Let's talk about gravity

I don't need to make up magical non-existent forces to support my argument, I have the proof of my claims.

What proof?  You have proved nothing except that you don’t understand basic mechanics.

What you call “magical” has been measured and verified by countless people.

You own explanation that things fall down because god put them on the surface is far more magical, has zero evidence and is hilariously obviously just plain wrong.

God

There is no reason to believe your imaginary evil tyrant exists.
If you need to appeal to a god to claim god makes things fall down, your position is so horribly pathetic it isn't funny.
It means you have no explanation at all.

When lifted up, carried elsewhere, and put back down to the surface, or thrown into air, 10 feet away, they are still where they originate

So they fly back to where you picked them up from?
If not, they are not returning to where they originated.
It doesn't matter what BS you want to coat it in, the simple fact they are not returning to where they originated.

You may as well just say God makes things fall down.

Your claim of a magical force within Earth contradicts every ACTUAL FORCE ON EARTH!

We are appealing to a very real force which has been shown to exist countless times.
A force which acts just like the other fundamental forces.
A force which clearly resists motions against it.
A force which varies depending on distance.

You are yet to provide a single example of how it contradicts every other force.

Conversely, you are appealing to a magic sky fairy of which there is not a single shred of evidence to indicate it exits which withstands even basic scrutiny.
You are claiming this magic sky fairy magically makes things fall for no reason at all.
So don't suggest we are the ones appealing to magic.

God created objects with mass and density, to live on Earth, not in air. That's why God made air with little mass and density, so objects fall through it to the surface, where all things originate, and made to exist on.

Following this line of make believe, your imaginary fiend made water to live on the surface of Earth, not in air, so when you heat water up and make it boil, turning it into a gas, it should remain on Earth's surface, where your imaginary fiend made it to live. But in reality, we observe water vapour go up, into the air, not down to Earth. It doesn't even need us to lift it up, it just goes up all by itself, directly defying the will of your imaginary fiend.
Likewise, your imaginary fiend made nitrogen and oxygen exist above Earth, not on its surface. Yet when we liquify it, it falls just like other dense fluids, in direct defiance of the will of your imaginary fiend.

And while we are at it, in your fairy tale book, your magic fiend didn't just make water on Earth, instead it made water above Earth in your magic firmament, of which there is also no evidence of its existence, and under Earth.
However, this magic water didn't want to just stay where God put it.
Instead in the first book of genocide, the evil tyrant decided to open the flood gates and commit a massive act of genocide by having the water above fall down and the water below Earth rise above it.

So even though the water originated in a particular location, it didn't stay there.
So that also shows your delusional BS is delusional even with your fantasy of a magic sky fairy.

No need for magical forces, to 'pull all things down to Earth', or 'hold all things down to Earth'

You mean there is no need for real forces, because you can just have your magic sky fairy sprinkle its magic pixie dust to have everything just magically work.

Mass and density of objects IS greater than that of air, it isn't 'made up', it is true.

No one is suggesting mass and density is not real.
The problem for you is that it doesn't explain why anything should move, nor why it should move in a particular direction, nor why it should accelerate at a particular rate.
In short, it explains nothing.

Only your magical force is made up.

Your imaginary sky fiend is made up.
Gravity is backed up by mountains of evidence and there is not a single reason to think it isn't real.
You not liking that wont change that facts.

This isn't about any religion, it's based on the evidence, nothing else.

You invoked a god, and effectively claimed that it is gods will.
That makes it religion.
It certainly has nothing to do with evidence, as there is no evidence to support any of your nonsense.

Everything on Earth, has always existed on Earth, based on all of the evidence.

Pure BS.
There is absolutely no evidence to indicate everything currently on Earth has always been on Earth.
Instead there is plenty of evidence that meteors from space collide with Earth.
If you wish to falsely claim that everything has always existed on Earth, that is your personal belief which is an outright rejection of the available evidence.

I follow what the evidence is

If you followed the evidence you would accept that things don't all originate on Earth, that Earth is round, and that gravity is real.
Instead you do whatever you can to escape evidence, declaring anything which doesn't fit your fantasy as a fabrication.

Why would you dispute all the evidence, without any evidence to oppose it? Any idea?

That is a good question. Why do you dispute all the evidence, just making up pure BS, and then falsely claiming your BS is supported by evidence, when you provide none?

I have the proof of my claims.

Then why do you refuse to provide any?

Objects, to our knowledge, have always existed on Earth, or its waters. You have no proof of it otherwise.

This is not how proof works.
This is you trying to shift the burden of proof.
It is equivalent to demanding you prove that there isn't a magical invisible dragon hidden under my bed, and me boldly proclaiming that because you can't, it proves I'm correct.

This just further shows that you have no proof of your claims.
All you have are baseless claims.
That is not following the evidence.

Even more, as already pointed out, we have evidence that meteors fall from space onto Earth.
So not only do you have no evidence for your claims, the actual evidence goes directly against it.

So why would there be a force, pulling us down to Earth, or holding us down to Earth, there's and no need for such a thing, anyway!

To explain why things fall and why they remain on Earth.
Why claim there is no need for such a force?
The simple evidence that even you would be able to obtain gives you Newtonian mechanics.
This means that if you throw something up into the air, without another force acting on it, it will continue to go up forever.
That is why you need a force, to make things stop just going up, and then to accelerate them to make them fall back down.

And I've told you why - they aren't in air, first of all, they are on the surface, first of all, and THEN put up into air, by a force acting on them.

And we have told you why that is pure BS that doesn't explain it.
Objects start in a particular location, we can move them around in any direction, making this point of origin in any arbitrary direction from where it started, yet the object only falls down.
Objects can be put to the right by a force acting on them, and that doesn't cause them to fall to the left.
We can even go to a cliff face and pull an object off it to the right, holding it quite close to the cliff face, and when released, it falls down, not towards the much closer surface of Earth to the left.

All your attempts to appeal to down being special amounts to just claiming they fall down.
It provides no reason for why they fall down.

Their mass and density make them fall through air, downward to the surface.

This makes no sense. There is no reason for mass and density to make them fall. You need a force to do that. Mass and density are not forces. They provide no directionality.
Saying mass and density makes them fall through the air is no better than saying mass and density makes them do circles around your house.

There's nothing made up at all, it's entirely fact.

It is almost entirely made up, with only very little fact.
The only factual component is that objects have mass and density, and (because of gravity) objects with more mass and density than the fluid they are in will be at the bottom of the fluid.

So they fly back to where you picked them up from?
If not, they are not returning to where they originated.
It doesn't matter what BS you want to coat it in, the simple fact they are not returning to where they originated.

They originated on the Earth's surface, nowhere BUT on the Earth's surface. You think they originate somewhere else? Where would that be?

We are appealing to a very real force which has been shown to exist countless times.
A force which acts just like the other fundamental forces.
A force which clearly resists motions against it.
A force which varies depending on distance.

You are yet to provide a single example of how it contradicts every other force.

It's the very OPPOSITE of actual forces. It offers NO resistance against opposing forces, unlike actual forces.

There is NO way to DEMONSTRATE your magical force even exists, unlike every actually force.

Let's compare it to magnetic force - when you pull away a magnet from a metal object, you feel the RESISTANCE from the magnet, right?
pull
Or, when you put a piece of metal near a magnet, you feel the magnet draw the metal piece toward it, right?

In both examples, you feel the MAGNETIC FORCE from the magnet, through your hand, either resist your pull, or the pull TOWARDS the magnet, in each case.

That is what an ACTUAL force feels like - it is unmistakeable!

Following this line of make believe, your imaginary fiend made water to live on the surface of Earth, not in air, so when you heat water up and make it boil, turning it into a gas, it should remain on Earth's surface, where your imaginary fiend made it to live. But in reality, we observe water vapour go up, into the air, not down to Earth. It doesn't even need us to lift it up, it just goes up all by itself, directly defying the will of your imaginary fiend.
Likewise, your imaginary fiend made nitrogen and oxygen exist above Earth, not on its surface. Yet when we liquify it, it falls just like other dense fluids, in direct defiance of the will of your imaginary fiend.

And while we are at it, in your fairy tale book, your magic fiend didn't just make water on Earth, instead it made water above Earth in your magic firmament, of which there is also no evidence of its existence, and under Earth.

Now you're rambling incoherently, but it's all the same reason I told you - density and mass.

However, this magic water didn't want to just stay where God put it.
Instead in the first book of genocide, the evil tyrant decided to open the flood gates and commit a massive act of genocide by having the water above fall down and the water below Earth rise above it.

So even though the water originated in a particular location, it didn't stay there.
So that also shows your delusional BS is delusional even with your fantasy of a magic sky fairy.

More incoherent rambling. Why are you trying to 'quote' something from the Bible, which you've already dismissed as nonsense? At least get your story straight, before you try twisting it around!

There is absolutely no evidence to indicate everything currently on Earth has always been on Earth.

Really?

Do you have any evidence to indicate otherwise?

No, there IS no such evidence!

Based on all the AVAILABLE EVIDENCE, everything ON the Earth, has always EXISTED on the Earth, right?


Why would you argue for something that has NO evidence supporting it?
We already KNOW why, don't we?

You've been resorting to arguments about 'comets from outer space', which NOBODY can prove, and think that's a better case than ACTUAL objects on Earth, which have always existed on Earth, which NOBODY can dispute!

Come on, this is pathetic!

They originated on the Earth's surface

It originated at a particular point on Earth's surface.
It doesn't fall back to that point.
That means it doesn't fall back to its point of origin.
And in some cases it doesn't even fall towards the closest surface.

Again you are wrong.
If you want to appeal to the point of origin, then appeal to the POINT of origin.
That means you need to claim if you move something to the right it will fall back to the left.
If you aren't willing to do that, then stop repeating the same ignorant BS by falsely claiming it falls back towards its point of origin.

Instead just say what you really mean, that it falls down, for no reason at all.

It's the very OPPOSITE of actual forces. It offers NO resistance against opposing forces, unlike actual forces.
There is NO way to DEMONSTRATE your magical force even exists, unlike every actually force.
Let's compare it to magnetic force - when you pull away a magnet from a metal object, you feel the RESISTANCE from the magnet, right?
pull
Or, when you put a piece of metal near a magnet, you feel the magnet draw the metal piece toward it, right?

You have spouted all this BS before, and had it exposed as BS before.

Repeating the same BS wont magically make it true.
So why repeat it now as if it hasn't already been refuted?

Gravity matches all of what you claim for real forces.
It offers resistance, just like real forces.
You feel this resistance when you try to lift a heavy object or when you try to support a heavy object against gravity.
When you lift an object up you feel gravity pulling it back down.
If you hold a heavy object above Earth you feel gravity pulling it down.

So you most certainly feel it.

If you didn't, you could walk up to a car, and just throw it up in the air as if it was nothing.
Or you could have a car run over you, as if it was nothing.

Likewise, there are plenty of ways to demonstrate that gravity exists, the simplest of which is simply dropping something, or measuring its weight.
The more precise test is cavendish.
And there are also practical examples of satellites in orbit based on gravity.

So gravity very much matches what you expect for a real force.
So much so that you claim it is unmistakeable.
This means your claims about it aren't just you not understanding; instead they are you blatantly lying, wilfully rejecting reality, all so you can try and save your fantasy.

Now you're rambling incoherently

You mean making a simple coherent argument that you cannot refute or even attempt to.
So instead of even trying to refute it, you just insult me and deflect.

it's all the same reason I told you - density and mass.

And yet again you change your reason.
Like I have said before MAKE UP YOUR MIND!
Does it fall towards its point of origin, or does it fall because it is more dense?
You can't have both.

If it is falling because of its point of origin, then any water that originated on Earth's surface should fall to Earth's surface.
Instead we can boil it and make it "fall" to the sky, directly away from its alleged point of origin.

If it mass and density, the the origin is entirely irrelevant and you have nothing even resembling a reason for why things should fall down.

So make up your mind.
Either claim it is the point of origin, and then explain why water vapour falls away from its point of origin and why pushing things to the right doesn't make them fall to the left, or claim it is due to mass and density and explain why having a greater density should make something fall down.

Either way, stop with the entirely stupid "mass and density".
The only role mass plays is determining density along with the volume.

It is the same mass of water before and after you boil it.
So if it was going to be the mass, changing phase should do nothing.

More incoherent rambling.

You mean more coherent arguments that so clearly demonstrate you are spouting pure BS.

Why are you trying to 'quote' something from the Bible, which you've already dismissed as nonsense?

To show just how ridiculous your argument is.
Your argument is appealing to a fictional magic sky fairy, with claims about what this sky fairy allegedly did.
Yet you have no evidence to support it at all.

Do you have any evidence to indicate otherwise?

Do you understand the burden of proof?
YOU made the claim that "Everything on Earth, has always existed on Earth, based on all of the evidence."
The burden of proof for that claim is entirely on you.
I am under no burden to show that claim is BS.
Until you justify it, I can dismiss it as the BS that it is.
That means you cannot rely on it to try and prop up your failed argument.

You have no evidence of how Earth came to be or how objects came to be on Earth.
So you have no evidence that would indicate that everything on Earth has always existed on Earth.

Conversely, we have a simple everyday occurrence.

We have evidence of water falling from the sky.
Something not on Earth falling to Earth.
Sure, you can claim that that water was originally on Earth, and it evaporated to go into the sky and then falls back down.
And I can object to that and instead claim the water originated in the sky, falls to Earth due to gravity, and then when it evaporates, it goes back into the sky.

You have no way to determine if it originated on Earth, or if it originated in the sky.
Instead all you can do is demonstrate that it cycles between them.

We have oxygen and nitrogen and other gases, that we literally condense from the air. That sure seems like it came from the sky, above Earth, not on Earth.

And we have meteors, literal chunks of rock which fall from the sky.

And we have the auroras, which is the solar wind coming into Earth's atmosphere.

So there is plenty of evidence to suggest Earth formed from the sky, with matter coming from the sky/space to Earth.

So the vastly more evidence based statement is:
"Nothing on Earth has always existed on Earth, based on all of the evidence."

So just what evidence do you have to support your entirely baseless claim?

Why would you argue for something that has NO evidence supporting it?
We already KNOW why, don't we?

Good question, why do you?
You have no evidence for your claim that gravity isn't a force.
You have no evidence for your claim that objects magically fall towards their point of orign.
You have no evidence for your claim that gravity does not vary with distance.
You have no evidence for your claim that there is no resistance to gravity.
You have no evidence for your claim that everything on Earth originated on Earth.
You have no evidence for your claim that a magic sky fairy put it there.

And we know why, to prop up the biggest claim, the basis of your delusional fantasy, that Earth is flat.
The question is why are you here claiming Earth is flat, when you have no evidence for that?

which NOBODY can prove

You mean which you reject, as it destroys your argument; with no justification at all.

When you claim that your magical made up 'force', actually DOES offer resistance against opposing forces, which we feel when lifting up an object from the ground!

Except if it is due to a magical force resisting our lifting the object from the ground, which you claim we 'feel' as resistance against our lifting it upward, we would ALSO feel it 'PULLING THAT OBJECT DOWNWARD TO THE SURFACE, in the opposite of that - an ATTRACTING of the object DOWNWARD to Earth, as it MUST have EQUAL FORCE to exist as a force!


That is how a magnet works - resistance, AND attraction, and we feel BOTH OF THEM!

When you talk about us 'feeling' resistance from this magical force, you hide from the fact we would CERTAINLY 'feel' it as a 'pulling down', or attraction from the surface, and we clearly don't feel anything at all of a 'pulling down' from below us!


You want a magical made up force when it suits you, but think you can just ignore it when it's found to be total crap!

It originated at a particular point on Earth's surface.
It doesn't fall back to that point.
That means it doesn't fall back to its point of origin.
And in some cases it doesn't even fall towards the closest surface.


If you want to appeal to the point of origin, then appeal to the POINT of origin.
That means you need to claim if you move something to the right it will fall back to the left.
If you aren't willing to do that, then stop repeating the same ignorant BS by falsely claiming it falls back towards its point of origin.


Do you understand the burden of proof?
YOU made the claim that "Everything on Earth, has always existed on Earth, based on all of the evidence."
The burden of proof for that claim is entirely on you.
I am under no burden to show that claim is BS.
Until you justify it, I can dismiss it as the BS that it is.
That means you cannot rely on it to try and prop up your failed argument.

You have no evidence of how Earth came to be or how objects came to be on Earth.
So you have no evidence that would indicate that everything on Earth has always existed on Earth.

Everything we know that exists on the Earth, has always existed on Earth, from what we know. If you don't believe this is true, there is absolutely nothing to support your belief, which is nothing more than your own belief.

All things originate on the Earth's surface or waters, it's not one specific point that matters at all. What happens when a strong wind blows a rock 10 feet away? You think it should move back to where it was before the wind moved it somewhere else? Any reason you think it should always be at one 'point' on the surface? They originate on the surface, and may move around on it, by winds, or so forth, remaining on the surface the whole time, as that is where they originate, anywhere on the surface.

Why claim there is no need for such a force?
The simple evidence that even you would be able to obtain gives you Newtonian mechanics.
This means that if you throw something up into the air, without another force acting on it, it will continue to go up forever.
That is why you need a force, to make things stop just going up, and then to accelerate them to make them fall back down.

There is no reason for mass and density to make them fall. You need a force to do that. Mass and density are not forces. They provide no directionality.
Saying mass and density makes them fall through the air is no better than saying mass and density makes them do circles around your house.

No, their mass and density won't drive them into the surface, where they originate. Only when they are put into air, where they do NOT originate, does their mass and density make them fall through air downward. Where else do you expect them to go? Upwards in air, which has less mass and density than they do? Why should they defy physical laws, and fly upward? That's stupid, is it not? Sure it is.

Force must be used to throw objects up into air, right? A force is energy, acting on an object, a limited energy, NOT infinite energy. It will dissipate and die out, and then that object has NO SOURCE OF ENERGY ACTING ON IT ANYMORE.

It only was in motion from energy acting on it, so why would it move after the energy is spent away? Because the ball Earth can't work without such lies, of course!

When you claim that your magical made up 'force', actually DOES offer resistance against opposing forces, which we feel when lifting up an object from the ground!

Except if it is due to a magical force resisting our lifting the object from the ground, which you claim we 'feel' as resistance against our lifting it upward, we would ALSO feel it 'PULLING THAT OBJECT DOWNWARD TO THE SURFACE, in the opposite of that - an ATTRACTING of the object DOWNWARD to Earth, as it MUST have EQUAL FORCE to exist as a force!


That is how a magnet works - resistance, AND attraction, and we feel BOTH OF THEM!

When you talk about us 'feeling' resistance from this magical force, you hide from the fact we would CERTAINLY 'feel' it as a 'pulling down', or attraction from the surface, and we clearly don't feel anything at all of a 'pulling down' from below us!


You want a magical made up force when it suits you, but think you can just ignore it when it's found to be total crap!

Except I DO feel it as pulling me down, I feel the same forces when deeling with magnets as I do with gravity.

Quote from: JackBlack on May 06, 2022, 09:35:06 PM

It originated at a particular point on Earth's surface.
It doesn't fall back to that point.
That means it doesn't fall back to its point of origin.
And in some cases it doesn't even fall towards the closest surface.


If you want to appeal to the point of origin, then appeal to the POINT of origin.
That means you need to claim if you move something to the right it will fall back to the left.
If you aren't willing to do that, then stop repeating the same ignorant BS by falsely claiming it falls back towards its point of origin.


Do you understand the burden of proof?
YOU made the claim that "Everything on Earth, has always existed on Earth, based on all of the evidence."
The burden of proof for that claim is entirely on you.
I am under no burden to show that claim is BS.
Until you justify it, I can dismiss it as the BS that it is.
That means you cannot rely on it to try and prop up your failed argument.

You have no evidence of how Earth came to be or how objects came to be on Earth.
So you have no evidence that would indicate that everything on Earth has always existed on Earth.

Everything we know that exists on the Earth, has always existed on Earth, from what we know. If you don't believe this is true, there is absolutely nothing to support your belief, which is nothing more than your own belief.

All things originate on the Earth's surface or waters, it's not one specific point that matters at all. What happens when a strong wind blows a rock 10 feet away? You think it should move back to where it was before the wind moved it somewhere else? Any reason you think it should always be at one 'point' on the surface? They originate on the surface, and may move around on it, by winds, or so forth, remaining on the surface the whole time, as that is where they originate, anywhere on the surface.

No, they originate at some point at the surface, that's their point of origin.

"Everything we know that exists on the Earth, has always existed on Earth, from what we know."
And this is an absolutely false statement.
The existence of meteorites refutes this.

Quote from: JackBlack on April 30, 2022, 02:26:26 PM

Why claim there is no need for such a force?
The simple evidence that even you would be able to obtain gives you Newtonian mechanics.
This means that if you throw something up into the air, without another force acting on it, it will continue to go up forever.
That is why you need a force, to make things stop just going up, and then to accelerate them to make them fall back down.

There is no reason for mass and density to make them fall. You need a force to do that. Mass and density are not forces. They provide no directionality.
Saying mass and density makes them fall through the air is no better than saying mass and density makes them do circles around your house.

No, their mass and density won't drive them into the surface, where they originate. Only when they are put into air, where they do NOT originate, does their mass and density make them fall through air downward. Where else do you expect them to go? Upwards in air, which has less mass and density than they do? Why should they defy physical laws, and fly upward? That's stupid, is it not? Sure it is.

Force must be used to throw objects up into air, right? A force is energy, acting on an object, a limited energy, NOT infinite energy. It will dissipate and die out, and then that object has NO SOURCE OF ENERGY ACTING ON IT ANYMORE.

It only was in motion from energy acting on it, so why would it move after the energy is spent away? Because the ball Earth can't work without such lies, of course!

Mass and density aren't forces.
If I pick up and object, then let it go, it's goes from being stationary to moving. From having no Kinetic energy to having some kinetic energy. WHERE did this energy come from.

Quote from: turbonium2 on May 07, 2022, 05:32:16 AM

When you claim that your magical made up 'force', actually DOES offer resistance against opposing forces, which we feel when lifting up an object from the ground!

Except if it is due to a magical force resisting our lifting the object from the ground, which you claim we 'feel' as resistance against our lifting it upward, we would ALSO feel it 'PULLING THAT OBJECT DOWNWARD TO THE SURFACE, in the opposite of that - an ATTRACTING of the object DOWNWARD to Earth, as it MUST have EQUAL FORCE to exist as a force!


That is how a magnet works - resistance, AND attraction, and we feel BOTH OF THEM!

When you talk about us 'feeling' resistance from this magical force, you hide from the fact we would CERTAINLY 'feel' it as a 'pulling down', or attraction from the surface, and we clearly don't feel anything at all of a 'pulling down' from below us!


You want a magical made up force when it suits you, but think you can just ignore it when it's found to be total crap!

Except I DO feel it as pulling me down, I feel the same forces when deeling with magnets as I do with gravity.

I know what a 'pull' feels like, there's nothing I feel in a fall, just freely falling in air. A 'pull' is very, very different than falling through air is.

I know what a 'pull' feels like, there's nothing I feel in a fall, just freely falling in air. A 'pull' is very, very different than falling through air is.

How do you calculate your free fall velocity?

Quote from: turbonium2 on May 07, 2022, 08:20:46 AM

Quote from: JackBlack on April 30, 2022, 02:26:26 PM

Why claim there is no need for such a force?
The simple evidence that even you would be able to obtain gives you Newtonian mechanics.
This means that if you throw something up into the air, without another force acting on it, it will continue to go up forever.
That is why you need a force, to make things stop just going up, and then to accelerate them to make them fall back down.

There is no reason for mass and density to make them fall. You need a force to do that. Mass and density are not forces. They provide no directionality.
Saying mass and density makes them fall through the air is no better than saying mass and density makes them do circles around your house.

No, their mass and density won't drive them into the surface, where they originate. Only when they are put into air, where they do NOT originate, does their mass and density make them fall through air downward. Where else do you expect them to go? Upwards in air, which has less mass and density than they do? Why should they defy physical laws, and fly upward? That's stupid, is it not? Sure it is.

Force must be used to throw objects up into air, right? A force is energy, acting on an object, a limited energy, NOT infinite energy. It will dissipate and die out, and then that object has NO SOURCE OF ENERGY ACTING ON IT ANYMORE.

It only was in motion from energy acting on it, so why would it move after the energy is spent away? Because the ball Earth can't work without such lies, of course!

Mass and density aren't forces.
If I pick up and object, then let it go, it's goes from being stationary to moving. From having no Kinetic energy to having some kinetic energy. WHERE did this energy come from.

From it's own motion in falling through air, it creates energy. It becomes a force of energy, in falling through air. Simple as that. No need to make up any magical forces here.

That's why Newton tried to make up BS 'laws' about motion, and needing another 'force' to 'stop' motion. While ignoring that it stops when the force which CAUSED it's motion dies out, and because energy GAVE it motion, the loss of energy STOPS it's motion afterwards! Other forces only play a small part in it, not the main cause at all, in most cases.

That's why Newton tried to make up BS 'laws' about motion

How do you calculate your free fall velocity?

 

When you claim that your magical

You are the one claiming magic, not me.
I am claiming gravity, which is very real, and matches everything expected for forces.
The only strange part is how gravitational mass matches inertial mass.

Except if it is due to a magical force resisting our lifting the object from the ground, which you claim we 'feel' as resistance against our lifting it upward, we would ALSO feel it 'PULLING THAT OBJECT DOWNWARD TO THE SURFACE, in the opposite of that - an ATTRACTING of the object DOWNWARD to Earth, as it MUST have EQUAL FORCE to exist as a force!

And we do.
Again, where is the problem?

If I go and lift up a heavy object, I feel that heavy being pulled down to Earth.
I need to resist that force to hold it up.

That is how a magnet works - resistance, AND attraction, and we feel BOTH OF THEM!

You mean we feel it. It is the one thing.
It is an attractive force acting between the objects.
This attractive force is the resistance to pulling the object away.

You want a magical made up force when it suits you, but think you can just ignore it when it's found to be total crap!

You are the one ignoring it, not me.

I fully accept gravity clearly acts as a force pulling objects down to Earth (when Earth is the most massive object in the vicinity).
I can quite clearly feel something (most likely gravity) pulling objects down when I hold them above Earth.

I know what a 'pull' feels like, there's nothing I feel in a fall, just freely falling in air. A 'pull' is very, very different than falling through air is.

And yet again you pathetic deflect and dodge.
Do you feel yourself being attracted to a magnet? No. You feel an object in your hand being attracted.
We were talking about a heavy object in your hand being attracted to Earth, pulling your hand down, not you feeling yourself being attracted as you fall.

It has also been explained why you don't feel it when you are falling, which is the same as why a magnet wouldn't feel it when it is falling towards a magnet.
You feel forces being transferred through your body, which act to compress or stretch your body.
If a force acts on your entire body to move it together, you don't feel that as there is no relative motion caused by it.

Everything we know that exists on the Earth, has always existed on Earth, from what we know. If you don't believe this is true, there is absolutely nothing to support your belief, which is nothing more than your own belief.

You really do love just ignoring everything that shows you are wrong and repeating the same baseless BS again and again.

Again, where is your evidence of that entirely baseless claim?
You have provided absolutely nothing to support that delusional BS of yours.
It is not knowledge. It is your baseless, delusional BS.

Conversely, I provided you with evidence, in the very post you quoted, which you ignored and didn't quote.
Here it is again:
We have evidence of water falling from the sky.
Something not on Earth falling to Earth.
Sure, you can claim that that water was originally on Earth, and it evaporated to go into the sky and then falls back down.
And I can object to that and instead claim the water originated in the sky, falls to Earth due to gravity, and then when it evaporates, it goes back into the sky.

You have no way to determine if it originated on Earth, or if it originated in the sky.
Instead all you can do is demonstrate that it cycles between them.

We have oxygen and nitrogen and other gases, that we literally condense from the air. That sure seems like it came from the sky, above Earth, not on Earth.

And we have meteors, literal chunks of rock which fall from the sky.

And we have the auroras, which is the solar wind coming into Earth's atmosphere.

So there is plenty of evidence to suggest Earth formed from the sky, with matter coming from the sky/space to Earth.

So it is you with nothing supporting their beliefs, not me.

And remember, it isn't me claiming it isn't true, it is me claiming there is nothing to support that claim, so you cannot base your argument on it.

All things originate on the Earth's surface or waters, it's not one specific point that matters at all.

Again, all that is saying is that things fall down.
If the origin matters, then it is the point of origin.
Why should it be the surface of origin?
Is it because that surface is down?
Because that is just saying things fall down.

What happens when a strong wind blows a rock 10 feet away? You think it should move back to where it was before the wind moved it somewhere else?

No, I claim gravity should continue to act to pull it to the surface.
I also point that your delusional BS where things magically go back to where they originated should cause it to go back.

Any reason you think it should always be at one 'point' on the surface?

It is called "POINT of origin" for a reason, because it is a POINT!
Last time I checked, things don't originate all over a surface.
Instead it originates at a point on the surface.

When people ask you where you live, do you just say the surface of Earth, or do you give an address pointing to a point on the surface?

Any reason you think it should be a surface?
Again, you are just running through a bunch of circular reasoning to try and claim that things fall down because they fall down.

They originate on the surface, and may move around on it, by winds, or so forth, remaining on the surface the whole time, as that is where they originate

But that is moving away from where they originated.
If it originates at one location, and the wind blows it around, it is no longer at that location.
They mostly stay on the surface due to gravity. It has nothing to do with where they originate.

No, their mass and density won't drive them into the surface

Good, stop claiming it should.
Stop appealing to mass and density at all.
Instead, stick to your delusional BS of point of origin.

Where else do you expect them to go?

We have been over this countless times; without a force acting on them, I don't expect them to change their motion at all. So they should continue with

Why should they defy physical laws, and fly upward? That's stupid, is it not? Sure it is.

Why should they defy physical laws, magically slow with no force acting to stop them, and then magically accelerate in another direction with no force acting on them?
That is pure stupidity.

You are the one claiming things which defy the known physical laws of motion, not me.

I accept that there is a force acting, a force which tries to accelerate them downwards, a force which acts to stop their upwards motion and then accelerate them down.
You are the one claiming pure magic where that isn't a force at all.
All so you can try and dismiss gravity and prop up your delusional fantasy.

Force must be used to throw objects up into air, right? A force is energy, acting on an object, a limited energy, NOT infinite energy. It will dissipate and die out, and then that object has NO SOURCE OF ENERGY ACTING ON IT ANYMORE.

It doesn't dissipate and die out.
It stops acting as soon as you stop applying the force onto it.
It will then continue with the finite energy it has, as kinetic energy, where it will continue to move at a particular velocity until a force acts on it to stop it.

The motion doesn't magically dissipate and die out.

It only was in motion from energy acting on it, so why would it move after the energy is spent away?

The energy isn't "spent".
The energy is transferred.
You use energy to accelerate an object when you apply a force to it.
This energy is transferred to the object as kinetic energy.

Because the ball Earth can't work without such lies, of course!

You sure love repeating this garbage don't you?

I have already explained how your delusional garbage works just as well for the RE.
All that changes is instead of the surface being flat (of which there is no evidence at all), it is round.
Things on Earth, e.g. rocks, will fall to Earth, because they originated on Earths round surface.
If you move them to a different point on Earth, they still fall down because they originated on the surface.

You can even go further.
Earth remains in orbit around the sun, because it originated in such an orbit.

So if your delusional BS was true, the RE would work with it as well.

But notice how it doesn't work the other way around?
Your delusional fantasy can't work with gravity.
So you need to reject it at all costs.

From it's own motion in falling through air, it creates energy.

No, it starts stationary in the air.
What gives it the energy?
You are trying to have energy magically come from nothing.

If there is no need to make up magic, you need a force.

That's why Newton tried to make up BS 'laws' about motion, and needing another 'force' to 'stop' motion.

No, he made up laws of motion based upon observations.
Observations that objects will continue with their motion rather than magically stopping or magically accelerating without cause.
This is why cars are made to be aerodynamic and have brakes, and have ball bearings and so on.

If your delusional BS was true, none of that would be needed, and all that would be required to stop a car is to take your foot off the accelerator.

While ignoring that it stops when the force which CAUSED it's motion dies out

Except it doesn't.
Instead it continues going.
Throw a ball from your hand, you see it continue to move through the air
It doesn't magically stop.
And this is really a great example.
If your delusional BS was true, if you threw a ball upwards at an angle, it should travel in a straight line and stop, and then fall straight back towards you (its point of origin).

Instead what we observe is that its horizontal motion remains basically unchanged, while its vertical motion changes at a rate of ~-9.8 m/s^2.

Other forces only play a small part in it, not the main cause at all, in most cases.

Again, in reality we observe that other forces play a major role, being capable of entirely explaining why objects stop moving.
The main thing stopping the motion of a car is friction with things like air resistance and friction caused by the brakes, and ball bearings and so on.
There is no indication that any motion is magically dying out rather than a force being applied to slow it down.

There is no need to invoke any magical dying out of motion.
Especially as such magic requires an absolute reference frame, which there is also absolutely no evidence of.

Everything we know that exists on the Earth, has always existed on Earth, from what we know. If you don't believe this is true, there is absolutely nothing to support your belief, which is nothing more than your own belief.

You are free to have whatever religious beliefs you want, but they are not actually evidence, no matter how badly you want them to be.

The moon rocks brought from the moon are direct evidence that your belief in this case is wrong.

Quote from: blademan9999 on May 07, 2022, 09:08:00 AM

Quote from: turbonium2 on May 07, 2022, 08:20:46 AM

Quote from: JackBlack on April 30, 2022, 02:26:26 PM

Why claim there is no need for such a force?
The simple evidence that even you would be able to obtain gives you Newtonian mechanics.
This means that if you throw something up into the air, without another force acting on it, it will continue to go up forever.
That is why you need a force, to make things stop just going up, and then to accelerate them to make them fall back down.

There is no reason for mass and density to make them fall. You need a force to do that. Mass and density are not forces. They provide no directionality.
Saying mass and density makes them fall through the air is no better than saying mass and density makes them do circles around your house.

No, their mass and density won't drive them into the surface, where they originate. Only when they are put into air, where they do NOT originate, does their mass and density make them fall through air downward. Where else do you expect them to go? Upwards in air, which has less mass and density than they do? Why should they defy physical laws, and fly upward? That's stupid, is it not? Sure it is.

Force must be used to throw objects up into air, right? A force is energy, acting on an object, a limited energy, NOT infinite energy. It will dissipate and die out, and then that object has NO SOURCE OF ENERGY ACTING ON IT ANYMORE.

It only was in motion from energy acting on it, so why would it move after the energy is spent away? Because the ball Earth can't work without such lies, of course!

Mass and density aren't forces.
If I pick up and object, then let it go, it's goes from being stationary to moving. From having no Kinetic energy to having some kinetic energy. WHERE did this energy come from.

From it's own motion in falling through air, it creates energy. It becomes a force of energy, in falling through air. Simple as that. No need to make up any magical forces here.

That's why Newton tried to make up BS 'laws' about motion, and needing another 'force' to 'stop' motion. While ignoring that it stops when the force which CAUSED it's motion dies out, and because energy GAVE it motion, the loss of energy STOPS it's motion afterwards! Other forces only play a small part in it, not the main cause at all, in most cases.

It “creates” the energy? Form where?

So is the "orign" below the surface?  How far below?  If a deep hole is dug anything brought over it falls to the bottom? 
With gravity, there is a reason for things to attract to a central point.  Just originating somewhere has no reason for it to "want" to return.  Unless you actually attribute some form of intelligence to all things, which still does not explain where the energy to move back to that origin comes from.  You also have the problem of what is the actual origin point.  Where is it?  Can't just be the surface because you can dig everything out from under it and it falls. 

Quote from: JackBlack on April 23, 2022, 03:27:58 AM

When in air, not acted on by any force like gravity, they shouldn't go anywhere.
It makes no sense for them to go in any direction.

Are you serious?

Again, as always, you completely IGNORE the fact that all objects are on the ground, they do NOT exist in the air, do not come into existence from the air, do not ORIGINATE in air!

They all originate on Earth's SURFACE, or it's waters, NOT within air.

You cannot say 'why do objects always go DOWN within the air', like they ORIGINATE in air, which you keep doing, over and over again.

Objects are all ON THE SURFACE OF EARTH, or it's waters, and the air is ABOVE all objects, from the very start, first of all, and THEN, can lift up, into the air, if a force acts on them, because they all originate, and always remain, on the Earth's surface, or it's waters, unless acted on by a force.

That means, all objects on Earth, have always existed on Earth, as God created all things to exist on the Earth. Nothing but the heavenly objects above Earth were created to be elsewhere than on Earth or it's waters. And the reason those objects REMAIN above Earth, is from force, or energy, which remain unknown today, probably, but they DO use energy to remain in air, and move around in air, above Earth. That's obvious to see with the Sun, stars and moon, all use  energy, it's only a matter of what forms of energy, how it's used, and so on, are up for debate, on each side. Your side claims the only energy, or the main energy, exists within all objects, all things, and is holding all things that exist, together, within an endless area called the 'universe', or 'space'. This incredible, omnipotent 'force', is called 'gravity'. A force of all things, which exists within all things, right?

When you already assume such things as that, when you already KNOW it cannot POSSIBLY be proven at all, if it's a universe without end, it's nonsense to claim it's true, or 'known' as true....

It's rather arrogant and foolish of you, and your side, to claim there's no proof or evidence of a flat Earth, after you claim there's a great force, called 'gravity', which exists in all things, within  the 'universe', a vast area which has no end, and this great force makes all things in that endless universe stick together, or most things, anyway.

To assume all that, and claim that the flat Earth has no proof, is completely absurd.


This doesn't make any sense, it's nonsense from the start. You've got an endless universe, and a magical force within it, that's already two of the most significant, grandiose claims ever made, or the top two ever made, but you act like both of them are true, and proven to be true, which is pure BS.

If you refuse to think of Earth as flat, with a firmament above it, with all stars, Sun, and moon below it, because THAT is my argument here, you're never going to understand how it all DOES make sense, and works, without a magical force at all.

You're still ignoring the fact that objects do NOT magically exist within air, because that's where you're trying to start from. It's ridiculous. Objects are on the ground, and THEN they will go up into air, from the ground, if a force acts on them, or they have a force within to use. No object goes into air unless a force acts on them, to go up into air, when they first exist on the ground.

When all objects originate on the Earth's surface, or it's waters, and the air ABOVE Earth's surface has NO objects that originate within it (except those which originate within the heavens, of course), why would you think a 'force' must exist, is falsely assuming YOUR version of a ball Earth that WOULD need such a force to explain it. That's NOT the Earth I'm referring to, which is the flat Earth, and firmament above Earth, with Sun, moon, and stars below the firmament, and so on.

This model of Earth requires NO force within it, to pull all things down from air to it, or hold all things down to it. Since all things ORIGINATE on Earth's surface or waters, being of greater mass and density than the air ABOVE Earth, at the very beginning. That's why objects are always on the surface, unless a force acts on them, to go up into air, where once again, their greater mass and density than air causes them to fall through the air, back to the surface again.

Objects are on Earth, and from there, they can only go UP from the surface, which is ALSO just ONE, AND ONLY ONE, direction, from FIRST being on the Earth's surface, which is air above the surface, for all objects that originate ON the surface. No matter what OTHER direction a force makes them go, across in air, at angles up and across air, or whatever, they all must go UP from the surface, which is one direction, the opposite of the other direction, after they're in air, which is downward.

Objects are always on Earth being of greater mass and density than air, and WHEN they are put in air, their SAME mass and density cause them to fall through the air, back down to the surface again. And they will remain on the surface, afterwards, unless a force AGAIN acts on them.

Objects do not need a force to act on them when within air, their mass and density are greater than that of air, so they fall through it themselves, by their mass and density.

Your views while interesting are of course totally wrong. Your whole concept of how you think the world works sounds like it is rooted in religious doctrine. There is a huge difference between a scientific theory that has come about through decades and  decades of experimentation and research by a multitude of different scientific minds to an idea penned by some religious thinker two thousand years ago.
You make the mistake of dismissing gravity by calling it magical as though that somehow magically renders it null and void! Though this is something you need to do to convince your own self  of your own beliefs.

You have a problem to contend with and it’s a huge one and that’s the countless volumes of scientific data that support the existence and the reality of gravity. Just conveniently  ignoring all this evidence then waving your hand and proclaiming it’s all just magical only reveals your gross ignorance of scientific reality.

Gravity like it or not is a fact supported by evidence while your position is based on disregarding these facts coupled with a dose of blind ignorance.

That is the real truth of the matter.

From it's own motion in falling through air, it creates energy. It becomes a force of energy, in falling through air. Simple as that. No need to make up any magical forces here.

That's why Newton tried to make up BS 'laws' about motion, and needing another 'force' to 'stop' motion. While ignoring that it stops when the force which CAUSED it's motion dies out, and because energy GAVE it motion, the loss of energy STOPS it's motion afterwards! Other forces only play a small part in it, not the main cause at all, in most cases.

Newton's laws of motion are about the most basic principles of mechanics.  How have scientists and engineers used them to create all the technology you use if they have it all so wrong on such a fundamental level?

Why does no one use this alternative version of yours?

And have you considered the possibility that whatever crap pops into your head, might just be laughably wrong?

And have you considered the possibility that whatever crap pops into your head, might just be laughably wrong?

This seems to be the major issue most conspiracy theorists have, the inability to accurately weigh sources of information.  Crap in their heads gets top priority to the exclusion of all else.  They are always the smartest person in the world on every subject.

Claiming gravity is 'magical' and completely wrong despite having zero evidence and ignoring the entire world is built on these theories and not having an alternative is just nuts.

It's wrong because I don't like it seems to be the extend of the argument here.

It doesn't dissipate and die out.
It stops acting as soon as you stop applying the force onto it.
It will then continue with the finite energy it has, as kinetic energy, where it will continue to move at a particular velocity until a force acts on it to stop it.

The motion doesn't magically dissipate and die out.

The energy isn't "spent".
The energy is transferred.
You use energy to accelerate an object when you apply a force to it.
This energy is transferred to the object as kinetic energy.[/quote]


No, it starts stationary in the air.
What gives it the energy?
You are trying to have energy magically come from nothing.
[/quote]

If you still don't have any clue, objects are on the surface, not within air, first of all, you cannot argue they begin within air, because it's complete BS.

Objects are on the surface, and THEN, are PUT UPWARD INTO AIR, if acted on BY A FORCE, and  only with a force, can objects GO UPWARD INTO AIR, and fall through it, and what causes it, or how could it be, etc. - can be argued about, afterwards.

Your act is to argue from a set point, or a certain assumption is the starting point, nothing else matters!

You've argued about something that happens afterwards, is the starting point, and you cannot do that, because it is NOT the starting point of it.


Objects don't start in air, you cannot START with objects being in air, they are on the ground, and not in air, found in air, within air, existing in air, first of all, to begin with, to start everything from.....

What is your argument here? That objects are within air, will start your whole argument!

Air isn't where objects are from, or exist, or originate, they are on the surface, or the waters of Earth, NOT within air, and you're BS about being in air, from nothing else, as a starting point, doesn't work, it's just BS.

We all know objects don't just 'exist' within air, they must be PUT into the air, from the ground, or waters.

If you still don't have any clue, objects are on the surface, not within air, first of all, you cannot argue they begin within air, because it's complete BS.

I have a clue, so much so that I see straight through all your BS.

You claim they all originated on the surface, with no justification at all.
All you can do is repeatedly assert the same BS.

Again, do you have any evidence that objects originate on the surface? No.
Is there evidence to question that baseless assumption of yours? Yes.
Have you dealt with any of that evidence to show any problem with it? No.

Objects are on the surface, and THEN, are PUT UPWARD INTO AIR, if acted on BY A FORCE, and  only with a force, can objects GO UPWARD INTO AIR, and fall through it, and what causes it, or how could it be, etc. - can be argued about, afterwards.

No, objects have a force acting on them, even when they are on the ground.
So there is no need to lift them into the air.

Your act is to argue from a set point, or a certain assumption is the starting point, nothing else matters!

No, that would be you, starting from your completely baseless assumption that everything magically originates on Earths surface and magically falls down to it and that gravity definitely isn't real, and anything suggesting it is real must be a conspiracy.

I instead focus on the evidence and logic, two things you lack.

You've argued about something that happens afterwards, is the starting point, and you cannot do that, because it is NOT the starting point of it.

I have repeatedly justified why.
When we push something to the right it doesn't magically fall to the left.
This shows it isn't a case of the magically knowing where it started and returning to that point.
It shows that the path taken is irrelevant. What matters is where it is.
An object in the air falls down. An object on the ground has a force acting to try and move it down.

What causes this force/what is this force?

Objects don't start in air, you cannot START with objects being in air, they are on the ground, and not in air, found in air, within air, existing in air, first of all, to begin with, to start everything from.....

That is your claim, one you are yet to substantiate.

What is your argument here?

That has been made quite clear repeatedly.
Gravity has everything expected for a force.
It displays resistance.
It varies with distance.
It is measurable and repeatable.

It doesn't matter where the object starts or what path it follows, on Earth, things generally fall down. Not back to where they originated, DOWN.
The exception is when other forces act.
And this acceleration towards the ground requires a force, as all accelerations do.

If an object is thrown upwards, without a force acting (and ignoring the typically minimal air resistance), the object should continue going upwards forever.
You need a force to act to stop the object and then cause it to accelerate towards the ground.

Density is clearly not a force and has no directionality.

Conversely, what is your argument? That things magically fall for no reason at all an that objects magically slow down for no reason at all, completely violating the known laws of motion.

Air isn't where objects are from, or exist, or originate, they are on the surface

Objects can quite clearly exist in the air.
You have no basis for your claim that all objects magically originate on the surface.

Stop just repeatedly asserting the same baseless BS.

As you said "you're BS about [originating on the ground], from nothing else, as a starting point, doesn't work, it's just BS."

You claim they all originated on the surface, with no justification at all.
All you can do is repeatedly assert the same BS.

Again, do you have any evidence that objects originate on the surface? No.
Is there evidence to question that baseless assumption of yours? Yes.
Have you dealt with any of that evidence to show any problem with it? No.

When we push something to the right it doesn't magically fall to the left.
This shows it isn't a case of the magically knowing where it started and returning to that point.
It shows that the path taken is irrelevant. What matters is where it is.
An object in the air falls down. An object on the ground has a force acting to try and move it down.


Objects can quite clearly exist in the air.
You have no basis for your claim that all objects magically originate on the surface.

Stop just repeatedly asserting the same baseless BS.

As you said "you're BS about [originating on the ground], from nothing else, as a starting point, doesn't work, it's just BS."

That's based on our entire existence on Earth, as humans, when seeing it this way, and always do today, and no reason to think so in future, too!

When you suggest I don't have any evidence for my claim, maybe it's knowing that the countless gazillions of objects on Earth, have always been on Earth, to our knowledge, and nothing indicates otherwise, in any way at all.

Your argument is that all objects on Earth, which have always BEEN on Earth, as we know it, over thousands of years at least, do not hold up as evidence for it, as true, or fact....

Being that you haven't found A SHRED OF EVIDENCE this would not be true, based on your one claim, which is based on your assumptions of what we've never found, never seen, or witnessed, as an object, or part of an object, whether or not it comes to the surface of Earth from somewhere above Earth, or not, and if we assume it does, that it must originate from somewhere far, far beyond the Earth, which means from 'outer space', nobody knows or sees at all, but it is 'really all true', right?
 
What proof is there of any comet, or valid evidence of a comet, or what proof of being from 'outer space', which is all BS, anyway!

Lies to support other lies, which support more lies, and so on....


I have every object on Earth, always being on Earth, always WILL be on Earth, as MY evidence of all things originating on Earth. 

You have said that there is one specific object, which you claim is not from Earth's surface, unlike all the gazillions of OTHER objects on Earth!

I've already mentioned that stars, etc. originate ABOVE the Earth, not on the surface of Earth, or waters, right?

So you're arguing that comets are from 'outer space', which are just our skies at night, used for BS claims, as we all know...


Assuming all of this is the case, for argument's sake, you'd have shown that one, specific object, that originates not on Earth, but above the Earth, like stars, among others, originate ABOVE the Earth.


Sometimes a comet appears above Earth one night, and travels over the skies a few more nights, and goes out of view. 

I'm aware that they claim comets have broken apart, in our atmosphere, and pieces have hit the Earth, but it's BS, not having any proof for their claim. A hole isn't proof of squat.


You actually believe that one specific object, which you claim is from 'space', and claim hits the Earth sometimes, would indicate that all other objects on Earth, which have always BEEN on Earth, while no OTHER object from elsewhere than on Earth, has come down to the Earth's surface, or its waters, let alone would exist afterwards, on Earth, unlike all objects on the Earth's surface.


When all objects have been on Earth's surface or waters, always has, to this very day, while there has never been a SINGLE object from elsewhere than on Earth, which has COME DOWN TO EARTH, from 'space', and has been found on Earth like all OTHER objects on Earth are.

Your argument is based on pure nonsense, out of sheer desperation.....   

That's based on our entire existence on Earth, as humans, when seeing it this way, and always do today, and no reason to think so in future, too!

No, it isn't.
I have provided examples where your claims go directly against what is observed.

You ignoring that to pretend your BS is justified wont magically make it go away.

Just focusing on the simplest, we quite often see water fall from the sky.
Why should we assume it originated on Earth rather than in the sky or above it?
You have literally no evidence that water actually originated on Earth.
All you can do is demonstrate that it cycles between being on Earth and in the sky.

When you suggest I don't have any evidence for my claim, maybe it's knowing that the countless gazillions of objects on Earth, have always been on Earth, to our knowledge, and nothing indicates otherwise, in any way at all.

Which is just your fancy way of saying you have absolutely nothing to support your position, so you just assume your claim must be true and demand others prove the opposite.

There is no evidence at all that everything on Earth has always been on Earth.
That is not knowledge.
That is a baseless asusmption.

Your argument is that all objects on Earth, which have always BEEN on Earth

That is your assumption. You have no evidence that they have always been on Earth.
Prove that these objects have always been on Earth rather than are just on Earth now.

which is based on your assumptions

I'm not the one making assumptions here.
I am the one pointing your assumptions.

What proof is there of any comet, or valid evidence of a comet, or what proof of being from 'outer space', which is all BS, anyway!

People watching it fall from the sky?
That not good enough?

Lies to support other lies, which support more lies, and so on....

That does seem to be all you have. Lies and more lies.
You certainly don't have any evidence or rational arguments.

I have every object on Earth, always being on Earth, always WILL be on Earth

That is not evidence of your claim.
That is your claim.
That is your baseless assumption you need for your fairy tale to work.
It is not based on any evidence.

I'm aware that they claim comets have broken apart, in our atmosphere, and pieces have hit the Earth, but it's BS

You mean you are fully aware of evidence that shows your claim is pure garbage, but you just reject it, because you need to to support your fantasy.
You happily assert pure BS, which you have no evidence for at all, and dismiss actual evidence that shows you are wrong.

Your argument is based on pure nonsense, out of sheer desperation.....

And more pathetic projection.
You still have no rational objection to the simple everyday observation of rain.
You have no justification for your outright lies about gravity, nor any actual reason to doubt it as a force.
You have no justification for why things should magically fall down without a force acting, nor why they should magically stop moving a force acting.
Plenty of what you have said has been shown to be pure BS.

That is your assumption. You have no evidence that they have always been on Earth.
Prove that these objects have always been on Earth rather than are just on Earth now.

It's based on everything BEING on Earth for thousands of years at least, without any object on Earth coming here from ELSEWHERE.

For you to claim it doesn't PROVE that has ALWAYS been true, is based on nothing but fantasy and fables, because there sure isn't any EVIDENCE for it, that's blatantly obvious!


What would you ever BASE your claim on? To ignore all the evidence we have, over thousands of years, is absurd, and foolish.

What is your argument? That all objects on Earth came down from 'space'? Everything was a pile of random goo, which magically transformed into all life, all objects, over XYZ years?

The 'over many many years' argument, which makes everything exist out of goo?

It's based on everything BEING on Earth for thousands of years at least, without any object on Earth coming here from ELSEWHERE.

Which would just be evidence that they have been here for a long time, not that they originated here.
But even then you don't have that.
You have no evidence that nothing else come from elsewhere.
To make that claim you have to literally reject the evidence of things that have come from outside Earth.
And it requires you to reject the everyday occurrence of rain.

Do you think rain is a massive conspiracy?

And do you notice the blatant dishonesty, with your dishonest double standard?
You are happy to accept the words of people saying things have been on Earth, and that Earth has been around for thousands of years.
Yet you reject the plentiful evidence of things coming from space.

If we can't trust the evidence of meteors impacting Earth, then just what evidence is there to trust that things have been on Earth for thousands of years?

For you to claim it doesn't PROVE that has ALWAYS been true

Is based on nothing but simple rational thought and evidence.
2 things you severely lack.

What would you ever BASE your claim on? To ignore all the evidence we have, over thousands of years, is absurd, and foolish.

You ignoring the evidence doesn't mean it isn't there.
You have been provided with the evidence.
A simple everyday occurrence of rain, and observations of objects falling from the sky.
 

What is your argument? That all objects on Earth came down from 'space'? Everything was a pile of random goo, which magically transformed into all life, all objects, over XYZ years?

If you want to talk about abiogenesis, go start a new thread on it.
You have already fled far enough from the topic.

My argument is that gravity matches all your requirements for a real force.
My argument is that acceleration requires a force.
That includes the acceleration to stop an object going upwards, and to accelerate it back down.
My argument is that objects do not magically return to their point of orign.
My argument is that you have no basis for your claim that everything magically originates on Earth, especially with the everyday occurrence of rain.

Water alone is enough to completely destroy that nonsense.
We can boil water and have it rise, only to have it then condense and fall.

According to your delusional BS, water originated on the surface of Earth, and so it should always go towards it unless a force is acting to lift it up.
But when we boil it, even without a force applied (remember, you called buoyancy made up, so you can't appeal to that), even when the water vapour is initial directed towards the ground, the water will rise. Then it condenses and falls back down.
This shows it doesn't just magically go to the point of origin.

Quote from: JackBlack on May 14, 2022, 01:38:20 AM

That is your assumption. You have no evidence that they have always been on Earth.
Prove that these objects have always been on Earth rather than are just on Earth now.

It's based on everything BEING on Earth for thousands of years at least, without any object on Earth coming here from ELSEWHERE.

For you to claim it doesn't PROVE that has ALWAYS been true, is based on nothing but fantasy and fables, because there sure isn't any EVIDENCE for it, that's blatantly obvious!


What would you ever BASE your claim on? To ignore all the evidence we have, over thousands of years, is absurd, and foolish.

What is your argument? That all objects on Earth came down from 'space'? Everything was a pile of random goo, which magically transformed into all life, all objects, over XYZ years?

The 'over many many years' argument, which makes everything exist out of goo?

The argument is that it doesn’t matter where an object originated.  Drop a rock and it falls, because of gravity, that’s it.

In simple terms, it takes force to accelerate an object, just as it takes force to compress a spring. 

Your origin nonsense has no equivalent force.  Objects can move, springs compress, etc with no forces applied.  Things just magically move down because they somehow remember where they came from.  Mental.