
Alex Boge
@alexboge • 7,369 subscribers
Photographer, SCUBA DiveMaster, Harley-Davidson Rider, IPSC Open Master, degrees in CIS & Physics, studying conspiracies, Bitcoin+MSTR+ASTS+RKLB
Shorts
Videos

I require this level of patience dealing with conspiracy addicts. I don’t always succeed.
Alex Boge182,519 Aufrufe • vor 8 Tagen

Prominent Flat Earthers explaining what a 24‑hour sun in Antarctica would mean. And in their own words, confirming the obvious: “If there is a 24‑hour sun in Antarctica, the Earth cannot be flat.” No debunking needed. Just receipts - paired with uninterrupted Antarctic sunlight, personally witnessed and recorded by multiple Flat Earthers and normal travelers, using multiple cameras, during a documented trip to Antarctica. Timelapse credit: Dave McKeegan
Alex Boge796,855 Aufrufe • vor 6 Monaten

A tiny little scene in Season 1, Episode 6 of The Expanse shows Uncle Mateo, a Belter, popping open his helmet for a few seconds to yank out a sparking sensor wire that had come loose inside his helmet. He takes a big breath first to better oxygenate his bloodstream, then begins exhaling steadily as he opens the helmet. He pulls the wire, seals it, and repressurizes - and he's fine. It always got me thinking how over-the-top Hollywood usually makes exposure to vacuum in movies. But this scene actually gets the science right. (Note: In real spacesuits you can't open a helmet like this - the pressurized bubble stays sealed. But the physics of what would happen if you could is still fascinating.) You MUST exhale steadily, and here's why: The reason is Boyle's Law. When external pressure drops to zero, the air trapped in your lungs wants to expand dramatically. Even at only 4.3 psi inside the suit, that creates a huge unbalanced pressure pushing outward against the delicate alveoli. On Earth a big breath is safe because pressure is equal on both sides. In vacuum it's not - the alveoli can tear, sending air bubbles into your blood (an arterial gas embolism that can hit your brain or heart). Game over. Even if you somehow held it, you couldn't use the oxygen anyway. In vacuum the pressure gradient reverses and your lungs start stripping oxygen out of your blood. So you take that big breath to load up your bloodstream with extra oxygen, then you begin a steady exhale as you open the helmet, and… - 0–2 seconds: What little bit of air is left rushes out of your lungs. - 3–5 seconds: Your saliva starts fizzing and boiling on your tongue - that weird, carbonated, Pop-Rocks feeling. If you stay exposed without resealing: In 10–15 seconds you black out from lack of oxygen. Once you pass out, your face and body start swelling from water vapor forming in the tissues. Not the dramatic explosion of bad sci-fi - more like severe bloating, and it reverses almost completely once you repressurize. But you could last unconscious for up to approximately three minutes. Should someone reach you, seal your helmet, and repressurize, you'd have a surprisingly good chance at recovering. Uncle Mateo was fine. His exposure was very brief. He exhaled, and as a Belter, he'd probably become used to that mild Pop-Rocks feeling. NASA proved all of this with real tests in the 1960s - Jim LeBlanc's near-vacuum accident plus animal chamber studies. It's not movie nonsense. It's physics.
Alex Boge213,910 Aufrufe • vor 1 Monat

Boy, the zoom on these new phones is getting quite good eh? Saturn, its ring and one of its moons looks cool 😁😁😁
Alex Boge182,222 Aufrufe • vor 7 Monaten

Earth, rotating in full view, captured by NASA’s EPIC camera aboard NOAA’s DSCOVR spacecraft. DSCOVR sits near Sun-Earth L1, about 1 million miles away, where it can continuously view the fully sunlit side of our planet. This is not composited, these are full Earth hemisphere photos assembled into a video. EPIC takes 10 narrow-band spectral images of Earth, from ultraviolet through visible light, roughly 13 to 22 times per day. The public images are natural-color views assembled from that real data. Frame after frame, Earth turns. Cloud systems move. Continents rotate through sunlight. Weather evolves across a curved, spinning world. This is what reality looks like. Flerfs in denial.
Alex Boge53,814 Aufrufe • vor 2 Monaten

Some time ago, flat Earthers were asked for their models, and the majority who provided specifics described a domed flat Earth with the sun and moon as small, local objects under the dome - both about 32 miles in diameter, circling at around 3000 miles high, with stars projected on the dome roughly 100 miles above them. The animation below models exactly these values. It fully incorporates atmospheric effects (density, scattering, and obscuration), the inverse square law for light falloff, and is 100% faithful to the described flat Earth model. Let’s see how well it matches everyday observations, shall we? To the inevitable deniers flooding the comments: If your personal model differs, post about it on your own content. You didn’t specify one when asked - so it wasn’t incorporated. (Probably because you know it falls apart too.)
Alex Boge142,076 Aufrufe • vor 6 Monaten

The ISS orbiting Earth - making a full orbit in approximately 90 minutes at ≈17,500 mph (about 5 miles per second). Beautiful 😍 The straight edges of the solar panels that remain perfectly straight as they adjust in this sped-up footage prove this is not a fish-eye lens.
Alex Boge60,624 Aufrufe • vor 2 Monaten

Ever seen a piece of 1960s space hardware still haunting Earth's neighborhood decades later? 🚀 This NASA JPL animation shows J002E3 - the spent S-IVB third stage from Apollo 12's Saturn V (launched November 1969). In 2002, amateur astronomer Bill Yeung spotted it and logged it as a near-Earth asteroid. Turned out to be a 33-year-old rocket stage. Watch the cyan path trace its journey from May 23, 2002 to June 17, 2003. It drifts in from the left, loops and twists around Earth and the Moon in wild, non-repeating arcs, threading past the L1 point - the gravitational gateway between Earth's and the Sun's sphere of influence - while the Moon tugs it back and forth in a chaotic, unpredictable dance. No neat ellipses. No tidy repeating orbits. Just a 50-year-old rocket stage being slowly torn between three gravitational masters. No trajectory predictor in 1969 could have told you where this thing would be in 2002. Chaos saw to that. 🧵 Part 2: the full orbital mechanics breakdown ↓
Alex Boge46,022 Aufrufe • vor 1 Monat

You’ve seen them in the comments: “How come Artemis’s crew didn’t zoom in to the “underside” of the supposed globe to show people in Australia upside down? The mission was fake!” Folks, this is exactly the shot flat earthers keep demanding - a zoom from space straight down to the “bottom” of the globe, Australia front and center, upside down. Here’s the thing. Even with this absurd, physically impossible zoom, this is exactly what you’d see on a spherical Earth. If, that is, IF the person who produced it didn’t just rotate the video to match convention. Why would anyone produce such a video? Literally no one cares what Flerfs want, they are irrelevant. They reject gravity. They reject the globe. And then they miss the most basic consequence of both: “down” is toward the center of mass. Every person on Earth stands on their own local vertical. An Australian isn’t hanging upside down - they’re standing just as upright as you are. This is physics taught to ten-year-olds. Incredible it even needs to be addressed. So they keep demanding evidence that, even if handed to them from space, they would immediately misinterpret and still deny. And that’s why these demands don’t get taken seriously. Flat Earth is dead, it’s a zombie conspiracy.
Alex Boge56,236 Aufrufe • vor 2 Monaten

MH370 'Satellite' video with a motion extraction effect 100% proves the video is CG with a static background. Sorry, not sorry, mh370x “Using two copies of the same video, I've inverted the colour of one and reduced the opacity to 50%. Then I've shifted the time by 5 frames so that the videos are slightly out of sync. When the inverted video is overlaying on the original copy, any movement is accentuated by a 'shadow'. Anything that doesn't move remains neutral. You'll notice in the video that the only movement you see is in the plane, mouse cursor and when the screen shifts position.” **The clouds do not move hence the solid background.**
Alex Boge78,992 Aufrufe • vor 7 Monaten

FLERFs have clipped a Brian Cox segment from Joe Rogan and - as usual - had to surgically remove the context to make it work. Gotta Lie To Flerf. The clip they're pushing shows Cox saying there's no experiment you can do on Earth to detect its motion. What they don't show is everything before it: Cox is specifically talking about detecting Earth's *orbit around the Sun*. That part's actually correct - Einstein and Hawking both concluded there's no *local* experiment that can distinguish being at rest from moving in a straight line through space. There is no absolute space. That's the point. None of that has anything to do with Earth's *rotation*. Because here's the thing: we can prove Earth rotates. Foucault's pendulum has been doing it since 1851. We watch Earth spin in real time with satellites. The Coriolis effect shapes weather systems across entire hemispheres. These aren't theoretical - they're observable, measurable, repeatable. Even if the quote meant what the FLERFs claim it means (it doesn't), it *still* wouldn't prove Earth doesn't rotate. That's how badly this fails on every level. Full clip attached so you can see the actual context. Gotta Lie to FLERF. 🌍
Alex Boge24,568 Aufrufe • vor 2 Monaten

Stanley Kubrick filmed the moon landing hoax? Not a chance. This was the best he could do with a massive crew and the latest special effects for 2001: A Space Odyssey (1968). The Earth is oversized. He added fake stars. And they couldn’t reproduce the Moon’s low gravity right.
Alex Boge18,527 Aufrufe • vor 2 Monaten

Moon landing deniers claim that because the Sun is distant, all lunar shadows must look perfectly parallel. When they see shadows that appear to diverge, they call it proof of a studio hoax. That ignores perspective. Parallel light does not mean parallel-looking lines in a photograph. In perspective projection, parallel lines in 3D space appear to converge or diverge depending on camera position. Add uneven terrain and the apparent angles shift even more. As shown in this drone video, when viewed straight down, parallel shadows appear parallel. Lower the camera and tilt the view, and those same shadows begin to fan outward - even though nothing about the light or objects changed. It’s geometry, not Hollywood.
Alex Boge20,182 Aufrufe • vor 4 Monaten

MH370 'Satellite' video with a motion extraction effect 100% proves the video is CG with a static background (again) “Using two copies of the same video, I've inverted the colour of one and reduced the opacity to 50%. Then I've shifted the time by 5 frames so that the videos are slightly out of sync. When the inverted video is overlaying on the original copy, any movement is accentuated by a 'shadow'. Anything that doesn't move remains neutral. You'll notice in the video that the only movement you see is in the plane, mouse cursor and when the screen shifts position.” **The clouds do not move hence the solid background.** Fuck off MH370X retards and culties Source:
Alex Boge38,751 Aufrufe • vor 1 Jahr
Keine weiteren Inhalte verfügbar