Moses asks science

[TagliatelliMonster]

Again you avoid the question

I didn't avoid anything. I merely corrected a rather silly statement you made about GPS.

and provide ''gobbly gook'''

If you wish to call the workings of GPS systems "gobbly gook", be my guest.
Meanwhile, your statement concerning GPS was still blatantly wrong.
But you don't care, do you?

trying to sway the reader into believing the human cloned data

No idea what that drivel is supposed to mean.

. Again , gravity has nothing to do with GPS .

Every GPS builder in the world, disagrees.


Tell you what... Here's a challenge...
Build and deploy a GPS system WITHOUT using any equation from Newton or Einstein.

 

[ratiocinator]

You are side tracking a direct answer , providing a link of ''gobbly gook'' to try and confuse your fellow human data clones .

It's not gobbledygook, it's just more complicated than it seems your simplistic mind can handle, and it doesn't fit with your blind faith.

I'm not here to teach you the basics of science, especially when you keep telling us you've studied it yourself. If it's gobbledygook, then go through the detail and tell us why it's wrong, in detail. You never do that. You seem to be covering your own inability to understand by just making baseless assertions that things are wrong.

 

[TagliatelliMonster]

If you go a supermarket , how is the mass of apples measured ?

Ow, you mean that that kind of scale.... Sorry I didn't understood that. My mind has a habbit of not assuming mega-ridiculous things.


No, you can't put the earth on a scale. There are other ways of measuring mass.
Read the link I gave you. It's all explained there.

 

[ratiocinator]

As I am talking to you right now I am also taking an intuitive leap , I am talking to God right now and God is providing direct wisdom to assimilate you, the human data clones , into becoming human .

 

[jes-us]

No, you can't put the earth on a scale.

See, how hard was that to be honest and human ?

There isn't any other way to measure mass , an equation can't work .

Sciences famous equation reads ?*?/?^2

 

[ratiocinator]

If you go a supermarket , how is the mass of apples measured ?

I already explained to you why scales basically use the same mathematics as you reject to convert gravitational force into mass. This is the third time I've referenced back to answers I already gave in #198.

What is it about #198 that scares you so much that you keep ignoring it?

 

[jes-us]

I already explained to you why scales basically use the same mathematics as you reject to convert gravitational force into mass. This is the third time I've referenced back to answers I already gave in #198.

What is it about #198 that scares you so much that you keep ignoring it?

I don't think the lord can help you , you will always be a human data clone .

 

[TagliatelliMonster]

See, how hard was that to be honest and human ?

It's hilarious to see that being followed up with:

There isn't any other way to measure mass , an equation can't work .

While in the very post you are replying to it is mentioned where you can go and read up on other ways to measure mass.

I think your religion says something about bearing false witness.

BTW: you also might consider reading up on how scales actually work.

 

[ratiocinator]

I don't think the lord can help you , you will always be a human data clone .

Still running away from the detail in #198! This is getting even more comical.

 

[ratiocinator]

While in the very post you are replying to it is mentioned where you can go and read up on other ways to measure mass.

In #198, I actually pointed out that scales basically rely on the Newtonian theory anyway, and did the actual maths in the post for him. Now he is refusing to comment on it at all. Seems to be a good tip to put him off. If you can actually do the maths right in a post, he can't accuse you of just referring to other sources, and, as he doesn't understand any real maths, he seems too afraid to answer.

Rather sad but a bit funny too.

 

[Terrywoodenpic]

Everything on the earth and the moon are affected by each others gravity.
this attraction is enough to have stopped the rotation of the moon in respect to the earth since it was formed.
Smaller seas and lakes that are enclosed by land have virtually no apparent tides, for example the Mediterranean which only has a small feed from the Atlantic ocean and has minimal tides.

 

[TagliatelliMonster]

In #198, I actually pointed out that scales basically rely on the Newtonian theory anyway, and did the actual maths in the post for him. Now he is refusing to comment on it at all. Seems to be a good tip to put him off. If you can actually do the maths right in a post, he can't accuse you of just referring to other sources, and, as he doesn't understand any real maths, he seems too afraid to answer.

Rather sad but a bit funny too.

It certainly is. But while I understand the overall concepts, the actual math isn't something I could do without reading up.
Unlike some people, I refrain to mention things I don't know enough about..

 

[Evangelicalhumanist]

What does this prove? Or in other words, so what? Gorillas and chimpanzees do not have the capacity to do this. As the saying might go, they haven't "evolved" to build atomic or nuclear bombs.

That was not enough close to @TagliatelliMonster's meaning.

 

[ratiocinator]

Unlike some people, I refrain to mention things I don't know enough about..

Very wise. I'm fortunate/strange enough to be fascinated by mathematics and have studied Newtonian theories as well a quantum mechanics and relativity. It's absolutely clear this guy knows nothing.

Also worth noting, that, as @exchemist pointed out earlier (#98), @jes-us seems to have remarkably similar BS to several other identities. I can definitely see it myself. The same nonsense science, the same meaningless 'equations' and pointless diagrams. I think he was 'james blunt' last time I challenged his nonsense.

 

[Eddi]

Oops! We ran into some problems.​

This user's profile is not available.

 

[Evangelicalhumanist]

I don't think the dude cares much for what is mathematically provable.
The only thing he seems to care about is his a priori dogmatic faith based beliefs.

That seems to be the universal "test" he applies to any and all claims about literally anything.
He asks the question "does it fit my a priori beliefs?". If the answer is "yes", it passes the test and he considers it truth. If the answer is "no", it is rejected based on that alone.

He's like a walking textbook example of the dangers of fundy indoctrination. Another potentially rational mind bites the dust.

Which is why I finally put him on Ignore. It got boring pretty quick.

 

[Valjean]

Except that it doesn't . The equation is conceptual rather than physical

Huh? What dues that mean? What's a 'physical' equation?

There is no way of knowing the earths mass or the moons mass without a direct measure . Any equation would be a fabricated result and untrue .

But they are measurable. Do you not understand how?

Additionally the radius would also be guess work because it is not an exact measure .

I am sorry but there is a huge margin for error using that equation because of the guess work involved .

Do you believe the Moon and Mars landings were fictional?

Seriously , people replies make me scratch my head in amazement . GPS using triangulation and carrier signals , it has nothing to do with gravity , where did you get such an idea ?

How do you think GPS works? How do you think the satellites are placed or positioned?

 

[exchemist]

Huh? What dues that mean? What's a 'physical' equation?

But they are measurable. Do you not understand how?

Do you believe the Moon and Mars landings were fictional?

I have a feeling this poster may no longer be on the forum.

 

[ratiocinator]

I have a feeling this poster may no longer be on the forum.

Just beat me to it! Was literally typing something like this when your post landed...

 

[Eddi]

I have a feeling this poster may no longer be on the forum.

I'm sure he'll be back