Remember me
▼ Content

Climate denier Myron Ebell as head of EPA?


Climate denier Myron Ebell as head of EPA?10-11-2016 19:10
Madison
☆☆☆☆☆
(21)
Do you think this nightmare will happen in the Trump administration? Or will he even choose to close the EPA, as he has "promised"?

https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/trump-picks-top-climate-skeptic-to-lead-epa-transition/
10-11-2016 22:09
Surface Detail
★★★★☆
(1622)
One new paper, based on research using data from past climate changes, suggests that the situation may even worse than we think. The world needs proper leadership, now!

Climate change may be escalating so fast it could be 'game over', scientists warn

"New research suggests the Earth's climate could be more sensitive to greenhouse gases than thought, raising the spectre of an 'apocalyptic side of bad' temperature rise of more than 7C within a lifetime."
10-11-2016 23:33
IBdaMann
★★★★★
(3109)
Surface Detail wrote:One new paper, based on [crap]...

You raise a good point. Perhaps that journal doesn't deserve any respect if it's going to present WACKY unfalsifiable religious dogma and unsupported claims as actual science.

Maybe that's why the name of the journal is hidden.


.


Global Warming: The preferred religion of the scientifically illiterate.

Ceist - I couldn't agree with you more. But when money and religion are involved, and there are people who value them above all else, then the lies begin. - trafn

You are completely misunderstanding their use of the word "accumulation"! - Climate Scientist.

The Stefan-Boltzman equation doesn't come up with the correct temperature if greenhouse gases are not considered - Hank

:*sigh* Not the "raw data" crap. - Leafsdude

IB STILL hasn't explained what Planck's Law means. Just more hand waving that it applies to everything and more asserting that the greenhouse effect 'violates' it.- Ceist
11-11-2016 01:38
Surface Detail
★★★★☆
(1622)
IBdaMann wrote:
Surface Detail wrote:One new paper, based on [crap]...

You raise a good point. Perhaps that journal doesn't deserve any respect if it's going to present WACKY unfalsifiable religious dogma and unsupported claims as actual science.

Maybe that's why the name of the journal is hidden.

In what sense is it hidden? The name of the journal is "Scientific Advances" as stated in the article. It's the first open-access journal published by the American Association for the Advancement of Science.
11-11-2016 04:12
IBdaMann
★★★★★
(3109)
Surface Detail wrote:
IBdaMann wrote:
Surface Detail wrote:One new paper, based on [crap]...

You raise a good point. Perhaps that journal doesn't deserve any respect if it's going to present WACKY unfalsifiable religious dogma and unsupported claims as actual science.

Maybe that's why the name of the journal is hidden.

In what sense is it hidden? The name of the journal is "Scientific Advances" as stated in the article. It's the first open-access journal published by the American Association for the Advancement of Science.

It should be named "Religious Devotions."


Global Warming: The preferred religion of the scientifically illiterate.

Ceist - I couldn't agree with you more. But when money and religion are involved, and there are people who value them above all else, then the lies begin. - trafn

You are completely misunderstanding their use of the word "accumulation"! - Climate Scientist.

The Stefan-Boltzman equation doesn't come up with the correct temperature if greenhouse gases are not considered - Hank

:*sigh* Not the "raw data" crap. - Leafsdude

IB STILL hasn't explained what Planck's Law means. Just more hand waving that it applies to everything and more asserting that the greenhouse effect 'violates' it.- Ceist
05-06-2017 03:16
litesong
★★★★☆
(1232)
"old sick silly sleepy sleezy slimy steeknin' filty vile reprobate rooting (& rotting) racist pukey proud pig AGW denier liar whiner i b da no-sigh-ants mann" muffed: It should be named "Religious Devotions."

....says, "old sick silly sleepy sleezy slimy steeknin' filty vile reprobate rooting (& rotting) racist pukey proud pig AGW denier liar whiner i b da no-sigh-ants mann".
05-06-2017 05:38
IBdaMann
★★★★★
(3109)
litesong wrote:
"old sick silly sleepy sleezy slimy steeknin' filty vile reprobate rooting (& rotting) racist pukey proud pig AGW denier liar whiner i b da no-sigh-ants mann" muffed: It should be named "Religious Devotions."

....says, "old sick silly sleepy sleezy slimy steeknin' filty vile reprobate rooting (& rotting) racist pukey proud pig AGW denier liar whiner i b da no-sigh-ants mann".

Thanks litesong. It's good to know you got my back.

Go pukey proud pigs!



.


Global Warming: The preferred religion of the scientifically illiterate.

Ceist - I couldn't agree with you more. But when money and religion are involved, and there are people who value them above all else, then the lies begin. - trafn

You are completely misunderstanding their use of the word "accumulation"! - Climate Scientist.

The Stefan-Boltzman equation doesn't come up with the correct temperature if greenhouse gases are not considered - Hank

:*sigh* Not the "raw data" crap. - Leafsdude

IB STILL hasn't explained what Planck's Law means. Just more hand waving that it applies to everything and more asserting that the greenhouse effect 'violates' it.- Ceist
06-06-2017 00:09
Wake
★★★★☆
(1645)
Madison wrote:
Do you think this nightmare will happen in the Trump administration? Or will he even choose to close the EPA, as he has "promised"?

https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/trump-picks-top-climate-skeptic-to-lead-epa-transition/


What this means is that from now on the only thing that counts is scientific research that offers scientific evidence. That is the death sentence of AGW since there has NEVER been one single objective piece of evidence that it exists.

But is it your position that just saying it's there is sufficient evidence for people like you - True Believers in the Religion of Global Warming. Those that want to kill most of the world's population because they use energy. Those like you that think that if the killing were to start that fools like you would be spared?
06-06-2017 02:48
Into the Night
★★★★★
(3137)
Wake wrote:
Madison wrote:
Do you think this nightmare will happen in the Trump administration? Or will he even choose to close the EPA, as he has "promised"?

https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/trump-picks-top-climate-skeptic-to-lead-epa-transition/


What this means is that from now on the only thing that counts is scientific research that offers scientific evidence.

There is no such thing as 'scientific' evidence. There is evidence, or there is not. There is no such thing as 'scientific' research. There is research, or there is not.

Science isn't research. Science isn't evidence. Science is a collection of falsifiable theories that describe nature.

Wake wrote:
That is the death sentence of AGW since there has NEVER been one single objective piece of evidence that it exists.

It was already dead. It was just sucking money up like a parasite. Trump is trying to dry up the parasite and remove this leech from doing any more damage.
Wake wrote:
But is it your position that just saying it's there is sufficient evidence for people like you - True Believers in the Religion of Global Warming. Those that want to kill most of the world's population because they use energy. Those like you that think that if the killing were to start that fools like you would be spared?

This seems to be your position lately. What makes you think you would be spared?


The Parrot Killer
08-06-2017 20:05
Wake
★★★★☆
(1645)
Into the Night wrote: This seems to be your position lately. What makes you think you would be spared?


Because people like you are frightened of me. The cops are frightened of me. Obama's regime was frightened of me and attempted to take all of my money via the IRS. Too bad I had legal means to break their backs. Not one red cent did I pay. But the IRS did.

You being not very bright and thinking that you can simply lie your way through to anything think that other people are like you.

https://www.infowars.com/enviroment-eugenics-quotes/

I personally HEARD Professor Ehrlich say this in a speech and when I asked if he knew what he was saying he casually said "Yes, I know very well that that means."

But you seem to think that people that are trying to gain power are harmless.
08-06-2017 21:53
Into the Night
★★★★★
(3137)
Wake wrote:
Into the Night wrote: This seems to be your position lately. What makes you think you would be spared?


Because people like you are frightened of me.

I am not frightened of you. I know you are powerless.
Wake wrote:
The cops are frightened of me.

If the cops have to deal with anyone, they SHOULD be ready to deal with anything. Human beings are dangerous.
Wake wrote:
Obama's regime was frightened of me and attempted to take all of my money via the IRS.

Apparently they weren't. They decided to try such a stunt.
Wake wrote:
Too bad I had legal means to break their backs. Not one red cent did I pay. But the IRS did.

I am glad you won your case. I have little patience for people who break the law like Obama or the IRS.
Wake wrote:
You being not very bright and thinking that you can simply lie your way through to anything think that other people are like you.

Where the hell did you get THAT idea???
Wake wrote:
...deleted redundant link...
I personally HEARD Professor Ehrlich say this in a speech and when I asked if he knew what he was saying he casually said "Yes, I know very well that that means."

Of course he does. No surprise there. This has been his position for a long time now.
Wake wrote:
But you seem to think that people that are trying to gain power are harmless.

Whatever gave you THAT idea??? Do you think I do not know what dictators are and what they do???


I support the Constitution of the United States and of the several States for a reason, dude.


The Parrot Killer
Edited on 08-06-2017 21:53
09-06-2017 04:21
too
☆☆☆☆☆
(2)
There is no such thing as a "climate change denier"
https://theobjectiveobserverblog.wordpress.com/2017/06/09/there-are-no-climate-change-deniers/
09-06-2017 15:42
Wake
★★★★☆
(1645)
too wrote:
There is no such thing as a "climate change denier"
https://theobjectiveobserverblog.wordpress.com/2017/06/09/there-are-no-climate-change-deniers/


I have made this statement elsewhere but perhaps I should do this again: Satellite temperature data started in 1979. And what did it show? An extremely sharp contrast to the ground based temperature readings.

And why was that? Because the ground based stations are mostly in urban areas. This has caused what is called the "urban heat island effect." That is because of the very rapid growth of cities around these temperature monitoring stations we get falsely high readings of temperatures that do not show up in temperature monitoring stations in surrounding open land areas.


The temperature curves quoted by NOAA and NASA are shown in:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Global_warming#/media/File:Global_Temperature_Anomaly.svg

If you note the specific growth from 1980 until present you can see a growth of 0.7 degrees C.

But if we look at the satellite record we see:
http://www.drroyspencer.com/wp-content/uploads/UAH_LT_1979_thru_March_2017_v6.jpg

What we see that as an average since 1979 there has been NO warming whatsoever.

Let us underscore this in another manner: Between 1880 and 1940 the population growth due to the industrial revolution in the US was 280% and mostly in the urban areas where there were jobs.

And from 1950 to 1970 the population growth was only 32%.

This means that, referring to the initial NOAA temperature chart, that the urban temperature growth in the first part of the 20th century also matches high urbanization growth.

And then in the WW II years and shortly thereafter both the growth in the cities and population growth was much less and the temperature growth consequently was "paused". Then starting in 1960 to the present there has been an additional 70% growth and this is only an estimate since it is likely that there has been at the very least another 10% growth from illegal aliens entering our open border policy.

The sum result of this is that the urban heat island effect was extremely strong over the last several decades and temperature measurements from ground based stations have proven to be completely inaccurate.

So there may have been NO warming since 1900 or so and that all we're doing is the normal recovery from the Maunder minimum followed in short order by the Dalton Minimum.

That what we're looking at is nothing more than a STABLE temperature causing a NORMAL recession of low latitude and altitude glaciers that were formed in the Little Ice Age.

These things COULD have been investigated by NOAA but they were chosen to provide purposely false reports that Obama could use to help move this country closer to a One World Government. The Marxists in the media and government (virtually all liberal Democrats) have used these reports to enhance their own political power.

And there can be ONLY one response to this: The founders public speeches and writings plainly showed that they expected the US to run via citizen representatives. That has disappeared under a Congress that has used their power for their own fortunes.

All governmental personal power should disappear immediately if not sooner. There should be NO retirement for Congress people other than Social Security. There should be NO medial coverage other than Medicare. All Congress people should be limited to 6 years of service. They should NOT be allowed to set their own pay - this should be limited to 3% growth or the CPI whichever is lower. Their salaries should be set by VOTE of the population. There should be NO financial incentives to run for Congress other than the intent to do public service.

Any corruption should be punishable by life in prison without parole. Any person that the Attorney General does not pursue with provable corruption should make the Attorney General complicit in the crime.

NO executive orders should be issued pertinent to any private information of the Chief Executive save in time of declared war.

The people of this country have been forced to GIVE billions and even trillions of dollars to what is a false cause supported by the most obscene crazies this world has ever seen. These people that claim that man is a pox upon this Earth and have actually suggested the total destruction of the Human species.

It is long past time that this has been stopped cold in it's tracks.
09-06-2017 16:17
IBdaMann
★★★★★
(3109)
Wake wrote: What this means is that from now on the only thing that counts is scientific research that offers scientific evidence.


Scientific research? Scientific evidence?

Too funny.

So, if I have stacks of research, involving numbers, dates, materials, objects, i.e. lots of stuff ... how can I tell what research is "scientific" as opposed to being merely ordinary research?

So if I am sifting through a bunch of evidence, how can I tell when I come across "scientific" evidence?


.


Global Warming: The preferred religion of the scientifically illiterate.

Ceist - I couldn't agree with you more. But when money and religion are involved, and there are people who value them above all else, then the lies begin. - trafn

You are completely misunderstanding their use of the word "accumulation"! - Climate Scientist.

The Stefan-Boltzman equation doesn't come up with the correct temperature if greenhouse gases are not considered - Hank

:*sigh* Not the "raw data" crap. - Leafsdude

IB STILL hasn't explained what Planck's Law means. Just more hand waving that it applies to everything and more asserting that the greenhouse effect 'violates' it.- Ceist
09-06-2017 17:42
Into the Night
★★★★★
(3137)
Wake wrote:
I have made this statement elsewhere but perhaps I should do this again: Satellite temperature data started in 1979. And what did it show? An extremely sharp contrast to the ground based temperature readings.

Satellites can't measure temperature. They measure light.
Wake wrote:
And why was that?
Satellites can't measure temperature.
Wake wrote:
Because the ground based stations are mostly in urban areas.

Wrong. We've been over this. Most stations in the United States are in suburban or rural areas.
Wake wrote:
This has caused what is called the "urban heat island effect." That is because of the very rapid growth of cities around these temperature monitoring stations we get falsely high readings of temperatures that do not show up in temperature monitoring stations in surrounding open land areas.
Not an issue. All the cities on Earth combined comprise of about 0.3% of the total surface area of the Earth. The stations themselves are located all over. The United States is not a global temperature. The stations combined are not a temperature of the U.S.
Wake wrote:
The temperature curves quoted by NOAA and NASA are shown in:
...deleted link...
If you note the specific growth from 1980 until present you can see a growth of 0.7 degrees C.
It is not possible to determine the temperature of the Earth to any useful degree of accuracy. This goes both ways, affecting the Church of Global Warming and the Outsiders.
Wake wrote:
But if we look at the satellite record we see:
...deleted link...
What we see that as an average since 1979 there has been NO warming whatsoever.
Satellites cannot measure temperature. They measure light. The light they see is a combination of emitted and reflected light.
Wake wrote:
The people of this country have been forced to GIVE billions and even trillions of dollars to what is a false cause supported by the most obscene crazies this world has ever seen. These people that claim that man is a pox upon this Earth and have actually suggested the total destruction of the Human species.
True. The Church of Global Warming has a parent religion, the Church of Karl Marx.
Wake wrote:
It is long past time that this has been stopped cold in it's tracks.

Agreed. We should not allow the establishment or survival of a state sponsored religion.


The Parrot Killer
09-06-2017 18:07
Wake
★★★★☆
(1645)
Into the Night wrote:
Wake wrote:
I have made this statement elsewhere but perhaps I should do this again: Satellite temperature data started in 1979. And what did it show? An extremely sharp contrast to the ground based temperature readings.

Satellites can't measure temperature. They measure light.
Wake wrote:
And why was that?
Satellites can't measure temperature.
Wake wrote:
Because the ground based stations are mostly in urban areas.

Wrong. We've been over this. Most stations in the United States are in suburban or rural areas.
Wake wrote:
This has caused what is called the "urban heat island effect." That is because of the very rapid growth of cities around these temperature monitoring stations we get falsely high readings of temperatures that do not show up in temperature monitoring stations in surrounding open land areas.
Not an issue. All the cities on Earth combined comprise of about 0.3% of the total surface area of the Earth. The stations themselves are located all over. The United States is not a global temperature. The stations combined are not a temperature of the U.S.
Wake wrote:
The temperature curves quoted by NOAA and NASA are shown in:
...deleted link...
If you note the specific growth from 1980 until present you can see a growth of 0.7 degrees C.
It is not possible to determine the temperature of the Earth to any useful degree of accuracy. This goes both ways, affecting the Church of Global Warming and the Outsiders.
Wake wrote:
But if we look at the satellite record we see:
...deleted link...
What we see that as an average since 1979 there has been NO warming whatsoever.
Satellites cannot measure temperature. They measure light. The light they see is a combination of emitted and reflected light.
Wake wrote:
The people of this country have been forced to GIVE billions and even trillions of dollars to what is a false cause supported by the most obscene crazies this world has ever seen. These people that claim that man is a pox upon this Earth and have actually suggested the total destruction of the Human species.
True. The Church of Global Warming has a parent religion, the Church of Karl Marx.
Wake wrote:
It is long past time that this has been stopped cold in it's tracks.

Agreed. We should not allow the establishment or survival of a state sponsored religion.


We can only assume that you deny rather simple physics because you understand none of it. The equations of the Stefan-Boltzmann law and Wien's equations are so simple that high school college prep students can understand them and you cannot.

Virtually ALL of the 200,000 ground temperature recording sites are in urban areas. ALL of the major sources of the Feds, some 2,000 are commercial airports. Commercial airports are not in open land areas but apparently you don't know that. The majority of the rest of the "private records" come from both state owned sources almost all of which are in cities or from universities and in case you are unaware of it universities are not situated in farm land.

There ARE some few sources in open areas such as most lighthouses and very few in farming areas. And even many lighthouses are situated within the boundaries of urban areas.
09-06-2017 18:57
Into the Night
★★★★★
(3137)
Wake wrote:
Into the Night wrote:
[quote]Wake wrote:
I have made this statement elsewhere but perhaps I should do this again: Satellite temperature data started in 1979. And what did it show? An extremely sharp contrast to the ground based temperature readings.

Satellites can't measure temperature. They measure light.
Wake wrote:
And why was that?
Satellites can't measure temperature.
Wake wrote:
Because the ground based stations are mostly in urban areas.

Wrong. We've been over this. Most stations in the United States are in suburban or rural areas.
Wake wrote:
This has caused what is called the "urban heat island effect." That is because of the very rapid growth of cities around these temperature monitoring stations we get falsely high readings of temperatures that do not show up in temperature monitoring stations in surrounding open land areas.
Not an issue. All the cities on Earth combined comprise of about 0.3% of the total surface area of the Earth. The stations themselves are located all over. The United States is not a global temperature. The stations combined are not a temperature of the U.S.
Wake wrote:
The temperature curves quoted by NOAA and NASA are shown in:
...deleted link...
If you note the specific growth from 1980 until present you can see a growth of 0.7 degrees C.
It is not possible to determine the temperature of the Earth to any useful degree of accuracy. This goes both ways, affecting the Church of Global Warming and the Outsiders.
Wake wrote:
But if we look at the satellite record we see:
...deleted link...
What we see that as an average since 1979 there has been NO warming whatsoever.
Satellites cannot measure temperature. They measure light. The light they see is a combination of emitted and reflected light.
Wake wrote:
The people of this country have been forced to GIVE billions and even trillions of dollars to what is a false cause supported by the most obscene crazies this world has ever seen. These people that claim that man is a pox upon this Earth and have actually suggested the total destruction of the Human species.
True. The Church of Global Warming has a parent religion, the Church of Karl Marx.
Wake wrote:
It is long past time that this has been stopped cold in it's tracks.

Agreed. We should not allow the establishment or survival of a state sponsored religion.

Wake wrote:
We can only assume that you deny rather simple physics because you understand none of it.

The equations of the Stefan-Boltzmann law and Wien's equations are so simple that high school college prep students can understand them and you cannot.

I understand both equations. Neither calculates temperature from light.

Wien's law calculates the peak of a band of light from a temperature. The light you see is not necessarily this peak.

The Stefan-Boltzmann law calculates emitted radiance from temperature. It depends on knowing the emissivity of the surface. We do not know the emissivity or albedo of Earth. It is not possible to determine.

A satellite can only see light from all sources. It is incapable of measuring temperature.

Wake wrote:
Virtually ALL of the 200,000 ground temperature recording sites are in urban areas.
Wrong.
Wake wrote:
ALL of the major sources of the Feds,
Wrong.
Wake wrote:
some 2,000 are commercial airports.
Commercial airports do not report weather to NOAA. They report current conditions for that airport only to the FSS network, if they report anything at all.
Wake wrote:
Commercial airports are not in open land areas but apparently you don't know that.
Kinda makes it hard to land airplanes then. LOL
Wake wrote:
The majority of the rest of the "private records" come from both state owned sources almost all of which are in cities or from universities and in case you are unaware of it universities are not situated in farm land.
These are not part of the NOAA database.
Wake wrote:
There ARE some few sources in open areas such as most lighthouses
Lighthouses do not have weather stations.
Wake wrote:
and very few in farming areas.
Farmers are actually keenly interested in the temperature. They all measure it as accurately as they can. These are not part of the NOAA database.
Wake wrote:
And even many lighthouses are situated within the boundaries of urban areas.

Lighthouses do not have weather stations.


The Parrot Killer
Edited on 09-06-2017 19:02
09-06-2017 21:50
Wake
★★★★☆
(1645)
Into the Night wrote:
Wake wrote:
Into the Night wrote:
[quote]Wake wrote:
I have made this statement elsewhere but perhaps I should do this again: Satellite temperature data started in 1979. And what did it show? An extremely sharp contrast to the ground based temperature readings.

Satellites can't measure temperature. They measure light.
Wake wrote:
And why was that?
Satellites can't measure temperature.
Wake wrote:
Because the ground based stations are mostly in urban areas.

Wrong. We've been over this. Most stations in the United States are in suburban or rural areas.
Wake wrote:
This has caused what is called the "urban heat island effect." That is because of the very rapid growth of cities around these temperature monitoring stations we get falsely high readings of temperatures that do not show up in temperature monitoring stations in surrounding open land areas.
Not an issue. All the cities on Earth combined comprise of about 0.3% of the total surface area of the Earth. The stations themselves are located all over. The United States is not a global temperature. The stations combined are not a temperature of the U.S.
Wake wrote:
The temperature curves quoted by NOAA and NASA are shown in:
...deleted link...
If you note the specific growth from 1980 until present you can see a growth of 0.7 degrees C.
It is not possible to determine the temperature of the Earth to any useful degree of accuracy. This goes both ways, affecting the Church of Global Warming and the Outsiders.
Wake wrote:
But if we look at the satellite record we see:
...deleted link...
What we see that as an average since 1979 there has been NO warming whatsoever.
Satellites cannot measure temperature. They measure light. The light they see is a combination of emitted and reflected light.
Wake wrote:
The people of this country have been forced to GIVE billions and even trillions of dollars to what is a false cause supported by the most obscene crazies this world has ever seen. These people that claim that man is a pox upon this Earth and have actually suggested the total destruction of the Human species.
True. The Church of Global Warming has a parent religion, the Church of Karl Marx.
Wake wrote:
It is long past time that this has been stopped cold in it's tracks.

Agreed. We should not allow the establishment or survival of a state sponsored religion.

Wake wrote:
We can only assume that you deny rather simple physics because you understand none of it.

The equations of the Stefan-Boltzmann law and Wien's equations are so simple that high school college prep students can understand them and you cannot.

I understand both equations. Neither calculates temperature from light.

Wien's law calculates the peak of a band of light from a temperature. The light you see is not necessarily this peak.

The Stefan-Boltzmann law calculates emitted radiance from temperature. It depends on knowing the emissivity of the surface. We do not know the emissivity or albedo of Earth. It is not possible to determine.

A satellite can only see light from all sources. It is incapable of measuring temperature.

Wake wrote:
Virtually ALL of the 200,000 ground temperature recording sites are in urban areas.
Wrong.
Wake wrote:
ALL of the major sources of the Feds,
Wrong.
Wake wrote:
some 2,000 are commercial airports.
Commercial airports do not report weather to NOAA. They report current conditions for that airport only to the FSS network, if they report anything at all.
Wake wrote:
Commercial airports are not in open land areas but apparently you don't know that.
Kinda makes it hard to land airplanes then. LOL
Wake wrote:
The majority of the rest of the "private records" come from both state owned sources almost all of which are in cities or from universities and in case you are unaware of it universities are not situated in farm land.
These are not part of the NOAA database.
Wake wrote:
There ARE some few sources in open areas such as most lighthouses
Lighthouses do not have weather stations.
Wake wrote:
and very few in farming areas.
Farmers are actually keenly interested in the temperature. They all measure it as accurately as they can. These are not part of the NOAA database.
Wake wrote:
And even many lighthouses are situated within the boundaries of urban areas.

Lighthouses do not have weather stations.


Enough is enough. http://wws-map.com/

We need no more of your ignorance.

We also don't need someone that cannot use simple arithmetic telling use that physics cannot tell us the temperature from it's emissions.

Where do you jackasses get off pretending to know things that are first year physics in high school? Do you think that you stupidity isn't plain to anyone that knows science?
10-06-2017 05:37
IBdaMann
★★★★★
(3109)
Into the Night wrote: True. The Church of Global Warming has a parent religion, the Church of Karl Marx.

Agreed. We should not allow the establishment or survival of a state sponsored religion.

True wisdom.


.


Global Warming: The preferred religion of the scientifically illiterate.

Ceist - I couldn't agree with you more. But when money and religion are involved, and there are people who value them above all else, then the lies begin. - trafn

You are completely misunderstanding their use of the word "accumulation"! - Climate Scientist.

The Stefan-Boltzman equation doesn't come up with the correct temperature if greenhouse gases are not considered - Hank

:*sigh* Not the "raw data" crap. - Leafsdude

IB STILL hasn't explained what Planck's Law means. Just more hand waving that it applies to everything and more asserting that the greenhouse effect 'violates' it.- Ceist
10-06-2017 07:18
Into the Night
★★★★★
(3137)
Wake wrote:
Into the Night wrote:
Wake wrote:
Into the Night wrote:
[quote]Wake wrote:
I have made this statement elsewhere but perhaps I should do this again: Satellite temperature data started in 1979. And what did it show? An extremely sharp contrast to the ground based temperature readings.

Satellites can't measure temperature. They measure light.
Wake wrote:
And why was that?
Satellites can't measure temperature.
Wake wrote:
Because the ground based stations are mostly in urban areas.

Wrong. We've been over this. Most stations in the United States are in suburban or rural areas.
Wake wrote:
This has caused what is called the "urban heat island effect." That is because of the very rapid growth of cities around these temperature monitoring stations we get falsely high readings of temperatures that do not show up in temperature monitoring stations in surrounding open land areas.
Not an issue. All the cities on Earth combined comprise of about 0.3% of the total surface area of the Earth. The stations themselves are located all over. The United States is not a global temperature. The stations combined are not a temperature of the U.S.
Wake wrote:
The temperature curves quoted by NOAA and NASA are shown in:
...deleted link...
If you note the specific growth from 1980 until present you can see a growth of 0.7 degrees C.
It is not possible to determine the temperature of the Earth to any useful degree of accuracy. This goes both ways, affecting the Church of Global Warming and the Outsiders.
Wake wrote:
But if we look at the satellite record we see:
...deleted link...
What we see that as an average since 1979 there has been NO warming whatsoever.
Satellites cannot measure temperature. They measure light. The light they see is a combination of emitted and reflected light.
Wake wrote:
The people of this country have been forced to GIVE billions and even trillions of dollars to what is a false cause supported by the most obscene crazies this world has ever seen. These people that claim that man is a pox upon this Earth and have actually suggested the total destruction of the Human species.
True. The Church of Global Warming has a parent religion, the Church of Karl Marx.
Wake wrote:
It is long past time that this has been stopped cold in it's tracks.

Agreed. We should not allow the establishment or survival of a state sponsored religion.

Wake wrote:
We can only assume that you deny rather simple physics because you understand none of it.

The equations of the Stefan-Boltzmann law and Wien's equations are so simple that high school college prep students can understand them and you cannot.

I understand both equations. Neither calculates temperature from light.

Wien's law calculates the peak of a band of light from a temperature. The light you see is not necessarily this peak.

The Stefan-Boltzmann law calculates emitted radiance from temperature. It depends on knowing the emissivity of the surface. We do not know the emissivity or albedo of Earth. It is not possible to determine.

A satellite can only see light from all sources. It is incapable of measuring temperature.

Wake wrote:
Virtually ALL of the 200,000 ground temperature recording sites are in urban areas.
Wrong.
Wake wrote:
ALL of the major sources of the Feds,
Wrong.
Wake wrote:
some 2,000 are commercial airports.
Commercial airports do not report weather to NOAA. They report current conditions for that airport only to the FSS network, if they report anything at all.
Wake wrote:
Commercial airports are not in open land areas but apparently you don't know that.
Kinda makes it hard to land airplanes then. LOL
Wake wrote:
The majority of the rest of the "private records" come from both state owned sources almost all of which are in cities or from universities and in case you are unaware of it universities are not situated in farm land.
These are not part of the NOAA database.
Wake wrote:
There ARE some few sources in open areas such as most lighthouses
Lighthouses do not have weather stations.
Wake wrote:
and very few in farming areas.
Farmers are actually keenly interested in the temperature. They all measure it as accurately as they can. These are not part of the NOAA database.
Wake wrote:
And even many lighthouses are situated within the boundaries of urban areas.

Lighthouses do not have weather stations.


Enough is enough. http://wws-map.com/

An interesting map. It seems to be missing a lot of stations. (Most of them, actually). It also doesn't list many NOAA stations. It DOES list a Portland, OR station that is not a NOAA station as 'the weather station' of Portland, OR. That is an amateur operated station and is not part of the NOAA network.
Wake wrote:
We need no more of your ignorance.
You need to stop believing everything the internet tells you. The internet is not the Oracle of Truth.
Wake wrote:
We also don't need someone that cannot use simple arithmetic telling use that physics cannot tell us the temperature from it's emissions.
You can't. The simple arithmetic says why. You are trying to combine light from multiple sources as 'the' light, as if it were only emitted light you were looking at.
Wake wrote:
Where do you jackasses get off pretending to know things that are first year physics in high school? Do you think that you stupidity isn't plain to anyone that knows science?

Since you have clearly not understood the concept of how these equations work, and why it is VERY difficult to just reverse them algebraically, this is YOUR problem.

May I suggest a good book on Planck's law and it's derivative laws? Perhaps a study of mathematics relating to random numbers, probability, and statistics would do you good as well.


The Parrot Killer
10-06-2017 15:03
IBdaMann
★★★★★
(3109)
Wake wrote: Commercial airports are not in open land areas but apparently you don't know that.

Really? Explain.







.


Global Warming: The preferred religion of the scientifically illiterate.

Ceist - I couldn't agree with you more. But when money and religion are involved, and there are people who value them above all else, then the lies begin. - trafn

You are completely misunderstanding their use of the word "accumulation"! - Climate Scientist.

The Stefan-Boltzman equation doesn't come up with the correct temperature if greenhouse gases are not considered - Hank

:*sigh* Not the "raw data" crap. - Leafsdude

IB STILL hasn't explained what Planck's Law means. Just more hand waving that it applies to everything and more asserting that the greenhouse effect 'violates' it.- Ceist
10-06-2017 19:23
GasGuzzler
★★★☆☆
(562)
Doesn't matter much where the airport is when the thermometer is 3 ft from the AC condenser unit. This has been confirmed at several official reporting stations.


Fartsong wrote: Stuff your shit, you AGW denier liar whiner!
10-06-2017 21:09
Wake
★★★★☆
(1645)
IBdaMann wrote:
Wake wrote: Commercial airports are not in open land areas but apparently you don't know that.

Really? Explain.







.


Explain what? Those are not commercial airports stupid.
11-06-2017 00:48
IBdaMann
★★★★★
(3109)
Wake wrote:Explain what? Those are not commercial airports stupid.

Fine. We can play this game all day.

Vancouver


Butler County Regional



Global Warming: The preferred religion of the scientifically illiterate.

Ceist - I couldn't agree with you more. But when money and religion are involved, and there are people who value them above all else, then the lies begin. - trafn

You are completely misunderstanding their use of the word "accumulation"! - Climate Scientist.

The Stefan-Boltzman equation doesn't come up with the correct temperature if greenhouse gases are not considered - Hank

:*sigh* Not the "raw data" crap. - Leafsdude

IB STILL hasn't explained what Planck's Law means. Just more hand waving that it applies to everything and more asserting that the greenhouse effect 'violates' it.- Ceist
11-06-2017 01:12
Wake
★★★★☆
(1645)
IBdaMann wrote:
Wake wrote:Explain what? Those are not commercial airports stupid.

Fine. We can play this game all day.

Vancouver


Butler County Regional


So in your book Vancouver is not an urban area.

And you appear to think that Butler County Airport even though there is a small Cessna moving down the taxiway and taking up the entire taxiway is a commercial airport.

It's always good to know what sort of mind you have.

I spent a war working on B52's and between technical jobs I repaired commercial aircraft for 3 years. But you with absolutely no experience can't even tell a commercial airstrip from a small aircraft airstrip.

Let's go back to your idea that Vancouver isn't an urban area. That's your speed. Vancouver is the largest metropolitan area is western Canada but to you that's not an urban area.

Or you can tell us ALL about how many weather stations there are missing from the map I gave you. Even though I had previously said that these are almost entirely privately owned or state owned and almost entirely in urban areas since farmers have better things to do that to report to the NOAA station.

And operating light houses are STATE owned and hence to the Federal Government they are privately owned since they are not Federally financed.

Every word out of your mouth makes you look more and more stupid.
11-06-2017 01:36
IBdaMann
★★★★★
(3109)
Wake wrote: So in your book Vancouver is not an urban area.

Hey, goalpost-shifter, you were the one who specifically used the words "open area" and absurdly claimed that commercial airports don't have it. Do you know of commercial airplanes that land in non-open areas?

So who are you going to blame for your penchant for writing stupid things.

Wake wrote: And you appear to think that Butler County Airport even though there is a small Cessna moving down the taxiway and taking up the entire taxiway is a commercial airport.

It's a commercial airport ... and it has MANY acres of open area.

It's always good to know what sort of mind you have.

Wake wrote: But you with absolutely no experience can't even tell a commercial airstrip from a small aircraft airstrip.

Delicious! You are desperately deluding yourself into believing you can declare what experience I do and do not have.

What else is clear is that *IF* you actually did spend a war working with aircraft, you didn't learn much, or anything at all.


.


Global Warming: The preferred religion of the scientifically illiterate.

Ceist - I couldn't agree with you more. But when money and religion are involved, and there are people who value them above all else, then the lies begin. - trafn

You are completely misunderstanding their use of the word "accumulation"! - Climate Scientist.

The Stefan-Boltzman equation doesn't come up with the correct temperature if greenhouse gases are not considered - Hank

:*sigh* Not the "raw data" crap. - Leafsdude

IB STILL hasn't explained what Planck's Law means. Just more hand waving that it applies to everything and more asserting that the greenhouse effect 'violates' it.- Ceist
11-06-2017 10:41
Into the Night
★★★★★
(3137)
Wake wrote:
IBdaMann wrote:
Wake wrote:Explain what? Those are not commercial airports stupid.

Fine. We can play this game all day.

Vancouver


Butler County Regional


So in your book Vancouver is not an urban area.
Most of the Vancouver B.C. area is swamp and unbuildable. There are two major airports in the Vancouver B.C. area. This image shows only one of them. It is open land as you can see, just as any airport is. A weather station happens to be located on this airport. There is also one at West Vancouver, Coquitlam, Richmond (located out in a swamp), Surrey (near the Kingsway), White Rock (near the border), Abbotsford, one near Bridal Veil Falls, Fort Langley, Pitt Meadows, North Vancouver (serving the Capilano area), etc. Only 2 of these are in an urban area. 3 are in suburban area. The remainder are in swamp, mountains, and/or forest.
Wake wrote:
And you appear to think that Butler County Airport even though there is a small Cessna moving down the taxiway and taking up the entire taxiway is a commercial airport.
Did you know Cessnas can fly into commercial airports? Yes! It's true! Here in the Seattle area, we have two commercial airports. We are trying to open a third. Cessnas not only fly into all of them, they are based there.
Wake wrote:
It's always good to know what sort of mind you have.
Turning to insults again?
Wake wrote:
I spent a war working on B52's and between technical jobs I repaired commercial aircraft for 3 years.
Credentials mean nothing here. I don't believe you. Your displayed knowledge of aircraft and airports tell me you're lying.
Wake wrote:
But you with absolutely no experience can't even tell a commercial airstrip from a small aircraft airstrip.
All of the images displayed are commercial airports.
Wake wrote:
Let's go back to your idea that Vancouver isn't an urban area.
Only a small part of Vancouver B.C. (there are TWO cities called Vancouver around here!) is an urban area.
Wake wrote:
That's your speed. Vancouver is the largest metropolitan area is western Canada but to you that's not an urban area.
I take it you think that's impressive. As the 'largest metropolitan area in western Canada', it's a picturesque town that you can drive across in about 10 minutes (iff they had decent roads to drive on!).

I don't think you understand how unpopulated western Canada is (or Canada in general!). The Canadian government currently lists the national population at about 35 million, compared to the United States at about 321 million. Canada is only marginally larger than the United States. Most of the Canadian people live within 50 miles of the southern border, and most of THAT is in the Ontario and Quebec provinces.

Wake wrote:
Or you can tell us ALL about how many weather stations there are missing from the map I gave you.
Do you want me to list them AGAIN? Argument of the Stone.
Wake wrote:
Even though I had previously said that these are almost entirely privately owned or state owned and almost entirely in urban areas since farmers have better things to do that to report to the NOAA station.
NOAA stations are not privately owned. They are not State owned. They are owned and operated by the Federal government. Farmers do not report to weather stations.The weather stations report to farmers.
Wake wrote:
And operating light houses are STATE owned
Light houses in the United States were built primarily by the Coast Guard. They are currently maintained by the National Park Service, and various private preservation societies, since they importance to navigation at sea has declined so much.
Wake wrote:
and hence to the Federal Government they are privately owned since they are not Federally financed.
They were built by the Coast Guard and maintained by the National Park Service. These are both federal agencies.
Wake wrote:
Every word out of your mouth makes you look more and more stupid.

Now that you've established you know nothing about lighthouses, weather stations, aviation, science, statistics, mathematics, the atmosphere, units of measurement, or what the concepts of 'open land' or 'urban area' mean, do you want to try another subject that you are illiterate in?


The Parrot Killer
11-06-2017 11:35
Into the Night
★★★★★
(3137)
IBdaMann wrote:
What else is clear is that *IF* you actually did spend a war working with aircraft, you didn't learn much, or anything at all.
.


He didn't. His knowledge of aviation is practically nil. He doesn't understand the concept of pressure, the concept of heat, or the characteristics of air.

I think he probably understands that you go to an airport to board a passenger jet. That's about it.

An attitude like his kills people. Aircraft mechanics would not want to be anywhere near a guy like this. He obviously doesn't fly (except as a passenger), since he understands nothing about the national airspace system, meteorology, the flight service system, or the instrumentation used for flight.

He could never pass an FAA or an FCC test with his current demonstrated knowledge.


The Parrot Killer
11-06-2017 16:15
Wake
★★★★☆
(1645)
IBdaMann wrote:
Wake wrote: So in your book Vancouver is not an urban area.

Hey, goalpost-shifter, you were the one who specifically used the words "open area" and absurdly claimed that commercial airports don't have it. Do you know of commercial airplanes that land in non-open areas?

So who are you going to blame for your penchant for writing stupid things.

Wake wrote: And you appear to think that Butler County Airport even though there is a small Cessna moving down the taxiway and taking up the entire taxiway is a commercial airport.

It's a commercial airport ... and it has MANY acres of open area.

It's always good to know what sort of mind you have.

Wake wrote: But you with absolutely no experience can't even tell a commercial airstrip from a small aircraft airstrip.

Delicious! You are desperately deluding yourself into believing you can declare what experience I do and do not have.

What else is clear is that *IF* you actually did spend a war working with aircraft, you didn't learn much, or anything at all.
.


Now you're busy showing us that you haven't the faintest idea what an urban heat island is. Thanks for demonstrating still again that you are an idiot. Open areas indeed. You are next going to tell us that Times Square or Central Park are open areas.

Apparently to you a "Commercial Airport" is one that is open to any aircraft light sport plane or Business jet. And again the stupidity reins. "Mommy he's being mean to me."
11-06-2017 16:49
IBdaMann
★★★★★
(3109)
Wake wrote: Now you're busy showing us that you haven't the faintest idea what an urban heat island is.

You and I have never discussed "urban heat islands."

Wake wrote: Thanks for demonstrating still again that you are an idiot.

Remind me who is the one who imagines conversations and then acts like they really happened.


Wake wrote: Open areas indeed.

Wow. What do *you* consider to be "open area" such that many acres of cleared land does not qualify?

How is this not "open area"?



Wake wrote: You are next going to tell us that Times Square or Central Park are open areas.

Did I make that claim or are you lying?

Wake wrote: Apparently to you a "Commercial Airport" is one that is open to any aircraft light sport plane or Business jet.

"Commercial Airport" is well defined by the FAA. Might you wish to look it up?


Why do you take your rampant ignorance so personally?


.


Global Warming: The preferred religion of the scientifically illiterate.

Ceist - I couldn't agree with you more. But when money and religion are involved, and there are people who value them above all else, then the lies begin. - trafn

You are completely misunderstanding their use of the word "accumulation"! - Climate Scientist.

The Stefan-Boltzman equation doesn't come up with the correct temperature if greenhouse gases are not considered - Hank

:*sigh* Not the "raw data" crap. - Leafsdude

IB STILL hasn't explained what Planck's Law means. Just more hand waving that it applies to everything and more asserting that the greenhouse effect 'violates' it.- Ceist
11-06-2017 16:57
Wake
★★★★☆
(1645)
IBdaMann wrote:
Wake wrote: Now you're busy showing us that you haven't the faintest idea what an urban heat island is.

You and I have never discussed "urban heat islands."

Wake wrote: Thanks for demonstrating still again that you are an idiot.

Remind me who is the one who imagines conversations and then acts like they really happened.


Wake wrote: Open areas indeed.

Wow. What do *you* consider to be "open area" such that many acres of cleared land does not qualify?

How is this not "open area"?



Wake wrote: You are next going to tell us that Times Square or Central Park are open areas.

Did I make that claim or are you lying?

Wake wrote: Apparently to you a "Commercial Airport" is one that is open to any aircraft light sport plane or Business jet.

"Commercial Airport" is well defined by the FAA. Might you wish to look it up?


Why do you take your rampant ignorance so personally?
.


You and I never discussed urban heat islands because you were busy implying that there was no such thing.

And indeed the FAA does have a definition of "commercial airport"":

"Landed weight" means the weight of aircraft transporting only cargo in intrastate, interstate, and foreign air transportation. ... General Aviation Airports are public-use airports that do not have scheduled service or have less than 2,500 annual passenger boardings (49 USC 47102(8))."

Which makes three of those four "commercial airports" you cited NOT commercial airports.

And you also told us that Vancouver was not an urban area that underwent heavy urban growth and then tried to back out of your stupidity with "You said they weren't in open areas" with the supremely stupid idea that somehow grass around a landing strip made this an "open area".

You are nothing more than a True Believer that thinks that you can give other True Believers a chance by denying AGW with excuses so transparently ignorant that they can easily prove you wrong.

You've been caught.

By the way stupid - thermal energy and heat are the same thing. And thermal energy does NOT move instantaneously. And conduction and convection are part of the same process that you do not even slightly understand.

We're waiting for you usual "You're being mean to me" with the claims that I'm all wrong and that you're smarter than me. Stupid is as stupid does.
Edited on 11-06-2017 17:07
11-06-2017 17:54
IBdaMann
★★★★★
(3109)
Wake wrote: You and I never discussed urban heat islands because you were busy implying that there was no such thing.

I never implied any such thing. You and I have never discussed "urban heat islands."


Wake wrote: And indeed the FAA does have a definition of "commercial airport"":

"Landed weight" means the weight of aircraft transporting only cargo in intrastate, interstate, and foreign air transportation. ... General Aviation Airports are public-use airports that do not have scheduled service or have less than 2,500 annual passenger boardings (49 USC 47102(8))."

Which makes three of those four "commercial airports" you cited NOT commercial airports.

Try again. You posted the FAA's definition of "Landed Weight" and of "General Aviation Airport" but we're talking about "Commercial Airport."

How do any of the commercial airports I posted not meet the FAA's definition of "Commercial Airport"?


Wake wrote: And you also told us that Vancouver was not an urban area ...

In what imaginary conversation did I claim that?

I pointed out that Vancouver has a commercial airport with lots of open area. You amazingly deny this.

Actually it's not so amazing. You'll deny science so what's a little reality-denial in addition.

Wake wrote: ... with "You said they weren't in open areas" with the supremely stupid idea that somehow grass around a landing strip made this an "open area".

Are you going to explain *your* definition of "open area" such that many acres of grass around a landing strip somehow does not apply?

You have EVADED every single question I have asked of you for clarification.

You have mischaracterized my position.

You have asserted discussions that never happened.

You use flagrant dishonesty behind which to (try to) hide your shameful ignorance.


Wake wrote: ... True Believers a chance by denying AGW with excuses so transparently ignorant that they can easily prove you wrong.

Can you give me a example of one of my transparently ignorant arguments? ... or are you required to EVADE this as well?

Wake wrote: By the way stupid - thermal energy and heat are the same thing.

They can be to the ignorant homeless guy sleeping in the gutter.

It seems you need to learn thermodynamics.

Wake wrote: And thermal energy does NOT move instantaneously.

Hey moron, if I place a hot object in contact with a cold object, how much of a delay do you claim is required for thermal energy to flow?

You are an idiot.


Wake wrote: And conduction and convection are part of the same process that you do not even slightly understand.

Aaaahh, so you're back to deluding yourself into believing that you can declare what others don't understand.


You're an idiot .


.


Global Warming: The preferred religion of the scientifically illiterate.

Ceist - I couldn't agree with you more. But when money and religion are involved, and there are people who value them above all else, then the lies begin. - trafn

You are completely misunderstanding their use of the word "accumulation"! - Climate Scientist.

The Stefan-Boltzman equation doesn't come up with the correct temperature if greenhouse gases are not considered - Hank

:*sigh* Not the "raw data" crap. - Leafsdude

IB STILL hasn't explained what Planck's Law means. Just more hand waving that it applies to everything and more asserting that the greenhouse effect 'violates' it.- Ceist
11-06-2017 19:41
Into the Night
★★★★★
(3137)
Wake wrote:
IBdaMann wrote:
Wake wrote: So in your book Vancouver is not an urban area.

Hey, goalpost-shifter, you were the one who specifically used the words "open area" and absurdly claimed that commercial airports don't have it. Do you know of commercial airplanes that land in non-open areas?

So who are you going to blame for your penchant for writing stupid things.

Wake wrote: And you appear to think that Butler County Airport even though there is a small Cessna moving down the taxiway and taking up the entire taxiway is a commercial airport.

It's a commercial airport ... and it has MANY acres of open area.

It's always good to know what sort of mind you have.

Wake wrote: But you with absolutely no experience can't even tell a commercial airstrip from a small aircraft airstrip.

Delicious! You are desperately deluding yourself into believing you can declare what experience I do and do not have.

What else is clear is that *IF* you actually did spend a war working with aircraft, you didn't learn much, or anything at all.
.

Now you're busy showing us that you haven't the faintest idea what an urban heat island is.
Non-sequitur. We are talking about open areas, not urban heat islands.
Wake wrote:
Thanks for demonstrating still again that you are an idiot.
Again with the insults.
Wake wrote:
Open areas indeed.
That's what they are.
Wake wrote:
You are next going to tell us that Times Square or Central Park are open areas.
Times Square may or may not be an open area, depending on the city. There are a lot of places called Times Square. You mean the one in New York? No, that is not an open area.
Central Park is an open area that is 2.5 miles lone and half a mile wide. If it weren't for all the trees and rocks and people on it, it could serve as a small general aviation airport. Of course, these days, New Yorkers are a bit nervous about aircraft flying around at low altitude near the city....even Cessnas.
Wake wrote:
Apparently to you a "Commercial Airport" is one that is open to any aircraft light sport plane or Business jet.
The FAA has a specific definition of a commercial airport. Every airport IBdaMann has shown IS a commercial airport. You can find that definition in the FAR part 49, section 47, paragraph 102, subparagraph 7.

Light aircraft and business jets can land on any civilian airport, including like SeaTac airport, LAX, Orange County airport (now known as John Wayne airport), Denver International, Chicago O'Hare, Reagan International airport, Atlanta airport (currently the busiest in the nation), and McCarron airport in Las Vegas.

I have personally landed my Cessna 150 at McCarren, Orange County, SeaTac, Oakland airport in California, Sacramento airport, San Jose airport, Lindbergh Field in San Diego, Palm Springs airport, and a host of others; all of which are commercial airports. I have no problem flying in the same airspace as the 'big fish'. I was even based at Boeing Field for awhile, a commercial airport.


The Parrot Killer
Edited on 11-06-2017 19:43
11-06-2017 19:56
Into the Night
★★★★★
(3137)
Wake wrote:
IBdaMann wrote:
Wake wrote: Now you're busy showing us that you haven't the faintest idea what an urban heat island is.

You and I have never discussed "urban heat islands."

Wake wrote: Thanks for demonstrating still again that you are an idiot.

Remind me who is the one who imagines conversations and then acts like they really happened.


Wake wrote: Open areas indeed.

Wow. What do *you* consider to be "open area" such that many acres of cleared land does not qualify?

How is this not "open area"?



Wake wrote: You are next going to tell us that Times Square or Central Park are open areas.

Did I make that claim or are you lying?

Wake wrote: Apparently to you a "Commercial Airport" is one that is open to any aircraft light sport plane or Business jet.

"Commercial Airport" is well defined by the FAA. Might you wish to look it up?


Why do you take your rampant ignorance so personally?
.


You and I never discussed urban heat islands because you were busy implying that there was no such thing.

And indeed the FAA does have a definition of "commercial airport"":

"Landed weight" means the weight of aircraft transporting only cargo in intrastate, interstate, and foreign air transportation. ... General Aviation Airports are public-use airports that do not have scheduled service or have less than 2,500 annual passenger boardings (49 USC 47102(8))."

Which makes three of those four "commercial airports" you cited NOT commercial airports.
Actually, it DOES.
Wake wrote:
And you also told us that Vancouver was not an urban area that underwent heavy urban growth and then tried to back out of your stupidity with "You said they weren't in open areas" with the supremely stupid idea that somehow grass around a landing strip made this an "open area".
Most of the Vancouver B.C. area is swamp and unbuildable. (It is the Fraser river delta, after all). The urban part of Vancouver is so small it's laughable. You really could have picked a better example.
Wake wrote:
You are nothing more than a True Believer that thinks that you can give other True Believers a chance by denying AGW with excuses so transparently ignorant that they can easily prove you wrong.
Denying the Church of Global Warming needs no excuse. The term 'global warming' doesn't mean anything.
Wake wrote:
You've been caught.
Really? How? I think you are hallucinating again.
Wake wrote:
By the way stupid - thermal energy and heat are the same thing.
No, they aren't. You obviously don't understand what 'heat' is.
Wake wrote:
And thermal energy does NOT move instantaneously.
No one ever said it did.
Wake wrote:
And conduction and convection are part of the same process that you do not even slightly understand.
Conduction and convection are two completely separate means of heating. They are not the same thing at all.
Wake wrote:
We're waiting for you usual "You're being mean to me" with the claims that I'm all wrong and that you're smarter than me. Stupid is as stupid does.

You are definitely hallucinating. Put down the drug, dude.


The Parrot Killer




Join the debate Climate denier Myron Ebell as head of EPA?:

Remember me

Related content
ThreadsRepliesLast post
So, how many M2C2 deniers can you fit on the head of a needle?1018-07-2017 03:28
Climate change denier crosses from the dark side7704-06-2017 23:18
The greenhouse effect denier Enceladus2101-05-2017 15:41
New EPA chief does not think carbon dioxide causes climate change1714-03-2017 18:59
Preferred word in lieu of "GW Denier"4019-09-2016 22:48
▲ Top of page
Public Poll
Will Arctic summers be ice-free in this century?

Yes

No

Don't know


Thanks for supporting Climate-Debate.com.
Copyright © 2009-2017 Climate-Debate.com | About | Contact