CreateDebate


Goldtop's Waterfall RSS

This personal waterfall shows you all of Goldtop's arguments, looking across every debate.
1 point

That's where I found it. At Harvard.

You found it on Google when you did a quick search, I have shown you where it came from because that's exactly what it says on the article, but you never read it so you wouldn't know.

Isn't it interesting that you would sooner attack semantics like a seven year old child instead of learn something by actually reading the article?

You're just propping up the full length mirror again. YOU didn't read it, which is obvious when you referred to absolute time, which is not mentioned in the article at all. Once again, you have shown us all how much of an utter buffoon you are.

Goldtop(166) Clarified
1 point

There is no doubt that it is corrupt then. Even if part of it is true, NASA only stamp it when the BS needs a 'shut up, NASA approves so don't question it.' authoritative nature to it.

I have no idea why you keep harping about NASA, they have absolutely nothing to do with any of this. That's just a red herring.

Goldtop(166) Clarified
1 point

I assumed your comeback would be the GoPro camera videos

I don't need to talk about GoPro camera videos because I've seen lots of them. So what.

I was talking about the flat earth model, the motion of the sun and moon which is simply impossible as a moving object will move in a straight line, but they are moving in circles, how is this magical feat accomplished?

Goldtop(166) Clarified
1 point

it's still a design/destiny-map that isn't really 'out there' to explore but instead some kind of mystical map of many realms

So, it's all just a fantasy?

I've seen the GoPro cameras leaving Earth; they support the Flat Earther's idea of what's outside of the sky NASA come up with excuses for that too.

Stick to the truth, don't lie.

Goldtop(166) Clarified
1 point

That isn't Netwon's first law.

Your ignorant denials have been noted

the WTC buildings on 9/11, because you rapidly begin to understand what a total pack of lies people were fed.

Terrific, another 911 nutter. Get a brain.

Goldtop(166) Clarified
1 point

That isn't Netwon's first law.

Your ignorant denials have been noted

the WTC buildings on 9/11, because you rapidly begin to understand what a total pack of lies people were fed.

Terrific, another 911 nutter. Get a brain.

Goldtop(166) Clarified
1 point

I'll explain it later (involves them moving by either magic or magnetism

Sorry, but neither of those are valid as there is zero evidence for both.

the first law is obvious if the third law is true

Not really, they are different laws. One is about a force being exerted on an object while the other is simply the object moving in a straight line at the same velocity.

Goldtop(166) Clarified
1 point

You mentioned on another thread where I was banned by the cowardly BurritoBreath about Newtons laws, I'll paste it here where BurritoBrain can't do anything but rant.

The first and third law are actually the same law, I do not know why they just split those two elements of the same law. How is that law not operating in a Flat Earth?

The first and third are entirely different laws. Let's look at the first law - every object in a state of uniform motion will remain in that state of motion unless an external force acts on it.

What that law says is that after a force has been exerted on an object, the object will move in a straight line and continue to keep moving until another force has acted upon it.

The third law says for every action there is an equal and opposite reaction.

What that law says is that when the force is exerted on the object, the reaction from the object will be equal to the force that was exerted on it and it will react in the opposite direction. It is the second law that qualifies this law in a formula - force equals mass times acceleration. F=ma.

These laws are being violated on a flat earth model by the motion of the Sun and Moon. Both are in a constant state of acceleration as they move in circles above a flat earth. This is impossible unless there is some force constantly acting upon them in order for them to move in a circle.

Since the flat earth model denies the existence of gravity, flat earthers are left without an explanation and evidence for their model.

Goldtop(166) Clarified
1 point

my article is from Harvard, so it kind of assumes the reader has been to high school.

Lol. No, the article is from the Royal Astronomical Society stored in the NASA Astrophysics Data System (ADS) on a server at High Energy Astrophysics Division at the Harvard-Smithsonian Center for Astrophysics.

And, you never read it, but instead blurted out something entirely different than what was presented in the article. You have made a buffoon of yourself once again. Congratulations!

Goldtop(166) Clarified
2 points

Would you like me to explain my claim that the Sun is hot too?

I don't think you can explain that without looking it up.

1 point

Newton's laws are not accurate at long distances because he assumed time had an absolute value.

Yet, the article you just googled says nothing about time causing issues with Newtons laws at long distance. Obviously, you didn't read it.

That is literally information you should have received in middle school or, at best, high school. Where were you guys when you should have been at school?

On the Validity of Newton's Law At A Long Distance

The paper you just googled and didn't read is a hypothesis regarding stability of galaxy clusters. There is no evidence this hypothesis is correct. But, we know you just pulled it up on a search, because I just did the same thing and found the same article. You didn't read this in middle school or high school or ever.

Goldtop(166) Clarified
1 point

Looks like your alt LordofIdiocy is down voting me and up voting you again. It's funny how you still believe voting has any relevance whatsoever. So childish.

que ban from Burrito/LordofFiction

Goldtop(166) Clarified
-1 points

You'll need to shut your stupid mouth or I'll kick you out of the thread.

As I suspected, you can't explain your claims. Here's how you operate:

1. Make ridiculous claim.

2. Ban those who question your claim.

3. Revel in your victory.

4. Wash. Rinse. Repeat.

Goldtop(166) Clarified
1 point

Newton's equations don't work over long distances

You'll need to explain that claim and provide examples.

Goldtop(166) Clarified
1 point

people trust NASA

NASA has absolutely nothing to do with this. They do not determine the shape of the earth, that is done by a completely different organization, which you simply are ingnorant to understand.

Goldtop(166) Clarified
1 point

only the third law of Newton would be true under the coherent flat-earth model

But, the flat earth model violates all three laws among a host of others.

Einstein already debunked Newton

No, he didn't. He corrected Newton on a few points. Other than that, Newtons laws hold.

Sorry, you're really going to have to put your big boy pants on for this and try to come up with something valid. Right now, you're just shooting blanks.

Goldtop(166) Clarified
1 point

I can and have

But, you haven't formed an argument for a flat earth, no one has.

In fact, we even got down to the very basics of violating Newton's laws of motion, which your claims do violate, despite the fact it has never occurred anywhere in nature. We then went on further to establish you didn't know those laws, couldn't come up with an explanation, so you just disappeared.

Goldtop(166) Clarified
1 point

The fervour with which you loathe me, mock me and spit at my metaphorical face

I do no such thing, this is just how you react to others when you can't form an argument to defend your irrational beliefs about a flat earth.

perceive the truth without ego and sheep-think involved

If by ego, you refer to facts and by sheep-think you refer to evidence, then yes, that is how it works.

Goldtop(166) Clarified
1 point

it is usually better to know something that most don't

You know as well as I do that you don't know the earth is flat, we determined that through our discussions on the topic. Your entire education on flat earth logistics comes from youtube videos of other flat earth proponents who attempt to show the earth is flat by placing a camera on a tennis court.

"See, the tennis court is flat, ergo..."

Goldtop(166) Clarified
0 points

I'm not him

And, I'm sure you would like everyone to believe that regardless of how indistinguishable your posts are from Burrito's.

people from CD know me as FactMachine

Was that one of the many accounts you have in addition to these others?

If not, perhaps you could explain why you are as equally brain dead as Burrito, why your posts and threads you create are literally identical to his?

Goldtop(166) Clarified
1 point

I'm saying that there are reasons I dare not come out as a flat-earther

Are you also afraid of losing your Fellowship from Cambridge? Or, was the constant hysterical laughter finally getting to you?

Goldtop(166) Clarified
0 points

Thank you for your clarification, Burrito. I know how important it is for you to not make spelling mistakes when you offer nonsensical word salads topped off with dried profanity crumbs.

Goldtop(166) Clarified
1 point

you didn't know the difference between a subscript and a superscript.

No, that was you who doesn't still yet know what a subscript is, then you went on to lie about what he said when YOU changed his story.

How quickly they forget. Lol.

Goldtop(166) Clarified
1 point

There are no research papers on turning male mammals into female mammals

Your claim is that it couldn't be done, do you have evidence to support that?

ADHD, mild autism

Those can be found in non-transgender folks, a lot of them.

recent social movements made it faddish to claim the biologically disjunctive gender

What social movements do you refer and how did they lead to fads?


1 of 15 Pages: Next >>

Results Per Page: [12] [24] [48] [96]