I Don't Believe in Gravity!

[shunyadragon]

You also stated in a previous post that science doesn't prove anything, which I think we've demonstrated to be an inaccurate statement.

I clarified that statement that in reference to theories and hypothesis, they cannot be proven. This does not apply to observed facts. My post was in response to statements concerning the theory of gravity and evolution. Observed facts such as the earth is round and the earth revolves around the sun ultimately need not be subject to falsification as the theories of gravity and evolution.

 

[Polymath257]

You also stated in a previous post that science doesn't prove anything, which I think we've demonstrated to be an inaccurate statement.

Science can prove ideas are *wrong*. It can prove specific instances happen. It cannot prove that general statements are true to absolute precision. There are *always* error bars on any measurement.

BTW: There is no gravity, the Earth sucks!

 

[SalixIncendium]

It is fine for you to accept that.

To me, it would be "How a swinging pendulum proves the Earth has magnetisicm and electricity that causes motion."

 

[SalixIncendium]

Science can prove ideas are *wrong*. It can prove specific instances happen. It cannot prove that general statements are true to absolute precision. There are *always* error bars on any measurement.

Correct.

BTW: There is no gravity, the Earth sucks!

 

[Polymath257]

It is fine for you to accept that.

To me, it would be "How a swinging pendulum proves the Earth has magnetisicm and electricity that causes motion."

Huh???? Magnetism and electricity have *nothing* to do with this!

Troll? Or stupid?

 

[Profound Realization]

But you *do* travel at 1000 mph in the direction of the spin! The point is that you *continue* to do so when you jump.

The speed of the rocket from the rotation of the earth has to be taken into account when figuring out the extra speed required for orbit. It comes up in the amount of fuel required, etc. Launching a rocket that orbits in the same direction as the Earth spins is a quite different matter than launching one that orbits in the opposite direction (or even one that has a polar orbit).

I understand that, why I used the said relativity as an example. Perhaps I should have worded that better, that I wouldn't travel 1000mph non-relative with the direction of spin. Although when I'm in an elevator, or accelerate quickly... I most certainly feel the motion, at speeds much less than 1000mph.

Just as, the post in which I replied had to do with direct observation proving the Earths spin. A rocket going into orbit is not direct observation of the Earths spin. Read up before assuming so much.

 

[Profound Realization]

Huh???? Magnetism and electricity have *nothing* to do with this!

Troll? Or stupid?

Magnetism and electricity have nothing to do with it??? I'd ask the same regarding you but I'm not that dense of judgement.

Show me where electromagnetism has nothing to do with it. Good luck.

 

[Enoch07]

I think we have our first flat earther here on RF. I hoped this day would never come here but me thinks it has arrived!

 

[blü 2]

Okay, but that still doesn't support your claim that science doesn't prove anything. Did science not prove the world is round? That the earth revolves around the sun? That the sun is the center of our solar system? That Down Syndrome is caused by an extra copy of chromosome 21?

'Proof' has two meanings, so it's good to be careful with that word. In maths and formal logic you can 'prove' things ie get valid results by processes that fully conform to the requirements of the system. They are, of course all subject to the GIGO rule.

The word has a different meaning in law. Your 'proof' is simply your demonstration, arguing from evidence and law, that your case meets the required standard (balance of probabilities in civil actions, beyond a reasonable doubt in criminal matters).

So it makes things clearer if you think of science as demonstrating the correctness of its claims rather that 'proving' them, since that word often carries the 'absolute' connotations of maths &c.

Indeed we use mathematical models throughout physics. We put people on the moon, landers on Mars, Cassini in orbit, with those maths, so they can be pretty good.

But the maths is not sacred. If our physical object behaves differently to the predictions of maths, then it's the maths that must be amended, not the physical object.

In other words, the conclusions of science are verified by empiricism and induction, not by calculation, and nothing protects those conclusions from a counterexample we might find tomorrow ─ or never find.

So all conclusions of science are tentative. There are no absolutes.

 

[gnostic]

Well, I must say that I do believe in evolution.
However, I'm not 100% convinced that gravity is holding me on the earth. I think it's because I weigh too much.

Then I would suggest that you cut down on your cakes , donuts and beers

 

[Polymath257]

I understand that, why I used the said relativity as an example. Perhaps I should have worded that better, that I wouldn't travel 1000mph non-relative with the direction of spin. Although when I'm in an elevator, or accelerate quickly... I most certainly feel the motion, at speeds much less than 1000mph.

You are feeling the acceleration, not the velocity. The acceleration from the spin of the Earth is much less than the contribution to the overall force from gravity.

Just as, the post in which I replied had to do with direct observation proving the Earths spin. A rocket going into orbit is not direct observation of the Earths spin. Read up before assuming so much.

What do you count as 'direct observation'? Technically, *nothing* is 'directly observed' because there is always some sort of medium between the thing observed and your brain interpreting.

 

[Polymath257]

Magnetism and electricity have nothing to do with it??? I'd ask the same regarding you but I'm not that dense of judgement.

Show me where electromagnetism has nothing to do with it. Good luck.

Specifically, magnetism and electricity have nothing to do with the effects on a Foucault pendulum. You can see exactly the same effects without metal anywhere. This is purely a mechanics, not an E&M thing.

 

[Thief]

You first. Please note your observations and present any evidence here that you find.

it's a gospel story

the proving is in your head
feel 'free' to make the attempt

I shall refrain
gravity is relentless
it will not yield

unless of course........you can walk on water

 

[Profound Realization]

Specifically, magnetism and electricity have nothing to do with the effects on a Foucault pendulum. You can see exactly the same effects without metal anywhere. This is purely a mechanics, not an E&M thing.

http://www.academypendulums.com/pdf/Mark2FoucaultInstallation.pdf

Also, of course, the pendelum(designed with electricity and magnetism: read link) always comes to a stop. The only things that keep them in motion are an initial startup force, and electromagnetism. Gravity doesn't keep them going. Unless the Earth also stops on it own.

 

[Profound Realization]

You are feeling the acceleration, not the velocity. The acceleration from the spin of the Earth is much less than the contribution to the overall force from gravity.



What do you count as 'direct observation'? Technically, *nothing* is 'directly observed' because there is always some sort of medium between the thing observed and your brain interpreting.

That was what I was responding to. The poster said the Earths spin was of direct observations and not any calculations/mathematics. Used the rocket launch as an example with the accountance of considerations. Those considerations are based on calculations/mathematics, not direct observation as the poster was referring to.

 

[Native]

Gravity and evolution are both established fact. Scientific theory revolves around investigating working details that we don't fully understand in regards to something that we know is already there.

Just as Evolution don´t explain the origin of Life, the very "force of gravity" isn´t causally explained scientifically.

 

[blü 2]

Just as Evolution don´t explain the origin of Life, the very "force of gravity" isn´t causally explained scientifically.

You probably haven't come across an obscure paper from 1915 about something called "allgemeine Relativitätstheorie" by Albert someone.

As Wikipedia puts it, he "describes gravity not as a force, but as a consequence of the curvature of spacetime caused by the uneven distribution of mass."

 

[12jtartar]

Sounds like a silly statement, doesn't it?

So why do we buy into gravity? Is it because we buy into Newton's mathematical equation? Is it because of evidence presented through scientific method? Or is it because we know the earth spins at 1000 miles per hour (at the equator) and we have an understanding that without it, we would be flung into space like fleas being shaken off of a dog (until they hit the ground because of gravity)?

So is it fair to say that we buy into this scientific theory because we have subjective experience, and not because of evidence presented through scientific method?

Another scientific theory is Darwin's theory of evolution through natural selection. Like gravity, it is a scientific theory arrived at through use of the scientific method. Yet 42% of the population (according to a poll I made up for this thread) does not buy into evolution or natural selection even though it uses the same scientific method used to arrive at the theory of gravity (systematic observation, measurement, experimentation, formulation, testing, and modification of hypotheses). One can hypothesize (as I do) that the only reason that one would not believe in evolution is because s/he lacks subjective experience.

So In this thread, I would like to hear from those that believe in gravity and do not believe in evolution through natural selection. Why is gravity more valid to you than evolution?

Salixlncendium,
I believe in gravity, because it can easily be seen and demonstrated!!!
I do not believe in Evolution, because there has never been, even an iota of proof. Even when several scientists, in the past, have claimed to have found a Hopeful Monster, it has later found to be a fraud,made up by scientists in order to keep getting grant money. You see, scientists, just like many other people are crooked, when it comes to their livelihood.
I just want to point out a couple of things that make evolution impossible. One, is the indisputable fact that God put into all living things, His Law, that things would be able to, only reproduce, After their own kind, Genesis 1:11,12,21,24,25. For many years scientists tried everything they could think of to break this Law of God, but most gave up, realizing it is an unbreakable Law.
Darwin said that if the fossil record did not prove evolution, then evolution was not a fact. There has NEVER been found, one fossil that had the characteristics of both, a higher form of life and a lower. If evolution were true; over millions of years of evolution, there would not be ONE kind that would not have characteristics of both. The problem for evolutionists Is; there has never been found fossil that had any proof of changing, but all are easily recognized as a distinct kind.
If evolution were true, farmers would not know what to plant, because anything could come up, but because of God’s Laws they know that if they plant wheat, wheat will come up.
God’s Law of Prestabilism will always be true!!!
Edited for typos

 

[SalixIncendium]

Salixlncendium,
I believe in gravity, because it can easily be seen and demonstrated!!!
I do not believe in Evolution, because there has never been, even an iota of proof.

Yet you claim to be Christian, correct? Unless you can see and demonstrate Jesus Christ or the Christian God, this statement makes you a hypocrite.

And don't even begin to try to refute this with Scripture. I'll tell you preemptively that Scripture is not proof of anything other than man can write.

Even when several scientists, in the past, have claimed to have found a Hopeful Monster, it has later found to be a fraud,made up by scientists in order to keep getting grant money. You see, scientists, just like many other people are crooked, when it comes to their livelihood.

So all scientists are crooked. Got it.

I just want to point out a couple of things that make evolution impossible. One, is the indisputable fact that God put into all living things...

[citation needed]

His Law, that things would be able to, only reproduce, After their own kind, Genesis 1:11,12,21,24,25. For many years scientists tried everything they could think of to break this Law of God, but most gave up, realizing it is an unbreakable Law.

So 'things' are only here to procreate. And science doesn't want that to happen. Got it.

Darwin said that if the fossil record did not prove evolution, then evolution was not a fact. There has NEVER been found, one fossil that had the characteristics of both, a higher form of life and a lower. If evolution were true; over millions of years of evolution, there would not be ONE kind that would not have characteristics of both. The problem for evolutionists Is; there has never been found fossil that had any proof of changing, but all are easily recognized as a distinct kind.

There are so many things wrong with this statement, save sentence structure, I don't know where to begin.

There have been countless fossils found that provide evidence of changes over time. One example is the whale, who evolved from a four legged land animal to a legless aquatic mammal.

The evolution of whales

If evolution were true, farmers would not know what to plant, because anything could come up, but because of God’s Laws they know that if they plant wheat, wheat will come up.
God’s Law of Prestabilism will always be true!!!

Please cite a peer reviewed article about God's Law of Prestabilism.

 

[Sunstone]

So all scientists are crooked. Got it.

But it's true! Just last week, a man came up to me on the street and told me the voices in his head had informed him that the world's 2,000,000 evolutionary scientists and teachers were holding a top secret convention in Los Vegas next month to hammer out some of the details of their conspiracy to promote silly old evolution as true! I was so alarmed!