OOAK Table Tennis Forum

Agreed. This is the danger of conspiracy volume. Noise. And the consequences are real. As in, pediatric FLU fatalities real.

_________________
Blog: "Holy Chtchet!" ⇝

Projects: Player Equipment Grid ⇝ Comprehensive Thin Inverted Chopping Rubbers Grid ⇝ Please send me corrections or new submissions

For me, the scariest of all nuttiness is climate change denial. When the world (round, of course) is hurtling towards catastrophic destruction and politicians dismiss the science for their own political ends, I shake my head in despair. Flat-earthers are comedy; climate change deniers are the enemy of all.

birchamboi wrote:


I disagree for the following reasons:
1) Anthropogenic climate change is where the money is - research, grant whatever you call it. "A man will not deny that which makes him money" - cynical? moi?
2) There are many factors involved in what makes up the climate. I am not aware of a so-called climate model that has ever predicted anything correctly
3) There are subsequently documented instances where historical weather records have been "adjusted" (without any fanfare whatsoever) to make the anthropogenic climate change story stronger
4) Climate change itself is pretty much accepted as happening. What is up for debate is the influence of human factors on it. The old "a butterfly flaps its wing in the US and causes a tornado (monsoon?) in China" chaotic system sort of stuff argues that we don't know whether the changes we are seeing can be blamed on human activity or the solar cycle or a whole lot of butterflies flapping their wings.

Having set up that can of worms, now back to the flat earth can of worms.

_________________
Retriever (sometimes golden, but often leaden)
Moderator, Inverted Retriever Technique sub-forum - http://ooakforum.com/viewforum.php?f=74

I foind this and it disproves their globe model.



The Suez Canal is 120 miles long and 79 feet deep ( originally 26 feet deep but subsequent adjustments to depth to accommodate for present day ships gives us the 79 foot depth today ) This Canal has no locks meaning over the 120 miles distance the water is level and demonstrably so. On a spherical or spheroidal earth, if you would stand at the center point of the Canal, the rate at which the Canal would drop would be 8 inches per mile squared to either side so that both the Mediterranean and the Red Sea would be over 2000 feet below the observer. Since the Engineers architects and builders neither accounted for nor observed this and presently no demonstrable proof of curvature has been offered the only logical conclusion is that of a demonstrably level plane which we call Earth and not a spinning wobbling flying potato in infinite space vacuum and all.

No. Words.

ROFL. Can you see all the way from one end of the canal to the other? No? Why not? Because the water DOES indeed drop "8 inches per mile" or whatever it's supposed to drop. Doesn't matter if you have a D200 or whatever the latest super-zoom camera model is.

I've honestly gotten sick of the whole flat earth thing. For a while I watched all sorts of flat earth debunking videos (SciManDan and Conspiracy Katz were the most interesting, but there are many others). For a while it was really funny - flat earthers have to be some of the DUMBEST people I've come across. But I've gotten bored with it. The flat earth thing folks seem to post the same old same old arguments that have been debunked dozens of times. Just like the one above, here. Some are dumb, some, I think, are in it for the money - they don't actually believe (if they ever did) that the Earth is flat, but they make hundreds of dollars every month by posting videos for the dumb ones.

I mean, I don't see how ANYONE could continue insisting the Earth is unmoving and flat after buying a ring laser gyro and having it demonstrate that the Earth is indeed spinning at 15 degrees per hour. He's GOT to be in it for the money and just pretending to believe in the flat earth.



FF to 4:26.

Iskandar

That court rule is funny. Did someone forgot his evidence?

The ISS is not travelling at a constant speed so the folks on it would be squashed to death.

Watch from 10 minutes 30 seconds.


https://m.youtube.com/watch?feature=you ... z_fzp59rg#

Why? Just why?

Why do you insist on posting this nonsense over and over and over again?
Why do you think that your brain is bigger than the real scientists who do real science instead of this mumbo jumbo claptrap?
Why do you repeat the same old tired and meaningless arguments, particularly the nonsense in the Suez Canal bunkum?
Why do you believe that only a handful of nutjobs know what's really going on and the rest of us are somehow deluded?
Why do you blindly accept the science that gives you the things you want while vehemently denying one particular aspect of that very same science?
Why do you think we care?

Why do you never, ever answer a single question?

He's scratching an itch.

Iskandar

Chris' "proof based on physics" proves one thing, namely his limited knowledge of applied physics.

This time he is conveniently forgetting one aspect of physics: Our everyday perception of it does not reflect the actual physics involved.

What humans perceive as change of speed is really a change of the forces affecting us (momentarily bringing us out of equilibrium in some manner) Force is not applied by speed, but by acceleration, and as long as acceleration is virtually constant, we will not perceive any noticeable affecting force (because there is no great change of force bringing us out of balance).

Also, one important reason why the fairground attraction and train carriage examples don't apply well to astrophysics, is that their acceleration is mostly along either the support plane (the floor/deck/ground we are standing on) or along the line of movement. In many cases both. The acceleration caused by planetary rotation and satellite orbits is mostly perpendicular to both.

Not sure why I bother to post this, though. Feels like a failure. Doing it anyway.

Interview with a leading astrophysicist.


https://m.youtube.com/watch?feature=you ... oAhIsk5m9Y

Yep! Zero valid counter arguments. Loads of cross cutting silly faces. Overload of the techniques we learned in video class in 7th grade (oops, sorry, I forgot, the interviewer never really attended school, and quit for good at 15, isn't that what he said...).

One hour of an interviewer busy entertaining his own preconceptions, not really listening to the interview subject, only cherry picking the facts he has prepared for himself. No wonder she turns negative when the interviewer, who has made arrangements on false assumptions, lied, and doesn't really listen, at the end of the "interview" tries to define what should be the agenda for her research. Some of the interviewer's closing words, like "egoistic arrogance", is a precise description of his own procedure and demeanour in this video.

You actually WATCH these videos? I can't stand them..

Iskandar