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.
How do coriolons "know" that something is in motion? The entire earth is in motion (in both theories).
Nice contradiction. While it is fun to make up theories, try harder to not make ones you know can't be possible.
How does gravity "know" things have mass? Interacting differently in different circumstances does not constitute knowledge or sentience.
Worldwide overpopulation will have to be addressed sooner or later. Some time in the not so far future it will become a matter of survival and governments will have to decide what to do. Either prevent people from having too many children, with force if necessary, or contain the problem to the main contributing nations (those being the ones with the highest birthrate), again by force if necessary.
Both scenarios are far from pretty and I would much prefer a different solution, but I think there is none.
There are many solutions. Terraforming, satellite colonies, lunar colonization.
Okay, you got me there. I should have worded it differently. "..., but I think there are none we can achieve before the problem becomes critical."
These technologies will be here in 50 years. How long do you think we have until the problem becomes critical?
I somehow doubt it. It currently costs an objects weight in gold to get them into orbit. At that cost we could afford to clothe and feed them for their lives.
In fact we could currently feed everyone in the world, but the transportation costs and stunt to local agricultural development would lead to worse problems down the line. The population has to make a dramatic drop and perhaps AIDS will do that as it makes its slow burn through the human population.
Wow, you guys have
1. No faith in science advancing
2. No faith in humanity
3. A tendency to want everyone else to suffer
1. Expecting science to advance at a cost cutting rate as high as you expect is stupid. Look at airline flight costs, they still really haven't gone down enough for those "One day you'll fly to Paris for breakfast" predictions to come true. And unless a new cheap fuel source comes along to replace fossil fuels the cost to get to orbit will remain pretty similar.
2. Humanity has never done anything to inspire much faith in it. I'd list the things it's done wrong but I don't feel like typing out the history of mankind
3. I don't want anyone to suffer, hence my desire for a population decimation. Dying in war isn't half as bad as watching your village die from lack of food water and medical resources.
Worldwide overpopulation will have to be addressed sooner or later. Some time in the not so far future it will become a matter of survival and governments will have to decide what to do. Either prevent people from having too many children, with force if necessary, or contain the problem to the main contributing nations (those being the ones with the highest birthrate), again by force if necessary.
Both scenarios are far from pretty and I would much prefer a different solution, but I think there is none.
There are many solutions. Terraforming, satellite colonies, lunar colonization.
Okay, you got me there. I should have worded it differently. "..., but I think there are none we can achieve before the problem becomes critical."
These technologies will be here in 50 years. How long do you think we have until the problem becomes critical?
I somehow doubt it. It currently costs an objects weight in gold to get them into orbit. At that cost we could afford to clothe and feed them for their lives.
In fact we could currently feed everyone in the world, but the transportation costs and stunt to local agricultural development would lead to worse problems down the line. The population has to make a dramatic drop and perhaps AIDS will do that as it makes its slow burn through the human population.
You haven't proposed a mechanism,
Tell me the mechanism for gravity, and I will gladly concede the point.Quotenor provided a map of FE,
Yes, I know the popular media image of the FEer is the rich jetsetting playboy, but unfortunately that's a rather inaccurate representation. Sadly, I can't afford the kind of work required to map the entire Earth. And I must confess, I'm also not a trained cartographer, so you'd probably call my map into question anyway, and rightly so.
Quotenor provided an accurate diagram of the suns orbit.
I told you, I don't do diagrams. If you want to debate you're going to have to do it the old-fashioned way.QuoteDon't give me the all theories are half-finished, because at this point, this is just a hypothesis. Until we can test it, it is not a theory.
Look up all definitions of the word theory before you make that baseless accusation.QuoteYou left out the parts that lets us debate.
!
It's funny, the ground doesn't instantly freeze at night, either. Obviously the effects of the sun last into nighttime; my theory conforms to the norm rather than bucking it.
No, the theory that the earth is round is the norm. You are foolishly bucking a wealth of knowledge.
Actually I believe I'm reinterpreting it. It's high time somebody did. Right or wrong it at least makes for entertaining discussions.
Except there is nothing to discuss. You told us about a half-finished, unprovable theory and haven't even described key parts of the world you believe it exists in (geography of your FE, solar orbit, etc).
Well, I've found the discussion entertaining, anyway.
Anyway, all theories are half-finished, no theories are provable, and my theory does indeed describe key parts of the world I believe it exists in. It just doesn't describe all of them, but I really don't see why that's such a problem.
It's funny, the ground doesn't instantly freeze at night, either. Obviously the effects of the sun last into nighttime; my theory conforms to the norm rather than bucking it.
No, the theory that the earth is round is the norm. You are foolishly bucking a wealth of knowledge.
Actually I believe I'm reinterpreting it. It's high time somebody did. Right or wrong it at least makes for entertaining discussions.
Worldwide overpopulation will have to be addressed sooner or later. Some time in the not so far future it will become a matter of survival and governments will have to decide what to do. Either prevent people from having too many children, with force if necessary, or contain the problem to the main contributing nations (those being the ones with the highest birthrate), again by force if necessary.
Both scenarios are far from pretty and I would much prefer a different solution, but I think there is none.
There are many solutions. Terraforming, satellite colonies, lunar colonization.
Okay, you got me there. I should have worded it differently. "..., but I think there are none we can achieve before the problem becomes critical."
Worldwide overpopulation will have to be addressed sooner or later. Some time in the not so far future it will become a matter of survival and governments will have to decide what to do. Either prevent people from having too many children, with force if necessary, or contain the problem to the main contributing nations (those being the ones with the highest birthrate), again by force if necessary.
Both scenarios are far from pretty and I would much prefer a different solution, but I think there is none.
I'm glad we are in agreement that NASAs findings say little of the shape of the Earth due to their ignorance and negligence.
Obviously... Your point?Just because things look round far away does not mean they are round.
Just because things look flat far away does not mean they are flat.
Give me a diagram of your sun and its "orbit" about the FE. The FE has many different theories.
Sorry, I don't do diagrams. But it's pretty easy to envision. The sun is always very close to the equator; when it's summer in the northern hemisphere, the orbit narrows slightly; when it's summer in the southern hemisphere, it widens slightly. It's directly above the equator on the equinoxes.QuoteHow does it work? If it interacts with matter, it should be detectable. A graviton is only one theory for Gravity.
One extremely well-supported theory, and one most physicists now take for granted.QuoteHell, even FET relies on gravity.
I won't comment until you explain the relevance.QuoteAlso, subtle wouldn't work on hurricanes. They have a lot of mass. Why isn't this force felt on the ground? Or on the water?
If the effect wasn't subtle, the OP would be entirely correct. You're silly.QuoteGive me a mechanism.
The mechanism is unknown.QuoteOtherwise, this isn't a fully fledged theory.
So you don't consider the theory of gravity to be fully fledged? Interesting.
Just because things look round far away does not mean they are round.
Impossible to see? Unobservable?
Yes. It's far from unprecedented for such particles to be theorized to exist.QuoteEnough force to change the direction of hurricanes?
It's actually an extremely subtle effect; that's why it's only really noticeable in large weather systems.QuoteWhy is the equator the magical dividing line?
Because the sun lies more or less above the equator.QuoteIt is not supported at all with physics.
How can you even argue that when you've just now seen the theory presented? Prove to me that it's not supported by physics.QuoteExample, neutrino's which are very undetectable do nothing to matter. Does something = is detectable.
How about gravitons? Are they observable? Do they do anything to matter?
Goddamn Wilmore, it is exceedingly obvious on your map that the northern route takes far more distance than the eastern or western routes.Prove it. Stop making baseless claims which are grounded in nothing more than your assumptions.
No matter how good you may think your theory is, it doesn't disprove anything. You need evidence to do that.
photon is 0.00000000000000000000039 times the mass of an electron.That's why it's called light.
Anyone ever give any thought to how difficult making a visual approach in an aircraft would be if light was "bendy"? I bet the VASI, much less ILS for an instrument landing, would end up being wildly inaccurate.Why the fuck didn't I think of this?
This is true, you can hold a constant power setting, constant airspeed, therefore constant profile and have the vasi/papi give the same reading.
Mind if I make a topic on it?
