The lake mirror is pretty obvious but also, the fact that and body of water will reflect the sun or moon in a direct line to your feet 100% proves there is no curvature.
Any curvature at all will distort the mirror image on the lake. It would also stop the sun or moon reflection from reaching your feet since the water would be angled away from you.
Lol. No thanks. I'll just stick to things I can verify myself. Like my post. Have anything to say about it or do you just want to point me to a Google search result you found?
Another ad hominem from voat. Lol. It's like nothing but kikes respond. I get it though, If you can't attack the argument, attack the person. Kike 101.
Dude, i have tried to tell you this. Think about it. It does not matter what the shape of the lakebed is—it could be convex on the bottom or concave or sloped to one end or in the shape of a swastika—the water equalizes pressure and finds a level normal to the gravitational force.
Fill up a cup with water and tilt it back and forth and notice how the water DOES NOT CARE. It shows you gravity. That’s why we can use it in levels. Still waiting for you to take your telescope that can see to the fucking moon and point it to the horizon and take a picture of literally anything in another continent…
[ - ] McNasty [op] 1 point 1.6 yearsSep 23, 2023 01:06:04 ago (+2/-1)
It shows you gravity.
It shows you a downward biased on the Earth. You keep calling that downward bias gravity. That is your unproven THEORY. Gravity is defined as the warping of spacetime. In no way does it explain what causes mass to roll down the hill created by the warping of space time. If gravity is the hill, it cannot be the force that causes an object to roll down it. It can only provide the direction to an object as force is applied.
Think about it. It does not matter what the shape of the lakebed is
The water on top is flat.
Fill up a cup with water and tilt it back and forth and notice how the water DOES NOT CARE. It shows you gravity.
The water finds and remains with a 'flat' surface no matter the angle of the cup. This does not 'demonstrate' gravity. It demonstrates what we already know, that denser objects fall and lighter objects rise within the electromagnetic field of the earth, the earth being the ground bias (-).
Still waiting for you to take your telescope that can see to the fucking moon and point it to the horizon and take a picture of literally anything in another continent…
Whataboutism based on ignorance (or mocking, hard to tell given the subject).
Angular resolution is something we have explained before and demonstrated/illustrated in a video, but 'da bibeo is too long!', because you're not serious about the truth, you just want to regurgitate your gnostic-scientism world-view.
You are fundamentally misunderstanding the problem.
Not only are there landmarks in the way, but there is a limit to the resolution of our eyes and of measuring apparatus. This is something known as Angular Resolution.
Moreover, light has a fall-off of radiance as opposed to the common trope of light travelling forever (the space lie, that light travels unimpeded over ridiculously vast distances). This is something called the Inverse Square law.
LoRa: Long Range is a physical proprietary radio communication technique. It is based on spread spectrum modulation techniques derived from chirp spread spectrum (CSS) technology.
The remarkable point of this record is that it is achieved at sea level. Reaching extended distances with LoRaWAN at sea level eliminates potential variables introduced by varying altitudes, providing a standardized and objective measure of the technology's capabilities. We do have to note that this is an exceptional achievement. The majority of The Things Stack-operated devices range between 25 and 100 meters (75-300 feet) from the gateway.
11 Myths About LoRaWAN 2. LoRa signals can’t really transmit over 10 km. That’s nuts! LoRa’s range depends on “radio line-of-sight.” Radio waves in the 400- to 900-MHz range may pass through some obstructions, depending on their composition, but will be absorbed or reflected otherwise. This means that the signal can potentially reach as far as the horizon, as long as there are no physical barriers to block it. Elevating LoRa devices—placing them on rooftops or mountaintops, for example—will maximize their range. Other factors, such as antenna gain, will also have a large impact on range.
Demonstrably not true. You can rub a balloon on your shirt and it 'magically defies gravity'. You can fill a balloon with helium and it floats upward. The air resistance is still there in both circumstances.
So go ahead, explain how 'air resistance' makes balloons rise...
I think the term you may be looking for is 'density'. Denisty is why helium rises and why apples fall.
This is still not proof of gravity, this is proof of a downward bias.
This makes more sense if you understand the earth as an electromagnetic realm. The earth is the negative biased ground and as you rise in elevation, you will measure an increasing voltage relative to the earth. This bias is what accelerates objects toward their equilibrium point.
Typically this term refers to a rhetorical strategy where the speaker attacks the character, motive, or some other attribute of the person making an argument rather than attacking the substance of the argument itself.
Well, seeing as how you haven't offered any sort of substantive argument and you are making personal attacks, I would say it is indeed an ad hominem.
Maybe you should gather your feelings together and take stock. Figure out what is making you mad here. Why are you mad over an idea as impersonal as this?
[ + ] Deleted
[ - ] deleted 3 points 1.6 yearsSep 22, 2023 20:04:02 ago (+3/-0)
[ + ] McNasty
[ - ] McNasty [op] 0 points 1.6 yearsSep 22, 2023 20:06:01 ago (+2/-2)
[ + ] Deleted
[ - ] deleted 1 point 1.6 yearsSep 23, 2023 00:50:03 ago (+1/-0)
[ + ] McNasty
[ - ] McNasty [op] 0 points 1.6 yearsSep 23, 2023 10:41:54 ago (+1/-1)
Regardless, if we were in a simulation, It's easy to prove that the simulation is flat and not curved.
[ + ] Not_a_redfugee
[ - ] Not_a_redfugee 1 point 1.6 yearsSep 22, 2023 19:58:16 ago (+1/-0)
[ + ] McNasty
[ - ] McNasty [op] 0 points 1.6 yearsSep 22, 2023 20:00:26 ago (+2/-2)
[ + ] Nonanonanon
[ - ] Nonanonanon 0 points 1.6 yearsSep 23, 2023 00:48:13 ago (+0/-0)
Fill up a cup with water and tilt it back and forth and notice how the water DOES NOT CARE. It shows you gravity. That’s why we can use it in levels. Still waiting for you to take your telescope that can see to the fucking moon and point it to the horizon and take a picture of literally anything in another continent…
[ + ] McNasty
[ - ] McNasty [op] 1 point 1.6 yearsSep 23, 2023 01:06:04 ago (+2/-1)
It shows you a downward biased on the Earth. You keep calling that downward bias gravity. That is your unproven THEORY. Gravity is defined as the warping of spacetime. In no way does it explain what causes mass to roll down the hill created by the warping of space time. If gravity is the hill, it cannot be the force that causes an object to roll down it. It can only provide the direction to an object as force is applied.
[ + ] Love240
[ - ] Love240 0 points 1.6 yearsSep 23, 2023 01:06:46 ago (+0/-0)
The water on top is flat.
The water finds and remains with a 'flat' surface no matter the angle of the cup. This does not 'demonstrate' gravity. It demonstrates what we already know, that denser objects fall and lighter objects rise within the electromagnetic field of the earth, the earth being the ground bias (-).
Whataboutism based on ignorance (or mocking, hard to tell given the subject).
Angular resolution is something we have explained before and demonstrated/illustrated in a video, but 'da bibeo is too long!', because you're not serious about the truth, you just want to regurgitate your gnostic-scientism world-view.
[ + ] Nonanonanon
[ - ] Nonanonanon 0 points 1.6 yearsSep 23, 2023 01:13:53 ago (+0/-0)
[ + ] Love240
[ - ] Love240 0 points 1.6 yearsSep 23, 2023 01:31:26 ago (+0/-0)
Not only are there landmarks in the way, but there is a limit to the resolution of our eyes and of measuring apparatus. This is something known as Angular Resolution.
Moreover, light has a fall-off of radiance as opposed to the common trope of light travelling forever (the space lie, that light travels unimpeded over ridiculously vast distances).
This is something called the Inverse Square law.
https://odysee.com/@TabooConspiracy:c/the-inverse-square-law-proves-local-sun:5
Now, for some evidence.
LoRa: Long Range is a physical proprietary radio communication technique. It is based on spread spectrum modulation techniques derived from chirp spread spectrum (CSS) technology.
New LoRa world record: 1336 km / 830 mi
https://www.thethingsnetwork.org/article/new-lora-world-record-1336-km-830-mi
https://odysee.com/@TabooConspiracy:c/830-miles-world-record-flat-earth-proof:b
2. LoRa signals can’t really transmit over 10 km. That’s nuts!
LoRa’s range depends on “radio line-of-sight.” Radio waves in the 400- to 900-MHz range may pass through some obstructions, depending on their composition, but will be absorbed or reflected otherwise. This means that the signal can potentially reach as far as the horizon, as long as there are no physical barriers to block it. Elevating LoRa devices—placing them on rooftops or mountaintops, for example—will maximize their range. Other factors, such as antenna gain, will also have a large impact on range.
https://www.electronicdesign.com/markets/automation/article/21806072/11-myths-about-lorawan
[ + ] Nonanonanon
[ - ] Nonanonanon 0 points 1.6 yearsSep 23, 2023 01:15:14 ago (+0/-0)
[ + ] Love240
[ - ] Love240 0 points 1.6 yearsSep 23, 2023 01:16:38 ago (+0/-0)
You can rub a balloon on your shirt and it 'magically defies gravity'.
You can fill a balloon with helium and it floats upward.
The air resistance is still there in both circumstances.
[ + ] Nonanonanon
[ - ] Nonanonanon 0 points 1.6 yearsSep 23, 2023 01:24:48 ago (+0/-0)
Electrostatic forces do exhibit work against gravity, but I’m sure your explanation for that is equally daft.
[ + ] Love240
[ - ] Love240 0 points 1.6 yearsSep 23, 2023 01:41:17 ago (+0/-0)
So go ahead, explain how 'air resistance' makes balloons rise...
I think the term you may be looking for is 'density'. Denisty is why helium rises and why apples fall.
This is still not proof of gravity, this is proof of a downward bias.
This makes more sense if you understand the earth as an electromagnetic realm. The earth is the negative biased ground and as you rise in elevation, you will measure an increasing voltage relative to the earth. This bias is what accelerates objects toward their equilibrium point.
https://files.catbox.moe/pf12r3.png
Even the Egyptian hieroglyphs bear testament to the electromagnetic nature of existence.
https://www.godelectric.org/
[ + ] Nonanonanon
[ - ] Nonanonanon 0 points 1.6 yearsSep 23, 2023 01:51:32 ago (+0/-0)
[ + ] Love240
[ - ] Love240 0 points 1.6 yearsSep 23, 2023 01:58:45 ago (+0/-0)
This is exactly why it's ludicrous to think the earths atmos exists directly next to a vacuum ('space'), without a container (the firmament).
[ + ] Nonanonanon
[ - ] Nonanonanon 0 points 1.6 yearsSep 23, 2023 02:15:24 ago (+0/-0)
[ + ] Love240
[ - ] Love240 0 points 1.6 yearsSep 23, 2023 02:31:43 ago (+0/-0)
What I am not for, is assuming that a 'thought experiment' or a hypothetical one is proof of anything.
[ + ] Nonanonanon
[ - ] Nonanonanon 0 points 1.6 yearsSep 23, 2023 02:05:53 ago (+0/-0)
[ + ] Love240
[ - ] Love240 0 points 1.6 yearsSep 23, 2023 02:10:28 ago (+0/-0)
Well, seeing as how you haven't offered any sort of substantive argument and you are making personal attacks, I would say it is indeed an ad hominem.
Maybe you should gather your feelings together and take stock. Figure out what is making you mad here. Why are you mad over an idea as impersonal as this?
https://files.catbox.moe/vgx8xz.jpg
[ + ] Nonanonanon
[ - ] Nonanonanon 0 points 1.6 yearsSep 23, 2023 02:23:51 ago (+0/-0)
[ + ] Love240
[ - ] Love240 0 points 1.6 yearsSep 23, 2023 02:30:30 ago (+0/-0)
Also as the density of the volume around the object becomes less and less, the object is thereby more relatively dense, thus it would fall.
Another ad hominem, because you have provided nothing of substance, only insults.
[ + ] Nonanonanon
[ - ] Nonanonanon 0 points 1.6 yearsSep 23, 2023 01:17:31 ago (+0/-0)
[ + ] Love240
[ - ] Love240 0 points 1.6 yearsSep 23, 2023 02:01:23 ago (+0/-0)