View Single Post
Old 02-09-2013, 05:04 PM   #72
Ring of Famer

Join Date: Apr 2006
Posts: 11,540

Originally Posted by orangeatheist View Post
But, Mark, you haven't established anything yet. You've presented a fringe idea that has not been verified by peer-review. I know for a fact I'm not an astronomer and I doubt you have any training in the field, either, so how can either of us decide the validity of the McCanney's claims? Desire to do so won't cut it. W*gs uncovered one PhD'd astronomer who has critiqued McCanney's model and found all sorts of holes in it. All you've done is poo-poo Plait's comments and level unfounded ad homs at him (e.g. "Plait never had an original thought in his entire life."). Do you realize how petty you look?

Again, ANYONE can come up with a fringe idea. Ideas need to be tested in order for them to gain any sort of purchase in the realm of intelligent discussion. You can spend this whole thread regurgitating someone else's fringe theory all you want, but it won't get you anywhere. So, I'll ask again: To which peer-reviewed journals did McCanney submit his theory and what were the results of those submissions? You can't just bark "conspiracy" unless you can back up that claim with some established facts. So, if McCanney was systematically blocked from submitting his ideas to journals, please produce the evidence that this occurred. It may be that what you interpret as "conspiracy" was simply rejection for an idea the peer-review editors felt did not meet their high-standards for publication. In other words, the qualified editors themselves found too many flaws in the idea to even publish the work. Exactly what they would do to me if I floated the idea into a higher journal of Egyptology that the pyramids are millennia older than what is currently accepted based upon their alignment with Jupiter, my theory of Atlanthian influence and a reading of the Akashic Records.

Do you get it now? You need to SUPPORT these assertions, not merely present them. You've put the horse far too out in front of the cart, I'm afraid.
I have presented strong supporting evidence. It is a fact that a comet's coma and tail change size and shape as a comet approaches and moves away from the sun.

The equations presented by McCanney in his plasma discharge comet model very accurately predict this behavior. In case you don't know, prediction is the essence of science.

The snowball comet model has no such predictive capacity.

Indeed, it's a joke -- and you are clowns to continue to support such nonsense. Comets are hard objects like asteroids. They can be any size -- even planetary size. The size issue is crucial in the case of Venus, as I will explain in my next couple of posts.

mhgaffney is offline   Reply With Quote