Parabolic Orbit vs Radial Orbit

I have been reading that the Flat Earther’s don’t have a model of the sun and the earth. Well, they might be right, but I will come back to you and say that the Spherical Earther’s don’t have a correct model either.

The Parabolic Orbit is pure fiction and I will explain why.

Take a yo-yo and spin it in the air. It will make a circular orbit because the tension in string will hold it in position. A string or rope can only have expansion forces; no compression forces. You can’t push something with a string, only pull.

In our yo-yo model, take the sun to be your hand and the earth to be the yo-yo.
The string is the force that binds the sun and the earth together and it can act only in one direction, it can’t do both pull and push.

In order to have a model of the Sun – earth rotation with an elliptical trajectory, with a yo-yo, that would mean that the string would have to change in size as it is spinning.

Which would mean that the gravitational forces of the sun to the earth will have to change, based upon the position.

Also from basic geometry, we know to plot a ellipse, you need to have two focal point where in a circle you have only one.

In the Heliocentric Model, we only have 1 focal point, the sun.

The elliptical orbit is pure fiction, but it was the only way that they could make the heliocentric hypothesis to work out.

Can the Spherical Earthers, build something that rotates in an elliptical orbit, like a motor?

Last time I checked they were all round.

They have created funny math to make it appear that it works, but it really does not. Like I say, make a yo-yo have an elliptical orbit and I will agree with you that I am wrong.

If the Earth can't be a tennis ball, then it can't be a yo-yo, either.  Try again.

Quote from: Kami on July 26, 2017, 01:54:20 AM

I have a dream, that one day, InFlatEarth will rise up and post something in the thread it belongs to, and not in five different threads all over the board!

We all have dreams

My dream is the scientist will tell the truth about the flat earth

Well, your dream came true. Actually it would appear that it came true quite some time ago. The earth isn't flat, the flat earth idea is wrong.
You must be happy about that, right?

And just on a completely unrelated side-note, demanding to be told the truth and to be told what you want to hear are not really the same thing.

The numbers don't lie...

Again, stop spamming the same shit all over the place. Deal with it in one thread.
It has been refuted there.

Quote from: InFlatEarth on July 26, 2017, 01:58:00 AM

Quote from: Kami on July 26, 2017, 01:54:20 AM

I have a dream, that one day, InFlatEarth will rise up and post something in the thread it belongs to, and not in five different threads all over the board!

We all have dreams

My dream is the scientist will tell the truth about the flat earth

They do, and have done for recorded history.
The Sumerians, Babylonians and early Chinese "scientisrs" (astronomers/astrologers) might have believed the earth was flat, but they told the truth as they saw it.

And I have not seen any evidence that any real scientist believes the earth flat, yet claims it to be a Globe.

If you are going to quote historical books, then you also have to quote the bible which contradict the heliocentric fair-tail.

As for the scientist, you only publish the material that supports your hypothesis, never research that goes against it!!

But thank God for the internet, where people can bypass the scientific journals and reach the people directly, just like Trump does!!!

This will be my last post for the day on this thread!!!

If you are going to quote historical books, then you also have to quote the bible which contradict the heliocentric fair-tail.

The Bible is the fairy tale, not a historical book.

As for the scientist, you only publish the material that supports your hypothesis, never research that goes against it!!

No. As a scientist you publish your findings, regardless of if they support your hypothesis or not. You try to reformulate your hypothesis if it was shown to be wrong.

If a scientist had serious evidence against the RE model or in favour of the FE model they would publish it, and likely get a Nobel prize for it.

But thank God for the internet, where people can bypass the scientific journals and reach the people directly, just like Trump does!!!

You means spouting pure bullshit without any system of peer review to point out it is bullshit.

What you can't explain in your Heliocentric fair-tail, you call it laughable.

Quote from: InFlatEarth

What on earth is a

Heliocentric fair-tail?

Little hint! When you indulge in copy-pasta, make sure you error-check the copy-source before you plaster your rubbish everywhere.

Bottom line you are always adding second to the clock, because the earth is slowing down.

Only slightly correct! If you want to see why your sums are all totally wrong,
read Heliocentric Hypothesis busted with mathematics and the moon!!! « Reply #79 on: Today at 09:22:29 PM »

Your Hypothesis has been busted!!!

What a joke! You say that over and over as though it means something.

The Heliocentric Globe has survived for over 300 years so far, so there's not much you can do about busting the it.

All you do is put up your own totally false straw-man arguments, the try to debunk you own argument.
That's what so many Flatists do and it proves nothing more that they don't understand the Heliocentric Globe.

Quote from: rabinoz on July 26, 2017, 02:31:52 AM

Quote from: InFlatEarth on July 26, 2017, 01:58:00 AM

Quote from: Kami on July 26, 2017, 01:54:20 AM

I have a dream, that one day, InFlatEarth will rise up and post something in the thread it belongs to, and not in five different threads all over the board!

We all have dreams

My dream is the scientist will tell the truth about the flat earth

They do, and have done for recorded history.
The Sumerians, Babylonians and early Chinese "scientisrs" (astronomers/astrologers) might have believed the earth was flat, but they told the truth as they saw it.

And I have not seen any evidence that any real scientist believes the earth flat, yet claims it to be a Globe.

If you are going to quote historical books, then you also have to quote the bible which contradict the heliocentric fair-tail.

As for the scientist, you only publish the material that supports your hypothesis, never research that goes against it!!

But thank God for the internet, where people can bypass the scientific journals and reach the people directly, just like Trump does!!!

This will be my last post for the day on this thread!!!

Do you have any faith left?  You keep trying to prove that the bible contradicts science and therefore science must be wrong.  You are not understanding the message at all.  You are getting faith confused with facts.  Religion require faith.  Religious faith is believing in a religion when there is no proof to support it, perhaps a lot of proof to deny it. 
I guess you do not have faith that God can do the impossible?  Oh that's right, your faith is in the book, told word of mouth for hundreds, a few stories in the thousands, of years then written and rewritten and rewritten and rewritten and rewritten and rewritten by man.  You keep bringing up God and the bible, it is rather disgusting how you are trying to wield them as some form of weapons out of context. 
You do know it is people like you that give Christians a bad name right?  Sitting on a fake moral throne, passing judgement.     

Actually scientist do tons of research with the express intent to contradict a former finding.  To test it.  It's an integral part of the scientific process.

The numbers don't lie...

True. Also true: you don't understand what they're saying.

Their is a linear line in the graph between Leap seconds added and the number of years that have passed

[/url]

The data

<removed to save space, see here if desired>

OK. So? A straight line means the earth's rate of rotation isn't changing. The line would be curved upward if the earth's rotation were slowing, but over the 44.5 years between the first and last data points, the rate hasn't changed enough to see that amongst the noise. This graph suggests that the definition of the second is a little too short.

Here's a better plot, without the extraneous data points.



Plotted data from here: https://www.timeanddate.com/time/leap-seconds-future.html

This plot also shows the formula for the regression line.  Since X = 0 is the beginning of Dec 31, 1899, the intercept is kinda meaningless, but the slope is what we're interested in. Excel reckons time in days, so 0.0016x means the earth's rotation averages 1.6 millisecond longer than the nominal civil day (neglecting leap seconds), accumulating to a full second of error every 625 days, on average (1/0.0016 = 625).

There's no direct evidence in these plots that the earth's rotation is slowing. If anything, it vaguely suggests that it's speeding up, but there too much noise in the data to draw definitive conclusions from this data alone.