Someone posted a link to a photo of a person photographing the ISS in the concave FB group, with the backdrop of the Moon. So I superimposed my own plane over the Moon as a direct visual size comparison.
This is a fair question I want to resolve in my thinking... Given that that plane is probably 35K feet high (approx 6 miles high max from the ground, and if lower it's even more questionable). The ISS is told to the public to be 220 miles high up. Now these comparisons for the ISS against some normal planes...
Can anyone reasonably say that shows an object approximately 30 times further away? Yes I took a photo of a smaller than 747 plane, but they aren't radically that much smaller. I would say even it's suspect at 10 times further away.
I think that's quite a nice evidence find :) People want the truth of what this world is now.. the ones that aren't brainwashed by the media and repeating words like tin foil hat, conspiracy at anyone that dares to think the media and governments aren't a source of truth at all.
My observation is when the moon get viewed in the these high altitude videos it seems much smaller. I know there is no good reference, but it does seem that way. So things up there are smaller than we see perceive them looking up from the surface. My opinion anyhow.
I agree with the exposing of lies that a lot of FE'ers do against nasa, I think it's vital now, I just don't agree with the end point they are jumping to. Light is bending, so seeing that moon in that position from that height and time can give just as much weight to Steven's concave, of it wrapping around visually. Must think working models in your mind, not purely what your eyes see.
haha Dani you should join under the pretense of genuine curiosity and ask questions for them to answer. Then you basically question their answer in a way that proves them wrong ;) chances are you will get banned in 1 day though
Hi Eric, I know there's something so very wrong with the world, and see maps everywhere that don't make sense, until I came across your books on eBay, then everything just clicked! I want to help bring the flat 2d world to the masses now and live in hope the stupid people walking the earth don't someday fall off the edge. All my love, Kirsten xxxxxxx
It is not that those of you on other forums besides IFERS or TFES are ignorant. The truth is that the people on those forums are ignorant as well and for the most part completely rehashing everything they've heard from others. When you read Dubay's 'answers' he is basically copy+pasting Samuel Rowbotham's work (which I suggest you read yourself and really comprehend in order to grasp where he was correct and where he fell short).
For example, in Rowbotham's "Earth not a globe" he reasons in his star trail section that 1) Sigma Octantis doesn't exist, 2) The Southern cross actually moves in a great arc and does not in fact rotate along an axis.
He cited these things with so much conviction because he knew that if these postulates were not correct that Flat Earth theory will fail pretty hard. He knew that if the Southern stars indeed rotated about an axis that Earth could not in fact be flat.
So he made assumptions based on limited knowledge at the time and the truth of the matter is he simply did not have enough information about the Southern star trails. He lived in the North hermisphere and relied on testimonies from people in ships going a few degrees south of the equator.
So, his erroneous conclusions have been disseminated and passed down, watered down, bastardized and disseminated again amongst hordes of people who know no better. But it is based on an assumption- a huge gamble at the time (late 1800's) that turned out to be false. The Southern stars do indeed rotate about an axis.
I can almost assure you that with today's library of information Rowbotham would not have concluded the Earth was flat. He most likely would have ended up here in this forum and continually asked questions from all angles and without bias.
well if that is the correct position of the moon at that day, it just proves light bends a whole lot more at high altitudes (not 73 miles). their instruments are inaccurate. simply put...when a rocket with a camera shoots from that height the refraction from the glass sky is going to allow you to see the moon even though it is a quarter way around the inside of the earth.
acenci, you've had enough to understand earth is not flat but concave. why don't you get the fuck outta here.