|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#21
|
|||
|
|||
Sirius and us, Newtonian inseparable / FAS & Brad Guth
On Jul 15, 10:33*am, BradGuth wrote:
On Jul 6, 6:55*am, BradGuth wrote: Sirius and our solar system are clearly inseparable, at least according to the regular laws of physics, Newtonian gravity and orbital mechanics. In spite of whatever those mainstream textbooks and their puppet media has to say, we seem to have become closely associated with the Sirius star cluster, even though Sirius has only been a relatively newish and extremely vibrant stellar evolution (quite possibly contributed from our encountering another galaxy), and especially terrestrial illuminating of the first 200~250 million years worth. First off, it took a cosmic molecular cloud worth perhaps at the very least 125,000 solar masses in order to produce such a 12.5 mass worthy star system, leaving 99.99% of that molecular mass as supposedly blown away and having to fend for itself, at a place and time when our existing solar system wasn't any too far away. *Others might go so far as to suggest a more than likely molecular cloud mass of 1.25 million, while still others yet would prefer a more robust cloud worthy of 12.5 million solar masses as having emerged from encountering a smaller galaxy that merged with our Milky Way. *In any case, that must have been quite a stellar birthing process, especially if the remains of this terrific cloud of originally near 100 ly diameter is suddenly nowhere to be found. In any case, there's no way that our passive little solar system wasn't somehow directly affected by and otherwise having become tidal radius interrelated with such a nearby mass, and/or at least subsequently associated with the mutual barycenter that's primarily dominated by the Sirius star/solar system. Lo and behold, it seems that numerous mergers of galactic proportions isn’t nearly as uncommon as some of our perpetual naysayers and Big Bang of devout OT thumpers might care to suggest. Our Milky Way Galaxy and its Companions (we are not alone) *http://www.public.asu.edu/~rjansen/l...ocalgroup.html The Hipparcos Space Astrometry Mission: (mainstream media ignored) *http://sci.esa.int/science-e/www/are...cfm?fareaid=20 *http://www.spacedaily.com/news/milkyway-04m.html Local galactic motion simulation: *"The Geneva-Copenhagen survey of the Solar neighbourhood", by B. Nordström et al. *http://www.aanda.org/content/view/71/42/lang,en According to several physics and astronomy kinds of *observationology science (deductive interpretation of eye-candy plus other peer replicated research), our Milky Way is made up of at least two galactic units, with more of the same on their blue-shifted way towards encountering us (namely Andromeda). *Seems hardly fair considering that everything was supposedly created via one singular Big Bang, not to mention that hundreds to perhaps thousands of galaxies seem rather nicely headed into the Great Attractor (including us) for their final demise and/or rebirth. Don’t forget to appreciate those Hubble, KECK and multiple other archives (including those of what FAS has compiled) depicting “colliding galaxies”, as well as soon to become ESA color/hue enhanced and expanded upon via a trio of their impressive orbital observatories, not to mention whatever the renewed and improved Hubble plus our next generation of orbital observatories should further document. *It may even become hard to find galaxies as massive as ours and Andromeda that are entirely original without their having grown via mergers. Where's our TRACEe3 and the all-knowing expertise from FAS, telling us whatever they seem to know best or at least suspect is most likely? Surely these brown-nosed clowns of mostly pretend Atheists, as well as republican faith-based bigots and typically closed mindsets of our Usenet/newsgroup cabal that are enforcing their mainstream status quo (much like my personal rabbi shadow tries to do), are hopefully not representing or otherwise speaking on behalf of our FAS. *~ Brad Guth Brad_Guth Brad.Guth BradGuth BG / “Guth Usenet” What would have happened within our solar system and the environment of Eden/Earth as we passed through any remaining portion of the same molecular cloud of 1.25e7 solar masses, as what had just given birth to those nearby Sirius stars and such having taken at least ten millions to a hundred some odd million years in order to create? *~ BG Notice that whenever the regular laws of physics and best available science that's easily peer replicated supports an outside theory or deductive interpretation of anything, suddenly those exact same laws of physics (including everything Newtonian) and whatever science are systematically disqualified and/or simply can't apply. It's like everything of Usenet/newsgroups and Google Groups turns itself into a brown-nosed clown populated realm of bizarro land, whereas up becomes down and black becomes white, or else we merely slip into the 4th or 5th dimension (similar to falling off the edge of Earth). ~ BG |
#22
|
|||
|
|||
Sirius and us, Newtonian inseparable / FAS & Brad Guth
On Jul 15, 10:33*am, BradGuth wrote:
On Jul 6, 6:55*am, BradGuth wrote: Sirius and our solar system are clearly inseparable, at least according to the regular laws of physics, Newtonian gravity and orbital mechanics. In spite of whatever those mainstream textbooks and their puppet media has to say, we seem to have become closely associated with the Sirius star cluster, even though Sirius has only been a relatively newish and extremely vibrant stellar evolution (quite possibly contributed from our encountering another galaxy), and especially terrestrial illuminating of the first 200~250 million years worth. First off, it took a cosmic molecular cloud worth perhaps at the very least 125,000 solar masses in order to produce such a 12.5 mass worthy star system, leaving 99.99% of that molecular mass as supposedly blown away and having to fend for itself, at a place and time when our existing solar system wasn't any too far away. *Others might go so far as to suggest a more than likely molecular cloud mass of 1.25 million, while still others yet would prefer a more robust cloud worthy of 12.5 million solar masses as having emerged from encountering a smaller galaxy that merged with our Milky Way. *In any case, that must have been quite a stellar birthing process, especially if the remains of this terrific cloud of originally near 100 ly diameter is suddenly nowhere to be found. In any case, there's no way that our passive little solar system wasn't somehow directly affected by and otherwise having become tidal radius interrelated with such a nearby mass, and/or at least subsequently associated with the mutual barycenter that's primarily dominated by the Sirius star/solar system. Lo and behold, it seems that numerous mergers of galactic proportions isn’t nearly as uncommon as some of our perpetual naysayers and Big Bang of devout OT thumpers might care to suggest. Our Milky Way Galaxy and its Companions (we are not alone) *http://www.public.asu.edu/~rjansen/l...ocalgroup.html The Hipparcos Space Astrometry Mission: (mainstream media ignored) *http://sci.esa.int/science-e/www/are...cfm?fareaid=20 *http://www.spacedaily.com/news/milkyway-04m.html Local galactic motion simulation: *"The Geneva-Copenhagen survey of the Solar neighbourhood", by B. Nordström et al. *http://www.aanda.org/content/view/71/42/lang,en According to several physics and astronomy kinds of *observationology science (deductive interpretation of eye-candy plus other peer replicated research), our Milky Way is made up of at least two galactic units, with more of the same on their blue-shifted way towards encountering us (namely Andromeda). *Seems hardly fair considering that everything was supposedly created via one singular Big Bang, not to mention that hundreds to perhaps thousands of galaxies seem rather nicely headed into the Great Attractor (including us) for their final demise and/or rebirth. Don’t forget to appreciate those Hubble, KECK and multiple other archives (including those of what FAS has compiled) depicting “colliding galaxies”, as well as soon to become ESA color/hue enhanced and expanded upon via a trio of their impressive orbital observatories, not to mention whatever the renewed and improved Hubble plus our next generation of orbital observatories should further document. *It may even become hard to find galaxies as massive as ours and Andromeda that are entirely original without their having grown via mergers. Where's our TRACEe3 and the all-knowing expertise from FAS, telling us whatever they seem to know best or at least suspect is most likely? Surely these brown-nosed clowns of mostly pretend Atheists, as well as republican faith-based bigots and typically closed mindsets of our Usenet/newsgroup cabal that are enforcing their mainstream status quo (much like my personal rabbi shadow tries to do), are hopefully not representing or otherwise speaking on behalf of our FAS. *~ Brad Guth Brad_Guth Brad.Guth BradGuth BG / “Guth Usenet” What would have happened within our solar system and the environment of Eden/Earth as we passed through any remaining portion of the same molecular cloud of 1.25e7 solar masses, as what had just given birth to those nearby Sirius stars and such having taken at least ten millions to a hundred some odd million years in order to create? Obviously our local environment and of course that of our sun would have been affected by the excess of whatever the Sirius molecular cloud had to offer, not to mention that of it's terrific original mass. And btw; don't let the gauntlet of these Usenet/newsgroup bogeyman and faith-based pretenders and mainstream pranksters keep us from the task of deductively and otherwise independently thinking for ourselves, because now and then it’s perfectly OK to color outside the lines. ~ BG |
#23
|
|||
|
|||
Sirius and us, Newtonian inseparable / FAS & Brad Guth
On Jul 21, 2:46*am, BradGuth wrote:
On Jul 15, 10:33*am, BradGuth wrote: On Jul 6, 6:55*am, BradGuth wrote: Sirius and our solar system are clearly inseparable, at least according to the regular laws of physics, Newtonian gravity and orbital mechanics. In spite of whatever those mainstream textbooks and their puppet media has to say, we seem to have become closely associated with the Sirius star cluster, even though Sirius has only been a relatively newish and extremely vibrant stellar evolution (quite possibly contributed from our encountering another galaxy), and especially terrestrial illuminating of the first 200~250 million years worth. First off, it took a cosmic molecular cloud worth perhaps at the very least 125,000 solar masses in order to produce such a 12.5 mass worthy star system, leaving 99.99% of that molecular mass as supposedly blown away and having to fend for itself, at a place and time when our existing solar system wasn't any too far away. *Others might go so far as to suggest a more than likely molecular cloud mass of 1.25 million, while still others yet would prefer a more robust cloud worthy of 12.5 million solar masses as having emerged from encountering a smaller galaxy that merged with our Milky Way. *In any case, that must have been quite a stellar birthing process, especially if the remains of this terrific cloud of originally near 100 ly diameter is suddenly nowhere to be found. In any case, there's no way that our passive little solar system wasn't somehow directly affected by and otherwise having become tidal radius interrelated with such a nearby mass, and/or at least subsequently associated with the mutual barycenter that's primarily dominated by the Sirius star/solar system. Lo and behold, it seems that numerous mergers of galactic proportions isn’t nearly as uncommon as some of our perpetual naysayers and Big Bang of devout OT thumpers might care to suggest. Our Milky Way Galaxy and its Companions (we are not alone) *http://www.public.asu.edu/~rjansen/l...ocalgroup.html The Hipparcos Space Astrometry Mission: (mainstream media ignored) *http://sci.esa.int/science-e/www/are...cfm?fareaid=20 *http://www.spacedaily.com/news/milkyway-04m.html Local galactic motion simulation: *"The Geneva-Copenhagen survey of the Solar neighbourhood", by B. Nordström et al. *http://www.aanda.org/content/view/71/42/lang,en According to several physics and astronomy kinds of *observationology science (deductive interpretation of eye-candy plus other peer replicated research), our Milky Way is made up of at least two galactic units, with more of the same on their blue-shifted way towards encountering us (namely Andromeda). *Seems hardly fair considering that everything was supposedly created via one singular Big Bang, not to mention that hundreds to perhaps thousands of galaxies seem rather nicely headed into the Great Attractor (including us) for their final demise and/or rebirth. Don’t forget to appreciate those Hubble, KECK and multiple other archives (including those of what FAS has compiled) depicting “colliding galaxies”, as well as soon to become ESA color/hue enhanced and expanded upon via a trio of their impressive orbital observatories, not to mention whatever the renewed and improved Hubble plus our next generation of orbital observatories should further document. *It may even become hard to find galaxies as massive as ours and Andromeda that are entirely original without their having grown via mergers. Where's our TRACEe3 and the all-knowing expertise from FAS, telling us whatever they seem to know best or at least suspect is most likely? Surely these brown-nosed clowns of mostly pretend Atheists, as well as republican faith-based bigots and typically closed mindsets of our Usenet/newsgroup cabal that are enforcing their mainstream status quo (much like my personal rabbi shadow tries to do), are hopefully not representing or otherwise speaking on behalf of our FAS. *~ Brad Guth Brad_Guth Brad.Guth BradGuth BG / “Guth Usenet” What would have happened within our solar system and the environment of Eden/Earth as we passed through any remaining portion of the same molecular cloud of 1.25e7 solar masses, as what had just given birth to those nearby Sirius stars and such having taken at least ten millions to a hundred some odd million years in order to create? Obviously our local environment and of course that of our sun would have been affected by the excess of whatever the Sirius molecular cloud had to offer, not to mention that of it's terrific original mass. And btw; *don't let the gauntlet of these Usenet/newsgroup bogeyman and faith-based pretenders and mainstream pranksters keep us from the task of deductively and otherwise independently thinking for ourselves, because now and then it’s perfectly OK to color outside the lines. So once again, instead of progress we have this thing of ignoring and/ or obfuscating in behalf of whatever is technically doable and banishing those with nothing but good intentions, and otherwise we have this other lemming genetic disorder and subsequent obsession of no longer deductively thinking for ourselves. No wonder this nation has been going nowhere. ~ BG |
#24
|
|||
|
|||
Sirius and us, Newtonian inseparable / FAS & Brad Guth
On 22 July, 14:16, BradGuth wrote:
On Jul 21, 2:46*am, BradGuth wrote: On Jul 15, 10:33*am, BradGuth wrote: On Jul 6, 6:55*am, BradGuth wrote: Sirius and our solar system are clearly inseparable, at least according to the regular laws of physics, Newtonian gravity and orbital mechanics. In spite of whatever those mainstream textbooks and their puppet media has to say, we seem to have become closely associated with the Sirius star cluster, even though Sirius has only been a relatively newish and extremely vibrant stellar evolution (quite possibly contributed from our encountering another galaxy), and especially terrestrial illuminating of the first 200~250 million years worth. First off, it took a cosmic molecular cloud worth perhaps at the very least 125,000 solar masses in order to produce such a 12.5 mass worthy star system, leaving 99.99% of that molecular mass as supposedly blown away and having to fend for itself, at a place and time when our existing solar system wasn't any too far away. *Others might go so far as to suggest a more than likely molecular cloud mass of 1.25 million, while still others yet would prefer a more robust cloud worthy of 12.5 million solar masses as having emerged from encountering a smaller galaxy that merged with our Milky Way. *In any case, that must have been quite a stellar birthing process, especially if the remains of this terrific cloud of originally near 100 ly diameter is suddenly nowhere to be found. In any case, there's no way that our passive little solar system wasn't somehow directly affected by and otherwise having become tidal radius interrelated with such a nearby mass, and/or at least subsequently associated with the mutual barycenter that's primarily dominated by the Sirius star/solar system. Lo and behold, it seems that numerous mergers of galactic proportions isn’t nearly as uncommon as some of our perpetual naysayers and Big Bang of devout OT thumpers might care to suggest. Our Milky Way Galaxy and its Companions (we are not alone) *http://www.public.asu.edu/~rjansen/l...ocalgroup.html The Hipparcos Space Astrometry Mission: (mainstream media ignored) *http://sci.esa.int/science-e/www/are...cfm?fareaid=20 *http://www.spacedaily.com/news/milkyway-04m.html Local galactic motion simulation: *"The Geneva-Copenhagen survey of the Solar neighbourhood", by B. Nordström et al. *http://www.aanda.org/content/view/71/42/lang,en According to several physics and astronomy kinds of *observationology science (deductive interpretation of eye-candy plus other peer replicated research), our Milky Way is made up of at least two galactic units, with more of the same on their blue-shifted way towards encountering us (namely Andromeda). *Seems hardly fair considering that everything was supposedly created via one singular Big Bang, not to mention that hundreds to perhaps thousands of galaxies seem rather nicely headed into the Great Attractor (including us) for their final demise and/or rebirth. Don’t forget to appreciate those Hubble, KECK and multiple other archives (including those of what FAS has compiled) depicting “colliding galaxies”, as well as soon to become ESA color/hue enhanced and expanded upon via a trio of their impressive orbital observatories, not to mention whatever the renewed and improved Hubble plus our next generation of orbital observatories should further document. *It may even become hard to find galaxies as massive as ours and Andromeda that are entirely original without their having grown via mergers. Where's our TRACEe3 and the all-knowing expertise from FAS, telling us whatever they seem to know best or at least suspect is most likely? Surely these brown-nosed clowns of mostly pretend Atheists, as well as republican faith-based bigots and typically closed mindsets of our Usenet/newsgroup cabal that are enforcing their mainstream status quo (much like my personal rabbi shadow tries to do), are hopefully not representing or otherwise speaking on behalf of our FAS. *~ Brad Guth Brad_Guth Brad.Guth BradGuth BG / “Guth Usenet” What would have happened within our solar system and the environment of Eden/Earth as we passed through any remaining portion of the same molecular cloud of 1.25e7 solar masses, as what had just given birth to those nearby Sirius stars and such having taken at least ten millions to a hundred some odd million years in order to create? Obviously our local environment and of course that of our sun would have been affected by the excess of whatever the Sirius molecular cloud had to offer, not to mention that of it's terrific original mass. And btw; *don't let the gauntlet of these Usenet/newsgroup bogeyman and faith-based pretenders and mainstream pranksters keep us from the task of deductively and otherwise independently thinking for ourselves, because now and then it’s perfectly OK to color outside the lines. So once again, instead of progress we have this thing of ignoring and/ or obfuscating in behalf of whatever is technically doable and banishing those with nothing but good intentions, and otherwise we have this other lemming genetic disorder and subsequent obsession of no longer deductively thinking for ourselves. *No wonder this nation has been going nowhere. *~ BG- Hide quoted text - - Show quoted text - Forget about Sirius. Try looking at Apollo landing site photographs instead. http://www.nasa.gov/mission_pages/LR...ollosites.html |
#25
|
|||
|
|||
Sirius and us, Newtonian inseparable / FAS & Brad Guth
On Jul 22, 2:41*pm, Mike Collins
wrote: On 22 July, 14:16, BradGuth wrote: On Jul 21, 2:46*am, BradGuth wrote: On Jul 15, 10:33*am, BradGuth wrote: On Jul 6, 6:55*am, BradGuth wrote: Sirius and our solar system are clearly inseparable, at least according to the regular laws of physics, Newtonian gravity and orbital mechanics. In spite of whatever those mainstream textbooks and their puppet media has to say, we seem to have become closely associated with the Sirius star cluster, even though Sirius has only been a relatively newish and extremely vibrant stellar evolution (quite possibly contributed from our encountering another galaxy), and especially terrestrial illuminating of the first 200~250 million years worth. First off, it took a cosmic molecular cloud worth perhaps at the very least 125,000 solar masses in order to produce such a 12.5 mass worthy star system, leaving 99.99% of that molecular mass as supposedly blown away and having to fend for itself, at a place and time when our existing solar system wasn't any too far away. *Others might go so far as to suggest a more than likely molecular cloud mass of 1.25 million, while still others yet would prefer a more robust cloud worthy of 12.5 million solar masses as having emerged from encountering a smaller galaxy that merged with our Milky Way. *In any case, that must have been quite a stellar birthing process, especially if the remains of this terrific cloud of originally near 100 ly diameter is suddenly nowhere to be found. In any case, there's no way that our passive little solar system wasn't somehow directly affected by and otherwise having become tidal radius interrelated with such a nearby mass, and/or at least subsequently associated with the mutual barycenter that's primarily dominated by the Sirius star/solar system. Lo and behold, it seems that numerous mergers of galactic proportions isn’t nearly as uncommon as some of our perpetual naysayers and Big Bang of devout OT thumpers might care to suggest. Our Milky Way Galaxy and its Companions (we are not alone) *http://www.public.asu.edu/~rjansen/l...ocalgroup.html The Hipparcos Space Astrometry Mission: (mainstream media ignored) *http://sci.esa.int/science-e/www/are...cfm?fareaid=20 *http://www.spacedaily.com/news/milkyway-04m.html Local galactic motion simulation: *"The Geneva-Copenhagen survey of the Solar neighbourhood", by B. |
#26
|
|||
|
|||
Sirius and us, Newtonian inseparable / FAS & Brad Guth
On Jul 22, 2:41*pm, Mike Collins
wrote: On 22 July, 14:16, BradGuth wrote: On Jul 21, 2:46*am, BradGuth wrote: On Jul 15, 10:33*am, BradGuth wrote: On Jul 6, 6:55*am, BradGuth wrote: Sirius and our solar system are clearly inseparable, at least according to the regular laws of physics, Newtonian gravity and orbital mechanics. In spite of whatever those mainstream textbooks and their puppet media has to say, we seem to have become closely associated with the Sirius star cluster, even though Sirius has only been a relatively newish and extremely vibrant stellar evolution (quite possibly contributed from our encountering another galaxy), and especially terrestrial illuminating of the first 200~250 million years worth. First off, it took a cosmic molecular cloud worth perhaps at the very least 125,000 solar masses in order to produce such a 12.5 mass worthy star system, leaving 99.99% of that molecular mass as supposedly blown away and having to fend for itself, at a place and time when our existing solar system wasn't any too far away. *Others might go so far as to suggest a more than likely molecular cloud mass of 1.25 million, while still others yet would prefer a more robust cloud worthy of 12.5 million solar masses as having emerged from encountering a smaller galaxy that merged with our Milky Way. *In any case, that must have been quite a stellar birthing process, especially if the remains of this terrific cloud of originally near 100 ly diameter is suddenly nowhere to be found. In any case, there's no way that our passive little solar system wasn't somehow directly affected by and otherwise having become tidal radius interrelated with such a nearby mass, and/or at least subsequently associated with the mutual barycenter that's primarily dominated by the Sirius star/solar system. Lo and behold, it seems that numerous mergers of galactic proportions isn’t nearly as uncommon as some of our perpetual naysayers and Big Bang of devout OT thumpers might care to suggest. Our Milky Way Galaxy and its Companions (we are not alone) *http://www.public.asu.edu/~rjansen/l...ocalgroup.html The Hipparcos Space Astrometry Mission: (mainstream media ignored) *http://sci.esa.int/science-e/www/are...cfm?fareaid=20 *http://www.spacedaily.com/news/milkyway-04m.html Local galactic motion simulation: *"The Geneva-Copenhagen survey of the Solar neighbourhood", by B. |
#27
|
|||
|
|||
Sirius and us, Newtonian inseparable / FAS & Brad Guth
On 23 July, 00:05, BradGuth wrote:
On Jul 22, 2:41*pm, Mike Collins wrote: On 22 July, 14:16, BradGuth wrote: On Jul 21, 2:46*am, BradGuth wrote: On Jul 15, 10:33*am, BradGuth wrote: On Jul 6, 6:55*am, BradGuth wrote: Sirius and our solar system are clearly inseparable, at least according to the regular laws of physics, Newtonian gravity and orbital mechanics. In spite of whatever those mainstream textbooks and their puppet media has to say, we seem to have become closely associated with the Sirius star cluster, even though Sirius has only been a relatively newish and extremely vibrant stellar evolution (quite possibly contributed from our encountering another galaxy), and especially terrestrial illuminating of the first 200~250 million years worth. First off, it took a cosmic molecular cloud worth perhaps at the very least 125,000 solar masses in order to produce such a 12.5 mass worthy star system, leaving 99.99% of that molecular mass as supposedly blown away and having to fend for itself, at a place and time when our existing solar system wasn't any too far away. *Others might go so far as to suggest a more than likely molecular cloud mass of 1.25 million, while still others yet would prefer a more robust cloud worthy of 12.5 million solar masses as having emerged from encountering a smaller galaxy that merged with our Milky Way. *In any case, that must have been quite a stellar birthing process, especially if the remains of this terrific cloud of originally near 100 ly diameter is suddenly nowhere to be found. In any case, there's no way that our passive little solar system wasn't somehow directly affected by and otherwise having become tidal radius interrelated with such a nearby mass, and/or at least subsequently associated with the mutual barycenter that's primarily dominated by the Sirius star/solar system. Lo and behold, it seems that numerous mergers of galactic proportions isn’t nearly as uncommon as some of our perpetual naysayers and Big Bang of devout OT thumpers might care to suggest. Our Milky Way Galaxy and its Companions (we are not alone) *http://www.public.asu.edu/~rjansen/l...ocalgroup.html The Hipparcos Space Astrometry Mission: (mainstream media ignored) *http://sci.esa.int/science-e/www/are...cfm?fareaid=20 *http://www.spacedaily.com/news/milkyway-04m.html Local galactic motion simulation: *"The Geneva-Copenhagen survey of the Solar neighbourhood", by B. Nordström et al. *http://www.aanda.org/content/view/71/42/lang,en According to several physics and astronomy kinds of *observationology science (deductive interpretation of eye-candy plus other peer replicated research), our Milky Way is made up of at least two galactic units, with more of the same on their blue-shifted way towards encountering us (namely Andromeda). *Seems hardly fair considering that everything was supposedly created via one singular Big Bang, not to mention that hundreds to perhaps thousands of galaxies seem rather nicely headed into the Great Attractor (including us) for their final demise and/or rebirth. Don’t forget to appreciate those Hubble, KECK and multiple other archives (including those of what FAS has compiled) depicting “colliding galaxies”, as well as soon to become ESA color/hue enhanced and expanded upon via a trio of their impressive orbital observatories, not to mention whatever the renewed and improved Hubble plus our next generation of orbital observatories should further document. *It may even become hard to find galaxies as massive as ours and Andromeda that are entirely original without their having grown via mergers. Where's our TRACEe3 and the all-knowing expertise from FAS, telling us whatever they seem to know best or at least suspect is most likely? Surely these brown-nosed clowns of mostly pretend Atheists, as well as republican faith-based bigots and typically closed mindsets of our Usenet/newsgroup cabal that are enforcing their mainstream status quo (much like my personal rabbi shadow tries to do), are hopefully not representing or otherwise speaking on behalf of our FAS. *~ Brad Guth Brad_Guth Brad.Guth BradGuth BG / “Guth Usenet” What would have happened within our solar system and the environment of Eden/Earth as we passed through any remaining portion of the same molecular cloud of 1.25e7 solar masses, as what had just given birth to those nearby Sirius stars and such having taken at least ten millions to a hundred some odd million years in order to create? Obviously our local environment and of course that of our sun would have been affected by the excess of whatever the Sirius molecular cloud had to offer, not to mention that of it's terrific original mass. And btw; *don't let the gauntlet of these Usenet/newsgroup bogeyman and faith-based pretenders and mainstream pranksters keep us from the task of deductively and otherwise independently thinking for ourselves, because now and then it’s perfectly OK to color outside the lines. So once again, instead of progress we have this thing of ignoring and/ or obfuscating in behalf of whatever is technically doable and banishing those with nothing but good intentions, and otherwise we have this other lemming genetic disorder and subsequent obsession of no longer deductively thinking for ourselves. *No wonder this nation has been going nowhere. *~ BG- Hide quoted text - - Show quoted text - Forget about Sirius. Try looking at Apollo landing site photographs instead.http://www.nasa.gov/mission_pages/LR...ges/apollosite... Been there, done that. So far those LROC images are not very good (still too far away and must be using a narrow bandpass as well as only a small portion of their DR), and oddly those original Apollo metric mapping images do not seem to look as though the moon is so gosh darn reflective. *How the heck did A-16 end up in such a vast lunar expanse of such a near white-out area that went in all directions for as far as their 70 mm film and its unfiltered lens could see? *~ BG- Hide quoted text - - Show quoted text - You write "Been there, done that" and yet the evidence that you are wrong did not tempt you to post about it. You've been bleating on for years that the Moon landings were a hoax with the lack of images being high up on your list of "evidence". Thes are early images and will be improved. The track of the moonwalks seems particularly convincing. When better images are available we should have images of the rover tracks aswell. |
#28
|
|||
|
|||
Sirius and us, Newtonian inseparable / FAS & Brad Guth
On Jul 23, 2:40*pm, Mike Collins
wrote: On 23 July, 00:05, BradGuth wrote: On Jul 22, 2:41*pm, Mike Collins wrote: On 22 July, 14:16, BradGuth wrote: On Jul 21, 2:46*am, BradGuth wrote: On Jul 15, 10:33*am, BradGuth wrote: On Jul 6, 6:55*am, BradGuth wrote: Sirius and our solar system are clearly inseparable, at least according to the regular laws of physics, Newtonian gravity and orbital mechanics. In spite of whatever those mainstream textbooks and their puppet media has to say, we seem to have become closely associated with the Sirius star cluster, even though Sirius has only been a relatively newish and extremely vibrant stellar evolution (quite possibly contributed from our encountering another galaxy), and especially terrestrial illuminating of the first 200~250 million years worth. First off, it took a cosmic molecular cloud worth perhaps at the very least 125,000 solar masses in order to produce such a 12.5 mass worthy star system, leaving 99.99% of that molecular mass as supposedly blown away and having to fend for itself, at a place and time when our existing solar system wasn't any too far away. *Others might go so far as to suggest a more than likely molecular cloud mass of 1.25 million, while still others yet would prefer a more robust cloud worthy of 12.5 million solar masses as having emerged from encountering a smaller galaxy that merged with our Milky Way. *In any case, that must have been quite a stellar birthing process, especially if the remains of this terrific cloud of originally near 100 ly diameter is suddenly nowhere to be found. In any case, there's no way that our passive little solar system wasn't somehow directly affected by and otherwise having become tidal radius interrelated with such a nearby mass, and/or at least subsequently associated with the mutual barycenter that's primarily dominated by the Sirius star/solar system. Lo and behold, it seems that numerous mergers of galactic proportions isn’t nearly as uncommon as some of our perpetual naysayers and Big Bang of devout OT thumpers might care to suggest. Our Milky Way Galaxy and its Companions (we are not alone) *http://www.public.asu.edu/~rjansen/l...ocalgroup.html The Hipparcos Space Astrometry Mission: (mainstream media ignored) *http://sci.esa.int/science-e/www/are...cfm?fareaid=20 *http://www.spacedaily.com/news/milkyway-04m.html Local galactic motion simulation: *"The Geneva-Copenhagen survey of the Solar neighbourhood", by B. Nordström et al. *http://www.aanda.org/content/view/71/42/lang,en According to several physics and astronomy kinds of *observationology science (deductive interpretation of eye-candy plus other peer replicated research), our Milky Way is made up of at least two galactic units, with more of the same on their blue-shifted way towards encountering us (namely Andromeda). *Seems hardly fair considering that everything was supposedly created via one singular Big Bang, not to mention that hundreds to perhaps thousands of galaxies seem rather nicely headed into the Great Attractor (including us) for their final demise and/or rebirth. Don’t forget to appreciate those Hubble, KECK and multiple other archives (including those of what FAS has compiled) depicting “colliding galaxies”, as well as soon to become ESA color/hue enhanced and expanded upon via a trio of their impressive orbital observatories, not to mention whatever the renewed and improved Hubble plus our next generation of orbital observatories should further document. *It may even become hard to find galaxies as massive as ours and Andromeda that are entirely original without their having grown via mergers. Where's our TRACEe3 and the all-knowing expertise from FAS, telling us whatever they seem to know best or at least suspect is most likely? Surely these brown-nosed clowns of mostly pretend Atheists, as well as republican faith-based bigots and typically closed mindsets of our Usenet/newsgroup cabal that are enforcing their mainstream status quo (much like my personal rabbi shadow tries to do), are hopefully not representing or otherwise speaking on behalf of our FAS. *~ Brad Guth Brad_Guth Brad.Guth BradGuth BG / “Guth Usenet” What would have happened within our solar system and the environment of Eden/Earth as we passed through any remaining portion of the same molecular cloud of 1.25e7 solar masses, as what had just given birth to those nearby Sirius stars and such having taken at least ten millions to a hundred some odd million years in order to create? Obviously our local environment and of course that of our sun would have been affected by the excess of whatever the Sirius molecular cloud had to offer, not to mention that of it's terrific original mass. And btw; *don't let the gauntlet of these Usenet/newsgroup bogeyman and faith-based pretenders and mainstream pranksters keep us from the task of deductively and otherwise independently thinking for ourselves, because now and then it’s perfectly OK to color outside the lines. So once again, instead of progress we have this thing of ignoring and/ or obfuscating in behalf of whatever is technically doable and banishing those with nothing but good intentions, and otherwise we have this other lemming genetic disorder and subsequent obsession of no longer deductively thinking for ourselves. *No wonder this nation has been going nowhere. *~ BG- Hide quoted text - - Show quoted text - Forget about Sirius. Try looking at Apollo landing site photographs instead.http://www.nasa.gov/mission_pages/LR...ges/apollosite... Been there, done that. So far those LROC images are not very good (still too far away and must be using a narrow bandpass as well as only a small portion of their DR), and oddly those original Apollo metric mapping images do not seem to look as though the moon is so gosh darn reflective. *How the heck did A-16 end up in such a vast lunar expanse of such a near white-out area that went in all directions for as far as their 70 mm film and its unfiltered lens could see? *~ BG- Hide quoted text - - Show quoted text - You write "Been there, done that" and yet the evidence that you are wrong did not tempt you to post about it. You've been bleating on for years that the Moon landings were a hoax with the lack of images being high up on your list of "evidence". Thes are early images and will be improved. The track of the moonwalks seems particularly convincing. When better images are available we should have images of the rover tracks aswell. I never said or implied that Apollo equipment didn't make it to the physically dark surface. I stipulated that the objective evidence for such being fully manned and otherwise entirely unharmed (not a scratch or one strand of damaged DNA) simply didn't exist (too much missing evidence and original science documentation that's still nowhere to be found), and again there's still some lingering doubts as to those EVAs taking place as specified, because of too much of what simply doesn't add up. Robotically, all sorts of complex things could have taken place (including rover tracks). ~ BG |
#29
|
|||
|
|||
Sirius and us, Newtonian inseparable / FAS & Brad Guth
On Jul 22, 2:41*pm, Mike Collins
wrote: On 22 July, 14:16, BradGuth wrote: On Jul 21, 2:46*am, BradGuth wrote: On Jul 15, 10:33*am, BradGuth wrote: On Jul 6, 6:55*am, BradGuth wrote: Sirius and our solar system are clearly inseparable, at least according to the regular laws of physics, Newtonian gravity and orbital mechanics. In spite of whatever those mainstream textbooks and their puppet media has to say, we seem to have become closely associated with the Sirius star cluster, even though Sirius has only been a relatively newish and extremely vibrant stellar evolution (quite possibly contributed from our encountering another galaxy), and especially terrestrial illuminating of the first 200~250 million years worth. First off, it took a cosmic molecular cloud worth perhaps at the very least 125,000 solar masses in order to produce such a 12.5 mass worthy star system, leaving 99.99% of that molecular mass as supposedly blown away and having to fend for itself, at a place and time when our existing solar system wasn't any too far away. *Others might go so far as to suggest a more than likely molecular cloud mass of 1.25 million, while still others yet would prefer a more robust cloud worthy of 12.5 million solar masses as having emerged from encountering a smaller galaxy that merged with our Milky Way. *In any case, that must have been quite a stellar birthing process, especially if the remains of this terrific cloud of originally near 100 ly diameter is suddenly nowhere to be found. In any case, there's no way that our passive little solar system wasn't somehow directly affected by and otherwise having become tidal radius interrelated with such a nearby mass, and/or at least subsequently associated with the mutual barycenter that's primarily dominated by the Sirius star/solar system. Lo and behold, it seems that numerous mergers of galactic proportions isn’t nearly as uncommon as some of our perpetual naysayers and Big Bang of devout OT thumpers might care to suggest. Our Milky Way Galaxy and its Companions (we are not alone) *http://www.public.asu.edu/~rjansen/l...ocalgroup.html The Hipparcos Space Astrometry Mission: (mainstream media ignored) *http://sci.esa.int/science-e/www/are...cfm?fareaid=20 *http://www.spacedaily.com/news/milkyway-04m.html Local galactic motion simulation: *"The Geneva-Copenhagen survey of the Solar neighbourhood", by B. |
#30
|
|||
|
|||
Sirius and us, Newtonian inseparable / FAS & Brad Guth
On Jul 23, 9:42*pm, BradGuth wrote:
On Jul 22, 2:41*pm, Mike Collins wrote: On 22 July, 14:16, BradGuth wrote: On Jul 21, 2:46*am, BradGuth wrote: On Jul 15, 10:33*am, BradGuth wrote: On Jul 6, 6:55*am, BradGuth wrote: Sirius and our solar system are clearly inseparable, at least according to the regular laws of physics, Newtonian gravity and orbital mechanics. In spite of whatever those mainstream textbooks and their puppet media has to say, we seem to have become closely associated with the Sirius star cluster, even though Sirius has only been a relatively newish and extremely vibrant stellar evolution (quite possibly contributed from our encountering another galaxy), and especially terrestrial illuminating of the first 200~250 million years worth. First off, it took a cosmic molecular cloud worth perhaps at the very least 125,000 solar masses in order to produce such a 12.5 mass worthy star system, leaving 99.99% of that molecular mass as supposedly blown away and having to fend for itself, at a place and time when our existing solar system wasn't any too far away. *Others might go so far as to suggest a more than likely molecular cloud mass of 1.25 million, while still others yet would prefer a more robust cloud worthy of 12.5 million solar masses as having emerged from encountering a smaller galaxy that merged with our Milky Way. *In any case, that must have been quite a stellar birthing process, especially if the remains of this terrific cloud of originally near 100 ly diameter is suddenly nowhere to be found. In any case, there's no way that our passive little solar system wasn't somehow directly affected by and otherwise having become tidal radius interrelated with such a nearby mass, and/or at least subsequently associated with the mutual barycenter that's primarily dominated by the Sirius star/solar system. Lo and behold, it seems that numerous mergers of galactic proportions isn’t nearly as uncommon as some of our perpetual naysayers and Big Bang of devout OT thumpers might care to suggest. Our Milky Way Galaxy and its Companions (we are not alone) *http://www.public.asu.edu/~rjansen/l...ocalgroup.html The Hipparcos Space Astrometry Mission: (mainstream media ignored) *http://sci.esa.int/science-e/www/are...cfm?fareaid=20 *http://www.spacedaily.com/news/milkyway-04m.html Local galactic motion simulation: *"The Geneva-Copenhagen survey of the Solar neighbourhood", by B. Nordström et al. *http://www.aanda.org/content/view/71/42/lang,en According to several physics and astronomy kinds of *observationology science (deductive interpretation of eye-candy plus other peer replicated research), our Milky Way is made up of at least two galactic units, with more of the same on their blue-shifted way towards encountering us (namely Andromeda). *Seems hardly fair considering that everything was supposedly created via one singular Big Bang, not to mention that hundreds to perhaps thousands of galaxies seem rather nicely headed into the Great Attractor (including us) for their final demise and/or rebirth. Don’t forget to appreciate those Hubble, KECK and multiple other archives (including those of what FAS has compiled) depicting “colliding galaxies”, as well as soon to become ESA color/hue enhanced and expanded upon via a trio of their impressive orbital observatories, not to mention whatever the renewed and improved Hubble plus our next generation of orbital observatories should further document. *It may even become hard to find galaxies as massive as ours and Andromeda that are entirely original without their having grown via mergers. Where's our TRACEe3 and the all-knowing expertise from FAS, telling us whatever they seem to know best or at least suspect is most likely? Surely these brown-nosed clowns of mostly pretend Atheists, as well as republican faith-based bigots and typically closed mindsets of our Usenet/newsgroup cabal that are enforcing their mainstream status quo (much like my personal rabbi shadow tries to do), are hopefully not representing or otherwise speaking on behalf of our FAS. *~ Brad Guth Brad_Guth Brad.Guth BradGuth BG / “Guth Usenet” What would have happened within our solar system and the environment of Eden/Earth as we passed through any remaining portion of the same molecular cloud of 1.25e7 solar masses, as what had just given birth to those nearby Sirius stars and such having taken at least ten millions to a hundred some odd million years in order to create? Obviously our local environment and of course that of our sun would have been affected by the excess of whatever the Sirius molecular cloud had to offer, not to mention that of it's terrific original mass. And btw; *don't let the gauntlet of these Usenet/newsgroup bogeyman and faith-based pretenders and mainstream pranksters keep us from the task of deductively and otherwise independently thinking for ourselves, because now and then it’s perfectly OK to color outside the lines. So once again, instead of progress we have this thing of ignoring and/ or obfuscating in behalf of whatever is technically doable and banishing those with nothing but good intentions, and otherwise we have this other lemming genetic disorder and subsequent obsession of no longer deductively thinking for ourselves. *No wonder this nation has been going nowhere. *~ BG- Hide quoted text - - Show quoted text - Forget about Sirius. Try looking at Apollo landing site photographs instead.http://www.nasa.gov/mission_pages/LR...ges/apollosite... How the heck did A-16 end up landing in such a vast lunar expanse of such a near white-out area that went in all directions for as far as their Kodak 70 mm film and its unfiltered lens could see? *~ BG How the heck did our Apollo 16 end up landing within such a vast lunar expanse of such a near white-out terrain that recorded as oddly more as what a guano island made to look as a lunar terrain, that went off in all directions for as far as their unshielded Kodak 70 mm film and its unfiltered lens could see? Correction; each lens had a polarized element, as intended to reduce/ eliminate surface glare, and thus making whatever surfaces as solar illuminated record as noticeably darker than what the naked eye sees. (what the hell went wrong? are such laws of physics different while on the moon?) ~ BG |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Brad Guth is...... | OM | History | 0 | December 27th 03 12:34 AM |