a pagan a day keeps the ice cubes away
comsen...@my-dejanews.com
>
> dear idot boy,
Ahh, the irony...
>
> >It is not steam. It is a vapor trail.
>
> "As the comet nears the sun, the particles and gases are driven off"
So? The word "steam" does not appear in your one-sentence citation.
>
> The Concise Columbia Encyclopedia is licensed from Columbia University Press.
> Copyright © 1995 by Columbia University Press. All rights reserved.
>
There you go again, with your selective editing. Knowing you, I'm quite
certain that the reference you provide proves you wrong, which is why you
only quoted _one_ _sentence_. The key word above is _GASES_. Recall in my
previous post, I maintained that a comet's trail is not a _STEAM_ trail, as
you contend, but a _VAPOR_ trail. Since you are either too lazy or too
stupid to look it up in a science text, or (more likely, although I haven't
ruled out the too stupid part) you have looked it up, know you're wrong, and
won't admit it, let me point out that steam is made of _WATER_, while _VAPOR_
is defined as a substance (or substances) in a gaseous state. The _GASES_
you cite are comprised of substances OTHER than water, and are NOT steam.
Let's examine this a bit further.
=============================================================================
=== =
>From http://www.windows.umich.edu/comets/comet_nucleus.html
A comet nucleus is made of a special sort of silicate rock which is
called "fluffy" because it could be as light weight and full of holes as
a sponge. The holes are filled with ices made of carbon dioxide (dry
ice), carbon monoxide (what comes out of your car), ammonia (what you
clean your bathtub with), and other frozen molecules. Observations of
the nucleus of comet Hale-Bopp and Hyakutake have given scientists fresh
ideas about comet composition and evolution.
Scientists do not know whether the nucleus is very hard, like solid
ground, or very soft and breakable, like a snowball. The Rosetta mission
hopes to land a probe onto the surface of a comet and find out just how
hard it is.
As the comet approaches the sun, it begins to evaporate(*) and form the
coma and spectacular comet tail. This picture shows that evaporation may
happen only in specific places on the nucleus. These spots of
evaporation are called "jets". The jets can sometimes help to turn the
comet and make it tumble in space. Halley's comet was photographed with
three distinct jets on its surface as it approached the sun in 1986.
(*) [The word "evaporate" is a hypertext link. When you click on it, it
gives you the following material, which is the important part--CS]
Evaporation is not quite the correct term to describe what happens to a
comet as it approaches the sun. The correct term is sublimation. The
term describes what happens when a frozen material changes to gaseous
form. (Evaporation describes what happens when a liquid changes to a
vapor).
The most common example of sublimation is that of dry ice, which is the
common name of frozen CO2. When dry ice is exposed to the air it begins
to sublimate, or change to vapor, before your very eyes. This happens to
dry ice because at room temperature the frozen gas would rather be a gas
than frozen solid.
When a comet approaches the sun, the comet comes to a region of space where
it is warm enough that the frozen gases inside the nucleus would rather be
gaseous than frozen solid, and that is when the tail and coma of the comet
form.
=============================================================================
=== ===
Checkmate.
> and you call your self commen sence, opps, time to change your screan name.
Not only are you stupid, but you are also a liar who knowingly quotes
select portions of articles and omits others in pathetic attempts to
back up your psuedo-science.
If your intention is to portray Islam in a favorable light, you could at
least do it honestly. Using deception isn't going to get you anywhere.
>
> >1) We are talking about comets traveling through space.
>
> who is we ?
Everyone in this thread but you, apparently. The thread started with
Barwell's quoting the verse in the Qur'an which, in his translation,
maintains that Satan is chased around by fiery comets. Barwell noted
(accurately) that comets are not fiery; for starters, there is no oxygen
in space to maintain a fire. You tried to maintain that they are hot.
Wrong. Gases like carbon dioxide, carbon monoxide, ammonia must be
subjected to _extremely_ cold temperatures in order to become frozen,
_far_ below 0 degrees C.
Comets are not hot, pea-brain.
>you take bits and pieces and do not follow the thread, through out
> this thread I have been telling the other pagan besides you,
Piss off. I am not a pagan, dumbell. I don't believe in their
unprovable claims any more than I believe in yours.
>that when comets
> travel through our Ozone, they are fiery hot,
Again you lie. The verse in Barwell's translation mentioned about
comets chasing Satan through the constellations, which are not in the
Earth's atmosphere. Furthermore, you argued that due to the speed at
which comets orbit the Sun, they would be hot. Wrong; there is no
friction in space, because there is no air.
As an aside, Satan must be an exceedingly stupid creature not to move
out of the path of a comet. They tend to travel in relatively
predictable paths...sort of like saying that he's being chased by a
train: as long as he's smart enough to hop off the tracks, he's safe. I
would wager if you put a mouse on a circular model train track and he
saw the train coming at him, he'd probably have the smarts to jump off
the track. I guess you can relax; Satan makes you look quite
intelligent.
>though do to his overdose on
> soda,
The fact that you are too stupid to understand his simple analogy about
a soda can, and instead twisted it around to maintain that he claimed
comets emit soda pop exemplifies your idiocy and dishonesty.
>he insists that comets are not hot at [[any stage]], even when traveling
> through the Ozone.
He never said any such thing. Again you lie. You are arguing that they
are hot even in space. Wrong.
>
> > There are no comets
> >in the Earth's atmosphere.
>
> never ? would you like to repharse that ?
There is no need; I did not say "there are never comets in the Earth's
atmosphere", or "there have never been any comets in the Earth's
atmosphere". I said there _are_ no comets in the Earth's atmosphere,
which is a fact.
>
> >2) Comets traveling though space are not hot.
>
> gee, I guess that's why they melt ? daaa
The only one looking dumb here is you. To freeze gases into solids
requires temperatures hundreds of degrees below 0 C. Space is COLD,
silly idolater.
>
> > There is no AIR in space.
> >Therefore, there is no FRICTION generated as the comet moves through space.
>
> There is Plenty of hydrogen in space, and the gases around the sun fry up
> comets quickly, incase you don't know, which you plainly don't, comets circle
> the sun once or twice and then are toast .
You are so uninformed, it's pathetic. Halley's comet has been circling
the Sun, once every 76 years, for thousands of years.
>
> They are partially made of carbin which helps the burning up process.
Citations, please. For _any_ of the drivel you claim. And please
provide a link, or at least a paragraph. One sentence doesn't cut it.
>
> >3) Comets are made of ice, and are NOT hot. See:
> >
> >http://www.nasm.edu/ceps/ETP/COMETS/comet_anatomy.html
> >http://www.windows.umich.edu/comets/comet_nucleus.html
> >http://spaceboy.nasda.go.jp/Note/Taiyo/E/Tai13_e.html
> >http://www.fortunecity.com/meltingpot/mlk/698/page6.html
> >http://www.lafsd.k12.ca.us/hv/Hale-Bopp/questions_answers/index.html
>
> dumb boy, comets do not sit still, the travel around the sun, hence get hot
and
> burn out, daaa
What planet are you on? I never claimed they sit still, idolater-boy.
I never said anything remotely close to this. You are too dense to
understand English, let alone attempt to argue in it.
>
> >Wrong. Again, I produce your quote, and a link to your message, which is the
> >first in this thread: From http://x3.dejanews.com/=hg/getdoc.xp?AN=460121047
> >
> >>mghounem wrote:
> >>>William Barwell wrote:
> >>>Pillars are solid things that support objects
> >>
> >>wrong, wrong, wrong.
>
> dence person, I stated repeatedly throughout this thread that pillars are both
> solid and figurative, the other pagan insists on confineing the meaning, I
told
> him he was "wrong", and proceeded to show him the other things it can mean.
You not only told him he was wrong, you accused him of falsifying
dictionary definitions, knowing full well that a pillar _is_ a solid
object used to support something. Again you lie. Your words speak for
themselves:
http://x3.dejanews.com/=hg/getdoc.xp?AN=460121047
>
> Up until now, I do not deny they are slabs of rocks like your head,
You attempted to deny it, until I provided the portion of the
definition you omitted, which proved you wrong. Only then did you try
to wiggle out of it.
>but the
> other pagan still denies the word pillar can be other than a solid object, and
> that is where he is wrong.
Where has he "still" denied it? Produce a quote.
>
> The entire post clearly shows I am telling him ((there is more then one
meaning
> for "pillar"))
Another lie. The entire post clearly shows your intent to deceive.
>
> >You did not say "this word has dual meanings". You said he was "wrong,
> >wrong, wrong".
>
> silly person, I said he was wrong, but if you saw the previous thread, and the
> following ones, you would see I repeatedly state the word has more than one
> meaning, are all pagans this stupid ?
I am not a pagan. Are all idolaters this stupid?
>
> >It misrepresents their findings. One "scientist" prominently quoted at that
> >site, Maurice Brucaille
>
> no where is Dr. Brucaille at the mountain site I offered here:
>
> http://www.geocities.com/Athens/Agora/4229/mtn.html
>
> instead if you had looked, which you lie and say you have, just as you did
> about the previous threads, you would know these are scientists such as;
>
> Ortelius ( 1596), Bacon (1620) Placet (1668) Snider-Pellegrini (1858)
> Taylor & Baker (1908) Wegener (1915) DuToit ,Tethys Sea. Holmes (1928)
etc...
This site starts with a quote of the following two verses from the
Qur'an:
"Or, Who made the earth a resting place, and made in it rivers, and
raised on it mountains and placed between the two seas a barrier. Is
there a god with Allah? Nay! most of them do not know!" {Qur'an 27:61}
There are seven seas on Earth, not two. And anyone living in Muhammad's
day would know that there were mountains and rivers. Plus, saying that
mountains are "raised" proves nothing; in other verses, it is claimed
that mountains were placed on the Earth. And stating that mountains were
"raised" is intuitive; one would say this about any tall structure.
"And He it is Who spread the earth and made in it firm mountains and
rivers, and of all fruits He has made in it two kinds; He makes the
night cover the day; most surely there are signs in this for a people
who reflect." {Qur'an 13:3}
Night does not "cover" the day. Night comes when the Earth rotates away
from the Sun. And the statement that all fruits have two kinds is
false; there are many fruits that have far more than two varieties.
Moving right along, the site you cite shows quotations from scientists
in the fields of geology, tectonics, etc., that deal with the formation
and structure of the Earth. No quotations from any scientist endorsing
the scientific accuracy of the Qur'an are provided. Finally, the page
closes by saying "In conclusion, Mountains were raised from the earth
and stopped the earth crust from Shaking as was proven this century by
scientists while it was revealed in the Holy Qur'an 14 Centuries ago."
Which is not stated in the above verses, the only verses from the Qur'an
to appear on this page. Nor is there any quotation from any scientist
provided that says mountains stop the Earth's crust from shaking, or
anything remotely close to this.
Some proof.
>
> these are the founders and experts in the field of mountain formation (plate
> tactonics) , and their findings confirm what was written in the Qur'an,
> centuries before their time.
Hardly.
>
> By the way, no body is bribing any body, Maurice Brucaille never went to Saudi
> Arabia,
I'm sure that Dr. Bucaille would be surprised to discover he never went to
Saudi Arabia. Here is a quote from his book "The Bible, The Qur'an, and
Science" (pp 119-120).
=============================================================================
=== === "It was in Saudi Arabia itself that an inkling was given to me of the
extent to which opinions held in the West on this subject are liable to
error."
"The debt of gratitude I owe to the late King Faisal, whose memory I salute
with deepest respect, is indeed very great: the fact that I was given the
signal honour of hearing him speak on Islam and was able to raise with him
certain problems concerning the interpretation of the Qur'an in relation to
modern science is a very cherished memory. It was an extremely great
privilege for me to have gathered so much precious information from him
personally and those around him.""
=============================================================================
=== ===
>your are thinking of the former Christian Moore, who also confirms the
> truth in the Qur'an with his study in the field of embrology.
Nope.
>
> > I would no more consult a
> >physician about physics than I would consult Stephen Hawking about a
> >headache.
>
> who ever it may be, you certainly do need consultation.
I think you need English lessons. And counseling.
CS
-----------== Posted via Deja News, The Discussion Network ==----------
http://www.dejanews.com/ Search, Read, Discuss, or Start Your Own
MGhounem
>As the comet approaches the sun, it begins to evaporate
now the pagans claim this is caused by the comet becoming colder, hence proving
idots exist.
>The thread started with
>Barwell's quoting the verse in the Qur'an which, in his translation,
>maintains that Satan is chased around by fiery comets.
you are a selective reader, this penguin house translation completely
mis-translated the verse to trick pagans such as yourself to either be
christian or non-Muslim.
The entire Qur'an makes no mention of comets.
I decided to continue on the issue of comets just to show how ignorantly
illogicall pagans are.
to pagans, hot is cold and light is dark (period)
comsen...@my-dejanews.com
quantities of hallucinogens MGhounem wrote (and, in his very first sentence,
kindly provided an accurate summary of his entire post):
>
> moron speaks again;
>
> >As the comet approaches the sun, it begins to evaporate
>
> now the pagans claim this is caused by the comet becoming colder, hence
proving
> idots exist.
It's "idiot". Idiot.
Yes, yes, we know: in the wonderful world of Ghounem, comets are blazing hot,
mountains prevent earthquakes, gravity holds clouds up and is caused by
particles which can be removed in a super-secret room at NASA, iron bars can
float, unicorns exist, and there are little green pixies running around in
your front yard. Tell me: what color is the sun in your world?
You've been sneaking off to the peyote patch again, haven't you? Naughty,
naughty! If Satan weren't so busy orbiting around the Sun running from
comets, he'd get you!
>
> >The thread started with
> >Barwell's quoting the verse in the Qur'an which, in his translation,
> >maintains that Satan is chased around by fiery comets.
>
> you are a selective reader, this penguin house translation completely
> mis-translated the verse to trick pagans such as yourself to either be
> christian or non-Muslim.
>
> The entire Qur'an makes no mention of comets.
If the verse does not say "comets", then why in the hell are you expending so
much energy making yourself look like such an "idot"?
>
> I decided to continue on the issue of comets just to show how ignorantly
> illogicall pagans are.
You have demonstrated much more aptly your total lack of scientific knowledge,
and your dishonesty.
>
> to pagans, hot is cold and light is dark (period)
I wouldn't know; I'm not a pagan, you see. Do all idolaters disclaim science?
john smith
MGhounem wrote:
> moron speaks again;
>
> >As the comet approaches the sun, it begins to evaporate
>
> now the pagans claim this is caused by the comet becoming colder, hence proving
> idots exist.
>
***I dont know about what Pagans claim, but the Comet obvioulsy gets hottter as it
approaches the Sun hence the material evaporates due to the increased HEAT! This is
how the tail of the Comet developes as it approaches the Sun.
Adam
comsen...@my-dejanews.com
For starters, mghounem is lying, or is hallucinating again. No one ever
claimed that comets approaching the Sun get colder. The argument stems
from someone quoting a translated verse from the Qu'ran in which it was
claimed that fiery comets chase Satan around the constellations, which
can be seen (I don't have the exact quote). Ignoring the fact that any
comets we can see are in our solar system, while the constellations are
light-years away from Earth, the argument proceeded along the lines of
mghounem arguing many strange things, among which was the claim that
comets are hot as they travel through space. Actually, I invite you to
read the whole thread; some of his assertions are quite humorous...
Anyway, you are correct in asserting that the heat of the comet
increases as it approaches the Sun; however, bear in mind that this is
in open space, and it's still quite cold out there. I posted a
selection from a University site dealing with comets in:
http://x6.dejanews.com/=hg/getdoc.xp?AN=462657371
Here are some URLs with comet info:
http://www.nasm.edu/ceps/ETP/COMETS/comet_anatomy.html
http://www.windows.umich.edu/comets/comet_nucleus.html
http://spaceboy.nasda.go.jp/Note/Taiyo/E/Tai13_e.html
http://www.fortunecity.com/meltingpot/mlk/698/page6.html
http://www.lafsd.k12.ca.us/hv/Hale-Bopp/questions_answers/index.html
About comets:
http://www.sciam.com/askexpert/astronomy/astronomy32/astronomy32.html
Comet definitions:
http://www.hawastsoc.org/solar/eng/comet.htm
Comet observations:
http://encke.jpl.nasa.gov/index.html
Comet links:
http://medicine.wustl.edu/~kronkg/comlink.html
MGhounem
>increases as it approaches the Sun;
Huh ?! CAN THIS BE A ADMISSION THAT COMETS GET HOT ?
and all along I was under the impression that they were made of a new pepsi
thirst buster brand which got colder as the temp got higher, in the case of the
sun, about a million or so degrees .
the suns heat then makes the comets circleing the sun so cold, that the comet
decides to melt in protest.
comsen...@my-dejanews.com
>
>> you are correct in asserting that the heat of the comet
>>increases as it approaches the Sun;
>
>Huh ?! CAN THIS BE A ADMISSION THAT COMETS GET HOT ?
Hah. You wish, idolater-boy. I've been posting all along that they get
_warmer_ as they approach the Sun. Look at any of my letters... Do they get
_hot_? As in _fiery_ hot? Nah.
And might I remind you that you were arguing they were hot in space,
regardless of position? Now, you change your argument to suit the facts yet
again.
>
>and all along I was under the impression that they were made of a new pepsi
>thirst buster brand which got colder as the temp got higher, in the case of the
>sun, about a million or so degrees .
The thing is, silly soda sipper, that space itself is very cold, because there
is no air to trap heat. So cold that gases will freeze into solids, as in the
case of our friend the comet.
As was alluded to in one of the citations I provided, certain substances have
higher melting points than others. Set a block of dry ice in your room
sometime. You will see it "evaporate" right before your very eyes, at room
temperature. Is it hot? No. (Please, put your tongue on the block to find
out if you don't believe me!)
Nor do the frozen gases of which a comet is comprised have to get hot to
evaporate.
If you would take a few minutes to read some of the following links, you'd
stop looking so silly.
http://www.nasm.edu/ceps/ETP/COMETS/comet_anatomy.html
http://www.windows.umich.edu/comets/comet_nucleus.html
http://spaceboy.nasda.go.jp/Note/Taiyo/E/Tai13_e.html
http://www.fortunecity.com/meltingpot/mlk/698/page6.html
http://www.lafsd.k12.ca.us/hv/Hale-Bopp/questions_answers/index.html
About comets:
http://www.sciam.com/askexpert/astronomy/astronomy32/astronomy32.html
Comet definitions:
http://www.hawastsoc.org/solar/eng/comet.htm
Comet observations:
http://encke.jpl.nasa.gov/index.html
Comet links:
http://medicine.wustl.edu/~kronkg/comlink.html
>
>the suns heat then makes the comets circleing the sun so cold, that the comet
>decides to melt in protest.
They eventually melt away, but this can take thousands of years. If they got
anywhere near as hot as you're claiming, they'd never complete a single
revolution.
Well, mghounem, as fun as this has all been, I'm afraid I've got more
interesting discussions to engage in. If you'd care to start supplying
citations and references for your bogus scientific claims, feel free. Until
then, asta la vista.
MGhounem
>_warmer_ as they approach the Sun.
and then ?
put your cheap geniric no frill soda on the oven and keep the temp on warm,
=eventually=, the can will catch on fire .
((Even if you previously had the can frozen in your freezer))
>The thing is, silly soda sipper, that space itself is very cold, because
>there
>is no air to trap heat.
too much dr. pepper got into your nose, your forgeting a thing in ((cold ice
making space)) called the sun .
put away your twirly straw collection with the rainbow colors and mickey mouse
at the end, return your no-frill soda and get back your 39 cents, and enjoy the
spring .
Peace