Lunar Eclipse on April 4, 2015. Flat earther explanation, please.

  • 35 Replies
  • 4517 Views
*

JRoweSkeptic

  • Flat Earth Believer
  • 5407
  • DET Developer
Re: Lunar Eclipse on April 4, 2015. Flat earther explanation, please.
« Reply #30 on: April 07, 2015, 12:36:09 PM »
elimist. forcing preconceptions of matter onto a no-material substance are simply not going to work. i fail to see why you struggle to grasp that concept. i can disprove your assertion with a word: vacuum. vacuums exist, but are not composed of any particles, but clearly some places are more vacuum than others. i also used the example of heat, which does not exist with matter, but alters in concentration.

space does not have constituent parts, because that implies matter.

my model has been used to predict the behavior of what we observe, just as einstein did with mercury. i have said that before. you reject it on principle.

have some truth:
http://www.newscientist.com/special/seven-things-that-dont-make-sense-about-gravity
1, 2 and 7 specifically. no one claims gravity is understood: something as fundamental as what it is eludes scientists. the idea of space behaving as everything else does, however, is not only simpler, but answers all questions.

Congratulations on such hardcore trolling. Through my dealings with creationists and such I truly believed someone could be this stupid. But now I realize you're just asserting the same crap to get me to repeat myself. See ya.

your argument gets ruined, you resort to name-calling. have fun with your fantasy.
http://fet.wikia.com
dualearththeory.proboards.com/
On the sister site if you want to talk.

*

The Ellimist

  • 538
  • "Let us play a game, Crayak."
Re: Lunar Eclipse on April 4, 2015. Flat earther explanation, please.
« Reply #31 on: April 07, 2015, 03:48:34 PM »
elimist. forcing preconceptions of matter onto a no-material substance are simply not going to work. i fail to see why you struggle to grasp that concept. i can disprove your assertion with a word: vacuum. vacuums exist, but are not composed of any particles, but clearly some places are more vacuum than others. i also used the example of heat, which does not exist with matter, but alters in concentration.

space does not have constituent parts, because that implies matter.

my model has been used to predict the behavior of what we observe, just as einstein did with mercury. i have said that before. you reject it on principle.

have some truth:
http://www.newscientist.com/special/seven-things-that-dont-make-sense-about-gravity
1, 2 and 7 specifically. no one claims gravity is understood: something as fundamental as what it is eludes scientists. the idea of space behaving as everything else does, however, is not only simpler, but answers all questions.

Congratulations on such hardcore trolling. Through my dealings with creationists and such I truly believed someone could be this stupid. But now I realize you're just asserting the same crap to get me to repeat myself. See ya.

your argument gets ruined, you resort to name-calling. have fun with your fantasy.

Fine, I'll pay your silly game. Gravity makes no assumptions because experiments have been conducted to show that gravity is the cause. We are able to show that mass bends spacetime. No need for assumptions. However, you assume that these properties of space cause phenomena. But you cannot show us space forming whirlpools. You cannot show us space forming concentrations. Therefore, they are assumed. That means your theory makes more assumptions. So by Occam's Razor it's incorrect.
Additionally, we cannot entirely rule out the nefarious effects of demons, spirits, gnomes, and wizards on our society's ability to comprehend our flat earth as it really is. 

*

JRoweSkeptic

  • Flat Earth Believer
  • 5407
  • DET Developer
Re: Lunar Eclipse on April 4, 2015. Flat earther explanation, please.
« Reply #32 on: April 08, 2015, 05:12:23 AM »
elimist. forcing preconceptions of matter onto a no-material substance are simply not going to work. i fail to see why you struggle to grasp that concept. i can disprove your assertion with a word: vacuum. vacuums exist, but are not composed of any particles, but clearly some places are more vacuum than others. i also used the example of heat, which does not exist with matter, but alters in concentration.

space does not have constituent parts, because that implies matter.

my model has been used to predict the behavior of what we observe, just as einstein did with mercury. i have said that before. you reject it on principle.

have some truth:
http://www.newscientist.com/special/seven-things-that-dont-make-sense-about-gravity
1, 2 and 7 specifically. no one claims gravity is understood: something as fundamental as what it is eludes scientists. the idea of space behaving as everything else does, however, is not only simpler, but answers all questions.

Congratulations on such hardcore trolling. Through my dealings with creationists and such I truly believed someone could be this stupid. But now I realize you're just asserting the same crap to get me to repeat myself. See ya.

your argument gets ruined, you resort to name-calling. have fun with your fantasy.

Fine, I'll pay your silly game. Gravity makes no assumptions because experiments have been conducted to show that gravity is the cause. We are able to show that mass bends spacetime. No need for assumptions. However, you assume that these properties of space cause phenomena. But you cannot show us space forming whirlpools. You cannot show us space forming concentrations. Therefore, they are assumed. That means your theory makes more assumptions. So by Occam's Razor it's incorrect.

mass bends spacetime? would you care to provide an account of one such experiment, and why it must show that, and why this must be the explanation for gravity.

i refer you yet again to the basic principle of deductive and observational evidence. the fact you have not so much as acknowledged my deduction is a fault with you.
http://fet.wikia.com
dualearththeory.proboards.com/
On the sister site if you want to talk.

*

Rama Set

  • 6877
  • I am also an engineer
Re: Lunar Eclipse on April 4, 2015. Flat earther explanation, please.
« Reply #33 on: April 08, 2015, 06:29:59 AM »
This from the guy who cannot show any evidence that the amount of meters/meter of space can vary...

Gravity Prove B has observed the geodetic effect[/quote]. 
Aether is the  characteristic of action or inaction of charged  & noncharged particals.

*

JRoweSkeptic

  • Flat Earth Believer
  • 5407
  • DET Developer
Re: Lunar Eclipse on April 4, 2015. Flat earther explanation, please.
« Reply #34 on: April 08, 2015, 07:16:16 AM »
This from the guy who cannot show any evidence that the amount of meters/meter of space can vary...

Gravity Prove B has observed the geodetic effect
.
[/quote]

why would i want to show evidence of that? i have never claimed it. please pay attention rather than constructing straw men. my statement is, and has always been, that it takes less time to cross less space, if you move at a constant speed: when space alters, distance alters.
if you're going to start insisting that space and distance are two separate entities, you are just being absurd.
http://fet.wikia.com
dualearththeory.proboards.com/
On the sister site if you want to talk.

*

LuggerSailor

  • 197
  • 12 men on the Moon, 11 of them Scouts.
Re: Lunar Eclipse on April 4, 2015. Flat earther explanation, please.
« Reply #35 on: April 08, 2015, 07:34:35 AM »
mass bends spacetime? would you care to provide an account of one such experiment, and why it must show that, and why this must be the explanation for gravity.

i refer you yet again to the basic principle of deductive and observational evidence. the fact you have not so much as acknowledged my deduction is a fault with you.

There you go - http://www.newscientist.com/article/dn27305-einstein-puts-a-ring-on-distant-galaxy.html#.VSU7IkZwZJ9

Enjoy.
LuggerSailor.
Sailor and Navigator.