.....
Yeah, riiiight... dream on. Moonlanding was staged in a hollywood studio at remote secret location. No one can land on the moon as it is not a solid object but lesser light created on day 4 of Lord's creation.
....
Meaningless images deleted.
Got any proof for your wild claim?
Listen you spentulus the zombie:
-first, posted images are common sense facts, so they are not meaningless.
-second, It is well established fact now that the moon landing was staged in a studio at secret remote location. No one can or will ever be, landing on the moon as it is not a solid object, but lesser light in the firmament of heaven.
bonus hint:
....
+reminder for treasonous badecker
....
Nonsense images deleted.
So you have no arguments, ... sock puppet.
^^^ What do you think is more reasonable, that the nautical mile used for navigation in conjunction with the sextant, a tool that measures angles between objects using the human eye was created based on:
(A) the angular resolution limit of the human human eye,
or
(B) the radius of a globe in a time when everybody knew the Earth was flat, and it's just pure (((coincidence))) that the radius of the globe matches the 1 minute limit of the eye?
Keep in mind that the globe model breaks down and is falsified when a zoom lens with a limit of less than 1 minute is employed. We haven't even got to question of weather the "rule of 60s" applies to celestial objects yet and your claim that the Moon is a giant sphere 240k miles away (((Copernican model))) is dead in the water.
I notice that you want to keep ducking and dodging numerous of my questions.
As for your rambling above, you seem to be asking now about the origin of the "nautical mile." That does not matter, any consistent units of measurement can be used.
You seem to think the angular resolution of the human eye is precise, but then people used to believe a red cunt hair was a precise unit of measurement, too.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hair%27s_breadth
