Re: paleomagnetism and EE

In article <u0gsc3hm1li6jd3nv3fqrbung0h87364jk@xxxxxxx>,
J. Taylor <nchiwana@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

On Thu, 23 Aug 2007 17:55:48 -0700, Timberwoof
<timberwoof.spam@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

In article
<timberwoof.spam-50D881.10012823082007@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>,
Timberwoof <timberwoof.spam@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

In article <da5rc3tdlo504vfvp8o37crcq7ic71ek6q@xxxxxxx>,
J. Taylor <nchiwana@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

On Wed, 22 Aug 2007 23:22:13 -0700, Timberwoof
<timberwoof.spam@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

In article <bsvpc3pi8oq6fudu4h5mkrvf1r11rk92e2@xxxxxxx>,
J. Taylor <nchiwana@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

On Wed, 22 Aug 2007 20:29:41 -0700, Stuart <bigdakine@xxxxxxx>
wrote:

On Aug 22, 4:44 pm, J. Taylor <nchiw...@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
wrote:

remarkably the matter created in the core is iron

That is the theory

No. That is magic.

No, it is a theory it is iron.

It works pretty well: the density is right, the seismic behavior
is right, the magnetic behavior is right.

Do you think the core is not iron? What is it, then? Do you think
the mantle is not olivine? What is it, then? How do you know? Do
you have any evidence? Do you understand why geophysicists think
the earth has a specific composition? Do you think they are wrong?

And you think the answers to those questions will change your guess
into a fact?

Well, you've pretty much confirmed that you don't have the answers to
those questions. You merely assert that the earth's composition is
not what people say it is, but you have no evidence whatsoever. You
recognize that to make your EE hypothesis work, the composition of
the Earth becomes suspect, so you reactively deny what mainstream
geology says it is. Where's your unambiguous direct evidence? You
haven't got any ... so you try to change the subject.

You at like someone desperately trying to be mistaken for a kook.
Either that or you're a kook. We'll let Mr. Occam decide.



In article <6tfrc3tsrfb8qv7g954oc73r12fin9vnff@xxxxxxx>,
"J. Taylor" <nchiwana@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

On Thu, 23 Aug 2007 10:03:59 -0700, Timberwoof
<timberwoof.spam@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

Taylor's recent claims (without any evidence whatsoever) that the core
of the Earth is not ... ironic ... only adds to the ... irony.

You are a liar, and your making up words and then claiming them as
mine does not make it my claim.

Do you agree with the hypothesis that the Earth's core is iron and that
the mantle is olivine or not?

I very much see why they are the most likely, but it is not something
which can be claimed as a fact. Can you see that?

It is not only important to know what we know but why we know it.

Stuart very much made a statement as if it was fact to show why
something was its self unlikely to be produced. And that maybe true,
but it is still one possibility among many.

Nice waffle. Goes well with maple syrup.

The point of all that was to get an explanation for how the matter which
appears inside the earth does so in that nicely stratified configuration
which seismic studies reveal. Why is the new matter not heterogeneous
throughout? That's a more likely way for it to show up. How does know
what to appear as?

And then, how does the new matter know what momentum to have, and how
does it avoid sucking the moon in closer?

--
Timberwoof <me at timberwoof dot com> http://www.timberwoof.com
"When you post sewage, don't blame others for
emptying chamber pots in your direction." ?Chris L.
an important web site: http://www.muslim-refusenik.com/
.

Relevant Pages

  • Re: The important question for the Expanding Earth believers.
    ... bulk composition that you thought Herndon addressed and supported... ... to guess what was the past composition of inner earth because the ... The matter detected is detectable since it forms most ... recycling it into the mantle, those constraints imposed by your own ...
    (sci.geo.geology)
  • Re: The important question for the Expanding Earth believers.
    ... A paper in which Herndon laid out a strong case for the composition of an extremely small region of the inner core (which, at last check, resides a substantial distance beneath our ... constituting a nuclear reactor inside earth is not an alternative view ... Conjuring matter at earth's P and T range isn't magic? ... It would depend on what isotope you're looking for by comparison to what ...
    (sci.geo.geology)
  • Re: Earth expansion - puzzled......
    ... Or any evidence of net change in the size of the earth ... > accumulation of cosmic matter would see to that. ... oceanic expansion between currently existing continents. ...
    (sci.geo.geology)
  • Re: Earth expansion - puzzled......
    ... Or any evidence of net change in the size of the earth ... > accumulation of cosmic matter would see to that. ... oceanic expansion between currently existing continents. ...
    (sci.geo.geology)
  • Re: evidences against subduction theory
    ... However, what we do know, rules out Expanding Earth ... way for matter to appear in the Earth and make it expand. ... MASS, MASS, MASS you dumbass!! ... question back to the evidence for it, and what was originally stated, ...
    (sci.geo.geology)