Jump to content




Welcome to Unexplained Mysteries! Please sign in or create an account to start posting and to access a host of extra features.


- - - - -

Earth could become too hot for humans


  • Please log in to reply
45 replies to this topic

#16    SlimJim22

SlimJim22

    Alien Abducter

  • Member
  • 4,682 posts
  • Joined:10 Dec 2009
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Wales

  • "As far as we can discern, the sole purpose of human existence is to kindle a light in the darkness of mere being." Carl Jung

Posted 21 May 2010 - 11:49 AM

View PostJ.B., on 15 May 2010 - 09:08 PM, said:

Planets are planets, and if our planet could become a sun, I should think Sol would have begun as a very cold planet. No dice, I think Electric sun is a pipe-dream, not science. Before you can take a source as anything, you have to research the particulars of the source itself. Who wrote it? What are their credentials? You don't take astrophysics lessons from a fisherman unless you come to find out that fisherman is a retired astrophysicist who spends his non-fishing time staying on top of the latest science in the field.

Personally I think the Electric or Plasma Universe theory makes a great deal of sense but what do I know especially about science.

http://www.electric-...ntroduction.htm

http://www.electric-...rg/indexOLD.htm

It all sounds pretty convincing when compared to the various alternatives.

"I belive no thing, I follow the Law of One. I am a Man-O'-Sion under construction."

#17    Br Cornelius

Br Cornelius

    Omnipotent Entity

  • Member
  • 9,783 posts
  • Joined:13 Aug 2008
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Eire

  • Stupid Monkeys.

    Life Sucks.
    Get over it.

Posted 21 May 2010 - 12:38 PM

View PostSlimJim22, on 21 May 2010 - 11:49 AM, said:

Personally I think the Electric or Plasma Universe theory makes a great deal of sense but what do I know especially about science.

http://www.electric-...ntroduction.htm

http://www.electric-...rg/indexOLD.htm

It all sounds pretty convincing when compared to the various alternatives.

I agree that certain aspects of it clear up a lot of the contradictions implicit in modern physics and cosmology. However I am not a cosmologist or a particle physicist so really am not qualified to comment.
Large chunks of physics are well overdue for a massive overhaul and it is only academic inertia which is stopping it happening.
Thomas Townsend Brown did a lot of experimental research on electrogravitics which demonstrate a definate correlation between high potential electricity and gravity distortion. It is one of the only physical explanations around for what gravity actually is.

Br Cornelius

I believe nothing, but I have my suspicions.

Robert Anton Wilson

#18    Mattshark

Mattshark

    stuff

  • Member
  • 16,985 posts
  • Joined:29 Dec 2006
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Liverpool, UK

  • Sea Shepherd, making conservation harder.

    If you care about wildlife, do not support these pirates.......

Posted 21 May 2010 - 02:48 PM

View PostBr Cornelius, on 21 May 2010 - 12:38 PM, said:

I agree that certain aspects of it clear up a lot of the contradictions implicit in modern physics and cosmology. However I am not a cosmologist or a particle physicist so really am not qualified to comment.
Large chunks of physics are well overdue for a massive overhaul and it is only academic inertia which is stopping it happening.
Thomas Townsend Brown did a lot of experimental research on electrogravitics which demonstrate a definate correlation between high potential electricity and gravity distortion. It is one of the only physical explanations around for what gravity actually is.

Br Cornelius
That may be, but current research pretty much keeps the electric universe idea as pseudo-scientific as it is completely contradictory to all the evidence. It has no scientific basis.

Algae : Protists not Plants!

YNWA

#19    Remelic

Remelic

    Ectoplasmic Residue

  • Member
  • Pip
  • 126 posts
  • Joined:13 Apr 2010
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Canada

  • "It is the mark of an educated mind to be able to entertain a thought without accepting it" - Aristotle

Posted 21 May 2010 - 03:19 PM

View PostMattshark, on 21 May 2010 - 02:48 PM, said:

That may be, but current research pretty much keeps the electric universe idea as pseudo-scientific as it is completely contradictory to all the evidence. It has no scientific basis.

Well I tried not getting involved but I have to ask...

What evidence? What evidence disproves the Electric Sun/Universe?
I have to hear this...

It is completely ignorant to dismiss electric/plasma/magnetic physics out of cosmology...wouldn't you say?

Since no one here is Einstein or Steven Hawkins, telling you is like telling a priest that God doesn't exist. The priest wont believe it until the bible tells him also.

You are believing in fifty year old physics that completely disregards electricity in space and that is a huge mistake. I guess you are saying that we Earthlings have the only planet privileged enough to support electricity Since the cosmos has nothing to do with it.

Much of the current knowledge of the Sun-Earth connection can be historically credited to Kristian Birkeland and Hannes Alfven, among others, who could back up their statements with experimental data, that today is proven correct. Electrical engineering and plasma physics ties in very well with several established fields of science, so it's not some separate invented field that one can freely decide to include or not include into astrophysics.

Electric Sun

Cheers...


#20    Mattshark

Mattshark

    stuff

  • Member
  • 16,985 posts
  • Joined:29 Dec 2006
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Liverpool, UK

  • Sea Shepherd, making conservation harder.

    If you care about wildlife, do not support these pirates.......

Posted 21 May 2010 - 03:29 PM

View PostRemelic, on 21 May 2010 - 03:19 PM, said:

Well I tried not getting involved but I have to ask...

What evidence? What evidence disproves the Electric Sun/Universe?
I have to hear this...

It is completely ignorant to dismiss electric/plasma/magnetic physics out of cosmology...wouldn't you say?

Since no one here is Einstein or Steven Hawkins, telling you is like telling a priest that God doesn't exist. The priest wont believe it until the bible tells him also.

You are believing in fifty year old physics that completely disregards electricity in space and that is a huge mistake. I guess you are saying that we Earthlings have the only planet privileged enough to support electricity Since the cosmos has nothing to do with it.

Much of the current knowledge of the Sun-Earth connection can be historically credited to Kristian Birkeland and Hannes Alfven, among others, who could back up their statements with experimental data, that today is proven correct. Electrical engineering and plasma physics ties in very well with several established fields of science, so it's not some separate invented field that one can freely decide to include or not include into astrophysics.

Electric Sun

Cheers...

Firstly there is no scientific evidence to support it, that alone makes it unscientific, when you last tried to pass this stuff of as science you relied on outdated links about our lack of knowledge and a pseudo-scientific website which misrepresented data.

Maybe you should read what I put up about this last time ;).

And you don't prove anything in science.

Just to add, making stuff up based on baseless claims found on the internet is very much not how you do science. This idea has no maths, no papers, no experimental data, no modelling data and not observational evidence in support of it. It has no place in science because it is fiction based on ignorance.

Edited by Mattshark, 21 May 2010 - 03:34 PM.

Algae : Protists not Plants!

YNWA

#21    Remelic

Remelic

    Ectoplasmic Residue

  • Member
  • Pip
  • 126 posts
  • Joined:13 Apr 2010
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Canada

  • "It is the mark of an educated mind to be able to entertain a thought without accepting it" - Aristotle

Posted 21 May 2010 - 04:11 PM

View PostMattshark, on 21 May 2010 - 03:29 PM, said:

Firstly there is no scientific evidence to support it, that alone makes it unscientific, when you last tried to pass this stuff of as science you relied on outdated links about our lack of knowledge and a pseudo-scientific website which misrepresented data.

Do you even know who Kristian Birkeland and Hannes Alfven were?

Scientist who provided scientific theories that cosmology has electric properties that today has answer all observed "problems" with the current model. Which has not been unproven since. Even modern cosmologists admit they are wrong. But they will just come up with strange things like Dark Matter to replace electric phenomenon.

Have you read anything about Electric Universe to make your own determination?

Peter


#22    SlimJim22

SlimJim22

    Alien Abducter

  • Member
  • 4,682 posts
  • Joined:10 Dec 2009
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Wales

  • "As far as we can discern, the sole purpose of human existence is to kindle a light in the darkness of mere being." Carl Jung

Posted 21 May 2010 - 04:14 PM

Pseudo science versus pseudo skeptics me thinks. The argument against the EU theory seems to be that there is no recognizable electric charge. However, this can be explained as when there is an equal positive and negative charge it appears to be no charge when in fact it has just been cancelled out.

http://www.thunderbo...ogs/descott.htm

Worth watching this carefully to see if any new developments come about. Particularly with regard to climate change as if it is cosmic rays that is warming the entire solar system then at least could try and counteract what is going on.

"I belive no thing, I follow the Law of One. I am a Man-O'-Sion under construction."

#23    Mattshark

Mattshark

    stuff

  • Member
  • 16,985 posts
  • Joined:29 Dec 2006
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Liverpool, UK

  • Sea Shepherd, making conservation harder.

    If you care about wildlife, do not support these pirates.......

Posted 21 May 2010 - 04:28 PM

View PostRemelic, on 21 May 2010 - 04:11 PM, said:

Do you even know who Kristian Birkeland and Hannes Alfven were?

Scientist who provided scientific theories that cosmology has electric properties that today has answer all observed "problems" with the current model. Which has not been unproven since. Even modern cosmologists admit they are wrong. But they will just come up with strange things like Dark Matter to replace electric phenomenon.

Have you read anything about Electric Universe to make your own determination?

Peter
Yes I know who they are one, did work over a century ago an one was an electrical engineer. I suggest you look up that thing called evidence.

I have read about electric universe, it isn't science.

Algae : Protists not Plants!

YNWA

#24    Mattshark

Mattshark

    stuff

  • Member
  • 16,985 posts
  • Joined:29 Dec 2006
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Liverpool, UK

  • Sea Shepherd, making conservation harder.

    If you care about wildlife, do not support these pirates.......

Posted 21 May 2010 - 04:33 PM

View PostSlimJim22, on 21 May 2010 - 04:14 PM, said:

Pseudo science versus pseudo skeptics me thinks. The argument against the EU theory seems to be that there is no recognizable electric charge. However, this can be explained as when there is an equal positive and negative charge it appears to be no charge when in fact it has just been cancelled out.

http://www.thunderbo...ogs/descott.htm

Worth watching this carefully to see if any new developments come about. Particularly with regard to climate change as if it is cosmic rays that is warming the entire solar system then at least could try and counteract what is going on.

Sorry Slim, that simply looks like like Dr Scott is whinging because his idea's are neither supported and that some dared to question him. He puts forward no scientific basis or mathematics to back his claims.

This probably why he is an engineer (using science) rather than a scientist (advancing science).

Algae : Protists not Plants!

YNWA

#25    SlimJim22

SlimJim22

    Alien Abducter

  • Member
  • 4,682 posts
  • Joined:10 Dec 2009
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Wales

  • "As far as we can discern, the sole purpose of human existence is to kindle a light in the darkness of mere being." Carl Jung

Posted 21 May 2010 - 05:18 PM

View PostMattshark, on 21 May 2010 - 04:33 PM, said:

Sorry Slim, that simply looks like like Dr Scott is whinging because his idea's are neither supported and that some dared to question him. He puts forward no scientific basis or mathematics to back his claims.

This probably why he is an engineer (using science) rather than a scientist (advancing science).

No it is a theory Matt. It is not an idea but a perfectly valid hypothesis. The only way to evidence it is to direct funs specifically to research this area. Considering the other theories that get grants why not this? On what basis is it not conceivable because it would seem to aptly fit what we can observe in nature so why not the cosmos as a whole.

I believe it is the electricity that gives the universe the propulsion that it needs to exist. It would also give reasonable explanation to the nature of cycles as everything is part of a giant circuit. Having no background in science I should probably pipedown then again I have respect for guys like Veliskovsky despite his humiliation by academia. In two hundred years the situation should be resolved either way and we can all sleep easy. In the meantime might be worth observing climate changes on the planets of the solar system. Both Jupiter and Saturn have undergone visible changes recently, what would you or the established view suggest is causing this? What is the catalyst for this change?

"I belive no thing, I follow the Law of One. I am a Man-O'-Sion under construction."

#26    Remelic

Remelic

    Ectoplasmic Residue

  • Member
  • Pip
  • 126 posts
  • Joined:13 Apr 2010
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Canada

  • "It is the mark of an educated mind to be able to entertain a thought without accepting it" - Aristotle

Posted 21 May 2010 - 05:25 PM

View PostSlimJim22, on 21 May 2010 - 05:18 PM, said:

Both Jupiter and Saturn have undergone visible changes recently, what would you or the established view suggest is causing this? What is the catalyst for this change?

I agree with your stand with EU. I can see it's value in cosmology.

Also Mars has heated up and so has Mercury apparently. Earth has been hotter then this before and has gone through colder periods as well. I would say that it is a natural heating that will one day subside. Even if it is in a hundred years. We dont know anything about the long term climate changes except for that found in ice-cores. These show changes of all kinds. Warming periods are to be expected...

The only system capable of changing the solar temperature is the sun. So the sun is the logical reason for other solar bodies heating up as well.


#27    Mattshark

Mattshark

    stuff

  • Member
  • 16,985 posts
  • Joined:29 Dec 2006
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Liverpool, UK

  • Sea Shepherd, making conservation harder.

    If you care about wildlife, do not support these pirates.......

Posted 21 May 2010 - 05:31 PM

View PostSlimJim22, on 21 May 2010 - 05:18 PM, said:

No it is a theory Matt. It is not an idea but a perfectly valid hypothesis. The only way to evidence it is to direct funs specifically to research this area. Considering the other theories that get grants why not this? On what basis is it not conceivable because it would seem to aptly fit what we can observe in nature so why not the cosmos as a whole.

I believe it is the electricity that gives the universe the propulsion that it needs to exist. It would also give reasonable explanation to the nature of cycles as everything is part of a giant circuit. Having no background in science I should probably pipedown then again I have respect for guys like Veliskovsky despite his humiliation by academia. In two hundred years the situation should be resolved either way and we can all sleep easy. In the meantime might be worth observing climate changes on the planets of the solar system. Both Jupiter and Saturn have undergone visible changes recently, what would you or the established view suggest is causing this? What is the catalyst for this change?

No, sorry mate, but it isn't a theory or a hypothesis. Sorry but that is simply fact, it doesn't fit the criteria for either of those terms. No observation = no hypothesis, no evidence and no facts = no theory.
It doesn't get grants because it is bad science. It is the make it up as you go along approach and that is not science. Scientific theory is just something made up to fit a problem.
Veliskovsky is not respected because he lets his religous views and Zionism get in the way of his claims, which he made about fields he had no understanding of what he was promoting and he simply wanted his ideas to be taken seriously without justification. It is basically like you telling a surgeon or a plumber or an electrician how to do his job because it suited your belief.

As far as I know Jupiter's and Saturn's change is hypothesised to be around climate cycles.

Algae : Protists not Plants!

YNWA

#28    Mattshark

Mattshark

    stuff

  • Member
  • 16,985 posts
  • Joined:29 Dec 2006
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Liverpool, UK

  • Sea Shepherd, making conservation harder.

    If you care about wildlife, do not support these pirates.......

Posted 21 May 2010 - 05:32 PM

View PostRemelic, on 21 May 2010 - 05:25 PM, said:

I agree with your stand with EU. I can see it's value in cosmology.

Also Mars has heated up and so has Mercury apparently. Earth has been hotter then this before and has gone through colder periods as well. I would say that it is a natural heating that will one day subside. Even if it is in a hundred years. We dont know anything about the long term climate changes except for that found in ice-cores. These show changes of all kinds. Warming periods are to be expected...

The only system capable of changing the solar temperature is the sun. So the sun is the logical reason for other solar bodies heating up as well.

You are simply tacking on an explanation here that simply suits your belief, not basing it on science. That is not science and deserves no respect in science.

Algae : Protists not Plants!

YNWA

#29    SlimJim22

SlimJim22

    Alien Abducter

  • Member
  • 4,682 posts
  • Joined:10 Dec 2009
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Wales

  • "As far as we can discern, the sole purpose of human existence is to kindle a light in the darkness of mere being." Carl Jung

Posted 21 May 2010 - 07:37 PM

View PostMattshark, on 21 May 2010 - 05:31 PM, said:

No, sorry mate, but it isn't a theory or a hypothesis. Sorry but that is simply fact, it doesn't fit the criteria for either of those terms. No observation = no hypothesis, no evidence and no facts = no theory.
It doesn't get grants because it is bad science. It is the make it up as you go along approach and that is not science. Scientific theory is just something made up to fit a problem.
Veliskovsky is not respected because he lets his religous views and Zionism get in the way of his claims, which he made about fields he had no understanding of what he was promoting and he simply wanted his ideas to be taken seriously without justification. It is basically like you telling a surgeon or a plumber or an electrician how to do his job because it suited your belief.

As far as I know Jupiter's and Saturn's change is hypothesised to be around climate cycles.

Ok so he's not a bona fide scientist but he was best chums with Einstein. This doesn't exactly lend him credibility on astrophysics but his area of study was comparative mythologies and consciousness from a psychiatric POV. I doubt zionism ever came in to it but if you know of something then please tell me.

http://www.varchive....stein/index.htm

http://www.varchive.org/

http://www.knowledge.co.uk/velikovsky/

http://en.wikipedia....nuel_Velikovsky

... And I think it does qualify as a theory but I will need to look deeper.

"I belive no thing, I follow the Law of One. I am a Man-O'-Sion under construction."

#30    SlimJim22

SlimJim22

    Alien Abducter

  • Member
  • 4,682 posts
  • Joined:10 Dec 2009
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Wales

  • "As far as we can discern, the sole purpose of human existence is to kindle a light in the darkness of mere being." Carl Jung

Posted 21 May 2010 - 08:31 PM

So dr scott has got more critics than he has fans and it does seem like the initial hypothesis is flawed but still a hypothesis it be, he just needs to make a new one.

http://docs.google.c...LJVPONvG6LscRDA

Mars is warming

http://www.realclima...arming-on-mars/

How about cosmoclimatology? That's a new one on me.
Changes in the intensity of galactic cosmic rays alter the Earth's cloudiness. A recent experiment has shown how electrons liberated by cosmic rays assist in making aerosols, the building blocks of cloud condensation nuclei, while anomalous climatic trends in Antarctica confirm the role of clouds in helping to drive climate change. Variations in the cosmic-ray influx due to solar magnetic activity account well for climatic fluctuations on decadal, centennial and millennial timescales. Over longer intervals, the changing galactic environment of the solar system has had dramatic consequences, including Snowball Earth episodes. A new contribution to the faint young Sun paradox is also on offer.

"I belive no thing, I follow the Law of One. I am a Man-O'-Sion under construction."




0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users