- This topic has 6,414 replies, 23 voices, and was last updated 2 months, 1 week ago by
.
- Posts
Hi Mike.
I don’t think that is the water for two reasons.
- Because the line is too irregular;
- You can actually see the horizon below the boat? It’s part of the light blue band that extends across the visual frame.
Alrighty then? lol. A good way to end the video.
I googled this explanation:
The difference between annular and total eclipses depends on where the point of that umbral cone is.
When the moon is farther away, the point is actually above Earth’s surface. That means there is no place in Earth that is directly in the umbra, and the result is an annular eclipse, where that thin ring of the sun can still be seen.
When the moon is closer, the point of the umbra hits Earth’s surface, and every place where that point hits sees a total eclipse.
A hybrid eclipse happens when the distance between the Earth and moon is so finely balanced that the curvature of the Earth comes into play.
Sunday morning, when the moon’s disk was beginning to slide in front of the sun in North America, the umbral point was not touching Earth, so it appeared as if the sun was heading toward an annular eclipse. And for 15 seconds somewhere out over the Atlantic ocean, an annular eclipse actually happened.
T8, you’re up to your old games of not answering questions but simply repeating yourself over and over.
That is because the answer provides an adequate explanation, but you do not understand it. If you cannot comprehend what I’m repeatedly saying then I’m certainly not going to scratch around for a different answer that you can understand. Instead, I challenge you to actually understand what zero pressure would do to almost zero pressure. Maybe relaying this conceptly in the language of math, it might click. Here goes:
Imagine the number 1,000,000.
Now minus .000001 from 1,000,000.
What is the answer?
Well for all intents and purposes, the answer is still 1,000,000 because the number interacting with one million is so small, it actually doesn’t matter to us in the scale of things.However, if you were doing an experiment and need to be exact, then you might express the answer as 999,999.999999. And from what I have read, that is kind of what is going on with the edge of the atmosphere when it meets space. Apparently there is actually loss of atmosphere, but it is miniscule and would only become a problem so far in the future that you might as well also worry about the sun going supernova in 5 billion years while you are at it.
Wikipedia provides a precise answer. It says:
Earth is too large to lose a significant proportion of its atmosphere through Jeans escape. The current rate of loss is about 3 kg of hydrogen and 50 g of helium per second. The exosphere is the high-altitude region where atmospheric density is sparse and Jeans escape occurs.Jeans escape calculations assuming an exosphere temperature of 1,800 K [13] show that to deplete O+ ions by a factor of e (2.718…) would take nearly a billion years. 1,800 K is higher than the actual observed exosphere temperature; at the actual average exosphere temperature, depletion of O+ ions would not occur even over a trillion years. Furthermore, most oxygen on Earth is bound as O2, which is too massive to escape Earth by Jeans escape.
Once again, you are focused on the atmosphere and not on the vacuum. Remember I asked how powerful the vacuum of space was? You have completely ignored that information. Let’s start there.
If you want to learn a little, have a watch;
The vacuum of space is not powerful at all. It is not an actual sucking force of some kind. It is just empty so to speak, so anything that is full will rush into it if it comes in contact. If you have water on one side of of a container and it is empty on the other side with a wall separating both, then the water will fill that space once the wall is removed.
But the edge of the atmosphere is nearly empty, so that effect will not occur, or will happen so slowly that it matters little. Like a few drops of water next to an empty space. Remove the wall and they will not rush into the empty space because the drops are basically already sitting in near empty space.
T8: The vacuum of space is not powerful at all.
😂 I guess that’s why they made the lunar lander out of cardboard, tinfoil and duct tape.
No reason to keep this up since you refuse to see the 600 pound gorilla in the room.
By the way, that was a great video! Rob Skiba presented some excellent evidence! If I didn’t believe what I do now I would begin to take it very seriously.
It’s no secret that a vacuum is not some kind of force, it is just mostly nothing. And what do we observe when there is nothing, we’ll something fills the void. And if a vacuum is next to a vacuum then still nothing. Now put air pressure next do it and create an opening between the two and the something will fill the nothing.
By logical extention, if you have a vacuum next to 1 particle inside empty space then what happens, we’ll the particle is surrounded by nothing too, so it may not move to the vacuum or do anything since it was already practically a vacuum.
And that my friend is the edge of our atmosphere. It is almost a vacuum itself. It’s not my fault if you do not understand what a vacuum really is.
Also think about things that have higher PSI than sea level. A fire extinguisher or a car tyre. When there is a breach, what happens?
Now imagine a container that has air pressure at slight more of less the PSI of air at sea level. What happens if that container has a breach at seal level? Nothing spectacular right.
It’s simple physics. Near zero pressure interacting with zero pressure is nothing to really be concerned about.
I find it funny that every example you use to illustrate how a vacuum works is some kind of container. Yet you don’t understand how crazy and unbiblical it is to believe that our pressurized atmosphere has no firmament surrounding it.
You still haven’t answered why the vacuum of space stops at the thin upper atmosphere. What keeps it from proceeding further? The way you make it sound it’s like the vacuum gets to our atmosphere and says, “well, not much here, I suppose I’ll just stop looking”.
So please, tell me why the vacuum would stop at our upper atmosphere and not proceed to the more pressurized lower atmosphere. Remember that according to you there is NO barrier or firmament to stop it!
How can the vacuum of space that supposedly exists everywhere in space, which by the way is much larger than the earth, suddenly just stop when it comes to a highly pressurized atmosphere?
You still haven’t answered why the vacuum of space stops at the thin upper atmosphere. What keeps it from proceeding further? The way you make it sound it’s like the vacuum gets to our atmosphere and says, “well, not much here, I suppose I’ll just stop looking”.
Pay attention Dig. First off, it does interact. Secondly, the interaction is tiny because space is interacting with molecules that are sitting mostly in their own empty space. So the interaction is not dramatic, in fact it is hardly noticeable.
T8: I don’t think that is the water…
The fact is that the stripes on the flag ARE disappearing, but the boat is clearly NOT going over some curved horizon. Neither is ANY boat going “over the horizon” in any case. Things disappear from the bottom up because of perspective, atmospheric distortion, and the way our eyes work. You saw this same effect with the guy dragging the box over the perfectly level warehouse floor, and the guy walking away on the perfectly level football field. In this case, Nat Geo accidentally provided hard evidence of what we have been saying for quite a while now.
T8: A hybrid eclipse happens when the distance between the Earth and moon is so finely balanced that the curvature of the Earth comes into play.
The curvature of the earth would have NOTHING to do with whether the moon itself is close enough to block the entire sun, or far enough away to block only the center part, leaving a ring of light around the edges. Do you agree?
T8: …the interaction is tiny because space is interacting with molecules that are sitting mostly in their own empty space.
Okay, let’s call this layer you describe “L-5”. L-4 has more pressure than L-5, so what’s keeping the air in L-4 pressurized when L-5 is basically a vacuum?
And finally, have you had time to “investigate” my sun, moon and earth drawing yet? It should take you about 2.3 minutes to find out if my diagram conveys the idea.
The fact is that the stripes on the flag ARE disappearing, but the boat is clearly NOT going over some curved horizon.
That’s like saying that 70 storeys of a 100 storey building being visible doesn’t prove the curve because the basic shape looks about right. First off, a boat does go below water level regardless, and if 1 foot of the boat is missing above the water level, then it will still have its basic shape right? Your comment is too general to be scientific.
Okay, let’s call this layer you describe “L-5”. L-4 has more pressure than L-5, so what’s keeping the air in L-4 pressurized when L-5 is basically a vacuum?
First off this is correct because you can actually test the decreasing PSI of air as you gain altitude without relying on NASA. So whether the Earth is a globe or a flat disk, this is a fact that requires an explanation.
Secondly, L4 so to speak has more molecules because of gravity and L3 even more for the same reason. Sea level is closest to Earth’s centre, so would have the most air molecules.
Imagine a round magnet with a sheet of paper sitting over it. Sprinkle iron filings on the paper. What you would expect to see is a concentration of filings over the magnet and a lesser concentration the further out you go. Imagine those iron filings are molecules and the magnetism is gravity.
Now ask Dig’s questions to yourself and you have the answer immediately
Why don’t the iron filings in L3 get sucked toward L4 and so on till they escape the magnets magnetic field.
Simple answer is magnetism for the magnet and gravity for the Earth.
God’s creation is amazing isn’t it. Way better than a snow globe that Angels themselves could have constructed.
Dig
Jeranism = Scientism.
The arguments I have made earlier to you debunk this video you posted. I will explain it again for you and hopefully you get it this time.
Vacuums suck is a myth
Molecules only go into a vacuum because contained air pressure pushes out from its container and if there is a breach or hole in the container, then by logical extension of that, air molecules will get pushed out of the hole due to a lack of resistance and not because vacuums suck. Knowing this, if there is one air molecule in a container and there is a hole, then the molecule probably won’t go out of the hole because there are no other molecules to push it out of the hole, i.e, there is practically no air pressure because pressure is caused by molecules pressing on each other. Space will not suck out that one molecule and air pressure requires many molecules that press against each other.
Pressure is caused by molecules pressing on each other
If the outer atmosphere has fewer and fewer molecules, then just before space or zero molecules there will be an area of very few molecules. These molecules will mostly just sit where they are because they are not hitting each other or pressing against each other because they are too far apart to press on each other. And given that space doesn’t suck, then there will be no or few molecules moving into the void of space.
The reason space doesn’t suck
Space doesn’t suck because space is essentially nothing or at least nothing in the sense of molecules and air pressure. So space is what we call nothing and most of the universe is space or nothing. That is, most of space is not a planet, sun, rock, atmosphere, or whatever. If it is nothing then it won’t suck because nothing doesn’t suck. There is a reason it is called nothing. Nothing does nothing and it certainly doesn’t suck. If it did suck, then it would be something causing that and it wouldn’t be called nothing or empty space. Please define what it is then if you believe it sucks. You think it sucks because that is what you think happens in Star Trek when Voyager has a breach or you think it sucks because vacuum cleaners on earth do suck. But ask yourself this, is the inside of the vacuum cleaner nothing and is air from your house being sucked into nothing in the vacuum cleaner? Of course not.
The reason why there is decreasing air pressure as you gain altitude
Gravity is the reason for less air pressure as you gain altitude. Gravity forces air molecules toward the centre of the earth. Of course, air molecules will not hit the centre of the earth as it is a solid barrier. The result is a tendency for air molecules to go toward sea level and this can be tested without NASA by using a barometer. Of course there are other forces to that disturb air molecules so they tend to move in lots of directions, but gravity will concentrate them at sea level and a barometer will show thinning air pressure the higher you go.
Thinning air pressure is a huge problem for the Flat Earth
Besides the problems I have just posed for the Flat Earth in this post, another problem for the Flat Earth needs to be addressed. The Flat Earth model suggests that the Earth is a disk contained within a dome of some kind. Some people like Mike think it is made of something like glass. If this were true and there was no gravity, then air molecules would spread out evenly under the dome, but a simple barometer will prove this is not the case.
T8: Dig
Jeranism = Scientism.
I guess T8 couldn’t even make it to the 5:40 mark of the video, where we see an MIT professor explaining this very situation.
T8: …L4 so to speak has more molecules because of gravity and L3 even more for the same reason. Sea level is closest to Earth’s centre, so would have the most air molecules.
Throughout this discussion, D4T and I have granted you the never-proven and only-hypothetical force of gravity, whereby objects with mass just magically attract each other. But even granting you this, your story fails. Okay, let’s say your above statement is correct, and sea level would have more molecules than L2-L5 due to gravity. We’re not asking about more molecules simply collecting closer to the center of gravity. We’re asking how gravity can SQUISH those molecules so tightly together that they have a pressure of 14.7 pounds per square inch. Do you see the difference between an errant gas molecule floating through space and being pulled to a planet due to gravity and that same gas molecule being squished out of shape by that same force of gravity? The more you try to squish molecules together, the more they heat up and repel each other. That’s why secular science admits it has never solved the problem of how stars form. They think the giant interstellar gas cloud “wants” to collapse on itself due to it’s self-gravity, creating so much heat and pressure that a nuclear reaction takes place and ignites in the middle. BUT they also realize that ordinary gas pressure would fight a collapse, because the tighter gravity tried to squeeze the gas molecules to the middle, the more they would heat up and repel each other. They also think these space clouds are rotating, which would also fight collapse. In his book “Death By Black Hole”, Neil DeGrasse Tyson points out these problems (and a couple more) and concludes, “If none of us knew in advance that stars exist, front line research would offer plenty of convincing reasons why they could never form.”
Well here we have the same problem, T8. The natural repelling force of the gas molecules would overcome any attempt by gravity to squish them together. And you have to also deal with the earth spinning at 1000 mph – which would also fight against gravity pressurizing the gas – because of centrifugal force.
Remember what the word “pressure” even means, T8. It describes a condition whereby things are PRESSED upon. There is no such thing as “pressure” in an open container. If your pressurized car tire gets a hole in it, it becomes an open container – and ceases to be pressurized. A planet in the vacuum of space is as open of a container as you can get. So you can imagine gravity attracts passing gas molecules to the earth – and even piles them up on top of each other. But the minute you begin to imagine that gravity is strong enough to not only squish them together, but squish them so powerfully that they create 15 psi of pressure, you’re practicing pseudoscience. Can you imagine how a force that strong would affect the other things on earth? If it could squish gas molecules together at 15 psi, we wouldn’t be able to lift our foot off the ground.
Anyway, all of these arguments are based on gravity existing. Of course such a force has NEVER been scientifically verified, and the very hypothesis of it has tons of problems. For instance, Newtonian gravity isn’t the same as Einsteinian gravity. And neither of them work in quantum mechanics. Nor do they work in astronomy. Didn’t you know that the reason they had to invent the hypothetical entities of dark matter and dark energy is because gravity – as they understand it – cannot account for the alleged galaxies in our alleged universe. There’s not enough matter to explain stars and galaxies using gravity, so they had to invent ANOTHER completely hypothetical force to go along with the completely hypothetical force of gravity.
Now, who’s really the one practicing pseudoscience here? Tell ya what… we’ll take gravity away from you because nobody has or can prove it even exists. How do you explain a pressurized atmosphere WITHOUT your completely hypothetical rescue device gravity?
T8: Besides the problems I have just posed for the Flat Earth in this post, another problem for the Flat Earth needs to be addressed. The Flat Earth model suggests that the Earth is a disk contained within a dome of some kind. Some people like Mike think it is made of something like glass. If this were true and there was no gravity, then air molecules would spread out evenly under the dome, but a simple barometer will prove this is not the case.
You mean “people like Mike, the writers of scripture, and God Himself”, right? Because that’s where Mike learned of our “hard as glass” firmament that separates the waters above from the waters below, and in which the sun, moon, and stars run their God-appointed courses over our stationary earth that is firmly fixed on pillars and cannot be moved.
We don’t deny that there is less pressure the higher you go, but why do you think this hypothetical force called gravity is the only answer for it? Tesla said if you want to understand the world, think in terms of electromagnetism, vibration, and frequency. Have you heard of Mag-Lev trains? They don’t overcome “gravity”, but work by using the earth’s electromagnetic fields. Scientists now say that’s how bumble bees and other insects fly. They know how to manipulate earth’s electromagnetism and use it to their advantage. You’ll love this 5 minute video about quantum levitation…
Now who’s to say that’s not exactly how our earth works? Who’s to say that the reason we have varying pressures within our enclosed dome isn’t because of gas molecules behaving differently in different layers of electromagnetism?
Wow, way cool video and some very insightful points, Mike!
I can hear the response now, “but, but, but, gravittttty!!!! Or something along those lines. I have long given up any hope that t8 would acknowledge any good point made by us. He is just not after the truth anymore – he’s after winning.
But perhaps I’m not giving him enough credit, he hasn’t responded yet. I mean he would have to admit he knows more than an MIT Professer. But hey if we’re playing the odds…
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.
