I'm not sure I understand the connection between hollow earth and CERN, why this would mean that CERN can exercise mind control over the public or whatever. But setting that aside, I think you have a lot of work to do in demonstrating that we are in fact inside a "hollow" / "concave" earth. The flat earthers here and elsewhere will be pretty mad to hear you confirm curvature and rotation and deny the firmament, of course. But honestly, as bad as flat earth is as a conspiracy, "hollow" / "concave" earth is even worse. The documentary you linked says pretty much nothing, it is just a bunch of CGI, some cut off half claims about experiments no one explains, and a bunch of strange pulsing music.

Seriously, if Neal Degrasse Tyson and Bill Nye claimed we were on the inside of a hollow earth and posted that video as evidence, would you believe them?

Particularly, how they're supposedly so smart, with all their scientists, around the world, yet over the years, nobody has still even figured out what "gravity", fuckin is...

This always amazes me. Every single explanation leaves some things unexplained, or else the explanation would be infinite. The typical flat earth "density and buoyancy" leaves those two things unexplained. The more ethereal flat earth "static electric fields" and "toroidal magnetism" leaves those unexplained. The difference is, physics explains exactly how gravity behaves. Whether Newtonian or relativistic, anyone can learn a universal phenomenon of gravity and then calculate for themselves what is expected in any circumstance. Physics does something similar for electricity and magnetism too. I never see theorists like you object to how we can't explain why electricity and magnetism happens, and in fact, people like you tend to like using those phenomena in theories. Gravity is no different.

Newton gave gravity a simple rule and left its mechanism unexplained. Einstein gave it a mechanism with a slightly more complex rule, but left the mechanism for that unexplained. Maybe someday someone will explain gen rel gravity by more fundamental principles, who knows...

even though they can throw "string theory" at it.

No, because most people don't believe in string theory because it is verging on not being science. Only some weirdos like Michio Kaku are into that. Serious people like Penrose don't waste their time on it.

This is why the flat earth guys have some observations that may have data which seems to show

No, they don't. There are no observations invalidating the globe model, there are just incorrect claims about observations.

When I was going through that, the data was like.. hey.. there's no plot holes here. WTF.

To be totally clear, you are saying that after extensive study, you found absolutely nothing to invalidate a "hollow / concave earth" model. There is no observation contradicting the predictions of a "hollow / concave earth" model. None? But the globe is full of "plot holes" as you call them?

explains how the fucking gasses don't just evaporate into outer space.

No serious person thinks that this is an objection. Unless you are a child starting science education, there should be no paradox as to why the atmosphere does not just rush off into space. There is an entire body of study called "atmospheric science" or "atmospheric physics" that studies atmospheres in intricate detail. Understanding how an atmosphere can remain attached to a planet is something any reasonably clever undergrad can do.

Gravity is just "centrifugal force", like the carnival pin you to the wall, spin ride. This whole thing is rotating around in here.

As I said, the FE people will be very angry with you for saying their precious stationary plane is actually a spinning ball (albeit the inside of one). But seriously, the gravity that you for some reason won't believe exists even though you would never jump off of your roof is the reason why the atmosphere stays on the earth despite the vacuum of space.

And while you refuse to believe in the principle of gravity, this "centrifugal effect" you are appealing to is about the easiest thing to refute. If we were on the inside of a non gravitating spinning ball and our experience of gravity was the centrifugal effect, then we would measure what we call gravity as being half as strong near the arctic and antarctic circles as at the equator. The UN does not get you out of this because people live in Norway, Finland, Greenland, and Tierra del Fuego.

But in fact, we measure that acceleration to be about 0.3% (that is, 0.003) weaker at the equator. This is consistent with the centrifugal effect being upwards, that is, the opposite direction of what we call gravity, and much weaker than it, owing to the earth's rotation rate (given by the length of the day) and claimed radius. In fact, given the measured average acceleration that anyone anywhere can check, the reduction at the equator is pretty much spot on as the centrifugal effect for the known length of a day and claimed radius.

You can't go to the fuckin planets cause it's like a bad fuckin "planetarium", 1970's museum, projection show.

"No plot holes," I see. Everything we see in the sky is just a bad planetarium as would be in a 1970s museum.

Well, it's like these fuckin prisms that can bend shit.

"No plot holes," I see. The apparent sunrise and sunset is "like these fuckin prisms that can bend shit." LMAO.

I don't know.. I don't believe anything unless I'd see it with my own eyes.

Apparently except for the "hollow" / "concave" "cell / egg" earth we are on the inside of, unless you saw that at some point? Or at least data demonstrating it? And apparently the "bad 1970s planetarium" is something you are willing to believe without seeing it with your own eyes?

What you do know, is what they're trying to tell you in school, you sense, like come on.. you guys are so fuckin smart, how come you can't figure out shit like damn gravity.

They have figured out "damn gravity." Gravity can be used to know when a solar eclipse will occur in a thousand years. It can be used to project the position of every planet for centuries. So it depends on what you mean by "figure out." If you mean accuracy at the scale of galactic and intergalactic space, then the answer is "maybe." It would require new mass, but otherwise gravity is wrong and needs to be corrected. It would not be the first time, in the early 1900s gravity had some wrong predictions (one in particular involving Mercury) and it was corrected in GR. If by "figure out" you mean "the big why" then no, no one understands "the big why" gravity exists.

But at practical scales, gravity is well understood and is infinitely more refined, exact, and accurate than any flat earth or hollow earth model. And no flat or concave earther understands "the big why" their supposed "toroidal magnetism" or "density and buoyancy" exist either. But in addition to that they can't do anything useful with their theories. They pretty much are unable to explain the seasons, phases of the moon, or why we will have an eclipse in about seven weeks (on August twelve).

How about if you check the damn moon lander

The moon lander was not made to fly to the moon, it was made to be carried to the moon and then land one time, last for a few days, and be left behind (a small portion of it had to dock with the orbiter briefly). It was subjected to intense thermal loads, which is why it has foil shielding on it. Other than that it was designed to be as light as possible, which is why everything is small and the foil is just adhered onto the frame.

Nixon on the phone with fuckin the moon and they get back to him right away. Should be a delay.

Just go watch the video. There is a delay of about 3 seconds every time the astronauts speak. This is a thing so easy to verify that even you can manage to do it, despite all the time you have to spend on your other "research." The video of the phone call is all over the internet. The delay is unmistakable. I guess it could still be faked, but "there should be delay" is not a valid argument.

Red Hot Chili Peppers

Holy shit, a rock band putting funny lyrics into a song referencing a conspiracy theory that existed for decades prior is not an argument.

So yeah.. all this shit, it's pointing towards concave earth.

LMAO. All what shit, exactly? I'm still waiting for some sort of demonstration of what a "concave earth" theory looks like. In fact, I am still waiting for a single argument why the conventional globe model is wrong. No one ever provides one.

I'm not sure I understand the connection between hollow earth and CERN, why this would mean that CERN can exercise mind control over the public or whatever. But setting that aside, I think you have a lot of work to do in demonstrating that we are in fact inside a "hollow" / "concave" earth. The flat earthers here and elsewhere will be pretty mad to hear you confirm curvature and rotation and deny the firmament, of course. But honestly, as bad as flat earth is as a conspiracy, "hollow" / "concave" earth is even worse. The documentary you linked says pretty much nothing, it is just a bunch of CGI, some cut off half claims about experiments no one explains, and a bunch of strange pulsing music.

Seriously, if Neal Degrasse Tyson and Bill Nye claimed we were on the inside of a hollow earth and posted that video as evidence, would you believe them?

Particularly, how they're supposedly so smart, with all their scientists, around the world, yet over the years, nobody has still even figured out what "gravity", fuckin is...

This always amazes me. Every single explanation leaves some things unexplained, or else the explanation would be infinite. The typical flat earth "density and buoyancy" leaves those two things unexplained. The more ethereal flat earth "static electric fields" and "toroidal magnetism" leaves those unexplained. The difference is, physics explains exactly how gravity behaves. Whether Newtonian or relativistic, anyone can learn a universal phenomenon of gravity and then calculate for themselves what is expected in any circumstance. Physics does something similar for electricity and magnetism too. I never see theorists like you object to how we can't explain why electricity and magnetism happens, and in fact, people like you tend to like using those phenomena in theories. Gravity is no different.

Newton gave gravity a simple rule and left its mechanism unexplained. Einstein gave it a mechanism with a slightly more complex rule, but left the mechanism for that unexplained. Maybe someday someone will explain gen rel gravity by more fundamental principles, who knows...

even though they can throw "string theory" at it.

No, because most people don't believe in string theory because it is verging on not being science. Only some weirdos like Michio Kaku are into that. Serious people like Penrose don't waste their time on it.

This is why the flat earth guys have some observations that may have data which seems to show

No, they don't. There are no observations invalidating the globe model, there are just incorrect claims about observations.

When I was going through that, the data was like.. hey.. there's no plot holes here. WTF.

To be totally clear, you are saying that after extensive study, you found absolutely nothing to invalidate a "hollow / concave earth" model. There is no observation contradicting the predictions of a "hollow / concave earth" model. None? But the globe is full of "plot holes" as you call them?

explains how the fucking gasses don't just evaporate into outer space.

No serious person thinks that this is an objection. Unless you are a child starting science education, there should be no paradox as to why the atmosphere does not just rush off into space. There is an entire body of study called "atmospheric science" or "atmospheric physics" that studies atmospheres in intricate detail. Understanding how an atmosphere can remain attached to a planet is something any reasonably clever undergrad can do.

Gravity is just "centrifugal force", like the carnival pin you to the wall, spin ride. This whole thing is rotating around in here.

As I said, the FE people will be very angry with you for saying their precious stationary plane is actually a spinning ball (albeit the inside of one). But seriously, the gravity that you for some reason won't believe exists even though you would never jump off of your roof is the reason why the atmosphere stays on the earth despite the vacuum of space.

And while you refuse to believe in the principle of gravity, this "centrifugal effect" you are appealing to is about the easiest thing to refute. If we were on the inside of a non gravitating spinning ball and our experience of gravity was the centrifugal effect, then we would measure what we call gravity as being half as strong near the arctic and antarctic circles as at the equator. The UN does not get you out of this because people live in Norway, Finland, Greenland, and Tierra del Fuego.

But in fact, we measure that acceleration to be about 0.3% (that is, 0.003) weaker at the equator. This is consistent with the centrifugal effect being upwards, that is, the opposite direction of what we call gravity, and much weaker than it, owing to the earth's rotation rate (given by the length of the day) and claimed radius. In fact, given the measured average acceleration that anyone anywhere can check, the reduction at the equator is pretty much spot on as the centrifugal effect for the known length of a day and claimed radius.

You can't go to the fuckin planets cause it's like a bad fuckin "planetarium", 1970's museum, projection show.

"No plot holes," I see. Everything we see in the sky is just a bad planetarium as would be in a 1970s museum.

Well, it's like these fuckin prisms that can bend shit.

"No plot holes," I see. The apparent sunrise and sunset is "like "hese fuckin prisms that can bend shit." LMAO.

I don't know.. I don't believe anything unless I'd see it with my own eyes.

Apparently except for the "hollow" / "concave" "cell / egg" earth we are on the inside of, unless you saw that at some point? Or at least data demonstrating it? And apparently the "bad 1970s planetarium" is something you are willing to believe without seeing it with your own eyes?

What you do know, is what they're trying to tell you in school, you sense, like come on.. you guys are so fuckin smart, how come you can't figure out shit like damn gravity.

They have figured out "damn gravity." Gravity can be used to know when a solar eclipse will occur in a thousand years. It can be used to project the position of every planet for centuries. So it depends on what you mean by "figure out." If you mean accuracy at the scale of galactic and intergalactic space, then the answer is "maybe." It would require new mass, but otherwise gravity is wrong and needs to be corrected. It would not be the first time, in the early 1900s gravity had some wrong predictions (one in particular involving Mercury) and it was corrected in GR. If by "figure out" you mean "the big why" then no, no one understands "the big why" gravity exists.

But at practical scales, gravity is well understood and is infinitely more refined, exact, and accurate than any flat earth or hollow earth model. And no flat or concave earther understands "the big why" their supposed "toroidal magnetism" or "density and buoyancy" exist either. But in addition to that they can't do anything useful with their theories. They pretty much are unable to explain the seasons, phases of the moon, or why we will have an eclipse in about seven weeks (on August twelve).

How about if you check the damn moon lander

The moon lander was not made to fly to the moon, it was made to be carried to the moon and then land one time, last for a few days, and be left behind (a small portion of it had to dock with the orbiter briefly). It was subjected to intense thermal loads, which is why it has foil shielding on it. Other than that it was designed to be as light as possible, which is why everything is small and the foil is just adhered onto the frame.

Nixon on the phone with fuckin the moon and they get back to him right away. Should be a delay.

Just go watch the video. There is a delay of about 3 seconds every time the astronauts speak. This is a thing so easy to verify that even you can manage to do it, despite all the time you have to spend on your other "research." The video of the phone call is all over the internet. The delay is unmistakable. I guess it could still be faked, but "there should be delay" is not a valid argument.

Red Hot Chili Peppers

Holy shit, a rock band putting funny lyrics into a song referencing a conspiracy theory that existed for decades prior is not an argument.

So yeah.. all this shit, it's pointing towards concave earth.

LMAO. All what shit, exactly? I'm still waiting for some sort of demonstration of what a "concave earth" theory looks like. In fact, I am still waiting for a single argument why the conventional globe model is wrong. No one ever provides one.

I'm not sure I understand the connection between hollow earth and CERN, why this would mean that CERN can exercise mind control over the public or whatever. But setting that aside, I think you have a lot of work to do in demonstrating that we are in fact inside a "hollow" / "concave" earth. The flat earthers here and elsewhere will be pretty mad to hear you confirm curvature and rotation and deny the firmament, of course. But honestly, as bad as flat earth is as a conspiracy, "hollow" / "concave" earth is even worse. The documentary you linked says pretty much nothing, it is just a bunch of CGI, some cut off half claims about experiments no one explains, and a bunch of strange pulsing music.

Seriously, if Neal Degrasse Tyson and Bill Nye claimed we were on the inside of a hollow earth and posted that video as evidence, would you believe them?

Particularly, how they're supposedly so smart, with all their scientists, around the world, yet over the years, nobody has still even figured out what "gravity", fuckin is...

This always amazes me. Every single explanation leaves some things unexplained, or else the explanation would be infinite. The typical flat earth "density and buoyancy" leaves those two things unexplained. The more ethereal flat earth "static electric fields" and "toroidal magnetism" leaves those unexplained. The difference is, physics explains exactly how gravity behaves. Whether Newtonian or relativistic, anyone can learn a universal phenomenon of gravity and then calculate for themselves what is expected in any circumstance. Physics does something similar for electricity and magnetism too. I never see theorists like you object to how we can't explain why electricity and magnetism happens, and in fact, people like you tend to like using those phenomena in theories. Gravity is no different.

Newton gave gravity a simple rule and left its mechanism unexplained. Einstein gave it a mechanism with a slightly more complex rule, but left the mechanism for that unexplained. Maybe someday someone will explain gen rel gravity by more fundamental principles, who knows...

even though they can throw "string theory" at it.

No, because most people don't believe in string theory because it is verging on not being science. Only some weirdos like Michio Kaku are into that. Serious people like Penrose don't waste their time on it.

This is why the flat earth guys have some observations that may have data which seems to show

No, they don't. There are no observations invalidating the globe model, there are just incorrect claims about observations.

When I was going through that, the data was like.. hey.. there's no plot holes here. WTF.

To be totally clear, you are saying that after extensive study, you found absolutely nothing to invalidate a "hollow / concave earth" model. There is no observation contradicting the predictions of a "hollow / concave earth" model. None? But the globe is full of "plot holes" as you call them?

explains how the fucking gasses don't just evaporate into outer space.

No serious person thinks that this is an objection. Unless you are a child starting science education, there should be no paradox as to why the atmosphere does not just rush off into space. There is an entire body of study called "atmospheric science" or "atmospheric physics" that studies atmospheres in intricate detail. Understanding how an atmosphere can remain attached to a planet is something any reasonably clever undergrad can do.

Gravity is just "centrifugal force", like the carnival pin you to the wall, spin ride. This whole thing is rotating around in here.

As I said, the FE people will be very angry with you for saying their precious stationary plane is actually a spinning ball (albeit the inside of one). But seriously, the gravity that you for some reason won't believe exists even though you would never jump off of your roof is the reason why the atmosphere stays on the earth despite the vacuum of space.

And while you refuse to believe in the principle of gravity, this "centrifugal effect" you are appealing to is about the easiest thing to refute. If we were on the inside of a non gravitating spinning ball and our experience of gravity was the centrifugal effect, then we would measure what we call gravity as being half as strong near the arctic and antarctic circles as at the equator. The UN does not get you out of this because people live in Norway, Finland, Greenland, and Tierra del Fuego.

But in fact, we measure that acceleration to be about 0.3% (that is, 0.003) weaker at the equator. This is consistent with the centrifugal effect being upwards, that is, the opposite direction of what we call gravity, and much weaker than it, owing to the earth's rotation rate (given by the length of the day) and claimed radius. In fact, given the measured average acceleration that anyone anywhere can check, the reduction at the equator is pretty much spot on as the centrifugal effect for the known length of a day and claimed radius.

You can't go to the fuckin planets cause it's like a bad fuckin "planetarium", 1970's museum, projection show.

"No plot holes," I see. Everything we see in the sky is just a bad planetarium as would be in a 1970s museum.

Well, it's like these fuckin prisms that can bend shit.

"No plot holes," I see. The apparent sunrise and sunset is like "these fuckin prisms that can bend shit." LMAO.

I don't know.. I don't believe anything unless I'd see it with my own eyes.

Apparently except for the "hollow" / "concave" "cell / egg" earth we are on the inside of, unless you saw that at some point? Or at least data demonstrating it? And apparently the "bad 1970s planetarium" is something you are willing to believe without seeing it with your own eyes?

What you do know, is what they're trying to tell you in school, you sense, like come on.. you guys are so fuckin smart, how come you can't figure out shit like damn gravity.

They have figured out "damn gravity." Gravity can be used to know when a solar eclipse will occur in a thousand years. It can be used to project the position of every planet for centuries. So it depends on what you mean by "figure out." If you mean accuracy at the scale of galactic and intergalactic space, then the answer is "maybe." It would require new mass, but otherwise gravity is wrong and needs to be corrected. It would not be the first time, in the early 1900s gravity had some wrong predictions (one in particular involving Mercury) and it was corrected in GR. If by "figure out" you mean "the big why" then no, no one understands "the big why" gravity exists.

But at practical scales, gravity is well understood and is infinitely more refined, exact, and accurate than any flat earth or hollow earth model. And no flat or concave earther understands "the big why" their supposed "toroidal magnetism" or "density and buoyancy" exist either. But in addition to that they can't do anything useful with their theories. They pretty much are unable to explain the seasons, phases of the moon, or why we will have an eclipse in about seven weeks (on August twelve).

How about if you check the damn moon lander

The moon lander was not made to fly to the moon, it was made to be carried to the moon and then land one time, last for a few days, and be left behind (a small portion of it had to dock with the orbiter briefly). It was subjected to intense thermal loads, which is why it has foil shielding on it. Other than that it was designed to be as light as possible, which is why everything is small and the foil is just adhered onto the frame.

Nixon on the phone with fuckin the moon and they get back to him right away. Should be a delay.

Just go watch the video. There is a delay of about 3 seconds every time the astronauts speak. This is a thing so easy to verify that even you can manage to do it, despite all the time you have to spend on your other "research." The video of the phone call is all over the internet. The delay is unmistakable. I guess it could still be faked, but "there should be delay" is not a valid argument.

Red Hot Chili Peppers

Holy shit, a rock band putting funny lyrics into a song referencing a conspiracy theory that existed for decades prior is not an argument.

So yeah.. all this shit, it's pointing towards concave earth.

LMAO. All what shit, exactly? I'm still waiting for some sort of demonstration of what a "concave earth" theory looks like. In fact, I am still waiting for a single argument why the conventional globe model is wrong. No one ever provides one.

I'm not sure I understand the connection between hollow earth and CERN, why this would mean that CERN can exercise mind control over the public or whatever. But setting that aside, I think you have a lot of work to do in demonstrating that we are in fact inside a "hollow" / "concave" earth. The flat earthers here and elsewhere will be pretty mad to hear you confirm curvature and rotation and deny the firmament, of course. But honestly, as bad as flat earth is as a conspiracy, "hollow" / "concave" earth is even worse. The documentary you linked says pretty much nothing, it is just a bunch of CGI, some cut off half claims about experiments no one explains, and a bunch of strange pulsing music.

Seriously, if Neal Degrasse Tyson and Bill Nye claimed we were on the inside of a hollow earth and posted that video as evidence, would you believe them?

Particularly, how they're supposedly so smart, with all their scientists, around the world, yet over the years, nobody has still even figured out what "gravity", fuckin is...

This always amazes me. Every single explanation leaves some things unexplained, or else the explanation would be infinite. The typical flat earth "density and buoyancy" leaves those two things unexplained. The more ethereal flat earth "static electric fields" and "toroidal magnetism" leaves those unexplained. The difference is, physics explains exactly how gravity behaves. Whether Newtonian or relativistic, anyone can learn a universal phenomenon of gravity and then calculate for themselves what is expected in any circumstance. Physics does something similar for electricity and magnetism too. I never see theorists like you object to how we can't explain why electricity and magnetism happens, and in fact, people like you tend to like using those phenomena in theories. Gravity is no different.

Newton gave gravity a simple rule and left its mechanism unexplained. Einstein gave it a mechanism with a slightly more complex rule, but left the mechanism for that unexplained. Maybe someday someone will explain gen rel gravity by more fundamental principles, who knows...

even though they can throw "string theory" at it.

No, because most people don't believe in string theory because it is verging on not being science. Only some weirdos like Michio Kaku are into that. Serious people like Penrose don't waste their time on it.

This is why the flat earth guys have some observations that may have data which seems to show

No, they don't. There are no observations invalidating the globe model, there are just incorrect claims about observations.

When I was going through that, the data was like.. hey.. there's no plot holes here. WTF.

To be totally clear, you are saying that after extensive study, you found absolutely nothing to invalidate a "hollow / concave earth" model. There is no observation contradicting the predictions of a "hollow / concave earth" model. None? But the globe is full of "plot holes" as you call them?

explains how the fucking gasses don't just evaporate into outer space.

No serious person thinks that this is an objection. Unless you are a child starting science education, there should be no paradox as to why the atmosphere does not just rush off into space. There is an entire body of study called "atmospheric science" or "atmospheric physics" that studies atmospheres in intricate detail. Understanding how an atmosphere can remain attached to a planet is something any reasonably clever undergrad can do.

Gravity is just "centrifugal force", like the carnival pin you to the wall, spin ride. This whole thing is rotating around in here.

As I said, the FE people will be very angry with you for saying their precious stationary plane is actually a spinning ball (albeit the inside of one). But seriously, the gravity that you for some reason won't believe exists even though you would never jump off of your roof is the reason why the atmosphere stays on the earth despite the vacuum of space.

And while you refuse to believe in the principle of gravity, this "centrifugal effect" you are appealing to is about the easiest thing to refute. If we were on the inside of a non gravitating globe and our experience of gravity was the centrifugal effect, then we would measure what we call gravity as being half as strong near the arctic and antarctic circles as at the equator. But in fact, we measure it about 0.3% (that is, 0.003) weaker at the equator. This is consistent with the centrifugal effect being upwards, that is, the opposite direction of what we call gravity, and much weaker than it, owing to the earth's rotation rate (given by the length of the day) and claimed radius.

You can't go to the fuckin planets cause it's like a bad fuckin "planetarium", 1970's museum, projection show.

"No plot holes," I see. Everything we see in the sky is just a bad planetarium as would be in a 1970s museum.

Well, it's like these fuckin prisms that can bend shit.

"No plot holes," I see. The apparent sunrise and sunset is like "these fuckin prisms that can bend shit." LMAO.

I don't know.. I don't believe anything unless I'd see it with my own eyes.

Apparently except for the "hollow" / "concave" "cell / egg" earth we are on the inside of, unless you saw that at some point? Or at least data demonstrating it? And apparently the "bad 1970s planetarium" is something you are willing to believe without seeing it with your own eyes?

What you do know, is what they're trying to tell you in school, you sense, like come on.. you guys are so fuckin smart, how come you can't figure out shit like damn gravity.

They have figured out "damn gravity." Gravity can be used to know when a solar eclipse will occur in a thousand years. It can be used to project the position of every planet for centuries. So it depends on what you mean by "figure out." If you mean accuracy at the scale of galactic and intergalactic space, then the answer is "maybe." It would require new mass, but otherwise gravity is wrong and needs to be corrected. It would not be the first time, in the early 1900s gravity had some wrong predictions (one in particular involving Mercury) and it was corrected in GR. If by "figure out" you mean "the big why" then no, no one understands "the big why" gravity exists.

But at practical scales, gravity is well understood and is infinitely more refined, exact, and accurate than any flat earth or hollow earth model. And no flat or concave earther understands "the big why" their supposed "toroidal magnetism" or "density and buoyancy" exist either. But in addition to that they can't do anything useful with their theories. They pretty much are unable to explain the seasons, phases of the moon, or why we will have an eclipse in about seven weeks (on August twelve).

How about if you check the damn moon lander

The moon lander was not made to fly to the moon, it was made to be carried to the moon and then land one time, last for a few days, and be left behind (a small portion of it had to dock with the orbiter briefly). It was subjected to intense thermal loads, which is why it has foil shielding on it. Other than that it was designed to be as light as possible, which is why everything is small and the foil is just adhered onto the frame.

Nixon on the phone with fuckin the moon and they get back to him right away. Should be a delay.

Just go watch the video. There is a delay of about 3 seconds every time the astronauts speak. This is a thing so easy to verify that even you can manage to do it, despite all the time you have to spend on your other "research." The video of the phone call is all over the internet. The delay is unmistakable. I guess it could still be faked, but "there should be delay" is not a valid argument.

Red Hot Chili Peppers

Holy shit, a rock band putting funny lyrics into a song referencing a conspiracy theory that existed for decades prior is not an argument.

So yeah.. all this shit, it's pointing towards concave earth.

LMAO. All what shit, exactly? I'm still waiting for some sort of demonstration of what a "concave earth" theory looks like. In fact, I am still waiting for a single argument why the conventional globe model is wrong. No one ever provides one.

I'm not sure I understand the connection between hollow earth and CERN, why this would mean that CERN can exercise mind control over the public or whatever. But setting that aside, I think you have a lot of work to do in demonstrating that we are in fact inside a "hollow" / "concave" earth. The flat earthers here and elsewhere will be pretty mad to hear you confirm curvature and rotation and deny the firmament, of course. But honestly, as bad as flat earth is as a conspiracy, "hollow" / "concave" earth is even worse. The documentary you linked says pretty much nothing, it is just a bunch of CGI, some cut off half claims about experiments no one explains, and a bunch of strange pulsing music.

Seriously, if Neal Degrasse Tyson and Bill Nye claimed we were on the inside of a hollow earth and posted that video as evidence, would you believe them?

Particularly, how they're supposedly so smart, with all their scientists, around the world, yet over the years, nobody has still even figured out what "gravity", fuckin is...

This always amazes me. Every single explanation leaves some things unexplained, or else the explanation would be infinite. The typical flat earth "density and buoyancy" leaves those two things unexplained. The more ethereal flat earth "static electric fields" and "toroidal magnetism" leaves those unexplained. The difference is, physics explains exactly how gravity behaves. Whether Newtonian or relativistic, anyone can learn a universal phenomenon of gravity and then calculate for themselves what is expected in any circumstance. Physics does something similar for electricity and magnetism too. I never see theorists like you object to how we can't explain why electricity or magnetism happens.

Newton gave gravity a simple rule and left its mechanism unexplained. Einstein gave it a mechanism with a slightly more complex rule, but left the mechanism for that unexplained. Maybe someday someone will explain gen rel gravity by more fundamental principles, who knows...

even though they can throw "string theory" at it.

No, because most people don't believe in string theory because it is verging on not being science. Only some weirdos like Michio Kaku are into that. Serious people like Penrose don't waste their time on it.

This is why the flat earth guys have some observations that may have data which seems to show

No, they don't. There are no observations invalidating the globe model, there are just incorrect claims about observations.

When I was going through that, the data was like.. hey.. there's no plot holes here. WTF.

To be totally clear, you are saying that after extensive study, you found absolutely nothing to invalidate a "hollow / concave earth" model. There is no observation contradicting the predictions of a "hollow / concave earth" model. None? But the globe is full of "plot holes" as you call them?

explains how the fucking gasses don't just evaporate into outer space.

No serious person thinks that this is an objection. Unless you are a child starting science education, there should be no paradox as to why the atmosphere does not just rush off into space. There is an entire body of study called "atmospheric science" or "atmospheric physics" that studies atmospheres in intricate detail. Understanding how an atmosphere can remain attached to a planet is something any reasonably clever undergrad can do.

Gravity is just "centrifugal force", like the carnival pin you to the wall, spin ride. This whole thing is rotating around in here.

As I said, the FE people will be very angry with you for saying their precious stationary plane is actually a spinning ball (albeit the inside of one). But seriously, the gravity that you for some reason won't believe exists even though you would never jump off of your roof is the reason why the atmosphere stays on the earth despite the vacuum of space.

And while you refuse to believe in the principle of gravity, this "centrifugal effect" you are appealing to is about the easiest thing to refute. If we were on the inside of a non gravitating globe and our experience of gravity was the centrifugal effect, then we would measure what we call gravity as being half as strong near the arctic and antarctic circles as at the equator. But in fact, we measure it about 0.3% (that is, 0.003) weaker at the equator. This is consistent with the centrifugal effect being upwards, that is, the opposite direction of what we call gravity, and much weaker than it, owing to the earth's rotation rate (given by the length of the day) and claimed radius.

You can't go to the fuckin planets cause it's like a bad fuckin "planetarium", 1970's museum, projection show.

"No plot holes," I see. Everything we see in the sky is just a bad planetarium as would be in a 1970s museum.

Well, it's like these fuckin prisms that can bend shit.

"No plot holes," I see. The apparent sunrise and sunset is like "these fuckin prisms that can bend shit." LMAO.

I don't know.. I don't believe anything unless I'd see it with my own eyes.

Apparently except for the "hollow" / "concave" "cell / egg" earth we are on the inside of, unless you saw that at some point? Or at least data demonstrating it? And apparently the "bad 1970s planetarium" is something you are willing to believe without seeing it with your own eyes?

What you do know, is what they're trying to tell you in school, you sense, like come on.. you guys are so fuckin smart, how come you can't figure out shit like damn gravity.

They have figured out "damn gravity." Gravity can be used to know when a solar eclipse will occur in a thousand years. It can be used to project the position of every planet for centuries. So it depends on what you mean by "figure out." If you mean accuracy at the scale of galactic and intergalactic space, then the answer is "maybe." It would require new mass, but otherwise gravity is wrong and needs to be corrected. It would not be the first time, in the early 1900s gravity had some wrong predictions (one in particular involving Mercury) and it was corrected in GR. If by "figure out" you mean "the big why" then no, no one understands "the big why" gravity exists.

But at practical scales, gravity is well understood and is infinitely more refined, exact, and accurate than any flat earth or hollow earth model. And no flat or concave earther understands "the big why" their supposed "toroidal magnetism" or "density and buoyancy" exist either. But in addition to that they can't do anything useful with their theories. They pretty much are unable to explain the seasons, phases of the moon, or why we will have an eclipse in about seven weeks (on August twelve).

How about if you check the damn moon lander

The moon lander was not made to fly to the moon, it was made to be carried to the moon and then land one time, last for a few days, and be left behind (a small portion of it had to dock with the orbiter briefly). It was subjected to intense thermal loads, which is why it has foil shielding on it. Other than that it was designed to be as light as possible, which is why everything is small and the foil is just adhered onto the frame.

Nixon on the phone with fuckin the moon and they get back to him right away. Should be a delay.

Just go watch the video. There is a delay of about 3 seconds every time the astronauts speak. This is a thing so easy to verify that even you can manage to do it, despite all the time you have to spend on your other "research." The video of the phone call is all over the internet. The delay is unmistakable. I guess it could still be faked, but "there should be delay" is not a valid argument.

Red Hot Chili Peppers

Holy shit, a rock band putting funny lyrics into a song referencing a conspiracy theory that existed for decades prior is not an argument.

So yeah.. all this shit, it's pointing towards concave earth.

LMAO. All what shit, exactly? I'm still waiting for some sort of demonstration of what a "concave earth" theory looks like. In fact, I am still waiting for a single argument why the conventional globe model is wrong. No one ever provides one.

I'm not sure I understand the connection between hollow earth and CERN, why this would mean that CERN can exercise mind control over the public or whatever. But setting that aside, I think you have a lot of work to do in demonstrating that we are in fact inside a "hollow" / "concave" earth. The flat earthers here and elsewhere will be pretty mad to hear you confirm curvature and rotation and deny the firmament, of course. But honestly, as bad as flat earth is as a conspiracy, "hollow" / "concave" earth is even worse. The documentary you linked says pretty much nothing, it is just a bunch of CGI, some cut off half claims about experiments no one explains, and a bunch of strange pulsing music.

Seriously, if Neal Degrasse Tyson and Bill Nye claimed the earth was hollow and posted that video as evidence, would you believe them?

Particularly, how they're supposedly so smart, with all their scientists, around the world, yet over the years, nobody has still even figured out what "gravity", fuckin is...

This always amazes me. Every single explanation leaves some things unexplained, or else the explanation would be infinite. The typical flat earth "density and buoyancy" leaves those two things unexplained. The more ethereal flat earth "static electric fields" and "toroidal magnetism" leaves those unexplained. The difference is, physics explains exactly how gravity behaves. Whether Newtonian or relativistic, anyone can learn a universal phenomenon of gravity and then calculate for themselves what is expected in any circumstance. Physics does something similar for electricity and magnetism too. I never see theorists like you object to how we can't explain why electricity or magnetism happens.

Newton gave gravity a simple rule and left its mechanism unexplained. Einstein gave it a mechanism with a slightly more complex rule, but left the mechanism for that unexplained. Maybe someday someone will explain gen rel gravity by more fundamental principles, who knows...

even though they can throw "string theory" at it.

No, because most people don't believe in string theory because it is verging on not being science. Only some weirdos like Michio Kaku are into that. Serious people like Penrose don't waste their time on it.

This is why the flat earth guys have some observations that may have data which seems to show

No, they don't. There are no observations invalidating the globe model, there are just incorrect claims about observations.

When I was going through that, the data was like.. hey.. there's no plot holes here. WTF.

To be totally clear, you are saying that after extensive study, you found absolutely nothing to invalidate a "hollow / concave earth" model. There is no observation contradicting the predictions of a "hollow / concave earth" model. None? But the globe is full of "plot holes" as you call them?

explains how the fucking gasses don't just evaporate into outer space.

No serious person thinks that this is an objection. Unless you are a child starting science education, there should be no paradox as to why the atmosphere does not just rush off into space. There is an entire body of study called "atmospheric science" or "atmospheric physics" that studies atmospheres in intricate detail. Understanding how an atmosphere can remain attached to a planet is something any reasonably clever undergrad can do.

Gravity is just "centrifugal force", like the carnival pin you to the wall, spin ride. This whole thing is rotating around in here.

As I said, the FE people will be very angry with you for saying their precious stationary plane is actually a spinning ball (albeit the inside of one). But seriously, the gravity that you for some reason won't believe exists even though you would never jump off of your roof is the reason why the atmosphere stays on the earth despite the vacuum of space.

And while you refuse to believe in the principle of gravity, this "centrifugal effect" you are appealing to is about the easiest thing to refute. If we were on the inside of a non gravitating globe and our experience of gravity was the centrifugal effect, then we would measure what we call gravity as being half as strong near the arctic and antarctic circles as at the equator. But in fact, we measure it about 0.3% (that is, 0.003) weaker at the equator. This is consistent with the centrifugal effect being upwards, that is, the opposite direction of what we call gravity, and much weaker than it, owing to the earth's rotation rate (given by the length of the day) and claimed radius.

You can't go to the fuckin planets cause it's like a bad fuckin "planetarium", 1970's museum, projection show.

"No plot holes," I see. Everything we see in the sky is just a bad planetarium as would be in a 1970s museum.

Well, it's like these fuckin prisms that can bend shit.

"No plot holes," I see. The apparent sunrise and sunset is like "these fuckin prisms that can bend shit." LMAO.

I don't know.. I don't believe anything unless I'd see it with my own eyes.

Apparently except for the "hollow" / "concave" "cell / egg" earth we are on the inside of, unless you saw that at some point? Or at least data demonstrating it? And apparently the "bad 1970s planetarium" is something you are willing to believe without seeing it with your own eyes?

What you do know, is what they're trying to tell you in school, you sense, like come on.. you guys are so fuckin smart, how come you can't figure out shit like damn gravity.

They have figured out "damn gravity." Gravity can be used to know when a solar eclipse will occur in a thousand years. It can be used to project the position of every planet for centuries. So it depends on what you mean by "figure out." If you mean accuracy at the scale of galactic and intergalactic space, then the answer is "maybe." It would require new mass, but otherwise gravity is wrong and needs to be corrected. It would not be the first time, in the early 1900s gravity had some wrong predictions (one in particular involving Mercury) and it was corrected in GR. If by "figure out" you mean "the big why" then no, no one understands "the big why" gravity exists.

But at practical scales, gravity is well understood and is infinitely more refined, exact, and accurate than any flat earth or hollow earth model. And no flat or concave earther understands "the big why" their supposed "toroidal magnetism" or "density and buoyancy" exist either. But in addition to that they can't do anything useful with their theories. They pretty much are unable to explain the seasons, phases of the moon, or why we will have an eclipse in about seven weeks (on August twelve).

How about if you check the damn moon lander

The moon lander was not made to fly to the moon, it was made to be carried to the moon and then land one time, last for a few days, and be left behind (a small portion of it had to dock with the orbiter briefly). It was subjected to intense thermal loads, which is why it has foil shielding on it. Other than that it was designed to be as light as possible, which is why everything is small and the foil is just adhered onto the frame.

Nixon on the phone with fuckin the moon and they get back to him right away. Should be a delay.

Just go watch the video. There is a delay of about 3 seconds every time the astronauts speak. This is a thing so easy to verify that even you can manage to do it, despite all the time you have to spend on your other "research." The video of the phone call is all over the internet. The delay is unmistakable. I guess it could still be faked, but "there should be delay" is not a valid argument.

Red Hot Chili Peppers

Holy shit, a rock band putting funny lyrics into a song referencing a conspiracy theory that existed for decades prior is not an argument.

So yeah.. all this shit, it's pointing towards concave earth.

LMAO. All what shit, exactly? I'm still waiting for some sort of demonstration of what a "concave earth" theory looks like. In fact, I am still waiting for a single argument why the conventional globe model is wrong. No one ever provides one.

I'm not sure I understand the connection between hollow earth and CERN, why this would mean that CERN can exercise mind control over the public or whatever. But setting that aside, I think you have a lot of work to do in demonstrating that we are in fact inside a hollow earth. The flat earthers here and elsewhere will be pretty mad to hear you confirm curvature and rotation and deny the firmament, of course. But honestly, as bad as flat earth is as a conspiracy, "hollow" / "concave" earth is even worse. The documentary you linked says pretty much nothing, it is just a bunch of CGI, some cut off half claims about experiments no one explains, and a bunch of strange pulsing music.

Seriously, if Neal Degrasse Tyson and Bill Nye claimed the earth was hollow and posted that video as evidence, would you believe them?

Particularly, how they're supposedly so smart, with all their scientists, around the world, yet over the years, nobody has still even figured out what "gravity", fuckin is...

This always amazes me. Every single explanation leaves some things unexplained, or else the explanation would be infinite. The typical flat earth "density and buoyancy" leaves those two things unexplained. The more ethereal flat earth "static electric fields" and "toroidal magnetism" leaves those unexplained. The difference is, physics explains exactly how gravity behaves. Whether Newtonian or relativistic, anyone can learn a universal phenomenon of gravity and then calculate for themselves what is expected in any circumstance. Physics does something similar for electricity and magnetism too. I never see theorists like you object to how we can't explain why electricity or magnetism happens.

Newton gave gravity a simple rule and left its mechanism unexplained. Einstein gave it a mechanism with a slightly more complex rule, but left the mechanism for that unexplained. Maybe someday someone will explain gen rel gravity by more fundamental principles, who knows...

even though they can throw "string theory" at it.

No, because most people don't believe in string theory because it is verging on not being science. Only some weirdos like Michio Kaku are into that. Serious people like Penrose don't waste their time on it.

This is why the flat earth guys have some observations that may have data which seems to show

No, they don't. There are no observations invalidating the globe model, there are just incorrect claims about observations.

When I was going through that, the data was like.. hey.. there's no plot holes here. WTF.

To be totally clear, you are saying that after extensive study, you found absolutely nothing to invalidate a "hollow / concave earth" model. There is no observation contradicting the predictions of a "hollow / concave earth" model. None? But the globe is full of "plot holes" as you call them?

explains how the fucking gasses don't just evaporate into outer space.

No serious person thinks that this is an objection. Unless you are a child starting science education, there should be no paradox as to why the atmosphere does not just rush off into space. There is an entire body of study called "atmospheric science" or "atmospheric physics" that studies atmospheres in intricate detail. Understanding how an atmosphere can remain attached to a planet is something any reasonably clever undergrad can do.

Gravity is just "centrifugal force", like the carnival pin you to the wall, spin ride. This whole thing is rotating around in here.

As I said, the FE people will be very angry with you for saying their precious stationary plane is actually a spinning ball (albeit the inside of one). But seriously, the gravity that you for some reason won't believe exists even though you would never jump off of your roof is the reason why the atmosphere stays on the earth despite the vacuum of space.

And while you refuse to believe in the principle of gravity, this "centrifugal effect" you are appealing to is about the easiest thing to refute. If we were on the inside of a non gravitating globe and our experience of gravity was the centrifugal effect, then we would measure what we call gravity as being half as strong near the arctic and antarctic circles as at the equator. But in fact, we measure it about 0.3% (that is, 0.003) weaker at the equator. This is consistent with the centrifugal effect being upwards, that is, the opposite direction of what we call gravity, and much weaker than it, owing to the earth's rotation rate (given by the length of the day) and claimed radius.

You can't go to the fuckin planets cause it's like a bad fuckin "planetarium", 1970's museum, projection show.

"No plot holes," I see. Everything we see in the sky is just a bad planetarium as would be in a 1970s museum.

Well, it's like these fuckin prisms that can bend shit.

"No plot holes," I see. The apparent sunrise and sunset is like "these fuckin prisms that can bend shit." LMAO.

I don't know.. I don't believe anything unless I'd see it with my own eyes.

Apparently except for the "hollow" / "concave" "cell / egg" earth we are on the inside of, unless you saw that at some point? Or at least data demonstrating it? And apparently the "bad 1970s planetarium" is something you are willing to believe without seeing it with your own eyes?

What you do know, is what they're trying to tell you in school, you sense, like come on.. you guys are so fuckin smart, how come you can't figure out shit like damn gravity.

They have figured out "damn gravity." Gravity can be used to know when a solar eclipse will occur in a thousand years. It can be used to project the position of every planet for centuries. So it depends on what you mean by "figure out." If you mean accuracy at the scale of galactic and intergalactic space, then the answer is "maybe." It would require new mass, but otherwise gravity is wrong and needs to be corrected. It would not be the first time, in the early 1900s gravity had some wrong predictions (one in particular involving Mercury) and it was corrected in GR. If by "figure out" you mean "the big why" then no, no one understands "the big why" gravity exists.

But at practical scales, gravity is well understood and is infinitely more refined, exact, and accurate than any flat earth or hollow earth model. And no flat or concave earther understands "the big why" their supposed "toroidal magnetism" or "density and buoyancy" exist either. But in addition to that they can't do anything useful with their theories. They pretty much are unable to explain the seasons, phases of the moon, or why we will have an eclipse in about seven weeks (on August twelve).

How about if you check the damn moon lander

The moon lander was not made to fly to the moon, it was made to be carried to the moon and then land one time, last for a few days, and be left behind (a small portion of it had to dock with the orbiter briefly). It was subjected to intense thermal loads, which is why it has foil shielding on it. Other than that it was designed to be as light as possible, which is why everything is small and the foil is just adhered onto the frame.

Nixon on the phone with fuckin the moon and they get back to him right away. Should be a delay.

Just go watch the video. There is a delay of about 3 seconds every time the astronauts speak. This is a thing so easy to verify that even you can manage to do it, despite all the time you have to spend on your other "research." The video of the phone call is all over the internet. The delay is unmistakable. I guess it could still be faked, but "there should be delay" is not a valid argument.

Red Hot Chili Peppers

Holy shit, a rock band putting funny lyrics into a song referencing a conspiracy theory that existed for decades prior is not an argument.

So yeah.. all this shit, it's pointing towards concave earth.

LMAO. All what shit, exactly? I'm still waiting for some sort of demonstration of what a "concave earth" theory looks like. In fact, I am still waiting for a single argument why the conventional globe model is wrong. No one ever provides one.

I'm not sure I understand the connection between hollow earth and CERN, why this would mean that CERN can exercise mind control over the public or whatever. But setting that aside, I think you have a lot of work to do in demonstrating that we are in fact inside a hollow earth. The flat earthers here and elsewhere will be pretty mad to hear you confirm curvature and rotation and deny the firmament, of course. But honestly, as bad as flat earth is as a conspiracy, "hollow" / "concave" earth is even worse. The documentary you linked says pretty much nothing, it is just a bunch of CGI, some cut off half claims about experiments no one explains, and a bunch of strange pulsing music.

Seriously, if Neal Degrasse Tyson and Bill Nye claimed the earth was hollow and posted that video as evidence, would you believe them?

Particularly, how they're supposedly so smart, with all their scientists, around the world, yet over the years, nobody has still even figured out what "gravity", fuckin is...

This always amazes me. Every single explanation leaves some things unexplained, or else the explanation would be infinite. The typical flat earth "density and buoyancy" leaves those two things unexplained. The more ethereal flat earth "static electric fields" and "toroidal magnetism" leaves those unexplained. The difference is, physics explains exactly how gravity behaves. Whether Newtonian or relativistic, anyone can learn a universal phenomenon of gravity and then calculate for themselves what is expected in any circumstance. Physics does something similar for electricity and magnetism too. I never see theorists like you object to how we can't explain why electricity or magnetism happens.

Newton gave gravity a simple rule and left its mechanism unexplained. Einstein gave it a mechanism with a slightly more complex rule, but left the mechanism for that unexplained. Maybe someday someone will explain gen rel gravity by more fundamental principles, who knows...

even though they can throw "string theory" at it.

No, because most people don't believe in string theory because it is verging on not being science. Only some weirdos like Michio Kaku are into that. Serious people like Penrose don't waste their time on it.

This is why the flat earth guys have some observations that may have data which seems to show

No, they don't. There are no observations invalidating the globe model, there are just incorrect claims about observations.

When I was going through that, the data was like.. hey.. there's no plot holes here. WTF.

To be totally clear, you are saying that after extensive study, you found absolutely nothing to invalidate a "hollow / concave earth" model. There is no observation contradicting the predictions of a "hollow / concave earth" model. None? But the globe is full of "plot holes" as you call them?

explains how the fucking gasses don't just evaporate into outer space.

No serious person thinks that this is an objection. Unless you are a child starting science education, there should be no paradox as to why the atmosphere does not just rush off into space. There is an entire body of study called "atmospheric science" or "atmospheric physics" that studies atmospheres in intricate detail. Understanding how an atmosphere can remain attached to a planet is something any reasonably clever undergrad can do.

Gravity is just "centrifugal force", like the carnival pin you to the wall, spin ride. This whole thing is rotating around in here.

As I said, the FE people will be very angry with you for saying their precious stationary plane is actually a spinning ball (albeit the inside of one). But seriously, the gravity that you for some reason won't believe exists even though you would never jump off of your roof is the reason why the atmosphere stays on the earth despite the vacuum of space.

And while you refuse to believe in the principle of gravity, this "centrifugal effect" you are appealing to is about the easiest thing to refute. If we were on the inside of a non gravitating globe and our experience of gravity was the centrifugal effect, then we would measure what we call gravity as being half as strong near the arctic and antarctic circles as at the equator. But in fact, we measure it about 0.3% (that is, 0.003) weaker at the equator. This is consistent with the centrifugal effect being upwards, that is, the opposite direction of what we call gravity, and much weaker than it, owing to the earth's rotation rate (given by the length of the day) and claimed radius.

You can't go to the fuckin planets cause it's like a bad fuckin "planetarium", 1970's museum, projection show.

"No plot holes," I see. Everything we see in the sky is just a bad planetarium as would be in a 1970s museum.

Well, it's like these fuckin prisms that can bend shit.

"No plot holes," I see. The apparent sunrise and sunset is like "these fuckin prisms that can bend shit." LMAO.

I don't know.. I don't believe anything unless I'd see it with my own eyes.

Apparently except for the "hollow" / "concave" "cell / egg" earth we are on the inside of, unless you saw that at some point? Or at least data demonstrating it? And apparently the "bad 1970s planetarium" is something you are willing to believe without seeing it with your own eyes?

What you do know, is what they're trying to tell you in school, you sense, like come on.. you guys are so fuckin smart, how come you can't figure out shit like damn gravity.

They have figured out "damn gravity." Gravity can be used to know when a solar eclipse will occur in a thousand years. It can be used to project the position of every planet for centuries. So it depends on what you mean by "figure out." If you mean accuracy at the scale of galactic and intergalactic space, then the answer is "maybe." It would require new mass, but otherwise gravity is wrong and needs to be corrected. It would not be the first time, in the early 1900s gravity had some wrong predictions (one in particular involving Mercury) and it was corrected in GR. If by "figure out" you mean "the big why" then no, no one understands "the big why" gravity exists. But at practical scales, gravity is well understood and is infinitely more refined exact and accurate than any flat earth or hollow earth model. And no flat or concave earther understands "the big why" their supposed "toroidal magnetism" or "density and buoyancy" exist either, but they can't do anything useful with their theories.

How about if you check the damn moon lander

The moon lander was not made to fly to the moon, it was made to be carried to the moon and then land one time, last for a few days, and be left behind (a small portion of it had to dock with the orbiter briefly). It was subjected to intense thermal loads, which is why it has foil shielding on it. Other than that it was designed to be as light as possible, which is why everything is small and the foil is just adhered onto the frame.

Nixon on the phone with fuckin the moon and they get back to him right away. Should be a delay.

Just go watch the video. There is a delay of about 3 seconds every time the astronauts speak. This is a thing so easy to verify that even you can manage to do it, despite all the time you have to spend on your other "research." The video of the phone call is all over the internet. The delay is unmistakable. I guess it could still be faked, but "there should be delay" is not a valid argument.

Red Hot Chili Peppers

Holy shit, a rock band putting funny lyrics into a song referencing a conspiracy theory that existed for decades prior is not an argument.

So yeah.. all this shit, it's pointing towards concave earth.

LMAO. All what shit, exactly? I'm still waiting for some sort of demonstration of what a "concave earth" theory looks like. In fact, I am still waiting for a single argument why the conventional globe model is wrong. No one ever provides one.

I'm not sure I understand the connection between hollow earth and CERN, why this would mean that CERN can exercise mind control over the public or whatever. But setting that aside, I think you have a lot of work to do in demonstrating that we are in fact inside a hollow earth. The flat earthers here and elsewhere will be pretty mad to hear you confirm curvature and rotation and deny the firmament, of course. But honestly, as bad as flat earth is as a conspiracy, "hollow" / "concave" earth is even worse. The documentary you linked says pretty much nothing, it is just a bunch of CGI, some cut off half claims about experiments no one explains, and a bunch of strange pulsing music.

Seriously, if Neal Degrasse Tyson and Bill Nye claimed the earth was hollow and posted that video as evidence, would you believe them?

Particularly, how they're supposedly so smart, with all their scientists, around the world, yet over the years, nobody has still even figured out what "gravity", fuckin is...

This always amazes me. Every single explanation leaves some things unexplained, or else the explanation would be infinite. The typical flat earth "density and buoyancy" leaves those two things unexplained. The more ethereal flat earth "static electric fields" and "toroidal magnetism" leaves those unexplained. The difference is, physics explains exactly how gravity behaves. Whether Newtonian or relativistic, anyone can learn a universal phenomenon of gravity and then calculate for themselves what is expected in any circumstance. Physics does something similar for electricity and magnetism too. I never see theorists like you object to how we can't explain why electricity or magnetism happens.

Newton gave gravity a simple rule and left its mechanism unexplained. Einstein gave it a mechanism with a slightly more complex rule, but left the mechanism for that unexplained. Maybe someday someone will explain gen rel gravity by more fundamental principles, who knows...

even though they can throw "string theory" at it.

No, because most people don't believe in string theory because it is verging on not being science. Only some weirdos like Michio Kaku are into that. Serious people like Penrose don't waste their time on it.

This is why the flat earth guys have some observations that may have data which seems to show

No, they don't. There are no observations invalidating the globe model, there are just incorrect claims about observations.

When I was going through that, the data was like.. hey.. there's no plot holes here. WTF.

To be totally clear, you are saying that after extensive study, you found absolutely nothing to invalidate a "hollow / concave earth" model. There is no observation contradicting the predictions of a "hollow / concave earth" model. None? But the globe is full of "plot holes" as you call them?

explains how the fucking gasses don't just evaporate into outer space.

No serious person thinks that this is an objection. Unless you are a child starting science education, there should be no paradox as to why the atmosphere does not just rush off into space. There is an entire body of study called "atmospheric science" or "atmospheric physics" that studies atmospheres in intricate detail. Understanding how an atmosphere can remain attached to a planet is something any reasonably clever undergrad can do.

Gravity is just "centrifugal force", like the carnival pin you to the wall, spin ride. This whole thing is rotating around in here.

As I said, the FE people will be very angry with you for saying their precious stationary plane is actually a spinning ball (albeit the inside of one). But seriously, the gravity that you for some reason won't believe exists even though you would never jump off of your roof is the reason why the atmosphere stays on the earth despite the vacuum of space.

And while you refuse to believe in the principle of gravity, this "centrifugal effect" you are appealing to is about the easiest thing to refute. If we were on the inside of a non gravitating globe and our experience of gravity was the centrifugal effect, then we would measure what we call gravity as being half as strong near the arctic and antarctic circles as at the equator. But in fact, we measure it about 0.3% (that is, 0.003) weaker at the equator. This is consistent with the centrifugal effect being upwards, that is, the opposite direction of what we call gravity, and much weaker than it, owing to the earth's rotation rate (given by the length of the day) and claimed radius.

You can't go to the fuckin planets cause it's like a bad fuckin "planetarium", 1970's museum, projection show.

"No plot holes," I see. Everything we see in the sky is just a bad planetarium as would be in a 1970s museum.

Well, it's like these fuckin prisms that can bend shit.

"No plot holes," I see. The apparent sunrise and sunset is like "these fuckin prisms that can bend shit." LMAO.

I don't know.. I don't believe anything unless I'd see it with my own eyes.

Apparently except for the "hollow" / "concave" "cell / egg" earth we are on the inside of, unless you saw that at some point? Or at least data demonstrating it? And apparently the "bad 1970s planetarium" is something you are willing to believe without seeing it with your own eyes?

What you do know, is what they're trying to tell you in school, you sense, like come on.. you guys are so fuckin smart, how come you can't figure out shit like damn gravity.

They have figured out "damn gravity." Gravity can be used to know when a solar eclipse will occur in a thousand years. It can be used to project the position of every planet for centuries. So it depends on what you mean by "figure out." If you mean accuracy at the scale of galactic and intergalactic space, then the answer is "maybe." It would require new mass, but otherwise gravity is wrong and needs to be corrected. It would not be the first time, in the early 1900s gravity had some wrong predictions (one in particular involving Mercury) and it was corrected in GR. If by "figure out" you mean "the big why" then no, no one understands "(the big) why" gravity exists. But at practical scales, gravity is well understood and is infinitely more refined exact and accurate than any flat earth or hollow earth model.

How about if you check the damn moon lander

The moon lander was not made to fly to the moon, it was made to be carried to the moon and then land one time, last for a few days, and be left behind (a small portion of it had to dock with the orbiter briefly). It was subjected to intense thermal loads, which is why it has foil shielding on it. Other than that it was designed to be as light as possible, which is why everything is small and the foil is just adhered onto the frame.

Nixon on the phone with fuckin the moon and they get back to him right away. Should be a delay.

Just go watch the video. There is a delay of about 3 seconds every time the astronauts speak. This is a thing so easy to verify that even you can manage to do it, despite all the time you have to spend on your other "research." The video of the phone call is all over the internet. The delay is unmistakable. I guess it could still be faked, but "there should be delay" is not a valid argument.

Red Hot Chili Peppers

Holy shit, a rock band putting funny lyrics into a song referencing a conspiracy theory that existed for decades prior is not an argument.

So yeah.. all this shit, it's pointing towards concave earth.

LMAO. All what shit, exactly? I'm still waiting for some sort of demonstration of what a "concave earth" theory looks like. In fact, I am still waiting for a single argument why the conventional globe model is wrong. No one ever provides one.

I'm not sure I understand the connection between hollow earth and CERN, why this would mean that CERN can exercise mind control over the public or whatever. But setting that aside, I think you have a lot of work to do in demonstrating that we are in fact inside a hollow earth. The flat earthers here and elsewhere will be pretty mad to hear you confirm curvature and rotation and deny the firmament, of course. But honestly, as bad as flat earth is as a conspiracy, "hollow" / "concave" earth is even worse. The documentary you linked says pretty much nothing, it is just a bunch of CGI, some cut off half claims about experiments no one explains, and a bunch of strange pulsing music.

Seriously, if Neal Degrasse Tyson and Bill Nye claimed the earth was hollow and posted that video as evidence, would you believe them?

Particularly, how they're supposedly so smart, with all their scientists, around the world, yet over the years, nobody has still even figured out what "gravity", fuckin is...

This always amazes me. Every single explanation leaves some things unexplained, or else the explanation would be infinite. The typical flat earth "density and buoyancy" leaves those two things unexplained. The more ethereal flat earth "static electric fields" and "toroidal magnetism" leaves those unexplained. The difference is, physics explains exactly how gravity behaves. Whether Newtonian or relativistic, anyone can learn a universal phenomenon of gravity and then calculate for themselves what is expected in any circumstance. Physics does something similar for electricity and magnetism too. I never see theorists like you object to how we can't explain why electricity or magnetism happens.

Newton gave gravity a simple rule and left its mechanism unexplained. Einstein gave it a mechanism with a slightly more complex rule, but left the mechanism for that unexplained. Maybe someday someone will explain gen rel gravity by more fundamental principles, who knows...

even though they can throw "string theory" at it.

No, because most people don't believe in string theory because it is verging on not being science. Only some weirdos like Michio Kaku are into that. Serious people like Penrose don't waste their time on it.

This is why the flat earth guys have some observations that may have data which seems to show

No, they don't. There are no observations invalidating the globe model, there are just incorrect claims about observations.

When I was going through that, the data was like.. hey.. there's no plot holes here. WTF.

To be totally clear, you are saying that after extensive study, you found absolutely nothing to invalidate a "hollow / concave earth" model. There is no observation contradicting the predictions of a "hollow / concave earth" model. None? But the globe is full of "plot holes" as you call them?

explains how the fucking gasses don't just evaporate into outer space.

No serious person thinks that this is an objection. Unless you are a child starting science education, there should be no paradox as to why the atmosphere does not just rush off into space. There is an entire body of study called "atmospheric science" or "atmospheric physics" that studies atmospheres in intricate detail. Understanding how an atmosphere can remain attached to a planet is something any reasonably clever undergrad can do.

Gravity is just "centrifugal force", like the carnival pin you to the wall, spin ride. This whole thing is rotating around in here.

As I said, the FE people will be very angry with you for saying their precious stationary plane is actually a spinning ball (albeit the inside of one). But seriously, the gravity that you for some reason won't believe exists even though you would never jump off of your roof is the reason why the atmosphere stays on the earth despite the vacuum of space.

And while you refuse to believe in the principle of gravity, this "centrifugal effect" you are appealing to is about the easiest thing to refute. If we were on the inside of a non gravitating globe and our experience of gravity was the centrifugal effect, then we would measure what we call gravity as being half as strong near the arctic and antarctic circles as at the equator. But in fact, we measure it about 0.3% (that is, 0.003) weaker at the equator. This is consistent with the centrifugal effect being upwards, that is, the opposite direction of what we call gravity, and much weaker than it, owing to the earth's rotation rate (given by the length of the day) and claimed radius.

You can't go to the fuckin planets cause it's like a bad fuckin "planetarium", 1970's museum, projection show.

"No plot holes," I see. Everything we see in the sky is just a bad planetarium as would be in a 1970s museum.

Well, it's like these fuckin prisms that can bend shit.

"No plot holes," I see. The apparent sunrise and sunset is like "these fuckin prisms that can bend shit." LMAO.

I don't know.. I don't believe anything unless I'd see it with my own eyes.

Apparently except for the "hollow" / "concave" "cell / egg" earth we are on the inside of, unless you saw that at some point? Or at least data demonstrating it? And apparently the "bad 1970s planetarium" is something you are willing to believe without seeing it with your own eyes?

What you do know, is what they're trying to tell you in school, you sense, like come on.. you guys are so fuckin smart, how come you can't figure out shit like damn gravity.

They have figured out "damn gravity." Gravity can be used to know when a solar eclipse will occur in a thousand years. It can be used to project the position of every planet for centuries. So it depends on what you mean by "figure out." If you mean accuracy at the scale of galactic and intergalactic space, then the answer is "maybe." It would require new mass, but otherwise gravity is wrong and needs to be corrected. It would not be the first time, in the early 1900s gravity had some wrong predictions (one in particular involving Mercury) and it was corrected in GR. It by "figure out" you mean "the big why" then no, no one understands "(the big) why" gravity exists. But at practical scales, gravity is well understood and is infinitely more refined exact and accurate than any flat earth or hollow earth model.

How about if you check the damn moon lander

The moon lander was not made to fly to the moon, it was made to be carried to the moon and then land one time, last for a few days, and be left behind (a small portion of it had to dock with the orbiter briefly). It was subjected to intense thermal loads, which is why it has foil shielding on it. Other than that it was designed to be as light as possible, which is why everything is small and the foil is just adhered onto the frame.

Nixon on the phone with fuckin the moon and they get back to him right away. Should be a delay.

Just go watch the video. There is a delay of about 3 seconds every time the astronauts speak. This is a thing so easy to verify that even you can manage to do it, despite all the time you have to spend on your other "research." The video of the phone call is all over the internet. The delay is unmistakable. I guess it could still be faked, but "there should be delay" is not a valid argument.

Red Hot Chili Peppers

Holy shit, a rock band putting funny lyrics into a song referencing a conspiracy theory that existed for decades prior is not an argument.

So yeah.. all this shit, it's pointing towards concave earth.

LMAO. All what shit, exactly? I'm still waiting for some sort of demonstration of what a "concave earth" theory looks like. In fact, I am still waiting for a single argument why the conventional globe model is wrong. No one ever provides one.

I'm not sure I understand the connection between hollow earth and CERN, why this would mean that CERN can exercise mind control over the public or whatever. But setting that aside, I think you have a lot of work to do in demonstrating that we are in fact inside a hollow earth. The flat earthers here and elsewhere will be pretty mad to hear you confirm curvature and rotation and deny the firmament, of course. But honestly, as bad as flat earth is as a conspiracy, "hollow" / "concave" earth is even worse. The documentary you linked says pretty much nothing, it is just a bunch of CGI, some cut off half claims about experiments no one explains, and a bunch of strange pulsing music.

Seriously, if Neal Degrasse Tyson and Bill Nye claimed the earth was hollow and posted that video as evidence, would you believe them?

Particularly, how they're supposedly so smart, with all their scientists, around the world, yet over the years, nobody has still even figured out what "gravity", fuckin is...

This always amazes me. Every single explanation leaves some things unexplained, or else the explanation would be infinite. The typical flat earth "density and buoyancy" leaves those two things unexplained. The more ethereal flat earth "static electric fields" and "toroidal magnetism" leaves those unexplained. The difference is, physics explains exactly how gravity behaves. Whether Newtonian or relativistic, anyone can learn a universal phenomenon of gravity and then calculate for themselves what is expected in any circumstance. Physics does something similar for electricity and magnetism too. I never see theorists like you object to how we can't explain why electricity or magnetism happens.

Newton gave gravity a simple rule and left its mechanism unexplained. Einstein gave it a mechanism with a slightly more complex rule, but left the mechanism for that unexplained. Maybe someday someone will explain gen rel gravity by more fundamental principles, who knows...

even though they can throw "string theory" at it.

No, because most people don't believe in string theory because it is verging on not being science. Only some weirdos like Michio Kaku are into that. Serious people like Penrose don't waste their time on it.

This is why the flat earth guys have some observations that may have data which seems to show

No, they don't. There are no observations invalidating the globe model, there are just incorrect claims about observations.

When I was going through that, the data was like.. hey.. there's no plot holes here. WTF.

To be totally clear, you are saying that after extensive study, you found absolutely nothing to invalidate a "hollow / concave earth" model. There is no observation contradicting the predictions of a "hollow / concave earth" model. None? But the globe is full of "plot holes" as you call them?

explains how the fucking gasses don't just evaporate into outer space.

No serious person thinks that this is an objection. Unless you are a child starting science education, there should be no paradox as to why the atmosphere does not just rush off into space. There is an entire body of study called "atmospheric science" or "atmospheric physics" that studies atmospheres in intricate detail. Understanding how an atmosphere can remain attached to a planet is something any reasonably clever undergrad can do.

Gravity is just "centrifugal force", like the carnival pin you to the wall, spin ride. This whole thing is rotating around in here.

As I said, the FE people will be very angry with you for saying their precious stationary plane is actually a spinning ball (albeit the inside of one). But seriously, the gravity that you for some reason won't believe exists even though you would never jump off of your roof is the reason why the atmosphere stays on the earth despite the vacuum of space.

And while you refuse to believe in the principle of gravity, this "centrifugal effect" you are appealing to is about the easiest thing to refute. If we were on the inside of a non gravitating globe and our experience of gravity was the centrifugal effect, then we would measure what we call gravity as being half as strong near the arctic and antarctic circles as at the equator. But in fact, we measure it about 0.3% (that is, 0.003) weaker at the equator. This is consistent with the centrifugal effect being upwards, that is, the opposite direction of what we call gravity, and much weaker than it, owing to the earth's rotation rate (given by the length of the day) and claimed radius.

You can't go to the fuckin planets cause it's like a bad fuckin "planetarium", 1970's museum, projection show.

"No plot holes," I see. Everything we see in the sky is just a bad planetarium as would be in a 1970s museum.

Well, it's like these fuckin prisms that can bend shit.

"No plot holes," I see. The apparent sunrise and sunset is like "these fuckin prisms that can bend shit." LMAO.

I don't know.. I don't believe anything unless I'd see it with my own eyes.

Apparently except for the "hollow" / "concave" "cell / egg" earth we are on the inside of, unless you saw that at some point? Or at least data demonstrating it? And apparently the "bad 1970s planetarium" is something you are willing to believe without seeing it with your own eyes?

What you do know, is what they're trying to tell you in school, you sense, like come on.. you guys are so fuckin smart, how come you can't figure out shit like damn gravity.

They have figured out "damn gravity." Gravity can be used to know when a solar eclipse will occur in a thousand years. It can be used to project the position of every planet for centuries. So it depends on what you mean by "figure out." If you mean accuracy at the scale of galactic and intergalactic space, then the answer is "maybe." It would require new mass, but otherwise gravity is wrong and needs to be corrected. It would not be the first time, in the early 1900s gravity had some wrong predictions (one particular involving Mercury) and it was corrected in GR. It by "figure out" you mean "the big why" then no, no one understands "(the big) why" gravity exists. But at practical scales, gravity is well understood and is infinitely more refined exact and accurate than any flat earth or hollow earth model.

How about if you check the damn moon lander

The moon lander was not made to fly to the moon, it was made to be carried to the moon and then land one time, last for a few days, and be left behind (a small portion of it had to dock with the orbiter briefly). It was subjected to intense thermal loads, which is why it has foil shielding on it. Other than that it was designed to be as light as possible, which is why everything is small and the foil is just adhered onto the frame.

Nixon on the phone with fuckin the moon and they get back to him right away. Should be a delay.

Just go watch the video. There is a delay of about 3 seconds every time the astronauts speak. This is a thing so easy to verify that even you can manage to do it, despite all the time you have to spend on your other "research." The video of the phone call is all over the internet. The delay is unmistakable. I guess it could still be faked, but "there should be delay" is not a valid argument.

Red Hot Chili Peppers

Holy shit, a rock band putting funny lyrics into a song referencing a conspiracy theory that existed for decades prior is not an argument.

So yeah.. all this shit, it's pointing towards concave earth.

LMAO. All what shit, exactly? I'm still waiting for some sort of demonstration of what a "concave earth" theory looks like. In fact, I am still waiting for a single argument why the conventional globe model is wrong. No one ever provides one.

I'm not sure I understand the connection between hollow earth and CERN, why this would mean that CERN can exercise mind control over the public or whatever. But setting that aside, I think you have a lot of work to do in demonstrating that we are in fact inside a hollow earth. The flat earthers here and elsewhere will be pretty mad to hear you confirm curvature and rotation and deny the firmament, of course. But honestly, as bad as flat earth is as a conspiracy, "hollow" / "concave" earth is even worse. The documentary you linked says pretty much nothing, it is just a bunch of CGI, some cut off half claims about experiments no one explains, and a bunch of strange pulsing music.

Seriously, if Neal Degrasse Tyson and Bill Nye claimed the earth was hollow and posted that video as evidence, would you believe them?

Particularly, how they're supposedly so smart, with all their scientists, around the world, yet over the years, nobody has still even figured out what "gravity", fuckin is...

This always amazes me. Every single explanation leaves some things unexplained, or else the explanation would be infinite. The typical flat earth "density and buoyancy" leaves those two things unexplained. The more ethereal flat earth "static electric fields" and "toroidal magnetism" leaves those unexplained. The difference is, physics explains exactly how gravity behaves. Whether Newtonian or relativistic, anyone can learn a universal phenomenon of gravity and then calculate for themselves what is expected in any circumstance. Physics does something similar for electricity and magnetism too. I never see theorists like you object to how we can't explain why electricity or magnetism happens.

Newton gave gravity a simple rule and left its mechanism unexplained. Einstein gave it a mechanism with a slightly more complex rule, but left the mechanism for that unexplained. Maybe someday someone will explain gen rel gravity by more fundamental principles, who knows...

even though they can throw "string theory" at it.

No, because most people don't believe in string theory because it is verging on not being science. Only some weirdos like Michio Kaku are into that. Serious people like Penrose don't waste their time on it.

This is why the flat earth guys have some observations that may have data which seems to show

No, they don't. There are no observations invalidating the globe model, there are just incorrect claims about observations.

When I was going through that, the data was like.. hey.. there's no plot holes here. WTF.

To be totally clear, you are saying that after extensive study, you found absolutely nothing to invalidate a "hollow / concave earth" model. There is no observation contradicting the predictions of a "hollow / concave earth" model. None? But the globe is full of "plot holes" as you call them?

explains how the fucking gasses don't just evaporate into outer space.

No serious person thinks that this is an objection. Unless you are a child starting science education, there should be no paradox as to why the atmosphere does not just rush off into space. There is an entire body of study called "atmospheric science" or "atmospheric physics" that studies atmospheres in intricate detail. Understanding how an atmosphere can remain attached to a planet is something any reasonably clever undergrad can do.

Gravity is just "centrifugal force", like the carnival pin you to the wall, spin ride. This whole thing is rotating around in here.

As I said, the FE people will be very angry with you for saying their precious stationary plane is actually a spinning ball (albeit the inside of one). But seriously, the gravity that you for some reason won't believe exists even though you would never jump off of your roof is the reason why the atmosphere stays on the earth despite the vacuum of space.

And while you refuse to believe in the principle of gravity, this "centrifugal effect" you are appealing to is about the easiest thing to refute. If we were on the inside of a non gravitating globe and our experience of gravity was the centrifugal effect, then we would measure what we call gravity as being half as strong near the arctic and antarctic circles as at the equator. But in fact, we measure it about 0.3% (that is, 0.003) weaker at the equator. This is consistent with the centrifugal effect being upwards, that is, the opposite direction of what we call gravity, and much weaker than it, owing to the earth's rotation rate (given by the length of the day) and claimed radius.

You can't go to the fuckin planets cause it's like a bad fuckin "planetarium", 1970's museum, projection show.

"No plot holes," I see. Everything we see in the sky is just a bad planetarium as would be in a 1970s museum.

Well, it's like these fuckin prisms that can bend shit.

"No plot holes," I see. The apparent sunrise and sunset is like "these fuckin prisms that can bend shit." LMAO.

I don't know.. I don't believe anything unless I'd see it with my own eyes.

Apparently except for the "hollow" / "concave" "cell / egg" earth we are on the inside of, unless you saw that at some point? Or at least data demonstrating it? And apparently the "bad 1970s planetarium" is something you are willing to believe without seeing it with your own eyes?

What you do know, is what they're trying to tell you in school, you sense, like come on.. you guys are so fuckin smart, how come you can't figure out shit like damn gravity.

They have figured out "damn gravity." Gravity can be used to know when a solar eclipse will occur in a thousand years. It can be used to project the position of every planet for centuries. So it depends on what you mean by "figure out." If you mean accuracy at the scale of galactic and intergalactic space, then the answer is "maybe." It would require new mass, but otherwise gravity is wrong and needs to be corrected. It would not be the first time, in the early 1900s gravity had some wrong predictions (one particular involving Mercury) and it was corrected in GR. It by "figure out" you mean "the big why" then no, no one understands "(the big) why" gravity exists. But at practical scales, gravity is well understood and is infinitely more refined exact and accurate than any flat earth or hollow earth model.

How about if you check the damn moon lander

The moon lander was not made to fly to the moon, it was made to be carried to the moon and then land one time, last for a few days, and be left behind (a small portion of it had to dock with the orbiter briefly). It was subjected to intense thermal loads, which is why it has foil shielding on it. Other than that it was designed to be as light as possible, which is why everything is small and the foil is just adhered onto the frame.

Nixon on the phone with fuckin the moon and they get back to him right away. Should be a delay.

Just go watch the video. There is a delay of about 3 seconds every time the astronauts speak. This is a thing so easy to verify that even you can manage to do it, despite all the time you have to spend on your other "research." The video of the phone call is all over the internet. The delay is unmistakable. I guess it could still be faked, but "there should be delay" is not a valid argument.

Red Hot Chili Peppers

Holy shit, a rock band putting funny lyrics into a song referencing a conspiracy theory that existed for decades prior is not an argument.

So yeah.. all this shit, it's pointing towards concave earth.

LMAO. All what shit, exactly? I'm still waiting for some sort of demonstration of what a "concave earth" theory looks like. In fact, I am still waiting for a single argument why the conventional globe model is wrong. No one ever provides one.

I'm not sure I understand the connection between hollow earth and CERN, why this would mean that CERN can exercise mind control over the public or whatever. But setting that aside, I think you have a lot of work to do in demonstrating that we are in fact inside a hollow earth. The flat earthers here and elsewhere will be pretty mad to hear you confirm curvature and rotation and deny the firmament, of course. But honestly, as bad as flat earth is as a conspiracy, "hollow" / "concave" earth is even worse. The documentary you linked says pretty much nothing, it is just a bunch of CGI, some cut off half claims about experiments no one explains, and a bunch of strange pulsing music.

Seriously, if Neal Degrasse Tyson and Bill Nye claimed the earth was hollow and posted that video as evidence, would you believe them?

Particularly, how they're supposedly so smart, with all their scientists, around the world, yet over the years, nobody has still even figured out what "gravity", fuckin is...

This always amazes me. Every single explanation leaves some things unexplained, or else the explanation would be infinite. The typical flat earth "density and buoyancy" leaves those two things unexplained. The more ethereal flat earth "static electric fields" and "toroidal magnetism" leaves those unexplained. The difference is, physics explains exactly how gravity behaves. Whether Newtonian or relativistic, anyone can learn a universal phenomenon of gravity and then calculate for themselves what is expected in any circumstance. Physics does something similar for electricity and magnetism too. I never see theorists like you object to how we can't explain why electricity or magnetism happens.

Newton gave gravity a simple rule and left its mechanism unexplained. Einstein gave it a mechanism with a slightly more complex rule, but left the mechanism for that unexplained. Maybe someday someone will explain gen rel gravity by more fundamental principles, who knows...

even though they can throw "string theory" at it.

No, because most people don't believe in string theory because it is verging on not being science. Only some weirdos like Michio Kaku are into that. Serious people like Penrose don't waste their time on it.

This is why the flat earth guys have some observations that may have data which seems to show

No, they don't. There are no observations invalidating the globe model, there are just incorrect claims about observations.

When I was going through that, the data was like.. hey.. there's no plot holes here. WTF.

To be totally clear, you are saying that after extensive study, you found absolutely nothing to invalidate a "hollow / concave earth" model. There is no observation contradicting the predictions of a "hollow / concave earth" model. None? But the globe is full of "plot holes" as you call them?

explains how the fucking gasses don't just evaporate into outer space.

No serious person thinks that this is an objection. Unless you are a child starting science education, there should be no paradox as to why the atmosphere does not just rush off into space. There is an entire body of study called "atmospheric science" or "atmospheric physics" that studies atmospheres in intricate detail. Understanding how an atmosphere can remain attached to a planet is something any reasonably clever undergrad can do.

Gravity is just "centrifugal force", like the carnival pin you to the wall, spin ride. This whole thing is rotating around in here.

As I said, the FE people will be very angry with you for saying their precious stationary plane is actually a spinning ball (albeit the inside of one). But seriously, the gravity that you for some reason won't believe exists even though you would never jump off of your roof is the reason why the atmosphere stays on the earth despite the vacuum of space.

And while you refuse to believe in the principle of gravity, this "centrifugal effect" you are appealing to is about the easiest thing to refute. If we were on the inside of a non gravitating globe and our experience of gravity was the centrifugal effect, then we would measure what we call gravity as being half as strong near the arctic and antarctic circles as at the equator. But in fact, we measure it about 0.3% (that is, 0.003) weaker at the equator. This is consistent with the centrifugal effect being upwards, that is, the opposite direction of what we call gravity, and much weaker than it, owing to the earth's rotation rate (given by the length of the day) and claimed radius.

You can't go to the fuckin planets cause it's like a bad fuckin "planetarium", 1970's museum, projection show.

"No plot holes," I see. Everything we see in the sky is just a bad planetarium as would be in a 1970s museum.

Well, it's like these fuckin prisms that can bend shit.

"No plot holes," I see. The apparent sunrise and sunset is like "these fuckin prisms that can bend shit." LMAO.

I don't know.. I don't believe anything unless I'd see it with my own eyes.

Apparently except for the "hollow" / "concave" "cell / egg" earth we are on the inside of, unless you saw that at some point? Or at least data demonstrating it?

What you do know, is what they're trying to tell you in school, you sense, like come on.. you guys are so fuckin smart, how come you can't figure out shit like damn gravity.

They have figured out "damn gravity." Gravity can be used to know when a solar eclipse will occur in a thousand years. It can be used to project the position of every planet for centuries. So it depends on what you mean by "figure out." If you mean accuracy at the scale of galactic and intergalactic space, then the answer is "maybe." It would require new mass, but otherwise gravity is wrong and needs to be corrected. It would not be the first time, in the early 1900s gravity had some wrong predictions (one particular involving Mercury) and it was corrected in GR. It by "figure out" you mean "the big why" then no, no one understands "(the big) why" gravity exists. But at practical scales, gravity is well understood and is infinitely more refined exact and accurate than any flat earth or hollow earth model.

How about if you check the damn moon lander

The moon lander was not made to fly to the moon, it was made to be carried to the moon and then land one time, last for a few days, and be left behind (a small portion of it had to dock with the orbiter briefly). It was subjected to intense thermal loads, which is why it has foil shielding on it. Other than that it was designed to be as light as possible, which is why everything is small and the foil is just adhered onto the frame.

Nixon on the phone with fuckin the moon and they get back to him right away. Should be a delay.

Just go watch the video. There is a delay of about 3 seconds every time the astronauts speak. This is a thing so easy to verify that even you can manage to do it, despite all the time you have to spend on your other "research." The video of the phone call is all over the internet. The delay is unmistakable. I guess it could still be faked, but "there should be delay" is not a valid argument.

Red Hot Chili Peppers

Holy shit, a rock band putting funny lyrics into a song referencing a conspiracy theory that existed for decades prior is not an argument.

So yeah.. all this shit, it's pointing towards concave earth.

LMAO. All what shit, exactly? I'm still waiting for some sort of demonstration of what a "concave earth" theory looks like. In fact, I am still waiting for a single argument why the conventional globe model is wrong. No one ever provides one.

I'm not sure I understand the connection between hollow earth and CERN, why this would mean that CERN can exercise mind control over the public or whatever. But setting that aside, I think you have a lot of work to do in demonstrating that we are in fact inside a hollow earth. The flat earthers here and elsewhere will be pretty mad to hear you confirm curvature and rotation and deny the firmament, of course. But honestly, as bad as flat earth is as a conspiracy, "hollow" / "concave" earth is even worse. The documentary you linked says pretty much nothing, it is just a bunch of CGI, some cut off half claims about experiments no one explains, and a bunch of strange pulsing music.

Seriously, if Neal Degrasse Tyson and Bill Nye claimed the earth was hollow and posted that video as evidence, would you believe them?

Particularly, how they're supposedly so smart, with all their scientists, around the world, yet over the years, nobody has still even figured out what "gravity", fuckin is...

This always amazes me. Every single explanation leaves some things unexplained, or else the explanation would be infinite. The typical flat earth "density and buoyancy" leaves those two things unexplained. The more ethereal flat earth "static electric fields" and "toroidal magnetism" leaves those unexplained. The difference is, physics explains exactly how gravity behaves. Whether Newtonian or relativistic, anyone can learn a universal phenomenon of gravity and then calculate for themselves what is expected in any circumstance. Physics does something similar for electricity and magnetism too. I never see theorists like you object to how we can't explain why electricity or magnetism happens.

Newton gave gravity a simple rule and left its mechanism unexplained. Einstein gave it a mechanism with a slightly more complex rule, but left the mechanism for that unexplained. Maybe someday someone will explain gen rel gravity by more fundamental principles, who knows...

even though they can throw "string theory" at it.

No, because most people don't believe in string theory because it is verging on not being science. Only some weirdos like Michio Kaku are into that. Serious people like Penrose don't waste their time on it.

This is why the flat earth guys have some observations that may have data which seems to show

No, they don't. There are no observations invalidating the globe model, there are just incorrect claims about observations.

When I was going through that, the data was like.. hey.. there's no plot holes here. WTF.

To be totally clear, you are saying that after extensive study, you found absolutely nothing to invalidate a "hollow / concave earth" model. There is no observation contradicting the predictions of a "hollow / concave earth" model. None? But the globe is full of "plot holes" as you call them?

explains how the fucking gasses don't just evaporate into outer space.

No serious person thinks that this is an objection. Unless you are a child starting science education, there should be no paradox as to why the atmosphere does not just rush off into space. There is an entire body of study called "atmospheric science" or "atmospheric physics" that studies atmospheres in intricate detail. Understanding how an atmosphere can remain attached to a planet is something any reasonably clever undergrad can do.

Gravity is just "centrifugal force", like the carnival pin you to the wall, spin ride. This whole thing is rotating around in here.

As I said, the FE people will be very angry with you for saying their precious stationary plane is actually a spinning ball (albeit the inside of one). But seriously, the gravity that you for some reason won't believe exists even though you would never jump off of your roof is the reason why the atmosphere stays on the earth despite the vacuum of space.

And while you refuse to believe in the principle of gravity, this "centrifugal effect" you are appealing to is about the easiest thing to refute. If we were on the inside of a non gravitating globe and our experience of gravity was the centrifugal effect, then we would measure what we call gravity as being half as strong near the arctic and antarctic circles as at the equator. But in fact, we measure it about 0.3% (that is, 0.003) weaker at the equator. This is consistent with the centrifugal effect being upwards, that is, the opposite direction of what we call gravity, and much weaker than it, owing to the rotation rate of the earth (given by the length of the day) and the claimed radius.

You can't go to the fuckin planets cause it's like a bad fuckin "planetarium", 1970's museum, projection show.

"No plot holes," I see. Everything we see in the sky is just a bad planetarium as would be in a 1970s museum.

Well, it's like these fuckin prisms that can bend shit.

"No plot holes," I see. The apparent sunrise and sunset is like "these fuckin prisms that can bend shit." LMAO.

I don't know.. I don't believe anything unless I'd see it with my own eyes.

Apparently except for the "hollow" / "concave" "cell / egg" earth we are on the inside of, unless you saw that at some point? Or at least data demonstrating it?

What you do know, is what they're trying to tell you in school, you sense, like come on.. you guys are so fuckin smart, how come you can't figure out shit like damn gravity.

They have figured out "damn gravity." Gravity can be used to know when a solar eclipse will occur in a thousand years. It can be used to project the position of every planet for centuries. So it depends on what you mean by "figure out." If you mean accuracy at the scale of galactic and intergalactic space, then the answer is "maybe." It would require new mass, but otherwise gravity is wrong and needs to be corrected. It would not be the first time, in the early 1900s gravity had some wrong predictions (one particular involving Mercury) and it was corrected in GR. It by "figure out" you mean "the big why" then no, no one understands "(the big) why" gravity exists. But at practical scales, gravity is well understood and is infinitely more refined exact and accurate than any flat earth or hollow earth model.

How about if you check the damn moon lander

The moon lander was not made to fly to the moon, it was made to be carried to the moon and then land one time, last for a few days, and be left behind (a small portion of it had to dock with the orbiter briefly). It was subjected to intense thermal loads, which is why it has foil shielding on it. Other than that it was designed to be as light as possible, which is why everything is small and the foil is just adhered onto the frame.

Nixon on the phone with fuckin the moon and they get back to him right away. Should be a delay.

Just go watch the video. There is a delay of about 3 seconds every time the astronauts speak. This is a thing so easy to verify that even you can manage to do it, despite all the time you have to spend on your other "research." The video of the phone call is all over the internet. The delay is unmistakable. I guess it could still be faked, but "there should be delay" is not a valid argument.

Red Hot Chili Peppers

Holy shit, a rock band putting funny lyrics into a song referencing a conspiracy theory that existed for decades prior is not an argument.

So yeah.. all this shit, it's pointing towards concave earth.

LMAO. All what shit, exactly? I'm still waiting for some sort of demonstration of what a "concave earth" theory looks like. In fact, I am still waiting for a single argument why the conventional globe model is wrong. No one ever provides one.

I'm not sure I understand the connection between hollow earth and CERN, why this would mean that CERN can exercise mind control over the public or whatever. But setting that aside, I think you have a lot of work to do in demonstrating that we are in fact inside a hollow earth. The flat earthers here and elsewhere will be pretty mad to hear you confirm curvature and rotation and deny the firmament, of course. But honestly, as bad as flat earth is as a conspiracy, "hollow" / "concave" earth is even worse. The documentary you linked says pretty much nothing, it is just a bunch of CGI, some cut off half claims about experiments no one explains, and a bunch of strange pulsing music.

Seriously, if Neal Degrasse Tyson and Bill Nye claimed the earth was hollow and posted that video as evidence, would you believe them?

Particularly, how they're supposedly so smart, with all their scientists, around the world, yet over the years, nobody has still even figured out what "gravity", fuckin is...

This always amazes me. Every single explanation leaves some things unexplained, or else the explanation would be infinite. The typical flat earth "density and buoyancy" leaves those two things unexplained. The more ethereal flat earth "static electric fields" and "toroidal magnetism" leaves those unexplained. The difference is, physics explains exactly how gravity behaves. Whether Newtonian or relativistic, anyone can learn a universal phenomenon of gravity and then calculate for themselves what is expected in any circumstance. Physics does something similar for electricity and magnetism too. I never see theorists like you object to how we can't explain why electricity or magnetism happens.

Newton gave gravity a simple rule and left its mechanism unexplained. Einstein gave it a mechanism with a slightly more complex rule, but left the mechanism for that unexplained. Maybe someday someone will explain gen rel gravity by more fundamental principles, who knows...

even though they can throw "string theory" at it.

No, because most people don't believe in string theory because it is verging on not being science. Only some weirdos like Michio Kaku are into that. Serious people like Penrose don't waste their time on it.

This is why the flat earth guys have some observations that may have data which seems to show

No, they don't. There are no observations invalidating the globe model, there are just incorrect claims about observations.

When I was going through that, the data was like.. hey.. there's no plot holes here. WTF.

To be totally clear, you are saying that after extensive study, you found absolutely nothing to invalidate a "hollow / concave earth" model. There is no observation contradicting the predictions of a "hollow / concave earth" model. None? But the globe is full of "plot holes" as you call them?

explains how the fucking gasses don't just evaporate into outer space.

No serious person thinks that this is an objection. Unless you are a child starting science education, there should be no paradox as to why the atmosphere does not just rush off into space. There is an entire body of study called "atmospheric science" or "atmospheric physics" that studies atmospheres in intricate detail. Understanding how an atmosphere can remain attached to a planet is something any reasonably clever undergrad can do.

Gravity is just "centrifugal force", like the carnival pin you to the wall, spin ride. This whole thing is rotating around in here.

As I said, the FE people will be very angry with you for saying their precious stationary plane is actually a spinning ball (albeit the inside of one). But seriously, the gravity that you for some reason won't believe exists even though you would never jump off of your roof is the reason why the atmosphere stays on the earth despite the vacuum of space.

And while you refuse to believe in the principle of gravity, this "centrifugal effect" you are appealing to is about the easiest thing to refute. If we were on the inside of a non gravitating globe and our experience of gravity was the centrifugal effect, then we would measure what we call gravity as being half as strong near the arctic and antarctic circles as at the equator. But in fact, we measure it about 0.3% (that is, 0.003) weaker at the equator. This is consistent with the centrifugal effect being upwards, that is, the opposite direction of what we call gravity.

You can't go to the fuckin planets cause it's like a bad fuckin "planetarium", 1970's museum, projection show.

"No plot holes," I see. Everything we see in the sky is just a bad planetarium as would be in a 1970s museum.

Well, it's like these fuckin prisms that can bend shit.

"No plot holes," I see. The apparent sunrise and sunset is like "these fuckin prisms that can bend shit." LMAO.

I don't know.. I don't believe anything unless I'd see it with my own eyes.

Apparently except for the "hollow" / "concave" "cell / egg" earth we are on the inside of, unless you saw that at some point? Or at least data demonstrating it?

What you do know, is what they're trying to tell you in school, you sense, like come on.. you guys are so fuckin smart, how come you can't figure out shit like damn gravity.

They have figured out "damn gravity." Gravity can be used to know when a solar eclipse will occur in a thousand years. It can be used to project the position of every planet for centuries. So it depends on what you mean by "figure out." If you mean accuracy at the scale of galactic and intergalactic space, then the answer is "maybe." It would require new mass, but otherwise gravity is wrong and needs to be corrected. It would not be the first time, in the early 1900s gravity had some wrong predictions (one particular involving Mercury) and it was corrected in GR. It by "figure out" you mean "the big why" then no, no one understands "(the big) why" gravity exists. But at practical scales, gravity is well understood and is infinitely more refined exact and accurate than any flat earth or hollow earth model.

How about if you check the damn moon lander

The moon lander was not made to fly to the moon, it was made to be carried to the moon and then land one time, last for a few days, and be left behind (a small portion of it had to dock with the orbiter briefly). It was subjected to intense thermal loads, which is why it has foil shielding on it. Other than that it was designed to be as light as possible, which is why everything is small and the foil is just adhered onto the frame.

Nixon on the phone with fuckin the moon and they get back to him right away. Should be a delay.

Just go watch the video. There is a delay of about 3 seconds every time the astronauts speak. This is a thing so easy to verify that even you can manage to do it, despite all the time you have to spend on your other "research." The video of the phone call is all over the internet. The delay is unmistakable. I guess it could still be faked, but "there should be delay" is not a valid argument.

Red Hot Chili Peppers

Holy shit, a rock band putting funny lyrics into a song referencing a conspiracy theory that existed for decades prior is not an argument.

So yeah.. all this shit, it's pointing towards concave earth.

LMAO. All what shit, exactly? I'm still waiting for some sort of demonstration of what a "concave earth" theory looks like. In fact, I am still waiting for a single argument why the conventional globe model is wrong. No one ever provides one.

I'm not sure I understand the connection between hollow earth and CERN, why this would mean that CERN can exercise mind control over the public or whatever. But setting that aside, I think you have a lot of work to do in demonstrating that we are in fact inside a hollow earth. The flat earthers here and elsewhere will be pretty mad to hear you confirm curvature and rotation and deny the firmament, of course. But honestly, as bad as flat earth is as a conspiracy, "hollow" / "concave" earth is even worse. The documentary you linked says pretty much nothing, it is just a bunch of CGI, some cut off half claims about experiments no one explains, and a bunch of strange pulsing music.

Seriously, if Neal Degrasse Tyson and Bill Nye claimed the earth was hollow and posted that video as evidence, would you believe them?

Particularly, how they're supposedly so smart, with all their scientists, around the world, yet over the years, nobody has still even figured out what "gravity", fuckin is...

This always amazes me. Every single explanation leaves some things unexplained, or else the explanation would be infinite. The typical flat earth "density and buoyancy" leaves those two things unexplained. The more ethereal flat earth "static electric fields" and "toroidal magnetism" leaves those unexplained. The difference is, physics explains exactly how gravity behaves. Whether Newtonian or relativistic, anyone can learn a universal phenomenon of gravity and then calculate for themselves what is expected in any circumstance. Physics does something similar for electricity and magnetism too. I never see theorists like you object to how we can't explain why electricity or magnetism happens.

Newton gave gravity a simple rule and left its mechanism unexplained. Einstein gave it a mechanism with a slightly more complex rule, but left the mechanism for that unexplained. Maybe someday someone will explain gen rel gravity by more fundamental principles, who knows...

even though they can throw "string theory" at it.

No, because most people don't believe in string theory because it is verging on not being science. Only some weirdos like Michio Kaku are into that. Serious people like Penrose don't waste their time on it.

This is why the flat earth guys have some observations that may have data which seems to show

No, they don't. There are no observations invalidating the globe model, there are just incorrect claims about observations.

When I was going through that, the data was like.. hey.. there's no plot holes here. WTF.

To be totally clear, you are saying that after extensive study, you found absolutely nothing to invalidate a "hollow / concave earth" model. There is no observation contradicting the predictions of a "hollow / concave earth" model. None? But the globe is full of "plot holes" as you call them?

explains how the fucking gasses don't just evaporate into outer space.

No serious person thinks that this is an objection. Unless you are a child starting science education, there should be no paradox as to why the atmosphere does not just rush off into space. There is an entire body of study called "atmospheric science" or "atmospheric physics" that studies atmospheres in intricate detail. Understanding how an atmosphere can remain attached to a planet is something any reasonably clever undergrad can do.

Gravity is just "centrifugal force", like the carnival pin you to the wall, spin ride. This whole thing is rotating around in here.

As I said, the FE people will be very angry with you for saying their precious stationary plane is actually a spinning globe (albeit the inside of one). But seriously, the gravity that you for some reason won't believe exists even though you would never jump off of your roof is the reason why the atmosphere stays on the earth despite the vacuum of space.

And while you refuse to believe in the principle of gravity, this "centrifugal effect" you are appealing to is about the easiest thing to refute. If we were on the inside of a non gravitating globe and our experience of gravity was the centrifugal effect, then we would measure what we call gravity as being half as strong near the arctic and antarctic circles as at the equator. But in fact, we measure it about 0.3% (that is, 0.003) weaker at the equator. This is consistent with the centrifugal effect being upwards, that is, the opposite direction of what we call gravity.

You can't go to the fuckin planets cause it's like a bad fuckin "planetarium", 1970's museum, projection show.

"No plot holes," I see. Everything we see in the sky is just a bad planetarium as would be in a 1970s museum.

Well, it's like these fuckin prisms that can bend shit.

"No plot holes," I see. The apparent sunrise and sunset is like "these fuckin prisms that can bend shit." LMAO.

I don't know.. I don't believe anything unless I'd see it with my own eyes.

Apparently except for the "hollow" / "concave" "cell / egg" earth we are on the inside of, unless you saw that at some point? Or at least data demonstrating it?

What you do know, is what they're trying to tell you in school, you sense, like come on.. you guys are so fuckin smart, how come you can't figure out shit like damn gravity.

They have figured out "damn gravity." Gravity can be used to know when a solar eclipse will occur in a thousand years. It can be used to project the position of every planet for centuries. So it depends on what you mean by "figure out." If you mean accuracy at the scale of galactic and intergalactic space, then the answer is "maybe." It would require new mass, but otherwise gravity is wrong and needs to be corrected. It would not be the first time, in the early 1900s gravity had some wrong predictions (one particular involving Mercury) and it was corrected in GR. It by "figure out" you mean "the big why" then no, no one understands "(the big) why" gravity exists. But at practical scales, gravity is well understood and is infinitely more refined exact and accurate than any flat earth or hollow earth model.

How about if you check the damn moon lander

The moon lander was not made to fly to the moon, it was made to be carried to the moon and then land one time, last for a few days, and be left behind (a small portion of it had to dock with the orbiter briefly). It was subjected to intense thermal loads, which is why it has foil shielding on it. Other than that it was designed to be as light as possible, which is why everything is small and the foil is just adhered onto the frame.

Nixon on the phone with fuckin the moon and they get back to him right away. Should be a delay.

Just go watch the video. There is a delay of about 3 seconds every time the astronauts speak. This is a thing so easy to verify that even you can manage to do it, despite all the time you have to spend on your other "research." The video of the phone call is all over the internet. The delay is unmistakable. I guess it could still be faked, but "there should be delay" is not a valid argument.

Red Hot Chili Peppers

Holy shit, a rock band putting funny lyrics into a song referencing a conspiracy theory that existed for decades prior is not an argument.

So yeah.. all this shit, it's pointing towards concave earth.

LMAO. All what shit, exactly? I'm still waiting for some sort of demonstration of what a "concave earth" theory looks like. In fact, I am still waiting for a single argument why the conventional globe model is wrong. No one ever provides one.

I'm not sure I understand the connection between hollow earth and CERN, why this would mean that CERN can exercise mind control over the public or whatever. But setting that aside, I think you have a lot of work to do in demonstrating that we are in fact inside a hollow earth. The flat earthers here and elsewhere will be pretty mad to hear you confirm curvature and rotation and deny the firmament, of course. But honestly, as bad as flat earth is as a conspiracy, "hollow" / "concave" earth is even worse. The documentary you linked says pretty much nothing, it is just a bunch of CGI, some cut off half claims about experiments no one explains, and a bunch of strange pulsing music.

Seriously, if Neal Degrasse Tyson and Bill Nye claimed the earth was hollow and posted that video as evidence, would you believe them?

Particularly, how they're supposedly so smart, with all their scientists, around the world, yet over the years, nobody has still even figured out what "gravity", fuckin is...

This always amazes me. Every single explanation leaves some things unexplained, or else the explanation would be infinite. The typical flat earth "density and buoyancy" leaves those two things unexplained. The more ethereal flat earth "static electric fields" and "toroidal magnetism" leaves those unexplained. The difference is, physics explains exactly how gravity behaves. Whether Newtonian or relativistic, anyone can learn a universal phenomenon of gravity and then calculate for themselves what is expected in any circumstance. Physics does something similar for electricity and magnetism too. I never see theorists like you object to how we can't explain why electricity or magnetism happens.

Newton gave gravity a simple rule and left its mechanism unexplained. Einstein gave it a mechanism with a slightly more complex rule, but left the mechanism for that unexplained. Maybe someday someone will explain gen rel gravity by more fundamental principles, who knows...

even though they can throw "string theory" at it.

No, because most people don't believe in string theory because it is verging on not being science. Only some weirdos like Michio Kaku are into that. Serious people like Penrose don't waste their time on it.

This is why the flat earth guys have some observations that may have data which seems to show

No, they don't. There are no observations invalidating the globe model, there are just incorrect claims about observations.

When I was going through that, the data was like.. hey.. there's no plot holes here. WTF.

To be totally clear, you are saying that after extensive study, you found absolutely nothing to invalidate a "hollow earth" model. There is no observation contradicting the predictions of a "hollow earth" model. None? But the globe is full of "plot holes" as you call them?

explains how the fucking gasses don't just evaporate into outer space.

No serious person thinks that this is an objection. Unless you are a child starting science education, there should be no paradox as to why the atmosphere does not just rush off into space. There is an body of knowledge called "atmospheric science" or "atmospheric physics" that studies atmospheres in intricate detail. Understanding how an atmosphere can remain attached to a planet is something any reasonably clever undergrad can do.

Gravity is just "centrifugal force", like the carnival pin you to the wall, spin ride. This whole thing is rotating around in here.

As I said, the FE people will be very angry with you for saying their precious stationary plane is actually a spinning globe (albeit the inside of one). But seriously, the gravity that you for some reason won't believe exists even though you would never jump off of your roof is the reason why the atmosphere stays on the earth despite the vacuum of space.

And while you refuse to believe in the principle of gravity, this "centrifugal effect" you are appealing to is about the easiest thing to refute. If we were on the inside of a non gravitating globe and our experience of gravity was the centrifugal effect, then we would measure what we call gravity as being half as strong near the arctic and antarctic circles as at the equator. But in fact, we measure it about 0.3% (that is, 0.003) weaker at the equator. This is consistent with the centrifugal effect being upwards, that is, the opposite direction of what we call gravity.

You can't go to the fuckin planets cause it's like a bad fuckin "planetarium", 1970's museum, projection show.

"No plot holes," I see. Everything we see in the sky is just a bad planetarium as would be in a 1970s museum.

Well, it's like these fuckin prisms that can bend shit.

"No plot holes," I see. The apparent sunrise and sunset is like "these fuckin prisms that can bend shit." LMAO.

I don't know.. I don't believe anything unless I'd see it with my own eyes.

Apparently except for the "hollow" / "concave" "cell / egg" earth we are on the inside of, unless you saw that at some point? Or at least data demonstrating it?

What you do know, is what they're trying to tell you in school, you sense, like come on.. you guys are so fuckin smart, how come you can't figure out shit like damn gravity.

They have figured out "damn gravity." Gravity can be used to know when a solar eclipse will occur in a thousand years. It can be used to project the position of every planet for centuries. So it depends on what you mean by "figure out." If you mean accuracy at the scale of galactic and intergalactic space, then the answer is "maybe." It would require new mass, but otherwise gravity is wrong and needs to be corrected. It would not be the first time, in the early 1900s gravity had some wrong predictions (one particular involving Mercury) and it was corrected in GR. It by "figure out" you mean "the big why" then no, no one understands "(the big) why" gravity exists. But at practical scales, gravity is well understood and is infinitely more refined exact and accurate than any flat earth or hollow earth model.

How about if you check the damn moon lander

The moon lander was not made to fly to the moon, it was made to be carried to the moon and then land one time, last for a few days, and be left behind (a small portion of it had to dock with the orbiter briefly). It was subjected to intense thermal loads, which is why it has foil shielding on it. Other than that it was designed to be as light as possible, which is why everything is small and the foil is just adhered onto the frame.

Nixon on the phone with fuckin the moon and they get back to him right away. Should be a delay.

Just go watch the video. There is a delay of about 3 seconds every time the astronauts speak. This is a thing so easy to verify that even you can manage to do it, despite all the time you have to spend on your other "research." The video of the phone call is all over the internet. The delay is unmistakable. I guess it could still be faked, but "there should be delay" is not a valid argument.

Red Hot Chili Peppers

Holy shit, a rock band putting funny lyrics into a song referencing a conspiracy theory that existed for decades prior is not an argument.

So yeah.. all this shit, it's pointing towards concave earth.

LMAO. All what shit, exactly? I'm still waiting for some sort of demonstration of what a "concave earth" theory looks like. In fact, I am still waiting for a single argument why the conventional globe model is wrong. No one ever provides one.

I'm not sure I understand the connection between hollow earth and CERN, why this would mean that CERN can exercise mind control over the public or whatever. But setting that aside, I think you have a lot of work to do in demonstrating that we are in fact inside a hollow earth. The flat earthers here and elsewhere will be pretty mad to hear you confirm curvature and rotation and deny the firmament, of course. But honestly, as bad as flat earth is as a conspiracy, "hollow" / "concave" earth is even worse. The documentary you linked says pretty much nothing, it is just a bunch of CGI, some cut off half claims about experiments no one explains, and a bunch of strange pulsing music.

Seriously, if Neal Degrasse Tyson and Bill Nye claimed the earth was hollow and posted that video as evidence, would you believe them?

Particularly, how they're supposedly so smart, with all their scientists, around the world, yet over the years, nobody has still even figured out what "gravity", fuckin is...

This always amazes me. Every single explanation leaves some things unexplained, or else the explanation would be infinite. The typical flat earth "density and buoyancy" leaves those two things unexplained. The more ethereal flat earth "static electric fields" and "toroidal magnetism" leaves those unexplained. The difference is, physics explains exactly how gravity behaves. Whether Newtonian or relativistic, anyone can learn a universal phenomenon of gravity and then calculate for themselves what is expected in any circumstance. Physics does something similar for electricity and magnetism too. I never see theorists like you object to how we can't explain why electricity or magnetism happens.

Newton gave gravity a simple rule and left its mechanism unexplained. Einstein gave it a mechanism with a slightly more complex rule, but left the mechanism for that unexplained. Maybe someday someone will explain gen rel gravity by more fundamental principles, who knows...

even though they can throw "string theory" at it.

No, because most people don't believe in string theory because it is verging on not being science. Only some weirdos like Michio Kaku are into that. Serious people like Penrose don't waste their time on it.

This is why the flat earth guys have some observations that may have data which seems to show

No, they don't. There are no observations invalidating the globe model, there are just incorrect claims about observations.

When I was going through that, the data was like.. hey.. there's no plot holes here. WTF.

To be totally clear, you are saying that after extensive study, you found absolutely nothing to invalidate a "hollow earth" model. There is no observation contradicting the predictions of a "hollow earth" model. None? But the globe is full of "plot holes" as you call them?

explains how the fucking gasses don't just evaporate into outer space.

No serious person thinks that this is an objection. Unless you are a child starting science education, there should be no paradox as to why the atmosphere does not just rush off into space. There is an body of knowledge called "atmospheric science" or "atmospheric physics" that studies atmospheres in intricate detail. Understanding how an atmosphere can remain attached to a planet is something any reasonably clever undergrad can do.

Gravity is just "centrifugal force", like the carnival pin you to the wall, spin ride. This whole thing is rotating around in here.

As I said, the FE people will be very angry with you for saying their precious stationary plane is actually a spinning globe (albeit the inside of one). But seriously, the gravity that you for some reason won't believe exists even though you would never jump off of your roof is the reason why the atmosphere stays on the earth despite the vacuum of space.

And while you refuse to believe in the principle of gravity, this "centrifugal effect" you are appealing to is about the easiest thing to refute. If we were on the inside of a non gravitating globe and our experience of gravity was the centrifugal effect, then we would measure what we call gravity as being half as strong near the arctic and antarctic circles as at the equator. But in fact, we measure it about 0.3% (that is, 0.003) weaker at the equator. This is consistent with the centrifugal effect being upwards, that is, the opposite direction of what we call gravity.

You can't go to the fuckin planets cause it's like a bad fuckin "planetarium", 1970's museum, projection show.

"No plot holes," I see. Everything we see in the sky is just a bad planetarium as would be in a 1970s museum.

Well, it's like these fuckin prisms that can bend shit.

"No plot holes," I see. The apparent sunrise and sunset is like "these fuckin prisms that can bend shit." LMAO.

I don't know.. I don't believe anything unless I'd see it with my own eyes.

Apparently except for the "hollow" / "concave" "cell / egg" earth we are on the inside of, unless you saw that at some point? Or at least data demonstrating it?

What you do know, is what they're trying to tell you in school, you sense, like come on.. you guys are so fuckin smart, how come you can't figure out shit like damn gravity.

They have figured out "damn gravity." Gravity can be used to know when a solar eclipse will occur in a thousand years. It can be used to project the position of every planet for centuries. So it depends on what you mean by "figure out." If you mean accuracy at the scale of galactic and intergalactic space, then the answer is "maybe" (if the dark matter models are right, which is an if). It you mean "the big why" then no, no one understands "(the big) why" gravity exists. But at practical scales, gravity is well understood and is infinitely more refined exact and accurate than any flat earth or hollow earth model.

How about if you check the damn moon lander

The moon lander was not made to fly to the moon, it was made to be carried to the moon and then land one time, last for a few days, and be left behind (a small portion of it had to dock with the orbiter briefly). It was subjected to intense thermal loads, which is why it has foil shielding on it. Other than that it was designed to be as light as possible, which is why everything is small and the foil is just adhered onto the frame.

Nixon on the phone with fuckin the moon and they get back to him right away. Should be a delay.

Just go watch the video. There is a delay of about 3 seconds every time the astronauts speak. This is a thing so easy to verify that even you can manage to do it, despite all the time you have to spend on your other "research." The video of the phone call is all over the internet. The delay is unmistakable. I guess it could still be faked, but "there should be delay" is not a valid argument.

Red Hot Chili Peppers

Holy shit, a rock band putting funny lyrics into a song referencing a conspiracy theory that existed for decades prior is not an argument.

So yeah.. all this shit, it's pointing towards concave earth.

LMAO. All what shit, exactly? I'm still waiting for some sort of demonstration of what a "concave earth" theory looks like. In fact, I am still waiting for a single argument why the conventional globe model is wrong. No one ever provides one.

I'm not sure I understand the connection between hollow earth and CERN, why this would mean that CERN can exercise mind control over the public or whatever. But setting that aside, I think you have a lot of work to do in demonstrating that we are in fact inside a hollow earth. The flat earthers here and elsewhere will be pretty mad to hear you confirm curvature and rotation and deny the firmament, of course. But honestly, as bad as flat earth is as a conspiracy, "hollow"/"concave" earth is even worse. The documentary you linked says pretty much nothing, it is just a bunch of CGI, some cut off half claims about experiments no one explains, and a bunch of strange pulsing music.

Seriously, if Neal Degrasse Tyson and Bill Nye claimed the earth was hollow and posted that video as evidence, would you believe them?

Particularly, how they're supposedly so smart, with all their scientists, around the world, yet over the years, nobody has still even figured out what "gravity", fuckin is...

This always amazes me. Every single explanation leaves some things unexplained, or else the explanation would be infinite. The typical flat earth "density and buoyancy" leaves those two things unexplained. The more ethereal flat earth "static electric fields" and "toroidal magnetism" leaves those unexplained. The difference is, physics explains exactly how gravity behaves. Whether Newtonian or relativistic, anyone can learn a universal phenomenon of gravity and then calculate for themselves what is expected in any circumstance. Physics does something similar for electricity and magnetism too. I never see theorists like you object to how we can't explain why electricity or magnetism happens.

Newton gave gravity a simple rule and left its mechanism unexplained. Einstein gave it a mechanism with a slightly more complex rule, but left the mechanism for that unexplained. Maybe someday someone will explain gen rel gravity by more fundamental principles, who knows...

even though they can throw "string theory" at it.

No, because most people don't believe in string theory because it is verging on not being science. Only some weirdos like Michio Kaku are into that. Serious people like Penrose don't waste their time on it.

This is why the flat earth guys have some observations that may have data which seems to show

No, they don't. There are no observations invalidating the globe model, there are just incorrect claims about observations.

When I was going through that, the data was like.. hey.. there's no plot holes here. WTF.

To be totally clear, you are saying that after extensive study, you found absolutely nothing to invalidate a "hollow earth" model. There is no observation contradicting the predictions of a "hollow earth" model. None? But the globe is full of "plot holes" as you call them?

explains how the fucking gasses don't just evaporate into outer space.

No serious person thinks that this is an objection. Unless you are a child starting science education, there should be no paradox as to why the atmosphere does not just rush off into space. There is an body of knowledge called "atmospheric science" or "atmospheric physics" that studies atmospheres in intricate detail. Understanding how an atmosphere can remain attached to a planet is something any reasonably clever undergrad can do.

Gravity is just "centrifugal force", like the carnival pin you to the wall, spin ride. This whole thing is rotating around in here.

As I said, the FE people will be very angry with you for saying their precious stationary plane is actually a spinning globe (albeit the inside of one). But seriously, the gravity that you for some reason won't believe exists even though you would never jump off of your roof is the reason why the atmosphere stays on the earth despite the vacuum of space.

And while you refuse to believe in the principle of gravity, this "centrifugal effect" you are appealing to is about the easiest thing to refute. If we were on the inside of a non gravitating globe and our experience of gravity was the centrifugal effect, then we would measure what we call gravity as being half as strong near the arctic and antarctic circles as at the equator. But in fact, we measure it about 0.3% (that is, 0.003) weaker at the equator. This is consistent with the centrifugal effect being upwards, that is, the opposite direction of what we call gravity.

You can't go to the fuckin planets cause it's like a bad fuckin "planetarium", 1970's museum, projection show.

"No plot holes," I see. Everything we see in the sky is just a bad planetarium as would be in a 1970s museum.

Well, it's like these fuckin prisms that can bend shit.

"No plot holes," I see. The apparent sunrise and sunset is like "these fuckin prisms that can bend shit." LMAO.

I don't know.. I don't believe anything unless I'd see it with my own eyes.

Apparently except for the "hollow"/"convex" "cell / egg" earth we are on the inside of, unless you saw that at some point? Or at least data demonstrating it?

What you do know, is what they're trying to tell you in school, you sense, like come on.. you guys are so fuckin smart, how come you can't figure out shit like damn gravity.

They have figured out "damn gravity." Gravity can be used to know when a solar eclipse will occur in a thousand years. It can be used to project the position of every planet for centuries. So it depends on what you mean by "figure out." If you mean accuracy at the scale of galactic and intergalactic space, then the answer is "maybe" (if the dark matter models are right, which is an if). It you mean "the big why" then no, no one understands "(the big) why" gravity exists. But at practical scales, gravity is well understood and is infinitely more refined exact and accurate than any flat earth or hollow earth model.

How about if you check the damn moon lander

The moon lander was not made to fly to the moon, it was made to be carried to the moon and then land one time, last for a few days, and be left behind (a small portion of it had to dock with the orbiter briefly). It was subjected to intense thermal loads, which is why it has foil shielding on it. Other than that it was designed to be as light as possible, which is why everything is small and the foil is just adhered onto the frame.

Nixon on the phone with fuckin the moon and they get back to him right away. Should be a delay.

Just go watch the video. There is a delay of about 3 seconds every time the astronauts speak. This is a thing so easy to verify that even you can manage to do it, despite all the time you have to spend on your other "research." The video of the phone call is all over the internet. The delay is unmistakable. I guess it could still be faked, but "there should be delay" is not a valid argument.

Red Hot Chili Peppers

Holy shit, a rock band putting funny lyrics into a song referencing a conspiracy theory that existed for decades prior is not an argument.

So yeah.. all this shit, it's pointing towards concave earth.

LMAO. All what shit, exactly? I'm still waiting for some sort of demonstration of what a "concave earth" theory looks like. In fact, I am still waiting for a single argument why the conventional globe model is wrong. No one ever provides one.

I'm not sure I understand the connection between hollow earth and CERN, why this would mean that CERN can exercise mind control over the public or whatever. But setting that aside, I think you have a lot of work to do in demonstrating that we are in fact inside a hollow earth. The flat earthers here and elsewhere will be pretty mad to hear you confirm curvature and rotation and deny the firmament, of course. But honestly, as bad as flat earth is as a conspiracy, "hollow"/"concave" earth is even worse. The documentary you linked says pretty much nothing, it is just a bunch of CGI, some cut off half claims about experiments no one explains, and a bunch of strange pulsing music.

Seriously, if Neal Degrasse Tyson and Bill Nye claimed the earth was hollow and posted that video as evidence, would you believe them?

Particularly, how they're supposedly so smart, with all their scientists, around the world, yet over the years, nobody has still even figured out what "gravity", fuckin is...

This always amazes me. Every single explanation leaves some things unexplained, or else the explanation would be infinite. The typical flat earth "density and buoyancy" leaves those two things unexplained. The more ethereal flat earth "static electric fields" and "toroidal magnetism" leaves those unexplained. The difference is, physics explains exactly how gravity behaves. Whether Newtonian or relativistic, anyone can learn a universal phenomenon of gravity and then calculate for themselves what is expected in any circumstance. Physics does something similar for electricity and magnetism too. I never see theorists like you object to how we can't explain why electricity or magnetism happens.

Newton gave gravity a simple rule and left its mechanism unexplained. Einstein gave it a mechanism with a slightly more complex rule, but left the mechanism for that unexplained. Maybe someday someone will explain gen rel gravity by more fundamental principles, who knows...

even though they can throw "string theory" at it.

No, because most people don't believe in string theory because it is verging on not being science. Only some weirdos like Michio Kaku are into that. Serious people like Penrose don't waste their time on it.

This is why the flat earth guys have some observations that may have data which seems to show

No, they don't. There are no observations invalidating the globe model, there are just incorrect claims about observations.

When I was going through that, the data was like.. hey.. there's no plot holes here. WTF.

To be totally clear, you are saying that after extensive study, you found absolutely nothing to invalidate a "hollow earth" model. There is no observation contradicting the predictions of a "hollow earth" model. None? But the globe is full of "plot holes" as you call them?

explains how the fucking gasses don't just evaporate into outer space.

No serious person thinks that this is an objection. Unless you are a child starting science education, there should be no paradox as to why the atmosphere does not just rush off into space. There is an body of knowledge called "atmospheric science" or "atmospheric physics" that studies atmospheres in intricate detail. Understanding how an atmosphere can remain attached to a planet is something any reasonably clever undergrad can do.

Gravity is just "centrifugal force", like the carnival pin you to the wall, spin ride. This whole thing is rotating around in here.

As I said, the FE people will be very angry with you for saying their precious stationary plane is actually a spinning globe (albeit the inside of one). But seriously, the gravity that you for some reason won't believe exists even though you would never jump off of your roof is the reason why the atmosphere stays on the earth despite the vacuum of space.

And while you refuse to believe in the principle of gravity, this "centrifugal effect" you are appealing to is about the easiest thing to refute. If we were on the inside of a non gravitating globe and our experience of gravity was the centrifugal effect, then we would measure what we call gravity as being half as strong near the arctic and antarctic circles as at the equator. But in fact, we measure it about 0.3% (that is, 0.003) weaker at the equator. This is consistent with the centrifugal effect being upwards, that is, the opposite direction of what we call gravity.

You can't go to the fuckin planets cause it's like a bad fuckin "planetarium", 1970's museum, projection show.

"No plot holes," I see. Everything we see in the sky is just a bad planetarium as would be in a 1970s museum.

Well, it's like these fuckin prisms that can bend shit.

"No plot holes," I see. The apparent sunrise and sunset is like "these fuckin prisms that can bend shit." LMAO.

I don't know.. I don't believe anything unless I'd see it with my own eyes.

Apparently except for the hollow "cell / egg" earth we are on the inside of, unless you saw that at some point? Or at least data demonstrating it?

What you do know, is what they're trying to tell you in school, you sense, like come on.. you guys are so fuckin smart, how come you can't figure out shit like damn gravity.

They have figured out "damn gravity." Gravity can be used to know when a solar eclipse will occur in a thousand years. It can be used to project the position of every planet for centuries. So it depends on what you mean by "figure out." If you mean accuracy at the scale of galactic and intergalactic space, then the answer is "maybe" (if the dark matter models are right, which is an if). It you mean "the big why" then no, no one understands "(the big) why" gravity exists. But at practical scales, gravity is well understood and is infinitely more refined exact and accurate than any flat earth or hollow earth model.

How about if you check the damn moon lander

The moon lander was not made to fly to the moon, it was made to be carried to the moon and then land one time, last for a few days, and be left behind (a small portion of it had to dock with the orbiter briefly). It was subjected to intense thermal loads, which is why it has foil shielding on it. Other than that it was designed to be as light as possible, which is why everything is small and the foil is just adhered onto the frame.

Nixon on the phone with fuckin the moon and they get back to him right away. Should be a delay.

Just go watch the video. There is a delay of about 3 seconds every time the astronauts speak. This is a thing so easy to verify that even you can manage to do it, despite all the time you have to spend on your other "research." The video of the phone call is all over the internet. The delay is unmistakable. I guess it could still be faked, but "there should be delay" is not a valid argument.

Red Hot Chili Peppers

Holy shit, a rock band putting funny lyrics into a song referencing a conspiracy theory that existed for decades prior is not an argument.

So yeah.. all this shit, it's pointing towards concave earth.

LMAO. All what shit, exactly? I'm still waiting for some sort of demonstration of what a "concave earth" theory looks like. In fact, I am still waiting for a single argument why the conventional globe model is wrong. No one ever provides one.

I'm not sure I understand the connection between hollow earth and CERN, why this would mean that CERN can exercise mind control over the public or whatever. But setting that aside, I think you have a lot of work to do in demonstrating that we are in fact inside a hollow earth. The flat earthers here and elsewhere will be pretty mad to hear you confirm curvature and rotation and deny the firmament, of course. But honestly, as bad as flat earth is as a conspiracy, "hollow"/"concave" earth is even worse. The documentary you linked says pretty much nothing, it is just a bunch of CGI, some cut off half claims about experiments no one explains, and a bunch of strange pulsing music.

Seriously, if Neal Degrasse Tyson and Bill Nye claimed the earth was hollow and posted that video as evidence, would you believe them?

Particularly, how they're supposedly so smart, with all their scientists, around the world, yet over the years, nobody has still even figured out what "gravity", fuckin is...

This always amazes me. Every single explanation leaves some things unexplained, or else the explanation would be infinite. The typical flat earth "density and buoyancy" leaves those two things unexplained. The more ethereal flat earth "static electric fields" and "toroidal magnetism" leaves those unexplained. The difference is, physics explains exactly how gravity behaves. Whether Newtonian or relativistic, anyone can learn a universal phenomenon of gravity and then calculate for themselves what is expected in any circumstance. Physics does something similar for electricity and magnetism too. I never see theorists like you object to how we can't explain why electricity or magnetism happens.

Newton gave gravity a simple rule and left its mechanism unexplained. Einstein gave it a mechanism with a slightly more complex rule, but left the mechanism for that unexplained. Maybe someday someone will explain gen rel gravity by more fundamental principles, who knows...

even though they can throw "string theory" at it.

No, because most people don't believe in string theory because it is verging on not being science. Only some weirdos like Michio Kaku are into that. Serious people like Penrose don't waste their time on it.

This is why the flat earth guys have some observations that may have data which seems to show

No, they don't. There are no observations invalidating the globe model, there are just incorrect claims about observations.

When I was going through that, the data was like.. hey.. there's no plot holes here. WTF.

To be totally clear, you are saying that after extensive study, you found absolutely nothing to invalidate a "hollow earth" model. There is no observation contradicting the predictions of a "hollow earth" model. None? But the globe is full of "plot holes" as you call them?

explains how the fucking gasses don't just evaporate into outer space.

No serious person thinks that this is an objection. Unless you are a child starting science education, there should be no paradox as to why the atmosphere does not just rush off into space. There is an body of knowledge called "atmospheric science" or "atmospheric physics" that studies atmospheres in intricate detail. Understanding how an atmosphere can remain attached to a planet is something any reasonably clever undergrad can do.

Gravity is just "centrifugal force", like the carnival pin you to the wall, spin ride. This whole thing is rotating around in here.

As I said, the FE people will be very angry with you for saying their precious stationary plane is actually a spinning globe (albeit the inside of one). But seriously, the gravity that you for some reason won't believe exists even though you would never jump off of your roof is the reason why the atmosphere stays on the earth despite the vacuum of space.

And while you refuse to believe in the principle of gravity, this "centrifugal effect" you are appealing to is about the easiest thing to refute. If we were on the inside of a non gravitating globe and our experience of gravity was the centrifugal effect, then we would measure what we call gravity as being half as strong near the arctic and antarctic circles as at the equator. But in fact, we measure it about 0.3% (that is, 0.003) weaker at the equator. This is consistent with the centrifugal effect being upwards, that is, the opposite direction of what we call gravity.

You can't go to the fuckin planets cause it's like a bad fuckin "planetarium", 1970's museum, projection show.

"No plot holes," I see. Everything we see in the sky is just a bad planetarium as would be in a 1970s museum.

Well, it's like these fuckin prisms that can bend shit.

"No plot holes," I see. The apparent sunrise and sunset is like "these fuckin prisms that can bend shit." LMAO.

I don't know.. I don't believe anything unless I'd see it with my own eyes.

Apparently except for the hollow "cell / egg" earth we are on the inside of, unless you saw that at some point? Or at least data demonstrating it?

What you do know, is what they're trying to tell you in school, you sense, like come on.. you guys are so fuckin smart, how come you can't figure out shit like damn gravity.

They have figured out "damn gravity." Gravity can be used to know when a solar eclipse will occur in a thousand years. It can be used to project the position of every planet for centuries. So it depends on what you mean by "figure out." If you mean accuracy at the scale of galactic and intergalactic space, then the answer is "maybe" (if the dark matter models are right, which is an if). It you mean "the big why" then no, no one understands "(the big) why" gravity exists. But at practical scales, gravity is well understood and is infinitely more refined exact and accurate than any flat earth or hollow earth model.

How about if you check the damn moon lander

The moon lander was not made to fly to the moon, it was made to be carried to the moon and then land one time, last for a few days, and be left behind (a small portion of it had to dock with the orbiter briefly). It was subjected to intense thermal loads, which is why it has foil shielding on it. Other than that it was designed to be as light as possible, which is why everything is small and the foil is just adhered onto the frame.

Nixon on the phone with fuckin the moon and they get back to him right away. Should be a delay.

Just go watch the video. There is a delay of about 3 seconds every time the astronauts speak. This is a thing so easy to verify that even you can manage to do it, despite all the time you have to spend on your other "research." The video of the phone call is all over the internet. The delay is unmistakable. I guess it could still be faked, but "there should be delay" is not a valid argument.

Red Hot Chili Peppers

Holy shit, a rock band putting funny lyrics into a song referencing a conspiracy theory that existed for decades prior is not an argument.

So yeah.. all this shit, it's pointing towards concave earth.

LMAO. All what shit, exactly? I'm still waiting for some sort of demonstration of what a "concave earth" theory looks like. In fact, I am still waiting for a single argument why the conventional globe model is wrong. No one ever provides one.