Proposal for experiment to obtain footage of firmament dome (South) or Mount Meru (North).

originally posted by: servovenford


What would NASA, other space agencies, SpaceX, governments & militaries, etc stand to gain by orchestrating a massive "lie" about the shape of the earth? What would their purpose be, telling everyone "nonsense" about curved flight paths, orbits, etc? Why would they hide the SHAPE of the earth?

I've thought about this a lot too and think a possible answer is to keep us dumbed down and on the work treadmill. We are so indoctrinated to think that you grow up, get a job and then maybe your reward is marriage, kids, a beer with friends, retirement. We are intentionally worn out so few venture further mentally or physically. This keeps us "in".

If you thing about the timing around when Admiral Byrd said on tv that there was land beyond the south pole (unless that is cgi/ai faked) and the next year (I think) when the Antarctic Treaty established a no go zone, people were getting tvs en masse and while it opened up their minds to comments such as Byrd's the controllers don't want to lose a good thing in their underlings paying their entire wages toward the corporations so they control the airwaves also and shut down the nature of the earth to prevent escapee minds.

When I first saw the high altitude balloon footage I was hit with a sense of wonder and hopium, I guess, but the whole flat earth thing is so rigged toward derision that people automatically laugh before and if they even listen. Flat earther is used as an insult and in a time when society gets bent out of shape over obscure pronouns, you'd think it would be rude but no. Cleverly created hatred or disdain is a useful tool to shut something down. I think it's worth looking into even for that angle. As a conspiracy theorist, I always using a sort of sense to feel out if government overreach and influence is perhaps a case of "The lady doth protest too much, methinks"

Antarctica can be visited, the dome referred to in Encyclopaedia is an ice dome and can still be read about in Encyclopaedia, and scientists do not have to sign NDA.

Go ahead, spend your money, you'll prove the Earth is a sphere.

originally posted by: scraedtosleep
a reply to: FlyInTheOintment

Here's a youtube video of some random person sending a camera into space on a balloon.

and another.

My question now is if photographs & videos were all you needed to convince yourself that earth is flat, then why doesn't these videos convince you that it's round?
You even say that the videos never actually show the rocket or balloon hitting the dome. But here we clearly see the balloons and cameras above the planet showing a curve. They never hit anything.

I know you didn't ask me but the problem I see with all high altitude video, even a lot from flat earthers, is the distortion. The go pro has fish eye lenses and wide angle lenses create a lot of distortion too. Some of the video of flat earth show a fluctuating, converse to concave, skyline which isn't right either. I suspect that is from the balloon swaying so much that the camera tries to compensate but it would need to be ruled out somehow.

There are huge discrepancies between views at similar heights. When nasa shows video at a specific height it tends to be much more fisheye than even amateur videos at the same height. Nasa has also tried to pass off cgi as earth numerous times where the USA looks like the only thing on that side of the globe, it's huge. Then another time it's back to it's normal size. There is no excuse for a space agency which happily rakes in millions of taxpayer's money to fudge these things and get it wrong yet they do it routinely. There are whole videos devoted to exposing each year's nasa earth and how different it was from the past years. Hardly adds to their credibility. It's really a case of needing to see it to believe it.

As to the dome, I've only seen one video of hitting a dome and it could have been easily faked. There's grift in every single subject so flat earth won't be any different there. People want to make a buck.

originally posted by: OneBigMonkeyToo
Antarctica can be visited, the dome referred to in Encyclopaedia is an ice dome and can still be read about in Encyclopaedia, and scientists do not have to sign NDA.

Go ahead, spend your money, you'll prove the Earth is a sphere.

There are some videos showing the complexity of the application process for going to antarctica, outside of approved tourist trips, and the requirements are rigorous to the point of ridiculousness.

Hmm Maybe thats exactly what China was doing...

Not buying the Flat Earth theory though.

a reply to: FlyInTheOintment

Just as an example: I can track Star-Link taking off in a rocket from earth.
If the location of deployment of the satellites is in my area - which I have witnessed take place from my back yard with binoculars.
I can visibly see the chain of satellites traverse the night sky with the help of the sun on the other side of the earth, reflecting off the satellites.
Once out of my line of vision - or eclipsed by the earth, I can then use the Stellarium App to track their movement around the earth - and time it so I can see the Star Link train reappear again.

a reply to: FlyInTheOintment


Ummm...if we live on a flat earth...then why hasn't all the air and water leaked...or been pushed off the edge...?

Does the flat earth...rotate...?

Does the Flat earth rotate around the flat sun...?

How do you account for tidal action on a flat earth...?

How do you account for seasonal change on a flat earth...?

Also...what's on the other side of the coin... heads or tails...?

Seriously...what's on the flip side...or the dark side...?

These also...are questions...


I've never once considered this flat earth hypothesis...beyond the LOL forum...

So...please forgive my ignorance about the above questions...I've never personally read any authors claims...so please elucidate...




YouSir

originally posted by: wavelength

originally posted by: Macenroe82
I have a question because im truly curious.

If the earth is just a flat plane, why are multiple satellites needed to beam information to one another?

Pretty expensive grift if it was flat, then technically wouldn't 1 stationary satellite, directly above the center of the "great plane" be able to reach every spot on it?

Good one! To add to this, what about OTH radar?

Traditional ground-based radars have a range limited to the line of sight.

When the earth's horizon curves away over hundreds to thousands of kilometers, it is no longer in the radar's line of sight. Over-The-Horizon (OTH) radar circumvents this limitation by sending a powerful radio signal up into the ionosphere which is reflected (or 'bounced') back down to the target (below the horizon). A portion of those signals are reflected back to the target the same way they went out. All of this engineering was necessary to extend the range of the radar beyond the curvature of the horizon.

You just destroyed the Flat Earth argument.
However, some people refuse the science and rely on the "feelez."
Well done

a reply to: FlyInTheOintment

There are companies that will fly a camera you supply to those altitudes.

I've linked a video made by one of those companies in other posts about the recent Chinese balloon, showing the company flying an airship at 95KFT.

ne-np.facebook.com...


They can advise you on lens, power, actuation, and insulation requirements, as well as cost.

It might be cheaper than designing, building, and launching your own system.


Some of their earliest flights used cheap drugstore film cameras with an electric servo to "click" the camera's mechanical shutter.



Question:

Assuming that your chosen camera reaches the appropriate altitude, what do expect to see that would convince you, once and forever, that the Earth was, in fact, a globe?

I think your vimana will be successful. The zeppelin upgrades typically are, despite the Devil's drones. Godspeed.
Hey, u 'member when only a few earthlings claimed the luxury of automobile and air travel? Silly times.

a reply to: malte85

HAHAH
I was looking for that video earlier

How exactly would a plum bob work on a flat earth?

If it points to the center of mass, it would get further off verticle the further you are from then center.

Tables would need to be angled to hold anything from rolling off except very near the center of the flat disk.

Has anyone got pictures of 45 degree or more table top that will in fact have a ball rest on them? That is without glueing it there.

Space is not at 90,000 feet. Space starts at 6 miles. Over 300,000 feet.a reply to: malte85

originally posted by: beyondknowledge
How exactly would a plum bob work on a flat earth?

If it points to the center of mass, it would get further off verticle the further you are from then center.

Tables would need to be angled to hold anything from rolling off except very near the center of the flat disk.

Has anyone got pictures of 45 degree or more table top that will in fact have a ball rest on them? That is without glueing it there.

Exactly.
www.youtube.com...

There's some pretty cool stuff about the tides. The sea rising and receding doesn't seem to care one way or the other what the moon is doing. Go dig into that rabbit hole. a reply to: YouSir

a reply to: beyondknowledge

Exactly, like those merry go round things on playgrounds.

originally posted by: beyondknowledge
How exactly would a plum bob work on a flat earth?

If it points to the center of mass, it would get further off verticle the further you are from then center.

Tables would need to be angled to hold anything from rolling off except very near the center of the flat disk.

Has anyone got pictures of 45 degree or more table top that will in fact have a ball rest on them? That is without glueing it there.

If you guys want to make arguments with flat earthers, you need to know something about flat earth theory to make arguments that carry any weight.

Your argument appears to be based on gravity, and flat earthers don't believe in gravity, according to the flat earth website.

They think what we feel as gravity is simulated by the earth accelerating "upward" at 1g, so not that I'm arguing for a flat earth, but plumb bobs would still point down everywhere if that was the case (it's not).

Professor Dave made some good videos to challenge the flat earth theory based on science and logic without even using any math.

originally posted by: 00018GE
Space is not at 90,000 feet. Space starts at 6 miles. Over 300,000 feet.a reply to: malte85

That's a bit contradictory, since 6 miles is about 32,000 feet, where commercial aircraft fly.

Any "line" you pick for the beginning of space is going to be somewhat arbitrary. There is no exact altitude where space begins, but a commonly mentioned altitude is the Kármán line.

The FAI defines the Kármán line as space beginning 100 kilometres (54 nautical miles; 62 miles; 330,000 feet) above Earth's mean sea level. This number is well above the altitude reachable by a conventional airplane and is approximately where satellites, even on very eccentric trajectories, will decay before completing a single orbit.

While experts disagree on exactly where the atmosphere ends and space begins, most regulatory agencies (including the United Nations) accept the FAI Kármán line definition or something close to it...

Works by Jonathan McDowell (Harvard-Smithsonian Center for Astrophysics) and Thomas Gangale (University of Nebraska-Lincoln) in 2018 advocate that the demarcation of space should be at 80 km (50 miles; 260,000 feet), citing as evidence von Kármán's original notes and calculations (which concluded the boundary should be 270,000 ft)

So yes 90,000 feet seems a bit low, but 6 miles is even lower and that may be a typo, because nobody cites that figure.

Why do people in the southern hemisphere see constellations such as Orion (say right after it has risen in the east) at un upside-down orientation compared to people in the Northern hemisphere if the earth were flat and we were all looking at the stars as "lights on the firmament dome"?

It make perfect sense on a globe...





...but please explain it on the flat earth model.