If space is vacuum it would be impossible for our atmosphere to exists without a solid barrier ("firmament") containing it.
Gas has mass. There's no reason gravity should have no effect on it.
all these forces at work moving balls millions of miles without one iota of decay or change
Strawman. Orbits do change and decay. Why argue against something you don't understand. The actual proposed orbits are way more fucked up looking than what you saw in textbooks, all that shit is dumbed down for kids and retards.
It is an odd coincidence that the moon orbits at a rate that keeps the same side facing us at all times. Another odd coincidence is the sun being exactly far enough away from us to be the same size as the moon in the sky
NASA has been faking their space activities for 50+ years
No, there isn't. A vacuum is just nothing. It's not a force, there's no reason it would rip away the atmosphere. You people really have no grasp of physics. If you have a particle floating in a vacuum, it will move towards a source of gravity. And stay there.
Gas has mass. There's no reason gravity should have no effect on it.
So you're saying that a force of 9.8m/s², a force so weak that a bug can fly against it, is strong enough to hold off an infinite vacuum? Do I have that right?
What happens when the bug stops flying? Wonder if that happens to things that aren't a bug too. "Things go up, so gravity not real" is a pretty braindead take. This whole thing would be more interesting if flat earthers had a coherent physics model, but you never have and never will.
hold off an infinite vacuum
You don't need to "hold off" a vacuum. It's not exerting force on anything. It helps to have some understanding of what you're trying to argue against.
Do things move if no force is being exerted on them?
Gas has mass. There's no reason gravity should have no effect on it.
There is if mass and gravitation are entirely mathematical fiction with no reality outside of equation! It is not coincidence that when combined they annihilate each other and return to the real and measured weight they began as!
Strawman
If it is a strawman, who are they falsely attributing the view to and when do they intend to burn it down for rhetorical purpose?
Another odd coincidence is the sun being exactly far enough away from us to be the same size as the moon in the sky
There are many such coincidences ;) The three body problem has no solution, nor did it ever.
I think I’ve invited you before, but all the same - please join us on the community I created to further explore, discuss, and exchange views on these topics!
There is if mass and gravitation are entirely mathematical fiction with no reality outside of equation
TIL things don't actually fall when I drop them, it's just an equation. Flat earthers are quick to dismiss something as fiction while never providing a working model of physics.
If it is a strawman
They're strawmanning the conventional model of space. You know this. You're just being obtuse. They said that it's absurd to suggest that orbits don't change, no model of space suggests that orbits don't change. It's just mind numbing ignorance of the opposite position.
TIL things don't actually fall when I drop them, it's just an equation.
Well you didn’t learn that from me!
Equations are just equations. Math is merely a descriptive symbolic language.
Phenomena, like falling for instance, are phenomena! They are real because we can observe and measure them, not because we can describe them in one language or another. Indeed we can describe many things (phenomena included) that do not exist to observe, and are not real. Gravitation and mass are two such examples. As I said, it is not coincidence that they annihilate one another and return to the real and measured weight they began as!
Flat earthers are quick to dismiss something as fiction while never providing a working model of physics.
I know that this has been your experience. In general, there are no flat earthers. You have been misinformed/misled by a psyop. I am a flat earth researcher, and I care about science deeply. There are good reasons and justifications for my statements that only require your interest and time to understand.
They're strawmanning the conventional model of space. You know this.
I think they are earnestly describing their understanding of the conventional astronomical model, and are not doing so for rhetorical purpose. A strawman is for the purpose of making your opponent in a debate look stupid by attributing false (and contrived) stupid views to them and then handily defeating (setting fire to the strawman/effigy) them to convince onlookers. I don’t think that is what they are doing here.
They said that it's absurd to suggest that orbits don't change, no model of space suggests that orbits don't change.
All the original ones do. Newtons did, for instance. That’s one of the reasons he invented our modern concept of the “vacuum of space”. He understood that if space were not entirely empty - then collision would upset and change the clockwork heavens which he knew from 1000’s of years of available astronomical recording did not take place. I am aware that modern models do suggest that orbits change over time, but there is precious little observation to actually support these assertions.
Archeoastronomy flatly refutes such assertions, as does the antikythera device and epicycles which are still used today for prediction of eclipses (and other things) in the most sophisticated models available.
It's just mind numbing ignorance of the opposite position.
That may be, but it isn’t a strawman (if the above is truly your view).
Gas has mass. There's no reason gravity should have no effect on it.
Strawman. Orbits do change and decay. Why argue against something you don't understand. The actual proposed orbits are way more fucked up looking than what you saw in textbooks, all that shit is dumbed down for kids and retards.
It is an odd coincidence that the moon orbits at a rate that keeps the same side facing us at all times. Another odd coincidence is the sun being exactly far enough away from us to be the same size as the moon in the sky
Yep, seems that way.
im offended at your use of "retard."
i identify as retard.
the updoots are sending me mixed messages.
Don't worry, only true intellectuals can give themselves shit and call themselves retarded.
youre a GOD-DAMN FED, too.
like fcukn god-damn roaches.
MODS... if this TURD of a FCUK refuses to jack off into a coffin.... y'all need to do cleanup action on his FAKE and GAY ass.
“Stop noticing things”
No, there isn't. A vacuum is just nothing. It's not a force, there's no reason it would rip away the atmosphere. You people really have no grasp of physics. If you have a particle floating in a vacuum, it will move towards a source of gravity. And stay there.
Gravity doesn't exist.
What do you call it when you let go of something and it falls to the ground?
So you're saying that a force of 9.8m/s², a force so weak that a bug can fly against it, is strong enough to hold off an infinite vacuum? Do I have that right?
You have no grasp of physics at all.
That's not a measurement of force. Try again
What happens when the bug stops flying? Wonder if that happens to things that aren't a bug too. "Things go up, so gravity not real" is a pretty braindead take. This whole thing would be more interesting if flat earthers had a coherent physics model, but you never have and never will.
You don't need to "hold off" a vacuum. It's not exerting force on anything. It helps to have some understanding of what you're trying to argue against.
Do things move if no force is being exerted on them?
Ah so I guess you’re just gonna ignore the point. Alright.
I addressed everything you said. Tell me what I ignored.
There is if mass and gravitation are entirely mathematical fiction with no reality outside of equation! It is not coincidence that when combined they annihilate each other and return to the real and measured weight they began as!
If it is a strawman, who are they falsely attributing the view to and when do they intend to burn it down for rhetorical purpose?
There are many such coincidences ;) The three body problem has no solution, nor did it ever.
I think I’ve invited you before, but all the same - please join us on the community I created to further explore, discuss, and exchange views on these topics!
TIL things don't actually fall when I drop them, it's just an equation. Flat earthers are quick to dismiss something as fiction while never providing a working model of physics.
They're strawmanning the conventional model of space. You know this. You're just being obtuse. They said that it's absurd to suggest that orbits don't change, no model of space suggests that orbits don't change. It's just mind numbing ignorance of the opposite position.
Well you didn’t learn that from me!
Equations are just equations. Math is merely a descriptive symbolic language.
Phenomena, like falling for instance, are phenomena! They are real because we can observe and measure them, not because we can describe them in one language or another. Indeed we can describe many things (phenomena included) that do not exist to observe, and are not real. Gravitation and mass are two such examples. As I said, it is not coincidence that they annihilate one another and return to the real and measured weight they began as!
I know that this has been your experience. In general, there are no flat earthers. You have been misinformed/misled by a psyop. I am a flat earth researcher, and I care about science deeply. There are good reasons and justifications for my statements that only require your interest and time to understand.
I think they are earnestly describing their understanding of the conventional astronomical model, and are not doing so for rhetorical purpose. A strawman is for the purpose of making your opponent in a debate look stupid by attributing false (and contrived) stupid views to them and then handily defeating (setting fire to the strawman/effigy) them to convince onlookers. I don’t think that is what they are doing here.
All the original ones do. Newtons did, for instance. That’s one of the reasons he invented our modern concept of the “vacuum of space”. He understood that if space were not entirely empty - then collision would upset and change the clockwork heavens which he knew from 1000’s of years of available astronomical recording did not take place. I am aware that modern models do suggest that orbits change over time, but there is precious little observation to actually support these assertions.
Archeoastronomy flatly refutes such assertions, as does the antikythera device and epicycles which are still used today for prediction of eclipses (and other things) in the most sophisticated models available.
That may be, but it isn’t a strawman (if the above is truly your view).
Gravity doesn't exist, retard.