|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#11
|
|||
|
|||
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
|
|||
|
|||
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
|
|||
|
|||
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
|
|||
|
|||
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
|
|||
|
|||
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
|
|||
|
|||
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
|
|||
|
|||
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
|
|||
|
|||
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
|
|||
|
|||
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
|
|||
|
|||
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 | |
|
|
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 |