IS Forum
Forum Index Register Members List Events Search Today's Posts 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.
Closed Thread
Old 19th November 2017, 02:55 PM   #601
Reality Check
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: New Zealand
Posts: 28,521
Thumbs down Sol88: Lies again about Deca et. al. containing double layers

Originally Posted by Sol88 View Post
...These double layers...
20 November 2017 Sol88: Lies again about Deca et. al. containing double layers.
Electron and Ion Dynamics of the Solar Wind Interaction with a Weakly Outgassing Comet (paper) (PDF) by Deca et. al.
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 Back to Top
Old 19th November 2017, 03:04 PM   #602
Reality Check
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: New Zealand
Posts: 28,521
Thumbs down Sol88: A lie about "bloody pages arguing about" ambipolar electric fields

Originally Posted by Sol88 View Post
And you thought that not important to share with our lurker friends after we spent bloody pages arguing over them existing at comets?
20 November 2017 Sol88: A lie about "bloody pages arguing about" electric fields on comets, including ambipolar electric fields.
There are 15 posts in this thread alone containing the word ambipolar. No one has said they do not exist.

What we are saying is that your absolutely ignorant delusions about comets include an imaginary electric field between the Sun and comets. An electric field between electrons and ions in comet coma is not that fantasy. Every time you mention a cometary electric filed you are lying about your comet delusions.
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 Back to Top
Old 19th November 2017, 03:10 PM   #603
Reality Check
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: New Zealand
Posts: 28,521
362 items of ignorance, idiocy (citing irrelevant mainstream papers), delusion and lies dating from 29 August 2016 to 13 November 2017 (maybe hundreds more in the last 8 years!)
  1. 16 November 2017 Sol88: A lie that Bockelée-Morvan et. al. states there was no gas in the outbursts.
  2. 16 November 2017 Sol88: Lying highlighting in a quote from Bockelée-Morvan et. al.
  3. 16 November 2017 Sol88: Usual idiocy of citing a paper on comets made of ices and dust.
  4. 16 November 2017 Sol88: Extra idiocy of citing a paper stating "Gaseous outbursts with no dust counterparts were also observed (Feldman et al. 2016)"!
  5. 16 November 2017 Sol88: Lie about working comet science failing.http://www.internationalskeptics.com...8#post12077638
  6. 16 November 2017 Sol88: The idiocy of citing a paper not about comet outbursts (Nordheim et. al.) in reply to a post about comet outbursts.
  7. 16 November 2017 Sol88: An implied lie that Nordheim et. al. is the detection of electrostatically ejected dust.
  8. 16 November 2017 Sol88: The idiocy of citing a paper on comets made of ices and dust (Nordheim et. al.).
  9. 16 November 2017 Sol88: A lie about his cult comet delusions being about electrostatic dust charging.
  10. 16 November 2017 Sol88: Irrelevant question to detail from his comet delusions.
  11. 16 November 2017 Sol88: Lies with a gas drag question that he knows the answer to.
  12. 16 November 20107 Sol88: Idiotic repeat of an uncited quote after a source is asked for
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 Back to Top
Old 19th November 2017, 03:46 PM   #604
ferd burfle
Graduate Poster
 
ferd burfle's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Philippine Republic
Posts: 1,634
Originally Posted by The Man View Post
Naw, Sol88's SOP appears to be just find some mainstream paper that simply mentions electro-magnetic interactions in relations to comets and then simply portray it as supportive EC and EU even if it directly refutes them (overall neutrality). Same thing with the dust assertions, find something that says dust can be levitated and assert it as supportive regardless of the specific conditions involved.

This. Critical analysis begins and ends with word-search.
__________________
If bands were cars, Band Maid would be a pink Nissan GT-R with a Hello Kitty graphic wrap.
ferd burfle 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
Old 19th November 2017, 06:00 PM   #605
The Man
Unbanned zombie poster
 
The Man's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Poughkeepsie, NY
Posts: 18,384
Originally Posted by ferd burfle View Post
This. Critical analysis begins and ends with word-search.
But it doesn't even seem to be a comprehensive word search. I see this so often with crank science proponents' citations. Can't they even do a similar search in the target citation for the words or indications that it doesn't support their assertions? I don't even do a word search, often just a quick read of the key points in the reference and the counter indications are obvious.
__________________
BRAINZZZZZZZZ

Last edited by The Man; 19th November 2017 at 06:04 PM. Reason: typo
The Man 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
Old 20th November 2017, 01:04 AM   #606
tusenfem
Illuminator
 
tusenfem's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2008
Posts: 3,197
Originally Posted by The Man View Post
Naw, Sol88's SOP appears to be just find some mainstream paper that simply mentions electro-magnetic interactions in relations to comets and then simply portray it as supportive EC and EU even if it directly refutes them (overall neutrality). Same thing with the dust assertions, find something that says dust can be levitated and assert it as supportive regardless of the specific conditions involved.
Yes, you are completely correct.
This is, for a long time already, not a "electric comet" thread, but a "attack and misinterpret mainstream" thread, in order to find that one small comment (e.g. ambi-polar electric field) to vindicate the EC idea.
Indeed, anything electromagnetic will be taken as a confirmation that the EC idea has merit, even though many important aspects, like the creation of OH or H2O in the coma are totally debunked.
__________________
Scientific progress goes *BOINK* -- Calvin & Hobbes
twitter: @tusenfem -- Super Duper Space Plasma Physicist
tusenfem 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
Old 20th November 2017, 02:04 AM   #607
tusenfem
Illuminator
 
tusenfem's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2008
Posts: 3,197
Originally Posted by Sol88 View Post
And you thought that not important to share with our lurker friends after we spent bloody pages arguing over them existing at comets?
And what exactly do you expect from the ambi-polar electric field?
How strong do you think it is, and what effect will it have on the dust?
Will this electric field lead to the discharges that will EDM the surface of the comet?
__________________
Scientific progress goes *BOINK* -- Calvin & Hobbes
twitter: @tusenfem -- Super Duper Space Plasma Physicist
tusenfem 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
Old 20th November 2017, 04:08 AM   #608
Sol88
Philosopher
 
Sol88's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Posts: 7,270
Originally Posted by tusenfem View Post
And what exactly do you expect from the ambi-polar electric field?
How strong do you think it is, and what effect will it have on the dust?
Will this electric field lead to the discharges that will EDM the surface of the comet?
Well let's back the truck up here ay?

Quote:
put comet in title
put double layer in abstract
double layers are rare breed, though

I don't know about kettle of fish, don't you think that that would depend on where the double layer is, how strong the double layer is, etc.

Just got to love these immediate assumptions of EU-tians, if you have a DL then everything is solved.
Dear Sol, please explain us how this double layer is created, set up, and what it is doing to the jets.
Tusenfems post from aways back...

Whenever your ready there cob!
__________________
“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
Old 20th November 2017, 04:55 AM   #609
tusenfem
Illuminator
 
tusenfem's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2008
Posts: 3,197
Originally Posted by Sol88 View Post
Well let's back the truck up here ay?

Tusenfems post from aways back...

Whenever your ready there cob!
The ball is in your court, Sol.
__________________
Scientific progress goes *BOINK* -- Calvin & Hobbes
twitter: @tusenfem -- Super Duper Space Plasma Physicist
tusenfem 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
Old 20th November 2017, 05:50 AM   #610
Sol88
Philosopher
 
Sol88's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Posts: 7,270
Originally Posted by tusenfem View Post
The ball is in your court, Sol.
Quote:
It is concluded that the dust particles are strongly charged and partially coupled to cometary plasmas (or vice versa).
http://esoads.eso.org/abs/1991JGR....96.7731L

Back to you sport

Jd116 might like to pay attention here.
__________________
“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
Old 20th November 2017, 06:09 AM   #611
jonesdave116
Philosopher
 
jonesdave116's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2015
Posts: 5,837
Originally Posted by Sol88 View Post
http://esoads.eso.org/abs/1991JGR....96.7731L

Back to you sport

Jd116 might like to pay attention here.
I am. These are processes that happen within the coma, once the dust has been lofted there by gas. It says nothing about surface effects. As Tusenfem says, you need to explain how a DL would form within a diamagnetic cavity, and how it would then loft dust into the coma. Explosively. From a very localised area. Not happening.
__________________
“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
Old 20th November 2017, 06:56 AM   #612
The Man
Unbanned zombie poster
 
The Man's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Poughkeepsie, NY
Posts: 18,384
Originally Posted by tusenfem View Post
Yes, you are completely correct.
This is, for a long time already, not a "electric comet" thread, but a "attack and misinterpret mainstream" thread, in order to find that one small comment (e.g. ambi-polar electric field) to vindicate the EC idea.
Indeed, anything electromagnetic will be taken as a confirmation that the EC idea has merit, even though many important aspects, like the creation of OH or H2O in the coma are totally debunked.
Originally Posted by tusenfem View Post
And what exactly do you expect from the ambi-polar electric field?
How strong do you think it is, and what effect will it have on the dust?
Will this electric field lead to the discharges that will EDM the surface of the comet?

Correct on both counts. According to the EC prognostications the comet carries a substantial charge that results in catastrophic discharges that will EDM the surface. That ain't no ambi-polar electric field but just a direct potential difference relative to the comet with periodic conductive pathways. Sol88 mentioned the comet losing excess electrons before so I'll ask again.


Generally how many "excess electrons" does "The ELECTRIC COMET" notion propose such a comet has?
__________________
BRAINZZZZZZZZ
The Man 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
Old 20th November 2017, 08:12 AM   #613
tusenfem
Illuminator
 
tusenfem's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2008
Posts: 3,197
Also, what one should take into account is why such a small electric field is needed, to quote Madanian et al. [2016]:

Quote:
Quasineutrality requires that the electron and ion densities be the same, and under certain conditions an ambipolar electric field is required to achieve quasi-neutrality.
(with the omission that "the same" holds for volumes greater than the Debye sphere)

Or another quote fromVigren et al. [2017]

Quote:
From LAP measurements during a few radial scans Edberg et al. (2015) reported an on average r−1 decay in the electron number density. Combined with a hot and more constant electron temperature, such a density decay can (depending on the magnetic field environment) set up an ambipolar electric field due to the electron pressure gradient, which accelerates cometary ions radially outward.
And the fields are rather small, say with Rosetta at 200 km from 67P and the accelerated particles have 100 eV, so 100 V over 200 km or so, which is less than 1 mV/m !!

And yes, when it is there, it does something with the plasma environment, but nothing as crazy and wild as the EC proponents are wanting us to believe is happening.
__________________
Scientific progress goes *BOINK* -- Calvin & Hobbes
twitter: @tusenfem -- Super Duper Space Plasma Physicist
tusenfem 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
Old 20th November 2017, 12:47 PM   #614
Reality Check
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: New Zealand
Posts: 28,521
Thumbs down Sol88: Lies about a tusenfem post which is not about his ambipolar delusion

Originally Posted by Sol88 View Post
Well let's back the truck up here ay?
21 November 2017 Sol88: Lies about a tusenfem post which is not about his new delusion that ambipolar electric fields are double layers.

On 6th January 2015 tusenfem wrote
Quote:
put comet in title
put double layer in abstract
double layers are rare breed, though

I don't know about kettle of fish, don't you think that that would depend on where the double layer is, how strong the double layer is, etc.

Just got to love these immediate assumptions of EU-tians, if you have a DL then everything is solved.
Dear Sol, please explain us how this double layer is created, set up, and what it is doing to the jets.
This post is that papers about cometary double layers are extremely rare. There are 46 according to SAO/NASA Astrophysics Data System (ADS). I have read one before and it was on double layers inside the comet the nucleus ! Some of the results are false positives, e.g. one using data on 67P's coma from the Double Focusing Mass Spectrometer.
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 Back to Top
Old 20th November 2017, 12:51 PM   #615
Reality Check
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: New Zealand
Posts: 28,521
Thumbs down Sol88: Lies about a paper which is not on his current ambipolar delusion

Originally Posted by Sol88 View Post
21 November 2017 Sol88: Lies about a paper which is not on his current delusion that ambipolar electric fields are double layers or his other comet delusions.
Electric fields and cold electrons in the vicinity of Comet Halley from 1991 !
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 Back to Top
Old 20th November 2017, 01:02 PM   #616
Reality Check
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: New Zealand
Posts: 28,521
Originally Posted by tusenfem View Post
And yes, when it is there, it does something with the plasma environment, but nothing as crazy and wild as the EC proponents are wanting us to believe is happening.
What is worse is that these are electric fields local to the comet reducing with distance as in that Vigren et al. [2017] quote "on average r−1 decay in the electron number density".

A fundamental part of the EC delusion is that there is an electric field between the Sun and a comet. It is totally stupid to go on for months or years about locally produced electric fields that are irrelevant. Doubling up on that with imaginary and irrelevant double layers is doubly stupid. Sol88 has being whining about his cometary double layers delusion since at least 6th January 2015.
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 Back to Top
Old 20th November 2017, 01:12 PM   #617
Reality Check
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: New Zealand
Posts: 28,521
374 items of ignorance, idiocy (citing irrelevant mainstream papers), delusion and lies dating from 29 August 2016 to 16 November 2017 (maybe hundreds more in the last 8 years!)
  1. 16 November 20107 Sol88: Lies about what he quotes as an answer to a question.
  2. 20 November 2017 Sol88: The repeated idiocy of writing the title only of a paper.
  3. 20 November 2017 Sol88: The repeated idiocy of citing papers on comets made of ices and dust.
  4. 20 November 2017 Sol88: The insanity yet again that a description in quotes is a model.
  5. 20 November 2017 Sol88: A part truth for once - more "cherry picking and buzz words" and lies and delusions on the way and already added to his signature.
  6. 20 November 2017 Sol88: Electric fields lies about the mainstream and his comet delusions.
  7. 20 November 2017 Sol88: Deluded "double layer" lie about Deca et. al.
  8. 20 November 2017 Sol88: Double "plasma boundary" lie - not a double layer, not in the paper.
  9. 20 November 2017 Sol88: Question derailing yet again from his comet delusions.
  10. 20 November 2017 Sol88: A link to the insanely deluded Thunderbolts cult.
  11. 20 November 2017 Sol88: Idiocy and lies about highly collimated dust jets, etc.
  12. 20 November 2017 Sol88: Confirms how gullible he is by linking to the totally insane Thunderbolts cult again.
  13. 20 November 2017 Sol88: Lies again about an ambipolar electric field being a double layer.
  14. 20 November 2017 Sol88: Lies again about Deca et. al. containing double layers.
  15. 20 November 2017 Sol88: A lie about "bloody pages arguing about" electric fields on comets, including ambipolar electric fields.
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 Back to Top
Old 20th November 2017, 03:33 PM   #618
Sol88
Philosopher
 
Sol88's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Posts: 7,270
Originally Posted by tusenfem View Post
Also, what one should take into account is why such a small electric field is needed, to quote Madanian et al. [2016]:



(with the omission that "the same" holds for volumes greater than the Debye sphere)

Or another quote fromVigren et al. [2017]



And the fields are rather small, say with Rosetta at 200 km from 67P and the accelerated particles have 100 eV, so 100 V over 200 km or so, which is less than 1 mV/m !!

And yes, when it is there, it does something with the plasma environment, but nothing as crazy and wild as the EC proponents are wanting us to believe is happening.
What does it do, Tusenfem?

You may remember this as well...
Quote:
From the behaviour of the magnetic eld components it was deduced that there are not only currents perpendicular to the magnetic field (taking care of the shielding of the cavity) but there are also strong field-aligned currents in alternating directions.
As comprehensively covered by D . E. Scott, Ph.D. (EE)

And

Quote:
This leads to t nT. They realize that this folding leads to two regions with oppositely directed eld, similar to the Earth's magnetotail, and thus that there needs to be a cross-tail current through Ampere's law (Eq. (1)), with t 8 A for a tail length of t 6 km. Ip [1979] assumes that (part) of this current can suddenly be channeled through the cometary atmosphere, in a similar way to what happens in the Earth's tail during a substorm [Bostr¨om, 1974]. This eld-aligned current can then, again, be used to increase the ionization rate near the nucleus.
Currents in Cometary Comae Martin Volwerk 1



And what effect would this have on the double layers we are discussing?
__________________
“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; 20th November 2017 at 03:40 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 Back to Top
Old 20th November 2017, 03:44 PM   #619
Sol88
Philosopher
 
Sol88's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Posts: 7,270
Originally Posted by tusenfem View Post
Also, what one should take into account is why such a small electric field is needed, to quote Madanian et al. [2016]:



(with the omission that "the same" holds for volumes greater than the Debye sphere)

Or another quote fromVigren et al. [2017]



And the fields are rather small, say with Rosetta at 200 km from 67P and the accelerated particles have 100 eV, so 100 V over 200 km or so, which is less than 1 mV/m !!

And yes, when it is there, it does something with the plasma environment, but nothing as crazy and wild as the EC proponents are wanting us to believe is happening.
Yeah very small pissy electric fields, nothing to see hear folks, move along.

@Tusenfem, what strength are the electric fields that are set up between sunlit and shadowed areas?

You are aware it will set up an electric field?
__________________
“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
Old 20th November 2017, 03:49 PM   #620
Reality Check
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: New Zealand
Posts: 28,521
Thumbs down Sol88: Irrelevant question to derail from his comet delusions

Originally Posted by Sol88 View Post
What does it do, Tusenfem?
21 November 2017 Sol88: Irrelevant question to derail from his comet delusions.

21 November 2017 Sol88: Idiotic and irerlvant link to a deluded Thunderbolts cult "prophet". (D . E. Scott)
As soon as we see "Birkeland" we know this is the Thunderbolt cult inane delusion of Birkeland currents doing magic.

21 November 2017 Sol88: A lie - his delusion of cometary double layers is being pointed out yet again.
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 Back to Top
Old 20th November 2017, 03:49 PM   #621
Sol88
Philosopher
 
Sol88's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Posts: 7,270
Originally Posted by Reality Check View Post
374 items of ignorance, idiocy (citing irrelevant mainstream papers), delusion and lies dating from 29 August 2016 to 16 November 2017 (maybe hundreds more in the last 8 years!)
  1. 16 November 20107 Sol88: Lies about what he quotes as an answer to a question.
  2. 20 November 2017 Sol88: The repeated idiocy of writing the title only of a paper.
  3. 20 November 2017 Sol88: The repeated idiocy of citing papers on comets made of ices and dust.
  4. 20 November 2017 Sol88: The insanity yet again that a description in quotes is a model.
  5. 20 November 2017 Sol88: A part truth for once - more "cherry picking and buzz words" and lies and delusions on the way and already added to his signature.
  6. 20 November 2017 Sol88: Electric fields lies about the mainstream and his comet delusions.
  7. 20 November 2017 Sol88: Deluded "double layer" lie about Deca et. al.
  8. 20 November 2017 Sol88: Double "plasma boundary" lie - not a double layer, not in the paper.
  9. 20 November 2017 Sol88: Question derailing yet again from his comet delusions.
  10. 20 November 2017 Sol88: A link to the insanely deluded Thunderbolts cult.
  11. 20 November 2017 Sol88: Idiocy and lies about highly collimated dust jets, etc.
  12. 20 November 2017 Sol88: Confirms how gullible he is by linking to the totally insane Thunderbolts cult again.
  13. 20 November 2017 Sol88: Lies again about an ambipolar electric field being a double layer.
  14. 20 November 2017 Sol88: Lies again about Deca et. al. containing double layers.
  15. 20 November 2017 Sol88: A lie about "bloody pages arguing about" electric fields on comets, including ambipolar electric fields.

Are there double layers at a comet, 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 Back to Top
Old 20th November 2017, 03:50 PM   #622
Reality Check
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: New Zealand
Posts: 28,521
Thumbs down Sol88: Irrelevant question to derail from his comet delusions.

Originally Posted by Sol88 View Post
@Tusenfem, what strength are the electric fields that are set up between sunlit and shadowed areas?
21 November 2017 Sol88: Irrelevant question to derail from his comet delusions.
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 Back to Top
Old 20th November 2017, 03:55 PM   #623
Reality Check
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: New Zealand
Posts: 28,521
Thumbs down Sol88: Stupid question for me to derail from his comet delusions

Originally Posted by Sol88 View Post
Are there double layers at a comet, Reality Check?
21 November 2017 Sol88: Doubly stupid question for me to derail from his comet delusions.
I was the one who emphasized the lack of literature on cometary double layers.
389 items of ignorance, idiocy (citing irrelevant mainstream papers), delusion and lies dating from 29 August 2016 to 16 November 2017 (maybe hundreds more in the last 8 years!) includes your lies about cometary double layers.

You are the one with the delusion that there are cometary double layers.
21 November 2017 Sol88: Cite your sources for your assertion of double layers at a comet.
I expect more spamming of the thread with insanity from the Thunderbolts cult or lies about papers.

Last edited by Reality Check; 20th November 2017 at 04:00 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 Back to Top
Old 20th November 2017, 04:42 PM   #624
Sol88
Philosopher
 
Sol88's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Posts: 7,270
Originally Posted by Reality Check View Post
21 November 2017 Sol88: Irrelevant question to derail from his comet delusions.

21 November 2017 Sol88: Idiotic and irerlvant link to a deluded Thunderbolts cult "prophet". (D . E. Scott)
As soon as we see "Birkeland" we know this is the Thunderbolt cult inane delusion of Birkeland currents doing magic.

21 November 2017 Sol88: A lie - his delusion of cometary double layers is being pointed out yet again.
It is ok to say "I dont know" Reality Check. If you dont know you dont know, ay.

But that's science eh?

No you know!

Along with all the lurkers
__________________
“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
Old 20th November 2017, 05:50 PM   #625
jonesdave116
Philosopher
 
jonesdave116's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2015
Posts: 5,837
Originally Posted by Sol88 View Post
@Tusenfem, what strength are the electric fields that are set up between sunlit and shadowed areas?

You are aware it will set up an electric field?
Zero when the solar wind is not reaching the nucleus. See the Nordheim paper. Anything else, or should we move right along, given that Sol is seemingly incapable of understanding either the Wang or Nordheim papers? What exactly are we doing here? I thought David Talbott told us that we were going to get all sorts of electric woo. Where was it? You know, all this EDM nonsense? Wandering electric arcs? Lol. Didn't happen, did it Solly boy? You are now reduced to trying to misinterpret mainstream papers to include anything that has the suffix electro, yes? Sad.
It was going to be so much more spectacular than this, wasn't it? And, when it wasn't, you have been reduced to this! Very, very sad.
Do not blame me, or RC, or Tusenfem, or Tim Thompson, and many others who told you that this was unscientific garbage. Blame yourself for believing such garbage. Now give it up. Nobody is interested. It's dead. Kaput. Finito. Shuffled off its mortal coil. Gone to meet its maker. It is an ex stupid idea. Nobody is listening.
__________________
“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
Old 20th November 2017, 06:25 PM   #626
jonesdave116
Philosopher
 
jonesdave116's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2015
Posts: 5,837
Originally Posted by Sol88 View Post
Are there double layers at a comet, Reality Check?
Err, no. Is that a sufficient answer? Please show us, including a plasma astrophysicist, who has access to the data, where this occurred. Please advise us of your qualifications and previous publications on this matter. Or,on the other hand, ................well I don't want to risk a ban, so I won't say it. Better come up with something good, though. Other than 'Wal said it would happen'. Lol. Anything else, Sol? Have we answered your questions? You do realise that you are probably the only person on the planet who still believes in this lunacy. Yes? I doubt T & T ever believed it. However, once they have conned enough people into believing their nonsense, and shelling out for books and DVDs, they really aren't bothered. You've been taken for a mug, sunshine.
__________________
“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
Old 20th November 2017, 07:18 PM   #627
Reality Check
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: New Zealand
Posts: 28,521
Thumbs down Sol88: A lie that I do not know that there are no cometary double layers

Originally Posted by Sol88 View Post
It is ok to say "I dont know" Reality Check.
21 November 2017 Sol88: A lie that I do not know that there are no cometary double layers after I emphasized the lack of literature on cometary double layers.
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 Back to Top
Old 20th November 2017, 07:26 PM   #628
Reality Check
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: New Zealand
Posts: 28,521
Exclamation Sol88: Cite your sources for your assertion of double layers at a comet

389 items of ignorance, idiocy (citing irrelevant mainstream papers), delusion and lies dating from 29 August 2016 to 20 November 2017 (maybe hundreds more in the last 8 years!)
  1. 21 November 2017 Sol88: Lies about a tusenfem post which is not about his new delusion that ambipolar electric fields are double layers.
  2. 21 November 2017 Sol88: Lies about a paper which is not on his current delusion that ambipolar electric fields are double layers or his other comet delusions.
  3. 21 November 2017 Sol88: Irrelevant question to derail from his comet delusions.
  4. 21 November 2017 Sol88: Idiotic and irrelevant link to a deluded Thunderbolts cult "prophet". (D . E. Scott)
  5. 21 November 2017 Sol88: A lie - his delusion of cometary double layers is being pointed out yet again.
  6. 21 November 2017 Sol88: Irrelevant question to derail from his comet delusions.
  7. 21 November 2017 Sol88: Doubly stupid question for me to derail from his comet delusions.
  8. 21 November 2017 Sol88: Cite your sources for your assertion of double layers at a comet.
  9. 21 November 2017 Sol88: A lie that I do not know that there are no cometary double layers after I emphasized the lack of literature on cometary double layers.
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 Back to Top
Old 20th November 2017, 07:29 PM   #629
Reality Check
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: New Zealand
Posts: 28,521
jonesdave116, you may have not recognized this insult from Sol88:
Originally Posted by Sol88 View Post
Ya bloody drongo
drongo is an Australasian term for "idiot" or "stupid fellow". A quite mild insult by itself but "bloody" makes it worse.

Last edited by Reality Check; 20th November 2017 at 07:30 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 Back to Top
Old 21st November 2017, 12:43 AM   #630
tusenfem
Illuminator
 
tusenfem's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2008
Posts: 3,197
Originally Posted by Sol88 View Post
And what effect would this have on the double layers we are discussing?
As the density it probably high enough in the coma to carry this current, there is no need for double layers. And please note that I am talking about a tail detachment event in that section, not something that happens often, and has nothing to do with the previous discussion about the ambi-polar electric field.
You can keep on screaming double layers, but unless you come up with an actual description of what you think is happening, it ain't gonna happen.
And descriptions like

Originally Posted by Sol88
So we have energetic electron and ions doing all sorts of wonderfully complex, for the mathmagicians, behaviours that surprise scientists according to the “Ivey dust Ball”. This is achieved thru the ambipolar double layers set up that ARE coupled to the solar wind.
I will let the ivey for what it is, but then the bold, where we suddenly have ambipolar double layers!
So, Sol, show us what this is supposed to mean, show a model, and not some word salat, if you know everything so well, what "us scientists" surprises so much.
__________________
Scientific progress goes *BOINK* -- Calvin & Hobbes
twitter: @tusenfem -- Super Duper Space Plasma Physicist

Last edited by tusenfem; 21st November 2017 at 12:46 AM.
tusenfem 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
Old 21st November 2017, 03:51 AM   #631
Sol88
Philosopher
 
Sol88's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Posts: 7,270
WoW Tusenfem, WOW!

Your world is THAT small?
__________________
“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
Old 21st November 2017, 03:56 AM   #632
Sol88
Philosopher
 
Sol88's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Posts: 7,270
Originally Posted by Reality Check View Post
21 November 2017 Sol88: A lie that I do not know that there are no cometary double layers after I emphasized the lack of literature on cometary double layers.

Lack of literature you say...:rolley
__________________
“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
Old 21st November 2017, 04:07 AM   #633
Sol88
Philosopher
 
Sol88's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Posts: 7,270
Charged dust, electric fields (locally very strong), global electric currents, spikes in the magnetic field, double layers, massive charge seperation, suprathermal electron, dust showers arriving in ‘beams’, bedrock hard surface, visible granular dust, nm size dust both compact then as aggregates and larger (m??) , stratified and cracked “well consolidated surface” (bedrock), lack of any dust to be entrained in sublimating gasses, complex hydrocarbons and organic .....

We’ll start there. Paint me a picture on sublimating ‘ice’ and I mean all molecular species det4cted so far and how there in the “ice/s”...
__________________
“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
Old 21st November 2017, 04:10 AM   #634
Sol88
Philosopher
 
Sol88's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Posts: 7,270
Or how bout we start on your statement in my signature below, jd116?
__________________
“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
Old 21st November 2017, 06:02 AM   #635
jonesdave116
Philosopher
 
jonesdave116's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2015
Posts: 5,837
Originally Posted by Sol88 View Post
Charged dust, electric fields (locally very strong), global electric currents, spikes in the magnetic field, double layers, massive charge seperation, suprathermal electron, dust showers arriving in ‘beams’, bedrock hard surface, visible granular dust, nm size dust both compact then as aggregates and larger (m??) , stratified and cracked “well consolidated surface” (bedrock), lack of any dust to be entrained in sublimating gasses, complex hydrocarbons and organic .....

We’ll start there. Paint me a picture on sublimating ‘ice’ and I mean all molecular species det4cted so far and how there in the “ice/s”...
And away we go again. Rinse and repeat. Ad nauseam. And still zero attempt to explain how any of that is lifting dust when there is a diamagnetic cavity in place. There is nothing electrical going on in that cavity, otherwise it wouldn't be called 'diamagnetic' would it? So, for the umpteenth time, explain what is lofting dust, and how it could form within that cavity.

The charged dust is within the coma. Due to processes in the coma. There are no electric fields within a diamagnetic cavity. There are no currents within a diamagnetic cavity. There is no charge separation within a diamagnetic cavity. There are no suprathermal electrons within a diamagnetic cavity. There are no spikes in the magnetic field within a diamagnetic cavity. By definition. There are no double layers, as you have been repeatedly told. The dust is lofted by gas, and may or may not be collimated. The surface is not bedrock hard, as has been repeatedly pointed out to you.
Frankly, you are just wasting everybody's time with your inane claims, when it has been repeatedly explained to you, with links to the relevant science, that your claims are wrong. Demonstrably and without any doubt.
If you want to carry on your religious belief in this particularly idiotic, unscientific and evidence-free woo, then fine. I just wish you'd take your nonsense somewhere else, and leave the good people of this forum alone, and save them from having to continually correct your idiotic claims.
__________________
“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
Old 21st November 2017, 06:25 AM   #636
tusenfem
Illuminator
 
tusenfem's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2008
Posts: 3,197
Originally Posted by Sol88 View Post
Charged dust, electric fields (locally very strong), global electric currents, spikes in the magnetic field, double layers, massive charge seperation, suprathermal electron, dust showers arriving in ‘beams’, bedrock hard surface, visible granular dust, nm size dust both compact then as aggregates and larger (m??) , stratified and cracked “well consolidated surface” (bedrock), lack of any dust to be entrained in sublimating gasses, complex hydrocarbons and organic .....

We’ll start there. Paint me a picture on sublimating ‘ice’ and I mean all molecular species det4cted so far and how there in the “ice/s”...
  • Charged dust: and so what?
  • electric fields (locally very strong): care to elaborate what "very" strong means here, and where this "locally" is?
  • global electric currents: Guess you know more than the mainstream scientists. yes there are currents, mainly because of Ampere's law, curl B ~ J
  • spikes in the magnetic field: what spikes are you referring to here? it is not really special for magnetic fields in space plasma to be spikey through e.g. turbulence
  • double layers: what about double layers?
  • massive charge seperation: basically impossible in a natural plasma, of course I don't know what you mean by "massive", and where you get your "massive" values from
  • suprathermal electron: supra thermal electrons are nothing special, they exist in every natural plasma

Naturally, you are mixing up stuff, in order to confuse the reader. All the plasma stuff is not ice. As soon as the volatiles escape from the comet they are interacting with the solar wind and solar radiation, will get ionized and will start to interact with the electromagnetic surroundings they will find themselves in, mainly the IMF and the convectional electric field. This gives rise to all kinds of interesting plasma physical phenomena, that we mathemagically can describe very well.

The last part of your listing about dust and bedrock and whatevers is also gathered to confuse the reader. You might as well ask why you find dust and stones and rock and ice and water all mixed together here in the Austrian Alps. It cannot be, man, it has to be either one or the other.
__________________
Scientific progress goes *BOINK* -- Calvin & Hobbes
twitter: @tusenfem -- Super Duper Space Plasma Physicist
tusenfem 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
Old 21st November 2017, 12:41 PM   #637
Reality Check
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: New Zealand
Posts: 28,521
Thumbs down Sol88: Doubles up on a lie when he knows that is a lack of literature on cometary DL

Originally Posted by Sol88 View Post
Lack of literature you say...
22 November 2017 Sol88: Doubles up on a lie when he knows that is a lack of literature on cometary double layers.
Search ADS for 'comet double layer' and get only 46 results out of 13.4 million records !

21 November 2017 Sol88: A lie that I do not know that there are no cometary double layers after I emphasized the lack of literature on cometary double layers.

Last edited by Reality Check; 21st November 2017 at 12:44 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 Back to Top
Old 21st November 2017, 12:55 PM   #638
Reality Check
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: New Zealand
Posts: 28,521
Thumbs down Sol88: A stupid demand to derail from his comet delusions

Originally Posted by Sol88 View Post
Charged dust, ... Paint me a picture on sublimating ‘ice’ and I mean all molecular species det4cted so far and how there in the “ice/s”...
22 November 2017 Sol88: A stupid demand to derail from his comet delusions.
The repeated stupid demand that we waste time teaching a person who

Last edited by Reality Check; 21st November 2017 at 12:56 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 Back to Top
Old 21st November 2017, 01:04 PM   #639
Reality Check
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: New Zealand
Posts: 28,521
Thumbs down Sol88: A possibly lying by quote mining signature (no context)

Originally Posted by Sol88 View Post
Or how bout we start on your statement in my signature below, jd116?
22 November 2017 Sol88: A possibly lying by quote mining signature (no context). But let us see...
No post with that quote in this part of the thread...
In part II we have 27th August 2016, 01:36 PM [b]jonesdave116[/B]
Quote:
A new paper out regarding the observation of an outburst at the comet. As luck would have it, most of the relevant instruments were looking at the area in question at the time:

The 19 Feb. 2016 Outburst of Comet 67P/CG: An ESA Rosetta Multi-Instrument Study

http://mnras.oxfordjournals.org/cont....full.pdf+html (free access)

From the abstract:
"On 19 Feb. 2016 nine Rosetta instruments serendipitously observed an outburst of gas and dust from the nucleus of comet 67P/Churyumov-Gerasimenko. Among these instruments were cameras and spectrometers ranging from UV over visible to microwave wavelengths, in-situ gas, dust and plasma instruments, and one dust collector."

Goes without saying that nothing electrical happened.
Thus:
22 November 2017 Sol88: A lie in his signature by quote mining an obviously true statement by jonesdave116
A paper about the light defected by Rosetta instruments from an outburst of gas and dust on 67P is not about any of Sol88's electrical comet delusions.

That Sol88 would be ignorant, deluded or lie about that sentence is hinted at by the next posts
tusenfem: HELLO!! Spoiler alert!!!
jonesdave116: Damn you! You should know by now that people are awaiting the fulfilment of Wal and Dave's hypotheses. How dare you cut them off at the whatsits!!!!
Sol88 does not disappoint - posts follow that lie about the mainstream model of comets (this was 2016 - he had 7 years to learn about real comets).

One of the many Thunderbolts cult delusions is that astronomers think that there is nothing "electrical" in the universe. Posters here other than Sol88 are not that stupid. For example, ee know that the solar wind interacts with the neutral gases from sublimating ices on comet to give ions and electrons, i.e. "electrical" stuff but not as in Sol88's comet delusions. There have been many mainstream papers on that subject cited here even by guess who !

Last edited by Reality Check; 21st November 2017 at 01:21 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 Back to Top
Old 22nd November 2017, 01:37 AM   #640
Sol88
Philosopher
 
Sol88's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Posts: 7,270
Originally Posted by tusenfem View Post
  • Charged dust: and so what?
  • electric fields (locally very strong): care to elaborate what "very" strong means here, and where this "locally" is?
  • global electric currents: Guess you know more than the mainstream scientists. yes there are currents, mainly because of Ampere's law, curl B ~ J
  • spikes in the magnetic field: what spikes are you referring to here? it is not really special for magnetic fields in space plasma to be spikey through e.g. turbulence
  • double layers: what about double layers?
  • massive charge seperation: basically impossible in a natural plasma, of course I don't know what you mean by "massive", and where you get your "massive" values from
  • suprathermal electron: supra thermal electrons are nothing special, they exist in every natural plasma

Naturally, you are mixing up stuff, in order to confuse the reader. All the plasma stuff is not ice. As soon as the volatiles escape from the comet they are interacting with the solar wind and solar radiation, will get ionized and will start to interact with the electromagnetic surroundings they will find themselves in, mainly the IMF and the convectional electric field. This gives rise to all kinds of interesting plasma physical phenomena, that we mathemagically can describe very well.

The last part of your listing about dust and bedrock and whatevers is also gathered to confuse the reader. You might as well ask why you find dust and stones and rock and ice and water all mixed together here in the Austrian Alps. It cannot be, man, it has to be either one or the other.
Charged dust: and so what?
Quote:
5. Summary and Conclusions We present theoretical and observational evidence that electric forces play an important role in dust lifting on Earth, Mars, Venus, the Moon, and asteroids. We found that near-surface electric fields larger than 100 kV/m can occur in terrestrial dusty phenomena. These electric fields play an important role in saltation, and can even be large enough to directly lift particles from the surface (Kok and Renno, 2006, 2008). A detailed numerical model of saltation (Kok and Renno, 2008) predicts that electric fields in Martian dusty phenomena affect both dust lifting and atmospheric chemistry. Indeed, there is evidence that they dissociate water vapor and produce large amounts of hydrogen peroxide (Atreya et al., 2006). Moreover, saltation on Mars might produce electric fields large enough to produce electric discharges. Finally, there is evidence that electrostatic fields generated by the removal of electrons from sunlit areas and the deposition of free electrons on shadows and the night side creates large electric fields in shadow boundaries and at the terminator. Theoretical evidence suggests that this process can electrostatically lift dust particles from the surface of the Moon and asteroids. Electrostatic dust lifting might also be responsible for dust lifting in other celestial bodies. This hypothesis can be tested with measurements of particle size and electric fields at the surface with a miniature electric field sensor or from low orbit with “picosatellite sensors.”
Electrical activity and dust lifting on Earth, Mars, and beyond
Nilton O. Renno1,2,* and Jasper F. Kok1,2


electric fields (locally very strong): care to elaborate what "very" strong means here, and where this "locally" is? =
Quote:
The theory proposed by Kok and Renno (2006) and summarized in section 2.2 suggests a mechanism for the lifting, transport and ejection of fines from the surface of asteroids. As on the Moon, soft solar X-rays with wavelengths smaller than 25 Å can remove electrons with energies of 500 to 1500 eV from the surface of asteroids and create cm-scale electric fields of ~50-150 kV/m. Fig. 7 shows that electric fields of about 2 kV/m are necessary to lift solid dust particles from the surface of asteroid Eros (even smaller electric fields are required to lift dust from the surface of asteroid Itokawa, because it is smaller and thus has reduced gravitational forces). Moreover, it shows that mm-size particles can be most easily lifted from the surface. As these particles are lifted, they dislodge smaller, harder to lift particles. 10 Once dislodged, and free from the strong interparticle cohesion forces, the smaller particles can be accelerated upwards by electric forces and can possibly escape the asteroid. The larger particles, on the other hand, are trapped by the asteroids’ gravitational field, but can migrate from sunlit areas to shadows. During these migrations the larger particles can get trapped in topographic lows, as observed (Miyamoto et al., 2007). This hypothesis can be tested with measurements of particle size, kinetic energy, and electric fields at the surface of asteroids (Renno et al., 2008).
Same Paper


More later from your paper Tusenfem, Current in Cometary Comae
__________________
“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
Closed Thread

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

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 10:58 PM.
Powered by vBulletin. Copyright ©2000 - 2024, 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.