Free Republic

Well...

So many things that could be said but rest easy in the knowledge you have been a light and inspiratin for many. Godspeed, Jeff.

Good stuff as usual cIc. I’ve never been able to find a plausible explanation to the question of what happened to the “conservative” media; fishwraps in particular. Did “yellow” journalism make a contribution in some way? Did the mix of (professed)readership/advertisers play a part? Since ads pay the bills, what are the odds of collusion between fishy fishwraps and major advertisers? Was “conservative” media too straight laced to play the sensationalism game? The answers are out there....somewhere.

The thought that powerful news organizations such as NBC would hold and timely release news articles that is negative (or even positive) to influence our elections is pretty scary.

A brief history: In the beginning, uh, wait... From the outset; from the early days of the republic, there were competing "medias". And up until recent times(well, say as recent as the 70's, maybe 80's) there were news(sic)papers that identified themselves with the various parties. Primarily Dim and Pubbie. Still a few around. Every large and many medium sized metro areas had at least two fishwraps; each banging the drum for their "party". So, the question that needs to be asked is, what happened to the conservative "media"? Why did the liberal media prevail?

Assumptions that are proving to be not true.

Gotta wonder if at some point during the planning stage someone didn't ask the question, "What if our assumptions about the makeup of a comet are wrong?". These are presumably some of the best and brightest in the aerospace field and nobody challenged the conventional wisdom? Or, if someone did, were they ridiculed into silence? Just speculating...

All of which is academic at this point and we will probably never know why they almost blew an opportunity of a lifetime.

Well, color me confused. I think I recall reading an article a few months back that stated water was being FORMED by some mechanism I don’t understand, in this same general area. This article seems to contradict that mechanism by stating the water is being discharged from the comet itself. Which seems odd since the best I recall, there has been very little water detected in/on the comet. Have I missed something?

Curious. This particular article didn’t point out what several other articles did; that is, the “aurora” is apparently only “visible” in the ultraviolet. Maybe it’s more like a UV rainbow???

Answer: Citizen journalism. We have the tools, all we need is the will.

If there is an answer to be had, that might be part of it. Fact is, given the degraded condition of our culture, I'm not convinced any of us could move the needle enough to make much of a difference. I wonder if the Koch brothers for example, with their enormous resources could even turn the ship around. Or would they even want to???

Seen this???

Well done! In doing your research were you able to come to any conclusion about what happened to conservative media? As you know, they actually existed once upon a time. Why were they unable to compete?

Remember the calendar revisions described by Velikovsky? Remember the Emperor whose name was pronounced Yahoo?

I have a vague recollection of that. Seems that the world had turned upside down and their calendars didn't work any more???

I don't hang around FR nearly as much as I used to. The place ain't what it used to be. Anybody that thinks this place isn't crawling with trolls, including sleeper trolls, needs to recalibrate their antenna. Anyhow, it gets tiresome after a while...

Latest thread...

That’s odd; it doesn’t LOOK like a snowball. :-)

I watched the comet video and was duly impressed. Very compelling presentation. Now I’m off to watch the Mars video before my eyelids start to slam shut. I have marvelled over the various plasma/electromagnetic stuff for some time but never seem to be able to follow through because other interests invariably intrude.

Thanks for the links. I'm already familiar with much of what the Thunderbolts people have done. I haven't seen the comet video so I'll take a look at that one tomorrow sometime.

A side note on the dust/ice business. It's fairly apparent there is at least SOME ice on the surface of SOME comets so I was offering up an uneducated explanation for how it got there. As highly charged as comets appear to be, they will inevitably gather opposite charged particles as they tour the cosmos, no? And if, as the article stated, there is in fact dust/ice present in space, this COULD account for it being present on comets?

Anyhow, it's late and this is truly interesting stuff but the comet video will have to wait til tomorrow.

The only way that would work would be to again accept an electric nature with a charge that would attract the water.

To this layman that certainly seems possible. I don't know enough about the density of these dust/ice clouds to know if a charge could build up as a comet passes through them. Or if they would be opposite charges. It seems likely a comet would build up a charge as it moves through any medium. It also seems likely a greater and greater charge would develop as the medium becomes denser. Like when a comet approaches the sun. But that's just a back of the napkin guess, or WAG.

Thanks for your efforts. The fog is beginning to lift a little.

Shifting gears slightly: I've read several comments that water in its various forms could not exist in deep space. This OLDER ARTICLE says yes, in frozen and vapor form. In its frozen form it has attached itself to dust particles which accounts for ~99% of the water. The remaining ~1% in vapor form. What if comets, because of the nature of their travels, gather up this dust/ice along the way? Maybe on each circuit even, renewing its supply???

Try this on for size. The water is FORMED by the high-energy plasma-discharge interacting with the solar wind, which is made up of stripped protons.

Interestingly enough, that thought occurred to me but having ZERO background in science; in particular chemistry, I didn't even know where or how to begin a search to see if it was even possible. Gratifying to know that my thought processes still function properly -- more or less.

I did some scouting around to see what I could find out generally about Tempel1. Ran across several articles stating water ice or water ice patches were discovered on the comet. Conflicting and contradictory information is everywhere apparently. I discovered one article in my wandering in particular that gave me severe indigestion. If you have time, see what you can make of this item from HERE:

How hot is it on Tempel 1? Researchers made a temperature map of the sunlit side and found the hottest point nearly directly under the sun. It's 329 degrees Kelvin under the sun and 260 in the shade.

The coldest temperature is important because the temperature at which ices such as water, carbon dioxide and carbon monoxide turn directly into gas is below 200 degrees Kelvin.

The problem I have is reconciling the fact that from this same article it states 72°F is roughly 295°K. Nowhere near hot enough to cook off anything. Confusing for the layman.

After making what I thought was a fairly astute observation re a comet's characteristics and not getting a reply it occurs to me my first sentence in my previous reply MAY have had something to do with it...maybe not. You may have thought my comment "What a mess!!!" referred to your post. It did NOT. It was my opinion on the state of affairs generally about the inconsistent application of the scientific method concerning this issue...and others. I apologize for any confusion my lack of clarity may have caused. That critique from a non scientist BTW. I'm an old retired salesman with an interest in the, well, natural world, FWIW.

Moving along. I have spent a good deal of time trying to find additional information regarding alternative research on comets. As you're no doubt aware, there's not much out there. Maybe the same people are too busy banging the drum for algore warming or other "conventional wisdom", I dunno.

Although their instruments detected no water ice on(or in?) the comet; what to make of the water vapor their instruments detect escaping from the comet. Anywhere from a teacup full to over a gallon per SECOND.Might it be trapped in a highly vesicular chunk of rock. The rock itself appears to have been formed under "extreme" conditions.

What a mess!!! In any case, and coincidentally, I just finished watching a PBS show on the Rosetta's trip to the comet. Some conflicting information on the show but I suppose that's to be expected. In one of their demos they combined a mixture of "snow" and sand(I believe). Placed in a chamber, reduced temp to -195(F?), pulled a vacuum and nothing happened until they applied what they called the sun; something resembling a heat lamp. Things began to cook off in fairly dramatic fashion.

In a later portion of the show they determined the comet was NOT made of ice and furthermore, the density of the comet was much lighter than water; that is to say, this comet, or rock(?), would ride high in the water. Interesting that. It also brought to mind another type of rock that coincidentally fits what we actually observe. This thing actually LOOKS like lava rock and more specifically pumice. What are the odds...

So the dirty snowball notion is another one of those WAG's by the "experts" that, while looking more and more improbable, just won't go away. Seems to happen a lot...

I haven't been to the Thunderbolts site in a while but I'd bet a couple of bucks their considerable brain power will yield more accurate predictions than the space "experts".