Thank you for visiting my channel. Please be sure to subscribe
For further discussion, check out my Facebook discussion page, "Voices Of Reason To Explain X - VORTEX" - click the link below.
If you would like to support my work by making a small donation (or even a large one!), please click the PayPal button below. Your support will be most appreciated, thank you!
I use Starry Night Astronomy Software in my videos (see the links below)
Die Geschichte ist war,mein Großvater Peter war 1914-1918 in diesem Krieg. Als kleines Mädchen hatte ich Ihn gefragt ,ob es während des Krieges wenigstens einmal Frieden gab...ich schwöre bei Gott...er hat mir erzählt,daß die Waffen ruhten und Sie Weihnachten zusammen feierten.Mein Name ist Rita Anna👱♀️🖐❤️
Ok I'm not saying you're incorrect but that's only true if you can see more of that ship above the water line if it's much closer to you. This is a flawed test. You need to film a ship travelling away from the coast once the visible part is established and see if you see less of it as it saiks away from the shore. This does not give you the perspective to know if seeing more of hat ship above the water line is even possible.
I'm not sure I follow your logic given that the two ships we see are actually identical. Since we have two identical ships at different distances, it is the same as seeing the closer ship sail away. Bur for what it's worth, I do have other videos on my channel showing large cruise ships sailing away, including the following 200x speed time lapse. Please be sure to read the description under the video for the details: ru-vid.com/video/%D0%B2%D0%B8%D0%B4%D0%B5%D0%BE-_8-kKrM1xYQ.html
Hi Marie, I haven't "disappeared", I'm still right here but there is only so much "stupid s***" and all the toxicity that goes with debunking it that anyone in their right mind can take. Grifters will continue to grift. Liars will continue to lie. All my debunking videos are still there addressing all the stupid s*** if anyone needs to watch them. I hope you are doing well.
That's fine but you must understand that there is something happening in the world right now and it is very toxic. I'm so alone and i'm fucking terrified... terrified@@dazzathecameraman
In last year I found that my dad had died.And my kids's father had died and nobody told me.... I just don't get it.What did I do so wrong for peopleTo hate me.
@@mariecampbell5540 I'm sorry to hear of your loss. What is it that is happening in the world that is toxic? I will probably reply tomorrow as it is getting late here now.
No Mary, the Sun is not rising in the wrong place, if it was, every single star, planet and the Moon would also be in the wrong place and astronomers all over the world would be talking about it. Everything, including the Sun, are right where they should be.
in the summer of 1988 and 1989 it grew commonplace for me to notice a black spot in front of the sun on hazy and overcast days. This is the first I've ever heard anyone else ever mention it.
TALKING about the Rapture as the titles clearly state does not mean she was giving dates on ALL the articles she posted. Nicely fone- theyre flashing by long enough to see the word 'Rapture', but if u look closely like i did, you can see that less than 1% of her articles she actually predicted a date. 2ndly there r many Christians God has given insight regarding such things. Ur just not aware of circles like these. She may have missed the dates/or year...but
Don't need to show pictures, video, or argue to prove the Earth is a globe, the universal language of mathematics thoroughly, completely, and undeniably DESTROYS any and all Flat Earth theories. Thank goodness our military wasn't/isn't flat Earthers...otherwise these forums would be in German or Japanese....ever since naval and field artillery gunnery among other weaponry that could hit targets "beyond the horizon" or "negative LOS" plotting and targeting solutions must mathematically calculate and allow for Earth's curvature, rotation, and gravity to hit a target beyond the negative LOS....otherwise shells would NOT land anywhere near the intended target. Those calculations could easily be the difference between victory or defeat and/or life or death in battle. Undeniable mathematical calculations that have been proven by every military in the world that clearly demonstrates the Earth is a sphere. Again undeniable and fundamental FACTS based on many times over proven mathematical equations, NOT opinions, theories, conspiracy, religion, educational bias, or even governments and their space exploration agencies telling us what to believe, the numbers tell the truth by themselves because they don't lie or have an agenda!
Don't need to show pictures, video, or argue to prove the Earth is a globe, the universal language of mathematics thoroughly, completely, and undeniably DESTROYS any and all Flat Earth theories. Thank goodness our military wasn't/isn't flat Earthers...otherwise these forums would be in German or Japanese....ever since naval and field artillery gunnery among other weaponry that could hit targets "beyond the horizon" or "negative LOS" plotting and targeting solutions must mathematically calculate and allow for Earth's curvature, rotation, and gravity to hit a target beyond the negative LOS....otherwise shells would NOT land anywhere near the intended target. Those calculations could easily be the difference between victory or defeat and/or life or death in battle. Undeniable mathematical calculations that have been proven by every military in the world that clearly demonstrates the Earth is a sphere. Again undeniable and fundamental FACTS based on many times over proven mathematical equations, NOT opinions, theories, conspiracy, religion, educational bias, or even governments and their space exploration agencies telling us what to believe, the numbers tell the truth by themselves because they don't lie or have an agenda!
funny how other people did this same experiment and had different results and clearly showed the boat further and zooming in and this doesn't prove the earth is a spinning ball at all ... this could be elevation and many other factors and this video clearly shows the other boats zooming back in when they also were not in view ... #NoCurveNoBall ... this video also proves the earth is completely stationary and not rotating and you see it everyday you are not spinning a 1,000 mph but ignore that point also huh
Indeed there are other videos that zoom into small BOATS rising up and down on the ocean swells. This is why I don't film small BOATS, I film SHIPS. I have also filmed large cruise ships that are much larger and taller than these big cargo ships. My camera height is approx 30 ft above the water, well above the beach and well above the waves and swells, and we can see the closer ship right down to the water line but the distant identical ship appears to be sinking. How do you explain this? If the Earth is flat and "water always finds its level" then we should be able to see all of the distant ship all the way down to the water line. This video can't prove that the earth is or is not stationary but I do have other videos that do prove that the Earth is a rotating sphere. The fact that I see the stars circling clockwise around a point in my Southern sky proves that there are TWO points of opposite star rotation 180 degrees apart. This would be impossible if the Earth is a flat disk with a dome above it. You can't have the stars rotating in two opposite directions around two points of rotation. These are observable facts. All you have is denial.
@@dazzathecameraman I did something similar with one of Wolfie's videos of an oil rig as I took a screenshot while it was zoomed out and enlarged that before taking a screenshot of the zoomed in version. The zoomed in version was of course much clearer and more detailed than the enlarged version, but their _proportions_ were exactly the same.
"What is telephoto vs zoom? What is the difference between telephoto and zoom lenses. So telephoto and zoom lenses are not the same. The main distinguishing point between them is their focal length. A lens that has the shortest value of up to 85 mm will be just a zoom, everything that is above it can be called a telephoto lens." clideo.com/resources/what-is-zoom-and-telephoto-lens The Nikon P1000 has a focal length range of 24mm to 3000mm (at 35mm format equivalent). 3000mm is a HUGE telephoto zoom. I zoom in right up to 3000mm. There is overwhelming proof (not just evidence) that the Earth is a globe. Your denial and your religious belief does not change this fact.
Allah is the creator of earth and skies he told us that the earth is flat islam is the true religion it’s the truth of our existence.@@dazzathecameraman there is a difference between zooming and traveling with your sight it’s clear that you did not use a telephoto lens in this video because of how bad the image quality was when you zoomed in.
@@vamplate105 you claim I did not use a telephoto lens yet you can see me zooming in a very long way - to 12.6 miles away in fact - and yes, that is why the image quality is "bad" because at 12.6 miles, we are looking through a lot of atmosphere, haze and heat distortion. Your denials do not change the facts and you have completely ignored the fact that although we can see ALL of the closer ship down to the waterline, the distant ship appears to be sinking. The amount of the ship we can see doesn't change at all as I zoom in. Again, your denial and your religious belief does not change this fact.
Hi Sharon, even though you are YELLING your comment, you are very much mistaken. No, it is not a fisheye lens. You should be able to tell this in my wide shot at the start when I am zoomed right out. Do you see any fisheye distortion? I don't. But to be very sure, before replying to you, I took my craft mat which has a grid on it and I took some photos of it from near and far, with and without zoom. Guess what? No "fisheye" distortion. I would be happy to send you the photos. Or maybe you could buy a P1000 and test it for yourself? But let's say the lens was in fact a fisheye lens (which it isn't), how exactly would that cause the distant ship to be sinking while the closer identical ship is not? Please explain (in your own words). Thank you.
I confirmed the second sun etching live the Cox all sky mercury transit live observatory. Our second sun, not the array of simulated one which also are there I am one of his original community and never available to be debunked as I confirmed Bob Lazar's story myself and had access greater than a solar warden whistleblower that had to spy on system users to find information. We care and so should they that hate these secret military false scientists placing weapon in space never needed, like solar warden fleet None of the. Represent my kind of mankind in General and their pleasant lives professing are not with their my planets peoples right. For wrong and to wrong others as they were created in secret if the defacto people and it's governments by criminals Are criminals so beware as be aware...
What's really funny is how you have said absolutely nothing about the content of my video. If the Earth is flat as you claim, then we should be able to see all of BOTH the ships. Instead, one appears to be sinking. Poor effort, try harder.
The simple answer is that the Nikon P1000 does not have a large enough optical lens to see the further vessel, plus the Law of Reflections also dictates if any light from the vessel's hull is being seen by the camera.
A damn side more swell between you and the ship on left than thet of the middle ship, easily determined by the feintness of the image... So as he zoomed, the crane towers suddenly appeared, they were always there, you just couldnt see tat far without optical enhancement.. I can show similar video, but have nothing visible on alleged horizon, yet using zoom, I can bring into view, boats that we simply could not see and swell plays a major part, the closer the swell to the observer, the less you will see beyond it... Also keep in mind, this svideo already goes beyond the curvature ratio, so none of it should have been visible, if you cand work out there is a problem, then you are part of the problem....
Red is a typical code for globey shills. Hive Red6. 7H3 eARTh isz FL4T. nASSa is theft, deception, diversion. Deprogramming is horrifying. Especially if you deprogrammed early. I was just like you goyem. Flooby doobie do yo!!! Mass burial. ♾️* *G7J10* *♾️
Right. FEs use the fact that zooming out destroys the detail you require to compare proportional change. Another one of their ridiculously obvious tricks which still f00ls the FEs.
If the distance of that ship is 12.6 miles and the eye height is at about 30 feet, putting that into an earth curvature calculator, only 23 feet should be obscured. We don't see any of the hull, and I doubt that the hull was only 23 feet high or less. And I could not find Princess Paula, but I did find Glorious Mahuta's stats to be 180 meters in length. Since the ships look the same, I'm assuming they're the same size, and at that length, I calculated the height of the highest part of the hull on the right to be about 40 feet. If only 23 feet should be obscured, we'd still see another 17 feet of the hull, yet we see no hull at all. Other things such as refraction are most likely occurring here, you can see a thin band of white between the mountain on the right and the water, indicating a mirage.
The movie that shows the real Christmas magic: peace among men regardless the place. Merry Christmas to the men and women on both sides of the ukrainian front.
You know flat earth Dave wouldn't pay out even if he was taken to space to see the globe Earth for himself? He would simply claim it was all an eloborate hoax
It's something I've never said. Do you have the data on what ships they were and how far away they are. Also your camera height above sea level. Thanks
Sure. As it says in the description under the video "The distant "sinking" ship (Princess Paula) was at 12.6 miles. The closer ship (Glorious Mahuta) was at 8.86 miles. My camera was at approx 30 ft above the water. I still have available for you the original video and photos, the GPS data for the ship locations and my filming location and the weather and tide conditions at the time." If you would like to email me at dazzathecameraman at outlook dot com I will send you the GPS data of the ships, my filming location, sea and weather conditions etc
@@dazzathecameraman Ok. Yeah sorry about that, I should have read the description. If you put 8.86m observer height and 12.6 miles away you get including standard refraction 17' should be hidden. I film these ships almost everyday, so far 326 days of filming since Jan last year. In your footage you cannot see the hull of the ship or the bow of the ship, therefore there is actually closer to 50" of this ship hidden. Almost 3x what should be hidden. You can see a very slight inferior mirage, this means that the horizon has been brought closer to you. This is why the bottom of the ship is not visible, it's due to the refracted horizon being close. It has nothing to do with earth curve. I multiple observations to prove that it's the horizon that is being refracted which hides or reveals and nothing to do with objects in the distance being displaced down or up. If you ever want to actually chat about it I'm always available. I just filmed one of these ships that was 27 miles away and you could still see the 4 crane pillars but the distortion and zoom of my p1000 was losing it. That's 112' of missing curve.
@@Dr-Curious Lol. Yeah I should have read the description. Trust me I've done way more observing ships over the horizon than anyone you could mention and I have more footage than anyone you know of.
@@planereality3675 That doesn't matter, champ. It's the fact you can't model nor explain the effects using scientific principles you claim you are observing that matters - Shouting "eye limits" and "diffraction" as if they are explanations for simple obscuration is about the best I've seen from a FE.
I considering to buy tapo cs320ws for sky monitoring because this video, May I know what hardware version did you have for this ? I read some comment that V2 version of C320WS is not good as older version
Correct, the version 2 hardware version of the C320WS is not as good as the V1 for sky monitoring. The image is quite light and noisy. It does not have the same contrast as you see in this video. I have just bought a C325WB which performs much better but you need to set the spotlight LEDs to on and tape over the same spotlight LEDS. This seems to change the camera's exposure settings and improves the contrast. I will post some video links for you below a little later. I use ContaCam to detect meteor events etc
Check out the recent videos by my friend MargotChris. In his latest videos, he is using a C325WB. www.youtube.com/@MargotChris/videos When I get time, I'll try to post a video showing a comparison of the V1 and V2 of the C320WS - and later a comparison with the C325WB.
Thank you for your information, unfortunately my C320WS is waiting to shipment but I don't know later it will get the Version 1 or Version 2, are turned on spotlight lamp & cover the lamp with tape will be beneficial to improve C320WS V2 ?
@@azminawwar8820 "are turned on spotlight lamp & cover the lamp with tape will be beneficial to improve C320WS V2 ?". I will test it to confirm, hopefully overnight tonight (it is aftrer 6pm here now). I can tell you it doesn't help the V1, it makes it worse. You might like to email me at dazzathecameraman at outlook dot com and I can send you some info, screen shots etc
@@azminawwar8820 I taped up the spotlight LEDs, set them to the lowest brightness and then set them to on and it vastly improved the contrast and removed all the video noise. I still think the version 1 C320WS is a better camera with more stars visible though, but on the version 2, the LED "hack" certainly helps.
Of course not. The distant ship at 12.6 miles away is 580 ft long. How much curvature would you expect to see across such a short distance from left to right? In order to see just one tiny degree of curvature from left to right, we would need to be able to see 69 miles of horizon. As for the effects of the curve we see on the ships, remember that we are zoomed right in and the curve is tens of feet (and matches globe earth predictions).
"I will celebrate Christmas without my family for the first time in 42 years this year. When I watched this video, I cried like a little child. I hope to make up for it next year. Unfortunately, my parents are older, and my father is seriously ill. It's taking a toll on me. Thank you for sharing this video! It emphasizes how important Christmas is for us humans and gives hope that the future won't be as bleak as it currently seems. It's still 10 days away, but Merry Christmas to all of you, no matter where you're from, regardless of age, and whatever religion you belong to. Christmas is a celebration for everyone!"
You could also ask yourself why objects that disappear or stand behind an alleged curvature of the earth (like wind turbines) never tilt backwards, as they should on a sphere. And you could ask yourself why such pictures aren't even faked. (probably because things you don't see are easier to believe than when you see something contradictory ;)
Do you really think you are the first person to raise the question about tilt? No, you're not, and "you could ask yourself" how much the objects that disappear or stand behind an "alleged" curvature of the Earth (like wind turbines) would tilt backwards. Have you ever done this? The distant ship in my video is 12.6 miles away. Let's make it easier if you like and assume it is a nice round 10 miles away and instead of a ship, let's say it is a tall building. Tell me the angle it will be tilting away? This is a very simple exercise even if you have only very basic math skills. Can you tell me the answer and show me your workings or is this too hard for you?
I guess you must be unable to calculate the answer? I'll give you some help. If we assume the Earth is indeed a globe with a circumference of 24,900 miles and divide that by 360 degrees (a full circle) we find that the Earth measures at 69 miles per degree of curvature. That is just one tiny degree of curvature. The furthest ship in my video is only 12.6 miles away. 12.6 miles / 69 miles = 0.18 of one degree or less than 1/5 of one degree of curvature / tilt. Do you really think you could see 1/5th of one degree of tilt? Seriously? You could ask yourself why you fell for that Flat Earth claim in the first place.
@@Dr-Curious No, I didn't get that from a Flat earth video, I got it from logical thinking and physics, because if an object disappears behind the curvature of a sphere, then it "must" tilt backwards at some point, but we "never" see things like that lean away "no matter" how far away they are.. You can look at pictures of wind turbines, no matter how far away they are, no matter how little of them can still be seen and they are almost completely covered by a supposed curvature, they always remain "straight" and that is physically illogical. And if you believe in curvature, why don't you expect scientists to go to Lake Baikal, which at 670 km should have a curvature of 35 km... and show you there how water “bends”.. (Funny that no one has been able to prove this yet 🤫) PS: The earth's surface is not "smooth as glass". In the depths of the sea there are mountains higher than Mount Everest.. So we humans believe that water adapts "smoothly" to the shape of a globe that is actually not "smooth" at all, so we should also believe that water adapts to the "unevenness" of the earth, but we never see "both" because we only ever see that water is "flat and smooth as glass", and we only "believe" that it bends to an extent that is too large to be perceived. and that is exactly the manipulation with which we have been indoctrinated. Every time they can't prove any curvature, official science says that the Earth is just too big, that's always the excuse for everything. You can only ever "believe" in a "whole" of the earth, which is why FE is not a belief, but a realistic, less theoretical and tangible "starting point" because FE doesn't even try to "invent" a whole of the earth to refer to the "perceptual area" of the earth, namely the earth's surface. Pretty much no one would believe that we live on a giant globe if it hadn't been claimed, and if you strip away all the claims and theories and only refer to what is really "perceivable and measurable"... then the globe theory can't hold up hold more... Without the undetectable and antilogical selective/choosy attraction, the whole heliocentricity no longer works... (that's why this force was "invented" 😉)
You need to learn about perspective buddy.... You have a sky view and a land view... You can only physicly see so far before the sky and land view meet at your height that the ship is beyond your vanishing point while its masts are sticking up into your sky view... go up to a high point and you will see all the level ocean beyond the ship. Stand on the ship and you will see a level ocean beyond too
