Tres Juicy Posted December 19, 2011 Posted December 19, 2011 (edited) still watch occasionally to see if any of you have wised up yet.... Wow, this from someone who asserts that we live inside a giant ball? How would a system like that even work? Terrible idea for a universe... Edit: I've just read through the stuff on the website, just another creationist site full of mental "evidence" that everything observable is wrong Edited December 19, 2011 by Tres Juicy
John Cuthber Posted December 19, 2011 Posted December 19, 2011 still watch occasionally to see if any of you have wised up yet.... How will you tell? I mean, what criteria will you use to make the decision? Will you think that I have "wised up" if I decide to ignore , for example, the fact that my sat-nav works, and accept your model of the universe, even though it's not mechanically stable? If so, you need to check out the meaning of the word. For example from http://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/wise "Showing good judgement or the benefit of experience." My experience tells me the exact opposite of what you are saying so, if I'm to be wise I have to ignore you. Of course there's the other meaning "Disrespectful" By that definition I think you should agree that we are already a bunch of "Wise guys".
Tres Juicy Posted December 19, 2011 Posted December 19, 2011 Just for once it would be nice if one of these threads were just put out there to test the posters abillty to debate something that is clearly wrong and were done in good humor. I enjoy those from either side of the argument. Instead of just stating "this is how it is, you people are idiots" and then leaving... 2
Phi for All Posted December 19, 2011 Posted December 19, 2011 Nothing but threats and personal attacks, no answers, no explanations, no evidence. Is this how knowledge is gained? Really?! It's like the ghost of Kim Jong-Il has come back to haunt us. "Accept my outrageous claims and ask no questions, you unwise tardos!"
Tres Juicy Posted December 19, 2011 Posted December 19, 2011 Nothing but threats and personal attacks, no answers, no explanations, no evidence. Is this how knowledge is gained? Really?! It's like the ghost of Kim Jong-Il has come back to haunt us. "Accept my outrageous claims and ask no questions, you unwise tardos!" You've got to love the phrase "unwise tardo's" Thats going into my personal vernacular straight away!
Steve Christopher Posted December 19, 2011 Author Posted December 19, 2011 How do you explain sunrise and sunset? Someone is getting it! @chan00chap that's exactly right! TheFoxStevie 1 hour ago its true, if the moon was really a sphere during a full moon the center would be brighter than the edges but its not, its equally bright all around, which makes no sense, http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1ztoOqwCeqU Oh look, a page that I put in the op... http://www.missteribabylonestar.com/posthypnoticepiphany.html
Tres Juicy Posted December 19, 2011 Posted December 19, 2011 Someone is getting it! @chan00chap that's exactly right! TheFoxStevie 1 hour ago its true, if the moon was really a sphere during a full moon the center would be brighter than the edges but its not, its equally bright all around, which makes no sense, http://www.youtube.c...h?v=1ztoOqwCeqU Oh look, a page that I put in the op... http://www.missterib...icepiphany.html Ahhh Welcome back!! Please advise the unwise tardo's that post here as to how such a system could work I have some immediate problems with it, I will address the main ones.... 1) Wouldn't we see the curvature of the earth in the distance going up into the sky? 2) How does gravity work if you're inside a ball? Is it like a fairground ride that spins to "stick" you to the wall? 3) How big would the ball have to be so that when I look up through a powerful telescope I see space instead of the other side of the interior wall of the ball? 4) How does my sat nav work???? Since everything it's based on is wrong it should fail horribly 5) Since the website that you're linking to is a creationist site, why would a god create such a weird system? surely being on the outside of a ball is easier all round? (no pun) 6) Do you really believe this? Really? If so please explain why, in your view, this explains the obsevable universe better than current empirical evidence These are just a few, but its a good start
Phi for All Posted December 19, 2011 Posted December 19, 2011 4) How does my sat nav work???? Since everything it's based on is wrong it should fail horribly How does any satellite work? They're all built to orbit at certain distances, the lowest of which goes out to 1240 miles. Telecommunications, weather tracking, television, space telescopes, these all seem to support the Orbiting a Round Earth hypothesis. If not, how are companies and governments spending billions of dollars and accomplishing these technological feats with equipment designed incorrectly?
Steve Christopher Posted December 19, 2011 Author Posted December 19, 2011 (edited) 1) Wouldn't we see the curvature of the earth in the distance going up into the sky? No. Your eye stays level with the horizon. 2) How does gravity work if you're inside a ball? Is it like a fairground ride that spins to "stick" you to the wall? Force is irrelevant in relation to their being a force that holds you down to the ground, you can call it gravity, aether, higgs field, whatevah. 3) How big would the ball have to be so that when I look up through a powerful telescope I see space instead of the other side of the interior wall of the ball? Light travels on a curve, plus the wall of the central celestial sphere would block your vision of the other side of the Earth wall. 4) How does my sat nav work???? Since everything it's based on is wrong it should fail horribly All calculations are based on a stationary earth with sats orbiting inside, open any space app to see. 5) Since the website that you're linking to is a creationist site, why would a god create such a weird system? surely being on the outside of a ball is easier all round? (no pun) I am God, I like games. 6) Do you really believe this? Really? If so please explain why, in your view, this explains the obsevable universe better than current empirical evidence Give you a couple days of sincere, honestly, empirical study, and get back to me. How does any satellite work? They're all built to orbit at certain distances, the lowest of which goes out to 1240 miles. Telecommunications, weather tracking, television, space telescopes, these all seem to support the Orbiting a Round Earth hypothesis. If not, how are companies and governments spending billions of dollars and accomplishing these technological feats with equipment designed incorrectly? Don't believe the numbers, they lie. Money makes the world go round, lol. Why would they want to tell you the truth and loose all that wealth. Keep you stupid so they can make money. NASA is a money making machine. Find out how many corporations are in bed with NASA. k? K. Edited December 19, 2011 by Steve Christopher
Tres Juicy Posted December 19, 2011 Posted December 19, 2011 How does any satellite work? They're all built to orbit at certain distances, the lowest of which goes out to 1240 miles. Telecommunications, weather tracking, television, space telescopes, these all seem to support the Orbiting a Round Earth hypothesis. If not, how are companies and governments spending billions of dollars and accomplishing these technological feats with equipment designed incorrectly? Especially if there is a glass ceiling at 70 miles Plus, how do explain seasons? How do explain volcanic activity if we don't have a core? Not to mention the magnetic poles... What's outside the ball? How thick is the supposed wall? Could we dig our way out of the universe? If the ball is spinning to keep us stuck to the wall, the closer you got the poles the less the effect. You'd feel yourself spinning and fall down/up (if gravity works in this scenario). Man, I wish I could Wise up...
Steve Christopher Posted December 19, 2011 Author Posted December 19, 2011 (edited) Especially if there is a glass ceiling at 70 miles Plus, how do explain seasons? How do explain volcanic activity if we don't have a core? Not to mention the magnetic poles... What's outside the ball? How thick is the supposed wall? Could we dig our way out of the universe? If the ball is spinning to keep us stuck to the wall, the closer you got the poles the less the effect. You'd feel yourself spinning and fall down/up (if gravity works in this scenario). Man, I wish I could Wise up... Seasons are changed by the orbiting sun with a cylindrical orbit that oscillates between tropic zones every 6 months. What's outside? I guess that would be hell. Wanna find out? You can't dig more than about 9 miles. It doesn't spin. Sarcasm will only make your fall worse. just sayin, dummy. Edited December 19, 2011 by Steve Christopher
John Cuthber Posted December 19, 2011 Posted December 19, 2011 I guess they could fake the sat navs- after all, nobody does the maths for themselves. Can you explain the iridium flare observations?. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Satellite_flare#Iridium_satellite_flare Also there are observed variations of things like atmospheric density with altitude and changes in local gravity. These make sense if you assume we are on a (more or less) spherical planet that's spinning. They don't make sense in your scenario.
Steve Christopher Posted December 19, 2011 Author Posted December 19, 2011 I guess they could fake the sat navs- after all, nobody does the maths for themselves. Can you explain the iridium flare observations?. http://en.wikipedia....satellite_flare Also there are observed variations of things like atmospheric density with altitude and changes in local gravity. These make sense if you assume we are on a (more or less) spherical planet that's spinning. They don't make sense in your scenario. skid marks on glass. Oh boy, go do your homework, but throw away your old books. Don't waste my time or energy until you have a proper foundation for truth. Atmospheric pressure has all you need for evidence that you are in a container.
Tres Juicy Posted December 19, 2011 Posted December 19, 2011 (edited) 1) Wouldn't we see the curvature of the earth in the distance going up into the sky? No. Your eye stays level with the horizon. What does this mean? its a bit vague... 2) How does gravity work if you're inside a ball? Is it like a fairground ride that spins to "stick" you to the wall? Force is irrelevant in relation to their being a force that holds you down to the ground, you can call it gravity, aether, higgs field, whatevah. Lets call it gravity for the sake of tradition, So you're saying "don't ask how it works, just accept that it does"? Not going to cut it on a science forum pal. 3) How big would the ball have to be so that when I look up through a powerful telescope I see space instead of the other side of the interior wall of the ball? Light travels on a curve, plus the wall of the central celestial sphere would block your vision of the other side of the Earth wall. Similar argument to that of the "flat earthers", it falls down when you actually do some studies on light and its properties 4) How does my sat nav work???? Since everything it's based on is wrong it should fail horribly All calculations are based on a stationary earth with sats orbiting inside, open any space app to see. You're saying that they design sat navs based on your model? And they tell us they do it a different way? Why would they do that? What possible benefit is there? 5) Since the website that you're linking to is a creationist site, why would a god create such a weird system? surely being on the outside of a ball is easier all round? (no pun) I am God, I like games. This is just a cop out. Think of a better answer. 6) Do you really believe this? Really? If so please explain why, in your view, this explains the obsevable universe better than current empirical evidence Give you a couple days of sincere, honestly, empirical study, and get back to me. I'll give you the past 31 years of evidence to the contrary thanks Don't believe the numbers, they lie. What would be the reason to lie about the shape of the earth? Pointless.... Money makes the world go round, lol. This is the first sensible thing you've posted, however if you could explain how deceiving people about the shape of the earth is profitable that would be helpful.... Why would they want to tell you the truth and loose all that wealth. How can anyone make money based on the shape of the earth?? Think about it. Keep you stupid so they can make money. What do you think the church does? I could say the same thing about people with outrageous beliefs, how much of your time and money have you wasted on this? NASA is a money making machine. Find out how many corporations are in bed with NASA. Didn't Nasa just scrap a whole load of projects and are relying on other countries to take their kit into space? k? K. Edited December 19, 2011 by Tres Juicy
swansont Posted December 19, 2011 Posted December 19, 2011 wise up, dude well I outta here, you disrespect by moving the thread. see ya. tardos just sayin, dummy. ! Moderator Note Everyone: Be nice. Steve Christopher, These quotes would be examples of unacceptable responses based on civility (Rule 1) — appeal to conspiracy and hand-waving are unacceptable for other reasons having to to do with other rules. You can either address criticism with some evidence, or the moderators can lock the thread and/or suspend you. Your call. Do not respond to this modnote.
Klaynos Posted December 19, 2011 Posted December 19, 2011 I'm still waiting for any of my initial counter points to be dealt with. It appears he can't deal with them and therefore I see no reason to continue this... It's flawed in so many ways it's difficult to really know just where to start....
imatfaal Posted December 19, 2011 Posted December 19, 2011 I just read the website - wow! First thought was of Poe's Corollary
Phi for All Posted December 19, 2011 Posted December 19, 2011 I just want to devote a whole post to saying thank you, Steve Christopher, for taking the time to answer some of these questions we've had. Regardless of what we think initially of your hypothesis, your honest answers are sincerely appreciated.
Steve Christopher Posted December 19, 2011 Author Posted December 19, 2011 I just want to devote a whole post to saying thank you, Steve Christopher, for taking the time to answer some of these questions we've had. Regardless of what we think initially of your hypothesis, your honest answers are sincerely appreciated. Well thanks, try to understand I've been in this dance be4 and it's laborious and fruitless unless people take some time out to be open-minded. So I'll wait, and check in from time to time, but don't want to spend too much energy rebutting things people with enough brains can figure out themselves. I'm not here to spoon feed you. Cheers.
Phi for All Posted December 19, 2011 Posted December 19, 2011 Well thanks, try to understand I've been in this dance be4 and it's laborious and fruitless unless people take some time out to be open-minded. So I'll wait, and check in from time to time, but don't want to spend too much energy rebutting things people with enough brains can figure out themselves. I'm not here to spoon feed you. Cheers. No sir, that won't cut it. You're the one making the extraordinary claim. If we have questions, it's up to you to answer them. The burden of proof is on you. It's now possible to gain some clarity since you're answering us, and for that I wanted to say thanks. But make no mistake, there is so much evidence to support the concept of a spherical earth that you'll need to refute that I think it's going to try your patience to a great degree. If you think that's laborious then why did you posit such an idea on a science forum?
Steve Christopher Posted December 19, 2011 Author Posted December 19, 2011 No sir, that won't cut it. You're the one making the extraordinary claim. If we have questions, it's up to you to answer them. The burden of proof is on you. It's now possible to gain some clarity since you're answering us, and for that I wanted to say thanks. But make no mistake, there is so much evidence to support the concept of a spherical earth that you'll need to refute that I think it's going to try your patience to a great degree. If you think that's laborious then why did you posit such an idea on a science forum? Burden? You need to wear the Mark to survive. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0tI-Gspth1M
mississippichem Posted December 19, 2011 Posted December 19, 2011 skid marks on glass. Oh boy, go do your homework, but throw away your old books. Don't waste my time or energy until you have a proper foundation for truth. Atmospheric pressure has all you need for evidence that you are in a container. Oh really!? If we were inside a container then shouldn't atmospheric pressure not vary as a function of height? Atmospheric pressure does vary as a function of height. [math] p = p_0 \cdot \left(1 - \frac{L \cdot h}{T_0} \right)^\frac{g \cdot M}{R \cdot L} [/math] as detailed by Wikipedia: Wiki: density of air I'm sure many here would be willing to walk you through the experimental evidence of this or walk you through the derivation of this equation (which is surprisingly simple actually) but only if you are willing to keep an open mind. Like you I don't like wasting my time and energy on people that are just tolling or have already made up their mind. ***What would you accept as evidence of a spherical (right side out) Earth? If there is no evidence you would accept then please kindly bug off as we will just continue to argue back and forth to no avail. I have here offered mathematical and empirical evidence that the earth is in fact a sphere-like body in the vacuum of space. Can you do the same for your assertions? If not, then direct yourself back to the paragraph denoted ***. Please do not call me a dummy, this debate will get plenty heated without resorting to school house tactics. I will not call you names but I will call you on your unsupported assertions and hand-waving. 1
Steve Christopher Posted December 19, 2011 Author Posted December 19, 2011 (edited) Oh really!? If we were inside a container then shouldn't atmospheric pressure not vary as a function of height? Atmospheric pressure does vary as a function of height. [math] p = p_0 \cdot \left(1 - \frac{L \cdot h}{T_0} \right)^\frac{g \cdot M}{R \cdot L} [/math] ummmmm....yeah.........that's what I was saying...........(facepalm) Edited December 19, 2011 by Steve Christopher
Phi for All Posted December 19, 2011 Posted December 19, 2011 OK, obviously trying to boost traffic to the SJC YouTube portfolio. Can't seem to get enough attention. Closing the thread temporarily while I confer with staff members who aren't involved.
swansont Posted December 20, 2011 Posted December 20, 2011 OK, obviously trying to boost traffic to the SJC YouTube portfolio. Can't seem to get enough attention. Closing the thread temporarily while I confer with staff members who aren't involved. ! Moderator Note We'll make this permanent.
Recommended Posts