Win / Conspiracies
Conspiracies
Communities Topics Log In Sign Up
Sign In
Hot
All Posts
Settings
All
Profile
Saved
Upvoted
Hidden
Messages

Your Communities

General
AskWin
Funny
Technology
Animals
Sports
Gaming
DIY
Health
Positive
Privacy
News
Changelogs

More Communities

frenworld
OhTwitter
MillionDollarExtreme
NoNewNormal
Ladies
Conspiracies
GreatAwakening
IP2Always
GameDev
ParallelSociety
Privacy Policy
Terms of Service
Content Policy
DEFAULT COMMUNITIES • All General AskWin Funny Technology Animals Sports Gaming DIY Health Positive Privacy
Conspiracies Conspiracy Theories & Facts
hot new rising top

Sign In or Create an Account

9
Any flat earther here who can show me their calculations to predict an eclipse based on a flat earth model?
posted 1 year ago by vpnsurfer 1 year ago by vpnsurfer +14 / -5

Predictions: at best some incoherent rant that they can but won't do it for some bullshit reason

87 comments share
87 comments share save hide report block hide replies
You're viewing a single comment thread. View all comments, or full comment thread.
Comments (87)
sorted by:
▲ 1 ▼
– ceva 1 point 1 year ago +1 / -0

Just because something is written in a book does not make it consistent with reality.

I agree!

Similarly, just because a comment is written by you and you claim it's a law, also doesn't make it consistent with reality, That is exactly my point.

The reason it is a law is because it has only been measured to be correct

Who made measurements of the law as you've exactly stated it? Or are you simply referring to the general idea?

Things tend towards rest, not motion

Correct, but something with weight cannot rest in midair, thus they move down towards the earth.

So does gas displace space without gas?

permalink parent save report block reply
▲ 1 ▼
– jack445566778899 1 point 1 year ago +1 / -0

That is exactly my point.

You may ignore as much as you like. Stick your fingers in your ears and scream to your hearts content.

But reality doesn't care. The law stands, as it has for 3+ centuries precisely because there exist only measurements which confirm it and none that contradict it.

Don't you wonder at all why you can't provide a simple measurement that contradicts the law i've stated? It should be so simple considering it "isn't a law" and "isn't true" according to you - right? But instead of providing that simple measurement, you choose to stick your fingers in your ears, shut your eyes, and whine :(

Who made measurements of the law as you've exactly stated it?

Everyone who has measured the surface of still water and excluded the negligible (and known) surface tension artifacts. Many scientists and lay people going back centuries. But this isn't about them, it's about you!

Correct, but something with weight cannot rest in midair

Of course it can, and does. Why do you think it can't? Are you unfamiliar with floating/neutral buoyancy? Of course the air must be still in order for it to come to complete rest - but that is all.

So does gas displace space without gas?

Gas always expands to fill "space". Wether it can displace or is displaced itself depends on its volumetric weight (aka density) and that of the other matter involved.

permalink parent save report block reply
▲ 1 ▼
– ceva 1 point 1 year ago +1 / -0

Don't you wonder at all why you can't provide a simple measurement that contradicts the law i've stated?

You haven't stated a law, so I have made no effort to provide a contradiction. Once you state a law, not just your own summation of thought, then we can discuss it.

Everyone who has measured the surface of still water and excluded the negligible (and known) surface tension artifacts. Many scientists and lay people going back centuries.

Great! Could you please provide the name of one, and their findings?

Of course it can, and does.

Do you have an example of something we can observe at rest, in midair?

Gas always expands to fill "space"

At what point though does the weight of gas combat the property of it to continue expanding?

permalink parent save report block reply
▲ 1 ▼
– jack445566778899 1 point 1 year ago +1 / -0

You haven't stated a law

So you need to believe, and so repeat while sticking your fingers in your ears. But all the ignoring and childish wailing in the world won't change reality.

It is both a law in books (going back at least 3 centuries) and, much more importantly, a law in demonstrable reality. You can stubbornly continue to choose not to recognize that. I can't stop you, and wouldn't if i could. But i do urge you to reconsider though.

Could you please provide the name of one, and their findings?

I could, yes - though the "finding" has already been made explicit in this case. What you are obstinately missing is that who measured water's demonstrably flat surface at rest is irrelevant. This isn't about them; it's about you!

Do you have an example of something we can observe at rest, in midair?

Sure - the air itself is a good example. Clouds on a still day are another. If you want to demonstrate it for yourself, get a helium balloon and tie a small weight to it which matches its buoyant force. You seem to be unaware that "floating" (aka neutral buoyancy) is a possible rest state.

At what point though does the weight of gas combat the property of it to continue expanding?

All points, however as long as the gas is not at absolute zero it will always be able to expand and overcome that minuscule weight. All a gas must do to expand is cool down.

permalink parent save report block reply
▲ 1 ▼
– ceva 1 point 1 year ago +1 / -0

It is both a law in books (going back at least 3 centuries)...I could, yes - though the "finding" has already been made explicit in this case

You stating a thought in your own words is not an explicit finding, I'm sorry to say. If it is a law, then it would be written, as is, elsewhere aside from this forum.

Belief has nothing to do with it, it just simply is

I'm happy to be proven wrong if you can find even a single book stating this law as you have, but it doesn't appear that is possible.

get a helium balloon and tie a small weight to it which matches its buoyant force

Great example!

All points, however as long as the gas is not at absolute zero it will always be able to expand and overcome that minuscule weight

If so, why is the air so much thinner at higher altitudes? Shouldn't the gas be able to expand to be a constant pressure/density throughout our livable space, since it's not at absolute zero?

permalink parent save report block reply
... continue reading thread?

GIFs

Conspiracies Wiki & Links

Conspiracies Book List

External Digital Book Libraries

Mod Logs

Honor Roll

Conspiracies.win: This is a forum for free thinking and for discussing issues which have captured your imagination. Please respect other views and opinions, and keep an open mind. Our goal is to create a fairer and more transparent world for a better future.

Community Rules: <click this link for a detailed explanation of the rules

Rule 1: Be respectful. Attack the argument, not the person.

Rule 2: Don't abuse the report function.

Rule 3: No excessive, unnecessary and/or bullying "meta" posts.

To prevent SPAM, posts from accounts younger than 4 days old, and/or with <50 points, wont appear in the feed until approved by a mod.

Disclaimer: Submissions/comments of exceptionally low quality, trolling, stalking, spam, and those submissions/comments determined to be intentionally misleading, calls to violence and/or abuse of other users here, may all be removed at moderator's discretion.

Moderators

  • Doggos
  • axolotl_peyotl
  • trinadin
  • PutinLovesCats
  • clemaneuverers
  • C
Message the Moderators

Terms of Service | Privacy Policy

2025.03.01 - j6rsh (status)

Copyright © 2024.

Terms of Service | Privacy Policy