True

We’re st civil debate

lol.. you guys seriously want us to organise and deploy an insider undercover person into NASA

<#538929818834698260>

that's a better idea than what you're doing right now

and yeah, <#538929818834698260>

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0aocW1GB9tU

**Question[s] of the Day #144**

Did someone else have to clean up a mess that you made recently?

Please share your answer in the <#484514023698726912> , you filthy, lazy, unorganized slobs.

The kitchen

That’s all I am a boring person

yeah, a brainwashed sheep of the population lmao

@Seeker of Truth Nah

Michelson-Morley did not prove aether.

@Drewski4343 yes it did brainwashed monkey

Care to tell me how? because I actually know the results, and they have nothing to do with the aether.

Really

mhm

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0aocW1GB9tU

Watch this video

<:Redpill:551640293372329984>

lol the Principle!

rather than linking me to something, can you tell me in your own words?

the results for Michelson-Morley were, specifically, that light propagates at the same speed in all reference frames. Two conclusions can be drawn from this: 1) Aether exists but it and the earth are stationary. 2) Aether does not exist on a spinning globe. However you choose to interpret the data is unfortunately begging the question, thus making Michelson-Morley pretty much useless in a geocentric/heliocentric debate.

There’s no such thing as a reference frame

@Drewski4343

Also, the first one is true

The earth is stationary and the ether exist

👍

✌️

I see now who's brainwashed. That's too bad.

How do you know the second one is true?

Brainwashing

That’s too bad

I don't. I just said you can't know either is true based purely on Michelson-Morley.

Michelson-Morley provides little help with this debate.

¯\_(ツ)_/¯

Yes it does you ingrate

Lol

ad homs 👌

I don’t think you know what an ad hom is

attacking my character silly