Message from Willem Petzer in Willem Petzer Live Chat #info-wars

2018-07-19 13:09:19 UTC  

@Deejay from Earth Cool, can you tell me what force is responsible for making things fall and how I can empirically measure it?

2018-07-19 13:26:22 UTC  

It's called Density and Buoyancy. And please tell me which instrument I can use to measure Gravity "empirically".

2018-07-19 13:28:12 UTC

2018-07-19 13:41:46 UTC  

Better quality video

2018-07-19 14:14:09 UTC  

Newtons Law of Universal gravitation does provide an answer for your point on ""Magnetism"". Gravity is not reliant on magnetism but rather on mass and the relationship between mass and the distance between two objects. We calculate this gravitational force, by applying the inverse square law. Once we have this force we can simulate an environment where we can accurately predict the movement of celestial bodies in our cosmos. This is why we are able to accurately predict when Haley's Comet is going to pass us years and years in advance, we can predict it to such a level of accuracy that we can say what trajectory it will have in our skys as it passes by. The ability to accurately predict the motion of celestial bodies is good enough data by itself to say that Gravity is a valid scientific concept. If you acknowledge gravity exists then from there we can go into reasons why gravity and its effects on space are what give the earth its "round" shape.

2018-07-19 14:47:31 UTC  

Gravity? Where's your proof of gravity?

2018-07-19 14:47:46 UTC  

Why is it still a theory after 500 years?

2018-07-19 14:48:43 UTC  

eish bra... its not a theory. Its a Natural Law

2018-07-19 14:49:52 UTC  

What instrument can I use to measure it?

2018-07-19 14:50:53 UTC  

@Deejay from Earth a kitchen scale

2018-07-19 14:50:53 UTC  

Ditsem! @Willem Petzer, you just advanced to level 5!

2018-07-19 14:51:39 UTC  

@HoppeanSnake_ZA How was the 1600kmph speed of earth's axial rotation measured? When, where and what instruments were used?

2018-07-19 14:52:25 UTC  

@Willem Petzer Top fucking kek<:pepe3:469478301644357633>

2018-07-19 14:54:00 UTC

2018-07-19 14:54:49 UTC  

Yeah but Gravity is not theoretical physics...

2018-07-19 14:55:16 UTC  

The definition of a scientific theory (often contracted to theory for the sake of brevity) as used in the disciplines of science is significantly different from the common vernacular usage of the word theory. In everyday speech, theory can imply that something is an unsubstantiated and speculative guess, the opposite of its meaning in science. These different usages are comparable to the opposing usages of "prediction" in science versus common speech, where it denotes a mere hope.

2018-07-19 14:56:50 UTC  

Four conclusive experiments performed by the top scientists of their day proved that the Sun, Moon and stars revolve around us, and that Earth is the fixed, motionless centre of the universe.

The Michelson-Morley, Michelson-Gale, Airy's Failure and Sagnac experiments scientifically proved Geocentrism and nearly crushed the dying Heliocentric theory until Mr. Einstein came through with his Special Relativity mathematical denial of the proven Aether and philosophically (not scientifically) banished the Aether from study ever since.

These studies and peer reviewed experiments are never covered in any university courses. These conclusive peer-reviewed and repeated scientific results are nowhere debated or denied, merely suppressed and ignored. The fact of the matter is that Geocentrism has been conclusively proven for over a century.

In 1913 Sagnac conducted an experiment to test the speed and constancy of light and proved the existence of the Aether (Disproves relativity) Therefore, The Michelson-Morley experiment, conducted using an interferometer clearly demonstrated that the Earth was motionless. The Michelson-Gale experiment detected the Aether/Firmament passing over the surface of the motionless Earth. Airy's Failure, demonstrated that it is the stars moving relative to a stationary Earth, and not the fast orbiting Earth moving relative to comparatively stationary stars.

2018-07-19 14:57:46 UTC

2018-07-19 14:58:28 UTC  

I think you are having trouble visualising what a force is and how we can interpret it in a way that is easy to understand. Scientists and applied mathematicians use free body diagrams for this purpose.

2018-07-19 14:58:51 UTC  

@HoppeanSnake_ZA Are you avoiding my question?

2018-07-19 14:59:08 UTC

2018-07-19 14:59:09 UTC  

here is a link to a textbook that will help you understand what it is I am talking about

2018-07-19 15:00:16 UTC  

I shall post my question again. @HoppeanSnake_ZA How was the 1600kmph speed of earth's axial rotation measured? When, where and what instruments were used?

2018-07-19 15:02:40 UTC  

@Deejay from Earth okay so when we know what forces are acting on an object in space we draw Free Body Diagrams (FBDs) with all those forces acting in different directions, from there we can calculate things like angular velocity which gives us that figure that you gave.

2018-07-19 15:03:11 UTC

2018-07-19 15:03:41 UTC  

This was a good troll man, you did well.

2018-07-19 15:03:59 UTC  

Why are you avoiding my question?

2018-07-19 15:04:11 UTC  

I just answered it for you