Lunar Wave (Hologram?) Confirmed By Two Additional Videos!

See. To me, it looks like a shock wave passing through the atmosphere, interfering with the image of the moon. I don't know how long these propagate, but I'm guessing, it could be a while. I could be produced by meteors, aircraft, solar wind, etc.

www.solanum.org...

Or it could be a remnant of a far away shockwave, like this one:

www.armscontrolwonk.com...

why bother with mentalists...

its easier to fool a mong than it is to convince them they've been fooled.

the only proof would be to strap this person on a rocket so he can realize how wide of an angle is needed to capture curvature at close range, i.e. earth's own orbit zones. a simple scale experiment, can show you why you will never be able to see a full earth from low orbit or a low thousand foot range.

but it safe to assume none of the above makes any sense. so yea, the earth is flat, and the moon is a hologram and the unimaginable technical feat it would take to create a holographic moon, the only thing alien engineers couldnt handle was to not let it flicker at specific times when the earth's atmosphere and heat and condensation gives an illusion of a wave when being filmed at any frame rates. those ancient aliens who fooled us for thousands of years are such idiots.

a reply to: odzeandennz

I asked for vids of earth spinning from space, you showed me animated pictures, basically a cartoon. And the last one is clearly CGI no matter how much you don't want to believe it.

I've also been shown images from none space agencies of the earth from very low orbit, video or otherwise, instead I got balloon videos which prove nothing either way, well maybe showing how flat the earth is...

Don't see why I deserve to be called a mong though 😂😂😂

a reply to: thesneakiod

oh wow - another flat earther - actually the science of the spheroid model is very simple and utterly transparent

here - i shall re-yse a reply from another thread :

the spheroid model is empereically demonstrable by 3 very simple experiments - that can be done by just 2 people [ travel and or geographic seperation is required also ]

1 - the Eratosthenes experiment

very simple - and with modern measuring and time keeping equipment modern maths + average inteligence a figure for the dimater of the spheroid earth with an error of < 1% is easily obtained

however - the Eratosthenes experiment permits 2 conclusions :

A - the earth is a spheroid and the sun is a great distance away

B - the earth is a flat plane - and the distance to the sun is approx 3000km

now as A and B are mutuially exclusive premises - a second experiment is needed to verify which is correct

so lets do experiment two

2 - the easiest one = the paralax of the sun and or moon - simultaneous observations of either the sun or the moon from points > 6000km apart will reveal an degree of parralax that is difficult to measure without specialist equipment

however IF these celestial bodies were 3000km above a flat plane - the paralax would be absolutly obvious even to the naked eye

thus - the earth is a spheroid - QED

and then there is always polaris - for the cherry on top

the above is all very simple science - but the flat earth cultists will never address it - got to wonder why

once we have your agreement that the eatth is a spheroid - we can quickly establish that it rotates on its axis

but i forsee evasion obfuscation and denial

a reply to: Phage



Thanks for the sweet lil tune. Twas nice.

a reply to: ignorant_ape

Mmmm, wasn't Eratosthenes experiments based on a globe earth though?

And strangely, the experiments will also work on a flat earth model as well. A simple google check can Show you 👍

So I'm assuming you've looked on how his experiments can easily be wrong. Because you wouldn't just be following 2000 year old now mainstream religiously followed indoctirinated science now would you? 😳😳😳

a reply to: thesneakiod

you didnt read it - did you - i explain why in the caveat to experiment one - and why experiment two demonstates that the earth is a spheroid

FFS - if you are goig to attempt to participate - read whats presented - and understand it

a reply to: thesneakiod

You can quibble about the Suomi one all you like, I don't see you providing any proof that it isn't a genuine image of Earth rotating. Likewise you haven't said anything about the Galileo footage, or the climate satellite videos, and you'v ducked out of looking at the Apollo images in any great detail.

Like I said, moving goalposts - deciding what answer you'll accept when you ask a question, a question you only asked thinking you wouldn't get an answer at all.

Here's another little something for you to think about. It's not a moving image, but it's an image that is only possible because the thing that took the pictures was above a moving Earth.

The NIMBUS satellite taking each of these images followed a polar orbit timed so that the next time it commenced a descending pass the Earth would have moved underneath it so that it captured a different section of the Earth's surface.



If you look carefully you'll see weather features shown in the Apollo 11 video I made.

a reply to: OneBigMonkeyToo

Err, I gave opinions on all your links including the Galileo one which is a series of fake pictures laughable made to animate. As I said, in those supposed pics, the earth rotates for hours and the clouds stay exactly the same. That. Can't. Happen.

And anyway, as you know, I don't believe that NASA has put anything into space so why wound I believe Apollo earth pics?

a reply to: ignorant_ape

Actually I did read it and replied.

Every experiment, every "truths", every notion of a globe model can be shown to be either flawed, just a theory or shown that the said experiments can also apply to a flat earth model.

Ah well.

a reply to: thesneakiod

wrong - please show how exp 1 & 2 are congruent with a flat earth

Ever been on a plane? I have.
Ever flew long distances? I have.
Ever felt the plane nose down every few minutes to compensate for the curvature of the earth?

I haven't.

I now expect my question to be answered with ridicule and sciencism...

a reply to: thesneakiod

wow - you do not understand aeronautics ether - what a surprise

nor did you answer the actual question posed

As I've said. I'm not here to prove flat earth to you or anyone. I could spend all day posting links to why the globe model can be challenged. You still wouldn't be interested.

A quick google check always helps. You'll probably laugh but flat earth wiki on Eratosthenes is a good place to start.

👍

a reply to: thesneakiod

It wasn't clear which particular video your jerking knee was aiming at. You have only given your opinion about your beliefs. You have not supported that opinion with any fact. I even showed you where to look in the Apollo 11 video of mine for specific differences in 24 hours. You are absolutely right in saying the clouds wouldn't stay the same over that amount of time, which is why they don't. I can back up my argument, you prepared to back up yours?

NIMBUS satellite image dodged as well as the others.

a reply to: thesneakiod

"Scientism"?

Do please tell us why something programmed to fly at a specific altitude would constantly have to dip its nose. I'm assuming you have no idea how the plane works out how high it is. Did you fly to the other side of the world? I have.

originally posted by: thesneakiod
a reply to: eriktheawful

Don't know what you were trying to prove with those videos but they all clearly show a flat horizon. No curve whatsoever 👍

I would highly recommend that you get your eyes examined. You may be in need of corrective lenses, or if you already have corrected lenses, you may need a new prescription.

The curve is most certainly there.

a reply to: OneBigMonkeyToo

You're not getting it are you. I think ALL NASA images taken in space are fake. (Which they can't even do properly)

Anyway, you haven't explained why the nightime video of the earth shows barely any clouds?

Im not gonna convince anyone on here that we live on a flat earth. Dunno why you expect me to try really. Besides the shaky sciencism, there's no reason to believe we live on a globe.

I'd love peeps in here to at least spend an hour or two checking it out. But they won't get past the first flat earth vid on YouTube. But there's hundreds. If not thousands. Many many people from all walks of life are starting to wake up to this.

When I first got interested in FE, I thought it was utter rubbish as well. But I'm (nearly) convinced here. I just got a feeling in my gut.

But ya know, opinions...

👍

originally posted by: eriktheawful

originally posted by: thesneakiod
a reply to: eriktheawful

Don't know what you were trying to prove with those videos but they all clearly show a flat horizon. No curve whatsoever 👍

I would highly recommend that you get your eyes examined. You may be in need of corrective lenses, or if you already have corrected lenses, you may need a new prescription.

The curve is most certainly there.

It really really isn't you know.
Infact, in all three screenshots of the vids it clearly shows flat horizons??

And didn't an "expert" on here state that at that altitude no curve would be visible anyway??

Hmm, more subterfuge...

👍

originally posted by: OneBigMonkeyToo
a reply to: thesneakiod

"Scientism"?

Do please tell us why something programmed to fly at a specific altitude would constantly have to dip its nose. I'm assuming you have no idea how the plane works out how high it is. Did you fly to the other side of the world? I have.

Because if a plane is going straight how can it not dip it's nose without going of the planet and essentially getting higher and higher?

I'm assuming the plane must always have to be pointing down since it's an 8 inch squared drop for every mile?

And yeh, I've flown from the uk to Hawaii. And gave flown to Florida many times.

👍