-
Re: NASA says humans could land on Mars in 25 years
Quote:
Originally Posted by
p4pking
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Alpha
Quote:
Originally Posted by
p4pking
You mean no offence by telling me I ignore blatant evidence that the earth is flat, and I’m cult like for going by what every scientist worth a damn for centuries has believed, and that they aren’t all coerced by some global conspiracy force.... I wasnt exactly about to be outraged:rolleyes: No offence either, but if you aren’t trolling, I feel sorry for you.
I feel the same way for you. You're welcome to stay asleep.
You talk of scientists, but fail to realize that formal science is an artificial language, man made, has standards and norms, suits the purpose of the intended measurement, mathematics is an example, and maths proves nothing, theorems describing effects are not "Proofs" of reality or causation.
Natural science is observable, testable, repeatable and scalable.
But I won't say another thing on the matter.
For the love of fuck. Please,please don’t.
Nah wouldn't want you to think for yourself.
-
Re: NASA says humans could land on Mars in 25 years
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Alpha
There are numerous contradictions in the bible, would that constitute as proof?
There no serious contradictions in the four Gospels, although they were written by four different people in three different languages (Matthew and John wrote in Hebrew, Mark in Latin and Luke in Greek) so there's bound to be some minor differences. Matthew and John were disciples, while Mark and Luke were not.
Different authors give different emphasis to the three core beliefs in Christianity - faith, works and love. For example John consistently emphasized love while Paul more often emphasized faith. Yet in I Corinthians 13 Paul acknowledges that love is greater than faith.
-
Re: NASA says humans could land on Mars in 25 years
Richard Branson and Virgin flew into space and the world did not look flat from the pictures they showed.
Amazon and others want to do the same.
-
Re: NASA says humans could land on Mars in 25 years
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Master
Richard Branson and Virgin flew into space
Did you enjoy your trip with Mr Branson :S
Anyway Neil Armstrong spelled backwards is Gnorts Mr Alien... Moon landing was not fake but clearly an inside job by aliens.
-
Re: NASA says humans could land on Mars in 25 years
Quote:
Originally Posted by
palmerq
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Master
Richard Branson and Virgin flew into space
Did you enjoy your trip with Mr Branson :S
Anyway N
eil Armstrong spelled backwards is Gnorts Mr Alien... Moon landing was not fake but clearly an inside job by aliens.
It does have Lie in it backwards, just saying ;D
-
Re: NASA says humans could land on Mars in 25 years
-
Re: NASA says humans could land on Mars in 25 years
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Master
Richard Branson and Virgin flew into space and the world did not look flat from the pictures they showed.
Amazon and others want to do the same.
space ex Elon musk have been doing it successfully for some time master. He sent one of his Tesla roadsters into orbit
-
Re: NASA says humans could land on Mars in 25 years
Quote:
Originally Posted by
walrus
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Master
Richard Branson and Virgin flew into space and the world did not look flat from the pictures they showed.
Amazon and others want to do the same.
space ex Elon musk have been doing it successfully for some time master. He sent one of his Tesla roadsters into orbit
He is going underground with his 150 mph cars.
-
Re: NASA says humans could land on Mars in 25 years
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Master
Quote:
Originally Posted by
walrus
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Master
Richard Branson and Virgin flew into space and the world did not look flat from the pictures they showed.
Amazon and others want to do the same.
space ex Elon musk have been doing it successfully for some time master. He sent one of his Tesla roadsters into orbit
He is going underground with his 150 mph cars.
Dude it is amazing what that guy does. I invested in Tesla stock a few years ago, it’s done very well but it’s very volatile. I wouldn’t recommend it but I got it when it was 100 bucks. I’ll tell you, it is very overvalued but if u can withstand the risk it’s worth a gamble.
-
Re: NASA says humans could land on Mars in 25 years
Chinese probe in lunar orbit and set to make historic 1st landing on the 'dark side' of the moon
https://www.rt.com/news/447803-china...obe-dark-side/
-
Re: NASA says humans could land on Mars in 25 years
-
Re: NASA says humans could land on Mars in 25 years
-
Re: NASA says humans could land on Mars in 25 years
Alpha, you're not alone.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1gHbwT_R9t0
Wow... conventions and everything. ;D ;D
-
Re: NASA says humans could land on Mars in 25 years
Nah Sargent is a shill along with the whole 'flat earth society' site.
Dubay is one of the genuine ones.
-
Re: NASA says humans could land on Mars in 25 years
I want my 7 minutes back. 'The first rule about flat club is you don't talk about flat club' ;D. So basically we're one giant pool surrounded by the Artic ice glaciers holding everything in?
-
Re: NASA says humans could land on Mars in 25 years
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Spicoli
I want my 7 minutes back. 'The first rule about flat club is you don't talk about flat club' ;D. So basically we're one giant pool surrounded by the Artic ice glaciers holding everything in?
Didn't watch the vid, so don't know what was said.
I don't associate myself with any flat earth models/ maps. Some flat earthers speculate that an ice wall surrounds the earth/ disc.
But the reality is, we know how water works in this reality. We all know water will fill it's container and the surface will be flat (level if you want). I can show you water doing this, every time. It's something that is observable and demonstrable, you can do it yourself. You know the actual scientific method.
I'd like a ball earther to present me with a scale model of their ball earth, using the same substances, showing water conforming to the exterior of a shape.
In our reality we can do a scale model of anything tangible, that is real science.
If you can't scale it, and it's not observable, repeatable and demonstrable then it's just pseudoscience.
I'll wait ;D
-
Re: NASA says humans could land on Mars in 25 years
Ball Earthers ;D;D. Ok sorry. But how can some claim we're surrounded by glaciers to 'keep everything in :cwm13:' and some do not. Not exactly a unified fact based belief it would seem. But not to dumb it down too much..where does it drain. I mean water may be level on surface but ocean floors etc can vary by miles. What of waves. Why do we not eventually over saturate and simply fill up and spill over.
-
Re: NASA says humans could land on Mars in 25 years
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Spicoli
Ball Earthers ;D;D. Ok sorry. But how can some claim we're surrounded by glaciers to 'keep everything in :cwm13:' and some do not. Not exactly a unified fact based belief it would seem. But not to dumb it down too much..where does it drain. I mean water may be level on surface but ocean floors etc can vary by miles. What of waves. Why do we not eventually over saturate and simply fill up and spill over.
Like I said, there are some that are shills and provide mis information. Like the flat earth society, that thinks the earth is constantly moving upwards.
Some speculate that an ice wall surrounds us, but the reality is we don't know the true dimensions of what we are on. So I prefer to say I don't know, but I know it has to be some sort of container to keep the water in. There is no way it can be a sphere. Because we know how the natural physics of water work in this reality.
Waves are motion. If I make waves in a pool are you going to tell me it isn't level? I'm not sure what you mean by filling up, the earth is apparently 70% water, so that water moves around with tides, evaporation etc. It's not like there is more magic water filling up the earth from somewhere else.
Still waiting on the scale model with water conforming to the exterior of a shape. Not to dumb it down too much, but if you can't recreate a scale model in this reality then it really is a belief.
-
Re: NASA says humans could land on Mars in 25 years
It's healthy to be skeptical that is the basis of science itself the willingness to question anything. Denial is another thing entirely. That is why I think you won't start a thread Alpha to discuss any of these questions. They would not stand up to scrutiny.
-
Re: NASA says humans could land on Mars in 25 years
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Beanz
It's healthy to be skeptical that is the basis of science itself the willingness to question anything. Denial is another thing entirely. That is why I think you won't start a thread Alpha to discuss any of these questions. They would not stand up to scrutiny.
Anytime you can create a scale model for me, using the same substances, with water conforming to the exterior of a shape, I'll be interested.
And can I ask what type of science you are referring to?
Still waiting.
-
Re: NASA says humans could land on Mars in 25 years
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Alpha
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Beanz
It's healthy to be skeptical that is the basis of science itself the willingness to question anything. Denial is another thing entirely. That is why I think you won't start a thread Alpha to discuss any of these questions. They would not stand up to scrutiny.
Anytime you can create a scale model for me, using the same substances, with water conforming to the exterior of a shape, I'll be interested.
And can I ask what type of science you are referring to?
Still waiting.
Like I said.. denial.
Because we are not living in a vacuum in both a physical and philosophical sense.
You can't build a scale model even dismissing the problems with mass because you would be building that model on a spherical planet subject to friction and air resistance etc.
And we are not living in a scientific vacuum in which we need to dismiss everything you have not reproduced in a physical scaleable model and witnessed with your eyes. That requires a bigger leap of faith than that used by the religious.
We build on the knowledge of others not start from zero with every new human.
-
Re: NASA says humans could land on Mars in 25 years
So no scale model? You want me to just believe you then? Doesn't stand up to the scientific method then does it?
So I can tell and show you what water will do in this reality, and you can't provide a scale model of a ball earth but I'm in denial?
And what vacuum are you talking about? We can only produce a near vacuum.
Oh and you never said what type of science you were talking about.
Remember if it can't stand up to the scientific method then it isn't a fact.
-
Re: NASA says humans could land on Mars in 25 years
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Alpha
So no scale model? No for the reasons already stated
You want me to just believe you then? No that is you just inventing stuff. What you are actually insisting on is that nobody believes anything because there is in your mind no difference between healthy skepticism and not believing anything unless you witness it first hand and conduct every experiment needed to prove an hypothesis.
Doesn't stand up to the scientific method then does it? Actually it meets all the criteria for what is commonly accepted as 'The Scientific Method'. While there is not universal agreement on the definition of what the Scientific method consists of, your suggestion that one needs to be able to witness it with your own eyes and build scale-able models is just invention. You are pretending that even very early on in the formulation of a question that Science does not build on previous evidence. Conjecture and prediction are crucial to the method, and yet you are simply playing pretend with your insistence that testing and analysis, in a very crude and primitive sense, are acceptable as 'The Scientific Method'.
So I can tell and show you what water will do in this reality, and you can't provide a scale model of a ball earth but I'm in denial? No you cannot and that is not the only way in which you are pretending, your insistence on isolationism is just a part of your allegiance to denial.
And what vacuum are you talking about? We can only produce a near vacuum. A scale-able model on earth is still subject to the conditions on earth. Gravity itself is up for question with a flat earth theory but the reality is according all the best and readily available science and documentation that we are living on a sphere. Time zones, sunsets and sunrises at different times, the nature of eclipses, seasons, phases of the moon, all these observable things confirm this to be the most likely scenario also.
Oh and you never said what type of science you were talking about. Empirical Science - Physical, Biological and Psychological. The first two are quite obvious with lunar and solar cycles etc clearly demonstrated in their impact upon biological mechanisms and behaviours, but there is also psychological and certainly anthropological evidence for how living on a globe has affected us.
Remember if it can't stand up to the scientific method then it isn't a fact. But the criteria you are asking us to base our acceptance of what are facts seems to be conveniently ignored when presenting your own hypotheses, does it not? You can not seemingly even accept the entire commonly accepted 'Scientific Method' only the testing stage/phase.
It needs it's own thread. Freedom's Mars Ax thread is about Mars not a flat earth and that is certainly a subject radical enough to warrant it's own examination if you really believe it. Or do you just believe 'in it'?
-
Re: NASA says humans could land on Mars in 25 years
I don't believe it, I know it to be the truth.
Ok so what part of water conforming to the exterior of a shape do you have for me to observe? That's part of the scientific method right? You should be able to demonstrate it right? Then I should be able to repeat it right?
We're talking about earth, and what is reality on this earth. If you claim water can conform around the exterior of a shape on earth, then show me, on earth with an observable recreation to back up your claims. I have no hypothesis, only my own observations and experiences. Which are demostrable and repeatable.
So what empirical evidence (observation or experience rather than theory or pure logic) do you have of a ball earth?
And the sciences are Natural, Formal and Social. And as I have already mentioned many times here, formal sciences are artificial man made languages.
Start a thread if you want, but we would need to agree on some first principles first, if we are going to continue to discuss it.
-
Re: NASA says humans could land on Mars in 25 years
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Alpha
I don't believe it, I know it to be the truth.
Ok so what part of water conforming to the exterior of a shape do you have for me to observe? That's part of the scientific method right? You should be able to demonstrate it right? Then I should be able to repeat it right?
We're talking about earth, and what is reality on this earth. If you claim water can conform around the exterior of a shape on earth, then show me, on earth with an observable recreation to back up your claims. I have no hypothesis, only my own observations and experiences. Which are demostrable and repeatable.
So what empirical evidence (observation or experience rather than theory or pure logic) do you have of a ball earth?
And the sciences are Natural, Formal and Social. And as I have already mentioned many times here, formal sciences are artificial man made languages.
Start a thread if you want, but we would need to agree on some first principles first, if we are going to continue to discuss it.
Like I said you are confirming an almost religious zeal in your believing 'in it' rather than the believing the facts themselves. You are pretending to be interested in empirical evidence but then dismissing all empirical evidence unless YOU witness it directly with your eyes. How unreliable would that be? You do things everyday that rely upon your ability to trust science built upon the foundation of others and yet want to play a game in which you pretend that is not true and that you are really a pioneer unlocking mysteries nobody else would dare contemplate. You are literally wishing for the impossible to justify the implausible. Scale itself, area, force, pressure, density are all inherent reasons why water stays on and around the earth and yet you want me to recreate this on a small scale as though i subscribe to the same nonsense and these factors are irrelevant. It is not scale-able.
And so what if formal science is a man made language? What would you prefer we converse in ..Hebrew? Sumarian? Tamil? Sanskrit? Despite what Chomsky says Language is actually a tool by which we can make a more complex reality, understand and describe the world and science is no different. You can start the thread and state the principles you think need to be agreed in your opening post.
-
Re: NASA says humans could land on Mars in 25 years
Sorry Beanz, I didn't even read your post, I've told and shown you what water does in this reality. If you are disputing the natural physics of water, then it's on you to prove it. And for me to believe something to be true, I need to see it, be able to repeat it etc.
I know you can't scale it (doesn't that ring some alarm bells in your common sense?), but you will continue to believe water can conform to the exterior of a shape, even tho you can't demonstrate this claim to yourself. It's something you can't observe for yourself, so it's basically blind faith.
Enjoy your spinning ball.
-
Re: NASA says humans could land on Mars in 25 years
Keeping it simple metal sinks in water but a boat floats, aeroplane flies, rockets go into space.
Mathematicians and scientist's, have agreed the world is round for hundreds of years.
It is now just a given fact.
-
Re: NASA says humans could land on Mars in 25 years
-
Re: NASA says humans could land on Mars in 25 years
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Master
Keeping it simple metal sinks in water but a boat floats, aeroplane flies, rockets go into space.
Mathematicians and scientist's, have agreed the world is round for hundreds of years.
It is now just a given fact.
No it's not a fact.
Here's an experiment anyone can do. Get a camera and a level. Get to the lowest sea level possible and level the horizon in the centre of camera image. Then go to a higher sea level and repeat. You will find the horizon will be level at both heights, this is impossible on a globe. I'm sure I don't have to explain why.
-
Re: NASA says humans could land on Mars in 25 years
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Alpha
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Master
Keeping it simple metal sinks in water but a boat floats, aeroplane flies, rockets go into space.
Mathematicians and scientist's, have agreed the world is round for hundreds of years.
It is now just a given fact.
No it's not a fact.
Here's an experiment anyone can do. Get a camera and a level. Get to the lowest sea level possible and level the horizon in the centre of camera image. Then go to a higher sea level and repeat. You will find the horizon will be level at both heights, this is impossible on a globe. I'm sure I don't have to explain why.
Should never say I’m sure I don’t have to explain. If you have these repeatble experiments you shouldd give great Detail and explain why this proves your theory. We aren’t the flat earthers, convince us.
-
Re: NASA says humans could land on Mars in 25 years
Alpha, what are the dimensions of the planet. People only live on the top right? Since when we did we find things like oil, gold and silver might that mean the underside may be eldorado for lack of a better word?
-
Re: NASA says humans could land on Mars in 25 years
Welcome to the new year, 2018. The Earth has yet again made a revolution about the sun. But not so fast. If you subscribe to the idea of a flat Earth, then you’d believe that no such thing happened, because the sun rotates in a circle around the sky.
Humans have known for thousands of years that the planet is round, yet the belief in a flat Earth refuses to die. Members of the Flat Earth Society and several celebrities, including Atlanta rapper B.o.B and NBA player Kyrie Irving, claim to hold such beliefs. Let’s examine, then, how the well-known principles of physics and science would work (or not) on a flat Earth.
Gravity Fails
First of all, a pancaked planet might not have any gravity. It’s unclear how gravity would work, or be created, in such a world, says James Davis, a geophysicist at Columbia University’s Lamont-Doherty Earth Observatory. That’s a pretty big deal, since gravity explains a wide range of Earthly and cosmic observations. The same measurable force that causes an apple to fall from a tree also causes the moon to orbit the Earth and all the planets to orbit the sun.
People who believe in a flat Earth assume that gravity would pull straight down, but there’s no evidence to suggest it would work that way. What we know about gravity suggests it would pull toward the center of the disk. That means it would only pull straight down at one point on the center of the disk. As you got increasingly far from the center, gravity would tug more and more horizontally. This would have some strange impacts, like sucking all the water toward the center of the world, and making trees and plants grow diagonally, since they develop in the opposite direction of gravity’s pull.
Solar Problems
Then there’s the sun. In the scientifically supported model of the solar system, the Earth revolves around the sun because the latter is much more massive and has more gravity. However, the Earth doesn’t fall into the sun because it is traveling in an orbit. In other words, the sun’s gravity isn’t acting alone. The planet is also traveling in a direction perpendicular to the star’s gravitational tug; if it were possible to switch off that gravity, the Earth would shoot away in a straight line and hightail it out of the solar system. Instead, the linear momentum and the sun’s gravity combine, resulting in a circular orbit around the sun.
The flat Earth model places our planet at the center of the universe, but doesn’t suggest that the sun orbits the Earth. Rather, the sun circles over the top side of the world like a carousel, broadcasting light and warmth downward like a desk lamp. Without the linear, perpendicular momentum that helps generate an orbit, it’s unclear what force would keep the sun and moon hovering above the Earth, Davis says, instead of crashing into it.
Likewise, in a flat world, satellites likely wouldn’t be possible. How would they orbit a plane? “There are a number of satellite missions that society depends on that just wouldn’t work,” Davis says. For this reason, he says, “I cannot think of how GPS would work on a flat Earth.”
If the sun and moon just loop around one side of a flat Earth, there could presumably be a procession of days and nights. But it wouldn’t explain seasons, eclipses and many other phenomena. The sun would also presumably have to be smaller than Earth so as to not burn up or bump into our planet or the moon. However, we know the sun to be more than 100 times the diameter of the Earth.
Removing Heaven and Earth
Deep below ground, the solid core of the Earth generates the planet’s magnetic field. But in a flat planet, that would have to be replaced by something else. Perhaps a flat sheet of liquid metal. That, however, wouldn’t rotate in a way that creates a magnetic field. Without a magnetic field, charged particles from the sun would fry the planet. They could strip away the atmosphere, as they did after Mars lost its magnetic field, and the air and oceans would escape into space.
Tectonic plate movement and seismicity depend on a round Earth, because only on a sphere do all the plates fit together in a sensible way, Davis says. Movements of plates on one side of the Earth effect movements on the other. The areas of the Earth that create crust, like the mid-Atlantic ridge, are counterbalanced by places that consume crust, like subduction zones. On a flat Earth, none of this could be adequately explained. There’d also have to be an explanation for what happens to plates at the edge of the world. One could imagine they might fall off, but that would presumably jeopardize the proposed wall that prevents people from falling off the disk-shaped world.
map of flat earth
How some Flat Earthers map out the planet. The Arctic is at the center, and an “ice wall” around the edges supposedly prevents people from falling off. Image: Wiki Commons
Perhaps one of the most glaring oddities is that the proposed map of the flat Earth is totally different. It places the Arctic at the center while Antarctica forms an “ice wall” around the edges. In such a world, travel would look very different. Flying from Australia to certain parts of Antarctica would, for example, take forever—you’d have to travel over the Arctic and both Americas to get there. In addition, certain real-world feats, such as traveling across Antarctica (which has been done many times), would be impossible.
https://www.ldeo.columbia.edu/news-e...-actually-flat
-
Re: NASA says humans could land on Mars in 25 years
Quote:
Originally Posted by
walrus
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Alpha
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Master
Keeping it simple metal sinks in water but a boat floats, aeroplane flies, rockets go into space.
Mathematicians and scientist's, have agreed the world is round for hundreds of years.
It is now just a given fact.
No it's not a fact.
Here's an experiment anyone can do. Get a camera and a level. Get to the lowest sea level possible and level the horizon in the centre of camera image. Then go to a higher sea level and repeat. You will find the horizon will be level at both heights, this is impossible on a globe. I'm sure I don't have to explain why.
Should never say I’m sure I don’t have to explain. If you have these repeatble experiments you shouldd give great Detail and explain why this proves your theory. We aren’t the flat earthers, convince us.
I'm not trying to convince anyone, it's a knowledge that you have to find for yourself.
The reason the horizon can't rise to your eye level on a sphere, is because at the lowest height, when you have leveled it, the moment you rise in height, the horizon must drop below level. Think of a ball, place a ruler over it, flat against it. Then raise it slightly, because of the curvature it is not possible for both heights to show a level horizon.
Again, I have tried to keep it simple using water, something we all have experience with. We all know how it works.
The whole ball earth is a fantasy, do you guys know they want us to believe that the earth is spinning faster than the speed of sound?
-
Re: NASA says humans could land on Mars in 25 years
Quote:
Originally Posted by
walrus
Alpha, what are the dimensions of the planet. People only live on the top right? Since when we did we find things like oil, gold and silver might that mean the underside may be eldorado for lack of a better word?
I don't know, I have never seen the earth for myself. Only fake images.
We are also not free to explore this earth freely.
All I know is it needs to be some type of container to keep the water in.
-
Re: NASA says humans could land on Mars in 25 years
There are far too many common sense arguments to take this premise seriously. You can’t say all you know is the water needs to be contained on a flat surface, and at the same time “you don’t know” how this could be. The earth IS free to explore, for fucks sake. That’s what scientists do.
-
Re: NASA says humans could land on Mars in 25 years
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Alpha
Quote:
Originally Posted by
walrus
Alpha, what are the dimensions of the planet. People only live on the top right? Since when we did we find things like oil, gold and silver might that mean the underside may be eldorado for lack of a better word?
I don't know, I have never seen the earth for myself. Only fake images.
We are also not free to explore this earth freely.
All I know is it needs to be some type of container to keep the water in.
Wtf dude at least give me your ideas. You study this you must have painted a pic in your head. Are we living on top and bottom IN YOUR OPINION
-
Re: NASA says humans could land on Mars in 25 years
-
Re: NASA says humans could land on Mars in 25 years
Never really set out to scale anything or pretend I'm Mr. Wizards world, but if that's done would it be done with same speed as Earths rotation? At what point are photos no longer believed?
-
Re: NASA says humans could land on Mars in 25 years
And what is the magic of the Chocolate fountain? I like chocolate as much as the next guy but what magnetic befuddling genius is that. Serious inquiries.
-
Re: NASA says humans could land on Mars in 25 years
Quote:
Originally Posted by
p4pking
There are far too many common sense arguments to take this premise seriously. You can’t say all you know is the water needs to be contained on a flat surface, and at the same time “you don’t know” how this could be. The earth IS free to explore, for fucks sake. That’s what scientists do.
I don't know what we are on, have never professed to know exactly. I know it has to be some sort of container to keep the water in. Try going to Antarctica and exploring around by yourself. You won't even get close. You have never seen the earth with your own eyes, so you can't tell me exactly what it is either.
Quote:
Originally Posted by
walrus
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Alpha
Quote:
Originally Posted by
walrus
Alpha, what are the dimensions of the planet. People only live on the top right? Since when we did we find things like oil, gold and silver might that mean the underside may be eldorado for lack of a better word?
I don't know, I have never seen the earth for myself. Only fake images.
We are also not free to explore this earth freely.
All I know is it needs to be some type of container to keep the water in.
Wtf dude at least give me your ideas. You study this you must have painted a pic in your head. Are we living on top and bottom IN YOUR OPINION
I can speculate for you if you'd like, I have already said it must be some sort of container, whats below that, I have no idea, the deepest hole we have ever dug is 8 miles down. I know it's at least that thick.
Quote:
Originally Posted by
p4pking
He doesn’t have any....
More than you, still waiting on that scale model, challenge goes out to anyone. Back up your claims, with something I can observe and repeat or sit back down.
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Spicoli
Never really set out to scale anything or pretend I'm Mr. Wizards world, but if that's done would it be done with same speed as Earths rotation? At what point are photos no longer believed?
Depends on what it takes for you to believe something. If a photo is all it takes for you to believe something, then that's your prerogative. But photo's, and video can be manipulated.
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Spicoli
And what is the magic of the Chocolate fountain? I like chocolate as much as the next guy but what magnetic befuddling genius is that. Serious inquiries.
I'm not sure what you mean, are you comparing water to chocolate?
