Heiwa said:Björkman/Heiwa may be mis-quoted but a simple test is always good.
You need a bathroom scale and yourself!
Now put one foot on the scale and then your second foot. Note the scale! It indicates your weight! 200 lb? If you are 4 feet tall (small?), you are overweight - like 35% of the US population.
Now step off the weight scale and jump on it with two feet! Then note the scale. It still indicates your weight! 200 lb! OK, there was a little bounce, but who cares?
That's the purpose of your bathroom scale! To indicate your (over)weight! It works everytime.
Note that your whole bathroom didn't collapse when you jumped on the scale. According NIST/Bazant you should have initiated a one-way crush-down collapse of the scale/floor/bathroom/building by jumping on the scale.
i like how he even notes the higher force, then dismisses it
i like how he even notes the higher force, then dismisses it
yes i believe soIs that where he says, "OK, there was a little bounce, but who cares?"?
Is that where he says, "OK, there was a little bounce, but who cares?"?
The good news is that soon all three of these men will be proven to be right and the existing laws of conservation of energy and thermodynamics will be exposed for the flat earth hoaxes that they are.
Here's a dandy one!
The "commies" didn't give up, neither did the Nazis, they just moved over here. Read about "Operation Paperclip". What do you think the neo-CON movement is? Podhoretz, Kristol, Medved, Perle, et al are all neo-Trotskyite-commies. Check out their backgrounds. The Nazis and the Bolcheviks were funded and controlled by the same entity.
Here's a dandy one!
Yes, exactly right. He's actually admitting that he's ignoring the effect whose nonexistence he's trying to prove. Heiwa can produce weapons grade stupid.
Dave
president said:The mass of a single giant continent would have been larger than the mass of water on the opposite side of the planet.
The rotation would have been out of balance and cause massive shaking.
The turbulence would have been enough to tear the planet apart.
If there were indeed a unified landmass, It would have had to of been on either the north or south pole in order to keep the weight properly distributed.
The center of the continent would have been covered with ice.
And the water on the opposite pole would have looked quite amazing.
we can tell you that, but it wont make it trueI call Poe.
Please, someone tell me this is a parody.
Please.
Please.
BY ALL THAT IS DECENT AND GOOD, TELL ME.
I call Poe.
Please, someone tell me this is a parody.
Please.
Please.
BY ALL THAT IS DECENT AND GOOD, TELL ME.
He got this part right, then he got a slight problem of scale for the rest.The mass of a single giant continent would have been larger than the mass of water on the opposite side of the planet.
He got this part right, then he got a slight problem of scale for the rest.
How so? Wouldn't the mass of a supercontinent - Pangaea - be the same mass as the current continents totaled? And how would this be greater than the mass of all the water on the other side of the planet?
How so? Wouldn't the mass of a supercontinent - Pangaea - be the same mass as the current continents totaled? And how would this be greater than the mass of all the water on the othersidethree-quarters of the planet?