Neither Earth’s rotation nor the periodic bending/warping of Earth’s crust by the Moon is not even close enough to raise Earth’s core to any more than 20 degrees Celcius.
The story of the discovery of radioactivity starts with - of all things - Darwin’s book: On the origin of Species (published in 1859). Darwin understood that evolution takes a very long time and he needed to support the evolution theory by showing that Earth is old enough to bring about life and evolution. Darwin assumed an erosion rate of an inch a century, and then extrapolated that some 300 million years were apparently necessary to explain the total amount of erosion that had occurred.
In 1862, Lord Kelvin published his analysis in a paper titled On the Secular Cooling of the Earth. He arrived at a best estimate for the age of the Earth of 100 million years. Essentially, Lord Kelvin stated that if Earth is more than 100 million years old, there would be no volcanic activity (tidal forces would be unsufficiant) and the planet would be totally solid to the core.
The Christian Fundamentalists were in an uproar against Darwin and held up Lord Kelvin’s study to show that Darwin is incorrect. However, the sedimentation record of the Grand Canyon implies that Earth is at least 2 billion years old. Other studies concluded that Earth is much younger than 1 billion years old. There was much acrimony in the scientific world. It came to the point that Lord Kelvin stated that if one can discover an unknown - at that time - source of energy then he will acknowledge that his models were wrong.
Then in 1896, Henri Becquerel accidentally discovered radioactivity.
I learn the above story by reading 20 years ago a science book published before WW2. Today, all science textbooks start the radioactivity story with Becquerel.
You can read more about the radioactivity story at www.lewrockwell.com/orig9/deming4.1.1.html
Depends on who is doing the implying and how/why they interpreted facts and also whether they interpreted their "facts" based upon other mere implications thought to be facts but based upon other implications often based upon outdated science.
What a silly article... it’s settled science that global warming is caused by carbon dioxide.