Poll

Should engy unlock this thread?

Yes
No
« previous next »
Pages: 1 ... 7 8 [9] 10 11 ... 28   Go Down

RE floating oceans.

  • 817 Replies
  • 179645 Views
*

Jessica Alba

  • 19
  • +0/-0
Re: RE floating oceans.
« Reply #240 on: October 04, 2007, 07:57:43 PM »
Quote from: Smarticus on October 02, 2007, 09:39:40 AM
Quote from: Sharky on October 02, 2007, 08:12:37 AM
So you deny everything I just showed you and your counter argument is one of your facts that you haven't proven.

After have being put into error an huge amount of times <insert subject> refuse to accept it. Therefore there are noe two options :

1. This whole topice is a joke, even tho schooling you was fun (which is <was than is> probably the case)
2. Your opinion is worth nothing for a lack of giving better counter-arguments and yet still refusing to accept it.

<insert two options anytime>


Your opinion is invalidated by your inability to speak english.

Wow, you can't come up with a proper reply to the RE'ers so you point out some grammar errors?
Logged
?

Mac26

  • 23
  • +0/-0
Re: RE floating oceans.
« Reply #241 on: October 05, 2007, 08:37:34 AM »
Smarticus, please answer my question or otherwise RE'ers will be the WINNERS of this thread.
Logged
?

Loard Z

  • 4680
  • +0/-0
  • Insert witty intellectual phrase here...
Re: RE floating oceans.
« Reply #242 on: October 05, 2007, 08:41:15 AM »
edit: my point was already made some 30 posts earlier. Sorry.
« Last Edit: October 05, 2007, 08:45:56 AM by Z_the_Enlightened »
Logged
Quote from: eric bloedow on January 08, 2008, 04:03:12 PM
if i remember, austria is an old, dis-used name for what is now Germany.
See My Greatness
*

Trekky0623

  • Official Member
  • 10045
  • +0/-0
Re: RE floating oceans.
« Reply #243 on: October 05, 2007, 10:47:34 AM »
How are we arguing over 1 + 1 = 1?  This was from a thread a LONG time ago.

The example was 1 drop + 1 drop = 1 drop

THIS IS FALSE.

See: 1x + 1x = 1y

in which x = a drop of water of 1 unit and y = a drop of water of 2 units.

Therefore x = 1u = 1/2y

And therefore 1x + 1x = 2x
Logged
*

Username

  • President of The Flat Earth Society
  • Administrator
  • 18223
  • +41/-81
  • Most Accurate Scientist Ever
Re: RE floating oceans.
« Reply #244 on: October 05, 2007, 11:44:34 AM »
1 + 1 = 1 for sufficiently small values of 1
<rimshot>
Logged
If you can't argue bothh sides, you understand eivther
?

Gunznroses

  • 112
  • +0/-0
Re: RE floating oceans.
« Reply #245 on: October 05, 2007, 05:50:46 PM »
The time and effort that wasnt put into the thought behind this post makes me laugh,
Logged
Quote from: Gulliver on September 10, 2007, 04:28:51 PM
No problem solved in the least--and you only had to eliminate an entire continent to fail to accomplish it.
?

baptist_christian2

  • 23
  • +0/-0
Re: RE floating oceans.
« Reply #246 on: October 06, 2007, 07:33:29 AM »
Quote from: Smarticus on September 18, 2007, 07:59:53 AM
Let us consider the RE model, and please no giggling.

Their oceans. Consider a molecule of water anywhere in the ocean.

How much does this water molecule weigh?
How much volume does this water molecule displace?

What then is its buoyancy force?

Go ahead, figure it out... okay be lazy and I'll explain it. Every molecule in the ocean is perfectly buoyant. That is to say the buoyancy force is exactly opposite to the gravity force on it. This means the oceans are free from gravity.

Perplexed? Of course you are, you have never seen our oceans floating around our world like giant liquid clouds. They fill their container, starting from the lowest possible point. This can only be if the container is pushed into them. The earth MUST be accelerating into our oceans to prevent them from floating away.


Another victory for FE!!!
your stupidity astounds me. Oceans dont float in the air because they are made of matter. The earth's gravitational forces keep them from floating away.
Logged
*

narcberry

  • 5623
  • +0/-0
  • Official Flat Earth Society Spokesman/min
Re: RE floating oceans.
« Reply #247 on: October 06, 2007, 08:59:51 PM »
I'm glad you guys agree, the earth MUST be flat.
Logged
*

Dead Kangaroo

  • FES' Anchor Roo
  • The Elder Ones
  • 4551
  • +0/-0
  • K800 Model 101.
Re: RE floating oceans.
« Reply #248 on: October 06, 2007, 09:07:47 PM »
Quote from: Smarticus on October 06, 2007, 08:59:51 PM
I'm glad you guys agree, the earth MUST be flat.
Smarticus winsthe epic fail award for ignorance!
Logged
?

Gulliver

  • 3804
  • +0/-0
Re: RE floating oceans.
« Reply #249 on: October 06, 2007, 09:15:46 PM »
Quote from: Dead Kangaroo on October 06, 2007, 09:07:47 PM
Quote from: Smarticus on October 06, 2007, 08:59:51 PM
I'm glad you guys agree, the earth MUST be flat.
Smarticus winsthe epic fail award for ignorance!
Agreed!
Logged
*

Roundy the Truthinessist

  • Flat Earth TheFLAMETHROWER!
  • The Elder Ones
  • 26966
  • +0/-0
  • I'm the boss.
Re: RE floating oceans.
« Reply #250 on: October 06, 2007, 09:22:03 PM »
Another victory for FE!
Logged
Quote from: wise on August 21, 2018, 11:47:45 PM
Where did you educate the biology, in toulet?
?

eloireis

  • 8
  • +0/-0
Re: RE floating oceans.
« Reply #251 on: October 07, 2007, 05:12:43 AM »
stupid
Logged
?

Tom Dipshit

  • 484
  • +0/-0
  • Flat Earth Opponent
Re: RE floating oceans.
« Reply #252 on: October 07, 2007, 05:33:41 AM »
I'll keep making this post until you understand.

Water + Water = more water

5 pounds + 5 pounds = 10 pounds

1 + 1 = 2
Logged
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!!!"
*

narcberry

  • 5623
  • +0/-0
  • Official Flat Earth Society Spokesman/min
Re: RE floating oceans.
« Reply #253 on: October 07, 2007, 09:57:25 AM »
Quote from: flat_earth on October 07, 2007, 05:33:41 AM
I'll keep making this post until you understand.

Water + Water = more water

5 pounds + 5 pounds = 10 pounds

1 + 1 = 2

I'll keep responding this until you understand:

0 weight + 0 weight = 0 weight.
Logged
?

Tom Dipshit

  • 484
  • +0/-0
  • Flat Earth Opponent
Re: RE floating oceans.
« Reply #254 on: October 07, 2007, 10:05:33 AM »
Quote from: Smarticus on October 07, 2007, 09:57:25 AM
Quote from: flat_earth on October 07, 2007, 05:33:41 AM
I'll keep making this post until you understand.

Water + Water = more water

5 pounds + 5 pounds = 10 pounds

1 + 1 = 2

I'll keep responding this until you understand:

0 weight + 0 weight = 0 weight.
ok that is true, but combined the first two that you see.
Logged
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!!!"
*

narcberry

  • 5623
  • +0/-0
  • Official Flat Earth Society Spokesman/min
Re: RE floating oceans.
« Reply #255 on: October 07, 2007, 10:09:52 AM »
how much does water weigh in water?

(hint: it's weightless)
Logged
?

Tom Dipshit

  • 484
  • +0/-0
  • Flat Earth Opponent
Re: RE floating oceans.
« Reply #256 on: October 07, 2007, 10:11:51 AM »
Quote from: Smarticus on October 07, 2007, 10:09:52 AM
how much does water weigh in water?

(hint: it's weightless)
how much is the volume of water?
Logged
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!!!"
?

Gulliver

  • 3804
  • +0/-0
Re: RE floating oceans.
« Reply #257 on: October 07, 2007, 10:12:09 AM »
Quote from: Smarticus on October 07, 2007, 10:09:52 AM
how much does water weigh in water?

(hint: it's weightless)
How much does a mailbox weigh setting on its post?

(Hint: It's weightless.)
Logged
?

Tom Dipshit

  • 484
  • +0/-0
  • Flat Earth Opponent
Re: RE floating oceans.
« Reply #258 on: October 07, 2007, 10:17:20 AM »
How much does Narc's brain weigh compared to his ignorance on a scale?

(hint: the brain goes up and the ignorance goes down.)
Logged
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!!!"
*

Trekky0623

  • Official Member
  • 10045
  • +0/-0
Re: RE floating oceans.
« Reply #259 on: October 07, 2007, 10:53:51 AM »
GOOD GAWD NARC!

THIS THREAD HAS GONE ON LONG ENOUGH:

1) IF WATER FLOATS ON RE, IT FLOATS ON FE, SHIT FOR BRAINS.
2) EVERY MATERIAL IS BUOYANT IN IT'S MATERIAL.  EVERYTHING ELSE ISN'T FLOATING.
3) WATER IS WEIGHTLESS IN WATER.  IS WATER WEIGHTLESS IN AIR?  NO.
4) AIR IS BUOYANT IN AIR, AND AIR STILL HAS WEIGHT.  ATMOSPHERIC PRESSURE

[/thread]
« Last Edit: October 07, 2007, 11:00:11 AM by Trekky0623 »
Logged
?

Contipheral

Re: RE floating oceans.
« Reply #260 on: October 07, 2007, 11:00:58 AM »
Quote from: Smarticus on September 18, 2007, 02:20:12 PM
Quote from: Chris Spaghetti on September 18, 2007, 02:13:10 PM
Actually it's about 1000Kg/M^3, not weightless
Quote from: Marinade on September 18, 2007, 02:14:08 PM
Quote from: Smarticus on September 18, 2007, 02:07:40 PM
I love it, no contest from RE. Everyone knows the oceans are weightless.

That's why one cubic meter of water weighs one metric ton right?

And it weighs 0 pounds in water. A situation all the waters in the ocean are in. Therefore the oceans are weightless.

Have you EVER carried a bucket of water, it is NOT weightless. And don't tell me that somehow the bucket itself is gaining weight.
Logged
?

Mac26

  • 23
  • +0/-0
Re: RE floating oceans.
« Reply #261 on: October 07, 2007, 11:47:49 AM »
Quote from: Mac26 on October 05, 2007, 08:37:34 AM
Smarticus, please answer my question or otherwise RE'ers will be the WINNERS of this thread.

Quote from: Smarticus on October 06, 2007, 08:59:51 PM
I'm glad you guys agree, the earth MUST be flat.

Since you weren't able to answer my question, you agreed that the earth is ROUND. I'm glad that you finally found out the truth.
Logged
?

happyez

Re: RE floating oceans.
« Reply #262 on: October 07, 2007, 12:43:41 PM »
Thanks Smarticus and all the rest.

This has really been a funny discussion.

Whats been funny is from the Flat Earth position is an avoidance of basic physics, like a kid being a smart-arse would constantly harangue the teacher - acting like they know more, and refusing to listen to others.

What has also been funny is that, due to the arguementative techniques used by the person behind the name Smarticus (S), there have been many sane and intellegent people giving time and effort to educate a person who fronts an ersatz-formula for the sole reason to get people, in its eyes, 'mad'. (I get mad over the military in Burma, not asinine formulas!)

Notice the basic teenage-like thinking behind his remarks. When most of those with honest brains feel they have rapped up the arguement, our smart-arse friend pops up a non-flaming comment, seemingly honest in its approach to convince you they are right.

That start the conversation again, then out comes the baiting and namecalling.

Now people, we can all guess that this is a deliberate strategy to get you all to fight a useless fight.

S, if was serious about its model, would put it not on a 'Flat Earth' website, seen as a joke in scientific circles (which, in their work, have little time for the jokesters running this site, they have work to get on with that operates on a w=mg basis), but publish it in academic publications.

Unless this S person can cite this has happening, you can pretty much guess through logic, that this is a joke.

The only way it isnt a joke: is if its education of S was not one of science, but ideology. I hear that comes with some homeschooling practices in the USA....I also notice in some of S's statements that he believes that the Round Earth people 'fall apart' due to disagreements.

Which would indicate that even if this is a joke from S, he/it comes from a belief that anything presented is 'to battle'. Battling means unity from its side. Unity means you follow a code and dictat on how things exist. Then you can fight. The military operate like that. Notice in Iraq - those who follow that the 'Islamo-fascists are out to get them' tend to die first (white kids). Those that dont fall for that, usually black or hispanic kids from rough areas, know things arent as black & white as it is put about 'their enemy'

So, in the end, we may have learnt that S is most likely a right-wing ideologue that believes in slinging unproven hypothesis in a robotic-like unrelenting pressure way, in order to 'win' against his 'enemies'.
(of course, its obvious you 'need' enemies'. I find those in ideologies left & right, operate on this belief structure, bringing them closer together than they ever want. Thats why punks become skinheads, Trotskyists become Neo-Cons....)

So, thank you all, thanks S for showing what is really going on in your mind. Thanks those who fell for it, which are only a few.

I love the snarkyness of it all, and the drama of the fight (as we all do, I assume, or else this wouldnt be so long and full of name calling!)
Logged
?

Bushido

Re: RE floating oceans.
« Reply #263 on: October 07, 2007, 12:50:52 PM »
Quote from: Smarticus on September 18, 2007, 07:59:53 AM
Let us consider the RE model, and please no giggling.

Their oceans. Consider a molecule of water anywhere in the ocean.

How much does this water molecule weigh?
How much volume does this water molecule displace?

What then is its buoyancy force?

Go ahead, figure it out... okay be lazy and I'll explain it. Every molecule in the ocean is perfectly buoyant. That is to say the buoyancy force is exactly opposite to the gravity force on it. This means the oceans are free from gravity.

Perplexed? Of course you are, you have never seen our oceans floating around our world like giant liquid clouds. They fill their container, starting from the lowest possible point. This can only be if the container is pushed into them. The earth MUST be accelerating into our oceans to prevent them from floating away.


Another victory for FE!!!

There is no buoyant force if there is no gravity.
Logged
*

Trekky0623

  • Official Member
  • 10045
  • +0/-0
Re: RE floating oceans.
« Reply #264 on: October 07, 2007, 01:01:04 PM »
Water has mass.
Therefore it is affected by gravity.
In water, the gravity is counter effected by the buoyancy force.
The ocean as a whole is not buoyant in air.
Therefore the ocean is affected by gravity.
Logged
?

Bushido

Re: RE floating oceans.
« Reply #265 on: October 07, 2007, 10:00:18 PM »
Quote from: Trekky0623 on October 07, 2007, 01:01:04 PM
Ocean is water.
Water has mass.
Every massive object is affected by gravity.
Therefore the ocean is affected by gravity.

Fixed.

Logged
*

narcberry

  • 5623
  • +0/-0
  • Official Flat Earth Society Spokesman/min
Re: RE floating oceans.
« Reply #266 on: October 12, 2007, 12:10:13 AM »
@happyez: reported for racism.
Logged
?

The Communist

  • 1217
  • +0/-0
  • Paranoid Intellectual & Pedantic Twat
Re: RE floating oceans.
« Reply #267 on: October 12, 2007, 08:04:40 AM »
Quote from: Smarticus on September 18, 2007, 02:28:57 PM
All you RE'ers are crying bloody murder but the fact remains, water within water has a weight of 0. This means all the oceans, and none of you are able to refute that. Our oceans are weightless.

If oceans are weightless (i.e. not producing a force due to gravitation), I recommend you to scuba dive some 100 meters.
Logged
On FES, you attack a strawman. In Soviet Russia, the strawman attacks you
-JackASCII

Do you have any outlandish claims to back up your evidence?
-Raist

Quote from: GeneralGayer date=1190908626
Yeah I love gay porn.
?

afiq980

  • 37
  • +0/-0
  • Earth is round.
Re: RE floating oceans.
« Reply #268 on: October 12, 2007, 08:56:02 AM »
This is coming from a 15 year old boy from Singapore.

Smarticus is stupid, why?

1) He thinks that water is weightless, thus, it should float. But he contradicts it HIMSELF when he said that water is weightless in water. Alright, if you place a bottle with insignificant mass and fill it with water, and you place the water in water, the water in the bottle will not weigh anything. This is correct. But, the ocean, think of it as one body, is not in water. It is surrounded by land, air and anything else that is NOT water, so it will not be weightless.

Water in water = weightless

Water in another thing = NOT weightless.

Wait...

Maybe Smarticus is stressed out with so many words pounding at him, let us, the RE, show him a PICTURE to clearly show him our model.



As can be seen from the picture, the water in water is weightless...WOW!!! But, when it exits the ocean/sea/water-body, it acts like a fluid, meaning, it will sink, or in this case, fall, since it exited ocean and enter an "air" body, which has a lower density than water.

(similar to buoyancy)

The rest is explained in the picture

2) Smarticus believes that the Earth is pushing the water, so the water stays on the ground. This is STUPID. Let me say it again, THIS IS STUPID.

Obviously, Smarticus dont know a thing about RELATIVITY. The water, or the WHOLE SEA/OCEAN/WATER-body is traveling at the SAME SPEED as of the WHOLE EARTH, with a very small difference in speed, depending on the INDIVIDUAL movement of the molecules/atoms. When the speed, or in this case, VELOCITY, which is speed with a direction, is the same, the RELATIVE speed between Earth and the water you are talking about is ZERO km/h. Meaning, the water will not float.

But of course, the water is still pushing the Earth DOWN towards the Earth's core, but, because the Earth is so massive, the Earth only move an insignificant amount of displacement, and also, because there is an equal opposing force (newton's law).

( Force = Mass X Acceleration )

Take note: This is coming from a 15 year old kid studying PHYSICS!!! An adult is supposed to be more educated than a child, and this child is proving SMARTICUS/FE wrong...

Oh my god.
« Last Edit: October 12, 2007, 08:40:53 PM by afiq980 »
Logged
*

narcberry

  • 5623
  • +0/-0
  • Official Flat Earth Society Spokesman/min
Re: RE floating oceans.
« Reply #269 on: October 15, 2007, 07:53:47 AM »
But the water molecule never leaves water. As the oceans float (silly re model) all water remains within water.

Can you give an example of any water molecule in the ocean that is not in water?
Logged
Pages: 1 ... 7 8 [9] 10 11 ... 28   Go Up
« previous next »