A cool thing related to "the moon is sometimes transparent" (which of course is obviously nonsense)

Is that the edges of the moon are transparent to very high energy neutrinos, while the middle isn't. And the proportion of very high neutrinos depending on the distance from the edge follows exactly as we expect if the moon is spherical

Of course this is all shill bucks conspiracy blahblahblah but whatever

The earth is mostly transparent to nutrinos

To neutrinos that aren't extremely high energy

ok

I dunno, I saw images of stars thru the moon

I have no vested interest whether its true or false

I haven't with my eyes thru a telescope

maybe its false and falsified images/video

maybe it only happens in certain locations, I dunno

only time I seen something like that was when a satalites passes in front of it

Wich moves relative to the stars

um mayo do you work for CERN lol

Very high energy neutrinos (ones above the GZK cutoff) actually have a fairly noticeable cross section

eeek evil!

@dumblebore 🌈 yes on the ATLAS experiment

damnnnn

satanic

that's cool af

I'm going to go grab some food, pay some bills

bye

ok

don't go doing any flat earth resesarch without me

we've done it

here's the result: not flat

why research something that's been shown to be inconsistent multiple times

that's called being insane

doing the same thing over and over again expecting a change

Like being a globie

Good example

not tho

lol

gottem

oof

Difference is that it's coming out exactly as I expect

You know we are not a spinning space ball

Yet continue to propagandize it

I don't tho

I think what most flat earthers do sounds more like propoganda than what I do

<:smart:484956754489376781>

What do you think of this problem i found.

Rotating Atmosphere Paradox:
From Galileo Was Wrong: If we are on a rotating Earth with air subject only to gravity (i.e., the atmosphere is not coupled or bound by any forces to turn with the Earth), then we would experience tremendous wind problems, in which the spinning Earth encounters the full weight of the atmosphere. (NB: The atmosphere weighs more than 4 million billion tons.)

If we are on an Earth that is rotating, the atmosphere would obviously have to move with it. So, there needs to be some mechanism that allows this. However, there is so far no explained mechanism for this effect that is required on a rotating earth. There is no explanation for how friction would enable an atmosphere rotating in sync with Earth throughout the atmospheric altitudes.
The strength of friction decreases as the altitude increases, with it being inversely proportional to altitude. Friction may work right at the surface, with the strongest gravitational pull, but it decreases as the altitude increases, and so doesn't keep the entire atmosphere in sync with Earth's rotation.
Friction's effects on air motion decrease as the altitude increases -- to a point (usually 1-2 km) where it has no effect at all.
-- http://ww2010.atmos.uiuc.edu/(Gh)/guides/mtr/fw/bndy.rxml

Air is not very viscous ("sticky"), so "real" friction (the one that comes from molecular motion) is only important in a very thin layer of atmosphere next to the surface. However, air is very turbulent. This turbulence generates small-scale up and down motion, which mixes slow air from the friction layer with fast air from above, thereby spreading the effect of molecular friction over a layer a few hundred meters thick (turbulence is the reason for wind gusts). This interaction with the surface slows down atmospheric motion.
-- http://eesc.columbia.edu/courses/ees/climate/lectures/atm_dyn.html