Is Eric Dubay controlled opposition?

FFS with this upward moving Earth. Just full stop. There is no evidence at all for this.

Our world is electric. Literally everything is electric; even a Faraday cage is charged.  

As we move up from the ground, this potential increases by about 100 volts per meter. Thus we observe, can test and repeat these tests to show a vertical electric field of 100 volts/m in the air.

The ground we stand on is literally an electronic ground, sometimes referred to as negatively charged, but in actuality is discharge. There is only charge and discharge. These are the only two possible states in reality. This alone creates the downward bias observed for most objects. No motion is necessary, let alone observed or experienced.



9.8 meters per second squared or the observed rate of objects in freefall can be explained in terms of this gradient. This is what sets 'the rules' for what many refer to as this density gradient we exist within. In short, this electronic field (aether field) is there and this is what allows for the rules of buoyancy/density to just sort everything out.

Using a Van der Graaf Generator we can manipulate this field, forcing objects that usually sink to rise and vice versa. This includes nonconductive (insulator) objects such as plastic, glass, rubber, and wood. These are actual repeatable experiments where we manipulate the IV to show cause. We are simply reversing the electric field direction.

BUT, 9.8 meters per second squared is approximate! We have measured differences in the velocity of the exact same objects in freefall not only on different places on Earth, but also even in the same exact location on different days.

While this phenomena is easily explained through our understanding of electronic interference, it alone proves that the upward accelerating earth is a psyop and really stupid on its surface, for if the Earth were accelerating at any constant velocity as suggested, the above would not and could not be observed.

And you are forgetting that the water in your bottle is already set at the bottom of the bottle (not the top, left, or right). All the 'displacement' in your examples work exactly as would be expected.

Can you explain in your electric model how different states of matter (Liquid, solid, Gas) are all accelerated at the same rate when the vessel is dropped? And how buoyancy and density of the air bubble / solid object cease when the vessel is dropped?

These are as problematic for your electric model as they are for the stationary model.

No one is denying  the presence of electric forces, but you have completed neglected to show how they are the cause of different states of matter all accelerating at the same rate because you cant. Its an impossibility there is no evidence for this. All of the evidence and proof points to upward motion of the earth being the cause of the effects that are repeatably observed.

check out the video I posted above

c-level truth wrote:

Zzzap wrote:When I performed the experiment, the stone falls at the same speed as the glass bottle.   It never leaves the floor of the glass container.  The exact opposite of what you viewed.

thats because you did it wrong

I stand corrected, you added ABSOLUTELY NOTHING to the conversation.  Is that video really suppose to be an example of the experiment?  
Impossible to understand what is happening.  If it is repeatable , do it and we will all follow your instructions.  But you continue to provide NOTHING.  

As per the rules of posting to this forum :

5. Be respectful, thorough and clear with your comments, and be sure to provide sufficient evidence/proof/sourced links for your claims.




I’ve seen enough until then.

actually you have added nothing but hysteria and high emotion with your caps lock, your silly oversized gifs and insults from the outset. So similar to the mentality and MO of the globe cult, its ironic, and funny.

The onus is on you to prove your downward acceleration claim and account for different states of matter all being accelerated at the same rate.

For those actually interested in discussion on this -
The basic premise of water not displacing in a dropped vessel does not require a video as its blatantly obvious, regardless of the shrill, disingenuous denials and calls for evidence by Zzzap, of a simple thing he can check himself.

To see some actual physics, do check out Andrews channel Execrate 200 (posted the video above) he has done lots of experiments disproving RDD

chuckle

c-level truth wrote:Can you explain in your electric model how different states of matter (Liquid, solid, Gas) are all accelerated at the same rate when the vessel is dropped? And how buoyancy and density of the air bubble / solid object cease when the vessel is dropped?

Huh? I literally answered all your questions above that you have carried on with for pages on a completely inappropriate thread.

This is a perfect subforum to inquire about an upward moving Earth (Flat Earth Shills, Trolls and Controlled Opposition) where the LAW of conservation of momentum simply ceases to exist, while we are asked to remain in complete, absolute and utter denial regarding the FACT that 9.8 meters per second squared is approximate! We have measured differences in the velocity of the exact same objects in freefall not only on different places on Earth, but also even in the same exact location on different days (as mentioned above).

c-level truth wrote:These are as problematic for your electric model as they are for the stationary model.

How so? I showed you what causes the observed 9.8 meters per sec sq. that allows buoyancy and density to work in the way we all see every single day. And! We don't need to ignore the LAW of conservation of momentum.

c-level truth wrote:No one is denying  the presence of electric forces, but you have completed neglected to show how they are the cause of different states of matter all accelerating at the same rate because you cant.

I just did, my dude, twice.

Now, does the Law of conservation of momentum apply in your world? If so, how so and LOL. Ring DElol.

enagfis wrote:

c-level truth wrote:Can you explain in your electric model how different states of matter (Liquid, solid, Gas) are all accelerated at the same rate when the vessel is dropped? And how buoyancy and density of the air bubble / solid object cease when the vessel is dropped?

Huh? I literally answered all your questions above that you have carried on with for pages on a completely inappropriate thread.

Huh?? Actually no, you did not answer either of these at all. In fact, looking at your previous post, (although you got lots if likes), its laden with nonsensical sophistry and it seems you didn't even understand the question or the problem it poses for your stationary model:

From your earlier post:

enagfis wrote:And you are forgetting that the water in your bottle is already set at the bottom of the bottle (not the top, left, or right). All the 'displacement' in your examples work exactly as would be expected.

Wow! Yes that's right - the water is at the bottom. And if it is then accelerated downwards when dropped - as required by your model -  the water would displace in an upward direction (ie away from the direction of motion) This is what happens when the vessel is actually accelerated in any vector, including down.  

enagfis wrote:This is a perfect subforum to inquire about an upward moving Earth (Flat Earth Shills, Trolls and Controlled Opposition) where the LAW of conservation of momentum simply ceases to exist, while we are asked to remain in complete, absolute and utter denial regarding the FACT that 9.8 meters per second squared is approximate! We have measured differences in the velocity of the exact same objects in freefall not only on different places on Earth, but also even in the same exact location on different days (as mentioned above).

c-level truth wrote:These are as problematic for your electric model as they are for the stationary model.

How so? I showed you what causes the observed 9.8 meters per sec sq. that allows buoyancy and density to work in the way we all see every single day. And! We don't need to ignore the LAW of conservation of momentum.

c-level truth wrote:No one is denying  the presence of electric forces, but you have completed neglected to show how they are the cause of different states of matter all accelerating at the same rate because you cant.

I just did, my dude, twice.

This obsession with 9.8 s/s (approximate) is yours, not mine. As I already mentioned, its a visual measurement, not a physical one.
(An accelerometer in freefall measures no acceleration.)


One thing we can agree on - this is the wrong thread for this discussion. So I have created a new thread here:

https://ifers.forumotion.com/t503-practical-science-that-disproves-the-globe-and-the-stationary-earth#21125

and would love to discuss with anyone who is not predisposed to mud slinging, globe-cult type mentality, bias and nonsensical sophistry.

enagfis wrote:
Now, does the Law of conservation of momentum apply in your world? If so, how so and LOL. Ring DElol.

I'll pass on ringing Del, I'm perfectly capable of thinking for myself and I don't like putting people on pedestals or guru status. Unlike so many here, sadly. My dude.

Jeran has gone all in against Eric. WTF?

It means that the model that we were given by the one and only true shill, Eric Dubay, who showed up in 2014 right after the movie The Principal came out, which was going to catapult geocentrism and catapult the idea that the Earth does not move, that the Copernican principle is a lie, that the universe is not expanding, and that there is no red shift.

We don't observe these things we believe them because they're fabrications of our minds. These things were going to start to come out. They were off by 10 to the 120th. All the stuff was going to come out and here comes Eric Dubay, map in hand and 200 proofs in hand.

And I say 200 proofs and that's a little wishy-washy because he changes them whenever he wants and you let him because that's what flat earthers want. Liars, do you understand that I'm being called names for telling the truth? Eric Dubay, nobody says a word and he actually changed his 200 proofs to prevent this final experiment from doing any damage to him and you all ate it up. You loved it. Let him do it. Not me, I'm the only one who stands true to what I thought was the case. I don't think it's okay to just change whenever anybody comes up.

Oh, I'm going to go check this proof of yours Eric. Oh well, I'm actually saying the opposite thing now. And Jeran’s a little shilly. I'm shilly cuz you can't keep a story? I'm shilly cuz the proofs in your book? No sir, what shill is plagiarizing? That’s the shill repeating the same thing from your same book. In every video you do the same words with your same gay voice. That's the shill, never talking on a live stream like I'm doing now. That's shilly. That shilly map in hand. Do you guys know what a shill is? A shill is somebody who gets there early.

[Tells shill story about a guy selling ‘magic’ tooth cream]

Only one person introduced the word shill to every single flat earther: Eric Dubay. Only one flat earther that I know of lived in Washington DC. His name, Eric Dubay. Only one flat earther that I know of ever got a vaccine payout for a vaccine injury. That would be Eric Dubay. Here's the map and it just so happens to be the AE map, I mean the UN map because that's what they do. Oh, they're so confident that they're just going to show us the map. Here's the map. It's the UN logo. They'll never catch us.

Timestamped…
https://youtu.be/dsCXuMMdMMA?t=7219
------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Eric, do you wish to get shead of this and clarify your reasoning for any changes that you’ve made to your proofs since the tfe observations?

I have never changed any proofs, I have never lived in Washington DC and I have never had a vaccine injury or payout for one. I have debunked these claims and others though here: