TO ALL THE SPACE DENIERS.......

[xCivicx]

Thousands of years mean nothing at those distances.

Galactic clusters (and matter within them) are gravitationally bound to a greater degree than objects in sparser intergalactic space. I'd imagine the vast majority of what could be detected thousands of years ago is within our local cluster.

"A supercluster is a large group of smaller galaxy clusters or galaxy groups;[1] it is among the largest-known structures of the cosmos. The Milky Way is part of the Local Group galaxy group (which contains more than 54 galaxies), which in turn is part of the Laniakea Supercluster.[2] This supercluster spans over 500 million light-years, while the Local Group spans over 10 million light-years.[1] The number of superclusters in the observable universe is estimated to be 10 million.[3]"
Supercluster - Wikipedia

Bodies in space are in rotation breh NOT (just) moving in "straight" (minskowski) lines.
The Moon rotates around the Earth.
The Earth around the Sun.
The Solar System (Sun bound) rotates within the Galaxy.
Galaxies rotate around each other.
In cycles.

Think of it this way even if we moved at 1 million miles in the last 100 years because the moon is gravitationally bound and moving with us it is is the approximate same relative position.

And to detect we measure angular shifts. The entire span of 16 billion years of motion is visible within (and hence subject to division by only) 360 degrees.

If you wait long enough (several billion years no doubt) then everything will pass the Universal Event Horizon and then the night sky will go dark forever.

Sorry but as I said before I've learned all this in high school and college and its gibberish

Rotational mechanics have nothing to do with what I'm speaking on

I'm talking about VECTORS

The VECTORS of the constellations arent parallel to the VECTOR that out galaxy is moving along

Meaning we're supposed to be moving in one direction and the constellations are supposed to be moving in a slightly different direction

By way of this "scientific fact" of heliocentrism, the parallax with respect to each constellations should vary from night to night

Its literally impossible for humans to have been viewing the exact same constellations for 1000s of years

And as a side note, I think it's pretty sad how yall repeat this fantastical science fiction-style rhetoric with such arrogance then show cgi pictures to try and support your claims(none of which you have personally proven, all of which you have been told to repeat)

And "youd imagine" that all the constellations that we see in the sky are tied to a galaxy supercluster huh?

But according to your science priests, even those galaxy supercluster are either expanding away from each other around a fixed point or pulling themselves all together around a fixed point, which STILL wouldnt explain the constellations because on order for objects to expand or contract to a certain point, all angles involved have to add up to 360 degrees, making it even MORE impossible that the constellations are moving in parallel to us smh

 

[xCivicx]

If it is a simulation why pretend it is a sphere at all? Why not create a world where the end-end leads to the starting-end in a continuous loop and just make a rule in your physics physics that allows for this. Such as how the universe might actually bend back on itself. That would be much better than hiding a secret that's so obviously a break in reality and so simple to detect that your average polar bear or penguin could find it.
If you wanted to hide something from humans you'd make it a little harder to discover wouldn't you.

??

How are you positive that reality isnt a loop?

 

[xCivicx]

The same way i understand that God is more intelligent than me and knows things i can't even begin to fathom

These brehs look at cac scientists that way and put their unwavering faith in them lol the irony

I'm smart enough to know that theres a ton of shyt that I dont know

These brehs really get off on thinking that they're smart enough to "out think" that which created us smh

 

[xCivicx]

Or he might be a pilot. Pilots have to constantly adjust for the curvature of the Earth.



Because radio waves travel at the speed of light? Why couldn't he do it?

"Light travels through space at just over 186,000 miles per second. The moon is just under 250,000 miles from Earth, so light from the Moon's surface has to travel more than one second (about 1.3 seconds) to reach us."



They do. Very slowly.



The Sun rotates too right? The moon for example is rotationally bound with the earth so we always see the same side. Not sure I understand the issue here



You can do that in space - if you are far enough from gravitational effects. That's like asking when someone being driven in a car cannot stop being moved by the car. The answer is the car takes the person along with them so they cannot. You somehow think that the atmosphere is different to a solid object (the car seat) in its effects rather than just the magnitude of its effects.

If the atmosphere did not form a barrier we would not be so limited in terms of the speed we could achieve within it.



Because they don't stretch from the equator to the north pole? The speed differential over a few km or so is nothing.



International Space Station

/sigh

Radio waves dont travel though our atmosphere at the speed of light so there should have AT LEAST been a delay both when the signal "left the atmosphere" then "came back"

Pilots actually dont have to adjust for the curvature of the earth. Gyroscopes keep planes parallel to the ground. They do not and cannot prove the shape of the earth in any way

Just like bridge builders dont have to adjust for the curvature of the earth

Just like railroad track constructors dont have to adjust for the curvature of the earth

You definitely did not understand that question. When you do you'll probably be embarrassed by your previous posts

You should look up the definition of the coriolis effect. Its something that your science priests invented

According to this effect, once a person leaves the actual ground of earth, that person is no longer moving at the same rate of speed of the earth. This INCLUDES THE ATMOSPHERE. According to yall it moves independently of the earths rotation. So I repeat that question about the helicopter

The law of the conservation of momentum has absolutely nothing to do with what I asked smh

Therea a lot that you've already admitted to not understanding about my questions so you should probably chill with the arrogance

I'll also ask the stars and satellites question again since you didnt answer it

 

[OJ Simpsom]

Flat Earth, Antarctica & The Great Pyramid [Discussion Thread]

 

[xCivicx]

Why is the routing of a phone call over radio waves hard to believe
There was even delay between the conversation. Possibly fake? Sure. Absolutely fake? Idiotic take.

What is your frame of reference? We have been watching the stars for a couple centuries. It took millions of years for the fukkin light from the stars to reach our eyes/telescopes. Maybe in a million more years, we will observe a nice change. Basic physics

The earth, with respect to the sun, does rotate in 24 hours. Those 24 hours count from solar noon to solar noon, not 360 degree movement. 360 degree movement is done in less than 24 hours, about 23 hrs 56 min . This time difference compiled over 6 months accounts for about 12 hours, hence the reason noon jan 1st to noon july first is still facing the sun. Its actually more than 182.5 days (half a year), its 183 days. 183 days from one point to the next will have you in the same sun facing position as the starting point. Same reason we have a leap year. Basic to comprehend.

Law of conversation of momentum. We, along with earth's atmosphere, are already moving at a set speed due to the earths rotation with respect to external, heavenly bodies. Lifting off does nothing to counteract the horizontal energy already applied to the helicopter. This is pretty basic physics, "physics major"

Not versed on this, but since youre asking such easily comprehended questions already, im sure an answer is out there.

An easy one: contrast. Same reason you wont be able to point a telescope at the moon and see stars if you are zoomed in. You have to zoom out and adjust the contrast. In pictures of earth, it is the subject of the photo. The stars, with much less light, are not seen. Basic physics yet again

Doesn't look like it..

You're wrong. I don't follow science religiously. The scientific method, although, is worth applying to most ideas in life. I can find no fault in it other than the humans that apply it.
I am not afraid to question anything, and I also have not been told not to question anything. That isnt how the scientific method works.
Question everything, sure. But make sure the question actually is backed by some logical thought that hadnt occurred to someone else before. Most all the shyt you and others say/post has been debunked, or the conclusion would fall to the wayside for some new theory as to how something works/ state of existence.
Most the shyt you posted is also easily explained in a logical manner with a few searches. That is, if you are able to fully comprehend and visualize what you are reading. Based on your questions, I am having doubts as such.

I answered most of this in my response to the other person but I'm just gonna hit on one thing here specifically

Since a full day is actually like 4 minutes short of 24 hours every single day, this means that there should be a 4 minutes shift in the suns position every day, meaning that if on day 1 the sunset at 7pm, then on day 2 it should be setting 4 minutes earlier at 6:56, then 6:52, then 6:48 and so on

After 30 days, there should be ~120 minute change in the time that the sun sets, meaning it SHOULD be setting at 5pm on day 30

Do you observe this?

Do you understand what I'm saying here?

 

[Black White Sox Hat]

Big whoop,wanna fight about it?

 

[xCivicx]

Eratosthenes of Cyrene (/ɛrəˈtɒsθəniːz/; Greek: Ἐρατοσθένης ὁ Κυρηναῖος, IPA: [eratostʰénɛːs]; c. 276 BC[1] – c. 195/194 BC[2]) was a Greek mathematician, geographer, poet, astronomer, and music theorist. He was a man of learning, becoming the chief librarian at the Library of Alexandria. He invented the discipline of geography, including the terminology used today.[3]

He is best known for being the first person to calculate the circumference of the Earth, which he did by comparing altitudes of the mid-day sun at two places a known North-South distance apart.[4] His calculation was remarkably accurate. He was also the first to calculate the tilt of the Earth's axis, again with remarkable accuracy.

Eratosthenes - Wikipedia

The circumference of the earth in the flat earth model is the exact same size as the circumference of the equator in the heliocentric model

 

[str8up]

NASA's own words.

No wonder we can't have threads on here to discuss anything space related.

We need a bushes version of HL where y'all conspiracy theorists can converse.

 

[xCivicx]

No wonder we can't have threads on here to discuss anything space related.

We need a bushes version of HL where y'all conspiracy theorists can converse.

Or yall should take all this space talk to the comic book/science fiction section where it belongs

 

[xCivicx]

Yall are in here mentally masturbating over cartoon CGI pics, believing in random inconceivable impossibilities as fact

But yall wanna call other people stupid huh smh

 

[OJ Simpsom]

 

[Hacksaw Jim Thuggin]

4 words:



'Van Allen Radiation Belt'






We ain't never been to the moon brehs.

no ppoint in even arguing this with you .....

just

 

[null]

The circumference of the earth in the flat earth model is the exact same size as the circumference of the equator in the heliocentric model

In all directions ? Just about...

 

[null]

/sigh

Radio waves dont travel though our atmosphere at the speed of light so there should have AT LEAST been a delay both when the signal "left the atmosphere" then "came back"

Pilots actually dont have to adjust for the curvature of the earth. Gyroscopes keep planes parallel to the ground. They do not and cannot prove the shape of the earth in any way

Just like bridge builders dont have to adjust for the curvature of the earth

Just like railroad track constructors dont have to adjust for the curvature of the earth

You definitely did not understand that question. When you do you'll probably be embarrassed by your previous posts

You should look up the definition of the coriolis effect. Its something that your science priests invented

According to this effect, once a person leaves the actual ground of earth, that person is no longer moving at the same rate of speed of the earth. This INCLUDES THE ATMOSPHERE. According to yall it moves independently of the earths rotation. So I repeat that question about the helicopter

The law of the conservation of momentum has absolutely nothing to do with what I asked smh

Therea a lot that you've already admitted to not understanding about my questions so you should probably chill with the arrogance

I'll also ask the stars and satellites question again since you didnt answer it

Are you sure you studied physics ?

1.
Atmospheric effects on the speed of light are insignificant.
Light traveling through Earth's atmosphere moves almost as fast as light in a vacuum, while light passing through a diamond is slowed to less than half that speed. Still, it travels through the gem at over 277 million mph (almost 124,000 km/s) — not a speed to scoff at.Mar 6, 2018
space.com. So that's a time of 3 seconds. If you read physics you would know that a portion of the originating signal bounced back within the very same object that it was transmitted from. No one said that the originating signal transferred the returned messages. In actuality however some of the originating signal did bounce back. That's called scattering. Scattering - Wikipedia.

2.
Bridge builders do adjust for the curvature of the Earth.
"Because of the height of the towers (693 ft or 211 m) and their distance from each other (4,260 ft or 1,298 m), the curvature of the Earth's surface had to be taken into account when designing the bridge."
Verrazzano-Narrows Bridge - Wikipedia

http://www.slac.stanford.edu/econf/C06092511/presents/TU004_PPT.PDF
Why do bridge designs account for the Earth's curvature?

3. "When you do you'll probably be embarrassed by your previous posts"
Spoken like a true academic.

4. "According to yall it moves independently of the earths rotation"
Not as a body, and not according to me.
When it does in localised sections you can feel it "blowing".

5. There was one question which you posed with your usual adroitness which made as much sense as FE theory.t.

Now go through the above point by point and refute them.
Unlike you I have said nothing about my qualifications. I didn't study physics at Uni but I did before and after Uni and I went to a top 10 school in the world.

Give me some structured answers directly to all examples in my post or that will be that. I have work to do and am not going to take the time out to teach if you show that you are not serious and structured.

As a last thought do remember, with the focus of the site in mind, that others have to live with the reflected glory (or otherwise) of your statements and intellect.