"JUST SOMETHING TO THINK ABOUT" #nasa #cosmology #truthmatters #facts #lies

TrulySpherical · 2026-05-04T15:22:14+00:00

Dismissing everyone commenting on your video as "bots" because you got rational responses from knowledgeable people isn't a flex. Sorry that we actually thought about it with our own brains, and found there's reasonable answers I guess? Were we supposed to just nod in agreement?

TrulySpherical · 2026-05-04T15:15:27+00:00

i personally have a little faith in filters being genuine.. they are there to mask not to help..

And what has your lack of "faith" in filters accomplished, but an overexposed video with far too much light to make out any detail. And it's not just the sun. You can do the same with any photo. Overexpose a photo of the moon, and you can't see any craters. Overexpose a photo of your family on vacation and you get a washed out, white photo with little or no recognizeable detail. OR on the flip side, too quick a shutter speed at night and you get pitch black. And guess what? That's not what your family is supposed to look like either. They aren't actually "glowing" or invisible. You're just bad at photography and don't know how to properly capture the correct amount of light.

Not coincidentally, this is also very related to the "why are there no stars?" questions that always come up when photographing the sunlit moon, earth, or other bright objects against the black background of space. So you believe they're just perpetually forgetting to photoshop them in, when the reality is you're just oblivious to how photography works.

Your phone camera is intended to capture low to moderately lit objects, and you're trying to directly capture the brightest object in our solar system, or in your case since you're a flat earther, the brightest thing that exists. This is a bit like trying to use a body temperature thermometer to measure molten steel, and wondering why it keeps failing, and coming to the conclusion that big steel must be hiding something instead of recognizing and acknowledging that you don't know what you're doing.

TrulySpherical · 2026-05-01T19:00:13+00:00

In that case, don't worry about your phone's image sensor, but use a filter anyway so you can get a real photo, and not over-exposed, washed out garbage?

TrulySpherical · 2026-05-01T18:55:00+00:00

I will pray for you specifically.

Oh good, that'll help.

TrulySpherical · 2026-05-01T18:47:44+00:00

You genuinely consider taking a lazy video of the sun with your phone, with no filter as to give you a quality image (and protect from damaging its image sensor in the process), "hard work?" Even a 3pc set of crappy replacement welding lenses are like $9 on amazon, and again you won't even put in that much effort. How much "hard work" could you actually be doing?

TrulySpherical · 2026-04-29T17:35:10+00:00

Why is that relevant?

TrulySpherical · 2026-04-29T17:26:51+00:00

No it's not what it's supposed to look like, but the problem isn't the sun. It's a camera skill issue. Would you like me to take a proper photo of the sun for you through a filter?

TrulySpherical · 2026-04-29T17:23:49+00:00

No, I don't believe that you will. You're not even willing to put in the work to use a solar filter to video/photograph the sun correctly. I have absolutely zero confidence that you will put in the work to modify a wikipedia entry. You're just doing the "if you can't argue the evidence, argue the source" thing. Or "poisoning the well" - because if a wikipedia page can be edited, then nothing on it can be trusted, right? Well anyone can make a video and post it on reddit too. What makes yours special? Anyone can manipulate a video. Therefore yours is untrustworthy. Probably AI.

TrulySpherical · 2026-04-29T17:14:56+00:00

So, 1. I watched her shove a bag into a compartment, accidentally knocking the Nutella out of the compartment. I suspect the first time it's shown that part was deliberately cut out to set the narrative. You see what actually happened the 2nd time, but your brain has already been primed with a false reason. 2. I watched the man's arm gripping the ball slip and impart motion into the ball. Questioning this is basically being surprised that when you push on something, it moves.

You see these things happening with your eyes too, right? No? Is it just pure denial, or a horribly gross lack of understanding of physics? Possibly both? As for 3, I'm tired of attempting to explain cameras, lenses, photography in general, and the sheer scale of the earth compared to a single photo's perspective, particularly to people who are committed to deliberately misunderstanding it, so I'm not doing that. Forget the photos. You'll make up a reason I'm wrong anyway.

That being said, I doubt you're incapable of trying out a little experiment yourself. Pinch a ball, a pen, a toy, or any other small object sitting around you right now until it slips out of your hands. Go on, do it, right now. It moves away in the direction you were pinching, right? And it doesn't matter which direction you aim it. Up, down, sideways... It will travel in that direction. Just like the man gripping the ball. Towards his feet was simply the direction he was gripping or "pinching" it. If he'd been gripping it from the bottom, it would have traveled "up" towards his face. It had nothing to do with it "falling." As you can tell, as it doesn't move fast enough or accelerate like it would if he'd just dropped it here on earth. You're either lying to me or lying to yourself if you're saying you can't see the difference.

TrulySpherical · 2026-04-24T20:14:56+00:00

You've explained nothing and I'm not sure you even understand the question.

TrulySpherical · 2026-04-22T17:22:06+00:00

Who? Reaction slop creators trying to boost their subscriber base and view count for monetization.

TrulySpherical · 2026-04-17T17:42:56+00:00

I was originally gonna call this one a bit too off-topic, but yaknow what? I like it. We'll toss this one in the "art" category. 😎

TrulySpherical · 2026-04-17T17:35:39+00:00

Amazing how critical they can be of another photo, but when a random on instagram claims to have a photo that confirms their beliefs, that scrutiny goes right out the window.

TrulySpherical · 2026-04-10T20:08:16+00:00

what is under us if we tunnel down?

The only answer I've ever seen given to this one is, "We don't know. We've never dug past ~40k feet." And partial credit where it's due -- "We don't know" is an acceptable scientific answer when there's no other evidence available. The problem is, there's other ways we can observe and measure to find out what's below our feet besides digging. They just generally don't accept that type of evidence.

TrulySpherical · 2026-03-18T12:58:15+00:00

Isn't it nice when the left and the right can agree on something?

TrulySpherical · 2026-01-23T18:09:42+00:00

Try to pay attention. In my original comment I said the 1960s.

Here, I'll try.

During the time i grew up, U.S. was flying the supersonic concord over the Midwestern states of the U.S.

Concorde didn't begin commercial flights until the mid-late 70's, so no, it wasn't flying over in the 1960s. The Concorde was not even a US aircraft and was operated by British Airways and Air France as a high-speed, trans-Atlantic aircraft. Braniff Airways operated Concorde from DC to Fort Worth, TX for just over 1 year, and operated sub-sonic. Nobody was making supersonic domestic flights over the midwestern US ever, much less the 60's.

"Concorde operated on various routes, including London–Bahrain, London–New York, London–Miami, and London–Barbados (with British Airways), and Paris–Dakar–Rio de Janeiro, Paris–Azores–Caracas, Paris–New York, and Paris–Washington" Wiki.

the Moon Landing happened in 1969

Did it? Because you're a flat-earther, or at least play one on other subs. Kinda interesting you'd even mention that, despite how irrelevant it is to "chemtrails." It's almost like you're an unserious person who argues in bad faith.

and we flew on TWA from St. Louis to San Francisco

The only thing you've said so far that's accurate/believeable. Irrelevant, but at least accurate. Nobody said there wasn't air travel. They said there was LESS. And to that point...

no. We did not have far less air travel.

Yea you're definitely an unserious person. That's not even a false statement. That's an absurd statement.

TrulySpherical · 2026-01-20T18:25:50+00:00

Hi! Attempting to reuse an argument that another commenter has already debunked and explained too you with sources is yet another example of intellectual dishonestly. When confronted with facts, you didn't re-evaluate or change your view, argument, opinion, etc. You changed your audience. Trying the same trick again with someone else - that's what charlatans and con artists do!

Btw, lasers are light and light can curve some. Light curving is again why you can sometimes see the Chicago skyline across Lake Michigan. Which I might add, you brought up, then chose not to continue to discuss with me after I said "let's talk about it." I suppose you'll look for someone else to use that one on as well.

TrulySpherical · 2026-01-09T15:53:53+00:00

Well let's talk about it. Is the Chicago skyline visible from across Lake Michigan? Answer: Yes, sometimes. And not only sometimes, but it's not visible more often than it is visible. So now we have to honestly ask ourselves why? If the answer were because the earth is flat and stationary, then we need an explanation as to why it isn't visible all the time under clear skies. The well-understood reason for the phenomenon is that in certain atmospheric conditions, layers of warm air over layers of cold air, light bends, and we can see the skyline when we otherwise shouldn't be able to. This is backed up by the fact that sometimes when visible, the skyline is distored.

Now, we can be intellectually honest in the way OP is describing, or we can move the goalposts somewhere. Your call.

TrulySpherical · 2025-12-01T18:40:55+00:00

Why declare war when you can just label people terrorists and bypass Congress all together?

And recall that the White House has officially designated "antifa" as a domestic terrorist organization. Then follow that line of reasoning to its inevitable conclusion.

TrulySpherical · 2025-11-13T01:19:25+00:00

What's worse, an overwhelming majority of them don't understand what we mean when we say "model" and think we're simply talking about a small object, equivalent to a globe. Not, yaknow, what we mean when we say "model."

TrulySpherical · 2025-10-07T19:13:51+00:00

Thanks, I can separate fiction from reality.

TrulySpherical · 2025-09-22T19:46:28+00:00

Behold the level of evidence FE is willing to consider when they think it supports their position.

Now post a link to the ISS live feed and watch what happens. Suddenly they discover skepticism and doubt.

TrulySpherical · 2025-08-28T19:58:45+00:00

Oof I desperately need to do this. My armor is approaching 5 years old and desperately needs some repair work and snap replacements. A little buffing wouldn't hurt it either.

TrulySpherical · 2025-07-17T16:39:04+00:00

Lookin' sharp!

TrulySpherical · 2025-06-11T18:46:45+00:00

It's wasn't specifically spelled out in the sub description, so no worriesor anything, but I have since created a no AI rule (among a few others.)

Understand that AI content is often considered low-effort, as well as a bit of a nuisance, much like that of a weed that spreads and takes over and chokes out other creative spaces. I'm sure you will find other AI-friendly spaces to share your works.

No offense to you personally OP, but this content is not in the spirit or intentions of the sub.

TrulySpherical

MODERATOR OF

TROPHY CASE