Skip navigation
Sidebar -

Advanced search options →
↑ ↓
CEMB → Forum → Get in the Ring → Ringside seats → Ringside: Quod Sum Eris vs CallMeTed - Is there scientific evidence that proves

Welcome

Welcome to CEMB forum.
Please login or register. Did you miss your activation email?

Donations

Help keep the Forum going!
Click on Kitty to donate:

Kitty is lost

Recent Posts

Lights on the way
by akay
November 22, 2024, 02:51 PM
Do humans have needed kno...
November 22, 2024, 06:45 AM
What music are you listen...
by zeca
November 21, 2024, 08:08 PM
Gaza assault
November 21, 2024, 07:56 PM
Qur'anic studies today
by zeca
November 21, 2024, 05:07 PM
New Britain
November 20, 2024, 05:41 PM
اضواء على الطريق ....... ...
by akay
November 20, 2024, 09:02 AM
Marcion and the introduct...
by zeca
November 19, 2024, 11:36 PM
Dutch elections
by zeca
November 15, 2024, 10:11 PM
Random Islamic History Po...
by zeca
November 15, 2024, 08:46 PM
AMRIKAAA Land of Free .....
November 07, 2024, 09:56 AM
The origins of Judaism
by zeca
November 02, 2024, 12:56 PM

Theme Changer

 Topic: Ringside: Quod Sum Eris vs CallMeTed - Is there scientific evidence that proves

 (Read 190607 times)
  • Previous page 1 ... 27 28 2930 31 ... 37 Next page « Previous thread | Next thread »
  • Ringside: Quod Sum Eris vs CallMeTed - Is there scientific evidence that proves
     Reply #840 - September 08, 2015, 09:01 AM
    Not sure how you can say that when I've already stated that I have problems which is why I understand where some of the posters here.
    My nasheed. Sing it with me!
  • Ringside: Quod Sum Eris vs CallMeTed - Is there scientific evidence that proves
     Reply #841 - September 08, 2015, 09:41 AM
    Quote from: CallMeTed on September 08, 2015, 09:01 AM
    Not sure how you can say that when I've already stated that I have problems which is why I understand where some of the posters here.

    well Ted,  you write gillion posts and I miss many of them.,  I didn't read that post of yours dear Ted., where did you say that? what did you say? 

    And what problems you have??  are they medical? by any chance are you diagnosed by autism?
    Do not let silence become your legacy.. Question everything   
    I renounced my faith to become a kafir, 
    the beloved betrayed me and turned in to  a Muslim     
  • Ringside: Quod Sum Eris vs CallMeTed - Is there scientific evidence that proves
     Reply #842 - September 08, 2015, 09:41 AM
    Quote from: yeezevee on September 08, 2015, 08:53 AM
    great.... Ted the Psychotherapist sees the problems in everyone except within himself.,   So Ted when are you going to see problems within your self?  and I too hope you will get  get better soon.
     


    He's also apparently now a psychic medical doctor, to know exactly why I am having sleeping spells/or whatever it is, without doing a single blood test or exam.
    Yea, though I walk through the valley of the shadow of death, I will fear no evil, for I have a sonic screwdriver, a tricorder, and a Type 2 phaser.
  • Ringside: Quod Sum Eris vs CallMeTed - Is there scientific evidence that proves
     Reply #843 - September 08, 2015, 11:19 AM
    Hey Ted Take it easy ., It is just a forum.. people including me write all sorts of stuff ., So  I don't mean to insult you  folks.. The Believers.,  but I do question their/your  faiths and sometimes I may heckle a  bit and go over board..

    with best wishes
    yeezevee
    Do not let silence become your legacy.. Question everything   
    I renounced my faith to become a kafir, 
    the beloved betrayed me and turned in to  a Muslim     
  • Ringside: Quod Sum Eris vs CallMeTed - Is there scientific evidence that proves
     Reply #844 - September 08, 2015, 12:36 PM
    It's not me who needs to take it easy.
    My nasheed. Sing it with me!
  • Ringside: Quod Sum Eris vs CallMeTed - Is there scientific evidence that proves
     Reply #845 - September 08, 2015, 01:23 PM
    Hey Ted, I'm still waiting for you over in the one on one.
    `But I don't want to go among mad people,' Alice remarked.
     `Oh, you can't help that,' said the Cat: `we're all mad here. I'm mad.  You're mad.'
     `How do you know I'm mad?' said Alice.
     `You must be,' said the Cat, `or you wouldn't have come here.'
  • Ringside: Quod Sum Eris vs CallMeTed - Is there scientific evidence that proves
     Reply #846 - September 08, 2015, 01:46 PM
    Quote from: CallMeTed on September 07, 2015, 09:10 PM
    You're talking gibberish again. First of all let's clarify that Newton himself never destroyed any claims that the earth is stationary. If you think he did then cite the reference.


    His theories on motion did this which applied to the pendulum example. His ideas on gravity also proved this via deflection. 

    http://www.oc.nps.edu/oc2902w/geodesy/graveth.pdf

    Quote
    Next I think you are saying that the laws Newton can be used to destroy the claim that the earth is stationary. Which is bullshit. There's no such law that can be used to prove the earth is not rotating.


    Those ideas did so as well as did observations from Kepler, Copernicus and Galileo.

    Argument from ignorance. Also your lack of education

    Quote
    You've just demonstrated how silly you are by trying to come across that you know physics and maths. If you think I'm wrong let's go through the laws of Newton which "destroyed the non-rotating Earth idea".


    Nope, my citation support my statements. Already did so with the links. Your refusal to read citation which refute your silly idea is not my problem.

  • Ringside: Quod Sum Eris vs CallMeTed - Is there scientific evidence that proves
     Reply #847 - September 08, 2015, 01:49 PM
    Quote from: Helaine on September 08, 2015, 12:21 AM
    This is such a basic freaking physics it boggles me he doesn't understand it.


    Shit like this is explained in middle school. Your very first few assignments and for middle school grade physics will include earth's gravity and rotation speed, speed relative to what, etc.

    We shouldn't need to explain this.

    Oh for fuck's sake.


    He has not passed high school, simple as that. The Dunning–Kruger effect kicks in as compensation for his lack of education to the point that physics is wrong, the education system is wrong, everyone is wrong but him. It is a typical response from people believing their religious views make them more intelligent than others regardless of education.
  • Ringside: Quod Sum Eris vs CallMeTed - Is there scientific evidence that proves
     Reply #848 - September 08, 2015, 01:50 PM
    Quote from: CallMeTed on September 08, 2015, 05:09 AM
    You guys are clueless. You think that by writing crap like the above you have knowledge of this area. You're only deluding yourselves.

    Not one of you was able to do simple calculations.

    Bogart has reading problems as well as not understanding the crap he writes himself.

    Please return to common sense all of you.


    Nope as all my sources support what I have said. Try again when you have a high school diploma.
  • Ringside: Quod Sum Eris vs CallMeTed - Is there scientific evidence that proves
     Reply #849 - September 08, 2015, 01:51 PM
    Quote from: CallMeTed on September 08, 2015, 09:01 AM
    Not sure how you can say that when I've already stated that I have problems which is why I understand where some of the posters here.


    Did you add a lack of an education to your list of problems? You should and place it high on your list of things to do.
  • Ringside: Quod Sum Eris vs CallMeTed - Is there scientific evidence that proves
     Reply #850 - September 08, 2015, 05:28 PM
    Quote from: bogart on September 08, 2015, 01:46 PM
    His theories on motion did this which applied to the pendulum example. His ideas on gravity also proved this via deflection. 

    http://www.oc.nps.edu/oc2902w/geodesy/graveth.pdf

    Those ideas did so as well as did observations from Kepler, Copernicus and Galileo.

    Argument from ignorance. Also your lack of education

    Nope, my citation support my statements. Already did so with the links. Your refusal to read citation which refute your silly idea is not my problem.




    OK so now you're admitting Newton never destroyed the non rotating earth idea.

    I find it strange that when it comes to doing some maths calculations you seem to be very reluctant. If you're crap at maths that's fine I won't bother taking you through some of them. I'm a bit rusty myself since I last went through this exercise some years ago. When you do go through the calcs you realise where it all comes from and you have to accept some of it is based on theory not facts.

    But there's no point explaining all that to you or the other people on here as you're just not interested. Which is understandable since maths and science isn't everyone's favourite subject.
    My nasheed. Sing it with me!
  • Ringside: Quod Sum Eris vs CallMeTed - Is there scientific evidence that proves
     Reply #851 - September 08, 2015, 05:49 PM
    Quote from: CallMeTed on September 08, 2015, 05:28 PM
    OK so now you're admitting Newton never destroyed the non rotating earth idea.

    Can you quote where you think bogart said that?
    `But I don't want to go among mad people,' Alice remarked.
     `Oh, you can't help that,' said the Cat: `we're all mad here. I'm mad.  You're mad.'
     `How do you know I'm mad?' said Alice.
     `You must be,' said the Cat, `or you wouldn't have come here.'
  • Ringside: Quod Sum Eris vs CallMeTed - Is there scientific evidence that proves
     Reply #852 - September 08, 2015, 07:03 PM
    Ask him yourself. It's hard getting a straight answer out of him. I don't think english is his first language.
    My nasheed. Sing it with me!
  • Ringside: Quod Sum Eris vs CallMeTed - Is there scientific evidence that proves
     Reply #853 - September 08, 2015, 07:05 PM
    such a troll Grin Roll Eyes
  • Ringside: Quod Sum Eris vs CallMeTed - Is there scientific evidence that proves
     Reply #854 - September 08, 2015, 07:41 PM
    Quote from: yeezevee on September 08, 2015, 09:41 AM
    well Ted,  you write gillion posts and I miss many of them.,  I didn't read that post of yours dear Ted., where did you say that? what did you say? 

    And what problems you have??  are they medical? by any chance are you diagnosed by autism?


    Not autistic. I have same kind of problems as most people. Financial, health and psychological. Mostly my own making. When I was ignorant of them I actually felt ok, happy. Now that I know I feel very bad. As they say "ignorance is bliss".
    My nasheed. Sing it with me!
  • Ringside: Quod Sum Eris vs CallMeTed - Is there scientific evidence that proves
     Reply #855 - September 09, 2015, 12:44 AM
    Quote from: yeezevee on September 08, 2015, 09:41 AM
    well Ted,  you write gillion posts and I miss many of them.,  I didn't read that post of yours dear Ted., where did you say that? what did you say? 

    And what problems you have??  are they medical? by any chance are you diagnosed by autism?


    I don't think it would be autism. Most autistics with such master of language are highly logical.
    Don't let Hitler have the street.
  • Ringside: Quod Sum Eris vs CallMeTed - Is there scientific evidence that proves
     Reply #856 - September 09, 2015, 06:41 AM
    Quote from: CallMeTed on September 08, 2015, 05:28 PM
    OK so now you're admitting Newton never destroyed the non rotating earth idea.


    Nope, his laws of motion and idea of deflection prove it. Read Principia.

    Quote
    I find it strange that when it comes to doing some maths calculations you seem to be very reluctant. If you're crap at maths that's fine I won't bother taking you through some of them. I'm a bit rusty myself since I last went through this exercise some years ago. When you do go through the calcs you realise where it all comes from and you have to accept some of it is based on theory not facts.


    I do not have an expertise in math but in history and science as an archaeologist.. Also you have provides zero math for your own statements so play your double-standard another time. Also no as the pendulum example requires no math as it is a direct experiment proving rotation.

    F=m*a (force= mass acceleration) second law of motion. Gravitational force=G*m1*m2/(radius)^2

    This are the two basic principles of motion and gravity as force.

    P1. Is the two laws above
    P2. P1 holds for object moving slower than the speed of light. 
    http://mypages.iit.edu/~smile/guests/Newton98B3.pdf
    http://www.sciencechannel.com/games-and-interactives/newtons-laws-of-motion-interactive/
    P3. Data must prove P2.
    P4. Spacecraft have been launched and sent into the solar system
    http://voyager.jpl.nasa.gov/
    P5. Given P1, P2 and P4 are true P3 is also true
    C:  Heliocentrism and rotation of the Earth are true

    There I took down both your views in one argument requiring no actual math used by me but by references in which the math worked and continues to do so.

    Quote
    But there's no point explaining all that to you or the other people on here as you're just not interested. Which is understandable since maths and science isn't everyone's favourite subject.


    Your explanation is refuted by the pendulum experiment. Try again son
  • Ringside: Quod Sum Eris vs CallMeTed - Is there scientific evidence that proves
     Reply #857 - September 09, 2015, 06:47 AM
    Lol.

    That explains a lot. There's no point in going any further with you as you'll find it difficult to understand. Would have been good if I had known this earlier so I wouldn't have to waste my time.
    My nasheed. Sing it with me!
  • Ringside: Quod Sum Eris vs CallMeTed - Is there scientific evidence that proves
     Reply #858 - September 09, 2015, 06:51 AM
    Quote from: CallMeTed on September 09, 2015, 06:47 AM
    Lol.

    That explains a lot. There's no point in going any further with you as you'll find it difficult to understand. Would have been good if I had known this earlier so I wouldn't have to waste my time.

    Gosh  .. Ted you are so headstrong...     you sound like as if you are  constipating and trying to shit in every  post of yours ..
    Do not let silence become your legacy.. Question everything   
    I renounced my faith to become a kafir, 
    the beloved betrayed me and turned in to  a Muslim     
  • Ringside: Quod Sum Eris vs CallMeTed - Is there scientific evidence that proves
     Reply #859 - September 09, 2015, 07:02 AM
    Yeez are you still working on those calculations?

    My nasheed. Sing it with me!
  • Ringside: Quod Sum Eris vs CallMeTed - Is there scientific evidence that proves
     Reply #860 - September 09, 2015, 07:08 AM
    Quote from: CallMeTed on September 09, 2015, 06:47 AM
    Lol.

    That explains a lot. There's no point in going any further with you as you'll find it difficult to understand. Would have been good if I had known this earlier so I wouldn't have to waste my time.


    The fact that you do not understand a rebuttal does not mean the rebuttal is not valid. You have provided no rebuttal, my argument stands.

    I have no issues understanding your view. It is a long refuted view which is being refuted by every pendulum experiment at museums which host such a display. This is happening now and will continue to do so regardless of what you believe. You confuse my lack of expertise in advance math as not understanding your view. It is not. Your view is that of a child trying to understand something they are not familiar with. Yet unlike a child you refuse information which resolves your issue.

    Try again son.
  • Ringside: Quod Sum Eris vs CallMeTed - Is there scientific evidence that proves
     Reply #861 - September 09, 2015, 07:11 AM
    Quote from: CallMeTed on September 08, 2015, 07:03 PM
    Ask him yourself. It's hard getting a straight answer out of him. I don't think english is his first language.


    I provided an answer you did not accept. Your lack of acceptance is on you and only you.
  • Ringside: Quod Sum Eris vs CallMeTed - Is there scientific evidence that proves
     Reply #862 - September 09, 2015, 07:12 AM
    Double post
  • Ringside: Quod Sum Eris vs CallMeTed - Is there scientific evidence that proves
     Reply #863 - September 09, 2015, 07:42 AM
    Quote from: bogart on September 09, 2015, 07:08 AM
    The fact that you do not understand a rebuttal does not mean the rebuttal is not valid. You have provided no rebuttal, my argument stands.

    I have no issues understanding your view. It is a long refuted view which is being refuted by every pendulum experiment at museums which host such a display. This is happening now and will continue to do so regardless of what you believe. You confuse my lack of expertise in advance math as not understanding your view. It is not. Your view is that of a child trying to understand something they are not familiar with. Yet unlike a child you refuse information which resolves your issue.

    Try again son.


    Please go and learn some maths and science first.
    My nasheed. Sing it with me!
  • Ringside: Quod Sum Eris vs CallMeTed - Is there scientific evidence that proves
     Reply #864 - September 09, 2015, 07:43 AM
    I have. My argument is based on it. You have no rebuttal. your point has been refuted. Try again.

    Also you deny the pendulum experiment thus you are deny science and math. So when you say math and science you are talking about pseudomath and pseudoscience thus I have no need to learn either as both are nonsense. Try again.
  • Ringside: Quod Sum Eris vs CallMeTed - Is there scientific evidence that proves
     Reply #865 - September 09, 2015, 08:46 AM
    The problem is bogart that you don't really understand scientific experimentation and how the smallest innocuous things needs to be accounted for. How you have to experiment with different conditions to make sure you are testing properly and that your results are not affected by other factors.

    The pendulum experiment initially supported the rotating earth but there have been events which put doubt on what is actually happening. There could be other forces which we have not discovered yet or maybe we still don't understand some things about the earth's gravity. People like yourself will blindly assume everything you read in the press or other so called science resources and then feel great in ridiculing those who have doubts.

    Take a look at these 2 articles:

    https://plus.maths.org/content/mathematical-mysteries-foucaults-pendulum-and-eclipse
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Allais_effect

    Basically some scientists were doing the pendulum experiment over a 30 day period and during the end there was an eclipse. The eclipse had a huge effect on the pendulum. Other scientists tried it and some were able to reproduce it and some weren't. If you understood science properly you'd realise there's something strange going on and you can't rely on Foucaults pendulum to support the rotation of the earth.

    There have been other experiments done as well such as dropping the ball from a height and seeing which direction it falls. The problem with the experiments done so far is that they can be affected by gravity. In my humble opinion you need to do an experiment which is not affected by gravity such as light as far as we know.

    I see where you are coming from but you've only scratched the surface. There's more to it than you read. I wouldn't expect someone with your background to have good knowledge of this area. I'm sure if you put the research in you'd understand where I'm coming from.

    One of the surprising things I learnt was that the distance between the earth and sun is used to work out the distance and mass of all the other planets. If the distance between the earth and sun is wrong it nullifies many many things we have assumed as fact about our solar system. Working out the distance between the sun and earth is not straight forward either even today.

    My nasheed. Sing it with me!
  • Ringside: Quod Sum Eris vs CallMeTed - Is there scientific evidence that proves
     Reply #866 - September 09, 2015, 09:02 AM
    Take a look at this as well - http://www.economist.com/node/3104321

    Quote
    “ASSUME nothing” is a good motto in science. Even the humble pendulum may spring a surprise on you. In 1954 Maurice Allais, a French economist who would go on to win, in 1988, the Nobel prize in his subject, decided to observe and record the movements of a pendulum over a period of 30 days. Coincidentally, one of his observations took place during a solar eclipse. When the moon passed in front of the sun, the pendulum unexpectedly started moving a bit faster than it should have done.

    Since that first observation, the “Allais effect”, as it is now called, has confounded physicists. If the effect is real, it could indicate a hitherto unperceived flaw in General Relativity—the current explanation of how gravity works.

    My nasheed. Sing it with me!
  • Ringside: Quod Sum Eris vs CallMeTed - Is there scientific evidence that proves
     Reply #867 - September 09, 2015, 09:11 AM
    Irrelevant as osculation occurred without a solar eclipse. Read what you link. Especially the Nasa part on probes. If these probes registered an effect these were launched using my argument above. You again just cited evidence supporting my view but you didn't understand what you linked. Hilarious.

    https://solarsystem.nasa.gov/missions/pioneer10
    https://solarsystem.nasa.gov/missions/pioneer11

  • Ringside: Quod Sum Eris vs CallMeTed - Is there scientific evidence that proves
     Reply #868 - September 09, 2015, 09:33 AM
    Ted, you realise you'e just argued that science doesn't deal in proofs and facts right? Grin
    `But I don't want to go among mad people,' Alice remarked.
     `Oh, you can't help that,' said the Cat: `we're all mad here. I'm mad.  You're mad.'
     `How do you know I'm mad?' said Alice.
     `You must be,' said the Cat, `or you wouldn't have come here.'
  • Ringside: Quod Sum Eris vs CallMeTed - Is there scientific evidence that proves
     Reply #869 - September 09, 2015, 09:50 AM
    Quote from: bogart on September 09, 2015, 09:11 AM
    Irrelevant as osculation occurred without a solar eclipse. Read what you link. Especially the Nasa part on probes. If these probes registered an effect these were launched using my argument above. You again just cited evidence supporting my view but you didn't understand what you linked. Hilarious.

    https://solarsystem.nasa.gov/missions/pioneer10
    https://solarsystem.nasa.gov/missions/pioneer11




    I don't think there's any point in taking this any further. Going to be too much hard work. I'll call it quits.
    My nasheed. Sing it with me!
  • Previous page 1 ... 27 28 2930 31 ... 37 Next page « Previous thread | Next thread »