
Flat Earth and gravity?


The electromagnetic field encompassing Earth is the sole possibility for electricity on Earth as well as electrostatics and of course electromagnetism. Electricity can be pulled from thin air, the air we breathe , it is electrostatically charged which allows wireless transmissions to travel through it to be received as well as what allows mitochondrial cell activity to operate such as heartbeat. The heart stops, which can happen with the right shock from current or statics, it is jumpstarted with electroshock. This energy field is first over water to make life possible.
Man can travel outside an beyond this energy field to still achieve +/- spark for the function of lights , camera , action, as well as electronics, phone calls from the moon (which would need to penetrate and pass through the radiation belt to then enter Earth’s energy field intact to be received by Houston or Nixon…on a landline) and remote control cars on Mars.
Only one of those paragraphs can be true at the same time and logic gives away the answer. Universal studios adopted a round Earth logo in the late 1910’s - early 1920’s , decades before NASA produced what looks coincidentally like the evolved logo of a filming firm that coincidentally has replication of a lunar landscape. To then assume the Earth is round since Man could not possibly have been far enough out to capture a full photo of Earth, is as silly as assuming it is flat.
A swimming pool could be made to stretch from East and West coast to demonstrate. Water always will level itself regardless of the contour of the bottom of what contains it. Never will the surface of water be influenced by hills , holes, or change of altitude of what it sits on, never will the surface bend to conform to a curve. Does the surface of a pool slant as does the bottom as it approaches the deep end? no. The fact that a wet spinning ball will sling water outward and off won’t change either because of the size of the ball. If spinning, only one star in the sky that was centered with the axis would appear sitting still.
Even the most devout of Christians will snicker & sneer at the flat earth debate as they claim faith in Christ as they call Him a liar.
In scripture Christ said that EVERY eye of Man will witness His return. There was no exception mentioned for those on the opposite side of a globe.
No one this stupid can exist.
Right? The question asker has to be trolling.
Yea, must be trolling. That's the most intelligent reply I've had. What a way to prove someone wrong dipshit
If you're not trolling then you are literally too stupid to live.
Says the doosh bag with no replies
NASA Technical Paper 2768; User's Manual for LINEAR, a FORTRAN Program to Derive Linear Aircraft Models (Page 12, Program Overview) ... “Within the program, the nonlinear equations of motion include 12 states representing a rigid aircraft flying in a stationary atmosphere over a flat nonrotating Earth” eat shit dumbass
I have 14 more for your retarded ass
Linear in that context refers to an equation you brain dead nut.
(sigh) The only point that I agree with here is when you say at the end, "I mean, come on!"
All of your questions can easily be answered by anyone who studied physics in high school.
Q1. No, I don't accept geocentrism, because it's not true. Heliocentrism is. This has been known since at least the time of Copernicus back in the 16th century.
Q2. Gravity is, according to GR, the warping of spacetime in the immediate vicinity of objects that possess sufficient mass to have that effect. Space, as it turns out, is elastic; it can, and does, stretch.
Q3. Clouds are amorphous concentrations of water vapour, formed around ice crystals. Water vapour is extremely light, and clouds are basically the same as condensation trails that are left behind by aircraft (and which silly conspiracy theorists call "chemtrails").
Q4. The point about the constellations (which you comically call "consolations"), don't take into consideration the vastness of space, for example. The constellations actually do move in the sky as the earth orbits the sun, but the effect isn't as large as you seem to think it should be because you must be one of those people who believe the stars are just small lanterns that are only a few kilometres above the dome, or some other such sh**.
Q5. The curvature and motion don't elude us though. The curvature can, and has been for thousands of years now, observed whenever a ship sailed off over the horizon. The hull disappears first, then the sails/superstructure. As for the motion of the earth around the sun, you observe the passing of the seasons don't you? Why do you think it becomes summer, autumn, winter and spring? It has to do with the axial tilt (of 23.5 degrees) of the earth in relation to the sun.
Q6. Gravity is an extremely weak force, which is why we don't see large ships attract smaller ones.
Look, just go back to school, and actually learn something this time.
How do you propose winning an argument by being a dick. I can't believe you're so naive you think we came from dirt. That in itself is appalling and it's extremely hard to take anyone serious.
Ships leave your perspective, not go over a non existent curve. The horizon rises with the eye of the observer. The higher you go, youd think you'd have to keep looking down if we're on a ball. Cognitive dissonance is strong with you. You've been well indoctrinated.
How was I "being a dick"? DO explain! Besides, regardless of that, am I actually wrong? I never claimed we "came from dirt"; now you're just making things up, things I never said.
Look, just admit that you're wrong about this. It's not hard to do.
To add to this (excellent) reply, I'd like to point that constellations actually DON'T stay the same over long 25,000 year cycles because the Earth is wobbling slightly on its axis. In 13,000 years from now, the constellation Capricorn will be visible in the summer night sky instead of the winter. (For those in the Northern Hemisphere).
So buddy, you're wrong on a few counts here.
That's not science Derek. That's not something we have or will observe.
NASA's Reference Publication #1207 entitled Derivation and Definition of a Linear Aircraft Model assumes the Earth is flat and not rotating. Produced in August 1988, the publication details obscure concepts such as "Rotational Acceleration" and "Earth-Relative Velocity. " Or to a layman, how planes lift off, fly over, and land upon the Earth. Immediately following the cover page and index on the very first line under Summary we see this: "This report documents the derivation and definition of a linear aircraft model for a rigid aircraft of constant mass flying over a flat, nonrotating Earth."
American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics; General Equations of Motion for a Damaged Asymmetric Aircraft (Page 2, Section II) ... “In this paper, the rigid body equations of motion over a flat non-rotating earth are developed…”
NASA Technical Memorandum 104330; Predicted Performance of a Thrust-Enhanced SR-71 Aircraft with an External Payload (Page 8 - Digital Performance Simulation Description) "The DPS equations of motion use four assumptions... a nonrotating Earth
NASA Technical Note: A Method for Reducing The Sensitivity of Optimal Nonlinear Systems to Parameter Uncertainty (Page 12 Problem Statement) ... "(2) A flat, nonrotating Earth"
Shall I continue. Look, just admit you're wrong. It's not that hard to do. Perhaps doing research and not believing your fairy tales would be beneficial. For everyone
NASA Technical Paper 2768; User's Manual for LINEAR, a FORTRAN Program to Derive Linear Aircraft Models (Page 12, Program Overview) ... “Within the program, the nonlinear equations of motion include 12 states representing a rigid aircraft flying in a stationary atmosphere over a flat nonrotating Earth”
"Obscure concepts" like rotational acceleration (also known as angular acceleration). Oh dear! LOL :D
Obscure? That's something I learnt about in high school!
It's also known as centripetal acceleration, and is equal to the velocity squared divided by the radius.
Do you even know who Jack Parsons is? Probably didn't know he was in an occult with Alister Crowley either huh? Crowley, ya know, Barbara Bush's father? The beast? Ya, that guy. You guys and your make believe wishful thinking. Its all magical right. Makes sense why Walt Disney was one of the founders of NASA. Did school teach you that too. Lol. What a shame. All that learning in indoctrination camps have you blinded and unable to think for yourselves. Don't question anything! Obviously you didn't
*Learned. Learnt.. that's comical
"Learnt" is the (correct) English spelling. You Yanks spell it as "learned", so the fact that you don't even know this is "comical". :P
Who cares about Jack Parsons? What does he have to do with any of this, and who the hell cares if he knew Crowley?
Google search Parsons Yankee doodle
I don't have to "google" him, I already know who he was.
Nice rebuttals on the NASA publications there, Rachy. I was gonna do ie but it didn't look right. Look, I love you. Just not your brain. Its not to be admired and it's sad it's going to waste bc you don't question what you learnt lol
Absolutely hilarious. A moronic flat-Earther telling ME that my "brain is not to be admired". Wow. The sheer hubris, the gall, the rank stupidity of everything you've said thus far!
By the way, it's nice to see that you actually understand (and can spell) the word "learnt". That's something I guess. Maybe there is (some) hope for you after all :D
Show me an authentic picture or video showing the Earth's curvature that hasn't been manipulated or fabricated that's in accordance to the theorem they use, and I'll become a believer. If not, stfu. Also, why does NASA ALSO say we've never left LEO. interesting.. I'll wait
Still no rebuttals. Lol. Didn't think so
I love you
Just please please don't have children. If you have already, God help us!
If I did show you an authentic video, you would just lamely say, "Oh that's not real, it's fake, it's CGI", so I fail to see the point.
Hmm... Xper level 1, no followers, and following only 3, and no MHO's. Yep, it's confirmed; you're just a troll. Good bye!
Oh, and could you do me a small favour? When you find the "edge" of the Earth, could you just jump off? And yes, the word 'favour' is spelt with a u. Also the word 'spelt' is the (proper) English spelling of the word that you Yankees spell as 'spelled'.
Also typical and yes of course I would point out what you blindly refuse to see. A fish eye lens was probably used. Keep trying on those rebuttals bc you have me in a corner
Just a troll? How about I'm new to the app. Ever think about that
Even if I jumped off the edge, your foolish gravity would just keep me in place huh lol.. get pissed all you want my lady. Most of you guys do with your nonsensical jargon when you don't have the answers
On the (very) off chance that you're not trolling and have somehow managed to escape the asylum long enough to post here, I'd like to point that we have historical evidence of the precession of the equinoxes. Ancient Greek astrologers noted that in the summer months, around the solstice, the sun was in the constellation of Cancer. That's why the 23.5 degree line north and south of the globe are called Tropic of... In the case of the North, it's Cancer because that's the constellation that the sun passed through on June 21 or thereabouts. If you look today, you'll see the sun in Gemini. Why do you propose that is?
Okay, so pretty much all your "points" are literally proved by science. Feel free of course to link yours to disprove all the points and prove a flat earth :D
I can't yet
Is there a law to never question science?
Putting your FAITH in science books is a dangerous move
Opinion
7Opinion
What do you mean where did gravity come from? Gravity is a feature created from space time having matter.
I mean, it isn't like you are doing much thinking right? Clouds and oceans have the same weight? Maybe the more massive things are. . . the more they are attracted by gravity. Maybe that is a one of the most fundamental constructs in this universe.
And we are not going in five different directions. We are on the rotating surface of the earth. But the only true motion we experience is motion relative to this reference frame. Just like if you were on a train, you are not moving with respect to objects on the train if you are sitting. But if you get up and move, all of a sudden you are in motion.
Even if from the perspective of a person outside the train, you have been moving the entire time.
The reason clouds float is because they are pushed up by warm air. Gravity pulls them down but because they are so light and have such a big surface area, the buoyancy force is stronger. Air and water are both pulled down by gravity. If they weren't they'd just float around and leak into space.
The curvature and motion of the Earth don't elude us. You can actually watch the sun set twice if you climb up a tall building after you saw the sun set on the ground. This is because of the curvature of the Earth. You can also see different constellations in the Southern and Northern hemisphere, more evidence of curvature. Astronomers can measure the distance to different stars due to a phenomenon called parallax, which only happens because the Earth moves around the Sun.
Simple, gravity is a weak force and the change in density overcomes gravity to some extent. It's like if you pour oil into water, the water will rise to the top and the oil will sink to the bottom. This is because of density, not gravity affecting the two substances differently.
The Baable says the earth is a disk so the earth MUST be flat. (either that or the Baable is false).
Hmm, which is more likely? A flat Earth, or a false Bible? Gee, this question really has me scratching my head :D :)
Where does it say that in the bible? That's like me saying science says blah blah blah so it must be true. Works both ways. Keep trying tho. However, makes more sense saying in the beginning God created the heavens and earth (time space matter) than in the beginning dirt. Kinda has me scratching my head. Where'd dirt come from? What about the energy? Gamma rays? Hmmm. Your religion is a lot more stupid and nonsensical. But don't question that huh? Lol. Ridiculous
1 Chronicles 16:30
1 Samuel 2:8
Isaiah 40:22
According to the Bible, the Earth is flat, therefore the Bible is wrong and is not "the word of God".
Lmao. You have literally no evidence whatsoever of a ball earth bc everything is CGI. Composite pictures. While you're at it read 2 Thessalonians chapter 2 9-11.. cognitive dissonance lol to the T
CGI? Are you insane? Why am I even asking this? Of course you are.
I'm actually quite intelligent. And I know when you're stumped bc instead of answering questions with a sophisticated rebuttal, you want to attack what you THINK my character. Typical. But no no, you're not being a dick!
@asskNEthing is trolling.
Your last statement is flawed. The reason that doesn't happen is because it doesn't have enough mass to generate its own gravitational field
Also its ok that we dont have an answer for everything let, this is why we have theortical physicists
there's compelling evidence that speaks for and against this
Only for people who question everything and don't put their faith in science books
LET GOD BE TRUE AND EVERY MAN A LIAR THE EARTH IS FLAT WITH A DOME
https://www.youtube.com/embed/SyyrhUKgSsoHaha.
You can also add your opinion below!
Most Helpful Opinions