Offline somerled

  • *
  • Posts: 292
    • View Profile
Flight path dictated by pressure change caused by altitude.

You forgot about stages 2 & 3. The graph is for Stage 1 only.

No I didn't .  Stage 1 rockets can only get so high as their efficiency at producing thrust decreases markedly with altitude . Stage two rockets have smaller nozzles with a decrease in area that allows more thrust to be produced as air pressure declines - same for stage 3 .All explained to us in physic class and believed by all.

Of course perceptions changed once I encountered Joules Law.

If you look at stages 2 & 3 in that link you will see that they are based on the premise of "no gravity" which renders them entirely fictional under what passes for mainstream science . Which is why I ignored them.



*

Offline stack

  • *
  • Posts: 1452
    • View Profile
Flight path dictated by pressure change caused by altitude.

You forgot about stages 2 & 3. The graph is for Stage 1 only.

No I didn't .  Stage 1 rockets can only get so high as their efficiency at producing thrust decreases markedly with altitude .

I'm not sure where you learned that. The thrust is constant, not diminishing, as the rocket gains speed as it becomes lighter due to burned off fuel. Burn time, about 2.5 mins before cut-off and jettison.

Stage two rockets have smaller nozzles with a decrease in area that allows more thrust to be produced as air pressure declines - same for stage 3 .All explained to us in physic class and believed by all.

Of course factoring in the rocket is now much lighter all in an effort to get to escape velocity, I think around 25k mph.

Of course perceptions changed once I encountered Joules Law.

The operative word being 'I'. Once you encountered Joules Law you dispensed with the rest of physics as we know and use it. I don't think you're in a position to do so based upon your encounter.

If you look at stages 2 & 3 in that link you will see that they are based on the premise of "no gravity" which renders them entirely fictional under what passes for mainstream science . Which is why I ignored them.

Yes and if you read further the author, as a thought experiment, by removing gravity, gets the lunar module to the moon in hours instead of the reality of days. You can find the actual data all over the web, thrust, velocity, weight, time, anything you want. Dig a little deeper and you'll find that your encounter is irrelevant here.

Not much is known about the celestial bodies and their distances.

Offline somerled

  • *
  • Posts: 292
    • View Profile
Active force is constant - thrust decreases with altitude as pressure decreases .

https://www.pprune.org/engineers-technicians/407743-relationship-between-thrust-tempreture.html

You could look that in two mins.

*

Offline stack

  • *
  • Posts: 1452
    • View Profile
Active force is constant - thrust decreases with altitude as pressure decreases .

https://www.pprune.org/engineers-technicians/407743-relationship-between-thrust-tempreture.html

You could look that in two mins.

Again, you're barking up the wrong tree just like with your 'encounter' with Joules Law and your interpretation. You cited a "Pilots" forum and they are talking about the performance of jet engines at higher altitudes. Jet engines rely on the intake of O2 from the atmosphere. Higher altitude, thinner air, more O2 is required. Rockets, conversely, do not rely on O2 intake from the atmosphere. A rockets Oxidizer is built into the internals of the combustion system. Apples & oranges in this regard.

You might want to take more than 2 minutes for your research going forward - These 'encounters' you have with various physical laws and how you interpret them are becoming increasingly irrelevant.

Not much is known about the celestial bodies and their distances.

Active force is constant - thrust decreases with altitude as pressure decreases .

https://www.pprune.org/engineers-technicians/407743-relationship-between-thrust-tempreture.html

You could look that in two mins.

Again, you're barking up the wrong tree just like with your 'encounter' with Joules Law and your interpretation. You cited a "Pilots" forum and they are talking about the performance of jet engines at higher altitudes. Jet engines rely on the intake of O2 from the atmosphere. Higher altitude, thinner air, more O2 is required. Rockets, conversely, do not rely on O2 intake from the atmosphere. A rockets Oxidizer is built into the internals of the combustion system. Apples & oranges in this regard.

You might want to take more than 2 minutes for your research going forward - These 'encounters' you have with various physical laws and how you interpret them are becoming increasingly irrelevant.
Aside from jets taking in oxygen from an intake, how do they move?
I didn't say (conversion of) thermal energy wasn't involved at all.
A rocket does not create thrust by converting thermal energy.

*

Offline stack

  • *
  • Posts: 1452
    • View Profile
Active force is constant - thrust decreases with altitude as pressure decreases .

https://www.pprune.org/engineers-technicians/407743-relationship-between-thrust-tempreture.html

You could look that in two mins.

Again, you're barking up the wrong tree just like with your 'encounter' with Joules Law and your interpretation. You cited a "Pilots" forum and they are talking about the performance of jet engines at higher altitudes. Jet engines rely on the intake of O2 from the atmosphere. Higher altitude, thinner air, more O2 is required. Rockets, conversely, do not rely on O2 intake from the atmosphere. A rockets Oxidizer is built into the internals of the combustion system. Apples & oranges in this regard.

You might want to take more than 2 minutes for your research going forward - These 'encounters' you have with various physical laws and how you interpret them are becoming increasingly irrelevant.
Aside from jets taking in oxygen from an intake, how do they move?

Irrelevant. We are talking about rockets, not jet engines, not turbo-props, etc. Rockets, rockets used to take man to the moon and back.
Not much is known about the celestial bodies and their distances.

*

Offline J-Man

  • *
  • Posts: 640
    • View Profile
Isn't the Hubble fake and all those really groovy pics?
What kind of person would devote endless hours posting scientific facts trying to correct the few retards who believe in the FE? I slay shitty little demons.

Offline ChrisTP

  • *
  • Posts: 789
    • View Profile
Isn't the Hubble fake and all those really groovy pics?
No.
Tom is wrong most of the time. Hardly big news, don't you think?

*

Offline JSS

  • *
  • Posts: 449
  • Math is math!
    • View Profile
It's been said before, but worth saying again.

NASA has an entire history of great achievements.

Viking probes? The Grand Tour? Close up pictures of the outer planets?

The Space Shuttle? That was pretty great, I remember watching those as a kid.

Mars landers? We put robots with fecking lasers on Mars.

We stuck a camera on a giant rocket and sent it to Pluto.

We slammed a probe into Jupiter on purpose. (Lets not talk about the Mars one, oops.)

We have a probe orbiting the sun at close range.

The Hubble?

The James Webb? (Hopefully soon, if it doesn't blow up or get stuck unfolding.)

NASA has done an amazing amount of work.

*

Offline J-Man

  • *
  • Posts: 640
    • View Profile
It's been said before, but worth saying again.

NASA has an entire history of great achievements.

Viking probes? The Grand Tour? Close up pictures of the outer planets?

The Space Shuttle? That was pretty great, I remember watching those as a kid.

Mars landers? We put robots with fecking lasers on Mars.

We stuck a camera on a giant rocket and sent it to Pluto.

We slammed a probe into Jupiter on purpose. (Lets not talk about the Mars one, oops.)

We have a probe orbiting the sun at close range.

The Hubble?

The James Webb? (Hopefully soon, if it doesn't blow up or get stuck unfolding.)

NASA has done an amazing amount of work.

NASA has a bunch of cartoonist and magicians on their staff. And of course writers like you all to come and flood sites with rubbish.
What kind of person would devote endless hours posting scientific facts trying to correct the few retards who believe in the FE? I slay shitty little demons.

*

Offline JSS

  • *
  • Posts: 449
  • Math is math!
    • View Profile
NASA has a bunch of cartoonist and magicians on their staff. And of course writers like you all to come and flood sites with rubbish.

Is this an example of high quality upper flora comments?

I don't work for NASA but I wish I did. If I worked for them I'd certainly say so and brag about it.

Offline ChrisTP

  • *
  • Posts: 789
    • View Profile
It's been said before, but worth saying again.

NASA has an entire history of great achievements.

Viking probes? The Grand Tour? Close up pictures of the outer planets?

The Space Shuttle? That was pretty great, I remember watching those as a kid.

Mars landers? We put robots with fecking lasers on Mars.

We stuck a camera on a giant rocket and sent it to Pluto.

We slammed a probe into Jupiter on purpose. (Lets not talk about the Mars one, oops.)

We have a probe orbiting the sun at close range.

The Hubble?

The James Webb? (Hopefully soon, if it doesn't blow up or get stuck unfolding.)

NASA has done an amazing amount of work.

NASA has a bunch of cartoonist and magicians on their staff. And of course writers like you all to come and flood sites with rubbish.
You probably wouldn't be able to use your computer to spout this kind of nonsensical ramblings if it weren't for tech made by NASA.
Tom is wrong most of the time. Hardly big news, don't you think?

NASA has a bunch of cartoonist and magicians on their staff. And of course writers like you all to come and flood sites with rubbish.

Is this an example of high quality upper flora comments?

I don't work for NASA but I wish I did. If I worked for them I'd certainly say so and brag about it.
I have a friend* who works for them, I don't know whether directly, she might just work with them.
She's doing some really cool stuff, taking seismology data from a craft on Mars to study "Marsquakes".
Which poses an interesting question for anyone who thinks NASA are faking it all.
Is the person I'm talking about "in on it"? Is she lying about this job?
Or is she being fed fake data? Why? For what purpose? Why would they employ her to do something entirely pointless?

[*full disclosure, no-one I've heard from in years, she's an ex-colleague and I heard this through a mutual ex-colleague]
If you are making your claim without evidence then we can discard it without evidence.

Nearly all flat earthers agree the earth is not a globe.

*

Offline JSS

  • *
  • Posts: 449
  • Math is math!
    • View Profile
NASA has a bunch of cartoonist and magicians on their staff. And of course writers like you all to come and flood sites with rubbish.

Is this an example of high quality upper flora comments?

I don't work for NASA but I wish I did. If I worked for them I'd certainly say so and brag about it.
I have a friend* who works for them, I don't know whether directly, she might just work with them.
She's doing some really cool stuff, taking seismology data from a craft on Mars to study "Marsquakes".
Which poses an interesting question for anyone who thinks NASA are faking it all.
Is the person I'm talking about "in on it"? Is she lying about this job?
Or is she being fed fake data? Why? For what purpose? Why would they employ her to do something entirely pointless?

[*full disclosure, no-one I've heard from in years, she's an ex-colleague and I heard this through a mutual ex-colleague]

I have a friend who helped build the Space Shuttle's robot arm. She got flown to the Kennedy Space center for all the shuttle launches as an expert consultant to help with any problems the arm might encounter. Again, very smart and I can't imagine she lied to me all those years about what she did.

NASA has a bunch of cartoonist and magicians on their staff. And of course writers like you all to come and flood sites with rubbish.

Is this an example of high quality upper flora comments?

I don't work for NASA but I wish I did. If I worked for them I'd certainly say so and brag about it.
I have a friend* who works for them, I don't know whether directly, she might just work with them.
She's doing some really cool stuff, taking seismology data from a craft on Mars to study "Marsquakes".
Which poses an interesting question for anyone who thinks NASA are faking it all.
Is the person I'm talking about "in on it"? Is she lying about this job?
Or is she being fed fake data? Why? For what purpose? Why would they employ her to do something entirely pointless?

[*full disclosure, no-one I've heard from in years, she's an ex-colleague and I heard this through a mutual ex-colleague]

I have a friend who helped build the Space Shuttle's robot arm. She got flown to the Kennedy Space center for all the shuttle launches as an expert consultant to help with any problems the arm might encounter. Again, very smart and I can't imagine she lied to me all those years about what she did.


Most of them believe the mainstream story, they aren't lying, they are deceived. As I said I worked on satellites myself, more specifically on the flight software (responsible for controlling the trajectory/orientation of the satellites, supposedly). I was given specifications that I had to turn into computer code. The problem is quite often there were logical contradictions in the specifications. That wasn't an isolated incident, it happened on many occasions. If I didn't uncover them and programmed the software according to the specifications there is no way the satellites could have flown properly. The guys I was working with were just turning the internally inconsistent specs into code like drones. With people like that working on critical parts of the satellites there is no way thousands of satellites are flying up there without any problem. Even the tests we conducted on the code to make sure it was working properly weren't foolproof. Back then despite all that I still believed the code I was writing was embedded on satellites orbiting up there. It took me many years to wake up.

Your friend who helped build the Space Shuttle's robot arm wasn't lying, she really built a robot arm. The friend taking seismology data from a craft on Mars isn't lying, she really believes that's what she's doing. Who is paying them for that work? Yourselves, through your taxes.

That work isn't pointless, it helps propagate the grand illusion that we're insignificant blobs of matter on a tiny speck of dust lost in an infinite universe, that there's nothing special about Earth or about us, that in the future life will become impossible on Earth and that in the distant future all life will become impossible in the universe, that everything will cease to exist, so as to make you believe that your life is meaningless and hide your true origins and your true purpose here. And while you're living in your bubble looking at pretty CGI and pursuing pointless materialistic goals, evil is spreading here on Earth and progressively enslaving humanity and destroying life and love and happiness.

*

Offline Tom Bishop

  • Zetetic Council Member
  • **
  • Posts: 6951
  • Flat Earth Believer
    • View Profile
People will believe that just because the government is paying for scientists to design things that it's actually going to be used, and that those technologies would have otherwise been created for nothing. Those NASA technologies are also being patented and spun off to industry.

Look at page ii on this 2013 NASA Socio-Economic Impacts Report --

Quote
Spurs Innovation and Business Growth

- 1,600 new technologies reported in 2012
- 2,200 tech transfer transactions in 2012
- $1M annually per spinoff (median, based on small study)

If those tech transfers to industry make 2.2 billion a year, and they are producing new technologies and transfers every year, that would add up quickly over 20 years, and would surpass their federal budget.
« Last Edit: May 11, 2020, 11:07:23 PM by Tom Bishop »
"The biggest problem in astronomy is that when we look at something in the sky, we don’t know how far away it is" — Pauline Barmby, Ph.D., Professor of Astronomy

*

Offline stack

  • *
  • Posts: 1452
    • View Profile
People will believe that just because the government is paying for scientists to design things that it's actually going to be used, and that those technologies would have otherwise been created for nothing. Those NASA technologies are also being spun off into patents.

Look at page ii on this 2013 NASA Socio-Economic Impacts Report --

Quote
Spurs Innovation and Business Growth

- 1,600 new technologies reported in 2012
- 2,200 tech transfer transactions in 2012
- $1M annually per spinoff (median, based on small study)

If those tech transfers to industry make 2.2 billion a year, that would quickly adds up over 20 years, and would surpass their federal budget.

I think you're mis-interpreting the report. It says:

"NASA’s technology transfer office surveyed companies featured in Spinoff to determine the impacts generated by NASA spinoffs."

Meaning, they contacted the companies that they spun off technology to and asked said companies what was THEIR revenue was attributable to NASA tech they are using/selling.

It goes on to say, "Of those, 39 respondents’ data could be used to derive annual estimates. Analysis of these data indicate the median annual revenue per spinoff per year is $1 million."

Again, referring to the revenue generated at the surveyed companies that got spunoff tech from NASA. It's not the amount of money NASA gets from their spinoffs. That would be easy to track. Patent out, dollars in. What this is about is how much revenue NASA spunoff tech makes other companies. Another metric to show how NASA helps to boost the economy in the private sector.

Not much is known about the celestial bodies and their distances.

NASA has a bunch of cartoonist and magicians on their staff. And of course writers like you all to come and flood sites with rubbish.

Is this an example of high quality upper flora comments?

I don't work for NASA but I wish I did. If I worked for them I'd certainly say so and brag about it.
I have a friend* who works for them, I don't know whether directly, she might just work with them.
She's doing some really cool stuff, taking seismology data from a craft on Mars to study "Marsquakes".
Which poses an interesting question for anyone who thinks NASA are faking it all.
Is the person I'm talking about "in on it"? Is she lying about this job?
Or is she being fed fake data? Why? For what purpose? Why would they employ her to do something entirely pointless?

[*full disclosure, no-one I've heard from in years, she's an ex-colleague and I heard this through a mutual ex-colleague]

I have a friend who helped build the Space Shuttle's robot arm. She got flown to the Kennedy Space center for all the shuttle launches as an expert consultant to help with any problems the arm might encounter. Again, very smart and I can't imagine she lied to me all those years about what she did.


Most of them believe the mainstream story, they aren't lying, they are deceived. As I said I worked on satellites myself, more specifically on the flight software (responsible for controlling the trajectory/orientation of the satellites, supposedly). I was given specifications that I had to turn into computer code. The problem is quite often there were logical contradictions in the specifications. That wasn't an isolated incident, it happened on many occasions. If I didn't uncover them and programmed the software according to the specifications there is no way the satellites could have flown properly. The guys I was working with were just turning the internally inconsistent specs into code like drones. With people like that working on critical parts of the satellites there is no way thousands of satellites are flying up there without any problem. Even the tests we conducted on the code to make sure it was working properly weren't foolproof. Back then despite all that I still believed the code I was writing was embedded on satellites orbiting up there. It took me many years to wake up.

Your friend who helped build the Space Shuttle's robot arm wasn't lying, she really built a robot arm. The friend taking seismology data from a craft on Mars isn't lying, she really believes that's what she's doing. Who is paying them for that work? Yourselves, through your taxes.

That work isn't pointless, it helps propagate the grand illusion that we're insignificant blobs of matter on a tiny speck of dust lost in an infinite universe, that there's nothing special about Earth or about us, that in the future life will become impossible on Earth and that in the distant future all life will become impossible in the universe, that everything will cease to exist, so as to make you believe that your life is meaningless and hide your true origins and your true purpose here. And while you're living in your bubble looking at pretty CGI and pursuing pointless materialistic goals, evil is spreading here on Earth and progressively enslaving humanity and destroying life and love and happiness.


Folks generally believe in Conspiracies (such as space travel being a hoax) so that they can make sense of a chaotic world and be assured that the Earth is the center of the universe and that we are not insignificant. In some cases, it's also to support religious belief or doctrine; a few folks that I've observed on this site fall into the "God-fearing" category with one citing religious doctrine with the Earth being flat and the Sun being only 6 feet in diameter.

It's a coping mechanism which consists of stitching together a narrative to help rationalize and make sense of our complex world. It's like eating comfort food.

When factual events, such as space travel and the moon landing, are difficult to comprehend as things humans actually achieved, than conspirators create a story or adopt notions that border on being delusional to ridiculous. You can't make this stuff up; it's fascinating. Its equivalent to the ridiculousness of aliens having visited Earth or the existence of BigFoot.
« Last Edit: May 12, 2020, 03:52:14 PM by GoldCashew »


Most of them believe the mainstream story, they aren't lying, they are deceived. As I said I worked on satellites myself, more specifically on the flight software (responsible for controlling the trajectory/orientation of the satellites, supposedly). I was given specifications that I had to turn into computer code. The problem is quite often there were logical contradictions in the specifications. That wasn't an isolated incident, it happened on many occasions. If I didn't uncover them and programmed the software according to the specifications there is no way the satellites could have flown properly. The guys I was working with were just turning the internally inconsistent specs into code like drones. With people like that working on critical parts of the satellites there is no way thousands of satellites are flying up there without any problem. Even the tests we conducted on the code to make sure it was working properly weren't foolproof. Back then despite all that I still believed the code I was writing was embedded on satellites orbiting up there. It took me many years to wake up.

Your friend who helped build the Space Shuttle's robot arm wasn't lying, she really built a robot arm. The friend taking seismology data from a craft on Mars isn't lying, she really believes that's what she's doing. Who is paying them for that work? Yourselves, through your taxes.

That work isn't pointless, it helps propagate the grand illusion that we're insignificant blobs of matter on a tiny speck of dust lost in an infinite universe, that there's nothing special about Earth or about us, that in the future life will become impossible on Earth and that in the distant future all life will become impossible in the universe, that everything will cease to exist, so as to make you believe that your life is meaningless and hide your true origins and your true purpose here. And while you're living in your bubble looking at pretty CGI and pursuing pointless materialistic goals, evil is spreading here on Earth and progressively enslaving humanity and destroying life and love and happiness.


Folks generally believe in Conspiracies (such as space travel being a hoax) so that they can make sense of a chaotic world and be assured that the Earth is the center of the universe and that we are not insignificant. In some cases, it's also to support religious belief or doctrine; a few folks that I've observed on this site fall into the "God-fearing" category with one citing religious doctrine with the Earth being flat and the Sun being only 6 feet in diameter.

It's a coping mechanism which consists of stitching together a narrative to help rationalize and make sense of our complex world. It's like eating comfort food.

When factual events, such as space travel and the moon landing, are difficult to comprehend as things humans actually achieved, than conspirators create a story or adopt notions that border on being delusional to ridiculous. You can't make this stuff up; it's fascinating. Its equivalent to the ridiculousness of aliens having visited Earth or the existence of BigFoot.

That's what you want to believe. I was an atheist and then an agnostic for most of my life, that didn't prevent me from seeing that science cannot prove that the Earth isn't flat or isn't at the center of the universe. All science can reasonably say is that a particular theory in which the Earth is round and orbiting the Sun is simpler than another particular theory in which the Earth is flat and at the center. This does not prove that there is no flat Earth theory that is simpler than the mainstream round Earth theory. And more and more it appears that observations/phenomena can be explained in a simple way within a flat Earth model.

As for the coping mechanism, it is a coping mechanism to refuse to seriously consider evidence when that evidence goes against one's own cherished beliefs. Such as the belief that powerful organizations wouldn't do that to you, wouldn't lie to you like that, wouldn't wish you ill. You want to believe that you are the master of your own life, that the bad things that happen in the world or in your mind are mostly an unfortunate consequence of the laws of physics, that there is no will behind them. You don't want to face the idea that powerful groups who have power over your life do not have your best interests at heart, but want you to be their slave, believing and accepting what you're told, so you can be controlled while they further their agenda. And that agenda doesn't lead to a world that is free and full of love and happiness. It leads to a world full of fear and suffering in which humanity is enslaved. And that isn't comforting. But the truth isn't easy to face.

Offline BRrollin

  • *
  • Posts: 265
    • View Profile

Most of them believe the mainstream story, they aren't lying, they are deceived. As I said I worked on satellites myself, more specifically on the flight software (responsible for controlling the trajectory/orientation of the satellites, supposedly). I was given specifications that I had to turn into computer code. The problem is quite often there were logical contradictions in the specifications. That wasn't an isolated incident, it happened on many occasions. If I didn't uncover them and programmed the software according to the specifications there is no way the satellites could have flown properly. The guys I was working with were just turning the internally inconsistent specs into code like drones. With people like that working on critical parts of the satellites there is no way thousands of satellites are flying up there without any problem. Even the tests we conducted on the code to make sure it was working properly weren't foolproof. Back then despite all that I still believed the code I was writing was embedded on satellites orbiting up there. It took me many years to wake up.

Your friend who helped build the Space Shuttle's robot arm wasn't lying, she really built a robot arm. The friend taking seismology data from a craft on Mars isn't lying, she really believes that's what she's doing. Who is paying them for that work? Yourselves, through your taxes.

That work isn't pointless, it helps propagate the grand illusion that we're insignificant blobs of matter on a tiny speck of dust lost in an infinite universe, that there's nothing special about Earth or about us, that in the future life will become impossible on Earth and that in the distant future all life will become impossible in the universe, that everything will cease to exist, so as to make you believe that your life is meaningless and hide your true origins and your true purpose here. And while you're living in your bubble looking at pretty CGI and pursuing pointless materialistic goals, evil is spreading here on Earth and progressively enslaving humanity and destroying life and love and happiness.


Folks generally believe in Conspiracies (such as space travel being a hoax) so that they can make sense of a chaotic world and be assured that the Earth is the center of the universe and that we are not insignificant. In some cases, it's also to support religious belief or doctrine; a few folks that I've observed on this site fall into the "God-fearing" category with one citing religious doctrine with the Earth being flat and the Sun being only 6 feet in diameter.

It's a coping mechanism which consists of stitching together a narrative to help rationalize and make sense of our complex world. It's like eating comfort food.

When factual events, such as space travel and the moon landing, are difficult to comprehend as things humans actually achieved, than conspirators create a story or adopt notions that border on being delusional to ridiculous. You can't make this stuff up; it's fascinating. Its equivalent to the ridiculousness of aliens having visited Earth or the existence of BigFoot.

That's what you want to believe. I was an atheist and then an agnostic for most of my life, that didn't prevent me from seeing that science cannot prove that the Earth isn't flat or isn't at the center of the universe. All science can reasonably say is that a particular theory in which the Earth is round and orbiting the Sun is simpler than another particular theory in which the Earth is flat and at the center. This does not prove that there is no flat Earth theory that is simpler than the mainstream round Earth theory. And more and more it appears that observations/phenomena can be explained in a simple way within a flat Earth model.

As for the coping mechanism, it is a coping mechanism to refuse to seriously consider evidence when that evidence goes against one's own cherished beliefs. Such as the belief that powerful organizations wouldn't do that to you, wouldn't lie to you like that, wouldn't wish you ill. You want to believe that you are the master of your own life, that the bad things that happen in the world or in your mind are mostly an unfortunate consequence of the laws of physics, that there is no will behind them. You don't want to face the idea that powerful groups who have power over your life do not have your best interests at heart, but want you to be their slave, believing and accepting what you're told, so you can be controlled while they further their agenda. And that agenda doesn't lead to a world that is free and full of love and happiness. It leads to a world full of fear and suffering in which humanity is enslaved. And that isn't comforting. But the truth isn't easy to face.

I agree with you! But this is shifting the burden of proof. It is not science’s job to prove the Earth isn’t flat - scientist’s aren’t claiming that it is! It is FEers job to prove that the Earth is flat, and provide evidence for that claim.

The one making the positive claim inherits a burden of proof, and in my view that burden is not met by claiming evidence of an alternate claim is invalid.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Null_hypothesis

The bull hypothesis of ANY claim is that it isn’t true.
“This just shows that you don't even understand the basic principle of UA...A projectile that goes up and then down again to an observer on Earth is not accelerating, it is the observer on Earth who accelerates.”

- Parsifal


“I hang out with sane people.”

- totallackey