1

Flat Earth Theory / Non-UA theories of gravity

« on: December 31, 2018, 03:36:04 AM »

It seems to me that the majority of Flat Earthers actually reject the idea of Universal Acceleration and claim that the reason things fall is some combination of "density", "air pressure", or "denpressure". While I actually have no problem with UA, I've never understood any of the others as complete models. I'm hoping a Flat Earther who does not believe in UA could clarify the following phenomena in their model for me by answering these specific questions:

• Do you believe Newton's laws of motion, specifically F=ma?
• If you reject Newton's laws, what about F=ma do you think should be different?
• Do things in free fall with negligible air resistance accelerate constantly or fall at a constant speed?
• If they accelerate constantly, is that acceleration different or the same for objects of different masses?
• If it is the same and you accept Newton's laws, how is that mathematically any different from a universal downward force that acts on objects proportionally to mass?
• If falling is related to air pressure, would things fall in a perfect vacuum?
• If falling is related to air pressure, do things fall at different rates at different pressures?
• If falling is caused by air pressure, does air pressure increase or decrease with altitude?

2

Flat Earth Theory / Re: Satellites

« on: March 16, 2018, 01:40:09 PM »

Stare at the supposed ISS live feed for a few days straight on Red Bull. I guarantee you that you will never see one of the supposed 1000's of satellites up there. Why?

They're FAKE !

Actually found this recent video where they faked it again. It's horrible to watch. I mean fast forward to 1:25:41, you can see they have placed a string of satellites in 'space'. So funny!

So you're insisting that since these satellites are in view of each other, but the ISS is not in view of any other satellites, that these both must be fake?

Naturally, if a single launch puts several satellites in orbit, it will place them in very similar places with very similar velocities. They are within view of each other because they were put up at the same time by the same launch in the same place. They stay near each other because they all have the same altitude and thus orbit at the same rate in the same direction. Satellites are often put up in groups like this because it is far cheaper than using an additional rocket launch for each one.

The ISS, on the other hand, was assembled from several launches, none of which, to my knowledge, contained parts for any other satellites. The ISS was a big project; I don't think they had any room for unrelated satellites. The ISS can see no fellow satellites because it was not near anything else to begin with, and the probability of it just happening to pass near enough another one to see it and have the other one pass in front of a running video camera is incredibly slim. Remember that LEO satellites are dispersed over an area slightly bigger than the surface area of the entire Earth, and that most are travelling in a similar direction with a similar speed (eastward at about 30,000 km/hr).