The Cashie B's Undoing. Are The Planets In The Solar System Flat?

[cashwhisperer]

And for the record, @sammyjax the Michelson-Morley Experiments weren't duds. They were only considered duds because they didn't fit the Copernican model. What they actually revealed was that the Earth was motionless and the center of the universe. That's what Einstein was saying. Einstein knew what was up, which is why he called Nikola Tesla the smartest man alive.

And this also debunks gravity. It's static electricity. Static Electricity determines up & down on a flat plane, not gravity.

 

[ORIGINAL NATION]

I watched the 2 videos you posted. Why is it that the white men they quoted did this at a time when blacks were enslaved? Our true history defied white physics. It is strange that we were born in a world that worships war and are constantly creating sickness? One black man was beaten to death for proving the power structure wrong. That same cross is represented by government and churches the same way white supremacist do.

 

[cashwhisperer]

I watched the 2 videos you posted. Why is it that the white men they quoted did this at a time when blacks were enslaved? Our true history defied white physics. It is strange that we were born in a world that worships war and are constantly creating sickness? One black man was beaten to death for proving the power structure wrong. That same cross is represented by government and churches the same way white supremacist do.

I only posted those videos to illustrate how most people, whether it's science or religion, are having faith in 2nd hand information with no 1st hand experience or witness to the shit they believe in.

 

[ORIGINAL NATION]

I only posted those videos to illustrate how most people, whether it's science or religion, are having faith in 2nd hand information with no 1st hand experience or witness to the shit they believe in.

About like 911. But it is still the same with us and what we pass on that promotes a white reality.

 

[sammyjax]

What the fuck are you talking about??? What level of the earth?? The FLIGHT DISTANCE between ATL and LA is approx 2000 miles. You have no topography in the air. You're not prepared.

I don't understand what you mean by "You can't get to that level of the entire Earth" but NASA apparently took a photo of the ENTIRE earth millions of times showing a sphere. A PERFECT sphere, not a lime or a pear. The topography of the highest points on earth are minuscule in proportion to the size of the entire earth. NASA gives you the circumference, diameter, radius of the ball earth. The diameter is not 8000 miles from top to bottom and 7000 miles from side to side. You are not prepared for this debate.

No I don't get it at all because you're not making any fucking sense. Using that logic, If I walk 100 yards away from a football it's gonna look like a basketball. So you're saying all those closeup, fullframe pictures of planets are really limes until you back away??!!?? And What in THEE FUCK does that have to do with what I'm saying?? How does that disprove what I'm saying?? You are not prepared dude, SMH

What. the. FUCK. are. you TALKING ABOUT????

Did you not see this image??? You think I'm Donald Trump??? You think I took a sharpie and scratched out ATL and then wrote Atlanta on the North Pole??? Is THAT what you think I did??? Sheesh! Not prepared dude!

You're saying that the bigger something is, first of all, your sentences are unintelligible, but your saying using the planet as a measuring stick (8000 miles in height) is not applicable to measuring a 2000 mile flight distance (8% of the 25,000 mile circumference). That tells me that again, YOU DON'T KNOW WHAT THE FUCK YOU'RE TALKING ABOUT. You are NOT prepared.




How bout you stfu. FOH. You played yourself on that stupid shit you typed.



Again, you ain't the one. Yall niggas bring somebody else, this ain't the one here. @sammyjax @AllUniverse17 @REDLINE @zod16 help ya mans out. Yall niggas quiet as church mice.

I been out drinking weed and fucking hoes weird ass nigga

I'm finna lay down but in a nutshell you don't appear to understand how flight works, that planes fly through the atmosphere which is round because of gravity, how altimeters work, or that planes constantly trim in order to maintain altitude, which again is controlled by atmospheric measurements. You look like you crunk tho.

 

[AllUniverse17]

Why does the sun set and rise like it does?

And where does it go at night?

 

[AllUniverse17]

Why do people in the southern hemisphere see the moon upside from us?

On what other shape would that be possible?

 

[zod16]

They aren't.

Matter of fact, it's almost impossible to find a perfect sphere anywhere in nature.

Just let this idiot talk to himself. This is shit we all figured out in grade school but apparently the concept that Atlanta doesn't exist at an elevation that would put it in space is too much for him. 500 miles is roughly 800km. Like I said before, I routinely enter/exit space and fly over satellites/the damn space station on my way to Hartsfield-jackson.

 

[PapaGrande]

Why do people in the southern hemisphere see the moon upside from us?

On what other shape would that be possible?

WHY DOES NASA REPEATEDLY REFER TO THE EARTH BEING STATIONARY AND FLAT WITHIN THEIR INTERNAL DOCUMENTS, BUT SPEND $22,000,000,000 A YEAR ON PHOTOSHOP TO SHOW YOU?

Explain NASA's fascination with the Flat, Non-rotating Earth on their own documents, but constantly providing the sheep a spberical fantasy.

Gave you one link from NASA showing you they use the Flat, Non-rotating Earth as apart of an Observation Model.

And it's not just NASA, the Army, Navy and Air Force have documentation referencing the Flat, Non-rotating Earth. They have since removed their links, but I'll get them if the Ballers need even more evidence from the PuppetMasters.

Well here is a few more

SR-71

Page 8 “…nonrotating Earth…”

https://www.nasa.gov/centers/dryden/pdf/88507main_H-2179.pdf

page 14:
(2) A flat, nonrotating earth

https://ntrs.nasa.gov/archive/nasa/casi.ntrs.nasa.gov/19710018599.pdf

page 8:
the missile position in space is computed relative to a flat nonrotating earth.

https://ntrs.nasa.gov/archive/nasa/casi.ntrs.nasa.gov/20040008097.pdf

page 108:
aircraft flying over flat, nonrotating earth

page:12
“aircraft flying in a stationary atmosphere over flat nonrotating earth”

https://www.nasa.gov/centers/dryden/pdf/88072main_H-1259.pdf

NASA Technical Paper 2835

September 1988

Page 1 Summary:

Flat nonrotating earth

Last page 126:
“The nonlinear equations of motion used are six-degree-of-freedom equations
with a stationary atmosphere and flat, nonrotating earth”

https://ntrs.nasa.gov/archive/nasa/casi.ntrs.nasa.gov/19890007066.pdf

Determination of Angles of Attack and Sideslip from Radar Data and a Roll Stabilized Platform

NASA
March 1972

page 2:
“The method is limited, however, to application where a flat, nonrotating earth”

https://ntrs.nasa.gov/archive/nasa/casi.ntrs.nasa.gov/19720012071.pdf

An Aircraft Model for the AIAA Controls Design Challenge

NASA
1991

page 11:
“The nonlinear equations of motion used in this model are general six-degree-of-freedom equations representing the flight dynamics of a rigid aircraft flying in a stationary atmosphere over a flat, nonrotating earth”

https://www.nasa.gov/centers/dryden/pdf/88248main_H-1777.pdf

Investigation of Aircraft Landing in Variable Wind Fields

NASA 1973

page14 pdf or 6 on actual report:

a) The earth is flat and non-rotating.

https://ntrs.nasa.gov/archive/nasa/casi.ntrs.nasa.gov/19790005472.pdf

 

[AllUniverse17]

WHY DOES NASA REPEATEDLY REFER TO THE EARTH BEING STATIONARY AND FLAT WITHIN THEIR INTERNAL DOCUMENTS, BUT SPEND $22,000,000,000 A YEAR ON PHOTOSHOP TO SHOW YOU?

Explain NASA's fascination with the Flat, Non-rotating Earth on their own documents, but constantly providing the sheep a spberical fantasy.

Gave you one link from NASA showing you they use the Flat, Non-rotating Earth as apart of an Observation Model.

And it's not just NASA, the Army, Navy and Air Force have documentation referencing the Flat, Non-rotating Earth. They have since removed their links, but I'll get them if the Ballers need even more evidence from the PuppetMasters.

Well here is a few more

SR-71

Page 8 “…nonrotating Earth…”

https://www.nasa.gov/centers/dryden/pdf/88507main_H-2179.pdf

page 14:
(2) A flat, nonrotating earth

https://ntrs.nasa.gov/archive/nasa/casi.ntrs.nasa.gov/19710018599.pdf

page 8:
the missile position in space is computed relative to a flat nonrotating earth.

https://ntrs.nasa.gov/archive/nasa/casi.ntrs.nasa.gov/20040008097.pdf

page 108:
aircraft flying over flat, nonrotating earth

page:12
“aircraft flying in a stationary atmosphere over flat nonrotating earth”

https://www.nasa.gov/centers/dryden/pdf/88072main_H-1259.pdf

NASA Technical Paper 2835

September 1988

Page 1 Summary:

Flat nonrotating earth

Last page 126:
“The nonlinear equations of motion used are six-degree-of-freedom equations
with a stationary atmosphere and flat, nonrotating earth”

https://ntrs.nasa.gov/archive/nasa/casi.ntrs.nasa.gov/19890007066.pdf

Determination of Angles of Attack and Sideslip from Radar Data and a Roll Stabilized Platform

NASA
March 1972

page 2:
“The method is limited, however, to application where a flat, nonrotating earth”

https://ntrs.nasa.gov/archive/nasa/casi.ntrs.nasa.gov/19720012071.pdf

An Aircraft Model for the AIAA Controls Design Challenge

NASA
1991

page 11:
“The nonlinear equations of motion used in this model are general six-degree-of-freedom equations representing the flight dynamics of a rigid aircraft flying in a stationary atmosphere over a flat, nonrotating earth”

https://www.nasa.gov/centers/dryden/pdf/88248main_H-1777.pdf

Investigation of Aircraft Landing in Variable Wind Fields

NASA 1973

page14 pdf or 6 on actual report:

a) The earth is flat and non-rotating.

https://ntrs.nasa.gov/archive/nasa/casi.ntrs.nasa.gov/19790005472.pdf

That is not an answer to my question.

I think we are better off if we don't if we dont answer questions by asking different, unrelated questions.

If you cant answer my question dont quote me.

 

[REDLINE]

You can literally view the Earth from space\ISS all the time.




But if NASA does all of this to fake showing a round Earth, then more power to them.

 

[zod16]

WHY DOES NASA REPEATEDLY REFER TO THE EARTH BEING STATIONARY AND FLAT WITHIN THEIR INTERNAL DOCUMENTS, BUT SPEND $22,000,000,000 A YEAR ON PHOTOSHOP TO SHOW YOU?

Explain NASA's fascination with the Flat, Non-rotating Earth on their own documents, but constantly providing the sheep a spberical fantasy.

Gave you one link from NASA showing you they use the Flat, Non-rotating Earth as apart of an Observation Model.

And it's not just NASA, the Army, Navy and Air Force have documentation referencing the Flat, Non-rotating Earth. They have since removed their links, but I'll get them if the Ballers need even more evidence from the PuppetMasters.

Well here is a few more

SR-71

Page 8 “…nonrotating Earth…”

https://www.nasa.gov/centers/dryden/pdf/88507main_H-2179.pdf

page 14:
(2) A flat, nonrotating earth

https://ntrs.nasa.gov/archive/nasa/casi.ntrs.nasa.gov/19710018599.pdf

page 8:
the missile position in space is computed relative to a flat nonrotating earth.

https://ntrs.nasa.gov/archive/nasa/casi.ntrs.nasa.gov/20040008097.pdf

page 108:
aircraft flying over flat, nonrotating earth

page:12
“aircraft flying in a stationary atmosphere over flat nonrotating earth”

https://www.nasa.gov/centers/dryden/pdf/88072main_H-1259.pdf

NASA Technical Paper 2835

September 1988

Page 1 Summary:

Flat nonrotating earth

Last page 126:
“The nonlinear equations of motion used are six-degree-of-freedom equations
with a stationary atmosphere and flat, nonrotating earth”

https://ntrs.nasa.gov/archive/nasa/casi.ntrs.nasa.gov/19890007066.pdf

Determination of Angles of Attack and Sideslip from Radar Data and a Roll Stabilized Platform

NASA
March 1972

page 2:
“The method is limited, however, to application where a flat, nonrotating earth”

https://ntrs.nasa.gov/archive/nasa/casi.ntrs.nasa.gov/19720012071.pdf

An Aircraft Model for the AIAA Controls Design Challenge

NASA
1991

page 11:
“The nonlinear equations of motion used in this model are general six-degree-of-freedom equations representing the flight dynamics of a rigid aircraft flying in a stationary atmosphere over a flat, nonrotating earth”

https://www.nasa.gov/centers/dryden/pdf/88248main_H-1777.pdf

Investigation of Aircraft Landing in Variable Wind Fields

NASA 1973

page14 pdf or 6 on actual report:

a) The earth is flat and non-rotating.

https://ntrs.nasa.gov/archive/nasa/casi.ntrs.nasa.gov/19790005472.pdf

You didn't read any of the shit you just posted as evidence. FORTRAN is the DPS system they are talking about and it is "simplified" meaning they didn't program in certain elements of reality. They literally tell you what elements of reality aren't included:

The DPS equations of motion use four assumptions that simplify the program while maintaining its fidelity for most maneuvers and applications: point-mass modeling, nonturbulent atmosphere, zero side forces, and a nonrotating Earth.

Using your logic, planes aren't impacted by side forces and we have a nonturbulent atmosphere too, right?

 

[PapaGrande]

You didn't read any of the shit you just posted as evidence. FORTRAN is the DPS system they are talking about and it is "simplified" meaning they didn't program in certain elements of reality. They literally tell you what elements of reality aren't included:

The DPS equations of motion use four assumptions that simplify the program while maintaining its fidelity for most maneuvers and applications: point-mass modeling, nonturbulent atmosphere, zero side forces, and a nonrotating Earth.

Using your logic, planes aren't impacted by side forces and we have a nonturbulent atmosphere too, right?

Why mention Flat, Non-rotating Earth at all if it's not an element of 'reality?

I'm not bringing into equations elements that aren't apart of an equation, especially when they are supposedly not real.

There is more tangible evidence of Sasquatch, then there is of a Ball Earth. Wonder why they didn't through him in these reports since there adding elements that really aren't included

No need to mention a non-existent

 

[zod16]

Why mention Flat, Non-rotating Earth at all if it's not an element of 'reality?

I'm not bringing into equations elements that aren't apart of an equation, especially when they are supposedly not real.

No need to mention a non-existent

They are telling you that the model is simplified to not include "realities" that actually have an impact on flight in real life.

The DPS equations of motion use four assumptions that simplify the program while maintaining its fidelity for most maneuvers and applications: point-mass modeling, nonturbulent atmosphere, zero side forces, and a nonrotating Earth.

If the earth didn't rotate or we actually had a nonturbulent atmoshphere, excluding them wouldn't "simplify" the program nor would there be a need to mention it. There is no way you do not understand this.

 

[BrownTurd]

That's incorrect. Planes fly 7 miles above the ground and adjust to the topography? They do that over mountain ranges too? What about over water? sea level?? Water has topography?? lol, Okay.

On a trip from ATL to LA, which is roughly 2000 miles, the trip covers 8% of the earth's surface circumference. The flight time is about 4 hours which means the plane travels a little over 500mph. If ATL is the top of the world (which any point you stand on is the top considering you're on a ball, from that perspective and lol, gravity) then the height difference between ATL and LA is about 500 miles, given that the diameter of the ball earth is roughly 8000 miles. So you're moving downward by 125 miles each hour at a 29 degree angle (arc). Or 62.5 miles every 30 minutes.....or 31 miles every 15.....or 15 miles every 7.......or 7 miles every 3.5 minutes.

Now again, the plane is cruising at 500+mph at 7 miles above the earth, level with the horizon, but descending 7 miles every 3.5 minutes at a 29 degree arc to maintain being parallel with the surface.

right???

Oh I forgot, I lack cognitive ability, nevermind ignore this post

No if you are on a ball/sphere than you would stay 7 miles above the earth until you reach LA and need to decend

 

[PapaGrande]

They are telling you that the model is simplified to not include "realities" that actually have an impact on flight in real life.

The DPS equations of motion use four assumptions that simplify the program while maintaining its fidelity for most maneuvers and applications: point-mass modeling, nonturbulent atmosphere, zero side forces, and a nonrotating Earth.

If the earth didn't rotate or we actually had a nonturbulent atmoshphere, excluding them wouldn't "simplify" the program nor would there be a need to mention it. There is no way you do not understand this.

I totally understand what they're saying, but since we have all known the Earth is spinning since grade school, why would top-notch NASA scientist need to remind each other of the so-called obvious?

Then why would they need to keep reminding themselves of the same non-existent element, in documentation after documentation?

Don't look at the forest, focus in on the tree!!!

 

[BrownTurd]

The DIAMETER of the earth is 8000 miles.

That means the HEIGHT of the ball is 8000 miles.

If you put ATL at the TOP of the ball (AN EQUIDISTANT SPHERE), it is 500 MILES above LA.

LOOK AT THE IMAGE AGAIN!

To answer your question properly, yes Atl would sit 500 miles above LA. If you took a basketball and placed ATL at the top and LA in relation to its position on earth, your equation would be 100% accurate. But you are missing 3 things that make your equation not work.

1. fabric of space
2. Time
3. Gravity

Because of the fabric of space you could never fly in a straight line because gravity and the mass of the earth is curving the fabric of space around it in all directions.

Your height would remain consistent around the world because of your relative position to the earth because of time, gravity and the fabric of space. This means you would never travel in a straight line but more of a constant free fall as you move.

 

[4 Dimensional]

You didn't read any of the shit you just posted as evidence. FORTRAN is the DPS system they are talking about and it is "simplified" meaning they didn't program in certain elements of reality. They literally tell you what elements of reality aren't included:

The DPS equations of motion use four assumptions that simplify the program while maintaining its fidelity for most maneuvers and applications: point-mass modeling, nonturbulent atmosphere, zero side forces, and a nonrotating Earth.

Using your logic, planes aren't impacted by side forces and we have a nonturbulent atmosphere too, right?

Hell, naw he didn’t read ANY of it. Not a single page.

 

[PapaGrande]

Hell, naw he didn’t read ANY of it. Not a single page.

But you didn't read my response....

 

[zod16]

Hell, naw he didn’t read ANY of it. Not a single page.

Not at all.

I am still dying that Atlanta being located at an elevation that would place it above the Space station is something that someone would say with their chest puffed out.

 

[PapaGrande]

Not at all.

I am still dying that Atlanta being located at an elevation that would place it above the Space station is something that someone would say with their chest puffed out.

Actually read all of them 2 years ago and even the ones from the Miltary, that have removed their links, but you still haven't mentioned why do they consistently refer to a model that doesn't exist, if it's already understood in grammar school.

There's no mention of;

Gravitational Waves
Dark Matter
Black Holes
Sasquatch
Thanos

But they keep mentioning a non-existent element over and over and over again.

When creating an Observation Model of Michael Jeffrey Jordan, I'm not mentioning his unsurpassed NBA Coaching Record (Because it doesn't exist)

Don't look at the forest, focus on the tree...

 

[sammyjax]

Everybody else

EVERYBODY IN THE WORLD

Wrong.

Except whatever white folks wrote the shit these niggas not reading then posting

 

[cashwhisperer]

Keep talking motherfuckas. Keep making yourselves look stupid as fuck. I proved the earth ain't a sphere, but it's okay. I don't expect yall to get it or admit it. My work here is DONE.

Page 6 of this thread lays it all out. You don't live on a goddamn ball.

 

[REDLINE]

Imagine me arguing with a muthafucka that’s telling me the Earth’s flat, I wish I would!

 

[cashwhisperer]

To answer your question properly, yes Atl would sit 500 miles above LA. If you took a basketball and placed ATL at the top and LA in relation to its position on earth, your equation would be 100% accurate. But you are missing 3 things that make your equation not work.

1. fabric of space
2. Time
3. Gravity

Because of the fabric of space you could never fly in a straight line because gravity and the mass of the earth is curving the fabric of space around it in all directions.

Your height would remain consistent around the world because of your relative position to the earth because of time, gravity and the fabric of space. This means you would never travel in a straight line but more of a constant free fall as you move.

 

[cashwhisperer]

Not at all.

I am still dying that Atlanta being located at an elevation that would place it above the Space station is something that someone would say with their chest puffed out.

 

[cashwhisperer]

You can literally view the Earth from space\ISS all the time.




But if NASA does all of this to fake showing a round Earth, then more power to them.

 

[cashwhisperer]

Just let this idiot talk to himself. This is shit we all figured out in grade school but apparently the concept that Atlanta doesn't exist at an elevation that would put it in space is too much for him. 500 miles is roughly 800km. Like I said before, I routinely enter/exit space and fly over satellites/the damn space station on my way to Hartsfield-jackson.

You retarded fucker!

 

[REDLINE]

 

[cashwhisperer]

Why does the sun set and rise like it does?

And where does it go at night?

Why do people in the southern hemisphere see the moon upside from us?

On what other shape would that be possible?

Why da son set huh? Where it go at night, huh?

Why da moon look opposite?



Nigga stop! Just stop!!

 

[PapaGrande]

Everybody else

EVERYBODY IN THE WORLD

Wrong.

Except whatever white folks wrote the shit these niggas not reading then posting

Now you're getting it...

The same white folks that tell you everything you believe (Faith) while ignoring what you know. These CAC's have performed a Jedi mind trick on the masses.

Wake up out your slumber and see the world that your essence presents, not what NASA produces for you (via Hollywood)

Knew you would come around...

 

[cashwhisperer]

 

[cashwhisperer]

I been out drinking weed and fucking hoes weird ass nigga

I'm finna lay down but in a nutshell you don't appear to understand how flight works, that planes fly through the atmosphere which is round because of gravity, how altimeters work, or that planes constantly trim in order to maintain altitude, which again is controlled by atmospheric measurements. You look like you crunk tho.

I'm finna do dis! I'm finna do dat!

GAME OVER nigga!!

 

[cashwhisperer]

Not at all.

I am still dying that Atlanta being located at an elevation that would place it above the Space station is something that someone would say with their chest puffed out.

You dumbass idiot!!! Still don't get it!

 

[REDLINE]

Why does the sun set and rise like it does?

And where does it go at night?

Why do people in the southern hemisphere see the moon upside from us?

On what other shape would that be possible?

Everybody else

EVERYBODY IN THE WORLD

Wrong.

Except whatever white folks wrote the shit these niggas not reading then posting

Brothas, sometimes

These dude’s are old, stubborn and stuck in their ways. Nothing you or I say to them will ever get them to admit that they’re wrong.

They could be taken up in a space shuttle, and see with their own eyes that the Earth is round. And then they’ll accuse NASA of using tv’s instead of windows that they’re looking out of to project images of a round Earth.

There’s no amount of proof that anyone could provide to prove them wrong, in their minds.