The reason it looks like we're looking at it through water is because the atmosphere is a fluid, made of countless particles moving around and bouncing off each other innumerable times a second. Photons are refracted by the matter they pass through, and because the atmosphere is comprised of matter- duh- it refracts the light. One must also keep in mind that although our Sun emits about 10 to the 45th power of photons every second, they arent focused in one specific direction. The same goes for other stars, and as a result the amount of photons recieved from distant stars fluctuates considerably. The inconsistent delivery of photons, combined with the turbulence in the atmosphere and the tightness of the focus, results in stars looking less like glowing balls of matter and more like strange, sparkly objects.
U are trying but people believe what they want 😂 god is great they say but base they believes on a hand made camera that is rediculous small compared with there is outside our world
You’re repeating the lies that they taught you, everything God created and made they give science as an explanation, because they are LIARS. It looks like we’re looking through water because that is the water God separated above from the waters below.
Ahhhh How can the ATMO- SPHERE Be a fluid? When Atmo means Air (Gas) And Sphere is a Shape That is an oxy moron. Gas does not adhere to shapes. And prerequisite to pressure is containment. Second law of thermodynamics dynamics. Natural law. Common sense
The most nonsensical stuff you can hear people say. All what you say is nonsense. Photon doesn't exist, the atmosphere is not made of bumping or bouncing particles. Nonsense. The Almighty created everything.
Thank you for the demo! I have had so many discussions explaining how to test their focus by locking it then point the camera down the road to see the focus distance. I have always found it interesting that these people don’t take the time to learn the basic operations of their camera, but insist that they are disproving all the work done by thousands of professional and amateur astronomers and photographers!
Thank you for the info, because I thought that might be what the stars really looked like... I am struggling to figure out manual focus on my P1000 that I recently got.. Thanks again for showing the streetlight/ focus deal
Hi Jesse! My son brought his P 1000 and $$$ tripod out to the family desert home for the holidays. 80 miles WSW from Tucson. So very very dark. As he picked up a bright star at close to max zoom we got that dancing effect but with a few more tweaks it was gone. Just a consistent, solid point from then on. No matter how hard we tried it was gone. Possibly some city/county lights are affecting your final resolution. That destroyed the dancing stars thing for us. (I was hoping we'd get it back lol!) Cheers!
You can put the P1000 to manual focus mode then you can turn the focus ring around the lens and just put the camera out of focus then you can get the amazing dancing blob stars! It even works on distance street lights, aircraft landing lights, and car headlights!
At 1:05 when he manages to focus, it's notable that the star's appearance hasn't changed much. And that is quite different from what astrology tells us. Thanks for confirming what was already obvious.
What we have to realise is that when we were young and at school all things were simplified. Religion has the bearded man in the sky watching over us, astronomy was called story telling also and poems or nursery rhymes .. the earth a perfect sphere .. So now as we grow we find the interest in the things we find most interesting. God changes form either by another religion or mind science. Astrology and astrology can change through Theology and understanding mythology. Our minds open our perceptions broaden, the minds eye awakens and we then can save up for the best of the best in books, telescopes, TH-cam channels etc on mobile phones etc so that it helps in our search for the path again of living to find the interest again in the things we lost because of our distractions growing up The stars are energy, the energy that transfers when they fall to earth as souls infinite ♾️ cycles of the earth and the stars forming sentient life forms ✨🙏🏻✨🕉️✨💜✨
@@JohnGreen-q2w People who talk like that never say anything substantial. Just platitudes
3 ปีที่แล้ว +11
Ohhh... So it's focus, not magic. Got it! As a hobby photographer throughout 20+ years, I have a hard time listening to flattards claiming those blobs are focused stars in the firmament. It really hurts! Thanks!
It drives me insane, because they could easily point a camera/telescope at something like a streetlight, crank up the “zoom” and see the same fuzzy ball. You never hear anyone claim streetlights are holograms.
@sadfriedgamer6648 we can either believe what God says in the Holy Bible about the stars that He created, and trust that along with what our eyes see, or, we can believe in man made theories or doctrines with zero scientific evidence. God says the stars are Angels that are within the Firmament above, not dying suns trillions of light years away. I choose to believe in God's word myself, but each to their own.
TH-cam is buggy, but if comments aren't showing, you can click the "SORT BY" option where it says "29 Comments" and choose "Newest." Sometimes that'll show missing comments. The other thing you may have to do is click every place it says "View 5 replies" or "View 14 replies" etc. Those replies to comments count as comments, but by default, they don't show. Hope that helps! I just counted and comments+replies=29, but youtube says "29 Comments" (should be 30 once I hit reply and you see this) so there don't seem to be any hidden from me. Do you see differently?
@@jakestablettableto9453 What do you think of my demonstration that a street light also looks like a giant orb star when put out of focus? th-cam.com/video/5txgOqPiE6Q/w-d-xo.html
why would flat earthers be sweating??? do you know the distances that modern pseudo-science claim the stars to be?? an you think we can zoom in on them with cameras from those fake claimed distances? wow... just wow... the stars are near and in the firmament... FACT
And is why this other star gives off a totally different frequency is it? th-cam.com/video/YtadBbiUSZo/w-d-xo.htmlsi=mqcyVzUjvtiWm92S. This looks fluid like water and there is more like this. I have a P1000. Planes do not have to calculate a moving target and calculate the descend accordingly to a flat surface.
Tell me, taking the angular resolution of the human eye into account because it is Fixed and has a limit where you can no longer resolve an object, if it's possible to see an object 54 miles in circumference at a distance of 240,000 miles. I think the math will show you that feat is quite impossible. Yet it's a Heliocentric claim.
Not being able to resolve detail in an object, doesn’t mean you can’t see it. You can see a 2 inch object from over a hundred miles away. At that distance, 2 inches is far below the angular resolution of the human eye, yet you can still see the lights on an airliner from a mountain top. The size doesn’t matter if you can see the object. It only matters how much light from that object reaches your eyes and the contrast against its surroundings.
> _Even In Focus it does Not look like or behave like what we are told about stars from the mainstream narrative according to your video._ What do you mean? It looks exactly like the mainstream narrative says it should look with that design of camera! > _I am not a photographer_ Well by George fix that problem my friend! You don't have to be a pro, but you can still learn how to be a photographer and it is much fun and you can learn enough so you won't make ridiculous statements as you did above! > _Tell me, taking the angular resolution of the human eye into account because it is Fixed and has a limit where you can no longer resolve an object, if it's possible to see an object 54 miles in circumference at a distance of 240,000 miles. I think the math will show you that feat is quite impossible._ You don't even know the definition of "angular resolution." You don't even know what it means to RESOLVE something as it relates to optics. Resolve means the ability to see DETAILS. For example if you're looking at the headlights of a car 20 miles away, you can see them with the unaided eye but it will probably look like a SINGLE light because the angle between the lights is only 0.002 degrees between the two lights and the human eye can only resolve things greater than 0.02 degrees. You will see the headlights, you but it will look like a single brighter light instead of two dimmer lights because the light from both of them will appear as one spot. "Limit of angular resolution" does not cause a light to vanish, it causes a loss of details. So it doesn't matter how far or how small a light is, if it's bright enough, you can still see it. You won't be able to see the shape or any details, it will just look like a point of light, because you are unable to RESOLVE it. But that doesn't mean you can't see it. By the way, I think it's checkmate for flat earth. If you stand 21.2 miles away from a 187ft building and you're both standing on a 50ft high hill, the entire building appears below you even though it's 181ft taller than you! Read all about it here: www.reddit.com/r/FlatEarthIsReal/comments/pch95u/evidence_of_curve_cline_spit_county_park/
@@IBHunter "You can see a 2 inch object from over a hundred miles away" I don't believe this claim is possible At All. You are going to have to Prove that claim to me via a real demonstration. I have seen videos of lights on train tracks where the track builders state they don't take Earth curvature into account and no matter how bright that light is, after so may feet you fail to see it entirely. I can make this observation with street lights. Other reason I don't believe it is it's not possible on your globe. Using the metabank calculator, your geometric horizon is 3 miles. You have a drop of 1.26 miles (6669.41 feet) and a hidden distance of 1.19 miles (6273.36 feet) You could not be able physically to see these distances beyond your assumed physical curved edge on the other side of your ball. Go ahead, show me your demonstration.. if you could which I seriously doubt you can, it would only serve to prove the Earth is not a ball with the sizes we are given. After you give me your physical demonstration of a 2 inch object being seen at 100 miles with the unaided eye, then I'll reply to fromjesse.
@@DivergentDroid The typical resolution of the human eye is about 1 arc minute. This is about 1 inch at 100 yards. The fact that we can see the 2 inch lights from 30,000 feet or 5.6 miles means we can see things smaller than we can resolve them.
@@DivergentDroid You can do the observation yourself. The flight aware website will allow you to track the locations of airliners in your area. While watching the airliner, you can track its position on the computer. If you use the earth curve calculator correctly, by entering a target height of 30,000 feet you will see that the aircraft is well above the horizon. If the observer is on a mountain like I said in my comment, and you enter an observer height of 10,000 feet, the horizon will be much farther. Give it a try. I should be fun and easy. If you are having trouble understanding why you can see an object your eye can not resolve, I can give you a much more thorough explanation, if you need.
No pal that is the shape of the star.. how could an out of focus image produce complex geometric patterns? Obviously it wouldn't.. So explain to everyone why every star has its own unique geometric patterns and each one with different color from the others.. I guess thats what happens when your nikon900 is out of focus again huh.. Obviously another shill for the agenda or worse, could actually be that ignorant
You are incorrect. An out of focus camera can cause the shapes of some of it's own complex geometric patterns. Research bokeh. I googled it for you, here's some random video I found showing how the shape of the aperture can appear in the picture when the camera is not focused on the light source. th-cam.com/video/Sn-EpqJCLXk/w-d-xo.html
So, I want to believe that stars are patterns and shapes of possible spirits/ Angels but I know for a fact that the dancing wave looking things is because the lights are in the Firmament with water behind, but this guy maybe even paid to hide truth... What is your take...?
It's all perception. We can see everything only n only in a certain fixed angle. We can never see its sides n behind it. So we will never know its true shape n size. Things are not what they seem to be. It's much much more. No human can ever find out.
'It's a heptagon, I know this because I saw it!' 'Well, you're seeing the shadows of the arperture blades because you didn't focus properly. Here's what it looks like when focused.' 'Well, actually, we'll never know because it's all perspective.'
Even In Focus it does Not look like or behave like what we are told about stars from the mainstream narrative according to your video. I'm a heliocentric skeptic but it is prudent to be skeptical of any claim you cannot test yourself. We don't even really know how far those objects are. None of you can prove the distance independently without relying on a mainstream source. I am not a photographer so I cannot test these claims myself however I never saw any evidence stars were in focus in Flat Earthers videos. This does Not mean however that it's proof of the heliocentric model.
Is there any evidence for a flat Earth that doesn't involve photos or videos taken close to the horizon? I mean, has any flat Earther even attempted to explain why the *horizontal* position of the sun, moon and stars always matches the globe? Seems like a pretty amazing coincidence to me and something that can be easily checked by anyone. Really, it doesn't actually matter if you do these types of observations, ie. azimuth, close to the horizon because refraction is almost entirely a vertical phenomenon.
You can even see vega star move with your own eyes hold your thumb out in front of you and place it just below the star and you will see it slip behind your thumb.
Я ничего не хочу менять в прогрессивном развитии человечества, движения к справедливому обществу без эксплуатации. Но вопрос: почему тысячи лет небо не изменилось ( расположение звёзд)?
The reason it looks like we're looking at it through water is because the atmosphere is a fluid, made of countless particles moving around and bouncing off each other innumerable times a second. Photons are refracted by the matter they pass through, and because the atmosphere is comprised of matter- duh- it refracts the light.
One must also keep in mind that although our Sun emits about 10 to the 45th power of photons every second, they arent focused in one specific direction. The same goes for other stars, and as a result the amount of photons recieved from distant stars fluctuates considerably.
The inconsistent delivery of photons, combined with the turbulence in the atmosphere and the tightness of the focus, results in stars looking less like glowing balls of matter and more like strange, sparkly objects.
U are trying but people believe what they want 😂 god is great they say but base they believes on a hand made camera that is rediculous small compared with there is outside our world
You’re repeating the lies that they taught you, everything God created and made they give science as an explanation, because they are LIARS. It looks like we’re looking through water because that is the water God separated above from the waters below.
Ahhhh
How can the ATMO- SPHERE
Be a fluid?
When Atmo means Air (Gas)
And Sphere is a Shape
That is an oxy moron.
Gas does not adhere to shapes.
And prerequisite to pressure is containment.
Second law of thermodynamics dynamics.
Natural law.
Common sense
Psalm 148:4
Read all of 148 while at it.
Yah bless
The most nonsensical stuff you can hear people say. All what you say is nonsense. Photon doesn't exist, the atmosphere is not made of bumping or bouncing particles. Nonsense. The Almighty created everything.
This is the place to argue
Thank you for the demo!
I have had so many discussions explaining how to test their focus by locking it then point the camera down the road to see the focus distance.
I have always found it interesting that these people don’t take the time to learn the basic operations of their camera, but insist that they are disproving all the work done by thousands of professional and amateur astronomers and photographers!
Such a nice looking star !
Thank you for the info, because I thought that might be what the stars really looked like... I am struggling to figure out manual focus on my P1000 that I recently got..
Thanks again for showing the streetlight/ focus deal
Thanks for this. There are many people that think that stars are seven sided! This explains why they are not.
Hi Jesse! My son brought his P 1000 and $$$ tripod out to the family desert home for the holidays. 80 miles WSW from Tucson.
So very very dark. As he picked up a bright star at close to max zoom we got that dancing effect but with a few more tweaks it was gone. Just a consistent, solid point from then on.
No matter how hard we tried it was gone. Possibly some city/county lights are affecting your final resolution.
That destroyed the dancing stars thing for us. (I was hoping we'd get it back lol!)
Cheers!
You can put the P1000 to manual focus mode then you can turn the focus ring around the lens and just put the camera out of focus then you can get the amazing dancing blob stars! It even works on distance street lights, aircraft landing lights, and car headlights!
At 1:05 when he manages to focus, it's notable that the star's appearance hasn't changed much. And that is quite different from what astrology tells us. Thanks for confirming what was already obvious.
And what, pray tell, does astrology tell you? Haha. (Or did you mean astronomy? )
It's not the star itself. It's the light being emitted off of the star.
What we have to realise is that when we were young and at school all things were simplified. Religion has the bearded man in the sky watching over us, astronomy was called story telling also and poems or nursery rhymes .. the earth a perfect sphere ..
So now as we grow we find the interest in the things we find most interesting.
God changes form either by another religion or mind science.
Astrology and astrology can change through Theology and understanding mythology.
Our minds open our perceptions broaden, the minds eye awakens and we then can save up for the best of the best in books, telescopes, TH-cam channels etc on mobile phones etc so that it helps in our search for the path again of living to find the interest again in the things we lost because of our distractions growing up
The stars are energy, the energy that transfers when they fall to earth as souls
infinite ♾️ cycles of the earth and the stars forming sentient life forms
✨🙏🏻✨🕉️✨💜✨
@@JohnGreen-q2w People who talk like that never say anything substantial. Just platitudes
Ohhh... So it's focus, not magic. Got it!
As a hobby photographer throughout 20+ years, I have a hard time listening to flattards claiming those blobs are focused stars in the firmament. It really hurts! Thanks!
You need a telescope Tommy
@@TheBestLife2184 What would be the point ?
Hologram not a stae
It drives me insane, because they could easily point a camera/telescope at something like a streetlight, crank up the “zoom” and see the same fuzzy ball. You never hear anyone claim streetlights are holograms.
@@maximus9812 Yeh, uh, he did that. He didn't get colored lights though and he didn't get crisp clear patterns like I've seen of stars.
In focus or out, it's not a dying sun a gazillion miles away
Nope. All stars are angels and your seeing their energy field
@twodyefor4207 Yes!
how though, I’d like to hear the reasoning maybe I could learn something
@sadfriedgamer6648 we can either believe what God says in the Holy Bible about the stars that He created, and trust that along with what our eyes see, or, we can believe in man made theories or doctrines with zero scientific evidence. God says the stars are Angels that are within the Firmament above, not dying suns trillions of light years away. I choose to believe in God's word myself, but each to their own.
Stars are not Angels they are balls of plasma made of hydrogen and helium
They can be any size and any mass and any color
Depending on the temperature
I wonder what the other 20+ comments I can’t see said.
TH-cam is buggy, but if comments aren't showing, you can click the "SORT BY" option where it says "29 Comments" and choose "Newest." Sometimes that'll show missing comments.
The other thing you may have to do is click every place it says "View 5 replies" or "View 14 replies" etc. Those replies to comments count as comments, but by default, they don't show. Hope that helps! I just counted and comments+replies=29, but youtube says "29 Comments" (should be 30 once I hit reply and you see this) so there don't seem to be any hidden from me. Do you see differently?
@@fromjesseare you trying to say youtube doesn't censor anything it doesn't want said?
@@jakestablettableto9453 Where did I say that?
@@fromjesse "are you trying to say"
@@jakestablettableto9453 What do you think of my demonstration that a street light also looks like a giant orb star when put out of focus? th-cam.com/video/5txgOqPiE6Q/w-d-xo.html
When zoomed Looks like 50pence piece🙂
Flat earthers are sweating
lol i film stars they are all close my friend
Sweating about what?
@@EricPepe but do you measure their distances?
why would flat earthers be sweating??? do you know the distances that modern pseudo-science claim the stars to be?? an you think we can zoom in on them with cameras from those fake claimed distances? wow... just wow... the stars are near and in the firmament... FACT
@@Reason1024 how do you know they are physical?
I am a Christian but I do not believe the stars are angels it is just the atmosphere
And is why this other star gives off a totally different frequency is it? th-cam.com/video/YtadBbiUSZo/w-d-xo.htmlsi=mqcyVzUjvtiWm92S. This looks fluid like water and there is more like this. I have a P1000. Planes do not have to calculate a moving target and calculate the descend accordingly to a flat surface.
Shared 👍
Tell me, taking the angular resolution of the human eye into account because it is Fixed and has a limit where you can no longer resolve an object, if it's possible to see an object 54 miles in circumference at a distance of 240,000 miles. I think the math will show you that feat is quite impossible. Yet it's a Heliocentric claim.
Not being able to resolve detail in an object, doesn’t mean you can’t see it. You can see a 2 inch object from over a hundred miles away. At that distance, 2 inches is far below the angular resolution of the human eye, yet you can still see the lights on an airliner from a mountain top.
The size doesn’t matter if you can see the object. It only matters how much light from that object reaches your eyes and the contrast against its surroundings.
> _Even In Focus it does Not look like or behave like what we are told about stars from the mainstream narrative according to your video._
What do you mean? It looks exactly like the mainstream narrative says it should look with that design of camera!
> _I am not a photographer_
Well by George fix that problem my friend! You don't have to be a pro, but you can still learn how to be a photographer and it is much fun and you can learn enough so you won't make ridiculous statements as you did above!
> _Tell me, taking the angular resolution of the human eye into account because it is Fixed and has a limit where you can no longer resolve an object, if it's possible to see an object 54 miles in circumference at a distance of 240,000 miles. I think the math will show you that feat is quite impossible._
You don't even know the definition of "angular resolution." You don't even know what it means to RESOLVE something as it relates to optics.
Resolve means the ability to see DETAILS. For example if you're looking at the headlights of a car 20 miles away, you can see them with the unaided eye but it will probably look like a SINGLE light because the angle between the lights is only 0.002 degrees between the two lights and the human eye can only resolve things greater than 0.02 degrees.
You will see the headlights, you but it will look like a single brighter light instead of two dimmer lights because the light from both of them will appear as one spot.
"Limit of angular resolution" does not cause a light to vanish, it causes a loss of details. So it doesn't matter how far or how small a light is, if it's bright enough, you can still see it. You won't be able to see the shape or any details, it will just look like a point of light, because you are unable to RESOLVE it. But that doesn't mean you can't see it.
By the way, I think it's checkmate for flat earth. If you stand 21.2 miles away from a 187ft building and you're both standing on a 50ft high hill, the entire building appears below you even though it's 181ft taller than you!
Read all about it here: www.reddit.com/r/FlatEarthIsReal/comments/pch95u/evidence_of_curve_cline_spit_county_park/
@@IBHunter "You can see a 2 inch object from over a hundred miles away" I don't believe this claim is possible At All. You are going to have to Prove that claim to me via a real demonstration. I have seen videos of lights on train tracks where the track builders state they don't take Earth curvature into account and no matter how bright that light is, after so may feet you fail to see it entirely. I can make this observation with street lights. Other reason I don't believe it is it's not possible on your globe. Using the metabank calculator, your geometric horizon is 3 miles. You have a drop of 1.26 miles (6669.41 feet) and a hidden distance of 1.19 miles (6273.36 feet) You could not be able physically to see these distances beyond your assumed physical curved edge on the other side of your ball. Go ahead, show me your demonstration.. if you could which I seriously doubt you can, it would only serve to prove the Earth is not a ball with the sizes we are given. After you give me your physical demonstration of a 2 inch object being seen at 100 miles with the unaided eye, then I'll reply to fromjesse.
@@DivergentDroid The typical resolution of the human eye is about 1 arc minute. This is about 1 inch at 100 yards. The fact that we can see the 2 inch lights from 30,000 feet or 5.6 miles means we can see things smaller than we can resolve them.
@@DivergentDroid You can do the observation yourself. The flight aware website will allow you to track the locations of airliners in your area. While watching the airliner, you can track its position on the computer.
If you use the earth curve calculator correctly, by entering a target height of 30,000 feet you will see that the aircraft is well above the horizon. If the observer is on a mountain like I said in my comment, and you enter an observer height of 10,000 feet, the horizon will be much farther.
Give it a try.
I should be fun and easy.
If you are having trouble understanding why you can see an object your eye can not resolve, I can give you a much more thorough explanation, if you need.
DUDE THAT IS NOT THE LENS LOL.. YOUR LOOKING AT AN ANGEL AND WATERS ABOVE.. YOU LIVE IN BIBLICAL CREATION. STOP LISTENING TO LIARS. THE DEVIL IS ALIAR
Lol
You see "waters above" in this video?
And circular angels out of focus?
I bet you made these up, and zero scripture supports your belief system
Only if you watched the video...
Well said
No pal that is the shape of the star.. how could an out of focus image produce complex geometric patterns? Obviously it wouldn't.. So explain to everyone why every star has its own unique geometric patterns and each one with different color from the others.. I guess thats what happens when your nikon900 is out of focus again huh.. Obviously another shill for the agenda or worse, could actually be that ignorant
You are incorrect. An out of focus camera can cause the shapes of some of it's own complex geometric patterns. Research bokeh. I googled it for you, here's some random video I found showing how the shape of the aperture can appear in the picture when the camera is not focused on the light source. th-cam.com/video/Sn-EpqJCLXk/w-d-xo.html
That's right sir. The poster is wrong and brainwashed. But I appreciated seeing this.
So, I want to believe that stars are patterns and shapes of possible spirits/ Angels but I know for a fact that the dancing wave looking things is because the lights are in the Firmament with water behind, but this guy maybe even paid to hide truth...
What is your take...?
Good, I just looked at your page quickly... We are on the same page, perfect...
It's all perception. We can see everything only n only in a certain fixed angle. We can never see its sides n behind it. So we will never know its true shape n size. Things are not what they seem to be. It's much much more. No human can ever find out.
'It's a heptagon, I know this because I saw it!'
'Well, you're seeing the shadows of the arperture blades because you didn't focus properly. Here's what it looks like when focused.'
'Well, actually, we'll never know because it's all perspective.'
Flat eather mem
Even In Focus it does Not look like or behave like what we are told about stars from the mainstream narrative according to your video. I'm a heliocentric skeptic but it is prudent to be skeptical of any claim you cannot test yourself. We don't even really know how far those objects are. None of you can prove the distance independently without relying on a mainstream source. I am not a photographer so I cannot test these claims myself however I never saw any evidence stars were in focus in Flat Earthers videos. This does Not mean however that it's proof of the heliocentric model.
Is there any evidence for a flat Earth that doesn't involve photos or videos taken close to the horizon? I mean, has any flat Earther even attempted to explain why the *horizontal* position of the sun, moon and stars always matches the globe? Seems like a pretty amazing coincidence to me and something that can be easily checked by anyone.
Really, it doesn't actually matter if you do these types of observations, ie. azimuth, close to the horizon because refraction is almost entirely a vertical phenomenon.
You can even see vega star move with your own eyes hold your thumb out in front of you and place it just below the star and you will see it slip behind your thumb.
@@joeynyesss1286 That's right. It's the celestial bodies that revolve around us. Earth does not move.
@@DivergentDroid you lack a brain 😂
Я ничего не хочу менять в прогрессивном развитии человечества, движения к справедливому обществу без эксплуатации. Но вопрос: почему тысячи лет небо не изменилось ( расположение звёзд)?
Flat-Earthers believe what they do because their brains operate on the same topography.
a p1000 at last some one with a top astrological equipment unlike that rubbish James web rubbish
oi don't call The James Webb Telescope Rubbish, the Nikon P1000 is full of rubbish.
I literally require this to be a satire
@@eMBO_Gaming it was
False comparison fallacy.
Stars to headlights and city lights lol