Dan Gleesak
Well-known member
Like you and microwaves?
Like you and microwaves?
Exactly like you and microwaves
My "views" are we don't know what the true shape is. It's meant to be a mystery. Hence, we live a in a realm.
If it's a ball, and one side is lit up all the time during daylight hours, where is my full color, ball earth in totality, non-composite picture? I mean, they only been up there how many decades supposedly? You'd think there would be literally thousands upon thousands of very high resolution single image photos available yet you are struggling to find even one. Because it's bullshit my brother.
Except it's not flat. Any spherical object with sufficient radius will appear flat from its surface from a human perspective. You have a tiny mind if you can't work that out. Even the wall in the hall of my house isn't perfectly flat thanks to my framers but it appears flat.So you infer from these observations that we live on a spinning ball but disregard direct observation that counters that it's flat?
They're all like the same size and resolution from vastly different distances. And they all look different too. I wonder if the DSCOVR satellite took any spinning earth video?This took a 5 second search. Only the 2002 image is composite. The other 3 are single image.
View attachment 349589
You're wasting your breath. So am I.This took a 5 second search. Only the 2002 image is composite. The other 3 are single image.
View attachment 349589
No I get it. ...And there's ALWAYS an explanation.Except it's not flat. Any spherical object with sufficient radius will appear flat. You have a tiny mind if you can't work that out. Even the wall in the hall of my house isn't perfectly flat thanks to my framers but it appears flat.
It doesnt really require much of an explanation. It's like why is water wet. It's basic stuff.No I get it. ...And there's ALWAYS an explanation.
Scaling of the image, different camera used. Not that difficult to understand.They're all like the same size and resolution from vastly different distances. And they all look different too. I wonder if the DSCOVR satellite took any spinning earth video?
Oh but for them it is.Not that difficult to understand.
Again, I get it. But if you've ever worked with digitized images and scaling you'd know that resolution is affected. You guys are easily convinced is all I can say. In this case each image, though scaled the same looks like a different object altogether. And does anyone really believe we have a camara and satellite that can take a picture and send it from a million miles away?Oh but for them it is.
The default position is not some fruitcake conspiracy. I don't have to prove anything. If you believe the absurd it just makes you gullible, stupid or insane. Take your pick - it has to be one of them.Again, I get it. But if you've ever worked with digitized images and scaling you'd know that resolution is affected. You guys are easily convinced is all I can say.
You know how closeted homosexuals have a tendency to call others gay?The default position is not some fruitcake conspiracy. I don't have to prove anything. If you believe the absurd it just makes you gullible, stupid or insane. Take your pick - it has to be one of them.
Care to explain how a fisheye lens would put an icewall circling a pancake Earth (Flat Earth's version of Antarctica) into a single pole at one end of a sphere? idiot.
That's a picture taken of the sky using a fisheye lens. WTH are you talking about short stack?Care to explain how a fisheye lens would put an icewall circling a pancake Earth (Flat Earth's version of Antarctica) into a single pole at one end of a sphere? idiot.
You guys are easily convinced is all I can say.
What point are you trying to make with this picture?