Comments by "Juzu Juzu" (@juzujuzu4555) on "Risking My Life To Settle A Physics Debate" video.

Flat earth is a CIA psyop. It happened pretty much overnight with massive amount of money poured into it. Suddenly channels spreading controversial truths about things like 911 and Apollo footage were filled with flat earth bots. And now people fear controversial subjects as they fear that they are considered as flat earthers. Physics and math are the best things showing the true conspiracies and lies of the past. How to make people actually researching these things is another thing.
8
I truly hope people don't just believe what people on the media say. Most of media is completely controlled and thus we get things like 911 commission report that people think is science, or closed source simulations that are considered as science. I love scientific method and the good honest scientists, but there's so much crap that we call science nowadays that I would hope people would research things before believing in anything.
4
@nichnocheins3121 Yes I have, but the problem is that you either already know it, or you would just call me crazy without researching the subject and I'm not interested in that today.
2
@foodandart5808 I used to laugh at this, after all I was studying to becoming physicist and was really intelligent. But on uni someone I truly looked up told me this and said it's true. So I had to start researching it and downloading collections of evidence from torrent sites (as people had been creating collections of all kind of evidence with sources). Suddenly there was one evidence that I understood perfectly, that could not be refuted in any way. And accepting that to be true really made me lose interest in science, I almost didn't graduate because of that. But it truly is the truth, and there's so much proof, and many individual methods that prove without any doubt that the footage is faked.
1
@MrBilld75 In about two weeks time all of my "truther channels" were full of flat earth lunatics. If you were there seeing how they operated, there would be no chance in hell that it wasn't funded with massive amounts of money. Flat earth has been MASSIVELY successful. It killed those truther channels that had tens of thousands of members worldwide, and since then ALL the normies know about flat earth and think "conspiracy people" being as stupid as flat earthers, and they also fear subconsciously all "conspiracy related" things because they don't want to be associated with flat earth. The quality of those youtube videos, the amount of those youtube videos etc. show quite clearly they are not made by individuals who want to make a quick buck. The quality on those videos exceeded pretty much all other conspiracy related videos, at the time those were really well made videos that required lost of talent behind them.
1
Mythbusters were pretty crappy show, sure entertaining, but unscientific at best and straight out lying to protect certain truths from coming out at worst.
1
@nichnocheins3121 Check out "Kubrick's odyssey one" on Bitchute. It might shock you, but watch it till the end, as there's one part that shows one clever proof. That video shows one of the things I disliked in mythbusters, but then again it's obvious why they are not telling the truth and why they are actually hiding the smoking gun, just like every other TV program has done on that subject.
1
@initialb123 Watch it till the end. It shows the method in the end, but it's one of those things that you should watch in total.
1
@nichnocheins3121 Hollywood has known from the start that it's frontscreen projection. It's been shown already in 1972 James Bond Diamonds are forever film. That video itself is only showing what to look for. The proof is probabilistic, you have the same things on the blackness of space, no matter which photo or film you look. There's no possibility of it being camera or the film. That means there must be background. The other frontscreen projection markings just prove the background is frontscreen projetion canvas. Again "scientists would have already proven this" as they have. But on things like JFK asssassination, 911 controlled demolition false flag, etc. you are not going to hear the truth from scientists, as there are certain agendas that you either accept or you will get fired, blacklisted, and censored. Those who speak the truth are being trashed as crazy people within the media and they are deemed as conspiracy theorists. Thus most follow the agenda. The Apollo footage's parallax shows that there's a background close by. The way dust flies from moon buggys tires shows there's atmosphere where the footage is filmed, and then there are other evidence that take much more work to verify. But the easiest thing is to follow the markings on the blackness of space. Having the same markings on all photos, but on different locations as the camera's angle etc. changes, is the best proof possible. But it requires thinking and it sinking in. American moon 2017 is pretty good documentary that clearly explains why Russia didn't expose it (though many cosmonauts still did), how Nasa collected moon rocks from Antarctica in the 60s, and all the other aspects as well. I highly recommend it. Though I'm not saying we haven't been on the moon. The official mission just is fake, just like the footage. There's no doubt on that and it's quite common knowledge among scientists, but people stay quiet.
1
@amedeeabreo7334 BS, they could have used whatever official Nasa photos and show that parallax proves the background doesn't move, and use the photos to show many photos were reused. The amount of evidence is majestic, and when you finally start to actually research this thing with open eyes, it will shock you. There's no change in hell that any show could actually show the parallax evidence or frontscreen projection proof, so in that sense the only thing that pisses me off is taking the whole subject at all.
1
@amedeeabreo7334 Sorry about that =)
1
@nichnocheins3121 Oswald didn't shot JFK because that's impossible by Newtonian physics. It couldn't be simpler, official lie claims Oswald was in the book repository that was straight back of JFK but on the footage JFK's head is thrown backwards, and Jackie is thus trying to get away from the car over the trunk. There's so much evidence on this thing, but who bothers to research? Almost no one, as they think they can just watch brainwash medias and know the truth. 911 is so filled with impossible physics and ridiculous mistakes by those who pushed this lie. Basements were exploded even before CGI planes were ever "hit" in the buildings. Then you can just watch and hear the explosions going from the TV footage. And those explosions were heard even from Jersey and collected from seismic meter station there. The amount of impossible physics and evidence is so immense that it's hard to communicate shortly. Planes had remote controls already in the 90s. Hijacking plane can be done, flying these planes however is impossible without experience on those specific planes. But the most important thing is that planes wouldn't collapse WTC. Even in theory if the top part would melt, the bottom would be just fine. Most intelligent people already know these things, it's totally obvious for anyone who bothers to research. But just like with all the lies that were used to all the wars in 20th and 21th century, nothing happens unless majority of people really wake up and demand some justice. But our world is sadly so controlled that media is not going to say how it was done, why, and by whom. People are too opportunistic, so money buys silence and those that are financially well seem to be happy about their situation and accepting all the crimes. That changes only when enough people throw their TVs and other corporate medias away and actually start researching things and talking about these things among other people.
1
@nichnocheins3121 There were websites that clearly showed the lack of correct parallax. Then it was taken down, later it re-emerged with another site, was taken down again. Now there are at least "Kubrick's odyssey 3" where that research is shown. Maybe that original site is on the darknet. Finding lack of parallax can be done from the official nasa photos, but that requires some work.
1