The Electric Comet theory

Status
Not open for further replies.
Belz... said:
Yes it does. You haven't put any effort or time into answering my question, clearly because you don't understand any of the ideas you claim to espouse.
Click to expand...

That's harsh.

I put in what time I have spare.

This thread about Electric Comets not about me.

Just look at the facts and evidence and make your own mind up. It's your choice but it is fun to watch the mainstream coming around to the Electromagnetic way ☺
 
Belz... said:
Reality is harsh.
Click to expand...
So it is.
Are you any relation to R C ?😊


What facts ? You have avoided answering my question with them.
Click to expand...

Belz if you don't notice the facts and evidence in the links and videos I've posted ... then we're done here. My putting them in my own words won't change your blindness to that.

Even if I could be bothered to waste more time on you.

Bye Bye
 
Haig said:
Belz if you don't notice the facts and evidence in the links and videos I've posted ... then we're done here.
Click to expand...

At the very least POINT OUT what your links say about EC. You just dump texts, none of which even discuss EC except to say that's going to be proven right at some point, and expect me to accept that as some sort of proof at rocky comets are in any related to the idea ?

And you have the gall to pretend that the fault is mine ?

You are a hack.
 
Haig said:
In my own words ??? ...
Click to expand...
In your own words what do we have, Haig?
A repeated obsession with the phrase "rock comet" used for asteroids that have dust tails close to the Sun and are not comets!

The repeated inability to tell the fantasies of the Thunderbolts forum commenters from reality. Remember these are people so ignorant that they cannot tell the difference between 0.6 g/cc and 3.0 g/cc :eek:!

The fantasy that rock comets are actual comets.

Ignorance about the electric comet idea - it is not dust being blown off rocks because of heating - that word electric should be a clue, Haig :eek:!

Four years and counting of ignorance about Electric comets still do not exist :jaw-dropp!

The inability to understand that citing a crank who thinks that electric discharges created the Grand Canyon and lied to the Thunderbolts readers reflects badly on your ability to tell the difference between delusions and reality.
 
Reality Check said:
Ignorance about the electric comet idea - it is not dust being blown off rocks because of heating - that word electric should be a clue, Haig :eek:!
Click to expand...

That's why I asked him to explain what the hell those comets have to do with the electric universe nonsense. He replies with links about how heat blows off part of the comets, as if that's electric, somehow.
 
Haig: List of outstanding questions

Haig said:
Rosetta Mission Update | Comets May Not Be What We Thought
Click to expand...
Another video of fantasies, delusions and lies from the Thunderbolts authors, Haig?
  1. Haig (30th June 2014): Why do EU supporters continue to claim that astronomers ignore E fields, etc.?
  2. Haig (3 November 2014) supplied another example of this ignorance by a EU supporter posting on the Thunderbolts forum.
  3. Haig (7th July 2014), is 3.0 different from 0.6?
  4. Haig (7th July 2014), if you want to see many cases of delusional thinking and ignorance from an EU "expert" often citing other EU "experts" then have a look at the Thunderbolts picture of the day blog!
  5. Haig (14th July 2014), How can you believe in the competence of the EU proponents when the speakers at their 2014 conference was a collection of cranks, actual deluded people and some electrical engineers? (the deluded people were the Velikovsky belivers: David Talbott, Daniel Jencka, Dwardu Cardona)?
  6. Haig (3 November 2014): What is the density of comet 67P; What is the density of rock? Are they the same?
  7. Plus any scientific answers to the science stated in Electric comets still do not exist!
  8. Haig (3rd November 2014): Have you noted the 19 items of ignorance and delusion in the first 11 minutes (out of 90!) of a Thunderbolt video that you cited?
  9. Haig (4th November 2014): Have you understood that Hyperion is an icy moon, not a rock (so why is it not a comet :) )?
  10. Haig (20th November 2014): Can you understand the ignorance and delusions in that Thunderbolts video about Mars?
  11. 24 November 2014 Haig: Please cite the electric comet predictions for the albedo of comet nuclei (actual numbers not fantasies!)
  12. 24 November 2014 Haig: Can you understand that this ES "paper" is ignorant about and lies about astronomy?
  13. 25 November 2014 Haig: Please cite the electric comet calculations for density of comets, e.g. 67P.
    Start by showing that the electric field of the Sun does not make the real density of comets less than the gravitationally calculated values :eek:
  14. 25 November 2014 Haig: Please cite the electric comet calculations for the production of a coma and jets from 67P at some 250 million miles from the Sun and at a temp of 205-230K (surface) and 30-160k (subsurface).
  15. 25 November 2014 Haig: Please cite the electric comet calculations for the production of organic compounds from 67P at some 250 million miles from the Sun and at a temp of 205-230K (surface) and 30-160k (subsurface).
  16. 4 December 2014 Haig: Present the evidence that our variable Sun has changed 67P activity.
  17. 5 December 2014 Haig: Please quote the section in [URL="http://iopscience.iop.org/0741-3335/41/3A/004"]Magnetic-field-aligned electric fields associated with Debye-scale plasma structures that measures or describes the potential drop between the corona and heliosphere.[/URL]
  18. 5 December 2014 Haig: Please quote the section in [URL="http://link.springer.com/article/10.1007%2FBF00793176"]Magnetosphere-ionosphere interactions —near-Earth manifestations of the plasma Universe that measures or describes the potential drop between the corona and heliosphere.[/URL]
  19. 5 December 2014 Haig: Please quote the section in [URL="http://sprg.ssl.berkeley.edu/adminstuff/webpubs/2001_prl_045003.pdf"]Direct Observation of Localized Parallel Electric Fields in a Space Plasma that measures or describes the potential drop between the corona and heliosphere.[/URL]
  20. 5 December 2014 Haig: Can you see the delusions and ignorance in the linked Electric Comet web page?, e.g. "The possibly Velikovskian delusion of "violent electrical interactions of planets and moons""
  21. 8 December 2014 Haig: Do electromagnetic waves contain electric currents (they have magnetic fields!)?
  22. 8 December 2014 Haig: Do electrons have intrinsic angular momentum and thus a magnetic moment without any electric currents?
  23. 12 December 2014 Haig: What is the logical fallacy of false dichotomy?
  24. 16 December 2014 Haig: What is the argument from incredibility or ignorance
  25. 15 December 2014 Haig: Please cite the Electric Comet answer to this Electric Comet behavior by Comet Holmes 17P. I will give you a bit of time before adding it to the debunking of the electric comet idea (item 20?).
 
Belz... said:
That's why I asked him to explain what the hell those comets have to do with the electric universe nonsense. He replies with links about how heat blows off part of the comets, as if that's electric, somehow.
Click to expand...
There is a reason why someone could be fooled into thinking that heat is electricity in "rocky comets":
Haig said:
Rosetta Mission Update | The Rocky Comet
Click to expand...
This is probably the usual Thunderbolts video full of fantasies, delusions and even lies. But a lack of reading comprehension could make someone think that this video is not about Rosetta - it is about "rocky comets".
 
Haig said:
Just look at the facts and evidence and make your own mind up. It's your choice but it is fun to watch the mainstream coming around to the Electromagnetic way ☺
Click to expand...
The facts and evidence is that: Electric comets still do not exist :eek:!
However it is a lie that "the mainstream coming around to the Electromagnetic way" (as in electric comet) because no knowledgeable scientists would be so ignorant that they would believe in the electric comet, Haig :jaw-dropp.

The mainstream has always used the Electromagnetic way - just not the ignorant, invalid way that the Thunderbolts authors have used that way.
This sounds like an extreme form of Haig (30th June 2014): Why do EU supporters continue to claim that astronomers ignore E fields, etc.?
 
Last edited:
paladin17 said:
Of course. Here they are: http://www.srl.caltech.edu/ACE/ASC/DATA/browse-plots/4day_plot_archive/..
Click to expand...
Sorry, paladin17, but if you looked at those images you would see that you are wrong. These are electron fluxes, not currents. A big clue is that the units are not Amperes!
About EPAM Data

To get a current you have a lot of work to do, paladin17. Of course this is all moot - Electric comets still do not exist so there is no point wasting anyone's time doing any calculations about them.
 
Reality Check said:
Sorry, paladin17, but if you looked at those images you would see that you are wrong. These are electron fluxes, not currents. A big clue is that the units are not Amperes!
About EPAM Data
Click to expand...
Doesn't make much difference, since the current is obviously proportional to the flux. You can use those as well to evaluate how "neutral" solar wind actually is.
 
Haig said:
It's ALL about evidence ... and here ...
Rosetta Mission Update | The Rocky Comet
Click to expand...


I've viewed several of these videos you keep spamming, Haig, and all I've seen is statements like "...if it looks like rock, it's safest to assume it's rock...", false dichotomies and conspiracy theory whining. I start to suspect that the posts supporting EC and kindred "theories" are primarily about playing to the EU grandstand, not trying to present a coherent theory. "Hey you guys, you should see us over at the skeptics forum, takin' into the man!"

ferd
 
paladin17 said:
Doesn't make much difference, since the current is obviously proportional to the flux.
Click to expand...
That is right, paladin17 - the current is proportional to the combination of the proton and electron fluxes. If you want to waste your time calculating it then go ahead. But as I noted and you ignored:
Reality Check said:
To get a current you have a lot of work to do, paladin17. Of course this is all moot - Electric comets still do not exist so there is no point wasting anyone's time doing any calculations about them.
Click to expand...
 
Last edited:
Status
Not open for further replies.

Back
Top Bottom