“…the only website about the subject was Flat Earth Society, which treated the entire thing like SATIRE, and made SEVERAL FALSE CLAIMS about what Flat Earth is actually hold true.” - Eric Dubay
Lol... I concur. Can't even remove profile in here. No need to waste time. Thanks, Eric ;)
I think he is faking the whole thing to get a free ride into space. Or maybe he's just pocketing the money? Idk...“…the only website about the subject was Flat Earth Society, which treated the entire thing like SATIRE, and made SEVERAL FALSE CLAIMS about what Flat Earth is actually hold true.” - Eric Dubay
Lol... I concur. Can't even remove profile in here. No need to waste time. Thanks, Eric ;)
Eric Dubay, is a moron an a fraud, and regularly gets his ass handed to him on YouTube. If he had a brain he would be dangerous.
“…the only website about the subject was Flat Earth Society, which treated the entire thing like SATIRE, and made SEVERAL FALSE CLAIMS about what Flat Earth is actually hold true.” - Eric DubayI have no earthly idea what the objective of this thread, or what the Original Poster is claiming relative to the flat earth theory other than their are disagreements (and vicious ones) amongst some Flat Earth theorists. Of course this NEVER happens with Helio-centrical Theorists!
Lol... I concur. Can't even remove profile in here. No need to waste time. Thanks, Eric ;)
“…the only website about the subject was Flat Earth Society, which treated the entire thing like SATIRE, and made SEVERAL FALSE CLAIMS about what Flat Earth is actually hold true.” - Eric DubayI have no earthly idea what the objective of this thread, or what the Original Poster is claiming relative to the flat earth theory other than their are disagreements (and vicious ones) amongst some Flat Earth theorists. Of course this NEVER happens with Helio-centrical Theorists!
Lol... I concur. Can't even remove profile in here. No need to waste time. Thanks, Eric ;)
Dubay's in it for the money, it's that simple.
He's an idiot. His way or the highway. His old forum banned anyone who didn't sing his praises, and he allows no disagreement, much like round earther discourse. He just constantly links to his books to get people to buy them and send him money. That's all he's after.
Anyone who doesn't agree completely with him is a shill, no matter how much support they've had for him.
"You make claims about how aether behaves that seem to answer many questions about our world. Now is the time to test these ideas."The first thing that you would need to show is how your aether model explains the results better than the currently accepted gravitational models.
Go ahead. you have access to the same resources as me.
Think about this for a moment though: if I came in one day, and said I'd performed the experiment, and that the results were exactly in line with DET... Even if I provided a few photos of a gravimeter and balloon, and even if I gave altitudes at which jumps occurred, what would that achieve?
Would you actually believe it, or would you just conclude I was lying to promote my model? Would that convince you, or would you remain a staunch round earther and ignore it?
I don't have unlimited funds, and it's quite an investment for me to perform the easier experiment, for zero actual gain.Believe it or not, the scientist performing those experiments aren't paying for them out of their own pockets. They think long and hard about their theories, carefully design experiments to falsify their theory, write up a detailed proposal and then look for someone with deep pockets (often, but not always, the government) and ask for funding to carry out the experiment. You can even try to crowdfund your experiment on a site like Kickstarter or Indiegogo.
"The first thing that you would need to show is how your aether model explains the results better than the currently accepted gravitational models."Why do you post in threads other than your own? You make all the other flat earthers run away to save face...
Or explains them to an equal degree with fewer assumptions, and makes a further prediction.
"Believe it or not, the scientist performing those experiments aren't paying for them out of their own pockets. They think long and hard about their theories, carefully design experiments to falsify their theory, write up a detailed proposal and then look for someone with deep pockets (often, but not always, the government) and ask for funding to carry out the experiment. You can even try to crowdfund your experiment on a site like Kickstarter or Indiegogo."
Don't be an idiot. No one respects Flat Earth Theory. It's a self-fulfilling prophecy: no one respects Flat Earth theory because there's less hard data, and there's less hard data because no one would fund Flat Earth research because they don't respect it. I need to raise awareness of DET first, to get the people who might potentially be interested in funding an experiment.
All you've ever been able to do is insult DET,is there anything else to do?
That sums you up. Incapable of a single bit of reasoning. Stop wasting my time.I beg to differ. I have done more math on this forum than you ever did when building your theory.
I'm not engaging with a liar.Sweet. You engage with me a lot, so I guess that means you don't think I'm a liar anymore. That is quite a lot of weight off of my chest.
You complain whenever I dare post relevant FE answers in a thread,You bring in DET nonsense into a flat earth theory thread. DET and Flat earth are not remotely compatible.
and now you're dragging this one off course by your own repeated dishonesty.I thought you thought I wasn't lying anymore?
I am not engaging with someone who repeatedly ignores every answer they are given.Same logic. You engage with me, so you must think I don't ignore answers. Which is true. I immediately debunk answers that don't match with physical everyday phenomena. But I do take in answers that make sense.
Goodbye. Again.Normally, when you say goodbye, you only say it once.
"You make claims about how aether behaves that seem to answer many questions about our world. Now is the time to test these ideas."
Go ahead. you have access to the same resources as me.
Think about this for a moment though: if I came in one day, and said I'd performed the experiment, and that the results were exactly in line with DET... Even if I provided a few photos of a gravimeter and balloon, and even if I gave altitudes at which jumps occurred, what would that achieve?
Would you actually believe it, or would you just conclude I was lying to promote my model? Would that convince you, or would you remain a staunch round earther and ignore it?
I don't have unlimited funds, and it's quite an investment for me to perform the easier experiment, for zero actual gain.
"The first thing that you would need to show is how your aether model explains the results better than the currently accepted gravitational models."I keep telling you, Occam's razor is a only a guide, not a rule.
Or explains them to an equal degree with fewer assumptions, and makes a further prediction.
"Believe it or not, the scientist performing those experiments aren't paying for them out of their own pockets. They think long and hard about their theories, carefully design experiments to falsify their theory, write up a detailed proposal and then look for someone with deep pockets (often, but not always, the government) and ask for funding to carry out the experiment. You can even try to crowdfund your experiment on a site like Kickstarter or Indiegogo."Who says that you need to reveal that it's a flat earth experiment? You tell them that you're testing for aether, or some of the alleged properties of aether. No one needs to know that you think that the earth looks like an egg muffin sandwich.
Don't be an idiot. No one respects Flat Earth Theory. It's a self-fulfilling prophecy: no one respects Flat Earth theory because there's less hard data, and there's less hard data because no one would fund Flat Earth research because they don't respect it. I need to raise awareness of DET first, to get the people who might potentially be interested in funding an experiment.
Because they are fun to talk to (sometimes). When you come along, they all abandon the forum because even they know that your theory is rediculous.
Because they are fun to talk to (sometimes). When you come along, they all abandon the forum because even they know that your theory is rediculous.
This isn't true! You're blaming JRowe for something that is really the fault of angry globularists. Once you guys pile on a thread it gets boring real fast.
"If you took valid pictures and documented your process, posted your data and everything checks out I would have a hard time denying it. If the experiment looked promising, with no signs of data tampering, I would have to conclude that your theories would have some merit."
No weasel-words. Yes or no, would you accept DET is the experiment succeeded?
And if so, give your criteria for it to be above board.
OSG, leave.Why? I want to make sure anybody who comes here doesn't leave with the wrong idea about the world. I am fine with you believing whatever makes you feel good, but I have problems when you try to get others to believe something that has been proven to be wrong (or is so much more complicated that it would be silly to believe it instead of a globe)
OSG, leave.Why? I want to make sure anybody who comes here doesn't leave with the wrong idea about the world. I am fine with you believing whatever makes you feel good, but I have problems when you try to get others to believe something that has been proven to be wrong (or is so much more complicated that it would be silly to believe it instead of a globe)
change the bolded part to "is incorrect" and you summed it up perfectly.OSG, leave.Why? I want to make sure anybody who comes here doesn't leave with the wrong idea about the world. I am fine with you believing whatever makes you feel good, but I have problems when you try to get others to believe something that has been proven to be wrong (or is so much more complicated that it would be silly to believe it instead of a globe)
Oh, so you are a white knight here to stop information that you do not like from spreading to the masses. Historically, has this not happened before?
Pay. Attention.
Once again, pay attention, actually think about the discussion, rather than thinking you're magically exempt to all basic rules of logic rather than repeating the same point already shown to be nonsensical. Better yet, think for yourself.
I will tell you what scepti...I will make you a deal, post up a few things you say, just like three things about yourself that you say as proof. Then, if you are willing to talk to me over the phone, so I can see if you are stable (as in not dangerous nut). If all that goes well, I will fly you out here free of charge. Also pay for your lodging, all you will have to cover is incidentals such as food or whatever exploring you want to do while you are here.
I will show you around the shops and we can do any experiments you want to do with any equipment I have. This includes the vacuum, some of the heat shielding I still have, some rocket components, well there is a bunch of random shit I can get into detail about later that you might like.
You film everything , only thing I ask is I want a copy of all data you film, or we can send it to multiple file sources during filming. I just want to make sure there are no dishonest edits.
Although I could not dedicate a huge amount of time to this, I could dedicate an entire day,maybe even two. Which would be plenty if all experiments are planned /designed ahead of time.
So.....
Also if in the real world, if you work in the mechanical engineering field, fluid dynamics, accounting, I.t., fabrication, design, electrical, board design and a few others I am brain farting on that would be even better for me. As I could write the whole thing off as consultant fees.
OSG, you have been caught out on numerous lies, I am no longer wasting time with you. Once again, leave. Do i need to remind anyone how you decided to ask a question that you had already conceded was answered, and that you admitted would make a waste of time to talk to if you ever asked it again?
"Think about it. Even if you found proof of the "jumps" in gravitational energy, could they not be caused by something else? This would not be conclusive proof of the existence of aether."
It would be a prediction made and verified.
Conclusive proof doesn't exist. There is no reason for you to selectively apply that criteria to my model, and not your own.
"Awesome, now present your credentials and provide links to the scientific journals you've submitted your work to. "
Once again, pay attention, read the thread, actually think about the discussion, rather than thinking you're magically exempt to all basic rules of logic rather than repeating the same point already shown to be nonsensical. Better yet, think for yourself.
Does aether cause the moons of Jupiter to move as well?
To my knowledge they have not been seen from Earth, so I'm ambivalent about whether they exist, let alone what causes them. Theoretically, though, yes.
Satellites of Jupitersee more in The Galileo Project, Satellites of Jupiter (http://galileo.rice.edu/sci/observations/jupiter_satellites.html). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .Galileo's expectation was that Jupiter, which was then in its retrograde loop, ould have moved from east to west and had left the three little stars behind. Instead, he saw all three stars to the west of Jupiter. It appeared as though Jupiter had not moved to the west but rather to the east. This was an anomaly, and Galileo returned to this formation again and again. Over the next week he found out several things. First, the little stars never left Jupiter; they appeared to be carried along with the planet. Second, as they were carried along, they changed their position with respect to each other and Jupiter. Third, there were not three but four of these little stars. By the 15th of January he had figured it out: these were not fixed stars but rather planetary bodies that revolved around Jupiter. Jupiter had four moons. His book, Sidereus Nuncius, in which his discovery was described, came off the press in Venice in the middle of March 1610 and made Galileo famous.
(https://thecuriousastronomer.files.wordpress.com/2015/02/galileonotebook.gif) Galileo's sketch of Jupiters Moons | But here is one taken on a Nikon D7000, handheld! (http://i1075.photobucket.com/albums/w433/RabDownunder/Astronomy/Gailiean%20Moons%20Paul%20Knight%20Providence%20RI%20Nikon%20D7000%20with%2018-200.%200.3%20sec%20f5.6%20OSO%202500._zpsg6exvlex.png) Gailiean Moons, Paul Knight, Providence RI, Nikon D7000 with 18-200. 0.3 sec f/5.6 ISO 2500 |
Does aether cause the moons of Jupiter to move as well?To my knowledge they have not been seen from Earth, so I'm ambivalent about whether they exist, let alone what causes them. Theoretically, though, yes.
Are saying "To my knowledge they have not been seen from Earth" about "the moons of Jupiter"?Not seen from earth to your knowledge! Well your knowledge is sorely lacking!These moons were first seen and noted by Galileo onQuote from: The Galileo Project, Satellites of JupiterSatellites of Jupitersee more in The Galileo Project, Satellites of Jupiter (http://galileo.rice.edu/sci/observations/jupiter_satellites.html). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .Galileo's expectation was that Jupiter, which was then in its retrograde loop, ould have moved from east to west and had left the three little stars behind. Instead, he saw all three stars to the west of Jupiter. It appeared as though Jupiter had not moved to the west but rather to the east. This was an anomaly, and Galileo returned to this formation again and again. Over the next week he found out several things. First, the little stars never left Jupiter; they appeared to be carried along with the planet. Second, as they were carried along, they changed their position with respect to each other and Jupiter. Third, there were not three but four of these little stars. By the 15th of January he had figured it out: these were not fixed stars but rather planetary bodies that revolved around Jupiter. Jupiter had four moons. His book, Sidereus Nuncius, in which his discovery was described, came off the press in Venice in the middle of March 1610 and made Galileo famous.
For obvious reasons I can't give you Gailieo's photos, but here is one of the sketches he made.
Galileo's sketch of Jupiters Moons
(http://i1075.photobucket.com/albums/w433/RabDownunder/Astronomy/Gailiean%20Moons%20Paul%20Knight%20Providence%20RI%20Nikon%20D7000%20with%2018-200.%200.3%20sec%20f5.6%20OSO%202500._zpsg6exvlex.png)
Gailiean Moons, Paul Knight, Providence RI, Nikon D7000
with 18-200. 0.3 sec f/5.6 ISO 2500
Honestly, you need to learn much more about the earth, its shape and dimensions, as well are a bit about observations about our neighbouring planetsbefore trying to single-handily develop your own "cosmology".
Please oh please, tell me you were joking when you claimed: "To my knowledge, they have not been seen from Earth"!
Does aether cause the moons of Jupiter to move as well?To my knowledge they have not been seen from Earth, so I'm ambivalent about whether they exist, let alone what causes them. Theoretically, though, yes.
Are saying "To my knowledge they have not been seen from Earth" about "the moons of Jupiter"?Not seen from earth to your knowledge! Well your knowledge is sorely lacking!These moons were first seen and noted by Galileo onQuote from: The Galileo Project, Satellites of JupiterSatellites of Jupitersee more in The Galileo Project, Satellites of Jupiter (http://galileo.rice.edu/sci/observations/jupiter_satellites.html). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .Galileo's expectation was that Jupiter, which was then in its retrograde loop, ould have moved from east to west and had left the three little stars behind. Instead, he saw all three stars to the west of Jupiter. It appeared as though Jupiter had not moved to the west but rather to the east. This was an anomaly, and Galileo returned to this formation again and again. Over the next week he found out several things. First, the little stars never left Jupiter; they appeared to be carried along with the planet. Second, as they were carried along, they changed their position with respect to each other and Jupiter. Third, there were not three but four of these little stars. By the 15th of January he had figured it out: these were not fixed stars but rather planetary bodies that revolved around Jupiter. Jupiter had four moons. His book, Sidereus Nuncius, in which his discovery was described, came off the press in Venice in the middle of March 1610 and made Galileo famous.
For obvious reasons I can't give you Gailieo's photos, but here is one of the sketches he made.
Galileo's sketch of Jupiters Moons
(http://i1075.photobucket.com/albums/w433/RabDownunder/Astronomy/Gailiean%20Moons%20Paul%20Knight%20Providence%20RI%20Nikon%20D7000%20with%2018-200.%200.3%20sec%20f5.6%20OSO%202500._zpsg6exvlex.png)
Gailiean Moons, Paul Knight, Providence RI, Nikon D7000
with 18-200. 0.3 sec f/5.6 ISO 2500
Honestly, you need to learn much more about the earth, its shape and dimensions, as well are a bit about observations about our neighbouring planetsbefore trying to single-handily develop your own "cosmology".
Please oh please, tell me you were joking when you claimed: "To my knowledge, they have not been seen from Earth"!
But you would argue for a spherical Earth, after all you're an ozzy and we all know ozzies don't really exist because if they did they'd have fallen off the Earth by now.
Check and mate.
To my knowledge they have not been seen from Earth, so I'm ambivalent about whether they exist, let alone what causes them. Theoretically, though, yes.but then his connection with reality is somewhat tenuous at best.
Does aether cause the moons of Jupiter to move as well?To my knowledge they have not been seen from Earth, so I'm ambivalent about whether they exist, let alone what causes them. Theoretically, though, yes.
Are saying "To my knowledge they have not been seen from Earth" about "the moons of Jupiter"?Not seen from earth to your knowledge! Well your knowledge is sorely lacking!These moons were first seen and noted by Galileo onQuote from: The Galileo Project, Satellites of JupiterSatellites of Jupitersee more in The Galileo Project, Satellites of Jupiter (http://galileo.rice.edu/sci/observations/jupiter_satellites.html). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .Galileo's expectation was that Jupiter, which was then in its retrograde loop, ould have moved from east to west and had left the three little stars behind. Instead, he saw all three stars to the west of Jupiter. It appeared as though Jupiter had not moved to the west but rather to the east. This was an anomaly, and Galileo returned to this formation again and again. Over the next week he found out several things. First, the little stars never left Jupiter; they appeared to be carried along with the planet. Second, as they were carried along, they changed their position with respect to each other and Jupiter. Third, there were not three but four of these little stars. By the 15th of January he had figured it out: these were not fixed stars but rather planetary bodies that revolved around Jupiter. Jupiter had four moons. His book, Sidereus Nuncius, in which his discovery was described, came off the press in Venice in the middle of March 1610 and made Galileo famous.
For obvious reasons I can't give you Gailieo's photos, but here is one of the sketches he made.
Honestly, you need to learn much more about the earth, its shape and dimensions, as well are a bit about observations about our neighbouring planetsbefore trying to single-handily develop your own "cosmology".
Please oh please, tell me you were joking when you claimed: "To my knowledge, they have not been seen from Earth"!
But you would argue for a spherical Earth, after all you're an ozzy and we all know ozzies don't really exist because if they did they'd have fallen off the Earth by now.
Check and mate.
Not yet, we're managing.So long as we repeat "I believe in Newton" five times a day we manage to stick to the Globe.
But i don't know the connection between that and JRoweSkeptic's silly claim:To my knowledge they have not been seen from Earth, so I'm ambivalent about whether they exist, let alone what causes them. Theoretically, though, yes.but then his connection with reality is somewhat tenuous at best.
Maybe you can enlighten me?