Earth w/o Magnetosphere, w/o Moon

Earth is not only going to eventually be w/o magnetosphere, as well as
it used to be w/o moon, but it's clearly operating w/o remorse as though
w/o so much as half a village idiot Usenet mind.

The vast bulk of topics here are absolutely silly and/or wussy, of no
importance to much of anything. The potentially serious topics are
being stalked, bashed, infomercial skewed and/or mutated in order to
banish or otherwise suit the all-knowing mainstream status quo,
especially if it isn't something 100+% pro-Jewish.

It's so freaking obvious that we're being given infomercial butt loads
of their used toilet paper instead of the truth, in that only the truly
dumb and dumber souls that are past their dumbfounded point of no return
are the ones still thinking their corrupted systems can somehow be fixed
with yet another ruse, another sting, another lie, another perpetrated
war.
-
Brad Guth


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

According to the Gods and wizards of Usenet:
Columbus discovered America first, only Shakespeare wrote every last
word, intelligent life only got created and coexisted here on Earth, a
mere 60:1 ratio of rocket/payload with a 30% inert GLOW is far more than
sufficient for doing our passive moon, Kodak film works entirely
different while on or anywhere near our moon, global warming has
absolutely nothing to do with humanity, and apparently God is Jewish
(period, end of discussion). The matter fact of there being hard
scientific evidence stipulating otherwise isn't even allowed to coexist,
much less advance towards the front of the line.

Evidence excluding works every time:
Earth may in fact be the most alive or at least the most screwed up
planet in the known universe (of course we only know extremely slight
and insignificant bits about 0.0000000000000000001% [1e-21] of this
universe), whereas no matters how much we clean up our act Earth will
never again see another ice age, especially as we retain our own nearby
orbiting mascon that's tidal and IR/FIR warming us to death, plus that
little pesky matter as our solar system orbits us closer to the Sirius
star/solar system, which by the way isn't exactly going to put any spare
ice upon Earth unless we're getting hit by another icy snowball from
encountering the Sirius Kuiper/Oort hell, or perhaps if somehow this
interstellar encounter manages to skew an icy Sedna into heading our
way.

No boat rocking is allowed:
The likes of our MESSENGER and NEW HORIZONS are each in the process
doing their spendy wag-thy-dog missions, and unfortunately the ESA Venus
EXPRESS mission is still flying low in their usual need-to-know
taboo/nondisclosure stealth mode, playing it extra damage-control safe
and cozy until their PFS instruments gets into action, if ever, so
there's not actually good or bad news to report.

God forbid, don't tell the truth:
Our mascon worthy moon is still physically dark, as well an extremely
hot/cold environment and otherwise unavoidably being it's terribly
reactive self in more ways than just gamma and hard-X-rays, however
Venus may have become the rarest of any planet that's hosting
intelligent other life, but then Earth may soon enough become just as
rare, as it's not only going to eventually become a world w/o sufficient
magnetosphere and otherwise w/o sufficient atmosphere, as well as it
used to be w/o our global warming moon, but at least it's inhabitance
are clearly operating as though w/o hardly a stitch of remorse and as
though w/o so much as hosting half a village idiot Usenet mind of it's
own (I believe it's called faith based base jumping, except without a
bungy cord or parachute).

Usenet MIB are still kicking butt:
The vast bulk of topics within this Usenet naysay land of what's
typically mainstream denial upon denial have become absolutely silly
and/or wussy, of no actual importance to much of anything that matters.
The potentially serious topics are those most often being systematically
stalked, bashed, infomercial skewed and/or having been intentionally
mutated in order to effectively banish such topics until otherwise
forced to suit the all-knowing mainstream status quo, especially getting
tormented to death if it isn't something 100+% pro-Jewish.

Where's the truth and nothing but the truth:
It has been so freaking obvious that we're being given and forced to
accept such infomercial butt loads of mainstream intellectual crapolla,
at best published upon used toilet paper and at our expense instead of
simply allowing and sharing the truth, in so much as only the truly dumb
and dumber souls that are well past their dumbfounded point of no return
are the ones still thinking their corrupted and/or bogus systems of
governments, agencies and of their religious puppeteers can somehow be
fixed with yet another ruse, another sting, another lie, another
perpetrated war, and if need be having Christ put back on that stick for
good measure.

Truth only has to be that which is deduced from the best available
science of the day, and such truth should therefore fit rather nicely
within the regular laws of physics, whereas infomercial-science needs
only to beget itself because, it only has to comply as to whatever fits
into their social/religious conditional laws of physics. Any lack of
evidence that should have existed in support of the status quo is
therefore standing as good as it gets, and simply can't be revised nor
argued or even suggested as being any part of their grand ruse/sting
that has most of us firmly gripped by our private parts, and the likes
of this Usenet and NASA's Uplink.Space has become the eGod(s) that's in
charge of enforcing such.
-
Brad Guth


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

As I've informed our Usenet resident anti-global-warming avenger "Roger
Coppock", that I'd go so far as to agree that humanity is worth as much
as 25% of our global warming fiasco, but that's about it.

Here's a fully "science friendly" solution that's technically doable and
way past due. OOPS! I forgot that your all or nothing mindset of
naysayism is still in the usual fail-safe mode of denial, as to our moon
having any impact whatsoever upon our environment. After all, isn't it
so much simpler to exclude hard-science and to otherwise avoid having to
use those pesky regular laws of physics?

What we badly need is a good or even not so good other planet or moon,
intended for sequestering those individuals that simply refuse to accept
the mainstream status quo of infomercial science and of infomercial
history. Of course, I'm being silly, as it should be the other way
around, or didn't you realize that part?

Got that "Prison Planet" ??? why the hell not Ceres ???
http://cosmic.lifeform.org/
Thomas Lee Elifritz,
Other than the prospects of getting a little crowded, perhaps "Ceres -
The Fifth Planet From A Star Called The Sun" can become our "Prison
Planet" should be looked into.

However, perhaps otherwise our extremely nearby and not so very old
Venus could also be utilized as is, in place of sending folks that have
failed to assimilate into the mainstream status quo to hell.

This alternative would be a darn good thing for "A government that
repeatedly makes bad decisions, resulting in worsening conditions for
the country it runs."

Better yet for a "A government run by an intellectually challenged
leader."

Best of all for "A nation comprised of intellectually challenged
citizens."

But what otherwise to do if having to continually deal with all the rest
of those village idiots that are merely dumbfounded past the point of no
return?

Too bad we still can't even get close enough to our own moon without
frying our frail DNA, much less walking on that physically dark and
otherwise downright nasty surface. However, underground is entirely
possible, as offering us a terrific 'Prison Moon' alternative that we
can obviously keep a close eye on those *******s we've sent there for
their own damn good.
-
Brad Guth


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

Earth w/o magnetosphere is somewhat doubtful that we'll survive for long
thereafter.

Earth w/o moon is however survivable, though an environment much colder
than you'd think.

Earth w/moon is unavoidably going to continue with the ongoing ice age
thaw, no matters what.

"Thomas Lee Elifritz" wrote in message

We may as well start with this one from the Items of the Day :
http://www.alternet.org/envirohealth/43084/

The housing bubble is upon us.
http://cosmic.lifeform.org

Ignore GM, over my ass. Sorry to have to keep reporting this, but lo
and behold GM is here to stay, with or w/o humans. The real climate
change is going to happen no matters what. Perhaps it's God's sadistic
way of slowly sending us to hell because of our having put one of
his/her own kind on a stick.

There are any number of viably technical and good old common sense
solutions towards GM moderation, but getting ignored to death or simply
further banishment of all such notions seems to be our most popular
outcome. Social/political/religious ethics means having remorse, and
thus far we haven't bothered to cultivate either.

Stephen Colbourne's "Solution to global warming"

http://mygate.mailgate.org/mynews/sc...smart&p=1/1166
I for one kid you folks not, whereas I have an even better solution
(especially since human cultivated bigotry, arrogance and most all forms
of their almighty pagan greed as having been based upon infomercial
history, infomercial science and those social/religious conditional laws
of physics is here to stay) that's actually a good though somewhat
spendy and time consuming solution based entirely upon replicated
science and them good old regular laws of physics.

3W/m2 of human induced global warming is certainly a contributing
factor, though actually next to nothing (perhaps representing as little
as 10% of the ongoing fiasco, or at most worth 25%). Try 0.1% of 2e20
joules of what having our orbiting mascon/moon represents, and even
that's excluding whatever secondary IR/FIR considerations, is worth a
whopping 390 J/m2.

Excluding whatever contributed secondary IR/FIR aspects, if taking but
0.01% of 2e20 J and dividing that amount by the 5.112e14 m2 of Earth is
what give us 39 J/m2 to work with. This 0.01% is what could represent
the slight amount of thermal energy that's getting transferred due to
tidal friction of mantle, oceans and a touch of atmospheric flow that's
induced into moving about by way of having that nearby moon.

Even taking 0.001% of our mascon worthy moon's orbital energy influence
is worth the 3.9 J/m2 of various tidal friction that's unavoidably taken
into becoming a little extra terrestrial heat.

I think some kind of sun shield in space would be the obvious answer
to this.

I tend to agree with that solar shade notion, although how about simply
moving the likes of icy Sedna into L1?

Icy Sedna (even after all that reddish ice is gone) would make for an
absolutely terrific solar shield, with shade to burn (sort of speak).

2) We live with it
If we try to live with it we will have to reduce the population to a
point where we can survive with less food being produced.
Birth control is the only good way to achieve this, the alternatives
are famine,war and disease.

I also agree, that reducing Earth's population by way of exporting all
of the Mars or bust fools as soon as possible seems doable (as offering
one-way tickets to ride), and perhaps all the rest can be sequestered
upon or rather within our salty moon, by which everything NASA/Apollo
stipulates as being entirely passive as a guano island that's xenon lamp
spectrum illuminated.

If we can get Earth's population down to 10% of what it is today (via
WW-III or whatever means of collateral damage and carnage of the
innocent), we'd still be getting a touch warmer because of our nearby
orbiting mascon of a moon that has only been with us since the last ice
age, but at least we'd have the affordable resources along with a much
cleaner environment in order to deal with that ongoing situation that
shouldn't be anywhere as postal as it's going right now.
-
Brad Guth


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

Apparently sharing the truth about much of anything is now classified as
being "ranter" rather than research based. As such, their anti-ranter
search engines are unable to extract much of anything important unless
it's somehow directly related to polishing one of their own knobs.

From: Aidan Karley .group
Subject: Earth's moon as of prior to 10,000 BC ???
Date: Mon, 23 Oct 2006 12:07:08 +0100

In article , wrote:
What I'm questioning is that it doesn't appear that we had our
moon until during or some time shortly after the last ice age.

What!?? IIRC, the last ice age wasn't all that long ago.
Some biology has evolved based on lunar cycles. It couldn't
have evolved that quickly.

I hadn't actually noticed the kill-filed Mr Guth's guff
(UK-english ; I guess he didn't know about it's meaning when he chose
his pseudonym) until you posted that snippet.
There are a number of examples of very finely laminated rocks
from ages back, at around 100 million years, and a couple in the ~350
million year time interval ; these rocks show asymmetric pairs of
events whose relative spacing changes on time scales of {varies with
coarse age} around 10 of the cycle pairs. These bicyclical variations
are interpreted as being tidal deposits with a twice-daily tidal cycle,
and a "monthly" interaction between the lunar and solar tides ; as we
have today.
The estimated hours-per-day and days-per-month figures for these
various deposits describe a lunar recession curve compatible with the
current values for hours-per-day and days-per-month, and for their
measured and their calculated rates of change.

Short version : geology gives fairly good evidence for the Moon
having been present and in the same (complex) relationship to Earth as
today, for at least as long as tetrapods have been breathing air and
walking under the sun.

One of the big problems for the ranters is that if they bury
relatively sensible questions in interminable rants, then their
original questions may never get noticed and answered. SIGH
--
Aidan Karley, FGS, / Aberdeen, Scotland

Aidan Karley,
I had no idea that your resources of such carbon/lead dating was that
precise, in that it could establish the bidaily layerings of such old
rock as having been associated with a lunar/mascon induced tide as
opposed to the solar induced tide. I'm looking forward to understanding
such precise geology that not even our NOAA, NASA or best teams of
associated researchers are aware of.

Cosmic salt:
There is essentially no significant salt to be found within bedrock or
the mantle substance of mother Earth, however salt has seemingly been
around from the very beginnings of our intelligent human existence, even
though other than our salty oceans it's not uniformly deposited. Since
this salt is not to any extent found to have existed as a raw element
from with Earth or even the likes of Mars, perhaps in a few other words,
this vast deposit of salt seems to have been imported from some cosmic
resource that's entirely foreign to our own planetology, but perhaps as
derived from our salty moon that once upon a time should have had the
likes of 262 km worth of salty ice to begin with.

It would be good bit of new and improved science as to know if Sedna's
reddish ice or if the composition of the dwarf planets such as Ceres,
Pluto and of it's Charon are the least bit salty, as well as if the
sequestered remainder of brines or crystallized solids upon and within
our moon is at all similar to our terrestrial salt.

Most of our rock/crystal salt deposits were initially formulated by the
fundamental process of evaporation, such as from ancient salt lakes or
via dried up underground brines that somehow also arrived within
somewhat recent geological times. The notion of salty ice balls from
God's cosmic creation is certainly a viable alternative, but then so is
the physics and scientific alternative of our environment obtaining a
salty and otherwise icy proto-moon as having impacted Earth.

World's oldest salt lake only a few thousand years old (Lake Eyre)
http://www.answersingenesis.org/crea.../salt_lake.asp
"This reduces the time period for accumulation to only 12,000 years."

Question is: If we're to be disregarding our moon, where the heck was
that original salty ice, as of prior to residing here on Earth and
having become such a salty deposit as lake Eyre?

How the heck does the science of carbon or lead dating determine the age
of salty seawater and/or the origin of all that original salty ice? (as
far as I know, it can not accomplish this task any more so than finely
laminated rocks can be determined to have been created by a lunar mascon
influence of our environment having such tidal considerations other than
solar).

This is not to say that Earth hasn't it's fair share of old salty
deposits to work with. What it's saying is that the vast bulk of our
salty oceans and other significant pockets of salt in crystal form
hasn't been with us for all that long, although the raw salt element
itself could obviously be every bit as old as the universe.

It seems as though mainstream science is only willing to accept upon
whatever doesn't rock their own good ship LOLLIPOP. Therefore, even the
most fuzzy logic of "very finely laminated rocks" is all the proof they
ever needed before taking their HIGH TEA.

The original orbs of Mercury, Venus, Earth and Mars simply were not
likely salty ice balls to start off with. So, where did our salt come
from, if not from our moon?
-
Brad Guth


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

I see that our "Aidan Karley" pulled his side of the Usenet plug just as
soon as I'd asked about whatever carbon/lead dating of those supposed
finely layered rocks had amounted to, of which I believe hasn't actually
proven squat about our environment as having that big old moon prior to
the last ice age. In fact, the true geology of Earth simply doesn't
afford any good signs of Earth having such tidal actions, and perhaps
not even a record as to the degree of seasons as should have been
depicted by intelligent souls as of times prior to 10,000 BC.

A nearly monoseason environment of having sustained life upon this Earth
would have managed with just the solar tide as well as having much less
if any global tilt. Earth's environment before having received the
glancing impact(s) from that icy proto-that moon also didn't require the
extent of such vast oceans, especially of such a salty volume.

Apparently our local orbiting mascon of a salty moon that's taking
roughly the equivalent of 2e20 joules worth of gravitational energy to
hold onto, and therby unavoidably involving a great deal of inside and
out tidal friction, is still by itself unavoidably IR/FIR hot by day, or
else it gets sub-freezing cold in the shade of night. That naked moon
of our's is also simply gamma and hard-X-ray TBI lethal to human DNA,
and otherwise remains as physically mineral and carbon/soot dark,
terribly electrostatic dusty and simply downright nasty, whereas Venus
offers a somewhat highly protected environment that's still far more
planetology alive than this anti-think-tank of such a warm and fuzzy
topic/author banishment Usenet from infomercial hell.

As I've often said before, that many of you folks are more naysay
mindset and thereby anti-think-tank worthy than our resident LLPOF
warlord(GW Bush). Being without remorse is also par for this Usenet
course of denial that's oddly having more than it's fair share of devout
born-again atheist that are rather oddly pro-Jewish and otherwise about
as faith-based as you can possibly get into being pro-Bush and
anti-environment at the same time, and thereby remaining as more
devoutly status quo than most anywhere else on Earth.

Firstly, our salty moon and of it's more than somewhat lethal surface
environment was perhaps once upon a time doable if such other life had
originally been residing as sequestered within the DNA protective 262 km
thick layer of salty ice, or perhaps having since migrated sufficiently
deep within hollow rilles or perhaps within geode pockets where there's
still some degree of a brine or other mineral/chemical substance
containing h2o. Life as we know it (spores, microbes and larger)
doesn't actually require direct sunlight, and sufficiently intelligent
life can simply devise upon whatever artificial light that a given
situation demands (proper evolution and/or intelligent design gives such
life bioluminance capability and if need be those better eyes that are
100 fold more sensitive, plus others as having far greater spectrum
capability than us humans that seem to have lost most all of that really
good DNA code).

The humanly subjective science of observationology and those regular
laws of physics go hand and hand with most other deductive analogies
that are usually accepted on behalf whatever's promoting the mainstream
status quo, whereas such there's all sorts of viable possibilities that
are currently available on behalf of those rationally deductive
interpretations of what's to be seen on behalf of that rather nearby
other planet having accommodated such Venusian and/or ET life, as to
having been existing/coexisting upon Venus in spite of their extremely
buoyant and toasty environment that offers so freaking much
spare/renewable energy to all but the most heathen species of village
idiots.

Venus is without question humanly hot because of the relatively newish
planetology of it's geothermally active environment, but it's not
actually the least bit insurmountably too hot or even too nasty as for
intelligent and/or of sufficiently evolved/adapted life to touch, nor as
having survived within that toasty environment for quite some time.
Perhaps that very same constructive analogy may even include us wussy
humans if we'd care to apply a little common sense worth of technology,
as based once again upon those pesky regular laws of physics.

As far as we know, the raw Venusian atmosphere isn't directly compatible
with our existing biological and/or physiological requirements of having
to accomplish whatever future expeditions of Venus while in the buff.
However, with some degree of protective suits and co2--co/o2 via
applied technology that's also extracting surplus heat is about all that
it should take in order to improve upon those breathable requirements on
our behalf.

With such local energy, most everything under the sun becomes doable,
whereas the somewhat newish planetology of Venus simply has way more
than it's fair share of fully renewable/spare energy than either of us
can shake a bloody fist full of flaming sticks at. Therefore little if
any such expedition related energy for whatever processing and/or the
accomplishing of whatever task need be imported from Earth. Isn't that
good news, or what?

At least for the task of our eventually accomplishing Venus, in as much
as we don't have to bother packing along those extra tonnes of spendy
nuclear reactors, is rather doable. In fact, with a composite rigid
airship (AKA fat waverider), there's no actual good reason(s) as to
setting a human hot foot on that geothermally active deck.
-
Brad Guth


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

Obviously this nifty topic has been taboo/nondisclosure or rather Usenet
off-limits, as having been summarily banished because of having too many
of those truth or consequence related matters, and otherwise asking far
too many questions.

Interesting to note how certain Mailgate/Usenet insider/stealth wizards
can somehow manage to selectively moderate and/or banish whomever rocks
thy good ship LOLLIPOP. It's as though their status quo ship of these
certain individuals isn't exactly all that seaworthy, and I do believe
that it's even badly infested with the sort of rats and other
spore/microbe vermin that carry the black plague.

We, as Scientists must show tolerance to opposite views

http://mygate.mailgate.org/mynews/sc...ma ilgate.org

http://groups.google.com/group/sci.e...d7f73f06d9fb93

I totally agree that $cience (especially Usenet-$cience) has simply
cultivated itself deep into their very own infomercial-$cience and
subsequent conditional-physics cesspool of their very own
taboo/nondisclosure worth of their potentially lethal intellectual
crapolla, as having become too cult like bigoted, arrogant and downright
greedy to tolerate even their own kind. Of course the same can be said
of certain mainstream religions and obviously politics goes without
saying that they'll cheat, steal and lie their infomercial spewing butts
off as they eat their own kind without showing so much as a speck of
remorse.

For an ongoing example of what another interpretation upon the best
available GW science that's supported by what's known of our
planetology/geology, and otherwise backed up with whatever those regular
laws of physics are having to say:

At 6.7e9 folks and counting, if each and every soul was somehow
responsible for having badly consumed at the rate of 1e4 joules (10 KW)
of energy continuously, that's only worth a global thermal impact of
0.131 j/m2

I'm not all that certain it's possible for humanity to individually
obtain such an average of having to create and thus having badly
consumed 1e4 j/soul, as I'm fairly certain that's representing
considerably more overall energy and subsequent global energy and/or
resource drain along with all of it's associated pollution than I'm
responsible for.

This is not to say we haven't negatively impacted our failing
environment by way of our rentless pillaging and raping of mother Earth
for all she's worth, and thereby albedo dimming via our soot and a fair
multitude of our having reintroduced a touch more than our fair share of
sequestered elements, such as CO2 and NOx, plus therefore having
physically polluted with such and otherwise radiated this extra
hypothetical 0.131 j/m2 into our global environment.

Notice how the regular every day science and even as having been posted
by way of "junkscience" continually excludes any mention of our
physically dark and salty moon, of their having avoided the otherwise
unavoidable physics and subsequent planetology of the thermal dynamics
involved, thereby excluding of whatever such tidal forces are having to
do with having contributed such continuous friction into our otherwise
supposedly energy balanced environment, that by rights (w/o moon) should
be much colder.
http://www.junkscience.com/Greenhouse/

Of what's technically equal to the combined forces of gravity is the
2e20 joules worth of energy that it's taking in order for our Earth/moon
to coexist (that's excluding whatever's of secondary IR/FIR). If only
0.01% of that orbital energy gets converted into tidal friction, that's
merely 39.1 j/m2.

It's worth noting that Earth has by far the largest and most robust
mascon/tidal worth of a moon of any known planet/moon ratio, and yet
there's no solid geological or any other known planetology evidence or
even that of humanly recorded evidence of whatever's much prior to
10,000 BC, as to be more than suggesting that our moon has not actually
been around us as of prior to the last ice age. Everything moon and
even of Earth having such extensive seasons relates to the geological
time since the last ice age. In other words, prior to the last ice age
Earth didn't have nearly the extent of seasons or tides because there
simply wasn't nearly the tilt, and apparently there simply wasn't that
pesky orbiting mascon worth of our moon causing all of the extra tidal
friction and subsequent thermal dynamic transfers via ocean and
atmospheric tides, and I'd have to suppose a few internal factors of
tidal induced super-rotation that are situated within and below our not
so solid mantle (other than always having the solar tidal action to deal
with because, Earth had previously been w/o moon).
-
Brad Guth


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

The mere thought of our icy protomoon and of it's lithobreaking arrival
is not a joke. It simply represents the laws of physics and the slim
but reasonable odds of such happening, especially if it had been dragged
and/or accommodated along with the arrival of Venus.

I also tend to believe that "Earth w/o Magnetosphere, w/o Moon" is also
somewhat interrelated to one another, as well as unavoidably related to
having established the global tilt that shifted us away from being a
nearly monoseason planet with only solar driven tides and otherwise
having quite a bit of spare ice to deal with.

In the past our Earth was a bit more surface roundish/smooth as having
hosted somewhat less vertically imposing terrain from ocean depths to
the peaks of mountanious creations that transpired rather quickly, and
certainly as having much less erosion as deposited into our oceans or
otherwise having to deal with, and of what little surface water there
was to behold was much less salty and either extensively sub-frozen
and/or at least getting monoseason frosted enough as to reaching that
icy line of frost to within the tropics of Cancer/Capricorn. This
nearly monoseason of Earth's early environment was also allowing those
early forms of humanity to essentially staying put, demanding few if any
migrations except within the Tropics of Cancer/Capricorn, that is unless
something truly horrific of geophysics from within the planetology of
Earth and/or of mother nature's surface environment was taking place,
whereas I believe most everything north or south of their
Cancer/Capricorn line of frost would have been at risk of having been
complicated if not unlivable much of the time, especially throughout a
typical ice-age deep freezing cycle that lasted for a good ten to twenty
some odd thousands of years at a time.

Here's the latest of topic related news that you can use, or perhaps
not, as to my somewhat dyslexic way of contemplating on behalf of the
most accepted what-if our moon had in fact been made of Earth, whereas
of 1 Ga those resulting tidal affects would have been at least half if
not nearly twice again as impressive (if not nearly tsunami worthy), and
of 2 Ga would have been generating those somewhat continuous tsunami
class of bulging tidal waves as worth a few good magnitudes of their
having been 5 to 10 times worse off than nowadays, not to mention what
our molten mantle being seriously motivated along via such horrific
mascon forces, as a somewhat super-rotation mass of thermal and magnetic
force taking place just below the crust of Earth.

If we gave our moon a supposed lifespan of being 4 Ga (4 billion years
old)

moon @0.0 Ga = 384,400 km from Earth / orbital energy 2e20 joules

moon @ -1 Ga = 332,000 km from Earth / orbital energy 3e20 joules

moon @ -2 Ga = 256,000 km from Earth / orbital energy 5e20 joules

moon @ -3 Ga = 192,000 km from Earth / orbital energy 8e20 joules
(possibly 1e21 joules)

moon @ -4 Ga = 0.0 km as supposedly emerging itself from Earth
(antiplode launch force/energy at 6 km/s = 5.3e30 J ????

Secondary impact/atiplode ejected mass 7.35e22 x 2 = 14.7e22 kg
I'm using 2x the mass of our moon because not everything that goes up
became moon)

Geophysical whatever antiplode launch exit velocity of roughly 6 km/s
Ke = .5MV2 7.35e22 x 36e6 = 265e28 joules
Kf = MV2 14.7e22 x 36e6 = 529e28 joules

Of course, silly Kroll and myself are perhaps still the two most
resident village idiots (AKA messengers from hell) as leaning ourselves
towards the more likely icy protomoon sort of implact, as having
delivered a very salty and rather icy worth of a glancing sucker-punch
(perhaps involving more than one such lithobreaking encounter) that
which established the major extent of Earth's tilt (thereby having
created seasons) and having subsequently produced the likes of our
Arctic ocean basin and/or Hudson Bay, along with the geophysical
antiplode result having created the sorts of horrific vertical land mass
and otherwise extremely mountainous terrain, as having been pushed up at
roughly those 180 degree longitude/latitude antiplode locations.

Since there's no apparent argument against really big and nasty stuff
having in fact impacted Earth from time to time, and since the laws of
physics and/or planetology should not have changed, whereas this icy
protomoon arrival as of the last ice age seems to give a viable degree
of it's own what-if on behalf of representing a perfectly rational set
of arguments, that's at least worth keeping on the public table so that
others having an honest thought from their open mindset might
constructively contribute as to sharing their expertise or best swag,
instead of merely enforcing and/or hiding behind the usual mainstream
naysayism, and of otherwise having to apply evidence denial and/or total
author/topic banishment upon this argument.

Unfortunately, this topic represents that there's a great deal of our
past, present and future that's at stake, of which nearly everything
under the sun that's apparently orbiting our infomercial bulging and
otherwise badly polluted flat Earth is at risk of falling off the edge,
such as most everything from their Old Testament certified 'Big Bang'
theory to that of our supposedly having walked on the moon is at risk.
Sorry about that. Secondly, clearly my old PC and that of my
Mailgate/Usenet access are still each getting summarily stalked, trashed
and/or terminated via spermware/****ware at every possible turn in this
extremely bumpy Usenet road, as though I'm somehow rocking more a bit
than my fair share of their good ship LOLLIPOP.
-
Brad Guth


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

In article
lgate.org,
"Brad Guth" wrote:

Unfortunately, this topic represents that there's a great deal of our
past, present and future that's at stake, of which nearly everything
under the sun that's apparently orbiting our infomercial bulging and
otherwise badly polluted flat Earth is at risk of falling off the edge,
such as most everything from their Old Testament certified 'Big Bang'
theory to that of our supposedly having walked on the moon is at risk.
Sorry about that. Secondly, clearly my old PC and that of my
Mailgate/Usenet access are still each getting summarily stalked, trashed
and/or terminated via spermware/****ware at every possible turn in this
extremely bumpy Usenet road, as though I'm somehow rocking more a bit
than my fair share of their good ship LOLLIPOP.

Is there any limit to the depth of your stupidity?

Tell you what. Try to answer me without references to

NASA. GWB. Sucks. Blows. Racial epithets

And keep it below 2 paragraphs.

--
Thermodynamics claims another crown!

http://hyperphysics.phy-astr.gsu.edu/hbase/heacon.html

--
Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com

2nd posting of this one is for the sake of Mailgate/Usenet that went
terminal the past couple of days.

The mere dreaded revision thought of an icy ProtoMoon and of it's
lithobreaking arrival is not a joke. This topic simply represents the
regular laws of physics and the slim but otherwise perfectly reasonable
odds of this event happening, especially if such an icy ProtoMoon had
been thrown our way from a nearby star/solar system, and as though
gravity dragged and/or accommodated into our solar system along with the
arrival of Venus (possibly as having belonged to Venus).

I also tend to believe that "Earth w/o magnetosphere, w/o moon" is also
somewhat interrelated to one another, as well as unavoidably
interrelated to the somewhat recent arrival of our moon as having
established the global tilt that shifted us away from being a nearly
monoseason planet with only solar driven tides and for otherwise as
having deposited quite a fair amount of salty ice for the environment of
Earth to deal with.

In the past our Earth was clearly a bit more surface roundish/smooth as
having hosted somewhat less vertically imposing terrain from ocean
depths to the peaks of mountainous creations that transpired rather
quickly (as though having been antipode induced), and certainly as
having much less erosion as deposited into our oceans or as otherwise
having to deal with, and of what little surface water there was already
here to behold was much less salty and either extensively sub-frozen
and/or at least getting monoseason frosted enough as to reaching that
icy line of frost to within the tropics of Cancer/Capricorn. This
nearly monoseason of Earth's early environment was also allowing those
early forms of humanity to essentially staying put, demanding few if any
migrations except within the relatively temperate life zone as
associated within the Tropics of Cancer/Capricorn, that is unless
something truly horrific of geophysics from within the planetology of
Earth and/or of mother nature's surface environment was taking place,
whereas I believe most everything north or south of their
Cancer/Capricorn line of frost would have been at risk of having been
complicated if not unlivable for much of the time, especially throughout
a typical ice-age deep freezing cycle that lasted for a good ten to
twenty some odd thousands of years at a whack.

Here's the latest of topic related news that I'd thought you folks can
use, or perhaps not (depending on your mindset), as to my somewhat
dyslexic way of contemplating on behalf of the most accepted what-if our
moon had in fact been made entirely of Earth, whereas of 1 Ga those
resulting tidal affects would have been at least half if not nearly
twice again as impressive (if not nearly tsunami worthy), and of 2 Ga
would have been generating those somewhat continuous tsunami class of
bulging tidal waves as worth a few good magnitudes of their having been
5 to 10 times worse off than nowadays, not to mention what our molten
mantle being seriously motivated along via such horrific mascon forces,
as a somewhat super-rotation mass of thermal and magnetic force taking
place just below the crust of Earth.

If we gave our moon a supposed lifespan of being 4 Ga (4 billion years
old)

moon @0.0 Ga = 384,400 km from Earth / orbital energy 2e20 joules

moon @ -1 Ga = 332,000 km from Earth / orbital energy 3e20 joules

moon @ -2 Ga = 256,000 km from Earth / orbital energy 5e20 joules

moon @ -3 Ga = 192,000 km from Earth / orbital energy 8e20 joules
(possibly 1e21 joules)

moon @ -4 Ga = 0.0 km as supposedly emerging itself from Earth
(antipode launch force/energy at 6 km/s = 5.3e30 J ????

Secondary impact/antipode ejected mass 7.35e22 x 2 = 14.7e22 kg
(I'm using 2x the mass of our moon because not everything that goes up
became moon)

Geophysical whatever antipode launch exit velocity of roughly 6 km/s
Ke = .5MV2 7.35e22 x 36e6 = 265e28 joules
Kf = MV2 14.7e22 x 36e6 = 529e28 joules

Of course, silly Kroll and myself are perhaps still the two most
resident village idiots (AKA messengers from hell) as having been
leaning ourselves towards the more likely icy protomoon sort of impact,
as having delivered a very salty and rather substantially icy worth of a
glancing sucker-punch (perhaps involving more than one such
lithobreaking and lunar iceberg deploying encounter) that which
established the major extent of Earth's tilt (thereby having created
seasons) and otherwise having subsequently produced the likes of our
Arctic ocean basin and/or Hudson Bay, along with the geophysical
antipode result having produced the sorts of horrific vertical land mass
and otherwise extremely mountainous terrain, as having been rather
abruptly pushed up at roughly those 180 degree longitude/latitude
antipode locations.

Since there's no apparent scientific nor physics related argument
against really big and nasty stuff having in fact impacted Earth from
time to time, and since the regular laws of physics and/or of
planetology should not have changed, whereas this icy ProtoMoon arrival
as of the last ice age seems to offer a viable degree of it's own
what-if on behalf of representing a perfectly rational set of arguments,
that's at least worth keeping on the public table so that others having
an honest thought from their open mindset might constructively
contribute as to sharing their expertise or best swag, instead of merely
enforcing upon and/or hiding behind the usual mainstream naysayism, and
of otherwise having to apply evidence denial and/or total author/topic
banishment upon this argument.

How Asteroids Trigger Volcanos / By Robert Roy Britt
A few other words of wisdom about Earth getting a serious hicky via
asteroid;
http://www.space.com/scienceastronom..._030204-1.html
Unfortunately, this author doesn't contribute anything as to whatever a
glancing blow via an icy protomoon might have represented. Therefore,
whatever horrific impact created ocean basins and/or antipode results
are not a part of this equation. However the following sub-topic is at
least an honest consideration as to what such a impactor of having
produced local and/or antipode induced event(s) might have helped to
have created the likes of Hawaii.

Asteroid May Have Created Hawaii

http://www.space.com/scienceastronom...id_010731.html
"Rocking the other side of the planet"

"Mark Boslough and his colleagues at Sandia National Laboratories have
modeled asteroid impacts. In a 1996 paper, they predicted that the
seismic energy from an impact travels through the Earth and is strongly
focussed at the antipode to the impact, near the boundary of the crust
and the hot, molten mantle."

Of course mountains that were not created via any volcanic process and
are less old than you'd think, and seemingly as having been created
within an extremely short amount of time, whereas these horrific
vertical formations seem as though more antipode generated than not.

This somewhat testy "Icy ProtoMoon" and of it's "Lithobreaking Arrival"
as a topic represents that within my open mindset there's a great deal
of our past, present and future that's at stake of getting revised, of
which nearly everything under the sun that's apparently orbiting our
infomercial bulging and otherwise badly polluted flat Earth is at risk
of falling off the edge, such as most everything from their Old
Testament certified 'Big Bang' theory to that of our supposedly having
walked on the moon is at risk. Sorry about that. Secondly, clearly my
extremely poor old PC and that of my limited Mailgate/Usenet access are
still each getting summarily stalked, trashed and/or terminated via
spermware/****ware at every possible turn in this extremely bumpy Usenet
road, as though I'm somehow the ultimate bad guy that's responsible for
rocking a bit more than my fair share of their good ship LOLLIPOP.
-
Brad Guth


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