« previous next »
Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 5   Go Down

I love how you guys think there is no proof for a flat earth

  • 147 Replies
  • 41164 Views
*

bullhorn

  • Flat Earth Scientist
  • 634
  • +3/-4
I love how you guys think there is no proof for a flat earth
« on: December 03, 2005, 09:12:02 PM »
I have explained several times on this forum how the idea of gravity cannot possibly work.  I will give the example of how you round Earthers believe that the more mass an object has the greater its gravitational index/force. If we were to believe this as true, then how come when the Earth is bombarded by comets and asteroids and its weight is increased by tons upon tons everyday it is not harder for use to move on this "planet". Why after millions of years are we still able to move?  How is it possible that every year human beings are breaking records in sports, running faster, jumping higher?  That should be proof enough that the Earth is not round.  dont say becuase of advances in training. This may help becasue since the earth has no gravity we are able to advance on an equal plane.  TELL ME HOW THIS COULD NOT BE CORRECT
Logged
?

Mundi

  • 136
  • +0/-0
I love how you guys think there is no proof for a flat earth
« Reply #1 on: December 03, 2005, 10:00:00 PM »
Mass of earth: 5.97 x 10^24 kg.

Mass of Ceres (largest asteroid in the solar system, comprising approximately one-third of the total mass of all such asterioids): 8.7 x 10^20 kg.

If Ceres were, somehow, to become attached to the Earth, then the increase in mass would be approximately 0.0015%.

The masses of objects recorded in various locations on the Earth's surface using the same equipment changes by more than this amount, and therefore the additional mass would have no measurable effect on anybody's perceived weight, or the performance of athletes.

I say nothing as to whether gravity exists or not: the above merely states that even adding every asteroid in the solar system to the mass of our planet would have almost no proportional effect on its mass. If gravity exists, and does depend on mass, then the gravitational attraction would change, even over millions of years, by such a small amount that the overall effect on the Earth's mass would produce an overall difference in gravitation not particularly different from walking up a very small hill.

To summarize: even a lot of asteroids doesn't change the overall mass of the Earth by anything which makes any difference; it follows that the gravitational attraction, were it to exist, would not change either.

Your counter-example is therefore not applicable, and hence doesn't prove or disprove anything.

Do you have another?
Logged
*

bullhorn

  • Flat Earth Scientist
  • 634
  • +3/-4
I love how you guys think there is no proof for a flat earth
« Reply #2 on: December 03, 2005, 11:16:03 PM »
No, I believe that I am correct. I ask you how do you know the weight of the earth? How do you know the effect constant bombardment of mass to our planet effects it in the way you are sasying
Logged
?

EnragedPenguin

  • The Elder Ones
  • 1004
  • +1/-0
I love how you guys think there is no proof for a flat earth
« Reply #3 on: December 04, 2005, 05:49:37 AM »
Well first off, it doesn't matter if we know the exact wieght of the planet, he was just explaining how the effect of being struck by meteorites would be negligable compared to the huge size of the planet.

And second, the meteorites that strike the planet do not "increase the wieght by tons upon tons everyday" because most of the meteorites that hit are about the size of a golf ball, usually smaller.
Logged
A different world cannot be built by indifferent people.
?

Mundi

  • 136
  • +0/-0
I love how you guys think there is no proof for a flat earth
« Reply #4 on: December 04, 2005, 09:47:26 AM »
EnragedPenguin is correct in stating that it is not the exact masses of any object which make a difference: it is clear that, no matter what asteroid or meteorite may fall to the Earth, it is so much smaller than the Earth that no difference proportionally in mass occurs.

This we can see by just direct observation. We can measure distances on the Earth, and we can measure the diameter of objects which land on the Earth. Since the objects which land are made of (very) roughly the same kind of material of the Earth itself, i.e. rocks, we know that the added mass of a meteorite makes almost no difference to the mass of the Earth.

It is therefore still the case that bullhorn's counter-example is invalid. Does he or she have another?
Logged
*

bullhorn

  • Flat Earth Scientist
  • 634
  • +3/-4
I love how you guys think there is no proof for a flat earth
« Reply #5 on: December 04, 2005, 10:08:55 AM »
Some comets and asteroids from space ar the size of golf balls and they could be smaller as well even the shabe of sand, but the constant bombardment of matter into the planet should effect it in some way, what im saying is I have not noticed any change in my day to day life.
Logged
?

EnragedPenguin

  • The Elder Ones
  • 1004
  • +1/-0
I love how you guys think there is no proof for a flat earth
« Reply #6 on: December 04, 2005, 02:05:02 PM »
Quote from: "bullhorn"
Some comets and asteroids from space ar the size of golf balls and they could be smaller as well even the shabe of sand, but the constant bombardment of matter into the planet should effect it in some way, what im saying is I have not noticed any change in my day to day life.


There isn't a constant bombardment though, the only "constant bombardment" is from dust particles that hit the atmosphere, the particles never reach earth however, because they burn up in the atmosphere.

About a hundred meteorites hit the earth every year, which to me, doesn't  constitute a "constant bombardment of matter into the planet".
Logged
A different world cannot be built by indifferent people.
*

bullhorn

  • Flat Earth Scientist
  • 634
  • +3/-4
I love how you guys think there is no proof for a flat earth
« Reply #7 on: December 04, 2005, 02:57:23 PM »
Even if they "burn up" they are still part of the planet just in a gas state, what im asying is all the fine particals will effect the planet in some way due to their mass together
Logged
?

EnragedPenguin

  • The Elder Ones
  • 1004
  • +1/-0
I love how you guys think there is no proof for a flat earth
« Reply #8 on: December 04, 2005, 06:42:03 PM »
Quote from: "bullhorn"
Even if they "burn up" they are still part of the planet just in a gas state, what im asying is all the fine particals will effect the planet in some way due to their mass together


Has the dust that builds upon your furniture caused it to collapse? has it had any noticeable effect on it at all? no? the reason is because the weight of the the dust is insignificant compared to the size of the piece of furniture, you'd have to have dust piled up to your ceiling before it would begin to have a noticeable effect (and even then it probably wouldn't be enough).
Logged
A different world cannot be built by indifferent people.
?

Mundi

  • 136
  • +0/-0
I love how you guys think there is no proof for a flat earth
« Reply #9 on: December 04, 2005, 07:27:05 PM »
As stated in now several previous posts, and to risk belaboring the point, the matter falling to the Earth, even over millions of years, makes no appreciable difference to the mass of the planet.

It could come to several millions of tons (which is an vast overestimate of what actually does make it to Earth by several factors), turn into gas, whatever: even if it were millions of tons (and it's not, but no matter), it would still make no proportional difference AT ALL to the mass of the Earth.

It follows that there would be no appreciable difference to the gravitational attraction, should gravity exist.

So, for the third time, I state: the counter-example does not have any merit. Does bullhorn have another one?

(For he or she seems to be stalling.)
Logged
*

bullhorn

  • Flat Earth Scientist
  • 634
  • +3/-4
I love how you guys think there is no proof for a flat earth
« Reply #10 on: December 04, 2005, 08:24:57 PM »
Well, I think it is fare to say that we dont have all the facts that are nessisary to come up with a valid conclusion. I am simply stating one of the many ways in which the earth could not possibly be a sphere.
Logged
?

Mundi

  • 136
  • +0/-0
I love how you guys think there is no proof for a flat earth
« Reply #11 on: December 05, 2005, 06:40:17 AM »
Perhaps we do not have all the facts. But I certainly have enough facts, observable by anyone, to know the following are true.

(a) The earth is larger than the objects falling into it by a factor of many, many millions.

(b) The mass of an object is related to its size, if it's made of the same material.

It is impossible, therefore, for it to be the case that the gravity on Earth (should it exist), due to foreign bodies entering the Earth's system, increases over time to such an extent that it becomes noticeable to anyone.

Your original point (that the fact that we should not be able to move, but yet we are, makes gravitational attraction impossible) is therefore still invalid.

Do you have a new point, bullhorn? You still haven't shown anything, and this discussion seems not to be going in your favor. Perhaps you something else to prove your case.
Logged
?

landstander

I love how you guys think there is no proof for a flat earth
« Reply #12 on: December 05, 2005, 10:29:27 AM »
Quote from: "bullhorn"
Even if they "burn up" they are still part of the planet just in a gas state, what im asying is all the fine particals will effect the planet in some way due to their mass together


If they become part of the atmosphere they would not contribute to Earth's gravitational pull as we feel it at ground level.  They would however, increase mean atmopheric pressure very very very slightly.  So, have you noticed that theoretical increase in pressure throughout your day to day life?
Logged
*

bullhorn

  • Flat Earth Scientist
  • 634
  • +3/-4
I love how you guys think there is no proof for a flat earth
« Reply #13 on: December 05, 2005, 04:31:32 PM »
I think it is clear that the facts that you need to say with all accuracy that the material that enters the atmosphere does not effect the gravitational pull are not present, Nor have you stated why my theroy is false, really the only thing that you have said is you dont think the mass of the forign bodies will affect the World in which we live. Phisics and science would dictate that there is SOME effect and I am simply pointing out is why havent we even been able to measure the change on the most sensitive of all scientific devices.
Logged
?

EnragedPenguin

  • The Elder Ones
  • 1004
  • +1/-0
I love how you guys think there is no proof for a flat earth
« Reply #14 on: December 05, 2005, 05:50:20 PM »
It's also clear that the facts needed to say with all accuracy that the material that enters the atmosphere does effect the gravitational pull, are not present, so your point is moot and you need to give us a new one.
Logged
A different world cannot be built by indifferent people.
*

bullhorn

  • Flat Earth Scientist
  • 634
  • +3/-4
I love how you guys think there is no proof for a flat earth
« Reply #15 on: December 05, 2005, 06:19:11 PM »
No my point is not mute. The earth is flat so my point is VERY VALID.  The fact that the more mass something has the more gravity force it presents simmilar to why the Sun has intense gravity. THE sun is all gas as my example of the comets and asteroids breaking up in the atmosphere of the earth it All contributes to the overall mass of the planet, YOU have not shown why it cannot be true
Logged
?

EnragedPenguin

  • The Elder Ones
  • 1004
  • +1/-0
I love how you guys think there is no proof for a flat earth
« Reply #16 on: December 05, 2005, 07:10:54 PM »
The amount that gas contributes to the mass of the earth is less than the amount that the meteorites do. The reason the sun has such a strong gravitational pull is because it is HUGE. Pretend this 'O' is the earth, and your computer is the sun, thats about the proportional difference in size between them.

We have already explained to you how meteorites hitting the earth would not have a noticable effect on the gravitational pull (which, stop me if I'm wrong, is your whole point) so that is in no way evidence that the earth isn't round and you need to come up with a new argument.
Logged
A different world cannot be built by indifferent people.
?

Mundi

  • 136
  • +0/-0
I love how you guys think there is no proof for a flat earth
« Reply #17 on: December 05, 2005, 09:42:41 PM »
Seconded.

The purpose of the original post in this thread was to attempt to discredit the existence of gravity. If gravity were to exist, bullhorn argues in that post, and since gravity is apparently proportional to the mass of the objects involved, then after millions of years of matter falling into the Earth, the mass of the Earth would increase to such an extent that the gravity would prevent people from even moving. Since we can still move, he points out, it must follow that gravity does not exist.

What has been pointed out so far is that that the matter falling into the Earth, whether it becomes gas or stays in rock form, whether it is in the Earth's atmosphere or on the ground, the amount of matter relative to the size of the Earth is very, very tiny. It follows that any increase in gravity would be in proportion to this increase: that is to say, very, very small.

Using the hypothesis that bullhorn himself put forward in the first post, it would seem that his conjectured huge increase in gravity is not possible using meteorites, or even larger objects like asteroids, falling into the Earth.

It follows that his counter-example is not a counter-example.

I had trouble understanding the grammar of some of more recent posts which argue against the above, so I shall leave them for now. Suffice to say that, since there isn't enough material entering the Earth from space to make any difference in the gravitational attraction (if it does indeed exist) then the original point made is not a counter-example to the existence of gravity.

I'm awfully sorry: you really are going to have to come up with something better (I believe this thread was started with the purpose of proving gravity non-existent: that has not been shown, because a counter-example which is false proves nothing).
Logged
*

bullhorn

  • Flat Earth Scientist
  • 634
  • +3/-4
I love how you guys think there is no proof for a flat earth
« Reply #18 on: December 05, 2005, 09:44:51 PM »
That argument is valid. We will leave it at rest becuase its time to talk about another proof of a flat earth.  Lets think of the "round earth" in space.  How does the earth continue to fly through space without stopping
Space is not a vaccum as we know it contains Gas and different elements, including objects such as asteroids and comets.  How would the earth be able to maintain a constant speed without slowing down because there is nothing that we know about in the universe that can maintain a certain speed in the face of friction. What is pushing the earth? I bet you are going to tell me its Atlas.
Logged
?

Mundi

  • 136
  • +0/-0
I love how you guys think there is no proof for a flat earth
« Reply #19 on: December 05, 2005, 10:04:53 PM »
Again, I'm so sorry: you don't appear to be doing any better than before. This is unfortunately another example of precisely the same flaws in argumentation which were evident in similar posts. That's too bad.

Your so-called counter-example to the movement of the Earth through space, using the argument that the gas in the near-vacuum that the Earth is travelling through would eventually slow the Earth down, is again not a counter-example.

When objects move through liquids or gases there exists what is called drag, which is a slowing down of the object due to the friction of particles the object has to move in order to be in the space which the liquid or gas was occupying previously. The denser the medium in which the object travels, the greater the friction (more particles to move).

The example given is therefore not good since the medium of the near-vacuum is almost devoid of matter (we know that vacuums produced on Earth have almost no matter in them, and no drag can be observed there: the vacuum in space, called a 'hard' vacuum, is even more devoid; the drag would be even less), and therefore producing almost no friction. There is so little matter in space that the friction produced is unimaginably small (almost no particles to move). If there were a slowing down from this, it would be almost impossible to measure.

You're really not doing too well here, are you? That's a pity. I do hope you're remembering that you're supposed to be proving that the Earth is flat. Proof usually takes the form of logical arguments in a sequence, starting from agreed data or precepts and using an agreed method of moving from one point to the next. Perhaps you need to have someone give you a little help on this one?
Logged
*

bullhorn

  • Flat Earth Scientist
  • 634
  • +3/-4
I love how you guys think there is no proof for a flat earth
« Reply #20 on: December 05, 2005, 11:17:15 PM »
Actually you are the one who is not doing very well. I have demonstrated two ways in which the round Earth cannot possibly exist. over billions of years we should notice some sort of change in the speed, After all you stated that there is little affect on the Earth, but over billions of years little equals alot.  An example that you may understand becuase you have a hard time understanding what I am saying.  Go to your bathroom and put the tap on so only a drip occours every second. Now leave that bathtub for 1 day and go back and see how full it is. You would probably have a hard time understanding this, but after alot of those little drips enter the tub it will eventuall fill up.  If you have a hard time understanding this I suggest you try out this example. And I pitty you for being so gullable as to believe that we live on a round earth,
Logged
?

shrimpdesign

  • 9
  • +0/-0
I love how you guys think there is no proof for a flat earth
« Reply #21 on: December 06, 2005, 12:54:35 AM »
Bullhorn, that really isn't a experiment. It's a bad metaphor.

EnragedPenguin and Mundi has quite precisely given facts and commen sense in favor of his arguement, and you give guesswork such as, "Well .... space can't be completely empty, so if the earth was moving through it, wouldn't it slow down?"

Then EnragedPenguin or Mundi gives some very specific reasons why this isn't true, and then you dodge and bring up another topic instead of directly rebuting his evidence.

Not to mention numerous examples, evidence and arguements that you just side-step with some usually illogical statement that usually doesn't make sense.
Logged
Shrimp
?

Goethe

  • 61
  • +0/-0
I love how you guys think there is no proof for a flat earth
« Reply #22 on: December 06, 2005, 04:10:52 AM »
Quote from: "bullhorn"
over billions of years we should notice some sort of change in the speed, After all you stated that there is little affect on the Earth, but over billions of years little equals alot.

That argument is seriously flawed, for us to notice a change we'd have to have actually been around a billion years ago.
Logged
ttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Earth
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gravity
?

Mundi

  • 136
  • +0/-0
I love how you guys think there is no proof for a flat earth
« Reply #23 on: December 06, 2005, 07:15:33 AM »
Regrettably, bullhorn, I can assure you that I do completely understand the points you make (grammar and punctuation notwithstanding). It's just a shame they do not have any relevance to the topic in question.

I have stuck to using observable data that we can see for ourselves here on Earth, and in particular make no claims as to the Earth being round, or that gravity exists (the original point, and one which you have yet to successfully argue): in fact, I have not been proposing that either of these exist, and none of my refutations of your counter-examples have relied on any such claims.

But, as has been demonstrated and agreed upon by all the posters here but yourself, your examples are either irrelevant or false.

In this thread, the burden of proof is on you to make your case. If your examples have any flaws in them at all, they have to be discounted, since a flawed proof is no proof at all (a point which you have relied upon in other threads, I observe).

You will notice that in this particular thread (where you are offering "proofs" for a flat Earth, but they are of course just examples, which are not proofs anyway), people who disagree with you do not have to prove their case: that is a topic for those threads which are dealing with that subject. Here, they only have to point out the flaws in your arguments. But you do have to prove your case, and any example you raise which has a mistake in it must be disregarded since it needs to be without error in order to count as part of a proof. Any reasonable error which is brought up (where what we see around us does not match up with your example) negates the whole thing, and you have to give us another.

So bad examples, irrelevant examples, and bad metaphors might be what you think of as reasonable argument, but, unfortunately, they are not. Sidestepping issues when you are not doing very well, in particular the rather unsatisfactory conclusion:
Quote
That argument is valid. We will leave it at rest becuase its time to talk about another proof of a flat earth.

is hardly a sparkling rejoinder, or a witty repartee. I was so disappointed.

Like I said, you have to come up with something better if you want to prove your case. Do try harder: you were almost doing okay! So, as I have said now several times before: next!
Logged
*

bullhorn

  • Flat Earth Scientist
  • 634
  • +3/-4
I love how you guys think there is no proof for a flat earth
« Reply #24 on: December 06, 2005, 09:51:50 AM »
Well, You have not seen the round earth. You have not been to space to observe it. You have to look at other peoples work and you beleive what they tell you. They have been deceved as you have. Space contains gas. The movment against it creates friction. Small ammounts yes, but nevertheless friction.  Over billions of years it should have an effect. I have explained myself mundie and endangered. The fact that you have chosen to ignore the facts presented is funny and of a concerne to me.  I am a man who doesent take things at face value. You on the otherhand believe anything that someone tells you.  My grammer is very good, you seem to spend alot of time talking about it as If it has something to do with the issue.  Again I have showed you 2 ways in which the Earth cant be round.
Logged
?

Mundi

  • 136
  • +0/-0
I love how you guys think there is no proof for a flat earth
« Reply #25 on: December 06, 2005, 10:58:20 AM »
I make no claims about the roundness or otherwise of the Earth: I haven't argued either way on that in this thread.

Space does contain gas. But there would have to be something even denser than our atmosphere in space (which is instead a hard vacuum) to create enough drag to have any observable effect on the slowing of the Earth's motion through space, in our lifetimes at least.

But space is a near vacuum (almost no gas at all). Not enough to create an effect which we could notice.

I haven't ignored the facts: indeed, they have been accounted for as above and in previous posts. Taking the above at face value, as you say, one would conclude that the lack of enough gas in space to make a difference to the speed of the Earth does not prove or disprove anything.

If you are arguing for something, you must make sure that what you state is true in all of its details, not just some. That there is gas in space is undeniable. But is there enough to create drag? We have shown that there is not. Your example, therefore, is still false. This would be like claiming a glass of water is full because there is some water in it: of course, if there is only a drop of water, then it's not full. What went wrong? The details of how much water was in the glass were omitted from the argument, nullifying its applicability.

And [sic]: (bold emphasis added)
Quote
My grammer is very good, you seem to spend alot of time talking about it as If it has something to do with the issue.

Never mind. And it's really just as well I don't believe anything that someone tells me: if I'd listened to certain people on this site, for example, or learned logic from about half of the posters here, I'd be in trouble.

Oh well: I guess you gave it a go. But I think you might have to try a little harder next time. Isn't this fun?

Next!
Logged
?

EnragedPenguin

  • The Elder Ones
  • 1004
  • +1/-0
I love how you guys think there is no proof for a flat earth
« Reply #26 on: December 06, 2005, 11:47:21 AM »
It looks like Mundi has this well in hand withuot my help so I'll just add one thing, I enjoy debating this issue with flat earthers because it makes me look at why I believe what I believe, and if you can provide enough proof I might decide to change my mind and believe the earth is flat after all, but so far the flat earthers have been unable to do that and so I will continue to think the earth is round until you can.

I don't just blindly believe what other people tell me, I look at the evidence suporting their claims and then decide whether to believe it or not.
Logged
A different world cannot be built by indifferent people.
?

shrimpdesign

  • 9
  • +0/-0
I love how you guys think there is no proof for a flat earth
« Reply #27 on: December 06, 2005, 11:36:04 PM »
Quote from: "bullhorn"
You have to look at other peoples work and you beleive what they tell you. They have been deceved as you have.


Quote
Space contains gas.


Sooooo ... you've been to space and seen the gas hanging out? It seems you believe what people tell you too.
Logged
Shrimp
?

Mundi

  • 136
  • +0/-0
I love how you guys think there is no proof for a flat earth
« Reply #28 on: December 08, 2005, 06:17:12 AM »
. . . which just shows the kind of logic which is employed to "prove" that the Earth is flat. Of course, we haven't had the promised proof in this thread yet; I wonder if it's ever going to appear. The original proposer seems to be a bit quiet of late. I am beginning to wonder if a conversion has taken place . . .
Logged
?

Lykos7D0

  • 12
  • +0/-0
I love how you guys think there is no proof for a flat earth
« Reply #29 on: December 11, 2005, 05:49:05 PM »
Allow me to answer this question.

Lets speak hypothetically and say that we can neither confirmed nor deny the specific increase or decrease in Earth's mass over any measurable period of time.

Instead, let us look at the hypothetical view that there may be a steady increase or decrease in Earth's mass. This increase or decrease is perhaps so steady that we adapt to the increase or decrease of gravity so gradually that we cannot tell a noteably increasing challenge to move or act.

Also look at the ratio -as others have- of space mass and Earth mass. The change is so minor that if and when it does play a part in gravitation increase that we certainly can't notice it.

To see animators play with this -and I know this sounds too unrealistic and mostly unrelated (it is)- watch the Dragon Ball Z episode where a character goes to a planet 10x denser than earth.

"One more thing." Bullhorn, where do you get your facts about "tons" of matter hitting Earth? Is or is not this source different from the same source that has supposively decieved us in believing in a spherical Earth?

Many seek for consistancy but snatch at it randomly.
Logged
Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 5   Go Up
« previous next »