-
The first stage of the forum upgrades has now been completed but they remain in a degraded state and are still being worked on. Normal posting/reading should now be possible.
Please read this thread for more details.
New user registrations are currently disabled.
Put a flat earthier into space
- Thread starter southstander
- Start date
He's an anti-vaxxer
BigPete
Striker
Ok, what if we aren't the one's making the decisions.
What if the one's we think are making the decisions are just puppets for a higher intelligence or something like that. Not from so called outer space but from actual Earth itself.
This will open a new can of worms for the frenzied to get right on me.
You mean like the hollow earth theory?
I don't believe in god like as in the bible etc but I do think there must be something higher and we could for all we know just be a experiment or simulation.
Something we will never know though I suppose.
Still hasn't replied to my post showing a rocket in a vaccum.
payne
Striker
As long as you don't pass it off as factual it becomes as valid as reality in flat earth world dome logic
He has dismissed it with a you tube video showing things can't burn in a vacuum. Don't think he gets how liquid fueled rockets work
BigPete
Striker
Nukehasslefan
Winger
If you want to believe the old white haired woman with the pointy nose peeping from behind her curtain can fly on a broomstick because people told you, then there's nothing wrong in going with that is enough people have mentioned it as being a truth.
It keeps up the suspense, just like a haunted house does and so on.
But there comes a time when you feel the need to question them, just like Santa and god and the tooth fairy...etc....etc.
With this space stuff, that's what I believe we're being asked to do and people simply go with it, which is fair enough. I simply don't.
Can you tell me how they work?
It's all you need.
A questioning mind to speculate.
Last edited:
It's you saying liquid fueled rockets don't work in a vacuum, it's down to you to show why they don't. The video you posted didn't touch on liquid fueled rockets
Nukehasslefan
Winger
If you can explain to me how a rocket can expel burning liquid fuel into a so called space vacuum in order to move in the opposite direction I'll certainly debate it.
Can you?
It's you saying it can't in the face of evidence to the contrary.
It's on you to to prove the evidence is flawed, can you do that, using verifiable information?
Nukehasslefan
Winger
Can you prove it's not flawed?
Can prove it is?
As the person setting out that the accepted knowledge is flawed the onus is on you to demonstrate that
DaveH
Striker
Whoa there, are you saying there is more than one kind of fuel?
Was it a video he had produced?
zwartekat
Striker
It doesn't. Simply, rockets use oxidizers to burn fuel and the expanding gases then provide thrust. I'm not sure why you're having a problem with this.
DaveH
Striker
I can't say for this one, I only ever see him on flat earth threads. But I know what you are saying. In this case I'm not picking on one individual and this post is not about him in any way.
To me, Brexit was a conspiracy theory. Anti-establishment, so much that was said was untrue and one of the killers is that the arguments fell apart when you drilled down to the details. Counter arguments waved away as "project fear" (where more traditional theories say "brainwashing" or "schooled"), without giving much justification for why they were waved away and the whole idea stuck. It had all the hall marks of a traditional conspiracy theory and there was a certain set of posters on the politics forum that were very active in the arguments.
Then Covid happened. Naturally there was a lot of discussion and it moved to it's own forum. People were concerned about it, people were concerned about those who didn't follow health guidelines and then arguments started. "It's not real", "over the top", "great reset", "government want to control", "will never give up their powers", "gradual degrading of our freedoms", etc. But most of the names I knew saying this were the same names from the politics forum.
Is it that when you believe one conspiracy theory you seem to be more likely to believe them all?
It seems so unlikely that someone has done loads of research in one area and uncovered the truth themselves in one area, only to have the time and mental capacity to do that in so many other areas too.
You can even prove you can get propulsion in a vaccum using a can of pop.
You must be logged on to see media items
Nukehasslefan
Winger
It depends on how it's looked at.
As I've said before, everything requires a medium in order to work in.
A rocket or jet or motor or whatever requires a reaction to the action of expelled energy.
Offering little to supposed no resistance (your space vacuum) will offer no push.
It's all about going right back to basics and understanding why little resistance is offered to any energy, as in a low pressure evacuation chamber.
A fan will not work.
Fire will burn out.
As for me directly proving anything to you. Nahhhh. Not a chance. That can only come from you to look at it all and decide, which you already have, which is fine.
If I'm to be coaxed into a belief of space rockets and such then I require proof, none of which can be provided.
It may frustrate people but it hasn't.
The oxidisers allow the fuel to burn against atmosphere. It expands into the atmosphere.
Your space vacuum offers no atmosphere and nothing to expand into. It's a dead stick.
Last edited:
How's the sketch coming on?
Nukehasslefan
Winger
The chamber is still in low pressure.
The can exploding is still compressing into it and against the wall of the container.
There is little room between the open can and the wall. This is simply an immediate compression.
A bad attempt at proving rockets supposedly work in a space vacuum.
It's not. I haven't done a sketch, yet.
Be patient until I do.
Nothing's going to spoil and nothing will change regardless of when I show a sketch.
Last edited:
