Setanta
 
  1  
Reply Tue 29 Nov, 2005 03:57 pm
The Wabbit will be there long before any of the rest of us . . . we'll wait an' see what happens to her . . .
0 Replies
 
mesquite
 
  1  
Reply Tue 29 Nov, 2005 04:28 pm
thunder_runner32 wrote:
Quote:
Mesquite, perhaps you would like to address how several of the planets which supposedly were formed according to the common theory of planetary evolution could rotate in a direction opposite their peers?


I have heard this before, and I am curious how this could occur...farmerman, you seem to be leading somwhere with 'angular momentum'...could you please elaborate?


thunder, farmerman had already answered your question on the page before and I see has done it again, but IMO good answers cannot be shown too often, so here we go one more time. Emphasis is mine.

farmerman wrote:
when discussing with rl, its merely a "Holdout". We can explain, he goes away, then he comes back a few pages later with same rubbish.

1Planetary motion-over 99.0% of the solar systems angular momentum is preserved in the orbital paths of the planets (Hint: they all orbit the same way). Planets witha reverse rotation , also have screwy axial directions. Planet accretion can be the entire force needed to cause a slow down and counterrotation. BUT, since the orbits are preserved, they are the biggest evidentiary items in common occurences. PS "The Big Bang" had nothing to do with dynamite.


2 Ive explained this twice already . DECAY OF THE MAGNETIC DIPOLE MOMENT IS HOGWASH.
The earth isnt always a simple dipole
Poles wander
The dipole moment has been essentially flat since the 1920s, its not decaying "exponentially or arithmetically"
Data on mineral alignment in magmatic deposits shows that the total field strngth has remained essentially the same since the Grenville age(About 1.2 BILLION years ago).
We have to correct our mag instruments to diurnal fluctuations and, because the pole is wandering southerly, all this year, weve been having to grade our readings "UP" a few gamma each day

There is a really good book published by the Maritime Geological Society of Canada. Its called"The LAst Billion Years" Its got a series of great discussions for those wanting to get at the concepts and not mess with all the differential equations. Ive used it twice in a survey Historical Geology course for non majors and, most all of them "got it"


In a summary rant about the " myth of the decay of the earths magnetic field" . Nobody has published ANYTHING of real science (except the very looney "honorary doctor Barnes and his equally looney Dr Cowling")
We've understood the earths magnetic field(s) since the days of
Chapman and Dobrin.
The interested reader can find a very good scholarly discussion and data presentation based upon remnant paleomagnetism (Torsvik and VAn der Voo 2002, "Refining Gondwana and Pangea: a refinement of Phanerozoic non-dipole(octupole) fields, Journal of Geophysics International.

I'm like the garage mechanic whose being critiqued by the little old lady who wants the air in her tires changed. I can only state that I work in this **** daily and I get annoyed at some bone-headed internet scraper telling me my field of endeavor, especially when its based upon religious lies and a fact that rl is "trying his damndest to bluff us". If real life had any idea about what he speaks, any investors would lose huuge sums of money on his "chicken little basis of the denial of science"We had the same magnetics discussion from RL a number of pages back and he quietly went away, only to return and further assault our intelligence. Maybe I should start a thread that says something like "Creationism is just fact-free kaka especially developed by and for people who cant conceive of the elegant theory that DArwin proposed".
Course that would be rude. Ill let gus do it.

http://www.able2know.com/forums/viewtopic.php?p=1695155#1695155
0 Replies
 
rosborne979
 
  1  
Reply Tue 29 Nov, 2005 04:29 pm
thunder_runner32 wrote:
Quote:
Mesquite, perhaps you would like to address how several of the planets which supposedly were formed according to the common theory of planetary evolution could rotate in a direction opposite their peers?


I have heard this before, and I am curious how this could occur...farmerman, you seem to be leading somwhere with 'angular momentum'...could you please elaborate?


Hi Thunder,

It can occur through impacts. *Did* it happen as a result of an impact, nobody knows, but it certainly could have.

We know that impacts occur (Craters on just about everything in the solar system, and Comet Shoemaker Levy impact on Jupiter), and we know that they impart energy (sometimes in the form of momentum changes) to the bodies they interact with. The evidence also points to larger and larger impact interactions in the early formation of the solar system, all of which agrees with basic solar system formation theory.

Conservation of Angular Momemtum is the force which causes gravitationally bound masses (whether solid or gaseous or just debris) to spin faster as they become more compact. It's the same force which causes an ice skater to spin faster as they pull their arms in during a spin (except that it isn't gravity which binds their arms to their bodies, it's electromagnetism Wink .

Just out of curiosity, if you (or RL) *don't* think that an impact changed the rotation of various planets, then what *do* you think caused it?

(by the way, orbital and rotational changes can also occur from gravitational tidal effects, such as with our Moon, but the mathematics for this don't match up with in the case of Venus for example, which leaves impact as the best available explanation).
0 Replies
 
RexRed
 
  1  
Reply Tue 29 Nov, 2005 04:54 pm
Because we are in a religion thread I will post this...

What does this have to do with the topic of this thread? Some...

the nature of us silly shape shifting evolving beings... hehe

I just wrote this:

The wind blew over the dusty parched desert as there was no other perceptible sound other than the buzzards flying overhead. To this place I was translated in a conscious dream. I was not intoxicated by anything other than the holy spirit. Yet the spirit was strong and overpowered my reality for a look into a world within.

I looked out on the horizon and it blurred with the heat and I could barely make out the line because the distant haze had obscured it so. The sky and earth became one I climbed successive dunes until I reached a summit high in what seemed like the air. I hollered at the top of my voice and said, "Appear to me!" The haze was orange like fire to my right and green to my left.

Then I noticed a face in the clouds had formed... it was a face I felt familiar with possibly someone from my past, someone who had died and been long gone. The cloud spoke and said, "Have you forgotten me?" I answered, "Who are you? They sadly said, "You do not remember?" I looked at the face and as I was speaking the face kept changing before my eyes! It bore the resemblance of many faces. Out of frustration I asked, "Are you God?" The face spoke and said, "No, I am not God..."

I was then struck coldly and I asked, "Then who are you"? The voice said, "I am Jesus whom you seek". But I said lord you change so, you are many faces that you morph at will... The voice spoke and said, "Yes, I change but it is the same nature and spirit God that energizes me that is always constant. I then asked how shall the people know you if you do not have the same face? The lord replied and said, "People see what they want to see. If it is their desire to see me for who I am, they will. Yet, they look to the earth and to the face and images that they want to desire. They surround themselves with many faces yet never forget their own image. They are so consumed with faces that they do not venture out into the desert of the soul and search for the true face of God."

I was now perplexed... I said, "You have many faces lord yet you are the image of God so does that mean that God has many faces? The lord said God has only one face that sees all... yet, God is diverse and infinite. It is this diversity that is within us all. We are some, vessels that are made to hold a part of creation. Suddenly the face began to change before my eyes. I saw all of the great people that had gone before me, my parents, some family, friends and I suddenly was so overwhelmed because I saw that it was the holy spirit in them that I had admired. This was the face of God...

The voice then spoke in a tone of authority and said, I am what you are and we are part of God.

I knew the lord was right and I did not have to speak that. We are all one with many faces...

Peace with God... Smile
0 Replies
 
dyslexia
 
  1  
Reply Tue 29 Nov, 2005 04:58 pm
Yes indeed, more info concerning the nature of empiricism, scientific methodology vs the flying spagetti monster. Neatly tied up in skins of semi-theological anecdotes occuring under the influence of psychotropic drugs. I too am perplexed.
0 Replies
 
RexRed
 
  1  
Reply Tue 29 Nov, 2005 05:34 pm
Give it a rest Dys...

How about your narrow minded spiteful view of the world? No thanks...
0 Replies
 
cicerone imposter
 
  1  
Reply Tue 29 Nov, 2005 05:36 pm
Hey, dys, I think you got under RR's skin with "the flying spagetti monster." LOL
0 Replies
 
neologist
 
  1  
Reply Tue 29 Nov, 2005 05:39 pm
I posted a similar experience in a more appropriate thread; http://able2know.com/forums/viewtopic.php?p=1321418#1321418
0 Replies
 
dyslexia
 
  1  
Reply Tue 29 Nov, 2005 05:39 pm
Mr Red, the one thing I am most adept at is "giving a rest" most usually mid-afternoon. On the other hand Mr Red your continous jesus screeds posted on a forum concerning the applicaton of theory about evolution are encouraging me to look towards and early evening retirement.
0 Replies
 
rosborne979
 
  1  
Reply Tue 29 Nov, 2005 05:51 pm
RexRed wrote:
I just wrote this:

The wind blew over the dusty parched desert as there was no other perceptible sound other than the buzzards flying overhead. ...

Peace with God... Smile


And from _The Judgement of the Birds_ the great Loren Eiseley wrote:
It was a late hour on a cold, wind-bitten autumn day when I climbed a great hill spined like a dinosaur's back and tried to take my bearings. The tumbled waste fell away in the waves in all directions. Blue air was darkening into purple along the bases of the hills. I shifted my knapsack, heavy with the petrified bones of long-vanished creatures, and studied my compass. I wanted to be out of there by nightfall, and already the sun was going sullenly down in the west.

It was then that I saw the flight coming on. It was moving like a little close-knit body of black specks that danced and darted and closed
again. It was pouring from the north and heading toward me with the undeviating relentlessness of a compass needle. It streamed through the shadows rising out of monstrous gorges. It rushed over towering pinnacles in the red light of the sun or momentarily sank from sight with their shade. Across that desert of eroding clay and wind-worn stone they came with a faint wild twittering that filled all the air about me as those tiny living bullets hurtled past into the night.

It may not strike you as a marvel. It would not, perhaps, unless you stood in the middle of a dead world at sunset, but that was where I stood. Fifty million years lay under my feet, fifty million years of bellowing monsters moving in a green world now gone so utterly that its very light was travelling on the farther edge of space. I had lifted a fistful of that ground. I held it while that wild flight of sound-bound warblers hurtled over me into the oncoming dark. There went phosphorous, there went iron, there went carbon, there beat the calcium in those hurrying wings. Alone on a dead planet I watched that incredible miracle speeding past. It ran by some true compass over field and waste land. It cried its individual ecstasies into the air until the gullies rang. It swerved like a single body. It knew itself, and, lonely, it bunched close in the racing darkness, its individual entities feeling about them rising nightÂ…

I dropped my fistful of earth. I heard it roll inanimate back into the gully at the base of the hill: iron, carbon, the chemicals of life. Like men from those wild tribes who had haunted these hills before me seeking visions, I made my sign to the great darkness. It was not a mocking sign, and I was not mocked.

As I walked into my camp late that night, one man, rousing from his blankets beside the fire, asked sleepy, "What did you see?" "I think a miracle", I said softly, but I said it to myself. Behind me that vast waste begun to glow under the rising moon.


Don't worry Rex, no one can compare.
0 Replies
 
farmerman
 
  1  
Reply Tue 29 Nov, 2005 06:01 pm
rexred, when speaking of dylsexia said
Quote:
How about your narrow minded spiteful view of the world? No thanks...


yes, clean and sober narrow minded spiteful views R us
0 Replies
 
neologist
 
  1  
Reply Tue 29 Nov, 2005 06:01 pm
Those of you who disbelieve the flying spaghetti monster have never seen my grandson's pasta fiesta.
0 Replies
 
cicerone imposter
 
  1  
Reply Tue 29 Nov, 2005 06:05 pm
he he he he.... Good on ya, neo.
0 Replies
 
spendius
 
  1  
Reply Tue 29 Nov, 2005 06:22 pm
I don't think that the curtains quite go with the carpet.

Would you pass the cream please?
0 Replies
 
RexRed
 
  1  
Reply Tue 29 Nov, 2005 09:03 pm
I suppose if I am going to go soul searching (dreaming) in a public forum that is what I should expect from some of you is common jest. I will not let is deter me though. I know how these "dreams" have affected people in intense ways. That is the art I make. I write song, poems, lyrics, novels and lately it has been dreams with stories hidden within. But they have content that is relative to life creation/evolution and other things. In the same way the early Greek philosophers were persecuted some perceive me today. But that is I guess human nature to reject the unfamiliar. It is not nature this tribute is for... That is what makes it rare indeed. Anyone can look at a sky and appreciate it's beauty. But to look at a sky and give a silent thanks to the maker of all things is where the cycle of life is finally complete and I am connected to my own purpose and meaning.

So, there is creation and creator. Science worships the creation.
0 Replies
 
RexRed
 
  1  
Reply Tue 29 Nov, 2005 09:42 pm
farmerman wrote:
rexred, when speaking of dylsexia said
Quote:
How about your narrow minded spiteful view of the world? No thanks...


yes, clean and sober narrow minded spiteful views R us


1Co 13:2
And though I have the gift of prophecy, and understand all mysteries, and all knowledge; and though I have all faith, so that I could remove mountains, and have not charity[love], I am nothing.


Comment:
Love is not spiteful... This scripture says you can remove mountains (science can do that) though if you do not have "love" (remember this "love" you said was warm and fuzzy?) then you are nothing...

Scientists, theists and aggies often down play the importance of love and what it really is as a power of nature. Why, because they do not understand it (or God). Thus if they diminish it's importance they can emphasize the physical aspects of science. Love in many ways makes the scientist obsolete. Love cures many ailments and love can benefit mental and physical well being. Hospitals are using love and laugher more as a basis for health care and a premature babies need to be held and loved to even survive.

So FM you can talk about your warm fuzzy feelings. I see a power in love (God) and your typical "kill love" trick will not work.

1John 4:16 And we have known and believed the love that God hath to us. God is love; and he that dwelleth in love dwelleth in God, and God in him.

So Dys again you can keep you spiteful narrow-minded point of view and anyone else who clings to it. As for me I will take the best of both worlds. I have a healthy appreciation for God and science. So who is the one who is narrow-minded? I can sense your spite... because I do not conform to your one-sided view of reality you are vindictive... Well, my purpose served itself. I will spread my love of God and science and you can spread your science and spite and we will see who is the better for it in the end.

Many of you "evolutionists" are no better than the radical right. You both only see one side of the total picture...

You think "scope" is only mouthwash? Smile
0 Replies
 
farmerman
 
  1  
Reply Tue 29 Nov, 2005 09:50 pm
rex red who hails from Jonesport sez
Quote:
So FM you can talk about your warm fuzzy feelings. I see a power in love (God) and your typical "kill love" trick will not work.



You talkin to me bunky?
Quote:
You think "scope" is only mouthwash?

Confused Confused Confused Confused Confused

Maybe youve confused me with someone else? I never say "warm and fuzzy" unless Im talkin about a puppy or a coon cat.
Quote:
Many of you "evolutionists" are no better than the radical right. You both only see one side of the total picture...

Yeh, AND you are certainly the poster child for objective reason. I dont even know what the hell youre talkin about half the time. (The only reason I understand the other half is because someone else has already taken offense to it and I understand THEM..
0 Replies
 
dyslexia
 
  1  
Reply Tue 29 Nov, 2005 09:59 pm
RexRed wrote:
In the same way the early Greek philosophers were persecuted some perceive me today.

Heavy Dude, way heavy. Very near messianic.
0 Replies
 
Rex the Wonder Squirrel
 
  1  
Reply Tue 29 Nov, 2005 10:03 pm
RexRed wrote:
In the same way the early Greek philosophers were persecuted some perceive me today.


And you've drank how many hemlock solutions? [/common_jest]

But no, really...common jest aside, from one Rex to another: the second you compare yourself to the early Greeks is the second you cease to possess the deliberate characteristic of pure philosophos encompassed by those such as Socrates/Plato, and instead endeavor into the realm of Heraclitus and Empedocles-- a realm which (I would hope) you don't particularly want to be associated with.

Unless, of course, this love jargon is all a subplot in your overall quest to assume the role of a "god" amongst of the high thinkers on this forum-- in which case you must, how you say, "step it up" a bit.*

*Forgive the common jest, there. I couldn't resist. Smile
0 Replies
 
real life
 
  1  
Reply Tue 29 Nov, 2005 10:17 pm
rosborne979 wrote:

It can occur through impacts. *Did* it happen as a result of an impact, nobody knows, but it certainly could have...........................Just out of curiosity, if you (or RL) *don't* think that an impact changed the rotation of various planets, then what *do* you think caused it?

(by the way, orbital and rotational changes can also occur from......


Hi Ros,

Aren't you simply making an assumption that a change of rotation did occur? Why is this assumption that something "happened" necessary?

Isn't the only reason to make this assumption is that to do otherwise would effectively forfeit the status of the reigning theory of planetary evolution? These 3 planets cannot have been spun out into a retrograde motion by the same process that put the other 6 planets into a different rotational direction, can it?

Further, the orbit of Uranus (along with those of Earth and Venus, which also supposedly suffered major collisions) are among the most circular of all the planets. Not what you'd expect in the aftermath of a catastrophic collision with a planetary sized object.
0 Replies
 
 

Related Topics

 
  1. Forums
  2. » Evolution? How?
  3. » Page 288
Copyright © 2025 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.07 seconds on 06/21/2025 at 07:46:22