How do gravimeters work in the Flat Earth?

UA. 

UA.

That is not force. By the way what type of force is pushing the FE?

UA.  I am not sure what you are confused about.

UA.  I am not sure what you are confused about.

What is the force or energy that is acceleration the flat earth. Don't be stupid.

There are many mysteries on this world.  What causes the UA is one of them.  I can speculate on the subject, if you would like?

There are many mysteries on this world.  What causes the UA is one of them.  I can speculate on the subject, if you would like?

I bet you could not come up with something reasonable to what it is.

I bet I could.  I could come up with some bull crap like Big Bang or Dark Energy or something.  At least I had the decency to inform you that I was going to speculate, unlike your RE scientists. 

I bet I could.  I could come up with some bull crap like Big Bang or Dark Energy or something.  At least I had the decency to inform you that I was going to speculate, unlike your RE scientists.

Well do come up with something. Don't invent something by using buzz words that you know nothing about. It is a force that is pushing. It at least must make sense.

Yeah, it is energy pushing against something.  What is hard to understand about that?

Yeah, it is energy pushing against something.  What is hard to understand about that?

Yes but what is it? Nuclear? Magnetism? Magical force? alien?

Is it possible that it is a force that does not exist on the Earth?  It can not be recreated, only observed. 

Other than things falling to the ground, how else is the UA observed?

We can observe the celestial objects. 

Is it possible that it is a force that does not exist on the Earth?  It can not be recreated, only observed.

I doubt it. There could be some unknown force or there could be are none. In the end it is your UA and there has to have some foundation for the theory. Like scepti once said: "I just need to prove one thing to be wrong to make it all wrong." There is a bit of logic to it but it works both ways. This UA force is by most part the key to the FET. If that force is not solid in the theory all the FET falls apart. A magical force theory simple is not good enough to convince anybody the earth is flat.

We can observe the celestial objects.

But you are telling us it reflections. Does that make sense?

Quote from: jroa on May 01, 2014, 05:43:31 PM

Is it possible that it is a force that does not exist on the Earth?  It can not be recreated, only observed.

I doubt it. There could be some unknown force or there could be are none. In the end it is your UA and there has to have some foundation for the theory. Like scepti once said: "I just need to prove one thing to be wrong to make it all wrong." There is a bit of logic to it but it works both ways. This UA force is by most part the key to the FET. If that force is not solid in the theory all the FET falls apart. A magical force theory simple is not good enough to convince anybody the earth is flat.

Can you reproduce the Big Bang on Earth?  If no, then it must be wrong, correct? 

Quote from: jroa on May 01, 2014, 05:59:02 PM

We can observe the celestial objects.

But you are telling us it reflections. Does that make sense?

For the last time, stop attributing anything, absolutely anything, that sceptimatic claims to me.  Just stop it already. 

I bet I could.  I could come up with some bull crap like Big Bang or Dark Energy or something.  At least I had the decency to inform you that I was going to speculate, unlike your RE scientists.

No scientist has confirmed the Big Bang theory or the existance of dark energy. It is speculation, but unlike yours, it is based on certain evidence. You can't see dark energy, but you can see its effect. So scientists say there is a hypothetical form of energy called dark energy that causes that.

Quote from: Starman on May 01, 2014, 06:05:28 PM

Quote from: jroa on May 01, 2014, 05:43:31 PM

Is it possible that it is a force that does not exist on the Earth?  It can not be recreated, only observed.

I doubt it. There could be some unknown force or there could be are none. In the end it is your UA and there has to have some foundation for the theory. Like scepti once said: "I just need to prove one thing to be wrong to make it all wrong." There is a bit of logic to it but it works both ways. This UA force is by most part the key to the FET. If that force is not solid in the theory all the FET falls apart. A magical force theory simple is not good enough to convince anybody the earth is flat.

Can you reproduce the Big Bang on Earth?  If no, then it must be wrong, correct? 

Quote from: Starman on May 01, 2014, 06:06:46 PM

Quote from: jroa on May 01, 2014, 05:59:02 PM

We can observe the celestial objects.

But you are telling us it reflections. Does that make sense?

For the last time, stop attributing anything, absolutely anything, that sceptimatic claims to me.  Just stop it already.

It is not about what we can do on earth it is about the US of your FE. Don't divert the question.
Back to celestial bodies. Some have said that mars is a reflection from earth(not scepti). Tell me what and where is Mars?

scepti and crew have postulated that sun, moon, and other celestial objects are a reflection of the Earth or from some sort of natural laser.  I never said this.  Please don't put his theories into my mouth.

As far as Mars goes, it is likely some form of wandering phlogiston caught in the eddy of the UA as it passes by the Earth. 

scepti and crew have postulated that sun, moon, and other celestial objects are a reflection of the Earth or from some sort of natural laser.  I never said this.  Please don't put his theories into my mouth.

As far as Mars goes, it is likely some form of wandering phlogiston caught in the eddy of the UA as it passes by the Earth.

So why does it appear to be perfectly round and have ice caps not to mention it has a very predictable orbit?

The lenses on your scope are round giving it a round appearance.   

Seriously, it is a burning ball of phlogiston.  That is why it appears round. 

The lenses on your scope are round giving it a round appearance.   

Seriously, it is a burning ball of phlogiston.  That is why it appears round.

If I used a square lens would it be square. How far is it?

If your head was square, would it be more full of intelligence? 

Mars is likely around 100 miles or so higher than the sun and moon. 

If your head was square, would it be more full of intelligence? 

Mars is likely around 100 miles or so higher than the sun and moon.

Well that is a reasonable answer. Is that your opinion or the official version.

That is my opinion.  There is no official version. 

That is my opinion.  There is no official version.

Is there going to be an official version. How can you accept a version of your world when it is not defined and everybody has their own version.

How can you accept science when every scientist has his own version? 

How can you accept science when every scientist has his own version?

You can have scientist that may have theories but the real mission is to prove it. That may not be easy or possible but there is a point where other scientist will test his theory for it to be valid. For example Einstein predicted the faster you go toward the speed of light time will slow down. This was all done mathematically. It was not just a idea from a dream. It was proven to be true.

Einstein never said that time slowed down locally.  It only appears to slow down for someone outside of your frame of reference. 

Einstein never said that time slowed down locally.  It only appears to slow down for someone outside of your frame of reference.

How close is locally?