@MikeB / Lou

Recently discovered a storm on Saturn larger than earth see it therefore has to be Nibiru because that's the only possible cause.

Last edited by BrianK on 21-May-2011 at 01:16 PM.

@BrianK

Quote:

The Rapture occurred! I contend all worthy Christians are gone

Didn't they claim 6 PM (local time) or something?

Last edited by MikeB on 21-May-2011 at 01:21 PM.

@Nimrod

Quote:

Nimrod wrote: @Lou Quote: Maybe it's old age. I do not want to confuse you, but I am the geriatric around here, and I already admitted that my age was irrelevant. The only other comment I will make on age is that you are now not in a position to argue that "age brings wisdom" to T-J, nor are you able to argue "out of touch with the latest information" to me. So maybe we can lose the personal insults. Quote: I said bodies with geodynamos are free to rotate unlike the moon which has none. From T-J's posts. Ganymede has a geodynamo. Ganymede is locked. Ganymede contradicts your hypothesis. Back to my little list: I will give you the same list, and challenge that I have given to MikeB Quote: 1. Base your conclusions on the evidence. Not vice versa. 2. Measure objectively, not guess selectively. 3. Back up statements with evidence. Claiming something to be a fact does not make it a fact. 4. Use large sample numbers for statistical analysis. 5. Use blind sampling for tests 6. Tests must include control groups. 7. Cite your sources of information. 8. Sources must be reliable, verifiable, and backed with evidence. 9. Opinion is not fact 10. No false evidence.(don't cheat) The challenge remains for you to provide a mathematical basis for your hypothesis.

So your "list of facts" is T-J's word despite me posting an up-to-date link that Ganymede about the direction of it's magnetic field which is what makes it the exception. Interesting.
I do now believe senility has kicked in. Because Ganymede's magnetic field is aligned almost 180 degrees to Jupiter's, it doesn't spin independently from it's orbit around Jupiter which is why it's tidally-locked.

It might even apparently "twist" from the point of view of the surface of Jupiter but I doubt there was and investigation done regarding that by any probes.

Last edited by Lou on 21-May-2011 at 04:50 PM.
Last edited by Lou on 21-May-2011 at 04:45 PM.
Last edited by Lou on 21-May-2011 at 04:26 PM.
Last edited by Lou on 21-May-2011 at 04:25 PM.

@T-J

Quote:

T-J wrote: @Lou Quote: You keep confusing yourself or everyone else to make your view look right. But you're the one with the made-up 'theory' with zero scientific credibility or evidence, who refuses to accept the findings of peer-reviewed research and who cites the writings of known liars and frauds as incontrovertible fact. If anyone here is attempting to deceive anyone, it is you. I am willing to give you the benefit of the doubt, of course, and assume that you have been taken in by the real frauds at work here. But you're still peddling fraud.

Scientists say 80% of the universe is dark matter. Interestingly all of ZERO dark matter has been found in this solar system. That tells me the theory of gravity has an 80% margin for error.

This is what you base your "facts" on. It's either that or the mythical "gravitational constant" is only relevant in this solar system. What does that tell you about this "constant"?

Quote:

Quote: I said bodies with geodynamos are free to rotate unlike the moon which has none. And you are wrong. Repeating your statement over and over again does not magically make it true.

So I'm guessing repeating that I am wrong then makes me wrong, right?
Now that's what I call the "scientific method".

Quote:

Quote: Maybe it's old age. Oh look! A personal attack attempting to discredit an opinion different to your own. It is very interesting to note that instead of using evidence to prove your theory, you instead attempt to discredit others by accusing me of senility.

I introduced a possibility. A personal attack is: T-J, you are senile. Clearly you are having comprehension difficulties...

Quote:

Well, I'm younger than you mate, so if I'm going senile, you're already there.

LOL!

Quote:

Yet again you're making blatant factual errors. For a start, Ganymede has a metallic core composed either of molten Fe or FeS. Iron or iron-sulphide. Gravitational data (eg. Anderson et al 1996) indicates this, as do magnetometer readings from the Galileo spacecraft (eg. McKinnon, 1997 or Kivelson, 2002). Since it does have a metallic core, despite your protestations to the contrary, and since it also has a fully differentiated inner structure, despite your refusal to accept the evidence, it is also far and away the best hypothesis that the magnetic field is generated due to dynamo flow within the core. So, gone over my head? No. You're just using false information.

Clearly you failed to take into account the alignment of it's magnetic field.
Clearly you are not taking all information into consideration which is what makes it the exception that proves the rule.

Quote:

We've got it all nicely worked out courtesy of Einstein, but of course being scientists we're willing to consider alternative hypotheses.

You continue to use Einstein's old theories. His Special Relativity theory is the appropriate one as it finally abandons gravity and uses magnetic fields.

Quote:

My references for the internal structure of Ganymede:

I already explained why it's the exception. Whether it's core is molten-rock (which is never pure and will contain iron) or molten-iron is irrelevant. That will only define it's strength.

@BrianK

Quote:

BrianK wrote: @MikeB / Lou Recently discovered a storm on Saturn larger than earth see it therefore has to be Nibiru because that's the only possible cause.

Coincidentaly that's when Elenin was discovered.

@Lou

Again you resort to personal attack rather than actually providing any evidence for your opinion. It doesn't reflect well on you.


Ganymede has a geodynamo generating a magnetosphere. Whether you like it or not. I've provided several independent and peer-reviewed references to back this statement up. To counter this, you have provided a link to Creation Wiki.

It is difficult to imagine a less credible scientific source, but I'm sure you'll be able to find some.

So in short - no evidence for your view, no mathematical system to test it with, no willingness to engage in rational debate on your part. And the peer-reviewed science overwhelmingly opposes you.

As sane, rational users of the Scientific Method, we therefore reject your opinion and stick with what the facts show.

@Lou

Quote:

Scientists say 80% of the universe is dark matter. Interestingly all of ZERO dark matter has been found in this solar system. That tells me the theory of gravity has an 80% margin for error. This is what you base your "facts" on. It's either that or the mythical "gravitational constant" is only relevant in this solar system. What does that tell you about this "constant"?

If gravity has an 80% margin for error, why is it so that we can predict the motion of the planets with accuracy to within fractions of a second?

Why is it we know exactly where the galaxies are going to be this time next year?

Why is it we can precisely and accurately place satellites in orbit around the gas giants? Why is it we can put probes out beyond the heliopause?

If our equations had an 80% margin for error, we would not have been able to do any of this.

Quote:

Clearly you failed to take into account the alignment of it's magnetic field. Clearly you are not taking all information into consideration which is what makes it the exception that proves the rule.

'The exception proves the rule' is a logical fallacy. That means its wrong. No such thing.

And the models that I have used as reference for my point of view have taken into account the alignment of the magnetic field of Ganymede. Its actually irrelevant.

The thing you don't seem to understand is that although Jupiter's magnetic field has an impact on Ganymede's magnetic field, it does not have an impact on Ganymede itself, because as we have demonstrated time and time again, the magnitude of the magnetic forces at work is hundreds of times too small to have any significant impact.

We have tested this experimentally. We know how strong a magnetic field you would need to move an object the size of Ganymede with its magnetic properties, and we have direct, instrumental evidence that Jupiter's field is far, far too weak. Why can you not accept this?

I suppose you will simply reject the existing mathematical proofs underlying those experiments, right? Without providing any alternative mathematical proof to counter them, of course. And certainly, with absolutely zero experimental evidence to back up your opinion.

It seems your opinion is based in nothing but faith. Praise Sitchin!

Quote:

You continue to use Einstein's old theories. His Special Relativity theory is the appropriate one as it finally abandons gravity and uses magnetic fields.

Prove it.

BrianK and Nimrod have given you plenty of walkthroughs of the maths we use to understand the universe, and I've been kind enough to give a summary of the geological evidence against Nibiru, so now its your turn.

Prove your point by giving us a worked example of how to use Special Relativity (which you appear to have got completely confused, but nevermind) to calculate the orbit of Ganymede.

Quote:

I already explained why it's the exception. Whether it's core is molten-rock (which is never pure and will contain iron) or molten-iron is irrelevant. That will only define it's strength.

No, the purity of the core has everything to do with the resulting magnetic field. Or do you reject materials science as well? Do you reject the 'unproven theory' that iron is magnetic?

Did CreationWiki tell you that God can change the physical properties of the metals at will, or something?

@Lou

Quote:

Quote: Recently discovered a storm on Saturn larger than earth see it therefore has to be Nibiru because that's the only possible cause. Coincidentaly that's when Elenin was discovered.

Saturn's Storm was seen starting around Dec 5th. Leonard Elenin discoverd C/2010 X1 on Dec 10th. The month is the same but neither dates nor times are not.

Is it a coincidence? I suppose it's all dependant upon what one considers an acceptable margin of error. As shown before the 'earthquakes happened on alignments' statement came with no big quakes on alignments and the big quakes within 8 days. So a boundary of alignment +/-8 days or roughly 16 days surrounding an alignment was seen as 'on the alignment'. Too large of a coincidence for me. But, others seem to think it's acceptable to them.

Also please don't forget the very important -- coorelation is not causation. Large storms such as this have been seen back as far as the late 1800s on Saturn.

Last edited by BrianK on 21-May-2011 at 05:14 PM.

@MikeB

Quote:

Quote: The Rapture occurred! I contend all worthy Christians are gone Didn't they claim 6 PM (local time) or something?

My understanding is the original statement was 2am Eastern Standard Time so 1am my local time. Though I still contend all the worthy Christians are gone.

@Lou

Quote:

So your "list of facts" is T-J's word despite me posting an up-to-date link that Ganymede about the direction of it's magnetic field which is what makes it the exception. Interesting.

I, and others, have tried to explain the scientific principle in simple terms. It seems that we have not been simple enough. I am an Electrical Engineer. I have been an Electrical Engineer for a long time. I understand the principles of interaction of rotating magnetic fields. I know how much energy is needed to induce magnetic fields. I know what is the magnetic permeability of free space, and why electric motors are made of materials with a relative permittivity of greater than 100. I have debated with you, about your "Electromotive Universe" ramblings from the point of view of my knowledge and experience of Mathematics, and Electronic engineering. You have responded with no mathematics, and generous helpings of opinion and insults.
T-J gave you a long and detailed analysis of why there is NO geological evidence of previous Nibiru events, and how the geological evidence that there is, refutes your pseudoscientific technobabble. He also gave a list of reasons why your postings about Ganymede were completely and absolutely wrong. This seemed to be too technical for you so I condensed and simplified the points that he had made to a point that even you could understand, and I quoted T-J as my source.
I did not agree with T-J because he is T-J, I agreed with T-J because his postings were verifiable and accurate. At every point T-J has used Geology to fault you just as I have used electrical theory and mathematics to fault you. From reading posts on this debate I would assume that T-J is at least as good a geologist as I am an engineer, and probably better. You on the other hand seem to be of the opinion that your faith in the fraud Sitchin makes you an expert in all fields of human endeavour.
Your OPINION has as much value in science as that of Harold Camping, and the forthcoming "Nibiru catastrophe" has as much validity as the verbal diahorroea preached by Camping.

This post is being submitted at 19:00 GMT 18:00 BST in order to sit out yet another fraudulent TEOTWAWKI fairy story. Just as I am laughing at Camping now, so I will laugh at all of the gullible suckers who have believed in the Nibiru hoax in October when we are all still unharmed.

Opinion is irrelevant, only mathematics has value.
Quote:

1. Base your conclusions on the evidence. Not vice versa. 2. Measure objectively, not guess selectively. 3. Back up statements with evidence. Claiming something to be a fact does not make it a fact. 4. Use large sample numbers for statistical analysis. 5. Use blind sampling for tests 6. Tests must include control groups. 7. Cite your sources of information. 8. Sources must be reliable, verifiable, and backed with evidence. 9. Opinion is not fact 10. No false evidence.(don't cheat)

T-J has met these criteria. BrianK has met these criteria. MikeB has NOT met these criteria. Lou has NOT met these criteria.

The challenge remains for you to provide a mathematical basis for your hypothesis.

_________________
When in trouble, fear or doubt, run in circles, scream and shout.

@BrianK

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_pTNBN7bqzE

His given end world date actually is much more interesting though, but there should be sightings well before that if Nibiru is close (at least by September). So it will not strike (/pass) entirely without warning ahead of time.

@Lou

Quote:

You continue to use Einstein's old theories. His Special Relativity theory is the appropriate one as it finally abandons gravity and uses magnetic fields.

Please look closely at the term "special relativity. Then look even closer. The word that is relevant is special. Now let me make it even simpler for you. The paragraph that you need to look at is Quote:

As Galilean relativity is now considered an approximation of special relativity valid for low speeds, special relativity is considered an approximation of the theory of general relativity valid for weak gravitational fields. General relativity postulates that physical laws should appear the same to all observers (an accelerating frame of reference being equivalent to one in which a gravitational field acts), and that gravitation is the effect of the curvature of spacetime caused by energy (including mass).

From this you will probably be able to read that special relativity is an approximation valid for weak gravitational fields. The gravitational fields around the sun are not weak, the gravitational attraction between the Earth and the moon is not weak, and the gravitation between Jupiter and its moons is not weak.

The gravitational attraction between the Earth and the Moon is 1.98x10^20N.
I have been unable to calculate the electromagnetic attraction between these two bodies because the moon does not have a magnetic field (inherent or induced) that I could use for calculation. If you would be willing to demonstrate your mathematics I will be willing to carry out the necessary calculations.
Quote:

Clearly you failed to take into account the alignment of it's magnetic field. Clearly you are not taking all information into consideration which is what makes it the exception that proves the rule.

No. We have not failed to take into account the magnetic field.
Yes. We are taking all of the information in to consideration.
In science, there is never an exception that proves the rule.
An exception tests the rule. Either the exception is false or the rule is false. Science tests and rejects false rules. If you have evidence that the rule is false then present the evidence.
Opinion is not evidence.
Assertion is not evidence.
Wishful thinking is not evidence.
Publish evidence of the existence of Nibiru.
Publish evidence that electromotive force is greater than gravity.
My little list defines the standard of acceptability in presenting evidence, but it was clearly too complicated for you to follow, so I will try to simplify it for you and post it later.

_________________
When in trouble, fear or doubt, run in circles, scream and shout.

Volcano erupts in Iceland, spurs 50 quakes

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/43121772

@MikeB

Volcano erupts in Iceland.

Sack of rice falling over in China.


Equally newsworthy in my book.

_________________
- We don't need good ideas, we haven't run out on bad ones yet
- blame Canada

@BrianK

Quote:

The Rapture occurred! I contend all worthy Christians are gone.

It looks like we were too late.

_________________
When in trouble, fear or doubt, run in circles, scream and shout.

@Kronos

Quote:

Volcano erupts in Iceland. Sack of rice falling over in China.

"plume of white smoke about 15 km (9 miles) into the air"

http://ca.reuters.com/article/topNews/idCATRE74K2KP20110521

It's Iceland's most active volcano, but this seems to be a new record since recorded history for this volcano.

@MikeB

Oh for goodness sake. 'Volcano erupts in Iceland' is not news. The most active volcano in one of the most volcanically active regions on Earth would be more notable if it went for long *without* erupting. And as for those fifty earthquakes, well, the biggest was 3.7 on the Richter Scale. If this is your 'Rapture', frankly I'm disappointed.

Quote:

this seems to be a new record since recorded history for this volcano.

Stop trying to scare people. If you've got the history of the Grimsvotn volcano, and can prove that it has in recent years or months set a new record for activity, please present that evidence.

Until you do so, I will stick with the official records that indicate Grimsvotn last erupted in 2004.

Geology clearly isn't your strong point, it it? You've still yet to address the geological evidence against your Nibiru hypothesis presented on post #17.

Last edited by T-J on 22-May-2011 at 12:11 AM.

@T-J

Quote:

If you've got the history of the Grimsvotn volcano, and can prove that it has in recent years or months set a new record for activity, please present that evidence.

http://www.volcano.si.edu/world/volcano.cfm?vnum=1703-01=&volpage=var

@MikeB

According to that link, Grimsvotn erupted in 1972, 1982, 1983, 1996, 1998, 2004 and now in 2011. So, it hasn't suddenly become more active than before.

Do you want to try again on exaggerating the event at Grimsvotn, or would you like to try to answer the points raised in post #17?

@Nimrod & T-J & BrianK

Quote:

Nimrod wrote: @Lou Publish evidence of the existence of Nibiru. Publish evidence that electromotive force is greater than gravity. My little list defines the standard of acceptability in presenting evidence, but it was clearly too complicated for you to follow, so I will try to simplify it for you and post it later.

Let's be clear. Elenin and Honda are related to the Hopi (T-J, are you happy I didn't say HOPI?) Prophecy. Elenin is not Nibiru. Tyche matches it's characteristics and I've already told you twice Sitchin's estimates are for around the year 2900.

Where I agree with MikeB is in the "electric universe theory".
There's plenty of scientific evidence for it. You just refuse to accept it by reading it for yourself and I don't need to recite it to "win on the internet" and am not going to bother.

I've said many times before that gravity is a side-effect or net effect.
This is why computations involving 'gravity' work because the side-effect can be estimated. In other space systems with different magnetic fields, SOLAR(system)-based gravitational math does an epic fail and 'dark matter' is invented to make up the difference in computed 'mass' to account for the orbittal deviations when the math doesn't work.

This is why I say gravity doesn't exist. There is no gravity wave or field or particle. It's just a measured side-effect of the sum of all electro-magnetic forces between two objects on this planet or solar system because we know the paramaters and they are as good as fixed for the time intervals we are working with.

Animals including birds and turtles can detect the Earth's magnetic field, and use the field to navigate during migration. Cows and wild deer tend to align their bodies north-south while relaxing, but not when the animals are under high voltage power lines, leading researchers to believe magnetism is responsible... I guess live animals are not proof in the AW Rocket Scientist community... Even humans maintain balance thanks to magnetic fields and not "gravity". This is why many people experience vertigo near power lines and you notice altitude changes even in an airplane...but people aren't proof either...

Perhaps I don't exist because other than what you read here, I have not provided myself to you for peer review. /fail