The Earth is FIXED in Space

spin a bucket of water over your head.

Wow! The water stays inside!

centrifugal force. Gotta love it.

If the earth STOPPED spinning we'd bounce around everywhere.

Actually, the speed of the earth at 1000 miles an hour is evident in that, at the equator, one cannot shoot a cannon ball at a target and hit it straight on. One must aim slightly to the left, or the spin of the earth will make it swerve off course.

I know it is quite useless to argue with you, Music... :frown2: you've already made up your mind and enjoy calling scientists fools too much to change... but I thought Kiki could do with some back up...

and by the way did you ever do that experiment I suggested?

A house built on sand will sink. A house built on rock will stand. That is the difference. The foundations of this conversation on the Earth and its fixed position are not agreed to by you and me. Therefore no further conversation would make sense.

The facts are as presented. I am again reminding you of them. You have only your dogmatic interpretations which are plainly in violation of these already established, verifiable, proven and simple facts. Further progress on this issue has been ruled out by your attitude to these same established, verifiable, measured and proven facts. Facts you can see for yourself and which you can find in all of the above cases. Facts which contradict your own dogmas. They are not interpretations of facts but are facts themselves.

You refuse to discuss this issue within the context of these plain, established and verifiable facts. In fact, you have no way of denying them. You are forced to impose on the subject only what you have learned from others who have the same dogmatic attitudes. And so you are trapped in a paradigm, unable to accept these findings of science and are determined to impose on others your dogmas of an occultist, pseudo-science.

Accept these facts given above and I will gladly converse with you on others. But, if not, we are all dragged in to your circular arguments. And that would not be honest. Not consistent with science and not fair on yourself.

Thanks

M, no one is saying that a flight from Miami to Los Angeles doesn't take much the same time as a flight from Los Angeles to Miami. And no one is saying that the ocean at the equator does not act in the way you say it does. And no one is saying that a plane flying through a cloud does not take the time to do so that you suggest it should. Everyone agrees that these are observable phenomenon.

But everyone also says that the heliocentric model not only explains these things, but predicts them. In fact, these things are completely consistent with the model. So it's no use saying that these things disprove the heliocentric model, because that model - right or wrong - is sophisticated enough to account for them. If you want to prove that the geocentric model is the truth, you not only have to show how it fits the observable facts, but you have to show why the heliocentric model doesn't.

And to do that, you have to understand the heliocentric model - you have to engage with the way it explains the phenomena you cite. Because it does explain them, just as yours does.

But if you're not prepared to do that, you must at least stop demanding that we agree that a plane journey in either direction takes about the same amount of time - no one's saying otherwise, because not only is it observably true, it's also consistent with both models.

{edit}The geocentric model is MATHEMATICALLY IMPOSSIBLE as the moon has not three phases nor only one during the night, every single night of the year.

You can keep denying other facts like tornados, what Katy North has just told you, whatever other people say, but you cannot, I repeat cannot, deny the moon with its cycle of 28 days as that is there for everyone to see. That is reality and reality by default is true. You can deny the effects that we feel of the earth turning under the pretence that they are a prodct of that thought, but you cannot deny what is in the sky now can you.

It is simply impossible to deny it as it is evidently in the sky. Keep denying that, and your house will sink into the sand of stupidity.

I repeat, and will also keep repeating that, unless you can come up with an explanation on that, your geocentric model is built on sand. Beside that, it is naturally, only you have to see the foundations collapse before you will acknowledge it and that will be very very painful. {edit}

medieval dogma: still 730
geocentric nonsense: still big f/phat horribly frightening, terrifying 0

~

Please do not personalise your arguments.

If you find that you are unable to accept/agree with other posters, please feel free to ignore this thread.

Posts containing personal/inflammatory comments will be deleted without any further notice.

~

If the earth is sitting in the middle of the earth in a FIXED location, then the calculations that NASA used to 'slingshot' Apollo 13 around the moon, back to a specified location (based on their belief of our solar system's movements that NASA upholds), would have ended that crew (and really any crew that had ever experienced space flight) in their ultimate demise.

But I imagine that all of the space flights, satellites, the moon walk, and NASA is just a conspiracy of events that have never happened...

Mark Bastable,

You are saying these three things are completely consistent with a rotating Earth ?

OK.

Let's test this.

Q1. Does your model suggest the land of America is rotating from West to East around 900 miles an hour during the 5 hours or so a plane takes to cross from Miami to Los Angeles and that a plane headed in the opposite direction takes from Los Angeles to Miami ? (A total change of around 4,500 miles). Give or take for head winds etc. Please give a simple Yes or No please ?

and -

Q2. Do you accept that the actual distance between Miami (Florida) and Los Angeles (California) is around 2348 miles (3778 kilometres) ? Yes or No please ?

http://wiki.answers.com/Q/How_many_m...les_California



Thank You

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by MarkBastable

M, no one is saying that a flight from Miami to Los Angeles doesn't take much the same time as a flight from Los Angeles to Miami. And no one is saying that the ocean at the equator does not act in the way you say it does. And no one is saying that a plane flying through a cloud does not take the time to do so that you suggest it should. Everyone agrees that these are observable phenomenon.

But everyone also says that the heliocentric model not only explains these things, but predicts them. In fact, these things are completely consistent with the model. So it's no use saying that these things disprove the heliocentric model, because that model - right or wrong - is sophisticated enough to account for them. If you want to prove that the geocentric model is the truth, you not only have to show how it fits the observable facts, but you have to show why the heliocentric model doesn't.

And to do that, you have to understand the heliocentric model - you have to engage with the way it explains the phenomena you cite. Because it does explain them, just as yours does.

But if you're not prepared to do that, you must at least stop demanding that we agree that a plane journey in either direction takes about the same amount of time - no one's saying otherwise, because not only is it observably true, it's also consistent with both models.

---

Would I be the first to agree with the view that the NASA space programme is entirely falsified ? No, I would not.

But this thread, fortunately, is on another subject. Isn't it ?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by BienvenuJDC

If the earth is sitting in the middle of the earth in a FIXED location, then the calculations that NASA used to 'slingshot' Apollo 13 around the moon, back to a specified location (based on their belief of our solar system's movements that NASA upholds), would have ended that crew (and really any crew that had ever experienced space flight) in their ultimate demise.

But I imagine that all of the space flights, satellites, the moon walk, and NASA is just a conspiracy of events that have never happened...

---

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Musicology

Would I be the first to agree with the view that the NASA space programme is entirely falsified ? No, I would not.

But this thread, fortunately, is on another subject. Isn't it ?

---

Isn't it totally relevant? NASA put men into space and brought them back using physics and calculations that you're saying aren't valid. If what you saying is true, Captain Lovell and his crew would still be floating around in space twiddling their thumbs.

Hurricane,

You say NASA put men into space (beyond the Van Allen Belt) and brought them back again. You are of course entitled to believe this and I respect your right to believe this. I do not. Since space beyond the Van Allen Belt would not be survived by Lovell or anyone else. Nor were any precautions taken to survive it. Space is utterly beyond the manned Apollo missions.

Captain Lovell and his crew never went into outer space. They were in low orbit of the Earth and never went outside of the Earth's atmosphere. But if you have evidence to the contrary which can be verified please present it on a different thread. Since this thread (as you can see) is on the subject of the Earth being fixed in space.

Regards

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Hurricane

Isn't it totally relevant? NASA put men into space and brought them back using physics and calculations that you're saying aren't valid. If what you saying is true, Captain Lovell and his crew would still be floating around in space twiddling their thumbs.

---

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Musicology

Q1. Does your model suggest the land of America is rotating from West to East around 900 miles an hour during the 5 hours or so a plane takes to cross from Miami to Los Angeles and that a plane headed in the opposite direction takes from Los Angeles to Miami ? (A total change of around 4,500 miles). Give or take for head winds etc. Please give a simple Yes or No please ?



Q2. Do you accept that the actual distance between Miami (Florida) and Los Angeles (California) is around 2348 miles (3778 kilometres) ? Yes or No please ?

---

If I answer yes or no these, will you answer two for me - without prevarication, delay, just-hang-ons or any other intervening conversation?

Yes, if they are relevant to the observable, published, and verifiable facts of science in respect of this thread. Of course. Since your delay in answering mine are already prevarication, delay and hang-ons, aren't they ?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by MarkBastable

If I answer yes or no these, will you answer two for me - without prevarication, delay, just-hang-ons or any other intervening conversation?

---

Well, as if you are going to answer them... We have seen what happened last time.

Still, you have not come up with an adequate explanation for the FACT that the moon has not several phases in the night sky, or only one ever every day.

Still denying relatity, are we.

Is that expanation still coming or do you admit that geocentrism is nonsense?

medieval dogma: still a immense 730
geocentric nonsense: still an amazing frightfully terrifyingly small, tiny in fact, 0

Well, Kiki, the clock is ticking. Let's see how fast we finally get an answer to my two questions. It has been several hours since they were posted as everyone can see. And guess which side is delaying ?

You've guessed it !! :blush:

Here are the two questions again -

Q1. Does your model suggest the land of America is rotating from West to East around 900 miles an hour during the 5 hours or so a plane takes to cross from Miami to Los Angeles and that of a plane headed in the opposite direction takes from Los Angeles to Miami ? (A total change of around 4,500 miles). Give or take for head winds etc. Please give a simple Yes or No please ?

and -

Q2. Do you accept that the actual distance between Miami (Florida) and Los Angeles (California) is around 2348 miles (3778 kilometres) ? Yes or No please ?

http://wiki.answers.com/Q/How_many_m...les_California

lol !

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by kiki1982

Well, as if you are going to answer them... We have seen what happened last time.

Still, you have not come up with an adequate explanation for the FACT that the moon has not several phases in the night sky, or only one ever every day.

Still denying relatity, are we.

Is that expanation still coming or do you admit that geocentrism is nonsense?

medieval dogma: still a immense 730
geocentric nonsense: still an amazing frightfully terrifyingly small, tiny in fact, 0

---

I asked my question about phases even days ago. Let's see how fast you are. Slower than a slug in my opinion, but there you go.

What do you think my model suggests?

I know the geocentric model suggests nonsense as I repeat again: it is MATHEMATICALLY IMPOSSIBLE for the moon and the sun to orbit the earth at respectively a cycle of 28 days and 24 hours, or respectively a cycle of 24 hours both because of what we see in the sky.

If that is impossible, therefore the geocentric model is also IMPOSSIBLE because it is not backed up by the moon in the night sky.

Show that it is possible.

And I have asked that we first agree on the 3 situations that have already been described. That of the Earth 'rotation', the speed of the ocean at the equator, and the long cloud being entered by a plane headed at constant speed in the opposite direction to the alleged rotation of Earth and its atmosphere. None of which you recognise as being relevant. Although they are the subject of this thread. 'The Earth is Fixed in Space'. And all 3 of them able to be verified by measured, agreed, published data.

So our conversation is not possible without that agreement.

All we have are answers to my two questions. Still awaited at this time from another poster (Mark Bastable) who promises to answer them. Let's hope he answers fast, without further delay, since I am due to go out soon myself !

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by kiki1982

I asked my question about phases even days ago.

Let's see how fast you are. Slower than a slug in my opinion, but there you go.

What do you think my model suggests?

I know the geocentric model suggests nonsense as I repeat again: it is MATHEMATICALLY IMPOSSIBLE for the moon and the sun to orbit the earth at respectively a cycle of 28 days and 24 hours, or respectively a cycle of 24 hours both because of what we see in the sky.

If that is impossible, therefore the geocentric model is also IMPOSSIBLE because it is not backed up by the moon in the night sky.

Show that it is possible.

---