ISF Logo   IS Forum
Forum Index Register Members List Events Mark Forums Read Help

Go Back   International Skeptics Forum » General Topics » Science, Mathematics, Medicine, and Technology
 


Welcome to the International Skeptics Forum, where we discuss skepticism, critical thinking, the paranormal and science in a friendly but lively way. You are currently viewing the forum as a guest, which means you are missing out on discussing matters that are of interest to you. Please consider registering so you can gain full use of the forum features and interact with other Members. Registration is simple, fast and free! Click here to register today.
Reply
Old 26th May 2020, 06:02 PM   #3041
Reality Check
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: New Zealand
Posts: 27,098
Originally Posted by jonesdave116 View Post
There is also Pierre-Marie Robitaille on that Facebook with a video on his delusion that the Sun is metallic hydrogen.
Robitaille is a professor of radiology who started with the idiocy that Kirchhoff’s Law of thermal emission (and thus Planck's law) was wrong when that is a law based on and confirmed by experiments. He added more idiocy of the CMBR being microwaves reflected by Earth's oceans. CMBR observations are from instruments pointing away from Earth, WMAP and Planck were at the L2 point 1,500,000 kilometres (930,000 mi) from the Earth. Then this stupidity of a ball of plasma being liquid metallic hydrogen.
Reality Check is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 26th May 2020, 10:24 PM   #3042
Sol88
Philosopher
 
Sol88's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Posts: 5,917
Originally Posted by jonesdave116 View Post
Molecular nitrogen in comet 67P/Churyumov-Gerasimenko indicates a low formation temperature
Rubin, M. et al. (2015)
https://hal.archives-ouvertes.fr/hal-01346031/document
So....once upon a time...

Nice fairetale jd116!

At least it's not written in crayon.
__________________
“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 Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 26th May 2020, 10:25 PM   #3043
Sol88
Philosopher
 
Sol88's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Posts: 5,917
Quote:
Such a striking agreement with all actual data on  may suggest that we understand the origin of comets better than their activity.
The Refractory-to-Ice Mass Ratio in Comets Fulle

Is this the case do you think jonesdave116?
__________________
“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 Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 27th May 2020, 12:24 AM   #3044
jonesdave116
Illuminator
 
jonesdave116's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2015
Posts: 4,855
Originally Posted by Sol88 View Post
So....once upon a time...

Nice fairetale jd116!

At least it's not written in crayon.
That is observational fact. Learn the difference. Lightning bolts carving rocks off of planets is fairy tales. Electric discharges at comets is fairy tales. EDM (lol) at comets is fairy tales. Invisible rock is fairy tales. Etc. Get back to us when you've actually got some valid science, yes?
__________________
“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 Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 27th May 2020, 12:26 AM   #3045
jonesdave116
Illuminator
 
jonesdave116's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2015
Posts: 4,855
Originally Posted by Sol88 View Post
The Refractory-to-Ice Mass Ratio in Comets Fulle

Is this the case do you think jonesdave116?
What has this got to do with your failed woo? When are you going to address your failed woo? Your failed woo is the subject of this thread. How about dealing with that failed woo before heading off into realms that are beyond your pay grade?
__________________
“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 Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 27th May 2020, 01:01 AM   #3046
Sol88
Philosopher
 
Sol88's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Posts: 5,917
Originally Posted by jonesdave116 View Post
That is observational fact. Learn the difference. Lightning bolts carving rocks off of planets is fairy tales. Electric discharges at comets is fairy tales. EDM (lol) at comets is fairy tales. Invisible rock is fairy tales. Etc. Get back to us when you've actually got some valid science, yes?
I'm back...

Quote:
One of the surprising findings of the Rosetta mission is the presence of suprathermal electrons in the close cometary plasma environment with energies up to about 100 eV. The population was present already during the weakly outgassing phases of 67P’s orbit around the Sun (Clark et al. 2015). Understanding the suprathermal electron population is important, since increased fluxes of the latter have been shown to strongly affect also the cometary ionosphere via electron impact ionization (Galand et al. 2016), charge exchange (Wedlund et al. 2017; Heritier et al. 2018), and is thought to affect dust grain charging processes (Gombosi et al. 2015).
Divin

__________________
“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 Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 27th May 2020, 01:12 AM   #3047
jonesdave116
Illuminator
 
jonesdave116's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2015
Posts: 4,855
Originally Posted by Sol88 View Post
I'm back...

Divin

And what has that got to do with your failed woo? Stop running away and deal with your failed woo.
__________________
“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 Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 27th May 2020, 01:26 AM   #3048
Sol88
Philosopher
 
Sol88's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Posts: 5,917
My failed woo...?

Quote:
ABSTRACT

The observed rate of water production of comet 67P/Churyumov–Gerasimenko near its perihelion can be approximated by a very steep power function of the heliocentric distance. Widely used thermophysical models based on a static dust layer on top of the icy/refractory matrix are poorly consistent with these observations. We analyse published model results and demonstrate that thermophysical models with a uniform and static ice free layer do not reproduce the observed steep water production rates of 67P near perihelion. Based on transient thermal modeling we conclude that the accelerated gas activity can be explained assuming that the active area fraction near the south pole is increased. The deeper penetration of the heat wave during polar day (no sunset) can activate sublimation through thicker inert dust layers. This can also lead to removal of thicker dust layers and consequently to an expansion of the active area.
Near-perihelion activity of comet 67P/Churyumov–Gerasimenko. A first attempt of non-static analysis

so was that a layer of dust or
Quote:
Our findings reject the idea that comets are fluffy aggregates, instead, they are characterised by consolidated surfaces.
So was that a consolidated surface of inert dust layers?

Talk about woo on woo! ad hoc is the norm for the mainstream, after all jonesdave116 knows how comets were formed and how their activity is produced!

Just a few T's to cross and some I's to dot and jobs done!

Quote:
Such a striking agreement with all actual data on may suggest that we understand the origin of comets better than their activity.
Marco Fulle


Big call Marco!

__________________
“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 Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 27th May 2020, 10:03 AM   #3049
jonesdave116
Illuminator
 
jonesdave116's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2015
Posts: 4,855
Originally Posted by Sol88 View Post
My failed woo...?



Near-perihelion activity of comet 67P/Churyumov–Gerasimenko. A first attempt of non-static analysis

so was that a layer of dust or

So was that a consolidated surface of inert dust layers?

Talk about woo on woo! ad hoc is the norm for the mainstream, after all jonesdave116 knows how comets were formed and how their activity is produced!

Just a few T's to cross and some I's to dot and jobs done!

Marco Fulle


Big call Marco!

None of which has the slightest relevance to your failed woo. Consolidated surfaces are not rock. No rock has ever been detected at a comet. Therefore, your woo has failed. We see sublimation, we see ice, and we see a comet that has a density of ~ half that of water. We do not see rock, we do not see discharges, and we do not see EDM (lol). So, when were you thinking of getting around to addressing your failed woo? Or are you just going to continue this science-free, decade long troll fest?
__________________
“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 Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 27th May 2020, 01:40 PM   #3050
Reality Check
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: New Zealand
Posts: 27,098
Exclamation A "Nice fairetale jd116" lie when cited a scientific paper reporting a fact

A "Nice fairetale jd116" lie when cited a scientific paper reporting a fact.
Originally Posted by jonesdave116 View Post
Molecular nitrogen in comet 67P/Churyumov-Gerasimenko indicates a low formation temperature
Rubin, M. et al. (2015)
https://hal.archives-ouvertes.fr/hal-01346031/document
We observe that molecular nitrogen (N2) is the most abundant form of nitrogen at Pluto and Triton and should be in the protosolar nebula. This is the fact comets also have molecular nitrogen as measured in-situ by Rosetta at 67P.
Reality Check is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 27th May 2020, 01:53 PM   #3051
Reality Check
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: New Zealand
Posts: 27,098
Exclamation Spams us again with an irrelevant "The Refractory-to-Ice Mass Ratio in Comets" paper

Spams us again with an irrelevant The Refractory-to-Ice Mass Ratio in Comets in a thread about his electric comet dogma.

This is a paper on mainstream ice and dust comets as in the title !
He has lied about the paper: I have highlighted his lie by quote mining. We predict that comets will have less water than CI chondrites. This paper supports this mainstream science.

A quote stating that the data supports the origin of mainstream comets !
Quote:
Such a striking agreement with all actual data on [the refractory-to-ice mass ratio] may suggest that we understand the origin of comets better than their activity.
Reality Check is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 27th May 2020, 01:58 PM   #3052
Reality Check
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: New Zealand
Posts: 27,098
Exclamation Spams us with an irrelevant "presence of suprathermal electrons" quote

Spams us yet again with an irrelevant "One of the surprising findings of the Rosetta mission is the presence of suprathermal electrons..." quote from Devin.
Reality Check is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 27th May 2020, 02:09 PM   #3053
Reality Check
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: New Zealand
Posts: 27,098
Exclamation "My failed woo...?" lies by citing irrelevant mainstream ice and dust papers

"My failed woo...?" lies by irrelevant citing, quoting and lying about mainstream ice and dust papers.

His dogma failed when it was formed as a religion by the neo-Velikovskyian Thunderbolts cranks. They made it a religion by denying the physical properties of comets (and stars), e.g. over 70 years of observations that comets have a density of ~0.6 g/cc which is not rock.

I have highlighted his lie by quote mining. We predict that comets will have less water than CI chondrites. This paper supports this mainstream science.
Reality Check is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 27th May 2020, 02:23 PM   #3054
Sol88
Philosopher
 
Sol88's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Posts: 5,917
Originally Posted by jonesdave116 View Post
None of which has the slightest relevance to your failed woo. Consolidated surfaces are not rock. No rock has ever been detected at a comet. Therefore, your woo has failed. We see sublimation, we see ice, and we see a comet that has a density of ~ half that of water. We do not see rock, we do not see discharges, and we do not see EDM (lol). So, when were you thinking of getting around to addressing your failed woo? Or are you just going to continue this science-free, decade long troll fest?
Consolidated surfaces are not rock?

Classic jonesdave116!



What is a Consolidated surfaces wrt comets?
Quote:

. We predict that comets will have less water than CI chondrites. This paper supports this mainstream science.
__________________
“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 Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 27th May 2020, 02:29 PM   #3055
steenkh
Philosopher
 
steenkh's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Denmark
Posts: 5,874
Originally Posted by Sol88 View Post
Consolidated surfaces are not rock?
Of course not. Is every hard surface rock in your book?
__________________
Steen

--
Jack of all trades - master of none!
steenkh is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 27th May 2020, 02:39 PM   #3056
Sol88
Philosopher
 
Sol88's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Posts: 5,917
Originally Posted by jonesdave116 View Post
That is observational fact. Learn the difference. Lightning bolts carving rocks off of planets is fairy tales. Electric discharges at comets is fairy tales. EDM (lol) at comets is fairy tales. Invisible rock is fairy tales. Etc. Get back to us when you've actually got some valid science, yes?

Giant ripples on comet 67P/Churyumov–Gerasimenko sculpted by sunset thermal wind

Quote:
For such thermal winds to be dense enough to transport grains—10 times greater than previous estimates—outgassing must take place through a surface porous granular layer, and that layer must be composed of grains whose roughness lowers cohesion consistently with contact mechanics.

Sing out if you’d like me to use KY jelly?
__________________
“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 Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 27th May 2020, 02:40 PM   #3057
Sol88
Philosopher
 
Sol88's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Posts: 5,917
Originally Posted by steenkh View Post
Of course not. Is every hard surface rock in your book?
I’ve heard mention that ice is also very hard.

__________________
“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 Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 27th May 2020, 02:54 PM   #3058
jonesdave116
Illuminator
 
jonesdave116's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2015
Posts: 4,855
Originally Posted by Sol88 View Post
Consolidated surfaces are not rock?

Classic jonesdave116!



What is a Consolidated surfaces wrt comets?

How many times are you going to ask the same questions? How many times will we have to link to the same papers, that show that the surface is nothing like rock? What did MUPUS find? What was the strength? Was it anything like rock? How far does the MIRO instrument probe beneath the surface? What thermal inertia did it measure? Is it anything like rock? Did the radio waves from CONSERT encounter anything remotely resembling rock? Are the calculated strengths from cliff collapses compatible with any rock known to man? Et cetera. There is no rock, or anything even approaching rock. Give up.
__________________
“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 Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 27th May 2020, 02:55 PM   #3059
Reality Check
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: New Zealand
Posts: 27,098
Exclamation A lying "Consolidated surfaces are not rock?" question even with a :D

A lying "Consolidated surfaces are not rock?" question even with a .

No consolidated surface mentioned in papers on real ice and dust comets is rock. It is ice and dust !
Reality Check is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 27th May 2020, 02:59 PM   #3060
jonesdave116
Illuminator
 
jonesdave116's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2015
Posts: 4,855
Originally Posted by Sol88 View Post
Giant ripples on comet 67P/Churyumov–Gerasimenko sculpted by sunset thermal wind




Sing out if you’d like me to use KY jelly?
And what the hell has that got to do with anything? No rock, no discharges, no EDM (lol). Get it through your skull. Your woo was a highly amusing failure. Predictable, given that it is scientifically impossible, but amusing all the same. Your inability to accept this failure is just an example of the lengths that some people will go to to hold on to their religious beliefs.
__________________
“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 Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 27th May 2020, 03:00 PM   #3061
Reality Check
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: New Zealand
Posts: 27,098
Exclamation A lie of being boggled with his lie of quote mining Fulle, et. al. (January 2019)

A lie of being boggled with I have highlighted his lie by quote mining. We predict that comets will have less water than CI chondrites. This paper supports this mainstream science.
Quote:
Therefore, comets and KBOs may have less water than CI-chondrites, as predicted by models of comet formation by the gravitational collapse of cm-sized pebbles driven by streaming instabilities in the protoplanetary disc.
The paper's abstract is clear English. The models of comet formation predict that comets and KBOs have less water than CI-chondrites. That is what the paper may have found.
Reality Check is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 27th May 2020, 03:38 PM   #3062
Reality Check
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: New Zealand
Posts: 27,098
Exclamation Spams us with an irrelevant "Giant ripples..." and lies about it

Spams us with an irrelevant Giant ripples on comet 67P/Churyumov–Gerasimenko sculpted by sunset thermal wind paper and lies about it.
This is a mainstream ice and dust comet paper.

A lie of "Sing out if you’d like me to use KY jelly?" when that paper is consistent with what the mainstream expects. It debunks his comets are rock dogma. He even highlights the debunking !
Quote:
For such thermal winds to be dense enough to transport grains—10 times greater than previous estimates—outgassing must take place through a surface porous granular layer, and that layer must be composed of grains whose roughness lowers cohesion consistently with contact mechanics.

Last edited by Reality Check; 27th May 2020 at 03:48 PM.
Reality Check is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 27th May 2020, 03:44 PM   #3063
Reality Check
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: New Zealand
Posts: 27,098
Some "I’ve heard mention that ice is also very hard" gibberish when everyone knows that ice can be very hard because they know about the sinking of the Titanic, etc.
In the context of comets, the ice and dust on the surface of the comets can be even harder since it can be sintered by the Sun's heat.
Reality Check is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 27th May 2020, 05:17 PM   #3064
Sol88
Philosopher
 
Sol88's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Posts: 5,917
Originally Posted by jonesdave116 View Post
And what the hell has that got to do with anything? No rock, no discharges, no EDM (lol). Get it through your skull. Your woo was a highly amusing failure. Predictable, given that it is scientifically impossible, but amusing all the same. Your inability to accept this failure is just an example of the lengths that some people will go to to hold on to their religious beliefs.
Edited by Agatha:  Removed breach of rule 9 and rule 11
__________________
“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

Last edited by Agatha; 28th May 2020 at 08:56 AM.
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 Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 27th May 2020, 05:19 PM   #3065
Sol88
Philosopher
 
Sol88's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Posts: 5,917
Originally Posted by Reality Check View Post
Some "I’ve heard mention that ice is also very hard" gibberish when everyone knows that ice can be very hard because they know about the sinking of the Titanic, etc.
In the context of comets, the ice and dust on the surface of the comets can be even harder since it can be sintered by the Sun's heat.
So, reality check doubleS down on a icy hard consolidated surface of ice and dust...in an object with less water than chondrites

__________________
“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 Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 27th May 2020, 05:57 PM   #3066
Reality Check
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: New Zealand
Posts: 27,098
Edited by Agatha:  Removed response to rule breach

Last edited by Agatha; 28th May 2020 at 08:57 AM.
Reality Check is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 27th May 2020, 06:11 PM   #3067
Reality Check
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: New Zealand
Posts: 27,098
Exclamation A "So, reality check doubleS down on a icy hard ..." lie

A blatant "So, reality check doubleS down on a icy hard consolidated surface of ice and dust...in an object with less water than chondrites" lie.

It is a blatant lie that comets having less water then CI-chondrites as predicted by mainstream science (not dogma from cranks), means that they cannot have "a icy hard consolidated surface of ice and dust".
The Fulle, et. al. (January 2019) paper in I have highlighted his lie by quote mining. We predict that comets will have less water than CI chondrites. This paper supports this mainstream science. is about the bulk composition of comets, not the surface.

It is a lie that I stated that comets have "a icy hard consolidated surface of ice and dust". I said that the ice on comet surfaces can be very hard because they can be sintered by the Sun's heat. Nothing about a "consolidated surface". Especially, nothing about his debunked dogma that this is rock.
What the physical evidence says is that comets are made of ice and dust and that on 1 single comet we have evidence of very hard ice in 1 single location. The results of the MUPUS/PEN instrument at 67P are consistent with a layer of sintered ice at the location of the lander.
Reality Check is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 28th May 2020, 01:43 AM   #3068
jonesdave116
Illuminator
 
jonesdave116's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2015
Posts: 4,855
Originally Posted by Sol88 View Post
Edited by Agatha:  removed rule breach
.
Edited by Agatha:  Removed breach of rule 12
__________________
“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

Last edited by Agatha; 28th May 2020 at 08:58 AM.
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 Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 28th May 2020, 09:13 AM   #3069
steenkh
Philosopher
 
steenkh's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Denmark
Posts: 5,874
Originally Posted by Sol88 View Post
I’ve heard mention that ice is also very hard.

Ice mixed with dust (like PykreteWP) can be very hard and stable.
__________________
Steen

--
Jack of all trades - master of none!
steenkh is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 28th May 2020, 04:58 PM   #3070
Sol88
Philosopher
 
Sol88's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Posts: 5,917
Originally Posted by steenkh View Post
Ice mixed with dust (like PykreteWP) can be very hard and stable.





Ice is blue and hard, got it. Not sure if sawdust or some other form of wood pulp has been detected at comets, yet.

Quote:
Given that the 67P high friction coefficients are comparable, or even exceed, those found on Earth dry landslides (Legros, 2002), this implies a mechanically rocky-type behaviour for the cometary material.

Our findings reject the idea that comets are fluffy aggregates, instead, they are characterised by consolidated surfaces.
Lucchetti
__________________
“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

Last edited by Sol88; 28th May 2020 at 05:01 PM.
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 Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 28th May 2020, 05:03 PM   #3071
Reality Check
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: New Zealand
Posts: 27,098
Exclamation Lies again about the Lucchetti paper yet again

Lies again about the Lucchetti paper yet again which only compares a landslide parameter on 67P to the same parameter "dry landslides" on Earth.

Usual lying by quote mining. The Lucchetti paper explicitly states that the landslides on 67P contain ice (volatiles) which affects the parameter and so are not "dry".

The lie is also explained here:
Originally Posted by Reality Check View Post
It is a lie that Fulle or Lucchetti, et. al. (2019) state that comets are rock. Lucchetti says that ice and dust grains in landslides on 67P have a parameter similar to rocky landslides on Earth and that the parameter varies with volatile content .

Last edited by Reality Check; 28th May 2020 at 05:18 PM.
Reality Check is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 28th May 2020, 05:10 PM   #3072
Reality Check
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: New Zealand
Posts: 27,098
Exclamation The usual abysmal level of lies, delusions, insults, etc. addressed since 6 July 2009

The thousands of lies, delusions, insults, etc. since 6 July 2009 from Sol88 about his cult's electric comet and electric Sun dogma.
The abysmal insults of the deceased Michael Francis A'Hearn and all astronomers by Sol88 linking them with Sol88's dogma, etc. (no astronomer believes comets are actual rock)
132 items of lies, etc. from Sol88 since ~10 March 2020
  1. A "Nice fairetale jd116" lie when cited a scientific paper reporting a fact.
  2. Spams us again with an irrelevant The Refractory-to-Ice Mass Ratio in Comets in a thread about his electric comet dogma.
  3. Spams us yet again with an irrelevant "One of the surprising findings of the Rosetta mission is the presence of suprathermal electrons..." quote from Devin.
  4. "My failed woo...?" lies by irrelevant citing, quoting and lying about mainstream ice and dust papers.
  5. A lying "Consolidated surfaces are not rock?" question even with a .
  6. A lie of being boggled with "I have highlighted his lie by quote mining. We predict that comets will have less water than CI chondrites. This paper supports this mainstream science."
  7. Spams us with an irrelevant "Giant ripples on comet 67P/Churyumov–Gerasimenko sculpted by sunset thermal wind" paper and lies about it.
  8. A blatant "So, reality check doubleS down on a icy hard consolidated surface of ice and dust...in an object with less water than chondrites" lie.
  9. Lies again about the Lucchetti paper yet again which only compares a landslide parameter on 67P to the same parameter "dry landslides" on Earth.

Last edited by Reality Check; 28th May 2020 at 05:17 PM.
Reality Check is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 28th May 2020, 05:13 PM   #3073
Sol88
Philosopher
 
Sol88's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Posts: 5,917
Originally Posted by Reality Check View Post
Lies again about the Lucchetti paper yet again which only compares a cometary landslide parameter to "dry landslides" on Earth.

What would you suggest, reality check?

__________________
“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 Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 28th May 2020, 05:18 PM   #3074
Reality Check
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: New Zealand
Posts: 27,098
Exclamation A lying "What would you suggest, reality check?" question

A lying "What would you suggest, reality check?" question when I have clearly documented his lies about the Lucchetti paper.
It is a lie that Fulle or Lucchetti, et. al. (2019) state that comets are rock.
Lies again about the Lucchetti paper yet again which only compares a landslide parameter on 67P to the same parameter "dry landslides" on Earth.

I suggest that he stop writing obvious lies that anyone can detect by reading the irrelevant mainstream papers he cites. I suggest that he stop spamming the thread with more of the thousands of papers on ice and dust comets that are irreverent to his dogma that comets are rocks blasted from planets, etc. This is a thread on his electric comet dogma. I know hat 11 years of lies and irrelevancy shows that will not happen.

Last edited by Reality Check; 28th May 2020 at 05:24 PM.
Reality Check is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 28th May 2020, 05:28 PM   #3075
Sol88
Philosopher
 
Sol88's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Posts: 5,917
The ELECTRIC COMET

Rocks discharging in the solar plasma...

Quote:
The nucleus is thus a highly porous very dusty body with very little ice.
Pätzold


Yup, sure is!

__________________
“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 Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 28th May 2020, 05:29 PM   #3076
Sol88
Philosopher
 
Sol88's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Posts: 5,917
Except...

Quote:
The calculated mean landslide apparent friction angle of 34°, is considerably higher than the values (14°) reported for fractured rock mass in other context (Quantin et al., 2044; Brunetti et al., 2014) and more comparable to those of pristine rocks such as sandstones, siltstones, gneisses and slates (from 27 to 34°), or basalts, granites and, limestones (from 34° to 40°) (Wyllie & Mah, 2005). This comparison indicates that the cometary material is characterised by a high to medium internal friction coefficient.
Lucchetti


Quote:
From its lofty perch in space, Spitzer was in the perfect position to scrutinize the cometary material ejected from comet Tempel 1. The sensitive telescope's spectrometer instrument detected dust particles finer than human hair, and discovered the presence of silicates (crushed rock or sand), carbonates (chalk), smectite (clay), metal sulfides (like fool's gold), amorphous carbon (soot) and polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons (carbon-rich molecules found on barbecue grills and in automobile exhaust on Earth).
https://www.nasa.gov/vision/universe...-20061010.html

__________________
“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

Last edited by Sol88; 28th May 2020 at 05:31 PM.
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 Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 28th May 2020, 06:04 PM   #3077
jonesdave116
Illuminator
 
jonesdave116's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2015
Posts: 4,855
Originally Posted by Sol88 View Post
The ELECTRIC COMET

Rocks discharging in the solar plasma...

Pätzold


Yup, sure is!

Wrong. And has nothing to do with your failed woo. No rock, no discharges, no EDM (lol). When are you going to deal with your failed woo? Or do we have to put up with another decade of science-free trolling?
__________________
“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 Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 28th May 2020, 06:05 PM   #3078
jonesdave116
Illuminator
 
jonesdave116's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2015
Posts: 4,855
Originally Posted by Sol88 View Post
Nothing to do with your failed woo. Deal with your failed woo.
__________________
“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 Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 28th May 2020, 06:48 PM   #3079
Sol88
Philosopher
 
Sol88's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Posts: 5,917
What are comets made of, jonesdave116?

Answer = mostly rock






Quote:
On the other hand, we know very little about the abundance of the many possible refractory species.
Deal with it and stop living in the past, jonesdave116

Comets: looking ahead
__________________
“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

Last edited by Sol88; 28th May 2020 at 06:51 PM.
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 Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 28th May 2020, 06:51 PM   #3080
jonesdave116
Illuminator
 
jonesdave116's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2015
Posts: 4,855
Originally Posted by Sol88 View Post
What are comets made of, jonesdave116?

Answer = mostly rock

Comets: looking ahead




Deal with it.
Liar. If lies is all you have, why don't you just go away and do us all a favour? Hmm? Hint for the hard of thinking: there is no rock. Never been seen nor detected at any comet. For the umpteen hundredth time.
__________________
“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 Reply With Quote Back to Top
Reply

International Skeptics Forum » General Topics » Science, Mathematics, Medicine, and Technology

Bookmarks

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump


All times are GMT -7. The time now is 05:27 PM.
Powered by vBulletin. Copyright ©2000 - 2020, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.

This forum began as part of the James Randi Education Foundation (JREF). However, the forum now exists as
an independent entity with no affiliation with or endorsement by the JREF, including the section in reference to "JREF" topics.

Disclaimer: Messages posted in the Forum are solely the opinion of their authors.