What are /r/globeskepticism's favorite Products & Services?

From 3.5 billion Reddit comments

The medium always affects the effects of gravity, whether the medium is air or water.

How Does Gravity Work in Water?

So yes, density, buoyancy, and displacement are all at work, in relationship with gravity.

Gravity is what tells the denser substances which way is down, and the more buoyant substance which way is up.

For example, in zero-g, none of the substances knows which way to go. Gravity is the force which organizes everything so that the most dense substance is on the bottom. Gravity is what determines which way is the bottom.

He's the creator of the Flat Earth Sun, Moon & Zodiac Clock App. (Apple App Store / Google Play Store)

Just the playlists of videos on that app alone makes the app entirely worth it. Youtube, Google, and even Duckduckgo will not show you those videos. If you want to understand the truth of the earth, not just the shape of it, but the history of it, this app is essential.

The Catholic Church is the religion of nimrod. Not of God. The body of Christ is spiritually organized by the Holy Spirit and not of men. Nimrod sought to kill Abraham at his north as it was revealed to him that he would carry on after Noah the people of God and stand against Nimrods authority. There is a long well documented history on all of this. Nature is proof. Whereas the earth is flat and the scriptures told us of this from the beginning at the dawn of man even then these things were less evident then as they are now. The 66 books of the Bible are less than what they really should be there are about 90 some with even more evidences. This book I own and have read puts it into great detail https://www.amazon.com/Like-Clay-Under-Seal-1/dp/1543987516

Here is a video of the writer of the book giving an 11 minute focused explanation of the Bible’s position https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=7Lzg3zF_qmc

>it's physically impossible to get a picture of the center of the earth

Ah, so physical possibility is a requirement to photograph something?

>Second, every picture in that article you can clearly see the curvature.

Hey, remember when you posted a picture that was actually an artist composite because you thought it was real? Boy, did you look like a pawn. Here, please watch this educational video on what could be causing you to say "you can clearly see the curvature."

You were wrong about an image that was actually an artist's rendition, and now you're wrong about these photos showing the curve. It's almost like I baited you. Oh gasp and gee wiz!

Ah, thank you!

I'm checking their stated math from the experiment and there are things that don't add up. They say the radio transceivers are only 1 meter from the water level, but you can tell they're clearly higher up (unless everyone in that video is only 4 feet tall). According to this online earth curvature calculator, at 1m from the water level and a distance of 14km, there should be 8.5m obscured by the horizon, not 3.84 as the video states. Why the discrepancies?

Since they mentioned the Fresnel zone in the conclusion, I used another calculator to find the Fresnel Zone for directional wifi antennas, and the Fresnel Zone for 14km at 5GHz has a radius of 15 meters. It's possible they were using a higher frequency, which would make the Fresnel Zone smaller. But as far as I could tell they're using standard wifi transmitters and connecting to the other computer via IP (since that's what ping uses).

I'll try and check out the other video this evening.

another view

One of the issues I'd like to get across is that I cannot in good conscience trust anything that comes from these space agencies. The Apollo missions were a FARCE.

We can see Buzz, Neil, and Collins faking being halfway to the moon by placing cutouts over the window to give the appearance of a distant ball Earth when in reality they're lower than the claimed distance of the ISS.

Plus about a hundred other things, so if they could do what they say, why would they ever need to fake anything?

Ok, prove me wrong. Here is an ISS tracker, here is a pair of binoculars that's only $60 right now. Take a picture of this drone or balloon or whatever you claim is flying over my head that I see when I look up in the sky.

>He says we're deceived into believing that we see through euclidean planar eyes. But he's wrong in that claim. The entire study of perspective is specifically geared towards how the spherical eyes take in the angles of a 3D world around them.

...

>perspective is all about how the spherical or angular eye takes in 3D space.

A. The study of perspective is the transposing the 3D world onto a 2D plane, like a canvas.

B. The canvas is planar.

C. The process of drawing perspective is euclidean.

D. Therefore, if you believe this is the correct way a spherical eye sees and it isn't the correct way a spherical eye sees, then you have been "deceived into believing that we see through euclidean planar eyes."

the curve of a sphere (earth in this case) can't be 8" per mile squared. plug that equation into a graphing calculator, you'll get a parabola, not a circle.

Here's a link to an online graphing calculator so you can see for yourself.

The Sun is far closer and smaller than the bogus assumptions of the proposed heliocentric model.

There is a limit to the extent of the light from the area around it, so as it circles above some areas are illuminated and others are not.

You can get a cheap app that portrays a possible way it'd operate: this