View Single Post
Old 1st April 2020, 01:02 AM   #1768
Sol88's Avatar
Join Date: Mar 2009
Posts: 6,611
Originally Posted by Lukraak_Sisser View Post
Yet, as steenkh noticed, it is true and you refuse to address these massive holes in your so called theory by diving down the rabbit hole of ridicule and misquoted minutiae.
You're amusing, but in no way convincing to anybody but maybe yourself.

Your so called theory does not give an alternate explanation for observed facts, but rather calls for observed facts that we use in daily life to be wrong.
Our findings reject the idea that comets are fluffy aggregates, instead, they are characterised by consolidated surfaces.
The rocky-like behavior of cometary landslides on 67P/Churyumov-Gerasimenko

Comets are rocky objects that are less hydrated than carbonaceous chondrites. Even though comets contain
One of the observers was the Spitzer Space Telescope, a NASA mission that takes pictures in the infrared part of the spectrum. In the burst of light after the collision, Spitzer detected specific colors of infrared light that indicated that Tempel 1 contained clays and carbonates, the minerals of limestone and seashells.

Clays and carbonates both require liquid water to form.

"How do clays and carbonates form in frozen comets where there isn't liquid water?" said Carey M. Lisse, a research scientist at the Applied Physics Laboratory at Johns Hopkins University who is presenting the Spitzer data today at a meeting of the Division for Planetary Sciences in Cambridge, England. "Nobody expected this."


So I was unsure how you update the dirtysnowball model?
“No rock. Any charge separation is limited. The electric field is pointing in the wrong direction. Currents are doing nothing.” Jonesdave116.

“The 'electric comet' is physically IMPOSSIBLE to model using mainstream science! PERIOD! True story! End of story!” Indagator
Sol88 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top