Cosmology Debate Thread ("Space Is Fake")

Ember said:
I can assure we are not missing the point at all. We have said, endlessly, that we know it is a psyop. No amount of lengthy junk posts will ever change that, not that anyone reads them.

The perpetrators of the Cass Sunstein Flat Earth psyop know that 'winning' the argument is never necessary for success, just the discourse. Too bad you have fallen for it so badly.
Click to expand...

No, you really don't know it to be a psyop, and neither does anyone else. They simply "say" it is and expect everyone to shut up. Yet again no one here even attempts to offer an explanation or proof of this infiltration. Discussions of cosmology are not psyops and have nothing to do with Cass Sunstein nor any alleged government policy. I've never heard of the "Cass Sunstein Flat Earth psyop." You either made it up or you're just parroting these other incompetents who also cry big bad jewish puppeteer because they don't like this topic being discussed.

I assure you that you don't understand the theory of cognitive infiltration versus instances of its implementation. It did not begin with Cass Sunstein and has an extensive history throughout the second half of the 20th century. I've offered explanations in previous posts on this thread against this same claim to show why this isn't, but since most of you "don't have time to read" then you wouldn't know. If you guys don't have time to read, then why are you even on an online forum?

As far as I'm concerned every post like this here is junk because all it does is attempt to stop people from having a conversation. So your argument is that because we are having discourse and haven't arrived at some foregone conclusion that it suddenly becomes cognitive infiltration? Or because some of us are contesting one model that we are being paid by the government to steer the truth away from what exactly? The government does not benefit from people disbelieving in their institutions.

All of these puerile psyop claims have no standing in reality. The only reason why we are getting mired down and not constructing solutions already is because of people interrupting this thread with this kind of jewish excrement.

Unlike the cognitive infiltration psyop perpetrators, I am attempting to arrive at a solution, but this is not a reduced geopolitical topic. This is something that has been discussed since man was able to conversate with another man, and these talks will outlive you, me, and everyone else on this forum. So what if everyone or a majority of people alive were convinced that the Earth was not a globe anymore? That isn't the end-all be-all for this subject anyhow. There is more to this than the idea of somebody overthrowing NASA and burning all the globes in a big pit. You, like many others, fail to see the spiritual significance of this subject. Do any of you even think of those implications?

Also, why I am the only one quoting Scripture in my arguments? I think it pisses some of you off that the heliocentric globe model is not supported by the Scriptures, and its upsetting that someone is delving into that. It makes a certain kind of person visibly uncomfortable. I've already confirmed from the original Masoretic Text that the Hebraic word for firmament implies a barrier, not an expanse, and have analyzed dozens of other passages in original Hebrew that contradict the pagan spinning ball model. Some of you don't act as Christian as you claim to be. I'm not saying simply because the Scriptures disprove the globe earth that the flat earth is immediately correct. I have debunked that model already and only discuss it for theoretical reasons, but there are truths exhibited in phenomena in both that can be explained by another construction.

Ember said:
This is why Flat Earth posts should be banned outright, and immediately deleted. This thread, if not deleted, should be locked and allowed to disappear down the page listings. The 'Space is Fake' topic was obviously intended to be a stepping stone to Flat Earth.
Click to expand...

No one's advocating violence or criminal acts here. If you don't like it don't participate, or in the very least contribute something to be debated. So show me some proof of your claim that this is a psyop, or post a question about something related to cosmology, and I'd be more than happy to look into it. Give me something ridiculous even and I'll look into it, I don't care.
 
MusicForThePiano said:
It is based on the star-tunnel and the spherical celestial rotating over a level plane Earth surface with an undistinguished underworld and no definitive boundary (hence no ice wall). That may sound even crazier than the flat-earth model that everyone here keeps talking about while I have already dumped that in the rubbish bin, but this is where true astronomical and cosmological studiers should place their efforts if they wish to begin an undertaking of the laws of nature and decipher through what we have been told versus what adds up in all measures of reality.
Click to expand...

Make a model picture of this, otherwise this theory is completely unintelligible to 99.9% of people. It's not flat earth but it's not really disproving globe earth either.

paternos said:
-There is no complete picture of Antarctica from the concept of outer space. (and not even with balloons / check google maps)
Click to expand...

This is because of lighting issues - it either gets total light during the summer months, where bright white ice reflects the sun back into the lens, which shows a giant white blob.

Conversely in the winter months, it's pitch black, and nothing can be seen.

That said, what IS suspicious about Antarctica is how all pictures of the US research bases in Antarctica are blurred out or omitted on Google maps. Why would they need to hide that?

paternos said:
-There is still no actual pictures of the earth in its complete and alleged globular shape from the concept of outer space. (no proof indeed)
Click to expand...

This is false - we can all see the round shape from space. Every country on planet earth has done this, so is there a worldwide conspiracy? Just absurd.


earth-russia.1419968512.jpg


MusicForThePiano said:
We already went over the linguistics of the firmament, and you said you were going to talk with your Bishop about it. The word in ancient Hebrew did not translate to expanse but a barrier. For the sake of making shorter posts I will just reference anyone to re-read earlier parts of this thread if they want a lesson in languages.
Click to expand...

Yes - my Bishop said he had no opinion and all translations were valid. He pointed me to email OT specialists within Orthodox Theological schools. He also told me it was a massive waste of time, that I should consider quitting this forum or to ban people discussing lol. I told him I wanted to save people, but I would actually shut this down if it persisted.
 
Samseau said:
That said, what IS suspicious about Antarctica is how all pictures of the US research bases in Antarctica are blurred out or omitted on Google maps. Why would they need to hide that?
Click to expand...
This is strange to say the least, what is also strange is that the amount of discovery has been so limited.

If we need to believe their lies, they got to asteroids to mine them, how about the south pole?
Samseau said:
This is false - we can all see the round shape from space. Every country on planet earth has done this, so is there a worldwide conspiracy? Just absurd.
Click to expand...

Yes. I think we have never been in space. I don't think we have satellites and I think space stations are fake. So indeed we have no pictures. I think logically we live on a globe. (seems the most realistic model to me) But we have never seen the globe with our own eyes. (our photography)
Samseau said:
earth-russia.1419968512.jpg




Yes - my Bishop said he had no opinion and all translations were valid. He pointed me to email OT specialists within Orthodox Theological schools. He also told me it was a massive waste of time, that I should consider quitting this forum or to ban people discussing lol. I told him I wanted to save people, but I would actually shut this down if it persisted.
Click to expand...
You could do it.

I think the cosmological debate has religious implications. If we start to doubt the NASA stories; satellites, distances, gravity, space stations, moon landings. We get to understand how little and futile we are in the light of God's creation.

It's not all. But the cosmic certainty the secularists claim is a foundational pillar or their faith.
 
sarmaticus said:
Because they might actually be that big? Conversely, Greenland on Larry's page map, has visually about the size of Africa and even a bit bigger than S America. Then, go to Wikipedia and find out the square meters of those, especially Greenland, see if its comparable in size to Africa or S America. You guys are falling into your own traps 🙂
Click to expand...

The only map that respects the actual size of territories depicted and actual distances is the 3D globe map. No flat map can do that.

That is the point.

The distortions and inconsistencies on your flat earth map are comically extreme and absurd. This is where the argument stops and the flat earth theory falls apart completely.
 
Cooper said:
The only map that respects the actual size of territories depicted and actual distances is the 3D globe map. No flat map can do that.

That is the point.

The distortions and inconsistencies on your flat earth map are comically extreme and absurd. This is where the argument stops and the flat earth theory falls apart completely.
Click to expand...

Do you realize all globes are made from stitching together flat maps? Do you realize all images from 'space' are flat and digitally refitted on a Globe? Of course you are going to ignore this post like you do to all my retorts. Your persian al biruni was debunked by the way, see my earlier post but crickets as expected from you. You shoulder change your name to coper.

Muh model cries the glober while literally being presented a full working model. He cries more not realizing that his own globe model is full of holes with no curvature measure. And so the glober holds on to his last 'proof', a cgi pictures from satellite.
 
Last edited:
Samseau, clearly an mentally ill individual who craves power and authority. You should really listen to your priest or whatever bro and quit the forum with some dignity but I know your manlet 5'8 150 pounds little self craves control. Just few years ago you were a player teaching dance moves and explaining why the Bible allows you to sleep around. Now a devout orthodox how convenient. Literally number 1 roosh fanboy and the only reason you even found 'faith' is because you had to follow daddy roosh. You must be heartbroken he quit on you
 
FlatEarther said:
Do you realize all globes are made from stitching together flat maps? Do you realize all images from 'space' are flat and digitally refitted on a Globe? Of course you are going to ignore this post like you do to all my retorts. Your persian al biruni was debunked by the way, see my earlier post but crickets as expected from you. You shoulder change your name to coper.

Muh model cries the glober while literally being presented a full working model. He cries more not realizing that his own globe model is full of holes with no curvature measure. And so the glober holds on to his last 'proof', a cgi pictures from satellite.
Click to expand...

Yeah, sure, your model with the "wall of ice" holding the ocean waters together is almost as goofy as the Indian cosmology model of flat earth being held up by giant elephants and turtles...

images


You have "debunked" nothing, and cannot address simple glaring flaws of flat earth like why you can't see the sun after sunset while it's still up 3 time zones away, or why the distances don't work at all on any flat earth map.
 
Cooper said:
Ccannot address simple glaring flaws of flat earth like why you can't see the sun after sunset while it's still up 3 time zones away, or why the distances don't work at all on any flat earth map.
Click to expand...
Flat earth believers please explain these 2 questions:
  • Why can't we see the sun after sunset while it's still up 3 time zones away? The earth model is perfect.
  • Why distances / flight times don't work at all on any flat earth map? The earth model is perfect.
 
Here's an interesting article about how "dark matter" might not really exist after all.

"Dark matter" has always seemed to me like one of the clowniest components of what midwit normies think of as "science." I think of it every time one of them gets really smug about believing in "science." The mainstream scientific understanding of dark matter is that although it's never been observed directly and probably cannot be, it definitely makes up about a third of the mass of the universe because otherwise none of their calculations and models that describe the universe really work.

 
MusicForThePiano said:
Funny how this thread is effectively shadowbanned unless one searches for it manually or looks at a users latest posting. I could see it when I wasn't logged in, but when I log in I see this:

View attachment 9149
Click to expand...
Ha ha, it seems that the shadow ban doesn't work as intended. I guess the board software cannot handle this stupid pride driven decision. This is just another case where the mod who did this should not be a mod in the first place. He's ruining the forum with his prideful bias, and more and more members have been disappearing in recent weeks and months.

The new admin should consider removing him as a mod to prevent a further drop in traffic.
 
MusicForThePiano said:
Funny how this thread is effectively shadowbanned unless one searches for it manually or looks at a users latest posting. I could see it when I wasn't logged in, but when I log in I see this:

View attachment 9149
Click to expand...

Check just above the first post of a page and you should have the option to un/ignore a thread.


ignore function.webp

It's possible it was unintentionally clicked while browsing, especially if this is a thread you wanted to watch.

If that doesn't work, chalk it up to a forum software bug, I guess.
 
scary_robot_music said:
Here's an interesting article about how "dark matter" might not really exist after all.

"Dark matter" has always seemed to me like one of the clowniest components of what midwit normies think of as "science." I think of it every time one of them gets really smug about believing in "science." The mainstream scientific understanding of dark matter is that although it's never been observed directly and probably cannot be, it definitely makes up about a third of the mass of the universe because otherwise none of their calculations and models that describe the universe really work.

Click to expand...
I've seen quite a bit of presumption about "dark matter" (formerly "cold, dark matter") over the past thirty-four years. Over the decades I watched the estimate of the proportion of the dark matter mass of the universe go from 99% to 75% to 25% and joked that one day they'll conclude that dark matter makes up 0% of the mass of the universe. Since then (about the mid-naughts) they've gotten bolder about the estimate, and pressed speculations of the nature of dark matter, and then dark energy.

One of the more responsible statements about it appears in the second edition of Barger and Olsson's Classical Mechanics: A Modern Perspective, page 335, circa 1995:
Knowledge about the universe is largely based on the detection of electromagnetic radiation (radio waves to gamma rays) from luminous matter in outer space. The existence of dark matter in the universe, which does not significantly emit or absorb electromagnetic radiation, is inferred from its gravitational effects. Possible dark matter candidates include low-mass stars in which thermonuclear reactions barely or never started, black holes, and exotic elementary particles. The presence of an astoundingly large amount of dark matter, at least five to ten times the amount of luminous matter, is inferred from the rotations of spiral galaxies and the dynamics of groups of galaxies.
Click to expand...
The first candidate represents normal matter that we have no way of seeing, as it lacks self-luminescence and the volume to occlude anything on a stellar scale. I find it plausible that the universe has quite a bit of this stuff.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top