Put a flat earthier into space

[Kevj]

Go and get a glass and a beer mat or similar to cover the glass.
Fill it with water and place the beer mat over it.
Upturn the glass and take your hand away from the beer mat. It stays in place.
The water does not push the beer mat away because atmospheric pressure stops it happening.
Why does it stop it happening?
Because the key to it is what atmospheric pressure is left inside the glass. Too little of it and it cannot push the water out to overcome the atmospheric external resistance to it.

Pretty simple really and shows a reality and also shows gravity to be utter nonsense.

And in one fell swoop, you have demonstrated your understanding science is fundamentally flawed.

 

[Nobby]

So you're told but this proves it wrong.

No it doesn't, it relies on gravity to work

 

[taipeisafc]

Go and get a glass and a beer mat or similar to cover the glass.
Fill it with water and place the beer mat over it.
Upturn the glass and take your hand away from the beer mat. It stays in place.
The water does not push the beer mat away because atmospheric pressure stops it happening.
Why does it stop it happening?
Because the key to it is what atmospheric pressure is left inside the glass. Too little of it and it cannot push the water out to overcome the atmospheric external resistance to it.

Pretty simple really and shows a reality and also shows gravity to be utter nonsense.

Yet more pseudoscience, the pressure in the glass under the beermat is slightly below atmospheric so, provided the column of water above the beermat is small enough, then the pressure exerted by the atmsopheric pressure (14.7 psig) is just enough to overcome the downward force exerted the the water under GRAVITY. Try it with a very long glass and see how it works. It does nothing to prove gravity doesn't exist it merely proves, what physicists always say, the gravity is a very weak force compared to the other fundamental forces we know of (Nuclear Strong force, nuclear weak force and electromagnetism IIRC)

 

[nahwee]

Go and get a glass and a beer mat or similar to cover the glass.
Fill it with water and place the beer mat over it.
Upturn the glass and take your hand away from the beer mat. It stays in place.
The water does not push the beer mat away because atmospheric pressure stops it happening.
Why does it stop it happening?
Because the key to it is what atmospheric pressure is left inside the glass. Too little of it and it cannot push the water out to overcome the atmospheric external resistance to it.

Pretty simple really and shows a reality and also shows gravity to be utter nonsense.

Impressive effort!

Now show the same effort and tell us how you proove water is flat.

 

[Nukehasslefan]

Yet more pseudoscience, the pressure in the glass under the beermat is slightly below atmospheric so, provided the column of water above the beermat is small enough, then the pressure exerted by the atmsopheric pressure (14.7 psig) is just enough to overcome the downward force exerted the the water under GRAVITY. Try it with a very long glass and see how it works. It does nothing to prove gravity doesn't exist it merely proves, what physicists always say, the gravity is a very weak force compared to the other fundamental forces we know of (Nuclear Strong force, nuclear weak force and electromagnetism IIRC)

It kills gravity stone dead.
And gravity is such a weak force when it suits. It's utter nonsense.

Impressive effort!

Now show the same effort and tell us how you proove water is flat.

You can do that yourself if you don't allow peer pressure to dictate your findings.

 

[nahwee]

You can do that yourself if you don't allow peer pressure to dictate your findings.

How?

 

[taipeisafc]

It kills gravity stone dead.
And gravity is such a weak force when it suits. It's utter nonsense.

You can do that yourself if you don't allow peer pressure to dictate your findings.

Gravity is a weak force - I can overcome it by jumping but no way can I tear an atom apart; that is why planes are easier to build than atomic bombs. Next fallacy to discount please

 

[monkeytassle]

I agree it is simple stuff. Rockets need an atmosphere in order to work. It basically kills off the space rocket, doesn't it.

There's lots of things to support it but people like yourself will immediately go to gravity as your explanation and pretend you know how and why it works.

The glass of water and beer mat is a perfect example of water and atmosphere and why density can be overcome if there is little atmospheric push..

So you think a rocket does not use atmosphere to push against?
Everything you know uses atmosphere in order to function but somehow the rocket doesn't. Really?

You see we all know why this is. It's because if we are told they need atmosphere to work in it immediately kills off space and all the rest of the gunk sold to us as factual storylines.

A rocket would prefer no atmosphere but it does not use the atmosphere. In fact it is totally the opposite.

 

[Kevj]

Gravity is a weak force - I can overcome it by jumping but no way can I tear an atom apart; that is why planes are easier to build than atomic bombs. Next fallacy to discount please

It’s too early to start the discussion about how submarines operate at various depths having gone though detailed design such that the ballasting requirements are known well in advance of and fabrication work.

 

[Nobby]

So called submarines

 

[monkeytassle]

It’s too early to start the discussion about how submarines operate at various depths having gone though detailed design such that the ballasting requirements are known well in advance of and fabrication work.

Oo I did some of this as part of my degree

 

[legend7]

Ok so a rocket works the same as a propeller.
So you're saying the rocket pushes against the atmosphere in order to work, right?

Basic experiment showing how a rocket will work in a vacuum.
Notice a drone won't fly in it, showing it works nothing like a propellor.
Do you have any experiments you can share to prove your theory?

You must be logged on to see media items

 

[Nukehasslefan]

Gravity is a weak force - I can overcome it by jumping but no way can I tear an atom apart; that is why planes are easier to build than atomic bombs. Next fallacy to discount please

You can overcome the atmospheric pressure upon and around you by jumping, for a short period under your own energy. Gravity doesn't come into it because gravity is the fallacy.

 

[Kevj]

Oo I did some of this as part of my degree

Imagine building a sub then having to take it for sea trials before you can spec or install the ballast pumps or ballast chamber size.

Imagine having a system so undefined that there is no basis to quantify anything in the physical world.

Now imagine that you do have the basis of this, but it only works part of the time, or it stops functioning when you decide you don’t like that part of physics.

You can overcome the atmospheric pressure upon and around you by jumping, for a short period under your own energy. Gravity doesn't come into it because gravity is the fallacy.

Berk.

 

[Nukehasslefan]

A rocket would prefer no atmosphere but it does not use the atmosphere. In fact it is totally the opposite.

A rocket has to use the atmosphere for two very very good reasons.

1. To enable it to push against by expending fuel against it.

2. To balance it in flight.

Imagine building a sub then having to take it for sea trials before you can spec or install the ballast pumps or ballast chamber size.

Imagine having a system so undefined that there is no basis to quantify anything in the physical world.

Now imagine that you do have the basis of this, but it only works part of the time, or it stops functioning when you decide you don’t like that part of physics.


Berk.

Subs use atmosphere. What's the issue?
I'm not questioning subs at the moment.

 

[Kevj]

A rocket has to use the atmosphere for two very very good reasons.

1. To enable it to push against by expending fuel against it.

2. To balance it in flight.

Subs use atmosphere. What's the issue?
I'm not questioning subs at the moment.

No, you are dismissing the fundamental principles on which fluid mechanics is based, which is also the basis or linked to all other science.

 

[Nukehasslefan]

No, you are dismissing the fundamental principles on which fluid mechanics is based, which is also the basis or linked to all other science.

No, I'm not. Those who pretend rockets work in a space vacuum are defying the laws of physics.
How people can believe a rocket works without the use of atmosphere baffles me.

 

[monkeytassle]

A rocket has to use the atmosphere for two very very good reasons.

1. To enable it to push against by expending fuel against it.

2. To balance it in flight.

Subs use atmosphere. What's the issue?
I'm not questioning subs at the moment.

1) No. No no no it doesn't I can assure you nasa would prefer to use less fuel and have no atmosphere the fuel is expended escaping the gravitational pull of the earth


2)wrong again. How many control surfaces do you see here?

You must be logged on to see external links

 

[No7]

Fair play to this knacker for continuing to post

 

[payne]

10 billion for a bit cgi

ridiculous

You must be logged on to see external links