How embarrassing for the author of this video. He is so stupid he doesn't realise just how terminally, mindboggingly stupid he is. I suspect that the moron doesn't have the most basic understanding of physics. What do you think the chances are he even knows the difference between kinetic and potential energy, let alone the equations defining them?
People like this shouldn't be allowed on youtube.
"the waterzooka can launch water 25 times the length of the tube." but thats because its a f*cking tube! the analysis that Nephy was providing was that it was shot through a massive crater in the earth! which would be a total open and air accessible passage! duuuh!
lol the force of someone pushing it down creates the force not the nozle :P that just creates water to be ejected at a smaller rate :p look at the presure mechanism on a chair that goes up and down its the same concept
The water pistol is a variable pressure system. Smaller nozzle allows greater pressure to be achieved. Bigger nozzle makes for lower pressure. But both will do the same amount of work since the girls physical strength is the same in both cases. A constant pressure system will do more work with a larger nozzle. It won't push the water higher, it will just push up more water for any given amount of time.
...the same goes for nephilims hypothesis, which would still only allow the water to go 40 km above the ground. thunderfoots even made a video about this, and you seem to be the one using pseudoscience.
@DebateCrusher you seem to forget that since there is a smaller hole in the earth in your image, that not only is more pressure applied to one area, but there is also less space for water to escape. it's like how bowling balls and feathers fall at the same rate in a vacuum. there is a greater weight in the bowling ball, but the bowling ball has more mass to pull down, causing it to fall at the same rate as the feather...
FAIL. The human is adding force to it, its not the force of gravity, it cant launch it like you claim with gravity alone, the human has to add the driving force, you are the one mistaken here.
You're saying that a SCIENTIST is using pseudoscience, and not a RELIGIOUS person? Here's another point: MOST ROCK, even VERY LARGE rocks, CANNOT PASS THROUGH THE ATMOSHPERE, GOING TOWARDS THE PLANET, without being turned into fine dust. You think WATER will fair better? Idiot!
OMGawsh. Why does TF only compare one thing to another and not many? Isotopic ratios of terrestrial water and cometary ice are quite different. I'm not even arguing that point! I'll take it further, how did all this water get on Earth? How could objects produce oceans with an earthly deuterium-to-hydrogen ratio with Earth’s early chemical composition? The natural implication is that the Earth formed with its volatiles in place right from the start.
Continued: -- To make the water shoot like that from the earth's crust, there would be no such thing... Thunderf00t left another important detail out: Since the crust (made of granit) is more dense than water, there would be no 10 mile layer of granit above the water. That is because the deeper in the crust we go, the more dense the crust becomes...That is because of gravity. The chambers containing the water would have caved in long before Noah's time.
Continued: -- To make the water shoot like that from the earth's crust, there would be no such thing... Thunderf00t left another important detail out: Since the crust (made of granit) is more dense than water, there would be no 10 mile layer of granit above the water. That is because the deeper in the crust we go, the more dense the crust becomes...That is because of gravity. The chambers containing the water would have caved in long before Noah's time.
Continued: -- To make the water shoot like that from the earth's crust, there would be no such thing... Thunderf00t left another important detail out: Since the crust (made of granit) is more dense than water, there would be no 10 mile layer of granit above the water. That is because the deeper in the crust we go, the more dense the crust becomes...That is because of gravity. The chambers containing the water would have caved in long before Noah's time.
The hydroplate theory does not involve an external force on the earth's crust, only the crust's potential before it displaces water underneath it, which Thunderf00t approximated quite reasonably.
Is this serious? I mean you compare mass falling to inject water into space, with kids using a fucking squirt gun? That comparison is weak. Obviously, the kids did not rely on gravity but rather used their strength to pressure the water out. You`re pathetic, a disgrace to your nickname.
In addition, you accepted his conclusion, but now try to pick apart his method, but failing. YOU SUCK
This is the funniest thing I think I've ever seen! Thank you for posting an irrefutable and undeniable example of just how little you know about science in general, physics in particular, and what constitutes a debate!
There are so many fallacies, incorrect assumptions, invalid reasoning, and misunderstood details in your water-squirting video that (like most others) I seriously had to consider whether you're mentally retarded or a jokester. I hope it's the former, because the joke's not funny.
In TF's example, the mass of the rock was calculated over an AREA which was equal to the area of the water. The toy uses a huge mass (the kid's weight) applied to a small area of water, representing FAR greater than a 4 to 1 mass ratio.
But in any case, water accelerated to escape velocity would be instantly vaporized. Glad you mentioned heat. Can steam bursts make craters 240,000 miles away?
The height of the earth's atmosphere is NOT the end of the earth's gravity, as you seem to imply.
And why are the waterzooka spraying half a liter 8 m up in the air? Cause a child using most of his body weight to press it out! Back to physics class.
My god this video is pathetic. Thunderf00t even makes a separate video explaining why the nozzle size is NOT a factor. The conservation of energy is an unbreakable law; it does not matter HOW an object got where it was, its potential energy is the same, meaning the minimum kinetic energy that is required to do so is also the same. The only effect the nozzle size will have will be on the friction of the water jet. Should've stayed in school.
Ive never seen such a congregation of retards, do people here honestly think the craters on the moon were made by water from the earth... seriously?
Sure you can shoot water further through a nozzle but you shoot less of it and either way it is still far short of the INCREDIBLE distance to the moon, what thunderfoot posted was factually correct as he didn't include the nozzle, you guys added it and said he was wrong, now who is making a fallacious claim?
This is all basic physics really.Th fact that so many can fall for thunderfoot's argument is incredible.I don't care about your religious point of view but to twist science in such a basic way? It isn't about the relationship between the density of the rook and water alone.The key point is about the area of the opening and depth .Temperature inside the earth is another BIG factor too.Plz ask any professor of psychics and face him with the example of the finger semi blocking the hose opening.PLZ!
This is all basic physics really.Th fact that so many can fall for thunderfoot's argument is incredible.I don't care about your religious point of view but to twist science in such a basic way? It isn't about the relationship between the density of the rook and water alone.The key point is about the area of the opening and depth .Temperature inside the earth is another BIG factor too.Plz ask any professor of psychics and face him with the example of the finger semi blocking the hose opening.PLZ!
@bfruitfulandmultiply Very good point about the area. That is the major point which totally discredits the water bazooka analogy.
You run a risk of being challenged when you tell other people to get guidance in a subject you clearly have never taken. Density of the rock IS a factor because it relates directly to the pressure on the water, per unit surface area. It is about a 4 or 5 to 1 ratio. The kid's mass on the toy's water surface area is many times that. (cont'd)
@bfruitfulandmultiply (Pt2) Good that you mentioned the heat, too. Have you calculated what initial speed would be necessary to launch an object from the surface of the earth to the moon? (With an atmosphere.) You do realize that the speed would be enough to instantly vaporize and maybe even plasmize the water. It would blast much of the local atmosphere away as well. So it would be just superhot gas and plasma exploding outward at a wide angle.
@DebateCrusher do you really think that all the water shot from the earth hit the moon so many times on impact. Please and your video of the "man made water bazooka" is irrelevant because you didn't even compair the science of the way the waterzooka shot's water and it's distance and the way the water would have shot from the earth comparing distance and force you know the force you would need to make set craters.
LOL Your amazing, being an ignorant creationist you would have no idea how wrong your claim is because you are talking about somthing totally irrelivant!
Physics Fail. TF00t's video refuted the Neph's claim that the falling rock caused the water to be propelled into space ultimately hitting the moon. So, the only force acted on the rock would have been gravity. Your example includes the use of an outside force (the kids' muscle power) which increases the pressure causing the water to exceed it's independent volumetric limits. Try using gravity only, and you will see the difference.
Debate crusher srsly... you should look at yourself from a different angle you just don't know physics...
Read a few physic books regarding mechanics and just learn facts - wiki alone wont help ya.
Apply what you have learned to question the bible..
Anyways what these kids are doing is this: The fill water into a tube , they apply outside force to the bottom of the tube thus increasing the pressure within and launching water higher. this has nothing to do with potential hight energy >.>
The problem with your analysis is that those kids are adding energy to the tube by pushing down on it. Check how far the water gets shot out if you let only gravity act on it.
Debatecrusher, the difference is that people are adding energy to the tube by pushing it down. Buy one of those and let the water squirt out through the energy of the falling tube, then show me how far it goes.
Between muscle power and compressed air........... I mean its not as if you are leaving gravity do all the work in creating pressure on the water. Not even close to it. Thunderf00t's proposal was based hugely on the following: potential energy = mgh. If you replace g with: children pushing an air compressed pump you should be able to see why the height obtained by the water is so great. If not, then I give up.
also, the water gun proves absolutely nothing. There is no way of showing how many joules of energy the kid put into the system. In order to show a working model to demonstrate Thunderf00ts error, a scale model would have had to be done were the ratio of joules input into the system / the mass of water remained constant (and where the Gravitational Field Strength was the same but that should be a given, and I don't think that anyone was planning on testing this on other planets.)
debatecrusher brings about a good point while making himself look like a total idiot. If no energy is lost (which is impossible but we'll just run with it for simplicity), then we would expect the gravitational energy from the rock to equal the gravitational energy from the water once the water comes to rest in the air. The equation for gravitational potential energy is energy= mass*g*height if the mass of the water was significantly less then it would go higher than 40 km (but not to the moon).
With depth of water comes heat? You do realize that water at deeper depths is colder, right?
You might as well have said "but thunderfoot is neglecting something here - god did it." It would have been every bit as intelligent as the argument you've put forth here.
its funy that you still believe what your saying is right when you dont grasp the most basic concepts of physics, the water shoots as far as the force one puts behind it will allow, thunderfoot gave you the maximum force that the rock would give and thus gave the maximum height water could travel. please go to school take a physics class and then apply the rudimentary concpets into your video
erm...is this person "debatecrusher" on serious amounts of drugs?
this is the most embarrassing example of scientific ignorance i have seen for a long time, for the record, whilst i personally believe thunderfoot has a firm grasp of science and evolution i also happen to think he is a prick
never the less these creationist "debunking" videos are just the products of idiots with too much time on their hands
How about you explain your argument using the adequate math instead of performing childish tricks? My guess is you know nothing about mathematics besides simple addition and subtraction, most becoming of any retrograde creationist. Keep in mind that some of us do have professional training in physics, so go ahead and please clarify your asinine guess for the rest of us.
Only a creationist could take 50ft divided by 3ft and get 25x. How are we supposed to take your video seriously when you won't take the time to click Start, All Programs, Accessories, CALCULATOR?
Also you need to change your argument to "God moved the moon much much closer to the earth then made tiny holes in the crust then pushed really really hard on it." Then you have us convinced :)
There is one crucial mistake you are making. In the waterzooka, the user applies the same amount of force until the water runs out, narrowing the nozzle will allow the user to impart the same force on less water.
The force behind noah's flood in the hypothetical scenario will decrease as the nozzle size decreases. This is because the same amount of pressure is acting on all of the water. By decreasing the nozzel length, you decrease the amount of force acting on the water.
If the flow of water is kept constant then a narrow nozzle size will make the water go further however it requires more energy.
If you test it with the waterzooka you will notice that to empty one with a narrower nozzle in the same amout of time it takes you empty one with a wider you will need to push/drag harder.
Wow. This is more proof that creationists need basic science courses. I wonder if a high school class could benefit from watching this and explaining why you suck.
DebateCrusher I recommend you repeat physics 101, because you fail to understand the principal of conservation of energy. You are saying that if you push water through a nozzle you get higher velocities which is true, but the amount of water expelled is a lot smaller, and therefore you need a lot more energy to achieve the nozzle velocity with a larger amount of water.
So again, it is true that the pressure of the crust of the earth COULD shoot water in to space, but not a lot of it.
I wonder if DebateCrusher realizes how ignorant this makes him look? I mean, this video displays such a breathtaking misunderstanding of physics that I'm starting to think it's actually a joke.
@ozmoroid - I'm saying that you telling us to suspend the fact that we saw thunderfoot refuted in the above video and to believe a make believe clap trap wherein TF tries to prove his point by omitting all facets of the physics involved dealing with confined water escaping through a nozzle.
@DebateCrusher In your study of "comprehensive physics" have you every come across Bernoulli's equation? That equation is another way to state Thunderf00t's argument. If you can show that it's wrong let us all know 'cause every civil/mechanical engineering in the world will need to go back to school, and every hydraulic system in existence will need to be redesigned.
@DebateCrusher You obviously don't understand rudimentary physics.
The rock mass is a constant pressure system. Therefore, the size of the nozzle has no affect on the height. decreasing the size of the hole to "increase the distance" will not work. and regardless of this FACT you're trying to prove a moot point even if the water could have been shot out "25" times further that doesn't help the case that water hit the moon. the distance to the moon is approx. 400000 miles.
@DebateCrusher The whole point almost every single poster is trying to get across to you is that your video did not refute TF. You proved that nozzle pressure does certain things completely unrelated to the model TF presented. If you were correct you would refute conservation of energy, you simply don't seem to have any grasp of physics at all. At this point I don't know what else to say.
@DebateCrusher The problem is the kids are adding energy to the tube by pushing down on it. Make a video in which that tube accelerates the water using only gravity and I think you'll see thunderfoot was correct.
@DebateCrusher seriously debate crusher? thats ur answer?. dont u realize that there is nothing to pressurise water other than rocks falling due to gravity. and the kinetic energy of the falling rock is the only available energy to acclerate the water upwards. U r using the nozzle size of a water gun to demonstrate the fact? well its the pressure available inside the gun that allows water to accelerate out.
@DebateCrusher What nozzle are you referring too? in Neph's vid he claimed that all the water shot from the earth and made the crater's on the moon well considering the large number's and size of the impacts on the moon it's foolish to assume the water would even make it to the earth before freezing or having the energy to not just to make it to the moon but to cause massive impacts and so many is ridicules.
The reason why those waterzookas can send water from a 3ft tube, up to 50 ft, is because the applied force does not just come from gravity alone, nor is there a 3 ft pile of rock with a constant preasured on top of it.. but the strength and force applied to it from the human handeling it.. and with our muscles, we're able to produce an excess amount of force to something, not just the weight of our self.
@DebateCrusher For a constant pressure system the size of the nozzle does NOT impact the velocity. Here is a simple proof. Pressure = Force/Area, i.e P=F/A. Now we know that a force produces an acceleration due to newtons 2nd law, this acceleration determines a final velocity (remember acceleration is change in velocity). Substitue F=Ma into the original equation (newtons 2nd law). We arrive at P= Ma/A, Rearange for a: a=PA/M , the Mass M can also be expressed as a force mg.... CONT
so a=PA/M, but P=F/A therefore a=(F/A)(A/M), a = FA/AM, so the area cancels to give a = F/M this proves, the area has no impact on the acceleration, and therefore the velocity. Only the mass of the fluid and the force it exerts influence its velocity.
Appologies for an incorrect statement regarding the mass M in my previous comment.
A flow system like a hoze is not the same as a static pressure system. In the hoze, a force is used to accelerate the water, This force DOES NOT come from the pressure of the water, Since force accelerates unit mass, a larger force applied to a smaller area would increase the velocity but only because less mass is being accelerated by the same force. Now if you remove the external force such as the child pushing the hoze, etc, it would NOT work.
@DebateCrusher Ahh, but first you must prove that the confined water escaped through this presumed nozzle. Firstly, you seriously just compared the earth's water, and a rock falling on the earth to a waterzooka. You are hilariously inaccurate. You're using pseudoscience to accuse someone of pseudoscience...and that's the funniest thing about the video.
@DebateCrusher You're saying that a SCIENTIST is using pseudoscience, and not a RELIGIOUS person? Here's another point: MOST ROCK, even VERY LARGE rocks, CANNOT PASS THROUGH THE ATMOSHPERE, GOING TOWARDS THE PLANET, without being turned into fine dust. You think WATER will fair better? Idiot!
@DebateCrusher and here we have yet another stunningly intelligent rebuttal. DebateCrusher, a high school student could tell you that there is a difference between energy applied by a falling mass, or potential gravitational energy, and energy applied by compressive force. the length of the tube has nothing to do with how much energy you can transfer to the water inside.
@ozmoroid "this video displays such a breathtaking misunderstanding of physics that I'm starting to think it's actually a joke"
A reasonable conclusion. I've encountered a lot of creoTards, but even they were not as stupid as DebateCrusher. He must be a Poe. If so, he went too far and exposed himself. If not, well at least he does a good job of making creoTard Christians appear as dumb and willfully ignorant as possible.
The reason why a smaller nozzle on a hose (or a water cannon) makes for higher exit velocity is simply and strictly because it allows for a greater build-up of pressure.
If you attach a hose to a constant pressure source (like the weight of rocks, as Neph suggests), nozzle size will make NO difference on the exit speed of the water. Try this out! Attach a hose to the bottom of a big barrel of water, and then see what it's like!
Hmm, ok I understand that. But who stated any of this was 'standard debate format'?
Thunderf00t addressed that you had made a video, in which you expressed that the nozzle size is indeed a factor in determining the velocity of the ejected water, correct?
Thunderf00t now has two videos, both demonstrating that such a factor has no influence on the velocity of the water at all. So what exactly is the problem here?
Physics includes math, and your math skills suck. Can you say 3 times 25 equals 50? Of course you can; you did!
Once again you make a video, so wrong everyone points out how wrong it is, just brimming with wrongability, overflowing with wrongness - the, dare I say, pinnacle of wrong, wrong, wrong - but you still can't admit that you got it wrong.
I can't believe you're still arguing after being totally owned by Thunderfoot. Check out RaymondCorrigan for an actual experiment on this that proves you are wrong.
you present no real argument here......and no real math.....please, try again, try harder. You will still fail, but at least then you can hold your head knowing you made a public spectacle of your willful ignorance.....
DebateCrusher, it is YOU who is leaving out a few variables. When a person uses a Waterzooka, they can determine how much pressure they are using and that's what is making the water shoot so far, not the nozzle size. The nozzle size only makes it easier to aim.
If you want it to shoot farther, then you use your muscles and increase the pressure. That is something that the crust of the Earth cannot do. It cannot consciously increase pressure to go higher.
Are you so sure? How about you try it out. How about you try and use a few Cinder blocks to pull it down and see if it can affect the height, proportionally to Thunderf00t's model.
Remember that Thunderf00t also mentioned that water moving at a high enough velocity can cut through rock like butter. If the nozzle started out small, why wouldn't the pressure break up the area, making the nozzle size bigger?
There are a few other variables that you are ignoring. You'll have try harder.
@DebateCrusher so you are saying that during the noahide flood there was concrete and waterzookas that caused the moon craters?? Well SHIT!! Why didn't you just say so?! It all makes perfect sense now!!!
This video folks is why you should never home school children. This TARD's understanding of physics and the problem presented by Thunderfoot are obviously way over his head. The only way this video is relevant is if the TARD is claiming God used hand operated pumps to spray the moon. LOL
@snappingbear - are you implying that Thunderfoot was homeschooled because he claime that there was no way for water to shoot up past 4X when the video shows water going up 24 X's? I wasn't homes schooled and I went to public school. You must have been home schooled because you failed! Actually homeschoolers I know are much more intelligent than you are and do very well in college. Your use of the word TARD shows an anti science motivation.
@DebateCrusher "he claime that there was no way for water to shoot up past 4X when the video shows water going up 24 X's"
Liar, he never said that. Pay attention to his video more closely, perhaps that's why you didn't get far in school. Did you suffer from A.D.D? Your video is nonsense because the pump applies so much extra force. BTW, not surprised you know Christian home schoolers, Was it them that gave you the idea for the video? LOL
@DebateCrusher what you showed here was not a system displaying uniform pressure as would be required by neffy's theory, but a variable pressure, so in essence, you are saying your skydaddy reached out and physically SQUEEZED the earth to generate the force needed....yeah....mmmmkay....
Thunderfoot is right. That aside so why is the dark side of the moon so much more cratered since it always faces away from the earth? Why are the craters so big on the facing side? I have never seen a jet of water from two moving bodies make only round craters why is this?also the amount of water as described would NOT be enough to crater the entire surface of the moon. The mid-Atlantic ridge only points partial at the moon and then you need enough water to cover the earth. What of Jupiter?
@fartedbananas - No he didn't. TF didn't even state my proposition, nor his original proposition. Honest people state the proposition and don't just jump into the argument and ambiguously wade through them.
@CitizenRare - no, i'm not making that claim, I'm making the claim that TF is not using standard debate format which is basic and natural. Those who are using deceit do not make this approach if their arguments are weak by nature. You always state your opponents claim accurately first. You don not prejudice the audience with things that aren't pertinent to the argument (that is called poisoning the water. TF first poisons the water ( faith statement) then proceeds without the claim.
Your statement: Little hole will make it fly higher... TC's scientific answer: NO. You get the force placed on the "cannon" from the kids. Nothing more. If the water is under the earth, then the force is from the falling rock, stupid, not from "god's hand" pushing the water up, like the children do. Even with a nozzle there is not so much difference as been showed by the real life experiments I linked you. TF showed this too. So yes, FAIL. Honest people ADMIT THEY MADE MISTAKES.
Holy fucking stupidity. I don't even have to answer this one. Don't you see my fucking irony from the analog between the kids and God's hand? And if you want to be sarcastic, say impossible stuff (or inrealistic stuff). 10 pounds, I hope you realise that's not much, moron...
@fartedbananas - It isn't much. It takes a genius to figure out that you can keep adding and adding, and then maybe a higher level of atheistic genius to figure out how much continental blocks worth of rocks weigh. But of course atheistic genius would never lead you in that direction.
No you can't keep adding rocks you fucking moron. That process is called isostasis. I can explain that to you. But why should I? See wikipedia... And continental blcok have a density of 2.8 g/cm³. Even this little constant explains why it's even impossible to have water (density: 0.999 g/cm³) under earth, that's why oceans are on the surface of the earth and earth sinks in water. Derp
@fartedbananas - which is why do scientists find water trapped in the rocks below? You're playing with a set of assumptions. Namely that water starts above and has to migrate to the caves below the rocks. Of course that wouldn't be possible. But if the waters were there from the get go, vacuum sealed, so to speak, that would explain why it rose to the surface. Duhhhhhhhhhh. Are you a scientists or what?
Dude, what is the difference between finding water at subducting plates and a full water layer below the earth's crest? THINK. Mostly the water isn't found deep, and in SEDIMENTARY ROCKS (automatically proves an old earth, stupid). Other places where water is found is at subducting oceanic plates under continental ones, like the andes mountains.The water comes up in the form of Geysers or as gas in volcano's. Another proof of plate tectonics and old earth.
And if you talk about caves you fucking shithead, then you also agree the earth is old. Caves are made in CaCo3 rock, and do you know from what that is made? I bet not, it's made of plankton (biostreams), ancient coral reefs (bioherms) or just sedimentary organisms like sea anemones and such. Another fail for flood geology. And of course, you should be really fucking retarded if you think that would explain why it rose to the surface. You are playing with debunked stuff you moron
FINALLY, you got it. ONLY 4 TIMES! 4*10km IS NOT 384399 km (distance to moon). That is the fucking point you moron! IT IS IMPOSSIBLE for water to get catapulted to the surface of the moon you dumb shithead. Go ahead, make a video. And do it on SCALE. And where the fuck did I say that is impossible? It's indeed 4X thesize of the rock. SEE TF HIS VIDEO!!!
YES ONLY 4 TIMES YOU FUCKING MORON. Don't you think I agree on that one? 4*10 Km IS NOT 384399 km (distance to moon). How retarded are you? If you want the water to reach the surface of the moon, it should be 38439 times the size of the rock o.O
@DebateCrusher No you didn`t , you confounded moron. All you showed is that water can be pushed by a human 24 feet through a water pistol. This was never disputed.
The point that TF was making is that gravity is a constant force, thus dropping one cubic meter of rock 10 feet will impart enough energy to push one cubic meter of water 40 feet.
@DebateCrusher You didn't address even one of fartedbananas statements. Stop fucking repeating yourself and telling him what the video showed and fucking respond to the question at hand. There is no evidence, anywhere in the world, for a worldwide flood....Humans have known this for decades.
@DebateCrusher Physics includes math, and your math skills suck. Can you say 3 times 25 equals 50? Of course you can; you did!
Once again you make a video, so wrong everyone points out how wrong it is, just brimming with wrongability, overflowing with wrongness - the, dare I say, pinnacle of wrong, wrong, wrong - but you still can't admit that you got it wrong.
@DebateCrusher Physics includes math, and your math skills suck. Can you say 3 times 25 equals 50? Of course you can; you did!
Once again you make a video, so wrong everyone points out how wrong it is, just brimming with wrongability, overflowing with wrongness - the, dare I say, pinnacle of wrong, wrong, wrong - but you still can't admit that you got it wrong.
This premise is structurally wrong before we even get to the math. That is a tube. A confined space in which pressure may build, resulting in a pressure difference. There is no such comparison with the landmasses of the planet, and there are also no instances of landmasses floating on water, that just doesn't happen. I suppose Thunderf00t got lost entertaining this concept's math. Negating the fact that the basis was wrong to begin with. Nice attempt though, thought someone actually had him.
No one ever lost to Nephi, he is way too stupid.
gregrutz 3 weeks ago
It really is sad that some christians don't realize how stupid they are...
FoxOutsideBox 1 month ago
How embarrassing for the author of this video. He is so stupid he doesn't realise just how terminally, mindboggingly stupid he is. I suspect that the moron doesn't have the most basic understanding of physics. What do you think the chances are he even knows the difference between kinetic and potential energy, let alone the equations defining them?
People like this shouldn't be allowed on youtube.
156651156 2 months ago
Power face palm!!!
"Shazaam!" - What a retard... Though I think it is fitting that you would quote a genie when defending 'christian science'. :)
Quimbyrbg 2 months ago
I don't think thunderf00t's presentation can be defined as pseudoscience since it doesn't meet the definition of the word.
mclem51 3 months ago
"the waterzooka can launch water 25 times the length of the tube." but thats because its a f*cking tube! the analysis that Nephy was providing was that it was shot through a massive crater in the earth! which would be a total open and air accessible passage! duuuh!
TheFlames376 3 months ago
im guessing you're the maker of waterzooka
lordrazr 4 months ago
"massive tons of rock" hahaha
omgwtfbbqxD 4 months ago
wow is all i can say.
is it mandatory frontal lobotomy to become a christian now?
im glad i got out in time
oneadamtwelve86 4 months ago
lol the force of someone pushing it down creates the force not the nozle :P that just creates water to be ejected at a smaller rate :p look at the presure mechanism on a chair that goes up and down its the same concept
WilkoPhilip 4 months ago
You got your ASS kicked, Crusher.....
A hahhahahhahahhahah!
odinata 7 months ago
I mean how do you respond to such stupidity, and saying someones facts are wrong when u clearly don't understand the principles involved.
Treefiddyfo 9 months ago
The water pistol is a variable pressure system. Smaller nozzle allows greater pressure to be achieved. Bigger nozzle makes for lower pressure. But both will do the same amount of work since the girls physical strength is the same in both cases. A constant pressure system will do more work with a larger nozzle. It won't push the water higher, it will just push up more water for any given amount of time.
DC you are as big a dimwit as NF. Just wow.
TerrencePhillip66 9 months ago
...the same goes for nephilims hypothesis, which would still only allow the water to go 40 km above the ground. thunderfoots even made a video about this, and you seem to be the one using pseudoscience.
Mr12345EGGNOG 9 months ago
@DebateCrusher you seem to forget that since there is a smaller hole in the earth in your image, that not only is more pressure applied to one area, but there is also less space for water to escape. it's like how bowling balls and feathers fall at the same rate in a vacuum. there is a greater weight in the bowling ball, but the bowling ball has more mass to pull down, causing it to fall at the same rate as the feather...
Mr12345EGGNOG 9 months ago
Fail. You are adding force. Do not pass go. Do not collect $200
MonochromaticEarth 9 months ago
FAIL. The human is adding force to it, its not the force of gravity, it cant launch it like you claim with gravity alone, the human has to add the driving force, you are the one mistaken here.
shadow11479 10 months ago
You're saying that a SCIENTIST is using pseudoscience, and not a RELIGIOUS person? Here's another point: MOST ROCK, even VERY LARGE rocks, CANNOT PASS THROUGH THE ATMOSHPERE, GOING TOWARDS THE PLANET, without being turned into fine dust. You think WATER will fair better? Idiot!
PalulukanMakto 10 months ago
Epic fail, srsly. So serioulsy that I have to say it again...EPIC FAIL, srsly!
StrangeCrewOrangeCat 1 year ago
@StrangeCrewOrangeCat Agreed! Epic epicness epic fail!
Wallebille 11 months ago
"The height of the pre flood atmosphere, which many believe to be lower"
Lower than what, your intelligence?
I really wish you were a joke because then at least you would be amusing.
In this case an implied facepalm is prescribed.
annoyed001 1 year ago
OMGawsh. Why does TF only compare one thing to another and not many? Isotopic ratios of terrestrial water and cometary ice are quite different. I'm not even arguing that point! I'll take it further, how did all this water get on Earth? How could objects produce oceans with an earthly deuterium-to-hydrogen ratio with Earth’s early chemical composition? The natural implication is that the Earth formed with its volatiles in place right from the start.
purpleorchid76 1 year ago
Continued: -- To make the water shoot like that from the earth's crust, there would be no such thing... Thunderf00t left another important detail out: Since the crust (made of granit) is more dense than water, there would be no 10 mile layer of granit above the water. That is because the deeper in the crust we go, the more dense the crust becomes...That is because of gravity. The chambers containing the water would have caved in long before Noah's time.
kris01987 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
Continued: -- To make the water shoot like that from the earth's crust, there would be no such thing... Thunderf00t left another important detail out: Since the crust (made of granit) is more dense than water, there would be no 10 mile layer of granit above the water. That is because the deeper in the crust we go, the more dense the crust becomes...That is because of gravity. The chambers containing the water would have caved in long before Noah's time.
kris01987 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
Continued: -- To make the water shoot like that from the earth's crust, there would be no such thing... Thunderf00t left another important detail out: Since the crust (made of granit) is more dense than water, there would be no 10 mile layer of granit above the water. That is because the deeper in the crust we go, the more dense the crust becomes...That is because of gravity. The chambers containing the water would have caved in long before Noah's time.
kris01987 1 year ago
The waterzooka is a bad example. The reason why the water can be shot much farther is because of the artificial preasure applied to it by humans.
kris01987 1 year ago
These kids are applying extra force to the water.
The hydroplate theory does not involve an external force on the earth's crust, only the crust's potential before it displaces water underneath it, which Thunderf00t approximated quite reasonably.
SonofOxford 1 year ago
Is this serious? I mean you compare mass falling to inject water into space, with kids using a fucking squirt gun? That comparison is weak. Obviously, the kids did not rely on gravity but rather used their strength to pressure the water out. You`re pathetic, a disgrace to your nickname.
In addition, you accepted his conclusion, but now try to pick apart his method, but failing. YOU SUCK
BillHicks420 1 year ago
ahah this has to be a joke
1aaronaaron1 1 year ago
This is the funniest thing I think I've ever seen! Thank you for posting an irrefutable and undeniable example of just how little you know about science in general, physics in particular, and what constitutes a debate!
There are so many fallacies, incorrect assumptions, invalid reasoning, and misunderstood details in your water-squirting video that (like most others) I seriously had to consider whether you're mentally retarded or a jokester. I hope it's the former, because the joke's not funny.
VinylMechanic 1 year ago
Comment removed
VinylMechanic 1 year ago
In TF's example, the mass of the rock was calculated over an AREA which was equal to the area of the water. The toy uses a huge mass (the kid's weight) applied to a small area of water, representing FAR greater than a 4 to 1 mass ratio.
But in any case, water accelerated to escape velocity would be instantly vaporized. Glad you mentioned heat. Can steam bursts make craters 240,000 miles away?
The height of the earth's atmosphere is NOT the end of the earth's gravity, as you seem to imply.
Astrobrant2 1 year ago
And why are the waterzooka spraying half a liter 8 m up in the air? Cause a child using most of his body weight to press it out! Back to physics class.
andvil01 1 year ago
My god this video is pathetic. Thunderf00t even makes a separate video explaining why the nozzle size is NOT a factor. The conservation of energy is an unbreakable law; it does not matter HOW an object got where it was, its potential energy is the same, meaning the minimum kinetic energy that is required to do so is also the same. The only effect the nozzle size will have will be on the friction of the water jet. Should've stayed in school.
05swanbe 1 year ago
Ive never seen such a congregation of retards, do people here honestly think the craters on the moon were made by water from the earth... seriously?
Sure you can shoot water further through a nozzle but you shoot less of it and either way it is still far short of the INCREDIBLE distance to the moon, what thunderfoot posted was factually correct as he didn't include the nozzle, you guys added it and said he was wrong, now who is making a fallacious claim?
roflex2 1 year ago
DebateCrusher, what is your education level?
Legit73Resurected 1 year ago
@Legit73Resurected
he/she/it never left primary school
Leadman1989 1 year ago
DC's penis is the size of like bar.
TheNamelessCharacter 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
This is all basic physics really.Th fact that so many can fall for thunderfoot's argument is incredible.I don't care about your religious point of view but to twist science in such a basic way? It isn't about the relationship between the density of the rook and water alone.The key point is about the area of the opening and depth .Temperature inside the earth is another BIG factor too.Plz ask any professor of psychics and face him with the example of the finger semi blocking the hose opening.PLZ!
bfruitfulandmultiply 1 year ago
This is all basic physics really.Th fact that so many can fall for thunderfoot's argument is incredible.I don't care about your religious point of view but to twist science in such a basic way? It isn't about the relationship between the density of the rook and water alone.The key point is about the area of the opening and depth .Temperature inside the earth is another BIG factor too.Plz ask any professor of psychics and face him with the example of the finger semi blocking the hose opening.PLZ!
bfruitfulandmultiply 1 year ago
@bfruitfulandmultiply Very good point about the area. That is the major point which totally discredits the water bazooka analogy.
You run a risk of being challenged when you tell other people to get guidance in a subject you clearly have never taken. Density of the rock IS a factor because it relates directly to the pressure on the water, per unit surface area. It is about a 4 or 5 to 1 ratio. The kid's mass on the toy's water surface area is many times that. (cont'd)
Astrobrant2 1 year ago
@bfruitfulandmultiply (Pt2) Good that you mentioned the heat, too. Have you calculated what initial speed would be necessary to launch an object from the surface of the earth to the moon? (With an atmosphere.) You do realize that the speed would be enough to instantly vaporize and maybe even plasmize the water. It would blast much of the local atmosphere away as well. So it would be just superhot gas and plasma exploding outward at a wide angle.
You think that would make craters on the moon?
Astrobrant2 1 year ago
Do you know the amount of pressure it takes to pump one of those waterzookas? Without that variable, your point is moot.
jebus6kryst 1 year ago
@DebateCrusher do you really think that all the water shot from the earth hit the moon so many times on impact. Please and your video of the "man made water bazooka" is irrelevant because you didn't even compair the science of the way the waterzooka shot's water and it's distance and the way the water would have shot from the earth comparing distance and force you know the force you would need to make set craters.
k1a2n3e41 1 year ago
LOL Your amazing, being an ignorant creationist you would have no idea how wrong your claim is because you are talking about somthing totally irrelivant!
gorilla199uncensored 1 year ago
The shadow of DebateCrusher's water spout seems to be nicely in focus on the wall of Plato's cave... six miles under the rocky mass...
studioROT 1 year ago
its not pseudoscience its called phisics
linkforever92 1 year ago
How exactly does the muscle force of a bunch of kids come into play regarding "Noah's flood water" flying to the moon?
anglicantian 1 year ago
Ah DebateCrusher fails to crush a debate yet again, your username is such a misnomer.
RandomSnot 1 year ago
Physics Fail. TF00t's video refuted the Neph's claim that the falling rock caused the water to be propelled into space ultimately hitting the moon. So, the only force acted on the rock would have been gravity. Your example includes the use of an outside force (the kids' muscle power) which increases the pressure causing the water to exceed it's independent volumetric limits. Try using gravity only, and you will see the difference.
Physics fail.
wuphat 1 year ago
@wuphat What you said. Hey, everyone! What he said!!!
DarthVictive 1 year ago
Debate crusher srsly... you should look at yourself from a different angle you just don't know physics...
Read a few physic books regarding mechanics and just learn facts - wiki alone wont help ya.
Apply what you have learned to question the bible..
Anyways what these kids are doing is this: The fill water into a tube , they apply outside force to the bottom of the tube thus increasing the pressure within and launching water higher. this has nothing to do with potential hight energy >.>
iEngoyPie 1 year ago
@DebateCrusher We could go into lengthy analysis and cite wikifacts, just to prove we are smart, but this short, to the point video suffices.
mikeet00n 1 year ago
The problem with your analysis is that those kids are adding energy to the tube by pushing down on it. Check how far the water gets shot out if you let only gravity act on it.
isthisasn 1 year ago
Debatecrusher, the difference is that people are adding energy to the tube by pushing it down. Buy one of those and let the water squirt out through the energy of the falling tube, then show me how far it goes.
isthisasn 1 year ago
Comment removed
ThePickyNancy 1 year ago
Between muscle power and compressed air........... I mean its not as if you are leaving gravity do all the work in creating pressure on the water. Not even close to it. Thunderf00t's proposal was based hugely on the following: potential energy = mgh. If you replace g with: children pushing an air compressed pump you should be able to see why the height obtained by the water is so great. If not, then I give up.
automaticSOM 1 year ago
@automaticSOM
this is a good point, and pretty much sums this debate up in its entirty.
i commented on one of TF's videos saying that this is exactly what would happen.
a debate would arise, and people that dont understand will still argue.
debating Neph for him was a lose lose. as i predicted it turned into "kids with squirt guns can launch it higher so that means that god did it."
next.." well my car is black so god did it." next "god did it so god did it." endless and un-winnable.
rlwiii 1 year ago
oh and nozzle size has nothing to do with it
theviolator23 1 year ago
also, the water gun proves absolutely nothing. There is no way of showing how many joules of energy the kid put into the system. In order to show a working model to demonstrate Thunderf00ts error, a scale model would have had to be done were the ratio of joules input into the system / the mass of water remained constant (and where the Gravitational Field Strength was the same but that should be a given, and I don't think that anyone was planning on testing this on other planets.)
theviolator23 1 year ago
debatecrusher brings about a good point while making himself look like a total idiot. If no energy is lost (which is impossible but we'll just run with it for simplicity), then we would expect the gravitational energy from the rock to equal the gravitational energy from the water once the water comes to rest in the air. The equation for gravitational potential energy is energy= mass*g*height if the mass of the water was significantly less then it would go higher than 40 km (but not to the moon).
theviolator23 1 year ago
With depth of water comes heat? You do realize that water at deeper depths is colder, right?
You might as well have said "but thunderfoot is neglecting something here - god did it." It would have been every bit as intelligent as the argument you've put forth here.
autumnsylver 1 year ago
lol too bad you know nothing of physics. Or you wouldnt have wasted your time on this video and we'd all be happier
theWestonian 1 year ago
its funy that you still believe what your saying is right when you dont grasp the most basic concepts of physics, the water shoots as far as the force one puts behind it will allow, thunderfoot gave you the maximum force that the rock would give and thus gave the maximum height water could travel. please go to school take a physics class and then apply the rudimentary concpets into your video
calus14 1 year ago
craters on the moon was obviously made by gigantic water bazookas used by dinosaurs that were pissed cuz they didnt get a spot on noahs ark.
sydman 1 year ago
DebateFailure, I think this pretty much sums it all up: watch?v=FZ1cJQ17sSk
impiouspuppy 1 year ago
ROFLMFAO! Is this a joke?
JesterAzazel 1 year ago
erm...is this person "debatecrusher" on serious amounts of drugs?
this is the most embarrassing example of scientific ignorance i have seen for a long time, for the record, whilst i personally believe thunderfoot has a firm grasp of science and evolution i also happen to think he is a prick
never the less these creationist "debunking" videos are just the products of idiots with too much time on their hands
debate crusher video = epic fail.
scottishreggaefan 1 year ago
Got any fancy maths to go with your self-righteous assumptions? Numbers are the most important thing in the whole world.
Riff625 1 year ago
The only debate you've crushed is one with anyone who did not previously accept the reality of the Dunning-Kruger effect.
How's that PhD from Harvard in "all science" working out for you?
Leehofooks 1 year ago
How about you explain your argument using the adequate math instead of performing childish tricks? My guess is you know nothing about mathematics besides simple addition and subtraction, most becoming of any retrograde creationist. Keep in mind that some of us do have professional training in physics, so go ahead and please clarify your asinine guess for the rest of us.
1971ojoalparche1971 1 year ago
Only a creationist could take 50ft divided by 3ft and get 25x. How are we supposed to take your video seriously when you won't take the time to click Start, All Programs, Accessories, CALCULATOR?
Also you need to change your argument to "God moved the moon much much closer to the earth then made tiny holes in the crust then pushed really really hard on it." Then you have us convinced :)
TheProphetless 1 year ago
Haha, Creationist Physics is so cool. If they knew that they do not need to accelerate the water to push it to the orbit ...
They just need to pray, really hard.
th3dig1tal0n3 1 year ago
There is one crucial mistake you are making. In the waterzooka, the user applies the same amount of force until the water runs out, narrowing the nozzle will allow the user to impart the same force on less water.
The force behind noah's flood in the hypothetical scenario will decrease as the nozzle size decreases. This is because the same amount of pressure is acting on all of the water. By decreasing the nozzel length, you decrease the amount of force acting on the water.
IceFire9yt 1 year ago
haha, hilarious stuff. So now we have Creationist Physics, too?
The level of denial is immense. Comprehensive, too!
Gnug215 1 year ago
You should change the title to "Debate Crusher's Psuedoscience"
SnipeZuDown 1 year ago
@DebateCrusher, I heard Middle School Physics is hard.
DaDoctaBoom 1 year ago
If the flow of water is kept constant then a narrow nozzle size will make the water go further however it requires more energy.
If you test it with the waterzooka you will notice that to empty one with a narrower nozzle in the same amout of time it takes you empty one with a wider you will need to push/drag harder.
Hedning1390 1 year ago
well....your videos just fails on all levels...
zenitSpb 1 year ago
Wow. This is more proof that creationists need basic science courses. I wonder if a high school class could benefit from watching this and explaining why you suck.
sherlockmethod 1 year ago
watch?v=xa7ZQnj-hso&annotation_id=annotation_304606&feature=iv
Peebody 1 year ago
DebateCrusher I recommend you repeat physics 101, because you fail to understand the principal of conservation of energy. You are saying that if you push water through a nozzle you get higher velocities which is true, but the amount of water expelled is a lot smaller, and therefore you need a lot more energy to achieve the nozzle velocity with a larger amount of water.
So again, it is true that the pressure of the crust of the earth COULD shoot water in to space, but not a lot of it.
egonecoetcenote 1 year ago
youtube.com/watch?v=km1ZeMBiWwU&feature=digest
youtube.com/watch?v=km1ZeMBiWwU&feature=digest
youtube.com/watch?v=km1ZeMBiWwU&feature=digest
youtube.com/watch?v=km1ZeMBiWwU&feature=digest
youtube.com/watch?v=km1ZeMBiWwU&feature=digest
youtube.com/watch?v=km1ZeMBiWwU&feature=digest
youtube.com/watch?v=km1ZeMBiWwU&feature=digest
June28July 1 year ago
I wonder if DebateCrusher realizes how ignorant this makes him look? I mean, this video displays such a breathtaking misunderstanding of physics that I'm starting to think it's actually a joke.
ozmoroid 1 year ago
@ozmoroid
The DebateCrusher takes himself very seriously. That makes it funnier!
June28July 1 year ago
@ozmoroid - you're a joke.
DebateCrusher 1 year ago
@DebateCrusher Are you saying that you do understand physics?
ozmoroid 1 year ago
@ozmoroid - I'm saying that you telling us to suspend the fact that we saw thunderfoot refuted in the above video and to believe a make believe clap trap wherein TF tries to prove his point by omitting all facets of the physics involved dealing with confined water escaping through a nozzle.
DebateCrusher 1 year ago
@DebateCrusher In your study of "comprehensive physics" have you every come across Bernoulli's equation? That equation is another way to state Thunderf00t's argument. If you can show that it's wrong let us all know 'cause every civil/mechanical engineering in the world will need to go back to school, and every hydraulic system in existence will need to be redesigned.
ozmoroid 1 year ago
@DebateCrusher You obviously don't understand rudimentary physics.
The rock mass is a constant pressure system. Therefore, the size of the nozzle has no affect on the height. decreasing the size of the hole to "increase the distance" will not work. and regardless of this FACT you're trying to prove a moot point even if the water could have been shot out "25" times further that doesn't help the case that water hit the moon. the distance to the moon is approx. 400000 miles.
Peebody 1 year ago
@DebateCrusher The whole point almost every single poster is trying to get across to you is that your video did not refute TF. You proved that nozzle pressure does certain things completely unrelated to the model TF presented. If you were correct you would refute conservation of energy, you simply don't seem to have any grasp of physics at all. At this point I don't know what else to say.
JimtheBob 1 year ago
@DebateCrusher The problem is the kids are adding energy to the tube by pushing down on it. Make a video in which that tube accelerates the water using only gravity and I think you'll see thunderfoot was correct.
isthisasn 1 year ago
@DebateCrusher seriously debate crusher? thats ur answer?. dont u realize that there is nothing to pressurise water other than rocks falling due to gravity. and the kinetic energy of the falling rock is the only available energy to acclerate the water upwards. U r using the nozzle size of a water gun to demonstrate the fact? well its the pressure available inside the gun that allows water to accelerate out.
mignik01 1 year ago
@DebateCrusher What nozzle are you referring too? in Neph's vid he claimed that all the water shot from the earth and made the crater's on the moon well considering the large number's and size of the impacts on the moon it's foolish to assume the water would even make it to the earth before freezing or having the energy to not just to make it to the moon but to cause massive impacts and so many is ridicules.
k1a2n3e41 1 year ago
@DebateCrusher
The reason why those waterzookas can send water from a 3ft tube, up to 50 ft, is because the applied force does not just come from gravity alone, nor is there a 3 ft pile of rock with a constant preasured on top of it.. but the strength and force applied to it from the human handeling it.. and with our muscles, we're able to produce an excess amount of force to something, not just the weight of our self.
bjormika9 1 year ago
@DebateCrusher LOL.
purpleorchid76 1 year ago
@DebateCrusher For a constant pressure system the size of the nozzle does NOT impact the velocity. Here is a simple proof. Pressure = Force/Area, i.e P=F/A. Now we know that a force produces an acceleration due to newtons 2nd law, this acceleration determines a final velocity (remember acceleration is change in velocity). Substitue F=Ma into the original equation (newtons 2nd law). We arrive at P= Ma/A, Rearange for a: a=PA/M , the Mass M can also be expressed as a force mg.... CONT
QuantumOverlord 1 year ago
so a=PA/M, but P=F/A therefore a=(F/A)(A/M), a = FA/AM, so the area cancels to give a = F/M this proves, the area has no impact on the acceleration, and therefore the velocity. Only the mass of the fluid and the force it exerts influence its velocity.
Appologies for an incorrect statement regarding the mass M in my previous comment.
QuantumOverlord 1 year ago
A flow system like a hoze is not the same as a static pressure system. In the hoze, a force is used to accelerate the water, This force DOES NOT come from the pressure of the water, Since force accelerates unit mass, a larger force applied to a smaller area would increase the velocity but only because less mass is being accelerated by the same force. Now if you remove the external force such as the child pushing the hoze, etc, it would NOT work.
QuantumOverlord 1 year ago
@DebateCrusher Ahh, but first you must prove that the confined water escaped through this presumed nozzle. Firstly, you seriously just compared the earth's water, and a rock falling on the earth to a waterzooka. You are hilariously inaccurate. You're using pseudoscience to accuse someone of pseudoscience...and that's the funniest thing about the video.
BigLundi 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@DebateCrusher You're saying that a SCIENTIST is using pseudoscience, and not a RELIGIOUS person? Here's another point: MOST ROCK, even VERY LARGE rocks, CANNOT PASS THROUGH THE ATMOSHPERE, GOING TOWARDS THE PLANET, without being turned into fine dust. You think WATER will fair better? Idiot!
PalulukanMakto 10 months ago
@DebateCrusher Sorry, I forgot the Earth had a giant nozzle. My mistake.
9hello123 8 months ago
@9hello123 Is this a joke?
MrNeodarwinian 2 months ago
@MrNeodarwinian Wow. I wonder?
9hello123 2 months ago
@DebateCrusher
your mom's a joke
lupocephalic 1 year ago
@DebateCrusher and here we have yet another stunningly intelligent rebuttal. DebateCrusher, a high school student could tell you that there is a difference between energy applied by a falling mass, or potential gravitational energy, and energy applied by compressive force. the length of the tube has nothing to do with how much energy you can transfer to the water inside.
hellbirdsflight 1 year ago
@DebateCrusher Maturity award!
vaguelyreptilian 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@ozmoroid "this video displays such a breathtaking misunderstanding of physics that I'm starting to think it's actually a joke"
A reasonable conclusion. I've encountered a lot of creoTards, but even they were not as stupid as DebateCrusher. He must be a Poe. If so, he went too far and exposed himself. If not, well at least he does a good job of making creoTard Christians appear as dumb and willfully ignorant as possible.
snappingbear 1 year ago
@ozmoroid haha it's so true!
MegaHazzer123 1 year ago
You have no idea how hard I laughed at this. You couldn't have misinterpreted Thunderf00t more if you tried.
Oh but wait, you're a creationist, so you did try.
CodaCola 1 year ago
Do you see now why your small nozzle doesn't matter?
lupocephalic 1 year ago
Ho boy. This is first-year physics, people.
The reason why a smaller nozzle on a hose (or a water cannon) makes for higher exit velocity is simply and strictly because it allows for a greater build-up of pressure.
If you attach a hose to a constant pressure source (like the weight of rocks, as Neph suggests), nozzle size will make NO difference on the exit speed of the water. Try this out! Attach a hose to the bottom of a big barrel of water, and then see what it's like!
FiverBeyond 1 year ago
Try learning some physics next time.
I love it when a creationist says he won't bother doing the math to make his point. That it is so obvious his view is right.
Just like it's obvious the earth is flat. You don't need to do the math. You can just tell.
noonespecia2007 1 year ago
Hmm, ok I understand that. But who stated any of this was 'standard debate format'?
Thunderf00t addressed that you had made a video, in which you expressed that the nozzle size is indeed a factor in determining the velocity of the ejected water, correct?
Thunderf00t now has two videos, both demonstrating that such a factor has no influence on the velocity of the water at all. So what exactly is the problem here?
CitizenRare 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
Physics includes math, and your math skills suck. Can you say 3 times 25 equals 50? Of course you can; you did!
Once again you make a video, so wrong everyone points out how wrong it is, just brimming with wrongability, overflowing with wrongness - the, dare I say, pinnacle of wrong, wrong, wrong - but you still can't admit that you got it wrong.
impiouspuppy 1 year ago
I would rather you did go into a lengthy analysis, quoting wikifacts.
Insolent85 1 year ago
@Insolent85 - Oh? You just don't want to be super power punched with excellent scientific research.
DebateCrusher 1 year ago
FAIL
Magic187u 1 year ago
I can't believe you're still arguing after being totally owned by Thunderfoot. Check out RaymondCorrigan for an actual experiment on this that proves you are wrong.
justwhoarebongorock 1 year ago
"For these reasons and some others, it is proven that Thunderfoot is just an activist looking to argue against creationists."
Wow DebateCrusher. You seriously need to take your own advice.
CitizenRare 1 year ago
you present no real argument here......and no real math.....please, try again, try harder. You will still fail, but at least then you can hold your head knowing you made a public spectacle of your willful ignorance.....
eire138 1 year ago
DebateCrusher, it is YOU who is leaving out a few variables. When a person uses a Waterzooka, they can determine how much pressure they are using and that's what is making the water shoot so far, not the nozzle size. The nozzle size only makes it easier to aim.
If you want it to shoot farther, then you use your muscles and increase the pressure. That is something that the crust of the Earth cannot do. It cannot consciously increase pressure to go higher.
underpantssquirrel 1 year ago
@underpantssquirrel - Put some concrete to that nozzle and let it free fall. No kid could duplicate that, and it would exceed 50ft.
DebateCrusher 1 year ago
Are you so sure? How about you try it out. How about you try and use a few Cinder blocks to pull it down and see if it can affect the height, proportionally to Thunderf00t's model.
Remember that Thunderf00t also mentioned that water moving at a high enough velocity can cut through rock like butter. If the nozzle started out small, why wouldn't the pressure break up the area, making the nozzle size bigger?
There are a few other variables that you are ignoring. You'll have try harder.
underpantssquirrel 1 year ago
@DebateCrusher so you are saying that during the noahide flood there was concrete and waterzookas that caused the moon craters?? Well SHIT!! Why didn't you just say so?! It all makes perfect sense now!!!
eire138 1 year ago
This video folks is why you should never home school children. This TARD's understanding of physics and the problem presented by Thunderfoot are obviously way over his head. The only way this video is relevant is if the TARD is claiming God used hand operated pumps to spray the moon. LOL
snappingbear 1 year ago
@snappingbear - are you implying that Thunderfoot was homeschooled because he claime that there was no way for water to shoot up past 4X when the video shows water going up 24 X's? I wasn't homes schooled and I went to public school. You must have been home schooled because you failed! Actually homeschoolers I know are much more intelligent than you are and do very well in college. Your use of the word TARD shows an anti science motivation.
DebateCrusher 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@DebateCrusher "he claime that there was no way for water to shoot up past 4X when the video shows water going up 24 X's"
Liar, he never said that. Pay attention to his video more closely, perhaps that's why you didn't get far in school. Did you suffer from A.D.D? Your video is nonsense because the pump applies so much extra force. BTW, not surprised you know Christian home schoolers, Was it them that gave you the idea for the video? LOL
snappingbear 1 year ago
@DebateCrusher what you showed here was not a system displaying uniform pressure as would be required by neffy's theory, but a variable pressure, so in essence, you are saying your skydaddy reached out and physically SQUEEZED the earth to generate the force needed....yeah....mmmmkay....
eire138 1 year ago
Thunderfoot is right. That aside so why is the dark side of the moon so much more cratered since it always faces away from the earth? Why are the craters so big on the facing side? I have never seen a jet of water from two moving bodies make only round craters why is this?also the amount of water as described would NOT be enough to crater the entire surface of the moon. The mid-Atlantic ridge only points partial at the moon and then you need enough water to cover the earth. What of Jupiter?
aBRUSHforCONFUCIUS 1 year ago
ah I see, somebody is deleting uncomfortable comments. How low can you go?
twentyinchsoul 1 year ago
Your argument fails, Thunderf00t has laready released a video showing why it fails.
Henrikswanstrom 1 year ago
Perhaps you could explain what size of nozzel is required to increase the height of the water from 40km to 407,000km?
Nakedhominid 1 year ago
you loose big time dc
twentyinchsoul 1 year ago 3
@twentyinchsoul - the video showed the water going 24X and that contradicts TF's max of 4X. TF lost by visual evidence.
DebateCrusher 1 year ago
@DebateCrusher Constant applied force by the children, not applicable to falling rock. What part of this don't you understand?
tarrin4ever 1 year ago
Is simply saying 'facepalm' at DebateCrusher enough?
SilentKafkan 1 year ago 3
@SilentKafkan - the video proved that water could go up 24X AND TF didn't address this issue in his video.
DebateCrusher 1 year ago
@DebateCrusher
Yes, but YOUR video does not take into account the force acting upon the water.
Nakedhominid 1 year ago
@DebateCrusher 24X still doesn't get you anywhere near the moon.
impiouspuppy 1 year ago
@impiouspuppy - we weren't discussing that. We were discussing TF's physics. See title. Failed again puppy.
DebateCrusher 1 year ago
@DebateCrusher
Now even TF answered your video. Failed even more, puppy
fartedbananas 1 year ago
@fartedbananas - No he didn't. TF didn't even state my proposition, nor his original proposition. Honest people state the proposition and don't just jump into the argument and ambiguously wade through them.
DebateCrusher 1 year ago
@DebateCrusher So you're saying because Thunderf00t didn't state what you had originally stated, then he is dishonest?
You're a tool.
CitizenRare 1 year ago
@CitizenRare - no, i'm not making that claim, I'm making the claim that TF is not using standard debate format which is basic and natural. Those who are using deceit do not make this approach if their arguments are weak by nature. You always state your opponents claim accurately first. You don not prejudice the audience with things that aren't pertinent to the argument (that is called poisoning the water. TF first poisons the water ( faith statement) then proceeds without the claim.
DebateCrusher 1 year ago
@DebateCrusher
Your statement: Little hole will make it fly higher... TC's scientific answer: NO. You get the force placed on the "cannon" from the kids. Nothing more. If the water is under the earth, then the force is from the falling rock, stupid, not from "god's hand" pushing the water up, like the children do. Even with a nozzle there is not so much difference as been showed by the real life experiments I linked you. TF showed this too. So yes, FAIL. Honest people ADMIT THEY MADE MISTAKES.
fartedbananas 1 year ago
@fartedbananas - so, kids have more force in their arms than ten pounds of rocks. Yeah, sure.
DebateCrusher 1 year ago
@DebateCrusher
Holy fucking stupidity. I don't even have to answer this one. Don't you see my fucking irony from the analog between the kids and God's hand? And if you want to be sarcastic, say impossible stuff (or inrealistic stuff). 10 pounds, I hope you realise that's not much, moron...
fartedbananas 1 year ago
@fartedbananas - It isn't much. It takes a genius to figure out that you can keep adding and adding, and then maybe a higher level of atheistic genius to figure out how much continental blocks worth of rocks weigh. But of course atheistic genius would never lead you in that direction.
DebateCrusher 1 year ago
@DebateCrusher
No you can't keep adding rocks you fucking moron. That process is called isostasis. I can explain that to you. But why should I? See wikipedia... And continental blcok have a density of 2.8 g/cm³. Even this little constant explains why it's even impossible to have water (density: 0.999 g/cm³) under earth, that's why oceans are on the surface of the earth and earth sinks in water. Derp
fartedbananas 1 year ago
@fartedbananas - which is why do scientists find water trapped in the rocks below? You're playing with a set of assumptions. Namely that water starts above and has to migrate to the caves below the rocks. Of course that wouldn't be possible. But if the waters were there from the get go, vacuum sealed, so to speak, that would explain why it rose to the surface. Duhhhhhhhhhh. Are you a scientists or what?
DebateCrusher 1 year ago
@DebateCrusher
Dude, what is the difference between finding water at subducting plates and a full water layer below the earth's crest? THINK. Mostly the water isn't found deep, and in SEDIMENTARY ROCKS (automatically proves an old earth, stupid). Other places where water is found is at subducting oceanic plates under continental ones, like the andes mountains.The water comes up in the form of Geysers or as gas in volcano's. Another proof of plate tectonics and old earth.
fartedbananas 1 year ago
Comment removed
fartedbananas 1 year ago
@DebateCrusher
And if you talk about caves you fucking shithead, then you also agree the earth is old. Caves are made in CaCo3 rock, and do you know from what that is made? I bet not, it's made of plankton (biostreams), ancient coral reefs (bioherms) or just sedimentary organisms like sea anemones and such. Another fail for flood geology. And of course, you should be really fucking retarded if you think that would explain why it rose to the surface. You are playing with debunked stuff you moron
fartedbananas 1 year ago
@fartedbananas - Since you are a numb skull who will not listen, I made a video that shows how water can shoot out more than 4X thesize of the rock.
DebateCrusher 1 year ago
@DebateCrusher
FINALLY, you got it. ONLY 4 TIMES! 4*10km IS NOT 384399 km (distance to moon). That is the fucking point you moron! IT IS IMPOSSIBLE for water to get catapulted to the surface of the moon you dumb shithead. Go ahead, make a video. And do it on SCALE. And where the fuck did I say that is impossible? It's indeed 4X thesize of the rock. SEE TF HIS VIDEO!!!
fartedbananas 1 year ago
@DebateCrusher
YES ONLY 4 TIMES YOU FUCKING MORON. Don't you think I agree on that one? 4*10 Km IS NOT 384399 km (distance to moon). How retarded are you? If you want the water to reach the surface of the moon, it should be 38439 times the size of the rock o.O
fartedbananas 1 year ago
@DebateCrusher No you didn`t , you confounded moron. All you showed is that water can be pushed by a human 24 feet through a water pistol. This was never disputed.
The point that TF was making is that gravity is a constant force, thus dropping one cubic meter of rock 10 feet will impart enough energy to push one cubic meter of water 40 feet.
Nakedhominid 1 year ago
@DebateCrusher You didn't address even one of fartedbananas statements. Stop fucking repeating yourself and telling him what the video showed and fucking respond to the question at hand. There is no evidence, anywhere in the world, for a worldwide flood....Humans have known this for decades.
Crossopterygii 1 year ago
@DebateCrusher ohh you mean the video that thunderfoot crushed using yet again basic physics? yup that sure is a good video to refer people too
calus14 1 year ago
@DebateCrusher holy crap learn somethings before you make videos
123columbo123 1 year ago
Comment removed
impiouspuppy 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@DebateCrusher Physics includes math, and your math skills suck. Can you say 3 times 25 equals 50? Of course you can; you did!
Once again you make a video, so wrong everyone points out how wrong it is, just brimming with wrongability, overflowing with wrongness - the, dare I say, pinnacle of wrong, wrong, wrong - but you still can't admit that you got it wrong.
impiouspuppy 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@DebateCrusher Physics includes math, and your math skills suck. Can you say 3 times 25 equals 50? Of course you can; you did!
Once again you make a video, so wrong everyone points out how wrong it is, just brimming with wrongability, overflowing with wrongness - the, dare I say, pinnacle of wrong, wrong, wrong - but you still can't admit that you got it wrong.
impiouspuppy 1 year ago
This premise is structurally wrong before we even get to the math. That is a tube. A confined space in which pressure may build, resulting in a pressure difference. There is no such comparison with the landmasses of the planet, and there are also no instances of landmasses floating on water, that just doesn't happen. I suppose Thunderf00t got lost entertaining this concept's math. Negating the fact that the basis was wrong to begin with. Nice attempt though, thought someone actually had him.
Ambelghan 1 year ago