Does the moon not go around the Earth? The reason it's more affected by the Earth than the Sun is because it's closer to the Earth, I thought.
Also, that passage questions the idea that the moon rotates on its axis and yet the same side always faces the Earth...uh, think about it!
"In fact, it is known that the flux of photons from the sun and the “solar wind” actually tends to push earth away." Yes, but then there is this thing called "gravity" that holds it in place.
"It seems that every time there is a theory of gravity, it is mixed up with “fringe” mathematics." You try to prove this sort of thing with 2+2.
"Adherents have a hard time explaining, for instance, why airplanes do not fall." lol. Go look it up.
"The core idea of “to each according to his weight, from each according to his mass” Actually I think objects fall at a rate with no relation to mass.
This web page seems to just be a load of rubbish someone has come up with based on half-remembered school lessons and a total lack of research.
Originally posted by lukemcmullanThat's because, if you look at the picture of Einstein writing 'LOL' and the fact that it's from a site about intelligent design, the article is intended as a parody of creationist attacks on evolution, not as an actual attack on the theory of gravity.
Does the moon not go around the Earth? The reason it's more affected by the Earth than the Sun is because it's closer to the Earth, I thought.
Also, that passage questions the idea that the moon rotates on its axis and yet the same side always faces the Earth...uh, think about it!
"In fact, it is known that the flux of photons from the sun and ...[text shortened]... h someone has come up with based on half-remembered school lessons and a total lack of research.
Originally posted by Will EverittOne thing I noticed about this so-called scientific article is one
For all of you that think of gravity as a universal law. Theres proof otherwise http://www.bringyou.to/apologetics/p67.htm its a good read i recomend it
factoid it got totally wrong: It says emphatically gravity does
not explain why Saturn has rings and Jupiter does not.
In fact Jupiter has rings, not as glorious as Saturn but the recent
probes going past have hit it from the right angle to image them.
This piece is another attempt by the so-called intelligent design
community to discredit every scientific advance with the end not
even remotely devoted to science but to the advancement of
right wing christian fundamentalists drive to force their "educational
standards" on americans, ala Kansas. I am suprised they are
trying to take on gravity, they should stick to their area of expertise,
their pseudo-science of creationism.
Originally posted by sonhouseSatire - a narrative where irony and exaggeration are used for a humorous portrayal.
One thing I noticed about this so-called scientific article is one
factoid it got totally wrong: It says emphatically gravity does
not explain why Saturn has rings and Jupiter does not.
In fact Jupiter has rings, not as glorious as Saturn but the recent
probes going past have hit it from the right angle to image them.
This piece is another attempt by t ...[text shortened]... on gravity, they should stick to their area of expertise,
their pseudo-science of creationism.
Parody:
- a composition that imitates somebody's style in a humorous way
- make a spoof of or make fun of
- humorous or satirical mimicry
- Joined
- 23 Jul 05
- Moves
- 8869
The article is filled with flaus:
For example.
"The theory of gravity violates common sense in many ways. Adherents have a hard time explaining, for instance, why airplanes do not fall. Since anti-gravity is rejected by the scientific establishment, they resort to lots of hand-waving. The theory, if taken seriously, implies that the default position for all airplanes is on the ground. While this is obviously true for Northwest airplanes (relying on “A Wing and a Prayer&rdquo😉, it appears that Jet Blue and Southwest have a superior theory that effectively harnesses forces that overcome so-called gravity."
This person is under the impression anti-gravity is used to lift airplanes above the ground; this is utter rubbish. http://www.planetharold.com/images/physics/Airplane%20Wing.jpg
When air moves fast over airplane wings the air moves at a higher velocity under the wing than over the wing, causing a low pressure above the wing and a high pressure below; this in turn causes lift. Lift towards the low pressure because things generally move from high pressure to low pressure (take weather systems for example). The plane gains more of the force of lift than the force of gravity, thus making the plane rise into the air. The height of the plane then plateaus at some level because the forces of lift and gravity are balanced.
ALL PLANES WORK ON THIS PRINCIPLE
The writer of this article must be fool, they are under the impression that "anti-gravity" lets planes fly. It is not.
There are many other flaus, like the moon example:
"If the theory of gravity were true, it would show that the sun's gravitational force on the moon is much stronger than the earth's gravitational force on the moon, so the moon would go around the sun."
This is wrong again, gravity between objects gets weaker the further apart they are from each other. The moon orbits the earth far closer than to that of the sun and therefore the gravity between the earth and the moon is greater than that of the moon and the sun.
Here's another flau:
"Gravity totally fails to explain why Saturn has rings and Jupiter does not."
Jupiter does have rings, but they are smaller and less of them. They have sent probes and seen them.
Through a lack of understanding scientific ideas and lack of true research into what the author is talking about there are plenty of mistakes, errors and lies.
Originally posted by Bad wolfSatire - a narrative where irony and exaggeration are used for a humorous portrayal.
The article is filled with flaus:
For example.
"The theory of gravity violates common sense in many ways. Adherents have a hard time explaining, for instance, why airplanes do not fall. Since anti-gravity is rejected by the scientific establishment, they resort to lots of hand-waving. The theory, if taken seriously, implies that the default position for ...[text shortened]... ue research into what the author is talking about there are plenty of mistakes, errors and lies.
Parody:
- a composition that imitates somebody's style in a humorous way
- make a spoof of or make fun of
- humorous or satirical mimicry
I have certainly questioned gravity. There are just too many holes in it and things it can't explain. Ask a physicist when the last time was that they directly observed a "graviton." This is supposed to be science not history class. You have to directly observe it.
And to think some people actually claim gravity has more support than evolution.
Originally posted by telerionSo, you and Xanthoz are both proponents of the Theory of Intelligent Falling, eh? How fascinating.
I have certainly questioned gravity. There are just too many holes in it and things it can't explain. Ask a physicist when the last time was that they directly observed a "graviton." This is supposed to be science not history class. You have to directly observe it.
And to think some people actually claim gravity has more support than evolution.
Originally posted by HalitoseShame.
A literary style lost on most.
I must point out that the authour has a degree in physics. More then anything I think its rather clear its satire when you read "The core idea of to each according to his weight, from each according to his mass is communist"
Originally posted by Will EverittShame.
Shame.
I must point out that the authour has a degree in physics. More then anything I think its rather clear its satire when you read "The core idea of to each according to his weight, from each according to his mass is communist"
???
That wasn't aimed at you - if that's what you were thinking.