It's just one big inside joke, right?

dude

>
>
>It's just one big inside joke, right?

But since it isn't obvious irony, it's definitely an incredibly bad look, regardless of what he believes.

My movies: http://russellhainline.com
My movie reviews: https://letterboxd.com/RussellHFilm/
My beer TikTok: https://www.tiktok.com/@thebeertravelguide

So take him at his word.

------
“There is no fate that cannot be surmounted by scorn.” -Albert Camus

That wasn't edited at odd sections like much of what NASA releases. And for the record I don't believe the earth is flat, but I do believe there's more going on with our planet, it's moon, and space than is let on

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qzMQza8xZCc

------
“There is no fate that cannot be surmounted by scorn.” -Albert Camus

>

LMAO! Yall ninjaz aint shit...

https://chriswind.bandcamp.com/track/massage

"You can take an African out of Africa, but you can't take Africa out of the African"
Afro-Americana/Afro-Caribbana/Afro-Latino unite. We are ALL Black!

I approach them from a critical standpoint and then walk through all of the bullshit that would have to exist for them to be true.
The meetings. The paperwork. The teleconferences. The collusion. The work around to petty infighting.
The list of things that would have to go right to perpetuate falsehoods on a massive scale is ridiculously long.


Meanwhile these bozos are sitting here like white people and additionally the worlds governments are all knowing and all powerful despite consistent evidence to the contrary.

------
“There is no fate that cannot be surmounted by scorn.” -Albert Camus

disappearing or getting offed

------
“There is no fate that cannot be surmounted by scorn.” -Albert Camus

http://www.popsci.com/now-you-can-see-all-space-junk-floating-around-earth-real-time

They must have the space station at the cleanest point of orbit

or you believe there is no space junk?


and you are saying because you do not see space junk in that live stream proves thats theres something "they" are keeping from "us"?


Because when I look up at the sky and see an airplane at 30k feet and it appears to be the size of my thumbnail(or even smaller),

it seems reasonable to e that it would be difficult to see 99% of the space junk orbiting the earth with the naked eye from a video camera on the space station


but thats just me

Wasn't there any from setting up the space station in the first place? I have my doubts about the feed being live. It doesn't seem like a smart thing just from a national security standpoint.

And traveling within frame of earth.
You can barely watch a golf ball travel across a course.
On earth
On a clear sky
Moving at less than 200 mph.
So you shouldn't expect to see something that small, moving that fast, particularly when a
PLANET
Moving
FASTER
Is
In
The
Same
Frame.

------
“There is no fate that cannot be surmounted by scorn.” -Albert Camus

https://www.quora.com/Why-dont-ISS-photos-show-any-of-the-thousands-of-satellites-orbiting-Earth

http://www.scienceworldreport.com/articles/56774/20170203/space-junk-crowds-earth-s-orbit-don-t-see-photos.htm

https://webcache.googleusercontent.com/search?q=cache:AUJcdKcItAgJ:https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/43yx4f/eli5_if_there_are_tons_of_satellites_and_space/+&cd=7&hl=en&ct=clnk&gl=us


Like none of this is even remotely hard to figure out. You use doubt to support your point of view, but not to question your point of view, that's a you problem and against the scientific method of inquiry.

------
“There is no fate that cannot be surmounted by scorn.” -Albert Camus

You can not see the entire earth in that footage so my point still stands

------
“There is no fate that cannot be surmounted by scorn.” -Albert Camus

At what point will you stop answering your doubt with specific questions and instead educate yourself fully?

------
“There is no fate that cannot be surmounted by scorn.” -Albert Camus

fuck you.

But it couldn't have possibly interacted with this world at any point and certainly isn't doing so now? Can't have it both ways

For two what we know about dimensions and perceptions is that we cant conceive of a dimension beyond ours. A being in a two dimensional world can't even perceive a 3D one and a 3D one can't perceive a 4D one.

For three. Space and time is vast and the universe is both constantly expanding and accelerating in its expansion. So between time, distance, and space time finding signs of other life are outrageously improbable.

Four four. We have extreme limitations on what we can observe in our own world. How deep is life in the ocean? No clue we can't get there. Is there possible life at the core? Unlikely, but we can't get there to observe. Some Jungles in the Amazon can't be reached. So caves can't be explored. And that's on earth. This planet.

------
“There is no fate that cannot be surmounted by scorn.” -Albert Camus

Or obscured and if it's responsible for our existence than we're on it's time it's not on ours.

And we're multiplying like wildfire.

------
“There is no fate that cannot be surmounted by scorn.” -Albert Camus

They suggest evolution was hijacked which resulted in mutliplyimg like wildfire

Wasting my time here talking to an alien flat earth conspiracy theorist.

------
“There is no fate that cannot be surmounted by scorn.” -Albert Camus

Religion says humans were created from other terrestrials too. Darwin says black people are the most like monkies, I know which of those two I'm writing off.

Also you could have just answered my question about the camera distance

Not aliens. It's having people live longer and be less susceptible to pandemics.
As living and pregnancy become less dangerous people produce more offspring.

------
“There is no fate that cannot be surmounted by scorn.” -Albert Camus

As intended by his makers

Why aren't they showing the entire earth from space?

This isn't about it being flat it's about there likely being things one can see from space on earth or its surrounding atmosphere that would cause a lot of control systems to fail. Particularly religion.

------
“There is no fate that cannot be surmounted by scorn.” -Albert Camus

http://ep.yimg.com/ay/skyimage/earth-from-space-44.jpg

^ Why wouldn they set up a camera to capture it as above?

Never mind on the questions I think you would have answered by now

Which is a single shot.

Q1:What kind of distance from the earth would a lens have to be to not distort the image.

Q2: what purpose would designating a satellite at that distance serve as

------
“There is no fate that cannot be surmounted by scorn.” -Albert Camus

You aren't t under the impression that I believe the earth is flat are you?

That you treat the ability to ask a question as a measure of scholasticism.

------
“There is no fate that cannot be surmounted by scorn.” -Albert Camus

I'm just stating something obvious or trying to. Simply show what you want to prove the end.

Show a round earth and people stop questioning it to a large degree,

to be placed far enough that would serve zero purpose other than to appease a small number of morons? really? you can see it's round in the live stream above just by watching it long enough...wtf

Let me sport my Air Hyperbole 2010s in peace. (c) ansomble

Building repetoires (c) spm since 1983

That the idea that a satellite should be developed, built, deployed, and work effectively to serve a single non essential purpose is treated rationally in some people's heads.

------
“There is no fate that cannot be surmounted by scorn.” -Albert Camus

Didn't you say there was a lot we didn't understand? Isn't there radiation and what not that can be monitored from there? Maybe the propoganda value in and of itself would be enough of a return on investment? Idk

It would be cheaper to put a satellite with a camera similar in strength to that used by the Apollo astronauts when they were at the proper distance

Certainly less costly than a Martian probe that goes offline

that isn't what they can see with their own eyes:

https://wiki.tfes.org/Frequently_Asked_Questions

There are many pictures on the internet and in other media depicting the earth as being round. Why do these not disprove flat earth theory?

In general, we at the Flat Earth Society do not lend much credibility to photographic evidence. It is too easily manipulated and altered. Many of the videos posted here to "prove a round earth" by showing curvature will show no curvature or even concave curvature at parts. The sources are so inaccurate it's difficult to build an argument on them in either case. Furthermore, barrel distortion and other quirks of modern cameras will cause a picture to distort with little or no apparent altercation; especially without references within the picture. Photographs are also prone to distortion when taken through the bent glass of a pressurized cabin as well as atmospheric conditions on the outside. With this litany of problems, it's easy to see why photographic evidence is not to be trusted.

It's also worth noting that if a person were to look down at the earth from high above, they would expect to see a circular shape where the sun's spotlight was shining. This explains why high altitude photographs are generally curved to produce the illusion of a round horizon.

People have been into space. How have they not discovered that the earth is flat?

The most commonly accepted explanation of this is that the space agencies of the world are involved in a conspiracy faking space travel and exploration. This likely began during the Cold War's 'Space Race', in which the USSR and USA were obsessed with beating each other into space to the point that each faked their accomplishments in an attempt to keep pace with the other's supposed achievements. Since the end of the Cold War, however, the conspiracy is most likely motivated by greed rather than political gains, and using only some of their funding to continue to fake space travel saves a lot of money to embezzle for themselves.

In light of the above, please note that we are not suggesting that space agencies are aware that the earth is flat and actively covering the fact up. They depict the earth as being round simply because that is what they expect it to be.

What evidence do you have?

The evidence for a flat earth is derived from many different facets of science and philosophy. The simplest is by relying on ones own senses to discern the true nature of the world around us. The world looks flat, the bottoms of clouds are flat, the movement of the sun; these are all examples of your senses telling you that we do not live on a spherical heliocentric world. This is using what's called an empirical approach, or an approach that relies on information from your senses. Alternatively, when using Descartes' method of Cartesian doubt to skeptically view the world around us, one quickly finds that the notion of a spherical world is the theory which has the burden of proof and not flat earth theory.

https://www.theflatearthsociety.org/home/index.php/faq

What about pictures from space?

There are a plethora of resources available that show us we can't trust the photographic evidence from organizations such as NASA. Some of the evidences that these should be discounted include constant changes in their depiction of the Earth, inconsistent lighting in moon footage, and other irregularities which are discussed in depth by those who believe the Moon landing was a hoax.

What about Astronauts?

Most Flat Earthers think Astronauts have been bribed or coerced into their testimonies. Some believe they have been fooled or are mistaken.

Fucking obviously
So stop acting like you are. The camera that you're asking for can't/doesn't exist.
You either get one that rotates with the earth to show you the curve ... which I linked to.
Or one that's far enough away to show you curvatures of shapes ... which you linked to.

One of the main reasons you can even perceive spheres is shadows and spacial relationships in the first place. But guess what. It's fucking space. And the nearest orb is the moon. And people have been using the moon as proof of curvature well before cameras.

You don't want answers. You want to be right.

------
“There is no fate that cannot be surmounted by scorn.” -Albert Camus

They could. And if they did people would be less doubtful. Personally, I think they don't due to possibly capturing unexplained phoenomeana around our earths atmosphere as well as on its surface and yeah maybe it's not worth it overall but at the same time there's no reason why there couldn't be a way station between the earth and moon. Y'know if the human trend of colonisation hadn't abruptly ceased.

What your asking for isn't physically possible.

I drew a quick sketch.

http://i.imgur.com/4JblqbS.jpg

The diameter of the earth is 31 times greater than the distance from the international space station or Hubble telescope.

That's stufff that orbits the earth.

For satellites they've sent further to explore our universe have nothing aside the moon to show the distortion backdrop needed to visualize curves.

You're asking for things that physically can not exist. And then ignoring the proofs that do exist. That's not a science thing. That's a you thing.

------
“There is no fate that cannot be surmounted by scorn.” -Albert Camus

Is what you're saying?

The largest satellite in orbit is the ISS
The second is the Hubble
You need large lenses to provide large angles.
I shouldn't have to explain these things to you.

------
“There is no fate that cannot be surmounted by scorn.” -Albert Camus

Because that's what it sounds like you're saying since Apollo atronauts are said to have photographed the earth while between it and the moon.

A device couldn't be built to do the same thing a few men in a giant oxygen tank did?

You showed me a picture of the earth. It appeared flat to you. I explained why a sphere would appear flat.
I showed you a video of a low orbiting satellite which is the only way to show curvature relative to the planet. You dismissed that as doctored.
I drew a diagram of the size and distance for what you're asking to be photographed. Now you're saying about pictures from the distance of the moon.
Where you'd still run into the issue of a black background unable to show curvature.

The reason you can observe curvature of the moons surface.
https://www.nasa.gov/image-feature/langley/50th-anniversary-of-lunar-orbiter-1-mission
Is because it's 7 times smaller than the earth. But responding to you isn't helping.

I'm good man. Have a good one.

------
“There is no fate that cannot be surmounted by scorn.” -Albert Camus

I'm saying if they can photograph it as a sphere they could set up a device at the same distance the astronauts were at when they took it in the 60's and I'm asking you if your're saying that's impossible.

Live stream right ?

You posted this one; http://board.okayplayer.com/okp.php?az=show_mesg&forum=4&topic_id=13129419&mesg_id=13129745&page= correct?

------
“There is no fate that cannot be surmounted by scorn.” -Albert Camus

lol


>I'm saying if they can photograph it as a sphere they could
>set up a device at the same distance the astronauts were at
>when they took it in the 60's and I'm asking you if your're
>saying that's impossible.

The stars in the sky aren't flat. But they appear to be little dots because we're far away.
Jesus

------
“There is no fate that cannot be surmounted by scorn.” -Albert Camus

im dying man

Let me sport my Air Hyperbole 2010s in peace. (c) ansomble

Building repetoires (c) spm since 1983

------
“There is no fate that cannot be surmounted by scorn.” -Albert Camus

>The stars in the sky aren't flat. But they appear to be
>little dots because we're far away.
>Jesus

lol

My whole point is that for people who doubt that earth is round they could just show the earth from the distance astronauts have videoed it from, but it sounds like MEAT is saying thats not possible because of the earth being too big in circumference to fully capture on film for much of the distance between earth and the moon, but if that's true where are the images that show a round earth coming from? Satellites we send out into space like voyager?

from NASA or anyone else for that matter. They only believe in what they can observe with their own eyes because they believe any photographic evidence is doctored, and that NASA's entire existence is to promote the conspiracy.

------
“There is no fate that cannot be surmounted by scorn.” -Albert Camus

https://twistedsifter.files.wordpress.com/2012/07/earth-the-water-planet-blue.jpg?w=800&h=534

but even if it appears more flat and circular what difference would it make if it's rotating?

Also if images like this aren't possible to take until about the moons distance from earth where are these images coming from? Satellites we send out of the system?

>That wasn't edited at odd sections like much of what NASA
>releases. And for the record I don't believe the earth is
>flat, but I do believe there's more going on with our planet,
>it's moon, and space than is let on

it can't all be fake

Man only landed on the moon in 1972. Do you know what the state of technology was in 1972? That's our baseline starting point to evaluate and observe theories ... 45 years of observable data.

We know more about football than we do about space.

We know more about coke a cola than we do about space

We know more about McDonalds burgers than we do about space.

It's not a cover up, it's lack of inquiry and funding for research.

------
“There is no fate that cannot be surmounted by scorn.” -Albert Camus

Plenty of organizations keep secrets why would NASA be any different ?

motive if you will

this is one of the aspects of the grand conspiracy i've always been fascinated by


what exactly to "they" have to gain

Didn't work for the Catholic Church or colonial and American slave masters. I suspect there's plenty that can be seen from space that at the very least would cause things like religion to fall apart. That in and of itself is enough reason.

NASA as an organization, would seemingly have MORE to gain if it turned out there was more going on in space

so to me for this to work it would require outside forces being involved which seems tough to pull off, and again to what extent, to keep people ignorant as you say? I dont really feel there is much to be gained but this is just my opinion

how would an outside group control NASA so tightly? Threaten funding of the entire agency if they reveal whats really happening?

I dunno this is where IMO it falls apart mostly the motivation and end goal for what is required to pull off

That despite everything we know about "them" and their short comings they're able to pull a cosmic conspiracy over your eyes.

------
“There is no fate that cannot be surmounted by scorn.” -Albert Camus