• "Spreading the ideas of freedom loving people on matters regarding high finance, politics, constructionist Constitution, and mental masturbation of all types"

200 Proofs Earth is Not a Spinning Ball

arminius

Platinum Bling
Platinum Bling
Midas Supporter ++
Joined
Jun 6, 2011
Messages
5,274
Likes
7,521
No insults here. Just the reality of how threads are captured by the really lowbrow get in your face (treat you as rectums) who tell you how it is in the universe, but you've been around for a while dealing with these type of rectal leaning folks and have lived thru a lot of these rectum leaning personages trying to assert their views as gospel on electronic media. There is a point of their quite lying assertions. They make money from fucking up your view of the world, and destroying your faith in reality and justice. Welcome to the real world.

Any way they can make you less certain of the world around you, they and thiers win, and we the people lose.
 

Joe King

Midas Member
Midas Member
Site Supporter ++
Joined
Mar 31, 2010
Messages
10,259
Likes
11,650
Location
Instant Gratification Land
Ha ha, you say no insults, then go on to post insult laden drivel. Lol


the really lowbrow get in your face

these type of rectal leaning folks

these rectum leaning personages

There is a point of their quite lying assertions. They make money from fucking up your view of the world, and destroying your faith in reality and justice.

If because I post proof of a round Earth and that chemtrails ain't real, it so easily fucks up your World view, it's probably because that view wasn't worth a $#!& to begin with.
....and since you are calling me a liar, prove it. Show a post where I lied. Any two bit clown can make an accusation.
 

Zed

Barely Bullish!
Midas Member
Site Supporter ++
Joined
Mar 30, 2010
Messages
16,896
Likes
16,435
Location
Hiding under the keyboard!
OK, that is demonstrably false to anyone reading the thread.

Just the reality of how threads are captured by the really lowbrow get in your face (treat you as rectums) who tell you how it is in the universe, but you've been around for a while dealing with these type of rectal leaning folks and have lived thru a lot of these rectum leaning personages trying to assert their views as gospel on electronic media.
How do you figure asking questions is "lowbrow", evading them certainly is but asking?

There is a point of their quite lying assertions. They make money from fucking up your view of the world, and destroying your faith in reality and justice. Welcome to the real world.
Again, I've made very few assertions and those that I have can be supported, and mostly I've been asking questions that NOT ONE OF YOU HAS TRIED TO ANSWER despite the obvious validity of the questions.

Make money? LOL... really, you actually believe that? What is this, back to the shrill cries of "You are a paid shill" every time the possibility of gold going down in price is discussed. LOL, I miss some of the old nuts!

Any way they can make you less certain of the world around you, they and thiers win, and we the people lose.
We, the people? Lose?

The day you stop asking questions you become a sheep...

Now, respectfully... please try and and answer the reasonable questions I have posed!
 

Zed

Barely Bullish!
Midas Member
Site Supporter ++
Joined
Mar 30, 2010
Messages
16,896
Likes
16,435
Location
Hiding under the keyboard!
Ha ha, you say no insults, then go on to post insult laden drivel. Lol
Yeah, I noticed that. Seems to have an certain fixation, but lets let that slide.
 

Zed

Barely Bullish!
Midas Member
Site Supporter ++
Joined
Mar 30, 2010
Messages
16,896
Likes
16,435
Location
Hiding under the keyboard!
All I can say is that if these guys are all bullshitting about the ol' ball shaped earth they put a HUGE amount of effort into it.
 

Zed

Barely Bullish!
Midas Member
Site Supporter ++
Joined
Mar 30, 2010
Messages
16,896
Likes
16,435
Location
Hiding under the keyboard!
A bike, two sticks and a plane ticket! Come on, you can do this yourself!

 

Zed

Barely Bullish!
Midas Member
Site Supporter ++
Joined
Mar 30, 2010
Messages
16,896
Likes
16,435
Location
Hiding under the keyboard!

Uncle

Midas Member
Midas Member
Midas Supporter
GIM Hall Of Fame
Joined
Apr 13, 2010
Messages
2,075
Likes
2,681
Location
SA
Maybe if you pulled your heads out of your a$$ once and a while and had a look around you might learn something. Taken with my telescope, camera at home. Processed on my computer. I guess, you think I must be on the NASA hoax payroll.

View attachment 154080
Fools, what causes the two faint lines starting bottom right-of-center at about 105 and 125 deg?

Golden Regards
Uncle
 

solarion

Midas Member
Midas Member
Sr Site Supporter
Joined
Nov 25, 2013
Messages
6,396
Likes
9,299
Some hints as to the shape of Sun and Moon, taken by yours truly with telescope and camera, to the brain dead bunch, that don't seem to know the a$$ from a hole in the ground.

View attachment 154078 View attachment 154079
Beautiful pics. Would it surprise you to learn that I too own a telescope? ...or that I too take photos of the moon, stars...wandering and otherwise? I've even posted some of my own here. Doesn't mean I have to accept everything cosmology/physics shovels or that I "know" things that I cannot possibly "know" about what's on the other end of the telescope.

If you're okay with believing that you took a picture of a star called "sol", that it's 93m miles away, that it's a nuclear fusion reactor, then that's up to you. If you believe men walked around on that moon you snapped a picture of, that it's 238,900 miles away, then that's up to you. I personally believe a couple of those beliefs are incorrect, but that shouldn't piss you off...should it?

In this very thread is a man that is adamantly opposed to the notion that a human could possibly ever take a photo on Earth of much of anything at ranges > 50 statutory miles or so while standing at sea level. When shown evidence of people doing precisely that he flips out, but he insists also that the moon is 238,900 miles away and that any of us can easily snap a detailed photo of it with a cheap cel phone camera. Yeah...that's weird to me, but YMMV.
 
Last edited:

EricTheCat

Gold Member
Gold Chaser
Midas Supporter
GIM Hall Of Fame
Joined
Apr 2, 2010
Messages
1,679
Likes
4,157
Location
Southern MN
I wonder if Foolsgold's post ushered this thread into the evidence submission phase? :)

There is an abundance of evidence for the accepted model for anyone with an open mind to discover on their own.

My radio meteor detection system has been providing evidence for a rotating moving Earth since 2007. There is a noticeable peak of meteor activity at around 6 am and a noticeable trough at around 6pm local time every day. This is easily explained by the accepted model of a rotation Earth orbiting the sun. At about 6am local time you are near the Earth's leading edge of its path in its orbit around the sun. Also the accepted model works very well to explain and predict the timing of annual meteor showers. Annual meteor showers occur when Earth passes through a region of space that has a higher than normal amount of debris.
Chart-MeteorRatesReasons.png


My current meteor activity chart so far for the month. Times are in UTC, I am UTC-6, so 12h is about 6am and 00h is about 6pm. Notice the higher rates around the 12h mark.
RMOB.jpg
 

EricTheCat

Gold Member
Gold Chaser
Midas Supporter
GIM Hall Of Fame
Joined
Apr 2, 2010
Messages
1,679
Likes
4,157
Location
Southern MN
Shapes and appearance of the celestial bodies match the accepted model according to my observations.

Jupiter and its moon IO
Jupiter-2019-07-11.gif


Mars, closer and further away in its orbit as predicted by the accepted model.
Mars-02-21-2004--08-08-2003-Compare.jpg


Saturn sure looks like it has spherical body
Saturn-2019-07-12-AllP2.jpg


The moon. How this can look to anyone as anything other than spherical is beyond me.
Moon-12-22-2012-IMG_1274SS.jpg


Hey look at Earth's shadow on the moon, as predicted by basic geometry you can see the shadow matches Earth's curved surface
LunarEclipse-2015-09-27-Img_8150SS.jpg
 

EricTheCat

Gold Member
Gold Chaser
Midas Supporter
GIM Hall Of Fame
Joined
Apr 2, 2010
Messages
1,679
Likes
4,157
Location
Southern MN
As the world turns. Notice how Polaris is not at the exact center of rotation.
CircumpolarStarTrails-2019-06-30-Img_8073P2SS.jpg


CircumpolarStarTrails-2019-06-30-Img_8073P2C1SS.jpg


Okay I'll take a breather for now even though I have an abundance of other evidence.
 

solarion

Midas Member
Midas Member
Sr Site Supporter
Joined
Nov 25, 2013
Messages
6,396
Likes
9,299
The problem with all the "evidence" of what's on the roof...is that you and I cannot go there.

The evidence of the shape of Earth is right under your feet. This is precisely why people are firing lasers over frozen lakes...snapping photos of other continents, other states, etc. If Earth is a spheroid 24,901 miles in circumference than one simply cannot see very far before encountering the fall off associated with a perspective one would encounter on the exterior surface of a giant spheroid. The maths are really very simple and they're RIGHT there.

All this talk about what space is, what's in it, and/or how it works never gets anyone anywhere. Hell I beat up on gravity constantly and you guys never even have any answers. The chief defender of pseudo-science here even told me once that excess motion on Earth is stored up by "gravity" somehow...like it's a cosmic banker. Gravitational theory is a huge problem that nobody ever seems to address...because it's based on nonsense. ...and faith.
 

EricTheCat

Gold Member
Gold Chaser
Midas Supporter
GIM Hall Of Fame
Joined
Apr 2, 2010
Messages
1,679
Likes
4,157
Location
Southern MN
All this talk about what space is, what's in it, and/or how it works never gets anyone anywhere. Hell I beat up on gravity constantly and you guys never even have any answers. The chief defender of pseudo-science here even told me once that excess motion on Earth is stored up by "gravity" somehow...like it's a cosmic banker. Gravitational theory is a huge problem that nobody ever seems to address...because it's based on nonsense. ...and faith.
Like the way the picture you shared of the Chicago skyline shows the bottom portion of the buildings obstructed by water which would only happen if there was a curved surface?


The evidence of the shape of Earth is right under your feet. This is precisely why people are firing lasers over frozen lakes...snapping photos of other continents, other states, etc. If Earth is a spheroid 24,901 miles in circumference than one simply cannot see very far before encountering the fall off associated with a perspective one would encounter on the exterior surface of a giant spheroid. The maths are really very simple and they're RIGHT there.
Here is the thing about gravity. I don't claim to know what causes it or even what it really is. However, I can state with absolute certainty that it is an apparent force in Newtonian physics. This is very simple to prove.
Fact: If you drop something that normally rests on the ground it accelerates downward at a predictable speed.
Newton's second law of motion:
F = ma
Where: F = force, m = mass of the object, a = acceleration

Just the fact that the object accelerates downward means there is an apparent force acting upon it. We refer to that apparent force as Gravity.

I have used the very same equation myself to write a program in C++ which accurately predicts:
Stable orbit of the solar system
Stable orbit of the moon around the Earth at the rate we experience
Stable orbit of the Earth around the Sun at the rate we experience
Stable orbit of the moons around Jupiter at the rate we can observe with even a small telescope
The acceleration of an object near Earth's surface to be near 9.8 meters/second
Stable orbit of the ISS at the height it is known to be (by amateur observation not involving NASA)


Do you have a better equation or explanation that can better make real predictions? Do enlighten us and all of humanity if you do!
 

foolsgold

Platinum Bling
Sr Site Supporter
Platinum Bling
Joined
Mar 31, 2010
Messages
4,336
Likes
4,895
Fools, what causes the two faint lines starting bottom right-of-center at about 105 and 125 deg?

Golden Regards
Uncle
Uncle they are jets, planes or satellites. These pictures were throw out of the batch I used to make that star trails composite. This is also the reason there are gaps in the star trails composite, several shots were thrown out because of the aircraft lights.

IMG_0010_tiny.jpg
IMG_0026_tiny.jpg
IMG_0041_tiny.jpg
IMG_0044_tiny.jpg
 

solarion

Midas Member
Midas Member
Sr Site Supporter
Joined
Nov 25, 2013
Messages
6,396
Likes
9,299
Here is the thing about gravity. I don't claim to know what causes it or even what it really is. However, I can state with absolute certainty that it is an apparent force in Newtonian physics. This is very simple to prove.
Excellent...and the rest of the theory? Do you believe then that gravity propagates at infinite speed for instance? Does uni-directional gravity push or pull? Does Newtonian gravity comply with inverse square laws? Why do you suppose it fails to predict the motion of Mercury? Galactic rotational speeds? Mass in a volume of space/time?

Never mind causality...that's likely never going to be determined. It's been 500 years since Copernicus and there's not even a shred of data on gravitational causality...only a theoretical particle called a "graviton".

Do you think it's unfair to ask these questions of a 337 year old theory? Can we at least agree that Newton's universal "law" of gravitation is provably wrong as it's written? ...and if so why is it still taught as though it's fact? How is that acceptable to science?

...and it's not just you, NOBODY knows what gravity is. NOBODY...not even the so called "experts". It's a 5 century old permanent "work in progress" that's taught as fact...even though it's backed by only the simple observable fact that "stuff falls". Around that simple concept an entire grand universal "law" of gravitation was formed. The man who wrote it, himself, called it madness and tried to run from it.
 
Last edited:

Joe King

Midas Member
Midas Member
Site Supporter ++
Joined
Mar 31, 2010
Messages
10,259
Likes
11,650
Location
Instant Gratification Land
Some hints as to the shape of Sun and Moon, taken by yours truly with telescope and camera, to the brain dead bunch, that don't seem to know the a$$ from a hole in the ground.
Unfortunately they'll need far more than hints. Lol


Maybe if you pulled your heads out of your a$$ once and a while and had a look around you might learn something. Taken with my telescope, camera at home. Processed on my computer. I
You're obviously on REPS* payroll. Confess!
*Round Earth Preservation Society.


I guess, you think I must be on the NASA hoax payroll.
Btw, has your direct deposit been going through? My last 3 million $ payments have taken a bit longer than usual.
I heard that you get the really big bux.


/sarc < unfortunately, the sarcasm needs to pointed out in a thread like this.




I cannot possibly "know" about what's on the other end of the telescope.
Well duh, there's an objective lens on the other end of the telescope!
....and maybe the problem is that you need something objective on the viewing end of your telescope too.



. I personally believe a couple of those beliefs are incorrect, but that shouldn't piss you off...should it?
It doesn't piss anyone off. What gets people, is your stubborn and arrogant way of ignoring anything that shows your "ideas" to be wrong. Ie: long ago you kicked objectivity out on its ass and replaced it with flat Earth dogma.



In this very thread is a man that is adamantly opposed to the notion that a human could possibly ever take a photo on Earth of much of anything at ranges > 50 statutory miles or so while standing at sea level. When shown evidence of people doing precisely that he flips out,
I never said you can't see something that is 50 miles away.
What I said is that you standing on the ground cannot see something 50 miles away at its ground level. If the thing you are looking at from 50 miles distance is tall enough, you will see the upper portions of it.
Kinda like that pic of Chicago you posted that only the upper portions of the buildings are visible.


I wonder if Foolsgold's post ushered this thread into the evidence submission phase? :)
This thread needs all the evidence it can get.


There is an abundance of evidence for the accepted model for anyone with an open mind to discover on their own
That's great, but ya got anything the closed minded among us might accept?


Okay I'll take a breather for now even though I have an abundance of other evidence.
Feel free to bring it. In fact, please do.


If Earth is a spheroid 24,901 miles in circumference than one simply cannot see very far before encountering the fall off associated with a perspective one would encounter on the exterior surface of a giant spheroid. The maths are really very simple and they're RIGHT there.
That is correct, and the pic you posted of Chicago proves it. Nothing is visible below about 500' in your pic.
...and that conforms to what you just posted.
Edited to add: amazingly, you ignore stuff that proves you right, if it also shows flat Earth to be wrong. What a conundrum! Lol



The chief defender of pseudo-science here even told me once that excess motion on Earth is stored up by "gravity" somehow...like it's a cosmic banker.
You obviously weten't paying attention, again. Lol


Just the fact that the object accelerates downward means there is an apparent force acting upon it. We
Try to explain to him why density is not what causes that please.
 
Last edited:

foolsgold

Platinum Bling
Sr Site Supporter
Platinum Bling
Joined
Mar 31, 2010
Messages
4,336
Likes
4,895
The problem with all the "evidence" of what's on the roof...
Roof? :dduck:There may indeed be a limit to God's creation, but I doubt it.

speed of light = 186,000 miles per second
seconds in a day = 43,200
miles in a light year = 8,035,200,000

distance to the Andromeda galaxy = 2.5 million light years

miles to the Andromeda galaxy = 200,880,000,000,000,000 approximately

200 quadrillion miles to the Andromeda galaxy the closest big galaxy. We better pack a lunch.

Again my telescope, camera and processing.

Finally I doubt and laugh at some scientific theories, but take on "faith" much of what we can easily see for ourselves if we are rational.

m31.jpg
 

EricTheCat

Gold Member
Gold Chaser
Midas Supporter
GIM Hall Of Fame
Joined
Apr 2, 2010
Messages
1,679
Likes
4,157
Location
Southern MN
Try to explain to him why density is not what causes that please.
Density is not a force. Density is simply a ratio of mass to volume. Density does not contain a vector / direction of acceleration. Density in no way predicts the observable orbits of Jupiter's moons, for example.
 

solarion

Midas Member
Midas Member
Sr Site Supporter
Joined
Nov 25, 2013
Messages
6,396
Likes
9,299
Gravity also is not a force according to Einstein. So what?

Why do people cling to a provably wrong 337 year old theory? I'm genuinely curious why this doesn't seem to bother other people.

It's a fundamental violation of everything accepted scientific methodology is based upon. It's not objective and it's completely irrational. So why? Toss the provably wrong theory and come up with a new one. Why are we even discussing Newtonian gravitational theory when general relativity is RIGHT there?
Finally I doubt and laugh at some scientific theories, but take on "faith" much of what we can easily see for ourselves if we are rational.
...and how do you "know" those distances are accurate? Is it because you "know" the speed of light? Have you tested it yourself? How do you "know" the speed of light is constant? ...have you tested that yourself? How do you "know" that redshift = distance? ...have you tested that yourself?
 

Joe King

Midas Member
Midas Member
Site Supporter ++
Joined
Mar 31, 2010
Messages
10,259
Likes
11,650
Location
Instant Gratification Land
if we are rational.
It's always that qualifier that seems to be sol and company's sticking point. If it's something that proves them wrong, they insist upon being able to physically go there and touch it in order to believe it is real.
....but they'll accept any ol' garbage on face value if it even merely suggests that the Earth might be flat.
 

solarion

Midas Member
Midas Member
Sr Site Supporter
Joined
Nov 25, 2013
Messages
6,396
Likes
9,299
That's a fair point. I don't, as I've never tested it myself. I merely accepted the word of those who said it fails to predict the motion of mercury with its included infinite propagation speed. ...that it fails to predict gravitational rotational speeds, and that it fails to predict mass in a volume of space/time.

There is an allegedly more up to date theory of gravity though...why are we still clinging to Newton's? Do you think? Can you at least tell me if you believe Newtonian gravity can POSSIBLY propagate at a speed that's = to infinity? If that's impossible then the theory is wrong. If it is possible then Einstein is wrong. Correct?
 

Joe King

Midas Member
Midas Member
Site Supporter ++
Joined
Mar 31, 2010
Messages
10,259
Likes
11,650
Location
Instant Gratification Land
Why are we even discussing Newtonian gravitational theory
"We" aren't. We are trying to discuss the shape of the Earth, hence the thread title of, " 200 Proofs Earth is Not a Spinning Ball"




How do you know this to be true?
I've no doubt he grabbed his sliderule and went there to check it out. Ol' sol don't post anything he didn't physically prove for himself.
 

EricTheCat

Gold Member
Gold Chaser
Midas Supporter
GIM Hall Of Fame
Joined
Apr 2, 2010
Messages
1,679
Likes
4,157
Location
Southern MN
Gravity also is not a force according to Einstein. So what?

Why do people cling to a provably wrong 337 year old theory? I'm genuinely curious why this doesn't seem to bother other people.

It's a fundamental violation of everything accepted scientific methodology is based upon. It's not objective and it's completely irrational. So why? Toss the provably wrong theory and come up with a new one. Why are we even discussing Newtonian gravitational theory when general relativity is RIGHT there?
Why is there water obstructing the bottom side of the buildings in the photo you posted a pic of with the Chicago skyline if the Earth is not curved?

Why use a 337 year old theory? Because it works very well. Only in extreme examples does it fail to make very accurate predictions. Have you even done the math yourself? If you did, you would see how incredibly accurate Newtonian physics is. Then if you want to go the next step and include Einstein's theories, you still will need Newton's equations in there. You will just have to apply them in a way that aligns with Einstein's theories, just like Einstein did. Einstein did not throw out Newtonian physics, he refined it.

Gravity is an apparent force. We know this to be true because objects accelerate and acceleration requires a force. Any argument against this fact is semantics.
 

EricTheCat

Gold Member
Gold Chaser
Midas Supporter
GIM Hall Of Fame
Joined
Apr 2, 2010
Messages
1,679
Likes
4,157
Location
Southern MN
There is an allegedly more up to date theory of gravity though...why are we still clinging to Newton's? Do you think? Can you at least tell me if you believe Newtonian gravity can POSSIBLY propagate at a speed that's = to infinity? If that's impossible then the theory is wrong. If it is possible then Einstein is wrong. Correct?
Einstein could be wrong. However, so far his theories hold up very well. It's not something that I can easily test, so I'm not going to tell you I know exactly how fast gravity propagates. You got me there but you still haven't provided a better way to predict things.
 

solarion

Midas Member
Midas Member
Sr Site Supporter
Joined
Nov 25, 2013
Messages
6,396
Likes
9,299
So no answer then. Kewl.

Let's all just pretend like gravity is magic then. That Einstein and Newton were in perfect agreement...that that's how scientific methodology works.

...and *I'M* the one making a mockery of science? LMAO

Here are the facts.

Newtonian gravity pulls. General relativity PUSHES.
Newtonian gravity propagates at infinite speed. General relativity at the speed of "C".
Newtonian gravity is a "force". General relativity is a "consequence".

Continue pretending as though these two mainstream gravitational theories happily co-exist if you like, but they're fundamentally opposed to one another. Where gravity is concerned scientific methodology is absent.

You guys are the ones making a mockery of scientific methodology. Provably wrong theories MUST be abandoned. Which would you like to abandon?

Oh neither? AWESOME! ...thanks again for making my point.
 

Joe King

Midas Member
Midas Member
Site Supporter ++
Joined
Mar 31, 2010
Messages
10,259
Likes
11,650
Location
Instant Gratification Land
Why is there water obstructing the bottom side of the buildings in the photo you posted a pic of with the Chicago skyline if the Earth is not curved?
Notice how ol'sol just cruised right on past that part of your response? I knew he would. That pic provides the proof that destroys his "theory" about the Earth being flat, so he has to ignore it.
....despite the fact that he's the one who origonally posted it in support of flat Earth. Lol
 

solarion

Midas Member
Midas Member
Sr Site Supporter
Joined
Nov 25, 2013
Messages
6,396
Likes
9,299
The reason you're forced to admit you do not know what gravity is...is because you refuse to apply scientific methodology to gravitational theory. You cannot define it because you refuse to do so. There are two competing definitions, but just like NASA/mainstream science you refuse to select just ONE of those definitions.

This is not science.
 

EricTheCat

Gold Member
Gold Chaser
Midas Supporter
GIM Hall Of Fame
Joined
Apr 2, 2010
Messages
1,679
Likes
4,157
Location
Southern MN
So no answer then. Kewl.

Let's all just pretend like gravity is magic then. That Einstein and Newton were in perfect agreement...that that's how scientific methodology works.

...and *I'M* the one making a mockery of science? LMAO

Here are the facts.

Newtonian gravity pulls. General relativity PUSHES.
Newtonian gravity propagates at infinite speed. General relativity at the speed of "C".
Newtonian gravity is a "force". General relativity is a "consequence".

Continue pretending as though these two mainstream gravitational theories happily co-exist if you like, but they're fundamentally opposed to one another. Where gravity is concerned scientific methodology is absent.

You guys are the ones making a mockery of scientific methodology. Provably wrong theories MUST be abandoned. Which would you like to abandon?

Oh neither? AWESOME! ...thanks again for making my point.
Awesome. So then, what would you replace these with if you were tasked with making an accurate prediction?
 

solarion

Midas Member
Midas Member
Sr Site Supporter
Joined
Nov 25, 2013
Messages
6,396
Likes
9,299
Oh I should answer your questions then? ...even though you ignore everything I ask/say?

I will despite not being treated in like fashion. I would replace the two WRONG mainstream gravitational theories with something bi-directional and likely based on electricity. ...I've even linked to Morton Spears work on numerous occasions, but just like the other HUNDREDS of theories about what gravitation is, his work is completely ignored by mainstream science so that the TWO theories that so called "science" continuously pretends are one can be promoted constantly.

Gravitational theory is not being treated as scientific theory at all...nor has it been for centuries. This fact is what is making a mockery of science...not people asking questions. Questions are what makes good science...it's the lack of skepticism that's turning it into a joke.
 

Joe King

Midas Member
Midas Member
Site Supporter ++
Joined
Mar 31, 2010
Messages
10,259
Likes
11,650
Location
Instant Gratification Land

EricTheCat

Gold Member
Gold Chaser
Midas Supporter
GIM Hall Of Fame
Joined
Apr 2, 2010
Messages
1,679
Likes
4,157
Location
Southern MN
I think it would be cool if we (as in humanity) can come to a better understanding of what gravity is.

I will admit I can't easily prove the theory wrong that gravity is electrical in nature. I can say I am fairly skeptical about the possibility. Just one example, things still fall down in a Faraday cage. Even if the cage is solid (such as a closed metal box) things still fall downward. Do you know of a way of to explain how that would be possible if gravity is electrical in nature?

That is just one of many questions I would have as someone who has designed high voltage power supplies and experimented with very high voltages AC and DC.
 

solarion

Midas Member
Midas Member
Sr Site Supporter
Joined
Nov 25, 2013
Messages
6,396
Likes
9,299
Don't you think it's important to dispense with existing provably wrong theories to make room for new improved theories? Is it not possible that the reason gravitational theory never moves forward is because it's not being met with proper scientific methodology?

Either general relativity is wrong or Newtonian gravitational theory is wrong. They do not compliment one another...pretending as though they do is illogical, irrational, and not scientific. It's simply a fact.

It's not appropriate for mainstream cosmology to invent "dark matter" to dismiss the problems with both general relativity AND Newtonian gravitational theory. If predictions based upon those two theories are wrong, then perhaps there's a problem with those theories themselves...and stacking more theories atop them is not scientifically justified.
 

Joe King

Midas Member
Midas Member
Site Supporter ++
Joined
Mar 31, 2010
Messages
10,259
Likes
11,650
Location
Instant Gratification Land
I still don't see how it is asking too much to expect an acknowledgement by sol or other flat Earthers of what the pic of Chicago clearly shows.

It is sols pic after all, and he says there is no evidence of curvature of the Earths surface, yet right there in the pic is all the evidence anyone with an IQ above room temperature should need to see in order to convince themselves that curvature does in fact exist.
....and sol has previously stated that the round Earth model is impossible without such a thing as gravity.

Can anyone not see why he ignores that pic? Because it proves him to be completely wrong.
 
Last edited:

Joe King

Midas Member
Midas Member
Site Supporter ++
Joined
Mar 31, 2010
Messages
10,259
Likes
11,650
Location
Instant Gratification Land
Don't you think it's important to dispense with existing provably wrong theories to make room for new improved theories?
YES! That's why I'm trying so hard to get you to look at that pic you posted. I'm trying to dispel your provably wrong wacko theory.
 

EricTheCat

Gold Member
Gold Chaser
Midas Supporter
GIM Hall Of Fame
Joined
Apr 2, 2010
Messages
1,679
Likes
4,157
Location
Southern MN
Don't you think it's important to dispense with existing provably wrong theories to make room for new improved theories? Is it not possible that the reason gravitational theory never moves forward is because it's not being met with proper scientific methodology?

Either general relativity is wrong or Newtonian gravitational theory is wrong. They do not compliment one another...pretending as though they do is illogical, irrational, and not scientific. It's simply a fact.

It's not appropriate for mainstream cosmology to invent "dark matter" to dismiss the problems with both general relativity AND Newtonian gravitational theory. If predictions based upon those two theories are wrong, then perhaps there's a problem with those theories themselves...and stacking more theories atop them is not scientifically justified.
The reason we still use Newtonian physics, and haven't thrown it out, is because you can still make accurate predictions. For example, you can predict all but the most extreme of orbits using Newtonian math without having to factor in relativity. Why then would you complicate it by including relativity when you might just get a few micrometers of more accuracy when you really are only trying to be accurate within say a few kilometers?

If you have a simpler way of making those predictions then there might be cause to throw out the Newtonian math. Until then, it is still a very useful tool. So tell us what is this more simple math we can use to make the same predictions more accurately?