wolfy

Nahh, it doesn't. Nobody has seen the globe of Earth because Earth isn't a globe. People have seen pictures depicting so called blue marble globe and when pressed on it, have said it's composites. Stitched together pictures. The ball is in your court. Let me know when it's all set up. First of all, I'd like to see someone go up physically before I get sent up. You know...just so I can be sure that humans get on these so called space rockets. Maybe I'll have to stand back about 10 miles before viewing it all.

Yeah. It doesn't go anywhere near proving anything about gravity and oceans on a supposed spinning Earth globe. No. I can't take you there no more than you can show me a globe and what not.

Maybe they are scared of close encountering a turd kind. You just never know.

Warped space time in this space vacuum we're told about. You can warp space right here. We do it every time we move as does every object that's part of the atmosphere. So space is like a blanket with a sun in and the Earth and all other so called planets just falling around the big indentation of the blanket and just play the wall of death. So why is this blanket just indented on one area and not all around this so called sun? They are using fictional space to explain what's really happening. A ball in atmosphere would push away the atmosphere it is in and that atmosphere that has been pushed aside would be pushing right back onto the ball. For every action there is an equal and opposite reaction. If mass attracted mass like we were told then a huge iron ball would attract speck sized matter to it. A mountain would simply attract grains of dust to it. Gravity cannot be explained as a force because it is simply made up to hide the reality of atmospheric pressure upon any dense object.

We are threatened daily with rogue asteroids and all kinds of crap like that. We never get hit by anything other than a turd from a plane, or a stray tyre flung stone from a motorway. Every time a supposed meteorite heads for Earth it manages to land somewhere in the back end of Russia or Antarctica, etc. If it's a falling so called satellite, it falls in the Australian outback. If I was going to fill people full of flange, then I'd make up the same stuff, because nobody can prove it. Just like the ISS actornauts back into the so called re-entry capsules after binning what appeared like a very comfortable shuttle, in order for them to land in the back of beyond in places like Kazakhstan. Landing by parachute but jettisoning a supposed heat plate before an arresting explosion takes place to ensure they don't land with a crunch. It begs questioning and can literally be seen for the nonsense that it is, as far as I'm concerned.

Fine if you believe you've proved it. I disagree that you've proved anything at all about Earth. You can call it arrogance or you can call it a case of me not seeing any real proof other than a basic theory that is cast out as a truth. Possibly close to the start of the elevation of it and not being able to venture further...maybe. I'm not saying it orbits any dome. I said it goes under the dome by reflection on the inner dome. You keep telling me that the globe has been proven and yet I've never seen any real proof of a globe other than nonsensical stitched together supposed photos of a ball in space and theories that explain more fantasy than reality. The issue is, it's officially put out so if we are told unicorns live on what they tell us is. mars and show us what we all assume a unicorn looks like, most people would actually argue the case for it. Let's be honest. Many swallowed landing a rover on mars by parachute and them thrusters and then they tell us that mars is close to vacuum conditions with extreme minute atmosphere. And yet they take the complete piss out of us by showing a parachute deploying to arrest a supposed fall. Then they show us massive dust clouds on this near vacuum. You see....one fantasy gets a little over the top and they have to back track and try and rescue the nonsense by using more nonsense. They do it with all this crap space idiocy.

I'm not talking about blasting off into your space. I'm talking about a good old friction blasting from a super 650 mph up to over 1000 mph, allegedly...wind. Atmospheric pressure keeps us pushed/squeezed to the Earth, not fictional gravity. Considering the Earth is a massive place and considering that we literally cannot see that far, never mind getting close enough to see where a sun comes from. However, remnants of where the energy comes from can be seen by what's known as the northern lights.

I said it moves over the dome as a reflection. Yep but you cannot leave your atmosphere behind, other wise we'd all have our bodies air blasted into oblivion at the speeds the Earth supposedly spins. Either way it's illogical, so there has to be another real explanation for it.

It's not a case of me knowing better. What do these people know and how did they managed to come to this decision for it to be relevant to this very day? So what proof's are there that we can all verify as a definitive truth? Nobody wants to accept that water is flat and level, even though we actually use it to level things. They would rather accept that it simply clings to a spinning ball when logic should tell people how nonsensical that is. But....enter Newton and all the old supposed genius scientists that just knew what was what with the crap tools they had. That's down to each persons thoughts on it. I don't believe in the space they tell us about. Does it get colder going towards what we are told is, Antarctica? All horizons are your personal viewpoint. the vanishing point of land and sky or sea and sky or whatever. You see a sun passing from east to west. You could see this all around a circle at anytime the sun reaches that point. Naturally you won't have that because you believe you're on a ball. Lot's of things can be explained. Proving them is a tad more difficult.

Basically if something is in the distance and you cannot see it from sea level, then climbing a height will bring it into focus due to less dense atmosphere allowing you to get that object reflected light to your eyes. The sun is no different. Brian Cox messed up when he took a ride is a jet and commented on the jet catching up with the Earth's supposed rotation and actually stopping the sun in it's tracks due to this supposed 650 mph flight supposedly rendering the Earth spin as stationary to the pilot and him. And yet we are told that the Atmosphere drags everything along. All Cox had done was actually catch up to the suns movement over the Earth and followed it at a precise movement. What does this tell us? At best...assuming the 650 mph jet speed was legit, then it shows us that the sun is inside Earth and also moving at 650 mph over it.

What proof do they have? Why don't you accept what has been proven and scrutinised for centuries, ahead of theories you're literally making up? What experiments are these that p[rove what you're saying? I don't know how close, I haven't been towards it to know how close we can get. And yes you would be able to measure a drop in temperature if you ventured towards it. The issue is in actually doing that. You see a movement under a dome, either higher or lower. Blow up a balloon. Place a balloon under water and push it down. Lots of things show us we are being squeezed. Breathe in and ask yourself how you can't hold your breath. Lack of oxygen or expansion of your chest against atmospheric squeeze back. Every action produces an equal and opposite reaction.

I've got no reason to wind anyone up on an internet forum. hat depends on what you believe is rational and irrational. You think a space sun and a spinning globe that we walk about on is rational? Of course you will do but why? What I'm saying may be irrational to people but so is lots of stuff if people have a mindset to dismiss it in favour of another. We all have choices and we all see good bad and indifferent in everything, including theories. Most people genuinely have no clue what's what. Most people just go with the flow for no real reason otehr than to simply follow mass opinion. We all do it in all walks of life. If you are moving over Earth then you will eventually move in or out of visible light, especially if you're in a plane, because you observe light much clearer from higher up due to less dense atmosphere.

I can equally say that about the official line. No problem. Show me some physical proofs that you know guarantee what we've been officially told about what we are talking about. Agreed. I'm one person putting together a very large jigsaw, piece by piece. I don't profess to have all the answers but equally I also will not accept that mainstream science does, so at the very least I'll counteract it, whether it's deemed right or wrong by people who just simply tell me what I'm supposed to basically follow, which is what mainstream official science is pushing. There is no edge. It's a dome on a foundation of denser ice and denser mass of Earth it stands upon. To go towards it would shut down any organism due to lack of agitated atmosphere, due to the suns energy from the centre not reaching out that far. Hence the frozen dome. You've seen what liquid nitrogen can do to metals and such. Imagine what it would be like as you ventured outwards of the circle. Not to mention you would be elevating as you moved towards the outer as the dome builds from within. Just look outside and you'll see it quite clearly if you can cast aside the global mindset. We are being squeezed by it. Place a window clamp to a window and ask yourself why that clamp stays on the window.

Lots of stuff but I'll leave those for another time.

So what exactly are you looking for that pertains to this?

Depends what you're looking for.

Ok, fair enough.

So basically you're saying it doesn't exist?

What exactly is a mental illness?

That's fair enough on your part. You're quite entitled to your own opinion on that.

You're quite entitled to do that.

Share them with me if you want to and I'll try my utmost to aid you in your thought process.

What is a good conspiracy theorist and what is a bad one? How is that determined?

Are you telling me I should accept it if I don't?

Can you imagine people who absolutely hate football in every way, shape or form, can think of people who follow it as almost like a religion? You see, it all depends on how something is viewed by any individual as a start and especially more intensely when a mass build up of people become involved. To us, it's exciting and we can talk about how skilful so and so is and what a goal so and so scored. People will go with a piece of paper and get a scribbled signature from a player. People will cry when their team loses or get blathered in the pub in a merry stupor when they win. Some will actually go and beat up another person who wears a different coloured shirt. Many will come onto forums and try and obliterate (word wise) any opposing person who stands by a different team. We all spend a lot of time debating all kinds of topics on one team and all players and yet we think its normal. Other people will think we are basically animalistic goons or unintelligent freaks. We can apply that to any sport or any pop music band or anything that people find interesting, that does not register as sane to a person who does not follow idolising, what they would deem as, nonsensical irrelevance. Some people can't fathom why people question official lines and call them conspiracy nuts.# Some people find it extremely interesting because they have suspicions about many things told to us officially. Many people brush off tabloid news as garbage or TV news as jumped up nonsense in part and others will follow it to the letter as 100% legitimate. I went a long way around simply saying that we are all different and by mass coaxing we can all be turned into pack animals.