We landed on Mars... again? [Mod note post #1]

You said "Sir Isaac Newton" twice on the same line. Just wondering why felt the need to give his full credentials? Newton fan?

Why won't you tell me which experiments he did that any fool can repeat?

OK, lets' be specific, in secondary school, first year, maybe second, we did experiments proving the 3 laws of motion.

Your turn.

In which post did I contest the three laws of motion? You need to read my posts carefully before trying to start debates.

What are you talking about? I was very clear on my position but you couldn't be bothered to read my post carefully. It's quoted above again for your information. I made it abundantly clear that Newton's theories of gravitation and orbital mechanics have zero experimental foundation.

apart from all the satellites we have placed in orbit and the rest of the US and Russian space programme? how did they did manage that if their understanding of gravity and orbital mechanics is wrong?

while it may have turned an operating profit for BA it never returned the money invested in it. Given that only 14 ever flew commercially it was never going to be a commercial success.

Not are you only ignoring everyone's questions put to you, but you are literally ignoring posters asking why you are ignoring all those questions.

1. Is the ISS real? yes or no, if no, what is it?
2. Do you think the Earth is a globe yes or no?
3. Do you believe there are satellites yes or no? if yes, how did they get up there? if no, then how does GPS work? how does satellite TV work?

I don't disagree with anything you said. It's no different to a parabolic flight. Branson and Bezos are playing on the ignorance of 99% of the population by producing clips of them floating around like clowns as evidence that they've been to space when the reality is that this footage could be shot at any altitude.

I even linked an article a page or two back of Branson practicing "zero-g" on one of these parabolic flights and he was coming out with statements like "It has certainly whetted our appetite to experience space for real."

I think it's hilarious all the posters here running to their defense given how deceptive they are. (Hmm, sounds very similar to certain other space agencies too doesn't it? 😆)

Ok. SO you agree that all of that happened, despite your previous claims. You seem to keep flip flopping depending on what's convenient to your silly beliefs. It's almost like you're making it all up on the spot without thinking very hard on it.

So since you agree with the facts of what happened with the flight, and no one claims anything else happened, what's the issue you have? What part was faked? How was it faked? How does this prove that the rest of the space industry was fake?

Why do you believe they are faking all of it?

Is it because the world is flat?

What should count as space in your uneducated opinion?

You obviously aren't going to be addressing any of the previous points, so we'll consider all of them forfeited by yourself.

You can't explain what was faked with Bransons or Bezos' flights. So you admit and agree that they happened as described and that you were lying when you claimed they were faked.

Would have been better and more honest if you just said this directly, but that's expecting too much honesty.

Yet you have a belief so farcical you can't support it in any way and can't answer any questions

Flat Earthers generally believe that there's no such thing as the South Pole and that Antarctica is really just a giant ice wall that encircles the disc of Earth.

So Marky here claiming that all Antarctic expeditions are also fake is very much in line with flat earth beliefs.

Haven't heard if Flat Earthers have any specific beliefs about Everest, but I'm sure they believe something wacky.

LOL 😄

Bezos now seeking to go to the moon in 2024!

Why 2024 and not right this instant? It took the US less than a decade to allegedly go to the moon with the crude equipment and technology they had in the 1960s and that was without the benefit of knowing if it was even possible. Why will it take them 3 years to do something that was done repeatedly with 100% success over 50 years ago? The questions that keep me up at night!

Also, why does he need NASA to get him there? Surely he could do this himself without the help? Not sure how much help NASA would be anyway - they lost all the technology to go to the moon years ago along with endless amounts of high definition footage. Why would Bezos trust such a bunch of clumsy little rattlesnakes?

Yes, thousands upon thousands of sailors lost at sea (along with millions worth of ships and cargo) lost due to ships being 20+km out of reckoning and ending up on the rocks, (sometimes even in broad daylight) mostly in the southern hemisphere due to the fact that they were so inebriated by the infallible Newton and his incorrect assumptions that the earth is an almost perfect sphere with slight compression at the poles.

This being completely contrary to the pendulum experiments of Von Gumpach who contested this and many of the phony astronomers of the mid 19th century with stone hard data and concluded that the earth is slightly elongated at the poles with a widening below the equator, or an oblate spheroid or 'pear shaped' as Neil DeAss Tyson calls it. All easily verifiable by NASA and their magical spaceships and telescopes but, alas, they downright refuse to.

You'd think they could rely on their eye sight to avoid rocks and not need Newton.

And again you are asking questions that we have answered for you previously on this thread. You have ignored them because you can't counter them.

Submerged rocks and sandbanks due to being too near to coastlines. You don't see them until you hit them

And your earth shape image? Can be approximate if you want.

But that's not true. Now on top of your constant dodging you are outright lying.

You were provided with many examples of what you asked for. Repeatedly.

Why are you lying?

Who do you think is going to buy this latest lie of yours?

But since you are going to dodge these questions because they are to difficult for you, perhaps you'd like to just have a rant about your beliefs.

Please explain what you believe is the true shape of the earth?

Newton said it was an oblate spheroid. Von Grumpach said it wasn't. Von Grumpach was wrong. The earth is an oblate spheroid.

The more interesting point is that markus doesnt even under what von gumpach claimed. He thinks von gumpech claimed that the earth was an oblate spheroid. He didn't. Von gumpach claimed that the earth was elongated at the poles. this is clearly wrong.

the difference is 21 KM. given the circumference of the earth is 40,075KM that is a difference of 0.05%. That is much less than the accuracy of navigation available at the time he lived. If ships ships were crashing into rocks it wasn't because of any miscalculation of the shape of the earth.