Carry on...I'll show you how kooky I can get by proving the globe Earth claim is BOGUS!
It works like this:
The way to measure curvature of a globe with claimed circumference of 24.901 miles is with the equasion eight inches by the mile squared. Do you even know what that means?
So... at a distance of 50-60 miles, how much of the Chicago bulildings should be visible from across lake Michigan?
Uhm, what's an "equasion"? Kooky jargon?
Error corrected thank you. Is that all you have, an ad hominem attack?
Typical.
Kooky (and incoherent) refers to your arguments.
You don't have one!
Do you like little boxes or something?
You're not worth my time. Come back when you learn something about Earth..
Carry on...I'll show you how kooky I can get by proving the globe Earth claim is BOGUS!
It works like this:
The way to measure curvature of a globe with claimed circumference of 24.901 miles is with the equasion eight inches by the mile squared. Do you even know what that means?
So... at a distance of 50-60 miles, how much of the Chicago bulildings should be visible from across lake Michigan?
Uhm, what's an "equasion"? Kooky jargon?
Error corrected thank you. Is that all you have, an ad hominem attack?
Carry on...I'll show you how kooky I can get by proving the globe Earth claim is BOGUS!
It works like this:
The way to measure curvature of a globe with claimed circumference of 24.901 miles is with the equasion eight inches by the mile squared. Do you even know what that means?
So... at a distance of 50-60 miles, how much of the Chicago bulildings should be visible from across lake Michigan?
Uhm, what's an "equasion"? Kooky jargon?
Error corrected thank you. Is that all you have, an ad hominem attack?
Typical.
I actually write the word 'dimension' quite a lot which is what this environment is. So Mr grammar, please Sir forgive me.
Carry on...I'll show you how kooky I can get by proving the globe Earth claim is BOGUS!
It works like this:
The way to measure curvature of a globe with claimed circumference of 24.901 miles is with the equasion eight inches by the mile squared. Do you even know what that means?
So... at a distance of 50-60 miles, how much of the Chicago bulildings should be visible from across lake Michigan?
Here is a fact for you: They claim the circumference of Earth is 24.901 miles and yet when we see things at distance that should fall beyond Earth's circumference, guess who's lying?
Kooky and incoherent.
Carry on...I'll show you how kooky I can get by proving the globe Earth claim is BOGUS!
It works like this:
The way to measure curvature of a globe with claimed circumference of 24.901 miles is with the equation eight inches by the mile squared. Do you even know what that means?
So... at a distance of 50-60 miles, how much of the Chicago bulildings should be visible from across lake Michigan?
Here is a fact for you: They claim the circumference of Earth is 24.901 miles and yet when we see things at distance that should fall beyond Earth's circumference, guess who's lying?
Kooky and incoherent.
Go find an Earth curvature calculator, then come back...
Here is a fact for you: They claim the circumference of Earth is 24.901 miles and yet when we see things at distance that should fall beyond Earth's circumference, guess who's lying?
So basically what you're ''claiming'' is that tides prove a globe Earth. How so?
Nope. I'm showing one kooky argument is much like another...
Here is a fact for you: They claim the circumference of Earth is 24.901 miles and yet when we see things at distance that should fall beyond it's circumference, guess who's lying?
Spoken with such conviction. Now prove space...CGI pictures don't count!
So basically what you're ''claiming'' is that tides prove a globe Earth. How so? Oh let me guess...GWAVITY! The mystical, magical glue that holds all the lies together. Consider this...there are oceanic depths unexplored. All it would take is a rising/falling seabed to create what we call tides. What's that you say...no proff of that huh? A bit like your moon controls the tides 'theory.' What if its the other way around and its the mass of water motion that correlates the moon cycles? Neither can be proven so stick to the facts please...
To work out how old the grains were, the researchers measured how long they had been exposed to cosmic rays in space. These rays are high-energy particles that travel through our galaxy and penetrate solid matter.
Some of these rays interact with the matter they encounter and form new elements. The longer they are exposed, the more of these elements form. The researchers used a particular form (isotope) of the element neon - Ne-21 - to date the grains.
"I compare this with putting out a bucket in a rainstorm. Assuming the rainfall is constant, the amount of water that accumulates in the bucket tells you how long it was exposed," said Dr Heck.
Measuring how many of the new elements are present tells scientists how long the grain was exposed to cosmic rays. This in turn informs them how old it is.
Some of the pre-solar grains turned out to be the oldest ever discovered.
Based on how many cosmic rays had interacted with the grains, most had to be 4.6-4.9 billion years old. For comparison, the Sun is 4.6 billion years old and the Earth is 4.5 billion.
However, the oldest yielded a date of around 7.5 billion years old.
Spoken with such conviction. Now prove space...CGI pictures don't count!
To work out how old the grains were, the researchers measured how long they had been exposed to cosmic rays in space. These rays are high-energy particles that travel through our galaxy and penetrate solid matter.
Some of these rays interact with the matter they encounter and form new elements. The longer they are exposed, the more of these elements form. The researchers used a particular form (isotope) of the element neon - Ne-21 - to date the grains.
"I compare this with putting out a bucket in a rainstorm. Assuming the rainfall is constant, the amount of water that accumulates in the bucket tells you how long it was exposed," said Dr Heck.
Measuring how many of the new elements are present tells scientists how long the grain was exposed to cosmic rays. This in turn informs them how old it is.
Some of the pre-solar grains turned out to be the oldest ever discovered.
Based on how many cosmic rays had interacted with the grains, most had to be 4.6-4.9 billion years old. For comparison, the Sun is 4.6 billion years old and the Earth is 4.5 billion.
However, the oldest yielded a date of around 7.5 billion years old.
Hey Boss...pssst.......we got another one rejecting the programming! Only kidding. Just point me towards the independant scientific reviews.....see you in another life, when we are rats...
