"Professor" Fraud Farina Is At It Again

[Michael Mozina]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vmVdPgkudC8
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0J6HDQLicWI

I see that our favorite fraudulent Youtube "Professor" is at it again, this time in reference to SAFIRE. As usual, his presentation is full of misinformation, disinformation, and outright BS.

Dave Farina of course begins by personally defining the term "electric universe" to suit himself, apparently based on a completely kludged misrepresentation of Wal Thornhill's personal beliefs, and Dave engages in an endless stream of personal insults and smear by association tactics. Typical nonsense.

A few of the scientific blunders that Dave makes are simply hilarious.

Dave begins his presentation by completely misrepresenting history when he falsely claims that Ralph Juergens wrote "the" electric sun model. Juergens wrote *an* electric sun model, one of at least three *different* electric sun models, the first "cathode" version being written by Birkeland, the second "homopolar generator" model being written by Alfven, and the third "anode" model being later written by Juergens.

Dave tries to make the claim that the mainstream is "all good" on neutrinos, and to support that claim he cites a low resolution solar image of neutrinos which *clearly* shows that solar neutrinos are *not* limited to simply a small region of the "core" of the sun. In fact the extremely low resolution image would tend to suggest that some neutrinos come from the solar atmosphere as well as the entire surface as EU/PC models would tend to predict.

Dave then rants on and on about how we should see massive amounts of gamma radiation if fusion occurs *above* the photosphere, apparently blissfully unaware of the fact that the electrode surface of Juergen's anode model doesn't necessarily have to be located *above* the surface of the photosphere and even the chromosphere would tend to absorb a lot of any gamma rays emitted near the surface of the photosphere. In fairness to Dave however, this is the assumption that Dr. Scott makes, but I'm not clear where Wal Thornhill would suggest that the anode surface is located with respect to the surface of the photosphere. IMO however, regardless of whether it's an anode or a cathode with respect to space, based on heliosiesmology data and solar images, the electrode surface is located about 4800KM *under* the surface of the photosphere. Dave then makes some derogatory claim about Childs without citing any video clip or any printed reference by Childs to support his statements about Child's beliefs about gamma radiation.

Dave also makes the claim that current flow patterns are *not* observed coming into and out of the sun, when in fact it certainly has been observed. We see Birkeland currents connecting the sun to various planets, and the heat signature of that sustained current flow is found all throughout the corona. It also drives the solar wind. We also see inbound high speed electrons flowing into the poles of the sun as a homopolar generator model would tend to predict.

Dave then repeats Lyin' Brian Koberlein's bogus and irrational claim about expecting a 5800K EU/PC solar photosphere to emit discrete "lines" rather than a full spectrum, when in fact the temperature of the photosphere would necessarily radiate *exactly* the same as the mainstream model because the temperature of the photosphere is *exactly the same temperature* as the standard model! Doh! Dave is simply an ignorant bozo.

I think the most ironic part of Dave's commentary is his point that we should expect to see about 10^18 amps of current flowing into a galaxy if Juergen's solar model is correct, and it just so happens that is *exactly* what we observe:

https://www.newscientist.com/article/mg ... ent-found/

Dave also makes a bunch of false claims involving "black holes" and whether they are or are not compatible with "electric universe" theory. This is of course entirely dependent on whom you might ask, and how *exactly* one defines a "black hole". Even Einstein himself rejected the mainstream model of a "black hole" with an infinitely dense 'point'.

Dave then makes a ridiculous statement about how the big bang model is supported by tons of evidence and he specifically cites the Planck data, of course without bothering to mention the fact that the LCDM model is *self conflicted* with respect to the Hubble constant as estimated based on Planck data vs. estimates based on SN1A data. Dave also completely ignores the fact that the distant universe contains massive and mature galaxies and quasars which absolutely *defy* the big bang model entirely. And of course he neglects to mention the complete absence of first generation (no metal) stars in the distant/early universe.

My favorite line however is when Dave erroneously claims that we "know" how stars work, when in fact the mainstream cannot even explain, let alone simulate something as simple as a full sphere solar corona in a lab. The mainstream absolutely *does not* know how stars actually work. The don't even understand the heat source of the corona!

I may eventually post a few more complaints about his video, but suffice to say it was a piece of trash just like the rest of his crappy videos on EU.

I'm not even personally a big fan of Jeurgen's anode solar model but it bugs the hell of me that Dave and his EU/PC hater posee don't even bother to actually understand the models that they pretend to criticize. I also thought it was absolutely hysterical that he put his own foot in his mouth with respect the amount of amps we might expect to see which just so happens to match up exactly with what we actually observe.

[Michael Mozina]

Youtube money scammer Dave also tries to rewrite history by suggesting that Juergens original "electric sun" model contained no concept of fusion whatsoever and it had to be "revised" by Dr. Donald Scott and Wal Thornhill. In reality however, solar neutrinos were first discovered and measured in 1968, and Juergens lived until 1979, so he would have been aware of the fact that at least *some* amount of fusion was probably occurring in/on the sun, albeit at much lower predicted rates than the standard model. The "revised" models would have simply added *more* local fusion to Juergen's model.

Secondly, and more importantly Dave erroneously claims that the plasma in the solar atmosphere is not hot enough or dense enough to produce fusion, when in fact "coronal loops" (AKA Birkeland currents) reach *tens of millions* of degrees Kelvin, and their density is determined by current flowing through the loop, and the pinch effect it has on ions, not the average density of the entire corona. Coronal loops are both hot enough and dense enough to produce nuclear fusion.

https://arxiv.org/abs/astro-ph/0512633

In his typical style of *disinformation*, Dave falsely asserts that EU solar models predict that nuclear fusion isn't responsible for heavy elements. That's utter BS. Dave just makes this stuff up.

[Michael Mozina]

I think the thing that bothers me the most about dishonest Dave is the fact that he intentionally misrepresents the history of electric universe theory by *never* discussing Kristian Birkeland, and by defining the term "electric universe" as being directly related to, and defined by Immanuel Velikovsky. Nothing could be further from the truth.

In fact when Dave claims to "begin at the beginning" he completely skips the first fifty years of "electric universe" theory entirely, and fixates on Velikovsky and Juergens, falsely describing Juergens' solar model as "the" (only) electric sun model and asserting that Velikovsky is the "l Ron Hubbard" of the "electric universe" concept. That's about as dishonest as it gets.

Not only is Dave willfully misrepresenting the history behind the electric universe concept, he's defining the term "electric universe" in very narrow terms, and in terms which Dave personally decides, and then Dave attempts to dismiss *all* electric universe concepts based on this methodology.

The worst part is that Dave attempts to smear *all* EU/PC proponents by claiming that we *all* cite and revere Velikovski, which is of course utter nonsense and Dave knows it, which is exactly why he refuses to debate me in public.

I'm gathering from the chit-chat about email at ISF, and Dave's overall definition of "electric universe" that jonesdave116 at ISF is our beloved fraud of a "professor" Dave Farina. I've never seen anyone use more anonymous handles than jonesdave. I think I've counted four of them already. What a sleazy guy.

[nick c]

Velikovsky did not support the Juergens model. Perhaps he would have had he lived longer, perhaps not.

[Michael Mozina]

Velikovsky did not support the Juergens model. Perhaps he would have had he lived longer, perhaps not.

Well, apparently from a recent post by Jonesdave116, Dave just has his head up Jonesdave's backside, and they apparently aren't the same person. They are however acting like a dishonest lying tag team, and they are both misrepresenting history in precisely the same way. To hear them (mis)tell the story, the "electric universe" concept begins and ends with Velikovsky and an anode sun in the 1950's, but as you point out, there's no guarantee Velikovsky would even have supported the anode solar model, so that whole line of reasoning is just absurd. not to mention historically inaccurate. It's also absurd to assume that all EU/PC proponents agree with either Velikovski or Juergens, since I do not.

Nothing like leaving out a half century of physics and physical research because it doesn't fit with your corrupt narrative. The mainstream astronomers are simply untrustworthy sources of information. They lie like a rug. Birkeland was the first "scientist" to propose an "electric universe", not Velikovski or Juergens.

Apparently Dave used some single sentence snipet from a 2016 video that he evidently linked to in an effort to support his commentary about gamma rays, while simply ignoring the part of the video where Monty explains that SAFIRE measured the temperature of the plasma above the anode to be much hotter than the surface of the anode, just like we see in the solar atmosphere. To this day the mainstream cannot explain the original heat source of a full sphere corona, let alone *simulate* such a process in a real lab experiment. That's been done now with both an anode and a cathode model in real lab experiments which actually work in the lab, unlike all the massive failures of the mainstream to find exotic dark matter.

Jonesdave is still clueless about current carrying plasma filaments. They absolutely are hot enough and dense enough in the solar atmosphere since they reach tens of millions of degrees, they *do* emit gamma rays sometimes, and they act to "pinch" the plasma together into filaments. Alfven describes a "magnetic rope" as a Bennett pinch. If the majority of the fusion in the sun is occurring inside those loops, but the majority of those loops are located well *underneath* the surface of the photosphere, the photosphere would simply absorb them just like it does so in the standard solar model, so Jonesdave is making exactly the same damn mistake that they accuse Monty of making! Sheesh. Talk about pure hypocrites. At worst case the EU/PC model would need a somewhat different density arrangement in the upper solar atmosphere, but I assumed that was already true based on satellite imagery.

The mainstream's association of EU/PC theory with religion and cults is simply hilarious and wildly ironic. Whether the anode or cathode or both models turn out to be incorrect, they actually work in the lab to produce a full sphere hot solar corona and a sustained planetary aurora, unlike all the pseudoscientific nonsense related to MRx. MRx is already more than a century behind in the lab and counting with respect to simulating a corona. A sustained planetary aurora? They can't even begin to simulate such a thing in the lab.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=m58-CfVrsN4

Even a simply 10,000 dollar experiment shows how an aurora actually works......electrically!

Worse still is the fact that 95 percent of the LCDM model is based on *metaphysical* crap which blatantly violates known laws of physics, it's not based on actual empirical physics. Unlike the EU/PC model of cosmology and it's various solar models, *nothing* of any a significance about the LCDM model or solar physics actually works in the lab, not one major claim. Hot full sphere sustained corona? Hell no! They can't simulate that with MRx! Dark matter? Sheesh, they can't even agree on what DM is, and its' failed every lab test in truly epic fashion. Dark energy? Where the hell does that come from, and how does it retain a constant density over multiple *exponential* increases in volume? They don't have a clue. Inflation? It's completely made up gibberish by the mainstream version of L Ron Hubbard, the revered Pope Guth of Guthianityl. "All hail the sacred inflation diety"!

In terms of "cults", every single one of the mainstream claims requires *blind faith* in the existence of their dark gods and inflation deities because they're completely and totally impotent in the lab. LCDM is a metaphysical math cult. They 'pretend' that the math they spew somehow excuses them from having to demonstrate their cause/effect claims in the lab. Nevermind the fact that their whole model is mathematical self conflicted with respect to the Hubble constant! Sheesh. What a pathetic mathematical piece of crap!

In a cathode solar model it's quite easy to explain how and why slower speeds solar wind electron and protons move in the same direction away from the sun, while faster moving "strahl"/electron beam electrons move away from the sun, and high speed (nearly the speed of light) ions bombard the entire solar system. We even measure both the outgoing electron beams and the incoming cosmic ray ions, so we can see that the actual "current" does move in *opposite* directions. The slower speed solar wind is simply a function of kinetic energy as high speed outbound electrons slam into solar atmospheric particles and push (and even pull) them out into space. Birkeland actually *predicted* that feature!

Apparently Jonedave thinks NASA writes crappy press releases and misrepresent the contents of various published papers. How ironic that its obvious how a "Birkeland current" generates sustained currents over *hours*, whereas such a thing has *never* been shown to happen in a lab with 'magnetic reconnection" nonsense. Sustained current generates sustained energy. MRX is an *induction* type process that could *never* produce a sustained current. It would only produce a short duration discharge at best.

While I personally do question the viability of what SAFIRE is proposing with respect to energy production, it's hard to take Dr. Morgan's comments too serious since he was apparently happily and willingly taking SAFIRE's money for more than six years until the money (and contracts) finally ran out. Disgruntled ex-employees are a dime a dozen.

Whatever SAFIRE's faults might be, they *pale* in comparison to all problems and all the money wasted on dark matter and MRx experiments which *to this very day* remain completely incapable of even generating a full sphere hot corona simulation.

[nick c]

there's no guarantee Velikovsky would even have supported the anode solar model,

Velikovsky was aware of the Juergens model. I would speculate that since Juergens was a friend of Velikovsky, he must have run his ideas by Velikovsky.
I believe that Juergens first published the model a couple of years before V passed away. V did not support the model,and stayed away from it, as if he did not want to get involved with an externally powered Sun.

[Cargo]

+100 for your vigilance and vitriol. But personally I can't give this yoyo a single click. A 'celebrity tuber' sucking in viewers and echo-chamber rabble. The guy has zero cred and zero sense. Literally a video shot of a promising JREF acolyte.

[Michael Mozina]

+100 for your vigilance and vitriol. But personally I can't give this yoyo a single click. A 'celebrity tuber' sucking in viewers and echo-chamber rabble. The guy has zero cred and zero sense. Literally a video shot of a promising JREF acolyte.

I guess what motivates me to respond to this tripe, and what absolutely blows me away, is the complete lack of professionalism, and the absolute incompetence of so called "professional astronomers" and self proclaimed "scientists". I never see a mainstream astronomer even bother to take the time to correctly understand any of the various solar models associated with EU/PC theory, or any of Birkeland's work or Alfven's actual work, or Peratt's work. In fact they consistently *misrepresent* their work on various websites and they simply ban any discussion of the subject. I can't even remember how many times I've heard a so called "professional" astronomer erroneously claim that there is no math to support EU/PC theory. The entire field of astronomy acts exactly like a cult these days, complete with their supernatural metaphysical entities which defy the laws of physics as we know them, and their online witch hunts resulting in the banning of all dissenters.

A great example of this gross professional incompetence is the utter ridiculousness of suggesting that an anode sun predicts "no neutrinos" (Lying Brian Koberlein), or that an anode sun should emit an overwhelming number of gamma rays (JonesDave/Fraud Farina). They are not only clueless, they willfully misrepresent the various model and the scientific facts. Even if *some* small amount of fusion occurs above the surface of the photosphere, current carrying filaments would be likely to exist all throughout the entire sun, and fusion could happen *everywhere* inside the sun, including the core of an anode model, just as is the case with Birkeland's cathode model or Alfven's homopolar generator model. Neutrino counts and the amount of gamma radiation from the sun in no way rule out *any* EU/PC solar model.

The irony is that jonesdave makes *exactly* the same mistake that they accuse Childs of making with respect to gamma radiation from the sun, and yet JD spews his nasty rhetoric Monty's way, never even realizing what a fool he's making of himself. Their lack of basic scientific curiosity and their willful incompetence is simply astounding. It's disgusting and unprofessional behavior.

The sad fact of the matter is that Aristarchus of Samos knew more about the solar system than 18 century's worth of so called "expert astronomers", and Birkeland knew more about the workings of the universe than the last century's worth of so called "experts". Astronomy today is about as scientifically credible as astrology, and just as impotent in a real lab experiment. Sheesh. They can't even get their beloved "magnetic reconnection" to generate a simulation of a full sphere corona or a sustained planetary aurora. How sad is that?

[nick c]

+100 for your vigilance and vitriol. But personally I can't give this yoyo a single click. A 'celebrity tuber' sucking in viewers and echo-chamber rabble. The guy has zero cred and zero sense. Literally a video shot of a promising JREF acolyte.

I agree! But I suspect that Michael enjoys jousting with these types,

[Michael Mozina]

+100 for your vigilance and vitriol. But personally I can't give this yoyo a single click. A 'celebrity tuber' sucking in viewers and echo-chamber rabble. The guy has zero cred and zero sense. Literally a video shot of a promising JREF acolyte.

I agree! But I suspect that Michael enjoys jousting with these types,

Well, sort of. I certainly do think that it's worth noting the sheer professional incompetence that we find in astronomy these days not to mention their absolute cowardice. Case in point:

http://www.internationalskeptics.com/fo ... count=3724

Mozina lies about basic nuclear physics, the Sun and Dave's plasma in the solar atmosphere is not hot enough or dense enough statement.
For fusion to happen, temperature has to be high enough so that nuclei collide and density has to be high enough for lots of these impacts. The combination makes the probability of fusion high enough to have a measurable rate. Dave noted this well known physics ("it is neither hot enough nor dense enough"). The corona is not ~15 million K. The corona is not about 10 times the density of gold!
It is a delusion that coronal loops are Birkeland currents. It is a lie that coronal loops get to *tens of millions* of degrees Kelvin. Corina loops get to a few million degrees Kelvin.

First off, it's worth noting that none of the EU/PC haters even has the courage to use their real names while personally attacking everyone within the EU/PC community *by name*. That sort of absolute cowardice is another one of the hallmark signatures of the EU/PC hater posse. They're all total cowards who cannot handle an honest scientific debate. The fact they use anonymous handles is half of the reason they feel "safe" spewing absolutely false and misleading information.

https://hesperia.gsfc.nasa.gov/sftheory/flare.htm

Solar flares extend out to the layer of the Sun called the corona. The corona is the outermost atmosphere of the Sun, consisting of highly rarefied gas. This gas normally has a temperature of a few million degrees Kelvin. Inside a flare, the temperature typically reaches 10 or 20 million degrees Kelvin, and can be as high as 100 million degrees Kelvin. The corona is visible in soft x-rays, as in the above image. Notice that the corona is not uniformly bright, but is concentrated around the solar equator in loop-shaped features. These bright loops are located within and connect areas of strong magnetic field called active regions. Sunspots are located within these active regions. Solar flares occur in active regions.

Emphasis mine. Not only are flare events, and the coronal loops that generate them more than hot enough to generate fusion, we certainly do see "measurable" amounts of gamma rays related to fusion occurring in the solar atmosphere.


https://arxiv.org/abs/astro-ph/0512633

Another case in point:

Lies about EU dogma about black holes.
EU denies the existence of mainstream black holes. Thunderbolts has the delusion that black holes are plasmoids. There is only 1 mainstream definition of a black hole. Einstein never rejected the mainstream model of a black hole.

https://www.scientificamerican.com/arti ... s-2007-04/

In 1939 Einstein published a paper in the journal Annals of Mathematics with the daunting title On a Stationary System with Spherical Symmetry Consisting of Many Gravitating Masses. With it, Einstein sought to prove that black holes--celestial objects so dense that their gravity prevents even light from escaping--were impossible.

RC lies like a rug. Einstein certainly rejected the mainstream concept of a black hole. I personally however don't have a problem with the concept of the formation of a massively heavy object, so RC lied on both points. They're all dishonest cowards.

I'd respond to RC's whole piece of trash post, but why bother? They make absolute fools of themselves by spewing utterly false disinformation in virtually every single post. They don't really care however since they're hiding behind handles like total cowards. It does however demonstrate their complete lack of professionalism and their professional incompetence. None of them know a damn thing about solar physics or astronomy. That's why they're stuck in the dark ages of astronomy and it's exactly why not even one of them can so much as name a single source of dark energy, nor explain how it retains a constant density over multiple exponential increases in volume, in spite of the fact that their metaphysical monstrosity makes up the vast majority of their cosmology model. Sheesh, what a bunch of clueless putzes.

[Michael Mozina]

http://www.internationalskeptics.com/fo ... count=3727

Well, after a little research, it looks like Fraud Farina's verbally abusive partner in crime (jonesdave116) is witless Whittaker. FYI Whittaker, you're not even the least bit professional, nor are you as anonymous as you think. All your childish verbal abuse will come back to haunt you.

https://www.ntu.ac.uk/staff-profiles/sc ... -whittaker

[JP Michael]

I've been amusing myself over on Farina's channel, trolling them with poignant poetry:

Four physics fudge factors fighting for finality, found fine falsification.

[RM2001]

Hello
(New to the forum, been following the EU with interest for a good few years and a recent member of the FB group)

I gather this 'Prof Dave' guy plans to 'debunk' Robitaille next. That is going to be even more infuriating to me, partly since he will have an easy time of it by simply gathering up and regurgitating all the existing stuff that's out there on the web about it. I wish that fool could be forced to have a face to face debate but I know there's no chance of that. I wonder if anyone might have Robitaille's contact info to at least give him a heads up or something?

[Michael Mozina]

Hello
(New to the forum, been following the EU with interest for a good few years and a recent member of the FB group)

I gather this 'Prof Dave' guy plans to 'debunk' Robitaille next. That is going to be even more infuriating to me, partly since he will have an easy time of it by simply gathering up and regurgitating all the existing stuff that's out there on the web about it. I wish that fool could be forced to have a face to face debate but I know there's no chance of that. I wonder if anyone might have Robitaille's contact info to at least give him a heads up or something?

If Farina had an ounce of personal or scientific integrity, he'd make his next video at the work of Kristian Birkland, and do some comparisons to the predictions that Birkeland made to the particle flow patterns that we now measure, like overwhelmingly positively charged "cosmic rays" from space and both types of charged particles flowing from the sun, and "cathode rays (electron beams)" flowing off the sun.

You're right however that he's likely to do another trash of someone else instead of focusing on the actual physics and the real science. Robitaille however is very likely to respond (by video) to whatever nonsense Farengi Farina is likely to post on the topic of the CMB. Farina is simply out of his league on that topic.

And to make it worse yet, every sun in every solar system in every single galaxy in space is a mass emitter of microwaves. It's not just foreground effects you'd have to eliminate to see some mythical surface of last scattering, it's every sun in every galaxy in space you'd have to filter out first.

[Open Mind]

Here are some of the comments on the page that demonstrate the motivations of debunkers mentality:

"Keep on debunking these absurd theories. It's very entertaining."
"For some reason, I love this types of videos!"
"I'm screaming in gleeeeeeee! Keep up the fantastic work! You're doing the good of the gods of science!"
"I have seen hundreds of videos debunking conspiracys, Flatearth, etc. but yours are clearly the best and most informative"
"Thank you for exposing these frauds."

I can't help imagining them in the Roman Cathedral cheering on the mutilation of human beings. Its about the kill more than the content. But in civilized society, we have to live with them even after knowing they have no intention of contributing and are solely driven by the blood lust of a take down. That dopamine spike in them is only connected to the tone of confident authority and condescension. Its like a hate lust addiction. Its ugly.

Conclusion, no one listens to them in any part of their life who matters in any way, because anyone not stricken with that terrible addiction can immediately sniff that condition easily, and the vast majority of people are not suffering that condition, so... they can be ignored.