Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]

Groups > sci.physics.relativity > #372953 > unrolled thread

Re: Our Solar System Is Overflowing with Liquid Water [Graphic]

Back to article view | Back to sci.physics.relativity

This discussion starts older than the indexed window; earlier articles aren't shown. The article labeled Started by below is the oldest one visible, not the original post.

Contents

  Re: Our Solar System Is Overflowing with Liquid Water [Graphic] Waye Kitchens <wscom@complang.net> - 2015-12-30 22:26 +0000
    Re: Our Solar System Is Overflowing with Liquid Water [Graphic] John Heath <heathjohn2@gmail.com> - 2015-12-30 15:34 -0800
      Re: Our Solar System Is Overflowing with Liquid Water [Graphic] Waye Kitchens <wscom@complang.net> - 2015-12-31 00:32 +0000
        Re: Our Solar System Is Overflowing with Liquid Water [Graphic] Sylvia Else <sylvia@not.at.this.address> - 2016-01-03 13:59 +1100
          Re: Our Solar System Is Overflowing with Liquid Water [Graphic] John Heath <heathjohn2@gmail.com> - 2016-01-02 22:31 -0800
          Re: Our Solar System Is Overflowing with Liquid Water [Graphic] Kathleen Winder <katwin@mcgatlin.org> - 2016-01-03 13:24 +0000
            Re: Our Solar System Is Overflowing with Liquid Water [Graphic] Kathleen Winder <katwin@mcgatlin.org> - 2016-01-03 13:34 +0000
              Re: Our Solar System Is Overflowing with Liquid Water [Graphic] John Heath <heathjohn2@gmail.com> - 2016-01-03 15:01 -0800
                Re: Our Solar System Is Overflowing with Liquid Water [Graphic] Kathleen Winder <katwin@mcgatlin.org> - 2016-01-03 23:07 +0000
                  Re: Our Solar System Is Overflowing with Liquid Water [Graphic] pnalsing@gmail.com - 2016-01-03 16:22 -0800
                    Re: Our Solar System Is Overflowing with Liquid Water [Graphic] Kathleen Winder <katwin@mcgatlin.org> - 2016-01-04 19:21 +0000
                      Re: Our Solar System Is Overflowing with Liquid Water [Graphic] pnalsing@gmail.com - 2016-01-04 12:39 -0800
                        Re: Our Solar System Is Overflowing with Liquid Water [Graphic] Kathleen Winder <katwin@mcgatlin.org> - 2016-01-04 20:47 +0000
                          Re: Our Solar System Is Overflowing with Liquid Water [Graphic] pnalsing@gmail.com - 2016-01-04 18:48 -0800
            Re: Our Solar System Is Overflowing with Liquid Water [Graphic] Sylvia Else <sylvia@not.at.this.address> - 2016-01-04 11:58 +1100
              Re: Our Solar System Is Overflowing with Liquid Water [Graphic] pnalsing@gmail.com - 2016-01-03 20:22 -0800
                Re: Our Solar System Is Overflowing with Liquid Water [Graphic] Sylvia Else <sylvia@not.at.this.address> - 2016-01-04 16:29 +1100
                  Re: Our Solar System Is Overflowing with Liquid Water [Graphic] Poutnik <Poutnik4NNTP@gmail.com> - 2016-01-04 11:12 +0100
                    Re: Our Solar System Is Overflowing with Liquid Water [Graphic] Sylvia Else <sylvia@not.at.this.address> - 2016-01-04 23:17 +1100
                      Re: Our Solar System Is Overflowing with Liquid Water [Graphic] Poutnik <Poutnik4NNTP@gmail.com> - 2016-01-04 13:57 +0100
              Re: Our Solar System Is Overflowing with Liquid Water [Graphic] Kathleen Winder <katwin@mcgatlin.org> - 2016-01-04 19:23 +0000
                Re: Our Solar System Is Overflowing with Liquid Water [Graphic] Sylvia Else <sylvia@not.at.this.address> - 2016-01-05 10:33 +1100
      Re: Our Solar System Is Overflowing with Liquid Water [Graphic] Gary Harnagel <hitlong@yahoo.com> - 2015-12-31 12:22 -0800
        Re: Our Solar System Is Overflowing with Liquid Water [Graphic] John Heath <heathjohn2@gmail.com> - 2016-01-02 01:02 -0800
          Re: Our Solar System Is Overflowing with Liquid Water [Graphic] Gary Harnagel <hitlong@yahoo.com> - 2016-01-02 04:49 -0800

Page 1 of 2  [1] 2  Next page →

#372953 — Re: Our Solar System Is Overflowing with Liquid Water [Graphic]

Sam Wormley wrote:

>> on Saturn's moon Enceladus, confirming long-held suspicions of an ocean
>> of liquid water deep beneath the ice. Soon after, a separate team saw
>> signs of an ocean sloshing within Ganymede, the largest of Jupiter's
>> icy moons. More recently, NASA presented the best evidence yet for
>> liquid water on Mars. It now looks like the solar system is awash with
>> this key ingredient for life.

Bullshit, no liquid fresh water anywhere. Water is produced by Sun 
abundantly.

[toc] | [next] | [standalone]

#372958

On Wednesday, December 30, 2015 at 5:26:22 PM UTC-5, Waye Kitchens wrote:
> Sam Wormley wrote:
> 
> >> on Saturn's moon Enceladus, confirming long-held suspicions of an ocean
> >> of liquid water deep beneath the ice. Soon after, a separate team saw
> >> signs of an ocean sloshing within Ganymede, the largest of Jupiter's
> >> icy moons. More recently, NASA presented the best evidence yet for
> >> liquid water on Mars. It now looks like the solar system is awash with
> >> this key ingredient for life.
> 
> Bullshit, no liquid fresh water anywhere. Water is produced by Sun 
> abundantly.

Meteorites are dirty snowballs with a iron core for the most part. The iron came from an energetic response from a star where water is unlikely to be in a condensed form. This begs the question where did the condensed water come from for the dirty snow ball that we are seeing? 

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#372964

John Heath wrote:

> Meteorites are dirty snowballs with a iron core for the most part.

Good question. Iron and Water cannot stay together same place same time, 
unless artificially creation. One more proof.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#373158

On 31/12/2015 11:32 AM, Waye Kitchens wrote:
> John Heath wrote:
>
>> Meteorites are dirty snowballs with a iron core for the most part.
>
> Good question. Iron and Water cannot stay together same place same time,
> unless artificially creation.

Why not?

Sylvia.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#373166

On Saturday, January 2, 2016 at 9:59:36 PM UTC-5, Sylvia Else wrote:
> On 31/12/2015 11:32 AM, Waye Kitchens wrote:
> > John Heath wrote:
> >
> >> Meteorites are dirty snowballs with a iron core for the most part.
> >
> > Good question. Iron and Water cannot stay together same place same time,
> > unless artificially creation.
> 
> Why not?
> 
> Sylvia.

I was wondering the same question. A little voice in the back of my head said do not open this can of worms. However the deed is done so pray tell , why not?

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#373179

Sylvia Else wrote:

> On 31/12/2015 11:32 AM, Waye Kitchens wrote:
>> John Heath wrote:
>>> Meteorites are dirty snowballs with a iron core for the most part.
>>
>> Good question. Iron and Water cannot stay together same place same
>> time, unless artificially creation.
> 
> Why not?

Water is about Oxygen, lady. Oxygen and Iron are highly reactive. My 
friend Potink may jump in and support.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#373182

Kathleen Winder wrote:

> Sylvia Else wrote:
> 
>> On 31/12/2015 11:32 AM, Waye Kitchens wrote:
>>> John Heath wrote:
>>>> Meteorites are dirty snowballs with a iron core for the most part.
>>>
>>> Good question. Iron and Water cannot stay together same place same
>>> time, unless artificially creation.
>> 
>> Why not?
> 
> Water is about Oxygen, lady. Oxygen and Iron are highly reactive. My
> friend Potink may jump in and support.

Which strongly indicate that those elements were put together artificially 
by creation.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#373238

On Sunday, January 3, 2016 at 8:37:56 AM UTC-5, Kathleen Winder wrote:
> Kathleen Winder wrote:
> 
> > Sylvia Else wrote:
> > 
> >> On 31/12/2015 11:32 AM, Waye Kitchens wrote:
> >>> John Heath wrote:
> >>>> Meteorites are dirty snowballs with a iron core for the most part.
> >>>
> >>> Good question. Iron and Water cannot stay together same place same
> >>> time, unless artificially creation.
> >> 
> >> Why not?
> > 
> > Water is about Oxygen, lady. Oxygen and Iron are highly reactive. My
> > friend Potink may jump in and support.
> 
> Which strongly indicate that those elements were put together artificially 
> by creation.

I knew this was a can of worms and its your fault Sylvia. You deal with it.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#373240

John Heath wrote:

> On Sunday, January 3, 2016 at 8:37:56 AM UTC-5, Kathleen Winder wrote:
>> Kathleen Winder wrote:
>> 
>> > Sylvia Else wrote:
>> > 
>> >> On 31/12/2015 11:32 AM, Waye Kitchens wrote:
>> >>> John Heath wrote:
>> >>>> Meteorites are dirty snowballs with a iron core for the most part.
>> >>>
>> >>> Good question. Iron and Water cannot stay together same place same
>> >>> time, unless artificially creation.
>> >> 
>> >> Why not?
>> > 
>> > Water is about Oxygen, lady. Oxygen and Iron are highly reactive. My
>> > friend Potink may jump in and support.
>> 
>> Which strongly indicate that those elements were put together
>> artificially by creation.
> 
> I knew this was a can of worms and its your fault Sylvia. You deal with
> it.

Where is that Iron and Water come from, if not artificially created? Water 
is needed by the cells and interstellar bacteria (information) transported 
by this mechanism. Iron like wise is needed for protection and to gain 
momentum for the journey, and to avoid dispersion. Remember that the most 
efficient way to travel in space is by using a heavy planet.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#373244

On Sunday, January 3, 2016 at 3:09:37 PM UTC-8, Kathleen Winder wrote:
 
> Where is that Iron and Water come from, if not artificially created? Water 
> is needed by the cells and interstellar bacteria (information) transported 
> by this mechanism. Iron like wise is needed for protection and to gain 
> momentum for the journey, and to avoid dispersion. Remember that the most 
> efficient way to travel in space is by using a heavy planet.

Complete and utter nonsense, almost every word...

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#373287

pnalsing wrote:

> On Sunday, January 3, 2016 at 3:09:37 PM UTC-8, Kathleen Winder wrote:
>  
>> Where is that Iron and Water come from, if not artificially created?
>> Water is needed by the cells and interstellar bacteria (information)
>> transported by this mechanism. Iron like wise is needed for protection
>> and to gain momentum for the journey, and to avoid dispersion. Remember
>> that the most efficient way to travel in space is by using a heavy
>> planet.
> 
> Complete and utter nonsense, almost every word...

Since you can only read Braille.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#373299

On Monday, January 4, 2016 at 11:23:26 AM UTC-8, Kathleen Winder wrote:
> pnalsing wrote:
> 
> > On Sunday, January 3, 2016 at 3:09:37 PM UTC-8, Kathleen Winder wrote:
> >  
> >> Where is that Iron and Water come from, if not artificially created?
> >> Water is needed by the cells and interstellar bacteria (information)
> >> transported by this mechanism. Iron like wise is needed for protection
> >> and to gain momentum for the journey, and to avoid dispersion. Remember
> >> that the most efficient way to travel in space is by using a heavy
> >> planet.
> > 
> > Complete and utter nonsense, almost every word...
> 
> Since you can only read Braille.

Dumber than a bag of hammers...

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#373301

pnalsing wrote:

> On Monday, January 4, 2016 at 11:23:26 AM UTC-8, Kathleen Winder wrote:
>> pnalsing wrote:
>> 
>> > On Sunday, January 3, 2016 at 3:09:37 PM UTC-8, Kathleen Winder
>> > wrote:
>> >  
>> >> Where is that Iron and Water come from, if not artificially created?
>> >> Water is needed by the cells and interstellar bacteria (information)
>> >> transported by this mechanism. Iron like wise is needed for
>> >> protection and to gain momentum for the journey, and to avoid
>> >> dispersion. Remember that the most efficient way to travel in space
>> >> is by using a heavy planet.
>> > 
>> > Complete and utter nonsense, almost every word...
>> 
>> Since you can only read Braille.
> 
> Dumber than a bag of hammers...

You must be shaving the hair down from your face, looking directly into a 
mirror.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#373322

On Monday, January 4, 2016 at 12:49:07 PM UTC-8, Kathleen Winder wrote:
> pnalsing wrote:
> 
> > On Monday, January 4, 2016 at 11:23:26 AM UTC-8, Kathleen Winder wrote:
> >> pnalsing wrote:
> >> 
> >> > On Sunday, January 3, 2016 at 3:09:37 PM UTC-8, Kathleen Winder
> >> > wrote:
> >> >  
> >> >> Where is that Iron and Water come from, if not artificially created?
> >> >> Water is needed by the cells and interstellar bacteria (information)
> >> >> transported by this mechanism. Iron like wise is needed for
> >> >> protection and to gain momentum for the journey, and to avoid
> >> >> dispersion. Remember that the most efficient way to travel in space
> >> >> is by using a heavy planet.
> >> > 
> >> > Complete and utter nonsense, almost every word...
> >> 
> >> Since you can only read Braille.
> > 
> > Dumber than a bag of hammers...
> 
> You must be shaving the hair down from your face, looking directly into a 
> mirror.

Dumber than 2 bags of hammers...

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#373248

On 4/01/2016 12:24 AM, Kathleen Winder wrote:
> Sylvia Else wrote:
>
>> On 31/12/2015 11:32 AM, Waye Kitchens wrote:
>>> John Heath wrote:
>>>> Meteorites are dirty snowballs with a iron core for the most part.
>>>
>>> Good question. Iron and Water cannot stay together same place same
>>> time, unless artificially creation.
>>
>> Why not?
>
> Water is about Oxygen, lady. Oxygen and Iron are highly reactive. My
> friend Potink may jump in and support.
>

Things often burn in oxygen, but I've not seen anything burn in water. 
As an argument, yours has much to be desired.

The reaction that turns iron to rust depends on the presence of both 
water and free oxygen. In the absence of either it cannot proceed. It is 
not sufficient to have just iron and water.

Sylvia.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#373250

On Sunday, January 3, 2016 at 4:58:50 PM UTC-8, Sylvia Else wrote:

> Things often burn in oxygen, but I've not seen anything burn in water.

Well, there is always sodium..

tp://tinyurl.com/nfnclat

... but I don't  know if this is technically 'burning'... we used to pinch chunks of sodium from the chem lab and toss them onto the local lagoon; it was quite a display!

\Paul A

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#373251

On 4/01/2016 3:22 PM, pnalsing@gmail.com wrote:
> On Sunday, January 3, 2016 at 4:58:50 PM UTC-8, Sylvia Else wrote:
>
>> Things often burn in oxygen, but I've not seen anything burn in water.
>
> Well, there is always sodium..
>
> tp://tinyurl.com/nfnclat
>
> ... but I don't  know if this is technically 'burning'... we used to pinch chunks of sodium from the chem lab and toss them onto the local lagoon; it was quite a display!

No, it's not burning.

It's liberating hydrogen, and it's the hydrogen that burns, ignited by 
the heat of reaction of the sodium with the water.

Sylvia.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#373262

On 01/04/2016 06:29 AM, Sylvia Else wrote:
> On 4/01/2016 3:22 PM, pnalsing@gmail.com wrote:
>> On Sunday, January 3, 2016 at 4:58:50 PM UTC-8, Sylvia Else wrote:
>>
>>> Things often burn in oxygen, but I've not seen anything burn in water.
>>
>> Well, there is always sodium..
>>
>> tp://tinyurl.com/nfnclat
>>
>> ... but I don't  know if this is technically 'burning'... we used to pinch chunks of sodium from the chem lab and toss them onto the local lagoon; it was quite a display!
> 
> No, it's not burning.
> 
> It's liberating hydrogen, and it's the hydrogen that burns, ignited by 
> the heat of reaction of the sodium with the water.
> 

In fact, hydrogen gets ignited by sparks from the sodium,
that gets positively charged by releasing electrons to water.

It was recently predicted
by quantum chemistry simulation of atom clusters
and confirmed by high speed camera.

See also

http://www.nature.com/news/sodium-s-explosive-secrets-revealed-1.16771
http://www.nature.com/nchem/journal/v7/n3/full/nchem.2161.html


-- 
Poutnik ( the Czech word for a wanderer )

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#373264

On 4/01/2016 9:12 PM, Poutnik wrote:
> On 01/04/2016 06:29 AM, Sylvia Else wrote:
>> On 4/01/2016 3:22 PM, pnalsing@gmail.com wrote:
>>> On Sunday, January 3, 2016 at 4:58:50 PM UTC-8, Sylvia Else wrote:
>>>
>>>> Things often burn in oxygen, but I've not seen anything burn in water.
>>>
>>> Well, there is always sodium..
>>>
>>> tp://tinyurl.com/nfnclat
>>>
>>> ... but I don't  know if this is technically 'burning'... we used to pinch chunks of sodium from the chem lab and toss them onto the local lagoon; it was quite a display!
>>
>> No, it's not burning.
>>
>> It's liberating hydrogen, and it's the hydrogen that burns, ignited by
>> the heat of reaction of the sodium with the water.
>>
>
> In fact, hydrogen gets ignited by sparks from the sodium,
> that gets positively charged by releasing electrons to water.
>
> It was recently predicted
> by quantum chemistry simulation of atom clusters
> and confirmed by high speed camera.
>
> See also
>
> http://www.nature.com/news/sodium-s-explosive-secrets-revealed-1.16771
> http://www.nature.com/nchem/journal/v7/n3/full/nchem.2161.html
>
>
OK, interesting. Doesn't affect my central point, though.

Sylvia.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#373266

On 01/04/2016 01:17 PM, Sylvia Else wrote:
> On 4/01/2016 9:12 PM, Poutnik wrote:

>>>
>>
>> In fact, hydrogen gets ignited by sparks from the sodium,
>> that gets positively charged by releasing electrons to water.
>>
>> It was recently predicted
>> by quantum chemistry simulation of atom clusters
>> and confirmed by high speed camera.
>>
>> See also
>>
>> http://www.nature.com/news/sodium-s-explosive-secrets-revealed-1.16771
>> http://www.nature.com/nchem/journal/v7/n3/full/nchem.2161.html
>>
>>
> OK, interesting. Doesn't affect my central point, though.
> 
> Sylvia.

It was not intended to affect it, but complement it, Sylvia. :-)

-- 
Poutnik ( the Czech word for a wanderer )

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

Page 1 of 2  [1] 2  Next page →

Back to top | Article view | sci.physics.relativity

csiph-web