Originally posted by FreakyKBHYou are the one deluding himself into thinking you actually are winning some kind of argument here. You think it is you and your conspirator buddies against the entire scientific establishment and you didn't even stop to look at what I said about the size of Earth viewed from Luna. You just ignore that analysis simply state, 'oh yeah, well you are wrong as an animation clearly shows'. Instead try looking at my analysis, draw it out on paper and see for yourself, draw it on 3 foot long paper and see it for yourself.
Yeah, you keep on saying that, even though there are pages and pages preceding this one which support what I've been saying and expose you as a liar.
What your opinion is of me could not be less in terms of consequence.
You are devoid of common sense, lacking in even basic critical thinking and are, generally, a dweeb.
What is noteworthy, however ...[text shortened]... to two stupid parrots who had learned three phrases and a few cuss words.
In a word, riveting.
You also are not able to respond to the fact Venus is about 1000 degrees hot and just how is that going to happen if the sun is whatever you think it is, a thousand miles high above Earth or some such rot.
Come on, you must have a rationale for that one.
Originally posted by Ghost of a DukeI remain highly doubtful we will ever obtain anything beyond low orbit.
In a few years space tourism will become much more commonplace (and affordable). Let's put this conversation on ice until 2021 when you can see for yourself what a doughnut you've been.
😏
If, after all of this, I am shown to be wrong, I will bring the doughnuts...
But I am reserving the maple bars for myself.
Originally posted by sonhouseYou are the one deluding himself into thinking you actually are winning some kind of argument here.
You are the one deluding himself into thinking you actually are winning some kind of argument here. You think it is you and your conspirator buddies against the entire scientific establishment and you didn't even stop to look at what I said about the size of Earth viewed from Luna. You just ignore that analysis simply state, 'oh yeah, well you are wrong as ...[text shortened]... d miles high above Earth or some such rot.
Come on, you must have a rationale for that one.
I deluded myself with facts.
You've deluded yourself with propaganda.
Which of the two positions seems more favorable for connecting to reality?
You think it is you and your conspirator buddies against the entire scientific establishment...
You and that conspiracy thing again.
You do realize that conspiracies are real, right?
I hesitate to provide a link, but here's one which highlights 16 conspiracies which were uncovered just over the last few decades--- wild-eyed, tin-foil hat wearing craziness from certified loons... which turned out to be true.
But they don't exist, right?
And (as usual) your grasp on reality is exposed.
No one is challenging the "entire scientific field," numbnuts.
The challenge is directed at the space programs.
All told, there are less than 20 specific fields (mostly sub-fields, really) among the hundreds of individual fields found within the four main branches.
Even most of those sub-fields have no way of knowing the level of NASA's duplicity as they are gazing up and out, not onto the earth's shape.
So let's try to refrain from your silly hyperbole, shall we?
...and you didn't even stop to look at what I said about the size of Earth viewed from Luna.
Wrong, again.
I read the entirety of the post.
Unfortunately, garbage in/garbage out.
You assume certain input in your formulas.
If that input is in error, how can your results be trusted?
You just ignore that analysis simply state, 'oh yeah, well you are wrong as an animation clearly shows'.
We have NASA saying one thing on one hand.
We have a guy who used to glue buttons on radios forty years ago saying something else on the other hand.
NASA shows the earth completely dominating the moon's sky.
Button gluer shows math which says 'no way, dude.'
Which one ought we believe?
How's that cognitive dissonance working out for your confirmation bias, by the way?
-Removed-You have NO argument to contend against, you just post unsupported claims.
Again, you reveal your ignorance in these matters.
I am not contending against an argument: I am making two claims.
In support of my claims, I have posted a link to NASA's website which clearly delineates exactly what I have said is indicative of all of NASA's productions: manipulation and outright fraud.
However, because one of my claims makes an all-encompassing assertion, i.e., all of NASA's images of earth are manipulated, that claim is easily refuted with the production of a SINGLE image which is not manipulated.
How mind-numbingly simple can your task be?
Link an image to this thread of ONE picture of earth from NASA which is not manipulated.
ONE.
You don't even really believe the earth is flat do you?
The reality is, no one knows the true shape of the earth--- at least no one at our level.
Here's what I do know on the basis of my own research, tested and retested many times over:
I know the math related to the curvature of the earth does not agree with the observable reality seen every day.
I know that every single image NASA has ever produced of the earth is a manipulation.
What do you "know?"
1 edit
Originally posted by FreakyKBHIn other words, waffling as usual. I asked you why it was important to you we can't drill more than 7 miles deep and I also got waffling.
I don't swear to God about anything, but I swear to God you are one dense mother you-know-whater.
I'm not going to bother retyping what I've said already, so just kindly re-read what I already posted.
So is the flatness of Earth, in your mythology, less than say 1000 miles deep? Less than 100? Can you put ANY number of miles on the depth of this flat Earth?
Last time it was 'nobody knows', which sounds an awful lot like waffling to me. Probably everyone else here also.
Also, you just can't process the idea that Venus is 1000 degrees hot on the surface can you. That couldn't possibly fit in with the ideas of your buddies that the sun is somewhere close to Earth and if that is the case it is very far from Venus and even the moon which we know gets to the boiling point of water in full sunlight.
But none of that bothers you since you are so thoroughly brainwashed by your flat Earth buddies.
-Removed-That's adorable: you're willing to hang your entire perspective on one image.
If you're curious--- truly curious--- see if you can find pictures and videos taken from the same vantage point which depicts something entirely different.
As stated, from my vantage point west of Cleveland, when visibility is cooperating, I can see both the entirety of the city's westside as well as north and east of the city: distances ranging from 21-31 miles away.
That's from ~250-540' worth of drop... and yet no loss whatsoever.
Buildings completely visible.
At various times of the day.
If I never saw the equivalent from multiple sources at even greater distances, the sample group available to me is enough to draw some conclusions.
Throw in the hundreds of examples from others, you can safely and accurately claim...
GAME OVER
Originally posted by sonhouseWhen you don't know the answer to something, how do you respond?
In other words, waffling as usual. I asked you why it was important to you we can't drill more than 7 miles deep and I also got waffling.
So is the flatness of Earth, in your mythology, less than say 1000 miles deep? Less than 100? Can you put ANY number of miles on the depth of this flat Earth?
Last time it was 'nobody knows', which sounds an awful ...[text shortened]... But none of that bothers you since you are so thoroughly brainwashed by your flat Earth buddies.
Make something up?
Or do you acknowledge your ignorance on the topic?
As per your usual tack, you misconstrue concepts and declare I am "waffling" by telling you I don't know the thickness of the earth.
In order for me to truly be "waffling," I'd have to give an answer at one point in time and then give a different answer to the same question at a later point.
I've unequivocally stated the thickness of the earth is an unknown.
I remain in that position.
I submitted the fact of our limitation of drilling no further than seven miles into the earth.
I remain in that position.
Claiming I am "waffling" is more of your stupidity along the lines of claiming I suffer from "cognitive dissonance"
In both instances, your formal education is exposed as a liability.
It is noted you've abandoned that former line of insult with no acknowledgement of your error.
I'm not inclined to address any of the other information you want to throw into the mix unless and until you answer the two questions.
Perhaps you can start with the contradictions presented with NASA's eclipse animation.
Originally posted by FreakyKBHThere are no contradictions with the eclipse 'animations', If you had actually read the article you would have seen the limitations of the spacecraft electronics which could not take images fast enough, it is not a video camera, it is a still camera and takes some time to go from one image to the next.
When you don't know the answer to something, how do you respond?
Make something up?
Or do you acknowledge your ignorance on the topic?
As per your usual tack, you misconstrue concepts and declare I am "waffling" by telling you I don't know the thickness of the earth.
In order for me to truly be "waffling," I'd have to give an answer at one point in t ...[text shortened]... stions.
Perhaps you can start with the contradictions presented with NASA's eclipse animation.
Of course that will not be enough for you since you are hell bent on dissing NASA but at the same time letting Russia, China, UK, Brazil and all the other space faring nations off the hook, somehow their images don't count.
You cannot answer the question of even why the MOON is hot in sunlight if your sun is supposed to be what, a thousand miles up off the surface of Earth to give us night and day and so forth. That leaves that sun a quarter million miles from the moon and I don't know if you ever heard of the 'inverse square law' but that says if the sun is 1000 miles from Earth, it is 250 times that distance and you square that to about 60,000 times less energy received by the moon. So the moon should be frozen stiff by that amount of heat coming from your supposed close in sun.
The only way both bodies can get warm at the same time is if the sun is in fact many millions of miles away.
If you can't process that, that is on you not me. I KNOW inverse square law since I am an expert on things RF which follows the same law as light.
I already answered you on NASA, they DON"T lie about anything on purpose, deliberately lying is not their game.
You don't know enough about horizon issues to even talk about it. You refuse to understand the role refraction plays in seeing over the horizon and that is what allows you to see stuff beyond what you normally would.
I also repeat, there would be no such effect on the moon which you also disregard, not having enough imagination to even THINK about that situation.
No atmosphere= ZERO seeing beyond the horizon.
Of course that is never going to be good enough for you.