#Login Register


  • 2 Vote(s) - 3 Average
Home 


Is it OK . . .
Anonymous Kritter Show this Post
06-13-2019, 04:03 PM #76
Anonymous Kritter Incognito Anonymous
 
(36 minutes ago)grav Wrote:  
(7 hours ago)Anonymous Kritter Wrote:  There is no centrifugal force . The Earth rotates at EXACTLY the same speed as the tip of an hour hand on a 24 hour clock . Twice as slow as the hour hand on your kitchen clock .

If that were the case, when we fly on planes at 30,000 feet , we would weigh even lighter again as you have now dramatically increased the size of the arc radius of the Earth .

An Ant walking on the hour hand or the Town Hall clock does not get thrown off when he reaches the tip and that is traveling TWICE as fast as the Earth is . We would only ever notice we are revolving at 1000mph if there was a fixed marker in our skies and attached to space .

Obvious shillogic.
Shameless too, how you blatantly use the word 'speed' instead of rpm's, or rpd's in the case of the globe rotating once per day.

Speed is distance covered in a time period. Your clock ant is speeding along at one foot per hour. A dead ant at the equator is spinning 1000 miles per hour.

Speed is speed is speed. Rim speed velocity is the true language to describe the motion of the outer edge of a spinning object. A fighter jet can fly in a straight line at 1000 mph. Or more. Put an ant on the wing of a jet and see how long before it would be knocked off.

Please don't put the ant inside the jet to make a false comparison. And then please explain how the air must sync speeds with the surface moving under it at over mach 1.

"A fighter jet can fly in a straight line at 1000 mph."

You dopey twit, you proved how brainless you are !
If in fact the "rim speed " of the Earth was actually 1000mph, the Jet , traveling at 1000mph could barely keep up with it and it could land like a Helicopter !!!!!!!!!

https://imgflip.com/i/33d4te
Anonymous Kritter Show this Post
06-13-2019, 04:09 PM #77
Anonymous Kritter Incognito Anonymous
 
(5 minutes ago)Anonymous Kritter Wrote:  
(42 minutes ago)grav Wrote:  
(7 hours ago)Anonymous Kritter Wrote:  There is no centrifugal force . The Earth rotates at EXACTLY the same speed as the tip of an hour hand on a 24 hour clock . Twice as slow as the hour hand on your kitchen clock .

If that were the case, when we fly on planes at 30,000 feet , we would weigh even lighter again as you have now dramatically increased the size of the arc radius of the Earth .

An Ant walking on the hour hand or the Town Hall clock does not get thrown off when he reaches the tip and that is traveling TWICE as fast as the Earth is . We would only ever notice we are revolving at 1000mph if there was a fixed marker in our skies and attached to space .

Obvious shillogic.
Shameless too, how you blatantly use the word 'speed' instead of rpm's, or rpd's in the case of the globe rotating once per day.

Speed is distance covered in a time period. Your clock ant is speeding along at one foot per hour. A dead ant at the equator is spinning 1000 miles per hour.

Speed is speed is speed. Rim speed velocity is the true language to describe the motion of the outer edge of a spinning object. A fighter jet can fly in a straight line at 1000 mph. Or more. Put an ant on the wing of a jet and see how long before it would be knocked off.

Please don't put the ant inside the jet to make a false comparison. And then please explain how the air must sync speeds with the surface moving under it at over mach 1.

"A fighter jet can fly in a straight line at 1000 mph."

You dopey twit, you proved how brainless you are !
If in fact the "rim speed " of the Earth was actually 1000mph, the Jet , traveling at 1000mph could barely keep up with it and it could land like a Helicopter !!!!!!!!!

https://i.imgflip.com/33d4te.jpg

https://i.imgflip.com/33d4te.jpg
Anonymous Kritter Show this Post
06-13-2019, 04:20 PM #78
Anonymous Kritter Incognito Anonymous
 
06-13-2019, 07:12 PM #79
grav Member
Posts:137 Threads:0 Joined:Jun 2019
(3 hours ago)Anonymous Kritter Wrote:  
(3 hours ago)Anonymous Kritter Wrote:  
(3 hours ago)grav Wrote:  
(10 hours ago)Anonymous Kritter Wrote:  There is no centrifugal force . The Earth rotates at EXACTLY the same speed as the tip of an hour hand on a 24 hour clock . Twice as slow as the hour hand on your kitchen clock .

If that were the case, when we fly on planes at 30,000 feet , we would weigh even lighter again as you have now dramatically increased the size of the arc radius of the Earth .

An Ant walking on the hour hand or the Town Hall clock does not get thrown off when he reaches the tip and that is traveling TWICE as fast as the Earth is . We would only ever notice we are revolving at 1000mph if there was a fixed marker in our skies and attached to space .

Obvious shillogic.
Shameless too, how you blatantly use the word 'speed' instead of rpm's, or rpd's in the case of the globe rotating once per day.

Speed is distance covered in a time period. Your clock ant is speeding along at one foot per hour. A dead ant at the equator is spinning 1000 miles per hour.

Speed is speed is speed. Rim speed velocity is the true language to describe the motion of the outer edge of a spinning object. A fighter jet can fly in a straight line at 1000 mph. Or more. Put an ant on the wing of a jet and see how long before it would be knocked off.

Please don't put the ant inside the jet to make a false comparison. And then please explain how the air must sync speeds with the surface moving under it at over mach 1.

"A fighter jet can fly in a straight line at 1000 mph."

You dopey twit, you proved how brainless you are !
If in fact the "rim speed " of the Earth was actually 1000mph, the Jet , traveling at 1000mph could barely keep up with it and it could land like a Helicopter !!!!!!!!!

https://i.imgflip.com/33d4te.jpg

https://i.imgflip.com/33d4te.jpg

İmage

chuckle.gif
Aw, gee, AE guy, you are so thoughtful.  hug.gif  Will this be available in tee shirts?

One little question . . . why "the" full grav?
And shouldn't there be a picture of the dopey idea people have about flat earth? like it's a frisbee between Venus and Mars.
The whole world should know by now that we don't believe in the space place as advertised in movies and teevee.
06-13-2019, 07:29 PM #80
grav Member
Posts:137 Threads:0 Joined:Jun 2019
(3 hours ago)Anonymous Kritter Wrote:  https://i.imgflip.com/33d8c5.jpg

 chuckle.gif

İmage

Another homage por moi?
Merci, AE ami.

Sorry to criticize a free gift, but you don't spell its with an apostrophe, unless you mean 'it is' -- "the" is also unnecessary.

A water drop is free fall, eh? On the International Fake Space Station, eh?

Whenever I embed a new image, it doesn't work. See my next post.
06-13-2019, 07:38 PM #81
grav Member
Posts:137 Threads:0 Joined:Jun 2019
İmage

This one shows how accumulated water works in the real world. It seeks its own level.

Ergo, bodies of water are level. Flat. Wind and temperatures will of course stir up ripples or waves. All conditions being still, water will always be flat.
Oceans are level. On a flat earth.
anonymous knitter Show this Post
06-13-2019, 08:37 PM #82
anonymous knitter Incognito Anonymous
 
anonymous knitter Show this Post
06-13-2019, 08:39 PM #83
anonymous knitter Incognito Anonymous
 
Not commonly known is the fact that the two oceans have different sea levels, and different levels of high tide. At the entrance to the Panama Canal, the Pacific Ocean can rise as much as 20 feet, but 45 miles away, the difference between high tide and low in the Atlantic is just three feet.

^ speaking of sea level chuckle.gif
06-13-2019, 11:48 PM #84
grav Member
Posts:137 Threads:0 Joined:Jun 2019
.
http://www.atlantanconspiracy.com/2015/0...-ball.html

16) The experiment known as “Airy’s Failure” proved that the stars move relative to a stationary Earth and not the other way around. By first filling a telescope with water to slow down the speed of light inside, then calculating the tilt necessary to get the starlight directly down the tube, Airy failed to prove the heliocentric theory since the starlight was already coming in the correct angle with no change necessary, and instead proved the geocentric model correct.

İmage
06-14-2019, 12:09 AM #85
grav Member
Posts:137 Threads:0 Joined:Jun 2019
.
The sun is supposed to be 93 million miles away. At perihelion, it's a mere 91 million miles.

Got it?
Sooooo. As the sun rises and sets during the day, it should still be 91 to 93 million miles away. Should it increase and decrease in size at that distance?

No -- is the correct answer. yep.
This is very short. You only need to watch the first minute or so.



Anonymous Kritter Show this Post
06-14-2019, 04:44 AM #86
Anonymous Kritter Incognito Anonymous
 
(8 hours ago)anonymous knitter Wrote:  Not commonly known is the fact that the two oceans have different sea levels, and different levels of high tide. At the entrance to the Panama Canal, the Pacific Ocean can rise as much as 20 feet, but 45 miles away, the difference between high tide and low in the Atlantic is just three feet.

^ speaking of sea level  chuckle.gif

Well that wrecks Grav ! IF water ACTUALLY remained level, the water in the Canal would be stationary and stagnate ! 37.gif
Anonymous Kritter Show this Post
06-14-2019, 04:59 AM #87
Anonymous Kritter Incognito Anonymous
 
(9 hours ago)grav Wrote:  
(Yesterday, 04:20 PM)Anonymous Kritter Wrote:  https://i.imgflip.com/33d8c5.jpg

 chuckle.gif

İmage

Another homage por moi?
Merci, AE ami.

A water drop is free fall, eh?

Yes and he was quick enough to poke a straw into it and form an air bubble as it fell past him !
Anonymous Kritter Show this Post
06-14-2019, 05:04 AM #88
Anonymous Kritter Incognito Anonymous
 
(4 hours ago)grav Wrote:  .
The sun is supposed to be 93 million miles away. At perihelion, it's a mere 91 million miles.

Got it?
Sooooo. As the sun rises and sets during the day, it should still be 91 to 93 million miles away. Should it increase and decrease in size at that distance?

No -- is the correct answer. yep.
This is very short. You only need to watch the first minute or so.




The correct answer is that the Sun DOES NOT RISE AND SET, we revolve away from it. THAT is why it APPEARS to get smaller, WE get further away from it , depending where we are standing . Standing at one of the Poles, the size of the Sun would not appear to change much throughout the day .
06-14-2019, 11:39 AM #89
grav Member
Posts:137 Threads:0 Joined:Jun 2019
(6 hours ago)Anonymous Kritter Wrote:  
(Yesterday, 07:39 PM)anonymous knitter Wrote:  Not commonly known is the fact that the two oceans have different sea levels, and different levels of high tide. At the entrance to the Panama Canal, the Pacific Ocean can rise as much as 20 feet, but 45 miles away, the difference between high tide and low in the Atlantic is just three feet.

^ speaking of sea level  chuckle.gif

Well that wrecks Grav ! IF water ACTUALLY remained level, the water in the Canal would be stationary and stagnate !  37.gif

Dynamite the land between the oceans and see what waters do. They join and seek a new sea level.
06-14-2019, 11:48 AM #90
grav Member
Posts:137 Threads:0 Joined:Jun 2019
(6 hours ago)Anonymous Kritter Wrote:  
(11 hours ago)grav Wrote:  .
The sun is supposed to be 93 million miles away. At perihelion, it's a mere 91 million miles.

Got it?
Sooooo. As the sun rises and sets during the day, it should still be 91 to 93 million miles away. Should it increase and decrease in size at that distance?

No -- is the correct answer. yep.
This is very short. You only need to watch the first minute or so.




The correct answer is that the Sun DOES NOT RISE AND SET, we revolve away from it. THAT is why it APPEARS to get smaller, WE get further away from it , depending where we are standing .  Standing at one of the Poles, the size of the Sun would not appear to change much throughout the day .

oh.
So we rotate and revolve at 90+ million miles away, yet the sun changes its size enormously during the day as it leisurely rolls overhead. That's some mighty big refraction.

And for proof of the sun's distance we have the moon landing hoaxers' word. And they triangulated the distance over a 6 month period. From a moving object. Earth. It's like running with a tape measure next to moving train to find how long it is.



Home 




 



DISCLAIMER / Terms of Service (TOS):
Kritterbox.com - Socialize anonymously, commentary, discussion, oddities, technology, music and more!  This website is provided "as is" without warranty of any kind, either expressed or implied. kritterbox.com shall not be liable for any damages whatsoever, including, without limitation, those resulting from loss of use, data or profits, whether or not advised of the possibility of damage, and on any theory of liability, arising out of or in connection with the use or performance of this site or other documents which are referenced by or linked to this site.
This website exists solely for the purposes of exchange of information, communication and general entertainment. Opinions from posters are in no way endorsed by kritterbox.com. All posts on this website are the opinion of the authors and are not to be taken as statements of fact on behalf of kritterbox.com. This site may contain coarse language or other material that kritterbox.com is in no way responsible for. Material deemed to be offensive or pornographic at the discretion of kritterbox.com shall be removed. kritterbox.com reserves the right to modify, or remove posts and user accounts on this website at our discretion. kritterbox.com disclaims all liability for damages incurred directly or indirectly as a result of any material on this website. Fictitious posts and any similarity to any person living or dead is coincidental.
All users shall limit the insertion of any and all copyrighted material to portions of the article that are relevant to the point being made, with no more than 50%, and preferably less of the original source material. A link shall be visible in text format, embedded directly to the original source material without exception.
No third party links, i.e. blogs or forums will be accepted under any circumstances, and will be edited by staff in order to reflect the original source of copyrighted material, or be removed at the sole discretion of kritterbox.com.
Fair Use Notice:
This site may contain copyrighted material the use of which has not always been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. Users may make such material available in an effort to advance awareness and understanding of issues relating to economics, individual rights, international affairs, liberty, science, and technology. This constitutes a 'fair use' of any such copyrighted material as provided for in section 107 of the US Copyright Law. In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C.Section 107, the material on this site is distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the included information for educational and/or research purposes.
This Disclaimer is subject to change at any time at our discretion.
Copyright © 2011 - 2017 kritterbox.com