A question for flat earth people

[Chinchilla]

If I were a heliocentrist, I'd answer - 'that's just the atmosphere trying to keep up with the Earth's spin. Gravity is mostly sticking it to the ground, but it slips a bit, 'cause it's old and tired'.

Then you could rightly ask, 'Where is the relationship between Earth-spin and change in wind speed/direction, based on the location measured on the alleged ball-Earth?'

Then I would say 'There are other factors involved in wind speed.'

Then you would rightly say 'There is no evidence the alleged Earth-spin has anything to do with wind, and therefore, what is wind?'

yea exactly that

 

[Bordeaux]

You would notice that Sam gets to a point where you could see her, but you could not longer see the marker. As Sam moved further away, more and more of her body detail would be lost/blurred with surroundings.

Page 161 of Earth not a Globe, by Samuel Birley Rowbotham (1881) provides information on how visual detail is lost with distance.
View attachment 239012

Below is a link to a site providing a free pdf of the entire book.

http://www.freepdf.info/index.php?post/Birley-Rowbotham-Samuel-Earth-not-a-globe

"I saw a man pursuing the horizon;
Round and round they sped.
I was disturbed at this;
I accosted the man.
"It is futile," I said,
"You can never -- "

"You lie," he cried,
And ran on."

by Stephen Crane

 

[Tom 1]

If gravity holds atmosphere then what is wind ?

If you jump up off the ground you are temporarily able to overcome gravity in a limited way, or, put in another way gravity isn’t so strong that it doesn’t allow some movement. The force of air moving from an area of high pressure to one of low pressure (one example of wind) is strong enough that it can act within the pull of gravity, in the same way that you can jump briefly above the earth.

 

[Tom 1]

"I saw a man pursuing the horizon;
Round and round they sped.
I was disturbed at this;
I accosted the man.
"It is futile," I said,
"You can never -- "

"You lie," he cried,
And ran on."

by Stephen Crane

Stephen Crane kind of likes pursuing the horizon. Maybe he’s the guy to ask.

 

[Tom 1]

Stephen Crane kind of likes pursuing the horizon. Maybe he’s the guy to ask.

"I saw a man pursuing the horizon;
Round and round they sped.
I was disturbed at this;
I accosted the man.
"It is futile," I said,
"You can never -- "

"You lie," he cried,
And ran on."

by Stephen Crane

Er wait a minute I was thinking of Nicholas Crane. Ignore my last post

 

[Bordeaux]

Stephen Crane kind of likes pursuing the horizon. Maybe he’s the guy to ask.

I don't think he does; I think he just likes writing about people who do.

Anyway, he has long since passed on. I don't think attempting to look past that horizon is a good idea.

 

[Tom 1]

I don't think attempting to look past that horizon is a good idea.

It might get you an appearance on daytime tv

 

[Doctor.Sphinx]

If you jump up off the ground you are temporarily able to overcome gravity in a limited way, or, put in another way gravity isn’t so strong that it doesn’t allow some movement. The force of air moving from an area of high pressure to one of low pressure (one example of wind) is strong enough that it can act within the pull of gravity, in the same way that you can jump briefly above the earth.

If the Earth really were spinning about it's alleged axis, and revolving around the sun, and gravity really were sticking the atmosphere in place, the atmosphere would need to move at different speeds to keep up (dependent on it's height).

This force should make any others (like small density fluctuations due to temperature and pressure) superfluous. That wind exists, that it varies with height, and that it is not consistent by location with the theory of the Earth's spin, is a fairly damning argument against heliocentrism.

 

[Sam91]

You would notice that Sam gets to a point where you could see her, but you could not longer see the marker. As Sam moved further away, more and more of her body detail would be lost/blurred with surroundings.

Page 161 of Earth not a Globe, by Samuel Birley Rowbotham (1881) provides information on how visual detail is lost with distance.
View attachment 239012

Below is a link to a site providing a free pdf of the entire book.

http://www.freepdf.info/index.php?post/Birley-Rowbotham-Samuel-Earth-not-a-globe

You could have made the markers less round!

 

[Tom 1]

If the Earth really were spinning about it's alleged axis, and revolving around the sun, and gravity really were sticking the atmosphere in place, the atmosphere would need to move at different speeds to keep up (dependent on it's height).

This force should make any others (like small density fluctuations due to temperature and pressure) superfluous. That wind exists, that it varies with height, and that it is not consistent by location with the theory of the Earth's spin, is a fairly damning argument against heliocentrism.

I think the relative effects of inertia on mass and density would explain any difference in movement of particles, or there might be some other explanation. I think the interplay between temperature differences, related pressure differences and terrain all factor into how wind behaves. I don’t think there’s just one answer that’s straightforward enough to be easily argued against.

 

[Chinchilla]

If you jump up off the ground you are temporarily able to overcome gravity in a limited way,

No , I push myself from ground to swim through air which is fluit but then fall back because of density .
Likewise birds use wings to push themselfes above the air to fly higher .

 

[Sam91]

No , I push myself from ground to swim through air which is fluit but then fall back because of density .
Likewise birds use wings to push themselfes above the air to fly higher .

If it was density wouldn't that mean that very obese people could jump higher than thin ones?

 

[Chinchilla]

If it was density wouldn't that mean that very obese people could jump higher than thin ones?

Depends in which fluid , in water for example obese person can't walk on the bottom of lake or does not have to swim to float above the water level , while slim person if not doing anything will go under water and is almost unable to float or will lose too much energy faster trying to .

Don't know about jumping good time for experiments .

 

[A_Thinker]

No , I push myself from ground to swim through air which is fluit but then fall back because of density .
Likewise birds use wings to push themselfes above the air to fly higher .

Birds fly through the air, not above the air.

They need air to breathe.

 

[A_Thinker]

Eh, I dunno'. All of the theories I've seen were still in the wild speculation stage. As per forces, in general, I have yet to see a good explanation as to the root cause of any of the basic forces. Physicists get so good at describing a thing that they sometimes forget that they haven't explained it yet.

One need not understand the cause of a particular phenomenon to observe it's effects.

For example, one need not understand the physics of fire to cook breakfast.

 

[A_Thinker]

If gravity holds atmosphere then what is wind ?

Gravity is a force, not a lock.

Gravity holds you to the Earth, nevertheless, you can move (though not off of the Earth).

Air acts in very similar manner ...

 

[Chinchilla]

Birds fly through the air, not above the air.

They need air to breathe.

They push air from above thier wings to below thier wings that what I meant like somebody using oar

 

[Doctor.Sphinx]

No , I push myself from ground to swim through air which is fluit but then fall back because of density .
Likewise birds use wings to push themselfes above the air to fly higher .

But insects fly via vortices in the fluid, I think.

 

[Doctor.Sphinx]

You could have made the markers less round!

You don't like round markers?

 

[JackRT]

How can we have sent probes, not to mention men to the moon when the Van Allen belt supposedly prevents us from doing so? Also, can you explain then how the vacuum of space is not extracting all the atmosphere of this earth when compared to the weakness of gravity which is supposed to be holding on to it?

The Van Allen radiation belts are indeed a serious hazard to any astronaut spending an extended time within them. All the earth orbit manned missions' including the international space station are well below this radiation hazard. However, the manned missions to the moon had to transit the VA belts both outbound and inbound. A lethal radiation dosage is 300 Rad in one hour. At the time of these missions the VA belts had been well mapped out in terms of radiation intensities. The Apollo mission's average speed through the belts was about 25,000 km/hr for a transit time of about 53 min each both outbound and inbound. Each transit would have resulted in crew members receiving about 12 Rads of radiation. So each astronaut on each complete Mission would have received about 24 Rads or about 8% of a lethal dose. Is there a risk? Yes, but it was a calculated risk. All such voyages of exploration were calculated risks. Some never came back. Lief Erikson, Christopher Columbus and Ferdinand Magellan did. Well, Magellan died in the last leg of the journey home, but his crew did make it back with his records. They were all calculated risks. That is how human progress takes place. The risks may vary but they are all risks.

In an earlier post I pointed out that the lighter more volatile gases, like He and H2, have boiled off the earths atmosphere. With a much weaker gravity all gases have boiled off the Moon and all but the heaviest gases, like CO2 and N, have boiled off of Mars.