You dont know and neither do I. No one knows what the earth looks like from space. The highest we go is a plane and that is not high enough to know if its flat or not.
Then how the fuck do satellites work genius? How do objects orbit following curved paths through the sky? Where does the curvature visible from high-altitude planes come from?
Just more glowfag shit, if there was any truth to it it would have been banned from YouTube and social media like questioning masks, vaccines, and election fraud.
In the flat earth model, there is a dome (firmament).
NASA is also the biggest consumer of helium, so, either not at all or something quite different from what we are told... also, 99% of communications are through underground cables.
Orbit following a curved path, are you talking visible curves or curves from the projection onto the map? The second is a result of fisheye lensing, shift the angle and you could make it look like we live on the inside of a sphere.
The topic is heavily restricted on YouTube, searching the topic leads people to "flat earth society" (glowfag group) and a small group of anti-flat earth people. When you find the real discussion of the topic and examine the arguments, there's a lot more merits to the topic than people realize.
That said, because this is a topic that is useful to smear, not relevant to Q, and other reasons, it's best kept to conspiracies.win. You'll find that there's some high level discussion and without doing some research will be quickly stuck appealing to NASA or calling them idiots.
The flat earth was categorically disproven by Magellan's circumnavigation of the World 500 years ago (but was known to be false long before). Please catch up with modern times.
Helium is used as a rocket propellant pressurant. It weighs much less than any other pressurant, and weight is king in launch vehicles. What else are you going to use it for? Party balloons?
Orbits are there and they are hundreds of kilometers high. Yeah, you can see the Earth curvature with no lens effects.
Catch up to modern times? I put out much harsher insults whenever I came across people pushing a flat earth model above and beyond that. It wasn't until being challenged to actually hear out the arguments before drawing conclusions that I actually realized just how tenuous the globe model is in actuality.
The globe model comes with a series of positive claims; the earth spins on it's north-south axis 23.4 degrees from the north pole (66.6 degrees north from the equator) and rotates around the sun at 66 600 miles per hour, the sun itself rotating around the milky way at 23.4 degrees above the galactic plane (66.6 from that planes tangent).
East-West circumnavigation is absolutely possible in either model, I actually went back further as proof to Eratosthenes, who used the sticks and their shadows to calculate out the distance of the sun... even with no concept of refraction, those numbers are still treated as approximately accurate. The "flat earth" map is best illustrated as the UN logo, with the north pole in the center and the south pole as the circumference.
NASA needs to justify the 50 million dollars per day they spend, that pressurizer shouldn't be needed when the rocket fuel is liquid hydrogen that will evaporate at -250C and expand drastically from its liquid form. If you're talking about the ISS, you're incorrect, they all use fisheye lenses (as well as plenty of greenscreen / chromakey compositing), hell, even NASA admits that the "blue marble" photos are all composites.
You dont know and neither do I. No one knows what the earth looks like from space. The highest we go is a plane and that is not high enough to know if its flat or not.
Then how the fuck do satellites work genius? How do objects orbit following curved paths through the sky? Where does the curvature visible from high-altitude planes come from?
Just more glowfag shit, if there was any truth to it it would have been banned from YouTube and social media like questioning masks, vaccines, and election fraud.
In the flat earth model, there is a dome (firmament).
NASA is also the biggest consumer of helium, so, either not at all or something quite different from what we are told... also, 99% of communications are through underground cables.
Orbit following a curved path, are you talking visible curves or curves from the projection onto the map? The second is a result of fisheye lensing, shift the angle and you could make it look like we live on the inside of a sphere.
The topic is heavily restricted on YouTube, searching the topic leads people to "flat earth society" (glowfag group) and a small group of anti-flat earth people. When you find the real discussion of the topic and examine the arguments, there's a lot more merits to the topic than people realize.
That said, because this is a topic that is useful to smear, not relevant to Q, and other reasons, it's best kept to conspiracies.win. You'll find that there's some high level discussion and without doing some research will be quickly stuck appealing to NASA or calling them idiots.
The flat earth was categorically disproven by Magellan's circumnavigation of the World 500 years ago (but was known to be false long before). Please catch up with modern times.
Helium is used as a rocket propellant pressurant. It weighs much less than any other pressurant, and weight is king in launch vehicles. What else are you going to use it for? Party balloons?
Orbits are there and they are hundreds of kilometers high. Yeah, you can see the Earth curvature with no lens effects.
Catch up to modern times? I put out much harsher insults whenever I came across people pushing a flat earth model above and beyond that. It wasn't until being challenged to actually hear out the arguments before drawing conclusions that I actually realized just how tenuous the globe model is in actuality.
The globe model comes with a series of positive claims; the earth spins on it's north-south axis 23.4 degrees from the north pole (66.6 degrees north from the equator) and rotates around the sun at 66 600 miles per hour, the sun itself rotating around the milky way at 23.4 degrees above the galactic plane (66.6 from that planes tangent).
East-West circumnavigation is absolutely possible in either model, I actually went back further as proof to Eratosthenes, who used the sticks and their shadows to calculate out the distance of the sun... even with no concept of refraction, those numbers are still treated as approximately accurate. The "flat earth" map is best illustrated as the UN logo, with the north pole in the center and the south pole as the circumference.
NASA needs to justify the 50 million dollars per day they spend, that pressurizer shouldn't be needed when the rocket fuel is liquid hydrogen that will evaporate at -250C and expand drastically from its liquid form. If you're talking about the ISS, you're incorrect, they all use fisheye lenses (as well as plenty of greenscreen / chromakey compositing), hell, even NASA admits that the "blue marble" photos are all composites.