Lxxx Posted December 29, 2015 Share Posted December 29, 2015 Branson with his space flights will clear all this up very soon anyway. If he could get the thing up there without it breaking. Or being sabotaged...or...or..or... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
quilp Posted December 29, 2015 Share Posted December 29, 2015 ...or...or..or... Trust you to stick your or in ... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
paswt Posted December 29, 2015 Share Posted December 29, 2015 Branson with his space flights will clear all this up very soon anyway. If he could get the thing up there without it breaking. Or being sabotaged...or...or..or... Wasn't he the chap who was going to save Concord,and then save Northern Rock then changed his mind ? Why anyone thinks he is such a great entrepreneurs beyond me , he's done OK for himself but so have a lot of shysters who have been demonstrable failures . Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dilligaf Posted December 29, 2015 Share Posted December 29, 2015 Branson with his space flights will clear all this up very soon anyway. If he could get the thing up there without it breaking. Or being sabotaged...or...or..or... Wasn't he the chap who was going to save Concord,and then save Northern Rock then changed his mind ? Why anyone thinks he is such a great entrepreneurs beyond me , he's done OK for himself but so have a lot of shysters who have been demonstrable failures . Richard Branson a failure? You can't be serious "paswt" Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
paswt Posted December 29, 2015 Share Posted December 29, 2015 "dilligaf" I consider him a "failure" , he's a great self publicist but thats about it in my book . I'd cross the road to avoid him Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gerrydandridge Posted December 30, 2015 Author Share Posted December 30, 2015 Moving back to trigonometry and the pole star, if Earth is a ball and the pole star is a long way away, then the angle of the pole star should be the same as the observers earthy latitude, so here on IOM the angle of the star should be about 54°, this correlates to Chinahands Trigonometry and the million earth radius distance for Polaris as being the best match. I have found no one in the FE community tackle this problem, and I think it is a big problem for the FE model as in no way can I make this happen on a flat Earth with any number of distances for the pole star. Without the maths this diagram explains the situation of the ball Earth observer latitude and North Star angles well. This diagram will also tell you that it is impossible to see Polaris from even 1° in the southern hemisphere, but apparently you can, some say as far as 15° into the southern hemisphere the pole star is visible, how does that work? So with this in mind there are still many compelling arguments to suggest we are on a plane, see Eric Dubay’s “200 proofs of a flat earth” and we must ask, does this Polaris problem outweigh all of these other “plane arguments”? I would still argue that without NASAs visual effect’s department it is easier to prove we are on a plane than a ball. Now saying all of this no private company will ever go up even 1000 miles let alone the 250,000 claimed by NASA in 1969, regardless of the shape of the Earth, flat or round, as I believe it has an impenetrable enclosure around / over it. Nearly 50 years after man went to the moon and the private sector cannot get into space without CGI help and a little imagination, they seem to be doing no better than the rocket scientists of the 1950s. Perhaps they have taken Richard Branson into the back room and told him it isn’t going to happen, “sorry you spent so much money Dick, but your effort simply hit the barrier, that we have been trying to open for the last 60 years” Perhaps they now think that the only way in or out of this "prison plane(t)" is by a less conventional form of travel, could this be the real reason for what particle accelerators are really trying to achieve. And in the meantime keep the public looking at a sideshow? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lxxx Posted December 30, 2015 Share Posted December 30, 2015 "dilligaf" I consider him a "failure" , he's a great self publicist but thats about it in my book . I'd cross the road to avoid him Your personal view on his grinning ginger beard shouldn't really detract from the fact he's a self made billionaire, which, in a capitalist society, means he's far from a failure. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
paswt Posted December 30, 2015 Share Posted December 30, 2015 "dilligaf" I consider him a "failure" , he's a great self publicist but thats about it in my book . I'd cross the road to avoid him Your personal view on his grinning ginger beard shouldn't really detract from the fact he's a self made billionaire, which, in a capitalist society, means he's far from a failure. You could say the same about blair mugabe, and many other "self made millionaires" , the trouble is many of them tend to worship their creator You can be a success in financial terms but a failure as a human being , well in my book anyway ." "You can tell what god thinks of money when you see the people he gives it to" Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chinahand Posted December 30, 2015 Share Posted December 30, 2015 Now saying all of this no private company will ever go up even 1000 miles let alone the 250,000 claimed by NASA in 1969, regardless of the shape of the Earth, flat or round, as I believe it has an impenetrable enclosure around / over it. It won't happen because you believe it is so - hahahaha. Gerry, I realize your ideas of evidence are shaky at best, but what do you consider the evidence for this to be? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Uhtred Posted December 30, 2015 Share Posted December 30, 2015 Now saying all of this no private company will ever go up even 1000 miles let alone the 250,000 claimed by NASA in 1969, regardless of the shape of the Earth, flat or round, as I believe it has an impenetrable enclosure around / over it. It won't happen because you believe it is so - hahahaha. Gerry, I realize your ideas of evidence are shaky at best, but what do you consider the evidence for this to be? The visit from the fish people with their magic trombone and impenetrable enclosure generator of course. Idiot. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gerrydandridge Posted December 31, 2015 Author Share Posted December 31, 2015 Now saying all of this no private company will ever go up even 1000 miles let alone the 250,000 claimed by NASA in 1969, regardless of the shape of the Earth, flat or round, as I believe it has an impenetrable enclosure around / over it. It won't happen because you believe it is so - hahahaha. Gerry, I realize your ideas of evidence are shaky at best, but what do you consider the evidence for this to be? The same evidence that we have that such a thing does not exist. Perhaps we should see how high the private efforts have achieved when in 20xx we are watching pictures of Freemasons, playing golf, driving a buggy and planting a flag on a deserted looking place, with a red tint to the images and saying they are on a planet 100,000,000 miles away. And some time after the return some busy body will ask to see the evidence of this great achievement to the answer "We seem to have lost it" Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chinahand Posted January 1, 2016 Share Posted January 1, 2016 ... some time after the return some busy body will ask to see the evidence of this great achievement to the answer "We seem to have lost it" Gerry, are you talking about this and this, rather than this? There is a huge amount of work going on using the 380 kilograms (380,000grams) of moon rock samples returned by the Apollo astronauts, they have unique radioactive isotope composition identifiably different from rocks from the Earth. This is hugely different from 184 gram sized samples given out to other countries as diplomatic presents being lost due to revolutions, corruption and incompetence. But as ever miss the big picture using 99.95% of the samples. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gerrydandridge Posted January 2, 2016 Author Share Posted January 2, 2016 I was thinking more on the theme of missing original footage, missing telemetry data, missing plans and documents of designs of the moon buggy, the space suits, the little foil wrapped capsule that put them on the surface, the one with a 20000 LB thrust engine that never displaced any moon dust whilst landing, not even dust on the feet of the lander, perhaps a silly over sight by the set creators, its impossible to create the perfect crime, mistake's will always be made, thus the need to lose and accidentally destroy evidence. It is quite common for the fraudster to destroy the evidence to conceal the crime, telemetry data would be a sure giveaway, and how convenient for the biggest achievement in human history to be taped over because of cut backs.. You surely don't believe this do you. not a dozen reels of data, thousands missing or destroyed. The moon rocks are quite interesting especially the ones that turned out to be petrified wood that were gifts to heads of state...I tend to not bother with this anymore as we could assume they were swapped by a thieves who then sold them on, must have been a good forger also to pull it off, but I admit it is possible to some extent that they were swapped by greedy people. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bobbie Bobster Posted January 2, 2016 Share Posted January 2, 2016 I'm betting that @China could counter, ooh let's say 95% of the claims in gerry's post above, but I would urge him not to bother. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr. Sausages Posted January 3, 2016 Share Posted January 3, 2016 Go for it China. On your deathbed, when your life flashes before your eyes, this thread will take up a big chunk of that time. You won't regret it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.