UA vs Denpressure

  • 448 Replies
  • 40133 Views
Re: UA vs Denpressure
« Reply #390 on: February 13, 2017, 01:09:42 PM »
You claim "I understand what they mean."
OK, please define:

"mass",.....The amount of material that makes up an object.
"weight",....The amount compactness of a material that can displace atmospheric pressure.
"volume",...The amount of porosity in any object.
"density"....The structure of a material that can displace atmospheric pressure to create a scale reading. (Denpressure)
"speed",....The ability to go a distance in a certain time in any direction.
"velocity",..... The speed of something in one direction, only.
"acceleration",.....The continuous build up of movement.
 "force",..... Any energy push in any direction
"inertia",..... Something that cannot be explained as anything, to be fair.
"pressure",.....I think pressure can be lumped in with force. there's actually no difference to what they both mean in the grand scheme of things.
"pressure gradient",........ The difference in energy force that goes from low to high or high to low.
"power",....  Energy push.
"energy"......Vibration and friction, which basically are the same thing.
There you go. I took the time out to answer them in my own words. Sit and argue them all you want by looking in your, all knowing no wrong science book of mainstream answers to any questions that you follow without question.
And it seems so strange that your wonderful ideas can never come up with any numerical values and
these are essential for thereal life design of everything from vacuum and pressure pumps to bridges, cars and aircraft.
But these things are successfully designed and work according to Newton's Theories of Motion and Gravitation.
I could quite easily bring up numerical values for them. All I need to do is to change the meanings and do a little bit of tweaking.
Will I do that?
Not a chance. there's absolutely no need, because anything said or numbers given would be denied or jumped on as gravity and all the rest of the pure crap that you people adhere to.
Isn't that a clue that something is right with "Newton's Theories of Motion and Gravitation" and wrong with your ideas.
Not at all, so take of your "I love Isaac Newton".scarf.
In my book, a correct theory is one that works in real life and you will never prove that yours will work.
Well you are certainly not proving any of your rigidly stuck to bullshit, are you?

I and others have asked you to do calculations that are easy using "Newton's Theories", but you simply refuse and say that you are not interested.
Well, if you are not interested in how your theory works in real life, you do not have a useful theory - end of story!
Ok, end your story. I've tried to help you end it but you keep piping in, so basically you cannot end the story, can you?

So if I ask you what the volume of a sphere is?
Never attribute to malice that which can be explained by ignorance or stupidity.

Re: UA vs Denpressure
« Reply #391 on: February 13, 2017, 02:08:05 PM »
Someone might have to quote me. Just remembered that Scepti has me on ignore.
Never attribute to malice that which can be explained by ignorance or stupidity.

*

disputeone

  • Ranters
  • 20190
  • Or should I?
Re: UA vs Denpressure
« Reply #392 on: February 13, 2017, 02:50:48 PM »
It's alright I got you.

http://lmgtfy.com/?q=Volume+of+a+sphere

Or here I made a thing for scepti's model.

Weight at sea level area of object = density.

Area of object - density = volume of object.

What is the radius of the sphere and the weight at sea level, I'll give you a number for the volume.

It won't reflect what the link says however.
« Last Edit: February 13, 2017, 02:58:21 PM by disputeone »
BOTD member

For all the law is fulfilled in one word, even in this.

The reason I am consistently personally attacked here.
https://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=69306.msg1960160#msg1960160

*

Rayzor

  • 11580
  • Looking for Occam
Re: UA vs Denpressure
« Reply #393 on: February 13, 2017, 04:10:33 PM »

Or here I made a thing for scepti's model.

Weight at sea level area of object = density

Area of object - density = volume of object.

What is the radius of the sphere and the weight at sea level, I'll give you a number for the volume.

It won't reflect what the link says however.

Huh?   Let's see if that makes sense. 

Weight at sea level area of object = density.
1 kg at sea level and an area of  1000 cm2    -->  density of 0.001 kg/cm2     So you are saying density has the units of pressure,  no reference to volume?

Moving right along.

Area of object - density = volume of object.   
1000 cm2  - 0.001 kg/cm2  = 999.1 cm3   ? sorry your equation can't be correct as written since units don't match,  apart from being obvious nonsense.

Your flawed interpretation of sceptimatics flawed model is flawed.   No surprise.
   
« Last Edit: February 13, 2017, 04:12:54 PM by Rayzor »
Stop gilding the pickle, you demisexual aromantic homoflexible snowflake.

*

Rayzor

  • 11580
  • Looking for Occam
Re: UA vs Denpressure
« Reply #394 on: February 13, 2017, 04:16:16 PM »


The reason the pressure is higher at the bottom of the sea than the top is because of gravity.   But I doubt you will ever be able to grasp that fact.

Without gravity there would be no pressure gradient.
Care to explain how that works when the ocean can apparently be pulled up by the little rocky muwn?

That's caused by gravity.   Want to guess the mass of the water in the earth's oceans?
Stop gilding the pickle, you demisexual aromantic homoflexible snowflake.

*

disputeone

  • Ranters
  • 20190
  • Or should I?
Re: UA vs Denpressure
« Reply #395 on: February 13, 2017, 04:25:24 PM »

Or here I made a thing for scepti's model.

Weight at sea level area of object = density

Area of object - density = volume of object.

What is the radius of the sphere and the weight at sea level, I'll give you a number for the volume.

It won't reflect what the link says however.

Huh?   Let's see if that makes sense. 

Weight at sea level area of object = density.
1 kg at sea level and an area of  1000 cm2    -->  density of 0.001 kg/cm2     So you are saying density has the units of pressure,  no reference to volume?

Moving right along.

Area of object - density = volume of object.   
1000 cm2  - 0.001 kg/cm2  = 999.1 cm3   ? sorry your equation can't be correct as written since units don't match,  apart from being obvious nonsense.

Your flawed interpretation of sceptimatics flawed model is flawed.   No surprise.
 

I think it worked well, you showed that something with a weight of 1kg at sea level occupying 1m2 has very little density. This is obvious, you then went to show that the object would have a lot of volume.

I think you did well, here, have a star.
« Last Edit: February 13, 2017, 04:27:01 PM by disputeone »
BOTD member

For all the law is fulfilled in one word, even in this.

The reason I am consistently personally attacked here.
https://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=69306.msg1960160#msg1960160

*

Bom Tishop

  • 11120
  • Official friend boy of the FES!!
Re: UA vs Denpressure
« Reply #396 on: February 13, 2017, 05:46:15 PM »

Or here I made a thing for scepti's model.

Weight at sea level area of object = density

Area of object - density = volume of object.

What is the radius of the sphere and the weight at sea level, I'll give you a number for the volume.

It won't reflect what the link says however.

Huh?   Let's see if that makes sense. 

Weight at sea level area of object = density.
1 kg at sea level and an area of  1000 cm2    -->  density of 0.001 kg/cm2     So you are saying density has the units of pressure,  no reference to volume?

Moving right along.

Area of object - density = volume of object.   
1000 cm2  - 0.001 kg/cm2  = 999.1 cm3   ? sorry your equation can't be correct as written since units don't match,  apart from being obvious nonsense.

Your flawed interpretation of sceptimatics flawed model is flawed.   No surprise.
 

I think it worked well, you showed that something with a weight of 1kg at sea level occupying 1m2 has very little density. This is obvious, you then went to show that the object would have a lot of volume.

I think you did well, here, have a star.

I am sensing a growing friction between these two from down under...

Perhaps a battle in a kangaroo lined pit is in the future?

Vegas odds anyone?

My money is on dispute....He looks like a scapper ....Sorry Rab don't get mad :(


Though...At the same time, it looks like he may have bigger problems with inky after him ::)
« Last Edit: February 13, 2017, 06:03:24 PM by Babyhighspeed »
Quote from: Bom Tishop
LordDave is quite alright even for a bleeding heart liberal. Godspeed good sir

*

disputeone

  • Ranters
  • 20190
  • Or should I?
Re: UA vs Denpressure
« Reply #397 on: February 13, 2017, 06:34:28 PM »

Or here I made a thing for scepti's model.

Weight at sea level area of object = density

Area of object - density = volume of object.

What is the radius of the sphere and the weight at sea level, I'll give you a number for the volume.

It won't reflect what the link says however.

Huh?   Let's see if that makes sense. 

Weight at sea level area of object = density.
1 kg at sea level and an area of  1000 cm2    -->  density of 0.001 kg/cm2     So you are saying density has the units of pressure,  no reference to volume?

Moving right along.

Area of object - density = volume of object.   
1000 cm2  - 0.001 kg/cm2  = 999.1 cm3   ? sorry your equation can't be correct as written since units don't match,  apart from being obvious nonsense.

Your flawed interpretation of sceptimatics flawed model is flawed.   No surprise.
 

I think it worked well, you showed that something with a weight of 1kg at sea level occupying 1m2 has very little density. This is obvious, you then went to show that the object would have a lot of volume.

I think you did well, here, have a star.

I am sensing a growing friction between these two from down under...

Perhaps a battle in a kangaroo lined pit is in the future?

Vegas odds anyone?

My money is on dispute....He looks like a scapper ....Sorry Rab don't get mad :(


Though...At the same time, it looks like he may have bigger problems with inky after him ::)

As much as scepti and myself have had our differences, I believe in this he is being treated unfairly.

I am also shaking in my boots thinking about Inky  ;D ;D
BOTD member

For all the law is fulfilled in one word, even in this.

The reason I am consistently personally attacked here.
https://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=69306.msg1960160#msg1960160

*

Rayzor

  • 11580
  • Looking for Occam
Re: UA vs Denpressure
« Reply #398 on: February 13, 2017, 06:36:31 PM »

Or here I made a thing for scepti's model.

Weight at sea level area of object = density

Area of object - density = volume of object.

What is the radius of the sphere and the weight at sea level, I'll give you a number for the volume.

It won't reflect what the link says however.

Huh?   Let's see if that makes sense. 

Weight at sea level area of object = density.
1 kg at sea level and an area of  1000 cm2    -->  density of 0.001 kg/cm2     So you are saying density has the units of pressure,  no reference to volume?

Moving right along.

Area of object - density = volume of object.   
1000 cm2  - 0.001 kg/cm2  = 999.1 cm3   ? sorry your equation can't be correct as written since units don't match,  apart from being obvious nonsense.

Your flawed interpretation of sceptimatics flawed model is flawed.   No surprise.
 

I think it worked well, you showed that something with a weight of 1kg at sea level occupying 1m2 has very little density. This is obvious, you then went to show that the object would have a lot of volume.

I think you did well, here, have a star.

Actually I showed that something weighing 1kg and occupying zero volume has infinite density.  You need volume,  not area,  to have density.
Stop gilding the pickle, you demisexual aromantic homoflexible snowflake.

*

Rayzor

  • 11580
  • Looking for Occam
Re: UA vs Denpressure
« Reply #399 on: February 13, 2017, 06:41:19 PM »
As much as scepti and myself have had our differences, I believe in this he is being treated unfairly.

LOL.    yep that'll fly.
Stop gilding the pickle, you demisexual aromantic homoflexible snowflake.

*

disputeone

  • Ranters
  • 20190
  • Or should I?
Re: UA vs Denpressure
« Reply #400 on: February 13, 2017, 06:51:34 PM »

Or here I made a thing for scepti's model.

Weight at sea level area of object = density

Area of object - density = volume of object.

What is the radius of the sphere and the weight at sea level, I'll give you a number for the volume.

It won't reflect what the link says however.

Huh?   Let's see if that makes sense. 

Weight at sea level area of object = density.
1 kg at sea level and an area of  1000 cm2    -->  density of 0.001 kg/cm2     So you are saying density has the units of pressure,  no reference to volume?

Moving right along.

Area of object - density = volume of object.   
1000 cm2  - 0.001 kg/cm2  = 999.1 cm3   ? sorry your equation can't be correct as written since units don't match,  apart from being obvious nonsense.

Your flawed interpretation of sceptimatics flawed model is flawed.   No surprise.
 

I think it worked well, you showed that something with a weight of 1kg at sea level occupying 1m2 has very little density. This is obvious, you then went to show that the object would have a lot of volume.

I think you did well, here, have a star.

Actually I showed that something weighing 1kg and occupying zero volume has infinite density.  You need volume,  not area,  to have density.

You are using the orthodox meaning of those terms, I don't know what you expect tbh.

Here, have a link that explains the terms how you are familiar with.

www.google.com
BOTD member

For all the law is fulfilled in one word, even in this.

The reason I am consistently personally attacked here.
https://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=69306.msg1960160#msg1960160

*

Bom Tishop

  • 11120
  • Official friend boy of the FES!!
Re: UA vs Denpressure
« Reply #401 on: February 13, 2017, 07:06:09 PM »
Oh shit on me....I thought you and rabinoz were still picking at each other...Didn't realize it was rayzor as well (that is what I get for posted while delierious with fever and influenza)...I just saw a colorful post...And we both know why I would assume rabinoz lol.

Entirely my fault...Though is rayzor from Australia too?

Quote from: Bom Tishop
LordDave is quite alright even for a bleeding heart liberal. Godspeed good sir

*

Rayzor

  • 11580
  • Looking for Occam
Re: UA vs Denpressure
« Reply #402 on: February 13, 2017, 07:31:32 PM »

Or here I made a thing for scepti's model.

Weight at sea level area of object = density

Area of object - density = volume of object.

What is the radius of the sphere and the weight at sea level, I'll give you a number for the volume.

It won't reflect what the link says however.

Huh?   Let's see if that makes sense. 

Weight at sea level area of object = density.
1 kg at sea level and an area of  1000 cm2    -->  density of 0.001 kg/cm2     So you are saying density has the units of pressure,  no reference to volume?

Moving right along.

Area of object - density = volume of object.   
1000 cm2  - 0.001 kg/cm2  = 999.1 cm3   ? sorry your equation can't be correct as written since units don't match,  apart from being obvious nonsense.

Your flawed interpretation of sceptimatics flawed model is flawed.   No surprise.
 

I think it worked well, you showed that something with a weight of 1kg at sea level occupying 1m2 has very little density. This is obvious, you then went to show that the object would have a lot of volume.

I think you did well, here, have a star.

Actually I showed that something weighing 1kg and occupying zero volume has infinite density.  You need volume,  not area,  to have density.

You are using the orthodox meaning of those terms, I don't know what you expect tbh.

Here, have a link that explains the terms how you are familiar with.

www.google.com

What language would you like to use for this discussion,   I see that you can speak fluent gibberish?   

What you mistakenly think is density,  is actually pressure,   what you think is volume,  I have no idea?   but you can't use units like kg  and cm, cm2 or cm3  they have already been defined so, you'll have to make up some new units.  Oh, and you aren't allowed to use the words weight, mass, density, volume, length,  they are already defined,  you'll need new words for those as well.

Good luck,  I'll be watching with interest.






Stop gilding the pickle, you demisexual aromantic homoflexible snowflake.

*

Rayzor

  • 11580
  • Looking for Occam
Re: UA vs Denpressure
« Reply #403 on: February 13, 2017, 07:33:44 PM »
Entirely my fault...Though is rayzor from Australia too?

Welcome to the party,   I'm about to spit-roast a flat earther,   after I gut and skin him of course.   Would you like a beer?

Stop gilding the pickle, you demisexual aromantic homoflexible snowflake.

*

disputeone

  • Ranters
  • 20190
  • Or should I?
Re: UA vs Denpressure
« Reply #404 on: February 13, 2017, 08:02:43 PM »
Entirely my fault...Though is rayzor from Australia too?

Welcome to the party,   I'm about to spit-roast a flat earther,   after I gut and skin him of course.   Would you like a beer?

What saddens me is how hollow you must be irl to get your kicks picking on flat earthers.

I trained MMA for a very long time for example, I was quite good. At no point in my career did I think it would be a good idea to beat up the kids I was training to feel better about myself.

But each to their own.

@BHS me and Rayzor had a disagreement about the fall acceleration of building 7 on 9/11/01.

https://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=69205.msg1867885#msg1867885

At first all he had was insults, (his usual shtick) however towards the end he explained why he believed what he believed well.

I am saddened to see he's back to name calling. However not surprised.
Apart from that there's no history.
BOTD member

For all the law is fulfilled in one word, even in this.

The reason I am consistently personally attacked here.
https://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=69306.msg1960160#msg1960160

*

Rayzor

  • 11580
  • Looking for Occam
Re: UA vs Denpressure
« Reply #405 on: February 13, 2017, 08:05:53 PM »
I am saddened to see he's back to name calling. However not surprised.
Apart from that there's no history.

Who said I was talking about you,  are you a flat earther?  I just thought you were a regular conspiracy looney.
Stop gilding the pickle, you demisexual aromantic homoflexible snowflake.

*

disputeone

  • Ranters
  • 20190
  • Or should I?
Re: UA vs Denpressure
« Reply #406 on: February 13, 2017, 08:09:52 PM »
I am saddened to see he's back to name calling. However not surprised.
Apart from that there's no history.

Who said I was talking about you,  are you a flat earther?  I just thought you were a regular conspiracy looney.

If you want to insult me I will buy you a beer and we can talk.

Otherwise stay on topic please.

Edit.

There are some very intelligent people who aren't satisfied with that particular story Rayzor.

Just a heads up.
« Last Edit: February 13, 2017, 08:12:03 PM by disputeone »
BOTD member

For all the law is fulfilled in one word, even in this.

The reason I am consistently personally attacked here.
https://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=69306.msg1960160#msg1960160

*

Rayzor

  • 11580
  • Looking for Occam
Re: UA vs Denpressure
« Reply #407 on: February 13, 2017, 08:25:41 PM »
I am saddened to see he's back to name calling. However not surprised.
Apart from that there's no history.

Who said I was talking about you,  are you a flat earther?  I just thought you were a regular conspiracy looney.

If you want to insult me I will buy you a beer and we can talk.

Otherwise stay on topic please.

Edit.

There are some very intelligent people who aren't satisfied with that particular story Rayzor.

Just a heads up.

So are you a flat earther or not?  You seem to think that was an insult?

And you still haven't  addressed the problem I raised with your definition of volume.   Stop derailing,   or don't you have a clue?
Stop gilding the pickle, you demisexual aromantic homoflexible snowflake.

*

disputeone

  • Ranters
  • 20190
  • Or should I?
Re: UA vs Denpressure
« Reply #408 on: February 13, 2017, 08:36:12 PM »
I am saddened to see he's back to name calling. However not surprised.
Apart from that there's no history.

Who said I was talking about you,  are you a flat earther?  I just thought you were a regular conspiracy looney.

If you want to insult me I will buy you a beer and we can talk.

Otherwise stay on topic please.

Edit.

There are some very intelligent people who aren't satisfied with that particular story Rayzor.

Just a heads up.

So are you a flat earther or not?  You seem to think that was an insult?

And you still haven't  addressed the problem I raised with your definition of volume.   Stop derailing,   or don't you have a clue?

I think the earth is most likely an oblate spheroid and that modern science is for the most part correct.

Volume is the amount of empty space in an object that doesn't displace atmosphere.

Density is the amount of material in an object that does displace atmosphere in scepti's model.

I don't see your objection, I never claimed to know or understand scepti's model.

If you want the orthodox definitions I would be happy to give them, in fact I belive I supplied a link with the answers you want.

Here.

www.google.com
BOTD member

For all the law is fulfilled in one word, even in this.

The reason I am consistently personally attacked here.
https://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=69306.msg1960160#msg1960160

*

Bom Tishop

  • 11120
  • Official friend boy of the FES!!
Re: UA vs Denpressure
« Reply #409 on: February 13, 2017, 08:37:26 PM »
I don't know what is worse.... Two Aussies getting worked up or two Texans.

Either way the friction can lead to some serious implosions lol ..About as friendly as a Neutron and plutonium butting against each other.
Quote from: Bom Tishop
LordDave is quite alright even for a bleeding heart liberal. Godspeed good sir

*

disputeone

  • Ranters
  • 20190
  • Or should I?
Re: UA vs Denpressure
« Reply #410 on: February 13, 2017, 08:38:22 PM »
Oh stuff it, here you are.

http://lmgtfy.com/?q=Density+define

http://lmgtfy.com/?q=Volume+define

There you go.

I don't know what is worse.... Two Aussies getting worked up or two Texans.

Either way the friction can lead to some serious implosions lol ..About as friendly as a Neutron and plutonium butting against each other.

I think aussies and texans are similar in the sense that we can have a heated disagreement and still respect each other.

I believe I only really started to respect you after you schooled me on theism in that thread so long ago :-).
« Last Edit: February 13, 2017, 08:40:22 PM by disputeone »
BOTD member

For all the law is fulfilled in one word, even in this.

The reason I am consistently personally attacked here.
https://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=69306.msg1960160#msg1960160

*

Rayzor

  • 11580
  • Looking for Occam
Re: UA vs Denpressure
« Reply #411 on: February 13, 2017, 08:49:11 PM »
Oh stuff it, here you are.
http://lmgtfy.com/?q=Density+define
http://lmgtfy.com/?q=Volume+define

There you go.

No,  you aren't allowed to use those words.  They are already taken.   Your description of what you called "volume",  and "density",  isn't  what is volume and density are in the real world,  you need a new words. 

And you also need new units. 


Stop gilding the pickle, you demisexual aromantic homoflexible snowflake.

*

disputeone

  • Ranters
  • 20190
  • Or should I?
Re: UA vs Denpressure
« Reply #412 on: February 13, 2017, 09:02:42 PM »
I'll let scepti decide the new words, being his idea and all.

Remember that kid who didn't think he would need calculus in highschool then instead of doing something constructive he goes on to disrupt the whole class and pick on the kids who are trying to learn?

You are being that kid.
BOTD member

For all the law is fulfilled in one word, even in this.

The reason I am consistently personally attacked here.
https://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=69306.msg1960160#msg1960160

*

Bom Tishop

  • 11120
  • Official friend boy of the FES!!
Re: UA vs Denpressure
« Reply #413 on: February 13, 2017, 09:27:01 PM »
Oh stuff it, here you are.

http://lmgtfy.com/?q=Density+define

http://lmgtfy.com/?q=Volume+define

There you go.

I don't know what is worse.... Two Aussies getting worked up or two Texans.

Either way the friction can lead to some serious implosions lol ..About as friendly as a Neutron and plutonium butting against each other.

I think aussies and texans are similar in the sense that we can have a heated disagreement and still respect each other.

I believe I only really started to respect you after you schooled me on theism in that thread so long ago :-).

I can agree with that...Though I don't remember any schooling...Maybe some "brisk" conversation lol.

There are still many places in Texas you can get in a fight (physical or verbal) and the winner buys the beer. That is how you meet the friends that are loyal and stay for the long haul. Two of my longest standing friends I met in a physical fight. Others through verbal confrontation...

Life before liberalism ;D


@BHS me and Rayzor had a disagreement about the fall acceleration of building 7 on 9/11/01.

So by this I assume he is an official story guy? If that is the case you can't expect too much from him ;D....Also, he should never give any crap about their views or believing in fairy tales.
Quote from: Bom Tishop
LordDave is quite alright even for a bleeding heart liberal. Godspeed good sir

*

Rayzor

  • 11580
  • Looking for Occam
Re: UA vs Denpressure
« Reply #414 on: February 13, 2017, 09:28:50 PM »
I'll let scepti decide the new words, being his idea and all.

Remember that kid who didn't think he would need calculus in highschool then instead of doing something constructive he goes on to disrupt the whole class and pick on the kids who are trying to learn?

You are being that kid.

My major was maths and physics,  Also I happen to like calculus.

Also,  It's become obvious that you don't actually have a clue about denspressure,  ( for that matter who does?)   so why are you debating it?   Just a masochistic streak?

You never owned up to being a flat earther,  so I'll assume you aren't  unless you want to correct me and claim otherwise.
Stop gilding the pickle, you demisexual aromantic homoflexible snowflake.

*

Rayzor

  • 11580
  • Looking for Occam
Re: UA vs Denpressure
« Reply #415 on: February 13, 2017, 09:32:43 PM »
So by this I assume he is an official story guy? If that is the case you can't expect too much from him ;D....Also, he should never give any crap about their views or believing in fairy tales.

I'd  take that challenge,  but I don't want to derail this thread.    Keep your stick on the ice champ,  we'll get back to you about fairy tales in due course. 
Stop gilding the pickle, you demisexual aromantic homoflexible snowflake.

*

disputeone

  • Ranters
  • 20190
  • Or should I?
Re: UA vs Denpressure
« Reply #416 on: February 13, 2017, 09:48:05 PM »
So by this I assume he is an official story guy? If that is the case you can't expect too much from him ;D....Also, he should never give any crap about their views or believing in fairy tales.

I'd  take that challenge,  but I don't want to derail this thread.    Keep your stick on the ice champ,  we'll get back to you about fairy tales in due course.

You struggled debating me, debating BHS would be like trying to push a truck up Everest, you are not prepared.  ;)

There are still many places in Texas you can get in a fight (physical or verbal) and the winner buys the beer. That is how you meet the friends that are loyal and stay for the long haul. Two of my longest standing friends I met in a physical fight. Others through verbal confrontation...

Life before liberalism ;D

The good old days. My longest standing friend I also met trying to punch me over a disagreement.

Top bloke.
BOTD member

For all the law is fulfilled in one word, even in this.

The reason I am consistently personally attacked here.
https://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=69306.msg1960160#msg1960160

*

disputeone

  • Ranters
  • 20190
  • Or should I?
Re: UA vs Denpressure
« Reply #417 on: February 13, 2017, 09:50:39 PM »
You never owned up to being a flat earther,  so I'll assume you aren't  unless you want to correct me and claim otherwise.

I think the earth is most likely an oblate spheroid and that modern science is for the most part correct.
BOTD member

For all the law is fulfilled in one word, even in this.

The reason I am consistently personally attacked here.
https://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=69306.msg1960160#msg1960160

*

Bom Tishop

  • 11120
  • Official friend boy of the FES!!
Re: UA vs Denpressure
« Reply #418 on: February 13, 2017, 10:26:02 PM »
So by this I assume he is an official story guy? If that is the case you can't expect too much from him ;D....Also, he should never give any crap about their views or believing in fairy tales.

I'd  take that challenge,  but I don't want to derail this thread.    Keep your stick on the ice champ,  we'll get back to you about fairy tales in due course. 

There are many threads available already in existence if you are feeling froggy sugar lips  :-*

Though I must question ....

My major was maths and physics,  Also I happen to like calculus.

Was this at a reputable school? Did you pass? Were you graded on a curve?

Or maybe a fan of Harry Potter? We all want to believe in magic rayzor...I want to believe my ex wife loved me and didn't sleep with an area code of people (guys and girls)...But sadly faith, doesn't always mean something is true.


Anyways.... You know what to do if you think your mouth can cash the check your ass wrote snookums :-*
Quote from: Bom Tishop
LordDave is quite alright even for a bleeding heart liberal. Godspeed good sir

?

Arealhumanbeing

  • 1474
  • Leader of the Second American Revolution
Re: UA vs Denpressure
« Reply #419 on: February 14, 2017, 05:42:28 AM »
You never owned up to being a flat earther,  so I'll assume you aren't  unless you want to correct me and claim otherwise.

I think the earth is most likely an oblate spheroid and that modern science is for the most part correct.
Turns out the earth really is flat.

Liar liar, pants on fire.