The ideology is making a successful push due to lack of confidence and respect for our leadership.
(media.greatawakening.win)
🤡 MSM Conspiracy Theory 🤡
Comments (246)
sorted by:
Space travel is evidently the only technology that is moving in reverse and the moon might be the one and only time in history where explorers went somewhere and never returned; a few missions; that’s it.
As this poster has pointed out ^ there are so many lies and half truths concerning both NASA and Antarctica that one can’t help but wonder why the tap dance?
Maybe it is all part of a ploy, by an organization that has existed for thousands of years, and it's known to play the long game, to provide supporting claims to a "conspiracy theory", fabricated by this same organization, just so they can mingle all future actual truth with it and therefore group everyone as lunatics, and immediately discredit said truth.
edit: just an anecdote to support this:
Last year, around July, the vaccination started for my age group down here, when I said I was just not going to take it kinda sent my whole, extremely brainwashed, family into a fit
My sister calls me and tries to talk me into getting it, when I make it clear I'm not budging an inch she drops any effort for pleasantries and first thing she says:
And that right there is the perfect example of exactly why this absolute moronicy was seeded so many years ago.
Good for you for holding your ground
Nasa lied.
Apparently Nasa in Hebrew means "to deceive". Funny that it would be Hebrew...
oy vey quit noticing goy
NASA is an acronym but hey
duh jooze
To be fair, things can be two things. You can start with a word and acronym it.
Acronyms Normally Are Lame Thesaurus Involving Typing Sessions
ANALTITS
Hey man. It's inevitable. One day your brain will be forced to make the connection.
And you will ask yourself as I have, "Why is it always them?"
LOL upvoted for hilarity
/wordnerd
Yeah, I know it's not an actual word, but I feel like it conveys the idea perfectly heh
I’m a bit more skeptical about the moon landing. But honestly, it’s expensive as hell to go there and if there’s not much there, why go back?
They say they can't go back. They destroyed the tech.
Lol.
It's a massive money laundering lie.
The guy you're referring to was probably not referring rockets and spacesuits... More likely referring to Montauk Project and Project Grill Flame type stuff.
We have no indication there is nothing there. I have heard military insiders for years talk about space stations on it and crystaline cities in ruins, The moon itself is an anomoly I could go on about. We have no knowledge they aren't still on the moon. It is my personal belief we have technology much beyond what we disclose have reverse engineered some of these craft and developed anti gravitic technologies, the reason they are having such a hard time forwarding the narrative in space is because it is built on lies so any advancement would break the narrive completly. They filmed the landings on a film studio most likely we have been to the moon mars and many others just not the people we were told about those are mason actors. Strapping explosions to the back of cargo can only sell as a meme narrative for so long until they would have to reveal the real stuff which is free energy
Pipe dream
I'm overall neutral on "there is fantastic tech they're hiding from us!", but I have a couple of points of doubt:
2: Free energy. There is no such thing. Ways of finding, storing, or otherwise harnessing hidden or unrealized energy? Sure. Pulling energy from some system outside our own? By all means. Mechanical work without an input? Never.
Anti-gravity wouldn't make you splatter into the wall, you are negating the downward force, not your horizontal velocity.
That's why there's artificial gravity and intertial dampeners/compensators in spacecraft in science fiction.
Tesla was on to something.
Tons of resources and really how much do we know about it, we've only been there supposedly 6 times. Humans are explorers and the fact we don't OPENLY explore the ocean, the poles, moon more makes me believe they already know whats there.
".. makes me believe they already know whats there."
And been told not to return. This "warning" includes not only the moon, but our own deep seas, Antarctica, and perhaps inner earth in my humble estimation
Should call it middle earth to get all the nerds interested.
Answer: Helium 3.
More H3 on the moon than earth. One shuttle load could power the U.S. for an entire yr, so [they] say
Iron Sky says so.
Not only did they never return but they destroyed all the data they had on how they got there lol
Yeah they taped over it. Probably wanted to Record ROOTS or Hillstreet Blues. Because..you know.. a government entity that receives funding to the tune of $30MM/daily (even back then!) is really strapped for magnetic tape
Going to Mars is one of the most stupid pipe dreams that anyone could ever have. It would be a one way trip. It would cost a fortune. What are you going to do when you get there? Collect rocks?
That's why nasa was forced into "global warming." They didn't have nothing better for it to do.
We are stuck here until the Lord releases us. When that happens, Mars won't even be a destination, you'll haul ass right by it on your way to Pegasus.
Pipe dream with our current technology WE KNOW about.
You cannot defeat physics.
Hence why they would terraform it. Which may have also occurred here on earth at some distant point in time.
Basically I think the argument is.. With this amount of lying, deception, and treachery....It's not that far fetched to think they may have made institutions to teach people false perceptions of reality. Though it seems like quite a waste of resources to perpetuate the lie.
I appreciate the sentiment of not trusting the government. You have to ALSO think though. You cant just blindly believe the opposite of what the government says.
I choose to believe my own observations. I have witnessed sunbeams through cloudcover and there is not a reliable explanation for the angle of the rays if the sun is light years away lime the solar system model proclaims. There are many other observable flaws in the solar system model that don’t have to do with the shape of the earth’s surface. If the model is wrong, why do they keep hammering it down everyone’s throats starting in kindergarten?
Same, the earthbis exactly what the Bible describes. Ikely bigger than we think and it's got a firmament. Argue with God if you don't like it.
The sun is not "light years away". This basic level stuff that you can easily research yourself is why people don't take our ideas seriously. And for good reason.
I trust my eyes too. Water always finds its own level.
Yep another easy concept. I can see the way shadows form in the clouds during sunset
It's level until you fart.
Thats called perspective. Those light rays are actually almost parallel but due to perspective we all learned in art class, they appear to converge.
Now take this knowledge about perspective and apply it to the size of the sun. Namely that it doesnt change size throughout the day. A FE would have you believe that its distance to grts shorter til high noon and then further until it sets.
The sun isn't light years away. It's approximately 93 million miles away, or one astronomical unit (AU).
THIS
"She then switches to Facebook where she learns the Holocaust is a lie, which is right up there with flat earth.
Meaning that just as i often discuss, people escape one level of the “Matrix” by rejecting the standard narrative they were brought up in and find themselves still trapped by the next layer.
These kinds of propaganda campaigns are designed for those that seek the truth, they place themselves opposed to the narrative specifically because when people reject the narrative the only places available to go are lies even more absurd than the narrative itself.
Think about how easy it is to find tinfoil, it’s always been easy, type lizard people or flat earth or adrenochrome and find literally thousands of sites dedicated to that nonsense dating back decades, but have you ever found anyone saying what I’m saying? If so please link me to them!
Everything about tinfoil is designed to keep people from finding the truth. To act as a literal foil to it, and this film goes over a lot more than just anti-Semitism, flat earth and holocaust denial, but we’ll get to that in a bit."
-DecodingSymbols
This happens because the human ego is obsessed with being right instead of seeking what is right.
Basically public edumacashun.
Waste of resources? Look how many idiots still listen to them because the lies fit their wishes.
So, you believe the government on flat earth being a conspiracy theory, but you don't believe many of their other narratives such as 9/11 or covid?
Correct. I can chose what to believe. I dont let them force me one way or the other.
You'll get a chance to wake up too. Your argument is weak.
based
Pushed by those who seek to discredit.
Flat earthers dont like to test their theories. I can come up with math checks and simple tests to support globe model. Flat earthers cant do the same. In that way they dont really fit in here. Theyre more like the sheep we see everyday but instead of believing everything the government says, they believe the opposite. That makes them only slightly more correct than the sheep overall.
Not saying I'm a flat earther but have seen several instances where math supports flat earth.
But my question to you is, if the perpetrators of round earth conceived said concept, would they not also create the means of supporting it as well?
Kind of pointless to push an earth model only to have it debunked by some basic math/calculations.
I'm not a flat earther, nor a round earther, but at this point, anything and everything is up in the air.
Not just math. Simple logic and tests.
Name a test that you or I can do that proves flat earth?
Q said Earth isn't flat. Q said disinformation is necessary. Therefore Earth is flat. cHeCKmAte dOrKs
(just kidding. I find flat Earthers amusing......)
Amusing until they try to tie FE to the Bible. They cherry pick a couple verses, take things out of context, or take things literally that were meant symbolically or metaphorically. It just makes christians look bad, but maybe thats their goal.
I've heard that Bs. "The Bible le says '4 corners' so that means it's flat!"
Scheiße
To be fair, the Bible is lacking a lot of information that was conveniently left out for the sake of enslaving minds. Also the whole "no adding to the Bible" bullshit was taken out of context: John likely meant no adding or distorting HIS specific Book of Revelation. We should all be adding our own stories and accounts.
Travel was also limited to foot or camel or wooden ship and sail.
Sun and moon the same size... coincidence? Perfect size ratios to account for their different distances? Or perhaps - same size and both are the same distance - and within the firmament?
Except then lunar eclipses dont make sense. Next one on May 15th. Check it out!
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Qr6raf9h2Zw
Perspective again - the sun is much farther away than the moon. Sun approximately 93 million miles; moon approximately a quarter million miles.
Perfect size ratios to account for their different distances?
Something like that is beyond my smooth-brain ability to calculate. There are filters for telescopes for both the sun and moon; I think there are also specific solar telescopes. I'm guessing measurements could be made that way.
The Danyang-Kunshan Grand Bridge in China is the longest bridge on earth at 102.4 miles long.
It should have a 6,990.50ft spherical drop from one end to the other to compensate for the supposed curvature.
But, it doesn't....
Can you prove that it doesnt?
Take a ball, poor water on it. Observe the effects.
Take a box, poor water in it. Observe the effects
Aside from changing it's properties in frozen form, water doesn't change it's properties when scaling up.
Water is somewhat heavy, if gravity were keeping it stuck to a globe, how do waves and lulls form? How do we so easily jump up from the surface?
Granted, that doesn't prove flat earth, but many factors when looked at with even a little skepticism can be seen as doubtful.
Regardless, flat or round, God's made a wonderfully mysterious home for us.
“Take a ball, poor water on it. Observe the effects”
So youre saying that because you cant see the effect of gravity between small objects it doesnt exist? What about large objects like the earth and moon? Scale is important to understand.
You think water finds its level when really water is attracted to the center of mass of the nearest largest object (the earth).
Haha. Water absolutely has properties that are only apparent at certain scales. Like a bead of water on a blade of grass or the surface that surrounds a bubble in a level (definitely not flat).
“Granted, that doesn't prove flat earth”
“Water is somewhat heavy, if gravity were keeping it stuck to a globe, how do waves form and lulls form? How do we so easily jump up from the surface”
So for gravity to exist, all other forces must cease to exist? You would expect a perfectly round sphere with no blemishes?
How about this test. A globe model would predict that the sun (and stars) would move 15 degrees every hour. Lets map it out. We all own a protractor, we can do this. A local sun moving over a disc would not do this.
Yes. You are right on all accounts. Forgiveness please, how dare the narrative be challenged. My GAW social score is plunging, please, no more!
Haha narrative…i presented a test. You ignored that. Which reinforces my first point, flat earthers dont like tests.
I came from a broken home, I don't own a protractor :(
I gotcha though but I'm not trying to prove or disprove anything, all I'm saying is for anyone to say anything with 100% certainty is a little cocky when none of us know just how deep the rabbit hole goes.
But I will say this, anything used by man to measure, test, or other in our environment are methods developed by man and our limited knowledge to explain the unknown.
LOL, good one!
Although I prefer my brain with a side of bacon...
If the Sun is a flying saucer pot light why does it always maintain its circular shape even during the sunset when it should look like in ellipse flying over the ocean really far away? Why does it look like a ball where our perspective to it is being cut off by the shape of the planet as it rotates?
This is an example of a question where you have to do mental gymnastics and hold cognitive dissonance ideas in your head to make this work in a flat Earth world.
The sun cannot be a flying projector light and look like it does and have sunsets. This is not a suggestion, it's an engineering reality.
Like FFS, just model it in 3D and look at what it looks like when the Sun goes around. The 3D model replication can be done with a globe model. It absolutely 100% cannot be done with a disc, it does not look like reality when you 3D model and explore the world as a disc.
The Flat Earther would most likely respond by saying the Sun is moving over the Dome (Firmament) above the Earth. This would make the disk appear more round throughout it's trajectory across the sky.
Because the 3D modeling companies are in on it. ;). Haha
It's like these people never took a projector light and pointed it down at a surface and ask themselves what does looking up at that like light look like with the scales that I've used in my model.
Even if they don't know 3D programming all they have to do is take a pot light and a desk and put the pot light close to the desk so that it lights up half of it had to go and then move it around and look at the shape of the light changing as it moves further away from you and closer.
It's like somebody suggested that it was a projector and all of the flat earthers went oh okay and then nobody ever bothered to think about what it would actually look like if it was a projector.
But seriously though like f*** this would be one of the easiest things to set up as a scene in blender. Literally you put down a flat disk and a projector light source set to move on a circular path, then set the camera to be on the disk pointed at the projector.
It literally would have taken them like an afternoon to test it in the physical world and like probably 15 minutes if they knew what they were doing on the computer.
For the record, I think the Sun is a sphere. But I'm not convinced it's 93 million miles away from us and 109 times larger than the earth.
Why not? Everything else makes sense if you understand that.
Because I can observe the rays of the sun spreading out from a hole in the clouds at an angles that should not be possible if the light was originating 93 million miles away; if the light source was that far away then all the suns rays would be shining straight down upon the earths surface, not at sharp angles. But the angle of those same rays would make sense if the Sun were roughly 3000 miles above us (or thereabouts).
No no no you don't get it, math is rigged to support round earth maaaaaaaannn
But seriously, you can observe for yourselves. I myself have seen other constellations that cannot be seen from the US.
https://www.livescience.com/60544-ways-to-prove-earth-is-round.html
Exactly this.
Actually, you're wrong about testing theories. There is more evidence and proof earth is flat than round. There is zero proof the earth is round. People in this board experience extreme cognitive dissonance when even thinking about talking to "one of those flat earthers." "Take that to conspiracies." I'm not going to provide any answers to people who think the earth is round. People can do their own research. Globe earthers don't do any research. They just believe NASA and TV.
All you said was meaningless words with no proof to back up your claims.
You can literally test these out yourself:
https://www.livescience.com/60544-ways-to-prove-earth-is-round.html
Is this real or fake? https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7PBJUogyCNw
Are you actually serious or purposefully retarded?
Where is your proof? Oh, all you have are insults. Insults only show your ignorance.
No matter how many times you spam this link, it backs up nothing other than the propaganda to drive the narrative.
Give me a test that youve done to prove it. Watching videos isnt considered research btw.
Prove what? You're the only one trying to prove anything, I've never said the earth is flat, I'm not trying to prove the earth is flat, I'm saying where much of our "reality" is fabricated, it's certainly a possibility.
Yeah, we can easily prove its round though, so why entertain what is trivial to your everyday life.
I said above, I'm not saying it's a flat earth, I'm not saying it's a round earth as I'm neither flat earther or round earther, I'm just an earther.
What does entertain me however is how staunch round earthers are in their opinion and opportunistic to dump on flat earthers.
You guys literally sound like Fauci on Ivermectin, or MSM on HB's laptop.
Prove it wrong with facts and logic. Your use of buzzwords makes you sound like the average Twatter user- okay, not so much anymore. Point is you haven't brought any counter evidence. At this point I'll just assume you to be another fed boi faggot attempting to gaslight.
There was a good lecture (I have to find it!) by some physicist that states the mathematical models for a heliocentric and geocentric earth can be proven correct. The math is there.
Not FE related.
Youre saying that math exists that shows the sun could revolve around that earth?
Yeap. The point of the lecture was you could model BOTH and it would work.
You got a link or just confirmation bias text blurbs?
I’ll look for it, will post back here to your comment when I do find it. It was awhile ago and I never bothered to dig further or archive.
https://rumble.com/vxt1pd-how-the-geocentric-universe-works-with-modern-physics.html
The force of gravity doesnt work like that. Thats like saying Jupiter orbits around one of its moons.
Geocentric means everything orbits around the earth. How the planets work in that model I have no idea, again I’ll have to look for the link … then one can dig further if interested.
It’s odd how massive an allergic reaction people have when the ‘standard’ is questioned, or other potentialities might exist. To me that’s a sign of a massive psyop or campaign designed to discredit discourse etc.
Very similar to how Tesla was discredited and pushed aside.
I think there is actual research that gets done here. And then theres the flat earth crowd that is more concerned with believing the opposite of what theyve been told than actually finding the truth.
Yeap pretty much.
Here you go. Lots of resources in there to dig further. The theory and calculations are to do with the fixed point of the universe… the modes would work if the center was the Earth or some far, far, distant singular point in the universe etc.
https://rumble.com/vxt1pd-how-the-geocentric-universe-works-with-modern-physics.html
Ok so the video boils down to motion is relative. I get that. There may not be absolute location or therefore absolute motion, I tend to think of the center of all mass being absolute center and everything also works relative to the inertial reference frame you are in. When were talking about motion of the solar system, it seems to make much more sense to describe the sun as the center even if the true center of mass of the solar system doesnt line up perfectly with the center of mass of the sun.
I havent gotten to the point where they explain how the stars being light years away could rotate around the earth everyday. That would mean theyre traveling much faster than the speed of light.
What is the current explanation for how stars / solar systems rotate around the galaxy center?
Gravity slowly orbits them around
Lunar eclipses must be hard to explain away as well.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Qr6raf9h2Zw
That's one of the craziest video's I've seen yet :)
I wonder how they explain the Sun and Moon moving in spirals? Perhaps they're on a really long bit of string and swing around like a plumb-bob :D
What do you all think? Some strong arguments made by the community. One of the dangers of being open minded and consistently lied to, is that you start to make any and everything a possibility.
I'll entertain most theories I find here but not flat earth.
Honestly, it's a misdirection of our resources,
Don't fall for it for a moment.
There's only one major problem with flat Earth theory: everything.
FET says gravity is a myth. Well if the disk is always accelerating up why can I point a flashlight at a wall and hit it with the light. It only takes 1 year at 9.81 m/s^2 to reach c. The sum of all the components vectors of a photon is c in whatever medium the photon is in. So if we moving beyond c in an upward direction. All light must hit and stay stuck to the floor.
Ships and distant structure always, universally, disappear from the bottom up with distance. Which is a globe phenomenon.
The fact that it's impossible to point a telescope latterly from a mountaintop in North America and see mount Everest is also globe proof and disk destruction evidence.
If the sun was a projector near earth then the disk of the projector must follow the rules of perspective as it moves. It must deform to a more and more extreme ellipse shape in view as the sun moves away from noon position.
Where's the light blead at night from the other side of the disk that's lit?
Why does the sun set below the ocean instead of looking like a disk of light flying above it really far away?
Why does sailing around Antarctica take the same ammount of time as sailing around the arctic when the perimeter of the disk is an order of magnitude larger at Antarctica in a disk world?
Satellites exist in orbit and they are not held up by balloons. They'res seriously some flat earthers who think that satellites are held up by balloons. Have the decency to buy a telescope and look at one. Others just say they're demons (if they're demons you have bigger problems then convincing people the world is flat)
Many flat Earth also say that the northern lights are a myth. I live on one of the highest points on Highway 11 in Canada, they are not a f****** myth, I live high enough in latitude that I see them a couple times a year when the sky is clear and I'm up late enough.
Flat earthers don't believe in mirages because lensing light is "impossible and couldn't possibly help to explain the god ray trajectories from the clouds." Seriously, these people think lensing light is myth.
If all of Astrophysics is a lie: explain HAM radio signal bouncing off the ionosphere that's only possible during a solar storm when the ionosphere is excited enough to bounce them. Explain why this would even be necessary on a disk world where you always have line of sight.
Line if sight. A regular average joe can see a candle light from 2 miles away in the dead of night. Name something else on the disc that you've seen lit up by the Sun while it was the dead of night in your area of the disc.
There is so much more, you actually have to not think about it to be flat Earth. Literally you have to not think about all of the secondary facts that have to be true and all of the tertiary facts that have to be true for the earth to be a disc. Well either that or you have to actually literally know nothing about physics and engineering.
These are all very easy to test things. The world cannot be a disc based on the observational evidence of the world and the engineering realities that would be apparent if the world was a disc.
Two of the biggest problems are line of sight which is whole distance on a discworld which clearly does not exist in a whole distance capacity on our planet and the shape of the solar projector as it moves above the disc.
Seriously, if the Sun is a flying pot light it should look like a flying pot light from a distance. Instead, it looks like a giant ball of fire that maintains its circular shape as it apparently sets while our line of sight to it is cut off by the rotation of the globe.
Thanks! They needed that.
I heard FET is meant to divide the truther community.
Im not sure about the Tartaria / mud flood / worlds fairs thing.😃😃
What about the World's Fair?
Flat earthers don't need to prove anything. You can find the answers to these questions if you really looked, but you won't so instead you just mock.
Can't blame them, they're fighting a lifetime of indoctrination starting from day one.
Many I conclude are university educated, thus highly indoctrinated.
What I find funny is they're on a MSM proclaimed "conspiracy theory" forum denying perhaps the biggest lie of all perpetrated by the cabal.
https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCN0p9kL7SLlYD5HnFUy-9XA/videos
Not a full FE here, yet. They've got some good arguments. What I notice though is that both sphere and flat models have some anomalies that their respective paradigms cannot explain.
To your Sun always looking like a disk point; the Flat Earther would most likely respond by saying the Sun is moving over the Dome (Firmament) above the Earth. This would make the disk appear more round throughout it's trajectory across the sky.
Again: model that. Now you have to explain the trajectory of light from the difference in where that light source is now pointing in order to create that shape. Presenting the firmament as an argument to combat my argument doesn't actually defeat my argument, it makes the other side worse. Because now you have to explain why the sun sets at all.
Clearly the sun moves below the water line from our perspective when we are looking at the sunset over the ocean. It does not move laterally when it's setting. A disc even with the fermament would require the sun to move laterally as it sets from a ground perspective. Furthermore the sun in a disc setting firmament or not will never look like it's going below the water from your perspective.
If it's on the inside of a dome and it maintains its disc shape because of its orientation relative on the dome that doesn't fix anything. Now you have to explain why the sun isn't an ellipse at noon.
Now you have to explain why the night exists.
Again you have to 3D model it and actually like look at the results of those models. Both from an overs perspective and from a ground perspective.
You have to explain why something that is flying looks like it's going underneath something that you know that you are above. When you know that thing is above you still.
You have to remember that you were talking about a flat plane when you're talking about this stuff. In a flat plain scenario like that if it looks like the sun collided with the ocean that would literally mean that the sun collided with the ocean.
There are no tricks of perspective on a flat plane.
As the sun descends it will create a tangent into the horizon. The perspective lines nearly merge, causing the receding body to appear to intersect the horizon from the bottom up. Next the light of the receding sun is dimmed to blackness by a non-transparent atmosphere.
Draw a picture.
This is false. Perspective makes all sorts of objects "disappear" into the distance.
Give an example.
Light posts getting shorter and disappearing into the distance. A flock of birds flying away from you. Almost any object that starts close and moves farther away will "appear" to disappear into the distance. This is Perspective in action.
Light posts don't light up 180° pointing towards the ground. They project light downward conically with light spillage due to the glass that covers the light. You can see a candle in the dark for 2 miles with how sensitive human eyes are you can't see it forever it's the same thing with the light post and especially because of the way it projects light down eventually you get to a point where you're pretty much outside of the cutoff.
This is the exact perfect example of why the sun is a projector does not work actually. If you take it telescope and look you can actually see it when you can't see it with your naked eyes anymore because of the little bit of light spillage.
230$ cad at Walmart at the right time of year. I've seen them on sale at the right time and year for like 180 bucks. Can probably get them even cheaper online
Anyways, same with the flock of birds.
Nothing disappears into the distance as long as you have line of sight and it's a clear day.
Things eventually get hidden in behind the globe but never disappear in the distance not on a clear day. You can see the space station in daytime on a clear day if you have a telescope and you know where to look and when.
You can look right at all kinds of satellites. It's not expensive it costs like two video games.
Just in case I was hiding behind a mental barrier, I've looked into flat earth three times now. Came to the conclusion that it was wrong all three times. It only took me one time to discover that Q was real.
With tens of thousands of satellites supposedly in space, we should have better footage of our planet, but we don't. Why is it all edited and shopped if there is no lie? NASA is lying about something huge, not sure what, but I don't think the earth is flat.
If the earth is flat, why are there no pictures of the edge?
Try taking a boat to Antarctica. See what happens.
Try taking a plane to Antarctica. See what happens.
You'll be stopped on both accounts....
By who?
A lot of ice
kek. That was cold.
By ice and a very inhospitable subzero environment. Plenty have gone to these places btw.
Have you attempted this before or is that what someone told you.
Flat-earthers = people who have woken up to the lies, but are not intelligent enough to follow logic for more than a few steps at a time.
Polaris never changes position in the night sky. That’s totally incompatible with the movement required for the globe model. The same people teaching the globe lie about everything else including evolutionary biology and world history
Right. We are told that the globe is spinning on it's axis at 1000mph. Then the Earth is orbiting the Sun at 50,000mph. Then the Solar System is moving through our galaxy at 500,000mph. Then our Galaxy is moving through the universe at an even more absurd speed.
Yet Polaris stays stationary. And we see the same Star constellations ALL the time.
With the amount of movement we are supposedly experiencing, we should be seeing new stars all the damn time. And Polaris DEF wouldn't be in the same spot.
When you consider the great distances things are away, it makes sense that they wouldnt noticeably move. The planets definitely move though.
I understand the great distances. But the speeds are great too. We should see much more movement from our Constellations and more particularly, Polaris.
Why particularly polaris? Directions matter too, so what if the constellations are moving in the same direction similar speed? Then the 500,000 mph wouldnt really matter. What would change the sky is great relative speeds and different directions.
Well, now we're talking about a ridiculous amount of "just so" measurements and speeds that have to be coordinated just right for them to stay the same relative our observations. Not sure I'm buying that yet...
Really not if theyre moving in relatively the same direction.
Lol
https://www.livescience.com/60544-ways-to-prove-earth-is-round.html
"Greek philosopher Aristotle figured out this one in 350 B.C., and nothing's changed. Different constellations are visible from different latitudes. Probably the two most striking examples are the Big Dipper and the Southern Cross. The Big Dipper, a set of seven stars that looks like a ladle, is always visible at latitudes of 41 degrees North or higher. Below 25 degrees South, you can't see it at all. And in northern Australia, just north of that latitude, the Big Dipper just barely squeaks above the horizon."
So why can we consistently see these constellations if the Earth is spinning, while flying through space? Are the stars all going at the same rate, too...?
When you really start to think about this idea that we are constantly hurtling through space, and everything around us is too, its kinda like... Hmmmm. Very unintuitive, for starters.
Polaris actually does precess and was not always at its current location. If you think that the procession of the Equinoxes is a myth then you should start praying apologies to all of your ancestors that you've insulted over the tens of thousands of years of observation that they had used to calculate the precession of the equinoxes.
It only takes a few generations before we all go back to the same ancestry. Don't insult our ancestors and their amazing accomplishment of mathematics over generations.
Yes yet somehow people always knew Polaris is in the north same direction the compass points
World governments have poisoned the whole world but they would never ever ever ever ever ever ever ever ever ever lie about the globe. It is a globe, 100 percent, dont use your eyes, they lie.
They might lie about the globe. I dont blindly trust anything. I like to test things. Do you have any tests that you or I could do to prove flat earth? Cause I have some for globe earth.
Nazis promoted hollow earth theory. They researched how to use the inner earth militarily. They were big fans of wind energy too. Idiots.
That’s why I cling bitterly to my Bible, and my gun.
The Clintons followed by the Bushes followed by Obama accelerated this nation’s managed decline while feathering their nests in preparation for the end.
It’s up to us to alter that timeline. We can’t do it alone. Remember we’re only human. Without God we’re doomed.
Good job refuting stupidity with Bible. Everybody should read that book but not everybody is actually intelligent enough to understand that book. Furthermore people are usually indoctrinated into having a closed mind about God and the teachings of the book by the time they're actually old enough to read the book so they have all these assumptions pre-built up in their head about God and the nature of God and everything and they can't actually read the book and see what the words are saying.
So kind of in the same way that the four corners of the worth is idiomatic God being all knowing is also idiomatic. God is the oldest thing. God is the first thing. God spent a lot of time by himself. An inconceivable amount of time by himself. Then God started making stuff like the seraphim and heaven. God did not give his seraphim permission to have free will. Most of the seraphim obeyed his orders literally and perfectly for eternity.
God has the power to do anything he wants, so he made the physical universe and then he made all the stuff and the intelligent life and then he told us we could have free will. If you actually read the Bible with an open mind you can see that God is a very complex being with complex emotions and feelings and that he is learning throughout the book. Not only is he learning but he is maturing and learning how to live with other beings that have their own free will and are doing things he doesn't want them to do all the time but that aren't necessarily wrong to do.
You can see this in how the rains get progressively loosened on humanity throughout the Bible. It starts out with a bunch of people and God telling them follow all of these complex instructions and rituals and maintain the covenant and by the time it gets to Jesus he is relaxed and he's like okay just love your neighbor and be nice to each other.
Most of the statements about God is this or God is that comes from people in the Bible. And anytime you read something that a person says in the Bible you have to remember that that person's saying whatever is not coming from God that person saying whatever is coming from that person and God told you that person said that, that doesn't mean that God believes it. It means that person believes it.
The typical Christian interpretation of God is a slap in his face. You take the most interesting and complex being in the entire universe and reduce it to a two-dimensional figure so that simpletons can understand it.
I look up at the moon and it is round. I look up at the sun and it's round. I get my cheap-o telescope to look at mars and it's round too. I don't understand how the flat earthers came to the conclusion that this planet is flat.
An O is round too. Round doesn't mean ball.
Unless you absolutely don't know math, which is a lot of zombies, you would think the earth is flat.
Just go stand by the ocean (doesn't matter, east or west).
https://www.livescience.com/60544-ways-to-prove-earth-is-round.html
Asteroid Impacts Cause Volcanoes to Erupt on the Opposite Side of the Planet
Doesn't fit a disk model.
"Although there is a strong case of impact events being related to antipodal volcanism, it is still a bit controversial of an idea."
This was the pinned comment by the creator of the video.
Although the author doesn't state why it's a controversial idea exactly, I suspect it's due to it hinging on the notion of plate-tectonics, an accepted but not necessarily proven model. Unless someone has a time machine it's always going to be a case of best-guess.
Video starts with "Approximately 251.9 million years ago", at the very best it's "educated" speculation, no one can say with certainty what happened that far back in the past. Shoot, the past 100 years are shrouded in mystery.
It's all theorizing that some others agree with, becomes plausible, gains traction and becomes probable.
That doesn't make it true.
The hypothesis can be tested though.
Can a Solid Glass Ball Stop a 50cal???
Shoots a glass sphere and it causes a fracture on the opposite side to where the bullet hit.
Flat earthers dont like to test. Or think.
That still leaves it a hypothesis. Density can explain how matter behaves even better than gravity. But gravity is what we are taught is the reason for an apple falling on a masons head. So just because you and test a theory to show it can be a theory doesn’t make it reality
Density doesnt explain why things fall **down.
Things that fall down are more dense than air. An apple is more dense than air therefore it will settle below the air. Nothing else changes as to why things work. Just the way you look at it. Why do different liquids stack on each other? Density. If you had a tube tall enough you would witness water “falling”through oil at a specific rate. This is just scratching the surface but as you know there is more than just density going on at one time but none the less the observable universe functions without “gravity”.
But why are things pulled DOWN? Not up?
They aren’t being pulled any which way. They are settling is a way to think about it. My problem with gravity is that they use it to how it fits in our perceived reality. Things we can actually see. Then they put it outside of our reality and claim that math works and it’s a done deal. They never prove it. I’m not saying the earth is flat. I am somewhere between NASA and Flat Earth. I don’t have all the answers because I don’t get to study these things myself. Many things other than gravity don’t add up and are taken as gospel. Like how can earth have a molten core that produces magnetism. Nothing else in the universe besides planets and stars apparently can produce magnetism and be molten. You or I can’t prove that one bit. So we are left with believe an organization started by Nazis or trust our eyes and what we can prove.
I guess another way to answer your question is that we are a mixture of various types of matter. The way it works is that we have muscles and bones and water holding us up. That puts us between air and ground density. Water is different because of people’s body mass but water between ground and air. So more dense is below our feet and less dense is above our heads.
KEK.
I find it amusing to read the increasingly complex models they use to promote their theories. Every rebuttal of FE is met with adding more exceptions to their theory.
Debunking them is a good mental exercise.
Flat earthers are psyops. This crazy idea is meant to discredit us. It's a real shame that so many truthers have bought into it.
I went and looked at the other comments and was surprised at how many anons cling desperately to their flat earth notion.
I have many examples, but we went through all that in 9th grade. All the planets I see in my telescope are orbs. I highly doubt that we're the only flat one in the bunch. eye roll.
Or, maybe it's just that the curvature math doesn't work for the size ball we've been told it is. Or, that aircraft never hover in place waiting for their destinations to arrive beneath them. Or, that water will always find level and it cannot stick to a spinning ball under any circumstances.
There are some things here that require better explanation.
I maintain: either the earth is flat or it is a much, much larger ball/other shape than what we've been told (this is problematic too, as it doesn't explain how the amount of gravity needed to make water [a heavy liquid] stick to it, at the same time allows much lighter things to fly around off the surface with ease, like birds/bugs/aircraft).
There are big lies afoot, this much is correct. Lies always make people ask questions.
https://qagg.news/?q=%23%23111
What kind of big picture would put 99 percent of people in the hospital?
Nancy Pelosi nude on a jumbotron? Just spitballin'. 😵
I assume that's the fact that a child rape cult runs the world, every single institution has a corrupt dark side that serves this cult, and all pop culture you've ever consumed is laced with symbolic code about the child rape.
“ that aircraft never hover in place waiting for their destinations to arrive beneath them.”
The planes are spinning too. Its not as if when they leave the earths surface all their momentum created from spin goes away.
Scale is the biggest misconception among flat earthers. Its SO big, until you get really far away, it seems flat. And all construction math works as if it is flat because the scale of building construction is too small to ever account for curvature.
“ he amount of gravity needed to make water [a heavy liquid] stick to it, at the same time allows much lighter things to fly around off the surface with ease, like birds/bugs/aircraft).”
Looks like we could study aerodynamics. i havent but I think I can explain it by flight is achieved by manipulating the air around it. But space ships dont have propellers because there is no air up there.
You accelerate air over a foil to create a negative pressure. The air on top is traveling faster than the air below. Race cars are the opposite; they accelerate air under the car to suck the car down to the ground.
Your comment about momentum of VSTOL aircraft is also correct. Its so stupid for people to say object can't hover above the ground just because the earth is spinning. The aircraft was/is spinning at the same rate as the earth, so of course it can hover and land in the exact same spot... also, in flight we take the curvature of earth into account. It's called the coriolis effect, which also affects fluids. People saying "the math doesn't work" have zero knowledge of math.
Another gravity denialist, perfect: I'm going to be a pedantic college graduate engineer at you.
Water absolutely can stick to a spinning ball: all liquids have some component cohesive and adhesive forces to them. This is what causes the meniscus to form in a tube. It is also what keeps a water column from flowing out of a tube even though nothing is blocking it when the tube is small enough. If you were to take a hydrophilic ball or a ball with a rough or absorbent surface and spin it at a rate of one rotation per day, you're not going to overpower the cohesive and adhesive forces. So absolutely yes, water can stick to a spinning ball. In fact if you're going to throw paint at a canvas you can use a ball on the end of a stick. You dip the ball in the paint and then spin the ball so that the paint never drips off the bottom and then you overpower the cohesive and adhesive forces by flinging the ball at the canvas.
Gravity is not a downward force. Get that concept out of your head: that is not how it works. REPEAT IT WITH ME: gravity is not a downward force, it is in attractive force.
Now beyond my pedantry, if water can't stick to the Earth if it's a ball and spinning: where do you propose the water would go?
Where is down when you're not standing somewhere on the planet and pointing at your feet and saying that's down?
I mean it you're trying to discredit the globe model from within the globe model which is the best way to discredit a theory. Use the theory itself to discredit the theory.
So if it's a ball and water can't stick to it, where does it go? What's the other option? Where is down if pointing at the most extreme local source of gravity and calling that down is not down?
NASA is just another slush fund.
1:Why do I get sunburned? I want a flat earther to explain the sun to me. 2:Nasa budget is one of the smallest of all agencies so it isnt money laundering. 3: too many nasa discoveries like insulation and batteries were specifically for space applications and would not have been discovered for awhile had they not been trying to do space shit. 4: I have been on one of the 2 flat floors that they built to simulate no gravity 5: all elites are building space companies 6: people often don't realize that satellites are rarely actually in space. "Space" doesn't start till over 250ish miles out and many satellites are far lower orbit as well as the space station.
I think it is more likely that there is breakaway civilization work and nasa is the cover. Not that space is fake.
Also understand 99.9 percent of all launches and missions don't actually go into "space"
I love that he actually answered such a question
Wish he'd pop in for a quick hello - would send anons over the moon :p
I don't understand why mods here will sticky stuff like this but not let people make posts about flat earth instead pushing to conspiracies or something. If this is a forbidden topic here, then stop stickying this stuff. This Q post doesn't prove the earth is round. The only proof the earth is round is CGI. NASA is on film caught faking round earth pictures. Official pictures of this CGI globe are not even consistent year to year, yet people still believe since they are conditioned by the media that flat earthers are like black sheep and they are too afraid to have independent thought. Even biology is faked using CGI. It's amazing to me how much people will accept as fact when presented with CGI as the only substantive proof.
Can't people realize that the left's main tactic is to use things you can't see to push their agenda? It's how they steal elections. They want to start wars over cyber attacks since you can't see it. It's how they lock down economies with some fake virus you can't see. It's how they funnel billions a year through NASA into dark projects with space you can't see. Yet, you still believe their propaganda. It's a TV show!
Sphere. I’ve seen it live from a non-NASA camera. F your flat Earth stupidity period!
Uh, hello, fish-eye lens...
All that proves is dont trust your eyes. Sure but you can trust tests. Got any?
Do you, that you've done yourself and documented, and verified through other means to verify the test parameters/methods aren't faulty?
If you would like to peer review me, great!
The earths curvature was calculated to be .00000024 inches per foot. I don’t think you can machine anything that flat. Info may come in handy if the flat earthers take over and you must pass a polygraph.
I believe in a roundish planet not much else the .gov spews about it.
Imagine not doing your own research and having to rely on some anonymous fuck who calls himself "Q" for all the answers. These fucks are probably more retarded than the people who rely on the TV for all the answers.
Disinfo is necessary. Q #2448
Caveat. This doesn't preclude it from being both flat and round ;)
... Initially thought it was obvious disinfo to probe how stupid people are, but Franco Denicola said it's both, so it's both.
Question should’ve read …
“Is the earth flat, square, domed, hollow, egg-shaped, or any shape other than a perfect sphere?”
When I get my ticket to visit the moon, Mars, or any other Planet and I see for my very own eyes how the Earth really looks like I’m open to possibilities ;)
Remember, there are many people out there who think you’re an absolute idiot for believing Jesus is real.
We gotta Open Source the Earth!
But Earf be flat, tho.
https://rumble.com/v12pzce-a-worldview-built-around-the-impossability-of-a-creator.html
My take: The earth is a fat-bellied globe and images are composited to take out all apparent off world tech floating and moving around, both terrestrian and alien. Every space project is a distraction from real and farther advanced projects and/or just for soaking up for fiat for their other worldly colonies.
I like this, plausible in a way ive never thought of.
So...not flat...more like bumpy?