From: news@fedfil.UUCP (news)
Newsgroups: talk.origins
Subject: Re: Uneven felt gravity
Date: 9 Oct 92 01:25:31 GMT
Organization: HTE

In article <1992Oct8.042118.22609@csis.dit.csiro.au>, prl@csis.dit.csiro.au (Peter Lamb) writes:

*>golden, or antediluvian age, when the earth was VERY egg-shaped, and then
*>the classical age of Cronos, or golden age, during which time the earth was
*>still egg-shaped, the felt effect of gravity still attenuated, but not
*>so greatly...  i.e. he figures the original conformation of the earth
*>collapsed in at least two discernable stages.

*Yes, but he also figures that the size of the bulge would have broken
*the earth into little pieces. In at least this, he is in full agreement
*with most of the other people who comment on your "theories".


*	"Danby's formula [for tidal distortion -prl] gives about
*	61000km for the distance needed for an eccentricity of 0.6 [the
*	size of the antediluvian hump -prl] and about 73000km for an
*	eccentricity of 0.36 [the size of the "golden age" hump -prl].
*	Both of these distances are considerably _less_ than the Roche
*	limit."[1] p21.

*The Roche limit is the smallest orbit that a body can have without
*tidal stresses destroying it. Ted has often been told on t.o that his
*schemes which gryate the Earth around Saturn producing huge humps
*would tear the earth apart; here he has it affirmed by his own sources.

Lamb conveniently omits a little discussion on page 19 of the same article:

   "But Danby's formula is not really applicable here.  the formula is 
   intended to apply to situations where the eccentricity is lower, where the
   distance is greater, where the distorting body is the primary rather than the
   satellite, where the distorting body is small enough and distant enough
   that it can be treated as a point, and where earth itself is a complete 
   fluid mass.  Even then the formula is only an approximation: it is derived 
   from an infinite series in which all higher order terms have been ignored.
   As Danby himself points out, "Comparison with actuality is not profitable
   here."
   
Rose also mentions that any and all effects of electro-magnetism are being
left entirely out of these gravity-only calculations;  a "minor" point
considering that this entire scenario is based mostly on electromagnetic
attraction, which is also the assumed basis of discussion.


On page 21, immediately after the discussion which Lamb quotes, Rose goes
on to say:

     "But Danby's formula, for all of the reasons that were discussed earlier,
     is unsuitable as a means of calculating the actual values here.  In my
     conjectures, I have relied upon Danby's formula ONLY to the extent of
     assuming that it indicates the approximate sort of difference between the
     Pangaea tide-raising distance and the Aden/Afar tide-raising distance."

 
*>  A big part of the problem is
*>that human memory in any form whatsoever goes no further back than a 
*>thousand years or so prior to the flood.  Given catastrophist hypotheses,
*>you assume that it gets harder to know much about earth history beyond
*>each catastrophe.  Rose's general hypothesis makes sense to me logically,

*Including the bits where Rose says that the tidal stress produced would
*tear the earth apart?


The problem I have here, Lamb, is that I am not easily able to believe that
you simply missed the discussions which you have so conveniently omitted in
claiming that my own sources prove me an idiot, and I am very rapidly
losing the reservations which I used to have about calling people liars
when they habitually attempt to produce effects using this sort of dishonest
quoting and use of sources.

In the entire world, if there's any one sort of person which I've no use for
whatsoever, it's a flagrant or pathalogical liar.  

I've no intention of wasting any more of my time writing new responses to your
bullshit.  In the one similar case on t.o, namely that of Meritt, I've simply
retained one or two standard posts which, to any reasonable observer, CLEARLY
show the guy for what he is, and that is what I intend to do with YOU.

I shall simply save this post and repost it to anything further which you
might have to say on the subject of Rose's Pangaea article.  In my judgement,
it tells any reasonable person anything and everything he might need to know
regarding how seriously to take anything which you might have to say.


-- 
Ted Holden
HTE

Newsgroups: talk.origins