The ball and car have the same speed. The person and the train have the same speed. The plane and earth do not have the same speed.

Instead of a person on a train if you were to launch a balloon the balloon would rise and train pass underneath. No matter how high the balloon rises (assuming no winds) if it descends from its apex it would land in the exact same spot. How is that?

Wait a second, now you are trying to apply Occam's razor? Ou literally can't believe in conspiracies like this an then fall back on that. Sorry.

Let's assume what you believe is the actual way things are, it would require you to go against Occam's razor. So please don't try to use that logic in defending any of your points.

Fwiw the plane is traveling at the speed of the earth rotation on the ground. All objects are. The speed we measure is the net difference relative to speed of rotation. So, let's say the earth only rotates at 1000 mph, then the plane on the ground is going 1000 mph, wen it gets to it's top speed of 300 mph(for example), it is actually going 1300 mph but we don't measure speed like that so we use the net difference of 300.

If the Earth doesn't move, where do waves come from? If your answer is "the wind," where does wind come from? Must be God blowing us a kiss, right?

No, I think you're mistaking science with religion. If that was true, the. At some point in history some super smart young scientist would have written a paper or something in support if your "theories." If it was so easy to prove, someone would have done it.

In before, "they tried but it was repressed because--ridiculous worldwide conspiracy to keep people in the dark." LOL

It's obvious that the Earth has a two-dimensional form, that's why locations are expressed with only two coordinates. If the Earth was truly spherical you would need at least three values.

And I wasn't talking about all 'weather patterns' but specifically about cyclones, also known as depressions, so your reply was off the point.

Wind is caused by waves. The earth heats quicker than water and the difference along the coastline creates wind. Another source of wind also comes from huge forests (including algae blooms) where each tree is responsible for thousands of microscopic breathes inhaling CO2, exhaling oxygen which culminates in wind.

Now, what snarky point were you going to try and make?

Explain the difference between the following, where you can compare a to a, b to b, etc.

Throwing ball in car

A= ball
B= hand
C= speed you/your hand/car are traveling

Plane flying

A= plane
B= earth
C=speed earth is rotating


In both an object is starting at a point with the same speed as the object it is in contact with, in both it leaves into the atmosphere for a period of time, but somehow you think the original speed of the object only matters in one(you agree that throwing a ball up in a car will return it to it's original spot).

The only fundamental difference(I am saving you time here) is that the plane can power itself. So please explain how that matters. Thanks!

Ok, this made me laugh.

This knowledge has been available for all time, there have been people writing about this and opposing mainstream view. It's hard to change an entire world view without the medium of the internet which is why this information is much more accessible nowadays.

There are conspiracies to keep people in the dark, a lot of them. Thinking that this couldnt be one of them is being naive.

Well that was a stupid response, how about you ponder this...

Theyre thousands of satellites in the sky but only a few pictures of Earth. Why aren't there countless, unaltered pictures of Earth?

Grunch: how do FE people explain bidirectional circumnavigation ?

The actual experiment, published in the scientific journal Nature in 1962, using a 6ft long 300-gal tank given 24 hours for the water to settle each time, and using woodchips to track the plughole vortex, was done in Boston, MA, with the anticlockwise vortex repeatedly and consistently observed, but unfortunately the researcher doesn't seem to have had an academic colleague (with a similar sense of humour) in Australia to do a southern-hemisphere check.

Hahaha

Are you serious? Have you seen this thing called Google Maps?

Youre not really understanding the importance of atmosphere. The car's windows are rolled up so what the ball moves through is vastly different to what the plane moves through.

Again, stupid response as google maps doesnt show the whole of the earth from space. And realistically what is more practical, that the aerial footage was taken by planes or by satellites?

Regarding the atmosphere: How does it differ?

This is correct.

What does bidirectional mean in this instance? No one has ever sailed North to South.

And you think a car is sealed from the outside world when the widows are up? Wouldn't we be in danger of running out breathable air?

Lol, you asked why there weren't countless photos of Earth taken from satellites and I gave you an example of exactly that. How stupid of me. If you want pictures of the entire earth, a) you need to be further away than most satellites are, b) you need to equip the satellite with a camera and some means of aiming/focusing/triggering photos and returning them to Earth, which adds needless expense for satellites that are put there for other (usually commercial) purposes, and c) we have plenty of photos of Earth, why do we need more? If we had twice as many, would you believe then? 100 times as many? You're just being obtuse arguing that we should have MORE pictures, MORE videos, MORE trips to the moon, etc. when we both know that even if we did you'd still say they're all fake, so what's the point?

Edit: And to answer your question, satellites by far.

When people travel around the earth in the Southern hemisphere by sailboat, how can they travel so much faster/cover so much greater of a distance than if they travelled at the center (northern hemisphere)?

Well, he is making a fair point but he doesn't understand why he's making it.

My top of train example was bad, let's take the ball inside of the train for a second.

Let's assume the train has a constant velocity, meaning it is neither in the process of accelerating or decelerating. When I sit in the train seat with my ball or whatever, my ABSOLUTE position is increasing with respect to the ground and is a function of my horizontal velocity - meaning, whatever speed (actually velocity, velocity and speed aren't the same thing) the train is going, my ass on the seat is also going.

However, my position relative to the rest of the train car remains unchanged, because we are all traveling at the same velocity as the train.

Ok. So I throw the ball directly upwards at a 90 degree angle into the air, applying vertical force to the ball. It still carries the HORIZONTAL velocity of the train, but it now has a vertical velocity as well, and a force is being applied to it, namely my hand and then gravity forcing it back down. However, no horizontal force whatsoever is being applied to the ball, so it maintains its horizontal velocity (thus its relative position to the rest of the train car) and lands in the same spot as it left, with respect the rest of the car.

Now take the ball outside and throw it into the air. It now has horizontal forces being applied to it, namely, drag caused by the air, which will cause it to decelerate with respect to the train's constant velocity.

Keep in mind, the train is experiencing the same force, drag - but it is self powered and able to maintain a constant velocity. That is why your balloon drifts off. Take the same balloon and let it loose inside of the train and it will go straight up.


Now, think of the airplane as the ball, the atmosphere as the train car, and the earth as the train. Except there's even more advantage for the plane, because it is self powered and able to change its relative position to the earth's surface at will.

Jmakin,

Obviously I know all of this. His point is still incredibly wrong. I trie to simplify things as much as possible for obvious reasons. I assumed he would bring up drag which is easy to address.