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

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...

What are you talking about? What?

Quote from: InFlatEarth on July 24, 2017, 11:50:09 PM

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...

What are you talking about? What?

He has no clue...

Science evolves, look at the fact that early humans thought the earth was flat...

Then we (most of us), learned the truth, it's actually a heliocentric oblate spheroid!

Quote from: InFlatEarth on July 24, 2017, 11:50:09 PM

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...

What are you talking about? What?

These guys always descend into random gibberish.

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.

No, he is saying Piltdown man had very little to do with real science (i.e. the actual scientific community).

Quote from: Definitely Not Official on July 24, 2017, 11:53:20 PM

Quote from: InFlatEarth on July 24, 2017, 11:50:09 PM

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...

What are you talking about? What?

These guys always descend into random gibberish.

nah give him a minute to replace the fuse that has blown.  He should be good as new shortly. 

OK, I have replaced the fuse that you like to talk about.

But the question is "How stupid are the scientist that believe in the Heliocentric Model?"

And today I have posted a thread that shows that the Heliocentric Fair-tail  does not work, because at 140800 ago the earth would be spinning at a rate of 60 RPM.

This is pure physics if you know angular velocities and accelerations. For the last 44 years, he have always added a leap second, never removed one.

If you disagree, below are the years that we added the leap second from 1972 till 2005

1972 - +2 second
1973 - +1 second
1974 - +1 second
1975 - +1 second
1976 - +1 second
1977 - +1 second
1979 - +1 second
1981 - +1 second
1982 - +1 second
1983 - +1 second
1985 - +1 second
1987 - +1 second
1989 - +1 second
1990 - +1 second
1992 - +1 second
1993 - +1 second
1994 - +1 second
1995 - +1 second
1997 - +1 second
1998 - +1 second
2005 - +1 second

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

Quote

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!!!

Please provide an accurate map of the flat earth that fits observable phenomenon.

OK, I have replaced the fuse that you like to talk about.

But the question is "How stupid are the scientist that believe in the Heliocentric Model?"

And today I have posted a thread that shows that the Heliocentric Fair-tail  does not work, because at 140800 ago the earth would be spinning at a rate of 60 RPM.

This is pure physics if you know angular velocities and accelerations. For the last 44 years, he have always added a leap second, never removed one.

If you disagree, below are the years that we added the leap second from 1972 till 2005

1972 - +2 second
1973 - +1 second
1974 - +1 second
1975 - +1 second
1976 - +1 second
1977 - +1 second
1979 - +1 second
1981 - +1 second
1982 - +1 second
1983 - +1 second
1985 - +1 second
1987 - +1 second
1989 - +1 second
1990 - +1 second
1992 - +1 second
1993 - +1 second
1994 - +1 second
1995 - +1 second
1997 - +1 second
1998 - +1 second
2005 - +1 second

Stop spamming the same topic all over this board when your ridiculous claim was defaulted already. Jeez... 

Quote from: InFlatEarth on July 25, 2017, 07:56:10 AM

OK, I have replaced the fuse that you like to talk about.

But the question is "How stupid are the scientist that believe in the Heliocentric Model?"

And today I have posted a thread that shows that the Heliocentric Fair-tail  does not work, because at 140800 ago the earth would be spinning at a rate of 60 RPM.

This is pure physics if you know angular velocities and accelerations. For the last 44 years, he have always added a leap second, never removed one.

If you disagree, below are the years that we added the leap second from 1972 till 2005

1972 - +2 second
1973 - +1 second
1974 - +1 second
1975 - +1 second
1976 - +1 second
1977 - +1 second
1979 - +1 second
1981 - +1 second
1982 - +1 second
1983 - +1 second
1985 - +1 second
1987 - +1 second
1989 - +1 second
1990 - +1 second
1992 - +1 second
1993 - +1 second
1994 - +1 second
1995 - +1 second
1997 - +1 second
1998 - +1 second
2005 - +1 second

Stop spamming the same topic all over this board when your ridiculous claim was defaulted already. Jeez... 

Stop laing to the people to hid the truth that your Hypothesis went down the toilet!!!

OK, I have replaced the fuse that you like to talk about.

Nope. Still seems to be blown.
You are spamming the same refuted nonsense all over the place.
Leave it in a single thread.

P.S. that list proves your claim about it being linear to be pure BS.

Quote from: InFlatEarth on July 25, 2017, 07:56:10 AM

OK, I have replaced the fuse that you like to talk about.

Nope. Still seems to be blown.
You are spamming the same refuted nonsense all over the place.
Leave it in a single thread.

P.S. that list proves your claim about it being linear to be pure BS.

By doing this, your problem will not go away

Quote from: JackBlack on July 25, 2017, 02:59:17 PM

Quote from: InFlatEarth on July 25, 2017, 07:56:10 AM

OK, I have replaced the fuse that you like to talk about.

Nope. Still seems to be blown.
You are spamming the same refuted nonsense all over the place.
Leave it in a single thread.

P.S. that list proves your claim about it being linear to be pure BS.

By doing this, your problem will not go away

Good thing I'm not doing that. I have refuted your BS in the other thread, yet you feel a need to spread it all over the place.
Is it because you know it is pure bullshit and thus want to spread it around so much that it is more likely for someone to be able to see it without the refutation?

That wont magically make it not bullshit, all it would mean is that you might fool some poor fool.

Blah, blah, blah blah

all talk and no math.

can't draw a Free Body Diagram that shows the forces that keep the airplane in sync with a spinning Earth.

Then you tell me that the atmosphere hold the plane in sync, but when asked for a Convection Heat Transfer Model of a spinning radiating earth which would show the height fo the velocity that the sphere would affect, would not provide anything.

When confronted with old scientific book which states that the Moon accelerates and asked your to be shown in the heliocentric model, did not provide any model.

When confronted about the leap second and that the earth is slowing down, your response was that I write gibberish.

The only thing that you are good at, is to write essays, maybe Hollywood is hiring, they need a few good story tellers.

This will be the last post in this thread for today.

Blah, blah, blah blah

all talk and no math.

can't draw a Free Body Diagram that shows the forces that keep the airplane in sync with a spinning Earth.

Then you tell me that the atmosphere hold the plane in sync, but when asked for a Convection Heat Transfer Model of a spinning radiating earth which would show the height fo the velocity that the sphere would affect, would not provide anything.

When confronted with old scientific book which states that the Moon accelerates and asked your to be shown in the heliocentric model, did not provide any model.

When confronted about the leap second and that the earth is slowing down, your response was that I write gibberish.

The only thing that you are good at, is to write essays, maybe Hollywood is hiring, they need a few good story tellers.

This will be the last post in this thread for today.

You say you're a mechanical engineer.  If that's true then you certainly understand the concept of a boundary layer in fluid mechanics.  In order to demand a free body diagram of an airplane that keeps it in sync with the rotating globe you would have to first prove that the planetary boundary layer doesn't exist as geophysical/fluid dynamics models prove they do.

Unless you disprove that then you have no cause for demanding an FBD that's any different than those already presented.

So, do you have any proof that the planetary boundary layer doesn't exist?

Mike

Blah, blah, blah blah
all talk and no math.

You mean the math I did to show how adding a leap second doesn't actually indicate Earth is slowing down and instead just indicates a day is actually slightly longer than 86400 seconds on average?
Or do you mean the math I did to show how observations of Polaris and the sun completely refute the idea of a flat Earth?
Or the math I did to show that a photon having some finite travel limit would violate the first law of thermodynamics?
Or the math I did to show that an experiment where you film yourself jumping using an iPhone has far too great an error to conclude what they claimed?

Should I go on?

You seem to be the one that is all talk and no math.
You keep bitching and moaning claiming that heat transfers disproves a spinning atmosphere, but you are yet to show this to be the case.

Where is your math to support it?

can't draw a Free Body Diagram that shows the forces that keep the airplane in sync with a spinning Earth.

I had no need to draw one. I explained it without one and I used the one you already provided (it already had the force on it).

Then you tell me that the atmosphere hold the plane in sync, but when asked for a Convection Heat Transfer Model of a spinning radiating earth which would show the height fo the velocity that the sphere would affect, would not provide anything.

Yes, and I explained why it wasn't needed. And you are yet to provide the model either, yet you keep appealing to it.

When confronted with old scientific book which states that the Moon accelerates and asked your to be shown in the heliocentric model, did not provide any model.

Yes, which states, with no real backing. I'd need to investigate it more.

When confronted about the leap second and that the earth is slowing down, your response was that I write gibberish.

No, my response was to completely disprove your claims.

This will be the last post in this thread for today.

Why not make it your last post forever? You never add anything of substance.

Blah, blah, blah blah

all talk and no math.

can't draw a Free Body Diagram that shows the forces that keep the airplane in sync with a spinning Earth.

Then you tell me that the atmosphere hold the plane in sync, but when asked for a Convection Heat Transfer Model of a spinning radiating earth which would show the height fo the velocity that the sphere would affect, would not provide anything.

When confronted with old scientific book which states that the Moon accelerates and asked your to be shown in the heliocentric model, did not provide any model.

When confronted about the leap second and that the earth is slowing down, your response was that I write gibberish.

The only thing that you are good at, is to write essays, maybe Hollywood is hiring, they need a few good story tellers.

This will be the last post in this thread for today.

Where's that map that fits with known reality?  Also how is I going on determining size and distance of the sun and moon?

Quote from: InFlatEarth on July 26, 2017, 03:20:29 AM

Blah, blah, blah blah
all talk and no math.

You mean the math I did to show how adding a leap second doesn't actually indicate Earth is slowing down and instead just indicates a day is actually slightly longer than 86400 seconds on average?
Or do you mean the math I did to show how observations of Polaris and the sun completely refute the idea of a flat Earth?
Or the math I did to show that a photon having some finite travel limit would violate the first law of thermodynamics?
Or the math I did to show that an experiment where you film yourself jumping using an iPhone has far too great an error to conclude what they claimed?

Should I go on?

You seem to be the one that is all talk and no math.
You keep bitching and moaning claiming that heat transfers disproves a spinning atmosphere, but you are yet to show this to be the case.

Where is your math to support it?

Quote from: InFlatEarth on July 26, 2017, 03:07:51 AM

can't draw a Free Body Diagram that shows the forces that keep the airplane in sync with a spinning Earth.

I had no need to draw one. I explained it without one and I used the one you already provided (it already had the force on it).

Quote from: InFlatEarth on July 26, 2017, 03:07:51 AM

Then you tell me that the atmosphere hold the plane in sync, but when asked for a Convection Heat Transfer Model of a spinning radiating earth which would show the height fo the velocity that the sphere would affect, would not provide anything.

Yes, and I explained why it wasn't needed. And you are yet to provide the model either, yet you keep appealing to it.

Quote from: InFlatEarth on July 26, 2017, 03:07:51 AM

When confronted with old scientific book which states that the Moon accelerates and asked your to be shown in the heliocentric model, did not provide any model.

Yes, which states, with no real backing. I'd need to investigate it more.

Quote from: InFlatEarth on July 26, 2017, 03:07:51 AM

When confronted about the leap second and that the earth is slowing down, your response was that I write gibberish.

No, my response was to completely disprove your claims.

Quote from: InFlatEarth on July 26, 2017, 03:07:51 AM

This will be the last post in this thread for today.

Why not make it your last post forever? You never add anything of substance.

I redid your math, I was wrong, but now a new problem has formed. The conservation of angular momentum. See the original thread to talkd about it.

I redid your math, I was wrong, but now a new problem has formed. The conservation of angular momentum. See the original thread to talkd about it.

Angular momentum is transferred from Earth to the moon. See details in other thread.