Global Warming: Earth can EXPLODE !!!

Discussion in 'Earth Science' started by wet1, Mar 25, 2002.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. Edufer Tired warrior Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    791
    <b>to gotanygum:</B> for changing your profile you make a click on "control panel" at the top of the screen. There you go to: "edit profile" and change whatever you wish. Good luck!
    ------------------------------------------------

    Now, down to business. I´ve spent some valuable time reading the original article (in .pdf format) written by Dr. Tom J. Chalko, MSc., PhD., on "<b>No second chance? Can Earth explode as a result of Global Warming?</b> that orginated this topic by banshee. I am also aware that I am spending some more valuable time giving my opinion here, but there are worse things (like getting married).

    As reading progressed, I had the feeling the article was something like the famous <b>"Dr. Fox experiment"</b>. For those who never heard about it: A researcher in scientific writing sent copies of three "scientific" articles for "peer-review" (signed by Dr. Fox) to many respected and not so respected scientists, exposing a theory. The first set was written in plain, normal English, very easy to understand. The second version of the same theory was written in a more elaborated manner, with lots of technical words. The third version was written in a way that was completely incomprehensible, in the most abstruse sintax and full of mathematical formulas that meant nothing.

    The response to the first version was an unanimous veredict: <b>"Nonsense"</b>. The second version response was: <b>"Highly interesting"</b> (from not-so-famous scientists). The third version, also from not-so-famous scientists, was <b>"Excellent"</b>. Famous scientists responded to all versions: <b>"Garbage"</b>. The favourable responses were from scientists that did not know anything about the subject, but <b>wouldn´t recognize they had some ignorance in any field</b>. That's one of the worst things in science today: scientists that have not the humbleness and honesty of simply saying: <b>"I don't know"</b>. The article by Dr. Tom Chalko <b>is a superb "Dr. Fox experiment" example.</b>

    Then, there is the fact that Dr. Chalko makes assertions that are <b>false</b>. He uses these false claims to support his theory, as this one:

    <i>"Surprising <b>support</b> for the likelihood of the above scenario comes from archaeology. Apparently, <b>the last ”mini” ice age on Earth</b> occurred between 536 and 540 AD - only 1490 years ago (!). </i>

    Actually, the last Little Ice Age on Earth occurred between the years (aprox.) 1200-1860 AD. The clima cooled down from the "Medieval Climatic Optimum" happened between (aprox.) 750-1150 A.D., when temperatures were <b>2°Centigrades higher than today.</b> No arguing here by scientists: that was the age when the vikings explored the North Atlantic Ocean, discovered and colonized a huge island they named <b>"Greenland"</b> grew vineyards in northern Canada and the US. People were croping wheat near the Arctic circle.

    There is also no arguing among serious climate scientists about the <b>Little Ice Age</b> starting at 1200 AD and ending around 1860 AD, centuries when the Thames river froze past London, and the measurement on tree rings made by Dr. John Eddy, of the National Center for Atmospheric Research identified the terrible winter of 1883-84 (also recorded in the novel <i>Lorna Doone</i>) when trees in Somerset, England, froze and many <b>exploded</b> from the buildup of internal ice. This <b>exploding</b> of freezing trees have been also recorded for the Southern Hemisphere by Spanish chroniclers present at the foundation of the Bolivian citiy of Santa Cruz de la Sierra (tropical region: 15°South) in the year of 1591. (Manuscripts in the Historical Library in Santa Cruz). Imagine that: freezing trees in the tropics!

    Which was the cause of the Little Ice Age? Remember "Spoerer Minimum" and "Maunder Minimum", during the medieval period? Those were years (centuries) of total absence of sunspots. See: <A HREF="http://deschutes.gso.uri.edu/~rutherfo/milankovitch.html">"Milankovitch cycles"</A> and also: <A HREF="http://www.mtwilson.edu/Science/UCLA/"> http://www.mtwilson.edu/Science/UCLA/</A>.

    Don't get nervous: 'll finish my opinion in my next post.
    ------------------------------------------------------------------------
     
  2. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  3. Edufer Tired warrior Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    791
    Last post

    When it comes to volcanoes, Dr. Chalko says: <i>"Following the explosive eruption of just <b>one</b> volcano in the Pacific ring of fire - trees on the entire planet stopped growing for several years. For several years there was no summer... [13] This is not a theory".</i>

    This is true, as recorded in recent history: Mount Tambora (1816), Krakatoa (1883), Mount Katmai, Alaska (1912), Hekla, Iceland (1947), Mount Redoubt, Alaska (1976 and 1989), El Chichon, Mexico (1982), Mount Saint Helens (1980), Mount Pinatubo (1991), etc., sent millions of tons of dust and gases to the stratosphere, cooling Earth for at least two years. Benjamin Franklin wrote about the Tambora eruption, blaming it for the "year without summer" of 1816, when temperatures in Hartford, Conn did not exceed 82°F. However, despite all these great eruptions, <b>there was no doom.</b> No Ice age triggered.

    And then, Dr. Chalko makes this incredible assertion: <b>"The ice age of 536 AD was caused by the explosion of a single volcano. Can you imagine the consequences of explosive eruptions of a hundred volcanoes?"</b>.As sunspot counting was started about 900 years later, we have no way to know what was the state of the sun then, but if huge volcano eruptions as Tambora or Krakatoa didn't start an Ice Agem, it is highly improbable that the eruption of 536 AD triggered one.

    And another, but not the only false assertions made by Dr. Chalko, is this:

    <b>"To be or Not to be?</b>
    <i>While politicians and businessmen still debate and dispute the need for reducing greenhouse emissions and take pride to evade accepting any responsibility, the process of overheating the inner core reactor has already begun - <b>polar oceans have become warmer</b> and <b>polar caps have begun to melt</b>. Although the danger seems to come from the inside of our planet, the actual reason for the coming disaster is the pollution of the atmosphere [17], which is clearly our responsibility. At present, the atmospheric pollution increases daily..."</I>

    Here we go!. A Global Warmer Catatstrophist. Another doomsayer blaming pollution for all our worries. The scientific facts are that <b>polar oceans have NOT become warmer</b> and <b>polar caps have NOT begun to melt</b>. Quite on the contrary, Antarctica ice cap has been <b>increasing by billions of tons a year</b> for several decades. So the "scientific" basis of Dr. Chalko becomes less and less a support to his wild theory of Earth's inner nuclear reactor.

    Finally, when I was convinced this was another "Dr. Fox experiment" kind of work, I reached the end of the article, where we can see something that could give us a clue of Dr. Chalko mental state:

    <b>The Big Picture</b>
    <i>The Universe in its entirety is a masterpiece of Intelligent Design. It is quite easy to demonstrate [14] that this Intelligently Designed Universe is Self-Perfecting. Aiming to design anything else just wouldn’t make sense... Aiming to design anything else would actually be an insult to the Intellect of the Designer... The existence of an extensive range of self-correcting mechanisms in the Universe virtually guarantees that it will eventually be inhabited by the Best of the Best. Thanks to Autonomy and the Freedom of Thought <b>[3]</b> - the Best of the Best can simply choose
    themselves..."

    "For millennia <b>[20]</b> wise people have been trying to bring to our attention that <i>”Whoever knows everything but lacks WITHIN - lacks EVERYTHING”</i>. How many people today comprehend the importance of this advice?</i>

    Now, as a final to this lenghty post, see some references made by Chalko:

    <b>Some References given:</b>

    [3] T.J. Chalko, The Freedom of Choice, Scientific Eng. Research, Melbourne, TheFreedomOfChoice.com, ISBN 0 9577882 1 5, (2000)

    [17] Desmarquet M., Thiaoouba Prophecy, Arafura Publishing, ISBN 0-646-31395-9, (2000), first published in 1993, e-book: http://www.thiaoouba.com/ebook.htm

    [20] Thomas, The Gospel of Thomas, Translation from the Coptic original by M.Meyer in ”Secret Teachings...” Random House, NY,
    1984, ISBN 0-394-74433-0

    Reference (3) is an auto-reference. This guy refers himself for something he could have explained in the article. Reference (17) is to <b>Thiaoouba Prophecy</b>. Now prophets come in the help of scientific theories! And reference (20) is a reference to <b>The Gosspel of Thomas</b> , where mythology comes also to the help of wacky theories!. Jesus! What fun! Now the apochrypha, the hidden, forbiden gosspels are used to help somebody to push his lunacy.

    Finishing: I won't give here the scientific details showing that Earth, Venus and Mars were created at the same time, following the same physical laws. Then Mars and Venus have nuclear reactors inside. As Venus surface temperature <b>is higher than 400°Centigrades</b>, why did not its reactor go off, making Venus another "asteroid belt"? (and what about Mercury?). Now, let us end this topic and give this theory the burial it deserves: <b>in a trash can.</b>
     
  4. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  5. gotanygum Registered Member

    Messages:
    27
    Are polar ice caps gaining more ice than is lost, really? Are you talking about the theory as mentioned on the website https://mail.lsit.ucsb.edu/pipermail/gordon-newspost/2002-February/002156.html ? [4/5 ths the way down the page, since I dont subscribe to that magazine]?

    other links:

    http://geowww.gcn.ou.edu/~jahern/solid_earth/prem.html

    http://geo.mff.cuni.cz/papers2.bin/a99lh1.pdf [interesting]

    **http://www.science-frontiers.com/sf033/sf033p19.htm [this is a link that supports the idea 536 volcanic event was most important in certain ways]

    Tom used the reference to a certain book, 'Thiaoouba Prophecy'. I dont mind trying to separate the scientific information from the spiritual persuasions that make one think when one sees such a title in a works cited list, since a hypothesis is a hypothesis -- I do however seem to remember you posting a link to 'Christian Publications'? Anyway the three related journal sources I listed below.
     
    Last edited: Jun 23, 2002
  6. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  7. Edufer Tired warrior Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    791
    Go to this study showing a reconstruction of temperatures by proxy methods of the Late Holocen Period (the present period), where you'll see mean global temperatures during the 1500s and 1600s being about 20°Farenheit below today's temperatures.

    <A HREF=http://deschutes.gso.uri.edu/~rutherfo/climaterecon.html>" Multiproxy Climate Reconstruction"</A>

    Nice and clear graph!
     
  8. Edufer Tired warrior Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    791
    He didn't say hundred or thousand volcanoes triggered the Ice Age of 536 AD. He said was just <b>ONE</b> (The bold belongs to the article)..

    So it is the "tampering" by human beings what will make the reactor increase his temperature? Or is the temperature alone -wheter natural or human induced-- that will do the trick? Besides that, temperatures inside a reactor are in the thousands of degrees centigrades... so what harm could a mere couple of degrees? As we say down here in Southamerica, "What will another spot do to the jaguar?".

    Yes. I am not a mathematician, and I don't think there are any proficient enough in the board. Probably, if a mathematician or a physicist get hold of the paper would show where the phallacies are. As I said before, this is a "Dr. Fox experiment" paper, where most ignorant people (like us) will be impressed and tend to think: <b>"Wow, how complicated this thing is! Then it must be right..."</b>

    I like funny and strange theories (I love Vedas, Upanishads, and Mahabharta, as I love theories about Ica stones and ancient vanished mankinds) but when I see things that I know about that don't fit into the picture, I can't help to be highly skeptical.
     
  9. gotanygum Registered Member

    Messages:
    27
    who is fox?

    What is his actual name? Dr. Fox, Who is that, like Fox Mulder? [just kidding]
     
    Last edited: May 10, 2002
  10. Adam §Þ@ç€ MØnk€¥ Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    7,415
    Earth can EXPLODE!!!




    KABOOM!!!


     
  11. Edufer Tired warrior Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    791
    Re: who is fox?

    That shows that you didn't read my first post, where "Dr. Fox experiment" was explained at length. Go back there, read it, and then you'll have the whole picture. Dr. Chalko's "study" is a perfect example of a "Dr. Fox" type of study.

    <b>Oops!.</b> Adam: I almost forgot: you should be posting in Mr. Jokes forum and newsletter. You are quite original... Do you have another clever remark to post? (PLEASE, don't say : <font color=red size=6><b>BANG!</b></FONT>
     
  12. Stryder Keeper of "good" ideas. Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    13,104
    It's not just cooling that causes volcanoes to errupt and earthquakes to occur. But radiation bombardment in the form of Satellites.

    Those humble television companies pumping out tripe, can cause frequency fluctuations that when bombarding the earths surface cause solitons that can in turn cause plate movements.

    Radiation bombardment can also cause winds through the warming of land, even lightening storms can be caused.
     
  13. gotanygum Registered Member

    Messages:
    27
    No, I read it. But I wanted to know the actual name of the guy, but I totally understand the concept. I even took some time on yahoo trying to find exactly who it was, didnt find anything real promising, pointing to a firsthand source that is readily accessible to read alot into, like a journal or something I could read online.
    Maybe you found something?

    There are three separate official journals mentioning the experiment and the man. But none of them are freely accessible, I may have to go see my local library or one that carries those journals. They cost $ and membership . . .

    stryderunknown, I agree with you.
     
    Last edited: Jun 23, 2002
  14. Adam §Þ@ç€ MØnk€¥ Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    7,415



    Blammo!!!


     
  15. (Q) Encephaloid Martini Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    20,834
  16. Mr. G reality.sys Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    5,137
    Oh, come on. Everyone knows that planet Earth ultimately will IMPLODE!!! due to the ever-increasing density of its Bozone Layer.
     
  17. Adam §Þ@ç€ MØnk€¥ Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    7,415



    Ka-pow!!!


     
  18. Edufer Tired warrior Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    791
    Dr. Fox Effect.

    From a web page on <A HREF=http://www.christianpublications.com/Periodicals/aareview/2000/perar2000e.html><b>"Dr. Fox"</B></A>

    "A celebrated case once involved the presentation of a fabricated "Dr. Fox" to a group of educators. The perpetrators of the hoax hired a professional actor who looked "distinguished and sounded authoritative." He was coached to present his lecture with "excessive use of double-talk, neologisms, non sequiturs, and contradictory statements."

    "Then the unsuspecting teachers listened to their guest speaker. Not surprisingly, "the professional educators rated ‘Dr. Fox’ favorably on eight general items, including organization of material, use of examples, arousal of interest, and stimulation of thinking." 10 Nonverbal communication and the phony speaker had carried the day."

    From: <A HREF="http://www.freevocabulary.com/order.htm">http://www.freevocabulary.com/order.htm</A>

    "people judge you and your ideas by the words you use. The <b>"Dr. Fox Effect:"</b> words used often influence more than objective content. Fair or not, even colleges judge using SAT vocabulary."

    Dr. Fox teaches you how <b>not to get fooled again</b> by "excessive use of double-talk, neologisms, non sequiturs, and contradictory statements." Dr, Chalko may be another Dr. Fox experiment going on...

    -------------------------------

    <b>Quote:></b> <i>"Earth ultimately will IMPLODE!!! due to the ever-increasing density of its Bozone Layer".</i>

    It will do it, but due to ever-increasing weight of the Green Moron Layer!

    -------------------------------------------------------

    Adam: you really got me. I am still laughing. Your sense of humor is great.

    Now I must go to fulfill my duty as Captain Marvel and try saving the Earth:

    <center><font color=red size=7><b>Sazham!</b></center>
     
  19. Adam §Þ@ç€ MØnk€¥ Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    7,415




    BIFFO!!!



     
  20. Edufer Tired warrior Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    791
    While the sun is shinning bright in Australia, your brain cells seems to keep working in order. Here in Argentina my brain cells tell me is time to <font size=7 face="Arial black" color=green>ZOOM!</FONT> to bed. Hasta la vista, baby, Terminator dixit...
     
  21. gotanygum Registered Member

    Messages:
    27
    DR FOX

    Whitman, N and Burgess PR. Teaching basic science Dr Fox in the phisiology chicken coop. Medical Education Journal 1988; 22 393-7

    Naftulin, D. H. , Ware, J.E., & Donnely, F.a. (1973) The Doctor Fox Lecture A Paradigm of Educational Seduction. Journal of Medical Education, 48, 630-635

    Marsh, H.W., and J.E. Ware (1982) Effects of expressiveness, content coverage, and incentive on multi-dimentionsl student rating scales: New interpretations of the Dr. Fox effect. Journal of Educational Psychology, 74, 126-134.

    ok, anyone able to obtain a full-text copy of any of these??
     
    Last edited: Jun 9, 2002
  22. gotanygum Registered Member

    Messages:
    27
    hmm . . .
     
    Last edited: Jun 23, 2002
  23. wet1 Wanderer Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    8,616
    The trouble I have with this is that the attributed cause is "internal heat". Now this isn't something that just appeared on the scene; this source of internal heat, mentioned. The radioactives that keep our core molten were formed with the rest of the solar system. Most of the planets have radioactives present in their cores.

    We don't see a series of asteroid belts out there indicating that planets are missing that once existed. The one that does exists has various theories as to why but to my knowledge there isn't one that the core exploded and caused the disinegration of the planet.

    The radioactives have existed since the earth was formed. If the case was that it could "over heat" and cause an explosion, then I put forth that the earth was in far greater danger of such, in it's early state of existance. When the radioactives had not decayed and the resulting heat higher than at present day. The fact that we are still here and going around the sun in the same state for all this time tells me what is what.

    We have a crackpot or a social experimenter...
     
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.

Share This Page