No, I mock him for posting memes instead of debating any of the points I have made, and wait - did you have anything intelligent to add to the discussion? Did you want to take the smallest stab at any of the points I have raised OVER AND OVER? Or just lurk on the conversation, then hide behind your science teacher's skirts?
This is the main difference between the flat earth community and the rest of you. You know when I first heard of this Idea, I mocked it, as well. But since I am not a coward - I actually took the time to investigate what all the fuss was about. And - as it turns out, for each theory presented to support the current model - there are, without exception, some parts of the theory that simply DO NOT FIT REALITY. And so- those theories MUST be abandoned in search of a better model. That IS how science works. Science is comprised of theory, not facts. This is why it is a sin to TEST a child on the so called 'fact' that the universe is 14.3 billion years old or any such nonsense, because - by it's very nature, this is an unknown, therefore a 'theory in progress'.
You are the type of person who worships Einstein - you call him a genius without understanding his scripture, without realizing that he took the realm of physics, and simply turned it into a math equation - an equation that can be changed to suit one's needs and one that is complex enough that the average layperson can't begin to decipher it. But no matter how hard you try math doesn't replace physics. That is why you can NOT make a smaller body orbit a larger one, even though the math says you can.
But you sit on the sidelines saying - 'Gee whiz - look at all them numbers and his crazy hair - that guy's a genius'.
I am the type of person who loves Tesla. Tesla knew Einstein was full of shit. And he marched ahead- mostly to great opposition - and invented most of the technology of the 20th century. And, for all of his achievements - he is STILL OMITTED from schoolbooks today, because he doesn't fit the 'model'.
So, who of these men is the scientist - and who is the pigeon?
But bro - do you even science? Miss me with that noise.
" there are, without exception, some parts of the theory that simply DO NOT FIT REALITY."
LOL.
" there are, without exception, some parts of the theory that simply DO NOT FIT REALITY."
You know what doesn't fit reality? 100% of the flat earth argument.
No working model.
No map.
No sense.
So no, I don't want to refute your points. MOst of your points are nonsense, and joshuatucker and kerri already refuted adequately.
You don't understand the gravity model (or anything else related) if you think somebody could/should be able to supply a picture of something orbiting around a mountain because gravity would equal something orbiting a mountain. I got a good laugh out of that one.
Try not to drool all over yourself while laughing.
The Earth is 81x more massive than the moon, so they say. So get a 1 gram ball and roll it across a table next to a 81 gram (or a 8,100,000 gram) ball.. it didnt do anything did it? It didnt change its course even slightly, did it?
That is called physics.
Try not to laugh all over your shirt explaining that one to me.
But I guess you REALLY do need someone to explain it to you.
Your 1g ball and your 81g ball are on a table on EARTH the planet that is (using your data) 81x more massive than the moon.
Rolling the 1g across the table from the 81g doesn't affect the trajectory of the 1g because they're both A. in the MUCH larger gravitational pull of the planet and B. do not have enough mass or velocity to break free from the planet's gravitational pull nor to to affect the 1g or 81g ball because they'd have to have more horizontal pull than the planet has vertical pull.
Your 'that is called physics' is laughable because you have to apply physics to call something physics, and you didn't, not even a little, in so many different ways.
Ah so by your logic the earth should not have a gravitational pull on the moon, because the sun 's gravity is so much stronger (even though we cant detect that, either).
And, physics is the study of the mechanisms of the physical world, not the study of hypothetical theories in outer space...
-and yes what I am saying is that GRAVITY is not at ALL as the equation that explains it.
Please show ONE example of gravity working as described in the equation (besides a continuous downwards pull), as the excuse you give( ie downwards gravity cancels out lateral gravity) is NOWHERE in the gravitational theory.. So really you are just making ideas up at this point.
The FACT is that gravity does NOT work as advertised in ANY context except... down. Proof otherwise? Why don't you have a seat and actually THINK about these things. Then read the equations, then compare. Then THINK! You can do it.
Can't even meme correctly...
You mock him for one graphic sizing fail, yet you can't science at all. sadheadshake
No, I mock him for posting memes instead of debating any of the points I have made, and wait - did you have anything intelligent to add to the discussion? Did you want to take the smallest stab at any of the points I have raised OVER AND OVER? Or just lurk on the conversation, then hide behind your science teacher's skirts?
This is the main difference between the flat earth community and the rest of you. You know when I first heard of this Idea, I mocked it, as well. But since I am not a coward - I actually took the time to investigate what all the fuss was about. And - as it turns out, for each theory presented to support the current model - there are, without exception, some parts of the theory that simply DO NOT FIT REALITY. And so- those theories MUST be abandoned in search of a better model. That IS how science works. Science is comprised of theory, not facts. This is why it is a sin to TEST a child on the so called 'fact' that the universe is 14.3 billion years old or any such nonsense, because - by it's very nature, this is an unknown, therefore a 'theory in progress'.
You are the type of person who worships Einstein - you call him a genius without understanding his scripture, without realizing that he took the realm of physics, and simply turned it into a math equation - an equation that can be changed to suit one's needs and one that is complex enough that the average layperson can't begin to decipher it. But no matter how hard you try math doesn't replace physics. That is why you can NOT make a smaller body orbit a larger one, even though the math says you can.
But you sit on the sidelines saying - 'Gee whiz - look at all them numbers and his crazy hair - that guy's a genius'.
I am the type of person who loves Tesla. Tesla knew Einstein was full of shit. And he marched ahead- mostly to great opposition - and invented most of the technology of the 20th century. And, for all of his achievements - he is STILL OMITTED from schoolbooks today, because he doesn't fit the 'model'.
So, who of these men is the scientist - and who is the pigeon?
But bro - do you even science? Miss me with that noise.
" there are, without exception, some parts of the theory that simply DO NOT FIT REALITY."
LOL.
" there are, without exception, some parts of the theory that simply DO NOT FIT REALITY."
You know what doesn't fit reality? 100% of the flat earth argument.
No working model.
No map.
No sense.
So no, I don't want to refute your points. MOst of your points are nonsense, and joshuatucker and kerri already refuted adequately.
You don't understand the gravity model (or anything else related) if you think somebody could/should be able to supply a picture of something orbiting around a mountain because gravity would equal something orbiting a mountain. I got a good laugh out of that one.
Try not to drool all over yourself while laughing.
The Earth is 81x more massive than the moon, so they say. So get a 1 gram ball and roll it across a table next to a 81 gram (or a 8,100,000 gram) ball.. it didnt do anything did it? It didnt change its course even slightly, did it?
That is called physics.
Try not to laugh all over your shirt explaining that one to me.
But I guess you REALLY do need someone to explain it to you.
Your 1g ball and your 81g ball are on a table on EARTH the planet that is (using your data) 81x more massive than the moon.
Rolling the 1g across the table from the 81g doesn't affect the trajectory of the 1g because they're both A. in the MUCH larger gravitational pull of the planet and B. do not have enough mass or velocity to break free from the planet's gravitational pull nor to to affect the 1g or 81g ball because they'd have to have more horizontal pull than the planet has vertical pull.
Your 'that is called physics' is laughable because you have to apply physics to call something physics, and you didn't, not even a little, in so many different ways.
Ah so by your logic the earth should not have a gravitational pull on the moon, because the sun 's gravity is so much stronger (even though we cant detect that, either).
And, physics is the study of the mechanisms of the physical world, not the study of hypothetical theories in outer space...
-and yes what I am saying is that GRAVITY is not at ALL as the equation that explains it.
Please show ONE example of gravity working as described in the equation (besides a continuous downwards pull), as the excuse you give( ie downwards gravity cancels out lateral gravity) is NOWHERE in the gravitational theory.. So really you are just making ideas up at this point.
The FACT is that gravity does NOT work as advertised in ANY context except... down. Proof otherwise? Why don't you have a seat and actually THINK about these things. Then read the equations, then compare. Then THINK! You can do it.
Can you understand any of this?
Lol. That's not physics. That's not even close to 'physics'.
At best that's toddler level thinking.