Science a GoGo's Home Page Forums General Discussion General Science Discussion Forum Mansfield's Earth Formation Hypothesis: Evidence.

I should setup a palm-reading shop - I'm clearly clairvoyant. Pre wrote exactly what I predicted he would.



And here we see pre lying to cover the fact that he cannot address the meat of my post.

He is 100% correct that I mistakenly stated 10^24J; when in fact I mean 10^24kJ. When he pointed that out I owned upto it.

For the unit-challanged a kJ is equal to 103 J, so 1024kJ is the exact same as 1027J.

And here we have pre's next red herring:



Yep, pre is basing his arguments against me on the statements of a man who doesn't understand the simple difference between an open and closed system, or newtons 3 laws.


But lets not loose track of the main points:

1) Pre quoted the first big number in the citation I provided as evidence I was wrong - despite the fact that the entirety of the paper was based around disproving that impact energy.

2) Despite providing step-by-step instructions on how to extract the impact energies in the paper I provided, pre has so far failed to do so. Instead he brings up red herring after red herring as proof I "lie".

3) As of the lines below, this is now the 8th time I've challenged pre to deal with 2 scientific publications that directly refute his hypothesis. He has consistently failed to do so:

McElhinney, M. W., Taylor, S. R., and Stevenson, D. J. (1978), "Limits to the expansion of Earth, Moon, Mars, and Mercury and to changes in the gravitational constant", Nature 271: 316–321,

http://www.eos.ubc.ca/~mjelline/453website/eosc453/E_prints/1999RG900016.p



I think he got tired of us laughing at him and his scientific illiteracy. Maybe oneday you'll do the same...

...oh wait, you did. Then you broke your promise and came back

Bryan