|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#451
|
|||
|
|||
Earth w/o Moon / by Brad Guth
On May 25, 10:16 am, David Johnston wrote:
On Sun, 25 May 2008 08:19:30 -0700 (PDT), BradGuth wrote: On May 25, 12:05 am, David Johnston wrote: On Sat, 24 May 2008 21:52:16 -0700 (PDT), BradGuth wrote: You know better, as so many and even myself can tell You can't. You just take it for granted that everyone "knows" these things in your head. Why bother making things up, when the truth is so much better? The truth about what? all sorts of stories about government, corporate and faith-based screw ups. say the moon with them horrific but shallow craters isn't real? No, I don't. Then give us your best swag as to whatever created those extremely large but shallow craters. Meteorite impact. We have them on Earth too but they don't last as long. That's funny, yawn I should have know you wouldn't be able to actually carry on a responsive conversation. Can't think of something to say? Go ape**** and start accusing people of being part of the conspiracy. Typical Zionist DARPA response noted. Is denial of real evidence You never present evidence. All you do is say something like "what about the shallow craters on the Moon" and expect that to mean something to someone else and then accuse people of working for DARPA as if DARPA doesn't have better things to do than harass a netkook. The original large diameter crater is clearly an indication of a major impact with something of a larger diameter and a whole lot softer than itself, as well as suggesting via deductive logic that our proto-moon as once upon a time having a thick layer of ice, snow and perhaps a few km worth of fluffy dry-ice on deck. . – Brad Guth |
#452
|
|||
|
|||
Earth w/o Moon / by Brad Guth
In article
, BradGuth wrote: On May 25, 12:09 am, David Johnston wrote: On Sat, 24 May 2008 22:01:01 -0700 (PDT), BradGuth wrote: How well protected from a nuclear surface blast is a submarine hiding under 3~4 meters worth of the Arctic polar ice cap? How long is a piece of string? OOPS! taboo/nondisclosure (aka need to know) The answer is, not at all. At least not by the ice. I suppose a 100 megaton would cause such ice to move and otherwise vaporise, although that in of itself takes away a great deal of energy. Say if given a one km radius of 3 meter thick ice is 2.355e6 m3 of such ice that needs to get displaced and/or melted. (more likely a 10 km radius = 230e6 tonnes of ice) Seems likely that amount of ice would moderate that kind of nuclear blast energy in more ways than just thermal energy, because as a physical blast or shockwave shield itself is going to take quite a bit of that kinetic energy away too. So, your "not at all" is perhaps yet another one of those special conditional laws of physics in order to suit your interpretation that'll benefit your side of this rant. Again, you're just talking in adjectives. You've thrown in a few numbers here and there so it looks scientific, but you haven't shown your math. So your explanation is rejected. Besides, there's no evidence that anyone ever detonated such a warhead in the Antarctic, so the question is moot. -- Timberwoof me at timberwoof dot com http://www.timberwoof.com "When you post sewage, don't blame others for emptying chamber pots in your direction." ‹Chris L. |
#453
|
|||
|
|||
Earth w/o Moon / by Brad Guth
On May 25, 12:28 pm, Timberwoof
wrote: A better cite would be...http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Venus#Orbit_and_rotation "[Venus] reaches inferior conjunction every 584 days, on average." 584 days / 365 day * 12 months = 19.2 months However, "Whether this relationship arose by chance or is the result of some kind of tidal locking with the Earth, is unknown." That's very true enough and directly usable for this argument. The Venus orbit is not unaffected by the tidal radius of Earth. What exactly do you not understand about a lithobraking encounter of an icy proto-moon (be it complex)? You have presented no reason to think such a thing is possible. Yes I have, Well, you've presented what you thought were reasons, but they've been disputed. Only within your totally subjective=objective mindset that's manic bipolar into accepting absolutely anything via your government or from their DARPA/NASA as the one and only word of your white Semitic God(s). but no matter the possible or not, it's still capable of being supercomputer simulated in full interactive 3D animated eye- candy mode. They have also simulated what would happen if dinosaurs were recreated and ran amuck on a tropical island. It proves nothing. It goes a long ways towards proving as to what's reasonably possible, and of what isn't. While you're at it; do tell us where that terrific arctic ocean basin came from? How about telling us when Earth got the vast majority of its seasonal tilt? The planets of the solar system vary widely in their range of axial tilts. There is nothing especially unusual about Earth's. Other than indications that before having our moon there existed a nearly monoseason environment, because there was only a small amount of seasonal tilt, although having a somewhat greater elliptical orbit and roughly a third the ocean tidal action taking place would have made the tropics quite survivable by us humans, regardless of how much polar ice expanded. But you've presented no evidence that any of this happened, and you've ignored other evidence that contradicts it. Yes I have, and no I have not. Terribly sorry about that. .. - Brad Guth |
#454
|
|||
|
|||
Earth w/o Moon / by Brad Guth
On May 25, 12:32 pm, Timberwoof
wrote: In article , BradGuth wrote: On May 25, 12:09 am, David Johnston wrote: On Sat, 24 May 2008 22:01:01 -0700 (PDT), BradGuth wrote: How well protected from a nuclear surface blast is a submarine hiding under 3~4 meters worth of the Arctic polar ice cap? How long is a piece of string? As long as you'd care to make it, such as nearly from our moon to Earth is technically doable, and of otherwise almost unlimited if deployed out past the moon's L2. OOPS! taboo/nondisclosure (aka need to know) The answer is, not at all. At least not by the ice. I suppose a 100 megaton would cause such ice to move and otherwise vaporise, although that in of itself takes away a great deal of energy. Say if given a one km radius of 3 meter thick ice is 2.355e6 m3 of such ice that needs to get displaced and/or melted. (more likely a 10 km radius = 230e6 tonnes of ice) Seems likely that amount of ice would moderate that kind of nuclear blast energy in more ways than just thermal energy, because as a physical blast or shockwave shield itself is going to take quite a bit of that kinetic energy away too. So, your "not at all" is perhaps yet another one of those special conditional laws of physics in order to suit your interpretation that'll benefit your side of this rant. Again, you're just talking in adjectives. You've thrown in a few numbers here and there so it looks scientific, but you haven't shown your math. So your explanation is rejected. Besides, there's no evidence that anyone ever detonated such a warhead in the Antarctic, so the question is moot. Are you suggesting that our government has no secrets and tells no lies? That's OK because, you would knowingly reject your own mother if you ever realized what unusual orifice you'd emerged out of. .. - Brad Guth |
#455
|
|||
|
|||
Earth w/o Moon / by Brad Guth
On May 25, 12:25*pm, BradGuth wrote:
As of prior to 12,500 BP, the best available science thus far tells us there were no apparent human or animal migrations pertaining to How the "F" can anyone know what occured 12,500 without robust, reliable, detailed records being made and kept safe for 12,500 years ??! What "F"ing best available science are you referring to ??! None exists! Grow up little dreamer. You appear fairly educated and somewhat bright here and there, yet you subtract this notion with a single paragraph. |
#456
|
|||
|
|||
Earth w/o Moon / by Brad Guth
BradGuth wrote:
On May 25, 12:32 pm, Timberwoof wrote: In article , BradGuth wrote: On May 25, 12:09 am, David Johnston wrote: On Sat, 24 May 2008 22:01:01 -0700 (PDT), BradGuth wrote: How well protected from a nuclear surface blast is a submarine hiding under 3~4 meters worth of the Arctic polar ice cap? How long is a piece of string? As long as you'd care to make it, such as nearly from our moon to Earth is technically doable, and of otherwise almost unlimited if deployed out past the moon's L2. OOPS! taboo/nondisclosure (aka need to know) The answer is, not at all. At least not by the ice. I suppose a 100 megaton would cause such ice to move and otherwise vaporise, although that in of itself takes away a great deal of energy. Say if given a one km radius of 3 meter thick ice is 2.355e6 m3 of such ice that needs to get displaced and/or melted. (more likely a 10 km radius = 230e6 tonnes of ice) Seems likely that amount of ice would moderate that kind of nuclear blast energy in more ways than just thermal energy, because as a physical blast or shockwave shield itself is going to take quite a bit of that kinetic energy away too. So, your "not at all" is perhaps yet another one of those special conditional laws of physics in order to suit your interpretation that'll benefit your side of this rant. Again, you're just talking in adjectives. You've thrown in a few numbers here and there so it looks scientific, but you haven't shown your math. So your explanation is rejected. Besides, there's no evidence that anyone ever detonated such a warhead in the Antarctic, so the question is moot. Are you suggesting that our government has no secrets and tells no lies? That's OK because, you would knowingly reject your own mother if you ever realized what unusual orifice you'd emerged out of. . - Brad Guth lets talk about accelerations. and the definition of excess escape velocity. first off an orbit is constrained and the energy function is negative. -- a fact of life any bound orbit will have negative energy. so a circular orbit is V^2 = GM/R to escape completely from the orbit. the V = (2)^1/2 * Vcircular. that little bit of extra energy will escape the system. in real terms that little bit of energy would be 1.4121 times any circurlar speed to escape from that orbit. whether elliptical or circular. a. a moon would escape from the earth b a planet would escape from the sun. any passing object ( sirius or any other sun) would exchange energy with the planets and moons and as it swoops by. they would bobble and leave the solar system. the problem is delineated in "Astrodynamics" by Bates, Mueller and White. Dover 1971 easy reading If you know a little bit of calculus and and lot of algebra. thats ok Brad does not read that kind of stuff. josephus -- I go sailing in the summer and look at stars in the winter, "Everybody is ignorant but on different subjects" --Will Rogers Its not what you know that gets you in trouble its what you know that ain so. --josh billings. |
#457
|
|||
|
|||
Earth w/o Moon / by Brad Guth
BradGuth wrote:
On May 25, 12:28 pm, Timberwoof wrote: A better cite would be...http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Venus#Orbit_and_rotation "[Venus] reaches inferior conjunction every 584 days, on average." 584 days / 365 day * 12 months = 19.2 months venus, mercury, Jupiter Saturn and lots of moons have small integer relations. it occurs everywhere. AE Roy talked about this. the real question is "Does this fact have anything to do with orbital stability?" I remember a simulation at JPL had a problem. I heard about it from one of the developers. the simulation was a stepwise emulation of the Solar System. well, some programmer made a mistake and when they ran the simulation the EARTH was missing. Venus and Mercury became unstable and Venus escaped the solar system. rather clear evidence that the hierarchy is particular and specific to stability. However, "Whether this relationship arose by chance or is the result of some kind of tidal locking with the Earth, is unknown." That's very true enough and directly usable for this argument. The Venus orbit is not unaffected by the tidal radius of Earth. What exactly do you not understand about a lithobraking encounter of an icy proto-moon (be it complex)? You have presented no reason to think such a thing is possible. Yes I have, Well, you've presented what you thought were reasons, but they've been disputed. lithobreaking is like antigravity and shares properties with it. it requires a mechanism the stop the inertia of an entire PLANET. F= GM*V^2 that is the energy to decellerate the earth. that decelleration would violently alter our orbit ( 1.4121* V is the definition of EXCESS HYPERBOLIC VELOCITY. Only within your totally subjective=objective mindset that's manic bipolar into accepting absolutely anything via your government or from their DARPA/NASA as the one and only word of your white Semitic God(s). but no matter the possible or not, it's still capable of being supercomputer simulated in full interactive 3D animated eye- candy mode. They have also simulated what would happen if dinosaurs were recreated and ran amuck on a tropical island. It proves nothing. It goes a long ways towards proving as to what's reasonably possible, and of what isn't. While you're at it; do tell us where that terrific arctic ocean basin came from? How about telling us when Earth got the vast majority of its seasonal tilt? The planets of the solar system vary widely in their range of axial tilts. There is nothing especially unusual about Earth's. Other than indications that before having our moon there existed a nearly monoseason environment, because there was only a small amount of seasonal tilt, although having a somewhat greater elliptical orbit and roughly a third the ocean tidal action taking place would have made the tropics quite survivable by us humans, regardless of how much polar ice expanded. But you've presented no evidence that any of this happened, and you've ignored other evidence that contradicts it. Yes I have, and no I have not. Terribly sorry about that. . - Brad Guth -- I go sailing in the summer and look at stars in the winter, "Everybody is ignorant but on different subjects" --Will Rogers Its not what you know that gets you in trouble its what you know that ain so. --josh billings. |
#458
|
|||
|
|||
Earth w/o Moon / by Brad Guth
wrote:
On May 25, 12:25�pm, BradGuth wrote: As of prior to 12,500 BP, the best available science thus far tells us there were no apparent human or animal migrations pertaining to How the "F" can anyone know what occured 12,500 without robust, reliable, detailed records being made and kept safe for 12,500 years ??! What "F"ing best available science are you referring to ??! None exists! Grow up little dreamer. You appear fairly educated and somewhat bright here and there, yet you subtract this notion with a single paragraph. Then perhaps your forever closed mindset and faith-based nayism shouldn't bother trying to deductively figure anything out for your self. I mean, why bother when the mostly subjective science of your mainstream status quo box is always Old Testament or Qur'an like, more than good enough? (even when 2+2 doesn’t equal 4) Tell us why didn't you hold your DARPA/NASA and of their Apollo fiasco to those same standards that you insist all others must provide? God forbid, apparently you wouldn't ever want to police your own kind. . - Brad Guth |
#459
|
|||
|
|||
Earth w/o Moon / by Brad Guth
BradGuth wrote:
On May 23, 10:35 pm, wrote: On May 23, 9:06 pm, BradGuth wrote: On May 23, 7:52 pm, wrote: On May 23, 4:06 pm, BradGuth wrote: On May 23, 8:21 am, wrote: On May 23, 7:43 am, David Johnston wrote: No degree of thickness of ice would keep the moon from shattering from such an impact. Absolutely, but what ice? Where's all that ice today? Your manic bipolar mindset is showing its ugly head again. And here you've boldly stated that Einstein was essentially a phony from the very get go. Now I'm not exactly certain which mainstream puppet is telling the truth, or even the half truth. Is that why you and others of your DARPA kind wouldn't dare run off those simulations? . - Brad Guth No hidden agendas or motives, just trying to see where the ice came from and where it went. Evasion noted. Dumb and dumber noted, as well as your denial of being in denial, or rather DARPA damage-control noted. When will you spooks and moles of the mainstream status quo (aka Dark Side) ever learn? Productive responses. Not. BTW, I'd thought Oort clouds were icy (somewhat worse off than those icy Saturn rings). So, how exactly does one migrate through the realms of such Oort clouds without getting icy? . - Brad Guth Evasion still noted. ? evasion ? Are you saying them Oort clouds are not icy? Are you saying them rings around Saturn are not icy? How about the Kuiper belt and of them KBOs, are they not icy? Speak up and tell us village idiots what is not icy out there? . - Brad Guth most of it. because the "ice" is not ice but methane. josephus -- I go sailing in the summer and look at stars in the winter, "Everybody is ignorant but on different subjects" --Will Rogers Its not what you know that gets you in trouble its what you know that ain so. --josh billings. |
#460
|
|||
|
|||
Earth w/o Moon / by Brad Guth
On May 26, 12:42 am, josephus wrote:
BradGuth wrote: On May 23, 10:35 pm, wrote: On May 23, 9:06 pm, BradGuth wrote: On May 23, 7:52 pm, wrote: On May 23, 4:06 pm, BradGuth wrote: On May 23, 8:21 am, wrote: On May 23, 7:43 am, David Johnston wrote: No degree of thickness of ice would keep the moon from shattering from such an impact. Absolutely, but what ice? Where's all that ice today? Your manic bipolar mindset is showing its ugly head again. And here you've boldly stated that Einstein was essentially a phony from the very get go. Now I'm not exactly certain which mainstream puppet is telling the truth, or even the half truth. Is that why you and others of your DARPA kind wouldn't dare run off those simulations? . - Brad Guth No hidden agendas or motives, just trying to see where the ice came from and where it went. Evasion noted. Dumb and dumber noted, as well as your denial of being in denial, or rather DARPA damage-control noted. When will you spooks and moles of the mainstream status quo (aka Dark Side) ever learn? Productive responses. Not. BTW, I'd thought Oort clouds were icy (somewhat worse off than those icy Saturn rings). So, how exactly does one migrate through the realms of such Oort clouds without getting icy? . - Brad Guth Evasion still noted. ? evasion ? Are you saying them Oort clouds are not icy? Are you saying them rings around Saturn are not icy? How about the Kuiper belt and of them KBOs, are they not icy? Speak up and tell us village idiots what is not icy out there? . - Brad Guth most of it. because the "ice" is not ice but methane. josephus -- Gee whiz, then that goes exactly along with my other argument about how next to impossible it is for plain old ice to exist/coexist in the vacuum and cosmic gauntlet of space, that is unless having a sufficient mass and way the hell and gone out there (such as Pluto and Sedna should contain such ice, along with their frozen methane and CO2 dry-ice). Of course, it there were a sufficient rocky core of 7.35e22 kg to start off with, as then the associated gravity would tend to hold onto whatever ice, be it of methane, dry-ice or plain old water-ice, as well as for whatever local geothermal energy causing internal gas/ vapors to emerge could also be held onto, and as long as it stayed far enough away from a given star or whatever large planet would also be essential for holding onto an atmosphere that would shield and/or insulate that icy surface, and obviously better yet if there was a magnetosphere for giving that thin atmosphere some protection from whatever solar wind. Perhaps the paramagnetic characteristics of our moon could have helped a little, if not via an active core that once upon a time having sustained just enough of a magnetosphere to have shielded itself, as of prior to merging along with Earth. .. - Brad Guth |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Aliens based on moon Brad Guth please review | LIBERATOR | Space Station | 39 | April 22nd 06 08:40 AM |
Aliens based on moon Brad Guth please review | anon | Space Station | 1 | April 19th 06 07:54 PM |
Aliens based on moon Brad Guth please review | honestjohn | Misc | 2 | April 19th 06 05:55 PM |
Moon is less hot by earthshine, says Brad Guth / IEIS~GASA | Ami Silberman | History | 13 | December 15th 03 08:13 PM |
Moon is less hot by earthshine, says Brad Guth / IEIS~GASA | Ami Silberman | Astronomy Misc | 13 | December 15th 03 08:13 PM |