Jump to content
Shilohsfoal

Predictions

Recommended Posts

On 11/19/2017 at 9:17 PM, Retrobyter said:

Shalom, Jude1:3.

You're right. You probably SHOULD have started a new thread on this one!

 

I made another thread in the theology section if you want to check out :

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, Enoch2021 said:

This has nothing Whatsoever to do with My Argument, it's Irrelevant IN TOTO. Ergo...

Red Herring Fallacy:  is a fallacy in which an irrelevant topic is presented in order to divert attention from the original issue.
http://www.nizkor.org/features/fallacies/red-herring.html

Leading to a Straw Man (Fallacy): when a person simply ignores a person's actual position and substitutes a distorted, exaggerated or misrepresented version of that position.
http://www.nizkor.org/features/fallacies/straw-man.html

Shalom, Enoch2021.

<Sigh.> Well, let's start over. You see, what I said had EVERYTHING to do with "your argument," and it's not "irrelevant" at all. You had mentioned three verses of Scripture that talked about the "world" when you were trying to make an argument for the "EARTH" being "stable." Observe:

(1 Chronicles 16:30) "Fear before him, all the earth: the world also shall be stable, that it be NOT-MOVED."

(Psalms 93:1) "The LORD reigneth, he is clothed with majesty; the LORD is clothed with strength, wherewith he hath girded himself: the world also is stablished, that it CANNOT BE MOVED."

(Psalms 96:10) "Say among the heathen that the LORD reigneth: the world also shall be established that it shall NOT BE MOVED: he shall judge the people righteously."

In all three cases, it is the WORLD that is stable or stablished or established, not the EARTH! Understand? Therefore, those three Scriptures are IRRELEVANT to your argument that "The Earth doesn't Orbit the Sun. It's Stationary... Non-Spinning 'Immovable'."

So, when you said,

5 hours ago, Enoch2021 said:

They "Stay" as they "Lay".  The Earth is Stationary.

This is a FALSE conclusion!

5 hours ago, Enoch2021 said:

You didn't have a "First".  

Sure I did. In my very first paragraph, I began with "First of all,...."

5 hours ago, Enoch2021 said:

Are you reading a different thread and responding here?   

btw: It was Joshua not Moses in the passage I referenced.

Ergo, yet another -- Red Herring Fallacy leading to a Straw Man Fallacy (SEE Above).

You're right; it was Joshua not Moses, but this is no "red herring"; your fourth verse quoted was Joshua 10:12 in which were the words "l`eeyneey Yisraa'eel," meaning "to-the-eyes of-Israel." Thus, his command to the sun and the moon to stand still was from the perspective of Israel!

Let's establish an understanding of a "frame of reference":

Let's say we have two trains traveling on parallel tracks, one going 60 mph (train A) and the other going 55 mph (train B). The trains ride very smoothly, and neither has any acceleration. An observer is on train A. The train A and the observer are BOTH traveling at 60 mph, but on the train (without looking out the window), if the observer was to drop a rock to the floor, it would fall straight down to his feet. That is his "frame of reference." Within the train car, he believes he is "stationary" with what happens within the train. When he looks out the window and looks inside the window of train B, he would see train B going backward from his perspective by 5 mph. If another person on train B were to drop a rock "straight down," the observer in train A would see the rock take a trajectory path backward, starting initially with a backward velocity of 5 mph and gradually adding vertical velocity downward as it accelerates in earth's pull of gravity. The path the rock would take would look like half a parabola. If the observer on train A were to draw the curtains closed, he would notice no change at all to the movements people and objects would make within the train as if he was standing still back on the platform.

Now, we look at train B traveling at 55 mph. Another observer, the one who dropped a rock straight down, has his OWN "frame of reference." With a smooth ride and no acceleration or deceleration and with the curtains closed, he, too, would experience events on his train as though he was standing still back on the platform. However, when he opens his curtains, he sees train A traveling at 5 mph forward, and if he saw a person on train A drop a rock, the path of the rock would look like a half parabola moving forward.

Which one of these people is "stationary?" NEITHER ONE in reality; however, each has his own "frame of reference," and each one from his  perspective is "stationary." If they didn't have another train or scenery to compare against, they would both suspect that they were not moving. If the trains were traveling through a blizzard with the whole scenery washed in a "white out," they would never know that they were moving at all; however, each would think that the OTHER train was moving at 5 mph, forward or backward.

5 hours ago, Enoch2021 said:

No that's called "Water Draining". ;)

Water draining down a drain doesn't go straight down. It SPINS counterclockwise down the drain. That SPIN is called the "Coriolis Effect."

5 hours ago, Enoch2021 said:

So a 'wiki/google' Scientist, eh?

No, brother, not anymore than you are a nizkor logician! (http://www.nizkor.org/features/fallacies/red-herring.html).

5 hours ago, Enoch2021 said:

No it's a "Pseudo" or "Fictitious" force.   Keeping with your 'wiki/google" acumen...

"Motion relative to a rotating frame results in another fictitious force: the Coriolis force."
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Centrifugal_force

It's actually not a Force at all but rather an "EFFECT".  And then it's only an "APPARENT"; "Apparent" meaning "NOT REAL".

I KNOW that! That's why I put the word "force" in quotation marks! "Apparent," though, doesn't mean it's "not real"; it means from a person's point of view, it "LOOKS LIKE" a force!

5 hours ago, Enoch2021 said:

"Within its rotating coordinate system, the object acted on by the CORIOLIS EFFECT APPEARS to deflect off of its path of motion. THIS DEFLECTION IS NOT REAL. It only APPEARS TO HAPPEN because the coordinate system that establishes a frame of reference for the observer is also rotating."
http://www.encyclopedia.com/earth-and-environment/atmosphere-and-weather/weather-and-climate-terms-and-concepts/coriolis-effect

You can't "bend" something that's NOT REAL;)

No, that's not true. It IS a very real deflection, but it's not a single force called "the Coriolis FORCE" that deflects it! It is a SYSTEM of forces that, acting together, give the appearance of a single force acting upon the deflection when it is really just inertia!

5 hours ago, Enoch2021 said:

Profound.

 

So Hurricanes always spin counterclockwise (Northern Hemisphere) because they are formed by low pressure systems? :huh:

Define Non-Sequitur Fallacy...?

So Cyclones always spin clockwise (Southern Hemisphere) because they are formed by HIGH pressure systems ??  lol

No, silly. Hurricanes always SPIN (the Coriolis Effect) in a counterclockwise direction in the Northern Hemisphere because they are formed by low pressure systems.

In the Southern Hemisphere, the low pressure systems SPIN (the Coriolis Effect) in a clockwise direction, and therefore, the hurricanes that form there are likewise SPINNING in a clockwise direction!

(More later.)

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Retrobyter said:

Well, let's start over. You see, what I said had EVERYTHING to do with "your argument," and it's not "irrelevant" at all. You had mentioned three verses of Scripture that talked about the "world" when you were trying to make an argument for the "EARTH" being "stable." Observe:

(1 Chronicles 16:30) "Fear before him, all the earth: the world also shall be stable, that it be NOT-MOVED."

(Psalms 93:1) "The LORD reigneth, he is clothed with majesty; the LORD is clothed with strength, wherewith he hath girded himself: the world also is stablished, that it CANNOT BE MOVED."

(Psalms 96:10) "Say among the heathen that the LORD reigneth: the world also shall be established that it shall NOT BE MOVED: he shall judge the people righteously."

In all three cases, it is the WORLD that is stable or stablished or established, not the EARTH! Understand? Therefore, those three Scriptures are IRRELEVANT to your argument that "The Earth doesn't Orbit the Sun. It's Stationary... Non-Spinning 'Immovable'."

Not the Earth, eh? 

"World" in all three passages: 

Strongs Hebrew: H8398
תֵּבֵל
têbêl
tay-bale'
From H2986; THE EARTH (as moist and therefore inhabited); by extension the globe; by implication its inhabitants; specifically a particular land, as Babylonia or Palestine: - habitable part, world.

 

Quote

Sure I did. In my very first paragraph, I began with "First of all,...."

Yes, but you had no point.

 

Quote

You're right; it was Joshua not Moses, but this is no "red herring"; your fourth verse quoted was Joshua 10:12 in which were the words "l`eeyneey Yisraa'eel," meaning "to-the-eyes of-Israel."

I don't care if it said "to the Eyes of Ground Squirrels".

 

Quote

 Thus, his command to the sun and the moon to stand still was from the perspective of Israel!

:huh: Are you saying that, to the Amorites... it was the Earth standing still? :rolleyes:

 

Oh Brother...

Quote

 

Let's establish an understanding of a "frame of reference":

Let's say we have two trains traveling on parallel tracks, one going 60 mph (train A) and the other going 55 mph (train B). The trains ride very smoothly, and neither has any acceleration. An observer is on train A. The train A and the observer are BOTH traveling at 60 mph, but on the train (without looking out the window), if the observer was to drop a rock to the floor, it would fall straight down to his feet.

 

Another Red Herring Fallacy and a False Equivalence Fallacy.

How is this tied to your Argument??

 

Quote

That is his "frame of reference." Within the train car, he believes he is "stationary" with what happens within the train.

If the Train is Stationary it's NOT MOVING.  If "he" thinks he's Stationary when the Train's Moving... then "he's" a Moron.

 

 

Quote

Which one of these people is "stationary?"

The One that's NOT MOVING.

 

Quote

Water draining down a drain doesn't go straight down.

Profound.

 

Quote

It SPINS counterclockwise down the drain.

That depends on the Shape of the Basin.

 

Quote

That SPIN is called the "Coriolis Effect."

:groan: What On Earth??

SPIN does not = Coriolis Effect. smh

This is the Coriolis Effect...

"CC.12 The Coriolis Effect :

When set in motion, freely moving objects, including *AIR* [Atmosphere] and *WATER* masses [Clouds/Water Vapor], move in straight paths while the Earth continues to 

                                                                      ROTATE INDEPENDENTLY.

Because freely moving objects ARE NOT carried with the Earth as it Rotates, they are subject to an APPARENT DEFLECTION called the “Coriolis Effect.” To an observer rotating with the Earth, freely moving objects that travel in a straight line appear to travel in a curved path on the Earth."
Segar, Douglas A; Introduction to Ocean Sciences, 2nd Edition: Critical Concept Reminders -- CC.12 The Coriolis Effect (pp. 313, 314, 323, 324), 
ISBN: 978-0-393-92629-3, 2007.
http://www.wwnorton.com/college/geo/oceansci/cc/cc12.html

 

Quote

I KNOW that! That's why I put the word "force" in quotation marks!

Ahhh, not a Chance.

 

Quote

"Apparent," though, doesn't mean it's "not real"; it means from a person's point of view, it "LOOKS LIKE" a force!

Right in the Face of...

"Within its rotating coordinate system, the object acted on by the CORIOLIS EFFECT APPEARS to deflect off of its path of motion. THIS DEFLECTION IS NOT REAL. It only APPEARS TO HAPPEN because the coordinate system that establishes a frame of reference for the observer is also rotating."
http://www.encyclopedia.com/earth-and-environment/atmosphere-and-weather/weather-and-climate-terms-and-concepts/coriolis-effect

Read this ^^^^^ Real Slow 5 Times.

 

Quote

No, that's not true. It IS a very real deflection

Right in the Face of...

"Within its rotating coordinate system, the object acted on by the CORIOLIS EFFECT APPEARS to deflect off of its path of motion. THIS DEFLECTION IS NOT REAL. It only APPEARS TO HAPPEN because the coordinate system that establishes a frame of reference for the observer is also rotating."
http://www.encyclopedia.com/earth-and-environment/atmosphere-and-weather/weather-and-climate-terms-and-concepts/coriolis-effect

 

Quote

but it's not a single force called "the Coriolis FORCE" that deflects it!

:huh:

 

Quote

It is a SYSTEM of forces that, acting together, give the appearance of a single force acting upon the deflection when it is really just inertia!

Factually Incorrect, AGAIN...

"CC.12 The Coriolis Effect :

When set in motion, freely moving objects, including *AIR* [Atmosphere] and *WATER* masses [Clouds/Water Vapor], move in straight paths while the Earth continues to 

                                                                      ROTATE INDEPENDENTLY.

Because freely moving objects ARE NOT carried with the Earth as it Rotates, they are subject to an APPARENT DEFLECTION called the “Coriolis Effect.” To an observer rotating with the Earth, freely moving objects that travel in a straight line appear to travel in a curved path on the Earth."
Segar, Douglas A; Introduction to Ocean Sciences, 2nd Edition: Critical Concept Reminders -- CC.12 The Coriolis Effect (pp. 313, 314, 323, 324), 
ISBN: 978-0-393-92629-3, 2007.
http://www.wwnorton.com/college/geo/oceansci/cc/cc12.html

 

Quote

No, silly. 1.) Hurricanes always SPIN (the Coriolis Effect) in a counterclockwise direction in the Northern Hemisphere 2.) because they are formed by low pressure systems.

You're calling me silly after this performance? :rolleyes: 

1.)  SPIN does not = Coriolis Effect. (SEE above)

The conditions needed are:

Two differing Frames of Reference (One Rotating Coordinate System (Non-Inertial) --- The Earth and One Non-Rotating Coordinate System (Inertial) --- The Atmosphere...and anything in it).

2.) Scientifically Validate "The Cause" of the direction (Counterclockwise or Clockwise) of the Storm...

a.  What Phenomenon was Observed...?
b.  Post the Formal Scientific Hypothesis then EXPERIMENT that validates your claim...?
c.  Highlight the "Independent Variable" that was used in the TEST...?
d.  Post the Null Hypothesis that was Rejected/Falsified...?

Storms don't SPIN in a Direction "BECAUSE" they are formed by low pressure systems; it's Non-Sequitur Fallacy.

 

Quote

1.) In the Southern Hemisphere, the low pressure systems SPIN (the Coriolis Effect) in a clockwise direction, 2.) and therefore, the hurricanes that form there are likewise SPINNING in a clockwise direction!

1.)  SPIN does not = Coriolis Effect. (SEE above) 

1.) Premise and 2.) "Therefore"... are Non-Sequitur because they're Circular...

You essentially said: In the Southern Hemisphere low pressure systems spin in a Clockwise Direction; Therefore, the low pressure systems likewise are spinning Clockwise.

Round and Round you go. :cool:

 

Quote

(More later.)

I can't wait. 

 

regards

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

×