Happier Abroad Forum Community

In this video, Eric Dubay, the world's leading flat earther, explains why gravity does not exist and is a hoax invented to justify the ball earth model that allows people to stand upside down and sideways on the ball earth without falling off. It's very interesting, especially since it's true that there is no scientific lab experiment that can prove that the mass of an object will create a magical force that makes other objects stick to it or rotate around it. The theory of gravity is also contradictory in that it allows birds and bees to fly yet pulls down entire oceans and rocks. And it allows whole moons to orbit around the earth and not crash down. Very fascinating arguments. So perhaps Isaac Newton invented a hoax after all? This video is pretty convincing and points out many anomalies and things that don't make sense about the theory of gravity.

Winston, gravity as a force is observable with the predictable tides which can be totally predicted by looking at the position of the moon. Most of your other comments can easily be explained within a good grasp of high school science. Give the mass of air and the interaction of air and the surface of an insect's wings, flight of insects or birds is not a mystery. If you believe science is a hoax, it is probably wise to avoid doctors or airplanes.
Not surprisingly, if you fashion a bird out of granite, like the mountain of rock, it will not fly either.

The thing about the flat earthers' arguments is that I can understand every one of them, and they correspond with my common sense of what I observe every day. I can't understand any of the counter-arguments, which usually come accompanied with the assertion that school children can grasp this easily. I was a school child -- about 26 years worth of it counting all degrees -- and Mensa seems to think I should be able to grasp this stuff, but I can't.

Let's not confuse technology with speculative "science" that claims we are 100 million light years away from some big bang through which everything was created from nothing, or a couple million years from our simian ancestors. That is pure, rank speculation, but passes for science in our current reign of insanity. The mechanics of how airplanes and birds fly is well understood (apart from the theory of gravity), and certainly not reliant on any of this bizarre speculation. It generally is wise to avoid doctors, especially in the current pharmaceutical regnum, except when they are functioning as mechanics. They are good at switching out and replacing body parts that don't work any more, from knees to heart valves.

OutWest wrote:Winston, gravity as a force is observable with the predictable tides which can be totally predicted by looking at the position of the moon. Most of your other comments can easily be explained within a good grasp of high school science. Give the mass of air and the interaction of air and the surface of an insect's wings, flight of insects or birds is not a mystery. If you believe science is a hoax, it is probably wise to avoid doctors or airplanes.
Not surprisingly, if you fashion a bird out of granite, like the mountain of rock, it will not fly either.

But it's pure theory. No one can show you a graviton. Or reproduce it in a lab with any models or experiments. Isn't the simpler explanation that objects fall because they are heavier than air? Watch the video above and see if you can explain the examples, questions and contradictions raised in it. Also see the memes below about the absurdity of gravity.

Some funny memes about the absurdity of the gravity theory. Hilarious. LOL





This is a good point. A spinning ball creates centrifugal force that should spin water and objects OUTWARD, not inward.



So true. LOL

There does seem to be a strong mystical element to mainstream science. It is supposed to be mechanistic, yet does not even attempt to posit a mechanism for attractive forces such as gravity.

gsjackson wrote:Let's not confuse technology with speculative "science" that claims we are 100 million light years away from some big bang through which everything was created from nothing, or a couple million years from our simian ancestors. That is pure, rank speculation, but passes for science in our current reign of insanity. The mechanics of how airplanes and birds fly is well understood (apart from the theory of gravity), and certainly not reliant on any of this bizarre speculation. It generally is wise to avoid doctors, especially in the current pharmaceutical regnum, except when they are functioning as mechanics. They are good at switching out and replacing body parts that don't work any more, from knees to heart valves.

You're a wise man. It's quite obvious that science is a lie, specifically astrophysics and evolution. There's no proof for any of it. Yet they brag about it like it's undeniable truth.

They even have constant debates about the nature of the Big Bang, but they all accept it as gospel.

They've even been shown to be hoaxing human evolution with the Piltdown man, and they have found no true transitional fossils to prove human evolution. And many of the bones they say belong to one specimen are strewn out over miles and not likely to be one individual at all. And then they don't know what the skin and hair looked like, but they put on some intermediate "scientific" speculation of what the thing must have looked like, to prove it is a transitional species. When in reality, they are just a few bones that they've made up stories about to fit their narrative. There's no proof for much of anything, and from start to finish their stories are complete fiction.

So many theories of nonsense. Now I can understand how people believe them because it's taught in school, but after having been exposed to the knowledge of the truth, people should be capable of waking up to reality. However many want to stick to their pleasant fantasy they've been indoctrinated with since childhood.

It's just the multiplicity of talking heads and fake scientists preaching this nonsense, and the fact that science is sponsored and approved of by governments and esteemed institutions. It's a mass information campaign of having important people repeat these lies over and over again until they're accepted as gospel, and all the evidence is lies, and if you question, you're insulted as being beyond foolish.

Winston wrote:In this video, Eric Dubay, the world's leading flat earther, explains why gravity does not exist and is a hoax invented to justify the ball earth model that allows people to stand upside down and sideways on the ball earth without falling off. It's very interesting, especially since it's true that there is no scientific lab experiment that can prove that the mass of an object will create a magical force that makes other objects stick to it or rotate around it. The theory of gravity is also contradictory in that it allows birds and bees to fly yet pulls down entire oceans and rocks. And it allows whole moons to orbit around the earth and not crash down. Very fascinating arguments. So perhaps Isaac Newton invented a hoax after all? This video is pretty convincing and sounds like good common sense.

[youtube]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4J18e30zTyE[/youtube]

It's just density, same as a dense object in water. There is no complex mathematical formula you need to figure out this one.

And if you think about it, if the earth can hold down the oceans, then there should be nothing capable of flying in the air. If the thing were true, life as we know it would not be possible, because the force would be too strong for movement to be possible. Basketball certainly wouldn't be possible. The world can hold onto the Pacific ocean, but a man can dunk against gravity?

Can anything dealing subjects such as astrophysics and palaeontology be rightfully called science? Real sciences such as biochemistry function on the principle of reproducibility and none of that stuff is reproducible.

Cornfed wrote:There does seem to be a strong mystical element to mainstream science. It is supposed to be mechanistic, yet does not even attempt to posit a mechanism for attractive forces such as gravity.

The mechanism of gravity is explained in general relativity. See:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/General_relativity
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Introduct ... ravitation

Cornfed wrote:There does seem to be a strong mystical element to mainstream science. It is supposed to be mechanistic, yet does not even attempt to posit a mechanism for attractive forces such as gravity.

It's best seen as a religion. One that confers social respectability, somewhat akin to my lawyer friend who switched from Baptist to Episcopalian because he thought the latter more intellectually reputable and therefore better for business. And one that brooks absolutely no dissent from the orthodoxy, which is the most bizarre mishmash of speculation imaginable.

fschmidt wrote:

Cornfed wrote:There does seem to be a strong mystical element to mainstream science. It is supposed to be mechanistic, yet does not even attempt to posit a mechanism for attractive forces such as gravity.

The mechanism of gravity is explained in general relativity. See:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/General_relativity
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Introduct ... ravitation

Does anyone even pretend to understand how this stuff works and think it makes sense?

fschmidt wrote:

Cornfed wrote:There does seem to be a strong mystical element to mainstream science. It is supposed to be mechanistic, yet does not even attempt to posit a mechanism for attractive forces such as gravity.

The mechanism of gravity is explained in general relativity. See:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/General_relativity
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Introduct ... ravitation

"We grow a trifle weary with Mr. Einstein's theory." Ditto to Corn's question, and is this what used to be called "Jewish science?"

Cornfed wrote:Does anyone even pretend to understand how this stuff works and think it makes sense?

Even though I was a math major, general relativity uses some math that I don't know like Riemannian geometry. So I don't fully understand it but I do understand the basic idea. (My father was a physicist and fully understood it.) The basic idea is that space-time can be represented geometrically, and mass bends this space-time which changes how objects move through it.

There is no such thing as Jewish science. Science is just science regardless of who contributes to it.

As for people who deny gravity, I would rather just discuss the matter with my dog.

fschmidt wrote:

Cornfed wrote:Does anyone even pretend to understand how this stuff works and think it makes sense?

Even though I was a math major, general relativity uses some math that I don't know like Riemannian geometry. So I don't fully understand it but I do understand the basic idea. (My father was a physicist and fully understood it.) The basic idea is that space-time can be represented geometrically, and mass bends this space-time which changes how objects move through it.

There is no such thing as Jewish science. Science is just science regardless of who contributes to it.

As for people who deny gravity, I would rather just discuss the matter with my dog.

Then you must have a really good reason for believing the gravity theory. I assume it's inarticulable to people, but the dog can get it.

Just a guess, but I'm thinking the term Jewish science referred to efforts to bamboozle the goy with incomprehensible and meaningless jargon. For all of the usual reasons. That's certainly 99 percent of what passes for academic publication today. Back in the '90s some enterprising student of academic folkways submitted a paper to a prestigious journal at, I'm sorry to say, the alma mater. It was deliberately written as total gobbledygook, but with lots of academic buzz words sprinkled in, such as "privilege" used as a verb. It was, of course, accepted for publication.