Search results

Yes. That's what I said. :chuckle: You're not very good at this, are you? :darwinsm: There's no hope for you. Sent from my SM-A520F using Tapatalk

This is an example of you trying to "falsify evidence." It's not a rational or scientific practice. You think the photograph is defensible from a flat-Earth perspective and use that to justify your rejection of reality. However, science doesn't call on you to falsify evidence, because you can...

Hermann Minkowski. Now who's an idiot? Sent from my SM-A520F using Tapatalk

Spacetime is an invention of those who did not want to believe in an aether, but found out they still needed an aether. Sent from my SM-A520F using Tapatalk

:up: Space is the conceptualized distance between things. Time is the conceptualized distance between events. Neither is a physical reality and they are not intrinsically linked. Sent from my SM-A520F using Tapatalk

:AMR: Why? Did you do the same for Darwinism? Luckily, you've been provided with evidence. You're supposed to focus on that and just ignore it when you're called a fruit loop. Nope. People don't give up ideas when they are shown scientifically impossible. We can't convince those who do not...

No. But you declare yourself open to evidence. Unfortunately, you have no idea how science works. You think it is our job to "prove" flat-Earthism false. It's not. That is your job. Our job is to test round-Earthism. We do that. For instance, I ask about the fundamentals. Why is the Earth...

:darwinsm: "Flat-Earthism isn't a hypothesis, it's a symptom." Sent from my SM-A520F using Tapatalk

http://kgov.com/bel/20180730 Sent from my SM-A520F using Tapatalk

Nope. That's because you reject physics, thinking it is magic, and make up scripture. You're not a nut. You're a fruit loop. Sent from my SM-A520F using Tapatalk

:kook: If you're not prepared to stick to reality, there's no point engaging. Sent from my SM-A520F using Tapatalk

If this was a discussion of a scientific nature, he would give us the physics behind a flat Earth. If it is a theological debate, he is making things up. Either way, it's like debating a Darwinist. Sent from my SM-A520F using Tapatalk

I see. So you don't have any understanding of physics. Your answers: Why is the Earth flat? God did it. Something you just made up. Why is the Earth round? Evolution. :chuckle: Nope. Physics. You know? Real science. :thumb: This isn't a science discussion, it's just you trolling people...

Are you just going to say stuff? :idunno: No. Try again. The question is: Why is the Earth flat? Physics. If I ask you why an automobile can move, you won't answer: "Because I can see it moving." You'll talk about engineering and chemistry. Why is the Earth flat? I can tell you why the...

Oh dear. :sigh: Physics. Explain why the Earth is flat from pure physics. We can explain why the Earth is round. :up: If you ask: Why is the Earth round, we are not going to give you "reasons to believe." We will tell you why. It's like if we were to ask why fire is hot. We would not give...

Is reading your second language? M&M's work showed an orbital velocity of 8kms. Sent from my SM-A520F using Tapatalk

This is not the scientific method. We have theories (round Earth, conservation of angular momentum) and evidence to support it (pendulums, M&M). You have your rejection of our ideas. To be part of a sensible conversation, you need to provide the same things. You could start by explaining why...

:darwinsm: Clete is right. You're stupid beyond belief. :chuckle: Sent from my SM-A520F using Tapatalk

M&M measured an orbital velocity of about 8 kilometers per second. Sent from my SM-A520F using Tapatalk

OK, well, you said the answer was in OP. It's not. So it looks like you're a liar. Sent from my SM-A520F using Tapatalk