/sci/ - Science & Math

>>11035124
name one of those you can't debunk

>>11035128
This thing

>>11035137
What's to debunk? A remote control camera?

>>11035137
perhaps it's some sort of robot, like the mars rover thingies, designed to send a live feed to the nasa hq to see if everything went right

>>11035124
You can also not validate the existence of white blood cells all by yourself. Science is a game of trust, only pure math you can check on your own.

>>11035141
Why does it look so fake?

>>11035137
Where is that from? Apollo 11 didn't have colour video, I think.

>>11035201
maybe it was one of the other 5 moon landings

>>11035164
Same reason people think actual real gunshots sound fake; you've been trained by Hollywood and fiction to have certain beliefs about how space looks that simply are not true. You probably think you would be able to see stars in space, or don't understand that light scattering wouldn't occur the same way as it would with air, resulting in extremely harsh shadows.

>>11035204
Probably. Or it's really not real. This doesn't mean that the other moon landings were fake though.

>>11035124
>I can't debunk any of the flat earth arguments.

Disproving flat earth is trivial, watch.
There is no change in the angular diameter of Sol throughout the day, so the Earth’s distance, or the distance of any observer on it, to the Sun doesn’t change throughout the day, so a local Sun above a flat disc, a feature of all flat earth models, is impossible.

Also, the sun would be visible 24/7 if the Sun were above the imaginary flat disc. It isn’t, so flat earth is yet again impossible.

>>11035124
Considering one of the arguments is the existence of the fucking horizon, you might as well be that retarded

>>11035164
What about it looks fake?

>>11035275
>Inb4 you can't see forever away

In some sense you can, all you lose is fidelity. Why the fuck do you think you can see the moon?

>>11035497
>when the flat earther claims distant objects become invisible but stars exist

>>11035497
Objects visually decrease in size as they recede until they reach one arc minute, then they only get dimmer.

>>11035502
>>11035497
>I love how there is actually no flatearther in the thread and we're still arguing with their shadows.

>>11035502
They literally think stars are only a few hundred miles up

>>11035124
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eratosthenes

Now piss off idiot.

>>11035124
>can't see the Southern Cross in the night sky
>can't see the Big Dipper in Australia
Hmmmm, it's as if there's something in the way...

>>11035507
Ur mum dimmer

>>11035147
remotely controlled, actually
they had a guy with a set of instructions, a joystick, and a stopwatch because light delay was long enough that he had to act several seconds in advance of anything happening

>>11035221
>>11035204
they only got it working on the last one, Apollo 17
for all the others the remote control camera missed the shot

so I looked it up: the TV camera used for that shot was mounted on the lunar roving vehicle
they didn't try to track it on 15, missed badly on 16, and got it perfect on 17
https://youtu.be/Y5f1oWu5VtY
https://youtu.be/yn1S-flYkaQ
https://youtu.be/XlGis35Epvs

Earth is round but the moon is flat. We've never seen the backside of it

>>11035619
>Luna 3

Because you don't understand how burden of proof works. It's their job to prove round earth is fake, not your job to use actual argumentative discourse as a response to conspiracy theorist loonies who only operate with non arguments
>UGH LOOK HOW FAKE THIS IS BALLTARDS YOU RETARDS WILL BELIEVE ANYTHING
>eschews scientific resources in favor of blogs written by literal whos because it agrees with them

posting debunks.

#1, all observers see the same face of the Moon at all times, everywhere on Earth

>>11035697
#2 stars in the southern hemisphere appear to rotate around the south pole, absolutely impossible in the flat earth geometry

>>11035701
#3 gyrocompasses use the earth's rotation to point north. Not to magnetic north either, true north. Mostly used in submarines

>>11035703
and here is how they work

>>11035137
>launching shit upwards is hard to comprehend
>recording something is also hard to comprehend
this says a lot anon. You don't deserve to know the answers

>>11035704
#4 in the flat Earth model, the sun should accelerate through the sky. Going fastest around midday, and slowing down around sunrise and sunset. But we observe a constant angular motion through the sky

>>11035706
>recording something
tv camera on the rover broadcasting to the command module for instantaneous rebroadcast to Earth

>>11035709
#5 tides confirm the round earth model. When the Moon is high in the sky, or on the opposite side, there is a high tide. When the Moon is near the horizon (or just below) there is a low tide. The phase of the Moon correlates to the tide's intensity. New and Full Moons are when the Moon and the Sun are in alignment, and thus have more widely swinging tides. "Neap tides" (weak tides) occur when there is a half Moon (the sun and the Moon are out of alignment). The sun has about 0.5 times the tidal force on the Earth as the Moon

>>11035508
That's how they win. I don't even know why do we even engage them? The crazy dude in the subway has more substance then these imbeciles.

>>11035137
you dont have to let them move the goalposts. even if the moon landing was fake that doesnt make the earth flat