Hap Rho

@Evil_MerlinX @lastr3sponder @xyphophor @sly_sparkane @CalmLogical @xeidamoka @JustTRi4 @OBJuanJuan @CoralBlob @Gleem39694761 @ianfmusgrave @EBagnatori @birp234 @ken_caudle @ThatGuyM77 @newbsharp @Alvamiga @HarryWorp @jpvanhoy @surfpurzel @guitardude42 @4dots899721 @Not_yourpilot @Stinkhorn11 @FooleryT @Marjori88206011 @First_Won_ @CatManitarMike @Gbear831 @earthlyskeptick @GrokProgrammer @haprho @Rudeboymessiah @8getoveritman8 @JuicyStuffing @ThoughtByJer @theSGM78 @RealAceFox1 @Copernicium1473 @space_audits @MaxQHellcat @locky82903378 @Notaspud_ @GlobeSlay3r @mrjaybeevee @TheSilverWave @PannyTickles @PiPiPyuPyu @cryptonian7665 Not sure on the validity of what its saying, as google seems to have a lot image analysis issues with its AI, so i always take what it says with a grain of salt. But i find it funny it immediately said it debunks FE. I didnt even say shit. I just reversed image searched it.

Your parroting false tropes. Airy & Michelson-Morley were both looking for evidence of AETHER by looking for the effect aether had on light as Earth moved through the aether at 30km/s. It says so EXPLICITLY in both their papers. Nowhere in either paper does it say they were trying to confirm Earth's 30km/s motion. I've shown you Airy, now I'll show you MMX. Attachment #1 is where MMX define the goal of their experiment. Michelson-Morley say¹: "The subject of the present experiment is a trial of the first hypothesis, which is aether is at rest except in a tranparent media" Their conclusions are in attachment 2 where they state¹: "Three different theories of aether are refuted (red underlines) proposed by the scientists Fresnel, Lorentz, and Stokes". These two excerpts (definition of experiment & conclusions) from MMX make crystal clear the focus was on aether, not Earth motion². There's not a single word written in MMX (or Airy – already covered) suggesting they were looking to confirm 30km/s. Not a single word in either paper was written suggesting Earth's 30km/s wasn't found, that there was any mystery or confusion about it, or that they thought "gee golly! Earth isn't moving!" It is a flat-Earth lie that Airy & Michelson-Morley failed to find Earth's motion. ——— ¹ paraphrased ² except as used to test aether's effect on light as Earth traveled through the aether at 30km/s

Your parroting false tropes. Airy & Michelson-Morley were both looking for evidence of AETHER by looking for the effect aether had on light as Earth moved through the aether at 30km/s. It says so EXPLICITLY in both their papers. Nowhere in either paper does it say they were trying to confirm Earth's 30km/s motion. I've shown you Airy, now I'll show you MMX. Attachment #1 is where MMX define the goal of their experiment. Michelson-Morley say¹: "The subject of the present experiment is a trial of the first hypothesis, which is aether is at rest except in a tranparent media" Their conclusions are in attachment 2 where they state¹: "Three different theories of aether are refuted (red underlines) proposed by the scientists Fresnel, Lorentz, and Stokes". These two excerpts (definition of experiment & conclusions) from MMX make crystal clear the focus was on aether, not Earth motion². There's not a single word written in MMX (or Airy – already covered) suggesting they were looking to confirm 30km/s. Not a single word in either paper was written suggesting Earth's 30km/s wasn't found, that there was any mystery or confusion about it, or that they thought "gee golly! Earth isn't moving!" It is a flat-Earth lie that Airy & Michelson-Morley failed to find Earth's motion. ——— ¹ paraphrased ² except as used to test aether's effect on light as Earth traveled through the aether at 30km/s

Curvature is trivially measured by: #hrcurve ▪︎ plumb lines (RZA) ▪︎ spherical excess (surveying) ▪︎ satellite orbits & satellite imaging ▪︎ bottom-up obstruction ▪︎ sunsets ▪︎ gyros, coriolis, Eötvös, weather patterns, tides ▪︎ because of earth's rotation, constant mass objects weigh 0.5% more at the poles than at the equator ▪︎ high-altitude balloons ▪︎ eclipses ▪︎ moon's orientation changes with latitude ▪︎ celestial navigation ▪︎ Polaris elevation angles ▪︎ Reeeeeally precise aberration observations (Gaia) ▪︎ Mt. Canigou & Pic Gaspard and all "see too far" memes ▪︎ No working flat map ▪︎ horizon dip increases with altitude ▪︎ horizon would never appear as a sharp line on flat ▪︎ aircraft flight paths ▪︎ common sense ▪︎ ad infinitum