No one is suggesting Earth is spinning that fast.
Try spinning a ball soaked in water at the staggering speed of 15 degrees an hour.
Try walking on something spinning at the staggering speed of 15 degrees an hour.
It is pretty much nothing.
Comparing it to something spinning so fast is extremely dishonest.
The "force" from the spin, assuming you are at the equator, for a 100 kg man, if I recall correctly, works out to be roughly 300 g.
It is no where near strong enough to overcome gravity.
In order to have the force from the spin match gravity you need to be something like 30 000 km above Earth in a geosynchronous orbit.
So no, that isn't conclusive proof at all. It is just the same old nonsense.
As for evidence Earth is spinning, how about Foucault's pendulum and laser ring gyroscopes, the Coriolis effect, Satellites, and so on.
1,000 MPH is 1,000 MPH, no matter the size of the vessel. The surface you stand on, Frenat, is said to be moving at 1,000 MPH. Where is the physical signs/evidence/clues from earth's condition that supports that worldview? I showed you what water does on a spinning ball, where is that evidence from earth's nature?
You showed us what water does on a ball spinning much much much faster than Earth. Due to the massive speed difference, it shows nothing or relevance.
Who cares if Earth is moving at 1000 mph?
You don't feel speed, you feel acceleration.
The reason the wing walkers have issues is the plane not flying perfectly straight and the wind that is effectively blowing into them at 1000 mph.
If you wish to discuss the centrifugal force using mph instead of angular velocity, that is fine, just note the formula connecting them.
a=v^2/r.
Before we jump straight into that, lets put it in more reasonable units.
1000 mph is 1600 km/hr.
That is ~ 444 m/s.
The radius of Earth is roughly 6400 km. That is 6 400 000 m.
So, putting those into the formula, you get a=(444*444/ 6 400 000) m/s^2.
This works out to be a tiny 0.03 m/s^2.
Gravity accelerates you at roughly 9.8 m/s^2.
So gravity wins and you don't even notice the difference.
As F=ma, you can figure out the force required to cause this acceleration to figure out the mass difference.
If you have a 100 kg man, then the force, in N is 0.03 m/s^2 * 100 kg. This is 3 N.
You can then use this to figure out what weight that would correspond to by dividing it by the acceleration due to gravity. That gives you 315 g.
You can also do it percentage wise. If you do that, you find out that for every kg something weighs, the spin at the equator makes it weigh roughly 3 grams less. That is 0.3%.
So no, the water wouldn't fly off the surface of Earth, not even at 1000 mph.
To get an idea of the force involved, you want that acceleration to remain the same, or v^2/r to remain the same.
So to reduce it to the size of a small ball, lets say with a 6.4 cm radius, that is 0.000 000 01 times the radius of Earth. That means the speed needs to be reduced to 0.000 1 times the speed of Earth. So rather than having this 6.4 cm ball spin at 1000 mph, you need it to spin at 0.1 miles per hour. That would be 0.16 km/hr, and thus roughly 0.04 m/s.
However, that is just scaling the speed of the ball, it isn't scaling gravity. So you need to observe the droplets would should speed away up to the sky.
Pendulums do not support a spinning earth, the counterweight would be pinned in a westerly direction if the ground it is mounted on is moving east at 1,000 MPH. Pendulums operate according to the cut of the ball and socket joint, some pendulums operate in reverse, some do not work at all.
Foucault's pendulum, not a generic one.
One which is free to swing in any direction.
What counterweight?
We are discussing a Foucault's pendulum, That has no counterweight. It just has a "bob" or weight.
Why would it be pinned in a westerly direction?
Again, you don't feel speed, you feel acceleration.
If you let something go in a car moving along at highway speeds (which isn't accelerating), does it fly back to the back of the car? NO.
Yes, some Foucault pendulums "work in reverse". This is because they are in the southern hemisphere, where they turn backwards, as you would expect on a spinning globe.
Some "don't work", either because they aren't swinging at all, or because they are on the equator.
How about instead of just dismissing the evidence presented you explain the actual issues, and I don't mean making baseless claims about it.
Coriolis affect: How can storms move west/south/north if the atmosphere is moving east at 1,000 MPH?
Because the storms moving east move at slightly more than 1000 mph.
The ones moving west are actually moving east at slightly less than 1000 mph.
"gyroscopic compasses"
Do not work on a spherical earth.
Prove it.
"Launching rockets to space East versus West."
What about it?
It takes less energy (and fuel) to launch a rocket into orbit if it is heading in an easterly direction than if it is heading in a westerly direction.
That is because regardless of which direction it is launched in, it is already travelling towards the east, and the speed required for an orbit is the same regardless of if you go east or west.
To put it simply, if it needs a speed of 5000 mph to orbit, and it is launched with a speed of 1000 mph eastward, then it just needs to accelerate by 4000 mph if it is orbiting to the east.
If it is orbiting to the west, it needs to accelerate 6000 mph, the 5000 mph to achieve orbit and the 1000 mph to shed its eastward speed.
You can also tweak it by using different latitudes.
Launching to the east is best done as close to the equator as possible to get as much speed as possible.
Launching to the west is best done as close to the poles as possible to get as little speed as possible.
Frenat- "cherry picking"
Didn't take long for the "cherry picking" excuse to rear its ugly head! Frenat, do you have any signs/clues/evidence from EARTH'S physical condition that supports we are spinning and speeding?
Yes, that is because it didn't take long for you to start cherry picking.
You completely ignored the majority of the post and just picked on a tiny little piece.
We have told you of the evidence and you just reject it with no rational explanation.