View Single Post
Old 3rd December 2019, 06:38 AM   #996
jonesdave116's Avatar
Join Date: Feb 2015
Posts: 5,037
Originally Posted by Sol88 View Post
Likely wrong?

‘Spose him and his team are unlikely to be wrong?

How’s that fit into the dirtysnowball if true?

Brace yourselves, here comes a large page count from reality check and a dummy spit from jonesy

Who is still struggling with the concept of electrodynamics and dusty kinetic plasmas.

Ice not needed or observed in the quantities needed.
Point 1: I know nowhere near as much about plasma physics as Tusenfem. Obviously. However, I know far more about it than you or the idiot Thornhill.

Point 2: You have run away again, haven't you? Go read the Patzold paper, and tell us what figures he is suggesting for the ice mass loss. Need me to do it for you? I think we all know why you won't answer that. It is quite plain in the paper. Go find it, and stop chickening out. Any ice kills your woo, and there are hundreds of thousands to millions of tonnes of it. Just as your woo was killed back in 2005 by the impact at Tempel 1.
“There is in every village a torch - the teacher; and an extinguisher - the priest.” - Victor Hugo

“Never argue with an idiot. They will only bring you down to their level and beat you with experience.” - George Carlin
jonesdave116 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