inherit
2044
0
Nov 10, 2016 16:47:07 GMT
10,271
AnDromedary
4,444
Nov 10, 2016 16:30:09 GMT
November 2016
andromedary
|
Post by AnDromedary on Nov 30, 2018 19:21:35 GMT
Haha, this thread is on the edge of comedic brilliance and constant facepalming. I like it.
A few things to consider: Whether gravity is defined as a force, depending on mass or as a distortion of space-time, depending on energy may very well be different perspectives on the same thing, since, according to Einstien energy and mass are equivalent (the famous E = mc^2). Secondly, gravity, while thoroughly described, not a fully explained phenomenon. In fact, the search for a unified quantum theory of gravity if one of the currently most investigated topics in theoretical physics. It's goal is to unify quantum mechanics with general relativity. Thirdly, I have a question: If atmospheric pressure were due to us living in an enclosed container, rather than earth's gravity attracting gaseous molecules, how do you explain that air pressure decreases with altitude? If we were in inside a pressurized container in which air is only adherent to the laws of entropy (as gravity is apparently not a thing), why wouldn't there be the same air pressure at sea level as there is, say on Mount Everest?
|
|
inherit
N7
289
0
Sept 21, 2024 0:54:11 GMT
8,016
Terminator Force
4,314
August 2016
terminatorforce
Mass Effect Trilogy, Dragon Age: Origins, Dragon Age 2, KOTOR, Mass Effect Andromeda, Mass Effect Legendary Edition
TerminatorForce2
|
Post by Terminator Force on Nov 30, 2018 19:26:13 GMT
How does looking at lights in the sky validate that they're tangible objects in the sky? No assertions being made. Can't have pressure without a container, can show examples of this all day. Can you demonstrate a gas pressure without a container? Good luck, because it defies the second law of thermodynamics; entropy. But if you can debunk entropy, you'll be famous. Never said the Earth goes forever or presented an accurate representation of the Earth. There's no need for speculations. No, you asked me to pick one of your Earth proofs to focus on, so choose what's your evidence for measurement of Earth's circumference? Not sure why you're so interested in the Edge of the Earth so much. This a segue to talk about Antarctica? Don't we have to many things on the dinner plate? What makes you think they are lights? If Jupiter is merely a light, why does it have smaller lights circling it? This has been observed. With telescopes. Oh, you probably don't believe those either.
No it doesn't. Earth is not a closed system. See the Sun, that bright ball of light up there. You didnt answer the question. The pressure in a gas canister is uniform,. Shh, lets just ignore that the planets air and water pressure is not.
Then prove it. Let's not speculate.
I already did
Is there reason you don't want to talk about it? Why assert that it exists? You complain about my assertions, but that's all you're doing. asserting left and right. PROVE SOMETHING
Assertions on top of assertions is proof of nothing. And I'm asking how can Earth be an open system when it's pressurized? Don't need to prove everything. It's ok not to know everything, gets you questioning things. Must have missed it, how was the Earth circumference measured again? I'll talk about whatever you want, but we're already discussing several things at once. Lets focus on one or two things. You're choice.
|
|
inherit
ღ Grumpy Old Man
1046
0
Feb 12, 2024 15:48:21 GMT
15,499
Space Cowboy
They call me a Space Cowboy
4,937
Aug 17, 2016 20:09:17 GMT
August 2016
spacecowboy
Mass Effect Trilogy, Dragon Age: Origins, Dragon Age 2, Dragon Age Inquistion, KOTOR, Baldur's Gate, Jade Empire
|
Post by Space Cowboy on Nov 30, 2018 19:27:47 GMT
Thirdly, I have a question: If atmospheric pressure were due to us living in an enclosed container, rather than earth's gravity attracting gaseous molecules, how do you explain that air pressure decreases with altitude? If we were in inside a pressurized container in which air is only adherent to the laws of entropy (as gravity is apparently not a thing), why wouldn't there be the same air pressure at sea level as there is, say on Mount Everest? I asked the same thing, twice. No answer. Good luck
|
|
inherit
N7
289
0
Sept 21, 2024 0:54:11 GMT
8,016
Terminator Force
4,314
August 2016
terminatorforce
Mass Effect Trilogy, Dragon Age: Origins, Dragon Age 2, KOTOR, Mass Effect Andromeda, Mass Effect Legendary Edition
TerminatorForce2
|
Post by Terminator Force on Nov 30, 2018 19:31:16 GMT
Haha, this thread is on the edge of comedic brilliance and constant facepalming. I like it. A few things to consider: Whether gravity is defined as a force, depending on mass or as a distortion of space-time, depending on energy may very well be different perspectives on the same thing, since, according to Einstien energy and mass are equivalent (the famous E = mc^2). Secondly, gravity, while thoroughly described, not a fully explained phenomenon. In fact, the search for a unified quantum theory of gravity if one of the currently most investigated topics in theoretical physics. It's goal is to unify quantum mechanics with general relativity. Thirdly, I have a question: If atmospheric pressure were due to us living in an enclosed container, rather than earth's gravity attracting gaseous molecules, how do you explain that air pressure decreases with altitude? If we were in inside a pressurized container in which air is only adherent to the laws of entropy (as gravity is apparently not a thing), why wouldn't there be the same air pressure at sea level as there is, say on Mount Everest? Theoretical physics is pseudoscience.
Pressure gradients are due to density and buoyancy. This is why you have to shake up some pressurized products first before using.
|
|
inherit
ღ Grumpy Old Man
1046
0
Feb 12, 2024 15:48:21 GMT
15,499
Space Cowboy
They call me a Space Cowboy
4,937
Aug 17, 2016 20:09:17 GMT
August 2016
spacecowboy
Mass Effect Trilogy, Dragon Age: Origins, Dragon Age 2, Dragon Age Inquistion, KOTOR, Baldur's Gate, Jade Empire
|
Post by Space Cowboy on Nov 30, 2018 19:31:46 GMT
What makes you think they are lights? If Jupiter is merely a light, why does it have smaller lights circling it? This has been observed. With telescopes. Oh, you probably don't believe those either.
No it doesn't. Earth is not a closed system. See the Sun, that bright ball of light up there. You didnt answer the question. The pressure in a gas canister is uniform,. Shh, lets just ignore that the planets air and water pressure is not.
Then prove it. Let's not speculate.
I already did
Is there reason you don't want to talk about it? Why assert that it exists? You complain about my assertions, but that's all you're doing. asserting left and right. PROVE SOMETHING
Assertions on top of assertions is proof of nothing. And I'm asking how can Earth be an open system when it's pressurized? Don't need to prove everything. It's ok not to know everything, gets you questioning things. Must have missed it, how was the Earth circumference measured again? I'll talk about whatever you want, but we're already discussing several things at once. Lets focus on one or two things. You're choice. You can observe it yourself, using a simple pair of binoculars. You just don't want to.
As for the rest.. wow that's some artful dodging there.
|
|
inherit
ღ Grumpy Old Man
1046
0
Feb 12, 2024 15:48:21 GMT
15,499
Space Cowboy
They call me a Space Cowboy
4,937
Aug 17, 2016 20:09:17 GMT
August 2016
spacecowboy
Mass Effect Trilogy, Dragon Age: Origins, Dragon Age 2, Dragon Age Inquistion, KOTOR, Baldur's Gate, Jade Empire
|
Post by Space Cowboy on Nov 30, 2018 19:33:31 GMT
Haha, this thread is on the edge of comedic brilliance and constant facepalming. I like it. A few things to consider: Whether gravity is defined as a force, depending on mass or as a distortion of space-time, depending on energy may very well be different perspectives on the same thing, since, according to Einstien energy and mass are equivalent (the famous E = mc^2). Secondly, gravity, while thoroughly described, not a fully explained phenomenon. In fact, the search for a unified quantum theory of gravity if one of the currently most investigated topics in theoretical physics. It's goal is to unify quantum mechanics with general relativity. Thirdly, I have a question: If atmospheric pressure were due to us living in an enclosed container, rather than earth's gravity attracting gaseous molecules, how do you explain that air pressure decreases with altitude? If we were in inside a pressurized container in which air is only adherent to the laws of entropy (as gravity is apparently not a thing), why wouldn't there be the same air pressure at sea level as there is, say on Mount Everest? Theoretical physics is pseudoscience.
Pressure gradients are due to density and buoyancy. This is why you have to shake up some pressurized products first before using. So gravity isn't a thing, but boyancy and density are. ooookkkk
|
|
inherit
2044
0
Nov 10, 2016 16:47:07 GMT
10,271
AnDromedary
4,444
Nov 10, 2016 16:30:09 GMT
November 2016
andromedary
|
Post by AnDromedary on Nov 30, 2018 19:36:28 GMT
Haha, this thread is on the edge of comedic brilliance and constant facepalming. I like it. A few things to consider: Whether gravity is defined as a force, depending on mass or as a distortion of space-time, depending on energy may very well be different perspectives on the same thing, since, according to Einstien energy and mass are equivalent (the famous E = mc^2). Secondly, gravity, while thoroughly described, not a fully explained phenomenon. In fact, the search for a unified quantum theory of gravity if one of the currently most investigated topics in theoretical physics. It's goal is to unify quantum mechanics with general relativity. Thirdly, I have a question: If atmospheric pressure were due to us living in an enclosed container, rather than earth's gravity attracting gaseous molecules, how do you explain that air pressure decreases with altitude? If we were in inside a pressurized container in which air is only adherent to the laws of entropy (as gravity is apparently not a thing), why wouldn't there be the same air pressure at sea level as there is, say on Mount Everest? Theoretical physics is pseudoscience.
Pressure gradients are due to density and buoyancy. This is why you have to shake up some pressurized products first before using. Aha, and density (mass/volume) dependent buoyancy is now working without gravity, I suppose? (ok, might go back to reading since I am ninjaed all the time anyway. )
|
|
inherit
N7
289
0
Sept 21, 2024 0:54:11 GMT
8,016
Terminator Force
4,314
August 2016
terminatorforce
Mass Effect Trilogy, Dragon Age: Origins, Dragon Age 2, KOTOR, Mass Effect Andromeda, Mass Effect Legendary Edition
TerminatorForce2
|
Post by Terminator Force on Nov 30, 2018 19:36:28 GMT
Assertions on top of assertions is proof of nothing. And I'm asking how can Earth be an open system when it's pressurized? Don't need to prove everything. It's ok not to know everything, gets you questioning things. Must have missed it, how was the Earth circumference measured again? I'll talk about whatever you want, but we're already discussing several things at once. Lets focus on one or two things. You're choice. You can observe it yourself, using a simple pair of binoculars. You just don't want to.
As for the rest.. wow that's some artful dodging there. So you can prove the lights in the sky are tangible objects with just a pair of binoculars? ... Alright. How to focus this argument more... how can you tell the size and distance of sun through binoculars? As for the rest, not sure what I'm dodging. Point one of the out for me.
|
|
inherit
N7
289
0
Sept 21, 2024 0:54:11 GMT
8,016
Terminator Force
4,314
August 2016
terminatorforce
Mass Effect Trilogy, Dragon Age: Origins, Dragon Age 2, KOTOR, Mass Effect Andromeda, Mass Effect Legendary Edition
TerminatorForce2
|
Post by Terminator Force on Nov 30, 2018 19:38:09 GMT
Theoretical physics is pseudoscience.
Pressure gradients are due to density and buoyancy. This is why you have to shake up some pressurized products first before using. So gravity isn't a thing, but boyancy and density are. ooookkkk Something has to determine up and down to determine the density/buoyancy alignment. So there is something else...
|
|
inherit
2044
0
Nov 10, 2016 16:47:07 GMT
10,271
AnDromedary
4,444
Nov 10, 2016 16:30:09 GMT
November 2016
andromedary
|
Post by AnDromedary on Nov 30, 2018 19:40:51 GMT
Alright, one more post, cause it's too much fun: We only believe what we can prove. Something has to determine up and down to determine the density/buoyancy alignment. So there is something else...
|
|
inherit
ღ Grumpy Old Man
1046
0
Feb 12, 2024 15:48:21 GMT
15,499
Space Cowboy
They call me a Space Cowboy
4,937
Aug 17, 2016 20:09:17 GMT
August 2016
spacecowboy
Mass Effect Trilogy, Dragon Age: Origins, Dragon Age 2, Dragon Age Inquistion, KOTOR, Baldur's Gate, Jade Empire
|
Post by Space Cowboy on Nov 30, 2018 19:41:18 GMT
You can observe it yourself, using a simple pair of binoculars. You just don't want to.
As for the rest.. wow that's some artful dodging there. So you can prove the lights in the sky are tangible objects with just a pair of binoculars? ... Alright. How to focus this argument more... how can you tell the size and distance of sun through binoculars? As for the rest, not sure what I'm dodging. Point one of the out for me. You didnt answer any of the other points, just said lets not talk about it. how is that NOT dodging?
Anyway, no, I doubt you can measure distance by using binoculars. Did I say you could? I never mentioned distance at all.
You can see, to repeat myself, lights circling around Jupiter. Observe them for a couple of months and you clearly see them moving around. For that matter Jupiter also moves in a set pattern in relation to the stars. Explain how this is possible.
|
|
inherit
ღ Grumpy Old Man
1046
0
Feb 12, 2024 15:48:21 GMT
15,499
Space Cowboy
They call me a Space Cowboy
4,937
Aug 17, 2016 20:09:17 GMT
August 2016
spacecowboy
Mass Effect Trilogy, Dragon Age: Origins, Dragon Age 2, Dragon Age Inquistion, KOTOR, Baldur's Gate, Jade Empire
|
Post by Space Cowboy on Nov 30, 2018 19:42:29 GMT
So gravity isn't a thing, but boyancy and density are. ooookkkk Something has to determine up and down to determine the density/buoyancy alignment. So there is something else... And what would that be?
|
|
inherit
N7
289
0
Sept 21, 2024 0:54:11 GMT
8,016
Terminator Force
4,314
August 2016
terminatorforce
Mass Effect Trilogy, Dragon Age: Origins, Dragon Age 2, KOTOR, Mass Effect Andromeda, Mass Effect Legendary Edition
TerminatorForce2
|
Post by Terminator Force on Nov 30, 2018 19:45:18 GMT
Alright, one more post, cause it's too much fun: We only believe what we can prove. Something has to determine up and down to determine the density/buoyancy alignment. So there is something else... Well flat Earther's are split on gravity. Some outright deny it because I guess it's a trigger word for many FEs, while others are open minded and trying to figure it out. But make no mistake, there is as of yet no scientific validation to the cause of gravity.
|
|
inherit
N7
289
0
Sept 21, 2024 0:54:11 GMT
8,016
Terminator Force
4,314
August 2016
terminatorforce
Mass Effect Trilogy, Dragon Age: Origins, Dragon Age 2, KOTOR, Mass Effect Andromeda, Mass Effect Legendary Edition
TerminatorForce2
|
Post by Terminator Force on Nov 30, 2018 19:48:58 GMT
So you can prove the lights in the sky are tangible objects with just a pair of binoculars? ... Alright. How to focus this argument more... how can you tell the size and distance of sun through binoculars? As for the rest, not sure what I'm dodging. Point one of the out for me. You didnt answer any of the other points, just said lets not talk about it. how is that NOT dodging?
Anyway, no, I doubt you can measure distance by using binoculars. Did I say you could? I never mentioned distance at all.
You can see, to repeat myself, lights circling around Jupiter. Observe them for a couple of months and you clearly see them moving around. For that matter Jupiter also moves in a set pattern in relation to the stars. Explain how this is possible.
Well if you can't measure distance and size of lights in the sky with binoculars, you're left just a bunch of assumptions. This is my point. Lights circling lights, how does that prove tangible objects at various distances and sizes?
|
|
inherit
N7
289
0
Sept 21, 2024 0:54:11 GMT
8,016
Terminator Force
4,314
August 2016
terminatorforce
Mass Effect Trilogy, Dragon Age: Origins, Dragon Age 2, KOTOR, Mass Effect Andromeda, Mass Effect Legendary Edition
TerminatorForce2
|
Post by Terminator Force on Nov 30, 2018 19:54:17 GMT
Something has to determine up and down to determine the density/buoyancy alignment. So there is something else... And what would that be?
You love making assertions. Actually do believe in gravity. But make no mistake about it, it's a belief. Only the gravity I believe in is for what determines up and down, nowhere near the crazy assertion that it can hold trillions of tons of water to a ball without crushing every living being at the same time.
|
|
inherit
ღ Grumpy Old Man
1046
0
Feb 12, 2024 15:48:21 GMT
15,499
Space Cowboy
They call me a Space Cowboy
4,937
Aug 17, 2016 20:09:17 GMT
August 2016
spacecowboy
Mass Effect Trilogy, Dragon Age: Origins, Dragon Age 2, Dragon Age Inquistion, KOTOR, Baldur's Gate, Jade Empire
|
Post by Space Cowboy on Nov 30, 2018 19:55:38 GMT
You didnt answer any of the other points, just said lets not talk about it. how is that NOT dodging?
Anyway, no, I doubt you can measure distance by using binoculars. Did I say you could? I never mentioned distance at all.
You can see, to repeat myself, lights circling around Jupiter. Observe them for a couple of months and you clearly see them moving around. For that matter Jupiter also moves in a set pattern in relation to the stars. Explain how this is possible.
Well if you can't measure distance and size of lights in the sky with binoculars, you're left just a bunch of assumptions. This is my point. Lights circling lights, how does that prove tangible objects at various distances and sizes? There's little point in discussing anything with you if all you want to do is dismiss everything as 'assertions' while making your own with no consequence. Prove they are lights. You measure distances via triangulation as far as I know.
You still haven't told me about the edge of the earth that you've observed. Since, we know you don't assert such a thing. Right?
|
|
inherit
ღ Grumpy Old Man
1046
0
Feb 12, 2024 15:48:21 GMT
15,499
Space Cowboy
They call me a Space Cowboy
4,937
Aug 17, 2016 20:09:17 GMT
August 2016
spacecowboy
Mass Effect Trilogy, Dragon Age: Origins, Dragon Age 2, Dragon Age Inquistion, KOTOR, Baldur's Gate, Jade Empire
|
Post by Space Cowboy on Nov 30, 2018 19:58:37 GMT
You love making assertions. Actually do believe in gravity. But make no mistake about it, it's a belief. But the gravity I believe in is for what determines up and down, nowhere near the crazy assertion that it can hold trillions of tons of water to a ball without crushing every living being at the same time. And what's keeping everything in place on your flat earth model? Gravity, the way you prefer defining it. So why can it keep everything on the flat earth including all that water, not to mention rocks etc, without crushing every living being? How is that any different?
|
|
inherit
N7
289
0
Sept 21, 2024 0:54:11 GMT
8,016
Terminator Force
4,314
August 2016
terminatorforce
Mass Effect Trilogy, Dragon Age: Origins, Dragon Age 2, KOTOR, Mass Effect Andromeda, Mass Effect Legendary Edition
TerminatorForce2
|
Post by Terminator Force on Nov 30, 2018 20:04:46 GMT
Well if you can't measure distance and size of lights in the sky with binoculars, you're left just a bunch of assumptions. This is my point. Lights circling lights, how does that prove tangible objects at various distances and sizes? There's little point in discussing anything with you if all you want to do is dismiss everything as 'assertions' while making your own with no consequence. Prove they are lights. You measure distances via triangulation as far as I know.
You still haven't told me about the edge of the earth that you've observed. Since, we know you don't assert such a thing. Right?
Triangulation to sun is based off a bunch of assumption, one of them being the shape of the Earth. The other assumption that Venus transiting the sun is the same size as Earth. So yeah, more proof of nothing assertions. Still don't get why you're so obsessed with the edge of the Earth, is not knowing bothering you that much?
|
|
inherit
N7
289
0
Sept 21, 2024 0:54:11 GMT
8,016
Terminator Force
4,314
August 2016
terminatorforce
Mass Effect Trilogy, Dragon Age: Origins, Dragon Age 2, KOTOR, Mass Effect Andromeda, Mass Effect Legendary Edition
TerminatorForce2
|
Post by Terminator Force on Nov 30, 2018 20:05:45 GMT
You love making assertions. Actually do believe in gravity. But make no mistake about it, it's a belief. But the gravity I believe in is for what determines up and down, nowhere near the crazy assertion that it can hold trillions of tons of water to a ball without crushing every living being at the same time. And what's keeping everything in place on your flat earth model? Gravity, the way you prefer defining it. So why can it keep everything on the flat earth including all that water, not to mention rocks etc, without crushing every living being? How is that any different? I don't claim to know everything.
|
|
inherit
ღ Grumpy Old Man
1046
0
Feb 12, 2024 15:48:21 GMT
15,499
Space Cowboy
They call me a Space Cowboy
4,937
Aug 17, 2016 20:09:17 GMT
August 2016
spacecowboy
Mass Effect Trilogy, Dragon Age: Origins, Dragon Age 2, Dragon Age Inquistion, KOTOR, Baldur's Gate, Jade Empire
|
Post by Space Cowboy on Nov 30, 2018 20:08:13 GMT
There's little point in discussing anything with you if all you want to do is dismiss everything as 'assertions' while making your own with no consequence. Prove they are lights. You measure distances via triangulation as far as I know.
You still haven't told me about the edge of the earth that you've observed. Since, we know you don't assert such a thing. Right?
Triangulation to sun is based off a bunch of assumption, one of them being the shape of the Earth. The other assumption that Venus transiting the sun is the same size as Earth. So yeah, more proof of nothing assertions. Still don't get why you're so obsessed with the edge of the Earth, is not knowing bothering you that much? Oh my.. ok, if venus is simply another light in the sky, how can it transit the sun? This keeps getting funnier. Sadly I have to go out soon though.
Well you did ask for my 'favourite globe earth proof'. So there it is. Show me the edge of the earth.
|
|
inherit
ღ Grumpy Old Man
1046
0
Feb 12, 2024 15:48:21 GMT
15,499
Space Cowboy
They call me a Space Cowboy
4,937
Aug 17, 2016 20:09:17 GMT
August 2016
spacecowboy
Mass Effect Trilogy, Dragon Age: Origins, Dragon Age 2, Dragon Age Inquistion, KOTOR, Baldur's Gate, Jade Empire
|
Post by Space Cowboy on Nov 30, 2018 20:09:05 GMT
And what's keeping everything in place on your flat earth model? Gravity, the way you prefer defining it. So why can it keep everything on the flat earth including all that water, not to mention rocks etc, without crushing every living being? How is that any different? I don't claim to know everything. OK now I know you're a troll. It's been fun.
|
|
inherit
2044
0
Nov 10, 2016 16:47:07 GMT
10,271
AnDromedary
4,444
Nov 10, 2016 16:30:09 GMT
November 2016
andromedary
|
Post by AnDromedary on Nov 30, 2018 20:11:04 GMT
Alright, one more post, cause it's too much fun: Well flat Earther's are split on gravity. Some outright deny it because I guess it's a trigger word for many FEs, while others are open minded and trying to figure it out. But make no mistake, there is as of yet no scientific validation to the cause of gravity. As I said, there is no unifying theory on quantum gravity, we agree on that but the effects of gravity (or lack thereof) have been observed.
The problem here is that you claim that you are only taking into account what you can prove but in the end, you are relying on just as many or even more assertions than anyone else. And assertions on their own are fine, they are very much part of the scientific method. A scientific theory must be considered valid, as long as it isn't disproved by observation. Now, you seem to be unwilling to believe anything, reported by others, say astronauts, who have actually been to space and who can actually prove that they were there with fairly simple observations that - with just some time and effort - you could even repeat yourself (you can actually see the ISS and other satellites with fairly cheap equipment or if you wanted to get more elaborate, you could go for something like an LLR experiment). If you can't deal with the math, that was involved in early disproofs of the flat earth theory, those fairly direct observations should do the trick. My question is, if your own observations can corroborate the reports of these people, would you be willing to reconsider your theory? And if that fails, maybe buy a flight: London -> LA -> Tokyo -> London and see if the planes constantly maintain a westward heading. I mean, these days it is fairly easy for any first world individual to try and disprove their own theories on earth geometry, if they are willing to try and disprove it in the first place.
|
|
inherit
N7
289
0
Sept 21, 2024 0:54:11 GMT
8,016
Terminator Force
4,314
August 2016
terminatorforce
Mass Effect Trilogy, Dragon Age: Origins, Dragon Age 2, KOTOR, Mass Effect Andromeda, Mass Effect Legendary Edition
TerminatorForce2
|
Post by Terminator Force on Nov 30, 2018 20:12:17 GMT
Triangulation to sun is based off a bunch of assumption, one of them being the shape of the Earth. The other assumption that Venus transiting the sun is the same size as Earth. So yeah, more proof of nothing assertions. Still don't get why you're so obsessed with the edge of the Earth, is not knowing bothering you that much? Oh my.. ok, if venus is simply another light in the sky, how can it transit the sun? This keeps getting funnier. Sadly I have to go out soon though.
Well you did ask for my 'favourite globe earth proof'. So there it is. Show me the edge of the earth. You mean to tell me lights can't transit other lights? So because you can't know the edge of the Earth that's a globe Earth proof? Explain.
|
|
inherit
ღ Grumpy Old Man
1046
0
Feb 12, 2024 15:48:21 GMT
15,499
Space Cowboy
They call me a Space Cowboy
4,937
Aug 17, 2016 20:09:17 GMT
August 2016
spacecowboy
Mass Effect Trilogy, Dragon Age: Origins, Dragon Age 2, Dragon Age Inquistion, KOTOR, Baldur's Gate, Jade Empire
|
Post by Space Cowboy on Nov 30, 2018 20:14:21 GMT
Oh my.. ok, if venus is simply another light in the sky, how can it transit the sun? This keeps getting funnier. Sadly I have to go out soon though.
Well you did ask for my 'favourite globe earth proof'. So there it is. Show me the edge of the earth. You mean to tell me lights can't transit other lights? So because you can't know the edge of the Earth that's a globe Earth proof? Explain. This flat earth, as defied by you, has to have an edge. Show me.
|
|
inherit
N7
289
0
Sept 21, 2024 0:54:11 GMT
8,016
Terminator Force
4,314
August 2016
terminatorforce
Mass Effect Trilogy, Dragon Age: Origins, Dragon Age 2, KOTOR, Mass Effect Andromeda, Mass Effect Legendary Edition
TerminatorForce2
|
Post by Terminator Force on Nov 30, 2018 20:16:02 GMT
You mean to tell me lights can't transit other lights? So because you can't know the edge of the Earth that's a globe Earth proof? Explain. This flat earth, as defied by you, has to have an edge. Show me. Did I assert there was an edge?
|
|