The Last Man on the Moon - Page 6 - Anything Goes - Other topics not covered elsewhere - Tartan Army Message Board Jump to content

The Last Man on the Moon


Recommended Posts

3 hours ago, iainmac1 said:

Why bother? Who gains anything from saying the world is a sphere? Why not just say the world is flat.

It gives the iron age stories some validity 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

23 hours ago, Scotty CTA said:

The calculation shows 3 spheres.

The calculation does not show three spheres. The calculation is the maths bit, not the text or the pictures. The calculation does not, at any point, assume spheres or use any kind of maths that implies a sphere.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 hours ago, Scotty CTA said:

Flights from one point below the Equator (for example, Johanesburg) in South Africa to another point below the Equator (for example, Santiago, Chile) in South America always fly through distant points North of the Equator.

BTW - can you confirm this assertion?...

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 minutes ago, Toepoke said:

BTW - can you confirm this assertion?...

 

If you go onto flight radar you can see flights in the Southern Hemisphere easily. However, there are far fewer south to south flights, so there aren't many. In addition to small numbers however, the main reason you don't get flights going over the Antarctic is just geography. There are virtually no major conurbations below 40 degrees south latitude, whereas above 40 degrees north latitude you have most of the major cities in Europe, half of the USA, Russia, a bit China etc. So it's a basic geometry thing to fly over the arctic circle on northern routes. No flights are scheduled over the North Pole though, that's a baseless assertion.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 hours ago, Scotty CTA said:

Embracing ignorance... deception... lacking truth... happy with a 'don't want to know' attitude...

I've only put a couple of hundred hours into this (compared to the thousands and thousands of hours put into JFK and 9/11). I still have lots of questions...

Apparently, we can book flights that fly over the North Pole, but we can't book flights that fly over 'a South Pole'.

Flights from one point below the Equator (for example, Johanesburg) in South Africa to another point below the Equator (for example, Santiago, Chile) in South America always fly through distant points North of the Equator.

Why is that?

Why no direct non-stop shortcuts?

Why not a straightforward 11 hour flight instead of an 18+ hour flight?

There is no 'South Pole' in the masonic United Nations flag.

UNFlag33.jpg

(Truth hidden in plain sight?)

 

 

The complete lack of understanding of basic physics in those videos is hilarious.

and the assertion about planes is easily falsified by looking at flight radar, where I can see at the moment a Johannesburg to Singapore flights flying over the Indian Ocean, so not in the northern hemisphere. But of course flightradar24 will now be added to the list of websites controlled by the illuminati so it will be dismissed as a source of data.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 minutes ago, biffer said:

If you go onto flight radar you can see flights in the Southern Hemisphere easily. However, there are far fewer south to south flights, so there aren't many. In addition to small numbers however, the main reason you don't get flights going over the Antarctic is just geography. There are virtually no major conurbations below 40 degrees south latitude, whereas above 40 degrees north latitude you have most of the major cities in Europe, half of the USA, Russia, a bit China etc. So it's a basic geometry thing to fly over the arctic circle on northern routes. No flights are scheduled over the North Pole though, that's a baseless assertion.

Also do commercial flights not have to stay a certain distance from an airport in case of an emergency diversion? That would be a barrier to flying over the South Pole.

Also I'd read that planes that do fly over Antarctica have to carry survival equipment which would be an additional cost airlines wouldn't want to fork out...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

18 hours ago, iainmac1 said:

OK let's say that the world is flat and that all pictures and video from space etc are faked. 

Look at NASA's official 'painted' CGI images of earth...

zz1%252B%2525282%252529.jpg

11794566_435328969987083_357219717557197

Seriously?

18 hours ago, iainmac1 said:

Why bother? Who gains anything from saying the world is a sphere? Why not just say the world is flat.

If the earth really orbits the sun then the enemy will try to claim that we are an accidental insignificant speck in a godless universe, but if the sun orbits the earth then there would be the danger of coming to the conclusion that we are at the centre of a special creation.

NASA and the space programs exist to 'hide' God.

The sun and the moon are closer and smaller than we have been taught. (They are probably about the same size too.)

The lie is that the sun is supposed to be (conveniently) 400 times bigger than the moon and at the same time (conveniently) 400 times further away, so they only appear to be the same size.

Solar_eclipse_1999_4_NR.jpg

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 hours ago, Toepoke said:

Also I'd read that planes that do fly over Antarctica have to carry survival equipment which would be an additional cost airlines wouldn't want to fork out...

What about doubling the distances?

Do you see any additional costs there?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Looking up at the heavens & simply wondering is one of the few things that actually makes most people wonder about God & the meaning of life. It's a thing of awe-inspiring beauty as it is. God wouldn't need flat Earths & assorted nonsense to remind people of what a bewildering creation the universe is.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

45 minutes ago, Huddersfield said:

Looking up at the heavens & simply wondering is one of the few things that actually makes most people wonder about God & the meaning of life. It's a thing of awe-inspiring beauty as it is. God wouldn't need flat Earths & assorted nonsense to remind people of what a bewildering creation the universe is.

:ok:. It's a bizarre thought process we're witnessing here. The beautiful 'coincidence' of the relative sizes and distances that provides us with the solar eclipse is far better evidence of a divine creator, if anyone chooses to take it as such, than "it's all a demonic conspiracy cooked up by NASA" (and every astronomer since Huygens).

Still, we're moving well into Poe's Law territory now and I'm starting to feel we're being taken for a ride ...

[Congratulations for Sunday btw - always warms the heart to see those sods beaten and hear Garry with the monk on ...]

Edited by DonnyTJS
Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 hours ago, Scotty CTA said:

You can confirm it yourself. Try booking.

There are only a few direct flights posted for the sake of appearances, but you could never get on one as the path doesn't exist.

 

Just had a look at South African Airways website, there's a daily direct flight from Johnnesburg to Perth Australia, takes around 9 hours to do the 5000 miles, a cruising speed of around 550mph, perfectly reasonable, and no diversion into the northern hemisphere. You can follow previous routes taken by the flight here...

https://www.flightradar24.com/data/flights/sa280

Also found this on Wikipedia...

"Depending on the winds, the Qantas flight QF 63 from Sydney to Johannesburg-O. R. Tambo sometimes flies over the Antarctic Circle to latitude 71 degrees as well and allowing views of the icecap"

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Polar_route#Antarctica

 

On ‎05‎/‎02‎/‎2017 at 1:46 AM, Scotty CTA said:

 

 

 

 

We're still waiting on your explanation of how the permanent daylight of the Antarctic summer can occur in this model.

Also from the above animation Sydney would only get about 4 hours of daylight in the middle of summer.

And how come the night sky is totally different north and south of the equator if we're all looking up in the same direction?

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 hours ago, Scotty CTA said:

You can confirm it yourself. Try booking.

There are only a few direct flights posted for the sake of appearances, but you could never get on one as the path doesn't exist.

 

:lol: Flights don't exist. You have to be a special type of window licker to even begin to believe this crap. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 hours ago, Scotty CTA said:

You can confirm it yourself. Try booking.

There are only a few direct flights posted for the sake of appearances, but you could never get on one as the path doesn't exist.

 

Wow.

That's amazing.

I cannot believe anybody could take that seriously.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, biffer said:

The saddest thing about this thread is that it was started out of respect for a man who achieved more in his life than anyone who has commented has or will. And then it got taken over by complete nut####erry. 

 

Yes. And the reason it ended up with all the fcukwittery was that the usual suspect asked if there had been a "deathbed confession". Whilst all that stuff is at best laughable it really is pretty offensive and nasty, questioning the morality of decent people who have achieved great things.  That sort of stuff shouldn't go unchallenged.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

16 hours ago, Scotty CTA said:

Seriously?

If the earth really orbits the sun then the enemy will try to claim that we are an accidental insignificant speck in a godless universe, but if the sun orbits the earth then there would be the danger of coming to the conclusion that we are at the centre of a special creation.

NASA and the space programs exist to 'hide' God.

The sun and the moon are closer and smaller than we have been taught. (They are probably about the same size too.)

The lie is that the sun is supposed to be (conveniently) 400 times bigger than the moon and at the same time (conveniently) 400 times further away, so they only appear to be the same size.

 

I'm pretty confused now. So it's the devil that benifits from a Spherical Earth belief??

There must be thousands and thousands of people involved in this conspiracy. How come no one has ever spoken out?

Also spherical earth theories first came about thousands of years ago in ancient Greece. Were they all in on this conspiracy, did they start it?

Also many civilisations throughout the world who never came into contact all put forward spherical earth theories. How did they come together to do this?

Also...Columbus wanted to spread Christianity. Was he a big lilar?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

20 hours ago, Huddersfield said:

Looking up at the heavens & simply wondering is one of the few things that actually makes most people wonder about God & the meaning of life. It's a thing of awe-inspiring beauty as it is. God wouldn't need flat Earths & assorted nonsense to remind people of what a bewildering creation the universe is.

You can't see a flat earth by looking up (and it's satan that needs the deception).

6 hours ago, iainmac1 said:

I'm pretty confused now. So it's the devil that benifits from a Spherical Earth belief??

Of course.

Even Dawkins would have to admit that there couldn't be 'evolution' in a closed system.

6 hours ago, iainmac1 said:

There must be thousands and thousands of people involved in this conspiracy. How come no one has ever spoken out?

Most believed the world to be flat until about 500 years ago.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

20 minutes ago, Scotty CTA said:

 

Most believed the world to be flat until about 500 years ago.

No they didn't. See Gould's study of the literature that I linked to above. Also, as mentioned, ancient Greek mathematics on the circumference of the Earth was based on its being a sphere.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The great pyramid of Giza is also aligned to true north, what were they aligning it to if the earth was flat?

Or the ancient building that take into account the precession of the equinoxes  (the wobble in the sphere we live on) these predate the very concept you're saying is reason behind it.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, Scotty CTA said:

Even Dawkins would have to admit that there couldn't be 'evolution' in a closed system.

Most believed the world to be flat until about 500 years ago.

 

Dawkins would be unlikely to admit that as it remains a complex scientific debate.

Have you read any of the work of JB Russell? He's a Professor of Medieval History with an interest in Flat Earth theories. He makes two interesting points. Firstly, that other than in the earliest days of philosophy or in tribal societies, virtually no evidence exists anywhere of anyone believing that until around the 1830s. He has also suggested that the reason the theory emerged at that time was a straw man strategy, to deliberately discredit Christianity by artificially placing it in contradiction to Darwinism.

http://www.veritas-ucsb.org/library/russell/FlatEarth.html

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
×
×
  • Create New...