https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UqV sA5wOjTw >people sti

>>7914406
what do you mean "why"?

I only believe what I see with my own eyes, and I only see the earth as flat.
Actually even better, I can guarantee no one can see the earth as anything other than flat.

>>7914409
I'm not criticizing.

I'm just asking, why? Why is it that believable in the first place?

File: 1452874695591.jpg (84KB, 990x1051px) Image search: [Google]

84KB, 990x1051px

>>7914406
you cannot even prove that the earth exists.

File: 41585472_p20_master1200.jpg (203KB, 600x420px) Image search: [Google]

203KB, 600x420px

https://youtu.be/UqVsA5wOjTw?t=20m35s

>this whole argument

wattafuk man

>>7914406
Astronomers fail to detect stellar parallax even though we are told that the sun orbits the galaxy. The constellations should be different that what we had a thousand years before but they are not.
In fact, the predictions of constellations, eclipses, and events were known even in Mayan times.

>replies

Airey's Failure is proof that the earth is not moving at all.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=81v0j2qg9Lo

This is stupid, from Tierra del fuego the sun would always be between 135º and 225º of azimuth, which does not happen at all. You can't just throw away the spherical symmetry because it's present in both hemispheres.

>>7914406
>>>/x/

Here is where you will find your answer.

I hope your faith in humanity is strong.

Godspeed OP.

>>7915718
This. It seems like all of modern science has been a vast con.

>>7915718
This is of course rubbish. However.. Some dark matter theorists postulate that the intergalactic spaces are filled with small rocks (oort cloud style).
From this one can surmise there are also huge 'clouds' of water vapour, and areas of no water vapour, or gravitational increases due to mass conglomerations.
regrettably,this is putting the idea of galaxies 'red shifting' and 'blue shifting' as directional indicators into a false flag area. And if galaxies are NOT moving towards away from us the static universe model has to be accepted. If that is accepted, then I dont know how we prove the universe exists.

>>7916428
Wut?

>>7916428
There are no records of galaxies or stars blue shifting ever. They are all moving away from us, which puts Earth at the centre of the Universe. That is what the video is about, more so than dark matter. If the Earth is stationary and the stars are rotating around it then we do away with superfluous concepts like dark matter altogether. Everything becomes simpler.

Also I don't see why an expanding universe is more real than a static one. Not that this has anything to do with a static universe, as the galaxies are all red shifted anyway. It has to do with a universe with a stationary earth at its centre. Did you even watch the video?

>>7916598
andromeda galaxy has a blue shift and is moving toward us.

>>7916809
Andromeda and the Milky Way are on a collision course with one another. It is a special case. But you are right of course. Almost all blueshifted Galaxies are in our local group and as such have very active gravitational forces working on each other. This is to be expected.

How does the fact that large bodies close to one another exert an attractive force upon each other confirm idea of an expanding universe, versus the geocentric model? How do you explain the fact that the vast majority of Galaxies are redshifted based on the consensus model?

>>7916830
because it works like dots on a ballon that gets filled with air.
Not the Objects are moving, the space between them expands.
Doens't matter wich point of obersvation you choose everything is always fleeing away from you.

>>7916855
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3WL_vtu4r1w

like here

>>7916830
The comological principle in addition to observed redshifts associated with velocities greater than c. The cosmological principle assumes we are not in a privileged location (i.e. we are not at the center of the universe), while redshifts greater than c means that the expansion is necessarily due to metric expansion (or relativity is wrong, but there is a lot of evidence that says otherwise) and thus any arbitrary point you pick will appear to be the center of the universe.

>>7916855
But in order for this model to be correct space must expand uniformly in all directions. Recent maps of the Cosmic Microwave Background reveal it to be bumpy, thereby disproving the theory. Also galaxies are not evenly distributed but appear clumped together, further disproving it.

>>7916880
Who says it is expanding like a perfect globe? Maybe high gravitational areas have an impact on space expansion itself making it an uneven body.

>>7916894
Who says its expanding at all. The cosmological constant expects homogenous expansion. According to BB space and time were created at the singularity, there is nothing outside to pull on it to give it a non-uniform shape.

>>7916903
>Who says its expanding at all.
https://youtu.be/jjy-eqWM38g?list=PL8dPuuaLjXtPAJr1ysd5yGIyiSFuh0mIL&t=520
Observation obviously.
> there is nothing outside to pull on it to give it a non-uniform shape
Says who? And i was refering to large galaxy clusters or black holes that maybe slow expansion of space around them slightly.

>>7916927
Observation doesn't explain it though. If you see a car wheel spinning so fast that it appears to spin backwards it doesn't mean that it is actually spinning backwards. Observation is a given when we 'look' at anything. The observation is not the important thing, how we interpret them is however.

Science is supposed to be based on the least amount of assumptions. Based on the simple observation of all the galaxies in the universe being red shifted (bar a neglible few) cosmologists would now have us believe in a run away expansion which requires; dark engery, dark matter, a cosmological constant, uniform expansion that doesn't have to be uniform, the existence of other universe outside our own causing drag to disrupt the cosmological constant. One of these ideas on their own would be sufficient to call time on the concept. All of them together is an avalanche of unfounded nonsense each one requiring its own special clauses and mirky underpinnings just to keeps its head above water.

>>7916950
Well disprove them than if you are so smart. I bet ther's a Nobel Price in it for you.
Just because you can't see electricity with your eye doesn't mean it cannot be measured.

>>7916962
Disprove who? I am merely presenting data that is already known about and in the public sphere. What good is a nobel prize when the best prize you can have is the truth?

>>7914409
What is the horizon then. Why cant I see America from Cornwall.

>>7916962
The point is that we have the observation that the galaxies are all redshifted, which is the doppler effect. The conclusion that modern day cosmologists are giving that this means that the universe is expanding is an unfounded claim, and an overly complex interpretation which wouldn't withstand the weakest application of Occam's Razor. It is far simpler to assume that the stars are just moving away from us in every direction.

Think of it this way. If I observe two cars driving away from each other at speed and I am asked to come up with a model to explain that and I say "The cars aren't moving its just that the road is getting longer" would you find that credible? No, because you would have to account for the creation of mass from nothing and the energy needed to drive it. Too many assumptions leads to bad science and defending bad science is an exercise in faith that these people know more than you do and that they have the right answers you just aren't smart enough to understand yet.

>>7916962
>disprove them than if you are so smart. I bet ther's a Nobel Price in it for you.
This is a science board where we discuss scientific evidence and data. Through that we are able to come to our own conclusions. There is no hierarchies in science that we are to be subordinate to. The only thing you should be subordinate to is your own reason, all else leads to a kind of entrenched dogmatic science.

>>7914406
Because The Bible says so.

>>7917027
The bible said the Earth was a sphere you dolt.

>>7917035
Say that to fundamentalists.