it does not matter, gravity believes in you. or i should say it believes in your mass warping the fabric of space/time.
You have to understand the duplicity of the space agencies around the world and their history of working together during times when their parent countries were at war with each other. The most notable possibly being an un used apollo shuttle linked with a Russian soyuz spacecraft in 1975 under the guise of dentente. The since long term space travel is impossible, these agencies must employ subterfuge to continue bringing in large budgets. FE was known before anything went into space. Many prominent americans believed in FE and experiments had been done to prove there was in fact no curvature. FDR was a FE advocate. He died, or was killed possibly at the order of Colonel Sanders shortly after he had seriously began speaking of the logic behind FE. It would not take as many people as some would think world wide, and while the numbers do vary greatly, it has been narrowed down to no more than 1500, to no less than 167.
you think so? I am only trying to inform the benighted masses of this terrible plot to conceal the true nature of the earth. KFC is NASA's intelligence arm and they are linked to the slaughter of innocent paleontologists and prominent theorists who study dinosaurs.
Sir Isaac Newton discovered gravity in 1650, when an apple fell on his head. because of this people started believing in him........this is ridiculous. the year was 1650. polscie
Now for some appropriate mood music... Gravity by John Mayer http://www.metrolyrics.com/gravity-lyrics-john-mayer.html
it almost looks so real......you throw an object or an object falls like the apple as an experience of newton and you would think and conclude that there is a pull, a pull by the surface of the earth. but unknowingly it isn't a pull, but a force of a push or a squeeze, and since the nearest object of another object is the surface of the earth, this pushed or squeezed object has no other choice but to hit or land directly to the nearest surface of the earth. there is no gravity. the entire space or universe is a MEGA BUBBLE. this bubble holds everything that is in its existence. this mega bubble is so thick and tight (not fluid) that it can hold even the biggest and heaviest rock there is. and one can observe as to why Man floats in outer space. the reason isn't the lack of gravity or the absence of it, but because Man, as an object that exist (imagine how .0000000 tiny and light Man is) is being cuddled by this bubble. there is no gravity, in the year 1650 Man said there is a pull and named it as gravity.....................I refuse to believe him. the man is ignorant. polscie don't you see how dust floats in the air. this air is the bubble here on earth. don't you see Man floating in the outer space. this space is the bubble in the entire universe. dust floats in the air bubble. there is no gravity. man floats in the non air bubble in the universe. gravity does not exist. there are 3 bubbles: water bubble. air bubble. non air bubble. these 3 bubbles explain as to why such matters in its own existence react accordingly. polscie
The opening post is, of course, worthless, but I like Felix's "universal acceleration" prank, because it's actually a testable hypothesis. It's not the meaningless mumbo jumbo that's being thrown around here far too often. Let's think about it. There are obvious objections like pictures from space (which Felix cleverly ruled out using a conspiracy theory involving NASA and KFC). We could also observe the curvature of the Earth's surface directly in various ways without going all the way into space. But that's not fun, isn't it? Let's say two persons start at the north pole and walk away at a right angle to each other. In your FE world they meet after 1/4 or 3/4 of the whole distance around the world as seen on the attached picture. On a spherical world they meet after 1/2 the way back to the north pole. This can and has been checked. If you prefer to travel short distances, start off at a small angle and you're expected to meet again much sooner on a flat earth. Also, it's worth checking whether the gravitational acceleration really is constant at 8.91m/s². Various measurements indicate that it isn't the same everywhere on the world. For example, it's height dependent, which can be verified by measuring the acceleration of a falling object both on top of a mountain and in a valley. How can those deviations be explained with a flat earth model? After all, if the flat earth isn't accelerated at the same rate everywhere, it's being torn apart within no time. Another effect that needs to be explained on a flat earth is Foucault's pendulum, which is easy to build everywhere around the world. The rotation of the plane of swing has already been found to be dependent on the latitude (which would need to be redefined flat earth in a self-consistent way, if that's at all possible). I'm sure there are many more predictions such a model makes. That's the beauty of physical models. They make a lot of predictions and all of them need to fit real observations. It's not an easy task to devise such models of reality and it's nice to see in how many ways a bad model fails. That way, we learn to appreciate the good ideas.
That sounds fun. Unfortunately, all the pictures I hung on walls so far disagree with you. They aren't pushed towards the nearest surface (the wall), but the floor instead. Why does inanimate matter refuse to believe in your bubble theory, polscie?
nearest surface is still the floor. the wall is not the surface of the picture because the pictures and the wall, they stay vertical to each other. pictures stand vertically, floor lays down horizontally. happy arguing. polscie.
I always hang my pictures parallel to the surface of the wall and that's what most people do where I live. How do you find out whether a surface is horizontal, vertical, or something in between?
Sorry, but if you believe in UA and flat Earth, your beliefs are indeed, dumb. Dumber than a sack of hammers. Not all beliefs and opinions hold equal weight (pun intended), especially those that have been proven false for hundreds (gravity) or thousands (flat Earth) of years.
You are not observing curvature anywhere on the earths surface. The celestial bodies have a pull from the way the celestial gears (CG) work which allow for deviations in UA from higher altitue. This also acounts for you pendulum. However the pendulum has a much more Detailed explaination as im sure this will not suffice your inquiry. Please allow me to consult my notes.
So what you have said is gravity has been proven false for hundreds of years, and the earth being flat has been proven false for thousands. Before that you called my beliefs "dumber than a sack of hammers". I must confess that I do know what you were trying to say. You most likely had exhausted all of your power to think conjuring up that joke you made about equal weight.
You're right, I should have worded that differently. At least you say you still understood my meaning. You believe that there is no such thing as gravity, rather this effect is caused by a disk-shaped Earth flying "upward" through space, sort of pushing us down. And you have the nerve to claim I lack the power to think? Unbelievable. Please tell us, why do you believe this?
First, I do not rightly believe you actually lack the ability to think simply because of a simple typo, that would be absurd as I make these mistakes as well. I only said that as a sort of reciprocation to your rather unlettered 'sack of hammers' analogy. Secondly, why do you believe in gravity? Have you observed the earth being round? Science has explained many things in this world and has attempted to explain a great deal more. You may be surprised how much is based on theory. Your signature has a quote saying 'certainty is absurd' however you dismiss something before you even know a small portion of the theories backing it.
Could you explain what that sentence means? What are celestial bodies? Are they small or big compared to the Earth's surface? How do they pull at high altitudes? Where are they relative to the flat earth? How do they move? What are celestial gears? Is there a way to observe them at least indirectly? I apologize for bombarding you with questions, but I need to know what the words you use mean to think about your idea.
Fair enough. Because we can see its effects. We can accurately measure it. We can make testable and verifiable predictions on how it should behave under various conditions and how it interacts with objects and causes various objects to interact. Yes, I have. Obviously I have never been to space (Earth orbit), but I have flown in planes. At high altitudes, you can clearly see the curvature of the Earth. This would not exist if it were flat. Second, you are making a common logical flaw. We do not need to personally observe, participate in, or discover every facet of nature and science in order to accept them as true. If we did, all progress of knowledge would have came to a halt thousands of years ago. The human life span is no where nearly long enough to personally verify every piece of human knowledge. Just about everything is in some way build on the work and/or knowledge that came before it by someone else. Some would label this as "faith", but in their context, that would be fallacious and deceitful (not necessarily saying you would do this, but I just wanted to address it before someone inevitably mentions it). This statement shows a fundamental ignorance on science and "theory". It is unfortunate, yet very common. A scientific theory is not the same as the common definition - it is not a guess. A scientific theory is basically a model used to explain observed facts. The shape of the Earth is a fact, and not a theory. We have directly observed it, and we are able to precisely measure it. It is technically an ellipsoid, but calling it a sphere would be close enough for most contexts. First, I have read various explanations and rationals behind those who believe in a flat Earth. However, that is irrelevant. Something that which directly conflicts with observable facts, can be immediately dismissed. In other words, we know the shape of the Earth, and it's not flat. Therefore, when someone claims that the Earth is flat, it can be dismissed without first knowing the reason(s) why that person makes the claim. On a clear sunny day, if I were to say to you that the sky is red with green stripes, you would be fully correct to point up and say, "no, it's blue". I don't even have to explain to you why I believe that, my reasons don't matter. My claim would directly conflict with observable fact, and thus, is wrong. You still have not answered why you think gravity does not exist, and also why you believe the Earth is flat. Lastly, I want to apologize if anything I've said has come off as hostile. Most of the people on this board with whom I regularly debate these types of issues with act that way toward me, so I naturally sort of jumped right into that "mode". It was not intentional.
Apoplogy accepted good friend. You cannot rightly observe alleged curvature of a so called round earth from any altitute. Yes, you can observe gravity and its effects except if you were to jump off a table you would observe the earth pulling you down, I observe the earth rising up at me. Im not saying just because something cannot be scientifically proven that anyone would want to give up and abandon hope of ever discovering an answer. Nobody thinks like that as you said. Many go on with the most prominent ideas in the field and attempt to build off of them. Gravitational pull really makes the universe appear to make sense. All these things rotating as they revovle around larger bodies. However there are many theories which logically challenge this.
Where as you claim to have observed curvature, I and many others have not at extremely high altitudes. It looks flat to me.
No its ok, I deserved it. Celestial gears is the most prominent theory backing how the celestial bodies, (sun, moon, anti-moon to allow eclipse, stars, and planets) The sun is approximately 3200 miles above the earths surface And moves along over the equator acting a bit like a spot light. Its distance and position does vary throughout time giving the opportunity to observe seasonal climate change. The celestial bodies are much closer than what is suspected under round earth theory (RET), so we can experience a pull (albeit very slight) from the celestial bodies. There are diagrams providing a visual representation of all this. I communicate now from a cellular however I will attempt to locate these and post the desired link.
In regards to the sun, objects of course get smaller as they get further away and light bends upwards giving the appearance of horizons.
