Bruce Tuncks Posted January 24 Posted January 24 My understanding is that the 2 places were deliberately mis-named from the start, in what may be the world's first real-estate scam. 1
Jerry_Atrick Posted January 24 Posted January 24 I had a quick search of the inner annals of Google - but de nada.. Any sources?
Litespeed Posted January 25 Posted January 25 7 hours ago, Bruce Tuncks said: My understanding is that the 2 places were deliberately mis-named from the start, in what may be the world's first real-estate scam. Yes it was a scam, to get viking settlers to go there seeking a new home. Greenland was a huge scam and many died from the cold. 1
octave Posted March 15 Posted March 15 (edited) https://ny1.com/nyc/all-boroughs/news/2024/03/05/state-data-shows-rapidly-rising-sea-levels-in-near-future https://sealevel.nasa.gov/faq/9/are-sea-levels-rising-the-same-all-over-the-world-as-if-were-filling-a-giant-bathtub/#:~:text=No.,and Earth's uneven gravity field. Edited March 15 by octave 1
spacesailor Posted March 15 Posted March 15 The scientists are now saying , that it is the fault of The planit mars interacting with Earth. What will they think of next . spacesailor
octave Posted March 15 Posted March 15 3 minutes ago, spacesailor said: The scientists are now saying , that it is the fault of The planit mars interacting with Earth. What will they think of next . spacesailor Can you post a link please?
Jerry_Atrick Posted March 15 Posted March 15 29 minutes ago, spacesailor said: The scientists are now saying , that it is the fault of The planit mars interacting with Earth. What will they think of next . spacesailor Even if that were true, most reputable scientists would label it a hypothesis and conduct expierments to prove it is likely, then publish their results in reputable journals that would be peer revieed (crtiqued) before being accepted. They will be very clear about what is a hypothesis, results of expirements/studies, and peer accepted. There are always exceptions, but the scientific coimmunity will normally be very vocal when one goes feral and tries to claim science before it has gone through the process. Of course, those that make unilateral announcements of Sky News and the like don't generally fall into the reputable scientist category. 2
spacesailor Posted March 16 Posted March 16 Yes , they wouldn't except my ' theory ' ,that it was the moon. That was smashed by a ' killer ' asteroid. And a large piece fell onto our world . Someone will take credit IF they, take it further . spacesailor
spacesailor Posted March 16 Posted March 16 HEY . I'M NOT THAT OLD . I just don't remember that well now. Before " Gondwanaland " , Also they ( nameless ) boffin, have stated , there is evidence of ' alien ' rocks in our Earth. ( could it be , that ' Killer ' asteroid) . spacesailor 1
facthunter Posted March 16 Posted March 16 Judging by the cratering on the moon which has no atmosphere the earth would have had many asteroids land here at high speed. which often causes them to burn up in the process. . All the substances high up on the periodic Table come from black holes. Nev 1
nomadpete Posted March 16 Posted March 16 31 minutes ago, facthunter said: . All the substances high up on the periodic Table come from black holes. Nev Nah, couldn't be! If that was true, Gina would have a mine there and by now got a government subsidy to build a rail track to it. 1 2
nomadpete Posted March 16 Posted March 16 (edited) 3 hours ago, pmccarthy said: You can't call them black holes any more. "Chomatically Challenged" Just doesn't have the same ring to it, does it! Edited March 16 by nomadpete 1
facthunter Posted March 17 Posted March 17 The are Black because light cannot escape it's gravitational pull.. Nev
old man emu Posted March 17 Posted March 17 1 hour ago, facthunter said: The are Black because light cannot escape it's gravitational pull.. Nev Which raises an interesting point. Is light particulate ( photon) or is it a waveform? If light cannot escape the gravitational pull of a black hole, then it implies that light is particulate because it is a component of a Force. =force =gravitational constant =mass of object 1 (black hole) =mass of object 2 (photon) ^2=distance between centers of the masses But we also know that light behaves as if it is a waveform.
facthunter Posted March 17 Posted March 17 It's acted upon by gravity is the main factor in the Black hole situation as well as it's limited speed. Nev
Bruce Tuncks Posted March 25 Posted March 25 Not necessarily according to einstein nev. The black hole warps space-time and so light doesn't need any mass to be kept in. No I don't understand it either, but Newton has been proved wrong each time a GPS is used. Personally, I much prefer Newton stuff as I can understand it a bit. 1
onetrack Posted March 25 Posted March 25 All my money seems to disappear into black holes every month. The Saudi Petro Dollar black hole must be the largest in the entire Universe. 1
facthunter Posted March 26 Posted March 26 Flying around earth, Newton is all you need to be a safe pilot.. There's been some dickhead descriptions of how lift happens. Nev 1
old man emu Posted March 26 Posted March 26 29 minutes ago, facthunter said: There's been some dickhead descriptions of how lift happens. It is interesting that something that produces such a very important result in our modern world is still not fully understood. It seems that aircraft designers are happy with "We don't know why, but we know it works." 1
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now