Continuation The Electric Comet Theory Boogaloo (Part 2)

Status
Not open for further replies.
jonesdave116 said:
These may or may not dispel the strange, scientifically unsupported beliefs the EU fantasists have about the Deep Impact mission;

The distribution of water ice in the interior of Comet Tempel 1
http://www.planetary.brown.edu/pdfs/3546.pdf

Exposed Water Ice Deposits on the Surface of Comet 9P/Tempel 1
http://planetary.brown.edu/pdfs/3779.pdf

Note that in both these cases the ice and ejected ice (vapour) were observed from their spectral lines in IR. They were not inferred from the observation of dissociation products. They were direct observations.

Furthermore, the follow up observation by Stardust/NExT determined the resulting crater to be 150m in diameter. No way in hell would you get a crater of that diameter in silicate rock with a ~1m impactor, with a mass of ~360kg, at ~10km/s. Try any online crater impact calculator you like.
Click to expand...

Yeah they found trivial ice on Tempel 1 made a big hoohar but forgot about the
recession of icy cliffs at the margins
Click to expand...

PIA13862_Tempel_1_annotated.jpg


Please explain???
 
Sol88 said:
Please explain???
Click to expand...

I'll explain it when you provide a link to the scientific paper, or publication, that the images come from. I don't do arguments based on pareidolia.
And failing to answer one question by posing another is just another example of 'crank science 101'. Divert, obfuscate, gish gallop, ignore.
They blasted out a shed load of water from a 'rocky' comet, leaving behind a 150m diameter crater. Explain that, as it has far more relevance.
Then, of course, there is still the unexplained density issue. Well, only unexplained if you follow the rantings of a crank and charlatan, who is unqualified to pronounce on such matters.
 
I'll explain it when you provide a link to the scientific paper, or publication, that the images come from. I don't do arguments based on pareidolia.
Click to expand...

Sorry my blue, LINK supplied

Comparison of Deep Impact and Stardust photos of a smooth elevated feature on the surface of the nucleus showing recession of icy cliffs at the margins.
Click to expand...

Why would they say ICE when the " icy cliffs" have receded and not mention it in the paper on the observed surface ice?

No scientific paper on the receding icy cliffs that I can find, maybe you would have better luck finding some peer reviewed paper...is that crickets I hear?
 
Last edited:
Sol88 said:
Why would they say ICE when the " icy cliffs" have receded and not mention it in the paper on the observed surface ice?

No scientific paper on the receding icy cliffs that I can find, maybe you would have better luck finding some peer reviewed paper...is that crickets I hear?
Click to expand...

I don't see what the problem is here. It's ice, that's all that matters. As you can see from the Tempel 1 surface ice paper, in Fig. 2, it says "F) IR data (120 m/pixel). Note that the IR scan at the highest resolution only covers the upper half of the nucleus, as shown."

The cliff photos are recognisably from the lower part of the nucleus. A lot would depend on orbital parameters, and when the IR data were collected. Maybe it was never in a position to do an IR scan of this region. I don't see how they can be expected to produce a paper on something they haven't had a chance to look at in IR. If you look at the photo you posted from DI, you'll see that it was most likely taken on July 4 2005. That was the date of the impact. I suspect that was the first decent look at it that they'd had, and their attention was elsewhere! See the image here, for instance: http://science.nasa.gov/science-news/science-at-nasa/2011/09feb_stardustnext/
They saw, and indeed I have seen, more ice than they actually investigated with IR. There is no reason to believe that bright patches on the comet, shown to be water ice, should be of any different composition than other bright patches that they didn't have a chance to investigate.
The observation that was most germane, was the one that shows that smashing a projectile into a comet releases copious amounts of water.
They've seen it on the surface, they've seen it sub-surface. QED.
 
Sol88 said:
@ Tusenfem

Has the comet song changed in the last couple months?
Click to expand...

Actually, yes, as of a few months ago, the singing has petered off, and other kinds of waves have appeared. This shows that the magnetoplasma around the comet is changing with greater outgassing and stronger magnetic fields.

Come to my talk "RPC-MAG in 67P/CG‘s Wavy Wonderland" on Saturday morning at the IUGG in Prague.
 
Sol88 said:
Mmmmmm.......I think we are talking more like LUNAR DUST LEVITATION
Click to expand...

I don't care about Moon. I care about fact that I do not see any discharges in photos, but jets. Discharges look nothing like jets. In fact, in Electric Universe cometary jets should not exist at all. No water inside to release when comet warms up, no jets, no comet coma. Just a lot of smaller and bigger discharges, as common as jets in our universe.

According to EC methodology a la "it looks like bunny", this situation falsifies EC.

Sol88 said:
than arcs on this very weakly discharging comet.
Click to expand...
My prediction: every comet we will visit in future will just happen to be "very weakly discharging", too.

tusenfem said:
Oh brother! Even more work to do! :-P
Click to expand...
Shush, you are getting paid for it, so no complaints. :P
 
Sol88 said:
Yeah they found trivial ice on Tempel 1 made a big hoohar but forgot about the "recession of icy cliffs at the margins " ...snipped images.... Please explain???
Click to expand...
Easy, Sol88: You forgot that a mindless obsession with the Thunderbolts delusions hints that your brain forgotten basic facts about the real world:p!
Cliffs made up of CO, water, etc. ices will recede at their edges as those ices sublimate :jaw-dropp!
Also a delusion of your own- no one has forgotten about the trivial fact that there are observations about recession of icy cliffs at the margins on Tempel 1 as expected for icy cliffs.
 
Last edited:
Sol88 said:
Sorry my blue, LINK supplied
Click to expand...
Close to lying again, Sol88, with a bit of quote mining by missing out Tempel 1 NExT_mission
Scientists were able to quickly spot locations where an elevated flow-like formation of icy material on the comet's surface receded due to sublimation between encounters.[9]
Click to expand...
which makes your question ridiculous (unless you are admitting that you cannot read :p)

They say ICE because that the cliffs are made of ICE (and dust), not the rock that only deluded idiots such as the Thunderbolts people think that comets are.

The source for the images is a blog entry that compares scientific images.
Some early scientific impressions of Stardust's Tempel 1 flyby Posted by Emily Lakdawalla 2011/02/16 21:20 UTC
I've spent a day with the Stardust images from Tempel 1, and had a chat with co-investigator Jessica Sunshine, so here are a bunch of images with some preliminary scientific commentary.
Click to expand...
It discusses what you have been avoiding - the Deep Impact crater exists.
Astronomers are happy that it is the result of the impactor hitting relatively soft ices and dust as matched by experiment :eek:!
 
Sol88: What is the crater size for Deep Impact hitting a rock

Reality Check said:
It discusses what you have been avoiding - the Deep Impact crater exists.
Astronomers are happy that it is the result of the impactor hitting relatively soft ices and dust as matched by experiment :eek:!
Click to expand...
This event provides an extremely simple method of determining whether comets are rock or not. Just calculate what the effect would be for the "Smart Impactor" section of Deep Impact hitting a rock. The deluded Thunderbolts people have not done this in the 10 years since Deep Impact :jaw-dropp!

One wonders whether Sol88 will be brave enough to actually test the electric comet idea or will mindlessly cling to the delusion that comets are rock? Let us find out (we all know the answer though).

The "Smart Impactor" section had a mass of 370 kg and a collision speed of 10.2 km/s. It produced a crater ~150 meters across
On February 15, NASA scientists identified the crater formed by Deep Impact in images from Stardust. The crater is estimated to be 150 meters (500 ft) in diameter, and has a bright mound in the center likely created when material from the impact fell back into the crater.[46]
Click to expand...

There are plenty of impact calculators on the Internet. Usually for asteroids hitting the Earth which happens to be a rocky planet. It took me literally 2 minutes to find one and that the crater would have been about 7 meters in diameter :eye-poppi!

25 June 2015 Sol88: Use a impact calculator to calculate the size of the crater on a comet made of rock by the Deep Impact impactor. Please report the results in your next post.
 
Last edited:
I had to use one for the Moon, RC, because Earth burnt up the impactor I was trying to use. Either way, it's nonsense, and they know it is. I suspect that they've known for years, but it has become a faith based belief.
Velikovsky, or is it Von Daniken?
Nonsense either way. Need an IQ of a rabbit to follow that garbage.
 
Last edited:
Reality Check said:
Easy, Sol88: You forgot that a mindless obsession with the Thunderbolts delusions hints that your brain forgotten basic facts about the real world:p!
Cliffs made up of CO, water, etc. ices will recede at their edges as those ices sublimate :jaw-dropp!
Also a delusion of your own- no one has forgotten about the trivial fact that there are observations about recession of icy cliffs at the margins on Tempel 1 as expected for icy cliffs.
Click to expand...

http://d2ws0xxnnorfdo.cloudfront.net/meme/611858

Edited by zooterkin: 
Edited for rule 5.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
ECH Logic

Creationist: "There's a gap in the fossil record!"
Scientist: "Here's a transitional fossil"
Creationist: "Ooh, look, now there are two gaps!"
 
Last edited:
Status
Not open for further replies.

Share this page

ISF - Join now!

Every member here is approved by hand. No bots, no spam, just people who care about evidence and honest debate.

Membership is free!

Create your free account

Back
Top Bottom