The flat earth conspiracy

sigh - and turbo troll is back in the same rut - again

flat earth cosmology still cannot explain :

where polaris is

how we can measure latitude using polaris and a sextant

why one minuite of latutude = 1 nauticle mile

the summersolstice - total daylight // the winte solstice - total darkness inside the arctic circle

longitude measurments south of the equator

where sigma octanis is

where the magnetic south pole is

visual and radar horizons

VHF comms tanges

and many more

regards - the alledged " global conspiracy of pilots "

john lear = a pilot

john lear is not a flat earth proponent

john lear is a proponent for a whole range of idiotic conspiracy allegations

1 of his " finest " - he alleges that " satalite death rays " were used to attack the WTC on 9/11

oops - mr lear just falsified your conspiracy

a reply to: turbonium1

What will it take, before you finally start to see how utterly ridiculous, and farcical, this is?

You prove exactly how ridiculous and farcical your entire hypothesis is with every single post you make.

I really should know better and shouldn't have wasted my time hoping that you'd see sense.

Have a drink on me and good luck.

lack of understanding of the very simplest concepts....

over and over he states "why hasn't anyone filmed a rocket going straight up until its a speck in the sky"

and over and over its been explained... it would come "straight" back down... so what would be the point

go back to grade school buddy... learn some significant words that apply to what you're trying to talk about here...

remember how you learned a little bit about "lift"? Even though you didn't apply it to your chronic nonsense?

Your next word is "orbit"... and Go

a reply to: turbonium1

Yes, I agree with you. Your posts are now utterly ridiculous and farcical.
You have asked for proof. Proof has been given to you, but then you move the goalposts or lie outright about said proof. Yes, I said lie. You are trolling us, we all know that, let's not pretend otherwise.

originally posted by: ignorant_ape
sigh - and turbo troll is back in the same rut - again

flat earth cosmology still cannot explain :

where polaris is

how we can measure latitude using polaris and a sextant

why one minuite of latutude = 1 nauticle mile

the summersolstice - total daylight // the winte solstice - total darkness inside the arctic circle

longitude measurments south of the equator

where sigma octanis is

where the magnetic south pole is

visual and radar horizons

VHF comms tanges

and many more

Again, why can't you show a single rocket flying up high enough, that all we see from Earth is a speck?

That is what would prove your claim, and without it, you have nothing but excuses, and trying to change the issue....like above, once again.

Every one of your points has been addressed already, more than once.

Why would you expect to see Polaris from anywhere on flat surface? Because it's flat? The surface of Earth is far too large, and Polaris is far too low above Earth, to ever see it from everywhere below. I've explained that repeatedly, but you still have no clue about it.

The same principle explains why there is almost no sunlight in the north, during winter solstice. Because the Sun, at that time, is circling far from the center of Earth, and being low above Earth, it doesn't reach the center, or north.

There is no magnetic south pole, as there IS no south 'pole' in the first place. There is only a magnetic NORTH, which is how compasses work - by reading the magnetic north point of Earth, which is the center of Earth itself. Look at how compasses are also flat, when they read the center, or north, of Earth. If the Earth was round, and you had a compass, how would it possibly know where north was?

Anyway, you haven't shown a rocket actually flies into 'space', or 'orbit', and never will. All you're left with are excuses, in desperation.

originally posted by: Akragon
lack of understanding of the very simplest concepts....

over and over he states "why hasn't anyone filmed a rocket going straight up until its a speck in the sky"

and over and over its been explained... it would come "straight" back down... so what would be the point

go back to grade school buddy... learn some significant words that apply to what you're trying to talk about here...

remember how you learned a little bit about "lift"? Even though you didn't apply it to your chronic nonsense?

Your next word is "orbit"... and Go

You just keep lying and lying about what I've said, despite what I've told you again and again...

But, when you actually go and put quotation marks around something, and falsely attribute the quote to ME, that goes way beyond lying. It is defamation, and slander.

I'll give you a chance to cite this quote as mine, but if you cannot find it, then everyone will finally see that you're a blatant liar, and a weasel...


Once again, what I've repeatedly said is that no rockets have ever been seen from Earth flying upward, AT ANY TIME, ANYWHERE AT ALL, until they appear as a mere speck in the sky, above Earth.

That's the issue here. Nothing to do with flying 'straight up', or whatever else. It is completely irrelevant to the matter.

a reply to: turbonium1

thanks for quoting your idiocy for me...

originally posted by: Akragon
a reply to: turbonium1

thanks for quoting your idiocy for me...

You might be a total liar, but at least you could show that you're not a blithering idiot, posting nothing but crap, over and over again!

When someone cannot address the problem, which you ignore, and excuse, and avoid at all costs, spews insult after insult, and nothing else, it's over.

How would you argue for rockets flying into 'space', into 'orbit', when the entire world, since day one, and ever after, when nobody has ever seen it, or filmed it, doesn't make sense, or at least, should raise the question about WHY it isn't mentioned to us - where it will go, where to SEE it, after the launch....

Why wouldn't you think it's rather odd, that nobody has seen a rocket go any higher than airplanes - anywhere, anytime?

You still believe we've filmed it, many times, after I've told you, again and again, why no such films exist, anywhere, at all. I've shown you that all of your 'evidence' on films, is from a 'rocket' viewpoint, or so forth..

It's funny that they can film rockets flying into 'space', or 'orbit', from all the rockets, while nobody can seem to film it from Earth, yet!!

Haa! This is still going on. The earth is both round and flat. Because it is situated in an illusion. Cant we all just agree that the earth is roundflatish or something?

a reply to: turbonium1

Yet again you repeat your ridiculous claim that launches have not been filmed to some arbitrary standard you have decided is important, despite repeated postings of links, videos and other resources that show your claim to be absolutely false.

You deciding that this evidence is false (even though you very obviously haven't actually checked it) does not make it so. Dismissing evidence with no attempt whatsover to justify that dismissal does not mean the evidence is invalid.

And in all your word salad I don't see anything from you proving that what I filmed over Vietnam was not the ISS.

If Earth and life on Earth is all an illusion, not real, then reality must exist, to oppose what is NOT real, or illusion.

But on Earth, there are illusions that create fears, and insecurities, and terror, which do not exist on Earth, so whether or not Earth itself is an illusion, it simply doesn't matter.

Many people have asked why they'd want to fool everyone about Earth being round, and not flat.

When people start to believe the Earth is a ball, flying through space, who can protect us from the dangers, and tell us all exactly what we should do, when danger is near, to our fragile little Earth?


Who else, but our new gods, of all knowledge, of things in 'space', and how we might, if we're lucky, be able to protect our planet, from unknown, great hazards, which reside all over 'space'.


If people knew the Earth was not a ball, flying through 'space', it wouldn't work. It's a very sad thing to see so many people being fooled...

Evidence.

Provide some.

Also, learn how to use a comma.

originally posted by: OneBigMonkeyToo
a reply to: turbonium1

Yet again you repeat your ridiculous claim that launches have not been filmed to some arbitrary standard you have decided is important, despite repeated postings of links, videos and other resources that show your claim to be absolutely false.

You deciding that this evidence is false (even though you very obviously haven't actually checked it) does not make it so. Dismissing evidence with no attempt whatsover to justify that dismissal does not mean the evidence is invalid.

And in all your word salad I don't see anything from you proving that what I filmed over Vietnam was not the ISS.

It's time to dredge out the good old "arbitrary standard" excuse, once again!


Now when I ask you, yet again, why has nobod ever seen, or filmed, a rocket, until we see it as a mere speck, high in the sky?

You now answer it - this is not at all important, as 'we' are all fine, without seeing, or filming it, as a small speck above us!

Why have they never once told us WHERE the rockets fly, after they all vanish, over the ocean?

It's not important to tell us that, it's simply your personal opinion on what they 'should do'!

To say they 'should tell us where to see their rockets from Earth', is an 'opinion'. An 'arbitrary standard' that I make up, and say it must be met.



It is complete bs.


When you claim a rocket flies into 'orbit', or 'space', it cannot be proven, either way. Fine.

What CAN be proven, is simply to see rockets from Earth, appearing smaller and smaller, in the sky above us, where rockets have to go, before they reach 'orbit'.


You claim that all of these rockets will first have to fly around Earth, before going into 'orbit', so they all would appear on Earth, no matter wherever, or whenever, it happens.

There is nothing 'arbitrary' about this. It is not what I prefer, it is not about my opinion, either.

Proof is not about opinions, it is not 'arbitrary', it is merely the last, desperate excuse, you're spewing out.


Are you suggesting that nobody wants to see a rocket from Earth, after it launches off? After three minutes?

Nobody can even FILM a rocket after three minutes?

Or they could film it after three minutes, but they never have?


If we can see, and film, rockets for three minutes or so, when they launch, we would certainly film them after that, right?


Of course we would. No reason they wouldn't film them all the way, until they finally lose sight of them, being so high up.


The reason they haven't, ever filmed one, or told us where to see one, is because they are faked. A child could easily understand this... so what is your excuse?

originally posted by: OneBigMonkeyToo
Evidence.

Provide some.

Says the guy who can't show a rocket flying around Earth, after 3 minutes or so! That really proves it, no doubt!

a reply to: turbonium1

please give an honest answer, do you believe we are all lying to you or are we all being decieved/foolish?

while you are the only one who knows the truth, please answer the above question

originally posted by: UpIsNowDown
a reply to: turbonium1

please give an honest answer, do you believe we are all lying to you or are we all being decieved/foolish?

while you are the only one who knows the truth, please answer the above question

Why would they never mention where to see a rocket going around Earth, before 'orbit'? Please answer this question, honestly..

Then, I'll be more than happy to answer YOUR question, as well.

It's not a hard question to answer, is it?

a reply to: turbonium1

Neither is mine, Are we all lying to you?

OR

Are we all fools?

which do you believe, in fact i think my question is easier as it requires just your words on this forum as opposed to science or videos.

So please give us a straight answer, are we liars or fools

a reply to: turbonium1

You have been given more than enough, I'm not wasting my time repeating myself. You can either provide some actual evidence of your own or you can provide a logically constructed evidence backed critique of what you've been given.

Calorie free word salad in 3..2..1..