See other Science/Tech Articles
Title: 200 Proofs Earth is Not a Spinning Ball
Source:
[None]
URL Source: https://youtu.be/-Ax_YpQsy88
Published: Dec 29, 2019
Author: Eric Dubay
Post Date: 2019-12-29 19:57:38 by wudidiz
Keywords: None
Views: 26965
Comments: 351
Post Comment Private Reply Ignore Thread
Top • Page Up • Full Thread • Page Down • Bottom/Latest
Begin Trace Mode for Comment # 92.
#3. To: wudidiz (#0)
They are not "proofs". They are arguments, and all I've considered are, to various degrees, easily dismissed.
Actually, what's advance here is more like "evidences." ...All I've considered are, to various degrees, easily dismissed. Not only are NONE are "easily dismissed," but to various degrees IMPOSSIBLE to dismiss. Period. (Please let go of your single objection regarding the flight from Chile to NZ and focus instead on some OTHER points/objections.) Yes, we've indeed belabored this subject ad nauseum, but with "200 Proofs" to consider debunking, I seriously doubt you or most folks are going to watch and consider all 200 proofs of this vid for one and a half hours (if you do, chances are you will seriously question this realm.) And then there are the countless YT vids to seriously consider that fully expose and destroy the lies while illuminating the truth. Many are extremely convincing. Either one is compelled to learn the truth on the matter or finds it irrelevant or "settled science" by the very same "Science Communitah," Academia, and Political Institutions that blatantly lie about Gender, Climate Change, Vaccines, Chemtrails, Illuminati/Luciferians/Satanists, Tesla, Natural Healing, NASA hoaxing, Politics, "Education," etc, etc. FWIW... The same "Modern" astronomy, cosmology, archaeology, and the "laws of sciences" which we've all been taught/indoctrinated in public schools as "gospel-science" have actually been nothing but...HYPOTHESES, which have been PURPOSELY WRONG, SLOPPY, and SHAM. Ping, I've recently read 5 books on the subject from contemporaries of Darwin and Einstein published between 1865-1922; basically contemporaries of all those who steamrolled their respective hypotheses of "Gravity" (Newton), Evolution (Darwin), Heliocentrism (Copernicus), Relativity (Einstein), Nebularism, aka "Sphere-ism" (Kant). Guess what? These foundations of "modern science" wind up as unproveable theoretical BS back then; And still unprovable theory NOW. That means "they've"knowingly been deceiving the world with layers of lies. For those like you who may eschew scriptural support on the subject of "Flat" or Plane Earthly realm, one particular book addresses all of the above, based only examining actual observable science: 'Kings Dethroned' Author: Gerrard Hickson https://www.amazon.com/Kings-Dethroned-History-Evolution-Astronomy/dp/1407691384 Einstein's "Relativism" is especially interesting in that his theory (yes, even HE admitted it could NOT be proven) was cooked up specifically to disprove the Michelson-Morley experiment which proved the earth is NOT SPINNING (look it up.) So...If the earth is not actually spinning, it destroys all the other theories on sphere-earth, geocentricism, gravity, a "Light Years" universe etal. Again -- THE definitive RECOMMENDED BOOK ON THIS ENTIRE SUBJECT: 'Kings Dethroned' Author: Gerrard Hickson Other highly recommended books (written and published back when knowledge wasn't censored or controlled by the PTB). To Believers: These book WILL ALSO consider Biblical/Divine authority and reference as to the shape and description of our Eealm and Firmament: Zetetic Astronomy -- Earth is Not a Globe Samuel Birley Rowbotham Terra Firma: the Earth Not a Planet, Proved from Scripture, Reason, and Fact David Wardlaw Scott The Greatest Lie on Earth: Proof That Our World Is Not a Moving Globe Edward Hendrie I found it amazing that Science and scientists were already so well in tune and familiar with and to natural earthly "laws" and our realm. Moreover -- unbeknownst to us today -- at the time (1880-1920) a very large battle waged over ALL these theories and whether or not they should be considered true and "Science." (The PTB at the time won that battle, obviously.) Einstein's sham 'Theory of Relativity' save the day for Fake Science. ***FINAL NOTE The 'Flat Earth Society' is CONTROLLED OPPOSITION, so dismiss it fully.
If you can't understand the most fundamental concepts of motion, you have no business even mentioning Einstein.
Fine. Please explain ANY "fundamental concept of motion." And while you're at it, exactly what did I claim about Einstein that you object to? Thanks...
Please explain ANY "fundamental concept of motion." Never heard of Newton's Laws of Motion I take it... From Wiki First law Second law Third law And while you're at it, exactly what did I claim about Einstein that you object to? You said, "Einstein's sham 'Theory of Relativity' save the day for Fake Science. " amongst other laughable remarks you made. You have no idea of what the Theory of Relativity is, so never mind making any sort of claim against it.
There are no replies to Comment # 92. End Trace Mode for Comment # 92.
Top • Page Up • Full Thread • Page Down • Bottom/Latest200 Proofs Earth is Not a Spinning Ball
#26. To: Pinguinite, wudidiz, ALL (#3)
(Edited)
They are not "proofs". They are arguments, and all I've considered are, to various degrees, easily dismissed.
It is devastatingly effective and convincing.
#49. To: Liberator (#26)
Einstein's "Relativism" is especially interesting in that his theory (yes, even HE admitted it could NOT be proven) was cooked up specifically to disprove the Michelson-Morley experiment which proved the earth is NOT SPINNING (look it up.)
#68. To: FormerLurker (#49)
If you can't understand the most fundamental concepts of motion, you have no business even mentioning Einstein.
#92. To: Liberator (#68)
Newton's laws of motion are three physical laws that, together, laid the foundation for classical mechanics. They describe the relationship between a body and the forces acting upon it, and its motion in response to those forces. More precisely, the first law defines the force qualitatively, the second law offers a quantitative measure of the force, and the third asserts that a single isolated force doesn't exist. These three laws have been expressed in several ways, over nearly three centuries,[a] and can be summarised as follows:
In an inertial frame of reference, an object either remains at rest or continues to move at a constant velocity, unless acted upon by a force.[2][3]
In an inertial frame of reference, the vector sum of the forces F on an object is equal to the mass m of that object multiplied by the acceleration a of the object: F = ma. (It is assumed here that the mass m is constant – see below.)
When one body exerts a force on a second body, the second body simultaneously exerts a force equal in magnitude and opposite in direction on the first body.
Replies to Comment # 92.