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.


Messages - tradosaurus

Pages: [1]
1
http://www.atlanteanconspiracy.com/2016/01/gravity-does-not-exist.html

Quote
If you fill a balloon with helium, a substance lighter than the nitrogen, oxygen and other elements which compose the air around it, the balloon will immediately fly upwards.  If you fill a balloon with hydrogen, a substance even lighter than helium, the balloon will fly upwards even faster.  If you blow a dandelion seed out of your hands, a substance just barely heavier than the air, it will float away and slowly but eventually fall to the ground.  And if you drop an anvil from your hands, something much heavier than the air, it will quickly and directly fall straight to the ground.  Now, this has absolutely nothing to do with “gravity.”  The fact that light things rise up and heavy things fall down is simply a natural property of weight.  That is very different from “gravity.”  Gravity is a hypothetical magnetic-like force possessed by large masses which Isaac Newton needed to help explain the heliocentric theory of the universe.

In the globe earth cult religion gravity is magic.

3
Flat Earth Q&A / Re: New member with open mind
« on: April 05, 2015, 08:23:05 PM »

1. Evolution has observational evidence, so it is not a religion.

2. a. The Van Allen belts are not a problem, neither is the thermosphere.
    b. How do you know this? Your incredulity is not evidence.

3. It does not matter if the heliocentric theory is not biblical or not. Observational evidence tells us it is correct, and if the Bible disagrees, the Bible is incorrect or metaphorical. The Bible is not a science book. Also, heliocentric theory, evolution, and the Big Bang theory do not go "hand in hand." Evolution could be true in a geocentric solar system, The Earth could revolve around the Sun and still be created by God in 7 days, and the universe could have existed forever and evolution and heliocentrism would still be true. The 3 things do not depend on each other to be true because they deal with 3 different subjects: Biology, astronomy/astrophysics, and cosmology.

1.  Ignoring micro-evolution (within a single population) which isn't evolution at all, tell me what has been observed to support evolution?  Where is the half fish/half bird?  Why aren't apes evolving into humans today?  Remember the claim is that changes in kind (fish to a bird for example) happened over millions and millions of years.

2.  In 2012 NASA launched two satellites to explore the Van Allen radiation belts to determine how dangerous it really is.  Why?  If there were over 5 moon missions that passed safely through the belts does NASA need more information?

3.  Well when I look up at the sky I see the sun move. 

4
Flat Earth Q&A / Re: New member with open mind
« on: April 05, 2015, 08:18:44 AM »

What about the thermosphere and the Van Allen belts precludes human space travel. Looking for actual evidence and science here and not hand waving.

What about 1960's technology was lacking? Germany was launching sub-orbital rockets in the 40's.

Alan Bean, Apollo 12 astro-not,  was interviewed a few years back and said that battery packs were used to keep the lunar module cooled and heated.   Do you believe this was possible?  What size of battery would be used to keep the astro-nots cooled while walking around in 250 F temperatures?  Could we do this with today's technology?


5
Flat Earth Q&A / Re: New member with open mind
« on: April 04, 2015, 06:42:10 PM »
" class="bbc_link" target="_blank">

An interesting interview with a gentleman who worked at Rocketdyne from 1956 to 1963, where Saturn V rocket engines were built.

1) No hole or depression made by the jets while the looney module was landing.
2) Very little noise from the jet engines while Neil Armstrong was talking on a microphone.
3) Clear communication with 1960's technology from the astro-nots on the moon to NASA. 

Beam me up Scotty!

6
Flat Earth General / Re: What would it take to change your mind?
« on: April 04, 2015, 12:04:58 PM »
By the way I believe in a geocentric universe as it is easier to believe than the preposterous speeds in the heliocentric universe that the planets are traveling around the sun and the solar system is traveling around the universe.

Please explain why a slow speed is more believable than a fast one. Use logic in your answer.

The Geocentric universe has a medium called aether that permeates all objects and is what is spinning around the earth which is immobile.  According to Ernst Mach and Lense-Thirring, supported by Einstein himself, the gravitational effects of a rotating star system around a stationary earth are exactly the same as the gravitational effects of a rotating earth in a stationary star system.

The stars don’t have to travel huge speeds themselves as would be required in the heliocentric universe, rather, they are carried in an aether medium that satisfies almost all the speed demands.  It is the aether that moves and carries the planets and stars.

This means that the sun, relative to the aether, is not moving at 24 million miles per hour, but is hardly moving at all. The independent movement the sun makes relative to the aether, however, will allow it to transcribe a path through the zodiac each year. Hence, as the aether rotates once per day around the earth, the sun rotates with it, and the sun will come back to almost the same position each day, except that it will be 1/365th ahead of where it was the day before. As for the rest of the stars, they also rotate with the aether, and thus they are not moving at exorbitant speeds, rather, the aether is rotating. Since the aether is at Planck dimensions, it can withstand such speeds.

However, the heliocentric system demands that the sun move around the galaxy at a half million miles per hour, and that the Milky Way galaxy move about 100 times faster than the sun around clusters of other galaxies, and that the outer most galaxies are moving faster than the speed of light. Now that’s getting into the science fiction realm!  Thus the heliocentric system DEMANDS these impossible speeds for the stars.

You have not explained why a faster speed is "more preposterous" than a slow one.
You have not used logic in your answer, other than the circular kind, because you take geocentricity as a starting premise rather than as a conclusion drawn from the greater likelihood of slower speeds.
In summary: you can't answer my question.

In summary you won't listen.  ;)   
The earth is not moving at all nor is it rotating.  In the fictitious heliocentric universe we are moving millions of miles per hour.  What's hard to comprehend?

7
Flat Earth Q&A / Re: New member with open mind
« on: April 04, 2015, 12:02:42 PM »
Moon landing was faked, IMO, because humans couldn't survive the trip through the thermosphere or the Van Allen radiation belts.  Also 1960's technology couldn't produce the ability to launch a large tin can to the moon and back.

Tell me, exactly what component of the Apollo programme was beyond the technology of the 1960s? Was it the propulsion system, based on the rockets used by Hitler in WWII? Was it the orbital mechanics, using principles worked out by Newton hundreds of years earlier? What bit of the mission was incapable of being done by late 60's technology? Where's your evidence that humans couldn't survive the trip?

In 1998, when the space shuttle flew to its highest altitude ever, three hundred sixty-five miles, one third higher than they normally flew, they were asked to descend to a lower altitude by mission control due to lethal space radiation they encountered by approaching too close to the “Van Allen Radiation Belts”, which don’t even begin until one thousand miles altitude (and continue for an additional twenty-five thousand miles). 

We don't have the technology now so we obviously didn't have the technology in 1960's to safely travel through the Van Allen radiation belts.

Beam me up Scotty!

The Apollo 11 press conference featured the 3 astro-nots who were grinning from ear to ear with the greatest feat of mankind, landing on the moon.  They were pumped and full of enthusiasm because they were awesome!

" class="bbc_link" target="_blank">

8
Flat Earth General / Re: What would it take to change your mind?
« on: April 04, 2015, 11:28:59 AM »
By the way I believe in a geocentric universe as it is easier to believe than the preposterous speeds in the heliocentric universe that the planets are traveling around the sun and the solar system is traveling around the universe.

Please explain why a slow speed is more believable than a fast one. Use logic in your answer.

The Geocentric universe has a medium called aether that permeates all objects and is what is spinning around the earth which is immobile.  According to Ernst Mach and Lense-Thirring, supported by Einstein himself, the gravitational effects of a rotating star system around a stationary earth are exactly the same as the gravitational effects of a rotating earth in a stationary star system.

The stars don’t have to travel huge speeds themselves as would be required in the heliocentric universe, rather, they are carried in an aether medium that satisfies almost all the speed demands.  It is the aether that moves and carries the planets and stars.

This means that the sun, relative to the aether, is not moving at 24 million miles per hour, but is hardly moving at all. The independent movement the sun makes relative to the aether, however, will allow it to transcribe a path through the zodiac each year. Hence, as the aether rotates once per day around the earth, the sun rotates with it, and the sun will come back to almost the same position each day, except that it will be 1/365th ahead of where it was the day before. As for the rest of the stars, they also rotate with the aether, and thus they are not moving at exorbitant speeds, rather, the aether is rotating. Since the aether is at Planck dimensions, it can withstand such speeds.

However, the heliocentric system demands that the sun move around the galaxy at a half million miles per hour, and that the Milky Way galaxy move about 100 times faster than the sun around clusters of other galaxies, and that the outer most galaxies are moving faster than the speed of light. Now that’s getting into the science fiction realm!  Thus the heliocentric system DEMANDS these impossible speeds for the stars. 

9
Flat Earth General / Re: What would it take to change your mind?
« on: April 04, 2015, 10:45:10 AM »

For the records, millions of experiments have proven the Earth to be round and to orbit the sun at 93m miles, while zero repeatable experiments with reproducible results have been demonstrated for a flat earth or an earth centric solar system.

True science is observational evidence. 

Do you know that by a simple observation of the timed movement of the sun that you can determine that either the sun is not 865,000 miles in diameter or the sun is not 93,000,000 miles from earth? 

Using 93,000,000 mile distance of the sun from the earth the sun diameter comes out to be 3,333 miles, given that the sun moves a distance of its diameter in 3 minutes?

Personally I believe that the sun is much smaller and closer to the earth.
I would love to see your math behind this one.

I just drew a large circle around the sun. 93,000,000 miles is the radius of the circle. Circumference = 2*pi*radius. Earth supposedly travels 365 days around circumference of sun. 365 days = 526,000 minutes. From this earth travels 1,111 miles/min around circumference of circle. 3 minutes for sun to travel its diameter = 3,333 miles for diameter. 

If you are going to duplicate this experiment (true science) then do it early in the morning with a reference point to see the sun move the distance of its diameter in 3 minutes. 

By the way I believe in a geocentric universe as it is easier to believe than the preposterous speeds in the heliocentric universe that the planets are traveling around the sun and the solar system is traveling around the universe.

10
Flat Earth General / Re: What would it take to change your mind?
« on: April 04, 2015, 10:40:06 AM »
"True Science" is not making one stupid observation and then plugging your ears. It's actually experimenting. I have no tolerance for people like you.

I have no tolerance for ignoramus' like yourself who shove your religion down our throats at tax payers expense.   If people want to teach evolution and big bang theory then teach it in a private school.

I see that you didn't ask for my evidence.  So who is plugging their ears?

11
Flat Earth Q&A / Re: New member with open mind
« on: April 04, 2015, 10:37:22 AM »
I am a 50 y.o. engineer who has learned to be skeptical of the mainstream information like evolution, heliocentric theory, moon landing.

Do you mind if I ask you why you are "skeptical" of these things?


Evolution, as presented today, is a religion because it takes faith to believe in something with no observational evidence.  It is scientifically impossible.

Moon landing was faked, IMO, because humans couldn't survive the trip through the thermosphere or the Van Allen radiation belts.  Also 1960's technology couldn't produce the ability to launch a large tin can to the moon and back.

The heliocentric theory is not biblical and goes hand in hand with evolution and the big-bang theory.  a simple observational experiment proves the sun is either not 865,000 miles in diameter or 93,000,000 miles from the earth.

12
Flat Earth Q&A / Re: New member with open mind
« on: April 04, 2015, 10:32:25 AM »

1. Do you believe that other planets are round?  If so why?

If I recall correctly, Flat Earthers believe other planets are round and Earth is flat because Earth is somehow different from other planets.

Yhe correct answer her is: earth is not a planet.

So do FE's believe in the geocentric universe?

13
Flat Earth General / Re: What would it take to change your mind?
« on: April 04, 2015, 09:19:39 AM »

For the records, millions of experiments have proven the Earth to be round and to orbit the sun at 93m miles, while zero repeatable experiments with reproducible results have been demonstrated for a flat earth or an earth centric solar system.

True science is observational evidence. 

Do you know that by a simple observation of the timed movement of the sun that you can determine that either the sun is not 865,000 miles in diameter or the sun is not 93,000,000 miles from earth? 

Using 93,000,000 mile distance of the sun from the earth the sun diameter comes out to be 3,333 miles, given that the sun moves a distance of its diameter in 3 minutes?

Personally I believe that the sun is much smaller and closer to the earth. 

14
Flat Earth Q&A / New member with open mind
« on: April 04, 2015, 07:38:07 AM »
I am a 50 y.o. engineer who has learned to be skeptical of the mainstream information like evolution, heliocentric theory, moon landing.

So I have an open mind on the flat earth theory.

I am re-posting some of the questions another gentleman posted because I didn't see an answer for any of the questions.  A few questions are my own.

1. Do you believe that other planets are round?  If so why?

2. What happens when you reach the edge of a flat earth? Do you fall off?

3. What is at the bottom of a flat earth?

4. Is the flat earth out in space? What holds the flat earth up?

5. The sun is explained as having a spot light effect in the flat earth theory to explain night and day.  If the sun is an orb that shines 360 degrees how is this possible?  Or is the sun not an orb in the flat earth theory.

6. How wide is the flat earth? And how far up would you have to go to see the whole flat earth from above?

My understanding is that the story that Christians believed in a flat earth until Columbus’ time, and for some time thereafter, began as part of a fictional story that was elevated to historical fact by late 19th-century Darwinists who used it primarily as a means to ridicule Christians.   Christian theologians, almost without exception, likewise accepted the fact that the earth is a sphere.   Basically Christians never believed in the flat earth.


Pages: [1]