An Indonesian baby is hooked on nicotine because his mother feels she is powerless to deny him his habit. He supposedly smokes 40 a day.
Unbelievable....Smoking at the age of two.
Printable View
An Indonesian baby is hooked on nicotine because his mother feels she is powerless to deny him his habit. He supposedly smokes 40 a day.
Unbelievable....Smoking at the age of two.
Quote:
Originally Posted by hillwalker
He'd have a lot more competition with all of his imitators. It has been estimated that, if their number continues to grow exponentially, by the next century one third of the Earth's male population will be made up of Elvis Presley impersonators.
Does it get any more depressing? The kid is two and smokes like he's been at it for years. I am speechless. How I wish this was a fake story.Quote:
Originally Posted by BienvenuJDC
Hillwalker,
Let's not bring religion or irreligion in to this discussion. Let's stay with the actual subject of the Oxford academic's post. Care to do that ?
You will notice (if you are not too dizzy) that the name of his article is - (and I quote) -
'Geostationary Satellites in a Geocentric Universe'.
Now, I don't want to go too fast for you. But this subject is not a religious one, is it ? Nor is it irreligious. Why not read it ?
Do you know what a geostationary satellite is ??? You do ? Or are you already too dizzy ? Great, let's proceed to the next point. If you read the document you will see it was not written by a fool but by a man qualified to talk about satellites and about the mathematics of gravity. Are you feeling dizzy yet ?
Would you care to tell us how, if the Earth is revolving on its axis, satellites maintain close location to stations on Earth which are monitoring them, and do so over a period of time ?
But don't bother. You already deserve another large shot of NASA hyperbole.
LOL :nopity:
http://www.geocentricperspective.com/geosat.pdf
Lokasenna,Quote:
Originally Posted by hillwalker
Kindly explain to us how the Earth can be rotating on its axis at a speed of close to 1,000 mph at the equator if satellites are fixed in to position with their equatorial base over any real period of time ? But, better still, why not take off your cowboy boots and study the article instead of talking nonsense as if it has been answered ? It has not.
You've been 'NASAfied' and it shows :nopity:
Try reading something which challenges your fairy stories and answering the points it makes on matters of scientific fact. Thank You. We've been here before and you abandoned ship. ''Hello Houston, I think we have a problem''.
Or, to put it another way, if the Earth is really revolving at around 1,000 mph at the equator, how are these satellites kept in close proximity to their fixed terrestrial bases over any period of time if the forces of gravity are acting upon it (the satellite) during all the time they are there in space ? To do so would require that satellite to be continually kept at the same rotating speed as a rotating Earth. Right ? The slightest deviation from the speed of such a satellite would take it many miles out of contact with its local base on Earth. Faster than Earth would propell it further forward than the Earth's orbit and slower would result in it being behind the alleged Earth orbit. 'Er, hello Houston'..................... And since the satellite is doomed to plunge to Earth by the forces of gravity, how then does it, can it, remain fixed above the tracking station at the same (alleged) speed as a revolving Earth ?
Game set and match !!!!!!
LOL !!!!!!!!!! Don't you just love science fiction ?
http://www.geocentricperspective.com/geosat.pdf
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lokasenna
You obviously have missed the point - this eminent physicist is the one who is dragging religion into the argument - and I am choosing to question his motivation for spreading such spurious mis-information.Quote:
Originally Posted by Musicology
Yes I do.Quote:
Originally Posted by Musicology
Qualified - according to whom? The nonsense he is spouting would suggest he is no more qualified than an ex-neighbour of mine. A Cambridge graduate - who gained a VQ in Domestic Science from Cambridge College of Technology. Although, on second thoughts, I do her a disservice. Her grasp of science is probably far greater.Quote:
Originally Posted by Musicology
My pleasure. These satellites remain geostationary because, having been positioned in an orbit approximately 22,236 miles above the Earth's surface, they are neither drawn back down by gravity nor carried out into space by centrifugal force. It begs the question -Quote:
Originally Posted by Musicology
I also wonder why you stoop to making personal jibes against anyone who picks holes in your fatuous arguments. But fret not, my friend, I shall lose no sleep over it.Quote:
Do you know what a geostationary satellite is?
H
Hillwalker,
Can you (finally) address yourself to what the article says about satellites, gravitational forces, and the alleged rotation of the Earth, whether you like the author's religion or not ? The alternative is to ignore what he has provided about satellites, gravity and the alleged rotation of the Earth, isn't it ? Where is the 'spurious misinformation' to which you refer ? Care to show us an example ? Just one ? You can do this, can't you ? Or can you ? No, of course you can't.
You say, and I quote ' The satellites remain 'geostationary' because, having been positioned in an orbit approximately 22,236 miles above the Earth's surface (is that 'approximate or exact' ????) they are neither drawn back down by gravity nor carried out into space by centrifugal force'
WOW !!!
And how is THAT magic trick done ?? Consider the nonsense you have just written. First of all, an orbit of 22,236 miles above the Earth is NOT 'approximate'. Is it ? Only in your head, that is. It's very, very precise, isn't it ? It's not approximate at all. Is it ? Any other orbit would not work, would it ? Any other orbit busts the mission. Why then do you call it 'approximate' ? Or do you even know what 'precise' means ? Shall I give a dictionary definition of 'precise' ? You've been NASIfied, haven't you ?
So, here is a satellite, according to you, not only amazingly locked in position to its ground station at a precise and permanent speed that is exactly and precisely equivalent to the supposed rotation of a pinpoint location on the Earth itself but also locked in to its own speed so precisely it never stops being overhead of that land station on Earth !!!!!!!!!!! Neither less nor more. How bizzare is that ? The satellite is so precisely linked to that land station it is the equivalent of threading a needle wearing a pair of boxing gloves while wearing dark glasses. And keeping that satellite at PRECISELY the same speed directly overhead for the entire duration of its life. Despite the inevitable pull of gravity on it while will end when it crashes in the ocean. You have heard of gravity, haven't you ? Neither less nor more lol !!! Who but the insane would believe such utter and complete NONSENSE !!!
How can a satellite even approach that single, unique, position overhead at a speed so precise when it arrives it is then fixed in relation to the ground station and is precisely fixed to rotate at that same speed when it finally arrives there ??
The lunatics have truly taken over the asylum !
Tell us how this stupendous feat of NASAfiction is achieved ? If at all. We would like a description of how it's done. A more crazy scenario cannot be invented, even by a cathode ray tube hustler from some fun factory. But you believe it all the same. Don't you ? You've seen it on TV. Right ?
You will 'lose no sleep over it'. You are so darned right. Keep snoring !
Over to you Mr Nasa.
:nopity:
Whether the sun revolves around us...or we are spinning, the results are the same. Does it matter which is the case?
Are you kidding me? The geocentic/heliocentric debate found its way into here?!
Yes it did...and I wish that it hadn't...
Quote:
Gary Coleman, the child star of the TV sitcom Diff'rent Strokes, died Friday after suffering an intercranial hemorrhage. He was 42.
Utah Valley Regional Medical Center spokeswoman Janet Frank says life support was terminated and Coleman died at 12:05 p.m.
Coleman was hospitalized Wednesday after falling and suffering a head injury at his home south of Salt Lake City, according to family members.
For a while, it seemed that Gary Coleman's cherubic face was everywhere, from TV to T-shirts to lunchboxes.
http://www.usatoday.com/life/people/...n_N.htm?csp=hf
You said it.Quote:
Originally Posted by Musicology
Once in place a satellite requires no motive power to maintain its speed relative to the Earth rotating below it - gravitational and centrifugal forces see to that. There is actually no magic involved - just a rocket which carries it up from the ground to the sky and programmed to release it at precisely the correct altitude. They can do things like that nowadays you will probably be amazed to learn.
The "magic" altitude of 22,236 miles (35,786 km)is precisely the point at which a satellite's orbital period matches, or is an integral part of, the period at which the Earth rotates: once every sidereal day (23 hours 56 minutes 4 seconds). In that case, the satellite is said to be geosynchronous.
When its orbit also lies entirely over the equator, the satellite remains stationary relative to the Earth's surface – and so it is said to be geostationary.
At the correct height gravity and centrifugal force balance out - hence natural forces (as per Newton's Laws of Gravity and Keppler's Third Law) keep the satellite in orbit.Quote:
Originally Posted by Musicology
I do so enjoy these civilised discussions - it really brings out the best (and worst) in people. It's like a game of tennis, except you keep running off with the ball because you want everyone to play by your rules.
Deuce I think, old chap.
H
With all the respect in the world for Gary....Quote:
Originally Posted by papayahed
"Watchu' talkin' 'bout, Willis?"
He'll live in our hearts forever...
Another great loss....
Kids Say the Darnest Things' Art Linkletter dies at 97...
I hate death... and theres just too many people dying lately. :(
Quote:
Originally Posted by DanielBenoit
Apologies everyone for allowing this silly thread to flourish - I have only just discovered that it is a reincarnation of another similar thread posted last month (?) which was eventually dumped by the mods.Quote:
Yes it did...and I wish that it hadn't...
You are right - this is a News thread and I shall allow our learned friend to thrive in isolation with his own belief system without interfering any further.
Such a shame he feels the need to indoctrinate everybody with such twaddle.
Peace upon you all..... and may the force be with us all (!?!).
H
Thank you Daniel Benoit for your brilliant refutation of the fact that the Earth stands still in space and is not rotating or revolving. It is easily the best analysis of that heresy posted by the Oxford academic.
'Geostationary Satellites in a Geocentric Universe' (2002)
http://www.geocentricperspective.com/geosat.pdf
The marvellous criticism of his calculations and observations which you have made here on this thread deserves a Nobel Prize. :nopity: and should be applauded by your brilliant colleagues.
In the meantime (and not wishing to deflate your ego) -
NASA are no longer answering public questions about the alleged ''rotation of the Earth on its axis each day''. On the NASA website under the subject of 'The Speed of the Turning of the Earth' is the following comment near the bottom of the page -
'''Questions on this topic are no longer responded to by the "Ask an Astrophysicist" service''
http://imagine.gsfc.nasa.gov/docs/as...s/970401c.html
How unfortunate !!! 'Hello Houston, I think you have a problem' !!!!
LOL !!!!!!!!!!! :flare:
Quote:
Originally Posted by DanielBenoit