Three words: expanding earth theory.
Quote from: Ski on January 23, 2009, 09:43:19 PMThe truth is scientists predict the density of the layers based on the seismographic evidence, not the other way around. They say "there must be a fluid layer here reflecting these waves" to make the data fit the RE model. Not the other way around.It would be entirely possible to create a FE model for seismic wave propagation. In fact, the military uses a FE model as well as a more publicized RE model. In addition to making assumptions about the density and composition of the earth's core despite barely having scratched it, they come up with nifty things like anistropic wave propagation to make the data fit the model -- again, not the other way around.
The truth is scientists predict the density of the layers based on the seismographic evidence, not the other way around. They say "there must be a fluid layer here reflecting these waves" to make the data fit the RE model. Not the other way around.It would be entirely possible to create a FE model for seismic wave propagation. In fact, the military uses a FE model as well as a more publicized RE model.
Why wouldn't they be read from various points on the earth?
Quote from: Ski on December 16, 2010, 11:10:53 AMWhy wouldn't they be read from various points on the earth?I think the point he is a FE would have considerable trouble explaining the S wave Shadow zone, explained easily by RET.
Quote from: Joeval on December 16, 2010, 02:42:01 PMQuote from: Ski on December 16, 2010, 11:10:53 AMWhy wouldn't they be read from various points on the earth?I think the point he is a FE would have considerable trouble explaining the S wave Shadow zone, explained easily by RET.Yeah this. An EQ in brazil would be felt more in india than in russia with the RE model, which is illogical when looking at the FE.
I'm not familiar with seismology, but would it be possible to have a layer of some material which bounces back the waves?
Quote from: Ungoliant on December 18, 2010, 08:30:14 PMI'm not familiar with seismology, but would it be possible to have a layer of some material which bounces back the waves?When you get a change in the medium in which the wave travels, you can get some reflection. This has already been taken into account with th RE model.Until the FES tests the Earths composition and layers for themselves, I would find it hard to accept any of their claims.
Besides, perhaps FET is a conspiracy too.
It is just the way it is, you understanding it doesn't concern me.
And if you can't make it fit, introduce anistropic material...
To be fair, sometimes what FE'ers say makes so little sense that it's hard to come up with a rebuttal.
Quote from: Ski on December 16, 2010, 11:10:53 AMWhy wouldn't they be read from various points on the earth?I think the point is a FE would have considerable trouble explaining the S wave Shadow zone, explained easily by RET.(Edited for grammar)
Quote from: Ski on December 20, 2010, 12:28:24 PMAnd if you can't make it fit, introduce anistropic material...Any relation to FE Aether?BernyToo cloudy here for seeing the eclipse.
Quote from: berny_74 on December 20, 2010, 02:35:43 PMQuote from: Ski on December 20, 2010, 12:28:24 PMAnd if you can't make it fit, introduce anistropic material...Any relation to FE Aether?BernyToo cloudy here for seeing the eclipse.Aether has existed since ancient times until now. We have no part in "introducing" aether. It has existed until Einstein, and after Einstein redefined it up into the current redefinitions now (which are very funny - why not call a cat a cat instead of whatever name will save you face in your paper against the globularist science monument?)
You don't want to make an enemy of me. I'm very powerful.