Posted on 08/12/2015 8:48:40 AM PDT by Purdue77
Popular Science (8/11, Fecht) reports that on July 29, the Rosetta spacecraft was able to capture what the ESA called a “dramatic outburst” from Comet 67P, which was strong enough to affect the solar wind. The article notes that the ESA said that “unpredictable outbursts” like this one are occurring more frequently as the comet reaches perihelion, or its closest point to the sun in its orbit, on August 13.
(Excerpt) Read more at popsci.com ...
NAH! Hillary's already on Pluto. . .
Here are some possibilities without to resorting to any nuttiness.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Origin_of_water_on_Earth
only asked because all I can see on my pings page are little black squares, no images.
interesting comment btw.
Nose picking with no proof, Moonman. That proof is what they are so desperate to find . . . and they are NOT finding it where they are looking. When are you going to open your closed mind?
The nuttiness is clinging to the Dirty Snowball theory when EVERY SINGLE COMET we've had close contact with has had very little, if any water, at all. . . Comet 67P is no different. The Coma has 3.3% water. Where is the water Moonman62. And please try and answer. Dry bones are wetter.
If the Oceans on Earth came from comets like 67P they'd be made up of 96.7% all of these compounds:
They are not finding the massive amounts of water they expect, Moonman62. . . but they refuse to change their wishful thinking that only if they go to just one more comet, they'll find their dirty snowball with massive amounts of water to prove their theories true. I think we are up to nine comet visits and close fly-bys now. No snow, no water, just Dry rocks, indistinguishable from any other asteroid.
"Insanity: doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results." — Albert Einstein
There were so many failures about the Rosetta mission because they based their assumptions of encountering ICE and found ROCK instead. . . and they are being surprised by everything they are running into because of their bad theories and bad assumption that comets are dirty snowballs made up of water ice. They could not even land and anchor the Philae lander to the surface of 67P because the surface wasn't the soft ice they thought but hard ROCK instead!
You are doing the same thing, Moonman62, posting the same claims of "nuttyness" on here claiming the people who PREDICTED these results before they ever launched even one their comet probes and have been proved RIGHT in every single one of their predictions. Isn't the test of any theory how well that theory predicts future discoveries and findings? The Dirty Snowball theorists are running on empty while the Electric and Plasma Universe theorists are pretty damn close to 100% on theirs.
Which images are showing only little black squares? I see them on my FR page? Anyone else have an issue?
From what I’ve read, it doesn’t look like planetary scientists are clinging to the dirty snowball theory, so maybe you should give that a rest.
I take it you didn’t bother to read the link I posted.
Yes, you're right. I read as far as the first paragraph after the first claimed source, which called for a citation. It said as its first thing "comets." I did not read to the third paragraph of that second water source section where an anonymous editor negated the lede.
I see the latest editing has added that the cometary theory is "implausible" but the Rosetta mission scientists haven't gotten that memo yet. . . nor have the space journalists covering it. Even the editor of the Wikipedia article has merely transferred his explanation from comets to mythical "protoplanets" formed in the outer asteroid belt, with no evidence such things ever existed (sound familiar?
That the Earth's water originated purely from comets is implausible, as a result of measurements of the isotope ratios of hydrogen in the four comets Halley, Hyakutake, Hale-Bopp, and 67P/Churyumov–Gerasimenko by researchers such as David Jewitt, as according to this research the ratio of deuterium to protium (D/H ratio) of the comets is approximately double that of oceanic water. What is however unclear is whether these comets are representative of those from the Kuiper Belt. According to A. Morbidelli [4] the largest part of today's water comes from protoplanets formed in the outer asteroid belt that plunged towards the Earth, as indicated by the D/H proportions in carbon-rich chondrites.This is postulated as though we have knowledge that the D/H ratio in the outer asteroids match the D/H ratio of our oceans without every seeing an outer asteroid belt "protoplanet", much less visiting one, or sampling one to actually test it. It sounds like it has as much validity as claiming "Most of our water today comes from Unicorn pee, which as everyone knows, has the same D/H ratio as modern ocean water." Both have as much chance of being true.
http://www.popsci.com.au/space/riding-a-shrinking-comet-toward-the-sun,407858
posting the link to the images for anyone else who can’t see them.
the source article has a redirect
Good stuff. Been eating them since I was 4 or 5.
H2S is highest on the bar graph, and so it truly is a cosmic fart, with the right odoriferous gas component, aided by methane.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.