Welcome to
Science a GoGo's
Discussion Forums
Please keep your postings on-topic or they will be moved to a galaxy far, far away.
Your use of this forum indicates your agreement to our terms of use.
So that we remain spam-free, please note that all posts by new users are moderated.


The Forums
General Science Talk        Not-Quite-Science        Climate Change Discussion        Physics Forum        Science Fiction

Who's Online
0 registered (), 226 Guests and 1 Spider online.
Key: Admin, Global Mod, Mod
Latest Posts
Is there anybody out there?
by paul
12/07/19 03:58 AM
Top Posters (30 Days)
True 1
paul 1
Page 2 of 3 < 1 2 3 >
Topic Options
#44441 - 07/29/12 12:20 AM Re: Mansfield's Earth Formation Hypothesis: Update. [Re: Bill S.]
preearth Offline
Senior Member

Registered: 05/22/10
Posts: 370
Originally Posted By: Bill S.
However, I suspect that a major factor is your tendency to make dogmatic statements....

Bill S. is truly, truly, stupid; He whines that preearth makes dogmatic statements, then he IMMEDIATELY goes on to make the following FIVE dogmatic statements:

"Plate-tectonics, is the belief that many of Earth's geological features, such as mountains, are caused by currents of solid rock which circulate in the mantle. Wrong.

"The convection is claimed to be due to the temperature difference (about 3,000 degrees) between the top and the bottom of the mantle." Wrong.

"The basic idea, is that the rock at the bottom of the mantle, on being heated by the core, becomes lighter, and thus, rises (in a gigantic up-welling) to the top of the mantle". Wrong.

"The rock current, then flows (away from the up-welling and) under the Earth's surface, but parallel to it (carrying the continents with it), until it cools". Wrong.

"On cooling sufficiently, the rock becomes heavier and sinks (in a gigantic down-welling) back to the bottom of the mantle, and on doing so, completes one lap of a circuit". Wrong.


Proving, at the very least, that he doesn't understand the words he uses.

Also, if you have any honestly at all, you should now back up these FIVE dogmatic statements of yours, with evidence.

_________________________
Earth formed from a collision
www.preearth.net

Plate-tectonics is wrong
www.preearth.net/plate.html

Top
.
#44442 - 07/29/12 12:48 AM Re: Mansfield's Earth Formation Hypothesis: Update. [Re: preearth]
Bill S. Offline
Megastar

Registered: 08/20/10
Posts: 3570
Loc: Essex, UK
Pre, are you adsking me to back up these statements, or the fact that I said they were wrong?

Quote:
Bill S. is truly, truly, stupid;


If all the people you regard as stupid really are, that puts me in quite good company; thanks.
_________________________
There never was nothing.

Top
#44443 - 07/29/12 03:22 AM Re: Mansfield's Earth Formation Hypothesis: Update. [Re: preearth]
Amaranth Rose II Offline

Superstar

Registered: 12/16/06
Posts: 962
Loc: Southeast Nebraska, USA
Pre, you have got to stop insulting people and calling them stupid and suchlike. If you cannot respect those who disagree with you and refrain from demeaning them in your posts you will not be allowed to post here. State your arguments and respect the views of others, or take it elsewhere.
_________________________
If you don't care for reality, just wait a while; another will be along shortly. --A Rose


Top
#44468 - 07/29/12 11:47 AM Re: Mansfield's Earth Formation Hypothesis: Update. [Re: preearth]
Bill S. Offline
Megastar

Registered: 08/20/10
Posts: 3570
Loc: Essex, UK
Thanks for the back-up, Rose. Actually, I'm quite happy when Pre responds with a personal insult, it's a clear indication that he can't think of a more intelligent response, which suggests that whatever point I am making has some validity.
_________________________
There never was nothing.

Top
#44470 - 07/29/12 12:23 PM Re: Mansfield's Earth Formation Hypothesis: Update. [Re: preearth]
Bill S. Offline
Megastar

Registered: 08/20/10
Posts: 3570
Loc: Essex, UK
Originally Posted By: Pre
Also, if you have any honestly at all, you should now back up these FIVE dogmatic statements of yours, with evidence.


In an attempt to distance any real discussion from ranting about Jews ans racists, I am taking my response to "Global Tectonics"
_________________________
There never was nothing.

Top
#44500 - 07/31/12 02:01 AM Re: Mansfield's Earth Formation Hypothesis: Update. [Re: preearth]
preearth Offline
Senior Member

Registered: 05/22/10
Posts: 370
Amaranth Rose II is being racist (and one does not expect this from a Jew).

She allows Orac (whose has made it more than clear that he is also a Jew) to repeatedly call me racist and a Nazi (for posting photos of Barack Obama and G.W. Bush wearing Jewish skullcaps and photos of them holding Jewish religious ceremonies at the white house).

http://www.preearth.net/phpBB3/viewtopic.php?f=20&t=630

She has not once complained about such name calling.

But if I call someone stupid, for being stupid, she gets her nickers in a huge twist.

Miss Amaranth, it is racist to have one set of actions for Jews and another for others.

You do know that is racist,... don't you?

_________________________
Earth formed from a collision
www.preearth.net

Plate-tectonics is wrong
www.preearth.net/plate.html

Top
#45682 - 09/29/12 11:16 AM Re: Mansfield's Earth Formation Hypothesis: Update. [Re: preearth]
preearth Offline
Senior Member

Registered: 05/22/10
Posts: 370

Bill S. has supplied the following;
Some "answers" for Pre
“Plate-tectonics, is the belief that many of Earth's geological features, such as mountains, are caused by currents of solid rock which circulate in the mantle.“
Current belief is that many of the Earth’s geological features are caused, or at least influenced, by the movement of tectonic plates. For some time the belief was quite widely held that these movements were driven by mantle convection, such is no longer the case. Gravity is now regarded as a more important influence.
“The convection is claimed to be due to the temperature difference (about 3,000 degrees) between the top and the bottom of the mantle.“
Although there are still discussions about the possibility of such features as mantle plumes; if convection occurs, it is much more likely to be on a smaller scale, and would be driven by local differences in temperature and density, not by the difference between top and bottom, which would be influenced by intervening discontinuities.
“The basic idea, is that the rock at the bottom of the mantle, on being heated by the core, becomes lighter, and thus, rises (in a gigantic up-welling) to the top of the mantle”.
This somewhat outdated idea is covered in the previous response. “gigantic up-wellings” may still be favoured by mantle plume supporters, but are not “flavour of the month”.
“The rock current, then flows (away from the up-welling and) under the Earth's surface, but parallel to it (carrying the continents with it), until it cools”
This too is an outdated concept.
“On cooling sufficiently, the rock becomes heavier and sinks (in a gigantic down-welling) back to the bottom of the mantle, and on doing so, completes one lap of a circuit”.
There is some evidence, which I have indicated, that sinking , cold rock can be traced to considerable depth, but that this has anything to do with a clearly defined “lap of a circuit” is an assumption too far.
_________________________
Earth formed from a collision
www.preearth.net

Plate-tectonics is wrong
www.preearth.net/plate.html

Top
#45683 - 09/29/12 12:29 PM Re: Mansfield's Earth Formation Hypothesis: Update. [Re: preearth]
Bill S. Offline
Megastar

Registered: 08/20/10
Posts: 3570
Loc: Essex, UK
Thank you Pre. Your comments on this would be appreciated; as would those of other posters.
_________________________
There never was nothing.

Top
#46223 - 11/21/12 08:59 PM Re: Mansfield's Earth Formation Hypothesis: Update. [Re: preearth]
preearth Offline
Senior Member

Registered: 05/22/10
Posts: 370
Bill; why don't you explain what you think has replaced mantle currents as the force that moved the continents so far apart?

You don't seem to know what this force is,... do you?
_________________________
Earth formed from a collision
www.preearth.net

Plate-tectonics is wrong
www.preearth.net/plate.html

Top
#46230 - 11/22/12 12:19 AM Re: Mansfield's Earth Formation Hypothesis: Update. [Re: preearth]
Bill S. Offline
Megastar

Registered: 08/20/10
Posts: 3570
Loc: Essex, UK
Pre, In how many threads do you want me to explain something I didn't say?

In your post #45682 You quote me quite extensively. I suggest you start by reading the first paragraph of that quote.

If you wish, we can take it from there, but I shall expect some answers from you as well if we are to have any kind of a discussion.
_________________________
There never was nothing.

Top
#47335 - 01/05/13 01:22 AM Re: Mansfield's Earth Formation Hypothesis: Update. [Re: Bill S.]
preearth Offline
Senior Member

Registered: 05/22/10
Posts: 370
Originally Posted By: Bill S.
Thank you Pre. Your comments on this would be appreciated; as would those of other posters.
My comment; Your comments above are garbage (as anyone with half a brain can see for themselves).
_________________________
Earth formed from a collision
www.preearth.net

Plate-tectonics is wrong
www.preearth.net/plate.html

Top
#47402 - 01/07/13 05:45 PM Re: Mansfield's Earth Formation Hypothesis: Update. [Re: preearth]
Orac Offline
Megastar

Registered: 05/20/11
Posts: 2819
Loc: Currently Illinois, USA


Edited by Orac (01/07/13 05:45 PM)
_________________________
I believe in "Evil, Bad, Ungodly fantasy science and maths", so I am undoubtedly wrong to you.

Top
#47403 - 01/07/13 08:23 PM Re: Mansfield's Earth Formation Hypothesis: Update. [Re: preearth]
Bill S. Offline
Megastar

Registered: 08/20/10
Posts: 3570
Loc: Essex, UK
Originally Posted By: Pre
...as anyone with half a brain can see for themselves


I was rather hoping for comments from someone with a whole brain.
Wishful thinking, perhaps.
_________________________
There never was nothing.

Top
#47420 - 01/08/13 12:48 PM Re: Mansfield's Earth Formation Hypothesis: Update. [Re: Bill S.]
Orac Offline
Megastar

Registered: 05/20/11
Posts: 2819
Loc: Currently Illinois, USA
No Bill those with a brain know what proper science looks like

http://arxiv.org/pdf/1007.1418v1.pdf

Quote:

"ON THE POSSIBILITY OF TIDAL FORMATION OF BINARY PLANETS AROUND ORDINARY STARS"

ABSTRACT

The planet formation process and subsequent planet migration may lead to configurations resulting in strong dynamical interactions among the various planets. Well-studied possible outcomes include collisions between planets, scattering events that eject one or more of the planets, and a collision of one or more of the planets with the parent star. In this work we consider one other possibility that has seemingly been overlooked in the various scattering calculations presented in the literature: the tidal capture of two planets which leads to the formation of a binary planet (or binary brown dwarf) in orbit about the parent star. We carry out extensive numerical simulations of such dynamical and tidal interactions to explore the parameter space for the formation of such binary planets. We show that tidal formation of binary planets is possible for typical planet masses and distances from the host star. The detection (or lack thereof) of planet{planet binaries can thus be used to constrain the properties of planetary systems, including their mutual spacing during formation, and the fraction of close planets in very eccentric orbits which are believed to form by a closely related process.


It would not be hard to put the central concept of preearths idea to the axe but he doesn't really want to because like all pseudoscience dipsticks what do they have left if their pet idea is wrong smile

The really funny part is even if he was right someone like those above will do the formal proof and get the credit and poor preearth will be left bleating that he discovered it which science will ignore because he did no formal proof ... oh the irony and justice in the world laugh

You have to see the humour and irony in that Preearth and I am not being mean or harsh, you have been told by at least twenty scientists on different forums how it works and refuse to listen. Hence you fate is sealed smile


Edited by Orac (01/08/13 03:07 PM)
_________________________
I believe in "Evil, Bad, Ungodly fantasy science and maths", so I am undoubtedly wrong to you.

Top
#47435 - 01/09/13 06:39 AM Re: Mansfield's Earth Formation Hypothesis: Update. [Re: preearth]
preearth Offline
Senior Member

Registered: 05/22/10
Posts: 370
Hi Orac, this is for you;

Architect, Ron Avery, has produced a video called "911 Undeniable Conspiracy."

Part 1. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QGx7aifCZxA
Part 2. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZtKqhsN4nFo

In this video Avery claims that one Larry Silverstein bought a lease giving him control of the entire World Trade Center complex, just six weeks before it "fell down." He already owned WTC7.

Avery claims that (at the time of purchase) Larry Silverstein insured the entire World Trade Center complex against acts of terrorism and has since received billions of dollars from insurance companies.

Apparently, Larry Silverstein has made EIGHT BILLION dollars from the murder of 3000 Americans.

Larry Silverstein admitted on camera (some PBS documentary called 'America Rebuilds'), that he, as the owner of WTC7, made the decision to demolish (pull) the building.

This is what Larry Silverstein said "I remember getting a call from the, er, fire department commander, telling me that they were not sure they were gonna be able to contain the fire, and I said, 'We've had such terrible loss of life, maybe the smartest thing to do is pull it.' And they [actually Silverstein] made that decision to pull and we watched the building collapse."

Larry Silverstein actually admitted that WTC7 was demolished by explosives.

Although, just one watch of the WTC7 videos is enough to tell you that WTC7 was demolished by explosives. It really is that obvious.

However, if WTC7 was wired for demolition, then so were both WTC1 and WTC2.

Hence, the World Trade Center massacre, was absolutely an inside job.

So how come none of you here have ever mentioned this Larry Silverstein and WTC7? Because he's a Jew?

Damn. Larry Silverstein is one evil evil dude. Any relation of yours Orac?

Apparently, the rest of the world already knows all about this. There are many youtube videos on the topic. Here's three from google;


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qLK0c-pgJBQ
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=84doiQHJ5rQ
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7OE3Adu4l0g

_________________________
Earth formed from a collision
www.preearth.net

Plate-tectonics is wrong
www.preearth.net/plate.html

Top
#47446 - 01/09/13 11:51 AM Re: Mansfield's Earth Formation Hypothesis: Update. [Re: preearth]
Orac Offline
Megastar

Registered: 05/20/11
Posts: 2819
Loc: Currently Illinois, USA
Only one comment ... what on earth makes you think I care about any of this?

Here are my two questions to you preearth

1.) This affects me and has relevance to me how ?
2.) I should care about it because ?
_________________________
I believe in "Evil, Bad, Ungodly fantasy science and maths", so I am undoubtedly wrong to you.

Top
#47451 - 01/09/13 07:36 PM Re: Mansfield's Earth Formation Hypothesis: Update. [Re: preearth]
paul Offline
Megastar

Registered: 03/21/06
Posts: 4136
8:30 into it.
_________________________
3/4 inch of dust build up on the moon in 4.527 billion years,LOL and QM is fantasy science.

Top
#47453 - 01/09/13 08:06 PM Re: Mansfield's Earth Formation Hypothesis: Update. [Re: paul]
Bill S. Offline
Megastar

Registered: 08/20/10
Posts: 3570
Loc: Essex, UK
Fascinating video, Paul, but as someone with a completely open mind on the issue I find myself wondering if this is evidence that the whole thing was a set-up, or if this is just an example of powerful people, with lots to hide, taking advantage of the situation.
_________________________
There never was nothing.

Top
#47455 - 01/09/13 08:44 PM Re: Mansfield's Earth Formation Hypothesis: Update. [Re: preearth]
Bill Offline
Megastar

Registered: 12/31/10
Posts: 1858
Loc: Oklahoma, USA
Well, this is NQS, so I guess a question I have had may be appropriate here.

How is it that conspiracy theories are generated so quickly? It seems as though some traumatic event happens, and before most people can really grasp what has happened there are already conspiracy theories going around. They appear to be generated spontaneously just by the fact that something happened.

I guess that applies to man made events. I don't suppose that tsunamis and hurricanes are considered as conspiracies.

Bill Gill
_________________________
C is not the speed of light in a vacuum.
C is the universal speed limit.

Top
#47457 - 01/09/13 10:02 PM Re: Mansfield's Earth Formation Hypothesis: Update. [Re: Bill]
Bill S. Offline
Megastar

Registered: 08/20/10
Posts: 3570
Loc: Essex, UK
Quote:
I don't suppose that tsunamis and hurricanes are considered as conspiracies.


Keep up, Bill! Climate Change Forum. Maybe it's something else?
smile
_________________________
There never was nothing.

Top
Page 2 of 3 < 1 2 3 >



Newest Members
debbieevans, bkhj, jackk, Johnmattison, RacerGT
865 Registered Users
Sponsor
Facebook

We're on Facebook
Join Our Group

Science a GoGo's Home Page | Terms of Use | Privacy Policy | Contact Us
Features | News | Books | Physics | Space | Climate Change | Health | Technology | Natural World

Copyright © 1998 - 2016 Science a GoGo and its licensors. All rights reserved.