## Challenge to Globe earthers. | |

Anonymous Coward User ID: 75240880 Portugal 07/17/2017 11:17 AM Report Abusive Post Report Copyright Violation | ...And if you continue south, eventually you will hit the ocean again and get straight to north. You flat brains never sailed a boat, haven't you? Anonymous Coward 75240880 well no one else ever done it, so why are you so sure? Anonymous Coward 75239647 Your answer told me everything I already knew. Anonymous Coward 75240880 Im not the one claiming you can cross antartica to other side of the earth based on no evidence because no one ever done it - you are. Anonymous Coward 75239647 No I haven't crossed Antarctica, true, but what you told me without telling me is that you know nothing.NOTHING. If you knew how to sail a boat you would never believed that flat brain theory. NEVER. |

Anonymous Coward (OP)User ID: 75239647 Israel 07/17/2017 11:17 AM Report Abusive Post Report Copyright Violation | Fact A: centrifugal force acts opposite to gravity in a spinning globe model Quoting: Fact B: if the earth's spin slows down centrifugal force gets weaker - and gravity stronger Fact C: at the poles the speed of the spin is exactly 0.000 MPH ___________ assumption: the force of gravity at the poles is stronger than at the equator by 100% (or at least 50%)... but its not assumption B: gravity doesnt exist, and the earth doesnt spin. ___________ imagine a wet tennis ball spinning. water will shoot out from the ball roughly at the equator of the ball... never the poles. Anonymous Coward 75239647 Your post seems to be based on the premise of gravity NOT being a form of electro-magnetic connection. Everything is made of different wavelenghts of electromagnetic radiation (and also emits emf radiation in the form of light) so to assume 'gravity' is not electromagnetic attraction then your post would be mind opening. Anonymous Coward 75080743 fine, lets assume gravity is electro magnetism, why is it not way stronger at the poles since at the poles there is no centrifugal force??? Anonymous Coward 75239647 Stronger at the poles? Yes. Way stronger? Well, no. At the equator where the velocity is greatest, 1,700 km per hour, the corresponding acceleration induced by earth's rotation is equal to v^2/r where v = 1,700 km per hour and r = 6,378,000 m. Converting that to meters per second you get v = 472.222 m/s, so the acceleration would be 0.03 m/s^2. Earth's gravity provides an acceleration of about 9.8 m/s^2, so the amount it is offset by earth's rotation is essentially negligible. The difference between the equator and the poles is quite small. Do the math yourself, here's a calculator: [link to www.calctool.org] The Gentle Astromut yeah I know the official number - 0.5% less gravity. BULLSHIT! 100% less centrifugal force = 0.5% gravity? only in equation fantasy land, not real world. |

The Gentle AstromutSenior Forum Moderator 07/17/2017 11:18 AM Report Abusive Post Report Copyright Violation | ...Your post seems to be based on the premise of gravity NOT being a form of electro-magnetic connection. Everything is made of different wavelenghts of electromagnetic radiation (and also emits emf radiation in the form of light) so to assume 'gravity' is not electromagnetic attraction then your post would be mind opening. Anonymous Coward 75080743 fine, lets assume gravity is electro magnetism, why is it not way stronger at the poles since at the poles there is no centrifugal force??? Anonymous Coward 75239647 Stronger at the poles? Yes. Way stronger? Well, no. At the equator where the velocity is greatest, 1,700 km per hour, the corresponding acceleration induced by earth's rotation is equal to v^2/r where v = 1,700 km per hour and r = 6,378,000 m. Converting that to meters per second you get v = 472.222 m/s, so the acceleration would be 0.03 m/s^2. Earth's gravity provides an acceleration of about 9.8 m/s^2, so the amount it is offset by earth's rotation is essentially negligible. The difference between the equator and the poles is quite small. Do the math yourself, here's a calculator: [link to www.calctool.org] The Gentle Astromut yeah I know the official number - 0.5% less gravity. BULLSHIT! 100% less centrifugal force = 0.5% gravity? only in equation fantasy land, not real world. Anonymous Coward 75239647 So you lied, you knew the answer to start with, and you claimed it should be "50%-100% stronger" at the pole. Got it. The math doesn't lie, you do. |

Anonymous Coward (OP)User ID: 75239647 Israel 07/17/2017 11:18 AM Report Abusive Post Report Copyright Violation | Im not the one claiming you can cross antartica to other side of the earth based on no evidence because no one ever done it - you are. Anonymous Coward 75239647 No I haven't crossed Antarctica, true, but what you told me without telling me is that you know nothing.NOTHING. If you knew how to sail a boat you would never believed that flat brain theory. NEVER. Anonymous Coward 75240880 well I can use my eyes and see 20 miles of stright horizon line I can read history books and see how no one circumnavigated south north, only east west... wonder why? |

Anonymous Coward User ID: 71103511 United States 07/17/2017 11:19 AM Report Abusive Post Report Copyright Violation | no matter where you are, take out your compass and head south, eventually you will get to a wall of ice... thats the edge. you welcome. Anonymous Coward 75239647 You do realize that people have been to the South Pole , right? Your premise is flawed on so many levels that it is laughable. Are you aware the earth is hurling through space, rotating around the sun, which in turn rotates whithin the galaxy, which is moving through the universe? Do you have even the slightest grasp of relativity? Go back a few steps, learn to color inside the lines, then move on to the first grade. |

Anonymous Coward (OP)User ID: 75239647 Israel 07/17/2017 11:20 AM Report Abusive Post Report Copyright Violation | ...fine, lets assume gravity is electro magnetism, why is it not way stronger at the poles since at the poles there is no centrifugal force??? Anonymous Coward 75239647 Stronger at the poles? Yes. Way stronger? Well, no. At the equator where the velocity is greatest, 1,700 km per hour, the corresponding acceleration induced by earth's rotation is equal to v^2/r where v = 1,700 km per hour and r = 6,378,000 m. Converting that to meters per second you get v = 472.222 m/s, so the acceleration would be 0.03 m/s^2. Earth's gravity provides an acceleration of about 9.8 m/s^2, so the amount it is offset by earth's rotation is essentially negligible. The difference between the equator and the poles is quite small. Do the math yourself, here's a calculator: [link to www.calctool.org] The Gentle Astromut yeah I know the official number - 0.5% less gravity. BULLSHIT! 100% less centrifugal force = 0.5% gravity? only in equation fantasy land, not real world. Anonymous Coward 75239647 So you lied, you knew the answer to start with, and you claimed it should be "50%-100% stronger" at the pole. Got it. The math doesn't lie, you do. The Gentle Astromut I lied? where? which math? you as a mathamatician pre decide the result you want to get, you can get any number you want. math is not substitution to real experiments. see the vid??? can you explain why increase of 0.5% in gravity explains why no water shoots out from the poles of the wet ball? |

Anonymous Coward (OP)User ID: 75239647 Israel 07/17/2017 11:21 AM Report Abusive Post Report Copyright Violation | no matter where you are, take out your compass and head south, eventually you will get to a wall of ice... thats the edge. you welcome. Anonymous Coward 75239647 You do realize that people have been to the South Pole , right?Your premise is flawed on so many levels that it is laughable. Are you aware the earth is hurling through space, rotating around the sun, which in turn rotates whithin the galaxy, which is moving through the universe? Do you have even the slightest grasp of relativity? Go back a few steps, learn to color inside the lines, then move on to the first grade. Anonymous Coward 71103511 says who? can they prove it? I am aware thats what they say, but I must be retarded cause I dont feel any motion. |

The Gentle AstromutSenior Forum Moderator 07/17/2017 11:24 AM Report Abusive Post Report Copyright Violation | ...Stronger at the poles? Yes. Way stronger? Well, no. At the equator where the velocity is greatest, 1,700 km per hour, the corresponding acceleration induced by earth's rotation is equal to v^2/r where v = 1,700 km per hour and r = 6,378,000 m. Converting that to meters per second you get v = 472.222 m/s, so the acceleration would be 0.03 m/s^2. Earth's gravity provides an acceleration of about 9.8 m/s^2, so the amount it is offset by earth's rotation is essentially negligible. The difference between the equator and the poles is quite small. Do the math yourself, here's a calculator: [link to www.calctool.org] The Gentle Astromut yeah I know the official number - 0.5% less gravity. BULLSHIT! 100% less centrifugal force = 0.5% gravity? only in equation fantasy land, not real world. Anonymous Coward 75239647 So you lied, you knew the answer to start with, and you claimed it should be "50%-100% stronger" at the pole. Got it. The math doesn't lie, you do. The Gentle Astromut I lied? where? Anonymous Coward 75239647 Fact A: centrifugal force acts opposite to gravity in a spinning globe model Quoting: Fact B: if the earth's spin slows down centrifugal force gets weaker - and gravity stronger Fact C: at the poles the speed of the spin is exactly 0.000 MPH ___________ assumption: the force of gravity at the poles is stronger than at the equator by 100% (or at least 50%)... but its not Anonymous Coward 75239647 You just admitted you knew the actual number was less than 1%. You lied. which math? you as a mathamatician pre decide the result you want to get, you can get any number you want. Quoting: ACNo, I can't. Show where I fudged any of my numbers on the size or velocity of earth. Otherwise you have nothing. You are a liar. |

Nameless the DeplorableUser ID: 73740591 United States 07/17/2017 11:24 AM Report Abusive Post Report Copyright Violation | I'd honestly like this explained as well. My nephew is taking an interest in planets and asked me this question...but I can't explain it further than centrifugal force. Quoting: Btw OP, that video is pretty neat...the spinning ball reminds me of our galaxy. Beautiful. -- Nameless the Deplorable there is no explanation. its a flaw in their lie, the earth is not a globe it doesnt exist and there is no such thing as gravity Anonymous Coward 75239647 We did an experiment with centrifugal force and it would make sense on a concave earth. In theory, anyway. We are working on a flat earth model, it's the easiest one to replicate so far. We can't work out a spherical earth model. I told him we needed the vacuum of space to do it. Am I incorrect? Does anyone know of any experiment (computer or accomplished in a mini vacuum) I could use as a reference? -- -- 'If you're going through Hell, keep going." -Winston Churchill "The only thing necessary for the triumph of evil is for good men to do nothing." -Edmund Burke |

Anonymous Coward (OP)User ID: 75239647 Israel 07/17/2017 11:24 AM Report Abusive Post Report Copyright Violation | its a flaw in their lie, the earth is not a globe it doesnt exist and there is no such thing as gravity Quoting: Anonymous Coward 75239647 Wrong. [link to www.fourmilab.ch (secure)] The Gentle Astromut wrong because gibberish. explain it in layman terms, it will also attest to your understanding of this. |

Anonymous Coward User ID: 71103511 United States 07/17/2017 11:24 AM Report Abusive Post Report Copyright Violation | |

The Gentle AstromutSenior Forum Moderator 07/17/2017 11:25 AM Report Abusive Post Report Copyright Violation | I'd honestly like this explained as well. My nephew is taking an interest in planets and asked me this question...but I can't explain it further than centrifugal force. Quoting: Btw OP, that video is pretty neat...the spinning ball reminds me of our galaxy. Beautiful. -- Nameless the Deplorable there is no explanation. its a flaw in their lie, the earth is not a globe it doesnt exist and there is no such thing as gravity Anonymous Coward 75239647 We did an experiment with centrifugal force and it would make sense on a concave earth. In theory, anyway. We are working on a flat earth model, it's the easiest one to replicate so far. We can't work out a spherical earth model. I told him we needed the vacuum of space to do it. Am I incorrect? Does anyone know of any experiment (computer or accomplished in a mini vacuum) I could use as a reference? -- -- Nameless the Deplorable Read my posts. Spherical earth works. Flat doesn't, for a wide variety of reasons I don't have time to list. |

Anonymous Coward User ID: 75240880 Portugal 07/17/2017 11:25 AM Report Abusive Post Report Copyright Violation | Im not the one claiming you can cross antartica to other side of the earth based on no evidence because no one ever done it - you are. Anonymous Coward 75239647 No I haven't crossed Antarctica, true, but what you told me without telling me is that you know nothing.NOTHING. If you knew how to sail a boat you would never believed that flat brain theory. NEVER. Anonymous Coward 75240880 well I can use my eyes and see 20 miles of stright horizon line I can read history books and see how no one circumnavigated south north, only east west... wonder why? Anonymous Coward 75239647 Your ignorance blinds you. |

The Gentle AstromutSenior Forum Moderator 07/17/2017 11:26 AM Report Abusive Post Report Copyright Violation | its a flaw in their lie, the earth is not a globe it doesnt exist and there is no such thing as gravity Quoting: Anonymous Coward 75239647 Wrong. [link to www.fourmilab.ch (secure)] The Gentle Astromut wrong because gibberish. explain it in layman terms, it will also attest to your understanding of this. Anonymous Coward 75239647 It's not gibberish, it IS in layman terms. If you don't understand it then you really need to go back to school. But given your propensity to lie, there is no point in discussing it with you further. You knew the answer to start with in your thread and lied about it. |

Anonymous Coward (OP)User ID: 75239647 Israel 07/17/2017 11:27 AM Report Abusive Post Report Copyright Violation | ...yeah I know the official number - 0.5% less gravity. BULLSHIT! 100% less centrifugal force = 0.5% gravity? only in equation fantasy land, not real world. Anonymous Coward 75239647 So you lied, you knew the answer to start with, and you claimed it should be "50%-100% stronger" at the pole. Got it. The math doesn't lie, you do. The Gentle Astromut I lied? where? Anonymous Coward 75239647 Fact A: centrifugal force acts opposite to gravity in a spinning globe model Quoting: Fact B: if the earth's spin slows down centrifugal force gets weaker - and gravity stronger Fact C: at the poles the speed of the spin is exactly 0.000 MPH ___________ assumption: the force of gravity at the poles is stronger than at the equator by 100% (or at least 50%)... but its not Anonymous Coward 75239647 You just admitted you knew the actual number was less than 1%. You lied. which math? you as a mathamatician pre decide the result you want to get, you can get any number you want. Quoting: ACNo, I can't. Show where I fudged any of my numbers on the size or velocity of earth. Otherwise you have nothing. You are a liar. OPwhere did I say I didnt know there is an official number? where have I implied there isnt such a number? I only said it should be x, but it isnt. I dont need math to know that if decrease one force by 100%!!!!! fucking 100% the result would be the opposite force increasing by 100% or atleast 50! explain why no water shoots from the poles of the wet ball! 0.5% increase doesnt account for that. your math may be correct, its just NOT AN ACTUAL DESCRIPTION OF REALITY! only a description of your fantasy math land. |

Anonymous Coward User ID: 75213782 United States 07/17/2017 11:28 AM Report Abusive Post Report Copyright Violation | |

Anonymous Coward (OP)User ID: 75239647 Israel 07/17/2017 11:28 AM Report Abusive Post Report Copyright Violation | Your history books suck too. Quoting: Polar crossing circumnavigation has occurred several times. Do you people EVER tell the truth? Anonymous Coward 71103511 BS! not once! people going south and then TURNING back returning at any meridian NOT the opposite to the meridian of approach IS NOT circumnavigation. |

Anonymous Coward User ID: 75240880 Portugal 07/17/2017 11:28 AM Report Abusive Post Report Copyright Violation | its a flaw in their lie, the earth is not a globe it doesnt exist and there is no such thing as gravity Quoting: Anonymous Coward 75239647 Wrong. [link to www.fourmilab.ch (secure)] The Gentle Astromut wrong because gibberish. explain it in layman terms, it will also attest to your understanding of this. Anonymous Coward 75239647 It's not gibberish, it IS in layman terms. If you don't understand it then you really need to go back to school. But given your propensity to lie, there is no point in discussing it with you further. You knew the answer to start with in your thread and lied about it. The Gentle Astromut |

MaybeTrollingUUser ID: 75241400 Brazil 07/17/2017 11:28 AM Report Abusive Post Report Copyright Violation | ...Your post seems to be based on the premise of gravity NOT being a form of electro-magnetic connection. Everything is made of different wavelenghts of electromagnetic radiation (and also emits emf radiation in the form of light) so to assume 'gravity' is not electromagnetic attraction then your post would be mind opening. Anonymous Coward 75080743 fine, lets assume gravity is electro magnetism, why is it not way stronger at the poles since at the poles there is no centrifugal force??? Anonymous Coward 75239647 Stronger at the poles? Yes. Way stronger? Well, no. At the equator where the velocity is greatest, 1,700 km per hour, the corresponding acceleration induced by earth's rotation is equal to v^2/r where v = 1,700 km per hour and r = 6,378,000 m. Converting that to meters per second you get v = 472.222 m/s, so the acceleration would be 0.03 m/s^2. Earth's gravity provides an acceleration of about 9.8 m/s^2, so the amount it is offset by earth's rotation is essentially negligible. The difference between the equator and the poles is quite small. Do the math yourself, here's a calculator: [link to www.calctool.org] The Gentle Astromut yeah I know the official number - 0.5% less gravity. BULLSHIT! 100% less centrifugal force = 0.5% gravity? only in equation fantasy land, not real world. Anonymous Coward 75239647 Prove him wrong... it should be easy, right? |

The Gentle AstromutSenior Forum Moderator 07/17/2017 11:28 AM Report Abusive Post Report Copyright Violation | ...So you lied, you knew the answer to start with, and you claimed it should be "50%-100% stronger" at the pole. Got it. The math doesn't lie, you do. The Gentle Astromut I lied? where? Anonymous Coward 75239647 Fact A: centrifugal force acts opposite to gravity in a spinning globe model Quoting: Fact B: if the earth's spin slows down centrifugal force gets weaker - and gravity stronger Fact C: at the poles the speed of the spin is exactly 0.000 MPH ___________ assumption: the force of gravity at the poles is stronger than at the equator by 100% (or at least 50%)... but its not Anonymous Coward 75239647 You just admitted you knew the actual number was less than 1%. You lied. which math? you as a mathamatician pre decide the result you want to get, you can get any number you want. Quoting: ACNo, I can't. Show where I fudged any of my numbers on the size or velocity of earth. Otherwise you have nothing. You are a liar. OPwhere did I say I didnt know there is an official number? where have I implied there isnt such a number? The Gentle Astromut You claimed in your opening post the number was between 50-100% difference in gravity between the poles and equator. You knew the math showed a dramatically different number was to be expected. The math is an actual description of reality. You are a liar. You are dismissed. Last Edited by The Gentle Astromut on 07/17/2017 11:29 AM |

Anonymous Coward (OP)User ID: 75239647 Israel 07/17/2017 11:29 AM Report Abusive Post Report Copyright Violation | Anonymous Coward 75239647 Wrong. [link to www.fourmilab.ch (secure)] The Gentle Astromut wrong because gibberish. explain it in layman terms, it will also attest to your understanding of this. Anonymous Coward 75239647 It's not gibberish, it IS in layman terms. If you don't understand it then you really need to go back to school. But given your propensity to lie, there is no point in discussing it with you further. You knew the answer to start with in your thread and lied about it. The Gentle Astromut obviously intelligent you can explain it cant you? come on, surely you can deduce it to one or two paragraphs. didnt einstien say that if you cant explain something in a simple manner, it means you have no understanding of it. |

Anonymous Coward User ID: 75240880 Portugal 07/17/2017 11:30 AM Report Abusive Post Report Copyright Violation | ...You just admitted you knew the actual number was less than 1%. You lied. ...No, I can't. Show where I fudged any of my numbers on the size or velocity of earth. Otherwise you have nothing. You are a liar. OPwhere did I say I didnt know there is an official number? where have I implied there isnt such a number? The Gentle Astromut You claimed in your opening post the number was between 50-100% difference in gravity between the poles and equator. You knew the math showed a dramatically different number was to be expected. The math is an actual description of reality. You are a liar. You are dismissed. Anonymous Coward 75239647 And being a liar is worse than being an ignorant. |

Nameless the DeplorableUser ID: 73740591 United States 07/17/2017 11:31 AM Report Abusive Post Report Copyright Violation | I'd honestly like this explained as well. My nephew is taking an interest in planets and asked me this question...but I can't explain it further than centrifugal force. Quoting: Btw OP, that video is pretty neat...the spinning ball reminds me of our galaxy. Beautiful. -- Nameless the Deplorable there is no explanation. its a flaw in their lie, the earth is not a globe it doesnt exist and there is no such thing as gravity Anonymous Coward 75239647 We did an experiment with centrifugal force and it would make sense on a concave earth. In theory, anyway. We are working on a flat earth model, it's the easiest one to replicate so far. We can't work out a spherical earth model. I told him we needed the vacuum of space to do it. Am I incorrect? Does anyone know of any experiment (computer or accomplished in a mini vacuum) I could use as a reference? -- -- Nameless the Deplorable Read my posts. Spherical earth works. Flat doesn't, for a wide variety of reasons I don't have time to list. The Gentle Astromut Obviously it works, we are on the earth. My question is are there any models or experiments I can use to show him how it works? The YouTube generation are watching these videos and we need to be able to counter them with something credible. Everyone on here is calling each other names and dismissing this as stupid, but it isn't stupid to ask questions and explain it to the younger generation. -- 'If you're going through Hell, keep going." -Winston Churchill "The only thing necessary for the triumph of evil is for good men to do nothing." -Edmund Burke |

The Gentle AstromutSenior Forum Moderator 07/17/2017 11:31 AM Report Abusive Post Report Copyright Violation | wrong because gibberish. explain it in layman terms, it will also attest to your understanding of this. Anonymous Coward 75239647 It's not gibberish, it IS in layman terms. If you don't understand it then you really need to go back to school. But given your propensity to lie, there is no point in discussing it with you further. You knew the answer to start with in your thread and lied about it. The Gentle Astromut obviously intelligent you can explain it cant you? come on, surely you can deduce it to one or two paragraphs. didnt einstien say that if you cant explain something in a simple manner, it means you have no understanding of it. Anonymous Coward 75239647 Sure, I can explain it simply, I simply don't care to discuss it further with you. You have proven yourself to be dishonest and there is no point in discussing the fact that a torsion balance demonstrates gravity even between relatively small objects on earth. |

Anonymous Coward (OP)User ID: 75239647 Israel 07/17/2017 11:32 AM Report Abusive Post Report Copyright Violation | ...You just admitted you knew the actual number was less than 1%. You lied. ...No, I can't. Show where I fudged any of my numbers on the size or velocity of earth. Otherwise you have nothing. You are a liar. OPwhere did I say I didnt know there is an official number? where have I implied there isnt such a number? The Gentle Astromut You claimed in your opening post the number was between 50-100% difference in gravity between the poles and equator. You knew the math showed a dramatically different number was to be expected. The math is an actual description of reality. You are a liar. You are dismissed. Anonymous Coward 75239647 the math says... the math says the holy math says! well we can make holy math say what ever we want in fantasy land! 100% less centrifuge doesnt account for only 0.5% increase in gravity in the world of COMMON SENSE LOGIC!!! you see my OP?! its based on COMMEN SENSE LOGIC! not fantasy math. OP STILL CORRECT! |

MaybeTrollingUUser ID: 75241400 Brazil 07/17/2017 11:33 AM Report Abusive Post Report Copyright Violation | ......where did I say I didnt know there is an official number? where have I implied there isnt such a number? The Gentle Astromut You claimed in your opening post the number was between 50-100% difference in gravity between the poles and equator. You knew the math showed a dramatically different number was to be expected. The math is an actual description of reality. You are a liar. You are dismissed. Anonymous Coward 75239647 the math says... the math says the holy math says! well we can make holy math say what ever we want in fantasy land! 100% less centrifuge doesnt account for only 0.5% increase in gravity in the world of COMMON SENSE LOGIC!!! you see my OP?! its based on COMMEN SENSE LOGIC! not fantasy math. OP STILL CORRECT! The Gentle Astromut Sure! OP is still correct! LOL!!! |

The Gentle AstromutSenior Forum Moderator 07/17/2017 11:33 AM Report Abusive Post Report Copyright Violation | ...there is no explanation. its a flaw in their lie, the earth is not a globe it doesnt exist and there is no such thing as gravity Anonymous Coward 75239647 We did an experiment with centrifugal force and it would make sense on a concave earth. In theory, anyway. We are working on a flat earth model, it's the easiest one to replicate so far. We can't work out a spherical earth model. I told him we needed the vacuum of space to do it. Am I incorrect? Does anyone know of any experiment (computer or accomplished in a mini vacuum) I could use as a reference? -- -- Nameless the Deplorable Read my posts. Spherical earth works. Flat doesn't, for a wide variety of reasons I don't have time to list. The Gentle Astromut Obviously it works, we are on the earth. My question is are there any models or experiments I can use to show him how it works? The YouTube generation are watching these videos and we need to be able to counter them with something credible. Everyone on here is calling each other names and dismissing this as stupid, but it isn't stupid to ask questions and explain it to the younger generation. -- Nameless the Deplorable See, that's the thing, I came into this thread without name calling, simply giving him the facts, and immediately he resorts to shouting "bullshit" in reply and accidentally reveals he knew the truth to start with and chose to cover it up and forge the figure he gave to start with. There is no reasoning with unreasonable people. All the YouTube videos and models in the world will not change that. The best we can do is teach the younger generation the fundamentals of math and science so that they have the toolset needed to see through the lies and disprove it themselves. |

Anonymous Coward User ID: 70186654 United States 07/17/2017 11:33 AM Report Abusive Post Report Copyright Violation | |

Anonymous Coward (OP)User ID: 75239647 Israel 07/17/2017 11:34 AM Report Abusive Post Report Copyright Violation | ...wrong because gibberish. explain it in layman terms, it will also attest to your understanding of this. Anonymous Coward 75239647 It's not gibberish, it IS in layman terms. If you don't understand it then you really need to go back to school. But given your propensity to lie, there is no point in discussing it with you further. You knew the answer to start with in your thread and lied about it. The Gentle Astromut obviously intelligent you can explain it cant you? come on, surely you can deduce it to one or two paragraphs. didnt einstien say that if you cant explain something in a simple manner, it means you have no understanding of it. Anonymous Coward 75239647 Sure, I can explain it simply, I simply don't care to discuss it further with you. You have proven yourself to be dishonest and there is no point in discussing the fact that a torsion balance demonstrates gravity even between relatively small objects on earth.The Gentle Astromut oh ok... I am a liar because I dont give a damn for fantasy math when common sense says that if I decrease centrifugal force by 100% I should experience increase of 100% or atleast 50% in gravity. common sense logic, thats the basis of the OP not fantasy math. |

Anonymous Coward (OP)User ID: 75239647 Israel 07/17/2017 11:35 AM Report Abusive Post Report Copyright Violation | |

Related Threads