Gravity and the Formation of the Earth

  • 37 Replies
  • 3688 Views
*

Dog

  • 1162
  • Literally a dog
Re: Gravity and the Formation of the Earth
« Reply #30 on: July 07, 2015, 05:54:21 PM »
I am tired of repeating myself. If you are not going to read my posts, of what purpose would writing the same answers and points serve?

Us: "A"
You: "So you're saying B?"
Us: "No"
You: "There is no way B is true"
Us: "We didn't say B"
You: "Yeah you did"
Us: "Please point out where we said B"
You: "I'm so tired of repeating myself! I have already explained this! Do you even read?!!"

?

hoyhoy5

  • 72
  • Irrational disbelief is not critically thinking.
Re: Gravity and the Formation of the Earth
« Reply #31 on: July 07, 2015, 07:12:07 PM »
Markjo,

Regarding this eletrostatic force of which you spoke of, i remember once watching a gif of a "fake" astronaut in the "fake" ISS showing a droplet of water 'orbiting' a pen. I also remember some people explaining this phenomenon not through gravity, of which orbitation is often refered to, but because of eletrostatic forces. How do these eletrostatic forces work, both in the space and in the Earth's atmosphere?
When in doubt, remember RELM:
Rationality, Evidence, Logic and Math.

*

mikeman7918

  • 5431
  • Round Earther
Re: Gravity and the Formation of the Earth
« Reply #32 on: July 07, 2015, 11:08:28 PM »
Let's look at more Round Earth inconsistencies.

Once the Earth was dust, spinning around loosely. Then gravity exerted from each speck of dust drew it all together to create a planet.

Gravity depends on mass apparently, however: and the mass of dust is negible. If the Sun existed, and it apparenly did, then the dust should have been drawn to that first. Even assuming the colossal unlikelihood of dust going in at just the right angle to orbit the Sun, the cloud of dust would be close to equilibrium: the negligible attractive force of one speck would be countered by the attractive force of another speck. How could gravity cause a planet to form when the only gravity at play was utterly negligible? Where was the substantial mass that drew the dust to it? Where did it come from?

Apparently we're expected to believe loose dust exerts enough force to not only draw more specks towards them, but to compact them absurdly, and keep them at an absurd heat, and not only that but keep it together while it formed, while spinning like crazy: the outwards forces caused by rotation should have ruined the loose dust slowly coming together.

Does anyone really believe this?

Try not to insult and evade over multiple pages, like you do every other time I ask a question.

The gravitational attraction between dust particles is negligible in most situations, but over billions of years it can have a significant effect.  The Sun actually did pull in the vast majority of the dust, that's why it's so big.  Some of the dust got into orbit of the Sun and over billions of years their tiny gravitational attraction stuck pieces together and sense the pieces became bigger they have stronger gravity and start attracting more dust and larger pieces.  This didn't happen overnight though, it took billions of years.

You can actually see planetary disks in the Orion nebula with the proper equipment.
I am having a video war with Jeranism.
See the thread about it here.

Re: Gravity and the Formation of the Earth
« Reply #33 on: July 08, 2015, 05:34:46 AM »
Markjo,

Regarding this eletrostatic force of which you spoke of, i remember once watching a gif of a "fake" astronaut in the "fake" ISS showing a droplet of water 'orbiting' a pen. I also remember some people explaining this phenomenon not through gravity, of which orbitation is often refered to, but because of eletrostatic forces. How do these eletrostatic forces work, both in the space and in the Earth's atmosphere?

Easiest way is to show you with a simple home experiment.

Grab a plastic comb and run it through your hair several times to build up a static charge. Turn on a tap and adjust so that you have a nice thin but continuous stream. Now move the comb close to the water (but not touching). You should see the water start to bend towards the comb.

Opposite electric charges attract each other. when you brush the comb in your hair you build up a negative electric charge on it. The molecules in water are polar (ie the have negative charge on one side and positive on the other) so will be attracted to the negative charge on the comb.
Never attribute to malice that which can be explained by ignorance or stupidity.

Re: Gravity and the Formation of the Earth
« Reply #34 on: July 08, 2015, 06:13:22 AM »
I feel like there is a Bill Nye the Science Guy episode that explains this quite well and in terms a child can understand.  Now if only we could break it down simpler so JRS could understand it.

*

JRoweSkeptic

  • Flat Earth Believer
  • 5407
  • DET Developer
Re: Gravity and the Formation of the Earth
« Reply #35 on: July 09, 2015, 09:08:40 AM »
Stop repeating yourselves when I have refuted you, read what I'm saying, and respond. Why is this so much to ask?

Also, Dog, actually:
Me: why is A?
You: Because B
Me: But B cannot be true because C
You: but B
Me: But B cannot be true because C
You: But B
...
http://fet.wikia.com
dualearththeory.proboards.com/
On the sister site if you want to talk.

Re: Gravity and the Formation of the Earth
« Reply #36 on: July 09, 2015, 11:41:54 AM »
Stop repeating yourselves when I have refuted you, read what I'm saying, and respond. Why is this so much to ask?

No one has seen a meaningful refutation from you yet, so when you give one of your typical erroneous, irrelevant, and/or insulting replies, we read what you say then repeat our questions or assertions, sometimes rephrasing them in an effort to make it easier for you to understand. Are you really that slow to learn, or are you just acting that way?

Is requesting a link back to an actual example where you successfully refute something too much to ask because:

A) You don't know how to do it?
B) There's nothing to link back to?
C) Both of the above?
D) None of the above?

If you think it's D), please elaborate.

The correct answer appears to be B) or C); perhaps you can shed some light on this.
"Everyone is entitled to his own opinion, but not to his own facts." - Daniel Patrick Moynihan

*

Dog

  • 1162
  • Literally a dog
Re: Gravity and the Formation of the Earth
« Reply #37 on: July 09, 2015, 05:30:57 PM »
Stop repeating yourselves when I have refuted you, read what I'm saying, and respond. Why is this so much to ask?

You have have refuted nothing. We are explaining as directly as possible why your statements are wrong. Now is the part where you actually put in some effort and back up your statements with evidence. If you can't even do that, this thread is as good as over.