Absolute Proof the Earth is Round NOT Flat!

originally posted by: AncientHeru
I was anti religoius and scripturally ignorant at the time so i don't get how my cultural experience would shape what i saw.

It shaped how you defined it afterwards. Why settle on the firmament and why settle for the firmament not being spherical?

I could go on and on if you would like.

You see, there is a bias and I may be off but it seems to be a product of your choice to label your vision one of the firmament.

You may have been religious and scripturally ignorant when that happened but you ran with that in a specific direction.

ETA: Just wanted to say that I am aware that what I say here is different than "culture molding the vision" that I mentioned earlier.

Still, Hunger games was 2012 and you even mentioned Dyson spheres so that type of structure certainly was part of your culture at the time, you just were not calling it the firmament back then.

a reply to: AncientHeru

Also there are so many holes in space theory. for example

" some of the tapes that had original footage of the Apollo 11 moonwalk has concluded that they were probably destroyed during a period when NASA was erasing old magnetic tapes and reusing them to record satellite data."

How could they "accidently erase moon footage thats so important?"

Wrong no photos were erased it was telemetry readings in other words recordings of the beeps made by the apollo spacecraft. They used these beeps to tell where the spacecraft was in the sky. There was no reason for NASA to even keep them once telemetry was determined.

"The Dutch national museum said Thursday that one of its prized possessions, a rock supposedly brought back from the moon by U.S. astronauts, is just a piece of petrified wood."

Why would nasa give another country a peice of wood claiming to be a moon rock? It would have been simple to give them the actually rock if they realy had it.

They did indeed give them a moon rock at a later date it was encapsulated in plastic with a plaque for authentication.a real sample was donated to the Netherlands and stored at the Boerhaave Museum.

The real Dutch sample is encapsulated in plastic and accompanied by a national flag and by plaques that clearly identify it as fragments of Moon rocks retrieved by Apollo 11 and “presented to the people of the Kingdom of the Netherlands by Richard Nixon, President of the United States of America”. Specifically, the plaque states that “this flag of your nation was carried to the Moon and back by Apollo 11, and this fragment of the Moon’s surface was brought to Earth by the crew of that first manned lunar landing.”

However, this museum was faking a moon rock it had because of an artist at the museum. Well actually two of them they actually faked the moon rock. The alleged “Moon rock” is not encapsulated or mounted in any way and is simply accompanied by a gold-colored card. This card doesn’t even say it’s a lunar sample and spells center with an incongruous British spelling (centre) and hyphenates the name of the mission (“Apollo-11”). No way the state department is going to misspell a word on anything they were handing out to foreign governments. And in fact, it was a NASA scientist that first told them their rock was fake.

I suggest before you believe web rumors do some research it would have been easy to tell something wasn't right. Even the time period was wrong this tour by the astronauts went to several countries and no one received anything as it was just a PR campaign. It was only 3 months after their return and no way NASA was going to release moon rocks until they got more.

a reply to: daskakik

I didn't see Hunger Games until a few years ago, it just looked like what I saw so I mentioned it. I also didn't know about Dyson's sphere until after I started researching about what I saw.

I understand you saying that religion led me to believe that what I saw was the firmament. Yes it could have been a shell that I only saw half of, or it could have been a Dyson's sphere, or it could have even been project bluebeam.

The reason I believe that what I saw was the firmament is not only scriptures, but I saw the other side in a dream. Have you heard about astral projection or remote viewing? The CIA and government has a lot of research and experiments with the subject.

I saw the other side while in astral projection. Yeah you could say it was a random dream but what I saw on the other side is explained verbatim in scripture. Again I couldn't know whats on the other side before I saw it, because I didn't know anything about religion.

a reply to: dragonridr

They aren't rumors actually. The story is published on many reputable news sources.

The Rijksmuseum museum admitted "The rock was given as a private gift to former prime minister Willem Drees Jr in 1969 by the U.S. ambassador to The Netherlands, J. William Middendorf II, during a visit by the Apollo 11 astronauts, Armstrong, Collins and Aldrin, soon after the first moon landing"

"Former U.S. ambassador, Mr Middendorf was unable to recall the exact details of how the rock came to be in the U.S. State Department's possession. According to a museum spokeswoman, Ms Van Gelder, no one doubted the authenticity of the rock because it was in the prime minister's own collection, and they had VETTED the acquisition by a phone call to NASA."

Where is the rumor? Now we are in a he said, she said situation. If you make a mistake its easy to change the narrative and try to cover up. Who knows who's telling the truth now. As for the "real"rocks, can they even test the "real" moon rocks since they are encased in plastic?

From Nasa website "NASA searched for but could not locate some of the original Apollo 11 data tapes – “original” in the sense that they directly recorded data transmitted from the Moon. An intensive search of archives and records concluded that the most likely scenario was that the program managers determined there was no longer a need to keep the tapes — since all the video and data were recorded elsewhere — and they were erased and reused."

"The data on those tapes, including video data"

So they did loose video tapes that were recorded directly on the moon, not just telemetry. They are saying they didn't need those original tapes because they data was recorded elsewhere.

Who's to trust?

a reply to: AncientHeru

In terms of the "moon rock" story, the whole thing was part of a publicity stunt for an art exhibition. I've written a page on it here

onebigmonkey.com...

which links to an excellent couple of videos. If you can't be bothered with that, the summary is that no astronaut gave any rocks to anyone. No-one from NASA ever claimed it was a moon rock. That's it. The real moon rocks are kept in secure storage available for analysis. All you need to do is give them a valid research proposal and you'll get one.

As for telemetry, as you've had pointed out to you, there was nothing on the tapes that wasn't available elsewhere. The back up tapes were being recorded in case there were any problems with the TV broadcast as it was re-transmitted from Australia to California and onwards. The tapes were not recorded on the moon, they were recorded on Earth. There were no problems, they didn't need them any more, everything important on them was already available.

a reply to: AncientHeru
Funny because I was a rather religious child. My family wasn't very religious but just the basic sunday christians. I knew about the basics and loved reading so I got into reading the bible and just accepted it was all true.

At the age of 11 I had my first OOBE and saw a light being. Of course in my mind it was an angel because that was all it could be. That just made me more religious.

As the years went by I started having more OOBEs and what I noticed was that not much matched up with scripture. With time my faith in christianity died out. I became an atheist, not because I don't believe/know there's more to the world than what science can measure but because what I experienced never included anything that felt "biblical".

Which is correct, your experiences seeing a firmament or mine, with no firmament in sight, even when flying so far out I could even see earth anymore?

Maybe neither. I just saw a post in another forum a couple of weeks ago that said, paraphrasing, "what if OOBEs and astral projection are just dreams of you leaving your body?"

a reply to: OneBigMonkeyToo

Yeah like I said, its a he said she said situation. Your page is a piecing together of information to create a theory, not an actual factual conclusion. Of course Mr. Drees is going to say he never gave a rock to the ambassador after it was proven to be fake. And we don't know which rock NASA vetted. Your also guessing that "Middendorf is mixing up events in his 84 year old mind." It seems like an elaborate thing to make up and there is a lot of guessing going on.

originally posted by: AncientHeru
Why are there no stars in the background on the original moon tape footage.

Because that's not how cameras work. This is really easy to work out if you do the smallest amount of work, and it's something you can easily check for yourself by going out with a camera. If you want stars in Apollo photographs you need to look at thosew taken under specific conditions and/or specific film dedicated for the job:

onebigmonkey.com...

Why could we go to the moon in 1969 and not now.

We can go now. What is required is for someone to spend the money. They stopped spending the money.

It would be mich harder to fake with todays cameras.

And any attempt at faking it would be spotted very quickly. The original missions were not faked. Not one single thing about them can be disproven.

I could go on and on if you would like.

And I'm willing to bet that every single concern you have are very easily explained with the smallest amount of actual investigation.

Why have so many problems with a sound sceintific truth?

You haven't presented any, that's the problem.

a reply to: daskakik

What I am saying it that I saw the first heaven through the seventh, even the eighth heaven in extreme detail. Now what I saw was described in scripture exactly how I saw it.

How could I see something so specific and it be exactly what is written in the holy books. I could describe religious cosmology even before I read anything about any of it.

a reply to: AncientHeru

As opposed to the version of events you prefer that fits in with your world view.

It is an absolute fact that at the time of the Apollo 11 goodwill tour no moonrocks were made available to anyone.

It is an absolute fact that the person who supposedly received the moon rock was not actually there.

I'm not guessing, I'm drawing a reasonable conclusion from the evidence available, having done a considerable amount of investigation on the subject. You just read a news story and believed it unquestioningly.

originally posted by: UpThenDown

originally posted by: turbonium1


No, you wouldn't. Direct north is the exact center point of Earth, so everywhere opposite of the center is to the south,

So what happens if you keep walking south from the direct centre

what is the distance from direct centre to the edge on the flat earth model? and what happens if i exceed it when traveling south?

edit

Also are there no degrees in the flat earth model, can i walk south east or south west or only south? as you said "everywhere opposite of the center is to the south"

OPPOSITE of exact center point, outward, is South. In ALL directions outward, from center, is to the South.

To go east, or west, or north-east, or north-west, south-west, south-east, is based from the center point, of Earth, which you call the 'north pole', in other directions, NOT to the center, nor opposite the center.

Compasses are flat, that's why they point towards the direct center of Earth, which is magnetized.

What does a compass indicate, when within a deeper southern region, like Australia?

We know it's BS, because the opposite doesn't happen when in Australia, or at the southernmost tips of South America, or Africa, in reverse, opposite, of northern areas, at all. It's nice to claim there's two 'poles', one on top, one on bottom, of a ball Earth, but it's sheer nonsense.

You couldn't know any directions on Earth, without a direct center point, to everything out from that central position.

What if it's NOT one central point, but there are TWO central points, one that is placed at the exact opposite spot, of the other one? What then?

Nothing supports your fairy tale. It's loony.

The SURFACE is what shows us the reality, the truth, and it's NOT a ball Earth, because the surface is NOT curved, it is completely FLAT, based on all the evidence.

You believe that every surveyor is 'accounting for curvature', because it's put in a book, and they read this book, so they must accept everything in their books, as real, and true, and follow whatever is in their books, all of the time.

Except they're clearly NOT accounting for 'curvature', because they've actually SAID that they don't. Right?

While you still think they DO account for 'curvature', since it's mentioned how to 'account for curvature', while it also accounts for refraction, at the same time!

You know that they do NOT account for it, because they say so. Drop your BS.

None of them ever mention they actually DO 'account for curvature'. They're all saying that they don't. Get over it.


When they assume the surface is flat, you say it's because it's not relevant, not significant to 'account for'!

They have to account for fractions of an inch. If 4 or 5 inches of 'curvature' aren't 'relevant', it's all BS.

If 'curvature' existed, we'd have piles of valid evidence for it. We'd easily measure it, anywhere, anytime.


If they actually DID believe that 'curvature' existed, over the whole surface of Earth, they would ALWAYS account for it, because this would be our NORMAL surface, at all times, the original surface, unless something changes it in some way.


When assuming the NORMAL surface, they're assuming it is flat, since they know it is flat, obviously.

If they thought the surface was slightly curved, to assume it's flat, would make them a bunch of morons. They certainly aren't morons, of course.


It simply doesn't make sense, unless they knew it was flat, and it makes perfect sense that they are always assuming it is flat.

originally posted by: turbonium1

Compasses are flat, that's why they point towards the direct center of Earth, which is magnetized.

What does a compass indicate, when within a deeper southern region, like Australia?

aaaaaand we can add "how compasses work" to the long list of things you don't understand.

Compasses align themselves with the Earth's magnetic field. They don't even point even point to the geographic north pole.

originally posted by: AncientHeru
What I am saying it that I saw the first heaven through the seventh, even the eighth heaven in extreme detail. Now what I saw was described in scripture exactly how I saw it.

How could I see something so specific and it be exactly what is written in the holy books. I could describe religious cosmology even before I read anything about any of it.

And I'm saying I have had OOBEs for over 35 years and never saw any of that, but you keep talking about seeing this stuff in dreams.

I've seen a whole lot of stuff in dreams but it isn't the same.

Also we hear and see so many stories, before we can read that who knows what you were exposed to before your visions started.

a reply to: OneBigMonkeyToo

They way your talking is like you were there. You have no idea what went down. The two ambassadors were friends its entirely possible they met at any time.

If can't realize its a he said she said, I don't know what to tell you.

a reply to: daskakik

Acts 2:17

“And in the last days it shall be, God declares, that I will pour out my Spirit on all flesh, and your sons and your daughters shall prophesy, and your young men shall see visions, and your old men shall dream dreams"

Its possible that I luckily new what the heavens looked like some how, but because of the detail of what I saw, it is very improbable.

originally posted by: AncientHeru
a reply to: OneBigMonkeyToo

They way your talking is like you were there. You have no idea what went down. The two ambassadors were friends its entirely possible they met at any time.

If can't realize its a he said she said, I don't know what to tell you.

And you also weren't there, but I have a considerable amount of research material available that allows me to draw a reasonable conclusion. You have not bothered to try and found out what supports one conclusion or another, you've just read something that chimes with what you believe.

I am more than happy to tell you with absolute certainty that no moon rocks were given out by anyone on the Apollo 11 goodwill tour. I am very sure that the person who supposedly received that rock was not actually there, and I am also certain that no-one from NASA, or indeed anyone connected with the USA ever claimed that the fossilised wood in question was from the moon. The reason I am happy and certain in those conclusions is because I've examined the facts available, not just sucked up a news report I liked.

a reply to: turbonium1

You know where you keep whining that surveyors don't account for curvature? You know you;ve been proven wrong on that right? How many pages of links do I need to post proving that you're lying again?

www.flatironsinc.com...

Of course, the surveyor must be familiar with mathematics, especially the application of trigonometry. Most traditional surveying is which does not take into account the curvature of the earth. For most surveying projects, the curvature of the earth is slight enough that the effects can be ignored, greatly simplifying the calculations involved. For projects involving greater distances, the curvature of the earth must be taken into account; this is geodetic surveying, an application of geodesy.

www.sciencedirect.com...

Geodetic surveys cover large areas of the Earth’s surface with measurements over long distances, where curvature is significant and taken into account to reach a high accuracy.

www.civillead.com...

Geodetic surveying...is the type of surveying in which the curvature of the Earth is taken into account

www.hydrometronics.com...

www.ngs.noaa.gov...

a reply to: AncientHeru
What do you mean by details? Usually they only give a couple of outstanding features and they are usually the same as most fairy tales. A city made of some jewel, rivers of something desirable (milk, honey, wine), a tree that has different kinds of fruits and it is always loaded.

I don't know how old you were when you started having your visions but by the time we are 10 years old, we have heard a whole bunch of tall tales.

ETA: Also, in that bible quote Peter is saying that people were speaking in tongues because the prophesy of Joel had come true, but that would mean that the end times were happening 2000 or so years ago.

You see how you are trying to shoehorn your experience into religion?

originally posted by: daskakik

originally posted by: turbonium1
The firmament is what bothers you, and others, which is perfectly understandable, of course.

Don't know about anyone else but what bothers me is your insistence that it exists without any proof, other than old stories, and then you hypocritically use that same argument against the curvature of the earth while dismissing much more proof than you have offered for the firmament.

The firmament has proof, from videos of rockets hitting it, and veering off, one that even bumped it along the way, appearing to cause ripples within the waters.

Sending many more rockets directly upward, and then hitting into a barrier - would THAT prove to you, that the firmament exists? Sure it would, right?

But if rockets kept on flying upward, until a small speck in the sky, then it would prove that there is NO firmament, right?


And why wouldn't they simply PROVE there's no firmament, to settle this debate, once and for all? Because they know what would happen, it would hit the firmament, and spin off sideways. Otherwise, they'd already have done it many times now, to prove there's no firmament, that space is endless, and so on!

But it's all BS, and that's they cannot 'prove' s(*^t, despite having the rockets to prove it...

a reply to: OneBigMonkeyToo

I know I wasn't there. Thats why I said its he said she said. I read your "research," it wasn't convincing in the least bit.

Your certain no moon rocks were given out on the moon tour, I guess you know what goes on behind closed doors now.

I don't know what happened but the entire story is highly suspect. Unless you were there, or talked to the ambassadors and the museum yourself, your research means nothing.

Have they tested the new rocks enclosed in the plastic yet?