Tides

[Gardon Thomas]

Moontanman

 

#4 yes, I did observe and reply to Granpa in regards to the appreciated chart. But it's only a semi accurate account of fours hours of 1 day. so... I noticed it right after making the "Sink" comment labeled ANSWER.

 

#3 I never heard of that theory. But that is why I had to ask before continuing. I don't know where flat Earth theories originate, it's not scriptural, I honestly think that they are made up theories that real people never believed in the first of places [ modern day twists of tales, like Christmas. which pertains to the Holy Spirit in giving during the winter solstice which occurs when no food grows of the ground and needy people are hungry everywhere north of Israel (which was christian).].

 

#2 You had already provided evidence, via witness that the tides did not come in at the same time every day. iNow, had also provided a link to a chart, at which time I acknowledged my error, but also stated it was disregard-able in comparing theories, and also that what I really wanted was to know where the tide goes thereafter (answer: like a sink bowl).

 

However we agree that the ocean temperatures do change, and every degree causes significant change, just not a predictable change. Scientists say that if the earth changed 4 degrees centigrade the earth would be in catastrophe, for the ocean to change such a small amount is truly of a similar magnitude.

Remember that when considering the ocean temperature in relation to tides you must look at the Sea as a whole, not a single ocean, coast or bay.

 

Wind is caused by temperature changes on and off land correct?

 

Weather seldom relates to the entire planet on a scale or time period long enough to create flaw in the theory that the sun and moon heat not pull the oceans.

 

Thank you for this mature discussion, but I had not overlooked these points.

 

 

But #1. Why would you suggest that space travel is impossible?

If there is no reply to these statements after a temporary pause I will be more specific immediately instead of postponing further as I have written was the intention. Your maturity makes me not want to wait..

But as a Jew, Muslim, Christian or Mormon, you must acknowledge two facts.

That the sun and moon ceased to revolve about the earth and stood still in the sky for approximately a 24hour period (the 100% accuracy of this time was lost because the sun and moon stopped revolving. [convenient I know]).

It is also against these religions to study the stars. Stars being observable hosts of the sky that are not from Earth.

Therefore as a Christian, I cannot believe in space travel, and as a scientist I'll explain why I am sure of this momentarily.

Edited January 18, 2012 by Gardon Thomas

[Ophiolite]

Allowing this self indulgent lunacy to remain in speculations, with no effort to post even a smidegeon of evidence, surely is wrong. Is gross sutpidity not more at home in the trash can?

[granpa]

the animation covers a full 25 hour period and is based on satellite data

 

http://www.esr.org/ptm_index.html

 

TPXO7.1 is a medium-resolution, 1/4o x 1/4o global inverse tide model developed by Gary Egbert and Lana Erofeeva at Oregon State University. The model domain includes ocean cavities under the floating ice shelves in Antarctica and Greenland. TPXO7.1 assimilates TOPEX/Poseidon (T/P) and TOPEX Tandem satellite radar altimetry (available for the ice-free ocean between +/-66o latitude), and in situ tide gauge data in the Antarctic (see ESR’s Antarctic Tide Gauge Database) and the Arctic (cf. the Arctic inverse model AOTIM-5). TPXO7.1 is one of the most accurate global tidal solutions, particularly for high latitudes because of the assimilation of tide gauge data and since it utilizes recent Antarctic grounding line information.

 

TPXO7.1 is distributed with a Matlab Graphical User Interface ("GUI") called "TMD" (the Tide Model Driver). TMD can be used to quickly access and browse the model, and to make tide height and current (velocity component) predictions. The TMD package also contains scripted functions for use in batch-mode Matlab processing. For an overview of the GUI and scripts, view or download the README PDF file. For FORTRAN access, please go to the Oregon State "OTIS" web page.

 

Please reference Egbert and Erofeeva (2002) for the use of TPXO7.1.

 

Contact Laurie Padman for advice on which model to use for a particular application, to be added to an update notification list, or for further information on the tide models.

 

http://volkov.oce.orst.edu/tides/

 

http://volkov.oce.orst.edu/tides/

 

TPXO*.* is a current version of a global model of ocean tides, which best-fits, in a least-squares sense, the Laplace Tidal Equations and along track averaged data from TOPEX/Poseidon and Jason (on TOPEX/POSEIDON tracks since 2002) obtained with OTIS. The methods used to compute the model are described in details by Egbert, Bennett, and Foreman,1994 and further by Egbert and Erofeeva, 2002

 

The tides are provided as complex amplitudes of earth-relative sea-surface elevation for eight primary (M2, S2, N2, K2, K1, O1, P1, Q1), two long period (Mf,Mm) and 3 non-linear (M4, MS4, MN4) harmonic constituents, on a 1440x721, 1/4 degree resolution full global grid (for versions 6.* and later).

 

Each latest version of the TPXO model is of better quality compared to the earlier versions, since:

it assimilates longer satellite time series;

more data sites are included into assimilation;

bathymetry is improving from version to version;

resolution of global and local grids is improving from version to version;

click here for details of transfrom TPXO7.1 => TPXO7.2

Edited January 18, 2012 by granpa

[D H]

Allowing this self indulgent lunacy to remain in speculations, with no effort to post even a smidegeon of evidence, surely is wrong. Is gross sutpidity not more at home in the trash can?

 

I disagree.

 

 

 

But as a Jew, Muslim, Christian or Mormon, you must acknowledge two facts.

That the sun and moon ceased to revolve about the earth and stood still in the sky for approximately a 24hour period (the 100% accuracy of this time was lost because the sun and moon stopped revolving. [convenient I know]).

It is also against these religions to study the stars. Stars being observable hosts of the sky that are not from Earth.

Therefore as a Christian, I cannot believe in space travel, and as a scientist I'll explain why I am sure of this momentarily.

 

This doesn't even belong in the trash can.

[Moontanman]

Moontanman

 

#4 yes, I did observe and reply to Granpa in regards to the appreciated chart. But it's only a semi accurate account of fours hours of 1 day. so... I noticed it right after making the "Sink" comment labeled ANSWER.

 

I think you need to consider it again...

 

 

#3 I never heard of that theory. But that is why I had to ask before continuing. I don't know where flat Earth theories originate, it's not scriptural, I honestly think that they are made up theories that real people never believed in the first of places [ modern day twists of tales, like Christmas. which pertains to the Holy Spirit in giving during the winter solstice which occurs when no food grows of the ground and needy people are hungry everywhere north of Israel (which was christian).].

 

 

No, these are precisely what people used to believe, it is indeed in many holy books and it is trivially falsified and yet believed.... in fact it is what the holy book you profess to believe...

 

#2 You had already provided evidence, via witness that the tides did not come in at the same time every day. iNow, had also provided a link to a chart, at which time I acknowledged my error, but also stated it was disregard-able in comparing theories, and also that what I really wanted was to know where the tide goes thereafter (answer: like a sink bowl).

 

I am sorry, but the tides goes no place any more than any other ocean wave goes someplace, after it crashes on shore, the tides goes back out after it comes in, i don't see what point you are trying to make...

 

 

However we agree that the ocean temperatures do change, and every degree causes significant change, just not a predictable change. Scientists say that if the earth changed 4 degrees centigrade the earth would be in catastrophe, for the ocean to change such a small amount is truly of a similar magnitude.

 

On a daily basis the ocean changes not at all, your point makes no sense...

 

Remember that when considering the ocean temperature in relation to tides you must look at the Sea as a whole, not a single ocean, coast or bay.

 

where is this enormous temp change? How can it account for tides of several feet every day?

 

Wind is caused by temperature changes on and off land correct?

 

True but it is not a constant predictable effect, we can predict the tides years if not decades in advance...

 

Weather seldom relates to the entire planet on a scale or time period long enough to create flaw in the theory that the sun and moon heat not pull the oceans.

 

This makes no sense, did you mistype this?

 

Thank you for this mature discussion, but I had not overlooked these points.

 

yes you have and are overlooking my points...

 

 

But #1. Why would you suggest that space travel is impossible?

If there is no reply to these statements after a temporary pause I will be more specific immediately instead of postponing further as I have written was the intention. Your maturity makes me not want to wait..

 

Please do so...

 

But as a Jew, Muslim, Christian or Mormon, you must acknowledge two facts.

That the sun and moon ceased to revolve about the earth and stood still in the sky for approximately a 24hour period (the 100% accuracy of this time was lost because the sun and moon stopped revolving. [convenient I know]).

 

Actually no, there is no more evidence of this than the idea of the earth being a flat disc covered by a crystal dome which is also what you must believe if you believe those bronze age myths...

 

It is also against these religions to study the stars. Stars being observable hosts of the sky that are not from Earth.

Therefore as a Christian, I cannot believe in space travel, and as a scientist I'll explain why I am sure of this momentarily.

 

Please do explain this since you are a scientist...

[Gardon Thomas]

Ophiolite

please notice the topic was a question. this discussion was just a note I asked people to consider.

No one answered the question either.

 

but again

 

thank you again Granpa

(I posted at the beginning, I was having troubles finding the right information online),

So,

ANSWER: The Tides go North and South, not East and West. And they move like water would, such as in a sink, but distinctly North and South.

Is that a satisfying answer to my original question? Where does the water go when the tide goes out (North, south, east/west)?

 

 

please note:

This assortment of replies is why I've postponed explaining how the Theory of Aerodynamics counters the Theory of Gravitational pull, but is dependent on space travel truly being a conspiracy.

answer truthfully, if space travel is a hoax, is it so absurd?

 

H D

Were you going to provide further evidence rather then non-photographic illustrations that the far side of the moon has ever been observed?

because there aren't any. H D, maybe you've provided an illustration of the far side of the moon, but those drawings are not evidence of space travel or a moon landing, they are not photographs.

 

 

Moontanman

"I am sorry, but the tides goes no place any more than any other ocean wave goes someplace, after it crashes on shore, the tides goes back out after it comes in, i don't see what point you are trying to make... "

- aha, That's my point, where is that place. That was the initial question.

 

"where is this enormous temp change? How can it account for tides of several feet every day?"

There is a time of more heat, and a time of evening out the heat. The ocean rolls over itself, to stay as constant as possible always, and the sun makes it impossible to stay constant.

The ocean temperature is always changing, don't be so ignorant of the obvious. Just because the warm and cool areas move about, and sink and rise doesn't mean they are not factual. Otherwise it would not be disputable that the icecaps shouldn't' be melting so fast, climate change in the ocean between dawn and dusk even out, after temperature changes of mere degrees.

 

and I did not overlook those points you made. Your being close minded.

 

now, just because my theory has been pushed of topic temporarily, address the reason why.

Where does it say the planet is flat? In the bible, Earth pertains to dry land or it's inhabitants, not oceans.

Edited January 18, 2012 by Gardon Thomas

[granpa]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Amphidromic_point

 

An amphidromic point is a point within a tidal system where the tidal range is almost zero. The tidal range (the height difference between high tide and low tide) is zero at the amphidromic point and increases with distance from this point.[1] [2][3] These points are called nodes.[4]

The M2 tidal constituent, the amplitude indicated by color. The white lines are cotidal lines spaced at phase intervals of 30° (a bit over 1 hr).[5] The amphidromic points are the dark blue areas where the lines come together.

 

Amphidromic points occur because of the Coriolis effect and interference within oceanic basins, seas and bays creating a wave pattern — called an amphidromic system — which rotates around the amphidromic point.[6][7] At the amphidromic point, there is no vertical movement from tidal action.[8] There can be tidal currents as the water levels on either side of the amphidromic point are not the same.

 

 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kelvin_wave

 

A Kelvin wave is a wave in the ocean or atmosphere that balances the Earth's Coriolis force against a topographic boundary such as a coastline, or a waveguide such as the equator. A feature of a Kelvin wave is that it is non-dispersive, i.e., the phase speed of the wave crests is equal to the group speed of the wave energy for all frequencies. This means that it retains its shape in the alongshore direction over time.

[Gardon Thomas]

Thanks Granpa

but these are observed reactions,

the cause is still theoretical.

 

The idea that the solar heating of the ocean is not voided by any means.

 

but thank you for staying on the actual topic. I was very curious to find out where they go.

it is North South right? as apposed to being pulled to the east / west by the Coriolis effect.

Edited January 18, 2012 by Gardon Thomas

[Moontanman]

Where does it say the planet is flat? In the bible, Earth pertains to dry land or it's inhabitants, not oceans.

 

 

Gardon, I'll tell you the truth, i have pointed out the scriptures of the bible that assert a flat earth so many times i grow tired of telling people what their own holy book says. Here is a series of short videos that tell the truth very accurately and explicitly, please take the time to watch them.

 

 

Ophiolite

please notice the topic was a question. this discussion was just a note I asked people to consider.

No one answered the question either.

 

but again

 

thank you again Granpa

(I posted at the beginning, I was having troubles finding the right information online),

So,

ANSWER: The Tides go North and South, not East and West. And they move like water would, such as in a sink, but distinctly North and South.

Is that a satisfying answer to my original question? Where does the water go when the tide goes out (North, south, east/west)?

 

The water goes back out into the ocean, I have watched it go in and out most of my life, the water flows in for about 6 hours and flow back out another 6 hours or so, there is no mystery here... The water flows inland, sometimes hundreds of miles up stream, then goes back out to sea, why is this so difficult to understand?

 

 

please note:

This assortment of replies is why I've postponed explaining how the Theory of Aerodynamics counters the Theory of Gravitational pull, but is dependent on space travel truly being a conspiracy.

answer truthfully, if space travel is a hoax, is it so absurd?

 

If? If space travel is a hoax? What if religion is a hoax? If frogs had wings they wouldn't bust their little slimy asses every time they jump... There is no conspiracy, space travel is real, you are being close minded...

 

Were you going to provide further evidence rather then non-photographic illustrations that the far side of the moon has ever been observed?

because there aren't any. H D, maybe you've provided an illustration of the far side of the moon, but those drawings are not evidence of space travel or a moon landing, they are not photographs.

 

Yes there are photographs... how does anyone not know these things in this day and age?

 

 

 

"where is this enormous temp change? How can it account for tides of several feet every day?"

There is a time of more heat, and a time of evening out the heat. The ocean rolls over itself, to stay as constant as possible always, and the sun makes it impossible to stay constant.

The ocean temperature is always changing, don't be so ignorant of the obvious. Just because the warm and cool areas move about, and sink and rise doesn't mean they are not factual. Otherwise it would not be disputable that the icecaps shouldn't' be melting so fast, climate change in the ocean between dawn and dusk even out, after temperature changes of mere degrees.

 

Again, I'll say, the ocean temps do not have anything to do with tides, if they did why is the position of the moon and sun able to predict the tides years in advance? you damn sure can't predict the weather years in advance on a daily basis... not only the tide times can be predicted but the actual height of the tides can be predicted.. years in advance...

 

and I did not overlook those points you made. Your being close minded.

 

Why because I don't let my brain fall out?

Edited January 18, 2012 by Moontanman

[Gardon Thomas]

Moontanman,

The reference made about the earth seeming circular in the book of Isaiah is because he was describing a vision God game him.

Clearly, the planet appears circular. The Bible does not say the earth is flat once. Flawed accusation. Poor supporting evidence.

 

 

 

The Theory of Aerodynamics

an opposition to The Theory of Gravity.

 

"If it causes flight, it is rightly that which impedes it. Cause and effect"

 

Air is continuously competing to be at the lowest area possible, even if that means where you are. However air is so thin, it is rarely successful and when compressed it freely displaces itself rather then any objects. Thus in its natural state as the Sky, it is relatively harmless, but requires other solid objects to become threatening. This meaning, that it requires artificial forces to compress air without it freely dispersing itself without harm.

 

Air and Water, however are both truly water, biblically differentiated Sea and Sky, and react in almost the same way: Always seeking the lowest point, and always determined to stay as a whole, like a water droplet.

 

Separately, though both water, they cling to themselves and to the nearest solid object, which when considered in scale is the planet as a whole, not any object, because before it can be measured on such a small scale it must be considered that the entire sky is in competition as a whole with itself. Thus, the lowest point is determined by the sky, which by not being Sea has enough influence to manipulate it.

 

Air will press down on you until you escape it, and at the outer limits it will cling to you and bring you back.

 

Because the air is so thin, when you go up, the density of the air bellow you, being so thin, cannot hold you there, and you must fall, because the sky is now competing to take your place elevated above the ground also. As a Competition we are speaking in relative volumes, regardless of the whole, so the mass of the sky is not a relate-able measurement when inquiring as to why you do not remain suspended.

 

But, if you compact air, then lift may be achieved, and this is how flight works.

 

However, once you reach the outer limits of the atmosphere the air, which no longer has the entire bulk of the Sky pressing down on it, it freely reaches out to the fabrics of Space, which scientists agree cannot be a vacuum.

Thus the out atmosphere, is a double flip, creating a zone in which the air will not pull you down to earth any longer (or at least at an accelerated pace), in which all satellites and space crafts fly about the earth. The moon is beyond that double flip.

 

The air however, in this Flip, is so thin that enough propulsion cannot be achieved to further space travel, and therefore it is made impossible.

 

The observable facts are the behaviors of water and of air, as well as the lack of space travel evidence, as well as the biblical incentives.

 

The living God said do not study the stars, and also, that Air is like Sea, they are both water. The sun and moon stopped for 24 hours, thus God has provided his proof, and recorded it to the ends of time.

 

 

 

 

And thus, I do not believe in The Theory of Gravity, which has provided no further evidence that it is accurate,

if space travel cannot be proven to me: It never has.

 

Moontanman

clearly my brain hasn't fallen out.

so say anything you want, that isn't what would make it true or not,

not even repeating it.

But if you believe there are photographs of the far side of the moon, please, i am interested in the truth very much.

 

but as far as the Tides, which was the initial purpose of this topic... I have a feeling your 12 or something...

when the tides go out,

DO THEY GO NORTH, SOUTH, or EAST/WEST?

that isn't a complicated question, butt he answer is hard to find.

uhhh!

Out is the worst possible answer! It was in the question!

Edited January 18, 2012 by Gardon Thomas

[Moontanman]

 

Out is the worst possible answer! It was in the question!

 

 

Sadly while it might to you be the worst possible answer it is indeed the truth, I tried to discuss this with you as seriously as i could but you are being willfully ignorant, you accuse everyone else of being disingenuous while you assert idiocy as the truth and then you anchor it in, of all things religion, on a science forum. you accuse me of being close minded while you fully ignore anything that disagrees with your totally unsupported assertions that are trivially falsified... I'm betting you don't have much use for deep time or evolution either, am i correct? Are you going to tell us the earth is 6,000 years old next? You sir are full of horse feathers...

[D H]

but as far as the Tides, which was the initial purpose of this topic... I have a feeling your 12 or something...

when the tides go out,

DO THEY GO NORTH, SOUTH, or EAST/WEST?

that isn't a complicated question, butt he answer is hard to find.

uhhh!

Out is the worst possible answer! It was in the question!

The answer is yes. The tides go north, south, east, and west. Or sometimes north north east. Or west south west.

 

 

The above shows the largest component of the tides, the principal lunar semidiurnal M2 tidal component. It is caused by the Moon, not the Sun, caused by gravity, not heating. The colors indicate the intensity of the M2 tidal. The white lines are cotidal lines, lines along which high tide occurs at the same time. Notice that these cotidal lines emanate from the center of several dark blue areas. Those points where the cotidal lines converge are amphidromic points. The tides rotate around these amphidromic points. Some systems have a clockwise rotation, others, counterclockwise. The M2 tidal is but one of many tidal component. The next figure depicts the M2 component plus three others for the Arctic ocean:

 

 

Those other three components are the principal solar semidiurnal (S2), the lunisolar diurnal (K1), and the principal lunar diurnal (O1). (There are hundreds more such components. Modeling the tides is a detailed science.) Notice that the amphidromic points, the cotidal lines, and the tidal amplitudes are different for each component. This is because those different tidal components have different frequencies.

 

Notice in the first figure that some places such as the southeast coast of Argentina, the Yellow Sea, and the North Sea are jam packed with cotidal lines. Here's a detailed map of the M2 tidal component for the North Sea:

 

 

As you can see, it's always high tide somewhere in the North Sea. As you can also see, the tides do go north, south, east, and west. And even south south east.

[Moontanman]

Awesome effort DH, great information, i learned a few things i didn't know...

[Tres Juicy]

Honestly, I cannot believe some of what I've just read...

 

1) The sky is not water

 

2) Space travel is well documented

 

3) air has no mechanism to "hold you down", if that were true would it not hold you in place as well?

 

You've called your *Theory* (which it's not but I won't go into that), "the theory of aerodynamics", have you studied aerodynamics?

If you had you would know that such properties of air (like its density) only have an effect when travelling through it at high speed.

 

4) If you're interested in tides there has been some very good information posted here

(proven information - not wild speculation or conjecture), have a look at it and you are very likely to learn a lot.

 

Failing that: Get a bowl, fill it with water and slosh it around. You will see the basics of how water acts

 

5) There is no god, you are wasting your life believing in fairy tales

 

6) The sun and moon did not stop (you are aware that we orbit the sun, right?).

 

7) If you're willing to accept "proof" from bronze age superstition then why ask questions at all?

 

Lets just say your god does it by magic, does that make you feel better?

 

8) Get yourself an education (a proper one), read a book (again, a proper one)

 

9) If you cannot do/accept any of the above join a religion forum instead and stop wasting our time

Edited January 18, 2012 by Tres Juicy

[Essay]

The answer is yes. The tides go north, south, east, and west. Or sometimes north north east. Or west south west.

 

As you can see, it's always high tide somewhere in the North Sea. As you can also see, the tides do go north, south, east, and west. And even south south east.

 

And the OP could also google: tidal ground movement CERN

 

or look up Earth tide on Wikipedia

 

...(but not today as they are black in protest of SOPA/PIPA).

 

~

 

Thanks for the great post!

[D H]

And the OP could also google: tidal ground movement CERN

 

or look up Earth tide on Wikipedia

I mentioned the solid body tides back in post #13. It didn't seem to click.

[Tres Juicy]

I mentioned the solid body tides back in post #13. It didn't seem to click.

 

 

I get the distinct impression nothing ever will

[Moontanman]

I feel a little sorry for this guy, he is under the control of powerful mind altering memes, he cannot see reality with out the filters of his memes and he has fallen prey to some of the worst memes of all and is liberally mixing them with the meme of fundamentalist Christianity, he is one lost puppy for sure....

[Tres Juicy]

I feel a little sorry for this guy, he is under the control of powerful mind altering memes, he cannot see reality with out the filters of his memes and he has fallen prey to some of the worst memes of all and is liberally mixing them with the meme of fundamentalist Christianity, he is one lost puppy for sure....

 

 

Yes, but at the same time it's up to him to learn

 

You would think that people who are willing to believe in what essentially boils down to magic would be more open minded than the rest of us, not the other way around...

Edited January 18, 2012 by Tres Juicy

[Gardon Thomas]

You guys fail to see how none of the information you provide supports Gravity or disproves what I've suggested may be a more logical answer.

The information you've provided is merely, observed motions, they can be applied to any theory.

Unless we've been to space, gravity is not a proven theory, and there is no evidence we ever have been to space.

The pivotal evidence that makes this statement not trolling according to the forum policy, is that there is a lack of evidence showing we've been to space.

 

 

Tres Juicy

3) air has no mechanism to "hold you down", if that were true would it not hold you in place as well?

I guess you never read the article I posted: Air is not thick enough in volumes to entrap you, it sooner displaces an equal volume of itself.

"air has no mechanism to "hold you down"

Are you suggesting I said that or is it your own words? Because, It does hold you down. The entire sky is trying to be lower then you, even if it means attempting to crush you unsuccessfully.

 

 

H D

your post about solid body tides in post #13 was a theoretical statement involving a planet with no dry land: was that the reference you made at the top of the page?

going on to,

"... Those primary and reflected waves interfere creating very complex interference patterns. That simple two bulge model is just wrong when it comes to the ocean tides. Modeling the ocean tides is an empirical science. Fortunately, the concept of looking at the tides in the frequency domain is still valid. ..."

This statement is exactly the scientifically concept, Aerodynamics is based upon.

The fact that the moon can be used to predict tides is 100% as supportive to My theory as that of Gravity. I am not ignoring the moon when considering the solar heat.

 

 

 

But, as this is a

 

Tidal thread,

What then is the answer to the question:

Is it so, that when the tide recedes in the North it comes back in the south hemisphere?

or

Does, the tide come back in the Eastern coasts while receding in the western ones?

 

wow. these were yes/no questions.

you guys are a joke.

 

If your so concerned about spelling maybe you'd pay attention to grammar, and

just say NO.

when the tide goes out in the north that does not mean it is coming in in the south.

And also, NO, it does not mean it is bouncing back to opposite coastlands.

But Because you insist this thread is more about Gravity than Tidal motions,

Please, in your own words, using your own proofs (as in personally and manually demonstrable facts) PROVE GRAVITY.

Or it is a THEORY!

 

Theory:

a particular conception or view of something to be done or of the method of doing it; a system of rules or principles:

a proposed explanation whose status is still conjectural and subject to experimentation, in contrast to well-established propositions that are regarded as reporting matters of actual fact.

 

because if we are speaking of things regarded as fact, you're arguing with the entire religious world. We are valid opposition to unproven claims.

Thus, also, my theory of Aerodynamics is indeed a theory.

Edited January 18, 2012 by Gardon Thomas

[D H]

Some requests, Gardon:

• Read post #13.
  
• Learn to use the quote button.
  
• Read post #13, again.
  
• My username is D H, not H D. Use it, please.
  
• Read post #13 one more time, and this time do what it says.

[Tres Juicy]

You guys fail to see how none of the information you provide supports Gravity or disproves what I've suggested may be a more logical answer.

The information you've provided is merely, observed motions, they can be applied to any theory.

Unless we've been to space, gravity is not a proven theory, and there is no evidence we ever have been to space.

The pivotal evidence that makes this statement not trolling according to the forum policy, is that there is a lack of evidence showing we've been to space.

 

We have been to space, there have been numerous posts showing varied evidence from different sources.

 

Where is your evidence? I refer you to Swansonts earlier post:

!

Moderator Note

An extraordinary claim (along with a few others). Extraordinary claims demand extraordinary evidence, and the rules of this forum do as well. Post the evidence.

 

Do not respond to this modnote. Do not post more speculation or discussion. Posting your evidence is the only acceptable response.

 

 

Tres Juicy

3) air has no mechanism to "hold you down", if that were true would it not hold you in place as well?

I guess you never read the article I posted: Air is not thick enough in volumes to entrap you, it sooner displaces an equal volume of itself.

"air has no mechanism to "hold you down"

Are you suggesting I said that or is it your own words? Because, It does hold you down. The entire sky is trying to be lower then you, even if it means attempting to crush you unsuccessfully.

 

 

Read a book you moron.

 

If all the air was trying to get beneath me it would have a lifting effect on me rather than holding me down, like water does.

 

Stop wasting your time on fairy tales and rubbish.

 

But Because you insist this thread is more about Gravity than Tidal motions,

Please, in your own words, using your own proofs (as in personally and manually demonstrable facts) PROVE GRAVITY.

Or it is a THEORY!

 

As it turns out you can't have tides without gravity.

 

If air was responsible for holding us down, then ask yourself this:

 

Why can gravity be observed to work in a vacuum?

 

because if we are speaking of things regarded as fact, you're arguing with the entire religious world. We are valid opposition to unproven claims.

Thus, also, my theory of Aerodynamics is indeed a theory.

 

Bullshit: Again - Why can gravity be observed to work in a vacuum?

 

 

Answer this honestly with evidence or take your voodoo crap to a religious forum where you might stand a chance

Edited January 18, 2012 by Tres Juicy

[Moontanman]

You guys fail to see how none of the information you provide supports Gravity or disproves what I've suggested may be a more logical answer.

The information you've provided is merely, observed motions, they can be applied to any theory.

Unless we've been to space, gravity is not a proven theory, and there is no evidence we ever have been to space.

The pivotal evidence that makes this statement not trolling according to the forum policy, is that there is a lack of evidence showing we've been to space.

 

We've had probes crawling around on the surface of Mars for years, how did they get there? We have pictures of the surface of the Moon and Mars close ups that could only have been taken by space craft, how do you explain that? We have a probe that is currently in orbit of the asteroid Vesta, in a year or so that probe will move to the asteroid Ceres, we've sent probes to all of the planets expect Pluto, we have close up films of planets and moons that could only have been taken by space craft. Regular people like you and me can set up radio recievers to pick up the broad casts of some of these probes, the entire network of global positioning satellites are out side the earths atmosphere (not to mention the ISS and all other satellites) , how do you explain that? Space travel is real, the evidence it is real is overwhelming, your "theory" is trivially falsified...

 

Tres Juicy

3) air has no mechanism to "hold you down", if that were true would it not hold you in place as well?

I guess you never read the article I posted: Air is not thick enough in volumes to entrap you, it sooner displaces an equal volume of itself.

"air has no mechanism to "hold you down"

Are you suggesting I said that or is it your own words? Because, It does hold you down. The entire sky is trying to be lower then you, even if it means attempting to crush you unsuccessfully.

 

Again you are asserting something that is nonsensical, the air you keep talking about is held to the earth because of gravity. Air does nothing to hold you down...

 

 

H D

your post about solid body tides in post #13 was a theoretical statement involving a planet with no dry land: was that the reference you made at the top of the page?

going on to,

"... Those primary and reflected waves interfere creating very complex interference patterns. That simple two bulge model is just wrong when it comes to the ocean tides. Modeling the ocean tides is an empirical science. Fortunately, the concept of looking at the tides in the frequency domain is still valid. ..."

This statement is exactly the scientifically concept, Aerodynamics is based upon.

The fact that the moon can be used to predict tides is 100% as supportive to My theory as that of Gravity. I am not ignoring the moon when considering the solar heat.

 

Solar heat has nothing to do with tides, it cannot be sued to predict the tides or shown to be responsible in any way and yet you still assert the suns heats causes tides... open your mind to reality Gardon, reality is beautiful, not scary.

 

 

But, as this is a

 

Tidal thread,

What then is the answer to the question:

Is it so, that when the tide recedes in the North it comes back in the south hemisphere?

or

Does, the tide come back in the Eastern coasts while receding in the western ones?

 

wow. these were yes/no questions.

you guys are a joke.

 

You're an idiot... your questions are nonsensical.. several illustrations have been given that shows how the tides work, insisting the tide has to go someplace makes no sense what so ever...

 

If your so concerned about spelling maybe you'd pay attention to grammar, and

just say NO.

when the tide goes out in the north that does not mean it is coming in in the south.

And also, NO, it does not mean it is bouncing back to opposite coastlands.

But Because you insist this thread is more about Gravity than Tidal motions,

Please, in your own words, using your own proofs (as in personally and manually demonstrable facts) PROVE GRAVITY.

Or it is a THEORY!

 

Gravity is real, how it works is a theory, stop being willfully ignorant, space travel is real, the air doesn't hold you down, we have shown you many times how and why you are mistaken, open your mind to reality dude...

 

Theory:

a particular conception or view of something to be done or of the method of doing it; a system of rules or principles:

a proposed explanation whose status is still conjectural and subject to experimentation, in contrast to well-established propositions that are regarded as reporting matters of actual fact.

 

By that definition you must defend your position with facts, if you cannot do so then your assertion is at best a failed hypothesis but really more of a delusion...

 

because if we are speaking of things regarded as fact, you're arguing with the entire religious world. We are valid opposition to unproven claims.

Thus, also, my theory of Aerodynamics is indeed a theory.

 

 

How does religion refute space travel? The holy book you refer to is easily shown to be false and no matter how many religious nuts think science is wrong doesn't make science wrong, reality is not a popular vote, no matter how many people refuse to believe in reality the reality never changes, and you using religion to refute science is simply a waste of yours and our time...

[D H]

[Tres Juicy]

I predict that this question will go unanswered:

 

Why can gravity be observed to work in a vacuum?