NASA Satellite stops on a dime!? WTF!!!

[DrEvil]

One last go. Can't.. Resist..

DrEvil we are have arrived where we were before. My position is things move down because of density/buoyancy. This is clearly verifiable/testable. You believe in an invisible force pulling things to the ground that cannot be seen or measured that magically only appears on a planetary scale.

It appears on all scales, it's just extremely weak on small scales. Our bodies have a gravitational field, it's just so weak that for practical purposes it's irrelevant.
But fine, let's assume that your density/buoyancy theory is correct (which it isn't). Now explain why things still fall down inside a vacuum chamber.

It should be obvious that the light of the sun wont reach something on the other side of the world ten thousand+ miles away.

No, it's not obvious at all. Why should the most powerful source of light known to man dissipate over a few thousand miles? We can bounce lasers off the moon which is 300,000 km away with no problem.

And why are parts of the earth in perpetual darkness for several months a year, and then in perpetual daylight for several more months?

[Searcher08]

I am with you SLAD. It's just I have spent my entire life arguing against scientific illiteracy. Like a moth to a flame I get attracted to pseudo science. It actually really bothers me that people carry around dumb ideas and then turn around and insult rather than actually answer or explain.

I have tried my level best to not launch into my famous "fuckity fucks". That would get none of us anywhere. So I am just needling away, keeping it as sarcastic (or "obtuse") as possible. I love ideas of any kind. You wanna be a dick, maco, go for it, but I don't want to get suspended. Because believe me if you haven't been destroyed yet by the many comments here in this thread. . . well. . .

It is tricky, because the question of who gets to put the pseudo in pseudoscience is at the messy overlap between scientific methodology and social systems.

Here is my thoughts re Flat Earth:
Most people I have seen propose it turn out to be Born Again Christians, who believe it is described in the Bible. It then becomes a religious discussion.

Otherwise, there is the question does the Flat Earth model have predictive power.
Yes.
It predicts specifically that certain non-stop long-haul flights in the far Southern Hemisphere will take much *longer* than they actually do.
Specifically
SAA flights between South Africa and Australia and
Qantas flights between Australia and Chile.

(The SAA flight is quite frequent as there are always many Saffa, Aussies and Kiwis zipping around (rugby etc) between each country.)

If a model gives a very clear prediction and that result is wrong, would you not agree that the model is an inaccurate description of reality?

This is a very clear counterexample, not subject to interpretation or intuition - it is purely about models and the underlying mathematics.

The other side of FE is people proposing ideas that go violently against mainstream thought. Just because there is a deep reaction against the idea, this doesn't entail the theory being a valid physical explanation. Looking for a single theory demolishing counterexample is more powerful than wading through loads of low grade interpretation.

You might enjoy
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paul_Feyerabend#Nature_of_scientific_method

[maco144]

One last go. Can't.. Resist..

DrEvil we are have arrived where we were before. My position is things move down because of density/buoyancy. This is clearly verifiable/testable. You believe in an invisible force pulling things to the ground that cannot be seen or measured that magically only appears on a planetary scale.

It appears on all scales, it's just extremely weak on small scales. Our bodies have a gravitational field, it's just so weak that for practical purposes it's irrelevant.
But fine, let's assume that your density/buoyancy theory is correct (which it isn't). Now explain why things still fall down inside a vacuum chamber.

It should be obvious that the light of the sun wont reach something on the other side of the world ten thousand+ miles away.

No, it's not obvious at all. Why should the most powerful source of light known to man dissipate over a few thousand miles? We can bounce lasers off the moon which is 300,000 km away with no problem.

And why are parts of the earth in perpetual darkness for several months a year, and then in perpetual daylight for several more months?

I cannot ascribe to the GR theory that massless objects exert gravity. For me that is preposterous.

I think model confusion is leading to your misunderstanding of how the Sun works. What you're stating is analogous to believing that a light bulb slightly above a pitch light should have the capacity to light up the entire thing. Youve conveniently forgotten about atmosphere as well. In your mind it shouldnt be darker on a cloudy day as well because the Sun is just so big and powerful.

Let me ask a question about your Sun model. Why should the most powerful and massive light appear to fade away at a sunset with its light retracting around it leaving part of the horizon dark? The sun blankets the Earth completely in its rays whatever side faces it due to it being 109x bigger (this is what you believe) which means that the light of a still visible sun shouldnt leave part of the sky/horizon in darkness.

A much smaller Sun explains this phenomenon completely. What is your explanation?

[maco144]

Can any of you globe believers explain to me why the Equator is the hottest part of the planet?

[82_28]

Can any of you globe believers explain to me why the Equator is the hottest part of the planet?

Hahaha! Seriously? You just asked that? I suppose along with the flood lights at the poles used, it's probably a bunch of space heaters at the equator.

[seemslikeadream]

I think it's because they watch a whole lot of Shakira videos


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DUT5rEU6pqM

[Searcher08]

Can any of you globe believers explain to me why the Equator is the hottest part of the planet?

It isnt.
The hottest place on Earth is in Iran
http://www.livescience.com/19700-hottest-place-earth.html

[maco144]

Can any of you globe believers explain to me why the Equator is the hottest part of the planet?

Hahaha! Seriously? You just asked that? I suppose along with the flood lights at the poles used, it's probably a bunch of space heaters at the equator.

I am going to point out the contradictions in your answer should you have the courage to actually try and post something scientific.

[82_28]

Damn dude, you are one literal motherfucker. I am making fun of your nonsense. So answer my question: what the fuck got you into this? How did elementary science classes and pedestrian freely available observations fail you so badly?

[Morty]

Let me ask a question about your Sun model. Why should the most powerful and massive light appear to fade away at a sunset with its light retracting around it leaving part of the horizon dark? The sun blankets the Earth completely in its rays whatever side faces it due to it being 109x bigger (this is what you believe) which means that the light of a still visible sun shouldnt leave part of the sky/horizon in darkness.
A much smaller Sun explains this phenomenon completely. What is your explanation?

That's a picture of a sunset, not a sunset. I imagine the camera had some sort of filter on it to take that shot...or else there were distinct atmospheric conditions prevailing.

To the broader "fading away and retracting light at sunset" question: Wherever sunset is occurring around the globe the sun's rays are passing through maximum atmosphere. At midday, in the globe model, the sun passes through the 10 miles of the densest atmosphere directly, from high above, but at sunset the sun's rays are traveling through not 10 miles, but hundreds of miles of dense atmosphere. This stops a significant portion of the sun's rays from arriving where a straight line of sight would indicate they should, and makes the sunlight lose its strength before it goes out of view.

[DrEvil]

One last go. Can't.. Resist..

DrEvil we are have arrived where we were before. My position is things move down because of density/buoyancy. This is clearly verifiable/testable. You believe in an invisible force pulling things to the ground that cannot be seen or measured that magically only appears on a planetary scale.

It appears on all scales, it's just extremely weak on small scales. Our bodies have a gravitational field, it's just so weak that for practical purposes it's irrelevant.
But fine, let's assume that your density/buoyancy theory is correct (which it isn't). Now explain why things still fall down inside a vacuum chamber.

It should be obvious that the light of the sun wont reach something on the other side of the world ten thousand+ miles away.

No, it's not obvious at all. Why should the most powerful source of light known to man dissipate over a few thousand miles? We can bounce lasers off the moon which is 300,000 km away with no problem.

And why are parts of the earth in perpetual darkness for several months a year, and then in perpetual daylight for several more months?

I cannot ascribe to the GR theory that massless objects exert gravity. For me that is preposterous.

Wait, we don't have mass now? I would really like to hear your explanation for that.

I think model confusion is leading to your misunderstanding of how the Sun works. What you're stating is analogous to believing that a light bulb slightly above a pitch light should have the capacity to light up the entire thing. Youve conveniently forgotten about atmosphere as well. In your mind it shouldnt be darker on a cloudy day as well because the Sun is just so big and powerful.

Let me ask a question about your Sun model. Why should the most powerful and massive light appear to fade away at a sunset with its light retracting around it leaving part of the horizon dark? The sun blankets the Earth completely in its rays whatever side faces it due to it being 109x bigger (this is what you believe) which means that the light of a still visible sun shouldnt leave part of the sky/horizon in darkness.
A much smaller Sun explains this phenomenon completely. What is your explanation?

Of course it gets darker with clouds in the way. It still doesn't explain why parts of the earth are pitch black at night. And no, a light bulb can't light up an entire pitch, but you can definitely see the damn thing even if you're at the opposite end of the pitch. Why can't we see the sun at all at night? At the very least there should be a slightly brighter spot somewhere in the sky.

You didn't answer my other questions: Why does stuff fall down in a vacuum chamber and why are parts of the earth perpetually dark or light depending on the season, and what's the point of it all.
Who is behind the hoax and why? What's in it for them? And if it's such a big deal, why haven't you had an accident yet? Why are the people behind the biggest hoax in human history letting you lay it all out here for anyone to see without consequence?

[82_28]

You're not going to be a fan of this link, maco. Sorry to again be the bearer of bad news.

http://www.rawstory.com/2016/12/10-incr ... -new-book/

The hoax is so vast that there are so many idiots out there that "buy" the truth of nature. I would say the ratio of flat Earthers who know what's going on is 1:100,000,000 of those who have been fooled. And that is being kind.

[Belligerent Savant]

,
Interesting how one can create an alternate explanation with metrics to (mostly) fit with their proposed model:



And here, an inability to provide specific "proofs" Re: sunrise/sunset problems inherent with the FE model:

https://www.theflatearthsociety.org/for ... ic=53629.0

[seemslikeadream]

I think someone needs a nap


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AF_nfazQaek

[maco144]

Wait, we don't have mass now? I would really like to hear your explanation for that.

Of course it gets darker with clouds in the way. It still doesn't explain why parts of the earth are pitch black at night. And no, a light bulb can't light up an entire pitch, but you can definitely see the damn thing even if you're at the opposite end of the pitch. Why can't we see the sun at all at night? At the very least there should be a slightly brighter spot somewhere in the sky.

You didn't answer my other questions: Why does stuff fall down in a vacuum chamber and why are parts of the earth perpetually dark or light depending on the season, and what's the point of it all.
Who is behind the hoax and why? What's in it for them? And if it's such a big deal, why haven't you had an accident yet? Why are the people behind the biggest hoax in human history letting you lay it all out here for anyone to see without consequence?

We have mass. My point is that if you accept gravity theory where tiny things have gravity you must also believe massless things have gravity. You are aware of that right?

I have answered these questions you repeatedly ask in this thread already. My answers you deem to be unacceptable so you continue to ask answered questions. For the sake of my own time and enjoyment I'm not again answering what has been answered.

Why should a mite on a blade of grass on the other side of the pitch be able to see the light? Have you forgotten perspective?