GuerrillaPack said:

---

grantwolf said:

---

GuerrillaPack said:

---

As anyone should understand from basic physics, our atmosphere must have a container. A gas cannot maintain a pressure unless it is contained. And it is impossible for our atmosphere on earth to exist right next to a supposed "vacuum of space". If a gas is exposed to a vacuum, it would be sucked away. If the earth were a ball flying through space at hundreds of thousands (or millions) of miles per hour, the atmosphere would blow away or be sucked away by the vacuum of space.

---

Why don't you take 10 minutes out of your day to "research" why our atmosphere isn't "sucked out to space"? Your command of physics would make the NC State College of Engineering do a big ole' facepalm. You are Dunning-Krugering all over the place.

---

I've taken HUNDREDS of hours over approximately 10 years to research all of these things related to the "official" claims on cosmology - heliocentric theory, Big Bang theory, Apollo "moon landing" hoaxes, globe earth theory, flat earth argument, etc. I've seen the arguments from both sides. I've "internally debated" and thought about these things critically.

In contrast, I bet the average person who believes in the "official" view of cosmology has not spent even 20 minutes seriously considering any arguments that go against the "official" view. They have not thought about these orthodox theories and arguments critically, to any substantial degree. They have only unquestionably believed what they've been told to believe.

---

I know I haven't. :B

Oldsouljer said:

---

GuerrillaPack said:

---

grantwolf said:

---

GuerrillaPack said:

---

As anyone should understand from basic physics, our atmosphere must have a container. A gas cannot maintain a pressure unless it is contained. And it is impossible for our atmosphere on earth to exist right next to a supposed "vacuum of space". If a gas is exposed to a vacuum, it would be sucked away. If the earth were a ball flying through space at hundreds of thousands (or millions) of miles per hour, the atmosphere would blow away or be sucked away by the vacuum of space.

---

Why don't you take 10 minutes out of your day to "research" why our atmosphere isn't "sucked out to space"? Your command of physics would make the NC State College of Engineering do a big ole' facepalm. You are Dunning-Krugering all over the place.

---

I've taken HUNDREDS of hours over approximately 10 years to research all of these things related to the "official" claims on cosmology - heliocentric theory, Big Bang theory, Apollo "moon landing" hoaxes, globe earth theory, flat earth argument, etc. I've seen the arguments from both sides. I've "internally debated" and thought about these things critically.

In contrast, I bet the average person who believes in the "official" view of cosmology has not spent even 20 minutes seriously considering any arguments that go against the "official" view. They have not thought about these orthodox theories and arguments critically, to any substantial degree. They have only unquestionably believed what they've been told to believe.

---

I know I haven't. :B

---

Exactly. Thank you for verifying that.

And in life in general, it's impossible for any person to make a sound judgement about whether any particular argument is true or false if they haven't even really considered the arguments and the evidence for it. Myself included. And once a person actually looks at the evidence and truly considers opposing arguments, they may be very surprised to find that those arguments have merit.

I have a hard time believing you spent hours upon hours researching this, yet you think the "vacuum of space" is like a vacuum cleaner that sucks things away.

Oldsouljer said:

---

GuerrillaPack said:

---

grantwolf said:

---

GuerrillaPack said:

---

As anyone should understand from basic physics, our atmosphere must have a container. A gas cannot maintain a pressure unless it is contained. And it is impossible for our atmosphere on earth to exist right next to a supposed "vacuum of space". If a gas is exposed to a vacuum, it would be sucked away. If the earth were a ball flying through space at hundreds of thousands (or millions) of miles per hour, the atmosphere would blow away or be sucked away by the vacuum of space.

---

Why don't you take 10 minutes out of your day to "research" why our atmosphere isn't "sucked out to space"? Your command of physics would make the NC State College of Engineering do a big ole' facepalm. You are Dunning-Krugering all over the place.

---

I've taken HUNDREDS of hours over approximately 10 years to research all of these things related to the "official" claims on cosmology - heliocentric theory, Big Bang theory, Apollo "moon landing" hoaxes, globe earth theory, flat earth argument, etc. I've seen the arguments from both sides. I've "internally debated" and thought about these things critically.

In contrast, I bet the average person who believes in the "official" view of cosmology has not spent even 20 minutes seriously considering any arguments that go against the "official" view. They have not thought about these orthodox theories and arguments critically, to any substantial degree. They have only unquestionably believed what they've been told to believe.

---

I know I haven't. :B

---

Me neither. But when I hear a *good* argument, I'll seriously consider it.

Quick practical question: The transparent dome that holds in the atmosphere - how does it stay clean?

GuerrillaPack said:

---

Exactly. Thank you for verifying that.

And in life in general, it's impossible for any person to make a sound judgement about whether any particular argument is true or false if they haven't even really considered the arguments and the evidence for it. Myself included. And once a person actually looks at the evidence and truly considers opposing arguments, they may be very surprised to find that those arguments have merit.

---

Isn't that why we're debating on this thread? To hear other arguments for/against?

Only, when you present an argument, I debunk it.
When I present an argument, you ignore it....and start yelling about marxist globalists.

grantwolf said:

---

GuerrillaPack said:

---

Exactly. Thank you for verifying that.

And in life in general, it's impossible for any person to make a sound judgement about whether any particular argument is true or false if they haven't even really considered the arguments and the evidence for it. Myself included. And once a person actually looks at the evidence and truly considers opposing arguments, they may be very surprised to find that those arguments have merit.

---

Isn't that why we're debating on this thread? To hear other arguments for/against?

Only, when you present an argument, I debunk it.
When I present an argument, you ignore it....and start yelling about marxist globalists.

---

You haven't debunked anything. You just claim you have.

GuerrillaPack said:

---

grantwolf said:

---

GuerrillaPack said:

---

Exactly. Thank you for verifying that.

And in life in general, it's impossible for any person to make a sound judgement about whether any particular argument is true or false if they haven't even really considered the arguments and the evidence for it. Myself included. And once a person actually looks at the evidence and truly considers opposing arguments, they may be very surprised to find that those arguments have merit.

---

Isn't that why we're debating on this thread? To hear other arguments for/against?

Only, when you present an argument, I debunk it.
When I present an argument, you ignore it....and start yelling about marxist globalists.

---

You haven't debunked anything. You just claim you have.

---

Your root problem (and that of lots of conspiracy theorists) is confirmation bias. You believe the Earth is flat, so you seek our videos that claim to "prove" this. Unfortunately in almost every case, these videos are either ignorant of the science or are intentionally misleading.

In your myriad of examples of "you shouldn't be able to see so far!!!", never is it documented what the actual atmospheric conditions are, nor do they ever follow up with the same "experiment" in different conditions. Under the right circumstances, light will refract in a manner that allows the viewer to see beyond the horizon. In many examples, the conditions are actually newsworthy (like the news segment about seeing chicago from across lake michigan). If this was a normal phenomenon, it wouldn't be newsworthy.

This news channel did a pretty good piece on this:

Refraction

Here is an interesting perspective of the moon landing footage, as analyzed by FX gurus.

Watch and weep NASA fanboys...

https://instagr.am/p/C_LqXS7OFLI

GuerrillaPack said:

---

Watch and weep NASA fanboys...

https://instagr.am/p/C_LqXS7OFLI

---

You won't watch it, but here ya go.

SpaceX walk is going on right now. I'm hoping they can show the world as flat….

caryking said:

---

SpaceX walk is going on right now. I'm hoping they can show the world as flat….

---

Lol.. I just spit out my coffee