Show Posts

This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.

Messages - stack

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 146  Next >
Flat Earth Theory / Re: In FE, why is Earth a magnet?
« on: December 09, 2022, 09:26:23 PM »
Stack, I've never said Earth is a hollowed out Dome..

I know and I didn't mean to imply that. Yours is a dome over a disk. A disk that is earth. What I was addressing is that your experiments didn't use a "dome" they used a solid hunk of glass. There is quite a difference.

To say it's not possible for air to affect the way we see objects on or away from Earth is unfair.

I never said the atmosphere has no affect on observations - Not sure where that is coming from.

Where is the sun in your model?

In any case, how do all those people who visit the North Pole flip down to the underside of the earth? How does that work?

And when you say, "but this is already a phenomenon we observe up there", you don't have to name the "we", but it would be helpful if you explained how you made that observation and where is "up there"?

Flat Earth Theory / Re: The cosmos, confusion, and further understanding
« on: December 09, 2022, 12:08:58 AM »
How come an image such as this one has never been seen (the top image in the below link) ?

What makes you say it "has never been seen"? And why does it have to be fake? How do you know that no one called the coast guard?

Seeing this would probably prompt to call the coast guard, not the other one...

Flat Earth Theory / Re: In FE, why is Earth a magnet?
« on: December 09, 2022, 12:02:10 AM »
Stack, the atmosphere is like my unpopular glass dome experiments where I show you how a source of light which mimics the sun, can hit class at a certain angle and represent the amount of light people see on earth if it were flat...  Remember the earth spins and wobbles which scatter light in different directions.

Oh yeah, sorry, I forgot about the rotating disk. A rarity among FEr's from what I've seen. Is the sun stationary or does it move too?

One of the reasons your "dome" experiments are controversial is because they are not "dome" experiments. They are
"paperweight" experiments. Meaning you used a hunk of solid glass, not a hollowed out dome, like an upside down glass bowl. Your experiment/model would crush everything and everyone on earth.

And for your second question, not many people have been to the north pole.  I'm aware of a few skiers, a motorcyclist, a cruise ship, and some science expedition's who have been there...  And that's not even the edge of the world in my opinion.  And even if a person descided to travel farther and farther in a particular direction which is near the edge of the world, I'm told the air is so thin that planes can't get there and probably any other machine or human that I know of.

For $31k you can take a 2 week excursion to the north pole on a luxury ice-breaker with helicopter tours and polar bear sightings.

Visiting The North Pole

Are these people on the underside of the disk? If so, how did they flip down to get there?

And who exactly told you the air is thin somewhere around there? And why would that be anyway?

Flat Earth Theory / Re: In FE, why is Earth a magnet?
« on: December 08, 2022, 06:45:20 PM »
Its just an optical property of the atmosphere (imo)...

I understand that it would be an optical property. But how does the optical property know when to predictably switch day for night for all points on earth? In other words, how does the property work?

I updated the Magnet Picture below... 

The north pole as we know it on a spherical world (90'N Latitude) would be on the underside of a flat earth below the south pole / Antarctica.   Imagine your standing at the north pole on a spherical earth and the world is squished a little into a disc shape.  The south pole would still be beneath your feet on the other side of the world.   The only difference is that on a flat world we would only live in one particular hemisphere, or one side of earth, but the magnetic lines do dip under. 

How do people get to the North Pole if it's on the underside of the disk? Many people have been there and many a plane have flown over it. How did they pull that off?

Philosophy, Religion & Society / Re: Trump
« on: December 08, 2022, 06:37:12 PM »
Wasn't the initial argument that the Feds planted the docs?

Flat Earth Theory / Re: In FE, why is Earth a magnet?
« on: December 08, 2022, 05:43:54 AM »
Okay, to answer your questions from before - yes, it's a south centered AE map with Antarctica at the center.  Even though they say Anarctica is where the geographic and magnetic south pole is it is not.  The polarity of Antarctica is North with upward moving magnetic field lines as illustrated in the picture above.

To quickly sum up the model here, the sun is stationary.  Earth tilts towards the sun just like the Round Earth model.  But instead of Earth orbitting the sun, it also sits stationary beneath the sun and wobbles once a year to account for seasonal and celestial visual changes.   It's not a spot light sun, it just hovers near Earth like all the other planets but uses the Earths atmosphere to divide the light into night and day.  And our Earthly solar system I think is simply a small Galaxy orbitting the Milky Way.

How does the atmosphere know how to divide the light? And where is the north pole again? Underneath the disk?

Philosophy, Religion & Society / Re: Died Suddenly
« on: December 08, 2022, 05:41:09 AM »
I guess the assumption is that people don't die anymore?

Philosophy, Religion & Society / Re: Trump
« on: December 06, 2022, 10:12:01 PM »


$1.61 million in fines

Chuckle like a $5 tip

However, a felony conviction could impact its ability to do business or obtain loans or contracts.

Which would mean lost "income" that could well greatly exceed $1.6m fine. Often times it's not the felony penalty that gets you it's the implications going forward of being a felon.

Philosophy, Religion & Society / Re: Died Suddenly
« on: December 06, 2022, 10:06:35 PM »
Hang in there Al..Not a clot shot?

"The holiday marked the first time in 27 years that Roker was not part of NBC's coverage of the Macy's Thanksgiving Day Parade last week."

"Today" show anchor Al Roker has returned to the hospital as he continues to recover from blood clots in his legs and lungs."

Al Roker, healthiest man alive. From the same article:

Roker has had a host of medical problems. Two years ago, he announced he had prostate cancer and had to have an organ removed. He's also had surgeries to fix issues with his hip and knees.

Philosophy, Religion & Society / Re: Trump
« on: December 06, 2022, 09:53:30 PM »
The impeachment process is a process granted to legitimate Presidents, not illegitimate ones. An illegitimate President would not be granted that process. The process of impeaching the President assumes by default that it is a legitimate President.

If it were found that the US President was a Deep Fake CGI creation by the Chinese Government, and that he was replaced at some point during his term, would Congress need to muster up the required amount of votes to impeach and remove him with the standard processes granted to a President? No.

That would make for a really interesting inauguration. How would a Chinese deep-fake CGI creation put his/her/its hand on the bible?

Philosophy, Religion & Society / Re: Trump
« on: December 06, 2022, 08:32:55 AM »
Stack comes along and agrees that termination of the Constitution is the appropriate thing to do in the case of fraud and that it is not such an outrageous thing to say, but says there wasn't no fraud so it doesn't matter.

Not sure how you arrived at all that. I just said your point is moot. There was no fraud so whether the constitution speaks to presidential election fraud or not is neither here nor there. As honk pointed out, there is a mechanism that is in the constitution, impeachment.

As well, there has been much debate over just such a scenario. Some legal scholars claim that Article II of the Constitution prevents holding a presidential election again whereas others point to some case law where courts may interpret the constitution differently and allow a redo. So to say "Trump is right" is just blindingly partisan and, in fact, incorrect, as it has not been determined one way or the other. 

As far as Trump goes, totally to be expected. 3 years on, still claiming there was fraud without a shred of evidence and then saying we should ditch the constitution. He's just playing to the delusional idiots who still idolize him...Pillow guy, et al, and filling his coffers.

Philosophy, Religion & Society / Re: Trump
« on: December 06, 2022, 04:49:43 AM »
The conversation wasn't about how the constitution handles fraud until you just brought it up. The conversation was about Trump wanting to toss out the constitution because he thinks there was fraud, years now after it's been shown there wasn't any fraud. Since there was no fraud, whether the constitution addresses fraud or not, is a moot point.

Philosophy, Religion & Society / Re: Trump
« on: December 06, 2022, 03:44:00 AM »
Trump is correct. The Constitution does not outline what happens if there is fraud. When Constitution talking about how the winner of the election is certified and put into power it is implying that the legitimately elected person is certified and put into power. Therefore in a cause of fraud large parts of the Constitution on how the President is given power, or how that President can be impeached, can be discarded because they are not applicable to an illegitimately elected President.

What fraud?

Please refrain from low content posting. Read the link to find out what is being discussed.

I did. But since there was no fraud, kinda a moot point.

Philosophy, Religion & Society / Re: Trump
« on: December 06, 2022, 03:41:00 AM »
Trump is correct. The Constitution does not outline what happens if there is fraud. When Constitution talking about how the winner of the election is certified and put into power it is implying that the legitimately elected person is certified and put into power. Therefore in a cause of fraud large parts of the Constitution on how the President is given power, or how that President can be impeached, can be discarded because they are not applicable to an illegitimately elected President.

What fraud?


Two of russia's old drones hits 450 miles inside russia. Putie gonna be pissed.

Is this more information you want to share from NASA?

Russia GDP:

ouch ouch

if you were russia, wouldn't you want NATO and the west to think your hurting from sanctions?
They just made $1 billion off grain harvest in Ukie

Hilarious, when it's convenient, you now all of a sudden believe NASA???

Russia Reaped $1 Billion of Wheat in Occupied Ukraine, NASA Says
- NASA Harvest uses satellite imagery to model wheat crop
- A quarter of Ukraine wheat is grown on land claimed by Russia

Ukraine has lost at least $1 billion of wheat that was harvested in areas controlled by Russia, according to research using satellite imagery from NASA’s food security and agriculture program.

Ouch is right. Your hypocrisy on display.

I was alluding to a much scaled down experiment perhaps under lab conditions. Take a 'large enough mass' of clayey earth for example maybe weighing a few kilos, mould it into an unorthodox shape, subject it to magnetism or gravity (or both - one at a time); and moisture and heat and light and generally 'age' it and watch it collapse into a sphere. It shouldn't take long for something that size. Or is a specific minimum size of 'large enough mass' required if so what is that size?
I can't see it happening for some reason. But there must be some evidence to show that this has happened in the past - however as it cannot be replicated then the theory might take some proving.

Just get a bar magnet and some iron filings and see how they arrange themselves.

It would be difficult to do with gravity as a "large enough mass" would have to be around 400-600 km and it would still take thousands, if not tens of thousands of years.

Am not sure that a magnetic and some iron filings demonstrates/proves the large-mass-becomes-sphere theory.
But surely its all relative. And the timescale of tens of thousands of years for a large mass to become a sphere would be much reduced for a very small mass surely? Or is there a minimum definitive size of mass which only above this the sphere theory works? If so what is that 'size'? If the theory has been tested, peer-reviewed, accepted by (and everything else that goes with proving such things) by science that shouldn't be a difficult one to answer.

It depends on what the object is made from

Here's a good paper on the subject
The term used us hydrostatic equilibrium. As gravity pulls equally in every direction it will naturally attempt to pull things into an object where the mass is equally distributed from the centre of mass (a sphere). But depending on the material the object is, it's own integrity will try and resist the change. We can see this when we look at asteroids and moons as the paper shows in its diagrams. Below a certain size they will be more lumpy and potato shaped, but as they get larger the more rounder they are. The maths given are how this is calculated and the verification is observing the different sized bodies in the solar system.

Think of a thought experiment to explain why not just any body will turn into a sphere. Take a cardboard box and place a weight in it. The box is unlikely to collapse in any given timeframe. We add the same sized box with a weight in on top. Unless they are very poorly made your stack should be fine. But if we keep going eventually we will reach a trigger point. The weight constantly increasing is balancing against the strength of the boxes which is fixed. When the weight gets too much a crush begins. In our example you'll end up with a big pile of boxes, but in space with nothing to act on them you'll get a cloud. Keep adding boxes, they'll all be attracted to one another and with pressure on every side with enough you'll end up with a sphere!

Thank you. Very interesting. Also interesting was the article in the link you provided. In particular the galactic disk M104. And a thought came to mind; If this 'flat' galaxy was being 'pulled' together by a central force (magnetic, anti-gravity or something else) might it be possible for the constituent parts (of the galaxy) to form a complete disk? And even if this was just remotely possible could this therefore suggest how a flat as opposed to global earth was formed? Is there anything to dispel this for example?

Not really a comprehensive, in depth explanation, but a good primer of what we think we know to date:

Why Are Galaxies Flat?

In Summary
- Galaxies are flat because of the conservation of angular momentum.
- Flat galaxies are usually spiral galaxies.
- Our solar system is also flat because of the conservation of angular momentum. Past Neptune, our solar system ceases to be flat.
- Elliptical galaxies are not flat and lean more towards a spherical shape.
- The Milky Way was probably flat at one time, but currently, it is warped because of some unknown force.

Technology & Information / Re: Ask Rushy about Bitcoins.
« on: December 02, 2022, 12:30:30 AM »
1 bitcoin is worth over 210,000 NOK (around 21,560 USD) and it increases in price because of interest if you keep it in the bank or whatever.
Gold increases in price too but 1 ounce is worth less than a bitcoin.
It would be better to buy 1 bitcoin instead of gold in my opinion.

You just lost $4500...

Philosophy, Religion & Society / Re: B Flat with Ralphy
« on: December 02, 2022, 12:14:33 AM »
Peddling motivational speakers now? Did you drop 750 quid on a 1-1 session with this guy?

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 146  Next >