I think there are many compelling reasons to look into flat earth.
The suggestion that earth's atmosphere is held together by gravity, while it sits next to an infinite vacuum simply defies anything we know about physics. If space is vacuum it would be impossible for our atmosphere to exists without a solid barrier ("firmament") containing it.
It is absurd to suggest that the moon orbits around the earth in a perfectly predictable manner, like it was on rails, and this is from "gravity". Meanwhile the earth orbits around a sun in the same manner, in an exact same pattern for 1000s of years. all these forces at work moving balls millions of miles without one iota of decay or change. invisible strings is a more convincing argument than "gravity". Any scientific experiment regarding centrifugal force or attempting to model these type of orbits will invariably show decay and the 2 objects eventually collide or they fly away from one another. the predictable and reliable movements of the bodies in the sky simply has not been adequately explained by modern "science"
while not a proof of flat earth, the fact is NASA has been faking their space activities for 50+ years. They fake their photos of planets and the earth. Their videos of moon landings do not hold up as believable. There are videos showing fakes missions with the space shuttles. They are caught faking stuff with green screens on the ISS to this day. If they can't show us real videos and photos of the globe and space, why not? Its a valid starting point to question what else we are lied to about.
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
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).
I think there are many compelling reasons to look into flat earth.
The suggestion that earth's atmosphere is held together by gravity, while it sits next to an infinite vacuum simply defies anything we know about physics. If space is vacuum it would be impossible for our atmosphere to exists without a solid barrier ("firmament") containing it.
It is absurd to suggest that the moon orbits around the earth in a perfectly predictable manner, like it was on rails, and this is from "gravity". Meanwhile the earth orbits around a sun in the same manner, in an exact same pattern for 1000s of years. all these forces at work moving balls millions of miles without one iota of decay or change. invisible strings is a more convincing argument than "gravity". Any scientific experiment regarding centrifugal force or attempting to model these type of orbits will invariably show decay and the 2 objects eventually collide or they fly away from one another. the predictable and reliable movements of the bodies in the sky simply has not been adequately explained by modern "science"
while not a proof of flat earth, the fact is NASA has been faking their space activities for 50+ years. They fake their photos of planets and the earth. Their videos of moon landings do not hold up as believable. There are videos showing fakes missions with the space shuttles. They are caught faking stuff with green screens on the ISS to this day. If they can't show us real videos and photos of the globe and space, why not? Its a valid starting point to question what else we are lied to about.
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.
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).