Gravity is proportional to the mass of the object you know, lol. The gravity of Earth overwhelmingly outpowers the gravity of the glass.

My question is why would Earth's water not stay on Earth even with Earth being the most powerful gravitational force in the vicinity?

Keep in mind when you're analyzing a theory other than yours you don't do it from the lens of your theory.



Earth is an oblate spheroid. People have literally seen it from space lol. We have a space station inhabited by multiple non-allied, unfriendly countries from which there has been photos and videos taken. We can even see it fly overhead with the naked eye at exactly the expected orbiting speed that it would be if Earth was spheroidal. The movements of the stars, planets, comets, etc. are exactly what would be expected in a spheroidal model and completely incompatible with a flat model. We can see Earth's curvature even from a plane. Our GPS systems only work in a spheroidal model. They would break down in a flat model. There is overwhelming evidence in favor of a spheroidal model, overwhelming evidence contradicting a flat model, and virtually no evidence in support of a flat model. You're being contrarian and irrational because of your conspiracy theories and don't care about what the evidence actually supports.

P.S. I'm not going to keep responding because the fact that I have to argue in favor of such an obviously true fact is ridiculous. I doubt this post will change your mind because you're so unreasonable, but it should.

This post was edited by Voyaging on Oct 22 2016 11:55pm

That's the one. Card sultan is going to read that post and say "Oh, shit, now I get it. You have finally explained it clearly to me, and now I no longer believe in a flat earth. Thank you for the enlightening words, my good friend."

card_sultan is unable to learn don't bother i've explained his issue with momentum several times using basic math and basic kinematics but it doesn't matter

Perhaps the craziest thing about this general election is that at times, Donald Trump and his campaign have appeared so incompetent that they haven't even wanted to win.

Trump refused to let his campaign do research his past to prepare for Clinton campaign attacks, leaving him blindsided in a few debates. His campaign did zero self-opposition research. He's surrounded himself with advisers that have no idea what they are doing instead of political strategist and scientists like Clinton.

He has also refused for his campaign to conduct proper data operations and build adequate ground games. Clinton's campaign is much more sophisticated and pervasive than Trump's.

So it is disturbing to me that a demagogue with almost zero policy substance and authoritarian undertones is only 5.9 points down on the most "qualified presidential candidate ever," especially when you consider how bad of a campaign he has ran and how he can't stay out of his way for more than two seconds.

Even if Clinton wins in a landslide in the electoral college, Trump is still likely to get about 42% of the popular vote and obtain millions of votes. If there was a candidate with the exact same agenda as Trump who was perhaps an even slightly better politician who ran an even slightly better campaign, what's stopping them from winning this election?

This post was edited by ThatAlex on Oct 23 2016 10:59am

Gravity makes no sense, has never been proved, and is just a theory and if the earth is really spinning at 1000 mph - you should be able to just fly a few 100 feet off the ground in a helicopter and just stay there for a few hours and travel 1000s of miles. But of course you dont - why - because earth's supposed gravity is also holding the air in the relative direction of the spin of the earth - so if the earth and the air we breath is spinning at 1000 mph , orbiting the sun at 66.600 mph and spiraling around the galaxy at 500,000 mph - all in a constant vectored direction - how does an airplane fly against the air in the opposite direction?

Here's a cartographic approach to proving the shape of the Earth with observable empirical evidence. You probably shouldn't watch it though if you fear the resulting cognitive dissonance which is an inevitable feeling will be too strong in you.



This post was edited by card_sultan on Oct 23 2016 11:34am

Even NASA admits that what you think is a "1 photographic shot" , is just a composite made of hundred of high altitude photographs and just straight photoshopped, cgi, computerized and completely fake. You obviously need to do research here and stop blindly accepting your own fantasies.



Inhabited by Masons and liars which Neil Armstrong called parrots who cant fly and then also said that discoveries will be possible once we remove truths protective layer.
So the truth needs to be protected, really - is it because people like you cant handle the truth - what truth do you think it is that you canthandle?
Also we cant see spy planes that fly at 3x less than the iss - but you you wanna tell me you see satellites and the iss that are smaller in size and fly at 3 x greater height - shut the front door, please.

Also the Hubble can "photograph" 13 billion years into space - but it cant take any photos of the moon or have complete coverage of earth - please they show you drawings and what they want to.

Also i saw a photo from the earth of the ISS taken with a telescope, to me and a lot of commentators it looked pretty fake - the military knows how to project holographic images - wake up - i've seen concerts with Micheal Jackson and Tupac performing on stage after they were dead, so dont tell me you've never heard of this technology - again do some research.



Actually - if you look at experiments that try to duplicate gravity and orbits - they all wind up crashing into the sun - its called orbital decay - perpetual or synchronous orbit is a myth and not possible, Comets are a great example - if they take over 100 years to "orbit" - but the sun is traveling at 500,000 mph in the opposite direction - what draws it back in the exact same path - its not gravity - cause gravity doesn't exist.

Also if we were really orbiting around the sun -day and night would be reversed when we were on opposite sides of the sun, and actually being at a slight angle to the sun - doesn't explain the seasons - if that heat and light are really traveling 93 million miles.

No we dont - you only see the curve created by use very wide angle lenses and fish eye lenses which curves horizon and and warp your perspective of things in the distance, you should learn about optics and how lenses work.

You should probably phone the US Military and tell them that because they use a completely flat co ordination system. Basically this is the Longitude/latitude argument - that they only work on a globe - such silliness really. Gps can also be worked out with triangulation and high altitude planes, plus noticed when those planes went missing in South East Asia - they didn't have satellite photos/data to search - they were just winging it.




****Fixed



Nothing is even remotely true about the heliocentric sun worshiping model, But i doubt this post will change your mind because you're being unreasonable and i suspect you and many others will continue to be completely blind and ignorant to the lies.

This post was edited by card_sultan on Oct 24 2016 10:15am

Planets orbiting the sun are accelerating, as in turning in an arc, due to gravity.

I'm impressed that you know that the word acceleration has a English meaning of "speeding up" and a physics meaning of moving.

nice basic understanding - except the earths orbit around the sun is not circular but elliptical - nor is it theorized that the earth travels at the exact same speed all the time - wonder how that happens - does the suns gravity change - cause surely its mass doesn't change? hmm you should look that up.

Also - i was watching a documentary on the science last night talk about the Black Knight Satellite, so these satellites (and the ISS) are traveling at 17,000 mph - consistently - they dont need a force to keep pushing them right, they got that force because rockets pushed them into space and there is no fiction - its just a vacuum of space right? So when an Astronot goes for a space walk - he can just float freely on a string because he is also going 17000 mph right?

So why when they drop a tool or something - why does it not simply travel along with them and goes flying back into space because that object is also going 17,000 miles an hour and there in a vacuum?
The iss has no propulsion system, so why do some objects stay at 17,000 mph speed in orbit and other objects just float around freely like they are in water and some object just fly away at lightning speed? Why were earlier space stations always worried about orbital decay and now its just fixed i guess - perpetual continuous orbit is possible - even though it doesn't work like that in nature, joke is what it is.

This post was edited by card_sultan on Oct 24 2016 11:57am