For anyone else who might be reading these comments, I don't agree with even one sentence 925thejoyisgone has typed above. But I'm not wasting any more time or mental effort engaging with this delusional wrong-headedness.
I have a question for you...have you ever watched that documentary American Moon?
Is it worth the watch? I'm not a fan of videos in the slightest, but I wouldn't mind your opinion on it, especially because they somewhat distance themselves from "flat-Earthers" right at the outset.
Yes it's worth the watch. A bit long for one sitting but you can split it into sections. The highlights are the his tackling of historical context at the start where he establishes the reasons why NASA would almost be compelled to fake the missions if they could not do them for real. He also makes a convincing argument for why the Russians would play along. He does some good research.
And then section at the end where he presents the photos to various professional photographers who have never before studied the images with the intention of seeing if they were real or not.
The director's story is he was a big fan of the moon landings when young and had some big poster of one image in his room. He became a professional photographer himself and later rediscovered his poster and noticed hotspots and light fall-off that he was by then familiar with in studio photography with artificial light source.
And btw that is one thing that has never sat well with me. Russia. Sure...terrible terrible enemies, yet we can collaborate with them on some things and everything is hugs and smiles.
When my dad was in the army (intelligence), he said he rather frequently ran into both Russian and Mossad operatives. Like, height of the Cold War. And he would go up to them and joke around with them.
And then, back in the future, we found out that there were some nice digs right outside both DC and Annapolis, MD that housed Russian operatives (one had pools and tennis courts and stuff like that). And one of them was directly across the water from Gibson Island, where the elite plan much of their shenanigans.
He made a really good point lmao. Please explain to me how a hovering drone accelerates to match the earth rotating below on a shorter circumference than the drone?
A bit late, but in regards to you “earth rotating so fast” question, one day is 24 hours. The earth rotates once in that time. If we wanna be precise it’s actually like 23 hours 56 minutes and 4 seconds and that’s why we do the leap year shit. Spinning once a day is like 0.0007 RPM, a very small and hard to perceive amount.
Rotational speed at the equator is 27.7 KM per minute, and all objects on the earth have the same kinetic energy , including the at atmosphere.
To put it another way, if you’re in a train going 100 mph and you jump up, you aren’t instantly slammed into the rear of the train car and killed, you too are going 100 mph even though you’re able to sip your drink and munch on some chips. A drone flying straight up is still in the atmosphere travelling east-west and with Newton’s third law taken into account, since no outside force is acting on the drone to slow it down it goes the same direction it was originally heading aided by the atmosphere it’s in.
We have to make a few assumptions here and there’s a good chance we’re wrong.
Assuming the drone gets no input to keep it straight up, well you may be able to prove that. Turning the controller off and letting the drone sit there flying on its own for example. But to assume no wind at all? Even in a calm situation you’ll find there’s actually air movement. Figuring out how the clouds should move is complicated due to the size of the planet and the sheer number of variables involved. Complex weather systems are well, complex and not only would I most likely not do it justice trying to simplify it, we’ll be here quite a while setting up the particulars of the variables that change very rapidly. Amount of sunlight , reflection off water, absorbing and reflection of heat from the sun on black tilled farmland, upper air currents, hell that’s just a short list that doesn’t even scrape the surface of how many factors are at play. So with your permission, I’ll leave the clouds movement for now?
We’ll stick with the drone. Yes, I agree with you that the circumference of the orbit of the drone is larger than the circumference of the earth at ground level. While the drone is hovering 2 miles up, it’s still being pushed upon by the rotating atmosphere. Until you leave the atmosphere you’re still being pushed by it. This is a hard example to nail down details on as the higher you go up the lower the air pressure but you started off with X kinetic energy at ground level and have moved into a lower air pressure which will have less resistance to your drone relative to the air resistance at ground level. The air isn’t like still water in a swimming pool, it’s a turbulent gas mixture that’s quite hard to visualize moving the way it actually does and describing it is harder. Remember the movie twister where they put all those little sensors into the tornado to map it and show it on the computer screen? If you could do something like that with the earths atmosphere and show it to someone you could describe the events going on. The upper atmosphere can already be moving at higher speeds relative to you at ground level and without measurements of both the ground air speed and the speed at the drone height, the answer ends up being “we it could be _____”.
Do you have any experiments showing a drone was set to fly up , do only vertical force and no lateral correction and flew there for an hour and then landed hundreds of miles away to present?
For anyone else who might be reading these comments, I don't agree with even one sentence 925thejoyisgone has typed above. But I'm not wasting any more time or mental effort engaging with this delusional wrong-headedness.
I have a question for you...have you ever watched that documentary American Moon?
Is it worth the watch? I'm not a fan of videos in the slightest, but I wouldn't mind your opinion on it, especially because they somewhat distance themselves from "flat-Earthers" right at the outset.
Yes it's worth the watch. A bit long for one sitting but you can split it into sections. The highlights are the his tackling of historical context at the start where he establishes the reasons why NASA would almost be compelled to fake the missions if they could not do them for real. He also makes a convincing argument for why the Russians would play along. He does some good research.
And then section at the end where he presents the photos to various professional photographers who have never before studied the images with the intention of seeing if they were real or not.
The director's story is he was a big fan of the moon landings when young and had some big poster of one image in his room. He became a professional photographer himself and later rediscovered his poster and noticed hotspots and light fall-off that he was by then familiar with in studio photography with artificial light source.
Thanks, I will give it a watch.
And btw that is one thing that has never sat well with me. Russia. Sure...terrible terrible enemies, yet we can collaborate with them on some things and everything is hugs and smiles.
When my dad was in the army (intelligence), he said he rather frequently ran into both Russian and Mossad operatives. Like, height of the Cold War. And he would go up to them and joke around with them.
And then, back in the future, we found out that there were some nice digs right outside both DC and Annapolis, MD that housed Russian operatives (one had pools and tennis courts and stuff like that). And one of them was directly across the water from Gibson Island, where the elite plan much of their shenanigans.
Russia to me was always the real paper tiger.
He made a really good point lmao. Please explain to me how a hovering drone accelerates to match the earth rotating below on a shorter circumference than the drone?
A bit late, but in regards to you “earth rotating so fast” question, one day is 24 hours. The earth rotates once in that time. If we wanna be precise it’s actually like 23 hours 56 minutes and 4 seconds and that’s why we do the leap year shit. Spinning once a day is like 0.0007 RPM, a very small and hard to perceive amount. Rotational speed at the equator is 27.7 KM per minute, and all objects on the earth have the same kinetic energy , including the at atmosphere. To put it another way, if you’re in a train going 100 mph and you jump up, you aren’t instantly slammed into the rear of the train car and killed, you too are going 100 mph even though you’re able to sip your drink and munch on some chips. A drone flying straight up is still in the atmosphere travelling east-west and with Newton’s third law taken into account, since no outside force is acting on the drone to slow it down it goes the same direction it was originally heading aided by the atmosphere it’s in.
We have to make a few assumptions here and there’s a good chance we’re wrong. Assuming the drone gets no input to keep it straight up, well you may be able to prove that. Turning the controller off and letting the drone sit there flying on its own for example. But to assume no wind at all? Even in a calm situation you’ll find there’s actually air movement. Figuring out how the clouds should move is complicated due to the size of the planet and the sheer number of variables involved. Complex weather systems are well, complex and not only would I most likely not do it justice trying to simplify it, we’ll be here quite a while setting up the particulars of the variables that change very rapidly. Amount of sunlight , reflection off water, absorbing and reflection of heat from the sun on black tilled farmland, upper air currents, hell that’s just a short list that doesn’t even scrape the surface of how many factors are at play. So with your permission, I’ll leave the clouds movement for now? We’ll stick with the drone. Yes, I agree with you that the circumference of the orbit of the drone is larger than the circumference of the earth at ground level. While the drone is hovering 2 miles up, it’s still being pushed upon by the rotating atmosphere. Until you leave the atmosphere you’re still being pushed by it. This is a hard example to nail down details on as the higher you go up the lower the air pressure but you started off with X kinetic energy at ground level and have moved into a lower air pressure which will have less resistance to your drone relative to the air resistance at ground level. The air isn’t like still water in a swimming pool, it’s a turbulent gas mixture that’s quite hard to visualize moving the way it actually does and describing it is harder. Remember the movie twister where they put all those little sensors into the tornado to map it and show it on the computer screen? If you could do something like that with the earths atmosphere and show it to someone you could describe the events going on. The upper atmosphere can already be moving at higher speeds relative to you at ground level and without measurements of both the ground air speed and the speed at the drone height, the answer ends up being “we it could be _____”. Do you have any experiments showing a drone was set to fly up , do only vertical force and no lateral correction and flew there for an hour and then landed hundreds of miles away to present?
Truth hurts your brain. Noted.