Flat earth theory?

originally posted by: neutronflux
a reply to: turbonium1

Really. Looks like a normal glacier to me.

You

Here's a video of the ice wall...

www.youtube.com...

That’s not the your supposed ice wall because you said:

www.abovetopsecret.com...

Planes cannot fly to the wall, nor a blimp, nor anything else can do it.

The weather is very extreme, apparently, all of the time, flight is not possible. Other means of travel don't work, either.

Thanks for proving you post blatant falsehoods.

haha

I didn't actually see this post earlier when reading

This is a home run to win the match,

a buzzer beater from half way

Nothing Turbo can say to turn around the BS.




You cant see the ice wall, fly to it or get there in any way because of extreme weather

then


here is YouTube video showing the ice wall






I guess you have post things every now and then to show how much you are taking the piss out us as Turbo just has.

a reply to: turbonium1

If you want to believe in things you never see, and nobody else has ever seen, then go right ahead. It's your own little fantasy-tale, nothing I say will ever change your delusional world that doesn't exist.

The exact same can be said of you.

Showing a video of a coastline and then trying to pass that off as your mythical "Ice Wall" is just dishonest.

How come the guy taking the video got to this ice wall when you have claimed that no transport works there and/or there is always extreme weather? What about the "guards" - did they take the day off or something?

a reply to: InhaleExhale

You cant see the ice wall, fly to it or get there in any way because of extreme weather

And, of course, you can't do any of that because it's all a load of bollox.

originally posted by: turbonium1


Here's a video of the ice wall...

www.youtube.com...

LOL. It is ripped off footage of the Ross Ice Shelf Front:

The aircraft is transiting from seismic station DR03 to DR04



Other videos from the source at following link.

www.youtube.com...

scripps.ucsd.edu...

originally posted by: turbonium1


Planes cannot fly to the wall, nor a blimp, nor anything else can do it.

The weather is very extreme, apparently, all of the time, flight is not possible. Other means of travel don't work, either.

LOL. So how are these hundreds of passengers able to fly to and cross over the "wall"? A flight from Melbourne, Australia. What excuse will you come up with to hand wave away the footage? You too can take such a flight. Come on take such a flight and come back and tell us all where they actually flew you!

First video of a series of 5 - the first video has the flight route.



Rest of the flight videos at following YT Channel link.

YT Channel Link

originally posted by: UpForGrabs
a reply to: Phage

But yes, they do eventually fly beyond the horizon in the process. What else would you expect to see on a round world?

I think the question is why they dont keep flying straight up but instead veer off to the horizon.

the reason planes dont fly off into space is simply because jet engines require atmosphere to produce thrust which keeps them in the air above the earth. If they were to keep going higher the engines would fail when the atmosphere starts to thin.

originally posted by: turbonium1


They always claim these rockets have been launched into 'orbit', and show rockets fly over the ocean, out of sight. They always claim they 'track' these rockets after they launch from Earth, where they go, from launch, to 'orbit'...

And that is exactly consistent with what a rocket launched into orbit around a globe would do.

Why would I expect a rocket launched from Cape Canaveral to do anything else?

Why, if all that is true, would they NEVER, before now, or in future, have mentioned where to SEE rockets fly upward into 'orbit'!!


Because rockets don't fly up, into 'orbit', obviously. Had a rocket ever really flown into 'orbit', they'd have shown us, and told us where to see it from Earth, fly up towards 'orbit'. This would prove rockets fly into 'orbit', and promote space flight, merely by showing a rocket flying up towards 'orbit', from Earth, seen by everyone on Earth, as it really happens...

A rocket that flies straight up will not get into orbit. If it's trajectory is generally straight up (on a path that is generally perpendicular to the ground), then that rocket likely would not achieve orbit. Instead, gravity would crash it back to the ground.

Instead, a rocket needs to move generally parallel to the ground (after achieving some height), because the craft's/satellite's eventual orbit would be generally parallel to the ground.

Consider "Newton's Cannonball":

Newton's Cannonball

www.eg.bucknell.edu...

a reply to: Box of Rain

he believes "orbit" means floating above the ground....

Theres really no way to explain it to him

a reply to: Akragon

According to Turbo, there is no gravity. I am floating around right now, how about you. That’s why I have to drink from juice boxes. Otherwise, my drink would float out of an open cup.

a reply to: Akragon

See. Juice boxes are proof there is no gravity. Why else would they be invited?

a reply to: neutronflux

According to Einstein, there is no gravity.

a reply to: Box of Rain

A rocket that flies straight up will not get into orbit. If it's trajectory is generally straight up (on a path that is generally perpendicular to the ground), then that rocket likely would not achieve orbit. Instead, gravity would crash it back to the ground.

Why not let it fly straight up taking the shortest path possible through the atmosphere then have it turn 90 degrees and use engines to reach orbital speed in the dragless vacuum?

a reply to: InfiniteTrinity

Because that would just be dumb?

a reply to: oldcarpy

There only are dumb answers like you just demonstrated.

a reply to: InfiniteTrinity

Eh?

a reply to: oldcarpy

Exactly.

a reply to: oldcarpy

Exactly what?

Perhaps you should contact the rocket scientists at NASA, ESA etc and put them straight about where they have been going wrong all these years?

originally posted by: InfiniteTrinity
a reply to: neutronflux

According to Einstein, there is no gravity.

I don’t think Einstein believed items sunk through the firmament based solely on the property of density to settle on the earth’s surface either.

I though Einstein believed the “force” of gravity was from all objects accelerating in the same direction through some strange trick of geometry.

originally posted by: InfiniteTrinity
a reply to: neutronflux

According to Einstein, there is no gravity.

Can you quote Einstein where he said there was no “gravity”. I think the truthful argument is he said gravity wasn’t a force....

Einstein's genius changed science's perception of gravity

www.sciencenews.org...

a reply to: neutronflux

I don’t think Einstein believed items sunk through the firmament based solely on the property of density to settle on the earth’s surface either.

No what he thought was even more bizarre, nonsensical and untestable. Of course, believing in "buoyancy and density" as a force is indeed ridiculous because you still need some kind of force that governs it.
But believing in the warping of the non defined spacetime concept as the cause for the phenomenon that we call gravity is the same as a Flat Earther claiming that things just fall down due to Geflavitty, also refered to as Droppitty.