ur saying they dont have the tech to play with virtual objects ?

It was always there, they just copied the background. Notice how it's only in the area that's not changing?

so when u see them playing with a bubble in space ur sure its real though and not one of those virtual objects they can interact with

Compare your videos to Chris hadfield wringing out a wash cloth

Waaaay more convincing than your misinterpreted video compression artifacts

chris hadfield tweeted hole in the iss the posted a pic of a hole in a satellite that h appened years before so

No evidence of virtual objects

i trust him

u can believe what u want

the tiems when they do play with the bubbles doesnt even match reality

What doesn't match

not only are they using special effects and wires and parabolic flight but their story isnt consistent and or doesnt match reality

figure it out or not idc

You're judgement here is flawrd

believe them blindly if u want its up to u

How do they simulate weightlessness for minutes, in a plane

Is every water droplet on a string?

"In fact, it can be shown that the refraction near the horizon depends mostly on the local temperature gradient, which is much more important than the local temperature itself. For this reason, all the refraction phenomena near the horizon — mirages, dip, terrestrial refraction, etc., as well as the astronomical refraction — are very sensitive to the temperature gradient; and they all vary a great deal more than does the astronomical refraction well up in the sky."
To: "It is obvious that the effect of temperature variation is decisive over the
other atmospheric factors on refraction, to the following proportions: Temperature to humidity to carbon dioxide content to air pressure = 100 : 6 : 2 : 1 "

INVESTIGATION OF REFRACTION
IN THE LOW ATMOSPHERE
By
K. HORV_,.TH
Department of Survey. Technical university. Budapest
(Received Alay 29, 1969)
Presented by Ass. Prof. Dr. F. SAHKOZY
https://aty.sdsu.edu/explain/atmos_refr/astr_refr.html

@Shabam because I have peer reviewed scientific evidence and you do not

@Human Sheeple oh so all of the sudden peer reviewed science isngood enough?

Ok what about all the peer reviewed science for spaceflight and shape of the earth

And since you invoked astronomy, what about the aberration of light that proves the earth is moving

@Human Sheeple fisheye lense

@Shabam Aberration of light was added to fit the model when it didn't add up

And if we're going down that route, why don't we get aberration of light off the moon?

@Shabam What peer reviewed measurement of the Earth?

Lol the entirety of geodesy fool

Name me one thing right now

You don't even know Snell's law properly, go read more

I own a laser and I understand snell's law very well in fact

Lol own a laser? A pointer?

What type of laser is it

As for your fish eye lens claim, why is the horizon flat in the photographs and videos provided?

445nm

@jeremy how do you still think there are virtual objects

Changing the subject, deflection. can you answer the question please @Shabam

Or are you butt hurt you lost a debate to a flat earther

FLAT EARTH GLOBER MELTDOWN: https://imgur.com/gJsKaGX