Flat Earthers- what to do with em

[Shuvi McTupya]

Super Slo Mo said:

Out of self interest I watched the clip. I don’t see anything untoward going on.

Television is my day job and all I saw in that film was some edited footage, with no proof of its provenance, that’s been cut together to tell a particular story.

It’s not proof of anything, I wouldn’t take it too seriously.

Thank you. that was one of my suggestions.

So, in your opinion it is Nasa footage that has been edited in an attempt to discredit Nasa.

To me, it definitely looks like a guy might look if he were on a harness , but i am happy to accept he might not be!

[Bright Halo]

I can always remember a friend of my dads who was well into his photography saying that the colour pictures the astronauts took on the lunar surface were incredibly good and how difficult that must have been even with their advanced Hassleblad cameras.
The focus, contrast and everything else was spot on.
All adjustments done manually whilst wearing very cumbersome gloves.
I heard that from him about 40years ago and then I read it in an article about two years ago by someone who thought the moon landings were real but the photography was all faked.

Strange world we live in.

[Bright Halo]

Anyway back to flat earthers.
I think I mentioned this before. Snipers making long shots have to take into account the rotation of the earth based on which direction they are shooting.
How can that be if the earth is flat?

[valiant]

TwigtheWonderkid said:

Much as I think moon landing deniers are complete idiots, I find it hard to believe that men brave enough to test and fly rockets would be greatly offended by these idiots. They're hardly snowflakes. I suspect the guy you spoke to, who was probably a bean counter or something, was greatly offended, but the blokes at the sharp end couldn't give two hoots about what a few morons think.

Didn't Buzz Aldrin lump someone who questioned whether the moon landings were fake or not?

It's the only answer really, punch the stupidity out of people...

[Streetrod]

Here is a quick one to stump a flat earther. If according to the flat earth model the sun circles over and around the plane, plus to them is only about 3000 miles up, why does the suns angular size not get smaller as it moves away from you then bigger as it comes back around?

If you do the math, standing on the equator the sun would be a less than a third of its size at its furthest point away as it would when it was over head at noon.

[LimaDelta]

Streetrod said:

Here is a quick one to stump a flat earther. If according to the flat earth model the sun circles over and around the plane, plus to them is only about 3000 miles up, why does the suns angular size not get smaller as it moves away from you then bigger as it comes back around?

If you do the math, standing on the equator the sun would be a less than a third of its size at its furthest point away as it would when it was over head at noon.

Don't come in here with all your science mumbo jumbo!

The Sun constantly expands and contracts to counteract that effect obvs.

[peter tdci]

Or how you can fly between Australia/New Zealand and Chile in around 12 hours and your route doesn't take you over the north pole. Similarly between Australia and South Africa.

[Eric Mc]

TwigtheWonderkid said:

Much as I think moon landing deniers are complete idiots, I find it hard to believe that men brave enough to test and fly rockets would be greatly offended by these idiots. They're hardly snowflakes. I suspect the guy you spoke to, who was probably a bean counter or something, was greatly offended, but the blokes at the sharp end couldn't give two hoots about what a few morons think.

Buzz Aldrin was offended enough to smack one in the gob. Buzz is no snowflake.

[MTech535]

Apparently it takes a lot longer but they knock the passengers out using gas and mess with the clocks.

[Eric Mc]

Bright Halo said:

I can always remember a friend of my dads who was well into his photography saying that the colour pictures the astronauts took on the lunar surface were incredibly good and how difficult that must have been even with their advanced Hassleblad cameras.
The focus, contrast and everything else was spot on.
All adjustments done manually whilst wearing very cumbersome gloves.
I heard that from him about 40years ago and then I read it in an article about two years ago by someone who thought the moon landings were real but the photography was all faked.

Strange world we live in.

There is tons of information available on all the cameras used in Apollo and how the astronauts were trained to use them. Nothing mysterious - just professionals trained to operate equipment efficiently and correctly.

[mickk]

MTech535 said:

Apparently it takes a lot longer but they knock the passengers out using gas and mess with the clocks.

Ah right, thanks that explains it and I thought they were all crazy!

[TooMany2cvs]

MTech535 said:

Apparently it takes a lot longer but they knock the passengers out using gas and mess with the clocks.

Is that the same anaesthetic gas that Bad People use to rob truck drivers, caravanners and motorhomers at French services?

(The one that the Royal College of Anaesthetists says doesn't exist, and would leave a long trail of dead people?)

[TwigtheWonderkid]

Eric Mc said:

TwigtheWonderkid said:

Much as I think moon landing deniers are complete idiots, I find it hard to believe that men brave enough to test and fly rockets would be greatly offended by these idiots. They're hardly snowflakes. I suspect the guy you spoke to, who was probably a bean counter or something, was greatly offended, but the blokes at the sharp end couldn't give two hoots about what a few morons think.

Buzz Aldrin was offended enough to smack one in the gob. Buzz is no snowflake.

Well he was daft if he did, it just makes it look as if the denier had touched a nerve. He would have been far better just to laugh at him.

I don't think hitting people who hold stupid opinions is a cool thing to do.

[Eric Mc]

It wasn't just because of what he said. It was the fact that he was physically trying to block Buzz and his wife from making their way out of the building. Buzz was actually worried that he was going to attack them both.

The guy (Bart Sibrel) tried to take Buzz to court for assault - but the prosecutor threw the allegations out..

From Wiki -

"As he was leaving the hotel, Sibrel was there requesting that he swear an oath on a Bible that he had walked on the Moon.
When Aldrin refused, Sibrel followed him and said "you're the one who said you walked on the moon when you didn't", and then called Aldrin "a coward, and a liar, and a thief". Aldrin, after asking Sibrel "will you get away from me?", reacted by punching Sibrel in the jaw, while being recorded by Sibrel's camera crew. Sibrel later attempted to use the tape to convince police and prosecutors that he was the victim of an assault. However, it was decided that Aldrin had been provoked and no charges were filed. Many talk shows aired the clip, usually siding with Aldrin's response. Sibrel said later that he wrote a letter of apology to Aldrin for speaking to him harshly".

[TooMany2cvs]

And here's the Aldrin punch clip...
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=k5hQjMTBfQs

st music kicks in just before the actual punch, but a lot of the dialogue in the run-up is perfectly clear before it does. Sibrel is clearly the antagonist.

[Bright Halo]

Nice punch!

[James_B]

Shuvi McTupya said:

So when you watch that clip, you see a guy just naturally floating in zero gravity, and don't notice that his body position suggests he is suspended and he has leg supports and something sticking up from his belt, that looks very much like it would do if it were supporting his weight?

Fair enough.

Yes. You are looking at something in free-fall and applying heuristics from what you see here on Earth. You are hunting for anomalies based on your everyday experience, but forgetting that things act so very differently in free fall. I do not see any problem at all.

I think it’d be worth your reading up on science a bit more before expressing doubts, by the way. Gravity in the ISS is not zero, it is pretty much the same as on Earth. It’s maybe the lack of science education that makes you doubt what is possible.

[James_B]

Shuvi McTupya said:

Someone posts this every time any one questions anything.

Is that not very much like saying that if you believe in one god, then it follows that you must believe in ALL gods?

As it happens though you are right in this case, I don't believe the 'magic bullet' theory when it comes to JFK.

And yes, i do have questions about some of the events of 9/11 but i don't deny it happened

No, it’s not like that. We see that most religious people believe in only their religion’s god or gods but that conspiracy theorists tend to believe in a great many.

The only interesting thing about conspiracy theorists is the aberrant psychology that leads people to these clusters of belief. It looks likely to be a problem with their agency detection. Agency detection is very important, but if it’s overactive then they see agency where there is none.

As in your case, it leads to people who believe in one conspiracy believing several. What else do you have these thoughts about? Chemtrails, pan-world government or the like, or are the three that you mentioned the only ones?

[TwigtheWonderkid]

Eric Mc said:

It wasn't just because of what he said. It was the fact that he was physically trying to block Buzz and his wife from making their way out of the building. Buzz was actually worried that he was going to attack them both.

Well that's a different matter. Aldrin didn't punch him because he was deeply offended by the plonkers idiotic opinions (as was suggested), he punched him because he feared for his and his wife's safety.

[James_B]

Eric Mc said:

Lunatics do make the world interesting - but education, knowledge and acknowledgement of facts makes it FAR more interesting.

I’ve enjoyed Sachs’ books on the strange things that the brain does when it is not working properly. The man who mistook his wife for a hat has fascinating case studies in it, and I think that conspiracy theorists show similar unusual cognitive patterns.

Edited to add the first article I found on the subject,

https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/...

Edited by James_B on Sunday 5th August 20:12