25
« on: March 16, 2007, 08:23:02 AM »
Ok...this is going to be a LONG post... Some things I would be confused about...I'm wondering if you could explain AM and FM radio waves to me, and why you need high towers to send FM radio signals to extend their distance as well as your line of sight (using a telescope) For those who don't know, FM waves are limited to line of sight, while AM waves are affected by gravity, and if powerful enough can travel around the curvature of the earth... Speaking of gravity, your FAQ says the gravitation pull of the earth is caused by it's movement, but what exactly cause the sun and moon to orbit the earth if it has no natural attraction of it's own. Without some kind of pull, momentum would cause both to continue on in a straight line.
I was also wondering what's on the other side of the earth. I'd very much like to see some physics model for the universe and I'm curious as to whether you believe in anything NASA has done?
I'm reading your FAQ right now, and I have some issues with the logic... First, it says:
"Q: "The government could not pull off the conspiracy successfully"
A: Actually, they could."
The magnitude of such a conspiracy makes it prohibitive. When you consider that all the governments do not have the same agenda, at some point one would have certainly disputed the claim. To achieve such a conspiracy, the sheer number of people involved tax the laws of probability to an insane degree. With so many possible problems, without a doubt someone, somewhere would have gotten the "real" information out.
To use an example, very little can go wrong with a wedge. It's simple, and it works...the more moving parts a machine has, the greater the chance of it breaking down. If you have an extremely complex machine, over time it is inevitable that it will break down in several areas.
"Q: "Please explain sunrises/sunsets."
A: It's a perspective effect. Really, the sun is just getting farther away; it looks like it disappears because everything gets smaller and eventually disappears as it gets farther away."
Um...not sure what to say about this. The moon, for example, doesn't really appear to get smaller. You can see it against the horizon, often cut in half... it does not get smaller. Also, taking into consideration that the moon is rarely full, goes far to dispel the theory that it is it's own source of light, when the explanation that it's merely reflecting another light source is much more reasonable.
"
Q: "What about satellites? How do they orbit the Earth?"
A1: They don't, satellite signals come from radio towers."
They do not come from radio towers. Take TV dishes, for example. They must be pointing at the satellite in order to receive the signal. Consider the mass multitude of dishes which need to point at the sky to receive the signal. If you've ever attempted to set a dish up, you'd see that they must be very specifically directed to work. Also, with a strong enough telescope, you can see satellites.
"Q: "Why does gravity vary with altitude?"
A: The moon and stars have a slight gravitational pull.
Q: Follow-up to previous question: How is it that the Earth does not have a gravitational pull, but stars and the moon do?
A: This argument is a non sequitur. You might as well ask, "How is it that snakes do not have legs, but dogs and cats do?" Snakes are not dogs or cats. The Earth is not a star or the moon. It doesn't follow that each must have exactly the properties of the others, and no more."
This analogy does not work. Snakes and dogs follow the same rules of physics, the issue of legs does not relate. If a body of the moon has a gravitational pulled, it stands to reason that a similar mass would have a same effect. Science suggests that all mass has attraction and the greater the mass, the greater attraction. The theory of the universe in this sense works. To suggest that the moon and stars have gravity without any reason greatly lessons the credibility of the model.
"Q: "Why doesn't water run off the Earth?"
A: There is a vast ice wall that keeps the water where it is. The ice wall is roughly 150ft high. This also explains why you can find a vast plane of ice when you travel south."
Have you seen the ice wall? I ask this question only since the central idea that I'm hearing is that you believe the world to be flat because it's what you see... I wonder at the faith in this "ice wall" that no one has any actually proof of...
"Q: "How does global warming affect the ice wall?"
A1: Global warming is melting the ice wall, but the government isn't doing anything because cutting carbon emissions would damage the economy, and they only care about making money.
A2: Global Warming doesn't happen. It and its counter-theory (Global Cooling) are effects that cancel each other out. Remember, these "greenhouse gasses" can reflect heat back out into space as well as keep it on Earth. Yes, there are recorded rises in temperature, but the only records we have go back, at most, around 150 years. This is very likely an occurrence that happens every [x>150] years, that's happened before (perhaps many times), and that the Earth has thus survived before."
The green house effect is simple. The thicker atmosphere does not both reflect AND magnify. Consider a car parked in the sun with the windows closed. The glass magnifies energy and keep it in the car. Glass does not reflect, as it's transparent. The ice is responsible for reflecting the energy, but as it melts, less and less get reflected away from the earth, thus increasing the "warming" effect. If you question this theory, go back to the car analogy. Touch a white car sitting in the sun, then touch a black car sitting in the same area. You'll notice that the black car has absorbed a considerable amount of heat compared to the white.
"Q: "What about tides?"
A: The tides exist due to a slight see-saw effect on the earth. As it goes back and forth, the water rushes to the side that is lower. Note, this is a very slight wobble. Remember, these wobbles are created by very minor earthquakes. They keep the tides in check. Notice that large earthquakes result in large tides or "tsunami"."
Exactly what physical law causes the "see-saw" effect? All the laws of physics suggest that an object in motion requires much more energy to change course than to stay the course. To prove this, take your car around a sharp turn, and in the apex, let go of the wheel. Without direction, it will continue along a forward path.
Show Posts
