Someone debate me

  • 79 Replies
  • 12051 Views
Re: Someone debate me
« Reply #60 on: October 20, 2011, 09:26:16 AM »
Flat on the top and round on the bottom. We are on an upside-down hamburger bun.

The question that springs to mind then is why an upside-down hamburger bun? What are the forces that contort it into this shape? If it's forces much the same as those that act on a raindrop, then there should be a force pushing down on the surface we live on to make it flat.

*

Zogg

  • 128
  • Secret NASA space picture photoshopper
Re: Someone debate me
« Reply #61 on: October 20, 2011, 09:53:58 AM »
Flat on the top and round on the bottom. We are on an upside-down hamburger bun.

Hmmm... Flat and round... That may be an approach for a compromise between different theories...


Edit: ;)
« Last Edit: October 20, 2011, 10:25:41 AM by Zogg »

?

Nolhekh

  • 1669
  • Animator
Re: Someone debate me
« Reply #62 on: October 20, 2011, 10:05:11 AM »
argumentum ad temperantiam?

*

Lord Xenu

  • 1029
  • ALL HAIL XENU!
Re: Someone debate me
« Reply #63 on: October 20, 2011, 10:23:23 AM »
Flat on the top and round on the bottom. We are on an upside-down hamburger bun.

The question that springs to mind then is why an upside-down hamburger bun? What are the forces that contort it into this shape? If it's forces much the same as those that act on a raindrop, then there should be a force pushing down on the surface we live on to make it flat.
Aether resistance.

*

Lord Xenu

  • 1029
  • ALL HAIL XENU!
Re: Someone debate me
« Reply #64 on: October 20, 2011, 10:24:56 AM »
Flat on the top and round on the bottom. We are on an upside-down hamburger bun.

Hmmm... Flat and round... That may be an approach for a compromise between different theories...



Another round earther with photoshop and paint skills. This has been noted.

Re: Someone debate me
« Reply #65 on: October 20, 2011, 04:08:50 PM »
Aether resistance.

Wouldn't we then have an unexplained resistive force every time we move around? Why don't we detect this?

*

Lord Xenu

  • 1029
  • ALL HAIL XENU!
Re: Someone debate me
« Reply #66 on: October 21, 2011, 02:49:00 AM »
Aether resistance.

Wouldn't we then have an unexplained resistive force every time we move around? Why don't we detect this?
No. How does that follow?

*

Son of Orospu

  • Jura's b*tch and proud of it!
  • Planar Moderator
  • 37820
  • I have artificial intelligence
Re: Someone debate me
« Reply #67 on: October 21, 2011, 04:48:28 AM »
Aether resistance.

Wouldn't we then have an unexplained resistive force every time we move around? Why don't we detect this?

Now air resistance has been disproved?

*

Lord Xenu

  • 1029
  • ALL HAIL XENU!
Re: Someone debate me
« Reply #68 on: October 21, 2011, 04:55:50 AM »
Aether resistance.

Wouldn't we then have an unexplained resistive force every time we move around? Why don't we detect this?

Now air resistance has been disproved?
How has air resistance been disproved?  ???

*

Son of Orospu

  • Jura's b*tch and proud of it!
  • Planar Moderator
  • 37820
  • I have artificial intelligence
Re: Someone debate me
« Reply #69 on: October 21, 2011, 05:01:08 AM »
Aether resistance.

Wouldn't we then have an unexplained resistive force every time we move around? Why don't we detect this?

Now air resistance has been disproved?
How has air resistance been disproved?  ???

Aether resistance.

Wouldn't we then have an unexplained resistive force every time we move around? Why don't we detect this?

 ???

Re: Someone debate me
« Reply #70 on: October 21, 2011, 05:02:39 AM »
No. How does that follow?

Well, a force that resists the motion of the flat Earth upwards would no doubt resist the motion of any objects on it's surface that this aether also comes into contact with. Why wouldn't it?

Now air resistance has been disproved?

I'm not sure I follow. Are you suggesting this aether resistance is just air resistance?

*

Lord Xenu

  • 1029
  • ALL HAIL XENU!
Re: Someone debate me
« Reply #71 on: October 21, 2011, 05:19:33 AM »
Well, a force that resists the motion of the flat Earth upwards would no doubt resist the motion of any objects on it's surface that this aether also comes into contact with. Why wouldn't it?
The aether comes into contact with the air of the atmolayer. Aether is not air.

*

Conker

  • 1557
  • Official FES jerk / kneebiter
Re: Someone debate me
« Reply #72 on: October 21, 2011, 10:15:05 AM »
Well, a force that resists the motion of the flat Earth upwards would no doubt resist the motion of any objects on it's surface that this aether also comes into contact with. Why wouldn't it?
The aether comes into contact with the air of the atmolayer. Aether is not air.
It´s not because, well, it dooes not exit. Also, it´s incompatible by definition with the relativity
This is not a joke society.
Quote from: OpenedEyes
You shouldn't be allowed to talk on a free discussion forum.

*

Lord Xenu

  • 1029
  • ALL HAIL XENU!
Re: Someone debate me
« Reply #73 on: October 21, 2011, 10:43:59 AM »
Well, a force that resists the motion of the flat Earth upwards would no doubt resist the motion of any objects on it's surface that this aether also comes into contact with. Why wouldn't it?
The aether comes into contact with the air of the atmolayer. Aether is not air.
It´s not because, well, it dooes not exit. Also, it´s incompatible by definition with the relativity
ORLY?

*

Conker

  • 1557
  • Official FES jerk / kneebiter
Re: Someone debate me
« Reply #74 on: October 21, 2011, 10:49:39 AM »
Yep. The Lorenz equation (?) was made for aetherical measures (it states the compresion of the aether being pushed on near-light speeds) , and then, with the substitution of aether with space, it just explains the effects of near light speeds on bodies. As it can only be used to ONE of those things, and it has been proved, you must choose. Aether, or Real Life TM
This is not a joke society.
Quote from: OpenedEyes
You shouldn't be allowed to talk on a free discussion forum.

*

Lord Xenu

  • 1029
  • ALL HAIL XENU!
Re: Someone debate me
« Reply #75 on: October 21, 2011, 11:00:22 AM »
Yep. The Lorenz equation (?) was made for aetherical measures (it states the compresion of the aether being pushed on near-light speeds) , and then, with the substitution of aether with space, it just explains the effects of near light speeds on bodies. As it can only be used to ONE of those things, and it has been proved, you must choose. Aether, or Real Life TM
You must be referring to the Lorentz ether theory.
Quote from: Wikipedia
What is now often called Lorentz Ether theory ("LET") has its roots in Hendrik Lorentz's "Theory of electrons", which was the final point in the development of the classical aether theories at the end of the 19th and at the beginning of the 20th century.
Lorentz's initial theory created in 1892 and 1895 was based on a completely motionless aether. It explained the failure of the negative aether drift experiments to first order in v/c by introducing an auxiliary variable called "local time" for connecting systems at rest and in motion in the aether. In addition, the negative result of the Michelson-Morley experiment led to the introduction of the hypothesis of length contraction in 1892. However, other experiments also produced negative results and (guided by Henri Poincaré's principle of relativity) Lorentz tried in 1899 and 1904 to expand his theory to all orders in v/c by introducing the Lorentz transformation. In addition, he assumed that also non-electromagnetic forces (if they exist) transform like electric forces. However, Lorentz's expression for charge density and current were incorrect, so his theory did not fully exclude the possibility of detecting the aether. Eventually, it was Henri Poincaré who in 1905 corrected the errors in Lorentz's paper and actually incorporated non-electromagnetic forces (incl. Gravitation) within the theory, which he called "The New Mechanics". Many aspects of Lorentz's theory were incorporated into special relativity (SR) with the works of Albert Einstein and Hermann Minkowski.
Even Wikipedia seems to think this is BS. Why should this be taken as evidence?

*

Conker

  • 1557
  • Official FES jerk / kneebiter
Re: Someone debate me
« Reply #76 on: October 21, 2011, 11:05:24 AM »
WTF means BS?
This is not a joke society.
Quote from: OpenedEyes
You shouldn't be allowed to talk on a free discussion forum.

*

Lord Xenu

  • 1029
  • ALL HAIL XENU!
Re: Someone debate me
« Reply #77 on: October 21, 2011, 11:08:24 AM »
WTF means BS?
Use Urban Dictionary.

*

Conker

  • 1557
  • Official FES jerk / kneebiter
Re: Someone debate me
« Reply #78 on: October 21, 2011, 12:15:56 PM »
It really hurts my religion to use a trollish dictionary.
This is not a joke society.
Quote from: OpenedEyes
You shouldn't be allowed to talk on a free discussion forum.

*

Lord Xenu

  • 1029
  • ALL HAIL XENU!
Re: Someone debate me
« Reply #79 on: October 21, 2011, 12:22:31 PM »
It really hurts my religion to use a trollish dictionary.
Urban Dictionary is not for trolls. It is a reliable source for all kinds of slang and the names of bizarre sexual practices.