The Earth Is Not Flat

[Radagast]

That’s a nice shot!

Apollo 8. Old fashioned film tech.

 

[Jok]

Why would it be totally dark? The sun shines on a massive part of it all the time. All they would have to do is take a picture when the sun shines on it.

Photoshop would not ever be needed even when taking pics of the "dark side of the Earth".

I was just referring to those dead center and perfectly up close pics because they always seem to be the ones posted when people discuss this. But I understand now. And I was speed posting too lol, I probably should have never said pitch dark instead of having dark sections that need photoshopping

 

[ewq1938]

And I was speed posting too lol, I probably should have never said pitch dark instead of having dark sections that need photoshopping

Pics like that, if they exist, would not "need" photoshopping.

 

[TenthAveN]

Why lie about the earth being flat? What do we lose or gain if the earth is in fact flat? Why is sandwich meat round when the bread is square? Shouldn’t narwhals be called unicorn belugas?

 

[Jok]

Pics like that, if they exist, would not "need" photoshopping.

I was informed that those perfectly up close pics are composites. I thought they might have instead been very close satellite pics but that’s not the case.

 

[Peeteramid]

I wanted to create this topic since it came up in another one,.. now does this look flat to anybody?

Yes, the planet is not flat, however the cosmos is spatially flat, and might have the border around the Earth. Hereby the galaxies are red-shifted because they fly away from Earth, without the space expansion.
In such a model the Earth is true symmetric center of Universe. Look for yourself how Dr. Sabine Hossenfeld on YouTube talks about the possible absence of Dark Energy. The absence of Dark Energy points to this model.

 

[exitstageright]

Exactly and how could it spin if it was flat? Not to mention people and animals would be falling off the earth by now.

People,animals,and everything is held on to the Earth by gravity. The bigger the sphere, the more gravity it has. For example,the Earth is 6 times bigger than our moon. Our moon's gravity is 1/6 that of the Earth's. If someone on Earth weighs 100 pounds, one would weigh only 16 pounds,10 ounces on our moon.

 

[Radagast]

I was informed that those perfectly up close pics are composites. I thought they might have instead been very close satellite pics but that’s not the case.

Some of them are composites, some are satellite pics.

 

[Radagast]

In such a model the Earth is true symmetric center of Universe.

No, actually. The Universe has no such "centre."

 

[prodromos]

No. There are many photos of Earth from space, like this one, taken before Photoshop existed:

But people knew the Earth was that shape for 2400 years before NASA.

Another old fashioned film photo from Apollo 17

 

[Radagast]

For example,the Earth is 6 times bigger than our moon. Our moon's gravity is 1/6 that of the Earth's.

It doesn't work like that. Surface gravitational acceleration is planetary mass divided by radius squared.

Earth mass = 81 * Moon
Earth radius = 11/3 * Moon

81 / (11/3)^2 = 6 (roughly)

 

[prodromos]

Some of them are composites, some are satellite pics.

If it's cloud free, you can be pretty confident that it is a composite image.

 

[Radagast]

If it's cloud free, you can be pretty confident that it is a composite image.

True. The composite in the O.P. started with a cloud-free composite, but then some artistic clouds were added.

It's a little "too good," compared to the Apollo 17 photo, since there's no atmospheric haze, which means there's too much fine detail. Also the shallow water is too greenish.

 

[Jok]

Some of them are composites, some are satellite pics.

If they complain about the overly perfect composite pictures then fine, but I don’t know why they aren’t happy then with the more accurate pictures like your picture in post in 35

 

[Radagast]

If they complain about the overly perfect composite pictures then fine, but I don’t know why they aren’t happy then with the more accurate pictures like your picture in post in 35

Flat-earthers are not known for being logical.

 

[Strathos]

Lol I find that a little hard to believe that they would do that. XD If that's the case then they would do the same thing for the astronomers.

Every astronomer is in on the conspiracy. Even amateurs who just use a telescope in their backyard.

 

[Peeteramid]

No, actually. The Universe has no such "centre."

In fact, it has center but in an unpublished model.

 

[Radagast]

In fact, it has center but in an unpublished model.

In other words, the Universe does not have a centre.

We don't give "unpublished models" any credit here.

 

[Peeteramid]

We don't give "unpublished models" any credit here.

It goes against the Presumption of Innocence, which is "nobody is wrong until proven wrong."

 

[Radagast]

It goes against the Presumption of Innocence, which is "nobody is wrong until proven wrong."

Science has no "Presumption of Truth." Quite the opposite.

And the more dramatic your claim, the stronger your evidence has to be before we take notice.