The earth is flat and we never went to the moon--Part II

[1Mind1Spirit]

Ingrate.

Maybe she shoulda tried some honey?

 

[Tambora]

Freaked her out when I told her I remembered her tryin' to suffocate me with that teat, too.

I think every kid should get on their knees every single day and thank their parents for not killing them before they reached adulthood.
Nothing but a bunch of needy little love terrorists.

 

[1Mind1Spirit]

I think every kid should get on their knees every single day and thank their parents for not killing them before they reached adulthood.
Nothing but a bunch of needy little love terrorists.

Mommies anyhow.

I worked long hours when my kids were little and only got the good.

Thanks for reminding me to appreciate my wife the more.:salute:

 

[JudgeRightly]

Good point. As a Creationist how do you explain the movement of the planets?

Are you seriously trying to say that God created a property of matter but couldn't move said matter?

A point I want to make...

I'm of the belief that God didn't create the physical laws, only created matter that follows those laws.

God no doubt created gravity but what mechanism did God create that moves the planets.

Do you seriously not understand how momentum/inertia works?

Gravity can't both move planets and hold them in an orbit which is why for an atheist the big bang moves them and gravity holds, or keeps them from moving away from their orbit.

GRAVITY doesn't "MOVE" ANYthing. It only pulls. It keeps satellites (no, not just man-made ones) in orbit their orbits, but it didn't put them in motion.

Do you really think God is incapable of moving planets around, setting them at a certain distance from a star or larger body, and then setting them in motion around it?

You know there are many Christians who believe God created the big bang and believe in the evolution of the universe from it but not in biological evolution.

--Dave

Which, again, is not my belief, and, when discussing flat earth vs globe, really has very little to do with the topic.

 

[musterion]

Flat Earthlings,

Is it a bad idea: taking a boat in a straight line toward where a globe says there is no ice wall, just to see if you hit one anyway?

 

[Stuu]

Good point. As a Creationist how do you explain the movement of the planets?

Magic, of course. As a creationist, that's how you 'explain' everything.

God no doubt created gravity but what mechanism did God create that moves the planets.

The magical intelligent moving hypothesis.

Gravity can't both move planets and hold them in an orbit which is why for an atheist the big bang moves them and gravity holds, or keeps them from moving away from their orbit.

If you are going to talk about 'atheist' science, then you will have to accept proper explanations for how things really work. Are you ready for that shock?

Everything is in an elliptical orbit around something else, and gravity makes that work because orbiting is the same thing as falling. The satellite is moving tangentially and falling towards the central object (sun/planet/whatever) at the same rate that the surface of that object falls away because it is a sphere. The satellite remains at roughly the same distance from the surface as a result. Of course these are ellipses, so the distance does vary according to a regular pattern.

In our solar system, the planetary nebula, a disc of gas and dust, was in orbit around the newly forming sun and already spinning, because it was attracted into orbit by the gravity of the solar mass at a slight angle. Planetary accretion followed, forming the planets orbiting within the plane of the ecliptic.

You know there are many Christians who believe God created the big bang and believe in the evolution of the universe from it but not in biological evolution.

Yes, you can pick and choose from science if you want. But did you want to know what is really going on, or not?

Stuart

 

[JudgeRightly]

In our solar system, the planetary nebula, a disc of gas and dust, was in orbit around the newly forming sun and already spinning, because it was attracted into orbit by the gravity of the solar mass at a slight angle. Planetary accretion followed, forming the planets orbiting within the plane of the ecliptic.

The Nebular hypothesis for solar system formation doesn't work, at least, not according to Isaac Newton...

http://www.newtonproject.ox.ac.uk/view/texts/normalized/THEM00256

Physics just doesn't support it.

 

[Stuu]

The Nebular hypothesis for solar system formation doesn't work, at least, not according to Isaac Newton...
http://www.newtonproject.ox.ac.uk/view/texts/normalized/THEM00256

Nice letter. Shame he didn't know how planets form.

Physics just doesn't support it.

Physics entirely explains it. The planetary nebula only has to have an overall rotation in one direction. As you have increasing gravitational attraction from a contracting star, the collapsing planetary nebula conserves its angular momentum by rotating faster and faster, like a tornado or a ballerina pulling her arms in to spin faster. That easily gives the particles, then the accreting protoplanets, then the planets, the right tangential speed (angular momentum) for maintaining an elliptical orbit around the sun, as well as providing the kinetic energy for the particles to collide and melt together to form the rocky planets.

Stuart

 

[DFT_Dave]

Are you seriously trying to say that God created a property of matter but couldn't move said matter?

A point I want to make...

I'm of the belief that God didn't create the physical laws, only created matter that follows those laws.

Do you seriously not understand how momentum/inertia works?

GRAVITY doesn't "MOVE" ANYthing. It only pulls. It keeps satellites (no, not just man-made ones) in orbit their orbits, but it didn't put them in motion.

Do you really think God is incapable of moving planets around, setting them at a certain distance from a star or larger body, and then setting them in motion around it?

Which, again, is not my belief, and, when discussing flat earth vs globe, really has very little to do with the topic.

It could be said we don't need a natural mechanism called gravity since God simply moves planets and keeps them in their path. If we credit God for moving/inertia/momentum the planets why disregard the power of God and imagine a natural mechanism called gravity?

--Dave

 

[DFT_Dave]

Magic, of course. As a creationist, that's how you 'explain' everything.

The magical intelligent moving hypothesis.

If you are going to talk about 'atheist' science, then you will have to accept proper explanations for how things really work. Are you ready for that shock?

Everything is in an elliptical orbit around something else, and gravity makes that work because orbiting is the same thing as falling. The satellite is moving tangentially and falling towards the central object (sun/planet/whatever) at the same rate that the surface of that object falls away because it is a sphere. The satellite remains at roughly the same distance from the surface as a result. Of course these are ellipses, so the distance does vary according to a regular pattern.

In our solar system, the planetary nebula, a disc of gas and dust, was in orbit around the newly forming sun and already spinning, because it was attracted into orbit by the gravity of the solar mass at a slight angle. Planetary accretion followed, forming the planets orbiting within the plane of the ecliptic.

Yes, you can pick and choose from science if you want. But did you want to know what is really going on, or not?

Stuart

Yes Stuu, Biblical Copernican cosmologists are inconsistent with the cause of movement/inertia and gravity.

--Dave

 

[CabinetMaker]

Exactly. You would not have anything that had weight. Things of mass and density have weight that air cannot hold up which is why things fall to the ground, no special force (gravity) needed on a flat stationary earth.

--Dave

But why do they fall? Why does water always flow down hill? A helium balloon has mass and density yet it floats. A hot air balloon has mass and density yet it floats. A bird has mass and density buy flies. A jet airliner has considerable mass and still it flies. Obviously much more is going on than simply mass and density. Yet you remain completely unable to explain why an object that has mass and density falls when dropped. You are competing with hundreds of years and science and your only answer is ti say that it is wrong and part of a conspiracy theory. Yet in my job as an engineer I use that science everyday because I know that it works to give me results I can use to build things. There is nothing you have said that I can use as it simply does not work.

 

[CabinetMaker]

I've criticised many works and have explained why including this curvature test. If you think the curvature calculator I used is wrong then it's up to you explain it not me.

--Dave

Is this another way of saying that you do not have the math skills required to do it? If you can't do the math then why would I listen to you when many scientists who routinely do the math have repeatedly demonstrated that their math accurately models the world around us and can be used to make useful predictions?

You claim that you have shown how videos depicting a globe Earth are wrong yet you have NEVER addressed why the sun and the moon are ALWAYS the same size as they traverse the sky from the time they rise to the time they set. You have attempted to explain why they set from the bottom up by using the vanishing point and have only succeeded in proving that you do not understand what the vanishing point is.

Nobody is going to listen to your critique of videos so it is time for you t step up and to the actual work and post that. Design your experiments, gather the data, analyze it and show that your experiment is correct. Keep in mind that your work will be reviewed and that you will have to defend it and may have to revise it just as every other scientist must do with their work.

 

[JudgeRightly]

It could be said we don't need a natural mechanism called gravity since God simply moves planets and keeps them in their path. If we credit God for moving/inertia/momentum the planets why disregard the power of God and imagine a natural mechanism called gravity?

--Dave

David, question for you:

Does God do more work than He has to to maintain something? Or is He allowed to use mechanisms that He created to keep things in motion?

For example: Would would be the point of God doing miracles on a daily basis protecting Abraham and his household of 70 people after sending them into Canaan, where it would be far easier to send them to and embed them into Egypt, where they could grow for 400 years to well over a million people, then take them out of Egypt and have them be able to defend themselves? Especially since, if you understand the whole Bible, miracles almost always produce unbelief, which would be counterproductive to His goals...

 

[chair]

Though Dave pretends that he isn't convinced that the world is flat, he is convinced of that. He believes it is Biblical, and he is afraid that his whole belief system will come tumbling down if he admits that the earth is a globe. That is why he must ignore plain facts that would show him wrong. Repeatedly.

He is uneducated, and can't think logically, at least on this topic. It is possible that he gets an ego boost from thinking that he is smarter than all those professors and so-called "knowledgeable" folk out there.

He hasn't been convinced of his error yet. Nor will he ever be.

 

[Nathon Detroit]

Maybe she shoulda tried some honey?

I think every kid should get on their knees every single day and thank their parents for not killing them before they reached adulthood.
Nothing but a bunch of needy little love terrorists.

Can you guys chat in a different thread?

 

[Nathon Detroit]

Though Dave pretends that he isn't convinced that the world is flat, he is convinced of that. He believes it is Biblical, and he is afraid that his whole belief system will come tumbling down if he admits that the earth is a globe. That is why he must ignore plain facts that would show him wrong. Repeatedly.

He is uneducated, and can't think logically, at least on this topic. It is possible that he gets an ego boost from thinking that he is smarter than all those professors and so-called "knowledgeable" folk out there.

He hasn't been convinced of his error yet. Nor will he ever be.

I agree with your analysis.

Although... I do think he will eventually discard the belief in the Flat Earth. Maybe not for a long time but he will. The truth is inevitable and it will eat at him until he gets too tired swimming upstream every day.

 

[Right Divider]

Clete.... Right Divider... Judge Rightly.... I know it was painful to see DFT_Dave crash and burn but it might be even worse to see STP head off the cliff of insanity.

Does this shock you? How do you feel about seeing these guys act this way? And what does it say about their witness for Christ in general?

I am shocked and do not know how this affects their witness for Christ in general.

 

[Stuu]

Yes Stuu, Biblical Copernican cosmologists are inconsistent with the cause of movement/inertia and gravity.

That sentence doesn't even parse.

Which is also an applicable word when you remove the p.

Stuart

 

[1Mind1Spirit]

Though Dave pretends that he isn't convinced that the world is flat, he is convinced of that. He believes it is Biblical, and he is afraid that his whole belief system will come tumbling down if he admits that the earth is a globe. That is why he must ignore plain facts that would show him wrong. Repeatedly.

He is uneducated, and can't think logically, at least on this topic. It is possible that he gets an ego boost from thinking that he is smarter than all those professors and so-called "knowledgeable" folk out there.

He hasn't been convinced of his error yet. Nor will he ever be.

Think again.....

 

[DFT_Dave]

But why do they fall? Why does water always flow down hill? A helium balloon has mass and density yet it floats. A hot air balloon has mass and density yet it floats. A bird has mass and density buy flies. A jet airliner has considerable mass and still it flies. Obviously much more is going on than simply mass and density. Yet you remain completely unable to explain why an object that has mass and density falls when dropped. You are competing with hundreds of years and science and your only answer is ti say that it is wrong and part of a conspiracy theory. Yet in my job as an engineer I use that science everyday because I know that it works to give me results I can use to build things. There is nothing you have said that I can use as it simply does not work.

Helium is lighter than air so it goes up, but you knew that so why ask? Water falls it is not "pulled down". That things fall down is because they have weight is an answer that needs no other explanation. The spinning globe obviously needs another answer, flat earth does not.

--Dave