The flat earth conspiracy

originally posted by: neutronflux
a reply to: turbonium1

There is plenty of evidence of trips beyond Earth’s orbit.

Third-party evidence for Apollo Moon landings

en.m.wikipedia.org...

Kettering Grammar School Edit
A group at Kettering Grammar School, using simple radio equipment, monitored Soviet and U.S. spacecraft and calculated their orbits.[9][10] According to the group, in December 1972 a member "picks up Apollo 17 on its way to the Moon".[11]

Apollo 8 Edit
Main article: Apollo 8
Apollo 8 was the first crewed mission to orbit the Moon, but did not land.

On December 21, 1968, at 18:00 UT, amateur astronomers (H. R. Hatfield, M. J. Hendrie, F. Kent, Alan Heath, and M. J. Oates) in the UK photographed a fuel dump from the jettisoned S-IVB third rocket stage.[5]
Pic du Midi Observatory (in the French Pyrenees); the Catalina Station of the Lunar and Planetary Laboratory (University of Arizona); Corralitos Observatory, New Mexico, then operated by Northwestern University; McDonald Observatory of the University of Texas; and Lick Observatory of the University of California all filed reports of observations.[5]
Dr. Michael Moutsoulas at Pic du Midi Observatory reported an initial sighting around 17:10 UT on December 21 with the 1.1-metre reflector as an object (magnitude near 10, through clouds) moving eastward near the predicted location of Apollo 8. He used a 60 cm refractor telescope to observe a cluster of objects which were obscured by the appearance of a nebulous cloud at a time which matches a firing of the service module engine to assure adequate separation from the S-IVB. This event can be traced with the Apollo 8 Flight Journal, noting that launch was at 0751 EST or 12:51 UT on December 21.[5]
Justus Dunlap and others at Corralitos Observatory (then operated by Northwestern University) obtained over 400 short-exposure intensified images, giving very accurate locations for the spacecraft.[5]
The 2.1 m Otto Struve Telescope at McDonald Observatory, from 01:50 to 2:37 UT on December 23, observed the brightest object flashing as bright as magnitude 15, with the flash pattern recurring about once a minute.[5]
The Lick Observatory observations during the return coast to Earth produced live television pictures broadcast to United States west coast viewers via KQED-TV in San Francisco.[5]
An article in the March 1969 issue of Sky & Telescope contained many reports of optical tracking of Apollo 8.[5][12]
The first post-launch sightings were from the Smithsonian Astrophysical Observatory (SAO) station on Maui.[5] Many in Hawaii observed the trans-lunar injection burn near 15:44 UT on December 21.[13]

Chang'e 4

en.m.wikipedia.org...-2_rover


A few days after landing, Yutu-2 went into hibernation for its first lunar night and it resumed activities on January 29, 2019 with all instruments operating nominally. During its first full lunar day, the rover travelled 120 m (390 ft), and on 11 February 2019 it powered down for its second lunar night.[76][77] In May 2019, it was reported that Chang'e 4 has identified what appear to be mantle rocks on the surface, its primary objective.[78][79][80] In January 2020, China released a large amount of data and high-resolution images from the mission lander and rover.[81] In February 2020, Chinese astronomers reported, for the first time, a high-resolution image of a lunar ejecta sequence, and, as well, direct analysis of its internal architecture. These were based on observations made by the Lunar Penetrating Radar (LPR) on board the Yutu-2 rover while studying the far side of the Moon.[82][83]

Making the claim nothing man made ever mad it to lunar orbit, or the moon’s surface is plain ignorant.

No, it's ignorant to believe something you would easily see with your own eyes, if it was true, simply by seeing a rocket fly more than three minutes at a launch site!

Consider Apollo 11, for example. Everyone went to see it launch from Earth, and fly over the Atlantic Ocean, right?

We are quite capable of seeing the rocket from the Atlantic, three minutes after it launches, right?
But nobody saw it from the Atlantic, or filmed it, which they surely would have, but they weren't told where the rocket was heading, when it went over the Atlantic, so nobody knew where to go, and see it, and film it, from the Atlantic. And nobody did, for that reason.

What would they keep it secret for? No reason, if it was true, right? On the other hand, they certainly had a very good reason to keep it a secret, if it was faked, right?

Purely logical, pure common sense, isn't it?

Look at where the rocket was last seen on film, and how long after launch they stopped filming it. The rocket is obviously still visible, when they stopped filming it, right?

WHY would they stop filming this historic rocket in flight, when it is still visible?

It is completely illogical, makes no sense at all, and is utterly ridiculous. So unless they were complete morons, they stopped filming it because they wanted to stop filming it, or were told to stop filming it, right? No other reason for it, and you know it.

Every time a rocket is filmed, they stop filming it when it is still visible, at about the three minute mark or so. No longer than that, ever. So tell me why they don't film a rocket for more than three minutes, when it is still visible, if it is genuine....

Who buys this crap? Do you really believe they all stop filming rockets when they are still visible, after three minutes, or do you understand that since they can keep on filming rockets after three minutes, they will keep filming them, but edit the last parts out, before they show it?

Somehow, a rocket is only filmed for the first three minutes or so, when they STOP filming them, or likely, keep the rest of their film hidden from the public, and only show the first three minutes of it.

This is utter nonsense, right? Of course it is.


They don't show more than the first three minutes of a rocket, after launch, because it would show rockets don't keep on flying much longer than three minutes, when they start to sputter, because they have burned all their fuel, and will soon drop straight down towards Earth, and crash in the Atlantic. One video that goes past three minutes shows a rocket sputtering fuel, a circle turns to a blob shape, as the rocket begins to slant downward, and then, the film is cut.

originally posted by: puzzled2
a reply to: turbonium1
haha you're funny.

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.

Distance + air pressure + speed = flat Earth..

Your not making much sense. Lets work out your own flight over the ocean and plot it against your MAP.

Where did you take off from?
What time did you take off?
Where did you land?
What time did you land? ( use same time zone as take off,please)

So we can then look at your map and see how far it was then calculate speed of plane to match flight time.

IF you're really right then this is a good way of proving to all the disbelievers.
If you avoid answering, then your just a sad Troll, having fun during your once in 3 days computer time.

Stay safe and have fun

The map I showed you was from a random image, to explain why we can fly around the world, in one direction, without hitting an 'edge'. You ignored what I told you, and are trying to change your argument to this map, which is very troll-like of you, to attempt such a tactic. So do you understand we can fly around the world, on a flat Earth, in one direction, or do you need me to go over it again? It seems pretty simple, no?

This specific map is from a book cover, and I haven't studied it, I used it so you could visualize the flat world in some fashion.


Don't try to make this about speed of planes over a flat Earth, or a round Earth, because you can show anything you want to from that, and prove nothing at all. It is entirely irrelevant, as well.

Every plane has instruments which measure Earth as flat, so that IS proof. There is no excuses for it, no magical non-existent forces in play that help your argument, either.

Level flight is the proof, planes fly level at altitude, remain level at altitude throughout most of the flight, and land at the correct altitude flying over a flat Earth, simple as that. A six hour flight over a curved Earth would require the plane to descend about 1800 feet during flight, which obviously would be measured on their instruments, and it is NOT measured in any way, ever.

What more proof do you need than that?

Why would you think a magical force, which doesn't exist, and has no proof it exists, somehow DOES exist, anyway, and makes instruments measure 'level' for some reason, as NOT level?

Do you really think this makes any sense? Where would proof be - actual instruments, measuring the flat Earth, or magical non-existent forces, that make instruments on planes read level, as not level, because that's the only way it can fit with your absurd argument?

a reply to: turbonium1

As usual you're full of it.

Here's a shot from the live launch broadcast at over 4 minutes:

at which point they are 140 miles away.

Still just visible. There are clips on youtube of the news still broadcasting the long distance view at 5 minutes. Google it.

Here are some links showing that Apollo 11's ground track was public knowledge, and also one reporting the first hand experience of the Atlantic tracking stations:

ntrs.nasa.gov...

web.mit.edu...

www.collectspace.com...

nypost.com...

Your inability to use Google and being too lazy and to read the links you demand is not proof of anything apart from your own intellectual dishonesty.

originally posted by: turbonium1

This specific map is from a book cover, and I haven't studied it

Hilarious. The nearest you get to research is looking at a book, not in one.

a reply to: turbonium1

So?

You cannot debunk
Oh. And it’s fun seeing you melt down over simple truths

originally posted by: neutronflux
a reply to: turbonium1

There is plenty of evidence of trips beyond Earth’s orbit.

Third-party evidence for Apollo Moon landings

en.m.wikipedia.org...

Kettering Grammar School Edit
A group at Kettering Grammar School, using simple radio equipment, monitored Soviet and U.S. spacecraft and calculated their orbits.[9][10] According to the group, in December 1972 a member "picks up Apollo 17 on its way to the Moon".[11]

Apollo 8 Edit
Main article: Apollo 8
Apollo 8 was the first crewed mission to orbit the Moon, but did not land.

On December 21, 1968, at 18:00 UT, amateur astronomers (H. R. Hatfield, M. J. Hendrie, F. Kent, Alan Heath, and M. J. Oates) in the UK photographed a fuel dump from the jettisoned S-IVB third rocket stage.[5]
Pic du Midi Observatory (in the French Pyrenees); the Catalina Station of the Lunar and Planetary Laboratory (University of Arizona); Corralitos Observatory, New Mexico, then operated by Northwestern University; McDonald Observatory of the University of Texas; and Lick Observatory of the University of California all filed reports of observations.[5]
Dr. Michael Moutsoulas at Pic du Midi Observatory reported an initial sighting around 17:10 UT on December 21 with the 1.1-metre reflector as an object (magnitude near 10, through clouds) moving eastward near the predicted location of Apollo 8. He used a 60 cm refractor telescope to observe a cluster of objects which were obscured by the appearance of a nebulous cloud at a time which matches a firing of the service module engine to assure adequate separation from the S-IVB. This event can be traced with the Apollo 8 Flight Journal, noting that launch was at 0751 EST or 12:51 UT on December 21.[5]
Justus Dunlap and others at Corralitos Observatory (then operated by Northwestern University) obtained over 400 short-exposure intensified images, giving very accurate locations for the spacecraft.[5]
The 2.1 m Otto Struve Telescope at McDonald Observatory, from 01:50 to 2:37 UT on December 23, observed the brightest object flashing as bright as magnitude 15, with the flash pattern recurring about once a minute.[5]
The Lick Observatory observations during the return coast to Earth produced live television pictures broadcast to United States west coast viewers via KQED-TV in San Francisco.[5]
An article in the March 1969 issue of Sky & Telescope contained many reports of optical tracking of Apollo 8.[5][12]
The first post-launch sightings were from the Smithsonian Astrophysical Observatory (SAO) station on Maui.[5] Many in Hawaii observed the trans-lunar injection burn near 15:44 UT on December 21.[13]

Chang'e 4

en.m.wikipedia.org...-2_rover


A few days after landing, Yutu-2 went into hibernation for its first lunar night and it resumed activities on January 29, 2019 with all instruments operating nominally. During its first full lunar day, the rover travelled 120 m (390 ft), and on 11 February 2019 it powered down for its second lunar night.[76][77] In May 2019, it was reported that Chang'e 4 has identified what appear to be mantle rocks on the surface, its primary objective.[78][79][80] In January 2020, China released a large amount of data and high-resolution images from the mission lander and rover.[81] In February 2020, Chinese astronomers reported, for the first time, a high-resolution image of a lunar ejecta sequence, and, as well, direct analysis of its internal architecture. These were based on observations made by the Lunar Penetrating Radar (LPR) on board the Yutu-2 rover while studying the far side of the Moon.[82][83]

a reply to: turbonium1

Lest start at the beginning.

Debunk Sputnik.

60 years ago, Sputnik shocked the world and started the space race
www.popsci.com...
It was 8:07 p.m. on a Friday night in Riverhead, Long Island, when the operators at an RCA Communications outpost picked up a signal that had never been heard before on Earth. A sharp, insistent beep sang out over short-wave radios, filling up our ears with the knowledge that humans had succeeded in sending something outside our protective blanket of nitrogen, oxygen, and carbon dioxide.

Within hours of the announcement, diligent searchers of the skies—all volunteer amateur astronomers who had trained for this moment—assembled, and confirmed with their eyes what our ears already knew. In Terre Haute, Indiana; Whittaker, California; and Columbus, Ohio, these stargazers tracked a faintly shining object as it sped around Earth at 18,000 miles per hour, heading from west to east across the darkened sky.

The appearance of a second, 184 pound moon in the skies above America shocked the nation, not in the least because our new moonlet had been sent there by the rival Soviet

Sputnik was verified by sight and by transmissions.

And. Again. Your no video argument is false, illogical, and has nothing to do with something actually existing. We don’t have video of you, so by your own logic you don’t exist.

If your god exists, then produce a video of the entity.

a reply to: turbonium1

The launch of Sputnik should meet all your requirements.

The orbit was tracked by transmissions.

The orbit of Sputnik was seen from earth.

The rocket that placed Sputnik was photographed from Montreal.


www.space.com...

a reply to: turbonium1

The earth exists we can agree on that.

Regardless of technology made by a species on the earth it is either flat or a Globe. can we agree on that?

From your view the sun would make the whole flat surface covered in daylight at the same time, for at least a short fraction of time depending on how in your world goes from night to day.

Is that correct?

So regardless of where someone was stood on the flat surface I could call them and ask if it was day or night during that moment and everyone in the world would say same as me night or day.

Is this correct?

Unless you care to explain how we go from day to night without a flat surface being totally the same.

Note no lies, no curves, no cgi, I'm not trying to persuade you, you're trying to convince me.

ps
got a spare 16k or you could copy this guy kickstart - Created by
Jerry Williams and bring back evidence.

Over to you to provide data.

a reply to: puzzled2


at 12:00 UTC on june 21st or december 21st - it is very easy to pick 6 points - and dependant on which date is selected - 3 will be in adrkness , 3 will be daylight .

and using the flaterth proponents own claims of sun position - the absurdity of thier delusion is graphically illustrated

the excuses they attempt are truelly hysterical .

ETA - does any flat earth proponent reading this want to play the game ?

originally posted by: turbonium1

This specific map is from a book cover, and I haven't studied it

originally posted by: OneBigMonkeyToo

originally posted by: turbonium1

This specific map is from a book cover, and I haven't studied it

Hilarious. The nearest you get to research is looking at a book, not in one.

As we can longer star replies I have to say your response hits the truth big time, nothing more to add, thanks OBMT for spotting turboniums obviuos problem, as jigsaw would say "game over"

originally posted by: UpIsNowDown

originally posted by: turbonium1

This specific map is from a book cover, and I haven't studied it

that is the response of a furiously back-peddling troll

the map in question - has been frequently cited in previous flat earth threads

originally posted by: OneBigMonkeyToo
a reply to: turbonium1

As usual you're full of it.

Here's a shot from the live launch broadcast at over 4 minutes:

at which point they are 140 miles away.

Where is the actual video, then?

Showing a screen shot of nothing but a clock is the best you can do?

Are you serious?

originally posted by: OneBigMonkeyToo
Still just visible. There are clips on youtube of the news still broadcasting the long distance view at 5 minutes. Google it.

Here are some links showing that Apollo 11's ground track was public knowledge, and also one reporting the first hand experience of the Atlantic tracking stations:

ntrs.nasa.gov...

web.mit.edu...

www.collectspace.com...

nypost.com...

Your inability to use Google and being too lazy and to read the links you demand is not proof of anything apart from your own intellectual dishonesty.

YOU support your claim, don't tell me to 'google it'!

Show me the videos you claim exist, don't keep making excuses, you only look more ridiculous.

originally posted by: neutronflux
a reply to: turbonium1

The launch of Sputnik should meet all your requirements.

The orbit was tracked by transmissions.

The orbit of Sputnik was seen from earth.

The rocket that placed Sputnik was photographed from Montreal.

www.space.com...

Again, you miss the whole point. Show me a rocket FROM EARTH that flies up, until it is a speck above us, and no more excuses.

originally posted by: puzzled2
a reply to: turbonium1

The earth exists we can agree on that.

Regardless of technology made by a species on the earth it is either flat or a Globe. can we agree on that?

From your view the sun would make the whole flat surface covered in daylight at the same time, for at least a short fraction of time depending on how in your world goes from night to day.

Is that correct?

So regardless of where someone was stood on the flat surface I could call them and ask if it was day or night during that moment and everyone in the world would say same as me night or day.

Is this correct?

Unless you care to explain how we go from day to night without a flat surface being totally the same.

Make your living room dark. Take a flashlight, and point it down to your coffee table.

The table is not completely in light, only a part of it, right?

Even though the table is flat, the light doesn't hit the entire surface.

Same thing with the Sun, hitting the flat Earth.

Simple as that.

originally posted by: turbonium1

originally posted by: OneBigMonkeyToo
a reply to: turbonium1

As usual you're full of it.

Here's a shot from the live launch broadcast at over 4 minutes:

at which point they are 140 miles away.

Where is the actual video, then?

Showing a screen shot of nothing but a clock is the best you can do?

Are you serious?

originally posted by: OneBigMonkeyToo
Still just visible. There are clips on youtube of the news still broadcasting the long distance view at 5 minutes. Google it.

Here are some links showing that Apollo 11's ground track was public knowledge, and also one reporting the first hand experience of the Atlantic tracking stations:

ntrs.nasa.gov...

web.mit.edu...

www.collectspace.com...

nypost.com...

Your inability to use Google and being too lazy and to read the links you demand is not proof of anything apart from your own intellectual dishonesty.

YOU support your claim, don't tell me to 'google it'!

Show me the videos you claim exist, don't keep making excuses, you only look more ridiculous.

Ridiculous? Like posting the cover of a book that you admit you’ve never read? Yes... you’re a bastion of scientific integrity.

originally posted by: peter vlar

originally posted by: turbonium1

originally posted by: OneBigMonkeyToo
a reply to: turbonium1

As usual you're full of it.

Here's a shot from the live launch broadcast at over 4 minutes:

at which point they are 140 miles away.

Where is the actual video, then?

Showing a screen shot of nothing but a clock is the best you can do?

Are you serious?

originally posted by: OneBigMonkeyToo
Still just visible. There are clips on youtube of the news still broadcasting the long distance view at 5 minutes. Google it.

Here are some links showing that Apollo 11's ground track was public knowledge, and also one reporting the first hand experience of the Atlantic tracking stations:

ntrs.nasa.gov...

web.mit.edu...

www.collectspace.com...

nypost.com...

Your inability to use Google and being too lazy and to read the links you demand is not proof of anything apart from your own intellectual dishonesty.

YOU support your claim, don't tell me to 'google it'!

Show me the videos you claim exist, don't keep making excuses, you only look more ridiculous.

Ridiculous? Like posting the cover of a book that you admit you’ve never read? Yes... you’re a bastion of scientific integrity.

I was asked how it was possible for us to travel in one direction, around the world, without hitting a wall, or an 'edge', if Earth was flat.

An example of Earth as a flat surface found online, was a map shown on a book cover, which made my point clear, and that's why I used it.

You simply ignore it, as if you never brought it up in the first place, which you certainly did, and asked me to explain how it could work, on a flat Earth. Which I did explain to you, using a map of the flat Earth as an example.


You asked me for an explanation, I explained it to you, and if you really wanted an answer to your question, you'd have acknowledged it, said it would work that way, or could work, on a flat Earth.

If you can't act honestly, and maturely, what does that say about your entire argument? Any idea?

a reply to: turbonium1

Welcome back

SO the flat earth is wider than the sun. Does the sun go around the flat earth? because pretty sure it doesn't go back a fore.

----------------
O

So
----- = flat earth
O = sun or is the sun flat too?
how does it move around to give the day and night effect again?
As you said

YOU support your claim, don't tell me to 'google it'[ /quote]
Hope you follow your own statements.

Give some evidence.

This was your argument, first of all...

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.

You thought a flat Earth would have to be flown within the one, same path, going back and forth, to 'avoid' the 'edge' of Earth.....right?

So I proved how it would work, on a flat Earth, on a map, which I even told you was only an example of it, from a book cover, to give you the idea in visual terms.

You weasel around the whole claim you brought up, to me, which is bs, and I've had enough of it.

I answered your argument, you ignored the answer.

Why? Because you know it works, and you certainly cannot say it would work. You'll pretend the issue never came up, in the first place!! You'll try to make it about something else, avoiding the issue YOU brought up!


Sad.

originally posted by: turbonium1

originally posted by: neutronflux
a reply to: turbonium1

The launch of Sputnik meets all your requirements.

The orbit was tracked by transmissions.

The orbit of Sputnik was seen from earth.

The rocket that placed Sputnik was photographed from Montreal.

www.space.com...

Again, you miss the whole point. Show me a rocket FROM EARTH that flies up, until it is a speck above us, and no more excuses.

So. You are being purposefully intellectually dishonest. AGAIN!

Sputnik meets all your requirements.

Rocket seen over Montreal that deployed Sputnik.



Check.

How would a camera in Russia film the entire flight of the rocket that deployed Sputnik into space if it’s flight path to place the satellite into space was over Montreal?

It shows your argument is crap, and has a total disregard for the physics of placing a payload in orbit.

Then your logic is crap. We don’t have a video of you posting. By your own logic you are not real.

Next. Sputnik was seen in orbit from earth by the naked eye. Check.

Then. Then the orbit of Sputnik was verified by its transmission. Check.

Finally. You have no explanation for Sputnik. The object seen orbiting the earth. The object picked up as transmitting from orbit.

You cannot even “debunk” Sputnik. The first man made satellite placed in orbit.

a reply to: turbonium1


Not following you, to be flat the earth has to surrounded by an Edge would it not?

You said we would fly in a straight line to get anywhere
but if a flat earth was a disk shape we could go around in a circle in the same direction without going over the edge.

Which asked you to provide evidence of those flight times on the disk. But as usual you didn't prove anything.

Trying to see how you believe the earth is flat, I really am but your not giving any proof just ranting and raving.
Is that why you only have access to a computer every 3 days, ranting and raving?

From what you said I have so far Earth is a disk shaped flat and with the north pole in the middle.
The sun is smaller than the earth going around it like a flashlight over a coffee table.

Really need as you said

YOU support your claim, don't tell me to 'google it'

As googling it doesn't make be believe YOU.

So come on explain in 1 post, with the evidence, how the earth is flat, and how the Sun light reaches parts of earth at different times.