Talk Conspiracy Member Posts

 

Ed033's Profile

Current Avatar:
Ed033's Avatar
Correct Score Competition:
UsernamePoints
8.)   octopus eats crocodile224
9.)   Ed002215
10.)   Ed018210
11.)   Ed033208
12.)   ED025188
13.)   Premier League and Beyond178
14.)   ritchie1168
Flat Out Racing:

Not played Flat Out Racing


Current Profile Picture:
Click to view larger image
Ed033's Profile Picture

Team: Aldershot Town


Where from: 5


Favourite player: 3


Best team moment: 2


Interests: 3


Timezone: (GMT -10:00) Hawaii




Ed033's Posts and Other Poster's Replies To Ed033's Posts

 

 

To Ed033's last 5 rumours posts

 

To Ed033's last 5 rumour replies

 

Ed033's rumours posts with other poster's replies to Ed033's rumours posts

 

25 Feb 2020 23:14:18
Africa in the 1700s - Not What We've Been Told.


 

 

25 Feb 2020 13:28:39
This is crazy. The European Space agency put out a video and said it was the ISS taken from a Soyuz spacecraft. Starting at 44 seconds into the video, A clear model of the ISS is being shown to us as the real ISS.


1.) 25 Feb 2020 14:29:30
Explain how this is a clear model?

{Ed033's Note - Wow, it's obvious


2.) 25 Feb 2020 14:46:33
Here is the full video:


3.) 25 Feb 2020 23:05:39
Explain how it isn't hsf.

It's so fake it's hilarious.


4.) 26 Feb 2020 08:17:07
I'm not saying I know that this is for sure the real deal but it's not obvious to me that its a model. Being an unfamiliar shape, a one off machine, and the only other examples most of us see being actual models, I can see why that connection might be made but I've got to ask, if it is genuine footage of the ISS, how would you expect it to look? How would it differ from what we see here?

Silly question maybe but related and I'm sure some of you clever dudes can explain it to me. Why don't I see any stars in this video, I would have thought being above the light pollution of the Earth, I'd see billions up there?

{Ed033's Note - They haven't put stars in the background because it would be too difficult to figure out where all the stars should be placed and how they should look.

It appears that they can never get far enough away from Earth to photograph it as a whole, this is why the Earth presented to us is strips of photographs curved around a ball in photoshop or placed into a 3d modelling software and presented to us as CGI.

Also, on a lot of the Earth from allegedly outer space, you typically don't see any recognisable land masses. Do you see any land masses in the above video. If not why not?

Also you either see clouds moving and the Earth being stationary or the Earth rotating and the clouds still or both not moving.

If you don't know, in order for the heliocentric model to work, Earth spins at around 1000 miles per hour, the Earth rotates around the Sun at 66,000 mph, the Sun moves through the Milky Way at 500,000 mph, the Milky Way moves through the Universe at over 1 million mph.

What we see with any space agency video in outer space is not consistent with the heliocentric model.


 

 

24 Feb 2020 13:44:21
If you think about it, we can't have the alleged vacuum of 'outer space' directly next to our atmosphere. On Earth, if we want to create an area of different pressure, it has to be held inside a container, so is it possible that Earth is in a container?

A container has a top, bottom and sides.

The Crystal Firmament could be the top.

The bottom would be as far down we could go.

I think the sides would be beyond the Antarctic ice wall in all directions, with other worlds (with life forms) similar to our own being beyond the Antarctic ice wall. With 'Outer Space' being anything beyond the Antarctic ice wall.

If you have seen the video on here before that was possibly showing the Firmament, then this video shows more footage of the phenomenon at the Firmament.

It also attempts to show what could be the bottom and the walls of our enclosed system.


1.) 24 Feb 2020 17:20:56
I really can not get my head around how a pressurised atmosphere and a vacuum can sit side by side with no barrier separating them. It just wouldn't work.

I have had discussions where people argue that the air thins and gradually turns to a vacuum, all held in place by gravity.

If gravity was holding the air in place, how is it we get different layers of clouds moving in different direction?

{Ed033's Note - I guess gravity has artificial intelligence and knows to hold down certain stuff and let other stuff do its thing.

And if gravity does have artificial intelligence, then we must be in an amazing creation.

At the moment their gravity answer is an all in one catch word that they hope people repeat, but don't think about.

Look at the crazy answer to the Michelson-Morley experiment, that the measuring apparatus itself contracts in length and changes ellipsoidal shape the exact amount to give them the exact number they need to show the Earth is rotating at the correct amount around the Sun.


2.) 24 Feb 2020 19:17:02
Haha, subjective gravity. Don't give 'them' ideas, Ed.

The Michelson-Morley experiment explanation is a joke.

Actually, the same person I spoke to about the vacuum / pressurised atmosphere, I explained the M-M experiment to them. They looked perplexed. Not from the fact they didn't understand what I had explained. More the fact they couldn't compute what the experiment concludes because it goes against their programming.

It's frustrating not being able to talk to intellectuals that are boxed in by MSBS thought.

But it's great when you see you have got through to them, on some level.

{Ed033's Note - A lot of people seem to have been hypnotised by people like Neil deGrasse Tyson and Brian Cox.


3.) 24 Feb 2020 20:07:14
Agree Ed gravity must be cleaver because like others have said.
It knows the difference between air and helium in a ballon lol.
Also when u thought ahh I just dropped the remote,
It actually got pull out of your hand.
And if u ever want to go sky diving u will be pull to earth not fall .

I do agree atmosphere next to vacuum is near impossible.
But I'm still sat on a painfull fence sorry SM and ed.

{Ed033's Note - We all have to figure it out for ourselves.


4.) 24 Feb 2020 21:49:20
Sorry for what, Southampton? .

In seeking the truth, I haven't found the answers. It's just made me see the lies.

{Ed033's Note - It's difficult to come up with an overall theory.


5.) 24 Feb 2020 23:25:25
That's it ed33.


6.) 27 Feb 2020 12:13:12
Soz SM just see message

I've been looking into flat earth theory for years but never gone full in till late.


 

 

22 Feb 2020 13:32:04
Rockets cannot work in the vacuum of Outer Space because there is nothing there to push against:


1.) 22 Feb 2020 17:45:10
According to this experiment, they do. Rockets in a Vacuum Chamber - Newton's third law of motion Visualized

{Ed033's Note - Hi Southern Monkey, when he says vacuum, he doesn't mean Outer Space vacuum, which is allegedly something like 1x10 to minus 13 Torr. On the Moon the alleged vacuum is 1x10 to minus 11 Torr.

On Earth there are a couple of medium vacuum chambers at 1 x 10 to minus 6 Torr and there is only 1 vacuum chamber that is at 1 x 10 to minus 8 Torr and that is as far as they can go with current technology.

Earth's atmosphere is around 740 Torr apparently from memory.

This guy is removing a few particles with his vacuum pump, so there is still loads of particles in there to push off.

But remember there may not be an actual outer space if the Firmament is real and is the reason for them not being able to go beyond 'low Earth orbit'.


2.) 22 Feb 2020 20:21:42
Can you imagine sending astronauts to the Moon with an alleged 1x10 to minus 11 Torr and not even being able to test whether they can handle being in a 1x10 to minus 11 Torr vacuum?

Apparently only 1 guy in a space suit has ever been in a 1x10 to minus 6 Torr vacuum chamber and he was in there for 2 seconds before passing out and they had to get him out. He said that just before passing out, he could feel the moisture on his tongue boiling.


3.) 22 Feb 2020 21:01:32
If space is a near perfect vacuum like they tell us.
Rockets would have nothing to thrust against.
That's if were understanding a vacuum correct.
But for these test to be correct the vacuum has to be same as space.
The area and vehicle would have to be sized to that of the real environment and thrust.
Or your actually testing something other than operating a rocket in space.

{Ed033's Note - Yes, this is not how a rocket would operate in the alleged vacuum of alleged outer space. In addition he's not opearating this rocket at the alleged extreme temperatures of alleged outer space.


4.) 22 Feb 2020 21:14:18
Jim Le Blanc was the astronaut in the vacuum chamber, but it was apparently an airline that had come loose on his suit which caused him to depressurise. That's what we are told anyway.

I don't know about the rockets not working in a vacuum. The way I am visualising it, is the force of the rocket has to push out of the rocket to escape, therefore there is no external pushing forces needed. the escaping rocket flame is just the burning fuel escaping after it has 'pushed' itself out of the rocket.

I maybe totally wrong. But if say it was an motorised fan which was used as the propeller, and does need an external pushing force, then I would agree it would not work in space.

{Ed033's Note - But if something was loose on his suit, why not try with another suit?

To me, they know that the space suits can't handle even a medium vacuum, that's why no one else has ever gone into a medium vacuum chamber.


Remember the LEM allegedly leaving the Moon, it just floated upwards.


5.) 22 Feb 2020 21:57:43
They have allegedly tested the Apollo in a vacuum chamber. I believe the same chamber Le Blanc was in.

I am not saying there isn't fakery, Ed. You know I don't believe we have been to the Moon.


{Ed033's Note - ok thanks.


6.) 22 Feb 2020 22:02:28
You are probably right in saying space suits can not handle being in a vacuum.

The BBC faked a vacuum experiment with James May, I don't know if you have seen this.

This is a clip from the BBC. There are 2 people inside the vacuum chamber with James May and they only have overalls and oxygen masks on. Everything else is exposed to the vacuum.

What was it that happens to exposed parts of the body in a vacuum?

Pure fakery, mate.

{Ed033's Note - No haven't seen it thanks.


7.) 22 Feb 2020 22:25:03
Hi Ed just used the link from the Everton banter page didn’t know any of this stuff was here. To the point in hand, firstly I know nothing about space or vacuums or what Torr is yet there a few things that immediately spring to mind .

A. If there is nothing for rockets to push against to move through space how and why do planets orbit the the stars/ suns surely in a such a vacuum nothing would move yet orbits occur and and as a result of said movement there must be a disturbance of the vacuum thus causing a path within the vacuum. The word vacuum itself implies an absence of anything, yet within space there is stuff such as meteors, comets, Satelite’s, space junk etc,

B, each body within the galaxy has a magnetic/ gravitational pull / field and while not visible with the eye are proven to exist therefore with space flight the lunar missions use the gravitational pull of earth and the Moon and their orbits of the earth and moon to achieve breakaway and landing thus providing a force to push against which in turn cause movement as in Newton’s law equal and opposite motion .
And C if a vacuum exists how does the sun warm or illuminate our planet as surely the heat would remain around the sun as the heat of the tea doesn’t heat the outside of your flask.

And D, How does Riquelme get spotted in so many different locations at the same time on transfer deadline day without the ability to move at the speed of light which we know is proven yet couldn’t in a vacuum of nothingness,

it is my conclusion that it’s all a load of bollocks that no one is even close to understanding and it is easier to find reasons why the lunar landings were allegedly faked than except that it just does exist like my unicorn and ability to do magic
I must sign off as I’m due in the electro therapy room
Big C.

{Ed033's Note - A. planets don't orbit the the stars. Planets are wandering luminaries in the Firmament.

B. There is no 'galaxy'. There are luminaries in the Firmament. No rocket or space shuttle can 'orbit' the Earth because the Earth is not a sphere or 'orbit' the Moon because the Moon we see in our reality is possibly a projection.

C. Outer Space doesn't exist and therefore the Outer space vacuum doesn't exist. The Sun in our reality is also possibly a projection.

The Sun and Moon are physical either in or above the Firmament.

Yes, your conclusion of mainstream space science being bull is correct.


8.) 22 Feb 2020 22:39:43
And it is probably a case of 'no one knows' if a rocket can work in space or not. I can not find one bit of rocket launch 'external camera' footage that goes beyond 70 - 100 miles up, then it always cuts off or goes to a cartoon.

If someone has seen any footage past this point, please post it here, thanks. And Apollo footage is fake, so don't bother posting low Earth orbit window pics :)

70-100 miles. Wouldn't that be around the height of the starting point/ edge of the 'dome' 'waters above' firmament', Ed?

{Ed033's Note - I'm not sure where the Firmament starts 70 - 100 miles above Earth maybe about right. I would imagine any 'footage' would be CGI.


9.) 23 Feb 2020 02:59:16
Sm from what i think I learnt,
On earth the rockets thrust hits our atmosphere and this is what propels the rocket along.
But In a vacuum the energy of thrust would disappear in the vacuum of space.


10.) 24 Feb 2020 00:21:37
I may not be right, Southampton, but I think you are incorrect. Sorry :)

A rocket is basically a controlled explosion over a period of time.

To me the force is happening inside the rocket as the fuel escapes, it doesn't need the escaping fuel to push on something to make it move because there are internal forces at play, which make the rocket move.

Remember that we are told space is a vacuum. A vacuum will not hinder the result of internal forces and this will create a directional movement directly related to where the force originated. Therefor a controlled forward movement in relation to a rocket.


11.) 24 Feb 2020 09:46:01
No problem SM
Nothing wrong with being put right mate
Cheers.


 

 

21 Feb 2020 07:43:26
Was the Ionosphere invented to try to explain Marconi's 2135 mile first transatlantic radio signal that was considered impossible due to the alleged curvature of the Earth?

And how do you bounce signals off of air in the part of the atmosphere they call the Ionosphere? It would at least make more sense to say we can bounce signals off the crystal Firmament.


1.) 21 Feb 2020 18:56:34
For the signal to be constant u would assume it would have to hit something more than atmosphere.

{Ed033's Note - yes that's what i would have thought, but the mainstream science are saying they bounce signals off thin air in the sky in this made up region called ionosphere?

But if you don't have the curvature of the Earth, then over the flat ocean, you can send the signals without bouncing off anything because you have straight line of sight.

Over land is different as you have the petrified fauna and flora (hills and mountains), slag heaps and volcanos in the way of straight line of sight signals. So overland, do they bounce some signals off satellites attached to high altitude balloons or do they bounce some signals off the Crystal Firmament?


2.) 21 Feb 2020 20:32:27
Agree land is a total different ball game because of what u have listed.
In regards to the ocean u would have to take into account size of waves above sea level I would guess.
In regards to the satellites I can only see them working as a ballon type configuration.

{Ed033's Note - yeah, but if you have transmission stations high above sea level, that should take care of waves on a normal day.


3.) 21 Feb 2020 20:35:52
That video posted the other day from above the storm was something to see.

{Ed033's Note - Yes, it actually may have shown us the Firmament.


4.) 21 Feb 2020 22:09:30
Yes that is realistic,
If u go above wave height there should be no obstructions to stop a signal being sent straight across.

And to me when I see that video I looked as though a jelly fish type shape appeared after the lighting lol.
Unless that was some sort of pixel mix up on my device.

{Ed033's Note - It could have been some kind of plasma or electrical or electro magnetic event.


5.) 22 Feb 2020 00:19:09
Surely even across the Atlantic ocean the curvature of the earth plays a big part.
We all know the world is a sphere right?

{Ed033's Note - It appears it can't be proven to be a sphere and all observations seem to show it's not a sphere. Before the early 1900s, it was taught in schools that the Earth was flat. Wherever has anbody observed curved water?


6.) 23 Feb 2020 11:02:11
The miniscus on top of an over full glass, raindrops,


 

 

 

Ed033 has no Banter Posts

 

 

Ed033's rumour replies

 

Click To View This Thread

26 Feb 2020 18:13:36
Reposts of NASA faking outer space posted originally by Souther Monkey.
1. where someone's head outside the space shuttle gets in the way of the model and 2. recent video where NASA launches a satellite into a tank of water with the lights off.
Why do they need to always fake outer space?

This is NASA footage of the STS-8 Challenger mission, 1983.

At 3min 27s you can see the launch of the satellite from the cargo bay. Does anything catch your attention at this time?

Like the giant head floating in space?

Clearly the astronaut narrating missed it.

Also, at 4m 12s, get ready to turn the Earth on!






Here is the launch of the 'Solar Orbiter' a few days ago.

7m23s switch Earth on.

7m26s - 7m30s They don't think the Earth is curved enough. 7m30s ah that's better.

You can see the underwater satellite launch at 7m37s.

Mariana trench here we come!



 

 

Click To View This Thread

22 Feb 2020 20:21:42
Can you imagine sending astronauts to the Moon with an alleged 1x10 to minus 11 Torr and not even being able to test whether they can handle being in a 1x10 to minus 11 Torr vacuum?

Apparently only 1 guy in a space suit has ever been in a 1x10 to minus 6 Torr vacuum chamber and he was in there for 2 seconds before passing out and they had to get him out. He said that just before passing out, he could feel the moisture on his tongue boiling.


 

 

Click To View This Thread

21 Feb 2020 08:26:47
Yes, they have to destroy the knowledge and physical evidence of the past. They don't want us knowing about the Atlanteans / Tartarians.


 

 

Click To View This Thread

19 Feb 2020 16:28:03
Thanks Southern Monkey, I saw a Galen Winsor video before, from what he says, it makes things make more sense.


 

 

Click To View This Thread

18 Feb 2020 07:54:38
The video at timestamp 18 Feb 2020 07:46:28 says a bit more on the concave / convex fisheye lenses.


 

 

 

Ed033 has no Banter Replies