The Flat Earth Society
Flat Earth Discussion Boards => Flat Earth Community => Topic started by: squevil on December 14, 2013, 07:32:55 AM
-
So caught the news this morning and a Chinese bot will land on the moon at some point today. Question is; will they find moon shrimp evidence or will it be seen as another hoax. I look forward to the news images they release. Lets hope they do, I can't wait to see what the conspiracy theorists point out in the images this time. Thing is if the last one was such an obvious hoax, then why would the bbc even show it on the news?! Who's getting paid off and if the hoax was so obvious then why is it still on the news?
-
I hope the Chinese step up their game this time and make it some what believable. They did a horrible job on their fake space walk. Maybe they learned from their previous mistakes.
-
Thing is if the last one was such an obvious hoax, then why would the bbc even show it on the news?! Who's getting paid off and if the hoax was so obvious then why is it still on the news?
Fact-checking in the news isn't what it used to be.
-
Apparently they already landed. But where are the video from this event? All I've seen released from China is a news announcement.
-
Did you expect the paparazzi to be there to photograph the landing or something?
Also: http://english.cntv.cn/special/lunarmission/index.shtml
-
Did you expect the paparazzi to be there to photograph the landing or something?
Also: http://english.cntv.cn/special/lunarmission/index.shtml
Actual video and telemetry data would be nice in the face of their space walk controversy.
-
Did you expect the paparazzi to be there to photograph the landing or something?
Also: http://english.cntv.cn/special/lunarmission/index.shtml
Actual video evidence would be nice in the face of their space walk controversy.
While I agree that the space walk videos were highly suspect, calling them a controversy is pretty off-base.
OH THE... outrage???
Stop the presses! Youtube commenters and conspiracy theorist websites alike are in an uproar over China's alleged fake space walks.
Nobody really cares.
-
While I agree that the space walk videos were highly suspect, calling them a controversy is pretty off-base.
OH THE... outrage???
Stop the presses! Youtube commenters and conspiracy theorist websites alike are in an uproar over China's alleged fake space walks.
Nobody really cares.
China released dialogue between the taikonauts of a successful launch hours before the craft actually launched:
http://www.david-kilgour.com/2008/Sep_29_2008_03.php
China posts fake rocket launch story
CHINA'S leading Xinhua news agency reported the successful flight of the Shenzhou VII - complete with detailed dialogue between the astronauts - hours before the nation's third-ever manned space mission had even lifted off.
On Thursday morning, Xinhua posted a story on its website saying the Shenzhou capsule had been successfully tracked flying over the Pacific Ocean even though the rocket and its three astronauts had not yet been launched.
The article, dated September 27, described the rocket in flight, complete with a sharply detailed dialogue between the three astronauts.
Excerpts are below:
"After this order, signal lights all were switched on, various data show up on rows of screens, hundreds of technicians staring at the screens, without missing any slightest changes ...
"One minute to go!' 'Changjiang No.1 found the target! ...
"The firm voice of the controller broke the silence of the whole ship. Now, the target is captured 12 seconds ahead of the predicted time ...
"The air pressure in the cabin is normal!
"Ten minutes later, the ship disappears below the horizon. Warm clapping and excited cheering breaks the night sky, echoing across the silent Pacific Ocean."
An editor at Xinhau told AFP that the story had been posted due to a technical problem.
"We dealt with it after we had found it," the editor said.
The Shenzhou VII was launched from the Jiuquan Satellite Launch Centre in northwestern China shorlty after 9pm (AEST) Thursday.
The mission, expected to last three to four days, is devoted almost entirely to the execution of the spacewalk, and is expected to help China master the technology for docking two orbiters to create the country's first orbiting space station in the next few years.
-
Also:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lBL98p0wZ7g
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=d9LWNv-kdTI&feature=c4-overview&list=UUs_nvA4kNUBKCPMTG1ixeIw
-
old man, let me be clear. I think China was faking it too. I think there may be a minority that does give a crap about it but such accusations are in no way in the hearts and hive-like minds of society.
-
old man, let me be clear. I think China was faking it too. I think there may be a minority that does give a crap about it but such accusations are in no way in the hearts and hive-like minds of society.
Great, then we can discount this "moon landing" as additional propaganda and need not discuss the matter further.
-
old man, let me be clear. I think China was faking it too. I think there may be a minority that does give a crap about it but such accusations are in no way in the hearts and hive-like minds of society.
Great, then we can discount this "moon landing" as additional propaganda and need not discuss the matter further.
not really. This is the same thing you've done countless times.
A fake moon rock exists > All moon rocks are fake
A moon rock kinda sorta looks like a squirrel > All moon pictures are fake
Hollywood can make realistic movies about space > All space videos are made by Hollywood
China desperately faked a moon walk > China will never get to the moon
-
If China faked a space mission in front of a world audience, which was supposed to be an incremental step of technological achievement, then how are we supposed to trust them on this next achievement of which very little media was released?
-
If China faked a space mission in front of a world audience, which was supposed to be an incremental step of technological achievement, then how are we supposed to trust them on this next achievement of which very little media was released?
I agree, lack of trust is warranted. Does it mean it didn't happen? I'm afraid not. This is where you and I differ. You tend to make absolute judgements about things like this... China, rocks, squirrels.
Conspiracy theorists just really reach at straws with no factual basis and tons of conjecture.
So let me clear... I'm not saying that China just successfully landed on the moon but for some reason, you want to imply that they didn't.
-
"Kim Jing, the Chinese chess champion, was found to be a cheater and a fraud... but then he went on to win several more chess champions around the country so it's all good."
I'm afraid it does not work that way.
-
How are you having a hard time understanding this? Your example paints me as someone who would just let it slide. Your political tactics seem to even slip into upper fora discussion I gather.
I'll be even more clear...
We (as in you and me) do not know if China just landed on the moon or not. <---- FACT
-
A cheating chess champion is a fraud for life. It simply does not matter if he now claims to have won a chess championship match behind closed doors.
His reputation was ruined when he decided to cheat. A fraud is a fraud, and there is no erasing that fact.
-
A cheating chess champion is a fraud for life. It simply does not matter if he now claims to have won a chess championship match behind closed doors.
His reputation was ruined when he decided to cheat. A fraud is a fraud, and there is no erasing that fact.
Again, you are painting me as someone who would let it slide. Just stop.
Furthermore, a cheating chess champion is an individual. A government of a country of billions of people is a dynamic entity and governments in general are likely to change their act when something is exposed.
It's happened with the US of A.
In any case, I'm not here to defend China. I actually reposted this story before Markjo let me know it was already being discussed. I see it as information to be discussed or merely taken in, not affirmation in one way or the other.
Try some agnosticism, it's healthy.
-
A cheating chess champion is a fraud for life. It simply does not matter if he now claims to have won a chess championship match behind closed doors.
His reputation was ruined when he decided to cheat. A fraud is a fraud, and there is no erasing that fact.
Tom, rather than derailing this thread with completely irrelevant chess analogies, why don't you try discussing the topic at hand; namely, what sort of tasty recipes do you suppose that the Chinese will come up with for all of those moon shrimp that they are surely looking to harvest?
-
The much simpler, more obvious, and fact-based explanation is that China's stat-run news agency prepared the article in advance of the event because they're just the mouthpiece for China's propaganda machine. Xinhua is run by the Propaganda Department. Literally. That's what it's called. Propaganda machines usually aren't super concerned with journalistic ethics.
-
The much simpler, more obvious, and fact-based explanation is that China's stat-run news agency prepared the article in advance of the event because they're just the mouthpiece for China's propaganda machine. Xinhua is run by the Propaganda Department. Literally. That's what it's called. Propaganda machines usually aren't super concerned with journalistic ethics.
'
Great, then we can discount this "moon landing" as additional propaganda and need not discuss the matter further.
-
I havnt seen any Chinese images yet. I hope something is released. They must still be in the photoshop lab.
-
There is some stuff
http://www.universetoday.com/107196/chinas-maiden-lunar-rover-yutu-rolls-6-wheels-onto-the-moon-photo-and-video-gallery/ (http://www.universetoday.com/107196/chinas-maiden-lunar-rover-yutu-rolls-6-wheels-onto-the-moon-photo-and-video-gallery/)
In any case, it's a spectacular display of paranoia watching the FE responses here.
-
Any information from amateurs who may of tracked it with radios?
-
Is your google broken? Go look for it.
-
You seem to have a better google than mine.
-
You seem to have a better google than mine.
That isn't the point of what I said. If you can't find it then other people probably can't either. Since you want to know, then look for it.
-
Maybe you should be more to the point. Direct even.
-
Seriously?
Be... to the point?
What does "go Google it" mean to you?
In modern times that means, "look for it". Does that need an explanation?
I even said "look for it". I couldn't possibly be more direct.
-
You seem angry and mad. Perhaps lashing out on us will make you feel better. If so, then please, I will be your whipping post.
I hope things get better for you, rottingroom. I will give you any support that I can.
-
Whatever dood.
-
jroa, please tell me what you are trying to insinuate with your signature...
When I was in 2nd grade I knew the Earth was a spheroid.
Almost as good as the Pope vs Hitler.......... :P
-
When I was in 2nd grade I knew the Earth was a spheroid.
After you had been indoctrinated!
-
When I was in 2nd grade I knew the Earth was a spheroid.
After you had been indoctrinated!
Oh yeah, I forgot that everyone's stupid but you few.
-
Not stupid, merely conditioned to accept RET without zetetically observing it themselves.
-
Not stupid, merely conditioned to accept RET without zetetically observing it themselves.
I keep an open mind.
My open mind tells me that you are wrong, as do my observations.
Things unaccounted for in your theories such as the effects of Lorentz contraction and special relativity (Which is taken into consideration, but used and applied improperly.) lead me to believe that the UA theory is false.
Direct "zetetic" observations such as the Sun disappearing under the horizon - and the crazy ideas such as moon shrimp - render me to submit to the idea that believing the world is flat is an exercise in lunacy fueled by paranoia and an inability to just trust the data and facts sometimes.
Skepticism is a good thing... Up to a certain point.
You guys cross that point.
-
Welcome to TFES! I'm pleased to see that we're starting to get angry noobs again. First, I encourage you to avoid making assumptions. We all know the saying about what assume does to us. Instead of saying 'You can't explain x', I suggest you instead say 'How do you explain x?'. You might be surprised at how not-insane Flat Earth Theory actually is.
Things unaccounted for in your theories such as the effects of Lorentz contraction and special relativity (Which is taken into consideration, but used and applied improperly.) lead me to believe that the UA theory is false.
I'm not sure where you're trying to go with Special Relativity. You might want to expand on that a bit, but in a different thread. Hijacking threads (which is absolutely what you're doing right now) is frowned upon.
Direct "zetetic" observations such as the Sun disappearing under the horizon - and the crazy ideas such as moon shrimp - render me to submit to the idea that believing the world is flat is an exercise in lunacy fueled by paranoia and an inability to just trust the data and facts sometimes.
Don't worry, the Moon Shramp are an inside joke. Nobody actually believes in them with the possible exception of iwanttobelieve, who appears to be mentally unstable.
The cycling of the Sun is clearly explained by FET. I suggest you read the FAQ. There will be a link to it in my signature within the next five minutes.
-
th3rm0m3t3r0, I am not sure what you are confused about. If you can tell me what you can not understand, I will try to explain it in more simpler terms. I am here to help.
-
Welcome to TFES! I'm pleased to see that we're starting to get angry noobs again. First, I encourage you to avoid making assumptions. We all know the saying about what assume does to us. Instead of saying 'You can't explain x', I suggest you instead say 'How do you explain x?'. You might be surprised at how not-insane Flat Earth Theory actually is.
Things unaccounted for in your theories such as the effects of Lorentz contraction and special relativity (Which is taken into consideration, but used and applied improperly.) lead me to believe that the UA theory is false.
I'm not sure where you're trying to go with Special Relativity. You might want to expand on that a bit, but in a different thread. Hijacking threads (which is absolutely what you're doing right now) is frowned upon.
Direct "zetetic" observations such as the Sun disappearing under the horizon - and the crazy ideas such as moon shrimp - render me to submit to the idea that believing the world is flat is an exercise in lunacy fueled by paranoia and an inability to just trust the data and facts sometimes.
Don't worry, the Moon Shramp are an inside joke. Nobody actually believes in them with the possible exception of iwanttobelieve, who appears to be mentally unstable.
The cycling of the Sun is clearly explained by FET. I suggest you read the FAQ. There will be a link to it in my signature within the next five minutes.
Date Registered: July 21, 2009, 02:44:23 PM
Not an angry noob.
Beside the point.
I suggest reading this for my problem with Lorentz contraction and the UA. http://theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=60351.0#.UsDxFHlMhnw (http://theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=60351.0#.UsDxFHlMhnw)
I'm not talking about the cycle of the Sun.
I'm talking about how it clearly dips below the horizon, and does not "fade out due to a perspective effect".
I'm also glad that the moon shrimp are a joke. 8)
th3rm0m3t3r0, I am not sure what you are confused about. If you can tell me what you can not understand, I will try to explain it in more simpler terms. I am here to help.
I understand it, it just doesn't fit.
-
Welcome to TFES! I'm pleased to see that we're starting to get angry noobs again. First, I encourage you to avoid making assumptions. We all know the saying about what assume does to us. Instead of saying 'You can't explain x', I suggest you instead say 'How do you explain x?'. You might be surprised at how not-insane Flat Earth Theory actually is.
Things unaccounted for in your theories such as the effects of Lorentz contraction and special relativity (Which is taken into consideration, but used and applied improperly.) lead me to believe that the UA theory is false.
I'm not sure where you're trying to go with Special Relativity. You might want to expand on that a bit, but in a different thread. Hijacking threads (which is absolutely what you're doing right now) is frowned upon.
Direct "zetetic" observations such as the Sun disappearing under the horizon - and the crazy ideas such as moon shrimp - render me to submit to the idea that believing the world is flat is an exercise in lunacy fueled by paranoia and an inability to just trust the data and facts sometimes.
Don't worry, the Moon Shramp are an inside joke. Nobody actually believes in them with the possible exception of iwanttobelieve, who appears to be mentally unstable.
The cycling of the Sun is clearly explained by FET. I suggest you read the FAQ. There will be a link to it in my signature within the next five minutes.
Date Registered: July 21, 2009, 02:44:23 PM
Not an angry noob.
Beside the point.
I suggest reading this for my problem with Lorentz contraction and the UA. http://theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=60351.0#.UsDxFHlMhnw (http://theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=60351.0#.UsDxFHlMhnw)
I'm not talking about the cycle of the Sun.
I'm talking about how it clearly dips below the horizon, and does not "fade out due to a perspective effect".
I'm also glad that the moon shrimp are a joke. 8)
th3rm0m3t3r0, I am not sure what you are confused about. If you can tell me what you can not understand, I will try to explain it in more simpler terms. I am here to help.
I understand it, it just doesn't fit.
Angry noobdom isn't about when you registered. It's a state of mind.
Anyway, in response to your other thread all of the other stars, galaxies, etc. are evidently in our frame of reference. Otherwise they'd be somewhere behind us by now.
-
th3rm0m3t3r0, the joke is on you, then, if you can not even see how it fits.
-
Welcome to TFES! I'm pleased to see that we're starting to get angry noobs again. First, I encourage you to avoid making assumptions. We all know the saying about what assume does to us. Instead of saying 'You can't explain x', I suggest you instead say 'How do you explain x?'. You might be surprised at how not-insane Flat Earth Theory actually is.
Things unaccounted for in your theories such as the effects of Lorentz contraction and special relativity (Which is taken into consideration, but used and applied improperly.) lead me to believe that the UA theory is false.
I'm not sure where you're trying to go with Special Relativity. You might want to expand on that a bit, but in a different thread. Hijacking threads (which is absolutely what you're doing right now) is frowned upon.
Direct "zetetic" observations such as the Sun disappearing under the horizon - and the crazy ideas such as moon shrimp - render me to submit to the idea that believing the world is flat is an exercise in lunacy fueled by paranoia and an inability to just trust the data and facts sometimes.
Don't worry, the Moon Shramp are an inside joke. Nobody actually believes in them with the possible exception of iwanttobelieve, who appears to be mentally unstable.
The cycling of the Sun is clearly explained by FET. I suggest you read the FAQ. There will be a link to it in my signature within the next five minutes.
Date Registered: July 21, 2009, 02:44:23 PM
Not an angry noob.
Beside the point.
I suggest reading this for my problem with Lorentz contraction and the UA. http://theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=60351.0#.UsDxFHlMhnw (http://theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=60351.0#.UsDxFHlMhnw)
I'm not talking about the cycle of the Sun.
I'm talking about how it clearly dips below the horizon, and does not "fade out due to a perspective effect".
I'm also glad that the moon shrimp are a joke. 8)
th3rm0m3t3r0, I am not sure what you are confused about. If you can tell me what you can not understand, I will try to explain it in more simpler terms. I am here to help.
I understand it, it just doesn't fit.
Angry noobdom isn't about when you registered. It's a state of mind.
Anyway, in response to your other thread all of the other stars, galaxies, etc. are evidently in our frame of reference. Otherwise they'd be somewhere behind us by now.
My point was that I'm not a "noob".
Certainly not angry.
I think you should reread that thread, because what you just said makes little sense.
-
th3rm0m3t3r0, the joke is on you, then, if you can not even see how it fits.
Good.
Go look out your window some more and get back to me with results.
-
It looks flat. I have not had my eyeballs calibrated lately, though.
-
It looks flat. I have not had my eyeballs calibrated lately, though.
Pancakes and windows bore me.
-
lol, you guys are nuts. Everytime someone shows you evidence that the earth is round, you come up with excuses. This is the crazy asylum.
-
lol, you guys are nuts. Everytime someone shows you evidence that the earth is round, you come up with excuses. This is the crazy asylum.
Show us your teeth.
-
lol, you guys are nuts. Everytime someone shows you evidence that the earth is round, you come up with excuses. This is the crazy asylum.
Show us your teeth.
I've got all of my teeth, plus I still have two of my Wisdom teeth, although two were chipped from a couple of fights.
-
lol, you guys are nuts. Everytime someone shows you evidence that the earth is round, you come up with excuses. This is the crazy asylum.
I most certainly do not respond with excuses. If you have evidence to present, by all means do so. The topic at hand is the luminosity of the moon, I believe. You may begin.
-
The moon reflects light from the sun. How can this happen? Because the earth is round and so is the sun and moon. If you don't believe me, go back to school and actually learn something this time.
-
The moon reflects light from the sun. How can this happen? Because the earth is round and so is the sun and moon. If you don't believe me, go back to school and actually learn something this time.
And your evidence is?
-
Of course there is evidence. Just pick up a science book every now and then. Viola, evidence of the shape of the earth and sun and moon.
-
Of course there is evidence. Just pick up a science book every now and then. Viola, evidence of the shape of the earth and sun and moon.
So you don't have any actual evidence then. Good to know, move along.
-
There is literally evidence everywhere. You just choose to ignore everything that does not fit into you flat earth theory.
-
http://www.raleys.com/www/recipe;jsessionid=FFA4B0E03A53D758C930F557319F92E8?recipeid=1080613&themeid=
Moon shrimp are delicious. They fall to earth and are yummy.
http://io9.com/5895116/the-mystery-of-raining-animals-and-other-impossible-but-real-weather-weirdness
-
lol, you are seriously trying to impose moon shrimp into a serious discussion? You people are lame.
-
I have sources, you have insults. You aren't doing a very good job for the round team.
-
I am not a newby. I lurked on the other site for a long time. I know about moon shrimp and I know it is a joke. Maybe you can grow up an see that the earth is round, or maybe not.
-
Its not all one way traffic here. We can have fun at you, as much as you can have fun with us. :D
-
I don't try to have fun with you. I will probably never come back after today. I am just here to make you look like fools, because every piece of evidence points to the world being round.
-
I don't try to have fun with you. I will probably never come back after today.
Shame. You can string a sentence together, I know if I keep working at it I'll discover a sense of humour in there somewhere and you'd probably discover the community (other non-earth topics) and have a laugh if you did.
I am just here to make you look like fools
You aren't doing a very good job.
-
Thork, your avatar makes me believe that you are not serious about this forum.
-
That's not my real face.
Like I said, there is a whole community here. Its not all about earth's shape.
-
You could have fooled me, by looking at your posts.
-
I'm pretty sure I invented moon shrimp.
-
Nah the moon did? Or you are god.
-
I am God of Moon Shrimp.
-
Willmore didn't see that one coming.
-
Willmore didn't see that one coming.
Speaking for Wilmore. Hummmm. That reminds me of some else I know.
-
You saying he knew fappenhosen was the shramp god?