Acme

At the risk of being snotty, we do in fact know. Galileo he ain't. Edit: Addendum: Following up on Galileo, ignoring evidence in favor of magic, and snottiness, I will point out that it is I in fact in this circumstance that shares characteristics with the man. You see Galileo got house arrest in good part not just for pointing out factual errors of the church, but for mocking the church's position in his book Dialogue Concerning the Two Chief World Systems. Therein, Galileo casts un-critical thinkers as the character Simplicito, a double entendre for simple minded. So I'm in good company and take my red card as a mark of it.

The harm insofar as science and the forum goes is in ignoring evidence and opting for bullshit. My thoughts are as well grounded as my peas, squashes, tomatoes, jalapeños, spinach and radishes which are already up and enjoying the Sun. How gracious of you.

Seems clear enough to me that your mind was made up before you started the thread, so I have to ask why did you even bother us with the idea? Something has been manured I'll have to agree.

Addendum: Intuited the smiley, & forgot the Agricultural astrology. Indeed the magic experiment has gone apace for thousands of years and not merely hundreds, and at least in the Northern hemisphere one may assume predominately under the sign of the ram. Agricultural astrology

And lo, the din has not diminished, it has grown. Biodynamic agriculture

Seems to me the 'experiment' has been running for a few hundred years and the din has not appreciably decreased. I agree that if Ant wants to try, he certainly may.

Which leaves you et al with your faith, which is not evidence, and therefore does not belong in this thread.

Edgar Cayce Welcome home Atlanteans. PS You say "Edgar Cayce has given (195-70, 10)", but you do not give a link or other direction to your source. Please give us the reference information we need to evaluate your assertion.

Speaking of history, I had an exciting discovery in the garden today. (You Brits may get a kick out of this. ) So last Fall the grandkids came home with a cutting from a ~180 year old apple tree that is still growing in my village. In spite of the late season I dipped it in some rooting hormone and stuck it in a pot to show them how cuttings are reared. I didn't have much hope for it but lo and behold it's alive!! The apples are small, green, & bitter and suitable for pie & cider. "'Old Apple Tree', Vancouver, Washington"

Which, yet again, does not meet the criteria Ten oz has asked for. The scroll is by an unknown author and written centuries after Jesus [is said to have] lived.

It's not that it's not worth investigating for someone, it's just not worth me doing it. The study results I ran across are rather inconclusive and one would think that for as long as this 'urban legend' has been floating around if there were any great gain to be had then people would be all over it. For Ant or any 'small' gardener to have a reliable test they would have to plant controls right alongside the moon units, and while he may have the space, I don't. By all means have at it & report back. I just got in from planting 2 rows of carrots on the day after the first quarter moon. I expect in a few months I will have carrots. . Addendum: Moreover, do large commercial farms make it a point to plant on Full Moons? Do extension services recommend it? Do you overlook all other planting cues/circumstances and wait 3+ weeks for the next Full Moon? When do you plant controls? New Moon? First quarter? Third quarter? Other? Every day?

You're welcome and you're welcome. As to the experimenting, it's all well and good if one has the time. I kept a log last year of when I planted things and when they sprouted, but all-in-all I think its rather useless as far as using it as any sort of guide to this year or future years. Seed batches vary, temperatures vary, water varies, soil varies, and yada yada yada very varying variables. I usually end up growing more than I can use and I expect that by shear chance I have planted on every phase of the Moon. Noticing any appreciable difference and accounting for all the variables would take up so much time there would be little left for gardening. Put some seeds in the ground, water them, and when the produce is ready, harvest it and eat it. It ain't rocket science when it comes to a small home garden. Oddly enough -I don't know why- when I give a link I expect folks will read it. Thnx for following & for the pic-liment; I'll try and add some more soon. PS I have tractor envy now thanks to you guys, though I barely have room to even turn one around without a 6-point turn if I had one.

I raise vegetables too, but have been posting on it in ydoaPs' (Sub)Urban Farming thread. As to lunar planting, there does appear to be some evidence for shorter germination period when planting at certain lunar phases. I have never bothered, but if you have the time then go for it. This study has a section on germination and initial growth compared with lunar-synodic fluctuations. >>Chronobiology of Trees and the Fourth Phase of Water

Tonight's Moon: First Quarter Saturday March 21: Venus & Waxing Crescent Moon

You're welcome. I was thinking that the ongoing decimal expansions imply that the physical thing those decimals describe go on & on too, which clearly the physical 'things' do not. In a similar bass-ackwards sort of way, a mathematical polygon with sufficiently many sides becomes indistinguishable from the physical circle. See Chiliagon

No one is entitled to racism. While humans primarily spread non-native plants, making that spreading out to be the work of a single culture is narrow-minded to say the least. Perhaps viruses could be used, however: >> Plant virus Put it where you think best and if the staff thinks it belongs elsewhere they will move it. There are subcategories already to delineate specific circumstances of native vs. non-native. Noxious weed is such a class and depending on the severity of the damage/threat there are sub-classifications by letters, e.g. Class C noxious weed. The idea of being benign is already a part of the classification systems in use, albeit these names vary by region and country. So again yes, viruses may have some use. It's a ways off it seems and it may prove as detrimental as herbicides so caution seems advisable.

I'm well aware of animal invaders and your 'joke' smacks of racism. Start your own thread and don't hijack mine. Humans have no sub-species. If you want to elaborate on water hyacinth, feel free. Edit: Fix quotes

I and the rest have given all the facts necessary to answer the OP. You and David Levy can choose to ignore them at your leisure.

That's the problem. Once the planet has formed, there is no more fuel for the fire. Barring very large impacts of course. Presuming that Venus has decaying radioisotopes in the core, these do not make the core hotter than when the planet formed, they only keep it hot longer. Edit: In you compost pile example, the bacteria which are generating the heat are reproducing, i.e. more of them come on the scene. The radioisotopes in a core are not reproducing, they are decaying.

How about any irrational number? For instance, π has no mathematical termination, but circles are closed. Same for [math]\sqrt{2}[/math]; no termination but squares have diagonals.

You said: "It does not add heat to the core but enables it to get hotter." Think about that. Getting hotter means adding heat. As long as the core is hotter than the surface, it loses heat to the surface. The insulating factor only changes the rate of that loss, it does not raise the core temperature.

Linked sprung prongs? Yea, that'll work.

Yes the solar radiation heats the surface and yes the atmosphere can trap heat. But primarily Venus is as hot as it is today because of its proximity to the Sun, not because of its core temperature or lack of a magnetic field. Venus is in a surface temperature equilibrium just as are the other planets and notwithstanding variations in Sol's output. That is to say, that if the Sun's output were to increase, then the planets' surface temperatures would rise until a new equilibrium was reached and if the Sun's output decreased, then the planets' surface temperatures would decrease until reaching a new equilibrium. In any case, the cores will continue to cool until at some point the cores will reach equilibrium as well. A hotter surface may slow heat loss from the interior, but it does not add heat to the interior. Heat transfer

Your calculations aside, your described fork is a physical impossibility. It's just plain pwrong.

First, you can do away with the distracting formatting; it only serves to make already confused writing harder to read. Second, it is not the heat that directly makes a dynamo work, it's the convection in the liquid core. When Earth cools sufficiently, the geodynamo will cease to operate and our magnetic field will fail, but this is not going to make Earth heat up. Again, no. Loosing a magnetic field does not cause heating. The magnetic field fails because the core cools. In a word, no. Whether it's your English, or your understanding, or both, what you just wrote there is gibberish.