Fixed Earth Opinion: A Closer Look

  • Thread starter Thread starter Alkatran
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Earth
Click For Summary
The discussion critiques a website's claims regarding astronomical concepts, particularly the assertion that the Earth is stationary and the Big Bang never occurred. The arguments presented are viewed as lacking credibility, with excessive punctuation undermining their seriousness. A notable point of contention is the claim that stars cannot be far away, based on flawed reasoning about photon detection and energy density. Initial calculations suggested a star could be seen from 105 million light years away, but upon reevaluation, this was corrected to less than half a light year, raising questions about the original assumptions. The conversation also touches on gravitational interactions between the Earth and the Moon, challenging the understanding of tidal forces and gravity's role in motion. The idea that no particular point on Earth can be proven to be moving is debated, with references to relativity and acceleration as key concepts. The need for clear evidence in support of astronomical claims is emphasized, alongside skepticism about the reliability of certain online sources.
  • #31
physicsuser said:
Why don't we put a camera up in space so that it can show us the solar system or at least part of it?

We already have a bunch of these (e.g., many of NASA's past and ongoing missions to other planets, asteroids, comets, etc...also satellites, etc.)

But just try convincing this guy that the points of light you get in the photos are what you say they are.
 
Earth sciences news on Phys.org
  • #32
physicsuser said:
Why don't we put a camera up in space so that it can show us the solar system or at least part of it?
I think you may be operating on some sort of scale misconception here: a camera up in space far enough away to take pictures of a large portion of the solar system wouldn't see anything except the sun that would be recognizable to a layperson. All of the planets would just be point sources of light.
 
  • #33
The Binary Monster said:
Okay, okay, okay. I lose. That'll teach me to try and be big, clever, and make things up. I stand corrected for most if not all of my posts so far... Thank you for pointing out the flaws, even so. I feel like I learn through these stupid mistakes. :)
My $0.02's worth: they are not stupid mistakes, they are excellent questions which needed to be addressed properly (and they were). I hope that you never, ever stop asking questions, and demanding clear and consistent explanations! :smile: :approve:
 
  • #34
Phobos said:
We already have a bunch of these (e.g., many of NASA's past and ongoing missions to other planets, asteroids, comets, etc...also satellites, etc.)

But just try convincing this guy that the points of light you get in the photos are what you say they are.

Are there actual photographs or videos of the solar system? Or for example do they have actual footage of Mars mission I mean as the probe nears mars. Sort of like the "moon footage" of going to, orbiting, and landing on the moon. All that I've seen from Mars mission, besides the photographs after landing, are animations.

If you could post a linky to such things that be great.

ps
I am not saying that it not true or anything I just haven't seen anything. But I really realy want to see something like that.
 
  • #35
physicsuser said:
Are there actual photographs or videos of the solar system? Or for example do they have actual footage of Mars mission I mean as the probe nears mars. Sort of like the "moon footage" of going to, orbiting, and landing on the moon. All that I've seen from Mars mission, besides the photographs after landing, are animations.

If you could post a linky to such things that be great.

ps
I am not saying that it not true or anything I just haven't seen anything. But I really realy want to see something like that.

Video is not usually used because it takes up a lot more memory space/bandwidth to store and transmit that data as compared to a single photo...plus, most astronomical things appear to occur in slow motion from our perspective (no significant changes from one second to another, so video would provide a lot of redundant data). Video makes more sense for manned missions where events occur faster. Sometimes, NASA will do a flip-book like animation of a series of photos (e.g., rotation of the sun/a planet/an asteroid, or a spacecraft 's approach to a comet/asteroid). I know they've posted many of these real-photo animations to the internet. Try their website. If I have time, I'll take a look for some.
 
  • #36
Do sites like these make you wish you could just beat the living crap out of the creator
 
  • #37
oh, and i love how he advertises with OVER SEVENTY LINKS
because if i have a lot of links it must be right
 
  • #38
and most of them are dead
 
  • #39
Yes, I noticed that whenever he had a paragraph it would end with:
"(Here, Here, Here, Here, Here, Here)"

And that all the links pointed at his own site... makes a wonder stack of cards.
 

Similar threads

Replies
17
Views
4K
  • · Replies 21 ·
Replies
21
Views
5K
  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
3K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
4K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
3K
  • · Replies 22 ·
Replies
22
Views
60K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
4K
Replies
6
Views
4K
Replies
1
Views
7K
  • · Replies 16 ·
Replies
16
Views
5K