Yeah, this has been debunked for years now. If that's the curve then New Mexico covers 1/3 of the "ball".
You are viewing a single comment's thread from:
Yeah, this has been debunked for years now. If that's the curve then New Mexico covers 1/3 of the "ball".
Yes, very debunked, very "fishy" indeed. This is not even something that Heliocentric defenders use as "proof" any longer, as it is clearly a go-pro, fish-eye lens, as made very evident by the size of New Mexico below it. There's no debate here.
Great question. You should really look into it, if you're interested. :)