Appreciate the detailed response — even if it was laced with sarcasm and condescension. It’s interesting how asking honest questions seems to trigger emotional defensiveness, not rational conversation. That usually tells me we’re hitting a nerve.
Let me respond plainly:
On the Foucault Pendulum
You asked how it works on a flat earth. Good question.
The Foucault pendulum shows rotation — but it doesn’t prove
what is rotating. It’s often claimed as “proof” the Earth spins, but the assumption is that the Earth is the one moving. That’s a presumption, not a fact.
A flat, stationary earth model with a rotating celestial dome (firmament or ether) could just as easily cause the pendulum to precess due to external forces. Tesla himself rejected Einstein’s relativity and leaned toward an energetic medium. You may scoff, but even mainstream scientists debate the nature of inertia and reference frames. The pendulum’s behavior simply shows motion — not the source.
Also:
- Pendulums don’t behave uniformly across the globe.
- Some setups have been caught using hidden motors to maintain motion in museums.
- A pendulum in a perfectly still room can be affected by building vibrations, magnetic interference, or even temperature gradients. So it's not the untouchable proof some make it out to be.
Let’s not pretend this single device explains the cosmos.
And now, to be equally direct in return:
If the Earth really is spinning, orbiting, and flying through space at incredible speeds, how do we:
- See the exact same star constellations year after year?
- Observe a flat horizon from mountain tops or aircraft (without fish-eye lenses)?
- Watch the sun shrink in size with zoom as it “sets,” rather than vanish over a curve?
- Watch ships “disappear” hull-first, only to reappear fully with a decent zoom lens?
- Accept that no full photo of Earth exists — just composites, as NASA themselves admit?
- Trust moon landings from the 60s, when NASA now admits they “can’t get past the Van Allen belts”?
These are
basic questions that deserve thought — not mockery. You talk about submitting a paper, but history has shown that when establishment dogma is challenged, ridicule comes before investigation.
I’m not here to argue—I’m here to think. If that offends you, perhaps ask yourself why.
