Flat Earth: Planets don’t exist?

Flat earthers say planets are not globes, they are created by NASA with CGI. Planets are just lights in the sky.

As Above, so Below

One of the proofs given by the globe earthers is “as above, so below.” They look up into the sky and see the moon, the sun and the planets are all globes. So it is a reasonable supposition that the earth planet we are standing on my be something like the globes we see floating in the sky above us. Of course it may also be that what we are standing on is completely different from what we see floating above our heads in the sky.

Flat Earthers Hate Globes

Flat earthers, on the other hand, tend to be totally against globes, anywhere. They generally say the moon is not a globe, the planets are not globes, they even go so far as to say that NASA has invented the planets and they are just CGI. They hate globes. They don’t want to see globes anywhere in the universe.

Planets are an invention of NASA…

According to flat earthers that we can not see the planets as they are depicted by NASA, they are just lights in the sky, not globes, etc, etc. The beautiful planets NASA shows us are just creations of their computer graphics animations.

We can all see the Planets ourselves with a Decent Telescope

Of course any of us who have actually looked at the planets through a decent telescope can verify that they are most certainly globes and they do clearly have the features NASA depicts in their images. It is not at all difficult to get quite clear images of the planets in a telescope and confirm they are globes. At least they appear to be globes and that would be the most obvious conclusion to draw. Of course NASA has made images of the planets which are much clearer and more detailed than what we can see in a telescope, and perhaps they have done this with CGI, but the NASA images are based on real photographs of the real planets.

I will get out my telescope and take some pictures of the planets and post them here later.

Supporting Flat Earth Proofs

  • 119) …When looked at with an unprejudiced naked-eye or through a telescope, the fixed and wandering stars appear as luminous discs of light, NOT spherical terra firma. The pictures and videos shown by NASA of spherical terra firma planets are all clearly fake computer-generated images, and NOT photographs…
  • 120) The etymology of the word “planet” actually comes from late Old English planete, from Old French planete (Modern French planète), from Latin planeta, from Greek planetes, from (asteres) planetai “wandering (stars),” from planasthai “to wander,” of unknown origin, possibly from PIE *pele “flat, to spread” or notion of “spread out.” And Plane (n) “flat surface,” c. 1600, from Latin planum “flat surface, plane, level, plain,” planus “flat, level, even, plain, clear.” They just added a “t” to our Earth plane and everyone bought it.

36 Replies to “Flat Earth: Planets don’t exist?”

    • Herbert I Marone

      This is not a theory invented by NASA, but a fact. This is something for you to think about. If you were proposing and new idea and you had to develop a symbol for your your new idea, would your symbol include a serpent tong. Of course not because in western culture, the tong represents the lying serpent. NASA never went to the moon and we live on a flat plane,covered by a doom that will not let us leave this planet. If you want want more evidence, here is something else for you to think about. When Admiral Perry went to the so call south pole, he said on national TV in the 50’s, that he flew in a plane many miles south of the so call south pole. There is no south pole on a flat earth, just magnetic north, if he travel that far further south he would been in outer space. In conclusion, the physical devil is a liar. That is what the Serpent Tong is informing you. You must just open up your 3rd eye and ask question, which eventually will lead you to factual answers.

  1. Chainlink700rt

    Ahhhh, ok, how about this, flat earth only exists here where you stand.
    Me, I prefer the globe that I have seen with my own eyes from orbit.
    It consists of a fuzzy whitish dark blue, sometimes grey near storms, and the earth is very large compared too us.
    Out in the distance is all the same, and the sun is the most spectacular view you could ever imagine. Another fact all the people on earth can fit into the state of Delaware, give or take a 1000 miles or two.

    • Kris Fox

      How , when and where did you go up in orbit to view this spectacular blue ball , Do you have real pictures of the earth because if you do the pictures are worth millions because they will be the first real pictures to ever be seen by the public. I would love to see them… Do tell..

    • On the Level

      Your telescope provides a two-dimensional image which you interpret to have three dimensions. If you see what you call a planet in the night sky with your telescope you will see what many others have seen when viewing the moon and stars through a telescope, a round disc image that you apparently interpret as a ball. Your mind will quickly model what you see in terms of what you expect to see. Much of what we claim to see is made up in our minds that’s why it is so easy to fool people with optical illusions. Proving one’s model to be accurate is a whole different venture that requires direct first hand empirical evidence, which from our vantage point regarding the stars and/or what you call planets, we simply don’t have.

      • Jerry Paul

        Well, because we can see the planets turn, we can see the entire surface as it spins. For example, if you look at Jupiter on any given day you will see one side, this does appear to us as a disc, but when you go back and look again we can see that the surface appears to have changed. This is due to the rotation, and we can follow surface feature such as the giant red spot, this is a storm, and we see that it moves across the face of the planet. The only way this is possible is because the planet is spinning. Any other explanation, such as the same facw we see changing because srorms move across the face, simply make no sense. You would have to believe something even more crazy and unlikely than that this planet revolves.
        When the comet Shoemaker/Levy 9 slammed into Jupiters southern hemisphere we could see the impact on the clouds move across the surface. Only a spinning planet would create this sight.
        Why would someone come up with a less likely and illogical scenario to explain something when the proven model works. We not only see the spin from earth, when we have sent manmade robotic spaceships out to view them up close, All our observations confirm the fact that they spin. Not one single observation or test has ever shown anything other than that the planets spin. If a person fails to accept that mankind has sent machines to the outer planets then of course it is hard to believe the observations. If someone fails to see how advanced we are in space travel, then that person cannot interpret any evidence no matter how concrete. Those who cannot see facts for what they are then that person is not in touch with reality. And no, we do not just take someone’s word for it that we are a space faring species, we see, we experianced, and we know from personal experience that mankind jas been in space for decades.

  2. the earth isn’t flat

    if they are then are all stars small then eh?
    have you ever looked into a telescope that would let you see the other planets?

    • Trinket

      Why in the world are people still having this debate about flat and round?? This is ridiculous and why the hell does it matter? Come on people do something better with your time while you’re still living on this earth…We didn’t make this world so get over it! And as far as “planets” go, apparently only a high definition sophisticated blah nasa telescope can see these “planets” funny how that works! It’s BS people don’t let these clowns fool you. See ya!

  3. On the Level

    The Earth is flat

    With a telescope at sea level an averaged height person can see much farther across the ocean than ~3 miles with any decent telescope. Earth’s curvature as claimed ( 25K mile circumference ) should make this impossible. Surface water and full vessel images of boats much farther than 3 miles have been photographed many times. NASA does not and never will have a reasonable explanation for this. Facts must be determined by repeated investigation not propagandist delusion.

    Have a great day!

    • Russell

      3 miles to the visible horizon?? Says who?! Certainly NOT THE NAVY!! The massive guns with barrels 9 yards long on the battle ships are designed to fire projectiles at a distance of 30 miles. Why? Because THAT’S the distance to the horizon when ships are at sea. Did you just want it to be 3 so you could debunk it?? How flat is the top of your head?

  4. Chainlink700rt

    I can hardly come up with a solution to help the flat earthers, because the science they live by is like in the ozone of drug use.
    I can’t imagine being this lost on a subject thats known throughout the world.
    You can’t argue a point with a flat earther
    apparently they are at a IQ level that doesn’t exist in modern times.

    • Flat Earth Facts

      It’s true. Flat earthers don’t even have a model. They can’t explain how anything would work if the earth was flat and if one flat earther has an idea then another flat earther will disagree with him. So yes. Flat earth does not attract the most intelligent people…

      • On the level

        “It’s true. Flat earthers don’t even have a model. They can’t explain how anything would work if the earth was flat and if one flat earther has an idea then another flat earther will disagree with Jim.”

        Really! What’s your model? Heliocentrism? Few believe that any more.

        Do you agree now with NASA’s model? You didn’t use to.

        Cheers!

        • Flat Earth Facts

          Hare Krishna On the Level

          Please, try to get back into reality. My model, I am open to the possibilities. I am prepared to consider different models. At this point I have realised that we don’t have 100% proof the earth is a spinning globe however scientists and great thinkers over the years have made observations and on the basis of their observations they have speculated the globe earth model and using this premise, the earth is a globe spinning in space, they have been able to very accurately predict and describe the actual things we observe happening in the sky around us.

          So the globe earthers do have a valid predictive scientific model which, in almost all cases, accurately predicts our observations. So it is quite a persuasive argument they are able to put forward, the earth is a globe spinning in space.

          As I saw someone else pointing out to you, there are other globes spinning in space. For example we can observe the planets, and if you look from day to day you will see the features on the planets are moving around, showing they are globes spinning in space. So that is one of the circumstantial proofs that the earth is a globe spinning in space, “As above so below.” They say because they can see the planets are globes spinning in space, even with some of them having moons orbiting them, then it is not a very far stretch of the imagination to think that the earth is also a globe spinning in space with a moon orbiting it.

          Of course you do not understand it, the globe earth model, but if you did understand it you would appreciate that it is a very beautiful model that does tell a story that very accurately predicts and models what we observe.

          Critics will say they have tweaked the globe earth model to match the observations, and that is, of course, true. It is derived from the observations and tweaked to match the observations. However they have a working predictive scientific model that gives reasonable logical explanations of almost everything we observe.

          And, if you would come out of your flat earth bubble for a moment, you will see that 99.9999% of the people accept and believe in the globe earth model. Of course that is because they have been taught to believe it, brainwashed, if you like, to believe it. They could have been taught a different model and they would believe that also.

          But the problem is On the Level, you, as a flat earther, you don’t have any model to teach them. You have no idea how we could be observing the things we are observing in the sky, presuming the earth is flat. You can not provide a valid flat earth map that works, that matches our observations and experiences, presuming the earth is flat. You can not show even exactly how the sun rise and sun set times could be achieved as we observe them, presuming the earth is flat.

          So yes. You can train the people to accept any model, and most people will even accept an illogical model, like flat earth, but there are some intelligent people, who want to understand how it works. So if you try to preach flat earth to an intelligent person he will laugh at you because you have no model, you have no idea actually, how the earth could be flat and at the same time match our physical observations of what we see in the sky and what we experience as we travel around the earth.

          So that is the problem. You have a sentimental religious fanatical belief that the earth is flat, which is not based on any logic, science, and you have no idea how it could be flat, you have no way to explain our actual physical observations. So only fools realistically can accept the earth is flat, in the absence of any model that explains how the earth could be flat and at the same time we could experience it as we do.

          So, of course, I am open to the possibilities. It might be flat, it might be a globe, but at the moment we have got a very very very good case for it being a globe and no case at all for it being flat.

          So you need to produce a valid predictive scientific model that explains how we observe what we do physically observe based on the premise that the earth is flat. Otherwise no intelligent person can take this flat earth idea seriously.

          Of course the world is full of fools, so any foolish idea, in a ocean of fools, will find some followers. But just because you have foolish followers does not mean your ideas have any merit.

          • Jerry Paul

            So in your view all of our space based telescopes like Hubble have not really seen anything? Where are all the pics of the local universe coming from? Are all of our probes to other planets fake or what? Why do these many examples not sway your opinion? I have a hard time believing that all of our space science’s are somehow made up. How on earth could anyone fake out the entire world? The reality of our ventures in space are much more believable then that its all fake.

          • Flat Earth Facts

            Hi Jerry

            Yes. The expeditions in space are so easy to fake, we only really know that they can put things in low-earth orbit, and that is above the atmosphere, so certainly they can put telescopes up there and get a clearer picture, avoiding the distortions of the atmosphere. The pictures can come from earth-based telescopes also. You know we have some magnificent earth based telescopes on the top of mountains in Chile, which give fabulous pics. You can have much, much bigger telescopes on earth than you can put in space, so the slight advantage of getting outside the atmosphere is there for space based telescopes, but you can only put small telescopes in space, so in many cases the earth based ones are better anyhow.

            So realistically, these days, when we have wonderful computers capable of producing fabulous pics of everything in the galaxy from any angle you may want to see it, to really absolutely believe these are real pics. That is the problem these days. Everything is simulated and the simulations are so good.

            Nowadays, even if you go to an observatory, instead of looking through a telescope, they sit you down in front of a big screen and run a computer simulation and explain to you everything you can see in the sky, using their simulated universe in their computer.

            So the point is it is so easy to simulate the universe, they have got everything in their 3D maps and you just put the camera wherevery you want and that way easily get the pics you want.

            Yes. All the probes to other planets may well be fake. We have no way of telling if they are real or fake.

            The point is NASA gets trillions of dollars for these rovers on Mars, etc, do you think if they could not do it actually, they would not fake it? If they didn’t fake it they would loose the trillions of dollars an all their jobs. So they have got a huge motivation to fake it if they can’t actually do it.

            That is why I suggest they do something on the moon that we can all see from earth with an inexpensive telescope. With a $300 telescope you can easily image the moon down to the crater level. So I suggested before that Elon Musk can just send up a probe with one of his power walls and some solar panels and some huge led floodlights and land it in one of the craters and during the time when the moon is dark he can flood that crater with flashing red, white and blue lights. That would be very inexpensive, India can send a probe to the moon for only 80 million dollars, so they tell us, so for a very tiny investment Elon could convince us all that he can at least send unmanned probes to the moon.

            But you know they have never done anything that proves they can go to the moon, and it would be so, so easy to do something on the moon to show us earthlings they had actually reached it, that is if they can actually reach it.

            So yes, without seeing some actual proof they can go to the moon, and that is seeing the evidence of their activities on the moon from the earth, it is not far away, if they start doing anything at all really on the moon, we will see the evidence from our telescopes on earth. So without any evidence we can only presume they are faking it.

            Of course now they say they can’t even send people to the moon any more, if we give NASA a few more trillions of dollars they might be able to send men to the moon by 2030…

            So sounds like a pack of liars to me.

            If they can do it then why don’t they prove it?

          • On the level

            One other point regarding Maps. There are no fully Accurate and consistent set of Maps and/or globes to claim otherwise is counterfactual nonsense. Entire land masses have been removed from maps almost always portrayed, discussed and described prior to the 16-17th centuries. Current globes and Maps virtually all greatly exagerate the size of some continents like North America and Greenland while shrinking others like South America, Africa and Australia. Map distortion is apparently real.

            Have a great day!

          • Flat Earth Facts

            Hi On the Level. Yes, of course, there is no way to accurately display continents which are on the surface of a globe on a flat piece of paper. So it is impossible to have a flat map of a globe that is not distorted. Everyone know that. That is what a projection means. When you project a globe onto a flat piece of paper the result has to be distorted. So everyone accepts that any map which is on a flat piece of paper can not truly represent the correct shapes of the continents and the correct distances.

            But, as we presume the earth is a globe, there should not be any distortions on the globes. So I think you can forget about complaining about the distortions on the flat maps, everyone know that. But I think you will find the projection of the continents on the globe is consistent with the actual measurements. If you want to prove something you have to try proving that the globe is not a true representation of reality as we experience it. I would be surprised if you can do this.

        • Jerry Paul

          When you say “few believe in the heliocentric model any more,” who exactly are you referring to? If when you say “few”, you mean that like only 95 plus % of educated people believe in the heliocentric model then you are correct, few believe it anymore. If you mean that few, like 5 %, actually believe in the heliocentric model then you would be incorrect. Maybe your contact with the world outside of the flat earth community is limited and because you associate primarily with conspiricy theorists, this is the reason your statistics on the percentage of people who accept heliocentrism is way off. I’m not sure where you get the idea that few people accept the sol centered solar system, but maybe you should research outside of your comfort zone a little and understand that we are all capable of confirmation bias and we are all guilty of the human flaw of only giving credit to information that agrees with our own existing world views. Most people fail to think deeply enough about the reasons we believe things, let alone what those beliefs are. If we all realized that most of us accept the first reasonable story we hear about some explanation, and few of us continue the process of reasoning out a problem all the way to the only conclusion possible, this leads to false beliefs being accepted over reality. Because this is a comfortable way to learn things, most people will not look any further for a more scientifically accurate model. This really holds a lot of people back from learning the real explanations to the questions we have. For most people , any answer, whether correct or not, is better than no answer at all.
          So my advice to you is to keep going in your reasoning when you have a question as to the reality of our planet and its shape, which is of course round. If however you simply cannot accept all the thousands of pictures, testimonials, and eyewitness accounts of humanities presence in space for the past 50 years, then you cannot trust your own judgement because if evidence means nothing to you then nothing will ever make sense.
          I have a hard time understanding why flat earthers refuse to accept the evidence we have about our presence in space and the shape of our planet. All I can see are some obscure references to NASA employees saying things like “we cannot go to the moon,” or “all pictures from space are fake,”. Who exactly are these NASA employees and when were these statements made? In order to believe these kinds of statements, we need to know who, what, where, when, and how. If flat earthers refuse to believe all the evidence put out there by people who work either in space or on space missions, then how do they explain their belief in obscure references to faking space exploration. Where does the faith in these unsubstantiated claims come from? What is the criteria flat earthers use when they accept certain claims and reject all the scientifically verifiable claims that any and all people can repeat, both in time and space. I’m sure it has a lot more to do with paranoia and the belief that everyone is trying to lie to them, then actually doing the research. because if someone thinks everyone is lying to them then that person has some serious mental issues. I would research the DSM 5 to pinpoint your exact disorder and then work on overcoming them. Peace out

          • On the level

            Really? 95% of educated people believe the sun is the center of the universe? That isn’t NASA’s view although Copernicus and Galileo proferred it. You clearly should increasing your exposure to science and history. The Heliocentric theory claimed the sun was the center of the entire universe not just the solar system. Prior to that claim the prevailing model was that the Earth was the center of the Universe, or Geocentrism. Tyco Brahe posited a Geocentric model in which the planets revolved around the sun, the sun and planets revolved around a globe Earth. Tyco Brahe kept extensive records of the stars and their motion that was later provided to his student Johan Kepler that claimed planets had elliptical orbits and such. In any case the theoretical claim of a solar system came after the Heliocentric theory.

            Since you appear to require extensive education I recommend you take your own advice, and allow others to pursue the facts unfiltered by thoretical speculation.

            Have a Great day!

          • On the level

            For clarity, my statement should have read:

            In any case the theoretical claim of a solar system as part of a larger galactic structure, and the sun only central to the Earth and a few planets, came after the Heliocentric theory.

          • On the level

            Jerry,

            Since you have trouble remembering my several posts where I provided names and links of NASA employees and their statements about the impossibility of Leaving low Earth orbit I Will provide one of them again to you now:

            http://www.americanmoon.org/NASA/index.htm

            Please note the statements of Dr. Kelly Smith, Dr. Kathleen Rubins and Col. Terry Virts.

            NASA officials make counterfactual and conflicting claims frequently, but when they tell you they cannot pursue a course of action now like leaving low Earth orbit, going to the moon, or operating in the Van Allen Radiation belt region you can take it to the bank they never have. No rational organization looses capababilities over time.

            As to questioning NASA and globist theoretical structures, please heed the words of Sir Arthur Conan Doyle:

            “Once you eliminate the impossible, whatever remains, no matter how improbable, must be the truth.”

            Arthur Conan Doyle

            IMO, if you eliminate impossible NASA claims, bogus theories and conjectures throughout history, our round level Earth becomes all the more obvious.

            Have a great day!

            ( correction re-write )

        • Jerry Paul

          Almost every single example on the level gives about NASA claiming we can’t get out of low earth orbit is taken out of context, obviously.

          • Flat Earth Facts

            It’s not Jerry Paul. It is not that we can’t get out of low-earth orbit, according to NASA. According to NASA we can send unmanned missions out of low-earth orbit but NASA clearly states that it is not possible to send people out of low-earth orbit because of the fatal radiation that one would have to pass through in the Van Allen belts. Without adequate shielding the astronauts would not survive, not that we can’t provide the adequate shielding, according to NASA, we could use a foot of lead shielding, for example, but there’s no way we could get such a heavy capsule with so much lead shielding up there into orbit…

            So NASA are working on trying to overcome a number of problems like this, and until they overcome these problems it will not be possible to send people beyond low-earth orbit.

            So if we can not do it now, then we could not do it also in the 1960s, therefore, even according to NASA, they 1960’s men on the moon story is fake. And surprisingly you can not find anyone in NASA to publicly support the idea they sent men to the moon in the 1960s, and privately, if you speak to the employees of NASA, as I have done on a number of times, they will admit quite openly that they are not sure if they really sent men to the moon or not in the 1960s.

            The problem is no matter where you start to investigate the Apollo mission story it seems so unlikely and you find so many contradictions, that taken together, it is absolutely certain that they did not send men to the moon in the 1960s. And real scientists, actual intelligent people who have studied it, they know it. Most of them in NASA either know they did not send men to the moon, or they are uncertain about it.

            So you will never see NASA defending themselves in this regard, because the NASA people themselves don’t believe in their “men on the moon” story…

      • On the level

        In the Middle Ages people believed that the earth was flat, for which they had at least the evidence of their senses: we believe it to be round, not because as many as 1 percent of us could give physical reasons for so quaint a belief, but because modern science has convinced us that nothing that is obvious is true, and that everything that is magical, improbable, extraordinary, gigantic, microscopic, heartless, or outrageous is scientific.”

        – George Bernard Shaw

        “Earth is a realm, it is not a planet. It is not an object, therefore, it has no edge. Earth would be more easily defined as a system environment. Earth is also a machine, it is a Tesla coil. The sun and moon are powered wirelessly with the electromagnetic field (the Aether). This field also suspends the celestial spheres with electo-magnetic levitation. Electromag levitation disproves gravity because the only force you need to counter is the electromagnetic force, not gravity. The stars are attached to the FIRMAMENT.”

        – Nikola Tesla

        • ON THE LEVEL

          The Nikola Tesla quote above is wrong, does not belong to him. Please ignore. Please find three quotes below that do reflect his views.

          ““Today’s scientists have substituted mathematics for experiments, and they wander off through equation after equation, and eventually build a structure which has no relation to reality.” ~Nikola Tesla

          “I hold that space cannot be curved, for the simple reason that it can have no properties. It might as well be said that God has properties. He has not, but only attributes and these are of our own making. Of properties we can only speak when dealing with matter filling the space. To say that in the presence of large bodies space becomes curved is equivalent to stating that something can act upon nothing. I, for one, refuse to subscribe to such a view.” ~Nikola Tesla

          “Though free to think and act, we are held together like the stars in the firmament, with ties inseparable. These ties cannot be seen, but we can feel them, each of us is only part of a whole.” ~Nikola Tesla

          “An unalterable rotational velocity thru all phases of planetary evolution is manifestly impossible. The truth is, the so-called “axial rotation” of the moon is a phenomenon deceptive alike to the eye and mind and devoid of physical meaning. The moon does rotate, not on its own, but about an axis passing thru the center of the earth, the true and only one.” ~Nikola Tesla

  5. On the level

    Nikola Tesla on Relatvity Theory ( conjecture )

    The theory of relativity is a mass of error and deceptive ideas violently opposed to the teachings of great men of science of the past and even to common sense … The theory, wraps all these errors and fallacies and clothes them in magnificent mathematical garb which fascinates, dazzles and makes people blind to the underlying errors. The theory is like a beggar clothed in purple whom ignorant people take for a king. Its exponents are very brilliant men, but they are metaphysicists rather than scientists. Not a single one of the relativity propositions has been proved.”

    – Nikola Tesla

    Gee! Who will tell NASA and all their followers?

    • tfr001

      >Not a single one of the relativity propositions has been proved.

      He was wrong then and is wrong now. If you believe this, you really haven’t been paying much attention.

  6. On the level

    Dont worry! Dan Petit at apparently claimed we ( NASA ) destroyed the technology we had to go to the moon! Even through according to other scientists we’re still developing the technology just to get through the Van Allen Radiation belts. Amazing really. Oh! And where did that telemetry data go? Apparently No evidence it still exists.

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

    NASA supporter’s credulit as boundless as they think space is.

  7. kris

    Yes I got a kick out of that , I saw it too. The guy seemed very please with his answer when he got done saying it. I saw that a while back . And then the other guy was saying that they are still trying to build something safe enough to be able to get humans through the Van Allen belt. I could of sworn that he mentioned electronics could also get fried at the same time.. lmao

  8. Jerry Paul

    Hello again Flat Earth Facts,
    You are absolutely correct when you suggest that they, whoever, NASA, Elon, the Indians, can prove to the world that man has been to the moon by placing some kind of light show that can be witnessed from earth. That would certainly prove we have been at least to the moon. This may sway your opinion as to mankinds capabilities in space but what about those individuals who will never be convinced? Those people would just say, “well so they placed lights on a balloon in front of the moon,” or, “so they put lights on the inside of the dome made of clear glass,” or some such nonsense. There are people who cannot, for whatever reason, put aside their egocentric self denial and admit that they were wrong no matter what proof is presented. There is the problem with those kinds of people who refuse to accept any kind of evidence no matter how solid it may be. For instance you yourself have a hard time believing that we sent men to the moon 50 years ago based on some obscure statements and other seemingly nonsensical evidence about NASA’s faking pictures of outer space. I have to admit if those things which make you question NASA’s sincerity about their abilities in the space science were the only evidence out there then I would question their truthfulness as well but there is so many more examples of the truthfulness of man kinds space experiance that, in my opinion, far, far out weighs any questionable issues with their sincerity. I mean there is just no possible way that a thing like NASA faking everything about our space missions could be accomplished. If, as you may believe, NASA is faking all these things, the problems that would arise just trying to accomplish something that outlandish would far outweigh any missions to the moon or the other planets in our solar system. It would create literally millions of issues that could never be solved. There would be millions of loose ends to tie up that no amount of cover up or organisation could even hope to accomplish. I don’t even want to start to go through all the problems that they would have to solve in order fake out every one. But just to name a couple of glaring examples, lets run through some. So they would have to get every person who ever worked for, with, or on any of a hundred missions that used rockets, telescopes, communications, robotic autonomous vehicles and or mans entire exsistance in space science to agree not to tell anyone about the fact that their entire careers were simply to fool the other half of humanity. They would have to get all the governments of every scientifically advance nation in the world to agree to lie to the other half of humanity. They would have millions of people working on projects that were never ment to work and they would have to spend litterally millions of man hours working out how to make these misaions work when they were really never planing on them needing to work in the first place. Many, many careers and the livlyhoods of millions of people would have to be for nothing because if it was all fake then why would they really need all these scientists to spend all their time figuring out all these hard problems of getting to and surviving space missions. They would have to convince all these people to simply waist their careers faking their careers. There is no way these kinds of things could ever be accomplished on such a scale as you would have me believe. That job is literally impossible to ever imagine let alone accomplish. That is simply an impossibility. What is possible however is that mankind is capable of these grand feats of science and we have accomplished the things we claim and we are a capable species and we can do those hard missions and we do work very hard trying to make them safe and possible and we do want to advance our abilities in the sciences and those who believe that they are faking it all and doing this impossible job of tying up the millions of loose ends have to really take a huge leap of faith that anyone could make the impossible happen. You would have to believe in a fantasy to believe anyone could make that happen. I mean how often do any two people completely agree on anything and not be competitive and make the impossible happen? And why would anyone spend 80 or so million dollars to convince a few conspiricy theorist that we have the capability to convince a few conspiracy theorist that we have been to the moon? In the grand scheme of things, flat earthers and their opinions are just about meaningless to the realities we face doing all of these great things in space and beyond. I foresee a future where humanity can expand outward to explore this grand and exciting universe we find ourselves in. Can you not imagine just for once that what we see up there really is wonderful and ready to be explored by mankind. Isn’t that more exciting than some paranoid dilusional ideology? Now I’m now speaking about anybody in particular when I say that so please don’t take anything I say that way, just my opinion. Thanks for listening.

    • Flat Earth Facts

      Jerry…

      You are very much in denial of the possibility that NASA faked the moon missions. However this is a VERY REAL possibility.

      So you are one of those people you are describing, one of those fanatical people that simply blindly and illogically believe in something no matter how many logical and factual proofs there may be contradicting your belief.

      So you, Jerry Paul, with you blind unshakable faith in NASA and their “men on the moon” story, you will blindly believe this story no matter what.

      However, there are reasonable people, and reasonable people expect to see some proof. If they say they went to the moon in the 1960s they should be able to go to the moon now. But now they can not even get out of low-earth orbit. Today NASA can not send people more than a couple of hundred miles up, that’s it, no more. So if it is not possible for NASA to get people out of low earth orbit today Jerry Paul, it was not possible for NASA to get people out of low earth orbit in the 1960s.

      It is not that just no one has gone back to the moon, no one has even left low earth orbit since the Apollo missions. BECAUSE IT IS NOT POSSIBLE at the moment…

      So it is you Jerry Paul who needs to take a long and throughtful look at your belief system and your blind fanatical baseless faith in NASA’s “men on the moon” story.

      As I have explained even the NASA employees today do not believe this story and I challenge you to find any official NASA scientist, etc, who is prepared to come out today and argue they sent men to the moon in the 1960s. They won’d do it, because they did not do it.

      And for you to not even consider this very very likely possibility, that means you are a fanatic exhibiting some paranoid delusional ideology…

  9. John J Crimsen

    The government has used all of its “NASA” money on everything but Space. Such a great cover up. Actually brilliant. Billions of dollars to move around the world and the people eat it up as truth. 100% flat earth .

Leave a Reply to Jerry Paul Cancel reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *