The atmosphere does not spin the same as the planet.
Not only that, but the atmospheric winds travel in the opposite direction of the Earth's rotation in the Southern Hemisphere (but not in the Northern Hemisphere).
Why do I feel a flat Earth argument coming?
Because OP clearly wants to start some stupid bullshit.
If you look at his posting history, it is almost entirely centered around Bible topics. Maybe he believes in a flat earth because he thinks it says so in the Bible.
But the one thing I bet he will NOT do is provide any scientific evidence to back up his opinion. Because there isn't any.
I'm saying the scientific evidence of a spinning earth is lacking.
I'm pointing out that our observations are that of a stable earth with a chaotic yet somewhat predictable weather pattern. Not an atmosphere that is uniformly matching the Earth's rotations sufficient to hide the expected behavior of smoke on a spinning surface.
The fact that I find the Bible to be true doesn't excuse observational science to support that belief. Science just always does end up agreeing with the Bible when it's not distorted by doctrine. The spinning earth model is nothing more than doctrine.
I'm not sure how they are confusing. But I am confused about how a spinning earth at 1000 mph rotational velocity at it's equator and have a starry background that remains consistent for thousands of years. You realize stars in constellations aren't actually anywhere near each other, right? (According to the text book)
All I'm saying is we can't be spinning. What magical force is counter acting the observable centrifugal force? It should increase toward the equator making you weigh less as you go south and more as you go north. We tend to believe science can't be corrupt before 2020.
If you’re really interested in the answer to that question, replicate what this father and son did with a weather balloon and an iPhone and see for yourself. They even have video.
Interesting video. I'm not sure it answers very much about the shape of earth but after over an hour of the planet rotating away it ended up only 30 miles north an a little east. So it's another observation that shows zero spinning.
My point is that you can recreate the exercise and test your theory. You might be right, but do something to prove it. I get the theoretical discussion, but why not prove it?
What magical force is counter acting the observable centrifugal force?
That is not necessary.
Once the Earth started spinning, it continued to spin forever because there is no friction in space. There is nothing to slow it down or stop it. Just empty space.
Objects in motion tend to stay in motion, unless and until there is a resistance to that motion. There is no resistance in space.
It should increase toward the equator making you weigh less as you go south and more as you go north.
Why? Same gravitational forces at the equator as at the poles.
We tend to believe science can't be corrupt before 2020.
Plenty of "science" has been corrupt for generations. But that does mean that ALL science is corrupt.
The way we figure out what is what is to follow the Scientific Method, not muh feelings.
You've probably did a loop on a rollercoaster. It's natural to counter gravity by rotating. If you rotate a ball, you'll see the equator necessarily has to move faster than the poles. And you could connect strings to the ball and see them point away from the axis not the center of the ball unless they are connected to the equator.
Now that is the observable physical science. Gravity pushes down (or toward the center) and the centrifugal pushes away from the axis. Something must erase that force on the grand scale of earth, yet the same force comes back to explain the shape and expansion in space. Weird.
Great. And we can test how energy is lost to contrary physical interactions.
This is why we know about these physical laws. We observe them. You're suggesting the vacuum of space explains why the atmosphere is rotating virtually at pace with the surface regardless of the rest of physical laws at play.
We need to burn fuel to counter the downward force of gravity and go the opposite direction. Now you have asserted a lateral force exists that we do not need extra fuel to overcome.
So you're suggesting the atmosphere just has enough momentum then? Effectively you're now giving clouds and the atmosphere basically an orbital velocity. Nonetheless, traveling with this moving (physically dense) atmosphere should cost more fuel than traveling against it to cover the same distance east or west.(points on the ground are headed east)
Well on the scale of 9/11 or any huge wildfire, where smoke is abundantly spewed into the sky for days or weeks... You have to end up with smoke rings or you have to assume another invisible force other than gravity is laterally moving the atmosphere.
Respectfully, flat earth post do not belong here. Also: What relevance or difference does it make? I just hide posts like yours because they are a total waste of time.
Forum sliding with stupid bullshit.
Correct.
It's called the great awakening.
The atmosphere does not spin the same as the planet.
Why do I feel a flat Earth argument coming?
Not only that, but the atmospheric winds travel in the opposite direction of the Earth's rotation in the Southern Hemisphere (but not in the Northern Hemisphere).
Because OP clearly wants to start some stupid bullshit.
If you look at his posting history, it is almost entirely centered around Bible topics. Maybe he believes in a flat earth because he thinks it says so in the Bible.
But the one thing I bet he will NOT do is provide any scientific evidence to back up his opinion. Because there isn't any.
I'm saying the scientific evidence of a spinning earth is lacking.
I'm pointing out that our observations are that of a stable earth with a chaotic yet somewhat predictable weather pattern. Not an atmosphere that is uniformly matching the Earth's rotations sufficient to hide the expected behavior of smoke on a spinning surface.
The fact that I find the Bible to be true doesn't excuse observational science to support that belief. Science just always does end up agreeing with the Bible when it's not distorted by doctrine. The spinning earth model is nothing more than doctrine.
Book of Enoch junkies need to get a life instead of trying to discredit this board.
If you believe God can become man and be born from a virgin. Then there's nothing in Enoch that you cannot test and validate.
Explain sunrise and sunset, dummy.
I'm not sure how they are confusing. But I am confused about how a spinning earth at 1000 mph rotational velocity at it's equator and have a starry background that remains consistent for thousands of years. You realize stars in constellations aren't actually anywhere near each other, right? (According to the text book)
All I'm saying is we can't be spinning. What magical force is counter acting the observable centrifugal force? It should increase toward the equator making you weigh less as you go south and more as you go north. We tend to believe science can't be corrupt before 2020.
If you’re really interested in the answer to that question, replicate what this father and son did with a weather balloon and an iPhone and see for yourself. They even have video.
Interesting video. I'm not sure it answers very much about the shape of earth but after over an hour of the planet rotating away it ended up only 30 miles north an a little east. So it's another observation that shows zero spinning.
My point is that you can recreate the exercise and test your theory. You might be right, but do something to prove it. I get the theoretical discussion, but why not prove it?
That is not necessary.
Once the Earth started spinning, it continued to spin forever because there is no friction in space. There is nothing to slow it down or stop it. Just empty space.
Objects in motion tend to stay in motion, unless and until there is a resistance to that motion. There is no resistance in space.
Why? Same gravitational forces at the equator as at the poles.
Plenty of "science" has been corrupt for generations. But that does mean that ALL science is corrupt.
The way we figure out what is what is to follow the Scientific Method, not muh feelings.
You've probably did a loop on a rollercoaster. It's natural to counter gravity by rotating. If you rotate a ball, you'll see the equator necessarily has to move faster than the poles. And you could connect strings to the ball and see them point away from the axis not the center of the ball unless they are connected to the equator.
Now that is the observable physical science. Gravity pushes down (or toward the center) and the centrifugal pushes away from the axis. Something must erase that force on the grand scale of earth, yet the same force comes back to explain the shape and expansion in space. Weird.
Ok so test it then. That's all I'm doing.
Thanks for engaging the actual questions.
Yes the atmosphere is not tied to the ground as inside the buss. The earth should behave more like if you were on top of the buss.
Great. And we can test how energy is lost to contrary physical interactions.
This is why we know about these physical laws. We observe them. You're suggesting the vacuum of space explains why the atmosphere is rotating virtually at pace with the surface regardless of the rest of physical laws at play.
We need to burn fuel to counter the downward force of gravity and go the opposite direction. Now you have asserted a lateral force exists that we do not need extra fuel to overcome.
So you're suggesting the atmosphere just has enough momentum then? Effectively you're now giving clouds and the atmosphere basically an orbital velocity. Nonetheless, traveling with this moving (physically dense) atmosphere should cost more fuel than traveling against it to cover the same distance east or west.(points on the ground are headed east)
Scale probably comes into play there.
Well on the scale of 9/11 or any huge wildfire, where smoke is abundantly spewed into the sky for days or weeks... You have to end up with smoke rings or you have to assume another invisible force other than gravity is laterally moving the atmosphere.
Respectfully, flat earth post do not belong here. Also: What relevance or difference does it make? I just hide posts like yours because they are a total waste of time.
The great awakening might be bigger than you can imagine.
I'm not arguing flat. I'm just saying stable.
I can't make sense of the spinning globe with the observable predictable night sky.