200 Proofs that Eric Dubay is a liar and an idiot

"Quoting “Terra Firma” by David Wardlaw Scott, “ The system of the Universe , as taught by Modern Astronomers, being founded entirely on theory, for the truth of which they are unable to advance one single real proof, they have entrenched themselves in a conspiracy of silence, and decline to answer any objections which may be made to their hypotheses ... Copernicus himself, who revived the theory of the heathen philosopher Pythagoras, and his great exponent Sir Isaac Newton, confessed that their system of a revolving Earth was only a possibility, and could not be proved by facts. It is only their followers who have decorated it with the name of an ' exact science, ’ yea, according to them, ‘ the most exact of all the sciences. ’ Yet one Astronomer Royal for England once said, speaking of the motion of the whole Solar system: ‘ The matter is left in a most delightful state of uncertainty, and I shall be very glad if any one can help me out of it. ’ What a very sad position for

"From Pythagoras to Copernicus, Galileo and Newton, to modern astronauts like Aldrin, Armstrong and Collins, to director of NASA and Grand Commander of the 33rd degree C. Fred Kleinknecht, the founding fathers of the spinning ball mythos have all been Freemasons!  The fact that so many members of this, the largest and oldest secret society in existence have all been co-conspirators bringing about this literal “planetary revolution” is beyond the possibility of coincidence and provides proof of organized collusion in creating and maintaining this multi-generational deception." Pathetic The reason Dubay is spouting this nonsense is because flat earth theories can only exist if there is some grand global conspiracy.  Since NASA was only formed in 1958 flat earthers need some other organisation to blame the conspiracy on before then.  The Freemasons are as good as anyone else I suppose. But Pythagoras!  Most agree that the Freemansons were formed in the middle ages in En

"Cultures the world over throughout history have all described and purported the existence of a geocentric, stationary flat Earth. Egyptians, Indians, Mayans, Chinese, Native Americans and literally every ancient civilization on Earth had a geocentric Hat-Earth cosmology. Before Pythagoras, the idea of a spinning ball-Earth was non-existent and even after Pythagoras it remained an obscure minority view until 2000 years later when Copernicus began reviving the heliocentric theory." Yes, but we now know better In case Mr Dubay hasn’t noticed, our civilisation is more advanced than the ancient Egyptians, Indians, Mayans etc.  We are more advanced than they were because we know more than they did, in other words our knowledge is superior to their knowledge. Mr Dubay wants to make a special exception for the shape of the Earth.  Unfortunately his proofs in support of this have been rather pathetic. < Prev       181-190      Next >

"The Bible, Koran, Srimad Bhagavatam, and many other holy books describe and purport the existence of a geocentric, stationary flat Earth. For example, 1 Chronicles 16:30 and Psalm 96:10 both read, “He has fixed the earth firm, immovable .” And Psalm 93:1 says, “The world also is stablished, that it cannot be moved.” The Bible also repeatedly affirms that the Earth is “outstretched” as a plane, with the outstretched heavens everywhere above (not all around) giving a scriptural proof the Earth is not a spinning ball." We should take the Bible as proof.  Really? Thanks for that opinion, but I think I’ll continue to rely on scientists instead of priests to tell me about computers, airplanes, nuclear power stations, medicines, the weather, space etc.  In fact anything that relates to the physical world. Presumably Dubay also believes in sorcerers and magicians because the Bible says they exist Exodus 7:9-12 New International Version (NIV)   "When Pharaoh says to

"Over the years NASA has twice changed their story regarding the shape of the Earth. At first they maintained Earth was a perfect sphere, which later changed to an “oblate spheroid” flattened at the poles, and then changed again to being “pear-shaped” as the Southern hemisphere allegedly bulges out as well. Unfortunately for NASA, however, none of their official pictures show an oblate spheroid or pear-shaped Earth! All their pictures, contrary to their words, show a spherical (and clearly CGI fake) Earth." What is it with flat earthers and their NASA fixation!  Here Dubay exaggerates extravagantly in order to make people believe his lame proof It was widely accepted that the Earth was a sphere since the 12th century and Isaac Newton 1643-1727 first proposed that Earth was an oblate spheroid, confirmed by measurements soon after.  A little early for NASA to be involved. Earth as an oblate sphere NASA’s IGY Vanguard I satellite launched in 1958 did indeed show that

"The second law of thermodynamics, otherwise known as the law of entropy, along with the fundamental principles of friction/resistance determine the impossibility of Earth being a uniformly spinning ball. Over time, the spinning ball Earth would experience measurable amounts of drag constantly slowing the spin and lengthening the amount of hours per day. As not the slightest such change has ever been observed in all of recorded history it is absurd to assume the Earth has ever moved an inch." Dubay likes to quote bits of science that he does not understand.  He really shouldn't ... it just makes him look stupid. In order for friction to occur matter must come into contact with other matter.  Space is a vacuum.  That means that there is no matter there to come into contact with.  Therefore Earth cannot experience friction or drag as it spins in space and orbits the Sun. Perhaps we should be looking for the big brake calipers in the sky. Regarding the second law o

"People sensitive to motion sickness feel distinct unease and physical discomfort from motion as slight as an elevator or a train ride. This means that the 1000mph alleged uniform spin of the Earth has no effect on such people, but add an extra 50mph uniform velocity of a car and their stomach starts turning knots. The idea that motion sickness is nowhere apparent in anyone at 1000mph, but suddenly comes about at 1050mph is ridiculous and proves the Earth is not in motion whatsoever."  Add motion sickness to the long list of things that Dubay does not understamd To be fair to Dubay, the exact mechanics of motion sickness are still being debated, and the effects differ between people, but most agree that motion sickness is caused by the mixed signals sent to the brain by your senses including the inner ear, which detects gravity, acceleration and its direction. Your ability to anticipate the acceleration that you experience also appears to have an effect. Car sick

"We are told that the Earth and atmosphere spin together at such a perfect uniform velocity that no one in history has ever seen, heard, felt or measured the supposed 1000mph movement. This is then often compared to traveling in a car at uniform velocity, where we only feel the movement during acceleration or deceleration. In reality, however, even with eyes closed, windows up, over smooth tar in a luxury car at a mere uniform 50mph, the movement absolutely can be felt! At 20 times this speed, Earth’s imaginary 1000mph spin would most certainly be noticeable, felt, seen and heard by all."  Source:  https://ruarrijoseph.com/avtomobili/671-vibraciya-na-skorosti-100-120-km-ch-osnovnye-prichiny.html Apparently Dubay needs to have vibration explained to him Driving a budget car along a rough road at 70 mph will feel like it is travelling much faster than a Rolls Royce travelling along a smooth highway at 100 mph. This is because we are not feeling velocity we are

"Flights Eastwards from Paris to Rome with the alleged spin of the ball-Earth take an average of 2 hours, therefore the return flights Westwards against the alleged spin should take an average of 1 hour, but in actual fact have an average flight duration of 2 hours 10 minutes, a flight time totally inconsistent with the spinning ball model." Exactly the same point as  proof 179  ... again. < Prev       181-190      Next >

"Flights Eastwards from Chicago to Boston with the alleged spin of the ball-Earth take an average of 2.25 hours, therefore the return flights Westwards against the alleged spin should take an average of just over an hour, but in actual fact take an average of 2.75 hours, once again, completely inconsistent with the spinning ball model."  Exactly the same point as  proof 179  ... again. < Prev       181-190      Next >

"Flights Eastwards with the alleged spin of the ball-Earth from NY to London take an average of 7 hours, therefore the return flights Westwards against the alleged spin should take an average of 3.5 hours, but in actual fact take an average of 7.5 hours, a flight time totally inconsistent with the spinning ball model." Exactly the same point as  proof 179  ... again. < Prev       181-190      Next >

"Flights Eastwards with the alleged spin of the ball-Earth from Tokyo to LA take an average of 10.5 hours, therefore the return flights Westwards against the alleged spin should take an average of 5.25 hours, but in actual fact take an average of 11.5 hours, another flight time totally inconsistent with the spinning ball model." Exactly the same point as proof 179 ... again. < Prev      181-190     Next >

"The spinning ball model dictates that the Earth and atmosphere would be moving together at approximately 500mph at the mid-latitudes where an LA to NYC flight takes place. The average commercial airliner traveling 500mph takes 5.5 hours traveling East with the alleged rotation of the Earth, so the return flight West should take only 2.75 hours, but in fact we find the average NYC to LA flight takes 6 hours, a flight time totally inconsistent with the spinning ball model." Exactly the same point as proof 179 with a different example. < Prev      171-180     Next >

"If the Earth were constantly spinning Eastwards 1000mph then airplane flight durations going Eastwards vs. Westwards should be significantly different. If the average commercial airliner travels 500mph, it follows that Westbound equatorial flights should reach their destination at approximately thrice the speed as their Eastbound return flights. In reality, however, the differences in East/Westbound flight durations usually amount to a matter of minutes, and nothing near what would occur on a 1000mph spinning ball Earth." This is just another repeat of proofs 21 , 22 and 23 .   Dubay still does not understand relative motion It is true that east and westbound flights typically take different amounts of time, but this is not directly to do with the rotation of the Earth, and flights are faster eastward rather than westward.   This is due to the jet stream.  The jet stream is a very high altitude wind which always blows from the West to the East. The planes moving a

"People claim Google Earth somehow proves the ball model without realizing that Google Earth is simply a composite program of images taken from high-altitude planes and street-level car-cameras superimposed onto a CGI model of a ball Earth. The same could be just as easily modeled onto a square Earth or any other shape and therefore cannot be used as proof of Earth’s rotundity." Could be true But that does not prove it is true.  Some evidence for the things Dubay claims would be nice occasionally. < Prev      171-180     Next >

"In the documentary “A Funny Thing Happened on the Way to the Moon,” you can watch official leaked NASA footage showing Apollo 11 astronauts Buzz Aldrin, Neil Armstrong and Michael Collins, for almost an hour, using transparencies and camera-tricks to fake shots of a round Earth! They communicate over audio with control in Houston about how to accurately stage the shot, and someone keeps prompting them on how to effectively manipulate the camera to achieve the desired effect. First, they blacked out all the windows except for a downward facing circular one, which they aimed the camera towards from several feet away. This created the illusion of a ball-shaped Earth surrounded by the blackness of space, when in fact it was simply a round window in their dark cabin. Neil Armstrong claimed at this point to be 130,000 miles from Earth, half-way to the Moon, but when camera-tricks were finished the viewer could see for themselves the astro-nots were not more than a couple dozen miles ab

"When NASA’s images of the ball-Earth are compared with one another the coloration of the land/oceans and relative size of the continents are consistently so drastically different from one another as to prove beyond any reasonable doubt that the pictures are all fake." Enhanced images Many of the images of Earth are documented as being colour enhanced.  Others are documented as unenhanced.   It is obvious that you cannot prove anything by comparing the colour of these two types of images. Both the images above are used frequently on the Internet, but unfortunately I have not been able to find the sources to confirm that the left hand image is enhanced and the right hand image is unenhanced.  However if you look at the colour of the images shown in the following two links it would suggest that the image on the left is indeed enhanced and the one on the right unenhanced.  Consequently comparing these two images proves nothing. https://epic.gsfc.nasa.gov/enhance

"Professional photo-analysts have dissected several NASA images of the ball-Earth and found undeniable proof of computer editing. For example, images of the Earth allegedly taken from the Moon have proven to be copied and pasted in, as evidenced by rectangular cuts found in the black background around the “Earth” by adjusting brightness and contrast levels. If they were truly on the Moon and Earth was truly a ball, there would be no need to fake such pictures." Dubay is the lying faker caught red handed Let us do what Dubay says and manipulate the image by adjusting brightness and contrast.  This is the original image available at http://www.hq.nasa.gov/alsj/a17/AS17-134-20471HR.jpg   I found that it was not possible to reproduce Dubay’s image by adjusting brightness and contrast, but I could get close if I also adjusted the colour balance.  I set contrast to maximum, brightness to almost maximum and adjusted colour balance to remove green while mainta

"NASA graphics artists have placed things like faces, dragons, and even the word “SEX” into cloud patterns over their various ball-Earth pictures. Their recent 2015 Pluto pictures even clearly have a picture of Disney’s “Pluto” the dog layered into the background. Such blatant fraud goes unnoticed by the hypnotized masses, but provides further proof of the illegitimacy of NASA and their spinning ball planet mythos." At best this proof proves that some images of Earth have been photoshopped ... something that NASA readily admits to.  It is not proof that ALL photos of Earth from space are fake. The example given by Dubay certainly does look edited, but it could also just be the tendency for humans to find patterns nature.  Unless Mr Dubay also blames NASA for every cloud that looks like a face or a puppy it is hard to be certain. http://www.amusingplanet.com/2012/04/clouds-that-look-like-things.html   If we assume that someone at NASA did photosho

"NASA has several alleged photographs of the ball-Earth which show several exact duplicate cloud patterns!  The likelihood of having two or three clouds of the exact same shape in the same picture is as likely as finding two or three people with exactly the same fingerprints. In fact it is solid proof that the clouds were copied and pasted in a computer program and that such pictures showing a ball- shaped Earth are fakes."  Yes we know.  Proves nothing This is the picture of Earth made famous by its inclusion on Iphones.  The history of this photo is well documented. https://qz.com/192700/the-guy-who-created-iphones-earth-image-explains-why-he-needed-to-fake-it/ Robert Simmon and Reto Stöckli, the two NASA employees who created this image, readily admit there are numerous fakeries in his image.   It's not a conspiracy if it is well documented, readily admitted and easily looked up by anyone who cares to. The image is a composite of strips taken over the co

"If you pick any cloud in the sky and watch for several minutes, two things will happen: the clouds will move and they will morph gradually changing shape. In official NASA footage of the spinning ball Earth, such as the “Galileo” time-lapse video however, clouds are constantly shown for 24+ hours at a time and not moving or morphing whatsoever! This is completely impossible, further proof that NASA produces fake CGI videos, and further evidence that Earth is not a spinning ball." Dubay does not understand the differences of scale When you look up at a cloudy sky you can make out individual clouds and see these clouds visibly forming, changing and dissipating. A satellite is much further away and does not pick out individual clouds.  Satellite photos only show global weather patterns. What may look like a completely blue area of sky on a satellite may have sparely spread clouds, and an area that looks like solid white clouds may have gaps of blue sky. So clouds may

"NASA claims there are upwards of 20,000 satellites floating around Earth’s upper-atmosphere sending us radio, television, GPS, and taking pictures of the planet. All these supposed satellite pictures, however, are admittedly “composite images, edited in photoshop!” They claim to receive “ribbons of imagery” from satellites which must then be spliced together to create composite images of the Earth, all of which are clearly CGI and not photographs. If Earth were truly a ball with 20,000 satellites orbiting, it would be a simple matter to mount a camera and take some real photographs. The fact that no real satellite photographs of the supposed ball Earth exist in favor of NASA’s “ribbons of composite CG imagery,” is further proof we are not being told the truth." Source:  https://epic.gsfc.nasa.gov/ Another lie.  Flat earthers analyse photos that NASA admits are photoshoped and surprise surprise they find evidence that they have been photoshoped.  Then they conveniently

"People even claim to see satellites with their naked eyes, but this is ridiculous considering they are smaller than a bus and allegedly 100+ miles away; It is impossible to see anything so small that far away. Even using telescopes, no one claims to discern the shape of satellites but rather describes seeing passing moving lights, which could easily be any number of things from airplanes to drones to shooting stars or other unidentified flying objects." More opinion from Dubay with nothing to back it up It is impossible to see anything so small that far away Dubay's assertion that it would be impossible to see the light reflected off something as small as a satellite is easily disproved because people have looked into how sensitive the human eye is, and it is very sensitive. You can see a flickering candle from 30 miles away.  You can see starlight from millions of miles away (although flat earthers would of course dispute that source). [The observed

"So-called “satellite” TV dishes are almost always positioned at a 45 degree angle towards the nearest ground-based repeater tower. If TV antennae were actually picking up signals from satellites 100+ miles in space, most TV dishes should be pointing more or less straight up to the sky.   The fact that “satellite” dishes are never pointing straight up and almost always positioned at a 45 degree angle proves they are picking up ground-based tower signals and not “outer-space satellites.” " More lies that are easily exposed A few seconds googling TV satellite dish images can show this claim to be completely bogus.  Satellite dishes can be found at all sorts of angles, including straight up. Source:  https://pixabay.com/ A satellite dish pointing straight as seen in the above image immediately disproves the ground station theory, so Dubay does what he always does and pretends that it never happens. Also note that Dubay can’t actually give a location of any

"So-called “satellite” phones have been found to have reception problems in countries like Kazakhstan with very few cell phone towers. If the Earth were a ball with 20,000+ satellites surrounding, such blackouts should not regularly occur in any rural countryside areas." Dubay makes blanket claims for all satellite companies without providing any specifics. 20,000+ satellites There are several satellite communications companies, all with different technologies, coverage and service capabilities.  The 20,000+ number of satellites figure is meaningless since only a few of these are used to provide satellite phone services. Some of the major satellite phone companies are listed below with the number of satellites that they operate. Iridium:  66 low Earth orbit satellites Gloabalstar: 24 low Earth orbit satellites Immarsat: 13 geostationary satellites Satellite phones have reception problems where there are few cellphone towers Dubay is implying that satel