Catch up on stories from the past week (and beyond) at the Slashdot story archive


Forgot your password?
Note: You can take 10% off all Slashdot Deals with coupon code "slashdot10off." ×

Comment Re:Jim Stone reports Hawking died years ago (Score 1) 165

"Skilled in the art" -- thank you sir! I don't think that myself, I just receive inputs from disparate sources and attempt to put them together into something coherent and usable. Nobody has survived as long as Hawking has, with the disease that he has. So, as they say, "extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence." From wikipedia and wikipedia:

The diagnosis of motor neurone disease came when Hawking was 21, in 1963. At the time, doctors gave him a life expectancy of two years.[38][39]

The average survival from onset to death is three to four years.[8] About 10% survive longer than 10 years.[4]

The evidence that Hawking is still alive is lacking, just as the evidence that the earth is a globe is lacking. And, apparently, intentionally ridiculous (the "SEX" in the clouds in the newest photo from a month ago; the perm sported on the space station (how did she spray, without everyone else coughing it up?); the bubbles seen rising in the Chinese "space walk" video; the "thunk" that can be heard as an Apollo astronaut tosses something and it hits the (completely turned off) lander, so the sound was picked up through the suit's microphone ... in vacuum ...; and many more instances of their intentionally showing us the fakery, not to mention The Shining).

While I used to find your signature amusing, I now understand that they (politicians) only act as imbeciles, while they rape the country and its resources. Look at Hillary's behavior, selling 18,000 documents to foreign powers, a true Bolshevik communist, and now all the media distractions keeping that story from the surface (the fake shooting in VA, "Cecil the lion", etc).

Comment Re:NASA needs more Antarctica defense money (Score -1, Troll) 77

It's not funny, and it's not a troll. It's Informative, but since there was a globe in the first classroom you ever entered, you've been programmed to dismiss this knowledge.

I sincerely apologize for the cognitive dissonance. It took me a bit to get through as well.

Comment Re:NASA should spend its money wisely (Score 1) 71

I realized I didn't answer your question. We can see things in the distance that should be obscured, if the curvature is accurate.

Thus, this tells me that the curvature equations are wrong. Occam's Razor thus tells me that through simple experimentation (as opposed to "trusting experts") I can see for myself that water is flat and level. Once I know that fact, I can deduce that people who promote the global Earth theory are lying, plain and simple, whether they know it or not. (Many of us are their "useful idiots"; until 2 months ago, I would have responded as you did as well.) It's possible that it's still curved, just it's much larger than they think, which would be the reason we can see so far -- but even that is still speculation, as through observation I can prove water to be level, but I can't prove it to curve, upwards or downwards.

My investigation proceeded from there. Antarctica is really bizarre. Flights don't go over it either, although on my globe, a string placed from southern South America to southern Australia shows that it would be the shortest distance, if the globe model were correct. But instead, they make stops in northern latitudes on their way. This makes sense on a flat Earth map, as the shortest distance from southern South America to southern Australia actually goes over the center of the map (the "North pole").

I believe you when you say you worked on a rocket. But, and this is a serious question: did you ride the rocket? Or did you only receive images on a screen? (Similarly, have you watched the 1977 movie Capricorn One, about faking a mission to Mars?)

Comment Re:NASA should spend its money wisely (Score 1) 71

Antarctica is the clincher, for me. Admiral Byrd reported in the late 50s that there were a ton of resources there -- coal, oil, uranium, in vast expanses of mountain ranges.

So, why was the Antarctica Treaty then signed a few years later, barring any non-military expeditions? And at the same time, the US and Russian began throwing nuclear bombs into the sky -- to test the strength of the firmament?

You would think, in the intervening 60 years, that Shell, Exxon, BP, et al would have rigs down there, pumping resources out in order to enrich themselves.

That they're not there, is telling.

Whenever something is "classified", one can know that a conspiracy is happening. The definition of conspiracy is two or more people acting, with one or more people not knowing. Surprise parties, and the mafia, are evidence of conspiracies. (They don't always have to be negative, e.g., surprise party.)

I don't have all the answers, but I am learning about the proper shape of the world and my place in it.

The recent Red Bull dive, from 120,000 feet, briefly showed a flat horizon in the quick image from inside the capsule. Then all the images from outside the capsule were with GoPro cameras with wide angle lenses; the horizon is sometimes concave, sometimes flat, and sometimes convex, so can't be used to determine the shape (unless run through a filter which fixed the wide angle).

The horizon always rises to eye (or camera) level, even from that brief shot inside the Red Bull capsule. If the Earth were a globe, one should need to look down at the Earth as one rises.

One can see Chicago from 50 miles across Lake Michigan. At 50 miles, based on the astronomers' calculations for the curvature, it should be 50 * 50 * 8 inches below the horizon, or 20,000 inches, which is 1,666 feet (the Mason astronomers love to put 666 in their calculations [1]), and the tallest building in Chicago is the Sears Tower, rising 1,451 feet, so even that building shouldn't be visible. But the entire skyline was, and was not hazy/wavy like a mirage would have been (that weatherman couldn't keep a straight face, he knew he was fibbing).

[1] -- The tilt of the Earth is 23.4 degrees, they said. Sounds innocuous, yes, until one subtracts the angle from 90 degrees -- then, one gets 66.6 degrees.

Comment Jim Stone reports Hawking died years ago (Score 1) 165

Jim Stone, freelance journalist, points out that Stephen Hawking died years ago, "on schedule" (e.g., from the disease that he had). (search for "Hawking").

Which raises the question, why are they perpetuating him? His voice has been used in many mainstream media projects in the past few years -- a Pink Floyd song, a Big Bang episode, some other song more recently, The Simpsons, etc. MSM is being used to perpetuate the lie, just as they're being used to perpetuate the lie that the Earth is a globe (well, now it's a pear, Neil DeGrass Tyson says, because we've figured out that there's more land in the south, which makes sense if you look at the UN flag, which is a map of the flat Earth -- so they keep changing what "science" says to fit their narrative, but how the heck did NASA get pictures of a round Earth!??! Especially one with "SEX" in the clouds, the recent photoshop disaster).

Comment NASA needs more Antarctica defense money (Score 0, Troll) 77

Spend 2% of the budget on CGI, then the rest goes to keeping us from finding out the boundaries of our existence. You do know that NASA is a military operation, right? NASA never went to the moon, or Mars, or anywhere else. It's all "wow" CGI effects. Winning the space race was one thing; they lied to the Russians in order to keep us from war, which saved lives. But in doing so, they lied to us as well. They need to come clean, and expose the flat earth conspiracy.

Comment NASA can't get to the moon, let alone "outside" (Score 1, Funny) 43

The Earth is provably flat; level water proves it. Moonlight makes things colder (it's warmer in moonlight's shadow), unlike sunlight, so it's not reflected sunlight. A lunar eclipse has been witnessed with the sun also in the sky; this is impossible if the Earth is a ball.

NASA has been proven to lie. Why trust liars? They employ graphic artists to "wow" us.

Look through the strongest telescope you can; the planets are a bright light. It's only through NASA's "you have no access" devices that we can see higher resolution paintings. (Did you know the Vatican's telescope is named Lucifer?)

The ISS "space walk" footage is performed in a pool in Texas; look carefully at the footage and you can see bubbles arising. There aren't bubbles in space. This woman "on the ISS" permed her hair so we can't see it move around from the turbulence in the "vomit comet" airplane, in which the footage is being filmed; you can hear the airplane engines during said footage.

See as well as Samuel Rowbotham's "Zetetic Astronomy":

Comment Re:NASA should spend its money wisely (Score 0) 71

To put your mind to rest: I am not trolling. I have the "blessing" of having many hours of time to study esoteric subjects, lately.

To answer your question: "Rahu" is a third disc in the sky; it's dark. It's what causes the eclipses; especially, the lunar eclipses, because there's no "ball Earth" that can put itself in between the sun and the moon, to cause the lunar eclipse. In addition, there have been several lunar eclipses recorded throughout recent history (e.g., past few hundred years) in which the eclipsed moon as well as the sun were visible in the sky, and this would not be possible because these three objects (sun, Earth, moon) would need to form a (new word to me) syzygy, or three points on a straight line. We would not be able to see both the sun and moon if they were in a syzygy with the Earth.

Here's an article on Rahu:

The IFERS (International Flat Earth Research Society) is a great resource for learning the truth: (However, avoid the "Flat Earth Society" which is full of disinfo, like the lead guy carrying around a rock saying "I was going over the edge, and this rock saved me!" Obama was correct -- we don't have time for a meeting of the "Flat Earth Society" because it's full of lies! It's amazing to me that he called out the increasing number of people who are learning about this truth and spreading it; it's almost like he wanted to help spread it!)

I have also read Samuel Rowbotham's "Zetetic Astronomy" which contains many experiments proving that water is level, not curved, and that the Earth is thus flat; you can read it in its entirety here:

Antarctica is also a really neat subject -- there are 52 countries which have signed the Antarctic Treaty, and they are using their citizens' resources to patrol the coast (which is huge, it's the outer circumference of the flat earth, the map of which the UN uses for their logo and flag!), to keep us from learning the truth. Similarly, nobody can go "up" except state agencies, which are also all in on it together.

Note the bubbles from the Chinese "space walk" -- proof that the "astronauts" are really swimming in a pool on Earth.

Thank you for asking. Mostly I get voted down. I used to be in the dark, and I hope I can help illuminate. Please, ask more questions -- I'm still learning myself, I was only exposed to this two months ago.

Comment Re:NASA should spend its money wisely (Score 2) 71

Outsourcing it to Hollywood would get even more bang for the buck. And would at least be more truthful.

NASA never made it to the moon. The moon is a semi-transparent disc; at times, one can see stars through the dark portion of the moon (e.g., when it's half, or when new). This would not be possible if the moon were a globe; hence, the moon is not a globe that we can visit.

In addition, moonlight has different properties than sunlight, proving that it's not "reflected sunlight". In sunlight, things are warmer than they are in the shade. In moonlight, it's actually warmer in the shade! You can test this in a couple days, the moon will be full. I did last full moon, and intent to again with this one, taking a video this time.

Comment Image a Slashdot... (Score 1) 113

Paraphrasing: Imagine how nerve-racking – terrifying, even – posting to Slashdot would be if it was immutable and irrevocable?

This is idiotic. Once you say something, it has been said. Thinking you can hide your output is ridiculous, and could only be hatched in the minds of liars.

"The fundamental principle of science, the definition almost, is this: the sole test of the validity of any idea is experiment." -- Richard P. Feynman