- This topic has 6,414 replies, 23 voices, and was last updated 2 months, 1 week ago by
.
- Posts
That information from snopes should help those who fell for the hoaxes implying that we did not land on the moon and that NASA is deceiving us. Please can this be over, boys?
Mike,
you said:
You cannot have a FULL moon during the daytime.
This will explain how that it is possible to have a full moon during the daytime:
https://www.quora.com/How-can-we-see-a-full-moon-during-the-day-while-the-sun-is-still-in-the-sky
Hope that helps!
The Flat Firmament Theory
Mike, we have been getting some very clear skies here in the antipodes as the air is especially crisp this time of the year. Tonight I had a look up at the firmament and noticed something. I observed that the stars in the firmament appeared to not be in a dome but was flat across the sky. Now I could understand the firmament being flatish if you were in the centre of the disk or further out to some degree, but here in NZ, and the city I live in, lies Antarctica directly below. So this got me thinking, why don’t the stars dip down in a curve in the firmament as you look south toward Antarctica?
I think we have been lied to by FE scientists who are trying to tell us it is curved. What curve? My instincts say it looks flat when I look south, in other words the stars appear in a layer that is just as high south as it is north. The Dome or Ball Firmament theory would have us believe that it curves down way before the Antarctica and finally hits the edge. Have we been deceived?
I would like to propose the firmament is flat not a dome as many would have us believe. I wonder if this idea could gain momentum and make me kinds famous in the process. I like the idea that I was the guy that first floated the idea of the flat firmament. You could be second if you like. Just get behind the idea and make videos and stuff. It could go viral. Seriously, imagine the ad revenue we could generate on Youtube. We need to make some observations that propose the idea that the curve shape or ball/curve/dome shape of the firmament is preposterous. I mean, can you see the curve, has Dig4Truth seen the curve, does the Bible mention the curve? No one has seen the curve and I argue that is because it is not curved. Simple as that. Now we just need to take some of that energy being poured into the FE theory to divert to the Flat Firmament theory. I am sure we could come up with some compelling observations, measurements, and models to show its flatness. I am feeling quite excited about this now.
Mike….this may be a hard pill to swallow brother, but it is true that the earth is a sphere moving through space with our sun and moon. I think by now you probably really understand this. It certanily is not wrong to question things, we were taught or what we hear. I believe you are smart enough to come reasonable conclusion, admitting it may be another point though, no need to for my sake though. I still believe you are a seeker of truth, and that is a good thing.
Join us on the other discussions here I alway appreciate your imput, even if i don’t always agree with them, i still your views.
Peace and love to you and yours. ……gene
Hey t8, your last post reminded me of a video that explains our perception of what we see in the sky. To summarize, we all have a limited viewing distance, about 3 miles in any direction. A similar limit would also include looking up.
From this fact we can establish how objects are perceived in our field of view. As I said before, without taking this information into account we will always come to an incorrect conclusion about what we perceive.
In this video (from the 8 minute mark to 18 minutes – 10 minutes long) you can understand why we see only a small portion of the night sky and that it would appear flat and not curved.
D4T: Wow, which is it stars or no stars???
And not only that but the most brilliant light or thick blackness? Hmm.
It’s the “I don’t remember” that strikes me as the most absurd. You’ve been sent where no man has gone before – to investigate heavens – and you don’t even remember if you could see the heavens while you were up there? Come on, man. 🙂
Mike: “It’s the “I don’t remember” that strikes me as the most absurd. You’ve been sent where no man has gone before – to investigate heavens – and you don’t even remember if you could see the heavens while you were up there? Come on, man. 🙂”
Reminds me of another woman who couldn’t recall key facts while under oath!
Kathi: Mike,
Perhaps all their answers are right in their own context from their unique perspectives. The video takes short comments out of their full context. Why aren’t you critical of that?
Kathi, I’m the one who snipped them down to fit them into a short video. You can find the extended interviews online if you want. But the context is always…
Question: “Can you see stars when you’re up there?”
Answers: “Yes.” “No.” “I don’t remember.”
Or…
Question: “What does the sky look like from up there?”
Answers: “It’s the blackest black you can imagine.” “Its overwhelmingly bright with the light of all the stars and planets.”
I’ve queued the Apollo 11 post-moon press conference to the part where the reporter asks the question about seeing the stars. Watch it in context if you think it’ll change the fact that some astronauts say they can, some say they can’t, some say it’s black, some say it’s bright, and some say they can’t even remember. Notice Neil’s reaction when Collins says, “I don’t remember seeing any.” Note that Collins stayed in the command module orbiting the moon while Neil and Buzz were on the moon. That means he was going between the sun side and the dark side over and over, so even if they couldn’t see stars from the sun side of the moon, Collins surely would have seen them when the module was on the dark side. To say that he doesn’t remember what should have been the most awe-inspiring sight any man has ever seen is a joke, and the reason Neil flipped out when Collins gave that answer. Anyway, here’s that press conference queued up for you…
Kathi: From the overwhelming evidence of a globe earth in Charlie Duke’s testimony, you still want to keep this up?
This is the point I keep making, Kathi. You guys have testimonies, ie: word of mouth hearsay that we can’t personally prove is the truth. That’s it. On the other hand, I’ve got wet flags, images of a way too tiny earth that would be impossible to see from that angle anyway, and undeniable evidence that the earth was pasted into that photo. And that’s just ONE image! As I mentioned before, there are literally hundreds of hours of NASA videos and thousands of NASA images that have already been easily debunked as fakes. I’ve only showed you one image and two ISS videos so far… out of thousands. Here’s another good one. I have it queued to 1:23, and you only need watch one minute to get the gist…
Can you see this is CGI layering? People don’t just fade into ghosts in real life, Kathi. The actor is in front of a green screen/chroma key backdrop that is reflecting a mock-up of the inside of the ISS. The actor is not in a real ISS orbiting the earth, but performing in front of the green screen right here on earth. If you want, you can invest 5 minutes in this video about how they did the green screen shots of Sandra Bullock floating in the movie Gravity…
This is also how some of it’s done by NASA, Kathi. (They also use “vomit comets”, but I’ll hold off on that for now.) And you don’t have to take my word for it. This 2 minute video shows an astronaut caught in the act of doing it…
Notice the ISS props surrounding the chroma key screen. It is the same equipment that shows on the fringe of all those ISS videos. Also notice the green ball “floating in the weightlessness of the ISS”… when Tim Peake is really right here on earth performing his act.
I’ve been trying my best to take this thread slowly, because as I keep telling you guys, this is a HUGE deception, and spans many different individual topics and sub-deceptions. I don’t want to overwhelm you with everything at once, because we’d never get anywhere. So while I’m happy that you are now engaged in the thread and asking good questions, the sheer volume of information I’m going to show you will blow your mind, and I have to take it one step at a time to keep us from getting bogged down and talking over each other.
Kathi: Amazing isn’t it…we always have the 4 seasons every year.
I just talked to T8 about the NASA explanation for our seasons. The idea is that the earth’s rotational axis is tilted to 23.5 degrees, thereby giving us seasons. But were you aware that while this tilt would position the northern hemisphere a few thousand miles closer to the sun during our summer, the earth is 3.1 million miles further away from the sun at that time? That’s right. We’re tilted a couple thousand miles closer, but 3 million miles further away – and somehow they’ve convinced gullible people (like me for most of my life) that moving 3 million miles farther away from the heat source will increase our temperature and give us hot summers in the north.
The whole thing is a house of cards built on absurdities, deceptions, and testimonials from military members sworn to secrecy under threat of court martial or much worse. If you stick around, you will see the truth with your own eyes.
D4T: David (ex-NASA): Worked for Goddard Space Center
(His words) “No South Pole“. Worked on Data Ingest System to map Antartica. 10 years later there is still a gapping hole in the data! Google Earth still has gapping hole in center of Antartica when he was there to correct it! Information was sent to the North (Norwegian) via fiber optics! Why if there are polar orbiting satellites? EOS (Earth’s Observation Systems) which observed different spectrum still did not contribute data. It was all ground based! [Its photoshopped because it has to]. NASA missions data missing!
Believes earth is not a spinning ball. Believes in Yeshua.
Cindy (ex-NASA): Worked for Lockhead Martin, Airforce, Raytheon
Research shows that satellites that are supposed to be there are not! Yes, people build them but the part that’s fake is at they are in space. Everything is “need to know“. “None of us know the truth!”,(the individual workers). Photographers in next office said they couldn’t believe that anyone believed in the fake moon landing! Retrospect is a backup system to back up computer systems. This would have included the moon missions!
Believes earth is not a spinning ball. Believes in Yeshua.
Gaping hole in the center of Antarctica? You stupid flattard, I can see Antarctica on Google Earth…
The lighter colored cross shape is due to how the winds blow the snow around! Anyone with half a brain knows that, idiot!
LOL. Thanks for sharing that, D. Real live people who risk a lot to go against the deception and tell the truth. God bless them. More and more of them are coming out of the closet all the time. This charade is nearing its end.
I believe this theory of NASA faking the moon landing and the ISS is very disappointing when adopted by those confessing to have the indwelling Spirit of God. Christians are to have discernment over what is truth and what is not truth. When Christians fall for the error, God does not receive the glory He is due. We need to reflect truth. This thread is a rather perfect demonstration of two opposing truths…the moon landing was true vs. the moon landing was false.
If you took the time to follow the snopes.com links that I put up, you will see how false rumors and/or fictional satire became someone’s truth whether intentionally or by ignorance or by being just plain gullible, lacking discernment.
One more for further example: https://www.snopes.com/fact-check/barry-wilmore-see-astronaut-ramirez-outside-the-space-station/
I believe those snopes.com links provide enough information to give reason that NASA did send men to the moon and that people have twisted the truth to give way to doubt and then doubt sets in leading to all sorts of confusion and deceit. Let’s be better guards of our minds. We want to seek truth and glorify God.
Timothy 6:20O Timothy, guard what has been entrusted to you, avoiding worldly and empty chatter and the opposing arguments of what is falsely called “knowledge”— 21which some have professed and thus gone astray from the faith.
Grace be with you.Lightenup, here is the last couple of paragraphs from an interesting article. It is not unique because there are many similar articles about snopes.
I’ve actually been reviewing hundreds of Snopes.com articles over the past few years. It takes many years to be able to recognize subtle biases, especially if there is a purposeful obfuscation of process or people involved. There is no doubt in my mind that Snopes.com is not a neutral, rigorously fact-checked source that you should rely on for decision-making. I don’t have the time or interest to study Snopes any further because I’ve seen enough. However, I encourage you to take a look at numerous articles, research the sources they list, verify the claims for yourself, and then come to your own conclusions about Snopes and its content. I also encourage you to see other articles (example, example) from other journalists that are also concerned about how biased Snopes and its writers are.
I do not necessarily agree with the content of the Daily Caller or Medium, for example, but they do seem to indicate a clear bias in their examples of Snopes articles. What passes off as a fact-checking source is very weak at best, in all of these cases. I list these just as examples only!
Snopes is Childish, Very Biased
Here is an example of how childish, immature, agenda-laden, inconsistent, and biased Snopes.com content can be. If you were to read a blog post like this one (screen shot), you have to question a blog touting itself as the best fact-checking source around.
Gene: Mike…. I told you from the start there is so much overwhelming proof the woeld is indeed round.
Sorry Gene, I’m going to need a little more than your claim that there is proof. I’m going to need to see some of that proof for myself. What proof can you offer me that I can see with my own eyes, and test for validity with my own experiments?
Gene: NICK AND I BOTH HAVE BOTH HAVE TOLD YOU THE TRUTH CONCERNING GOD THE FATHER SPEAKING DIRECTLY THROUGH THE MOUTH OF JESUS, AND SOME TIMES IN FIRST PERSON, BUT YOU NEED THE Spirit of truth to be “in” to reconize when that is happening in our scriptures. Without tbe spirit of truth in you , a person can’t pick up on it.
Again, I’ll need more than just your claim that you have the Spirit in you, and I don’t have it in me. I’m not wasting time with Nick right now, since he can’t bring himself to answer a simple question. But I’ve already pointed out that in John 6:35, the Apostle John says that Jesus said the following words. You and Nick seem to think the Father said them, but John tells us Jesus said them. So right off the bat, you two are at odds with the Apostle John. Now look at verse 36…
But as I told you, you have seen me and still you do not believe.
Who said those words? If it was the Father speaking through the mouth of Jesus, why would He say the Jews had seen Him? Had any of those Jews seen the Father, Gene? Has any man seen the Father? What say you?
Lightenup, I have to wonder once again when some are upholding Scripture that the sun has a circuit and that at one time the sun stood still which goes against what is commonly being taught now, how then is it “Christians falling for error”?
Evolution is being taught as well. Is this something that we should “listen to the experts” about? It comes down to where we place our authority, on Scripture or in men.
When we discovered the law of quarantine, which separates disease from healthy individuals, it upheld the biblical principle. When we discovered the currents in the oceans and the currents in the air, these also upheld Scripture. This is good science.
When man “discovers” something that is contrary to the scriptures it is not good science because it will ultimately fail.
D4T: Lightenup, here is the last couple of paragraphs from an interesting article. It is not unique because there are many similar articles about snopes.
Snopes is just a guy who took it upon himself to be the arbiter of what is true and what is not. And his ideas of what is true align 100% with the mainstream narrative that is pushed on us by the 5 entities who own the entire worldwide news network. There is no valid reason to take anything the site says as valid or trustworthy. I’m still a few pages back in the thread, but when I catch up, I’ll take a look at one of Kathi’s links, and see what I can do.
Dig4truth,
The Christian astronauts are using scripture. Check out the reasons in the scopes articles before you dismiss them.
“But the Comforter, which is the Holy Ghost, whom the Father will send in my name, he shall teach you all things, and bring all things to your remembrance, whatsoever I have said unto you.” John 14:26
I know that neither myself or Mike wants to engage in this topic, at least not in this thread. Suffice to say, end of discussion.
Honor this and if this topic (FE) is not one that you desire to engage in then simply find another. That is why there are numerous threads in this forum. Trying to derail someone else’s thread is not brotherly.
I’m new to this forum and I like it a lot. I have been to other forums that were mostly hard core atheists and evolutionists. I know their tactics. We don’t want any of that here, believe me!
Lightenup: “The Christian astronauts are using scripture. Check out the reasons in the scopes articles before you dismiss them.”
My response would mean nothing. It is their testimony and not mine. It is their first-hand account and not mine. How could I judge them as to whether they are telling the truth or not?
What I have seen and experienced is people that call themselves “Christians” acting nothing like the biblical model. But I have also witnessed genuine believers that were humble and loving and you could really feel God’s presence with their acts of kindness and mercy.
Please keep in mind that satan used Scripture also. Not saying that is the case here but just to point out that not everyone that does is genuine and not without their own motives. (Think tv evangelists)
T8: Hi Mike.
Not sure if you have seen this. If so, can you debunk it?
Ah… another video by The Greater Sapien. I took his video about how Apollo 11 faked the earth by shooting through a round window to task. I did it during a lengthy discussion in the comment section of the video itself. Check it out if you want. I haven’t watched this one, but I’m sure it is just as easily debunked. But this is a give and take, T8. This isn’t an exercise in which you post a video, I watch it and debunk it, and then you say nothing about the rebuttal and just post yet another video for me to debunk. You posted one about how we can have a full moon in the daytime. I watched it and didn’t even have to debunk it because the guy who made the video debunked it on the flippin’ video you posted as proof. But then what? Did you respond? Nope. Just started posting more videos that “debunk everything the flat earthers say” and more stuff about the Antarctic (which, btw, is something completely different than the alleged CONTINENT of Antarctica – just so you know).
When I get your response to the full moon in daylight video I debunked, we can move on to another point. And for the love of God, at least pretend that you are putting a little effort into it, man. Don’t just post a video and walk away. If you’re going to use a video, then queue it to the point that I need to watch, tell me how long I need to watch to get the point you’re using it to make, and then write in your own words the point you think the video is making – and how you think it argues against flat earth.
Anyone can copy and paste a link from YouTube. Show us that you are a serious truth seeker. Ask questions. Make your own points. Engage in an honest back and forth about those points. Posting videos and huge copy and pastes about the Antarctic (not to be confused with Antarctica) isn’t having a discussion.
Two more short points, Lightenup:
This is why Mike is asking for experiments and observations that we can do ourselves. And two, I wanted to thank you for taking this topic and trying hard to prove your point.
T8: List of Antarctic expeditions…
I saw a whole bunch of them going from an ice wall to the South Pole – a place they themselves tells us is ever changing and never in the same place. So basically, people have arrived at the coast, traveled inland for a bit, and then turned around and when back to the same coast. Where is the one where a person arrived at a coast, and then traveled across the entire continent to exit at the opposite coast? Where is the video and photographic proof of their adventure – so we can verify they did what they said they did?
T8, can you prove – beyond any shadow of a doubt – that Antarctica exists as the continent we’ve been told? If so, do it. If not, let it go and let’s talk about things we can prove one way or the other, okay?
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.
