- Joined
- Aug 13, 2021
- Messages
- 22
- Reaction score
- 75
Thank you for your awesome presentation, Catalyst! I see nothing in the brilliant exposition of old world technology here presented that is not compatible with a plane that has no known limits. I spent over 40 years of my life immersed in Astronomy and theoretical physics and considered myself quite proficient in helio-centricity. I went into Flat Earth looking to disprove it, wondering how anyone dared to hold such a belief : I was certain I could refute all of their arguments (and more!) with my understanding of complex issues like star formation, space vacuum, and etc. Well, you know how it turned out. I had a crisis when I realized for the first time in my life that space does not exist; you cannot have rocket propulsion (nothing to thrust against!), planetary formation, or flesh and blood humans in flimsy *flexible* space suits in a near perfect vacuum (negative pressure, lowered boiling points and expansion of objects in vacuums require an immensely dense and rigid metal cage to protect the human-- a space suit is an impossibility). Apart from NASA documents that strangely "assume a stationary, non-rotating earth", I wondered how I had missed the issues with the relatively dustless vertical moon landing and take-offs; the choosy power of gravity that can hold the oceans down on madly spinning ball but cannot hold back a large bird or butterfly; the photoshopped and perfectly spherical blue marble images from NASA with varying continent sizes that is missing the "Oblate Spheroid" pear shape that NASA claims it is -- So many issues, including the fact that you cannot replicate what you see of a moon's allegedly reflected light when you shine a light on a true sphere ( the true sphere has a focal point or bright spot reflecting the light, not the entire face flatly radiating "even light" like we see of the full moon), the locked face of the moon always facing us, the incredible accident of a perfect solar eclipse.. the even brightness in all directions when you observe the sky on a sunny day as though a firmament were reflecting light to produce what we call "full natural light" in photography; the impossibility of observing the inner planets at night when their orbits always exist between us and the Sun only during the day NOT at night when we are facing away from the Sun .. issues go on and on but literally every claim of the geocentric model I held onto fell apart. I hope you continue your journey to research this topic because for me, it changed my entire life.I know that the Earth's shape topic is kinda controversial so I'm not trying to insist on anything. Ordinary people like us can only guess based on various evidence, which in turn, are sometimes also subjective and not trustworthy. I personally believe that its a globe. But I think so not because I was told so, but rather because I feel that it would be more convenient in terms of space systems planning/building (for those forces that are involved in it). And also because it just feels right for me.