Still no one drilled deeper than 8 miles deep, but we know for sure whats 4000 miles deep and there's iron core that's causing gravity.

Can you explain how earth can have a magnetic field if molten metal loses all ability to hold magnetic charge?

What Famous scientist told you that Newtonian gravity was debunked by Einstein and that even his interpretation is being challenged by by differnt theories?

So why are your simply stuck in 400 year old ideas from a bachelor whose real passion was trying to turn things into gold?

This post was edited by card_sultan on Aug 10 2017 02:02pm

Would that include this site?
https://www.nature.com/

You referenced them as a source for that impenetrable dome question
There are many articles on the site about the planet earth being a globe so we have to assume your own reference was unreliable

The idea that any one source is always 100% correct no matter what they say is a ridiculous assumption and one i would never presume.

I do like alot of their work, but if it has to do with strictly a globe bias - they like most people are guilty of using consensus pop science and that is simply obeying the powers that should not be who use us social constructs and fear based propaganda to control the people.

The idea we are in an open environment to space is another misnomer that "science" cannot openly address because it would also point out that we never went to the moon and then it would be just openly admitting that everyone was lied to and that's never going to happen, so you need to read between the lines. They have actually known about this plasmashere since the 50s buy this is the problem with lying, you just need to pile on more and more ridiculous lies on top of it till it reaches a critical point, and now they need to figure out how to tell you without losing cred. Not an easy task. I think they should just rip off that bandaid - blame idiots in the past and be done with it.

This post was edited by card_sultan on Aug 10 2017 02:24pm

You're making it really obvious that you can't answer the question.

You really have no idea what you're talking about.

In reality what determines if something sinks or floats is its mass per unit volume. Vibrations have nothing to do with it. If vibrations were important to density then literally every solid would be SIGNIFICANTLY more dense than every liquid.

Your answer can't even begin to approach why the density of ice changes as a function of temperature, with a minimum density at 4 celsius.

This post was edited by Thor123422 on Aug 10 2017 02:17pm

Fair enough .
But here we talking about a credible scientific source. You disagree with some of the info, fine.

But now with the people making conspiracy videos what proof is there of their credibility as individuals?
A far as their info is concerned did they get it from a source or did they make it up?

And yet you claim all your youtube videos are 100% correct

the problem here is your stuck with your definition of density as a product of strickly mass.

But lets look at the issue in terms of Memory sticks or Ram - does higher density mean a 2 gb memory stick weighs 128x less than a 256 gb memory stick?

Also i've noticed that you have a hard time dealing with open form compound words - not understanding that it creates a separate meaning that is completely different to your blinders engaged/tunnel vision definition of each word separately.

This post was edited by card_sultan on Aug 10 2017 02:37pm

nope, that is just your assumption - there's disinfo all over the place.

Thinking that would be about as dumb as claiming because if its a youtube video it must be wrong.

If people are going to claim that i may as start telling people to stfu - you dont have a phd in Typing and therefore no right to post on the internet.

This post was edited by card_sultan on Aug 10 2017 02:42pm

Its not because its on youtube.
Many scientific sites use youtube as a video hosting service and link it to their site ( like the one we just mentioned. )
They thus endorse the video and provide it with some credibility.

So if Nasa says something and then someone else says the exact same thing on video how is it any different than collusion? But i digress.
Something being on video is just such a non issue and troll by the trollers, dont fall for it. It neither proves or disproves anything - its simply a point of view that you can and dont agree with, thats all.

It all boils down to observable evidence vs an assumption, how far away is the sun and stars and is your evidence for it being that far observable and consistent. Relying on what you were taught is simply not enough. For example -Eratosthenes assumed that all sun rays are parallel because he assumed the sun was far away for his stick and shadows experiment to say that the earth must be a sphere.
But during the eclipse coming up it is explained by the sun rays converging the shadow of the moon. Nice jedi trick - sun rays are parallel when you want them to be but also converging when you need them to be. That kind of hypocrisy is called cherry picking to make your model work. Really its that simple.