The Flat Earth Society
Flat Earth Discussion Boards => Flat Earth Theory => Topic started by: Airplane on February 07, 2018, 05:31:45 AM
-
Space X did a live stream of a car being launched into space on a rocket. In the video the earth is clearly round. Why/how would they fake this?
https://m.youtube.com/watch?feature=youtu.be&v=aBr2kKAHN6M
-
I've been reading this forum for a while now, but I came here today to ask exactly the same question.
This launch was viewed by thousands of people. A skyscraper sized rocket definately took off, there's no faking that. The internet is flooded today with people sharing their stories and pictures of seeing the rocket in various stages of flight - I've even seen pictures of the night sky with the 2nd stage burn showing up like a comet, in exactly the time and place where it should be. Furthermore, thousands of people saw two of the rocket cores land softly on their pads, ready for reuse.
The live stream video syncs perfectly with all ground-based observations, and shows the rocket flying up out of the atmosphere and releasing Elon Musk's beautiful cherry red Tesla Roadster, which can still be seen now drifting further and further away from a distinctly spherical earth.
Surely this about wraps it up for the so called Flat Earth Theory?
-
I've been reading this forum for a while now, but I came here today to ask exactly the same question.
This launch was viewed by thousands of people. A skyscraper sized rocket definately took off, there's no faking that. The internet is flooded today with people sharing their stories and pictures of seeing the rocket in various stages of flight - I've even seen pictures of the night sky with the 2nd stage burn showing up like a comet, in exactly the time and place where it should be. Furthermore, thousands of people saw two of the rocket cores land softly on their pads, ready for reuse.
The live stream video syncs perfectly with all ground-based observations, and shows the rocket flying up out of the atmosphere and releasing Elon Musk's beautiful cherry red Tesla Roadster, which can still be seen now drifting further and further away from a distinctly spherical earth.
Surely this about wraps it up for the so called Flat Earth Theory?
Unfortunately, it won't.
There has been sufficient proof given for the shape of the earth that has been continuously ignored, discounted or claimed to be fake by flat earth believers. One more nail won't make a difference.
Primarily because I expect this bit of proof to be called fake.
-
Unfortunately, it won't.
There has been sufficient proof given for the shape of the earth that has been continuously ignored, discounted or claimed to be fake by flat earth believers. One more nail won't make a difference.
Primarily because I expect this bit of proof to be called fake.
Well, it has to be called fake. What other explanation is there if you're going to cling on to the idea of a flat earth?
There is no level of proof they will accept, some of them have just staked too much on it and cognitive dissonance simply won't let them.
The "prove" themselves right by ignoring the evidence and proof which shows them wrong and ignoring all the gaping holes in their model.
-
There will be no nail in the coffin of flat Earth because humans have an unsurpassed ability to lie to themselves. I feel a little bad for them because the launch and recovery of the rockets was really amazing to watch.
Speaking specifically about the live feed of the car, it isn't a NASA thing, so what reason would there be for Musk to do a live feed of his car as it floats in space? Is he trying to perpetuate the round Earth lie?? lol
-
No, Elon Musk did a live stream of his car for publicity, that should be obvious. This is a business venture for him. Now why he would fake it is less obvious but if I wanted to put myself in the conspiracy mindset, I could devise a couple of reasons.
-
No, Elon Musk did a live stream of his car for publicity, that should be obvious. This is a business venture for him. Now why he would fake it is less obvious but if I wanted to put myself in the conspiracy mindset, I could devise a couple of reasons.
I should have been more specific. In the real world, it is obvious why he did it. I was thinking from a strictly FE perspective. NASA supposedly fakes live feeds to keep up the charade. Why would Musk go through the expense of faking a live feed to keep up the FE nonsense?
-
Elon Musk did a live stream of his car for publicity, that should be obvious. This is a business venture for him.
He built and publicly launched a 1500 tonne, 70m high rocket, sending it at least far enough into the sky to fool the thousands of civilian onlookers. This is absolutely undeniable.
You're suggesting he did that just as a marketting stunt for a car brand that already has several hundred thousand buyers signed up to a waiting list, with deposits paid?
-
Elon Musk did a live stream of his car for publicity, that should be obvious. This is a business venture for him.
He built and publicly launched a 1500 tonne, 70m high rocket, sending it at least far enough into the sky to fool the thousands of civilian onlookers. This is absolutely undeniable.
You're suggesting he did that just as a marketting stunt for a car brand that already has several hundred thousand buyers signed up to a waiting list, with deposits paid?
No. It's a marketing stunt for SpaceX. To drum up interest in it, and convince investors it's a working product/company to enable more money/funds to come in. Remember, the core (where the car was ostensibly launched from) crashed back to Earth at 300 mph according to SpaceX. Thus providing suitable means to hide the fact nothing actually left the atmosphere. Presuming you're a conspiracy theorist ofc. There's nothing new here that can't be waved away by/under the umbrella of conspiracy.
-
Elon Musk did a live stream of his car for publicity, that should be obvious. This is a business venture for him.
He built and publicly launched a 1500 tonne, 70m high rocket, sending it at least far enough into the sky to fool the thousands of civilian onlookers. This is absolutely undeniable.
You're suggesting he did that just as a marketting stunt for a car brand that already has several hundred thousand buyers signed up to a waiting list, with deposits paid?
That’s why the car was onboard, yes. The rocket was launched to test their rocket technology and it appears to work swimmingly. Does anyone know what is next for SpaceX? Are they one of the companies planning an imminent lunar mission?
-
I see Pete has put something on the home page along the lines of "Just because I saw it on the internet, doesn't mean it's true".
To be fair, that is correct.
But this isn't some wild rumour, the rocket went up somewhere, there were plenty of witnesses.
The live stream could be CGI but as others have said why would he bother?
-
I see Pete has put something on the home page along the lines of "Just because I saw it on the internet, doesn't mean it's true".
To be fair, that is correct.
But this isn't some wild rumour, the rocket went up somewhere, there were plenty of witnesses.
The live stream could be CGI but as others have said why would he bother?
In typical conspiracy theorist style, he took a quote about Musk out of context.
Even Steve Wozniak has remarked that ‘[he doesn't] believe anything [Musk] says’.
This was in relation to features for the Tesla and not that he doesn't believe Musk in general. Very poor form, Pete.
-
Not to mention that whether or not Steve Wozniacki believes Elon Musk is irrelevant to claims that Elon Musk makes. Lots of people don’t believe dietary fat is healthy for you, including doctors, and guess what? They’re wrong! Same could be true of Wozniacki; it’s just a fallacious appeal to authority.
-
It's like the old FE standby about all NASA photos of the whole earth being Photoshopped which is wrong in two ways
a) No they aren't, there are genuine photos of the whole earth from space, but some are indeed composites
b) Composite != Fake. What do you think your phone is doing when it creates a panoramic, it's compositing a load of photos together. That doesn't make the end result fake.
-
I see Pete has put something on the home page along the lines of "Just because I saw it on the internet, doesn't mean it's true".
To be clear, the intention of that post was not to assert that it's false (though you can guess my thoughts on the matter). It is mostly an appeal to the immense number of people who contacted me (mostly on Facebook and Twitter) to take things with more caution. If, after evaluating the material carefully, they personally decide that it's of value to them, fine. But it's not the "gotcha!" many think it is.
This was in relation to features for the Tesla and not that he doesn't believe Musk in general.
Of course. It was not for one moment my intention to suggest that Wozniak said "omg the Earth is flat!" - merely to point out that corporations don't even trust one another. I provided a link to the source for those who want to read it in its full context.
-
I see Pete has put something on the home page along the lines of "Just because I saw it on the internet, doesn't mean it's true".
To be clear, the intention of that post was not to assert that it's false (though you can guess my thoughts on the matter). It is mostly an appeal to the immense number of people who contacted me (mostly on Facebook and Twitter) to take things with more caution. If, after evaluating the material carefully, they personally decide that it's of value to them, fine. But it's not the "gotcha!" many think it is.
Things online definitely need to be taken with caution - I don't know if you saw the Trump "Tweet" about the Dow Jones amid the recent fall:
(https://www.thesun.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/2018/02/trump.jpg)
Well, that really is fake news although it was initially intended as a joke apparently
https://www.snopes.com/did-trump-tweet-president-dow-joans/
So yes, things online should be checked. But this launch isn't just some internet rumour, the launch clearly happened. Whether it went where it's claimed or if the live feed is genuine are more up for debate.
I'm interested though, yes I can guess what your thoughts are but do you have any basis for thinking it's faked? As clarified above, the Wozniak quote is in the context of Tesla features Musk promised. I don't think Wozniak has expressed any doubt that this launch is genuine.
It seems to me the FE mentality is "the earth is flat, ergo anything showing it isn't must be fake" rather than "OK, I thought the earth was flat but this launch could show I'm mistaken, let's look in to that to see whether there's evidence of fakery". You assume fakery without basis rather than considering you may be mistaken. That is how it comes across anyway.
-
It's a gotcha piece in the same way that every other rocket launch is. You get put in checkmate, say 'everyone can evaluate the material for themselves', and insist the game is still on. But space travel is real, the conspiracy is false, and the Earth is not flat.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wbSwFU6tY1c
Start at 26:35 to see uninterrupted footage from the side boosters during reentry.
Then, watch other film taken by onlookers:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wMCC0iigRWI
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=k7LNFggUiKc
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=d_rRVe4_x8o
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qhhPs7en1G8
</3
-
I actually saw a Shuttle launch once by the way. In real life.
Was quite a long way away, some beach about 8 or 9 miles away - think that's about as close as you get without paying.
Just happened to be in Florida when a launch was scheduled - we actually should have missed it but it got delayed because of the weather or something.
Anyway, the point is: it was amazing. Because we were so far away it took quite a while for the sound to reach us and then there was a deep rumble like a subway (Underground, for fellow Londoners) train going under your feet.
-
That's fine. You guys saw what you saw, you reached your own conclusions. I may disagree, but I see no issue with disagreeing.
Of course the game is still on. The Flat Earth Movement is growing rapidly.
As for the Wozniak quote, my reading of the article goes along the ways of "I used to believe what Musk says, then I caught him lying about Teslas once. Fool me once, yadda yadda, but then it happened again. Now I no longer trust anything Musk says". It is absolutely subject to interpretation - that's why I chose to provide the link to the full article. I gave you the tools to determine for yourself whether or not you agree with my interpretation - and if you don't, that's cool.
As an aside: I'd just like to say that I appreciate you guys keeping this debate within appropriate threads. I was worried that the Announcements thread would get spammed to oblivion, but so far you proved me wrong.
-
It seems to me the FE mentality is "the earth is flat, ergo anything showing it isn't must be fake" rather than "OK, I thought the earth was flat but this launch could show I'm mistaken, let's look in to that to see whether there's evidence of fakery". You assume fakery without basis rather than considering you may be mistaken. That is how it comes across anyway.
I'm just putting the link to this in my signature at this point. Yes, this is the FES view on things. This is the official stance on it outlined in the wiki (https://wiki.tfes.org/Place_of_the_Conspiracy_in_FET). Until one of them comes out and clarifies this to mean something different, this is your starting point. This is why photos have no value, why experiments done by most of the people here have no apparent value, why any information presented or set forth that has not been personally seen by an FE'er will continue to have no value. Because the Earth is clearly flat, so anything that presents it as otherwise is clearly fake.
That said, I'm waiting eagerly to see just what people will attempt to take issue with in some of these videos tbh. TFES doesn't need to touch this part, there's plenty of non-FE NASAphobes that will deconstruct these videos to 'prove' them fake. While waiting though, I would love to see any sort of rationale posted by someone in TFES for how they know these videos are faked. Other than the whole 'showing a round Earth' thing ofc.
-
That's fine. You guys saw what you saw, you reached your own conclusions. I may disagree, but I see no issue with disagreeing.
But...this isn't like some "UFO" footage where it's some smudge and people can interpret how they like. This was a rocket launch all in full HD and reported by basically every major news agency and witnessed by hundreds of people and there was then a live stream from it. I don't think we are leaping to conclusions here.
You need to provide some basis for thinking that something underhand was going on and a quote from Wozniak which was based on being let down about Tesla's claims about its cars is pretty flimsy.
Of course the game is still on. The Flat Earth Movement is growing rapidly.
It is, but Trump won an election too and "post truth" was "word of the year in 2016. We do seem to be living in an era where people increasingly don't seem to care what is true. I wouldn't say that the growth of the Flat Earth Movement is a sign of you winning the argument, for me it's a rather depressing sign of the times.
-
Plus, popularity is not a metric flat Earth believers should reference regarding the game, so to speak.
-
That's fine. You guys saw what you saw, you reached your own conclusions. I may disagree, but I see no issue with disagreeing.
So wait, You disagree that we were legitimately there and watched this thing launch off into space? So, are you saying we're all lying, and our video footage of those of us who were physically there are somehow all faked and don't actually show a rocket being sent out of the planet?
It's starting to sound like one of those nuts that think that the mass shooting in Vegas was faked by the government.
-
That's fine. You guys saw what you saw, you reached your own conclusions. I may disagree, but I see no issue with disagreeing.
So wait, You disagree that we were legitimately there and watched this thing launch off into space?
Do answer this Svarrior. Because I live not far from Cape Canaveral, and I can attest to the fact that a big rocket-shaped object could be seen leaving the atmosphere from my backyard yesterday afternoon.
-
Does anyone know what is next for SpaceX? Are they one of the companies planning an imminent lunar mission?
If they can get their Crewed Dragon certified for human flight, then they're supposed to be sending 2 unnamed gazillionaires on a lunar flyby flight this coming December (although I wouldn't be surprised if the date slips more than once).
http://www.spacex.com/news/2017/02/27/spacex-send-privately-crewed-dragon-spacecraft-beyond-moon-next-year
-
So wait, You disagree that we were legitimately there and watched this thing launch off into space?
No. I have no way of ascertaining where you were at the time. I don't know kw how you Interpreted "You guys saw what you saw." as polemic.
That said I do assume you don't have the x-ray vision required to actually directly see the rocket reach space.
It is, but Trump won an election too and "post truth" was "word of the year in 2016. We do seem to be living in an era where people increasingly don't seem to care what is true. I wouldn't say that the growth of the Flat Earth Movement is a sign of you winning the argument, for me it's a rather depressing sign of the times.
That's only natural. Your side is losing ground at a rapid pace. I would expect you to be nothing but disappointed about it.
-
Pete, or any other FEr really. Any chance of some analysis and actual reasons why you believe the video from the car is fake? Because at present it appears to simply be 'because it is' rather than actual reasons. How do you know it's fake? Or what makes you believe it is? Is it simply that you believe in FE so firmly the fact it shows a round Earth is enough to dismiss it? If not, if you're willing to actually examine it as evidence that can potentially prove a globe Earth, what to you shows it's fake?
-
I see Pete has put something on the home page along the lines of "Just because I saw it on the internet, doesn't mean it's true".
To be clear, the intention of that post was not to assert that it's false (though you can guess my thoughts on the matter). It is mostly an appeal to the immense number of people who contacted me (mostly on Facebook and Twitter) to take things with more caution. If, after evaluating the material carefully, they personally decide that it's of value to them, fine. But it's not the "gotcha!" many think it is.
This was in relation to features for the Tesla and not that he doesn't believe Musk in general.
Of course. It was not for one moment my intention to suggest that Wozniak said "omg the Earth is flat!" - merely to point out that corporations don't even trust one another. I provided a link to the source for those who want to read it in its full context.
When you say "though you can guess my thoughts on the matter" do you not find that telling? What I read is that you know other people know that your belief supersedes apparent reality.
In other words, you are almost admitting that your default position is set, regardless of the evidence to the contrary. You HAVE to believe it is somehow a fraud otherwise all of your time invested in this paradigm is for nothing.
I don't say this to belittle you, we all operate on some sort of programming, but once you realize that "my god, I cannot escape my program because anything that challenges it must vis a vis be wrong" it should throw up red flags in your brain.
Let me assume that what I said somehow got past your programming and you got my message, now what do you do? Do you throw away everything FE related? Not necessarily. If you know NASA has lie, and that is true regardless of your FE belief, you must then ask yourself, okay if NASA wasnt lying or covering up a flat earth, what the fuck was NASA lying for or covering up.
Avail yourself to truth, don't assume you have it and make reality conform around it.
-
Space X did a live stream of a car being launched into space on a rocket. In the video the earth is clearly round. Why/how would they fake this?
https://m.youtube.com/watch?feature=youtu.be&v=aBr2kKAHN6M
Can someone explain me, In this video at 01:51:51 why doesnt earth have a single piece of land ?? ???
-
So wait, You disagree that we were legitimately there and watched this thing launch off into space?
No. I have no way of ascertaining where you were at the time. I don't know kw how you Interpreted "You guys saw what you saw." as polemic.
That said I do assume you don't have the x-ray vision required to actually directly see the rocket reach space.
So from your perspective, all of the videos that you've seen of the rocket launching could have been faked, since you were not there? I'm just trying to understand your logic. I'm basing this comment off of: "That's fine. You guys saw what you saw, you reached your own conclusions. I may disagree, but I see no issue with disagreeing." Which reads to most people as even though we say what we saw, you disagree with what we saw. Much like how AllAroundTheWorld put it: "But...this isn't like some "UFO" footage where it's some smudge and people can interpret how they like. This was a rocket launch all in full HD and reported by basically every major news agency and witnessed by hundreds of people and there was then a live stream from it. I don't think we are leaping to conclusions here.".
Also I didn't know x-ray gave a telescopic property but... Did you know, that there are these really awesome focal devices called telescopes, binoculars, telescopic camera lenses? They allow you to see very far away, much further than the human eye, are easy to obtain, and let you see things after they are too far away for you to see with your naked eyes.
Can someone explain me, In this video at 01:51:51 why doesnt earth have a single piece of land ?? ???
Oceans are very large, 70% of the Earth large, it's not too farfetched to think that it was over a part of the ocean where land wasn't able to be seen.
-
Can someone explain me, In this video at 01:51:51 why doesnt earth have a single piece of land ?? ???
Well, 71% of the earth is covered in ocean and you don't see the whole globe in the section you mention.
Towards the left of the image there's something which looks like it could be land but it is admittedly hard to tell.
If they faked it all you'd think they'd have put some land in, more likely that shot just shows mostly ocean which is not implausible given how much of the earth is covered in ocean.
-
So from your perspective, all of the videos that you've seen of the rocket launching could have been faked, since you were not there?
No, my presence at the launch site would have had no impact on the video's perceived validity.
I'm just trying to understand your logic. I'm basing this comment off of: "That's fine. You guys saw what you saw, you reached your own conclusions. I may disagree, but I see no issue with disagreeing." Which reads to most people as even though we say what we saw, you disagree with what we saw.
Not at all. I'm just leaving my options open. It is possible that you misinterpreted the situation.
Much like how AllAroundTheWorld put it: "But...this isn't like some "UFO" footage where it's some smudge and people can interpret how they like. This was a rocket launch all in full HD and reported by basically every major news agency and witnessed by hundreds of people and there was then a live stream from it. I don't think we are leaping to conclusions here.".
That's okay. You are welcome to believe in whatever you wish. If your incomplete account is all you need, I choose to disagree with your methodology. But that's neither here nor there in the context of my appeal.
Also I didn't know x-ray gave a telescopic property but... Did you know, that there are these really awesome focal devices called telescopes, binoculars, telescopic camera lenses? They allow you to see very far away, much further than the human eye, are easy to obtain, and let you see things after they are too far away for you to see with your naked eyes.
Yes, I happen to own one of those mythical devices. As a friendly tip to a newcomer, you're not going to engage many people by asking questions like this. Instead, you're likely to confine yourself to the "uninteresting debaters" list.
-
So from your perspective, all of the videos that you've seen of the rocket launching could have been faked, since you were not there?
No, my presence at the launch site would have had no impact on the video's perceived validity.
I'm just trying to understand your logic. I'm basing this comment off of: "That's fine. You guys saw what you saw, you reached your own conclusions. I may disagree, but I see no issue with disagreeing." Which reads to most people as even though we say what we saw, you disagree with what we saw.
Not at all. I'm just leaving my options open. It is possible that you misinterpreted the situation.
Much like how AllAroundTheWorld put it: "But...this isn't like some "UFO" footage where it's some smudge and people can interpret how they like. This was a rocket launch all in full HD and reported by basically every major news agency and witnessed by hundreds of people and there was then a live stream from it. I don't think we are leaping to conclusions here.".
That's okay. You are welcome to believe in whatever you wish. If your incomplete account is all you need, I choose to disagree with your methodology. But that's neither here nor there in the context of my appeal.
Also I didn't know x-ray gave a telescopic property but... Did you know, that there are these really awesome focal devices called telescopes, binoculars, telescopic camera lenses? They allow you to see very far away, much further than the human eye, are easy to obtain, and let you see things after they are too far away for you to see with your naked eyes.
Yes, I happen to own one of those mythical devices. As a friendly tip to a newcomer, you're not going to engage many people by asking questions like this. Instead, you're likely to confine yourself to the "uninteresting debaters" list.
-
That's only natural. Your side is losing ground at a rapid pace. I would expect you to be nothing but disappointed about it.
I don't have a "side". I don't have a stake in this. The earth's shape is what it is. I think truth is important, if I have a side then that's the side I'm on. So what I'm disappointed about is the way people increasingly don't seem to be able to think rationally about things or care what is true. The election of Trump is an indicator. Most of what Trump says is not true. Just demonstrably not true. But no-one seems to care. Or not enough people. (Not that I think that Clinton was a brilliant candidate either by the way). It was the same with the Brexit vote here.
Hence the TIME cover "IS TRUTH DEAD?"
It's a depressing indication of the state of our society and education system which doesn't seem to teach people how to think logically or analyse things critically. The Globe Earth "side" isn't losing much ground in terms of the argument. The Flat Earth Movement has gained publicity at a rapid pace but a lot of that is people shaking their heads in disbelief that anyone would still believe this. If the Flat Earth Movement is gaining any traction in terms of people's beliefs then it is a depressing indictment of the post-truth world we live in, not an indication of the strength of your argument. Just like things like homeopathy which are surprisingly popular despite demonstrably not working (placebo effect aside).
You are not winning the argument with many people, mostly because you don't have an argument.
You have decided the earth is flat. I can't begin to imagine why as it flies in the face of all the evidence and many gaping holes have been pointed out which render a flat earth impossible.
But you refuse to consider any evidence which shows your belief to be incorrect. In the Q&A thread there was a survey and one of the questions was what would you do if the earth was conclusively proven to be spherical. You said:
I'd move on pretty quickly. It's impossible to follow the path of inquiry without making some mistakes.
But the earth has just been proven to be spherical with this launch. Well, not just, it's been known for millennia. But the launch and footage from it reinforces what we've known all that time. Instead of your response being "Fair enough, sorry chaps but we've been wasting our time", your reaction is, predictably, "Fake! Laa laa laa, can't hear you."
You have precisely zero evidence that this was faked. If the best you've got is one quote from Wozniak where he says he doesn't trust Musk - which was in the context of Tesla deadlines about self-driving cars - then you are struggling.
But you declare it fake anyway. Why? Because to admit it real is to admit that the earth is a sphere. And the cognitive dissonance is too strong. So you do the only thing you can do in order to maintain your mistaken belief, dismiss it.
You can prove yourself correct about anything if you ignore or dismiss all the evidence which shows you to be mistaken.
-
Our opinions clearly differ. I see no benefit to continuously exchanging "nuh uhs" and "yuh uhs"
-
That strikes me as funny, since you seem to be unaware that your side is the main side that does that. Maybe instead of saying that they can't debate, you could review the "nuh-uh" and "yuh-uh" conversations and think about who starts those. But I think you believe so much in TFE that when you look at the conversations, you can't see your side starting them.
-
Our opinions clearly differ. I see no benefit to continuously exchanging "nuh uhs" and "yuh uhs"
But you have provided no evidence for your opinion because you have none.
My opinion is based on a load of photos, videos and witness testimony.
Yours is based on "the earth is flat so this must be fake". That really isn't evidence, it's just denial.
Addendum:
You may have heard of the "Black Swan" idea which represents an unexpected event.
So the idea goes that if you've only ever seen white swans then your reasonable conclusion would be that all swans are white.
But there are black swans in Australia and New Zealand.
So when you hear about this you have to change your thinking. Not all swans are white after all.
That is the rational thing to do. Modify one's opinions in the light of new evidence.
The denialist thing to do is say "I don't believe you, all swans are white".
Then when someone shows you a photo you say "Fake! That image has been Photoshopped. All swans are white.".
Then when someone tells you they've seen one you call them a liar.
And so on.
That is the Flat Earth mentality.
-
But you have provided no evidence for your opinion because you have none.
Actually, I haven't provided an opinion.
-
But you have provided no evidence for your opinion because you have none.
Actually, I haven't provided an opinion.
Neither have you renounced the folly of your Flat Earth ways.
I have inferred your opinion from that ;D
EDIT: And you said our opinions differ. I have made mine clear so I can infer yours from that too.
-
So from your perspective, all of the videos that you've seen of the rocket launching could have been faked, since you were not there?
No, my presence at the launch site would have had no impact on the video's perceived validity.
How would it have no impact on the validity, if you have a telescope, had it with you, and were following the rocket as it went out into space, while also having the live stream playing? I'd figure that would make quite the impact.
I'm just trying to understand your logic. I'm basing this comment off of: "That's fine. You guys saw what you saw, you reached your own conclusions. I may disagree, but I see no issue with disagreeing." Which reads to most people as even though we say what we saw, you disagree with what we saw.
Not at all. I'm just leaving my options open. It is possible that you misinterpreted the situation.
I'm not the only one, could it possibly be you worded it in a way that could be taken more than one way purposely to make argument?
Much like how AllAroundTheWorld put it: "But...this isn't like some "UFO" footage where it's some smudge and people can interpret how they like. This was a rocket launch all in full HD and reported by basically every major news agency and witnessed by hundreds of people and there was then a live stream from it. I don't think we are leaping to conclusions here.".
That's okay. You are welcome to believe in whatever you wish. If your incomplete account is all you need, I choose to disagree with your methodology. But that's neither here nor there in the context of my appeal.
How is my account incomplete? I watched it until it got too far for my eyes to see, I watched it from a telescope after that, meanwhile taking turns with a pal who had a stream of it from it's view. I'd say that's a pretty complete account, the rocket didn't just vanish into nothing, it kept going until the telescope couldn't see it, it didn't come back to Earth, it kept going. So, what about that account makes it incomplete? Why do you disagree with methodology of seeing something with your own eyes and believing it instead of thinking it was somehow magically faked when it happened right in front of you? Is it simply because you yourself were not there to experience it so therefor anyone's account other than yours is incorrect? What you're spouting makes no sense to me, and it makes you sound like possibly you're just a troll trying to get a ruse out of the society.
Also I didn't know x-ray gave a telescopic property but... Did you know, that there are these really awesome focal devices called telescopes, binoculars, telescopic camera lenses? They allow you to see very far away, much further than the human eye, are easy to obtain, and let you see things after they are too far away for you to see with your naked eyes.
Yes, I happen to own one of those mythical devices. As a friendly tip to a newcomer, you're not going to engage many people by asking questions like this. Instead, you're likely to confine yourself to the "uninteresting debaters" list.
"you're not going to engage many people by asking questions like this. Instead" Says the guy who gave the silly response of accusing me of having X-ray vision to see far distances without using your brain to think "Maybe this guy had a telescope." By your recent responses I'm shocked to see that people take you seriously in this website. As so far, honestly, you're far over the border of "This guy is a troll".
But you have provided no evidence for your opinion because you have none.
Actually, I haven't provided an opinion.
You've provided your opinion quite clearly to us who say we were there and witnessed it, your opinion is "You are welcome to believe in whatever you wish. If your incomplete account is all you need, I choose to disagree with your methodology." showing that you actually do have an opinion on this matter, only you aren't giving your side of it, how you think it was faked, what you think wasn't real about it, where you think the rocket mysteriously vanished to. I'm all ears... or eyes in this case to what your opinion on this is. However, instead of trying to debate about it, or showing us what your full thought on it is you say:
Our opinions clearly differ. I see no benefit to continuously exchanging "nuh uhs" and "yuh uhs"
So how is this going to get anywhere with moot responses such as that? The same thing AllAroundTheWorld is doing --- we're inferring your opinion based on your lackluster "nuh uh" comments that seem to be nothing more than "nuh uhs" without giving the other side (whom give more insight to their "yuh uhs") insight into why you say "nuh uh".
That's only natural. Your side is losing ground at a rapid pace. I would expect you to be nothing but disappointed about it.
The IQ rate of the world is also going down at a rapid pace, so I'd say the disappointment is pointed at people believing in this nonsense. It's exactly like those people who say recent mass shootings were all staged by the government.
-
I'm not the only one, could it possibly be you worded it in a way that could be taken more than one way purposely to make argument?
By "the situation" I mean what people may or may not have seen during the launch, not my words just now.
-
I'm not the only one, could it possibly be you worded it in a way that could be taken more than one way purposely to make argument?
By "the situation" I mean what people may or may not have seen during the launch, not my words just now.
Really Pete? Is that the only part you're going to make a comment on? You're just going to ignore the rest? You're just going to leave another vague response Pete?
Pete, This is exactly what we're talking about, you keep saying "Nuh Uh" doing basically nothing more than "Nuh Uh" without giving any decent sort of debate. Meanwhile we're giving logical responses that can't be misinterpreted. How does this make you any different from Religious nuts saying their religion is the right one because the book someone wrote thousands of years ago is the right book. Or the people saying that the mass shootings are all staged by the governments to warrant war against whatever, whoever? You have to provide logical information to be perceived as anything more than just a troll Pete. You can't just pick and choose whatever response you want to make another vague, moot reply to and think you're making the intelligent response by only giving a half-assed response to one portion.
-
I didn't state an opinion on the subject. If you guys want to argue against what you've decided my opinion is, that's fine by me.
-
I didn't state an opinion on the subject. If you guys want to argue against what you've decided my opinion is, that's fine by me.
Okay Pete, what's your opinion then?
-
I do not yet have an opinion strong enough to bring to the table. That's why I haven't brought one. Unlike some of the more zealous individuals here, I don't make snap decisions about things like this.
-
I do not yet have an opinion strong enough to bring to the table. That's why I haven't brought one. Unlike some of the more zealous individuals here, I don't make snap decisions about things like this.
So witnessing an event in multiple viewpoints, then making a decision based off of what we witnessed first hand makes us "zealous individuals making snap decisions"? Are you saying something could have been faked with what we saw? That someone could have on-the-fly edited the video to make it exactly what we saw at the same moment?
-
I see Pete has put something on the home page along the lines of "Just because I saw it on the internet, doesn't mean it's true".
To be clear, the intention of that post was not to assert that it's false (though you can guess my thoughts on the matter). It is mostly an appeal to the immense number of people who contacted me (mostly on Facebook and Twitter) to take things with more caution. If, after evaluating the material carefully, they personally decide that it's of value to them, fine. But it's not the "gotcha!" many think it is.
This was in relation to features for the Tesla and not that he doesn't believe Musk in general.
Of course. It was not for one moment my intention to suggest that Wozniak said "omg the Earth is flat!" - merely to point out that corporations don't even trust one another. I provided a link to the source for those who want to read it in its full context.
When you say "though you can guess my thoughts on the matter" do you not find that telling? What I read is that you know other people know that your belief supersedes apparent reality.
In other words, you are almost admitting that your default position is set, regardless of the evidence to the contrary. You HAVE to believe it is somehow a fraud otherwise all of your time invested in this paradigm is for nothing.
I don't say this to belittle you, we all operate on some sort of programming, but once you realize that "my god, I cannot escape my program because anything that challenges it must vis a vis be wrong" it should throw up red flags in your brain.
Let me assume that what I said somehow got past your programming and you got my message, now what do you do? Do you throw away everything FE related? Not necessarily. If you know NASA has lie, and that is true regardless of your FE belief, you must then ask yourself, okay if NASA wasnt lying or covering up a flat earth, what the fuck was NASA lying for or covering up.
Avail yourself to truth, don't assume you have it and make reality conform around it.
-
The SpaceX "car in space" really tests the limits of the public perception of space and space travel. If you can convince someone so easily of something as absurd as launching an open top convertible into space, then surely there's no better evidence that your audience is gullible? Imagine if I broadcasted a video that Vulcans have come to Earth in a first contact scenario and people actually believed it happened. The implications are disturbing. If I can convince you of something cheesy and obviously fake, then of course I can convince you of something much more believable with manufactured evidence, like going to war with Russia, China, or North Korea, for example.
-
The SpaceX "car in space" really tests the limits of the public perception of space and space travel. If you can convince someone so easily of something as absurd as launching an open top convertible into space, then surely there's no better evidence that your audience is gullible? Imagine if I broadcasted a video that Vulcans have come to Earth in a first contact scenario and people actually believed it happened. The implications are disturbing. If I can convince you of something cheesy and obviously fake, then of course I can convince you of something much more believable with manufactured evidence, like going to war with Russia, China, or North Korea, for example.
Mind laying out how you know the video feed from the Tesla is 'obviously fake' and 'cheesy' by any chance? Since that is the sticking point, as the launch of the rockets themselves can't really be denied, only what happened 'in orbit' and mostly out of view of public eyes.
-
Mind laying out how you know the video feed from the Tesla is 'obviously fake' and 'cheesy' by any chance? Since that is the sticking point, as the launch of the rockets themselves can't really be denied, only what happened 'in orbit' and mostly out of view of public eyes.
Ah, yes, the classical "prove it isn't there" approach. Perhaps you'd like to read this amazing article in Wikipedia called Russell's Teapot and then make your claim again: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Russell%27s_teapot.
-
I mean, there's the famous example of the first war of the worlds broadcast. People do tend to accept what they see or hear at face value. Skepticism is a good thing. Y'all though, you are not skeptics, because you don't accept good evidence for what it is. You are not disillusioned, but in denial.
I.e., 'Too ridiculous to be true' is not a worthy evaluation of the evidence. Get specific, focus your argument. How was the footage made, where and when, by whom, why, can it be corroborated, is there lasting evidence, and so on, are questions to address in really evaluating this evidence.
My evaluation is, it's real. If you disagree, I invite debate.
-
Falcon Heavy is so far, the best proof of spaceflight. Most of the typical Flat Earthers arguments don't apply here,
Its fake CGI! - no, thousands of people watched the launch in real life.
It was a holographic projection! - A hologram that can project hundreds of kilometers up into the sky, without any clear buffering/problems? Tell me more about it!
The Launch was real, but the Tesla is fake! - We know the second stage is real, because people saw the second stage firing in the night sky with their own cameras and telescopes, wich is impossible to project at such height with a hologram. So if the second stage is real, why not plop a Tesla and a live camera on it right? And what proof do you have that it was Fake? There are no stars and sattelites! Thats proof its fake and satellites don't exist!. Nope, you might notice the camera quality isn't the best on the live cam, so why do you expect to see stars and satellites, seriously, try and take a picture of a starry night sky with your iphone, you can't? Not to mention the sunlight and the Earth that helps along with scattering the sunlight, that make it extremely difficult to film stars.
-
I mean, there's the famous example of the first war of the worlds broadcast. People do tend to accept what they see or hear at face value. Skepticism is a good thing. Y'all though, you are not skeptics, because you don't accept good evidence for what it is. You are not disillusioned, but in denial.
I.e., 'Too ridiculous to be true' is not a worthy evaluation of the evidence. Get specific, focus your argument. How was the footage made, where and when, by whom, why, can it be corroborated, is there lasting evidence, and so on, are questions to address in really evaluating this evidence.
My evaluation is, it's real. If you disagree, I invite debate.
How did you verify that there is currently a roadster in orbit right now?
-
Mind laying out how you know the video feed from the Tesla is 'obviously fake' and 'cheesy' by any chance? Since that is the sticking point, as the launch of the rockets themselves can't really be denied, only what happened 'in orbit' and mostly out of view of public eyes.
Ah, yes, the classical "prove it isn't there" approach. Perhaps you'd like to read this amazing article in Wikipedia called Russell's Teapot and then make your claim again: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Russell%27s_teapot.
Ah the classic deflection approach. We have live feed from the car. You claim it's 'obviously fake' for some reason. What reason do you have for this? It's a pretty simple question. Russel's teapot has nothing to do with it, as I'm not asking you to prove the car isn't there. I don't care about that. I'm asking you to back your apparent claim that the live feed from the car is 'obviously fake'.
-
Mind laying out how you know the video feed from the Tesla is 'obviously fake' and 'cheesy' by any chance? Since that is the sticking point, as the launch of the rockets themselves can't really be denied, only what happened 'in orbit' and mostly out of view of public eyes.
Ah, yes, the classical "prove it isn't there" approach. Perhaps you'd like to read this amazing article in Wikipedia called Russell's Teapot and then make your claim again: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Russell%27s_teapot.
Ah the classic deflection approach. We have live feed from the car. You claim it's 'obviously fake' for some reason. What reason do you have for this? It's a pretty simple question. Russel's teapot has nothing to do with it, as I'm not asking you to prove the car isn't there. I don't care about that. I'm asking you to back your apparent claim that the live feed from the car is 'obviously fake'.
Perhaps you'd like me to show you a verified picture of Tatooine, Luke Skywalker's home planet, in order to show you that a long time ago in a very far away galaxy there once existed an Empire and a bunch of rascally rebels?
-
Rushy, that's tu quoque. Deflection. Present your own reasoning and stop dancing like a troll
-
I do not yet have an opinion strong enough to bring to the table. That's why I haven't brought one. Unlike some of the more zealous individuals here, I don't make snap decisions about things like this.
Hahahahahahaha
Things like what? Whether space travel is legitimate or not? If you watched the many videos or were actually there than you've seen it. Also there are now photographs of the lunar landings from satellites.
Whether the earth is a globe or flat is not a debate anymore, it hasn't been for quite a while. This is more like a few people arguing that 2+2 equals 538. When it clearly doesn't and there is absolutely no evidence to suggest it does. Every single explanation I've seen on here and other places like YouTube is very flawed, with most not even understanding basic science.
Do you realize transporting things into space is how SpaceX makes money? Do you think other companies are paying them to pretend to launch their satellites into space? Do you understand how ridiculous of an argument that is?
-
Rushy, that's tu quoque. Deflection. Present your own reasoning and stop dancing like a troll
The Fallacy Fallacy is not an argument. Your failure to address my point, regardless of whether or not it is fallacious (it isn't) is its own form of deflection. Perhaps you should answer the very to-the-point question I asked you earlier instead of busying yourself addressing non-existent fallacies.
-
Rushy, that's tu quoque. Deflection. Present your own reasoning and stop dancing like a troll
The Fallacy Fallacy is not an argument. Your failure to address my point, regardless of whether or not it is fallacious (it isn't) is its own form of deflection. Perhaps you should answer the very to-the-point question I asked you earlier instead of busying yourself addressing non-existent fallacies.
Rushy, the same logic can be applied against yours. Prove that it's not real, thousands of people including myself watched this being launched into space, watched it being released, watched it going further and further out. How can you prove that what I saw, when you didn't see it, fake? Again this comes down to the same nonsense as the religious fanatics saying their bible is the right bible because it's what's written on the paper. Or The Mass shootings were staged, or government planned. People were there, People saw it. You didn't see it, so you want proof. But any video proof people give you, you automatically turn against it with "It's a video, it's not proof".... So how on earth are we supposed to prove to you that we were there, when even if we gave you proof you'd automatically say it's fake? You're really open minded....
Also, Admins who keep deleting comments when people are trying to have a discussion, Why do you keep doing that?
And Pete, I'm still waiting to hear why you say you have no opinion, yet dismiss the people who claim they were actually there and tell them that their decision is Zealous and a snappy decision.
-
That's literally tu quoque, again. But whatever
I saw the live feed of the car in space, and the footage of the rocket launch taken from onboard cameras and people on the ground, and accepted the evidence. It scanned with my knowledge of optics, sound, and space travel, so I'm happy to believe we put a car into space.
Your turn
-
Prove that it's not real...
Nice, asking to prove a negative.
Also, Admins who keep deleting comments, Why do you keep doing that?
No one is deleting comments. Sometimes off-topic comments will be split from a thread and moved to another forum/topic. I don't see any recent comments in this thread being split or moved.
-
Prove that it's not real...
Nice, asking to prove a negative.
Put another way, he's saying prove that the footage and eyewitness accounts are fake. It's not unfalsifiable
-
Prove that it's not real...
Nice, asking to prove a negative.
Yet, any proof that people do post of them being there, or them watching the feed while being there is immediately shunned and labeled as fake. It's just an infinite circle of "Prove it" -posts proof- "I wasn't there so it's not true."
Also, Admins who keep deleting comments, Why do you keep doing that?
No one is deleting comments. Sometimes off-topic comments will be split from a thread and moved to another forum/topic. I don't see any recent comments in this thread being split or moved.
There was a string of comments between Pete and I that were about his non-opinion and us being "Zealous people" for being able to make a snappy decision about what really happened while we were watching it happen first hand. it was right at the end of page 2, now there's a page 3, and those comments between Pete and I are gone.
-
Prove that it's not real...
Nice, asking to prove a negative.
Also, Admins who keep deleting comments, Why do you keep doing that?
No one is deleting comments. Sometimes off-topic comments will be split from a thread and moved to another forum/topic. I don't see any recent comments in this thread being split or moved.
Yesterday this thread was 2 pages long when I responded, today I looked through the thread 5 times looking for my post and it wasn't there. About an hour ago I noticed the first response on page 2 was from Pete today, now I look and it is different and my post magically reappeared.
I have no idea what is going on, just letting you know what I am experiencing (I am on my mobile, but I havent seen this on other forums on my mobile).
Regards
-
There was a string of comments between Pete and I that were about his non-opinion and us being "Zealous people" for being able to make a snappy decision about what really happened while we were watching it happen first hand. it was right at the end of page 2, now there's a page 3, and those comments between Pete and I are gone.
Users can edit/remove their own posts. It wasn't moderation/admin. I see your "zealous" posts/quotes in this thread.
-
Prove that it's not real...
Nice, asking to prove a negative.
Put another way, he's saying prove that the footage and eyewitness accounts are fake. It's not unfalsifiable
The only thing I asked you to prove is that there is in fact a roadster in orbit. Instead of saying "I can't" you'd rather post incorrectly about fallacies. I think it's interesting that rather than admitting you can't prove your own claim, you'd prefer that I prove the car is not there. Like the other poster, let me point you to Russell's Teapot: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Russell%27s_teapot
-
Prove that it's not real...
Nice, asking to prove a negative.
Put another way, he's saying prove that the footage and eyewitness accounts are fake. It's not unfalsifiable
The only thing I asked you to prove is that there is in fact a roadster in orbit. Instead of saying "I can't" you'd rather post incorrectly about fallacies.
Many people watched it get put there Rushy, that's the proof. Although to you, that's not enough proof that people watched and recorded it get put there. Because as we said, so even though people have shown proof, your mindset is that of "If I didn't see it, It's not true". So, how even when we can show you proof (like the entire launch of the rocket, to where the car is in space) when all you'll do is say it's fake because you weren't there and we don't have any images proving that it's there right now?
There was a string of comments between Pete and I that were about his non-opinion and us being "Zealous people" for being able to make a snappy decision about what really happened while we were watching it happen first hand. it was right at the end of page 2, now there's a page 3, and those comments between Pete and I are gone.
Users can edit/remove their own posts. It wasn't moderation/admin. I see your "zealous" posts/quotes in this thread.
I do not yet have an opinion strong enough to bring to the table. That's why I haven't brought one. Unlike some of the more zealous individuals here, I don't make snap decisions about things like this.
ones like this, Junker, Pete and I had a few posts after this one on page 2 that You see my Zealous Posts/Quotes that were the recent ones of me asking him for a response after the original ones are gone. There were multiple ones after the last post of mine on page 2. I don't know if Pete deleted his posts, but I sure didn't and they're no longer there.
It was something close to Pete quoted one of the few things at the end of page 2 that I posted. Then said something about how i misunderstood it.
I posted a thing quoting it saying it wasn't quite misunderstood as it was mis-wrote, and allaround and I were still waiting to hear what reasoning he had to not believe that we saw what we saw.
Pete posted he had no opinions on it because he isn't a Zealous person enough to make snappy decisions that weren't well thought through.
I posted that I don't understand how being there and confirming with my own eyes using multiple devices to watch the machine be thrown further and further into space is snappy and not well thought through.
he posted something about he didn't have an opinion and we just think he did.
I asked him what his opinion was then. ------ a few hours later I"m back and this entire discussion in this thread is gone.
-
Like I said, the rocket launch is not a teapot, because it is falsifiable. I am encouraging you to share your reasoning and falsification, so to speak.
A careful reader may have noticed my evaluation is already in the thread, maybe look again
-
Prove that it's not real...
Nice, asking to prove a negative.
Put another way, he's saying prove that the footage and eyewitness accounts are fake. It's not unfalsifiable
The only thing I asked you to prove is that there is in fact a roadster in orbit. Instead of saying "I can't" you'd rather post incorrectly about fallacies.
Many people watched it get put there Rushy, that's the proof. Although to you, that's not enough proof that people watched and recorded it get put there. Because as we said, Even though people have shown proof, Your mindset is that of "If I didn't see it, It's not true"
There was a string of comments between Pete and I that were about his non-opinion and us being "Zealous people" for being able to make a snappy decision about what really happened while we were watching it happen first hand. it was right at the end of page 2, now there's a page 3, and those comments between Pete and I are gone.
Users can edit/remove their own posts. It wasn't moderation/admin. I see your "zealous" posts/quotes in this thread.
I do not yet have an opinion strong enough to bring to the table. That's why I haven't brought one. Unlike some of the more zealous individuals here, I don't make snap decisions about things like this.
ones like this, Junker, Pete and I had 2-3 posts after this one on page 2 that You see my Zealous Posts/Quotes that were the recent ones of me asking him for a response after the original ones are gone. There were multiple ones after the last post of mine on page 2. I don't know if Pete deleted his posts, but I sure didn't and they're no longer there.
Same here. I thought I was going nuts for a minute.
-
Also, Rushy has a post at the top of page 3 quoting me referencing war of the worlds, but my post along those lines is now missing. Like, clicking the quote link just reloads the page
I can reach the post through my profile, following its permalink takes me to the top of page 3, post not seen
-
Also, Rushy has a post at the top of page 3 quoting me referencing war of the worlds, but my post along those lines is now missing. Like, clicking the quote link just reloads the page
I know I'm not deleting my comments, so Junky either there's a problem on the servers end with the comments being deleted for no reason. Or there's an admin/mod doing it.
-
Also, Rushy has a post at the top of page 3 quoting me referencing war of the worlds, but my post along those lines is now missing. Like, clicking the quote link just reloads the page
I don't see any trace of that one. There was a database issue this morning (https://forum.tfes.org/index.php?topic=8724.0), I assume it could be related to that. Won't know for sure until Parsifal makes a post about it and we know the impact, but I can confirm it wasn't a mod/admin split/move/delete because those are all logged.
-
Back on topic though Rushy, ---- If we have proof and you just dismiss it as fake no matter what because you weren't there or didn't see it. How can we who were there and did see it prove to you that it happened? No matter what you're going to say it's not true because you didn't see it so, how can we prove it to you?
-
And Pete, I'm still waiting to hear why you say you have no opinion, yet dismiss the people who claim they were actually there and tell them that their decision is Zealous and a snappy decision.
I do not dismiss them. I've done anything but that. I said (to paraphrase) "You saw what you saw, and that's fine by me. We might disagree, but there's nothing wrong with disagreeing." You are extremely intent on claiming that I said things I didn't say, and you simply refuse to accept any attempts at clarification. If you're not interested in what I'm actually saying, why ask? Why not just debate your strawman in the comfort and privacy of your own bedroom?
-
Also, Rushy has a post at the top of page 3 quoting me referencing war of the worlds, but my post along those lines is now missing. Like, clicking the quote link just reloads the page
I don't see any trace of that one. There was a database issue this morning (https://forum.tfes.org/index.php?topic=8724.0), I assume it could be related to that. Won't know for sure until Parsifal makes a post about it and we know the impact, but I can confirm it wasn't a mod/admin split/move/delete because those are all logged.
Curiously, most of these 'vanished' posts can be seen in the topic summary when making a post. Maybe that'll be helpful to sorting things out.
Prove that it's not real...
Nice, asking to prove a negative.
Put another way, he's saying prove that the footage and eyewitness accounts are fake. It's not unfalsifiable
The only thing I asked you to prove is that there is in fact a roadster in orbit. Instead of saying "I can't" you'd rather post incorrectly about fallacies. I think it's interesting that rather than admitting you can't prove your own claim, you'd prefer that I prove the car is not there. Like the other poster, let me point you to Russell's Teapot: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Russell%27s_teapot
Sure, there's a live feed from the roadster about right now(? Might no longer be up, but here (https://youtu.be/aBr2kKAHN6M?t=1670) is some archived footage, clipped right before a beautiful view of the Earth is shown) as well as video from many angles of the object that brought it up there taking off, and pieces of it returning. Your turn. Care to show the 'obvious fakery' in this video? Or do I need to find some more of the videos of the launch?
-
And Pete, I'm still waiting to hear why you say you have no opinion, yet dismiss the people who claim they were actually there and tell them that their decision is Zealous and a snappy decision.
I do not dismiss them. I've done anything but that. I said (to paraphrase) "You saw what you saw, and that's fine by me. We might disagree, but there's nothing wrong with disagreeing." You are extremely intent on claiming that I said things I didn't say, and you simply refuse to accept any attempts at clarification. If you're not interested in what I'm actually saying, why ask? Why not just debate your strawman in the comfort and privacy of your own bedroom?
You are dismissing it though. "If your incomplete account is all you need, I choose to disagree with your methodology." And you somehow disagree with what we saw. Yet you haven't explained why our accounts of what happened were incomplete, you haven't explained why you disagree with our methodology, and you haven't explained on how you disagree with a conclusion that some people who witnessed first hand have come up with claiming it's incomplete. When you yourself did not see it. You apparently haven't even made an opinion on what you saw during a live feed (or replay of a live feed ---- even though you said in that one post that you can't believe everything you see on tv---or internet --- which is an opinion).
But long story short, you're trying to say that it's just our opinion is that they launched the rocket with a car in it into outer space. Meanwhile, it's not an opinion, it's a fact that was observed by many people. --- Everything you have been saying to us, has been you dismissing what we say because it's not factual enough for you since you weren't there.
-
You are dismissing it though.
Okay, well, if you're not willing to accept that I probably know my own intentions better than you do, I sincerely doubt that this conversation is going to take us anywhere at all.
-
You are dismissing it though.
Okay, well, if you're not willing to accept that I probably know my own intentions better than you do, I sincerely doubt that this conversation is going to take us anywhere at all.
And there you go ignoring the other bits, If you know your own intentions then explain how what we saw was an incomplete account in your eyes. Explain how you disagree with what we saw.
-
And Pete, I'm still waiting to hear why you say you have no opinion, yet dismiss the people who claim they were actually there and tell them that their decision is Zealous and a snappy decision.
I do not dismiss them. I've done anything but that. I said (to paraphrase) "You saw what you saw, and that's fine by me. We might disagree, but there's nothing wrong with disagreeing." You are extremely intent on claiming that I said things I didn't say, and you simply refuse to accept any attempts at clarification. If you're not interested in what I'm actually saying, why ask? Why not just debate your strawman in the comfort and privacy of your own bedroom?
"To be clear, the intention of that post was not to assert that it's false (though you can guess my thoughts on the matter)."
It seems as though you are insinuating that you think it is false but refuse to actually say it because you cannot justify it. Lets face it, you know it was real but your preconceived belief procludes you from admitting it. The only thing you can do is compartmentalize it so you don't have to address it.
As much as your programming wants you to dismiss it, I believe deep down you know it to be true.
Am I wrong?
I have had my entire paradigm wrecked many times, I know it isn't pleasant, it can take a long time to try to piece things back together in another way that makes sense, but we have to be honest with ourself.
I actually find it way more exciting just taking in information and letting the pieces fall where they may.
-
I guess my question would be (by the way hi, first time poster!):
Why would Elon Musk spend all this time, effort and money on the line to do something fake? He has a business to run, profits to make, Space X cost a large fortune to fund, build and finally generate results. He also has plans to take it further and make it s profitable enterprise. I can’t see why he would possibly agree to do this, and then fake it. I mean, what would be the point? He’s a business man, a smart one. There’s just no reason why he would agree to build a rocket and pretend it works, fake the images, and pretend to release a car into space. What would he possibly gain from doing that?
I can see exactly what he’d lose, along with the money and effort of setting the whole thing up, if he was ever proven to be a fraud he would destroy his name, business and everything else. You wouldn’t risk that for... well that’s my block. He doesn’t need money, he’s a private business so he doesn’t need the government or NASA. He did this himself.
Help me out here.
Either: It was real, and it was a huge event showing a private organisation launching a rocket (and car) into space. Promoting his achievements, business and name.
Or: It was fake. Pointless. Could destroy everything for him should he ever be discovered.
That’s my question.
-
The only thing I asked you to prove is that there is in fact a roadster in orbit. Instead of saying "I can't" you'd rather post incorrectly about fallacies
OK, fine. I'll admit it. I can't prove it. You win. The earth is flat. Well done.
But...hang on, can you prove the existence of the "shadow object" which no-one has ever observed but apparently in your model causes lunar eclipses?
And if your response is "well, something must be casting the shadow" then my retort is "Yes, it's the earth but in your model the sun and moon are both above the plane so you had to make up some object in between them to try and explain it". I'm talking to myself now so I'll stop.
Point is, I cannot prove there is a roadster in space (not in orbit actually, isn't it just heading for outer space?).
How can I possibly prove that absolutely? It's a ridiculous thing for you to ask. But there are a load of things you can't prove about your flat earth model either
One thing you could prove is the distance to the sun or moon with some observations and triangulation, it's telling that my repeated suggestions about this have been met with a stony silence.
What I can say quite confidently is there was a rocket launch. It's all on film, there were numerous witnesses many of whom took their own footage.
I've not heard any reports of anyone who saw the rocket come down anywhere - apart from those boosters which landed again as intended.
It was all live streamed so there is plenty of video of the whole thing.
So on the balance of probabilities it seems to me that this happened and there is indeed a roadster in space right now.
There is clearly no way of proving this absolutely but you could say that about anything.
Could it all have been faked? Well, the launch not. The live stream, maybe not completely impossible but technically difficult I would suggest.
The question for you though is do you have any evidence or proof of fakery?
What reason do you have to doubt it happened?
And it seems to me the answer to that is that if you accepted this really happened then it would mean you have to abandon your flat earth beliefs.
And you're so invested in it that cognitive dissonance is not letting you do that.
So rather than consider this new evidence and re-evaluating your beliefs about the shape of the earth you have to dismiss this as fake.
This is not healthy scepticism, it's just denial.
If I'm wrong and you have some actual evidence that it was faked then please present it so I and others can evaluate it.
-
The car was heading towards Mars, but they’ve calculated the tradgectory and it is likely to miss, swing past and continue to head into space. Although there is an asteroid field that may, or may not, stop it’s advance onwards.
-
You are dismissing it though.
Okay, well, if you're not willing to accept that I probably know my own intentions better than you do, I sincerely doubt that this conversation is going to take us anywhere at all.
Pete, I would like to know whether you think the launch was real or not. Do you think the live feed was fake? If I remember, you do seem to be one of the FEers who was more open to the concept of space. (yes, I know that is oddly worded, but I think you know what I mean)
-
There's easy ways we can prove this happened. The easiest is by comparing the video with cloud data.
I did it here!: https://imgur.com/a/iMZMQ
(https://i.imgur.com/2y1yV3h.png)(https://i.imgur.com/7xAA2kw.png)
Compare the top image (frame from video) and bottom image (Australian Bureau of Meteorology cloud data).
The top image is at 3:40:25. The live stream started about 15-20 minutes after launch, so we can say this frame is about 4 hours after launch. The rocket launched at 15:45 ET on Tuesday, meaning this frame was from 19:45 ET on Tuesday. This frame from the video shows Australia, so we know the frame was taken at 10:45 AEST on Wednesday (time zones are crazy).
Now, the bottom image shows the clouds at 13:30 AEST on Wednesday, about 3 hours AFTER the time in the video. Compare the cloud covers. Compare the shape of the clouds. Can't see it? Allow me to show you: https://imgur.com/a/dML4O
(https://i.imgur.com/zbna4II.png)(https://i.imgur.com/VTTQeon.png)
How could SpaceX know what the cloud covers looked like in real time? You can even see them moving! Compare a frame from the beginning of the video (28:18) to the 3:40:25 one: https://imgur.com/a/Tv9hS
(https://i.imgur.com/HFM6Esk.png?1)(https://i.imgur.com/XKqxcJo.png?1)
For the first image, you can see that Australia is MUCH closer to the terminator line than in the image 3 hours later. The clouds appear to have shifted slightly as well over the 3 hours. The top of the cloud band at the bottom of the first frame has moved between frames (in the latter image it moves with Australia), but if you look at the cloud's shape, it still changed. Compare any frame. Not only do they match up with the cloud cover data, but they match up with satellite imagery (fake tho, right? /s). It would be extraordinarily difficult to fake this in real time. All observation tools and data has some kind of delay, usually hourly, or quarter-hourly, and to predict where the clouds will be this precisely is impossible. The data shows it was live. The data matches with the video, showing the video to be real, or all the data and the video to be fake. The only other explanation I have is that Musk has a time machine and observed the cloud patterns before the launch.
Additionally, there were independent observers that saw the second stage fire up again to send the car into a heliocentric orbit. Check out this video from an observatory: https://twitter.com/te_pickering/status/961080240389832706
or this image: https://twitter.com/EricPeterson602/status/961066925521477632?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw&ref_url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.ksby.com%2Fstory%2F37444542%2Fbright-light-seen-in-california-southwestern-night-sky
or this image: https://twitter.com/dougrfolk/status/961065341903253504?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw&ref_url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.12news.com%2Farticle%2Fnews%2Flocal%2Fvalley%2Flight-seen-over-valley-skies-may-be-spacex-rocket%2F75-515504890
You can even see the moon in some shots! 30:30 - 31:57 as it enters from the bottom left corner, passes behind the car, and reappears and leaves in the bottom right corner. 1:07:19 - 1:07:32 in the bottom under the engine bell. 1:14:17 - 1:14:32 to the left of the engine bell. 1:21:25 - 1:21:35 in the top left. 2:55:16 - 2:55:59 appearing from the top moving right. 3:18:22 - 3:18:34 in the bottom left. 3:19:54 - 3:20:00 in the bottom right. 3:41:21 - 3:41:36 above the engine bell moving down. Real faint. 3:41:37 - 3:41:46 in the bottom left. 3:48:36 - 3:48:46 in the left. 3:55:21 - 3:55:35 in the bottom left of the bell. 3:55:36 - 3:55:46 in the top left of the bell, real faint.
Those are all the ones I found. I'm sure there are a few more though.
In my opinion this was absolutely real, and shows that the Earth really is round. But, believe what you want. Only you can decide what to believe, I can only provide my information to you.
-
Great contribution Nick.
I really hope that convinces at least one person to reconsider.
-
Great contribution Nick.
I really hope that convinces at least one person to reconsider.
Thanks. It won't though. Sadly. Maybe it will for those on the border but not for those who are hardcore believers. It will likely be ignored or passed off as "fake cgi."
-
You want proof the car is in space? There's another thread here with video of the ISS transiting the sun. That will be dismissed as fake, so please, you tell US what proof would satisfy you if actual ground based video observations aren't satisfactory.
-
There's easy ways we can prove this happened. The easiest is by comparing the video with cloud data.
Wow. That is a brilliant post. Great analysis.
As I said above, the FE mentality is not healthy scepticism, it's just denial. I've said previously you can do this with anything.
"I don't believe in kangaroos"
"Here's a picture of one"
"Fake!"
"OK..here's some video of one hopping about, you think that could be faked?"
"Have you seen Jurassic Park? Is that real too?"
"I've been to Australia and seen them!"
"Liar! You're part of the great kangaroo conspiracy!"
"OK...look, now we're at the zoo. There's a kangaroo"
"That's clearly animatronic..."
And so on. You can prove anything to yourself if you ignore all the evidence showing you're wrong. The FE mentality starts with the assertion that the earth is flat. How they came to that conclusion remains a mystery to me. But then everything else is wrapped around that. Changing their minds is not an option so when new evidence comes in their only concern is "how do I explain this away". Which in most cases like this just involves shouting "Fake!" and running away without presenting a scrap of evidence that it was faked.
-
It seems as though you are insinuating that you think it is false but refuse to actually say it because you cannot justify it. Lets face it, you know it was real but your preconceived belief procludes you from admitting it. The only thing you can do is compartmentalize it so you don't have to address it.
As much as your programming wants you to dismiss it, I believe deep down you know it to be true.
Am I wrong?
Sounds to me like you have a very strong preconceived notion about who I am and how I behave. It completely contradicts my day-to-day behaviour. You are wrong, and would do well to listen to your own advice about breaking out of paradigms.
Pete, I would like to know whether you think the launch was real or not. Do you think the live feed was fake? If I remember, you do seem to be one of the FEers who was more open to the concept of space. (yes, I know that is oddly worded, but I think you know what I mean)
I am undecided as of yet. I have my reasons to doubt it, but doubt is not the default state for me. I'm working through it at my own pace, and it may yet turn out that I'll simply remain undecided about this particular event. You won't hear any pompous and brazen statements from me at this stage - I only do that when I'm fairly strongly convinced of something.
-
I also found an independent video, showing that they spotted Starman in space on its way to a solar orbit!
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OLLHsstAY44
The person then calculated the path of the object, and it turned out to match what Musk posted online.
-
It seems as though you are insinuating that you think it is false but refuse to actually say it because you cannot justify it. Lets face it, you know it was real but your preconceived belief procludes you from admitting it. The only thing you can do is compartmentalize it so you don't have to address it.
As much as your programming wants you to dismiss it, I believe deep down you know it to be true.
Am I wrong?
Sounds to me like you have a very strong preconceived notion about who I am and how I behave. It completely contradicts my day-to-day behaviour. You are wrong, and would do well to listen to your own advice about breaking out of paradigms.
Pete, I would like to know whether you think the launch was real or not. Do you think the live feed was fake? If I remember, you do seem to be one of the FEers who was more open to the concept of space. (yes, I know that is oddly worded, but I think you know what I mean)
I am undecided as of yet. I have my reasons to doubt it, but doubt is not the default state for me. I'm working through it at my own pace, and it may yet turn out that I'll simply remain undecided about this particular event. You won't hear any pompous and brazen statements from me at this stage - I only do that when I'm fairly strongly convinced of something.
I am pleased that I am wrong, but in light of the scant details you have provided, that was the most accurate assessment I could formulate.
As I mentioned, my paradigm has been repeatedly shattered, at this point, instead of tryint to erect another one, I try to take in as much info as possible and make the best sense of it I can. I cannot imagine any new data that would surprise me anymore.
When I first heard about flat earth, I was skeptical as I am with everything, but I also knew that most conspiracy theories have some elements of truth. Some of my family were into it so I figured I should check it our with an open mind.
I was disappointed this time. I challenge almost every aspect of mainstream science, particularly in physics, so I am fairly predisposed in entertaining typical ideas.
I just want to know what I am missing i.e. how others find it compelling.
-
Apparently the FES tweeted this is fake... yet no one in here seems to agree with the FES twitter, who are they representing?
https://www.space.com/39628-flat-earthers-spacex-falcon-heavy-conspiracy.html?utm_source=dlvr.it&utm_medium=twitter
-
NASA and the NOAA control the most advanced weather monitoring systems on earth. The government has radar stations, weather monitoring buoys, and weather balloons deployed world wide, and has direct feeds to the weather data of many countries.
Why wouldn't they plug that data into their images of the earth? Even the local weather man can overlay weather data over an image on televison...
-
NASA and the NOAA control the most advanced weather monitoring systems on earth. The government has radar stations and weather balloons deployed world wide and has direct feeds to the weather data of many countries.
Why wouldn't they plug that data into their images of the earth? Even the local weather man can overlay weather data over an image on televison...
Please explain what yoou mean by plugging data.
-
NASA and the NOAA control the most advanced weather monitoring systems on earth. The government has radar stations, weather monitoring buoys, and weather balloons deployed world wide, and has direct feeds to the weather data of many countries.
Why wouldn't they plug that data into their images of the earth? Even the local weather man can overlay weather data over an image on televison...
So you believe this launch was faked?
I mean, obviously you have to believe that because cognitive dissonance won't let you accept it is real, otherwise you'd have to accept the globe earth.
But what actual evidence do you have for fakery?
-
NASA and the NOAA control the most advanced weather monitoring systems on earth. The government has radar stations, weather monitoring buoys, and weather balloons deployed world wide, and has direct feeds to the weather data of many countries.
Why wouldn't they plug that data into their images of the earth? Even the local weather man can overlay weather data over an image on televison...
Tom, then why would they make it look so fake then? Why not have CGI that looks like the "CGI" from the ISS? Why not make it look like the movie gravity? Why does it look like something someone with 5 minutes of experience with photoshop, blender, etc did?
Also, what was the exhaust people observed over California then, or the video of the second stage burning from the observatory in Arizona? What about those independent trackers that actually calculated Starman's orbit based on their observations? How did SpaceX fake that?
-
To be fair, the image of the clouds is from a satellite, so of course they are going to agree. The question is why, and you have two possible explanations:
- The pictures agree because two independent satellites are observing the same objective truth.
- The pictures agree because the feed from one satellite is being faked using the same data source as the other faked satellite, either fake cloud data, or real data reconstructed from the alleged large network of surface sensors.
Yes, this would involve realtime 3-D rendering etc that would be difficult. I clearly favor the "objective truth" explanation, but if you already believe all images from space are faked I'm not sure how confirming that two fake images are identical is going to change any minds.
-
I dont know if this has been asked before or not if so i do apologize. Even if the earth was flat, which i believe it to be round, What would nasa or anyone care to cover it up or fake anything? What point would there be? Because people would still continue to do the same things they do now day after day, go to work, have sex (i know i would) drive etc.. Things would not come to a stop or the world erupt into chaos. Folks would still go on vacation, have kids and drive cars just as we do now.. We as a human race have been doing these very things for years and if the world was flat we would still continue to do so. Even if there were a special news bulletin saying folks we have just found out the planet we live on is flat, folks would be surprised and talk about this for a few weeks and life in general would return to normal. We as the human race have been doing fine for thousands of years and things have worked fine so far so there would be no great gotcha moment that would bring life as we know it to a standstill... We would carry on just fine.. Thanks
Kasparov-- A round Earther in the sense losing a few pounds would be a good thing.
-
The idea that the weather shown on the live feed is just the same fake information NASA provides has two big plot flaws in my opinion:
1) Once again NASA has proven themselves to be the worst organization for managing a fake scenario. As mentioned in other threads, they willingly show themselves to be close to incompetent, fat, slow to change and their budgets suffer because of it. They pretend to kill 14 astronauts due to managerial errors. Now they provide SpaceX with a fake weather feed that fits into the Round Earth fraud. SpaceX supposedly launched a rocket for a fraction of what NASA can do it for. This is a huge threat to their budgets. If I was in charge of NASA, I would have provided yesterday's weather feed to SpaceX so that I could prove it was indeed a fake. Thereby my budget would be safe that much longer.
2) As I harp on about on this site, the whole FE theory is arrogant in that it ignores that people chose to live south of the equator. If you stay in England, you can look at a weather map of the globe showing clouds and pronounce that it is a fake. This is a slap in the face of all the people that are living under those clouds, in say Mauritius, or Rikitea. You can claim the maps of the earth are fake and distances shown are fake and they well could be except that people living in Vaitape know it is not 7000 miles to Hanga Roa, as a flat earth map might show. NASA would have a hell of a time producing a fake weather map that shows clouds circling a round earth and then also have to show the clouds that actually exist over the Albatross Bar in Edinburgh of the Seven Seas and then have the clouds move to be seen arriving at Cape Town at the correct time. People living in these places know if it is cloudy or clear and would scream conspiracy if the NASA weather maps did not jive with their local weather. If you sit in your back yard in Boston and ignore that there might be smart people in other continents, you can be a flat earther. People in Sydney watch the sun circle the south pole. To ignore them is to be arrogant.
-
People in Sydney watch the sun circle the south pole. To ignore them is to be arrogant.
Fascinating. When I visited a fellow FE'er in Sydney, he neglected to tell me that there's a vantage point from which you can see the South Pole, and the Sun circling around it. It would have been quite a sight to behold!
-
Yeah pretty sure that the sun is always to the north in Sydney except on the equinox.
-
Musk is to late, the first car in space was in 1981
1981 Heavy Metal movie introduction RADAR RIDER by RIGGS
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=t_KXgFpguE0