• Same story, different day...........year ie more of the same fiat floods the world
  • There are no markets
  • "Spreading the ideas of freedom loving people on matters regarding high finance, politics, constructionist Constitution, and mental masturbation of all types"

Cavaliers star Kyrie Irving is a flat-Earth truther

BarnacleBob

GIM Founding Member & Mod.
Founding Member
Site Mgr
Site Supporter
Joined
Oct 15, 2012
Messages
9,353
Likes
11,005
Location
Ten-Oh-Cee
#1

TAEZZAR

LADY JUSTICE ISNT BLIND, SHES JUST AFRAID TO WATCH
Midas Member
Sr Site Supporter
Joined
Apr 2, 2010
Messages
12,081
Likes
19,586
Location
ORYGUN
#2
YUP
Last line from the link:
Perhaps Irving’s search should take him to Google, where he can find the concrete information he believes is lacking.

FLAT EARTH PHOTO.jpg
 

GOLDBRIX

God,Donald Trump,most in GIM2 I Trust. OTHERS-meh
Platinum Bling
Site Supporter ++
Joined
Apr 4, 2010
Messages
6,536
Likes
6,734
#3
"Good Grief Charlie Brown !"
 

tom baxter

back from 2004
Joined
Oct 21, 2016
Messages
698
Likes
645
Location
Australia
#5
Well of course the earth is flat! The big conspiracy is how NASA has made all the other planets, the moon and the Sun look round. How did they accomplish this? Simple, Galileo, the secret founder of NASA, designed the first telescope to be ROUND. He persuaded Sir Issac Newton to make his scope round as well and all telescopes since have been of this design. There have been designs patented for Flat telescopes but big secret conglomerates buy up the patents and hide the designs. As long as the majority of people on Earth believe it is round they will pay exorbitant fees for internet and telephone access under the erroneous belief orbiting satellites are needed to send the signals.
 

TAEZZAR

LADY JUSTICE ISNT BLIND, SHES JUST AFRAID TO WATCH
Midas Member
Sr Site Supporter
Joined
Apr 2, 2010
Messages
12,081
Likes
19,586
Location
ORYGUN
#6
Well of course the earth is flat! The big conspiracy is how NASA has made all the other planets, the moon and the Sun look round. How did they accomplish this? Simple, Galileo, the secret founder of NASA, designed the first telescope to be ROUND. He persuaded Sir Issac Newton to make his scope round as well and all telescopes since have been of this design. There have been designs patented for Flat telescopes but big secret conglomerates buy up the patents and hide the designs. As long as the majority of people on Earth believe it is round they will pay exorbitant fees for internet and telephone access under the erroneous belief orbiting satellites are needed to send the signals.
tom, have you, in the past, or do you now, work for the lame stream media or senior soros ?? OR, are you an unemployed comedian ?? LOL
 

GOLDBRIX

God,Donald Trump,most in GIM2 I Trust. OTHERS-meh
Platinum Bling
Site Supporter ++
Joined
Apr 4, 2010
Messages
6,536
Likes
6,734
#7
There have been designs patented for Flat telescopes but big secret conglomerates buy up the patents and hide the designs.
They're hidden next to the patents for the 100 miles per gallon of gasoline carburetor(s) for V8 engines.
 

tom baxter

back from 2004
Joined
Oct 21, 2016
Messages
698
Likes
645
Location
Australia
#8
tom, have you, in the past, or do you now, work for the lame stream media or senior soros ?? OR, are you an unemployed comedian ?? LOL
No, but I always like to take the delusional person to the next level, because confronting them with the truth is a pointless exercise in frustration. My brother believes the whole nation can be run (at current energy consumption levels) on a few solar thermal farms out in the desert. They last forever he claims, you only need to wash the mirrors every now and then. I showed him, actually printed out, the news stories about how they are all failing to deliver across the planet and the companies are going bankrupt. He would have none of it though, and continued to rehash the same corporate investment tripe every time I saw him. What to do? Then I hit on it.

As soon as he starts his rant I cut him off with "No no, geostationary parabolic mirrors is the way to go. You trap 100% of the energy and convert it to microwaves then beam it down to earth stations, no clouds to worry about and you can direct the power with precise accuracy from station to station to follow demand. The losses are small compared to conventional transmission lines and the system works 24 hour a day. On and on I rant and he can't Challenge my delusion because it's the next obvious step up the Cornucopian ladder he so blandly believes in. I say blandly because these people never actually do any primary research, they simply watch TV and watch Youtube and are convinced on the basis of that. They are basically uneducated, dumbed down.
 

TAEZZAR

LADY JUSTICE ISNT BLIND, SHES JUST AFRAID TO WATCH
Midas Member
Sr Site Supporter
Joined
Apr 2, 2010
Messages
12,081
Likes
19,586
Location
ORYGUN
#9
They last forever he claims
Geee, they must be quite unique to last forever !!
Is he a younger brother? I have a younger brother that thinks very different too.
I would like to think that it was his koledg edjukashun, as opposed to a genetic malfunction.
 

solarion

Gold Member
Gold Chaser
Site Supporter ++
Joined
Nov 25, 2013
Messages
5,050
Likes
7,613
#10
“I’m telling you, it’s right in front of our faces,” Irving said. “They lie to us.”
Well that's definitely true. Ball Earth theory is one of the very first things young minds are indoctrinated with. Heck when I went to skool there was a globe in every single room. Wonder why it's so important to convince kids so young that the Earth is a beautiful blue spinning marble.

Instead of simply ridiculing him, can anyone tell me how Irving is wrong?

...anything besides NASA(DOD) said so? What proof is there that the world is round and spinning at 1040mph?

If the Earth is spinning that fast then how come I can launch a rocket straight up? Shouldn't it appear to fall backwards after it leaves the Earth's surface? I mean, if I launch a bottle rocket straight up while standing on a truck moving at 70mph on the highway...the rocket immediately appears to fall back as it leaves the surface, and that's only at 70mph.

What holds the water to the surface of the Earth while the planet is allegedly spinning at 1040mph? Gravity? ...seriously? Gravity is so weak it cannot even stop a helium filled balloon from rising. How in the hell does gravity stop trillions of gallons of water from spinning off a sphere that's supposedly rotating at 1040mph? Does gravity even exist or is it just density we're perceiving? In Newton's famous apple tree experiment, sure the apple falls through air, because it's more dense than air, but apples float on water. How come? Why doesn't gravity just pull the apple under water if it's such a powerful force? The apple is less dense than water...that's why...gravity doesn't mean crap in that experiment, only density.

The Earth is spinning at over 1k mph while hurtling around the sun, the solar system is allegedly speeding through space, AND the galaxy is allegedly moving at incredible speed...yet the constellations barely change? Maybe I'm crazy, but that seems odd.

There are countless problems with ball Earth theory...these are just a couple. I don't pretend to know the shape of the planet, but I have very serious doubts that it's a sphere spinning at 1040mph as we've all been taught. There are just too many problems with that notion. Despite the Earth supposedly spinning at 1k mph and speeding around the sun at 67k mph I cannot detect any motion, yet if I step into an elevator I can detect that few mph easily. What gives?

Serious questions. Can anyone answer these? Cuz they're bugging me. Also, if the moon is supposedly causing ocean tides, how come fresh water remains unaffected? ...and how come tidal forces vary so widely from location to location while the distance to the moon changes only a tiny amount? Makes zero sense. The moon is not causing tides imo, so what is?
 
Last edited:

Flight2gold

Silver Member
Silver Miner
Site Supporter ++
Joined
May 12, 2010
Messages
1,486
Likes
1,834
Location
Florida
#11
You can only speak from a position of what you observe.
Sometimes when I'm flying East with the sun setting at my back the shadow of the Earth appears low in the East and slowly extends up and around over time. I would think that the shadow would look rather different if the Earth was a flat disk or area?
A lot of my flights are 14 or 15 hour durations. The path of these flights are flown in what is called the "great circle route", meaning in an arc around the Earth. An arc over a disk is the shortest distance from point to point.
If the Earth was flat why would there be a need to arc from point a to point b?
 
Last edited:

TAEZZAR

LADY JUSTICE ISNT BLIND, SHES JUST AFRAID TO WATCH
Midas Member
Sr Site Supporter
Joined
Apr 2, 2010
Messages
12,081
Likes
19,586
Location
ORYGUN
#12
solarion, how far is your tongue into your cheek? Or, are you truly serious?
The curvature of the earth is obvious to a sailor, for the range of his radio is limited by his antenna height vs. distance to transmit, the higher the antenna, the farther the distance. Same for visual distance anywhere on earth.
I mean, if I launch a bottle rocket straight up while standing on a truck moving at 70mph on the highway...the rocket immediately appears to fall back as it leaves the surface, and that's only at 70mph.
This, to me, is simple. The truck continues down the road & the bottle rocket takes the course that it was set upon at the time of launch. The bottle rocket cannot/does not stay with the moving truck.
Your apple water theory is explained by "displacement". Boats float because of "displacement" & rocks sink because of lack of "displacement".
The Great Lakes are fresh water & have tidal movement. I believe that a body of water must be vast before it is effected by the moon.
The ocean tides are DIRECTLY predicted by the phases of the moon, as are the Great Lakes.
I did not address all of your concerns, but I hope I made my point. The earth is round !
So, now, I ask you, with tongue firmly planted in cheek, Why didn't Lief Erikson, Columbus, Cortez, Balboa or the ships of today, fall off the edge of the earth while circumnavigating the earth ??? Or did they sail upside down for half of their journey ? LOL
 

andial

use default title
Midas Member
Site Supporter ++
Joined
Apr 1, 2010
Messages
10,479
Likes
10,753
#13
If the Earth is spinning that fast then how come I can launch a rocket straight up? Shouldn't it appear to fall backwards after it leaves the Earth's surface? I mean, if I launch a bottle rocket straight up while standing on a truck moving at 70mph on the highway...the rocket immediately appears to fall back as it leaves the surface, and that's only at 70mph.

What holds the water to the surface of the Earth while the planet is allegedly spinning at 1040mph? Gravity? ...seriously? Gravity is so weak it cannot even stop a helium filled balloon from rising. How in the hell does gravity stop trillions of gallons of water from spinning off a sphere that's supposedly rotating at 1040mph? Does gravity even exist or is it just density we're perceiving? In Newton's famous apple tree experiment, sure the apple falls through air, because it's more dense than air, but apples float on water. How come? Why doesn't gravity just pull the apple under water if it's such a powerful force? The apple is less dense than water...that's why...gravity doesn't mean crap in that experiment, only density.
solar, don't know if this helps but will use the "paint can theory" that Zed spoke of.
When you mix a can of paint with a stick you will notice the swirling action will bring the mass inward not outward consider the atmosphere paint. So everything is moving together (planet and atmosphere) in an inward fashion not outwards. Hey I got this from me pal Zed so don't rag on the messenger please.
 

GOLDBRIX

God,Donald Trump,most in GIM2 I Trust. OTHERS-meh
Platinum Bling
Site Supporter ++
Joined
Apr 4, 2010
Messages
6,536
Likes
6,734
#14
solarion, how far is your tongue into your cheek? Or, are you truly serious?
The curvature of the earth is obvious to a sailor, for the range of his radio is limited by his antenna height vs. distance to transmit, the higher the antenna, the farther the distance. Same for visual distance anywhere on earth.

This, to me, is simple. The truck continues down the road & the bottle rocket takes the course that it was set upon at the time of launch. The bottle rocket cannot/does not stay with the moving truck.
Your apple water theory is explained by "displacement". Boats float because of "displacement" & rocks sink because of lack of "displacement".
The Great Lakes are fresh water & have tidal movement. I believe that a body of water must be vast before it is effected by the moon.
The ocean tides are DIRECTLY predicted by the phases of the moon, as are the Great Lakes.
I did not address all of your concerns, but I hope I made my point. The earth is round !
So, now, I ask you, with tongue firmly planted in cheek, Why didn't Lief Erikson, Columbus, Cortez, Balboa or the ships of today, fall off the edge of the earth while circumnavigating the earth ??? Or did they sail upside down for half of their journey ? LOL
Along this line of Radio Signals lets look at FM. The FM signal is straight and strong. FM signals are only good on the EARTH surface for about 75 miles.
WHY ? The curvature of the Earth. The signal keeps going straight while the Earth's curved surface slowly falls away and out of the signal.

FM waves have bounced off of planets and have been picked up years / decades later (Unintentionally) after the broadcast. Early Radio shows have been heard on radio telescopes.

If EARTH was flat any FM station could be heard all over this planet N.S/E/&/W.
But for some reason (curvature) they can NOT.

I guess taking PE 101 and Intro to basketweaving does not address critical thinking when you are headed to the NBA.
 

solarion

Gold Member
Gold Chaser
Site Supporter ++
Joined
Nov 25, 2013
Messages
5,050
Likes
7,613
#15
As I said, I do not pretend to know the shape of the planet I live upon. Perhaps it is a pretty blue sphere as NASA claims, but I doubt it. It could have some curvature without being a sphere...I've no idea, but the notion that the Earth is a near perfect blue sphere rotating at over 1,000 mph seems like total nonsense based on what one can observe with their own eyes.

This, to me, is simple. The truck continues down the road & the bottle rocket takes the course that it was set upon at the time of launch. The bottle rocket cannot/does not stay with the moving truck.
Agree, and since the bottle rocket is now separated from the truck it will no longer share the truck's forward momentum and falls behind. Why doesn't this same effect occur when one launches fireworks into the atmosphere from the Earth's surface? How about a space shuttle launch? Ever been in a plane at altitude looking down at smoke plumes rising from industries? The only discernible effect upon rising smoke is from wind...not the alleged rotational velocity of the planet. Why? Is the atmosphere supposedly rotating at the same velocity as the planet? If so, what mechanism accomplishes this incredible feat?
So, now, I ask you, with tongue firmly planted in cheek, Why didn't Lief Erikson, Columbus, Cortez, Balboa or the ships of today, fall off the edge of the earth while circumnavigating the earth ??? Or did they sail upside down for half of their journey ? LOL
I've no idea, I wasn't there. Heck we still teach kids that Columbus "discovered" America, even though he thought he was in India and called the PEOPLE he encountered "Indians" which we still call them to this very day. I've had to unlearn nearly everything I've ever been taught because it's all BS. I see no reason not to re-examine what I think I know about the planet I live upon. When I do, the observable effects I can witness with my own senses are not consistent with the notion that Earth is a spinning sphere.
solar, don't know if this helps but will use the "paint can theory" that Zed spoke of.
When you mix a can of paint with a stick you will notice the swirling action will bring the mass inward not outward consider the atmosphere paint. So everything is moving together (planet and atmosphere) in an inward fashion not outwards. Hey I got this from me pal Zed so don't rag on the messenger please.
Doesn't sound right. If I soak down a tennis ball and throw it with spin...the water will fly outward in every direction. The same effect can be observed when you swing a bucket of water in a complete circle. Centrifugal force easily overcomes the weak forces of gravity...if gravity even exists. Trying to stick water to a rapidly spinning sphere is difficult...yet the weak forces of gravity allegedly accomplish this.
 
Last edited:

TAEZZAR

LADY JUSTICE ISNT BLIND, SHES JUST AFRAID TO WATCH
Midas Member
Sr Site Supporter
Joined
Apr 2, 2010
Messages
12,081
Likes
19,586
Location
ORYGUN
#16
Agree, and since the bottle rocket is now separated from the truck it will no longer share the truck's forward momentum and falls behind. Why doesn't this same effect occur when one launches fireworks into the atmosphere from the Earth's surface? How about a space shuttle launch? Ever been in a plane at altitude looking down at smoke plumes rising from industries? The only effect upon rising smoke is from wind...not the alleged rotational velocity of the planet. Why?
The atmosphere is in synchronous rotation with the earth, therefore everything moves at the same rate. Even your little bottle rocket is travelling right along with the truck, it's just that the truck is travelling faster on the surface & therefore out runs the rocket.
You are confusing synchronous rotation with vehicular velocity, be it on the surface or in the air, these velocities are independent of earth's rotational velocity. They are, however contained within the earth's velocity.
 

TAEZZAR

LADY JUSTICE ISNT BLIND, SHES JUST AFRAID TO WATCH
Midas Member
Sr Site Supporter
Joined
Apr 2, 2010
Messages
12,081
Likes
19,586
Location
ORYGUN
#17
As I said, I do not pretend to know the shape of the planet I live upon. Perhaps it is a pretty blue sphere as NASA claims, but I doubt it. It could have some curvature without being a sphere...I've no idea, but the notion that the Earth is a near perfect blue sphere rotating at over 1,000 mph seems like total nonsense based on what one can observe with their own eyes.


Agree, and since the bottle rocket is now separated from the truck it will no longer share the truck's forward momentum and falls behind. Why doesn't this same effect occur when one launches fireworks into the atmosphere from the Earth's surface? How about a space shuttle launch? Ever been in a plane at altitude looking down at smoke plumes rising from industries? The only discernible effect upon rising smoke is from wind...not the alleged rotational velocity of the planet. Why? Is the atmosphere supposedly rotating at the same velocity as the planet? If so, what mechanism accomplishes this incredible feat?

Doesn't sound right. If I soak down a tennis ball and throw it with spin...the water will fly outward in every direction. The same effect can be observed when you swing a bucket of water in a complete circle. Centrifugal force easily overcomes the weak forces of gravity...if gravity even exists. Trying to stick water to a rapidly spinning sphere is difficult...yet the weak forces of gravity allegedly accomplish this.
If gravity did not exist you would "fall apart", gravity puts approx. 15 lbs./sq. inch pressure on your body to hold you & everything else in one piece.
 

solarion

Gold Member
Gold Chaser
Site Supporter ++
Joined
Nov 25, 2013
Messages
5,050
Likes
7,613
#18
The atmosphere is in synchronous rotation with the earth, therefore everything moves at the same rate. Even your little bottle rocket is travelling right along with the truck, it's just that the truck is travelling faster on the surface & therefore out runs the rocket.
You are confusing synchronous rotation with vehicular velocity, be it on the surface or in the air, these velocities are independent of earth's rotational velocity. They are, however contained within the earth's velocity.
So the Earth is spinning at 1040mph due to it's energetic nickel/iron core and it's just taking along with it a 300 mile thick layer of air comprised mostly of nitrogen? How the heck does that work? ...in your opinion? I could try to replicate that action in a lab, but I suspect we both know it would not work out. If I spin a sphere at 1040mph the air around it will heat a bit and some air would be displaced, but that effect would only occur very near the surface of the sphere and even the air in contact with the surface wouldn't spin at anywhere near the velocity that the sphere was spinning.
If gravity did not exist you would "fall apart", gravity puts approx. 15 lbs./sq. inch pressure on your body to hold you & everything else in one piece.
You're describing air pressure, not gravitational forces. Air is light, but a 300 mile thick atmosphere has some mass. That mass is what creates air pressure...imo, not gravity. If gravity actually exists I mean.

Thank you sir, for addressing my concerns btw. I too accepted ball Earth theory for decades without much thought, but it really does seem to be as flimsy as the nonsense Al Einstein peddled with his silly theories.
 
Last edited:

TAEZZAR

LADY JUSTICE ISNT BLIND, SHES JUST AFRAID TO WATCH
Midas Member
Sr Site Supporter
Joined
Apr 2, 2010
Messages
12,081
Likes
19,586
Location
ORYGUN
#19
mass is what creates air pressure...imo, not gravity. If gravity actually exists I mean.
Gravity is what pulls on mass. Without gravity, our world would spin apart.

We are being lied to, in many ways, but I think the science here, is not one of the lies.
 

solarion

Gold Member
Gold Chaser
Site Supporter ++
Joined
Nov 25, 2013
Messages
5,050
Likes
7,613
#21
Gravity is what pulls on mass. Without gravity, our world would spin apart.
Kinda what I'm saying though. Gravity, if it exists, is a ridiculously weak(and potentially selective) force. Gravity cannot stop a finch from rising from the ground. Gravity cannot stop a helium or hydrogen filled blimp from rising...even though the good year blimp weighs close to 13,000 pounds. Despite the demonstrable wimpiness of gravity it is really all that's keeping the trillions of gallons of water stuck to the Earth's surface while spinning at 1k mph AND being tugged on by the moon's alleged gravity? That doesn't even pass basic smell tests when you think about it.
If the earth were flat, wouldn't the time of day and night be the same for everyone on the planet?
Most alternatives to ball Earth theory I've seen have a far closer sun & moon traveling in concentric circles above the surface of the Earth. I don't know that I necessarily buy flat Earth theory either, but I cannot ignore all the problems with ball Earth theory.
 
Last edited:

TAEZZAR

LADY JUSTICE ISNT BLIND, SHES JUST AFRAID TO WATCH
Midas Member
Sr Site Supporter
Joined
Apr 2, 2010
Messages
12,081
Likes
19,586
Location
ORYGUN
#22
Kinda what I'm saying though. Gravity, if it exists, is a ridiculously weak(and potentially selective) force. Gravity cannot stop a finch from rising from the ground. Gravity cannot stop a helium or hydrogen filled blimp from rising...even though the good year blimp weighs close to 13,000 pounds. Despite the demonstrable wimpiness of gravity it is really all that's keeping the trillions of gallons of water stuck to the Earth's surface while spinning at 1k mph AND being tugged on by the moon's alleged gravity? That doesn't even pass basic smell tests when you think about it.
Nope. Gravity, in a vacuum, is a "non-discriminatory" force. A feather & a lead ball fall equally in a vacuum, back to that "displacement" stuff I spoke of. !!
At 15lbs/sq. inch, times the millions of sq. miles (Trillions of Trillions of sq. inches), that is a lot of force holding the ocean in place, as liquid as it is.
I think you need to do a little more studying, you are not thinking your thoughts all the way through.
 
Last edited:

GOLDBRIX

God,Donald Trump,most in GIM2 I Trust. OTHERS-meh
Platinum Bling
Site Supporter ++
Joined
Apr 4, 2010
Messages
6,536
Likes
6,734
#23
...That doesn't even pass basic smell tests when you think about it.
Most alternatives to ball Earth theory I've seen have a far closer sun & moon traveling in concentric circles above the surface of the Earth. I don't know that I necessarily buy flat Earth theory either, but I cannot ignore all the problems with ball Earth theory.
Smell Test THINKING about it ? WTF

If the EARTH WAS flat we would have no Night and Day and NO SEASONS. The Sun would blot out the Moon most of the time. AND why would the times when you can see a faint moon does the moon look tilted ? ANSWER - The Moon is not tilted the EARTH is. Between 22 and 24 Degrees.

YOU mentions the Space Shuttle. I mention the big rockets used to launch it in space.
The Rockets launch straight up. The spin of the Earth is what causes the arch to appear in the exhaust fumes. A No spinning Earth those rockets would go straight up in a straight line.

As gravity goes, there are photos of some comets and asteroids that are traveling faster than Earth yet have "Companions" orbiting the main body as they pass through our solar system.

If Einstien was WRONG about everything how did the Atomic Bomb become reality ?
 

tom baxter

back from 2004
Joined
Oct 21, 2016
Messages
698
Likes
645
Location
Australia
#24
Instead of simply ridiculing him, can anyone tell me how Irving is wrong?...


Serious questions. Can anyone answer these? Cuz they're bugging me.
I will assume you are not trolling and give you the only answer that will satisfy your concerns.
You need to educate yourself in physics, chemistry, astronomy. I'm not talking about watching Youtube vids either, you need to get back to basic books. Once you have a good understanding of basic science the answers to the questions you ask will be self evident. Ignorance is the main reason people flock to things like flat earth theory.

Nearly everyone once believed the earth was flat because the church told them it was and they were ignorant. But every now and then an educated person would point to the simple facts and say, no, it's round. They were usually burnt at the stake.
 

tom baxter

back from 2004
Joined
Oct 21, 2016
Messages
698
Likes
645
Location
Australia
#25
Geee, they must be quite unique to last forever !!
Is he a younger brother? I have a younger brother that thinks very different too.
No he's an older brother but he's just watched too much television and any science displayed there he believes verbatim. The fact is all these new developments are skeptical once you get past the corporate promotion blurb. Mars colony? AI? the list is endless and behind each new "Almost breakthrough" is a bunch of snake oil salesmen driving Maserati's. As I have said before, I love science fiction, but I don't confuse it with reality.
 

Joe King

Gold Member
Gold Chaser
Site Supporter
Joined
Mar 31, 2010
Messages
5,933
Likes
5,915
Location
Instant Gratification Land
#26
Why doesn't this same effect occur when one launches fireworks into the atmosphere from the Earth's surface? How about a space shuttle launch?
Because all those things share the angular momentum as the Earth at the location in question. Ie: The Earths angular momentum varies depending on ones location relative to latitude. Which is why big rockets launch from as far South as possible. The closer you are to the Equator, the faster you are moving East.


the observable effects I can witness with my own senses are not consistent with the notion that Earth is a spinning sphere.
That's because you are spinning with it and there is no other large mass nearby to exert any other discernible force upon your body.


If I soak down a tennis ball and throw it with spin...the water will fly outward in every direction.
The drops of water fly off at a tangent relative to its motion at the point it loses contact with the surface. Ie: the water does not fly off in "every direction" nor does it fly off in a direction directly from the center of the ball, despite it appearing to do so.


Isn't really a force at all.


Trying to stick water to a rapidly spinning sphere is difficult...yet the weak forces of gravity allegedly accomplish this.
What you are describing is a thing called buoyancy. The atmosphere behaves as a liquid and therefor follows the laws of fluid dynamics. In any solution, you should always expect heavier/denser liquids at the bottom and lighter liquids at the top of any solution. That is of course if you and that solution are under the effects of a planets gravity. If it weren't, it would just spread out in all directions.


Even your little bottle rocket is travelling right along with the truck, it's just that the truck is travelling faster on the surface & therefore out runs the rocket.
Maybe I'm looking at this wrong, but I would think that it is the resistance of the air that robs the tiny little bottle rocket of the trucks added forward momentum. If the same experiment were to be conducted in a vacuum, wouldn't the rocket retain the added momentum of the truck? I know that the Earths angular momentum aids in launching big rockets. That's one of the main reasons why Cape Canaveral is where it is.


Air is light, but a 300 mile thick atmosphere has some mass. That mass is what creates air pressure...
Only because it's being pulled down by gravity. If there were no gravity, it would just keep expanding outward, getting thinner and thinner in it's quest for equilibrium.


Gravity, if it exists, is a ridiculously weak(and potentially selective) force. Gravity cannot stop a finch from rising from the ground. Gravity cannot stop a helium or hydrogen filled blimp from rising...even though the good year blimp weighs close to 13,000 pounds.
Gravity is in fact one of the weak forces in nature.
...and again, you are describing buoyancy when wondering how the Good Year blimp can float. Same reason a helium balloon floats away. It's seeking a level in the fluid we call the atmosphere. It's also why clouds, potentially containing millions of pounds of water vapor, can float along as though they weigh nothing at all.
 
Last edited:

EricTheCat

Gold Member
Gold Chaser
Sr Site Supporter
Joined
Apr 2, 2010
Messages
651
Likes
1,105
Location
Southern MN
#27
Just in case anyone is looking for more evidence that the Earth is round and spinning, here are a few things I have done that you can try for yourself:
1) Watch a lunar eclipse and notice Earth's shadow is round. Watch several and you always have that same round shadow moving across the moon and it always coincides with when the moon is opposite [(edit) the Sun as seen from] the Earth and we know it's Earths' shadow because conditions of Earth's atmosphere affect the color of the shadow.
2) Follow the motions of the stars, see Earth is spinning
3) Set up a radio meteor detection system to automatically count meteor activity and notice how around 6am local time you have the highest rate of meteor activity and at 6pm local time you have the lowest rate of meteor activity because at 6am when you look strait up you are looking in the direction Earth is moving. This might sound elaborate but I have done it and currently have a system running and automatically submitting counts to the Radio Meteor Observers organization.

If you study physics, I mean really study to the point that you understand the math and geometry involved you will start to realize how well the math and geometry works out and why educated people (not brainwashed, educated) will have very little regard for any theory stating the Earth is not what it is purported to be. Yes governments lie but not everything is a lie.

Here is a graphic that I made a while back that might help explain #3, it also shows how meteor showers occur due to Earth crossing through areas with more debris
Chart-MeteorRatesReasons.png


As a side note, if someone told me 10 years ago that in 10 years I would be trying to convince someone the Earth was not flat I would fully have expected to be having that conversation among a bunch of ruins in some post-apocalyptic scenario speaking with someone who was too small of a child when it all went down to ever have been taught science and math.
 
Last edited:

TAEZZAR

LADY JUSTICE ISNT BLIND, SHES JUST AFRAID TO WATCH
Midas Member
Sr Site Supporter
Joined
Apr 2, 2010
Messages
12,081
Likes
19,586
Location
ORYGUN
#28
Maybe I'm looking at this wrong, but I would think that it is the resistance of the air that robs the tiny little bottle rocket of the trucks added forward momentum. If the same experiment were to be conducted in a vacuum, wouldn't the rocket retain the added momentum of the truck? I know that the Earths angular momentum aids in launching big rockets. That's one of the main reasons why Cape Canaveral is where it is.
In theory, you are correct. I wasn't going to go there.
But to complete the thought, the truck is moving against the resistance of the atmosphere, with the driving wheels maintaining the forward velocity. The little bottle rocket is being robbed of it's forward momentum by atmospheric resistance & is losing it's relative position with the truck because it's driving force is only upward & nothing in the direction of the truck.
 

skychief

enthusiastic stacker
Silver Miner
Joined
Sep 25, 2014
Messages
685
Likes
807
Location
California Coast
#30
An easy excercise to prove conclusively that the earth is NOT flat is to grab some good quality 50x binoculars and head down to the beach near a major shipping port.

With your naked eyes spot a container ship on or near the horizon. It should be about 6 or 7 miles away. Of course at that distance, to the naked eye, it will be a speck.

Grab your binoculars and observe the ship. You can clearly see the containers and the bridge/superstructure of the ship, but the hull of the ship is not visible. Because at this distance, 18 feet of the ships hull is obscured by curvature of the Earth. The farther away the ship is, the more of the hull will be obscured.

Did you remember to bring your 18-foot ladder? Great. Climb the ladder and observe the same ship through your binoculars. The hull is now visible! Magic? Nah.. Geometry and Calculus.
 

the_shootist

Midas Member
Midas Member
Sr Site Supporter
Joined
May 31, 2015
Messages
20,231
Likes
21,566
#31
Why do I care about the beliefs of an African Handball player? The Earth is the Earth. I don't care if its shaped like Hillary's asshole, as long as it stays stable and firmly beneath my feet I'm good.
 

tom baxter

back from 2004
Joined
Oct 21, 2016
Messages
698
Likes
645
Location
Australia
#32
You guys that watch TV need to check your minds.

Turn that crap off.
They really do, but it's so ubiquitous, so "there from the day I was born" it takes a big psychological leap to break the habit. Also if they are married to a watcher, and everyone is a watcher, it's impossible to get the poxy thing out of the house.

I did it drunk one night in my late teens, dragged (literally) the IDIOT box out side and dumped it on the footpath. I did it because after coming back from a trip to the mines where we never watched it I was confronted with more ads then I could remember. Looking back I think I was just lucky, just one of those things. I have never owned one since and frankly never missed it either. Heroin is what it's been compared to by some.
 

solarion

Gold Member
Gold Chaser
Site Supporter ++
Joined
Nov 25, 2013
Messages
5,050
Likes
7,613
#33
yeah yeah guys. I had my head filled with the same crap you did when I was young. I "know" how the laws of physics work because like all of you I was told what to think. I "know" that space is a vacuum because I was taught to "know" that. Now I hear some jaggov with a bunch of letters behind his name telling me that space is not a vacuum and it's filled with dark matter which is ripping the universe apart. What the actual fuq.

I recall some actual physics results when I was a kid, things I could verify with my own senses, collision tests and the like, but at some point that stuff fell by the wayside and physics became a bunch of silly mathemagician's "proofs" instead of independently verifiable data. Seems every day now there's some other scientific "fact" that I "know" to be true that turns out to not be true.

I also "know" that Einstein claimed the speed of light was a universal constant. Is it? Well Al wrote some equations that say so, but is that the same as "knowing"? I don't think it is...and there are more than a few scientists out there that claim Einstein may well have been wrong. Tesla had some not awesome things to say about Einstein's theory of relativity for instance. So what if Einstein was wrong? All that we have been taught to "know" is built like a house of cards upon Einstein's math that we cannot verify with our own senses.

To my mind science is turning into a religion of sorts with one PHDummy after another concocting fuzzier and fuzzier maths to justify their unverifiable "conclusions". Listening to Michio Kaku, for instance, wax ridiculous about unverifiable string theory for more than 10mins makes my ears bleed. These guys aren't scientists...they're fuzzy mathemagicians and your first hint that they may be full of doody should be the verifiable fact that they spent thousands upon thousands of "dollars" to be indoctrinated at a skool.

I too thought I "knew" the Earth was a beautiful round sphere spinning on its axis and hurtling through space. People that claimed otherwise were just crackpots. Now that I've come to realize that nearly everything I thought I "knew" is bullshit crammed into my head during my public skool indoctrination, everything is on the table. I'm just going to go ahead and get comfortable with the idea that I "know" next to nothing. YMMV, but I suggest that before you call someone a dimwit for backing an unusual theory you be certain you're not just regurgitating the dog vomit you too were taught to "know" in skool.
 

Joe King

Gold Member
Gold Chaser
Site Supporter
Joined
Mar 31, 2010
Messages
5,933
Likes
5,915
Location
Instant Gratification Land
#34
Listening to Michio Kaku, for instance, wax ridiculous about unverifiable string theory for more than 10mins makes my ears bleed. These guys aren't scientists...they're fuzzy mathemagicians
You are confusing two separate fields. Ie: Michio Kaku is what's known as a theoretical physicist. What you decry are but the tools of the trade.

Theoretical physicist.PNG
 

EricTheCat

Gold Member
Gold Chaser
Sr Site Supporter
Joined
Apr 2, 2010
Messages
651
Likes
1,105
Location
Southern MN
#35
yeah yeah guys. I had my head filled with the same crap you did when I was young. I "know" how the laws of physics work because like all of you I was told what to think. I "know" that space is a vacuum because I was taught to "know" that. Now I hear some jaggov with a bunch of letters behind his name telling me that space is not a vacuum and it's filled with dark matter which is ripping the universe apart. What the actual fuq.

I recall some actual physics results when I was a kid, things I could verify with my own senses, collision tests and the like, but at some point that stuff fell by the wayside and physics became a bunch of silly mathemagician's "proofs" instead of independently verifiable data. Seems every day now there's some other scientific "fact" that I "know" to be true that turns out to not be true.

I also "know" that Einstein claimed the speed of light was a universal constant. Is it? Well Al wrote some equations that say so, but is that the same as "knowing"? I don't think it is...and there are more than a few scientists out there that claim Einstein may well have been wrong. Tesla had some not awesome things to say about Einstein's theory of relativity for instance. So what if Einstein was wrong? All that we have been taught to "know" is built like a house of cards upon Einstein's math that we cannot verify with our own senses.

To my mind science is turning into a religion of sorts with one PHDummy after another concocting fuzzier and fuzzier maths to justify their unverifiable "conclusions". Listening to Michio Kaku, for instance, wax ridiculous about unverifiable string theory for more than 10mins makes my ears bleed. These guys aren't scientists...they're fuzzy mathemagicians and your first hint that they may be full of doody should be the verifiable fact that they spent thousands upon thousands of "dollars" to be indoctrinated at a skool.

I too thought I "knew" the Earth was a beautiful round sphere spinning on its axis and hurtling through space. People that claimed otherwise were just crackpots. Now that I've come to realize that nearly everything I thought I "knew" is bullshit crammed into my head during my public skool indoctrination, everything is on the table. I'm just going to go ahead and get comfortable with the idea that I "know" next to nothing. YMMV, but I suggest that before you call someone a dimwit for backing an unusual theory you be certain you're not just regurgitating the dog vomit you too were taught to "know" in skool.

You think the examples I showed, examples that you can try yourself, "regurgitating the dog vomit you too were taught". Please. I don't believe for a second that you understand the math and the physics and how things work out or we would not be having this conversation, period. You can't just discount geometry and basic physics (I'm not talking about theoretical physics here, that's completely different), I'm talking about the simple stuff like Newtonian math and geometry. Not to mention we can see for our self that Jupiter is round, the moon is round, Venus is round, Saturn is round, yet for some reason you doubt the Earth is round from what I am gathering simply because you were taught it was. Can you explain the round shadow on the moon during a lunar eclipse? Can you explain why the stars take the path they do in the sky? Try some of the things I mentioned and try to explain why it would work without the Earth being round. I am not "regurgitating dog vomit" and am plenty capable of thinking for myself.
 

ABC123

Silver Member
Silver Miner
Joined
Apr 10, 2010
Messages
1,005
Likes
1,103
#36
This was proved hundreds of years ago with basic math and telescopes through "observational techniques". All while being persecuted for these observational FACTS!

Why would men of genius and intellectual superiority risk their lives if it were not true?

Your barking up the wrong tree solarion and anyone who believes otherwise is delusional.
 

TAEZZAR

LADY JUSTICE ISNT BLIND, SHES JUST AFRAID TO WATCH
Midas Member
Sr Site Supporter
Joined
Apr 2, 2010
Messages
12,081
Likes
19,586
Location
ORYGUN
#37
To my mind science is turning into a religion of sorts with one PHDummy after another concocting fuzzier and fuzzier maths to justify their unverifiable "conclusions".
YES. there is a LOT of that !!!!! Can you say "Global Warming, caused by humans?"
 

tom baxter

back from 2004
Joined
Oct 21, 2016
Messages
698
Likes
645
Location
Australia
#38
The simple fact is a lot of people writing this flat earth dribble and faces on Mars twaddle are schizophrenics, Self admitted. Why would anyone take a loon seriously is beyond me but I suspect it originates from that public health campaign of a couple of decades ago that told us people suffering mental health problems were just normal everyday disabled people, like deaf folks or folks with no legs. But you wouldn't take a deaf person's advice on stereo systems or the advice of a multiple amputee's on the best racing bike would you? So why listen to a lunatic when it comes to scientific matters.

[ This isn't a straw man either. It's just common sense ]
 

tom baxter

back from 2004
Joined
Oct 21, 2016
Messages
698
Likes
645
Location
Australia
#39
" If a schizophrenic takes three hits of acid in the forest and sees demons in the trees, and snaps, do you cut down the trees?" RollingStone.com
 

solarion

Gold Member
Gold Chaser
Site Supporter ++
Joined
Nov 25, 2013
Messages
5,050
Likes
7,613
#40
I don't believe for a second that you understand the math and the physics and how things work out or we would not be having this conversation, period.
Nice post cat. Am I supposed to give a sh1t or two what you believe? ...about what I understand? LMAO

The only ones I see lobbing bombs in this thread are ball Earth theory supporters, wonder why questioning such basic stuff gets people so riled up.