superball

"How did they do that? with smoke and mirrors, flashy cards, and lots, and lots of assertion." Cheers, its time for tea...

Perhaps the red queen can explain it for you. The Red Queen's Hypothesis In reference to an evolutionary system, continuing adaptation is needed in order for a species to maintain its relative fitness amongst the systems being co-evolved with http://scholar.google.com/scholar?q=Gravitational+Lensing+effect+on+flux&hl=en&as_sdt=0&as_vis=1&oi=scholart cheers..

Greetings again. I will clear up these discrepancy's for you. I had never said in any of my posts that human involvement was not a contributing factor. Now we agree. I have not said the precession was the cause of expansion Solar energy interacting with the system, it must be moved higher on the list of cause and effect. Expansion is an effect of induction. You really don't want me to go there. How does a climatologist have any clue outside of there closed system analogy. Induction is explained by physics. co2 is a factor, I never said it wasn't. the only problem is the exclusion of well known principles, and the way you have gone about providing detailed information. I ask for a quantity of material entering from both sides nature and man made. provide that and we are getting somewhere. Hence the invention of a new field of study, and the new terminology related to global warming. ( The anthropogenic view point.) I will stand on the opposite side of that view point, because I will learn more from nature than man can ever explain. A valid interjection, because they have a category for there carbon tax agenda, and that is unscientific. There are other ways to include the solar factor without saying the sun is expanding. I already had said there is definite change on earth leading to increased radiation reaching the surface. In this case the sun did not need to change, solar rays have become more penetrating. If you really need an explanation for a trend, I suggest you play the stock market. Material goes up, it interacts, it expands, it contracts, it converts to other more dangerous gaseous material bla bla bla. If you need some type of proof of precession, then i will give you one, and only one proving once, and for all it is occurring. There will be a third great quake, the only way that is possible is for something to cause it. The date will be between mid January, and mid April 2012. If that is not a fact I will bow down, and say the co2 did it. Closest possible dates. Jan 17, Feb 16, March 23 April 17. Let see how a co2 chart can explain that. Maybe they can pull it out of there hat? Respectfully, seriously, jokingly. My attacks are on the model, and not the person stating them. cheers.

I bring your attention to the chart, climate change attribution you had posted. Looking at the lines on the graph, and its relation to model forcing. 1. The chart is for 2007, and is out dated, but ill say its a valid chart showing something, but what? The answer may not surprise you. The anthropogenic is a funny word, defined it means caused by humans: why not say human impact, not important. you may find it interesting. Back to the chart. A decline in volcanic eruptions in the last 30 years. what? You know as well as I do it has been increasing. The funny thing is it does not show a quantity, it is used as smoke, and mirrors. 2. Carbon dioxide is also one of the main volcanic contributors. The chart is not giving a quantity invalid. It also separates green house gasses from volcanoes rather then merging them. Again no quantity is given I cant say this enough. the production of gaseous material in the atmosphere begins to change under certain condition, that is due to the solar rays interaction, and it produces ozone. With that said, they simply include ozone in the chart with out providing a source for ozone production. If you say cars and human involvement I think I am going to shoot myself, and you can save your bullet. You may want to research how gaseous material interacts with sunlight, and what by product is produced. I stand by my previous statements, solar radiation it a main contributor to the effect you see, and the changes that are occurring. you simply cant hold back the damns any longer it will accelerate, ( therefore the human or anthropogenic) is negated.. http://quercus.igpp....etal_nat_00.pdf This PDF on co2. Let not argue about it any longer, if all the facts are not included, then all global warming models invalidate themselves, because of exclusion of certain well known principles. cheers. I am done editing, sorry. The problem we have is not disrespect, or ignorance it is related to methodology. Defined: Methodology is generally a guideline for solving a problem, with specific components such as phases, tasks, methods, techniques and tools. It can be defined as follows: "the analysis of the principles of methods, rules, and postulates employed by a discipline" "the systematic study of methods that are, can be, or have been applied within a discipline" the study or description of methods It is a scientific discipline, it is systematic, and is descriptive. If all information is not included for the reader, the reader finds there own valid Q. A. In order for that statement to be true, we must assume something. Some one had said in a response science looks for superior theory. That is nonsense, the sun also expands just like planets do. Today we have evidence it is in expansion mode. You may say what proof do you have? because we have a cause, The precession related to earths axis, and the external force that must cause it. Einstein described the three requirements for his premise. I will locate that document for your shortly. Einstein proposed three tests of general relativity, subsequently called the classical tests of general relativity, http://einstein.stanford.edu/SPACETIME/spacetime4.html This may not serve my point well, but my objections are relative to the observer. cheers. To answer this question you have assumed it has already been studied? Because any specific study in not included does not say it is less of a factor, and has already proposed. It may have been ignored. This goes back to the last response, Because a study in not included does not say it is less of a factor, and has already proposed. scientific methods, do not assume ignorance. That may be so, but 98% of 100 men does not mean even 10% of the world population accept it. http://www.logicalsc...s/consensus.htm No offense taken, i have not ignored your points at all, my approach was as an observer. I have weighed the information, and I simply interject that all the facts are included. Respectfully super-ball cheers.

I bring your attention to the chart, climate change attribution you had posted. Looking at the lines on the graph, and its relation to model forcing. 1. The chart is for 2007, and is out dated, but ill say its a valid chart showing something, but what? The answer may not surprise you. The anthropogenic is a funny word, defined it means caused by humans: why not say human impact, not important. you may find it interesting. Back to the chart. A decline in volcanic eruptions in the last 30 years. what? You know as well as I do it has been increasing. The funny thing is it does not show a quantity, it is used as smoke, and mirrors. 2. Carbon dioxide is also one of the main volcanic contributors. The chart is not giving a quantity, invalid. It also separates green house gasses from volcanoes rather then merging them. Again no quantity is given I cant say this enough. The production of gaseous material in the atmosphere begins to change under certain conditions, that is due to the solar rays interaction, and it produces ozone, but that is only one byproduct, there are many others that are just as harmful. With that said, they simply include ozone in the chart with out providing a source for ozone production. If you say cars and human involvement I think I am going to shoot myself, and you can save your bullet. You may want to research how gaseous material interacts with sunlight, and what by products are produced. I stand by my previous statements, solar radiation is a (main) contributor to the effects you see, and the changes that are occurring. Must be included. You simply cant hold back the damns any longer it will accelerate, ( therefore the human or anthropogenic) is negated.. http://quercus.igpp....etal_nat_00.pdf This PDF on co2. Lets not argue about it any longer, if all the facts are not included, then all global warming models invalidate themselves, because of exclusion of certain well known principles. Refer to previous post. cheers.

Greetings folks, this is an opportunity for you to include your observations, and possible outcomes for the near future. Predictions should follow the geologic, and climate change effects. Earthquakes, volcanic eruptions, whatever. If you predict an earth quake include the magnitude it should be at least a 6.0 or better. Location will be difficult to predict. If you predict a volcanic eruption, give the name of the volcano. this is not easy to do, you may say a major eruption will occur, and give a date or estimate. Serious predictions is best, not Michel Jackson ghost will come back and haunt the globe theater, Pull a rabbit out of your hat for science. White rabbit song. The magician does not tell his secrets, but in this case science does. Add predictions, because science loves to be right.

Every thing in nature, everything included in a system has a generating effect on another system. You might say mainstream global warming scientist look at a completely empty system, with no regard for all the facts, only including there axioms that blame The human race for any changes in that system. Radioactive material, and the inability to contain it is there fault not mine. They have destroyed vast quantity of land mass, leaving it uninhabitable for generations, leaving piles of spent fuel rods in land fills, leaving that material in a delicate system such as earth enters the atmosphere, ground water, and destroys all life. Every change leads to other changes. Simple these changes are accumulative, and the main cause of change in the system is not co2. That is all I have to say about that. You may wonder why most people call global warming BS, because they include what there feeble minds allow them to. They may have a theory fine, but it needs structure and not simple assertion. you know what i am saying, not the scientists fault they are only there to cover up what is implied by these changes. Cheers.

Excellent post, well planned, touche. No, I did not imply deforestation as the main cause, my only assertion was that it should have been considered. They exist side by side. You said, Generally, we see some release from the oceans during evaporation, and also volcanic eruptions. I asked why is the human a prime mover in comparison to release from oceans, and volcanoes. certainly not a negligible factor. Volume of gas can be measurable from either side, nature, or man made. Were is that chart? I see you had included a chart, but it definitly does not express current levels, or even take into account underwater releases that are genuinely unobserved. I simply say there is more coming from nature, and is not a negligible factor. Fine no measurable increase, even with that said it is an accumulative process, same as man. why would the idea be excluded, if co2 may be included? But there is definite change on earth leading to increased radiation reaching the surface. In this case the sun did not need to change, solar rays have become more penetrating. We definitely have two different mind sets. A good thing. I am very analytical in processing information. I tend to use my words as I intended for there use. Sorry if we crossed hemispheres. PS. what is your take on my ice age proposal? could you answer some of my questions i had asked? thank you. Friends? cheers. Every thing in nature, everything included in a system has a generating effect on another system. You might say mainstream global warming scientist look at a completely empty system, with no regard for all the facts, only including there axioms that blame The human race for any changes in that system. Radioactive material, and the inability to contain it is there fault not mine. They have destroyed vast quantity of land mass, leaving it uninhabitable for generations, leaving piles of spent fuel rods in land fills, leaving that material in a delicate system such as earth enters the atmosphere, ground water, and destroys all life. Every change leads to other changes. Simple these changes are accumulative, and the main cause of change in the system is not co2. That is all I have to say about that. You may wonder why most people call global warming BS, because they include what there feeble minds allow them to. They may have a theory fine, but it needs structure and not simple assertion. you know what i am saying, not the scientists fault they are only there to cover up what is implied by these changes. Cheers.

Greetings all, going out on a limb for gravity. If mass equals energy, and quantitatively energy can be derived from mass, and gravity is inherently derived from mass, is it safe to say material contains gravity as energy? Stepping on a bear trap now, if a graviton is a mass-less hypothetical particle, and has a tensor quantity to describe density, energy, and flux, could gravity actually be a particle of some size or mass? If it is spinning, then something must take the form of matter in order for it to spin. :blink:gravity wow. its spinning, its spinning, are you getting dizzy? jokingly super-ball.

Did heavy deforestation start just around the same time climate record keeping started? smile. The only thing we should say is they coenside with the time line. a little more 100 years. why would the idea be excluded, if co2 may be included? lol don't answer that.. Look how much damage can be done in as few as 10 years. http://en.wikipedia....ation_in_Borneo There was certainly more demand in the last hundred years for lumber, most of very good size benefiting the system. I agree short term a balance may not be found, but we have composites that may be used as a replacement. carbon fiber, smile. The production of solid carbon composites is a good place to start focusing on the future, even a practical way to help clean the environment. Extracting the carbon from solution or the environment.. You say a temperature trend is indisputably the primary explanation, and is caused by humans, but were is your evidence of that? How do you see some release from oceans, and volcanoes as being the negligible factor? This link states otherwise. http://pubs.usgs.gov...2/of97-262.html A single volcanic eruption may produce a huge quantity of carbon dioxide, sulfur, other, also water vapor is the number one release into the atmosphere. If co2 is not necessarily related, then why does mainstream always include it? Was this another assumption? I do like your take on using greener technologies. I agree oceanic temperatures plays a major roll considering the earth is close to 70%. Please explain how this gaseous material co2 can shift the currents, is there some strong force we are dealing with? I would be more happy if you had said the solar warmth reaching the oceans, cause heating, and change. Thanks for your previous post, I hope I do not complicate things any more than I had intended too. Smile Respectfully superball.

Even if there was one billion different particles It would still be possible to categorize them perhaps into 4 or less parts? Perhaps like this, particles are divided into 2 piles. positive charge particles, and negative. Below, or above the plane of enlightenment. If we found negative mass particles, and they are called anti particles they would still have there anti particle negative, or positive charges, in the negative reality scene, below the plane of enlightenment. speculation of course, but perhaps... respectfully super ball.

Its a very interesting array of mirror reflectors, and the salt solutions after they become molten has insulation properties,for heat retention. The problem I see is it is very inefficient designed. Research, and development was key in getting this idea off the ground, but the concept is still a good one. I would use sunlight, steam power, and the power of hydrogen, and oxygen as the fuel to sustain the energy in the system. 1. by a process of super-heating steam for generators. 2. by the use of natural light sources processing superheated steam to its constitute parts even further for use as fuel.. 3. by the absorption, and reflective spectrum energies of natural sunlight by acting higher the energy vacuum electron energies, and emissions of the same. There is some other very key concepts that validate this idea. I hope it is ok to cut, and paste the information for your review. I cant find the link, here is the hard copy. Absolute Proof that Operational COP>1.0 EM Systems Are Possible and Eventually Practical Brody, Herb. Victor Klimov in Los Alamos National Laboratory in New Mexico has constructed a solar cell which can absorb the light of a specific wave length in such a way, that one photon can energize more than one electron. As soon as the electron absorbs a photon, it disappears for a very short moment into the quantum field. Being in the virtual state the electron can borrow energy from the vacuum and thereafter appears again in our reality. Now the electron can energize up to 7 other electrons. This leads to a theoretical coefficient of performance (COP) of 700%. A COP = 200% can be readily achieved and it has been. The experiment has also been replicated successfully by the National Renewable Energy Laboratory in Golden Colorado. [Herb Brody, "Solar Power - Seriously Souped Up." New Scientist, May 27, 2006, p 45]. Quoting: "Make solar cells as small as a molecule; and you get more than you bargained for. Could this be the route to limitless clean power?"]. modnote: deletia AFAICT the entirety of the remainder of the material (now deleted) is located here: http://www.cheniere.org/correspondence/100608.htm

Greetings all, I had some interesting concerns, and would like your take on the validity of human life evolving into DNA strings that eventually will include silicon. Is there a possibility of human evolution incorporating silicon, or crystalline silicon DNA strings? Can evolution of man also incorporate crystallizing carbon strings as well ? Respectfully, superball.

Author notes, and topics open for review. Greetings all, I have outlined key factors, that separate this model from main stream science. I would like to validate any responses to this topic. when dealing with terminology, it was stated many factors mainstream claimed may have been overlooked, ignored, assumed, and misleading. This is open for discussion. It was said facts stated in this model do not fit in with current understanding on the subject. Have the virtues of science been ignored, along with the process, and steps necessary for functionality of a working model been distorted over the years? This is open for discussion. All assumptions have been eliminated. The major relations dealing with cause, and effect have been determined, and demonstrated. This followed by answering the questions that make valid relations, rather then assumptions that science can not account for. Self-evident or to define and delimit the realm of analysis. In other words, an axiom is a logical statement that is assumed to be true. Therefore, its truth is taken for granted, and serves as a starting point for deducing and inferring other (theory dependent) truths. basic, foundational proposition or assumption that cannot be deduced from any other proposition, or assumption. Was it this model that has taken for granted self evident processes, and delimit the realm of analysis, or has main stream confounded the situation, because they lost there way by not following self evident principles, and observation? This is open for discussion. Author notes. Modern scientists have lost sight of these simple truths, and have polluted a valid working model to the point of dis-functionality. A fresh start is the best way to solve these issues, listing cause, and effect on a scale of importance, by its own merit, and not by adding impertinent factors, that ask for assumptions based uncertainty. I hope you have learned as much as I have dealing with this subject, and its leading role for past, present, and future understanding, predictions, and interpretations. I have enjoyed providing,and addressing all concerns. Thank you for all your positive feed back. Respectfully superball.

In one way its closed, in another it is open. refer to auroras, it is a result of an external force. A CME does cause induction of that energy into the ionosphere, that energy can indeed reach the surface as electric charge. I said it was closed, because I was relating to the atmosphere, assuming it did not leak into outer-space, but in reality it can. I vote open technically. I include both perspectives

What leads you to the assumption relative matter gain, or losses are negligible? A common mistake. yes the system is changing quickly, a body in motion remains in motion. In this case the changing circulation patterns, oceanic tides, or king tides if you like. A bubble on the level only takes the slightest movements to cause a shift. On a global scale cold air circulation from the southern hemisphere will produce immediate effects in the form of powerful storms. The changes are related to today, and is valid for future outcomes. The tipping point, or plane of equality has already been found to have changed, by the balance on the scale. Linking a further assumptions is another mistake.

Final. "Terminology of definitions, context : in traditional logic, an axiom or postulate is a proposition that is not proven or demonstrated but considered either to be self-evident or to define and delimit the realm of analysis. In other words, an axiom is a logical statement that is assumed to be true. Therefore, its truth is taken for granted, and serves as a starting point for deducing and inferring other (theory dependent) truths. basic, foundational proposition or assumption that cannot be deduced from any other proposition, or assumption. to be the cause of; bring about. A person, or thing that acts, happens, or exists in such a way that some specific thing happens as a result; the producer of an effect: " Background for reader. Science has been looking for evidence that explain what chain of events, or factors play a major role in predicting cataclysmic events in the past, present, and future. Making past assumptions leads to debate, a major problem for modern theoretical advancements, and the difficulty researchers have addressing these issues. My goal : By taking certain considerations, and factors into account paving the way for new viable study dealing with past, present, and future crisis of the environment. With the flurry of data entering the debate, certain real factors may have been ignored, or misunderstood in recent years, leading to false, or misleading outcomes. The reader is stuck in the middle of this debate, asking more questions than having answers provided. In light of the moon, Bruce Lee said, "don't focus on the finger, or you will miss all that heavenly glory." I have chosen the date Jan 29, 2010 to begin this study. Why? Because it was then certain information had come to light relating to the events that follow. I bring your attention to the first wolf moon in 20 years. smiling at Bruce. The event may have not been all that memorable to the reader, but it was for me. What occurred shortly thereafter was something incredible indeed. After turning my attention away from the moon I observed the sun in its relation out of curiosity for the event. I had discovered the sun was in a process of change, that change was the beginning of a new solar cycle. (solar cycle 24) A process that will be the most memorable event for the rest of my life. After I had observed this process for the next 5 to 7 days I had confirmed that a new solar cycle had begun. shortly after it was also confirmed by leading scientists of the day. The next observation lead me to focus on the effects this change could have on the planet earth, and that is just what i did. I now had 3 factors to keep a close eye on. Each new factor was leading to other factors with a higher, and higher degree of probable outcomes. (cause, and effect chain.) 1. The sun. solar rotational periods. 2. The moon. lunar periods of change. 3. The planet earth, and all the effects relate to these changes. The first real results came as a series of powerful earthquakes. Unaware at the time of the historical implications of the Jan 17, 2010 Haiti earthquake, occurring just prior to the start of solar cycle 24. I had considered all may have been by coincidence, and my attention was now on the The Vernal Equinox. A time when the Sun reaches the balancing point in its path through the tropical zodiac, when the length of the day is equal to the length of the night. It marks the beginning of the new astrological year, (the new age) The dawning of the age of Aquarius. It was my belief at the time Feb 16, 2010 marked Equinox, sweet 16. I also confirmed it had occurred in a specific location on the planet looking at astronomical charts. If you like a good mystery like I do, check out the coral castle By Edward Leedskalnin. My focus is on the stars, I had observed something special. Jupiter aligns with mars, and the moon enters the seventh house. looking from the northern hemisphere to the west. One pill will make you grow, one pill will make you small. (feeding your head) I had expanded my mind. Smile. These are the true observations I had made. I scrabbled for more information in astronomy, solar cycles, lunar cycles, Earth cycles, and precession. I found what I was looking for, unknowing what would lead to the next change, and cause of events that would follow. I had found MIT lectures By X-ray Astronomer Walter Lewin, and proceeded to watch them all, over the next several months. 801, 802, and 803 lectures, as a refresher to my major. 11 days later, Feb 27, 2010 Great quake of chili happened. I thought could this have any relation to this special time, and are these effects directly related? Focusing now on Earth weather patterns, cloud cover, and the circulation within our atmosphere. I observed closely, and intently for the last couple of years. What had occurred next was another astonishing effect, seemingly there was a hick-up in the direction of circulation within the system. Storms had spawned quickly after the Great quake, and I was like, another coincidence? I started questioning my motives to find a solution to these effects. What would be revealed to me over the course of the next year could not be caused by the sun alone. Prior to this i began predicting powerful earthquakes accurately, and immediately began to understand the true meaning of climatology. storms would spawn, cyclones, tornadoes, and even hail in diverse places on earth. Another coincidence i said? questioning my sanity, my mind suddenly ruptured into a volcano of information from my observations. I made several conclusions, and these conclusions were short lived, until I discovered the induction factor. Induction you may say? Yes, at this point several volcanoes began to erupt within a short period of time, and had to understand this better for my own research purposes, and knowledge. I found part of the answer. Induction, something was causing the Earths core to expand I said. On the next new moon, another eruption had occurred, and for a period of time, about 3 months the eruptions had stopped. This is very odd, I was convinced science could explain these immediate effects, and by 2011 I had used all the information I had gained, and applied it with present day predictions. Looking always for a cause, and effect, I had discovered a short time period of about 13 days before a major event, and they did occur as expected. This was in relation to earthquakes, so i made it my goal to prove there was no way this is a coincidence. I would set as a minimum magnitude that could not be only by chance. 6.4 was the norm for these time variable events, and then i demonstrated to many of my friends who are extremely skeptical with ease. I raised the bar once again, I had set the limits of reportable magnitude to at least 7.0. with The same outcome. I even had the March 11 2011 quake predicted to 24 hours. That is strange indeed. hold on to your pants for part 2 Prior to the March 11 2011 quake, I was looking for variables, I was also expecting the first results relating to strong quakes by February 16 2010, although it may have been subtle, or a overlooked effect at 6.4 , taking place in the same region in Japan. This as a signal of effects I had thought, a pair of events would signal the predicted outcomes following part one. 4. Induction factor related to expansion periods during the time frame proposed, 2 years. this can be extended 2 more years taken what was learned. 5. Angular momentum, or earth rotational speed that is under change, relating to the circulation of air flow in the system. 6. Oceanic tidal surges, and there specific location to the rotational center of mass of the given body. accompanied by marine life loosing the ability to navigate by instinct. Even other magnetic variations in the system, causing airplanes to miss runways wile trying to land, and crash. leading to the recalibration of airport automatic safe guards that use the earths magnetic field. 7. A genuine gravitational lensing effect, and an increase in uv bursts, magnetic flux, or pressure, (casimir effect) coronal mass ejections, solar flairs, and solar winds interacting with the earths ionosphere. (Auroras) leading to ozone production, and the rarefaction of our atmosphere. 8. concluding with the continued effects, time lines, and progressive events. All of these factors were found to be related to cause, these are the major determining predictable factors that validate this model wile at the same time excluding less known causes such as an increase of co2 levels in the system, the continued reduction of Antarctic ozone levels, or the depletion of the rain forests. even by excluding all man made flora carbons of the last 100 years, What relations, or assumptions have you made by reading about my progress? What may have been the author inner meaning, when referring to the analogy of the door mouse, when he said feed your head? One pill will make you grow, one pill will make you small. Feeding your head I had expanded my mind. The twist is in the traits of the species. The doors that are enshrouded, are now open. The sleepy mouse comes out to play. What may have been implied by the rabbit from a hat? That a magician does not reveal his secrets, but in this case science does. I will include any other research and advancements if requested. I thank you for your time. looking forward to your reviews. respectfully, superball. http://news.national...moon-2010-mars/ http://science.nasa....6mar_supermoon/ http://science.nasa....ep_harvestmoon/ http://dundalk.patch...-rising-tonight http://www.examiner....ight-january-29

There was a reason I had included it.

In one way its closed, in another it is open. refer to auroras, it is a result of an external force. A CME does cause induction of that energy into the ionosphere, that energy can indeed reach the surface as electric charge. I said it was closed, because I was relating to the atmosphere, assuming it did not leak into outer-space, but in reality it can. I vote open. 1 for open technically. I would include both perspectives in your report. Good poll.

Guys, my short paragraphs have turned into a short story. before you read on, understand I am giving account for my progress, and cause chain. If anything at all is true, I hope at least you will enjoy reading part 1. (one) I need a break.. Background for reader. Science has been looking for evidence that explain what chain of events, or factors play a major role in predicting cataclysmic events in the past, present, and future. Making past assumptions leads to debate, a major problem for modern theoretical advancements, and the difficulty researchers have addressing these issues. My goal : By taking certain considerations, and factors into account paving the way for new viable study's dealing with past, present, and future crisis of the environment. With the flurry of data entering the debate, certain real factors may have been ignored, or misunderstood in recent years, leading to false, or misleading outcomes. The reader is stuck in the middle of this debate, asking more questions, than having answers provided. In light of the moon, Bruce Lee said, "don't focus on the finger, or you will miss all that heavenly glory." I have chosen the date Jan 29, 2010 to begin this study. Why? Because it was then certain information had come to light relating to the events that follow. I bring your attention to the first wolf moon in 20 years. smiling at Bruce. The event may have not been all that memorable to the reader, but it was for me. What occurred shortly thereafter was something incredible indeed. After turning my attention away from the moon I observed the sun in its relation out of curiosity for the event. I had discovered the sun was in a process of change, that change was the beginning of a new solar cycle. (solar cycle 24) A process that will be the most memorable event for the rest of my life. After I had observed this process for the next 5 to 7 days I had confirmed that a new solar cycle had begun. shortly after it was also confirmed by leading scientists of the day. The next observation lead me to focus on the effects this change could have on the planet earth, and that is just what i did. I now had 3 factors to keep a close eye on. Each new factor was leading to other factors with a higher, and higher degree of probable outcomes. (cause, and effect chain.) 1. The sun. solar rotational periods. 2. The moon. lunar periods of change. 3. The planet earth, and all the effects relate to these changes. The first real results came as a series of powerful earthquakes. Unaware at the time of the historical implications of the Jan 17, 2010 Haiti earthquake, occurring just prior to the start of solar cycle 24. I had considered all may have been by coincidence, and my attention was now on the The Vernal Equinox. A time when the Sun reaches the balancing point in its path through the tropical zodiac, when the length of the day is equal to the length of the night. It marks the beginning of the new astrological year, (the new age) The dawning of the age of Aquarius. It was my belief at the time Feb 16, 2010 marked Equinox, sweet 16. I also confirmed it had occurred in a specific location on the planet looking at astronomical charts. If you like a good mystery like I do, check out the coral castle By Ed Lee for a good read. My focus is on the stars, I had observed something special. Jupiter aligns with mars, and the moon enters the seventh house. looking from the northern hemisphere to the west. One pill will make you grow, one pill will make you small. (feeding your head) I had expanded my mind. Smile. These are the true observations I had made. I scrabbled for more information in astronomy, solar cycles, lunar cycles, Earth cycles, and precession. I found what I was looking for, unknowing what would lead to the next change, and cause of events that would follow. I had found MIT lectures By X-ray Astronomer Walter Lewin, and proceeded to watch them all, over the next several months. 801, 802, and 803 lectures, as a refresher to my major. 11 days later, Feb 27, 2010 Great quake of chili happened. I thought could this have any relation to this special time, and are these effects directly related? Focusing now on Earth weather patterns, cloud cover, and the circulation within our atmosphere. I observed closely, and intently for the last couple of years. What had occurred next was another astonishing effect, seemingly there was a hick-up in the direction of circulation within the system. Storms had spawned quickly after the Great quake, and I was like, another coincidence? I started questioning my motives to find a solution to these effects. What would be revealed to me over the course of the next year could not be caused by the sun alone. Prior to this i began predicting powerful earthquakes accurately, and immediately began to understand the true meaning of climatology. storms would spawn, cyclones, tornadoes, and even hail in diverse places on earth. Another coincidence i said? questioning my sanity, my mind suddenly ruptured into a volcano of information from my observations. I made several conclusions, and these conclusions were short lived, until I discovered the induction factor. Induction you may say? Yes, at this point several volcanoes began to erupt within a short period of time, and had to understand this better for my own research purposes, and knowledge. I found part of the answer. Induction, something was causing the Earths core to expand I said. On the next new moon, another eruption had occurred, and for a period of time, about 3 months the eruptions had stopped. This is very odd, I was convinced science could explain these immediate effects, and by 2011 I had used all the information I had gained, and applied it with present day predictions. Looking always for a cause, and effect, I had discovered a short time period of about 13 days before a major event, and they did occur as expected. This was in relation to earthquakes, so i made it my goal to prove there was no way this is a coincidence. I would set as a minimum magnitude that could not be only by chance. 6.4 was the norm for these time variable events, and then i demonstrated to many of my friends who are extremely skeptical with ease. I raised the bar once again, I had set the limits of reportable magnitude to at least 7.0. with The same outcome. I even had the March 11 2011 quake predicted to 24 hours. That is strange indeed. hold on to your pants for part 2.

I am very sorry if I had not given you the proper answer to your question, I thought it to be self explanatory. My thesis is: Q: "What are the potential causes, and effects for Global changes. Such as changes in a closed system leading to the dawning of Ice age periods in the future, or past periods of the same? A: " That at least one cause, or a string of causes may explain to a high degree, specific outcomes in relation to past, future, and present periods of climate change through observation, and historical study of the same. I will add the paragraphs you asked for in the chain of events shortly. Thank you for your help, respectfully superball.

I accept your terms. I hope you will accept mine as well. "Terminology of definitions, context : in traditional logic, an axiom or postulate is a proposition that is not proven or demonstrated but considered either to be self-evident or to define and delimit the realm of analysis. In other words, an axiom is a logical statement that is assumed to be true. Therefore, its truth is taken for granted, and serves as a starting point for deducing and inferring other (theory dependent) truths. basic, foundational proposition or assumption that cannot be deduced from any other proposition, or assumption. to be the cause of; bring about. A person, or thing that acts, happens, or exists in such a way that some specific thing happens as a result; the producer of an effect: " Greetings all, this is a challenge, I am willing to provide in conclusion how I was able to deduce this model, and the ability of it to be self evident, if you had the first determining factor, or cause in a chain of events, future predictions are possible. Don't get all technical on me guys with terminology. Simply a string of causes, and out comes that should be self evident. In light of the moon, Bruce Lee said, "don't focus on the finger, or you will miss all that heavenly glory." Smile. A recent chain of events with predictable outcomes. The model is valid if the main concept that was used to provide some, but not all of the most likely outcomes. same is true for global warming theory. Starting with the extinction of the dinosaurs, what was the main cause for there disappearance? We do not have the single cause, even though scientists have been postulating for many many years. Observation in my opinion is Key to this model. A logical statement can be a large meteorite, volcanic eruption on a global scale, or an ice age had caused it. Although it was not observed by modern man the most probable reason was some cataclysmic event. This still cant be 100% proof of cause. With that said I will lay the foundation of what can be observed today. Start date January 29th 2010:

Perhaps light can change speed under certain conditions. http://news.harvard.edu/gazette/2001/01.24/01-stoplight.html white rabbit. cheers.

Excellent information there, thank you for elaborating. Now that brings me to another question. Maybe science had it wrong, just kidding? >space time fabric=space time waters.< If that was the case we could use fluid dynamics, or a manifestation of continuum mechanics to describe the universe? A little bird told me so. Again just kidding? Sorry, I went off on a tangent. The real question, or magic unfolds from the effects of the black hole, were jets of high energy particles and material are sent out from the black hole, (perpendicular do the disk) expelling them perhaps faster then light, forming the new pockets of nebula moving at a high rate of speed. Given time the energy(material) would slow (condense), and rest to a degree forming new galaxy's that appear to be moving away from the observer. Red shift? I'm happy with that. (Top jet to form a positive attracting galaxy, bottom jet a negative charge repelling galaxy.) following the inverse-square law of course. What do you think? Again sorry if I am off on a tangent.