Real Science Radio: Earth & Mercury's Decaying Magnetic Fields
- Thread starter Jefferson
- Start date
:doh:Well done, LH, but I think we all agreed where the mantle was.lain:
According to what I posted magma is melted mantle.
gcthomas
New member
In some cases, yes, so they have different properties, just as water behaves differently from snow.
Stripe had claimed (although now he declines to defend it) that because some magma at some times may be neutrally buoyant, then the solid rock of the mantle (a) can't convect, (b) becomes denser when it melts, (c, the silliest by far) becomes denser when heated.
Since solid mantle and magma behave differently, it is important to distinguish research on magma from that on mantle, especially if he is going to conflate the two materials.
Evolutionists love pretending that their opponent has given up.gcthomas said:
Nope.
The claim is simple. At sufficient pressure, rock becomes more dense upon being melted.
This is the claim you challenged. This is the claim I provided evidence for. This is the claim you are yet to show false.
Yip. Evidence. Respect it. :up:
Actually, just heating might not alter density. Which is another problem for the convection idea.
Which is evo-babble for "We don't want to consider your idea."
From Google Nexus and the TOL app!
gcthomas
New member
You have evidence that hotspots in the mantle aren't buoyant?
GCT, I hadn’t realized it until I stood back and looked at the last number of replies from Stripe, but he has carefully moved back into his previously declared stance of “irritating evolutionists” as his number one priority. Notice how many times he has had proof of his errors presented, yet his response is to trivially deny it. That means this part of this thread no longer is a two-sided discussion of science, but instead simply a forum for Stripe to continually deny he is wrong and to ridicule his opponents.
If you don't want to be part of the conversation, feel free to leave. :thumb:
gcthomas
New member
Nope.
You asked for evidence that rocks become denser upon melting given extreme pressure. We have seen two papers showing examples of exactly that. So far, the evidence supports what I said.
However, the evolutionists have decided to abandon any semblance of rationality and are throwing about insults as if that covers their bankrupt worldview.
Trolls. The lot of you. :troll:
On multiple prior threads when I have conversed with Stripe and he is in over his head, he has abandoned any pretense of honesty, just as he has done here. When that happens, I am fine with letting what has been posted stand as it is. Those readers who honor dogma above reason will not be persuaded by anything I can say, but those who are honestly interested in following the ideas discussed can see for themselves who is being honest.
gcthomas
New member
Yup. Every technical thread he says something so silly that he has to abandon it, since he will never back down after going full pelt in its favour.
gcthomas
New member
Which must be why you keep butting in with these useless posts.
... says the past master at butting in with useless posts. :chuckle:
What are you talking about? I never ever do that. You must be off your meds. Every post I make is on-target. You need to take a chill pill. I never butt in. Dishonest trolls like you are just looking for ways to cause troubles. If you had any sense of rationality you would know that. Insults are your stock-in-trade. Evidence supports everything I say, and none of yours. If you can’t handle the conversation, feel free to leave. Creationists, yuk. Fundies, yuckier. You are just pretending, anyway. It’s all so simple, yet it’s over your head. I pass your puerile games with flying colors and I am consistently accurate and reasonable. You cannot even accurately characterize your position, so there seems no point discussing it. Triply so when you refuse to correct your mistakes. Calm down. Why are you always poisoning the well? You know that is a logical fallacy. You need to let go of your anger and try to engage rationally. Everything I have said is pretty simple, and I believe relevant and reasonable. You need to think through, rationally what we have said. You’re so worked up you can’t see straight. Wake me up when and if your brain wakes up. You really shouldn’t inject straw men arguments in a rational discussion. Etc. etc.Which must be why you keep butting in with these useless posts.
(Wow, that was kinda therapeutic).
GCT, hi! We're past "later that year", and now we're near the end of the following year. Any magnetic field generated? If they've been able to reach full speed, and keep their experiment going, they've now had enough time to simulate 150-billion-years-worth of trying to get a dynamo to generate a magnetic field.
BTW, during that time, at Real Science Radio, we've earned high placement, and even #1 ranking, from Google, for search terms like:
* big bang predictions
* evidence against the big bang
BTW, during that time, at Real Science Radio, we've earned high placement, and even #1 ranking, from Google, for search terms like:
* big bang predictions
* evidence against the big bang
gcthomas
New member
The most recent paper published (Sept: http://link.springer.com/article/10.1186/s40645-015-0058-1) was based, naturally, on work earlier in the year with the half speed rotation. Any work done now will not be published until the papers have been written, gone through the review process and waited for publication.
BTW, during that time, at Real Science Radio, we've earned high placement, and even #1 ranking, from Google, for search terms like:
* big bang predictions
* evidence against the big bang
"big bang predictions" (400 000 results) are not the terms non-cranks would search for. Your page "www.kgov.com/big-bang-predictions" has a Google page rank of only 1/10.
The first hit from "big bang confirmation" (3 million results) (http://www.dailygalaxy.com/my_weblog/) has a page rank of 5/10.
Go figure. The scientific reports are far more popular.
that is surprising. Would have thought that Pastor Bob's followers would log in every day to boost his position.
It is of interest though that Pastor Bob feels his Google rating validates his lousy science. I'm sure Donald Trump's Google rating is through the roof but not sure it validates his candidacy to be President.
gcthomas
New member
Yup. I'd log in regularly to watch an enormous, slow train crash if it were available on the web.
I was a bit surprised to see the recent post from Enyart. This thread lies inactive for over a year, and then out of the blue suddenly Enyart gloats over what I guess he thinks is a failure on the part of gcthomas, and simultaneously Enyart struts around beating his own drum about how popular his stuff is on the net. It may be that I have slacked way off on watching the Enyart side-show in the last couple of years, and maybe this is just another salvo in the battle of Enyart vs science. I presume Enyart wants some sort of admission of failure on the part of gcthomas, yet I can’t help wondering if Enyart has been equally circumspect himself by admitting to his disseminating pseudo-scientific nonsense in the past via radio/TV/internet (Moslem quibla, volcanoes on Io, belt of Orion, depth of moon dust, HDF, etc.).