Video

Ayooooo 🤣🤣🤣…..them ppl have to be robots at this point bro!

@@drulamane 🤣

Lol no

Think again.

Well you can think whatever you like. You are wrong, though.

I agree!

Everything is spinning with the Earth (including the atmosphere and everything that flies in it). Conservation of momentum, you know.

@@zeendaniels5809 so there is no winds too, to move ballon?

@@jora4986 Of course, and the winds pushed it around 50 miles (something like that says in the description).

It came back down, then just some GPS magic.

Where is that fish eye?

@@Bnslambright from when it takes off the lense bends the surrounding terrain and horizon to an extreme degree first into an upside down U shape, then as it tilts up from jiggling it reverses the shape.

At a low altitude, like your timestamp, the horizon looks convex when it is above the center of the frame. The horizon will look concave when it is below the center of the frame. The horizon will look straight when it is at the center of the frame. That's a typical fish eye lens effect. At a very high altitude the horizon is curved at the center of the frame. That's because a fish eye lens don't distort the center of the frame.

@@Bnslamb I think you meant "don't distort" instead of do distort. Altough i think you said the truth, because again other footage shows it not curving at all and high altitudes. So something is going on on postpo be it camera or otherwise. If the goal of this was to prove Earth's supposed curvature, it would be a pseufoscientific "experiment" poorly done, no rigor whatsoever. So since it's not, take it for what it is, and if they insist on implying this proves their arcane Pitarorean theory of the ball Earth then it just doesn't. Anyways, whatever the truth is, we approximate, i take this stance now because that's what i can come close to proving. I don't trust testinomials especially when they are 33 grade masons tbh, like most astronauts of space agencies. And i'm not joking, they do admit it. And part of m3sonic ideology is the ball symbol, so it's like they want to prove their religion/cult right. That's fine, we all have biases and that's natural... But acting as if they are neutral is just not true, they got an agenda, and the shape of the earth is part of it, for the ones asking "what do they win with that" I also took the FE as a joke before, when i had no idea, there is a lot of dumb FE posts, either by ignorant people, or by legit infiltration. Fun fact, the founder of the Flat Earth society is also a M3son... and they seem to say dumb and wrong things on purpose... They founded their society shortly after the International Flat Earth Research Society which was founded by real scientists and has actual arguments for the FE theory and against the spinning ball (Or pea?) E theory... I do recommend you investigate, the best of what i found is "Don't sphere the truth" and Eric Dubay, some arguments may be weak but others aren't and even if you disagree they put more effort in that than our schools just telling us the theory and not admitting a no for an answer (indoctrination basically) Who knows, i might change my mind if i get more evidence, but this deal is about finding the truth, not being considered sane in an insane society... Peace

@@owncraticpath _"I think you meant "don't distort" instead of do distort."_ Right, corrected, thanks. _"Altough i think you said the truth, because again other footage shows it not curving at all and high altitudes."_ Videos are showing a flat horizon at a high altitude when the horizon is just below the center of the frame and the fish eye lens canceling the curvature. The globe was known long before any cameras, masons and space agencies existed. Adolf loving Dubay is a grifter and debunked countless times by, among others, GreaterSapien. _"I do recommend you investigate"_ I've done that for years. All the big FE channels are grifters. They know it's a globe. They refuse to take a free trip to Antarctica and prove there is no 24/7 Sun there as they claim.

@@Bnslamb I see. Altough i disagree, but who knows since history is full of lies anyways. Pitagoras is considered the first freemason by some, he surely had mystical practices and a cult to himself as others admit. So i disagree once again with that idea of people "knowing it's a globe" before cults like the free m3sons existed I think cults have had traditions they slightly change and they also change names but they are essentially the same. And the ball is surely their symbol, you may argue they knew the earth is a globe and they made their symbol because of that, perhaps... As I said tho, it's a matter of belief to a degree, there are testimonials included in the mix and yeah i don't trust those at all, sorry they disappoint a lot and it's not wise to trust in liars. About debunking FE, tbh some of their arguments are not that strong, but i saw some "debunkings" that were debunked later. Don't sphere the truth debunked the Scottish dude many times and it was shown the Scottish was dishonest in many instances... But i must admit he sounded convincing, if you don't hear the rebuttal. The planes and the light below them i mean, it did sound convincing until it was shown that it can happen on a plane also, thus his argument for the ball was a lie, scientifically disproven, This doesn't mean all is a lie but they still need to bring more unambiguous evidence of it being a ball, especially evidence that can be proven scientifically, not only by elite agencies or traveling to forbidden areas.

All the footage in here is with fish eyes lenses🤓

@@Dawgissadogyou burst his globe

How do you figure the distance?

Omg its almost as if the sun is 1000x bigger than the earth. Use your brain you little monkey childish trunk

As said in the description.

Cause it’s fish eye lens.

There is a link in the video description, with a little documetary blog and also a picture of google maps or so, where you see the path of the balloon

In space, visible at night.

for what? he didnt want to prove the earth is a globe. its already proven.

Even though you are right this is not space, there's no such thing as a firmament.

@zeendaniels5809 then why can't elon musk rockets can't get out ??

@@turbo139sti How high EXACTLY is this firmament of yours?

@zeendaniels5809 all I know is we never landed on the moon and can't get into space we stuck In the dome

@@turbo139sti I was asking for the height because there are a lot of satellites in very high orbits (notably, the DSCOVR satellite orbiting beyond the Moon) and how are satellites launched? That's right, using rockets. So... Let's address this one point at a time ok? Your dome, firmament or whatever... Where is it? Evidence?

In length? Look at a ball.

It's a plane, a flat plane as far as the eye can see

​​​@@Bnslamb The camera doesn't show the Earth's entire form, so there is no proof the Earth is shaped like a ball.

The camera is nowhere NEAR high enough to show the Earth's full shape.

@@abunchofrandomgarbage23 so then why does nasa no real photos of earth? All easily disproven as CGI and photoshop

_"What if the earth is eternal in length from all sides?"_ It isn't. It has been measuered, seen and photographed a million times as a globe.

_"But when it’s in the middle it’s flat line"_ I've just checked, it's curved. The center of my screen is marked, and when the horizon is there, it's curved. Proof earth is a globe. BTW, the shape was known 2400 years before any camera.

Planets usually aren't very flat

The camera is nowhere NEAR high enough to show the full Earth's shape. If it was, you would clearly see it's a sphere.

_"Where's the thousands of satellites?"_ Most are more than 500 km above the balloon and can't be seen in the middle of the day in sunshine. _"You people never critically think about anything"_ The irony. Fell for the stupidest hoax on the internet.

@@Bnslamb so, How do you know they're up there if you can't see them from Earth or in these horseshït CGI space videos? 🤣🤣

@@Bnslamb the curve begins at ground level 🤣🤣🤣

@@Bnslamb the fisheye lens flattens & curves Earth here 🤣🤣 there's no consistent curvature dude, Why do you believe this fkn horseshït?

@@tonyflatearther _"if you can't see them from Earth"_ I can.

_"Get a camera with a regular lens"_ Do you think no one has done that? Wrong, and they show curvature.

@@Bnslamb regular lenses don't show curvature but fisheye lenses do

@@tonyflatearther _"regular lenses don't show curvature"_ They do. And the shape was known thousands of years before any camera existed.

@@Bnslamb 1st it was a globe, then it magically formed into a oblate spheroid, then it magically formed into a pear, What shape is it gonna magically form into in a another thousand to a billion years 🤣🤣🤣 why is Nasa showing the perfect sphere of it's an oblate spheroid? Where's the football shaped Earth Nasa claims is the real shape of Earth? Where's the solid physical Moon eclipsing the Sun during the April 8th solar eclipse? That one single solar eclipse debunks the globe & that's gotta be hurting your lil sissified pampered taint 🤣🤣 you can't prove it was the solid physical Moon eclipsing the Sun because it didn't magically eclipse the Sun while it's orbiting Earth at 2,388mph at the same time no matter how much you want it to be true, magical multi tasking Moon's don't exist bud Watch this video destroy your heliosexual globe religious belief system balltard, you love to look at gigantic balls 🤣🤣 czcams.com/video/Ei5KfS85rYE/video.htmlsi=fK78GeFCNPK4gmF9

​@@tonyflatearther "1st it was a globe, then it magically formed into a oblate spheroid, then it magically formed into a pear, What shape is it gonna magically form into in a another thousand to a billion years" Imagine you come into a room and somebody ask you about the shape. - first you have no tools. And just by your eyes you say "It is a square" - the next day you have a tape measure and you see it is 350 cm long and 351cm wide, so you say "Not a square, but a rectangle" - the third day you have better tape measure and more time to measure, and you see that the one side of the room is 351.1 cm and the opposite side is 351.8 cm. So you say "not a rectangle, but a trapezoid" Would you also say that the room magically formed from a square to a rectangle to a trapezoid? No, just you methods to measure the room became better. "why is Nasa showing the perfect sphere of it's an oblate spheroid? " Why are you guys so afraid of just looking things up? Or are you just too stupid? Imagine you come in a room and you see a circle painted on a wall, and you would say it is a perfect circle. But then some guy says "It is not a circle, it is an ellipse". What would you do? Well, every normal person would take a ruler and measure the height and width of the circle. And then you see that it is a few millimeters wider than it is high. So the guy was right: It is not a circle, but an ellipse. So why are you so stupid and don't come to the idea to just look up what "earth is not a sphere, but an oblate spheroid " means in actual numbers? OK, so I do it for you: The current measurement for the radius of the earth that are used are: - 6,378,137 m at the equator - 6,356,752 m at the poles So the deviation to a perfect sphere is tiny, you don't notice it on a picture. You need a picture with high resolution to even could measure it. I have never tried it, but I heard that you can measure the deviation on the pictures of Himawari 8 (a japanese weather satellite in geostationry orbit, that sends live pictures every ten minutes, you can see them online) And we find out that there are also some other tiny deviations so that it is (of course only in a exaggerated metaphor) more "pear shaped"(and not a perfect oblate spheorid). Actually in Germany we talk about "Kartoffel" (potato). The scientific field that make these measurements is geodesy. It is actually an engineering field, just go to a university and study it. BTW the first attempt to measure the earth exactly were expeditions to Peru and Lappland already in 1740. They came to: - 6,379,500 m - 6,349,800 m So already very good. And because of the shape (higher gravity at the poles) and the rotation of the earth (centrifugal force) an object weighs more when you go closer to the poles and less when you go to the equator. That is a measurable fact. How do you explain that in your flat earth model?

I don't believe anything but it's obviously fish eye, it looked round since it was firstly launched

@@ImranKibouch Fish eye lenses does not distort the center.

@@Bnslamb that doesn't change anything, watch "Lumix GH5 how to film space" which was recorded with no fish eye

@@ImranKibouch Do you mean this --> Lumix GH5 | How to film the Earth from space? The curvature is obvious on from start.