I understand that you have claimed since maybe 2005 that there are iron mountain ranges on the surface of the Sun.
False. That's a great example your highly unethical habit of sticking false words in my mouth, just like you stick false words in Scott's mouth and Thornhill's mouth about their neutrino predictions. I have in fact used the term 'mountain ranges' on my website but I have never used the term "iron mountain ranges". Do you ever tell the truth?
That is ~5700 K where iron not even a liquid!
That's another great example of you misrepresenting my statements and the model on my website. Did you bother to notice that the blue corona in that video is hotter than the cathode surface? The layers of the sun get progressively cooler as we move inward from the outer million degree corona, to the inner chromosphere, to the cooler photosphere and eventually to the electrode in *any* EU/PC model, including Birkeland's cathode model. There are additional double layers in the cathode model on my website and the lowest layer is closer to 1200K, not 5800K. You've *never* accurately quoted me, or listened to anything I've said. Your behaviors and statements are unethical misrepresentations of my statements, just like you misrepresented Thornhill's neutrino predictions in his solar model. Do you ever tell the truth?
What is worse you use images of plasma at temperatures > 160,000K to support the fantasy.
The fantasy is your false claim about those 160,000+ degree coronal loops being indicative of the surface temperature of any double layer in a cathode solar model. It's a fantasy of yours that the blue regions of that corona in that video are the same temperature as the cathode.
Since your convection predictions were shown to be off by two whole orders of magnitude you have no evidence that iron and nickel stay mixed together with hydrogen and helium. The double layers are mass separated in the model on my website yet you continuously try to use *falsified* (by SDO) mainstream claims to apply to my model. More unethical nonsense on your part.
I will ignore ignorant and irrelevant fantasies about a "falsified" solar model which does not leave much.
Speaking of falsified solar models, when were you intending to fix your fantasy about fast convection and fix your broken solar model?
Weak solar convection – approximately 100 times slower than scientists had previously projected
The persistent "image of the surface" fantasy about the
Transition Region and Coronal Explorer which took images of a solar flare on August 28, 2000. The images are of a flare starting at many kilometers above the photosphere.
The flare itself is indeed occurring above the surface of the photosphere in that video, but magnetic ropes start *under* the surface of the photosphere, and not all magnetic ropes are large enough to rise out of the photosphere.
This has been explained many times before.
I've also explained my model to you many times before, but that hasn't stopped you from misrepresenting it anymore than your nonsense about any EU/PC solar model predicting "no neutrinos". You constantly and consistently misrepresent EU/PC solar models *plural*. Your lack of ethics is legendary and appalling.
The filter that took those images only allows light thru from plasma > 160,000 K. That happens above the photosphere.
So what? I've never disputed that the light sources themselves are in some case *millions* of degrees, not just 160,000. You keep misrepresenting that issue as well. I don't think you even know how to tell the truth.
Irrelevant discharges fantasies when
solar flares are all observed to happen above the surface of the Sun (solar flare) !
No, *all* magnetic ropes are not observed to occur only above the surface of the photosphere. Not all magnetic ropes even result in solar flares in the first place!
No expectation of an answer given ~9 years of parroting his fantasies but just in case:
I've answered all of your questions *dozens* of times before on many forums including this one, and you simply ignore my answers, unethically make up your own answers, and then repeat the same questions over and over again. It's your unethical gish-gallop routine running amuck.
I'll repeat again that sunspot umbras are *routinely* measured to be *thousands* of degrees cooler than the surface of the photosphere, just like the surface of the photosphere is *thousands* of degrees cooler than the chromosphere, and the chromosphere is thousands of degrees cooler than the corona. There are simply additional non-opaque layers in my model which are cooler than the photosphere. When are you going to acknowledge that difference between the model on my website and the standard (and now falsified) solar model?
1 March 2018 Michael: Cite the scientific literature that states that
solar flares happen below or on the surface of the sun.
For the *millionth* time, I didn't say that in the first place! Quit unethically putting false words in my mouth. I have only stated that *magnetic ropes* (not solar flares) happen below the surface of the photosphere. Get it right this time or I'll simply point out your continuous stream of lies.
In fact pretty much every following comment that you made is a blatant misrepresentation of my statements, but that's the whole point of your gish gallop nonsense. You misrepresent my statement and my model over and over and over again.
It's simply amazing that you show up here every year or two and dig up the same threads and repeat the same lies over and over and over again and put the same false words in my mouth. Do you have any ethics at all?