Is Our Earth FLAT and Motionless, Not a Spinning Globe?

[Gali]

Here is something I didn't think of. On a globe earth, how could we see Mercury and Venus at night? If it is night it follows that we are on the side of the earth facing away from the sun. Since Mercury and Venus are on inner orbits compared to us, it follows that the mass of the earth should block our view of them, as it does of the sun. One might argue that the angle might be such that we could see them just after dusk and before dawn, but we can often see them hours after dusk and before dawn.

Because it is a hoax

https://www.reddit.com/r/askscience/com ... he_sky_if/

[Gali]

Science? Astronomy science cannot be verified. It's just a bunch of numbers and formulas. Anyone can come up with bullshido science that has no basis in reality. Tesla said today's science is just equations on the chalkboard, without any real experiments. Science is abstract and can be junk too. You worship it too much. I saw some quotes about this but I don't remember the source. Anyone can make up stuff even science stuff. Plus the science of the past was different than the science of today. For example macroevolution is considered science but it cannot be proven or demonstrated with the scientific method. Yet it's considered fact, and that's wrong. If you mean the scientific method, then sorry but the scientific method only works with stuff that's testable. Astronomy is not testable. Neither is the moon landing. Neither is heliocentrism. Even the spinning ball globe earth is not really testable because there's no way to prove the earth is spinning or moving at all. Einstein even admitted this. You are way too religious man.

You do not even accept or know basic science. Stuff like physics, chemistry, biology.

[Gali]

Even so, that doesn't prove the Mars Rover is on Mars. You take it on faith because you trust NASA. Admit it. NASA is your God. Why else do you defend it? You have no God so science is your God. Admit it. A true freethinker questions everything, you do not.

Officially Apollo went through the Van Allen Belt but realistically I doubt it. Some of the astronauts didn't know what the Belt was and never knew they went through it. James Van Allen said humans could not pass through it.

See this analysis of the Mars Rover by independent freethinkers who are unbiased.

Insanity

https://www.buzzfeed.com/ishmaeldaro/ma ... acy-theory

[Winston]

Science? Astronomy science cannot be verified. It's just a bunch of numbers and formulas. Anyone can come up with bullshido science that has no basis in reality. Tesla said today's science is just equations on the chalkboard, without any real experiments. Science is abstract and can be junk too. You worship it too much. I saw some quotes about this but I don't remember the source. Anyone can make up stuff even science stuff. Plus the science of the past was different than the science of today. For example macroevolution is considered science but it cannot be proven or demonstrated with the scientific method. Yet it's considered fact, and that's wrong. If you mean the scientific method, then sorry but the scientific method only works with stuff that's testable. Astronomy is not testable. Neither is the moon landing. Neither is heliocentrism. Even the spinning ball globe earth is not really testable because there's no way to prove the earth is spinning or moving at all. Einstein even admitted this. You are way too religious man.

You do not even accept or know basic science. Stuff like physics, chemistry, biology.

Are you dumb or pretending to be dumb? I told you already, there are some things in science you can test, like the boiling point of water for example. But you cannot test how far away the stars are or the sun and moon, or whether stars are suns or not. None of that is testable. Neither is evolution or the big bang. How many times do I have to explain that? You sound like a mindless parrot. All you do is parrot scientism and its priesthood.

Science is a tool, not a being with opinions or dogmas. You don't seem to understand that. It does not have opinions on God, the spirit world, the paranormal, etc. Dogmatic men do, not science itself.

[Winston]

Even so, that doesn't prove the Mars Rover is on Mars. You take it on faith because you trust NASA. Admit it. NASA is your God. Why else do you defend it? You have no God so science is your God. Admit it. A true freethinker questions everything, you do not.

Officially Apollo went through the Van Allen Belt but realistically I doubt it. Some of the astronauts didn't know what the Belt was and never knew they went through it. James Van Allen said humans could not pass through it.

See this analysis of the Mars Rover by independent freethinkers who are unbiased.

Insanity

https://www.buzzfeed.com/ishmaeldaro/ma ... acy-theory

If you watch the video analysis with Richard Hall and Andrew Johnson above, you would see that it is very scientific, logical, and objective. But you didn't watch it of course. Your fault.



Did you see the movie "The Martian" with Matt Damon? They showed the same Mars landscape as from the Mars Rover. So it's easy to fake.

[Gali]

Science? Astronomy science cannot be verified. It's just a bunch of numbers and formulas. Anyone can come up with bullshido science that has no basis in reality. Tesla said today's science is just equations on the chalkboard, without any real experiments. Science is abstract and can be junk too. You worship it too much. I saw some quotes about this but I don't remember the source. Anyone can make up stuff even science stuff. Plus the science of the past was different than the science of today. For example macroevolution is considered science but it cannot be proven or demonstrated with the scientific method. Yet it's considered fact, and that's wrong. If you mean the scientific method, then sorry but the scientific method only works with stuff that's testable. Astronomy is not testable. Neither is the moon landing. Neither is heliocentrism. Even the spinning ball globe earth is not really testable because there's no way to prove the earth is spinning or moving at all. Einstein even admitted this. You are way too religious man.

You do not even accept or know basic science. Stuff like physics, chemistry, biology.

Are you dumb or pretending to be dumb? I told you already, there are some things in science you can test, like the boiling point of water for example. But you cannot test how far away the stars are or the sun and moon, or whether stars are suns or not. None of that is testable. Neither is evolution or the big bang. How many times do I have to explain that? You sound like a mindless parrot. All you do is parrot scientism and its priesthood.

Science is a tool, not a being with opinions or dogmas. You don't seem to understand that. It does not have opinions on God, the spirit world, the paranormal, etc. Dogmatic men do, not science itself.

Boiling water is science for 6 year olds.

I am talking about basic science knowledge for adults like this

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dftq9xGXcf8
GCSE Science Revision Physics "Atomic Structure"

or this

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7ukDKVHnac4
Transistors, How do they work ?

[Winston]

Just posting this because I like the rap song.

Don't you mean the song by Red Hot Chili Peppers called Californication that goes like this, "Space is the final frontier, but it's made in a Hollywood basement"?

I don't know if that's referring to all of space being a hoax or just the space you see in sci fi movies.

[Winston]

Science? Astronomy science cannot be verified. It's just a bunch of numbers and formulas. Anyone can come up with bullshido science that has no basis in reality. Tesla said today's science is just equations on the chalkboard, without any real experiments. Science is abstract and can be junk too. You worship it too much. I saw some quotes about this but I don't remember the source. Anyone can make up stuff even science stuff. Plus the science of the past was different than the science of today. For example macroevolution is considered science but it cannot be proven or demonstrated with the scientific method. Yet it's considered fact, and that's wrong. If you mean the scientific method, then sorry but the scientific method only works with stuff that's testable. Astronomy is not testable. Neither is the moon landing. Neither is heliocentrism. Even the spinning ball globe earth is not really testable because there's no way to prove the earth is spinning or moving at all. Einstein even admitted this. You are way too religious man.

You do not even accept or know basic science. Stuff like physics, chemistry, biology.

Are you dumb or pretending to be dumb? I told you already, there are some things in science you can test, like the boiling point of water for example. But you cannot test how far away the stars are or the sun and moon, or whether stars are suns or not. None of that is testable. Neither is evolution or the big bang. How many times do I have to explain that? You sound like a mindless parrot. All you do is parrot scientism and its priesthood.

Science is a tool, not a being with opinions or dogmas. You don't seem to understand that. It does not have opinions on God, the spirit world, the paranormal, etc. Dogmatic men do, not science itself.

Boiling water is science for 6 year olds.

I am talking about basic science knowledge for adults like this

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dftq9xGXcf8
GCSE Science Revision Physics "Atomic Structure"

or this

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7ukDKVHnac4
Transistors, How do they work ?

Again, I already told you, some things are testable. Some are not.

Again, you cannot test how far away the stars are or the sun and moon, or whether stars are suns or not. None of that is testable. Neither is evolution or the big bang. How many times do I have to explain that? You sound like a mindless parrot. All you do is parrot scientism and its priesthood.

Science is a tool, not a being with opinions or dogmas. You don't seem to understand that. It does not have opinions on God, the spirit world, the paranormal, etc. Dogmatic men do, not science itself.

[Gali]

Winston, I gave you the examples I am talking about. I am not talking about stars.

[Winston]

The point is, you do not KNOW that stars are suns, or the that big bang happened, or that macro evolution happened, etc. Or that man went to the moon in 1969. You take all that on FAITH, because the scientific establishment is your God. Admit it. You forget that science is a CONCEPT and a TOOL and METHODOLOGY. Not an infallible being or deity or person. You don't know the difference between science and scientific establishment, that's one core fallacy of yours. And you also assume that the scientific institution is pure, objective, neutral, and incorruptable, which again is totally false so that's another core fallacy. You hold 2 major core FALSE assumptions and don't even know it. You are blind to your own fallacies and false assumptions.

[Gali]

The point is, you do not KNOW that stars are suns, or the that big bang happened, or that macro evolution happened, etc. Or that man went to the moon in 1969. You take all that on FAITH, because the scientific establishment is your God. Admit it. You forget that science is a CONCEPT and a TOOL and METHODOLOGY. Not an infallible being or deity or person. You don't know the difference between science and scientific establishment, that's one core fallacy of yours. And you also assume that the scientific institution is pure, objective, neutral, and incorruptable, which again is totally false so that's another core fallacy. You hold 2 major core FALSE assumptions and don't even know it. You are blind to your own fallacies and false assumptions.

So you rather believe planes and laptops work through magic rather than because of science? I know science is hard work. Magic is more exciting. You can be a hero without brain and work.

[Cornfed]

Here Sam Gerans explains that both the Koran and the Bible expound the flat earth model.

[gsjackson]

The point is, you do not KNOW that stars are suns, or the that big bang happened, or that macro evolution happened, etc. Or that man went to the moon in 1969. You take all that on FAITH, because the scientific establishment is your God. Admit it. You forget that science is a CONCEPT and a TOOL and METHODOLOGY. Not an infallible being or deity or person. You don't know the difference between science and scientific establishment, that's one core fallacy of yours. And you also assume that the scientific institution is pure, objective, neutral, and incorruptable, which again is totally false so that's another core fallacy. You hold 2 major core FALSE assumptions and don't even know it. You are blind to your own fallacies and false assumptions.

So you rather believe planes and laptops work through magic rather than because of science? I know science is hard work. Magic is more exciting. You can be a hero without brain and work.

What does technology have to do with theoretical astrophysics?

[Gali]

The point is, you do not KNOW that stars are suns, or the that big bang happened, or that macro evolution happened, etc. Or that man went to the moon in 1969. You take all that on FAITH, because the scientific establishment is your God. Admit it. You forget that science is a CONCEPT and a TOOL and METHODOLOGY. Not an infallible being or deity or person. You don't know the difference between science and scientific establishment, that's one core fallacy of yours. And you also assume that the scientific institution is pure, objective, neutral, and incorruptable, which again is totally false so that's another core fallacy. You hold 2 major core FALSE assumptions and don't even know it. You are blind to your own fallacies and false assumptions.

So you rather believe planes and laptops work through magic rather than because of science? I know science is hard work. Magic is more exciting. You can be a hero without brain and work.

What does technology have to do with theoretical astrophysics?

If you do not understand or accept the science behind technology it does not make sense to deal with astrophysics.

[Cornfed]

If you do not understand or accept the science behind technology it does not make sense to deal with astrophysics.

Could you expand on this. It seems to be a complete non-sequitur indicating that you have a brain the size of a walnut.