What makes the world go around?

[Rens]

I don't understand why it's of importance that we're in the centre of the universe and everything moves around us.
Cause that has a very negative connotation. They always say: the whole world doesn't spin around you.
He has to be in the center.

Hey I googled that, look what I found LOL:

http://cnn.com.de/news/donald-trump-says-earth-flat/

 

[MoreCoffee]

I don't understand why it's of importance that we're in the centre of the universe and everything moves around us.
Cause that has a very negative connotation. They always say: the whole world doesn't spin around you.
He has to be in the center.

Hey I googled that, look what I found LOL:

http://cnn.com.de/news/donald-trump-says-earth-flat/

If Donald Trump says it is flat then it must be a lie

 

[Stravinsk]

I don't understand why it's of importance that we're in the centre of the universe and everything moves around us.
Cause that has a very negative connotation. They always say: the whole world doesn't spin around you.
He has to be in the center.

Hey I googled that, look what I found LOL:

http://cnn.com.de/news/donald-trump-says-earth-flat/

Importance:

1. The flat earth model acknowledges Creation account. It acknowledges a creator.

The Spinning Globe Heliocentric model denies Creation account and all the relative passages. It calls many passages in the Bible a lie.

2. The flat earth reality destroys Atheism and it destroys NASA and other space agencies who steal billions of dollars every year in taxpayers money

3. The flat earth reality destroys illusions meant to confuse human minds. Some of these illusions include:

1. The Sun is 93 million miles away - but somehow changes in size
2. The Sun is 93 million miles away - but for some strange reason the hottest part of the day is when the sun is directly over. Such small differences in a rotating earth should not account for such large heat differences within the same day if the sun is that far away. The people in space should be melting along with all the satellites and equipment.
3. The moon is 238,000 miles away - yet magically only illuminates relatively close clouds.
4. The Nile River impossibly runs uphill over the supposed curve of the Globe.
5. No thinking Human would ever think they could store water on the outside of a globe or spheroid - and yet - we are told this is exactly how God encompasses waters.
- Makes believing in God a bit difficult.
6. Enter Gravity. It's very selective. It is supposedly holding trillions of gallons of water in a globe shape that is rapidly spinning, so that none flies off into space - and yet - you or I could defy such a strong force simply by holding our breath in water. Imagine that. The bogus scientist arguments is that gravity is weak when they want it to be, but super strong when they want it to be. An exercise in confusing us. Works great.

4. The purpose of the Globe BEFORE NASA and so called "space missions" is for mental slavery. It is the ultimate mental slavery - it says you can't trust your eyes, your experiences, you intuition and none of your senses. Instead, you must bow and prostrate yourself before the so called "Science gods" - who get to tell you, on their authority alone, and not on prove-able science (real science) how the universe works. They get to steal your money in the process. And most importantly - because they tell you you came from some star dust that somehow became a piece of slime that evolved into an ape and finally into a human - you have 0 inherited worth. You are nothing to God. In fact, God in their model is extremely hard to believe in. He apparently doesn't care and there's no way we can be "created in His image" if this was the process.

So yes, it matters a lot, on many many different levels - and it has nothing to do with ego, as you are inferring. Because it does not place just 1 person at the center of creation - it places all of us at the center of it. Humans are of great worth in God's eyes. In the model we have all been taught, however - they are nothing, insignificant and worth nothing. It is no wonder the world is so messed up.

 

[Cassia]

I'm wondering how the tropics figger in to the flatearth equation?

 

[Brighten04]

Answer: It doesn't. The sun, moon and stars revolve around it. They revolve around us. And yes, each of us is very special. The place we live is special. It is the work of the Creator.

Hi Stravinsk. Your answer here sparked two questions that need answering.
1. If the universe revolves around the Earth, what is it that makes the universe go around?

2.Isn't the entire universe a work of God?

Thanks for you consideration.

 

[Stravinsk]

Hi Stravinsk. Your answer here sparked two questions that need answering.
1. If the universe revolves around the Earth, what is it that makes the universe go around?

2.Isn't the entire universe a work of God?

Thanks for you consideration.

The answer to the 2nd question is yes. But the model you are flirting with is based on Atheism, a big bang where everything comes from nothing because of the mystical force called "Gravity". The spinning Globe is the basis of much of western entertainment, especially the science fiction type.

To the first question. I know you ask from incredulity.

There is a point when one must make a choice between accepting an understanding of our universe that includes God and cannot fully be explained as if He didn't exist but fits with the facts...
or accepting a universe that is explained away without God, that doesn't fit the facts.

While your mind is out there, and while you're looking out there - into the land of fantasy and science fiction garbage - it is blind to where your body actually lives:

 

[MoreCoffee]

I favour the notion that a small electric motor makes the world go round.

 

[Brighten04]

The answer to the 2nd question is yes. But the model you are flirting with is based on Atheism, a big bang where everything comes from nothing because of the mystical force called "Gravity". The spinning Globe is the basis of much of western entertainment, especially the science fiction type.

To the first question. I know you ask from incredulity.

There is a point when one must make a choice between accepting an understanding of our universe that includes God and cannot fully be explained as if He didn't exist but fits with the facts...
or accepting a universe that is explained away without God, that doesn't fit the facts.

While your mind is out there, and while you're looking out there - into the land of fantasy and science fiction garbage - it is blind to where your body actually lives:

I would like to know why you are attacking me for asking a question that I really want the answer to. I don't have a problem with your believing whatever you want to believe. But, if you are proselytizing for your position, you should be able to answer some questions without denigrating the person asking. You said the universe revolves around the Earth. My question was what is it that makes the universe go around? Do you know the answer? Please answer without trying to guess my motive for asking, or trying to deflect by pointing out perceived flaws in my ability to understand. I am trying to civil and respectful of your knowledge of your position. I expect the same from you.

 

[Stravinsk]

I would like to know why you are attacking me for asking a question that I really want the answer to. I don't have a problem with your believing whatever you want to believe. But, if you are proselytizing for your position, you should be able to answer some questions without denigrating the person asking. You said the universe revolves around the Earth. My question was what is it that makes the universe go around? Do you know the answer? Please answer without trying to guess my motive for asking, or trying to deflect by pointing out perceived flaws in my ability to understand. I am trying to civil and respectful of your knowledge of your position. I expect the same from you.

I do not know what or if there is some sort of force that spins the stars, sun and moon around us. Perhaps there is, but I will not guess at what it is, give it a name or guess at how exactly it works. Some have postulated that it is a form of electromagnetism. Perhaps - but I do not know enough at this point to say yes or no.
Here is an example of electromagnetism moving an object over a flat surface:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=G9OTL-5eLT0
Again, I do not know for sure if that is how it works, but it is certainly one possibility.

That being said - the people who believe in a spinning globe claim they have an answer. So one will ask them "what causes the spin of your globe, and what keeps everything stuck to it?"

And they will say : GRAVITY!

However, their answer is not consistent with observable reality. Gravity must be a tremendous force to hold trillions of gallons of water to the outside of a spinning sphere shape. Water simply does not stick to the outside of spinning spheres. So if Gravity is what they say it is - it must be a tremendous force indeed.

And yet it can be countered by the weakest of forces. A tiny air bubble in water that rises against it. A balloon filled with helium that rises against it. Even your body, that weighs infinitely less than oceans of water, can defy it. You do so every time you put one foot in front of another while taking a walk, or jumping up. Remember, by doing so you are countering the tremendous force you believe holds trillions of gallons of water to the outside of a spinning Globe.

Then the spinning Globe believers will say "But Gravity is a relatively weak force"

Their position is not consistent - it is either a tremendous force that holds trillions of gallons of oceans to the outside of a rapidly spinning Globe, or it is not. And just as an aside - by necessity Gravity must be much stronger at the equator around a Globe than at or near the poles, since that area, being the widest circumference, is spinning fastest if the world is a spinning Globe. Of course it is not - because earth isn't a Globe or an oblate spheroid and it doesn't spin.

Flat earthers explain the thing called "gravity" in terms of density, buoyancy and aerodynamic drag. There is no force that holds trillions of gallons of water to the outside of a rapidly spinning sphere or spheroid - because we don't live on one.

 

[tango]

These kinds of "news" articles are the favorites of globeheads. It's required reading whenever the spinning globe is tested...because hey - Flat Earther's - YOUR THREATENING OUR ENTERTAINMENT...Buck Rogers, Star Trek, Star Wars etc...

I especially like the fares for 1st class patrons. $3,333. Ah, Freemason BS.

But "we believe in the bible".

Actually, no you don't. It tells a bunch of lies about a stationary earth, that has pillars and doesn't move. Being a Globe Believer means you treat the Creation account and all kinds of verses as complete fiction. It's calling it a lie. Sounds harsh? Yes, but it's the truth.

Go back to the flight tracking site I showed you. 0 flights go over Antarctica. It's practical to fly over Antarctica for a number of reasons if we lived on a Globe - but 0 flights fly over it!

Duh moment.

But...but...our entertainment! Luke, don't abandon me! Spaaaacccceeee......

I'm not sure you can conclude much from an observation that flights don't go over Antarctica.

The observation, in and of itself, could lead one to conclude something similar to your assertions in your other thread, that Antarctica is essentially the bit around the outside of a disc earth. One could also conclude that it's such a hostile environment it would spell certain death for any survivors if a plane should go down there, and it's therefore desirable to avoid flying over it in the interests of maximising survivability in the event a plane didn't make it to its destination.

 

[tango]

I do not know what or if there is some sort of force that spins the stars, sun and moon around us. Perhaps there is, but I will not guess at what it is, give it a name or guess at how exactly it works. Some have postulated that it is a form of electromagnetism. Perhaps - but I do not know enough at this point to say yes or no.
Here is an example of electromagnetism moving an object over a flat surface:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=G9OTL-5eLT0
Again, I do not know for sure if that is how it works, but it is certainly one possibility.

That being said - the people who believe in a spinning globe claim they have an answer. So one will ask them "what causes the spin of your globe, and what keeps everything stuck to it?"

And they will say : GRAVITY!

However, their answer is not consistent with observable reality. Gravity must be a tremendous force to hold trillions of gallons of water to the outside of a spinning sphere shape. Water simply does not stick to the outside of spinning spheres. So if Gravity is what they say it is - it must be a tremendous force indeed.

And yet it can be countered by the weakest of forces. A tiny air bubble in water that rises against it. A balloon filled with helium that rises against it. Even your body, that weighs infinitely less than oceans of water, can defy it. You do so every time you put one foot in front of another while taking a walk, or jumping up. Remember, by doing so you are countering the tremendous force you believe holds trillions of gallons of water to the outside of a spinning Globe.

Then the spinning Globe believers will say "But Gravity is a relatively weak force"

Their position is not consistent - it is either a tremendous force that holds trillions of gallons of oceans to the outside of a rapidly spinning Globe, or it is not. And just as an aside - by necessity Gravity must be much stronger at the equator around a Globe than at or near the poles, since that area, being the widest circumference, is spinning fastest if the world is a spinning Globe. Of course it is not - because earth isn't a Globe or an oblate spheroid and it doesn't spin.

Flat earthers explain the thing called "gravity" in terms of density, buoyancy and aerodynamic drag. There is no force that holds trillions of gallons of water to the outside of a rapidly spinning sphere or spheroid - because we don't live on one.

The earth isn't "rapidly spinning", the round earth approach holds that it takes 24 hours to perform one complete rotation about its axis, which means it rotates 15 degrees per hour. I don't know I'd call that "rapidly spinning"

As for gravity, the formula for gravitational attraction is something like gMm / r2 (can't be bothered to figure out how to use Latex to make it look pretty). g is a constant, M and m are the masses of the two objects, and r is the distance between them. The ocean weighs a lot more than I do, therefore the gravitational pull between the mass of the earth and the mass of the water is much larger than the gravitational pull between the earth and me. There's also a gravitational pull between you and me, but since (relatively speaking) we are very small and very far apart the gravitational attraction is so small as to be unmeasurable.

 

[Stravinsk]

I'm not sure you can conclude much from an observation that flights don't go over Antarctica.

The observation, in and of itself, could lead one to conclude something similar to your assertions in your other thread, that Antarctica is essentially the bit around the outside of a disc earth. One could also conclude that it's such a hostile environment it would spell certain death for any survivors if a plane should go down there, and it's therefore desirable to avoid flying over it in the interests of maximising survivability in the event a plane didn't make it to its destination.

By "hostile environment" - you mean - "too cold"? I memory serves that is the official reason planes don't fly over Antarctica. And btw - if you visit Antarctica - you cannot go to the geographic South pole. It's in an "off limits" area - BY LAW. But you can go to their "ceremonial south pole", which of course isn't real, since one cannot test it with a compass that should show North in every direction while standing at it.

But dealing with the "hostile environment/too cold" excuse for why planes do not fly over it. It's an interesting excuse because if it's a safety issue due to coldness, then surely the ISS orbiting the earth at 330 km (205 mi) or man going to and walking on the moon should present much worse weather conditions? They, along with all their equipment should melt in the sun side, and completely freeze over on the non-sun side.

But apparently not. The excuse they use is bollocks. Antarctica isn't flown over because it's not what the Globe depicts it as. There will never be, nor ever has been North-->South circumnavigation of "the globe", no matter what propaganda is written in a newspaper. It is circular ice-wall holding in the oceans.

 

[Stravinsk]

The earth isn't "rapidly spinning", the round earth approach holds that it takes 24 hours to perform one complete rotation about its axis, which means it rotates 15 degrees per hour. I don't know I'd call that "rapidly spinning"

Sigh.

As for gravity, the formula for gravitational attraction is something like gMm / r2 (can't be bothered to figure out how to use Latex to make it look pretty). g is a constant, M and m are the masses of the two objects, and r is the distance between them. The ocean weighs a lot more than I do, therefore the gravitational pull between the mass of the earth and the mass of the water is much larger than the gravitational pull between the earth and me. There's also a gravitational pull between you and me, but since (relatively speaking) we are very small and very far apart the gravitational attraction is so small as to be unmeasurable.

I see. So gravity decides it's strength or force of pull completely on mass?

More bollocks. I challenge you to do this simple experiment:

Take a flat piece of paper. Hold it out at arm's length and drop it. Count the time it takes to hit the ground.
Do it again.

Now take the paper and crumple it into a tight ball. Hold it out at arm's length and drop it. Count the time it takes to hit the ground.
You will notice that the time it takes is much shorter...

But you haven't changed the mass of the paper. Only it's shape.

 

[MoreCoffee]

Stravinsk, read up on physics. There's good teaching books on angular momentum, centripetal force and centrifugal force.

https://youtu.be/DLgy6rVV-08

 

[Stravinsk]

Stravinsk, read up on physics. There's good teaching books on angular momentum, centripetal force and centrifugal force.

https://youtu.be/DLgy6rVV-08

Can you dip the tether ball in water and have it stick to it while it flies around the pole? No.

If you replace the tether ball with, let's say, something that can hold water to it - like a tennis ball - if you likewise fling it around the pole will water stick to it? No again.

You lose.

 

[MoreCoffee]

Can you dip the tether ball in water and have it stick to it while it flies around the pole? No.

If you replace the tether ball with, let's say, something that can hold water to it - like a tennis ball - if you likewise fling it around the pole will water stick to it? No again.

You lose.

I could dip the ball in water and have the water stay on it is I rotated the ball on its own axis at one revolution per 24 hours.

I bet you didn't go get a book or even open a web page to investigate how centripetal force and centrifugal force work.

 

[Stravinsk]

I could dip the ball in water and have the water stay on it is I rotated the ball on its own axis at one revolution per 24 hours.

I bet you didn't go get a book or even open a web page to investigate how centripetal force and centrifugal force work.

Even if you slowly rotated it once in 24 hours the water would drip and the sun would slowly dry it out over time.

If you haven't noticed, the earth isn't losing any water. It's not floating up due to the sun's heat and escaping into space. The reason it isn't is for the same reason I don't need to water my closed terrariums. The water never leaves the terrarium no matter how hot it gets.

The other reason your comparison is not valid is that the tennis ball, being rotated at a speed coinciding to 1 revolution per 24 hours, is not equivalent to the 1670km/hour the earth is supposed to be rotating at the equator.

 

[MoreCoffee]

Even if you slowly rotated it once in 24 hours the water would drip and the sun would slowly dry it out over time.

If you haven't noticed, the earth isn't losing any water. It's not floating up due to the sun's heat and escaping into space. The reason it isn't is for the same reason I don't need to water my closed terrariums. The water never leaves the terrarium no matter how hot it gets.

The other reason your comparison is not valid is that the tennis ball, being rotated at a speed coinciding to 1 revolution per 24 hours, is not equivalent to the 1670km/hour the earth is supposed to be rotating at the equator.

The Earth rotates once every 24 hours so it is the same only smaller. The speed at the surface of the basket ball is 360 degrees per day just like it is for the rotating Earth. The water will not fly off the ball nor does it fly off the Earth. 360 degrees per day is the speed measured angularly.

Do that google search for centripetal force and centrifugal force. It may be helpful. It is part of one's due diligence is it not?

 

[Stravinsk]

The Earth rotates once every 24 hours so it is the same only smaller. The speed at the surface of the basket ball is 360 degrees per day just like it is for the rotating Earth. The water will not fly off the ball nor does it fly off the Earth. 360 degrees per day is the speed measured angularly.

Do that google search for centripetal force and centrifugal force. It may be helpful. It is part of one's due diligence is it not?

I've never heard of a spinning basketball nor a tennis ball being a good storage medium for water.

Ever heard of a Gravitron, MoreCoffee? When a person experiences the ride, they are stuck to the wall that is around the outside of the ride. What's important here is that they are INSIDE the ride, and the force is pushing them against the OUTER wall of the INSIDE of the ride:

If the wall wasn't there, and they were on the outside they would all be flung off.

Simple question - do we live inside the earth, or on the surface?

I know what you are likely to think...you'll be pulling up Gravity again *wink* *wink*

 

[MoreCoffee]

I've never heard of a spinning basketball nor a tennis ball being a good storage medium for water. Ever heard of a Gravitron, MoreCoffee? When a person experiences the ride, they are stuck to the wall that is around the outside of the ride. What's important here is that they are INSIDE the ride, and the force is pushing them against the OUTER wall of the INSIDE of the ride: If the wall wasn't there, and they were on the outside they would all be flung off. Simple question - do we live inside the earth, or on the surface? I know what you are likely to think...you'll be pulling up Gravity again *wink* *wink*

Ever tried that ride spinning at 360 degrees per day?