Flat Earth Believers, I would like to hear your ideas.

a reply to: eriktheawful

These are descriptions of observations, not explanations on what causes it and how it works. Quite acting like its known.

originally posted by: TheFaceOfTheEarth

originally posted by: AngryCymraeg

originally posted by: TheFaceOfTheEarth
a reply to: AngryCymraeg

It explains gravity

Gravity is unexplained, and it is "supported" by contradictions.

Why do you say gravity is caused by the spinning Earth.

Thank you for proving that you either know nothing about this or are trolling us. Gravity is not caused by the rotation of the Earth. If the Earth stopped spinning tomorrow we wouldn't fly off it. Gravity is something explained by mass. It's not unexplained.

You said it was caused by rotation of the Earth......

You keep mentioning 'spinning ball Earth' as if it's ridiculous. It's not. It explains gravity,

I asked you why you said this.


And no, gravity has not been explained, only described.

No, I did not say that it was explained by the rotation of the Earth. I said that it was because the Earth is a sphere - which also has mass. This is basic.

originally posted by: TheFaceOfTheEarth

Not affected by rotation and gravity supposedly pulling into the direction of rotation that is.

The principle of the precious Foucault Pendulum is that the pendulum swings independantly from the rotating Earth, keeping its original orientation, while the Earth, with the base of the pendulum, move, causing an apparant deviation.

This is not the principle?

its not swinging independantly from the rotating earth.. it is affected by it..

the device works does it not?? it proves that the earth rotates.. if the earth was and i quote you:

originally posted by: TheFaceOfTheEarth
motionless Earth.

why does the foucault pendulum deviate???

a reply to: AngryCymraeg

Do I need to post that again. Based on the context of the sentence you qouted, your comment suggested this. Maybe it's not what you meant but that's how it read.

Mass is not an explanation of gravity.

originally posted by: TheFaceOfTheEarth
a reply to: choos

and what is this gravity of a spinning ball in the direction of rotation??? are you talking about centrifugal/centripetal forces??

You tell me. This force is claimed by Ball Earthers. It's the only way planes can land on north/south facing runways, it seems.

??????????? Can you please explain this remarkable claim? Because as far as I'm concerned it's baseless.

a reply to: choos

its not swinging independantly from the rotating earth.. it is affected by it..

Not according to ball Earth science. The whole point is that it keeps its original orientation and the Earth moves under it making it look like the direction of swing changed.

a reply to: AngryCymraeg

It's a claim made by a Ball Earther to explain why the Earth doesn't rotate away from a plane trying to land on a north/south facing runway.

I mean you guys need some force pulling things along with the rotation otherwise it don't make sense......

originally posted by: TheFaceOfTheEarth
a reply to: AngryCymraeg

Do I need to post that again. Based on the context of the sentence you qouted, your comment suggested this. Maybe it's not what you meant but that's how it read.

Mass is not an explanation of gravity.

I said the following:

You keep mentioning 'spinning ball Earth' as if it's ridiculous. It's not. It explains gravity, the existence of the atmosphere, the Seasons, plate tectonics, volcanoes, night, day, the length of the year, the existence of the moon... where would you like me to stop?

Now, it's possible that you are being overly picky, but I was referring to the concept of the Earth being a rotating sphere. Hopefully that is now perfectly clear. Sphere. Round thing. Globe. Gravity is not something that it is caused by rotation. It's caused by mass. To be more specific, consequence of the curvature of spacetime caused by the uneven distribution of mass/energy, as laid out by Einstein's General Theory of Relativity. Mass is the cause of gravity. Once again this is basic physics. Which, it appears, you failed at some point.

originally posted by: TheFaceOfTheEarth
a reply to: AngryCymraeg

It's a claim made by a Ball Earther to explain why the Earth doesn't rotate away from a plane trying to land on a north/south facing runway.

I mean you guys need some force pulling things along with the rotation otherwise it don't make sense......

(Facepalm)
Dear. God. This nonsense again? The air (and therefore the aeroplane itself) rotates with the Earth at the same time. And the Earth is not hurtling around at a billion miles an hour. One revolution per 24 hours. There's a name for it. It's called a 'day'.
By the way, your question is lifted straight from a Flat Earth Society website. It was answered there by people with knowledge of physics. It's nonsense.

originally posted by: TheFaceOfTheEarth
a reply to: choos

and what is this gravity of a spinning ball in the direction of rotation??? are you talking about centrifugal/centripetal forces??

You tell me. This force is claimed by Ball Earthers. It's the only way planes can land on north/south facing runways, it seems.

oh i get it.. you think that the absolutely minor offset seen from the Foucault Pendulum should also be seen when an aircraft is landing is that what you think??

how long do you think an aircraft takes to land? and what kind of deviation is seen from the pendulum??
is the aircraft capable of making adjustments midflight?
is moving air ie.wind going to be an overwhelming factor?
do planes take into account of Coriolis force during flight?

oh btw this Foucault Pendulum is a demonstration of the corioslis effect.

originally posted by: TheFaceOfTheEarth
a reply to: choos

its not swinging independantly from the rotating earth.. it is affected by it..

Not according to ball Earth science. The whole point is that it keeps its original orientation and the Earth moves under it making it look like the direction of swing changed.

perhaps you think that the pendulum should be swinging widely in every direction??

perhaps you forgot that the pendulum is already under the influence of the earths rotation??

the deviation of the pendulum IS MINOR.. it is basically a demonstration of the coriolis effect.. which again, proves that the earth is spinning.. contrary to your claims of the earth being motionless.

a reply to: AngryCymraeg

Dear. God. This nonsense again? The air (and therefore the aeroplane itself) rotates with the Earth at the same time.

So the air is moving with Earth's rotation,in sync, in one direction, and it is also pushing the plane. So gravity is only pulling down on the plane, not into the direction of rotation. So what pulls the air along into one direction, the direction of rotation, in sync with it?

a reply to: choos

the deviation of the pendulum IS MINOR.. it is basically a demonstration of the coriolis effect.. which again, proves that the earth is spinning.. contrary to your claims of the earth being motionless.

Once more, according to science, the pendulum keeps it original orientation, regardless of Earth's movements. This is not up for debate. The fact that the orientation appears to change is because the Earth moves under it. This is claimed by Ball Earth science.

This means that there is no force pulling at an object into the direction of rotation. The question is then why do objects in the sky stay in sync with Earth's rotation. We have just eliminated gravity.

originally posted by: TheFaceOfTheEarth
a reply to: AngryCymraeg

Dear. God. This nonsense again? The air (and therefore the aeroplane itself) rotates with the Earth at the same time.

So the air is moving with Earth's rotation,in sync, in one direction, and it is also pushing the plane. So gravity is only pulling down on the plane, not into the direction of rotation. So what pulls the air along into one direction, the direction of rotation, in sync with it?

You are either willfully ignorant or you are trolling us. It's called 'weather'. As has been pointed out in other places, the centrifugal acceleration of anything travelling with Earth at the equator is a massive 0.003m/s2, and as the atmosphere is held in place by gravity there's really no issue here.

Aircraft, due to the fact that they are aircraft and reliant on aerofoils and powered flight, are terribly affected by the weather patterns of Earth. This means that during a windy day aircraft can struggle to cover ground against the wind and yet save fuel and make amazing time if flying with it. The weather patterns of the earth tend to be measured in reference to the ground because they are inherently pinned to it. Gravity, holding the air down, also causes friction with the ground, air gets caught on trees, buildings, islands, water, grass, the sea, boats, mountains, cars, roads, well you get the idea. This results in a ball of air around the ball of the earth that spins with it. This spin, just like the Earth, changes as you move North/South. It's really not that frightening of a prospect. Once again, this is basic.

a reply to: AngryCymraeg

You are either willfully ignorant or you are trolling us. It's called 'weather'

Weather is what keeps a plane moving in sync with Earth's rotation? The plane is moving in sync with the air which moves in sync with the Earth you say, and now you start talking about the weather.

So does wind blow in only one direction? How is gravity pulling the air along, but not the plane. I mean the plane was pushed by the air that is being pulled in the direction of rotation, in sync with it, by the gravity, at least that's what your argument so far boils down to.

originally posted by: TheFaceOfTheEarth
a reply to: AngryCymraeg

You are either willfully ignorant or you are trolling us. It's called 'weather'

Weather is what keeps a plane moving in sync with Earth's rotation? The plane is moving in sync with the air which moves in sync with the Earth you say, and now you start talking about the weather.

So does wind blow in only one direction? How is gravity pulling the air along, but not the plane. I mean the plane was pushed by the air that is being pulled in the direction of rotation, in sync with it, by the gravity, at least that's what your argument so far boils down to.

As you are now wilfully misunderstanding, here's a handy link. Why don't you go and educate yourself? And here's a handy link on flight.

a reply to: AngryCymraeg

Really guy, a link to a site about weather, and one about flight in general.

This is not what we were discussing were we.

a reply to: AngryCymraeg

This is ridiculous, for this to work in relation with objects in the air remaining in sync with the rotation, the air should be causing just as much friction on an object as the surface.

A jet standing on the surface would be pulled along by the ground but according to your logic the air is putting the same amount of force on it when it's airborne which is ridiculous.

The implication is also that movement in opposite directions would have to overcome this force.

a reply to: TheFaceOfTheEarth

you will eventually have to address " relative velocity "

a reply to: TheFaceOfTheEarth

foucault pendulum

another of your claims falsified