21

Flat Earth Community / Re: Flat Earth Letter to Neil deGrasse Tyson Still Unanswered

« on: May 19, 2018, 04:30:20 AM »

We need specific sources of every debunked photograph with explanations explaining how they are CGI along with the methods used.

That sounds like great idea. Lets do it. Are you going to fund me for the next few months to spend my time collecting all of the evidence on the internet, examine original evidence, and provide assessments and sources and references on all of that for our Wiki?

Nope it was your side's claim. I don't have to pay a dime, you need to provide evidence for your claim.

22

Flat Earth Community / Re: Flat Earth Letter to Neil deGrasse Tyson Still Unanswered

« on: May 19, 2018, 12:51:43 AM »

The way of tackling FE is to show the evidence for the globe, obviously some will dismiss that or call it fake, there's nothing you can do about that.

70+ years of orbital spaceflight. That does it for me. Why look for a curve from ground level when the presence of 70 years' worth of orbital satellites shows it beyond all doubt?

And, in other news, SpaceX have deployed ANOTHER orbital satellite, successfully bringing the first stage back to a controlled landing on their ocean-going barge.

Are you talking about the CGI pictures that have already been debunked?

Where have they been debunked?

Internet is full of NASA pictures shown to be fake. YouTube is littered with it. SEX was written is the clouds in one. Straight off NASA site. NASA took it down afterwards. And another showed same clouds copied and placed throughout the globe picture.

Ok let me be more specific.

Which photos have been debunked and where. Please provide specific sources for your claim.

YouTube it. Google it. There are a whole world of websites dedicated to that purpose. We have several such examples in The Conspiracy section of our Wiki.

That kind of evidence doesn't fly here remember?

We need specific sources of every debunked photograph with explanations explaining how they are CGI along with the methods used.

23

Flat Earth Community / Re: Flat Earth Letter to Neil deGrasse Tyson Still Unanswered

« on: May 18, 2018, 10:50:37 PM »

The way of tackling FE is to show the evidence for the globe, obviously some will dismiss that or call it fake, there's nothing you can do about that.

70+ years of orbital spaceflight. That does it for me. Why look for a curve from ground level when the presence of 70 years' worth of orbital satellites shows it beyond all doubt?

And, in other news, SpaceX have deployed ANOTHER orbital satellite, successfully bringing the first stage back to a controlled landing on their ocean-going barge.

Are you talking about the CGI pictures that have already been debunked?

Where have they been debunked?

Internet is full of NASA pictures shown to be fake. YouTube is littered with it. SEX was written is the clouds in one. Straight off NASA site. NASA took it down afterwards. And another showed same clouds copied and placed throughout the globe picture.

Ok let me be more specific.

Which photos have been debunked and where. Please provide specific sources for your claim.

24

Flat Earth Theory / Re: What is the reason for perpetuating the round earth?

« on: May 17, 2018, 01:09:32 PM »

Bush and Congress appointed an Inspector General to oversee the issues with federal agencies like NASA wasting money. That's why. If one reads the links they will see letters to Congressmen justifying their activities. Do you think they write letters to Congress every year as standard procedure? There was a lot of heat during those years. When Obama came in, in 2009, he wasn't interested in heavy oversight of Federal agencies. The GAO doesn't do such violating audits every year.

Per decades prior, there isn't really that much online from the 60's, 70's and 80's. But consider: Companies and government agencies usually only improve their financial management. In 2005 if they were totally unauditable, what makes you think that 1985 NASA was a saint? Why would they downgrade a good process of financial management? "Nah, we don't need to keep good records or perform internal financial audits anymore. Lets stop doing that. Boring." Are we to assume that this is what happened?

Then why was it not revealed NASA had been mismanaging finances since it's inception? That's a pretty big revelation. Surely they didn't just stop at 2002 and say "eh 2001 is probably fine we don't need to keep going back." Especially during this sensitive time period as you said.

25

Flat Earth Community / Re: Flat Earth Letter to Neil deGrasse Tyson Still Unanswered

« on: May 17, 2018, 03:28:43 AM »

The way of tackling FE is to show the evidence for the globe, obviously some will dismiss that or call it fake, there's nothing you can do about that.

70+ years of orbital spaceflight. That does it for me. Why look for a curve from ground level when the presence of 70 years' worth of orbital satellites shows it beyond all doubt?

And, in other news, SpaceX have deployed ANOTHER orbital satellite, successfully bringing the first stage back to a controlled landing on their ocean-going barge.

Are you talking about the CGI pictures that have already been debunked?

Where have they been debunked?

26

Flat Earth Community / Re: Flat Earth UK Convention

« on: May 14, 2018, 05:17:41 PM »

I don't think it really matters whether the room was bursting at the seams or half full, the point is it was in a small venue, a couple of hundred people attended and the speakers included an NHS manager, a former graphic designer and a Bolton-based dance musician.

Their website still has a "countdown" counter (minus 16 days and counting...) and a "Register Now" button on.

It's all very low-rent and completely at odds with Pete's giddy excitement about how brilliantly they're doing. It doesn't have the hallmarks of a serious organisation.

It's hardly a movement which is sweeping the "disc". Interest has certainly increased so they have done well to publicise themselves but much of that publicity is people pointing and laughing.

True, I was wondering how many of the attendees were press and sceptics out for a bit of a giggle? With the price as it was, maybe a few sceptics, and probably half a dozen press, so that makes the numbers somewhat smaller.

I think most decent sized pubs could hold that many attendees!

I looked at hate website, and did notice a fair amount of the speakers were from one organisation, and a NHS manager, a graphic designer and dance musician are hardly world renown scientists about to uncover some radical new ideas. Although the PacMan idea did rather make me giggle a bit!

As you say, i doubt real science has anything to worry about, other than how do they reach out to those who are almost completely closed off from the world, but then there have always been fringes around society who have had wacky ideas, and were mostly given a wide berth, and smirked at behind their backs.......

What if an FE becomes a trained pilot?

There is a user here named Treep who claims to be a flat earth pilot (private).

27

Flat Earth Theory / Re: What is the reason for perpetuating the round earth?

« on: May 14, 2018, 01:46:49 PM »

Those are publications by NASA, not the GAO. The URL on those links is nasa.gov. Why would NASA broadcast "The GAO exposed again that we are essentially unauditable this year"?

In those documents I do see some references to an independent auditor that they hand selected. "We're clean as a whistle. Those billions were spent properly. Just ask this small company I hired!" Few references to the GAO.

You are also assuming that any such routine federal audit performed during the Obama years would be of the serious in-depth variety. I severely doubt that, considering that administration.

What about anything more recent? Surely they didn't just stop being a money laundering scheme in 2006. GAO reports from 2009-2016 appear to generally be in order, with GAO noting predictable fluctuation in cost and an increase in delays as projects approach a certain phase. All of your references appear at least a decade old.

It also doesn't make sense they would choose to lie about finance between 2002-2006 but not during its early years. Wasn't the purpose of NASA's creation to steal tax payers money? Why is that apparent during the oddly specific years of 2002-2006 but not any years prior (or after) ?

28

Flat Earth Investigations / Re: NASA Live Stream

« on: May 12, 2018, 12:42:16 PM »

Must one be an extremist or a zealot to be able to represent or aid a cause? I firmly believe that this is not the case.

No you don't have to be a radical but there is no such thing as neutral position when you make a statement like this:

given Hubble is currently in orbit.

This is not a given. Your argument is "I'm right, therefore I'm not wrong." How boring.

Either it is an orbit or it is not in orbit. You are suggesting, contrary to the fact that it could be seen in orbit, that it is not in orbit. As Tom would say "your claim, back it up. "

29

Flat Earth Investigations / Re: NASA Live Stream

« on: May 10, 2018, 10:40:35 PM »

Got it.

No, you didn't get it at all. We know that not even NASA claims for this particular stream to be real. This doesn't magically make everything NASA says true, it just uncovers an inconsistency in the OP and your consequent attempts at devil's advocacy.

It's unfortunate that you saw the word NASA and decided ignore the rest of the quotes I posted, instead grouping them all under the "NASA is unreliable" umbrella. You should reread those quotes and tell me where the last two came from (hint: not NASA).

30

Flat Earth Community / Re: What Makes conspiracy Theorists believe.

« on: May 10, 2018, 12:51:25 PM »

Why not question the world? Why not question what you are told?

So far, so reasonable.
Questioning things is a good thing.
But that isn’t what you do.
You simply accept anything blindly which confirms your world view and reject anything spuriously which does not.
Witness your response to the horizon dip experiments. They all - four different ways - show the same result, they all show that horizon dips.

I think the best example of this is the shaq debacle.

https://forum.tfes.org/index.php?topic=5909.0

When Shaq agreed with his viewpoint his words were taken at face value and used as irrefutable evidence for FET. When it's revealed later that Shaq was joking his words became open to interpretation and the conspiracy was expanded to include his managers forcing him to retract his statements in any effort to reverse damage to his brand.

31

Flat Earth Theory / Re: So what benefits for government lying to us?????

« on: May 10, 2018, 12:49:55 AM »

So NASA isn't proof of a round earth? Got it.

What? How did you get to that conclusion from "At no point has anyone claimed that funding for NASA was used to confirm what the shape of the earth was."

Again you are either making up points no one has stated or misinterpreting words. Possibly both.

32

Flat Earth Investigations / Re: NASA Live Stream

« on: May 10, 2018, 12:15:10 AM »

You do realize this came from your source right?

I don't see how this is relevant. I'm not disagreeing with the article - these organisations most likely said what the BBC claims they said. That doesn't magically make it an insurmountable truth.

So you when claim that the live stream is "fake" based on information from your source it is evidence. When I cite the same source using the same information as evidence for the validity of footage for said "fake" stream it is an appeal to authority.

Got it.

33

Flat Earth Community / Re: What Makes conspiracy Theorists believe.

« on: May 10, 2018, 12:10:51 AM »

I don't see the connection.

How does lying about the Vietnam war tie into NASA being a fraud? Is everything that happened during those administrators a lie as well because they covered up this secret war?

These were not good people. They are not trustworthy. If they are willing to conduct a secret war then is is certainly no leap that they are willing to create some fake space achievements. The credibility is shot.

Which ones exactly were the corrupt individuals? The whole administration?

And if they're credibility was lost after the secret war cover up then is it a stretch to say that 3 administrations straight lied about everything they did?

I see where you're going with "if they lied about x then what else are they willing to cover up?" but I can't see that as an excuse to dismiss everything by default, including incidents that have nothing to do with each other (NASA and the Vietnam war).

What do you mean the Vietnam War had nothing to do with NASA? NASA was created as a direct consequence of the Cold War.

Well that's my point right there.

NASA was not created because of the Vietnam war and we didn't enter Vietnam because of NASA. They are two separate incidents. They may have been during the same time period and under the same circumstances but that does not mean they are connected in any way other than those two reasons.

You're claiming that NASA is an organization of liars because the same politicians (Eisenhower) involved with the creation of it just so happened to be involved in the Vietnam war in which they (Johnson) tricked the American public and Congress into participating so they could run a secret war against China and communism. That's a pretty big stretch.

Governments are more than just a few people and the people who would have started this are long gone. "They" would need to carefully select their successors to make sure that the truth never gets out and I find it hard to believe "they" have gone on this long doing just that (and have grown to include even more people at the same time).

I have to say Tom, all this does is help cement the idea that things are actually in space. The fallout from the collapse of the USSR, the rivalry between the two. Neither side during that period was 'debunked' on going into space or orbit. Both sides had all the reason in the world to show they hadn't managed their claims. Hell, the US even after the collapse/fall had more than enough reason (if it was found to be so) to show how Russia and Russians never got into space. How could it have hurt their credibility at all in that time period? To me at least everything you've presented here points away from a now global conspiracy of space flight.

The countries did cast doubt and yell "fake!" after each achievement at the time. It took a long time for NASA to accept Russia's claim of the first man in space. Russian officials are still yelling "fake!"

You have no idea what you are talking about. What are you are claiming what would happen has happened. The world just ignored it.

OK so if we've never been to space, and Russia has never believed we've been to space, who are we fooling? Wouldn't it be more effective to actually go to space than continue faking it and run the risk of having our bluff called?

Also if we're accepting Russia's claim of being the first to go to space how is that good for us. They could essentially wipe us all out with the press of a button, seeing as there's a huge military advantage to controlling space and all.

34

Flat Earth Theory / Re: So what benefits for government lying to us?????

« on: May 09, 2018, 08:09:47 PM »

If no one mentioned anything about them being paid solely to find out the earth's shape then why mention that?

This whole thread is about why people would claim the earth is round despite the reality of it being flat. You don't think the motivation of space agency's funding is relevant to that conversation?

No, because they weren't being funded to confirm the shape of the earth (you even said it was irrelevant to the discussion). We had an idea of what the earth looked like when we went into space, on the way to the moon we happened to see that it was just as we thought (a sphere).

At no point has anyone claimed that funding for NASA was used to confirm what the shape of the earth was. You came up with that assertion all on your own.

35

Flat Earth Community / Re: What Makes conspiracy Theorists believe.

« on: May 09, 2018, 07:54:13 PM »

I don't see the connection.

How does lying about the Vietnam war tie into NASA being a fraud? Is everything that happened during those administrators a lie as well because they covered up this secret war?

These were not good people. They are not trustworthy. If they are willing to conduct a secret war then is is certainly no leap that they are willing to create some fake space achievements. The credibility is shot.

Which ones exactly were the corrupt individuals? The whole administration?

And if they're credibility was lost after the secret war cover up then is it a stretch to say that 3 administrations straight lied about everything they did?

I see where you're going with "if they lied about x then what else are they willing to cover up?" but I can't see that as an excuse to dismiss everything by default, including incidents that have nothing to do with each other (NASA and the Vietnam war).

36

Flat Earth Community / Re: What Makes conspiracy Theorists believe.

« on: May 09, 2018, 06:32:52 PM »

The people who created NASA were also caught conducting a secret war. Why should we trust a word from them?

Is that real? Like actually because if so, wow.

Yes. Look into the Pentagon Papers which exposed the secret war of the Vietnam era in which the public and Congress were systematically lied to about the scale of the war and reckless disregard for civilian casualties for over 20 years between 1945 to 1967. The Secret War was administrated by the Eisenhower, Kennedy and Johnson administration, the same people who were in charge around the time when NASA started making all of its fantastic claims.

From the wiki link --

President Johnson had decided to expand the war while promising "we seek no wider war" during his 1964 presidential campaign,[8] including plans to bomb North Vietnam well before the 1964 Election. President Johnson had been outspoken against doing so during the election and claimed that his opponent Barry Goldwater was the one that wanted to bomb North Vietnam.

Those same legislators also put Nazi war criminals in the NASA administration.

I don't see the connection.

How does lying about the Vietnam war tie into NASA being a fraud? Is everything that happened during those administrators a lie as well because they covered up this secret war?

37

Flat Earth Theory / Re: So what benefits for government lying to us?????

« on: May 09, 2018, 11:38:15 AM »

I never claimed it was a singular reason for funding. They are funded for a number of reasons I already addressed, and many I have not had to mention.

Then what was the purpose of this statement?

Good, so we agree the shape of the earth is irrelevant to why space agency's are funded.
 

If no one mentioned anything about them being paid solely to find out the earth's shape then why mention that?

38

Flat Earth Theory / Re: So what benefits for government lying to us?????

« on: May 09, 2018, 02:06:42 AM »

Oh, I didn't realize the Russian Space Agency was a sub division of NASA.

I was demonstrating that space agencies can develop technology besides space travel, and did so. I'm sure the Russians probably invent things too, but I'm not as familiar and don't speak Russian so digging for foreign language sources for a concept already demonstrated is silly.

Sure, but that wasn't a part of my question.

No one has made that statement, where are you getting your information from?

From this guy who said they space agency's aren't funded to confirm the earth's shape.

Also they aren't paid to confirm the earth's shape.

They are NOT paid for the singular purpose of confirming earth's shape. That is exactly what I said in that quote.

So then where did you get the idea that they were funded solely for that purpose? That was my question which you neglected to answer.

39

Flat Earth Theory / Re: So what benefits for government lying to us?????

« on: May 09, 2018, 12:21:27 AM »

New technology like what? If they aren't going to space then what area could they possibly be innovating in.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/NASA_spinoff_technologies

There's a list of things that aren't going to space that NASA has claimed credit for.

Oh, I didn't realize the Russian Space Agency was a sub division of NASA.

 

Also they aren't paid to confirm the earth's shape.

Good, so we agree the shape of the earth is irrelevant to why space agency's are funded.

No one has made that statement, where are you getting your information from?

40

Flat Earth Theory / Re: So what benefits for government lying to us?????

« on: May 08, 2018, 12:10:19 PM »

Do you think putin has the resources to keep pouring money into a program that produces 0 results?

Why are you claiming that the Russian Space Agency produces zero results? National prestige, new technology, economic stimulus. There's loads of reasons to keep giving them money completely irrelevant to the earth's shape.

New technology like what? If they aren't going to space then what area could they possibly be innovating in.

Also they aren't paid to confirm the earth's shape. That was confirmed a long time ago.