Godlike Productions - Discussion Forum
Users Online Now: 2,164 (Who's On?)Visitors Today: 808,320
Pageviews Today: 1,333,655Threads Today: 537Posts Today: 9,268
01:37 PM


Back to Forum
Back to Forum
Back to Thread
Back to Thread
REPORT ABUSIVE REPLY
Message Subject Comet C/2012 S1 ISON is Nibiru the great perturber.
Poster Handle Dr. Astro
Post Content
...

The first part is not confirmation of the claim. I did not put words in your mouth, I explained why you are wrong and asked you a question. I addressed the issue of "atmospheric changes." Atmospheric changes happen all the time in the absence of comets, it means nothing with respect to the claim. If NASA detects something new about the atmosphere of Mars after comet ISON it will not serve as confirmation that it had anything to do with ISON or that ISON was a massive object as McCanney claims. If what McCanney claims is true then it would produce a detectable perturbation of the orbit. If there is no perturbation then it was not the massive object he claimed it was. Will you ignore that empirical data if indeed it proves that McCanney was wrong, yes or no? Answer the question.
...

Your ignorance is your problem, not mine.
...

I don't give a damn. It is not up to me to teach you astronomy so that you can confirm it for yourself. I will show my data and you can work on your own at studying astronomy and acquiring the equipment or access to equipment needed to repeat it for yourself if you like, but that is not my problem if you are incapable or unwilling to do it. You clearly don't understand science at all if you think the onus is on me to do that for you.
...

I do not agree to your terms. Either you will accept the empirical data or you will ignore the empirical data, which is it?
...

Nope. You have until October to learn how to do astronomy and astrometry for yourself if you want to be able to do it for yourself. That is not my problem. Atmospheric changes etc are not confirmation of ISON being a massive object, particularly in the face of a lack of perturbations in the orbit of Mars.

If NASA's probes detect something new about the atmosphere of Mars that they hadn't noticed before (entirely possible, maybe even likely given the rate of new discoveries), that would meet your arbitrary and incorrect goalpost and allow you to claim you were right when in fact it wouldn't be confirmation at all. I will present astrometric data showing the presence or absence of perturbations in Mars' orbit. You can either choose to accept it or ignore empirical data. Your choice.
 Quoting: Dr. Astro


WOW. After reading this argument i have come to this conclusion.

I FEEL you have nothing to contribute to this discussion.

Glauco just proved to me that your insights have no meaning.
 Quoting: Skyking 19276606

Your feelings are irrelevant.
He asked simple questions, 1 example to share your knowledge in astronomy. Which I think should not be hard for an any astronomer.
 Quoting: skyking

I keep asking 1 simple question, not a trick question either, just 1 simple question to see how intellectually honest or dishonest he is willing to be. I keep getting nothing but dodging from him. His request is inherently dishonest, he knows there is no planet (maybe you could make a case for Io, but that's a moon not a planet) in our solar system that currently undergoes changes that extreme that rapidly, so why exactly do YOU claim it should not be hard for an astronomer to produce an example of something that does not exist?

But ok, if you two are going to be like that and ask dishonest questions you already know the answer to, I'll give you an example to work with whether you like it or not. Io. Io is an example of a solar system body that undergoes massive amounts of volcanism, rapid turnover of surface material, and atmospheric density changes.
 Quoting: Dr. Astro


Glauco: Give me only one example of a planet getting or losing large amount of atmosphere, or getting dozens of vulcans erupting, or getting new moutains by itself in one-week period and I do the bet in your conditions.

Astro: I'll give you an example to work with whether you like it or not. Io. Io is an example of a solar system body that undergoes massive amounts of volcanism, rapid turnover of surface material, and atmospheric density changes.

ok. Let me rephrase this. Not I FEEL but IMO.

Your right...my feelings are irrelevant but my OPINION might not be.
 Quoting: Skyking 19276606

An opinion is only worth what you can back it up with. Same goes for everyone, myself included.

I like it! know why? Its an example! Now if its a planet or not doesnt matter to me. The fact there is a object out there that shows atmospheric changes (with in a week or not)
tells me that this has been observed before and is not enough evidence FOR ME that this comet IS the reason for said changes.

Astro: so why exactly do YOU claim it should not be hard for an astronomer to produce an example of something that does not exist?

Now was that hard?

Thanks for the reply Astro my OPINION of you just got better!
 Quoting: skyking

In a literal sense it doesn't really count; the request was for a planet, not a moon, so that would ordinarily exclude Io from consideration. Nevertheless, I am glad it satisfied you.
 
Please verify you're human:




Reason for reporting:







GLP