Artemis

[MacMunin]

We don’t want Gleason to explain it, we want YOU to.

We aren’t asking you to go somewhere to learn what we are telling you, we are telling you because we understand them.

Tell us what it is that YOU actually understand…


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

How many times do I need to explain the local lights traverse circuits depending on the time of the year before it sinks in? I get tired of repating myself, so the map is to help you stop asking the same questions over and over but just in different ways.

[jonboy79]

Incorrect. The distance and your model lends against what we see in this realm. Based on the model, a Sun sitting at 93 million miles away does not lend to such differeing temps on a ball at the "poles", regarldess of tilt. Injectting Ice into the scenario is almost laugable, since it would also be evidence against the nonsesne you are fed. It actually proves my point even more, that a ball at 93 million miles would not lend to a "land full of Ice" at one pole whie the opposite takes place at the other.

Why cant the Sun be seen constantly at the North? Really? Please go check out the updated gleasons provided. You have it yet or would you like me to repost the link? Here it is:

https://drive.google.com/drive/folde...qGS3_L37lcvOuI

Read up on Albido.

This was kindergarten science. I vividly remember putting water in a paint can painted white, and another painted black, putting them out in the sun and then measuring their temps an hour later.

It’s also not the distance created by the tilt that matters, it is the angle the sun’s rays approach the land from.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[2bynight]

So youre nothing more than a robot, a regurgitaitng mouthpiece /extension of your Governments psychological babble to supress any Truth.

I have already explaine the history of "Satlelites" and explained it came from the imagination of Authur C. Clarke and that all of international comms are through burired fiber optics. A link was also supplied where NASA has an actual facility they launch these things from and also explained why you will see repeater buoys in the Ocean. If salelites existed, you wouldnt need these.

Uhh, no. That is not how communications work. Yes, you need fiber optics or old style copper (no longer used) from cell towers for the last mile to the central office. However, I have worked with satellite companies. You have to account for transponder delay which can be as high as 400ms and not suitable for certain VoIP transmissions. Buoys in the ocean are normally used for scientific measurements relayed to satellite transponders. However, international calls typically DO NOT use satellites. They use buried oceanic cables in systems like Apollo or Yellow and do not use oceanic buoys at all. Repeaters are spliced into the cables which terminate onto wire racks in landing sites. Satellites used for voice communications are typically for remote areas not serviced by cell or landline.

[jonboy79]

Anyone with any sense knows it is impossiball for people to be walking upside down South of the Equator. What was that mumbo jumbo about blood and brain you tried to pass off before? LOL. Amazing!!!!!!!!

Well, they aren’t upside down Down there, since gravity pulls straight towards the center of the Lola et, it doesn’t matter where you are, you are always straight up.

Once again, this is actually the simplest and most elegant proof for a globular earth, thanks for the assist once again.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[blah3]

How many times do I need to explain the local lights traverse circuits depending on the time of the year before it sinks in? I get tired of repating myself, so the map is to help you stop asking the same questions over and over but just in different ways.

Again what the hell are local lights and these circuits they transverse???

[MacMunin]

Well, they aren’t upside down Down there, since gravity pulls straight towards the center of the Lola et, it doesn’t matter where you are, you are always straight up.

Once again, this is actually the simplest and most elegant proof for a globular earth, thanks for the assist once again.



Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Bahahaha. If a bug crawls down a basketball, it is not standing up once it reaches the bottom. Magical Grabbity never proven does not change reality and any of that blood brain nonsense you spewed out before is a clasic example of someone who has held dear to indoctrinations fed as a kindergartener and why they feed children with the nonses your brain cannot escape now. Thanks for remiaing a walking dead zombie.

[jonboy79]

Bahahaha. If a bug crawls down a basketball, it is not standing up once it reaches the bottom. Magical Grabbity never proven does not change reality and any of that blood brain nonsense you spewed out before is a clasic example of someone who has held dear to indoctrinations fed as a kindergartener and why they feed children with the nonses your brain cannot escape now. Thanks for remiaing a walking dead zombie.

No, because the effect of gravity from a basketball doesn’t approach the gravity from the giant planet underneath it.

No, it shows how someone is able to retain knowledge; build upon it with more knowledge and learned to think critically. It shows that someone received not one but two bachelors degrees.

All you show, is how someone is easily brainwashed into believing in a coloring book and was taught NOT to believe what is around you and instead only what your master teaches you to be true(even when it makes literally no sense at all).


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[MacMunin]

No, because the effect of gravity from a basketball doesn’t approach the gravity from the giant planet underneath it.

No, it shows how someone is able to retain knowledge; build upon it with more knowledge and learned to think critically. It shows that someone received not one but two bachelors degrees.

All you show, is how someone is easily brainwashed into believing in a coloring book and was taught NOT to believe what is around you and instead only what your master teaches you to be true(even when it makes literally no sense at all).


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

All you have retained is theoreticals never proven and then more BS piled upon that original BS.

Once you get up to Phd level, you then have a choice to either see the insanity and stop playing the mental masterbation ideas over never proven, or you hold those dear and go make a bunch of money afterwards selling BS never proven to the blind.

Congrats on your 2 degrees, good thing you arent or never was in theroetical stuff is what I'd say to you.

[MacMunin]

TRUMAN!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

[Greg]

Incorrect. The distance and your model lends against what we see in this realm. Based on the model, a Sun sitting at 93 million miles away does not lend to such differeing temps on a ball at the "poles", regarldess of tilt. Injectting Ice into the scenario is almost laugable, since it would also be evidence against the nonsesne you are fed. It actually proves my point even more, that a ball at 93 million miles would not lend to a "land full of Ice" at one pole whie the opposite takes place at the other.

Why cant the Sun be seen constantly at the North? Really? Please go check out the updated gleasons provided. You have it yet or would you like me to repost the link? Here it is:

https://drive.google.com/drive/folde...qGS3_L37lcvOuI

The distance ASSUMES a set power for the sun. I know you don't believe this but there are many stars MUCH, MUCH bigger than the sun that would literally incinerate us in a moment if we were 93 million miles from them. Then there are smaller stars that we would be frozen instantly for that distance. The size and brilliance of the sun plays a part, you see. I am close to treating you as exceedingly stupid and asking you to take a 40 watt incandescent bulb and compare it to a 100 watt one and see if there is a brightness difference, and more to the point, that the 100 watt one will throw off considerably more heat as well.

Why are you telling me to check out Gleason's model? Why can't you simply explain it? If you don't understand it why do you believe it?

[Greg]

Anyone with any sense knows it is impossiball for people to be walking upside down South of the Equator. What was that mumbo jumbo about blood and brain you tried to pass off before? LOL. Amazing!!!!!!!!

Oh my. They are not upside down. As jonboy explained numerous times the center of gravitational pull on the sphere is the center of the sphere. It is directly underneath anything on the surface. There is no top or bottom to a sphere.

What's the top of a basketball?

We talk of the north pole as the top of the world and draw maps that way but we could just as easily flip that. But our early societies developed north of the equator so we treat the north as the top when in reality either would work.

We are talking in three dimensions and you are stuck in two.

[Greg]

How many times do I need to explain the local lights traverse circuits depending on the time of the year before it sinks in? I get tired of repating myself, so the map is to help you stop asking the same questions over and over but just in different ways.

Please explain, and without directing me to Jackie Gleason or whoever it is, how a circuit on the firmament would hide the sun from the center of the disc for half of the year. Then explain why the other half of the year the ice wall dwellers can't see it.