NASA'S "FLAT EARTH" DBA STRATEGY

If NASA faked the moon landings, does the agency have any credibility at all? Was the Space Shuttle program also a hoax? Is the International Space Station another one? Do not dismiss these hypotheses offhand. Check out our wider NASA research and make up your own mind about it all.
Peter
Member
Posts: 130
Joined: Tue Jan 03, 2017 6:46 pm

Re: NASA'S FLAT EARTH DBA STRATEGY

Unread post by Peter »

Having said that I accept the globe earth, there is much in astronomy where a ludicrous theory is promoted rather than just saying “we don’t know”.

The Big Bang theory has to be the most ludicrous religion disguised as science, probably created to bolster the atomic bomb myth. The moon always shows us the same face. Accepted theory is that its rotation is coincidentally exactly synced with the earth’s, both of them from their original big bang inertia billions of years ago. There must be unknown forces. Also gravity theory is lacking. Also planets have been shown to slow down and then speed up. But they too are supposed to be moving under their big bang inertia. Magically they lose some of that inertia and then somehow regain it.

I must admit not to having checked if they’ve come up with answers to the above in recent years, to patch up those theories. But I don’t believe much of official cosmology.
hoi.polloi
Member
Posts: 5060
Joined: Sun Nov 14, 2010 7:24 pm

Re: NASA'S FLAT EARTH DBA STRATEGY

Unread post by hoi.polloi »

Peter » March 12th, 2017, 9:52 pm wrote:Having said that I accept the globe earth, there is much in astronomy where a ludicrous theory is promoted rather than just saying “we don’t know”.

The Big Bang theory has to be the most ludicrous religion disguised as science, probably created to bolster the atomic bomb myth. The moon always shows us the same face. Accepted theory is that its rotation is coincidentally exactly synced with the earth’s, both of them from their original big bang inertia billions of years ago. There must be unknown forces. Also gravity theory is lacking. Also planets have been shown to slow down and then speed up. But they too are supposed to be moving under their big bang inertia. Magically they lose some of that inertia and then somehow regain it.

I must admit not to having checked if they’ve come up with answers to the above in recent years, to patch up those theories. But I don’t believe much of official cosmology.
Peter, while I agree the Big Bang is absurd, I would like to know the supposed times planets speed up or slow down. Simon's new theory may debunk such a belief and that is why I ask.
Peter
Member
Posts: 130
Joined: Tue Jan 03, 2017 6:46 pm

Re: NASA'S FLAT EARTH DBA STRATEGY

Unread post by Peter »

Hoi I'm afraid it is a long time ago that I read about the slight aberrations in speeds of some planets. I just remember the point that hit me was that it was an accepted theory and that it contradicted the accepted theory about the forces which move planets. I don't know the current situation but about 10 or more years ago it was simultaneously accepted as reality that Jupiter's light is purely solar reflection and that Jupiter reflects more light than it receives from the sun. So while I continued observing with my telescope I lost interest in cosmology theory because it was hypocritical and rigid.

The Vatican used to try to force a monopoly view on cosmology. Big western government, dangerously bloated from excessive taxation and loans, has taken over, and ultimately employs all astronomers, and thus our present dark age.

Edit: I have been meaning to take a look at Simon's theory, seemed interesting, but needs a decent amount of concentration to follow (for me anyway).
simonshack
Administrator
Posts: 7339
Joined: Sun Oct 18, 2009 8:09 pm
Location: italy
Contact:

Re: NASA'S FLAT EARTH DBA STRATEGY

Unread post by simonshack »

Peter » March 13th, 2017, 6:23 am wrote: Edit: I have been meaning to take a look at Simon's theory, seemed interesting, but needs a decent amount of concentration to follow (for me anyway).
Dear Peter, my theory isn't actually out there yet - am currently working on it tirelessly 24/7 - like a 'mad wannabe scientist' (and have been for a long time now : I keep telling Hoi that I'm almost ready to release it - but then I keep finding ever more corroborating aspects to it... someone please stop me! :) ). Since I've made enormous progress since my tentative / early musings over at our "SSSS" thread, I would not advise you to spend much time reading through them - they may only confuse you, for they were - in fact - only early musings (although a precious few were heading in the right direction - and helped me wrap my head around some fundamental aspects of what was then just a nascent, fledgling theory). Two things, I can anticipate, are for sure though: both the Copernican and the FE 'cosmic models' are demonstrably invalid / impossible.
roastrunner
Member
Posts: 27
Joined: Sat Apr 25, 2015 8:27 pm

Re: NASA'S FLAT EARTH DBA STRATEGY

Unread post by roastrunner »

Peter, I wanted to address something you said, which is that the cause of the Earth's and moon's synchronous rotation is coincidental. If true, I agree that would be extremely hard to believe.

However there's a logical explanation. The real mystery is how so large a body as our moon exists in the first place. But given that it's there, the theory is that the "tidal locking" appeared slowly over millions or maybe billions of years. Slight bulges in both the Earth and the moon create unequal gravitational force between them as they rotate, eventually settling on a matching rotation to both bodies as the entropic state. Meaning that gravity works to keep the bodies synchronized together, given the imperfect mass distributions that are always going to exist

I believe that theory to be correct. I think it makes sense at any rate.
Peter
Member
Posts: 130
Joined: Tue Jan 03, 2017 6:46 pm

Re: NASA'S FLAT EARTH DBA STRATEGY

Unread post by Peter »

Roastrunner re:

"Peter, I wanted to address something you said, which is that the cause of the Earth's and moon's synchronous rotation is coincidental"

Just to clarify - that is what I read in an authoritative and officially accepted publication many years ago which I thought was nonsense. Something along the lines of what you said - tides and so on - is more likely and is also a theory that is out there but there is/was some confusion as to whether the tides effect the moon or the moon effects the tides. Tides are in a state of flux oc and it is a hypothesis which consists mostly of knowledge voids, but it may be the best so far and a start in the right direction.
------------------------------------------------------
Simon that seems a very difficult but fascinating and worthy endeavor.
kickstones
Member
Posts: 368
Joined: Wed Jan 16, 2013 1:15 pm

Re: NASA'S FLAT EARTH DBA STRATEGY

Unread post by kickstones »

Whilst looking for material authenticating the existence of Antarctica on archive.org I happened to come across - William Carpenter's “100 Proofs the Earth is Not a Globe”

As the post querying the existence of Antarctica was on this thread regarding NASA'S FLAT EARTH DBA STRATEGY I thought I'd take a quick look at its content, and found this following so called 'proof'...

57. The Newtonian hypothesis involves the necessity of the Sun, in the case of a lunar eclipse, being on the opposite side of a globular Earth, to cast its shadow on the Moon: but, since eclipses of the Moon have taken place with both the Sun and the Moon above the horizon, it follows that it cannot be the shadow of the Earth that eclipses the Moon; that the theory is a blunder; and that it is nothing less than a proof that the Earth is not a globe.

While there may or maybe not a perfectly good explanation for this so called 'proof', it does raise to my mind an unexplained phenomenon I myself have oft encountered whilst walking home at night / early morning, why is it that the shadow on the moon does not align to my viewpoint of the position of the Sun in relation to Earth's position at that moment in time, if that makes sense?


https://archive.org/details/onehundredproofs00carp
Peter
Member
Posts: 130
Joined: Tue Jan 03, 2017 6:46 pm

Re: NASA'S FLAT EARTH DBA STRATEGY

Unread post by Peter »

FE = DBA seems the most likely and logical. I'm surprised though that a lot of their anti-NASA stuff is such high quality though. A lot of it is original and highly convincing, in fact the best quality NASA debunking out there.

Why? Too much money and time on their hands so they make their non-disinfo part of their campaign too convincing?
hoi.polloi
Member
Posts: 5060
Joined: Sun Nov 14, 2010 7:24 pm

Re: NASA'S FLAT EARTH DBA STRATEGY

Unread post by hoi.polloi »

kickstones » March 16th, 2017, 10:15 am wrote: While there may or maybe not a perfectly good explanation for this so called 'proof', it does raise to my mind an unexplained phenomenon I myself have oft encountered whilst walking home at night / early morning, why is it that the shadow on the moon does not align to my viewpoint of the position of the Sun in relation to Earth's position at that moment in time, if that makes sense?
That is a rather separate issue (though one I've noted and tried to make people address in the "Cold of space" thread) from "Flat Earth".

Please see my posts there re:

How Is the Moon Lit?
Part I: http://cluesforum.info/viewtopic.php?p=2388703#p2388703
Part II: http://cluesforum.info/viewtopic.php?p=2392185#p2392185

However, please note a lot of these subjects, as we must admit per the reasonable proofs there is an active DBA campaign against us, are encouraged as a way to make us argue in circles (no pun intended). So please, let us not dredge up old science things while critical media fakery goes unexamined, unless you think you can come up with a true and proper system (as Simon is doing — and believe me, it's a lot of work). I would love to discuss many of these subjects, but they simply become too far out there, too quickly, for them to be of use to us right now. So please forgive us if we put aside these topics for the time being, as the active campaign continues to make the subjects not so much "taboo" as a risk. That is, a risk to give attention on the DBA video artists working on sliding propaganda (anti-"September Clues" and otherwise) in their otherwise "intriguing" videos.

(That is to also admit my own interests in the great scientific and philosophical issues of the world, and therefore my contribution to those talking subjects which may be weaponized by those less benevolent than me, of course. I have censored myself here, on these subjects, for the over all benefit of this forum's main topic. It has not made me less interested. On the contrary, I may find other venues for my thoughts on these subjects and I suggest you try as well. Using what we know about "intelligence" groups trying to derail us should be a powerful technique to approach the wide open world of available knowledge out there to be gained and shared, and to avoid bad people, distractions and people who want to bribe and/or control the dialogue.)
patrix
Member
Posts: 712
Joined: Wed Dec 14, 2016 10:24 am

Re: NASA'S FLAT EARTH DBA STRATEGY

Unread post by patrix »

NASA's Flat Earth DBA in action on the streets...

full link: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bWmVNHgT3Jg
patrix
Member
Posts: 712
Joined: Wed Dec 14, 2016 10:24 am

Re: NASA'S FLAT EARTH DBA STRATEGY

Unread post by patrix »

NASA's Flat Earth DBA in social media:
"The picture NASA doesn't want you to see"
Image
https://www.reddit.com/r/funny/comments ... ou_to_see/
OpticalIllusion
Member
Posts: 50
Joined: Fri Sep 20, 2013 10:19 pm

Re: NASA'S FLAT EARTH DBA STRATEGY

Unread post by OpticalIllusion »

I started a "stop Flat earth" facebook group a few months back and have been bombarded with trolls and even death threats lol. Facebook has gone to crap since I signed up in 12 years ago but for some reason I cant stand to let this cult grow.
https://www.facebook.com/groups/174060043080069/ if you want to see them make a fool of themselves..
Altair
Member
Posts: 90
Joined: Thu Feb 02, 2017 2:05 pm

Re: NASA'S FLAT EARTH DBA STRATEGY

Unread post by Altair »

Anyway, I've found that some of the objections in the 'flat earth' videos are quite real (not that I'm a 'flat-earther', of course). For example, the one I'm bringing points to a quite evident flaw in that amazing HD time-lapse shoot in 4K from "the Thing". Namely, the long lasting lightnings and still street lights. If it was true, lightnings should last for minutes in real time!


full link: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PST810eICoY
Altair
Member
Posts: 90
Joined: Thu Feb 02, 2017 2:05 pm

Re: NASA'S FLAT EARTH DBA STRATEGY

Unread post by Altair »

Oh, and also the 'still' clouds...
Nathan Draco
Member
Posts: 47
Joined: Sun Aug 27, 2017 3:13 pm

Re: NASA'S FLAT EARTH DBA STRATEGY

Unread post by Nathan Draco »

^
I am by no means a flat-earther either lol.

But I don't believe we have or can send anything into space (satellites and such) with current technology (rocketry).
So I don't believe any of NASA's "Earth from space" footage or "Live streams" are real but merely CGI renditions made with budget of millions.


full link: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EWDlZF6z_O4

and the above video was just made by a small team of animators using consumer level PCs and equipment.

Imagine what NASA could accomplish with their supercomputers, vastly more powerful custom simulation programs, and a near limitless amount of money.
Post Reply