Remember me
▼ Content

Greenhouse gasses



Page 2 of 3<123>
31-12-2018 19:01
HarveyH55
★★☆☆☆
(390)
Your right of course, I worked my way through 2.5 years of college, government wasn't very generous with the financial aid. I was in for Electrical Engineering, but didn't see that happened, took what I needed to get an AA degree, least it was something. Most of those classes we garbage required classes, had little to nothing to do with electronics. Even the required class that were electronics, wasn't anything different from the high school shop classes I took. Really should have gone for Computer Science at the time, but desk top computers were basically toys back then. Those classes filled quick though, and figured it take a while. Wasn't easy to work, and study, young, and wanting to have fun. I stay play with electronics, probably always will.

Like I said in an earlier post, I just feel there is something not quite right about the science or conclusions. The warming seems entirely normal, natural, the CO2 just seems coincidental, and the IPCC goes to great length, with a long circumstantial chain, to put it all off on man-made CO2, and 'Fossil Fuels'. There real is no conceivable way we can watch atmospheric molecules in nature, only in a sealed container, in a lab. The atmosphere is obviously not a sealed container, nor can you simulate one in the lab, except on a computer, in software. I do have some programming experience, mostly machine language for microcontrollers. Working on C+, but I don't take well to the structure. Don't have a lot of trouble going through other people's work, and pulling out the parts I need, modifying it. Still more of a code-pirate, than actually righting my own C routines. If the models are right, the science is sound, no reason not to openly share, time is short. More people working on this crisis, the quicker the could get people to act. The results need to be verified and validated, just not happening in this case.

'Climate', is a word that can be used in a number of ways, other than weather related. In the context it was taken out of, we were discussing a 1.5 c increase in temperature, which is rather insignificant. Weather isn't entirely driven by heat, usually a difference in temperature, moving from on place to another. Like our winter weather pattern, is a cold front from up north, hits our warm air, we get rain, then a day or two of cold (50s). Summer, we get a sea breeze off the east coast, and west coast, depending on wind speed, ant temperature difference, we get a storm where the collide, sometimes just a sprinkle, often a thunderstorm and torrential rain, occasionally tornadoes. But, the IPCC would have me believe its all just temperature and CO2, just doesn't pass as the truth to me.
01-01-2019 00:09
Into the Night
★★★★★
(6962)
Wake wrote:
None of the models, not ONE, has shown not only any accuracy in predicting temperature changes, but operating backwards has even been able to predict the climate that was. Now this is important because it is the past temperatures that supposedly directed the calculation of the computer models.

So you cannot say one single word about IPCC predictions with any knowledge whatsoever.

And there is far more to this than you seem to realize. The "predictions" of the IPCC are "from the start of the industrial period". That is 1880 or just 30 years after the agreed upon end of the Little Ice Age.

The 'Little Ice Age' started around 1245 and is generally agreed to be ended in 1715, Wake. That was was the last time the Thames river in London froze over every year. The industrial revolution began in 1750.
Wake wrote:
Tell me - wouldn't you expect the temperatures to warm after the end of an extremely cold period in which the entire subcontinent of Greenland was rendered uninhabitable? Where Alaskan Glaciers grew as much as 30 miles from their previous bases?

Greenland was never rendered uninhabitable. People still live there today. First colonies of Vikings arrived in Greenland around 930 AD. That colony survived until about 1350 or so. No one knows what killed them, but it was probably a combination of raids from the Inuit, the taxes from Rome, isolation as trade with Norway fell off, and their own mismanagement of their resources. The 'Little Ice Age' didn't help, but they survived it for quite awhile.
Wake wrote:
Just returning to "normal" pre-LIA temperatures would show the warming that we have seen. Also the rise in sea levels.

It is not possible to measure global sea level, Wake. No reference point.
Wake wrote:
Then the IPCC makes what is not a mistake but rather a totally unscientific prediction - that the world will not return to normal but will continue to heat at the same rate indefinitely.

They can't even define what 'normal' is!
Wake wrote:
There is absolutely NO basis for this. This is nothing more than political scare tactics in order to gain political control over as much of the world as possible.

True. This is the goal of the Church of Global Warming. It is also the same goal of the Church of Green and the Church of Karl Marx.
Wake wrote:
If you wish to believe that the IPCC conclusions are accurate then do so. But the rest of the world does not. China and India have simply signed the agreement and then totally ignored it. China is taking actions that reduced the horrible smog in the major cities and they tell people they are taking actions agreed upon with the IPCC. They are not by simply installing stack scrubbers - the technology developed in the US in the 1960's because of the smog problem especially in LA.

Coal burning particulates is not smog, Wake. Neither is sulfur dioxide (what scrubbers remove). Otherwise you are correct. China signed the document, then ignored it. Why not? That document is about control by monitoring a nation's contribution CO2. That is not possible to measure. Trump pulled out of the accord without signing it. He understood the thing is a waste of time and unenforceable, and is targeted to punish the United States.
Wake wrote:
To be rather pointed - I have yet to see any answers as to why NASA counterfeited their own temperature data lists in 1998 and again in 2008. I have yet to see any answers as to how NASA had temperature data from areas around the world where neither they or any local authorities have weather stations to record such data.

Counterfeiting random numbers produces random numbers, Wake. There was never any global temperature data. It is not possible to measure the temperature of the Earth.
Wake wrote:
And most importantly, since it is nearly impossible to correct temperature for the Urban Heat Island Effect I would like to know why they haven't explained this problem.

Irrelevant. In any statistical analysis, RAW data must be used. Cooking data renders it useless. Selection MUST be by randN. That means that if a data point is selected, it may be selected ONCE and only ONCE, not twice, not three times, not 0.7 times, ONCE. Any other selection method introduces bias and renders the analysis useless.

NO correction for 'urban island effect' is allowed.


The Parrot Killer
01-01-2019 00:34
Into the Night
★★★★★
(6962)
HarveyH55 wrote:
How about the use of Chlorine in drinking water, pools, or Fluorine? Aren't these also greenhouse gasses, which we've been releasing in to the atmosphere, in large quantities for quite some time. Not sure when water treatment started, but both have other industrial applications.

Maybe, sugary, carbonated beverages. The industrial revolution mass produced many things, that also released 'greenhouse' gases. I just find it odd that it's only CO2, from burning 'fossil fuels' that's the only problem worth consideration. Our many energy source is 'Fossil Fuels', and cutting their use, is going to significantly cut available energy. Alternatives aren't cheap, as efficient. Low power, more efficient replacements for existing equipment, aren't readily available, cheap, or as efficient.

Oddly enough, chlorine and fluorine sources have already been attacked for their 'contribution' to the 'ozone hole problem'. The biggest use of chlorine is in the form of sodium chloride, or common table salt. Chlorine gas itself is used as a bleaching agent in paper mills, water treatment. It is also used to produce many plastics, make explosives, etc. Some folks in the Church of Global Warming label CFC's, like R-12 and FFC's, like R134a, as 'greenhouse' gases. The Church of the Ozone Hole is specifically concerned about CFC's.
HarveyH55 wrote:
The IPCC never promises to stop, or reverse the warming trend, just that me might slow it down, so another generation can deal with it. A lot of people are struggling as it is, and a quick change to alternative energy sources, will literally kill many of them. Rich folks will ride out the storm, some better than others, but quite a few will grow their wealth, at an alarming rate... Seems like the 'cure' is scarier than the weather and natural disasters being predicted. I've survived some pretty nasty weather events, so have millions of others. But then again, I've been through several financial hardships, and survived as well. Least with the weather, it's relatively a brief event, and you can pick up the pieces afterwards. Financial hardships take years sometimes, takes almost a miracle to turn things around, like landing a better paying job, when few people are hiring. It's depressing, to work long hours, tight survivalist budget, and have very little left of you paycheck, after the most basic expenses are paid...

It can be quite depressing to work so hard and make so little. Prices of wages, however, are determined by market forces (like anything else). To make more money, you have to produce something that few others produce, or produce something much cheaper than it costs others to produce.


The Parrot Killer
01-01-2019 00:36
Into the Night
★★★★★
(6962)
wdmn wrote:
Weather is what's happening, Climate is how we perceive our environment. The climate can FEEL warm, hot, cold, damp, wet, dry. The perception isn't shared equally from person to person.


Well folks, there you have it. This is Harvey's commitment to truth and inquiry on display. You have the internet or a dictionary? You can see that he has not a clue what he's talking about, OR he's deliberately attempting to mislead.

Either way, I rest my case.


Okay then. Define 'global warming' or 'climate change'. Remember, you can't define a word with itself.

Feel to quote any dictionary you wish. Quote it here, rather than just vaguely saying it's a simple definition.


The Parrot Killer
01-01-2019 00:39
Into the Night
★★★★★
(6962)
GasGuzzler wrote:
Wdmn,

Maybe I give YOU the benefit of the doubt that you're not just a troll.

I've been reading your posts and I'd like to give you a chance to explain.

You seem to be, like many others who have come here and failed, trying to associate a warming earth with extreme weather events. You have stated the Arctic is warming at a much faster rate.

Like Harvey, I see a whole lotta hooyey that don't add up. You correctly stated that weather events are created from temperature differential. One example is the jet. A stronger differential is a stronger jet. It has been my experience following my local weather for decades that a weak jet is typically benign weather.

Please explain how a warming Arctic is conducive to a stronger jet and extreme weather.

Maybe you back up a step and show me some actual data that shows extreme weather events are on the increase.....and the 1930s in the USA...what the hell was THAT all about??


Excellent. You caught this paradox. He did indeed claim the Artic is warming faster than the rest of the planet, then turned right around and claimed a stronger Jet stream.


The Parrot Killer
01-01-2019 00:42
Wake
★★★★★
(3894)
Into the Night wrote:
Wake wrote:
None of the models, not ONE, has shown not only any accuracy in predicting temperature changes, but operating backwards has even been able to predict the climate that was. Now this is important because it is the past temperatures that supposedly directed the calculation of the computer models.

So you cannot say one single word about IPCC predictions with any knowledge whatsoever.

And there is far more to this than you seem to realize. The "predictions" of the IPCC are "from the start of the industrial period". That is 1880 or just 30 years after the agreed upon end of the Little Ice Age.

The 'Little Ice Age' started around 1245 and is generally agreed to be ended in 1715, Wake. That was was the last time the Thames river in London froze over every year. The industrial revolution began in 1750.
Wake wrote:
Tell me - wouldn't you expect the temperatures to warm after the end of an extremely cold period in which the entire subcontinent of Greenland was rendered uninhabitable? Where Alaskan Glaciers grew as much as 30 miles from their previous bases?

Greenland was never rendered uninhabitable. People still live there today. First colonies of Vikings arrived in Greenland around 930 AD. That colony survived until about 1350 or so. No one knows what killed them, but it was probably a combination of raids from the Inuit, the taxes from Rome, isolation as trade with Norway fell off, and their own mismanagement of their resources. The 'Little Ice Age' didn't help, but they survived it for quite awhile.
Wake wrote:
Just returning to "normal" pre-LIA temperatures would show the warming that we have seen. Also the rise in sea levels.

It is not possible to measure global sea level, Wake. No reference point.
Wake wrote:
Then the IPCC makes what is not a mistake but rather a totally unscientific prediction - that the world will not return to normal but will continue to heat at the same rate indefinitely.

They can't even define what 'normal' is!
Wake wrote:
There is absolutely NO basis for this. This is nothing more than political scare tactics in order to gain political control over as much of the world as possible.

True. This is the goal of the Church of Global Warming. It is also the same goal of the Church of Green and the Church of Karl Marx.
Wake wrote:
If you wish to believe that the IPCC conclusions are accurate then do so. But the rest of the world does not. China and India have simply signed the agreement and then totally ignored it. China is taking actions that reduced the horrible smog in the major cities and they tell people they are taking actions agreed upon with the IPCC. They are not by simply installing stack scrubbers - the technology developed in the US in the 1960's because of the smog problem especially in LA.

Coal burning particulates is not smog, Wake. Neither is sulfur dioxide (what scrubbers remove). Otherwise you are correct. China signed the document, then ignored it. Why not? That document is about control by monitoring a nation's contribution CO2. That is not possible to measure. Trump pulled out of the accord without signing it. He understood the thing is a waste of time and unenforceable, and is targeted to punish the United States.
Wake wrote:
To be rather pointed - I have yet to see any answers as to why NASA counterfeited their own temperature data lists in 1998 and again in 2008. I have yet to see any answers as to how NASA had temperature data from areas around the world where neither they or any local authorities have weather stations to record such data.

Counterfeiting random numbers produces random numbers, Wake. There was never any global temperature data. It is not possible to measure the temperature of the Earth.
Wake wrote:
And most importantly, since it is nearly impossible to correct temperature for the Urban Heat Island Effect I would like to know why they haven't explained this problem.

Irrelevant. In any statistical analysis, RAW data must be used. Cooking data renders it useless. Selection MUST be by randN. That means that if a data point is selected, it may be selected ONCE and only ONCE, not twice, not three times, not 0.7 times, ONCE. Any other selection method introduces bias and renders the analysis useless.

NO correction for 'urban island effect' is allowed.


The Little Ice Age was a period of regionally cold conditions between roughly AD 1300 and 1850. This was roughly split into two long periods not of really cold but of colder than normal weather. It doesn't require a lot of cold global temperatures to cause glaciers to grow and sea ice to grows much thicker than normal.

Whereas the "Industrial Revolution" was in the 18th Century is didn't have any real effect until 1880 or so when large scale manufacturing really began.

We don[t need any of your uneducated misunderstandings of Mean Global Temperature.
01-01-2019 01:10
Into the Night
★★★★★
(6962)
Wake wrote:
wdmn wrote:
Weather is what's happening, Climate is how we perceive our environment. The climate can FEEL warm, hot, cold, damp, wet, dry. The perception isn't shared equally from person to person.


Well folks, there you have it. This is Harvey's commitment to truth and inquiry on display. You have the internet or a dictionary? You can see that he has not a clue what he's talking about, OR he's deliberately attempting to mislead.

Either way, I rest my case.


Unfortunately we do not have people purposely misleading people. They honestly believe what they honestly believe.

The educational system has been slowly and surely destroyed because it requires ignorant people to be handled by a bureaucratic government composed of hundreds of little Fiefdoms.

I'm retired as is my wife. I was a high school dropout from the 60's that went into the Air Force and was put through 6 months of basic electronics training. After getting out I built that into a nice career - technician, senior technician, jr engineer, engineer, sr. engineer and finally a manager which I hated and dropped back to sr. engineer but once you've been a department head it is difficult not to fix things in a bad company so I would hire on as an engineer and end up straightening up the companies I would work for. It was staggering how graduate engineers or even post grads could not do half the work that I could. In one company I had six engineers working for me and I still had to do half of the hardware design, write the entire real time operating system and then finish half of the application software. ONE VS SIX!

I don't believe you. You have already demonstrated your lack of understanding of anything electrical or electronic, and I know you couldn't code your way out of a wet paper bag.
Wake wrote:
My wife was a teacher and she had something rather informative to say. When they taught high school they used text books from the 1950's and 60's. But when they taught the advanced classes they used textbooks from the 1920's.

I don't believe you. There are no 'advanced classes' in high school. There are required courses and elective courses. That's it. You are also making a void argument fallacy.
Wake wrote:
So when you see the almost unbelievable ignorance displayed on these groups (nightmare is a perfect example) you can write this off to an education that was purposely designed to not teach whatever subject it was supposed to be. Education made to either ill educate or to not educate at all.

Funny how a lot of people are actually building things like cars, spaceships that travel to the Moon and other planets, computers that are dirt cheap, networks to tie them together into a functional whole, machines that automate everything from washing your dishes and clothes to understanding your voice, recognize faces, or drive your car, improve medicine to the point where heart transplants are almost passe` and major surgery can often be done with an incision no more than an inch across. Guess the education system has failed, eh?
Wake wrote:
Most Americans are well aware of this. They can see what has occurred to their own children. People do not like to think that they are smarter than they own children who they paid vast sums to send through college but they are watching it and wondering. There is only one thing to do - get the government entirely out of education and leave it to the states who are much more under state control - under voter control.

Education is not that bad, Wake. Sure, a lot of indoctrination takes place there, but education is still occurring.
Wake wrote:
So don't think that people are lying to you so much as they think they're telling the truth and couldn't find the truth if it was staring them in the eyes.

The truth is staring at YOU in the eyes, Wake.

Your electrical knowledge? You can't even correctly describe power distribution systems. You have trouble understanding your home wiring.

Your electronics knowledge? You can't even correctly describe light or its properties correctly. You seem to have no knowledge of oscillators or how to design one. Because of your lack of expertise in power distribution systems, you can't design a power supply safely.

Your programming knowledge? You have written no operating system. You don't understand any of the concepts of either a real-time system or any form of time sharing system. Your knowledge of AI is zero. Your knowledge of network technology is almost zero (you happen to use it, which is why I don't say zero). You have demonstrated your lack of knowledge already with instrumentation programming. At best you're a script kiddie.

You still continue to deny theories of science such as the Stefan-Boltzmann law. You still continue to deny mathematics such as probability and statistical mathematics. You still continue to deny logic. You still continue to deny philosophy, especially phenomenology. You still continue to quote history that never happened. You still continue to manufacture history, data, and fake claims of expertise. You still continue to project your illiteracy on anyone that doesn't agree with you.

You especially dislike me because I show others what you are.


The Parrot Killer
01-01-2019 01:27
James___
★★★☆☆
(955)
This would make a good episode for the Twilight Zone. It's like that "She Shed she said" commercial. Neither of you understand the difference between an electron in electrical engineering and an electron in electronics. It might be this understanding that most of physics today is rooted in but neither of you seem to understand the fork in the road.
01-01-2019 02:13
Into the Night
★★★★★
(6962)
James___ wrote:
This would make a good episode for the Twilight Zone. It's like that "She Shed she said" commercial. Neither of you understand the difference between an electron in electrical engineering and an electron in electronics.

There is none, James.
James___ wrote:
It might be this understanding that most of physics today is rooted in but neither of you seem to understand the fork in the road.

There is no fork in that road, James.


The Parrot Killer
01-01-2019 04:04
James___
★★★☆☆
(955)
Into the Night wrote:
James___ wrote:
This would make a good episode for the Twilight Zone. It's like that "She Shed she said" commercial. Neither of you understand the difference between an electron in electrical engineering and an electron in electronics.

There is none, James.
James___ wrote:
It might be this understanding that most of physics today is rooted in but neither of you seem to understand the fork in the road.

There is no fork in that road, James.


Happy New Years ITN. Every road has a fork in it. The only question is if you noticed it. If not then you are not aware that the straight line that you are traveling isn't straight.
01-01-2019 11:26
HarveyH55
★★☆☆☆
(390)
Why do they even use the 'greenhouse' analogy? Far as I know, there is no ceiling or enclosure, the atmosphere is in a way, flexible. Hot air rises in a greenhouse, until it hits the ceiling, but would thing that the hot air could keep rising in the atmosphere, until it conducts enough heat away, to fall back to the ground level. I know materials heat, cool, a dissipate heat differently, suppose atmospheric molecules are the same. We use aluminum to conduct heat away from semiconductors in high power circuits. Insulation is slow to conduct heat. Think focusing on CO2, we sort of lose sight that there are other molecules out there, that conduct heat differently. Heat will always rise away from the surface, and there is no ceiling or enclosure to stop it. This is kind of where the lab and paper observations differ from the outside world. Suppose it could be argued, that the far upper atmosphere is thin on molecules, mostly an insulator, but it's not going to stay thin, if a warm molecule can still rise, but it's chilly up there, and those molecules will cool off kind of quick.
01-01-2019 19:47
Wake
★★★★★
(3894)
James___ wrote:
This would make a good episode for the Twilight Zone. It's like that "She Shed she said" commercial. Neither of you understand the difference between an electron in electrical engineering and an electron in electronics. It might be this understanding that most of physics today is rooted in but neither of you seem to understand the fork in the road.


Nightmare is now reduced to saying "I don't believe you" or "Flangalantafleecy" or other things he got from his "Big Book of Words To Make You Sound Smart".

He has so little education he can tell us all that thousands and thousands of scientists on this planet that have studied all of the manners in which to measure Mean Global Temperature are stupid whereas he is bright and can tell us that it isn't possible to measure. He doesn't even understand that MGT is a mathematical average and the a slight change in that average can signal large changes in localized temperatures.

For over 100 years we have sent weather balloons up to the edge of space and compared surface temperatures to those at the top of the atmosphere which gives us the emission factor of the planet but such things do not exist in Nightmare's universe.

You have watched him write many times now that visible light showing on a non-reflective surface does not heat it. According to him it is only infrared that heats the Earth. Of course 80% of the energy that falls on the Earth is in the visible wavelengths and the Earth would not be the temperature it is were not those visible energies absorbed and causing heating of the Earth but this somehow doesn't click with Nightmare.

He is unaware that the blanketing effect of the atmosphere raises the expected surface temperature of the Earth something like 30 degrees C.

So perhaps to you this is a duel but to anyone with scientific knowledge it is plainly an idiot against a person with knowledge. Oh, wait, Nightmare saying "I don't believe you" nullifies my 40 years in science research and development.

He doesn't believe that I designed all of the electronics and programmed the Thoratec RAS1000 and RAS1600 which was used to detect and identify HIV which we then used to clear the world's blood banking systems of HIV and hence cut the number of straight people contracting AIDS to nearly zero. Do you realize this stupid bstrd argued that I couldn't have done it because I misspelled Dr. Kary Mullis' name as Kerry? You have to have a pretty sick mind to have to stoop to something like that. Dr. Mullis won a Nobel Prize in Chemistry which he would have had a hard time of doing without my work for him.

He doesn't believe that I designed the digital portion of the ClearCom beltpack which was used for switching from station to station. These are used on movie and television sets all over the world and are now the standard. ClearCom has since been bought up by an English firm and most of the Engineering is done there. Their chief engineer is Charley Button whom I work for on many projects since he is one of the best analog designers in the world but doesn't know didley squat about digital design. Charley made 3 Emmy Awards off of his intercom designs and ClearCom got one additional. Charley was more famous for designing the sound system for the Grateful Dead so that open air concerts didn't echo.

I designed and programmed simple bus communications cards and then was the interface with NASA since they were used on the original American space station which has become expanded into the International Space Station.

To Nightmare he can make all of this null and void by saying "I don't believe you". Think about that for a moment. How would I even KNOW about these things if I hadn't done them? But the sick mind of Nightmare will continue on telling us that visible light doesn't warm the Earth and that we can't tell the temperature of the surface of the Sun or Mean Global Temperature of the Earth and the other planets.

This is a guy that people are actually responding to on these groups. A mental case that is growing progressively worse and not better over time.
Edited on 01-01-2019 20:28
01-01-2019 21:35
Into the Night
★★★★★
(6962)
Wake wrote:
Nightmare is now reduced to saying "I don't believe you" or "Flangalantafleecy" or other things he got from his "Big Book of Words To Make You Sound Smart".

Ah. Your usual insult. I usually number these.
Wake wrote:
He has so little education he can tell us all that thousands and thousands of scientists on this planet that have studied all of the manners in which to measure Mean Global Temperature are stupid whereas he is bright and can tell us that it isn't possible to measure.

Science isn't measurement, Wake. Science is a set of falsifiable theories. Measuring the temperature of the Earth is a statistical analysis problem (mathematics, which you deny), not science. False authority fallacy. Argument from randU fallacy.
Wake wrote:
He doesn't even understand that MGT is a mathematical average and the a slight change in that average can signal large changes in localized temperatures.

Averages are useless without the rest of the mathematics, Wake. The margin of error calculation is a required calculation in statistical math.

Math error. Failure to select by randN. Failure to normalize by paired randU. Failure to calculate margin of error. Failure to show provide raw data. Failure to remove biasing influences. Failure to specify source of variance.
Wake wrote:
For over 100 years we have sent weather balloons up to the edge of space and compared surface temperatures to those at the top of the atmosphere which gives us the emission factor of the planet but such things do not exist in Nightmare's universe.

Balloons do not give us the emissivity of Earth. You cannot determine emissivity by comparing temperatures at two different altitudes.
Wake wrote:
You have watched him write many times now that visible light showing on a non-reflective surface does not heat it.

It generally doesn't. See quantum physics.
Wake wrote:
According to him it is only infrared that heats the Earth.

That's right. It is infrared light that primarily heats the Earth. See quantum physics.
Wake wrote:
Of course 80% of the energy that falls on the Earth is in the visible wavelengths

WRONG. The largest share of energy from the Sun is infrared, even though the peak is in the visible range. See a frequency chart and the spectrum of the Sun.
Wake wrote:
and the Earth would not be the temperature it is were not those visible energies absorbed and causing heating of the Earth but this somehow doesn't click with Nightmare.

Visible light does not cause a lot of heating, if any. See quantum physics.
Wake wrote:
He is unaware that the blanketing effect of the atmosphere raises the expected surface temperature of the Earth something like 30 degrees C.

No, it doesn't. There is no 'expected' surface temperature. The emissivity of Earth is unknown. The atmosphere is not an energy source. See the 1st law of thermodynamics.
Wake wrote:
So perhaps to you this is a duel but to anyone with scientific knowledge it is plainly an idiot against a person with knowledge. Oh, wait, Nightmare saying "I don't believe you" nullifies my 40 years in science research and development.

No, your own statements nullify that. I don't know what you've been doing for 40 years, but it isn't science research or development.
Wake wrote:
He doesn't believe that I designed all of the electronics and programmed the Thoratec RAS1000 and RAS1600 which was used to detect and identify HIV which we then used to clear the world's blood banking systems of HIV and hence cut the number of straight people contracting AIDS to nearly zero.

That's right. I don't believe you.
Wake wrote:
Do you realize this stupid bstrd argued that I couldn't have done it because I misspelled Dr. Kary Mullis' name as Kerry? You have to have a pretty sick mind to have to stoop to something like that. Dr. Mullis won a Nobel Prize in Chemistry which he would have had a hard time of doing without my work for him.

Irrelevance fallacy.
Wake wrote:
He doesn't believe that I designed the digital portion of the ClearCom beltpack which was used for switching from station to station.

That's right. I don't believe you.
Wake wrote:
I designed and programmed simple bus communications cards and then was the interface with NASA since they were used on the original American space station which has become expanded into the International Space Station.

The original American space station burned up when it fell out of orbit, Wake. I don't believe you.
Wake wrote:
To Nightmare he can make all of this null and void by saying "I don't believe you".

Using any credentials, licenses, past experience, or claims of any such thing, mean nothing on blind forums, Wake. You can't use them as the authority of any argument.
Wake wrote:
Think about that for a moment. How would I even KNOW about these things if I hadn't done them?

Easy, the internet, and making things up.
Wake wrote:
But the sick mind of Nightmare will continue on telling us that visible light doesn't warm the Earth

It generally doesn't. See quantum physics.
Wake wrote:
and that we can't tell the temperature of the surface of the Sun

You can, within a few thousands of degrees. Useless for the purposes of the Church of Global Warming.
Wake wrote:
or Mean Global Temperature of the Earth and the other planets.

You can't. You don't have enough thermometers. You deny mathematics.
Wake wrote:
This is a guy that people are actually responding to on these groups. A mental case that is growing progressively worse and not better over time.

Insult fallacy.


The Parrot Killer
01-01-2019 21:54
Wake
★★★★★
(3894)
Into the Night wrote:
Wake wrote:
Nightmare is now reduced to saying "I don't believe you" or "Flangalantafleecy" or other things he got from his "Big Book of Words To Make You Sound Smart".

Ah. Your usual insult. I usually number these.
Wake wrote:
He has so little education he can tell us all that thousands and thousands of scientists on this planet that have studied all of the manners in which to measure Mean Global Temperature are stupid whereas he is bright and can tell us that it isn't possible to measure.

Science isn't measurement, Wake. Science is a set of falsifiable theories. Measuring the temperature of the Earth is a statistical analysis problem (mathematics, which you deny), not science. False authority fallacy. Argument from randU fallacy.
Wake wrote:
He doesn't even understand that MGT is a mathematical average and the a slight change in that average can signal large changes in localized temperatures.

Averages are useless without the rest of the mathematics, Wake. The margin of error calculation is a required calculation in statistical math.

Math error. Failure to select by randN. Failure to normalize by paired randU. Failure to calculate margin of error. Failure to show provide raw data. Failure to remove biasing influences. Failure to specify source of variance.
Wake wrote:
For over 100 years we have sent weather balloons up to the edge of space and compared surface temperatures to those at the top of the atmosphere which gives us the emission factor of the planet but such things do not exist in Nightmare's universe.

Balloons do not give us the emissivity of Earth. You cannot determine emissivity by comparing temperatures at two different altitudes.
Wake wrote:
You have watched him write many times now that visible light showing on a non-reflective surface does not heat it.

It generally doesn't. See quantum physics.
Wake wrote:
According to him it is only infrared that heats the Earth.

That's right. It is infrared light that primarily heats the Earth. See quantum physics.
Wake wrote:
Of course 80% of the energy that falls on the Earth is in the visible wavelengths

WRONG. The largest share of energy from the Sun is infrared, even though the peak is in the visible range. See a frequency chart and the spectrum of the Sun.
Wake wrote:
and the Earth would not be the temperature it is were not those visible energies absorbed and causing heating of the Earth but this somehow doesn't click with Nightmare.

Visible light does not cause a lot of heating, if any. See quantum physics.
Wake wrote:
He is unaware that the blanketing effect of the atmosphere raises the expected surface temperature of the Earth something like 30 degrees C.

No, it doesn't. There is no 'expected' surface temperature. The emissivity of Earth is unknown. The atmosphere is not an energy source. See the 1st law of thermodynamics.
Wake wrote:
So perhaps to you this is a duel but to anyone with scientific knowledge it is plainly an idiot against a person with knowledge. Oh, wait, Nightmare saying "I don't believe you" nullifies my 40 years in science research and development.

No, your own statements nullify that. I don't know what you've been doing for 40 years, but it isn't science research or development.
Wake wrote:
He doesn't believe that I designed all of the electronics and programmed the Thoratec RAS1000 and RAS1600 which was used to detect and identify HIV which we then used to clear the world's blood banking systems of HIV and hence cut the number of straight people contracting AIDS to nearly zero.

That's right. I don't believe you.
Wake wrote:
Do you realize this stupid bstrd argued that I couldn't have done it because I misspelled Dr. Kary Mullis' name as Kerry? You have to have a pretty sick mind to have to stoop to something like that. Dr. Mullis won a Nobel Prize in Chemistry which he would have had a hard time of doing without my work for him.

Irrelevance fallacy.
Wake wrote:
He doesn't believe that I designed the digital portion of the ClearCom beltpack which was used for switching from station to station.

That's right. I don't believe you.
Wake wrote:
I designed and programmed simple bus communications cards and then was the interface with NASA since they were used on the original American space station which has become expanded into the International Space Station.

The original American space station burned up when it fell out of orbit, Wake. I don't believe you.
Wake wrote:
To Nightmare he can make all of this null and void by saying "I don't believe you".

Using any credentials, licenses, past experience, or claims of any such thing, mean nothing on blind forums, Wake. You can't use them as the authority of any argument.
Wake wrote:
Think about that for a moment. How would I even KNOW about these things if I hadn't done them?

Easy, the internet, and making things up.
Wake wrote:
But the sick mind of Nightmare will continue on telling us that visible light doesn't warm the Earth

It generally doesn't. See quantum physics.
Wake wrote:
and that we can't tell the temperature of the surface of the Sun

You can, within a few thousands of degrees. Useless for the purposes of the Church of Global Warming.
Wake wrote:
or Mean Global Temperature of the Earth and the other planets.

You can't. You don't have enough thermometers. You deny mathematics.
Wake wrote:
This is a guy that people are actually responding to on these groups. A mental case that is growing progressively worse and not better over time.

Insult fallacy.


Apparently you are a real dumbass aside from bring stupid. There is a difference between the Space Station and Skylab that burned up on reentry way back in 1979. But who is surprised that you are even more stupid that you usually act.

Insulting a moron like you isn't a falacy - it is an apt description of a loud-mouthed incompetent fool who couldn't find his own butt with both hands.
02-01-2019 00:20
Into the Night
★★★★★
(6962)
Wake wrote:
Into the Night wrote:
Wake wrote:
Nightmare is now reduced to saying "I don't believe you" or "Flangalantafleecy" or other things he got from his "Big Book of Words To Make You Sound Smart".

Ah. Your usual insult. I usually number these.
Wake wrote:
He has so little education he can tell us all that thousands and thousands of scientists on this planet that have studied all of the manners in which to measure Mean Global Temperature are stupid whereas he is bright and can tell us that it isn't possible to measure.

Science isn't measurement, Wake. Science is a set of falsifiable theories. Measuring the temperature of the Earth is a statistical analysis problem (mathematics, which you deny), not science. False authority fallacy. Argument from randU fallacy.
Wake wrote:
He doesn't even understand that MGT is a mathematical average and the a slight change in that average can signal large changes in localized temperatures.

Averages are useless without the rest of the mathematics, Wake. The margin of error calculation is a required calculation in statistical math.

Math error. Failure to select by randN. Failure to normalize by paired randU. Failure to calculate margin of error. Failure to show provide raw data. Failure to remove biasing influences. Failure to specify source of variance.
Wake wrote:
For over 100 years we have sent weather balloons up to the edge of space and compared surface temperatures to those at the top of the atmosphere which gives us the emission factor of the planet but such things do not exist in Nightmare's universe.

Balloons do not give us the emissivity of Earth. You cannot determine emissivity by comparing temperatures at two different altitudes.
Wake wrote:
You have watched him write many times now that visible light showing on a non-reflective surface does not heat it.

It generally doesn't. See quantum physics.
Wake wrote:
According to him it is only infrared that heats the Earth.

That's right. It is infrared light that primarily heats the Earth. See quantum physics.
Wake wrote:
Of course 80% of the energy that falls on the Earth is in the visible wavelengths

WRONG. The largest share of energy from the Sun is infrared, even though the peak is in the visible range. See a frequency chart and the spectrum of the Sun.
Wake wrote:
and the Earth would not be the temperature it is were not those visible energies absorbed and causing heating of the Earth but this somehow doesn't click with Nightmare.

Visible light does not cause a lot of heating, if any. See quantum physics.
Wake wrote:
He is unaware that the blanketing effect of the atmosphere raises the expected surface temperature of the Earth something like 30 degrees C.

No, it doesn't. There is no 'expected' surface temperature. The emissivity of Earth is unknown. The atmosphere is not an energy source. See the 1st law of thermodynamics.
Wake wrote:
So perhaps to you this is a duel but to anyone with scientific knowledge it is plainly an idiot against a person with knowledge. Oh, wait, Nightmare saying "I don't believe you" nullifies my 40 years in science research and development.

No, your own statements nullify that. I don't know what you've been doing for 40 years, but it isn't science research or development.
Wake wrote:
He doesn't believe that I designed all of the electronics and programmed the Thoratec RAS1000 and RAS1600 which was used to detect and identify HIV which we then used to clear the world's blood banking systems of HIV and hence cut the number of straight people contracting AIDS to nearly zero.

That's right. I don't believe you.
Wake wrote:
Do you realize this stupid bstrd argued that I couldn't have done it because I misspelled Dr. Kary Mullis' name as Kerry? You have to have a pretty sick mind to have to stoop to something like that. Dr. Mullis won a Nobel Prize in Chemistry which he would have had a hard time of doing without my work for him.

Irrelevance fallacy.
Wake wrote:
He doesn't believe that I designed the digital portion of the ClearCom beltpack which was used for switching from station to station.

That's right. I don't believe you.
Wake wrote:
I designed and programmed simple bus communications cards and then was the interface with NASA since they were used on the original American space station which has become expanded into the International Space Station.

The original American space station burned up when it fell out of orbit, Wake. I don't believe you.
Wake wrote:
To Nightmare he can make all of this null and void by saying "I don't believe you".

Using any credentials, licenses, past experience, or claims of any such thing, mean nothing on blind forums, Wake. You can't use them as the authority of any argument.
Wake wrote:
Think about that for a moment. How would I even KNOW about these things if I hadn't done them?

Easy, the internet, and making things up.
Wake wrote:
But the sick mind of Nightmare will continue on telling us that visible light doesn't warm the Earth

It generally doesn't. See quantum physics.
Wake wrote:
and that we can't tell the temperature of the surface of the Sun

You can, within a few thousands of degrees. Useless for the purposes of the Church of Global Warming.
Wake wrote:
or Mean Global Temperature of the Earth and the other planets.

You can't. You don't have enough thermometers. You deny mathematics.
Wake wrote:
This is a guy that people are actually responding to on these groups. A mental case that is growing progressively worse and not better over time.

Insult fallacy.


...deleted insult fallacies...
There is a difference between the Space Station and Skylab that burned up on reentry way back in 1979.
...deleted insult fallacies.

That's right! Apparently you haven't figured that out until just now!


The Parrot Killer
Edited on 02-01-2019 00:21
02-01-2019 01:01
Wake
★★★★★
(3894)
Well, at least we know that at this time Nightmare is proud of not being able to find his butt with both hands. Nightmare thinks he is a scientist because he is a certified aircraft mechanic is really going to impress us all with his intellect.
02-01-2019 01:34
Into the Night
★★★★★
(6962)
Wake wrote:
Well, at least we know that at this time Nightmare is proud of not being able to find his butt with both hands. Nightmare thinks he is a scientist because he is a certified aircraft mechanic is really going to impress us all with his intellect.


Any certified aircraft mechanic has more intellect than you, Wake. They actually had to learn a certain amount of physics before getting their license.


The Parrot Killer
02-01-2019 01:41
Wake
★★★★★
(3894)
Into the Night wrote:
Wake wrote:
Well, at least we know that at this time Nightmare is proud of not being able to find his butt with both hands. Nightmare thinks he is a scientist because he is a certified aircraft mechanic is really going to impress us all with his intellect.


Any certified aircraft mechanic has more intellect than you, Wake. They actually had to learn a certain amount of physics before getting their license.


Then by all means tell us what sort of physics you need to be an aircraft mechanic? You couldn't even properly explain the laws of motion.
02-01-2019 02:37
Into the Night
★★★★★
(6962)
Wake wrote:
Into the Night wrote:
Wake wrote:
Well, at least we know that at this time Nightmare is proud of not being able to find his butt with both hands. Nightmare thinks he is a scientist because he is a certified aircraft mechanic is really going to impress us all with his intellect.


Any certified aircraft mechanic has more intellect than you, Wake. They actually had to learn a certain amount of physics before getting their license.


Then by all means tell us what sort of physics you need to be an aircraft mechanic? You couldn't even properly explain the laws of motion.


Classical mechanics (including the law of motion...there is only one law: F=mA). Electricity. Electronics. Chemistry. Thermodynamics. Hydrodynamics. Aerodynamics. Ideal gas law. Metallurgy.

That's in addition to strength of materials, a bunch of federal regulations, the math for it all, etc.

I have no problem with fixing something on an aircraft where over a hundred lives are at stake because I can do it safely, and legally.


The Parrot Killer
02-01-2019 02:45
Wake
★★★★★
(3894)
Into the Night wrote:
Wake wrote:
Into the Night wrote:
Wake wrote:
Well, at least we know that at this time Nightmare is proud of not being able to find his butt with both hands. Nightmare thinks he is a scientist because he is a certified aircraft mechanic is really going to impress us all with his intellect.


Any certified aircraft mechanic has more intellect than you, Wake. They actually had to learn a certain amount of physics before getting their license.


Then by all means tell us what sort of physics you need to be an aircraft mechanic? You couldn't even properly explain the laws of motion.


Classical mechanics (including the law of motion...there is only one law: F=mA). Electricity. Electronics. Chemistry. Thermodynamics. Hydrodynamics. Aerodynamics. Ideal gas law. Metallurgy.

That's in addition to strength of materials, a bunch of federal regulations, the math for it all, etc.

I have no problem with fixing something on an aircraft where over a hundred lives are at stake because I can do it safely, and legally.


Exactly who do you think you're fooling? A certified aircraft mechanic needs to know NOTHING but how to follow the repair directions supplied by the manufacturer. And if you deviate ONE iota you can lose your certification. And your answer now makes me seriously doubt that you were ever certified.
02-01-2019 02:52
Into the Night
★★★★★
(6962)
Wake wrote:
Into the Night wrote:
Wake wrote:
Into the Night wrote:
Wake wrote:
Well, at least we know that at this time Nightmare is proud of not being able to find his butt with both hands. Nightmare thinks he is a scientist because he is a certified aircraft mechanic is really going to impress us all with his intellect.


Any certified aircraft mechanic has more intellect than you, Wake. They actually had to learn a certain amount of physics before getting their license.


Then by all means tell us what sort of physics you need to be an aircraft mechanic? You couldn't even properly explain the laws of motion.


Classical mechanics (including the law of motion...there is only one law: F=mA). Electricity. Electronics. Chemistry. Thermodynamics. Hydrodynamics. Aerodynamics. Ideal gas law. Metallurgy.

That's in addition to strength of materials, a bunch of federal regulations, the math for it all, etc.

I have no problem with fixing something on an aircraft where over a hundred lives are at stake because I can do it safely, and legally.


Exactly who do you think you're fooling? A certified aircraft mechanic needs to know NOTHING but how to follow the repair directions supplied by the manufacturer. And if you deviate ONE iota you can lose your certification. And your answer now makes me seriously doubt that you were ever certified.


Then go take the test, Wake. Let's see you pass it! LOL


The Parrot Killer
02-01-2019 02:59
Wake
★★★★★
(3894)
Into the Night wrote:
Wake wrote:
Into the Night wrote:
Wake wrote:
Into the Night wrote:
Wake wrote:
Well, at least we know that at this time Nightmare is proud of not being able to find his butt with both hands. Nightmare thinks he is a scientist because he is a certified aircraft mechanic is really going to impress us all with his intellect.


Any certified aircraft mechanic has more intellect than you, Wake. They actually had to learn a certain amount of physics before getting their license.


Then by all means tell us what sort of physics you need to be an aircraft mechanic? You couldn't even properly explain the laws of motion.


Classical mechanics (including the law of motion...there is only one law: F=mA). Electricity. Electronics. Chemistry. Thermodynamics. Hydrodynamics. Aerodynamics. Ideal gas law. Metallurgy.

That's in addition to strength of materials, a bunch of federal regulations, the math for it all, etc.

I have no problem with fixing something on an aircraft where over a hundred lives are at stake because I can do it safely, and legally.


Exactly who do you think you're fooling? A certified aircraft mechanic needs to know NOTHING but how to follow the repair directions supplied by the manufacturer. And if you deviate ONE iota you can lose your certification. And your answer now makes me seriously doubt that you were ever certified.


Then go take the test, Wake. Let's see you pass it! LOL


Why in he hell would I want to stoop to being a mechanic. I did that when I was 15 years old. Now I leave that to people who can't do any better such as you.
02-01-2019 03:26
Into the Night
★★★★★
(6962)
Wake wrote:
Into the Night wrote:
Wake wrote:
Into the Night wrote:
Wake wrote:
Into the Night wrote:
Wake wrote:
Well, at least we know that at this time Nightmare is proud of not being able to find his butt with both hands. Nightmare thinks he is a scientist because he is a certified aircraft mechanic is really going to impress us all with his intellect.


Any certified aircraft mechanic has more intellect than you, Wake. They actually had to learn a certain amount of physics before getting their license.


Then by all means tell us what sort of physics you need to be an aircraft mechanic? You couldn't even properly explain the laws of motion.


Classical mechanics (including the law of motion...there is only one law: F=mA). Electricity. Electronics. Chemistry. Thermodynamics. Hydrodynamics. Aerodynamics. Ideal gas law. Metallurgy.

That's in addition to strength of materials, a bunch of federal regulations, the math for it all, etc.

I have no problem with fixing something on an aircraft where over a hundred lives are at stake because I can do it safely, and legally.


Exactly who do you think you're fooling? A certified aircraft mechanic needs to know NOTHING but how to follow the repair directions supplied by the manufacturer. And if you deviate ONE iota you can lose your certification. And your answer now makes me seriously doubt that you were ever certified.


Then go take the test, Wake. Let's see you pass it! LOL


Why in he hell would I want to stoop to being a mechanic. I did that when I was 15 years old. Now I leave that to people who can't do any better such as you.

Minimum age for an aircraft mechanic is 18 years old, Wake! You flunk! LOL

Are you going to claim to be a pilot too??


The Parrot Killer
Edited on 02-01-2019 03:27
02-01-2019 16:22
Wake
★★★★★
(3894)
Into the Night wrote:
Wake wrote:
Why in he hell would I want to stoop to being a mechanic. I did that when I was 15 years old. Now I leave that to people who can't do any better such as you.

Minimum age for an aircraft mechanic is 18 years old, Wake! You flunk! LOL

Are you going to claim to be a pilot too??


And yet another example of the fool in action. When I was a mechanic it was 1959 and almost on que this worthless POS tells us about now. Well, I do not think that you are certified since you seem to think that you need physics to repair an aircraft rather than the aircraft manual. There is something seriously wrong in your mind and nothing is going to fix that and perhaps we ought to send your postings to the FAA since you appear to be a danger to people using aircraft.
02-01-2019 21:40
Into the Night
★★★★★
(6962)
Wake wrote:
Into the Night wrote:
Wake wrote:
Why in he hell would I want to stoop to being a mechanic. I did that when I was 15 years old. Now I leave that to people who can't do any better such as you.

Minimum age for an aircraft mechanic is 18 years old, Wake! You flunk! LOL

Are you going to claim to be a pilot too??


And yet another example of the fool in action. When I was a mechanic it was 1959 and almost on que this worthless POS tells us about now. Well, I do not think that you are certified since you seem to think that you need physics to repair an aircraft rather than the aircraft manual. There is something seriously wrong in your mind and nothing is going to fix that and perhaps we ought to send your postings to the FAA since you appear to be a danger to people using aircraft.


I don't believe you. You were never an aircraft mechanic. You go ahead and send my postings to the FAA. I know exactly what they're going to do with them.


The Parrot Killer
Edited on 02-01-2019 21:42
02-01-2019 23:46
Wake
★★★★★
(3894)
Into the Night wrote:
Wake wrote:
Into the Night wrote:
Wake wrote:
Why in he hell would I want to stoop to being a mechanic. I did that when I was 15 years old. Now I leave that to people who can't do any better such as you.

Minimum age for an aircraft mechanic is 18 years old, Wake! You flunk! LOL

Are you going to claim to be a pilot too??


And yet another example of the fool in action. When I was a mechanic it was 1959 and almost on que this worthless POS tells us about now. Well, I do not think that you are certified since you seem to think that you need physics to repair an aircraft rather than the aircraft manual. There is something seriously wrong in your mind and nothing is going to fix that and perhaps we ought to send your postings to the FAA since you appear to be a danger to people using aircraft.


I don't believe you. You were never an aircraft mechanic. You go ahead and send my postings to the FAA. I know exactly what they're going to do with them.


I do too. They're going to wonder what you could possibly do with physics, or at least your version of physics, which is nothing like the actual science, as an aircraft mechanic.
03-01-2019 03:54
Into the Night
★★★★★
(6962)
Wake wrote:
Into the Night wrote:
Wake wrote:
Into the Night wrote:
Wake wrote:
Why in he hell would I want to stoop to being a mechanic. I did that when I was 15 years old. Now I leave that to people who can't do any better such as you.

Minimum age for an aircraft mechanic is 18 years old, Wake! You flunk! LOL

Are you going to claim to be a pilot too??


And yet another example of the fool in action. When I was a mechanic it was 1959 and almost on que this worthless POS tells us about now. Well, I do not think that you are certified since you seem to think that you need physics to repair an aircraft rather than the aircraft manual. There is something seriously wrong in your mind and nothing is going to fix that and perhaps we ought to send your postings to the FAA since you appear to be a danger to people using aircraft.


I don't believe you. You were never an aircraft mechanic. You go ahead and send my postings to the FAA. I know exactly what they're going to do with them.


I do too. They're going to wonder what you could possibly do with physics, or at least your version of physics, which is nothing like the actual science, as an aircraft mechanic.


Did you know airplanes fly because of physics, Wake?


The Parrot Killer
03-01-2019 16:46
Wake
★★★★★
(3894)
Into the Night wrote: Did you know airplanes fly because of physics, Wake?

No, dumbass, airplanes fly because of the Wright Bros. who had no training in physics. Say something else stupid just to show the minute size of your brain.
03-01-2019 16:57
GasGuzzler
★★★★☆
(1086)
Wake wrote:
Into the Night wrote: Did you know airplanes fly because of physics, Wake?

No, dumbass, airplanes fly because of the Wright Bros. who had no training in physics. Say something else stupid just to show the minute size of your brain.


They kinda designed a plane that lost 1/2 a propeller and killed an army lieutenant. Just sayin.
03-01-2019 17:44
Wake
★★★★★
(3894)
GasGuzzler wrote:
Wake wrote:
Into the Night wrote: Did you know airplanes fly because of physics, Wake?

No, dumbass, airplanes fly because of the Wright Bros. who had no training in physics. Say something else stupid just to show the minute size of your brain.


They kinda designed a plane that lost 1/2 a propeller and killed an army lieutenant. Just sayin.


Flying was in its infancy and all of the Wright model C aircraft crashed mostly due to trying to climb too fast and stalling. But Curtis aircraft did as well.
03-01-2019 23:02
Into the Night
★★★★★
(6962)
Wake wrote:
Into the Night wrote: Did you know airplanes fly because of physics, Wake?

No, dumbass, airplanes fly because of the Wright Bros. who had no training in physics.

No? Building bicycles requires physics too, Wake.


The Parrot Killer
03-01-2019 23:03
Into the Night
★★★★★
(6962)
GasGuzzler wrote:
Wake wrote:
Into the Night wrote: Did you know airplanes fly because of physics, Wake?

No, dumbass, airplanes fly because of the Wright Bros. who had no training in physics. Say something else stupid just to show the minute size of your brain.


They kinda designed a plane that lost 1/2 a propeller and killed an army lieutenant. Just sayin.


Heh. That still happens! Rarely, but it still happens.


The Parrot Killer
03-01-2019 23:11
Into the Night
★★★★★
(6962)
Wake wrote:
GasGuzzler wrote:
Wake wrote:
Into the Night wrote: Did you know airplanes fly because of physics, Wake?

No, dumbass, airplanes fly because of the Wright Bros. who had no training in physics. Say something else stupid just to show the minute size of your brain.


They kinda designed a plane that lost 1/2 a propeller and killed an army lieutenant. Just sayin.


Flying was in its infancy and all of the Wright model C aircraft crashed mostly due to trying to climb too fast and stalling.

Nope. It was because of limited power and the lack of good lateral control.
Wake wrote:
But Curtis aircraft did as well.

Nope. Curtis invented the aileron. Their aircraft were a LOT more controllable because of it. There are still original Curtis designs flying today. We have one right here in Washington (a Curtis Jenny). The Wright company adopted use of the aileron as well and built several successful designs with it. Some of those are still flying today as well.

Any aircraft can stall. Even helicopters.


The Parrot Killer
03-01-2019 23:17
Into the Night
★★★★★
(6962)
Wake wrote:
Why in he hell would I want to stoop to being a mechanic.


Since you treat blue collar workers with such disdain, Wake, I hope the next plumber, auto mechanic, trucker, electrician, or carpenter you hire recognizes your attitude and takes revenge upon you. The way you treat people you figure are 'beneath' you is really pretty disgusting.

Fortunately for you, aircraft mechanics aren't going to take your personal problems into account. They will fix the aircraft you are riding in just the same. They know that a life, even a miserable and hate filled life like yours, is still a life.


The Parrot Killer
04-01-2019 00:23
Wake
★★★★★
(3894)
Into the Night wrote:
Wake wrote:
GasGuzzler wrote:
Wake wrote:
Into the Night wrote: Did you know airplanes fly because of physics, Wake?

No, dumbass, airplanes fly because of the Wright Bros. who had no training in physics. Say something else stupid just to show the minute size of your brain.


They kinda designed a plane that lost 1/2 a propeller and killed an army lieutenant. Just sayin.


Flying was in its infancy and all of the Wright model C aircraft crashed mostly due to trying to climb too fast and stalling.

Nope. It was because of limited power and the lack of good lateral control.
Wake wrote:
But Curtis aircraft did as well.

Nope. Curtis invented the aileron. Their aircraft were a LOT more controllable because of it. There are still original Curtis designs flying today. We have one right here in Washington (a Curtis Jenny). The Wright company adopted use of the aileron as well and built several successful designs with it. Some of those are still flying today as well.

Any aircraft can stall. Even helicopters.


There is no end to your stupidity. The early aircraft stalled because of insufficient power to climb.

The Wright Bros had three axis control by flexing the wings which was far more efficient than ailerons.

But Curtis stole the idea of Ailerons from the Wright Bros. and they didn't pursue it. In their patent they said that they were using wing warping but that any other number of methods could be used to change he airflow over the wings to cause three dimensional air controls. Their elevators and rudder used hinged surfaces.

And for your information no one knows what makes a bicycle remain upright. Every single theory has been proven inaccurate since they can build bicycles in any number of ways and they can still be ridden by a normal person. So shove your stupid ideas of what is and what isn't physics.

There isn't one F-ing thing you can talk about where you aren't wrong more than correct. Not that it will stop you.
04-01-2019 01:34
Into the Night
★★★★★
(6962)
Wake wrote:
Into the Night wrote:
Wake wrote:
GasGuzzler wrote:
Wake wrote:
[quote]Into the Night wrote: Did you know airplanes fly because of physics, Wake?

No, dumbass, airplanes fly because of the Wright Bros. who had no training in physics. Say something else stupid just to show the minute size of your brain.


They kinda designed a plane that lost 1/2 a propeller and killed an army lieutenant. Just sayin.


Flying was in its infancy and all of the Wright model C aircraft crashed mostly due to trying to climb too fast and stalling.

Nope. It was because of limited power and the lack of good lateral control.
Wake wrote:
But Curtis aircraft did as well.

Nope. Curtis invented the aileron. Their aircraft were a LOT more controllable because of it. There are still original Curtis designs flying today. We have one right here in Washington (a Curtis Jenny). The Wright company adopted use of the aileron as well and built several successful designs with it. Some of those are still flying today as well.

Any aircraft can stall. Even helicopters.


There is no end to your stupidity. The early aircraft stalled because of insufficient power to climb.
Wake wrote:
The Wright Bros had three axis control by flexing the wings which was far more efficient than ailerons.
[quote]Wake wrote:
But Curtis stole the idea of Ailerons from the Wright Bros. and they didn't pursue it.

Nope. Curtis Aircraft invented the aileron. The Wright Aircraft company copied it.
Wake wrote:
In their patent they said that they were using wing warping but that any other number of methods could be used to change he airflow over the wings to cause three dimensional air controls.

Their first aircraft was wing warping for lateral control. It didn't work very well.
Wake wrote:
Their elevators and rudder used hinged surfaces.
The Wright flyer had no rudder. The elevator was not a hinged surface.
Wake wrote:
And for your information no one knows what makes a bicycle remain upright.
It's called gyroscopics, Wake.
Wake wrote:
Every single theory has been proven inaccurate since they can build bicycles in any number of ways and they can still be ridden by a normal person.
Of course they can.
Wake wrote:
So shove your stupid ideas of what is and what isn't physics.
So now you deny classical mechanics as well. Not surprising.
Wake wrote:
There isn't one F-ing thing you can talk about where you aren't wrong more than correct. Not that it will stop you.

Bulverism fallacy.


The Parrot Killer
04-01-2019 17:09
Wake
★★★★★
(3894)
Into the Night wrote:
Wake wrote:
Into the Night wrote:
Wake wrote:
GasGuzzler wrote:
[quote]Wake wrote:
[quote]Into the Night wrote: Did you know airplanes fly because of physics, Wake?

No, dumbass, airplanes fly because of the Wright Bros. who had no training in physics. Say something else stupid just to show the minute size of your brain.


They kinda designed a plane that lost 1/2 a propeller and killed an army lieutenant. Just sayin.


Flying was in its infancy and all of the Wright model C aircraft crashed mostly due to trying to climb too fast and stalling.

Nope. It was because of limited power and the lack of good lateral control.
Wake wrote:
But Curtis aircraft did as well.

Nope. Curtis invented the aileron. Their aircraft were a LOT more controllable because of it. There are still original Curtis designs flying today. We have one right here in Washington (a Curtis Jenny). The Wright company adopted use of the aileron as well and built several successful designs with it. Some of those are still flying today as well.

Any aircraft can stall. Even helicopters.


There is no end to your stupidity. The early aircraft stalled because of insufficient power to climb.
Wake wrote:
The Wright Bros had three axis control by flexing the wings which was far more efficient than ailerons.
Wake wrote:
But Curtis stole the idea of Ailerons from the Wright Bros. and they didn't pursue it.

Nope. Curtis Aircraft invented the aileron. The Wright Aircraft company copied it.
Wake wrote:
In their patent they said that they were using wing warping but that any other number of methods could be used to change he airflow over the wings to cause three dimensional air controls.

Their first aircraft was wing warping for lateral control. It didn't work very well.
Wake wrote:
Their elevators and rudder used hinged surfaces.
The Wright flyer had no rudder. The elevator was not a hinged surface.
Wake wrote:
And for your information no one knows what makes a bicycle remain upright.
It's called gyroscopics, Wake.
Wake wrote:
Every single theory has been proven inaccurate since they can build bicycles in any number of ways and they can still be ridden by a normal person.
Of course they can.
Wake wrote:
So shove your stupid ideas of what is and what isn't physics.
So now you deny classical mechanics as well. Not surprising.
Wake wrote:
There isn't one F-ing thing you can talk about where you aren't wrong more than correct. Not that it will stop you.

Bulverism fallacy.


More words from your "Big Book of Words To Make You Sound Smart" doesn't change anything.

The AILERON is in the copyright that the Wright Bros had. Pretending that Glen Curtis did anything other than copy it is the sort of thing you like to do just to sound clever. You're not.

The ignorance of you knows absolutely no bounds. Cornell University, MIT and Cambridge departments of mechanical engineering have studied the problem of bicycles for more than a century but you actually know what they don't. You really are a moron! Centrifugal force indeed! I can come to a complete stop with my feet on the pedals. Every cyclist can slow to the point where there is no effective centrifugal force. You can tell professors on 6 continents that they don't know what they're talking about. You cannot build a bicycle that cannot be balanced by a rider and not a "good" rider but a normal rider. Penny Farthings had none of the geometry of the modern bicycle and yet they could not only be ridden but raced.

https://www.nature.com/news/the-bicycle-problem-that-nearly-broke-mathematics-1.20281

I know classical mechanics and you pretend to. You are telling us that you need to know physics to repair aircraft. People like you are why Boeing moved their headquarters out of Washington. The mental illness of leftists knows absolutely no bounds.
05-01-2019 12:22
Tim the plumber
★★★★☆
(1284)
Wake wrote:
wdmn wrote:
Weather is what's happening, Climate is how we perceive our environment. The climate can FEEL warm, hot, cold, damp, wet, dry. The perception isn't shared equally from person to person.


Well folks, there you have it. This is Harvey's commitment to truth and inquiry on display. You have the internet or a dictionary? You can see that he has not a clue what he's talking about, OR he's deliberately attempting to mislead.

Either way, I rest my case.


Unfortunately we do not have people purposely misleading people. They honestly believe what they honestly believe.

The educational system has been slowly and surely destroyed because it requires ignorant people to be handled by a bureaucratic government composed of hundreds of little Fiefdoms.

I'm retired as is my wife. I was a high school dropout from the 60's that went into the Air Force and was put through 6 months of basic electronics training. After getting out I built that into a nice career - technician, senior technician, jr engineer, engineer, sr. engineer and finally a manager which I hated and dropped back to sr. engineer but once you've been a department head it is difficult not to fix things in a bad company so I would hire on as an engineer and end up straightening up the companies I would work for. It was staggering how graduate engineers or even post grads could not do half the work that I could. In one company I had six engineers working for me and I still had to do half of the hardware design, write the entire real time operating system and then finish half of the application software. ONE VS SIX!

My wife was a teacher and she had something rather informative to say. When they taught high school they used text books from the 1950's and 60's. But when they taught the advanced classes they used textbooks from the 1920's.

So when you see the almost unbelievable ignorance displayed on these groups (nightmare is a perfect example) you can write this off to an education that was purposely designed to not teach whatever subject it was supposed to be. Education made to either ill educate or to not educate at all.

Most Americans are well aware of this. They can see what has occurred to their own children. People do not like to think that they are smarter than they own children who they paid vast sums to send through college but they are watching it and wondering. There is only one thing to do - get the government entirely out of education and leave it to the states who are much more under state control - under voter control.

So don't think that people are lying to you so much as they think they're telling the truth and couldn't find the truth if it was staring them in the eyes.


I agree with your assesment of education.

I have an interest in history.

History is obviously the best story ever. The way it is taught in school is to make it the most boring impossible to be interested in subject ever. This is also the case for all other subjects.

I believe it may be due to the infiltration of the education management by the left. The hard communist left. The goal of which is the destruction of society to then build their new world order. Although it is almost all about the destruction part really. Basically traitor personality type.

These people exists. They work together to do what they do.
05-01-2019 14:47
HarveyH55
★★☆☆☆
(390)
Tim the plumber wrote:


I agree with your assesment of education.

I have an interest in history.

History is obviously the best story ever. The way it is taught in school is to make it the most boring impossible to be interested in subject ever. This is also the case for all other subjects.

I believe it may be due to the infiltration of the education management by the left. The hard communist left. The goal of which is the destruction of society to then build their new world order. Although it is almost all about the destruction part really. Basically traitor personality type.

These people exists. They work together to do what they do.


History covers a lot of area, unfortunately most of the history classes I took focused on war and government, both weren't of any particular interest to me. I guess it was because there was so much of it going on at the time, it was like getting a double dose, and sort crowded everything else. Starting with the Kennedy assassinations, Vietnam war, and Watergate. A lot of repetition, and no end or change in sight. Guess I just learned to find something else to study, or do, and it sort of carried over to history class, or pretty much anything related. Now, I like natural history, local history, and most anything related to subject had an interest in.

I real do believe there is something more going on with many of the democrats, least the far left progressives. It's not just a common set of views and values, but there seems to be a well defined path to reach certain goals. Seemed pretty obvious that there was no collusion, and no real definitive proof given of the Russian meddling (details were never released, because of the investigation). But, it was important to keep Trump busy, and away from even talking to the Russians. Russia is a strong power on the planet, like them or hate them, we need to have some sort of relationship. All the past presidents have had many talks with russian leaders, and Trump should have been doing so, regardless of the investigation. I think ObamaCare was the thing that really opened my eyes. Health insurance certainly isn't health care. It's everyone paying, for something most don't need, and many don't need. It was already widely available, and affordable through many employers. Insurance is great, but pretty useless, if you can't afford the co-pay or deductible. If your young, in good health, just starting out on your own, it's not a high priority. The claimed 50 million Americans were uninsured, didn't seem like a high number, to force the other 350 million to pay more, and get less. Would have been better to encourage more employers to offer a group plan. Many of those uninsured, simply needed to get a job. Took three tries to push Obamacare through, and quite a few in congress admitted they hadn't read the bill, before voting for it, they didn't do their job, and it didn't matter. There really wasn't any urgency, other than politics, and losing power to get it passed.

The border wall, and security seems like a long neglected, and more urgently needed topic to address. Instead of individuals and small groups, they come to the border by the thousands. While we are focused on the large group, the rest of the border is wide open for the smaller groups and individuals. A wall won't stop them much, but slow them down some, make it a little easier to catch them in the act. Really don't get how foreign criminals are entitled to the same legal rights as our own citizens. Shouldn't be a trial process, just send them back over the border. A wall, a physical barrier is just a good start, easier to patrol and defend. Technology can be added and used later, as needed.

There are a lot of good ideas, but the urgency and implementation is all wrong. A lot of people are getting hurt, financially, and some people are getting wealthy out of the political agenda of pushing these things. Seems well planned, and focused. What we see as sources of the main problems, are defended, protected. The people who provide use jobs, and protect our savings and investments, are attacked and crippled.
05-01-2019 16:02
Wake
★★★★★
(3894)
Into the Night wrote:
Classical mechanics (including the law of motion...there is only one law: F=mA).

More from the fount of knowledge

https://www.bing.com/images/search?view=detailV2&ccid=AhLLUxUF&id=5D249AC92A72442B556C6EF70E023024C905DEBC&thid=OIP.AhLLUxUFEiXLuuZreKpe7QHaFj&mediaurl=http%3a%2f%2fwww.cobblearning.net%2falholder%2ffiles%2f2016%2f01%2fnewtons-3-laws-of-motion-1neouv8.jpg&exph=546&expw=728&q=the+laws+of+motion&simid=608054427144684989&selectedIndex=0&ajaxhist=0
Page 2 of 3<123>





Join the debate Greenhouse gasses:

Remember me

Related content
ThreadsRepliesLast post
Greenhouse gas hypothesis violates Law of Conservation of Energy218-03-2019 18:56
It is ridiculous to suggest N2 and O2 are not greenhouse gases just because the don't absorb IR324-02-2019 22:09
How are O2 and N2 not greenhouse gases?1212-02-2019 01:36
NOAA's greenhouse gas forcing is fake?107-02-2019 19:12
Water Vapor is THE Dominant Greenhouse Gas1010-05-2018 00:58
▲ Top of page
Public Poll
Who is leading the renewable energy race?

US

EU

China

Japan

India

Brazil

Other

Don't know


Thanks for supporting Climate-Debate.com.
Copyright © 2009-2019 Climate-Debate.com | About | Contact