All scientific papers contain methodology.

I see a lot of cherrypicked images there.

I’m sure you’ve heard of the Cavendish Experiment and other things, right?

Even that had a methodology written and recorded

Says you.

Btw I have a bad habit of leaving things so if I ever gotta go without a response I swear it’s not because I’m intentionally ditching y’all

College life n all that

You can see them disappear. There’s two ways.
1) The whole object gets proportionally smaller relative to the field of view, and
2) Curvature takes away the bottom portion from the field of view first

What’s the term? Angular size? Idk it’s been a while

Ew debate, yeah I’ll probably not go on there when I’m procrastinating a paper lmao

I got a paper on agency

@floridaswamptrash the ground has a net positive charge. Applying a negative charge into the balloons increases attraction towards the ground.

What’s the point of the vid? It doesn’t actually address an apparent downward force

For the question of the day, absolutely. Pesticides have been a major issue for several insect populations.

You can’t stimulate parallel rays without either a laser or an incredibly bright and distant source

Example please?

Make a summation because I’m not gonna spend hours just to get through a single video

Flearthers have a bad habit of not getting to the point

At least from what I’ve seen

You know, I remember something from a while back

If we lived on a planar disc-like structure, regardless of size, we would always observe the sun rising and setting to the north

NASA funding rn compared to the past is pretty low

Js

Elon Musk isn’t your friend btw, no billionaire is

100% of the time they have ulterior motives

Pretty sure mockery isn’t against the rules on here

@The_chickenmaster mockery is against the rules

I’m not living on a turtle because the ground tastes like dirt and not turtle soup

https://picsart.com/i/296516866135201

We can’t live on a flat plane

Otherwise the sun would rise and set in the north

It’s a theory, not a law

A law is a matter of what happens, whereas a theory is a matter of why something happens

A scientific theory is not a theory until it has been tested.

The problem with the standard model is incomplete information and @Drewski4343 Drewski4343 8/ 100% correct

Hold on, don’t be misleading there

Constant? Or consistent

I’ve heard a lot of electric universe theories but you would literally be ripped apart atom by atom if that were the case

Sorry, “theories”*

I think he’s referring to a circular disc rather than a spheroid

A theory can be proven wrong, Aba

@RidleyChozo he’s just using big numbers to intentionally mislead the audience. Impulse and impact aren’t the same

You have to simplify things in school, otherwise concepts can’t be grasped.

Now THATS what sucks about school

You’re always given the option to pursue knowledge further, but school doesn’t incentivize it as much as it should.

What (in the curriculum) is taught as fact, but it just an assumption?

Like, not what teachers personally say Bc they’ll imprint their beliefs and views into everything

The Big Bang is taught as a theory, aka an explanation for why something is, and then it was tested. It is very valuable, especially in higher level physics.

We then use the Big Bang as an axiom for further discussion and research

We do have entire alternate hypotheses and theories

Saying “just a theory” is misleading, because a theory has sufficient evidence backing it to be accepted as fact.

There are some explanations for why the Big Bang happened, but what caused it is surprisingly irrelevant to whether or not it happened

Also we’ve directly observed speciation btw

We all have internal biases, objectively equal treatment is impossible. You should account for these and treat people accordingly.

Oh god it’s becoming a fantasy

Ronin, shoot me please

Please don’t

You do realize women hate that and/or are intentionally trying to get people to do that to up their stats?

Dear god you people are insufferable

The night sky is always the opposite side from the sun. This, in 6 months, we should be seeing the opposite direction, this stars would not be visible on a spheroid also Earth.

The biggest caveat, however, is that we do see different stars, and the overwhelming distance and varying angles overlap so that some stars can still be seen throughout.

So basically, the meme is a load of crap.

I believe in the plausibility of aliens

How so, Kevin?

Ah

No I don’t

Antarctic Treaty doesn’t cover space, and any civilian can go to Antarctica as long as they provide valid notice.

You can go to the South Pole yourself

Yes you do, Veritas

You have a legal obligation to let the signatories know you’re going there

How would you go from Chile to Antarctica in 2 hours?

Not Antarctica

The north pole*

And why would a South Pole Compass work

Compasses produced commercially aren’t reliable near the poles and will go haywire

You need to have a compass with specific design parameters

Technically yes, they can

It is technically probably both of those things can “happen” given time. Entropy’s a b*tch

I’m talking the inevitable formation of patterns given time, not evolution

Given infinite time, every single possible configuration will be made

That is an inevitability

We’ve observed speciation between flowers, Kevin.

Carbon dating isn’t used for dinosaur fossils

Not unless you’re talking recently dead avian dinosaurs

Petoskey stones are pretty famous here in Michigan

It’s our state rock (why do we have a state rock?)

Eh we have worse things here, like *shudder* our state flag

Dear god half of the state flags in America are dreadful

They’re using different parameters for atmosphere, Kevin

Specifically for that, they’re talking about hydrogen and helium atoms

When did they move the sun further away?

“One”

No source either

Kevin

Please provide source material

We need sources

I don’t care about his name, I care about the source for this.

Where did you find the information

Yes

Taking someone’s word at face value with absolutely no credibility, supporting evidence, or even referencability

Is that a word? Referencability?