|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#11
|
|||
|
|||
The Moon does not Rotate.
On Tuesday, November 27, 2018 at 9:56:46 AM UTC-8, Mark Earnest wrote:
On Tuesday, November 27, 2018 at 11:48:17 AM UTC-6, palsing wrote: On Tuesday, November 27, 2018 at 7:51:18 AM UTC-8, Mark Earnest wrote: On Tuesday, November 27, 2018 at 9:42:22 AM UTC-6, casagi wrote... we can add velocities and be correct, within reason. When velocities approach c, that can't be done, because nothing can equal or exceed the speed of light. To believe otherwise is just folly. So very true. There is no such thing as c, there is no such thing as velocity. Fortunately, your opinion is not science, and c will safely remain the speed of light in a vacuum. https://tinyurl.com/ya32nb73 You STILL don't know what you don't know... If your opinion is science we are going nowhere fast. I am not presenting my opinion, but rather my link provides over 100 years of evidence supporting c as the speed of light in a vacuum. Perhaps you have evidence to the contrary? Let's see it. Science is based on experiments and observations, of which you have *none*. "The good thing about Science is that it's true whether or not you believe in it." - Neil deGrasse Tyson |
#12
|
|||
|
|||
The Moon does not Rotate.
On Tuesday, November 27, 2018 at 12:33:00 PM UTC-6, palsing wrote:
On Tuesday, November 27, 2018 at 9:56:46 AM UTC-8, Mark Earnest wrote: On Tuesday, November 27, 2018 at 11:48:17 AM UTC-6, palsing wrote: On Tuesday, November 27, 2018 at 7:51:18 AM UTC-8, Mark Earnest wrote: On Tuesday, November 27, 2018 at 9:42:22 AM UTC-6, casagi wrote... we can add velocities and be correct, within reason. When velocities approach c, that can't be done, because nothing can equal or exceed the speed of light. To believe otherwise is just folly. So very true. There is no such thing as c, there is no such thing as velocity. Fortunately, your opinion is not science, and c will safely remain the speed of light in a vacuum. https://tinyurl.com/ya32nb73 You STILL don't know what you don't know... If your opinion is science we are going nowhere fast. I am not presenting my opinion, but rather my link provides over 100 years of evidence supporting c as the speed of light in a vacuum. Perhaps you have evidence to the contrary? Let's see it. Science is based on experiments and observations, of which you have *none*. I have one observation. Your brand of science keeps us motionless on planet Earth instead of adventuring among the stars where we need to be. Your view is worthless. |
#13
|
|||
|
|||
The Moon does not Rotate.
On Tuesday, November 27, 2018 at 10:49:18 AM UTC-8, Mark Earnest wrote:
On Tuesday, November 27, 2018 at 12:33:00 PM UTC-6, palsing wrote: I am not presenting my opinion, but rather my link provides over 100 years of evidence supporting c as the speed of light in a vacuum. Perhaps you have evidence to the contrary? Let's see it. Science is based on experiments and observations, of which you have *none*. I have one observation. Your brand of science keeps us motionless on planet Earth instead of adventuring among the stars where we need to be. Your view is worthless. *My* brand of science? WTF is that supposed to mean? Motionless on the planet? Adventuring among the stars? You have no concept of reality, this much is clear. Technology today is inadequate to support travel to the stars. You have no clue as to the distances involved, or the time requirements, or the staggering cost. None. Nada. Zero. Interstellar travel is a delusional fantasy. Here, read a few of these links... https://tinyurl.com/y9ojblep\ .... if you can actually comprehend what you read. |
#14
|
|||
|
|||
The Moon does not Rotate.
On Tuesday, November 27, 2018 at 8:05:52 PM UTC-6, palsing wrote:
On Tuesday, November 27, 2018 at 10:49:18 AM UTC-8, Mark Earnest wrote: On Tuesday, November 27, 2018 at 12:33:00 PM UTC-6, palsing wrote: I am not presenting my opinion, but rather my link provides over 100 years of evidence supporting c as the speed of light in a vacuum. Perhaps you have evidence to the contrary? Let's see it. Science is based on experiments and observations, of which you have *none*. I have one observation. Your brand of science keeps us motionless on planet Earth instead of adventuring among the stars where we need to be. Your view is worthless. *My* brand of science? WTF is that supposed to mean? Motionless on the planet? Adventuring among the stars? You have no concept of reality, this much is clear. Technology today is inadequate to support travel to the stars. You have no clue as to the distances involved, or the time requirements, or the staggering cost. None. Nada. Zero. Interstellar travel is a delusional fantasy. Here, read a few of these links... So now travel to the stars is insane? Anyone like you who makes war against knowledge and the advancement of us all is of no value to the human race. You and your kind--and there are many--belong in the poor section of town. |
#15
|
|||
|
|||
The Moon does not Rotate.
I didn't say insane, I said delusional.
Big difference. You didnt read any of those links, did you... |
#16
|
|||
|
|||
The Moon does not Rotate.
On Wednesday, November 28, 2018 at 9:09:44 AM UTC-6, palsing wrote:
I didn't say insane, I said delusional. Big difference. You didnt read any of those links, did you... No I don't bother with any of men's war against knowledge except to oppose it. |
#17
|
|||
|
|||
The Moon does not Rotate.
So basically you admit that you oppose all science because you dont understand any of it.
Got it. |
#18
|
|||
|
|||
The Moon does not Rotate.
On Wednesday, November 28, 2018 at 11:49:15 AM UTC-6, palsing wrote:
So basically you admit that you oppose all science because you dont understand any of it. Got it. What is there to understand? There is nothing there to understand. Modern science is little more than failed attempts to impress colleagues. I will try to work with it as best I can because it is the current spoken language. I made A's in college physics. I know how science people attempt to communicate. |
#19
|
|||
|
|||
The Moon does not Rotate.
On Wednesday, November 28, 2018 at 3:47:52 PM UTC-8, Mark Earnest wrote:
On Wednesday, November 28, 2018 at 11:49:15 AM UTC-6, palsing wrote: So basically you admit that you oppose all science because you don't understand any of it. Got it. What is there to understand? There is nothing there to understand. So... why are you here at all? According to you, science isn't even worth discussing, right? Nothing to understand? Right now we are lucky if we understand 50% of what nature has to offer, there are still great secrets to be discovered, through hard work and a little luck now and then. Modern science is little more than failed attempts to impress colleagues. Oh, now you sound like a sour-grapes failed student. Were the sciences in school a little too hard for you to grasp? I will try to work with it as best I can because it is the current spoken language. I made A's in college physics. Oh, my Bull**** Meter is having a conniption fit, I think you may have permanently disabled it! It is unlikely that you even took physics in college, let alone got A's! You don't even know about closing speeds, a really, really basic concept of relativity, Physics 101 stuff, freshman year! The fact that you have, at best, a superficial knowledge of things astronomical informs us that you have nearly zero comprehension of things in the world of physics. There is no shame in not understanding scientific concepts but it is shameful not to attempt to learn about them when the answers are just a few clicks away these days. Instead, you just make it up and claim it is fact, and then stand behind those claims in spite of overwhelming evidence to the contrary. I provide links with good information and you proudly declare... "No I don't bother with any of men's war against knowledge except to oppose it.", an ignorant statement if I've ever heard one. I know how science people attempt to communicate. No, you don't, you really don't, this is quite clear to anyone with even half a brain. Again, why are you even here? Certainly not to learn, and just as certainly not to teach. |
#20
|
|||
|
|||
The Moon does not Rotate.
On Wednesday, November 28, 2018 at 9:40:00 PM UTC-6, palsing wrote:
On Wednesday, November 28, 2018 at 3:47:52 PM UTC-8, Mark Earnest wrote: On Wednesday, November 28, 2018 at 11:49:15 AM UTC-6, palsing wrote: So basically you admit that you oppose all science because you don't understand any of it. Got it. What is there to understand? There is nothing there to understand. So... why are you here at all? According to you, science isn't even worth discussing, right? Nothing to understand? Right now we are lucky if we understand 50% of what nature has to offer, there are still great secrets to be discovered, through hard work and a little luck now and then. Modern science is little more than failed attempts to impress colleagues. Oh, now you sound like a sour-grapes failed student. Were the sciences in school a little too hard for you to grasp? I will try to work with it as best I can because it is the current spoken language. I made A's in college physics. Oh, my Bull**** Meter is having a conniption fit, I think you may have permanently disabled it! It is unlikely that you even took physics in college, let alone got A's! You don't even know about closing speeds, a really, really basic concept of relativity, Physics 101 stuff, freshman year! The fact that you have, at best, a superficial knowledge of things astronomical informs us that you have nearly zero comprehension of things in the world of physics. There is no shame in not understanding scientific concepts but it is shameful not to attempt to learn about them when the answers are just a few clicks away these days. Instead, you just make it up and claim it is fact, and then stand behind those claims in spite of overwhelming evidence to the contrary. I provide links with good information and you proudly declare... "No I don't bother with any of men's war against knowledge except to oppose it.", an ignorant statement if I've ever heard one. I know how science people attempt to communicate. No, you don't, you really don't, this is quite clear to anyone with even half a brain. Again, why are you even here? Certainly not to learn, and just as certainly not to teach. I don't know who you are trying to persuade I don't know anything. Everyone on this forum is three quarters crazy and love crazy stuff. Yes I did make A's in college physics. I understand the astrophysics of the motions of planets in orbit about their stars well enough to know it means travel to the stars is possible. And don't tell me about Einstein. I know Einstein. |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
MOON DOES NOT ROTATE ????? | Benzopia Topia | Misc | 37 | July 20th 05 12:38 AM |
Does the sun rotate? | Tom | Amateur Astronomy | 18 | August 26th 04 01:23 AM |
If We Had No Large Moon, would we Rotate like Venus? | TerryS | Amateur Astronomy | 8 | August 18th 04 07:47 AM |
Does Ceres rotate? | Titan Point | Astronomy Misc | 3 | December 23rd 03 07:47 PM |
Which way do stars rotate? | ypauls | Amateur Astronomy | 2 | July 16th 03 07:13 PM |