When will RE Community Accept Defeat?

  • 1981 Replies
  • 230608 Views
*

Plat Terra

  • 1121
  • I am a Neutral Flat Earther
Re: When will RE Community Accept Defeat?
« Reply #1500 on: September 01, 2019, 06:49:29 PM »
I don’t have an answer for you at this time.
Then why not accept defeat?


Because Earth is a Plane.
Then why don't you have a flat earth model that works better than the RE model?

We do and if we just use a concave disk filled with water, rocks and sand in the middle laying on the ground, it would be 100% better than your Globe Model that can’t hold water. We would get a grade of A and you a F for failing to do so after 500 years.  You need it to hold water to compete. That's important for life. This isn't a game for toys.

What drugs are you on, and where can I get some? The sheer mass of the earth causes everything to stick to it's surface by a force called GRAVITY. You can't recreate that effect, with a tennis ball, and a glass of water, numb nuts.

You get an A++ for STUPID.

A sphere earth with a 3959 mile radius is not very big. Hell, there would be a curvature drop of 6' just 3 miles out all around you. And you wonder why it floods.  Massive is an infinite Plane.

Technically, you can't modify 'infinite' with 'massive'. 'Infinite' is considered an absolute. Infinite is neither massive nor tiny, it is endless, therefore no scale can be applied to it in its entirety because it has no entirety.

As for a sphere with a 3959 mile radius and a 25,000 mile circumference, on a human scale, now that is massive.

Can we stop using primitive and outdated imperial measurements? It's 6,357km radius and 40,075km circumference.

Thank you.

Oh wait. America is still regressive in this time. No worries, I'll wait a few decades for you to finally move in sync with the rest of the world.... ::) ::) 8)

What, back to school with Stash and watch him get beat up all the time?  :)
« Last Edit: September 01, 2019, 07:06:04 PM by Plat Terra »
The Globe community is incapable of verifying Earth has the curvature calculated through experiment or claimed by anyone. They can measure a band of helium but they can’t actually measure and verify the dictated curvature of any landmass or canal. Why not?

*

rabinoz

  • 26528
  • Real Earth Believer
Re: When will RE Community Accept Defeat?
« Reply #1501 on: September 01, 2019, 06:56:26 PM »
Can we stop using primitive and outdated imperial measurements? It's 6,357km radius and 40,075km circumference.

Thank you.

You'll have to forgive the poor dears in the USA and the UK. They'll get on board one century.

*

markjo

  • Content Nazi
  • The Elder Ones
  • 42535
Re: When will RE Community Accept Defeat?
« Reply #1502 on: September 01, 2019, 07:57:08 PM »
I don’t have an answer for you at this time.
Then why not accept defeat?


Because Earth is a Plane.
Then why don't you have a flat earth model that works better than the RE model?

We do and if we just use a concave disk filled with water, rocks and sand in the middle laying on the ground, it would be 100% better than your Globe Model that can’t hold water. We would get a grade of A and you a F for failing to do so after 500 years.  You need it to hold water to compete. That's important for life. This isn't a game for toys.
How does your FE model explain the phases of the moon?
Science is what happens when preconception meets verification.
Quote from: Robosteve
Besides, perhaps FET is a conspiracy too.
Quote from: bullhorn
It is just the way it is, you understanding it doesn't concern me.

*

rabinoz

  • 26528
  • Real Earth Believer
Re: When will RE Community Accept Defeat?
« Reply #1503 on: September 01, 2019, 09:20:43 PM »
Then why don't you have a flat earth model that works better than the RE model?

We do.
I will not believe that until you either
  • Present your flat earth model here in detail or
  • post a link to where such a description might be found.
Over to you.

Quote from: Plat Terra
This isn't a game for toys.
Well it's time you stopped posting silly incorrect memes and started presenting a working flat earth model because the bits you've hinted at so far fail miserably!

For example I've present numerous reasons why the one based on a north pole centred circular disk cannot be right.
Just two of those reasons were:
  • Southern Star trails and the necessity of a single South Celestial Pole and
  • The many known polar circumnavigations on record.
Again over to you.

*

kopfverderber

  • 441
  • Globularist
Re: When will RE Community Accept Defeat?
« Reply #1504 on: September 01, 2019, 09:47:00 PM »
   I don’t have an answer for you at this time. The camera is just a few feet from the concave plate. Its not thousands of miles away and there’s not multiple layers atmosphere with different types of gas that can make light bend multiple times. Science is involved with such a dome system.

I do know that no answer I give is going to make land and water rise up and curve so you can see if it measures to a sphere with a 3959 mile radius. Actually proving curvature should be your main concern.

Light bends towards the normal when going into a medium with higher refractive index.  Earth's atmosphere would make your  disk moon look even more ellipsoid. That makes me wonder what kind of atmosphere would be needed for FE.

Against all available evidence you have decided that the earth is flat.

Since a spheric moon doesnt work well with your FE you also decide that the moon is a concave disk facing down. Again without evidence.

But that doesn't work either so you appeal to some sort of magic bendy light  which would make the moon look like a sphere to everyone while being a disk facing down. Again without evidence or proof.

But bendy light still doesnt solve your problem. It doesnt explain why we see an inverted moon looking from north vs south, but not west vs east. You didnt even attempt to explain moon phases yet.

FE atmosphere must be some sort of magical arrangement made to fix all FE problems. First the atmospheric bank, then atmospheric lensing , weather effects that make mountains cast a shadow under clouds and now bendy light caused by atmospheric gases.
You must gather your party before venturing forth

*

Wolvaccine

  • EXTRA SPICY MODE
  • 25833
Re: When will RE Community Accept Defeat?
« Reply #1505 on: September 01, 2019, 09:54:03 PM »
   I don’t have an answer for you at this time. The camera is just a few feet from the concave plate. Its not thousands of miles away and there’s not multiple layers atmosphere with different types of gas that can make light bend multiple times. Science is involved with such a dome system.

I do know that no answer I give is going to make land and water rise up and curve so you can see if it measures to a sphere with a 3959 mile radius. Actually proving curvature should be your main concern.

Light bends towards the normal when going into a medium with higher refractive index.  Earth's atmosphere would make your  disk moon look even more ellipsoid. That makes me wonder what kind of atmosphere would be needed for FE.

Against all available evidence you have decided that the earth is flat.

Since a spheric moon doesnt work well with your FE you also decide that the moon is a concave disk facing down. Again without evidence.

But that doesn't work either so you appeal to some sort of magic bendy light  which would make the moon look like a sphere to everyone while being a disk facing down. Again without evidence or proof.

But bendy light still doesnt solve your problem. It doesnt explain why we see an inverted moon looking from north vs south, but not west vs east. You didnt even attempt to explain moon phases yet.

FE atmosphere must be some sort of magical arrangement made to fix all FE problems. First the atmospheric bank, then atmospheric lensing , weather effects that make mountains cast a shadow under clouds and now bendy light caused by atmospheric gases.

What's magic about light being able to bend? Hold a straight object like a ruler half in and out of water. Heard of refraction?

You roundtards try to make fun and discredit flatties by saying 'bendy light' but it only shows your own incompetence

Quote from: sokarul
what website did you use to buy your wife? Did you choose Chinese over Russian because she can't open her eyes to see you?

What animal relates to your wife?

Know your place

Re: When will RE Community Accept Defeat?
« Reply #1506 on: September 01, 2019, 09:58:36 PM »
I don’t have an answer for you at this time.
Then why not accept defeat?


Because Earth is a Plane.
Then why don't you have a flat earth model that works better than the RE model?

We do and if we just use a concave disk filled with water, rocks and sand in the middle laying on the ground, it would be 100% better than your Globe Model that can’t hold water. We would get a grade of A and you a F for failing to do so after 500 years.  You need it to hold water to compete. That's important for life. This isn't a game for toys.

What drugs are you on, and where can I get some? The sheer mass of the earth causes everything to stick to it's surface by a force called GRAVITY. You can't recreate that effect, with a tennis ball, and a glass of water, numb nuts.

You get an A++ for STUPID.

A sphere earth with a 3959 mile radius is not very big. Hell, there would be a curvature drop of 6' just 3 miles out all around you. And you wonder why it floods.  Massive is an infinite Plane.

The Earth curves on average, 11cm per 1 kilometre. If you were to piece together a 3 dimensional globe of the Earth, complete with land contours, you would understand exactly why it floods.

Like all of us, you are living upon this planet, like a skin cell lives on your own body. You are too small, and too close to the earth surface. You can't see the forest from the trees.

Maybe you never will. So be it.

*

kopfverderber

  • 441
  • Globularist
Re: When will RE Community Accept Defeat?
« Reply #1507 on: September 01, 2019, 10:13:59 PM »
   I don’t have an answer for you at this time. The camera is just a few feet from the concave plate. Its not thousands of miles away and there’s not multiple layers atmosphere with different types of gas that can make light bend multiple times. Science is involved with such a dome system.

I do know that no answer I give is going to make land and water rise up and curve so you can see if it measures to a sphere with a 3959 mile radius. Actually proving curvature should be your main concern.

Light bends towards the normal when going into a medium with higher refractive index.  Earth's atmosphere would make your  disk moon look even more ellipsoid. That makes me wonder what kind of atmosphere would be needed for FE.

Against all available evidence you have decided that the earth is flat.

Since a spheric moon doesnt work well with your FE you also decide that the moon is a concave disk facing down. Again without evidence.

But that doesn't work either so you appeal to some sort of magic bendy light  which would make the moon look like a sphere to everyone while being a disk facing down. Again without evidence or proof.

But bendy light still doesnt solve your problem. It doesnt explain why we see an inverted moon looking from north vs south, but not west vs east. You didnt even attempt to explain moon phases yet.

FE atmosphere must be some sort of magical arrangement made to fix all FE problems. First the atmospheric bank, then atmospheric lensing , weather effects that make mountains cast a shadow under clouds and now bendy light caused by atmospheric gases.

What's magic about light being able to bend? Hold a straight object like a ruler half in and out of water. Heard of refraction?

You roundtards try to make fun and discredit flatties by saying 'bendy light' but it only shows your own incompetence
Read the whole quote:

Light bends towards the normal when going into a medium with higher refractive index.  Earth's atmosphere would make your  disk moon look even more ellipsoid. That makes me wonder what kind of atmosphere would be needed for FE.
You must gather your party before venturing forth

*

mak3m

  • 737
Re: When will RE Community Accept Defeat?
« Reply #1508 on: September 02, 2019, 12:38:33 AM »
Can we stop using primitive and outdated imperial measurements? It's 6,357km radius and 40,075km circumference.

Thank you.

You'll have to forgive the poor dears in the USA and the UK. They'll get on board one century.

Hahaha hands up to that one, although in my defence I was taught the metric system by people who had used imperial all their lives
You have to learn to reply without quoting a long previous answer.

*

Wolvaccine

  • EXTRA SPICY MODE
  • 25833
Re: When will RE Community Accept Defeat?
« Reply #1509 on: September 02, 2019, 12:41:33 AM »
Can we stop using primitive and outdated imperial measurements? It's 6,357km radius and 40,075km circumference.

Thank you.

You'll have to forgive the poor dears in the USA and the UK. They'll get on board one century.

Hahaha hands up to that one, although in my defence I was taught the metric system by people who had used imperial all their lives

How much push back would there be in America if the President said he wanted to eventually change over to the metric system. Of course it would cost many billions of dollars but hell you could at least standardise it for use in science.

Star Trek had the foresight of using metric and Kelvins though.  8)

Quote from: sokarul
what website did you use to buy your wife? Did you choose Chinese over Russian because she can't open her eyes to see you?

What animal relates to your wife?

Know your place

*

mak3m

  • 737
Re: When will RE Community Accept Defeat?
« Reply #1510 on: September 02, 2019, 12:44:54 AM »
Can we stop using primitive and outdated imperial measurements? It's 6,357km radius and 40,075km circumference.

Thank you.

You'll have to forgive the poor dears in the USA and the UK. They'll get on board one century.

Hahaha hands up to that one, although in my defence I was taught the metric system by people who had used imperial all their lives

How much push back would there be in America if the President said he wanted to eventually change over to the metric system. Of course it would cost many billions of dollars but hell you could at least standardise it for use in science.

Star Trek had the foresight of using metric and Kelvins though.  8)

Im from the UK.

We have some kind of half way house system. Road signs are still mph and feet and inches, but if you try and sell fruit and veg in pounds and ounces you get taken to court ;)
You have to learn to reply without quoting a long previous answer.

*

rabinoz

  • 26528
  • Real Earth Believer
Re: When will RE Community Accept Defeat?
« Reply #1511 on: September 02, 2019, 01:01:50 AM »
Of course it would cost many billions of dollars
I imagine that's all that's both the US and the UK back. But if the US had adopted it everywhere back in 1866 things might have been different.
Quote
In 1866, the U.S. Congress authorized the use of the metric system and almost a decade later America became one of 17 original signatory nations to the Treaty of theMeter. A more modern system was approved in 1960 and is commonly known as SI or the International System of Units.
Great Britain didn't authorise it officially until after the SI system was introduced.
Quote
British Imperial System, traditional system of weights and measures used officially in Great Britain from 1824 until the adoption of the metric system beginning in 1965.

Quote from: Shifter
but hell you could at least standardise it for use in science.
Almost all science in the US already does use the SI. There are some exceptions, including NASA ::) who still use a mixed system even on the ISSUE.

*

kopfverderber

  • 441
  • Globularist
Re: When will RE Community Accept Defeat?
« Reply #1512 on: September 02, 2019, 01:34:14 AM »
What's magic about light being able to bend? Hold a straight object like a ruler half in and out of water. Heard of refraction?

You roundtards try to make fun and discredit flatties by saying 'bendy light' but it only shows your own incompetence

Here's more on the difference between known atmospheric refraction and bendy light. Let's hope flatties are able to understand diagrams:


« Last Edit: September 02, 2019, 01:46:10 AM by kopfverderber »
You must gather your party before venturing forth

Re: When will RE Community Accept Defeat?
« Reply #1513 on: September 02, 2019, 01:36:01 AM »
Of course it would cost many billions of dollars
I imagine that's all that's both the US and the UK back. But if the US had adopted it everywhere back in 1866 things might have been different.
Quote
In 1866, the U.S. Congress authorized the use of the metric system and almost a decade later America became one of 17 original signatory nations to the Treaty of theMeter. A more modern system was approved in 1960 and is commonly known as SI or the International System of Units.
Great Britain didn't authorise it officially until after the SI system was introduced.
Quote
British Imperial System, traditional system of weights and measures used officially in Great Britain from 1824 until the adoption of the metric system beginning in 1965.

Quote from: Shifter
but hell you could at least standardise it for use in science.
Almost all science in the US already does use the SI. There are some exceptions, including NASA ::) who still use a mixed system even on the ISSUE.

Tee hee!
Well it's a rather brisk 288K where I am, Rab.
What's it like in OZ, at 0.57 radians, bearing in mind your blood temperature is a toasty 310K.
Meanwhile I guarantee the shiny jets flying over are measuring their altitude in good old feet (well, flight level if we are being really pedantic).

*

JackBlack

  • 21898
Re: When will RE Community Accept Defeat?
« Reply #1514 on: September 02, 2019, 01:40:38 AM »
We do
Sure doesn't seem like it.
Again, there are plenty of problems for a FE which have been raised and all you have been able to do is appeal to ignorance to say there might not be a problem without providing a solution.
Meanwhile you are yet to provide a single actual problem with the RE.
So it sure seems like the RE model is vastly superior to FE.

Sure you could see it on your sphere earth right after the sun went down.
Not easily.
Right after the sun sets you have a region of time known as twilight where the sun is still illuminating the atmosphere above you.
It would still be quite difficult to record. And as I have already pointed out, it is only a tiny sliver that would be visible.

You have provided absolutely no justification for why there should be pictures of it all over the place.

So no, still not time to join the FE fantasy club. We will stick to the RE club which can actually explain reality.

Like I said, when you can actually show a problem with the RE, and provide FE solutions and explanations, then it would be. Until then, I will stick with reality.

*

rabinoz

  • 26528
  • Real Earth Believer
Re: When will RE Community Accept Defeat?
« Reply #1515 on: September 02, 2019, 03:25:05 AM »
Tee hee!
Well it's a rather brisk 288K where I am, Rab.
We use Celsius here and:
Quote
The Celsius scale, also known as the centigrade scale, is a temperature scale used by the International System of Units (SI). As an SI derived unit, it is used worldwide.
And here this morning the minimum was 10.2°C, maximum 29.3°C and now it is 19.7°C. So your 14.85°C sounds OK, but cooler than I like.

Quote from: Didymus
What's it like in OZ, at 0.57 radians,
I don't know because I live close to 0.48 rad S.

While radians is certainly the preferred unit for angle in physics the degree, minute and seconds is allowed for latitude/longitude or astronomy.
Quote
degree (in full, a degree of arc, arc degree, or arcdegree), usually denoted by ° (the degree symbol), is a measurement of a plane angle, defined so that a full rotation is 360 degrees. It is not an SI unit, as the SI unit of angular measure is the radian, but it is mentioned in the SI brochure as an accepted unit.
So I'll stick to saying that I live near 27.5° S, 153.0° E.

Quote from: Didymus
bearing in mind your blood temperature is a toasty 310K.
Close, let's call it 37°C.

Quote from: Didymus
Meanwhile I guarantee the shiny jets flying over are measuring their altitude in good old feet (well, flight level if we are being really pedantic).

I guess we're stuck that with that archaic unit and we can put the blame on the early proliferation of American and British aircraft in the early days.

But and there's always a "but" ;D:
Quote
Measuring Altitude: Feet vs. Meters
Here’s where things get tricky. Because of the proliferation of American and British aircraft during the early years of aviation, the imperial foot became standard for altitude measurement. China (PRC), North Korea, and Russia, however, use meters for altitude measurement.
[Update: Russian high altitude airspace changed to Flight Levels calibrated in feet. In 2017, all Russian airspace from the surface up, began transitioning to feet.]

It's a crazy world we live in!

?

frenat

  • 3752
Re: When will RE Community Accept Defeat?
« Reply #1516 on: September 02, 2019, 06:06:04 AM »
I don’t have an answer for you at this time.
Then why not accept defeat?


Because Earth is a Plane.
Then why don't you have a flat earth model that works better than the RE model?

We do and if we just use a concave disk filled with water, rocks and sand in the middle laying on the ground, it would be 100% better than your Globe Model that can’t hold water. We would get a grade of A and you a F for failing to do so after 500 years.  You need it to hold water to compete. That's important for life. This isn't a game for toys.

What drugs are you on, and where can I get some? The sheer mass of the earth causes everything to stick to it's surface by a force called GRAVITY. You can't recreate that effect, with a tennis ball, and a glass of water, numb nuts.

You get an A++ for STUPID.

A sphere earth with a 3959 mile radius is not very big. Hell, there would be a curvature drop of 6' just 3 miles out all around you. And you wonder why it floods.  Massive is an infinite Plane.
A drop due to curvature is not the same as an elevation change.
Did your parents have any children that lived?

Re: When will RE Community Accept Defeat?
« Reply #1517 on: September 02, 2019, 06:08:43 AM »
I don’t have an answer for you at this time.
Then why not accept defeat?


Because Earth is a Plane.
Then why don't you have a flat earth model that works better than the RE model?

We do and if we just use a concave disk filled with water, rocks and sand in the middle laying on the ground, it would be 100% better than your Globe Model that can’t hold water. We would get a grade of A and you a F for failing to do so after 500 years.  You need it to hold water to compete. That's important for life. This isn't a game for toys.

What drugs are you on, and where can I get some? The sheer mass of the earth causes everything to stick to it's surface by a force called GRAVITY. You can't recreate that effect, with a tennis ball, and a glass of water, numb nuts.

You get an A++ for STUPID.

A sphere earth with a 3959 mile radius is not very big. Hell, there would be a curvature drop of 6' just 3 miles out all around you. And you wonder why it floods.  Massive is an infinite Plane.
A drop due to curvature is not the same as an elevation change.
Did your parents have any children that lived?

I never knew my mother, she left before I was born.
Astronomer, photographer, and astro-photographer for 51 years. Satellite observer for 3 years, satellite builder in the 80's. Telescope maker and familiar with optical theory and designs. Machinists and machine tool programmer.

*

rabinoz

  • 26528
  • Real Earth Believer
Re: When will RE Community Accept Defeat?
« Reply #1518 on: September 02, 2019, 06:38:05 AM »
What drugs are you on, and where can I get some? The sheer mass of the earth causes everything to stick to it's surface by a force called GRAVITY. You can't recreate that effect, with a tennis ball, and a glass of water, numb nuts.

You get an A++ for STUPID.

A sphere earth with a 3959 mile radius is not very big. Hell, there would be a curvature drop of 6' just 3 miles out all around you. And you wonder why it floods.
You, like all flat earthers, have no sense of scale of perspective!

But the curvature in 3 miles would be more realistically described as the centre being only 1' 6" above a straight line joining the ends.
And that is less than 1 part in 10,000 - that's pretty flat!

And your silly comment about flooding is totally meaningless!
Whether the earth is flat or has a slight curve if water rises above the level of the land due extremely high tides or excessive rain the land floods!

But whatever you say, the earth is what it is and it has been shown for millennia that it cannot be flat!

If you disagree please present a flat earth map that explains all observations both on earth and in the movement of the Sun, Moon, planets and stars.

Over to you!

Put up your model or give up. To date, no flat earther has ever presented a flat earth model that meets these requirements - so prove me wrong, IF you can!

Quote from: Plat Terra
Massive is an infinite Plane.
No, "infinite" is infinitely larger than "massive"!

*

NotSoSkeptical

  • 8548
  • Flat like a droplet of water.
Re: When will RE Community Accept Defeat?
« Reply #1519 on: September 02, 2019, 06:47:06 AM »
Can we stop using primitive and outdated imperial measurements? It's 6,357km radius and 40,075km circumference.

Thank you.

You'll have to forgive the poor dears in the USA and the UK. They'll get on board one century.

Nothing wrong with the imperial system.
Rabinoz RIP

That would put you in the same category as pedophile perverts like John Davis, NSS, robots like Stash, Shifter, and victimized kids like Alexey.

*

rvlvr

  • 2148
Re: When will RE Community Accept Defeat?
« Reply #1520 on: September 02, 2019, 12:40:25 PM »
Yeah! Works for the Liberia, Myanmar and the good ol’ US of A, dammit!

*

Plat Terra

  • 1121
  • I am a Neutral Flat Earther
Re: When will RE Community Accept Defeat?
« Reply #1521 on: September 02, 2019, 12:50:10 PM »
A few complained cikljamas posted this in "HAPPY HOAX ANNIVERSARY!!! (Rockets can't fly in a vacuum)"

I see it's great for here. This will help the Globe Community understand why they have no choice but to accept defeat.
..............................................
Posted by cikljamas

Let me amuse you some more :

The Big Bang Has Big Problems

Keating: page 304: “Then it was Sungenis’s turn. Flora was not impressed  by  what  she  heard.  ‘He  argued  that  the  mass  of  the  universe isn’t accounted for by heliocentrism’ and ‘that scientists have  added  dark  matter  ad  hoc  to  make  equations  work.  He  argued  that  if  the  Big  Bang  is  true,  the  universe  must  be  homogeneous and yet did not explain why that should be true. If anything, Newtonian physics—the law of universal gravitation—says that things would form in clumps as larger masses attracted smaller masses into them.’ This was an astute observation. If one posits  that  at  the  beginning  of  the  Big  Bang...matter  or  proto-matter  was  spewed  out  in  all  directions,  it  is  hard  to  conceive  how that material could have radiated exactly equally toward all distant  point.  If  there  were  the  slightest  disturbance  from  equal distribution and speed, matter indeed would have begun to ‘form into  clumps.’  When  those  clumps  became  large  enough,  they  would  have  formed  stars  and  various  bodies  that  orbit  stars.  Perfect  homogeneity  is  precisely  what  one  would  not  expect  to  find.  This  means  that  the  lack  of  homogeneity,  which  can  be  seen  even  with  the  naked  eye,  is  no  argument  against  the  Big  Bang.”

R. Sungenis: This is what happens when people who don’t study the issue begin  to  think  they  are  experts  on  how  to  explain  it  when  presented  with  challenges. Neither Keating nor Flora understand what the problem is. The  Big  Bang,  in  opposition  to  Steady  State  cosmology,  believes  in  a  beginning  to  our  universe  –  an  explosion  of  some  undefined  infinitesimal  entity that occurred 13.7 billion years ago. This entity is said to have been spawned from a previous universe, and that universe from an even earlier universe (which, as will see in chapter 3, is the same mysticism inherent in ancient  Indian  cosmology  that  believed  the  world  rested  on  the  backs  of  successive turtles).  As  if  getting  something  from  nothing  is  not  enough  of  a  problem,  the  second  thorn  in  the  side  for  the  Big  Bang  appears  when  the  rate  of  the  explosion  must  be  determined.  If  it’s  too  slow,  the  universe  will  go  into  what is called the “Big Crunch,” that is, gravity will pull all the exploding parts back together before it can evolve into the organized biophilic system we see today. If it’s too fast, the universe will be diffuse and likewise will not   be   able   to   produce   galactic   structure   and   biological   life.   Like   Goldilocks  and  her  porridge,  the  expansion  must  be  just  right  otherwise  life  couldn’t  exist  (at  least  under  modern  science’s  illusory  belief  in  evolution  as  the  mechanical  process  that  produces  life).  Too  boot,  the  amount  of  matter  in  the  explosion  must  also  be  just  right.  Too  much  and  the universe will not expand. Too little and no complex structures will be formed.  As  one  scientist  put  it,  it’s  like  trying  to  balance  a  pencil  on  its  point. As  one  can  see,  modern  cosmology  is  in  a  real  pickle.  But  it  didn’t  start  here.  When  Newton  discovered  gravity,  one  of  his  first  problems  was  having to deal with Copernicus’ limited universe. Newton realized that the very  gravity  he  discovered  would  eventually  pull  the  stars  into  one  massive ball. In order to compensate for this problem, Newton opted for an infinite  universe.  As  time  went  by,  science  realized  there  were  too  many  problems  with  an  infinite  universe,  so  Einstein  tried  to  compensate  for  gravity   by   introducing   an   opposing   force,   which   he   called   the   “cosmological constant.” As Misner, et al, describe it:

In  1915,  when  Einstein  developed  his  general  relativity  theory,  the  permanence  of  the  universe  was  a  fixed  item  of  belief  in  Western  philosophy.  “The  heavens  endure  from  everlasting  to  everlasting.”  Thus,  it  disturbed  Einstein  greatly  to  discover  that  his  geometrodynamic  law  G  =  8πT  predicts  a  non-permanent universe;  a  dynamic  universe;  a  universe  that  originated  in  a  “big-bang”   explosion,   or   will   be   destroyed   eventually   by   contraction   to   infinite   density,   or   both.   Faced   with   this   contradiction  between  his  theory  and  the  firm  philosophical  belief of the day, Einstein weakened; he modified his theory.

His new theory would reverse the effects of gravity and keep the universe from falling in on itself. The universe would remain static, not expanding or  contracting.  It  would  also  follow  Mach’s  principle,  wherein  space  was  defined  by  the  matter  within  it.  But  Wilhelm  de  Sitter  didn’t  follow  Mach’s rules and created a variation for Einstein’s cosmological constant. De  Sitter  ignored  all  the  matter  of  the  universe  and  only  concentrated  on  its  quantum  energy,  an  energy  that  would  be  enough  to  propel  the  expansion of the universe. So the choice was between Einstein’s static but matter-filled   universe   and   de   Sitter’s   expanding   but   matter-deficient   universe. 

Next,   Alexander   Friedmann   then   fiddled   with   Einstein’s   math   and   eliminated the cosmological constant and produced an expanding universe still under the constraints of General Relativity. But this required that he make  the  equations  produce  a  universe  whose  matter  was  spread  out  evenly  and  was  the  same  everywhere  (i.e.,  isotropic  and  homogeneous),  otherwise  known  as  the  “cosmological  principle.”  This  made  Arthur Eddington   backtrack   to   point   out   that,   even   with   the   cosmological   constant, an Einstein-type universe was not really static or balanced. Since gravity  and  Einstein’s  cosmological  constant  (Λ)  had  to  be  balanced  so  perfectly   (e.g.,   like   balancing   a   pencil   on   its   point),   even   minute   fluctuations   would   produce   a   runaway   expansion   or   an   unstoppable   contraction.  The  best  Friedmann  could  do  was  propose  a  universe  with  enough matter (what he called “the critical density”) that would allow the universe to expand for eternity but at an ever decreasing rate, even though this solution itself was counterintuitive. As NASA puts it:

Einstein    first    proposed    the    cosmological    constant...as    a    mathematical   fix   to   the   theory   of   general   relativity.   In   its   simplest form, general relativity predicted that the universe must either  expand  or  contract.  Einstein  thought  the  universe  was  static,  so  he  added  this  new  term  [(Λ)  lambda]  to  stop  the  expansion.  Friedmann,  a  Russian  mathematician,  realized  that  this was an unstable fix, like balancing a pencil on its point, and proposed an expanding universe model, now called the Big Bang theory.

In  retrospect,  when  Hubble  relieved  some  of  the  problem  by  interpreting  the redshift of galaxies as a sign that the universe was expanding, still, in order  to  have  the  matter  move  yet  remain  homogeneous  (as  required  by  Friedmann’s  equation),  the  value  of  its  rate  of  expansion  (H);  as  well  as  the  value  of  its  density  (Ω);  and  the  energy  to  propel  the  expansion  (Λ), had to fulfill the Goldilocks rule – it had to be just right or there would be no  universe.  Various  scientists  have  spent  their  entire  careers  trying  to  figure out the perfect combination to these three numbers, but to no avail. Again,  it  is  like  trying  to  balance  a  pencil  on  its  point.  This  is  what  happens  when  the  universe  is  made  to  start  from  a  big  bang  instead  of  creative fiat – the math never produces what we actually see. Postulating a big  bang  is  easy. Making  it  work  with  all  the  other  laws  of  science  is  impossible.


The proponents of this convenient manipulation of data seem oblivious to their ploys. But George Ellis is not ashamed to admit that the whole thing is based on wishing or presuming that the Copernican Principle is true:

Additionally,   we   must   take   seriously   the   idea   that   the   acceleration apparently indicated by supernova data could be due to large scale inhomogeneity with no dark energy. Observational tests of the latter possibility are as important as pursuing the dark energy   (exotic   physics)   option   in   a   homogeneous   universe.   Theoretical  prejudices  as  to  the  universe’s  geometry,  and  our  place  in  it,  must  bow  to  such  observational  tests.  Precisely  because  of  the  foundational  nature  of  the  Copernican  Principle  for standard cosmology, we need to fully check this foundation. And  one  must  emphasize  here  that  standard  CMB  anisotropy  studies do not prove the Copernican principle: they assume it at the  start....The  further  issue  that  arises  is  that  while  some  form  of averaging process is in principle what one should do to arrive at  the  large  scale  geometry  of  the  universe  on  the  basis  of  observations,  in  practice  what  is  normally  done  is  the  inverse.  One  assumes  a  priori  a  FLRW model as  a  background  model,  and then uses some form of observationally-based fitting process to determine its basic parameters.

As  the  famous  20th-century  historian  Arthur C. Clarke once said: 

“The  lesson  to  be  learned  from  these  examples  is  one  that  can  never be repeated too often, and is one that is seldom understood by   laymen   –   who   have   an   almost   superstitious   awe   of   mathematics.   But   mathematics   is   only   a   tool,   though   an   immensely powerful one. No equations, however impressive and complex,  can  arrive  at  the  truth  if  the  initial  assumptions  are  incorrect.  It  is  really  quite  amazing  by  what  margins  competent  but  conservative  scientists  and  engineers  can  miss  the  mark,  when  they  start  with  the  preconceived  idea  that  what  they  are  investigating  is  impossible.  When  this  happens,  the  most  well-informed men become blinded by their prejudices and are unable to  see  what  lies  directly  ahead  of  them.  What  is  even  more  incredible,   they   refuse   to   learn   from   experience;   they   will   continue to make the same mistake over and over again. Some of my best friends are astronomers, and I am sorry to keep throwing stones at them – but they do seem to have an appalling record as prophets.”
----------------
The Globe community is incapable of verifying Earth has the curvature calculated through experiment or claimed by anyone. They can measure a band of helium but they can’t actually measure and verify the dictated curvature of any landmass or canal. Why not?

*

rvlvr

  • 2148
Re: When will RE Community Accept Defeat?
« Reply #1522 on: September 02, 2019, 01:02:06 PM »
What does that have to do with Earth being flat? Care to elaborate?

Re: When will RE Community Accept Defeat?
« Reply #1523 on: September 02, 2019, 01:12:17 PM »
Dowsnt chickikipijamas believe the earht is a ball?

*

Stash

  • Ethical Stash
  • 13398
  • I am car!
Re: When will RE Community Accept Defeat?
« Reply #1524 on: September 02, 2019, 01:25:35 PM »
Dowsnt chickikipijamas believe the earht is a ball?

Correct. He was a flat earther then became a Geocentrist globe believer maybe with a hint of young earth creationism thrown in there.

*

Plat Terra

  • 1121
  • I am a Neutral Flat Earther
Re: When will RE Community Accept Defeat?
« Reply #1525 on: September 02, 2019, 02:10:17 PM »
What does that have to do with Earth being flat? Care to elaborate?

Sure, I will elaborate. A hell of a lot of lies are connected to the Globe theory.
The Globe community is incapable of verifying Earth has the curvature calculated through experiment or claimed by anyone. They can measure a band of helium but they can’t actually measure and verify the dictated curvature of any landmass or canal. Why not?

*

Wolvaccine

  • EXTRA SPICY MODE
  • 25833
Re: When will RE Community Accept Defeat?
« Reply #1526 on: September 02, 2019, 02:17:49 PM »
Dowsnt chickikipijamas believe the earht is a ball?

Correct. He was a flat earther then became a Geocentrist globe believer maybe with a hint of young earth creationism thrown in there.

And he also has a point. Scientists have come up with all sorts of theories before they have all the data. How can you arrive at the truth? Your a biasing yourself from the start. You will only find the data that matches what you wish to believe is true. If a scientist came across data that was at odds or contradicted the 'big bang' origin, it would likely be dismissed or not taken seriously.

Quote from: sokarul
what website did you use to buy your wife? Did you choose Chinese over Russian because she can't open her eyes to see you?

What animal relates to your wife?

Know your place

*

Stash

  • Ethical Stash
  • 13398
  • I am car!
Re: When will RE Community Accept Defeat?
« Reply #1527 on: September 02, 2019, 02:17:55 PM »
What does that have to do with Earth being flat? Care to elaborate?

Sure, I will elaborate. A hell of a lot of lies are connected to the Globe theory.

Are you a bible based Geocentric globe believer now?

*

JackBlack

  • 21898
Re: When will RE Community Accept Defeat?
« Reply #1528 on: September 02, 2019, 02:21:50 PM »
I see it's great for here. This will help the Globe Community understand why they have no choice but to accept defeat.
You mean it will help us understand that dishonest FEers like you have no concern for the truth and will continue to bring up nonsense after nonsense to try to defend your failed fantasy?

The shape of Earth is not dependent upon the Big Bang. Especially not based upon outright lies and baseless assertions about it.

Now, have you figured out all the problems with a FE yet?

*

Stash

  • Ethical Stash
  • 13398
  • I am car!
Re: When will RE Community Accept Defeat?
« Reply #1529 on: September 02, 2019, 02:26:22 PM »
Dowsnt chickikipijamas believe the earht is a ball?

Correct. He was a flat earther then became a Geocentrist globe believer maybe with a hint of young earth creationism thrown in there.

And he also has a point. Scientists have come up with all sorts of theories before they have all the data. How can you arrive at the truth? Your a biasing yourself from the start. You will only find the data that matches what you wish to believe is true. If a scientist came across data that was at odds or contradicted the 'big bang' origin, it would likely be dismissed or not taken seriously.

Sure, that's why Big Bang is a theory. There are many theories regarding the origin of Universe. Seemingly kind of hard to pin down considering we're talking about the origin of the bloody Universe. Some have data that fit, perhaps some don't. It's not like we base the workings of our current reality on the theory, unlike how we do base a lot of the workings of reality based upon a globe earth; navigation, commerce, transport, etc.

Personally, I don't care about the origin of the Universe theories. We'll never know for sure anyway.