Lost NASA Tapes Unearthed: Astronauts Heard ‘Music’ on Far side of the Moon

| |

Top Tier Gear USA

the moon wikimedia

When astronauts with the Apollo 10 mission traveled around the far side of the moon, they didn’t expect to hear anything on their radios. After all they would be out of radio contact with Mission Control for over an hour. In fact, there’s no way any transmission from Earth could reach them during this brief period of time. They did however, hear something really strange that day, which they likened to “music.”

Fortunately their conversations were recorded so NASA could exam them after they regained radio contact, but they were promptly classified and buried for nearly 40 years, until they were released in 2008. The nature of the transmission has been debated since then, but no definitive conclusions have been drawn.

Recently, the science channel released a documentary on the incident as part of their series “NASA’s Unexplained Files.” Check it out below, and share what you think these astronauts heard in the comments.

Delivered by The Daily Sheeple

We encourage you to share and republish our reports, analyses, breaking news and videos (Click for details).

Contributed by Joshua Krause of The Daily Sheeple.

Joshua Krause is a reporter, writer and researcher at The Daily Sheeple. He was born and raised in the Bay Area and is a freelance writer and author. You can follow Joshua’s reports at Facebook or on his personal Twitter. Joshua’s website is Strange Danger .

Wake The Flock Up! Please Share With Sheeple Far & Wide:
  • Razedbywolvs


  • MrApple

    The “alien” music is still better than 83% of the shit they play on the radio today.

    • Lydia Anderson

      ❝my .friend’s mate Is getting 98$. HOURLY. on the internet.”….two days ago new McLaren. F1 bought after earning 18,512$,,,this was my previous month’s paycheck ,and-a little over, 17k$ Last month ..3-5 h/r of work a day ..with extra open doors & weekly. paychecks.. it’s realy the easiest work I have ever Do.. I Joined This 7 months ago and now making over 87$, p/h.Learn. More right Here:;/465➤➤➤➤➤ http://GlobalSuperEmploymentVacanciesReportsOnline/GetPaid/98$hourly…. .❦2:❦2:❦2:❦2:❦2:❦2:❦2:❦2:❦2:❦2:❦2:❦2:❦2:❦2:❦2:❦2:❦2:❦2:❦2:❦2:❦2:❦2:❦2:❦2:❦2:❦2:❦2:❦2:::::;/465……..

    • Amyekaiser2

      ❝my .friend’s mate Is getting 98$. HOURLY. on the internet.”….two days ago new McLaren. F1 bought after earning 18,512$,,,this was my previous month’s paycheck ,and-a little over, 17k$ Last month ..3-5 h/r of work a days ..with extra open doors & weekly. paychecks.. it’s realy the easiest work I have ever Do.. I Joined This 7 months ago and now making over 87$, p/h.Learn. More right Here!b!495➤➤➤➤➤ http://GlobalSuperEmploymentVacanciesReportsApple/GetPaid/98$hourly…. .❦2:❦2:❦2:❦2:❦2:❦2:❦2:❦2:❦2:❦2:❦2:❦2:❦2:❦2:❦2:❦2:❦2:❦2:❦2:❦2:❦2:❦2:❦2:❦2:❦2:❦2:❦2:❦2:::::!b!495……

  • doucyet

    Ground control to Major Tom………….


  • fedup taxpayer

    swamp gas… or other logically explained phenomena …. nothing to see here!

  • moovova

    I’ve had THAT album for several decades.

  • Donna

    Well remember it is

    The Dark Side of the Moon

  • Kula Farmer

    Was it Pink Floyd?

  • Unapologetically White

    Weird Al.

  • RandyJ/ProudSurvivor

    If the Hollow Moon Theory is correct, the “music” heard could be from vibration or resonance brought about by objects impacting the surface, or thermal differentiation. Or, it could be that the aliens were rockin’ out.

  • Dow Jones

    Mercans do not question dear leader & your elite guardians of the holy hubris rotten apple pie upon which you are fed. Listen not to these dissidents, malcontents & unamercan non sheeple rabble rousers. Remember Pentacon Kill Industries, the Washing town whore house & its all mighty 1% empowered psychopathic scum are in control.

    Do not doubt or falter or YOU TOO will be going on a permanent FEMA Punishment Park Japanese style sojourn. Now on your knees & let US prey & prey & then some

    Remember o protoplasmic sons of Merca the sacred WASPish trinity of doctrinal tenets upon which the religion of the dogma of the Holy Hubris is erected.

    ONE: Harvey Lee did smite John F Kennedy, womanising playboy Knight of Camelot and said sneaky malcontent commie bastud Patsy Harvey did so all on his own using “magic bullets” and ancient wop rifle (because said knight wanted to give away our Mercan stuff to the poor and lesser tribes upon which we feed).

    TWO: NaSA and Pentacon Kill Industries’ NAZI rocket meisters then proceeded to “land” tin can on moon (dark side thereof when no one was looking) using fred flintstone technology and Hollyweird magic light box wizzardy to get all red blooded Mercans wet and gasping in awe at our prowess. Brave moononauts then shot a round of hoppy golf, snapped some kodak for the kids, pissed off back up in the “sky” in cool tin can and got home just in time for Archie Bunker.

    THREE: terrist camel herders from Bush’s Saudi oil patch did with terrible cunning and immeasurable guile using only box cutters, strippers, coke and fanatical hatred of our “freedoms” did tear down our phallic boxes of bizness as usual in Manhattan, blow up Pentacon Kill Industries head office, knocked plane out of sky using nail clippers and then finished off WTC 7 20 mins too late after the BBC talking head skipped a page and almost blew the whole scam.

    These are the holy doctrines of the troika of miracles upon which our cultural sanity rests. Now let US continue preying coz that’s all we are capable of. Ah

    Onward o sheeple to the Holy Hollow Cost when there will be hell to pay for our abounding stupidity!

    delusions…breaking the Matrix once and for all.

    Werner Von Braun
    Disney logic before “the trick”

    A funny thing happened on the way to the moon

    General shenanigans…

    • Gary

      Lol. 🙂

  • harry freeloaderII

    I’ve heard music coming from my bath tub drain. Does that mean the aliens are living in the sewer or was that a dynamite doobie I smoked?

    • Gawd, that makes me miss my nights spent high listening to the Moody Blues!

      • sunshine

        I love the Moody Blues! 😀

  • Ken, Megapolis

    And this website wonders why I spend more time on Facebook.
    Zuckerberg is a donkey we all agree. However, he posts far less ballshit than this rubbish place. Part of me would rather kiss Hilary Clinton than come here again.
    So help me afford another night out on £7 an hour??

    • Maybe you’d oblige us by explaining why you spend ANY time on Facebook?

    • reggie

      Wash your mouth out with soap? killery? The thought makes me gag.

  • Jeffersonian

    Who is writing this bs? We never went to the moon, or land on it! They’ve admitted they can’t travel that far without killing people, let alone have the cameras and film able to withstand the temps and radiation

    • Why hasn’t anybody shot photos of the trash we left on the moon with the superior optics he have now, if it is there?

    • sunshine

      Yep. Whenever anyone brings it up, all my husband ever says is “Van Allen radiation belts”. Nothing else needs to be said. We were talking to my mother about it once, and she told me that my grandfather said that it was all a hoax back when it happened. She thought he was just a crazy hillbilly (he was a coal miner in Appalachia), so when we convinced her, she laughed and said she was sorry for ever laughing at him and that he was right. She was kind of awed that he could see through the BS somehow. But I think people back then were less credulous in a lot of ways (and maybe more so in a lot of different ways).

      • You, your husband, Mother and grandfather are wise people.

      • This from a self-proclaimed Trump supporter.

    • Never A Straight Answer is a money-stealing, bullshit, military, psyop agency and so far… they are doing a GREAT job because most still believe in them.

    • “They’ve admitted!” LMFAO. Of course “they” have.

  • Sometimes this general ignorance of electromagnetic radiation, its sources, and its effects, is one of the most annoying parts of “the deliberate dumbing down of america.” Why would they waste limited power by leaving their radio receiver on?…

  • Adol Hintner

    This is all a hoax, the earth is flat, and they never went to the moon. Check out Mark Sargeant, on youtube, ‘Flat earth explained.’
    Why does the U.N. flag have an official flat earth map on it? Look at the U.N. flag, and then look for the South Pole.

    • davee
      • So why are REAL explorers wanted by the authorities in several countries? Can’t just sail a boat to an icy destination where nobody lives without getting arrested? Why?

        Courtesy of Gary:

        • Adol Hintner


      • Adol Hintner

        I don’t want to fly around in circles. I think you need to get out of the plane, and really try to explore it. You’ll be arrested.

        • Al Mather

          You can get out of your plane and ski right to the heart of it. http://www.adventureconsultants.com/adventure/SouthPoleAlltheWay/

          • Adol Hintner

            How do you know that’s the heart of it, and not the end of the line, have you ever taken this trip?

          • Al Mather

            Because Antarctica has been circumnavigated many,many many times…is consistently flown over, it is well mapped and we know it’s dimensions.
            Fellate Earthers need to deny all this to cling to their stupidity.

          • Gary

            But no one is allowed to check those dimensions, because that would be illegal. Insurance, permits etc. Tsk, tsk. 🙂

          • Al Mather

            Childishly lame. The requirement of ships to carry insurance and act in accordance to maritime laws has nothing specifically to do with Antarctica. Your guy Jarle was not attempting to “map” or check dimension when his ship sank… he was riding ATVs to the pole. He got their and did his thing with NO permit anyway.

          • Gary doesn’t follow you anywhere but you follow him all over the internet so doesn’t that make YOU the loser?

            You follow me around too… how pathetic.. you should look into getting your own life 🙂

          • Al Mather

            I enjoy shutting down Flat Earth garbage. Thank you for introducing me to it….it epitomizes narrow, anti intelligence, hate filled, conspiratorial pseudo science. Exposing it for how ridiculous it is and making you guys face your own stupidity, well…. it’s a guilty pleasure.

          • ..and it also makes YOU the loser following others around, not us, so let’s knock it off with the projection eh?

            I can just use simple math to shut you down… it’ll work every. single. time. 🙂

          • Al Mather

            I say keep trying. I’m right here.
            Seems to me you and Gary got paddled BAD in the math department by Andrew Lazarus, and Fred.. I noticed when those guys dissected your faulty math you both just scurried away.
            Conversations are still sitting there waiting for you if you want to go back and dazzle us with math.

          • Fred calculations were wrong(8″ x miles instead of miles²) and mine were correct(8″ x miles²). I labeled it as calculating the bulge when it was in fact calculating the obscurity… but my math was still correct and always was, just not the calculation needed for the bulge in between 2 points.

            Andrew Lazarus uses 8″ x miles instead of 8″ per mile² so he can’t be THAT good at math or else he is purposely lying 🙂

            The bulge determination calculation from Fred was correct just as my curvature calculation was correct 🙂

          • Al Mather

            That’s not how the conversations went… or what those guys contended.. go back and finish them off Rolly!

          • Well the math IS still sitting there, right where I left it for anyone to read, no modifications 🙂

          • Al Mather

            Right where you left it when you tucked tail and ran…sure is.

          • No need, math doesn’t lie 🙂

          • Al Mather

            And BTW…I was commenting on Adol’s post when Gary chimed in.

          • Gary

            Lol. So we just have to trust you and your fellow masons that the dimensions are correct? And the fact that its illegal to go to Antarctica is just an inconvenient truth that we’ll have to accept? The time for believing cons such as this was last century. 🙂

            Jarle never reached any south pole, as it doesn’t exist.

            If you didn’t live in your own mom’s basement, perhaps you would be less obsessed with others doing the same. 😀

          • Al Mather

            The reason we non delusional adults use the construct of you delusional conspiracy types as “living in your Moms basement”, is the way you constantly interpret normal “out here in the real world ‘ reality into dark or scary boogeymen signs.
            It’s NOT illegal to go to Antarctica… it just requires a permit. An estimated 30,000 people make it there each year IN SPITE of how barely survivable and generally inhospitable it is upon arrival. Most countries require passports and/or travel visa.. insurance is a reality… hundreds of vessel have circumnavigated the Antarctic. You dolts have seized upon ONE GUY …who btw is not some fellate earth nut…went there without any prerequisite permits, ill prepared and uninsured. His crew and ship perished. He is a criminal. Which makes him the hero of your fairy tale I guess.

    • Mark Sergeant and Eric Dubay are at odds with one another but each has their contributions.

    • Al Mather

      is the flat earth surrounded by laurels and flying on a pole… what kind of idiotic logic is that?

      • Adol Hintner

        The Globe theory was invented in 1500’s and was never able to be proven until 1950’s. Do you believe the earth is spinning at 700 miles per hour on the equator line and the earth is totally still on many days? What kind of idiotic logic is that?

        • Actually, since the circumference of the earth is 24,901.55 miles, and it takes 24 hours to rotate completely, the speed at the equator would be a bit over 1000 mph. Mathematics will always best idiotic anything. You have to remember that the atmosphere rotates with the planet, and the oceans.

          • If that is true this photo couldn’t exist: [click for photo]. So why don’t we see horizontal streaks across the night sky where seemingly still stars currently sit? Do the stars move along with the oceans and atmosphere also?

            You’re right about the mathematics, it always disproves the BS, that’s why I use math!

            You just got a troll up-vote on that one, FYI.

          • Al Mather

            Faulty premise. We would only see those streaks if the stars were right overhead … not if the stars are lights years away.. fixed in relation to Earth as we rotate …so we
            see them move across the night sky like the hour hands of a clock.. the direction you point your camera changes the imagery of the start trails in a manner that …. of course… supports what all of us non delusional people know of the rotation of the Earth relative to the stars

          • Balhh blahh blahh, no circular star trails over a spinning anything, PERIOD:

            Star trails1
            Star trails2
            Star trails3
            Star trails4

            We aren’t moving at all but the sky is, all around us, constantly, since the beginning of time, just as these photos clearly show you and anyone else who looks at them. So… are these photos all fakes? They clearly prove your faulty premise.

            You need magic to explain your dogma, I only need my two eyes.

          • Al Mather

            That’s exactly what happens …and what would happen … if you were on a spinning sphere pointing a camera toward the axis.. not complicated!
            Why do we get different star trails (which happen to support the rotating sphere) if we point the camera North, South ,East & West???…Sorry cupcake…we’re on a sphere.
            What magic? It’s so simple a child can grasp it. Not sure where your confusion comes from.
            BTW.. Polaris is about 3/4 of a degree from the axis so it makes it’s own little circle too.. if somehow you think that’s some kind of complicated magic I can’t help you.

          • Lol, the start rails all oscillate around Polaris which needs to move perfectly along with the earth for your ball model to work… and it doesn’t. Please find a life.

          • Al Mather

            Grasp idiot boy… the motion in the pics is not the stars… it’s the camera.

          • It’s time lapse photography you shill and no you can’t fake that by spinning the camera around, lol, not with the land in the same frame. The camera needs to be set up for weeks and many stills combined to create that effect.

          • Al Mather

            **sigh** The camera is moving…BECAUSE IT’S ON THE EARTH.
            The stars are billions of miles away …laughing at you.

          • Polaris has never moved… laughing harder!

          • Al Mather

            Hope this simple drawing makes it easier for you.

          • If it stays put we aren’t spinning no matter any tilt, wobble or roll. The ONLY place you would be able to observe the circular star trail phenomenon on a spinning anything would be to situate yourself directly beneath the spinning point, which is Polaris, and circular star trails can photographed from anywhere because after all, the fixed sky continues to move above us no matter what vantage point we observe it from.

          • Al Mather

            Your understanding of the perspective is faulty …Circular star trails are absolutely possible from both hemispheres.. Oddly it seems only Flat Earthers seem to have this difficulty understanding the perspective of the scale of the earth relative to the position of the stars. Amateur photographers share their knowledge here. Maybe you could get one of them to explain it to you…http://photo.net/travel-photography-forum/00Bodf

          • Given how far away those stars are relative to how far the observer moves…

          • If you were spinnin’ then(since the beginning of time) and you are still spinnin’ now you should see horizontal streaks, not dots, no matter the distance.

          • Human sight is not time lapse like the linked photo.

          • 1000mph spin creates streaks no matter what

          • Not when panned from many light years away.

          • Again, those CIRCULAR star trail pictures I linked to absolutely prove that the sky moves and we do not as they would be horizontal otherwise regardless of distance.

          • Of course the sky moves. If it didn’t, we wouldn’t need astronomers or star charts.

          • So why do you think it is us and not the sky moving then?

          • Geosynchronous satellites move too, but you’d have a hard time proving it to someone who doesn’t believe that they are in orbit.

          • You dodged the question. Time-lapse photographs, like the ones I linked to, are created from filming the night sky for extended periods of time. It is not possible on a spinning ball to to take circular-star trail, time-lapse photographs that I have already provided as proof in those pictures I posted.

          • It is only possible if they are taken from the poles of a spinning globe, which would simultaneously prove the positioning.

          • YES! Circular star trails would only be possible on a spinning ball if you were situated directly beneath Polaris! This photo here was taken from Australia which is why Polaris is so low to the Horizon: https://images.duckduckgo.com/iu/?u=http%3A%2F%2Fblog.wanken.com%2Fwp-content%2Fuploads%2F2012%2F07%2Fstar-trails-over-the-australian-outback-01.jpg&f=1

          • Regardless of where it was taken, it is of little more than aesthetic value without the temporal data.

          • It clearly shows that:
            A. The time-lapse photograph was not taken directly beneath Polaris as Polaris is observed very low on the horizon, not directly overhead of the observer/time-lapse photographer.
            B. The time lapse-photo clearly shows circular star trial patterns proving that we are still and the sky moves as one above us regardless of the distance of said stars/sky.

          • or C. The photographer spun the camera about the lens’ axis while making a time lapse exposure.

          • Nope, impossible, as the relative position of the stars to the land beneath(both stars and land are observed in the same frame) it would not change and they would have to in order to get a circular star trail effect.

          • How can a basketball player spin a basketball on his finger, then? I guess Photoshop is out of the question as well?

          • Has nothing to do with the relative position of the stars vs. the land. Your faulty premise would only be possible with a “sky-only” shot taken from directly beneath the north star, Polaris.

            How can basketball players play basketball at all on an object spinning @ 1000mph? Those would be some tough jump shots 😉

          • Did you take this photograph?

          • Nope, didn’t take any of these either and even if I did you would just say that I am lying 🙂

          • I’m just trying to establish why you place so much credibility in something you found online. Forrest Gump shaking JFK’s hand is just as credible.

          • Well those pics are backed up with my own two eyes which I can use to observe the seemingly still night sky.

          • You can see in time lapse?

          • I can see we aren’t spinning, clearly. I can also see circular star trials, not horizontal ones.

          • You can see me? I guess I’ll have to find something better to cover the camera on this Chromebook!
            You said you can see the same thing with your eyes that is shown in the photos. How do you see what was recorded in time lapse without time lapse vision? Who’s dodging the question now?

          • Where did I ever say I can see you? I used my search and can’t find the text. Yes, I can see the same still sky that those photos are based upon, I do not have time-lapse vision nor did I ever imply that i did and not answering if I can see in time lapse it hardly a question dodge as everyone knows I cannot.

          • “I can see we aren’t spinning, clearly.” Who else constitutes “we”? If you can’t see what the photos show, you can’t see what the photo show. You can’t see everything that tells me that I’m on a big spinning pile of rocks, but not you, so your senses are different from mine, obviously. So, the planet is a cube?

          • “Who else constitutes “we”?”Everyone on Earth.

            I still can’t find the text where I asserted these extraordinary abilities you claim I have. I am just merely posting pictures of proof of what I am saying and they DO prove what I am saying without a doubt.

          • If the earth isn’t a globe, what is it?

          • Look at the UN logo, they know too! http://www.un.org/ – hidden in plain sight!

            Here is what I want to know(but probably never will know): What is on and beyond the Rockefeller Plateaus in West

          • The earth is a colander?

          • Al Mather

            Prove that the pics were taken in Australia.
            There would have to be some Australian photography blog with hundreds of them.
            Star patterns of MANY directions are easily understood, created, and provable on our rotating sphere. Amateur shutterbugs make them all the time.
            You discount all NASA, satellite imagery ..all ISS.. all international space images as fake.. and you expect this common star trail pic to be your “evidence” because you CLAIM it’s from Australia…’fraid not

          • Oh so now the pictures are fakes, lol, getting desperate eh?

          • Al Mather

            Picture is probably real…your claim is BS.

          • Not it isn’t as I have exhaustively proven here already… shillon!

          • Al Mather

            You proved the pic is from Australia… I must have missed it… how so?

          • They are from an Australian photography blog.

          • Al Mather

            Link please.

          • Dude, give it up already! So you don’t agree, great, I don’t care! Disagree and move on! I see people on here worshiping religions I don’t agree with at all yet I don’t follow them around telling them how wrong they are, constantly, for weeks, you got probs.

          • Al Mather

            No problems. Not just you Rolly. I like shooting down stupidity. You guys have just provided the most enticing target. Hey …doesn’t change the fact that you float around in topic after topic.. trying to peddle this Flat Earth spew. 2 Sides of the coin.

          • Topic after topic? Only when it comes up and I’ve been on these same sites for years but yet you keep following me and now Gary around which is pathetic! Go start a “I hate flat earthers blog,” I won’t care, I won’t even visit, I’ll be right here like I’ve always been 🙂

          • Al Mather

            Hey if I can find others talking flat earth stupidity… I’ll follow them as well. Disqus is built on following folks. Really though… it’s not as if you just mention it if it comes up… you are part of a little cult of stupidity that constructs faulty premises and “proofs” just for the purpose of debating and convincing people.

          • Al Mather

            Actually just pointing the camera toward your hemispheres axis will give you circular star trails… The closer you are to the pole the more complete ..wider circles you get.

          • Gary

            Lol. Exactly. The sky moves – we do not. Believe what you see, not what they tell you.

          • Actually, if forced to be accurate, the atmosphere moves, the sky is everything above the horizon, which is created by the curvature of the allegedly flat earth in the other direction.

          • Al Mather

            If it take 12 hours for the stars to make that <180 degree journey across our night sky WHY would we see streaks?

          • If we are spinning east to west, regardless of speed, circular star trails are impossible. Circular star trails prove that the sky, not us, is moving.

          • Al Mather

            Funny …every one else seems to be able to grasp how circular star trails are photographed..why they appear as they do.. even how to point your camera different directions to create them showing different angles…how to create them in the southern hemisphere …Where they spin clockwise..opposite of the northern hemisphere star trails.. and we all know what that indicates.

          • Southern circles move, northern one doesn’t, do you understand why that is? There are also vertical looking lines in between the circles sometimes. The sky moves and we don’t… get over it already, it’s always been this way, that’s why using astrology is the best keeper of very long distance time periods, like the Mayans were able to do. No astrology signs observed from a spinning ball, all lines would be horizontal, for the 20th time.

            Learn this on your own, I am not trying to teach. Go look for a shill degrasse tyson explanation
            if that makes you feel better, I already told you I don’t care, I
            already understand and can comprehend this… it’s not on me that you
            can’t, I am not your keeper. You can think I am wrong.. I am fine with that, why can’t you be?

          • Al Mather

            Might have to explain it more than 20 times to the thousands and thousands of photographers from around the world who take counter clockwise star trails in the northern hemisphere… And clockwise star trails in the southern hemisphere… Let’s just take a look at that and tell me how that is possible in the fellate earth model.

          • Your “globe” spins and it doesn’t spin the opposite way beneath the equator according to your $cientists so that phenomenon even makes less sense on ball spinning in the same direction. Are you saying the southern hemisphere spins the opposite way? Remember, Polaris doesn’t move and never has.

            I do understand this and why but I am not going to explain this to you, learn it yourself(taking a learning shortcut by trolling, smart but not honest at all), and you’re wasting my time… again!

          • Al Mather

            Lol…a child can grasp that if you are on a sphere spinning east to west looking up at the northern axis would be counter clockwise. ..and looking up at the southern axis would be clockwise..even I think you are too smart not to realize this simple concept. You can’t explain the variation of star trails direction with a flat earth so you will probably try to squirm out of the conversation at this point. Or just try to deny what photographers all over the world demonstrate. .or are they all secret evil masonic jews too?

          • I told you, you are way off and I am not explaining it to you because YOU AREN’T WORTH IT! BYE!

          • Al Mather

            There’s the squirm away I predicted. Hey.. I don’t blame you..there’s no explanation .. other than the reality of the Earth being a glorious rotating sphere in an amazing wonderful universe.

          • A rotating sphere with Polaris that never moves situated above it, lololol, you go man, you keep thinking that start trails reverse themselves on a ball that only spins one way with a northern star above it that has never moved. There absulutly is an explanation, I have the bookmarks and info right here right now and I’ll explain this concept to an honest truth seeker but not to you because you’ll just keep wasting my time and I’ve already proven you wrong over and over again so it doesn’t even matter at this point. Polaris, as it sits there and doesn’t move in direct alignment with the magnetic north pole at center of Earth and every thing else, discredits your spinning ball to any thinking human being. CASE CLOSED!

          • Al Mather

            Look at a fan from one side idiot…it spins clockwise…. go to the other side of it and look at it… it’s spinning counter clockwise.
            Your inability( or transparent intellectual dishonesty ) to grasp this simple simple concept as you go through these dodging gymnastics is hilarious.
            Of course Polaris doesn’t change its relative angle to us during rotating because it aligns with or axis… again simple simple concept.

          • Look at the still stars, idiot, we aren’t spinning @ 1000mph and since Polaris doesn’t change position, ever, “because it aligns with or axis” then where is the Merry-go-round point directly beneath it on Earth where you will become very dizzy from merely standing? It doesn’t exist… idiot, because your ball model is bullshit and $cience isn’t science.

            Still not giving you the star trail knowledge, you can learn it from me in the future when an honest truth seeker asks the same question. LEAVE ME ALONE!

          • Al Mather

            Well…since you asked…lol…THINK…the earth takes 24 hours to go 360 degrees. ..so. .if you are standing on the axis it still takes 24 hours to go 360…this again..simple simple simple concepts.

          • If I was wrong you wouldn’t be following me around now would you? Again, circular star trails prove we aren’t moving, you would only be able to observe such a phenomenon if you were directly situated beneath it yet we can observe it from Australia! And you’re right about the 24hour rotation scenario, that wouldn’t make you dizzy, that was a bad example on my part but alas, for umpteenth time, I have never branded myself as an expert! The star trails takes an explanation, not 1 comment, and I am not going into that with you and I really don’t care if that makes you think I don’t know, whatever, my previous math has already solidified my position now MOVE ON!

          • Al Mather

            Tsk Tsk … as Gary would say. You have had this explained many times Rolly. It’s a very simple concept & a simple matter of perspective. But my feeling is that no matter how easily grasped it is.. how many times it is shown or demonstrated to you …you will not let your mind get around it or admit …that what everyone from children to amateur photographers, casual stargazers comprehends so naturally.






            As far as this sudden “Leave me alone!” pleas suddenly… all I can say is ..gladly. But I have every right to join in discussions of flat earth stupidity if THAT is what interests me. You might notice I do not join in conversations you are having about other topics.

            Just a few days ago when you were spewing flat earth tripe to others you were practically calling for me to join in..
            “I’ll probably have my zionist troll buddy showing up soon to tell everyone how dumb I am because “false” topics always need zionist shills to constantly discredit them they are so false, hahaha ;-)”

            “Where is my assigned shill? Yo buddy, didn’t your script go off as soon as I typed flat earth, where are you? You puttin’ on your zioman cape first or what?”
            Now that you’re getting spanked about star trails it’s “wah-wah”..

          • *laughs* You are correct, it IS a matter of perspective, you just have no idea how(your fan blade example highlighted your confusion, I had to think about it because it is such a different (literally warped) perspective than that of the flat earth model(it doesn’t make logical sense and things must be logical in my world, I think logically, I think like a machine, I have to, to be effective and a spinning ball would NOT produce those effects(no ID of constellations)) but even with the flat earth model I needed a simulator so I could see it and yes the star trails change complete direction in the southern portion of the sky, due to perspective).

            Yeah I said those things because you come and troll every single time I post flat earth facts and if you weren’t lurking in the background you wouldn’t have known I said it…. so I was right, wasn’t I? Of course I was, after all, here you are 🙂

            Are you a fan of The Who? Smart people, they knew too:

            I Can See For Miles – LYRICS

            I know you’ve deceived me, now here’s a surprise
            I know that you have ’cause there’s magic in my eyes

            I can see for miles and miles and miles and miles and miles
            Oh yeah

            If you think that I don’t know about the little tricks you’ve played
            And never see you when deliberately you put things in my way

            Well, here’s a poke at you
            You’re gonna choke on it too
            You’re gonna lose that smile
            Because all the while

            I can see for miles and miles
            I can see for miles and miles
            I can see for miles and miles and miles and miles and miles
            Oh yeah

            You took advantage of my trust in you when I was so far away
            I saw you holding lots of other guys and now you’ve got the nerve to say

            That you still want me
            Well, that’s as may be
            But you gotta stand trial
            Because all the while

            I can see for miles and miles
            I can see for miles and miles
            I can see for miles and miles and miles and miles and miles
            Oh yeah

            I know you’ve deceived me, now here’s a surprise
            I know that you have ’cause there’s magic in my eyes

            I can see for miles and miles and miles and miles and miles
            Oh yeah

            The Eiffel Tower and the Taj Mahal are mine to see on clear days
            You thought that I would need a crystal ball to see right through the haze

            Well, here’s a poke at you
            You’re gonna choke on it too
            You’re gonna lose that smile
            Because all the while

            I can see for miles and miles
            I can see for miles and miles
            I can see for miles and miles and miles and miles and miles
            and miles and miles and miles and miles

            I can see for miles and miles
            I can see for miles and miles
            I can see for miles and miles
            I can see for miles and miles

            ***They got it way back then, why can’t you get it now when it is spoon-fed to you? They were under layers and layers of propaganda back then so I have a new found respect for those guys.

          • Al Mather

            from the album Tommy… A concept album .. Came out when I was in 7th grade . That song was about a guy who was away at war but knew his wife had cheated on him …according to the thread of the Tommy story. But songs are for the listener to take away.
            We have made some progress then! … I cleared you up on your spinning dizzy 1000 mph at the axis concept, and now you grasp that star trails SHOULD spin in opposite direction in different hemispheres…
            Next… Those circular star trails in the northern and southern hemispheres…spinning in opposite directions… are created by focusing the camera on DIFFERENT AXIAL STARS. Think about that for a while and you’ll see TWO things that support that glorious blue ball and disprove FE.

          • Still don’t understand that circular star trails, revolving around Polaris, visible at mid latitudes, is impossible on a spinning ball! THINK! The sky moves, WE DON’T! If we were the ones spinning you’d have to be standing ON the north pole to get your circles, it is not my fault you can’t grasp this.

            Why do I help you? I honestly do not know… Download and install this:
            http://stellarium.org/ – enable the grid, change your view settings to PERSPECTIVE which means the horizon stays flat/level, just like in real life, leave the location at the default, find Polaris and select it, make sure the grid is on, now in the control at the bottom hit fast forward(in time) and you can keep clicking it to speed it up, get a nice speed going to easily observe the FIXED, MOVING sky, observe that you are seeing circular star patterns around Polaris at a mid latitude(impossible on a spinning sphere), now pan to straight overhead, the star trails look horizontal, now look towards the south, the line are moving in the opposite direction and you can start to see an arc, this is all due to perspective. Now change your location to new zealand and locate sigma octanis, then observe the CIRCULAR star trail patterns moving the OPPOSITE way, due to perspective, now look back to the north, again, the almost horizontal lines are moving the opposite way and the farther north you go, as Polaris is visible on the very low horizon you will see the circular star trails around it again. This is the explanation I didn’t feel like giving you, not because it isn’t true but because I don’t feel like go round after round with someone who refuses logic and mathematics and thus will only serve to waste my time! Now do you see? Rhetorical question 🙂

            Trying to explain a concept like this to someone who subscribes to a completely different ideology is like trying to teach a fish to climb a tree and I don’t have time to teach fish to climb trees, does that clear up why I didn’t(and don’t) feel like doing this? The only beneficiary is you, I already understand.

          • Al Mather

            Hahaha… everything you just described is EXACTLY what would happen…and TOTALLY supports the sphere!! Except you keep proclaiming it’s impossible …? All you did was provide a link to virtual software that completely supports what I have been telling you.
            You must have a very stunted sense of abstract visualization.
            Visualize this if you will let yourself…Your tiny little camera lens is on a basketball… keep in mind that every point you stand on the sphere the “radius” is to that point is “plum”.. pointing straight up. …. Polaris is MILES above that basketball… you would be able to see it right down to it’s equator ..from slightly different angle depending on proximity to the axis.. but since that degree to Polaris never changes with rotation as all the other stars do it would appear unmoving as the other stars formed circles to your open shutter.
            This happens in the Southern hemisphere with Octans. Completely different set of stars… counter directional circles. We already established that…Right?
            We know that it does …thousands and thousand of photographers all repeat the experiment.. how COULD that happen UNLESS it was sphere?????

          • Because unless you were plum to Polaris, you wouldn’t see circles, you would see lines if it were YOU(Earth) spinning and not the sky! The fact that you see circles at mid latitudes proves we aren’t spinning but the sky is! I know you didn’t look at the software, you responded too quickly to have done so.

            Polaris is MILES above that basketball… you would be able to see it right down to it’s equator – Correct! Now THINK! You can clearly see Polaris from the underside of your basketball which would be impossible if what you say is true: https://images.duckduckgo.com/iu/?u=http%3A%2F%2Fblog.wanken.com%2Fwp-content%2Fuploads%2F2012%2F07%2Fstar-trails-over-the-australian-outback-01.jpg&f=1 – that low dot that all of the stars are encircling in that photograph is Polaris and that picture was taken from Australia, the far underside of your basketball, thus WE DON’T LIVE ON A SPINNING BALL BUT RATHER AN EXTENDED FLAT PLANE!

            I knew how you would interpret the star trails which is WHY I didn’t feel like getting into this, fish will never climb trees.

          • Al Mather

            Wrong.. wow.. this is simple stuff dude, and you are either truly challenged & just not seeing it or being purposefully obtuse. We’ve already muddled through a few of your misconceptions … this is just another I guess. You just can’t grasp this simple obvious concept because you mind won’t let you grasp the perspective and scale of it. We all get it… we all see it. The rest of the thinking world is not trying to play some kind of trick on you dude.
            If that one pic you keep throwing up as “proof “really is from Australia it would be focused on Octans …giving that clockwise rotation… I don’t see any star in the middle of it so probably.Again… more proof of the spinning blue ball.
            If your degree of angle to the axial star never changes.. you will see circles around it the earth rotates. and it & the surrounding stars remain still… it’s not that hard to grasp.

          • You can’t see Polaris from Australia in your ball model yet there it is! Big ball, small ball, beach ball, fitness ball, the underside can’t see what’s over top no matter how high you go as you would be looking THROUGH the ball in order to see it! Now who is being purposely obtuse?

            I am not avoiding anything about star trials, I have a video that you surely couldn’t comprehend as you can’t even comprehend the fact that circular star trails are not possible at mid latitudes on your spinning Earth-ball. It’s right there, in your face, even time-lapse photography to prove it but you still can’t see it…. on purpose! Since you can’t even grasp that simple concept why makes you think you can comprehend a more difficult concept? YOU CAN’T thus I am not avoiding anything but your further, purposeful misunderstanding! Can’t be in 2nd grade without passing 1st initially.

            That one pic IS PROOF and it IS from Australia and that IS Polaris in the sky very low to the horizon(counter clockwise circles = Polaris at the center), click here for pic, sorry it doesn’t jive with your $cience, lost of facts don’t.

            Here is a phrase snippet quoted beneath the pic: “the visible stars in the sky rotate around the polar axis – the photographer thinks the earth is spherical just like everybody else but he freely admits that he is photographing, from Australia, the polar axis which is the star Polaris which is also evident by observing the DIRECTION of the star trails around it, the stars around Polaris move counterclockwise just as the time lapse photo indicates 🙂

            If that were Sigma Octanis the star trails would move clockwise because of perspective which the stellarium software would clearly show to your face and enable one to observe the phenomenon.

            Polaris is time-lapse photographed from Australia – Ergo the Earth is flat!

          • Al Mather

            Let’s just stick with the topic at hand … do you have any proof that that picture is from Australia? Any reference, any link? DO you have any proof that isn’t a picture isn’t Octan …because that is the southern polar axis.
            My guess is NO. Am I Right?
            Dude I could post a pic of Bigfoot in my kitchen… not really proof right?
            Let’s establish one fact… Polaris can NOT be viewed from Australia. Other than some hoaky flat earth site pic .. can you dispute that?? Got ANYTHING that proves that??
            Dontcha think someone might have noticed?? Let’s not jump to quantum stupidity.
            We can all smell the desperation through your posts Rolly.

          • What desperation, lol? I’m provably and logically RIGHT, lol! You are the one who desperately tries to but can’t prove me wrong so let’s knock it off with the projection…. again… capice? All you have done here is expose yourself using your very own examples and now you’re mad from being defeated so you try to accuse my sources as being false? Dude, the URL of this “fictitious” website has been staring you in the face for the ENTIRE debate every time I have posted the pic, lol! LOOK!

            Salar de Uyuni – 4000 square miles and completely flat which can’t exist on NASA’s ball.

          • Al Mather

            So…Like I said… no reference or link for that pic being from Australia.
            Like I said…simply SAYING Polaris can be seen from Australia doesn’t make it so. It can not.
            You can’t dispute that in ANY intelligent way.
            Which obviously hasn’t stopped you yet.
            And still… you have NO explanation of how the stars rotate in different directions when star trails are done of the northern & southern polar axis…. as it would on the sphere.
            But could NOT on the plane.
            I see you keep trying to shift the discussion to some new flat earth “proof”… to get away from this .It must be frustrating … no way out.

          • It can not e seen in the ball model but it can in the flat earth model aka. reality. That IS Polaris, sorry.

          • Al Mather

            So now even the photographer that TOOK the picture YOU used is lying?
            Funny that no one in Australia has noticed Polaris is visible… there must be hundreds of thousands of people residing there, astronomers,stargazers, mariners… that would alert the world to this shocking discovery … that seemingly only YOU are aware of.

            Your delusion is getting kind of pathetic Rolly. Should have dropped the star trails things early on. It’s yet another major disproof of flat earth.

          • The flat earth flips over at night. Isn’t that how it works?

          • If you have noodles-fer-brains, sure, lol

          • Seems like as good an explanation as any of yours.

          • Like the mathematics that prove me correct? hahaha

          • Please. I’m not Al; I will not engage posters on Poe sites or blithering idiots. I’m guessing you are a member of the former group since you seem otherwise intelligent.

          • Not asking you to and I didn’t even know what the hell a Poe even is until I heard from your ilk.

          • Just because you were not familiar with Poe’s Law does not mean that you were not playing that game. The first time I played with myself, I probably didn’t know the word for it either; that doesn’t mean I wasn’t masturbating.

          • Being that what I post is provably, mathematically correct… it isn’t POE!

          • Your crap has been completely dismantled by several posters. Just because you refuse to acknowledge it does not change that fact. I can’t even believe we’re having this conversation.

          • My MATH still stands, I guess math isn’t popular… oh well.

          • Al Mather

            Only problem is the math you posted proves NADA.

          • It proves me right every time I calculate earth curvature and disprove it, wanna play? 🙂

          • BTW, I AM wrong about the star trails from Australia and the reason I believed that was Polaris is because the guy who took the picture referred to it as “the sky rotates around the polar axis” of which there is only one but then I realized that HE believes there are 2 so I defaulted to the stellarium software and was able to observe it for myself from an approximate location and no, you can’t see Polaris from Australia, at least I couldn’t from all of the locations I tried but you CAN still see the stars in the sky reverse direction when looking to the North from Australia just as you can observe the stars trails moving in the opposite direction in the south at northern latitudes.

          • Al Mather

            Duh… that’s exactly what I explained to you …exactly what happens on the sphere. ..and you thought it was ridiculous until a few posts ago.The stars don’t reverse direction when you turn around you just have a reversed perspective facing north/south. . The star trails for each axial star spin opposite.. as it will on the sphere rotating west to east. When you are in one hemisphere and look toward the equator the stars will have a more horizontal path in the opposite direction of your axial star trail.

          • I was wrong about the PHOTOGRAPH and its location(Location of Polaris in far southern latitudes… still learning here, no expert, remember?), NOT about the behavior of the star trails themselves. I am not going to take your word for it, or the word of “$cientists” or the word of Eric Dubay… I have to see/experience/understand something in order for me to accept it.

            “The stars don’t reverse direction when you turn around you just have a reversed perspective facing north/south.”

            We finally agree on something but we still don’t agree on the cause.

            This same star trails reversing phenomenon can be explained with the flat earth model but the flat earth model also includes the reason you can see circular start trails around Polaris at mid-latitudes and the spherical model doesn’t offer anything besides an axial tilt that still wouldn’t produce those effects.

            I posted about the salt flats in Bolivia because I just discovered their existence and I think they are amazing.

          • Al Mather

            If we “FINALLY” agree on something it’s because you got boxed into a corner …… I have been saying the same thing from the get go.
            This is the 3rd thing you suddenly “get”.
            If you can’t “get” how star trails happen at mid latitudes not sure what your problem is. It’s as simple as any of the other concepts you couldn’t “get”….. Your angle to the axial star remains constant …the camera rotates fixed on it and everything in the field around it turns into a circle…every kid in school, amateur photographer, anyone with a basic grasp of the physical geometry of the axis star in a field of stars above us can grasp this… YOU can not.
            So go ahead and give us this comprehensive “flat earth” explanation of why the star trail rotation would spin the opposite way in the southern hemisphere… that you seem to have less trouble buying into..This should be good

          • Hehe, imagining stuff now? My position has remained constant, go check. My mistake about an australian blog does not even address the the Polaris circular star trails observation at mid latitudes.

            As far as photographing star trails.. “the camera rotates fixed on it “ – the camera absolutely does not rotate, that effect would work with a sky only shot and you would need something to hold and spin the camera perfectly in the same location but all of the photos I have posted include land also so using that trick wouldn’t work. Here is how it is done: http://www.instructables.com/id/Star-Trails-Photography-and-Night-Sky-Time-Lapse/

            2nd item listed: “A Stable Tripod for your camera to sit on. It needs to be able to keep the camera perfectly still for long periods of time.” – no camera spin to make these effects, no need because the sky is what is spinning.

            Start trails reverse because of perspective, they’re actually all going the same way as clearly demonstrated in the stellarium software.

          • Al Mather

            The camera rotates because it is on the rotating earth , moron..which is rotating… this simple concept has been repeated to you and still you misinterpret.

            You thought if the earth spun at 1000 mph at the equator it would spin 1000 mph at the axis…. you mocked this concept because people would be dizzy at 1000 mph..You could not grasp the fact that the star trails rotated the opposite direction in the southern hemisphere…. mocked the idea of everything spinning the other way …you insisted multiple times in the face of multiple direct questions and demands for proof.. that that photo you have used repeatedly was absolutely Polaris from Australia…only admitting it was not when it was shown to be a lie…You insisted that Polaris was visible from Australia in the face of reality..

            I think you are still confused about star trails…OF COURSE they rotate the opposite way around Sigma Octans but NO stars are moving…it’s because the earth rotates west to east… simple simple concepts confounding the morons of flat earth trying desperately… hilariously.. to disprove. At this point it doesn’t even sound like you believe.. or are trying to make any else believe.. you sound like a little kid just trying to make up silly answers just to have SOMETHING to cling to in your defeat. Sad.

          • For the intelligent reader who has a higher comprehension ability than the above: http://www.sacred-texts.com/earth/za/za48.htm

          • Al Mather

            EXPLAIN ..and STOP DODGING..why star trails spins around Sigma Octans, a completely different polar star surrounded by a completely different field of other stars… in the opposite direction as Polaris as it would on the sphere …. in your flat earth model.

          • It’s hard to explain, man, I needed software to full understand it, I don’t know how to put it into words other than they all go one way as demonstrated when panning straight overhead, north to south and vice versa in stellarium. Here is a video, the one I got the software from, I don’t have time to make my own: youtube.com/watch?v=ahNfU7zYlmY – this is a good explanation but I still needed to see it for myself.. in action, and I did via stellarium. Of course you’ll rip it apart but the software shows the same phenomenon they explain in the vid.

            You are not gonna “go flat” by watching this, lol, but at least you will see a demonstration of perspective in how we view our sky, you can’t see all of it from any vantage point on Earth.

          • Al Mather

            Stellarium demonstrates EXACTLY what happens in the ball earth model. Brilliant software I love it.
            You’ll need to fill me in as to what YOU think was explained in that video …I’m not sure an explanation was even offered.

          • Glad you like stellarium, I love it also, a very valuable tool and I wouldn’t have understood the phenomenon without it. I like it so much I am going to get a telescope to start observing the real deal but for now, this is absolutely awesome IMO. You can go forward and backward in time also, I wish it included crazy events like the Tunguska event but I guess I just need to be happy with what I already have.

            Not sure where your confusion lies now because not too long ago in this debate you admitted they all go in the same direction also… so where is your confusion coming from this time? This video laid to rest the reasons for the backward spin: youtube.com/watch?v=ahNfU7zYlmY

          • Al Mather

            Opposite poles opposite spin in star trail pics… go back to my fan example.. the earth spins in one direction. . The perspective of course changes when looking toward each axis. .no confusion and have NEVER said anything different…you still haven’t explain ed it in your flat earth model with all those southern locations spinning opposite the Polaris pics.. STILL waiting.. let’s hear YOUR explanation.

          • Here: https://youtu.be/ahNfU7zYlmY?t=240 – explained in one minute but without watching the previous content it may be tough to follow, the use of different color dots was brilliant IMO.

            **Speed up time in stellarium, the whole damn sky revolves around you, you can see it. I want a telescope now, lol, never thought I’d care enough to buy one.

          • Al Mather

            Okay …I just spent 15+ minutes listening to Eric DuBay…. with my volume CRANKED because he was mumbling so quietly on that video… and he NEVER explains the north/ south opposite rotation.
            He says a bunch of stuff very haltingly about what IS observed on the ball earth .. just as you would expect it to be.. then says “and that explains it” .. total gobblety gook.
            He lays down totally unsupported “basics” about land horizon and “sky horizon”? A graph he just made up for this attempt at an explanation. Which make no sense till you realize he is trying to account for sky blocked by curvature… lame.
            At one point he claims if you are on the flat earth in New Zealand looking south … you are actually looking north from the UK perspective ( WTF??????) (that shouldn’t even make sense to YOU) and “that explains it”…He never even approaches how the 3 “triad” of locations I mentioned.. Chile, Australia, South Africa would all see Sigma Octans and a clockwise rotation simultaneously, even though they’re all on different thirds of the “flat earth map”???
            He never mentions ( of course) that the entire field of stars surrounding the 2 axial stars in each hemisphere are completely different, and consistent in each of the aforementioned locations..
            None of those things could happen in flat earth model ..and completely support the simple ball earth reality. His “explanation” is muttering gibberish .
            YOU claim you get this? Please … by all means… give us YOU take on these points .

          • You’ve spent time on that so it’s only fair that I now spend time answering you and I will, I’ll just reply to this comment again when I’m done but it may not be till later tonight or tomorrow. His explanation didn’t do it for me either, I needed stellarium to understand with a combo of some of those perspective graphics to get it and now I do. Like I said I’ll put some time/effort into my reply to this.

          • Al Mather

            Wow… sounds like a lot of gymnastics to go through to come up with a plausible, alternate explanation for something that is perfectly and ever so simple & simply illustrative of our rotating planet.
            Whatever you are going to demonstrate must be some eye opening & obvious once we see it.
            Got to tell you that Eric DuBay mumble was total nonsensical mush
            . The kind of stuff a confused schizophrenic or someone on acid would pass off as an valid explanation.

          • Except that it’s not perfectly simple nor totally illustrative with a rotating planet, a concept you struggle with. In order for you to observe the circular star trails that you clearly see and NOT be situated at an axial point the Earth would have to be doing this:

            https://youtu.be/ahNfU7zYlmY?t=896 – play for 20seconds to clearly illustrate my point.

            For one, you wouldn’t even see circles, you would see lines unless situated at axial points.

            Spin a basketball on your finger and imagine being on the side of it, anywhere on the side of it, in a room with no lights on but full of white Christmas lights in a grid pattern all over the walls, ceiling, and floor… your completely still stars move horizontally if you’re a tiny little dude anywhere on the side of that basketball, now stand completely opposite on the basketball from where the person’s finger is touching the bottom, the spinning(axial) point, now you have circles! Easy peasy!

            Also, if you are situated on that axial point on the top of the basketball the stars will spin one way but with the basketball still spinning in the same direction situate yourself on the bottom axial point and… OMG!… they’re spinning the opposite way! Get it yet? That’s pretty damn simple if you ask me! I easily understand this concept so what is your problem?

          • Al Mather

            No Rolly .. I don’t struggle at all. This is like some optical illusion where everyone else can see it , stargazers, astronomers, astrologers, mathematicians, students, teachers, engineers, photographers, construction guys like me… we can all see easily grasp the concept of looking at the axial start that far away and the exposures showing the circles as the earth rotates.
            YOU can’t …Flat earthers would LOVE to deny it because it makes their silliness very difficult to sell.
            Don’t you think someone else besides a flat earther would pick up on the physical inconsistency ???Really? Do you think EVERYBODY is in on it??

          • Al Mather

            Let’s try this since you are using the spinning ball scenarios … If you were on a tiny ping pong ball spinning inside a huge stadium … Same Christmas lights… If you had circular star trails at your axial points… Do you see how moving over a half inch wouldn’t change that… Your perspective on the sky would be the same?
            Another disproof of the flat earth model … If everyone on Earth gathered in a circle at the equator with their backs to Polaris facing South …they ALL see the same sky with the same star field surrounding the same axial star Sigma Octans which has a specific magnitude…. If they turn around and face north they ALL see Polaris….a star of specific magnitude surrounded by its own star field… Other than a few degrees seasonally these views remains constant… How does that happen anywhere but on this rotating sphere?

          • Okay, good, do you realize that if you are situating yourself on that tiny ball that you yourself would be even more tiny? I sure hope so, anyway, since you wold be so tiny the same effect would be observed with the lights all around the enclosed stadium, if you were anywhere on the side of the ping pong ball, you will see lines, but if you are at either axial point, you will see circles. Triple the size of the stadium now, same lines on the sides, same circles from the axial points.

            How does that happen anywhere but on this rotating sphere?

            The same effect happens if the sky is spinning and we are not. This is why I need Bryce because you aren’t going to be the last one stuck on this.

            I managed to get bryce up and running last night but apparently bryce isn’t like riding a bike, I have forgotten everything, lol, so it will take some practice to yield the results I am looking for. Keep in mind I am not merely rendering graphics, these will be 3d animations. I’m pretty sure Bryce is the tool for the job though and if I can match my skills I used to have I will be able to create some very good 3d graphics/animations to illustrate the concepts. I’ll even be able to illustrate your concepts into animations so we will both clearly see what is going on. Can’t promise a time/date though, I have no idea how long it will take me or if a lightbulb will go off and I suddenly remember but as of now the interface and the controls look familiar but that’s it. I AM motivated to do this though, it will be one of the easiest vehicles for understanding IMO.

          • Al Mather

            Lot’s of post comment editing so I will break in here … just to explain the simple fact that POLARIS ISN”T 15,000 miles away from earth … it’s light years away… your little cartoon is ridiculously inappropriate in ant attempt at a perspective explanation. Your thick as a brick confusion lies in this fact …and the fact that on the globe… “UP” in every point is plum to the radius of that point.

          • If that were true then Polaris, something light years away, MUST magically move perfectly along with earth, never interrupting this symbiotic, cosmic relationship spinning perfectly along with it and the earth’s atmosphere which also moves along with the earth perfectly which spins @ 1000mph yet we have days with 0 winds and winds the blow in all directions… sure! I don’t care what you believe after all.

          • Al Mather

            Are you that oblivious to scale that you don’t realize when something is that far away the earths tiny little orbit around the sun has NO negligible variation on the angle or degree. Sad. Your brain is obviously underdeveloped in the abstract reasoning department.
            Back to the 1000 mph wind stupidity…wow.

          • Are you too dense to realize that when you are on the side of a spinning basketball, even the upper half, half way to the top, similar to your position on earth, your whole world around you spins horizontally and not in circles?

            “1000 mph wind stupidity”? lol, YOU’RE the one who believes the “atmosphere moves perfectly along with the earth,” and now the north star Polaris too! On our stationary flat earth we aren’t moving at all, just like it looks, just as it feels 🙂

          • Al Mather

            Lol…we still spin on our axis … Hence the circles around our axial star in the pics.
            You’ll never ” get” it Rolly .
            Of course our atmosphere moves with us … And of course Polaris does not…why do you keep insisting I’ve said that.? More lies.
            Still waiting on that explanation of the stars spinning clockwise in the southern hemisphere… Would still love to see that map of the flat earth.

          • Al Mather

            I just got a video from a friend… of her walking in Salar de Uyuni after a rain storm yesterday… it was covered in a thin layer of water and reflecting the sky.

          • That’s got to be one of the most beautiful places on Earth.

          • Adol Hintner

            It’s apparent your argument is one sided, I suggest you read more on the flat earth. You’d be more amazed, and mathematics would make more sense.

          • Correct, the mathematics prove it!

          • Reading can’t tell me as much as observation can.

          • Observation proves we aren’t spinning @ 1000mph, Polaris doesn’t move.

          • It is not Paranoia

            Hey Rolly, how come you have your own pet shill? I want one too!! :)) Good to see you feed it, you wouldn’t let it die wouldn’t you??!

            Also I admire your courage and patience, keep it up!

            Do you know how to tell who’s right on the internet? Those who are right have people following them telling them how wrong they are and calling them names.

            Regular people don’t have time for this 🙂 Shills do.

          • He’s getting fat and needs to go on a diet 😉

          • Gary

            I learn a lot from yours posts about Earth being flat. I would actually like to take some star trail photos myself (as I live in Australia). I need to get a suitable camera when I get some time, and leave it out overnight (if the street lighting doesn’t interfere).

            The sad thing about shills is that if you give them a good spanking, as you have yours and as he clearly deserved, they get fat. If you don’t, they defile the chessboard and fly back to their flock to claim the victory.

          • Check out stellarium.org, that thing is awesome and you can change your location quickly so I did the UK to get a mid-latitude perspective of Polaris then panned over to the south but from overhead to see the star trails change direction and go horizontal in the middle, it’s really cool. Then I changed to new zealand, somewhere very far south to get a look at sigma octanis(or it’s approx. whereabouts to observe the star trails moving in the opposite direction but they are really all moving in the same direction, a phenomenon that you can oberserve by panning overhead north to south and south to north, you can see the lines “reverse” directions which is really due to your perspective of what is moving overhead, here is the explanation, it’s a tough-to-grasp concept but as soon as I saw that software(stellarium) in this vid I went and grabbed it and when I viewed it live I understood immediately: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ahNfU7zYlmY )

          • Yo Gary, I messed up, I used stellarium so I could observe the same phenomenon as the star trails pics from Australia that I have been posting and that is NOT Polaris, I was thrown off by what the guy posted beneath the pics, “The star trails appear circular because as our planet rotates around its axis every 24 hours, the visible stars in the sky rotate around the polar axis.” – which led me to believe he was speaking of Polaris but he wasn’t, I wasn’t considering that he thinks there are 2 Polar axes… DOH! My bad, honest mistake. That software enables me to see everything so clearly when studying this topic.

          • Al Mather

            That there is some sweet poetic irony …the shill accusation .. from someone who’s beliefs require the name .. “It is not paranoia “.

          • SP_88

            The earth is not flat. And there are so many ways to prove it.

          • Adol Hintner


          • I have more proof of Earth being a plane than you do of it being a sphere… know why? Because I have done the research and it can be proven with simple math… I’ll show you if you’re interested. Believe mathematics, not lyin’-ass humans called $cientists.

          • SP_88

            I admit that I don’t have a lot of information to prove anything. It’s not something that I studied from this perspective, everything I ever learned was using the round earth model.
            I did however stumble across a video suggesting that the earth is flat. I didn’t feel as though it proved anything and I wasn’t sure if it was serious or one of those internet hoaxes like bonsai kittens. So I looked some more and I found some videos and websites with more information about it. And I admit that it was very convincing and for a while I really questioned the round earth model.
            They used math and geometry a long time ago to show the earth was round. Could they have been wrong? Of course. They used two long poles and their shadow to show the curvature of the earth. But their measurements could have been off by a tiny amount and it would have been proof of a flat earth instead.
            I have looked at a lot of things that attempt to prove the flat earth model and some were fairly complicated and I lost interest, others were very subjective and I had to take their word for it which means that it isn’t proof and some of them ignored evidence to the contrary. So honestly I wasn’t convinced.
            As for the round earth model, I have very little, but because I believed the earth was round all my life, I have a bias towards believing it. I’m being honest with you, I have a tendency to lean towards the round earth model simply because it’s what I always believed, and because of that it will take more convincing evidence to change my mind than to reinforce what I already believe. I believe that is called cognitive dissonance. So as much as I want to be open minded, I will have that bias to overcome.
            The reasons I can think of that make me believe the earth is round are:
            1. All the other planets are round, the sun is round, any fluid floating in zero gravity will form a sphere so it stands to reason that if the earth and other planets were at one time a mass of molten rock, dust or gas floating in space, they would naturally form into a sphere. And anyone can see this by taking a handful of water and throwing it up in the air and as it falls, it will momentarily form a sphere.
            2. The coriolis effect. This is a phenomenon that can be shown in more than one way. Some people use the swirling motion of water as it drains through a hole. It will swirl one way in the northern hemisphere and flow the opposite way in the southern hemisphere. Apparently it just drains straight down at the equator.
            Another way that I have seen it is with long distance rifle shooting. It is something that I learned to compensate for when shooting at a target that is far away. Depending on the direction I’m aiming, I need to compensate for the rotation of the earth. When shooting towards the east, all shots will land lower than the point of aim. And to the west, they will be higher. To the north they will land to the right, and shooting towards the south, they will land to the left.
            The reason is because after the bullet leaves the barrel, the target, which is on a rotating globe, will move before the bullet gets there. This isn’t noticeable at distances less than 800- 1000 meters, but beyond that it’s a problem.
            When shooting towards the east, after the bullet leaves the barrel, the earth is rotating towards the bullet, so in relation to the bullet’s trajectory, the target will move towards the bullet and up because of the curvature of the earth, and so the bullet lands lower on the target than where you were aiming. The only explanation for this is that we are standing on a rotating globe. If we were on a flat plane, there would be no need to compensate for this. And if we were on a flat rotating disk, all bullets would land left or right depending on the direction of rotation and where you are standing. There would never be a situation where up or down compensation was necessary.
            And unlike most of the information I have found to show earth’s shape either way, this is something I have seen with my own eyes and I was right there learning about it with my equipment as well as other people’s equipment. I wasn’t learning about it because I needed to prove that the earth is round, it was simply something that I learned because I wanted to be a more accurate shooter. I learned this years ago, long before I ever knew that there were people who believed in the flat earth model.
            I will end my list here for now because everything else that I know of is not something that I have enough knowledge about to use as an example one way or the other. But I will learn more.
            Like I said, I don’t have a lot of evidence, and I have a bias towards the round earth model, but I will be as open minded as possible and I am willing to consider your evidence to the best of my ability. If it is more complicated than I can grasp, I will tell you.
            I don’t really care one way or the other what the truth is. This planet is going to have a certain shape regardless of what I believe. I have no stake in this either way, other than the fact that I have lived my whole life believing earth is round, so if you can prove otherwise, I am open to change my belief. It may be difficult for me, but I am willing to do it.
            But tell me this, if someone were to show you absolute proof that earth is round, would you change your mind? Since I believe the round earth model, I am obviously going to try to convince you that my belief is true.
            I look forward to a good discussion, since I know that you are one of those people who can hold a reasonable conversation and actually have an exchange of ideas without having to resort to name calling and whatnot like many people do. I feel that we agree on many things and this is the first difference I am aware of.

          • YES! I LOVE that attitude! And believe me, I did NOT come to this conclusion overnight and even after I did I had to keep reading about it for MONTHS until I felt I had enough info to post about it, this thing is BIG and the subject matter is deep but physical proof will trump all every time for me as well as proven mathematics. I don’t care if I am the only one on a site who believes it, I have done the work first then made my decision. I cannot convince you, you are an intelligent individual and if you apply that intelligence, think of the things you have already figured out that the average person would tell you NO, YOU’RE wrong when you have put in the work and know that is not true, this is the same thing only much, much bigger(thus more work). Here are the best links with the best info, lots of BS to throw you off(red flag), many shills(another red flag) even entire fake, psyop communities like theflatearthsociety.org – you step into that mess you’ll be thrown off, all by design of course. These are the sources I draw from, all very good researchers:

            Here are some of the fakes: atlanteanconspiracy.com/2015/06/flat-earth-shill-wall-of-shame.html + many more, it’s infested!

            My former bias, the same that you have, faded away the further I studied but that is just me. It’s been over a year now and I can’t believe they got my ass for all those years, I knew it sounded like BS as a child but I was “going along with it” and now I know why… gut feeling I didn’t recognize.

            With this topic you must avoid all speculation and along with that those who speculate because deviating from the facts is fruitless at this stage, we are in the exposing stage, this is going to blow up much more than it already has as a light is lit inside each human that realizes this truth but many people will attempt to “poison the well,” even repsected writers and such. If you ever learned enough about it to start posting look out you’re gonna have to defend your position over and over, such has been the case with me so far.

            As for your question YES! If I saw absolute proof it was a sphere(how I started off) I would believe it but alas, it is not there, as I can clearly show show you.

            **There is nothing I can say to make you believe, you have to really try hard to break the mental bars but once you see it, you can’t un-see it. Truth is the authority and the authority most certainly is not the TRUTH + I am no authority nor expert, I just happened to be already following the main guy that broke this open 2 years ago and I was NOT on board until I kept reading and thinking, it took time.

            In response to your 2 reasons, some stuff to consider..
            1. We actually do not know the shape of the planets, we are only told… BIG difference(bigger red flag). The most powerful telescope in the world is owned by the Catholics and is named Lucifer and no the unwashed masses aren’t allowed to look through it(red flag).

            Very pleased to see you analysing properties of water as proof because the properties of water will clue you in if you really think about it. Water doesn’t bend and must for a spherical earth to exist, water must bend around big things but at any other scale this effect is not reproducible. Yes water can create spheres when buoyant into the air but as soon as it settles on something it finds the lowest point and levels itself out; it never bends, not even around big things. Water levels are the most accurate levels in the world, water will always level itself out and offers physical proof of the shape of what we live on in many ways, one is water lines along the sides of canals, they can be measured and are flat and go on consistently for the length of the canal. No such thing as a convex water canal, lol, doesn’t make much sense, it would require water propulsion to shoot the water uphill, over the arc, that would be an enormous and most likely very loud machine IMO. + Shooting ships uphill over the arc, that would be some serious tech. The Suez canal is 100miles long and flat, not possible on a sphere yet there it sits. There is a huge canal in China, I forget how long, it’s well over 500miles I believe. Use math to determine the curve, then plug in the length of these canals to see how much they should curve to match the $cience, here is a calculator: https://dizzib.github.io/earth/curve-calc/ – 6ft height @ 100miles has 6273.678774655439 ft of curvature! Canals are provably flat!

            Soak a tennis ball in water then throw it but spin it, what happens to the water? Flings right off in a really cool spiral pattern, right? 1000mph rotating earth, all oceans stay put though though… gravity? That’s a strong force and if so, how do birds easily fly away from the surface of these oceans if there is a force so great it’s making the oceans stick to the sphere, defying the physical properties of water and motion you just witnessed with the spinning tennis ball + causing water to bend… it’s no different just because Earth is huge, water will do the SAME thing, always, thus it would spin off into space if it was “stuck” momentarily to a spinning ball.

            Coriolis effect – The “Coriolis Effect” is often said to cause sinks and toilet bowls in
            the Northern Hemisphere to drain spinning in one direction while in the
            Southern Hemisphere causing them to spin the opposite way, thus
            providing proof of the spinning ball-Earth. However, the reality is,
            sinks and toilets in the Northern and Southern Hemispheres do not
            consistently spin in any one direction! Sinks and toilets in the very
            same household are often found to spin opposite directions, depending
            entirely upon the shape of the basin and the angle of the water’s entry,
            not the supposed rotation of the Earth.

            “While the premise
            makes sense – that the earth’s eastward spin would cause the water in a
            toilet bowl to spin as well – in reality, the force and speed at which
            the water enters and leaves the receptacle is much too great to be
            influenced by something as miniscule as a single, 360-degree turn over
            the span of a day. When all is said and done, the Coriolis effect plays
            no larger role in toilet flushes than it does in the revolution of CDs
            in your stereo. The things that really determine the direction in which
            water leaves your toilet or sink are the shape of the bowl and the angle
            at which the liquid initially enters that bowl.” -Jennifer Horton,
            “Does the Rotation of the Earth Affect Toilets and Baseball Games?”

            The Coriolis Effect is also said to
            affect bullet trajectories and weather patterns as well, supposedly
            causing most storms in the Northern Hemisphere to rotate
            counter-clockwise, and most storms in the Southern Hemisphere to rotate
            clockwise, to cause bullets from long range guns to tend towards the
            right of the target in the Northern Hemisphere and to the left in the
            Southern Hemisphere. Again, however, the same problems remain. Not every
            bullet and not every storm consistently displays the behavior and
            therefore cannot reasonably be used as proof of anything. What about the
            precision of the sight aperture, human error, and wind? What about Michelson-Morley-Gale’s
            proven motion of the aether’s potential effect? Why does the Coriolis
            Effect affect most storms but not all? If some storms rotate clockwise
            in the North and counter-clockwise in the South, how do those storms
            escape the Coriolis force? And if the entire Earth’s spin is uniform,
            why should the two hemispheres be affected any differently?
            Source: http://ifers.ace.st/t70-questions-about-the-flat-earth

            **my addition to that is: Coriolis effect affects bullet trajectories in mere seconds of flight but has no bearing on a helicopter that can hover closely above land until it runs out of fuel without the earth moving beneath it. Since the coriolis effect cannot be consistently repeated it stands, to me, that wind resistance/direction & atmospheric conditions(moisture/temperature) would be the reason but regardless with a constant spin you could use constant techniques but in that case you cannot.

            Another wonder to ponder: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Salar_de_Uyuni – how can a 4000 square mile flat anything exist on a 12k mile-wide ball? It can’t!

          • SP_88

            It’s a lot to take in. I will read the information on the sites you posted. Two of them look the same with the exception of some extra numbers on the end. I believe it was theatlanteanconspiracy dot com and the other one has 2015/0 something, something after it. These two sites are not related? I just want to make sure to separate the disinformation from this. It’s hard enough trying to figure out something without someone adding a bunch of nonsense and BS to read through with the intention of corrupting the whole thing.
            I will look at this again. And if I can, I will do some of my own observations. Either way, my beliefs should be irrelevant, the outcome is not going to be different just because I believe one way or the other.

          • Yes, one is a link to the root website, the other is a link to a specific article exposing the fakes on the same website which I thought I made clear so they are the same in the beginning but ultimately are different links, one being a specific article on shills and the other just listed in line with the other truthful FE sites, not sure how that can be interpreted as attempting to corrupt anything but I don’t blame you, after all, I don’t trust anybody either so good for you and I respect that.

            I am leery of other flat earthers there are so many fakes but the commenter Gary is authentic, I do know that, so is It’s Not Paranoia.

            “my beliefs should be irrelevant, the outcome is not going to be different just because I believe one way or the other.” – that is what it takes to grasp this and only very few have the ability as I have witnessed myself over the last year. Always put facts before beliefs!
            Eric Dubays’s youtube channel has the best concentration of well researched, non-shill flat earth videos as well as waykiwayki. At least you have a map of the real info, something most who look into this do not have.

          • SP_88

            What I meant by corruption was people who claim to support something, but they are really out to mislead people with ridiculous claims in an attempt to make the whole thing sound crazy. I misunderstood the difference between the two links. I thought one was an actual source of information and the other was a fake with a similar name, or one was real and the other was a shill. So the link with the date at the end is not a shill, it’s about shills. That was my confusion.
            I got it now. I haven’t started reading yet, but I will start tonight. Thank You.

          • Sorry man, I didn’t mean to create that confusion at all, my fault completely… and you’re welcome. IFERS is the core resource, FYI.

  • gdaym8

    Interesting timing. Releasing this after all these years, AND at a time when increasing reports of unexplained “sounds” are being heard all around the world.

    * Coincidence? I think NOT!

  • It is not Paranoia

    I don’t believe this “it could be aliens” shit. It’s made to make you think about fucking aliens. Every thought about fucking aliens makes you think more and more that we live on a ball earth in space with other balls.

    We don’t.

    • Well they have to do something to attempt the thwart the awakening, right? As long as they can keep your mind out there it won’t ever wonder what is right around here.

    • Your premise falls apart if aliens turn out to reproduce asexually.

  • mirageseekr

    More lies and disinformation from the hoaxsters at NASA. Must be getting ramped up for project Bluebeam or a request for more money.

  • Al Mather

    The “music” was really just an oscillating noise … it was ID’d & explained thoroughly as 2 radios in proximity causing the signal.

  • I believe it is a homing signal for aliens.

  • dago dingo

    Yeah, the music was coming from the warehouse next door from where they were filming.

    • haha!

    • Gary

      So true! Probably the next set. 🙂

  • Oboehner

    Some “astronaut” food that went bad.

  • John Cathy


  • There is no dark side of the moon, really; as a matter of fact, it’s all dark.