Oddbean new post about login | logout The blue dot is admitted to being a composite image by the guy who made it himself. It's not a real photo, none of them are. Flat earth pilots exist, if there were none I would be more skeptical. I have hours of interviews, but I can seem to locate them online now. Here's an exceprt from the longer interview. https://video.nostr.build/ac44427ff6d826c6589411a770eb7c9e965bc9c9cbbdb473f58794c51f5295df.mp4 I think a good question would be what would you consider credible evidence that the earth isn't a curved ball flying through space?
A picture of it, from space, showing the edge
The idea that there is an edge as a presumption though. No one makes that claim. The photos we have from 'space' or high altitudes show a level surface. See how the misrepresent things? Why do this? The claim: https://image.nostr.build/375544c73aa400119a81403f60fced6d13f0925194e79599ea0d6615e75caa84.jpg Reality: https://image.nostr.build/ec5171ec79b461eb7a8f6660e2d43eaacccd36f937d733145e8d9b763756a462.jpg
Those both look like fake pictures
Agreed. The former is what is typically presented as proof.
https://www.nasa.gov/gallery/walking-in-space/
NASA is fake and gay. I know they faked the moon landings, which means their credibility is totally shot. Only a handful of people have ever claimed to leave LEO. I think it's a cool story. As real as a Hollywood production.
Its just a bunch of pictures. You can just as easily get similar pictures from another space agency. Don't you think China would love to point out that NASA is fake? But instead they have their own agency doing the same things.
All the countries have unilaterally agreed to the Antarctica treaty despite claims they are mortal enemies. If that's feasible, it's feasible they have other arrangements to. These things are proof of anything. The fact is curvature is repeatedly debunked with long distance observations and radio waves. Indisputably so, that's why the topic always shifts to "but what about .... explain that." Once you get into the physics then it really starts to go downhill. Did you know there were pages that emerged which were removed from the end of Newton's Principia? Want to guess what was in them? Why would they hide those?
*aren't proof Fake agencies are there to manufacture the propaganda, and be propped up by fake media and paid of experts.
Most treaties are only signed because the states signing them aren't affected by the treaty. Antarctica is not relevant to anyone, so its easy to get a treaty for it. On the other hand, the US refuses to sign the treaty that limits ocean borders, despite most of the world signing, and despite China clearly violating it. It would be an easy win, but the cost of being restricted is too high. Likewise, the nuclear non proliferation treaty was mostly signed by states that lacked nukes, and exception was given to states that already had nukes - the treaty is fluff, completely inconsequential, just political theater.
As are space agencies; a wonderful way to psyphon off money from the public while providing no value in return. Goes hand in hand with the trillions the pentagon can't account for. We can argue about the semantics of politics, doesn't matter when we have the other proofs for which there is no other explanation.
Well... They are corrupt... Government would make an agency if oligarchs couldn't use it to steal money.
Exactly, so what would exempt NASA from being another corrupted institution just like the rest of them? Just the hopes and dreams they sell us, because that's their job in order to maintain funding.
It IS corrupt... But that doesn't mean the earth is flat.
True, but it does suggest we can't trust what they tell us. The data we can acquire independent of them is far more reliable and valuable, and that's why I go with that.
To restate my position; it appears flat because we can't find the claimed curvature. It could be anything else other than curving, because various types of measurements falsify the claim of curvature. Similarly, there is no evidence the earth is in motion. There is an equivalence in the models, in that one proposes we are moving while the other proposes that the bodies are moving around us. Both are equally valid from a kinematic and dynamic perspective in physics. I've come to the conclusion that the physics which supports heliocentrism is wrong. It's reached a dead end and it has problems, like dark matter, which geonentrism doesn't need to account for because we have an aether. That's why I believe one of the main keys to breaking this apart entirely is zero point energy, which is only possible with an infinite energy source, or the aether.
Above the water at very low altitude... In northern Iraq? What water is in northern Iraq? Also he seems too old to have flown a fighter in Iraq. Where's the evidence that thus guy is actually a pilot? If I was a con man, I would make sure to mention family, and a daughter is the perfect person to mention for gaining confidence. Perception is reality, as they say in the Air Force. They say it too much for it not to he suspicious. There's good reason to have people chasing nonsense - an adversary who's world is false is much less dangerous than one who's world is accurate. War is the final arbiter. If one side believes nonsense, they die. Or they render their product up to their superior. If our military believed the earth was flat, and was wrong, we would lose. If you believe something false, you are not only at a disadvantage, but you will be easier to rob, or lead into other falsehoods before robbing you. There are many reasons to disbelieve this guy, and few to none to believe him.
Look at a map, there are lakes in Iraq. You're attacking his credibility in your entire response. You doubt he's a pilot because of what his position, rather than addressing the points being made. You would think this guy would be proven a fraud 3 or 4 years since this video was made, no? Think about who has more to gain from this lie? I found the full interview, here: https://youtu.be/fGjcTypR1GI From the same perspective, who has more to gain, lying antivaxxers or the corporations making them? Risk/benefit doesn't add up there, nor here. There is little to nothing to gain from lying about this, nor is there anything to gain from being a geocentrist; at least not from a monetary perspective. Many credible pilots make the same claims, I can't find all of the videos online. Here's another compilation I found while searching: https://x.com/RobotPolisher/status/1682219372503347201 Ironically, to your point about the military, that's what happened in WW2. Germans used a system targeting system the Brits claimed couldn't work on a curved earth, and the Germans bombed factories in England using that targeting system. LOL Line of sight radar debunks the curvature rate, seeing as these tests have been conducted over hundreds or thousands of miles. I've heard all the cope presented as a rebuttal. https://youtu.be/n2r6hFMBaKE
