d2jsp
Log InRegister
d2jsp Forums > Off-Topic > General Chat > Science, Technology & Nature > Monolths
Prev1139140141142143174Next
Closed New Topic New Poll
Member
Posts: 52,224
Joined: Jan 3 2009
Gold: 8,902.00
May 5 2017 01:20pm
Quote (tard_sultan @ May 5 2017 11:27am)
Wait so the guy who posted on a debunking site , his proof is a review post on amazon?

omg thats so funny, nice scientific proof - a multi.

Ok, let me get this straight – The Government never conspires if someone talks about it on utube/internet – but a Goverment propaganda site on the internet that does nothing but find stupid excuses for you to taught as “evidence” is more credible to you? Wow, that's pretty pathetic.

Foucault's pendulum would be Empirical except it is does stops swinging at some point, does the Earth stop spinning too? Also Eclipses disrupt its swing. Could the rotation of the swing be do to the magnetic rotation of the sun, moon and stars. Airy's Failure is an experiment that failed to prove the Earth was spinning and it is the stars that spin. Basically its a large string bob that tricks the mind with its centripetal swings that reacts to the magnetic rotation of the sun and stars that goes around Earth.

Stellar Parallax hasn't changed in thousands of years yet the Earth spins around the Milky way at 500,000 mph, so not blindly believing that one.
Nikon P900 camera footage with a 2000m zoom suggests the stars are not burning balls of gas but just a result of Sonoluminescence.


Great Circle Navigation - oh is that the one that uses the Azimuth equidistant map as shows distances on a flat plane?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rYTDsdofCFc

Gyroscopes are useful for measuring or managing orientation because it maintains its rigidity in space and so the inner gimbal can be used to detect the rotation of the Earth about its axis because it seeks its true north, rather than the magnetic north

That video about debunking myth busters did not prove rockets allow combustion to occur in a vacuum
because the first two experiment showed combustion would not happen and the third one – the rocket only worked because he enclosed the rocket in a separate enclosed sealed tube, as soon as the force of the rocket blew off the seal, thus making that chamber a vacuum as well, the rocket did not work anymore, the reason his stick propeller still showed spin was because of the force of the rocket exploding inside a non vacuum and the force it created allowed spin of his stick but you can see it was slowing down, because the rocket no longer worked.



Actually its quality sphere-chucker wrecking, if it wasn't you would try so hard, but it is cute to see you utterly fail over and over.


One of the very many points in the debunking included the poor reviews of the altimeter. They used Google Earth as well as other software to replicate the position the photo was taken from, and with publicly available data, they were able to show that the photo was taken 100+ feet higher in elevation than his altimeter said he was. But just keep dodging that McIntyre himself admitted his video was shit so that you can pretend that reality didn't just rain down on you like a ton of bricks.

Not even sure exactly what you're trying to address with your next pair of thought-disjuncted sentences.

That the pendulum stops swinging does not change the fact that it demonstrates the rotation while it is swinging. Holy fucking derp. There is no such thing as Airy's failure, because there wasn't a failure, except in understanding everything at play in the experiment. More learned people pointed this out at the time.

There you go, YET AGAIN, showing off your spectacular inability to understand the differences between absolute motions and relative motions. Is continually showing off a mental deficiency a defense mechanism for you?

No, great circle navigation does not depend on a flat Earth map. It relies on flat maps and mathematical conversions of courses to achieve the shortest distance from one point to another. All of the world's ocean shipping and all of the world's airline traffic use it to minimize fuel expenses and travel times.

...and what, pray tell, does the Earth's mass and linear velocity have to do with a gyroscope "measuring or managing orientation?" Be precise, because you keep bringing it up as if it mattered.

Yes, it did. Maybe you missed how that tiny capsule was demolished? You want to pretend that a miniature initial flash of rocket did that? The rocket needed the tube's pressure, as the author noted. The pressure was almost instantly lost, but it was enough to fire the rocket and allow it to burn up, which it did.
Member
Posts: 63,097
Joined: Jan 11 2005
Gold: 9,765.00
Warn: 60%
May 5 2017 01:55pm
Quote (Santard @ May 5 2017 09:20am)
One of the very many points in the debunking included the poor reviews of the altimeter. They used Google Earth as well as other software to replicate the position the photo was taken from, and with publicly available data, they were able to show that the photo was taken 100+ feet higher in elevation than his altimeter said he was. But just keep dodging that McIntyre himself admitted his video was shit so that you can pretend that reality didn't just rain down on you like a ton of bricks.

Not even sure exactly what you're trying to address with your next pair of thought-disjuncted sentences.

That the pendulum stops swinging does not change the fact that it demonstrates the rotation while it is swinging. Holy fucking derp. There is no such thing as Airy's failure, because there wasn't a failure, except in understanding everything at play in the experiment. More learned people pointed this out at the time.

There you go, YET AGAIN, showing off your spectacular inability to understand the differences between absolute motions and relative motions. Is continually showing off a mental deficiency a defense mechanism for you?

No, great circle navigation does not depend on a flat Earth map. It relies on flat maps and mathematical conversions of courses to achieve the shortest distance from one point to another. All of the world's ocean shipping and all of the world's airline traffic use it to minimize fuel expenses and travel times.

...and what, pray tell, does the Earth's mass and linear velocity have to do with a gyroscope "measuring or managing orientation?" Be precise, because you keep bringing it up as if it mattered.

Yes, it did. Maybe you missed how that tiny capsule was demolished? You want to pretend that a miniature initial flash of rocket did that? The rocket needed the tube's pressure, as the author noted. The pressure was almost instantly lost, but it was enough to fire the rocket and allow it to burn up, which it did.


So Google Earth and Amazon reviews are a credible source but if anyone says or shows any empirical evidence that doesn't agree with your bias - its not scientific enough for you, wow your retarded logic only confirms your low mental capacity to understand anything.

So they need to a way to make people think they are going around a curved earth but they are just traveling on the flat plane - great circle jerk travel - Bam!
Basically it proves that the Azimuthal Equidistant map is correct in showing the "lower hemisphere" as a much more expansive flat plane.

And that debunk video did not show your assumption of the rocket continuing to burn cause the stick is shown to slow down, cause the force of the rocket wasn't working anymore, duhhhh

Foucault's Failure was for idiots and obviously your one who fell for it. Airy's Failure doesn't exist? - wow thats the dumbest thing to be ever said on this site, congratulations!
You're a failure. String bobs actually prove the Earth is flat.

This is why you got so angry when i doubted the ball picture, people rage when you leave a cult.

This post was edited by card_sultan on May 5 2017 02:04pm
Member
Posts: 52,224
Joined: Jan 3 2009
Gold: 8,902.00
May 5 2017 03:19pm
Quote (tard_sultan @ May 5 2017 02:55pm)
So Google Earth and Amazon reviews are a credible source but if anyone says or shows any empirical evidence that doesn't agree with your bias - its not scientific enough for you, wow your retarded logic only confirms your low mental capacity to understand anything.

So they need to a way to make people think they are going around a curved earth but they are just traveling on the flat plane - great circle jerk travel - Bam!
Basically it proves that the Azimuthal Equidistant map is correct in showing the "lower hemisphere" as a much more expansive flat plane.

And that debunk video did not show your assumption of the rocket continuing to burn cause the stick is shown to slow down, cause the force of the rocket wasn't working anymore, duhhhh

Foucault's Failure was for idiots and obviously your one who fell for it. Airy's Failure doesn't exist? - wow thats the dumbest thing to be ever said on this site, congratulations!
You're a failure. String bobs actually prove the Earth is flat.

This is why you got so angry when i doubted the ball picture, people rage when you leave a cult.


He didn't have empirical evidence. He had falsified evidence, meaning he had a null hypothesis. That's the thing about science, you have to document it so others can try to see of you made mistakes along the way. This guy's mistakes were pointed out to him, and he at least had enough intellectual honesty to admit it. Unlike you. Liar.

No, it doesn't prove that at all, that's just you being a stupid monkey flinging shit at the wall hoping it sticks. And really, if your moronic "lower hemisphere" were accurate, why has no one ever documented flying over India and the Himalayas to get from Sydney to Johannesburg instead of flying over the ocean the whole way like they do in the real world? For real, on a flat Earth, for a direct flight from Sydney to Johannesburg, there isn't a passenger airliner in the world with the range to make it, yet somehow, magically, those passengers keep getting from one to the other without reporting that they had to stop for fuel on the way.

Oh, I guess that plastic just burned itself up in the vacuum? That wasn't a deformation by explosion, that was a deformation by burning, dumbass.

That's right, "Airy's failure" doesn't exist, because THERE WAS NO FAILURE.
Member
Posts: 63,097
Joined: Jan 11 2005
Gold: 9,765.00
Warn: 60%
May 5 2017 03:45pm
Quote (Santard @ May 5 2017 11:19am)
He didn't have empirical evidence. He had falsified evidence, meaning he had a null hypothesis. That's the thing about science, you have to document it so others can try to see of you made mistakes along the way. This guy's mistakes were pointed out to him, and he at least had enough intellectual honesty to admit it. Unlike you. Liar.

No, it doesn't prove that at all, that's just you being a stupid monkey flinging shit at the wall hoping it sticks. And really, if your moronic "lower hemisphere" were accurate, why has no one ever documented flying over India and the Himalayas to get from Sydney to Johannesburg instead of flying over the ocean the whole way like they do in the real world? For real, on a flat Earth, for a direct flight from Sydney to Johannesburg, there isn't a passenger airliner in the world with the range to make it, yet somehow, magically, those passengers keep getting from one to the other without reporting that they had to stop for fuel on the way.

Oh, I guess that plastic just burned itself up in the vacuum? That wasn't a deformation by explosion, that was a deformation by burning, dumbass.

That's right, "Airy's failure" doesn't exist, because THERE WAS NO FAILURE.


Empirical evidence is falsified, but an Amazon review is "scientific proof" - good grief - every one of your posts reaches a new level of retardation.

The plastic burned up from the initial explosion, didn't you hear it go bang/pow - he did not show sustained combustion, that's why his stick fan was obviously slowing down.

The first two experiments alone prove that the Myth Busters where not using a vacuum to show their results. If you have any proof of sustained combustion in a unsealed chamber inside an actual vacuum and not just a vacuum looking chamber, i'd love to see it, until then it's just one of your blatantly fabricated low intelligent thoughts that occur whenever you open your mouth as you so often do.

Your anger that I left your monotheistic sun worshipping cult is obvious, and it's apparently blocking any critical thought from getting through. You should really get over it.

oh and btw - Airy's Failure actually happened, and it failed to prove the earth moved, that the rotating stars were the cause for light aberration

This post was edited by card_sultan on May 5 2017 03:52pm
Member
Posts: 52,224
Joined: Jan 3 2009
Gold: 8,902.00
May 5 2017 03:58pm
Quote (tard_sultan @ May 5 2017 04:45pm)
Empirical evidence is falsified, but an Amazon review is "scientific proof" - good greif - every one of your posts reach a new level of retardation.

The plastic burned up from the initial explosion, didn't you hear it go bang/pow - he did not show sustained combustion, that's why his stick fan was obviously slowing down.

The first two experiments alone prove that the Myth Busters where not using a vacuum to show their results. If you have any proof of sustained combustion in a unsealed chamber inside a vacuum, id love to see it, until then it's just one of your blatantly fabricated low intelligent thoughts that occur whenever you open your mouth as you so often do.

Your anger that I left your monotheistic sun worshipping cult is obvious, and it's apparently blocking any critical thought from getting through. You should really get over it.


No, you simpleton, the Amazon review was a piece of the puzzle. He used a shitty altimeter. His altitude was shown to be well off from where he stated he was by means other than a fucking Amazon review, for fuck's sake. Does it often hurt to be this stupid? Or does your mother send you out with a padded vest and a helmet every day? How does she keep you from licking the fingerprints on windowpanes?

You've never burned plastic? I have, and I can guarantee you that the plastic was burned, not "exploded." Sound doesn't travel in a vacuum. The sound you heard was one of two things, a portion of the plastic bottle hitting the wall of the pressure cooker, or the ignition cables hitting the wall of the pressure cooker. I'm not denying that some miniature explosion took place, one probably did when the bottle's rear seal broke, but the explosion couldn't possibly explain the appearance of the bottle the rocket was in when he opened the chamber.

That test showed you that you need pressure to have a rocket burn in vacuum, which rockets are made to do - create a pressure chamber for combustion. It blows my mind how much reality you have to deny to grip this level of retardation.
Member
Posts: 63,097
Joined: Jan 11 2005
Gold: 9,765.00
Warn: 60%
May 5 2017 04:26pm
Quote (Santard @ May 5 2017 11:58am)
No, you simpleton, the Amazon review was a piece of the puzzle. He used a shitty altimeter. His altitude was shown to be well off from where he stated he was by means other than a fucking Amazon review, for fuck's sake. Does it often hurt to be this stupid? Or does your mother send you out with a padded vest and a helmet every day? How does she keep you from licking the fingerprints on windowpanes?

You've never burned plastic? I have, and I can guarantee you that the plastic was burned, not "exploded." Sound doesn't travel in a vacuum. The sound you heard was one of two things, a portion of the plastic bottle hitting the wall of the pressure cooker, or the ignition cables hitting the wall of the pressure cooker. I'm not denying that some miniature explosion took place, one probably did when the bottle's rear seal broke, but the explosion couldn't possibly explain the appearance of the bottle the rocket was in when he opened the chamber.

That test showed you that you need pressure to have a rocket burn in vacuum, which rockets are made to do - create a pressure chamber for combustion. It blows my mind how much reality you have to deny to grip this level of retardation.


Slammed dunked focker - look at this - absolute proof you cannot deny - :rofl:



Sound doesnt travel in a vacuum - um ok, i guess he debunked that one too. :P

This post was edited by card_sultan on May 5 2017 04:29pm
Member
Posts: 63,097
Joined: Jan 11 2005
Gold: 9,765.00
Warn: 60%
May 5 2017 04:48pm
And he actually say the rocket cannot sustain a burn in a vacuum at 6:45 of that video, the reason you can't accept it is because you have 100000000% faith in your military propaganda.

Member
Posts: 52,224
Joined: Jan 3 2009
Gold: 8,902.00
May 5 2017 05:28pm
Quote (tard_sultan @ May 5 2017 05:26pm)
Slammed dunked focker - look at this - absolute proof you cannot deny - :rofl:

http://i68.tinypic.com/124kbus.jpg

Sound doesnt travel in a vacuum - um ok, i guess he debunked that one too. :P


I bet your mom wished she swallowed.

Did you really not know that sound waves require a medium to travel?

Here's a YouTube, you always believe everything on YouTube:



Quote (tard_sultan @ May 5 2017 05:48pm)
And he actually say the rocket cannot sustain a burn in a vacuum at 6:45 of that video, the reason you can't accept it is because you have 100000000% faith in your military propaganda.

http://i64.tinypic.com/2zhh6cw.jpg


Did you also not realize that the person who made the video and the person who superimposed the script had different conclusions?

This post was edited by Santara on May 5 2017 05:38pm
Member
Posts: 66,666
Joined: May 17 2005
Gold: 17,384.69
May 5 2017 05:42pm
Quote (crab_sultan @ 5 May 2017 23:48)
And he actually say the rocket cannot sustain a burn in a vacuum at 6:45 of that video, the reason you can't accept it is because you have 100000000% faith in your military propaganda.
http://i64.tinypic.com/2zhh6cw.jpg


lol i though my browser was bugged
Member
Posts: 63,097
Joined: Jan 11 2005
Gold: 9,765.00
Warn: 60%
May 5 2017 06:43pm
Quote (Saucisson6000 @ May 5 2017 01:42pm)
lol i though my browser was bugged


Lol.

Quote (Santard @ May 5 2017 01:28pm)
blah blah blah


Dude , i have my comment from Amazon - Flat Earth can not be denied!

Why are you posting youtube video - they are all lies as you said.

Quote (Santara @ May 5 2017 01:28pm)
Did you also not realize that the person who made the video and the person who superimposed the script had different conclusions?


of course they are different people - the first two lines are what the guy says verbatim - the part about taking Nasa as 100% truth is the commentators thoughts on to why he cant figure it out like you - because you take anything that Nasa says as 1000000000000000% irrefutable. Cmon they are the Gods of Truth after all right?

This post was edited by card_sultan on May 5 2017 07:10pm
Go Back To Science, Technology & Nature Topic List
Prev1139140141142143174Next
Closed New Topic New Poll