|
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. |
![]() |
#1081 |
Dark Lord of the JREF
Join Date: Sep 2007
Posts: 4,171
|
|
__________________
"The truth is out there. But the lies are inside your head." |
|
![]() ![]() |
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
![]() |
#1082 |
Critical Thinker
Join Date: Dec 2014
Location: Cocoa Beach, FL
Posts: 329
|
It follows from the conservation of mass. If a massive object loses mass faster than it gains mass then it will be a net loss of mass.
For human beings during the very early stages of human growth the net mass gain is vastly higher than mass loss. If it wasn't that way, we would be very, very tiny. With the stars it is reverse. They lose great amounts of mass and become very tiny, leaving their hard rocky differentiated leftovers after many billions of years of evolution. Unfortunately the observational evidence for this is ignored and ridiculed by establishment, that is granted that they are even paying attention (which is doubtful, most of those types are too arrogant to know any better). The fact that stars are young planets sticks out to me like a dog's balls. It is incredibly obvious to the point that I have found it absolutely ridiculous to mention otherwise. Sorry for the side track but, The Sun and all stars are losing mass faster than they are gaining mass, therefore they are mass loss phenomenon. This is a directly observed in all measurements of the Sun. The mass loss of the Sun and stars as they evolve is beyond question. Assuming that they do not lose mass as they evolve is ignoring all observations. This is outlined in the "mass loss principle" of stellar evolution. The stars lose mass via solar wind, photoevaporation, coronal mass ejections, flares, impacts, etc. When they are too cool to do the majority of self-mass loss, the mass is lost via host stars doing the work of ripping the objects atmosphere away. What happened is that modelers have consistently inaccurately modeled the Sun and all stars as being thermodynamically closed systems. They are not thermodynamically closed, they are open systems. They can freely exchange both energy and matter with their environments. Who ever allowed for such inaccurate modelling to occur concerning the stars was clearly not observing the stars. They were probably staring at blackboard equations probably in some dark room blasting Mozart. Not only that, but the mass that is lost from the Sun even reaches to the Earth as well as even the poles and those charged particles are field aligned by the Earth creating what are called aurora. So literally, the aurora demonstrates that mass is coming out of the Sun, as it is an open system. Of course there is even more history to that, as simply supposing there were particles coming out of the Sun was against the dogma at the time. What this means too is that we are breathing in possible atoms that have origins from the Sun itself. How much? Idk. on that point, my friend has made a new video, showing a slower version of what happens to stars, and putting their actual ages on a graph, per their averages, in the Wolynski-Taylor diagram. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UKFubHUqIj4 In this video I explain that there are no gaps in stellar evolution. The "gaps" are invented to try and explain some sort of protoplanetary theory, but as we know the protoplanetary disk/nebular hypothesis is inaccurate and invalid at all scales of planet formation (can also be called stellar evolution.) https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=D-TC22pj91I Here are some new papers: Defining Atmospheric Depth in Stellar Metamorphosis: http://vixra.org/pdf/1706.0567v1.pdf The Principle of Multiple Orbiting Objects in Stellar Metamorphosis http://vixra.org/pdf/1706.0466v1.pdf |
__________________
Planets are not formed from disks, that would be in violation of the conservation of angular momentum. A "planet" is just an ancient star. They were never mutually exclusive. http://vixra.org/pdf/1711.0206v3.pdf The new book. |
|
![]() ![]() |
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
![]() |
#1083 |
Graduate Poster
Join Date: Apr 2011
Posts: 1,257
|
|
![]() ![]() |
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
![]() |
#1085 |
Penultimate Amazing
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: New Zealand
Posts: 21,480
|
![]()
Followed by an irrelevant biology analogy
![]() 3 July 2017 jeffreyw: A fantasy that stars "grow" in the opposite way to human beings ![]() The Sun is currently losing about (2–3)×10−14 M☉ per year and
Quote:
![]() White dwarf stars only loss mass through electromagnetic radiation at decreasing rates until they become black dwarfs. |
__________________
NASA Finds Direct Proof of Dark Matter (another observation) (and Abell 520) Electric comets still do not exist! |
|
![]() ![]() |
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
![]() |
#1086 |
Penultimate Amazing
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: New Zealand
Posts: 21,480
|
![]()
3 July 2017 jeffreyw: A delusion about "host stars".
There are no such things, e.g. the Sun is not in orbit around a "host star". The majority of stars are in binary systems where the more massive star is called the primary. A primary or secondary having its atmosphere ripped away by the other star is rare. |
__________________
NASA Finds Direct Proof of Dark Matter (another observation) (and Abell 520) Electric comets still do not exist! |
|
![]() ![]() |
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
![]() |
#1087 |
Penultimate Amazing
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: New Zealand
Posts: 21,480
|
![]()
3 July 2017 jeffreyw: An ignorant assertion of "modeled the Sun and all stars as being thermodynamically closed systems".
Astronomers know that light travels from stars (they have looked at the night sky for thousands of years ![]() 3 July 2017 jeffreyw: Usual dogma delusion. |
__________________
NASA Finds Direct Proof of Dark Matter (another observation) (and Abell 520) Electric comets still do not exist! |
|
![]() ![]() |
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
![]() |
#1088 |
Penultimate Amazing
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: New Zealand
Posts: 21,480
|
![]() |
__________________
NASA Finds Direct Proof of Dark Matter (another observation) (and Abell 520) Electric comets still do not exist! |
|
![]() ![]() |
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
![]() |
#1089 |
Penultimate Amazing
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: New Zealand
Posts: 21,480
|
![]()
3 July 2017 jeffreyw: A video lying about "gaps" being invented in stellar evolution.
Stellar evolution comes after stars are formed, i.e. after "protoplanetary theory". The Hertzsprung–Russell diagram is a plot of empirical data:
Quote:
|
__________________
NASA Finds Direct Proof of Dark Matter (another observation) (and Abell 520) Electric comets still do not exist! |
|
![]() ![]() |
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
![]() |
#1090 |
Penultimate Amazing
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: New Zealand
Posts: 21,480
|
![]()
3 July 2017 jeffreyw: Yet another ignorant and deluded PDF.
A paragraph of incoherent and ignorant gibberish about convection, "magna", "human centered definitions" as if he was not human!, etc.
|
__________________
NASA Finds Direct Proof of Dark Matter (another observation) (and Abell 520) Electric comets still do not exist! |
|
![]() ![]() |
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
![]() |
#1091 |
Penultimate Amazing
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: New Zealand
Posts: 21,480
|
jeffreyw: Ignorance of orbital mechanics as we need not observe a planet "year"
28 June 2017 jeffreyw: Yet another ignorant and deluded PDF (orbiting objects).
I will add: 3 July 2017 jeffreyw: Ignorance of orbital mechanics as we do not need to observe a planet for a "year" to measure its period. All we need to do is observe enough of its orbit. For example the dwarf planet Pluto was discovered in 1930, has been observed for 87 years and has an orbital period of 248 years. Likewise long term comets have periods of thousands of years and have not observed fro thousands of years. It may be that 1 transit event by itself gives us an estimate of the orbital period of a planet. The planet's size, transit time and radius of orbit can be determined from a transit. |
__________________
NASA Finds Direct Proof of Dark Matter (another observation) (and Abell 520) Electric comets still do not exist! |
|
![]() ![]() |
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
![]() |
#1092 |
Protected by Samurai Hedgehogs!
Join Date: Feb 2003
Posts: 10,775
|
I have a simple question.
Where are the red giant stars in stellar metamorphosis? |
__________________
"You're a sick SOB. You know that, Wollery?" - Roadtoad "Just think how stupid the average person is, and then realize that half of them are even stupider!" --George Carlin |
|
![]() ![]() |
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
![]() |
#1093 |
Illuminator
Join Date: Dec 2002
Posts: 4,214
|
|
__________________
"Such reports are usually based on the sighting of something the sighters cannot explain and that they (or someone else on their behalf) explain as representing an interstellar spaceship-often by saying "But what else can it be?" as though thier own ignorance is a decisive factor." Isaac Asimov |
|
![]() ![]() |
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
![]() |
#1094 |
Critical Thinker
Join Date: Dec 2014
Location: Cocoa Beach, FL
Posts: 329
|
Peas? lol
Okay, new video that explains what will happen to the two "ice giants" here and where they are in their current stage of evolution. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=H3LmLZj69ug |
__________________
Planets are not formed from disks, that would be in violation of the conservation of angular momentum. A "planet" is just an ancient star. They were never mutually exclusive. http://vixra.org/pdf/1711.0206v3.pdf The new book. |
|
![]() ![]() |
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
![]() |
#1095 |
Protected by Samurai Hedgehogs!
Join Date: Feb 2003
Posts: 10,775
|
|
__________________
"You're a sick SOB. You know that, Wollery?" - Roadtoad "Just think how stupid the average person is, and then realize that half of them are even stupider!" --George Carlin |
|
![]() ![]() |
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
![]() |
#1096 |
Penultimate Amazing
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: New Zealand
Posts: 21,480
|
![]() |
__________________
NASA Finds Direct Proof of Dark Matter (another observation) (and Abell 520) Electric comets still do not exist! |
|
![]() ![]() |
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
![]() |
#1097 |
Illuminator
Join Date: Dec 2002
Posts: 4,214
|
Stars are old galaxies. Galaxies are old super clusters. Super clusters are old universes. Universes are old multiverses. Then come the turtles.
|
__________________
"Such reports are usually based on the sighting of something the sighters cannot explain and that they (or someone else on their behalf) explain as representing an interstellar spaceship-often by saying "But what else can it be?" as though thier own ignorance is a decisive factor." Isaac Asimov |
|
![]() ![]() |
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
![]() |
#1098 |
Dark Lord of the JREF
Join Date: Sep 2007
Posts: 4,171
|
|
__________________
"The truth is out there. But the lies are inside your head." |
|
![]() ![]() |
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
![]() |
#1099 |
Penultimate Amazing
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: New Zealand
Posts: 21,480
|
![]()
7 July 2017 jeffreyw: A lie of two "ice giants".
Uranus is a gas giant. Neptune is a gas giant. 7 July 2017 jeffreyw: The inanity of enaming Uranus as Uranium! 7 July 2017 jeffreyw: A delusion That "Neptunes" are about 2 billion years old" because he has a cartoon! 7 July 2017 jeffreyw: An irrelevant cartoon of natural gas reservoirs on Earth! The petroleum that produces natural gas is decayed vegetable and animal matter in the real world but not in his delusion ![]() 7 July 2017 jeffreyw: A delusion that the Solar System is a "system of adopted objects" 7 July 2017 jeffreyw: The usual dogma delusion. |
__________________
NASA Finds Direct Proof of Dark Matter (another observation) (and Abell 520) Electric comets still do not exist! |
|
![]() ![]() |
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
![]() |
#1100 |
Critical Thinker
Join Date: Dec 2014
Location: Cocoa Beach, FL
Posts: 329
|
I would put them in the very beginning. I'm thinking they are the very beginning of stellar evolution, as well I would not consider them to be actual "stars" per say, they have no defined photosphere.
So it would go like this giant molecular cloud that starts pinching in its interior from magnetic activity. Depending on how large the cloud is will determine if there is an appearance of a "star". In other words, the bright object inside of a "red giant" is where the stellar birthing process could happen. Once the thick atmosphere of the nebula starts dissipating, the white dwarf is exposed. The white dwarf then begins expanding to dissipate heat and cooling down. Then it hits blue giant stage. Once it hits that stage it begins shrinking and losing mass (stellar metamorphosis). I think the problem is that scientists have confused a bright nebula with a "star". It is not a "star". No objects that big are "stars", because they have no defined photosphere, given a good defined photosphere would signal a youthful star, not an intermediate/old aged one. That's where I am with this. Keep in mind this is a reasonable approach, because astronomers have a history of confusing what they see with what is actually there. They at one point thought Uranus was a star like the Sun. Not only that, they thought the Andromeda galaxy was a very close in nebula, inside of the Milky Way. So, given astronomers have a history of making mistakes, it is not unreasonable to figure they made more mistakes. Which leads me to everything that I'm doing. They have made hundreds of mistakes. New paper: The Relation of Surface Temperature and Populations of Stars in Evolving Galaxies http://vixra.org/pdf/1707.0158v1.pdf |
__________________
Planets are not formed from disks, that would be in violation of the conservation of angular momentum. A "planet" is just an ancient star. They were never mutually exclusive. http://vixra.org/pdf/1711.0206v3.pdf The new book. |
|
![]() ![]() |
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
![]() |
#1101 |
Penultimate Amazing
Join Date: Feb 2011
Posts: 17,487
|
|
__________________
Who is General Failure? And why is he reading my hard drive? |
|
![]() ![]() |
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
![]() |
#1102 |
Critical Thinker
Join Date: Dec 2014
Location: Cocoa Beach, FL
Posts: 329
|
Planets are evolving/old/dead stars. Galaxies are comprised of these evolving/old/dead stars.
A super cluster is a group of thousands of galaxies. The universe has many billions of super clusters. There is no need for a "multiverse". The universe is everything, that in effect includes all "everythings". Evolved stars probably have various different types of turtles, Earth has many of its own, there are probably thousands of evolved stars that have different types of turtles on them. They probably look very strange, some probably exactly the same. |
__________________
Planets are not formed from disks, that would be in violation of the conservation of angular momentum. A "planet" is just an ancient star. They were never mutually exclusive. http://vixra.org/pdf/1711.0206v3.pdf The new book. |
|
![]() ![]() |
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
![]() |
#1103 |
Critical Thinker
Join Date: Dec 2014
Location: Cocoa Beach, FL
Posts: 329
|
I did answer the inquiry even before you typed this.
http://vixra.org/pdf/1703.0283v1.pdf Can I see the future? No. Did you not read about the theory before commenting? Yes. Why bother writing all of this into hundreds of vixra papers if people who ask questions do not do their homework? http://vixra.org/author/jeffrey_joseph_wolynski It is literally ALL OUT IN THE OPEN. |
__________________
Planets are not formed from disks, that would be in violation of the conservation of angular momentum. A "planet" is just an ancient star. They were never mutually exclusive. http://vixra.org/pdf/1711.0206v3.pdf The new book. |
|
![]() ![]() |
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
![]() |
#1104 |
Illuminator
Join Date: Dec 2002
Posts: 4,214
|
|
__________________
"Such reports are usually based on the sighting of something the sighters cannot explain and that they (or someone else on their behalf) explain as representing an interstellar spaceship-often by saying "But what else can it be?" as though thier own ignorance is a decisive factor." Isaac Asimov |
|
![]() ![]() |
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
![]() |
#1105 |
Penultimate Amazing
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: New Zealand
Posts: 21,480
|
![]()
abaddon's Start to finish, utter bollocks. is a pithy summary of the post.
17 July 2017 jeffreyw: New ignorant and deluded one page (!) PDF about galaxies this time. 17 July 2017 jeffreyw: The planets are dead stars delusion. 17 July 2017 jeffreyw: The idiocy of predicting that there will be vastly more planets than stars from the Solar System. jeffreyw has the delusion that every body n the Solar System is an old star. That is not only the 8 planets but also the Moon! That extends to the dozens of moons of Jupiter, Saturn, etc. And the billions of other objectsi n the Solar System ![]() The data is that there is 1 or more planets per star: One or more bound planets per Milky Way star from microlensing observations 17 July 2017 jeffreyw: A lie of "two blue dwarfs" (a predicted stage of the formation of red dwarf stars) in the Solar System. 17 July 2017 jeffreyw: A lie of "accepted percentages of the number of stars in specific spectrum classes". jeffreyw seems to plagiarize the Wikipedia Harvard spectral classification diagram with the "Fraction of all main-sequence stars" column. Main-sequence stars are not the only stars that exist! White dwarf and giant stars are off sequence. |
__________________
NASA Finds Direct Proof of Dark Matter (another observation) (and Abell 520) Electric comets still do not exist! |
|
![]() ![]() |
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
![]() |
#1106 |
Penultimate Amazing
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: New Zealand
Posts: 21,480
|
|
__________________
NASA Finds Direct Proof of Dark Matter (another observation) (and Abell 520) Electric comets still do not exist! |
|
![]() ![]() |
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
![]() |
#1107 |
Penultimate Amazing
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: New Zealand
Posts: 21,480
|
![]()
17 July 2017 jeffreyw: A 1 paragraph ignorant and deluded PDF about red giants!
His delusion of "stellar metamorphosis" does not predict anything, not even that "gravitation keeps objects mostly spherical as they form and evolve.". It is real physics that states that gravitation makes bodies mostly spherical. The heavier a body the more likely it is to be spherical. So gas giants are spherical, rocky planets are spherical, dwarf planets are spherical, the Moon is spherical but smaller moons can be non-spherical, very small moons are unlikely to be spherical, asteroids and comets are hardly ever spherical. 17 July 2017 jeffreyw: A partial lie of "In the case of mis-shapen asteroids they were created by impacts". Of the millions of asteroids, the most misshapen asteroids are actually contact binaries. 17 July 2017 jeffreyw: An ignorant and deluded statement that red giants are not stars ![]() Red giants are very much stars.
Quote:
17 July 2017 jeffreyw: A delusion that red giants are "just might be the very beginning of a star’s birthing". The reason that red giants are giants is that they are older stars that have begun to run out of fuel. 17 July 2017 jeffreyw: A delusion that red giants are "nebulas with which a single star is born in". Nebula are clouds of gas thin enough that we can see through them. Red giants are stars made of relatively thick plasma. 17 July 2017 jeffreyw: An ignorant fairy story about the imaginary nebula "evaporating" to reveal a white dwarf, etc. A white dwarf is formed by a red giant collapsing with its outer layers being blown off to form a planetary nebula.. |
__________________
NASA Finds Direct Proof of Dark Matter (another observation) (and Abell 520) Electric comets still do not exist! |
|
![]() ![]() |
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
![]() |
#1108 |
Critical Thinker
Join Date: Dec 2014
Location: Cocoa Beach, FL
Posts: 329
|
|
__________________
Planets are not formed from disks, that would be in violation of the conservation of angular momentum. A "planet" is just an ancient star. They were never mutually exclusive. http://vixra.org/pdf/1711.0206v3.pdf The new book. |
|
![]() ![]() |
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
![]() |
#1109 |
Critical Thinker
Join Date: Dec 2014
Location: Cocoa Beach, FL
Posts: 329
|
Dogma 101 and 102: we have to wait until people who are accredited discover things before they really count as discoveries.
It is the "not invented here" syndrome as well the Cornell effect has a large part of it as well. I wrote a paper on those things: http://vixra.org/pdf/1606.0098v1.pdf Basically the Cornell effect is a permanent ignorance brought on by being overly educated. Lord Kelvin is the best example, a really educated, important scientist... completely trash talking radioactivity or "atoms falling apart". |
__________________
Planets are not formed from disks, that would be in violation of the conservation of angular momentum. A "planet" is just an ancient star. They were never mutually exclusive. http://vixra.org/pdf/1711.0206v3.pdf The new book. |
|
![]() ![]() |
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
![]() |
#1110 |
Penultimate Amazing
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: New Zealand
Posts: 21,480
|
![]() |
__________________
NASA Finds Direct Proof of Dark Matter (another observation) (and Abell 520) Electric comets still do not exist! |
|
![]() ![]() |
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
![]() |
#1111 |
Penultimate Amazing
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: New Zealand
Posts: 21,480
|
18 July 2017 jeffreyw: His "Cornell Effect" which is actually his personal insults of some highly educated people.
|
__________________
NASA Finds Direct Proof of Dark Matter (another observation) (and Abell 520) Electric comets still do not exist! |
|
![]() ![]() |
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
![]() |
#1112 |
Penultimate Amazing
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: New Zealand
Posts: 21,480
|
![]()
18 July 2017 jeffreyw: A delusion that only accredited people discover things in science.
It is true that accredited people make most of the scientific discoveries for the simple reasons that they know what to look for and more importantly what is obviously ignorant or even deluded. For example: 7 Great Discoveries by Amateur Astronomers That the "planets are old stars" idea is ignorant and deluded is obvious to every normally educated person in the world (not only "accredited" people). Rocky planets are made of rock. Old stars are made of plasma. Planets are a minute proportion of the mass of old stars. We have measured the age of the Earth and it agrees with the age of the Sun (not older as in your delusion). We have measured the age of the Moon and it is slightly younger than the Earth and Sun (not older as in your delusion). We have estimate the ages of other bodies in the Solar System and they are all about that of the Sun. |
__________________
NASA Finds Direct Proof of Dark Matter (another observation) (and Abell 520) Electric comets still do not exist! |
|
![]() ![]() |
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
![]() |
#1113 |
Illuminator
Join Date: Dec 2002
Posts: 4,214
|
|
__________________
"Such reports are usually based on the sighting of something the sighters cannot explain and that they (or someone else on their behalf) explain as representing an interstellar spaceship-often by saying "But what else can it be?" as though thier own ignorance is a decisive factor." Isaac Asimov |
|
![]() ![]() |
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
![]() |
#1114 |
Dark Lord of the JREF
Join Date: Sep 2007
Posts: 4,171
|
|
__________________
"The truth is out there. But the lies are inside your head." |
|
![]() ![]() |
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
![]() |
#1115 |
Graduate Poster
Join Date: Feb 2007
Posts: 1,300
|
|
![]() ![]() |
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
![]() |
#1116 |
Illuminator
Join Date: Dec 2002
Posts: 4,214
|
|
__________________
"Such reports are usually based on the sighting of something the sighters cannot explain and that they (or someone else on their behalf) explain as representing an interstellar spaceship-often by saying "But what else can it be?" as though thier own ignorance is a decisive factor." Isaac Asimov |
|
![]() ![]() |
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
![]() |
#1117 |
Critical Thinker
Join Date: Dec 2014
Location: Cocoa Beach, FL
Posts: 329
|
I have no idea who that person is. On that note, I have written a new paper. I have called it, "The Principle of Equatorial Planes in Planet Formation (Stellar Evolution) in Stellar Metamorphosis"
http://vixra.org/pdf/1707.0257v1.pdf Crazy is subjective. To me I think its crazy that people here accept the idea that all the objects in the solar system formed from the same gas cloud as the Sun. I do not think people on this forum can really comprehend the distances involved. Here is a flash program that allows you to scroll through the to scale distances between all the major objects in the solar system. http://joshworth.com/dev/pixelspace/...larsystem.html To believe all of these objects are related to each other via formation is absolutely insane. Yet that is what the people on this forum believe. Clearly they are independent objects that are evolving on their own. The whole "single disk forming solar systems" idea was debunked by Hubble when he discovered that the spiral nebulas were not new solar systems, but entire galaxies full of hundreds of billions of stars. The argument was the "nebular hypothesis" vs. "the island universe". Yet, scientists STILL TO THIS DAY accept the nebular hypothesis. Insane. Genuinely insane. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nebular_hypothesis It is crazy to still believe an idea that has been debunked almost 100 years ago. The objects in the solar system are all stars/star remains that evolved on timescales way, way beyond the Sun. They are not related to the Sun at all. Not only that, but they can be fit onto a single diagram, and their actual ages can be determined by a rough analysis of where they are on this graph. ![]() |
__________________
Planets are not formed from disks, that would be in violation of the conservation of angular momentum. A "planet" is just an ancient star. They were never mutually exclusive. http://vixra.org/pdf/1711.0206v3.pdf The new book. |
|
![]() ![]() |
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
![]() |
#1118 |
Illuminator
Join Date: Aug 2007
Posts: 3,683
|
|
![]() ![]() |
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
![]() |
#1119 |
Graduate Poster
Join Date: Feb 2007
Posts: 1,300
|
I didn't expect you to know KindaGamey, he is a member at Skeptiko that is a fan of yours. As I said previously Skeptiko members would likely be receptive to your beliefs go post there too.
There's no rational reason not to think all celestial bodies are associated. All of the celestial bodies in 5his and every other galaxy are. Galaxies are tremendously bigger than this little solar system. People such as you for example whom have such unwavering unrelenting passion for their ill concieved ideas always cause me to wonder what's going on in their minds. Is how they think some form of psychosis, maybe there's a genetic component. Perhaps they a narsicistic? Leading them to believe they are smarter than everyone else. I don't know. What I do know is you are an intriguing individual. Don't construe this as a compliment. |
![]() ![]() |
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
![]() |
#1120 |
Dark Lord of the JREF
Join Date: Sep 2007
Posts: 4,171
|
Insanity. That's what it is to deny the pea-soup of stellar creation and metamorphisisisis.. I've debunked all of astrophysics. What do you have? A self published 'paper', and pretty graphics. What observations have you done? None. What do I have? Pea soup. You can even observe how pea soup forms stars and planets on your own stove. Checkmate. |
__________________
"The truth is out there. But the lies are inside your head." |
|
![]() ![]() |
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
![]() |
Bookmarks |
Thread Tools | |
|
|