“It’ll shut the door on this ball earth,” Hughes said in a fundraising interview with a flat-Earth group for Saturday’s flight, which ranged across theories that NASA is controlled by round-Earth Freemasons, and Elon Musk makes fake rockets from blimps.
“said in a fundraising interview”
I admire his entrepreneurial spirit.
I was wondering what happened to all of the flat earthers. Turns out, they’re killing themselves off.
The earth is flat, you freemason lapdog!
Im tempted to make a crowdfund donation just sose he can kill himself.
curious how the flat earthers NEVER get past the elephant in the room question, wtf is past the horizon? does the ‘flat’ part go on to infinity? is there a ‘cliff’ somewhere? if so, why does the earth HAVE TO be flat? why not oval, polygon, or gawd ferbid, ROUND??
kinda like the apollo conspiracists who adamantly refuse to expound on just how much of the entire world’s space progams are also ‘fake’.
I blame the edjukashun cycstem where all ideas are ‘valid’. usual ‘white european male’ exceptions of course.
Years ago a blog was founded when Kate found herself yelling at the radio that they didn’t speak for her. She realized that the media was propaganda used to shape the views of the audience through selective content, biased journalism, and using fake conservatives to tell the serfs how conservatives thought. Media as a propaganda tool serves the interests of the elite.
Think about that.
Then think about how likely it is that this story is true.
And why it is being given full media saturation? If flat earthers are so stupid, then what’s the perceived threat?
https://youtu.be/mt78u0oq6pU
Really Watto? Do we really have to explain the difference to you?
The Earth is an oblate spheroid, I learned that at navigation school, so the flat-earthers are at least right that it’s not round!
We are all taught things by various organizations, and have no reason to doubt them. That said, we also don’t independently test their conclusions – we just assume they are true. After all, they’d know, right? And why would they teach us something that wasn’t true?
Until the day you realize that one of the things you were taught isn’t true, based on your own experience. And through research, you discover that no one can demonstrate otherwise.
For example, we’re taught as infants that ships disappear over the horizon due to the curvature of the earth. Many years later, due to advances in optical zoom technology and reductions in costs, the average person may buy cameras with 83x optical zoom. They may watch the ship disappear over the horizon, and then bring it back by zooming in to it. And then watch it go over the horizon again.
And then zoom further and bring it back.
And again.
And again.
At that point you learn that what you were taught was a lie, and that what you actually experienced has to do with perception, and how the human eye perceives objects in 3D as it approaches the horizon line.
Not round?
Flat ?
I’ve been lied to?
This changes everything.
Interesting because it used to be assumed to be a perfect sphere, then an oblate spheroid and now they’re saying it’s a pear shape. I’m not saying it’s flat here but apparently they don’t know exactly what shape it is.
“…And why it is being given full media saturation? …”
“The media” is a business. They’ll tell you the truth if there is nothing better to get your attention. Or something else if it suits their needs better. And if they are telling you things that are true, whether they tell you the more important or less important, the more useful or the less useful, may be partly influenced by some political agenda and/or a particular hobby horse of an editor or the owner/director of the particular outlet, but the main thing is whether they think the story get attention from an audience that they can sell to an advertising customer. That’s the infotainment business.
I’m really hoping he’s wrong ’cause I’m an acrophobe, and the thought of falling over the edge makes me nauseous. Seriously! 😉
.
The FLAT EARTH SOCIETY claims to have members all around the globe.
.
Noticed this recently on Youtube and watched some of their live streams in disbelief.
Well, we have sufficient people believing in 57 gender BS, why shouldn’t we have nutters thinking the earth is flat?
Science is HARD
Keep up the coverage.
It helps the fanatics feed their frenzy.
I’m not talking about flat earthers.
I’m talking about the likes of an Ottawa university prof that just connected this bozo with Trump on his FB page.
Seriously…
lol !!!
ah crikey. try this mr/ms what:
we used to live in St Catharines, pt dalhousie to be exact, a few blocks from the cliffside.
tranna was very visible especially on clear days.
but only the top part of the downtown skyscrapers. due to that portion of the earth’s curvature across lake ontariowe.
?
did the bottom parts mysteriously sink into the ground each time I ‘perceived’ this image?
was everyone in downtown tranna ‘in on’ the (gasp!!) COVERUP ??????
LOL !!!
and what part of all the nations’ space programs including 1000s of satellites is ‘fake’?
is the GPS sysem ‘fake’ and actually strictly earth based? after all, for them to ORBIT it kinda requires a mostly ROUND earth . . . .
I’m pretty sure the oblate spheroid myth is promulgated by the Templar / Masonic / Vatican Continuum taking their secret orders from the Planet Fluoride.
At least we know who will this year’s Darwin Award.
“Hughes promised the flat Earth community to expose the conspiracy with his steam-powered rocket, which will launch from a heavily modified mobile home – though he acknowledged that he still had much to learn about rocket science.”
Steam powered rocket? Like a big bottle rocket? Gosh! If the NorKs latch onto this technology we’re doomed. Doomed I tell ya./
Actually a prolate spheroid. Closer to a thick pancake than egg shape.
Well good. If they earth is flat we won’t have to worry about more earthquakes next year because of the earth’s slowing rotation.
https://www.theguardian.com/world/2017/nov/18/2018-set-to-be-year-of-big-earthquakes
Scientists have warned there could be a big increase in numbers of devastating earthquakes around the world next year. They believe variations in the speed of Earth’s rotation could trigger intense seismic activity, particularly in heavily populated tropical regions.
Watto.
So, how gullible ARE YOU?
As a well trained and experienced GPS surveyor, you’ve been led down the garden path of stupidity.
And that’s being diplomatic, my uneducated “friend” lurker.
Don’t tell me, you also think the Moon Landings were faked, and it’s a conspiracy of tens of thousands of people who haven’t leaked out the secrets.
I have Bridge for sale in northern B.C., it’s cheap and it has your name on it. I’ll give you a great deal, honest, chum!
Well, the mathematical formula for the Earth’s curvature is approximately 8 inches per mile squared. As such, one should not be able to see the bottom 8 inches of a structure from a mile away, assuming the surface between you and the object is flat, due to the curvature of the Earth.
At 2 miles, you would not see the bottom 32 inches (8 inches times 2 squared), and at 10 miles, you couldn’t see the bottom 800 inches (8 inches times 10 squared) or 66 2/3 feet.
Water is flat, and therefore is a good test of this principle.
Except that test after test shows objects that should be mostly or completely “behind the curve”. YouTube is full of videos submitted from all over the world that show objects up to 150 miles away.
But for you, here’s Toronto:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AFJnrMZT7KA
So obviously this didn’t happen: A voyage from “August 1519 to 8 September 1522, started by Portuguese navigator Fernão de Magalhães (Ferdinand Magellan) and completed by Spanish Basque navigator Juan Sebastián Elcano after Magellan’s death, was the first global circumnavigation”. And only one “line of sight” cell phone tower erected on the highest point in the Cypress Hills is actually good enough to serve half of Saskatchewan and a third of Alberta. And watching live daylight broadcasts of the Sochi winter games at 3am in pitch black darkness is just camera tricks. And the seasons are merely timed to when Odin-Buddha-Claus moves around a big heat lamp with his reindeer powered Viking sky ship. This braindead madness just proves that some people will believe anything for money. Just like progressives everywhere.
Nice video. But it doesn’t account for height of ground relative to Toronto shoreline.
The CN Tower is not on the water, there is easily 100 feet or more rise from base of tower to shoreline. I can’t recall exactly, and I’ve never measured it.
hey dumbo, “across water”!!!!! Think about it fool
Martin, Magellan and others could very easily have travelled in a very large circle, especially if they were using stellar navigation. Your other points would be true both on a heliocentric ball-Earth model and a flat earth model. If you read about the flat earth model, you’d have a better appreciation why it isn’t as idiotic as portrayed by the media.
Paul, the height of the ground relative to Toronto is negligible. Many videos of enormous distances are taken from the seashore. Although water surfaces are generally flat, wave action would cause some of the lower surfaces to be obscured.
For the answers to these questions, and others, feel free to pick up a copy of “One Hundred Proofs That The Earth is Not a Globe” by William M. Carpenter. The book was first published in 1885. Try to disprove any of his points. If you can’t, ask your friends. If they can’t, ask NASA or whoever you wish. When they give answers using circular logic, or evade your questions…
Then decide if you’d like to take the red pill or the blue pill.
Watto
What’s your PhD in? Applied BS?
Please quote the University that teaches your idiocy?
I can find webpages that defend any ridiculous POV, including yours. Big secret, chum, just because you found a vid clip on YouTube, doesn’t make it true.
Keep up the laughs.
I asked you a question, we’re the moon landings faked too? Afraid to answer, chum?
Game of Thrones isn’t a documentary, Watto.
Sorry Dan, I missed your question.
Yes, the moon landing were faked. Forget about such things like the waving flag, multiple shadow angles, close horizon line, improper height and size of the Earth as seen from the moon, the lack of solar light reflection from the ground, the presence of footprints and moon buggy tracks on moon dust that contained no moisture, the travel speed not lining up with their arrival time, and the other usual arguments.
Instead ask yourself how the astronauts each took a picture at increments of less than 1 minute each for the entire time they were on the moon’s surface.
From cameras that were placed on their chests.
Without viewfinders.
That all turned out studio quality.
While they assembled a lunar rover that wouldn’t have fit in the lander along with the astronauts, battery packs, spacesuits, water, oxygen, CO2 returning equipment, food, etc. And took the pieces both down and up a rung ladder.
And watch the lander lift off from the moon’s surface. The video can still be seen on YouTube.
I wonder who stayed behind to take the video from the moon’s surface?
Anyhow, those special effects must have been stunning back in the day, but so was claymation Godzilla and the Tribbles on the Starship Enterprise.
Kind of embarrassing to watch today.
The Wizard of Canterbury solved/resolved these concepts circa 1980.
We are infesting the inside of a ball,the universe is an illusion painted on the ceiling.
The Wizard of Canterbury Christchurch New Zealand.
His earthquake ban worked as well,Christchurch did not fall until 30 years after he moved.
To some it up succinctly, you’re an idiot Watto. Take your cut and paste conspiracies elsewhere, Mr Troofer
Oh, and the Jetsons wasn’t a documentary either.
It seems that Washington Irving invented the flat earth theory about 336 years after Columbus sailed the ocean blue.
The Russians and many others were listening to the Apollo radio transmissions. I’d expect that they could pinpoint the Apollo’s location to within a few miles.
If you say so, Dan.
Thank you for thoughtfully considered my points before your well thought-out conclusion.
I’ll leave you with this video showing the take-off of the lunar lander. Although some might point out issues with its smooth speed and vertical ascension (almost like it was on a wire being lifted by a crane), and wonder who was filming it from the surface of the moon, I personally love the colorful sprinkles emitted from the propulsion system.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Obd_jTO66-0
Of course, I’m just a “Troofer” and don’t have the intellectual capacity of you Dan. I’d gladly appreciated your insight as to how my conclusions are wrong so that you may save me from my ignorance.
The “flat earth theory” was historically known as fact and was accepted by everyone. It wasn’t until gnostic cultists invented the heliocentric ball earth model that there was any doubt as to the make-up of the earth.
Today, we accept the heliocentric ball-earth model not through any scientific rigor on our part, but because freemasons and Nazi recruits into NASA tell us so, and because they show us CGI pictures. Admittedly, with advances in technology, it is becoming more difficult to detect their deceptions. Back in the day, they could simple use a proto-photoshop to badly crop a picture of a globe earth and plunk it into the background of a picture “from the moon”.
What you are referring to is the semi-modern “movement” to reestablish what was known and never scientifically proven otherwise since the beginning of time.
Although some might point out issues with its smooth speed and vertical ascension (almost like it was on a wire being lifted by a crane), and wonder who was filming it from the surface of the moon, I personally love the colorful sprinkles emitted from the propulsion system.
Amazing what happens with 1/6 the gravity of Earth to contend with. As far as the “colorful sprinkles” go, you do know, don’t you, that the descent stage of the lander was just a space frame (you might have to look that up, I realize) covered in reflective mylar to protect components on the descent engine and equipment in the scientific equipment bay. Your “sprinkles” are the mylar on top being blown to bits by the ascent stage engine.
Regarding your flat Earth nonsense, try sailing or walking to the horizon and let us know how that works out for you. (N.B., the horizon is not you mom’s basement wall.)
Ah, gotcha Ralph. Thank you for your insight.
I imagine that your condescending remarks and childish retort was simply your best attempt to bring me back into the fold, even if it meant lowering yourself to do so. I admire the lengths to which you’ll go.
Regarding “1/6 the gravity”, I suppose your explanation would make sense if not for the stubborn refusal of that weaker gravity to impose itself anywhere else during the moon landing. If one exactly doubles the speed of the moon walks, it looks like a couple of guys in suits walking in the desert. Their steps aren’t even any higher that on Earth. The only recorded instances of higher steps seem to be caused by harnesses and wires, using the same technologies used by Hollywood in that era. In fact, there is a famous scene whereby one of the astronauts trips, and is lifted up without the use of his arms or legs.
How odd.
I guess it’s things like this that make me “simple”, unlike you who can see through such seeming problems:
http://www.dailymotion.com/video/x7h1db
I guess it’s things like this that make me “simple”…
Simple, denser than depleted uranium, or just a troll.
Here is a decent video of astronauts tripping and getting up pretty effortlessly mainly because they have their full strength, but weigh, with all the space suit and other apparatus, a whopping 80 lbs in the moon’s gravity.
Going back to one of your earlier comments:
1. The horizon line is closer because the moon’s radius is smaller.
2. That the Earth seems larger is due to the fact that they were using telephoto lenses (250mm) on the Hasselblads with which they were equipped. A normal lens for that format is 80mm, as with any telephoto, they make distant objects appear larger closer than they actually are.
3. The cameras had magazines that were capable of a total of 360 images. That is one per minute for 6 hours straight. I have an old Nikon motor drive that with mirror up will go through a roll of 36 exposures in 4 seconds, so one a minute is nothing.
4. Cameras on the chests, yeah, they would never train on the Earth to aim the things – more on this later.
5. “Studio quality” – Hasselblads have always been one of the finest cameras you can buy. Each camera had 18 magazines, so there were 6480 pictures/camera/flight, or 45,360/camera for 11-17. No one outside of NASA has seen all of them, there are no doubt a lot that were rubbish. Of the ones we see, most have been what we call “cropped” so as to improve composition, straighten them, or fit a publication.
6. The lander wasn’t assembled, it was stowed in an equipment bay on the side of the lander. On the moon it weighed a whopping 76 pounds.
8. The video of the ascent stage taking off was filmed by a camera mounted on the rover, pre-programmed to track the ascent, and triggered by a signal from mission control. It took them three tries on different flights before they got it right.
All of this is readily available information.
Now go and find me some pictures of Toronto taken with a telescope from Rochester if you really think Lake Erie is flat.
“Water is flat, and therefore is a good test of this principle.”
well dere ya got it mate. the whole Pacific Ocean be flat as a billiard table dere. so, the shape of the earth all you rounders or spheroiders or whatsits is more like an orange with a big flat slice taken off.
yep yep yep yep yep.
p.s., anybody notice mr/ms what’s ‘circular’ logic? (pun intended!)
I have replies for all your replies which are basically NASA’s answers to some of the questions posed to them about problems with their accounts and inconsistencies in their own statements.
That said, I don’t have time at the moment.
In the meantime, here’s a video of Toronto across the lake – taken not from a telescope, but from a modern camera.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bdIlq_Xfdng
In the meantime, here’s a video of Toronto across the lake – taken not from a telescope, but from a modern camera.
With 60X optical zoom (essentially a telescope), we don’t really know where in NY. The horizon, for a six foot person, is 12 miles away. Average wave height of Lake Ontario in October, 2-4 feet. If Lake Erie was flat, we should see to ground level, not just the tops of tall buildings.
It is amazing, that if not just a troll, there are people like you in the 21st century who think the Earth is flat, especially given that any amateur astronomer can make (and have made) videos of other planets rotating which rather proves their roundness.
So now go to the west coast, get on a boat, head west, and let us know when you make it to the horizon, which would be the edge of your imaginary Earth.
Try not to fall off, but if you do, say hi to the turtles holding the planet up.
Using your logic, if I showed you a video of a tiger escaping from a zoo in Toronto, but you couldn’t see its ankles, you’d argue that it wasn’t actually a tiger. Whether or not you can see the bottom of the buildings, the principle undisputed fact is that you CAN see the majority of the buildings, which should be impossible.
You have revealed yourself to be the troll – uninterested in doing anything other than arguing irrelevant trivialities in a rush to combat your cognitive dissonance and gleefully toss out more insults to those who disagree with you. In so doing, you display your character, or lack thereof.
Your loss, Ralph.