Poll

Should engy unlock this thread?

Yes
No

RE floating oceans.

  • 817 Replies
  • 179658 Views
?

Conspiracy Mastermind

  • 1836
  • +0/-0
  • There is no conspiracy...
Re: RE floating oceans.
« Reply #300 on: October 17, 2007, 01:03:21 PM »
No counter argument, maybe because the first argument was too stupid for words, it wasn't worth the space it takes on the server. His argument about floating oceans would apply to both FE and RE, and since his logic is fundamentaly flawed you should not claim it as a victory for FE. There are counter arguments, like the argument that gravity pulls water down, water can't be claimed as buoyant in itself, if it could then reality itself would cease to be logical. Mercury would be bouyant in mercury, so should also float. The fact is that firstly gravity pulls water down, and the pressure of the air pushes the water down. If you are going to declare anything, declare this argument null and void.
Quote from: Tomcooper84
there is no optical light, there is just light and theres no other type of light unless you start talkling about energy saving lightbulbs compared to other types of light bulbs
ENaG: Evidence Not a Guarantee.

?

Tom Dipshit

  • 484
  • +0/-0
  • Flat Earth Opponent
Re: RE floating oceans.
« Reply #301 on: October 17, 2007, 01:05:12 PM »
No counter argument, maybe because the first argument was too stupid for words, it wasn't worth the space it takes on the server. His argument about floating oceans would apply to both FE and RE, and since his logic is fundamentaly flawed you should not claim it as a victory for FE. There are counter arguments, like the argument that gravity pulls water down, water can't be claimed as buoyant in itself, if it could then reality itself would cease to be logical. Mercury would be bouyant in mercury, so should also float. The fact is that firstly gravity pulls water down, and the pressure of the air pushes the water down. If you are going to declare anything, declare this argument null and void.
Thank you, my heart and blood pressure rate has dropped back to normal.
Tom Bishop: "The earth cuts the universe in half."

Narcberry (smarticus): "Oceans are free from gravity."

Z' Lord of Purple: "yes, superfast jet streams for the win!!!"

?

Conspiracy Mastermind

  • 1836
  • +0/-0
  • There is no conspiracy...
Re: RE floating oceans.
« Reply #302 on: October 17, 2007, 01:07:37 PM »
Yes, if the logic of this argument were the actual case in reality, all matter would fly appart and there would be no earth, none of us and no silly forum for us to debate, since everything is buoyant in itself, so thank your lucky stars you're not exploding into seperate molecules.
Quote from: Tomcooper84
there is no optical light, there is just light and theres no other type of light unless you start talkling about energy saving lightbulbs compared to other types of light bulbs
ENaG: Evidence Not a Guarantee.

?

MasterofGrond

Re: RE floating oceans.
« Reply #303 on: October 17, 2007, 01:58:37 PM »
In spite of the fact that I believe this is one of the greatest trolls ever, I'm going to post a rebuttal, something anyone who has ever taken a physics course can tell you.

Weight = Mass x Gravity

Okay, you with me so far?

The water on the bottom of the oceans does not fall because the sea floor is there, providing a Normal force to "hold up" the water, as if a book were resting on a table.

The water that is on top of this water is held up by a buoyant force from the water below it. This means due to Newton's third law, that the top water also exerts a force on lower water, increasing the pressure, but because the earth's crust is rigid, the Normal force it pushes on the water with merely increases.

Summary: The sea floor holds up the bottom water, which holds up the higher water, which holds up the top water. There can be as many levels of water as you want, even ones 1 molecule thick but it still works. Every single molecule has a weight, and is being pulled down. It is just being supported by the molecules below it.

Analogy: Stack of books. Table holds up the weight of all books (i.e. sea floor). The book directly on the table holds up weight of all books above it (bottom molecules) and so on and so forth to the top book.

The reason a bucket of water in water appears to weigh nothing is because it is being "held up" by the water the bucket is in, thus increasing the total force downward through the system. The bucket of water becomes the "top book" with a net force (due to the equal and opposite weight and buoyancy forces) of 0. Once the water is no longer resting on other water though, (say if some water tried to "fly into the air) the buoyant force disappears and weight pulls it back down on top of the other water.

Try weighing a book that is sitting on a table. It is the same thing as weighing a bucket of water in an ocean. I'm going to go out on a limb and say the answer will be zero. Yet no one claims books are going to start flying up in the air. Water acts very predictably according to Newton's Laws, and therefore the "WATER FLOATS: EARTH MUST BE FLAT" argument is false.



Anyway, keep up the good work with the trolling.

« Last Edit: October 17, 2007, 02:42:08 PM by MasterofGrond »

?

Conspiracy Mastermind

  • 1836
  • +0/-0
  • There is no conspiracy...
Re: RE floating oceans.
« Reply #304 on: October 17, 2007, 02:35:22 PM »
I had a similar line of logic, but didn;t know how to put it into simple enough terms.
Quote from: Tomcooper84
there is no optical light, there is just light and theres no other type of light unless you start talkling about energy saving lightbulbs compared to other types of light bulbs
ENaG: Evidence Not a Guarantee.

*

narcberry

  • 5623
  • +0/-0
  • Official Flat Earth Society Spokesman/min
Re: RE floating oceans.
« Reply #305 on: October 17, 2007, 03:29:49 PM »
Yeah, except we never remove the bottommost supporting layer. The ocean would remain within itself and could remain supporting itself through bouyancy force. The oceans would literally lift themselves into the upper atmosphere, where heat and cosmic decay would take their toll.

Since this is not observed, the earth must, indeed, be flat.

?

MasterofGrond

Re: RE floating oceans.
« Reply #306 on: October 17, 2007, 03:45:15 PM »
If you pull out the bottommost supporting layer, there will be nothing holding up the upper layers, they will fall until they contact the sea floor, again brining the system to equilibrium. If you pull out the bottom book from the pile (ignoring friction which would likely topple the tower) the rest of the books, being without support, fall to the table, where they are again supported by the normal force, and resume equilibrium position.

The same effect would be noticed if you could instantly suck out the bottom layer of seawater.

Please try again.

?

Conspiracy Mastermind

  • 1836
  • +0/-0
  • There is no conspiracy...
Re: RE floating oceans.
« Reply #307 on: October 17, 2007, 03:54:44 PM »
The bottommost layer has no water below it, so no buyoncy provided, so it does not move upwards because it would lose the upwards force of the seabed, and could not support the weight of water above it.
The next layer up, resting on this layer, is held up by this bottom layer, but since the bottom layer cannot move upwards, neither can this layer, since if it were to do so it would lose the buoyancy and upwards force of the bottom layer and therefore would not be able to hold up the layers above.
The same can be said for the next layer up, if it were to rise it would lose the buoyancy of the lower layer, and therefore has no force to hold up the layers above, which would then push it down.
This applies for all the layers, aside from the top layer, which has no water above it, this topmost layer of molecules can float away, and they do, in the form of evaporation, which leads to rain.

Even if you were to somehow come to the insane conclusion that water can magically fly and matter should fly appart, then you would have to explain the fact that this magic flying water problem applies both to the RE and FE models, since the UA performs the same function as the gravity of RE.
Quote from: Tomcooper84
there is no optical light, there is just light and theres no other type of light unless you start talkling about energy saving lightbulbs compared to other types of light bulbs
ENaG: Evidence Not a Guarantee.

?

MasterofGrond

Re: RE floating oceans.
« Reply #308 on: October 17, 2007, 04:01:25 PM »
Even if you were to somehow come to the insane conclusion that water can magically fly and matter should fly apart, then you would have to explain the fact that this magic flying water problem applies both to the RE and FE models, since the UA performs the same function as the gravity of RE.

Exactly.

To a normal person standing on the surface of the Earth UA and Gravity would appear exactly the same. So saying water doesn't fly off the Earth so the Earth is flat prove absolutely nothing. The entire point of this thread has just been proven completely bunk.


*

Chris Spaghetti

  • Flat Earth Editor
  • 12631
  • +0/-4
Re: RE floating oceans.
« Reply #309 on: October 17, 2007, 04:02:29 PM »
SIXTEEN PAGES!?!?!

Narc really has you guys in the keep-net now doesn't he?

?

MasterofGrond

Re: RE floating oceans.
« Reply #310 on: October 17, 2007, 04:08:29 PM »
In my defense, I only just joined the discussion, and also acknowledged his role as a troll.

And having just won the internets, I believe I will quit this thread.

*

Trekky0623

  • Official Member
  • 10045
  • +0/-0
Re: RE floating oceans.
« Reply #311 on: October 17, 2007, 04:34:11 PM »
NARC!!!!

IF WATER FLOATS ON RE, IT FLOATS ON FE

WATER DON'T FLOAT BECAUSE BUOYANCY AND WEIGHTLESSNESS ARE NOT THE SAME.

TRY LIFTING A BUCKET OF WATER AND TELL ME IT IS WEIGHTLESS.

RE WINS.

*

Chris Spaghetti

  • Flat Earth Editor
  • 12631
  • +0/-4
Re: RE floating oceans.
« Reply #312 on: October 17, 2007, 04:34:40 PM »
*headdesk*

*

Trekky0623

  • Official Member
  • 10045
  • +0/-0
Re: RE floating oceans.
« Reply #313 on: October 17, 2007, 04:46:53 PM »

?

Tom Dipshit

  • 484
  • +0/-0
  • Flat Earth Opponent
Re: RE floating oceans.
« Reply #314 on: October 17, 2007, 05:33:06 PM »
SOMEONE TAKE THIS TO COMPLETE NONSENSE OR CLOSE THIS THREAD PLEASE!!!!
Tom Bishop: "The earth cuts the universe in half."

Narcberry (smarticus): "Oceans are free from gravity."

Z' Lord of Purple: "yes, superfast jet streams for the win!!!"

?

Loard Z

  • 4680
  • +0/-0
  • Insert witty intellectual phrase here...
Re: RE floating oceans.
« Reply #315 on: October 17, 2007, 06:37:45 PM »
if i remember, austria is an old, dis-used name for what is now Germany.
See My Greatness

*

narcberry

  • 5623
  • +0/-0
  • Official Flat Earth Society Spokesman/min
Re: RE floating oceans.
« Reply #316 on: October 17, 2007, 06:48:12 PM »
Even if you were to somehow come to the insane conclusion that water can magically fly and matter should fly appart...

Wait, did you just call the RE model, "insane" and "magical"?
Welcome to the conclusion of this thread. RE is insane and magical. FE wins.

*

Trekky0623

  • Official Member
  • 10045
  • +0/-0
Re: RE floating oceans.
« Reply #317 on: October 17, 2007, 06:59:14 PM »
YOU IDIOT!!!

YOU DON'T READ DO YOU?

BUOYANCY AND WEIGHTLESSNESS ARE NOT THE SAME.

A particle is buoyant in it's own material, and the buoyant force counteracts the gravitational force or UA.  Gravity is not "turned off".

*

Jack

  • Administrator
  • 5180
  • +2/-6
Re: RE floating oceans.
« Reply #318 on: October 17, 2007, 06:59:25 PM »
Welcome to the conclusion of this thread. FE is insane and magical. RE wins.

Fixed.

*

Trekky0623

  • Official Member
  • 10045
  • +0/-0
Re: RE floating oceans.
« Reply #319 on: October 17, 2007, 07:05:18 PM »
If water floats, why doesn't everything float?

As I've said before, it would float on an FE too.

You believe the earth is flat, correct?

When you float in a pool, you experience buoyancy.

By your logic, why can't there be FE floating oceans?  BECAUSE buoyancy only exists within the material.

In order for the entire ocean to float, water would have to be buoyant in air, which it is not.

FAIL.

?

Loard Z

  • 4680
  • +0/-0
  • Insert witty intellectual phrase here...
Re: RE floating oceans.
« Reply #320 on: October 17, 2007, 07:07:12 PM »
The floating oceans thing is absolutely hilarious.

The thing that makes me laugh more is the fact that water is denser than ice, and thus the ICEWALL (ZOMG) should float on top of the oceans, and the earth should spill off into nothingness
if i remember, austria is an old, dis-used name for what is now Germany.
See My Greatness

*

Jack

  • Administrator
  • 5180
  • +2/-6
Re: RE floating oceans.
« Reply #321 on: October 17, 2007, 07:08:42 PM »
The floating oceans thing is absolutely hilarious.

The thing that makes me laugh more is the fact that water is denser than ice, and thus the ICEWALL (ZOMG) should float on top of the oceans, and the earth should spill off into nothingness

There's also a thread where they say "when ice melts, water level drops."

?

Conspiracy Mastermind

  • 1836
  • +0/-0
  • There is no conspiracy...
Re: RE floating oceans.
« Reply #322 on: October 18, 2007, 01:49:58 AM »
Even if you were to somehow come to the insane conclusion that water can magically fly and matter should fly appart...

Wait, did you just call the RE model, "insane" and "magical"?
Welcome to the conclusion of this thread. RE is insane and magical. FE wins.

No, I called the floating oceans idea insane and magical. The RE model is logical and accurate.
Quote from: Tomcooper84
there is no optical light, there is just light and theres no other type of light unless you start talkling about energy saving lightbulbs compared to other types of light bulbs
ENaG: Evidence Not a Guarantee.

?

Brennan

  • 144
  • +0/-0
Re: RE floating oceans.
« Reply #323 on: October 18, 2007, 02:59:35 AM »
Yeah, except we never remove the bottommost supporting layer. The ocean would remain within itself and could remain supporting itself through bouyancy force. The oceans would literally lift themselves into the upper atmosphere, where heat and cosmic decay would take their toll.

Since this is not observed, the earth must, indeed, be flat.
Of course its ******* observed you moron. Blow a bubble underwater, the result is that the water on top no longer feels the buoyancy force as strongly and 'falls' in to the space occupied by the air. The result being that the air bubble rises to the surface as it is forced upwards due to it's lower density.
Quote from: Tom Bishop
tell me how your model explains why deep-dripping Russian geologists found an impenetrable layer of turtle shell when attempting to breach the crust of the earth.

?

Conspiracy Mastermind

  • 1836
  • +0/-0
  • There is no conspiracy...
Re: RE floating oceans.
« Reply #324 on: October 18, 2007, 03:24:19 AM »
Is this what the Fe'ers have resorted to? Rewriting science in order to create bizarre, stupid illogical effects that are not observed in order to prove the earth is flat?

Water is not buoyant in itself, each water molecule simply rests on the water molecule below it (or the seabed if it is on the bottom). The reason they don't all fall further is the electrostatic repulsion that defeats the force of gravity. If a layer of water were to rise, this repulsion (which is a close-range phenomenon) would cease and gravity would take over.
Quote from: Tomcooper84
there is no optical light, there is just light and theres no other type of light unless you start talkling about energy saving lightbulbs compared to other types of light bulbs
ENaG: Evidence Not a Guarantee.

*

Trekky0623

  • Official Member
  • 10045
  • +0/-0
Re: RE floating oceans.
« Reply #325 on: October 18, 2007, 03:45:43 AM »
Or buoyancy, as it is called.

*

Misfortune

  • 512
  • +0/-0
  • My name is no longer blank. God damn it.
Re: RE floating oceans.
« Reply #326 on: October 18, 2007, 04:06:26 AM »
Even if you were to somehow come to the insane conclusion that water can magically fly and matter should fly appart...

Wait, did you just call the RE model, "insane" and "magical"?
Welcome to the conclusion of this thread. RE is insane and magical. FE wins.
Welcome to the REAL conclusion of this thread: Smarticus is stupid as a cow and can not read.


?

Conspiracy Mastermind

  • 1836
  • +0/-0
  • There is no conspiracy...
Re: RE floating oceans.
« Reply #327 on: October 18, 2007, 09:28:50 AM »
Indeed, don't you just love the irony?
Quote from: Tomcooper84
there is no optical light, there is just light and theres no other type of light unless you start talkling about energy saving lightbulbs compared to other types of light bulbs
ENaG: Evidence Not a Guarantee.

?

Marinade

  • 406
  • +0/-0
  • FE is for laughing at... not with.
Re: RE floating oceans.
« Reply #328 on: October 18, 2007, 09:40:26 AM »
Even if you were to somehow come to the insane conclusion that water can magically fly and matter should fly appart...

Wait, did you just call the RE model, "insane" and "magical"?
Welcome to the conclusion of this thread. RE is insane and magical. FE wins.

All I want to say is no they are calling your incorrect version of RE theory insane and magical.

I underlined the important words so hopefully Smarticus will notice them. (not that I expect it too, stupid non-person)
Haha Tom is so funny. He can't be serious, no one is that stubborn or dumb.

?

Tom Dipshit

  • 484
  • +0/-0
  • Flat Earth Opponent
Re: RE floating oceans.
« Reply #329 on: October 18, 2007, 09:56:53 AM »
Even if you were to somehow come to the insane conclusion that water can magically fly and matter should fly appart...

Wait, did you just call the RE model, "insane" and "magical"?
Welcome to the conclusion of this thread. RE is insane and magical. FE wins.

All I want to say is no they are calling your incorrect version of RE theory insane and magical.

I underlined the important words so hopefully Smarticus will notice them. (not that I expect it too, stupid non-person)
Note: this will be his reply.

"So your agreeing that the RE theory is insane and magical. For once you RE'er can agree on something."
Tom Bishop: "The earth cuts the universe in half."

Narcberry (smarticus): "Oceans are free from gravity."

Z' Lord of Purple: "yes, superfast jet streams for the win!!!"