Space

Explain telescopes.

>>17458551
explain it more

>>17458551
So NASA conspired with Roscosmos during the Cold War? Makes sense.

>>17458551
Has potential but need abit more to go on bro.

government think tanks conjure and spread conspiracies like flat earth, 911 no plane, etc to discredit real conspiracies which there is ample evidence for. sorry your friend took the bait

They just poised the possibility that space wasn't "real", or that it isn't actually "outer space" as we've been told. Perhaps the truth of what it really is is just too insane for us common folk to comprehend. Even that "space" was too much for those in the know to grasp, as well.

As far as telescopes, I felt speculation of this theory didn't say we can't observe this mystery entity of space. Telescope science doesn't get in the way.

I saw a concave sphere earth diagram that had always boggled me, this theory of NASA's deception could be that space is inner, not outer?

>>17458709

Feelsbadman

I have always felt that the more outlandish a conspiracy sounds, the closer it is to the truth. You don't think there's maybe 1-3% truth included in shill information?

>>17458716
Absolutely. Wrapping a partial truth in absurdity is the most effective form of disinfo. Reptilians are real, for instance, but they're not shapeshifting aliens. They're a human clique that has been pulling the strings of power throughout history, whose inherited genetic traits tend towards semi-reptile appearance.

>>17458716
Which do you think is more likely:

1) That the contents universe as we know it is fabricated by the US government in quite possibly the biggest conspiracy ever in the history of mankind

2) That the contents of the universe (as far as we understand it) are as our scientific observations tell us

>>17458551
>what ever could be going on?
Who do you know that might have the power to cast such a wide illusion? They would have to be ridiculously dedicated to secrecy, capable of manipulating the very boundary of existence, and have a penchant for mathematics that spans the entire cosmos. Do you know of any entity with those traits? Never mind the global human conspiracy; look at the sky. Who would cast such an illusion?

>>17458747
Me, but I didn't so don't worry about it.

>>17458734
>are as our scientific observations tell us
The most massive mystery in the history of mankind? Because that's literally what science documentaries have been shouting at us for the last century.

>>17458731
>wake up sheeple

>>17458756
>The most massive mystery in the history of mankind?

Actually, the universe is pretty damn-well understood. At least we understand how it works, unlike the human brain.

>>17458752
>Me
Never heard of 'em. Sounds like a fake.

>>17458772
>we understand how it works
We have theoretical physicists working around the clock to get a decent hypothesis up. The theories we're making now won't be testable for ages to come. Our only explanation for why galaxies don't spin the way we thought they would is "dark matter" the most heavily shilled ad-hoc hypothesis that science has ever "known." You have to be legitimately retarded to think we know much about outer space, let alone the galaxy, let alone our own damn solar system. Science literally can't get enough funding to launch the amount of probes we'd need if we were to believe that there really is something out there to study.

Neuropsychology at least has access to its victims.

>>17458779
>We have theoretical physicists working around the clock to get a decent hypothesis up.
>around the clock
we don't. most of what needs to be figured out has already been figured out. there are still areas where work needs to be done, but we can definitely say we understand physics and astrophysics better than something like the brain.
>Our only explanation for why galaxies don't spin the way we thought they would is "dark matter" the most heavily shilled ad-hoc hypothesis that science has ever "known."
that's not the only theory, and dark matter has basis in science.
>You have to be legitimately retarded to think we know much about outer space, let alone the galaxy, let alone our own damn solar system.
and yet NASA literally did this to land their rover on mars. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=924O-cnkvr0
it's like something straight out of a fucking anime. it's incredible.
>Science literally can't get enough funding to launch the amount of probes we'd need if we were to believe that there really is something out there to study.
true, NASA doesn't get enough funding to do things like launch probes to Titan and Europa (and maybe Enceladus) to check for life, or send better quality probes out there so we get better pictures of the planets.

>Neuropsychology at least has access to its victims.
And yet we know so very little about the human brain comparatively. we can do insane, crazy shit like in that video, but we can't fix an illness as "simple" as depression or anxiety without resorting to neurotransmitter fuckery. schizophrenia is understood well enough that we know what "parts" (i use this term loosely. we still haven't properly sectioned the brain) cause it and what parts experience brain volume wasting, but we are powerless to stop it in cases where antipsychotics (neurotransmitter, in this case dopamine and sometimes serotonin, fuckery) don't work. we literally resort to SHOCKING THE VICTIM'S HEAD FOR MONTHS or running magnets over it for months.

>>17458779
You literally don't know a thing about Astrophysics, or just how science works in general, do you?

>>17458809
>most of what needs to be figured out has already been figured out
Before I bother giving you the courtesy of a real reply, can you tell me in your own words what a TOE is? Because I'm really tired of explaining this.

>>17458815
Fuck off back to /sci/. I'm not having this debate with an utter cunt. I've met far too many self-sure dickwads to tolerate sci-fi fanboi #831352.

>>17458827
>can you tell me in your own words what a TOE is?
I don't know what that is. I googled it and got several military and medical hits. Which do you want?

If it's some occult shit then don't expect me to know it without research.

>>17458834
It's a scientific concept. If you don't recognize the acronym right away, you are years beneath my level of study. Literally not going to bother reading your post.

>>17458831
I'm sorry for calling you out on things that are factually incorrect? The fuck do you mean go back to /sci/?

>>17458840
>It's a scientific concept. If you don't recognize the acronym right away, you are years beneath my level of study.
>muh obscure acronyms
>my level of study
you're obviously not at any level of study if you're confusing physiology with psychology like you did in this post >>17458779

you can't formulate a proper reply to what i posted so you dismiss it for me not understanding some stupid acronym.

>>17458840
Sick burden of proof fallacy.

>>17458827
>>17458840
oh i think i get it now. i think you wanted me to explain the Theory of Everything (acronym doesn't have a capital O, btw) based on your fallacious claims about dark matter and such.

a Theory of Everything is basically the reconciliation of QM and GR. It solves problems like dark matter/dark energy and eliminates fringe theories like string/M.

that good enough for you, faggot?

>>17458840
It's Brief History of the Universe tier shit, you pretentious cumwad.

>>17458843
You literally shitposted without making an argument. This thread is specifically questioning the veracity of the scientific model of the cosmos. If you can't into hard skepticism, lurk /sci/ until it starts to make sense that you CAN question scientific knowledge. Pro tip: You can't do science unless you ask scientific questions.
>>17458846
>obscure
Fuck off. You are literally a know-nothing dipshit. It isn't worth my time to explain to you what a Theory of Everything actually looks like. It's so far from obscure that it's literally more probably that a shill put you up to this than anything else.
>some stupid acronym
It's the single acronym that would've support your retarded assertion the the universe is well understood. Seriously, how old are you? Because I don't mind educating people that are willing to learn, but I'm done debating with ignorant dipshits that won't admit their ignorance.

>>17458854
After the number of forcefully idiotic members of the science fan club as I've had to deal with, it is nothing short of reasonable for me to ask that you demonstrate basic knowledge of science before I bother acknowledging your existence. Yes, the burden of proof is on you to show that you're worth my time.
>>17458857
>fallacious claims about dark matter
Look up ad-hoc hypothesis. Dark matter is one.
>>17458857
>that good enough for you, faggot?
Damn straight it is. But I'm not going to read that other anon's post.
>>17458858
If you know where it's from then feel free to explain the other anon's post to me, because I sure as fuck don't care to read it yet.

You aren't ITT to teach me things I already know.

>>17458886
>Damn straight it is. But I'm not going to read that other anon's post.
But I am the anon who posted that other post you dismissed.

>>17458888
I don't give a shit if you are. The point was that it's not worth my time without a TL;DR. If you can't infer that then you're sure as fuck not going to have a UFT quality discussion with me right now.

>>17458886
Don't expect people to take you seriously when your arguments are garbage and reek of unwarranted self-importance.

>Yes, the burden of proof is on you to show that you're worth my time

No it fucking isn't. Get your head out of your ass.

Space is an illusion

>>17458886
>Look up ad-hoc hypothesis. Dark matter is one.
yes, dark matter/energy/static universe is a problem, but it's not so much of a problem that you can say things like "retarded assertion the the universe is well understood"

the model we have, complete or not, works. it almost always works and it's almost always accurate. there are a few things that haven't been figured out yet, but that doesn't make the other assertation "retarded." things wouldn't work as well as they do if we didn't understand the universe to some level of competency, and predictions wouldn't often be true for the same reason.

>>17458892
>UFT quality discussion
i don't want a unified field theory discussion with you right now. the fact that you think we need a UFT to even begin to understand the universe is ridiculous.

whatever. here's your tl;dr:

>can do shit like this: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=924O-cnkvr0
>can't solve schizophrenia or depression when meds don't work without relatively randomly shocking the patient's head for a week or two or passing strong magnetic fields over the patient's head every day for 6 weeks at a minimum in the hopes that one of these will "reset" the brain

>>17458894
It is if I'm the anon you're replying to. It'll take a mind roughly twice as tolerant and refined as yours to get me out of shitposting mode. If you want to reply to the plethora of other anons that are both willing and able to discuss cosmology, in an, "I don't think science has it right and I believe I can argue my stance competently," then by my guest.

File: 1453272900799.jpg (35KB, 735x541px) Image search: [Google]

35KB, 735x541px

>>17458903
So every post you made was a shitpost? What a surprise. Why would I want to debate with someone who willingly shitposts because they unjustifiably believe that people aren't up to par with their self-purported intellect? Either that, or you're quite the epic troll, my friend!

>>17458899
>retarded assertion the the universe is well understood
Sorry, allow me to rephrase my argument so that you can understand it flawlessly.

1. You made a claim that science doesn't agree with.
2. You are a retard.

My argument was actually an ad hominem. You're still not worth replying to until you can prove my ad hominem argument incorrect.
>works
No, it fucking doesn't. That's why the dark matter ad hoc hypothesis had to be tacked on; because it couldn't fucking explain galactic rotation.
>>17458899
>almost always
In other words: NOT A VALID UFT.
>>17458899
>to some level of competency
I've changed my mind, thank you anon. You might be worth the effort it takes to get serious about it.
>>17458899
>in the hopes that one of these will "reset" the brain
I'm not a fan of modern psychology either, but I'm generally gonna be a bitch about the mind/brain dichotomy. If you say brain, I'll think neuropsych, but if you say psychology, we'll be dealing with an /x/-tier subject that doesn't require a real scientific background. I apologize for being difficult. I'm not in a good mood tonight. Veeeeery little patience.

Hmmm... I can see where you're coming from now. I was in alternate cosmology mode for this thread so I felt like shitposting out anyone that might be ready to argue for the standard scientific model ITT.

Per scientific cosmology, yes, I'd agree that the depth to which we understand the structure of the universe is much greater than the relative depth to which science has studied the mind. Basically the entire conspiracy to suppress psychedelics was a declaration of war on the study of consciousness.

>>17458915
Wasn't trolling. Shitposting != trolling. Go back to >>>/b/ until your brain magically reconfigures your mind into one that's capable of comprehending what it means to lurk. Nobody missed the fact that you came at me with the "You don't know anything?" shitpost and you're a braindead retard if you can't see it for the shitpost it was.

holy FUCK you guys say "literally" a lot

>>17458917
>In other words: NOT A VALID UFT.
it doesn't have to be a valid UFT. we NEED one, but it's not like the shit we have is just going to stop working because we're never going to be able to see inside a black hole.

it's like when those headlines about neutrinos exceeding c started making headlines and normos started talking about physics and how it was SO BROKEN OMG! without understanding that even were it true, the science and technology developed with that science that relies on c being what it is are still accurate.

dark matter/energy is a fuck fest and i don't believe it, but i literally just don't have enough knowledge to suggest anything better, and i haven't run into anyone or anything that explains it better.

was static universe a mistake as bad as anime? probably, but we don't have anything better (as far as i know)

>Basically the entire conspiracy to suppress psychedelics was a declaration of war on the study of consciousness.
agreed, but the study of consciousness isn't really all that related to understanding the physiology of the brain. we can identify the areas that waste away in untreated/resistant schizophrenia or depression. we can identify excesses or shortages of dopamine (in the case of schizophrenia) and prescribe just fucking awful, dangerous drugs to people to try to fix these.

it works sometimes and sometimes it doesn't, and that's when we get to shit like ECT and TMS where the understanding is basically
>well the brain works with electricity so maybe if we shock it enough it will reset and this person's schizophrenia will go away for a bit
and oddly enough it works. the schizophrenia usually comes back, but for a few weeks/months it's gone.

pretty sad that we're better able to detect planets in systems multiple light years away than we are at treating extremely common mental illnesses.

the brain is a complicated machine but it's not like physics is simple either.

File: chris-traeger-literally.jpg (57KB, 650x477px) Image search: [Google]

57KB, 650x477px

>>17458969

File: 1449569946906.png (196KB, 400x554px) Image search: [Google]

196KB, 400x554px

>>17458982
hehehe

>>17458972
>it's not like the shit we have is just going to stop working because we're never going to be able to see inside a black hole.
That's kind of literally what I believe. It's stuff like that that drives me to shitpost scientists out of flat earth threads. Try to remember: This is the thread that asked, "What if the sky was a veil?" Literally, our inability to see inside black holes is evidence that reality might not hold the shape we think it to have in the modern era. For all we know, physics might turn off at some point because the entity behind the illusion got bored of waiting for us to find a way to peer into black holes. Not everyone believes that reality is static, and static reality is one of the biggest tenets/assumptions of scientific thought. Literally, we need to get to UFT levels of dialogue to accurately discuss alternate cosmology.

>i literally just don't have enough knowledge to suggest anything better
That's the trap of modern science; you're not supposed to argue against the normative beliefs of your day and age, you're supposed to restrict yourself to hypotheses that you can actually test. Dark matter isn't really a hypothesis yet because we have no known way to test it. The idea of a unified field theory hasn't been proven by science, so in theory, any piece of evidence that shows the current scientific model to be wrong is de-facto evidence that the model is false. This tenet of falsifiability was created specifically to stop discussions of objective truth like we see so often on the internet today.

>it's not like physics is simple either
In comparison to the brain? The brain is the damn thing that understands physics in the first place! Heh. It's like rocket science if rocket science itself were self-aware.

>>17458840
If you can't explain it in a simple manner to someone that had no knowledge of the subject, then you really don't understand it all that well.
If you just don't want to explain it, you would have either not posted or ad hominemed more

>>17459338
My shitposting is always disingenuous. This is the first night of my life that I actually ever felt impatient. It's new to me. Point was that this isn't a science thread, this is a thread whose explicit purpose is to ask if science is wrong. Insisting that science isn't wrong because it's science is a circular argument. It doesn't actually address the proposition supposed by the OP.

File: The Big Bang Theory.gif (10KB, 300x364px) Image search: [Google]

10KB, 300x364px

>>17458831
Post this on /sci/, report results.

>>17458551
Is your friend Jaden Smith?

>>17459363
I think about how to go about that every single day.

I'll let you know if I find a way to say it that won't get the thread nuked on site. Fucking fanboys.

File: 2016-01-24 22.14.49.png (190KB, 715x1226px) Image search: [Google]

190KB, 715x1226px

I have one for you.

How do they know exactly how much time the light coming from the sun has been traveling?

Because, sure. Yoy can measure how long it takes for light to go through two glass panels here on earth. But how do you know shit works the same out there?

For all you know, the density of the sun could be keeping light in its gravity well for 5 years before it can finally escape and reach earth.

>>17459460
>For all you know
No, for all YOU know, because you appear to know nothing about physics or mathematics.

>>17459464
Oh, right. I forgot you've been to outer space, you closely examined the sun and it told you it was god, and you personally discovered what's it like inside a black hole.

Fuck off, you just read what somebody else wrote and repeat it with an air of superiority.

jaden go back 2 bed

>>17459460
>the density of the sun could be keeping light in its gravity well

That's not how anything works

>>17458684
/thread
or it should..oh this is a RP thread, carry on

File: 20160306_063157.jpg (3MB, 3264x2448px) Image search: [Google]

3MB, 3264x2448px

>>17459604
>That's not how anything works


>That's not how they say it works
There, fixed that for you

>>17459460
>You can measure how long it takes for light to go through two glass panels here on earth.

You can also calculate it based on the electromagnetic properties of glass. The model of the structure of the Sun has been validated by seeing how sound waves propagate though the Sun.

>>17458972
>was static universe a mistake as bad as anime? probably, but we don't have anything better (as far as i know)

The static universe universe wasn't tenable anymore. They similarly require dark matter and dark energy, they don't get you out of that. The expanding universe however predicted many things like the CMB and the Baryon peak in galaxy clustering. The static universe can't even explain the existence of the latter never mind predicting it.

what is different about the "real" space?

what you're saying isn't really incorrect. we don't know that much about what space actually is. on a fundamental level, it is something, but in a lot ways it's nothing.

>>17458551
The level of fedora tipping ITT is outstanding

Science in the realm of space is just basic explanations concerning the physical interrelationships between celestial bodies, their movements and velocity, how stars and planets are made, extraordinary phenomenons and general superficial knowledge in summary

What i'm trying to imply by saying superficial is basically "what's on the surface"

I'm not trying to sound pretentious or anything but i've been deep enough in reading/studying history of ancient civilizations, their myths, beliefs, their evolution and pretty much anything related to metaphysics and what not

I'm just going to drop something concerning the ancient secret societies of back then(which have been around forever up to this age) operating in pure secrecy

Now here's a little fraction of information for all those of you who would dare going further in the understanding of the "reptilians"

Y'all are familiar with the mythological snake, right? It's been shrouded in so much bullshit that it's basic signification has been coated with so much misinfo that most people associate it with "bad"

That's half true

In fact there were 2 snake beings being the contrary opposites of each other; one beneficial, the other chaotic

Wadjet was an ancient Egyptian cobra deity which was goddess of the upper Egypt being the protector of the kings and whatnot relating to loyalty

>>17459818
Then the 2 snakes:

Mehen(historically linked to Ouroboros) was the good snake symbolizing illumination, protection and renaissance, regeneration. Mehen was Ra's(Sun god) faithful warrior/protector/servant

Apep was the evil snake of chaos, the famous Nahash from the garden of Eden who tricked Adam and Eve to eat from the tree of life resulting in being kicked out of the garden of Eden

Apep was a malefic being which tryed to dethrone Ra and plunge the world and chaos

Without going much into the epic battle details between Mehen and Apep

Apep is at the root of most ancient societies running the world in secrecy which constitues the Elite that always has been there throughout time

I'm pretty sure all reptilian beings are linked to this malefic snake and why the world is runned the way it is today

The reasons why most profound intricate and powerful knowledge of the universe are carefully kept in secrecy from the everyone

That is why modern science focuses mostly on superficial elaboration and critically deny the intangible

Everything is deeply hidden

When we'll come to understand the dualistic nature of existence and reality we'll accept it's paradoxical nature aswell

Believe me or not, idgaf, tryed to make it as brief as possible

space is the realm of the dead, but they wouldnt waste fuel and materials shooting rockets and satellites up there if they weren't getting a little something out of it.

Notice how the pictures from "space" get better as CGI gets better? Co-incidence? I think not.

>>17459919
W-What? I don't believe this level of stupidity can be found in one human.

>>17459919
The same can be said about phone cameras.

baka

File: Earth from Moon.jpg (41KB, 1041x833px) Image search: [Google]

41KB, 1041x833px

>>17459919
I don't know about that. I've seen some pretty decent pictures dating back into the 60s.

http://www.cbsnews.com/pictures/nasa-skylab-marks-40-years/16/

I don't have trouble believing that society lies to us ona lot of things, but I'm very annoyed by the tendencies of people who are so bored with their existence that they must dismiss everything we have ever learned as a big conspiracy to keep us in the shadow so that they can have the smallest glimpse of hope that, instead, it covers a far bigger secret that there is something incredibly exciting and magic out there to discover like mystical creatures or spirits.

I mean, yes, it's all interesting and all, I want to believe as much as the next guy, but Life is far from being boring, my friend. Why are you bored with your existence when you live on planet motherfucking earth? A speck of dust in a massive void where so much shit is going down since the beginning of mankind that we don'T have enough records to keep tabs on it.

I have a friend who is currently living on the road in a westfalia he bought last autumn that I helped him rebuilt, it was infested with mice and we had to, pretty much renovate it entirely. He lives in it, travels from state to state, meet people and keeps a vlog about it. He's living a genuine adventure full of problems, discoveries and risks and it has basolutely nothing paranormal in it.

So why exactly do you need to believe that you are lied to on such a scale?

File: 79496.jpg (27KB, 524x562px) Image search: [Google]

27KB, 524x562px

>this thinly veiled Fat Earth thread

>>17459996
WHAT????

Ok what the HELL?!? The Earth is NOT FAT. That's shameful and just plain RUDE. Yes, fine, Earth has a slight buldge to its middle, but ALL planets have that. Earth is in perfectly fine shape and it doesn't help anything to have going around starting Fat Earth threads. What, you want a skeletal, tiny column for a planet? You can't handle a beautiful planet's natural and VERY attractive curves?

Fuck you Skinny Earth bitches.

>>17459460
>For all you know, the density of the sun could be keeping light in its gravity well for 5 years before it can finally escape and reach earth.


Actually, that's EXACTLY what we know. Or rather it's easily determined once we nail down a few unknown parameters. But those only change the result, not how to determine it.

http://image.gsfc.nasa.gov/poetry/ask/a11354.html

Depending on values such as "mean free path" (basically how far a photon can go before it bumps into something else), and the density of the plasma, light takes anywhere from 4000 to 1 million years from production at the sun's core to emission at the surface.

File: serveimage?url=https:%2F%2Fplanetagea.files.wordpress.com%2F2012%2F04%2Fmini-jets.jpg&sp=9472b1c0ed3fcf373cd64b48d522b54a.jpg (20KB, 631x354px) Image search: [Google]

20KB, 631x354px

>>17458684
What of them?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8ulqsAgrlYI
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pNKEpFBYnZM
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bwktqSDdh_g
You don't need to look at Hubble deep field images to look for ayys. We've got plenty of shit going on in our own backyard.

>>17461725
Finally! Someone who UNDERSTANDS!

>>17461725
kek/10