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: 88
14
<< 85  86  87    89  90  91 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Apr, 13 2019 @ 08:15 AM
link   
a reply to: turbonium1

Flightless birds are flightless because they have evolved that way !
Penguins dont fly because they evolved to live in the sea as with other flightles birds they dont fly because they evolved that way and lost their flight capability !

the largest flight capable bird is the African Bustard , its heavy , it flies because its wings are strong enough to fly same with the Albatross and swan they evolved that way!

then if weight is an issue then how did we have larger still flight capable birds from pre history and then even dinosaurs
teradactyl , petrodacytl , weight is not the reason humans cant simply fly , the reason why is we dont have wings or any other means of flight !
we can jump but our muscles in our body only provide a specific amount of lift which works against gravity!


birds have evolved specifically because of gravity in order to fly! , their bones are less dense , they have wings to provide lift, they dont have offspring grow in uetero instead they have eggs, birds dont have bladders!

humans on the other hand evolved to live on the land !

gravity among other things is the reason birds have evolved the way the have !

edit on 13-4-2019 by sapien82 because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 16 2019 @ 08:09 AM
link   
a reply to: turbonium1

If gravity is an illusion, why would anything settle towards the ground based on density? Mass only gains the force of weight because of gravities pull. No gravity, there is no settling based on density. What is the motive force that makes items settle based on density.



ccrma.stanford.edu...

Newton's Three Laws of Motion



Every object in a state of uniform motion will remain in that state of motion unless an external force acts on it.
Force equals mass times acceleration [ $ f(t)=m,a(t)$ ].
For every action there is an equal and opposite reaction.



posted on Apr, 16 2019 @ 08:11 AM
link   

originally posted by: captainpudding

originally posted by: turbonium1

originally posted by: Akragon
a reply to: AngryCymraeg

We are LOLing...

tis the right forum



No, but the space forum would suit it quite perfectly, though.


Your faith literally denies the existence of space, it would be like putting anti-vax threads in a science forum.
Speaking of space, our Australian stargazers are really looking forward to getting a nice look at Polaris, where should they look?
I'm in Canada and the overnight temperatures are starting to creep up above freezing, it would be awesome if you could give me the coordinates to check out Sigma Octantis tonight.


Still no answer from Turbo?



posted on Apr, 16 2019 @ 08:30 AM
link   
a reply to: turbonium1




The reasons for lying about the Earth being round, instead of flat, are clear to see.... Saying Earth isn't created, life isn't created to inhabit the Earth, is saying that there is/was no God, or a creator, of any kind... That allows them to say everyone on Earth is created out of primordial soup, all at random. Earth is just a ball, flying randomly through the endless universe, as well. Science becomes our savior, our faith, our 'protector'...


What is to stop the idea that God created a round Earth?



Earth is just a ball, flying randomly through the endless universe, as well.


It is not flying randomly.



posted on Apr, 18 2019 @ 08:43 PM
link   

originally posted by: sapien82
a reply to: turbonium1

Flightless birds are flightless because they have evolved that way !
Penguins dont fly because they evolved to live in the sea as with other flightles birds they dont fly because they evolved that way and lost their flight capability !

the largest flight capable bird is the African Bustard , its heavy , it flies because its wings are strong enough to fly same with the Albatross and swan they evolved that way!

then if weight is an issue then how did we have larger still flight capable birds from pre history and then even dinosaurs
teradactyl , petrodacytl , weight is not the reason humans cant simply fly , the reason why is we dont have wings or any other means of flight !
we can jump but our muscles in our body only provide a specific amount of lift which works against gravity!


birds have evolved specifically because of gravity in order to fly! , their bones are less dense , they have wings to provide lift, they dont have offspring grow in uetero instead they have eggs, birds dont have bladders!

humans on the other hand evolved to live on the land !

gravity among other things is the reason birds have evolved the way the have !


A lie on top of a lie doesn't work any better.

Nothing "evolved" into anything else. Look around, and show me one species that isn't the exact same species over thousands of years....

That's over a quadrillion examples of NOTHING 'evolving'. Or even an indication of anything 'evolving'.

To point to extinct species, and claim that they somehow 'transformed' themselves into completely different species, doesn't mean anything. In fact, thousands of species have gone extinct since humans were around, and NONE of them ever 'evolved' into any other species. They simply died off, and that was the end of the species.

But let's stick to the issue at hand..



posted on Apr, 18 2019 @ 08:56 PM
link   

originally posted by: neutronflux
a reply to: turbonium1

If gravity is an illusion, why would anything settle towards the ground based on density? Mass only gains the force of weight because of gravities pull. No gravity, there is no settling based on density. What is the motive force that makes items settle based on density.



ccrma.stanford.edu...

Newton's Three Laws of Motion



Every object in a state of uniform motion will remain in that state of motion unless an external force acts on it.
Force equals mass times acceleration [ $ f(t)=m,a(t)$ ].
For every action there is an equal and opposite reaction.




No. An object with mass, falls through air, which has almost no mass. The object only stops falling when it hits something with more mass, like the ground, or a floor, or a table. That's all there is to it.

There is no 'pull' on the object in air from the ground, or from some force within the ground. That is clear, because the object stops falling on a floor, or a table. It doesn't even touch the surface of Earth before it stops falling.

By your argument, a floor 'pulls' an object towards it, just like the Earth's surface is supposed to 'pull' objects toward it.

There is also no resistance from any 'force' that 'pulls' all objects towards the Earth's surface, as a bird or insect flies freely above the Earth's surface, which proves no force exists in the Earth at all.



posted on Apr, 18 2019 @ 10:08 PM
link   

originally posted by: neutronflux

originally posted by: captainpudding

originally posted by: turbonium1

originally posted by: Akragon
a reply to: AngryCymraeg

We are LOLing...

tis the right forum



No, but the space forum would suit it quite perfectly, though.


Your faith literally denies the existence of space, it would be like putting anti-vax threads in a science forum.
Speaking of space, our Australian stargazers are really looking forward to getting a nice look at Polaris, where should they look?
I'm in Canada and the overnight temperatures are starting to creep up above freezing, it would be awesome if you could give me the coordinates to check out Sigma Octantis tonight.


Still no answer from Turbo?


I've already addressed this issue. Polaris is far too distant from Australia to be seen from there. It has nothing to do with the Earth being a ball. A plane can't be seen when it's too far away, either, but the plane is obviously seen when it is near enough, as we all know.


Faith is accepting something without any evidence, which - ironically - is what YOUR side does. It accepts 'science' as God, and believes every claim made by their God, as 100% true, and never once question or doubt the word of their God.

When we look at the moon in daylight, below the blue skies, blocking out the blue skies, it is obviously because the moon is BENEATH the blue skies. It cannot be in so-called 'space', 1/4 million miles away from Earth, yet that is what you believe, because all your Gods of science tell you it is.

Simply look at the moon before it is seen below our blue skies, if you don't understand this yet. At night, the moon is seen among the stars, right? Over the next few hours, it is still seen, only it has moved across the sky, right?

Same moon, same size, throughout that time, right?

It is obviously there, from dark of night, to the light of day, without question.

Which means the moon IS below the blue skies, right where we see it in daylight.


What your side tries to claim is that the moon is actually 1/4 million miles away from Earth, in the blackness of 'space', which means you need to 'explain' how the moon is not there, below the blue skies, blocking out the blue skies, where we see it, with our own eyes!

Your side claims it is an 'illusion', or 'projection of the moon', which is a reflection of sunlight, on the moon, and it projects the whole moon, from 1/4 million miles away, back to Earth, through the atmosphere, and below the blue skies, where it then stops projecting itself, for some reason, where we all see it in daylight skies!!

How can sunlight, from 93 million miles away, hit an object - our moon - that is only 1/4 million miles away, on the other side, which faces Earth, while both Sun and moon are seen alongside each other, in daylight skies?

Of course, that's why your 'experts' cannot even demonstrate this 'phenomenon', because it doesn't exist in reality.



posted on Apr, 18 2019 @ 10:09 PM
link   
a reply to: turbonium1



No. An object with mass, falls through air, which has almost no mass. The object only stops falling when it hits something with more mass, like the ground, or a floor, or a table. That's all there is to it.



What force makes it move?

Newton’s first law.


ccrma.stanford.edu...

Every object in a state of uniform motion will remain in that state of motion unless an external force acts on it.


Is Newton’s first law a lie?

What property of mass makes an object self motivated to move.

If there was no gravity, you could place a brick five feet above the earth so it was perfectly still, and it would not move once unsupported. Is that false in the context of Newton’s first law. So when I hold a brick above the earth’s surface perfectly still, what force causes the brick to accelerate towards the earth’s surface when I let go of the perfectly still brick?

When I throw a brick straight up in the air, according to Newton’s first law it should continue to go straight up. What force slows the brick’s climb into the atmosphere, causes the brick to lose all upward movement, and switch direction to fall back towards the earth.



posted on Apr, 18 2019 @ 10:18 PM
link   
a reply to: turbonium1



I've already addressed this issue. Polaris is far too distant from Australia to be seen from there.



What magnitude of brightness is Polaris, and you cannot see it from Australia? Not even with a telescope. Polaris doesn’t dim as you go from the northern Hemisphere south across the equator. Polaris gets lower and lower on the horizon until the curve of the earth blocks the view of Polaris when traveling south across the equator.

What’s it like to have to resort to blatant falsehoods to keep the lie of flat earth alive in your delusion?



posted on Apr, 18 2019 @ 10:27 PM
link   
a reply to: turbonium1

And you are making zero sense. Light reflects of objects and that is why you see things like trees and distant mountains.

The moon is seen trough the atmosphere. There is a reason the moon is not visible on a cloudy night. It’s because it’s outside earth’s atmosphere.

If the moon is in earth’s atmosphere, then you should be able to measure the distance to the moon by radar. Is that false.



posted on Apr, 18 2019 @ 11:09 PM
link   

originally posted by: oldcarpy
a reply to: turbonium1




The reasons for lying about the Earth being round, instead of flat, are clear to see.... Saying Earth isn't created, life isn't created to inhabit the Earth, is saying that there is/was no God, or a creator, of any kind... That allows them to say everyone on Earth is created out of primordial soup, all at random. Earth is just a ball, flying randomly through the endless universe, as well. Science becomes our savior, our faith, our 'protector'...


What is to stop the idea that God created a round Earth?



Earth is just a ball, flying randomly through the endless universe, as well.


It is not flying randomly.


Nor is it flying, at all.


Earth could have been created in any form, whether flat, or round, or pear-shaped, or anything else, it doesn't matter.


What matters is saying Earth is round, when it is not, and saying Earth flies through space, when it does not.


Saying the moon isn't under our blue skies, when obviously it is.


Saying ships go over curvature, when they do NOT.



posted on Apr, 18 2019 @ 11:20 PM
link   
a reply to: turbonium1

Or that you have any sense of reality

When clearly you don't


edit on 19-4-2019 by Akragon because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 19 2019 @ 01:55 AM
link   

originally posted by: neutronflux
a reply to: turbonium1



No. An object with mass, falls through air, which has almost no mass. The object only stops falling when it hits something with more mass, like the ground, or a floor, or a table. That's all there is to it.



What force makes it move?

Newton’s first law.


ccrma.stanford.edu...

Every object in a state of uniform motion will remain in that state of motion unless an external force acts on it.


Is Newton’s first law a lie?

What property of mass makes an object self motivated to move.

If there was no gravity, you could place a brick five feet above the earth so it was perfectly still, and it would not move once unsupported. Is that false in the context of Newton’s first law. So when I hold a brick above the earth’s surface perfectly still, what force causes the brick to accelerate towards the earth’s surface when I let go of the perfectly still brick?

When I throw a brick straight up in the air, according to Newton’s first law it should continue to go straight up. What force slows the brick’s climb into the atmosphere, causes the brick to lose all upward movement, and switch direction to fall back towards the earth.


Why would the brick even fly up in air, first of all? Because you used force, to make it fly up in air, right?

What makes the brick stop flying up, forever and ever, afterwards?

You assume the brick was already flying in the air, all by itself, then? No.

A force made the brick fly up in air, first of all, right?

Because air is a less dense medium than an object, like a brick, or a bird, or insect, there has to be an initial force applied to go upward into the less dense medium above Earth...

The removal of initial force required to go upward into the medium, makes the brick, or bird, or insect, fall in the opposite direction after removing the initial force which allowed it to fly upward, in the less dense medium, first of all.


What happens when you kick a soccer ball along the ground, without raising it in air? Why doesn't it keep rolling forever after you kick it? Does a force in the ground make a ball stop rolling, when it's already on the ground?

No. Objects that roll on the ground, are forced by some means, into rolling, first of all. If there was not an initial force that acted on these objects, to make them roll, nothing would roll. A boulder rolls down a mountain, because of unusual weather over a long period, with other factors in play...

What you still wish to believe here, is that objects are being forced down to Earth's surface, because you assume everything they claim about 'space' is true, first of all, which shows astronauts floating in 'space', which has no gravity, of course!

If there is no gravity, we'd all be floating around, like astronauts in 'space', right?


Since nobody can prove them wrong, then it's certainly 100% true, of course!


A lie, built on another lie, on more lies...


It's clever, but it's still all just a bunch of lies...



posted on Apr, 19 2019 @ 02:53 AM
link   
The earth isn't round. That's silly, its roundish, or more like an egg or pot.

Sometimes its flat, but only if enough people believe it, but it can also be a triangle or hexagon if enough people believe it. The truth is that reality is based on believe. Especially when that believe is enforced. Sometimes reality is perceived, while a great other times its based on popular opinion. And distinguishing between the two, is quite the test.

And in the end the only way to know is to see it all with your own eyes. But sometimes even your eyes lie to you.



posted on Apr, 19 2019 @ 03:03 AM
link   

originally posted by: neutronflux
a reply to: turbonium1

And you are making zero sense. Light reflects of objects and that is why you see things like trees and distant mountains.

The moon is seen trough the atmosphere. There is a reason the moon is not visible on a cloudy night. It’s because it’s outside earth’s atmosphere.

If the moon is in earth’s atmosphere, then you should be able to measure the distance to the moon by radar. Is that false.


Airplanes fly above clouds, so I guess they are also in 'space', right?!?

Pure nonsense, indeed.

Sunlight cannot resolve the problem, as I've already explained...


First of all, where is the Sun, when the moon is seen in daylight?

Both the Sun and moon are seen in our blue skies....at the same time...


Being how you still believe the Sun is 93 million miles away from Earth, and that the moon is 1/4 million miles away from Earth....


How would the Sun, far behind the moon, appear alongside the moon, in daylight, yet somehow, reflect sunlight on the moon, on the side which faces Earth, which is NOT the side facing the Sun, which is far behind the moon, and could never reflect sunlight to the side facing Earth?

It's utter nonsense.


They have never, ever, shown any model, or demonstration, or simulation, to support their utterly absurd claims...

Because it's impossible.


That's the reality.



posted on Apr, 19 2019 @ 03:46 AM
link   
a reply to: turbonium1

You have totally lost it.

Newton’s first law again, “Every object in a state of uniform motion will remain in that state of motion unless an external force acts on it.“

You


The removal of initial force required to go upward into the medium, makes the brick, or bird, or insect, fall in the opposite direction after removing the initial force which allowed it to fly upward, in the less dense medium, first of all.


There is noting in your model to remove initial force, and you are making zero sense. The brick is thrown straight up by my hand. Once the brick leaves my hand, it is not being acted upon by a force, the object has momentum/inertia. The brick is flying straight up through the “less dense” atmosphere. Why would the brick “care” if it’s falling up or down under the flat earth model with no gravity. According to Newton’s first law, it will continue upward until acted upon by another force. Worst case flat earth scenario, air fiction makes the brick slow down and stop. But if you throw a brick straight up in your scenario, the brick should travel straight up until it hits something more solid. Is that false? For flat earth no gravity, what force causes objects thrown straight up to lose all upward movement, and switch direction to fall back towards the earth.
edit on 19-4-2019 by neutronflux because: Added and fixed



posted on Apr, 19 2019 @ 03:52 AM
link   
a reply to: turbonium1



Airplanes fly above clouds, so I guess they are also in 'space', right?!?


Then why doesn’t the moon look noticeably larger when seen from a Jet above the clouds. Why doesn’t the moon show up on a jest’s radar.

And why does the more dense moon not fall to the surface of the earth?



Being how you still believe the Sun is 93 million miles away from Earth, and that the moon is 1/4 million miles away from Earth....


Because the sun is acting like a large lightbulb that lights up a room. The room being our solar system illuminated by the sun.
edit on 19-4-2019 by neutronflux because: Added and fixed



posted on Apr, 19 2019 @ 03:53 AM
link   
a reply to: turbonium1

And you didn’t answer to....

What magnitude of brightness is Polaris, and you cannot see it from Australia? Not even with a telescope. Polaris doesn’t dim as you go from the northern Hemisphere south across the equator. Polaris gets lower and lower on the horizon until the curve of the earth blocks the view of Polaris when traveling south across the equator.

What’s it like to have to resort to blatant falsehoods to keep the lie of flat earth alive in your delusion?



posted on Apr, 19 2019 @ 04:21 AM
link   
a reply to: turbonium1

yeh we dont see evolution because its a process that occurs longer than a couple of thousand years , the ability for mammals to fly had already been put in place millions of years before birds existed as they are today !

This group of flying animals existed about 225 million years ago , so much longer than any human scale of understanding!
the evidence science has used to discover the origins of flight relies on the fossil record!
Pterosaurian Flight

Then you have the vertebrate fliers whose arrival was 150 milllion years ago
Vertebrate fliers

species die off because they are either wiped out by natural disaster or killed by other animals or humans
this is because a species has failed to adapt to its changing environment.
The ones that do survive however have done so through adaptation, the ones that surive pass on those adaptations
in order to best serve the next generation. This process over millions of years is evolution of a species, provided that the species survives long enough to record the evolutionary process of change.
It has been said however that the earth is changing so much now that many species will not be able to adapt to the rapid changes and will die off !

If you want to speak of evolution , then look at life in general , from single celled organisms to large complex animals
that process is billions of years!

but the evidence is there and shows that animals evolved based on the physical properties of the planet earth, it's gravity , its atmosphere, and you will notice that earths gravitational pull has remained constant , if it changed you would see this in the evolution of life on earth over billions of years

so check it out

Gravitational biology

then explain to me how gravitropism works on the flat earth model and how plants grow.
edit on 19-4-2019 by sapien82 because: (no reason given)


then look at gravitational affects on single celled organisms


Gravity has had an effect on the development of animal life since the first single-celled organism. The size of single biological cells is inversely proportional to the strength of the gravitational field exerted on the cell. That is, in stronger gravitational fields the size of cells decreases, and in weaker gravitational fields the size of cells increases. Gravity is thus a limiting factor in the growth of individual cells.

edit on 19-4-2019 by sapien82 because: (no reason given)


So through the process of evolution life went from single celled organisms to complex animals , this happened by organisms developing skeletal structures to cope with gravity! and many other biological structures to make life on land possible
edit on 19-4-2019 by sapien82 because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 19 2019 @ 04:29 AM
link   
a reply to: neutronflux

he has been shown everything that needs to be shown and people have explained simple concepts until they're blue in the face... fact is flat earth believers are morons

Its as simple as that...

I mean... dude thinks the moon is under the sky...


edit on 19-4-2019 by Akragon because: (no reason given)




top topics



 
14
<< 85  86  87    89  90  91 >>

log in

join