Quick Questions, Short Answers - No Debate

8 - COMETS—Comets, journeying around the sun, are assumed to have the same age as our world and solar system. But, as *Fred Whipple has acknowledged, astronomers have no idea where or how comets originated. Evidently all the comets should self-destruct within a time frame that is fairly short. Careful study has indicated that the effect of this dissolution process on short-term comets would have totally dissipated them within 10,000 years.

Typical creationist nonsense. Even if we had no clue where comets came from this would not logically result. The only thing you need to have to make this argument invalid is a source for comets that can "replenish" the number that we see -- specifically short term comets.

The other question is what causes the self-destruction -- if it is due to repeated passages close to the gravity well of the sun (causing tidal forces to break up the body), then it is related to the number of passes rather than the term of the comet.

http://www.solarviews.com/eng/oort.htm

quote:

---

The Oort cloud is an immense spherical cloud surrounding the planetary system and extending approximately 3 light years, about 30 trillion kilometers from the Sun. This vast distance is considered the edge of the Sun's orb of physical, gravitational, or dynamical influence.

Within the cloud, comets are typically tens of millions of kilometers apart. They are weakly bound to the sun, and passing stars and other forces can readily change their orbits, sending them into the inner solar system or out to interstellar space. This is especially true of comets on the outer edges of the Oort cloud. The structure of the cloud is believed to consist of a relatively dense core that lies near the ecliptic plane and gradually replenishes the outer boundaries, creating a steady state. One sixth of an estimated six trillion icy objects or comets are in the outer region with the remainder in the relatively dense core.

The Oort cloud is the source of long-period comets and possibly higher-inclination intermediate comets that were pulled into shorter period orbits by the planets, such as Halley and Swift-Tuttle. Comets can also shift their orbits due to jets of gas and dust that rocket from their icy surface as they approach the sun. Although they get off course, comets do have initial orbits with widely different ranges, from 200 years to once every million years or more. Comets entering the planetary region for the first time, come from an average distance of 44,000 astronomical units.

---

So the Oort cloud can supply new long-term comets at any time for as long as the cloud exists. Any long-term comet can be converted to a short-term comet by a change in orbit (passes too close to Jupiter on one of it's rare long-term passes).

http://www.fas.org/irp/imint/docs/rst/Sect19/Sect19_22.html

quote:

---

As of 1995, 878 comets have been catalogued; most now have their orbits reasonably well calculated. Of these 184 have definitely been established as periodic (at intervals of years to centuries pass the inner Solar System as they orbit the Sun; these can be divided into Short-Period (KBO) and Long Period (OC) types; new comets and others of the 878 may also be periodic but more observations over time are needed to confirm this. The number of comets - most still undetected - within the Solar System may be in the trillions.

---

Doesn't sound like we need to worry about running out any time soon - if we lost a short-term comet every year and replaced it with one of the trillions in the Oort cloud, it would be a very long time ...

Enjoy.

ps - this is a Hovind classic, and a PRATT

http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/hovind/howgood-yea.html#proof3

Edited by RAZD, : clarity.

---

Join the effort to unravel AIDS/HIV, unfold Proteomes, fight Cancer,
compare Fiocruz Genome and fight Muscular Dystrophy with Team EvC! (click)

---

we are limited in our ability to understand
by our ability to understand
RebelAAmericanOZen[Deist
... to learn ... to think ... to live ... to laugh ...
to share.

Try google with

site:http:// Brookings

You may need to pick the Similar Pages link.

Enjoy.

(cutie ;))

I feel pretty
oh so pretty
it's a pity how pretty I feeeeeeeeeeeeel ...

---

Join the effort to solve medical problems, AIDS/HIV, Cancer and more with Team EvC! (click)

---

we are limited in our ability to understand
by our ability to understand
RebelAAmericanOZen[Deist
... to learn ... to think ... to live ... to laugh ...
to share.

Actually stamping out forest fires is why ducks have flat feet.

Rhinos have flat feet for stamping out flaming ducks.

(old elephant joke)

Enjoy.

Hey Zucadragon

I need a bit of help, I'm in a discussion that starts with the basic, and I'm trying to find a good dictionary (or dictionaries) to define the term "evolution".

If you want to see how absurd that discussion can get see
http://www.evcforum.net/cgi-bin/dm.cgi?action=msg&f=8&t=153&m=1

Why not use definitions as used by universities that actually teach biological evolution?

Berkeley University

quote:

---

The Definition:
Biological evolution, simply put, is descent with modification. This definition encompasses small-scale evolution (changes in gene frequency in a population from one generation to the next) and large-scale evolution (the descent of different species from a common ancestor over many generations). Evolution helps us to understand the history of life.

---

University of Michigan

quote:

---

Definitions of Biological Evolution

We begin with two working definitions of biological evolution, which capture these two facets of genetics and differences among life forms. Then we will ask what is a species, and how does a species arise?

Definition 1:

Changes in the genetic composition of a population with the passage of each generation

Definition 2:

The gradual change of living things from one form into another over the course of time, the origin of species and lineages by descent of living forms from ancestral forms, and the generation of diversity

Note that the first definition emphasizes genetic change. It commonly is referred to as microevolution. The second definition emphasizes the appearance of new, physically distinct life forms that can be grouped with similar appearing life forms in a taxonomic hierarchy. It commonly is referred to as macroevolution.

---

Or you can use Darwin as a starting point: Descent with Modification.

Or the "modern synthesis" definition: the change in frequency of alleles in populations over generations.

Any definition not used in the science is irrelevant, as it is talking about a different evolution, and any attempt to use it in place of a scientific definition is equivocation and misrepresentation.

Enjoy.

---

we are limited in our ability to understand
by our ability to understand
Rebel American Zen Deist
... to learn ... to think ... to live ... to laugh ...
to share.

---

• • • Join the effort to solve medical problems, AIDS/HIV, Cancer and more with Team EvC! (click) • • •

Try a pink answer (it is actually closer to magenta but easier to type)

Testing pink on black

Testing pink on blue

Testing pink on green

Hi dwise1,

Recently, somebody on this forum complained about that color combination and I also now found it a bit harsh on the eyes.

yeah, that was one of my posts.

Personally I like tan, gold and orange as stand-alone colors and rarely use red, green or brown

I also like blue or black with  white ([bgcolor]) or  tan backgrounds [blockcolor])

Enjoy.

Edited by RAZD, : more bling

Hi Percy,

F&L is correct, it's on the todo list, but you are correct, too, we did used to have chat. It was provided by third party software. Initially it was free, then $10/year, then $25/year, then $75/year. At the last price hike I disabled the feature, and I don't know what the price is now.

What is the difference between a chat function and open discussion on an open forum thread?

Why not just have a "CHAT" forum and people can start chats on any topic, discuss them, and do anything you can do in a chat room, couldn't they?

Put it in Side Orders with minimal moderation.

Similar to Free For All
Interested in free and wild debate unencumbered by most moderation? Then this is the forum for you. Just stay on topic.

CHAT
Interested in free ranging and unencumbered chats with other members with minimal moderation? Want to branch off from existing threads and not be tied to a topic? Then this is the forum for you. Just keep it legal and "family friendly".

Just a thought. Certainly could be an interim solution?

Enjoy.

Edited by Zen Deist, : added

Limit the posts to 200 characters and it should not take that long to make a post and then see the rest of the posts when it refreshes.

Personally I don't need faster.

I don't need privacy, I wouldn't post anything that would need privacy.

But if you need it, then use the chat forum to make contacts to then communicate by PM links

Edited by Zen Deist, : .

Hi hooah212002,

Do I see a need for it? Not personally, but apparently there is a want for it from other members. The only use I could see for it is because it is difficult/obscure to see the (1)message blinking.

Yeah, the only time I've used chat is at work where it was used as a "watson, i need you" kind of message.

... it is because it is difficult/obscure to see the (1)message blinking.

Perhaps the location is wrong -- what if it was under your avatar?

Enjoy

Hi Percy,

Hey Percy

This recently occurred to me:

Reply ALL function?

Would it be possible to have a "reply all" (or reply multiple) function for when you get a number of replies to one message?

This may need to be initiated within the post that gets the multiple replies, and could be where the "you have not yet responded" link is?

Probably a bit more difficult would be to have an option in the reply program to "add another Reply to" which could be a toggle under the "Reply to: Message xxx by {Y}" where you can pick among the others that reply to the same post? then you would have

Replies to: Message xxx by {A}
            Message yyy by {B}
  select another reply to ◊  

It would likely need to be similar to a general reply (where you can see all the previous posts) but with the posts restricted to those that replied or that are selected for the response being shown (ie 2 or 3 posts).

The link/s from the response to each of the replies could still look the same (replies to this message), but at the bottom it list the "ALL" posts under "This message is a reply to:"

Enjoy.

Hi percy another one for your copious free time

[qs=mid#] ie [qs=636038]

would look like

Message 214 writes: This recently occurred to me: Reply ALL function?

This would be especially useful in the multiple response posts (whether done manually or with the mechanism suggested in Message 214

Enjoy

And for just a couple more minutes ...

how about a CC option ...

under the
Reply to: Message 214 by Zen Deist

you would then have pull down menus for
  add another reply to ⟨ select ⟩  
  add cc to member     ⟨ select ⟩  

and putting it all together the reply window would have:

Replies to: Message 214 by Zen Deist                    Message 215 by Zen Deist           cc to: xongsmith   add another reply to ⟨ select ⟩     add cc to member     ⟨ select ⟩

and the posted version would look like

Replies to: Message 214 by Zen Deist                    Message 215 by Zen Deist           cc to: xongsmith

where the CC's would show up on the members page as unanswered posts (those blue arrows)?

Message 214 writes: This recently occurred to me: Reply ALL function?

Message 215 writes: This would be especially useful in the multiple response posts (whether done manually or with the mechanism suggested in Message 214

Edited by Zen Deist, : blue arrow

Hi Percy, hope you like.

one question: when you make a reply the system automatically adds "Re:" to the subtitle ...

except that it doesn't when it is the next reply or for blank subtitles.

I think it could be interesting if this kept incrementing (so a reply to this would be

Re: Re: message CC?

and the next

Re: Re: Re: message CC?

it would kind of force a subtitle change on our subtitle challenged members ...

Enjoy.

Hi Percy,

It works like this: Only messages from the last 90 days are used to calculate member ratings. All cheers and jeers for a member are summed. A cheer is plus one, a jeer is minus one. The sum of all cheers and jeers is divided over the member's total number of messages for the past 90 days, giving his raw rating. The raw ratings across all members are normalized into the range 1 to 10, with 1 lowest and 10 highest. The results are the ratings you see.

It is a popularity rating rather than a content rating.

I would think that the default rating would be in the middle, average ... 5? Someone who posts little and says nothing controversial should be a 5? It seems to me that the distribution is skewed.

The ability to view your messages that have received votes will be implemented at the same time as the automated post of the month system.

Although popular does not necessarily mean good quality.

A post like "Rick Perry is a doofus" could be highly popular, but would hardly qualify for post of the month in my opinion.

Enjoy

Edited by Zen Deist, : example