Guide to the FLAT EARTH

a reply to: TheDon

How is parallax an opinion, exactly? Parallax is scientifically valid and can be PROVEN simply by looking out the window of a car while it's moving. This is how you're being intentionally dishonest. You take any facts and proof offered and dismiss it as "Well that's only opinion" or "Have YOU been to space to see it for yourself?"

I have this feeling that even if an astronaut came into this thread and told you "Yep, I've been to space and earth is a ball" you'd dismiss it as being part of NASA propaganda/disinformation.

Your intentional dishonesty is obvious.

Late arrival to the thread, however here is a little something that those who believe in a FE may want to think about.

There are, out in the real world, historic photographs taken by satellites, both polar orbital geosynchronous ones and also geostationary ones.

The photographic evidence from these satellites pre-dates anything remotely resembling photoshop.

Have some info on a geostationary one:

library.ssec.wisc.edu...

and a cool video of several day's images combined into a movie:



If you believe in a flat earth, where is the rest of the Earth in this film?

Polar orbital ones orbit roughly north-south, and their orbital parameters are designed so that they pass over the same place at roughly the same time every day. The ones I have examined from the late 60s and early 70s usually time it so that they have a daylight pass at local noon.

What they would also do is take photographs using infra-red on the night time pass, so that you would have photos taken in one direction in daylight (ascending), and in another direction at night (descending).

How does this work on a flat Earth? All explanations not involving magic gratefully received.

Now, as well as the volumes published of the images from these satellites (freely available on the internet) you can also download the individual images themselves, which are time and date stamped, so you can work out for yourself which direction the satellite was travelling in and how long they took:

nsidc.org...

I actually have original books of these images, pre-dating the internet, photoshop, you name it. They are not faked.

The images they show are not in the least bit supportive of a flat Earth, the different directions shown by the daytime and nighttime passes support a sphere.

a reply to: onebigmonkey

Hello one big monkey.

This thread is not about proving that the earth is flat, more questioning what I have been told and what i see.
As a new comer to the thread, based on your post, I can see that you have not read all of the thread or watched the videos? would this be correct?

To address your post, btw this has been addressed in this thread and also in a number off videos is this thread as well, plus you can also go out and do you own research.

There is actually only a few offical photos released from NASA, which they claim are actual photos off the earth from space, that is not a composite or painted/photoshopped, these has been widely used in all text books.

Of course you have the Apollo footage which is widely used on the internet, but as you will know the quality is not very good regarding these images.

What you are seeing mostly is composite images, which NASA admits to using all off the time.

What I ask and have asked in this thread, is why do we not have 1000's of pictures off the earth in full which are not composite images ? if we are to believe we have all these satilites up there, Mars missions etc.

You can not find a HD NASA offical photo off the Earth in full from space without it being a composite! That is a fact.
But yet, we are given 1000's of photos of other planets, stars, moons, galaxy etc.
I don't know about you but I would like to see were i live in full, un-edited and in detail!

Also because you have seen a picture and been told the earth is a globe, does that in your eyes make it a globe?

When I went too school I was told the same, and every classroom had a model globe, I as surounded by the globe model.

If you find this topic of interest, I advise reading some of the thread and watching the videos.

Thanks.

originally posted by: TheDon
a reply to: onebigmonkey

Hello one big monkey.

This thread is not about proving that the earth is flat, more questioning what I have been told and what i see.

The thread title is 'guide to the flat Earth'. The large numbers of videos you have posted are about the 'theory', an the content of your OP, suggest it is about the flat Earth. I am also questioning what I am being told and what I see - by people trying to claim that the Earth is flat.

I have said it many times in other threads: asking questions is fine, but you have to be prepared to accept the answer. Deciding that there is only one set of answers you are prepared to believe is not asking questions.

As a new comer to the thread, based on your post, I can see that you have not read all of the thread or watched the videos? would this be correct?

I have read enough it to know that there has been considerable discussion as to (for example) the ISS, satellites, and whether or not the Earth is flat. I have not watched the videos. I have a life. I felt that I could add something to the discussion given that I have a reasonable knowledge of satellites and how they work - particularly those that pre-date the modern computer age.

To address your post, btw this has been addressed in this thread and also in a number off videos is this thread as well, plus you can also go out and do you own research.

As I said, I have done a considerable amount of research into satellites as part of my own study comparing them with Apollo imagery. I am more than happy that I have it covered, thanks.

There is actually only a few offical photos released from NASA, which they claim are actual photos off the earth from space, that is not a composite or painted/photoshopped, these has been widely used in all text books.

There is actually a considerable number of photographs showing Earth from space, both whole Earth and those partial enough to reveal considerable horizon curvature. There are also TV and 16mm images. I have taken several images taken during Apollo flights and combined them into movies, and these show a nice spherical Earth rotating over time. How do I know it is sperical? The shape of the terminator and changes in shapes of landmasses and so on as perspective changes.

Of course you have the Apollo footage which is widely used on the internet, but as you will know the quality is not very good regarding these images.

Not just over the internet, but in films that pre-date the internet. The quality of footage on the internet can be very poor depending on the competence of film's encoder. Much of the footage is of very high quality. The quality of the photographic images (and I have many) is also very good.

What you are seeing mostly is composite images, which NASA admits to using all off the time.

NASA does indeed use composite images. NASA also has whole Earth images. Your use of the term 'admits' is very loaded.

What I ask and have asked in this thread, is why do we not have 1000's of pictures off the earth in full which are not composite images ? if we are to believe we have all these satilites up there, Mars missions etc.

We do.

There are the many hundreds taken by Apollo, and many hundreds also taken by the ATS-1 and ATS-3 satellites, as well as various other images taken by unmanned probes , including Surveyor, Lunar Orbiter, Zond and Kaguya. You not having seen or found them does not equate to them not being out there.

You can not find a HD NASA offical photo off the Earth in full from space without it being a composite! That is a fact.

No, that is a claim you are making. It is not true.

But yet, we are given 1000's of photos of other planets, stars, moons, galaxy etc.
I don't know about you but I would like to see were i live in full, un-edited and in detail!

Then visit the ALSJ, Apollo Image Atlas, Gateway to Astronaut Photographs of Earth, amongst many others, that will provide with the images you want.

You do realise that those other moons, planets and stars are also spheres?

Also because you have seen a picture and been told the earth is a globe, does that in your eyes make it a globe?

You are making a considerable assumptions there. My life experience and the balance of evidence tells me the Earth is a sphere, not flat. Why should I accept anyone's word, or their pictures, that says it is flat when my experience an research tells me it is not?

When I went too school I was told the same, and every classroom had a model globe, I as surounded by the globe model.

If you find this topic of interest, I advise reading some of the thread and watching the videos.

Thanks.

You seem to assume that I am not agreeing with you because I have not researched the subject, whereas in fact I am disagreeing with you because you are wrong.

Your statements about a lack of photographs of Earth in space are wrong, your claim that all photographs taken of a whole Earth in space are composites is wrong. Suggestions that the Earth is flat are wrong.

If you are genuinely interested in the subject, go here

www.lib.noaa.gov...

and do some reading about meteorological satellites.

You could also books full of images of a whole Earth (the ATS meteorological data catalogues), eg

ntrs.nasa.gov...

If you don't trust the pdfs you can buy an original book of them:

www.abebooks.co.uk...

a reply to: onebigmonkey

First off, I will say thank you for your polite reply, nice to see that for a change on this thread :-) I have no problem, discussing this subject and points i bring up with them which are willing to do the same.

OK to some of your points/comments.

There is actually a considerable number of photographs showing Earth from space, both whole Earth and those partial enough to reveal considerable horizon curvature.

Please provide some examples, of ones that are not from the 70's or are not composite off the full earth which are official. Regarding the ones showing the curvature, I have addressed them and the videos earlier in this thread.

NASA does indeed use composite images. NASA also has whole Earth images. Your use of the term 'admits' is very loaded.

See my comment above, I believe you will only find a few which they claim are unedited, full earth images which are not composite.

You can not find a HD NASA offical photo off the Earth in full from space without it being a composite! That is a fact.

No, that is a claim you are making. It is not true.

I have looked, so if you have access to some images in HD off the earth which I can not find, which are not composite, or edited etc I would love to see some in HD.

Your statements about a lack of photographs of Earth in space are wrong, your claim that all photographs taken of a whole Earth in space are composites is wrong. Suggestions that the Earth is flat are wrong. If you are genuinely interested in the subject, go here www.lib.noaa.gov...

I have been to your link, but surely if you have looked into this subject and believe I am wrong, then why when you like or show proof, do you link to gov sites or gov run sites?
Would these agencies not be part off the cover up?

The problem is the source.

All space exploration world over is controlled and run by some form or goverment or goverment agency, that is fact.
There is no private run ventures, that are actually out in space and exploring it.

And in my experience, I have been and still are lied to by goverments.

Quote from my sig.
Fool me once shame on you. Fool me twice shame on me.
"Condemnation before investigation is the height of ignorance"

Thanks.

EDIT

Just to add, IMO, this part of conspiracy is a very small part of the whole flat earth theories, either way if one was presented with a globe photo or a flat earth photo, it still would not prove 100% were we live.
IMO the problem is the source, as always.

a reply to: TheDon

OK, so your problem straight away is that you are only prepared to look at sources that you like, not sources that you don't like. It's too easy to avoid justifying your point of view by dismissing the source of information that proves you to be incorrect. You want me to watch videos from someone I don't believe, but won't look at sources that disagree with you? How fair is that?

You can't discount the information just because you don't like who is giving it to you - it's either correct or it isn't.

You may well have been lied to by governments, that does not mean that everything government says is a lie. You also need to separate 'government' from 'things the government pays for'.

A photograph published by NASA is not automatically false just because you don't like Dubya, or whoever. Goi search for the places I gave you - they are plenty of high resolution images of Earth.

Here's a very famous one:



Of which high resolution versions exist in both print and the internet. Look at the Antarctic - it's very unusual to get that view. Look at the cyclone over India in the upper left quarter. Can you recognise the shape of India? Or is it obscured by the curvature? It is not a composite image - it is a single image.

I haven't just chosen it because it is well known, I've chosen it because it also exists on 16mm video. There is also 16mm video of the same scene taken just after Apollo 17 left lunar orbit which pans down the Earth and shows a different view.

The same 'blue marble image forms part of a long sequence of image that can be run together to show Earth's rotation:



It's just one example of many.

Oh, I did watch one of the videos just now. The one that claims that he was up all night trying to book direct flights across the southern hemisphere but failed, and therefore it must be because the Earth is not a sphere.

It took me 5 minutes to find non-stop flights from Australia to South America and South Africa to Australia. Either his research skills are poor or he is deliberately skewing the search so that he will get the results he wants. Airline route choices are not a a scientific proof of a flat Earth.

a reply to: onebigmonkey

OK, so your problem straight away is that you are only prepared to look at sources that you like, not sources that you don't like. It's too easy to avoid justifying your point of view by dismissing the source of information that proves you to be incorrect. You want me to watch videos from someone I don't believe, but won't look at sources that disagree with you? How fair is that?

OK, first off i stated, I had been to your link, so i did look at your source.
So your statement is not true there, also like you I have no choice regarding sources when it comes to finding photos off the earth, so how is that unfair, I am looking at the sources you are, as there is no other choice.

Regarding your image you posted, that is the one of the official images from NASA that I have refered too. Also the video I have seen, as does not address what we were discussing.

Show me some NEW HD unedited photos which are not from the 70's of the Earth in full, like you claimed there are many!

I made a claim there is none, and you said there was.

I would like to see them, or can't you find any either? I have looked with no joy.

It took me 5 minutes to find non-stop flights from Australia to South America and South Africa to Australia. Either his research skills are poor or he is deliberately skewing the search so that he will get the results he wants. Airline route choices are not a a scientific proof of a flat Earth.

Not my research FYI, and I have also tried as well, try booking it, Also note that the flight has a fuel stop even though it says non stop.
IMO an interesting rabbit hole when it comes to the flat earth theories, but still does not prove the earth is flat or a globe.

Thanks

Thanks

originally posted by: TheDon
a reply to: onebigmonkey

OK, so your problem straight away is that you are only prepared to look at sources that you like, not sources that you don't like. It's too easy to avoid justifying your point of view by dismissing the source of information that proves you to be incorrect. You want me to watch videos from someone I don't believe, but won't look at sources that disagree with you? How fair is that?

OK, first off i stated, I had been to your link, so i did look at your source.
So your statement is not true there, also like you I have no choice regarding sources when it comes to finding photos off the earth, so how is that unfair, I am looking at the sources you are, as there is no other choice.

Regarding your image you posted, that is the one of the official images from NASA that I have refered too. Also the video I have seen, as does not address what we were discussing.

Show me some NEW HD unedited photos which are not from the 70's of the Earth in full, like you claimed there are many!

I made a claim there is none, and you said there was.

I would like to see them, or can't you find any either? I have looked with no joy.

It took me 5 minutes to find non-stop flights from Australia to South America and South Africa to Australia. Either his research skills are poor or he is deliberately skewing the search so that he will get the results he wants. Airline route choices are not a a scientific proof of a flat Earth.

Not my research FYI, and I have also tried as well, try booking it, Also note that the flight has a fuel stop even though it says non stop.
IMO an interesting rabbit hole when it comes to the flat earth theories, but still does not prove the earth is flat or a globe.

Thanks

Thanks

Here's a picture by Rosetta for a start..

www.esa.int...

a reply to: AgentSmith
from your link

The image above is a colour composite of the NAC orange, green and blue filters.

a reply to: TheDon

I think perhaps it may be worth clarifying what you deem unacceptable by a composite, as there are two different meanings here.

The composite in Agent Smith's post is done by combining three different coloured images of the whole Earth. This is different from an image being a composite of several different images.

As for other points - the flights I looked at (Qantas) all listed no stops. You can't have a fuel stop in the middle of the ocean and as the OP video points out the distance is no problem for a modern jet.

This video was taken by a passenger on a Qantas flight from Sydney to Johannesburg and passed near the Antarctic to avoid strong winds.



You can also take tourist flights over the Antarctic by Qantas from Australia, and if the Antarctic were genuinely a ring around a flat disc the advertised flight plans would (I thnk) not be possible in the time allowed.

The ring of ice idea would also have made the people who made these transantarctic treks walk a lot further (treks that also prove the often repeated claims that the antarctic is some sort of no go zone to be false):

www.thecoldestjourney.org...

www.telegraph.co.uk...

www.thespec.com...

www.bmj.com...

www.southpolestation.com...

As for your claim about there being no images of the entire Earth, you were not specific about new ones, and again I don't see why it is acceptable for you to limit the parameters of what you find to e acceptable evidence. The blue marble image is genuine and shows a spherical whole Earth, including the Antarctic that is supposedly a ring of ice instead of a large island landmass.

Still, if you want a modern one, have one from China:

phys.org...

originally posted by: TheDon
a reply to: AgentSmith
from your link

The image above is a colour composite of the NAC orange, green and blue filters.

Hehe! I hoped you say that..

As OBM pointed out its a color composite, so 3 separate images are taken through different colour filters and then combined to make it colour as your eye would perceive it. Regardless, each monochrome image still clearly shows a round planet.

You can access the raw unprocessed data in the PSA here: Planetary Science Archive

I assume you are familiar with handling this type of data in your research?

In any case, there is also an easily accessible archive of NAVCAM images including Earth flybys here:

imagearchives.esac.esa.int.../category/48#&ui-state=dialog]NAVCAM Archive

Oh I forgot to ask, how are you coming along analysing the source code for the open source GPS software based around SDR? It's written using a spherical planet and orbiting satellites, so if the world is flat the evidence will be there. Open source so it can't be faked.. :-)

Something occurred to me this morning.

While we're busy discussing the view from space, the view of space doesn't seem to get a look in.

How does the FE camp explain the southern celestial sky?

Why can't someone in New Zealand navigate using Polaris?

Why can't I enjoy a view of Crux from my position in Arctic Yorkshire?

How come someone in Argentina sees exactly the same constellations as someone in Perth?

How come southern hemisphere star trail photographs focus on a star you can't see from the north, and vice versa?

Why is the moon upside down in the southern hemisphere when compared with the north, and the view from the equator sideways on?

The view of the ground is one thing - the view from it is much more difficult for the FE camp to explain.

Hi thread ppl,

I'll try to present my case for a globe, and a few things we could easilly do to support that without relying on any gov or agency.

1 - Lunar eclipses. For the earth to cast a shadow on the moon the earth needs to be between the moon and sun. The standard FE model has the moon and sun both 'above' the disc, so lunar eclipses should never happen, if the moon goes 'behind' the disc then the eclipse would not be viewable anyway. All lunar eclipses are explainable and predicable using the globe model.

2 - The FE model has a way for what we normally think of as northern hemisphere countries to have longer days than nights (and an arctic midnight sun), but not the southern. Can some ATSers in a southern hemisphere country confirm or refute that the day is longer than the night in your summers?

3 - ATSers in northerm hemisphere could confirm that the stars appear to rotate anti-clockwise around the pole star, ATSers in the southern hemisphere could confirm that they rotate clockwise around the south celestial pole. Videos can be made and shared (not by me I don't know how to do that lol).

4 - Who saw the transits of venus in 2012 and 2004? For that to happen venus has to eclipse the sun, FE model doesn't provide a way for this to happen. Globe does.

5 - We could check the ISS tracking data isn't made up by having different ATSers confirm it passing overhead, then mark the time and places of sightings on both a globe and an FE map just to see what each path looks like.

6 - We go on an expedition to the south pole (lol joke).

the earth from outer space may appear to be a circle due to the convex lens in all human eyes and cameras, the ray-tracing of a plane would appear to be a circle after it passes through a convex lens to the observer.

The video of the red-bull spacediver shows how the horizon changes from convex to concave depending on the angle of the convex lens (camera):

www.youtube.com...
^^^skip to 3:50 of the video

hi - i am also late to this idiocy , but have a question :

how do flat earth believers explain the volvo ocea race route ?

leg 5 is the clincher

the synopsis of my argument is :

the " global earth " claim is that leg 5 is 7200 nautical miles - consistant with the earth being an oblate spheroid

the flat earth " model " makes the distance far longer

the volvo race competitors [ and other racing yachts ] can do this leg in 18 ~ 22 days - dept on weather conditions

this time is consistent with other legs

so - if the earth is flat - how do they do it

is the volvo race a hoax ? [ requires a " cast " of thousands per year ]

magic ? - yes i am being snarky

or the flat earth " model " is utter twaddle ?????????????

discuss

rebuting a " flat earth argument " :

the typical claim [ paraphrasred ] :

"why does the horizon apear flat in every direction [ to an observer in mid ocean ] "

this is a typical flat earther canard - repeated in some guise on almost every flat earth website

and the answer is blisteringly simple - the distance to the horizon is identical

this non sense!!!

very funny indeed find someone beliving this!!!

Magellano is rolling around in the grave!

en.wikipedia.org...

It seems like "Flat-Earth" theory has been gaining a tremendous amount of circulation within alternative forums lately. I can only imagine this is meant to discredit any number of valid theories that may be leaking into mainstream awareness.

Every map you are looking at is wrong!
twitter.com...
twitter.com...

Talk about dis-info. Our Presidents scientific adviser Neil DeGrasse Tyson says it is "shaped like a Pair". What! lets see those pictures NASA.

Did you know that South America is actually 9 times larger than Greenland and Africa is 14 times larger than Greenland? The Murcator Maps is distorted. The Flat Earth map(used by the United Nations as their logo) depicts the reality of the plane that we live on, in my opinion.

a reply to: TheDon

I dont understand why the ancients thought the world was flat.

If you stand on a really high altitude e.g. a mountain top or cliff, you can clearly see the view of the earth and horizon shows a slight curviture.... it doesnt take a genius to realize that this goes on to mean that your standing on a sphere.

I figured this out alone at the age of 4 or 5... so why did it take the ancients thousands of years???

This is one fact i seriously dont get!