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.
Now that the "here's how Trump can still win" mantra has faded, 'the great reset' is what we'll get to hear all about?
What is there to understand about the numbers?
https://www.cdc.gov/coronavirus/2019-ncov/vaccines/safety/adverse-events.html
Reports of death after COVID-19 vaccination are rare. More than 331 million doses of COVID-19 vaccines were administered in the United States from December 14, 2020, through July 6, 2021. During this time, VAERS received 5,946 reports of death (0.0018%) among people who received a COVID-19 vaccine. FDA requires healthcare providers to report any death after COVID-19 vaccination to VAERS, even if it’s unclear whether the vaccine was the cause.Reports of adverse events to VAERS following vaccination, including deaths, do not necessarily mean that a vaccine caused a health problem. A review of available clinical information, including death certificates, autopsy, and medical records, has not established a causal link to COVID-19 vaccines.
What I'm saying is RE prediction matches what is seen.Matches how? You haven't shown any real world evidence. Stating your theory and claiming your theory are correct is a million miles from DEMONSTRATING that your theory is correct. I could theorise that it rains blood in Kenya. This is because I believe clouds are made of sheep and it rains when God squeezes them. My theory matches what is seen and your theory isn't even close. - Can you not see how silly your argument is?
For those who care, FE would actually give the exact same prediction but we're dealing with someone of limited intelligence so come back on page 4 or 5 when WTF_Seriously has caught up.
So what you are saying is "My round earth prediction is this. Your flat earth prediction is different. Explain why your flat earth prediction is different." ... Answer ... it's a different model. One you have failed to debunk.
... but you're not that smart.
Lol "Everyone is Wrong and LiEeInG"
That is a desperate argument from a losing position.......
Why did you pick at 9am and 3pm?
Please look at Ottawa below. It is at 45.42 degrees of latitude. Very near the 45 degrees you stipulate.
https://www.timeanddate.com/sun/canada/ottawa?month=9&year=2021
The meridian is not 12pm on the equinox (22nd September). Its 12:55pm.
9am is 3 hours 55 mins earlier.
3pm is just 2 hours 5 mins later.
Why would you be surprised to see different shadow lengths?
The reality is you didn't see anything at all. You made assumptions based on your round earth preconceptions and then demanded to know why 'what we see' <-- actually something you didn't see but lied about, doesn't match a flat earth prediction. Come back when you have real world evidence to suggest the shadows are as you predict.
Lol "Everyone is Wrong and LiEeInG"
That is a desperate argument from a losing position. An argument from a position of strength would have positive evidence for that position.
Average velocity (linear) is calculated by (final velocity+ initial velocity)/2 as demonstrated here: https://www.calculatorsoup.com/calculators/physics/velocity_avg.php
If you think you are somehow claiming that on the one hand, I am wrong by giving the average velocity of 8000km/h derived by your figures, then only to provide the displacement/t as the correct figure, then you would need to counter this: https://www.calculatorsoup.com/calculators/physics/velocity_avg.php
Type in 0 for initial velocity and 16,000 km/h for final velocity.
See what you get.
??
Pardon me for not reading 13 pages of replies, but coming down to the end of this, it seems to me that none of this is necessary. The target of an ICBM will be in a very different place if the earth is flat or round. All that is necessary for the question of FE vs RE is to observe that if you get the shape of the earth wrong, the missile will miss by hundreds of miles. The US has multiple test ranges and tracks missiles with radar, gps, and hydrophone grid at landing site. Russia shoots them at Siberia and can see where they landed. They want to get the CEP (circular error probability) down as low as possible (certainly less than a mile) to hit hardened targets.
The equation for a multi-stage rocket would be very complex, and I believe they have in flight guidance control of some kind. There is a gap between stages firing, the stages have different power and weight. It is not physics 101 textbook parabola. They are MIRVed and different warheads land different places.
The North Korea missiles went almost straight up. To know how far they can go if aimed more horizontally, one must know the shape of the earth.
Why do REs here go down the rabbit hole of arguing exact equations etc when there is a simple principle that will determine the point being debated? Complexity obscures, and RE should be looking for clarity and simplicity. Sometimes I think this is not about RE or FE but who has the most detailed scientific knowledge and math ability.
My point was that missiles that go a thousand miles or more will land in very different places on FE or RE. The people who test them have spent huge amounts of money tracking and instrumenting to know exactly where they are landing. Multiple countries have done this. There are 3 possibilities.
1. They know earth is round.
2. They know earth is flat.
3. All such systems have failed and none of the countries that desperately want to have their missiles hit a target have succeeded.
I do not care what the equation is. I care whether there is a giant worldwide conspiracy, required for case 2 or 3. Case 1 is ICBMs work and RE is true. Case 2 is ICBMs work and everyone involved with knows the earth is flat. Case 3 is everyone is an idiot and desperately trying to look like a genius, in which case it puzzles me that they could be so incompetent at aiming and so brilliant at faking it.
Do you think that no one knows where ICBMs will land? Because if someone knows, they know the shape of the earth. Multiple ranges and organizations in the US and more in other countries. Tracked by radar and gps and landing area instrumented with hydrophones.
The fact that people who are wrong about something can achieve great things does absolutely nothing to make them right on those other things.
Regardless of whether or not you want to call it a mental illness, it's a very real phenomenon that affects millions of people. And I don't believe that there's any risk to "security and privacy" from women accidentally catching a glimpse of male genitals. If you're making a new argument about predatory transwomen seeking access to women-only spaces for nefarious reasons, you're going to need to back that up with something other than your own intuition, because all evidence suggests that it quite simply doesn't happen.Women are uncomfortable with it. We know this because they complain about it. Why does the comfort of a mentally ill man trump that of perfectly sane women?
But he's a serial grifter, a lot of this has been to raise money to fight the good fight (read "service his debts")
assembled press who a) knew they would be there and b) felt in absolutely no mortal danger whatsoever?
You contend that 159,000 lbs consisted of a, "majority of which is fuel," based on "what exactly?"
Any idea on the altitude and rate of travel achieved by the time of engine cut off? It is apparent you disagree with the 4500 km achieved at that time, contending an unpowered ballistic object can continue gaining a significant amount of altitude after impetus is removed.