There IS no gravity.

[A_Thinker]

Really?

I can set two snooker balls on a smooth table.. so close that you can just see daylight between them... If I leave them there of a month....they will still be in the exact same positions when I check them again.

From our joint Engineering background, you know that's because there are other forces acting to keep the balls from moving ... namely friction and inertia and the pull of earth's gravity.

If you subtract these other forces to the greatest extent possible, you can demonstrate the attraction ...

 

[rambot]

So sorry... you cannot watch a 58 minute video that shows mountains in different places, all viewed from one spot, while being different distances away... show no proof of diminishing elevations, as would be necessary for proof of a curve?

using an uneven horizon in any way to disprove or prove the curvature of the earth is unbelievably stupid and dishonestly trying to ignore appropriate and simple methods of evidence. Not only that but this is like, the very definition of a straw man.
To be clear your argument is, essentially seeing mountains of different heights from one spot without them getting smaller is should not be happenning therefore proof the earth is not curved.
If the curve is 8"/m2 you honestly expect to see that 8" difference in mountains give most are only a few miles away? Of those mountains are 4000ft tall? Come on guy. That's ludicrous.

This, after requesting photos that show that we can see farther than we should and objects are in view that should not be?

this does neither of those things. You may think it does but it does not.

Since you have no time to view something that you requested... I have no time to read your entire post.....

sure. Its not that you can't address the math. So I have to waste my time on your video but you don't even have to look at mine. Sounds predictable.

I think that you don't want to watch it.... because you will then have to accept what it proves

it doesn't prove anything because it starts out with absolutely NOT evidence and then being incredulous that it is anything other than a nail in a Sphereoid earth.
I don't want to watch it Because it's 58 minutes long. Is that REALLY such a crazy thing to think? If it was 58 minutes and it starts off with some really convincing evidence then I would watch each piece of evidence he presents until it gets shoddy. But judging by the rubric that guy employs right off the bat as to what makes good evidence I can already tell his standard is too low.

A word of advice... if you ask for someone to search for something... and they take the time to find it and post it for you..... Have the respect, selflessness and integrity to watch it.

cool your jets there Copernicus. You don't need to be upset that the 30 second Google search you did to get that video was wasted effort. As I said, I watched as much of that video as the quality of evidence suggested I do.

I don't have the time to do your research for you in the first place... let alone post something that you are just going to ignore for fear of it proving you wrong.

1. I didn't ignore it at all. I addressed it and my problem s with it. You are welcome to explain why the, say 4-10ft (generous) curvature of the earth would be noticed on 4000Dr mpuntains. curvature of the earth SHOULD.
You make it sound like I'm SCARED to be proven wrong. That is straight up laughable. God makes me scared of nothing. Every piece of earthly knowledge I have could be proven wrong tomorrow and I would feel happy in Jesus. But God has also given me a brain to use and the education to employ it to a pretty good effect. He also calls on me not to bear false witness. Because of the last two things I don't think I'll ever be a flat earther. But that doesn't mean solid evidence cant convince me. Again . anything could be right. But anything would be backed up with research and observable evidence.


2. You don't need to play the victim card here. Just address my concerns. If you think that evidence is airtight explain why it's airtight given the context of the theory you are trying to disprove.

Did you expect me to flip over and be an automatic flat earther because you showed 1 video? Did you not expect me to address the shoddy logic (in not saying science cause no science was involved)? Perhaps your trajectory was to unquestioningly watch FE video after FE video without getting answers to your questions (or just not asking them). But we are not all you. I believe God expects me to question things and ask experts when necessary.

 

[Arius]

There have been circumpolar trips. I have flown the entirety around the globe on different trips. My parents have done it in different directions, on several occasions.

As for the earth being curved?
Airplanes, sensibly, will always take the shortest distance between their departure and and arrival point. To do that on a flat earth, they would be following a straight latitudinal line. But they don't do that at all. The follow curved travel lines.

Why would airlines travel an extra few hundred kilometers in wasted fuel by going in these archs if the earth was flat?

How many times in the past 40 years have I taken a flight from Phoenix to San Diego and stopped on the way in Las Vegas!
The reason planes fly all over the place is because NASA says so: "Captain, we know it's dumbfounding, but the earth is a globe, so act like it's a globe. Just do as we tell you!"

 

[Arius]

From our joint Engineering background, you know that's because there are other forces acting to keep the balls from moving ... namely friction and inertia and the pull of earth's gravity.

If you subtract these other forces to the greatest extent possible, you can demonstrate the attraction ...

My Brother, thank you, .. thank you, .. thank you, .. I could kiss you, .. actually I did kiss you (now I have to wipe the screen), because with this video:

you just provided contradictory evidence to the Brian Cox/NASA Giant Vacuum Chamber Bowling ball - Feather drop gravity experiment.

Where if gravity existed (as you shown in the video) the bowling ball should have fallen first.

Remember the Globetard rules to dropping two objects no matter what size difference, that: "All mass, no matter the size/mass will fall to the earth at 9.807 m/s^2" (on the moon they all supposedly drop 1.62 m/s^2, on Mars 3.711 m/s^2 etc.) Now you show this video (which I never seen before, most likely NASA keeps it from the public for the obvious reasons I'm just pointing out) which also contradicts the "Elephant/feather drop fall at the same rate" GRAVITY claim.

As I stated in another post, that dropping the 16,000 lb. Elephant and the .00025 g feather, the feather would of gravitate/stuck to the elephant less than half way down, yet NASA NEVER shows such scientific experiments on their ISS so called "space-walks", .. wonder why?

I'm not even going to mention all the G-force effects that the god Helios aka sun, and moon would have on those lead balls if gravity existed.

Besides, this video is also good for proving the earth is stationary, not spinning, wobbling, orbiting around the sun, twirling through the imaginary galaxy and whatnot,

.. because those weights would be moving all over the place. That's how Gyroscopes help detect movement in airplanes, yet absolutely no evidence of all these 'supposed' movements of earth.

Thanx again.

 

[Hieronymus]

My Brother, thank you, .. thank you, .. thank you, .. I could kiss you, .. actually I did kiss you (now I have to wipe the screen), because with this video:

you just provided contradictory evidence to the Brian Cox/NASA Giant Vacuum Chamber Bowling ball - Feather drop gravity experiment.

Where if gravity existed (as you shown in the video) the bowling ball should have fallen first.

NO!
Stop listening to fools!!

Gravitational acceleration is the same for any object falling down without wind or other drag (like in a vacuum chamber)

Listen:
What takes longer to get up to speed?
An empty shopping cart, or a full shopping cart?
Yes, the full one.
You apply the same force to both carts so the heavy one accelerated slowly.
Now, what has more gravitational force pulling down?
The feather or the bowling ball?
The bowling ball.
And that's why it accelerates just as fast as the light weight feather.
So, with gravity, the downward force is always as big as it needs to be to get an acceleration in freefall of 9.8 meters per second per second, or meters per second squared, or m/s²
That's how man discovered g = 9.8m/s²

I've performed the experiment numerous times when i was 'the experiment guy' in a school
I used a feather and a steel bearing ball in a 1.5 meter long glass tube.
Depending on the mood our old vacuum pumps were in, it shows perfectly that g is the same for both objects.

Remember the Globetard rules to dropping two objects no matter what size difference, that: "All mass, no matter the size/mass will fall to the earth at 9.807 m/s^2" (on the moon they all supposedly drop 1.62 m/s^2, on Mars 3.711 m/s^2 etc.) Now you show this video (which I never seen before, most likely NASA keeps it from the public for the obvious reasons I'm just pointing out) which also contradicts the "Elephant/feather drop fall at the same rate" GRAVITY claim.

Oh i see.
So you do know but don't understand, yet you think you're smarter...

As I stated in another post, that dropping the 16,000 lb. Elephant and the .00025 g feather, the feather would of gravitate/stuck to the elephant less than half way down, yet NASA NEVER shows such scientific experiments on their ISS so called "space-walks", .. wonder why?

Ah, yes, the "NASA fakes stuff so the earth is flat" argument....

I'll refrain from commenting on the rest of your drivel.

 

[Arius]

it doesn't prove anything because it starts out with absolutely NOT evidence and then being incredulous that it is anything other than a nail in a Sphereoid earth.
I don't want to watch it Because it's 58 minutes long. Is that REALLY such a crazy thing to think? If it was 58 minutes and it starts off with some really convincing evidence then I would watch each piece of evidence he presents until it gets shoddy. But judging by the rubric that guy employs right off the bat as to what makes good evidence I can already tell his standard is too low.
cool your jets there Copernicus. You don't need to be upset that the 30 second Google search you did to get that video was wasted effort. As I said, I watched as much of that video as the quality of evidence suggested I do.

Hey @JacksBratt what @rambot is asking for is actual scientific videos with "quality of evidence" like this:

Only 1 minute 56 seconds long, and covers all the math., .. this is how their "moon" was formed, spun around in orbit of the earth, and then both chunks of rocks (Globe and their moon) got smoothed out nice and round as they rubbed themselves on the sand paper; Spacetime Fabric over Carl Sagan millions and billions, and trillions of years:

 

[rambot]

How many times in the past 40 years have I taken a flight from Phoenix to San Diego and stopped on the way in Las Vegas!
The reason planes fly all over the place is because NASA says so: "Captain, we know it's dumbfounding, but the earth is a globe, so act like it's a globe. Just do as we tell you!"

I have no idea what this is saying of the argument is here. Are you supporting or contradicting my statement?

 

[Hieronymus]

Hey @JacksBratt what @rambot is asking for is actual scientific videos with "quality of evidence" like this:

Only 1 minute 56 seconds long, and covers all the math., .. this is how their "moon" was formed, spun around in orbit of the earth, and then both chunks of rocks (Globe and their moon) got smoothed out nice and round as they rubbed themselves on the sand paper; Spacetime Fabric over Carl Sagan millions and billions, and trillions of years:

That has nothing to do with present day reality of our spherical spinning earth and the moon that spins around it.

It seems your only arguments are like "they lied about something and therefore the earth is flat and gravity does not exist".

 

[Hieronymus]

I have no idea what this is saying of the argument is here. Are you supporting or contradicting my statement?

Contradicting (or ignoring) everything any "globetard" says, apparently...

 

[Hieronymus]

I'm leaving this thread.
All has been said and my behaviour gets worse.

Take care all.

 

[Aldebaran]

NO!
Stop listening to fools!!

Gravitational acceleration is the same for any object falling down without wind or other drag (like in a vacuum chamber)

Listen:
What takes longer to get up to speed?
An empty shopping cart, or a full shopping cart?
Yes, the empty one.
You apply the same force to both carts so the heavy one accelerated slowly.
Now, what has more gravitational force pulling down?
The feather or the bowling ball?
The bowling ball.
And that's why it accelerates just as fast as the light weight feather.
So, with gravity, the downward force is always as big as it needs to be to get an acceleration in freefall of 9.8 meters per second per second, or meters per second squared, or m/s²
That's how man discovered g = 9.8m/s²

I've performed the experiment numerous times when i was 'the experiment guy' in a school
I used a feather and a steel bearing ball in a 1.5 meter long glass tube.
Depending on the mood our old vacuum pumps were in, it shows perfectly that g is the same for both objects.Oh i see.
So you do know but don't understand, yet you think you're smarter...
Ah, yes, the "NASA fakes stuff so the earth is flat" argument....

I'll refrain from commenting on the rest of your drivel.

At the top of your post, I think you meant that the FULL cart takes longer to get up to speed.

 

[JacksBratt]

You have made 13,521 posts on this forum... You ask for examples of something and then say that you don't have time to show the respect of observing the response.


So... do you only have time to talk and no time to listen?

Then, you comment on the evidence that you failed to even observe... making comments that only show your ignorance.

So. I will point out your ignorance for you:

using an uneven horizon in any way to disprove or prove the curvature of the earth is unbelievably stupid

Seriously... a mountain peak that has an known elevation, above sea level, lets say 3000 feet... that is visible from 100 miles away.. should be 3,666 feet below the line of site on the proposed globe model. In other words, you should not see any of it.

and dishonestly trying to ignore appropriate and simple methods of evidence. Not only that but this is like, the very definition of a straw man.

Actually, requesting proof, not even viewing the proof, then critiquing the proof that you have absolutely no knowledge of... is arrogant and only shows your ignorance.

To be clear your argument is, essentially seeing mountains of different heights from one spot without them getting smaller is should not be happenning therefore proof the earth is not curved.

Is that my argument? How on earth would you know? You didn't have time to even find out.

If the curve is 8"/m2 you honestly expect to see that 8" difference in mountains give most are only a few miles away? Of those mountains are 4000ft tall? Come on guy. That's ludicrous.

Thank you so much for showing your total ignorance of the facts being presented.

Not only would a mountain "a few miles away" totally obscure the horizon.. but you would be looking up to the summit.

this does neither of those things. You may think it does but it does not.

How would you know?

sure. Its not that you can't address the math. So I have to waste my time on your video but you don't even have to look at mine. Sounds predictable.

First, you watch my vid and then show me what you would like me to view.

Remember, you requested proof and did not even view it.

it doesn't prove anything

The video that you did not watch... doesn't prove anything?

I don't want to watch it Because it's 58 minutes long.

However, you do have time to argue with me about what it shows in the video that you did not watch. Really?

Is that REALLY such a crazy thing to think? If it was 58 minutes and it starts off with some really convincing evidence then I would watch each piece of evidence he presents until it gets shoddy. But judging by the rubric that guy employs right off the bat as to what makes good evidence I can already tell his standard is too low.
cool your jets there Copernicus. You don't need to be upset that the 30 second Google search you did to get that video was wasted effort. As I said, I watched as much of that video as the quality of evidence suggested I do.

Ya, I knew a doctor... well, he would have been a doctor but, according to him, they wanted him to take high school and some crazy "pre med" course before he could become a doctor.. These courses took time and didn't tell him anything about surgery or bone grafting.. it was shoddy and a waste of time and money.

1. I didn't ignore it at all. I addressed it and my problem s with it. You are welcome to explain why the, say 4-10ft (generous) curvature of the earth would be noticed on 4000Dr mpuntains. curvature of the earth SHOULD.

LOL seriously... You really want me to explain anything to you about this?

Sorry Mac... this will be the last bit of time that I waste responding to you.

For the record.. the video, when watched, is pretty clear to even the most ignorant.

You make it sound like I'm SCARED to be proven wrong. That is straight up laughable. God makes me scared of nothing. Every piece of earthly knowledge I have could be proven wrong tomorrow and I would feel happy in Jesus. But God has also given me a brain to use and the education to employ it to a pretty good effect. He also calls on me not to bear false witness. Because of the last two things I don't think I'll ever be a flat earther. But that doesn't mean solid evidence cant convince me. Again . anything could be right. But anything would be backed up with research and observable evidence.

I see you do like to talk... It's the listening that you have trouble with.

2. You don't need to play the victim card here. Just address my concerns. If you think that evidence is airtight explain why it's airtight given the context of the theory you are trying to disprove.

Again, I will explain nothing to a 13,000 plus poster that doesn't have the integrity to watch a 58 minute video that was searched for, then posted, in a direct response to their request...not happening dude...

Did you expect me to flip over and be an automatic flat earther because you showed 1 video?

Actually, and I don't know why... I expected you to watch it.

Did you not expect me to address the shoddy logic (in not saying science cause no science was involved)?

I was pretty sure that you would reject it. But I thought that you would observe it first.. thus you could of at least sounded like you had a bit of intelligence when you were trying to debunk it.

Perhaps your trajectory was to unquestioningly watch FE video after FE video without getting answers to your questions (or just not asking them). But we are not all you. I believe God expects me to question things and ask experts when necessary.

Why bother questioning if you don't listen to the answers...?

Your like a teacher that asks for a 5000 word essay and then gives the kid an "F" because it was too long to read..

Good day... God bless.

 

[JacksBratt]

From our joint Engineering background, you know that's because there are other forces acting to keep the balls from moving ... namely friction and inertia and the pull of earth's gravity.

If you subtract these other forces to the greatest extent possible, you can demonstrate the attraction ...

Just think about what you just said:
"the friction and inertia and the pull of the earths gravity keep the balls from moving... less than a millimeter apart... on a smooth surface?

Yet, the sun can hold Pluto in orbit from millions of miles of distance.. while Pluto has inertia as well... Sorry.. it's preposterous.

Even a tiny puff of air blown between these two snooker balls, which have forces of inertia, friction and the pull of earths gravity on them.... will come together. But, no evidence of some magical tractor beam of force pulling them toward each other... like Running Bear and Little White dove.

This magical "Tractor Beam" or "Pull" of gravity is a farce....Nothing is "pulling" us down.. That is only necessary if the earth is a ball and the guy in Australia needs to be "pulled Down" which would be "up" in our location.... So, they invented something to explain it away.. But, nobody knows the source...

Oh, we can study the facts of falling objects all day long.... it's a fairly easily observed fact... but a tractor beam? Nope...

Even magnets are somewhat confusing. But two magnets 1mm apart will move together... or repel each other... Gravity.. on the other hand... absent.. not present

 

[A_Thinker]

Just think about what you just said:
"the friction and inertia and the pull of the earths gravity keep the balls from moving... less than a millimeter apart... on a smooth surface?

Yet, the sun can hold Pluto in orbit from millions of miles of distance.. while Pluto has inertia as well... Sorry.. it's preposterous.

No ... it's not. It's all dependent upon the masses involved.

Even magnets are somewhat confusing. But two magnets 1mm apart will move together... or repel each other... Gravity.. on the other hand... absent.. not present

Gravity is, at close inspection, a relatively weak force. Nothing on Earth has enough mass to generate much gravitational force.

But put enough mass on the table (say, a planet or a sun) ... and it can be very powerful ...

 

[A_Thinker]

My Brother, thank you, .. thank you, .. thank you, .. I could kiss you, .. actually I did kiss you (now I have to wipe the screen), because with this video:

You just provided contradictory evidence to the Brian Cox/NASA Giant Vacuum Chamber Bowling ball - Feather drop gravity experiment.

Where if gravity existed (as you show in the video) the bowling ball should have fallen first.

Your reasoning makes no sense. The attraction of objects to each other has nothing to do with the speed at which objects fall to the earth.

I'm not even going to mention all the G-force effects that the god Helios aka sun, and moon would have on those lead balls if gravity existed.

Distance makes a difference ... and the earth is much more proximate ...

Besides, this video is also good for proving the earth is stationary, not spinning, wobbling, orbiting around the sun, twirling through the imaginary galaxy and whatnot,

Yep ... the Earth makes one rotation per day ... and makes it around the sun only once per year ... I'm shaking ...

 

[JacksBratt]

No ... it's not. It's all dependent upon the masses involved.



Gravity is, at close inspection, a relatively weak force. Nothing on Earth has enough mass to generate much gravitational force.

But put enough mass on the table (say, a planet or a sun) ... and it can be very powerful ...

Proportionally it is fiction..

The sun, in proportional size and distance.. to Pluto... should have the same results as an objects of scaled down sizes that are proportional.

You cannot claim that it is due to mass and distance... and then say that two snooker balls, proportionately.. will have no affect on each other.

Face it... whatever gravity is.... Whether a physical force that our creator has made on a ball earth... or just the fact that things will fall down on a FE.... they don't know squat about it...

Not only that.. but the math that they are feeding you on those white boards.. must only come into play in space... it certainly does not make sense here in the real world.

I believe.. that it is a force that white coats need ... in order to "man-splain" their globe.

 

[A_Thinker]

Proportionally it is fiction..

The sun, in proportional size and distance.. to Pluto... should have the same results as an objects of scaled down sizes that are proportional.

You cannot claim that it is due to mass and distance... and then say that two snooker balls, proportionately.. will have no affect on each other.

Sounds like badly informed opinion ... to me. No facts, no figures, no science, ... just ... it doesn't sound right to me. Well, quantum physics sounds weird to me, but it doesn't make it untrue.

And why should God's mysteries of the universe make any sense at all to you ?

Scientists at least have the humility to seek out the answers to their questions, rather than decide what the answers are before they seek ...

 

[Radagast]

You cannot claim that it is due to mass and distance... and then say that two snooker balls, proportionately.. will have no affect on each other.

Force = 0.0000000000667408 × M × m / d^2

This is true both on Earth and in space.

Proven by experiment.

 

[rambot]

Seriously... a mountain peak that has an known elevation, above sea level, lets say 3000 feet... that is visible from 100 miles away.. should be 3,666 feet below the line of site on the proposed globe model. In other words, you should not see any of it.

You are confusing the horizon with an elevation above sea level. And that is assuming you are standing at 0ft elevation and not at 4000ft elevation yourself.

I don't have the energy or perseverance to nit pick every mistake if this is where we are starting; Not only that but I'm sure you have no interest in hearing about it.

I keep addressing the 5 minutes of content I DID bear through but you don't seem willing to address this shoddiness and seem focussed on ad homineming me for not watching the rest of the 53 minutes. I'm sorry I disappointed you in that regard JackBratt. Better luck next time I guess..

As Hieronymus said (with a slight change):

I'm leaving this thread.
All has been said and [our] behaviour gets worse.

 

[Arius]

NO!
Stop listening to fools!!

Gravitational acceleration is the same for any object falling down without wind or other drag (like in a vacuum chamber)

Listen:
What takes longer to get up to speed?
An empty shopping cart, or a full shopping cart?
Yes, the full one.
You apply the same force to both carts so the heavy one accelerated slowly.
Now, what has more gravitational force pulling down?
The feather or the bowling ball?
The bowling ball.
And that's why it accelerates just as fast as the light weight feather.
So, with gravity, the downward force is always as big as it needs to be to get an acceleration in freefall of 9.8 meters per second per second, or meters per second squared, or m/s²
That's how man discovered g = 9.8m/s²

My Lord man, have you read anything I said?
Look at that video of the lead balls getting attracted to the little steel bars. If that's enough G-force in those little lead balls, then the bowling ball should have gravitated - pulled the feather to itself as they were both falling, and if dropped separately, it would have fallen much faster. That video PROVES the Brian Cox/NASA video false, so which video is true?

If gravity is what NASA and you claim:

1. the "force" that attracts a body to the center of the earth, or ANY other physical body having mass.
2. This means that anything with mass has a gravitational force.
3. Gravity pulls falling objects to the ground.
4. It applies to objects of all sizes, stating that the more mass an object had, the more it attracted other objects.

.. and that video is true (not a trick like putting a little magnet in the middle of the lead balls) then most definitely the bowling ball should have passed up the feather, especially if they dropped a 16,000 lb. elephant and the feather.

Thus, the Brian Cox/NASA video is a real experiment that proved;
1. There is no gravity in mass
2. NASA never landed anything anywhere other than here on earth.

I've performed the experiment numerous times when i was 'the experiment guy' in a school
I used a feather and a steel bearing ball in a 1.5 meter long glass tube.
Depending on the mood our old vacuum pumps were in, it shows perfectly that g is the same for both objects.Oh i see.
So you do know but don't understand, yet you think you're smarter...

Yes, all things fall at the same rate BECAUSE there is no gravity. The gravity of the bowling ball and your globe, according to all the CLAIMS of gravity should be GREATER then the gravity of the feather and the globe. Do the numbers dude, .. if the Globe weighs 5.972X10^24 kg with a gravity of 9.807 m/s^2, then both the bowling ball and the feather has their own g-force, you use math, you know like 1+2=3, .. as simple as that.
A 16,000 lb. elephant has a g-force of 0.00000000000000000000119 m/s^2 the feather is 7 digits to the left of that. It is still a number and that is the actual g-force (if it existed), and as you seen in that lead ball experiment, it MATTERS.

Ah, yes, the "NASA fakes stuff so the earth is flat" argument....

I'll refrain from commenting on the rest of your drivel.

.. drivel is all we FE's get, .. so please, stop commenting unless you present some scientifically or mathematically refuting evidence.

What are you Globetrotters going to defend next, .. that "light has speed, but is a constant speed for all observers" as in Einstein's Relativity? LOL

Actually with Gods help I will start a topic on that, .. just to see what "drivel" you Globers will come up for that?