thplinth Posted January 4, 2019 Share Posted January 4, 2019 (edited) The Flat Earth stuff has an alternative explanation for everything. Maths often throws up these weird alternative solutions to the commonly accepted solution and these are IMHO the equivalent theories... Consequently I doubt you will ever disprove them. edit: Least not in our TAMB lifetime. edit: but it really is... he is close... no he is far away... father ted type arguments with the flat earth stuff. Edited January 4, 2019 by thplinth Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
thplinth Posted January 4, 2019 Share Posted January 4, 2019 The moon has a wee patch at one of the poles (southern?) which (near) enjoys 24hr sunshine apparently. So there is some speculation it could lead to a scrap with every cunt wanting to make a moon base there. You think of all that money wasted on weapons and the middle east when we could have been star trekking... cunts. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Toepoke Posted January 4, 2019 Author Share Posted January 4, 2019 Anyway back on topic, the Chinese lunar rover has successfully set off on its exploration... https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-46760729 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
thplinth Posted January 4, 2019 Share Posted January 4, 2019 The last one they landed went dark after about two minutes. Total mystery not explained I think. That new one looks like it is heading to that crater on a suicide mission... Good work to the Chinese if they do get the pictures flowing. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Toepoke Posted January 4, 2019 Author Share Posted January 4, 2019 2 minutes ago, thplinth said: The moon has a wee patch at one of the poles (southern?) which (near) enjoys 24hr sunshine apparently. So there is some speculation it could lead to a scrap with every cunt wanting to make a moon base there. I'd have thought it would be preferable to keep a moonbase out of the sun's radiation as much as possible? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Grim Jim Posted January 5, 2019 Share Posted January 5, 2019 A wee bit chilly? Where is the Goldilocks moonbase? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Scotty CTA Posted January 5, 2019 Share Posted January 5, 2019 7 hours ago, Toepoke said: Not really, it's just a lot of light condensed into a smaller viewing area as your altitude increases. You can see flashes of lightning brightly from space, watching those from the ground doesn't burn anyone's retinas out. Point being that the lights wouldn't be that bright from 200 miles away. 6 hours ago, Toepoke said: Here's a list of claims from previous flat earth threads on here:- 1) South Pole does not exist. Correct! 2) The flat Earth is surrounded by an impenetrable ice wall called Antarctica. 3) 60 years of continuous space exploration has been fabricated. (There's no such thing as 'space' to explore.) 4) Southern hemisphere scheduled air travel is bogus. (Planes don't fly over the South Pole as a shortcut to another continent.) 5) Human eye is only capable of seeing for around 12 miles into the distance. (Further under the right conditions.) 6) Earth is able to survive despite being 3000 miles from a functioning star the 32 mile diameter sun. 7) Earth is encased in a dome like structure that cannot be explored penetrated. 8 ) Sun never rises or sets over the horizon but fades in and out of view. Correct! All of the above has to be correct or the argument totally falls down. 3 hours ago, thplinth said: The moon has a wee patch at one of the poles (southern?) which (near) enjoys 24hr sunshine apparently. So there is some speculation it could lead to a scrap with every cunt wanting to make a moon base there. You think of all that money wasted on weapons and the middle east when we could have been star trekking... cunts. Space Truckin' 3 hours ago, Toepoke said: Anyway back on topic, the Chinese lunar rover has successfully set off on its exploration... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Scotty CTA Posted January 5, 2019 Share Posted January 5, 2019 (edited) 4 hours ago, thplinth said: So there is some speculation it could lead to a scrap with every cunt wanting to make a moon base there. Edited January 5, 2019 by Scotty CTA Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Toepoke Posted January 5, 2019 Author Share Posted January 5, 2019 Scotty I'm starting to think you're trolling us with this nonsense to get us to succumb and crowdfund you a trip on Virgin Galactic. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
iainmac1 Posted January 5, 2019 Share Posted January 5, 2019 1 hour ago, Toepoke said: Scotty I'm starting to think you're trolling us with this nonsense to get us to succumb and crowdfund you a trip on Virgin Galactic. That's just a really good virtual reality machine. Like the ones you get down the shows where you pretend you're on a rollercoaster. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Toepoke Posted January 5, 2019 Author Share Posted January 5, 2019 15 hours ago, thplinth said: The last one they landed went dark after about two minutes. Total mystery not explained I think. Just been having a read into that mission. Seemed like it had an erratic life but did last a good bit longer than that before it failed... https://www.newscientist.com/article/2099696-chinas-jade-rabbit-moon-rover-dead-after-31-months-on-surface/ Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Scotty CTA Posted January 5, 2019 Share Posted January 5, 2019 6 hours ago, Toepoke said: Scotty I'm starting to think you're trolling us with this nonsense to get us to succumb and crowdfund you a trip on Virgin Galactic. No, I'm genuinely serious about the flat earth. It makes perfect sense to my senses (and my understanding). Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Huddersfield Posted January 5, 2019 Share Posted January 5, 2019 Just now, Scotty CTA said: No, I'm genuinely serious about the flat earth. It makes perfect sense to my senses (and my understanding). Have you tested any of the challenges/experiments that were put to you on the other thread? If not, then your understanding is being weakened by an unwillingness to consider alternative evidence, which is something FE proponents tend to accuse everyone else of. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Scotty CTA Posted January 5, 2019 Share Posted January 5, 2019 7 minutes ago, Huddersfield said: Have you tested any of the challenges/experiments that were put to you on the other thread? Unfortunately time is against me. 7 minutes ago, Huddersfield said: If not, then your understanding is being weakened... Fair enough. (It's on the list.) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Toepoke Posted January 11, 2019 Author Share Posted January 11, 2019 New photos released from the lander and the rover. The moon's not changed much in 50 years... https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-46836047 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
exile Posted January 11, 2019 Share Posted January 11, 2019 (edited) On 1/5/2019 at 12:45 AM, Scotty CTA said: Point being that the lights wouldn't be that bright from 200 miles away. QUOTE WITHIN QUOTE Here's a list of claims from previous flat earth threads on here:- 1) South Pole does not exist. Correct! 2) The flat Earth is surrounded by an impenetrable ice wall called Antarctica. 3) 60 years of continuous space exploration has been fabricated. (There's no such thing as 'space' to explore.) 4) Southern hemisphere scheduled air travel is bogus. (Planes don't fly over the South Pole as a shortcut to another continent.) 5) Human eye is only capable of seeing for around 12 miles into the distance. (Further under the right conditions.) 6) Earth is able to survive despite being 3000 miles from a functioning star the 32 mile diameter sun. 7) Earth is encased in a dome like structure that cannot be explored penetrated. 8 ) Sun never rises or sets over the horizon but fades in and out of view. Correct! All of the above has to be correct or the argument totally falls down. Hi, sorry for going off the original topic again but would just like to note a few points here. The above point of view suggests: 2.. Not only all space exploration is a sham, but all Antarctic polar exploration (ie near the South Pole or dependent on the assumption of the South Pole existing) is also a sham. Scott, Shackleton, Amundsen were all part of the conspiracy. 3. Not only 60 years of space exploration (rocket flights etc) fabricated but hundreds of years of observations and calculations about the movement of 'heavenly bodies'. Astronomers from Copernicus and Galileo have been part of the conspiracy for over 500 years ! 4. Not only can there be no flights over the South Pole, but also no direct flights in the southern hemisphere between S America, S Africa and Australia where the airlines say they are but go via the northern hemisphere (see detailed maps in the summer!) (as implied in the original post which I think shouldn't be scored out) In fact if I follow correctly, there is no southern hemisphere, because there are no hemispheres, there is no sphere in the first place! All the airlines and shipping companies, and weather organisations, and naturalists, everyone who ever traversed or explored the southern hemisphere have been part of the conspiracy too. 7. The dome-like structure (celestial sphere or hemisphere) can't be penetrated... but could it be explored? That is not denied. So, how would one explore the explore the inside of the dome? Space travel? Finally I can't help wondering, if there's no space, why do people invest so much time and money in faking space travel, why don't they go and explore what's beyond the (not impenetrable) ice of Antarctica? All you need is a few huskies? Edited January 11, 2019 by exile Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Orraloon Posted January 11, 2019 Share Posted January 11, 2019 4 hours ago, Toepoke said: New photos released from the lander and the rover. The moon's not changed much in 50 years... https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-46836047 Is that a Mexican looking over the horizon at it? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Toepoke Posted January 11, 2019 Author Share Posted January 11, 2019 Video released of the landing. Reminiscent of Apollo 11, but with Neil Armstrong replaced by suitably oriental music... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Scotty CTA Posted January 12, 2019 Share Posted January 12, 2019 9 hours ago, Toepoke said: New photos released from the lander and the rover. The moon's not changed much in 50 years... https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-46836047 How come we can take pictures of the 'heavens' from earth, but no one seems to be able to do so from the moon? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Scotty CTA Posted January 12, 2019 Share Posted January 12, 2019 6 hours ago, exile said: Hi, sorry for going off the original topic again but would just like to note a few points here. The above point of view suggests: 2.. Not only all space exploration is a sham... Any claims to have gone to or be in 'outer space' would be. 6 hours ago, exile said: ...but all Antarctic polar exploration... No, Antarctica exists (just not now we were taught/told). 6 hours ago, exile said: ...(ie near the South Pole or dependent on the assumption of the South Pole existing) is also a sham. Correct. 6 hours ago, exile said: Scott, Shackleton, Amundsen were all part of the conspiracy. Not necessarily. It's actually possible to travel to Antarctica. (It's just not possible for us to travel to the moon.) 6 hours ago, exile said: 3. Not only 60 years of space exploration (rocket flights to outer space etc) fabricated... Correct. NASA was created to deceive. 7 hours ago, exile said: ...but hundreds of years of observations and calculations about the movement of 'heavenly bodies'. Astronomers from Copernicus and Galileo have been part of the conspiracy for over 500 years ! People can mistakenly believe and subscribe to flawed theories. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Scotty CTA Posted January 12, 2019 Share Posted January 12, 2019 7 hours ago, exile said: 4. Not only can there be no flights over the South Pole... Under... 7 hours ago, exile said: ...but also no direct flights in the southern hemisphere between S America, S Africa and Australia where the airlines say they are but go via the northern hemisphere (see detailed maps in the summer!) (as implied in the original post which I think shouldn't be scored out) In fact if I follow correctly, there is no southern hemisphere, because there are no hemispheres, there is no sphere in the first place! Correct. 7 hours ago, exile said: All the airlines and shipping companies, and weather organisations, and naturalists, everyone who ever traversed or explored the southern hemisphere have been part of the conspiracy too. Again... not necessarily. The people at the top... yes, but 'numbers' based on theory would be 'sold' through compartmentalisation. 7 hours ago, exile said: 7. The dome-like structure (celestial sphere or hemisphere) can't be penetrated... but could it be explored? Not by going there, no. The dome is highly polished mirror-like metal. 7 hours ago, exile said: Finally I can't help wondering, if there's no space, why do people invest so much time and money in faking space travel... By attempting to portray us as an insignificant 'lucky' random speck in the universe (instead of the centre of creation) the enemy goes a long way to hiding God from the masses. Money is of no consequence to Satan. Paying for the charade is essential. 7 hours ago, exile said: ...why don't they go and explore what's beyond the (not impenetrable) ice of Antarctica? Admiral Byrd went there. It's impenetrable, too... Every nation has agreed to a treaty. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Toepoke Posted January 12, 2019 Author Share Posted January 12, 2019 8 hours ago, Scotty CTA said: How come we can take pictures of the 'heavens' from earth, but no one seems to be able to do so from the moon? Look at the shadow below the lander, the moon is covered in bright sunlight. It's hard enough to catch the stars in a photo, nevermind during the day. There are actually plans to utilise the shelter of the far side of moon for radio astronomy in particular... https://www.space.com/31811-universe-dark-ages-dare-moon-orbiter.html Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Grim Jim Posted January 12, 2019 Share Posted January 12, 2019 Scotty forgot a bit. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Eisegerwind Posted January 12, 2019 Share Posted January 12, 2019 8 hours ago, Scotty CTA said: The dome is highly polished mirror-like metal. Absolutely fascinating Scotty.I have a couple of questions. 1, Do we know what metal it is, or is it possibly an alloy? 2. Has the dome been cast in 'metat' or is it a formed 'metal'? 3. Was it cast or formed in a single piece or several pieces? 4. The polished surface implies that some post processing has been applied to the 'metal'. Essentialy polishing requires increasingly finer abrasives to be drawn across the surface to produce the polished finish. It's essentialy a very manual process although it can be made easier with the use of machines Did he have a special polishing machine or did he do it himself or maybe subbed it out to the angels. 5. See the chart below showing surface finishes, do you know what he managed to achieve on the dome? https://www.allsealsinc.com/surface_finish_chart.pdf Again, absolutely fascinting stuff Scotty. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Huddersfield Posted January 12, 2019 Share Posted January 12, 2019 It's easy to find photos of the Earth taken from the surface of the Moon & even more so from lunar orbit. But you'll just say they are photoshopped so there's not much point linking to them. There were two main reasons (as I understand it) why the astronauts didn't get many images from the surface. Firstly, they weren't there to take pretty pictures & cared little about 'proving' they'd been there for the sake of a debate that didn't even really exist at the time. Secondly, the landings were predominantly in equatorial regions of the Moon, meaning that for the larger part of the time people were on the Moon, the Earth was generally very high in the sky so didn't show up on most of the photos that were taken. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.