NASA says humans could land on Mars in 25 years

[Spicoli]

Flat, round, elliptical, pear-shaped...... you just have to ask yourself what geometrical shape is more logical to be hurtling through space without undue stresses, and where everything is pretty symmetrical. I don't think we have to delve into quantum physics to surmise that something close to a sphere is the natural shape that is more conducive to traveling through space as a celestial body.

Logical to be hurtling through space?

What are the odds that we're one of the only flat planets though. Or the only one, and exactly how many known spherical planets can be seen with the naked eye across the World or with high powered telescopes, observatories etc. If one is a flat Earther do we dispute that these are 'known' Planets to begin with?

The planets were originally called wondering stars. Take a look at the planets through high powered telescopes (there a heaps on YT), they look like light, not like the CGI images NASA presents.

Think about a pool table, just because the balls are round, doesn't mean the table is round as well, is a good example of your assumption.

Pool table.. huh . So you're saying there's a great chance Earth would be the only flat planet, or what we see through telescopes is indistinguishable as flat or round? Save for the Moon clear to the naked eye as round. I thought there were other planets clear to the eye as round also? Depending on location.

[Alpha]

Flat, round, elliptical, pear-shaped...... you just have to ask yourself what geometrical shape is more logical to be hurtling through space without undue stresses, and where everything is pretty symmetrical. I don't think we have to delve into quantum physics to surmise that something close to a sphere is the natural shape that is more conducive to traveling through space as a celestial body.

Logical to be hurtling through space?

What are the odds that we're one of the only flat planets though. Or the only one, and exactly how many known spherical planets can be seen with the naked eye across the World or with high powered telescopes, observatories etc. If one is a flat Earther do we dispute that these are 'known' Planets to begin with?

The planets were originally called wondering stars. Take a look at the planets through high powered telescopes (there a heaps on YT), they look like light, not like the CGI images NASA presents.

Think about a pool table, just because the balls are round, doesn't mean the table is round as well, is a good example of your assumption.

Pool table.. huh . So you're saying there's a great chance Earth would be the only flat planet, or what we see through telescopes is indistinguishable as flat or round? Save for the Moon clear to the naked eye as round. I thought there were other planets clear to the eye as round also? Depending on location.

I'm just saying by you're reasoning the pool table example can be used. Just because the balls are round, doesn't mean the table is as well.

Sure planets look round, but solid? Take a look yourself if you get the chance. They look nothing like NASA's 'super' telescope images. Like I mentioned, the ancients referred to them as 'wandering stars'.

We only ever see 1 side of the moon from earth. Take away NASA's fake images and you can see the possibility of it being a disc.