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).
This is a common misconception, in my view. I think we likely agree on the meaning, and disagree on the verbiage.
Gravity, the scientific/natural law, has existed (been defined/known) for millennia. It is merely the phenomenon of falling. In its simplest form it is the statement “what goes up, must come down”. Natural laws in science are just phenomena; they do not speculate on cause and are merely “the what” established by measurement.
The people who say “gravity” causes things to fall, are imprecise with their words and incorrect. It is gravitation that is supposed to cause things to fall (though , relativistically speaking, not directly - gravitation is taught as a pseudoforce today)
I think we agree (and/or should) that the scientific law of gravity (aka falling) is demonstrably real, but that it is gravitation which doesn’t exist. Right?
retard.
If you can resist, it is best to avoid ad hominem. It is the last resort of the intellectually weak, and is across purposes to learning/teaching and communication of any kind.
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.
This is a common misconception, in my view. I think we likely agree on the meaning, and disagree on the verbiage.
Gravity, the scientific/natural law, has existed (been defined/known) for millennia. It is merely the phenomenon of falling. In its simplest form it is the statement “what goes up, must come down”. Natural laws in science are just phenomena; they do not speculate on cause and are merely “the what” established by measurement.
The people who say “gravity” causes things to fall, are imprecise with their words and incorrect. It is gravitation that is supposed to cause things to fall (though , relativistically speaking, not directly - gravitation is taught as a pseudoforce today)
I think we agree (and/or should) that the scientific law of gravity (aka falling) is demonstrably real, but that it is gravitation which doesn’t exist. Right?
If you can resist, it is best to avoid ad hominem. It is the last resort of the intellectually weak, and is across purposes to learning/teaching and communication of any kind.
Shut up, retard.