lounge
Discord ID: 484514023698726912
1,016,926 total messages. Viewing 250 per page.
Prev |
Page 2324/4068
| Next
O
N theory you couldnโt see further the higher you got on a ball
Cause the ground curves away
@Question For Your Life youโre showing the last image with the sun at a higher elevation than the one showing a reflection on a curve
even then the one showing a reflection on a plane the light source is higher up
!mute <@330401359507619840>
f
You think curved water can have a flat reflection?
You think water curves around a ball??
Yeah, itโs a wonderful thing called gravity ๐
How the funk did people get tricked
Show me itโs possible without pre supposing the ocean is doing it
Ever time I pour water on a ball it rolls off
g r a v i t y
Every time I pour it in a bowl it stays
Thatโs a word
Show me itโs possiable like I just showed you it isnโt
@Jack123 can u ask them to unmute me
You canโt you can only assume it so itโs a faith based idea
how does that prove anything? the gravitational force produced by a little ball is nothing in comparison to the huge ball that is earth. Everything creates its own gravitational force but little toy balls with very little mass have such a low gravitational force that itโs irrevelent
Again you assume gravity
And you assume no gravity
Show me itโs possiable for water to stick to a ball I donโt care what words you use
Lol
I can demonstrate water NOT sticking
Can you do the opposite?
Even Einstein assumed gravity on the relativity theory.
yup
Thatโs amamzing
Now show me itโs possiable
in order to demonstrate water sticking to a ball iโd need a ball big enough to produce a significant gravitational force ๐
There's always something in the way xD
So thatโs fancy talk for you canโt demonstrate it
So you can just make a claim and never back it up?
Can I do that too?
Okay? just because you can use your flawed methods to prove your flawed theory means nothing
The scientific method is to come up with a claim and try to disprove it, not to prove it.
Why is it flawed? Cause I can demonstrate my claim and you canโt?
@AltHarrington u only can prove gravity in larger scale
The scientific method is how you determine proof. Period.
So how do you use the scienctific method to prove the mass of the earth is pulling everything down?
No, your experiment is flawed because it ignores one of the most important laws of physics ๐
How can an experiment in reality ignore a law of nature?
Maybe your making gravity up
The fact is water disproves the ball and your only excuse is to ignore it
Prove that gravity doesnโt exist, without the aid of a silly gif or image. Use your own words.
No you have that backwards.
Prove gravity exists.
Then prove it doesnโt
Prove a negative lol
How do you prove the tooth fairy ISNT real?
That is for you to do.
sry
But LMAO
I have a lambo, prove that i dont
Or is it for me to prove i have a lambo
Tooth fairy is real. Prove she isnโt
Exactly looool
LMAO
So why should I believe water sticks to a ball?
I know why, you cant disprove grabbbity
Is that good enough?
For them it is
For these religious zealots, yeah
the name Bibleman is offensive to me
<@330401359507619840> if you're calm you can rejoin
You can leave if you don't like it here.
ok
The main problem of gravity lies in the definition. โHow thereโs a force that pulls to the center of the earth.โ When in actuality, the measurement for a downward force all over the exterior of the surface of earth, works just as well on a Flat Earth. The problem again, is the definition. We have never seen earth being a ball where we can say itโs because earth is a ball, pulling objects to the center. When the fact that earth could simply be flat, and thereโs already a downward force inherent to a stationary reality where thereโs an up, and down.
@Derek Nelson its not even a force
I know. But itโs so they can understand.
Not everything goes down
@SamanthaFluff u here
Does air in a container fall down or expand out?
@*VuchucK ๐ฎ๐ yeah
sending ๐ bullets
Space time bending
<3
Good lord
where do u think ur from fluff
Ever heard of a word having so many different definitions or inferences?
The English word "fine"
Fine for parking here
Court: Why did you park there?
Because it said it was fine for parking here
๐คฆ๐ป
I will commit a hate crime
@*VuchucK ๐ฎ๐ I'm from California
our inexperience
<@330401359507619840> as @Jose Meza Just showed you. The theory of relativity doesnโt even define gravity as a force. And that is the most commonly used theory regarding gravity today.
<@330401359507619840> the fact that we're dense!
or is it our experience?
^^;
@rightthehand sorry, phone died.The basis of your whole argument is that I canโt prove gravity exists, in which i realistically canโt prove it, because Iโm not a scientist, nor do I claim to be one. I know that there is proof, but i do not know off the top of my head what that proof is. Iโm just an average person, after all. So prove that gravity doesnโt exist.
There is no scientist today or in history who has ever proven gravity. So donโt feel bad.
Also, itโs a lot easier to prove that thereโs no tooth fairy then it is to prove gravity ๐
Thereโs evidence, is what iโm saying
the existence of a downward force does not prove the globe model, nor the idea that objects are attracted to each other. you cannot recreate the phenomenon of a โendless orbitโ in any experiment
Gravity isnโt a downward force, itโs a force that attracts things together ๐
@rightthehand dont add to it u finished it end of debate thats a truth sentence.
Gravity isn't a force
what would you call it
^
what force?
I didn't call it anything
I'm following the theory
nor of orbits in general. in fact, experiments in a โvacuumโ show that objects do not create anything close to the theoretical concepts you claim. attraction between objects can be explained by electromagnetism between objects in the aether. the fact that you cannot recreate the solar system in an experiment shows that your model has no basis in reality. science is the process of proving theories through experimentation. you have not proven the concept of orbits via experimentation
The force weโre all taught to believe, when thatโs not even the theory mainstream science operates by. So they can hoodwink people with wordplay and multiple definitions.
In simple terms gravity is called a force so average everyday people can understand it, moreso than spacetime bending ๐
But
It says it isn't a force
well we are not ur average joes
So why would they call it a force?
in simple terms you cannot prove your โsolar systemโ model through experimentation. proving there is a downward force on the earth does not prove the solar system theory
Do you call fur hair
Because normal people wouldn't understand the difference
They donโt call it a force, itโs just referred to as a force ๐. Stop bending what i say to aid your arguments
CAUSE AND EFFECT
fur is just soft hair kek
Why is it referenced as a force
If it clearly says
Its not a force
Mainstream science basically has itโs own language. Like advanced mathematics do. The average person isnโt taught to understand, neither are they intended to. To keep them feeling stupid, because they havenโt been taught the languages.
you claim that space is a vacuum, and yet objects in a vacuum behave nothing like how scientists theorize that objects behave in โspace.โ that in itself disproves their theories
Nasa says its a force
But do we trust nasa
i do kek
Or the person who made the theory
Dictionaries call gravity a force too.
i like how globers just start posting dictionary definitions when theyโre out of arguments
Itโs all effing wordplay.
Shouldn't we trust the creator of the theory
Or the modernized version
The enhancement
Because the enhancement could be the right one
@Morning Dew space is a vacuum, but also has no gravity. If there is gravity on earth, and we canโt create a magical zero gravity chamber, we canโt accurately simulate space on earth
@AltHarrington we can
Nasa has a zero G gravity chamber
Scapegoats for mainstream pseudoscientists who can keep jumping back and forth between definitions on a whim, so they can say, โthatโs not what I meantโ, or โyou have the wrong idea.โ
They use it to practice
@Morning Dew All people do in other servers is post gifs that claim to prove something
you can literally create an opposite force that cancels out the downward pull, and even in that environment it behaves nothing like your theoretical โspace.โ the fact is, you have a theory that has not been proven through experimentation. you have proven nothing
He hasnโt been taught how to prove something.
OK
On purpose.
SO I GAVE TWO OPTIONS @AltHarrington
Same with the rest of us, until we learned otherwise.
ENHANCMENT OR ORIGINAL
PICK
I dont know what youโre talking about
*facepalm*
this discussion of semantics is a deflection from the things you have no answer for, and the theories you have not proven
The theory of evolution
lol, encyclopedia britannica is proof
Loool
You going to pick NASA's definition
Man i just came here to argue about vaccines, i know more about that than this ๐
Or the original theory of gravity
Ignore them for a minute, Alt. Let me tell you how to prove something.
Vaccines are gud
the basis for you entire model of the universe has not been proven through the scientific method, which is extremely ironic.
The scientific method.
You still haven't picked
Is taught one of two ways.
Nasa definition
Or regular definition
The first is the google definition.
Observation, hypothesis, measurement, and experiment.
The second.
so jack, do you just regurgitate the words of others, or do you speak the language of English? just curious
@Abe Lover both are equally good. Nasa just had to dumb it down a little so people would understand
No they changed the definition entirely
First definition DELETES force
Second one adds a force
not really. The non-nasa definition goes more in-depth
The second, is simply observation, measurement, and experiment.
The earth is clearly flat if it was round how did nasa take this picture
No it literally says NO FORCE
You donโt actually need to hypothesize shit.
See no force
you cannot prove the concept of orbits through experimentation. your bickering over semantics is a pointless deflection. @Mystery NASA had absolutely no real pictures of earth. what you think are โpicturesโ are CGI images
The blue marble is a very artificial image in any case
Oh, the meme army is here too?? Yeah, composite is a real thing
and it does not make them fake
@AltHarrington so again
You can if you want after, but at any rate, whatโs important is that youโre able to make an observation, measure the observation, and experiment with it.
Which one
composites can be easily faked. you could use them to make a flat or globe model. it proves nothing
Thereโs one full image of the earth and I believe it was taken on the moon ๐
*earth
What?
Ohhh
sorry my brain died
Anyone can take pictures of the moon
I can right now
have a camera 6 inches away from a basketball, but you want a picture of the whole thing... what do you do
move further away kek
Stop trying to promote your spinning water pear belief inside an infinite vacuum
keep regurgitating your shill talking points
Its dumb
heliocentric model, gravity, black holes, evolution = all theory
hey z
Yo =]
awww... someone doesnt know what scientific theory is...
sad
@Citizen Z sup
Your asking for the impossible
We get a lot of obsessed water pear earthers here @Jose Meza
They can't pick which definition they like
@Abe Lover yo =)
speaking of โscientific theoryโ show me the scientific theory that proves objects behave as you claim in your solar system model.
So which one
Original definition
Or enhanced
Lol n00bs
Scientific theory is not a method of determining proof. Ever.
DUDE JUST SHUT UP THEYโRE BOTH GOOD DEFINITIONS THAT OFFER DIFFERENT WAYS OF EXPLAINING IT
@Abe Lover your discussion of semantics is a deflection from the conversations that matter. you waste time on purpose
Lots of people don't understand the basic issue of asking other people to just believe some facts
aww.. someone STILL dosnt know what scientific theroy is...
sad
ARE YOU BLIND
You can bury anything under layers of semantics and text. There's a lot to talk about. But not with attitude of "you're all wrong, here's my thing, believe it instead"
ONE SAYS GRAVITY IS NOT A FORCE THE OTHER ONE SAYS IT IS
1,016,926 total messages. Viewing 250 per page.
Prev |
Page 2324/4068
| Next