Flat Earthers

  • Christian Chat is a moderated online Christian community allowing Christians around the world to fellowship with each other in real time chat via webcam, voice, and text, with the Christian Chat app. You can also start or participate in a Bible-based discussion here in the Christian Chat Forums, where members can also share with each other their own videos, pictures, or favorite Christian music.

    If you are a Christian and need encouragement and fellowship, we're here for you! If you are not a Christian but interested in knowing more about Jesus our Lord, you're also welcome! Want to know what the Bible says, and how you can apply it to your life? Join us!

    To make new Christian friends now around the world, click here to join Christian Chat.
Feb 28, 2016
11,311
2,972
113
Christ's Love is like a sphere, it always comes bouncing back to us',
no matter how we try to scatter or miss-use it.
:):)
 

posthuman

Senior Member
Jul 31, 2013
36,818
13,183
113
There’s a night on the that moon.
it's night is in the wrong place??

something about the moon:
half the earth can see the moon at any given time.
everyone on the whole earth sees the same phase of the moon on any given night/day cycle, and it changes in a regular way.

look at those snowglobe models. try to imagine how to color in the lit side of the moon so that someone right under it sees it exactly the same way as someone on the opposite side of the map.. say i'm directly underneath it looking straight up, and i see a half moon. what does someone way to my left see? a half moon. what does someone way to my right see? the same half moon.
could someone draw that for me?
 
Dec 12, 2013
46,515
20,396
113
I
My brothers and sisters in Jesus Christ, every place in the world is given a latitude and longitude, in the lying system of latitude and longitude called the GPS; or Global Positioning System. That position is given it’s coordinates (latitude and longitude) because of how the exact same stars pass over them (latitude), and what time they pass over (longitude [in a sidereal day for the stars]). Solar noon for every place in the world, in the lying system of GPS, is the exact moment you can draw a perpendicular line through the course of the sun (through the actual middle of the sun); as it appears (it’s whole course line [from when it is first seen on the horizon, until it is last seen on the horizon], directly dividing it) in the sky above, to point to exactly where the geographical North Pole and geographical South Pole are from you.

The only problem with that, is that the sun rises and goes down above the world over the south; and then continues on through it’s chamber over the north (around 93 miles up while going over the north at the same speed and altitude [doing a perfect half circle while over the north]).

Which is as a bridegroom coming out of his chamber, and rejoiceth as a strong man to run a race. Psalms 19:5

You already know how looking toward the claimed south works in the claimed Southern Hemisphere; and how the stars continue to make a counterclockwise rotation above the world, as they are seen to go around the far side of the claimed Southern Hemisphere circle of stars (and are not really there, but only projected to be by the firmament [and are really going over the other side of the world, directly behind the observer at that moment]). If the sun did do a perfect circle above the world at all times, then everyone would be pointing to the same center of the world; called the geographical North Pole today, when drawing a perpendicular line through it’s course at solar noon and pointing toward the center of the world. But since the sun rises and therefore extends it’s course out over the south (and goes down and closes in that extended course back into making a perfect circle [only over the north]), that causes the dividing line drawn through the course of the sun at solar noon, not to point toward the claimed geographical North Pole for everyone in the world (and it definitely doesn’t point toward a [claimed] geographical South Pole because that doesn’t exist).

That is the reason the United States is not as wide as Australia, claimed east to claimed west; but Australia only has three time zones, while the continental United States has four. For most of the people in the continental United States, when they point toward the claimed geographical North Pole, they are mostly pointing in the correct direction (except for the claimed eastern [continental] United States that points slightly to the right, and the claimed western [continental] United States that points even less slightly to the left). Because of where Australia is and how the sun begins to rise (and extend it’s course) as it passes around 2/3 of the way past Australia, all of Australia is looking much further to the left of the direction of the claimed geographical North Pole when they think they are looking directly at it (than the United States looks to the right of it on the claimed east coast and slightly to the left of it on the claimed west coast).

So realize my brothers and sisters, every place in the world that is given their latitude and longitude, in the lying system of GPS, is just that – a lying system of a way to navigate, in a lying representation of God’s world. The world is not round. It is flat. Every place in the world is given their lying latitude and longitude as if they were over a globe world. That is the reason that direct flights from Houston, TX to anywhere in Australia go over Mexico; when a flight from Houston, TX to anywhere in Australia should not fly over Mexico at all.

It is the reason that direct flights from Perth to Sydney, Australia take much less time to fly than direct flights from Portland, OR to Boston, MA. The engines just work a little harder while on the flight from Perth to Sydney, than they do from Portland to Boston. Everything, from all of the pilot’s cockpit instruments, to your Smartphone that you have looking at your speedometer, are all plugged into the lying system of GPS that is constantly calculating what direction you should fly (telling you that you are flying a straight line when you are not); and how fast you are flying (when you are not flying that speed at all – only what the calculated speed is depending on where your position is at that moment – a position based on a lying position on a sphere). It is all lies.

For the greater deception, in the direct flights from Santiago, Chile to Sydney, Australia, and back, that could not possibly fly that fast to hide the deception, they fly to the claimed north of New Zealand, instead of to the claimed south of it on those flights. Looking at a video from Max Igan, you can see that on his direct flight from Santiago, Chile to Sydney, Australia, around ¾ of the way through his flight, while the onboard passenger monitor was showing that the plane was flying in a northwest direction, his personal magnetic compass was showing that the plane was flying in a west southwest direction. This proves that the plane was flying to the claimed north of New Zealand, instead of to the claimed south of it (where it should be flying if we were on a globe).
I have made 22 flights to Australia feom Texas..there are no direct flights from Houston....they all fly from Dallas/Fort Worth.....I know....19 of my 22 have been from Dallas
 
Dec 12, 2013
46,515
20,396
113
I

I have made 22 flights to Australia from Texas..there are no direct flights from Houston....they all fly from Dallas/Fort Worth.....I know....19 of my 22 have been from Dallas the other 3 from LA and SF.........unless United flies out of Houston.....or another airline I am not aware of....
Ran out of time and wanted add the bolded....
 

PennEd

Senior Member
Apr 22, 2013
13,049
8,728
113
No, now the shape of the pool of light defies optical physics and doesn't match what we know by direct observation about the distribution of daylight on the planet.

Look at this flat Earth map. Now envision a flight from Santiago Chile to Sydney Australia.

On a Globe, you wouldn't fly over any land except maybe a Pacific Island. But airlines aren't going to make nearly a double distance trip over the vast ocean. So they would partially fly over Peru, Central america, and maybe even Western USA. You could also calculate air speed with supposed distances on a globe vs. a flat Earth map.

Or, a boat would be even better, easier, and possibly have less deceptive results. Have you ever read about those stories where some dude spent MONTHS and a few cases well over a YEAR floating around the south Pacific lost? I know even a globe it's huge but it still defies logic to think they wouldn't hit land or see a passing vessel.

I for one would like to know. Not sure why it would be important, except to the extent that it is part of satan's great deception.

 

posthuman

Senior Member
Jul 31, 2013
36,818
13,183
113
Look at this flat Earth map. Now envision a flight from Santiago Chile to Sydney Australia.

On a Globe, you wouldn't fly over any land except maybe a Pacific Island. But airlines aren't going to make nearly a double distance trip over the vast ocean. So they would partially fly over Peru, Central america, and maybe even Western USA. You could also calculate air speed with supposed distances on a globe vs. a flat Earth map.
according to this discussion they don't fly over the Americas.
they fly over ocean and a bit of island chain.
 

PennEd

Senior Member
Apr 22, 2013
13,049
8,728
113
according to this discussion they don't fly over the Americas.
they fly over ocean and a bit of island chain.
VERY compelling evidence! Thanks for posting. Reading through the comments I did see some legitimate points made by the Flat earthers.

For some, it might be a doubting Thomas moment. "Unless I book the flight, and travel under 11 hrs, I will not believe".

Now for the fake moon landing! That one I AM onboard with. NASA itself admits we can't penetrate the Van Allen belts. Also, the fact that most of the Apollo astronauts are/were free masons, and a bunch of other evidence, I am convinced we did NOT land there.
 
S

Susanna

Guest
VERY compelling evidence! Thanks for posting. Reading through the comments I did see some legitimate points made by the Flat earthers.

For some, it might be a doubting Thomas moment. "Unless I book the flight, and travel under 11 hrs, I will not believe".

Now for the fake moon landing! That one I AM onboard with. NASA itself admits we can't penetrate the Van Allen belts. Also, the fact that most of the Apollo astronauts are/were free masons, and a bunch of other evidence, I am convinced we did NOT land there.
The Vice President says we have to get back to the moon as quickly as possible. Looks like he believes we’ve been to the moon.
 

PennEd

Senior Member
Apr 22, 2013
13,049
8,728
113
The Vice President says we have to get back to the moon as quickly as possible. Looks like he believes we’ve been to the moon.
Umm... I'm sure he does. Most do. What the heck does that have to do anything?
 

PennEd

Senior Member
Apr 22, 2013
13,049
8,728
113
I’m just a little surprised you don’t believe in it.

Well it's a fairly recent development for me.

I'm not obsessed with it at all. In fact I kinda stumbled across the defining evidence while researching the "nephillim". But it does shine a gigantic spotlight on the lies and deceit of what I thought were established historical facts. One of my earliest memories was being bored to tears at my Grandmas house watching the moon landing in 1969.

There is a LOT of evidence against the landing, but I'll just touch on the few that changed my mind.

The Van Allen Belts. These videos should give you an idea of what they are and how they are impenetrable for humans:

This Nasa Engineer admits that humans can't pass through. This distance from Earth is far nearer than the Moon. I also saw a vid of an Apollo astronaut fumble and bumble through a question given to him of how THEY went through the Van Allen Belts. He basically says, "Well we just figured it out". Others have said we have lost the knowledge of how to go there.

 

PennEd

Senior Member
Apr 22, 2013
13,049
8,728
113
We're also expected to believe that a few millimeters of glorified aluminum foil was sufficient to block the immense radiation the Astronauts would have endured on the moon.

Skip and just watch from 3:00 to 6:00 minutes:

 

PennEd

Senior Member
Apr 22, 2013
13,049
8,728
113

I mean Nasa has to say SOMETHING. It was THEIR representatives that said we can't get through, and did you watch the guy ridiculously saying that they forgot how they went to the moon!!?

Here's something else to chew on. Just like the Global Warming debacle, they keep moving the goal posts as to when we are going back. Mind you, it's been HALF a Century!
Bush in 2004:
President Bush Offers New Vision For NASA
01.14.04



President Bush has unveiled a new vision for space exploration, calling on NASA to "gain a new foothold on the moon and to prepare for new journeys to the worlds beyond our own."

In a speech at NASA Headquarters in Washington, D.C., the President said that the "new course for America's space program" would give NASA a new focus and clear objectives for the future.

"We do not know where this journey will end," said Bush, "yet we know this: Human beings are headed into the cosmos."

+ View Transcript of the President's Speech (PDF)
+Read White House Fact Sheet

The President's plan for steady human and robotic exploration is based on a series of goals.

First, he said, America will "finish what it started," completing the International Space Station by 2010. Research on the station will be focused on studying the long-term effects of space travel on humans, preparing for the longer journeys of the future. After the Station is complete, the Space Shuttle would be retired, after nearly 30 years of duty.

"We do not know where this journey will end, yet we know this: Human beings are headed into the cosmos."--President George W. Bush Second, the United States will begin developing a new manned exploration vehicle, called the Crew Exploration Vechicle (CEV). The first craft to explore beyond Earth orbit since the Apollo days, the spacecraft would be developed and tested by 2008 and conduct its first manned mission no later than 2014. Though its main purpose would be to leave Earth orbit, the vehicle would also ferry astronauts to and from the International Space Station after the shuttle is retired.

"Our third goal," Bush said, "is to return to the moon by 2020, as the launching point for missions beyond." He proposed sending robotic probes to the lunar surface by 2008, with a human mission as early as 2015, "with the goal of living and working there for increasingly extended periods of time."

Bush said lunar exploration could lead to new technologies or the harvesting of raw materials that might be turned into rocket fuel or breathable air.


"With the experience and knowledge gained on the moon," he said, "we will then be ready to take the next steps of space exploration: human missions to Mars and to worlds beyond."

The propsed funding for the new exploration initiative will total $12 billion over the next five years, with much of it coming from reallocation of $11 billion within NASA's current five-year budget. The president called on Congress to increase the agency's budget by roughly $1 billion spread over the next five years.

+ View Budget Chart (PDF)

The president also announced the formation of a commission, headed by former Secretary of the Air Force Pete Aldrich, to advise him on the implementation of the new vision.

Bush closed by acknowledging the sacrifices of fallen astronauts and looking to the future.

"We choose to explore space because doing so improves our lives and lifts our national spirit," Bush said. "So let us continue the journey."


This from the New York Times just a couple of weeks ago:
NASA Prioritizes Moon Landings Under Trump Budget Proposal
The agency would get $600 million for infrastructure and research in support of lunar missions, but astronauts won’t return until 2028 at the earliest.
THAT'S 2028!!!!

Do ya notice the goalposts keep moving back? Cmon! We're NOT stupid! Your'e tellin me, with 21st century technology, we can't do what we did BEFORE there were pocket calcualtors, 8 track tapes, cordless phones, or Disco!!!?

You can bet in a couple of yrs the goalposts will move again.
 
S

Susanna

Guest
Mr. Penned, those are just conspiracy theories, and rather bad ones as well.

Also, I think the interpretation of what #43 said is a little out of whack.

One of the reasons the authorities are being so hesitant about lunar missions today is the fact that we don’t accept the kind of risk that we fully accepted 45-50 years back. Today we want to reduce the risk to something near zero.

In 1969-1972, we just sent the astronauts to the moon hoping for the best. It’s like United Airlines should go back to using DC-9 instead of a modern aircraft. The chance of a crash would be increasing drastically, and most people would think twice before flying from Houston to Kansas City in a plane like that. Same goes for astronauts.
 

PennEd

Senior Member
Apr 22, 2013
13,049
8,728
113
Mr. Penned, those are just conspiracy theories, and rather bad ones as well.

Also, I think the interpretation of what #43 said is a little out of whack.

One of the reasons the authorities are being so hesitant about lunar missions today is the fact that we don’t accept the kind of risk that we fully accepted 45-50 years back. Today we want to reduce the risk to something near zero.

In 1969-1972, we just sent the astronauts to the moon hoping for the best. It’s like United Airlines should go back to using DC-9 instead of a modern aircraft. The chance of a crash would be increasing drastically, and most people would think twice before flying from Houston to Kansas City in a plane like that. Same goes for astronauts.

What was the conspiracy theory? I mean the evidence speaks for itself. Seems very open and shut. I agree it is a terribly hard pill to swallow when you think of the ramifications of such a massive lie. Nobody wants to think that what they already filed away as established fact is actually a lie. I get that. I would have thought it ridiculous as little as a year ago.

You of course will believe whatever you want to believe. This is settled in my mind. The flat Earth stuff doesn't have the evidence. That IS speculative. But it's just the fact of this massive NASA US Gov. moon fraud that gave me pause about just what else they are lying about.
 
S

Susanna

Guest
What was the conspiracy theory? I mean the evidence speaks for itself. Seems very open and shut. I agree it is a terribly hard pill to swallow when you think of the ramifications of such a massive lie. Nobody wants to think that what they already filed away as established fact is actually a lie. I get that. I would have thought it ridiculous as little as a year ago.

You of course will believe whatever you want to believe. This is settled in my mind. The flat Earth stuff doesn't have the evidence. That IS speculative. But it's just the fact of this massive NASA US Gov. moon fraud that gave me pause about just what else they are lying about.
A massive lie about the moon landing? And this secret kept for 50 years by literally an army of people?

That video you provided wasn’t convincing. Except from Don Pettit, no names were offered. No sources were offered. The excerpts from people talking about low orbit and the Van Allen belt did in not provide the evidence the narrator claimed.

I think you should be a little more critical to a random guy on the internet twisting what others have said in a different context. The scientific value of that video would never be approved by merited scientists. It’s no more than a scam. A hoax, in the moon landing skeptics own words.

You should ask yourself one question, why is it so important to them that the moon landing is a hoax?
 

tourist

Senior Member
Mar 13, 2014
41,459
16,374
113
69
Tennessee
A massive lie about the moon landing? And this secret kept for 50 years by literally an army of people?

That video you provided wasn’t convincing. Except from Don Pettit, no names were offered. No sources were offered. The excerpts from people talking about low orbit and the Van Allen belt did in not provide the evidence the narrator claimed.

I think you should be a little more critical to a random guy on the internet twisting what others have said in a different context. The scientific value of that video would never be approved by merited scientists. It’s no more than a scam. A hoax, in the moon landing skeptics own words.

You should ask yourself one question, why is it so important to them that the moon landing is a hoax?
There is evidence that the video in question was doctored and pieced together to make it appear convincing. I would certainly not put my faith that the moon landing was a hoax based on some hokey video. If a hoax was really perpetrated it would be impossible to keep it a secret due to the hundreds of people who would know the truth of the matter.