NASA Fraud and Fakery Exposed?? 2024-11-12 • ? 24:54 • ? 144 MBPodcast: @EricDubay on Odysee Author: @EricDubayWeb player: https://podcastaddict.com/ericdubay-on-odysee/episode/185921536 Episode: https://player.odycdn.com/api/v3/streams/free/NASA-Fraud-and-Fakery-Exposed(1)/6a9fcb279e836852f633aa0653d9345c3d46b4f6/b97849.mp4We have become too complacent, settling for the absolute minimum: a fleeting headline, the sight of a rocket climbing the sky, and a handful of dubious images alleged as “evidence.” This is an affront to the public’s intelligence and their entitlement as tax payers to an acceptable level of proof of such alleged monumental space endeavors…Read the Full FREE PDF “Escaping the Maze” here: https://tinyurl.com/escapingthemazeGet Connected with and Help Support Eric: Website: http://www.EricDubay.com Books: http://www.lulu.com/spotlight/ericdubay Patreon: https://www.patreon.com/EricDubay Blog: http://www.AtlanteanConspiracy.com Forum: http://www.IFERS.123.st Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/groups/edfes/ Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/ericdubaz/ X: https://twitter.com/EricDubay Gettr: https://gettr.com/user/eric_dubay SoundCloud: https://soundcloud.com/eric-dubay/ Mewe: https://mewe.com/i/ericdubay Minds: https://www.minds.com/EricDubay Gab: https://gab.ai/Eric-Dubay Goodreads: https://www.goodreads.com/ericdubay YouTube: http://www.youtube.com/c/flateartheric Odysee: https://odysee.com/@EricDubay:c BitChute: https://www.bitchute.com/channel/TCgwKoAf3Y9z/ Real Truthseekers: https://real-truth-seekers.com/@ericdubay Rokfin: https://rokfin.com/EricDubay Rumble: https://rumble.com/c/c-1286253 Dollar Vigilante: https://dollarvigilante.tv/c/eric.dubay/videos Audible: https://www.audible.com/search?searchNarrator=Eric+Dubay Telegram: t.me/flatearthericdubay Email: ericdubaynewsletter@protonmail.com
Fakeologist.com
Deconstructing media fakery one PsyOp at a time.
No need to be a flat earther to realize that NASA has fooled the world since its inception. The FE crowd is a bit late in the game, isn’t it? Over at CLUESFORUM, we have been thoroughly exposing the space travel fraud – ever since 2009:
https://cluesforum.info/viewforum.php?f=23
Sadly, the FE crowd has just subtituted the silly heliocentric lie with another silly lie. Over at the TYCHOS forum and website, we are currently deconstructing what has to be the greatest deception (or ‘honest mistake’?) of our era, namely the heliocentric model as “established” up by the likes of Copernicus, Galileo and Kepler. The TYCHOS model is the only existing configuration of our solar system which fully agrees with empirical observation.
https://www.tychos.space/
I’m happy to accept that it is possible that the Tychos model you propose is indeed a better model for what is commonly accepted. I don’t track the movement of stars, planets, and other lights in the sky personally, but occasionally I have double checked what I see, against some software such as stellarium, and what I can personally see seems aligned with the software – so I am also happy to accept that what is being shown in software is in line with what can be empirically observed. I know you do not accept that space travel is possible because of the vacuum etc – I agree with this too.
However, my issue with what I have heard you propose, is that the lights we observe really are physical objects… I cannot understand how you make that leap. Why can it not be the case that they are a sort of projection. Eg, if you have ever been to a planetarium, you can similarly observe lights moving in the way you have observed with your telescope, only you can be sure that this is a projection on to a curved ceiling.
As unlikely as it seems, there are some small elements in support of the idea that what we see is a projection – such as the moon. How can it be, that the largest body to us (the moon) does not act like a sphere? We only ever see one side – it does not rotate. The moon is better modelled as a plate, imo, rather than a sphere. But I understand that you believe differently.
Would you concede that it is possible that what we see in the sky could also be a light projection rather than floating rocks?
I hope you can also see the similarities in what I’m saying to your excellent 911 breakdown – that the presentation needed not have anything to do with the reality, which cannot be known/verified given what we observe at a distance. One can only use that information to eliminate incoherent lines of inquiry as false.
Simon, I wonder if you could take the time to give an opinion on this question,
What are shooting stars and why do they always appear to travel horizontally or down, never up?