Do you really think the moon is a sphere?

originally posted by: Toolman18
Just put a basketball about 20 feet in the air and try to observe the same face of it when you walk a circle around it.

But the Earth does not revolve around the Moon.

OK, I'll give this a try, but i'm not sure why. You in fact DO see different parts of the moon when it's on the horizon and when it's over head. Go buy a telescope and look for yourself.

Has anyone ever tried the y-x light experiment? Send light towards the direction we are moving and split it with one going in a 90° pattern. They will always meet at the same point,same time. Proof the planet isn't moving. Really. Proves the known equation E=mc2 is flawed. All the educated people on this site just regurtitate things read in books but lots of that info is just educated guesses. If you don't do your own research on every topic or if you deny the power of Christ, you don't actually know what you're talking about. Really. The speed of light isn't consistent . The red shift on distant observational objects isn't consistent. So how can anything taught as basic knowledge be considered correct?

In the words of Mac "science is a liar sometimes."

a reply to: Toolman18

oh joy - you have returned :

now you are hear again - please actually address the replies to your OP instead of simply moving teh goalposts

as for your claims in the ^ post :

citation required

And forget about what I said about the flat moon,earth or whatever. Just go somewhere and meditate on it. The planet we live on isn't moving as far as I can tell. The explanation of the atmosphere moving the same speed as the solid body it's attached to is ridiculous. Speed would have to increase with altitude consistently to make it work but there is nothing giving the higher, faster atmosphere energy to do so.

None of this makes sense if you study it. But it is what it is. The 400 t* smaller than the sun but being 400 times closer to our planet point is the silliest part of all of this. If you call that just random madness, than you are correct.

Get your heads out the sand and pay attention. This is "The Moment."
Things are going down fast and hard without an end in sight. Cling to your Lord and savior. Don't ever look back because it's death.

The best way I can think to wake you people up is why haven't private companies been sending people to space?Regularly? Apparently some bodies outside of our atmosphere have more valuable metal than we have now but we are expected to believe no one has been sent to claim them?

Yeah cos that's a really really easy simple thing to do.

originally posted by: Toolman18
None of this makes sense if you study it.

None of it makes sense to you.

originally posted by: Toolman18
The explanation of the atmosphere moving the same speed as the solid body it's attached to is ridiculous. Speed would have to increase with altitude consistently to make it work but there is nothing giving the higher, faster atmosphere energy to do so.

Your mistake here involves frames of reference. The top of the atmosphere is indeed moving "faster than" the atmosphere in which we go about our everyday business. But relative to the ground, it is stationary.

The same thing would apply if you were to build the world's tallest flagpole from ground level to the outer limits of the atmosphere. The top and bottom would move together, the pole would not stretch, bend, or break as a result of the altitude at the top, and you would not be able to discern any speed difference between top and bottom because both ends of the flagpole would be motionless.

The same thing applies to a satellite in geostationary orbit. From outside the Earth's orbit, it would seem to be moving around with the planet at an incredible rate. But if you (back at ground level) extended your enormous flagpole to touch the satellite overhead, you'd soon see it wasn't moving at all. The flagpole would remain vertical, and the satellite would sit on top without moving. You'd look up and see nothing remarkable happening at all.

This isn't some linguistic trickery, it's just a 'thing' in physics that is difficult to wrap your head round. Put it this way, if you were travelling in a train that was doing 100mph, and you held up a tennis-ball and let go of it, you wouldn't expect the tennis-ball to shoot off backwards at 100mph in the other direction. On the other hand, everything you see through the windows of the carriage does seem to be moving at 100mph in the opposite direction to the train.

a reply to: audubon

I would say your explanation misses the frame of reference. How can a gas that is independent of a solid naturally sync up? It just won't. The flagpole explanation uses a solid object attached to the object in motion. That doesn't explain how "air"moves at all.
It's all just a bunch of crap.

For the atmosphere to be in sync with the planet, the outer atmosphere has to move faster than the planet itself. For that to happen, energy has to compensate automatically and intelligently to keep it going at the exact rate of speed needed for the survival of the planet as it goes through space.
The axle with a rotating wheel isn't the type of experiment needed for this question because we are dealing with gases.

a reply to: OneBigMonkeyToo

Not to mention, the Moon is much further away from Earth than most people think. Pictures like yours tend to show the Moon fairly close to Earth, like this:

If people think this is somewhat accurate, it makes sense that they'd think the people near the North Pole would see different "sides" of the Moon than what people near the South Pole would see. But the distance between the Earth and Moon is actually more like this:

From that distance, our perspectives would be nearly identical no matter where we were on Earth.

a reply to: Toolman18

Watch the movie ZARDOZ.
The intellectual elite close themselves off from the survivors of the nuclear war they created.
Then they teach the barbarians through a flying God head that they should worship the gun and hate the penis.
Ie: kill each other, and do not reproduce.

I have a hankering that this flat earth thing is a bit of the same type of deal.

The elites leave the lower people an apocalyptic wasteland, with the idea that the earth is flat.

Reboot.

Survivors have a complete loss of science and culture...
Thinking the world is actually FLAT....
This goes on for a thousand years and eventually tribes form and civilization starts again and has to navigate the oceans and globe, and do it all over again...

AD INFINITUM....

MEANWHILE...
The elites are laughing hysterically at the idiocy they view from their passing spacecraft's....


This world has finally become a living, breathing, tabloid.

a reply to: OneBigMonkeyToo.

thats not true

originally posted by: Toolman18
a reply to: audubon

I would say your explanation misses the frame of reference.

Well, you'd be wrong. Sorry.

You can check for yourself: ask your local airport whether a flight from west to east takes longer than the same flight from east to west.

If you were right, the rotation of the Earth would mean the west-bound plane and its destination were travelling towards each other and passengers would get there twice as quick.

a reply to: enlightenedservant

perversly - your top pic :

" a moon close to the earth "

is EXACTLY that the flat earth delusion cult claims

but they conveniently ignore the issue of aspect [ i know because i brought it up in previous threads ]

go figure

King Kong "skull island" lightly touches up on the hollow earth theory but they kind of leave you hanging. It makes me wonder if they have plans for a sequel where they get more into that?

Anyone seem that movie? It is so good.

I think the moon is not perfectly spherical ......i think either God or aliens put it there. It didn't just randomly happen.

That or the ultimate conspiracy is true and it's a hologram.

Scale.
How tiny the human race and it's machines are is something
you just can't get your head around?
We are so small that even our largest planes from our tiny
perspective can nether see nor feel the movement of such a gigantic
ball of rock.

a reply to: ignorant_ape

Yet if it were that close, it would fill up the sky when it's overhead. Like this:


Of course, Earth's gravity would pull it in until it crashed & obliterated everything on the planet. So the whole "flat earth" debate would be irrelevant.

a reply to: Toolman18

Precisely my point.
You built a strawman argument that doesn't work.