1
Flat Earth Q&A / Relativity disproves accellerating Earth
« on: February 16, 2007, 07:50:40 PM »
What is the flaw with gravity?
Show Posts
This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.
Pages: [1]
2
Flat Earth Q&A / Relativity disproves accellerating Earth
« on: February 16, 2007, 07:37:45 PM »
You see, the flat earth people do not believe in gravity. They now encountered the puzzle of why things fall to the ground if you let go of them.
So instead of gravity, they now say the earth is moving at the rate of 9.8m/s^2 straight up. This way, its not gravity pulling the object to the floor, its the earth coming up to hit it becuase it is constantly moving up.
(This is where the arguement came up with the whole if its always accelerating, we must be reaching the speed of light, which isn't possible according to einstin.)
Anyway, there are holes in this theory. The easiest ones to point out are the source of what is making the whole earth move constantly at the rate of 9.8m/s^2.
It can't be anything gravity related, cause they don't believe in that.
Another one is how is the atmosphere able to stay on the earth if there is no gravity? Wouldn't it just blow away since nothing is holding it to the earth?
They also believe the sun and moon are spotlights, the sun being a really hot one.
I don't really get that because their explination involves orbits, and we all know they don't believe in gravity, so it kinda contradicts itself somewhat.
So instead of gravity, they now say the earth is moving at the rate of 9.8m/s^2 straight up. This way, its not gravity pulling the object to the floor, its the earth coming up to hit it becuase it is constantly moving up.
(This is where the arguement came up with the whole if its always accelerating, we must be reaching the speed of light, which isn't possible according to einstin.)
Anyway, there are holes in this theory. The easiest ones to point out are the source of what is making the whole earth move constantly at the rate of 9.8m/s^2.
It can't be anything gravity related, cause they don't believe in that.
Another one is how is the atmosphere able to stay on the earth if there is no gravity? Wouldn't it just blow away since nothing is holding it to the earth?
They also believe the sun and moon are spotlights, the sun being a really hot one.
I don't really get that because their explination involves orbits, and we all know they don't believe in gravity, so it kinda contradicts itself somewhat.
3
Flat Earth Debate / My Trip To The Ice Wall
« on: February 16, 2007, 07:16:59 PM »
You know, the only reason they're making this ice wall trip stuff up is because they can't answer any of our questions anymore.
Their theory has a lot of holes, and to fill those holes they're telling tales of "I've been there, so I can believe it if I want to" stories. We all know the stories are fake, and they're pissed off how we're making them doubt their religion.
So they are on the brink of going insananity by making shit up to prove their point. I wonder how long they can keep this up.
Their theory has a lot of holes, and to fill those holes they're telling tales of "I've been there, so I can believe it if I want to" stories. We all know the stories are fake, and they're pissed off how we're making them doubt their religion.
So they are on the brink of going insananity by making shit up to prove their point. I wonder how long they can keep this up.
4
Flat Earth Debate / My Trip To The Ice Wall
« on: February 16, 2007, 06:56:38 PM »
Alright, seeing how you are all very scientific, how is the atmosphere able to stay on the earth? Wouldn't just blow into space without the gravitational pull of the earth?
5
Flat Earth Q&A / Relativity disproves accellerating Earth
« on: February 16, 2007, 06:45:51 PM »
The very core of your theory is that the Earth is flat. The reason why things don't wall off the Earth is because it is accelerating at the rate of 9.8m/s^2. Now you tell me that the mechanism of why the Earth is accelerating is unknown, and has been given a place holder name of dark energy.
Is that not accurate?
Is that not accurate?
6
Flat Earth Q&A / Relativity disproves accellerating Earth
« on: February 16, 2007, 05:59:47 PM »
... this is starting to sound more like faith. Everything about your theory revolves, no pun intended, on the fact that the Earth is accelerating at 9.8m/s^2.
You are believing in a theory that cannot be proven. I mean, I guess you can if you were to go to the ice wall or were to explore the other side of the earth, but in the end, the math just doesn't add up.
And to have something at the very core of your theory, and then not know how it is done, it's more like a religion rather than science. You believe the Earth is flat. Although you can't prove the very core of it. Again, no pun intended.
So if you really want others to believe, go to the ice-wall and take pictures with the kids. Otherwise, you guys are just blindly following. How come there's not one picture of the ice-wall? We can get pictures of naked celebrities on the beach, we can go deep under water and take pictures of creatures that live in the dark, but you can't take a picture of a giant wall of ice?
You are believing in a theory that cannot be proven. I mean, I guess you can if you were to go to the ice wall or were to explore the other side of the earth, but in the end, the math just doesn't add up.
And to have something at the very core of your theory, and then not know how it is done, it's more like a religion rather than science. You believe the Earth is flat. Although you can't prove the very core of it. Again, no pun intended.
So if you really want others to believe, go to the ice-wall and take pictures with the kids. Otherwise, you guys are just blindly following. How come there's not one picture of the ice-wall? We can get pictures of naked celebrities on the beach, we can go deep under water and take pictures of creatures that live in the dark, but you can't take a picture of a giant wall of ice?
7
Flat Earth Q&A / Relativity disproves accellerating Earth
« on: February 16, 2007, 05:42:06 PM »
Yes, we get all that, we're not reaching the speed of light. What is making the Earth move 9.8m/s^2, thus causing things to fall down?
You can't say it's Gravity, and we're going in a circle around the universe and is keeping us going at a rate of 9.8m/s^2, because that would mean we are in orbit around the universe, and that would have to use gravity, and isn't that the whole point of a flat earth? No gravity? So what is making the earth move at 9.8m/s^2?
You can't say it's Gravity, and we're going in a circle around the universe and is keeping us going at a rate of 9.8m/s^2, because that would mean we are in orbit around the universe, and that would have to use gravity, and isn't that the whole point of a flat earth? No gravity? So what is making the earth move at 9.8m/s^2?
8
Flat Earth Q&A / Relativity disproves accellerating Earth
« on: February 16, 2007, 05:30:22 PM »Quote from: "DrunkardRP"
He's not asking if the energy required to accelerate is increasing, he's asking where is it coming from. What is making the earth move 9.8m/s^2.
9
Flat Earth Q&A / Relativity disproves accellerating Earth
« on: February 16, 2007, 05:27:33 PM »
He's not asking if the energy required to accelerate is increasing, he's asking where is it coming from. What is making the earth move 9.8m/s^2.
10
Flat Earth Q&A / GOOD WORK WAS ABOUT TIME FOR A CLEANUP IN HERE
« on: February 16, 2007, 05:23:14 PM »Quote from: "harold132"
what about the ocean... you can see it there like when a ship comes into view.
Add to that, how exactly are the sun and moon, or "spotlights" above the earth?
Sorry that there are some Diggers here just spamming. They just need some ritalin or something. They should go back to playing their wii60.
11
Flat Earth Q&A / Relativity disproves accellerating Earth
« on: February 16, 2007, 05:19:36 PM »
I get what they're trying to say. I guess I'll use a metaphor for what they're trying to say.
Imagine a tall drinking glass.
The top of the glass would represent the speed of light.
Now they're saying that we are accelerating at the rate of 9.8 m/s^2.
For the sake of the metaphor, lets say the rate of the acceleration of the Earth is the rate of water being poured into the glass.
Now, lets say that there's a hole, just below the top of the glass, and every time reaches this point, water pours out of the glass, and the glass is never reaching "the speed of light".
"Water" is still being "poured" at the rate of 9.8m/s^2, it's just that we never quite get to the top of the glass.
Correct me if I'm wrong on my metaphor.
That is basically their argument on the whole speed of light thing.
Now what LucidObscurity is asking is where the "water" is coming from. What is providing the Acceleration.
Imagine a tall drinking glass.
The top of the glass would represent the speed of light.
Now they're saying that we are accelerating at the rate of 9.8 m/s^2.
For the sake of the metaphor, lets say the rate of the acceleration of the Earth is the rate of water being poured into the glass.
Now, lets say that there's a hole, just below the top of the glass, and every time reaches this point, water pours out of the glass, and the glass is never reaching "the speed of light".
"Water" is still being "poured" at the rate of 9.8m/s^2, it's just that we never quite get to the top of the glass.
Correct me if I'm wrong on my metaphor.
That is basically their argument on the whole speed of light thing.
Now what LucidObscurity is asking is where the "water" is coming from. What is providing the Acceleration.
12
Flat Earth Q&A / Relativity disproves accellerating Earth
« on: February 16, 2007, 05:03:37 PM »
Ok... so if the Earth is accelerating at the rate of 9.8 m/s^2, then why is it not possible for the Earth to approach the velocity of the speed of light?
13
Flat Earth Q&A / Relativity disproves accellerating Earth
« on: February 16, 2007, 04:52:03 PM »
ok, so it is accelerating. at the speed of 9.8 m/s?
14
Flat Earth Q&A / Relativity disproves accellerating Earth
« on: February 16, 2007, 04:46:10 PM »Quote from: "LucidObscurity"
OK, mass is relative, but there still needs to be an explaination for the near infinite amount of energy required to maintain the accelleration of the Earth at near light speed.
Quote from: "The FAQs"
Q: "What's underneath the Earth?" aka "What's on the bottom?" aka "What's on the other side?"
A: This is unknown. Some believe it to be just rocks, others believe the Earth rests on the back of four elephants and a turtle.
Turtle Power I guess.
Anyway... so the Earth is not accelerating, but is moving at a constant speed of 9.8 m/s?
Pages: [1]