1 posted on
01/01/2004 9:49:41 AM PST by
blam
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-20, 21-39 next last
To: blam
Hmmm ... must be a slow news day huh?
2 posted on
01/01/2004 9:52:59 AM PST by
_Jim
( <--- Ann Coulter speaks on gutless Liberals (RealAudio files))
To: blam
"Magnetic loss of earth increases under Bush Presidency"
"Wes Clark introduces 8 point plan to restore Magnetism"
To: blam
I want to be the first to say it:
"It's George Bush's fault" :o)
To: blam
Magnetism is not as attractive as it used to be.
5 posted on
01/01/2004 9:56:26 AM PST by
Consort
To: blam
This is more proof that we should pass Kyoto and not eat at McDonald's. And stop the disparity between rich and poor nations, which causes this imbalance. This might also be caused by all the bombs being dropped in Afghanistan and Iraq on babies.
6 posted on
01/01/2004 9:57:36 AM PST by
Koblenz
(There's usually a free market solution)
To: blam
Dammit!! I was beaten by 1 minute 45 seconds!!!
...and also beaten by someone with a funnier line!
To: blam
At the current rate of decline it would take 1,500 to 2,000 years to disappear. I can hardly wait.
8 posted on
01/01/2004 10:02:04 AM PST by
curmudgeonII
(In the interim perhaps I could read some of the speeches of Al Gore.)
To: blam
Is this why I'm having to wrap my feet around my computer chair to keep from smacking into the ceiling?
To: blam
No wonder I can jump higher.
And the scale says I lost 20 pounds also!
To: blam
This would give animals which use the magnetic field for navigation, such as some birds, turtles and bees, time to reorient themselves.
If I recall my college courses correctly, this theory was discounted in the 50's.
It would be shocking if the magnetic fields stayed exactly the same over the years. (Same goes for the global temperature, sea levels, rain patterns, CO2 levels ...) If the magnetic fields were increasing we would be reading an article about how dangerous this is.
14 posted on
01/01/2004 10:08:54 AM PST by
gitmo
(Who is John Galt?)
To: blam
The heat of the solid inner core keeps the molten cocktail of nickel and iron churning in the outer core, which generates a magnetic field.Something about that doesn't make sense to me. Simply moving a metallic substance around and around shouldn't be able to generate a magnetic field, unless the substance is charged for some reason. But what would be causing it to be charged, and where's the balance of the charge gone to?
15 posted on
01/01/2004 10:10:18 AM PST by
inquest
(The only problem with partisanship is that it leads to bipartisanship)
To: blam
"If we had the equivalent of a space probe that went into the core and made measurements for us, that would tell us a tremendous amount," said Dr Bloxham. Hollywood may be able to do these things, but we can't." Rule number one in the serach for legitimacy:
Anytime one makes even a passing reference to the movie "The Core" no matter if it was a lame attempt to insert humor into the article by way of a disparaging remark, has not only failed but should now and forever be banned from any position of responsibility higher than say professional dog curber.
16 posted on
01/01/2004 10:12:53 AM PST by
Mad Dawgg
(French: old Europe word meaning surrender)
To: blam; RadioAstronomer
Some interesting science threads lately.
18 posted on
01/01/2004 10:15:42 AM PST by
farmfriend
( Isaiah 55:10,11)
To: blam
And they would certainly not threaten life on Earth as they do in science fiction. Although there would be extra radiation exposure to satellites and some airplanes, there would also be enough of a residual field to provide protection to people, and certainly no more radiation than what is observed at the poles, where the field lines currently dip.[snip]
This would give animals which use the magnetic field for navigation, such as some birds, turtles and bees, time to reorient themselves.
"They'd go through many generations in the period in which the field was entering the phase of reversal," said Dr Bloxham. "Presumably they would learn new behaviour patterns to accommodate it."
Anyone else find it very interesting how the scientists are so blase about these environmental changes, when they're naturally (though completely haphazardly) occurring, but if man were to cause these exact same changes, there'd be no end to the gloom and doom we'd be hearing?
19 posted on
01/01/2004 10:15:49 AM PST by
inquest
(The only problem with partisanship is that it leads to bipartisanship)
To: blam
How did a woolly mammoth freeze with tropical flowers in his mouth and stomach?
To: blam
Just saw Howard Dean Speak about this on a morning show His Blue ribbon panel has already been working on this they found that It is the recent increase in refrigartor magnets use
21 posted on
01/01/2004 10:18:22 AM PST by
al baby
(Ice cream does not have bones)
To: blam
Wow, just about the same time as increased solar flare activity. Interesting coincidence.
22 posted on
01/01/2004 10:25:59 AM PST by
dr_who_2
To: blam
I have 15 magnets on my 'fridge.
23 posted on
01/01/2004 10:26:25 AM PST by
muleskinner
("Oh, please")
To: blam
Earth's magnetic field is fading I knew something felt different.
25 posted on
01/01/2004 10:27:53 AM PST by
boycott
To: blam
Tom Daschle is deeply saddened.
26 posted on
01/01/2004 10:28:54 AM PST by
freedumb2003
(Peace through Strength)
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-20, 21-39 next last
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson