The deceit of NASA and the US government

MHz

Time Out
Mar 16, 2007
41,030
43
48
Red Deer AB
https://sputniknews.com/science/201812051070392735-China-Will-Launch-Probe-Moon-Far-Side/
The China National Space Administration (CNSA) has been setting the stage for a number of remote lunar operations, launching the Queqiao communications satellite to an orbit on the far side of the moon this past May and planning out its new Long March 9 heavy lifting rockets. Now, the space agency is ready to take the next step by sending the Chang'e-4 probe to Earth's natural satellite. The lander and rover will launch on Saturday from Sichuan's Xichang Satellite Launch Center and arrive at the moon before the year is out, the Standard reported.

​The probe will attempt to land in the Von Karman crater in the moon's southern hemisphere, close to its South Pole. Upon arrival, Chang'e-4 will become the first human craft to land on the far side of the moon, which never faces the Earth. Spacecraft have orbited the moon and taken photos of its dark half, but never landed there before.
 

Dexter Sinister

Unspecified Specialist
Oct 1, 2004
10,168
536
113
Regina, SK
None of you guys seem to understand how this works. You, Torch light, Darkbeaver, and others, consistently make claims that are contrary to a well established body of knowledge, and most of what I do in these science-themed threads is just point that out. It's not up to me to prove you're wrong, I'm casting doubt on your claims, which is the default position in science. The burden of proof is on you, and your evidence and arguments have to meet the standards of science if you expect your claims to be accepted as having some truth content. None of you have done so.
 

MHz

Time Out
Mar 16, 2007
41,030
43
48
Red Deer AB
Back before I exiled myself we happened to be on the same thread on you pointed out to somebody by sating something like, 'That guy, right there.'

Who were you talking to??
To show up and say you won't be contributing anything because we are all from something akin to a 'belonging lesser race' isn't going to make anybody run to the bathroom in tears, never has in the past so the future looks set, no updates ever needed.
 

MHz

Time Out
Mar 16, 2007
41,030
43
48
Red Deer AB
. . . consistently make claims that are contrary to a well established body of knowledge, and most of what I do in these science-themed threads is just point that out. It's not up to me to prove you're wrong, I'm casting doubt on your claims, .
I clam the earth has increases it's surface are by about 510 million square kilometers in the last 200M years.

https://www.britannica.com/science/oceanic-crust

Please show how the map that supports that is bogus and your untold version is more accurate.

I fired you as thee 'science guy' a long time ago, troll became your new title, perhaps you missed that memo. Your Clergy spiel is even worse, I thought you should be reminded of that as you keep forgetting those updates.

Take Walnut with you. DS can stay, the place needs an example of what not to do.
 

Dexter Sinister

Unspecified Specialist
Oct 1, 2004
10,168
536
113
Regina, SK
I clam the earth has increases it's surface are by about 510 million square kilometers in the last 200M years.
Please show how the map that supports that is bogus and your untold version is more accurate.
You clam that it's increases it's surface are? Preview Post is your friend, try to be more careful, it'd help people make sense of what you write. Four errors in nine words is extreme even for you. Doesn't help your credibility, especially when it's clear that you CAN write well when you try.

But, no, you're still not getting it. The expanding earth claim is contrary to accepted geological science, so it's not my problem to prove you wrong. You're the one making the claim, so the burden of proof is on you to show that you're right and conventional geology is wrong, using the normal standards of scientific evidence and argument. A YouTube video produced by a cartoonist, which is one of the things you or one of your fellow travellers once linked to in support of this claim, isn't it, and neither is the map, it's not enough by itself to make the case. At the very least, you need to provide a plausible mechanism, and explanations of how it has (or has not) affected the mass of the earth and the gravitational acceleration vector at the surface.

You might also explain how it is that the earth's current surface area is about 510 million square km, so you're claiming it was about zero 200 million years ago.
 

petros

The Central Scrutinizer
Nov 21, 2008
108,912
11,193
113
Low Earth Orbit
He thinks the Mid Atlantic Rift is expanding the Earth as he noted by the age of seafloor basalt but he completely forwent and forwent and forwent subduction of said seafloor basalt beneath the continents.

Problem solved.
 

darkbeaver

the universe is electric
Jan 26, 2006
41,035
201
63
RR1 Distopia 666 Discordia
None of you guys seem to understand how this works. You, Torch light, Darkbeaver, and others, consistently make claims that are contrary to a well established body of knowledge, and most of what I do in these science-themed threads is just point that out. It's not up to me to prove you're wrong, I'm casting doubt on your claims, which is the default position in science. The burden of proof is on you, and your evidence and arguments have to meet the standards of science if you expect your claims to be accepted as having some truth content. None of you have done so.


Let,s some evening review the list of failed well established bodies of knowledge.

When I cast doubt I,m in contravention of the scientific default position, while you cast undoubtable doubt.
 

Dexter Sinister

Unspecified Specialist
Oct 1, 2004
10,168
536
113
Regina, SK
Let,s some evening review the list of failed well established bodies of knowledge.
Sure, offer a list and we'll see what happens.
When I cast doubt I,m in contravention of the scientific default position, while you cast undoubtable doubt.
Casting doubt isn't what you do. You make what you believe to be truth claims contrary to well established science without sufficient evidence, and often throw in mockery and name calling with them.
 

darkbeaver

the universe is electric
Jan 26, 2006
41,035
201
63
RR1 Distopia 666 Discordia
Sure, offer a list and we'll see what happens. Casting doubt isn't what you do. You make what you believe to be truth claims contrary to well established science without sufficient evidence, and often throw in mockery and name calling with them.


All you have to do is suggest a well established science to test your theory about me. And it,s quite hilarous for you to be accusing me of mockery and name calling when your public record of that very same mockery and name calling is amply demonstrated.
In any case it is very nice to see you contributing here again after your absence. How long were you under psychiatric care this time?
 

Dexter Sinister

Unspecified Specialist
Oct 1, 2004
10,168
536
113
Regina, SK
I don't have a theory about you to test, just some observations that seem to fit a pattern I've seen in others in the real world, but I'm not interested in turning it into a theory.


I was absent for a long time because there was a handful of posters dominating every discussion that interested me who were incapable of sustaining a civilized conversation. I got fed up with all the insults and abuse, especially after they permanently drove away one of my favourite posters and I learned via email what had really happened behind the scenes. I also have other interests than CC, and tend not to be very active here until bad weather keeps me indoors a lot.
 
Last edited:

MHz

Time Out
Mar 16, 2007
41,030
43
48
Red Deer AB
He thinks the Mid Atlantic Rift is expanding the Earth as he noted by the age of seafloor basalt but he completely forwent and forwent and forwent subduction of said seafloor basalt beneath the continents.

Problem solved.
Considering you are the 'they went guy' you get to answer ever question like an adult or I'll be moving them to the introduction thread.

Are you saying the Atlantic Ocean has always been there in the same form as it is today?? Post the link as the Pangaea theory is pretty stupid when it has to take the age of the oceanic crust into account, so when you post a link make sure it deals with that data.

Are you saying the Pacific Ocean is the same as it always been and that it can do the subduction for the spreading the Atlantic Rift also does?
 

MHz

Time Out
Mar 16, 2007
41,030
43
48
Red Deer AB
You might also explain how it is that the earth's current surface area is about 510 million square km, so you're claiming it was about zero 200 million years ago.
Preview Post is your friend, try to be more careful, it'd help people make sense of what you write. Four errors in nine words is extreme even for you.
Karma doesn't exist does it.
I can comment on a number of earth science topics, if you have not taken up my offers in the past why would the future be any different. When the one my post is sent to is a troll they get the draft copy. Care to explain how I got that wrong also?
The typo I saw was when I 'tyhpw' with my feet up, another things that is for trolls only.




Quote: Originally Posted by MHz
I clam the earth has increases it's surface are by about 510 million square kilometers in the last 200M years.
Please show how the map that supports that is bogus and your untold version is more accurate.

You clam that it's increases it's surface are?
Here is where it is more useful to look at what you use as the 'question dodging tactic' rather than just answer the question. This part of my post is not important enough for you to make a reply so the part you left out entirely is the reason for the post. It was to show you weren't silenced for good by the part about who you were 'flagging down' so they could pay attention to my posts rather than the topic of the thread was the important part. I don't need to know, it show that being open is a one-way street so why would I care one way or the other what you think anymore. I'll just post along the line that this reply is going to take.

One change, move the important parts to the top and the least important to the bottom of the pile.


Doesn't help your credibility, especially when it's clear that you CAN write well when you try.
It wasn't mine that took a tumble, it was yours. My illness goes away when I sit up straight, your's will never go away. You should be interested in hearing about what else you have wrong. Got a topic for the in-laws for X-mas dinner yet, I'll play 'the visitor'.
I commented on quite a few vids that were produced by Rabbis and it took me a lot longer to type it out than it did to know what should be typed. Bones has a link.



But, no, you're still not getting it.
I got that you have troll tendencies as far back as when your historical version was wrong, no matter how finely it was detailed. Not many people have explained it any better, they are a lot smarter than than an American Evangelican Christian or RCC member.
Wrong is wrong, claiming to be 'God's people' and act like you are taking part in the exodus wars is not what the book promotes. That is what Merchants do rather than Priests.
Back when this topic first surfaced I referenced the series, 'How the Earth was made.' as representing what Science currently promoted. That was as far as the discussion was allowed to go die to your doing some troll move that was alsi a sigb the pack attack should take place to put the 'outsider in their place'.



The expanding earth claim is contrary to accepted geological science, so it's not my problem to prove you wrong.
What makes you think that made it mine? I watched the 12 hours made by the Scientist that was promoting the theory, like all things I agree with some parts and have reservations about the mechanics being promoted.

How many theories need to be proved before they can be talked about?



You're the one making the claim, so the burden of proof is on you to show that you're right and conventional geology is wrong, using the normal standards of scientific evidence and argument.
For what part, you passed on all 10 parts in that series. You are passing on saying anything of any substance in this one. Pete jumped to you aid the last time too, you two belong to the same club??



A YouTube video produced by a cartoonist, which is one of the things you or one of your fellow travellers once linked to in support of this claim, isn't it, and neither is the map, it's not enough by itself to make the case.
Easy to understand, Right? That is all it was meant to do. The series is there anytime you want to start the topic. I find trolls don't, Pete doesn't because he is a liar.
Look for the links, a Scientist at your pay-scale should be able to find them.


At the very least, you need to provide a plausible mechanism, and explanations of how it has (or has not) affected the mass of the earth and the gravitational acceleration vector at the surface.


Which post did I cover the last 4B years, back when some parts of the crust existed as shown by science today? There are a few snowball periods as well as the moon being much closer and a full day was much shorter. Either the core changed speed or time on the crust was faster because the planet was smaller. You want me to prove all of that before I even speculate. If there was a vid I would just link to it, in this case I have to get you to sit and listen or talk about this topic. Random like this works as it is you that is exposing themselves. The more I know about you the better my replies should be, for better or worse thingy.

Bad karma is a tap on the shoulder, . . . . either that or I'm practicing science fiction-writing. Told you the worst was last.
 

MHz

Time Out
Mar 16, 2007
41,030
43
48
Red Deer AB
Another stellar post by the (not quite)smartest one of the (rapidly shrinking) collective.

Ring of Fire is an expansion zone, that means magma flows in the same direction that is at right angles to the 'rift', the 'zone' where magma descends to the core to replace what has risen below the rifts and pushed the crust apart.

Hawaii sits above such a spot, if it was above a spot of rising magma it would be a mountain chain like the Atlantic Rift is.


Will the San Andreas Fault look like the African Rift a million years from now, IMO if things keep moving like they are then yes, 4 ft sideways for every ft northwards.






A long vid will show the dings of fire are expansion joints. The magma also raises and lowers itself based on the total pressure. Without the walls in place the rifts would keep expanding. The rigs can be turned back to liquid if an explosion sends magma up and it comes back om the land and that extra heat will see a melting that consumes the whole ting before it stops. There are several vids that shows how the proto crust 4BYA would also have acted including collapse from the center of the ring as that is the place where the suction from the down-flow would be the greatest.


See why you are the troll and always will be??
 

DaSleeper

Trolling Hypocrites
May 27, 2007
33,676
1,665
113
Northern Ontario,
And don't forget to take your anti delusion pills you skitso!


Ever study the Law of conservation of mass and energy? you stoopid Joo hater?
 

Torch light

House Member
Dec 4, 2017
3,504
151
63
I'm casting doubt on your claims, which is the default position in science. The burden of proof is on you, and your evidence and arguments have to meet the standards of science if you expect your claims to be accepted as having some truth content.

This is correct and acceptable..but this was not strictly your way in fact .. this is what I demanded of you and others to do.
 

MHz

Time Out
Mar 16, 2007
41,030
43
48
Red Deer AB
And don't forget to take your anti delusion pills you skitso!


Ever study the Law of conservation of mass and energy? you stoopid Joo hater?
The 500M sq km over 200M years = 2.5M sq km / yr of magma going from molten to about 100F releases how much heat compared to what the sun heats up??
Better that than become a useless fuktard such as yourself, . . . . whack.
 
Last edited: