RodeoSchro said:

Funkcreep said:

Yeah they went up...but didnt continue going straight up? why do they always go sideways?

LMFAO, you're awesome.

Do you believe that if a rocketship were to travel to a point in space - be it the moon, or the ISS, or the Hubble - that you just point the craft at that destination, light fires, and go?

Everything from here on out depends on how you answer that question.

"be it the moon"??? of gosh...please don't tell me you still believe in that fake moon landing??? please say it ain't so joe!

JustErin said:

Funkcreep said:

Look again. They are mountains, the lady who took the video obviously would know if she was filming clouds or mountains. Plus I just watched it again....they are mountains seen from over 100 miles away which would be impossible on a global earth.

Seriously, no more than a week ago I was travelling with my son and we were commenting on how much a group of clouds looked exactly like a mountains in the distance.

Also, I looked up the mountains it was supposed to be...they do not match...could not find angle where it did.

There are plenty of pictures showing the lack of curvature. Plus another big evidence to show lack of curviture is lighhouses. Ships from as far as 50 miles (possibly more) out can see lighthouses which would be impossible if there was curvature on the earth. I have a great pic of the mountains in question taken from Anchorage that clearly show the mountains. I didn't take the pic though.

lust said:

Funkcreep said:

You answered my question, but it was the wrong answer. The horizon always stays at eye level. The next time your on a plane, take a look at the horizon. do you have to look down (which is how it should be on a global earth) or does it remain at eye level?

No. It doesn't stay at eye level if you go high enough. What a stupid assertion. Have you ever travelled by sea to another land mass?

No matter how high you go (aside from NASA of course), the horizon stays at eye level. That would be impossible on a global earth.

I've never travelled by sea to another land mass. (See that..i answered your question...see if you can answer this)

If Earth were a ball 25,000 miles in circumference as NASA and modern astronomy claim, spherical trigonometry dictates the surface of all standing water must curve downward an easily measurable 8 inches per mile multiplied by the square of the distance. This means along a 6 mile channel of standing water, the Earth would dip 6 feet on either end from the central peak. Heres the question, how come every time such experiments have been conducted, standing water has proven to be perfectly level, why is that???

lust said:

Why can't the southern cross be seen from the so called "northern hemisphere"? A flat earth would neccessetate the same night sky. No? I'm in New Zealand. When I speak to my mum in London late at night and she says it's sunny outside where she is. How does that work? Or is she in on the conspiracy. Or am I? And New Zealand doesn't even exist. It's pretty simple stuff. You have thought about this stuff before you've brought these concerns here yes?

Lust, You cannot see every star from every point on Earth simultaneously due to the horizon and law of perspective.

If you have a street, a mile long, and theres a row of streep lamps, it will be noticed that from where we stand the lamps gradually decline to the ground, the last one apparently quite on the ground. Take the lamp at the end of the street and walk away from it a hundred yards, and it will appear to be much nearer the ground than when we were close to it; keep on walking away and it will appear to be graduall depressed until it is last seen on the ground and then disappears.

This proves that the depression of the Pole Star can and does take place in relation to a flat surface, simply because we increase our distance from it, the same as from the street lamp. In other words, the further away we get from an object above us, as a star for example, the more it is depressed, and if we go far enough it will sink (or appear to sink) to the horizon and then disappear.

Lust, hopefully that answers you question "Why can't the southern cross be seen from the so called "northern hemisphere"?

[Edited 8/14/15 7:49am]

This page expains in the most basic way, for those that are basic why the earth is not flat.

But even just the first explanation explains so well:

Aristotle (who made quite a lot of observations about the spherical nature of the Earth) noticed that during lunar eclipses (when the Earth’s orbit places it directly between the Sun and the Moon, creating a shadow in the process), the shadow on the Moon’s surface is round. This shadow is the Earth’s, and it’s a great clue on the spherical shape of the Earth.

Since the earth is rotating (see the “Foucault Pendulum” experiment for a definite proof, if you are doubtful), the consistent oval-shadow it produces in each and every lunar eclipse proves that the earth is not only round but spherical – absolutely, utterly, beyond a shadow of a doubt not flat.

http://www.smarterthanthat.com/astronomy/top-10-ways-to-know-the-earth-is-not-flat/

Again, I ask...what is the purpose and motivation in denying that the earth is flat?

Funkcreep said:

There are plenty of pictures showing the lack of curvature. Plus another big evidence to show lack of curviture is lighhouses. Ships from as far as 50 miles (possibly more) out can see lighthouses which would be impossible if there was curvature on the earth.

depends on how high the lightsource is over the water line

I did a quick calculation with Pythagoras (using the metric system cause I'm used to it)
a lighthouse 100 meter over water will be seen from at least 35 kilometers away
so if you claim 50 miles, then the tower would have to be very high indeed, actually higher than any lighthouse existing

alrigthy, so then if you didn't just pull that nnumber out your ass, can you give a peer reviewed paper for an experiment where a distance of 50 milers has been confirmed? because just "saying stuff" is not good enough for me


but be it 35, 50, 70 or whatever, I have a counter question:

if it is flat, then on a clear day the light must be seen from 100, 300, 500+... miles away too.

do you have observations and confirmed experiments for that?

Dancelot said:

Funkcreep said:

There are plenty of pictures showing the lack of curvature. Plus another big evidence to show lack of curviture is lighhouses. Ships from as far as 50 miles (possibly more) out can see lighthouses which would be impossible if there was curvature on the earth.

depends on how high the lightsource is over the water line

I did a quick calculation with Pythagoras (using the metric system cause I'm used to it)
a lighthouse 100 meter over water will be seen from at least 35 kilometers away
so if you claim 50 miles, then the tower would have to be very high indeed, actually higher than any lighthouse existing

alrigthy, so then if you didn't just pull that nnumber out your ass, can you give a peer reviewed paper for an experiment where a distance of 50 milers has been confirmed? because just "saying stuff" is not good enough for me


but be it 35, 50, 70 or whatever, I have a counter question:

if it is flat, then on a clear day the light must be seen from 100, 300, 500+... miles away too.

do you have observations and confirmed experiments for that?

The Isle of White lighthouse in England is 180 feet high and can be seen up to 42 miles away, a distance at which modern astronomers say the light should fall 996 feet below line of sight.

The Cape L'Agulhas lighthouse in South Africa is 33 feet high, 238 feet above sea level, and can be seen for over 50 miles. If the world was a globe, this light would fall 1,400 feet below an observer's line of sight!

The lighthouse of Port Said, Egypt, at an elevation of only 60 feet has been seen an astonishing 58 miles away, where according to modern atronomy it should be 2,182 feet below the line of sight!

Another great example is the Norte Dame Antwerp spire standing 403 feet high from the foot of the tower with Strasburg measuring 468 feet above sea level. With the aid of a telescope, ships can be distinguished on the horizon and captains declare they can see the cathedral spire from an amazing 150 miles away. If the earth were a globe, however, at that distance the spire should be an entire mile, 5280 feet below the horizon!

[Edited 8/14/15 8:28am]

Funkcreep said:

RodeoSchro said:

LMFAO, you're awesome.

Do you believe that if a rocketship were to travel to a point in space - be it the moon, or the ISS, or the Hubble - that you just point the craft at that destination, light fires, and go?

Everything from here on out depends on how you answer that question.

"be it the moon"??? of gosh...please don't tell me you still believe in that fake moon landing??? please say it ain't so joe!

LMAO, you're awesome! Of course it happened. You should start another thread about it!

I'm going to rely on my friends that have actually been to outer space and seen the Earth from the International Space Station. They all say Earth is round. So to recap: You have never been outside the USA. My friends have been to outer space. I win.

RodeoSchro said:

Funkcreep said:

"be it the moon"??? of gosh...please don't tell me you still believe in that fake moon landing??? please say it ain't so joe!

LMAO, you're awesome! Of course it happened. You should start another thread about it!

I'm going to rely on my friends that have actually been to outer space and seen the Earth from the International Space Station. They all say Earth is round. So to recap: You have never been outside the USA. My friends have been to outer space. I win.

"of course it happend"??? wow! and you have friends who have been to outer space???

They must have figured out how to get past the Van Allen radiation belt because NASA is still working on it.

Why do same-sized virtical objects cast shadows of different lengths at the same time of the day if they are different parts of the planet?

Funkcreep said:

RodeoSchro said:

LMAO, you're awesome! Of course it happened. You should start another thread about it!

I'm going to rely on my friends that have actually been to outer space and seen the Earth from the International Space Station. They all say Earth is round. So to recap: You have never been outside the USA. My friends have been to outer space. I win.

"of course it happend"??? wow! and you have friends who have been to outer space???

They must have figured out how to get past the Van Allen radiation belt because NASA is still working on it.

Yep! Lots of them! I even know a guy that went to the moon. Shucks, I got a Thanksgiving card emailed to me from the ISS one year. Heck, I've even talked to astronauts on the ISS via cell phone. Figure that one out!

RodeoSchro said:

Funkcreep said:

"of course it happend"??? wow! and you have friends who have been to outer space???

They must have figured out how to get past the Van Allen radiation belt because NASA is still working on it.

Yep! Lots of them! I even know a guy that went to the moon. Shucks, I got a Thanksgiving card emailed to me from the ISS one year. Heck, I've even talked to astronauts on the ISS via cell phone. Figure that one out!

Would you please address the video i posted titled "NASA engineer admits they can't get past the Val Allen radiation belts"

Funkcreep said:

RodeoSchro said:

Yep! Lots of them! I even know a guy that went to the moon. Shucks, I got a Thanksgiving card emailed to me from the ISS one year. Heck, I've even talked to astronauts on the ISS via cell phone. Figure that one out!

Would you please address the video i posted titled "NASA engineer admits they can't get past the Val Allen radiation belts"

Great response to this video:

"He didn't admit anything Apollo mission was carried more than 4 decades ago. 4 decades ago risking the safety of human crew was very much acceptable. NASA accepted much greater risks than passing through Van Allen Belt at that time. Today such risk is not acceptable. That is why today they have to solve those challenges instead of putting astronauts at risk like in the 60s. Van Allen Belts are not lethal. They "CAN" harm the craft and the crew. There is a big difference between "can" and "will". Micrometeorites can harm the craft and the crew as well, and they're everywhere. That doesn't mean they will. By your logic ISS can't really exist either as it's traveling through all that space debris and micrometeorites so I guess it's fake as well. Never mind it's flying over your head every day. Damn, people are so under educated these days... Radio telemetry from across the globe (even Russia) tracked the Apollo module to/from the Moon. Would have been very obvious if signal wasn't originating from where NASA said the astronauts were. But a layman like you can't possible understand how radio works, so you'll end up believing crackpot stories told around camp fires. Get yourself educated, for your own sake."

JustErin said:

Funkcreep said:

Would you please address the video i posted titled "NASA engineer admits they can't get past the Val Allen radiation belts"

Great response to this video:

"He didn't admit anything Apollo mission was carried more than 4 decades ago. 4 decades ago risking the safety of human crew was very much acceptable. NASA accepted much greater risks than passing through Van Allen Belt at that time. Today such risk is not acceptable. That is why today they have to solve those challenges instead of putting astronauts at risk like in the 60s. Van Allen Belts are not lethal. They "CAN" harm the craft and the crew. There is a big difference between "can" and "will". Micrometeorites can harm the craft and the crew as well, and they're everywhere. That doesn't mean they will. By your logic ISS can't really exist either as it's traveling through all that space debris and micrometeorites so I guess it's fake as well. Never mind it's flying over your head every day. Damn, people are so under educated these days... Radio telemetry from across the globe (even Russia) tracked the Apollo module to/from the Moon. Would have been very obvious if signal wasn't originating from where NASA said the astronauts were. But a layman like you can't possible understand how radio works, so you'll end up believing crackpot stories told around camp fires. Get yourself educated, for your own sake."

Thanks!

JustErin said:

Funkcreep said:

Would you please address the video i posted titled "NASA engineer admits they can't get past the Val Allen radiation belts"

Great response to this video:

"He didn't admit anything Apollo mission was carried more than 4 decades ago. 4 decades ago risking the safety of human crew was very much acceptable. NASA accepted much greater risks than passing through Van Allen Belt at that time. Today such risk is not acceptable. That is why today they have to solve those challenges instead of putting astronauts at risk like in the 60s. Van Allen Belts are not lethal. They "CAN" harm the craft and the crew. There is a big difference between "can" and "will". Micrometeorites can harm the craft and the crew as well, and they're everywhere. That doesn't mean they will. By your logic ISS can't really exist either as it's traveling through all that space debris and micrometeorites so I guess it's fake as well. Never mind it's flying over your head every day. Damn, people are so under educated these days... Radio telemetry from across the globe (even Russia) tracked the Apollo module to/from the Moon. Would have been very obvious if signal wasn't originating from where NASA said the astronauts were. But a layman like you can't possible understand how radio works, so you'll end up believing crackpot stories told around camp fires. Get yourself educated, for your own sake."

"Van Allen Belts are not lethal"?? LOL ok...if you say so.

The ISS is a fraud, just like the moon landing. Space travel as you've been taught is a fantasy world. NASA put's up fake CGI pictures and that just proves space travel to the masses. You stick to the fake pics that NASA feeds to the sheep and I'll stick with science, experiements performed on earth, etc...

Let me ask you a question?

Where does space actually begin? 10,000 miles up? 1000 miles up? And how does space even exist if it's connected to our atmosphere? That cant possibly be accurate because space for it to exist the way NASA portrays it, would have to be in a vacuum.

I'm afraid to ask if you still think hijackers with box cutters hijacked jets and slammned them in to the trade centers which caused them to collapse? I'm really afraid to ask that if you believe an aluminum jet can not only penetrate a steel building but pop out on the other side......UNDAMAGED! Please tell me you don't buy the offiicial 9/11 story.

I'll be darned. Kelly Smith - the NASA engineer in your video - works right here at the Johnson Space Center. Shouldn't be too hard to find him and ask him if that's what he really meant.

Funkcreep said:

JustErin said:

Great response to this video:

"He didn't admit anything Apollo mission was carried more than 4 decades ago. 4 decades ago risking the safety of human crew was very much acceptable. NASA accepted much greater risks than passing through Van Allen Belt at that time. Today such risk is not acceptable. That is why today they have to solve those challenges instead of putting astronauts at risk like in the 60s. Van Allen Belts are not lethal. They "CAN" harm the craft and the crew. There is a big difference between "can" and "will". Micrometeorites can harm the craft and the crew as well, and they're everywhere. That doesn't mean they will. By your logic ISS can't really exist either as it's traveling through all that space debris and micrometeorites so I guess it's fake as well. Never mind it's flying over your head every day. Damn, people are so under educated these days... Radio telemetry from across the globe (even Russia) tracked the Apollo module to/from the Moon. Would have been very obvious if signal wasn't originating from where NASA said the astronauts were. But a layman like you can't possible understand how radio works, so you'll end up believing crackpot stories told around camp fires. Get yourself educated, for your own sake."

"Van Allen Belts are not lethal"?? LOL ok...if you say so.

The ISS is a fraud, just like the moon landing. Space travel as you've been taught is a fantasy world. NASA put's up fake CGI pictures and that just proves space travel to the masses. You stick to the fake pics that NASA feeds to the sheep and I'll stick with science, experiements performed on earth, etc...

Let me ask you a question?

Where does space actually begin? 10,000 miles up? 1000 miles up? And how does space even exist if it's connected to our atmosphere? That cant possibly be accurate because space for it to exist the way NASA portrays it, would have to be in a vacuum.

I'm afraid to ask if you still think hijackers with box cutters hijacked jets and slammned them in to the trade centers which caused them to collapse? I'm really afraid to ask that if you believe an aluminum jet can not only penetrate a steel building but pop out on the other side......UNDAMAGED! Please tell me you don't buy the offiicial 9/11 story.

ZOMG do I have some friends in P&R that need to meet you!

Funkcreep said:

JustErin said:

Great response to this video:

"He didn't admit anything Apollo mission was carried more than 4 decades ago. 4 decades ago risking the safety of human crew was very much acceptable. NASA accepted much greater risks than passing through Van Allen Belt at that time. Today such risk is not acceptable. That is why today they have to solve those challenges instead of putting astronauts at risk like in the 60s. Van Allen Belts are not lethal. They "CAN" harm the craft and the crew. There is a big difference between "can" and "will". Micrometeorites can harm the craft and the crew as well, and they're everywhere. That doesn't mean they will. By your logic ISS can't really exist either as it's traveling through all that space debris and micrometeorites so I guess it's fake as well. Never mind it's flying over your head every day. Damn, people are so under educated these days... Radio telemetry from across the globe (even Russia) tracked the Apollo module to/from the Moon. Would have been very obvious if signal wasn't originating from where NASA said the astronauts were. But a layman like you can't possible understand how radio works, so you'll end up believing crackpot stories told around camp fires. Get yourself educated, for your own sake."

"Van Allen Belts are not lethal"?? LOL ok...if you say so.

The ISS is a fraud, just like the moon landing. Space travel as you've been taught is a fantasy world. NASA put's up fake CGI pictures and that just proves space travel to the masses. You stick to the fake pics that NASA feeds to the sheep and I'll stick with science, experiements performed on earth, etc...

Let me ask you a question?

Where does space actually begin? 10,000 miles up? 1000 miles up? And how does space even exist if it's connected to our atmosphere? That cant possibly be accurate because space for it to exist the way NASA portrays it, would have to be in a vacuum.

I'm afraid to ask if you still think hijackers with box cutters hijacked jets and slammned them in to the trade centers which caused them to collapse? I'm really afraid to ask that if you believe an aluminum jet can not only penetrate a steel building but pop out on the other side......UNDAMAGED! Please tell me you don't buy the offiicial 9/11 story.

I'm going to ask this again, what is the exact purpose for one to deny that the earth is flat?

What is the purpose for all the faking and fraudulent claims, by basically the entire world?

JustErin said:

Funkcreep said:

"Van Allen Belts are not lethal"?? LOL ok...if you say so.

The ISS is a fraud, just like the moon landing. Space travel as you've been taught is a fantasy world. NASA put's up fake CGI pictures and that just proves space travel to the masses. You stick to the fake pics that NASA feeds to the sheep and I'll stick with science, experiements performed on earth, etc...

Let me ask you a question?

Where does space actually begin? 10,000 miles up? 1000 miles up? And how does space even exist if it's connected to our atmosphere? That cant possibly be accurate because space for it to exist the way NASA portrays it, would have to be in a vacuum.

I'm afraid to ask if you still think hijackers with box cutters hijacked jets and slammned them in to the trade centers which caused them to collapse? I'm really afraid to ask that if you believe an aluminum jet can not only penetrate a steel building but pop out on the other side......UNDAMAGED! Please tell me you don't buy the offiicial 9/11 story.

I'm going to ask this again, what is the exact purpose for one to deny that the earth is flat?

What is the purpose for all the faking and fraudulent claims, by basically the entire world?

The ones in power, the elites know that in order to really control the world, the masses need to be controlled, misled, then they can have power over us. Flat Earth, Fed Reserve (fracional reserve banking), World Wars, 9/11, Moon Landing etc..

Flat earth belief - the earth was created by God and we are special with the sun, moon and stars revolving around us! We are the center of the universe.

Global earth belief - the earth was not created by God and we are not special becuase there are bilion and bilions of other planets, galaxies etc... We are NOT the center of the universe, we're just a spec in the galaxy.

Financial...NASA's budget is upwards to 80-90 billion dollars per year.

Funkcreep said:

JustErin said:

I'm going to ask this again, what is the exact purpose for one to deny that the earth is flat?

What is the purpose for all the faking and fraudulent claims, by basically the entire world?

The ones in power, the elites know that in order to really control the world, the masses need to be controlled, misled, then they can have power over us. Flat Earth, Fed Reserve (fracional reserve banking), World Wars, 9/11, Moon Landing etc..

Flat earth belief - the earth was created by God and we are special with the sun, moon and stars revolving around us! We are the center of the universe.

Global earth belief - the earth was not created by God and we are not special becuase there are bilion and bilions of other planets, galaxies etc... We are NOT the center of the universe, we're just a spec in the galaxy.

Financial...NASA's budget is upwards to 80-90 billion dollars per year.

"Elites" saying the earth is round vs flat somehow asserts more control? Please explain to me how it does?

How does saying we are not the center of the universe assert more control over the population?

Accusations and claims mean nothing without motive and explanation.

So please provide me with exact information on how making these fraudulent claims actually controls the masses, and what the consequences of not making these claims would be.

ThisOne said:

Do u have a map of flat earth?

I found some pictures!











Check out this thread. It's full of impeccable proof that the Earth is, actually, flat:


http://www.landoverbaptis...hp?t=40617

ThisOne said:

Do u have a map of flat earth?

lust said:

So presumably your model requires the sun and stars to be extremely small and extremely close above our surface. Speak more to the specifics of that. How far up are they? How big are they. How does this tiny sun have the energy to continuingly burn and warm us for 4.54 billion years? Ok let's just head that one off right now. How does it have the energy to burn bright for the last 6000 years? Tell us more.

Measuring with sextants and calculating with plane trigonometry both the Sun and Moon figure to be only about 32 miles in diameter and approximately 3,000 miles away.

lust said:

So presumably your model requires the sun and stars to be extremely small and extremely close above our surface. Speak more to the specifics of that. How far up are they? How big are they. How does this tiny sun have the energy to continuingly burn and warm us for 4.54 billion years? Ok let's just head that one off right now. How does it have the energy to burn bright for the last 6000 years? Tell us more.

Lust: How does it have the energy to burn bright for the last 6000 years?

Me: That's a great question...i'm still researching that one. Amazing, creation by God this whole world is.

I couldn't believe that there are really people out there in 2015 that still buy into this and the I googled it and: http://www.theflatearthsociety.org/cms/

Funkcreep said: