Moderated Iron sun with Aether batteries...

Status
Not open for further replies.
Michael Mozina said:
The fact you even find that belief to be hard to believe speaks volumes about you IMO GM. I really didn't think anyone on Earth believed that none of the materials on Earth came from our sun.
Click to expand...


You apparently translate Birkeland's completely incorrect notion that the Sun spews atoms into space which coalesce into new planets into something about some material on Earth being particles from the Sun. And that goes back to your qualifications to communicate in a sane, rational, or intelligent way about solar physics being challenged, and more importantly, your apparent inability to demonstrate that you have any such qualifications.
 
Ziggurat said:
Being curious about what Birkeland thought the mass of the sun was is historical curiosity, not scientific curiosity.
Click to expand...

:) Oh the irony.

It was both Zig. It took the "mainstream" almost 70 years to accept his aurora theories. At the rate you guys are moving it might take you another 70 years to figure out solar wind acceleration and 70 more years to get to the iron aspects of his his "cathode solar model". I definitely won't live long enough for you to figure it out if you can't even be bothered to read his work, and you handwave at it so frivolously and foolishly.

And you are quite incurious about actual science. When presented with actual science that isn't in the form of pretty pictures, you recoil.
Click to expand...

Not at all. I offered you additional reading material that you refused to read. It's like watching a creationist handwave at carbon dating based on one flawed carbon dating test from 20 years ago.
 
Funny as it sounds PS, it was that same scientific curiosity that led me to "question my faith" both from the standpoint of religion and the "96% dark stuff" religion called "cosmology theory" today.

The only difference between their religion of dark evil energies and any other religion is that their inflation deity is now dead, and useless. It's a pathetically useless religion based on a dead inflation god and his dark energy gnome and dark matter elf sidekicks.
 
DeiRenDopa said:
Not to mention that he thought Saturn's rings were self-luminous ... what kind of empirical, observation-based, scientist would make such a gigantic blunder?
Click to expand...
I am not sure that it was a blunder given the knowledge of the time. It is possible that telescopes capable of resolving the spectrum of the rings and determining that they were emitting reflected light had not been built yet, e.g. the Hale telescope was built in 1917 and the Hooker in 1919.

Another possiblity is just that Birkeland had just missed the papers showing that the rings reflected light. He obviously missed James Keele's 1895 paper measuring the doppler shift of the rings
James Keeler proved Maxwell correct in 1895 when he measured the doppler shifts of different parts of the rings and found that the outer parts of the ring system orbited at a slower speed than the inner parts. The rings obeyed Kepler's third law and, therefore, must be made of millions of tiny bodies each orbiting Saturn as a tiny mini-moon.
Click to expand...
 
Michael Mozina said:
Not at all. I offered you additional reading material that you refused to read.
Click to expand...

You mean that paper of yours which violates both the 1st and 2nd laws of thermodynamics? Why should I read any more of it? What merit is there in a theory that violates both?

It's like watching a creationist handwave at carbon dating based on one flawed carbon dating test from 20 years ago.
Click to expand...

I'm not the one who runs away from quantification, Michael. You still can't quantify anything about your model. Who exactly do you think you're going to fool with that accusation of handwaving?
 
I just love hearing you guys try to pick on Birkeland and his work. It's like watching little children that have never played a single empirical instrument criticize the empirical maestro. :)
 
Michael Mozina said:
You are clearly clueless when it comes to the mentality of the EU crowd so let me clue you in a bit. Unlike your "we have it all figured out" mentality, the EU crowd tends to realize that we've only scratched the surface of what we actually "understand" about the universe. They tend to be much more "open minded" when it comes to new ideas. They don't tend to go on crusade like you guys to "snuff out" any idea they don't like. They tend to adopt a more "live an let live" mentality. It's a much "freer" way of looking at the universe and leads to more "honest" scientific conversations. We don't feel the need to lash out at each others ideas, nor misrepresent them in any way. We just offer our ideas and let nature run it's course.

Get the idea yet? I can elaborate more if you like, but I assure you it's not nearly as regimented or closed minded as your little cult. Nobody there ever tried to publicly lynch me for me beliefs. See how much nicer that is?
Click to expand...
Dude, have you seen what they do to people who post, over in Thunderdolts, with "solar models" which are NOT by-the-Scott-book? If I'm not mistaken, there's even a sticky which proclaims, in absolutely no uncertain terms, that if it's not in Scott's book (Thornhill's website, etc), then it is verboten (or there used to be)!

You might also like to check out some of the comments by self-proclaimed advocates of "electric universe theory" based "solar models" on Tom Bridgman's blog (start with the April 2009 ones, and then click on the relevant tags).

You can also google terms like "Electric Universe Scott", and read all the polite, open-minded (NOT) comments by "the EU crowd", about "solar models" that deviate from the one true god Scott. Go ahead, perform an objective, independently verifiable search!
 
Last edited:
Michael Mozina said:
...snipped usual MM rant displaying his ignorance...
Click to expand...
[sarcasm]
The only difference between your religion of dark evil iron crust fantasies and any other religion is that your iron crust deity has been dead and useless for years*. It's a pathetically useless religion based on a dead iron crust god and his electric universe gnome and RD image elf sidekicks.
[/sarcasm]
:dl:​

* Micheal Mozina's iron crust has been totally debunked!
The fact that it fails many other observations (an iron crust at a temperature of > 9400 K :jaw-dropp ) and predicts absolutely nothing just makes it a joke. See the over 70 questions that Michael Mozina is incapable of answering.
 
DeiRenDopa said:
Dude, have you seen what they do to people who post, over in Thunderdolts, with "solar models" which are NOT by-the-Scott-book?
Click to expand...

Sure, I've experienced it first hand several years ago. It was polite and courteous and when I was done, that was that.

If you're trying to create division between me and anyone involved at Thunderbolts or Don Scott, you're wasting your breath. I personally enjoyed Don's book.
 
Michael Mozina said:
Funny as it sounds PS, it was that same scientific curiosity that led me to "question my faith" both from the standpoint of religion and the "96% dark stuff" religion called "cosmology theory" today.

The only difference between their religion of dark evil energies and any other religion is that their inflation deity is now dead, and useless. It's a pathetically useless religion based on a dead inflation god and his dark energy gnome and dark matter elf sidekicks.
Click to expand...

:dl:
If you had any real "scientific curiosity" you would not be so ignorant of the nature of scientific methodology and scientific evidence and you would understand the MATHEMATICAL nature of physics. All you really have is scientific pretensions!
:dl:
 
Michael Mozina said:
No, I meant Birkeland's original writings. *ALL* of them.
Click to expand...


You mean like where Birkeland said the Sun spews atoms into space which coalesce into new planets? That nutty fellow who seemed to believe Saturn had a solid brass shell and the rings of Saturn were electrons swirling around in an electromagnetic field? That crazy Kristian Birkeland and his whacked out ideas about astrophysics, eh? Maybe you'd make more headway if all your arguments weren't built on a foundation of looks-like-a-bunny grade school science and worshiping a hero who was apparently wrong about almost all his ideas. :boggled:
 
Perpetual Student said:
If you had any real "scientific curiosity" you would not be so ignorant of the nature of scientific methodology and scientific evidence and you would understand the MATHEMATICAL nature of physics. All you really have is scientific pretensions!
Click to expand...

The nature of the scientific method has nothing to do with "dark magic" PS. They don't have a single clue about empirical physics. It doesn't go out of style and it works in the lab. Their stuff *NEVER* shows up in a lab. It's religion and metaphysics with pretty mathematical window dressing. It's 96% metaphysical mumbo-jumbo with only 4% actual token physics thrown in to make it look "psuedoscientific". In terms of empirical support it's about as well supported as creationism. You can never get either of them to back up their beliefs in the lab.
 
Michael Mozina said:
Sure, I've experienced it first hand several years ago. It was polite and courteous and when I was done, that was that.
Click to expand...
Times have changed MM, times have changed.
If you're trying to create division between me and anyone involved at Thunderbolts or Don Scott, you're wasting your breath.
Click to expand...
We're playing, what, tiddly winks now?
I personally enjoyed Don's book.
Click to expand...
Which tells us, what, exactly about how tolerant "the EU crowd" are of heretics dissenters? It certainly speaks volumes about your inability to make sound, science-based judgements when it comes to astronomy, astrophysics, space science, ...

ETA: there's a nice comment by Tom Bridgman, in his April, 24 2010 blog:
The Electric Sky by Donald E. Scott, pg 53, concerning astronomers and astronomy, Dr. Scott says: "All these shortcomings are shrouded in a fortress-like collective mentality that rejects anything electrical."
along with statements along similar lines throughout the book. So are you saying that EU supporters knew this statement to be false or that planetary scientists are not astronomers and therefore their work should not be included in the category?
Click to expand...
 
Last edited:
GeeMack said:
You mean like where Birkeland said the Sun spews atoms into space which coalesce into new planets?
Click to expand...

Why is that so hard for you to accept? I guess you simply can't think in EU terms yet, and therefore you think there's something wrong with that idea, but everything on our planet came from the stars GM, everything.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Back
Top Bottom