Truth Seeking Pluralist

On about September 21, 2017 I received via email some questions/comments related to vacuum and how rockets and spacecraft are able to operate in space.   I replied within about 1 day and my responses are presented below slightly edited. QUESTIONS/COMMENTS AS PRESENTED How can anything be propagated through space if it is a vacuum, nothing? If space is a vacuum then what does the rocket push off of?    How does the rocket maintain its heading and not spin out of control if there is no air to stabilize off of? Space travel believers will say that they use special propellant that when ejected out of the thruster nozzle has an equal and opposite reaction.   If that’s the case then wouldn't the thrusters on let’s say the space shuttle when maneuvering to the ISS have to eject the special propellant faster than 17,500MPH which is the speed they are traveling? All tests show that rockets don't work in a vacuum. T MARK HIGHTOWER’S RESPONSE I am going to do

LINES OF LATITUDE AND LONGITUDE ARE DISTORTED TO HIDE THE FLAT EARTH or DISTORTIONS OF LATITUDE AND LONGITUDE MAKE FLAT EARTH SEEM LIKE A SPHERE or DOES IT MAKE SENSE FOR FLAT EARTH ADVOCATES TO CONTEND THAT DISTORTIONS AND/OR STRETCHING OF LINES OF LATITUDE AND LONGITUDE ON BOTH LAND MASSES AND OCEANS MAKE THE SPHERICAL EARTH MODEL SEEM TO BE CORRECT ON LAND MASSES BUT IT FAILS ON THE OCEANS WHERE IT REALLY CANNOT BE VERIFIED? PROBLEM STATEMENT AND RESPONSE by T. Mark Hightower 9/19/2017 SUMMARY OF THIS ARGUMENT USED IN FAVOR OF FLAT EARTH THEORY I cited to a flat earth advocate how the closest distance between Perth Australia and Sydney Australia on the spherical earth model is a little over 2000 miles, whereas the closest distance between these two cities on the flat earth model (azimuthal equidistant map most often cited and shown by flat earth model advocates) is over 5000 miles.   And surely Australians would know that the 2000 mile distance makes sense if they h

WOULD ROCKET ENGINES FIRING IN SPACE NOT BE ABLE TO AFFECT THE MOTION OF THE SPACECRAFT SINCE THEY HAVE NOTHING TO PUSH AGAINST IN THE VACUUM OF SPACE? PROBLEM STATEMENT AND RESPONSE by T. Mark Hightower 9/20/2017 SUMMARY OF THIS ARGUMENT USED IN FAVOR OF FLAT EARTH THEORY This argument describes physical behavior familiar to most on the earth where it is either clear that motion is achieved by pushing against something or it appears that this is the case.   I will describe two examples.   A car pushes against the road with its drive wheels powered by the car's engine or motor in a direction opposite to the direction of the car's motion.   A jet aircraft in motion in the air (atmosphere) appears to be achieving its forward motion by pushing against the air behind it with the thrust of its jet engines.   In space there is no air, but instead a vacuum.   A spacecraft in space firing it rocket engine would have nothing to push against, therefore the firing of its rock

Kelvinsong, Earth's atmosphere, CC BY-SA 3.0 DOES SIMPLE VACUUM BOTTLE EXPERIMENT IMPLY THAT ENTIRE ATMOSPHERE SHOULD HAVE BEEN SUCKED INTO SPACE LONG AGO ACCORDING TO CONVENTIONAL PHYSICS MODEL? PROBLEM STATEMENT AND RESPONSE by T. Mark Hightower 9/17/2017 SUMMARY OF THIS ARGUMENT USED IN FAVOR OF FLAT EARTH THEORY First pull some significant level of vacuum in a rigid bottle.  Place the bottom of the bottle into a body of water.  Create a hole in the bottom of the bottle.  A significant amount of water will be sucked up into the bottle above the level of the body of water.  Since this vacuum sucked up water, a liquid, it would be even easier to suck up air (a gas) which is what makes up the atmosphere according to spherical earth theory.  Since the atmosphere does not get sucked up into space, the spherical earth theory fails this simple thought experiment. T MARK HIGHTOWER'S RESPONSE This argument appears to make sense in a qualitative sense

In May 2017 I wrote up my Christian testimony and shared it with a few people, and was thinking about how I might eventually share it with a wider audience.   I thought about posting it on the web but I was not sure exactly how to best go about doing that.   So I procrastinated.   Then about a week ago I felt so strongly about conclusions and views I was coming to on the flat earth theory versus the spherical earth theory controversy that I felt I had to move forward and get something on the web, so I started this Blog in the easiest way I could find, using Google’s Blogger app.   So I no longer have an excuse to procrastinate in getting my testimony out on the web. The only thing I think I would add for clarification at this point, is that I feel that I am definitely a religious pluralist.   Both of the books that I recently read by Dr. Boyd Purcell, “Spiritual Terrorism” and “Christianity Without Insanity,” helped me to conclude that I have to be a religious pluralist, eve