Flat Earth: Stanford Graduate Finds Out Hubble Doesn’t Exist
- Start Here
- First Questions Asked?
- Jesuits; Rulers of Evil
- History of Geocentric Theory
- The Heliocentric Globalist Theory
- Reasons to Doubt the Earth is Truly a Sphere
- Reasons to Doubt Everything NASA
- Moon Hoax Images
- Moon Hoax Videos
- Trusted FE Links
- Other Author Websites
- The F.E.S.S. Forum
- Flat Earth Videos
- Flat Earth Library
- Quotes
- Flat Earth Gallery I
- Flat Earth Gallery II
- FE Memes I
- FE Memes II
- FE Music Vids
- New! FE Maps
- Flat Earth Book Now On Sale!
Aplanetruth.info 
I listened to the entire thing. Some points:
-The speaker is NOT a “Stanford Graduate.” He states very clearly that he is enrolled in a certificate program at Stanford. He’s not even a regular student – he’s in the ‘center for professional development’ not the actually university.
-His claim is that they pushed the hubble and due to the laws of physics it just kept going (‘an object in motion remains in motion…’). He conveniently left out gravity. (For those of you who do not believe in gravity: Can you throw a rock in the air and watch it keep going up? Or does it come down? Whatever force you believe in, the speaker is wrong when he says the hubble should have just kept going.)
-The recording is almost all monologue. The person he is talking to never says anything about hubble not existing. He is associated with a completely different project which has nothing to do with hubble.
So, once gain the evidence does not withstand the simplest scrutiny. Speaker’s credentials inflated, completely wrong physics, and the call is simply the speaker abusing some scientist who does not confirm anything the speaker is saying.
LikeLiked by 1 person
“its all a lie. all of it.”
The problem is that each time you provide evidence to support your assertions, the evidence does not withstand the simplest scrutiny.
“What parts did you agree with?”
The part where the person being called explains the difference in capabilities between SOFIA and Hubble. However, what the main speaker is saying is mostly nonsense. The person being called is happy and eager to help a fellow researcher, but when the main speaker starts saying things nonsensical (e.g. they “catapulted” Hubble and it just kept going) he goes mostly silent, just wanting the call to end.
“always dissing”
You presented evidence, and it did not support your assertion. This is science, not “dissing.”
“even if he was a Stanford graduate, so what?”
Saying someone is a Stanford Graduate when they are not is dishonest and misleading. Being dishonest and misleading lessens the credibility of what is being said.
“their (sic) all indoctrinated.”
If that is true, than someone enrolled in a simple certificate program at Stanford would also be “indoctrinated.”
jwlpeace, I obviously appreciate your blog. But I have yet to find an assertion here that is supported by evidence (not including stories about vaccines and some other non-FE topics). I’m sorry if you are offended or disturbed by this, but the claims of FE theorists are simply not true – because the evidence does not support them and evidence provided to support FE theories are easily debunked.
LikeLiked by 1 person