3 > Discussions; Public Archive

Reasonable FE discussion with RJ? (I hope)

<< < (35/35)

Dale Eastman:

--- Quote from: Kitty Eastman 30 1849 ---
Dear Dale,
you are dealing with a brainless fucking idiot. Either push him off a tall building to prove gravity is real (put him in a rubber suit first) or stop engaging with this moron.
Love, your family and friends
--- End quote ---

--- Quote from: 30 1859 ---No one denies the EFFECT of gravity. Whats disputed is the CAUSE of gravity. I posted how a manipulating the independent veriable of the electrostatic charge of something using a vidergraph generator will cause an object to either rise or fall. Ulinke dale, here, i actually show experimental evidence to support my claims. Unless you can show me how space/time is bent, your beleive in pseudoscience.
--- End quote ---

30 1859 No one denies the EFFECT of gravity. Whats disputed is the CAUSE of gravity.


--- Quote from: 30 2105 ---you post pseudo science crap that proves nothing! Most of your nonsense ONLY works under very specific conditions and CAN NOT be repeated. Maybe you should study the differences between scientific LAW and scientific THEORY
--- End quote ---

--- Quote from: 30 2113 ---Neither you nor Dale have posted anything that's observable, verifiable, and repeatable, which the scientific method requires. I understand the difference between scientific law and scientific theory, what causes the effect we see and call gravity is a theory, hence theoretical physics. If you spent more time studying the experimental evidence instead of regurgitating what's in the Rockefeller school books you could provide the evidence needed to substantiate the claims being proposed instead of just ad homing, and reifying you deeply held but erroneous beliefs because it's too hard to accept that maybe you've been duped. So no ad homs, do you have evidence that Dale can't provide or are you just triggered?
--- End quote ---

--- Quote from: 30 2124 ---Pot, kettle, black. None of your alleged evidence is observable, repeatable, verifiable.
--- End quote ---

--- Quote from: 30 2131 ---Again so far nothing dale has provided goes in the "globe only" basket. Maybe you're better at providing evidence than dale so I'll ask you, then. Do you have or can you provide an experiment that shows air pressure next to vacuum without equalization or a physical barrier? Or if you contend that gravity nullifies this LAW of thermodynamics, can you provide an experiment whereby gravity can defy the force of a vacuum?
--- End quote ---

--- Quote from: 30 2133 ---get this through your thick stupid skull. Pressure gradients!!! Apparently you do NOT understand Gradients. Hint: figure out what GRADUAL means
--- End quote ---

--- Quote from: 30 2137 ---again, in order to have air pressure a container is required. Do you have evidence of air pressure absent a container? Providing this could shut me up for good.
--- End quote ---

--- Quote from: 30 2145 ---gas/air pressure requires a container.
--- End quote ---

--- Quote from: 30 2150 ---Again- ignoring the key word GRADIENT as in GRADUAL; figure that out first. I will NOT waste my time on more of your BS until YOU can prove you understand what GRADUAL means
--- End quote ---

--- Quote from: 30 2157 ---again I've already shown that pressure gradients exist within a container. Can you show air/gas pressure period without a container? You listen worse than dale.
--- End quote ---

--- Quote ---pressure gradient existing within a container. Do you have evidence of pressure gradients absent a container, with out begging the question, and reification?
https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=PXnaVvgaYY8
--- End quote ---

--- Quote from: 30 2205 ---You still do not understand what gradual means. Let’s try this is the air pressure in Chicago. The same as it is I need Evans Colorado?
--- End quote ---

--- Quote from: 30 2225 ---Your begging the question. Your presuming that you're not in a contained system. That's why I'm asking a prerequisite question of whether it's possible to have air pressure without a container in the first place.
--- End quote ---

30 2225 Your presuming that you're not in a contained system.


--- Quote from: 30 2229 ---YOU prove your bullshit first. Without throwing more bullshit videos that do NoT answer a single question. Also go back and read you own words. You contradict yourself in nearly every post
--- End quote ---

--- Quote from: 30 2231 ---i just did, air and gas pressure requires a container. I just showed 4 screen shots and a video as proof of my claim. Now stop shifting the burden of proof and show me where you can have air pressure without a container.
--- End quote ---

--- Quote from: 1 0101 ---All garbage and does not prove anything. Now you get your head out of your rectum and prove you understand what gradients and gradual mean
--- End quote ---

--- Quote from: 1 0737 ---at sea level relative air pressure is 14.7 the higher the altitude the lower the air pressure gets. That's the gradient. Density and buoyancy can account for this as the denser air is settled at the bottom. Now can you show me air pressure without a container? Can you show cacuum without a container? Can you show high pressure next to low pressure without equalization or a physical barrier? I've been asking Dale this for a month now and he can't seem to answer without a logical fallacy of being the question fallacy or a reification fallacy, or an ad hom. Is there an experiment you can site that demonstrates either of those things.
--- End quote ---

--- Quote from: 1 0752 ---Now I understand what Robert Heinlein meant when he said, never try to teach a pig to sing.
--- End quote ---

--- Quote from: 1 0920 ---gradient isn't an answer to the question. Gradients exist within containers. I'm asking for evidence of a air pressure with our without a gradient without containment. Do you have evidence or just now ad homs?
--- End quote ---

--- Quote from: 1 1257 ---Sing, Piggy, come on sing!
--- End quote ---

--- Quote from: 1 1258 ---ad homs, cool. I didn't think I'd get an intelligent answer from you.
--- End quote ---

--- Quote from: 1 1259 ---Kitty Eastman you do realize you're projecting right now. You're the pig that can't learn to sing.
--- End quote ---

--- Quote from: 1 1300 ---every flat earther used to beleive in the globe they were indoctrinated to believe. Then upon closer examination we actually humbled ourselves and admitting we were wrong.
--- End quote ---

--- Quote from: 1 1307 ---you’re own words right back at you
--- End quote ---

--- Quote from: 1 1308 ---so you have no evidence for what you're claiming either? Why did you even chime in?
--- End quote ---

--- Quote from: 1 1308 --- are you saying believing in your nonsense is a 12 step program?
--- End quote ---

--- Quote from: 1 1309 ---More ad homs. Why don't you go fuck yourself.
--- End quote ---

--- Quote from: 1 1645 ---Fecalbook deleted this. I'm putting it back.
It is my intent to present you as you present yourself.
--- End quote ---
file:///C:/Users/daler/Pictures/Flat%20Earth/RJJ/MonkeyBrain.png

Dale Eastman:

--- Quote from: ---Private Message 1 1748 I got a restriction for fishing out what i received. Let's keep it even and fair. I can ad hom with the worst of them,  but I'm trying to have this discussion in good faith, but there's a limit when it comes to personal attacks.
--- End quote ---

--- Quote from: ---Private Message 1 2044 Dishing*
--- End quote ---

--- Quote ---Quoting my wife:
➽ Dear Dale,
you are dealing with a brainless fucking idiot.

Dear Kitty,
Yes. I know.

As you are aware, monkeys can be trapped very easily. All that is needed is a chained container with a hole just big enough for the monkey to reach in and grab the bait. Once the monkey grabs the bait, making a fist, the monkey can not withdraw their hand. The monkey is not smart enough to let go of that which it is so fixated on, so it gets captured.

I have seen many a mind get captured thusly because that mind refuses to give up a belief.

In the instance of this monkey minded flat earth believer, The reason this discussion has been going on since September 30, 2022 is because of my curiosity and attempt to understand the peanut his mind has grabbed and refuses to let go of. As you had focused, so do I... Pressure/density gradients.

On November 6 @ 0734 hrs, Monkey-brain posted:
➽ i don't beleive there's such a thing as "the vaccume of space"

Quite obvious to me, monkey-brain can not conceptualize "infinity".

If I was actually in a mood to continue interacting with his monkeyness, (which I am not because I've wasted entirely too much time interacting with him), I would ask him to discuss the concepts of looking straight up at night. Since any volume of space, that is, any three dimensional area, with nothing in it is by definition, a vacuum. His monkeyness implies his belief that he can see no further straight up than where air ceases to be... Because he doesn't believe in the nothingness beyond that edge of air.

Just as obvious to me, with his constant whining about pressure requires a container, that he believes there must be an atmospheric container at the edge of the air.

12 1207
➽ But because we know air pressure requires a container, it is simple to think whatever the container is and its shape could cause the light rays we see to make the angles we measure. Since you haven't shown how you can have air pressure next to a vaccume without it equalizing or without a physical barrier this just adds credence to the notion of a structure, either physical or energetic, above us.

Oh SNAP!
What's on the other side of that containing structure?

6 0734
➽ We have air pressure here in earth. Do you have an experiment that demonstrates high pressure next to low or no pressure without equalization or a physical barrier?

Monkey brain can't even recognize when he contradicts his own words.

The above words have been in the can since Thursday December 1rst.

These words were composed Tuesday December 6th.

After watching several episodes of "Mighty Ships" on the Smithsonian channel, the thought occurs to me that his monkeyness has no fucking clue about navigation.


By his religiously addled brain, every navigator of aircraft and ships MUST be in on the "globe earth conspiracy". Every one of those navigators MUST be making a public show of using globe earth navigation tools and procedures, while hiding flat earth tools and procedures.




--- End quote ---

Dale Eastman:

--- Quote from: 29 1549 direct message: ---I like how you like that people are talking shit while I'm banned for simply repeating the ad hom that was given to me, especially since you haven't substantiated. I'll be back in two days so you can elaborate on the claims of how you have air/ gas pressure without a container or how gravity is able to hold air/ gas in a density gradient. I expect an experiment to substantiate the claim,  you've had 30 days.
--- End quote ---

--- Quote ---Quote from: 29 1549 direct message:

➽ I like how you like that people are talking shit while I'm banned for simply repeating the ad hom that was given to me, especially since you haven't substantiated. I'll be back in two days so you can elaborate on the claims of how you have air/ gas pressure without a container or how gravity is able to hold air/ gas in a density gradient. I expect an experiment to substantiate the claim,  you've had 30 days.

With mixed emotions of both contempt and sadness, I decline to interact with your mindless parroting presentations. I have decided to NOT delete your comments on FE in this FE / GE discussion thread. I have also decided to not delete any of your non-FE comments anywhere else.

I have more important things to present. This cold civil war that is going on in the U.S. and the world could become a hot war with people being killed... That is, with people being killed in addition to the people being killed by governments around the world daily.

When you correctly explain the phases of the moon, I'll think about resuming discussion.

cc: tim lance

--- End quote ---

--- Quote from: 1 1333 ---Dale Eastman yeah all your ad homs don't constitute evidence of anything except a failure to make an intelligent argument. So now that I'm out of banishment for simply dishing out what i had received, do any of you have evidence of gas/air pressure absent a container, or if your claim is gravity holds the gas/air pressure to the earth i would like an experiment demonstrating such behavior. I've already shown an experiment demonstrating a gas/air pressure gradient within a container i will repost it if necessary.
--- End quote ---

--- Quote from: 1 1336 ---When you correctly explain the phases of the moon, I'll think about resuming discussion.
--- End quote ---

--- Quote from: 1 1343 ---no. YOU invoked the pressure gradient and i would like evidence that supports the claim. Or you can concede that you have no evidence that refutes the fact that gas/air pressure requires a container, and this a gas/air pressure gradient requires a container. If you can concede you we can get to the logical deduction of why a lens of some sort could be envoked in explaining how the sun apears in an apparent location and why the experiment of the flat table with a light source observed through a lens is plausible and viable.
--- End quote ---

--- Quote from: 1 1351 ---You have been given MY terms for continuing this discussion.

Else:
--- End quote ---

--- Quote ---Scroll Bar ⇉
Free To Use
--- End quote ---

--- Quote from: 1 1405 ---so you concede, then. Ok. We shall go over the moon phases. The sun circles the above the earth once every 24 hours and between the two tropics yearly, the moon moves between the tropics monthly, but circles the earth at a slower pace than the sun, whereby, the sun laps the moon once every 28 days. We used to have 13 months(moonths) of 28 days. So when the moon is closest to the sun we have a "new moon". No one sees the new moon, not even with ir cameras (interesting). When the moon is farthest from the sun (on opposite sides of the earth) we get our full moon. The moon is its own light sorce, but it's phases are dependent on its position relative to the sun. Why do i say the moon is its own light sorce? Because of the inverse square law of light. On a full moon night, where the moon casts a shadow on the ground, and we are very modest, say we could call that one lumin, it's like more but if we call it just one lumin, and we have the distance to the moon its 4 lumins(as the inverse square law of light dictates) half that distance again and were at 8 lumin, and you do this all the way till your 100 miles from the moon, in the globe model, the brightness it would have to be is multitudes brighter than we see the sun from here on earth. Now speaking of moon phases, have you heard of the "impossible eclipse" or the seleninlion eclipse?
--- End quote ---

--- Quote from: 1 1415 ---➽ so you concede, then. Ok. We shall go over the moon phases. The sun circles the above the earth once every 24 hours and between the two tropics yearly, the moon moves between the tropics monthly, but circles the earth at a slower pace than the sun, whereby, the sun laps the moon once every 28 days. We used to have 13 months(moonths) of 28 days. So when the moon is closest to the sun we have a "new moon". No one sees the new moon, not even with ir cameras (interesting). When the moon is farthest from the sun (on opposite sides of the earth) we get our full moon. The moon is its own light sorce, but it's phases are dependent on its position relative to the sun. Why do i say the moon is its own light sorce? Because of the inverse square law of light. On a full moon night, where the moon casts a shadow on the ground, and we are very modest, say we could call that one lumin, it's like more but if we call it just one lumin, and we have the distance to the moon its 4 lumins(as the inverse square law of light dictates) half that distance again and were at 8 lumin, and you do this all the way till your 100 miles from the moon, in the globe model, the brightness it would have to be is multitudes brighter than we see the sun from here on earth. Now speaking of moon phases, have you heard of the "impossible eclipse" or the seleninlion eclipse?

◎ All of the above
◎ Some of the above
◉ None of the above
--- End quote ---

--- Quote from: 1 1415 ---https://youtu.be/4q1f0fQizyc
--- End quote ---

--- Quote from: 1 1424 ---https://youtu.be/x0Cr_VUtY08
--- End quote ---

--- Quote from: 1 1452 ---https://youtu.be/9US3oaEZ8dI
--- End quote ---

--- Quote from: 1 1459 ---https://youtu.be/3vL3JCssBl4
--- End quote ---

--- Quote from: 1 1514 ---I have no duty to address your delusions...
So:

Scroll Bar ⇉
Free To Use

Move along.
You are dismissed.
file:///C:/Users/daler/Pictures/0001/No%20Delusion%20Duty.png
--- End quote ---

--- Quote from: 1 1528 --- you clearly cannot refute what I've put forward regarding gas/air pressure and claiming gravity creates a gradient with no evidence to support this claim, and by your silence and refusal to answer it is acceptance by acquiescence, another one for the flat-basket. I've moved on to the moon phases and eclipses with several videos as my proofs of claim. A ball casting a shadow on a ball creates an elliptical shadow contrary to what's observed. The shadow of a lunar eclipse will come in from the opposite side of the direction of how the earth is said to move in relation to the moon, in the globe model (i observed this myself with the last lunar eclipse. The seleninlion eclipse can't work on the ball as both moon and sun are both above the horizon. A shadow cannot be smaller than the object casting the shadow, the solar eclipse is refuted, unless you have evidence to the contrary. Can you provide or produce evidence of an object casting a shadow smaller than the object itself?
--- End quote ---

--- Quote from: 1 1529 ---https://youtu.be/dJbU4tSpsAY
--- End quote ---

--- Quote from: 1 1727 ---I have no duty to address your delusions...
So:

Scroll Bar ⇉
Free To Use

Move along.
You are dismissed.
--- End quote ---

--- Quote from: 1 1730 ---you're right but if you're claiming you can prove your claim you would show evidence, otherwise its an acceptance by acquiescence. So I've moved on to moon phases like you requested.
--- End quote ---

--- Quote from: 1 1743 ---Repeating what I wrote:
When you correctly explain the phases of the moon, I'll think about resuming discussion.

You have NOT correctly explained the phases of the moon.
You have posted crap vids that do NOT explain the phases of the moon...
Your vids are NOT YOU explaining.
You are not even smart enough to understand that this discussion is over.
Keep shitting last words in the conversation, I will block you. I'm tired of the work required to archive your delusional posts.

--- End quote ---

Dale Eastman:

--- Quote from: 1 20:22 ---get fucked. You haven't substantiate one claim of the globe. And nothing so far has been placed into the globe only basket. I'm out. Maybe flat earth just isn't for you. Have fun on your imaginary spinny space rock in your endless vacuum. Maybe one day you'll have the eyes to see.
--- End quote ---

--- Quote from: 2 0924 ---Have a nice life.
--- End quote ---

Navigation

[0] Message Index

[*] Previous page

Reply

Go to full version