we want more
All the lads are cheering
Get the fucking in
we want more
All the lads are cheering
Get the fucking in
we want more
All the lads are cheering
Get the fucking in
we want more
All the lads are cheering
Get the fucking in
we want more
All the lads are cheering
Get the fucking in
we want more
All the lads are cheering
Get the fucking in
we want more
All the lads are cheering
Get the fucking in
we want more
All the lads are cheering
Get the fucking in
we want more
All the lads are cheering
Get the fucking in
we want more
All the lads are cheering
Get the fucking in
we want more
All the lads are cheering
Get the fucking in
we want more
All the lads are cheering
Get the fucking in
we want more
All the lads are cheering
Get the fucking in
we want more
All the lads are cheering
Get the fucking in
we want more
All the lads are cheering
Get the fucking in
we want more
All the lads are cheering
Get the fucking in

Aye, the Macc Lads. Wot a bunch..

hackenslash wrote::beer: we want more
All the lads are cheering
Get the fucking in
we want more
All the lads are cheering
Get the fucking in
we want more
All the lads are cheering
Get the fucking in
we want more
All the lads are cheering
Get the fucking in
we want more
All the lads are cheering
Get the fucking in
we want more
All the lads are cheering
Get the fucking in
we want more
All the lads are cheering
Get the fucking in
we want more
All the lads are cheering
Get the fucking in
we want more
All the lads are cheering
Get the fucking in
we want more
All the lads are cheering
Get the fucking in
we want more
All the lads are cheering
Get the fucking in
we want more
All the lads are cheering
Get the fucking in
we want more
All the lads are cheering
Get the fucking in
we want more
All the lads are cheering
Get the fucking in
we want more
All the lads are cheering
Get the fucking in
we want more
All the lads are cheering
Get the fucking in

We need campermon here. Campermon where are you? hear our call, and come campermon. We want

One last thing before I drop the issue altogether. This is supposedly burckle crater.

lucek wrote:One last thing before I drop the issue altogether. This is supposedly burckle crater.

I commend you as I think the rest of us have given up.

What crater?

RS

A quick review of new posts reveals several corrections you all have made to my claims.
Thank you for your good responses, and clear corrections.

Those of you wasting space, please stop. Who cares if you think this is a joke, once the myths are dispelled, what will remain is fact. Some people see past that closed mindedness to the value of this endeavor.

Those of you who think this is a joke are closed minded because you think these ideas are not worth exploring.
The very idea that water (in whichever form) could form a temporary canopy above the earth and extend life times, as well as cause a great flood...seems ridiculous to you apparently, but how funny will it be for those who believe too easily, if this theory turns out true?

Einstein agrees, that dismissing ideas off-hand (without fair review) is foolish and stupid. So please don't do that.

Me: "Also the idea that the ice or water would fall super heated is ridiculous because of waters vaporization temp of 212F (100C)."


Were does the energy go?

Answer:

Energy beyond that which vaporized the water heats it until it becomes gaseous (so the atoms are separate, and holding more energy than as vapor-molecules)...then they heat up as separate atoms until those become Plasma...
Plasma is when the outer electrons extend well outside of the atoms, far beyond their normal outer shells radius.
The mass of a plasma is generally neutral, making it different than an ionized mass.
If my theory is correct about -&+ together creating gravity, then a very hot (electrically neutral) plasma should have no static field but a greater gravitational field, while a similar mass which is electrically charged (same mass and energy comparatively) will have more static field and weaker gravitational field.
I bet the experimental data already exists out there to check.

-----------------
Thank you for the solar eclipse map, clearly very few people will even see the next one.
Clearly I mistakenly applied the concept of a solar eclipse without considering that fact.

harleyborgais wrote:Me: "Also the idea that the ice or water would fall super heated is ridiculous because of waters vaporization temp of 212F (100C)."


Were does the energy go?

Answer:

Energy beyond that which vaporized the water heats it until it becomes gaseous (so the atoms are separate, and holding more energy than as vapor-molecules)...then they heat up as separate atoms until those become Plasma...
Plasma is when the outer electrons extend well outside of the atoms, far beyond their normal outer shells radius.
The mass of a plasma is generally neutral, making it different than an ionized mass.
If my theory is correct about -&+ together creating gravity, then a very hot (electrically neutral) plasma should have no static field but a greater gravitational field, while a similar mass which is electrically charged (same mass and energy comparatively) will have more static field and weaker gravitational field.
I bet the experimental data already exists out there to check.

-----------------
Thank you for the solar eclipse map, clearly very few people will even see the next one.
Clearly I mistakenly applied the concept of a solar eclipse without considering that fact.

So to review we have energy in the water, making super heated steam. This saves the hypothesis how? We have a hot atmosphere due to the gravitational heating.

To remind you the only way the earth loses heat is to space, and the main way we do is via infrared radiation. In this case we have clouds that absorb and re-radiate infrared radiation and a lot of heat. So how does the earth lose this energy quick enough that anything would survive in this pressure cooker.

harleyborgais wrote:A quick review of new posts reveals several corrections you all have made to my claims.
Thank you for your good responses, and clear corrections.

Those of you wasting space, please stop. Who cares if you think this is a joke, once the myths are dispelled, what will remain is fact. Some people see past that closed mindedness to the value of this endeavor.

Those of you who think this is a joke are closed minded because you think these ideas are not worth exploring.
The very idea that water (in whichever form) could form a temporary canopy above the earth and extend life times, as well as cause a great flood...seems ridiculous to you apparently, but how funny will it be for those who believe too easily, if this theory turns out true?

Einstein agrees, that dismissing ideas off-hand (without fair review) is foolish and stupid. So please don't do that.

Sir this is an open forum. If you don't like the fact people will joke and have fun on you're subject you are free not to post. I'd prefer you didn't leave frankly I find entertainment in some of you're claims on here, and enjoy having a list to research.

Nikola teslas wireless energy can (among other things) cause the effect of noctilucent clouds (which result from water or Hydrogen and Oxygen gas..being propelled well above the 28.3 mile high limit for liquid H2O).

Also nuclear explosions, volcanoes, and icy meteors... all of which deposit Hydrogen and Oxygen into the upper atmosphere, where it forms clouds and gradually falls into the liquid water area where normal cumulonimbus clouds (thunder/lightning/rain clouds) are limited to. I think this is also the ceiling for tornadoes, hurricanes, etc.

--------------------
Most elements will oxidize quite readily (and quickly) because oxygen has one of the lowest boiling points so the electrons in Oxygen are in a comparatively higher energy state than most elements at most temperatures.

So carbons and hydrogens become co2 and h2o whenever they can.

At the low pressures above 28.3 miles Hs and Os can become solids when their temperature is low enough:


So when the light of the sun hits it, Hs and Os separate, but when they are shaded by space debris or the earth (or moon) they freeze back into solids, and can crystallize just like snow...
and that is exactly the material Noctilucent clouds are made of at around 50 miles high.

So they are a candidate for the supposed water canopy, and they can explain longer life spans because of the whole thing with ionizing UV light and free radicals (ions = atoms with less or more electrons than protons. These make reactive molecules that harm your cells).
Also the way that water stays up there it could have contributed to a tremendous rain fall over an extended period of time.
The great flood was supposed to be about 1/9th of a year, or 40 rotations of earth.
-------------------

harleyborgais wrote:Nikola teslas wireless energy can (among other things) cause the effect of noctilucent clouds (which result from water or Hydrogen and Oxygen gas..being propelled well above the 28.3 mile high limit for liquid H2O).

Also nuclear explosions, volcanoes, and icy meteors... all of which deposit Hydrogen and Oxygen into the upper atmosphere, where it forms clouds and gradually falls into the liquid water area where normal cumulonimbus clouds (thunder/lightning/rain clouds) are limited to. I think this is also the ceiling for tornadoes, hurricanes, etc.

You really are underestimating the amount of energy involved in an icy asteroid with enough volume to cover mountains. First we're talking vaporization. Not just of the ice but of rock . Next were're talking about a firestorm that would cover the planet. Then we have a planet with no oceans and a cloud of super heated steam and rock vapor acting as a blanket keeping heat in. This is the kind of impact not seen sense 4.5-4.3 billion years ago.

"Most material ejected from the crater is deposited within a few crater radii, but a small fraction may travel large distances at high velocity, and in large impacts it may exceed escape velocity and leave the impacted planet or moon entirely." http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Impact_crater

"Low Earth Orbit...LEO is between 160–2,000 km (100–1,240 miles) above the Earth's surface"


"The Chicxulub crater... is more than 180 km (110 mi) in diameter" http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chicxulub_crater


So most of the Chicxulub ejecta was deposited within 165 miles of the impact site.
That allows for a significant amount to expand into Noctilucent cloud cover.
Also note that these gases will not fall back down like the solid materials will.
These gases will take a slower way down through the action of precipitation from the atmosphere.

It seems to me this is enough to show that this impact put a lot of UV blocking cloud cover (the water canopy) above the earth for some presently undetermined time period. But I do know that they come down very slowly.

We can also get into the mass of the impactor, the quantity of ejecta, the proportion of water to minerals, etc....
But for me, the diameter of the crater is enough to show that it was a significant amount.


---------------
"To analyze the motion of a body moving under the influence of a force which is always directed towards a fixed point" http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Planetary_ ... tal_motion

Theropod:
Tulane University WEB SITE says:
... An impact like the one that struck the Yucatan Peninsula, in Mexico about 65 million years ago, thought responsible for the extinction of the dinosaurs and numerous other species, created the Chicxulub Crater, 180 km in diameter and released energy equivalent to about 100 million megatons of TNT.

There is the energy of the impact...
now we can use the size (about 6.4-9.3 miles diameter) and try to figure out how much material it launched up.

Apparently I have given the impression that Tsunamis caused by the Chicxulub impact went into orbit, but that is obviously silly.

The portion of water and minerals (sediment) that formed the tsunami is clearly a different portion from the ejecta that attained orbit, and any material that may have actually achieved escape velocity.

Water would have reformed once the material started cooling down (especially above 28 miles high, and more so above 53 miles, then into low orbit of 100 miles high, which most of the ejecta could have reached -references posted above-today).

The time it takes those hydrogen and oxygen atoms (or frozen snow-like molecules) to come down is a long time (see noctilucent clouds).

Plants dont really need or even use the higher UV light which is what the water block out. Those energies cause free radicals (ions-breaking molecules) which decrease life spans (learn about telemerase enzymes for more).

So what challenges have I still not met on this theory?

harleyborgais wrote:"Most material ejected from the crater is deposited within a few crater radii, but a small fraction may travel large distances at high velocity, and in large impacts it may exceed escape velocity and leave the impacted planet or moon entirely." http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Impact_crater

"Low Earth Orbit...LEO is between 160–2,000 km (100–1,240 miles) above the Earth's surface"


"The Chicxulub crater... is more than 180 km (110 mi) in diameter" http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chicxulub_crater


So most of the Chicxulub ejecta was deposited within 165 miles of the impact site.
That allows for a significant amount to expand into Noctilucent cloud cover.
Also note that these gases will not fall back down like the solid materials will.
These gases will take a slower way down through the action of precipitation from the atmosphere.

It seems to me this is enough to show that this impact put a lot of UV blocking cloud cover (the water canopy) above the earth for some presently undetermined time period. But I do know that they come down very slowly.

We can also get into the mass of the impactor, the quantity of ejecta, the proportion of water to minerals, etc....
But for me, the diameter of the crater is enough to show that it was a significant amount.


---------------
"To analyze the motion of a body moving under the influence of a force which is always directed towards a fixed point" http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Planetary_ ... tal_motion

Ok when you made this mistake the first time it was pathetic now I don't even know.

The crater is more than 180 km (110 mi) in diameter, making the feature one of the largest confirmed impact structures on Earth; the impacting bolide that formed the crater was at least 10 km (6 mi) in diameter.

Bold mine.

Diameter is twice radius. Radius is what you are talking about later and that is 90km or 55 miles. Sir this is 6th grade remedial geometry.

harleyborgais wrote:Theropod:
Tulane University WEB SITE says:
... An impact like the one that struck the Yucatan Peninsula, in Mexico about 65 million years ago, thought responsible for the extinction of the dinosaurs and numerous other species, created the Chicxulub Crater, 180 km in diameter and released energy equivalent to about 100 million megatons of TNT.

There is the energy of the impact...
now we can use the size (about 6.4-9.3 miles diameter) and try to figure out how much material it launched up.

If you don't remember I already did. It's a simple calculation a few pages back, practically nothing compared to what you and Hovind describe.

harleyborgais wrote:...Above the 28mile ceiling water goes from solid to gas.
Gas means NOT h2o molecules, but Hydrogen and Oxygen gas atoms separated.
So the H and O recombine as they freeze when the sun does not hit them...

The_Metatron wrote:My elementary school boys know better than this retarded shit. Check that. That would make this an insult to retarded people.

Yay! All we need to do to get elemental hydrogen is subject water to a cold, dark vacuum!

No reason to think then, that this same trick wouldn't work for separating other compounds' constituent elements. So, what about that Harley? Are we to believe that no molecular compounds exist in space?

----------------------------

What is your point here?

Are you saying that I suggest there are no molecules in space?

Well of course there are, but they are solid minerals mostly...and there are plenty of frozen water chunks (asteroids).

I have clearly said that liquid or vaporized h20 molecules can not exist above 28.3 miles elevation...
but that Hydrogen and Oxygen gas do when light is hitting them...
and when there is no light to heat them, they solidify directly into snow-like ice and form such bodies as Noctilucent clouds.

Of course there are many molecular compounds in space, and most of them I do believe are oxides.

Oxygen is the favorite element for all others to bond to because it is the furthest from its boiling point thus its electrons are the furthest from a resting point (the most reactive).
Other elements are below Oxygen actually (by boiling temp), but they are either inert (outer shells full, so no bonding occurs)...
or there is the hydrogen, which is weaker at bonding because it has only one electron and proton.

That is why fire is all about oxygen bonding with each of the other elements, and releasing energy from whatever other elements were bonded before deflagration. Thermite reactions are good examples.

Please quote the post where you calculated the ejecta, I cannot search for it without the key words.
Thanks.