Mercury puzzles astronomers

[eanassir]

I think you need to take your own advice.

It is not a contest of words. I don't trust such figures completely, but you follow their words without imagining and contemplating the subject.

 

[gerryh]

It is not a contest of words. I don't trust such figures completely, but you follow their words without imagining and contemplating the subject.

wrong, which is getting to be your calling card, I don't take scientists word for anything. I also don't take "religious leaders" word for anything either. You, on the other hand, take the complete word of a man. A man that doesn't have the experience, knowledge, or equipment that is available to present day scientists.

It is you that is looking like the one that is duped, not I.

 

[eanassir]

wrong, which is getting to be your calling card, I don't take scientists word for anything. I also don't take "religious leaders" word for anything either. You, on the other hand, take the complete word of a man. A man that doesn't have the experience, knowledge, or equipment that is available to present day scientists.

It is you that is looking like the one that is duped, not I.

You are the wrong; if the religious leader word seem reasonable, I will take it certainly, and if his explanation is convincing, so I believe him more than the wrong assumptions of some scientists when it is wrong obviously.

Not every religion, not every religious leader.

On the other hand, I believe in most of the scientific work and achievement; I am certainly not against the science, but I shouldn't beleive every word they say although I see it wrong.

 

[gerryh]

You are the wrong; if the religious leader word seem reasonable, I will take it certainly, and if his explanation is convincing, so I believe him more than the wrong assumptions of some scientists when it is wrong obviously.

Not every religion, not every religious leader.

On the other hand, I believe in most of the scientific work and achievement; I am certainly not against the science, but I shouldn't beleive every word they say although I see it wrong.

The thing is ennasir, the explanations given by your "religious leader" are NOT reasonable nor convincing. His explanations of what comets are have already been proven wrong. This is just one example. His explanations of gravity are also out to lunch.

 

[eanassir]

The thing is ennasir, the explanations given by your "religious leader" are NOT reasonable nor convincing. His explanations of what comets are have already been proven wrong. This is just one example. His explanations of gravity are also out to lunch.

This is your opinion gery, which isn't necessarily correct.
In fact I see the comets large number and the high energy included in them indicate their origin from the sun, not for the cold region outside the solar system; how did you believe it for certain, and don't doubt it? This is not scientific or logical; at least say it may or almost it is as such.

 

[gerryh]

This is your opinion gery, which isn't necessarily correct.
In fact I see the comets large number and the high energy included in them indicate their origin from the sun, not for the cold region outside the solar system; how did you believe it for certain, and don't doubt it? This is not scientific or logical; at least say it may or almost it is as such.

Like I said, you're not understanding. Comets don't work the way you are thinking.

 

[petros]

Comets are rock, water, ammonia and methane. None of which could originate from the sun.

 

[eanassir]

Like I said, you're not understanding. Comets don't work the way you are thinking.

Like I said: you are not understanding the way the comet works.

Comets are rock, water, ammonia and methane. None of which could originate from the sun.

This is the meteorite and asteroid.
The comet: the tailed-star as publicly called is something different in constituents.

 

[gerryh]

Like I said: you are not understanding the way the comet works.



This is the meteorite and asteroid.
The comet: the tailed-star as publicly called is something different in constituents.

No, the meteor and asteroid are big lumps of rock mainly. Comets, simplified, are big chunks of frozen material. Mainly the gasses that Petros has already mentioned. The "tail" you see is the off gassing of that material as the comet get's closer the the sun. The "tail" is "blown" away from the comet by the sun's "solar wind" and therefore is always trailing away from the sun no matter whether the comet is approaching the sun or moving away from the sun. This is all well documented and is not considered a thesis or theory, it is fact. Observable and verifiable.

 

[eanassir]

No, the meteor and asteroid are big lumps of rock mainly.

True.

Comets, simplified, are big chunks of frozen material. Mainly the gasses that Petros has already mentioned.The "tail" you see is the off gassing of that material as the comet get's closer the the sun.

Wrong. How are you certain; you only believed what they say and took it as a fact.

The "tail" is "blown" away from the comet by the sun's "solar wind" and therefore is always trailing away from the sun no matter whether the comet is approaching the sun or moving away from the sun.

True

This is all well documented and is not considered a thesis or theory, it is fact. Observable and verifiable.

So you see that you have mixed true with false.