1
The Lounge / Re: is your avatar your real picture?
« on: February 23, 2010, 09:41:23 AM »
Yes.
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.
God, quit being so rude. You don't get to decide what people can or can't ask in Q&A.
Boobs aren't allowed on normal tv? Damn your country is full of prudes
i think your very slightly underestimating the mass of jupiter
although it is made of gas, it has more than 100x more mass than the earth (im not sure the exact number offhand)
Oh, so nothing was debunked then. Got it.
Everybody not retarded knows that mountains are formed on the boundary of two tectonic plates, and either go down so they are gradually pushed up. There is a lot of proof to suggest this is the case... unless, wait! It's the conspiracy again!
Sorry, what was debunked?
"You're wrong" isn't a debunking of anything.
Lice Farm you are being stupid! Any fule kno that paragraph 17 of Chapter III says "The remarks just made in reference to simple forward levelling apply with equal force to what is called by surveyors the back-and-fore-sight process".
The bit about Oranges is in Chapter VI.
that book is classified as science fiction. it is not a reliable source.No. It isnt. it freakin rotates, you can observe that with a telescope and a camera.
I have searched ENaG for "freakin rotates". 0 results found.
No. It isnt. it freakin rotates, you can observe that with a telescope and a camera.
?
what about the rest of our solar system?!
Like I said, I'm staying out of this thread, but perhaps you should check your logic in stating that they are incompatible.
Us being stuck to the earth has always been because we weren't being accelerated by the UA. Probably because we're sheilded by the earth or something like that.
Parsifal is correct, you are the failure.
Is this a well known fact or a well known prediction of Newton's Theory of Gravitation?
Light rays, although they obey analogous mathematical principles as point particles, are just a convenient pictorial representation of propagation of light in a particular domain of applicability called Geometrical Optics. They are not trajectories of some real physical particles. The concept of acceleration is only valid for the mechanical motion of real physical objects. If a light ray is represented by a curved line, it does not mean that there are some particles moving along that line. Therefore, the concept of acceleration is meaningless in the context of optics, even in geometrical optics.
Usually you're shielded from it due to how thick the FE is. The less earth you have between you and the source of UA, the stronger the effect of the UA has on you. So you're now slightly accelerating up due to the UA.
solar behaviour is not observed to vary with longitude.
When you dig the hole, you get closer to the force of the UA.
It's nice to see that you completely misunderstood my statement.
I remember when you did it. It was really not funny. You should do it again some time. Only funny.
I don't see how you would be able to "remember" something I did years ago when you weren't here, but I agree, it wasn't very funny. Still, at least I grew out of it, unlike you.
No, I understand entirely. A simulation based on a model is not proof of that model. Your entire reasoning is circular, in that the conclusion is the same as the premise.
For example: In the game Battle Field 1942 a bomber can be bombing you from overhead while a distant bomber appears closer and lower to the horizon, despite the two bombers flying at the same altitude.
If that distant bomber could shine a laser pointer out of his cockpit across the map, the laser would hit the bomber above you from the side, the laser being parallel with the earth.
Attention newbies:
Welcome to FES! Also, there are about four, maybe five active members here who genuinely believe the Earth is flat. "Lord Excalibur" is not one of them, and the idea of pretending to be a radical FE'er to "parody" us has been done about fifty times before.
This means, among other things, that I can record bit-perfect from Grooveshark.
Bendy light contradicts neither gravitation nor electromagnetism.