alright then let's move to <#538929818834698260>

have fun

well, the thing is

a NASA person that currently believes the earth to be flat will most likely become an ex very quickly

Nah

yah

im talking about one that speaks out about it

did you guys hear seeker of truth

If they openly say they believe the company they work for is lying, yeah

he said this isn't a debate channel

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?