I personally have always distinguished between "Moon Hoax" conspiracies and "Shape of the Earth" conspiracies (e.g. Flat Earth, etc.). The moon hoax ones are at least conceivable. That said, I still am of the opinion that the Apollo missions were more or less as described.
That is fair. I do admire the Poles. So did Hitler, actually. I am sort of being over the top here, I also like the Brits.
My objection to Poland is not that they don't have an admirable culture and history. They do . My problem is that they do stupid shit, the stupidest being aligning with the faggot liberals in the west when Hitler and his government were bending over backwards trying to negotiate a settlement with them. Imagine having hard line on Hitler when the jew USSR was amassing an army on your Eastern border. Fucking retarded.
Probably the best video you ever posted.
The prototypical "Believe Science" retard who talks first is exactly like every midwit I ever hear droning on about these things. The second guy who responds is such a breath of fresh air. Could you imagine Eric Dubay or Dave Weiss responding so succinctly and accurately?
It is honestly both hilarious and sad to me that the first guy actually believes what he is saying there. You can tell he has never even thought about any of the five examples he is given, and honestly that list is not even complete. The whole point of science is that a rational, skeptical person is supposed to be examining his own beliefs and interrogating why he thinks those things are true. This is why it was traditionally called "natural philosophy," because all things in a sense are philosophy and this is just the philosophy of nature.
Obviously, "Believe Science" guy missed the whole point, and for his entire life. The look on his face is priceless as the response comes in. You can tell that deep down he realizes that he does not understand things as well as he had been supposing and that the caricature he has made for himself of those he disagrees with is false.
That said, one thing science can definitely answer is what the shape of the earth is (sorry, couldn't resist).
It is an interesting twist of history that after being one of the shittiest actors in the war, the poles are one of the last half decent European countries while Germany is cucked beyond recognition. Some of this may be due to the fact that the Poles do not scare anyone since they are not going to organize anything. Certainly nothing like the Germans did.
LMAO! The Austrian Painter remains undefeated. Of all the dumbasses throughout Western Civ, the 1930s era Brit Cucks have got to be the most despicable. The British will continue to get pummeled up the ass by Our Greatest Strength until they finally come to terms with what they did as a nation and issue an apology.
Most specifically, the yellow toothed limey bastards need to apologize to the Germans, but honestly, they should just apologize to all white people everywhere. Why not? The Germans have been apologizing for the lolocaust for over 80 years now, and that isn't even a real thing. Then, they can take down every monument to Churchill in their country and replace it with one to a man who actually appreciated their culture and history. The Austrian Painter of course.
Wake me up when the British do that. Otherwise, all I hear is whining from the last people I have any sympathy for (except for the Poles, who literally started the war because they are almost as dumb as savages from Africa).
Also, I'm not entirely sure that theory of relativity is not a total bullcrap, but that is a discussion for another time.
Just to be clear, you are completely convinced that time is speeding up and consider a "lowering of the frame rate of the simulation" to be a plausible explanation for this, but you are "not entirely sure that theory of relativity is not a total bullcrap" lmao.
Besides, time is not slowing down. It is speeding up.
While I think Prof_Chaos is wrong for the reasons I listed in my reply, there is a grain of truth to what he is saying. When subject to time dilation due to being in a deep gravitational well, what one sees when one looks out into space is "everything moving in fast motion" so to speak. While this does not explain the effect you are talking about, which is what I told Prof_Chaos, it does show that being in time dilation will make it seem like time is speeding up. In fact, time dilation is similar in principle to "cutting the frame rate" as you put it.
And I'm not talking about long timespans in tens or hundreds of thousands of years (which would be required for gravitational time dilation to take place).
Time dilation responds instantaneously. It depends only on the local metric (that is, gravity) and your character of motion. However, all effects we are subject to are impossibly small.
FWIW, I think everyone is getting older. The zoomers are getting older too.
Dude, probably 20% - 25% of the people here think the earth is flat and stationary with everything in the sky making circles around it for some unexplained reason ("density and buoyancy"). They don't even think that gravity (the attractive force!) exists, much less the relativistic explanation of it, lol.
That said, time dilation, gravitational or otherwise, is not something that you experience. You just conclude it is there when you look through a telescope. So yes, being within a deep gravitational well will make outside space look like it is in fast motion, but you feel time passing normally and just wonder why everything out there is moving so fast.
Besides that, earth's gravity has not changed, and its various motions have not changed (in character) either, so why would there be any change in the local Lorentz factor?
Albert Einstein proved this idea in his theory of general relativity.
Strictly speaking, Albert Einstein never proved anything. He derived these results as consequences of his assumptions in relativity theory. Doing this does not prove anything is actually real. There are all sorts of theories out there, including 11 dimensional multiverses and whatever, and people derive mathematical consequences of these all the time. Things like time dilation were proven to be real by various experimenters.
The gravity and so time dilation due to Sagittarius A* is negligible as you can demonstrate for yourself using the numbers you posted. The local gravity of earth completely dominates it. Besides that, the background field from this black hole is not changing at any sort of rate that matters. The same can be said for any attraction to neighboring galaxies. So there is no expectation that these would cause people to suddenly "feel time speeding up."
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.
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.
The simple answer to this question, of course, would be that they did not fake the halfway video. Obviously if the moon landing was faked, then so was the halfway video. I personally have never seen a good reason to think the halfway video is fake. All people say is "look, they just zoomed into the window from across the space craft, therefore they are much lower." I don't see how that would make the earth look farther.