|
Welcome to the International Skeptics Forum, where we discuss skepticism, critical thinking, the paranormal and science in a friendly but lively way. You are currently viewing the forum as a guest, which means you are missing out on discussing matters that are of interest to you. Please consider registering so you can gain full use of the forum features and interact with other Members. Registration is simple, fast and free! Click here to register today. |
3rd December 2017, 01:48 PM | #401 |
Muse
Join Date: Jan 2016
Posts: 973
|
|
3rd December 2017, 01:53 PM | #402 |
Skeptic not Atheist
Join Date: May 2007
Location: West of Northshore MA
Posts: 24,748
|
|
__________________
"Remember that the goal of conspiracy rhetoric is to bog down the discussion, not to make progress toward a solution" Jay Windley "How many leaves on the seventh branch of the fourth tree?" is meaningless when you are in the wrong forest: ozeco41 |
|
3rd December 2017, 02:03 PM | #403 |
Muse
Join Date: Jan 2016
Posts: 973
|
|
3rd December 2017, 02:04 PM | #404 |
Devilish Dictionarian
Join Date: Oct 2011
Location: An elusive house at Bachelors Grove Cemetery
Posts: 20,071
|
Mass defined as the amount of physical substance a physical substance has.
Therefore you deny experimental evidence, repeated several times, accurately used to measure the strength of attraction between substances based on their amount of substance. Since you are in denial of reality, I see no point in giving any credence to your thoughts on the actual shape of the Earth. |
__________________
"You must not let your need to be right be more important than your need to find out what's true." - Ray Dalio, Principles |
|
3rd December 2017, 02:11 PM | #405 |
Devilish Dictionarian
Join Date: Oct 2011
Location: An elusive house at Bachelors Grove Cemetery
Posts: 20,071
|
No, because a target can be above the horizon and be line of sight, at 50 km. Self-declared victory by you negated.
You know that self-declared victory in a debate is only useful for ego-stoking don't you? Can you think of better ways to get an endorphin rush that aren't dependant on false pride? |
__________________
"You must not let your need to be right be more important than your need to find out what's true." - Ray Dalio, Principles |
|
3rd December 2017, 02:14 PM | #406 |
Penultimate Amazing
Join Date: Mar 2007
Posts: 21,203
|
Daniel,
Please reconcile the following issue.
Quote:
You - Earth's Atmosphere is in a Container Your Link - Gas inside a Container acquires a uniform density inside the container, even in the presence of gravity and regardless of the amount of substance in the container Observable reality - Earth's Atmosphere is not of a uniform Density! How do you explain that observation contradicts what must be true if your assertion that Earth's atmosphere is in a container is also true? BTW, this is what Scientists's call falsification. See we start with a Hypothesis.... Hypothesis - The Earth's Atmosphere is restrained by a container. We then come up with ways to test this in an attempt to disprove our hypothesis (falsify it). Known Properties of Gases - All gases in containers must be of a uniform density even in the presence of gravity or the amount of gas in the container. Test - Does Earth's Atmosphere have a uniform density? Answer - No, density declines with logarithmic proportionality to altitude. Conclusion - ????? By the way, when we fail to disprove our hypothesis multiple times to the point where it seems to be true, then we get to call our Hypothesis a Theory. See the normal use of the word Theory, and the Scientific usage are rather different. Normal Usage - A idea that is based on conjecture but is really unproven. Scientific Usage - A hypothesis that we have thrown everything at and have been unable to disprove. Scientific Laws are just Theories that we have tested so often and have passed every test we have thrown at them, that we pretty much assume it has to be the truth. So for Scientists there is really no difference in acceptance of the Theory of Relativity and the Laws of Motion, it just means one has been tested a whole lot more than the other. |
__________________
It must be fun to lead a life completely unburdened by reality. -- JayUtah I am not able to rightly apprehend the kind of confusion of ideas that could provoke such a question. -- Charles Babbage (1791-1871) |
|
3rd December 2017, 02:20 PM | #407 |
Graduate Poster
Join Date: Oct 2006
Posts: 1,353
|
Quote:
|
__________________
The secret NASA doesn't want you to know - God makes rockets work in space. |
|
3rd December 2017, 02:21 PM | #408 |
Penultimate Amazing
Join Date: Aug 2002
Posts: 24,894
|
Yes, because I assumed that if you did, you would understand it. Seems I was wrong.
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
However, it is not my problem. YOU demanded to know whether it is a force, or the Einsteinian explanation. The proper answer is "both", but ... if that's a problem for you, I suggest you study literature till you can make a personal decision. I don't really care much.
Quote:
2. Makes stuff fall down.
Quote:
Quote:
Hans |
__________________
Experience is an excellent teacher, but she sends large bills. |
|
3rd December 2017, 02:48 PM | #409 |
Skeptic not Atheist
Join Date: May 2007
Location: West of Northshore MA
Posts: 24,748
|
|
__________________
"Remember that the goal of conspiracy rhetoric is to bog down the discussion, not to make progress toward a solution" Jay Windley "How many leaves on the seventh branch of the fourth tree?" is meaningless when you are in the wrong forest: ozeco41 |
|
3rd December 2017, 03:22 PM | #410 |
Unbanned zombie poster
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Poughkeepsie, NY
Posts: 18,384
|
Actually the sudden appearance of a target over the local horizon and the limited engagement time due to their speed was one of the reasons for the development of the Sea Sparrow and other similar point defense systems.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/RIM-7_Sea_Sparrow Initially the mark 115 manned director would paint the target with a radar beam. Thus requiring line of sight. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/RIM-7_..._Director.JPEG The current Evolved SeaSparrow Missile (range 50km) makes use of more advanced guidance systems. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/RIM-162_ESSM However, the actual need for illuminating radar for at least terminal engagement won't be dispensed with until 2020 with the block 2's active radar.
Quote:
|
__________________
BRAINZZZZZZZZ |
|
3rd December 2017, 06:39 PM | #411 |
Graduate Poster
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: Near Wa-Wa-Wachusett
Posts: 1,052
|
Oh the humanity of the sphericalist conspiracy, eh?*
* - full disclosure - I'm a card-carrying member of the conspiracy, Geography/Cartography section. You seem to be doing most of your arguing with the Physics and Military sections. But hey, as long as everyone is still having fun, keep at it! Don't forget to save some energy for a nice flounce at the end, of course. |
3rd December 2017, 11:37 PM | #412 |
Illuminator
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: South Africa
Posts: 3,485
|
More evidence emerges of the true nature of the firmament.
|
__________________
This signature is intended to imitate people. |
|
4th December 2017, 01:14 AM | #413 |
Now. Do it now.
Join Date: Sep 2012
Location: UK
Posts: 24,804
|
There was a "supermoon" last night (perigee syzygy). Do the flat earthers have any theory as to why the moon is sometimes closer and sometimes further away from the earth? I mean, it obviously can't be in orbit, because that would require gravity, and gravity rather ***** up their whole fantasy. So what is it doing?
|
__________________
"The Conservatives want to keep wogs out and march boldly back to the 1950s when Britain still had an Empire and blacks, women, poofs and Irish knew their place." The Don That's what we've sunk to here. |
|
4th December 2017, 02:24 AM | #414 |
Philosopher
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: orange country, california
Posts: 9,434
|
The story of the precise collection of data about the paths of solar system objects (Tycho Brahe), the use of that data to show that objects in our solar system follow elliptical orbits(Kepler), the discovery of a mathematical way of predicting the path and speed of the objects (Kepler) and finally Newton's coupling of his gravitational theory and the mathematics he invented to prove the connection between the orbits of the planets and gravity is stirring. For a moment in time Newton had a deeper understanding of the solar system than anybody before him.
I don't know that Daniel truly believes what he has put forth here, but if he does he has failed to appreciate one of the most magnificent stories of human achievement in all history. A few other things of note here: 1. Tycho Brahe believed in a geocentric theory of the universe 2. Tycho Brahe did not believe in a flat earth as far as I could tell. It had been determined to be roughly a sphere sometime before 500 BCE 3. Erasthenes came up with a very good estimate for the circumference of the earth by observing the angle of a shadow in two different cities at the summer solstice in 240 BCE. This is a technique anybody can use today and you don't need to wait for a solstice. You can just use clocks and call up a buddy in a different city to get the angle of a shadow at noon. 4. Kepler made two important discoveries using Brahe's data: 4A. The planets and the moon follow elliptical orbits 4B. He came up with a mathematical technique for estimating the speed of the planets based on where they were in their orbits. 5. Newton used the information about the orbits of the planets discovered by Kepler, his gravitational theory and his mathematics to explain why the planets moved in elliptical orbits. 6. One of the reasons that Brahe rejected the heliocentric theory of the universe was that he couldn't detect the parallax of angles to the stars he expected to find if the earth was orbiting the sun. He didn't believe that the stars could be so far away that he couldn't calculated their position using parallax measured where the heliocentric model predicted two positions of the earth separated by half a year. 7. It wasn't until sometime in the 1800's that the technology was available to make fine enough measurements to the stars that it was possible to determine how far away they were from earth. |
__________________
The way of truth is along the path of intellectual sincerity. -- Henry S. Pritchett Perfection is the enemy of good enough -- Russian proverb |
|
4th December 2017, 05:26 AM | #415 |
Penultimate Amazing
Join Date: Dec 2012
Posts: 10,259
|
Your replies are getting lower energy as the thread proceeds. I give that one a 1 out of 10, but only because a 0 is not responding at all. You’ve reached the point where you might as well be calling anyone who disagrees with Flat Earth mythology a “poopiehead” with no further elaboration. |
4th December 2017, 05:31 AM | #416 |
Penultimate Amazing
Join Date: Dec 2012
Posts: 10,259
|
Ah, then you admit you have no explanation for phenomena that contradicts your mythology and you further admit you see no problem with this. Your admitted and enthusiastic reality denial has been noted. I find it amusing you accuse me of the straw man fallacy and then proceed to construct a comically bloated straw man of your own. I give your post a 3/10 on the Trolling scale. I’m grading you on a curve because most your entries have been so poor to begin with. |
4th December 2017, 06:56 AM | #417 |
Devilish Dictionarian
Join Date: Oct 2011
Location: An elusive house at Bachelors Grove Cemetery
Posts: 20,071
|
Funny!
On the subject of the firmament, I've attached a couple of photos showing how the concept fails (aside from Barnard's star, that is.) |
__________________
"You must not let your need to be right be more important than your need to find out what's true." - Ray Dalio, Principles |
|
4th December 2017, 06:58 AM | #418 |
Penultimate Amazing
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: 16 miles from 7 lakes
Posts: 11,098
|
There is apparently a "thought" process that believes that "random **** just happens" is not a model...
Sent from my SM-G920V using Tapatalk |
__________________
"Political correctness is a doctrine,...,which holds forth the proposition that it is entirely possible to pick up a turd by the clean end." "I pointed out that his argument was wrong in every particular, but he rightfully took me to task for attacking only the weak points." Myriad http://forums.randi.org/showthread.php?postid=6853275#post6853275 |
|
4th December 2017, 07:02 AM | #419 |
Unbanned zombie poster
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Poughkeepsie, NY
Posts: 18,384
|
Naw, I don't think Daniel constructed that strawman as it is practically word for word what another poster claimed on another thread. http://www.internationalskeptics.com...d.php?t=319960 So it seem like just a general use strawman to decry models without, obviously, understanding them, their almost ubiquitous use (we even construct them in our heads about how, the world, universe, things, animals and people might behave, we couldn't function with out it), and just the nature of a hypothesis in general (that it is specifically limited in it's validity by what it asserts). https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mental_model Heck, even just the absolutist approach that something must be totally valid or totally invalid is a metal model that isn't externally consistent nor even capable of accepting one's own limitations. |
__________________
BRAINZZZZZZZZ |
|
4th December 2017, 07:20 AM | #420 |
Penultimate Amazing
Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 13,001
|
kitty!
Hah! I've never spoken of this absurd strawman, your so-called "metal model". You are demolished. Checkmate, ISF not-so-smart man! You clearly know no more of the fundamental nature of reality than does some extremely stupid person! Consider yourself devastated, ect, ect, after mind-numbing ect! |
4th December 2017, 08:40 AM | #421 |
Dark Lord of the JREF
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: Somewhere Else
Posts: 5,805
|
You know. If the flat earth model were, in fact, the correct one, we would be able to view all stars and constellations from pretty much anywhere in the world.
However, we find that there are stars and constellations that are only viewable in the northern hemisphere, and not in the southern, and vice-versa of course. How do the flat-earthers reconcile this? |
__________________
"The truth is out there. But the lies are inside your head." |
|
4th December 2017, 08:46 AM | #422 |
Philosopher
Join Date: Aug 2009
Posts: 5,265
|
|
4th December 2017, 08:58 AM | #423 |
Dark Lord of the JREF
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: Somewhere Else
Posts: 5,805
|
|
__________________
"The truth is out there. But the lies are inside your head." |
|
4th December 2017, 09:54 AM | #424 | ||||||
Penultimate Amazing
Join Date: Dec 2012
Posts: 10,259
|
Videos! There are videos about it!
This discussion seems to gravitate between outright denial and blaming light pollution: https://forum.tfes.org/index.php?topic=5459.0 |
||||||
4th December 2017, 10:07 AM | #425 |
Penultimate Amazing
Join Date: Dec 2012
Posts: 10,259
|
If you ignore enough data, you can use the stars as proof of the Flat Earth Mythology:
http://www.atlanteanconspiracy.com/2...lat-earth.html Of course some people look at things a bit further South: http://www.thecreatorscalendar.com/t...-earth-theory/ Even the folks at "Answers in Genesis" take issue with Flat Earth "logic." https://answersingenesis.org/blogs/d...h-star-trails/ |
4th December 2017, 10:32 AM | #426 |
Dark Lord of the JREF
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: Somewhere Else
Posts: 5,805
|
This one hurt my head 'Mirror ball!'
Quote:
Quote:
Several years ago, I was on a trip to Hawaii, and took my Telescope with me. I traveled to the top of Mount Haleakala. which is one of the best Dark Sky sites in the world. Amazing. I watched stars and constellations rise over the horizon, but, no matter where I pointed my Telescope, there were stars that I could not see, yet, there would be those on the southern hemishere who could. |
__________________
"The truth is out there. But the lies are inside your head." |
|
4th December 2017, 10:46 AM | #427 |
Philosopher
Join Date: Dec 2013
Posts: 7,051
|
|
4th December 2017, 10:55 AM | #428 |
Devilish Dictionarian
Join Date: Oct 2011
Location: An elusive house at Bachelors Grove Cemetery
Posts: 20,071
|
|
__________________
"You must not let your need to be right be more important than your need to find out what's true." - Ray Dalio, Principles |
|
4th December 2017, 11:28 AM | #429 |
Unbanned zombie poster
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Poughkeepsie, NY
Posts: 18,384
|
|
__________________
BRAINZZZZZZZZ |
|
4th December 2017, 11:29 AM | #430 |
Not a doctor.
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: Texas
Posts: 25,863
|
|
__________________
Suffering is not a punishment not a fruit of sin, it is a gift of God. He allows us to share in His suffering and to make up for the sins of the world. -Mother Teresa If I had a pet panda I would name it Snowflake. |
|
4th December 2017, 12:05 PM | #431 |
Penultimate Amazing
Join Date: Dec 2012
Posts: 10,259
|
|
4th December 2017, 12:08 PM | #432 |
Penultimate Amazing
Join Date: Dec 2012
Posts: 10,259
|
Assuming you wish to learn, many of your questions and more are answered here:
The Hunt for Vulcan: . . . And How Albert Einstein Destroyed a Planet, Discovered Relativity, and Deciphered the Universe It's available in hardcover, paperback, eBook and audio book.
Quote:
|
4th December 2017, 03:12 PM | #433 |
Muse
Join Date: Jan 2016
Posts: 973
|
On the contrary, I love it; That's why I write it.
Quote:
Backpedal from what?? I said...: Ya see, when the Military denotes Ranges of its Weapon Systems/Munitions, it's SOP to be Uber Specific and Differentiate if there are limitations with different Targets/Situations (e.g., M203 -- Point vs Area Targets). Then I SUPPORTED that claim by posting a Reference that showed you that very fact with the M203. This is 'cut and dry'. This little Nonsensical Appeal Charade you got going on is and quite boring. Please respond with a 'Coherent' Substantive argument/position or consider this "Goodbye". Thanks regards |
4th December 2017, 03:30 PM | #434 |
Muse
Join Date: Jan 2016
Posts: 973
|
A "Tad" Circular dont'cha think? Errr... "Nature does not offer us any concept as 'the amount of matter'. History has struck down every proposal to define such a term. Even if we could count the number of atoms or by any other counting method try to evaluate amount of matter, that number would not equal mass". Taylor, Edwin., Wheeler, John: Spacetime Physics, p. 248, 1992
Quote:
There are ZERO Experiments let alone anything "Repeated". Moreover, I'd wager a small fortune that you wouldn't know what an Actual Experiment consists of or be able to differentiate one from a Pipe Wrench. Let's TEST that contention... Walk us through the Construction of an Experiment regarding ANYTHING...? (Hint: it starts with the First Step of The Scientific Method)
Quote:
Not quite. I'm in Denial of your "Claims to Evidence" which are nothing more than Baseless Ipse Dixit 'bare' Assertion Fallacies.
Quote:
You see no point because you (and your 'brethren') have gotten your Hats Handed to You so many times in this thread it's ridiculous. regards |
4th December 2017, 03:49 PM | #435 |
Graduate Poster
Join Date: Oct 2006
Posts: 1,353
|
On a flat earth, how are these explained?
Sunrise/sunset Angular size of sun is same from sunrise to sunset In Australia sunrise can be south of East and sunset can be south of West at some times of year Circular star trails when looking south in the southern hemisphere The same stars are visible when looking south in the southern hemisphere no matter if you're in Africa, Australia or south america |
__________________
The secret NASA doesn't want you to know - God makes rockets work in space. |
|
4th December 2017, 04:05 PM | #436 |
Muse
Join Date: Jan 2016
Posts: 973
|
AGAIN Red Herring Fallacy via Begging The Question Fallacy: Where'd you get "Gas Pressure" to begin with if there's NOT a Container...? <--- Answer this First; THEN we can discuss the mysteries of "Varying Pressure" in a Container.
Quote:
That's Great!! Red Herring Fallacy (again).
Quote:
THANKS, Priceless!!! This isn't a Viable Scientific Hypothesis, professor. Highlight the: 'Independent Variable': The Cause, i.e., what is being varied/manipulated by you...? So as to Confirm (The Effect) --- Dependent Variable...?
Quote:
Correct. All Gasses MUST BE in Containers to avail Gas Pressure. You just Proved My Case
Quote:
Ahhh, that's NOT a TEST...it's a Known Fact.
Quote:
Yes, I know. But you have yet to post a Viable Scientific Hypothesis.
Quote:
You're Preach'n to the Choir.
Quote:
THANKS AGAIN!! And Unsolicited no less. Errr, professor... "Scientific Theories": "Explain" --- The How/WHY (mechanisms/process) and Identify The CAUSE; e.g., Germ Theory. Scientific Theories are the Result of Validated/Confirmed Scientific Hypotheses that have been rigorously TESTED. "Scientific Laws": "describe" ---The What/IS (The How/Why and "CAUSE" is N/A). They are based SOLELY on OBSERVATIONS of "Natural Laws". Often expressed mathematically. e.g., 2nd Law of Thermodynamics. That's why they're called The Laws of Thermodynamics and NOT the 'Theories' of Thermodynamics. Scientific Law vs Scientific Theory: "Look above at the last definitions under Law and Theory. These definitions clearly differentiate the two words. Some scientists will tell you that the difference between them is that a LAW DESCRIBES WHAT nature does under certain conditions, and will predict what will happen as long as those conditions are met. A THEORY EXPLAINS HOW nature works..... From this view, laws and theories "do" different things and have different roles to play in science." http://facultyweb.kennesaw.edu/rmats...s/theories.php Scientific Laws NEVER become Scientific Theories or vice versa they're different domains and answer different questions. Ergo...You'd "FAIL" 5th Grade General Science.
Quote:
Thanks Again!!! Do you need any more Gasoline with your Matches?? regards |
4th December 2017, 04:06 PM | #437 |
Dark Lord of the JREF
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: Somewhere Else
Posts: 5,805
|
|
__________________
"The truth is out there. But the lies are inside your head." |
|
4th December 2017, 04:13 PM | #438 |
Muse
Join Date: Jan 2016
Posts: 973
|
There is no Flat (or Sphere) Earth 'model'. 'models' are demonstrable Pseudo-Science (SEE: Previous Post)
Quote:
Really? Scientifically Validate please... a. What Phenomenon was Observed...? b. Post the Formal Scientific Hypothesis then EXPERIMENT that validates your claim...? c. Highlight the "Independent Variable" that was used in the TEST...? d. Post the Null Hypothesis that was Rejected/Falsified...? regards |
4th December 2017, 04:14 PM | #439 |
Skeptic not Atheist
Join Date: May 2007
Location: West of Northshore MA
Posts: 24,748
|
|
__________________
"Remember that the goal of conspiracy rhetoric is to bog down the discussion, not to make progress toward a solution" Jay Windley "How many leaves on the seventh branch of the fourth tree?" is meaningless when you are in the wrong forest: ozeco41 |
|
4th December 2017, 04:19 PM | #440 |
Muse
Join Date: Jan 2016
Posts: 973
|
There is no South Pole or South Celestial Pole... "There is no "South Star". It's just a coincidence that there happens to be a bright star (Polaris) close to the Celestial North Pole. The Southern Hemisphere isn't so lucky. The only star that comes close is Sigma Octans, which is 1 degree away from the South Celestial Pole. But it's only 6th magnitude--too dim to see at all except under optimal conditions." http://curious.astro.cornell.edu/phy...r-intermediate So regards |
Thread Tools | |
|
|