Comet Elenin May End The World - Again! Massive Catastrophe Time - Now!

Originally posted by ZIPMATT
reply to post by ngchunter

 

I couldn't agree that you can weigh it (with or without a telescope) or identify its actual composition .

Then you can remain willfully ignorant.

I did see a picture here in this thread of the object passing the asteroid in question . What I did not see is any clear evidence that the asteroid was not perturbed , but am happy to accept assurances from those i have learned to trust , because i have to be . Or do I ?

You could study astronomy for yourself so that you too can learn how to make the same measurements and calculations I have made and see that I am right, but you don't seem particularly willing to.

reply to post by ngchunter


Nah I am not wilfully ignorant sir , but sharp as a knife . The two methods described here by which weight is measured/assessed/guestimated dont add up to proof to me , astronomy or not .

Telescopes dont weigh things , neither do presupposed perturbations . It doesnt equal evidence for the claims you have made .

I expect some will want to pile on and say , 'we were right' , 'velikovsky was wrong' etc . But it is not a matter of just that it is asking further questions which gain further answers.

I will study astronomy further , can you recommend any basic textbooks as it is not exactly taught in schools is it ..

I also want to know about Immanuel Velikovsky (see op) who was not just of Russian decent , he was a friend of Albert Einstein ,
and , interestingly , a well known Zionist . < That leaves us with questions about how this thread got here .

reply to post by ZIPMATT

I will study astronomy further , can you recommend any basic textbooks as it is not exactly taught in schools is it .

"21st Century Astronomy" by Jeff Hester, et al, is quite good. ISBN 0393974006.
www.amazon.com...=sr_1_1?s=books&ie=UTF8&qid=1316953069&sr=1-1

Product Dimensions: 10.7 x 8.9 x 1.2 inches

Shipping Weight: 3.6 pounds

LOL now that's heavy reply to post by DJW001


superstar ! thanks

Originally posted by ZIPMATT
reply to post by ngchunter

 

Nah I am not wilfully ignorant sir , but sharp as a knife . The two methods described here by which weight is measured/assessed/guestimated dont add up to proof to me , astronomy or not .

Telescopes dont weigh things , neither do presupposed perturbations . It doesnt equal evidence for the claims you have made .

Actually it does. I'm sorry but just flat out denying what I know to be true doesn't tell me anything except that you are perhaps suffering from the Dunning-Kruger effect quite dramatically. To fix this I would suggest you start by studying the history of how Jupiter was originally "weighed" using telescopes.

Give it to me babe.
Give me all the doom
I can handle it

reply to post by ngchunter


I think the big bang effect may shocked your brain , I know it did me when they tried to say how old the universe is , and have me beleive it. It may involve some fancy calculations but I dont buy hi-tech kit unless it still works after i have dropped it.

Common sense says it doesnt hold up ; you didnt weigh anything in space neither did anyone else. Neither will any picture tell you what it is made of , in entirety .

Yet I do know whatyou mean when you say you 'can' weigh it and 'have' done . So Kruger et al can put the studies away .

Originally posted by ZIPMATT
reply to post by ngchunter

 

Common sense says it doesnt hold up ; you didnt weigh anything in space neither did anyone else.

I'm sorry, but I really don't care what your "common sense" tells you, you're still wrong. It's basic orbital mechanics.

reply to post by ngchunter


lol unless you brought it down here and stuck it in a sling the measurements arent going to make sense anyway .
as far as i am aware geologists use hammers. back in the day, today, and next year they are going to use hammers , to chip away the substances for analysis .

orbital mechanics ,then , this year you have had
march 11th sun earth c2010x1 alignment , (3 days dehind the sun) ,
you've had a 30 year storm on saturn , Jupiter having audible storms as well ,
you've got the axis tilt , loads and more of cmes , and an absence of good reasons for it all, bar something heavy being up there .
Do we have to then agree to disagree ? Or are we going to learn something ? Maybe its not c2010x1 at all.
What does your concept of orbital mechanics tell you about the above ?

Originally posted by ZIPMATT
reply to post by ngchunter

 

lol unless you brought it down here and stuck it in a sling the measurements arent going to make sense anyway .

The measurements make sense if you understand astronomy. I'm sorry, but it's clear that you don't.

you've got the axis tilt ,

What is this even supposed to mean?

an absence of good reasons for it all,

I strongly disagree.

bar something heavy being up there .

Elenin did not perturb 1999 RQ176, therefore it is a low mass object.

Or are we going to learn something ?

You don't seem willing to learn anything, you won't even accept the basic fact that you CAN measure the mass of an object in space using telescopic observations.

What does your concept of orbital mechanics tell you about the above ?

You went completely off-topic, do you even know what orbital mechanics is? It has nothing to do with storms on Jupiter or Saturn, which by the way, are nothing new.