UFO story

[DeathofSpeech]

The earth's magnetic field is caused by a big metal ball spinning inside a liquid metal outer core.

Actually the magnetic field of Earth is caused by the convection of molten metal in the outer core. That is at least what I learned. Because of the changes in the convection of the molten metal in the core, we do have changes in the magnetic field and the polarity of the magnetic field of Earth. Evidence now shows that we are experiencing a change in the poles of the Earth and we know that this happened before. Is it possible that you can give me the source for your information?

Well I appear to be a little out of step on this one don't I?

^ "Rotation and magnetism of Earth's inner core", GA Glatzmaier and PH Roberts Science, 274, 1887-1891 1996

Convection as the cause and rotation as the mechanism that aligns the dipole... with allowance for the occasional observed instability.

 

[mirandansa]

No. This is one of the things i wanted experts to examine/debunk.

But you are unfairly shifting the burden of proof. There are thousands of wackos out there who all have demonstrably incorrect beliefs about lots of different things. Does it really make sense for experts in relevant fields to spend all of their time debunking these claims?

Not "all of their time", but some of their time. Isn't that what Dr. Ken Miller and YouTubers (DonExodus2, greenman3610, et al.) have been doing? I'm grateful to them for that.

I think that you need to take a long hard look at why you find this idea (black hole inside the sun) convincing in the first place.

I don't.

Do you believe it is evidence based?

I was not sure about its evidence and scientific status. That's why i threw in some videos for you people to watch and respond to.

Also, do you feel my "extraterrestrial conspiracy" analysis is accurate? Don't you have to believe that a race of vastly superior beings is intentionally attempting to deceive us?

:| Why should i?

 

[Nelson]

Do you believe it is evidence based?

I was not sure about its evidence and scientific status. That's why i threw in some videos for you people to watch and respond to.

But if you were truly pursuing an understanding of how the sun works, you could have started with something like this:

the proper place to begin

I find it highly unlikely that someone who is genuinely curious about the inner workings of stars would stumble upon this ridiculous idea of a black hole in the center of our sun on their path to understanding. This is why I asked you to analyze how you came to this idea in the first place, because I suspect it wasn't through a search for evidence based explanations.

Also, do you feel my "extraterrestrial conspiracy" analysis is accurate? Don't you have to believe that a race of vastly superior beings is intentionally attempting to deceive us?

:| Why should i?

Just to be clear, I meant this as in "If you believe the black hole idea, then don't you also have to believe this?" And if this is the case, then you should, because this seems to me to be a rather obvious implication. If you believe that there is a black hole at the center of the sun, despite the fact that our current understanding of stellar processes explains the appearance of the sun incredibly well, then you must assume that the outer surface of the sun is an intentional deception. The aliens who use this "gate" wish to keep it a secret and so they create it to appear like any other star. Does this not meet the criteria to be classified as a conspiracy?

Look, I'm not really trying to argue directly with you. It's not even clear to me how strongly you feel about this idea. I'm mainly trying to point out why, as soon as I heard of this concept, alarm bells started blaring in my head. This idea doesn't even make it past my first stage where I say, "Hmm that sounds interesting, perhaps I should investigate further."

 

[mirandansa]

I was not sure about its evidence and scientific status. That's why i threw in some videos for you people to watch and respond to.

But if you were truly pursuing an understanding of how the sun works, you could have started with something like this:

the proper place to begin

I knew the scientific consensus about the sun. What i wanted to know is what mainstream scientists could say about Haramein's idea.

I find it highly unlikely that someone who is genuinely curious about the inner workings of stars would stumble upon this ridiculous idea of a black hole in the center of our sun on their path to understanding. This is why I asked you to analyze how you came to this idea in the first place, because I suspect it wasn't through a search for evidence based explanations.

I had done research. That's how i found the blog posts debunking Haramein's Schwarzschild Proton model (the link to which i included in my initial post). But at the time i didn't find any debunking for his "black-hole sun" idea. Then i came across this thread, so i thought i could throw in my concern and heed responses.

Just to be clear, I meant this as in "If you believe the black hole idea, then don't you also have to believe this?" And if this is the case, then you should, because this seems to me to be a rather obvious implication. If you believe that there is a black hole at the center of the sun, despite the fact that our current understanding of stellar processes explains the appearance of the sun incredibly well, then you must assume that the outer surface of the sun is an intentional deception. The aliens who use this "gate" wish to keep it a secret and so they create it to appear like any other star. Does this not meet the criteria to be classified as a conspiracy?

I guess some could say that. But other uninformed folks could also say "That's how the sun naturally works: a black hole surrounded at a certain distance by thick layers of fire".

Look, I'm not really trying to argue directly with you. It's not even clear to me how strongly you feel about this idea. I'm mainly trying to point out why, as soon as I heard of this concept, alarm bells started blaring in my head. This idea doesn't even make it past my first stage where I say, "Hmm that sounds interesting, perhaps I should investigate further."

I wanted to be clear about this idea, and i wanted you people to address this idea without missing presumably crucial points of it, so i tried to do preliminary justice to Haramein by properly representing his idea rather than misrepresenting it. That's why i responded to you in the way that i did.


I don't understand. Why do people here think that if i ostensibly defend a position, that means i personally believe in that view? Cant' we discuss things just for the dialectics sake? This is something jericomovie and DasAmericanAtheist did a while ago, and i found it interesting:

 

[Ozymandyus]

Why exactly would aliens put big bright lights on the bottom of their spaceship, in wavelengths that are smack in the middle of what humans see best? They would have to be the dumbest aliens in the universe if they wanted to observe us without being seen and did it by coming down and shining big lights on us. And if they did want to be seen, they would land in central park. Just silliness. Are they not technologically advanced enough to look at something without shining a big light at it, is that the contention? Because if you can travel a few hundred lightyears through space, you can amplify ambient light or look at the infrared spectrum.

Even military aircraft for that matter would never have huge flood lights on the bottom of their supposedly top secret plane. It's just senseless. Still, military is theonly real possibility, but still, any kind of unmanned drone would have nightvision lenses and such, not gigantic floodlights.

 

[Commander Eagle]

I knew the scientific consensus about the sun. What i wanted to know is what mainstream scientists could say about Haramein's idea.

That it's batshit fucking insane.