Topic: Flat Earth - page 85. (Read 1095196 times)
^^^ There's no fucking gravity, the atmosphere your sack of shit displaces pushes you down. Your sack of shit causes the entire earth's atmosphere to rise up slightly and it reacts by pushing your shit down.
You can do your own research and arrive at your own conclusion. Pay attention to all the censorship and propaganda Eric Dubay and other legitimate Flat Earth researchers have been receiving across the internet. 2-3 years ago, they were laughing at the whole notion, but when the books and the research material started to become widespread, people started paying attention. They realized that there was only objective science going into the resurgence of the geocentric Flat Earth truth. There are hundreds of proofs which disprove the idea that we are on a spinning ball.
One of the reasons for the censorship is the common knowledge that we do not live on a spinning ball. When you note that it is basically the people who think that we don't live on a globe who say that we don't live on a spinning ball, you can see that the censorship isn't censorship. It is only lack of interest in silliness. Any censorship involved comes about because some people would rather have serious talks in their forums, etc.
I mean, EVERYBODY knows that we don't live on a a spinning ball. How do we know? Because gravity is a rather weak force, even though it is a pervading one among materials. If we lived on a spinning ball, the centrifugal force of the spin would send everything flying off the ball, and probably disintegrate the ball itself. Why? Because gravity, being a weak force, wouldn't be able to hold things together against a strong centrifugal force.
This fact alone discredits FE people. Why? Because they are essentially the only ones who talk about a spinning ball... even though they are against it. But they state that GE people think we are on a spinning ball, a thing that EVERYBODY knows doesn't exist, especially GE people.
So, when the FE people lie about what the GE people think, why would they be surprised when they get censored a little? Nobody likes other people telling everybody on the globe what they think... especially when it is wrong.
All that this means is, if FE people are outlandish enough to think that GE people think that we live on a spinning ball, FE people absolutely MUST be outlandish in their idea that we live on a FE. So, it is FE people who destroy their own credibility. And this is only the start. They even flunk the aether test with their explanations about how the aether works.
In the post directly above this one, notbatman appears to pick on coromandalStorm a little. Why? Because notbatman knows that spinning ball talk is a stupid point to use in favor of FE, just because NOBODY (except some super funny farm people) believes in a spinning ball earth. So, using the term "spinning ball" is counterproductive.
^^^ What if you're passionate about balls? Will you allow reason to govern and limit your passions?
You can do your own research and arrive at your own conclusion. Pay attention to all the censorship and propaganda Eric Dubay and other legitimate Flat Earth researchers have been receiving across the internet. 2-3 years ago, they were laughing at the whole notion, but when the books and the research material started to become widespread, people started paying attention. They realized that there was only objective science going into the resurgence of the geocentric Flat Earth truth. There are hundreds of proofs which disprove the idea that we are on a spinning ball.
Ladies and Gentlemen, Paris Is Burning.
^^^ They had you in mind when the term kook was coined.
https://i.imgur.com/gA4H6Vu.jpg
Space is fake and the globe is a tri-city criminal conspiracy (The New World Order) between Jews (City of London | financial center), Jesuits (The Vatican | religious center) and Freemasons (Washington DC | military center).
Maybe if we ask them nicely they'll stop being criminals?
https://i.imgur.com/M35NDlG.gif
https://i.imgur.com/gA4H6Vu.jpg
Space is fake and the globe is a tri-city criminal conspiracy (The New World Order) between Jews (City of London | financial center), Jesuits (The Vatican | religious center) and Freemasons (Washington DC | military center).
Maybe if we ask them nicely they'll stop being criminals?
https://i.imgur.com/M35NDlG.gif
I see you haven't had your daily electric shock therapy session, yet, have you.
^^^ They had you in mind when the term kook was coined.
Space is fake and the globe is a tri-city criminal conspiracy (The New World Order) between Jews (City of London | financial center), Jesuits (The Vatican | religious center) and Freemasons (Washington DC | military center).
Maybe if we ask them nicely they'll stop being criminals?
Space is fake and the globe is a tri-city criminal conspiracy (The New World Order) between Jews (City of London | financial center), Jesuits (The Vatican | religious center) and Freemasons (Washington DC | military center).
Maybe if we ask them nicely they'll stop being criminals?
How do you know ''Dufour & Prunier'' are not fake, though? Have you met them personally? If you believe the government is able to fake such a huge thing, why would you trust anything? What makes you so sure they even existed? How difficult would it be to fake their existence? Seems rather easy, no?
^^^ They had you in mind when the term kook was coined.
Space is fake and the globe is a tri-city criminal conspiracy (The New World Order) between Jews (City of London | financial center), Jesuits (The Vatican | religious center) and Freemasons (Washington DC | military center).
Maybe if we ask them nicely they'll stop being criminals?
Space is fake and the globe is a tri-city criminal conspiracy (The New World Order) between Jews (City of London | financial center), Jesuits (The Vatican | religious center) and Freemasons (Washington DC | military center).
Maybe if we ask them nicely they'll stop being criminals?
^^^ Did you fail to note that the firmament/sky was never mentioned before the separation of the waters?
You seem to have forgotten the part that God only talks about the waters under the firmament, until later.
The great deep is simply a term meaning the gigantic oceans as opposed to lakes or puddles.
Where do you think the sun, moon and stars came from? They were made out of the waters above the firmament, along with all the rest of the stuff in outer space. You said it yourself, or hadn't you noticed.
You simply refuse to understand that if you have a bunch of muddy water floating around without gravity, the density of this mud isn't effective in any way. However, it can be made effective with a centrifuge. Centrifuge force causes density to often act much more strongly than gravity causes density to act. We use it all the time.
If you really believe the things that you are talking about, you should take brain nutrients. Expeler processed walnut oil can greatly enhance your thinking ability. Also, gotu kola combined with Korean ginseng will energize your brain in ways that will let you think better. As a side note, using these just might give you the ability to state your garbage in a truly convincing fashion.
You seem to have forgotten the part that God only talks about the waters under the firmament, until later.
The great deep is simply a term meaning the gigantic oceans as opposed to lakes or puddles.
Where do you think the sun, moon and stars came from? They were made out of the waters above the firmament, along with all the rest of the stuff in outer space. You said it yourself, or hadn't you noticed.
You simply refuse to understand that if you have a bunch of muddy water floating around without gravity, the density of this mud isn't effective in any way. However, it can be made effective with a centrifuge. Centrifuge force causes density to often act much more strongly than gravity causes density to act. We use it all the time.
If you really believe the things that you are talking about, you should take brain nutrients. Expeler processed walnut oil can greatly enhance your thinking ability. Also, gotu kola combined with Korean ginseng will energize your brain in ways that will let you think better. As a side note, using these just might give you the ability to state your garbage in a truly convincing fashion.
I give credit for that atheist guy, at least he is honest, but you badecker are dishonest (if in any case you believe what the Word of God really says).
God called the dry land earth, and the gathering of the waters He called seas; and God saw that this was good (pleasing, useful) and He affirmed and sustained it. (AMP.version)
Get lost with your Copernicus and nasa, repent.
I don't want to blame you for promoting your pet point. I gues we all do that.
Genesis 1:6-10:
Quote
6 And God said, “Let there be an expanse between the waters to separate water from water.” 7So God made the expanse and separated the water under the expanse from the water above it. And it was so. 8God called the expanse “sky.” And there was evening, and there was morning—the second day.
9 And God said, “Let the water under the sky be gathered to one place, and let dry ground appear.” And
it was so. 10God called the dry ground “land,” and the gathered waters he called “seas.” And God saw
that it was good.
9 And God said, “Let the water under the sky be gathered to one place, and let dry ground appear.” And
it was so. 10God called the dry ground “land,” and the gathered waters he called “seas.” And God saw
that it was good.
Notice in the above verses that God separated the waters that were under the sky from the waters that were above the sky. Then, the next day, He gathered the waters under the sky to one place so that dry ground appeared.
The point? The waters were one before God separated them by placing the sky between them. After He separated them, the Bible record only talks about the waters under the sky. The waters under the sky had dirt mixed in; they were mud. How do we know? He separated the water from the dirt in the mud, so that the mud would become solidified dry ground.
Two points about this:
1. Before the separation, there was no distinction made between the waters (mud) that went above the sky, and the waters (mud) that went below the sky. The waters (mud) above the sky were the same as the waters (mud) below the sky. If God did any separating of the mud above the sky, He doesn't tell us. However;
2. The thing that keeps the waters separate is gravity. If we didn't have gravity (whatever it is), we would still have mud. Why? Because it is gravity that makes the various densities to be effective, so that dry ground can appear. So it was the beginning of the third day that God made gravity.
Note that all I am trying to do here is separate you from your distinctive densities.
You are the Lord's mighty handywork(firmament) denier.
Then trying to replace that powerful masterpiece display with bogus filth like gravity. Well how convenient. I already advice you to repent.
bonus:
+black hole debunk bonus & atheist testimony(at 15:05)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tRRdiOhkb4M
^^^
^^^
Two fish flopping around on the dry globe land.
^^^
Two fish flopping around on the dry globe land.
^^^ Another fish flapping around on dry land.
Heh, you know you have nothing mate, you didn't use any method, you didn't study anything, you just, for some reason, assume that those guys you mention are right and all the others aren't but how do you really know? What credentials do you have to make that assessment? You are not answering the question because you know you can't, the only answer is, you didn't, you didn't study anything, you didn't use any method, you simple chose some random scientists that lived decades ago who thought they ''falsified'' relativity.
You are a hoax.
^^^ Another fish flapping around on dry land.
^^^ The only one fighting established and meticulously documented science is you and your appeals to some imaginary authority or engineered consensus. Dufour was Sagnac's successor at the university of Paris, he was not some random crackpot off the street.
Ok so, you have a few guys, you claim they did something. How did you determine that what they did is true? You clearly don't believe Einstein, Newton and all the other hundreds of scientists who created, hypothesis, theories, etc for gravity, the universe, etc. What methodology did you use to determine those few that you are always quoting are the ones who are right?
^^^ The only one fighting established and meticulously documented science is you and your appeals to some imaginary authority or engineered consensus. Dufour was Sagnac's successor at the university of Paris, he was not some random crackpot off the street.
The Sagnac Effect via micro-mechanical aether displacement is how the MEMs gyroscope chip in your smartphone works. You can put you fingers in your ears and scream "LA LA LA LA LA THERE'S NO AETHER BECAUSE RELATIVITY" all day but that's not how shit works. Go blow it out your asshole!
The Sagnac Effect via micro-mechanical aether displacement is how the MEMs gyroscope chip in your smartphone works. You can put you fingers in your ears and scream "LA LA LA LA LA THERE'S NO AETHER BECAUSE RELATIVITY" all day but that's not how shit works. Go blow it out your asshole!
^^^ These French scientists (Dufour & Prunier), their credentials, published works and achievements speak for themselves. The one dude invented the oscilloscope for crying out loud. As their experiments established a static aether and proved "problematic for relativity" they receive nothing but slander and ignorance form powerful and secretive groups like the Jesuits and the Jews of whom Eisenstein was both. They refuse to stop pushing the Copernican model on anybody who isn't part of their club; it's a conspiracy and yes, the Freemasons are in bed with the Jesuits and the Jews on this; they're all massive hypocrites.
Riiiight and Einstein/Newton etcetera, their credentials and published works don't speak for themselves because... ehem. As their experiments established what gravity is, they receive nothing but slander from ignorant flattards who want to discredit their work.
You still haven't even answered the question, how do you know they did what they claimed they did? Are you a scientist? Are you certified in any type of science? How do you know what you are reading about them is true? Why would you pick them instead of the other thousands of scientists who support gravity, globe earth, etc?
^^^ These French scientists (Dufour & Prunier), their credentials, published works and achievements speak for themselves. The one dude invented the oscilloscope for crying out loud. As their experiments established a static aether and proved that "its interpretation in relativistic theory is problematic" and, they receive nothing but slander and ignorance form powerful and secretive groups like the Jesuits and the Jews of whom Eisenstein was both. They refuse to stop pushing the Copernican model on anybody who isn't part of their club; it's a conspiracy and yes, the Freemasons are in bed with the Jesuits and the Jews on this; they're all massive hypocrites.
Sources:
/Science-Journals/Historical Papers-Mechanics / Electrodynamics/Download/2470
MEETING OF 28 JUNE 1937., 1925 OPTICS. - On the observation of the phenomenon of Sagnac by an observer not entrained. Note by Messrs. Alexandre Dufour & Fernand Prunier.
Sources:
/Science-Journals/Historical Papers-Mechanics / Electrodynamics/Download/2470
MEETING OF 28 JUNE 1937., 1925 OPTICS. - On the observation of the phenomenon of Sagnac by an observer not entrained. Note by Messrs. Alexandre Dufour & Fernand Prunier.
^^^ You should kill yourself instead of being a massive cuck.
They took rotating frames of reference into account and falsified relativity with their replication of the Sagnac experiment, if you want details then read their fucking work.
They took rotating frames of reference into account and falsified relativity with their replication of the Sagnac experiment, if you want details then read their fucking work.
How do you know? Why do you keep saying ''they took'' were you there? Did you try it by yourself? Are you even a scientist? Read their work you say, why should I? I've read other work saying their work is garbage.
^^^ You should kill yourself instead of being a massive cuck.
They took rotating frames of reference into account and falsified relativity with their replication of the Sagnac experiment, if you want details then read their fucking work.
They took rotating frames of reference into account and falsified relativity with their replication of the Sagnac experiment, if you want details then read their fucking work.
Quote
Fernand Prunier is a French antirelativist engineer born in 1897 and died in 1971 who played a role in the history of the theory of relativity.
Summary
1 Books
2 Publications
3 References
4 External links
Books
Newton , Maupertuis and Einstein , reflections on relativity (1929)
On a displacement of fringes recorded on a platform in uniform rotation , with Alexandre Dufour (1940)
Some new observations and experiments and their consequences for theories of physics (1946)
On discrete numerical relations between the elements of the stars of the solar system and on their interpretation (1950)
On Fermat's theorem, did Fermat prove it? (1966)
Publications
On an experiment of Georges Sagnac which would be made with flows of electrons (January 1935)
On the observation of the Sagnac phenomenon with an untrained illuminating source (May 1937)
On the observation of the Sagnac phenomenon by an untrained observer (June 1937)
On the Sagnac effect (October 1937)
On the effect observed on a rotating Sagnac disc when part of the optical circuit is not trained (March 1939)
We Have Displacement of Fringes Recorded on a Platform in Uniform Rotation (September 1942)
References
Alex Moatti , Alterscience: postures, dogmas, ideologies , Odile Jacob, 2013, p.21.
Eric Gourgoulhon , Special Relativity in General Frames: From Particles to Astrophysics , Springer, 2010, p.469.
External links
Authority records: National Library of France ( data )
-- https://fr.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fernand_PrunierSummary
1 Books
2 Publications
3 References
4 External links
Books
Newton , Maupertuis and Einstein , reflections on relativity (1929)
On a displacement of fringes recorded on a platform in uniform rotation , with Alexandre Dufour (1940)
Some new observations and experiments and their consequences for theories of physics (1946)
On discrete numerical relations between the elements of the stars of the solar system and on their interpretation (1950)
On Fermat's theorem, did Fermat prove it? (1966)
Publications
On an experiment of Georges Sagnac which would be made with flows of electrons (January 1935)
On the observation of the Sagnac phenomenon with an untrained illuminating source (May 1937)
On the observation of the Sagnac phenomenon by an untrained observer (June 1937)
On the Sagnac effect (October 1937)
On the effect observed on a rotating Sagnac disc when part of the optical circuit is not trained (March 1939)
We Have Displacement of Fringes Recorded on a Platform in Uniform Rotation (September 1942)
References
Alex Moatti , Alterscience: postures, dogmas, ideologies , Odile Jacob, 2013, p.21.
Eric Gourgoulhon , Special Relativity in General Frames: From Particles to Astrophysics , Springer, 2010, p.469.
External links
Authority records: National Library of France ( data )
Quote
Alexandre Dufour is a French physicist who succeeded Georges Sagnac as lecturer in physics for the PCN certificate ( 1st year of medical studies) at the Faculty of Sciences of the University of Paris in September 1920. He obtained the title of professor without a chair on April 1 , 1927 , then was appointed full professor on October 1 , 1931 .
He was the inventor of the cathode oscillograph , whose process he described as early as 1914, before publishing the details of the apparatus in 1920.
A group of marginal scientists, defenders of theories for some of the pseudo-science, bore his name (the Physics Circle Alexandre Dufour). He met at the home of the Centralians from 1949 to 1983. Among its members was René-Louis Vallée, the inventor of Synergistic Physics .
Summary
1 Notes and references
2 See also
2.1 Bibliography
2.2 External links
Notes and references
↑ Reports of the sessions of the Academy of Sciences [archive] on Gallica
MA Dufour, " Cathodic Oscillograph " [archive] , on archives-ouvertes.fr
↑ Mentioned in particular by David Larousserie on lemonde.fr [archive]
Alexandre Moatti - SPS n ° 292, October 2010 [archive]
See also
Bibliography
Alexandre Moatti , Alterscience: Postures, dogmas, ideologies , Paris, Odile Jacob, coll. "Sciences", 2013 , 334 p. ( ISBN 978-2-7381-2887-4 ) , "Antirelativist Engineers: The Physics Circle Alexandre Dufour", p. 57-68.
External links
Research Resource: Professors of the Faculty of Sciences of Paris [archive]
-- https://fr.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alexandre_Dufour_(physicien)He was the inventor of the cathode oscillograph , whose process he described as early as 1914, before publishing the details of the apparatus in 1920.
A group of marginal scientists, defenders of theories for some of the pseudo-science, bore his name (the Physics Circle Alexandre Dufour). He met at the home of the Centralians from 1949 to 1983. Among its members was René-Louis Vallée, the inventor of Synergistic Physics .
Summary
1 Notes and references
2 See also
2.1 Bibliography
2.2 External links
Notes and references
↑ Reports of the sessions of the Academy of Sciences [archive] on Gallica
MA Dufour, " Cathodic Oscillograph " [archive] , on archives-ouvertes.fr
↑ Mentioned in particular by David Larousserie on lemonde.fr [archive]
Alexandre Moatti - SPS n ° 292, October 2010 [archive]
See also
Bibliography
Alexandre Moatti , Alterscience: Postures, dogmas, ideologies , Paris, Odile Jacob, coll. "Sciences", 2013 , 334 p. ( ISBN 978-2-7381-2887-4 ) , "Antirelativist Engineers: The Physics Circle Alexandre Dufour", p. 57-68.
External links
Research Resource: Professors of the Faculty of Sciences of Paris [archive]
Where does it say anything about what you claimed about relativity? And where is the evidence they did so?
Jump to: