Anonymous
7/15/2025, 9:38:07 PM No.22941947
Have you considered the posibility that Ptolemy´s geocentric cosmological model to be the truth?
Replies:
Thread 22941947 - /bant/ [Archived: 322 hours ago]
Anonymous
7/15/2025, 9:40:36 PM No.22941948
>>22941947 (OP)
I'd sooner believe in koreshan hollow earth
I'd sooner believe in koreshan hollow earth
Replies:
Anonymous
7/15/2025, 9:42:41 PM No.22941949
>>22941947 (OP)
No.
My brain is so fucked up from years of drug abuse and nonstop shitposting that I can only understand the concept of fucking women in the ass, of dick going into a female asshole. Nothing else interests me at the moment.
No.
My brain is so fucked up from years of drug abuse and nonstop shitposting that I can only understand the concept of fucking women in the ass, of dick going into a female asshole. Nothing else interests me at the moment.
Replies:
Anonymous
7/15/2025, 9:43:04 PM No.22941950
>>22941947 (OP)
No, the earth is also not a stationary ball. The surface of water does not curve, ever, to infinity. What is it with people and their ball? can not let go of that damn ball. Apparently people need to have a full "object" to have a sense of self. The level nature of this plain goes on, and nobody knows what's beyond Antarctica or how this physical existence was created. This is what scares people I guess.
No, the earth is also not a stationary ball. The surface of water does not curve, ever, to infinity. What is it with people and their ball? can not let go of that damn ball. Apparently people need to have a full "object" to have a sense of self. The level nature of this plain goes on, and nobody knows what's beyond Antarctica or how this physical existence was created. This is what scares people I guess.
Replies:
Anonymous
7/15/2025, 9:43:37 PM No.22941951
>>22941947 (OP)
ive considered the possibility the soientists are wrong about everything.
ive considered the possibility the soientists are wrong about everything.
Anonymous
7/15/2025, 9:44:20 PM No.22941952
>>22941949
you could have just said "I am a vile kike"
you could have just said "I am a vile kike"
Replies:
Anonymous
7/15/2025, 9:44:22 PM No.22941953
Anonymous
7/15/2025, 9:45:06 PM No.22941954
Only what I perceive is correct and as I do not perceive the Earth moving, it is stationary. The sun is also a solid disc and not a ball of fire.
Anonymous
7/15/2025, 9:50:08 PM No.22941957
>>22941949
thanks for the book review on the Talmud, faggot.
thanks for the book review on the Talmud, faggot.
Replies:
Anonymous
7/15/2025, 9:51:15 PM No.22941958
>>22941947 (OP)
No, it's retarded
>But muh epicycles explain every thing
Heliocentrism explains all of that, without just adding more until the model fits observations again.
No, it's retarded
>But muh epicycles explain every thing
Heliocentrism explains all of that, without just adding more until the model fits observations again.
Anonymous
7/15/2025, 9:54:15 PM No.22941959
>>22941947 (OP)
Astronomers who have recently re examined Ptolemys original data soon realized that retrocalculations of the planets proved that many of Ptolemys so called observations were wrong.
The errors were gross even by the standards of ancient astronomy that there is also no longer any doubt that Ptolemy plagiarized the work of the earlier Hipparchus.
the earlier star catalogue compiled by Hipparchus conducted his observations from the island of Rhodes.
This Greek island lies five degrees of latitude north of Alexandria (where Ptolemy was).
This makes for a five degree band of southern stars that can be seen from Alexandria but not from Rhodes.
Not a single one of the 1022 stars that Ptolemy listed in his catalogue is to be found in this five degree band.
Moreover, every example given in the Almagest of how to work out spherical astronomy problems is given for a latitude the same as that of Rhodes.
all his own observations are fraudulent, so far as we can test them.
Many of the observations that he attributes to other astronomers are also fraud that he has committed.
His work is riddled with theoretical errors and with failures of comprehension.
His models of the moon and Mercury conflict violently with elementary observation and must be counted as failures.
in rejecting the earlier belief that the planets revolved around the Sun, Ptolemy was responsible for preventing the advance of astronomy for a millennium.
Ptolemy also has caused us to lose much of the genuine work in Greek astronomy and it would have been better for astronomy had the Almagest never been written.
Astronomers who have recently re examined Ptolemys original data soon realized that retrocalculations of the planets proved that many of Ptolemys so called observations were wrong.
The errors were gross even by the standards of ancient astronomy that there is also no longer any doubt that Ptolemy plagiarized the work of the earlier Hipparchus.
the earlier star catalogue compiled by Hipparchus conducted his observations from the island of Rhodes.
This Greek island lies five degrees of latitude north of Alexandria (where Ptolemy was).
This makes for a five degree band of southern stars that can be seen from Alexandria but not from Rhodes.
Not a single one of the 1022 stars that Ptolemy listed in his catalogue is to be found in this five degree band.
Moreover, every example given in the Almagest of how to work out spherical astronomy problems is given for a latitude the same as that of Rhodes.
all his own observations are fraudulent, so far as we can test them.
Many of the observations that he attributes to other astronomers are also fraud that he has committed.
His work is riddled with theoretical errors and with failures of comprehension.
His models of the moon and Mercury conflict violently with elementary observation and must be counted as failures.
in rejecting the earlier belief that the planets revolved around the Sun, Ptolemy was responsible for preventing the advance of astronomy for a millennium.
Ptolemy also has caused us to lose much of the genuine work in Greek astronomy and it would have been better for astronomy had the Almagest never been written.
Anonymous
7/15/2025, 9:57:22 PM No.22941960
Anonymous
7/15/2025, 9:58:29 PM No.22941961
>>22941947 (OP)
It serves a purpose.
The mathematics they dreamed up to support it was absolutely wild.
So when I consider the current state of physics, cosmology and even mathematics today, with all the bending over backwards to make the theories work, I am reminded of the Ptolemaic model.
>"We found another sub atomic particle to add to our zoo! Its all very complicated..."
>"Hmm, there must be some form of dark matter..."
>"Why yes, of course there are multiple infinities, some bigger than others..."
It serves a purpose.
The mathematics they dreamed up to support it was absolutely wild.
So when I consider the current state of physics, cosmology and even mathematics today, with all the bending over backwards to make the theories work, I am reminded of the Ptolemaic model.
>"We found another sub atomic particle to add to our zoo! Its all very complicated..."
>"Hmm, there must be some form of dark matter..."
>"Why yes, of course there are multiple infinities, some bigger than others..."
Replies:
Anonymous
7/15/2025, 10:01:51 PM No.22941962
>>22941961
exactly the underlying problem is basic to science.
A theory is tested by comparing predictions derived from it with observations.
If a theorist merely introduces some new and arbitrary modification in his theory to fit the new observations, like the epicycles of Ptolemys cosmos, scientific method is abandoned.
Yet Big Bang theory is supported in great part by arbitrary, hypothetical entities, such as cosmic strings. It's disturbing to see that there is a new theory every time there's a new observation.
Despite the many new hypotheses, there remains no way to begin with the perfect universe of the Big Bang and arrive at the complex, structured universe of today in twenty billion years.
As one COBE scientist of the University of California at Berkeley, put it:
>"Using the forces we now know, you can't make the universe we know now."
exactly the underlying problem is basic to science.
A theory is tested by comparing predictions derived from it with observations.
If a theorist merely introduces some new and arbitrary modification in his theory to fit the new observations, like the epicycles of Ptolemys cosmos, scientific method is abandoned.
Yet Big Bang theory is supported in great part by arbitrary, hypothetical entities, such as cosmic strings. It's disturbing to see that there is a new theory every time there's a new observation.
Despite the many new hypotheses, there remains no way to begin with the perfect universe of the Big Bang and arrive at the complex, structured universe of today in twenty billion years.
As one COBE scientist of the University of California at Berkeley, put it:
>"Using the forces we now know, you can't make the universe we know now."
Anonymous
7/15/2025, 10:04:25 PM No.22941963
>>22941961
>"Why yes, of course there are multiple infinities, some bigger than others..."
What's wrong with this? If you have a bijection for N -> R lets hear it.
>"Why yes, of course there are multiple infinities, some bigger than others..."
What's wrong with this? If you have a bijection for N -> R lets hear it.
Anonymous
7/15/2025, 10:05:12 PM No.22941964
>>22941947 (OP)
This is how all planets orbit around earth in the geocentric model. Not in an oblong fashion like you'd expect.
This is how all planets orbit around earth in the geocentric model. Not in an oblong fashion like you'd expect.
Anonymous
7/15/2025, 10:09:53 PM No.22941966
Anonymous
7/15/2025, 10:10:39 PM No.22941967
>>22941947 (OP)
No, I'm not retarded.
No, I'm not retarded.
Anonymous
7/15/2025, 10:11:02 PM No.22941968
>>22941947 (OP)
Never, Copernicus dick was huge just like mine
I'm open to discuss any alternative theories as long as they respect the known facts about earth not being the center of the universe and the colossal tortoise carrying it on its shell
Never, Copernicus dick was huge just like mine
I'm open to discuss any alternative theories as long as they respect the known facts about earth not being the center of the universe and the colossal tortoise carrying it on its shell
Anonymous
7/15/2025, 10:14:56 PM No.22941970
>>22941947 (OP)
It's incompatible with phases is the main reason this doesn't really work. Sure the math works out the same if you frame it this way, but it makes it a hell of a lot easier to think about orbits by using the largest object as the middle.
>>22941948
Evidence of a hollow earth: Fantasy books
>>22941950
You give water this enigmatic property of 'does not curve' but that's a retarded concept that doesn't really MEAN anything. Why does water lay flat? It's because gravity causes water to fall to the lowest place it can, in a square container with even gravity, that's certainly flat. But that doesn't mean that at a macro level the earth must be flat, just that gravity at a small scale appears to be homogenous. But we know that isn't true, since gravity varies by location. For example, gravity is weaker at the poles due to lack of rotational inertia.
It's incompatible with phases is the main reason this doesn't really work. Sure the math works out the same if you frame it this way, but it makes it a hell of a lot easier to think about orbits by using the largest object as the middle.
>>22941948
Evidence of a hollow earth: Fantasy books
>>22941950
You give water this enigmatic property of 'does not curve' but that's a retarded concept that doesn't really MEAN anything. Why does water lay flat? It's because gravity causes water to fall to the lowest place it can, in a square container with even gravity, that's certainly flat. But that doesn't mean that at a macro level the earth must be flat, just that gravity at a small scale appears to be homogenous. But we know that isn't true, since gravity varies by location. For example, gravity is weaker at the poles due to lack of rotational inertia.
Anonymous
7/15/2025, 10:18:46 PM No.22941971
>>22941947 (OP)
As the only place in the known universe that can support life, earth is indeed the centre of the universe.
As the only place in the known universe that can support life, earth is indeed the centre of the universe.
Anonymous
7/15/2025, 10:21:06 PM No.22941972
>>22941947 (OP)
If it was, we could never have sent probes to other planets using the calculations and spacecraft that we did.
Unless you think it’s all been a big coverup.
If it was, we could never have sent probes to other planets using the calculations and spacecraft that we did.
Unless you think it’s all been a big coverup.