The Coriolis Effect is real... but not for the reasons the "rounders" think

  • 59 Replies
  • 10910 Views
*

Dog

  • 1162
  • Literally a dog
Surveyors   do not HAVE to correct for the curvature of the Earth... because there is NO curvature.

Except they do. http://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=66107.0

The Coriolis Effect has been explained- it is the quintessence and its rotational effect on objects for the 10th time. Surveyors   do not HAVE to correct for the curvature of the Earth... because there is NO curvature.  The models of the earth spinning would create a .17 ratio of uplift to distance for the US if the earth were spinning (vs the terrain ration of less than .01 as measured. There are numerous photos of Nasa "faking" the moon walk- just ask your self WHO filmed Neil Armstrong?

You have explained the Coriolis Effect very poorly, the same way my mother might explain how a computer works by saying it has electricity inside it. You need to explain your theory better than just saying quintessence and aether over and over again.

While you are at it, explain what a .17 ratio of uplift to distance is.

And what do you mean who filmed Neil Armstrong? A camera did. It was possible, even back then, to have a camera begin filming remotely without a human standing behind it. You can't argue that they were sophisticated enough to film a fake moon landing and also that they couldn't figure out how to remotely operate a camera.

*

rabinoz

  • 26528
  • Real Earth Believer
"Round ers" fail to realize that they start their explanations with a pre-supposition "the earth is round" and therefore their usually false conclusions are due to their faulty pre-supposition.
The Coriolis Effect is measured and is real. But the phenomena has nothing to do with the ridiculously high velocity of a spinning globe. Rather it is the affect of the aether (or more precisely the terrestrial quintessence) the presence of which was foreshadowed in the writings Aristotle.

The Coriolis Effect is a phenomena that is attributed to a "rotation" of a spherical planet for which there is scant real evidence. There is a much simpler explanation to this "Coriolis" affect than a hypothetical planetary rotation.  And that is the aforementioned  presence of quintessence on the terrestrial plane.

We know that Isaac Newton, in his "Philosophić Naturalis Principia Mathematica (the Principia)", based all the motions of objects (terrestrial and celestial) on their passage through an invisible, but none the less real, substance scientists call aether. Dr. Rubio Spurlowne, renowned philosopher and alchemist said "aether is no less real, and no less invisible, than wind."

"The most translucent of elements is called by the name of aether (or ether)" Plato quoted the Greek philosopher Timaeus.

As mentioned Aristotle did not incorporate aether into his learned four elements theory but he did recognize that the first element, located in the "nether" regions (meaning celestial), moved in a circular motion and had characteristics "differing from those of terrestrial elements".

Thus he described what we now know of as aether. Later scientists added to Aristotle's four elements being that of aether which was " neither hot, nor cold, nor wet, or dry."

The argument that generated much controversy amongst the scholastic school was whether aether was differentiated in substance and characteristic from quintessence. It was noted in careful experiments, using the proboscis of mated Ceylonese giant dragon flies, that quintessence was similar in characteristics to aether, yet little of it existed in the terrestrial spheres. By comparing the weight of mated Ceylonese giant dragon fly proboscis to that of normal unmated English dragon flies (but south of the equator) it was shown that slight variations in the drift of the two samples, in a close to absolute vacuum, varied in an inverse proportion to their weight. This is the opposite of what would be expected using Aristotle's dictum that "a body in motion desires to stay in motion." This difference (in drift) could only be explained by a difference in some other substance that was identical in characteristic to aether. This experiment confirmed the existence of aether, which is identical to quintessence (although in far larger density in the celestial realm) which had been posited by the natural philosopher Lullius.

Aether then is the same substance as quintessence (or has the same properties) but occurs in much higher concentrations in terrestrial vs celestial spheres. None the less the affects are the same in both but lessened in the terrestrial plane.  Quintessence moves, like aether, only in a circular formation but relative only to the celestial plane. As sound travels through water so light travels through quintessence in the terrestrial plan, or as does any other object in the celestial sphere.

We know that like aether, quintessence also moves in circular motions relative to the celestial plan. Thus the parsimonious explanation of the Coriolis Effect is the affect of the circular motion of quintessence on objects moving at great speed in the terrestrial plane. In the celestial sphere, where aether (think of aether as concentrated quintessence) the affect is much much greater- hence the circular movement of the sun and moon and the moving celestial objects such as comets.

I can only assume that you are showing us a preview of a new "Sci Fi Fantasy" book you are writing. Is it going to be in the same genre as Anne McCaffery's books or more along the line of Terry Pratchett's books?

I do so hope you are not serious!

Prove that the Coriolis Effect can work on a flat disk. ...and which would have proof of a flat earth. 


Yes we have "proven" that the Coriolis Effect is real and yes how it works. Please see my very complete post on the Coriolis Effect which is a phenomena of the interaction of an objective moving at a high velocity with the aether (technically on the terrestrial plane it is quintessence). No FE theorist (at least this one) doubts the Coriolis Effect- rather it is the pre-suppositions that Rounders bring that changes the cause.
Regarding those other issues- it is evident that you have not carefully read the Q&A and the forum posts by FEs (numerous) that deal with your questions on a scientific basis. It is simply that rounders have been so indoctrinated by the same CABAL that silenced Ptolemy and distorted the works of Isaac Newton that they are unable to break the bonds of intellectual slavery and look at the data and information without their rounder prejudice.

What Cabal silenced Ptolemy? And I assume you think this Cabal funded and proliferated the works of Copernicus and Galileo?  Who IS this Cabal? Can you please name exactly who we're dealing with?

While you're at it please explain how exactly you've "proven" how the coriolis effect works on a flat disk? Have you tested it? Do you have a working model? Uh, no...

*

Sir Richard

  • Flat Earth Believer
  • 451
Prove that the Coriolis Effect can work on a flat disk. ...and which would have proof of a flat earth. 


Yes we have "proven" that the Coriolis Effect is real and yes how it works. Please see my very complete post on the Coriolis Effect which is a phenomena of the interaction of an objective moving at a high velocity with the aether (technically on the terrestrial plane it is quintessence). No FE theorist (at least this one) doubts the Coriolis Effect- rather it is the pre-suppositions that Rounders bring that changes the cause.
Regarding those other issues- it is evident that you have not carefully read the Q&A and the forum posts by FEs (numerous) that deal with your questions on a scientific basis. It is simply that rounders have been so indoctrinated by the same CABAL that silenced Ptolemy and distorted the works of Isaac Newton that they are unable to break the bonds of intellectual slavery and look at the data and information without their rounder prejudice.

What Cabal silenced Ptolemy? And I assume you think this Cabal funded and proliferated the works of Copernicus and Galileo?  Who IS this Cabal? Can you please name exactly who we're dealing with?

While you're at it please explain how exactly you've "proven" how the coriolis effect works on a flat disk? Have you tested it? Do you have a working model? Uh, no...
Yes it is tested every day. The phenomena we call the Coriolis Effect occurs EVERY day on the flat earth.  WE can measure it. And it is caused by the interaction of said object with the diluted aether (technically quintessence) as it rotates.  End of story.
"Ideas are more powerful than guns. We would not let our enemies have guns, why should we let them have ideas?"  J Stalin

"It is not the people that vote that count it is the people that count the votes" J Stalin

?

palmerito0

  • 582
  • Why does this forum exist?
Prove that the Coriolis Effect can work on a flat disk. ...and which would have proof of a flat earth. 


Yes we have "proven" that the Coriolis Effect is real and yes how it works. Please see my very complete post on the Coriolis Effect which is a phenomena of the interaction of an objective moving at a high velocity with the aether (technically on the terrestrial plane it is quintessence). No FE theorist (at least this one) doubts the Coriolis Effect- rather it is the pre-suppositions that Rounders bring that changes the cause.
Regarding those other issues- it is evident that you have not carefully read the Q&A and the forum posts by FEs (numerous) that deal with your questions on a scientific basis. It is simply that rounders have been so indoctrinated by the same CABAL that silenced Ptolemy and distorted the works of Isaac Newton that they are unable to break the bonds of intellectual slavery and look at the data and information without their rounder prejudice.

What Cabal silenced Ptolemy? And I assume you think this Cabal funded and proliferated the works of Copernicus and Galileo?  Who IS this Cabal? Can you please name exactly who we're dealing with?

While you're at it please explain how exactly you've "proven" how the coriolis effect works on a flat disk? Have you tested it? Do you have a working model? Uh, no...
Yes it is tested every day. The phenomena we call the Coriolis Effect occurs EVERY day on the flat earth.  WE can measure it. And it is caused by the interaction of said object with the diluted aether (technically quintessence) as it rotates.  End of story.

@Sir Richard, you always seem so obsessed with Occam's Razor and the word "parsimonious". Why is it then that you have to include a "diluted aether" in your explanation of the Coriolis effect when it could be easily explained by a rotating sphere?
Heiwa on the impossibility of space travel:

There are no toilets up there and sex is also a problem, just to mention a few difficulties.

WHEEEEEEEEEEE

Prove that the Coriolis Effect can work on a flat disk. ...and which would have proof of a flat earth. 


Yes we have "proven" that the Coriolis Effect is real and yes how it works. Please see my very complete post on the Coriolis Effect which is a phenomena of the interaction of an objective moving at a high velocity with the aether (technically on the terrestrial plane it is quintessence). No FE theorist (at least this one) doubts the Coriolis Effect- rather it is the pre-suppositions that Rounders bring that changes the cause.
Regarding those other issues- it is evident that you have not carefully read the Q&A and the forum posts by FEs (numerous) that deal with your questions on a scientific basis. It is simply that rounders have been so indoctrinated by the same CABAL that silenced Ptolemy and distorted the works of Isaac Newton that they are unable to break the bonds of intellectual slavery and look at the data and information without their rounder prejudice.

What Cabal silenced Ptolemy? And I assume you think this Cabal funded and proliferated the works of Copernicus and Galileo?  Who IS this Cabal? Can you please name exactly who we're dealing with?

While you're at it please explain how exactly you've "proven" how the coriolis effect works on a flat disk? Have you tested it? Do you have a working model? Uh, no...
Yes it is tested every day. The phenomena we call the Coriolis Effect occurs EVERY day on the flat earth.  WE can measure it. And it is caused by the interaction of said object with the diluted aether (technically quintessence) as it rotates.  End of story.

"Diluted Aether - Quintessence?" Please prove. How exactly does "said object" interact with "diluted aether" and how is this measurable let alone provable?  Working model? Proof? (crickets chirping...)  Maybe you've been consulting too many old alchemical texts...




?

Woody

  • 1144
Prove that the Coriolis Effect can work on a flat disk. ...and which would have proof of a flat earth. 


Yes we have "proven" that the Coriolis Effect is real and yes how it works. Please see my very complete post on the Coriolis Effect which is a phenomena of the interaction of an objective moving at a high velocity with the aether (technically on the terrestrial plane it is quintessence). No FE theorist (at least this one) doubts the Coriolis Effect- rather it is the pre-suppositions that Rounders bring that changes the cause.
Regarding those other issues- it is evident that you have not carefully read the Q&A and the forum posts by FEs (numerous) that deal with your questions on a scientific basis. It is simply that rounders have been so indoctrinated by the same CABAL that silenced Ptolemy and distorted the works of Isaac Newton that they are unable to break the bonds of intellectual slavery and look at the data and information without their rounder prejudice.

What Cabal silenced Ptolemy? And I assume you think this Cabal funded and proliferated the works of Copernicus and Galileo?  Who IS this Cabal? Can you please name exactly who we're dealing with?

While you're at it please explain how exactly you've "proven" how the coriolis effect works on a flat disk? Have you tested it? Do you have a working model? Uh, no...
Yes it is tested every day. The phenomena we call the Coriolis Effect occurs EVERY day on the flat earth.  WE can measure it. And it is caused by the interaction of said object with the diluted aether (technically quintessence) as it rotates.  End of story.

Do you understand what the word like evidence means?

I can say the sun is like a giant hamster ball with a giant hamster in it that makes in move across the sky.  My proof is we can see the sun move across the sky.

Do you not see how my hypothesis about how the sun moves is similar to what you are saying what causes the Coriolis Effect?

*

Dog

  • 1162
  • Literally a dog
And it is caused by the interaction of said object with the diluted aether (technically quintessence) as it rotates.  End of story.

Oh cool are we just declaring things as fact now? My turn.

Wind across the Earth is actually caused by the rhythmic breathing of camels in Africa. Also, every now and then they gather for a ceremonial swim in the ocean and that causes El Nino or La Nina. Which one happens depends on the type of music the camels listen to.
« Last Edit: March 14, 2016, 08:49:17 PM by Dog »

?

ItsRoundBitch

  • 12
  • NASA is Awesome
When you said "The Aether" i just said "Nope, He is too far Gone Mentally to come back to sanity"
The earth is round Faggot.

*

Slemon

  • Flat Earth Researcher
  • 12330
Wind across the Earth is actually caused by the rhythmic breathing of camels in Africa. Also, every now and then they gather for a ceremonial swim in the ocean and that causes El Nino or La Nina. Which one happens depends on the type of music the camels listen to.

I'm convinced.
We all know deep in our hearts that Jane is the last face we'll see before we're choked to death!

*

Sir Richard

  • Flat Earth Believer
  • 451
Prove that the Coriolis Effect can work on a flat disk. ...and which would have proof of a flat earth. 


Yes we have "proven" that the Coriolis Effect is real and yes how it works. Please see my very complete post on the Coriolis Effect which is a phenomena of the interaction of an objective moving at a high velocity with the aether (technically on the terrestrial plane it is quintessence). No FE theorist (at least this one) doubts the Coriolis Effect- rather it is the pre-suppositions that Rounders bring that changes the cause.
Regarding those other issues- it is evident that you have not carefully read the Q&A and the forum posts by FEs (numerous) that deal with your questions on a scientific basis. It is simply that rounders have been so indoctrinated by the same CABAL that silenced Ptolemy and distorted the works of Isaac Newton that they are unable to break the bonds of intellectual slavery and look at the data and information without their rounder prejudice.

What Cabal silenced Ptolemy? And I assume you think this Cabal funded and proliferated the works of Copernicus and Galileo?  Who IS this Cabal? Can you please name exactly who we're dealing with?

While you're at it please explain how exactly you've "proven" how the coriolis effect works on a flat disk? Have you tested it? Do you have a working model? Uh, no...
Yes it is tested every day. The phenomena we call the Coriolis Effect occurs EVERY day on the flat earth.  WE can measure it. And it is caused by the interaction of said object with the diluted aether (technically quintessence) as it rotates.  End of story.

@Sir Richard, you always seem so obsessed with Occam's Razor and the word "parsimonious". Why is it then that you have to include a "diluted aether" in your explanation of the Coriolis effect when it could be easily explained by a rotating sphere?
A rotating sphere is simply not supported by the weight of science
"Ideas are more powerful than guns. We would not let our enemies have guns, why should we let them have ideas?"  J Stalin

"It is not the people that vote that count it is the people that count the votes" J Stalin

?

palmerito0

  • 582
  • Why does this forum exist?
A rotating sphere is simply not supported by the weight of science

Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence. What happened to all of those astronomers and physicists at NASA? Are they not a part of the scientific community?
Heiwa on the impossibility of space travel:

There are no toilets up there and sex is also a problem, just to mention a few difficulties.

WHEEEEEEEEEEE

?

Woody

  • 1144
And it is caused by the interaction of said object with the diluted aether (technically quintessence) as it rotates.  End of story.

Oh cool are we just declaring things as fact now? My turn.

Wind across the Earth is actually caused by the rhythmic breathing of camels in Africa. Also, every now and then they gather for a ceremonial swim in the ocean and that causes El Nino or La Nina. Which one happens depends on the type of music the camels listen to.

You have enlightened me.  I will discard my giant hamster living in the sun making it move across the sky.

I now have evidence the sun is propelled by camel farts.

 

*

Blue_Moon

  • 846
  • Defender of NASA
And it is caused by the interaction of said object with the diluted aether (technically quintessence) as it rotates.  End of story.

Oh cool are we just declaring things as fact now? My turn.

Wind across the Earth is actually caused by the rhythmic breathing of camels in Africa. Also, every now and then they gather for a ceremonial swim in the ocean and that causes El Nino or La Nina. Which one happens depends on the type of music the camels listen to.

You have enlightened me.  I will discard my giant hamster living in the sun making it move across the sky.

I now have evidence the sun is propelled by camel farts.

Ooh!  I bet global warming is a conspiracy created by the Camel cigarette company (which is run by the camels) to keep us off their trail!  It all fits!  And like most conspiracies, this one will be solved by vaping! 
Aerospace Engineering Student
NASA Enthusiast
Round Earth Advocate
More qualified to speak for NASA than you are to speak against them

*

rabinoz

  • 26528
  • Real Earth Believer
A rotating sphere is simply not supported by the weight of science
Please come up with all this "weight of science" that does not support a rotating sphere!

This is by far the most ignorant attempt to provide any sort of aid to the flat earth argument, that I have ever come across. There is litterally "0" validation to any of your presented arguments. You continually throw out these very bizzar assumptions and "theories" as if they alone stand to discredit any physical, real and tangible evidence countering your claims. Both sides of any debate must provide evidence to back their hypothesis for it to be held as, and remain valid. The whole reason why this flat earth model (in my opinion) does not work, is because there is no consistency. There is no analysis backed up with hard data to support any claims. Every supposed proof of the flat earth can be discredit, by much superior explanations that, are in fact, supported by real and tangible evidence. Your given hypothesis is incalculable. It cannot be proven by unbiased experimentation or reference. As for the excuse I saw someone provide for the lack of testing on this model (namely being that they haven't had time to build a working theoretical basis?), the flat earth ideology has been around long before we discovered that the earth is round. This is an OUTDATED theory. One which has been consistently inconsistent with observation and experimentation. Also, PLEEEEASE explain to me how believing in a round earth is a pre supposition, and yet your own ideals be identified as fact? I don't understand your logic at all. I understand the whole argument that you sense a flat world, therefore the earth must be flat, but one thing which is never brought into consideration on the matter, are the associated psychology, biochemistry, physics, etc. You cannot trust your senses and intuition alone. The human brain is an amazingly deceptive piece of bio machinery. Not to mention the nervous system and every other physiological aspect of the senses. You need to apply logic and open-mindedness to your efforts in understanding the world and your place in it. I personally hate rules and restrictions, more of the rebel type if you will. So by my very nature I cannot conform to the restrictive, tasteless and unimaginative model of the flat earth. If I combine that fundamental intuition which is engrained in me (that the flat earth is bullshit), and I combine that with the FACT that, since the only reality I can know is real, is that which I observe through my own experience, then I'm going to say that the earth is indeed, NOT FLAT. I won't say what it is, because I have never seen it but from above, but I will say that in MY reality, I do believe the earth is round, we experience gravity due to the fundamental, additively-attractive force of gravity, the sun sets because the earth is rotating on its axis, we experience seasons because that rotational axis is also rotational, the moon averages 300,000km from earth, the sun is so far away that it takes 8 minutes for light to get to us on earth traveling at 299,792,458m/s^2, the coriolis effect is cause by the earth's rotation beneath the flight path of the projectile, and unfortunately, people like you exist. Sorry for the insane runon sentence there. That was nuts.
“Advances are made by answering questions. Discoveries are made by questioning answers.”
-Bernhard Haisch, Astrophysicist

Sorry, I meant personalities like yours exist, not "people" like you. So yeah.
“Advances are made by answering questions. Discoveries are made by questioning answers.”
-Bernhard Haisch, Astrophysicist

*

Dog

  • 1162
  • Literally a dog
A rotating sphere is simply not supported by the weight of science

Cool. Nice. Great. Awesome. Outstanding. Radical. Righteous. Profound.

Now prove it.

*

Sir Richard

  • Flat Earth Believer
  • 451
This is by far the most ignorant attempt to provide any sort of aid to the flat earth argument, that I have ever come across. There is litterally "0" validation to any of your presented arguments. You continually throw out these very bizzar assumptions and "theories" as if they alone stand to discredit any physical, real and tangible evidence countering your claims. Both sides of any debate must provide evidence to back their hypothesis for it to be held as, and remain valid. The whole reason why this flat earth model (in my opinion) does not work, is because there is no consistency. There is no analysis backed up with hard data to support any claims. Every supposed proof of the flat earth can be discredit, by much superior explanations that, are in fact, supported by real and tangible evidence. Your given hypothesis is incalculable. It cannot be proven by unbiased experimentation or reference. As for the excuse I saw someone provide for the lack of testing on this model (namely being that they haven't had time to build a working theoretical basis?), the flat earth ideology has been around long before we discovered that the earth is round. This is an OUTDATED theory. One which has been consistently inconsistent with observation and experimentation. Also, PLEEEEASE explain to me how believing in a round earth is a pre supposition, and yet your own ideals be identified as fact? I don't understand your logic at all. I understand the whole argument that you sense a flat world, therefore the earth must be flat, but one thing which is never brought into consideration on the matter, are the associated psychology, biochemistry, physics, etc. You cannot trust your senses and intuition alone. The human brain is an amazingly deceptive piece of bio machinery. Not to mention the nervous system and every other physiological aspect of the senses. You need to apply logic and open-mindedness to your efforts in understanding the world and your place in it. I personally hate rules and restrictions, more of the rebel type if you will. So by my very nature I cannot conform to the restrictive, tasteless and unimaginative model of the flat earth. If I combine that fundamental intuition which is engrained in me (that the flat earth is bullshit), and I combine that with the FACT that, since the only reality I can know is real, is that which I observe through my own experience, then I'm going to say that the earth is indeed, NOT FLAT. I won't say what it is, because I have never seen it but from above, but I will say that in MY reality, I do believe the earth is round, we experience gravity due to the fundamental, additively-attractive force of gravity, the sun sets because the earth is rotating on its axis, we experience seasons because that rotational axis is also rotational, the moon averages 300,000km from earth, the sun is so far away that it takes 8 minutes for light to get to us on earth traveling at 299,792,458m/s^2, the coriolis effect is cause by the earth's rotation beneath the flight path of the projectile, and unfortunately, people like you exist. Sorry for the insane runon sentence there. That was nuts.

My translation of your post: "I believe (meaning you) in the helio-centric theory because I have swallowed (figuratively speaking of course) all thte of "theories" and beliefs that my teachers have placed on my "educational" spoon. I note the word "believe" scattered throughout your statement. Yet we have convincing proofs that are contrary to the assumption (Pre-supposition) that you start with; that is that the earth is a rapidly spinning globe. IF the earth is a spinning globe then it follows that all that you said is true. But if one starts with neither supposition (that the earth is either a flat disc or a spinning glove) then the arguments become equal for a spinning globe or a flat disc. But if one starts off with a pre-supposition that the earth is a round globe then of course one will prove it.

In other words you believe what you believe because you have been taught to believe it.
"Ideas are more powerful than guns. We would not let our enemies have guns, why should we let them have ideas?"  J Stalin

"It is not the people that vote that count it is the people that count the votes" J Stalin

My translation of your post: "I believe (meaning you) in the helio-centric theory because I have swallowed (figuratively speaking of course) all thte of "theories" and beliefs that my teachers have placed on my "educational" spoon. I note the word "believe" scattered throughout your statement. Yet we have convincing proofs that are contrary to the assumption (Pre-supposition) that you start with; that is that the earth is a rapidly spinning globe. IF the earth is a spinning globe then it follows that all that you said is true. But if one starts with neither supposition (that the earth is either a flat disc or a spinning glove) then the arguments become equal for a spinning globe or a flat disc. But if one starts off with a pre-supposition that the earth is a round globe then of course one will prove it.

In other words you believe what you believe because you have been taught to believe it.

The only thing you've served up so far is rhetoric. You haven't offered any evidence for anything you've asserted.

Your attempt at being derisive to people who accept a RE is laughable to put it lightly. There are very compelling reasons the RE model is accepted and it has nothing to do with beliefs, assumptions or presuppositions. The amount of evidence out there is impossible to ignore unless you're being intellectually dishonest. Not only that, you have to dream up an unfalsifiable global conspiracy for the ad hoc FEH to be even remotely plausible. Without it, FEH doesn't even get off the ground.

Yet we have convincing proofs that are contrary to the assumption (Pre-supposition) that you start with; that is that the earth is a rapidly spinning globe

Please list these 'convincing proofs' without your irrelevant commentary. We don't need to hear an origin story of where you heard of it.

*

Dog

  • 1162
  • Literally a dog
In other words you believe what you believe because you have been taught to believe it.

Ah the classic "You're all sheep who don't do actual science. You gobble it up out of textbooks". You really are new here aren't you? Why don't you take a stroll through old threads and see how the classic arguments get destroyed. Maybe you'll come up with something new.


Oh, and we're still waiting for that evidence....

This is by far the most ignorant attempt to provide any sort of aid to the flat earth argument, that I have ever come across. There is litterally "0" validation to any of your presented arguments. You continually throw out these very bizzar assumptions and "theories" as if they alone stand to discredit any physical, real and tangible evidence countering your claims. Both sides of any debate must provide evidence to back their hypothesis for it to be held as, and remain valid. The whole reason why this flat earth model (in my opinion) does not work, is because there is no consistency. There is no analysis backed up with hard data to support any claims. Every supposed proof of the flat earth can be discredit, by much superior explanations that, are in fact, supported by real and tangible evidence. Your given hypothesis is incalculable. It cannot be proven by unbiased experimentation or reference. As for the excuse I saw someone provide for the lack of testing on this model (namely being that they haven't had time to build a working theoretical basis?), the flat earth ideology has been around long before we discovered that the earth is round. This is an OUTDATED theory. One which has been consistently inconsistent with observation and experimentation. Also, PLEEEEASE explain to me how believing in a round earth is a pre supposition, and yet your own ideals be identified as fact? I don't understand your logic at all. I understand the whole
 argument that you sense a flat world, therefore the earth must be flat, but one thing which is never brought into consideration on the matter, are the associated psychology, biochemistry, physics, etc. You cannot trust your senses and intuition alone. The human brain is an amazingly deceptive piece of bio machinery. Not to mention the nervous system and every other physiological aspect of the senses. You need to apply logic and open-mindedness to your efforts in understanding the world and your place in it. I personally hate rules and restrictions, more of the rebel type if you will. So by my very nature I cannot conform to the restrictive, tasteless and unimaginative model of the flat earth. If I combine that fundamental intuition which is engrained in me (that the flat earth is bullshit), and I combine that with the FACT that, since the only reality I can know is real, is that which I observe through my own experience, then I'm going to say that the earth is indeed, NOT FLAT. I won't say what it is, because I have never seen it but from above, but I will say that in MY reality, I do believe the earth is round, we experience gravity due to the fundamental, additively-attractive force of gravity, the sun sets because the earth is rotating on its axis, we experience seasons because that rotational axis is also rotational, the moon averages 300,000km from earth, the sun is so far away that it takes 8 minutes for light to get to us on earth traveling at 299,792,458m/s^2, the coriolis effect is cause by the earth's rotation beneath the flight path of the projectile, and unfortunately, people like you exist. Sorry for the insane runon sentence there. That was nuts.

My translation of your post: "I believe (meaning you) in the helio-centric theory because I have swallowed (figuratively speaking of course) all thte of "theories" and beliefs that my teachers have placed on my "educational" spoon. I note the word "believe" scattered throughout your statement. Yet we have convincing proofs that are contrary to the assumption (Pre-supposition) that you start with; that is that the earth is a rapidly spinning globe. IF the earth is a spinning globe then it follows that all that you said is true. But if one starts with neither supposition (that the earth is either a flat disc or a spinning glove) then the arguments become equal for a spinning globe or a flat disc. But if one starts off with a pre-supposition that the earth is a round globe then of course one will prove it.

In other words you believe what you believe because you have been taught to believe it.
And yet again you only prove how absolutely foolish you are. To assume that I am incapable of coming to my own personal beliefs without external influence only proves to me that there's no debate to be had with you folk. You are seemingly grounded in your dumbfounding approach to explain what's already been explained through tedious and countless efforts throughout history. It is no different a mentality than I would expect any religious follower to posess. See with science comes this thing they call integrity. It's basically a measurement of competency and reliability over time, with deterministic accuracy. If a theory is unreliable then it simply does us no good. So that's why we have these theories that we do have, they are consistent, they agree with observation and can be manipulated so as to determine the result of some action. These theories are backed up by time and again reliably proven results, and anybody with a little curiosity and effort can experiment themselvesrather than rely on any outside influence. All that you have done here is argue that your theory is the correct theory but you have not presented one single shred of tangible evidence to prove your claims. Just as a priest would proclaim the existence of God without proof, you are being blindly mislead by your trust in mistrusting the world. I mean think about this for a second: no conspiracy on this scale can successfully operate without help from a multitude of contributors, large to small. Every single one of these people would have to keep this gigantic secret and how many people do you know how are good at keeping a secret? Especially if there's personal gain to be made from sharing those secrets. This alleged conspiracy that you propose is fundamentally flawed in that it relies solely on speculation and supposition not to mention completely hypocritical from the ground up. Until I see some convincing proof, as you continually mention there exists, I will continue to question your sanity and your usefulness to our species. I'm quite open to concepts and outside the box ways of thinking, but I disapprove of your yours for it is nothing to be admired.  What's that expression by that one guy? Something about don't argue with an idiot because they'll drag you down to their level and then beat you with experience. That basically sums this up right here, there's no getting logic through to you.
“Advances are made by answering questions. Discoveries are made by questioning answers.”
-Bernhard Haisch, Astrophysicist


A rotating sphere is simply not supported by the weight of science

When you throw out 99% of science and rely on looking out your window for scientific experimentation.

*

Sir Richard

  • Flat Earth Believer
  • 451


ved up so far is rhetoric. You haven't offered any evidence for anything you've asserted.

Your attempt at being derisive to people who accept a RE is laughable to put it lightly. There are very compelling reasons the RE model is accepted and it has nothing to do with beliefs, assumptions or presuppositions. The amount of evidence out there is impossible to ignore unless you're being intellectually dishonest. Not only that, you have to dream up an unfalsifiable global conspiracy for the ad hoc FEH to be even remotely plausible. Without it, FEH doesn't even get off the ground.


My apologies if, upon occasion, I appear to be deriding someone's sincerely held beliefs.  It was not my intention I can assure you. With regards to global conspiracy I believe that word is to strong.  For example of a secret that was kept through successive governments, leaders of such and secretaries of the United Kingdom: MI6 which was, apparently founded in 1906 or there about. Until the 10th decade of the previous century the existence of MI6 was denied, even under oath, by  governmental officials. Just think on that numerous Liberal, Tory and Conservative governments, heads of States with differing personalities and temperament, various foreign adventures and not once did the government admit of such.

Was this a conspiracy, yes, but not a conspiracy of the kind I do believe you refer to. The leaders of the government (the few who KNEW of MI6, not merely suspected its existence) kept it a secret for the protection of the public and so it could accomplish its deeds.

This is the nature of the "conspiracy" if conspiracy it is. Btw there were a few brave souls who tried to expose MI6 (including former agents) who were pilloried and ridiculed (and sued in one case) for their trouble.
"Ideas are more powerful than guns. We would not let our enemies have guns, why should we let them have ideas?"  J Stalin

"It is not the people that vote that count it is the people that count the votes" J Stalin

*

Blue_Moon

  • 846
  • Defender of NASA


ved up so far is rhetoric. You haven't offered any evidence for anything you've asserted.

Your attempt at being derisive to people who accept a RE is laughable to put it lightly. There are very compelling reasons the RE model is accepted and it has nothing to do with beliefs, assumptions or presuppositions. The amount of evidence out there is impossible to ignore unless you're being intellectually dishonest. Not only that, you have to dream up an unfalsifiable global conspiracy for the ad hoc FEH to be even remotely plausible. Without it, FEH doesn't even get off the ground.


My apologies if, upon occasion, I appear to be deriding someone's sincerely held beliefs.  It was not my intention I can assure you. With regards to global conspiracy I believe that word is to strong.  For example of a secret that was kept through successive governments, leaders of such and secretaries of the United Kingdom: MI6 which was, apparently founded in 1906 or there about. Until the 10th decade of the previous century the existence of MI6 was denied, even under oath, by  governmental officials. Just think on that numerous Liberal, Tory and Conservative governments, heads of States with differing personalities and temperament, various foreign adventures and not once did the government admit of such.

Was this a conspiracy, yes, but not a conspiracy of the kind I do believe you refer to. The leaders of the government (the few who KNEW of MI6, not merely suspected its existence) kept it a secret for the protection of the public and so it could accomplish its deeds.

This is the nature of the "conspiracy" if conspiracy it is. Btw there were a few brave souls who tried to expose MI6 (including former agents) who were pilloried and ridiculed (and sued in one case) for their trouble.
The difference is that the space agencies have been providing information, not hiding it.  MI6 was trying to remain as secretive as possible.  NASA's images are public domain. 
Aerospace Engineering Student
NASA Enthusiast
Round Earth Advocate
More qualified to speak for NASA than you are to speak against them

*

Sir Richard

  • Flat Earth Believer
  • 451


ved up so far is rhetoric. You haven't offered any evidence for anything you've asserted.

Your attempt at being derisive to people who accept a RE is laughable to put it lightly. There are very compelling reasons the RE model is accepted and it has nothing to do with beliefs, assumptions or presuppositions. The amount of evidence out there is impossible to ignore unless you're being intellectually dishonest. Not only that, you have to dream up an unfalsifiable global conspiracy for the ad hoc FEH to be even remotely plausible. Without it, FEH doesn't even get off the ground.

The difference is that the space agencies have been providing information, not hiding it.  MI6 was trying to remain as secretive as possible.  NASA's images are public domain.

Yes but this is an improve as the saying goes "There is no better place to hide than in plain sight"
And as Churchill most famously said
"Truth is so precious that she should always be attended by a bodyguard of lies"
"Ideas are more powerful than guns. We would not let our enemies have guns, why should we let them have ideas?"  J Stalin

"It is not the people that vote that count it is the people that count the votes" J Stalin

Was this a conspiracy, yes, but not a conspiracy of the kind I do believe you refer to. The leaders of the government (the few who KNEW of MI6, not merely suspected its existence) kept it a secret for the protection of the public and so it could accomplish its deeds.
The existence of MI6 was not a secret - you only had to watch a James Bond film.  They denied it just for the sake of tradition, not secrecy.

Quote
Btw there were a few brave souls who tried to expose MI6 (including former agents) who were pilloried and ridiculed (and sued in one case) for their trouble.
Expose MI6?  Probably the most famous, or at least second most famous, intelligence service in the world?  What are you talking about?
Quote from: mikeman7918
a single photon can pass through two sluts

Quote from: Chicken Fried Clucker
if Donald Trump stuck his penis in me after trying on clothes I would have that date and time burned in my head.

?

palmerito0

  • 582
  • Why does this forum exist?
Still waiting for the evidence.
Heiwa on the impossibility of space travel:

There are no toilets up there and sex is also a problem, just to mention a few difficulties.

WHEEEEEEEEEEE



ved up so far is rhetoric. You haven't offered any evidence for anything you've asserted.

Your attempt at being derisive to people who accept a RE is laughable to put it lightly. There are very compelling reasons the RE model is accepted and it has nothing to do with beliefs, assumptions or presuppositions. The amount of evidence out there is impossible to ignore unless you're being intellectually dishonest. Not only that, you have to dream up an unfalsifiable global conspiracy for the ad hoc FEH to be even remotely plausible. Without it, FEH doesn't even get off the ground.


My apologies if, upon occasion, I appear to be deriding someone's sincerely held beliefs.  It was not my intention I can assure you. With regards to global conspiracy I believe that word is to strong.  For example of a secret that was kept through successive governments, leaders of such and secretaries of the United Kingdom: MI6 which was, apparently founded in 1906 or there about. Until the 10th decade of the previous century the existence of MI6 was denied, even under oath, by  governmental officials. Just think on that numerous Liberal, Tory and Conservative governments, heads of States with differing personalities and temperament, various foreign adventures and not once did the government admit of such.

Was this a conspiracy, yes, but not a conspiracy of the kind I do believe you refer to. The leaders of the government (the few who KNEW of MI6, not merely suspected its existence) kept it a secret for the protection of the public and so it could accomplish its deeds.

This is the nature of the "conspiracy" if conspiracy it is. Btw there were a few brave souls who tried to expose MI6 (including former agents) who were pilloried and ridiculed (and sued in one case) for their trouble.
We all understand that no government is honest to the public, and of course people should be skeptical of the massive amounts of perverted information that's abound. But a highly secretive nature and attempted concealment of a national security agency  does not mean that the entire world is blind and the earth is flat. Please offer up something that can be supported with statistics or some kind of physical evidence that will support your argument and credibility to your statements. For example: I am on my way to becoming a computer engineer. I design circuits and devices on paper before I impliment any real application of those circuits. I do this because there are sets of rules and combinations of logical calculations which will tell me before I've constructed anything, whether my circuits will function as intended. If not, it's back to the drawing board, if they comply with the rules of computational logic and electromagnetic theory, then they can be constructed and will function as desired. I know from my own experience this is true and mathematics will provide me with support to validate my claims when describing how a circuit will operate. You need to apply the same concept to this topic and back up your claims with some unbiased method of support (math). I am still so far from convinced I may just make up my own "theory" about an inverted spherical earth because, it's possible. I'd still take that over your flat earth model.
“Advances are made by answering questions. Discoveries are made by questioning answers.”
-Bernhard Haisch, Astrophysicist