I don’t think this headline belongs to this article.

The article is talking about how the study referenced a non-existent source

Not an answer to your question, but years ago I used to work at best buy. My employee discount was 5% over cost. I could purchase their $200 service plan on an appliance for about $15. With the discount, definitely worth it.

The earth is rotating bro. It is not static. that’s literally why there are jets streams and prevailing wind patterns. If you could actually use a rotating body as a static reference frame, the stars in the sky would be spinning around your reference frame every 24 hours. Any star doesn’t have to be very far away before it needs to move faster than the speed of light to complete it’s rotation (which is not possible). Go spin a basketball. I promise you the 2 sides are moving in opposite directions from any reference frame that is not spinning (bc reference frames by definition are not spinning)

I see how you don’t understand reference frames. From any reference point, the 2 sides of the globe are moving differently. If you consider 1 side stationary, the other side of the earth is moving 3200 km/hr relative to you. If you’re at the core both sides are moving in opposite directions. I think you could teleport from one pole to the other and be ok. Reference frames by definition cannot be rotating.

The surface of the earth at the equator is moving at ~1600 km/hr in order to rotate fully in a day. If you teleport to the opposite side of the planet, you’ll still be moving at that speed but the surface there is moving in the opposite direction. You will now be having a very bad day.