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.
Closed Thread
Old 5th June 2020, 07:23 AM   #3201
jonesdave116
Illuminator
 
jonesdave116's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2015
Posts: 4,886
Quote:
Happy to talk discharching with you, tusenfem.
That will be a short conversation as there were none.
__________________
“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 5th June 2020, 07:24 AM   #3202
jonesdave116
Illuminator
 
jonesdave116's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2015
Posts: 4,886
Quote:
Let's talk cometary jets in light of Rosetta data of charged dust, shall we?
Nothing to talk about. They are neutral gas. As observed. Close the door on your way out.
__________________
“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 5th June 2020, 11:24 AM   #3203
steenkh
Philosopher
 
steenkh's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Denmark
Posts: 5,913
Originally Posted by jonesdave116 View Post
That will be a short conversation as there were none.

Well, they chose to discuss the observed discharges ...
__________________
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 Back to Top
Old 5th June 2020, 12:44 PM   #3204
Sol88
Philosopher
 
Sol88's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Posts: 6,039
Originally Posted by steenkh View Post
You got it at last. Rocky-type properties, but not actual rock. So it is of no use for EU.

So comets are rocky?

We all know what type of rock.
__________________
“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 5th June 2020, 12:45 PM   #3205
Sol88
Philosopher
 
Sol88's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Posts: 6,039
Originally Posted by jonesdave116 View Post
Nothing to talk about. They are neutral gas. As observed. Close the door on your way out.
Any dust?



Charged Dust?
__________________
“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 5th June 2020, 12:47 PM   #3206
jonesdave116
Illuminator
 
jonesdave116's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2015
Posts: 4,886
Originally Posted by Sol88 View Post
So comets are rocky?

We all know what type of rock.
Still can't do comprehension? Nope, no rock, nothing like 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 Back to Top
Old 5th June 2020, 12:49 PM   #3207
jonesdave116
Illuminator
 
jonesdave116's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2015
Posts: 4,886
Originally Posted by Sol88 View Post
Any dust?



Charged Dust?
And what has that got to do with a complete lack of rock and discharges and EDM? Give it up. Your woo failed and you know it failed. Get a new religion.
__________________
“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 5th June 2020, 01:20 PM   #3208
steenkh
Philosopher
 
steenkh's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Denmark
Posts: 5,913
Originally Posted by Sol88 View Post
So comets are rocky?

We all know what type of rock.

Yes, the ice and dust type.
__________________
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 Back to Top
Old 5th June 2020, 01:35 PM   #3209
JeanTate
Illuminator
 
Join Date: Nov 2014
Posts: 3,957
Originally Posted by Sol88 View Post
So comets are rocky?

We all know what type of rock.
Per The Electric Comet Theory, the topic of this thread, comets are composed of terrestrial rock (and maybe some are made of Venusian rock)*.

So there will be granite, basalt, shale, sandstone, gneiss, even limestone, and coal. And so on.

So far, no such rock has been observed in, or on, any comet*.

Kinda makes Electric Comet Theory comets more similar to unicorns and hobbits than to whales and gums trees, wouldn’t you say?

*That’s my understanding anyway.
JeanTate 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 5th June 2020, 03:34 PM   #3210
steenkh
Philosopher
 
steenkh's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Denmark
Posts: 5,913
Originally Posted by steenkh View Post
Originally Posted by Sol88 View Post
So comets are rocky?



We all know what type of rock.
Yes, the ice and dust type.
I just realised that I fell for your ruse in my first reply. Your misquotes had just been called, and you had run out of arguments. You then followed your usual tactics, and decided to stall until you could direct the discussion to another topic.

Well I admit that you played me well, but now I realised it, so please think of an argument instead of that lame response that you just brought up.
__________________
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 Back to Top
Old 6th June 2020, 11:54 PM   #3211
Sol88
Philosopher
 
Sol88's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Posts: 6,039
Originally Posted by steenkh View Post
I just realised that I fell for your ruse in my first reply. Your misquotes had just been called, and you had run out of arguments. You then followed your usual tactics, and decided to stall until you could direct the discussion to another topic.

Well I admit that you played me well, but now I realised it, so please think of an argument instead of that lame response that you just brought up.
I think we made progress.

Comets are rocky-like.
__________________
“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 7th June 2020, 12:09 AM   #3212
steenkh
Philosopher
 
steenkh's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Denmark
Posts: 5,913
Originally Posted by Sol88 View Post
I think we made progress.

Comets are rocky-like.

Interesting that you are still stalling. Yes, cometary material can behave rocky-like, but it is not rock. So where does that leave EU that claims that comets are made out of rock from the Earth or Venus as Jean Tate asked?

Can you face the problem, or will you switch subject again?
__________________
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 Back to Top
Old 7th June 2020, 12:51 AM   #3213
Sol88
Philosopher
 
Sol88's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Posts: 6,039
Originally Posted by steenkh View Post
Interesting that you are still stalling. Yes, cometary material can behave rocky-like, but it is not rock. So where does that leave EU that claims that comets are made out of rock from the Earth or Venus as Jean Tate asked?

Can you face the problem, or will you switch subject again?
I guess in the same place as the mainstream.

How are comets formed, according to mainstream?

Exactly...
__________________
“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; 7th June 2020 at 12:52 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 Back to Top
Old 7th June 2020, 03:56 AM   #3214
steenkh
Philosopher
 
steenkh's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Denmark
Posts: 5,913
Originally Posted by Sol88 View Post
I guess in the same place as the mainstream.
What is in the same place as mainstream?

Quote:
How are comets formed, according to mainstream?

Exactly...
So you chose to switch subject instead of addressing the problem that there is no rock on comets.

Why should we discuss how mainstream looks at the formation of comets? Isn't that irrelevant to EU theories? Or are you hoping mainstream has changed so that comets now form from Earth rocks?

You know, even if mainstream is wrong, EU remains absurdly wrong, so this line of inquiry is futile.
__________________
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 Back to Top
Old 7th June 2020, 05:51 AM   #3215
jonesdave116
Illuminator
 
jonesdave116's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2015
Posts: 4,886
Originally Posted by Sol88 View Post
I think we made progress.

Comets are rocky-like.
Nope. Still struggling with comprehension, I see.
__________________
“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 7th June 2020, 01:41 PM   #3216
Reality Check
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: New Zealand
Posts: 27,251
Exclamation A "You just posted a paper showing these observation do not fit the model!" lies

A "You just posted a paper showing these observation do not fit the model!" lies abut jonesdave116's Nope. Nothing like rock. As multiple observations show. post and the papers

As we and anyone who knows anything about comets knows the physical facts about comets, such as composition, density and porosity rule out rock.

The papers that jonesdave116 last posted do not say that observations do not fit the model. They say that the ice and dust of 67P have derived strength-to-gravity ratio is similar to weak rocks on Earth.

Last edited by Reality Check; 7th June 2020 at 01:46 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 7th June 2020, 01:55 PM   #3217
Reality Check
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: New Zealand
Posts: 27,251
Exclamation Lies about my post and Lucchetti et al. yet again

Lies about my post and Lucchetti et al. yet again.

We (everyone else) know the physical facts about comets, such as composition, density and porosity.
We know that comets have been measured to have ice and dust ruing out rock, as stated in the papers he has been lying about for years.
We know that comets have densities about half that of water ruing out rock, as stated in the papers he has been lying about for years.
We know that comet 67P has a measured porosity that is ~75% ruing out rock, as stated in the papers he has been lying about for years

Lies again about the Lucchetti paper yet again which only compares a landslide parameter on 67P to the same parameter in "dry landslides" on Earth.
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 7th June 2020, 02:00 PM   #3218
Reality Check
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: New Zealand
Posts: 27,251
Exclamation A "Happy to talk discharching with you, tusenfem." lie

A "Happy to talk discharching with you, tusenfem." lie

His obsessive posting about mainstream charged dust is irrelevant to his cult's impossible electric discharges between comets and the Sun in their fantasy of an undetected enormous solar electric field.
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 7th June 2020, 02:05 PM   #3219
Reality Check
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: New Zealand
Posts: 27,251
Exclamation A "Let's talk cometary jets in light of Rosetta data of charged dust" lie

A "Let's talk cometary jets in light of Rosetta data of charged dust" lie.

He is spamming to waste our time. We have already told him the mainstream science about the charged dust that Rosetta detected. It started as neutral dust ejected from the surface including in jets. It was charged by the solar wind. This science is irrelevant to his cult's dogma.
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 7th June 2020, 02:10 PM   #3220
Reality Check
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: New Zealand
Posts: 27,251
Exclamation Lies about steenkh's post with "So comets are rocky?"

Lies about steenkh's Rocky-type properties, but not actual rock. post with "So comets are rocky?".

steenkh clearly states that comets are not actual rock, i.e. not rocky as in the cult dogma of being blasted from rocky planets.
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 7th June 2020, 02:11 PM   #3221
Reality Check
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: New Zealand
Posts: 27,251
Exclamation His irrelevant obsession with mainstream charged dust again ("Charged Dust?")

His irrelevant obsession with mainstream charged dust again ("Charged 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 Back to Top
Old 7th June 2020, 02:21 PM   #3222
Reality Check
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: New Zealand
Posts: 27,251
Exclamation Lies about steenkh's post which has no "Comets are rocky-like."

Lies about steenkh's post which has no "Comets are rocky-like."

steenkh has been telling the truth about the Lucchetti et al. paper - they state that landslides on 67P have a range of a parameter caused by volatiles (ice!) that includes values similar to dry landslides on Earth. So the ice and dust landslides have similar behavior as in the paper's title !
The Rocky‐Like Behavior of Cometary Landslides on 67P/Churyumov‐Gerasimenko by Lucchetti, et. al. (2019).
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 7th June 2020, 02:26 PM   #3223
Reality Check
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: New Zealand
Posts: 27,251
Exclamation An irrelevant lying "How are comets formed, according to mainstream?"

An irrelevant lying "How are comets formed, according to mainstream?" question when he knows the answer and this thread is about his EU comets are rock, etc. dogma.
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 7th June 2020, 02:32 PM   #3224
Reality Check
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: New Zealand
Posts: 27,251
Exclamation

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)
166 items of lies, etc. from Sol88 since ~10 March 2020
  1. A lying "Is the dust charged, steenkh?" question.
  2. An 11 year old "we observe the nucleus discharging" lie !
  3. A lying "Are comets rocky-like jean tate?" question when no paper he has cited says that
  4. A "So comets are rock-like objects sublimating via insolation" lie.
  5. A "You have noticed it and ignored it too!" lie when no one can notice or ignore his cult's impossible electric discharges because they do not exist !
  6. Lies that GIADA and its fluffy grains is electric discharges.
  7. "So you are saying Alice Lucchetti (alice.lucchetti@inaf.it) et al are wrong?" lie when we have only been noting his persistent lies about the Lucchetti et al. paper.
  8. Spams us again with irrelevant quotes from Divin and M. Fulle and lies about them again - no electric discharges in the quotes.
  9. Repeats his "Like I said rocky-tyoe?.." lie when no paper has said that comets are rock or rocky-like.
  10. A lying "So are comets rocky-like/type, jonesy?" question when jonesdave116 has already said several times the paper says behavior, not actual rock.
  11. An "ergo Comets are rocky-like!" lie
  12. A repeated "I mean, we all know it's not real rock..." lie
  13. A repeated "I mean, we all know it's not real rock..." lie when his cult's dogma is that comets are real rock as blasted from rocky planets by impossible electric discharges between planets as they whizz frantically around the solar system including in recent times.
  14. A "You just posted a paper showing these observation do not fit the model!" lies abut jonesdave116's "Nope. Nothing like rock. As multiple observations show." post and the papers
  15. Lies about my post and Lucchetti et al. yet again.
  16. A "Happy to talk discharching with you, tusenfem." lie
  17. A "Let's talk cometary jets in light of Rosetta data of charged dust" lie.
  18. Lies about steenkh's "Rocky-type properties, but not actual rock." post with "So comets are rocky?".
  19. His irrelevant obsession with mainstream charged dust again ("Charged Dust?")
  20. Lies about steenkh's post which has no "Comets are rocky-like."
  21. An irrelevant lying "How are comets formed, according to mainstream?" question when he knows the answer and this thread is about his EU comets are rock, etc. dogma.
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 7th June 2020, 05:39 PM   #3225
Sol88
Philosopher
 
Sol88's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Posts: 6,039
Originally Posted by steenkh View Post
What is in the same place as mainstream?


So you chose to switch subject instead of addressing the problem that there is no rock on comets.

Why should we discuss how mainstream looks at the formation of comets? Isn't that irrelevant to EU theories? Or are you hoping mainstream has changed so that comets now form from Earth rocks?

You know, even if mainstream is wrong, EU remains absurdly wrong, so this line of inquiry is futile.
No, comets are rocky-like! you know this rocky-type mechanical behavior indicating that comets are made by consolidated materials

but as mainstream and as succinctly told by reality check
Quote:
As we and anyone who knows anything about comets knows the physical facts about comets, such as composition, density and porosity rule out rock.

The papers that jonesdave116 last posted do not say that observations do not fit the model. They say that the ice and dust of 67P have derived strength-to-gravity ratio is similar to weak rocks on Earth.
So your position of authority because you "know" is as weak as cats piss.

The dirtysnowyicydirtball is a bust!

As A'Hearn said
Quote:
(c) What are comets made of?
At the simplest level, a very basic question is whether comets are mostly ice or mostly rock/dirt/refractory material. Whipple’s [2] model of the dirty snowball, the first quantitative model, envisioned cometary nuclei as mostly ice, although our understanding has been evolving more toward mostly rock, particularly for 67P/C-G for which refractory/volatile ratios as high as 6 have been cited [3,4]. Nevertheless, there is still considerable uncertainty about even this basic parameter, not least of which is that most measurements are subject to selection effects in removing refractories from the nucleus to the coma, where they are observed as dust.
Talking about dust (charged) and consolidated rocky-type cometary surface...
Quote:
The release of micrometer-sized monomer grains is not possible because of the relatively high tensile strength required to detach the grains from the surface ( 1 kPa; see Blum et al. 2014). This high gas pressure cannot be reached at the ice-dust interface under normal conditions.
though B. Gundlach1, J. Blum1, H. U. Keller1, Y. V. Skorov2 do not mention the dust as being charged.

So...

Quote:
Conclusions.

Our model can explain the large grains (ranging from 2 cm to 1m in radius) in the inner coma of comet 67P/Churyumov- Gerasimenko that have been observed by the OSIRIS camera at heliocentric distances between 3:4AU and 3:7AU. Furthermore, the model predicts the release of decimeter-sized aggregates (trail particles) close to the heliocentric distance at which the gas-driven dust activity vanishes. However, the gas-driven dust activity cannot explain the presence of particles smaller than . 1mm in the coma because the high tensile strength required to detach these particles from the surface cannot be provided by evaporation of volatile ices. These smaller particles can be produced for instance by spin-up and centrifugal mass loss of ejected larger aggregates
These smaller particles can be produced for instance by spin-up and centrifugal mass loss of ejected larger aggregates or via the same mechanism as

Quote:
These aggregates are charged, fragmented, and decelerated by the spacecraft negative potential and enter GIADA in showers of
fragments at speeds m s .
M. Fulle et al DENSITY AND CHARGE OF PRISTINE FLUFFY PARTICLES FROM COMET
67P/CHURYUMOV–GERASIMENKO


Don't these people talk to each other?


In summary, how is the dust being released from a rock-type consolidated surface?

Good luck with your sublimation only model!
__________________
“No rock. Any charge separation is limited. The electric field is pointing in the wrong direction. Currents are doing nothing.” Jonesdave116.

“The 'electric comet' is physically IMPOSSIBLE to model using mainstream science! PERIOD! True story! End of story!” Indagator
Sol88 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 7th June 2020, 05:58 PM   #3226
Sol88
Philosopher
 
Sol88's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Posts: 6,039
Originally Posted by Reality Check View Post
A "Let's talk cometary jets in light of Rosetta data of charged dust" lie.

He is spamming to waste our time. We have already told him the mainstream science about the charged dust that Rosetta detected. It started as neutral dust ejected from the surface including in jets. It was charged by the solar wind. This science is irrelevant to his cult's dogma.
It was charged by the solar wind.

That's what you once thought!

Seems there is more to it!

As I've pointed out but ignored.

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).
A Fully Kinetic Perspective of Electron Acceleration around a Weakly Outgassing Comet

Thought to?


What are your thoughts 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 7th June 2020, 06:10 PM   #3227
Sol88
Philosopher
 
Sol88's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Posts: 6,039
Originally Posted by Reality Check View Post
Lies about my post and Lucchetti et al. yet again.

We (everyone else) know the physical facts about comets, such as composition, density and porosity.
We know that comets have been measured to have ice and dust ruing out rock, as stated in the papers he has been lying about for years.
We know that comets have densities about half that of water ruing out rock, as stated in the papers he has been lying about for years.
We know that comet 67P has a measured porosity that is ~75% ruing out rock, as stated in the papers he has been lying about for years

Lies again about the Lucchetti paper yet again which only compares a landslide parameter on 67P to the same parameter in "dry landslides" on Earth.
Is that the sum total of why cometary rocky-type consolidated surfaces is not just rock?
__________________
“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 7th June 2020, 07:55 PM   #3228
Reality Check
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: New Zealand
Posts: 27,251
Exclamation Lies yet again about Lucchetti et al.

Lies yet again about Lucchetti et al.

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

He lies that the paper says "rocky-type mechanical behavior indicating that comets are made by consolidated materials". The abstract states "This behavior indicates that 67P and likely comets in general are characterized by consolidated materials possibly rejecting the idea that they are fluffy aggregates.". IOW, the grains of ice and dust in landslides may not be fluffy aggregates.
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 7th June 2020, 08:01 PM   #3229
Reality Check
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: New Zealand
Posts: 27,251
Exclamation Lies about me, my post and astronomy

Lies about me, my post and astronomy ("So your position of authority because you "know" is as weak as cats piss.").

I am not a authority and have no "position of authority". My post is about the empirical evidence that he has cited and lies about.
We have over 70 years of empirical evidence that comets are half as dense as water and are not his dogma of actual rock. That includes the density of 67P which he has cited many times. We have decades of observations of gas from sublimating ice and dust from comet nuclei, as in the papers he has cited. We have the porosity of 67P that he has cited many times.

Last edited by Reality Check; 7th June 2020 at 09:04 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 7th June 2020, 08:10 PM   #3230
Reality Check
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: New Zealand
Posts: 27,251
Exclamation Usual insult and lie about A'Hearn who never wrote that comets are his actual rock

Usual insult and lie about A'Hearn who never wrote that comets are his cult's actual rock.

That "As A'Hearn said" quote is a mainstream ice and dust comet question by an author who had written hundreds of ice and dust comet papers: Michael Francis A'Hearn
We have over 70 years of empirical evidence that comets are ice and dust. We think that 67P has a high refractory/volatile but as A'Hearn stated in the quote, this is uncertain.

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)
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 7th June 2020, 08:19 PM   #3231
Sol88
Philosopher
 
Sol88's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Posts: 6,039
Originally Posted by Reality Check View Post
Lies yet again about Lucchetti et al.

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

He lies that the paper says "rocky-type mechanical behavior indicating that comets are made by consolidated materials". The abstract states "This behavior indicates that 67P and likely comets in general are characterized by consolidated materials possibly rejecting the idea that they are fluffy aggregates.". IOW, the grains of ice and dust in landslides may not be fluffy aggregates.

Seems not, seems its a consolidated surface. Much the same as dry rocky landslides on Mars and Earth.

Quote:
Such values are larger than those observed on other Solar System bodies, in particular compared to the icy bodies’. This analysis suggests that the falling icy material constituting the comet is characterised by a mechanical behaviour that is not comparable to the collapsed ice on other bodies.
Comets surface can be
Quote:
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.
Not saying they are, just saying it's comparable...


After all
Quote:
All these results make 67P a very peculiar object, mainly composed by ices and refractory materials, but characterised by rocky-type properties rather than icy-type characteristics.
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
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 7th June 2020, 08:22 PM   #3232
Reality Check
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: New Zealand
Posts: 27,251
Exclamation A "Talking about dust (charged) and consolidated rocky-type cometary surface" lie

A "Talking about dust (charged) and consolidated rocky-type cometary surface" lie.

What drives the dust activity of comet 67P/Churyumov-Gerasimenko? by
B. Gundlach1, J. Blum1, H. U. Keller1, Y. V. Skorov (2015) (PDF)
Quote:
Conclusions: Our model can explain the large grains (ranging from 2 cm to 1 m in radius) in the inner coma of comet 67P/Churyumov-Gerasimenko that have been observed by the OSIRIS camera at heliocentric distances between 3.4 AU and 3.7 AU. Furthermore, the model predicts the release of decimeter-sized aggregates (trail particles) close to the heliocentric distance at which the gas-driven dust activity vanishes. However, the gas-driven dust activity cannot explain the presence of particles smaller than ~1 mm in the coma because the high tensile strength required to detach these particles from the surface cannot be provided by evaporation of volatile ices. These smaller particles can be produced for instance by spin-up and centrifugal mass loss of ejected larger aggregates.
They do not mention there is charged dust because that is not the subject of the paper !

Their model is not his lie of a "consolidated rocky-type cometary surface". It is an "ensemble of millimeter- to centimeter-sized aggregates".

Last edited by Reality Check; 7th June 2020 at 08:26 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 7th June 2020, 08:34 PM   #3233
Reality Check
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: New Zealand
Posts: 27,251
Exclamation A "Don't these people talk to each other?" lie

A "Don't these people talk to each other?" lie

Gundlach, Blum, Keller, and Skorov found in 2015 that their model released decimeter-sized aggregate grains but did not predict particles smaller than . 1mm in the coma. They give a mechanism to produce them.

Density and Charge of Pristine Fluffy Particles from Comet 67P/Churyumov–Gerasimenko by Fuille et al. say GIADA detected fluffy aggregates "ranging in size from 0.2 to 2.5 mm", i.e. the aggregate grains Gundlach, Blum, Keller, and Skorov mention !
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 7th June 2020, 08:35 PM   #3234
Sol88
Philosopher
 
Sol88's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Posts: 6,039
Originally Posted by Reality Check View Post
Usual insult and lie about A'Hearn who never wrote that comets are his cult's actual rock.

That "As A'Hearn said" quote is a mainstream ice and dust comet question by an author who had written hundreds of ice and dust comet papers: Michael Francis A'Hearn
We have over 70 years of empirical evidence that comets are ice and dust. We think that 67P has a high refractory/volatile but as A'Hearn stated in the quote, this is uncertain.

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)

A'Hearn stated
Quote:
although our understanding has been evolving more toward mostly rock,
You make it sound like I'm saying our understanding has been evolving more toward mostly rock.

I guess coming from a scientist that built his career on icy cometary nuclei with some dust that his understanding has been evolving more toward mostly rock.

Not towards a more dusty less icy nucleus!

This rock-type rock is comparable to type of rock that would be found in dry landslides on Earth and Mars.

Quote:
The rocky-type behavior we highlight with this work does not mean that the material constituting comet 67P is dense as rock, as the mean bulk density of 537.8 kg/m3 points out (Preusker et al., 2017).
__________________
“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 7th June 2020, 08:41 PM   #3235
Reality Check
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: New Zealand
Posts: 27,251
Exclamation Persists with his dust cannot come from comet nuclei lie

Persists with his irrelevant to his dogma, 'dust cannot come from comet nuclei in the mainstream' lie.

He has just cited Gundlach, Blum, Keller, and Skorov paper from 2015 that gave a model producing the observed dust at 67P from ices sublimating !
Ditto with his "Good luck with your sublimation only model!' lie -
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 7th June 2020, 08:48 PM   #3236
Reality Check
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: New Zealand
Posts: 27,251
Exclamation A "That's what you once thought!" lie

A "That's what you once thought!" lie when A Fully Kinetic Perspective of Electron Acceleration around a Weakly Outgassing Comet does not say that.

His lie is highlighting "and is thought to" when basic reading comprehension show that this is present tense. Comet coma have a suprathermal electron population that is currently as in today thought to affect dust grain charging processes.

Dust charging is from dust interacting with the solar wind, indirectly from the solar wind by the formation of that suprathermal electron population, and maybe other processes (photoionization?).
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 7th June 2020, 08:57 PM   #3237
Reality Check
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: New Zealand
Posts: 27,251
Exclamation A lying question again about my post

A lying question again about my post.

His "cometary rocky-type consolidated surfaces" = his actual rock dogma (the subject of this tread) lie. My post was clear. Over the last 11 years, he has cited and lied about mainstream ice and dust papers that give the empirical evidence that comets (especially 67P) are not his cult's comets are actual rock blasted from rocky planets dogma.

We (everyone else) know the physical facts about comets, such as composition, density and porosity. [e.g. from the papers he has cited!]
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 7th June 2020, 09:05 PM   #3238
Reality Check
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: New Zealand
Posts: 27,251
Exclamation Lies yet again about Lucchetti et al. ("seems its a consolidated surface")

Repeats his "consolidated surface" lie about Lucchetti et al. who just reject fluffy aggregates.
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 7th June 2020, 09:09 PM   #3239
Reality Check
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: New Zealand
Posts: 27,251
Exclamation Usual insult and lie about A'Hearn who never wrote that comets are his cult's rock

Repeats his usual insult and lie about A'Hearn who never wrote that comets are his cult's actual rock.
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 7th June 2020, 09:18 PM   #3240
Reality Check
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: New Zealand
Posts: 27,251
Exclamation Another "rock-type rock" lie about Lucchetti et al. who state comet 67P is not rock

Another "rock-type rock" lie about Lucchetti et al. who state comet 67P is not as dense as rock (and so not rock!).

The lie is blatant because he quotes a source stating that comet 67P is not made of rock !
Quote:
The rocky-type behavior we highlight with this work does not mean that the material constituting comet 67P is dense as rock, as the mean bulk density of 537.8 kg/m3 points out (Preusker et al., 2017).
His "consolidated surface" lie about Lucchetti et al. who just reject fluffy aggregates.
Lies again about the Lucchetti paper yet again which only compares a landslide parameter on 67P to the same parameter in "dry landslides" on Earth.

He empathizes A lying question again about my post by citing the measured density of 67P at half that of water making 67P not his cult's actual rock blasted from rocky planets dogma.
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
Closed Thread

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 09:39 AM.
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.