Coriolis meters work on what principal then?

This only works if your standing below the light looking up at it, if your're looking at it away from the side (like you should be with this example) then it would be rotated (back to front) not inverted

So the sun/moon is close but the angels/size doesn't change as we move around? don't see how this is the same maths at all. Realized when saying last point that the moon has to be really close/small for flat earth to work, otherwise two people couldn't see it close to horizon in different hemisphere.

As for Coriolis effect doesn't work on drains but fine for weather systems etc

This post was edited by dakariii on Jul 3 2016 04:03pm

Dropped objects accelerating towards the Earth indicates the presence of a force directed towards the Earth, which historically has been give the name gravity. You can complain about the name (which is just a semantics argument) or you can argue about the source of the force. But when you say there is no such force you are just crazy; we all feel it every day of our lives.


1. The phrase "anti acceleration" is gibberish in classical mechanics, acceleration in any direction is acceleration.
2. The acceleration of an object it determined by the sum of all the forces on it, one of which is gravity, there are others such as buoyancy in the case of a hot air balloon.

yeah i wondered why they didn't say 'gravity is a type of electromagnetism' or something rather than 'gravity doesn't exist'
but then i guess people say if it is a type of electomagnetism why is it not effected by any electric or magnetic charge? so it's probably better for them to leave it open

Your right, the next problem with that line of reasoning is that like charges repel. Lets say we have a situation where 3 bodies (A, B, C) are attracting themselves under the influence of gravity. If they want to say gravity is an electromagnetic effect, they have a problem. If A has a positive charge, then for B to be attracted it must have a negative charge, but where does that leave C? There is no way to reproduce gravitational attraction with electric charge with only 2 charges.

So lets just pretend there is a 3rd eletrical charge (that no experiment has ever even hinted at). OK that fixed the 3 bodies problem, but it won't work for a 4 bodies.

Ultimately you would need a new charge for each potential body, Now consider a mole of hydrogen gas (about 1 liter), you would need 1 mole of new charges! So I often tell these guys their ideas make sense except for the fact that they are missing 10^23 charges. This dog don't hunt.

You heard it right - Hot Air Balloons should now be referred to as magical anti gravitational acceleration technology, proof that your farts are magical.
I guess if the atmosphere gets any hotter - it might all become anti-gravitational and leave the earth in a second....

This post was edited by card_sultan on Jul 3 2016 04:45pm

^hm are your three bodies earth and two people?
in which case charge between the people could be negligible (well from observation not experiment!)

if your using sun planets etc they will just say gravity doesn't work between them ^^


here you go:
You know that the moon is always facing us in the same direction right? no matter where/when you see the moon your're always looking at the same side

But if it was really close people standing off to the side would see if from different perspectives, not to mention a different view to someone standing below it

I think there's a point there somewhere, just not sure what it is. I think you're just starting to realize and you need to take a few days to think about it all and not try to come back with an immediate response. Instant messaging just make you not think, it only serves to reconfirm your bias.

This post was edited by card_sultan on Jul 3 2016 04:51pm

Actually it doesn't matter if the moon is always facing the same way
moon close, people can see from different sides at the same time, moon far away, people always looking at the same side at the same time

hm thought i was being pretty clear, don't know what you're on about tbh. Sometimes i misspell/get words wrong etc my english isn't very good, might want to re-read what i said I'm sure it will come to you

I guess I should have said "3 bodies which have a measred acceleration towards a common point.

I suppose you could say that, but along the same reasoning so could be baseballs that you throw into the air. As I have said many times, the sum of all forces is what determines the acceleration of an object, if there is enough upward force to overcome gravity the object will rise. Again, common experience, we all lift objects in defiance of gravity every day.