Nobody has ever been able to give me a good answer to this question: why does it matter? What hangs on whether the earth is a spheroid or flat?
It can't be shape in and of itself. I assume it must imply some even more esoteric fact, like flat earth means the government has lied about Antarctica or something.
I know some people seem to think that theism hangs on there being a flat earth, but for the life of me, I can't see how. I know guys like Dubay use terminology like 'realm', so that 'flat earth' really isn't a theory of flat earth as much as it is an anti-globe theory.
The only explanation I've gotten from the flat earthers is "if they can lie about the shape of the earth, it proves they can lie about anything!" but I already saw that when they lied about covid and it was glaringly obvious to anyone who spent 5 fucking minutes looking up the most basic scientific facts about their own immune system. Just because they can lie about anything, and have lied about some pretty big things, doesn't mean the earth is flat when there are plenty of things that you can observe with your own eyes that confirm round earth. But they can get stupid people riled up on conspiracy forums to make those of us who are trying to expose the kikes for raping kids to control us and creating six gorillion social and economic control schemes look bad by association.
Yeah, I don't need flat earth to believe that they can lie about anything. They have convinced people they can pick their gender out of a hat, which is more ridiculous than any belief you can have about the shape of the earth.
Thats right . If the Earth is flat then everything is called into question and no science is reliable and no history is reliable and the common fucking people have no concensus on anything and end up squabbling over how many angels fit on the head of a pin instead of uniting to kill the elites.
Someone is sowing chaos with this flat earth shit. They were pushing ESP and UFOs and spiritual posssesion a few decades ago. I never think any of this shit is truly “grass roots”.
The only thing I can think is that this has to do with the significance of entire worldviews. A lot of flat earthers want to talk about the ancient worldview. A big facet of that is geocentrism. So methinks this has something to do with undermining (concealing) the significance of human beings in a universe understood as a creation of God. So, the whole significance of the 'great lie' is to cut us off from a kind of 'empirical' rootedness in a world that is visibly the craftsmanship of a God who has something in mind for us.
Instead, we get Sagan's 'pale blue dot' in the middle of a hostile and bleak universe that doesn't care if we blip out of existence or if we hang around.
You know I'm a theist, and so, most often, I am trying to explain to flat-earthers that the 'centrism' issue is pretty much indeterminate anyway, and the 'music of the spheres' is a pretty grand scheme overall (meaning it is beautiful and awe inspiring); and the revelation of God is dual, coming in the form of both His presence and His absence. A big, dark, scary universe is not antithetical to the existence of a meaningful God. None of the medieval schoolmen thought so either, and nobody who has made a case from design or fine-tuning in a thousand years has required a reliance on flat earth to make a pretty convincing case. Hitchens even thought fine-tuning was the theistic argument that kept him awake at night.
Interesting perspective. I do think that people with zero scientific training and alot of religious training might find geocentrism attractive in its simplicity .
A big, dark, scary universe is not antithetical to the existence of a meaningful God.
No. It makes it a more complicated narrative to explain to the masses. One might ask “Why did God put us out on the periphery of one of thousands of different galaxies. Why are we not even in the middle of our own solar system?” This is an obvious question to ask if we believe God loves us best and made us special. And we don’t have an answer to that.
I can’t help but compare it to the debate we were having elsewhere about whether the virus was real, i.e. a highly lethal virus compared to flu. Evidence of government elites and corporations exagerating the dangers of the disease or using it as an excuse for a power grab, does not prove the virus doesn’t/didn’t exist. If both are true, its not the simplest narrative.
I just feel that people overwhelmed with the complexity of the universe or the world of human events find such pared down explanations appealing for obvious reasons but the universe is not like that. It feels like people are throwing in the towel by saying “it’s just X”—even with the jewish thing. Its not only the jews. Its jews more than any other group, but if we said it was jews and about 20% of white people who act exactly like jews, that would make our ideology just too complicated to communicate and we like neat narratives.
“Don’t even trust that the world is round!” is just intellectual laziness because the flat earther gets to dismiss all of science for 2000 years without having to examine our body of scientific knowlege for himself, which is hard and time consuming. I think theres a bit of the sour grapes in it too from people who couldn’t or didn’t want to pursue science.
[ - ] CHIRO 1 point 1.8 yearsJul 15, 2023 18:32:11 ago (+1/-0)*
I do think that people with zero scientific training and alot of religious training might find geocentrism attractive in its simplicity.
I think it is phenomenological. Our attention gravitates toward center/s. Jesus is seated at the center of da Vinci's The Last Supper. It's even evident in the terms we use to talk about our cognitive situation. We talk about things that aren't central (to our focus or priorities), or of things on the 'back' burner.
In reality, spatial terms like this suggest nothing equivocal about the way that God values things, only about the way that we do. I'll say more on this below.
One might ask “Why did God put us out on the periphery of one of thousands of different galaxies. Why are we not even in the middle of our own solar system?” This is an obvious question to ask if we believe God loves us best and made us special. And we don’t have an answer to that.
One answer might be natural necessity. If we look at the center of most cosmic events or objects, these tend to be something like the 'ordering factors' for surrounding objects, say, in terms of the big gravitational force generators, or in terms of light sources, or what have you. Ubiquitously, those center points are almost always very violent situations.
Take, for example, the sun, the sun's center, the earth's center, the supermassive black hole at the center of many galaxies (incl. ours), or the singularity at the center of black holes.
It isn't obvious the most loving place in nature is at the center, at least in cosmic terms.
I can’t help but compare it to the debate we were having elsewhere about whether the virus was real, i.e. a highly lethal virus compared to flu. Evidence of government elites and corporations exagerating the dangers of the disease or using it as an excuse for a power grab, does not prove the virus doesn’t/didn’t exist. If both are true, its not the simplest narrative.
First, we have to be careful how we deal with simplicity. Simplicity doesn't improve a theory independently. It is always relative to explanatory power. Only if two theories have equal explanatory power does simplicity help us decide independently which is better.
I think you mean that IF the virus was real, then my theory is simpler but lacks explanatory power. There would simply be facts that my theory couldn't explain, right? Like maybe if there was a death rate in 2020 or 2021 that could not possibly be explained by regular ole influenza.
But this is hard. Really hard. Because to establish that would also require us having pretty high reliability that the diagnostic data itself was being sensitive to the facts (i.e., about a super virus), rather than diagnostic differences year over year serving the false narrative. If the narrative of a super virus is needed, then diagnostic data is an obvious candidate for manipulation.
Does the data suggest a death toll we can trust was (i) real and (ii) really caused by a super bug?
My own theory - at least I think so - is not an attempt, subliminal or otherwise, at reducing overwhelming complexity. There were certain things I expected to see, given the narrative, which I did not see. These increased the probability of outright fraud.
On top of those 'missing' observations, it also occurred to me that if some effect X (a political and/or economic shift) is desired and it can be accomplished either with Y (creating and releasing an actual super virus) or WITHOUT it, then given the nature of sheer unknowns surrounding releasing an actual virus, there would be incentives to accompmish X without Y. Huge ones. Like, not causing an actual pandemic in your country.
It destroys god. It shrinks the earth to a finite space and keeps people stuck in place like a “prison planet” it negates thousands of years of history, legend, religion, culture etc. It puts the entirety of humanity in a box.
Please explain. There is nothing logically inconsistent with a creator God who generates either the solar system as we know it or the flat earth.
It shrinks the earth to a finite space. . .
Are you suggesting earth has infinite spatial extension?
"prison planet"
In what way is a round earth any more prison-like than a flat one?
negates thousands of years of history, legend, religion. . .
Metaphysics and theology are not physical sciences; it should not surprise us that any claims made by religious texts about the physical domain of existence could some day be proven wrong. The question is whether anything hangs on it. What is essential to Christianity, for example, that depends on the earth being a particular shape?
Michael Servetus & Giordano Bruno who expanded on their works were burned at the stake in the 16th Century .. the entire Flat Earth project is dumbdown on a massive scale, we say the Calvinists and Inquisitors who burnt Servetus and Bruno were financed by the same Zionist banking cartel that finances the Flat Earth brigade.
[ - ] chrimony 1 point 1.8 yearsJul 15, 2023 13:48:48 ago (+2/-1)
The moon landings were White man's greatest achievement. Why do you think the White men that built this rocket could not land on the moon? https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=46BW5IfshCE
Because the moon is a plasma projection from the Black sun beneath us duh
Aside from demonstrating that you're retarded, what does that have to do with the engineering that went into building this rocket? https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=46BW5IfshCE
Why do you believe in Government propaganda yet disbelieve in the holocaust?
Because not everything the government says or does is a lie. Is the Hoover Dam real?
This is the definition of doublethink
No, it's just a demonstration that you have a retarded brain limited to binary thinking.
If the moon is a projection, why do the tides follow the moon's movement? You can literally observe large bodies of water responding to the moon's gravity. Pretty hardcore for a projection.
[ - ] TheBigMan 1 point 1.8 yearsJul 15, 2023 15:36:20 ago (+2/-1)
Good luck. Retards always win when you argue with them because, well, they are retarded. It's quite amazing how easily they are tricked into believing bullshit like space aliens, faked moon landings, and flat earth.
[ - ] chrimony 1 point 1.8 yearsJul 15, 2023 16:03:20 ago (+1/-0)
Retards always win when you argue with them because, well, they are retarded.
Nah, it's not for their benefit, it's for the people on the borderline. Even nominally smart people have fallen for the moon landings being faked. The video of the Apollo launch is to show just what they are denying -- it really is awe-inspiring.
The earth is round and space is real, but the evidence we were shown of the moon landing was clearly fake. You can see the wires and see the astronauts behave as if they're on wires and not in low gravity in many shots from the Apollo missions. The Van Allen belts are deadly to living organisms but not nearly as harmful to electronic equipment with much less expensive shielding than it takes to protect living organisms passing through. The costs of getting humans safely to the moon would have been far more than what was spent and the craft needed would have been far larger and heavier than the tinfoil-covered lunar lander they showed us. We have likely landed unmanned craft on the moon, but not people, and we haven't even tried to land people on the moon since the 70s.
The earth is round and space is real, but the evidence we were shown of the moon landing was clearly fake.
No, I've examined the evidence, and it was not "clearly fake".
You can see the wires
Show, don't tell. There are no wires.
The Van Allen belts are deadly to living organisms
Yes, and the scientists and engineers responsible for discovering them also planned the missions to limit the radiation exposure to the astronauts.
The costs of getting humans safely to the moon would have been far more than what was spent and the craft needed would have been far larger and heavier than the tinfoil-covered lunar lander they showed us.
The costs of the moon landings were ENORMOUS. The lander did not have to deal with an atmosphere, and the gravity of the moon is only 1/6th that of Earth's.
we haven't even tried to land people on the moon since the 70s.
Because while doing it once was a historic achievement, there was little to no practical value to keep going there, while the costs were very high.
Some of the shots of astronauts on wires and of astronauts behaving in a way that makes a lot more sense if they were on wires than if they were in low-g: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Zz9Bzi_GyD0
Even at the lowest radiation points, you'd still need thicker shielding than just some gold foil to keep humans alive for hours as they passed through it. Going in a non-linear path back to earth would also require more fuel for steering which the minimally shielded lunar lander did not have. And seriously, the lander looks more like a B-movie prop than something you'd want to ride through space in. https://ichef.bbci.co.uk/news/976/cpsprodpb/11EF5/production/_107816437_as15-88-11866orig.jpg
It was so expensive and of so little practical value that we went back half a dozen times in the 70s and kept going even after unlucky Apollo 13 nearly killed the crew. But yeah, once super-honest President Nixon was out of office we stopped going.
Some of the shots of astronauts on wires and of astronauts behaving in a way that makes a lot more sense if they were on wires than if they were in low-g: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Zz9Bzi_GyD0
0:05: "There's no evidence at all of any astronaut making a leap or a jump anywhere near a height commensurate with 1/6th G possibilities."
Video then shows jump that would not have been possible on Earth. Go ahead, try that jump at home, see how high you get. Now do it with a bulky suit on.
Other examples include videos of astronauts moving around that look slightly funny: Yeah, they're wearing bulky suits, the gravity is unusual, and the video is low resolution and low framerate.
This is the kind of "evidence" we get for the missions being faked.
Even at the lowest radiation points, you'd still need thicker shielding than just some gold foil to keep humans alive for hours as they passed through it. Going in a non-linear path back to earth would also require more fuel for steering which the minimally shielded lunar lander did not have.
Oh, I didn't know you were a mission scientist. Please show me your analysis report. And, uh, Mr. Space Engineer, the lunar lander stayed at the moon.
And seriously, the lander looks more like a B-movie prop than something you'd want to ride through space in.
That's because it's just a lander that did not have to contend with atmosphere and only 1/6th the gravity of Earth, as I explained in my last comment.
It was so expensive and of so little practical value that we went back half a dozen times in the 70s and kept going even after unlucky Apollo 13 nearly killed the crew.
The missions were planned in advance. There were experiments planned for them. If the goal was to hoax it, why not just do one?
But yeah, once super-honest President Nixon was out of office we stopped going.
The last 3 missions were cancelled 2 years before Nixon left office. The public was bored with them. The money was not being well spent. And the risk of another Apollo 13 certainly played a factor.
So is this the extent of your super-serious, totally convincing argument that White man's greatest achievement was faked?
[ + ] HonkyMcNiggerSpic
[ - ] HonkyMcNiggerSpic 0 points 1.8 yearsJul 15, 2023 18:28:58 ago (+0/-0)
[ + ] BulletStopper
[ - ] BulletStopper 5 points 1.8 yearsJul 15, 2023 16:46:40 ago (+5/-0)
[ + ] CHIRO
[ - ] CHIRO 2 points 1.8 yearsJul 15, 2023 15:39:00 ago (+2/-0)
It can't be shape in and of itself. I assume it must imply some even more esoteric fact, like flat earth means the government has lied about Antarctica or something.
I know some people seem to think that theism hangs on there being a flat earth, but for the life of me, I can't see how. I know guys like Dubay use terminology like 'realm', so that 'flat earth' really isn't a theory of flat earth as much as it is an anti-globe theory.
[ + ] NaturalSelectionistWorker
[ - ] NaturalSelectionistWorker 4 points 1.8 yearsJul 15, 2023 15:45:18 ago (+4/-0)
[ + ] CHIRO
[ - ] CHIRO 2 points 1.8 yearsJul 15, 2023 16:02:09 ago (+2/-0)
[ + ] x0x7
[ - ] x0x7 0 points 1.8 yearsJul 15, 2023 16:58:32 ago (+0/-0)
[ + ] PostWallHelena
[ - ] PostWallHelena 2 points 1.8 yearsJul 15, 2023 15:50:41 ago (+2/-0)
Thats right . If the Earth is flat then everything is called into question and no science is reliable and no history is reliable and the common fucking people have no concensus on anything and end up squabbling over how many angels fit on the head of a pin instead of uniting to kill the elites.
Someone is sowing chaos with this flat earth shit. They were pushing ESP and UFOs and spiritual posssesion a few decades ago. I never think any of this shit is truly “grass roots”.
[ + ] CHIRO
[ - ] CHIRO 2 points 1.8 yearsJul 15, 2023 16:11:43 ago (+2/-0)
The only thing I can think is that this has to do with the significance of entire worldviews. A lot of flat earthers want to talk about the ancient worldview. A big facet of that is geocentrism. So methinks this has something to do with undermining (concealing) the significance of human beings in a universe understood as a creation of God. So, the whole significance of the 'great lie' is to cut us off from a kind of 'empirical' rootedness in a world that is visibly the craftsmanship of a God who has something in mind for us.
Instead, we get Sagan's 'pale blue dot' in the middle of a hostile and bleak universe that doesn't care if we blip out of existence or if we hang around.
You know I'm a theist, and so, most often, I am trying to explain to flat-earthers that the 'centrism' issue is pretty much indeterminate anyway, and the 'music of the spheres' is a pretty grand scheme overall (meaning it is beautiful and awe inspiring); and the revelation of God is dual, coming in the form of both His presence and His absence. A big, dark, scary universe is not antithetical to the existence of a meaningful God. None of the medieval schoolmen thought so either, and nobody who has made a case from design or fine-tuning in a thousand years has required a reliance on flat earth to make a pretty convincing case. Hitchens even thought fine-tuning was the theistic argument that kept him awake at night.
[ + ] PostWallHelena
[ - ] PostWallHelena 2 points 1.8 yearsJul 15, 2023 16:46:17 ago (+2/-0)
No. It makes it a more complicated narrative to explain to the masses. One might ask “Why did God put us out on the periphery of one of thousands of different galaxies. Why are we not even in the middle of our own solar system?” This is an obvious question to ask if we believe God loves us best and made us special. And we don’t have an answer to that.
I can’t help but compare it to the debate we were having elsewhere about whether the virus was real, i.e. a highly lethal virus compared to flu. Evidence of government elites and corporations exagerating the dangers of the disease or using it as an excuse for a power grab, does not prove the virus doesn’t/didn’t exist. If both are true, its not the simplest narrative.
I just feel that people overwhelmed with the complexity of the universe or the world of human events find such pared down explanations appealing for obvious reasons but the universe is not like that. It feels like people are throwing in the towel by saying “it’s just X”—even with the jewish thing. Its not only the jews. Its jews more than any other group, but if we said it was jews and about 20% of white people who act exactly like jews, that would make our ideology just too complicated to communicate and we like neat narratives.
“Don’t even trust that the world is round!” is just intellectual laziness because the flat earther gets to dismiss all of science for 2000 years without having to examine our body of scientific knowlege for himself, which is hard and time consuming. I think theres a bit of the sour grapes in it too from people who couldn’t or didn’t want to pursue science.
[ + ] CHIRO
[ - ] CHIRO 1 point 1.8 yearsJul 15, 2023 18:32:11 ago (+1/-0)*
I think it is phenomenological. Our attention gravitates toward center/s. Jesus is seated at the center of da Vinci's The Last Supper. It's even evident in the terms we use to talk about our cognitive situation. We talk about things that aren't central (to our focus or priorities), or of things on the 'back' burner.
In reality, spatial terms like this suggest nothing equivocal about the way that God values things, only about the way that we do. I'll say more on this below.
One answer might be natural necessity. If we look at the center of most cosmic events or objects, these tend to be something like the 'ordering factors' for surrounding objects, say, in terms of the big gravitational force generators, or in terms of light sources, or what have you. Ubiquitously, those center points are almost always very violent situations.
Take, for example, the sun, the sun's center, the earth's center, the supermassive black hole at the center of many galaxies (incl. ours), or the singularity at the center of black holes.
It isn't obvious the most loving place in nature is at the center, at least in cosmic terms.
First, we have to be careful how we deal with simplicity. Simplicity doesn't improve a theory independently. It is always relative to explanatory power. Only if two theories have equal explanatory power does simplicity help us decide independently which is better.
I think you mean that IF the virus was real, then my theory is simpler but lacks explanatory power. There would simply be facts that my theory couldn't explain, right? Like maybe if there was a death rate in 2020 or 2021 that could not possibly be explained by regular ole influenza.
But this is hard. Really hard. Because to establish that would also require us having pretty high reliability that the diagnostic data itself was being sensitive to the facts (i.e., about a super virus), rather than diagnostic differences year over year serving the false narrative. If the narrative of a super virus is needed, then diagnostic data is an obvious candidate for manipulation.
Does the data suggest a death toll we can trust was (i) real and (ii) really caused by a super bug?
My own theory - at least I think so - is not an attempt, subliminal or otherwise, at reducing overwhelming complexity. There were certain things I expected to see, given the narrative, which I did not see. These increased the probability of outright fraud.
On top of those 'missing' observations, it also occurred to me that if some effect X (a political and/or economic shift) is desired and it can be accomplished either with Y (creating and releasing an actual super virus) or WITHOUT it, then given the nature of sheer unknowns surrounding releasing an actual virus, there would be incentives to accompmish X without Y. Huge ones. Like, not causing an actual pandemic in your country.
[ + ] Jerd34
[ - ] Jerd34 0 points 1.8 yearsJul 16, 2023 06:50:26 ago (+0/-0)
[ + ] CHIRO
[ - ] CHIRO 0 points 1.8 yearsJul 16, 2023 10:13:00 ago (+0/-0)*
Please explain. There is nothing logically inconsistent with a creator God who generates either the solar system as we know it or the flat earth.
Are you suggesting earth has infinite spatial extension?
In what way is a round earth any more prison-like than a flat one?
Metaphysics and theology are not physical sciences; it should not surprise us that any claims made by religious texts about the physical domain of existence could some day be proven wrong. The question is whether anything hangs on it. What is essential to Christianity, for example, that depends on the earth being a particular shape?
[ + ] Jerd34
[ - ] Jerd34 0 points 1.8 yearsJul 16, 2023 11:28:32 ago (+0/-0)
[ + ] CHIRO
[ - ] CHIRO 0 points 1.8 yearsJul 16, 2023 11:32:03 ago (+0/-0)
[ + ] Jerd34
[ - ] Jerd34 0 points 1.8 yearsJul 16, 2023 13:56:52 ago (+0/-0)
[ + ] Doglegwarrior
[ - ] Doglegwarrior -4 points 1.8 yearsJul 15, 2023 14:13:40 ago (+2/-6)
[ + ] HonkyMcNiggerSpic
[ - ] HonkyMcNiggerSpic 1 point 1.8 yearsJul 15, 2023 18:29:38 ago (+1/-0)
[ + ] TankTinker
[ - ] TankTinker 1 point 1.8 yearsJul 15, 2023 13:13:16 ago (+1/-0)
Parmenides of Elea Demonstrated the Earth was a Sphere in 500 BC.
Indian Astronomer Aryabhata Asserted the Earth was a Globe in 500 AD.
Greek Mathematician Eratosthenes Calculated the Earth's Circumference in 250 BC.
https://i.postimg.cc/2yDWNJZR/burnt-alive2.jpg
Michael Servetus & Giordano Bruno who expanded on their works were burned at the stake in the 16th Century .. the entire Flat Earth project is dumbdown on a massive scale, we say the Calvinists and Inquisitors who burnt Servetus and Bruno were financed by the same Zionist banking cartel that finances the Flat Earth brigade.
https://i.postimg.cc/JhqR0kfD/Earth-Moon-Discovr.jpg
[ + ] Centaurus
[ - ] Centaurus 3 points 1.8 yearsJul 15, 2023 14:18:05 ago (+3/-0)
[ + ] FacelessOne
[ - ] FacelessOne -2 points 1.8 yearsJul 15, 2023 12:46:04 ago (+3/-5)
[ + ] observation1
[ - ] observation1 3 points 1.8 yearsJul 15, 2023 13:12:29 ago (+3/-0)
[ + ] FacelessOne
[ - ] FacelessOne 1 point 1.8 yearsJul 15, 2023 13:37:07 ago (+1/-0)
[ + ] chrimony
[ - ] chrimony 2 points 1.8 yearsJul 15, 2023 13:39:04 ago (+3/-1)
[ + ] FacelessOne
[ - ] FacelessOne 2 points 1.8 yearsJul 15, 2023 13:40:56 ago (+2/-0)
When will the doublethink end?
[ + ] chrimony
[ - ] chrimony 1 point 1.8 yearsJul 15, 2023 13:48:48 ago (+2/-1)
[ + ] FacelessOne
[ - ] FacelessOne 2 points 1.8 yearsJul 15, 2023 14:01:28 ago (+2/-0)
That we FaceTimed from the moon...
In the 60s...
[ + ] chrimony
[ - ] chrimony 1 point 1.8 yearsJul 15, 2023 14:07:30 ago (+1/-0)
[ + ] FacelessOne
[ - ] FacelessOne -1 points 1.8 yearsJul 15, 2023 14:10:38 ago (+2/-3)
Why do you believe in Government propaganda yet disbelieve in the holocaust?
This is the definition of doublethink
[ + ] chrimony
[ - ] chrimony 2 points 1.8 yearsJul 15, 2023 14:13:48 ago (+2/-0)
Aside from demonstrating that you're retarded, what does that have to do with the engineering that went into building this rocket? https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=46BW5IfshCE
Because not everything the government says or does is a lie. Is the Hoover Dam real?
No, it's just a demonstration that you have a retarded brain limited to binary thinking.
[ + ] NaturalSelectionistWorker
[ - ] NaturalSelectionistWorker 1 point 1.8 yearsJul 15, 2023 15:51:55 ago (+1/-0)
[ + ] TheBigMan
[ - ] TheBigMan 1 point 1.8 yearsJul 15, 2023 15:36:20 ago (+2/-1)
Retards always win when you argue with them because, well, they are retarded.
It's quite amazing how easily they are tricked into believing bullshit like space aliens, faked moon landings, and flat earth.
[ + ] chrimony
[ - ] chrimony 1 point 1.8 yearsJul 15, 2023 16:03:20 ago (+1/-0)
Nah, it's not for their benefit, it's for the people on the borderline. Even nominally smart people have fallen for the moon landings being faked. The video of the Apollo launch is to show just what they are denying -- it really is awe-inspiring.
[ + ] NaturalSelectionistWorker
[ - ] NaturalSelectionistWorker 1 point 1.8 yearsJul 15, 2023 15:50:15 ago (+1/-0)
[ + ] chrimony
[ - ] chrimony 0 points 1.8 yearsJul 15, 2023 16:00:23 ago (+0/-0)
No, I've examined the evidence, and it was not "clearly fake".
Show, don't tell. There are no wires.
Yes, and the scientists and engineers responsible for discovering them also planned the missions to limit the radiation exposure to the astronauts.
Did you not watch the video of this rocket launch? https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=46BW5IfshCE
The costs of the moon landings were ENORMOUS. The lander did not have to deal with an atmosphere, and the gravity of the moon is only 1/6th that of Earth's.
Because while doing it once was a historic achievement, there was little to no practical value to keep going there, while the costs were very high.
[ + ] NaturalSelectionistWorker
[ - ] NaturalSelectionistWorker 1 point 1.8 yearsJul 15, 2023 16:19:15 ago (+1/-0)
Even at the lowest radiation points, you'd still need thicker shielding than just some gold foil to keep humans alive for hours as they passed through it. Going in a non-linear path back to earth would also require more fuel for steering which the minimally shielded lunar lander did not have. And seriously, the lander looks more like a B-movie prop than something you'd want to ride through space in. https://ichef.bbci.co.uk/news/976/cpsprodpb/11EF5/production/_107816437_as15-88-11866orig.jpg
It was so expensive and of so little practical value that we went back half a dozen times in the 70s and kept going even after unlucky Apollo 13 nearly killed the crew. But yeah, once super-honest President Nixon was out of office we stopped going.
[ + ] chrimony
[ - ] chrimony 0 points 1.8 yearsJul 15, 2023 17:11:51 ago (+0/-0)
0:05: "There's no evidence at all of any astronaut making a leap or a jump anywhere near a height commensurate with 1/6th G possibilities."
Video then shows jump that would not have been possible on Earth. Go ahead, try that jump at home, see how high you get. Now do it with a bulky suit on.
1:07: Video of "wires" glinting in the sun: Yeah, those are antennas: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Apollo/Skylab_spacesuit#/media/File:EV-A7LB.png
Other examples include videos of astronauts moving around that look slightly funny: Yeah, they're wearing bulky suits, the gravity is unusual, and the video is low resolution and low framerate.
This is the kind of "evidence" we get for the missions being faked.
Oh, I didn't know you were a mission scientist. Please show me your analysis report. And, uh, Mr. Space Engineer, the lunar lander stayed at the moon.
That's because it's just a lander that did not have to contend with atmosphere and only 1/6th the gravity of Earth, as I explained in my last comment.
The missions were planned in advance. There were experiments planned for them. If the goal was to hoax it, why not just do one?
The last 3 missions were cancelled 2 years before Nixon left office. The public was bored with them. The money was not being well spent. And the risk of another Apollo 13 certainly played a factor.
So is this the extent of your super-serious, totally convincing argument that White man's greatest achievement was faked?
[ + ] NaturalSelectionistWorker
[ - ] NaturalSelectionistWorker 0 points 1.8 yearsJul 15, 2023 15:46:10 ago (+0/-0)
[ + ] FacelessOne
[ - ] FacelessOne 1 point 1.8 yearsJul 15, 2023 15:46:37 ago (+2/-1)