Atlantis, Proof Both Ways

[Gustav]

i am fucking serious
i would like a link or explanation

I fucked my mother last night. We hatched a plan to kill my Dad so we can fuck all the time

whaddya think?
you like that?
you find it an appropiate style of discourse?
should we all adopt it?
and pass it off as a joke?

 

[Squeak22]

yay fun. yet again, you take something fun and turn it into something inappropriate. He used the quote to display a point, and while yes, it was not the best thing to do, it by no means is as bad as what just did.


Anyway, welcome to the ignore list, and good luck trying to get banned.

 

[Gustav]

are you serious? i was joking!

 

[Gustav]

stupid maggot finds it perfectly acceptable to ridicule others with devious tactics and yet cannot cope when he is on the recieving end

we have mr anonymous plaigerizing portions of my posts and passing it off as his own here and here

et tu phlogistician?

is this a new tactic used by the pseudo sceptics?

 

[SkinWalker]

Well as usual skinwalker has eluded the conversation, don't even know why skinwalker bothers to post all that nonsense.

Eluded the conversation? You're kidding right? You're (Q), right? His sock puppet? You cannot be serious. I've provided evidence that counters nearly everthing you've said in regards to geomagnetic reversal... you've provided not one sliver of evidence. Not a single citation to a single paper or text. Instead, you rely on the typical pseudoscientific/crackpot methodology of saying, "the evidence is in front of you."

For those who wonder skinwalker has been presented with facts that are demonstared first had and are well known, but skinwalker refuses to acknowlegde the facts even of basic science.

You have yet to demonstrate that 'basic science' is even something that you've studied even casually.

For those that wounder because of skinwalkers questions, the time of a magnetic pole reversal is determined by radiocarbon dating, and at much effort given to this task world wide. The date given by analyase of carbon 14 gives the eact means by which to measure the distrbances of the earth as a whole. wherein a major event happens on earth effecting the entire earth. The analyse gives the a period of 8,000 years approximatly since the last world wide distrubance.

Then I ask: what is the radiocarbon evidence that is used to determine the last event? What was sampled? You cannot answer this Rabon, because it wasn't done.

There are only so many events that can cause a world wide disturbance, a marjor asteroid impact, or a magnetic pole reversal. carbon 14 is unique in making this determination, it provides a high level of accuracy as to the events of earth as the source of carbon 14 is not subject to events that happen on earth, such as erosion, volcanic activity ect... and therefor the direct time line can be seen to events on earth, at least major ones that effect the entire earth.

Case in point, you demonstrate a complete misunderstanding of how radiocarbon works and it can, indeed, be influenced by events on earth, which is why one is careful to examine the provenience of the sample. But I won't get into that. I just want to know what the citation is to the sample that proves a magnetic reversal. I also want to know the methodology used to determine through radiocarbon that a reversal occurred. Very simple questions that should have very direct and simple answers if you are being truthful. Questions you will not be able to answer if you are full of crap.

Next: The magnetic pole reversal is a major earth event, the magnetic feild of earth is a body that effects every atom,electron and as well [as] light on the earth where we live. imagine this if a compass neddle can move around because of a the earths magnetic feild and it is a piece of iron, what would other materials do, all elements that act in chemistry, known as atoms are magnetised and so they will respond to a magnetic feild, a very good example is a cathode tube here we can see a large force of elecrtons responding to a magnetic feild. the source of electricity is based on the ablity of a magnetic feild to collect electrons and send them down a wire.
The magnetic feild is stronger than any magnetic ever created on earth.

This, Rabon, is where you are speculating. And your speculations are baseless. There is NO evidence that in the absence of the earth's magnetic field that anything would be affected. Indeed, men have gone many days in absence of the earths magnetic field. I point you to astronauts and cosmonauts (the former visiting the Moon and Skylab and the latter the Soviet-then-Russian space station-all of which were outside of the magnetosphere). I also remind you that the earths magnetic field is not stronger than any created on earth. If it were, how then does my refrigerator hold all of my daughters artwork? I'm able to defeat this "strongest field" by simply magnetizing a paperclip and picking up another paperclip with it. Indeed, simply applying an MRI to a person to get a picture of their head is applying far more magnetic field than they've ever experienced, yet the patient feels nothing. Their electrons are intact. This is because electron affinity is a DIFFERENT force!

You've provided NOTHING in the way of citation, medical or physics, that suggests that human cells are affected by magnetic fields. You are engaging in uneducated poppycock.

when the magnetic feild reverses it will cause major disturbance, just as a common magnetic moves iron or other materials like tungsten, it will move the earth, but in such a way that the earth shrinks, causeing earth quakes, as well the it causes the atmopshere to move around greatly simply by ionzation, a very simple calculation of ionzation by a feild such as the magnetic feild of earth tell you the effect that such as magnetic feild will have on earth and its atmosphere, it is quite catastrophic, humans will by all means need to find a way to protect them selves. during and after a magnetic pole reversal.

If this were true, then we would have seen the evidence in the geologic record. We don't. More uneducated poppycock. You are full of shit. We may, indeed, be affected by a reversal should one occur in our lifetimes, but it will be navigation that relies upon magnetic compasses that will affect us. Those that have GPS will be fine. We might see an increase in skin cancers for the generation that deals with the reversal since the ozone is already thinned and less of the Sun's energy will be deflected. But there is ABSOLUTELY NO EVIDENCE OF ANY TECTONIC ACTIVITY ASSOCIATED WITH MAGNETIC REVERSALS.

Next: the magnetic feild and growth, just as the electrons in every atom are polarized by a magnetic feild, mainly the outter electrons, so also are electric currents with in the human body, that which effects neruons, neruons are what allows muscel cells and bones to heal and it is by response via nerouns that we grow. many exsperiment have been conducted, both on animals and humans with this resect to electric current, amphibians such as frogs and slamanders, and cameleon depend on this neroloical response and electric stimulous to regrow limbs that have been completely severed, this study was broaden to humans and the treatmeant of elderly,having bone fractures to much success. the magnetic feild determines the rate of elertical flow and for such reason magnetic feilds are used in the treatment of such illness as carpule tunel ect... the earth has a base magnetic feild that polarize every thing and effects the natural flow of every thing, electrons and ions. Once again as this subject can get very long with the effects of magnetic feilds on humans and life, just as magnetic feilds are used in chemistry to cause a given reaction in a mixture, the same occurs in the bodies of humans, the ions of the human body just as a ions in a chemical mixture are responsive to a magnetic feild. One of the best example of the effect of the magnetic feild on ions is the VanAllen belts above the earth in the sky, another example would be the a atom smasher.

Poppycock. You should educate yourself on chemistry and understand better the nature of electron affinity and on the nature of strong and weak electromagnetic forces. If electrons in the human body were to be adversly affected by outside electromagnetic forces, then the first person who ever experienced an MRI would have screamed in pain. The earth's magnetic field is not even felt by the electrons in the atoms that make up matter on earth, unless they are of minerals that are naturally magnetic, such as magnetite. Carbon, water, hydrogen, lithium, calcium, etc..... all unaffected. We see the evidence in the geologic record as well as experiments in magnatism done in elementary school science classes.

Skinwalker i don't mind if you ignore what i say as you add nothing to disscussion, skeptic well thats fine but i think you are over board, exspecially since you can not even admit to a simple point of fact, regarding even something as simple as a magnetic. you have formed some web site persinality that you can get out of in habit so if some one has something to say you will miss it. For example you probally don't know who your father is, even if your mother told you who your father was, you just belive that it is your father but the fact of reality is that you don't know that he is your father, you may say that i know he is my father but what i think is that your mother selpt with his brother or his father being skeptical about thing in all, not to insult you as it is just a exapmle of skeptic. did i take it to far?

Rabon, Phlogistican parodied your posts in a quote that he made several posts back. It was funny. But it was accurate. You clearly have no education in these matters and you are clearly a speculating alarmist, and one that has a crackpot idea about a subject that is easily sensationalized. You have yet to support ANY of your claims about magnatism and magnetic reversal with ANY citation of actual science. Instead, you make a loose correlation between the fact that since matter is made of atoms with magnetic forces, they must therefore be affected by the earth's magnetic field. Yet you fail to demonstrate that the earth's relatively weak magnetic field has any affect on anything. The earth's magnetic field is weak. It's big, but it's weak. I can overcome it by simply sticking a magnet to a refrigerator or saving information to my harddrive.

All your silly questions about my skeptical nature were likewise incoherent and did not make sense. I'm not sure if you were implying that I was a bastard or that I claim I'm a bastard. Truthfully, it lost me and I skimmed to the end where you asked if you took it too far. I read it again to find out and I'm really not sure where you were trying to take it and have no idea at what point such an analogy could be considered to far. If I had to guess, I'd say it would have been simpler just to say "you're a bastard."


For those that are wondering:

Rabon has -to date- stated that a magnetic reversal occurred only 8,000 years ago, yet there is no evidence to suggest this. He claims there is radiocarbon evidence, but has failed to demonstrate what that evidence is or what the methodology was that shows this alleged evidence proves a magnetic reversal occurred only 8 kya.

The last geomagnetic reversal of the earths poles occurred at around 780,000 years ago and it is called the Matuyama-Brunhes boundary and is considered to be the separation of the upper and lower Pleistocene epoch for geologists and paleontologists since it is so clearly delineated.

Rabon claims that such reversals cause global catastrophes and have deleterious effects on fauna, even though both the geologic record and the paleologic/archaeologic records do not demonstrate this claim. Nor does Rabon provide any citation that supports his claim.

Rabon claims that the earth's magnetic field, if absent, would have direct effect on human life. But humans have been without this field, albeit temporarily, during spaceflight and have had intense magnetic fields applied to them via MRI -neither showing any deleterious effects because of absence or increase of magnetic fields.

Rabon claims that the strong/weak electromagnetic forces in atoms are dependent upon the earth's magnetic field, yet science tells us otherwise. I won't get into a chemistry/physics lesson here, but we can look at the spaceprobes that have been sent with success out of the earth's magnetic field; examine the geologic/paleologic/archaeologic records to see that flora and fauna have been unaffected; and we can rely upon basic experimentation to see that electron affinity is independent of outside magnetic forces -most notably the very weak geomagnetic force. To separate an atom's components requires MUCH energy.

Rabon is a crackpot.

 

[SkinWalker]

THIS IS A MAP OF THE WORLD FLOODED, IT SHOWS THE WORLD SEA LEVEL AFTER THE THE OXYGEN IN OUR ATMOSPHERE AS BEEN CONVERTED TO WATER, FROM REACTION WITH HYDROGEN FROM THE SOLAR WINDS WHEN THE MAGNETIC FEILD HAS FAILED.

Why has not the past geomagnetic reversals resulted in similar reactions and what is the stochimetric equation for this reaction?

THE HYDROGEN ENTERS ARE ATMOSPHERE AND MAKES WATER WHEN IT MIXES WITH THE OXYGEN OF THE AIR AND IN RAINS FLOWING INTO THE OCEANS CAUSEING THE SEA LEVELTO RISE HAS HIGH AS 2,400 FT.

Why? Again, what is the stochiometric equation for this reaction?

THIS WOULD BE THE IMMEDIATE SEA LEVEL AFTER A MAGNETIC POLE REVERSAL,

Again, why has this not been evident in the geologic record since geomagnetic reversal is a relatively common occurance to the geologic record?

These are all simple questions for one who is a "genius" and has "studied" the subject. Please answer.

 

[Squeak22]

Ok lets take this piece by piece, your makeing reference to the fact that atoms are able to hold bonds in space, right we won't go into that as we know that chmeical behavior is different in space than it is on earth.

Sorry it's not, chemical reactions happen the same way in space as they do on earth. How do you think the batteries keep working on the space probes we send out to Jupiter, etc?

second: the various geolical records or studies that you mention are all subject to the condtion of time, where in they all divide the histroy of earth into different amount of time that may span millions of years for each period of time. These time periods are erronous as one carbon dating of carbon 14, and interstellar forces that effect our planet as we travel trough the galaxy do not allow such time periods for life on our planet, but mainly your idea of reference is to the that record of the magnetic stripes of the sea floor which is also erronous.

Ok, so all those dinosaurs appeared when? They are dated using techiques like carbon dating, how do you explain that?

The event of strong, weak and emf feilds of a atom are not going to stop the effects of a magnetic feild acting upon a atom, in fact atoms either cations or anions respond to a magnetic feild, atoms that are cooled first have a tendency to be come highy magnetic when applied to a magnetic feild as in gases, but that princpal is quite evident wehn we make a magnetic poured from the furnace.

If this is the case, atoms would be ripped apart when you put magnets near them. Notice that super-colliders smash atoms into other atoms, the magnets accelerating them don't have any affect, other than guiding and accelerating them.

humans can only live in space for so long then they have to come back to earth.

Yes, but this is because of the physical affects of zero-gravity, not from being away from the magnetic field. If we had artificial gravity, people could stay up in space indefinately without ill effects.

does it bother you that i am 1 of 600,000 genius in the world

DwayneD.L.Rabon

Even if you are a genius, you seem to have problems grasping simple concepts of science, and english in fact.

Please post some of your "calculations" along with your posts.

 

[SkinWalker]

Ok lets take this piece by piece, your makeing reference to the fact that atoms are able to hold bonds in space, right we won't go into that as we know that chmeical behavior is different in space than it is on earth.

Really? What's the reference to these differences that "we know" about? Citation please. Back up your shit.

second: the various geolical records or studies that you mention are all subject to the condtion of time, where in they all divide the histroy of earth into different amount of time that may span millions of years for each period of time. These time periods are erronous as one carbon dating of carbon 14, and interstellar forces that effect our planet as we travel trough the galaxy do not allow such time periods for life on our planet, but mainly your idea of reference is to the that record of the magnetic stripes of the sea floor which is also erronous.

Working backwards in the nonsensical paragraph above, first: why is the geologic evidence on the sea floor associated with sea floor-spreading at the oceanic rifts erroneous? Where is the citation for that information? Second: this isn't the only geologic evidence to which I am referring. For many of your WILD, SPECULATIVE CLAIMS to be true, there would be distinct and obvious record in the geologic strata all around the world. It simply doesn't exist. Third: your nonsensical claim about time periods seems to suggest that the earth is much younger than the evidence demonstrates. Moreover, your reliance on just C-14 as a dating method demonstrates your true ignorance. Much of what we know about geologic strata comes from other dating sources, since radiocarbon dating is limited to mainly the Holocene. So what is this "condition of time" you keep going on about like some young-earth creationist?

The event of strong, weak and emf feilds of a atom are not going to stop the effects of a magnetic feild acting upon a atom, in fact atoms either cations or anions respond to a magnetic feild, atoms that are cooled first have a tendency to be come highy magnetic when applied to a magnetic feild as in gases, but that princpal is quite evident wehn we make a magnetic poured from the furnace.

Again, your ignorance betrays you. Sure, magnetic fields can affect some ions. But you have yet to demonstrate ANYTHING STOCHIOMETRIC about any of the nonsense you claim. Put a quantitative and qualitative metric on the data, Rabon. You can't, can you? You don't have the EDUCATION, which is painfully obvious.

For any person that wishes to test the effects of magnetics on planet life in real time for self, they need only go any by a few magnets and plane them in a planters pot plant a few seeds and watch them grow, you can see which ones grow more robust/stronger, you can even incorporate the function of plant growth with out light by placing two plants in a box that has no sunlight, with a magnetic in one pot and the other with out a magnetic, not only will you see that sunlight is not nessacary for plant growth but that a magnetic effects growth, and just to be more intreseting you could even try electric stimulus which will result in curved growth depending on how you apply electricty to the plant, one old trick of the book is to wrap a cooper wire around the root of the plant changing the electrical nature of the plant,as plant growth is dependant on ionic nature of the soil.

More ignorance and evidence of undereducation. The Earth's magnetic field has a strength of about 0.5 gauss (Marshall and Skitek 1987). The magnets you might use for such an experiment would have a strength of about 1,000 to 4,000 gauss. I'd like to see the citation to an experiment conducted on a plant as you mentioned above without light. Or at least offer us a more professional account of the methodology (plant species, temp, time, humidity, etc.). Moreover, your WILD SPECULATION depends on the notion that the earth's magnetic field not only flips but ceases. According to Bouligand et al (2005), this just isn't the case. During a reversal -which could take a thousand years or more- the field doesn't "stop," it gets more complicated. It still exists, it is simply not as clearly defined.

Again, you have NOTHING in the way of evidence and are relying on sensationalism and alarmism.

Skin walker you saud there is no record of showing effect on planet life, if we check the growth rates, or size rates of animals over the last 200 years we find that animals as well as sea life have been decreaseing in size, at the same time we find that the magnetic feild has been decreaseing.

Tell me Rabon, what are the figures as far as planetary biomass? What are the selective pressures that might be at work for fuanal morphology? Could it be that organisms that are balanced in size to environment are more successful in their foraging efficiency? Get an education before you start making a fool of your self even more, son. There are many, more plausible and evidenced, reasons for changes in biomass for individuals and no evidence that I am aware of that the overall biomass of the planet is less than in the Cretaceous. We see the geologic evidence of "pole shifts" throughout the periods in which species of more massive proportions existed (dinosaurs) and no consistent correlation to mass extinction or changes in biomas for the individuals during these shifts. If you have it, cite it.

When the magnetic feild is increased the growth of plants increases,

Perhaps this can be demonstrated at gauss fields of on the order of 1,000 plus, but in the relatively weak 0.5 gauss field of this planet, you'll have a hard time proving it.

yes the current magnetic feild is weak, but it is not weak at the outter regions or end regions of the feild,

What is the gauss at the various levels of the magnetic field, Rabon? At the poles, where it is at its strongest, the field is about 0.62 gauss. That's it. Nothing more. At the equator, where it is weakest: 0.3 gauss. Get an education.

however other effects will cause genetic mutation and change,

Why? What is the evidence that "genetic mutation will occur?" Your speculative nonsense is baseles. Gustav was apparently offended by Phlog's parody, but Phlog was spot on. Nothing you are saying is coherent. It's apparent that you believe it, but it is incoherent nonetheless.

humans can only live in space for so long then they have to come back to earth.

You're right, but can you say why and back that up with a citation to the source of the knowledge. GET AN EDUCATION.

does it bother you that i am 1 of 600,000 genius in the world

Not at all. Indeed, you have yet to actually demonstrate that this is a true statement. I see only evidence of an undereducated braggart who has some wild, fantastical speculations that he feels the deep-seated need to find some social affirmation for.

You won't find it with me if you keep going on about un-evidenced and un-supported WILD SPECULATIONS.

Put up or shut up. Show the stochiometry and the citations. Or do as you did in the other thread and delete your nonsense and run.

References: (a.k.a. citations, sources, bibliography, resources, further reading, etc.)

Bouligand, C.; Hulot, G.; Khokhlov, A.; Glatzmaier, G. A. (2005) Statistical palaeomagnetic field modelling and dynamo numerical simulation Geophysical Journal International, 161(3), 603-626

Marshall, S. V,. and G. G. Skitek (1987). Electromagnetic Concepts and Applications. 2nd ed. Englewood Cliffs, N.J.: Prentice-Hall, Inc.

 

[Gustav]

Gustav was apparently offended by Phlog's parody, but Phlog was spot on.

the parody was harmless.
phlog just made an error of judgement with the quote ploy
no real biggie unless the tactic spreads
trolling will then take a really insidious form

 

[Gustav]

rabon

if skinwalker's concerns are not addressed, you are wasting your time.
while i do not claim to understand this shit..

you have to reconcile your theories with established scientific fact. if you dispute the facts, give reasons.

if you cannot get past skinwalker, i suggest you go back to the drawing board

 

[phlogistician]

the parody was harmless.
phlog just made an error of judgement with the quote ploy

It was a rather obvious parody to anybody who was following the thread, and explained in a following post that all Rabon had was a few terms interspersed with complete and utter bullshit.

The guy completely ignores FACTS that don't fit with his theory. He's a loon, plain and simple.

Here's a theory of my own;

"A chuuuka pukka erere fnarr ley lines kajanlang a flib abob ETI scheeeeruuukle area 51."

Now, disprove that!

 

[Squeak22]

The locations of dinosaur egg nest seems to macth that of the sea level after a magnetic pole reversal

DwayneD.L.Rabon

DwayneD.L.Rabon

Current layouts of the earth were not the same as millions of years ago. Plate Techtonics made the (speculated) single large land-mass breakup into the 7 major landmasses we have today. The Rocky Mountains were much smaller, and there was a large inland sea, because the earth was warmer during that time, and the sea level was higher.

Please take some time to read about dinosaurs before you make more wild assumptions about magnetic reversal. And nice misuse of what looks like a map of altitudes to use as your "flooded" example.

 

[SkinWalker]

name one wild assumption,about the magnetic pole reversal.

Does it have to be just one?

How about this one: that anything you claim to "know" is true?

Or:

... that it will result in genetic mutation (undemonstrated)

... that it will cause tectonic events (evidence suggests otherwise)

... that it will cause flooding (no evidence)

... that it has occurred between now and the last 700,000 years

Show us the stochiometry, Rabon. Give us citations to real sources (not just the ones that occupy your deluded mind). Go get a real education if you are able to cope in normal society.

 

[Squeak22]

Lastly this subject was a bout Atlantis, and my point was that the world was flooded, and give the condtions it is likly that some kind of area existed where humans gathered to lay eggs, it just so happens thats where dinosaurs layed there eggs is above the water line, some where on that sea level humans layed there eggs, i think that it is likly that it was in south aisa. althogu from the map there seems to be other places that they could go to that.

You missed the point, millions of years ago, when the dinosaurs laid these eggs, the landmasses were not the same, and the rocky mountains weren't even there. The mountains were formed by Plate techtonics, which takes millions of years to happen, but is the result of one plate of the earths crust ramming into another.

In the time of the dinosaurs, there (supposably) was one large landmass, and the current structure of the earths crust was a breakup of that.

The elevations of the points in question was MUCH LOWER than it is today, so in your "flooded world" they would be underwater too.

 

[Stryder]

From what I remember it was suggested that the poles had a large frozen surface area, due to changes in the earths orbit of the sun and it's pole relationship, those poles grew to consume some of the warmer areas forming giant glaciers and of course the Ice Age.

All climactic events are ever present trapped in both sedimentary rock formations and even Ice core samples take from both poles. Even some of the oldest trees can tell the tale of climate change by the way their bark grows with each year (Some years a mild and might allow a better growth as apposed to colder years)

It's even suggested that the seas of the world have risen by about 30-50 metres globally over the past 2000 years(Can't remember source, although some islands like Easter Island have man made structures beneath water because of the rise.)

as for sinking cities, there was a piece written on a Greek Town that supposedly "Sank beneath the waves", it was to do with an Earthquake and the shaking of the ground converting the once solid ground into a liquid state that swallowed the buildings. From the show I remember watching they showed such occurances in Japan where builds had sunk, and the earth bubbled like it was a liquid.

 

[SkinWalker]

What did I think of your "dinosaur map?" Not a lot. It was a world map with dots. No provenience or sourcing, just a pretty picture. Maybe that's where dinosaur eggs are found, maybe it isn't. Maybe eggs have been found in other localities... certainly I recognize some localities that aren't represented on the map just off the top of my head.

citations to real sources what does that mean some mathamatican in some book room, or some run of the mill chemist that puts water in a dish.

Assuming I have your sentence structure and grammar correct, no. It means scholarly, even peer-reviewed, literature that has a clear methodology and discussion of results. Something that one who was actually educated on the disciplines that are associated with the topic at hand might have reviewed.

Instead, we get your fanciful speculations. My "quotes from others," which are actually citations to those in science who have taken the time to do actual research, are good examples. You, however, are a crackpot. You have a bunch of unfounded, wild speculations about doomsday. NOTHING you've claimed has any basis in science, and if it does, you refuse to demonstrate how or cite a source that does.

You are a complete fraud and a fool.

 

[Ophiolite]

Important Notice:
It is very easy to fall into a confrontational approach to other posters when a single comment runs counter to our beliefs and experience. This can often escalate into name calling, ad hominem attacks and a generally aggressive and unproductive exchange of opinions, with a decided absence of facts.
To counter this it may be useful to find common ground with others and build from this towards better understanding and mutual respect. With this in mind I have searched Dwayne's posts for statements with which I, and I hope others, could find agreement. Here is such an example. I hope we can use this as a starting point from which to move forward.

don't even know why you keep talking about get a education, because i have one, and a iQ to match, .

Dwayne, there is little doubt in my mind that your education and IQ are very closely matched indeed.

 

[Light]

Well you all welcome to enjoy your oown nut shell.

DwayneD.L.Rabon

Finally! A completely true statement from Rabon! After all, no one should know a nutshell beter than a certified nut case.

 

[Light]

light is a retard on sciforums, your one of the dummest i have met.

Ha-ha-ha!!! Look who's talking!

You're nothing but a big joke, Rabon, and I actually get a kick out of reading your nonsense. Practically every science-fiction writer that has ever lived always used better science than you've presented - and they KNEW theirs was fiction.

Out of curosity, just what do you do all day, every day?

 

[Light]

your a dummy light, and thats why people like me will have to say something in issues like a magnetic pole reversal, your kind are not smart enough save your own.

for your information i work and do mathamatics and have been for many years

Your childish insults have no effect on me, kid. Precisely what KIND of work do you do?