LMAO. "previously recorded" now invalidates that anything ever happened.

Only you can come up with answers so incredibly stupid.

I think you both are just coming from different places.
Santara believes in academic science, card sultan doesn't.
I doubt you will able to agree on this subject or be able to convince the other.

Personally, I believe in the scientific method but am very skeptical of academic science.
I have found academic science to be way more interested in protecting positions and titles than the pursuit of truth.

I don't really think I'll have to convince him, I'll settle for catching him in perpetuating a lie, because he knowingly used a source (thinking it corroborated a "dome" over the flat Earth) that confirmed the ball Earth.

LOL tard posts source which discredits his argument.

ive said it before, ill say it again, give this idiot time and he always argues with himself.

I like your definition distinguishing between the theoretical and the practical.
Some people think we are at the pinnacle of understanding and think it you dont believe "a theory" you dont believe any of science, its these kind of people that hold back progression.

This post was edited by card_sultan on Jan 23 2017 05:28pm

you're about to get attacked for misspelling pinnacle.

Article says nothing about Earth being a ball, in fact the Earth having an invisible impenetrable dome that scientist's say is like a "glass ceiling" pretty much confirms a lot of Geocentricity

but oh wait - it has a cartoon picture to hook the idiots - ah ha - trolled by Image credit: NASA’s Scientific Visualization Studio.

And you've still yet to explain why the Earth is missing in the Jaxa meme, there's no reasonable reason for the Earth to be missing - and proves the image is made by combining images and feeding them to the public.

This post was edited by card_sultan on Jan 23 2017 05:42pm

Look at you and your blatant lying.

The article directly references satellites. The article also covers the Earth's plasmasphere, dipole magnetic field, magnetosphere, and was published in a peer-reviewed publication that doesn't even give a flat Earth theory the time of day (Nature).

What the fuck do you think spheres are? How do you explain a di-pole magnetic field on a flat Earth?

I did explain why the Earth was missing. You just don't understand big words. Perhaps I can dumb down the discussion well enough for you to understand. When I said:



...adjusting the attitude of the station means turning/rolling/flipping it. The camera you're freaking out about is facing away from the Earth, so of course you can't see it.



You can ignore the truth, but that won't stop me from pointing it out to you, and repeating it to you.

This post was edited by Santara on Jan 23 2017 05:58pm

Wow you've hit a new level of lying - article never confirms ball earth - i also never said it confirms Flat eath either - but its plainly suggesting it.


What are you going to claim the Atmosphere confirms ball earth, holy facepalm?

wait are you saying that they were flipping the iss - omg that's such a ridiculous excuse!

Wow that's a bad dodge even 4 card. Ignoring the entire magnetic pole call out. Embarrassing