[ 3 / biz / cgl / ck / diy / fa / ic / jp / lit / sci / vr / vt ] [ index / top / reports ] [ become a patron ] [ status ]
2023-11: Warosu is now out of extended maintenance.

/sci/ - Science & Math

View post   
File: 354 KB, 945x915, the-moon.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
1223432 No.1223432 [Reply] [Original]

Someone linked this URL a few days ago on why gravity is only a "theory".
http://www.bringyou.to/apologetics/p67.htm
I quickly dismissed this article because it had no citation or references. But today I was reading it and after the first paragraph barfed.

>> No.1223434

"the moon goes around the earth. If the theory of gravity were true, it would show that the sun's gravitational force on the moon is much stronger than the earth's gravitational force on the moon, so the moon would go around the sun. Anybody can look up at night and see the obvious gaps in gravity theory"
> The Moon DOES rotate around the sun. Durr

>> No.1223441

"It is not even clear why we need a theory of gravity -- there is not a single mention in the Bible, and the patriotic founding fathers never referred to it."

>WHAT

>> No.1223447

"Ellery Schempp (born Ellory Schempp, August 1940) is an accomplished physicist
Ellery received his Ph.D. in physics from Brown University."
> YOU HAVE GOT TO BE KIDDING

>> No.1223461

>>1223434
hurr, not in the sense they referred to

they do lack any grasp of how gravity works though (herpaderp it's universally strong)

>> No.1223498

Your post makes me vomit too OP.

Especially the sentences indicating that:
- you dismiss an article because it has no citation or references
- you don't know why gravity is only a theory (I suppose you're one of those folks who keep saying that "evolution is a FACT", often aggressively)

>> No.1223503

>>1223461
he has a Ph.D in biophysics. I wonder how he even passed his 1st year of post secondary education

>> No.1223534

>>1223498
I dismissed it because of the lack of proof he has to offer. This is merely an opinion piece without the right information.
I never argued on the fact that Gravity should not be a theory. In fact it has as many loose ends than (insert hair joke here). I also do not agree that evolution is a fact. Please do not assume pretentious garbage like that

>> No.1223545

>>1223431
Wｗw._Ａnｏｎ_+_m_-_M_+_TALＫ_.ｓE bfn obmr kn b mwnks cn nxutawg cllotahcmmvdfab c xj

>> No.1223543

>>1223498
Theory of evolution is a theory explaining observations of evolution.
Observations of evolution are facts.

I really which Darwin would have named his theory of evolution something other than evolution, it would stop people from getting confused.

>> No.1223562

>>1223429
ＷＷW._aｎON_+_Ｍ_-_ｍ_+_ＴaＬk_.ＳＥ btsehdlg i cpvpbtqjk p y x ebcb

>> No.1223771

I got all the way to the end of the fifth line before I lost fine control of my extremities.

I don't want to know what else will happen if I read it further.

>> No.1223792

>>1223543

He didn't. He outlined the process of natural selection. Evolution is a *way* later idea.