0
0

Is space real? (self.conspiracy)

smore-phine が 投稿

I need help here, r/conspiracy.
Remember the flat earth theory? Remember how (almost) everyone on the internet condemned this theory to fiery Oblivion, never to be spoken of again?
Well, I am one of those (fools) who decided the flat earth theory had some credibility. I mean, if you really think about it, there are some good points. If the Earth is curved, why are you able to see the Statue of Liberty from so far away, farther than what the curve would allow? Why is it that, no matter how high up you go, there is NEVER a curve? Why did a NASA worker confess to photo shopping the "blue-marble" photo of the earth? Why is Antarctica so heavily guarded, and why does every nation on the planet have a treaty to keep it that way? Why has every NASA astronaut that has been to space, ALSO been a high ranking Mason?
These questions have tortured me. And to make matters worse, I stumbled upon the findings of an independent research team. This team sent a craft into the atmosphere, in an attempt to see how high they could go. They found that as they left the atmosphere, flying farther and farther from the Earth's surface, radiation levels also grew. So essentially, this team discovered that the higher up you go, higher levels of radiation exist. If this were true, what would that mean for space travel? Do NASA's spacecrafts use some technology that prevents the radiation from seeping into the craft? Is such technology possible? Is spacetravel even possible??
I ask this in all seriousness. When I look up in the night sky, at all the stars and the moon, and all the glory, I am overtaken with images of beautiful, multicolored galaxies, red giants, black holes, FTL travel, human colonization, the f***ing Star Wars movies. I want all of this to be real, but my psychotic mind can't help but question it. I want to look at pictures from the Hubble Telescope and think "my goodness, I can't believe we discovered this!" instead of "what a pile of photoshopped garbage". So, will someone out there, PLEASE present me with some kind of evidence that space DOES exist, that there IS something out there for us to discover? I am beyond trusting anything NASA says, so none of that. What I'm looking for is discoveries of independently run research teams, discoveries that give credit to the "space frontier" ideology.

全 20 件のコメント
並べ替え:
ベスト
トップ新着論争中古い順Q&A

[–]Matthew-Ciuccio 1ポイント2ポイント  (4子コメント)

Once upon a time, I, Chuang Chou, dreamt I was a butterfly, fluttering hither and thither, to all intents and purposes a butterfly. I was conscious only of my happiness as a butterfly, unaware that I was Chou. Soon I awaked, and there I was, veritably myself again. Now I do not know whether I was then a man dreaming I was a butterfly, or whether I am now a butterfly, dreaming I am a man. Between a man and a butterfly there is necessarily a distinction. The transition is called the transformation of material things.

[–]TJTrailerjoe 2ポイント3ポイント  (2子コメント)

Well, if you go to the beach, gaze over the ocean, what is the reason you cant see land in the horizon if the earth is flat? Even if you brought your biggest telescope, you wouldn't be able to, because the earth is round. That's why when you see ships on the horizon, they will dissapear quickly after a certain length has been traveled, as they are now... well curving. If you want to see the curvature of earth yourself, it is possible to see it from hot air balloons, if you know of a place where you can lend one of those. Alternatively, go "sky-diving" with a parachute, go see the wonderful world we live on for yourself :D

And for the radiation stuff, well yea, we know there is radiation in space, and even with very little knowledge of science, you would know that most radiation is stopped by objects. Alpha is stopped by paper (alpha is the biggest of the radiation particles (and the most dangerous one), and is therefore stopped by very small objects), beta stopped by stuff like bricks or thick alluminium plates, and gamma is stopped by stuff like lead (gamma is also the least damaging type of radiation, and travels the furthest). Nasa knows there is radiation in space, and the spacesuits are made of a fabric that protects the wearer, much like people working in nuclear power-plants

[–]MitchMitchellisnotme 1ポイント2ポイント  (1子コメント)

I'm totally playing the devils advocate for the sake of OP's point of view. But real flat earthers will say that everything in your first paragraph is explainable by the law of perspective. There are plenty of videos that show a ship "sinking" below the horizon only to "reappear" once a telescope or some other optical zoom is applied. The last paragraph OP will surely just dismiss as evidence supplied by the lying Nazi's at NASA. Just saying.

[–]TJTrailerjoe [スコア非表示]  (0子コメント)

Yea, i had that feeling while typing it, but its ok, he can believe whatever he wants, its a free world :)

[–]luckinator 2ポイント3ポイント  (0子コメント)

Well, I am one of those (fools) who decided the flat earth theory had some credibility.

You sure are.

[–]MitchMitchellisnotme 0ポイント1ポイント  (0子コメント)

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=GhRiLP32qfs

I've seen everything this man has produced. Even though I don't believe the flat earth theory I think he is an amazing researcher and entertainer. By far the best flat earth theorist out there. He's the president of the International Flat Earth Research Society.

[–]emilskoda 0ポイント1ポイント  (1子コメント)

Eratosthenes determined that the earth was spherical 2200 years ago. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eratosthenes

As far as the nature of space goes, it's hard to say. NASA has lied so much to the world that sometimes it's hard to separate fact from fiction. I'm fairly confident we've never been through the Van Allen belt that surrounds the earth, though. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Van_Allen_radiation_belt

[–]JTRIG_trainee 0ポイント1ポイント  (0子コメント)

Nothing is real. And nothing to get hung about.

[–]Agenda2030 0ポイント1ポイント  (0子コメント)

We live in a dystopian sci-fi movie. Once you take the red pill you can't go back.

[–]zeuph 0ポイント1ポイント  (0子コメント)

The reason I don't quite like the theory is because there's so many people with a lower security clearance than the top people that could leak even a inch of significant evidence. Instead we don't see any. I can't think of any person with significant being an advocate of this theory. Maybe I'm asking for too much but it seems to me that this is far greater than what we can expect from a conspiracy. It just seems ridiculous to be able to keep a secret like this from the public for so many years without a inch of slightest evidence other than "why am I able to see beyond the curve?"

Then again, I am an advocate of the UFO-Conspiracy so maybe I'm being hypocritical saying it's far too great to hide away.

[–]i_LOSNAR_i 0ポイント1ポイント  (0子コメント)

To believe flat earth is to disbelieve our understanding of physics. I think I'll believe Newton, Einstein, and Hawking over some hole-filled theory or fantasy.

[–]factsnotfeelings -2ポイント-1ポイント  (3子コメント)

Have you heard of concave earth theory? It says that the earth IS curved, but it curves upwards not downwards.

[–]smore-phine[S] 0ポイント1ポイント  (2子コメント)

I am very interested in this theory. Any articles that come to mind for a starting point, or would my best bet be Google?

[–]factsnotfeelings 1ポイント2ポイント  (0子コメント)

I would recommend Concave Earth Treatise by Steven Christopher (aka Lord Steven Christ).

It gives an introduction to the evidence behind theory whilst mocking NASA and mainstream astronomy in general.

It is an entertaining and informative read.

[–]ChangeThroughTruth [スコア非表示]  (0子コメント)

Neither the official globe model nor the flat earth model work. The trick with flat earth is that it uses proofs against the official model as proofs of the new model, but this is a logical fail. Disproving one thing does not directly prove another.

The Concave Earth model does not suffer from the Southern problems that the flat earth model does.

A great resource for Concave Earth information with a forum: wildheretic.com

One of the key points to understand is that light does not travel straight through the atmosphere, but we interpret images assuming straight light. An experiment that shows light always bends upwards through the atmosphere: http://www.wildheretic.com/bendy-light-the-evidence/#Theodolites When we interpret our long range visual observations in this context we find that objects we see on the horizon straight in front of us must actually be above us.

"The Cellular Cosmogeny" (1922) Cyrus Teed - A book by an early proponent of the theory.

I have issues with behavior of the most visible proponent of concave earth theory, Steven Christopher. Given his actions, I think it is possible that he is playing a cointelpro type role in blackwashing this issue. But the credibility of a proponent of an idea has no direct bearing on the validity of that idea. Ideas stand separate from people.