Earth wobbles linked to extinctions

Does not look good for man made global warming....

http://edition.cnn.com/2006/TECH/sci...eut/index.html

LOL

'At the moment, the Earth is at the beginning of a cycle ....'

"Jan Panteltje" wrote in message


Does not look good for man made global warming....
http://edition.cnn.com/2006/TECH/sci...eut/index.html

'At the moment, the Earth is at the beginning of a cycle ....'

I'll give the ongoing bigotry, arrogance and greed of humanity at least
10%, the sun 5% and that of our moon the other 85% responsibility. At
most humanity gets 20% that sun gets a whopping 10% and that nasty moon
of ours is worth all of the other 70%, however there is a little
something extra solar getting contributed as of lately.

Obviously the wobble idiot and of his rodents from Lundon hasn't yet
heard of those pesky ice ages. If that's not representing a significant
climate change, then I obviously don't know what is.
-
Brad Guth


--
Posted via Mailgate.ORG Server - http://www.Mailgate.ORG

Earth wobble my ass. I believe that most anything is possible, and that
most everything unavoidably contributes something to the ongoing global
warming mix. However, what about our big old moon that caused our
global tilt in the first place. Otherwise, the only "beginning of a
cycle" that I can see coming at full speed ahead, is that one called
WW-III that'll be fought tooth and nail over oil, coal and yellowcake.

Isn't this fun. I keep asking these naysayers silly questions that we
actually should have all of the replicated to death worth of
hard-scientific answers to, yet you folks simply can't answer with a
straight butt crack. Why is that?

Got that big old physically dark and nasty moon hanging around Earth as
of something prior to the last ice age? (obviously not)

What can I say; it seems that we've only had our global warming moon
for a relatively short time.

How much of the moon's 2e20 joules is getting converted into terrestrial
tidal driven heat?

How much energy is the moon's reflected and secondary emitted IR and FIR
worth these days?

Too bad that most anything which happens to involve Venus or that of
ESA's VIRTIS mission is still topic/author worthy of being Usenet
trashed and/or banished because it's still so gosh darn
taboo/nondisclosure. It's almost as bad off as for that of folks
honestly discussing our nearby mascon of a moon, or forbid that of
China's soon to be owned and operated LSE-CM/ISS.

Also worth saying; we're simply not going to walk moonsuit butt naked
on that nasty moon of our's. Not way back in them good old cold-war
Apollo days of when most everything was possible via hocus-pocus physics
and need-to-know science, and otherwise not within the near future and
most likely not ever if it's attempted in any way as based upon our
perpetrated cold-war methods of having to use those highly conditional
laws of physics, and upon the infomercial-science which only our cloak
and dagger NASA can manage to replicate in private and/or behind closed
doors as they fornacate their brains out.

Just because our physically dark moon has nearly always been double IR
and FIR hot as hell since having lost it's rather thick covering of
salty ice upon it's arrival (some odd 10,000 BC ago), plus ever since
becoming atmospherically deficient remains as a touch gamma and
hard-X-ray lethal to our frail DNA, this doesn't mean that the
geothermally active and subsequently toasty but otherwise sufficiently
end-user friendly environment afforded by Venus is entirely
ET/biologically taboo, nor is it otherwise technologically all that
humanly insurmountable.

It's worth our noting that a perfectly viable other world or moon
needn't have but 0.001% the easily accessible water of Earth, and even
that amount of h2o needn't be situated as any pure form or even that of
a salty brine of an underground fluid, or that of whatever's sequestered
as deeper within geode pockets or that of even much deeper vanes, or as
merely packed underneath a healthy deposit of dry-ice that's covering
the open surface of their world isn't actually all that insurmountable.
I do believe we're talking of other life surviving upon even a good deal
less (perhaps as little as 0.0001% or a millionth that of Earth's
environment) if their local evolution of survival motivated DNA had
managed to formulate their physiology for being accustomed and/or having
become sufficiently survival intelligent as to artificially managing to
survive upon such scant amounts of h2o. Their form h2o could even be
that of a highly valuable mined or secondary substance, perhaps having
become artificially cultivated/recycled into something rather practical
and highly sought after via applied technology (aka beer).

Not all such other worthy planets as capable of hosting intelligent
other life need be as wet nor as badly over-populated with the sorts of
dumbfounded heathens as Earth. Such as, what if an extremely hot and
dry Earth had but a million or merely having to sustain a few thousand
intelligent souls as having to deal with that unfortunately newish
planetology. Why the heck shouldn't any hot or for that matter cold
Earth like planet or viable moon even have to be so populated with much
other than suitable plants, diatoms, insects and various larger animals?
(on Earth, didn't we come along at the very last planetology minute,
especially as for those of us being the supposedly intelligent species,
as only having existed from the very last ice age, that which our Earth
will ever see again).

"Eric Chomko" wrote in message
ups.com
Bleeding Scalp wrote:
In fact Earth is absolutely Unique there is none other like it an there
is nothing like a man anywhere else but on earh and decendants thereof.

How can you state that definitively? You have no idea if something like
man exists or does not exist all over the universe. What we do know is
that our galaxy is not unique, that our star in that galaxy is not
unique, nor is our planet that circles that star unique. That said, why
do you believe that life as we know it IS unique?

All I can say is thanks once again, Eric, for having put that one
through. Unlike what team SETI/OSETI and the likes of so many others as
focused upon continually living in their hocus-pocus past, and remaining
so mindset intent upon keeping the rest of us there seem to think, our
extremely wet and at multiple previous times having been extensively
frozen near solid isn't at all the unique unless we're speaking of our
rather unusually massive moon arriving since the last ice age, and/or
that of appreciating our rather uniquely cultivated form of our truly
unique intellectual incest of bigotry, arrogance and the sorts of
insurmountable greed that has been running most everything amuck since
recorded time, and then some.

If ETs were only half as smart and otherwise not at continual war with
one another, they'd be a good thousand percent better off than us.
Meaning; if having just 10% the local resources at their disposal,
they'd still be a whole lot better off than compared to what we've long
since trashed as our environment because we're such all-knowing pagan
idiots without a stitch of remorse.

Being survival smart and otherwise extremely intelligent has absolutely
nothing to do with ETs having radio, or much less any form of space
travel capability. (sorry about that)

If ETs had ongoing space probes and the likes of having accomplished
personal space travel capability, as such they most certainly wouldn't
be so primitive and thus limited to using the inefficiencies and
soup-can like limitations of radio (at least not the sorts of funky
radio we've been using).

If having been surviving upon a fully cloud covered planet (such as
Venus), or perhaps upon that of having survived upon a thick atmospheric
moon (such as Titan or even that of our once upon a time icy proto-moon
that's still rather salty), whereas the stars and of whatever other
nearby planets simply do not exist, do they. And besides all of that,
would such other intelligent ET's of conventional evolution or
especially those of intelligent design dare to knowingly trash their one
and only frail environment? (I don't think so)
-
Brad Guth


--
Posted via Mailgate.ORG Server - http://www.Mailgate.ORG

"Brad Guth" wrote in message
news:9dd1b77f4c00bb7c27d09e78fc3f2ea0.49644@mygate .mailgate.org...
| Earth wobble my ass.

I expect your arse wobbles too.

"Sorcerer" wrote in message
.uk

I expect your arse wobbles too.
MY wobble is strictly voluntary, though a touch of old age isn't exactly
helping. How about your's?
-
Brad Guth


--
Posted via Mailgate.ORG Server - http://www.Mailgate.ORG