Home > Bring truth out > #25 Is Sir Isaac Newton’s “Law of Gravity” Just One Great Big 500 Yr. Old Lie?

#25 Is Sir Isaac Newton’s “Law of Gravity” Just One Great Big 500 Yr. Old Lie?


You do look, my son, in a moved sort, As if you were dismay’d. Be cheerful, sir. Our revels now are ended. These our actors, As I foretold you, were all spirits and Are melted into air, into thin air; And, like the baseless fabric of this vision, The cloud-capp’d towers, the gorgeous palaces, The solemn temples, the great globe itself, Yea, all which it inherit, shall dissolve, And, like this insubstantial pageant faded, Leave not a rack behind. We are such stuff As dreams are made on, and our little life Is rounded with a sleep.

Wm. Shakespeare from the Tempest—Act IV, sc. i



The name is derived from the Latin word “ gravis,” which means “ heavy,” “ having weight,” while the Law of Gravitation is defined as “ That mutual action between masses of matter by virtue of which every such mass tends toward every…

View original post 4,200 more words

Categories: Bring truth out
  1. July 18, 2017 at 4:37 pm

    I was trying to reply to mjday from about 9 hours ago, and now can’t get a post through the original site; so I’ve reblogged this here. What I wanted to say was:

    mjday, (re: July 18, 2017 at 11:15 am)

    Thanks – I’m glad we are discussing the details. The beach ball is a stand-in for a specific visual reference, with a specific position above the water. Seeing where the land becomes water is a different reference, and is a visual observation, not a singular and measured point of reference.

    For example, under a curvature scenario, the land visually meets the sea, despite part of the land or sea not being visible. Specific reference points are needed to avoid visual corruption and our interpretation of what we “see”. In the end, it’s what we can measure that provides evidence, not what we see. 🙂

    I’m not disagreeing with “you can still see Cancun”, but that is where the details become critical. Cancun is an area, at various elevations, and not a point of reference to be measured.Seeing Cancun is just not scientific data (sorry).

    BTW – my earth curve drop value(s) are sourced from these:


    I’m indeed looking for truth (facts / evidence; aren’t you?), and am not picking a winner before science (not opinion or personal interpretations) can support/explain a set of “non-vague” conditions.

    I’m still interested in the set of details visible across 12 miles; What clearly identifiable structures or landscape features can be seen, and used for comparison.

    An example would be a specific number of floors of a multi-story building. One can test the actual number of floors to those visible at a long distance for evidence.

    That would be something!


  1. No trackbacks yet.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: