameras in space are set to focus on the brighter objects like the earth, the iss, the sun and so on.... An image focused on a bright object like a planet or moon won’t have a long enough exposure to see stars clearly. This is why you don't see stars in the Nasa live cam for example. The same apply when they take a picture.
What you are doing here is taking footages of astronauts out of their context.
Neil armstrong couldn't see stars when he was on moon surface , because the surface is way too bright when the sun shine on it. If he were on the dark side he would have seen the stars with no difficulty.

I, I don't know what to say, so I will say just this: that video is not the only one that caught NASA making things up, or giving conflicting answers, there are tons of them. Just as you are doing here, thank you.

Oh boy, just look at the lighting? What is that blue outline? The dark ball is the Earth I suppose, so the blue outline must be the sun. OK then, what is illuminating the satellite?
Also, they put stars almost right down to the bright blueish outline!

On the right we see the glowing nighttime lights of an aurora.
On the left where we see the blue it's day because the atmosphere looks blue when hit by sunlight.

Q: Why would the ISS do not get any light from the sun in that position?

.. the earth would be illuminated.
I have shown you how easy it is to make these pictures and videos with V.R. programs, any teen who is into creating games can do it. Pictures of imaginary science fiction planets, satellites put in space is old, but why spend the extra bucks when for the past 60 years the old system worked?

Besides, like yourself here you are not even making an effort to prove space, planets, moon landing was real because, half the fun is the obvious deception:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QM7ebcR3-xE

It's like the criminal returning to the scene of the crime.

[alexxcJRO]

Like I said, the Christians created the Big Bang theory, and yes, they believe in creators and gods. Like CERN, from the looks of it they obviously worship Shiva, Durga, and their son Gravity, through whom the imaginary "universe" was created. None of this has anything to do with the Bible, and our Creator and His creation mentioned in there which I refer to.
If you call me Christian, hopefully you are not comparing me to the 'religion', but to those early Believers who at Antioch were first called Christian.

Irrelevant ramblings.
Moving the goalpost again. We were talking whether the reason for conspiracy make sense and its justified.
Your done.
“Demanding from an opponent that he or she address more and more points after the initial counter-argument has been satisfied refusing to conceded or accept the opponent’s argument.�
https://www.logicallyfallacious.com/too ... _Goalposts

First you have to give me something real to observe.
Here are some Right Triangle trigonometry for ya;

See if the math works on that?

Irrelevant ramblings.
Moving the goalpost again. We were talking about the trigonometry I supplied.
Your done.
“Demanding from an opponent that he or she address more and more points after the initial counter-argument has been satisfied refusing to conceded or accept the opponent’s argument.�
https://www.logicallyfallacious.com/too ... _Goalposts

What you see is exactly what the Pendulum does on our Flat Earth. Now why don't you NASA scientists go from your ISS, and land on that alternate-reality Earth that's spinning, and twirling through space in Dr. Hawking's parallel universe, build a Foucault Pendulum, and see what it will do there? And film it in High Res CGI and bring it back down to this here stationary Flat Earth? =

Nonsense.

I think you don’t understand what angular velocity means or velocity for that matter.

Here:

Angular velocity

“In physics, the angular velocity of a body is the rate of change of its angular displacement with respect to time, and in three-dimensional space is a pseudovector quantity that specifies the rotational speed of an object and the orientation of the rotating. The SI unit of angular velocity is radians per second. “
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Angular_velocity

Velocity

“Velocity is a physical vector quantity; both magnitude and direction are needed to define it. The scalar absolute value (magnitude) of velocity is called "speed", being a coherent derived unit whose quantity is measured in the SI (metric system) as metres per second (m/s) or as the SI base unit of (m⋅s−1).�
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Velocity

We would not have any angular velocity on a Static Flat Earth, therefore no precession of the pendulum.

We would not have any velocity->speed->movement/rotation on a static Flat Earth.

Again, why build a cheap one, when we already have a real nice one in France?
And you keep avoiding to answer; why don't they build two and place it next to each other for comparison?

Irrelevant ramblings.
Moving the goalpost again. We were talking about whether building a pendulum is cheap or not.
Your done.
“Demanding from an opponent that he or she address more and more points after the initial counter-argument has been satisfied refusing to conceded or accept the opponent’s argument.�
https://www.logicallyfallacious.com/too ... _Goalposts

And, .. so what are you getting at? I already have all I need to verify that the Earth is Flat and stationary, and that the stars rotate around us. Have you heard of Airy's Failure?
Isn't it funny how any theory that opposes the Big-Banged flying through space vacuum theory is labeled as a failure? Just imagine living the rest of your life marked as a failure for getting a wrong conclusion on your science experiment?
How many scientists have made bad predictions, are they among the "Failures" like Airy?
Just like when anyone mentions the Flat Earth, right away they are attacked and mocked. Is that to encourage our children to be scientific minded, or is it mind control, like this?

time 1:51 and on is just unbelievable to the extent they will go to brainwash our children!

Irrelevant ramblings.
Moving the goalpost again. We were talking about whether Inertial Aerosystems is a private company or not.
Your done.
“Demanding from an opponent that he or she address more and more points after the initial counter-argument has been satisfied refusing to conceded or accept the opponent’s argument.�
https://www.logicallyfallacious.com/too ... _Goalposts

Yes, just like the ISS news feeds, especially to school children (get them when they're young, when their brain is like a sponge) switching between hanging on cables/green-screen, and the Zero-G ISS plane. But now they are switching over to Augmented-V.R., it saves money and having to ride the vomit-comet Zero-G ISS plane.

I was meant to say:
A glich does not prove a video is CGI. That would imply the every video in the world that has a glich in them is CGI in part; which is bonkers. There are billions of videos no related to Nasa and many have all kind of gliches in them.

I, I don't know what to say, so I will say just this: that video is not the only one that caught NASA making things up, or giving conflicting answers, there are tons of them. Just as you are doing here, thank you.

So your done. Ok.

.. the earth would be illuminated.

The earth is illuminated on the left side where we see the blue because the atmosphere looks blue when hit by sunlight.

[DanieltheDragon]

[Replying to post 104 by alexxcJRO]

When commercial space flights are a thing they will claim to have been drugged during the flight.

[Trump]

[Replying to post 104 by alexxcJRO]

When commercial space flights are a thing they will claim to have been drugged during the flight.

No sir, space flights are real, just as 'real' as space, gravity, planets are, and the moon landing was. Here:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=W1DKcbOI3ts&t=133s

Please watch it's only 6 minutes and 20 seconds, .. before you give a down payment to one of the so called "private space flight corporations" which people are now asking their money back from, since for years they keep canceling the flights.

I mean if they did it in 1968 and actually landed safely on the moon, and safely took off and came back to earth, what's so big about taking people into space just far enough for them to see the "curvature" of the earth?

But no, the closest that private space agencies (just more NASA affiliates raking in the money) will take people, is the Zero-G planes.

https://www.gozerog.com/

I mean come on, just a little higher and we could see the 'Blue Marble' with them clouds that spell out the word "sex".

How about buying some land on the moon, real or not?

https://www.lunarland.com/

Yes, it's for real, just as those bumps those poor deceived people have felt in their School bus Mars Rover here:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=W1DKcbOI3ts&t=133s

Please note what the Mars Flight attendant said starting from the beginning of the video, to time 0:33

specifically targeting the kindergartners, "who will be the ones going to Mars when they grow up!"

Remember how I shown you guys how they reveal the truth in movies and TV shows? Well I don't know just how far NASA will go with this "Traveling to Mars" hype, but this movie scene gave me the goosebumps when I thought of people actually convinced that they are being flown to Mars, and even paid the millions for the ticket:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4YsTKL7L6-o&t=6s

But when for 3 generations these children been brainwashed to believe that Mars is really a planet out there in space, and that they are really traveling there, even if at the last minute you told them the truth that it's all a lie, they would just get mad at you. I mean I know I would if God didn't have someone open my eyes to these truths! I always loved sci-fi.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_wjXpTDuHiE

1 John 5:19 We know that we are of God, and the whole world lies under the sway of the wicked one.
20 And we know that the Son of God has come and has given us an understanding, that we may know Him who is true; and we are in Him who is true, in His Son Jesus Christ. This is the true God and eternal life.

So people, keep yourselves from the lies of the serpent NASA, their emblem says it all.

https://www.google.com/search?q=nasa+sn ... 0764672982

[Wootah]

[Replying to post 106 by Trump]


Moderator Warning

Hi Trump,

The site supports and allows for a wide variety of views, so long as people engage in reasoned debate on the topic.

Linking to video's that have no relevance and simply mocking others beliefs does not count as civil debate.

Please review our Rules.

______________

Moderator warnings count as a strike against users. Additional violations in the future may warrant a final warning. Any challenges or replies to moderator postings should be made via Private Message to avoid derailing topics.

[DanieltheDragon]

[Replying to post 104 by alexxcJRO]

When commercial space flights are a thing they will claim to have been drugged during the flight.

No sir, space flights are real, just as 'real' as space, gravity, planets are, and the moon landing was. Here:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=W1DKcbOI3ts&t=133s

Please watch it's only 6 minutes and 20 seconds, .. before you give a down payment to one of the so called "private space flight corporations" which people are now asking their money back from, since for years they keep canceling the flights.

I mean if they did it in 1968 and actually landed safely on the moon, and safely took off and came back to earth, what's so big about taking people into space just far enough for them to see the "curvature" of the earth?

But no, the closest that private space agencies (just more NASA affiliates raking in the money) will take people, is the Zero-G planes.

https://www.gozerog.com/

I mean come on, just a little higher and we could see the 'Blue Marble' with them clouds that spell out the word "sex".

How about buying some land on the moon, real or not?

https://www.lunarland.com/

Yes, it's for real, just as those bumps those poor deceived people have felt in their School bus Mars Rover here:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=W1DKcbOI3ts&t=133s

Please note what the Mars Flight attendant said starting from the beginning of the video, to time 0:33

specifically targeting the kindergartners, "who will be the ones going to Mars when they grow up!"

Remember how I shown you guys how they reveal the truth in movies and TV shows? Well I don't know just how far NASA will go with this "Traveling to Mars" hype, but this movie scene gave me the goosebumps when I thought of people actually convinced that they are being flown to Mars, and even paid the millions for the ticket:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4YsTKL7L6-o&t=6s

But when for 3 generations these children been brainwashed to believe that Mars is really a planet out there in space, and that they are really traveling there, even if at the last minute you told them the truth that it's all a lie, they would just get mad at you. I mean I know I would if God didn't have someone open my eyes to these truths! I always loved sci-fi.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_wjXpTDuHiE

1 John 5:19 We know that we are of God, and the whole world lies under the sway of the wicked one.
20 And we know that the Son of God has come and has given us an understanding, that we may know Him who is true; and we are in Him who is true, in His Son Jesus Christ. This is the true God and eternal life.

So people, keep yourselves from the lies of the serpent NASA, their emblem says it all.

https://www.google.com/search?q=nasa+sn ... 0764672982

The NASA budget for the lunar landings was significantly higher than NASAs currents budget. The space flights virgin galactic advertised was around 100,000k a seat vastly lower than the billions it took to send a man on the moon. However with $21,000,000 you can fly on a Russian rocket and private space enthusiasts with that cash have. The problem with virgin galactic is specifically economies of scale. They need a craft that can do what our current technology is capable of at a 1/10 of the cost.

Thank you for illustrating my point of though...

[MuffMaYne]

It always astonishes me that a question can be asked by someone, they can be given an answer and they can then turn and act as if just because theres an answer doesnt mean it means anything. Why even ask a question if when you recieve an answer you basically say it doesnt matter?

[evilsorcerer1]

[Replying to post 3 by servant]

I think a god, the god, (which is a spirit) created everything from nothing using wind, fire, dirt, water. Everything is held in place by a spiritual force. I think the Earth has an atmosphere around it so while it is being spun around the sun (so everyone receives daylight and night) people don't fly out into space.