|
^^^ Fuck off, you're just making shit up.
Sources or you're just a lying faggot.
|
|
|
|
|
^^^ You're a retarded liar, all LASER light is monochromatic. That's just how stimulated emission works.
"... In laser action the stimulating emission triggers a chain reaction in which the radiation from one atom stimulates another in succession until all the excited atoms in the system have returned to normalcy. In doing so, coherent monochromatic light (light of a single wavelength) is emitted. ..." -- Encyclopedia Britannica
LIAR LIAR PANTS ON FIRE!!
|
|
|
|
|
^^^ You're so full of shit you scientifically illiterate buffoon! All LASER light is monochromatic you fucking liar.
|
|
|
|
|
^^^ I've already demonstrated the Moon is 32 nautical miles wide through direct measurnt with a sextant which absolutely debunks the Moon landing story. Yet you satanic fags still persist with your fraudulent claims...
How do you prove there are retro-reflectors on the Moon if laser pulses can be bounced off the surface without them? I purpose that the laser pulses are being reflected off of the firmament and that the Moon isn't even required!
Fucking liars.
|
|
|
|
....
Could be really happened but why they didn't send any men after that first landing on the moon in 1969,it would have been a tourist spot in 2019 if they did that with the technology in 1969.
Technology doesn't work that way. Taking a wild guess here I'll suggest that while computer tech is billions of times superior to that of 1969, rocket technology maybe 1.1 - 1.2x improved. It's like asking how improved are the passenger jets of 1969 compared to those of today. On the question of "did we land on the moon," this wikipedia article may be of interest. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Third-party_evidence_for_Apollo_Moon_landings -- https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Third-party_evidence_for_Apollo_Moon_landings"...The first successful tests were carried out in 1962 when a team from the Massachusetts Institute of Technology succeeded in observing laser pulses reflected from the Moon's surface using a laser with a millisecond pulse length..." -- https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lunar_Laser_Ranging_experimentSpendy, how do you explain this contradiction? They were bouncing lasers off the Moon almost a decade before the first Moon landing hoax. |
|
|
|
"The Flat Earth Society" is controlled opposition and disinformation. Here's the real deal: The International Flat Earth Research Society -- http://ifers.123.st/ |
|
|
|
there was also an ico project to raise funds for a rocket to see what the earth really is. who knows what end?
Sounds like a scam for gullible investors to me. |
|
|
|
^^^ Well, I don't have to ask why you refuse to acknowledge that the horizon is crated by the angular resolution limit of the "eye" being used; Earth curvature falsified. If you can't understand that for example, railroad tracks are parallel and don't physically converge in the distance, why am I arguing with a moron who can't understand what optical phenomena is? Are you really a fool or do you just play one on TV? You change the subject from something I can prove beyond a reasonable doubt to, subjects that I have to theorize about and, that somebody who's completely brainwashed with the heliocentric Copernican model of the universe would conciser absolutely absurd; 2 mile tall giants and the holographic Sun and Moon. You clearly have no interest in being intellectually honest, facts and or God forbid the truth. Do all three sides of a triangle add up to 180 degrees, hell yes, but that's fucking irrelevant if I've proven that your precious curvature is nothing but optical convergence!  Image source: ODD TV |
|
|
|
^^^ The Moon is a holographic projection made of plasma, so obviously if the ocean is cooling the projector solenoids it's not being towed around by an aircraft. Thanks for strawmanning my arguments, I'm sure everybody appreciates your honesty... @nutty, you're an idiot! The Earth is round, it's a circular plain. Also, believing that water can stick to a spinning sphere in vacuum is embarrassingly moronic IMO, an impossible flywheel with a 4,000 mile radius and a 1,000 MPH rim speed no less. The Earth is an engineered structure with artificial lighting.  Image source: The Truman Show (1998) |
|
|
|
|
These clowns have nothing; nutildah is frothing at the mouth over the bible and, spendy seems to think that railroad tracks actually converge in the distance while proclaiming the ophthalmology textbook description of a normal eye is in error.
It's a clown world after all folks!
|
|
|
|
 Image source: US dollar"...In fact, I don't think it (resolution limit of the eye)† has any relation to anything at all. No relation to calculating distances whatsoever. So why do you keep posting it? Measurement of distances and their relative positions is not limited by the human eye, that is why we have instruments, to be more precise than our natural senses..."
† added by me for clarity."...You already stated 1 degree = ~60 nautical miles in the flat earth thread and guess what, the Moon measures 32'..."
"...At sixty feet, one degree of arc is about one foot wide. So this 1:60 ratio applies, and at 3600 miles, 1 degree would sweep 60 miles..."You're putting the cart before the horse here (Porsche not withstanding), as I stated before the globe and thus the Copernican model's large heavy ball Moon are dead in the water as soon as the ratio of 1 minute to 1 nautical mile is defined. This is before any celestial measurements are made with the sextant. How is the ratio defined you ask? Since we will be measuring objects with a sextant using the human eye, the ratio is defined by the angular resolution limit of the human eye being 1 minute. This equates to being able to see a 1 foot object at a maximum distance of 1/2 nautical miles. Beyond 1/2 nautical miles, objects 1 foot and smaller can not be seen; objects in the field of view converge to a point at 1/2 nautical miles. If we place the human eye 1 foot above ground (observably a plain), all objects will converge to the vanishing point at a distance of 1 nautical mile. Since we are above a plain the vanishing point will form a line i.e. the horizon. The horizon is shown here to be an optical phenomenon thus, if the resolution limit changes due to using a zoom lens or, the height above ground changes (angle of attack) then, the distance objects converge to a point at (the horizon) changes also. The globe model requires that the horizon is a physical barrier (the theoretical curve) that can only change in distance based on the viewers height. The distance to the horizon on a globe is (((coincidentally))) the same distance to the horizon as based on the human eye but, if a zoom lens is employed and the resolution limit is changed to any other value than 1 minute then, the model breaks down and is falsified. So there you have it, the globe and Copernican models are falsified and we can start measuring objects and distances with our sextant. Any questions? The horizon line is created inside the eye i.e. it's an optical phenomenon. If the resolution limit is changed to another value from 1 minute i.e. by the use of a zoom lens, the distance to the horizon changes. If the distance to the horizon changes depending on the "eye" being used, then the horizon is not a physical object i.e. there's no curve. Why can't you get this through your fucking skull?
I'm just going to leave this here. NASA Going Nowhere Since 1958 -- https://youtu.be/AGxhmZ6OKUU |
|
|
|
"...The 1:60 ratio is an old navigator's trick..."
..... Meaningless images deleted. So you've got nothing to respond? You're claiming it's a "trick" and "based on trig" while providing exactly "nothing" to back it up, you're full of shit! Claiming? The history of the "rule of 60s" is well known. What's the big deal? What backs up the approximation is called trigonometry. You are full of shit, period. I provide references: Copyright Disclaimer under section 107 of the Copyright Act 1976, allowance is made for “fair use” for purposes such as criticism, comment, news reporting, teaching, scholarship, education and research. Image source: Yanoff, Myron; Duker, Jay S. (2009). Ophthalmology 3rd Edition. MOSBY Elsevier. p. 54. ISBN 978-0444511416. |
|
|
|
"...The 1:60 ratio is an old navigator's trick..."
..... Meaningless images deleted. So you've got nothing to respond? You're claiming it's a "trick" and "based on trig" while providing exactly "nothing" to back it up, you're full of shit! |
|
|
|
^^^ You must be from the Flat Earth Society (controlled opposition and disinformation) because that image is faker than the holocaust, here's the real deal:  Japan just proved Earth is Flat and DOMED!? -- https://youtu.be/M14-aK0mkZg |
|
|
|
"...The 1:60 ratio is an old navigator's trick..."
 Image source: https://deskgram.net/explore/tags/bankshatehim
...
Once after the stepping into moon and placing the US flag video got telecasted to the common people more controversy existed out of the same for some reason. If we begin to go through different sources related to the planet moon then only it is possible to get a deep vision how this can be achieved when most other countries associated with it hasn't took any decision about the righteous of the incident.
Righteous? I think it's pretty cool they planted the flag.
Other nations have no say in the matter.like the children raped on pedo island? 50 years after the moon landing, the us gov is the first to run a pedo island for very important pedos... or maybe not...  |
|
|
|
 Image source: https://www.pinterest.com/pin/692006298968823896/^^^ I said any questions, not the most biased opinions possible from somebody who's (I'm assuming) based their entire life and career around a lie and the biggest conspiracy in the history of the mankind bar-none.
Wait, so you don't want to look at three dimensional trig? "...You already stated 1 degree = ~60 nautical miles in the flat earth thread and guess what, the Moon measures 32'..."
At sixty feet, one degree of arc is about one foot wide. So this 1:60 ratio applies, and at 3600 miles, 1 degree would sweep 60 miles. But three dimensional trig allows accommodation for hills and valley on the earth. It's far more precise. Given that your measurement errors are a substantial part of the measurements, this would be the way to get it right. For example, from three points on the earth, say Manhattan, Los Angeles, and Miami, measure the angle to the moon at the same time. The four points form a triangle on each of four sides. What is the sum of the angles between the three ground points? You're putting the cart before the horse here (Porsche not withstanding), as I stated before the globe and thus the Copernican model's large heavy ball Moon are dead in the water as soon as the ratio of 1 minute to 1 nautical mile is defined. This is before any celestial measurements are made with the sextant. How is the ratio defined you ask? Since we will be measuring objects with a sextant using the human eye, the ratio is defined by the angular resolution limit of the human eye being 1 minute. This equates to being able to see a 1 foot object at a maximum distance of 1/2 nautical miles. Beyond 1/2 nautical miles, objects 1 foot and smaller can not be seen; objects in the field of view converge to a point at 1/2 nautical miles. If we place the human eye 1 foot above ground (observably a plain), all objects will converge to the vanishing point at a distance of 1 nautical mile. Since we are above a plain the vanishing point will form a line i.e. the horizon. The horizon is shown here to be an optical phenomenon thus, if the resolution limit changes due to using a zoom lens or, the height above ground changes (angle of attack) then, the distance objects converge to a point at (the horizon) changes also. The globe model requires that the horizon is a physical barrier (the theoretical curve) that can only change in distance based on the viewers height. The distance to the horizon on a globe is (((coincidentally))) the same distance to the horizon as based on the human eye but, if a zoom lens is employed and the resolution limit is changed to any other value than 1 minute then, the model breaks down and is falsified. So there you have it, the globe and Copernican models are falsified and we can start measuring objects and distances with our sextant. Any questions? |
|
|
|
Members of the Flat Earth Society claim to believe the Earth is flat, and, it seems, they're serious.
The Flat Earth Society is "controlled opposition" and the information they provide is complete garbage. |
|
|
|
|
^^^ I said any questions, not the most biased opinions possible from somebody who's (I'm assuming) based their entire life and career around a lie and the biggest conspiracy in the history of the mankind bar-none.
|
|
|
|
"...You already stated 1 degree = ~60 nautical miles in the flat earth thread and guess what, the Moon measures 32'..."
At sixty feet, one degree of arc is about one foot wide. So this 1:60 ratio applies, and at 3600 miles, 1 degree would sweep 60 miles. But three dimensional trig allows accommodation for hills and valley on the earth. It's far more precise. Given that your measurement errors are a substantial part of the measurements, this would be the way to get it right. For example, from three points on the earth, say Manhattan, Los Angeles, and Miami, measure the angle to the moon at the same time. The four points form a triangle on each of four sides. What is the sum of the angles between the three ground points? You're putting the cart before the horse here (Porsche not withstanding), as I stated before the globe and thus the Copernican model's large heavy ball Moon are dead in the water as soon as the ratio of 1 minute to 1 nautical mile is defined. This is before any celestial measurements are made with the sextant. How is the ratio defined you ask? Since we will be measuring objects with a sextant using the human eye, the ratio is defined by the angular resolution limit of the human eye being 1 minute. This equates to being able to see a 1 foot object at a maximum distance of 1/2 nautical miles. Beyond 1/2 nautical miles, objects 1 foot and smaller can not be seen; objects in the field of view converge to a point at 1/2 nautical miles. If we place the human eye 1 foot above ground (observably a plain), all objects will converge to the vanishing point at a distance of 1 nautical mile. Since we are above a plain the vanishing point will form a line i.e. the horizon. The horizon is shown here to be an optical phenomenon thus, if the resolution limit changes due to using a zoom lens or, the height above ground changes (angle of attack) then, the distance objects converge to a point at (the horizon) changes also. The globe model requires that the horizon is a physical barrier (the theoretical curve) that can only change in distance based on the viewers height. The distance to the horizon on a globe is (((coincidentally))) the same distance to the horizon as based on the human eye but, if a zoom lens is employed and the resolution limit is changed to any other value than 1 minute then, the model breaks down and is falsified. So there you have it, the globe and Copernican models are falsified and we can start measuring objects and distances with our sextant. Any questions? |
|
|
|
|
^^^ You already stated 1 degree = ~60 nautical miles in the flat earth thread and guess what, the Moon measures 32'. Now you're just a faggot who has to backtrack to maintain his master's lie.
|
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
