Відео

Yeah Sunny is cool, and I think he's a flat earther! lol - As to Jay, I had seen a video of his a while back where he made a very demeaning comment against flat earthers which in the context of his field of research seems inappropriate. Like you note, he's opposing and supporting NASA at the same time, speaking out of both sides of his mouth. As I said in the comments, I'm earth shape agnostic at the moment. But I don't denigrate anyone who is sincerely seeking the truth of the matter. I don't speak ill of those who think this is a simulation, or crater earthers, infinite plane earthers, hollow or concave earthers, toroidal field earthers etc., if they are sincerely exploring those possibilities. I think it's possible he's acting as a guard rail, a limited hangout agent trying to keep his flock in his narrow paradigm. I think he needed to be called out on it and I applaud you for doing so, and you inspired me to join in. Not to mess him up as you say, but to attempt to get him to at least acknowledge that there are many valid arguments for the various positions, some weaker than others of course, but still valid areas of inquiry. If he mocks people for believing in any of the earth models other than his own, then he should be ok with people mocking him for believing Kubrick filmed Apollo 11. Look forward to seeing more of your commentary!

​@@strainjerdaze Thanks, friend. We do not know if the Earth is endless or not nor do we know if there is any kind of dome or barrier. We do know that it cannot be concave in the same way we can prove that it is not convex. As I said, we do not know the dimensions of our Earth or if there are any other continents or worlds beyond but we do know the procession of the Sun, Moon, and stars, wandering stars, and can even calculate their position at any given time. The ancient cultures could calculate future eclipses using this unchanging system. So I think we can cautiously hypothesize that the Earth is a disk but we have no idea of its depth. And by using a sextant and trigonometry we can also easily calculate the distance of the Sun and Moon by their crepuscular rays. and know that both luminaries are very close and not millions of miles away. Jay asked me about the shadow on the moon and I linked him to a website that shows him that the moon phases are not created by the Earth's shadow, even NASA has to admit this since they have no explanation as to why we can at all times, somewhere in the world see both the Sun and Moon in the sky together. He also never got back to me about any real pictures of any satellite or planet that is not CGI created or a painting. I don't blame him since no one can as they don't exist. Just to let you know, 95% of the fake moon landing pictures were made in the 1990s. With the advent of the internet, people were demanding NASA to release more pictures. If you are old enough, you can remember that before the internet we were stuck with the same 5 or 6 grainy pictures. for decades. So NASA had to rush to create all these fakes where they got the lighting, logic, and chronological sequence all wrong. I listen to Jay, mostly for his guests who talk about economics and usually bypass his Kubrick obsession. And strangely, Jay doesn't do a very good job at disproving the moon landings. All he has to do is ask why they never a full 360 with the camera. It is because if they did then we would see the stage, film, and lighting crew, and the director Stanley Kubrick, himself! By the way, here is an interesting channel that you might be interested in: ua-cam.com/channels/adBL43irIsBzL6-tIunFtA.html Cheers.

@@karl2416 excellent points. Good to know you're also questioning history. I've been subbed to Michelle's channel for a while, and others like it. I think the history con is bigger than the moon landing con as to the scope of it. It's all been a pack of lies all along hasn't it?

@@strainjerdaze There definitely has been a reset and I think part of it was natural and part of it deliberate. Seems like history was either pushed back a thousand years or perhaps mostly re-written We really stay open about this and should make assumptions about things we don't have an answer for. I find the idea of a worldwide mood flood to be fascinating and there is much evidence to support it such as how they are able to dig out 80% of an already huge building. In my opinion, the mud flood was probably not created from the sky but from underneath the ground. And I won't even start to assume I know what the Star Forts are but the ones found in America sure as Hell are not American architecture and the ones found in the west coast surely were built before the Lewis and Clark Expedition and had no place in the Civil War.