Welcome • User Guide
ToS • Privacy • Canary
Donate • Bugs • License

©2025 Poal.co

(post is archived)

You are currently inside a comment thread.
Click here to see all the comments (40).
[–] [deleted] • 0 pt 4y

I said the sun doesn't change in ANGULAR size throughout the day. Not it's apparent size based on your perception or weather/atmospheric conditions. (link)(astronomy.swin.edu.au)

I'm not sure what you mean. The link you sent talks about angular diameter, which, when it comes to spheres like the sun, would only make a difference in apparent size. I'm not sure what other angles you mean?

We do have a container for the gradient.

Where is this container? You have air set next to the vacuum of space. There's no container and pressure does not exist without a container.

The Michelson-Morely experiment was to prove the existence of an Ether

At first blush. You didn't look past a wikipedia entry.

Just because we can't explain one aspect of an extremely complicated subject doesn't invalidate all the testable, repeatable, evidence for gravity.

Oh, I'm afraid it's a bit worse than that. Michio Kaku once said this to say about gravity on the galactic level.

"Usually in science, if we're off by a factor of 2 or a factor of 10, we call that horrible. We say, something's wrong with the theory. We're off by a factor of 10! However, in cosmology, we're off by a factor of 10 to the 120th. That is one with 100 and 20 zeroes after it. This is the largest mismatch between theory and experiment in the history of science."

Without gravity, you're whole ball earth "universe" falls apart... literally! Kaku said, given the current math, galaxies would be pulled apart. Gravity doesn't even work on subatomic particles. Again, NO ONE knows for sure what causes the effects we call "gravity".

Buoyancy/Density make far more sense than "a displacing of time and space". A particle of water will float on air to become a cloud. You can even float an anchor on liquid mercury.(youtube.com)

Just because we can't explain one aspect of an extremely complicated subject doesn't invalidate all the testable, repeatable, evidence for gravity.

You're pressuring others for 100% of the answers, yet Nasa STEALS 62 MILLION DOLLARS PER DAY from our paychecks, they STILL have no idea, and you're okay with that???

↓ expand content
[–] • 0 pt 4y (edited 4y)

Gravity is the container. Gravity manifests itself as a constant measurable force . That holds our atmosphere in place. Yes some of our atmospheric particles do escape earth's gravity. And a vacuum is just the absence of stuff my guy. Not some force that sucks on atmospheres.

I'm not pressuring anyone for 100% answers. Just some thing. A functioning model. Nothing wrong with that. A single measurement of flatness? An explanation for the constant aparent force that can explain f=m/a or explain bouyancy. Something. Anything

And what's the formula for bouyancy? And density is not a force. Density does not give things a vector. And since we both know bouyancy has that little g in there that kinda deflates that. And since density isnt a force and doesn't give things a vector no it doesn't make more sense.

Oh my God years later and still not a single original thought. Not a single measurement, prediction, anything and I did it again. I'm playing chess with a pigeon....

[–] [deleted] • 0 pt 4y

It's funny how you ignore that you have no explanation for the cause of gravity, only theories. And those theories are so wrong, globe earthers are constantly having to make up new lies to cover their previous lies... first by creating new theories like relativity and then by creating 100% theoretical BS that no one can see or detect like "dark matter."

You're entire premise for gravity is flawed, and you have no idea how to fix it. It just keeps getting more ridiculous. i'd sooner believe in fairies over your made up cap.

"Today's scientists have substituted mathematics for experiments, and they wander off through equation after equation, and eventually build a structure which has no relation to reality." - Nikola Tesla

You want proof? Do long range photography and compare it with the curve calculator. It's not that hard. Pigeon.

[–] • 0 pt 4y (edited 4y)

You're completely ignoring the fact that every mathematical equation has been proven and yields results we expect. You're forgetting that each equation complements the previous doesn't make it irrelevant?

And lemme guess you're referring to the 8in per mile ²? Which by the way something a flerf brought up who skimmed a surveying manual and didn't comprehend what he read! Bad news that is not the formula for curvature. If you plot that it makes a parabola. It's accurate enough for short distances. The actual equation for earth curve is HP = HP - 0.87 * d² /2R

So if I use the correct formula it will match up fine and has before.

Btw the cognitive dissonance. I use experiments that aren't from this century bad. You quote a failed scientist and electrical engineer who didn't believe in electrons from a century and half ago, relevant. You're just as intellectually dishonest and hypocritical as every other flerf I've had the displeasure of debating (and destroying).

I'm not wasting anymore energy on this. It's like playing chess with a pigeon. I made all the right moves and put you in check, and you made noise, knocked over all the pieces, shit the board, and strutted like you won. So go ahead and tell all 5 remaining flerfs out there how you "rEkT a scientism BaLL TaRd" on poal. I'm done with you like all the others. I presented evidence, measurements, experiments. You presented zero evidence, measurements, or experiments

Get a camera, get a solar filter, learn basic trig and do the experiment. Unless you're afraid of the truth.

You're kind makes all real skeptics and truth seekers look like scientifically illiterate retards.