Message from @chad46
Discord ID: 658708547210706945
We know that there’s a layer of much higher density below the crust
Damn well I haven’t do geography for ages
Brb anyways
@shakz7 refraction is deflection none coherent so please come again
The real fun is at vexillology
fantasy worlds beneath the earth
?
I, too, like flags
knowledge of unverifiable things
Anthurium gets it
We can verify the density of lower layers because we can even make seismic waves ourselves. That’s one way we detect nuclear tests
And we know rough origin points of earthwuakes too
that doenst verify anything
What’s the word? Episomething?
diging down is a way to know what is down there
and that surprised those who did it
Wym it doesn’t verify anything? That’s like saying you can’t know that water has a different density from air solely because it refracts light
Idk if I’d say it surprised anyone. We knew it’d get hot and the logistics would get increasingly more and more strained
i know its hard for you to grasp the fact that people make stuff up for money
Nonargument
@RadRhys we aren't propagating earthquakes although some think the HARP machine causes some of them do to it's use. Rough origins of earthquakes is not knowing where they come from what causes them and what they do other then the destruction they cause to our man made structures so what you have said is we really don't know anything at all about them. Carry on
what about all the water they found
Which body?
Chad
I don’t care about cause rn, that’s not within the bounds of the discussion. We’re specifically looking at why we can detect P waves going back to the surface.
And yes, knowing the origin is literally knowing where they come from.
one problem here is some are thinking earth is a flat disk
we don't what is underneath
what if it looks more like this?
i.e. large mass of known shape/size under the flat surface
thats just another story @Flat Earth PhD
Now we’re getting into Occam’s Razor. What’s more likely, an untestable mirror of sorts that would reflect P waves and change their speed, or P waves traveling through the Earth?
stories are not evidence
true but the point is we can't assume we know anything about the shape
under the surface
if you know nothing about something say nothing
That’s not an argument
That’s not even a defense
@Flat Earth PhD did you run the moon test with a photovoltaic cell yet?
I gotta go now, I’m done eating and this is my vacation
@RadRhys you don't know where they come from it is just an educated guess. They measure the strength of them when they occur but that doesn't tell you the what, the why, or how to prevent them. SO you know nothing other then their best educated guess which hasn't change in umpteen years. Don't bring up ridiculousness then. Yes it is okay when you get schooled on your own model to retract and refrain from using it as a defense and you can simply concede a point by saying you don't know something. We do it all the time. Give it a try.