Wait, what?

You're assuming I have not done these experiments as well.  Don't assume.  You have no proof you did these experiments, and I have no reason to believe you.  Regardless though, your experiments don't prove anything. 

You're assuming I have not done these experiments as well.  Don't assume.  You have no proof you did these experiments, and I have no reason to believe you.  Regardless though, your experiments don't prove anything. 

the fact of your negligence to assuming me not doing these experments would state you have not done them yourself or you found findings you did not like

the fact of your negligence to assuming me not doing these experments would state you have not done them yourself or you found findings you did not like

That is amazing!  Way to go psychologist! 

Let us get a little more specific.  The only 'experiment' you have described is climbing up a mountain and breathing, which I have done countless times (Elbert, Evans, greys, torrey's, all the collegiate peaks, and more).  You claim the difficulty in breathing is evidence for the RE, I claim it is equal evidence for the FE. 

Your experiment is pointless. 

Quote from: self on March 09, 2007, 12:26:06 AM

the fact of your negligence to assuming me not doing these experments would state you have not done them yourself or you found findings you did not like

That is amazing!  Way to go psychologist! 

Let us get a little more specific.  The only 'experiment' you have described is climbing up a mountain and breathing, which I have done countless times (Elbert, Evans, greys, torrey's, all the collegiate peaks, and more).  You claim the difficulty in breathing is evidence for the RE, I claim it is equal evidence for the FE. 

Your experiment is pointless. 

actually i claims the difference in oxygen levels the higher you go and further backs up that oxygen levels are denser towards the ground, which also links into the fact that somehow it's all contained within the world without it all dispersing and escaping

Quote from: self on March 09, 2007, 12:26:06 AM

the fact of your negligence to assuming me not doing these experments would state you have not done them yourself or you found findings you did not like

That is amazing!  Way to go psychologist! 

Let us get a little more specific.  The only 'experiment' you have described is climbing up a mountain and breathing, which I have done countless times (Elbert, Evans, greys, torrey's, all the collegiate peaks, and more).  You claim the difficulty in breathing is evidence for the RE, I claim it is equal evidence for the FE. 

Your experiment is pointless. 

Prove that the thin oxegen levels at high altitudes are proof of FE, and I'll prove thin oxegen levels at high altitudes are proof of RE.

I believe that was his point.

I believe that was his point.

Maybe so, but my point was that I wanted firm, solid ground proof that thin oxegen levels at high altitudes backs up the FE case.

Quote from: TheEngineer on March 09, 2007, 01:59:49 PM

I believe that was his point.

Maybe so, but my point was that I wanted firm, solid ground proof that thin oxegen levels at high altitudes backs up the FE case.

Gravity=acceleration.

There you go.

Quote

you see, mines physics 101 so you can find the proof in your local library (so many ppl seem to be refferring ppl to read boks so ill do the same)

Please name a single book that demonstrates beyond all power of doubt that the earth is a globe.

Why would anyone want to write a book called "Earth: A globe"? I'm, not sure it would sell many copies seeing as how everyone knows it's a globe already. Maybe you could write it Tom! I mean you've been using this forum for some time now and you should have aquired a pretty massive list of evidence for the Round Earth. You could make millions!!

Name me a single book that demonstrates beyond all power of doubt that the Earth is not a globe. Oh wait, you can't. Books full of lies, ambiguity, fallacy and generall horse shit do not count, in case you were thinking of giving me that same old list of useless publications that you usually do.

Quote from: ThatHippyMan on March 09, 2007, 02:05:01 PM

Quote from: TheEngineer on March 09, 2007, 01:59:49 PM

I believe that was his point.

Maybe so, but my point was that I wanted firm, solid ground proof that thin oxegen levels at high altitudes backs up the FE case.

Gravity=acceleration.

There you go.

Prove it.  Prove to me that the Earth is accelerating upwards or whatever you guys say.

Take a pen, hold it above the floor and let it go.  There you go, proof of acceleration.

Oh God here we go again.

You could at least change the object in the "example". Why can't it be a ball, or an orange, or a mobile phone? Why is it always the God damn pen?!

You guys get mad when we tell people to do a search, and you get mad when we answer the same question time and again.   If there no pleasing you people?

Take a pen, hold it above the floor and let it go.  There you go, proof of acceleration.

Proof of round earth.
Make a pendulum.  Swing it perfectly straight. It will get of axis in a way that could not be caused by a slight tilt, as the FE theory says.  It is more along the lines of a spinning, orbital globe.

You could at least change the object in the "example". Why can't it be a ball, or an orange, or a mobile phone? Why is it always the God damn pen?!

Most people have pens at their desk, where most people have their computers.

Quote from: TheEngineer on March 09, 2007, 02:16:55 PM

Take a pen, hold it above the floor and let it go.  There you go, proof of acceleration.

Proof of round earth.
Make a pendulum.  Swing it perfectly straight. It will get of axis in a way that could not be caused by a slight tilt, as the FE theory says.  It is more along the lines of a spinning, orbital globe.

You mean proof of rotation, right?

No, proof of a rotating globe due to the (predictable) differences in the rotation pattern at different points on Earth.

You guys get mad when we tell people to do a search, and you get mad when we answer the same question time and again.   If there no pleasing you people?

You don't answer the question you just repeat the same pointless sentences. Using equivalence principle is completely meaningless unless there is nothing else in the Universe besides Earth.

Also, read Elegant Universe or The Dancing Art of the Wu Li Masters.  Both highly credited physics books writen by poeple who belive in Globe Earth.  I'm sure they make a pretty good arguement, also.

And, to quote astronomy101 "YOUR A LAIR, READ [book name]!"

Also, read Elegant Universe or The Dancing Art of the Wu Li Masters.  Both highly credited physics books writen by poeple who belive in Globe Earth.  I'm sure they make a pretty good arguement, also.

And, to quote astronomy101 "YOUR A LAIR, READ [book name]!"

Sorry, but what did I lie about?

You don't answer the question you just repeat the same pointless sentences. Using equivalence principle is completely meaningless unless there is nothing else in the Universe besides Earth.

Someone should have told Einstein that before he wasted all that time on General Relativity...

Quote from: kasroa on March 09, 2007, 02:27:41 PM

You don't answer the question you just repeat the same pointless sentences. Using equivalence principle is completely meaningless unless there is nothing else in the Universe besides Earth.

Someone should have told Einstein that before he wasted all that time on General Relativity...

ho hum

if we were constantly accelerating faster and faster it would get harder and harder to move because the force keeping us down would become greater and greater..........

if we were constantly accelerating faster and faster it would get harder and harder to move because the force keeping us down would become greater and greater..........

The acceleration is constant.

Can I just end this now and say that equivalence principle proves fuck all about FE theory due to the fact that it could indicate a round Earth also. There you don't need to carry on with it now.

Who said the EP proved the FE?