Screen shot taken from the Live Nasa launch On U tube >people

>>17051521
www.youtube.com/watch?v=HDh4uK9PvJU
Here is link to live launch

File: Untitled1.png (1MB, 1920x1080px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 1920x1080px

>>17051521
update on launch
Considering it takes a few mins for the ISS to go around the earth
Looks pretty Spherical to me

>>17051528
90 mins to revolve around the earth in its orbit

What the fuck is there to gain from pretending the world is a certain shape anyway.

Flat earthers are seriously some of the most fucking delusional people I've ever encountered.

>>17051720
>>17051521
kike jew shills. flat earth 4ever.

>>17051720
To weed out the BS conspiracy!

They think the Moon is above us, circling above the flat plane.

Yet the moon doesn't change size as it gets "farther away".

How NASA has hidden elephants and a turtle?

>>17051521
Are you stupid? The Earth seems to be round just because of fish eye camera. It's flat.

>>17054219
Yes, I'm sure NASA enjoys using novelty lenses for important cinematography.

Not only that, but thats not how a fisheye shots would look.

File: earth.jpg (29KB, 500x331px) Image search: [Google]

29KB, 500x331px

>>17054260
>>17051528

Fisheye lenses aren't just novelty lenses for funny dog photos. It would make sense for NASA to use both fisheye and other less extreme wide angle lenses in much of their space photography because those lenses offer the widest field of view, and that's what you want in space to capture as much of the vista in the frame as possible. Landscape photographers also use wide angle lenses for the same reason, to capture a breathtaking large scale scene.

The downside of wide angle lenses is that with shorter focal lengths (short focal length=wider angle of view), you get image distortion which makes objects at the edges of the picture look curved, etc.

NASA DOES use wide angle lenses in space, it would be ridiculous not to, and depending on the angle of the shot, it can make the horizon look far more curved than it is. In fact, with extreme wide angle lenses, if the camera is pointed in a certain direction, the surface of the Earth will look more concave instead of convex.

So it is very possible, and most probable, that the Earth, when viewed by a human on the ISS, actually looks a lot flatter than it does from the wide-angle lens-equipped space camera's point of view that we are all used to seeing.

Pic related I believe this pic by Chris Hatfield is a more standard focal length lens, or possibly a telephoto lens. The horizon is completely flat. Does this prove the Earth is flat?

File: Shill.jpg (74KB, 501x585px) Image search: [Google]

74KB, 501x585px

>>17051727
YOU are the shill here!

>>17059299
what if it's CGI

>>17059316
Keep shilling friend

>>17051521
>using nasa as a source of reliability for nasa

>>17059410
People launch amateur sats all the time. Those also show that the Earth is round.

>>17059414
The OP's logic is no less flawed, though. Maybe this thread would convince the flat-earthers if it was amateur satellite footage instead.

>>17051727
>shills hard

>>17056637
solid post

File: AS11-44-6574HR-staged-small.jpg (265KB, 1521x1513px) Image search: [Google]

265KB, 1521x1513px

>>17056637
Earth is flat, there is no space program, no gravity, no space, no solar system.

>>17056637
Looks curved to me.

>>17053609
Also the shadow of the earth on the moon is round.

>>17059414

All of them using technology that runs through NASA covertly, obviously.

I've always wanted to ask a flatearther something: why do you think there are temperature differentials (cold at the poles, hot in the middle) of a flat earth, and how can people travel all the way around the world, one way or another, and not crest the disk? And I'll take my answer off the air.

>>17051521
>believing there are real flat earthers

Every single person who says the world is flat is lying purposely and solely for a reaction. Trolls, in other words.