Are you proposing human/biological life can't survive in space or that no man made satellites exist whatsoever?
I propose you research this stuff for yourself. If you spent some time, you would notice there is no evidence for 'space' but plenty of evidence of helium powered satellites which can account for every satellite since the original in 19xx and modern versions could obviously have some aspect of CPU driven gyro/drone tech.
By posing the question, seems you are in actuality proposing that space and satellites exist - and so as such one necessitates the other? You do not require 'space' to launch a floating craft into sky that can follow a set pattern.
I have done some research and come to the conclusion the earth is round with mass and there appears appears to be a singular sun that we orbit. If you go out on a boat or island, you can clearly see the earth's curvature with the naked eye. You can take some sticks in the ground and wait for the sun to tell u east/west. If you want to find a tall vantage point with other known reference points you can approximate the size/shape of the earth (as well as the changing orbit) with trig/measurements you can perform yourself. Have you tried any of these things?
That's fine, continue living on your ball. But did you research the 66,600 MPH orbital speed? Would be curious if you arrived to the same conclusion as those early (((scientists))) did when they concluded on that 'speed'. And while you're at it see if it is possible to spin a ball while keeping water stuck to it. It seems otherwise your research is incomplete (because the onus is on you and the other heliocentric radicals to prove these miracles & extreme mathematical models).
you can approximate the size/shape of the earth (as well as the changing orbit) with trig/measurements you can perform yourself.
yes, I am fully aware math has infinite numbers and as such infinite formulas you can iterate through until you finally get the fucking number you want. This trick of presenting valiid formulas using numbers that have no bearing on reality might work on normies but has no effect on me or anyone who uses math day to day in their profession.
So you'll have to come up with some more compelling response, such as proof of this so called curvature you can see with the naked eye - show us a picture or tell the location to go where this curvature can be viewed. Evidently you found the proof of the ball so this location should be famous ! Otherwise, all non-fisheye lens cams of the upper atmosphere captured to date simply show a horizon that rises to the horizontal middle of the camera's view to the highest altitudes possible, no curve is found.
(post is archived)