May 17, 2018 at 12:21 pm #826345
I can’t envisage if this model would actually work or not unless I devoted much brain power and time. But one thing that sticks out like dog balls is the fact that in NZ, I can see the Southern Cross as can someone in Africa and at the same time. In that case, the field of view dome that the person introduced into the model in the video does not stretch far enough and I wonder if this was intentional to escape this question.
If the guy adjusts the dome to fit the Southern Cross into the view of both Africa and NZ at the same time, then hello that field of view dome covers most if not nearly the whole disk, So why can’t everyone in that field of view disk dome see the Southern Cross at one time? For me, the question is still the same and only the Globe Earth has an explanation. That is, the Southern Ocean is not nearly as big as it is on the Flat Earth model compared to reality. In fact on a flat earth, the Southern Ocean is ridiculously huge and this doesn’t also fit with other observations. A simple thing like the Volvo Ocean Yacht Race proves this to be so.May 17, 2018 at 12:51 pm #826346Dig4truthParticipant
- Topics started 0
- Total replies 375
So you’re saying that the force of gravity is stronger than the force of a near perfect vacuum?
Here’s the scenario; the earth’s atmosphere is denser the lower you are. On the surface it is the most dense, and the higher you go the less dense it becomes.
This lesser density of the atmosphere is juxtaposed to the greatest vacuum, greater than anything we could produce on the earth’s surface, and somehow the atmosphere is not very effected by it. Why?
Because of this extremely weak force (gravity) at its greatest distance and the least amount of mass to exert that force on (higher atmosphere) but somehow it (gravity) wins over the incredible strong near perfect vacuum. Why? This is more like a superhero movie than science.
If you could address this then that would settle me down a bit.
We have seen what a weak vacuum can do to a thick metal railroad car – smash! It is a strong force!
Have you ever sucked the air out of a soda bottle and got you lips stuck on it? Sorry, just a memory from childhood. But back when sodas came in bottles it was a common occurrence. We would also place our bubblegum on the top of the bottle and it would inflate with the carbonated gasses. Two extremes coming from one object. Wonderful childhood! Real science!
Those experiments, drinking sodas on hot summer days, yes science is grueling, taught me that a vacuum was very strong and that the gasses would take a while to blow up the bubblegum, I would say much weaker.
These real world experiences taught me to trust my God given observations. That is all I’m trying to do now. How can the thinnest part of out atmosphere meet the strongest vacuum on earth (actually much stronger than anything on earth) without totally being taken over by the all consuming vacuum of space?
Some may say that the earth is dense and has a strong gravitational pull but space is vast and its vacuum can be equated to unmeasurable earth’s gravitational pull. What gives? Certainly not earth’s atmosphere.May 17, 2018 at 1:10 pm #826347
What day were the third heavens made? Do you know?
Day one, per Gen 1:1.May 17, 2018 at 1:14 pm #826348Dig4truthParticipant
- Topics started 0
- Total replies 375
Mike, I love that video about the map! It just goes to illustrate how we have accepted things that were taught to us, as we should have, but have not been allowed new discoveries to refine the old paradigm.
Does a pressurized gas live happily ever after with a voracious vacuum? Perhaps in fairytails.
Does water conform to the outside of a ball? Not in any of our experiments that are testable, repeatable and observable.
Can we see over a curved planet? All day long on a plane earth! Testable, repeatable and observable.May 17, 2018 at 1:25 pm #826350
Why doesn’t the vacuum of space suck out Earth’s atmosphere?
Dig4Truth: This lesser density of the atmosphere is juxtaposed to the greatest vacuum, greater than anything we could produce on the earth’s surface, and somehow the atmosphere is not very effected by it. Why?
The atmosphere thins out and is almost at zero before hitting space. That makes sense. I use to live in Bogota which is about 2700m above seal level. It was hard to breathe up there, and while you didn’t notice it right away, you certainly did when you went for a run.
If it air pressure were the same density all the way up, then the vacuum would affect the atmosphere like air getting sucked out a hole in a plane for sure. But the idea that a vacuum sucks might be sound when working out how a vacuum cleaner works. However, a vacuum cleaner doesn’t have zero air pressure or a piece of space inside does it. What really happens regarding the atmosphere is high air pressure is stronger than low air pressure or space, so the high air pressure simply flows into the lower air pressure zone or into space. But if the upper atmosphere has almost zero air pressure, then loss of atmosphere will be almost non-existent or extremely slow.
Maybe think of it as a water container with a hole in it that leads to another container. The water won’t flow into the other container because there is already water in it and the pressure is the same so to speak. But if there was no water in the other container just air (which is lower in pressure or density) then the water will move into the lower pressure / density space. If one container had saltwater and the other fresh water, I am willing to guess that the saltwater will very slowly flow into the freshwater till equilibrium takes place because saltwater is denser than freshwater.
So why doesn’t the miniscule amount of atmosphere vacate and move into the zero pressure of space? Apparently Earth does lose a miniscule amount of atmosphere, but it would take billions of years before we lost our atmosphere and suffer the same fate as Mars. Because Mars is smaller, it lost its atmosphere quicker because the force of gravity of that planet is less than Earth, thus they lost their atmosphere quicker than we will. And without googling this, I will go out on a limb and say the reason high air pressure doesn’t do the equilibrium thing with lower air pressure higher up is because of gravity. Gravity is stronger the closer to Earth you are, so it would stand to reason that the airpressure is higher there than further up. If this is a wrong explanation, I am sure there is a logical explanation that I could google.May 17, 2018 at 1:32 pm #826357
The official reason air pressure is higher nearer the Earth.
Ahh, I just googled the explanation as to why air pressure is lower the higher up you go in the atmosphere. I got the first reason correct in my above post when I said gravity is stronger the closer you are to Earth. The second reason is explained below.
there is less air pushing down from above, and gravity is weaker farther from Earth’s center. So at higher altitudes, air molecules can spread out more, and air density decreases
Makes sense right. When you descend into the sea, the pressure becomes greater as you go lower. Because you are getting closer to the centre of the earth and there is more water above you and water is quite heavy.May 17, 2018 at 1:33 pm #826349
Kathi: Isn’t it reasonable to say that the order of creation and created beings would be-first create the dwelling next create those who are meant to dwell there. The earth was prepared before the animals and Adam and Eve were there. The heavens were made on day two. The angels would be created after the heavens were created in which they dwell. The angels must have been created on or after day two.
Hi Kathi, I’m 7 pages behind, and just got done with a 12 hour work day, so I’m answering briefly today in the hopes I get caught back up. What you make says sense in that it would be wise to have the aquarium ready before buying the fish. And it could be that on that first 24 hour day, God created the heavens (a dwelling place), then brought forth Jesus, then created the angels through him, and then created the earth at which time the angels shouted for joy, and then created light. But in that case, Jesus couldn’t be the light, because according to Gen 1, the heavens and the earth were created, the earth was formless water, and THEN God said, “Let there be light.”May 17, 2018 at 1:34 pm #826354
D4T: I disagree that “it could be easily argued the sun was created on day one”. It cannot given the wording of Scripture. It clearly says that the sun was made on day 4.
That’s also how I see it. IMO, it is impossible that all this wording…
- “Let there be lights in the firmament…”
- And it was so.
- God made two great lights…
- God set them in the firmament to give light on the earth.
… could be construed into God really made the sun, the moon, and the stars on day 1.
I further conclude that the only reason anyone would even consider such a thing is because they’ve been told by men that planets are born from stars, and they trust these men more than they trust a straightforward interpretation of Genesis 1. Shame, because these same men will tell you unabashedly that they have no clue how stars and planets form… even today. I have many quotes to back this up, if anyone would like to see them.May 17, 2018 at 1:36 pm #826355
Ed: With the creation of the sun and rotation of the earth you can have THE FIRST day
Sure, but the scripture clearly says God made the sun, moon, and stars on the fourth day.May 17, 2018 at 1:41 pm #826356
T8: This video touches on some of the points I raised earlier about distances in the Southern Hemisphere.
IMO, it also debunks a number of Flat Earth claims that I have seen in some videos.
I watched the first 10 minutes when you posted it Sunday. All of what I saw is easily debunked. But most of these flat earth debunk videos and articles talk about the same basic things… things that have already been refuted or shown to rely on hypotheticals that have never been verified.May 17, 2018 at 1:49 pm #826358
D4T: So the atmosphere is rotating with the earth.. ?
If the globers start at 2:30, and watch til 10:15, they’ll have a much better idea about the nonsensical idea they’re fighting to protect.
Two key points from the video…
- The second law of thermodynamics states that gas pressure will move from high to low until the entire system reaches equilibrium.
- Gas pressure is a measurement of the pressure placed on the container that holds the pressurized gas.
Let those things sink in while you’re pondering this quote…
Attachments:You must be logged in to view attached files.May 17, 2018 at 2:00 pm #826363
The law of entropy states that gas pressure will move from high to low until the entire system reaches equilibrium.
Gas pressure is a measurement of the pressure placed on the container that holds the pressurized gas.
Mike, my two videos higher up this page explain this clearly.
What you are basically arguing here is that yes there is this law, but no, there are no other laws. So I could argue that you cannot fly a plane because of gravity. To say that, I have to ignore aerodynamics. Or that things fall because of gravity, so I could argue that they fall forever because I am leaving out electromagnetism.
My two posts above easily refute the logic that air pressure in the atmosphere will reach equilibrium and consequently be sucked out into the vacuum, of space.May 17, 2018 at 2:04 pm #826364
Nick: Hi Dig4,
The atmosphere is rotating with the earth??
Where do the winds of earth come from?
Why is the westerly predominant?
Globers often don’t even know the basics of what the heliocentric model actually says. Yes Nick, the heliocentric model says the atmosphere is stuck to the earth as if with Velcro, and moves seamlessly with it as it spins more than 1000 mph. Sound logical to you?May 17, 2018 at 2:08 pm #826366
Yes it is logical MIke and I can prove it.May 17, 2018 at 2:13 pm #826368
T8: Mike, my two videos higher up this page explain this clearly.
Use discernment, T8. Crying “GRAVITY!” doesn’t solve the problem in the least, and yet it is the only thing you guys have to answer it. What is gravity? What observational test has ever been done to confirm it’s existence? How is it so selective that it can hold trillions of cubic tons of water upside down on a spinning ball, yet a butterfly can easily escape it’s grasp? How is it so selective that it can keep certain bodies of mass, like planets, orbiting for eons, but affix other bodies of mass, like us, firmly to the ground… even upside down? Why don’t the planets become affixed, or people orbit around the earth?
Think on these things, and tell me what proof the scientific community has ever given for the existence of this magical force called gravity. If you really think about it with an open mind, you’ll come to the honest conclusion that it is an absurd concept, and begin to wonder why you ever would have believed such occultism in the first place.
You must be logged in to reply to this topic.