It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Flat earth theory?

page: 47
14
<< 44  45  46    48  49  50 >>

log in

join
share:
(post by wmd_2008 removed for a manners violation)

posted on Sep, 25 2018 @ 10:17 AM
link   
I was just away to shout out 47 pages of "debate" on flat earth and no shut down from the mods for T&C violations of personal attacks or slander

normally these threads dont make it past day one !

But well done everyone for keeping it civil -ish


Another yin Coriolis force , of cyclones/hurricanes spinning in different directions depending on which hemisphere of the earth they are in

how does flat earth explain that ?



posted on Sep, 25 2018 @ 04:32 PM
link   

originally posted by: turbonium1

Gravity doesn't exist. No force pulls objects to Earth's surface.

Gravity is a force of sheer fantasy.



Really here is the Gravity equation


F = Gm1m2/r2

where F is the force due to gravity, between two masses (m1 and m2), which are a distance r apart; G is the gravitational constant



From this is it straightforward to derive another, common, gravity equation, that which gives the acceleration due to gravity, g, here on the surface of the Earth:

g = GM/r2,
Where M is the mass of the Earth, r the radius of the Earth (or distance between the center of the Earth and you, standing on its surface), and G is the gravitational constant.



The gravitational constant (also known as the "universal gravitational constant", the "Newtonian constant of gravitation", or the "Cavendish gravitational constant"[1]), denoted by the letter G, is an empirical physical constant involved in the calculation of gravitational effects in Sir Isaac Newton's law of universal gravitation and in Albert Einstein's general theory of relativity.


Look at your bird quote well the bird has a tiny MASS compared to the EARTH so guess what the force generated on the bird is small the thrust and uplift created by the birds wings is greater so it can LIFT itself against Gravity.

Now lets look at some video



So do you want to explain the second experiment when the large weight is below the smaller one and the smaller weight increases

Want to explain that using your flat Earth density


turbonium chages subject in 10, 9, 8 ............ because flat Earthers don't understand physics, maths, scale or any other science.



posted on Sep, 25 2018 @ 04:49 PM
link   
a reply to: wmd_2008

Math doesn't exist either...

Shhhh...




posted on Sep, 25 2018 @ 07:03 PM
link   

originally posted by: pointessa

originally posted by: Akragon
a reply to: seagull


We live in a world where there are people this uneducated... and this actually scares me...

IF this guy actually believes the crap he spews... he is literally the evolving breed of idiocracy… And ironically he argues against evolution as well...

This means we are truly walking down that road as a species...

And people wonder why I don't have kids



You know what scares me? People parroting whatever they learn. At least the folks that you call idiots are attempting to uses their own reasoning and logic and make conclusions based on that, rather than buying into every "fact" they are taught in school. Does belittling them, make you feel like the big man on campus, at least for a little while???


Good point, errr... Pointessa.
So many rely on the instructions they were given in grade-school.
The name-callers here might be indulging in the last bastion, where they can still pretend to be tough.
It only diminishes their words, amongst adults, whom remember those grade-school bullies, as scared children.



posted on Sep, 25 2018 @ 07:14 PM
link   

originally posted by: AngryCymraeg

originally posted by: pointessa

originally posted by: DJW001
a reply to: pointessa


You know what scares me? People parroting whatever they learn. At least the folks that you call idiots are attempting to uses their own reasoning and logic and make conclusions based on that, rather than buying into every "fact" they are taught in school.


On the contrary. They are refusing to perform the experiments that would confirm the facts through their own experience. Make a sextant and hop in the car... or shut up.


What experiments have you personally done that backs up you stance? Be honest here. I am not defending or negating the flat earth theory here.


...A child can tell that the world is round.


Yeah. Often while pointing to the place where Santa Claus in from.



posted on Sep, 25 2018 @ 10:41 PM
link   

originally posted by: sapien82
a reply to: Nothin

let me find it and read it again!

You doubt I could find scientists to say their work provides truth?

Once again I dont believe it because I know it to be truth all of the things I hold as truth because I have learned them for myself and found that low and behold these were also found to be truth to others , so given that the result I find is the same as someone else it must be truth otherwise as I said we are all deluded !


as objective fact , whether there is belief in it or not is irrelevant !


You had replied to me because I said science deals in truth !
and that we can find truth through scientific enquiry , you then said that it was scientism

you mentioned the variation in temperature on a thermometer that the variation was somehow a challenge to the truth
of the fact that temperature can be measured and can also fluctuate, and that thermal dynamics are objective fact !
Yet still a truth , that temperature varies / fluctuates and can be measured , albeit with varying degrees of precision
depending on the quality of the device used to measure it.

This still brings us truth based on objective fact then backed up by multiple independent observation.
Anyone who has learned how a thermometer works or how temperature can fluctuate across the "globe"
knows these facts and so that the temperature reading they get will likely be different from someone else 10 meters across the street outside the shop
where they measured the temperature.
Even in a controlled environment within the same room the temperature can fluctuate from point A to point B , how do you think we discovered thermo dynamics because of the objective facts given to us by measurement of other variables and their relations , temperature , pressure , volume ?


Once again you go off into the realm of "budgets" and "ego"

Yes , peoples ego can get in the way and yes money can also be a factor, but still doesnt change objective facts which bring truth!

No real scientist worth their salt will fudge data for cash , theirs is the pursuit of knowledge and truth ! not fame and money

I think you have to stop tarring people with the general brush , not all scientists are money grabbing fame hungry egotists who want nothing more than to have their name remembered!

You make out as though all of the scientific community are in some huge gang and they continually hoax us just for personal gain!
when its simply not true.

To claim that scientific enquiry doesnt bring truth is a fallacy!

as I've said , everything you do involving anything man made until the day you die is because of scientific truth!


So where are we with the whole: ..."...Science is truth..."... thingy?
Are we all deluded?

You said it's not a belief, because it is truth. Do you think that infers that if it is not truth, it is therefore belief?

You did ask the question in the science thread: Ask a physics question thread

Perhaps the answers were not satisfactory for you, and you wish to continue the search for another scientist that will say that science is truth, as you have claimed?

Or have we begun to unravel the first layer, on the multi-layered onion of scientism?
If so: then might we perhaps look at how that, may pertain to this thread on FE?



posted on Sep, 26 2018 @ 04:05 AM
link   
a reply to: Nothin

One persons subjective opinion doesnt mean that you are right !

because Arbitageur doesnt necessarily think it brings truth he said to him it means understanding !


Sorry I didnt reply to you sooner, you know real life gets in the way !

As I've said before we are not here to discuss the philosophy of science or truth , we are here looking at objective facts about the earth in support of flat earth or spherical earth and the contrast between the two !

So far the evidence supports spherical earth



posted on Sep, 27 2018 @ 12:01 AM
link   

originally posted by: sapien82
a reply to: Nothin

One persons subjective opinion doesnt mean that you are right !

because Arbitageur doesnt necessarily think it brings truth he said to him it means understanding !


Sorry I didnt reply to you sooner, you know real life gets in the way !

As I've said before we are not here to discuss the philosophy of science or truth , we are here looking at objective facts about the earth in support of flat earth or spherical earth and the contrast between the two !

So far the evidence supports spherical earth


It wasn't one person that replied to you, but two scientists. The very ilk that you were sure would prove all of your many claims that science was truth, and that there was some sort of problem with me for not being able to understand that reasoning.

You didn't get the proof you sought, so now you're just brushing-off all of your claims?

The reason it is not philosophical, but useful to this thread: is that you, and others come into these threads clutching a bible of supposed scientific truth in one hand, and brandishing the ATS loge to "Deny Ignorance" in the other.

The self-appointed, and self-proclaimed FE theory debunkers!

These two tools are used to mock FE believers, and bully them into a corner.

But here we have seen that your bible of scientific truth is nothing but scientism. A false belief.
(The scientific method is neither true nor false. Thinking that science is always right, is a false belief.)

Then you, and so many others react to my questioning, by quickly assuming, and accusing me of being a FE believer.
But since that is false: it is you and the debunkers whom are all engaging in yet another false belief!

Do you see where this has led us now?

The debunkers are engaging in multiple false beliefs, yet are here to mock FE believers as engaging in a false belief!
The supposed deniers of ignorance, are actually soaking-in, and spreading ignorance!
Nobody has a leg to stand on.

The whole thread is preposterous!



posted on Sep, 27 2018 @ 03:12 AM
link   
a reply to: Nothin

Not as preposterous as you posts



posted on Sep, 27 2018 @ 06:57 AM
link   
a reply to: Nothin

Have I mocked you ?

or just asked you questions ?

that was what I was saying though all of the claims are not mine but the world of scientific community
which are easily repeated hence why they have become fact !

to me science is truth , (or at least in your opinion systematically removing falsehoods )to refine and improve our understanding which can lead to truth , if that's an opinion fine, but its a commonly shared opinion based on understanding.

Aye philosophical debates on truth are important, but we are looking at the objective facts here, which provide us with lots of evidence which supports the spherical earth theory.

I'm not clutching anything mate, I don't think science is always right that would be a lie and would be dishonest of anyone to say so!, and its unscientific , I think that scientific method brings us closer to truth , or a truth !

the difference here is that we don't need to believe anything because the facts support it and so it must be true , there is no other logical conclusion to be drawn !


I am not brushing anything off, one question in a a thread to arbigateur doesnt mean there is no proof!
that was the first place I've enquired.

I'm sorry if I haven't replied to you sooner but I do have a life to lead !

If you cant wait for my reply , you can look yourself i'm pretty sure there are plenty of scientists throughout human history who think that science can bring truth !

You would have to forgive us for thinking you assign to the FE theory , because you are here discussing it and trying to convince others that its theory has merit because the opposite spherical earth theory derived from scientism is all a falsehood!


You are happy to bang on about how scientism is a belief a falsehood, but the flat earth supporters use those same scientific principles/ empirical evidence / measurments / and human perception to prove their flat earth theory!

So isnt that a also a flasehood if your using the same belief system to prove your flat earth?


I will have a look again for more quotes from scientists about truth and science
but dont hold your breath waiting for me to reply as I am pretty busy , just to let you know I am not going out of my way to rush and find you quotes , because there are far more important things I need to do than debate flat earth online



posted on Sep, 27 2018 @ 11:02 AM
link   

originally posted by: pointessa

originally posted by: Akragon
a reply to: seagull


We live in a world where there are people this uneducated... and this actually scares me...

IF this guy actually believes the crap he spews... he is literally the evolving breed of idiocracy… And ironically he argues against evolution as well...

This means we are truly walking down that road as a species...

And people wonder why I don't have kids



You know what scares me? People parroting whatever they learn. At least the folks that you call idiots are attempting to uses their own reasoning and logic and make conclusions based on that, rather than buying into every "fact" they are taught in school. Does belittling them, make you feel like the big man on campus, at least for a little while???


You are correct. Nobody should blindly parrot what they are told by the government, in school, on the internet, or from YouTube videos.

I open-mindedly take a piece of new information presented to me, and then I do my due diligence in order to verify that piece of information. I'll check that information against other facts that have already been verified and use critical thought and logic.

That's why I know the Earth is a spheroid; that information I learned in school is consistent with my observations of the world around me and it passes the scrutiny of critical thought and reasoning.

Contrary to that, the ideas that Flat Earthers on YouTube or other internet sites do not stand up to the same scrutiny. They're claims are inconsistent with observations I can make and the totality of the explanations for a Flat Earth are not internally consistent (that is, the explanation for one Flat Earth observation contradicts the explanation for other flat Earth observations.

The Flat Earth hypothesis is just an bunch of separate "ad hoc" explanations that are inconsistent with each other.

So you are correct: Nobody should blindly acceptor parrot any information without putting it through scrutiny. Not information learned in school, or information from the government, or from your friend, of from a Flat Earther's YouTube video. Verify everything.

edit on 27/9/2018 by Soylent Green Is People because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 27 2018 @ 09:04 PM
link   

originally posted by: wmd_2008
Look at your bird quote well the bird has a tiny MASS compared to the EARTH so guess what the force generated on the bird is small the thrust and uplift created by the birds wings is greater so it can LIFT itself against Gravity.



The problem is, a force has to offer resistance against another, opposite force.

The bird flies without resistance.

No force, therefore.



posted on Sep, 27 2018 @ 10:03 PM
link   

originally posted by: wmd_2008



So do you want to explain the second experiment when the large weight is below the smaller one and the smaller weight increases

Want to explain that using your flat Earth density




I can show you countless examples of the opposite, actually.

A heavy, large object NOT attracting any smaller object.


Want to explain that?



posted on Sep, 27 2018 @ 10:30 PM
link   
Here is another problem...

Gravity supposedly forces objects to Earth's surface. Like humans, for example.

Now, gravity doesn't force objects to Earth's surface beyond a certain point above Earth.

When in Earth's orbit, for example, gravity is not forcing astronauts to Earth's surface.

At 0 gravity, astronauts 'float' in space.


How does Earth's gravity manage to hold the moon in place, if astronauts in 'Earth orbit', all float around in 0 g?


You think it 'jumps' over the astronauts, and grabs hold of the moon?

Who thinks up this idiotic crap?



posted on Sep, 27 2018 @ 10:43 PM
link   
a reply to: turbonium1

Orbital mechanics 101.


Of course, you'll ignore it. So I've wasted 30 seconds of my life, oh well, hope springs eternal that you'll actually read it, and learn something.



posted on Sep, 28 2018 @ 12:13 AM
link   

originally posted by: turbonium1
Here is another problem...

Gravity supposedly forces objects to Earth's surface. Like humans, for example.

Now, gravity doesn't force objects to Earth's surface beyond a certain point above Earth.

When in Earth's orbit, for example, gravity is not forcing astronauts to Earth's surface.

At 0 gravity, astronauts 'float' in space.


How does Earth's gravity manage to hold the moon in place, if astronauts in 'Earth orbit', all float around in 0 g?


You think it 'jumps' over the astronauts, and grabs hold of the moon?

Who thinks up this idiotic crap?


Love this... Yet another glaring example of pure ignorance

Gravity is still pulling on objects above the earth... There is no point above the earth where objects are not pulled by earths gravity... Yes... way out in space there is a point where objects are no longer affected by earths gravity... but considering the moon is affected by earths gravity... I don't think we have to worry about that point

Nothing just floats in orbit either...Satellites (ye know those things you don't believe in) do not float around earth... Nor does the ISS... or any comet... or anything for that matter

Anything in what we call "orbit" (look that up) is actually literally falling around earth... falling towards the planet, but moving at a speed where they do not actually get closer to the planet... which is called a stable orbit.

Zero gravity happens in this environment.. it can be simulated on a plane in our atmosphere... but im not going to get into that when you don't even understand how gravity works

You're hilarious man...

and by the way, uneducated people think that stuff up...


edit on 28-9-2018 by Akragon because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 28 2018 @ 07:42 AM
link   

originally posted by: turbonium1

How does Earth's gravity manage to hold the moon in place, if astronauts in 'Earth orbit', all float around in 0 g?


Astronauts in orbit, such as on the space station (ISS), are not just floating -- they are falling. At least 99% of Earth's gravity is still acting on the ISS and the astronauts, always pulling those astronauts and the ISS itself back down to Earth. However, since the astronauts and the ISS around them are falling together and at the same speed/direction, the net effect is zero G (similar to how the "Vomit Comet" aircraft works).

In addition, while the ISS and its crew are falling back to Earth due to gravity, the ISS also has a sideways momentum ("sideways" as in parallel to the curved surface of the Earth that prevents them from falling to the surface. That's because the surface curves away from them before they could hit.



A good way to illustrate how the surface curves away from an orbiting spacecraft before the spacecraft can hit that surface is a thought experiment Isaac Newton proposed back in 1687 that has become known as "Newton's Cannonball".

In this graphic representation of the thought experiment, cannonball A with the least velocity quickly falls back to earth due to gravity. Cannonball B has a bit more velocity that allows it to go almost to the edge of the curve, but not quite. Both A and B hit the ground because the ground "gets in their way" (so-to-speak).

Cannonball C, which has a greater velocity than both A and B, also gets pulled back down, but because of that greater velocity it can goes further out over the curved surface.

In fact, cannonball C so far out over the curved surface of the Earth that as gravity pulls it back down the surface curves away allowing cannon ball C to miss the ground.


Now, instead of cannonballs, imagine these are rockets pushing satellites or the ISS "sideways" to the ground at orbital speeds.


edit on 28/9/2018 by Soylent Green Is People because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 28 2018 @ 08:13 AM
link   
a reply to: turbonium1

I thought A bird flapped its wing to gain lift, which fights the force of gravity ,

the birds force of momentum against the force of gravity and of course air friction !



posted on Sep, 28 2018 @ 08:14 AM
link   
a reply to: turbonium1


Changing the subject once more, I see.

You have had orbital mechanics patiently explained to you. You have mocked it because plainly you had no clue about how this works. Now that you have been educated about it we will see if you really are just trolling.

If you are trolling you will ignore it and move on to some other point or other. If not, perhaps you will respond with your thoughts on orbital mechanics as an explanation for that which you previously did not understand?

Lets see what you do now.



new topics

top topics



 
14
<< 44  45  46    48  49  50 >>

log in

join