+- User

Welcome, Guest.
Please login or register.
 
 
 
Forgot your password?

+-Stats ezBlock

Members
Total Members: 96
Latest: sneakydove
New This Month: 2
New This Week: 1
New Today: 0
Stats
Total Posts: 7888
Total Topics: 513
Most Online Today: 357
Most Online Ever: 771
(July 30, 2019, 01:13:39 am)
Users Online
Members: 0
Guests: 213
Total: 213

Author Topic: Can You Debunk Flat Earth?  (Read 4111 times)

0 Members and 0 Guests are viewing this topic.

patrick jane

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Administrator
  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 3525
  • Karma: +1010/-0
  • Research Jesus Christ and then Research Flat Earth
  • Location: homeless in God's flat earth
  • Referrals: 35
    • Theology Forums
Re: Can You Debunk Flat Earth?
« Reply #39 on: March 20, 2019, 06:47:23 am »
1. In 1905, Einstein added time dilation to length contraction because it was required to fit his theory, not because he “discovered”  it. It has since been applied  to everything under  the sun so  that  the Einstein advocates can claim that everything works by SRT. So let’s assume that the GPS satellites are in an inertial frame. The fact is, the light beams traveling east-to-west are faster by 50ns than the beams traveling west-to-east. But according to SRT, there should beno difference of the two beams since both are in an inertial frame.  (And if they are not in an inertial frame, then SRT cannot be applied). So, in order to hide this discrepancy to save SRT, the GPS computers are preprogrammed with a Sagnac correction so that it appears that the east bound beam is going the same speed as the westbound beam, and voila! SRT is “proved.”

2. EINSTEIN SAID THAT IF THERE WAS ANY ETHER IN SPACE, THEN HIS THEORY IS NULLIFIED. HE SAID : If Michelson-Morley is wrong, then Relativity is wrong.  (Einstein ; The Life and Times, p. 107.) So, Einstein simply dismissed the fractional ether drift of MMX as a mere artifact. But the sad fact is, scientifically speaking, artifacts would not have appeared in all the dozens of interferometer experiments performed over the next 80 years.

In 1921, Einstein wrote to a friend that if "the Miller experiments" produced positive results *"the whole relativity theory collapses like a house of cards."

Miller's experiments produced consistently positive results.

The experiments of Sagnac and Michelson & Gale are rarely mentioned. Until recently it was quite difficult to find a reference to them. As Dean Turner pointed out "One may scan Einstein's writings in vain to find mention of the Sagnac or Michelson-Gale experiments. The same can be said of general physics text-books and of the McGraw-Hill Encyclopaedia of Science and Technology...Such an oversight constitutes a stinging indictment of professional scientific reporting". It is indeed quite difficult to get information on these experiments. They seem to be such an embarrassment to relativity that those who know about them would rather not say too much.

Quite a number of relativity experts, however, do know about them, and when pressed many admit that they show the Special Theory of Relativity (the theory taught to all science students, and the basis for much of "modern physics") to be inadequate.

3. Not only has General Relativity failed to provide adequate answers for stellar aberration, rotation, and
action-at-a-distance (that is, without resorting to Mach’s “distant rotating masses”), Van  Flandern
reminds us that…

“…it is not widely appreciated that this [General Relativity] is a purely mathematical model,
lacking a physical mechanism to initiate motion. For example, if a “space-time manifold” (like
the rubber sheet) exists near a source of mass, why would a small particle placed at rest in that
manifold  (on  the  rubber  sheet) begin to move toward the source mass? Indeed, why would
curvature of the manifold even have a sense of “down” unless some force such as gravity
already existed. Logically, the small particle at rest on a curved manifold would have no reason
to end its rest unless a force acted on it.”

 “…all existing experimental evidence requires the action of fields to be conveyed much faster
than lightspeed. This situation is ironic because the reason why the geometric interpretation
gained ascendancy over the field interpretation is that the implied faster-than-light action of
fields appeared to allow causality violations [e.g., moving backwards in time, according to the
principles of Special Relativity]….Yet the field interpretation of General Relativity requires
faster than light propagation. So if Special Relativity were a correct model of reality, the field
interpretation would violate the causality principle, which is why it fell from popularity.”

4. It is rather interesting that Relativists, on the one hand, claim that light is limited to 186,000 mps in Special Relativity, but admit that Special Relativity does not incorporate gravity or inertial forces.

On the other hand, they claim gravity is limited to the speed of light because Special Relativity  says nothing can go  faster  than light. But if Special Relativity has nothing to do with gravity, then how can Special Relativity claim that gravity’s speed
is limited to light speed? 
 
Moreover, in General Relativity, light, and we presume gravity, is not limited to 186,000 mps, and that is
because General Relativity deals with frames that  include gravity and inertial forces. But if gravity itself
is a non-inertial frame, then how can it be limited to 186,000 mps by Special Relativity which only deals
with inertial frames? This shows that the two theories of Relativity contradict themselves.

5. Einstein and Infield wrote in The Evolution of Physics (1938) :

“…the theory of relativity resembles a building consisting of two separate storeys (sic), the special  theory and the general theory. The special theory, on which the general theory rests, applies to all physical phenomena with the exception of gravitation.”

On this Dr. Kelly comments :

“So, if the special theory loses its basis, the general theory is also without foundation.”

The only original big idea in “Einstein's” so-called theory of general relativity was curved space. Yet through the 1980s and 1990s, and  today with the Hubble space telescope, astronomers have methodically and painstakingly developed three-dimensional atlases of the universe. However, they  have detected no curvature of space. Theoretical physicist Paul LaViolette observes :

“If space were curved by even the slightest amount, evidence of this would have shown up in astronomical surveys. When the data are checked, however, no evidence of curvature is found. Observations of the density of galaxies found at distant locations of the universe indicate that space is Euclidian out to the farthest limits of observation.”
 









Please Subscribe! Join my Free Forums for discussion, debate and fellowship
PayPal Donations : https://paypal.me/ThankYou3169
Flat Earth Forums : https://3169.createaforum.com/index.php?action=forum
Theology Forums :  https://theologyforums.com/index.php
YouTube : https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCpzjN3dF-_PnAc81SQVjqhg?view_as=subscriber
YouTube Back-Up Channel :  https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCMt94y3SDxgjpoucj6Yc_Xg
BitChute : https://www.bitchute.com/channel/xUZJpNWUz2T4/
Pinterest : https://www.pinterest.com/patrickjane3169/
Linkedin : https://www.linkedin.com/in/patrick-jane-833769164/
Hearing, believing and trusting the finished work of Jesus Christ on the cross; His death, burial and resurrection for the forgiveness of sins, the gospel of our salvation, and repenting, seals us with that Holy Spirit of Promise. The Lord is not slack concerning His promise. 2 Peter 3:9 KJV - 1 Corinthians 15:1-4 KJV - Ephesians 1:10-14 KJV - Romans 10:9-10 KJV - Romans 10:13 - Romans 10:17 - Ephesians 1:7 KJV - Colossians 1:14 KJV -


Copyright Disclaimer: All audio and music belongs to the owner/creator. This is a non-profit. Under Section 107 of the Copyright Act 1976, allowance is made for "fair use" for purposes such as criticism, comment, news reporting, teaching, scholarship, and research. Fair use is a use permitted by copyright statute that might otherwise be infringing.

patrick jane

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Administrator
  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 3525
  • Karma: +1010/-0
  • Research Jesus Christ and then Research Flat Earth
  • Location: homeless in God's flat earth
  • Referrals: 35
    • Theology Forums
Hearing, believing and trusting the finished work of Jesus Christ on the cross; His death, burial and resurrection for the forgiveness of sins, the gospel of our salvation, and repenting, seals us with that Holy Spirit of Promise. The Lord is not slack concerning His promise. 2 Peter 3:9 KJV - 1 Corinthians 15:1-4 KJV - Ephesians 1:10-14 KJV - Romans 10:9-10 KJV - Romans 10:13 - Romans 10:17 - Ephesians 1:7 KJV - Colossians 1:14 KJV -


Copyright Disclaimer: All audio and music belongs to the owner/creator. This is a non-profit. Under Section 107 of the Copyright Act 1976, allowance is made for "fair use" for purposes such as criticism, comment, news reporting, teaching, scholarship, and research. Fair use is a use permitted by copyright statute that might otherwise be infringing.

patrick jane

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Administrator
  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 3525
  • Karma: +1010/-0
  • Research Jesus Christ and then Research Flat Earth
  • Location: homeless in God's flat earth
  • Referrals: 35
    • Theology Forums
Re: Can You Debunk Flat Earth?
« Reply #41 on: April 13, 2019, 10:08:33 am »
Tycho Brahe's Arguments (see the comment section)


Comment :

What we have in the history of western science is a fully formed highly detailed geocentric cosmology and mathematical astronomy in the form of the Syntaxis Mathematiké from Ptolemaeus from the middle of the second century CE. This lays out in great detail all of the arguments for and against both the geocentric and heliocentric cosmologies known to the Greek astronomers and cosmologist over a period of about six hundred years. Not exactly fragments of ideas!

These arguments are logically argued scientific hypotheses based on solid empirical observation made by Babylonian and Greek astronomers over a period of approximately nine hundred years. Thanks to Ptolemaeus we know exactly why geocentrism was the standard. A standard that was accepted and defended in the works of Plato, Aristotle and many other Greek philosophers and mathematical commentators. This standard was also maintained and defended by many, many Islamic philosophers and astronomers from about 800 CE into the Early Modern Period.

The geocentric hypotheses of Greek and Islamic cosmology and astronomy were not based on religious beliefs but on solid empirical observations. The religious views of the astronomers and cosmologists who presented those hypotheses did not play a significant role in their work.

However the three main players in the introduction of heliocentric cosmology in the Early Modern Period Copernicus, Kepler and Newton (contrary to popular opinion Galileo only played a very minor role) were all deeply religious and the religious views of two of them did play a highly significant role in their scientific thought.

Copernicus was a cannon of a Catholic cathedral. Kepler trained for the priesthood in a Lutheran seminary and remained devotedly religious all of his life believing that he was serving his God through his astronomical work. Newton was by any standards a religious fanatic who believed that he had been special chosen by God to reveal the secrets of His creation.



10 minutes
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iEKOyGNLL58&t=384s
Hearing, believing and trusting the finished work of Jesus Christ on the cross; His death, burial and resurrection for the forgiveness of sins, the gospel of our salvation, and repenting, seals us with that Holy Spirit of Promise. The Lord is not slack concerning His promise. 2 Peter 3:9 KJV - 1 Corinthians 15:1-4 KJV - Ephesians 1:10-14 KJV - Romans 10:9-10 KJV - Romans 10:13 - Romans 10:17 - Ephesians 1:7 KJV - Colossians 1:14 KJV -


Copyright Disclaimer: All audio and music belongs to the owner/creator. This is a non-profit. Under Section 107 of the Copyright Act 1976, allowance is made for "fair use" for purposes such as criticism, comment, news reporting, teaching, scholarship, and research. Fair use is a use permitted by copyright statute that might otherwise be infringing.

Bladerunner

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Administrator
  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1041
  • Karma: +1025/-0
  • My Friend
  • Location: Tennessee, USA
  • Referrals: 0
Re: Can You Debunk Flat Earth?
« Reply #42 on: April 14, 2019, 08:58:42 pm »
Tycho Brahe's Arguments (see the comment section)


Comment :

What we have in the history of western science is a fully formed highly detailed geocentric cosmology and mathematical astronomy in the form of the Syntaxis Mathematiké from Ptolemaeus from the middle of the second century CE. This lays out in great detail all of the arguments for and against both the geocentric and heliocentric cosmologies known to the Greek astronomers and cosmologist over a period of about six hundred years. Not exactly fragments of ideas!

These arguments are logically argued scientific hypotheses based on solid empirical observation made by Babylonian and Greek astronomers over a period of approximately nine hundred years. Thanks to Ptolemaeus we know exactly why geocentrism was the standard. A standard that was accepted and defended in the works of Plato, Aristotle and many other Greek philosophers and mathematical commentators. This standard was also maintained and defended by many, many Islamic philosophers and astronomers from about 800 CE into the Early Modern Period.

The geocentric hypotheses of Greek and Islamic cosmology and astronomy were not based on religious beliefs but on solid empirical observations. The religious views of the astronomers and cosmologists who presented those hypotheses did not play a significant role in their work.

However the three main players in the introduction of heliocentric cosmology in the Early Modern Period Copernicus, Kepler and Newton (contrary to popular opinion Galileo only played a very minor role) were all deeply religious and the religious views of two of them did play a highly significant role in their scientific thought.

Copernicus was a cannon of a Catholic cathedral. Kepler trained for the priesthood in a Lutheran seminary and remained devotedly religious all of his life believing that he was serving his God through his astronomical work. Newton was by any standards a religious fanatic who believed that he had been special chosen by God to reveal the secrets of His creation.



10 minutes
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iEKOyGNLL58&t=384s

No but many have tried.

Blade
1 Cor 15:3-4.."For I delivered unto you first of all that which I also received, how that Christ died for our sins according to the scriptures; And that he was buried, and that he rose again the third day according to the scriptures:"

Acts 17:11.."These were more noble than those in Thessalonica, in that they received the word with all readiness of mind, and searched the scriptures daily, whether those things were so."
Like Like x 1 View List

patrick jane

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Administrator
  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 3525
  • Karma: +1010/-0
  • Research Jesus Christ and then Research Flat Earth
  • Location: homeless in God's flat earth
  • Referrals: 35
    • Theology Forums
Hearing, believing and trusting the finished work of Jesus Christ on the cross; His death, burial and resurrection for the forgiveness of sins, the gospel of our salvation, and repenting, seals us with that Holy Spirit of Promise. The Lord is not slack concerning His promise. 2 Peter 3:9 KJV - 1 Corinthians 15:1-4 KJV - Ephesians 1:10-14 KJV - Romans 10:9-10 KJV - Romans 10:13 - Romans 10:17 - Ephesians 1:7 KJV - Colossians 1:14 KJV -


Copyright Disclaimer: All audio and music belongs to the owner/creator. This is a non-profit. Under Section 107 of the Copyright Act 1976, allowance is made for "fair use" for purposes such as criticism, comment, news reporting, teaching, scholarship, and research. Fair use is a use permitted by copyright statute that might otherwise be infringing.

 

Related Topics

  Subject / Started by Replies Last post
68 Replies
10565 Views
Last post September 30, 2019, 07:34:58 pm
by Bladerunner
23 Replies
3821 Views
Last post June 20, 2019, 04:25:18 am
by patrick jane
2 Replies
1235 Views
Last post May 21, 2019, 08:47:51 pm
by patrick jane
2 Replies
760 Views
Last post August 12, 2019, 01:36:21 pm
by patrick jane
112 Replies
1247 Views
Last post Today at 04:05:37 am
by patrick jane

+-Recent Topics

Deep State Exposed - Project Veritas and More by patrick jane
Today at 05:11:57 pm

A Journey Thru Genesis by Olde Tymer
Today at 07:38:35 am

Christianity Today Magazine - October 2019 by patrick jane
Today at 04:42:12 am

PJ'S FLAT EARTH LIVE STREAMS ON YOUTUBE !!! by patrick jane
Today at 04:05:37 am

The Iran War 2019 by patrick jane
Today at 03:06:02 am

Trump 2020 - Winning !!! by patrick jane
October 15, 2019, 11:34:02 pm

Politics Today by patrick jane
October 15, 2019, 11:33:50 pm

Re: Trump 2020 - Winning !!! by patrick jane
October 15, 2019, 11:33:29 pm

Re: Politics Today by patrick jane
October 15, 2019, 11:33:16 pm

R U Ready To Leave?! by MichaelC
October 15, 2019, 09:10:10 pm

ROMANS 3:21 BUT NOW, THE RIGHTEOUSNESS OF GOD by doug
October 15, 2019, 11:48:49 am

Does your doctrine/theology limit God? by Lori Bolinger
October 15, 2019, 10:23:16 am

WILL THE BODY OF CHRIST COME BACK WITH CHRIST AT HIS COMING? by doug
October 15, 2019, 08:35:28 am

Christ's Ways by Olde Tymer
October 15, 2019, 07:54:38 am

Your Favorite Music, Images and Memes by Bladerunner
October 14, 2019, 10:07:31 pm

Should Christians Celebrate Halloween? | Is Halloween a Pagan Holiday? by Bladerunner
October 14, 2019, 08:06:40 pm

Late Term Abortion Law by Bladerunner
October 11, 2019, 08:42:28 pm

ROMANS 2:1 WILL THE GOOD BE SAVED? by doug
October 11, 2019, 09:14:04 am