d2jsp
Log InRegister
d2jsp Forums > Off-Topic > General Chat > Science, Technology & Nature > Monolths
Prev1144145146147148174Next
Closed New Topic New Poll
Member
Posts: 92,940
Joined: Dec 31 2007
Gold: 2,299.94
May 9 2017 12:39pm
Quote (card_sultan @ May 9 2017 12:30pm)
Well if your saying the dome...


I'm gonna stop you there.

what im saying, is that whether something is a "closed environment" or "open environment" can change, depending on many factors. Mainly what's trying to pass through.

Simply, the earth's atmosphere can be closed to air trying to leave it while also being open to meteorites entering or spaceships leaving. The same way that a car repels air but not a bullet, whether it's fired inside or outside of the car.

i'm just glad we finally agree.
Member
Posts: 66,666
Joined: May 17 2005
Gold: 17,384.69
May 9 2017 12:52pm
finally founf card_slutan brother:



:lol: GJ rly !
Member
Posts: 63,097
Joined: Jan 11 2005
Gold: 9,765.00
Warn: 60%
May 9 2017 01:25pm
Quote (Saucisson6000 @ May 9 2017 08:52am)
finally founf card_slutan brother:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DKSKUIjBiM0

:lol: GJ rly !


http://www.npr.org/sections/thetwo-way/2014/02/14/277058739/1-in-4-americans-think-the-sun-goes-around-the-earth-survey-says

So 82 million people in the usa alone are my brothers? Who knew i had such a big family, I better go buy some birthday cards!

Lots know gravity is a joke, we just dont talk about it. :)

This post was edited by card_sultan on May 9 2017 01:28pm
Member
Posts: 66,666
Joined: May 17 2005
Gold: 17,384.69
May 9 2017 04:02pm
Quote (card_sultan @ 9 May 2017 20:25)
http://www.npr.org/sections/thetwo-way/2014/02/14/277058739/1-in-4-americans-think-the-sun-goes-around-the-earth-survey-says

So 82 million people in the usa alone are my brothers? Who knew i had such a big family, I better go buy some birthday cards!

Lots know gravity is a joke, we just dont talk about it. :)


lol this is terrific, but i checked and i think you also got alot of cousins in europe too
Member
Posts: 63,097
Joined: Jan 11 2005
Gold: 9,765.00
Warn: 60%
May 9 2017 04:49pm
Quote (Saucisson6000 @ May 9 2017 12:02pm)
lol this is terrific, but i checked and i think you also got alot of cousins in europe too


I heard Flat Earth is blowing up in Russia too, bout time this paradigm shift wakes people up to all the diggery pokery applesauce going on. :thumbsup:
Member
Posts: 52,224
Joined: Jan 3 2009
Gold: 8,902.00
May 9 2017 04:58pm
Quote (tard_sultan @ May 9 2017 12:02pm)
No proof standard aircraft is used
No proof all speeds of all jet streams (theirs more than one idiot and they flow in multiple directions)
No speedometer/odometer/altimeter readings
No mechanical inspection of all equipment, instrument on plane that they aren't altered in any way

As planes fly higher the air is thinner, the means they can go faster cause the air is less dense, perhaps they are flying at an higher altitude then they say. The get away with this by claiming they are flying at optimal speed/height – optimal for what – to lie to you?

https://www.quora.com/Do-airplanes-fly-faster-at-higher-altitudes

“As altitude increases, air temperature decreases. The speed of sound in air varies directly with temperature, so as temperature decreases, so does the true airspeed associated with a given Mach.

As aircraft climb to the transition zone at a constant indicated airspeed (the speed shown on their instruments), their true airspeed (actual speed through the air) increases. This is because as air gets thinner it has less impact on the sensors that drive the airspeed indicators, so for a given indicated airspeed, true airspeed increases with altitude. So, Yes.”

Dodge more.


The first link in the post you quoted has the proof of the aircraft used, the Boeing 747-400, noted as "B744" on the upcoming flights, and with the tail numbers of the completed flights. But you're not interested in verifiable fact, so who am I kidding. You're already spewing that the airlines are now in on the scheme alongside NASA.
High altitude winds are known to break 100 mph. But even a 100 mph tailwind (assuming you actually have this wind the ENTIRE WAY does not turn a 660 mph cruising speed into a 1027 mph overland speed. And I was using a Google average for flight times. Some of the flights listed in that link are landing after just a 13 hour flight instead of 14:10. So on that particular flight, the aircraft would have had to averaged 1120 mph, close to double its optimal cruising speed. And to answer your question, "optimal" is the term used to note getting to your destination having used the least amount of fuel possible. So optimal air speeds are just the airlines' way of saying "go XXX this fast to get there using the least amount of fuel."

Altered equipment? You really want to cling desperately to an all encompassing conspiracy, don't you? Is this like a defense mechanism for you? A real life manifestation of the backfire effect? It certainly appears to be the case, so no matter how well we all demolish all your bullshit proofs, it will never sink in. Your primitive mind won't allow it. You are intellectually INCAPABLE of accepting criticism.
Member
Posts: 63,097
Joined: Jan 11 2005
Gold: 9,765.00
Warn: 60%
May 9 2017 05:21pm
Quote (Santara @ May 9 2017 12:58pm)
The first link in the post you quoted has the proof of the aircraft used, the Boeing 747-400, noted as "B744" on the upcoming flights, and with the tail numbers of the completed flights. But you're not interested in verifiable fact, so who am I kidding. You're already spewing that the airlines are now in on the scheme alongside NASA.
High altitude winds are known to break 100 mph. But even a 100 mph tailwind (assuming you actually have this wind the ENTIRE WAY does not turn a 660 mph cruising speed into a 1027 mph overland speed. And I was using a Google average for flight times. Some of the flights listed in that link are landing after just a 13 hour flight instead of 14:10. So on that particular flight, the aircraft would have had to averaged 1120 mph, close to double its optimal cruising speed. And to answer your question, "optimal" is the term used to note getting to your destination having used the least amount of fuel possible. So optimal air speeds are just the airlines' way of saying "go XXX this fast to get there using the least amount of fuel."

Altered equipment? You really want to cling desperately to an all encompassing conspiracy, don't you? Is this like a defense mechanism for you? A real life manifestation of the backfire effect? It certainly appears to be the case, so no matter how well we all demolish all your bullshit proofs, it will never sink in. Your primitive mind won't allow it. You are intellectually INCAPABLE of accepting criticism.


So obviously you didn't read my facts and want to desperately cling to your uneducated bias while dodging proving any proof beyond what your told and expected to think.
Its funny how so many of the globe myths have fallen and yet your still clinging to a thread of hope. I think that should the name for the next Star Wars film -"A Thread of Hope" Hold on tight ok?
Member
Posts: 52,224
Joined: Jan 3 2009
Gold: 8,902.00
May 9 2017 05:23pm
Quote (tard_sultan @ May 9 2017 06:21pm)
So obviously you didn't read my facts and want to desperately cling to your uneducated bias while dodging proving any proof beyond what your told and expected to think.
Its funny how so many of the globe myths have fallen and yet your still clinging to a thread of hope. I think that should the name for the next Star Wars film -"A Thread of Hope" Hold on tight ok?


Which "facts" do you believe were missed?
Member
Posts: 63,097
Joined: Jan 11 2005
Gold: 9,765.00
Warn: 60%
May 9 2017 05:47pm
Quote (Santara @ May 9 2017 01:23pm)
Which "facts" do you believe were missed?


The fact that mach is different at different altitude and airspeed doesn't work properly
The fact that the ground is curved a bit while even at 20 feet proves that people dont see the curve from Airplanes
The fact you dodged all my questions
The fact that you think a number painted on a tail fin must be that the plane is normal in every way, its like your in war and you see a guy in an American Uniform, then you think that must be because hes an American

Dude your anger is misplaced, i'm not the one lying to you - are you still 1000% sure the Earth is a ball still? Really?
Member
Posts: 52,224
Joined: Jan 3 2009
Gold: 8,902.00
May 9 2017 06:01pm
Quote (tard_sultan @ May 9 2017 06:47pm)
The fact that mach is different at different altitude and airspeed doesn't work properly
The fact that the ground is curved a bit while even at 20 feet proves that people dont see the curve from Airplanes
The fact you dodged all my questions
The fact that you think a number painted on a tail fin must be that the plane is normal in every way, its like your in war and you see a guy in an American Uniform, then you think that must be because hes an American

Dude your anger is misplaced, i'm not the one lying to you - are you still 1000% sure the Earth is a ball still? Really?


Mach 1 at 35,000 feet is 663 mph. The higher you go, the lower the number. A 747-400 doing .85 mach at 35,000 feet is travelling 564 mph. Just because you asked a question that wasn't addressed doesn't mean it makes your point or that it's not contestable.
I don't know how many times I have to tell you this: I'm not disagreeing. People generally can't see curvature from airliner altitudes. You have to go higher, like in the area of 60,000+ feet.
Dude, you dodge all the fucking time. I'm not going address every absurd claim you manage to concoct.
Do you know what "publicly available" information means? It means any schlep in the world can go out and disprove it. You should fly to Sydney and see if they lie about the type of aircraft the send to JNB.

I'm positive the Earth is ball shaped. Absolutely positive.
Go Back To Science, Technology & Nature Topic List
Prev1144145146147148174Next
Closed New Topic New Poll