A Space & astronomy forum. SpaceBanter.com

Go Back   Home » SpaceBanter.com forum » Others » UK Astronomy
Site Map Home Authors List Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read Web Partners

Earth w/o Magnetosphere, w/o Moon



 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #11  
Old September 14th 06, 04:05 AM posted to rec.org.mensa,sci.space.history,sci.physics,uk.sci.astronomy
Brad Guth[_2_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 3,941
Default Earth w/o Magnetosphere, w/o Moon

"BruceS" wrote in message


If you don't know the difference between energy and force, perhaps you
should lurk. I suspect that Mark will have a better response. At
least, I hope so.


I convert whatever I want in order to suit my dyslexic mindset. If I'm
ultimately after the potential extraction of energy, in which case I'll
convert whatever's the available N, kgf or pounds of force into joules
because I can.

If that's what's rocking your boat, so be it. Sorry about that.
-
Brad Guth






--
Posted via Mailgate.ORG Server - http://www.Mailgate.ORG
  #12  
Old September 14th 06, 04:12 AM posted to rec.org.mensa,sci.space.history,sci.physics,uk.sci.astronomy
Brad Guth[_2_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 3,941
Default Earth w/o Magnetosphere, w/o Moon

Even though our moon is a bit necessary for sustaining our grand
ruse/sting of the century, it has also been responsible on the long haul
for a share of our global warming fiasco. But fortunately we've become
such good wizards and rusemasters that I believe we can fix that with
yet another moon.

Being global warmed to death by our moon

http://groups.google.com/group/sci.e...a5375f416ad978

http://mygate.mailgate.org/mynews/sc...smart&p=1/1141

Global warming influx via our moon is a bit of a short term stretch,
whereas there's obviously not all that much of our IR reflective moon to
work with, as per the fractional area of the sky it represents, but
otherwise on the long haul it has been much closer and thereby a whole
lot more imposing in the past, and it has been nearly that of a
continuous resource of IR, plus having always caused a great deal of
terrestrial friction (inside and out), and quite possibly being
responsible for a good portion of having initiated and sustained our
badly failing magnetosphere.

I'd actually liked these numbers of Roger Coppock's, on behalf of
establishing that artificial sun shade.
Let's run some numbers on this idea . . .
The solar constant is ~1367 Watts per Meter squared
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Solar_Constant
Global Warming is now about 3 watts per meter squared,
which is 0.2% of the solar constant.
http://www.giss.nasa.gov/data/simodel/
(Global Warming will quadruple in a century or two.)
The cross sectional area of the Earth is 125,000,000 km^2
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Solar_Constant
The area of sunshade in orbit needed to remove the current
global warming is, therefore roughly .002 * 125,000,000 km squared
or 300000 km squared.


However, as long as the cost, time required or risk factors are hardly
if ever a consideration on behalf of going for establishing those
rad-hard and essentially meteorite proof habitats within our moon, or on
behalf of accomplishing Mars that's in certain other ways worse off, or
going for that of whatever's much further away (such as Titan or some
other godforsaken planet or moon), in that case, why not merely relocate
Sedna into Earth L1 (in place of our old and badly in need of a
replacement SOHO, with ACE not all that far behind), as then we'd have
ourselves a nifty outpost along with having accomplished shade to burn,
and not to forget lots more ice to boot.

In fact, the ice of Sedna itself could rather easily become the reaction
thrusting source (solar boosted super-boilers for creating the horrific
expansion into less than vapor and thereby accomplishing extremely good
h2o--ion vapor of thrust exit velocity) for the task of keeping Sedna
within that halo orbit. If Sedna wasn't allowed to spin, just sitting
within that halo worth of Earth L1, at least the side of Sedna facing
towards Earth should remain icy, and you'd also have a little better
gravity while walking about the equator of Sedna.

BTW; if need be, we could use thermal nuclear plus laser boosted cannons
of blasting solid icebergs into space as being our reaction thrusters,
or perhaps tethered GSO thrusters for accommodating the halo
station-keeping demands of sequestering Sedna for our benefit.

Regulating Earth's temperature via moving that frozen 1800 km orb (a
shade that's capable of 5.0868e6 km2) that's supposedly worth nearly
half it's volume as being of some kind of ice, whereas shifting that
sucker from side to side or up/down within the efficient halo zone could
thereby allow unregulated burning of our fossil oil, coal and natural
gas, along with our pillaging and burning down the remainders of
whatever pesky rain forest, and for all of that to continue unchecked
until there's nothing left, except people to burn, and even for that we
could always start off with burning Muslims.

Even when all of Sedna's ice is gone, there should still be something
better than 1e6 km2 worth of solar shade, and even of that much could be
intentionally navigated so as to benefit only our interest. That'll
show those Islamic heathens who's the alpha-dog ultimate boss of this
Earth.

What's the halo management down-side worth, of the reaction thrust
requirement per year if applied on behalf of station-keeping Sedna
within the Earth L1 zone?

This swag of mine may need a little rework but, I don't believe it would
be much greater than a kgf/tonne/year, and there are naysayers
flatulating within this anti-think-tank of a Usenet from hell that
already outperform that much.

Come to think about it, this relocating of little old icy Sedna might
even get myself nominated by the likes of ENRON, EXON, GE and GW Bush
himself, for a Nobel Prize.
-
Brad Guth


--
Posted via Mailgate.ORG Server - http://www.Mailgate.ORG
  #13  
Old September 15th 06, 04:23 PM posted to rec.org.mensa,sci.space.history,sci.physics,uk.sci.astronomy
Brad Guth[_2_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 3,941
Default Earth w/o Magnetosphere, w/o Moon

Dare to talk about our badly failing magnetosphere and/or of whatever's
technically doable, that's perhaps a little spendy but otherwise 100% in
favor of benefiting and thus saving all of humanity and that of our
global warming environment by way of actively moderating our ongoing
fiasco via solar shade, while at the same time getting ourselves one
hell of a nifty and somewhat icy orb of a platform established within
Earth's L1, and all of the sudden the anti-think-tank Usenet lights go
out.

topic: Being global warmed to death by our moon

http://mygate.mailgate.org/mynews/sc...smart&p=1/1142

http://groups.google.com/group/sci.e...a5375f416ad978
I happen to agree with the likes of Roger Coppock and many others that
the sun itself isn't the culprit, nor is it entirely via our IR
reflective moon that has only been with us since the last ice age, nor
otherwise the ongoing arrogance, bigotry and insurmountable greed of
humanity that clearly doesn't give a puck about anyone or anything other
than whatever benefits their personal quality or perversion of life.
However, putting those three factors together is a perfectly good
combination that's pretty hard to beat unless your naysay mindset is
still without a stitch of remorse.

Apparently being honest and dead serious about much of anything simply
is not Usenet accepted, especially if it involves the regular laws of
physics and of replicated hard-science that's pretty hard to ignore
unless you're a certified brown-nosed bigot of purely naysayism.
-
Brad Guth


--
Posted via Mailgate.ORG Server - http://www.Mailgate.ORG
  #14  
Old September 15th 06, 07:31 PM posted to rec.org.mensa,sci.space.history,sci.physics,uk.sci.astronomy
Brad Guth[_2_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 3,941
Default Earth w/o Magnetosphere, w/o Moon

What's it ISS dosage if it were cruising instead at 450+km and going
through the SAA on most every pass?
-
Brad Guth


--
Posted via Mailgate.ORG Server - http://www.Mailgate.ORG
  #15  
Old September 15th 06, 07:33 PM posted to rec.org.mensa,sci.space.history,sci.physics,uk.sci.astronomy
Brad Guth[_2_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 3,941
Default Earth w/o Magnetosphere, w/o Moon

What's the ISS dosage if it were cruising instead at 450+km and going
through the SAA on most every pass?
-
Brad Guth


--
Posted via Mailgate.ORG Server - http://www.Mailgate.ORG
  #16  
Old September 19th 06, 05:43 PM posted to rec.org.mensa,sci.space.history,sci.physics,uk.sci.astronomy
Brad Guth[_2_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 3,941
Default Earth w/o Magnetosphere, w/o Moon

Here's some of my old links of information and short stories by others
that's much like NASA loosing those 700 boxes of there own Apollo data,
whereas instead our planetology and historcal archives also seems to
have lost track of any records depicting an early existance of our moon,
and that's without my having involved any of Velikovsky's "Worlds in
Collision" nor having extracted from any other portions of his research
and subsequent writings.

Immanuel Velikovsky (banished for his being honest)
http://www.firmament-chaos.com/recent_papers.html
http://www.firmament-chaos.com/papers/fvenuspaper.pdf

Oldest petroglyphics(pecked art) of our moon? (not actually very old,
unless you'd consider that which had transpired since 12,000 BC as being
sufficiently classified as astronomically old), and to think that
12,000~14,000 years isn't hardly a drop in the evolutionary bucket of
intelligent life as we know it.

However, where's our moon depicted as of whatever's much older than
10,500 BC, and especially of anything that's 12,000 or forbid 15,000+ BC
is entirely without moon via such early depictions that's in any way is
remotely suggestive of being moon like. Yet those were artistically
intelligent humans with terrific cognitive skills as good as if not
better then myself, that had obviously been surviving for thousands of
years prior to 15,000 BC (were they all a species of blind souls, or
were they simply afraid to go outside their caves by night or even by
day?)

Was there an early evolutionary glitch in humanity's ability that would
have prevented their depicting our moon? Or, was Earth's environment of
such a thick and dense atmosphere that was continually clouded over and
thereby masking the sun, our moon and stars as being visually unknown to
such an early species of humanity? (I don't think so)

At best we have a little better than 10,500 years BC that'll contribute
as to our global environment having shared a moon as depicted within
such ancient petroglyphics/pictographics. Otherwise, as of anything
previously recorded or otherwise recorded seems w/o moon, whereas the
likes of pre 12,000 BC Earth seems as though entirely without offering
any appreciation of that nearby and otherwise of what should have been
an extremely extra earthshine illuminated moon, whereas most certainly
not all of mother Earth had been frozen solid. At least +/- 20 degrees
(tropic of Cancer/Capricorn) near the equator remained as extensively
ice free, although winter snow coverage may have reached a bit further,
therefore the albedo of mother Earth had to have been 0.75 if not
greater, and that's a simply a substantial amount of moon illuminating
earthshine.

Via the Dropas/Dzopas and of those nifty CD like stone disks of their
micro inscribed format of recorded history, and of the graphics upon
their 10,000 BC cave habitats which do establish the moon as being a
part of Earth's thawing environment, which thus far according to modern
science wasn't at the time transpiring all that much differently than
the many ice age cycles before. Although there's a few thousand years
worth of somewhat unual thermal hovering rather than merely peaking
within the latest latest period of thaw, which clearly remains as an
ongoing and fairly rapid overshoot, which leaves us with a great deal to
learn of what actually transpired as of those first indications of
having Earth's new and improved environment obtaining a working moon as
of roughly 10,500 BC.

http://www.burlingtonnews.net/dropas.html
"In the years since the discovery of the first disc, archeologists and
anthropologists had learned more about the isolated Bayan-Kara-Ula area.
And much of the information seemed to corroborate the bizarre story
recorded on the discs."

"Legend still preserved in the area spoke of small, gaunt, yellow faced
men who 'came from the clouds, long, long ago'. The men had huge,
bulging heads and puny bodies and were so ugly and repellent that they
were hounded down by local tribesmen on horseback. Strangely, the
description of the 'invaders' tallied with the skeletons orginally
discovered in the caves by Professor Chi Pu Tei. On the walls of the
caves themselves archeologists had uncovered crude pictures of the
rising Sun, the Moon, unidentifiable stars and the Earth... all joined
together by lines of pea-sized dots. Along with the discs, the cave
drawings had been dated around 12,000 years old."

So, what's there to behold that's established prior to 10,500 BC, as
having depicted our environment along with such an impressive moon?

Lascaux cave paintings / 15,000 BC w/o moon
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lascaux
http://www.culture.gouv.fr/culture/arcnat/lascaux/en/
These and of so many other similar and quite possibly of older drawings
around the globe simply fail to depict nor otherwise having suggested
anything as to any such extremely nearby moon. I wonder why that is?

Was our moon so gosh darn nearby and perhaps so much more so reflective,
in that they'd considered it our second sun, or was it merely invisible?

For it's apparent size and especially of having been closer in, plus
receiving an extra special amount of earthshine, and especially if that
moon had been still hosting a surface layer of it's orginal salty ice,
as such it would have been appearing as though looking nearly as bright
as the sun.

If these 15,000+BC folks of Lascaux were so good as they were at
artistically depicting such 3D depth and of proper physiological
dimentions of terrain, plants and animals, then why are there other
depictions around the globe as having offered so many images of
extremely weird looking humans, as though looking so ET and/or of
somewhat as though 50/50 human+animal ET looking?

And, why not of similar detailed images or other depictions of
themselves, or were they all Muslim?

Other much older graphics are equally without moon.
http://www.jqjacobs.net/rock_art/dawn.html
"Australian rock art may be as old as human occupation of that
continent, up to 60,000 years old and perhaps far older. Hundreds of
Australian sites may predate the cave art of Europe (Bednarik). In
Tanzania rock art sites date back about 50,000 years (Karoma). Painted
and engraved images of animals on stone slabs have been excavated and
dated to 28,000 years ago in Namibia (Feder and Park). The oldest known
example of rock art in Europe is an arrangement of eighteen cup marks on
a rock slab over a child's burial in a French cave. Radiocarbon dates
for European paintings range back to more than 32,000 years (Gould). By
this time art traditions are known to have existed in southern Africa,
the Levant, eastern Europe, India and Australia (Bednarik). A California
rock art site has been dated to about 20,000 years ago, based on
analysis of mineral varnish covering a pictograph (Bower 96a)."

"The most sophisticated techniques, shading, outlining and
representation of movement, are now known to have existed in the
earliest Paleolithic art in Europe, more than 30,000 years ago."

Now I'm further wondering as to when exacly did such rock nifty art or
other formats of petroglyphics/pictographics start to include our moon,
that you'd have to think was rather unavoidably impressive?

Of fairly modern depictions on behalf of Earth having two suns, or
perhaps most likely intended to represent that of the sun and of our
extremely nearby icy moon are those depictions as having been
contributed since the end of the last ice age era (8000~10500 BC), and
thus representing a somewhat recent planetology w/moon timeline of a
fairly modern day version of our evolutionary history.
http://www.jqjacobs.net/rock_art/chelly.html
http://www.jqjacobs.net/rock_art/images/narbonae.jpg
This seems to suggest that earlier humans were either quite terribly
dumb and dumber heathens that were afraid of their own shadows, or that
perhaps they were a species of physiologically impaired sight or perhaps
that of actually being blind. Either that or perhaps they never once
stuck their proto-human heads outside of their caves for an honest
look-see at whatever had to have been rather nicely illuminating their
snowy cold and clear nighttime.

I believe this item offers a rather unusually large depiction of our
early moon:
Sedona Back Country - Sun or Moon Pictograph
http://gosw.about.com/od/bestdaytrip...onahike_10.htm
http://z.about.com/d/gosw/1/5/v/Pictograph1.jpg

I interpret this next one is just that of our moon and sun (unless that
second sun is that representing Sirius), thereby proving that as of
somewhat recent though of primitive humans could in fact draw a good
number of such items, including the capability of their having no
apparent problems with having depicted our extremely nearby moon within
somewhat proper proportion to that of our sun.
http://www.hao.ucar.edu/Public/image...es/slide20.png

Unfortunately, I'm obviously not nearly smart enough because, I'm still
looking for those of ice age and/or of whatever's pre ice age or at
least as to appreciating whatever's the earliest versions of these
depictions that'll so happen to include our moon. Thus far we're not
seeing all that much, are we, or am I the only fool on Earth that's
thinking outside the mainstream status quo box.

Here's what's depicted as seeming very ET and otherwise depicting as a
rather unusually large moon in relationship to our human stature and
that of our sun, and otherwise of Earth as clearly having two suns.
There's also a few interesting looking aircraft/spacecraft items, and
all of this again transpiring from a time well after the peak of the
last ice age cycle, such as when Earth was nearly 50% frozen solid
and/or covered in those much longer lasting winter seasons of thick
snow...
http://www.crystalinks.com/ancientastronauts.html
So, once again man's artistic realm should have had no intellectual nor
apparent physiological problems in having depicted that moon of ours,
yet as of much earlier depictions of having demonstrated much greater
artistic expertise than necessary (including a good deal of 3D depth of
perspective view) failed to share or otherwise having included any such
highly illuminated moon.

This by rights interprets as though all available terrestrial evidence
by way of our own kind has more than depicted our early planetary
history as having been without moon, thereby indicating that our moon is
actually that of a fairly recent arrival, and perhaps that same analogy
might as well go for the planet Venus that should otherwise have been
unavoidably and thus easily included within such early (peak ice age or
pre ice age) notations.

Perhaps this next item is within the timeline of the arrival of our
moon, or possibly it's merely that of our having received a rather
significant multi-teratonne worth of a moon iceberg, such as having
created the arctic ocean basin as of roughly 10500~11000 BC.
http://mirrorh.com/timeline1.html (11,000 B.C. - 9,000 B.C.)
"The northern regions of Alaska and Siberia appear to have been the
worst hit by the murderous upheavals between 13,000 and 11,000 years
ago. In a great swathe of death around the edge of the Artic Circle the
remains of uncountable numbers of large animals have been found -
including many carcases with the flesh still intact, and astonishing
quantities of perfectly preserved mammoth tusks. Indeed, in both
regions, mammoth carcases have been thawed to feed to sled dogs and
mammoth steaks have featured on restaurant menus in Fairbanks. One
authority has commented, 'Hundreds of thousands of individuals must have
been frozen immediately after death and remained frozen, otherwise the
meat and the ivory would have spoiled ... Some powerful general force
was certainly at work to bring the catastrophe about.' " [Graham
Hancock, Fingerprints Of The Gods, p. 212-213]

Somewhere around the timeline of 10,500 ~ 11,000 BC, Earth received
quite a substantial booty of advanced tools and intellectual expertise,
as though it all just fell out of the sky. Seemingly there were also a
variety of new species introduced, as though having somewhat God like
arrived and/or materialized out of nowhere. Older than 10,500 BC
depictions of our moon seem to be as stealth as any Iraqi WMD, although
much other and older artistic expertise seems as though quite good
enough and even somewhat impressive looking, except w/o moon.

Everything which includes our moon or Venus seems to have been depicted
as though transpiroring from the beginning of our lasrt thaw
(10000~12000 BC) away from the most recent ice age, and there's lots
more as having been telling us this very same story over and over.
http://home.earthlink.net/~pcstef/venus_stone_age.html
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chinese_character
Even China that was perhaps the most intellectually, technologically and
artistically advance species, whereas even their pictophonetics is
coming up a little short at merely 6500 BC, of which those little
Dropa/Dzopa ETs of China having previously arrived along with having
engraved those CD like stone disks seem to offer the most advanced
skills as of their 10,000 BC arrival, are of what's essentially
sequestered as much as possible, perhaps because of whom they were and
of where they may have come from. The only folks not telling us this
honest story are the NASA/Apollo rusemasters and of their loyal borg
like collective of apparently incest cloned Third Reich collaborating
minions that have essentially everything you can imagine to lose if they
so much as give an inch.

Obviously others and I could be wrong (certainly wouldn't be the first
time), in which case you folks that insist our moon is nearly as old as
and essentially made of Earth can easily point out all of those pre ice
age pictographics of what had to have been our extremely nearby and
extra reflective moon, that which should have been downright if not
extremely impressive, especially at colder times when considering the
mostly snow and ice covered Earth that included our icy and snowy
environment as far south as Cuba as having contributed to a nearly 75%
albedo worth of earthshine, which should have been unavoidably
illuminating upon that rather nearby and thus rather enormous looking
pre-ice-age moon of ours, that is if in fact such ever existed.

Of course with Henry Kroll's and those of my ongoing research and of
subsequent thoughts, of our previously not having such nifty worth of
tidal energy for physically causing such horrific amounts of inside and
out friction, or that of having been contributing an extra share of
secondary IR energy, and of thereby having extensively kept our
geothermal and solar influx of our terrestrial thermal energy better
distributed, chances are that the previous ice ages w/o moon would have
been much worse off (which I believe science has since proven they
were), with only the latest thaw as having been contributed and
therefore affected by way of having those lunar tidal forces and extra
IR energy influx at play, is most likely why we'll never see another
deep ice age or even a mini-freeze since having contributed so much of
our biological and industrial byproducts and waste, along with our
unmitigated arrogance is what's going to continually see to the
elimination of any significant chance in hell, of our ever obtaining
greater snow coverage along with glacial and/or sea-ice improvements.

As a direct result of humanity and via a little secondary factor of
whatever our moon contributes, snow and ice are gradually becoming yet
another thing of the past, which isn't entirely a bad thing if you can
afford the necessary time and resources in order to deal with such
changes. Of course, the poor and those indifferent the truth may
literally have to appreciate the task of outrunning vast storms,
swimming for their lives and otherwise of how to go jellyfish (meaning
ocean dead zones of mostly jellyfish will have to become their new and
improved resource of seafood).
-
Brad Guth


--
Posted via Mailgate.ORG Server - http://www.Mailgate.ORG
  #17  
Old September 20th 06, 02:17 PM posted to rec.org.mensa,sci.space.history,sci.physics,uk.sci.astronomy
Brad Guth[_2_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 3,941
Default Earth w/o Magnetosphere, w/o Moon

Earth may be soon enough be w/o magnetosphere, but it also wasn't all
that long ago as being w/o Moon.

This new and improved syntax and a few pesky word improvements hasn't
change a darn thing, as otherwise it's the same old regular laws of
physics, of replicated science and associated old stories of Earth with
sufficiently artistic and intelligent souls from within our last ice
age, but w/o moon.

Not that anyone within this typically naysay Usenet from hell's
anti-think-tank that seriously sucks and blows actually gives an honest
tinker's damn, other than sharing as much of their infomercial-science
and infomercial-history as possible; Here's some of my old links of
information and short stories by others that's much the same as our NASA
loosing those 700 boxes of there own Apollo data, whereas instead our
planetology and historical archives thereof having also lost track of
records depicting the earliest existence of our moon, and that's without
my having involved Velikovsky's "Worlds in Collision" nor having
extracted from any other portions of his research and subsequent
writings.

Immanuel Velikovsky (banished for his being honest)
http://www.firmament-chaos.com/recent_papers.html
http://www.firmament-chaos.com/papers/fvenuspaper.pdf

Oldest petroglyphics(pecked art) of our moon? (not actually very old,
unless you'd consider that which had transpired since 10,500 BC as being
sufficiently classified as astronomically old), and to think that
12,000~15,000 years isn't hardly a drop in the evolutionary bucket of
our supposed intelligent life as we know it.

Where's our moon as of whatever's older than 10,500 BC, and especially
of anything that's 12,000 or forbid 15,000+ BC is entirely without moon
via such early depictions that's in any way is remotely suggestive of
being moon like. Yet those were artistically intelligent humans with
terrific cognitive skills as good as if not better then myself, that had
obviously been surviving for thousands of years prior to 15,000 BC (were
they all a species of blind souls, or were they simply afraid to go
outside their caves by night or even by day?)

Was there an early evolutionary glitch in humanity's ability, that would
have somehow prevented their depicting our moon? Or, was Earth's
environment of such a thick and dense atmosphere that was continually
clouded over and thereby masking the sun, our moon and stars as being
visually unknown to such an early species of humanity? (I don't think
so)

At best we have a little better than 10,500 years BC that'll contribute
as to our global environment having shared a moon as depicted within
such ancient petroglyphics/pictographics. Otherwise, as of anything
previously recorded or otherwise recorded seems w/o moon, whereas the
likes of pre 12,000 BC Earth seems as though entirely without offering
any appreciation of that nearby and otherwise of what should have been
an extremely extra earthshine illuminated moon, whereas most certainly
not all of mother Earth had been frozen solid. At least +/- 20 degrees
(Tropic of Cancer/Capricorn) near the equator remained as extensively
ice free, although winter snow coverage may have reached a bit further,
therefore the albedo of mother Earth had to have been 0.75 if not
greater, and that's a simply a substantial amount of moon illuminating
earthshine.

Via the Dropas/Dzopas and of those nifty CD like stone disks of their
micro inscribed format of recorded history, and of the graphics upon
their 10,000 BC cave habitats which do establish the moon as being a
part of Earth's thawing environment, which thus far according to modern
science wasn't at the time transpiring all that much differently than
the many ice age cycles before. Although there's a few thousand years
worth of somewhat unual thermal hovering rather than merely peaking
within the latest period of thaw, which clearly remains as an ongoing
and fairly rapid overshoot, which leaves us with a great deal to learn
of what actually transpired, as of those first indications of having
Earth's new and improved environment obtaining a working moon as of
roughly 10,500 BC.

http://www.burlingtonnews.net/dropas.html
"In the years since the discovery of the first disc, archeologists and
anthropologists had learned more about the isolated Bayan-Kara-Ula area.
And much of the information seemed to corroborate the bizarre story
recorded on the discs."

"Legend still preserved in the area spoke of small, gaunt, yellow faced
men who 'came from the clouds, long, long ago'. The men had huge,
bulging heads and puny bodies and were so ugly and repellent that they
were hounded down by local tribesmen on horseback. Strangely, the
description of the 'invaders' tallied with the skeletons orginally
discovered in the caves by Professor Chi Pu Tei. On the walls of the
caves themselves archeologists had uncovered crude pictures of the
rising Sun, the Moon, unidentifiable stars and the Earth... all joined
together by lines of pea-sized dots. Along with the discs, the cave
drawings had been dated around 12,000 years old."

So, what's there to behold that's established as of prior to 10,500 BC,
as having depicted our environment along with such an impressive looking
moon?

Lascaux cave paintings / 15,000 BC w/o moon
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lascaux
http://www.culture.gouv.fr/culture/arcnat/lascaux/en/
These and of so many other similar and quite possibly of older drawings
around the globe simply fail to depict nor otherwise having suggested
anything as to any such extremely nearby moon. I wonder why that is?

Was our moon so gosh darn nearby and perhaps so much more so reflective,
in that they'd considered it our second sun, or was it merely invisible?

For it's apparent size and especially of having been closer in, plus
receiving an extra special amount of earthshine, and especially if that
moon had been still hosting a surface layer of it's orginal salty ice,
as such it would have been appearing as though looking nearly as bright
as the sun.

If these 15,000+BC folks of Lascaux were so good as they were at
artistically depicting such 3D depth and of proper physiological
dimentions of terrain, plants and animals, then why are there other
depictions around the globe as having offered so many images of
extremely weird looking humans, as though looking so ET and/or of
somewhat as though 50/50 human+animal ET looking?

And, why not of similar detailed images or other depictions of
themselves, or were they all Muslim?

Other much older graphics are equally without moon.
http://www.jqjacobs.net/rock_art/dawn.html
"Australian rock art may be as old as human occupation of that
continent, up to 60,000 years old and perhaps far older. Hundreds of
Australian sites may predate the cave art of Europe (Bednarik). In
Tanzania rock art sites date back about 50,000 years (Karoma). Painted
and engraved images of animals on stone slabs have been excavated and
dated to 28,000 years ago in Namibia (Feder and Park). The oldest known
example of rock art in Europe is an arrangement of eighteen cup marks on
a rock slab over a child's burial in a French cave. Radiocarbon dates
for European paintings range back to more than 32,000 years (Gould). By
this time art traditions are known to have existed in southern Africa,
the Levant, eastern Europe, India and Australia (Bednarik). A California
rock art site has been dated to about 20,000 years ago, based on
analysis of mineral varnish covering a pictograph (Bower 96a)."

"The most sophisticated techniques, shading, outlining and
representation of movement, are now known to have existed in the
earliest Paleolithic art in Europe, more than 30,000 years ago."

Now I'm further wondering as to when exacly did such rock nifty art or
other formats of petroglyphics/pictographics start to include our moon,
that you'd have to think was rather unavoidably impressive?

Of fairly modern depictions on behalf of Earth having two suns, or
perhaps most likely intended to represent that of the sun and of our
extremely nearby icy moon are those depictions as having been
contributed since the end of the last ice age era (8000~10500 BC), and
thus representing a somewhat recent planetology w/moon timeline of a
fairly modern day version of our evolutionary history.
http://www.jqjacobs.net/rock_art/chelly.html
http://www.jqjacobs.net/rock_art/images/narbonae.jpg
This seems to suggest that earlier humans were either quite terribly
dumb and dumber heathens that were afraid of their own shadows, or that
perhaps they were a species of physiologically impaired sight or perhaps
that of actually being blind. Either that or perhaps they never once
stuck their proto-human heads outside of their caves for an honest
look-see at whatever had to have been rather nicely illuminating their
snowy cold and clear nighttime.

I believe this item offers a rather unusually large depiction of our
early moon:
Sedona Back Country - Sun or Moon Pictograph
http://gosw.about.com/od/bestdaytrip...onahike_10.htm
http://z.about.com/d/gosw/1/5/v/Pictograph1.jpg

I interpret this next one is just that of our moon and sun (unless that
second sun is that representing Sirius), thereby proving that as of
somewhat recent though of primitive humans could in fact draw a good
number of such items, including the capability of their having no
apparent problems with having depicted our extremely nearby moon within
somewhat proper proportion to that of our sun.
http://www.hao.ucar.edu/Public/image...es/slide20.png

Unfortunately, I'm obviously not nearly smart enough because, I'm still
looking for those of ice age and/or of whatever's pre ice age or at
least as to appreciating whatever's the earliest versions of these
depictions that'll so happen to include our moon. Thus far we're not
seeing all that much, are we, or am I the only fool on Earth that's
thinking outside the mainstream status quo box.

Here's what's depicted as seeming very ET and otherwise depicting as a
rather unusually large moon in relationship to our human stature and
that of our sun, and otherwise of Earth as clearly having two suns.
There's also a few interesting looking aircraft/spacecraft items, and
all of this again transpiring from a time well after the peak of the
last ice age cycle, such as when Earth was nearly 50% frozen solid
and/or covered in those much longer lasting winter seasons of thick
snow...
http://www.crystalinks.com/ancientastronauts.html
So, once again man's artistic realm should have had no intellectual nor
apparent physiological problems in having depicted that moon of ours,
yet as of much earlier depictions of having demonstrated much greater
artistic expertise than necessary (including a good deal of 3D depth of
perspective view) failed to share or otherwise having included any such
highly illuminated moon.

This by rights interprets as though all available terrestrial evidence
by way of our own kind has more than depicted our early planetary
history as having been without moon, thereby indicating that our moon is
actually that of a fairly recent arrival, and perhaps that same analogy
might as well go for the planet Venus that should otherwise have been
unavoidably and thus easily included within such early (peak ice age or
pre ice age) notations.

Perhaps this next item is within the timeline of the arrival of our
moon, or possibly it's merely that of our having received a rather
significant multi-teratonne worth of a moon iceberg, such as having
created the arctic ocean basin as of roughly 10500~11000 BC.
http://mirrorh.com/timeline1.html (11,000 B.C. - 9,000 B.C.)
"The northern regions of Alaska and Siberia appear to have been the
worst hit by the murderous upheavals between 13,000 and 11,000 years
ago. In a great swathe of death around the edge of the Artic Circle the
remains of uncountable numbers of large animals have been found -
including many carcases with the flesh still intact, and astonishing
quantities of perfectly preserved mammoth tusks. Indeed, in both
regions, mammoth carcases have been thawed to feed to sled dogs and
mammoth steaks have featured on restaurant menus in Fairbanks. One
authority has commented, 'Hundreds of thousands of individuals must have
been frozen immediately after death and remained frozen, otherwise the
meat and the ivory would have spoiled ... Some powerful general force
was certainly at work to bring the catastrophe about.' " [Graham
Hancock, Fingerprints Of The Gods, p. 212-213]

Somewhere around the timeline of 10,500 ~ 11,000 BC, Earth received
quite a substantial booty of advanced tools and intellectual expertise,
as though it all just fell out of the sky. Seemingly there were also a
variety of new species introduced, as though having somewhat God like or
via intelligent design having arrived and/or materialized out of
nowhere. Older than 10,500 BC depictions of our moon seem to be as
stealth as any Iraqi WMD, although, of other and much older artistic
expertise seems as though quite good enough and even somewhat impressive
looking, except oddly w/o moon.

Everything which includes our moon or Venus seems to have been depicted
as though having transpirored since our last thaw (10000~11000 BC),
meaning that only as of our most recent ice age has there been
depitstion of such, and there's lots other as having been telling us
this very same story over and over.
http://home.earthlink.net/~pcstef/venus_stone_age.html
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chinese_character
Even China that had been perhaps the most intellectually,
technologically and artistically advance species, whereas even their
pictophonetics is coming up a little short of having included a moon
symbol at merely 6500 BC, whereas those little Dropas/Dzopas of China
having previously arrived along with their having engraved those CD like
stone disks seem to offer the most advanced skills as of their 10,000 BC
arrival are still of what's essentially sequestered as much as possible,
perhaps because of whom they were and of where they may have come from.
The only folks not telling us this honest story are the NASA/Apollo
rusemasters and of their loyal borg like collective of apparently incest
cloned Third Reich collaborating minions, that have essentially
everything you can imagine to lose if they so much as give an inch.

Unfortunate for the truth, as well as humanity and that of our failing
environment, it seems those following in the pagan faith-based footsteps
of our NASA are every bit as much at fault as are the originators of
this ongoung fiasco. So, we're talking tens of thousands of fools upon
fools and with more on the way that'll need to accept responsibility and
the consequences of their actions.

Obviously others and I could be wrong (certainly wouldn't be the first
time), in which case you folks that insist our moon is nearly as old,
essentially made of Earth and typically a passive orb that's safe to
walk upon, can easily point out all of those pre ice age pictographics
of what had to have been our extremely nearby and extra reflective moon,
that which should have been downright if not extremely impressive,
especially at colder times when considering the mostly snow and ice
covered Earth that included our icy and snowy environment as far south
as Cuba as having contributed to a nearly 75% albedo worth of
earthshine, which should have been unavoidably illuminating upon that
rather nearby and thus rather enormous looking pre-ice-age moon of ours,
that is if in fact such ever existed.

With Henry Kroll's and those of my ongoing research and of our
subsequent thoughts or best swag of the day, of our world previously not
having such nifty worth of tidal energy for physically causing such
horrific amounts of inside and out friction, or that of having been
contributing an extra share of secondary IR energy, and of thereby
having extensively kept our geothermal and solar influx of our
terrestrial thermal energy better distributed, chances are that the
previous ice ages w/o moon would have been much worse off (which I do
believe science has since proven they were), with only the latest thaw
as having been contributed and therefore affected by way of having those
lunar tidal forces and extra IR energy influx at play, is most likely
why we'll never see another deep ice age or even a mini-freeze,
especially since having contributed so much of our biological and
industrial byproducts and waste, along with our unmitigated arrogance is
what's going to continually see to the elimination of any significant
snowball's chance in hell, of our ever obtaining greater snow coverage
along with glacial and/or sea-ice improvements.

As a direct result of modern humanity's total indifference and via a
little secondary factor of whatever our moon contributes, snow and ice
are gradually becoming yet another thing of the past, which isn't
entirely a bad thing if you can afford the necessary time and resources
in order to deal with such changes. Of course, the poor and those
indifferent the truth may literally have to appreciate the task of
outrunning vast storms, swimming for their lives and otherwise of how to
go jellyfish (meaning ocean dead zones of mostly jellyfish will have to
become their new and improved resource of seafood).
-
Brad Guth


--
Posted via Mailgate.ORG Server - http://www.Mailgate.ORG
  #18  
Old September 20th 06, 03:31 PM posted to sci.space.history,rec.org.mensa,sci.physics,uk.sci.astronomy
Brad Guth[_2_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 3,941
Default Earth w/o Magnetosphere, w/o Moon

I see that our "Earth w/o Magnetosphere, w/o Moon" has no meaning within
Usenet science or Usenet physics.

I guess the laws of Usenet physics are once again based upon the usual
space-toilet format of their infomercial-science that dictates as to
what those conditional laws of physics must thereby represent.

Too bad the scientific matter of replicated facts proves that I'm more
than sufficiently right. It also proves that you folks are just deathly
afraid of your own perpetrated cold-war shadows.

Thankfully, the smarts and wisdom of China and Russia are going to kick
serious butt, as they leave us in their moon dust and outside the ream
of what Venus has to behold.
-
Brad Guth


--
Posted via Mailgate.ORG Server - http://www.Mailgate.ORG
  #19  
Old September 21st 06, 05:31 AM posted to rec.org.mensa,sci.physics,uk.sci.astronomy
Lars Kecke
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 3
Default Earth w/o Magnetosphere, w/o Moon

BruceS wrote:
Mark McIntyre wrote:


"There is a huge force of gravity between the earth and moon - some 70
million trillion pounds (that's 70 with another 18 zeroes after it), or
30,000 trillion tonnes (that's 30 with 15 zeroes)."


Euh, firstly gravity isn't measured in pounds or tonnes


Why would one not use pounds to measure a force?


An old unit of force indeed was Kiloponds (i.e. the force of one
kilogram of mass at normal gravity), which is kind of misleading in
regions that don't have standard gravity, e.g. the earth-moon system.

Anyway, the moon's centripetal force is of course GmM/r^2 and its
binding energy is about -1/2 gmM/r, with r being about 4*10^8 m and GmM
being about 3*10^37 Jm, iaW the moon's binding energy is a few thousend
yottajoules (had to look up that prefix, never used anything bigger then
exa- ).

Lars
  #20  
Old September 21st 06, 02:44 PM posted to rec.org.mensa,sci.physics,uk.sci.astronomy
BruceS
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 10
Default Earth w/o Magnetosphere, w/o Moon

Lars Kecke wrote:
BruceS wrote:

Mark McIntyre wrote:



"There is a huge force of gravity between the earth and moon - some 70
million trillion pounds (that's 70 with another 18 zeroes after it), or
30,000 trillion tonnes (that's 30 with 15 zeroes)."


Euh, firstly gravity isn't measured in pounds or tonnes



Why would one not use pounds to measure a force?



An old unit of force indeed was Kiloponds (i.e. the force of one
kilogram of mass at normal gravity), which is kind of misleading in
regions that don't have standard gravity, e.g. the earth-moon system.

Anyway, the moon's centripetal force is of course GmM/r^2 and its
binding energy is about -1/2 gmM/r, with r being about 4*10^8 m and GmM
being about 3*10^37 Jm, iaW the moon's binding energy is a few thousend
yottajoules (had to look up that prefix, never used anything bigger then
exa- ).


Are we still conflating energy with force? Or is there another issue,
that some forces are measured in different units than others?
 




Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Space Calendar - May 24, 2006 [email protected] History 0 May 24th 06 04:12 PM
Space Calendar - March 23, 2006 [email protected] Astronomy Misc 0 March 23rd 06 05:18 PM
Space Calendar - January 26, 2006 [email protected] History 0 January 28th 06 01:42 AM
Space Calendar - October 27, 2005 [email protected] Astronomy Misc 0 October 27th 05 05:02 PM
Space Calendar - February 25, 2005 [email protected] Astronomy Misc 0 February 25th 05 05:25 PM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 01:46 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004-2024 SpaceBanter.com.
The comments are property of their posters.