A new book on the UFO, Alien Hoax

[Hermit]

You can't provide any evidence for your claim that planets are observed going around the sun, so now you're deflecting to earth rotation. Your problem is you think explanations are evidence or proof. You think some dipshits explaining how the earth spins or how planets go around the sun is proof that that is what happens in reality - it is not. Learn the difference between explanation and proof.

the Earth spins (at a constant speed so you don't notice it)

Earth’s Rotation Is Alarmingly Slowing Down

Time as we know it faces a profound threat.

www.popularmechanics.com

Why is the Earth spinning faster? Is time speeding up? Australia’s experts give us their second opinion

A standard Earth day is 86,400 seconds, but over three days in July and August, scientists expect the planet’s rotation to quicken relative to the sun

www.theguardian.com

 

[AN2]

You can't provide any evidence for your claim that planets are observed going around the sun,

I can't film it on my phone.. is really what you're saying. Flat-earthers folks

We've had the evidence for centuries. In fact, it was only afterwards that Newton pondered if the force that causes an apple to fall to the ground on Earth is the same force that causes the planets to orbit the Sun and of course, it is (albeit gravity isn't actually a force )

so now you're deflecting to earth rotation.

Yes, you could say that the planets are deflected (from their straight line path) because of gravity. Good, you're learning

Your problem is you think explanations are evidence or proof.

Your problem is that you don't realise that such things are surplus to requirements

You think some dipshits explaining how the earth spins or how planets go around the sun is proof that that is what happens in reality - it is not. Learn the difference between explanation and proof.

Obviously the "dipshit" in the previous video wasn't trying to convince anyone that the Earth spins (there weren't any flat-earthers there that day) but it's probably the case that a lot of people couldn't tell you why

The reason of course being inertia, which implies that it isn't caused by a force and its speed is constant

Earth’s Rotation Is Alarmingly Slowing Down

Time as we know it faces a profound threat.

www.popularmechanics.com

Why is the Earth spinning faster? Is time speeding up? Australia’s experts give us their second opinion

A standard Earth day is 86,400 seconds, but over three days in July and August, scientists expect the planet’s rotation to quicken relative to the sun

www.theguardian.com

Do you just read the headlines?

Yeah, you're not going to notice that either, Hermit

 

[Hermit]

I can't film it on my phone.. is really what you're saying. Flat-earthers folks

We've had the evidence for centuries. In fact, it was only afterwards that Newton pondered if the force that causes an apple to fall to the ground on Earth is the same force that causes the planets to orbit the Sun and of course, it is (albeit gravity isn't actually a force )

You have failed to provide evidence for your claim that planets are observed going around the sun. An apple falling to the ground has nothing to do with seeing planets going around the sun. You say an apple falls because of a force and then say that it's not a force, a violation of the law of noncontradiction.

Your problem is that you don't realise that such things are surplus to requirements

So you don't require evidence or proof, you just believe and have faith, like a religion.

Do you just read the headlines?

Yeah, you're not going to notice that either, Hermit

Opening sentence of the first article says the speed is not constant as you claimed. It cannot be constant if it is slowing down or speeding up.

The Earth’s rotation feels like a constant, but that speed actually goes through lots of small fluctuations that are unnoticed by most of the planet’s 8 billion human inhabitants.

 

[AN2]

You have failed to provide evidence for your claim that planets are observed going around the sun.

You wouldn't accept any. You would only accept the equivalent of a flat-earth goofball with a zoom lens filming it

An apple falling to the ground has nothing to do with seeing planets going around the sun.

True but it has to do with why they do. A combination of inertia and gravity is the reason planets orbit the Sun

You say an apple falls because of a force and then say that it's not a force, a violation of the law of noncontradiction.

Newton thought of it (gravity) as a force (in the classical sense) and then along came Einstein with a geometrical interpretation whereby it isn't a force rather the curvature of (4-dimensional) spacetime

So you don't require evidence or proof, you just believe and have faith, like a religion.

You said that I think the explanation is evidence or proof and I said that the evidence or proof (that planets orbit the Sun) came before the explanation, so obviously you were wrong. Even Kepler's laws (derived from observed astronomical data) were not the explanation

Opening sentence of the first article says the speed is not constant as you claimed. It cannot be constant if it is slowing down or speeding up.


View attachment 8001

[I told you when you quote the way you do it doesn't appear in the reply]
Those changes are unnoticed by all of Earth's inhabitants bar those involved in making precise calculations to detect it

I said that the Earth rotates at a constant speed (due to inertia).. so you're not going to notice it. Tiny fluctuations in the length of a day or gradual change over millions of years, you're not going to notice that either

 

[Myles O'Reilly]

If you believe in Christian theology you will understand that earth is not a ball in a space vacuum.

Hermit could you tell me please WTF Aul Lad was waffling on about?

 

[Hermit]

Hermit could you tell me please WTF Aul Lad was waffling on about?

The gist of it was:
"The universe is like really big and stuff, so big that I can't understand it. It would be real scary if we discovered aliens more advanced than us. If you're a Christian then the first question you would ask the aliens is who is your God, and if they didn't describe the Christian God then we would be in trouble."

 

[Hermit]

I said that the Earth rotates at a constant speed

But it doesn't rotate at a constant speed according to the heliocentric globe paradigm. It doesn't matter if fluctuations are small and you don't notice it, if it changes then it cannot be constant by definition. Constant means unchanging.

 

[AN2]

I said that the Earth rotates at a constant speed (due to inertia).. so you're not going to notice it. Tiny fluctuations in the length of a day or gradual change over millions of years, you're not going to notice that either

But it doesn't rotate at a constant speed

Obviously the relevance of this to flat-earth is that flat-earthers claim that the Earth doesn't rotate because otherwise it would be noticeable

Actual flat-earth science -


View: https://m.youtube.com/shorts/EgbvIwDK7ZU

 

[AN2]

The gist of it was:
"The universe is like really big and stuff, so big that I can't understand it. It would be real scary if we discovered aliens more advanced than us. If you're a Christian then the first question you would ask the aliens is who is your God, and if they didn't describe the Christian God then we would be in trouble."

Yeah, so I find it actually quite grating that a fucken flat-earther adopts a mocking imitatory tone for someone else (who doesn't think space is fake)

 

[AN2]

You have failed to provide evidence for your claim that planets are observed going around the sun. An apple falling to the ground has nothing to do with seeing planets going around the sun.

You say an apple falls because of a force and then say that it's not a force, a violation of the law of noncontradiction.

This is an excellent primer for general relativity (Ages 5+) that I just saw on YouTube, Hermit -


View: https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=LHPqhTY6dh0&t=2m26s

(rewind for the equivalence principle)

So you don't require evidence or proof, you just believe and have faith, like a religion.


Opening sentence of the first article says the speed is not constant as you claimed. It cannot be constant if it is slowing down or speeding up.


View attachment 8001

 

[AN2]

Gravity isn't a force

This is an excellent primer for general relativity (Ages 5+) that I just saw on YouTube, Hermit -


View: https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=LHPqhTY6dh0&t=2m26s

(rewind for the equivalence principle)

I hope you got a good idea about gravity (bendy spacetime) there Hermit

But you may still be asking yourself some (very good) fundamental questions..

If gravity isn't a force, why does it manifest as an acceleration?

Well, first of all, if a man jumps off a tall building with an accelerometer attached, the accelerometer won't measure any acceleration (until he goes splat), similarly, if a man jumps off a tall building with a weighing scales velcroed to his feet, the weighing scales won't measure any weight, these ideas are referred to as "Einstein's happiest thought" (the death of a man falling off a tall building)

But sure, we see objects that are falling accelerate towards the Earth (or is it the other way around?), that's just a fact.

So, what happens in gravitational field is that objects follow what's called a geodesic, which is a straight line, i.e. the shortest path from A to B, and as the object falls (towards the centre of gravity), this path from A to B shortens, resulting in an observed acceleration. That's how I think about it anyway (other people may think that that's a stupid answer)

Another question you may ask..

If gravity isn't a force, what gets the apple moving?

Well, I think an answer to that is time. All objects move through space and time, with one affecting the other, whether at rest or in motion. If after you let go of the apple and it wasn't to fall, time itself would have to have stopped.

Anyway, that's how I answer these fundamental questions to myself, better or any other answers than mine are always welcome, as are any questions..

Your humble servant,
SS (Science Supplier)

 

[Hermit]

Gravity isn't a force

I hope you got a good idea about gravity (bendy spacetime) there Hermit

Just another cartoon explanation, not even worth responding to.

If gravity isn't a force, why does it manifest as an acceleration?

Gravity is not a force according to Einstein. Prove gravity exists with the scientific method before arguing about whether or not it is a force.

If gravity isn't a force, what gets the apple moving?

Answer:

If after you let go of the apple and it wasn't to fall, time itself would have to have stopped.

 

[AN2]

Just another cartoon explanation, not even worth responding to.

Did you at least get the solar eclipse thingy?

Previously, you seemed to think that gravity only "bends" light during a solar eclipse..

Post in thread 'To The Moon' https://www.sarsfieldsvirtualpub.com/threads/to-the-moon.162/post-120133

Which is if course nonsense (it does it all the time)

Gravity is not a force according to Einstein.

Indeed

Prove gravity exists with the scientific method before arguing about whether or not it is a force.

Could you tell me what you think gravity is, first?

I mean, if I start talking about an apple and you think gravity is a banana, it probably won't make much sense to you. An important think to realise is that objects are moving in a straight line through curved spacetime, the planets are moving in a straight line (as far as they're concerned). Light only knows straight lines.. but it is "bent" by gravity

Answer:

Well, objects move through space and time, one affecting the other. Did you know that moving clocks tick slower than stationary ones as per relativity? Time is relative

 

[Hermit]

Did you at least get the solar eclipse thingy?

Previously, you seemed to think that gravity only "bends" light during a solar eclipse..

I never said that. I don't believe in gravity.

Could you tell me what you think gravity is, first?

I think it's a concept. "Curved spacetime" is a reification fallacy.

 

[AN2]

I never said that.

Well that's the impression I got when you were talking about the "scientific method" and whatever "fallacy" you were having at the time. The point being that a solar eclipse offered an opportunity to observe and it (general relativity) passed with flying colours. Photons are massless, therefore if the light (exactly as Einstein predicted) bends.. then it's space that's bent

I don't believe in gravity.

Which is idiotic and displays a profound level of the Dunning-Kruger effect

You should ask yourself why the flat-earth snake oil salesmen* tell you that gravity doesn't exist.. because it's the very reason the Earth is the shape it is

*Yes, I do believe that the head honchos in your movement know as well as anyone else that the Earth isn't flat. They prey on the conspiratorial-minded (you're been made a fool of)

I think it's a concept. "Curved spacetime" is a reification fallacy.

 

[Hermit]

Well that's the impression I got when you were talking about the "scientific method" and whatever "fallacy" you were having at the time. The point being that a solar eclipse offered an opportunity to observe and it (general relativity) passed with flying colours. Photons are massless, therefore if the light (exactly as Einstein predicted) bends.. then it's space that's bent

Your solar eclipse is only an observation, of a particular star beside the sun during a solar eclipse, not an observation of bendy space.

The claim that the solar eclipse proves bendy space is an affirming the consequent fallacy:

If space is bent and causes light to bend (P), we will observe a star near the sun during a solar eclipse (Q).
We observe a star near the sun during a solar eclipse (Q), therefore space is bent and causes light to bend (P).

That fallacious logic can also be used as follows:

If magic space unicorns cause light to bend (P), we will observe a star near the sun during a solar eclipse (Q).
We observe a star near the sun during a solar eclipse (Q), therefore magic space unicorns cause light to bend (P).

 

[AN2]

Your solar eclipse is only an observation, of a particular star beside the sun during a solar eclipse, not an observation of bendy space.

The claim that the solar eclipse proves bendy space is an affirming the consequent fallacy:

A solar eclipse was an opportunity - made it possible - to observe starlight around the Sun

If space is bent and causes light to bend (P), we will observe a star near the sun during a solar eclipse (Q).
We observe a star near the sun during a solar eclipse (Q), therefore space is bent and causes light to bend (P).

lol You're reaching near Tiger levels of embarrassing yourself

That fallacious logic can also be used as follows:

If magic space unicorns cause light to bend (P), we will observe a star near the sun during a solar eclipse (Q).
We observe a star near the sun during a solar eclipse (Q), therefore magic space unicorns cause light to bend (P).