>>13391590"earth is not accelerating."
>correct. but it is in motion.So you concede that the official NASA narrative globe model is a lie, and that there is no observable evidence for any acceleration other than the mentioned earthquakes and Schumann resonances.
>glurgle flurg! nurgle nurgle d durgle nerg?What?
>why it's fakeThere are many reasons. Money, for example the NASA budget is a lot more than they need to keep on a CGI lie. Also my example "believing in a globe means rejecting observation". This primes people to accept authority over their own personal physical experience. In short, to deceive is to exert power. Multiple anons have posted images which cast doubt on the image you posted. Who is real and who is fake? Only physical, personal observation can answer that question. Or you can choose to believe in the reality of your memories. I don't have to look at the ocean right now to remember how flat it was. I believe it will be just as flat whenever I go back and see it again. My evidence is physical perception. Some images line up with what I see in the real world, some do not. That is the basis for claiming that an image is real or fake. A fake image can depict a real concept just like a "real" picture can depict a false idea.
>sound principles of math and physicsSound principles go one way, and that is based in reality. You can create any model for physics, for example how the globe believers love to imagine about how "gravity" would be less on the moon and more on jupiter... This is just a mental math game with no baring on reality. In reality objects fall at a repeatable, measurable, and observable rate based on their density, aerodynamic profile, and the ambient air conditions. Sound physics is based on these repeatable, measurable, and observations. Physics and math do not dictate what we observe, instead we build physical and mathematical models based on observations.
