Sorry Dave, but you're question begging.
By definition, motion requires a "frame of reference."
From Wikipedia:
In physics, motion is the change in position of an object with respect to its surroundings in a given interval of time. Motion is mathematically described in terms of displacement, distance, velocity, acceleration, and speed. Motion of a body is observed by attaching a frame of reference to an observer and measuring the change in position of the body relative to that frame.
If the position of an object is not changing with respect to a given frame of reference (reference point), the object is said to be at rest, motionless, immobile, stationary, or to have constant (time-invariant) position with reference to its surroundings. Momentum is a quantity which is used for measuring the motion of an object. An object's momentum is directly related to the object's mass and velocity, and the total momentum of all objects in an isolated system (one not affected by external forces) does not change with time, as described by the law of conservation of momentum. An object's motion cannot change unless it is acted upon by a force.
As there is no absolute frame of reference, absolute motion cannot be determined. Thus, everything in the universe can be considered to be moving.
Motion applies to various physical systems: to objects, bodies, matter particles, matter fields, radiation, radiation fields, radiation particles, curvature and space-time. One can also speak of motion of images, shapes and boundaries. So, the term motion, in general, signifies a continuous change in the configuration of a physical system in space. For example, one can talk about motion of a wave or about motion of a quantum particle, where the configuration consists of probabilities of occupying specific positions. |
In other words, you cannot describe motion without an external frame of reference, which is why I said earlier that your statement "the earth is not moving because we feel no motion" was confirmation bias, that you're using the earth itself as a frame of reference for it's own motion, which is also circular reasoning.
Your assertion that, because we cannot measure absolute motion, that therefore the earth is not moving, is a non-sequitur, because by definition, there is no absolute frame of reference that we can use.
No, Dave, that problem is only in your head.
That would be true if there was an absolute frame of reference which we could use.
But since there's not, there's no contradiction.
Saying it doesn't make it so.
Red herring.
Atheism has nothing to do with this discussion.
There are Flat Earthers who are atheists and FEers that are Christians, and even FEers that ascribe to other religions.
No, research is about finding the truth.
You've been answered on this already.
Repeating your argument doesn't advance the discussion.
SO WHAT?!
If this isn't an appeal to authority, I don't know what is.
:blabla: