|
| Page 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29 |
Zetatalk debunker threads are hilarious ...
|
Anonymous Coward
User ID: 703876
6/23/2009 10:38 AM | | Re: Zetatalk debunker threads are hilarious ... | Quote |
The phases of the moon prove it's rotating. It's as simple as that. |
|
DrPostman  
Forum Moderator
User ID: 51197
6/23/2009 10:38 AM
 | | Re: Zetatalk debunker threads are hilarious ... | Quote |
I just want to add here that it looks like you guys might be hacking at the notion of the moon lacking spin a little too much.
Motion, ultimately, is defined along with a frame of reference. We tend to take that frame of reference for granted as implied by context.
But all motion is ultimately relative.
So Nancy can hardly be wrong if she's talking about the moon's spin if her frame of reference is to that which is synchronized to that spin, like the earth. Quoting: Andromeda
What most people fail to realize is that both the Earth and
the Moon orbit around a barycenter, like this
The Moon most defiantly turns on it's own axis or it couldn't
keep the same face towards the Earth.
"I've had two teenagers who were considering killing themselves, because they didn't want to
be around when the world ends. Two women in the last two weeks said they were contemplating
killing their children and themselves so they wouldn't have to suffer through the end of the world."
-- NASA Astrobiology Institute scientist David Morrison, on 2012 fears
Can't PM? Feel free to email me at DrPostman(at)gmail.com
Battlefield Heroes is now in Open Beta
[link to www.godlikeproductions.com]
Want to know if a site is down, or if the problem is at your end? Go to:
[link to downforeveryoneorjustme.com] |
|
Circuit Breaker
Countdown To Nancy's Next Failure
User ID: 612979
6/23/2009 11:58 AM
 | | Re: Zetatalk debunker threads are hilarious ... | Quote |
Ultimately, what it comes down to, the only way Free Store will believe anything is if the "Zetas" tell him.
Last Edited by Circuit Breaker on 6/23/2009 at 12:08 PM |
|
User # 78/68
User ID: 681262
6/23/2009 12:39 PM
 | | Re: Zetatalk debunker threads are hilarious ... | Quote |
I just want to add here that it looks like you guys might be hacking at the notion of the moon lacking spin a little too much.
Motion, ultimately, is defined along with a frame of reference. We tend to take that frame of reference for granted as implied by context.
But all motion is ultimately relative.
So Nancy can hardly be wrong if she's talking about the moon's spin if her frame of reference is to that which is synchronized to that spin, like the earth.
Of course, but the alternative is to say that the Moon is holding still and the starfield is rotating around it. Do you think that is happening?
She also says that the Moon wouldn't have ANY rotation if not for being paired with Earth because the Moon doesn't have a molten core. She's just wrong. Quoting: Menow 405501
You haven't proven this Menow.
The Earth is what is responsible for the "spin" of the moon. If you removed the Earth, the moon would probably spin for a while until it gradually slowed down and it's spin decayed to zero. It has no core, so no particle flow chasing each other creating a spin.
I think if you stopped the moon from spinning (hypothetical, I know this is hard for you to understand) and then let it go again in it's present orbit, it would increase it's "rate of spin" until it tidally locked back on to Earth's "spin rate". It's not "spinning" at the rate it is by fluke. The Earth controls that rate of turn ... ie. it is glued to it. |
|
Circuit Breaker
Countdown To Nancy's Next Failure
User ID: 612979
6/23/2009 1:02 PM
| | Re: Zetatalk debunker threads are hilarious ... | Quote |
You haven't proven this Menow.
The Earth is what is responsible for the "spin" of the moon. If you removed the Earth, the moon would probably spin for a while until it gradually slowed down and it's spin decayed to zero. It has no core, so no particle flow chasing each other creating a spin.
I think if you stopped the moon from spinning (hypothetical, I know this is hard for you to understand) and then let it go again in it's present orbit, it would increase it's "rate of spin" until it tidally locked back on to Earth's "spin rate". It's not "spinning" at the rate it is by fluke. The Earth controls that rate of turn ... ie. it is glued to it. Quoting: User # 78/68
I don't think that anyone disputed that the Earth impacted the Moon's rotation. As I gather from your post, you do agree that the moon does rotate. However, I would like to know where you get your information about the Moon's core. Everything I've seen says that it does have one...although small. But, it's a core just the same.
[link to www.psrd.hawaii.edu] |
|
User # 78/68
User ID: 681262
6/23/2009 1:20 PM
| | Re: Zetatalk debunker threads are hilarious ... | Quote |
You haven't proven this Menow.
The Earth is what is responsible for the "spin" of the moon. If you removed the Earth, the moon would probably spin for a while until it gradually slowed down and it's spin decayed to zero. It has no core, so no particle flow chasing each other creating a spin.
I think if you stopped the moon from spinning (hypothetical, I know this is hard for you to understand) and then let it go again in it's present orbit, it would increase it's "rate of spin" until it tidally locked back on to Earth's "spin rate". It's not "spinning" at the rate it is by fluke. The Earth controls that rate of turn ... ie. it is glued to it.
I don't think that anyone disputed that the Earth impacted the Moon's rotation. As I gather from your post, you do agree that the moon does rotate. However, I would like to know where you get your information about the Moon's core. Everything I've seen says that it does have one...although small. But, it's a core just the same.
[ link to www.psrd.hawaii.edu]
I've read some books on this topic, one such book, Alien Agenda, by Jim Marrs. He's a well known and respected author and researcher. In that book it claimed NASA has either crashed things into the Moon and/or exploded devices on the surface of the moon while having listening devices in it's crust. They heard long echos as the sound pinged within the moon extensively. I still have the book, and might read this chapter again, as it was interesting. I have also heard from other sources about the moon being hollow. Also, the moon may be denser (the rock) at it's surface than deeper down. The opposite of Earth. Interesting stuff, the moon! |
|
Anonymous Coward
User ID: 6330
6/23/2009 2:36 PM | | Re: Zetatalk debunker threads are hilarious ... | Quote |
The Earth is what is responsible for the "spin" of the moon. If you removed the Earth, the moon would probably spin for a while until it gradually slowed down and it's spin decayed to zero. It has no core, so no particle flow chasing each other creating a spin. Quoting: User # 78/68
Interesting. How do the Zetas define all the other objects tidally locked to their primaries that DO have cores? Particle flows appears to be unecessary to explain this motion, given the cores of other primaries.
However, #78/68 is right that if the Earth disappeared in a puff of logic, the Moon would gradually (over hundreds of millions of years) slow its rate of spin to become tidally locked to the Sun. I don't think that could be called a 'zero' spin, but, as noted above, it depends on what frame you choose. The Moon never rotates in a frame of reference where the Moon never rotates.
I think if you stopped the moon from spinning (hypothetical, I know this is hard for you to understand) and then let it go again in it's present orbit, it would increase it's "rate of spin" until it tidally locked back on to Earth's "spin rate". It's not "spinning" at the rate it is by fluke. The Earth controls that rate of turn ... ie. it is glued to it. Quoting: User # 78/68
You know, I'm not certain if tidal locking works that way. I don't think it can impart energy to accelerate a bodies' motion. I think it can impart energy to slow it...sort of like friction. But I don't think tidal locking could 'speed up' an objects spin...
I could easily be wrong, however. Any explanations out there? |
|
Circuit Breaker
Countdown To Nancy's Next Failure
User ID: 612979
6/23/2009 2:59 PM
| | Re: Zetatalk debunker threads are hilarious ... | Quote |
Eventually, the Earth's rotation will slow enough that its rotation will equal its orbit. |
|
Anonymous Coward
User ID: 6330
6/23/2009 3:04 PM | | Re: Zetatalk debunker threads are hilarious ... | Quote |
Eventually, the Earth's rotation will slow enough that its rotation will equal its orbit. Quoting: Circuit Breaker
I think that's true, but I believe the Sun doesn't last long enough for it to finish locking. It'll take more than five billion years...
I also think that the Sun doesn't give us quite enough time to tidally lock to the Moon, although the days will slowly get longer over millions of years. Eventually one face of the Earth would tidally lock to the Moon, were there enough time for our rate of rotation to slow to that point.
Interesting stuff. |
|
Anonymous Coward
User ID: 6330
6/23/2009 3:10 PM | | Re: Zetatalk debunker threads are hilarious ... | Quote |
Funny how only one side of the moon sees the stars rising and falling
Guess that proves it eh? Quoting: Free Store
That's not the way it works. All sides of the Moon see the stars rising and setting. In fact, even on the daytime side, you can see stars since there is not atmosphere to scatter sunlight.
However, the lunar 'day' is about 28 days long. The Sun slowly rises from the horizon to its zenith over about a week, then slowly sets at the opposite horizon over the next week, then you have 2 weeks of darkness before the cycle repeats. This is true wherever on the Moon you are.
Likewise, the stars rise and set in much the same way, over the course of a month. However, they are a little different, as each lunar 'day' the Sun rises in a different constellation.
The Earth does hang (mostly) motionless in the lunar sky, due to the Moon's tidal lock.
Hope that explains things a bit. |
|
Anonymous Coward
User ID: 703876
6/23/2009 3:42 PM | | Re: Zetatalk debunker threads are hilarious ... | Quote |
You haven't proven this Menow.
The Earth is what is responsible for the "spin" of the moon. If you removed the Earth, the moon would probably spin for a while until it gradually slowed down and it's spin decayed to zero. It has no core, so no particle flow chasing each other creating a spin.
I think if you stopped the moon from spinning (hypothetical, I know this is hard for you to understand) and then let it go again in it's present orbit, it would increase it's "rate of spin" until it tidally locked back on to Earth's "spin rate". It's not "spinning" at the rate it is by fluke. The Earth controls that rate of turn ... ie. it is glued to it. Quoting: User # 78/68
This is just stupidly wrong, Luser. A body's spin has nothing to do with your imaginary "particle flow". And you speak of Menow not having "proven" anything...try to find ANYTHING other than Nancy's blathering idiosy that supports your claim! |
|
Free Store
User ID: 142626
6/23/2009 3:46 PM
 | | Re: Zetatalk debunker threads are hilarious ... | Quote |
Ultimately, what it comes down to, the only way Free Store will believe anything is if the "Zetas" tell him. Quoting: Circuit Breaker
Ultimately Circuit Breaker I can abstractly see what Grant and the Zetas are talking about
By you saying I will believe anything the Zetas say as your final answer tells me you are towing one's line and not taking my actual observation of the gif or any other gif/ vid into account..just say it's me following the Zetas..fail
Another thing I said is does NASA refer to a space capsule orbiting the Earth as rotating around the Earth..no never :>
To change the story...hmmm no recovery of black boxs yet
We shall see...
"do geese see god?"
"... lol, do your eyes need proof that they can see for to be able to see? "
gooderboy |
|
Circuit Breaker
Countdown To Nancy's Next Failure
User ID: 612979
6/23/2009 3:46 PM
| | Re: Zetatalk debunker threads are hilarious ... | Quote |
While I don't agree with the previous poster's method, I do agree that your claim of a "particle flow" is, as far as I can tell, just a theory or claim and hasn't been proven. I'm not dismissing it. Just saying there needs to be more data. |
|
Anonymous Coward
User ID: 709137
6/23/2009 3:47 PM | | Re: Zetatalk debunker threads are hilarious ... | Quote |
I've read some books on this topic, one such book, Alien Agenda, by Jim Marrs. He's a well known and respected author and researcher. In that book it claimed NASA has either crashed things into the Moon and/or exploded devices on the surface of the moon while having listening devices in it's crust. They heard long echos as the sound pinged within the moon extensively. I still have the book, and might read this chapter again, as it was interesting. I have also heard from other sources about the moon being hollow. Also, the moon may be denser (the rock) at it's surface than deeper down. The opposite of Earth. Interesting stuff, the moon! Quoting: User # 78/68
err, no, he is a well known internet wingnut.
Hint: google is your friend |
|
Circuit Breaker
Countdown To Nancy's Next Failure
User ID: 612979
6/23/2009 3:51 PM
| | Re: Zetatalk debunker threads are hilarious ... | Quote |
By you saying I will believe anything the Zetas say as your final answer tells me you are towing one's line and not taking my actual observation of the gif or any other gif/ vid into account..just say it's me following the Zetas..fail Quoting: Free Store
You've been extolling how "right" the "Zetas" are about everything for the past several years, while dismissing anything presented that shows they are wrong. That highly suggests you only believe what "they" tell you through Nancy. So, this is not a failure. It is an accurate statement based on my personal observation.
Another thing I said is does NASA refer to a space capsule orbiting the Earth as rotating around the Earth..no never :> Quoting: Free Store
What has a space capsule got to do with anything?
To change the story...hmmm no recovery of black boxs yet Quoting: Free Store
And still no evidence that some "electromagnetic flux" brought it down either. |
|
Free Store
User ID: 142626
6/23/2009 3:56 PM | | Re: Zetatalk debunker threads are hilarious ... | Quote |
Guess we will never know without the black boxes |
|
Menow
User ID: 405501
6/23/2009 4:02 PM | | Re: Zetatalk debunker threads are hilarious ... | Quote |
I just want to add here that it looks like you guys might be hacking at the notion of the moon lacking spin a little too much.
Motion, ultimately, is defined along with a frame of reference. We tend to take that frame of reference for granted as implied by context.
But all motion is ultimately relative.
So Nancy can hardly be wrong if she's talking about the moon's spin if her frame of reference is to that which is synchronized to that spin, like the earth.
Of course, but the alternative is to say that the Moon is holding still and the starfield is rotating around it. Do you think that is happening?
She also says that the Moon wouldn't have ANY rotation if not for being paired with Earth because the Moon doesn't have a molten core. She's just wrong.
You haven't proven this Menow. Quoting: User # 78/68
Proven what? Please be specific. You are adept at saying nothing and then claiming to be right. Exactly WHAT have I allegedly not proven, and exactly WHAT would you accept as proof, if anything.
The Earth is what is responsible for the "spin" of the moon. If you removed the Earth, the moon would probably spin for a while until it gradually slowed down and it's spin decayed to zero. It has no core, so no particle flow chasing each other creating a spin. Quoting: User # 78/68
You mean we are supposed to just accept Nancy Lieder's proclamations as fact? Where is your evidence, much less any "proof" of this malarky?
I think if you stopped the moon from spinning (hypothetical, I know this is hard for you to understand) Quoting: User # 78/68
It is not *I* who is having trouble understanding. How can you STOP something from spinning if it is NOT SPINNING in the first place. This is what Nancy claims and YOU AGREE WITH, remember?
and then let it go again in it's present orbit, it would increase it's "rate of spin" Quoting: User # 78/68
Excuse me. Nancy's claim is that the MOON DOES NOT ROTATE, so why are you talking about increasing "rate of spin"? How can something increase it's rate of spin until it suddenly STOPS SPINNING???
until it tidally locked back on to Earth's "spin rate". Quoting: User # 78/68
The Moon is, in fact, tidally locked to Earth, but it is NOT tidally locked to Earth's "spin rate". What you are saying is non-sense.
It's not "spinning" at the rate it is by fluke. Quoting: User # 78/68
It's NOT SPINNING AT ALL, according to Nancy. Why do you keep contradicting her while trying to support her claim?
The Earth controls that rate of turn ... ie. it is glued to it. Quoting: User # 78/68
I have already posted(and you ignored) that it matters NOT ONE WHIT what caused the Moon to rotate in the first place. It *IS* rotating. Nancy's claim is that THE MOON DOES NOT ROTATE.
GET IT??
YET??
The other gobbldygook is beside the point. |
|
Menow
User ID: 405501
6/23/2009 4:07 PM | | Re: Zetatalk debunker threads are hilarious ... | Quote |
Ultimately, what it comes down to, the only way Free Store will believe anything is if the "Zetas" tell him.
Ultimately Circuit Breaker I can abstractly see what Grant and the Zetas are talking about
By you saying I will believe anything the Zetas say as your final answer tells me you are towing one's line and not taking my actual observation of the gif or any other gif/ vid into account..just say it's me following the Zetas..fail
Another thing I said is does NASA refer to a space capsule orbiting the Earth as rotating around the Earth..no never :>
To change the story...hmmm no recovery of black boxs yet
We shall see... Quoting: Free Store
No, NASA wouldn't say that because it is improper terminology. An orbit is a revolution, not a rotation. |
|
Menow
User ID: 405501
6/23/2009 4:09 PM | | Re: Zetatalk debunker threads are hilarious ... | Quote |
Guess we will never know without the black boxes Quoting: Free Store 142626
And if the boxes ARE recovered, you will STILL ignore any evidence contained in them which contradicts anything Nancy has ever told you. |
|
Free Store
User ID: 142626
6/23/2009 4:18 PM | | Re: Zetatalk debunker threads are hilarious ... | Quote |
Guess we will never know without the black boxes
And if the boxes ARE recovered, you will STILL ignore any evidence contained in them which contradicts anything Nancy has ever told you. Quoting: Menow 405501
And if they are not recovered are you going to give Nancy a little more respect? |
|
Menow
User ID: 405501
6/23/2009 4:21 PM | | Re: Zetatalk debunker threads are hilarious ... | Quote |
Guess we will never know without the black boxes
And if the boxes ARE recovered, you will STILL ignore any evidence contained in them which contradicts anything Nancy has ever told you.
And if they are not recovered are you going to give Nancy a little more respect? Quoting: Free Store 142626
Why? All she said was that they are unlikely to be recovered. ANYONE could have "predicted" that.
Nancy already utterly failed with the ADAM AIR claim, yet you deny that clear fact. |
|
Free Store
User ID: 142626
6/23/2009 4:27 PM | | Re: Zetatalk debunker threads are hilarious ... | Quote |
Because they did not salvage the plane as they said they would
total cop out
No plane no gain.. |
|
Free Store
User ID: 142626
6/23/2009 4:31 PM | | Re: Zetatalk debunker threads are hilarious ... | Quote |
Why? All she said was that they are unlikely to be recovered. ANYONE could have "predicted" that. Quoting: Menow 405501
No because the company that makes the black boxes says they have a 100 percent recovery rating meaning they have never lost a black box |
|
Menow
User ID: 405501
6/23/2009 4:32 PM | | Re: Zetatalk debunker threads are hilarious ... | Quote |
Because they did not salvage the plane as they said they would
total cop out
No plane no gain.. Quoting: Free Store 142626
When did "they" say they would "salvage the plane" and why would that matter. They recovered the flight data recorders and several crutial parts of the plane IN THE OCEAN. Nancy claimed the plane went down in an inland lake. Nancy WRONG, WRONG, WRONG, no matter how you try to deny it.
Nuff said. I will NOT argue with you anymore about it and have you ignore the facts. |
|
Menow
User ID: 405501
6/23/2009 4:34 PM | | Re: Zetatalk debunker threads are hilarious ... | Quote |
Why? All she said was that they are unlikely to be recovered. ANYONE could have "predicted" that.
No because the company that makes the black boxes says they have a 100 percent recovery rating meaning they have never lost a black box Quoting: Free Store 142626
link?
How does that mean anything to Nancy's mushy prediction? When did that company declare that they WOULD recover THESE boxes? |
|
Free Store
User ID: 142626
6/23/2009 4:42 PM | |
Menow
User ID: 405501
6/23/2009 4:47 PM | | Re: Zetatalk debunker threads are hilarious ... | Quote |
Quoting: Free Store 142626
"...says he hopes..."
5 seconds of reading to show that they didn't predict or promise ANYTHING. So what is your point? Kindly stop wasting my time. |
|
Uh, OK
User ID: 385444
6/23/2009 4:49 PM | | Re: Zetatalk debunker threads are hilarious ... | Quote |
Planet X or some large body with most likely drop by some time in the near future.
But, lets get something straight. There are no Zetas. They may talk with beings claiming to be Zetas, but I find it highly unlikely that is true. They are something sinister. Nancy has made statement after statement that turns out to be false, which in most circles makes her a liar and someone who should not be trusted. But hey, you feel free to follow her and her kind. I have no problem with people who follow people like her of their own free will. One day it will happen and after all their failed predictions they will claim "see it is true" and more will flock to the delusion. Have a great day.
Did you notice how Nancy's thread is no longer on the front page?
Funny thing, CB, both Nancy's June 6 and June 13 threads are on the front page right now (and not because of me). LOL Quoting: Soledad |
|
Free Store
User ID: 142626
6/23/2009 4:51 PM | | Re: Zetatalk debunker threads are hilarious ... | Quote |
Now I am being blamed for waisting your time
hilarious go do your thing and don't let me stop you |
|
Menow
User ID: 405501
6/23/2009 4:56 PM | | Re: Zetatalk debunker threads are hilarious ... | Quote |
Now I am being blamed for waisting your time
hilarious go do your thing and don't let me stop you Quoting: Free Store 142626
If you can't get to a rational point, with something to support it, then you are wasting my time. So can you, or not? |
|
| Page 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29 |
|
