>>52
Satellites and GPS were addressed in the thread before. Long story short flat earthers - and this is no all-inclusive term... - believe that gps is LORAN land-based or a derivative — a system that could do positioning as accurate from the land that GPS can now... before gps and "sattelites"... I just checked the wikipedia entry for it and the accuracy and length claims are directly contradicted by an old documentary i saw on the system which claimed it could have accuracy to a couple inch all around the world.

Also satellites doesnt use relativity for it's GPS despite what we have been told, i link to a paper that goes over this in the previous thread! better go check it out! :-)

Never heard about the lie down, stand up, double sun set.

>>53
There's tons of videos of this online. Apparently the consumer telescopes only get a blurry image and then they have to use a technique called "stacking" which takes a collection of all the frames and makes a sharper image... i have no idea how this works but it seems a bit like the CSI "enhance" thing :P

Apparently some dudes with telescopes, judging from yt comments wonder why they don't see the same thing nasa does/shows us...

The moon, which is the closest object appears like either a disc or a round object, i can't decide but it's definitively rounded.

the p900 which is the best zoom camera or roundabouts shows the planets slightly as nasa shows us, but the funny thing is every time they zoom onto a star it looks wildly different... not at all like a sun/star. You have shifting colors even rectangular patterns... this is fun to check out on yt.

I should mention that some people are geocentrists though(about 300 scientists last time i heard), not flat earthers... a relatively few are also concave earthers... but they all agree that things are not as we've been told. Take this image for example. On the image you have the x,y and z dimensions accounted for in one image making it impossible to be anything but proof of a close & small sun.