I don't like Klaus, but the costume is not his. It is that particular European universities version of the cap, gown and sash that people wear who are being awarded their Doctorate. At that ceremony, if you look it up, all the other people being awarded are dressed the same way. Yes, it's weird, but it's that universities weirdness, not Klaus's. It was an honorary doctorate they awarded him, he never even attended or studied there. They gave him the costume to wear.
It is just you, I guarantee it. There's nothing simple about the world, there is a lot we don't know or truly understand, and a lot of alleged facts are indeed truly assumptions when you dig down.
But some of the things we do actually know for certain are the approximate shape of the Earth and all the landmasses on it. That info was hard won by skilled, competent and intelligent people and simply can't be disproven no matter what kind of nonsense vomits out of your brain.
The writer of One Small Step is right about Yuri. Simon Shack doesn't have original thoughts. He presents other people's discoveries as his own. Anything he did "discover" re-9/11 has been fabricated from willful ignorance and misinterpretation of the facts. Almost no claim he made in any of his September Clues films stood up to scrutiny by other more serious 9/11 truth seekers. In some most cases it was clear he could have easily debunked himself by watching a few seconds more of various TV excerpts he presents in the film, which indicates he cut clips short before they disproved his theories, making him a liar and a fraud. He's poison for the 9/11 truth movement and conspiracizing in general. Also Ace Baker.
Looks like I put that reply in the wrong place, but it applies to you too so I'm glad you saw it.
The problem is your brain I'm afraid. Even if I spend the time investigating, reading (things you have not done) and then sumarizing and relaying the explanation to you in a ELI5 way about why there is nothing "off" about the "movement" of the sun in this particular video, you will reject it for your comfortable insanity.
You proved nothing except that you make assumptions based on ignorance.
You guys have demonstrated time and again that your belief in flat earth is profound, not based on logic and reason; yet you demand replies as if you've made some kind of logical, well thought-out or reasonable argument, which you have not. It's just pointless trolling and time wasting.
your reply was incoherent and not worth replying to. You assume you should see... a dip. Based on where you place your cursor on screen. That is not well articulated. Certainly not proof of anything. Waste of time even writing this to be honest.
All 24 hour time-lapses are constructed from still images like this.
This particular video is not done at the south pole, but somewhere near the coast of Antarctica I think. For one done at the south pole see:
Level Earth Observer
Opinion discarded
you can clearly see that its fake because the clouds are exactly the same at 0:24 and the end 1:24 seconds
This does not make it fake. The time-lapse is constructed from individual still images animated into a sequence. At some point towards the end of the time lapse as the sun got further away / went behind the mountain, Anthony probably chose to add in some images from the beginning of the sequence, probably to create a satisfying loop for his animation - to give the impression of it recurring again, which of course in reality it would. I doubt he realized he would have to deal with flat earthers accusations when he did that - it was an aesthetic choice made a film-maker.
why not film it?
Powell is not trying to create videos that prove the earth is not flat, that is merely incidental. He is using his digital stills camera to make animations that capture the movement of the sun and 24 hour sunlight in Antarctica.
Filming for 24 hours straight, uninterrupted, is more complicated than you have obviously considered. It is obviously not possible with analog film. But even with digital, it is not simply a matter of leaving the camera running. This is due to memory, power and camera restraints - you can see some discussion about the complications here if you like:
https://www.dpreview.com/forums/thread/3735074
You need specific brands of camera that have no recording limit (many do and will just shut off after a certain time period - this is to protect the electronics from being destroyed by over-heating), multiple memory slots and/or sufficiently large memory cards, a constant power source etc etc - and there are added complications when filming in Antarctica not mentioned there - extreme cold temperature affects battery performance and digital camera performance - it's quite likely a digital camera will just crap out before the 24 hour mark - due to cold rather than heat. Digital cameras are not generally built for extreme use like that.
What appeal to authority? The correct spelling of words? lol. So the journal is in English, but they choose to misspell the last word. Ok.
What language is this paper in?
Message by creator from the description:
Flat Earth people, you are very entertaining with your comments. My challenge to you: put your money where your mouth is and book a cruise ship holiday to Antarctica below the Antarctic circle to prove the video wrong. I'll even reimburse the cost of your trip if you can prove the sun does not do this as shown in this video... Edit: Years later, cue sound of crickets, despite 40,000 tourists and thousands of researchers and workers going to Antarctica every year, no one has taken me up on this offer.
The International Journal Of Science And Technoledge
The book was published the same year as that post and the exact same ground is covered in the post as in the first chapter of the book. Looks like Shack stole the entire contents of that post from the book and didn't give any attribution. Typical behavior from the fraud Simon Shack or whatever his real name is. People who researched him found that he's Norwegian I believe. He was in some pop band, and his father works for the UN.
edit I tell a lie, the book was actually published originally several years prior to Shacks post. In German in 2005, and in English in 2007. Also I presumed Shack made that post, but that may not be the case. I don't know what user names he used on his forum.
Yeah I think so. So many balloon threads was probably the inspiration.
Oh yeah, I forgot about that.
Didn't know he made a new doc. Interesting, thanks.
History youtuber Metatron recently did a deep dive on the Shroud too, and surprisingly ends up showing how it could be real:
yuh huh