What is Evangelism?

@TheCobbler,

We supposedly have this many quoted, yes.

Answer a quick question for me. Why do these satellites have to be in space? It is more practical to repair a satellite in a subspace flight orbit than it is to initiate a space flight just to go up and repair 6,542 satellites, all of which have decayed over time from swinging around the Earth. It is also more economical to have a blimp or other object with a long flight duration send out "satellite" signals to facilitate WIFI of one sort or another.

https://aplanetruth.info/2015/11/24/satellites-dont-exist/

Quote:

Why don’t we use satellite communication instead:
1. Satellites aren’t used because they can’t carry terabytes of data for less than a billion dollars per communication line.
(This should be stupidly obvious to anyone actually educated. You have to send a manned space flight, and drop a satellite up there. It is far easier task to fly up in a plane, and set up an industrial-grade or military-grade drone to take pictures)
2. The bandwidth available using a single fiber optic cable and a laser beam is much much greater than you can get from a single satellite radio channel. This is due to the higher frequency and shorter wavelength of light compared to microwaves. The higher the frequency, the greater the bandwidth.
(Or to put it more simply, you need to fly a further distance, the radio waves are less reliable from a distance, than they are zapped up close)
3. An undersea cable is a bundle many fiber optic cables. Consider each fiber cable as a channel. You can have more channels, each with a higher capacity, than you can build radio channels into a satellite.
4. The uplinks and downlinks cost and putting the satellite in space is a huge huge ask and far more risky.
5. The delay for satellite communications would be around 255ms both uplink and downlink. For continuous traffic this not to a bad price to pay. But for burst traffic (like voice) you pay for the delay at each pause. The Rule of Thumb is 10MS per 1000 miles so Rule of Thumb to Europe on say TAT-8 would be about 75MS vs 510MS for satellite.
(See #2. It simply is not efficient to have that sort of lag. And events in space that we can't even see can jam frequencies or create interference)
6. Finally, you can fix a broken cable. Once you launch the satellite you don’t get a chance to fix it if it gets broke.
(Short of spending a ton of money to head into space again. Good luck repairing all those satellites you mentioned)

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Atmospheric_satellite#High-altitude_airship
(Atmospheric satellites are a real thing. They are far more practical than these supposed 5,600 or so satellites in space, none of which I have ever seen when looking at the stars. They are easy to repair, and do all the jobs that the space satellites supposedly do)

And why do these "photos" of Earth all look like badly-layered artwork?

https://encrypted-tbn3.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:ANd9GcQlT9hncQfXHMIrCT1anzuiJ-B_Bke_gZtE5dnoi0e0KJecWg-k

https://encrypted-tbn1.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:ANd9GcR_ePpvdwri1ajx3lfuZpHVxj7nQK3lg8JhOZOHneXaL8GYylGh

https://encrypted-tbn3.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:ANd9GcQ-jgaUeN4ZoXZJXU0wPY8dQyxAWX93noOfCQQjywUahxZXPfUS

https://encrypted-tbn0.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:ANd9GcSV2GyyfjYi4y01gU-MND3QPIKYiSbVa5bBLBhR9QybIa56cv3L

1 Reply

@bulmabriefs144,

Oh, so because you can find a few computer graphic images of earth that means the earth is actually flat.

I can post millions upon millions of actual photos from satellites of the round, spherical earth.

Billions of flights of planes annually circumvent the globe.

Your logic stinks.

Because someone makes an anime depiction of you, does that means you don't exist?

You get dumber each time you post.

Something stupid about fixing cables. These are digital signals that send data.

https://d32ogoqmya1dw8.cloudfront.net/images/introgeo/earthsystem/apollo8.jpg_crops/9179175f24d66961a779d9b65af23942.jpg

An actual photo from the moon of the earth.

As you can see the earth is flat. End of discussion. (cynical) lol

https://gray-ksfy-prod.cdn.arcpublishing.com/resizer/u84ccWStpHzoc4mlSIEgoubbcA8=/1200x675/smart/filters:quality(85)/cloudfront-us-east-1.images.arcpublishing.com/gray/ISXKASNGXVDWTCSJFHAYJ2F7LQ.png

Notice how totally flat the earth is. (cynical)

https://astronomy.com/-/media/Images/News%20and%20Observing/News/2018/04/Earthfromspace.jpg?mw=600

The majestic Earth as seen through the eyes of astronauts

https://www.dpreview.com/files/p/articles/0041623053/iss063e034054.jpeg

Earth from the space station...

0 Replies

Enough of your brainwashed flat earth evangelical crap.

You are a slave to bimbos and deluded freaks.

You are but a tiny speck in the reality of things and your lies and religious fables and fiction have no bearing on the truth whatsoever.

2 Replies

@TheCobbler,

There's a strange drawn on brown line in the first video.

Rhetorical Question: Do you know the difference between a Hollywood movie and a NASA view of space?

It's rhetorical because I am certain the answer is no, you do not, and no there really isn't any. Hollywood can convince us that Stark Trek is visiting new worlds, when actually it's a painted set.

http://allhdwallpapers.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/07/Star-Trek-Deep-Space-Nine-2.jpg

First off, when it's not painted on, and when it's not fake footage, where we are actually looking at are sub-orbital pictures, which have then been cropped and spliced, and then a curve added. Darken the top half of the picture, add curve bend and voila! You're looking at things "from space." Oh? But here's the sorta view of countries you can see from a plane.

https://thumbs.dreamstime.com/b/high-altitude-view-utah-lake-near-provo-utah-aerial-area-river-valley-snow-capped-mountains-peak-freedom-peak-cascade-53313528.jpg

Here is low altitude of course.

https://cdn.boldmethod.com/images/blog/video/2019/05/pressure-and-density-altitude/primary.jpg

And past a certain altitude, all you can really see is clouds. But on a clear day, you might be able to see continents... from sub-orbit.

https://get.pxhere.com/photo/horizon-wing-cloud-sky-sunlight-dawn-atmosphere-flight-cumulus-blue-plain-blue-sky-high-altitude-the-clouds-meteorological-phenomenon-atmospheric-phenomenon-atmosphere-of-earth-667070.jpg

https://outpostmagazine.com/wp-content/uploads/2016/03/iStock_PLANE.jpg

If I were to cut the last picture which showed this nice horizon, and the day is clear enough that I can see continents, made the background even darker, added a curve... you can even animate this. This is how movies have big fake space travel using models of a small object moving from an Earth globe over here to this Planet X-13 over here. Oh noes, Flash Gordon fights off some other spacecraft using laser beams! Yes, but at the end of the day, you're supposed to drop suspension of disbelief and realize it's Hollywood. Yet space pictures of even lower production value, and you get swept up on it, just because someone calls it "news" or "NASA footage". No sir, I know what films look like. I watched the second video. I wasn't impressed.

1 Reply

@TheCobbler,

https://youtu.be/EPyl1LgNtoQ

Note the picture of the countries and such with lights.

https://cdn.discordapp.com/attachments/816868397836926996/972507346502836274/unknown.png

As you can see, this was extracted from a flat image.

I will show you how easy it is to turn a picture from a plane into a "space photo" of the "globe".

https://cdn.discordapp.com/attachments/816868397836926996/972513106947354634/EarthFromSpace.png

In less than an hour, I took a perfect flat overhead picture, cut the edges to make a "globe", added a stock shot of the moon, added stock stars background, and voila! A "view from space". I could add an "ozone layer" simply by backing the "globe" with a circle, with gradients. But I think that would humiliate you too much. You can even animate this picture but superimposing the flight animation on the background, and showing the moon change position. Hollywood figured this trick out with moving car scenes long ago.

(I don't even know how to embed videos, and even I can digital edit this sort of picture. It's insulting that you believe this farce, and even more so that you consider me an idiot for knowing otherwise)

If you want to donate money to NASA or Elon Musk, go right ahead. But I think I'll keep my money.

1 Reply

@bulmabriefs144,

Ohhh, they allow youtube embeds. There's alot of missing commands from the BB Code editor, so I'm not always sure what I can do.

But as you can see, this is the same picture, cropped from an aerial shot and given an ozone background, then placed in space.

0 Replies

@bulmabriefs144,

Do you work in 3d graphics?

Is your day job working with vector graphics and 3d models in modeling programs that Hollywood and NASA artists currently use?

Can you name even one 3d modeling program?

I own over 8000 3d models that are used in my modeling programs I have learned to use where I produce 3d videos and images.

Those 8,000 3d models cost me over 10,000 dollars to buy.

I have well over 30 years experience working with 3d models.

My eyes are trained to know the difference between 3d graphic photo realism and real photographic images. Videos are the easiest to spot as fakes.

You on the other hand are talking from second hand information and you sound like, well, uneducated...

Do you know how many gigabytes it takes to make a fairly believable 3d model of planet Earth? I do, I own several Hollywood level models of 3d Earth.

Do you even know how much a model like that would cost and what artists in the industry are known for making these models? I do...

Any good 3d artist with a trained eye knows the difference.

A fairly believable representation of planet Earth would require at least a 16k image wrapped around a wire mesh sphere. Then it would also require realistic volumetrics to create atmosphere and an infinitely detailed starfield for the sky. It would also require hundreds of layers like textures, bumps, diffuse, ambiance, metallicity, translucency, specular weight, glossy reflectivity, refraction weight, refraction index, normal maps and the list goes on...

What you are seeing in the 4k planet Earth YouTube videos from satellites are not possible to replicate with today's computational computers and graphics cards. That is an absolute certainty.

My graphics card cost me almost 2000 dollars and my 3d workstation computer cost me over 3000 dollars...

I render images that are 13,000 by 15,000 pixels and they take all night to render one single image and they do not have 1/1,000,000 of the detail that a satellite image of Earth has let alone the infinite amount of colors. shades that a billion hard drives and thousands of graphics cards in parallel could not replicate...

Your knowledge is that of a 5 year old.

Go try and pass your fanatic religious regurgitated crap off to someone who does not know anything.

Still Waters

https://scontent-lga3-2.xx.fbcdn.net/v/t39.30808-6/280370640_523197012570553_2908328790398004795_n.jpg?_nc_cat=105&ccb=1-6&_nc_sid=730e14&_nc_ohc=v7sxcjIiiXMAX-AFR2_&_nc_ht=scontent-lga3-2.xx&oh=00_AT9YRg59TVZtPMxXBZV_4PKAFZCr2Bf4U8aaop6j_WVHtg&oe=627ECEA1

This is one of my 3d art pieces. It appears pretty real and it is much higher graphics than any video game on the market today. But I can easily tell it is not real because that is my job to know this kind of stuff.

What 3d graphic images have you made to demonstrate that you are a professional in that field of study that your opinion should be taken with any serious consideration?

2 Replies

@TheCobbler,

TheCobbler wrote:

Do you work in 3d graphics?

Is your day job working with vector graphics and 3d models in modeling programs that Hollywood and NASA artists currently use?

Can you name even one 3d modeling program?

I own over 8000 3d models that are used in my modeling programs I have learned to use where I produce 3d videos and images.

Those 8,000 3d models cost me over 10,000 dollars to buy.

I have well over 30 years experience working with 3d models.

My eyes are trained to know the difference between 3d graphic photo realism and real photographic images. Videos are the easiest to spot as fakes.

You on the other hand are talking from second hand information and you sound like, well, uneducated...

Do you know how many gigabytes it takes to make a fairly believable 3d model of planet Earth? I do, I own several Hollywood level models of 3d Earth.

Do you even know how much a model like that would cost and what artists in the industry are known for making these models? I do...

Any good 3d artist with a trained eye knows the difference.

A fairly believable representation of planet Earth would require at least a 16k image wrapped around a wire mesh sphere. Then it would also require realistic volumetrics to create atmosphere and an infinitely detailed starfield for the sky. It would also require hundreds of layers like textures, bumps, diffuse, ambiance, metallicity, translucency, specular weight, glossy reflectivity, refraction weight, refraction index, normal maps and the list goes on...

What you are seeing in the 4k planet Earth YouTube videos from satellites are not possible to replicate with today's computational computers and graphics cards. That is an absolute certainty.

My graphics card cost me almost 2000 dollars and my 3d workstation computer cost me over 3000 dollars...

I render images that are 13,000 by 15,000 pixels and they take all night to render one single image and they do not have 1/1,000,000 of the detail that a satellite image of Earth has let alone the infinite amount of colors. shades that a billion hard drives and thousands of graphics cards in parallel could not replicate...

Your knowledge is that of a 5 year old.

Go try and pass your fanatic religious regurgitated crap off to someone who does not know anything.

Still Waters

This is one of my 3d art pieces. It appears pretty real and it is much higher graphics than any video game on the market today. But I can easily tell it is not real because that is my job to know this kind of stuff.

What 3d graphic images have you made to demonstrate that you are a professional in that field of study that your opinion should be taken with any serious consideration?

I truly admire your tenacity, Cobbler.

But you are trying to get a flat Earther to see reality.

Passing a camel through the eye of a needle (an actual needle, not a portal)...is apple pie compared with that.

2 Replies

@Frank Apisa,

Flat earther = flat thinker. 😊

0 Replies

@TheCobbler,

I do not work in 3D graphics. I am unemployed, with some knowledge of computers, and a major in history and a minor in science (horticulture)/religion.

That it is blatantly obvious that this is indeed a crappy fake picture that can be created in under an hour using only modest skill

But yes, yes, feel free to tell me how you know better because you own 8000 3D models. But you were scammed by a very poor quality GIMP edit by NASA.

You can tell me all you want how you think I'm as smart as a four-year-old. But what does this make you?

Here, I'll make a planet out of thin air, and then give it a moon, a sun, and satellites.

https://d53l9d6fqlxs2.cloudfront.net/photos/75616-adobestock_63768956jpeg.jpeg

Actual picture. A sunset on Earth.

Another picture, a rocky crag.

https://images.fineartamerica.com/images/artworkimages/mediumlarge/3/rocky-crag-terry-mcconnell.jpg

A picture of a sunset #2. Note the reddish clouds.

https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/5/58/Sunset_2007-1.jpg

Circle crop, circular motion blur. Reverse picture for "atmosphere."
Stock constellation background. Stock satellite, no background. Circle crop of rocky crag for "moon". Circle crop sunset 2 for "sun". Supernova effect to make it shine.

https://cdn.discordapp.com/attachments/816868397836926996/973366168117194772/Terra_221B.png

This is Terra 221B. It is a gas giant with no ring and an atmosphere, with a rocky moon Eldar orbiting it. Its sun, Musra, is 375 lightyears away from it, though it might not look this way in the picture. Terra 221B is home to lifeforms evolved enough to build and launch artificial satellites. These project various signals to the planet. While it doesn't share our love of fiction, the Terran occupy their time watching cooking shows and historical accounts.

All of this is supported by the picture...

And all of it is a complete lie. I made Terra 221B as an art project. Again, it took maybe an hour or two.

https://cdn.discordapp.com/attachments/816868397836926996/973364368911769680/unknown.png

Just a bunch of layered imports on GIMP.

So yeah, wave around your fancy credentials at me. It just makes you look like that much bigger of a fool for falling for this. My college taught me to examine information and weigh it on its merits. Yours apparently did not.

https://geospatialmedia.s3.amazonaws.com/wp-content/uploads/2019/01/satellelite1.jpg

Tell me again that satellites are real. It was remarkably easy to get a satellite to add to this picture. They had a ton of them with no background. Almost as though they were being used exactly for this purpose, adding a satellite to a picture, when the need arose.

Btw, I can give it rings if you want.

1 Reply

@Frank Apisa,

There is an Aramaic translation of the Bible that says that expression is really "It is easier to pass a rope through the eye of a needle..."

1 Reply

@bulmabriefs144,

That picture took me 8 hours to make and that is not even including render times. You have no experience so you make stuff up and live in your la la land of gross miscalculation.

Also, I pity the plants you torture.

Horticulture, what an oxymoron describing you.

No culture and no brain.

1 Reply

@bulmabriefs144,

What is even harder is to pass a conscious thought thorough your tiny brain.

1 Reply

@TheCobbler,

If the earth is flat, can the flat earthers tell us where the earth ends and nothing is coming except a drop into nothing?

1 Reply

@TheCobbler,

You are correct, making something really look good takes upward of 8+ hours, and I've occasionally spent 24+ hours if I had to render it myself. That's the point. I was able to find enough stock images, and to make them "round" simply by making cutouts that it was frankly kinda insulting. As I was talking to you about doing these posts I timed myself, and it was in fact easier than ant project I've ever done.

There is a reason why the bulk of pictures of the Earth are shown from the edge (either top or right side, in about 80% of space pictures). It's because it would be clear that it is a wraparound of a taken picture. I found a program online called Planet Maker. http://planetmaker.apoapsys.com/
I was able to turn any flat picture into a spherical planet.

In fact, I was able to take picture of two people kissing and turn it into a planet. It was unrecognizable as such until you looked at the dark side of the planet, instead looking like a greenish brown planet.

https://www.wallpapers13.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/11/Boy-and-Girl-Young-couple-Kissing-in-park-Mobile-phones-Tablet-and-laptops-840x525.jpg

https://cdn.discordapp.com/attachments/785252424427765802/973382605934305383/unknown.png

https://cdn.discordapp.com/attachments/785252424427765802/973382606978707536/unknown.png

Making realistic things or elaborate lies are both complicated, yes. But this is not an elaborate lie. This is a series of fake images, that people accept because they are told to. And you can tell me how stupid I am, all you want.
It doesn't change how unbelievably gullible you are. And how unsufferable you are for trying to pull other people into this lie.

1 Reply

@bulmabriefs144,

The actual Earth is not a flat image and no one tells people to believe it is round, it is round. Flat earthers are the ones manipulated to believe a lie. They believe many lies, what is one more?

The Church has told people to believe the Earth is flat and the Bible writers were clearly unaware it was round. That is because they were making **** up and they got caught in a lie.

The Earth is not an image stretched around a sphere like 3d objects.
And some 3 D objects are made up of many tiny images formed around a sphere and those images were made to stretch around a sphere because a sphere has a spherical UV map not a planar UV map.

The Earth was created by asteroids bombarding it from all directions and its spin and its core's gravity over billions of years smoothed it into a round surface. A physical force called isostacy gave the Earth mountains and valleys.

The Earth has plates and even those plates are not flat.

Everything you says is because the church told you what to believe and you are too weak minded to think on your own logically.

You want a lie to be true because you are terrified of having to face the real truth. And, the real truth is you have been manipulated by those who wish to control your life and everything you do. They want your money and your allegiance blindly and without question. They want you to fear them so much that your ability to speak is stunted and made mute. So you give them the authority over your mind because you are deluded and too abused by their loveless greed for power...

That is the real truth...

Sheep BLINDLY follow what they are told.

You accuse others out of your own guilt and hypocrisy.

1 Reply

@TheCobbler,

You are so stupid as you can't even see your handlers.

"Nobody tells you," yeah, you are told from cradle to grave that it is round. By teachers. By science experts. By state officials. And by NASA. Even by CIA operatives participating in forums to spread disinformation. :ahem: Because apparently, it is a threat to established order to believe that maybe what we are told abour things isn't true.
You are fed convincing pictures. But I have shown you twice, how even a novice using an art program can insert moons and satellites, create suns, and make round images from larger images.

The church has said no such thing. I arrived at this concludion by studying the Bible ( OT mostly), studying other religions' scripture, then looking at the sky and the earth, and making my own decision on the shape of the Earth. This proves you have little to no knowledge of what the church is about.

The Earth is an image stretch around 3d, if not often an outright cutout. And they use lazy top or side images to avoid showing the whole picture, becayse most dummies are convinced when they see a curved Earth from space.

Nothing can be created by asteroids bombing it. That's absurd. The planet would end up like the moon, pock-marked and bombed out. Not a rich atmosphere, filled with life. The Earth developed as a result of volcanic activity, with steam becoming wate and lava becoming dry earth.

The Earth has tectonic plates, yes. But if they were not flat, they would curve around each other, not bump against, as happens in California.

Nothing I said is because the church told me. The church doesn't teach science. Everything I said is alt-science based on my own observations and beliefs. But everything you have said is doctrinal science. Basically, consensus crap. Consensus violates the scientific method, as the scientific method was about testing results repeatedly to form conclusions. When you declare the science settled, you have moved into dogma territory, and become a temple.

"Baaaaaa baaaaaaa," you say. But I will not listen to your bleating. You will be led to the slaughter soon.

1 Reply

@glitterbag,

Turtles all the way.

0 Replies

@bulmabriefs144,

"No one told you, you read it in the Bible"... lol

Sheep...

NASA observes the Earth and you observe the Bible...

1 Reply

If we're criminalizing miscarriages, when do the COVID deniers get arrested?

https://www.dailykos.com/stories/2022/5/9/2096546/-If-we-re-criminalizing-miscarriages-when-do-the-COVID-deniers-get-arrested

0 Replies

What is Evangelism?

Related Topics

Quick Links

My Account

able2know