How stupid are the scientist that believe in the Heliocentric Model?

Where's the math to show a flat earth sun can work?

Where is the man that can make a yo-yo have an elliptical orbit with just 1 string!!

Just because you can make the funny math to make it true, does not mean that it is true!!!

Where is the man that can make a yo-yo have an elliptical orbit with just 1 string!!

Just because you can make the funny math to make it true, does not mean that it is true!!!

Check out the ANALEMA PROBLEM thread to see pictures demonstrating an elliptical orbit.

So about that FE sun, how does it work? Math says fusion can't work for a sun that small. 

Quote from: InFlatEarth on July 24, 2017, 03:21:30 AM

Where is the man that can make a yo-yo have an elliptical orbit with just 1 string!!

Just because you can make the funny math to make it true, does not mean that it is true!!!

Check out the ANALEMA PROBLEM thread to see pictures demonstrating an elliptical orbit.

So about that FE sun, how does it work? Math says fusion can't work for a sun that small.

Which math, true math or the funny math?

If the elliptical orbit is true, then you will have no problem in creating one with a yo-yo and one string!

You know, I can turn lead into Gold, but the mathematics are too complex for me to show, so you have to believe me, sound familiar....

I have showed you the maths. You're being dishonest.

Just because you can make the funny math to make it true, does not mean that it is true!!!

Why don't you show your own equations showing that the Earth is flat and stationary ? Go on, we're waiting.

Quote from: sokarul on July 24, 2017, 03:24:25 AM

Quote from: InFlatEarth on July 24, 2017, 03:21:30 AM

Where is the man that can make a yo-yo have an elliptical orbit with just 1 string!!

Just because you can make the funny math to make it true, does not mean that it is true!!!

Check out the ANALEMA PROBLEM thread to see pictures demonstrating an elliptical orbit.

So about that FE sun, how does it work? Math says fusion can't work for a sun that small.

Which math, true math or the funny math?

If the elliptical orbit is true, then you will have no problem in creating one with a yo-yo and one string!

Yo yo's put a tension on a string, the earth is in free fall around the sun.

They are not the same thing.

Their are the same,

Tension is a force that can only pull, not push,

Gravity is a force that can only attract, not repeal

The tension in the sting can only hold on the yo-yo, it can't push it away.

The gravity of the earth and the sun can only attract the two objects, it can't repeal them!!

Same principle, but in opposite direction.

same thing!!!

Their are the same,

Tension is a force that can only pull, not push,

Gravity is a force that can only attract, not repeal

The tension in the sting can only hold on the yo-yo, it can't push it away.

The gravity of the earth and the sun can only attract the two objects, it can't repeal them!!

Same principle, but in opposite direction.

same thing!!!

Gravitation is said not to be a force. You are 200 years behind.

Then what is it, a time machine...

Bend spacetime.

Kerbal Space Program is mentioned in here every once in awhile. I suggest playing it to see just how easy elliptical orbits are.

Thank you, but I have decided to use actual sun reading from the an observatory, before the heliocentric hypothesis was  developed. I don't believe that you would questioned their reading, will you  and if you can show me some data from back then, I would be happy to use it.

Don't expect this to happen overnight, I will need some time, since I'm doing some Moon experiment these days...

Care to provide these readings, including any errors?

Piltdown Man Syndrome
1) The earth rotates.
2) We do not experience winds up to 1600 km/hr on the earth's surface.
3) Therefore the atmosphere must rotate with the earth. QED
How about
1) The earth is stationary
2) If the Earth was rotating we would experience winds up to 1600 km/hr on the earth's surface.
Now, which versions sounds more accurate.

I would say the first one but it does skip a few steps.
The second one is pure bullshit.

Lets continue it shall we:
If Earth was rotating and the atmosphere was not rotating with it, there would be 1600 km/hr winds on the surface at the equator.
This would result in massive amounts of drag between the atmosphere and Earth.
Due to earth's much larger mass, the atmosphere would not be able to stop Earth rotating.
Instead the effect of this drag would be to accelerate the atmosphere and have it spin with Earth.
However as this is not perfect, perturbations can occur resulting in small winds.

As such, if Earth was rotating, the atmosphere, for the most part, would be rotating with Earth.

But if you still want to insist that the Earth's atmosphere spins with the Earth, show us your mathematical model to prove this.

No. Give me a reason why I would need to provide it?
Are you suggesting drag wouldn't result in the atmosphere moving?

In my town, they say put up or shut up.

So put up the mathematical model or say nothing...

No. You came here with a bunch of lies, claiming you had proof for things, claiming people are stupid and so on.
So you put up or fuck off.

Queue stupid comment deriding using a game to teach physics.

No the yoyo is not the same.  The string doesn't change length.  While an elliptical orbit changes the distance from the center with the change from potential to kinetic and back of energy. 
The only way to achieve this with a string is to allow the centerpoint to be moved with the "pull"  of the yoyo, and to shorten and lengthen the string to simulate the change from kinetic to potential and back if the energy.  Shorter string, more kinetic, etc.

Queue stupid comment deriding using a game to teach physics.

No the yoyo is not the same.  The string doesn't change length.  While an elliptical orbit changes the distance from the center with the change from potential to kinetic and back of energy. 
The only way to achieve this with a string is to allow the centerpoint to be moved with the "pull"  of the yoyo, and to shorten and lengthen the string to simulate the change from kinetic to potential and back if the energy.  Shorter string, more kinetic, etc.

So you want the Flat Earthers to make a middle of the Earth and sun using an elliptical  path, instead of a circular path, I'm I correct about this?

Quote from: Mikey T. on July 24, 2017, 04:21:30 AM

Queue stupid comment deriding using a game to teach physics.

No the yoyo is not the same.  The string doesn't change length.  While an elliptical orbit changes the distance from the center with the change from potential to kinetic and back of energy. 
The only way to achieve this with a string is to allow the centerpoint to be moved with the "pull"  of the yoyo, and to shorten and lengthen the string to simulate the change from kinetic to potential and back if the energy.  Shorter string, more kinetic, etc.

So you want the Flat Earthers to make a middle of the Earth and sun using an elliptical  path, instead of a circular path, I'm I correct about this?

No, I was talking about simulating an elliptical orbit with a fixed length yoyo string.  Your question btw.
But no you wanted the math.  I just explained as simply as possible that the yoyo string and gravity are not the same thing.
Interesting fact here, you know this or you would now have brought it up.  It is a false equivalence.  Proving you are just a troll.

funny men, make up funny math

Funny man think funny joke real!

funny men, make up funny math

So, the response is to insult.  Just another guy not worth my time.  Just getting their rocks off, telling themselves they are angering people on the internet from the safety of their mom's basement. 
When you grow up a lot more, maybe we can discuss stuff. 

Quote

The truth is the world is round, as you know.  Path of the sun proves it.

Are you smart enough to make an animation of the suns path on a Flat Earth?

Are you smart enough to make a free body diagram of the forces involved in sun's movement above a flat earth?

Quote from: InFlatEarth on July 23, 2017, 01:39:25 PM

Quote

The truth is the world is round, as you know.  Path of the sun proves it.

Are you smart enough to make an animation of the suns path on a Flat Earth?

Are you smart enough to make a free body diagram of the forces involved in sun's movement above a flat earth?

I have never learned in college how to make a Free Body Diagram of a light source

Have you?

Quote from: markjo on July 24, 2017, 11:22:23 AM

Quote from: InFlatEarth on July 23, 2017, 01:39:25 PM

Quote

The truth is the world is round, as you know.  Path of the sun proves it.

Are you smart enough to make an animation of the suns path on a Flat Earth?

Are you smart enough to make a free body diagram of the forces involved in sun's movement above a flat earth?

I have never learned in college how to make a Free Body Diagram of a light source

Have you?

Are you saying the sun has no physical body?

Quote from: markjo on July 24, 2017, 11:22:23 AM

Quote from: InFlatEarth on July 23, 2017, 01:39:25 PM

Quote

The truth is the world is round, as you know.  Path of the sun proves it.

Are you smart enough to make an animation of the suns path on a Flat Earth?

Are you smart enough to make a free body diagram of the forces involved in sun's movement above a flat earth?

I have never learned in college how to make a Free Body Diagram of a light source

Have you?

Are you suggesting that the sun is not a physical object? 

Where does the sun's light come from?

Apparently he seems to think that you cannot be a Christian and not be a flat earther

Well, I'm a Christian and I certainly believe we live on a globe. 

Mike

Quote from: markjo on July 24, 2017, 11:22:23 AM

Quote from: InFlatEarth on July 23, 2017, 01:39:25 PM

Quote

The truth is the world is round, as you know.  Path of the sun proves it.

Are you smart enough to make an animation of the suns path on a Flat Earth?

Are you smart enough to make a free body diagram of the forces involved in sun's movement above a flat earth?

I have never learned in college how to make a Free Body Diagram of a light source

Have you?

Gosh, the sudden decline... 

The scientist today are really stupid, if you look at their track record. For decades they believed and did research work and Ph’d on the Piltdown Man?

If this group of people were stupid enough to believe that lie, when why would you expect them the smart enough to distinguish another lie?

Their track record has proven that if something fits into their narrative, they will believe it.

The Piltdown Man was a phony, but the scientific community did not investigate it, but spend thousands of dollars in research to support it.

Know, the same hold true to the scientists that believe in the heliocentric hypothesis. If you give them enough CGI videos and some complicated equations, they will believe it, without questions, as long as it fits into their narrative.

They will also defend it to the max.

So bottom line, can the scientific community be trusted that they don’t believe in lies?

The Piltdown Man was essentially a newspaper hoax. Scientists had little to do with it.

Quote from: InFlatEarth on July 22, 2017, 09:04:00 AM

The scientist today are really stupid, if you look at their track record. For decades they believed and did research work and Ph’d on the Piltdown Man?

If this group of people were stupid enough to believe that lie, when why would you expect them the smart enough to distinguish another lie?

Their track record has proven that if something fits into their narrative, they will believe it.

The Piltdown Man was a phony, but the scientific community did not investigate it, but spend thousands of dollars in research to support it.

Know, the same hold true to the scientists that believe in the heliocentric hypothesis. If you give them enough CGI videos and some complicated equations, they will believe it, without questions, as long as it fits into their narrative.

They will also defend it to the max.

So bottom line, can the scientific community be trusted that they don’t believe in lies?

The Piltdown Man was essentially a newspaper hoax. Scientists had little to do with it.

So would it now be fair to claim

Quote from: InFlatEarth on July 22, 2017, 09:04:00 AM

The scientist today are really stupid, if you look at their track record. For decades they believed and did research work and Ph’d on the Piltdown Man?

If this group of people were stupid enough to believe that lie, when why would you expect them the smart enough to distinguish another lie?

Their track record has proven that if something fits into their narrative, they will believe it.

The Piltdown Man was a phony, but the scientific community did not investigate it, but spend thousands of dollars in research to support it.

Know, the same hold true to the scientists that believe in the heliocentric hypothesis. If you give them enough CGI videos and some complicated equations, they will believe it, without questions, as long as it fits into their narrative.

They will also defend it to the max.

So bottom line, can the scientific community be trusted that they don’t believe in lies?

The Piltdown Man was essentially a newspaper hoax. Scientists had little to do with it.

I'm guessing that astronomers and cosmologists had even less to do with it.

Quote from: InFlatEarth on July 22, 2017, 09:04:00 AM

The scientist today are really stupid, if you look at their track record. For decades they believed and did research work and Ph’d on the Piltdown Man?

If this group of people were stupid enough to believe that lie, when why would you expect them the smart enough to distinguish another lie?

Their track record has proven that if something fits into their narrative, they will believe it.

The Piltdown Man was a phony, but the scientific community did not investigate it, but spend thousands of dollars in research to support it.

Know, the same hold true to the scientists that believe in the heliocentric hypothesis. If you give them enough CGI videos and some complicated equations, they will believe it, without questions, as long as it fits into their narrative.

They will also defend it to the max.

So bottom line, can the scientific community be trusted that they don’t believe in lies?

The Piltdown Man was essentially a newspaper hoax. Scientists had little to do with it.

So what you are telling me is that the media dictates to the scientific community, like CNN (Fake News).

I personally agree, the scientific community has an agenda which is dictated by other no scientific sources.

Please provide a mathematical model to explain why the Moon Accelerates?

The time occupied by the moon in returning to the same star is called the time of her sidereal revolution. At the beginning of this century it amounted to 27.32 mean solar days. Its value is not the same in every century. From the time of the most ancient observations until the present day, we find that the sidereal revolution has been gradually becoming shorter and shorter. Will this acceleration always continue? This is a question which observation is incapable of deciding.

Popular Astronomy by Francois Arago 1858 - Page 235

https://books.google.co.uk/books?id=bNAUAQAAMAAJ&pg=PA257&dq=Popular+astronomy+volume+2&hl=en&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwjUsPij6e7TAhWELcAKHQfdDo4Q6AEIJzAA#v=onepage&q=Popular%20astronomy%20volume%202&f=false

These are your scientist that said this, and it is not stated in the bible!!!

Impressive.

"Paleoanthropologists once fell for a hoax a century ago. Therefore Earth is flat."

WTF.

So if you are saying that this is bogus, then can you please explain to me why a Heliocentric believer recommend me to read bogus materials?

This bring into question, ALL source material that you provide that it might be bogus and can't be taken at face value.

Piltdown Man, should I say more...