'Welease Wosetta!'

[FS3]

Latest "Blast" from Universe Today:

Two jets of gas and dust blast from Comet 67P/C-G in this reassembled and enhanced mosaic made from four photos taken by Rosetta’s navigation camera on September 2, Credit: ESA/Rosetta/ Navcam/Bob King

Anyhow, me thinks it should work more or less THIS way: Parallel currents between the surface and outer double layer of 67P are drawn towards the center of the object where they turn into glow mode and show abrasive EDM effects. That's why we find that typical "bone"-structure on asteroids/comets.

FS3

[Rossim]

Shouldn't these observations alone falsify comet theory? Columnated jets protruding from the surface, yet no vents can be found.

[Bomb20]

Indeed, it is so obvious! One has to be blindfolded to miss this.

[viscount aero]

“We’re a bit surprised at just how unreflective the comet’s surface is and how little evidence of exposed water-ice it shows,” says Dr. Alan Stern, Alice principal investigator and an associate vice president of the SwRI Space Science and Engineering Division.

I like the way the statement is spun: "how little evidence of exposed water-ice," meaning no evidence at all. By phrasing it this way, the report suggests that some water-ice has been found. So astronomers aren't utterly baffled and mystified. Nothing to see here. Move along.

("We really have to step up our efforts against those darn EU hooligans! Time to go full Velikovsky on them!" Look after Mr. Bond. See that some harm comes to him.)

Right. The whole phraseology is a setup to rearrange the theory, keeping it fully, to begin the continued hunt for subsurface ice (even though that will not be found). They have to keep the dirty snowball because they're "all in" and have declared the comets to be the icy "remnants" of the "early solar system" that "seeded Earth's oceans." They must keep this idea alive at all costs. And they will. They will not abandon their theory, only "tweak" it. That is all they do today. Falsified theories are kept as a rule of thumb in astronomy.

[viscount aero]

Shouldn't these observations alone falsify comet theory? Columnated jets protruding from the surface, yet no vents can be found.

Yes but again realize that theories in cosmology and astronomy are not falsifiable today. They are kept and then ad hoc'd. They will keep the dirty snowball theory in general but simply say what they are seeing is evidence for subsurface ice. And they will probably begin to mention dark matter at some point as a measure of last resort. Remember, too, that they will tend to invoke dark matter to solve any mystery. Even though they will not admit to it, their actions show that they have to know it all at any moment. So dark matter does that for their minds.

In other words, they're more concerned with keeping an outdated and failed theory than doing actual science. Rosetta will prove only that they will keep a failed theory and tweak it. The "ice" for them must be there. In modern cosmology and astronomy, direct observation is no longer a viable means of data gathering if it falsifies a theory. Their data must, instead, save the theory at all costs and simply indicate that all things exist indirectly most of the time. Dark matter is the crowning statement to this pseudo-science.

No ice on the surface? That is good news for them! It must be evidence for subsurface ice! No vents visible anywhere--ever? Great news for them! The vents are obscured by dark matter halos! This way, their ESA/Rosetta project is "on target" and proving that comets are dirty snowballs! Remember that Rosetta was designed only to prove a theory that they had no intention of ever abandoning in the first place

[Maustin]

http://www.universetoday.com/114034/wha ... in-common/


Composite image of 67P in 'real color' superimposed above Los Angeles for scale.

Interesting article, it's mainstream but hints that all is not well. Even though the photos we have of comets make them appear light-grey against the pitch black of space, it's only an artifact of the camera's contrast settings. In actuality, all comets we've ever photoed are as black as paving asphalt. A particularly appropriate, if unintentional analogy, if Velikovsky is correct about a cometary source of hydrocarbons.

The article reinforces the hydrocarbon association in a later paragraph:
"Astronomers hypothesize that a comet grows a dark ‘skin’ both from accumulated dust and irradiation of its pristine ices by cosmic rays. Cosmic rays loosen oxygen atoms from water ice, freeing them to combine with simple carbon molecules present on comets to form larger, more complex and darker compounds resembling tars and crude oil."

Ha, resembling tar and crude oil? Or it actually IS tar and crude oil? Well, they're getting closer...

[viscount aero]

http://www.universetoday.com/114034/wha ... in-common/


Composite image of 67P in 'real color' superimposed above Los Angeles for scale.

Wow! That's an awesome composite photo and one giant rock! I'm in LA so it "hits home" particularly for me The image is surreal.

Interesting article, it's mainstream but hints that all is not well. Even though the photos we have of comets make them appear light-grey against the pitch black of space, it's only an artifact of the camera's contrast settings. In actuality, all comets we've ever photoed are as black as paving asphalt. A particularly appropriate, if unintentional analogy, if Velikovsky is correct about a cometary source of hydrocarbons.

And take notice: Press release based science virtually never points this out. Almost never.

The article reinforces the hydrocarbon association in a later paragraph:
"Astronomers hypothesize that a comet grows a dark ‘skin’ both from accumulated dust and irradiation of its pristine ices by cosmic rays.

Here they go again "pristine ices" ---they cannot drop that issue.

Cosmic rays loosen oxygen atoms from water ice, freeing them to combine with simple carbon molecules present on comets to form larger, more complex and darker compounds resembling tars and crude oil."

Ha, resembling tar and crude oil? Or it actually IS tar and crude oil? Well, they're getting closer...

That's a stunning backdoor admission by the establishment. At some point they are going to have to take their heads out of the sand and face the reality of what they are observing:

• comets are generally dry
• comets are black as coal
• comets are not composed of ice or slushy dirt
• ice screws or ice harpoons will not find ice on a cometary surface
• OH- and so-called "water' is created outside of the comet
• comets are not borne of "ancient/primordial ice" or roaming in a fictitious state in the alleged Oort Cloud
• comets have nothing to do with the creation of Earth's oceans
• comets are hydrocarbon-based akin to coal or oil
• oil is not a "fossil fuel" only of the Earth
• oil is abiotic and not from the dinosaurs or rotted plants
• nebular collapse did not happen and comets are not "leftovers from the nebula"

[viscount aero]

Water Nonexistent: So far, 67P/Churyumov-Gerasimenko’s water ice remains hidden.
https://www.thunderbolts.info/wp/2014/0 ... nexistent/

[4realScience]

@Maustin,

Wow! What a graphic!

On another topic, I was at the ESA site a while ago and noticed, to their credit, they are allowing comments from laymen who are seeing the clothes-less emperor (rock not ice) and even some who are talking EU. We are winning.

See the comments on this page:
http://blogs.esa.int/rosetta/2014/09/05 ... et-67pc-g/

[viscount aero]

I submitted a comment to their site. But it's awaiting moderation. In case they reject my comment here it is:

Chad says:
Your comment is awaiting moderation.
08/09/2014 at 05:14

It's quite silly that the likes of ESA keep insisting that comets are icy water worlds. One sure observation from Rosetta is that comets are clearly not dirty snowballs and nowhere near it. Comets are not icy, snowy, or watery. They are asteroid-like and very dark, dry bodies. Why do the scientists keep insisting, in their culture of glib press releases to the general pubic, on the negligent and false idea of "icy comets" when comets have proven not to be anything like that from the past 5 comet encounters with probes? When will "icy comets" finally stop being printed by modern science publications and agencies?

[Metryq]

Wow! That's an awesome composite photo and one giant rock!

Oil strikes Los Angeles! Man bites dog!

I guess Viscount Aero wins the bet—comets are made of "dark matter." The question is: what flavor of dark matter? Cheese doodle flavor?

EDIT: I think I finally get it—why astronomy, of all the sciences, seems to be standing on its head. Think of all the time astronomers have spent looking through telescopes...

[viscount aero]

Wow! That's an awesome composite photo and one giant rock!

Oil strikes Los Angeles! Man bites dog!

I guess Viscount Aero wins the bet—comets are made of "dark matter." The question is: what flavor of dark matter? Cheese doodle flavor?

EDIT: I think I finally get it—why astronomy, of all the sciences, seems to be standing on its head. Think of all the time astronomers have spent looking through telescopes...

Yes its surface is quite the dark..... matter

[starbiter]

The link below describes carbon associated with comets.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Diatomic_carbon

"The light of fainter comets mainly originates from the emission of diatomic carbon. There are several lines of C2 light, mostly in the visible spectrum, forming the Swan bands."

me again,

With hydrogen ions available from the solar wind, this might explain hydrocarbons associated with comets.

Earlier posts below.

http://www.thunderbolts.info/forum/phpB ... 8ee#p98718

http://www.thunderbolts.info/forum/phpB ... 8ee#p98725

The details of the carbon/comet paper might give a chemist something to think about.

michael

[BronzeDragon]

[url][http://youtu.be/Mf1zsACcXc4/url]

I went to this video and posted the following comment: "So far, every picture of a comet has shown it to NOT be a pile of floating rubble with chunks of ice mixed in. In fact, they look exactly like asteroids and seem to have no ice at all, either on the surface or deep inside. The comet is a rock. Not a "dirty snowball," as NASA and ESA still keep insisting despite all evidence to the contrary, but a big chunk of very solid rock. They will not find ice on this, or any other, comet, and will continue to be baffled, yet won't bother trying to find an alternative reason for why comets look the way they do. It'll be dirty snowballs all the way." Wonder what sort of responses I'll get.

Harpoons? Maybe we'll all be surprised and the comet will pop like a balloon, then twirl away into space, farting like a whoopie cushion.

I know this was several pages ago, but damn, that's funny!

[GaryN]

Highest resolution image so far I think:
http://www.esa.int/var/esa/storage/imag ... r_2014.jpg