Den Pressure - A Definable Hypothesis & Experiments (Scepti, iWitness)

  • 3822 Replies
  • 824188 Views
*

sceptimatic

  • Flat Earth Scientist
  • 30076
  • +3/-4
Re: Den Pressure - A Definable Hypothesis & Experiments (Scepti, iWitness)
« Reply #810 on: August 24, 2016, 09:03:53 AM »
Has Den pressure been defined in this thread?

What is den pressure?
Denpressure is the reality of the fictional gravity.

*

sceptimatic

  • Flat Earth Scientist
  • 30076
  • +3/-4
Re: Den Pressure - A Definable Hypothesis & Experiments (Scepti, iWitness)
« Reply #811 on: August 24, 2016, 09:05:58 AM »
Has Den pressure been defined in this thread?

What is den pressure?

As far as I can understand it from the ramblings, den pressure is a way to explain weight from air pressure, rather than from gravity.

But since an object does not become lighter if you lower its surrounding air pressure, this is a ludicrous idea.
How do you know?

*

Omega

  • 929
  • +0/-0
  • Debating honestly even if no-one else will
Re: Den Pressure - A Definable Hypothesis & Experiments (Scepti, iWitness)
« Reply #812 on: August 24, 2016, 09:13:02 AM »
I have observed this many times.
Only thing round in FE is its circular logic.

*

sceptimatic

  • Flat Earth Scientist
  • 30076
  • +3/-4
Re: Den Pressure - A Definable Hypothesis & Experiments (Scepti, iWitness)
« Reply #813 on: August 24, 2016, 09:13:24 AM »
Drop an object in a near perfect vacuum is as close as we can get to completely removing friction and drag.

 Which I think is quite well demonstrated in this video

That experiment, or so called experiment is a complete and utter load of garbage.

*

sceptimatic

  • Flat Earth Scientist
  • 30076
  • +3/-4
Re: Den Pressure - A Definable Hypothesis & Experiments (Scepti, iWitness)
« Reply #814 on: August 24, 2016, 09:17:32 AM »
I have observed this many times.
Of course you have. People like you generally come out with this gunk.

*

Crouton

  • Flat Earth Inspector General of High Fashion Crimes and Misdemeanors
  • 17037
  • +5/-4
  • He who walks away from Omelas
Re: Den Pressure - A Definable Hypothesis & Experiments (Scepti, iWitness)
« Reply #815 on: August 24, 2016, 09:19:00 AM »
How can there be an 800+ number of posts in a thread about the theory that stuff has weight because of the air?

Even here?

I mean: the mantra of FEers seems to be: 'I only believe what I can observe'. Has any FEer observed something become less heavy when the air pressure drops?

I have seen many experiments in near vacuum conditions. At no point did the test matter float up or show any other behavior that suggests a decrease in weight. Has anyone here observed anything like that at all?

Drop an object in a near perfect vacuum is as close as we can get to completely removing friction and drag.

 Which I think is quite well demonstrated in this video

That experiment, or so called experiment is a complete and utter load of garbage.

Yep, that's what we've been having to put up with for 800+ posts now.

His courage to keep persevering even in the face of overwhelming evidence of every kind is almost inspiring really.  I think they might make a movie of his life one day.
Intelligentia et magnanimitas vincvnt violentiam et desperationem.
The truth behind NASA's budget

?

zork

  • 3338
  • +0/-0
Re: Den Pressure - A Definable Hypothesis & Experiments (Scepti, iWitness)
« Reply #816 on: August 24, 2016, 09:19:17 AM »
Drop an object in a near perfect vacuum is as close as we can get to completely removing friction and drag.

 Which I think is quite well demonstrated in this video

That experiment, or so called experiment is a complete and utter load of garbage.
But it is experiment which you can do if you have access to that chamber. Again, you can design your own experiment which shows how your stuff works and which is not a complete and utter load of garbage. We all are waiting.
« Last Edit: August 24, 2016, 09:21:08 AM by zork »
Rowbotham had bad eyesight
-
http://thulescientific.com/Lynch%20Curvature%202008.pdf - Visually discerning the curvature of the Earth
http://thulescientific.com/TurbulentShipWakes_Lynch_AO_2005.pdf - Turbulent ship wakes:further evidence that the Earth is round.

*

sceptimatic

  • Flat Earth Scientist
  • 30076
  • +3/-4
Re: Den Pressure - A Definable Hypothesis & Experiments (Scepti, iWitness)
« Reply #817 on: August 24, 2016, 09:23:09 AM »
How can there be an 800+ number of posts in a thread about the theory that stuff has weight because of the air?

Even here?

I mean: the mantra of FEers seems to be: 'I only believe what I can observe'. Has any FEer observed something become less heavy when the air pressure drops?

I have seen many experiments in near vacuum conditions. At no point did the test matter float up or show any other behavior that suggests a decrease in weight. Has anyone here observed anything like that at all?

Drop an object in a near perfect vacuum is as close as we can get to completely removing friction and drag.

 Which I think is quite well demonstrated in this video

That experiment, or so called experiment is a complete and utter load of garbage.

Yep, that's what we've been having to put up with for 800+ posts now.

His courage to keep persevering even in the face of overwhelming evidence of every kind is almost inspiring really.  I think they might make a movie of his life one day.
I don't need a movie of my life. I'd be happy if people would actually just wake up to the fact that they've been well and truly duped with stories of fiction that they are bullied into accepting as reality.
The bullying is a mild form of bullying. It's called brainwashing.

*

markjo

  • Content Nazi
  • 45133
  • +92/-135
Re: Den Pressure - A Definable Hypothesis & Experiments (Scepti, iWitness)
« Reply #818 on: August 24, 2016, 09:30:48 AM »
Oh, ok, so tell me what exactly INERTIA is.
***PRIMAL SCREAM*** This thread is a perfect example of intellectual inertia: your resistance to understanding the definition of inertia.
So inertia is really just resistance. Why can't resistance just be used?
Because inertia is a very special kind of resistance and shouldn't be confused with other kinds of resistance.
Ahhh, so it's a magical resistance, is it?
Do you believe that there is only one kind of resistance that works the same way in every situation or do you believe that there can be different kinds of resistance that work in different ways in different situation?
Science is what happens when preconception meets verification.
Quote from: Robosteve
Besides, perhaps FET is a conspiracy too.
Quote from: bullhorn
It is just the way it is, you understanding it doesn't concern me.

*

Crouton

  • Flat Earth Inspector General of High Fashion Crimes and Misdemeanors
  • 17037
  • +5/-4
  • He who walks away from Omelas
Re: Den Pressure - A Definable Hypothesis & Experiments (Scepti, iWitness)
« Reply #819 on: August 24, 2016, 09:31:04 AM »
How can there be an 800+ number of posts in a thread about the theory that stuff has weight because of the air?

Even here?

I mean: the mantra of FEers seems to be: 'I only believe what I can observe'. Has any FEer observed something become less heavy when the air pressure drops?

I have seen many experiments in near vacuum conditions. At no point did the test matter float up or show any other behavior that suggests a decrease in weight. Has anyone here observed anything like that at all?

Drop an object in a near perfect vacuum is as close as we can get to completely removing friction and drag.

 Which I think is quite well demonstrated in this video

That experiment, or so called experiment is a complete and utter load of garbage.

Yep, that's what we've been having to put up with for 800+ posts now.

His courage to keep persevering even in the face of overwhelming evidence of every kind is almost inspiring really.  I think they might make a movie of his life one day.
I don't need a movie of my life. I'd be happy if people would actually just wake up to the fact that they've been well and truly duped with stories of fiction that they are bullied into accepting as reality.
The bullying is a mild form of bullying. It's called brainwashing.
How can you be sure that you're not the one doing the bullying? 

How can you be sure that they're not the ones that have been duped?

How do you know you're the hero of this story?
Intelligentia et magnanimitas vincvnt violentiam et desperationem.
The truth behind NASA's budget

*

sceptimatic

  • Flat Earth Scientist
  • 30076
  • +3/-4
Re: Den Pressure - A Definable Hypothesis & Experiments (Scepti, iWitness)
« Reply #820 on: August 24, 2016, 09:36:18 AM »
Oh, ok, so tell me what exactly INERTIA is.
***PRIMAL SCREAM*** This thread is a perfect example of intellectual inertia: your resistance to understanding the definition of inertia.
So inertia is really just resistance. Why can't resistance just be used?
Because inertia is a very special kind of resistance and shouldn't be confused with other kinds of resistance.
Ahhh, so it's a magical resistance, is it?
Do you believe that there is only one kind of resistance that works the same way in every situation or do you believe that there can be different kinds of resistance that work in different ways in different situation?
Resistance is the same for anything. It might differ in terms of how it shows but the overall concept is exactly the same.

For instance: Water resistance and ice resistance or oil resistance or resistance in extreme low pressure environments - to the eye, are all different.
The reality is they all do exactly the same thing which is resist a force applied; always.

Unless you have some magical concept that you can prove me wrong with.

*

sceptimatic

  • Flat Earth Scientist
  • 30076
  • +3/-4
Re: Den Pressure - A Definable Hypothesis & Experiments (Scepti, iWitness)
« Reply #821 on: August 24, 2016, 09:44:43 AM »
How can you be sure that you're not the one doing the bullying? 
Maybe I am bullying. Maybe I'm bullying you people; the globalists because I'm reacting to similar en-mass.
How can you be sure that they're not the ones that have been duped?
It takes a very small amount of common sense and ability to observe outside of the box to understand who's being duped.
People who believe in a spinning ball in space and all the crap that goes with it are 100% duped.
How do you know you're the hero of this story?
I don't want to be any hero. I want you all to be heroes, if that's how you construe it. By that it means you wake up in some capacity and see the bullshit you've had to endure.

?

Master_Evar

  • 3381
  • +0/-0
  • Well rounded character
Re: Den Pressure - A Definable Hypothesis & Experiments (Scepti, iWitness)
« Reply #822 on: August 24, 2016, 09:50:07 AM »
sceptimatic, could you please for the x:th time explain to me your model of the atom and molecules?
I am eagerly awaiting your response.
@sceptimatic, could you please provide your explanation?
Math is the language of the universe.

The inability to explain something is not proof of something else.

We don't speak for reality - we only observe it. An observation can have any cause, but it is still no more than just an observation.

When in doubt; sources!

*

Crouton

  • Flat Earth Inspector General of High Fashion Crimes and Misdemeanors
  • 17037
  • +5/-4
  • He who walks away from Omelas
Re: Den Pressure - A Definable Hypothesis & Experiments (Scepti, iWitness)
« Reply #823 on: August 24, 2016, 10:03:33 AM »
It takes a very small amount of common sense and ability to observe outside of the box to understand who's being duped.
People who believe in a spinning ball in space and all the crap that goes with it are 100% duped.

No, personal incredulity is not an argument.  How do you know you're right?
Intelligentia et magnanimitas vincvnt violentiam et desperationem.
The truth behind NASA's budget

*

markjo

  • Content Nazi
  • 45133
  • +92/-135
Re: Den Pressure - A Definable Hypothesis & Experiments (Scepti, iWitness)
« Reply #824 on: August 24, 2016, 10:09:43 AM »
Oh, ok, so tell me what exactly INERTIA is.
***PRIMAL SCREAM*** This thread is a perfect example of intellectual inertia: your resistance to understanding the definition of inertia.
So inertia is really just resistance. Why can't resistance just be used?
Because inertia is a very special kind of resistance and shouldn't be confused with other kinds of resistance.
Ahhh, so it's a magical resistance, is it?
Do you believe that there is only one kind of resistance that works the same way in every situation or do you believe that there can be different kinds of resistance that work in different ways in different situation?
Resistance is the same for anything. It might differ in terms of how it shows but the overall concept is exactly the same.

For instance: Water resistance and ice resistance or oil resistance or resistance in extreme low pressure environments - to the eye, are all different.
The reality is they all do exactly the same thing which is resist a force applied; always.
So you're saying that friction is the only kind of resistance that there is, correct?

Unless you have some magical concept that you can prove me wrong with.
If by "magical concept" you mean "common sense", then yes, inertia is a magical concept.

Seriously, I believe that you're over thinking what inertia means.  Again, inertia is simply the abstract property of thing to want to keep moving in the same direction and same speed (even if that speed is zero) when there are no external forces (like resistance or friction) acting on them.

If you can imagine molecules expanding or compressing as they move in or out of a chamber, then I don't understand why you can't imagine a friction/resistance free environment.
Science is what happens when preconception meets verification.
Quote from: Robosteve
Besides, perhaps FET is a conspiracy too.
Quote from: bullhorn
It is just the way it is, you understanding it doesn't concern me.

*

Omega

  • 929
  • +0/-0
  • Debating honestly even if no-one else will
Re: Den Pressure - A Definable Hypothesis & Experiments (Scepti, iWitness)
« Reply #825 on: August 24, 2016, 10:11:42 AM »
Well, sceptomatic has at least a point when he says our universe is so wonderous that it is hard to accept how it works if you don't have the proper training and education.

Physics turned out to be more compex and at the same time more elegant than most of us expected.

But we are in trouble if we don't believe things we personally could not imagine.

Fifty years ago, no one could have imagined an iPad. And here I am, typing on one, battling autocorrect.

Another thing nobody would have imagined fifty years ago.
Only thing round in FE is its circular logic.

*

TheRealBillNye

  • 1224
  • +0/-0
Re: Den Pressure - A Definable Hypothesis & Experiments (Scepti, iWitness)
« Reply #826 on: August 24, 2016, 01:42:24 PM »
Drop an object in a near perfect vacuum is as close as we can get to completely removing friction and drag.

 Which I think is quite well demonstrated in this video

That experiment, or so called experiment is a complete and utter load of garbage.

What's garbage about it? How did the objects fall at the same rate?

We see you dismissing science outright, would you care to explain your reasoning?

?

Woody

  • 1144
  • +0/-0
Re: Den Pressure - A Definable Hypothesis & Experiments (Scepti, iWitness)
« Reply #827 on: August 24, 2016, 03:27:54 PM »
Drop an object in a near perfect vacuum is as close as we can get to completely removing friction and drag.

 Which I think is quite well demonstrated in this video

That experiment, or so called experiment is a complete and utter load of garbage.

What's garbage about it? How did the objects fall at the same rate?

We see you dismissing science outright, would you care to explain your reasoning?

We already know his reasoning.

It says he is wrong.  Since he believes he can not be wrong the video is complete and utter garbage.

Same reason no person can create a near vacuum in his model.  If they could he is proven wrong.


*

SpJunk

  • 577
  • +0/-0
Re: Den Pressure - A Definable Hypothesis & Experiments (Scepti, iWitness)
« Reply #828 on: August 24, 2016, 09:12:56 PM »
So basically inertia does not exist.

Doesn't exist?
You are doing this on purpose, just to get more attention.

If it doesn't exist, what makes you fly through windshield in car crash?
Why don't you just stop same as the car?
Maybe because your body still keeps its speed as a result of inertia?

Have you tried experiment with vacuum rag holder on botom side of glass shelf?
I which direction atmospheric pressure presses the holder to not fall off the shelf?
"If the facts don't fit the theory, change the facts." - Albert Einstein

"Your lack of simplicity is main reason why not many people would bother to try to understand you." - S.M.

*

Aliveandkicking

  • 1100
  • +0/-0
Re: Den Pressure - A Definable Hypothesis & Experiments (Scepti, iWitness)
« Reply #829 on: August 24, 2016, 09:37:47 PM »
So basically inertia does not exist.

Inertia is just a word to explain that making things move requires work, stopping things requires work, and making moving things move differently requires work.

We do not live in a something for nothing world and so things need work to behave differently.

So a boat takes 1 minute to begin moving at 10 knots, and other things being equal the same amount of work has to be performed to get the boat to stop which requires 1 minute to stop the boat.

The word inertia does not have to be used to explain what can be explained in more words but humans prefer to do less work.

If the idea of inertia was never discovered nothing would have changed.   However, supposedly hundreds of years ago, it was a novel idea that a moving object would continue moving for ever unless work was done upon it to stop it.   Supposedly at the time it was thought objects always needed work to be done to keep moving.


« Last Edit: August 24, 2016, 10:23:23 PM by Aliveandkicking »

*

rabinoz

  • 26528
  • +0/-0
  • Real Earth Believer
Re: Den Pressure - A Definable Hypothesis & Experiments (Scepti, iWitness)
« Reply #830 on: August 24, 2016, 09:38:50 PM »
Has Den pressure been defined in this thread?

What is den pressure?
;) That's easy! "Den pressure" is like "peer pressure", only between young in the same "den".  ;)
Well, it does make as much sense as "denpressure".

*

rabinoz

  • 26528
  • +0/-0
  • Real Earth Believer
Re: Den Pressure - A Definable Hypothesis & Experiments (Scepti, iWitness)
« Reply #831 on: August 24, 2016, 09:51:48 PM »

Because inertia is NOT "just" resistance!
So inertia is a resistance to a force.
So resistance is the word we require for reality.
The problem is we are not allowed to deal in reality so that's why inertia is used, because inertia  can be used in a few ways to basically scramble people's brains and yet to this very day, when asked about inertia as to what it is, it really can't be explained. It's like gravity and many other silly magical processes. It's there to simply baffle people and simply get them to follow the bullshit because they feel embarrassed to question it enough.
I do believe that I explained as carefully and patiently as I could that "inertia is NOT 'just' resistance!"
Simply because there are many causes of resistance to motion that have nothing to do with inertia.
So of course we need separate for "inertia" and "resistance".

What you are saying is that "dogs" are "animals" so we don't need the word "dog" in reality, we should just use "animal" instead.

*

Aliveandkicking

  • 1100
  • +0/-0
Re: Den Pressure - A Definable Hypothesis & Experiments (Scepti, iWitness)
« Reply #832 on: August 24, 2016, 10:32:18 PM »

Because inertia is NOT "just" resistance!
So inertia is a resistance to a force.
So resistance is the word we require for reality.
The problem is we are not allowed to deal in reality so that's why inertia is used, because inertia  can be used in a few ways to basically scramble people's brains and yet to this very day, when asked about inertia as to what it is, it really can't be explained. It's like gravity and many other silly magical processes. It's there to simply baffle people and simply get them to follow the bullshit because they feel embarrassed to question it enough.
I do believe that I explained as carefully and patiently as I could that "inertia is NOT 'just' resistance!"
Simply because there are many causes of resistance to motion that have nothing to do with inertia.
So of course we need separate for "inertia" and "resistance".

What you are saying is that "dogs" are "animals" so we don't need the word "dog" in reality, we should just use "animal" instead.

Does this conversation have an official dictionary?

Resistance is used in psychotherapy, where importantly if there were no resistant or resistive patients there would be no need for psychotherapy.

Yes Inertia is not just resistance to motion, it is also resistance to changing direction of and speed of motion.

Inertia involves work and resistance involves work.

Therapy involves work and resistance.   Is therapy working with inertia?   

Is this conversation working with therapy resistance and inertia?

*

sceptimatic

  • Flat Earth Scientist
  • 30076
  • +3/-4
Re: Den Pressure - A Definable Hypothesis & Experiments (Scepti, iWitness)
« Reply #833 on: August 25, 2016, 01:12:00 AM »

So you're saying that friction is the only kind of resistance that there is, correct?


If by "magical concept" you mean "common sense", then yes, inertia is a magical concept.
Inertia is certainly not common sense and it is magical. It's magical because it's just another bullshit saying to help try to clarify the rest of the bullshit that gets offered.
They all go hand in hand.

Seriously, I believe that you're over thinking what inertia means.  Again, inertia is simply the abstract property of thing to want to keep moving in the same direction and same speed (even if that speed is zero) when there are no external forces (like resistance or friction) acting on them.
There's always forces acting on everything. I've already explained this earlier.
Something wanting to move in the same direction is supposedly inertia. It makes absolutely no sense at all.
Inertia is just used for any and every concept.
"oh, why doesn't that move?"....INERTIA.
"Why does that keep moving?"....INERTIA.

The reason why anything moves or is hard to move is all down to resistance.
If you can imagine molecules expanding or compressing as they move in or out of a chamber, then I don't understand why you can't imagine a friction/resistance free environment.
Because molecules expanding and compressing are all under friction. They all RESIST each other. There is no free movement, EVER.

*

Aliveandkicking

  • 1100
  • +0/-0
Re: Den Pressure - A Definable Hypothesis & Experiments (Scepti, iWitness)
« Reply #834 on: August 25, 2016, 01:26:52 AM »

So you're saying that friction is the only kind of resistance that there is, correct?


If by "magical concept" you mean "common sense", then yes, inertia is a magical concept.
Inertia is certainly not common sense and it is magical. It's magical because it's just another bullshit saying to help try to clarify the rest of the bullshit that gets offered.
They all go hand in hand.

Seriously, I believe that you're over thinking what inertia means.  Again, inertia is simply the abstract property of thing to want to keep moving in the same direction and same speed (even if that speed is zero) when there are no external forces (like resistance or friction) acting on them.
There's always forces acting on everything. I've already explained this earlier.
Something wanting to move in the same direction is supposedly inertia. It makes absolutely no sense at all.
Inertia is just used for any and every concept.
"oh, why doesn't that move?"....INERTIA.
"Why does that keep moving?"....INERTIA.

The reason why anything moves or is hard to move is all down to resistance.
If you can imagine molecules expanding or compressing as they move in or out of a chamber, then I don't understand why you can't imagine a friction/resistance free environment.
Because molecules expanding and compressing are all under friction. They all RESIST each other. There is no free movement, EVER.

If we swim thru treacle and then swim thru water we can see that in one our movement is freer than the other.

The question here is are you able to imagine moving in a friction free environment?    It is not a question of physics but rather one of imagination.  Can you imagine it as it is imagined by Markjo?

Markjo is imagining a friction free environment.  You have not begun to imagine that yet.  Instead you are dealing with facts about the real world where we can suppose there is no friction free environment ever.

Reality may limit us, but our imaginations cannot limit us.

Can you imagine a friction free environment?
« Last Edit: August 25, 2016, 01:28:26 AM by Aliveandkicking »

?

fliggs

  • 567
  • +0/-0
Re: Den Pressure - A Definable Hypothesis & Experiments (Scepti, iWitness)
« Reply #835 on: August 25, 2016, 01:32:13 AM »
Drop an object in a near perfect vacuum is as close as we can get to completely removing friction and drag.

 Which I think is quite well demonstrated in this video

That experiment, or so called experiment is a complete and utter load of garbage.

Because it completely debunks denpressure? Or is your standard position to deny any and all evidence contrary to your position as faked?

*

sceptimatic

  • Flat Earth Scientist
  • 30076
  • +3/-4
Re: Den Pressure - A Definable Hypothesis & Experiments (Scepti, iWitness)
« Reply #836 on: August 25, 2016, 01:32:45 AM »
Well, sceptomatic has at least a point when he says our universe is so wonderous that it is hard to accept how it works if you don't have the proper training and education.
No, I don't say our universe is anything at all. I'll say that our cell/world that we live in can be fantastic. As for universe, nobody knows what it is except for the story books and reflective pictures they believe is a universe.
Physics turned out to be more compex and at the same time more elegant than most of us expected.
Physics is only as complex as people make it. It could all be simple if people stopped making simplicity appear super complex.
But we are in trouble if we don't believe things we personally could not imagine.
Being able to imagine something can work both ways. If you have a mind of your own or you have a mind to follow the minds of others who may or may not be mindful of what reality is.
Fifty years ago, no one could have imagined an iPad. And here I am, typing on one, battling autocorrect.

Another thing nobody would have imagined fifty years ago.
So you're using an ipad. It's called learning and adding as you go.
Anyone can imagine anything but it doesn't mean that it becomes reality.

I blame star trek and star wars for the way many people's minds are, in terms of so called space and all the pathetically made up so called physics that supposedly push it as reality.
Some people who can be stood out as extremely clever, could tell you all you need to know about the workings of the star ship enterprise, right down to the colour of Kirk's socks, etc.

What are they describing? Reality?
The trouble is they absorb into it all as a reality. They do it as a release from the actual reality they are part of. They could convince people that all this star trek crap was real and many people would buy into it.

This is exactly what's happening in the world from the past to the present. It's just stories of fiction mixed in with reality.
Most people don't want to veer off course from that because fantasy stories can be exciting and magical, as well as scary in terms of fictional world obliterating weapons and what not.

The reality of what life actually is can be a massive come down to many, or a fascinating insight to some.


*

sceptimatic

  • Flat Earth Scientist
  • 30076
  • +3/-4
Re: Den Pressure - A Definable Hypothesis & Experiments (Scepti, iWitness)
« Reply #837 on: August 25, 2016, 01:35:02 AM »
Drop an object in a near perfect vacuum is as close as we can get to completely removing friction and drag.

 Which I think is quite well demonstrated in this video

That experiment, or so called experiment is a complete and utter load of garbage.

What's garbage about it? How did the objects fall at the same rate?

We see you dismissing science outright, would you care to explain your reasoning?
Take a good look at the footage and see the bullshit for yourself. I won't bother explaining it because you people simply go into denial mode and idol mode where these so called pretend professors are concerned.

?

fliggs

  • 567
  • +0/-0
Re: Den Pressure - A Definable Hypothesis & Experiments (Scepti, iWitness)
« Reply #838 on: August 25, 2016, 01:36:19 AM »
And still no explanation from scepti-moron about his understanding of atoms and molecules. If he ever deigns to answer it will of course be total garbage, but it could be entertaining to here him describe how molecules 'expand' to fill free space.

*

sceptimatic

  • Flat Earth Scientist
  • 30076
  • +3/-4
Re: Den Pressure - A Definable Hypothesis & Experiments (Scepti, iWitness)
« Reply #839 on: August 25, 2016, 01:37:38 AM »
Drop an object in a near perfect vacuum is as close as we can get to completely removing friction and drag.

 Which I think is quite well demonstrated in this video

That experiment, or so called experiment is a complete and utter load of garbage.

What's garbage about it? How did the objects fall at the same rate?

We see you dismissing science outright, would you care to explain your reasoning?

We already know his reasoning.

It says he is wrong.  Since he believes he can not be wrong the video is complete and utter garbage.

Same reason no person can create a near vacuum in his model.  If they could he is proven wrong.
They can't and never will. That large so called chamber is anything but a vacuum chamber or anything near to it.