Three different FE’s, three different butchered versions of gravity.

  • 725 Replies
  • 52973 Views
*

Stash

  • Ethical Stash
  • 13398
  • I am car!
Re: Three different FEs, three different butchered versions of gravity.
« Reply #180 on: December 30, 2022, 05:14:07 PM »
Levels, gyroscopes, and accelerometer all rely on the same principles. Tilt (angular momentum).

Wait, so now you're saying that accelerometers measure tilt? You said this before:

It is not an accelerometer but a light sensor that determines tilt.

Sorry, maybe I have trouble speaking clearly. The device inside the Kindle is a simple light sensor, not an accelerometer.

Wait, even though you've been shown documentation and images and such that states/shows that Amazon and Apple themselves point to the inclusion of accelerometers in their devices?

Again, yet another Amazon source...From Amazon:

Device Orientation (Fire Tablets)
Accelerometer
When your app is in landscape orientation on a Fire tablet, for example in a game, use Display.getRotation() to check the display rotation when using raw accelerometer readings. The reference orientation for the Fire tablets is portrait mode, and the accelerometer readings are relative to a fixed coordinate system based on portrait orientation.

You need to translate the sensor data so that it makes sense for the current display rotation. That way, the logic in your app gets the expected input in landscape mode. For example, if you do not check the display rotation in a game, the game logic may move a character in the opposite direction from what the user intended.


So how do you know more than Amazon as to what components go into their devices than Amazon itself?

But all devices measure tilt. Not "gravity."

Not according to Texas Instruments:






How is it that you know more than TI?

So yes, it's fraud, but nobody is gonna sue over it.

So what's your evidence that accelerometers are fraud? Or is this just your belief based upon no evidence?

Sorry, maybe I have trouble speaking clearly. Accelerometers are as real as other devices made to measure tilt. But Amazon and Apple do not use accelerometers. They are probably custom parts, and there's no need for them when other devices do the same job. None of these devices measure "gravity" they measure tilt. Amazon could probably put a level inside their device if it would fit, and the same result.

I'm confused. You say that Amazon and Apple don't use accelerometers when it's been clearly shown to you that they do and clearly shown that accelerometers uses gravity.

How is it that you claim to know more about Amazon and Apple devices than Amazon and Apple do?

...we can give it to cellphone companies to make proper systems instead of fake helium "satellites".

Wait, and what's your evidence for helium "satellites"? Or is this just your belief based upon no evidence?

Oh I'm sorry, maybe you're incapable of reading. At some point, I quoted that NASA uses helium, for various programs. They claim they need it for other things, but later articles mention that they do use it for balloons.

NOAA uses helium for weather balloons. Many other agencies/companies use helium. How do you make the leap from a gas being used to fake satellites?

What's your evidence that satellites are helium balloons? How do they work? How do they stay aloft? How do they navigate?
And what's with the NASA! NASA! NASA!? You realize there are there are other space agencies/companies all over the globe that have nothing to do with NASA that put satellites into space, right?

https://greatmountainpublishing.com/2021/07/01/long-distance-radio-transmissions-prove-that-the-earth-is-flat/

Quote
In 2014, NASA contracted with Air Products and Chemicals, Inc. of Allentown, Pennsylvania, to supply 128.6 million cubic feet of gaseous helium to support operations at 13 NASA locations 24 over the next five years, from 2015 to 2019.

You realize satellites have been around for decades before 2014, right?

Do you have evidence for any of your assertions or you just doing the sheeple thing and just sticking to your belief system without evidence?

*

sceptimatic

  • Flat Earth Scientist
  • 30068
Re: Three different FEs, three different butchered versions of gravity.
« Reply #181 on: December 31, 2022, 04:13:03 AM »
Who is the father of satellite communication?
Image result for arthur c clarke satellite
The famous science fiction writer Arthur C. Clarke (1917-2008) was still an unknown quantity at the age of 28 when he wrote two scientific articles that would earn him the title of the father of satellite communications.


Not really much more needs to be said.

*

JackBlack

  • 22457
Re: Three different FEs, three different butchered versions of gravity.
« Reply #182 on: December 31, 2022, 12:20:18 PM »
Not really much more needs to be said.
How about anything at all related to the topic, rather than your pathetic attempt to dismiss reality as science fiction?

I get it, you can't handle reality. But if you aren't going to contribute, then it is best to remain silent.

*

Stash

  • Ethical Stash
  • 13398
  • I am car!
Re: Three different FEs, three different butchered versions of gravity.
« Reply #183 on: December 31, 2022, 12:36:45 PM »
Who is the father of satellite communication?
Image result for arthur c clarke satellite
The famous science fiction writer Arthur C. Clarke (1917-2008) was still an unknown quantity at the age of 28 when he wrote two scientific articles that would earn him the title of the father of satellite communications.


Not really much more needs to be said.

This really means nothing. People have written about, for example, computers and telecommunications on their wrists way, way before we had such things.

1940's:


Today:


Your point is pointless.

Not really much more needs to be said.

Re: Three different FEs, three different butchered versions of gravity.
« Reply #184 on: January 03, 2023, 06:56:38 AM »
Quote
Wait, even though you've been shown documentation and images and such that states/shows that Amazon and Apple themselves point to the inclusion of accelerometers in their devices?

When I've seen what an accelerometer looks like, ummm yeah? Especially since it doesn't look like what they point to and declare an accelerometer.

That you're gullible enough to buy it for its accelerometer is moot to me. I typically shut the thing off as it is mostly useless.

I buy a Kindle because it can read books, take pictures, and use the internet without the subscription fee of a cellphone (actually, it was a gift, so I didn't buy it at all). Since I never use the phone, an iPhone is worthless to me.

Quote
How is it that you know more than TI?

Forever accusing me of arrogance. Dude, I live in a small town. I don't have a girlfriend. I don't have alot of things. I am not "smarter" than TI, or Google, or whatever. That's a nonsense statement anyway, as you as a human cannot compare to a company, which is a construct based on the union of people. There is no Google to match wits with.

But to answer the question. I am smarter than mob rule and orthodoxy. A bunch of people said it, so they must be right. Sorry, let's apply skepticism to that.

Pyramid schemes (it was the first example I thought of) involve many people pushing a product. Believing in its value. But the owner of the company might actually be making money from the employees, rather than the other way around. They believe in the product and there are alot of them, but in some cases, no product exists.

And formulas can be wrong. Either contain mistakes (2+2 x 5 = 20 for example, unless it is parenthetically defined as (2+2)x5) or it can be wrong due to bad theory.

Re: Three different FEs, three different butchered versions of gravity.
« Reply #185 on: January 03, 2023, 07:42:31 AM »
Correct

You, biulmba, are wrong due to bad theory.

*

Stash

  • Ethical Stash
  • 13398
  • I am car!
Re: Three different FEs, three different butchered versions of gravity.
« Reply #186 on: January 03, 2023, 08:58:43 AM »
Quote
Wait, even though you've been shown documentation and images and such that states/shows that Amazon and Apple themselves point to the inclusion of accelerometers in their devices?

When I've seen what an accelerometer looks like, ummm yeah? Especially since it doesn't look like what they point to and declare an accelerometer.

And how would you know what an accelerometer is supposed to look like? Have you designed, engineered, manufactured and coded one? You're really reaching now.

That you're gullible enough to buy it for its accelerometer is moot to me. I typically shut the thing off as it is mostly useless.

I buy a Kindle because it can read books, take pictures, and use the internet without the subscription fee of a cellphone (actually, it was a gift, so I didn't buy it at all). Since I never use the phone, an iPhone is worthless to me.

It's not a matter of, "I bought a kindle because it has an accelerometer..." That's like saying, "I bought this car because it had an alternator.." It's just an intrinsic part of the machine. Like a CPU or RAM, etc.

You locking your device in portrait mode is not turning off an accelerometer. And it's neither here nor there whether you use a device for this or that. Such a strange thing to even bring up. Completely irrelevant. Like I said, you are really reaching now.

Quote
How is it that you know more than TI?

Forever accusing me of arrogance. Dude, I live in a small town. I don't have a girlfriend. I don't have alot of things. I am not "smarter" than TI, or Google, or whatever. That's a nonsense statement anyway, as you as a human cannot compare to a company, which is a construct based on the union of people. There is no Google to match wits with.

Another weird reach that is entirely irrelevant. You know this, but are somehow trying to make a strange strawman argument. You know I'm talking about humans that work for these types of companies that design, engineer and code such devices. You know I'm not literally comparing you to an entire corporation. Stop reaching for irrelevant and manufactured excuses and actually address the issue specifically without all this unnecessary hyperbole.

Even though you've been shown documentation and images and such that states/shows that engineers, humans at Amazon, Apple, Texas Instruments, etc., themselves point to the inclusion of accelerometers in their devices, you still claim they don't? They are lying for some completely unknown reason. How do you know more than those people?

But to answer the question. I am smarter than mob rule and orthodoxy. A bunch of people said it, so they must be right. Sorry, let's apply skepticism to that.

Again, a weird reach to irrelevancy. It's not "mob rule". No one cares about your conspiracy theories. It's just people, humans, engineers and designers coming up with tech that may make devices better, more useful...for profit by selling such products.

You think engineers/designers at Amazon, Apple, Texas Instruments, etc., sit there and say, "Oh, I know, let's really fuck with flat earthers and gravity deniers and lie to them about this fake 'accelerometer' gizmo and state in our specs that it actually exists. And we'll even write up documentation as to how how it works using g...That will really piss them off..."

Could you be more arrogant and delusional?

Pyramid schemes (it was the first example I thought of) involve many people pushing a product. Believing in its value. But the owner of the company might actually be making money from the employees, rather than the other way around. They believe in the product and there are alot of them, but in some cases, no product exists.

And formulas can be wrong. Either contain mistakes (2+2 x 5 = 20 for example, unless it is parenthetically defined as (2+2)x5) or it can be wrong due to bad theory.

Again, pyramid schemes? Entirely irrelevant. You are reaching so far it's bordering on some sort of psychotic break with reality.

What kind of argument is that, "formulas can be wrong"? Yeah, sure, and guess what, formulas can be right. Silly argument and meaningless.

*

JackBlack

  • 22457
Re: Three different FEs, three different butchered versions of gravity.
« Reply #187 on: January 03, 2023, 12:20:00 PM »
When I've seen what an accelerometer looks like, ummm yeah? Especially since it doesn't look like what they point to and declare an accelerometer.
You mean it looks just like an accelerometer chip on the board you provided pictures of?

That you're gullible enough to buy it for its accelerometer is moot to me.
You mean either you are truly deluded or are knowingly spouting pure BS to pretend your delusional BS is correct.
You have had it explained how it isn't the board that makes the accelerometer, and instead it is the accelerometer chip.

Again, which is it? Are you a troll, or are you truly delusional?

Forever accusing me of arrogance.
And with all your bold claims, based upon absolutely no evidence, with plenty of evidence to demonstrate you are wrong, that certainly seems to fit.

I am not "smarter" than TI, or Google, or whatever.
Then stop pretending you are.
Start admitting that you are wrong and don't know what you are talking about, and that these devices do have an accelerometer.

Re: Three different FE’s, three different butchered versions of gravity.
« Reply #188 on: January 04, 2023, 05:41:31 AM »
Formulas are more often wrong than right.

1. Bias: You want a theory to be right, so you write it, in hopes that as complicated as it looks, nobody will question it.
2. Collusion: You buy out a few other scientists. All of you get funding, even though the theory is fraud.
3. Legacy: "Einstein or Hawking were great men (howwere the great), so who am I to question them?" In fact, it's viewed as arrogant to touch the legacy of other people, and call into question what they said or wrote. Well, I'm sorry but both of these were theoretical scientists, not practical scientists (the only type I have respect for are those who actually built something with their theories)p, without that, it is just an idea in your head), and Hawking was paralyzed and for all we know, the chair was saying every brilliant thing he supposedly said.
 Who am I to question their legacy? I am me. I don't have to bow before people's legacy or fawn over their supposed greatness. Because I'm a human with a mind that is perfectly capable of observing and questioning ideas. Your brain is broken if you can't.
4. Error: Missing decimal points, putting in the wrong number or symbol in a particular spot, making mathematics mistakes on physics problems. In particular, people routinely faul to understand orders of magnitude, or they would understand that most of these systems are required to be gross overestimations. The speed the moon orbits, the speed the Earth rotates and orbits, the distance and size of the sun, all of these are absurd figures that RE types accept blindly.
5. Ignorance: Not understanding that there are rules to math and science. Putting symbols that have one context in biology and one in physics in the wrong context and expecting it to work. Trusting in formulas in the first place, when you only know the secondhand reputation of a person and not their motivations.

Yes, I don't trust formulas. Because they aren't proof of anything.



I use formulas for programming. But I know that all too often, if I make a mistake, it creates a glitch. I deal with mistakes all the time. Editing them is part of growth.

Theoretical scientists never have to deal with the fallout of their formulas being wrong. They get famous, then dead. And it is only after someone finally questions them that we take a look at their mistakes and how amateur their thinking was.

There are entire articles about the mistakes made in science.
Here's one.
https://www.discovermagazine.com/the-sciences/20-of-the-greatest-blunders-in-science-in-the-last-20-years
Your blind trust is cute, but no.

« Last Edit: January 04, 2023, 05:54:22 AM by bulmabriefs144 »

*

Stash

  • Ethical Stash
  • 13398
  • I am car!
Re: Three different FEs, three different butchered versions of gravity.
« Reply #189 on: January 04, 2023, 09:33:53 AM »
Formulas are more often wrong than right.

Says who? Are you basing this on your woeful coding skills?

Re: Three different FEs, three different butchered versions of gravity.
« Reply #190 on: January 04, 2023, 12:03:57 PM »
My coding skills are not that bad.

But every mistake I do make is a three hour lesson on how I can't trust math without question, but have to recheck things.

*

JackBlack

  • 22457
Re: Three different FEs, three different butchered versions of gravity.
« Reply #191 on: January 04, 2023, 01:51:48 PM »
Formulas are more often wrong than right.
No, you are more often wrong than right.
Unless you are trying for the fact that the formula is typically a simplification/approximation.

1. Bias: You want a theory to be right, so you write it, in hopes that as complicated as it looks, nobody will question it.
Pure BS.
The formulae are used to make predictions, to make useful devices.
If the formulae is not useful for making predictions, it will be discarded.

2. Collusion: You buy out a few other scientists. All of you get funding, even though the theory is fraud.
Paranoid, delusional BS.

3. Legacy: "Einstein or Hawking were great men (howwere the great), so who am I to question them?"
And who is using this? How does this demonstrate the formula is wrong?
You are setting up a strawman to knock down.

4. Error: Missing decimal points, putting in the wrong number or symbol in a particular spot, making mathematics mistakes on physics problems.
That would be people using the formula doing it wrong, not the formula.
Your misuse of a formula (as you have done several times) doesn't make the formula wrong, it makes YOU wrong.

they would understand that most of these systems are required to be gross overestimations. The speed the moon orbits, the speed the Earth rotates and orbits, the distance and size of the sun, all of these are absurd figures
Why? Because you say so?

5. Ignorance
Your wilful ignorance doesn't make the formulae wrong.
Ignorance resulting in the mis-application of a formula doesn't make the formula wrong.

Yes, I don't trust formulas. Because they aren't proof of anything.
Then you are a fool that entirely fails to understand the purpose; or you are once more setting up a pathetic strawman.

Formulae alone are not used as proof.
Instead a formula, with an explanation of this from this model, and a prediction from this formula which is tested, is used as evidence that the model is correct.
It is the predictive power, and how well it is explained by the model, which constitutes evidence, not simply its existence.

None of this helps prop up your delusional claims about accelerometers, nor about your attempt to reject gravity.

*

Stash

  • Ethical Stash
  • 13398
  • I am car!
Re: Three different FEs, three different butchered versions of gravity.
« Reply #192 on: January 04, 2023, 03:54:52 PM »
My coding skills are not that bad.

But every mistake I do make is a three hour lesson on how I can't trust math without question, but have to recheck things.

Of course one can't trust math without question. Math can be very complex. It's just when you come out with these grand statements without any basis and somehow think they back up your position it's noting but a massive failure. All you do is speculate and never offer or address evidence with evidence.

I mean, "Formulas are more often wrong than right," is just a weird irrelevant and unsupported statement. You consider that an argument for anything? One might as well say, "Anime is only for misanthropic losers who have to get lost in cartoon fantasies because they can't deal, nor have any connection with reality."

A grand statement that is highly speculative, means nothing, and is completely unsupported by evidence.

Enough with the manufactured speculation and try to provide just a smidge of evidence. This making up shit is just garbage trash-talk and is doing a great disservice to your cause. You just end up painting people with your belief system as deluded lunatic sheeple.

Re: Three different FEs, three different butchered versions of gravity.
« Reply #193 on: January 06, 2023, 01:00:24 AM »
My coding skills are not that bad.

But every mistake I do make is a three hour lesson on how I can't trust math without question, but have to recheck things.

Of course one can't trust math without question. Math can be very complex. It's just when you come out with these grand statements without any basis and somehow think they back up your position it's noting but a massive failure. All you do is speculate and never offer or address evidence with evidence.

I mean, "Formulas are more often wrong than right," is just a weird irrelevant and unsupported statement. You consider that an argument for anything? One might as well say, "Anime is only for misanthropic losers who have to get lost in cartoon fantasies because they can't deal, nor have any connection with reality."


You have just shown that blanket statements could be right.

*

Stash

  • Ethical Stash
  • 13398
  • I am car!
Re: Three different FEs, three different butchered versions of gravity.
« Reply #194 on: January 06, 2023, 02:22:22 AM »
My coding skills are not that bad.

But every mistake I do make is a three hour lesson on how I can't trust math without question, but have to recheck things.

Of course one can't trust math without question. Math can be very complex. It's just when you come out with these grand statements without any basis and somehow think they back up your position it's noting but a massive failure. All you do is speculate and never offer or address evidence with evidence.

I mean, "Formulas are more often wrong than right," is just a weird irrelevant and unsupported statement. You consider that an argument for anything? One might as well say, "Anime is only for misanthropic losers who have to get lost in cartoon fantasies because they can't deal, nor have any connection with reality."


You have just shown that blanket statements could be right.

Quite the contrary.

*

Stash

  • Ethical Stash
  • 13398
  • I am car!
Re: Three different FEs, three different butchered versions of gravity.
« Reply #195 on: January 06, 2023, 02:26:38 AM »
All of these account for already existing behaviors. Yet gravity claims the place of some of them, to prop up a screwy theory which btw has never really been proven.

https://ncse.ngo/gravity-its-only-theory

Absolutely hilarious how you will fall for anything that fits your sheeple belief system...

The article above was written by Ellery Schempp:
(born Ellory Schempp, August 5, 1940) is an American physicist[1] and the primary student involved in the landmark 1963 United States Supreme Court decision of Abington School District v. Schempp[2] which declared that required public school sanctioned Bible readings were unconstitutional.

He was basically responsible for, other than being a highly regarded physicist, getting the bible booted from American classrooms.

But more importantly, regarding the article you cited written by him, "Gravity: It's Only a Theory", it's a parody, satire. Here, this from the author himself:

GRAVITY: ONLY A THEORY--ANNOTATED
By Ellery Schempp

I wrote my "critique of gravity" as a spoof on the arguments used by
creationists and proponents of "intelligent design" in their attacks on
evolution and the efforts to put "disclaimer labels" in biology textbooks
that "evolution is only a theory". It was intended as a parody of the
creationists, using all the best techniques of half-truths, non-sequiturs,
logical fallacies, over-simplification, misleading statements,
authoritative assertion, biased words, and general absurdity that I learned
from them. To my surprise, some people didn't get the joke; others
wondered what was really true. One wrote me a lengthy email, ending: "If
you would like me to refute any of the other points made in the article, I
will happily do so but I believe the discussion above is enough to set the
record straight." That anyone would not get the joke is a sad commentary
on the state of science knowledge or our sense of humor or both! I mean,
if you tie in gravity to obesity, Saturn's rings, moral 'decline', and
universal health care, and you don't see the fun, what's to say?


And your second link is all about how gravity has served us quite well from a terrestrial standpoint. But when we move away from earth and get all "quantum-y" out in deep space, things get a little funky and we're still trying to figure out how to unify everything. And we're a ways away from that. But in the mean time, gravity works great for all of our purposes here.

So instead of defaulting to headlines/titles that you think play into your sheeple belief system, actually take the time to read through, reason out, and learn about what it is that doesn't fit your sheeple belief system. I mean your "best" evidence you mistakenly cited is a parody of and destroys your sheeple belief system. Try smarter and harder.

*

JackBlack

  • 22457
Re: Three different FEs, three different butchered versions of gravity.
« Reply #196 on: January 06, 2023, 03:09:43 AM »
You have just shown that blanket statements could be right.
Only some, like FEers are wrong about the shape of Earth.
But others, like yours are not.

All the delusional garbage you spout is entirely wrong.
But you don't care.
You just spout whatever BS you can think of to try and pretend your fantasy is correct.

Just look at the crap you posted in the thread Stash linked.
Because you can't show a fault with the RE model, you pretend it should be like Majora's Mask.
But this shows either a complete lack of understanding of how gravity works, or that you are intentionally lying about it.

Given how many times orbits have been explained to you, this shows that either you are lying, or you are truly deluded.

Look at the delusional crap you have spouted about accelerometers.
You find simple boards for hobbyists, ignore the accelerometer chip on it, and pretend the rest of the board magically functions as an accelerometer, even though it has no capability to do so, there are countless other boards which cannot perform that function yet with virtually the same components (just not the accelerometer microchip), and there are plenty of suppliers providing these as just chips, complete with datasheets and so on, and the boards you appeal to have accelerometer chips on them; but that didn't stop you from posting the back of a board to pretend it had no components.

Re: Three different FEs, three different butchered versions of gravity.
« Reply #197 on: January 06, 2023, 10:14:00 PM »
All of these account for already existing behaviors. Yet gravity claims the place of some of them, to prop up a screwy theory which btw has never really been proven.

https://ncse.ngo/gravity-its-only-theory

Absolutely hilarious how you will fall for anything that fits your sheeple belief system...

The article above was written by Ellery Schempp:
(born Ellory Schempp, August 5, 1940) is an American physicist[1] and the primary student involved in the landmark 1963 United States Supreme Court decision of Abington School District v. Schempp[2] which declared that required public school sanctioned Bible readings were unconstitutional.

He was basically responsible for, other than being a highly regarded physicist, getting the bible booted from American classrooms.

But more importantly, regarding the article you cited written by him, "Gravity: It's Only a Theory", it's a parody, satire. Here, this from the author himself:

GRAVITY: ONLY A THEORY--ANNOTATED
By Ellery Schempp

I wrote my "critique of gravity" as a spoof on the arguments used by
creationists and proponents of "intelligent design" in their attacks on
evolution and the efforts to put "disclaimer labels" in biology textbooks
that "evolution is only a theory". It was intended as a parody of the
creationists, using all the best techniques of half-truths, non-sequiturs,
logical fallacies, over-simplification, misleading statements,
authoritative assertion, biased words, and general absurdity that I learned
from them. To my surprise, some people didn't get the joke; others
wondered what was really true. One wrote me a lengthy email, ending: "If
you would like me to refute any of the other points made in the article, I
will happily do so but I believe the discussion above is enough to set the
record straight." That anyone would not get the joke is a sad commentary
on the state of science knowledge or our sense of humor or both! I mean,
if you tie in gravity to obesity, Saturn's rings, moral 'decline', and
universal health care, and you don't see the fun, what's to say?


And your second link is all about how gravity has served us quite well from a terrestrial standpoint. But when we move away from earth and get all "quantum-y" out in deep space, things get a little funky and we're still trying to figure out how to unify everything. And we're a ways away from that. But in the mean time, gravity works great for all of our purposes here.

So instead of defaulting to headlines/titles that you think play into your sheeple belief system, actually take the time to read through, reason out, and learn about what it is that doesn't fit your sheeple belief system. I mean your "best" evidence you mistakenly cited is a parody of and destroys your sheeple belief system. Try smarter and harder.

I think It's quite hilarious that you unironically use the term sheeple to mean someone like me.

Dude, sheeple are herd animals. They follow the mainstream orthodoxy. Or as Fauci put it, "the science."

I don't believe in things because other people tell me. In fact, even I know what I believe is fringe. And some of it is fringe even among other FE believers.

*

JackBlack

  • 22457
Re: Three different FEs, three different butchered versions of gravity.
« Reply #198 on: January 06, 2023, 10:29:59 PM »
I think It's quite hilarious that you unironically use the term sheeple to mean someone like me.
Dude, sheeple are herd animals.
Like the FE herd, often willing to pat each other on the back, and gobble up whatever BS their leaders spout.

I don't believe in things because other people tell me.
Then why do you believe it? As you are yet to provide any evidence or rational justification for any of your nonsense.
It certainly seems like you watched a FE video from a FE con man, and just blindly accepted it, like a sheep.

*

Stash

  • Ethical Stash
  • 13398
  • I am car!
Re: Three different FEs, three different butchered versions of gravity.
« Reply #199 on: January 07, 2023, 04:28:12 AM »
All of these account for already existing behaviors. Yet gravity claims the place of some of them, to prop up a screwy theory which btw has never really been proven.

https://ncse.ngo/gravity-its-only-theory

Absolutely hilarious how you will fall for anything that fits your sheeple belief system...

The article above was written by Ellery Schempp:
(born Ellory Schempp, August 5, 1940) is an American physicist[1] and the primary student involved in the landmark 1963 United States Supreme Court decision of Abington School District v. Schempp[2] which declared that required public school sanctioned Bible readings were unconstitutional.

He was basically responsible for, other than being a highly regarded physicist, getting the bible booted from American classrooms.

But more importantly, regarding the article you cited written by him, "Gravity: It's Only a Theory", it's a parody, satire. Here, this from the author himself:

GRAVITY: ONLY A THEORY--ANNOTATED
By Ellery Schempp

I wrote my "critique of gravity" as a spoof on the arguments used by
creationists and proponents of "intelligent design" in their attacks on
evolution and the efforts to put "disclaimer labels" in biology textbooks
that "evolution is only a theory". It was intended as a parody of the
creationists, using all the best techniques of half-truths, non-sequiturs,
logical fallacies, over-simplification, misleading statements,
authoritative assertion, biased words, and general absurdity that I learned
from them. To my surprise, some people didn't get the joke; others
wondered what was really true. One wrote me a lengthy email, ending: "If
you would like me to refute any of the other points made in the article, I
will happily do so but I believe the discussion above is enough to set the
record straight." That anyone would not get the joke is a sad commentary
on the state of science knowledge or our sense of humor or both! I mean,
if you tie in gravity to obesity, Saturn's rings, moral 'decline', and
universal health care, and you don't see the fun, what's to say?


And your second link is all about how gravity has served us quite well from a terrestrial standpoint. But when we move away from earth and get all "quantum-y" out in deep space, things get a little funky and we're still trying to figure out how to unify everything. And we're a ways away from that. But in the mean time, gravity works great for all of our purposes here.

So instead of defaulting to headlines/titles that you think play into your sheeple belief system, actually take the time to read through, reason out, and learn about what it is that doesn't fit your sheeple belief system. I mean your "best" evidence you mistakenly cited is a parody of and destroys your sheeple belief system. Try smarter and harder.

I think It's quite hilarious that you unironically use the term sheeple to mean someone like me.

Dude, sheeple are herd animals. They follow the mainstream orthodoxy. Or as Fauci put it, "the science."

I don't believe in things because other people tell me. In fact, even I know what I believe is fringe. And some of it is fringe even among other FE believers.

I would agree except for the fact that the majority of your speculations are the same as the FE herd. And classically, same as the FE sheeple herd, lacking in evidence and head in sand when confronted with actual evidence. Even when it's glaring. So you're not special in that regard, very much a part of the sheeple FE herd.

I mean there's nothing more glaring than no FE map and how the entirety of the world navigates, quite well, using global coordinates and tools. Yet FEr's, faced with that unsurmountable evidence, default to "lies/conspiracies". It doesn't get more sheeple than that.

Re: Three different FEs, three different butchered versions of gravity.
« Reply #200 on: January 07, 2023, 05:49:20 AM »
Someone is considered a 'sheeple', when they accept whatever they are told is the truth, without ever questioning it, or asking for proof of it, or most of the people don't care if it's true or not, so they are filed under  'I HAVE NO CLUE ABOUT IT', not as puffing up your numbers with the ignorant SHEEPLE, who believe what they're told to believe. No brains needed here, folks, thanks for saying you agree with all our BS being the truth, it's great to see!
 

*

Stash

  • Ethical Stash
  • 13398
  • I am car!
Re: Three different FEs, three different butchered versions of gravity.
« Reply #201 on: January 07, 2023, 06:25:57 AM »
Someone is considered a 'sheeple', when they accept whatever they are told is the truth, without ever questioning it, or asking for proof of it, or most of the people don't care if it's true or not, so they are filed under  'I HAVE NO CLUE ABOUT IT', not as puffing up your numbers with the ignorant SHEEPLE, who believe what they're told to believe. No brains needed here, folks, thanks for saying you agree with all our BS being the truth, it's great to see!

Actually, you just described your standpoint...as a sheeple. You never question your belief system and disregard everything that is counter to it as simply lies/conspiracy. Such and easy and honestly, lazy 'out'.You don't examine evidence that is counter to your belief system regardless of how you arrived at it. That is head in the sands sheeple-dom.
- Mountains of evidence for meteors. Nope, according to you, everyone is lying
- Mountains of evidence for rockets, space and such, nope, according to you, just lies and conspiracy
- Mountains of evidence for all forms of navigation, maps using global coordinates and tools. Nope, everyone is lying.

Your just trudging along with the lies/conspiracy sheeple and are never willing to question your own belief system.

Sure, everyone is taught globe earth stuff and I'm sure the vast majority of folks just happily go about their lives not questioning it mostly because it has zero bearing on their day-to-day. But what you find here, is most of the globe supporters actually examine the evidence around the spherical earth and try to understand how it works and when the evidence is clear, state it as such. I know that when I first came here I had to research a bunch of stuff about both RE and FE to understand what I was responding to. Tons of stuff like, "Now how do seasons work again?', "How do equinoxes/solstices work again?", "How do various transports navigate", all from both RE and FE perspectives.

Then examine the evidence, mostly from the perspective of what actually works. What do people that do rely on this stuff in their day-to-day use, calculate, engineer, design, utilize to get the results they need. And when something doesn't work, doesn't satisfy those needs, question some more.

And when I distill all that down, what people use and quite successfully use from engineers, to pilots, to surveyors, to navigators, to season, to equinoxes, etc., is the globe.

Now if someone could produce, let's say a flat earth map, that works for all the stuff that seems to work today under RE, then yeah, I would have to alter my belief system accordingly. So far, I've seen no evidence that FE works, let alone better than RE.

Lastly, I wish that modern education included more alternate theories of just about everything so kids could test them out and see what works and why. But that's a whole other enchilada.

*

JackBlack

  • 22457
Re: Three different FEs, three different butchered versions of gravity.
« Reply #202 on: January 07, 2023, 02:23:38 PM »
Someone is considered a 'sheeple', when they accept whatever they are told is the truth, without ever questioning it, or asking for proof of it, or most of the people don't care if it's true or not, so they are filed under  'I HAVE NO CLUE ABOUT IT', not as puffing up your numbers with the ignorant SHEEPLE, who believe what they're told to believe.
So the FEers, that believe Earth is flat, without questioning it, or having any evidence for it.
The people who outright reject so much evidence that shows they are wrong, and make bold claims about the RE which are either outright lies or which they have no clue about?

Re: Three different FEs, three different butchered versions of gravity.
« Reply #203 on: January 08, 2023, 06:41:54 AM »
Someone is considered a 'sheeple', when they accept whatever they are told is the truth, without ever questioning it, or asking for proof of it, or most of the people don't care if it's true or not, so they are filed under  'I HAVE NO CLUE ABOUT IT', not as puffing up your numbers with the ignorant SHEEPLE, who believe what they're told to believe.
So the FEers, that believe Earth is flat, without questioning it, or having any evidence for it.
The people who outright reject so much evidence that shows they are wrong, and make bold claims about the RE which are either outright lies or which they have no clue about?

No, I've looked into both arguments, and question both sides of it, YOUR side has never questioned the ball Earth claims, which I've told you about already.


You've never once questioned any claims from your 'astronomers', who have NEVER allow others to see if their claims ARE true, or not true, which means they are NOT telling us the truth, because that is the ONLY reason they don't allow others to validate their claims as true, because they know it is NOT true.

But for some strange reason, YOU still believe their claims, when they've never allowed anyone else to confirm all their claims, but you accept their claims, which they refuse to be confirmed by others, but you have no problem with that, either, right?

So we know who the 'sheeple' is here, it's blatantly obvious to see.

Re: Three different FEs, three different butchered versions of gravity.
« Reply #204 on: January 08, 2023, 07:11:45 AM »


You've never once questioned any claims from your 'astronomers',

Funny claim by you..

I seem to remember a specific post..

So the independent movements from the various parts of the plane show that it is the plane itself moving, not a heat haze?


The plane itself IS moving, but you claim Saturn itself is NOT moving at all, so you're comparison is wrong, right there, Also wrong, is that heat haze is a momentary effect, not an eternal one, and it effects ANY objects, and the whole scene as well,



Like how atmospheric turbulence effects the moon, Jupiter, and Saturn in these video clips?  Noticeably effected by heat waves.











Quote
not the object alone, so that's another contradiction.


The field of view is so narrow, and to properly expose Saturn, what other objects should be in the shot?

However, I have this overexposed video of Saturn. Its looks like its moon is being effected in lockstep with its planet Saturn.



I hope they play as little video clips as intended.  Ive reach my daily limit of YouTube video uploads.

?

ecco

  • 188
Re: Three different FEs, three different butchered versions of gravity.
« Reply #205 on: January 08, 2023, 09:17:10 AM »


1. Bias: You want a theory to be right, so you write it, in hopes that as complicated as it looks, nobody will question it.
2. Collusion: You buy out a few other scientists. All of you get funding, even though the theory is fraud.
3. Legacy: "Einstein or Hawking were great men (howwere the great), so who am I to question them?" In fact, it's viewed as arrogant to touch the legacy of other people, and call into question what they said or wrote. Well, I'm sorry but both of these were theoretical scientists, not practical scientists (the only type I have respect for are those who actually built something with their theories)p, without that, it is just an idea in your head), and Hawking was paralyzed and for all we know, the chair was saying every brilliant thing he supposedly said.
 Who am I to question their legacy? I am me. I don't have to bow before people's legacy or fawn over their supposed greatness. Because I'm a human with a mind that is perfectly capable of observing and questioning ideas. Your brain is broken if you can't.
 ...
There are entire articles about the mistakes made in science.
Here's one.
https://www.discovermagazine.com/the-sciences/20-of-the-greatest-blunders-in-science-in-the-last-20-years
 

One problem is that you do not even understand what you read or write.  You assert that scientists do not question other scientists.  Then you post a link to an article to verify your assertion.  In fact, the article actually refutes your assertion:

After years of investigation, McBride was found guilty of scientific fraud in 1993 by a medical tribunal.
...
Skeptical atmospheric scientists argued that Sagan's model ignored a variety of factors...
In a 1990 article in Science, Sagan and his original coauthors admitted that their initial temperature estimates were wrong.

...
At the University of Utah in 1989, chemists Stanley Pons and Martin Fleischmann announced that the world's energy problems had been solved. They claimed to have created nuclear fusion on a tabletop...
The problem is, no other scientists have been able to reproduce their results


In each case, it is scientists investigating claims made by other scientists, finding them to be wrong, and publicizing their errors.


Your egotistic belief that your mind is "perfectly capable of observing and questioning" is laughable nonsense.   

?

ecco

  • 188
Re: Three different FEs, three different butchered versions of gravity.
« Reply #206 on: January 08, 2023, 09:31:43 AM »
Someone is considered a 'sheeple', when they accept whatever they are told is the truth, without ever questioning it,  ...
That is a good definition and describes you and most other FEers.  The exceptions being those who propagate the FE nonsense and make a good living selling books, seminars, and tee-shirts.

Have you ever questioned any FE "leader" about the size of the sun?  Or the size of the moon?  Or their distances from the earth.  What evidence have they given you?  Why haven't you shared those findings and evidence with us when we specifically ask?

Do you question Da Big Flud?  Do you question how a small wooden rudderless craft with no powers of propulsion could have survived the most horrific storm ever?  Do you question how kangaroos got to Australia after the Flood? 

*

Stash

  • Ethical Stash
  • 13398
  • I am car!
Re: Three different FEs, three different butchered versions of gravity.
« Reply #207 on: January 08, 2023, 10:39:02 AM »
You've never once questioned any claims from your 'astronomers', who have NEVER allow others to see if their claims ARE true, or not true, which means they are NOT telling us the truth, because that is the ONLY reason they don't allow others to validate their claims as true, because they know it is NOT true.

This has got to be one of the strangest claims ever.

There are any number of observatories where you can go and are invited to even look through a mighty large telescope. You can buy your own high-powered telescope and look for yourself at leisure. There are a gazillion amateur astronomer/astro-videographers and photographers around, astronomy clubs, online and offline. Have you even thought to actually seek the "truth" yourself or are you just sitting there on a couch in the basement typing away at what's only inside your head?

If you don't want to be a sheeple, actually go and do something about it. Get out there and explore the cosmos yourself rather than just making up things to satisfy your internal sheeple belief system. Why so lazy?

You can study astronomy in college/uni if you so desire and have access to any data you want. Heck, even my old public high school now has a dome on the roof with a 12-inch Cassegrain telescope inside for upper level students of astronomy.

Just because you as a sheeple choose not to take advantage of the open access available is more a personal problem of yours - An extremely ignorant and bizarre claim that astronomers NEVER allow others to see if their claims ARE true. Have you ever even looked through a telescope? Binoculars?

*

JackBlack

  • 22457
Re: Three different FEs, three different butchered versions of gravity.
« Reply #208 on: January 08, 2023, 12:11:22 PM »
No, I've looked into both arguments, and question both sides of it, YOUR side has never questioned the ball Earth claims, which I've told you about already.
No, you haven't.
You have fully accepted the FE lies without questioning or thinking.
Meanwhile you outright reject the RE, no matter what evidence or explanations you are provided.

That is not questioning it.

Not rejecting the RE, because it actually explains reality, does not mean it is not questioned.
You are yet to demonstrate a single fault.
Instead you just continually make up pathetic lies to pretend there is a problem.
Lies you are entirely incapable of defending.
And you contradict yourself if you quest to pretend the RE is wrong.

You've never once questioned any claims from your 'astronomers', who have NEVER allow others to see if their claims ARE true, or not true
See, this is just another lie of yours.
No one is stopping you from checking if their claims are true.
But we will object to your dishonest attempts to prove them wrong.

Going out of your way to make excuses and try to find whatever garbage you can, while ignoring explanations, all to try to disprove them is not questioning them.
It is wilful rejection of reality.

You were getting so desperate you felt the need to reject evidence that was provided which clearly shows you were wrong, and reject the existence of heat hazes.

So we know who the 'sheeple' is here, it's blatantly obvious to see.
Yes, YOU!
The one that needs to repeat those pathetic lies and contradict themselves, all to pretend their fantasy is true.
The one that needs to flee from simple questions which show just how broken their system is.
The one that needs to continually ignore or dismiss evidence which shows they are wrong.

?

ecco

  • 188
Re: Three different FEs, three different butchered versions of gravity.
« Reply #209 on: January 08, 2023, 06:38:13 PM »

You've never once questioned any claims from your 'astronomers', who have NEVER allow others to see if their claims ARE true, or not true, which means they are NOT telling us the truth, because that is the ONLY reason they don't allow others to validate their claims as true, because they know it is NOT true. 

I'm sure this has been brought to your attention before, but, let's try to pound it in one more time.   Time on big telescopes is in high demand and expensive.  Why would they give any untrained person access to such expensive equipment? 

Do you think a formula one racing team would let you tinker with the engine or electronics of one of their cars?
Do you think a videographer would let you fool around with one of their Alexa LFs?

But, just for laughs, what would you want to look at if you had 10 minutes of access to one of the telescopes at Keck?  Really.  Tell us.  What do you think you could see that would change our (or your) mind about the shape of the earth?