Wanna watch some cozy globe earth? https://www.youtube.com/

File: flat79.png (617KB, 1280x738px) Image search: [Google]

617KB, 1280x738px

>>18230437
>>18230437
>curvy solar panel that proves the fish-eye lens
>air bubbles popping up here and there during the live performance
>no spinning of Earth or motion of clouds visible during the whole show
>no stars visible in the deep space, not a single one.

Earth is flat.

>>18230635
>Earth is flat.
Oh look, a retard!

File: lolspacestation.png (1018KB, 1280x1024px) Image search: [Google]

1018KB, 1280x1024px

>>18230647
why? I just proved that the live stream is made in a pool, I even posted a photography from high altitude that proves the flat earth. are you mentally impaired?

File: Curvature.webm (822KB, 1024x576px) Image search: [Google]

822KB, 1024x576px

>>18230635
Retard

>>18230667
lol
retard

>>18230667
off yourself

>>18230437
i just watched for about 2 minutes. dude turned the camera to his face, it cut a little bit like it was edited, then he turned it back(a total of maybe 6 seconds) and the clouds were completely different. Just happened.

>>18230647
>>18230693
>>18230696
>>18230702
that's not suspicious

File: ISSHOAX.png (814KB, 1276x788px) Image search: [Google]

814KB, 1276x788px

>>18230693
>>18230696
>>18230702
>durr oh duirr retard!
shills aren't very subtle anymore.
besides, can you please explain how to reconcile pic related to OP's pic, both are official pics of the lol station but one is showing a flat earth, the other shows a ridiculous curvature (so is the current live underwater)
so which is it, flat or curved? and why the discrepancy?

>>18230693
Some numbers to reference along with this webm:

1km: About 200m higher than the tallest building in the world
9km: A little bit higher than Mount Everest
12km: Highest cruising altitude for commercial airliners
53km: The world record for weather balloon altitude
215km: Sputnik 1's altitude

The ISS maintains an altitude of between 300km 400km, which is higher than my webm goes.

>>18230721
They were using different lenses, you mong.

File: s135e011867.jpg (1MB, 4256x2832px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 4256x2832px

>>18230721
That picture is literally shooped. Here's the original from NASA.

http://www.nasa.gov/image-feature/international-space-station-40

>>18230726
so the flat earth is the correct one.
That's what I thought.
what about the lack of stars, the air bubbles that keep popping, what are they? space bubbles made of aether?

>>18230733
See >>18230729

>>18230437
So who was the asian chick you used as pic in your last thread?

>>18230735
>>18230729
doesn't change the fact that a fish eye lens is being used to create a fake curvature. It can be difficult to detect it in the middle of the screen but it becomes obvious near the edges.
see >>18230667
If the curvature has to be created through artificial means does it mean that Earth is flat?

>>18230721
>le shill
take your meds retard

People always act like it is fucking impossible to tell that there is real curvature just because they used wide angle lenses. I think this is intelectually dishonest.
But whatever, no need to argue over this, since there is tons of footage with a "normal" lense.

for example:
http://www.ustream.tv/recorded/92209312

File: s135e011867.jpg (1MB, 4256x2832px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 4256x2832px

>>18230748
Ah yes, such blatant curvature.

File: spacejunk_leo_2009237.png (144KB, 720x720px) Image search: [Google]

144KB, 720x720px

>>18230750
why are there no stars in the deep space?
what are the origin of the space bubbles we can see popping in the live stream and all official footages? are they debris and if they are, isn't it dangerous for the lol station to fly at the speed of a bullet in the middle of these space debris. How many serious accidents and casualties (during space walks) have they reported so far, I guess quite a lot if we consider the amount of debris orbiting the globe. Pic related only shows sizable debris and is from nasa
please explain enlightened one.

File: flat77.png (562KB, 1268x816px) Image search: [Google]

562KB, 1268x816px

>>18230774
> It can be difficult to detect it in the middle of the screen but it becomes obvious near the edges.
reading comprehension

again see here for an example
>>18230667

let's have a real pic of Earth from high altitude balloon (what you guys call a satellite lol)

File: 1473405710110.jpg (15KB, 201x200px) Image search: [Google]

15KB, 201x200px

>>18230783
Ayy that one's also shooped.

>reading comprehension
One of those lines goes right to the edge of the frame my dude. A fisheye lens doesn't only distort on one axis.

>>18230779
So you basically know absolutely nothing about space but think your ignorance allows you to make valid conclusions.
Stop viewing nutjob yt videos and pick up a book. Right now you are a grand example of the dunning kruger effect.

>why are there no stars in the deep space?
There are. What are you on about?
Of course, if you look towards the day side of earth or towards the sun, the brightness will drown out the stars. You know, you cant see stars during the day. Cant believe I have to explain this.

>space debris
This is actually a real concern for space agencies. The only reason for there not being a lot of accidents is, that space is really fucking big and the probability of something colliding is very very small

File: bwhi1apicaaamlo.jpg_large.jpg (67KB, 1024x576px) Image search: [Google]

67KB, 1024x576px

>>18230783
>>18230793
http://www.nasa.gov/content/an-astronauts-view-from-space

File: flatburger.png (500KB, 1267x787px) Image search: [Google]

500KB, 1267x787px

>>18230793
>Ayy that one's also shooped.
source?
> A fisheye lens doesn't only distort on one axis.
so what caused the distortion if not a lens, photoshop?

>>18230795
>So you basically know absolutely nothing about space
No, you are right and you neither. How could we know anything about space if space doesn't exist.

>Of course, if you look towards the day side of earth or towards the sun, the brightness will drown out the stars.
ok good! please show me the material made with the stars in the background.
Where are they?

>This is actually a real concern for space agencies
but no accident or casualties after a 7 decades of space walk. Give me a break, shill.

>>18230810
that's a big burger

>>18230816
very nice video of the flat earth from high altitude.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WQITXbcz2hg

>>18230810
>source?
>>18230796
>so what caused the distortion if not a lens, photoshop?
There is no distortion, the Earth is actually round.

>90,000ft = 27.432km
Pause this >>18230693 at 27km and see just how little curvature there is at that altitude, and that's without lens distortion, clouds, atmospheric scattering, etc.

>>18230779
That and ever heard of satellites malfunctioning? Crashing together? Being damaged? Knocked out of orbit?

Of course not! Scientists are now so good that nothing bad will ever happen in space!

File: flatiskewl.png (587KB, 1267x717px) Image search: [Google]

587KB, 1267x717px

>>18230821
>source NASA

>There is no distortion,
the distortion of the solar panel, here
>>18230667
and No Earth is flat, look no further than here for a definitive answer
>>18230818

>>18230810
yeah, you are not even reading the explanations I gave you. You are also obviously ignoring everything that proves you wrong (where is the footage of stars? srs nigger?)
>shill
Guess I go back to call you retard again. I tried, but you dont want to learn. You are going to dismiss everything without giving a reason.

retard

File: Screen Shot 2016-10-14 at 01.49.44.png (144KB, 655x376px) Image search: [Google]

144KB, 655x376px

>>18230818
That video has the opposite problem to one taken with a fisheye.

Notice how the antenna curves away from the centre and how the atmospheric scattering dips slightly in the middle.

Not to mention that 121,000ft is only 37km.

>>18230830
>the distortion of the solar panel, here
Yes obviously that one's taken with a fisheye, but look how ridiculously curved the earth is compared to normal photos like >>18230796 and my webm (lest you forget >>18230693
) at 300km.

>>source NASA
M8 are you fucking serious? The photo was published by NASA. Are you saying some youtuber managed to somehow get the "original"?

File: 1475881296544.jpg (69KB, 843x843px) Image search: [Google]

69KB, 843x843px

>>18230826
THIS ^^

also nobody is asking how do people ingest food in so-called 0g environment?
Funny how the 0g planes are dubbed vomit planes precisely because it's impossible to ingest anything and to keep anything inside the stomach in a relative weightless environment

>>18230842
That picture was taken at 39km. Check what 39km looks like here >>18230693.

>>18230759
this

shut up about fish eye lenses

>>18230842
>it's impossible to ingest anything and to keep anything inside the stomach in a relative weightless environment
This is bullshit. The stomach is kept closed by a sphincter, and swallowing relies mainly on muscles. Literally try swallowing whilst lying down, it's not that hard.

Ok flat retards the earth is flat. How does that affect the course of events around the gl... plane?

>>18230437
You guys are all wrong!

Paper is flat. Books are full of paper. There are worlds upon worlds inside books. The world is shaped like a book.

This means the earth is a cube. Since stacks of paper make a cube, the earth was actually a cube all along.

You really only live in a bubble about 400ft across. that is 4 sides times 10 cubed. It all makes sense now right?

Since ancient people lived in different stories, the egyptians lived on a scroll. The world of stories is a long scroll written and read slowly. The world is a scroll. There is no other explanation.

The sumerians believed the earth was made of clay! What nonsense is this? They wrote clay tablets talking of the earth. They were EARTH BENDERS!
How did we not see this before. They were masters of clay, masters of the GLYPHS. Masters of the flat earth.

Not to mention that the sun is in the center of the earth, and we all live on the inside of the scroll. Its wrapped around the sun, with the poles off the edges of the scroll. We slowly turn over every day, when we are open its day, and when we get rolled up its night time. The sun is the center of the earth.

We live in a glass dome, that makes it appear the sun is out there. But really its passing over our dome, and the light is refracting into our eyes and brain painting the flat scrolls of written experience and existence. There is no world outside the words.

>>18230835
the slight curvature of the antenna is totally irrelevant but the lack of downward curvature totally prove that Earth isn't a spherical object.

>>18230850
> The stomach is kept closed by a sphincter,
in the lol station people do eat and drink, don't they?
do they have a tube that pump the shit directly into their stomach, are you dumb?

File: Stomach.jpg (19KB, 534x479px) Image search: [Google]

19KB, 534x479px

>>18230859
This isn't even high-school level anatomy man.

>>18230863
also show me the muscles involved in the ingestion and how weight isn't involved at all
because if your shit get stuck in the middle of your throat, I'm pretty sure it gonna be a problem quickly

File: Untitled.jpg (36KB, 1024x1152px) Image search: [Google]

36KB, 1024x1152px

>>18230856
It's definitely not irrelevant, it shows how distorted the image is. Here's pic related from the webm you refuse to watch. I've blurred the bottom panel to show how atmospheric scattering can make it more difficult to gauge curvature.

>>18230865
I'm not gonna spoon-feed you. Just try lying down and swallowing like I said. It's not very comfortable, but it isn't impossible.

File: oneorbothoftheseimagesmustbefake.jpg (218KB, 1260x1052px) Image search: [Google]

218KB, 1260x1052px

>>18230870
what is irrelevant? the lack of a downward curvature?
Of course it is (relevant), it proves that we are above a flat surface. On a flat surface no matter how high you are positioned, the horizon line will be at eye level (as seen in the video) while over a sphere the horizon will appear lower and lower and you will have to look down to have it in the middle of the screen.
In the video I linked here
>>18230818
the horizon is still in the middle of the screen after reaching 90,000 feet (in some as high as 130,000 feet) proving the ground is flat

>2016
>Still believing the Jewish lies of Eratosthenes.

File: 1472636553490.jpg (47KB, 480x360px) Image search: [Google]

47KB, 480x360px

>>18230873
nothing personal, kid
but you suck as a shill

File: Untitled.png (129KB, 652x373px)

129KB, 652x373px

>>18230887
>what is irrelevant?
Read the post I replied to dumbass.

>the horizon is still in the middle of the screen after reaching 90,000 feet (in some as high as 130,000 feet) proving the ground is flat
It's not at all in the middle of the screen, in fact it's almost exactly as far down as in >>18230693 at 37km.

>>18230892
It is a lot easier to ignore dissonant arguments than doing any thinking for yourself, isn't it?

>>18230887
>>18230900
>On a flat surface no matter how high you are positioned, the horizon line will be at eye level
Not to mention that this only applies to an infinite plane.

>>18230437
Fake and gay! The Earf is flat, you can't even get your rockets past muh firmament.

>>18230900
>it shows how distorted the image is.
this is irrelevant to the point being discussed, namely that Earth is flat. It show that the camera used had a slight distortion. Regardless there is no downward curvature to be seen and THAT is the point of relevance because no downward curvature means a flat ground, period.
Hope this helps

>It's not at all in the middle of the screen
you ain't very bright, the point was the camera was never moved during the making of the footage YET the horizon is always at the same location (when the camera is on the ground and at 90,000 feet high)
we don't need to have the horizon line exactly in the middle of the screen, LITERALLY
fucking autist, I'm not surprised you are shilling here.

>>18230903
I'm still waiting for your source. How are muscles involved in the ingestion process at all?
answer is they are not, weight is what make shits goes down into the stomach.
If you swallow anything in a weightless environment, you suffocate and die, period.
Now please fuck off.

>>18230887
regarding your retarded image, here is a video of a flat earther proving it wrong

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=M9-DMbGDsZ4&t=9m40s

File: 1474382469637.jpg (18KB, 520x347px) Image search: [Google]

18KB, 520x347px

>>18230918
>the camera used had a slight distortion
>there is no downward curvature to be seen
Which therefore means that the downward curvature has been distorted upwards, towards the centre of the frame to look relatively straight.

>when the camera is on the ground
When was this exactly? The video's 4 minutes long anon.

I'm done wasting my time here. You will never do unbiased research for yourself, so you will forever be misled and deceived.

>>18230920
The above applies to you too.

>>18230920
you can literally swallow stuff while being upside down (do a handstand for example)

Why are all your arguments based on ignorance?

>>18230929
>Which therefore means that the downward curvature has been distorted upwards
No, you can see the antenna is not bent vertically but horizontally, so no.

>When was this exactly? The video's 4 minutes long anon.
try another one, there a dozen of amateur balloons footage proving the flat earth on youtube.
try this other one for instance
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VMlLCKj85Ro
compare 0:47 and 1:13 marks, horizon isn't lower.

>>18230941
>you can literally swallow stuff while being upside down (do a handstand for example)
no you can't but please try.

>>18230922
look at 13:22, crispy image if the tennis ball and very small Earth in the background
then he starts zooming in
at 13:28 the surface of the tennis ball is totally unfocused which IS NOT what we have in the shot from the apollo missions
so No, this disinfo shill fails to prove his point.

>>18230962
I have dont it. Everybody can do it. You are now denying simple facts, that every school child knows and that are easily testable.
Congatulations retard

>>18230970
>You are now denying simple facts, that every school child knows and that are easily testable.

Do it, stand upside down and swallow a potato.

>>18230970
watch here moron

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rcD8LS2f99Y

>>18230852
>implying a flat domed earth doesn't instantly prove the existence of God and wouldn't impact world events tremendously

>>18230852
>Ok flat retards the earth is flat ...
cognitive dissonance.

>How does that affect the course of events around the gl... plane?
Pretty sure the taxpayers will want to ask a simple question, a trillion of dollars has been used to fund exactly what?

What ever happened to not feeding the trolls? Or at least reverse trolling a thread to shit?

>>18231031

A few trillion went missing few years ago..yet no one fussed much about it

>>18231048
it doesn't only affect the US but most of the world has invested quite some money into either a space program or at least fake satellites.
The real deal though is on the spiritual level. Domes do no spawn out the blue. They are built

>>18230437
Fakest thing I have ever seen

"Earth is flat hurr durr"

"fuck off retard"

"FUKCING SHILLS GET OFF MY BOARD!!!! WAKE UP SHEEPLE!!!!!! THIS EVIDENCE BY AWAKESOULS AND KATYPERRYNWO666 PROVES IT!!!!!!!!!!"

>>18230912
Dis^

>>18231114
Ehehehehehehe
>nice job disinfoagent

>>18230437
must be fake
google would not let me say ''fake and gay''

>>18231695
dude the chat is hilarious

I can't.

I keep expecting a meteor or explosion that cracks the earth in half.

Terrifies me to watch.

Please /x/, don't feed the trolls.

Problem with the flat earthers is that (trolls notwithstanding) they're so tennacious in their idiocy and they have clearly never read the history of astronomy. You can't talk to a fanatic, and proof will not sway them.

So learn to ignore them please.