Jump to content

KOYAANISQATSI

Members
  • Posts

    2,268
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    3

Everything posted by KOYAANISQATSI

  1. Yes Gibber! I am aware they disagree with me about the solidity of the surface of the Sun; instead using the long standing gas ball description and therefore, they don't incorporate solid surface features in their descriptions; because they don't entertain the idea, that the Sun could have anything like a solid surface. I doubt they were ever told; that just maybe, it does.
  2. They could try going for a black hole being at the center of a star again. That was a good one. Don't know! might just be a good shape to go for when it's hot and gooey in whatever fields are kicked up in star formation. It's not less silly than saying gas sucks itself and forms balls like a...like a?...I dunno; BALL LIGHTNING! Don't feel bad; it doesn't have to... It's just all this charged up stuff flying about the whole place. ^(Don't copy that bit. I'm using it in my next paper) Assume what you like mate. I wouldn't know what the crust or owt else about it is made of if that's what is. Rocks, metals, minerals; you know, stuff. Like a great big over charged planet. Not a big bubble of gas so much. EUers bicker and argue all this and everything else about an electric Sun among themselves constantly but the basic idea and the pointers pointing to it, just make a lot more sense than all the crazy s*it relativity drags around with it. Definitely not by his hand. It was just so 'them lot' can get away with more nonsense. Again; Ball Lightning? How do you magnetically reconnect that. If you ever had a plasma globe? did you ever call it a magnetic flux tube ball? Yeah, we'd be hoping they could do their job by now but I was more interested in investigating evidence surrounding the hugh electrical interaction it has suffered in the past. Newton gave a rough sketch of how the bodies move in relation to each other; not what moved them. And well done him. For his time, an outstanding job. The moon isn't where Newtons law says it should be and I presume NASA already figured this and made adjustments but the labels they put over them are a different matter and I Wouldn't hop on one of their inter-galactic cruisers just yet. What with their sums being 70% out on the galactic scale and something like 95% out on the rest of the universe they think they see when they look through their maths jotters.
  3. Not really There are no surface features visible; like was clear in the previous clip I provided. Magical magnetics is the favourite get out of jail card; no electric fields needed (never mind what Maxwell says) No such thing as double layers needed when you got Magnetic reconnection to explain things away (or does it?) "Magnetic reconnection is pseudo-science" Hannes Alfven Still waiting to hear why the sun's so round. Either they got what it's made of wrong or they got gravity wrong but a lot more than likely; is that they got both wrong. Maybe some super string will help, or perhaps some dark energy can be drafted in. Dark Energy is some pretty magic stuff as well; filling space at a density of 10-10 joules per cubic metre, it can shove the stars apart in an already expanding space. Despite the universe expanding; dark energy just keeps on going at 10-10 joules per cubic metre. Does it have to worry about the law of conservation of energy being violated? HELL NO!!! it runs on the negative work of all that other nothingness, outside the universe because in a closed system, no energy is lost to the empty space being created within said closed system...simples. It's all a bit wibbley wobbley, spacey and probably quantum and not to be considered if you don't understand the maths behind the curtain. Pseudo science is a term more relative to relativity methinks.
  4. You should post pictures of it being stable over a longer period. Why limit your pictorial evidence to minutes? 4332 minutes later...? http://www.thesurfaceofthesun.com/images/000606to8_eit195_rd.mpg
  5. If i've already said I think the Sun has a crust and a surface, then I presumed it would be taken as read, that this was not the gas ball of lore that I was describing. If it's not a gas ball then it's not going to flatten to the rules that their imaginary gas ball should and would flatten. It doesn't. So it isn't. Weave it any way you want but it still wont do what you want it to do, just because you want it to be what it just can't be.
  6. Six days you shall labor, and do Radio 2 Remember the Sabbath and keep it holy... http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KMPGAZpi7_4
  7. Perhaps you should take a bit longer to articulate your reply when upset on finding your posts crushed. That one just had the hurt of the butt, written all over it.
  8. "astronomers had always expected our nearest star to bulge slightly at its equator, making it very slightly flying-saucer shaped." Well it's the astronomers expectations, not mine! I think not! Although saying that the sun was this round in the past, would cause multiple glaringly obvious problems that would be spotted by any undergraduate who knows even basic solar theory. Nevertheless; data is data! http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2012/08/120816150801.htm http://oi48.tinypic.com/2r58g2a.jpg Yes! your problem here is that you are trying to group together; the Sun, that has been observed and measured, with neutron stars that have never been seen and are only inferred by mathematics. A common mistake. In truth; neutron stars can not exist, as they violate the island of stability. For some the new Sun finding is not that surprising. Others will just have to stay in school scratching heads; until teacher decides to admit to the children, that the old solar model was badly botched.
  9. Shocked scientists discover that the Sun is not a flying-saucer http://www.guardian.co.uk/science/2012/aug/16/sun-perfect-sphere-nature
  10. quite so. Besides there's worse things go's down around here. Some folk will hunt you down, break your skull, leave you for dead for no reason whatsoever; then get their name taken off court listings, and when the case comes up manage to avoid getting put up on the main page but allowed to slip past public view as quietly as possible, with hardly a blip on the radar. As long as you know a funny handshake it is amazing how easy it is to 'TUP' the scales of justice. http://www.shetnews.co.uk/newsbites/5420-yell-man-appears-on-assault-charge
  11. Rowdy Yates was Clint in Rawhide. Roddy Piper was out of bubblegum. Not all sevicemen will be at the games http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qsnZ1BFchfE The scam will always work; people are just stupid like that when their leaders speak but yes Mr Icke is most definitely NOT the credible and verifiable source one should be asking or promoting. This from auntie Beeb... http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sbkvz4hezmU&feature=related http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vYYKaOIh9aw&feature=related
  12. In the fifth dimension beyond that which is known to man. A dimension as vast as space and as timeless as infinity. In the middle ground between light and shadow, between science and superstition, between the pit of man's fears and the summit of his knowledge. The dimension of imagination. An area which we call the Leok Zone. http://oi48.tinypic.com/2eehdzt.jpg
  13. I just get the feeling, that if It was said such things could be found, before they had the data, that "impossible" would be top of the board in a cosmologist survey response; no doubt due to the multiple glaringly obvious problems that would be spotted by any undergraduate who knows even basic solar theory.
  14. Scientists say stars are impossible http://www.space.com/16739-impossible-stars-close-orbits.html
  15. "Be aware of what you KNOW and what you BELIEVE. Don't ever let what you believe block the path of knowledge, for knowledge is truth. Belief is a temporary crutch at best, and crutches are for disabled people." http://www.nyu.edu/about/news-publications/news/2012/07/09/researchers-create-mri-of-the-suns-interior-motions.html http://space.about.com/od/solarsystem/a/Origins_of_the_Solar_System.htm http://space.about.com/b/2010/04/19/theory-of-solar-systems-challenged.htm
  16. Cheers Iknow. Bit late now; Just gonna chillax by getting a quick BJ afore bed...
  17. But I wasn't talking about the loops michael, I meant the visible surface. Run the two pictures together. Bit stable for the surface of the Sun one would think. Jesus christ! Yes there are issues in need of research but it hardly amounts to the likes of the gaping holes, that you try to stuff full of dark energy and dark matter. You may lay claim to solar theory, but in truth you've been stumbling around for years like a blind blind man, groping to get to grips with even the most obvious feature; the corona and why it is so much hotter than the surface.
  18. Really? Did anybody else here ever think like this; what with special relativity being vindicated many times experimentally. I never did. I always thought they knew damn well what they were talking about; right up to the moment that I figured out they were just all full of s**t. Maybe you missed the massive amount of media publicity, the idiot box pumps out every goddamn day. At this point I would like to call bullcrap. You now look as honest to me as you have been interesting; as in not in the slightest bit. Why? did Shetlink seem like the type of place where such things gain much interest. I doubt it. More likely you saw the EU was being spouted here and have been drafted in to provide the robust response that your church demands be given to such things. Do you even know where Shetland is? is there a reason why only this thread has any interest to you. I told you the volcanos were just a plasma discharge and anything else will have to wait until N.A.S.A (never-a-straight-answer) are forced to be a bit more honest on what they report they witness. The people are starting to wake up to the crap your creed sell them on a daily basis and sooner or later it will sink your ghost ship. I don't give a flying monkeys f*** what method you use to make me look like a yokel without a clue because you may well be right but not on this and that's for damn sure. Your sole purpose here is to convince folk that there is nothing to see outside what they are told to see; even though the truth has been right in front of them for many years. Tell me Brian, does this look like a boiling hell of nuclear gas or are we seeing an electric discharge from a very solid and unchanging surface... http://oi48.tinypic.com/a3892.jpg http://oi45.tinypic.com/esjoz6.jpg One would think that in two minutes thirty seconds you would be seeing some changes and the loops sure flicker about but the base is grounded and FIXED. Don't bother responding; I can already sense the coronal foam forming at the sides of your lying mouth. Just what are those UFO sightings Brian. why is NASA so quiet still on the subject? Are they having trouble finding a realistic way to present them as floating, fleeting, merging, snowballs, reflecting sunlight? Are they in cahoots with the galactic federation of light and remain silent to keep aliens hidden and give David Icke something to talk about? Truth is; there is nothing here for Mulder and Scully to get out of bed for because all you got there is a few charged plasmoids doing there thing. Thing is though; that little truth is going to fly straight in the face of a certain popular idea about the nature of our Universe, isn't it Brian? Same goes for ball lightning... http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2006/05/060531-ball-lightning.html Can't touch this; can you Brian? Truth here might be a bit of a shock to the system. When it's not students with boards on their feet; you can put down crop circles as the grounded auroral footprint of these little beauties and tell the motherships of lore to piss of back to the field of sci fi. All these things and so much more are predictable and expected features in an electric universe. The mainstream will not and can not say a damn thing about, without shooting their own feet clean off. I won't be debating anything more with such a loathsome little shill as yourself anymore Brian. You are not here to spread any knowledge but just to cover for the lie that you have wasted your own and others lives on. Fire at will Brian Your bullets will in the end prove useless against this idea, that in time is going to take your little paradigm and nail it to the ******* wall.
  19. Course I can; it's where you put them if you're worried about someone pinching them
  20. http://worldsciencefestival.com/videos/ask_brian_greene_and_lawrence_krauss_cerns_higgs_announcement Welcome to the Aether We've been expecting you. As for your god particles; I'm sure with a few more 100's of billions of pounds of grants and public funding, they'll be able to tell us they've found Jesus or Madeleine Mccann in there as well. Not quite. I figured out you lot were wrong all by myself. I was quite surprised and a little bit miffed once I found out others had got there before me.
×
×
  • Create New...