To The Moon

Hermit said:
But I never said there is no ISS, I said there is no ISS in space.
Click to expand...

OK good, so we see along similar lines, perhaps we need to define 'Space'?
Meanwhile we can take for granted that it is where it says it is in LEO - Sure we (people on the ground) check the evidence nightly . . .
As is mentioned
valamhic said:
I also saw the ISS pass over on clear nights at the farm.
Click to expand...

And is shown . . .


View: https://www.youtube.com/shorts/x5yx5bvIqmA



There are many Home Telescope views of the ISS to be seen on Youtube, it's really up there, travelling in a fast moving orbit, no?

Hermit said:
That is because the vacuum of space next to earth without a physical barrier is a violation of the second law of thermodynamics, which can be demonstrated in a scientific experiment; therefore the ISS cannot be in a place that cannot exist according to laws of nature.
Click to expand...

But what do we know about 'the vacuum of space' ???
Certainly it's not like a giant hoover hovering around the Earth trying to suck away the atmosphere, where would it get sucked to, there's no place, is there?
Besides the Earth has attractive power (gravity, if you like) which apparently overrides any potential "Vaccum", perhaps due to the planets massive integral size.
 
Professor said:
OK good, so we see along similar lines, perhaps we need to define 'Space'?
Click to expand...
Space is claimed to be a vacuum, adjacent next to a gas pressure system, without a physical barrier or container. That's impossible according to the second law, so if you disagree then provide a scientific experiment which demonstrates a vacuum next to gas without a container.

Professor said:
There are many Home Telescope views of the ISS to be seen on Youtube, it's really up there, travelling in a fast moving orbit, no?
Click to expand...
I specifically said to Val "You saw something in the sky, that's fine." So I'm not denying we can see something up there in the sky. I just don't believe that it's a vacuum orbiting a ball earth at 8 km per second (17,900 mph).

Professor said:
But what do we know about 'the vacuum of space' ???
Click to expand...
We don't know anything because it has not and cannot be proven. You take NASA's word for it that it's real.

Professor said:
Certainly it's not like a giant hoover hovering around the Earth trying to suck away the atmosphere, where would it get sucked to,
Click to expand...
I never said it's like a giant hoover. The second law states that gas moves from volumes of higher pressure to lower pressure. There is no sucking. The atmosphere would push into the lower pressure vacuum of space.

Professor said:
there's no place, is there?
Click to expand...
There's no place in the infinite vacuum of space?

Professor said:
Besides the Earth has attractive power (gravity, if you like) which apparently overrides any potential "Vaccum", perhaps due to the planets massive integral size.
Click to expand...
So gravity contains gas? Okay, show me a demonstration of gas being contained by gravity.
 
David has been banned said:
Well you were talking about (according to) the laws of nature, and you seem perfectly happy to call the second law of thermodynamics, the second law of thermodynamics.. but you seem to get coy when it comes to naming the law of nature for why things fall down (gravity).
Click to expand...
Gravity is not a law of nature. The second law can be demonstrated in a scientific experiment, gravity cannot. There is no up or down on a ball earth.

David has been banned said:
I mean, you agree that things fall down, right?
Click to expand...
Yes. Things also float and rise. Whether an object rises or falls depends on the density of the object and the medium it is in.
 
PlunkettsGhost said:
I'd like some empirical evidence myself. There is nothing obvious about it, in fact it seems something of a cosmic miracle, that one of the weakest forces known in nature can keep a thin veneer of atmosphere around a rock hurtling through the void at 66,000 miles per second (so we're told anyway)

Forgetting, for a second, the extreme inverse forces generated by a vacuum, why doesn't the Moon's gravity suck off the outer periphery of our atmosphere at a constant rate, given that is powerful enough to create tidal forces? (or so we're told)
Click to expand...
What moves the oceans twice a day every day for millions of years -- something the size of a planet would do.
the boundary layer around a golf-ball has to be managed --we have to dimple it to get the ball to behave within the boundary layer .
when i land an aircraft i have to push the stick into the ground starting at 1.5 times the wingspan as the boundary layer wants me to fly .
cormorants fly at wave-top height as they can cover 3 times the distance flying in the boundary layer using the same energy.
Dornier the famous German seaplane co discovered in the 1920s they could fly twice the distance for the same fuel burn if the pilots flew 100 ft over the surface .
they developed a system where the pilots stood and wrestled with the non powered controls as they had more situational spacial awareness standing and flying at night took exhaustive concentration .
 
Hermit said:
:D Why not? You think he's honest because he's got has a dumb fuck happy face while singing a pop song. Of course he can lie.


You saw something in the sky, that's fine. But that is not proof that it is the ISS in orbit around a ball earth.


If you believe they faked the moon landing, then why would you believe anything they claim?


In a film studio.
Click to expand...
Assessing this topic is a skill which I have and you don't. It suits those claiming Apollo was real to have have you spouting that all space travel is fake. It s not fake. The films of weightless people floating cannot be
manufactured. Only Apollo moon landing were faked. No human has gone beyond LEO
 
Hermit said:
Space is claimed to be a vacuum, adjacent next to a gas pressure system, without a physical barrier or container. That's impossible according to the second law, so if you disagree then provide a scientific experiment which demonstrates a vacuum next to gas without a container.


I specifically said to Val "You saw something in the sky, that's fine." So I'm not denying we can see something up there in the sky. I just don't believe that it's a vacuum orbiting a ball earth at 8 km per second (17,900 mph).


We don't know anything because it has not and cannot be proven. You take NASA's word for it that it's real.


I never said it's like a giant hoover. The second law states that gas moves from volumes of higher pressure to lower pressure. There is no sucking. The atmosphere would push into the lower pressure vacuum of space.


There's no place in the infinite vacuum of space?


So gravity contains gas? Okay, show me a demonstration of gas being contained by gravity.
Click to expand...
Gravity is created by all mass. Anything made out of atoms. Hydrogen gas in space is compressed by its own gravity. Electromagnetic radiation is deflected by gravity but no one knows if electromagnetic radiation creates gravity. I suspect it does but cannot prove it.
 
valamhic said:
Assessing this topic is a skill which I have and you don't. It suits those claiming Apollo was real to have have you spouting that all space travel is fake. It s not fake. The films of weightless people floating cannot be
manufactured. Only Apollo moon landing were faked. No human has gone beyond LEO
Click to expand...
i think you are right the Russians said their people could not survive in outer space so they never left our orbit.
 
David has been banned said:
It's not? Why not?
Click to expand...
It is claimed to be a law of nature, but a law is supposed to be supported by scientific experimentation and observed in nature - there is no experiment for gravity and there is no observation of "mass attracting mass" or "bendy space time" in reality.

David has been banned said:
Do you agree that in such a scenario things fall down and not in any other direction, such as up or sideways?
Click to expand...
I agree, things do not fall up or sideways when in a medium of lower density.
 
Hermit said:
It's easy to repeat what you've been told about gravity, but there are no experiments to prove any of those claims.
Click to expand...
what is observable is the skyscraper of rocket fuel required to get your arse off this planet .
when you reach outer space the gravity is less and if you leave earths gravity pull a simple good kick in the arse will send you to the moon -literally.
hard to argue with the evidence of gravity --however i do not know what gravity is .
what is worth discussing is the effect the moon has on us --if it can lift the oceans what is it doing to us -twice a day .
i speak with nurses and i say rubbish to the lunatics and the moon or full moon= as it is called .
the full moon is with us twice a day and is visible at night without the light of the sun on it .
it is always a full moon but yet nurses in general hospitals state in groups that the patients go lu la at times of a full moon and they observe this each year for decades now.
 
AUL LAD said:
what is observable is the skyscraper of rocket fuel required to get your arse off this planet .
when you reach outer space the gravity is less and if you leave earths gravity pull a simple good kick in the arse will send you to the moon -literally.
hard to argue with the evidence of gravity --however i do not know what gravity is .
what is worth discussing is the effect the moon has on us --if it can lift the oceans what is it doing to us -twice a day .
i speak with nurses and i say rubbish to the lunatics and the moon or full moon= as it is called .
the full moon is with us twice a day and is visible at night without the light of the sun on it .
it is always a full moon but yet nurses in general hospitals state in groups that the patients go lu la at times of a full moon and they observe this each year for decades now.
Click to expand...
The word lunatic is a clue in itself.
 
Hermit said:
It's easy to repeat what you've been told about gravity, but there are no experiments to prove any of those claims.
Click to expand...
You want to try carrying a bag of my gold bullion and you will soon get to experience gravity.
 
AUL LAD said:
i think you are right the Russians said their people could not survive in outer space so they never left our orbit.
Click to expand...
The Russians took about one kilogram of moon material back to earth years ago with unmanned crafts.
They also placed a reflector on the moon which is still there and working. No people involved on the moon.

Also the moon surface is a reddish brown colour. The Chinese Change 4 landing proved that. Yet Apollo photographs only show a black silver and white landscape. https://www.bing.com/images/search?...A&id=92E9F8D7D386BC3E7DC07A46F363833E6721A4D1
 
AUL LAD said:
hard to argue with the evidence of gravity --however i do not know what gravity is .
Click to expand...
What evidence? How can you say there is evidence for gravity when you don't even know what gravity is?!!!
 
valamhic said:
64
Click to expand...
Born in Jan-Feb 1964, you would have at least 3 planets (Sun, Mars and Saturn) in Aquarius, so the Aquarian archetype will be prevalent in your personality, psychology and life experiences.

Aquarius keywords: unconventional, rebellious, contrarian, goes against the grain, devil's advocate, the outsider, alien, eccentric, unpredictable, unique, original, new, modern, progressive, the future, technology, robots, inventions, innovation, genius, mad scientist, humanitarian, social justice, conscientious objector.

Aquarius is said to be an intellectual sign, so I guess the stars are supporting your claims to high intelligence! It's an air sign, with the element of air corresponding with the mind and thought, communication and social interaction. The The Sun, representing your sense of identity, pride and ego, means you should identify with some of the keywords above.

Here's what AI says about two planetary aspects that would be in your chart. Does any of this resonate with you?

Jupiter square Mercury
Individuals with this aspect have urgent messages and thoughts they want to share with others.
Their minds race with a mix of vast and philosophical ideas alongside mundane or even petty thoughts.
They may not always sift through which thoughts are consequential and which are not.
The urgency to communicate can sometimes make them impatient when others don’t respond as quickly or seem indifferent.
Balancing their input/output cycles is crucial. They should listen actively and leave space for feedback.

He is frivolous and imprudent at times. He may lack judgement, and may be full of self-importance. He can have difficulty realizing his plans largely because he lacks clarity and he often overshoots.
Click to expand...
Sun conjunct Mars
You are enterprising and have powerful energy stores you can draw upon when needed. You respond to problems or challenges with a spirited and enthusiastic confidence that is admirable. You are naturally competitive, and this trait is generally well-received by others simply because it is unforced, unaffected, and sincere.

You truly believe in fair play, and you seem to be in love with life. When expressing competitiveness and courage, it's easy for others to accept these traits as positive rather than being rubbed the wrong way.

You have good physical vitality. Although competitive, you are not naturally combative. You may enjoy sports or games that are competitive but not violent. Breaking the rules of a competitive game is particularly upsetting to you. You can control your desires, aggressions, and instincts more than most. You know how to be fair and expect others to be fair! As such, sneaky behaviors, uncontrolled impulses, violence, and rage are offensive to you.
Click to expand...
 
AUL LAD said:
what is worth discussing is the effect the moon has on us --if it can lift the oceans what is it doing to us -twice a day .

the full moon is with us twice a day and is visible at night without the light of the sun on it .
it is always a full moon but yet nurses in general hospitals state in groups that the patients go lu la at times of a full moon and they observe this each year for decades now.
Click to expand...
this is the contents of my previous post -- nowhere does it say the moon rotates about the earth twice a day --

"""" but yet i am trolled here by the village idiot who somehow sees this in my post and rushes to tell the world to SPARE MY BLUSHES """""

and i make the clear point the gravity of the moon should drive the susceptible patients cracked TWICE a day if gravity is the force however the light on the moon once every 27.32 days is causing this and when you look at this we are told that birds regulate their reproduction per lunar cycle .
this shining of the suns torch on the moon once a month should not excite anyone but it does --all around the world .
 
If I were modding this, thread derailment would be ended long ago. This is a good thread about
whether NASA landed men on the moon or not. Yet we have the above dribble about gravity which
is totally unrelated to the thread topic. It is very sad but true and management is to blame.
 
AUL LAD said:
this is the contents of my previous post -- nowhere does it say the moon rotates about the earth twice a day --

"""" but yet i am trolled here by the village idiot who somehow sees this in my post and rushes to tell the world to SPARE MY BLUSHES """""

and i make the clear point the gravity of the moon should drive the susceptible patients cracked TWICE a day if gravity is the force however the light on the moon once every 27.32 days is causing this and when you look at this we are told that birds regulate their reproduction per lunar cycle .
this shining of the suns torch on the moon once a month should not excite anyone but it does --all around the world .
Click to expand...
Well said, also we could factor in how the moon gravitates closer to the earth within its cycles, sometimes it's much closer and hence a stronger pull is experienced - High Tides.
 
F_1SEraXcAAo47X.jpg
 
valamhic said:
If I were modding this, thread derailment would be ended long ago. This is a good thread about
whether NASA landed men on the moon or not. Yet we have the above dribble about gravity which
is totally unrelated to the thread topic. It is very sad but true and management is to blame.
Click to expand...
Gravity is not off topic in a thread about space. Gravity has never been proven. No gravity, no balls in space, no orbits, no moon landings. If you disagree, then give me the scientific experiment that proves gravity.
 
Hermit said:
Gravity is not off topic in a thread about space. Gravity has never been proven. No gravity, no balls in space, no orbits, no moon landings. If you disagree, then give me the scientific experiment that proves gravity.
Click to expand...
Do you have good links debunking gravity = mass attraction?

Ta
 
Isn't Gravity, More about the Reaction of Space to Objects with Mass ~ ~ Ergo, Gravity is Much More about Space, than Objects with Mass.
 
PlunkettsGhost said:
Do you have good links debunking gravity = mass attraction?

Ta
Click to expand...
This guy has a lot of technical debunks: https://www.quora.com/profile/Michael-Brenner-13/answers (I can't link his gravity posts directly so you'll have to scroll to find them)

Some more technical stuff here: https://ifers.forumotion.com/t353-mathematically-debunking-gravity-a-critique-of-newtons-laws

I have more stuff on my computer at home, I'll post later.

clarke-connolly said:
Isn't Gravity, More about the Reaction of Space to Objects with Mass ~ ~ Ergo, Gravity is Much More about Space, than Objects with Mass.
Click to expand...
Correct. Newtonian gravity (mass attracts mass) was superseded and replaced by mass bending spacetime (Einstein's relativity).
 
Hermit said:
This guy has a lot of technical debunks: https://www.quora.com/profile/Michael-Brenner-13/answers (I can't link his gravity posts directly so you'll have to scroll to find them)

Some more technical stuff here: https://ifers.forumotion.com/t353-mathematically-debunking-gravity-a-critique-of-newtons-laws

I have more stuff on my computer at home, I'll post later.


Correct. Newtonian gravity (mass attracts mass) was superseded and replaced by mass bending spacetime (Einstein's relativity).
Click to expand...
So, It can be said ~ ~ That the Potential for Gravity is always there in Space ~ ~ Therefore Space is more important in Gravity than Mass.

Also ~ What People think of as " " Empty Space " " = = Is Never Empty.

The " " Empty-ness Of Space " " may well be, The Most Important Thing in the Universe.

The " " Empty-ness Of Space " " is Pretty Much Everything !
 
David has been banned said:
No doubt your notion of supersession is bullshit
Click to expand...

Another topic deserving discussion is Einstein’s modification of Newton’s law of gravitation. In spite of all the excitement it created, Newton’s law of gravitation is not correct! It was modified by Einstein to take into account the theory of relativity. According to Newton, the gravitational effect is instantaneous, that is, if we were to move a mass, we would at once feel a new force because of the new position of that mass; by such means we could send signals at infinite speed. Einstein advanced arguments which suggest that we cannot send signals faster than the speed of light, so the law of gravitation must be wrong. By correcting it to take the delays into account, we have a new law, called Einstein’s law of gravitation.
Click to expand...

David has been banned said:
Newton's gravitation and general relativity both describe the same thing - gravity
Click to expand...
Newton: gravity is a force. Relativity: gravity is NOT a force. They are not the same.

Gravity is most accurately described by the general theory of relativity (proposed by Albert Einstein in 1915), which describes gravity not as a force, but as the curvature of spacetime
Click to expand...
Newton's law of universal gravitation says that every particle attracts every other particle in the universe with a force
Click to expand...
 
You can make objects 'float' using electro static technology. Another nail in gravity's coffin. Electrostatics create a field around an object that alters the density relative to the environment. We've all rubbed a a balloon and stuck it to the wall, or run a comb through the hair and then used the comb to lift pieces of paper. Electrostatics are used in industry for its 'lifting' capability.


View: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ViZNgU-Yt-Y
 
David has been banned said:
You are a goofball

"Another nail in the coffin of gravity"

You are an utter retard, a fucking joke human
Click to expand...
Jambo, I though Saturdays were prime Big Issue sales days? Your missing out on cash money, being on here old Bean . Go and stretch the aul pins and make a few shillings
 
David has been banned said:
"Another nail in the coffin of gravity"

"The Earth is flat"

You are completely fucking retarded
Click to expand...
I saw a documentary years ago about parrots adopted after the owner passes. It was hilarious, the parrots were effing and blinding or had their favourite funny little quotes and buzzwords. It was hilarious because a parrot has no understanding, and no depth to it.

This also why you are hilarious James. No depth, no understanding. All buzzwords and bile.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Latest Threads

Popular Threads

Back
Top Bottom