Let's talk about gravity

  • 519 Replies
  • 81039 Views
*

JJA

  • 6873
  • +2/-6
  • Math is math!
Re: Let's talk about gravity
« Reply #360 on: May 14, 2022, 05:35:29 AM »
It's based on everything BEING on Earth for thousands of years at least, without any object on Earth coming here from ELSEWHERE.

Moon rocks haven't been here for thousands of years.  Go visit a space museum and try and educate yourself.   ::)

*

NotSoSkeptical

  • 8820
  • +52/-50
  • Bestest Buddy of "wise"
Re: Let's talk about gravity
« Reply #361 on: May 14, 2022, 08:31:54 AM »
I'm still waiting on a response on if everything came from earth's surface and everything returns to earth's surface, where did Air come from and why does it not return to earth's surface.
If "deserving" time was a factor for responding on these forums, then no one would be here posting.

?

Unconvinced

  • 4031
  • +48/-67
Re: Let's talk about gravity
« Reply #362 on: May 14, 2022, 11:45:41 AM »
It's based on everything BEING on Earth for thousands of years at least, without any object on Earth coming here from ELSEWHERE.

Moon rocks haven't been here for thousands of years.  Go visit a space museum and try and educate yourself.   ::)

I’m sure this line of reasoning will go down well.

*

Mikey T.

  • 3546
  • +0/-1
Re: Let's talk about gravity
« Reply #363 on: May 14, 2022, 04:19:05 PM »
I'm still waiting on a response on if everything came from earth's surface and everything returns to earth's surface, where did Air come from and why does it not return to earth's surface.
I'm still waiting on explanation of what actual point things are trying to move back to.  Digging out everything under an object will cause it to fall down the hole, below the surface.

?

turbonium2

  • 3762
  • +51/-30
Re: Let's talk about gravity
« Reply #364 on: May 14, 2022, 08:26:21 PM »
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 surface of Earth, and return to the surface of Earth. How difficult is that to understand? I've explained it to my 12 year old nephew, he has no problem grasping it. Where things originate is on the surface of Earth, which is the entire surface, not one, specific POINT on the surface. If you were born in Italy, or 'originated' in Italy, do you have to return to the hospital bed in Italy, to RETURN to where you originated? No, Italy is where you were born, or 'originated', it doesn't matter WHERE in Italy you were born, that is where you came into existence.

As I've told you, when a small rock originated on the Earth's surface, and a wind blows it 15 feet over, it does NOT magically have to 'return' to where it was earlier, because it is still on the surface. If it is blown into a lake, and sinks, it is - once again - still on the surface of Earth, under it's waters. It does NOT magically rise from the lake, and roll over to where it was earlier. Because, as I keep telling you, it is still where it originates - the Earth's surface, either ON it, or under it's waters.

There are both POINTS of origin, and AREAS, or MEDIUMS of origin - do you get that? A POINT of origin is ONE specific POINT, somewhere. That's what YOU keep talking about - a specific POINT of origin. What I'm talking about is an AREA of origin, which is the surface of Earth, or its waters, or within the heavens. It doesn't matter WHERE they exist on their AREA of origin, they always RETURN to it, wherever ON the area that may be.

Do you know what AREAS of origin are, and how they differ from a POINT of origin?

If not, I suggest you study the difference between the two. Good luck!

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.

Saying the same old BS doesn't help your case.

It has "been shown to exist countless times"? I'd like to see ANY proof it exists! The gazillion objects on Earth obviously don't work, your magnetic objects fool nobody, and the BS claims about 'space' are all garbage. There goes your 'countless times'!

You claim the moon is 'held' near Earth by your magical force, so if it can pull it, or hold it, 25,000 miles away, it should KEEP pulling it until it hits the Earth's surface. Your excuse is that it holds it in 'orbit' around Earth, but if the moon goes nearer to Earth at times, your magical force should pull it to Earth, because you claim it 'varies' by distance! Obviously not.

And when your astro-nots 'float' in 'space', they would be MUCH closer to Earth than the moon would be, right? Why would they not be pulled down to Earth, if your magical force can hold a moon 250,000 miles away?

All by 'magic' as usual!

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.
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.

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.

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.

What would your 'available evidence' be, specifically? Stuff from 'space', that nobody but your liars claim to see in 'space'? Is that about it? Every object on Earth has always been here, for all human history, and you spew about made up crap in 'space', as proof?

'Space', and 'gravity', champions of the ball Earth fairy tale!


What do you believe the gazillion objects which are on Earth, and have always been, as WE know it, would be considered? Is that NOT evidence to you? I'd like to hear you explain THAT one, don't be shy now...

*

JackBlack

  • 26157
  • +51/-79
Re: Let's talk about gravity
« Reply #365 on: May 14, 2022, 09:24:34 PM »
They originated on the surface of Earth, and return to the surface of Earth. How difficult is that to understand?
It isn't a problem with understanding.
It is a problem with you just spouting BS.

Prove they originated on the surface, and then explain why that should make them return to the surface rather than the point they originated.
And then explain water and why it doesn't just go to the surface, where if you boil it, it goes up, and then when it condenses it goes back down.
And then explain why some things float on water, even though they originated on the surface of Earth according to your BS claims.

Where things originate is on the surface of Earth, which is the entire surface
Pure BS.
Things don't originate over an entire surface.
The originate at a point.

If you were born in Italy, or 'originated' in Italy, do you have to return to the hospital bed in Italy, to RETURN to where you originated?
That depends on how close to the point of origin you will count as returning to where you originated.
This is all based on an entirely subjective human idea of going back home.


If they were born in a small city and lived there most of their life, and then moved to another city in Italy, it would be them returning to their home city that would count.
If they went to another country, it would be returning to their home country that most would count.
Even being in Italian air-space would count for some people, you wouldn't need to be on the surface.
If they were jumping and in mid-air they would still be considered where they originated.

But according to your delusional nonsense, if you were born in Italy, and moved to New Zealand, as long as you were on the surface you are still where you originated.

Do you really think somewhere in New Zealand has returned to where they originated if they originated in Italy?
No. Not unless you are classing that point of origin as all of Earth.

As I've told you
You "telling me" isn't helping your case.
It is just more pathetic assertions without any justification or explanation.

a wind blows it 15 feet over, it does NOT magically have to 'return' to where it was earlier
Yet you claim if it is lifted a foot in the air it does have to magically return to where it was earlier.

Why should it matter in one direction but not another?

as I keep telling you, it is still where it originates
And you repeating the same false claim wont magically make it true.
It is not where it originated.
It was moved from where it originated.

What I'm talking about is an AREA of origin, which is the surface of Earth, or its waters, or within the heavens.
Which could be made into literally anything.
You could happily redefine it into a plane perpendicular to Earth oriented north-south, such that if it was moved east or west it would magically go back, but any other direction would be fine.
It is pure nonsense with no justification at all.

Regardless, an area of origin refers to the collection of points where multiple objects originated.

Saying the same old BS doesn't help your case.
I know, so why do you keep doing it?

I'd like to see ANY proof it exists!
You already know about it and have just rejected because it destroys your fantasy.
But like always you have no rational objection and instead just try to make it impossible.

Conversely, you have absolutely no evidence or justification for your delusional garbage.

You claim the moon is 'held' near Earth by your magical force, so if it can pull it, or hold it, 25,000 miles away, it should KEEP pulling it until it hits the Earth's surface.
And this just further shows your ignorance/dishonesty.
WHY?
Can you provide any justification at all for why it should do that?

Your claim is just as stupid as claiming that if you have an object tied to a string and spin it around your head, that because the string is applying a force accelerating it towards you, it should fly straight towards you and hit you in the head.

It is pure nonsense lacking any semblance of rational thought.
Just another pathetic dishonest FE claim to pretend there is a problem with gravity when they can't demonstrate any problem at all.

The moon is constantly accelerating towards Earth, as are all objects in orbit around Earth. But that doesn't mean they get closer.
Instead as they have lateral velocity as well, the acceleration towards Earth curves their path.
You can compare this to the acceleration required to follow a circular path.
That can be expressed as a=v^2/r=w^2*r
And it can be compared to the acceleration due to gravity in free-fall, a=GM/r^2.
So for an object in orbit, GM/r^2=v^2/r
so v^2=GM/r, so v=sqrt(GM/r).

If it is below this required speed, it will curve towards Earth.
But that also means it will speed up.
That means it can reach a point where it is going too fast for a circular orbit and it starts going back up.
This produces an elliptical orbit.

So the moon, when it is closer to Earth is going much faster and that means it isn't enough for the force to just be greater, it needs to be much greater to overcome that faster velocity. As it isn't, the moon remains in an elliptical orbit, rather than crashing into Earth.

astro-nots
What are they? Are they another fantasy of yours?


All by 'magic' as usual!
No, by simple physics, which anyone with a brain who chooses to use it can understand.
You are the one relying on pure magic.
Pure magic which causes objects to magically return to the surface of Earth, except when they decide not to.

What would your 'available evidence' be, specifically?
Stop just playing dumb.
You know what the evidence is. It has been pointed out plenty of times.
There are meteors from space, which you can provide nothing to refute, and the simple everyday occurrence of rain which you still can't deal with because it destroys your fantasy.

What do you believe the gazillion objects which are on Earth, and have always been, as WE know it, would be considered? Is that NOT evidence to you?
How may times must it be repeated before it sinks in:
THAT IS YOUR BASELESS CLAIM!
That baseless claim of yours is not evidence of that baseless claim.
Why would any sane person take that baseless claim of yous as evidence?

We don't know that everything has always been on Earth.
We have plenty of examples of things which haven't.
That includes both meteors which you dismiss as fake, and the simple everyday occurrence of rain.

You continually repeating the same pathetic BS won't magically make it true.

?

blademan9999

  • 250
  • +0/-0
Re: Let's talk about gravity
« Reply #366 on: May 14, 2022, 09:33:21 PM »
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 surface of Earth, and return to the surface of Earth. How difficult is that to understand? I've explained it to my 12 year old nephew, he has no problem grasping it. Where things originate is on the surface of Earth, which is the entire surface, not one, specific POINT on the surface. If you were born in Italy, or 'originated' in Italy, do you have to return to the hospital bed in Italy, to RETURN to where you originated? No, Italy is where you were born, or 'originated', it doesn't matter WHERE in Italy you were born, that is where you came into existence.

As I've told you, when a small rock originated on the Earth's surface, and a wind blows it 15 feet over, it does NOT magically have to 'return' to where it was earlier, because it is still on the surface. If it is blown into a lake, and sinks, it is - once again - still on the surface of Earth, under it's waters. It does NOT magically rise from the lake, and roll over to where it was earlier. Because, as I keep telling you, it is still where it originates - the Earth's surface, either ON it, or under it's waters.

There are both POINTS of origin, and AREAS, or MEDIUMS of origin - do you get that? A POINT of origin is ONE specific POINT, somewhere. That's what YOU keep talking about - a specific POINT of origin. What I'm talking about is an AREA of origin, which is the surface of Earth, or its waters, or within the heavens. It doesn't matter WHERE they exist on their AREA of origin, they always RETURN to it, wherever ON the area that may be.

Do you know what AREAS of origin are, and how they differ from a POINT of origin?

If not, I suggest you study the difference between the two. Good luck!

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.

Saying the same old BS doesn't help your case.

It has "been shown to exist countless times"? I'd like to see ANY proof it exists! The gazillion objects on Earth obviously don't work, your magnetic objects fool nobody, and the BS claims about 'space' are all garbage. There goes your 'countless times'!

You claim the moon is 'held' near Earth by your magical force, so if it can pull it, or hold it, 25,000 miles away, it should KEEP pulling it until it hits the Earth's surface. Your excuse is that it holds it in 'orbit' around Earth, but if the moon goes nearer to Earth at times, your magical force should pull it to Earth, because you claim it 'varies' by distance! Obviously not.

And when your astro-nots 'float' in 'space', they would be MUCH closer to Earth than the moon would be, right? Why would they not be pulled down to Earth, if your magical force can hold a moon 250,000 miles away?

All by 'magic' as usual!

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.
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.

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.

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.

What would your 'available evidence' be, specifically? Stuff from 'space', that nobody but your liars claim to see in 'space'? Is that about it? Every object on Earth has always been here, for all human history, and you spew about made up crap in 'space', as proof?

'Space', and 'gravity', champions of the ball Earth fairy tale!


What do you believe the gazillion objects which are on Earth, and have always been, as WE know it, would be considered? Is that NOT evidence to you? I'd like to hear you explain THAT one, don't be shy now...


Not all objects on earth originated from earth. For example there are meteroites. One notable example is the Chelyabinsk meteor. There's liquid nitrogen, which falls to the ground, despite originating in the air.


If you take a rock from the surface underground and then drop it, it'ss still fall, even though it's no below the surface.

*

Stash

  • Ethical Stash
  • 13398
  • +2/-2
  • I am car!
Re: Let's talk about gravity
« Reply #367 on: May 14, 2022, 10:16:49 PM »
Meteorite origin?


?

turbonium2

  • 3762
  • +51/-30
Re: Let's talk about gravity
« Reply #368 on: May 15, 2022, 12:52:42 AM »
Regardless, an area of origin refers to the collection of points where multiple objects originated.

YES, it is "an area of origin", the area of which they originate from. And the surface of Earth IS that 'area of origin', where multiple objects originate on. Some move around on the surface, others don't move, or move by other means, and all remain where they originate from, the Earth's surface.

You finally get it!


?

blademan9999

  • 250
  • +0/-0
Re: Let's talk about gravity
« Reply #369 on: May 15, 2022, 01:19:51 AM »
Regardless, an area of origin refers to the collection of points where multiple objects originated.

YES, it is "an area of origin", the area of which they originate from. And the surface of Earth IS that 'area of origin', where multiple objects originate on. Some move around on the surface, others don't move, or move by other means, and all remain where they originate from, the Earth's surface.

You finally get it!

And what force cause the to go toward their “origin”
Why are things pulled down even when they are underground?

*

JackBlack

  • 26157
  • +51/-79
Re: Let's talk about gravity
« Reply #370 on: May 15, 2022, 01:57:58 AM »
Regardless, an area of origin refers to the collection of points where multiple objects originated.
YES
Good, so now you can focus on a single object, which has a POINT of origin.

Again, you still have so many problems it isn't funny.
You are still yet to substantiate your claim that everything on Earth originates on Earth.
No, rejecting the evidence that shows you are wrong, does not support your claim.
Especially when you provide literally nothing to support it.

You still need to explain why objects should go towards their point of origin, except when they don't; such as when they fall from an outcrop downwards, instead of back up towards the surface; why water when boiled goes up but after it condenses it goes down, and why some objects float on water instead of going down to the surface of Earth.

And you are yet to show a single problem with gravity.

*

JJA

  • 6873
  • +2/-6
  • Math is math!
Re: Let's talk about gravity
« Reply #371 on: May 15, 2022, 02:34:19 AM »
They originated on the surface of Earth, and return to the surface of Earth. How difficult is that to understand? I've explained it to my 12 year old nephew, he has no problem grasping it.

You can fool a 12 year old.  That's something I guess.

What do you say when they ask about the moon rocks that were brought back?  Did the moon start on the Earth and get put up there?  What about the sun?  Stars?  Other planets?  They were all created here and what, shipped into the sky through Fed Express?

?

turbonium2

  • 3762
  • +51/-30
Re: Let's talk about gravity
« Reply #372 on: May 15, 2022, 03:39:04 AM »
Meteorite origin?



Whatever they were, or appeared to be, were ALL first seen b]low above Earth, as a streak of light, but no object is seen, at all, and then, when close to the surface, they suddenly puff up as balls of bright light, and dwindle out to nothing, while still above the surface.

Looking at how low they first appear in the sky, and immediately start to slope off and downward, when they first appear, and that they all expand into large balls of a much brighter light, and then fizzle into nothing at all, while in the sky, what would have all those same features, would be FIREWORKS, which are used at many sorts of events, like on the 4th of July, and on New Year's Eve, etc....

The ONLY difference I can see, is that these are much more powerful fireworks than others we've seen during public events, which are strictly regulated, for power, and range, because they're almost like small-scale missiles, and explode into a huge fireball, not exactly safe!

They are massive fireworks, probably, based on all the features of them. No 'comets', that's for sure. 

*

JackBlack

  • 26157
  • +51/-79
Re: Let's talk about gravity
« Reply #373 on: May 15, 2022, 04:09:55 AM »
as a streak of light, but no object is seen
That is typically what happens when there is a very bright light.
And it isn't surprising that they are seen when they start interacting significantly with the atmosphere to heat up.

Notice what isn't seen?
Anything going up from the surface towards it before it starts falling.
This shows it quite likely isn't coming from Earth.

They are massive fireworks, probably, based on all the features of them. No 'comets', that's for sure.
Does this look like a firework?
https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/3/39/Sylacauga_meteorite%2C_Smithsonian_Natural_History_Museum.jpg

They certainly seem like meteors, not fireworks.
Your "for sure" is just to try and up prop up your delusional fantasy.

Just where are these fireworks coming from?
Who is launching them?
Why aren't they seen before they start falling through the atmosphere at such high speeds?

The available evidence indicates they come from space, not the surface of Earth.
But because this destroys your claim, you need to come up with pathetic excuses.

All while still ignoring simple water which destroys your claims, and plenty of other things which do.

?

turbonium2

  • 3762
  • +51/-30
Re: Let's talk about gravity
« Reply #374 on: May 15, 2022, 04:46:01 AM »
And it isn't surprising that they are seen when they start interacting significantly with the atmosphere to heat up.

Notice what isn't seen?
Anything going up from the surface towards it before it starts falling.
This shows it quite likely isn't coming from Earth.

They first appear LOW above Earth, at a horizontal trajectory, which means they came from the ground, or low above ground, not from anywhere higher than first seen, unless you believe they flew down from 'space', through over 50000 feet of atmosphere, stopped, and veered off vertically at about 10000 feet, where they all suddenly APPEARED in the sky, and curved down towards Earth in an arc, expanded into a bright ball of light, and fizzled out of existence, while still in air...

The air doesn't burn flying rocks or anything else in the sky, it is NOT some huge furnace that hits 1000's of degrees temperatures. That's just one more lie in your fairy tale story, not found in the real world.

Endless BS, what else!

*

JackBlack

  • 26157
  • +51/-79
Re: Let's talk about gravity
« Reply #375 on: May 15, 2022, 05:17:56 AM »
They first appear LOW above Earth
No, they appear quite high above Earth, when they start significantly interacting with the atmosphere.
The fact that they appear that high, rather than on the ground shows there is no reason to think they came from the ground.

unless you believe they flew down from 'space', through over 50000 feet of atmosphere, stopped, and veered off vertically at about 10000 feet, where they all suddenly APPEARED in the sky
You sure do love spouting ignorant garbage don't you?
Earth is round. They don't need to come straight down to Earth to go into the atmosphere.
You are literally just making numbers up. You have no basis for your claim of 10000 archaic units.

The air doesn't burn flying rocks or anything else in the sky
Friction does, due to their speed.

Endless BS, what else!
Again, that does seem to be all you have.

Again, you still refuse to address water.

?

turbonium2

  • 3762
  • +51/-30
Re: Let's talk about gravity
« Reply #376 on: May 15, 2022, 05:45:34 AM »
No, they appear quite high above Earth, when they start significantly interacting with the atmosphere.

Friction does, due to their speed.



A plane at mach speeds are much faster than these fireworks are, and air has little friction, and doesn't heat anything up in air, let along burn it up like a roman candle!

The atmosphere doesn't burn things up, that's yet another lie they made up for their fairy tale, like everything else is.

And fireworks are timed to go off after they reach a specific height, they aren't seen until that point, same as THESE weren't seen at first, either. It's simple to understand this, no?

*

JackBlack

  • 26157
  • +51/-79
Re: Let's talk about gravity
« Reply #377 on: May 15, 2022, 06:17:42 AM »
A plane at mach speeds are much faster than these fireworks are
No, they are much slower.

air has little friction, and doesn't heat anything up in air
You not understanding friction isn't an valid rebuttal.

And fireworks are timed to go off after they reach a specific height, they aren't seen until that point
Do you mean the ones which just go up and go pop?
If so, they are nothing like this.
You need something to get it going that fast through the sky.
So it quite clearly isn't a firework.

Just like rain quite clearly isn't a firework.

*

Smoke Machine

  • 3975
  • +19/-20
Re: Let's talk about gravity
« Reply #378 on: May 15, 2022, 06:57:35 AM »
And it isn't surprising that they are seen when they start interacting significantly with the atmosphere to heat up.

Notice what isn't seen?
Anything going up from the surface towards it before it starts falling.
This shows it quite likely isn't coming from Earth.

They first appear LOW above Earth, at a horizontal trajectory, which means they came from the ground, or low above ground, not from anywhere higher than first seen, unless you believe they flew down from 'space', through over 50000 feet of atmosphere, stopped, and veered off vertically at about 10000 feet, where they all suddenly APPEARED in the sky, and curved down towards Earth in an arc, expanded into a bright ball of light, and fizzled out of existence, while still in air...

The air doesn't burn flying rocks or anything else in the sky, it is NOT some huge furnace that hits 1000's of degrees temperatures. That's just one more lie in your fairy tale story, not found in the real world.

Endless BS, what else!

Every meteor in these videos is travelling downwards on an angle. Fireworks go up and meteorites go down. Also, fireworks explode at their maximum height and the pieces burn out. These are one large piece at a time burning up approaching earth.





For the overall shape of Earth to be flat, requires billions of people and billions of pieces of information about Earth to be wrong. Do the maths.

?

blademan9999

  • 250
  • +0/-0
Re: Let's talk about gravity
« Reply #379 on: May 15, 2022, 08:01:27 AM »
Meteorite origin?



Whatever they were, or appeared to be, were ALL first seen b]low above Earth, as a streak of light, but no object is seen, at all, and then, when close to the surface, they suddenly puff up as balls of bright light, and dwindle out to nothing, while still above the surface.

Looking at how low they first appear in the sky, and immediately start to slope off and downward, when they first appear, and that they all expand into large balls of a much brighter light, and then fizzle into nothing at all, while in the sky, what would have all those same features, would be FIREWORKS, which are used at many sorts of events, like on the 4th of July, and on New Year's Eve, etc....

The ONLY difference I can see, is that these are much more powerful fireworks than others we've seen during public events, which are strictly regulated, for power, and range, because they're almost like small-scale missiles, and explode into a huge fireball, not exactly safe!

They are massive fireworks, probably, based on all the features of them. No 'comets', that's for sure.

The Chelyabinsk meteor resulted in an estimed Yield of 400-500 Kilo tons.
The Tunguska event had estimated yield of 10-15 MEGA Tons

?

blademan9999

  • 250
  • +0/-0
Re: Let's talk about gravity
« Reply #380 on: May 15, 2022, 08:04:31 AM »
No, they appear quite high above Earth, when they start significantly interacting with the atmosphere.

Friction does, due to their speed.



A plane at mach speeds are much faster than these fireworks are, and air has little friction, and doesn't heat anything up in air, let along burn it up like a roman candle!

The atmosphere doesn't burn things up, that's yet another lie they made up for their fairy tale, like everything else is.

And fireworks are timed to go off after they reach a specific height, they aren't seen until that point, same as THESE weren't seen at first, either. It's simple to understand this, no?

And these enter the atmosphere at Mach 30+, in comparison the concordes mach 2 was already enough to signigicantly heat up the outside of the place, imagine what 15+ times faster will do.

?

blademan9999

  • 250
  • +0/-0
Re: Let's talk about gravity
« Reply #381 on: May 15, 2022, 08:05:49 AM »
No, they appear quite high above Earth, when they start significantly interacting with the atmosphere.

Friction does, due to their speed.



A plane at mach speeds are much faster than these fireworks are, and air has little friction, and doesn't heat anything up in air, let along burn it up like a roman candle!

The atmosphere doesn't burn things up, that's yet another lie they made up for their fairy tale, like everything else is.

And fireworks are timed to go off after they reach a specific height, they aren't seen until that point, same as THESE weren't seen at first, either. It's simple to understand this, no?

And these enter the atmosphere at Mach 30+, in comparison the concordes mach 2 was already enough to signigicantly heat up the outside of the place, imagine what 15+ times faster will do.


Friction does, due to their speed.


Technically it's compressive heating.
Turbo, why does liquid nitrogen fall to the ground? Why does steam rise? Why does the atmoshpher get less dense as our altitude increases.

*

Stash

  • Ethical Stash
  • 13398
  • +2/-2
  • I am car!
Re: Let's talk about gravity
« Reply #382 on: May 15, 2022, 08:05:59 AM »
They are massive fireworks, probably, based on all the features of them. No 'comets', that's for sure.

How do you know for sure that it's fireworks? What do you know that the rest of the world doesn't?

Every meteorite fall on earth mapped
Or at least those we know about. And where are the known meteorite landing places on earth? These impact zones show where scientists have found meteorites, or the impact craters of meteorites, some dating back as far as the year 2,300BC. The data is from the Meteocritical Society and doesn't show those places where meteorites may have fallen but not been discovered



That's a lot of fireworks.

You know, people track this stuff. People have found craters and many meteorites on the ground and tested them and found compounds in them that are of wildly different in concentration than terrestrial rocks.

People study such things. Very learned people. Lots of them. And you come along with a theory that it's all "fireworks". You do understand how laughable that is, don't you?

*

JJA

  • 6873
  • +2/-6
  • Math is math!
Re: Let's talk about gravity
« Reply #383 on: May 15, 2022, 04:48:42 PM »
They are massive fireworks, probably, based on all the features of them. No 'comets', that's for sure.

Wait, wait.

So comets and meteors up there are... rockets?  Which you keep claiming are fake and can't get into space because of the dome?

This is great.  Do you even see your own contradictions here?

Where do I buy one of these 'fireworks' that can stay up in the sky shooting off a nice fake comet tail for MONTHS? ::)

?

stankann

  • 121
  • +0/-0
Re: Let's talk about gravity
« Reply #384 on: May 16, 2022, 08:01:32 AM »


No, it cannot maintain any velocity, the initial force causing it's motion, will soon dissipate and die out.



Where does the "initial force" go when it dissipates?  If it dies out, does the energy just vanish from something into nothing? 

*

Bullwinkle

  • The Elder Ones
  • 21053
  • +2/-1
  • Standard Idiot
Re: Let's talk about gravity
« Reply #385 on: May 16, 2022, 06:45:18 PM »
I'm still waiting on a response on if everything came from earth's surface and everything returns to earth's surface, where did Air come from and why does it not return to earth's surface.
I'm still waiting on explanation of what actual point things are trying to move back to.  Digging out everything under an object will cause it to fall down the hole, below the surface.
   


No, it gives room for the earth to come up and block the fall.    ;)

?

turbonium2

  • 3762
  • +51/-30
Re: Let's talk about gravity
« Reply #386 on: May 20, 2022, 05:27:52 PM »
Every meteor in these videos is travelling downwards on an angle. Fireworks go up and meteorites go down. Also, fireworks explode at their maximum height and the pieces burn out. These are one large piece at a time burning up approaching earth.

You've no proof of your claim, it's just your unsupported opinion, to back a ball Earth fairy tale story.

They just direct them from above ground, or set them from ground, and delay them until they start going DOWNWARD, instead of like normal, when set to go off upward, in air.

Do you believe they HAVE to go upward, for some reason? No, you must know they can direct them ANYWHERE they want, up or down or sideways, right?

You just assume they cannot be fireworks, because fireworks are always seen going UP?

Of course normal fireworks displays set them to go UPWARD in air, NOT sideways, over people's heads! They certainly COULD angle them that way, if they wanted to, but that's very dangerous, and illegal, and never done, for obvious reasons!

Have you ever seen a fireworks display that goes wrong? If you have, you know how FAST they fly in air, hit people, zoom over their heads, and so on. There is NO time to react to them, they fly far too fast to ever react beforehand!

Another problem for your claim - there is NO DEBRIS left anywhere on the ground, from your 'comets'! You say comets are 'space rocks', solid objects, which would mean they'd leave DEBRIS afterwards, on the surface!  Unlike fireworks, which leave NO debris, same as these leave no debris at all!

The lack of debris ALONE destroys your argument! It clearly supports mine, that it is fireworks of some sort, meant to appear as 'comets', to support their ball Earth lie!

It's absurd to claim they're 'comets', when nothing proves it, no debris left on the surface.

All those 'impact craters' they claim are from 'meteor/comet hits', NEVER have any debris around or in the 'craters'! Because they are NOT from 'comets/meteors' hitting Earth's surface, it's complete BS!  They are mostly sink holes, or similar phenomena causing them.

Look at all the sink holes which occur all the time, everywhere, MASSIVE sink holes, sometimes, just as large as your 'craters' are!

The only difference is, you cannot claim sink holes that we KNOW were not from 'meteor/comet hits', only the ones that happen in a desolate, non-inhabited areas, of course!


*

JackBlack

  • 26157
  • +51/-79
Re: Let's talk about gravity
« Reply #387 on: May 20, 2022, 05:36:27 PM »
You've no proof of your claim, it's just your unsupported opinion, to back a ball Earth fairy tale story.
You sure do love your pathetic projection don't you?

We have plentiful evidence to support our claims.
You have none.
You to reject all this evidence which shows you are wrong, all so you can pretend that everything originated on Earth, which you have absolutely no evidence for, all so you can try to prop up your FE fantasy.

They just direct them from above ground, or set them from ground, and delay them until they start going DOWNWARD, instead of like normal, when set to go off upward, in air.
How do they get up to speed? More FE magic?
You would be better off claiming they are missiles fired from stealth fighters.

Another problem for your claim - there is NO DEBRIS left anywhere on the ground
No, that isn't a problem for us, that is just another lie from you.
You claim there is no debris even though people have collected such debris.
But of course, accepting that debris would mean accepting you are wrong, so you don't.

Again, you wilfully rejecting the evidence doesn't mean it doesn't exist.

Now again, care to address water, and why rocks for overhanging ledges fall down rather than back up to the surface where they originated?

?

turbonium2

  • 3762
  • +51/-30
Re: Let's talk about gravity
« Reply #388 on: May 20, 2022, 08:23:12 PM »
You've no proof of your claim, it's just your unsupported opinion, to back a ball Earth fairy tale story.
You sure do love your pathetic projection don't you?

We have plentiful evidence to support our claims.
You have none.
You to reject all this evidence which shows you are wrong, all so you can pretend that everything originated on Earth, which you have absolutely no evidence for, all so you can try to prop up your FE fantasy.

They just direct them from above ground, or set them from ground, and delay them until they start going DOWNWARD, instead of like normal, when set to go off upward, in air.
How do they get up to speed? More FE magic?
You would be better off claiming they are missiles fired from stealth fighters.

Another problem for your claim - there is NO DEBRIS left anywhere on the ground
No, that isn't a problem for us, that is just another lie from you.
You claim there is no debris even though people have collected such debris.
But of course, accepting that debris would mean accepting you are wrong, so you don't.

Again, you wilfully rejecting the evidence doesn't mean it doesn't exist.

Now again, care to address water, and why rocks for overhanging ledges fall down rather than back up to the surface where they originated?

They are still on the surface of Earth, where they originated. Not above the surface, in air. Not up in 'space', either.

There's no debris, saying there is doesn't change that fact.


?

blademan9999

  • 250
  • +0/-0
Re: Let's talk about gravity
« Reply #389 on: May 20, 2022, 09:17:12 PM »
There is debris, claiming otherwise don’t change anything.

And let me do you this, what fireworks have NUCLEAR yields.

The Chelyabinsk Event had and estimated yield of 500kt, the Tunguska event had a estimated yield of 10-15 MEGA tons.