I know, it is Newton's laws on all three axes, but you would be surprised how controversial this is around here, lol.
No, I just always feel a bit awkward having someone have a comment taken down seemingly on my behalf. I know that isn't why you do it.
I am a bit sensitive because I got censored to hell over at TheDonald until was permabanned. I spent a long time having to carefully talk around all of their filters, because my account was monitored by bots that would take down any comment using key words.
The rules should be the same for everyone I guess. I am just saying that when someone calls me dumb, I don't really lose sleep over it. I was not happy that time that AI guy insinuated that I would get a visitor though, haha.
As always, you don't need to take comments down on my behalf. I actually found it a bit funny to be told I am a jabbed double booster because I should dare to point out that what Neil says in this video is correct.
People are free to not like NDT, I don't particularly care for him. But his description of the mechanics of jumping on an airplane here is correct and his analogizing it to being on the surface of a rotating globe is a valid argument. He is responding to standard arguments against the globe about how the motion of the earth should impact us. That still does not make the globe model correct, it just makes those criticisms from Eric Dubay and the others wrong.
Can you tell us how you arrived at the conclusion...
Well, I guess what value do you suppose there is in sending humans to the moon? I don't mean to avoid the question, I am being serious. I suppose if you build a moon base so people can actually live there, you could at least stay awhile and not just fly back and forth. What you do there, I'm not exactly sure.
Going forward, maybe there is some military or industrial use to being there. But that would have been totally impractical in the 1970s. So what exactly could NASA do on the moon that was important? Did they go to the moon to play golf? Or maybe to verify a conjecture of Galileo? LMAO! This is totally ridiculous. We have vacuum chambers in laboratories.
Moon hoax theories aside, the actual valuable science from the moon is not an argument for sending people. The constant reply against the theories "there are mirrors on the moon and we bounce lasers off of them" and "we have rocks from the moon that geologists study" may be an argument against "space is fake" but not against the moon hoax. Other countries have put mirrors on the moon and collected rocks that were returned to earth without sending people on this ludicrous trip to drop hammers and feathers. So this means we did not need to do the moon landing for laser reflecting mirrors or rock collecting.
People say after 1972 NASA stagnated and even went backwards. This is not true. Most honest scientists will say that everything of real scientific value from NASA came after Apollo was over. None of it was manned. The scientists who promote moon trips, and other manned missions, are people like Neil Degrass Tyson. He says it is important because it inspires the public or whatever. This is basically an admission that it has no real scientific value. If it did, he would be appealing to that rather than something intangible like "inspiring muh children."
In the next sentence... no longer a thing and never will be?
I am actually saying that nowadays it is the opposite, but yes after Apollo there was no longer any value to the politicians. It is completely unsurprising to me that after 50 years it looks sort of likely that we are going back to the moon now, and would you know it, the Chinese are going too. So in the 1960s, the moonshot was a proxy propaganda war between the USA and USSR, and nowadays it is a proxy propaganda war between the USA and China. The more things change, as they say.
As long as there is no geopolitical foe to project dominance over, there is little reason to do the moonshot, which is why governments don't care to go during those times.
A lot of debunkers just repeat the official...
I mean, that isn't just "the official statement" it is reality. I know some people deny all of the space program, and that is a separate issue. But NASA claims to have been very active since 1972, and that activity has been extremely valuable. By any objective metric, it has been more valuable.
A short and incomplete list would be (1) Robotic exploration: Voyager (1 and 2), Mariner, Galileo, Cassini, Juno, Curiosity, Opportunity, MRO, New Horizons, etc. (2) Space based telescopes: Hubble, Chandra, Kepler, Webb, Roman, etc.. (3) Earth surveys: all the low satellites mapping and studying every square inch of the earth. (4) Heliophysics and space weather: all the satellites monitoring the sun and its output in the local interplanetary medium. (5) Long term manned missions: the ISS and the shuttle (many people consider this to not have much scientific value compared to the other 4, however it is worth noting that it was a (LEO) manned mission that fixed Hubble after it went up dysfunctional and manned missions have done maintenance and dragged it out of orbital decay for 35 years).
Maybe you propose that all of this is fake too, that's fine. But the claim that space stopped after 1972 is just wrong. The issue is exactly what you asked me evidence for. The public was interested (initially) in the moon landing. They are not interested in the dynamics of the Saturn system, whether there is water on Mars, the minor rings of the other giants, or the glacial activity of Pluto, let alone deep telescopic imagery. So most people, apparently you too, don't seem to understand that NASA has been very active for the past 50 years. And by any honest metric their output has been much more important and valuable to humanity than Alan Shepard golfing on the moon.
Yes, but it is actually stronger than that. In addition to having no impact to jumping up and down on an airplane, or walking back and forth across the aisle (which is the same thing relative to the forward motion), there is no impediment to walking forward and backward along the aisle, which is the same axis.
It is not like you are on a plane moving 500 mph and you want to walk 5 mph to the front of the plane and you think to yourself "OK, now I have to remember that I really am accelerating myself to 505 mph." You just start walking forward as if the plane were not moving at all. Obviously, earth with a constant rotation rate is the same thing.
Honestly, I don't really care if people want to think the globe is fake and a conspiracy or whatever. But when they make arguments that are just mechanically wrong, I'm like, no that is just wrong. And since I think the "Believe The Science" crowd like Neil Tyson are definitely not what we want to promote, then we don't want to be in a position where we are very wrong and they are very right about something very obvious.
This whole "shape of the earth" thing is just one of those things. It is the most obvious one. If there were a good argument against the globe, people would not be saying that a rotating earth would move under a hovering helicopter or whatever. If there were a good argument, we would have already heard it.
Oh, I see. Yeah, I agree that Neil is not particularly impressive and I especially think his fans are generally dumb. I would definitely expect him to get helicopter autorotation wrong because he is a cosmologist which basically means he never has to do anything real with physics, lmao.
But still, his point here about jumping on an airplane is correct. I don't care if people say "ohhhh, you believe The Science Mr. Safe and Effective" or whatever. True and false are true and false and I am not going to take a false position just because it is the opposite of NDT's. I've been on an airplane traveling over 500 miles per hour and I can just open a can of seltzer and sip it calmly.
And yes, what Neil is saying is precisely why "the earth does not just fly underneath us when we jump even though it is supposedly traveling 1000 mph." You can dispute the globe if you want, but this particular argument is wrong.
Zero. The fact that you are asking this question is basically an admission that I am right, because otherwise you would be refuting me.
It is worth noting that while you are trying to troll me for having the same opinion about Neil and the rest of "The Science" regarding the mechanics of jumping on airplanes and the spin of the earth, you have the same opinion as them regarding the equivalence of these two positions. When they were pushing the jab, anyone who refused their "safe and effective vaccine" was essentially treated as someone who denied the round rotating globe.
So you and Neil actually agree that belief in the spinning ball and belief in the safe and effective vaccine are the same*. Those of us who are smart understand that these are two unrelated items that should be evaluated independently. It turns out that the claims about the jab's safety and effectiveness were totally absurd, and also, the claims about the failure of the spinning globe model are totally absurd.
*If you want to know why I always answer these things, it is because in my opinion the purpose of this whole psyop is to do exactly this. That is, bring the "conspiracy crowd" over to flat earth or other non traditional cosmologies. Then, you can use this as an "argument by association" on other things, like, say, the jab.
You may be right on both counts, but Neil's explanation of earth spin here (or rather, why we don't feel it) is sound.
I'm not sure what helicopter autorotation has to do with his point. If you jump in a plane (or train or boat or bus), you will land where you jumped as long as the vehicle is not accelerating.
What can I say to someone on a conspiracy site defending the Kubrik confessions as real...
This emoji sums it up...🤣
Like I said, I'm happy to hear moon hoax arguments out. Most of them are pretty dumb, some are OK. If so many moon hoaxers weren't flat earthers, people might take it more seriously.
I agree with your analysis that this is more bullshit to drum up public interest in the alien hoax. It seems they have been failing spectacularly to get anyone interested though.
To be fair, if you take "a physics 101 class" you will not come away understanding what zero point energy is or why it cannot be used for anything. But yeah, scientific knowledge in internet conspiracy corners is lacking to say the least. This is why "one of those scientists posted on social media they were going to whistle blow the ZPE and then they disappeared" is considered evidence by people.
I've always found it hilarious that the people who call every image from space fake will cite that one grainy video with some guy who doesn't even really look or sound like Kubrik for eternity. I mean, maybe that video is fake? Is that unthinkable to you people?
I am personally open to hearing out moon hoax theories, but unfortunately most of them are full of dumb bullshit. Obviously the majority are on flat earth videos, so that is expected.
I am doubtful of the moon hoax and similar NASA conspiracies, but I don't doubt for a minute it has been a cesspit of some of the weirdest degenerates in our society. Especially post Apollo and double especially in the more contemporary era.
Contrary to the conspiracy documentaries (at least the pre-10/7 ones), I have zero reservations for Werner von Braun and his band of Aerospace Aryans. Honestly, the last time I would consider NASA a semi trustworthy organization was when Werner was running the technical matters there.
I don't know if the reason we haven't gone back is due to their aversion to White excellence, though. I think they would love nothing more than to plant a large squad of diversity on the moon and "correct" the history. Honestly, as I said below, I think the issue really just comes down to the difficulty and cost of going to the moon. When you couple that with how incompetent the US is now due to the larger social agenda, I don't think they could get it together. Now that China will soon be there, their hand has been forced and they are trying to go back ASAP.
I know it won't be very popular to say here, but it is entirely understandable that we never went back to the moon after Apollo. Sending humans to the moon (and arguably space at all) has almost no value. The purpose of the moon landing was about geopolitical imagery. The USA and USSR were competing for dominance in the new field of space travel. Once the moon landing was complete, it was just a very expensive (and dangerous) boondoggle and the political will for it largely died out. It should not be lost on anyone that after 50 years of bullshit excuses we are now likely going back. The reason for that is that the Chinese will soon be there, and if not for that we would not be going.
There is a difference between "lost technology" (like we somehow forgot the basic principles) and just no longer making a really complicated machine that has almost no other use. The Saturn V still holds the record for the largest payload delivered to LEO. Unless you are a full "space is fake" person, we have been sending payload to LEO continually since Apollo. There is just no reason to use something like Saturn V when we can launch twice if we have that much to send up.
Again, I know I will get a lot of flack for this, but the reality is that the moon landing is one of the most pointless things imaginable. This is why we stopped going and very quickly all the "institutional knowledge" that was learned during Apollo was lost. Within 25 years, half the people who worked on Apollo had likely retired.
Unless you think Artemis II was a complicated CGI hoax that went on for a week, then we have been back to the moon. In fact, Artemis II broke the distance record that had been in place since Apollo 13. Not landing the first time is not some big tell, it is normal. Apollo 8 did not land either.
I know of an Austrian political leader who could solve this problem quickly and efficiently.
Yes. I know. Again. Don't care. His supporters made exactly this monster. In fact, I bet with some research we can find out that Platner himself made this monster. What were his opinions on E Jean Carrol and Stormy Daniels? The internet is forever.
Actions meet consequences.
Don't care. Every Platner voter is exactly the kind of person who promoted every rape hoax against any Republican or MAGA person for the past 10+ years. They are entirely responsible for the monster who now took down their preferred candidate, and I love nothing more than people experiencing the consequences of their own actions.
They are hopefully reflecting on what they did to us the past decade, and that they (meaning their party) are, in fact, "the baddies." They hopefully are also reflecting on the fact that the fact that we were able to resist the pressure of all these rape hoaxes is not indicative of how bad we are, but that we actually have something that almost resembles a political movement.
Just kidding, they are idiot leftists. They won't reflect on anything.
even if it was real
lmao. To be honest, though, I really enjoyed all these memes.
I came here to say this. It's Hollywood. Everything they make is "deliberate public humiliation." This is a "water is wet" sort of thing.
If people are tired of this shit, I would refer you to a storied German statesman. He was a sharp dresser, too.
Yes, interestingly right after this in the "Air Conditioning Is Unnatural" thread I saw CrazyRussian as one of the commenters and I kind of put the pieces together. He seems cool enough, so that is crazy if that guy can actually "hack satellites" and "sniff me out" or whatever, lol! I don't know what to believe from newfunturistic, though, because his threads are all over the place.
I didn't mean to scare him off. I won't ask him about his theories if he is just going to respond this way. It seems he sort of just wants to dump his rants and link to his book on Amazon, so whatever. Some people are fun to debate with, but when people react that way it isn't fun. Despite my lack of belief in any of the esoteric theories of the earth and the larger cosmology, I enjoy debating it if someone will do so in good faith. I was hoping he would argue his position, but he just kinda flipped out.
It is a bit bizarre to me to take the position that "more or less everyone throughout all of history is wrong, including people who dedicated full lifetimes of extraordinary talent to exactly this discipline, and I figured out the truth with a little bit of surfing the internet" and then get offended when someone says they don't accept your conclusion and press on some issues. I mean, the position he is taking is that he does not accept the conclusions of generations of our finest minds. How would Isaac Newton (or fill in anyone else appropriate) feel about newfunturistic's (and others like him) opinion of his work? Is newfunturistic "poo- pooing" Newton's work / books? Einstein's? Etc.?
Air conditioning is definitely unnatural. That is why we have to build machines to do it. Without them, the only way we get cold is for the sun to go away for a long enough period of time. In certain places at certain times of the year, that never happens. Hence the invention of air conditioning.
I don't think anyone ever said the heat is unhealthy (below a certain threshold of course). What the heat is, long before being unhealthy, is uncomfortable. In a few circumstances, it is actually unhealthy, as places like Death Valley exist.
It is not too difficult to understand why you missed it. All you need to do is scroll through the thread, lol. It was buried amidst a mass of text dropped out of Gemini that pretty much no one would ever read. Despite what you may have seen about me being a "surface skimmer," I did actually read it. It was all pretty funny (with somewhat of an exception for the part about getting drunk and turning into Mr Hyde) until I got to the part about people sniffing me out. I can tolerate the Jekyll and Hyde semi threat, but alluding to coming and finding me is a bit of a line.
I saw his response. I don't know who the "crazy Russian" he is referring to is. But whatever. Just more ramblings. But it seems I was right that he did not actually mean it.
Like I've said, I don't really mind insults. In the past few months, I have received plenty of comments that were more along the lines of "you're too stupid to understand this" and less along the lines of "this is why my position is true" and I would never care to report something like that. I know rule enforcement can cause you a headache, because I have seen the effects of it here. My attitude is sentient adults can figure out how to talk to one another.
But obviously if it sounds like someone wants to come find me in real life because I don't believe in their conspiracy, that is a different sort of thing. And it will very quickly lead me to not participating here. I don't mind explaining to people why their various models replacing the heliocentric globe are wrong, but I certainly don't need to spend my free time helping people understand the physical sciences. Especially among a population of people who seem largely uninterested in actually understanding it, haha.
So if it is going to get "not fun" to the point of "hmmm, I might be pissing off some serious crazies here" then I am going to be wanting off the merry-go-round.
I know you insist on enforcing the rules and all, but you really don't need to take insults down for me. I assume his first paragraph said something nasty about me, and I am sort of interested in what it was, lmao.
And yes, I was not attacking him at all. Initially, I was just debating his "concave / hollow" earth model, but this sent him off the deep end. I was just commenting on his behavior and the fact that, like you said too, he should probably lay off the AI a bit.
In that past thread, he did kind of cross the line a bit, threatening to dox me and whatever. I don't really care because I am pretty sure the statement was not serious. But while I am totally ambivalent to people here calling me an idiot and whether those rules are enforced, I do think there should be a "hard no" on threatening action on people in the real world.
If I have to worry about people trying to "sniff me out" in the real world (his words, not mine, go back and look) because they don't like my opinion about the shape of the earth and the accuracy of the physical sciences, then I have a lot better things I can do with my free time after work than debate here.
Great post. Hoffman's biography of Ernst Zundel was absolutely life changing for me. It was one of the most formative books I ever read and I strongly recommend it. It is not too big a commitment, like 150 pages or so.