Meteorites?

  • 152 Replies
  • 18289 Views
*

JackBlack

  • 18173
Re: Meteorites?
« Reply #120 on: November 25, 2017, 02:18:18 PM »
I did say, "which is faintly plausible" and who knows what the
hypothetical temperature might be at the hypothetical dome over the hypothetical flat earth might be?
By the way, does anyone think that Jane might be vying for jroa's exalted position as chief thread derailer?
Well with helium you run into another problem. You need high pressure to solidify it.

*

JackBlack

  • 18173
Re: Meteorites?
« Reply #121 on: November 25, 2017, 02:26:19 PM »
The dome makes a million per cent more sense than having a ball in a vacuum that somehow holds in a thin atmosphere and yet is among trillions of big fiery suns and planets that have big rocks and small rocks just whizzing around them all.
Then why have you been completely unable to show any indication that your dome makes sense while reality does not?

You already need to appeal to magic stacked atmosphere, without any explanation.
If this was the case, you wouldn't need a dome.
A dome would only make more sense if the entire atmosphere was at the same pressure.
But it isn't. There is a pressure gradient.
This indicates something is pulling the atmosphere down just like everything else.

Gravity is able to explain it just fine.

So what is so nonsensical about our MASSIVE Earth holding on to its atmosphere via gravity?
What is so nonsensical about the rest? I don't see any clear point being made, you seem to be more indicating you find it ridiculous.

When indoctrination goes this severe it's no wonder people will refuse to see past it.
I swear it's the fear of mass peer ridicule and a very weak mind that stops most people from daring to see the globe for what it is, which is absolute utter utter utter nonsense in the extreme and people who wake up will end up wanting to slap themselves when they realise it's not this ball spinning about a vacuum with all these so called pieces of rocks skimming it's atmosphere.
It isn't indoctrination or fear, it is all the evidence supporting it.
Why would rational people speak out against what all the evidence supports?
FE models are completely unable to explain numerous phenomenon. It is only by continually switching between the different models and/or completely ignoring massive flaws that they can pretend to work.

All the evidence indicates it is FE (including your garbage which doesn't actually support a FE) is nonsense. So when will you wake up and slap yourself?

I see some people on here....well the names....and I think, "surely to all hell you are logical and clever enough to see this global nonsense for what it is."
We do see it for what it is:
The best explanation for observed phenomenon, the best model to predict what will happen, what all the evidence supports, with the sole exception of galactic rotation curves.

I believe some do but are too afraid to change their stance because they see how much attempted ridicule gets thrown about by the masses against the few.
You mean you?
You believe you realise that your model is nonsense but are too afraid to chance your stance?

Do you know why there is so much ridicule thrown against the FEers?
Because they are completely unable to rationally defend their claims or rationally refute a RE.

*

JackBlack

  • 18173
Re: Meteorites?
« Reply #122 on: November 25, 2017, 02:34:33 PM »
Metallic particles are falling to the earth at very high speeds and are on fire and appear to be very hot. This happens at a predictable frequency and pattern each year and at unpredictable times. The composition of these rocks are the same as that found when observing deep layers of the earth. There are observations from "astrobiologists" of "fossilized biological structures" in meteorites. (see here:https://www.extremetech.com/extreme/150417-astrobiologists-discover-fossils-in-meteorite-fragments-confirming-extraterrestrial-life). Could it be that there was some kind of eruption from the earth that placed these fragments above us, like a volcanic eruption, etc. Meteorite could simply be this molten lava, iron, etc. that was projected into the area above the earth and are finding there way back down? Thus explaining the living particles and the common elements. By the way, if meteorites are from outer-space as this and other scientific discoveries have observed, then why hasn't there been a universal celebration of "life in space" after finding these biological evidence in meteorites? Seems very peculiar to me.
No. The lava layer is too shallow. What is thrown up into the sky is primarily crust (which contains various oxides such as silicon dioxide) and lava itself (which again is primarily silicate based).
The metallic iron is much lower.

Instead, this indicates that at least part of Earth shares a common origin with these meteorites.

People are hesitant to accept life in space.
There is the issue of confirming it is life, then the issue of confirming it isn't simply contamination.

Re: Meteorites?
« Reply #123 on: November 25, 2017, 06:13:56 PM »
I’ve heard the panspermia hypothesis in relation to a Martian meteorite strike ejecting rock into space.
"Science is real."
--They Might Be Giants

*

rabinoz

  • 26528
  • Real Earth Believer
Re: Meteorites?
« Reply #124 on: November 25, 2017, 07:17:18 PM »
I did say, "which is faintly plausible" and who knows what the
hypothetical temperature might be at the hypothetical dome over the hypothetical flat earth might be?
By the way, does anyone think that Jane might be vying for jroa's exalted position as chief thread derailer?
Well with helium you run into another problem. You need high pressure to solidify it.
Sure, it looks likes my faintly plausible is getting fainter and fainter like the Cheshire Cat, but what do you expect - it's Sceppy's hypothesis, not mine!

I was only trying to make Jane's rocks embedded in the ice look more ridiculous.

*

sceptimatic

  • Flat Earth Scientist
  • 28500
Re: Meteorites?
« Reply #125 on: November 26, 2017, 02:01:17 AM »
I did say, "which is faintly plausible" and who knows what the
hypothetical temperature might be at the hypothetical dome over the hypothetical flat earth might be?
By the way, does anyone think that Jane might be vying for jroa's exalted position as chief thread derailer?
Well with helium you run into another problem. You need high pressure to solidify it.
I'd suggest you have a break and sit back to try and get your head around stuff.

*

rabinoz

  • 26528
  • Real Earth Believer
Re: Meteorites?
« Reply #126 on: November 26, 2017, 04:11:59 AM »
I did say, "which is faintly plausible" and who knows what the
hypothetical temperature might be at the hypothetical dome over the hypothetical flat earth might be?
By the way, does anyone think that Jane might be vying for jroa's exalted position as chief thread derailer?
Well with helium you run into another problem. You need high pressure to solidify it.
I'd suggest you have a break and sit back to try and get your head around stuff.
Meteorites are, whether you like it or not, composed of rock, often with a high nickel and iron content.

And if you think that there could be rocks with a high nickel and iron content stuck in the dome you've got rocks in your head!

*

JackBlack

  • 18173
Re: Meteorites?
« Reply #127 on: November 26, 2017, 12:36:33 PM »
I'd suggest you have a break and sit back to try and get your head around stuff.
I'd suggest you follow your own advice.
I have gotten my head around stuff.

*

Son of Orospu

  • Jura's b*tch and proud of it!
  • Planar Moderator
  • 37834
  • I have artificial intelligence
Re: Meteorites?
« Reply #128 on: November 26, 2017, 01:31:29 PM »
I have been working on a model in which the force that causes the Universal Accellerator occasionally tears off pieces of the Earth and swirls them around above the Earth.  At certain times of the year, the sun is in the right position to cause them to dislodge from their path and hurl towards the Earth due to celestial gravitation.  We would see these as meteors, not meteorites which the OP claims he can see fly around the sky. 

As the pieces of Earth are flung away, they become ionic and have a charge.  This charge would be what causes lightning as the particals and pieces become neutral.  There would be a great flow of electrons flowing between the Earth and the particals and pieces swirling above. 

As many of us know, current flow produces magnetic fields.  This flow of electrons would enter the Earth and flow downwards, towards the ionized underbelly of the Earth, causing the effect that we see as magnetism on a compass. 
« Last Edit: November 26, 2017, 01:36:20 PM by jroa »

*

JackBlack

  • 18173
Re: Meteorites?
« Reply #129 on: November 26, 2017, 01:33:11 PM »
I have been working on a model in which the force that causes the Universal Accellerator occasionally tears of pieces of the Earth and swirls them around above the Earth.  At certain times of the year, the sun is in the right position to cause them to dislodge from their path an hurl towards the Earth due to celestial gravitation. 

As the pieces of Earth are flung away, they become ionic and have a charge.  This charge would be what causes lightning as the particals and pieces become neutral.  There would be a great flow of electrons flowing between the Earth and the particals and pieces swirling above. 

As many of us know, current flow produces magnetic fields.  This flow of electrons would enter the Earth and flow downwards, causing the effect that we see as magnetism on a compass.

If that was the case a compass would be highly affected by lightning. They aren't.

*

Son of Orospu

  • Jura's b*tch and proud of it!
  • Planar Moderator
  • 37834
  • I have artificial intelligence
Re: Meteorites?
« Reply #130 on: November 26, 2017, 01:37:42 PM »
I have been working on a model in which the force that causes the Universal Accellerator occasionally tears of pieces of the Earth and swirls them around above the Earth.  At certain times of the year, the sun is in the right position to cause them to dislodge from their path an hurl towards the Earth due to celestial gravitation. 

As the pieces of Earth are flung away, they become ionic and have a charge.  This charge would be what causes lightning as the particals and pieces become neutral.  There would be a great flow of electrons flowing between the Earth and the particals and pieces swirling above. 

As many of us know, current flow produces magnetic fields.  This flow of electrons would enter the Earth and flow downwards, causing the effect that we see as magnetism on a compass.

If that was the case a compass would be highly affected by lightning. They aren't.

You mean, they would not be affected much by individual lightning.  We are talking about the collective here. 

Re: Meteorites?
« Reply #131 on: November 26, 2017, 02:24:46 PM »
I have been working on a model in which the force that causes the Universal Accellerator occasionally tears off pieces of the Earth and swirls them around above the Earth.  At certain times of the year, the sun is in the right position to cause them to dislodge from their path and hurl towards the Earth due to celestial gravitation.  We would see these as meteors, not meteorites which the OP claims he can see fly around the sky. 

As the pieces of Earth are flung away, they become ionic and have a charge.  This charge would be what causes lightning as the particals and pieces become neutral.  There would be a great flow of electrons flowing between the Earth and the particals and pieces swirling above. 

As many of us know, current flow produces magnetic fields.  This flow of electrons would enter the Earth and flow downwards, towards the ionized underbelly of the Earth, causing the effect that we see as magnetism on a compass.

Meteors and meteorites are both visible. I originally focused on meteorites because they land on the ground and we know what they are with “down to Earth” certainty. Meteors are more commonly visible.

By the way, I like your science fiction story. When do the aliens arrive? Also, remember that good stories depend more on characters than the scenario, so don’t rely on that too much. Notice how much Harry Potter leans on good characters?
"Science is real."
--They Might Be Giants

*

rabinoz

  • 26528
  • Real Earth Believer
Re: Meteorites?
« Reply #132 on: November 26, 2017, 02:56:07 PM »
I have been working on a model in which the hypothetical force that causes the i]hypothetical[/i] Universal Accellerator occasionally tears off pieces of the Earth and swirls them i]hypothetical[/i] around above the Earth.  At certain times of the year, the sun is in the right position to cause them to dislodge from their path and hurl towards the Earth due to celestial gravitation.  We would see these as meteors, not meteorites which the OP claims he can see fly around the sky. 

As the pieces of Earth are flung away, they hypothetically become ionic and have a charge.  This charge would be what hypothetically causes lightning as the particals(sic) and pieces become neutral.  There would be a great flow of electrons flowing between the Earth and the particals(sic) and pieces swirling above. 

As many of us know, current flow produces magnetic fields.  This flow of electrons would enter the Earth and flow downwards, towards the ionized underbelly of the Earth, causing the effect that we see as magnetism on a compass.
Some little helpful additions made to aid comprehension.

But wouldn't this "flow of electrons . . . . downwards" cause a magnetic field that was around the earth and not south to north in a radial direction on your Discworld?
You do remember the old "right-hand screw rule", though, in FET, I think that becomes the "right-and screw-loose rule".

Now, please immediately post your Zetetic observations for such a faerie-tail.

I think the Zetecism as practised by FEers boils down to:
1) The earth looks flat, therefore the earth is flat.
2) Make a wild guess at the explanations for all other observations, like upside down refraction, wrong direction magnetic fields.

Still, the Master Derailer succeeds again in diverting attention from any real issues.

By the way, how is it that the meteorites from these torn "off pieces of the Earth" have quite a different composition to the surface rocks of earth?

*

Son of Orospu

  • Jura's b*tch and proud of it!
  • Planar Moderator
  • 37834
  • I have artificial intelligence
Re: Meteorites?
« Reply #133 on: November 26, 2017, 03:10:52 PM »
Meteors and meteorites are both visible.

Not as burning fireballs, which is what the OP was discussing.  ::)

*

Son of Orospu

  • Jura's b*tch and proud of it!
  • Planar Moderator
  • 37834
  • I have artificial intelligence
Re: Meteorites?
« Reply #134 on: November 26, 2017, 03:15:59 PM »
I have been working on a model in which the hypothetical force that causes the i]hypothetical[/i] Universal Accellerator occasionally tears off pieces of the Earth and swirls them i]hypothetical[/i] around above the Earth.  At certain times of the year, the sun is in the right position to cause them to dislodge from their path and hurl towards the Earth due to celestial gravitation.  We would see these as meteors, not meteorites which the OP claims he can see fly around the sky. 

As the pieces of Earth are flung away, they hypothetically become ionic and have a charge.  This charge would be what hypothetically causes lightning as the particals(sic) and pieces become neutral.  There would be a great flow of electrons flowing between the Earth and the particals(sic) and pieces swirling above. 

As many of us know, current flow produces magnetic fields.  This flow of electrons would enter the Earth and flow downwards, towards the ionized underbelly of the Earth, causing the effect that we see as magnetism on a compass.
Some little helpful additions made to aid comprehension.

But wouldn't this "flow of electrons . . . . downwards" cause a magnetic field that was around the earth and not south to north in a radial direction on your Discworld?
You do remember the old "right-hand screw rule", though, in FET, I think that becomes the "right-and screw-loose rule".

Now, please immediately post your Zetetic observations for such a faerie-tail.

I think the Zetecism as practised by FEers boils down to:
1) The earth looks flat, therefore the earth is flat.
2) Make a wild guess at the explanations for all other observations, like upside down refraction, wrong direction magnetic fields.

Still, the Master Derailer succeeds again in diverting attention from any real issues.

By the way, how is it that the meteorites from these torn "off pieces of the Earth" have quite a different composition to the surface rocks of earth?

Who said the magnetic poles are not radial?  They could be, or they could easily be perpendicular to the plane of the Earth.  Do I have to dig up the pictures of my magnet and compasses again for you?

By the way, if these pieces are coming from the bottom of the Earth, then what makes you so sure that they are supposed to have the same composition as the stuff on top of the Earth?

*

rabinoz

  • 26528
  • Real Earth Believer
Re: Meteorites?
« Reply #135 on: November 26, 2017, 04:44:33 PM »
I have been working on a model in which the hypothetical force that causes the i]hypothetical[/i] Universal Accellerator occasionally tears off pieces of the Earth and swirls them i]hypothetical[/i] around above the Earth.  At certain times of the year, the sun is in the right position to cause them to dislodge from their path and hurl towards the Earth due to celestial gravitation.  We would see these as meteors, not meteorites which the OP claims he can see fly around the sky. 

As the pieces of Earth are flung away, they hypothetically become ionic and have a charge.  This charge would be what hypothetically causes lightning as the particals(sic) and pieces become neutral.  There would be a great flow of electrons flowing between the Earth and the particals(sic) and pieces swirling above. 

As many of us know, current flow produces magnetic fields.  This flow of electrons would enter the Earth and flow downwards, towards the ionized underbelly of the Earth, causing the effect that we see as magnetism on a compass.
Some little helpful additions made to aid comprehension.

But wouldn't this "flow of electrons . . . . downwards" cause a magnetic field that was around the earth and not south to north in a radial direction on your Discworld?
You do remember the old "right-hand screw rule", though, in FET, I think that becomes the "right-and screw-loose rule".

Now, please immediately post your Zetetic observations for such a faerie-tail.

I think the Zetecism as practised by FEers boils down to:
1) The earth looks flat, therefore the earth is flat.
2) Make a wild guess at the explanations for all other observations, like upside down refraction, wrong direction magnetic fields.

Still, the Master Derailer succeeds again in diverting attention from any real issues.

By the way, how is it that the meteorites from these torn "off pieces of the Earth" have quite a different composition to the surface rocks of earth?

Who said the magnetic poles are not radial?  They could be, or they could easily be perpendicular to the plane of the Earth.  Do I have to dig up the pictures of my magnet and compasses again for you?
I did not say "magnetic poles are not radial", what I said was, "But wouldn't this 'flow of electrons . . . . downwards' cause a magnetic field that was around the earth and not south to north in a radial direction on your Discworld?"

You do remember the old 'right-hand screw rule', though, in FET, I think that becomes the 'right-and screw-loose rule'."
Brush up at The Khan Academy and try again!

Quote from: jroa
By the way, if these pieces are coming from the bottom of the Earth, then what makes you so sure that they are supposed to have the same composition as the stuff on top of the Earth?
I'l grant you that is a possibility if all your other hypothetical rubbish could happen.

Go back to sleep and dream up some more unscientific fantasy.


*

Son of Orospu

  • Jura's b*tch and proud of it!
  • Planar Moderator
  • 37834
  • I have artificial intelligence
Re: Meteorites?
« Reply #136 on: November 26, 2017, 04:54:51 PM »
I have been working on a model in which the hypothetical force that causes the i]hypothetical[/i] Universal Accellerator occasionally tears off pieces of the Earth and swirls them i]hypothetical[/i] around above the Earth.  At certain times of the year, the sun is in the right position to cause them to dislodge from their path and hurl towards the Earth due to celestial gravitation.  We would see these as meteors, not meteorites which the OP claims he can see fly around the sky. 

As the pieces of Earth are flung away, they hypothetically become ionic and have a charge.  This charge would be what hypothetically causes lightning as the particals(sic) and pieces become neutral.  There would be a great flow of electrons flowing between the Earth and the particals(sic) and pieces swirling above. 

As many of us know, current flow produces magnetic fields.  This flow of electrons would enter the Earth and flow downwards, towards the ionized underbelly of the Earth, causing the effect that we see as magnetism on a compass.
Some little helpful additions made to aid comprehension.

But wouldn't this "flow of electrons . . . . downwards" cause a magnetic field that was around the earth and not south to north in a radial direction on your Discworld?
You do remember the old "right-hand screw rule", though, in FET, I think that becomes the "right-and screw-loose rule".

Now, please immediately post your Zetetic observations for such a faerie-tail.

I think the Zetecism as practised by FEers boils down to:
1) The earth looks flat, therefore the earth is flat.
2) Make a wild guess at the explanations for all other observations, like upside down refraction, wrong direction magnetic fields.

Still, the Master Derailer succeeds again in diverting attention from any real issues.

By the way, how is it that the meteorites from these torn "off pieces of the Earth" have quite a different composition to the surface rocks of earth?

Who said the magnetic poles are not radial?  They could be, or they could easily be perpendicular to the plane of the Earth.  Do I have to dig up the pictures of my magnet and compasses again for you?
I did not say "magnetic poles are not radial", what I said was, "But wouldn't this 'flow of electrons . . . . downwards' cause a magnetic field that was around the earth and not south to north in a radial direction on your Discworld?"

You do remember the old 'right-hand screw rule', though, in FET, I think that becomes the 'right-and screw-loose rule'."
Brush up at The Khan Academy and try again!

Quote from: jroa
By the way, if these pieces are coming from the bottom of the Earth, then what makes you so sure that they are supposed to have the same composition as the stuff on top of the Earth?
I'l grant you that is a possibility if all your other hypothetical rubbish could happen.

Go back to sleep and dream up some more unscientific fantasy.



Learn to read, old man.  I did not say you said that, I asked who you think said that.  From what I understand, it gets harder to comprehend things as you get older, but please at least try.

Now, getting back on topic, you assume that "downward" means linearly, which is why you refer to a right-hand/left-hand rule of magnetism.  If the electrons are not traveling in a straight line, and instead are spiraling as they travel due to the forces of the aetheric whirlpool, then which hand rule am I supposed to apply?  You seem to always argue in absolutes, which makes your arguments weak and easy to pick apart. 

*

rabinoz

  • 26528
  • Real Earth Believer
Re: Meteorites?
« Reply #137 on: November 26, 2017, 05:26:59 PM »
Learn to read, old man.  I did not say you said that, I asked who you think said that.  From what I understand, it gets harder to comprehend things as you get older, but please at least try.
You said, "This flow of electrons would enter the Earth and flow downwards, towards the ionized underbelly of the Earth, causing the effect that we see as magnetism on a compass. "

Where is anything about spiralling?

Still, what can one expect from a 4 year old who hasn't gained nay maturity in tears?

*

Son of Orospu

  • Jura's b*tch and proud of it!
  • Planar Moderator
  • 37834
  • I have artificial intelligence
Re: Meteorites?
« Reply #138 on: November 26, 2017, 05:29:40 PM »
Learn to read, old man.  I did not say you said that, I asked who you think said that.  From what I understand, it gets harder to comprehend things as you get older, but please at least try.
You said, "This flow of electrons would enter the Earth and flow downwards, towards the ionized underbelly of the Earth, causing the effect that we see as magnetism on a compass. "

Where is anything about spiralling?

Still, what can one expect from a 4 year old who hasn't gained nay maturity in tears?

Things can travel to a particular place without traveling in straight lines, silly man. 

Re: Meteorites?
« Reply #139 on: November 26, 2017, 06:12:43 PM »
Meteors and meteorites are both visible.

Not as burning fireballs, which is what the OP was discussing.  ::)

There is an entire range of scale from the faintest streaks to bright lines to fragmented bright lines to fireballs small and large. The faint streaks tend to be meteors, and the brighter fireballs tend to be meteorites, but that isn’t a perfect test.

“7. How bright does a meteor have to be before there is a chance of it reaching the ground as a meteorite?

Generally speaking, a fireball must be greater than about magnitude -8 to -10 in order to potentially produce a meteorite fall. Two important additional requirements are that (1) the parent meteoroid must be of asteroidal origin, composed of sufficiently sturdy material for the trip through the atmosphere, and (2) the meteoroid must enter the atmosphere as a relatively slow meteor. Meteoroids of asteroid origin make up only a small percentage (about 5%) of the overall meteoroid population, which is primarily cometary in nature.

Photographic fireball studies have indicated that a fireball must usually still be generating visible light below the 20 km (12 mile) altitude level in order to have a good probability of producing a meteorite fall. Very bright meteors of magnitude -15 or better have been studied which produced no potential meteorites, especially those having a cometary origin.”

https://www.amsmeteors.org/fireballs/faqf/
"Science is real."
--They Might Be Giants

*

Son of Orospu

  • Jura's b*tch and proud of it!
  • Planar Moderator
  • 37834
  • I have artificial intelligence
Re: Meteorites?
« Reply #140 on: November 26, 2017, 06:39:36 PM »
All meteorites exist on the surface of the Earth.  It is impossible to see them streak through the sky. 

If a meteor survives the plunge through the atmosphere and lands on the surface, it's known as a meteorite.

Re: Meteorites?
« Reply #141 on: November 26, 2017, 06:56:24 PM »
I have been working on a model in which the force that causes the Universal Accellerator occasionally tears off pieces of the Earth and swirls them around above the Earth.  At certain times of the year, the sun is in the right position to cause them to dislodge from their path and hurl towards the Earth due to celestial gravitation.  We would see these as meteors, not meteorites which the OP claims he can see fly around the sky. 

As the pieces of Earth are flung away, they become ionic and have a charge.  This charge would be what causes lightning as the particals and pieces become neutral.  There would be a great flow of electrons flowing between the Earth and the particals and pieces swirling above

As many of us know, current flow produces magnetic fields.  This flow of electrons would enter the Earth and flow downwards, towards the ionized underbelly of the Earth, causing the effect that we see as magnetism on a compass.

I can only assume all of these things have been OBSERVED by some flat earth theorist?  Because otherwise, no good Zeteticist would base a model on them.

Re: Meteorites?
« Reply #142 on: November 26, 2017, 07:31:51 PM »
All meteorites exist on the surface of the Earth.  It is impossible to see them streak through the sky. 

If a meteor survives the plunge through the atmosphere and lands on the surface, it's known as a meteorite.

I keep correcting you tonight. Too much holiday nog?

“UPDATE February 16, 2016. Fragments of a daytime fireball – seen late last month over a large portion of northern Florida, southeast of Georgia and South Carolina – have now been found. Meteorite enthusiasts have picked up at least six meteorites ranging from 8.5 grams to 800 grams, just north of Osceola National Forest, near Lake City, in northern Florida.

Mike Hankey, Larry Atkins, Laura Atkins, Brendan Fallon, and Josh Adkins went meteorite hunting for several days, ranging through swampland and pine forests, and were successful...”

http://earthsky.org/space/daylight-meteor-over-southeastern-u-s-jan-24-2016
"Science is real."
--They Might Be Giants

*

Son of Orospu

  • Jura's b*tch and proud of it!
  • Planar Moderator
  • 37834
  • I have artificial intelligence
Re: Meteorites?
« Reply #143 on: November 26, 2017, 09:25:35 PM »
Meteorite enthusiasts have picked up at least six meteorites ranging from 8.5 grams to 800 grams, just north of Osceola National Forest, near Lake City, in northern Florida.

They were meteorites because they picked them up off the ground, which is exactly what I said.  In how many more ways are you going to prove yourself wrong tonight?

*

Bullwinkle

  • The Elder Ones
  • 21042
  • Standard Idiot
Re: Meteorites?
« Reply #144 on: November 26, 2017, 10:52:13 PM »
Meteor = Zoooom

Meteorite = Thud

*

Wolvaccine

  • EXTRA SPICY MODE
  • 24493
Re: Meteorites?
« Reply #145 on: November 26, 2017, 10:57:49 PM »
Meteorite enthusiasts have picked up at least six meteorites ranging from 8.5 grams to 800 grams, just north of Osceola National Forest, near Lake City, in northern Florida.

They were meteorites because they picked them up off the ground, which is exactly what I said.  In how many more ways are you going to prove yourself wrong tonight?

John B not so Smart!

Quote from: sokarul
what website did you use to buy your wife? Did you choose Chinese over Russian because she can't open her eyes to see you?

What animal relates to your wife?

Know your place

Re: Meteorites?
« Reply #146 on: November 27, 2017, 04:47:02 AM »
Meteorite enthusiasts have picked up at least six meteorites ranging from 8.5 grams to 800 grams, just north of Osceola National Forest, near Lake City, in northern Florida.

They were meteorites because they picked them up off the ground, which is exactly what I said.  In how many more ways are you going to prove yourself wrong tonight?

Do you not read words? There was a fireball in the sky, and then they found the meteorites that caused the fireball. THEREFORE, meteorites can be seen streaking through the sky as they fall.

The way you say nonsense like that makes it clear that you’re just a troll.
"Science is real."
--They Might Be Giants

Re: Meteorites?
« Reply #147 on: November 27, 2017, 05:10:35 AM »
Getting exasperated responding to trolls and trivia, so I’m going to go on vacation. The point of this thread is that RE knows exactly what meteorites and meteors are, while FE can only offer vague guesses. This is one of dozens of independent observations that support RE. Prove RE alone? No, but FE’s lack of an explanation, coupled with all of the other evidence of a solar system, help to reinforce the model.

However, I can’t leave without the link to this song:

"Science is real."
--They Might Be Giants

Re: Meteorites?
« Reply #148 on: November 27, 2017, 05:42:21 AM »
Typical lazy fuck.
Yes you are, aren't you.
You claim the reports are all over yet can't even put in the effort to find one.

Perhaps you (like so often) are just blatantly lying?
Perhaps the reports aren't all over?
Perhaps it hasn't actually occurred.

Regardless it doesn't change the fact that at least some come in with significant sideways velocity and thus it isn't simply "falling".

Now either find a report, provide an explanation that is more than just falling or get lost.

But what about Ann Hodges?
What about her?
A woman that was hit by a meteorite that wasn't simply falling and instead had significant sideways velocity.
Sideways velocity?

The fucking meteorite simply dropped through her roof for fuck sakes.

And what about meteorites without craters, lying about in deserts all over the world?
What about them?
Are you trying to make a point or just trying to avoid the failings of the FE models?
The point is the damn things would have craters or impact impressions if they were coming so hot and fast as you would have everyone believe.
« Last Edit: November 27, 2017, 05:47:29 AM by totallackey »

*

Son of Orospu

  • Jura's b*tch and proud of it!
  • Planar Moderator
  • 37834
  • I have artificial intelligence
Re: Meteorites?
« Reply #149 on: November 27, 2017, 05:45:13 AM »
Meteorite enthusiasts have picked up at least six meteorites ranging from 8.5 grams to 800 grams, just north of Osceola National Forest, near Lake City, in northern Florida.

They were meteorites because they picked them up off the ground, which is exactly what I said.  In how many more ways are you going to prove yourself wrong tonight?

Do you not read words? There was a fireball in the sky, and then they found the meteorites that caused the fireball. THEREFORE, meteorites can be seen streaking through the sky as they fall.

The way you say nonsense like that makes it clear that you’re just a troll.

Seeing a fireball in the sky and picking up meteorites are two seperate actions.  You are the one who seems to have comprehension problems.  Your own article does not say they plucked burning meteorites out of the sky, but you somehow are set on claiming that they did.  I even posted the a definition of a meteorite, and it said they come from the ground.  I am not sure what you are so confused about.