Gab@StFerdinandIII - https://unstabbinated.substack.com/
Plenty of cults exist - every cult has its 'religious dogma', its idols, its 'prophets', its 'science', its 'proof' and its intolerant liturgy of demands. Cults everywhere: Corona, 'The Science' or Scientism, Islam, the State, the cult of Gender Fascism, Marxism, Darwin and Evolution, Globaloneywarming, Changing Climate, Abortion...
Tempus Fugit Memento Mori - Time Flies Remember Death
Now let’s discuss tidal flows, another Fanboy ‘proof’ of the ‘rotating’ Earth and of the magical-druidic properties of that most famous of amen words - ‘gravity’.
We head back to the chapels of Apostle Newton and Messiah Al of the Einstein, the Lord, the giver of sentience. In summary, the standard Newtonian-heliocentric model, explicated through its divine professors, relies on a magical, invisible tether to explain the movement of our oceans. Canonical dogma demands that:
One part of the Standard Model states that the Moon, resting in a dead ‘vacuum’ 238,000 miles away, 1/81 the mass of this planet, uses the amen-word ‘gravity’ (now bow your heads and pray), to reach through the vast void and drag giga-tonnes of water around the Earth every single day. A second explanation, based on the prophecies of the Messiah A-Stone (Ein Stein); the Moon through its very limited mass ‘displaces’ space-time and drags the oceans on this planet.
The volumes involved are unimaginable and the movement, violent. Does the above pass the farmer’s common-sense test?
The gospel of the Standard Model does not make sense if we have a look at the physical mechanics of the oceans or the incredible volume of water being lifted and pushed (a tide is water being lifted and heaved, they are not ‘flows’ like a river current). If we consider the real nature of tidal flows, we will see the massive anomalies the establishment tries to hide with their arcane maths.
In the simplest terms, according to oceanographic science, tidal flows are the cyclical rising and falling of the Earth’s oceanic baseline. There are many reasons why water will oscillate against its natural baseline within a container but as usual ‘The Science’ will only allow one answer, one model interpretation.
“Whatever difficulties we may have in forming a consistent idea of the constitution of the aether, there can be no doubt that the interplanetary and interstellar spaces are not empty, but are occupied by a material substance or body, which is certainly the largest, and probably the most uniform body of which we have any knowledge.” — James Clerk Maxwell (a practical man who confirmed classical electromagnetism and that space is not a vacuum, but a fluid plenum).
“There is no energy in matter other than that received from the environment... All perceptible matter comes from a primary substance, or tenuity beyond conception, filling all space, the akasha or luminiferous ether, which is acted upon by the life-giving Prana or creative force, calling into existence, in never-ending cycles all things and phenomena.” — Nikola Tesla (affirming that the environment, the aether and external thermal/kinetic forces drive all physical phenomena, perfectly aligning with the thermal pressure gradient model of wind. Tesla is one of the greatest - and most ignored - engineers in history).
You remember your high school or equivalent science teacher. Before ‘teaching science’ he taught Phys-Ed and was your track coach. Before that German. Before that English. Before that he dabbled in maths for a few years. He was trained in ‘science’ for a few weeks in the summer. When you arrived in class chewing gum and telling silly jokes, you were surprised. What is the Phys Ed guy doing here? Too early for track practice. Am I in trouble again?
As your track coach hurdled through the ‘science’ and ‘physics’ curriculum he went through the Standard Model and undoubtedly alighted on the ‘Wind’ concept. He related this to sports of course. Wind was now equated with competition, opposition, movement, spinning, ‘survival of the fittest’, ‘evolution’, things-happen and various sports phenomena. Truly inspiring. But then your common-sense-critical-thinking module was turned on. Does this guy actually know what he is on about?
Wind is an issue for the Standard Model (below), but the issues are never discussed because they are not in the standard state-narrative-textbooks. This is called propaganda.
Let’s run a quick audit on the science curriculum to understand exactly what is being taught and why. The claim that a rotation is necessary to create wind is physically inaccurate. To be fair this is not precisely what is taught in the ‘school’ systems but it is certainly implied and it is wrong.
The claim is that there is a middle-age-overweight-bulge, nicely sited around the Earth’s waist. You would think the spinning ballerina of the standard model would be in finer fettle. Scientism and its Fanboys always use the ‘bulge’ as a ‘proof’ of heliocentricity and their model. This is of course more than tendentious; it is tedious and wrong. The 2 quotes above indicate why. The post below elucidates. A bulge, if it even exists, does not need to be generated by rotational movement.
The modern scientific establishment expects you to believe the Earth is a spinning water balloon flying through a dead, empty vacuum. Descartes, Hook, Leibniz, Faraday, Maxwell, Lodge and the founding naturalists of classical physics knew better. They understood that the universe is a highly pressurized fluid machine.
In fluid dynamics, a non-rigid body (the Earth) subjected to the immense, rotating pressure gradients of Descartes and Lodge’s aether would settle into an oblate shape, more expansive at the equator, ever so slightly flattened at the poles. This fact can be replicated in a lab and in the classroom.
The heliocentric argument for the bulge and the oblate shape of the Earth, dates back to Saint Newton of Gravity and the Light Corpuscle. Both theories are wrong.
Using centrifugal dynamics Newton calculated that if the Earth were rotating (and he assumed, orbiting the Sun), the centrifugal force would push the mass outward at the equator. His ratio was 1:230 (the poles are 1 slice out of 230 flatter than at the equator), or a 17 miles bulge at the equator. There is nothing wrong with this idea. You can take a non rigid ball and confirm this for yourself as you spin it at a high speed.
To prove Newton right, the French Academy of Sciences launched two large surveying missions in the 1730s (Terrall, 2002). One team went to Lapland near the North Pole and another to the equator in South America in the appropriately named Ecuador. They physically measured the ground of one degree of latitude. There are issues with their work and calculations (I list a few problems at the end, in sum their measurements were fraudulent, contain your shock).
Maupertius, a devoted Newtonian who led the effort, claimed a large bulge with a 1:179 ratio, or 22.1 miles. This is what the cult of Newton wanted. Given these ‘proofs’, Newton’s idea of a centrifugal force, forcing an oblate shape onto the Earth seemed sensible. Game on for the Copernicans.
“The universe is not executed twice over, once as reality and once as a copy in the mind. Whether we say the Earth rotates on its axis, or the Earth is at rest and the whole universe rotates around it, the two statements describe the same physical facts.” Mach, E. (1883) The Science of Mechanics. (Reprinted 1919, Chicago: Open Court Publishing).
“We cannot say the Earth rotates ‘relative to space.’ We can only say it rotates relative to the fixed stars. If the stars were to rotate around the Earth, the centrifugal forces and the optical effects [star trails] would be identical.” Barbour, J. (1889) Absolute or Relative Motion? Vol. 1: The Discovery of Dynamics. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Cosmo boy comes over for a visit. It is night time. He takes your iPhone or Android. He sets it on your desk which has a view of the heavens. Energised by Youtube videos and with a magnificent arm wave and a confident voice Cosmo boy declares, “Chud, here is definitive proof that the Earth spins and rotates while singing Largo al Factotum. I am going to turn on your iPhone’s camera, point it Polaris and take time-stamped photos over the next 12 hours. You will see swirling moving stars Chuddy. Twirling and dancing. Case closed on the stationary Earth. It is the science Chud.” Grinning widely and showing imperfect teeth Cosmo boy launches himself into your wine and popcorn and turns on yet another Star Trek re-run.
In related ‘science’ I sat a child on a merry-go-round, took long exposure photos and with great conviction declared that the universe rotates around the ride.
Cosmo boy has committed a fallacy. His iPhone claim is the classic ‘Optical Misinterpretation’ with a pre-determined, tautological claim which of course, proves nothing (Assis 1999). What he has happily identified, surprising himself, is a ‘Star Trail’ photograph or pattern. He is right in that if you leave your iPhone camera on a long exposure (or use an app) pointed at Polaris, the resulting image will show the stars moving in perfect concentric circles around the North Star. Nice one. So, what? This tells Chud precisely nothing.
The Standard Model preaches ‘Relativity’ and relative motion. They do this to avoid absolutes and the fact that light interference experiments do not find a motion of this planet, but they do find an aetheric wind. The aether is anathema to ‘The Science’, given it destroys modern physics and cosmology - especially its foundational and quite mutilated mathematics.
In any mechanical system involving two objects, in this case the Earth and the celestial sphere, if we have ‘relative motion’, it is simply impossible to determine which object is moving based on sight alone.
Cosmo Boy: “The Earth is spinning at 1,000 mph, making the stars look like they are moving.” This is tautological. Your iPhone photos have not proven that this planet is the object in motion.
Counter claim: “The aetheric deck which contains the stars, is rotating above a stationary Earth.” (Sungenis, Bennett, 2014). There is nothing illogical in this claim and this is what the evidence may support.
Evidence: The iPhone captures the exact same celestial image in both scenarios. Use Einstein’s ‘thought experiment’ analogy. Imagine a photo of a moving train taken from a platform which looks identical to a photo of what appears to be a moving platform taken from a train. It is obvious that an image is not a proof of cause. Remember the Corona plandemic cry when people died after being stabbinated, “Correlation is not Causation.” Sounds sciency.
But there is more to it for Cosmo Boy. In fact, his very ‘proof’ is most likely a disproof of his theory that the Earth is twirling around in tights and singing baritone. More here
“All truth passes through three stages. First, it is ridiculed. Second, it is violently opposed. Third, it is accepted as being self-evident.” (Arthur Schopenhauer)
“Scientists...are used to dealing with doubt and uncertainty. All scientific knowledge is uncertain….Science alone of all the subjects contains within itself the lesson of the danger of belief in the infallibility of the greatest teachers in the preceding generation….Learn from science that you must doubt the experts…Science is the belief in the ignorance of experts.” (Richard Feynman, quantum physicist)
Feynman’s adjuration to understand and challenge the ignorance of ‘experts’ is rarely followed. The opposite exists in our world. Submission and compliance to any who profess scientistic divine powers is de facto. Mass deference and fear from Schopenhauer’s establishment ridicule and violence. On full display during the Corona Plandemic Medical Nazism. It should be noted that ‘Corona’ was the name of the US military surveillance and espionage project in the 1960s. They do like to have a laugh.
The Church of Science is full of pharisees, sadducees, wizards and sorcerers who will convince you that dead RNA or bacteria detritus from a bat will kill you; injected poisons are health; plant food has deranged climate; testes are ovaries; and bacteria became you; and the universe is infinite in age and size and ours is one of dozens of such universes. Never question the narratives. When you do, expect to be censored, debarred, ostracised, debanked, perhaps imprisoned, murdered or crucified. Thriving democracy, free speech and all that. This post follows on from an earlier one on issues with the Standard Cosmological Model.
There are many issues with the ‘Standard Model’ of astrophysics and cosmology as outlined on this substack. We will summarise some key areas in this post. Anyone with an open and curious mind, regardless of background or education, can understand that ‘The Science’ in many domains is unsettled, distorted, distended and discordant with reality. So too with physics and cosmology.
The ‘Standard Model’ is not standardised on ‘science’.
It is built on Copernican philosophy and Copernicus and Galileo offered nothing new, no evidence, no observational facts, just philosophy,
Unproven geometrical and ontological demands of Relativities (there are many),
Ad hoc theories with no proof (dark matter, dark energy, endless time) and,
Tautological apriori conclusions and assumptions when viewing and interpreting data to fit a ‘Big Bang’ event model, itself a theory promulgated by a Belgian Catholic priest and astrophysicist (Le Maitre, or ‘the master’).
Most of what is offered is unproven and guesswork. It is almost wholly mathematical.
In short physics, astro-physics and cosmology is a metaphysical-ontological mess, not a ‘model’ of anything. It resembles the cat’s breakfast, not a well-constructed temple or church.
The electric-plasma-aether universe, the aether, the variance of light speed and about 100 other issues outlined on this substack destroy the Relativities (plural) and Big Bang. The ‘Standard Model’ and its components simply do not hold up to scrutiny or common-sense analysis. More here