Latest replies

23 Feb 2020 11:02:11
The miniscus on top of an over full glass, raindrops,

22 Feb 2020 23:59:50
If it helps further think of the old paper Christmas decorations that you buy as a flat semicircle but when you open it it forms a sphere of layers of paper all connected think of that but with infinite number of layers all separate but connected each with the earth as many see it on each side of the paper ie flat maps each running at their own time in history or future or present, then think of the multipaged pad with the cartoon of the one image moving but stationary on each page then think what happens when pages flick slower so the images get merged or conversely when a number of pages stick together and the image jumps from one view to another and apply that to the Christmas decoration of the earth, ghosts and the Loch Ness monster are thus explained By the slow flicking and earthquakes and extreme weather by the pages stuck together .

23 Feb 2020 02:59:16
Sm from what i think I learnt,
On earth the rockets thrust hits our atmosphere and this is what propels the rocket along.
But In a vacuum the energy of thrust would disappear in the vacuum of space.

22 Feb 2020 22:44:55
Hi Ed, I have an unproven theory but that may make sense if you think about it it may explain all your questions. If you think of the earth as a multi layered infinite flat disc or oemebus (spelling) loop with our reality existing within our time frame and each layer an infinite reality you can therefore see as far as you need with your zoom lens, and also explains the existence of ghosts the Loch Ness monster and big foot, they all exist but on another reality. If you think about the cartoon movement by the quick flicking of the pages then the image you see is whole and moving but in reality is multiple stationary realities but existing together as a single entity.
I hope that helps you understand the universe
Big C.

22 Feb 2020 22:25:03
Hi Ed just used the link from the Everton banter page didn’t know any of this stuff was here. To the point in hand, firstly I know nothing about space or vacuums or what Torr is yet there a few things that immediately spring to mind .

A. If there is nothing for rockets to push against to move through space how and why do planets orbit the the stars/ suns surely in a such a vacuum nothing would move yet orbits occur and and as a result of said movement there must be a disturbance of the vacuum thus causing a path within the vacuum. The word vacuum itself implies an absence of anything, yet within space there is stuff such as meteors, comets, Satelite’s, space junk etc,

B, each body within the galaxy has a magnetic/ gravitational pull / field and while not visible with the eye are proven to exist therefore with space flight the lunar missions use the gravitational pull of earth and the Moon and their orbits of the earth and moon to achieve breakaway and landing thus providing a force to push against which in turn cause movement as in Newton’s law equal and opposite motion .
And C if a vacuum exists how does the sun warm or illuminate our planet as surely the heat would remain around the sun as the heat of the tea doesn’t heat the outside of your flask.

And D, How does Riquelme get spotted in so many different locations at the same time on transfer deadline day without the ability to move at the speed of light which we know is proven yet couldn’t in a vacuum of nothingness,

it is my conclusion that it’s all a load of bollocks that no one is even close to understanding and it is easier to find reasons why the lunar landings were allegedly faked than except that it just does exist like my unicorn and ability to do magic
I must sign off as I’m due in the electro therapy room
Big C.

22 Feb 2020 22:39:43
And it is probably a case of 'no one knows' if a rocket can work in space or not. I can not find one bit of rocket launch 'external camera' footage that goes beyond 70 - 100 miles up, then it always cuts off or goes to a cartoon.

If someone has seen any footage past this point, please post it here, thanks. And Apollo footage is fake, so don't bother posting low Earth orbit window pics :)

70-100 miles. Wouldn't that be around the height of the starting point/ edge of the 'dome' 'waters above' firmament', Ed?

22 Feb 2020 21:57:43
They have allegedly tested the Apollo in a vacuum chamber. I believe the same chamber Le Blanc was in.

I am not saying there isn't fakery, Ed. You know I don't believe we have been to the Moon.

22 Feb 2020 22:02:28
You are probably right in saying space suits can not handle being in a vacuum.

The BBC faked a vacuum experiment with James May, I don't know if you have seen this.

This is a clip from the BBC. There are 2 people inside the vacuum chamber with James May and they only have overalls and oxygen masks on. Everything else is exposed to the vacuum.

What was it that happens to exposed parts of the body in a vacuum?

Pure fakery, mate.

22 Feb 2020 21:14:18
Jim Le Blanc was the astronaut in the vacuum chamber, but it was apparently an airline that had come loose on his suit which caused him to depressurise. That's what we are told anyway.

I don't know about the rockets not working in a vacuum. The way I am visualising it, is the force of the rocket has to push out of the rocket to escape, therefore there is no external pushing forces needed. the escaping rocket flame is just the burning fuel escaping after it has 'pushed' itself out of the rocket.

I maybe totally wrong. But if say it was an motorised fan which was used as the propeller, and does need an external pushing force, then I would agree it would not work in space.

22 Feb 2020 21:01:32
If space is a near perfect vacuum like they tell us.
Rockets would have nothing to thrust against.
That's if were understanding a vacuum correct.
But for these test to be correct the vacuum has to be same as space.
The area and vehicle would have to be sized to that of the real environment and thrust.
Or your actually testing something other than operating a rocket in space.

22 Feb 2020 20:21:42
Can you imagine sending astronauts to the Moon with an alleged 1x10 to minus 11 Torr and not even being able to test whether they can handle being in a 1x10 to minus 11 Torr vacuum?

Apparently only 1 guy in a space suit has ever been in a 1x10 to minus 6 Torr vacuum chamber and he was in there for 2 seconds before passing out and they had to get him out. He said that just before passing out, he could feel the moisture on his tongue boiling.

22 Feb 2020 19:54:08
Of course the world is round! I thought you guys were joking. No offence intended, its up to you. But weathermen and women show us satellite pictures all day every day. It's how we knew about storm Dennis. They don't always get it right, but they're not bad. The strength of telescopes is a mathematical science, you can literally pay to go and see for yourself, things that are hundreds of thousands of miles away.

Nothing will sway me from the knowledge that the earth is spherical. Because something is written on the Internet, doesn't make it true.
Virgin are already readying space tourism.

And what is proffesor Brian Cox and Sir Patrick Moore about? Are they agents of darkness spreading lies about the nature of reality? Or are they highly educated men, who have studied for years and years. What possible reason would there be for such an in depth conspiracy.

And I refuse to believe coxy is a liar. His enthusiasm is infectious and many people watch him just for that reason.

Go on Google earth. Keep heading east or west, doesn't matter, you will end up in the same spot.

Sometimes you can focus so strongly on a small part of the jigsaw that you miss the big picture.

Religion, or Christianity at any rate, once ruled the Western world. Its answers to the mystery of life was so appealing that people still believe it in the 21st century. But it was toppled by the world being round.

It proved that heaven and hell were not physically possible. There are so many sites where you can zoom out from you current position and see the earth as round.

If we can see stars that are millions of miles away, billions. Then how is it that we can't see the sun when it's a few thousand miles away.

I know you guys don't care, and I'm sure you have discovered the odd conspiracy out there. But anyone who thinks the world is flat is literally mental. I'm really sorry to say it. This stuff is interesting.

And why are there thousands of images of the spherical earth and none of this flat existence. You know there's no up and down in space? That's a product of gravity.

Sometimes it feels like this is the main problem flat earthers have. An inability to think in the abstract. As if this is the centre of the universe (it is if you believe in infinity)

22 Feb 2020 19:58:01
In my opinion,
When I look at stars I see a weird shape light even in telescope.
Not a ball.
And the moon is a round object that doesn't have a spot of intense light, like a ball does with a light shined on it and light tapering away to edges.
Only place I see a perfect ball is in space books and T.v but its cgi.
And the space station should be called atmosphere station lol.
Well it's not in space is it?

22 Feb 2020 17:45:10
According to this experiment, they do. Rockets in a Vacuum Chamber - Newton's third law of motion Visualized

22 Feb 2020 15:53:05
Hi. I also do not believe in the flat earth idea. Peoples beliefs are their own choice but I think it is disingenuous to claim proofs that are in fact nothing of the sort. A few points. None of those quoted suggested we could not leave low earth orbit. In fact Trump has announced NASA returning to the moon and plans for Mars. Obama was behind deep space unmanned missions. No one has returned to the moon on a manned mission due to cost and because we have been there and have no reason to return. The inverse square of light explains how and why we do see stars, not that it is impossible to do so. Our eyes only need to pick up 1 proton for the light to be visible. We can only see 9000 of the 300 billion stars in the Milky Way with our naked eye and the inverse law is the explanation for this. If the earth is flat then how can I see the sun rise and set over the ocean, moving in and out of view? And if the earth was flat and I looked out at empty ocean from the west coast of a USA or south coast of Australia then surely I would see the Antarctic Ice walls apparently surrounding us?

22 Feb 2020 13:48:23
Perhaps 350 miles is the distance to which the earth's gravitational pull has an effect on the space station.

I have zero belief in astrology, just as much truth in tea leaves.

22 Feb 2020 00:19:09
Surely even across the Atlantic ocean the curvature of the earth plays a big part.
We all know the world is a sphere right?

21 Feb 2020 22:15:55
I think in my opinion they probably found some proof of ancient civilisations Maybe advanced.
And if u think about when that place was last not frozen, it will knock there time and calendar side ways.

But no doubt they say it's to see damage of human made climate change lol.

21 Feb 2020 22:09:30
Yes that is realistic,
If u go above wave height there should be no obstructions to stop a signal being sent straight across.

And to me when I see that video I looked as though a jelly fish type shape appeared after the lighting lol.
Unless that was some sort of pixel mix up on my device.

21 Feb 2020 20:32:27
Agree land is a total different ball game because of what u have listed.
In regards to the ocean u would have to take into account size of waves above sea level I would guess.
In regards to the satellites I can only see them working as a ballon type configuration.