21

Flat Earth Theory / Re: Circumnavigation of the earth via both the South Pole and North Pole

« on: July 04, 2018, 01:46:49 AM »

Not a flat earther but I wish I could go on that trip. That would be so fun.

22

Suggestions & Concerns / Re: FE General Gone?

« on: July 03, 2018, 04:40:50 PM »

It got renamed to flat earth community.

Ah I didn't know that. I thought only FE Q&A became FE Community. Thanks.

23

Flat Earth Theory / Re: Yet another GPS Post: stationary radio towers can not mimic GPS signals

« on: July 03, 2018, 04:40:10 PM »

also, why is it that areas have random times of no satelitte coverage?  i mean, supposedly these things are hundreds/thousands of miles up:   http://www.nstb.tc.faa.gov/24Hr_RAIM.htm

Look at the map. The outage area seems to follow a pattern over the equator. The longest period of outage repeats 4 times, one over the Pacific to the West of South America, one in the Atlantic between S. America and Africa, one in the Indian Ocean just East of Africa, and one in the Pacific just East of Indonesia and North of Papua New Guinea. It is highly likely that this is due to the orbits of the satellites not crossing over those parts, or less satellites crossing over those parts than normal. It also seems planned that the outages occur where they do, because it's over water. Why would planes just avoid those four, regular, repeating areas? Why not cover those areas with the planes?

In the map you can also see the center two dropout areas (one between S. America and Africa, one East of Africa) have two perturbations. The left one has two going South. The right one has two going North. This seems more evident that it is simply something to do with the orbits of the satellites. Why would planes be making these patterns?

There are still more patterns on the map. Up at the top of the map a pattern repeats twice. There are five blobs in each pattern. The first section has blobs over the Southern area of Alaska, the Easternmost part of Alaska, a very large blob over very-North Canada, a blob over western Greenland, and a straighter blob between Greenland and Iceland. This exact pattern, with the shapes nearly perfect, repeats over Russia (East-West it goes Baltic Sea, Finland, biggest blob over central-north Russia (south of the Kara sea), one just south of the Laptev Sea, and the straight blob just south of the East Siberian Sea).

In the South are patterns as well. For this one I'll use the longitude and lattitude markers as a guide to wear to look. At -80S, -150W is a blob that repeats again at -80S, 25E. A blob at -70S,-100W repeats around -70S,75E. A blob that stretches from -80S to -60S and -25W to 0 (it's two that connect at a small area) repeats again at -80S to -60S and 150E-200E. There's one blob around -40S, -125W repeats at -40S, 50E.

Nearly every outage blob repeats somewhere on the map on the exact other side (180^o) of the Earth.

No way is this a fleet of planes.

24

Suggestions & Concerns / FE General Gone?

« on: July 03, 2018, 03:36:22 PM »

Will FE General be archived?

Since the introduction of the new sections, FE General is gone. There were some great resources and threads on there that could be valuable in information. Is there/will there be an archived version of it, or is it just gone?

25

Flat Earth Theory / Re: Full moon impossible?

« on: June 29, 2018, 02:24:29 AM »

Why is the earth's shadow decreasing in size?

  You do realize the sun is much bigger than Earth, correct?

In RET, sure. But it's also very far away and very small in the sky.

For the sun to cause the earth's shadow to decrease in size the moon would need to see the sun to be bigger than the earth in its sky.

If the sun is seen to be smaller than the earth, the opposite should occur, and the shadow should widen.

It's not a matter of what the Moon sees, though, nor the Sun's size in the sky apparent to Earth. It's a matter of the Sun's physical size in relation to the Earth. If the Sun is larger, it doesn't matter how far away the Sun is, the umbra of Earth's shadow will always decrease in size. That's how geometry works.

26

Flat Earth Investigations / Re: Video: NASA - 1983 space footage

« on: June 29, 2018, 02:20:25 AM »

Those black objects could be the camera, the side of the window, or any other object between the window and the man. He doesn't appear to be in front of the shuttle because the shuttle is a bright, white object that washes out faint, dark objects (the man).



This is a gif of the scene in question from the original source video (provided by andiwd). It can be clearly seen that his reflection overlaps the shuttle in the right side of the frame. Look very carefully because it's quite faint, but some bright facial features can be seen right on, and just below the blue area (where that diagonal line is at the edge of the shuttle, mainly). It's simply nothing but a reflection.

27

Flat Earth Theory / Re: Full moon impossible?

« on: June 27, 2018, 01:39:52 AM »

Here is a diagram showing the Earth and Moon to scale (not the sun), along with the Earth's shadow, and the Moon's orbital plane. As you can see the Moon has a lot of space to roam when in its "full" phase.



The moon could be close to the Earth's shadow, but not in it. Thus, we see 100%, but that's still rare. It's more common to see close, like 99.7%.

28

Flat Earth Theory / Re: Hours of Sunlight

« on: June 24, 2018, 11:41:53 PM »

I decided to look into how much daylight certain places have and I'm a little confused about something. Maybe someone can explain this.

I made a chart of the Sunlight hours for the USA on June 20th, 2018 when the sun would be at the Tropic of Cancer.

MAINE   15:53
MASS   15:17
NEW YORK     15:05
PENNSYLVANIA   15:01
DELAWARE   14:55
VIRGINIA   14:42
 (Nags Head) NORTH CAROLINA   14:36
(Georgetown) SOUTH CAROLINA   14:22
GEORGIA   14:15
(Jacksonville) FLORIDA  14:06
(Melbourne) FLORIDA    13:56
(Miami) FLORIDA     13:45

This one is easy. The sun's area of light overlaps the North Pole when the Sun is at the Tropic of Cancer. This is why higher latitudes increase in daylight duration until, when far enough North, the sun ceases to set at all and the Midnight Sun occurs.

Not exactly getting a great picture in my mind. Could we get a picture or a graphic?

29

Flat Earth Theory / Re: Hours of Sunlight

« on: June 17, 2018, 11:33:20 PM »

If you look at Timeanddate.com's world day/night map for June 20, you can see why. Here's a link to June 20th at 9:00 UTC: https://www.timeanddate.com/worldclock/sunearth.html?month=6&day=20&year=2018&hour=9&min=0&sec=0&n=&ntxt=&earth=0

As you can see on the US's east cost, Maine and Massachusetts get hit with light first. Then, about an hour later, Florida gets light.

On June 21st, at ~1:50 UTC, Florida then experiences sunset. Around 2:30 UTC, MA and ME then get sunset.

When I get the chance I'll make a 3D model.

30

Flat Earth Investigations / Re: How to Prove Satellite Images are Real

« on: June 13, 2018, 10:06:55 PM »

Not personally. But other people have.

Exactly

Have you ever personally witnessed the ISS to be a drone, then?

And why completely dismiss the video that proves the ISS is at its claimed altitude?

you guys are the ones claiming to know the exact height, speed and makeup of the satellite.  you provide claims about how easy it is to simply go out and triangulate the exact height of the ISS to verify.  it SOOOOO easy...yet not a SINGLE round earther on this website has ever done it.  hmmm....

I don't have two telescopes.

31

Flat Earth Investigations / Re: How to Prove Satellite Images are Real

« on: June 13, 2018, 05:13:28 PM »

Not personally. But other people have.

Exactly

Have you ever personally witnessed the ISS to be a drone, then?

And why completely dismiss the video that proves the ISS is at its claimed altitude?

32

Science & Alternative Science / Re: Neil Armstrong Gave Her A Vial Of Moon Dust. She's Suing So NASA Won't Take It

« on: June 13, 2018, 05:10:05 PM »

Many labs have tested moon rocks before. It's likely the sample was tested by one. Anyone can request moon rocks for scientific purposes from NASA. One test said it's not moon dust. One said it might be, but it's more likely to be a very small amount mixed in with plain-old earth stuff.

Also, the note given by Neil doesn't mention the sample at all. It's a real note, that's been confirmed, but it might have no relation whatsoever to the sample.

they just compared the sample to write up's from NASA which arent valid anyway.

Why aren't they valid?

all she did was find some dirt without organics.  its a fake, who cares.

We can't know for sure if its fake.

just more fake PR news issued by NASA to drum up support.  ironic this story is all of a sudden in the news as NASA is trying to keep funding for its future "moon/mars" missions.

This wasn't issued by NASA. This wouldn't even give NASA any support. NASA has been facing opposition for decades, this isn't planned. NASA even got a large increase in their budget for FY 2018, why would they need this to keep funding if they already have it?

33

Flat Earth Theory / Re: Garlic bread and the curve of the earth.

« on: June 13, 2018, 01:07:37 AM »

I'll make it simpler.

Imagine the earth was a flat square ... what shape is the horizon?


Something like this? With a straight horizon?

Now imagine it is a flat disc. Still got a perfectly straight horizon?


Nope.

Only a lunatic would say "the horizon bends and therefore the earth must be a ball".

Here is me looking out over the edge of a dinner plate.


Its not a ball, is it? But it has a horizon, a curved one.

This is only true if you do this near the center of the spotlight from the sun. Otherwise the curve around you will appear much different depending on where you look. It won't appear as an equal, continuous curve as should be seen on a spherical Earth (and as seen in reality).

34

Flat Earth Theory / Re: Garlic bread and the curve of the earth.

« on: June 13, 2018, 01:06:42 AM »

Now, I know some of you will say "oh well where is the full unedited video. Why didn't he upload that? It MUST be fake then."

Well, here you go then:

And for MUCH of the time you can see curve. Not fisheye. Not some act of perspective. Real, authentic, curvature of the earth.

I saw a video of Thanos fighting the Avengers. Does not make it real.

Then what about this video is fake, if it is? Everyone knows Thanos and the Avengers aren't real.

This isn't the same. Numerous independent observers have done the same thing and seen similar results (curve). Why should this, or any, be fake?

35

Flat Earth Theory / Re: The Moon demonstrates the curvature of the Earth using only the naked eye

« on: June 10, 2018, 07:37:31 PM »

RE here also.

This isn't impossible on a FE. You're simply looking at it from a different angle.

What is impossible is that, if the moon was a sphere above Earth, then viewing it from an angle other than directly underneath would allow you to see more of the sides of the Moon, something never observed.

36

Flat Earth Investigations / Re: satellite hoax

« on: June 10, 2018, 01:53:58 AM »

There is no new evidence in those videos that hasn't been debunked.

Number three isn't even evidence. He just shows an astronaut flipping forward, and then a montage of people doing flips on wires. He provides no actual proof the astronaut is using wires.

Disappointing. I was hoping for something new.

37

Flat Earth Theory / Re: Garlic bread and the curve of the earth.

« on: June 06, 2018, 02:14:59 PM »

Some good footage here from the ISS of a sunrise and sunset from there which might be close to what you're talking about.

This is a great video, thank you. You can clearly see the terminator line is not curving around the sun, but with the curve of the earth and in a straight line.

38

Flat Earth Investigations / Re: New 'Blue Marble'

« on: June 05, 2018, 03:47:19 AM »

TL;DW: Jeranism saw something that's definitely the same shape as the ISS, but he can neither explain what it is nor how whatever it is up there works.

It looks like a duck, it swims like a duck, it quacks like a duck, so it probably is a duck.

It looks like the ISS, moves like the ISS, and turns in the sky relative to the observer like the ISS, so it probably is the ISS.

He then babbles on about all sorts of reasons he personally doesn't believe anything, and why he thinks everything involved with it is "A complete and total joke" with his entire argument essentially being an argument from incredulity. Par for the course of those who subscribe to the space conspiracy hypothesis.

Typical. Jeranism resorts to blatant denial. Why does he keep refusing reality? Don't flat earthers, especially him, love to go on about "personal experience and first-hand observation" as evidence? Well, he observed the ISS himself, with his own eyes. What's his deal?

39

Flat Earth Theory / Re: Garlic bread and the curve of the earth.

« on: June 05, 2018, 03:43:08 AM »

Finally drew it. Here's crude representations of what should be seen:



Above is a RE model. The top left illustration is a view (if facing North from directly above) of sunlight hitting Earth, with the arrows representing light. The shaded side is the night side, and the circle on the terminator line is the location of launch of the balloon (or rocket or whatever). The illustration along the bottom is what should be seen from a non-fish eye camera. The horizon, curved, is curved regardless of where the light is. It's curved all around. The terminator line is a straight line. It does not turn relative to the camera.



Above is a FE model. The top left illustration is a view (facing from directly above) of sunlight hitting Earth. The non-shaded area is the light coming from the spotlight sun, while the shaded area is night. The circle on the terminator line is the location of the launch of the balloon. The illustration along the bottom is what should be seen from a non-fish eye camera. The horizon would appear curved only where light is due to the circle curving around the sun, but the terminator would also appear to curve to the right or left, depending on your orientation (the terminator line would encircle the sun). This isn't seen, ever.

I apologize for the not-to-scale, crude representation of the models. I do not know how to do 3D modelling in software, so if someone could (using accurate scales), that would be infinitely helpful.

40

Flat Earth Investigations / Re: New 'Blue Marble'

« on: June 05, 2018, 01:05:51 AM »

Who is an expert on what things look like in space? You ask a dozen astronauts what stars look like in space and you get a dozen different answers.

Some say you can't see any stars, some say you see far more stars than you could on earth, some say its a 'velvet effect of stars', some say you can see stars all the time, some say you can see stars only looking away from the sun, some say the zodiac stars are brighter ... they make it up.

No, they're all taken out of context. When saying if they can see stars, they also usually talk about if they're in the sunlight or not. If they're not in the shadow of the Earth or Moon, it's likely they won't see stars unless they're looking at nothing but the black of space. If they are in the shadow, then they can see stars. I've never heard an astronaut say you can see stars all the time.

So how am I supposed to know what things look like in space? I only have conflicting views to go on (all of which are lies).

They're only conflicting because you don't put them into context. How do you know they're ALL lying. How is NASA and other agencies able to keep more than 500 people silent about their space travels?

Below is a video with astronauts giving accounts of what space looks like. In the same video is a man telling you what models look like and how to tell them from machines.



Enjoy.

I'm not watching a 32 minute video. Timestamp the important parts or sum it up for me please.