Why does flat earth equate no space travel by man?

You must realize that, right? How can you NOT see that?

How about instead of deflecting, you try to provide evidence of your dome?

If you are so desperately craving uncut footage, why don't you go get it yourself?

Quote from: Smoke Machine on April 29, 2023, 03:47:02 PM

Here’s one, an uncut rocket flight straight up to 307k feet. It meets your criteria to end the debate and then some:


UNCUT: Loading, launching and landing of Blue Origin space flight

They claim it is UNCUT video of the rocket, and so do you, of course.

So you cannot excuse what is seen in the video, as an edit, or spliced with other clips, or so on, you claim it is uncut, original footage? We all can see more than one clip is shown, right away, when the 'crew' is walking towards the rocket, so what is 'uncut' supposed to mean?

'Uncut' is a video from one camera, throughout the clip, original and untouched footage, is it not? If you don't mean that, then explain what you DO mean by 'UNCUT'!

There's obviously more than one camera angle shown in the video, which means it is NOT 'uncut'. So why claim it IS 'uncut', when it's obviously NOT 'uncut', with multiple angles shown, it is a COMPILATION of different videos!

You must realize that, right? How can you NOT see that?

Because they do not want to see it of course.

They have either drunk the Koolaid or are actually selling Koolaid to others, so to speak.

Going to answer the question in context…

We observe comets farther out than the moon and sun

Do you really though?

Light and heat are aspects of atmosphere. So is movement. Without at least some atmosphere, objects would simply lack a medium to push through. 

That's some powerful Kool-Aid indeed!

Light and heat are aspects of atmosphere.

As from the other thread..

Yes, the solar system has very real mechanics. But the idea that we already know all of them is what's called hubris. Extreme arrogance to the point of one being destroyed.

Please quote where I claimed we know everything.  False argument to change the subject by you. 

The context of my post.

Your mean the very real area beyond the upper atmosphere where the density of the atmosphere goes to essentially zero and occupied by charged particles from the sun collected by the Van Allen belts seen as the northern lights where comets zoom about the solar system and planets like Saturn they have their own moons.  Space where meteorites originate.

Where we can see supernovas when they explode

And the addition of made made satellites changing the night sky.


————————

  Now.  Can you show flat earth can better model, explain, predict everything from the energy process of the sun, tides, to solar eclipses.

So is movement. Without at least some atmosphere, objects would simply lack a medium to push through.

Besides ignoring objects fall faster in a vacuum chamber with the air pumped out making air resistance negligible and radiate heat transfer, you mean space where comets, meteorites, moons orbiting planets, and the retrograde of planets as they orbit sun shows movement in our solar system.  Why can’t rockets travel in the paths of comets and meteorites.

That's some powerful Kool-Aid indeed!

Indeed. Couple of zooms and a split screen still showing the same shot. But for all intents and purposes, uncut as seen below...

Uncut from 9700'


To 159,000'



Uncut from 30,000'


To 350,000'


Not to mention, actual passenger accounts, one from none other than William Shatner. What he had to say about his flight:

"I saw a cold, dark, black emptiness. It was unlike any blackness you can see or feel on Earth. It was deep, enveloping, all-encompassing. I turned back toward the light of home. I could see the curvature of Earth, the beige of the desert, the white of the clouds and the blue of the sky. It was life. Nurturing, sustaining, life. Mother Earth. Gaia. And I was leaving her."

What is your evidence again?

That's some powerful Kool-Aid indeed!

How do tides work without gravity to create high tides, low tides, tide coming in, tide going out, spring tides, and some rivers at the coast change direction of flow because of tidal bores.

Light and heat are aspects of atmosphere. So is movement. Without at least some atmosphere, objects would simply lack a medium to push through.

No, they aren't.
They are things which the atmosphere can do (or emit), but they do not rely upon the atmosphere.

Without atmosphere (or some other fluid) there would be no medium to resist movement.

Quote from: turbonium2 on May 05, 2023, 08:21:31 PM

That's some powerful Kool-Aid indeed!

How do tides work without gravity to create high tides, low tides, tide coming in, tide going out, spring tides, and some rivers at the coast change direction of flow because of tidal bores.

The tides are caused by the Earth's tectonic plates which rise up and down once each day, normally. When these plates move up and/or down with more force, or shift against other plates, it causes a tremor or earthquake, and causes massive waves over the oceans, sometimes a tidal wave, which is direct proof that tides are caused by Earth's plates.


And what proof do YOU have, that it is caused by a made up magical force, beamed out half a million miles away from the moon, to the Earth, making our tides at regular cycles? 

I suppose earthquakes don't cause massive tides when Earth's plates shift, it must be when the moon shoots out MORE 'gravity' to Earth, right? 

A made up force can do anything at all, just make it up and say it is true, when it's complete BS  anyway, it doesn't matter what you claim it does, since it doesn't even exist in the first place!

Quote from: DataOverFlow2022 on May 05, 2023, 10:56:58 PM

Quote from: turbonium2 on May 05, 2023, 08:21:31 PM

That's some powerful Kool-Aid indeed!

How do tides work without gravity to create high tides, low tides, tide coming in, tide going out, spring tides, and some rivers at the coast change direction of flow because of tidal bores.

The tides are caused by the Earth's tectonic plates which rise up and down once each day, normally. When these plates move up and/or down with more force, or shift against other plates, it causes a tremor or earthquake, and causes massive waves over the oceans, sometimes a tidal wave, which is direct proof that tides are caused by Earth's plates.


And what proof do YOU have, that it is caused by a made up magical force, beamed out half a million miles away from the moon, to the Earth, making our tides at regular cycles? 

I suppose earthquakes don't cause massive tides when Earth's plates shift, it must be when the moon shoots out MORE 'gravity' to Earth, right? 

A made up force can do anything at all, just make it up and say it is true, when it's complete BS  anyway, it doesn't matter what you claim it does, since it doesn't even exist in the first place!

WTF?  Then what makes the plates rise and fall?  I thought you said everything wanted to go back to it's origin and thats why things fall.  Now they move up and down, how?  What magical intelligent force are you making up this time?
Gravity works fine to explain tides, without magical intelligent origination stupidity, or unexplained tectonic plate movement.  What we know about tectonic plate movement and what causes it works fine for explaining earthquakes, for tidal waves caused by earthquakes, no need for magical oopsies of a tectonic plate moving too much in its twice a day unexplained decision to rise and fall.   
Yeah your way is sooo much more simple, "God did it, stop asking questions".  So open minded of you guys.  Please stop already, we get it you want to show how silly FE sounds by making up the most off the wall crap to see if any of them will fall in line like good FE sheep.  We already thought that, you don't need to act the fool.  It  isn't that funny anymore.

You sure do hate being asked to provide evidence of your dome.

The tides are caused by the Earth's tectonic plates which rise up and down once each day, normally.

And why do they do that? And why does that cause such large tides which don't line up with the motion of the plates?

And what proof do YOU have, that it is caused by a made up magical force, beamed out half a million miles away from the moon, to the Earth, making our tides at regular cycles?

You mean a real force you are yet to demonstrate any fault with, with effects from both the moon and sun, resulting in a complex cycle based upon the position of the moon and sun.

Again, where is the evidence for your dome?

Nobody knows how life was ever created, or how Earth was created, or the air above Earth was created, or many, many more things were created, but we can find out how they work, what they are, and so forth, by studying them, and testing them, and seeing them, etc. 

The lies of a ball Earth, speeding, spinning, and rotating around, all at once, without end, in 'space', which is another lie they made up, to support the ball Earth lie, and every other lie afterwards, is piles of lies, made to support one another, is just more BS.

But there are many, many things we DO know, about things that exist, about us, how we 'work', what causes things to happen, and so on.

Those are all things that ALREADY exist, ALREADY were created.

So that's for us to study, to try and find out things, and learn more about things, and how they work, their basic structures, and so on.

We've long understood how actual forces work, and what they do, or can do, and what they do NOT do, and how they act, and how they don't act, and that's what you don't understand about 'gravity', because it is complete crap.


Trying to make up some sort of 'pulling down, holding down' force, that would explain all things held on a speeding and spinning ball Earth in 'space', had to be made up, and sold as really existing, when it never DID exist at all, yet it still managed to fool the ignorant masses, sadly.

When you claim that your made up force is pulling down all objects at the same speed, same rate of acceleration, within the air, because it uses 'proportional force', acting less or more on objects based on their mass....

Yikes. 

We all know that each and every one of our ACTUAL forces, which have all been proven, and confirmed, as being actual forces that exist, that are stronger when near their sources, and weaker with more distance from their sources, and offer resistance to opposing forces, and is often FELT as resistance.

A variable force that adjusts it's level of strength to the mass of each object? Get serious for once.

But there are many, many things we DO know,

FE’s?  They are so blinded by their delusions, the can’t even find the South Pole when a blind man can make it there..

Blind man treks to South Pole

Irishman Mark Pollock has become the first blind person in the world to make it to the South Pole, writes LORNA SIGGINS.

Tue Feb 3 2009 - 00:00

https://www.irishtimes.com/news/health/blind-man-treks-to-south-pole-1.691618

The lies of a ball Earth,

What navy has a tactical advantage because it treats the world as flat.

China is building a navy to deploy around the world, and shitheads in the west are still arguing the earth is flat.  What the fuck.   

Nobody knows how life was ever created, or how Earth was created

So you admit your claim that everything magically originated on Earth is baseless BS which you can never know.

The lies of a ball Earth, speeding, spinning, and rotating around, all at once, without end, in 'space', which is another lie they made up, to support the ball Earth lie, and every other lie afterwards, is piles of lies, made to support one another, is just more BS.

You mean facts, backed up by mountains of evidence which you are unable to show a single fault with and instead need to resort to lie after lie after lie to dismiss so much of reality?

But there are many, many things we DO know, about things that exist, about us, how we 'work', what causes things to happen, and so on.

Yes, like gravity and space and rockets and that Earth is round.

We've long understood how actual forces work, and what they do, or can do, and what they do NOT do, and how they act, and how they don't act

And we see that gravity behaves the same.
It resists things going against it.
It varies in strength with distance from the source.
It depends on a property of the object.

So we can understand that gravity certainly acts like a force.

Trying to make up some sort of 'pulling down, holding down' force, that would explain all things held on a speeding and spinning ball Earth in 'space', had to be made up, and sold as really existing, when it never DID exist at all, yet it still managed to fool the ignorant masses, sadly.

Again, your delusional BS works just as well on the RE as on a FE.
So if your delusional BS was true and actually worked, gravity would not be needed, even with a RE.

But your delusional BS makes no sense.

We all know that each and every one of our ACTUAL forces, which have all been proven, and confirmed, as being actual forces that exist, that are stronger when near their sources, and weaker with more distance from their sources, and offer resistance to opposing forces, and is often FELT as resistance.

Just like gravity.

A variable force that adjusts it's level of strength to the mass of each object? Get serious for once.

Just like how magnetism will quite strongly attract magnetic nails, but not attract plastic? And if you make mixtures of plastic and iron, the strength will depend upon how much iron is in it?
So just like how things you accept as forces behaves, but with a different property?

How about you follow your own advice and try to honestly respond to what has been said rather than repeating the same refuted BS again and again, especially when that BS is an outright lie?

Or better yet, how about you stop with the pathetic deflections and provide evidence of your magical dome?

So you admit your claim that everything magically originated on Earth is baseless BS which you can never know.

It is based on all of the available evidence, which has existed throughout all human history, to this day, so if you really believe that all things on Earth, were from 'space', it's obviously based on your own agenda, or ignorance of all the evidence we DO have, because it's certainly NOT logical or rational to excuse all the evidence over thousands of years, say there's no proof it originated on Earth, despite all of it being on Earth since day one, while trying to point to 'comets', which are simply objects above Earth, within the Firmament, like all stars, Sun and moon are, and claim they are in 'outer space', another lie they made up, and then say they 'hit down on Earth', another worthless, unproven claim, with no evidence of flying through air to the surface, after centuries or more, which seems very strange, in itself.

So you spew on about these 'meteors' from 'outer space', hitting the Earth, all of which is nonsense, without a SHRED of evidence for any of it, while saying that all objects on Earth over all human history are NOT evidence, unless it is PROVEN they originated on Earth! 

I've got bazillions of objects as my evidence, which was on Earth before humans existed, at very least, and ever SINCE then, for over 10-20 thousand years, at very least, while there has never been ONE object on Earth, that came from elsewhere, so your argument is complete garbage. 

Why would all 'space junk' be 'meteors', anyway? How would THAT make any sense, when there's a gazillion DIFFERENT objects on Earth, and NONE of them are so-called 'meteors from outer space'? 

Not only that, how would these liars ever IDENTIFY any object as being from 'outer space'? If you claim ALL objects came from 'outer space', or even a FRACTION of them, you'd have quadrillions of objects 'from outer space', ALREADY, right? 

But they never say that, they just claim 'meteors' are on Earth, and came here from 'outer space', right? How do they come to that conclusion? Not by any actual PROOF, or valid EVIDENCE, or videos that show objects from 'outer space', over millions of miles away, because nothing comes from 'outer space', or 'millions of miles away', those are nothing but lies, same as the rest is. 

But if we assume they DID hit Earth from 'outer space', and say there are certain materials within them, that 'prove' they came down to Earth from 'outer space'.

That means, all OTHER things on Earth, did NOT originate in 'outer space', when they claim to identify an object that IS from space, with DISTINCT DIFFERENCES to all OTHER objects on Earth.

Of course, nobody can ever VERIFY or CONFIRM their claims, as it is completely IMPOSSIBLE to verify. Saying an object is from 'outer space', based on it's materials, does NOT mean it IS from 'outer space' in any way.  There are countless objects with unique materials, it doesn't mean they came from 'outer space', even if there WAS an 'outer space' to begin with!

You mean facts, backed up by mountains of evidence which you are unable to show a single fault with and instead need to resort to lie after lie after lie to dismiss so much of reality?

And we see that gravity behaves the same.
It resists things going against it.
It varies in strength with distance from the source.
It depends on a property of the object.

So we can understand that gravity certainly acts like a force.

If only any of your claims were true, instead of lies...

Your made up force WOULD offer resistance to opposing forces, if it actually DID exist.

Resistance is probably the most critical feature of all actual forces, which indicates it IS an actual force, by using another force, opposing it. 

If 'gravity' DID exist, as an actual force, it would ALWAYS offer resistance, to any opposing forces. Once again, that is what we see occur with magnetic force. When we pull off a piece of metal from a magnet, it RESISTS our pull, and we certainly FEEL resistance from the magnet, to the metal piece. And we also feel LESS AND LESS resistance from the magnet, when we pull the metal further away from it, until there is NO resistance from it. Same as when we hold the metal closer and closer to the magnet, we feel it pulling on the metal with greater force.

Every other actual force does the same thing, of course.

I've never once heard, from your side, what the altitude is, above Earth, where your made up force does NOT pull things down to Earth's surface?

Obviously, you'll say it 'varies', or cannot be strictly defined as an altitude, or that 'gravity' will still be present, at these altitudes, or so on....

Do you realize that your entire argument about this 'pulling down/holding down' force, is never once explained, or described, with one single measurement, of it's maximum distance, or altitude, above the Earth, ANYWHERE above Earth, or at least, it's GENERAL, AVERAGE altitude, since that's one of the FIRST things we WOULD know, and have measured, for sure. 

There's so many flaws, and problems, and conflicts, and lack of actual figures, it's almost endless.

I've never seen anyone 'slightly start to float around', they always go from Earth's 'gravity', to NO 'gravity', or whatever you want to call it, that's when we see them 'float around', but they never say it happened at some specific altitude, whether it is the same all the time, or it varies within X and Y altitude, or X altitude over Europe, Y altitude over Australia, etc. 

Anyway, let's assume that 'gravity' STOPS pulling things down to Earth's surface, at 100,000 feet, or higher, just like in 'space', where nobody can ever confirm any of their claims, although for this issue, it doesn't matter what you claim it is, or in a range of altitudes.

If you say that 'gravity' stops pulling things down to Earth's surface, at 100,000 feet, for example, that is where 'gravity' is gone, isn't pulling things down to Earth's surface, and will 'float' or 'drift' or 'move around Earth at a distance', or whatever.

When you don't mention what the specific altitude is, or a range of altitudes, it tells me that you  have a reason for it. I mean, there would obviously have to be some altitude(s) where 'gravity' does NOT 'pull things down to Earth's surface', right? So what is it?

That altitude would obviously be very important, very significant, and I'm sure everyone would KNOW it, let alone those at NASA, so how is it NOT mentioned in documents, taught in schools, and so on? 

They never show someone who goes from Earth, in Earth's 'gravity', into 'space', with NO 'gravity', or not in Earth's 'gravity', as a gradual loss of 'gravity', where we slightly start to float around, in 5/6 gravity, and gradually go into 1/6 gravity, and then NO gravity, or where they all just float around in 'space'.

In fact, they've never mentioned that there is a gradual, measurable transition of 'gravitational force', outward from the Earth's 'gravity', into zero gravity, or whatever.

Yet you're claiming that 'gravity' varies in strength over distance from it's source. You HAVE to claim that, as all actual forces DO vary in strength over distance. They don't stop suddenly, or start instantly at full strength, it is always a gradual loss or gain of strength.

I'm sure if your made up force worked like all actual forces do, NASA would have mentioned it, and it would certainly have been documented, and we'd know about it, by now. 

But of course, they told us that we have to 'break free' from Earth's gravity, to go into 'outer space', where we have no Earth gravity. Doesn't sound like it's a gradual transition, like you claim it is.

Those who claim to have gone into 'space' have never mentioned that gravity loses strength over a distance, or said they have felt less and less 'pulling down' force along the way into 'space'.

There is not a shred of evidence for your made up force, nor for it's strength varying with distance, nor any documents to support your claim.

And we already know that forces do NOT vary in strength to the mass of objects, when we all know that forces can't make some objects move, due to their mass, and make other objects move easily, being of less mass.

Forces do NOT adjust in strength to match an object's mass, that is utterly ridiculous! 

Just like how magnetism will quite strongly attract magnetic nails, but not attract plastic? And if you make mixtures of plastic and iron, the strength will depend upon how much iron is in it?
So just like how things you accept as forces behaves, but with a different property?

Don't play the idiot. You know I'm comparing magnetic force, which attracts METAL objects with less mass, FASTER than it attracts METAL objects, with MORE mass. 

This has nothing to do with plastic mixed into metals, or whatever. I'm specifically comparing magnetic force, which attracts metals, to you made up force, which supposedly 'pulls down' ALL things towards it.

I know you need to make up another excuse, since this one flopped, so what else have you got, if anything? 

Don't play the idiot. You know I'm comparing magnetic force, which attracts METAL objects with less mass, FASTER than it attracts METAL objects, with MORE mass. 

And what happens if the magnet is big as the earth?  A magnet that has the mass equivalent of 5.972 × 10^21 tons.

You drop a 2 lbs steel weight and a 2 ton steel weight 100 feet above the magnet.  Do you think there would be a measurable difference in the speed the two weights would accelerate towards the much bigger 5.972 × 10^21 ton magnet?

Quote from: JackBlack on May 13, 2023, 05:39:55 AM

So you admit your claim that everything magically originated on Earth is baseless BS which you can never know.

It is based on all of the available evidence

No, it isn't.
It is based upon your wilful ignorance and baselessly asserting garbage.
And your own statement made it clear that you think we don't know.
That means you don't know if everything originated on Earth.
It is your baseless claim to try to prop your delusional BS.

I've got bazillions of objects as my evidence

Really? So you have observed these bazillions of objects come into being on Earth from nothing?
Or do you merely have objects on Earth, with no idea of if they originated on Earth, vs elsewhere?

there has never been ONE object on Earth, that came from elsewhere, so your argument is complete garbage.

Except the countless ones you wilfully ignore.
But all this delusional BS of yours is going off topic.

You need to explain what magic prevents space travel.
You claim it is your magical dome, even though you can provide no evidence at all for its existence, and there is plenty refuting its existence.

If only any of your claims were true, instead of lies...

They are true, unlike your lies.

Your made up force WOULD offer resistance to opposing forces, if it actually DID exist.

Try lifting a 1 ton block of steel/concrete.
If your blatant lie was true, there would be no resistance to this and you should have no problem at all lifting it up.
Try comparing pushing a car (or other object with wheels) on level ground, vs uphill.

So gravity, which is NOT made up, DOES provide resistance to opposing forces.
And there really is no need to call it resistance. You can just call it a force.
When you try to pull an object away from a magnet, you feel as if there is a force pulling the object back to the magnet.
Just like if you try to lift up a heavy object, you feel as if there is a force pulling it back to Earth.

Your blatant lie will not save you.

And we also feel LESS AND LESS resistance from the magnet, when we pull the metal further away from it, until there is NO resistance from it.

Wrong again. It never reaches a point where there is no force.
Instead, you just reach a point where it becomes negligible due to other forces.

If you go to Mars, the gravitational attraction of Earth is negligible.

Every other actual force does the same thing, of course.

You mean all forces, including gravity, do the same thing.

Do you realize that your entire argument

Do you realise that entire line of BS of yours is based upon a blatant lie about how forces work?
Fundamental forces NEVER drop to 0. They approach it.
Do you know the formula to determine the force due to the electrostatic force (or for any general monopole, including gravitational monopoles)?
F=kQq/d^2. Notice that this is of the form 1/d^2.
At what value of d will this reach 0?
NEVER.

Do you know the formula to determine the force between 2 cylindrical bar magnets (assuming they are far enough apart to treat the radius as negligible) (or any general dipole)?
F=k*(1/d^2+1/(d+2L)^2-2/(d+L)^2)
Where L is the length of the magnet.
At what value of d will this be 0?
NEVER.

There is NEVER any point where it magically reaches 0.
So if you want an altitude, you need to define some kind of threshold to compare it to.

There's so many flaws, and problems, and conflicts, and lack of actual figures, it's almost endless.

Yet you are entirely incapable of providing a single instance, and instead need to resort to pathetic lies.

that's when we see them 'float around', but they never say it happened at some specific altitude

No, it isn't.

They start to "float around" when they are in free fall, such as when they are in orbit.
Gravity is still very much acting on them, it is just that them and their surroundings are accelerating at the same rate.

Here is an example:


It is like if you pull a metallic object away from a magnet and release it. Once you release it, you don't feel that "resistance"

Anyway, let's assume that 'gravity' STOPS pulling things down to Earth's surface, at 100,000 feet

No.
Why would assume such delusional BS?

When you don't mention what the specific altitude is, or a range of altitudes, it tells me that you  have a reason for it. I mean, there would obviously have to be some altitude(s) where 'gravity' does NOT 'pull things down to Earth's surface', right?

No.
Instead you have a region where Earth is the predominant influence on gravity, then a region where Earth+the moon is, or Earth+the sun is, and then where Earth is negligible.

If you are really desperate for a simple number, you can consider the sphere of influence.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sphere_of_influence_(astrodynamics)

For the moon, the sphere of influence in 64 300 km.
For Earth, compared to the sun it is ~ 929 000 km

I'm sure if your made up force worked like all actual forces do, NASA would have mentioned it, and it would certainly have been documented, and we'd know about it, by now. 

You mean like the well documented universal law of gravitation? F=GMm/r^2?
Most people do know about it, but you choose to be wilfully ignorant.

Those who claim to have gone into 'space' have never mentioned that gravity loses strength over a distance, or said they have felt less and less 'pulling down' force along the way into 'space'.

Probably because they are too busy being forced upwards by the rocket.

And we already know that forces do NOT vary in strength to the mass of objects

No, we know that forces all have some factor which they depend upon.
For electrostatics it is charge. For wind it is area. For gravity it is mass.

when we all know that forces can't make some objects move, due to their mass

You mean due to the gravitational force holding them down due to their mass?

Forces do NOT adjust in strength to match an object's mass, that is utterly ridiculous!

It is no more or less ridiculous than the electrostatic force "adjusting" in strength to match on object's charge, or the wind "adjusting" in strength to match the objects area.

You not liking something doesn't make it ridiculous.

Don't play the idiot.

Why would I do that when you are doing such a great job at it?
I could never hope to replace you. It just comes so naturally to you.

You know I'm comparing magnetic force

And I am clearly demonstrating how it can vary. That it isn't magically fixed.
That a magnet will not magically apply the same force to every object.
In this case, the force is varying with the amount of metal in the object. Just like gravity varies with mass.

I know you need to make up another excuse, since this one flopped, so what else have you got, if anything?

I'm not making up excuses, and you are yet to demonstrate a single fault in my argument.

Now again, got any evidence of your fictional dome?

Try lifting a 1 ton block of steel/concrete.
If your blatant lie was true, there would be no resistance to this and you should have no problem at all lifting it up.

We would easily lift a 1 ton block if your made up force existed, and varied in strength to make a 1 ton block 'weigh' the same as a pebble, because that's your explanation for why all objects are 'pulled down' at the same speed, and same rate of acceleration when they are all 'pulled down' by your made up force. If there was such a force, mass would not matter when objects FALL, as if the same mass, nor would it matter to LIFT UP objects, by your own argument.

Why can we throw up a pebble into air, with ease, but not a 1 ton block?  If your made up force doesn't pull down objects with less mass, FASTER than objects with more mass, it would not apply MORE force to an opposite force lifting it up, either.  Your 'force' cannot work both ways, only one way, which you said made objects the same mass, when your magical force is 'pulling them down' like they were the same mass, so we could LIFT THEM UP as if they were the same mass when pulled down.

Quote from: turbonium2 on May 14, 2023, 01:02:35 AM

Don't play the idiot. You know I'm comparing magnetic force, which attracts METAL objects with less mass, FASTER than it attracts METAL objects, with MORE mass. 

And what happens if the magnet is big as the earth?  A magnet that has the mass equivalent of 5.972 × 10^21 tons.

You drop a 2 lbs steel weight and a 2 ton steel weight 100 feet above the magnet.  Do you think there would be a measurable difference in the speed the two weights would accelerate towards the much bigger 5.972 × 10^21 ton magnet?

No, when the magnet is large enough, it would pull both objects towards it at either the same speed, or close to the same speed, but the objects have different mass, when a smaller magnet cannot pull in the larger object to it, but pulls in the lighter object.

Also, when the larger object holds both the heavy and light objects to it, we cannot pull away EITHER object, because the magnet resists our pull on both objects with the SAME force. Not like your made up force, where we can pull away lighter objects but not heavier objects, which means there is no force pulling them down, or holding them down, as if they WERE the same mass.

No, when the magnet is large enough, it would pull both objects towards it at either the same speed,

You mean like on an earth so massive it does this for the same for a 2 pound or 2 ton weight?

because the magnet resists our pull

And electromagnetic forces are different than strong nuclear forces, which are different than weak nuclear forces, which are all different than mass attracted to mass through gravity. 

One.  Gravity is the weakest of the fundamental forces.  So you can’t compare the fundamental forces based off of electromagnetism vs the strength of gravity.

Two.  It makes sense the mutual attraction between the earth and a B-52 is greater than the mutual attraction of the earth and a hummingbird.

We would easily lift a 1 ton block if your made up force existed, and varied in strength to make a 1 ton block 'weigh' the same as a pebble

Stop just appealing to your fantasy.
Again, in reality, the force due to gravity is proportional to mass.
That means a 1000 kg block would have a force of 1 million times that of a 1 g pebble.
That means to hold it up, you would need to provide 1 million times that force you need to apply to a 1 g pebble.

Again, as we know F=ma, this tells us a=F/m.
That means if the mass increases, in order to keep the acceleration constant, the force needs to increase as well.

That means gravity, the force responsible for things falling, is proportional to mass.

This is quite simple.

Stop lying about gravity to set up a strawman to pretend there is a problem.

No, when the magnet is large enough, it would pull both objects towards it at either the same speed, or close to the same speed, but the objects have different mass, when a smaller magnet cannot pull in the larger object to it, but pulls in the lighter object.

So you say the larger object is accelerated at the same rate as the smaller object?
Wasn't that what you were trying to argue against?

What you need to ask yourself is what is stopping it pulling the smaller object.

Note that magnetism depends a lot upon geometry.

Maybe you should ask why all actual forces, which act on us, as a pull, or a push, or so forth, are always FELT by us, as a pull, or a push, by an actual force, while only your made up force is never, ever felt by us as any sort of pull? Because it does not exist, that's why it is never FELT by us!

But go on, ignore what you don't feel as a pull, because it is a pull by your made up force, which solves all problems, anytime, anywhere you need to 'plug it in'

I'm fine with real forces, which I do feel, when acting on me. I avoid imaginary, fairy tale forces, which nobody can feel,- that's your problem, not mine.!

Maybe you should ask why all actual forces, which act on us, as a pull, or a push, or so forth, are always FELT by us, as a pull, or a push, by an actual force, while only your made up force is never, ever felt by us as any sort of pull? Because it does not exist, that's why it is never FELT by us!

Maybe stop repeating the same pathetic lies.
We DO feel the force due to gravity. If I go to pick up an object, it feels as if something is pulling it down. If I rest it on a surface, then the surface holds the weight.
It can be felt and measured in the same way as other forces.

For example, a simple spring balance.
Surely you know how a spring works?
If you pull on it, it elongates.
And guess what happens if you try hanging something from it? The spring elongates, as if something is pulling the object down.

Just what do you think should be felt that isn't?

I'm fine with real forces, which I do feel, when acting on me.

As long as they fit in with your delusional fantasy.
As soon as they challenge it like gravity does, you reject it, and make up all sorts of delusional BS to pretend your irrational rejection is valid. But really all it is is a pathetic pack of lies from you because you can't handle reality.

Again, where is your evidence for your fictional dome?

which are simply objects above Earth, within the Firmament

I've got some gold, a little bottle of mercury, a piece of the Berlin wall and uranium glass on my desk.

I'd love a little piece of the Firmament to go with my collection.  Where can I get one?  Who has collected samples and do they sell them?

Can you get me a piece?  I'll pay for postage and your time of course.  It would look good next to my magnetic monopole.

We would easily lift a 1 ton block if your made up force existed, and varied in strength to make a 1 ton block 'weigh' the same as a pebble, because that's your explanation for why all objects are 'pulled down' at the same speed, and same rate of acceleration when they are all 'pulled down' by your made up force. If there was such a force, mass would not matter when objects FALL, as if the same mass, nor would it matter to LIFT UP objects, by your own argument.

LOL

Have you ever put the slightest effort into understanding how this stuff works?

Maybe you should ask why all actual forces, which act on us, as a pull, or a push, or so forth, are always FELT by us, as a pull, or a push, by an actual force, while only your made up force is never, ever felt by us as any sort of pull? Because it does not exist, that's why it is never FELT by us!

But go on, ignore what you don't feel as a pull, because it is a pull by your made up force, which solves all problems, anytime, anywhere you need to 'plug it in'

I'm fine with real forces, which I do feel, when acting on me. I avoid imaginary, fairy tale forces, which nobody can feel,- that's your problem, not mine.!

You don't feel the constant speed the car you are travelling in, is going at. You only feel it's acceleration or deceleration.

You don't feel constant speed like in a car or plane. That's a force you don't feel. So stop lying that you are fine with real forces acting on you only because you can feel them.

Really? So you have observed these bazillions of objects come into being on Earth from nothing?
Or do you merely have objects on Earth, with no idea of if they originated on Earth, vs elsewhere?

The fact that they have always BEEN on Earth, along with the fact NOTHING has ever COME DOWN to Earth from anywhere else, and even YOU only claim only ONE object has, which is 'meteors'! Maybe a few others, at most.  Without a shred of proof, of course.

I guess you'd have problems if you claimed that pink elephants 'from outer space', crashed down on Earth, or blue faced monkeys, with wings, or whatever.  Just claim 'rocks' came down to Earth from 'outer space, but of course, nobody has ever SEEN it land on Earth, or film one land on Earth!  'Space' is complete BS in itself, an illusion they've told us is real, an 'endless' area beyond a ball Earth in 'space'! 

I'm looking at all the evidence, and LACK of evidence, since day one, when we came to exist on Earth, and since then, and every day in future. 

Everything on Earth, has always BEEN on Earth, and nothing on Earth is from ELSEWHERE, because there is NO evidence to support YOUR claim.

Why would they all be 'meteors', anyway? From your 'endless space', with endless things in it, as your ball Earth is speeding through it, unknown areas of 'space', we'd surely have seen MANY, MANY OBJECTS from 'space', hit the Earth's surface, over thousands of years, besides 'meteors', that's for sure! 


Of course, I've already told you, many times.....

When they mention that any object was 'from outer space', and called it a 'meteor', which split apart into small chunks, in the Earth's atmosphere, for no possible reason at all, but support all the other BS they'd spewed out already.


How would they ever identify an object as being 'FROM SPACE', if your claiming there's no proof all objects originated on Earth?

Yet again, you don't use your own brain, to think it out logically.

They are claiming to have identified objects that are on the Earth, as coming from 'outer space', and landed on Earth, afterwards. 

All other objects on Earth, but those rare objects, are NOT from outer space, to distinguish those objects which ARE from 'space'!   

How about that!

Yet again you flee from the issues and decide to just spout more delusional BS.

Again, where is the evidence of your magical dome?
What magic stops space travel?

The fact that they have always BEEN on Earth, along with the fact NOTHING has ever COME DOWN to Earth from anywhere else

That is your baseless claim, which you are yet to support with any evidence at all; and which relies upon your wilful rejection of evidence.

That doesn't support you at all.
Again, by your own admission, YOU HAVE NO IDEA!
You are just making crap up to pretend your delusional fantasy works.

Why would they all be 'meteors', anyway? From your 'endless space', with endless things in it, as your ball Earth is speeding through it, unknown areas of 'space', we'd surely have seen MANY, MANY OBJECTS from 'space', hit the Earth's surface, over thousands of years, besides 'meteors', that's for sure!

Do you understand the model you hate so much at all?

For Earth, the vast majority of objects getting close to it would be those already in the solar system.
Of those objects, the most massive are planets.
Volumetrically, these are quite rare.
As an example, the entire solar system, has 8 planets. And these are in fairly stable orbits. So they are not likely to collide with Earth.
Once you leave a stellar system, and try to find a wandering planet, the likelihood of getting one is so incredibly rare it isn't funny.
And if one did collide with Earth, it would wipe out life on Earth.

This leaves much smaller objects, comets and asteroids. And the difference between them is that comets are made primarily of ice.
Comets, because they are made of ice are either quite large, or they would have likely ablated by now, leaving just the rocky core.
And regardless of what it is, when it enters an atmosphere, they are called a meteor.

Just just what else would you expect?

How would they ever identify an object as being 'FROM SPACE', if your claiming there's no proof all objects originated on Earth?

By observing it come from space.
But an understanding in context is helpful.
The idea is that it comes from space, with minimal subsequent processing by Earth.

Yet again, you don't use your own brain, to think it out logically.

Again, quite the opposite. I do use my brain, and see straight through your BS and deflection.

Stars are now being seen close up, with unique motions, shapes, colors, and details of each one, as your pack of liars tell us that they only look like tiny points of light, being trillions of miles away from Earth!

Why don't you try to make a tiny point otf light look like the stars, moving, show details, and depth, and colors, all the same way, with any out of focus cameras, or any effects of atmosphere, or anything you choose to use, and let's see what you come up with...

We've all seen Saturn in constant, eternal motion, never stopping at all, and no effects of atmosphere or out of focus camera can cause such magical effects at all. This would take CGI effects to simulate this. But come on, no atmospheric effects or out of focus camera can cause such magical effects.

This is complete BS, same as always.

We've all seen Saturn in constant,

Oh shit.  This lie again…

 and they also support my argument.

How?

Again..

Quote from: turbonium2 on October 29, 2022, 12:06:34 AM

Quote from: JackBlack on October 22, 2022, 02:34:10 PM

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. It’s looks like it’s moon is being effected in lockstep with its planet Saturn.



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

You claim it’s not the atmosphere.  I posted a video of Saturn and it’s moon being effected in the same manner lockstep by the atmosphere. 



It destroyed your argument.