FE eat your heart out - you'll like this for you toolbox
(emildziewanowski.com)
Comments (14)
sorted by:
Nothing new, NASA has been doing this for decades.
Yeah and now tech is available and accessible for people to rediscover and publish the old nasa work for video game design purposes. Kind of funny they refer to NASA images for inspiration too
They ain't exploring jack but they have some artistic skills.
Yeah but NASA needs people like this too
It's all to legitimaize it. NASA is the world's more valuable brand, it's no accident that a poorly funded space agency somehow got their logo to be cool among the population.
What exactly does this prove lmao.
Lol, I wasted five years of my life going to uni for game/simulation engineering.
While computers can be useful in mapping and predicting real life systems.
Most of it is like the movie sets. No one cares how you get something working, as long as it looks believable. Thats no different here.
Are you seriously expecting someone to have full rendered 3d setup and a simulated physics, just for a skybox?
If anything, you guys are proving spherical earth.
This is why no map is the same, there is no way to perfectly map a 3d texture onto a 2d plane. Each solution has its own problems.
I even give you guys the benefit of the doubt, for all we know, we live in some kinda dimension of existence, which looks flat down here, but could curve away the farther you get from it.
But this is just silly.
Why, we never see the full thing like we do here, rotate it the way you want.
It actually proves how difficult it is to fake a globe from a flat base.
And what we get from nasa isnt realtime, so it can be retouched here and there. Thats the difference.
This is realtime, but just as fake.
If you take a look at what Unreal 5.4 can do. Its pretty obvious the flood of videos of fake event will start. It can actually do CGI in realtime. It doesnt take hours anymore to make a short video.
They can actually already make reallife graphics. Go see Bodycam.
So it will be very hard to detect from now on.
I think this is for people who already know how to disprove the globe and space theory. Then, you're ready for a deeper dive into speculating how they decieve. To determine if they are decieving is better proven with a laser test or just common observation of where we really are.
I think we need to get as close to the truest representation of this world.
I don't believe the maps we get are anything close and it isn't even for the reasons they explain. We should be able to draw a flat map based on ground reference....it doesn't need to be a rectangular map to be flat...the edges may be screwed up for all we know, but it may not be a circle either.... I just want the truth or a better representation of it.
Ya, flat isn't a shape. It's just an observation and a certainty. The certainty is that it's not a globe
But ya, it means space cant be possible, so ya, land could go for trillions of miles in all directions
I don't bother. It's so easy to under a laser test, or any other numbers of obvious observations that prove the earth could not be a planet in space.
You don't need to go to much lengths to discredit the possibility of a globe and space.
So, though it's nice to have this in the toolset, it's for you and me, other people who are already awake. The people who aren't awake yet, cannot be convinced by this. They just need to take a second and understand basic tests that disprove the globe. Then they can recover from the shock, before diving this deep into speculation of the details that NASA must do. For them, they can't even imagine a world where space is fake.
Convince aka COM (together; with) VINCERE (to conquer). That's what few do...conquer many by tempting together.
NASA (Hebrew nasha; to beguile/deceive) is being suggested by few and consented to by many. Deception requires consent.
Languages are different sounds for the same data. Separate the word, the sound, the letters from the meaning.
If you look for meaning in words, then you search with a flash light compared to just looking during the day light.
a) Different languages are shaped (suggestion) within same sound (perceivable). That implies spell-craft and it's utilized to build a fictitious layer (suggested information) within reality (perceivable inspiration).
The trick...information tempts one to hold onto; while inspiration cannot be held onto.
b) DATA (Latin datum; things given) from root DO (to give)...nature gives all (perceivable) to each one (perception). The suggestions by others tempts one to "take", while ignoring that all is already given.
If I give you an apple and you'll take it; then you ignore that seed and soil where given before fruit came to be.
Ones consent to another ones suggestion implies taking (to buy) + giving (to sell)...a mercantile contract based on ones ignorance of being FREE will of choice within all nature offers.
One cannot give what nature already gave and one cannot take without ignoring that nature moves.
a) SOUND, adjective (Latin sanus) - "entire; unbroken; whole"
b) Sound implies all; each one within implies "insane person" aka in sanus (within sound) and per sonos (by sound) aka all setting itself apart internally/inherently into each one instrument (mind structured within).
c) Few suggest the words "insane person" to distract one from perceivable sound (in sanus + per sonos).
d) It's called "letter" because shaping perceivable sound into suggestible words requires ones consent to LET it happen.
Oneself is the LETTER of whatever words another suggests.
e) As for meaning...one signal moves (perceivable inspiration) another signal tempts one to hold onto (suggested information). Few tempt many to attach meaning to latter, while ignoring former.
The root of MEAN aka mei implies "change"...not truth; belief; proof; definition; information; accuracy; certainty; legitimacy; principle; actuality; axiom; correctness; verisimilitude etc.
...then you're a deaf phonetician (definition) aka deaf to phonics (sound), hence ignoring perceivable (sound) for suggested (word) aka falling for spell-craft.
Ones sight within all light implies by FREE will of choice...looking/locking implies focusing on the suggestions by another, hence narrowing ones sight.
a) Being implies flash (life) within light (inception towards death) aka "spark of life".
b) Ones doesn't need to search for; one needs to resist wanted temptations, while being (life) forwarded (inception towards death).
c) Those within light don't need to search for it...each one needs to discern self (enlightenment), while resisting the wanted temptation of ignorance (darkness).
Sleight of hand: "Exit light (out of discernment) enter night (into ignorance) take my hand (consent to my suggestion) and we're off to never-never land (denial of potential)"... https://genius.com/Metallica-enter-sandman-lyrics