/vx/ - Videogames and Paranormal

This goes both ways.

>>166884
>Space from space

Basically it's exposure. The ground is bright, it's daytime, the camera only captures light for a tiny bit, so the fainter stars don't get captured, it just looks odd because there's no atmosphere

Cameras generally don't get very good shots of stars I think. Nighttime photography upps the exposure to get better shots. I've noticed this when trying to take pictures of stars or northern lights here with my phone it just shows black

>Globe Debunked by Flat Earthers Armed with Lasers
https://odysee.com/@TabooConspiracy:c/globe-debunked-by-flat-earthers-armed:e
Mirror:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wEDMYdAwJtY
This an 1:11m clip from original 13:12 version.
Let the globers' salt begin.

>>166892
The earth isn't flat and i don't have le vaxx in my veins, keep coping.

>>166898
if not flat, then how it is?
In this thread there are plenty of experiments and science demonstrating that the tall tale about living on a ball is a lie. Can you demonstrate the ball?

>>166899
The earth as we know it is just a Hot pond with some islands in it, On a greater Ice Ball that contains more Hot ponds.

>>166900
Gotta a pic to figure it out?

>>166901
Yes.

>>166902
Aha. So, it is a theory.
Do you have anything backed by real science applying the scientific method?

>>166903
Its as much of a theory as your precious "Flat earth" buddy.

>>166904
I don't think so.
See >>166899

>>166905
Yea its a you made, so what?

>>166906
>so what?
You have no foundations to argue science. Even you bring the facts or all you have left is trolling.

>>166907
Genuine question, do you have autism?

>>166908
>derailing
Let us stick to science.

>>166909
Diagnosing Autism is a Science.

>>166908
Asking anyone on /mlpol/, or any brony community for that matter, if they're autistic is like asking a scuba diver if water is wet.

>>166911
Indeed.
It 's like the newfag needs to lurk moar.

>>166908
>newfaggotry
Lurk moar, please.

>>166911
>>166913
>>166912
Great more Autists

>>166914
>goes to racist mlp imageboard
>goes to flat earth thread
>is surprised by autism
An inability to detect social cues and a general lack of social awareness are both telling signs of autism. Have you had yourself tested?

>>166915
I Am Based(Not Autistic) and you are Cringe(Autistic)
>Pic rel
Its you

>>166916
>I Am Based(Not Autistic)
It's okay, anon. You're with your own people now.

>>166917
>>I Am Based(Not Autistic)
Yes i am Based (Not Autistic)

>>166918
I am Based (Autistic) and you are Cringe(Not autistic)
>Pic rel
Its me

Jason Breshears (Archaix)
>"If the only proof you have is that everybody else believes something, you have no proof at all"

Earth is not a spinning globe. Case closed, Dismissed, Have a nice day.

Just try to debunk Flat Earth. See what it happens.

>>166969
Nah, I had a friend who tried and he's sucking dicks for globes now.

>>166970
I wonder how he tried. Watching the faith arguments of Professor Dave perhaps?

>>166971
Are these two ideas mutually exclusive? It's all perspective.

Touching the moon with a laser.

>>166972
>Are these two ideas mutually exclusive?
According to the heliocentrism's priests, they are.

>>166984
I've never heard that before. Citation needed.

>>166983
What does this have to do with flat earth?
Also, this looks like a perspective trick to me. While a laser could in theory reach the moon, it would probably get chewed up and refracted by the atmosphere before then.

>>166985
>Citation needed.
It is exactly as stated in >>166971
The priests use indiscriminately those opposite ideas to shut down doubts on the heliocentric non-sense.
If you browse NASA' spokepersons on jewtube you'll find out.

>>166986
>What does this have to do with flat earth?
Everything. Read the thread and find out more about hypothetical celestial bodies.

>>166988
>Read the thread
I did read it.
What a nice way to say you're unable to reiterate your own argument.

>>166987
That's not a citation. That's a strawman meme about an absurd opinion that arguably doesn't even exist.

>>166881
What is the argument here? That it couldn't have landed on the moon because it looks silly? It's only one small
component of the larger device. It's not aerodynamic because it didn't need to be in space.
>>166882
>living there
I don't think living on the moon would have ever been a realistic idea.
We could've done more, but we decided to give trillions in foreign aid to niggers in Africa instead.
>cat photo
I take it this is a shitpost.
>Cameraman
>who filmed
Does it even cross your mind to look up these questions before you repost these shitty memes?
>Exhaust
Diffused in the vacuum of space.
>Footprint
The two photos are not shot in the same place.

>>166883
>Pic 1
Context matters
>"I'd go to the moon in a nanosecond. The problem is we don't have the technology to do that anymore. We used to but we destroyed that technology and it's a painful process to build it back again. But going to Mars should be one of the next series of steps that humans do."
He's talking about technology that was destroyed and not updated/maintained since the moon landing because the government didn't care to preserve or continue working on it, because it was expensive to do so. We have the technology in theory; we just don't have the physical equipment.
>pic 2
Your civilian cellphone network is not priority NASA equipment. It's not just a question of technology, but quality of service. They were using the best possible equipment at the time, which had fewer faults than our shitty civilian infrastructure even with today's tech.
Also, I can't even remember the last time I had a dropped call. This meme must be ancient.
>Pic 3
It wouldn't be the first time the government has lost shit, or quietly sold it off to embezzle taxpayers.
>pic 4
>what is folding?
>what is compression?
When was the last time you saw a parachute? Packaging large parachutes in small places isn't hard.
>pic 4
>what is folding?
It was folded. You can literally see the places where the vehicle is designed to fold from this picture.

>>166859
>not strong enough to move anything else
We already had this discussion. You must have either ignored the response of refused to acknowledge it.
It doesn't move anything else because solids aren't easy to move, but liquids move easily.
Remember the analogy to the weight of a quarter in your pocket when jumping? That's why you don't feel anything: it's too subtle.
>all these other memes
Ffs, these are the same redundant arguments over and over again. You keep posting more of them, even though any of us could just scroll up to see them.
We talked about Polaris. We talked about curves. We talked about horizon perspective. We talked about how earth looks from space. We talked about boats. We had every one of these topics before, but you keep regurgitating more memes about the exact same thing you've already said, instead of just replying to those same discussions. Why do you keep repeating yourself with things you've already said and posted?

>>167095
Does he believe the world is flat? I can't find anything that says he does.

>>167096
I don't know. But what I do know is that Bill Nye is a liar and a hack.

>>167099
https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=VtJFb_P2j48&pp=ygURQmlsbCBueWUgc2V4IGp1bms%3D
Remember when Bill Nye had some show that featured this Jewish gem.

>>167099
Okay, but what does that have to do with flat earth?
Neither of them believe in flat earth, including the one you said was more qualified.
Bill Nye is a hack and a showman, more of a TV personality than a scientist, but it's not like he invented the concept, nor is he a particularly vocal proponent of it. You won't have to look far here to find people who think he's full of shit, but how is that relevant to the conversation?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AFiXEPvK1u8
Level earth

>>167111
It's still a decent question though, because the implicit followup is what is the incentive for such an elaborate lie, if supposedly the shape were of little actual consequence.

>>167113
>the implicit followup is what is the incentive for such an elaborate lie
1) To discourage the idea of going beyond the Antarctic perimeter because supposedly there is nothing to see there
2) To discredit ancient civilizations' knowledge and also The Bible.

>>167116
>1) To discourage the idea of going beyond the Antarctic perimeter because supposedly there is nothing to see there
Why would they want people to not go there if there's nothing there? Heck, it would make more sense for them to commercialize it with "edge of the world" resorts and whatnot.
>2) To discredit ancient civilizations' knowledge and also The Bible.
There are easier ways to do this. Most people believe the earth is round, and most people are still religious. Round earth does not notably prevent people from being religious. Also, not all ancient civilizations said the world was flat.

>The Inverse Square Law Proves Local Sun
>This video demonstrates how the Inverse Square Law proves the sun is local, and disproves the heliocentric model.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FIjFkdbBe-8
Mirror:
https://odysee.com/@TabooConspiracy:c/the-inverse-square-law-proves-local-sun:5

>>167117
>Why would they want people to not go there if there's nothing there?
There is nothing according to the masons.
>Round earth does not notably prevent people from being religious
Round earth is a deceptive statement claiming that The Bible is wrong.
>not all ancient civilizations said the world was flat
Really? Would you mind to provide citations?

>>167127
>There is nothing according to the masons.
What is there according to non-masons then? Conventional science says there's outer space and a vast cosmos. What do you think is there?
>>167127
>deceptive statement
It has not notably prevented people from being religious or Christian, so it's a rather impotent method. This isn't really a decent motive for fabricating and maintaining such an elaborate lie that would take tons of resources to keep secret.
>citations
Greeks philosophers 5th century BC:
https://archive.org/details/earlygreekastron0000dick/page/n5/mode/1up
And that's just one example.

Bump for subversion

>>167139
Agreed.

Also >>167134 is a faggot, he sagged his post and nopony knows when an answer pops up.

>>167140
I sage because I only bump good threads.

>>167141
You sagged it again.

>>167141
Based

>>167145
Sagging won't make our realm round.
Just saying.

>>167146
Not saging will not make our planet flat.
Just saying

>>167146
If you want to bump the thread, bump it yourself.
I sage 1/5 posts I make to this board, and I did on 4chan too. I only bump the highest quality threads.

>"We haven't been to space." U.S.S.R. Cosmonaut Igor Volk (Confirmed)
>Does the fact that former U.S.S.R. cosmonaut Igor Volk admitting in 2014 that no one has been to space prove the earth is flat? Well, not necessarily, but it certainly evinces that all claims related to space are fake and it demolishes the number one proof of the globe. Furthermore, it proves that BIG lies are not only possible but are happening right now.
>The space deception is everywhere and permeates all major institutions including academia, enforcement agencies, governments, media, and religious institutions.
>This information from a brave whistleblower should be shared everywhere! Everyone should know the name Igor Volk.
https://odysee.com/@TabooConspiracy:c/we-haven't-been-to-space.-u.s.s.r.:8
Mirrors:
https://153news.net/watch_video.php?v=YB3AW9BNNM42
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=E0g2jPuN2Kg

>>167172
>number one proof of the globe
People knew the earth was round even before we ever got to space.

>>167175
People were actually told that this realm is not a plane.
To believe that lie doesn't change reality.

>>167182
no, you can do the experiments for yourself. unfortunately, it does require leaving your mom's house

>>167308
>no, you can do the experiments for yourself
Interesting.
Such as?

>>167309
how far is the moon from the Earth? (I already know what your answer will be but I want you to say it)

>>167310
>how far is the moon from the Earth?
What a disappointment. I was expecting you to describe the experiments.

>>167311
I'm getting there retard, answer the question

>Night Sky - When Lasers hit the Firmament [ 4K ]
>Scientists claim that they are using the most powerful lasers in the world to project an artificial star in the mesosphere for telescopes.
>They claim that a very thin layer of sodium is excited to glow.
>The problem here, the laser stops abruptly at a barrier. This is not possible, no matter with which wavelength.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=maBf0H3UNJI
Mirrors (no 4K):
https://odysee.com/@EddieAlencar:a/night-sky-when-lasers-hit-the-firmament:8
https://www.bitchute.com/video/tLrZ7GtYXK8M/
Beautiful night sky and music.

-----

The scientific lecture from 2010 explaining the physics of lasers. Then the NASA's claim of what they are doing is bullshit.
>Lene Hau: "Quantum control of light and matter - from the macroscopic to the nanoscale"
>Lecture, fall 2010
>Lene Hau, Harvard University
>Professor of Physics and Applied Physics :
>"Quantum control of light and matter - from the macroscopic to the nanoscale"
>Light pulses are slowed in ultra-cold atom clouds to bicycle speed: 24 km/hour, which is 50 million times lower than the light speed in vacuum. In the process the pulses spatially compress by the same large factor, from 1 km to only 0.02 mm at which point they fit entirely within the atom cloud. A light pulse can then be completely stopped for several milliseconds. In our more recent experiments, we take matters further: We stop and extinguish a light pulse in one part of space and revive it in a completely different location. The experiments create a new paradigm for control and inter-conversion of light and matter.... and the secret behind the trick will be revealed in the talk.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cxFx8m41QWM

The "Official™" "Experts™" and "Scientists™" claim that stallions can get pregnant, while some claim that only mares can get pregnant - that alone proves that if you truly want or need to know something, it's better to go on the (possibly years long) journey to find out for yourself.

The bigger question is this: are you getting genuine value for your limited and dwindling time and energy spent, by trying to figure out which "scientist™" or "expert™" to trust, and would you be getting genuine value in working out beyond any doubt what shape or size the Earth truly is?

>>167443
>would you be getting genuine value in working out beyond any doubt what shape or size the Earth truly is?
It is not only the lie, but what lies behind it.

>>167444
Check' em.

>>167444
My point is that this particular lie/psyop/subject was introduced by the enemy specifically to cause confusion and infighting among people/stallions/etc. who would otherwise have more time and energy to find out exactly who the enemies actually are, and what other tricks they use.
Also, these "bones" for the goyim to chew on and fight over help fine-tune the enemy's tactics and help them find out the identities of any actual threats who they feel need to be "dealt with" specifically.

I realise that not everyone can stare the monster in the eye directly and needs to use less intimidating subjects and battles to sharpen their skills, but at least be aware that you're choosing to fight inside the terrarium/pen/cage that was set up for you, by the enemy you're trying to outsmart.

The world has existed every day for at least 6000 years - it's not that important to know what shape it is, and arguing over it won't reveal all that much of those who set up the subject for people/stallions/etc. to argue over. That's what I'm Saiyan here. Sorry to be a killjoy, no fun allowed etc., feel free to ignore if need be.

Nevertheless, this argument isn't much different to the "infinite genders" deception: First there were two sexes (easy-peasy so far), then a "jew" came along and changed that to "genders" and people started accepting the new term, so now there are two genders, well since "gender" can now mean what those "jews" who introduced the term want it to mean they can then introduce additional genders and even change the original meaning of that word - further removing people from the actual reality that there still are and always only were two sexes! What's the point of arguing how many genders there are, when there are only two sexes and everything else is a work of "jewish" fiction? (Besides sharpening skills without directly confronting the monster, which could be done in all kinds of other ways.)

Just be aware of the artificially-created cage one enters by taking part in these arguments. One of the first steps of introducing (((communism))) is to remove the "goyim" from a benevolent higher power so they become confused and lost, and then have them fighting/killing each other over artificially-introduced belief-systems.

>>167443
>The "Official™" "Experts™" and "Scientists™" claim that stallions can get pregnant
Source? This doesn't sound like a settled topic.

>>167450
Oh, sorry I don't have a source on that statement right now, but the Science is Settled™ regardless. :3

>>167447
>My point is that this particular lie/psyop/subject was introduced by the enemy specifically to cause confusion and infighting among people/stallions/etc.
Rebuking heliocentrism is not new and hadn't been introduced by any enemy. It is all the contrary, heliocentrism is a hoax pushed by masons and jesuits.
Also it shouldn't be any infighting if the fags would had any STEM knowledge to follow science and understand that have been duped. This thread contains tons of invaluable scientific data but it looks that cannot be understood by the regular anon, worst yet, they ignore the data and keep repeating propaganda.

>>167452
>This thread contains tons of invaluable scientific data but it looks that cannot be understood by the regular anon, worst yet, they ignore the data and keep repeating propaganda.

If that's the case, then perhaps most people/stallions/etc. know on some level that there are bigger things to worry about, and that investing real time and energy into this discussion is going to hurt them down the road. Therefore, they'd rather just get a quick dopamine fix by making a half-hearted post and going elsewhere. It's a possible explanation.
Learning which battles to pick is pretty important as time grows shorter.

Yes this is a dedicated Flat Earth thread, but is it really THAT important to get consensus on the shape and size of the Earth, with everything else that's going on? All that energy would be far better spent on exposing the Holocaust™ lie worldwide, for example. That would wake up far more people to some harsh truths and might inspire them into more productive and positive community-action than to hear that the Earth is different to what was always assumed. Whether round or flat or big or small, it's still going to be the same as yesterday or thousands of years ago, and knowing for certain won't stop the whitey-genocide and (((chicom-style))) prison system being built around us. Just Saiyan.
I guess each side of this argument/topic is frustrated for their own reasons, and that's too bad, especially since the discussion's been going on and being kept alive for so long.

>>167453
>If that's the case, then perhaps most people/stallions/etc. know on some level that there are bigger things to worry about, and that investing real time and energy into this discussion is going to hurt them down the road.
Okay, now you make sense. You are in the wrong thread anon.

>>167453
I disagree that this is such a time sink. No one has an optimized schedule anyway.

Could you indulge in thought experiment for just a moment? Imagine that the earth actually is flat; and you look out at the horizon and think how it doesn't bend but continue on forever, you look up at the sun see that it's close so that's why it's rays spreads across the world, and you ponder what the stars can be if they aren't suns lightyears away; do you think this would not change you?

>>167453
>Yes this is a dedicated Flat Earth thread, but is it really THAT important to get consensus on the shape and size of the Earth
>to get consensus
To hell with consensus, that is anti-science and revolting to the truth.