It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

The flat earth conspiracy

page: 40
40
<< 37  38  39    41  42  43 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Mar, 15 2020 @ 12:41 AM
link   

originally posted by: 1320Q17yes
a reply to: neutronflux

Agree, ignoring if one is being triggered is a great idea, this data given a couple of weeks ago by Martin has little to no Flat Earth within but xlent herstory and mystory to ponder, ignore any flatness and watch and enjoy an open mind >



Why would you post videos that have nothing to do with the issue? Just because the title says 'Flat Earth' in it, doesn't mean you should post it here. Go post it in the relevant thread, if you want, but stop posting it here, that's just bs.



posted on Mar, 15 2020 @ 04:56 AM
link   
a reply to: turbonium1


You seem to to think that a) there's any kind of debate going on and b) that this thread is relevant in any way, shape or form. Which forum is it in again? Can you remind me please?



posted on Mar, 15 2020 @ 06:53 AM
link   
a reply to: turbonium1

You


I'm not the one who keeps on posting useless and/or fake and/or ridiculously idiotic videos, and saying they are 'proof' of your arguments!


In other words....

I cannot show proof they are “fake”. And cannot explain the rocket launches that place satellites that can be tracked by various means, and the services they provide.

I cannot explain the changes to what I call the “permanent firmament” since humanity started populating the space around earth with satellites and space junk.

You cannot explain what transmissions are tracked by amateurs tracking satellite transmissions.




Meet the amateur astronomers who track secretive spy satellites for fun

www.popsci.com...

It's a short jump from meteors to falling satellites, and Langbroek soon became interested in things that fell from the sky that humans had put up there to begin with—satellite re-entry. The change in direction led to a new, loosely-knit network of amateur observers that keeps tabs on the orbits of hundreds of classified satellites that continuously orbit the planet.


You cannot explain the data and services that are provided by satellites.

You cannot explain objects seen from earth like the internal space station and large satellites that have populated the “firmament” in time.

What is your explanation for all the space junk tracked by radar.

As far as filming a rocket reaching space what is you criteria?

Does higher than the Kármán line count? 100Km or 328083 feet in altitude.

Article and video of rocket reaching 342000 feet and space.


Blue Origin successfully launches and lands its New Shepard rocket during 12th overall test flight
The sixth launch for this vehicle

www.theverge.com...

Update December 11th, 1:10PM ET: Blue Origin successfully launched its New Shepard rocket just before at 12:53PM ET on December 11th. The vehicle flew to a height of 343,061 feet, or nearly 65 miles above Earth. Both the rocket and the capsule successfully landed in West Texas following the launch.


The tragedy of this launch is different because it is not trying to place a satellite in orbit. But the rocket does go into space and returns. And it’s all on film. With the rocket flying above the clouds. This rocket reached and altitude of 65 miles. Why wouldn’t a rocket be able to reach higher into space? There is no barrier detected by radar?



posted on Mar, 15 2020 @ 07:11 AM
link   
a reply to: turbonium1

It's exactly as relevant as anything you have ever posted: not at all.

You have never been able to refute anything posted by anyone, ever. Your entire posting history is one of argument from a) ignorance and b) for the sake of it.

You demand evidence, you get given it, you either ignore it or come with some utter BS excuse to decide you don't have to accept it. You embarrass yourself every weekend by claiming black is white and 2+2 = 5. Some of us will carry on pointing out that you're wrong for as long as it takes for you to get the message, just in case some idiot reads your word salad and decides it makes sense.



posted on Mar, 15 2020 @ 11:30 PM
link   

originally posted by: turbonium1

originally posted by: puzzled2
a reply to: turbonium1

Sorry turb, brother has been to Antarctica, flown across on a mission actually to collect a scientist. So Nice try but stealing someone's video of the cracked shelf isn't a good example. You might have heard of the Falkland island and south Georgia. You can visit there if you like.

You said the ice cliffs are all around us so from San Francisco sailing straight West how far until we hit the ice?


Being as I have family in Melbourne Australia and I'm in North America they fly West to go home after a visit and haven't seen this 1,000's of miles of ice. Where on a map would you expect yo find the edge?

You do have a map of Japan and America don't you?
There's an ocean in between and you ice sheet can you please show the location of the edge.

If you really believe the earth is flat you must have better proof surely.


Lets try small steps -- simple questions -- have you ever left you own/home continent?
if yes where did you go from and where did you go to? How did you do it?
if no ...... OMG.


You're confused about what I said.

The ice wall, which is actually many smaller walls attached together, making up one, massive boundary of ice around Earth. Our continents are far within it, closest being the southern tip of South America, hundreds of miles away from it. Australia is next closest, but still far away.

What do they say about Antarctica in the video? It's a vast, largely unknown, unexplored region , yes?

It's mostly unknown, and mostly unexplored, after all these years, just as I said.

The edge of Earth is beyond that, but we cannot reach it, and may never reach it, but who knows? I hope we can, someday, in the future. If the 'edge' is not reachable, then God may have meant it to be that way. But, we have no idea.


But I know if someone keeps claiming rockets fly into 'space', or into 'orbit', yet never telling us where to see a rocket from Earth, except at the launch site, where it goes out of sight, then I know something really smells fishy, and I don't understand why you are silent on it.

So why can't you address it?



Turb, having a good trolling day today. See you've been ahead of the curve in self isolation for years.

Don't ask us about rockets again as nothing I tell you will satisfy you.
Short of coming around your house, taking you out and physically showing you.

So let's get some facts about YOU.

Simple questions --
have you ever left your own/home continent?
if yes --- where did you go from and where did you go to? How did you do it?
if no ...... OMG.

See to be flat the travel between countries would always be along the same path to avoid going over the edge.
So if you can go from America to Japan flying west and don't see an edge, then flying east from America to Japan would be impossible do to because of the edge.

Has nothing to do with rockets, government lies and cover ups or even cgi.

So have fun trolling and enjoy your flat little existence. Feel very sorry for you.



posted on Mar, 17 2020 @ 05:45 AM
link   

originally posted by: turbonium1

Here's one video showing the ice walls...

www.youtube.com...



OMFG, your first video you do realise they are in a flying vehicle, we call them planes/helicopters, and you do realise it is flying higher than your flat earth barrier of ice edge (i can see why we in lol forum now), why pray tell could they not

A/ just fly over the ice wall (dont forget they achieved a higher altitude than it)

B/ could not see space (is space blue now beyond the ice wall?)

C/ land on top of the ice wall and just walk and walk until they hit.....space?

D/ deploy a drone with on board camera from their location

here is another video which i about as valid as the one you posted





edit on 17-3-2020 by UpIsNowDown because: typo



posted on Mar, 19 2020 @ 12:04 PM
link   
a reply to: turbonium1



NASA wants you to photograph Starlink satellites with your smartphone


SpaceX and others plan to launch thousands of new satellites into low-Earth orbit, creating streaks that cut through astronomers’ images. Now educators at NASA are asking citizen scientists to help document the problem.
By Eric Betz, Citizen Science Salon | Published: Monday, March 2, 2020

Over the coming years, Elon Musk’s private spaceflight company, SpaceX, will launch thousands of small satellites as part of an effort to provide global, space-based internet. But with each launch, astronomers have grown increasingly worried that this satellite constellation, called Starlink, will interfere with their telescopes’ abilities to study the night sky. This week, scientists with the Russian Academy of Sciences announced that they’ll take their concerns about Starlink to the United Nations, Newsweek reported.
astronomy.com...



posted on Mar, 19 2020 @ 12:12 PM
link   
a reply to: neutronflux

Those are balloons, not satellites.
And there is no such thing as GPS.
And either there is no such thing as trigonometry or the world is "variable."

edit on 3/19/2020 by Phage because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 19 2020 @ 12:25 PM
link   
mudflood is the new flat earth game



posted on Mar, 19 2020 @ 05:35 PM
link   
Mudflood n reset is the new challenge for some and oppurtunity to sanitize history for others, not FE though so is there a muddy floody thread ?, will look.



originally posted by: Lysergic
mudflood is the new flat earth game



posted on Mar, 20 2020 @ 05:42 PM
link   

originally posted by: puzzled2
See to be flat the travel between countries would always be along the same path to avoid going over the edge.
So if you can go from America to Japan flying west and don't see an edge, then flying east from America to Japan would be impossible do to because of the edge.

Has nothing to do with rockets, government lies and cover ups or even cgi.



No, it has to do with mistaking what the directions mean.

I used to think the same way as you about this, so let me explain what the problem is.

Here's a sample map of the flat Earth, to give you an image, first of all..



We start by flying from Los Angeles, California to Asia, over the Pacific Ocean, going west.

Then we continue flying west, over Asia, to Europe.

From Europe, we continue flying west, over the Atlantic Ocean, to NYC.

From NYC, we fly back to our starting point, in LA.

One complete trip around the world, going in the same direction, without hitting an 'edge'.


How is that done?

Because, the North is in the MIDDLE of Earth, at the very center point of Earth. The South is the outer boundary of Earth. It is a flat circle, with North being the center point.

When you fly west, or east, you are flying around the circle of a flat Earth. Of course, when you think of Earth as a ball, you think it could not work. But it's very simple, is it not?

If you fly from any point on Earth, directly South, you will eventually come to the ice wall, or boundary, of Earth. We never fly past South America, Australia, or South Africa, when going south. Except when we fly to 'Antarctica', which is not a continent, it is the boundary of Earth.



posted on Mar, 20 2020 @ 07:56 PM
link   
a reply to: turbonium1

See you want to rant than bother with reality.

originally posted by: neutronflux
a reply to: turbonium1



NASA wants you to photograph Starlink satellites with your smartphone


SpaceX and others plan to launch thousands of new satellites into low-Earth orbit, creating streaks that cut through astronomers’ images. Now educators at NASA are asking citizen scientists to help document the problem.
By Eric Betz, Citizen Science Salon | Published: Monday, March 2, 2020

Over the coming years, Elon Musk’s private spaceflight company, SpaceX, will launch thousands of small satellites as part of an effort to provide global, space-based internet. But with each launch, astronomers have grown increasingly worried that this satellite constellation, called Starlink, will interfere with their telescopes’ abilities to study the night sky. This week, scientists with the Russian Academy of Sciences announced that they’ll take their concerns about Starlink to the United Nations, Newsweek reported.
astronomy.com...



posted on Mar, 20 2020 @ 08:33 PM
link   
a reply to: turbonium1

see a problem with your map?


Distance between Australia and south America doesn't match the actual distance.
Nor does the other videos you produced talking about following light in straight lines.

Why don't you answer the questions?

Simple questions --
have you ever left your own/home continent?
if yes --- where did you go from and where did you go to? How did you do it?
if no ...... OMG.



posted on Mar, 20 2020 @ 10:20 PM
link   

originally posted by: puzzled2
a reply to: turbonium1

see a problem with your map?


Distance between Australia and south America doesn't match the actual distance.
Nor does the other videos you produced talking about following light in straight lines.

Why don't you answer the questions?

Simple questions --
have you ever left your own/home continent?
if yes --- where did you go from and where did you go to? How did you do it?
if no ...... OMG.


I have, like many others have, flown above Earth, over a continent, over an ocean -

Nobody has, or can, fly over the South Pole, from one side, say, from Australia's southern coast, over the South Pole, directly, as one straight path, across, to reach South America, or Africa, or anywhere, on the other side of the South Pole.

Planes (in general) choose to fly the most direct, fastest, path, between two points.....it makes sense, of course.

In crossing the oceans, from America, to either Asia, or Europe, we fly directly between points, east or west, to reach them as fast, and cheaply, as possible. No reason to fly indirectly, when it's possible to fly a straight line, obviously.

Why would they AVOID the direct route, if it existed? They wouldn't. It's avoided because it does NOT exist.



posted on Mar, 20 2020 @ 10:45 PM
link   

originally posted by: turbonium1

originally posted by: puzzled2
a reply to: turbonium1

see a problem with your map?


Distance between Australia and south America doesn't match the actual distance.
Nor does the other videos you produced talking about following light in straight lines.

Why don't you answer the questions?

Simple questions --
have you ever left your own/home continent?
if yes --- where did you go from and where did you go to? How did you do it?
if no ...... OMG.


I have, like many others have, flown above Earth, over a continent, over an ocean -

Nobody has, or can, fly over the South Pole, from one side, say, from Australia's southern coast, over the South Pole, directly, as one straight path, across, to reach South America, or Africa, or anywhere, on the other side of the South Pole.

Planes (in general) choose to fly the most direct, fastest, path, between two points.....it makes sense, of course.

In crossing the oceans, from America, to either Asia, or Europe, we fly directly between points, east or west, to reach them as fast, and cheaply, as possible. No reason to fly indirectly, when it's possible to fly a straight line, obviously.

Why would they AVOID the direct route, if it existed? They wouldn't. It's avoided because it does NOT exist.




So the direct route from Australia to Argentina is via the north pole on your map. But that's not the way they go. most long distance flight are curved see flightroutes.geographica.gs...

So What ocean did you fly over ? From -- to does the flight time match up with your map?



posted on Mar, 20 2020 @ 11:17 PM
link   

originally posted by: OneBigMonkeyToo
a reply to: turbonium1

It's exactly as relevant as anything you have ever posted: not at all.

You have never been able to refute anything posted by anyone, ever. Your entire posting history is one of argument from a) ignorance and b) for the sake of it.

You demand evidence, you get given it, you either ignore it or come with some utter BS excuse to decide you don't have to accept it. You embarrass yourself every weekend by claiming black is white and 2+2 = 5. Some of us will carry on pointing out that you're wrong for as long as it takes for you to get the message, just in case some idiot reads your word salad and decides it makes sense.


You don't know the flight paths of rockets, it is kept a secret.

Why is it a secret?

The idiot is someone who doesn't care it's a secret, who believes anyone would keep it a secret, for no reason. Who thinks a rocket flies into space, but never sees one fly higher than a plane, for a couple minutes, and doesn't care about it after that.

If we can see a rocket at the launch site, and three minutes after it has launched, it is still visible from the launch site, nobody would keep the rest a secret, unless they had a REASON to keep it a secret!


To keep a secret like this, to hide flight paths from us, to not tell us where to see a rocket from Earth, except at the launch site, should tell you this doesn't make sense, because it does NOT make sense, if it is genuine.


You know it's a secret, so why don't you care about it?



posted on Mar, 20 2020 @ 11:51 PM
link   
a reply to: turbonium1




it is kept a secret.

No it isn't.



posted on Mar, 21 2020 @ 01:05 AM
link   

originally posted by: puzzled2
So the direct route from Australia to Argentina is via the north pole on your map. But that's not the way they go. most long distance flight are curved see flightroutes.geographica.gs...

So What ocean did you fly over ? From -- to does the flight time match up with your map?


The actual flights are flown in straight lines, or close to it, but to draw the path on a ball Earth requires a curved line instead of the real path, which is straight. They can't show the real path is straight, on a ball-shaped Earth, obviously. Just like nobody can fly across the 'South Pole', either, because it doesn't exist.

What matters is the measurements taken on flights, by airplanes, which proves Earth is flat, not round. A level flight proves it is flat. Instruments prove this every day, on thousands of flights.

If Earth was round, wouldn't planes account for it? They don't account for it, or measure it, because it doesn't exist. You could not fly over a sphere, while measuring it as a flat surface, because it wouldn't work. It would be a disaster.

After a plane takes off, into air, the original altitude on the surface might be 'Sea Level', or 0 ft. altitude.

From that point, how is the plane's altitude measured, accurately? With instruments on the plane, obviously.

What are the instruments measuring for the correct altitude of the plane? Air pressure, during the flight, measures altitude. Except air pressure alone is not precise enough to measure exact altitude, because air pressure is in gradients, or levels, within the air. A single gradient may be hundreds of feet 'thick', within one layer, and altitude cannot have such variances of hundreds of feet, on a flight. A hundred foot mistake would be fatal.


But other instruments also measure the air pressure, in feet, which confirm the altitude is correct. The VSI measures a plane in ascent, in descent, and level flight, which is neither ascent or descent in flight.


No measurement is made of the surface below the plane, during a flight. And why would it be? Planes fly over mountains, and valleys, which are various altitudes on Earth, unknown, and changing along a flight, so what would be the purpose of measuring it for altitude in air? If it was even possible to measure it, that is!


A plane that ascends in air, flying at any speed, measures the ascent in feet per minute. It does not measure the distance it flies above the 'curved' surface, during an ascent in air.

If a plane flying 400 mph flies upward, it may measure as a 500 feet/minute ascent. If the same plane is flying at 500 mph, and does the same ascent, it may measure a 700 feet/minute ascent. But, they both flew the same distance over the surface below, while they ascended.

Because air pressure measures the flight of a plane, in ascent, in descent, or level flight. The surface of Earth does not matter at all, it is not measuring what the plane is doing. Nor could it.


The round Earth argument has become so desperate, it tries to make up non-existent forces within Earth, which somehow, makes airplanes measure level, when not level at all, because that's the only excuse they have, to claim that airplanes would fly 'level', over a curved surface, thousands of feet below it!

When you invent a magical force, you can make it do anything you want, to solve all problems.


Good one.



posted on Mar, 21 2020 @ 01:07 AM
link   
a reply to: turbonium1




The actual flights are flown in straight lines

No they aren't.



posted on Mar, 21 2020 @ 01:11 AM
link   

originally posted by: Phage
a reply to: turbonium1




it is kept a secret.

No it isn't.


Then show me where it is, if it's not a secret....

Saying 'no it isn't', doesn't help your case, so try again.



new topics

top topics



 
40
<< 37  38  39    41  42  43 >>

log in

join