Until a few weeks ago, I always thought flat earth was stupid. Then I began having discussions with someone who is very wise and level headed. Not like your typical flat earther who lacks an objective mind and simply finds the idea of a flat earth scintillating. I’ve since been searching for proofs either way. Please keep in my that I’m already fully aware of globe theory, and have a 1st class honours degree in aeronautical engineering. I supposed that one of the best proofs would be video footage of Antartica from space. Well, I couldn’t find any of that, so I settled for an image. Even an image was hard to find. Though this ‘mosaic’ image is on the NASA website. Supposedly there are a few others, but I suppose I’ll show this image to a few people and see what they think before I check others. Anyway, a huge chunk in the top image has no detail. Why not? It’s just pure white. I ran it through the photoshop checker, and it shows that the ‘pure white’ section is indeed of a completely different detail level. Though that’s obvious without the forensic tool. My other thoughts on this image are: 1) it looks like someone made a sculpture a foot wide on black felt and took a photo. 2) You cannot see any curvature. Like, if I take a photo of an orange, it will not look flat, just because you can only see part if one side. The light will allow you to see the curvature, no? Well you tell me - can you see curvature of either the continent or the cloud cover? Anyway, what does it imply? Just that for some reason NASA is unable to give even a good photo of Antarctica, a feat which should be easy, no?

Until a few weeks ago, I always thought flat earth was stupid. Then I began having discussions with someone who is very wise and level headed. Not like your typical flat earther who lacks an objective mind and simply finds the idea of a flat earth scintillating. I’ve since been searching for proofs either way. Please keep in my that I’m already fully aware of globe theory, and have a 1st class honours degree in aeronautical engineering. I supposed that one of the best proofs would be video footage of Antartica from space. Well, I couldn’t find any of that, so I settled for an image. Even an image was hard to find. Though this ‘mosaic’ image is on the NASA website. Supposedly there are a few others, but I suppose I’ll show this image to a few people and see what they think before I check others. Anyway, a huge chunk in the top image has no detail. Why not? It’s just pure white. I ran it through the photoshop checker, and it shows the the ‘pure white’ section is indeed of a completely different detail level. Though that’s obvious without the forensic tool. My other thoughts on this image are: 1) it looks like someone made a sculpture a foot wide on black felt and took a photo. 2) You cannot see any curvature. Like, if I take a photo of an orange, it will not look flat, just because you can only see part if one side. The light will allow you to see the curvature, no? Well you tell me - can you see curvature of either the continent or the cloud cover? Anyway, what does it imply? Just that for some reason NASA is unable to give even a good photo of Antarctica, a feat which should be easy, no?

Until a few weeks ago, I always thought flat earth was stupid. Then I began having discussions with someone who is very wise and level headed. Not like your typical flat earther who lacks an objective mind, but rather just finds the idea of a flat earth scintillating. I’ve since been searching for proofs either way. Please keep in my that I’m already fully aware of globe theory, and have a 1st class honours degree in aeronautical engineering. I supposed that one of the best proofs would be video footage of Antartica from space. Well, I couldn’t find any of that, so I settled for an image. Even an image was hard to find. Though this ‘mosaic’ image is on the NASA website. Supposedly there are a few others, but I suppose I’ll show this image to a few people and see what they think before I check others. Anyway, a huge chunk in the top image has no detail. Why not? It’s just pure white. I ran it through the photoshop checker, and it shows the the ‘pure white’ section is indeed of a completely different detail level. Though that’s obvious without the forensic tool. My other thoughts on this image are: 1) it looks like someone made a sculpture a foot wide on black felt and took a photo. 2) You cannot see any curvature. Like, if I take a photo of an orange, it will not look flat, just because you can only see part if one side. The light will allow you to see the curvature, no? Well you tell me - can you see curvature of either the continent or the cloud cover? Anyway, what does it imply? Just that for some reason NASA is unable to give even a good photo of Antarctica, a feat which should be easy, no?