Re: ZetaBabble [tm]
In Article <email@example.com> Jim Scotti wrote:
> I'm sure she'll come up with some sort of scam and excuse to
> convince herself and her suckers that doomsday is still next
Running off so SOON, Jim! Just as the tough questions and logic
discrepancies were closing in! Predictable. You did that LAST time.
>> See: 1998 sci.astro Debates (http://www.zetatalk.com/usenet/use00685.htm)
Which 1998 post during the LAST debate with Jim Scotti (who ran then and
is STILL frantically looking for the door), contained:
Subject: Re: Challenge to Jim Scotti
Date: 5 Jun 1998 15:05:44 GMT
In article <firstname.lastname@example.org> Eric George writes:
>> Do you satellites fly off into space, when going at faster
> circular orbit velocity is: V = C/P = sqrt(G*Me/a) ... So yes,
> geosync satellites do go faster then the moon, they are much
You are granting yourself an excape clause, so that you NEVER have to
address the factors you are plugging into your formulas. Your inverse
square law states quite plainly that the force of gravity between the
Earth and Moon is less than the full surface weight of the Moon, but
nevertheless can be calculated. What you have, then is the Moon at its
distance EQUATING to a lesser weight if on the surface! What is
"weight" if not the force of gravity in operation?
The exercise we went through established that the Moon, at its current
distance, is EQUIVALENT to a body weighing several million trillion
metric tons at the surface of the earth, while only orbiting at a speed
of 1023 m/s. Please address that without frantically looking for the
Last week, in article <email@example.com> The Zetas
> The theatre of the absurd is about to open.
And it has!
> Jim Scotti
> Lunar & Planetary Laboratory firstname.lastname@example.org
> University of Arizona
> Tucson, AZ 85721 USA http://www.lpl.arizona.edu/~jscotti/