All these Flat Earthers do is ask the right questions, demonstrate evidence, connect the dots -- and gently help you to draw the right conclusions. You're free to disagree, if they're illogical. But they're not. The evidence is always indisputable. They do an EXCELLENT job making their case, 99% of the time.
Insert Trump "WRONG!" meme
The no star movement during flight video :
What a load of crap. He's talking about some longer video, but only shows short sections, while distracting you with his FE talk. Then he says he'll finally show you the full length video, all 2000 miles of it (supposed to be like 4900 miles as he said earlier). These flat earth video makers often do this thing where they show contradictory evidence while distracting you with FE talk. He finally shows a 2000 mile clip, and says watch this one star that is rotating down, when we are supposed to be looking for an overall rising of all stars. I rather find roughly the center of rotation and see that those stars are all rising much more than in the south west video.
"3D model of globe shadow proves flat earth" One of the worst FE proof videos I've seen because it does such a good job of proving GE.
He starts out by showing pictures of the rising/setting sun casting a shadow of a tall mountain up onto some clouds, but quite foolishly claims that the shadow is cast down onto the clouds from above, simply because he can come up with pictures proving that that is possible, even though he was just showing some pictures where the mountain clearly was not reaching as high as the clouds. The shadow can be cast up and down depending on the time of day. More obvious FE deception just like any other common NWO conspiracy deception advertised right in front of people through movies and such "Eyes Wide Shut". But he's got more. As if the mountain casting a shadow up is not obvious enough proof of some kind of spherical shape, he goes a step further by demonstrating what a basic simulation of the earth's surface (excluding mountains) would look like casting a shadow up on the clouds. He can't accept GE with the proof in front of him, so he scrambles for some crap that will stick, and the globe surface caused shadow almost sticks.
I found this video funny because as he runs the simulation, he stops it such that it shows the mountain casting a shadow upward, and the sun illuminating the clouds from below, as I have observed in real life as a proof that the sun sets below cloud level, and says that this view proves GE wrong. He literaly shows proof of GE by simulation to you while telling you it is proof of FE. I was confused at first, but the I realized he's talking about the obvious line between light and dark on the clouds as the earth casts a shadow from it's surface. That clear division between light and dark is not so obvious in real life because his simulation uses parallel light rays, which isn't exactly realistic. In real life the sun is larger than the earth, so it can shine light a huge variety of angles, some of which can very slightly reach around the globe to a small extent. Also, real life sunlight is quite divergent, and scatters even more when interacting with the air and any clouds it shines through on the day side before reaching the twilight zone. The surface of earth is not perfectly flat due to hills and trees and such, so the line between light and dark on the clouds will really be jagged if the light rays were perfectly parallel. Couple that with the scattered divergent light of real life, and some refraction, and the real life distances (the simulation was not to scale) and you get a nice gradual transition between light and dark such that you aren't sure where the shadow precisely begins or ends. But they get hung up on that rather than realize that the simulation really proves the sun does set below cloud and mountain level, far lower than the FE model claims since he mentions in the video that the FE sun doesn't rise or set, but only gets closer and further.
The video of the Go Fast Rocket proving FE was pretty bad. They guy puts in the time and location, good, and the flat map representation of the globe displayed shows the moon's location happens to be arranged such that North America and the launch site is in the upper left corner, and Australia and the moon is at the lower right corner. The guy's like "Look, the moon's all the way over Australia on the other side of the globe". He fails to mention how the moon is on the east side of Australia, the same side as USA, and that the edge of the moon goes off the map and reappears on the left side very close to USA. You FE's do once again what you accuse GE's of doing: throwing crap against the wall hoping something sticks. You get so caught up in the appearances demonstrated by 2d representations of a 3d object, that you can't understand how stuff on a globe works. The solarsystem model he uses is far from to scale. The moon is so close that it is easily hidden behind the earth, while the smaller asteroids farther back are not hidden. On top of that, he forgets that the rocket was 73 miles high, which would give it a better view of seeing the moon from behind the globe.The globe looks curvy in the onboard video at 73 miles up.
You can even get a glimpse of the yo-yo despin string and weight a couple of times. Compare the curve seen to the simulation below at 73 miles.
A demonstration like this may be a good reference point for someone who will personally travel up to these altitudes, but cameras on balloons and such can't be trusted to demonstrate the effect well in real life because the lens often adds, removes, or reverses the curve depending on if the camera is centered above, on, or below the horizon, or they don't have a wide enough angle coupled with a wide enough play back screen to match the field of view of our eyes. If a person travels extremely high, they will naturally look toward the horizon, which will be lower, but they may not realize that they are looking lower than straight out. You FE's will come up with any individual excuse at any one time to maintain an absolute certainty that the earth is flat, but you so conveniently forget much of the evidence and arguments against FE, except for the weakest ones. Is it intentional or just blindness? Or is it the result of some limited mental capacity, since many FE's have a hard time grasping basic physical concepts and picturing such things in their mind, which is fine, because not everyone has the same skill set. Perhaps this is why they are so heavily reliant upon and easily deceived by videos.
We have to be careful how we go about seeking truth, and to what extent we believe certain things, or we can easily be deceived and obstinately get trapped in lies. Think any normal person, how they are thoroughly and hopelessly deceived about a great number of things, or certain resistance priests who care so much about truth and the faithful, yet they are blind to their errors. Wake up, and be careful. What makes people so certain about what they think they know? Is it some sort of pride? Blindness by some sin of vanity or misplaced priorities? Having your heart (inner most thoughts and desires) set on a flat earth, that seems to be where your treasure is. Might it be more profitable to discuss the properties of heaven and hell?
Topic: Space is fake and gαy (Read 91794 times)