Suddenly, A Flat Earther Appears!

Is it getting hot in here, or is it just me?



Definitely on the warm side. It just occurred to me that in Daniel's crazy world there really is a dark side of the moon, since his sun is much closer to earth than the moon is. Unfortunately that also means that in Daniel's universe solar eclipses can never happen.
 
Definitely on the warm side. It just occurred to me that in Daniel's crazy world there really is a dark side of the moon, since his sun is much closer to earth than the moon is. Unfortunately that also means that in Daniel's universe solar eclipses can never happen.

I'm not so sure about Daniel- "crazy world," or just a gag? In the "Creationist argument about DNA and information" thread, he was banging on and on (and on and on...) about how "information" proves Intelligent Design by his definition of information as necessarily and exclusively code, an intentional message. When it was pointed out to him that
Information does not have to be an intentional message. Seriously, these are facts and they have been clearly explained to you several times.
his response was this-
Well 'flat earth' has also been clearly explained several times, doesn't make it right or offer any VERACITY, whatsoever.
Kyoon is sincere (I think)- sadly so. Daniel, maybe not so much, at least not in this thread.
 
I hadn't seen any other threads Daniel participated in, but I'm quite sure he only plays the flat earther for his own entertainment.
 
I'm not so sure about Daniel- "crazy world," or just a gag? In the "Creationist argument about DNA and information" thread, he was banging on and on (and on and on...) about how "information" proves Intelligent Design by his definition of information as necessarily and exclusively code, an intentional message. When it was pointed out to him that

his response was this-

Kyoon is sincere (I think)- sadly so. Daniel, maybe not so much, at least not in this thread.

how long ago was that? Maybe he changed his mind, after knowing most Flat Earthers are creationists who think Flat Earth disproves evolution and all other science?
 
He plays a Young Earth Creationist too.

No kidding - he must have evolved one of those "back of the head" intelligence dimmers - where you can manually 'dim' or 'brighten' your level of intellectual capacity.

Bj8PM0v.jpg
 
No kidding - he must have evolved one of those "back of the head" intelligence dimmers - where you can manually 'dim' or 'brighten' your level of intellectual capacity.

[qimg]http://i.imgur.com/Bj8PM0v.jpg[/qimg]
Maybe he sees by the light of the Illuminati, who are after all the dimmest bulbs around.
 
I think it's pretty obvious what Daniel is doing when he pops up in a thread. The whole argument from ignorance stance, rejection of evidence through misapplication of logical fallacies, selective blindness, plus a sprinkling of Walter Mitty.

Needs more polish, though: "Don't bring a knife to a gunfight".
 
I think it's pretty obvious what Daniel is doing when he pops up in a thread. The whole argument from ignorance stance, rejection of evidence through misapplication of logical fallacies, selective blindness, plus a sprinkling of Walter Mitty.

Needs more polish, though: "Don't bring a rubber knife to a gunfight".

FIFY
 
May we ask what it was that you trained to do alongside these snipers, since it doesn't appear as if you trained to be a sniper?


I was in RECON. Back in those days, it was a Combat Support Company: Recon, Snipers, TOW, and 4.2 "4 Deuce" Mortars.


Now, can you please tell me how you can have a Vacuum attached to a Non-Vacuum and still retain the properties of each in the same system, simultaneously?

If you can't (and btw, you never will) then say goodbye to your World-View, Phlogiston is more tenable.


regards
 
they can´t even give you a map of Earth.


We don't need one professor to pummel your parroted fairytale.

Your appeal here is tantamount to a Judge refusing to allow a Defendant to present a case for his innocence until such time as the Defendant has found a suitable replacement for the Crime!!! :boggled:

oy vey
 
Oh hey he's back and still pretending - and asking for evidence which he has pre-denied.

Daniel why should anyone play this game with you?

lol
 
Since there are no 'coherent' answers to the "Spinning Ball" annihilators:

1. Entropy
2. Coriolis Effect
3. Naval Rail Gun

(ps. Don't worry, I posted these to a University Chair astrophysicist...he called me names. LOL)

Let's try some Stamp on the Forehead motifs:


Hubble Telescope:


So the Hubble Telescope (HST) @ ~340 Miles above the Earth. "Hubble doesn't even have a Propulsion System so it can't possibly change it's orbit by itself" (HST Deputy Missions Operation Manager --- Mike Myslinski nasa)-- Planate Veritas Phone Interview.

Even though its about 100 miles above the ISS, HST still suffers from Orbital Decay (Atmospheric Drag). There are many variables to consider (Sun Cycle ect); however, we can reasonably calculate a "Ball Park" figure. I've seen a few approximations for the ISS orbital decay....it comes in about 1-2 miles every 95 minutes or so (1 Orbit). Both ISS and Hubble orbit the Earth roughly 15 times/day ( www.heavens-above.com/orbit.aspx?satid=20580 )

The last servicing mission for HST was 11 May 2009 (STS-125). So from then until this year 11 May 2016 is 7 Years.

Let's give an EXTREME benefit of the doubt and say HST only suffers Orbital Decay @ a Quarter of a Mile per Orbit. So....

Hubble Telescope Altitude: 340 Miles


Loss in altitude per day (15 orbits): 3.75 miles

Loss in altitude per year: 1368 miles !!!

Loss in altitude in 7 YEARS: 9,581 Miles !!!!

The Hubble Telescope should be 9,574 Miles beneath the Mariana Trench !!!!!!!!!!!!!!! :jaw-dropp


1/8th of a Mile 'Orbital Decay' per orbit...

Loss in altitude per day: 1.87 Miles

Loss in altitude per year: 684 Miles

Loss of altitude in 7 Years: 4,790 Miles

The Hubble Telescope should be 4,784 Miles beneath the Mariana Trench !!!!!!!!!!!!!!! :eye-poppi


1/16th of a Mile 'Orbital Decay' per orbit ...

Loss in altitude per day: .93 Miles

Loss in altitude per year: 342 Miles

Loss of altitude in 7 Years: 2,395 Miles

The Hubble Telescope should be 2,389 Miles beneath the Mariana Trench !!!!!!!!!!!!!!! :eek:


too funny
 
We don't need one professor to pummel your parroted fairytale.

Your appeal here is tantamount to a Judge refusing to allow a Defendant to present a case for his innocence until such time as the Defendant has found a suitable replacement for the Crime!!! :boggled:

oy vey

ad-hom

False equivalence

Argument from Ignorance
 
Last edited:
1/16th of a Mile 'Orbital Decay' per orbit ...

Loss in altitude per day: .93 Miles

Loss in altitude per year: 342 Miles

Loss of altitude in 7 Years: 2,395 Miles

The Hubble Telescope should be 2,389 Miles beneath the Mariana Trench !!!!!!!!!!!!!!! :eek:


too funny

Thanks for your brain sapping assessment.
Hubble decays in a non linear way since the density of atmospheric drag is an equivalence of gravity(no need to refute this, we will take it as read that when you jump you don't fall back to Earth) also non linear. It is extremely slow and much less than the rather moronic 1/16th mile per orbit. Another 8-10 years and it will be a problem.

Anyway, since you are here, please explain what the force is that keeps you on the ground. I really, really hope you pick the answer I am hoping for, rather than the expected non response.
 
Last edited:
2500 miles...

OK.

So the Sun is 2,500 miles above the surface of the flat Earth.

Now, during high summer it can be verified that as it passes directly above at it's zenith of 90 degrees, as near as need be, it will be setting 6000 miles away due East.

Do you dispute that, if so how, since it can easily be verified. I would point you to any number of websites showing regional sunsets.

Waiting for your response.:boxedin:
 
Last edited:

Back
Top Bottom