The Conspiracy Theory
Comments
-
crispybug2 wrote:crispybug2 wrote:crispybug2 wrote:For all 9/11 conspiracy theorists....
A f**king big plane slams into a building at 500 + mph
These buildings buckle at points adjacent to the impact point
What is so f**king difficult to understand about this?
C'mon Manc, over three pages ago and no answer.... You can do better than that!
And another three pages elapse...... Ho hum.
Anything?
Anything at all?0 -
That image is from the CNSA probe Chang'e 5 not NASA. I don't know if that makes a difference to you.
Regarding the ISS feed, at least 3 of the images aren't clear enough to see any land, I can see land in the top right one. The ISS is 400Km from the earth so to take meaningful pictures of the earth (almost 13000km in diameter, if it's round) without a wide angle lens is probably difficult. To see how the proportion works out, try taking a photo of a football from 70mm away and see how round it looks.0 -
So, if I have this correct, you are suggesting the iss feed is not real and they are computer images? Yes?
And, what, you thought they just forgot to put the land on it? I'd say along with the sea that'd be one of the first things they'd check.
You say all the images are too round? Do you remember how much difference there is around the equator than around the poles? Have you checked the photos to that level of accuracy?
You want to see the earth in high definition? It's pretty big so the only way to do this is to take lots of photos and stich them together, a bit like, oh I don't know.... A composite?
You asked why they are just a series of pictures and not a video? What exactly do you think a video is?
Do you watch the video I posted about how likely the moon landing actually happening was?
Can someone post a picture of Gillian Anderson on my behalf please?www.conjunctivitis.com - a site for sore eyes0 -
I thought he said he thought it was round but has been taking the side of a flat earther to prove a point.0
-
-
Manc, BBC4 right now. Learn something, or not...
BTW, I did the Google search as posted above for Manc33. Are you really in "education"? :shock:0 -
Chris Bass wrote:So, if I have this correct, you are suggesting the iss feed is not real and they are computer images? Yes?
No, I said that feed is filming the Earth, but from a high altitude as opposed to being out in space.Chris Bass wrote:You say all the images are too round? Do you remember how much difference there is around the equator than around the poles? Have you checked the photos to that level of accuracy?
It is enough of a bulge to see it with the naked eye.Chris Bass wrote:You want to see the earth in high definition? It's pretty big so the only way to do this is to take lots of photos and stich them together, a bit like, oh I don't know.... A composite?
Or they could just try zooming out, but they can't zoom out and get the full thing in one frame because they are only at a high altitude as opposed to really being out in space.Chris Bass wrote:You asked why they are just a series of pictures and not a video? What exactly do you think a video is?
Something that goes at least 25 frames per second.Chris Bass wrote:Do you watch the video I posted about how likely the moon landing actually happening was?
I have heard it all my life without ever once hearing the other side of it, or knowing there was another side of it and all this fakery going on.
Some balance would be nice instead of just "They wouldn't lie" and so on. That goes in one ear and out the other when I hear it, doesn't register. You're introducing an opinion to say they wouldn't do this or wouldn't do that. Enough fakery has been shown to be the case by now that it is basically a given that they are faking it.
I think if they could successfully fake it they would, NASA obtains way more money that way and the real kicker is, they can spend it on anything they want and claim things like $38M for a moon buggy. Imagine the money they must have left over! The moon buggy was probably built for less than the cost of a Ford Mustang (about $3,000).0 -
Manc33, if you know so much about the world that others don't shouldn't you be spending more time trying to spread the word in a better way? Rather than talking shite on here?0
-
Veronese68 wrote:Could you explain the difference between a series of pictures and video for me please?
A video would be 25 FPS or more.
If it was a six hour video (only a 25% turn of the Earth) thats more than half a million images.
This is why I held off asking for five videos and only asked for one, faking just one video would probably take years on end if it needed 540,000 images doing for it. Its the ever changing cloud formations. The officially released NASA video of Earth spinning (that is really old) shows cloud formations that do not change, which is why it is a flat out fraud.
You'll get a lot more sense out of other people about this than me, I am just telling you about what I have found.
Why aren't the clouds changing?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DrDm7uO4Fu0&t=2m35s
lol the first comment, a man after my own heart :oops: No, it isn't me. :roll:
Five hours of rotation and not one single cloud changes.
We're going to have to use mental gymnastics to explain it, something like: On this day only, all of the air was still for five hours across the entire globe and during those five hours, Galileo coincidentally filmed Earth. There, all explained.0 -
Why aren't the clouds changing?
Five hours of rotation and not one single cloud changes shape or moves.
Because its another firkin animation.0 -
Where's the land?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XG90YYHCSeA
They can't show any land because it would give the scale away.0 -
If you were right you'd be debunking it properly instead of picking out stuff that doesn't mean much.
No one answers "Where's the thousands of images of Earth from space?"
No one answers "Where's a video of the full Earth spinning in space?"
No one answers "Why aren't the cloud formations changing over 5 hours?"
No one answers "Why isn't there any land on the ISS footage?"
The answer to the last one is "It is filmed at a high altitude with a wide angle lens and only shows a portion of the Earth, which is always the ocean. Land cannot be shown because it would give away the scale and how close to Earth it is being filmed."
Guys, you've got nothing, that's why you get so excited if I make a small error somewhere.
"Haha he said gravity, bring everything into disrepute!"
While avoiding all of the above points or just fobbing me off with more fake images claiming those are real. They might be real to you because you desperately want them to be and believe they must be, but they aren't.
Too late, people are coming out exposing this stuff, like the artist guy that worked for NASA doing planet and moon paintings, he never needed to know anything insidious is happening, he will just get told its artwork or whatever, but he managed to figure it out.
On a "need to know" basis, pretty much anything can be done and is. When you'll be killed for speaking out about your involvement, its hardly surprising the people involved don't speak out, grow a brain! You're talking about something going back centuries. People used to say the same thing about the Mafia (it doesn't exist). Now, we know differently.
People not knowing this stuff don't bother me, how can they just magically know any of this stuff... its the people that get told all this stuff and carry on ignoring it I can't fathom, but whatever. The fact that nothing I have said has been debunked yet might give you some clue.0 -
Can someone please tell me (or even speculate on) what the actual purpose of this 'global conspiracy' is..??
I've asked Manc33, but he doesn't know.0 -
Manc33 wrote:No one answers "Where's the thousands of images of Earth from space?"
There are but you don't think they are real (without proof).Manc33 wrote:No one answers "Where's a video of the full Earth spinning in space?"
I think someone posted it, but you don't think it's real. At least this time you do mention why...Manc33 wrote:No one answers "Why aren't the cloud formations changing over 5 hours?"
Didn't look at it, but i'd assume the perspective of said clouds changes considerably as the earth moves through 1/4 of it's rotation. So how do you know they aren't moving?Manc33 wrote:No one answers "Why isn't there any land on the ISS footage?"
There is and, as i mentioned the ISS isn't actually that far from the earth. In terms of sclae it's the same as taking a photo of a size 5 football from 70mm away.Manc33 wrote:While avoiding all of the above points or just fobbing me off with more fake images claiming those are real.
And in return you are just claiming they are fake.
This is a pointless discussion, we provide evidence, you say it's all fake and provide zero evidence of this, then you wonder why we won't change our minds.0 -
Aye, enough already. Getting boring now.
Anyone else got any different and more entertaining theories which don't involve NASA, flat earth and such like bollix?0 -
orraloon wrote:Aye, enough already. Getting boring now.
Anyone else got any different and more entertaining theories which don't involve NASA, flat earth and such like bollix?
100% agree
Manc seems to agree the ISS feed is real but just not from as high as is claimed, so he must at least accept this as proof the earth is a sphere.
And if it is a sphere then this gets rid of his density theory, because people in the southern hemisphere don't fall off the earth.
so that clears up two of them.
The images are fake and other stuff, i've completely forgotten what the point of that was so maybe we can all agree to disagree on that one.
So whats next?www.conjunctivitis.com - a site for sore eyes0 -
Chris Bass wrote:So whats next?
I need to understand why 'they' might be doing all of this? And if the conspiracy really does go back hundreds of years, WTF is taking them so long?0 -
If the others are anything like Wanc33 it's because they keep talking sh!t about it but are too trouserless to actually do anything about it. :roll:Imposter wrote:And if the conspiracy really does go back hundreds of years, WTF is taking them so long?0 -
Does anyone here think NASA sometimes tells you its own images are composites?
Or is EVEN THAT not true?
Just how naive are you guys?
Is there anyone here that thinks even that isn't true, just because I said it?
Sometimes you don't even need a conspiracy theorist. You guys just flat out see what you want to see. Did NASA say some images are composites... must have missed it.
No, clouds don't just stay exactly the same like that. Asking me "How do you know" is a red herring. Go take a picture of some clouds, now take a picture in the exact same spot 5 hours later. The clouds won't match up and there it is.
Asking me "How do you know" is just an indication that whoever is saying that doesn't know, doesn't want to know, isn't interested, hasn't learnt much about the topic at hand... and they are always surprised just because somebody knows something they don't. We all have to snap out of that way of thinking, it can't help.
Yes there's other stuff going on in the world, but blaming me, laughing and so on doesn't change much, apart from to provide a bit of comfort for those not willing/able to think about it.
Its all coming out. The very least that could happen now is scientists start saying "Actually, forget all the conspiracy crap, where are those damn images of Earth from space?" and start a petition. NASA cannot at that stage continue to put out all these mock ups, cartoons, CGI, animations, composites, or call a slideshow a "video". We have seen all that stuff now and it is not up to scratch, we want genuine images. People are going to start demanding proper photographic images. All of this is going to happen whether I post here or not lol.
All I am doing is trying to give people a heads up so they aren't all shocked when this stuff becomes common knowledge.
There Ghandi goes again with another one of his conspiracy theories. :roll:
Yes, everything is a conspiracy theory! Nothing that goes wrong in the world could possibly be planned that way - everything untoward is a coincidence. Any corruption being highlighted is a conspiracy theory. Banks financially raping everyone? Conspiracy theory! Secret societies don't exist, how could one! The secretive members that swore an oath to die would just tell us. Kennedy wasn't killed because at least three separate groups of people wanted him killed, it was a nutter called Oswald, acting alone. NASA never fakes anything, you can't possibly fake stuff like that, I mean I have seen George Clooney and Sandra Bullock floating around in space, proving it can be done. Get out of that one.0 -
Manc33 wrote:Does anyone here think NASA sometimes tells you its own images are composites?
Or is EVEN THAT not true?
Just how naive are you guys?
Is there anyone here that thinks even that isn't true, just because I said it?
Sometimes you don't even need a conspiracy theorist. You guys just flat out see what you want to see. Did NASA say some images are composites... must have missed it.
No, clouds don't just stay exactly the same like that. Asking me "How do you know" is a red herring. Go take a picture of some clouds, now take a picture in the exact same spot 5 hours later. The clouds won't match up and there it is.
Asking me "How do you know" is just an indication that whoever is saying that doesn't know, doesn't want to know, isn't interested, hasn't learnt much about the topic at hand... and they are always surprised just because somebody knows something they don't. We all have to snap out of that way of thinking, it can't help.
Yes there's other stuff going on in the world, but blaming me, laughing and so on doesn't change much, apart from to provide a bit of comfort for those not willing/able to think about it.
So why is all this happening Manc? Why are we being lied to on such a monumental scale about things which don't actually matter to most people, one way or the other? Like I said before, if all this turned out to be a massive hoax, like you claim, then literally nothing would change. So why bother?
And don't say "you'd have to ask them". Cos nobody knows who the fck 'them' are...0 -
Manc33, do you know what composites are? if so, what is the issue?www.conjunctivitis.com - a site for sore eyes0
-
Pretty bored now manc you're just go round in circles seemingly not reading any posts and only answering things that you have some deranged illogical answer for. You might think we aren't able to think about these things or that we are naive but really i don't particularly care.0
-
We've covered this many times already. Composites are not necessarily fakes but you are too stupid to understand this. I didn't bother reading any more of your post because you're not worth it.Manc33 wrote:Does anyone here think NASA sometimes tells you its own images are composites?0 -
When did I say composites are fakes? Composites are only fakes when I am asking for a full complete image of the full Earth in the frame with black space all the way around it and instead I get something that is a composite. That doesn't mean "composites are fakes", you're just assuming I think that, which says something about you, not me.
It was more of a test to see what people come up with in terms of explaining any of it. I expected most people to say "That is odd now you've pointed it out, I never noticed that before" which is a normal response. Instead, people would rather choose to carry on defending something that they have just been shown is indefensible, a very strange reaction if I may say so and a study all of its own.0 -
Manc33 wrote:When did I say composites are fakes? Composites are only fakes when I am asking for a full complete image of the full Earth in the frame with black space all the way around it and instead I get something that is a composite. That doesn't mean "composites are fakes", you're just assuming I think that, which says something about you, not me.
It was more of a test to see what people come up with in terms of explaining any of it. I expected most people to say "That is odd now you've pointed it out, I never noticed that before" which is a normal response. Instead, people would rather choose to carry on defending something that they have just been shown is indefensible, a very strange reaction if I may say so and a study all of its own.
So - as I have asked repeatedly - any word on who is behind all this and why..??0 -
We must bow to your superior intelligence.0
-
Does this forum have a way of blocking certain peoples posts that you really couldn't give a t*ss about?0
-
Choose your certain person as a Foe in the user control panel.0
-
Manc - you're comparing yourself to Gandhi?0
-
0
