The Flat Earth Society

Flat Earth Discussion Boards => Flat Earth Investigations => Topic started by: AATW on January 03, 2019, 11:21:02 AM

Title: The Dark Side of the Moon
Post by: AATW on January 03, 2019, 11:21:02 AM
China have landed a craft on the "dark" side of the moon

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-46724727

I guess the FE response is to call this fake, do the society have any evidence of fakery?
Title: Re: The Dark Side of the Moon
Post by: ChrisTP on January 03, 2019, 11:31:22 AM
It's worth mentioning that CNSA and NASA by law can't work together and so they have very little affiliation or reason to protect any US government secrets (secrets like moon landings being fake and earth being flat). There is a lot less reason for the CNSA to fake this in theory.

https://www.forbes.com/sites/williampentland/2011/05/07/congress-bans-scientific-collaboration-with-china-cites-high-espionage-risks/#18bd5b945629
Title: Re: The Dark Side of the Moon
Post by: shootingstar on January 03, 2019, 12:59:37 PM
Quote
China have landed a craft on the "dark" side of the moon

Just for the record the craft had landed on the far side of the Moon which never faces Earth.  The Moons rotation means that all areas of the Moons surface are 'bright' or 'dark' for an equal period of time each phase cycle.
Title: Re: The Dark Side of the Moon
Post by: SpaceCadet on January 03, 2019, 04:17:03 PM
Quote
China have landed a craft on the "dark" side of the moon

Just for the record the craft had landed on the far side of the Moon which never faces Earth.  The Moons rotation means that all areas of the Moons surface are 'bright' or 'dark' for an equal period of time each phase cycle.

Wouldn't the near side of the moon be on average brighter than the far side? After all, it would get both sunlight and earthshine while the farside gets only sunlight.
Title: Re: The Dark Side of the Moon
Post by: totallackey on January 03, 2019, 04:45:46 PM
China have landed a craft on the "dark" side of the moon

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-46724727

I guess the FE response is to call this fake, do the society have any evidence of fakery?
Do you have any evidence of reality?
Title: Re: The Dark Side of the Moon
Post by: ChrisTP on January 03, 2019, 04:54:47 PM
China have landed a craft on the "dark" side of the moon

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-46724727

I guess the FE response is to call this fake, do the society have any evidence of fakery?
Do you have any evidence of reality?
Yes, there's a factual article in his post with currently no evidence to the contrary until you or another FE'er provide it though. I think that's what he was asking for in the first place, evidence to debunk china landing on the moon. Since the article is presumed factual until you or someone provides evidence otherwise, it is 'in fact' a reality.

Not entirely sure what point you're trying to make so you've brought nothing to this discussion so far. How was your comment not considered "shit posting"? Please stay on topic as I'm also curious about the chance of this being faked.
Title: Re: The Dark Side of the Moon
Post by: shootingstar on January 03, 2019, 06:25:17 PM
Regarding Spacecadets comments I am not going to get into the pedantics about Earthshine. Each month at new Moon the far side of the Moon is in full Sunlight while the nearside is in darkness. At full Moon it is the reverse. So 'on average' the near side and the far side of the Moon receive the same amount of direct sunlight and darkness.
Title: Re: The Dark Side of the Moon
Post by: totallackey on January 04, 2019, 12:21:48 PM
China have landed a craft on the "dark" side of the moon

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-46724727

I guess the FE response is to call this fake, do the society have any evidence of fakery?
Do you have any evidence of reality?
Yes, there's a factual article in his post with currently no evidence to the contrary until you or another FE'er provide it though. I think that's what he was asking for in the first place, evidence to debunk china landing on the moon. Since the article is presumed factual until you or someone provides evidence otherwise, it is 'in fact' a reality.

Not entirely sure what point you're trying to make so you've brought nothing to this discussion so far. How was your comment not considered "shit posting"? Please stay on topic as I'm also curious about the chance of this being faked.
Let us examine your reply in terms of reality.

First, it is indeed a "factual article."

Please note it is not an article containing facts.

Nobody cares what you think.

You are correct in writing the article is "presumed," to contain facts. Presumption is tantamount to nothing so it is not reality, it remains belief.

My post was not considered "shitposting," as the OP can only do as much as the rest of us. Make assumptions based on belief.
Title: Re: The Dark Side of the Moon
Post by: AATW on January 04, 2019, 12:28:56 PM
Do you have any evidence of fakery?
Title: Re: The Dark Side of the Moon
Post by: ChrisTP on January 04, 2019, 01:56:23 PM
China have landed a craft on the "dark" side of the moon

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-46724727

I guess the FE response is to call this fake, do the society have any evidence of fakery?
Do you have any evidence of reality?
Yes, there's a factual article in his post with currently no evidence to the contrary until you or another FE'er provide it though. I think that's what he was asking for in the first place, evidence to debunk china landing on the moon. Since the article is presumed factual until you or someone provides evidence otherwise, it is 'in fact' a reality.

Not entirely sure what point you're trying to make so you've brought nothing to this discussion so far. How was your comment not considered "shit posting"? Please stay on topic as I'm also curious about the chance of this being faked.
Let us examine your reply in terms of reality.

First, it is indeed a "factual article."

Please note it is not an article containing facts.

Nobody cares what you think.

You are correct in writing the article is "presumed," to contain facts. Presumption is tantamount to nothing so it is not reality, it remains belief.

My post was not considered "shitposting," as the OP can only do as much as the rest of us. Make assumptions based on belief.
Once again you've added nothing to the discussion though. The article is presented as a fact, they are saying they have landed their equipment on the moon, showing photo evidence and information regarding their plans to explore and examine the moon. As they have their evidence and are quite obviously claiming this as real, thus the claim that it is in fact a reality that they've landed on the moon.

The OP has presented this article and asked if you or anyone have evidence to the contrary (substantial evidence of being fake) and so far you''ve not said anything useful, you have yet to answer to the OP's question. No one cares if you think it's fake until present your reasoning and evidence. Until then it's still a fact and thus real.

If you aren't going to be useful to the topic stop replying to this topic. If this still isn't clear to you let me lay it out;

OP: "Here's evidence that China landed on the moon. please present evidence to the contrary, proving it's fake"

Now FES's turn to present evidence that China did not land on the moon.

you:nah mate, not real 'cause what even is real?" Here is some evidence that it is faked and china did not land on the moon."
Title: Re: The Dark Side of the Moon
Post by: Pete Svarrior on January 04, 2019, 02:07:37 PM
Do you have any evidence of fakery?
Surely you're beyond such an obvious reversal of burden of proof? You and your Chinese friends are the claimants here.
Title: Re: The Dark Side of the Moon
Post by: markjo on January 04, 2019, 02:26:57 PM
Do you have any evidence of fakery?
Surely you're beyond such an obvious reversal of burden of proof? You and your Chinese friends are the claimants here.
What evidence do you suppose would be required to meet that burden of proof?
Title: Re: The Dark Side of the Moon
Post by: totallackey on January 04, 2019, 04:20:33 PM
Do you have any evidence of fakery?
And I repeat my query. Do you have any evidence of reality?
China have landed a craft on the "dark" side of the moon

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-46724727

I guess the FE response is to call this fake, do the society have any evidence of fakery?
Do you have any evidence of reality?
Yes, there's a factual article in his post with currently no evidence to the contrary until you or another FE'er provide it though. I think that's what he was asking for in the first place, evidence to debunk china landing on the moon. Since the article is presumed factual until you or someone provides evidence otherwise, it is 'in fact' a reality.

Not entirely sure what point you're trying to make so you've brought nothing to this discussion so far. How was your comment not considered "shit posting"? Please stay on topic as I'm also curious about the chance of this being faked.
Let us examine your reply in terms of reality.

First, it is indeed a "factual article."

Please note it is not an article containing facts.

Nobody cares what you think.

You are correct in writing the article is "presumed," to contain facts. Presumption is tantamount to nothing so it is not reality, it remains belief.

My post was not considered "shitposting," as the OP can only do as much as the rest of us. Make assumptions based on belief.
Once again you've added nothing to the discussion though.
I disagree.
The article is presented as a fact, they are saying they have landed their equipment on the moon, showing photo evidence and information regarding their plans to explore and examine the moon. As they have their evidence and are quite obviously claiming this as real, thus the claim that it is in fact a reality that they've landed on the moon.
It is presented as a factual article.

The Bible is presented as fact and there have been many finds (with supporting photographic evidence of those finds) in the field of archaeology supporting much of the writing in the Bible. But the Bible is the Bible, just as space agencies are space agencies.

The OP has presented this article and asked if you or anyone have evidence to the contrary (substantial evidence of being fake) and so far you''ve not said anything useful, you have yet to answer to the OP's question. No one cares if you think it's fake until present your reasoning and evidence. Until then it's still a fact and thus real.
It is here you fully demonstrate the depths of your disingenuous nature and predilection for intellectual and philosophical dishonesty.

It is not incumbent upon me to provide any evidence here. The OP has yet to provide any evidence the article contains any facts or that any of the events contained in the article are true.

The Chinese, as are all humans, notorious liars. That is an unequivocal fact.
If you aren't going to be useful to the topic stop replying to this topic.
I don't take orders from you, Copernicus.
If this still isn't clear to you let me lay it out;

OP: "Here's evidence that China landed on the moon. please present evidence to the contrary, proving it's fake"

Now FES's turn to present evidence that China did not land on the moon.

you:nah mate, not real 'cause what even is real?" Here is some evidence that it is faked and china did not land on the moon."
Maybe this will be clearer for you.

https://forum.tfes.org/index.php?topic=11752.msg178214#msg178214
Title: Re: The Dark Side of the Moon
Post by: AATW on January 04, 2019, 04:26:08 PM
Do you have any evidence of fakery?
Surely you're beyond such an obvious reversal of burden of proof? You and your Chinese friends are the claimants here.
I’m not asking for proof. Proof is not possible on either side. Absolute proof is only possible in the limited language of mathematics.

I’m just asking what the FE take on this claim from the Chinese is. I am anticipating that your stance will be that it’s faked. If that isn’t your stance then what is it? If your stance is that it is fake then do you have any evidence for that? It’s not a difficult question.
Title: Re: The Dark Side of the Moon
Post by: totallackey on January 04, 2019, 04:37:14 PM
Do you have any evidence of fakery?
Surely you're beyond such an obvious reversal of burden of proof? You and your Chinese friends are the claimants here.
I’m not asking for proof. Proof is not possible on either side. Absolute proof is only possible in the limited language of mathematics.

I’m just asking what the FE take on this claim from the Chinese is. I am anticipating that your stance will be that it’s faked. If that isn’t your stance then what is it? If your stance is that it is fake then do you have any evidence for that? It’s not a difficult question.
So your not asking for proof of anything?

Okay.

Do you have any evidence the events the article depicts have actually taken place?
Title: Re: The Dark Side of the Moon
Post by: Pete Svarrior on January 04, 2019, 04:56:29 PM
I’m not asking for proof.
The phrase burden of proof (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Burden_of_proof_(philosophy)) is fairly well-understood, and bickering about the semantics of the word "proof" won't change that. Sort of like how the United States of America having some territories outside of the Americas doesn't make it any less the USA.
Title: Re: The Dark Side of the Moon
Post by: Dr Van Nostrand on January 04, 2019, 05:03:34 PM
But still, what would constitute real 'proof'?

Unless you are standing on the far side of the moon in a space suit looking at the landed equipment, how can it be proven?

If one takes all the telemetry and data to be fake how do we prove this?

Title: Re: The Dark Side of the Moon
Post by: AATW on January 04, 2019, 05:13:49 PM
So your not asking for proof of anything?
*You’re
Proof is not possible on either side.
I can’t prove the Chinese have landed a craft on the moon. You can’t prove they haven’t.

So let’s look at the evidence.

Quote
Do you have any evidence the events the article depicts have actually taken place?
Firstly, you could ask that about any news article. Unless you personally witness the events what evidence do you have that they happened?

The evidence here is that every major news source has reported this as something that really happened. I’ve not heard anyone casting any doubt on the claim from the Chinese. Photos have been provided from the craft, I’ve not heard any claims that those are faked.

The technology to get craft in orbit around the moon has existed since the space race, the Russians (crash) landed Luna 2 on the moon in 1959. There have been multiple manned and unmanned missions since from multiple countries since.

So I have no reason to suspect this has been faked. Do you have any reason to and, if so, do you have any evidence of specific fakery in this instance?
Title: Re: The Dark Side of the Moon
Post by: AATW on January 04, 2019, 05:19:05 PM
I’m not asking for proof.
The phrase burden of proof (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Burden_of_proof_(philosophy)) is fairly well-understood, and bickering about the semantics of the word "proof" won't change that. Sort of like how the United States of America having some territories outside of the Americas doesn't make it any less the USA.
You do say quite a lot without really saying anything. This has been widely reported as something which happened. China have produced photos from the surface. My questions are

What is the FE response to this story?

If the response is that this has all been fabricated then do you have any evidence for that? (Obviously this second question is not relevant if your answer to the first question is different to the one I have suggested it might be)
Title: Re: The Dark Side of the Moon
Post by: shootingstar on January 05, 2019, 09:58:29 AM
Quote
Unless you are standing on the far side of the moon in a space suit looking at the landed equipment, how can it be proven?


I have never physically seen with my own eyes a polar bear, or visited the Grand Canyon or the Great Barrier Reef but i don't need anybody to 'prove' to me that they exist.  Same principle isn't it.
Title: Re: The Dark Side of the Moon
Post by: Pete Svarrior on January 05, 2019, 10:11:00 AM
You do say quite a lot without really saying anything.
Likewise, my friend.

Your question should not be answered, because it's not a fair question. You're asking us to substantiate a negative without providing any evidence to the positive other than "lots of people said it".

This is a reversal of burden of proof, and we shouldn't be engaging it. I can't tell others what to do, but I'm not falling for it, personally.
Title: Re: The Dark Side of the Moon
Post by: AATW on January 05, 2019, 10:36:25 AM
Quote
Unless you are standing on the far side of the moon in a space suit looking at the landed equipment, how can it be proven?
I have never physically seen with my own eyes a polar bear, or visited the Grand Canyon or the Great Barrier Reef but i don't need anybody to 'prove' to me that they exist.  Same principle isn't it.
There’s a good article about this here

http://theconversation.com/-to-reason-with-flat-earthers-it-may-not-help-though-95160

FE operates in the sceptical context.
How do we know the earth is round?
Well, lots of reasons but let’s look at one: we have photos of earth from space. Lots of them. That kills FE stone dead. So FE swings into sceptical context: Question everything. How do you know the photos are real?
Note that no actual evidence of fakery is presented. Lots of supposition, some out of context quotes from NASA about Photoshop and composite photos, a dash of misunderstanding about why photos appear inconsistent and voila - they have introduced an element of doubt.

But you can do that about anything. I’m told that kangaroos live wild in Australia. How do I know? I’ve never been there. Maybe all the people who tell me this are lying, maybe all the photos and film taken of them in the wild are really taken elsewhere. And so on.

The telling thing is this sceptical context is used very selectively - only for things which prove a globe earth. Rowbotham’s book, full of anecdotal “evidence”, is accepted without question.

That’s why I started this thread to see if there was any FE response or thoughts about this. And we see the sceptical context at work. Lackey and Pete basically asking how we can prove this is real, knowing that is impossible as it is impossible for pretty much any news story if you operate in the sceptical context. But no actual evidence of fakery is provided or felt to be needed. It contradicts FE, ergo it’s false until proven otherwise to a standard of proof impossible to achieve. It’s a mix of confirmation bias and cognitive dissonance.

I’m still waiting for an actual FE response giving their actual thoughts about this. Do they even have any? If one believes in a flat earth and was serious about seeking the truth of the matter then every space mission is another opportunity to examine one’s beliefs.
Title: Re: The Dark Side of the Moon
Post by: AATW on January 05, 2019, 12:10:31 PM
You do say quite a lot without really saying anything.
Likewise, my friend.

Your question should not be answered, because it's not a fair question. You're asking us to substantiate a negative without providing any evidence to the positive other than "lots of people said it".

This is a reversal of burden of proof, and we shouldn't be engaging it. I can't tell others what to do, but I'm not falling for it, personally.
The question in the initial post was maybe unfair as it presupposed the FE stance on this, so let me try again.

China claim to have landed a spacecraft on the far side of the moon. What is the FE reaction to this claim?

Is that a fair question? China have just claimed something which potentially affects FET. To have no reaction to that at all would be bizarre.
The 3 possibilities I see are:

1) China have done what they claim - ergo the earth is round.

2) China have faked the whole thing - I'm not sure that has any implications for the shape of the earth, if this hasn't happened then I'm not sure how an event not happening adds weight to either side of the FE/RE debate. You could say they have had to fake it because the earth is flat but I'd suggest it's equally plausible they've done it for the kudos the achievement had brought them.

3) China have done what they claim but have done so despite the earth being flat - I'm not quite sure how that's possible given the FE model presented here and without them discovering in the process that the earth was flat (unless they did and are suppressing that for some reason) but I've listed it as a possibility for completeness.

I'm not claiming to have proof of veracity of their claim, I'm not expecting you to have proof of fakery. This isn't a trap or a trick question.
But asking whether there is any thoughts from FE people about a claim from China which potentially has an impact on FE is a reasonable one.
Title: Re: The Dark Side of the Moon
Post by: totallackey on January 07, 2019, 12:11:16 PM
So your not asking for proof of anything?
*You’re
Correct, I apologize for the misspelling.
Proof is not possible on either side.
Correct.
I can’t prove the Chinese have landed a craft on the moon. You can’t prove they haven’t.
Correct.
So let’s look at the evidence.
Great.
Quote
Do you have any evidence the events the article depicts have actually taken place?
Firstly, you could ask that about any news article. Unless you personally witness the events what evidence do you have that they happened?
Some.
The evidence here is that every major news source has reported this as something that really happened.
And there is documented history of every news source as being responsible for making false reports, lying about specific incidents and happenings, and just plain old making shit up.
I’ve not heard anyone casting any doubt on the claim from the Chinese.
I am.
Photos have been provided from the craft, I’ve not heard any claims that those are faked.
I've not heard claims regarding legitimacy either.
The technology to get craft in orbit around the moon has existed since the space race, the Russians (crash) landed Luna 2 on the moon in 1959. There have been multiple manned and unmanned missions since from multiple countries since.
As reported by major media sources who have already been found to be liars in other instances.
So I have no reason to suspect this has been faked. Do you have any reason to and, if so, do you have any evidence of specific fakery in this instance?
Yes, I have reason to find the whole shebang suspect but I find all news to be suspect, nothing more or less in this case.
Title: Re: The Dark Side of the Moon
Post by: totallackey on January 07, 2019, 12:14:12 PM
Quote
Unless you are standing on the far side of the moon in a space suit looking at the landed equipment, how can it be proven?


I have never physically seen with my own eyes a polar bear, or visited the Grand Canyon or the Great Barrier Reef but i don't need anybody to 'prove' to me that they exist.  Same principle isn't it.
This type of equivalence is simply ridiculous.

These things of which you write exist here on flat earth.
Title: Re: The Dark Side of the Moon
Post by: totallackey on January 07, 2019, 12:26:38 PM
Quote
Unless you are standing on the far side of the moon in a space suit looking at the landed equipment, how can it be proven?
I have never physically seen with my own eyes a polar bear, or visited the Grand Canyon or the Great Barrier Reef but i don't need anybody to 'prove' to me that they exist.  Same principle isn't it.
There’s a good article about this here

http://theconversation.com/-to-reason-with-flat-earthers-it-may-not-help-though-95160

FE operates in the sceptical context.
How do we know the earth is round?
Well, lots of reasons but let’s look at one: we have photos of earth from space. Lots of them. That kills FE stone dead. So FE swings into sceptical context: Question everything. How do you know the photos are real?
Note that no actual evidence of fakery is presented. Lots of supposition, some out of context quotes from NASA about Photoshop and composite photos, a dash of misunderstanding about why photos appear inconsistent and voila - they have introduced an element of doubt.

But you can do that about anything. I’m told that kangaroos live wild in Australia. How do I know? I’ve never been there. Maybe all the people who tell me this are lying, maybe all the photos and film taken of them in the wild are really taken elsewhere. And so on.

The telling thing is this sceptical context is used very selectively - only for things which prove a globe earth. Rowbotham’s book, full of anecdotal “evidence”, is accepted without question.

That’s why I started this thread to see if there was any FE response or thoughts about this. And we see the sceptical context at work. Lackey and Pete basically asking how we can prove this is real, knowing that is impossible as it is impossible for pretty much any news story if you operate in the sceptical context. But no actual evidence of fakery is provided or felt to be needed. It contradicts FE, ergo it’s false until proven otherwise to a standard of proof impossible to achieve. It’s a mix of confirmation bias and cognitive dissonance.

I’m still waiting for an actual FE response giving their actual thoughts about this. Do they even have any? If one believes in a flat earth and was serious about seeking the truth of the matter then every space mission is another opportunity to examine one’s beliefs.
Nearly everything you write here is more of the, "equivalence," BS, plus totally characterizing my responses in this thread in an illegitimate fashion. I have not once categorized your responses using the phrase "proof."

Your initial query was,"Do you have any evidence of fakery?" My response was," Do you have any evidence of reality?

And yes, I do want to know if any photos are legit. Not only do I want to know if the photos are legit, I also want to know the photos were taken of the object which is claimed to be depicted in that photo. I have yet to see any evidence of this being the case. I see claims a plenty but no real evidence.

Things on the flat earth, like kangaroos, can be examined because these are things to which we have real opportunity of access. The supposed "dark side," of the moon? You cannot write for a fact that it even exists, let alone someone or somebodies capable of visiting it and photographing it. You cannot even state for a fact that what is printed in the paper is in fact a photo and not a painting.

News media LIE and PRINT LIES and have done so for a very long time (a lengthy body of evidence) and that is unequivocal FACT.
Title: Re: The Dark Side of the Moon
Post by: shootingstar on January 07, 2019, 12:28:54 PM
Sorry if my attempt at creating an analogy seems ridiculous to you. It was my weak attempt at illustrating a point. That point being that it seems to me that some people won't believe something exists or is true unless they are physically standing in front of it.


It is obviously physically impossible to go and stand on the far side of the Moon in front of the landing craft that the Chinese have put there so what how else apart from announcing it and showing photos taken by it are they supposed to prove it is actually there? 
Title: Re: The Dark Side of the Moon
Post by: totallackey on January 07, 2019, 12:42:12 PM
Sorry if my attempt at creating an analogy seems ridiculous to you. It was my weak attempt at illustrating a point. That point being that it seems to me that some people won't believe something exists or is true unless they are physically standing in front of it.
No one is denying that such people exist.

No one has pointed out why this approach to life in general is somehow less than.
It is obviously physically impossible to go and stand on the far side of the Moon in front of the landing craft that the Chinese have put there so what how else apart from announcing it and showing photos taken by it are they supposed to prove it is actually there?
I don't know.
Title: Re: The Dark Side of the Moon
Post by: ChrisTP on January 07, 2019, 02:13:00 PM
"No one has pointed out why this approach to life in general is somehow less than." - totallackey

It's fine to question things, this is the scientific method. If you've ever wondered why things like gravity are still called "theories" it's because while it's so far been proven to be a thing, there's still always the possibility that what we think we understand is actually not to be. and in the face of evidence against what we think we know, we should question what is is that we think we know and if needed, modify or come up with a new theory.

The problem you have is that you question absolutely everything that doesn't prove what you think to be true. This, at least in my opinion, is a lesser way of life because by selectively choosing to believe one thing and nothing else no matter what, you limit your knowledge and your ability to learn new things. This is detrimental to society IMO, we as a the human race should strive for knowledge and understanding. Choosing to stick to one thing stops that from happening.

What all "flat earthers" should be doing is if you really must question the earths shape, is to also question the idea of the earth being flat too. There is a ton more proof that the earth is sphere than flat, but both may be wrong as well. No one should stick to what they think they know in such a stubborn way but you should also not believe absolutely everything you're told either. In that sense I agree with you I think (to not believe everything you're told). But it's a very small agreement compared to the rest of your apparent beliefs.

I ask you this, what makes you think that the "documented history" that all media outlets lie is actually true? Why would you believe documented history stating news lies, yet not believe documented history stating that men landed on the moon? How are you validating all of this for yourself? And you should also ask yourself why you are validating some things and not others in your mind.

My 'belief' is to seek knowledge of all things. If something proves wrong what I thought was right, my mind is changed. So far I have no reason to believe china faked landing on the far side of the moon, but obviously, theoretically it is possible to fake it. It's actually far harder to fake something like that in the information age than it is to just be able to do it. Even the smallest of conspiracies will have whistle blowers from within. We will find out almost any 'scandal'. At least in my opinion.

This is in no way meant as an insult to you or FE people, just my observations and understanding of the mindset particularly you seem to have. Correct me if I'm wrong by all means but it seems like you simply don't want to to believe it, as opposed to having an actual reason not to believe it?
Title: Re: The Dark Side of the Moon
Post by: shootingstar on January 07, 2019, 03:39:51 PM
Flat Earthers as I understand it are 'empiricists' in that they base their views purely on evidence that can be gained from using our natural senses alone. If you can't see it simply by looking out and around you then it doesn't count. That is a very convenient way of getting around the problem of space based images that show the Earth to be round but that doesn't make those images any less real.

When I think back to times of ancient Greece and other famous civilisations, they had no knowledge at all of the causes or nature of what they saw around them and above them. Back then there was no NASA or ESA or any other government driven organisations that could be accused of deliberately lying to or deceiving the people. There was just a genuine fascination about the world around them and they had far less knowledge and reference material to help them than we do today. In that sense they were totally reliant on empirical methods. Yet they were able to start building a theory of the Universe and the Earth that mainstream science still follows today.  Why? because it explains very simply and very easily everything that we observe.

 
Title: Re: The Dark Side of the Moon
Post by: totallackey on January 07, 2019, 05:05:13 PM
"No one has pointed out why this approach to life in general is somehow less than." - totallackey

It's fine to question things, this is the scientific method. If you've ever wondered why things like gravity are still called "theories" it's because while it's so far been proven to be a thing, there's still always the possibility that what we think we understand is actually not to be. and in the face of evidence against what we think we know, we should question what is is that we think we know and if needed, modify or come up with a new theory.
Okay.
The problem you have is that you question absolutely everything that doesn't prove what you think to be true.
The more immediate problem YOU have is assuming facts not in evidence, leading way to you making such outlandish claims.
This, at least in my opinion, is a lesser way of life because by selectively choosing to believe one thing and nothing else no matter what, you limit your knowledge and your ability to learn new things.
I have no inability to learn new things, neither does any other human.
This is detrimental to society IMO, we as a the human race should strive for knowledge and understanding. Choosing to stick to one thing stops that from happening.
So sticking to 2+2 = 4 is setting unreasonable boundaries?
What all "flat earthers" should be doing is if you really must question the earths shape, is to also question the idea of the earth being flat too.
I do.
There is a ton more proof that the earth is sphere than flat...
Debatable.
...but both may be wrong as well.
True.
No one should stick to what they think they know in such a stubborn way...
Ah, here we find the mindset leading you to order me to "stop posting."

As stated before, a clear indication of philosophical, ethical, and intellectual dishonesty on your part.
...but you should also not believe absolutely everything you're told either.
I don't.
In that sense I agree with you I think (to not believe everything you're told).
Who wouldn't?
But it's a very small agreement compared to the rest of your apparent beliefs.
And to me, I categorize this specific agreement as the only one that counts.

Tell me, do you believe agreements should be solely categorized in terms of amount or substance?
I ask you this, what makes you think that the "documented history" that all media outlets lie is actually true?
Probably the multiple incidents of all news organizations, particular MSM, having formed their own lies and perpetuating lies, particularly on behalf of government.

Did I really need to write any answer to this question? 
Why would you believe documented history stating news lies...
Because of INDISPUTABLE PROOF of MSM having lied.
...yet not believe documented history stating that men landed on the moon?
Because of the SOURCE of the documentation.
How are you validating all of this for yourself?
I do not validate my beliefs. I do validate my knowledge.
And you should also ask yourself why you are validating some things and not others in your mind.
I do.
My 'belief' is to seek knowledge of all things. If something proves wrong what I thought was right, my mind is changed. So far I have no reason to believe china faked landing on the far side of the moon, but obviously, theoretically it is possible to fake it. It's actually far harder to fake something like that in the information age than it is to just be able to do it.
You were on such a roll.

It certainly is not far more or less HARD to fake anything.

It is easier to fake things and that is why people like David Copperfield, Penn & Teller, and Chriss Angel, are able to make a living.
Even the smallest of conspiracies will have whistle blowers from within. We will find out almost any 'scandal'. At least in my opinion.
Your opinion is yours.
This is in no way meant as an insult to you or FE people, just my observations and understanding of the mindset particularly you seem to have. Correct me if I'm wrong by all means but it seems like you simply don't want to to believe it, as opposed to having an actual reason not to believe it?
I have provided verifiable and indisputable evidence as to VALID reasons why I do not believe it.
Title: Re: The Dark Side of the Moon
Post by: Tumeni on January 07, 2019, 06:41:54 PM
This is a reversal of burden of proof, and we shouldn't be engaging it. I can't tell others what to do, but I'm not falling for it, personally.

Can you indicate what you would accept as proof, in this instance?

Photos relayed from the rover?
Telemetry data from the experiments on board the rover?
Something else?
Title: Re: The Dark Side of the Moon
Post by: Tumeni on January 07, 2019, 06:47:25 PM
Your initial query was,"Do you have any evidence of fakery?" My response was," Do you have any evidence of reality?

And yes, I do want to know if any photos are legit. Not only do I want to know if the photos are legit, I also want to know the photos were taken of the object which is claimed to be depicted in that photo. I have yet to see any evidence of this being the case. I see claims a plenty but no real evidence.

I've seen two or three shots of the rover leaving the lander. Which photos have you seen so far? Are you saying you've seen photos, but don't believe them, or that you've seen no photos yet?


News media LIE and PRINT LIES and have done so for a very long time (a lengthy body of evidence) and that is unequivocal FACT.

Even if it were proven that they have lied in the past, that's no proof of lies about this.

You wouldn't be able to convict someone of shoplifting if your only evidence was that they had shoplifted before, in another store  in another town
Title: Re: The Dark Side of the Moon
Post by: totallackey on January 08, 2019, 11:36:58 AM
I've seen two or three shots of the rover leaving the lander. Which photos have you seen so far? Are you saying you've seen photos, but don't believe them, or that you've seen no photos yet?
I have seen the photos.

This is merely evidence of images and not evidence of origin.
Even if it were proven that they have lied in the past, that's no proof of lies about this.
Why deny it with the phrase, "Even if..."? There is absolutely no doubt MSM has lied about past events and continue to lie or propagate/promulgate lies, particularly on behalf of governments.

It is evidence of lying and the best predictor of future behavior is past behavior.
You wouldn't be able to convict someone of shoplifting if your only evidence was that they had shoplifted before, in another store  in another town
Another false equivalence horse hockey venture.
Title: Re: The Dark Side of the Moon
Post by: shootingstar on January 08, 2019, 11:42:59 AM
I seem to have lost the plot now with this thread..  lost track of who is disagreeing with who.   We don't seem to be getting anywhere at the moment here and what has it got to do with the original OP?  What has the thread achieved so far?
Title: Re: The Dark Side of the Moon
Post by: WellRoundedIndividual on January 08, 2019, 11:54:57 AM
So your only real evidence to prove anything is if you witness it with your own eyes?

So George Washington and Alexander the Great did not exist? I mean, what evidence do we have?
Title: Re: The Dark Side of the Moon
Post by: totallackey on January 08, 2019, 12:10:40 PM
So your only real evidence to prove anything is if you witness it with your own eyes?

So George Washington and Alexander the Great did not exist? I mean, what evidence do we have?
Who claimed George Washington and Alexander the Great didn't exist?

What is with all these false equivalencies and straw men?
Title: Re: The Dark Side of the Moon
Post by: ChrisTP on January 08, 2019, 12:31:26 PM
So your only real evidence to prove anything is if you witness it with your own eyes?

So George Washington and Alexander the Great did not exist? I mean, what evidence do we have?
Who claimed George Washington and Alexander the Great didn't exist?

What is with all these false equivalencies and straw men?
The point they are trying to make is using the same logic, it's hard to really verify anything in all of history or around the world. an individual can't possible witness everything in all of time, therefore according to that logic very little exists to that individual. "I didn't witness it so it didn't happen" isn't really an argument against anything and is a pretty pointless argument to make. Sadly it's also how a lot of flat earther think and it stops any debate from flourishing.

Anyone could argue the same way for literally anything;

I haven't seen the globe earth from space, therefore the earth is flat.

I haven't seen the flat earth from space, therefore the earth is not flat.

I've never personally met Matt LeBlanc, therefore all footage of him is faked and CGI.

I've never personally drowned in the sea nor seen anyone drown, therefore I cannot drown under water.

I've never personally been mugged or witnessed a mugging, therefore I cannot be mugged.

The point being made here is that this way of thinking doesn't really help anyone and it does not further the discussion we are trying to have. At least, that would be my interpretation of the point they are trying to make. This means that such an argument is pointless to make. Why make a pointless argument? I cannot simply tell you that you can drown under water because you cannot take my word for it, since you need to be able to witness it yourself. It's a non-argument.

Disclaimer: please do not try to experiment by submerging yourself indefinitely under water.

Anyway we are divulging from the original topic, I'd like to hear more from flat earthers about China's claimed far side moon landing.
Title: Re: The Dark Side of the Moon
Post by: AATW on January 08, 2019, 12:37:47 PM
The most coherent response came from Pete. I've been meaning to reply. Unfortunately he posted it in a thread in AR but it's pertinent here, so:

It's not "fake". It's untrustworthy. Contrary to claims, very little actual examinable footage has been released, and most news stories contain primarily shitty computer animations reminiscent of old cartoons. Recall your own hand-waving around the subject of evidence.

It's an unverifiable claim and it's being treated as one.
Title: Re: The Dark Side of the Moon
Post by: totallackey on January 08, 2019, 12:44:05 PM
So your only real evidence to prove anything is if you witness it with your own eyes?

So George Washington and Alexander the Great did not exist? I mean, what evidence do we have?
Who claimed George Washington and Alexander the Great didn't exist?

What is with all these false equivalencies and straw men?
The point they are trying to make is using the same logic, it's hard to really verify anything in all of history or around the world. an individual can't possible witness everything in all of time, therefore according to that logic very little exists to that individual. "I didn't witness it so it didn't happen" isn't really an argument against anything and is a pretty pointless argument to make. Sadly it's also how a lot of flat earther think and it stops any debate from flourishing.
If it was even close to the same logic you might have a point.

Whether or not any FE adherent follows this approach is another story.

Claiming I follow it is simply a strawman.
Anyone could argue the same way for literally anything;

I haven't seen the globe earth from space, therefore the earth is flat.

I haven't seen the flat earth from space, therefore the earth is not flat.

I've never personally met Matt LeBlanc, therefore all footage of him is faked and CGI.

I've never personally drowned in the sea nor seen anyone drown, therefore I cannot drown under water.

I've never personally been mugged or witnessed a mugging, therefore I cannot be mugged.
Yeah, fine.

Let me know when you see that argument here in this thread.
The point being made here is that this way of thinking doesn't really help anyone and it does not further the discussion we are trying to have. At least, that would be my interpretation of the point they are trying to make. This means that such an argument is pointless to make. Why make a pointless argument? I cannot simply tell you that you can drown under water because you cannot take my word for it, since you need to be able to witness it yourself. It's a non-argument.
And you stating it is a non-argument is a waste of your time.

No one has ever stated it is a valid argument here in this thread.
Disclaimer: please do not try to experiment by submerging yourself indefinitely under water.
Oh geez...foiled again.
Anyway we are divulging from the original topic, I'd like to hear more from flat earthers about China's claimed far side moon landing.
What does FE have to do with the moon anyway?
Title: Re: The Dark Side of the Moon
Post by: shootingstar on January 08, 2019, 12:47:01 PM
Well I know its not on the original topic but since you asked the question.  Lunar eclipses are caused by the Earth so I guess that would have some relevance to what shape the Earth is.
Title: Re: The Dark Side of the Moon
Post by: totallackey on January 08, 2019, 01:09:57 PM
Well I know its not on the original topic but since you asked the question.  Lunar eclipses are caused by the Earth so I guess that would have some relevance to what shape the Earth is.
True, not on topic, and debatable statement anyway...
Title: Re: The Dark Side of the Moon
Post by: ChrisTP on January 08, 2019, 01:41:58 PM
Well I know its not on the original topic but since you asked the question.  Lunar eclipses are caused by the Earth so I guess that would have some relevance to what shape the Earth is.
True, not on topic, and debatable statement anyway...
It would be a debatable statement but you seem to refuse to debate it with counter arguments backed up with proof and evidence and instead resort to vitriolic behaviour with name calling and insults... This is why I'm interested in hearing from other flat earthers. Pete's statement is a stepping stone in the discussion at least. I'd like to go from there.

Quote
It's not "fake". It's untrustworthy. Contrary to claims, very little actual examinable footage has been released, and most news stories contain primarily shitty computer animations reminiscent of old cartoons. Recall your own hand-waving around the subject of evidence.

It's an unverifiable claim and it's being treated as one.
With regards to the bad graphic CGI they show, I feel this wasn't to fool anyone but to present to the audience what happened. Would you agree that no one claims that the CGI in the news article videos is real? Only the photos that were stated to be from the rover/satellite/craft etc. It would be hard to show with real footage since there are no camera crews in space and the only cameras would be on the craft it's self.

What would you say to the scientists and engineers that made the tech and were actively working together to launch the rover and land it? If you were to meet them in person or go to their place of work. Would you still claim unverifiable if the tech and calculations behind it were revealed to you and you had time to try to understand it? I'm assuming you aren't new to coding of any kind and you may be able to make some sense of some of the maths.

Title: Re: The Dark Side of the Moon
Post by: shootingstar on January 08, 2019, 02:01:35 PM
Quote
True, not on topic, and debatable statement anyway...


Hardly.... it's a well known fact.  Earth casts shadow into space (all solid objects cast a shadow as you will know), Moon passes into shadow of Earth at full Moon (when Earth lies directly between Sun and Moon) and therefore we see Moon eclipsed. There are many, many websites that will show this information and confirm it.
Title: Re: The Dark Side of the Moon
Post by: WellRoundedIndividual on January 08, 2019, 04:46:57 PM
No, its not a straw man argument.  Totallackey keeps pointing to the fact that MSM lies and whoever else and that nothing can be trusted, and its highly possible its all fake. The same damn argument can be made for any historical textbooks, because falsehoods have regularly been found in them, as well. Therefore, you can literally have a skeptical outlook on anything that you have not personally witnessed. Stop throwing around logical fallacy as a defense when its incorrect. Does anyone need to quote the Princess Bride here?
Title: Re: The Dark Side of the Moon
Post by: WellRoundedIndividual on January 08, 2019, 04:49:28 PM
I can literally say to you, Do you have evidence that George Washington existed? And I can reply that it is fake or a lie, because its just a history book or a historical document.  Did you go dig up his bones? No, they won't let you. Why? It must be a conspiracy to keep the truth of George Washington not actually existing from you. Sound a bit like the ice wall and government conspiracy to keep you from it???
Title: Re: The Dark Side of the Moon
Post by: totallackey on January 08, 2019, 04:55:38 PM
Quote
True, not on topic, and debatable statement anyway...


Hardly.... it's a well known fact.  Earth casts shadow into space (all solid objects cast a shadow as you will know), Moon passes into shadow of Earth at full Moon (when Earth lies directly between Sun and Moon) and therefore we see Moon eclipsed. There are many, many websites that will show this information and confirm it.
I am well aware of what science claims regarding lunar eclipses.

Claiming something to be a certain way does not = fact.
Title: Re: The Dark Side of the Moon
Post by: totallackey on January 08, 2019, 04:57:59 PM
No, its not a straw man argument.  Totallackey keeps pointing to the fact that MSM lies and whoever else and that nothing can be trusted, and its highly possible its all fake. The same damn argument can be made for any historical textbooks, because falsehoods have regularly been found in them, as well. Therefore, you can literally have a skeptical outlook on anything that you have not personally witnessed. Stop throwing around logical fallacy as a defense when its incorrect. Does anyone need to quote the Princess Bride here?
It is a strawman argument due to the fact we are not discussing historical or current events having taken place on Earth in this thread.

Equating the two is fallacious.
Title: Re: The Dark Side of the Moon
Post by: totallackey on January 08, 2019, 05:02:30 PM
I can literally say to you, Do you have evidence that George Washington existed? And I can reply that it is fake or a lie, because its just a history book or a historical document.  Did you go dig up his bones? No, they won't let you. Why? It must be a conspiracy to keep the truth of George Washington not actually existing from you. Sound a bit like the ice wall and government conspiracy to keep you from it???
No, I cannot literally write or say George Washington existed or not.

I can write or say I believe George Washington existed.

Are you writing you do not believe George Washington existed based on the evidence?

History books/historical documents =/= MSM or journalism. MSM or journalism could be part of a subset of the former.

But the latter runs with the "cherry tree," angle.
Title: Re: The Dark Side of the Moon
Post by: AATW on January 08, 2019, 05:04:22 PM
What this thread was getting at was, what I'm interested in (although I do concede the OP was a clumsy way of asking), is the FE response to the space industry generally. In 2018 alone there were 114 launches, 111 of them successful. And while NASA may be the poster boys for all this there were 6 agencies involved.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2018_in_spaceflight#By_country

And look at how many countries were involved overall:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2018_in_spaceflight#Orbital_launches

This is all so routine it rarely gets reported. This one did though. On 23rd December Elon Musk finally launched a military satellite into space:

https://www.theguardian.com/science/2018/dec/23/elon-musk-spacex-launches-military-rocket

This was noteworthy because it was a private company who won a contract to launch satellites for the military. What do FE people think is going on here?
Is Musk lying? Why haven't the military called him out on it if so? Surely if he claimed they were launching satellites for them and they just weren't then someone would say something. Are the military "in on it"? Are they lying? Why? Or is he fooling them some way, so they think he's launching satellites but he really isn't? You think they'd notice if the $500m satellite he'd launched wasn't working but maybe he's managed to fool them into thinking that it is.

It's all well and good to say that none of this is directly verifiable - and I guess that is actually true - but on balance of probabilities, given the rocket technology clearly exists, is it really likely that all of this is fake? I mean, GPS works, my satellite TV works, the ISS can be seen from earth.

Every launch is another opportunity for FE to examine its beliefs but I don't see much of that going on other than a vague "we can't verify this directly so we're not going to think about it too hard".
Title: Re: The Dark Side of the Moon
Post by: Pete Svarrior on January 08, 2019, 06:40:36 PM
Every launch is another opportunity for FE to examine its beliefs but I don't see much of that going on other than a vague "we can't verify this directly so we're not going to think about it too hard".
What is the benefit of sitting around on one's arse and pondering unverifiable claims? You RET lot usually have a lot to say about just how useful unfalsifiable hypotheses are, except when you push them yourselves. Suddenly they're good, because they're convenient.

To quote Tim Minchin:

Life is full of mysteries, yeah
But there are answers out there
And they won't be found by people sitting around looking serious and saying 'Isn't life mysterious?'
'Let's sit here and hope.
'Let's call up the fucking Pope.
'Let's go watch Oprah interview Deepak Chopra.'
Title: Re: The Dark Side of the Moon
Post by: AATW on January 08, 2019, 07:45:38 PM
What is the benefit of sitting around on one's arse and pondering unverifiable claims?
Because, if you're going to be strict about it, pretty much every claim is unverifiable.
So you either believe nothing at all or your form your world view based on evidence and balance of probabilities.
There's a reason why a court of law only demands a person be proven guilty beyond reasonable doubt, because absolute proof is impossible.

The earth being a globe is unverifiable in the strictest sense.
The earth being flat is unverifiable.
You believe one of those so you have clearly come to that conclusion based on some evidence, it isn't based on you having been up in a space ship and seen the flat earth.
Title: Re: The Dark Side of the Moon
Post by: Pete Svarrior on January 08, 2019, 08:19:50 PM
Sure, we can go with balance. But it will still be a balance of things I can verify, not things the nice man on TV told me to believe.
Title: Re: The Dark Side of the Moon
Post by: AATW on January 08, 2019, 09:00:11 PM
Sure, we can go with balance. But it will still be a balance of things I can verify, not things the nice man on TV told me to believe.
I literally have no idea how you make your mind up about anything then, because very little is personally verifiable if you’re going to go down that route. The principle you’re talking about isn’t bad per se, it’s just not possible or practical for most things.
Title: Re: The Dark Side of the Moon
Post by: shootingstar on January 08, 2019, 09:37:32 PM
Let me just ask you Pete quite candidly.  As I understand it flat Earth theory starts on the basis of the view of the world that we see directly yes? No aids to the basic human senses whatsoever. The world is flat because it looks flat from where ever we are standing.  Seeing is believing.

A simple yes or no answer to this question would be fine.
Title: Re: The Dark Side of the Moon
Post by: Tumeni on January 17, 2019, 09:35:01 PM
Sure, we can go with balance. But it will still be a balance of things I can verify, not things the nice man on TV told me to believe.

I have no idea how you can function in the world on that basis. You have to take hundreds of things at face value, without verification, every day....

If I look at the weather forecast, ON THE TV, on Sunday night, and it says there'll be heavy snow on Monday morning, I look out my snow boots and make sure the car anti-freeze is topped up. What do you do? Build your own weather-monitoring system so that you can check for yourself?

If the geiger counter reads off the scale as I approach (say) Chernobyl, I stop and move away. What do you do? Build a geiger counter from scratch?

If the microwave instructions say don't put body parts into the oven whilst it's operating, do you take that at face value, or do you stick a finger in to verify it?

Science tells you most all of the above. If you believe science on the above, but you cherry-pick to disbelieve it on shape of the planet, space exploration and such .... 
Title: Re: The Dark Side of the Moon
Post by: Tom Bishop on January 18, 2019, 01:24:29 AM
Sure, we can go with balance. But it will still be a balance of things I can verify, not things the nice man on TV told me to believe.

I have no idea how you can function in the world on that basis. You have to take hundreds of things at face value, without verification, every day....

If I look at the weather forecast, ON THE TV, on Sunday night, and it says there'll be heavy snow on Monday morning, I look out my snow boots and make sure the car anti-freeze is topped up. What do you do? Build your own weather-monitoring system so that you can check for yourself?

If the geiger counter reads off the scale as I approach (say) Chernobyl, I stop and move away. What do you do? Build a geiger counter from scratch?

If the microwave instructions say don't put body parts into the oven whilst it's operating, do you take that at face value, or do you stick a finger in to verify it?

Science tells you most all of the above. If you believe science on the above, but you cherry-pick to disbelieve it on shape of the planet, space exploration and such ....

This forum isn't about questioning any of those topics. Pete is asking you for items that can be verified in regards to the subject of the website. It is apparent that you are at a lack of answers and are just asking people to blindly believe.
Title: Re: The Dark Side of the Moon
Post by: J-Man on January 18, 2019, 02:20:28 AM
Maybe we should use some common sense. To place a man or mechanical craft on the back side of something never seen would take a lot of expertise. Is there a van allen belt? Is there a dome? Has china and the usa faked space walks or travel? Yes, bubble boys, an actual lunar reel discover faking a pic of the earth from the capsule. How many people have died in these space missions? Lets not count the launch pad or couple mile up booms. NONE... How can no one ever die in these en devours? Just monkeys rats and a dog.

Why is it we still can't figure out the pyramids, stones of Cuzco, underground cities like Derinkuyu yet we can place men and machines on the moon, mars and other celestial objects? Makes no sense, carries no logical thought process, it's all BS, fakery. Please don't ask me to believe the earth is a globe until these BS scientist can explain how a 1,650 ton stone block is carved with precision and expected to be moved 100's of miles let alone any of the for mentioned items.

The world is full of idiots, charlatans and scientists.

The earth is flat as a pancake and the creator said so. That's all I need. Now figure out the precision cuts inside the pyramid rooms and lack of any soot on the walls from light.
Title: Re: The Dark Side of the Moon
Post by: WellRoundedIndividual on January 18, 2019, 02:25:35 AM
Those arguments are irrelevant. You are probably typing that on a smartphone that has the processing capabilities that far outstrip the first computers ever developed. Mankind has made some amazing inventions. And yet, its inconceivable that space travel to the moon is impossible? Star Trek predicted cell phones 30 years before they were invented. Take a look at the genius of Nikola Tesla. For ed very argument you make that humans are stupid and cant figure anything out, I can give you counterpoint of amazing things that they have done. So, in the end, irrelevant. (Its very similar to the abortion argument of "killing a possible hitler" vs "killing the possible savior of mankind". Shhhhhhh
Title: Re: The Dark Side of the Moon
Post by: J-Man on January 18, 2019, 02:34:35 AM
Those arguments are irrelevant. You are probably typing that on a smartphone that has the processing capabilities that far outstrip the first computers ever developed. Mankind has made some amazing inventions. And yet, its inconceivable that space travel to the moon is impossible? Star Trek predicted cell phones 30 years before they were invented. Take a look at the genius of Nikola Tesla. For ed very argument you make that humans are stupid and cant figure anything out, I can give you counterpoint of amazing things that they have done. So, in the end, irrelevant. (Its very similar to the abortion argument of "killing a possible hitler" vs "killing the possible savior of mankind". Shhhhhhh

How many people died trying to go 300 mph in a quarter mile? Then how many trying to go 320 mph. It is relevant. No one dies because its all fakery.
Title: Re: The Dark Side of the Moon
Post by: ChrisTP on January 18, 2019, 02:39:10 AM
Maybe we should use some common sense. To place a man or mechanical craft on the back side of something never seen would take a lot of expertise. Is there a van allen belt? Is there a dome? Has china and the usa faked space walks or travel? Yes, bubble boys, an actual lunar reel discover faking a pic of the earth from the capsule. How many people have died in these space missions? Lets not count the launch pad or couple mile up booms. NONE... How can no one ever die in these en devours? Just monkeys rats and a dog.

Please don't ask me to believe the earth is a globe until these BS scientist can explain how a 1,650 ton stone block is carved with precision and expected to be moved 100's of miles let alone any of the for mentioned items.
Not sure where you got 1,650 tons from because that would be insane, more like 2 to 3 tons and I would imagine with enough slave labour dragging the bricks along using logs and possibly water to ease dragging the bricks along. More importantly, as this is beside the point, if you understand the maths, engineering and physics behind lunar landings it's not that hard to comprehend the possibility. If you don't understand these things you cannot simply say "it's bs". What's bs is claiming something is bs because you lack the understanding.

Also not many astronauts have died because there has not been many astronauts in the first place. There's possibly enough astronauts in all of history to fit on one commercial air flight which really isn't much. Perhaps if manned missions were more frequent there may be more casualties. the number of unmanned mission failures on the other hand is, well, existent at least.
Title: Re: The Dark Side of the Moon
Post by: J-Man on January 18, 2019, 02:47:50 AM
Maybe we should use some common sense. To place a man or mechanical craft on the back side of something never seen would take a lot of expertise. Is there a van allen belt? Is there a dome? Has china and the usa faked space walks or travel? Yes, bubble boys, an actual lunar reel discover faking a pic of the earth from the capsule. How many people have died in these space missions? Lets not count the launch pad or couple mile up booms. NONE... How can no one ever die in these en devours? Just monkeys rats and a dog.

Please don't ask me to believe the earth is a globe until these BS scientist can explain how a 1,650 ton stone block is carved with precision and expected to be moved 100's of miles let alone any of the for mentioned items.
Not sure where you got 1,650 tons from because that would be insane, more like 2 to 3 tons and I would imagine with enough slave labour dragging the bricks along using logs and possibly water to ease dragging the bricks along. More importantly, as this is beside the point, if you understand the maths, engineering and physics behind lunar landings it's not that hard to comprehend the possibility. If you don't understand these things you cannot simply say "it's bs". What's bs is claiming something is bs because you lack the understanding.

Also not many astronauts have died because there has not been many astronauts in the first place. There's possibly enough astronauts in all of history to fit on one commercial air flight which really isn't much. Perhaps if manned missions were more frequent there may be more casualties. the number of unmanned mission failures on the other hand is, well, existent at least.

https://io9.gizmodo.com/archaeologists-discover-the-worlds-largest-ancient-ston-1664281050

A few months ago, a team from the German Archaeological Institute conducted excavations at the quarry, and to their amazement they found an ever bigger stone just off to the side and underneath it. It measures 19.6 meters (64 feet) in length, 6 meters (19.6 feet) wide, and is at least 5.5 meters (18 feet) high. Its weight is estimated at a daunting 1,650 tons (that's 3,300,000 pounds, or 1,496,850 kg). Future excavations will confirm its precise dimensions.


Now please ask yourself this question: Have you ever had to reboot your computer, phone, or other devise run on any operating system. 99.99999999% will answer yes. People die when computers freeze on space missions......actually there is a simple answer, the rockets tip over so as not to hit the firmament and explode. The nukes taught us that.
Title: Re: The Dark Side of the Moon
Post by: ChrisTP on January 18, 2019, 03:30:52 AM
Maybe we should use some common sense. To place a man or mechanical craft on the back side of something never seen would take a lot of expertise. Is there a van allen belt? Is there a dome? Has china and the usa faked space walks or travel? Yes, bubble boys, an actual lunar reel discover faking a pic of the earth from the capsule. How many people have died in these space missions? Lets not count the launch pad or couple mile up booms. NONE... How can no one ever die in these en devours? Just monkeys rats and a dog.

Please don't ask me to believe the earth is a globe until these BS scientist can explain how a 1,650 ton stone block is carved with precision and expected to be moved 100's of miles let alone any of the for mentioned items.
Not sure where you got 1,650 tons from because that would be insane, more like 2 to 3 tons and I would imagine with enough slave labour dragging the bricks along using logs and possibly water to ease dragging the bricks along. More importantly, as this is beside the point, if you understand the maths, engineering and physics behind lunar landings it's not that hard to comprehend the possibility. If you don't understand these things you cannot simply say "it's bs". What's bs is claiming something is bs because you lack the understanding.

Also not many astronauts have died because there has not been many astronauts in the first place. There's possibly enough astronauts in all of history to fit on one commercial air flight which really isn't much. Perhaps if manned missions were more frequent there may be more casualties. the number of unmanned mission failures on the other hand is, well, existent at least.

https://io9.gizmodo.com/archaeologists-discover-the-worlds-largest-ancient-ston-1664281050

A few months ago, a team from the German Archaeological Institute conducted excavations at the quarry, and to their amazement they found an ever bigger stone just off to the side and underneath it. It measures 19.6 meters (64 feet) in length, 6 meters (19.6 feet) wide, and is at least 5.5 meters (18 feet) high. Its weight is estimated at a daunting 1,650 tons (that's 3,300,000 pounds, or 1,496,850 kg). Future excavations will confirm its precise dimensions.


Now please ask yourself this question: Have you ever had to reboot your computer, phone, or other devise run on any operating system. 99.99999999% will answer yes. People die when computers freeze on space missions......actually there is a simple answer, the rockets tip over so as not to hit the firmament and explode. The nukes taught us that.
I stand corrected, that's a pretty huge rock. But the article also says it was left in the quarry after getting cut into a brick.


Yes windows gets stalled sometimes, there's a lot more going on with your standard commercial operating system though and generic hardware, as opposed to machines made got vet specific functions of space travel. Less can go wrong if you're only executing a code that does less than a typical home desktop built with function in mind. It's not often software malfunctions in normal air travel. I understand where you're coming from though.
Title: Re: The Dark Side of the Moon
Post by: stack on January 18, 2019, 04:36:41 AM
....actually there is a simple answer, the rockets tip over so as not to hit the firmament and explode. The nukes taught us that.

Interesting statement. What's your evidence for this?
Title: Re: The Dark Side of the Moon
Post by: AATW on January 18, 2019, 09:23:21 AM
This forum isn't about questioning any of those topics. Pete is asking you for items that can be verified in regards to the subject of the website. It is apparent that you are at a lack of answers and are just asking people to blindly believe.
Which brings us back to this article:

http://theconversation.com/how-to-reason-with-flat-earthers-it-may-not-help-though-95160

With regards to the flat earth you operate in the sceptical context
How do we know the earth is a globe? Lots of reasons, but one big one of course is we have plenty of film and photos from space.
So you claim that's all fake.
OK, but there are now hundreds of people who have been to space.
So you claim they are all liars, they are all paid by NASA and are thus "in on it".
OK, but 7 of those are private citizens who paid for the privilege.
They're liars too, they're just doing it for publicity.

And then you claim that the globe earth hasn't been proven. Well, not by those standards it hasn't but by those standards you can't prove anything. I'm not going to type out the whole kangaroo nonsense again but if I keep on declaring your evidence of kangaroos existing as fake and the people who have seen them as liars then I can claim you haven't proven they exist. It would be a ridiculous claim but it's logically equivalent to what you do with the globe earth.

And the point is no-one operates this way in real life. If they did they wouldn't get out of bed in the morning until they'd personally tested the strength of the floorboards to confirm they will hold your weight. Sure, the people who built your house say they will but have you personally verified it for yourself? No-one lives this way, you only do very selectively when it comes to the shape of the earth.
The only reason you do that is it's the only way to cling to your belief. It's logically inconsistent with the way you live the rest of your life.
Title: Re: The Dark Side of the Moon
Post by: AATW on January 18, 2019, 09:34:24 AM
How many people died trying to go 300 mph in a quarter mile? Then how many trying to go 320 mph. It is relevant. No one dies because its all fakery.

18 people have died

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_spaceflight-related_accidents_and_incidents#During_spaceflight

I don't know why above you are arbitrarily deciding not to count certain incidents.
As for why there haven't been more fatalities, there have been a lot of failures over the years but before putting people in rockets they did a lot of unmanned tests.
An argument from incredulity is not an argument at all.
Title: Re: The Dark Side of the Moon
Post by: Tumeni on January 18, 2019, 09:38:12 AM
This forum isn't about questioning any of those topics. Pete is asking you for items that can be verified in regards to the subject of the website. It is apparent that you are at a lack of answers and are just asking people to blindly believe.

Are you telling me that I'm not allowed to draw an analogy between the things Pete rejects and other matters in everyday life, in order to make a point? Really?

Pete did not ask for items to be verified, he stated that he only accepts things which he can verify, and I don't see how a person could function, day-to-day, in that manner.
Title: Re: The Dark Side of the Moon
Post by: Tumeni on January 18, 2019, 09:44:24 AM
How many people died trying to go 300 mph in a quarter mile? Then how many trying to go 320 mph. It is relevant.

Not a valid comparison.

One is a land vehicle, with many moving parts, in constant contact with the ground

The other leaves the ground, and once it clears the atmosphere, has no contact with anything until landing.

Wear and tear, vibration, etc all affect the land cars, but not the spacecraft


===========================================
the rockets tip over so as not to hit the firmament and explode.

... yet nobody sees nor hears them all explode, no wreckage ever washes up on any beach, anywhere.

Honestly, there's a rocket launch almost every few days, somewhere in the world. If they had all exploded shortly after launch, the marine life of the Earth would be choking on rocket debris, not plastic. We'd see metal on the beaches instead of driftwood and household waste.

====================================
Maybe we should use some common sense. To place a man or mechanical craft on the back side of something never seen would take a lot of expertise.

*** It's not "never seen" - manned and unmanned missions have been seeing it since the 1960s. ***

Yes, bubble boys, an actual lunar reel discover faking a pic of the earth from the capsule.

If you're referring to the Sibrel footage, that's been debunked. Not fake
Title: Re: The Dark Side of the Moon
Post by: WellRoundedIndividual on January 18, 2019, 11:16:00 AM
And 99.9999% of the time a phone or PC has to be restarted because the user did something to cause it to crash. Your point is irrelevant.