HOME | DD
MatthewProcella β Flat Earth Where is the Curvature?
#earth #flatearth #earthfromspace
Published: 2017-05-11 23:16:26 +0000 UTC; Views: 1693; Favourites: 4; Downloads: 0
Redirect to original
Description
Earth from space. No curve.ΒRelated content
Comments: 12
π: 0 β©: 0
I have a question: Is this a photograph? And if so, where is the original so I can check it out? If it's not a photograph - the caption underneath talks about digital art and drawings, not photography - then the point is moot because someone can paint whatever they wish.
If it is a photograph, is this the original, or was it manipulated in some way, such as with a "de-fisheye" filter, etc? The problem with the de-fisheye filters is that if you don't know the exact lens configuration of the original lens then your results will not be correct.
Also, is Matthew Procella also known as "ODDTV" or "ODD Reality"? If so, he is well known for "bending the truth" in order to support his viewpoint. For example, he made a video with various NASA clips trying to make the case that NASA has not been beyond low Earth orbit.
In it, one of the NASA narrators says something along the lines of "We have not been beyond low Earth orbit" [CUT!] and then goes on to the next video clip. I thought that sounded a bit strange, so I looked up the original video from NASA and, guess what? The original
narrator continued with "...in a generation", completely nullifying ODDTV's claim. Now, the question is, did ODDTV get that clip from another flat Earther without checking the source (BAD)? Or, did he himself make the cut KNOWING full well that he was lying (MUCH WORSE)?
In any case, ODDTV is not entirely genuine and may, in fact, be a phony flat Earther.
π: 0 β©: 0
Here is your curvature...
1. 2.bp.blogspot.com/-fF-nfrhMb_kβ¦
2.Β pbs.twimg.com/media/C0jvnAgUsAβ¦
3. c1.staticflickr.com/8/7267/699β¦
The first image was taken by Explorer II in 1935 at a height of 22,000 metres. The black straight line near the horizon is there to make the curve apparent.
The second is a series of photographs taken in 1946 using a German V2 Rocket, at a height of 160,000 metres. These are the first photographs taken from space.
The third is a photograph of the Lake Pontchartrain Transmission Lines. Notice how the distant towers disappear below the horizon? You could actually go their, and see it for yourself.
π: 0 β©: 0
You need to be higher... How about a nice look from the Moon?
π: 0 β©: 1
There are no legitimate photos of earth from the moon, all the ones that exist are composites or digital renderings.
π: 0 β©: 2
"There are no legitimate photos of earth from the moon, all the ones that exist are composites or digital renderings"
What criteria do you use to determine if one is "legitimate" or not?
Where is your evidence that ALL of the ones that exist are composites or digital renderings?
Do you know what a composite is? It is not CGI.
π: 0 β©: 1
A composite is a series of images, more or less stitched together either physically or digitally from several other images.
For example when satellites or high orbit planes go over the planet.
Legitimate in the sense that we are only shown what the cabal wants us to see.
π: 0 β©: 1
True, but flat Earthers make it sound like a composite is automatically "fake" BECAUSE it was stitched together by the computer.
Using this logic, ALL images taken by their own digital cameras and/or cell phones should be considered fake, since the red, green
and blue components are combined internally to produce the final image.
As far as trusting what the "cabal" wants us to see, anyone is completely free to send up their own high altitude balloons with their
own cameras, etc to see what can be seen up there. So far, nothing fishy has turned up in their photos. Or, if they have the know-how,
they can make their own rockets and takeΒ pictures from MUCH higher (The amateur rocketry altitude record is more than 72 miles).
Also, on the previous point, famous flat Earther Rob Skiba sent up his own high altitude balloon last year with two cameras on it: One
wide angle (fisheye) and one non-fisheye (by Rob's own description). He did this live. When the balloon reached its apex around
100,000 feet very obvious curvature could be seen from both cameras. Rob doesn't like to talk about this much...
π: 0 β©: 0
Oh yes! Because NASA had nigh infinite resources in the 60s! With some of the most brilliant Hollywood actors and computer and editing software 50 years ahead of its fucking time.Β
Saying that NASA faked the photos is like saying the Europeans in the 1200s knew what bacterial infections were.
π: 0 β©: 1
Won't argue with you.Β I have inside knowledge. As well as first hand family member who worked for NASA, discovered a great deal of alien technology being hidden as well as other lies.
He was dead within a month of a very aggressive cancer. You can choose to believe what ever you want. At the end of the day, does it really matter? We all die one of these days and will find out.
π: 0 β©: 1
Give me a goddamn break. If NASA had "alien" technology, why not use it? If I was in charge of NASA and suddenly found out that I had a fucking warp drive. Fuckin slap that shit right onto a rocket and see where it goes. Anyone would! Any form of alien technology would be a major discovery and would be newsworthy! NASA wouldn't hide it! They would use it!Β
I even doubtbthat NASA has alien technology considering thier budget is only ten billion dollars.
Also so why did you say he died from aggressive cancer? What you think NASA has "cancer beams"? Or some shit? Give me another break, if you do.
π: 0 β©: 1
Look, at the end of the day it does not matter if you believe anything I say or not.
It does not matter if the world is round, or flat, or made of cheese.
It does not matter if alien tech is real, which it is as I have seen and felt it first hand.
The only thing that matters at the end of the day, is if you are a good person,
who treats others as you wish to be treated.
And you have failed miserably at that so. There is really no point in talking to you at all.
π: 0 β©: 0