The Argument for AGW

"old sick silly sleepy sleezy slimy steenkin' filthy vile reprobate rooting (& rotting) racist pukey proud pig AGW denier LIAR whiners & many time (plus 1) threatener wake-me-up" wiffed: Without a shred of scientific knowledge....

litesong wrote:

"old sick silly sleepy sleezy slimy steenkin' filthy vile reprobate rooting (& rotting) racist pukey proud pig AGW denier LIAR whiners & many time (plus 1) threatener wake-me-up" wiffed: Without a shred of scientific knowledge....

....most all old sick silly sleepy sleezy slimy steenkin' filthy vile reprobate rooting (& rotting) racist pukey proud pig AGW denier LIAR whiners & many time (plus 1) threateners never has science chemistry astronomy physics algebra or pre-calc in poorly (or un-) earned hi skule DEE-plooomaas.

Wake wrote:

litesong wrote:

"old sick silly sleepy sleezy slimy steenkin' filthy vile reprobate rooting (& rotting) racist pukey proud pig AGW denier LIAR whiners & many time (plus 1) threatener wake-me-up" wiffed: Without a shred of scientific knowledge....

....most all old sick silly sleepy sleezy slimy steenkin' filthy vile reprobate rooting (& rotting) racist pukey proud pig AGW denier LIAR whiners & many time (plus 1) threateners never has science chemistry astronomy physics algebra or pre-calc in poorly (or un-) earned hi skule DEE-plooomaas.

In my last job I was making a quarter of a million dollars a year. Have you ever made more than minimum wage Chief Loser?

Into the Night wrote:

Wake wrote:

litesong wrote:

"old sick silly sleepy sleezy slimy steenkin' filthy vile reprobate rooting (& rotting) racist pukey proud pig AGW denier LIAR whiners & many time (plus 1) threatener wake-me-up" wiffed: Without a shred of scientific knowledge....

....most all old sick silly sleepy sleezy slimy steenkin' filthy vile reprobate rooting (& rotting) racist pukey proud pig AGW denier LIAR whiners & many time (plus 1) threateners never has science chemistry astronomy physics algebra or pre-calc in poorly (or un-) earned hi skule DEE-plooomaas.

In my last job I was making a quarter of a million dollars a year. Have you ever made more than minimum wage Chief Loser?

What has that go to do with anything?

Wake wrote:

Into the Night wrote:

Wake wrote:

litesong wrote:

"old sick silly sleepy sleezy slimy steenkin' filthy vile reprobate rooting (& rotting) racist pukey proud pig AGW denier LIAR whiners & many time (plus 1) threatener wake-me-up" wiffed: Without a shred of scientific knowledge....

....most all old sick silly sleepy sleezy slimy steenkin' filthy vile reprobate rooting (& rotting) racist pukey proud pig AGW denier LIAR whiners & many time (plus 1) threateners never has science chemistry astronomy physics algebra or pre-calc in poorly (or un-) earned hi skule DEE-plooomaas.

In my last job I was making a quarter of a million dollars a year. Have you ever made more than minimum wage Chief Loser?

What has that go to do with anything?

What has one single thing that litebrain ever written had anything to do with anything you jackass.

Wake wrote:
...deleted argument of the Stone...Bulverism...Mantra 2...You think that light is not heat.

Wake wrote:
You think that fusion is not heat.

Wake wrote:
You think that the Earth returned ALL of the energy obtained from the Sun back to space.

Wake wrote:
When presented with actual graphs showing the relationship of TEMPERATURE and wavelength you actually deny them as wrong.
...deleted Mantra 2...1...

Into the Night wrote:

Wake wrote:

Into the Night wrote:

Wake wrote:

litesong wrote:

"old sick silly sleepy sleezy slimy steenkin' filthy vile reprobate rooting (& rotting) racist pukey proud pig AGW denier LIAR whiners & many time (plus 1) threatener wake-me-up" wiffed: Without a shred of scientific knowledge....

....most all old sick silly sleepy sleezy slimy steenkin' filthy vile reprobate rooting (& rotting) racist pukey proud pig AGW denier LIAR whiners & many time (plus 1) threateners never has science chemistry astronomy physics algebra or pre-calc in poorly (or un-) earned hi skule DEE-plooomaas.

In my last job I was making a quarter of a million dollars a year. Have you ever made more than minimum wage Chief Loser?

What has that go to do with anything?

What has one single thing that litebrain ever written had anything to do with anything you jackass.

So you do the same think as litebeer does and then complain about it???

Wake wrote:
...deleted argument of the Stone...Bulverism...Mantra 2...You think that light is not heat.

It isn't. It is only heat if it is absorbed by something and that causes thermal energy to increase.

Wake wrote:
You think that fusion is not heat.

It isn't.

Wake wrote:
You think that the Earth returned ALL of the energy obtained from the Sun back to space.

It does.

Wake wrote:
When presented with actual graphs showing the relationship of TEMPERATURE and wavelength you actually deny them as wrong.
...deleted Mantra 2...1...

I never denied them wrong. I pointed out that you are making a false equivalence with them.

Wake wrote:

litesong wrote:

"old sick silly sleepy sleezy slimy steenkin' filthy vile reprobate rooting (& rotting) racist pukey proud pig AGW denier LIAR whiners & many time (plus 1) threatener wake-me-up" wiffed: Without a shred of scientific knowledge....

....most all old sick silly sleepy sleezy slimy steenkin' filthy vile reprobate rooting (& rotting) racist pukey proud pig AGW denier LIAR whiners & many time (plus 1) threateners never has science chemistry astronomy physics algebra or pre-calc in poorly (or un-) earned hi skule DEE-plooomaas.

In my last job I was making a quarter of a million dollars a year. Have you ever made more than minimum wage Chief Loser?

Tim the plumber wrote:

Wake wrote:

litesong wrote:

"old sick silly sleepy sleezy slimy steenkin' filthy vile reprobate rooting (& rotting) racist pukey proud pig AGW denier LIAR whiners & many time (plus 1) threatener wake-me-up" wiffed: Without a shred of scientific knowledge....

....most all old sick silly sleepy sleezy slimy steenkin' filthy vile reprobate rooting (& rotting) racist pukey proud pig AGW denier LIAR whiners & many time (plus 1) threateners never has science chemistry astronomy physics algebra or pre-calc in poorly (or un-) earned hi skule DEE-plooomaas.

In my last job I was making a quarter of a million dollars a year. Have you ever made more than minimum wage Chief Loser?

Do you think he has ever made the minum wage for more than a week?

Into the Night wrote:

Tim the plumber wrote:

Wake wrote:

litesong wrote:

"old sick silly sleepy sleezy slimy steenkin' filthy vile reprobate rooting (& rotting) racist pukey proud pig AGW denier LIAR whiners & many time (plus 1) threatener wake-me-up" wiffed: Without a shred of scientific knowledge....

....most all old sick silly sleepy sleezy slimy steenkin' filthy vile reprobate rooting (& rotting) racist pukey proud pig AGW denier LIAR whiners & many time (plus 1) threateners never has science chemistry astronomy physics algebra or pre-calc in poorly (or un-) earned hi skule DEE-plooomaas.

In my last job I was making a quarter of a million dollars a year. Have you ever made more than minimum wage Chief Loser?

Do you think he has ever made the minum wage for more than a week?

What does it matter? Why are is Wake so fixated on who makes how much money?

Wake wrote:
We all have a good laugh now that the only torch is being carried by monckton nee spot.

With the stupendous scientific knowledge he has he as to resort to nothing more than citing youTube videos the nutcakes in them showing pictures of polar bears walking on broken ice as if the polar bear hasn't survives a million years through both a sea level of 8 meters higher than now and no ice anywhere on the planet to a real ice age.

When you cite youTube videos with real scientists making real points such as the temperature gains from 1886 to 1940 being more than the temperature rise from 1970 to the present day and the virtual absence of heavy industry before 1940. Or the almost perfect relationship to the Sun's sunspot cycles to the warm periods. Or the fact that the atmosphere was getting CO2 poor and that life forms were slowly dying out from the lack of food. Or that using several different forms of research that are designed to compare CO2 levels and mean global temperatures show NO connection.

These things make absolutely NO impact on the True Believers. Without a shred of scientific knowledge they will argue all day long. All night long for that matter. They show not the slightest interest in knowledge because like all religions they are demanded to believe and not actually know.

Tim the plumber wrote:

Into the Night wrote:

Tim the plumber wrote:

Wake wrote:

litesong wrote:

"old sick silly sleepy sleezy slimy steenkin' filthy vile reprobate rooting (& rotting) racist pukey proud pig AGW denier LIAR whiners & many time (plus 1) threatener wake-me-up" wiffed: Without a shred of scientific knowledge....

....most all old sick silly sleepy sleezy slimy steenkin' filthy vile reprobate rooting (& rotting) racist pukey proud pig AGW denier LIAR whiners & many time (plus 1) threateners never has science chemistry astronomy physics algebra or pre-calc in poorly (or un-) earned hi skule DEE-plooomaas.

In my last job I was making a quarter of a million dollars a year. Have you ever made more than minimum wage Chief Loser?

Do you think he has ever made the minum wage for more than a week?

What does it matter? Why are is Wake so fixated on who makes how much money?

The narrow point is that he is an utterly useless jerk.

Tim the plumber wrote:
The wider point is that all those (vertually all) who are in a panic about global warming are useless people. That they have never done anything much.

Tim the plumber wrote:
How many of the green side has ever taken a carrer choice which involved taking more of a risk and putting more effort than the general easy flow of life would expect?

Tim the plumber wrote:
Names and examples will be good.

James_ wrote:

Wake wrote:
We all have a good laugh now that the only torch is being carried by monckton nee spot.

With the stupendous scientific knowledge he has he as to resort to nothing more than citing youTube videos the nutcakes in them showing pictures of polar bears walking on broken ice as if the polar bear hasn't survives a million years through both a sea level of 8 meters higher than now and no ice anywhere on the planet to a real ice age.

When you cite youTube videos with real scientists making real points such as the temperature gains from 1886 to 1940 being more than the temperature rise from 1970 to the present day and the virtual absence of heavy industry before 1940. Or the almost perfect relationship to the Sun's sunspot cycles to the warm periods. Or the fact that the atmosphere was getting CO2 poor and that life forms were slowly dying out from the lack of food. Or that using several different forms of research that are designed to compare CO2 levels and mean global temperatures show NO connection.

These things make absolutely NO impact on the True Believers. Without a shred of scientific knowledge they will argue all day long. All night long for that matter. They show not the slightest interest in knowledge because like all religions they are demanded to believe and not actually know.

The Aral Sea is a good example of how industrialization and increased agricultural production can effect the climate/environment.

James_ wrote:
Those 2 words, climate and environment have an effect on each other.

James_ wrote:
With the region the Aral Sea is in, the average amount of rainfall has decreased.

James_ wrote:
This means that that region is becoming arid.

James_ wrote:
That is climate change.

Tim the plumber wrote:

Wake wrote:

litesong wrote:

"old sick silly sleepy sleezy slimy steenkin' filthy vile reprobate rooting (& rotting) racist pukey proud pig AGW denier LIAR whiners & many time (plus 1) threatener wake-me-up" wiffed: Without a shred of scientific knowledge....

....most all old sick silly sleepy sleezy slimy steenkin' filthy vile reprobate rooting (& rotting) racist pukey proud pig AGW denier LIAR whiners & many time (plus 1) threateners never has science chemistry astronomy physics algebra or pre-calc in poorly (or un-) earned hi skule DEE-plooomaas.

In my last job I was making a quarter of a million dollars a year. Have you ever made more than minimum wage Chief Loser?

Do you think he has ever made the minimum wage for more than a week?

James_ wrote: The Aral Sea is a good example of how industrialization and increased agricultural production can effect the climate/environment. Those 2 words, climate and environment have an effect on each other.
With the region the Aral Sea is in, the average amount of rainfall has decreased. This means that that region is becoming arid. That is climate change. The image is from NASA;http://www.baias.com/shocking-nasa-pictures-show-how-the-fourth-largest-lake-in-the-world-has-become-almost-completely-dry/
And :https://earthobservatory.nasa.gov/Features/WorldOfChange/aral_sea.php

"old sick silly sleepy sleezy slimy slimebarf filthy vile reprobate rooting (& rotting) racist pukey proud pig AGW denier liar whiner & many time (plus 1) threatener wake-me-up" wiffed:.. He is on this group 24 hours a day every day.

Wake wrote:

Tim the plumber wrote:

Wake wrote:

litesong wrote:

"old sick silly sleepy sleezy slimy steenkin' filthy vile reprobate rooting (& rotting) racist pukey proud pig AGW denier LIAR whiners & many time (plus 1) threatener wake-me-up" wiffed: Without a shred of scientific knowledge....

....most all old sick silly sleepy sleezy slimy steenkin' filthy vile reprobate rooting (& rotting) racist pukey proud pig AGW denier LIAR whiners & many time (plus 1) threateners never has science chemistry astronomy physics algebra or pre-calc in poorly (or un-) earned hi skule DEE-plooomaas.

In my last job I was making a quarter of a million dollars a year. Have you ever made more than minimum wage Chief Loser?

Do you think he has ever made the minimum wage for more than a week?

I don't think that he has ever worked an honest job.

Wake wrote:
He is on this group 24 hours a day every day.

Wake wrote:
His actions while here are those of a 15 year old.

Wake wrote:
He has a psychological illness leading me to believe that he doesn't work because he can't.

Wake wrote:

James_ wrote: The Aral Sea is a good example of how industrialization and increased agricultural production can effect the climate/environment. Those 2 words, climate and environment have an effect on each other.
With the region the Aral Sea is in, the average amount of rainfall has decreased. This means that that region is becoming arid. That is climate change. The image is from NASA;http://www.baias.com/shocking-nasa-pictures-show-how-the-fourth-largest-lake-in-the-world-has-become-almost-completely-dry/
And :https://earthobservatory.nasa.gov/Features/WorldOfChange/aral_sea.php

I am somewhat of a loss as to what you think that proves? That large industrial growth near a shallow lake can dry the lake up?

Wake wrote:
If you look up the normal rainfall for that area LAST year which was a heavy rain year for that area it was 2" of rainfall. 5" or less rainfall makes an area a desert. The normal rainfall for that area is less than 1".

Wake wrote:
The San Francisco bay area is about 24" a year. The Central Valley which hollowman (with the brains of a raccoon) calls a desert is sometimes referred to as "semi-arid" and yet the average rainfall at the south end of the Central Valley is 14".

Wake wrote:
The reason that it's taken a long time for the Aral Sea to dry up like the Great Salt Lake is that it is fed by a couple of rivers but they too come from areas that are desert or on the very edge of being so.

Wake wrote:
I've said many times that because things occur at or near the same time doesn't mean that they are in any way attached.

Wake wrote:
The average rainfall at the Great Salt Lake, UT with its almost limitless Bonneville Salt Flats is 2" of rain per year. Twice the norm for the Aral Sea.

James_ wrote:

Wake wrote:
We all have a good laugh now that the only torch is being carried by monckton nee spot.

With the stupendous scientific knowledge he has he as to resort to nothing more than citing youTube videos the nutcakes in them showing pictures of polar bears walking on broken ice as if the polar bear hasn't survives a million years through both a sea level of 8 meters higher than now and no ice anywhere on the planet to a real ice age.

When you cite youTube videos with real scientists making real points such as the temperature gains from 1886 to 1940 being more than the temperature rise from 1970 to the present day and the virtual absence of heavy industry before 1940. Or the almost perfect relationship to the Sun's sunspot cycles to the warm periods. Or the fact that the atmosphere was getting CO2 poor and that life forms were slowly dying out from the lack of food. Or that using several different forms of research that are designed to compare CO2 levels and mean global temperatures show NO connection.

These things make absolutely NO impact on the True Believers. Without a shred of scientific knowledge they will argue all day long. All night long for that matter. They show not the slightest interest in knowledge because like all religions they are demanded to believe and not actually know.

The Aral Sea is a good example of how industrialization and increased agricultural production can effect the climate/environment. Those 2 words, climate and environment have an effect on each other.
With the region the Aral Sea is in, the average amount of rainfall has decreased. This means that that region is becoming arid. That is climate change. The image is from NASA;http://www.baias.com/shocking-nasa-pictures-show-how-the-fourth-largest-lake-in-the-world-has-become-almost-completely-dry/
And :https://earthobservatory.nasa.gov/Features/WorldOfChange/aral_sea.php

Into the Night wrote:

Wake wrote:

James_ wrote: The Aral Sea is a good example of how industrialization and increased agricultural production can effect the climate/environment. Those 2 words, climate and environment have an effect on each other.
With the region the Aral Sea is in, the average amount of rainfall has decreased. This means that that region is becoming arid. That is climate change. The image is from NASA;http://www.baias.com/shocking-nasa-pictures-show-how-the-fourth-largest-lake-in-the-world-has-become-almost-completely-dry/
And :https://earthobservatory.nasa.gov/Features/WorldOfChange/aral_sea.php

I am somewhat of a loss as to what you think that proves? That large industrial growth near a shallow lake can dry the lake up?

Not what caused the Aral Sea to dry up. The lake water was redirected to agriculture by the government, instead of leaving the people there as fisherman, forcing them to become farmers.
There is insufficient incoming water to that area to sustain agriculture, so now they have no fish and their crops are failing. Good 'ole government in action!

Wake wrote:
If you look up the normal rainfall for that area LAST year which was a heavy rain year for that area it was 2" of rainfall. 5" or less rainfall makes an area a desert. The normal rainfall for that area is less than 1".

WRONG. The normal rainfall for the Aral Sea area is about 4" per year.

Wake wrote:
The San Francisco bay area is about 24" a year. The Central Valley which hollowman (with the brains of a raccoon) calls a desert is sometimes referred to as "semi-arid" and yet the average rainfall at the south end of the Central Valley is 14".

WRONG. The normal rainfall for the Central Valley area (which I never did call a desert) is about 63 inches a year.

Wake wrote:
The reason that it's taken a long time for the Aral Sea to dry up like the Great Salt Lake is that it is fed by a couple of rivers but they too come from areas that are desert or on the very edge of being so.

WRONG. Salt Lake is fed by rivers coming out of the Wasatch Mountains nearby. These are not deserts. These mountains form the main water supply for the entire Salt Lake area.

Wake wrote:
I've said many times that because things occur at or near the same time doesn't mean that they are in any way attached.

This is true.

Wake wrote:
The average rainfall at the Great Salt Lake, UT with its almost limitless Bonneville Salt Flats is 2" of rain per year. Twice the norm for the Aral Sea.

WRONG. The average rainfall in Salt Lake, UT is about 17 inches a year. Much more falls in the Wasatch Mountains.

You really should get your figures right. There are weather stations at each of these locations with these records.

You should also look up the history of the Aral Sea and how the government destroyed it.

Tim the plumber wrote: 63 inches is 1600mm. That is rainforrest, jungle, rainfall.

Tim the plumber wrote:
63 inches is 1600mm. That is rainforrest, jungle, rainfall.

Wake wrote:

Tim the plumber wrote: 63 inches is 1600mm. That is rainforrest, jungle, rainfall.

Where he comes up with these things only heavens knows. This jackass lives in Seattle where it rains 10 mouths out of the year and THERE they only average 37.5" a year.

Into the Night wrote:

Tim the plumber wrote:
63 inches is 1600mm. That is rainforrest, jungle, rainfall.

Heh. Not quite. We DO have a rainforest here in Washington. It receives 150 inches of rain a year. I think you will find most jungles are similar.

Tim the plumber wrote:

Into the Night wrote:

Tim the plumber wrote:
63 inches is 1600mm. That is rainforrest, jungle, rainfall.

Heh. Not quite. We DO have a rainforest here in Washington. It receives 150 inches of rain a year. I think you will find most jungles are similar.

When i did geography in school 1500mm was the lower limit for rain forrest.

Cheshire has 550mm and thus is a prime dairy region.

Wake wrote:

James_ wrote: The Aral Sea is a good example of how industrialization and increased agricultural production can effect the climate/environment. Those 2 words, climate and environment have an effect on each other.
With the region the Aral Sea is in, the average amount of rainfall has decreased. This means that that region is becoming arid. That is climate change. The image is from NASA;http://www.baias.com/shocking-nasa-pictures-show-how-the-fourth-largest-lake-in-the-world-has-become-almost-completely-dry/
And :https://earthobservatory.nasa.gov/Features/WorldOfChange/aral_sea.php

I am somewhat of a loss as to what you think that proves? That large industrial growth near a shallow lake can dry the lake up?

If you look up the normal rainfall for that area LAST year which was a heavy rain year for that area it was 2" of rainfall. 5" or less rainfall makes an area a desert. The normal rainfall for that area is less than 1".

The San Francisco bay area is about 24" a year. The Central Valley which hollowman (with the brains of a raccoon) calls a desert is sometimes referred to as "semi-arid" and yet the average rainfall at the south end of the Central Valley is 14".

The reason that it's taken a long time for the Aral Sea to dry up like the Great Salt Lake is that it is fed by a couple of rivers but they too come from areas that are desert or on the very edge of being so.

I've said many times that because things occur at or near the same time doesn't mean that they are in any way attached. The average rainfall at the Great Salt Lake, UT with its almost limitless Bonneville Salt Flats is 2" of rain per year. Twice the norm for the Aral Sea.

Tim the plumber wrote:

Into the Night wrote:

Tim the plumber wrote:
63 inches is 1600mm. That is rainforrest, jungle, rainfall.

Heh. Not quite. We DO have a rainforest here in Washington. It receives 150 inches of rain a year. I think you will find most jungles are similar.

When i did geography in school 1500mm was the lower limit for rain forrest.

Cheshire has 550mm and thus is a prime dairy region.

James_ wrote: The Ghost of AGW Future is gonna getcha!

Wake wrote:

Tim the plumber wrote:

Into the Night wrote:

Tim the plumber wrote:
63 inches is 1600mm. That is rainforrest, jungle, rainfall.

Heh. Not quite. We DO have a rainforest here in Washington. It receives 150 inches of rain a year. I think you will find most jungles are similar.

When i did geography in school 1500mm was the lower limit for rain forrest.

Cheshire has 550mm and thus is a prime dairy region.

It is indeed like trying to speak to a parrot where he only knows a couple of phrases and continues to repeat them over and over no matter that they mean nothing. hollowman strikes again.

Into the Night wrote:

Tim the plumber wrote:

Into the Night wrote:

Tim the plumber wrote:
63 inches is 1600mm. That is rainforrest, jungle, rainfall.

Heh. Not quite. We DO have a rainforest here in Washington. It receives 150 inches of rain a year. I think you will find most jungles are similar.

When i did geography in school 1500mm was the lower limit for rain forrest.

Cheshire has 550mm and thus is a prime dairy region.

Such is your school. Thanks for letting us know where you got this from.

Into the Night wrote:

Wake wrote:

Tim the plumber wrote:

Into the Night wrote:

Tim the plumber wrote:
63 inches is 1600mm. That is rainforrest, jungle, rainfall.

Heh. Not quite. We DO have a rainforest here in Washington. It receives 150 inches of rain a year. I think you will find most jungles are similar.

When i did geography in school 1500mm was the lower limit for rain forrest.

Cheshire has 550mm and thus is a prime dairy region.

It is indeed like trying to speak to a parrot where he only knows a couple of phrases and continues to repeat them over and over no matter that they mean nothing. hollowman strikes again.

It is YOU that insists on rewriting the Stefan-Boltzmann law. It is YOU that denies the 2nd law of thermodynamics. Your belief in the Church of Global Warming is preventing YOU from accepting existing theories of science.

In the UK, they apparently consider 60 inches a year a rainforest. Does the Central Valley look like a rainforest to you? How about nearby Donner pass, which receives 51 inches a year? Do you consider it close to a rainforest?

Can't image what he thinks Scotland is.

Wake wrote:

Into the Night wrote:

Wake wrote:

Tim the plumber wrote:

Into the Night wrote:

Tim the plumber wrote:
63 inches is 1600mm. That is rainforrest, jungle, rainfall.

Heh. Not quite. We DO have a rainforest here in Washington. It receives 150 inches of rain a year. I think you will find most jungles are similar.

When i did geography in school 1500mm was the lower limit for rain forrest.

Cheshire has 550mm and thus is a prime dairy region.

It is indeed like trying to speak to a parrot where he only knows a couple of phrases and continues to repeat them over and over no matter that they mean nothing. hollowman strikes again.

It is YOU that insists on rewriting the Stefan-Boltzmann law. It is YOU that denies the 2nd law of thermodynamics. Your belief in the Church of Global Warming is preventing YOU from accepting existing theories of science.

In the UK, they apparently consider 60 inches a year a rainforest. Does the Central Valley look like a rainforest to you? How about nearby Donner pass, which receives 51 inches a year? Do you consider it close to a rainforest?

Can't image what he thinks Scotland is.

hollowman, you should stop talking about things you know nothing about. The second law of thermodynamics is a general rule and not a specific one. But you couldn't even envision what I mean.

Wake wrote:
Here's an explanation that while designed for 12 year olds is far above your ability to understand:

http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/nova/next/physics/scientists-reverse-arrow-of-time-in-quantum-experiment/

Wake wrote:
http://www.askamathematician.com/2013/03/q-why-doesnt-life-and-evolution-violate-the-second-law-of-thermodynamics-dont-living-things-reverse-entropy/

Wake wrote:
Since it contradicts your ignorance of the world around you you can delete it at your convenience.

Wake wrote:
Your remarkable ignorance of the Stefan-Boltzmann Law and what it means is pretty funny as well. "Stefan-Boltzmann law, statement that the total radiant heat energy emitted from a surface is proportional to the fourth power of its absolute temperature."

Wake wrote:
That "radiant heat energy" is the color of the light being radiated from any surface and you don't need to know the "radiance" of any surface whatsoever.

Wake wrote:
Give us some more of your increasingly panic stricken stupidly. Tell us how the Central Valley of California is a desert where they ship in water to grow nut trees and then tell us you never said that.

Wake wrote:
Then tell us that the Central Valley which averages 20" of rainfall in the northern end and 5" in the far south into the Imperial Valley gets 67" of rain.
...deleted mantra 2...2...1...

Into the Night wrote:

Wake wrote:

Into the Night wrote:

Wake wrote:

Tim the plumber wrote:

Into the Night wrote:

Tim the plumber wrote:
63 inches is 1600mm. That is rainforrest, jungle, rainfall.

Heh. Not quite. We DO have a rainforest here in Washington. It receives 150 inches of rain a year. I think you will find most jungles are similar.

When i did geography in school 1500mm was the lower limit for rain forrest.

Cheshire has 550mm and thus is a prime dairy region.

It is indeed like trying to speak to a parrot where he only knows a couple of phrases and continues to repeat them over and over no matter that they mean nothing. hollowman strikes again.

It is YOU that insists on rewriting the Stefan-Boltzmann law. It is YOU that denies the 2nd law of thermodynamics. Your belief in the Church of Global Warming is preventing YOU from accepting existing theories of science.

In the UK, they apparently consider 60 inches a year a rainforest. Does the Central Valley look like a rainforest to you? How about nearby Donner pass, which receives 51 inches a year? Do you consider it close to a rainforest?

Can't image what he thinks Scotland is.

hollowman, you should stop talking about things you know nothing about. The second law of thermodynamics is a general rule and not a specific one. But you couldn't even envision what I mean.

No, it is not a rule at all. It is a theory of science. It is specific. It is falsifiable. It has been tested and it still survives as a theory of science.

Wake wrote:
Here's an explanation that while designed for 12 year olds is far above your ability to understand:

http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/nova/next/physics/scientists-reverse-arrow-of-time-in-quantum-experiment/

Correlating matter essentially makes them the same matter in quantum physics. Entropy was not decreased, because there are no longer two regions.

Wake wrote:
http://www.askamathematician.com/2013/03/q-why-doesnt-life-and-evolution-violate-the-second-law-of-thermodynamics-dont-living-things-reverse-entropy/

You really should read the papers you quote. It explains why your false equivalence you are trying to make is wrong.

Wake wrote:
Since it contradicts your ignorance of the world around you you can delete it at your convenience.

Normally I delete Holy Links, but I will leave them up this time for people to read them at their leisure without having to go back through to your post.

Wake wrote:
Your remarkable ignorance of the Stefan-Boltzmann Law and what it means is pretty funny as well. "Stefan-Boltzmann law, statement that the total radiant heat energy emitted from a surface is proportional to the fourth power of its absolute temperature."

Going to try to rewrite this law again, eh?

Wake wrote:
That "radiant heat energy" is the color of the light being radiated from any surface and you don't need to know the "radiance" of any surface whatsoever.

You have denied the Stefan-Boltzmann law by attempting to rewrite it.

There is no frequency component in the Stefan-Boltzmann law. It is color blind. ALL light of all frequencies is considered. Radiance is total radiance, an intensity, not a color.

You also dropped the term for the emissivity constant again. You can't just change the equation and still call it the Stefan-Boltzmann law.

Wake wrote:
Give us some more of your increasingly panic stricken stupidly. Tell us how the Central Valley of California is a desert where they ship in water to grow nut trees and then tell us you never said that.

A fair amount of it IS a desert.

Wake wrote:
Then tell us that the Central Valley which averages 20" of rainfall in the northern end and 5" in the far south into the Imperial Valley gets 67" of rain.
...deleted mantra 2...2...1...

WRONG. The Imperial valley averages only about 3 inches of rain per year. The northern valley averages about 39 inches per year.

Wake wrote:

Into the Night wrote:

Wake wrote:

Into the Night wrote:

Wake wrote:

Tim the plumber wrote:

Into the Night wrote:

Tim the plumber wrote:
63 inches is 1600mm. That is rainforrest, jungle, rainfall.

Heh. Not quite. We DO have a rainforest here in Washington. It receives 150 inches of rain a year. I think you will find most jungles are similar.

When i did geography in school 1500mm was the lower limit for rain forrest.

Cheshire has 550mm and thus is a prime dairy region.

It is indeed like trying to speak to a parrot where he only knows a couple of phrases and continues to repeat them over and over no matter that they mean nothing. hollowman strikes again.

It is YOU that insists on rewriting the Stefan-Boltzmann law. It is YOU that denies the 2nd law of thermodynamics. Your belief in the Church of Global Warming is preventing YOU from accepting existing theories of science.

In the UK, they apparently consider 60 inches a year a rainforest. Does the Central Valley look like a rainforest to you? How about nearby Donner pass, which receives 51 inches a year? Do you consider it close to a rainforest?

Can't image what he thinks Scotland is.

hollowman, you should stop talking about things you know nothing about. The second law of thermodynamics is a general rule and not a specific one. But you couldn't even envision what I mean.

No, it is not a rule at all. It is a theory of science. It is specific. It is falsifiable. It has been tested and it still survives as a theory of science.

Wake wrote:
Here's an explanation that while designed for 12 year olds is far above your ability to understand:

http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/nova/next/physics/scientists-reverse-arrow-of-time-in-quantum-experiment/

Correlating matter essentially makes them the same matter in quantum physics. Entropy was not decreased, because there are no longer two regions.

Wake wrote:
http://www.askamathematician.com/2013/03/q-why-doesnt-life-and-evolution-violate-the-second-law-of-thermodynamics-dont-living-things-reverse-entropy/

You really should read the papers you quote. It explains why your false equivalence you are trying to make is wrong.

Wake wrote:
Since it contradicts your ignorance of the world around you you can delete it at your convenience.

Normally I delete Holy Links, but I will leave them up this time for people to read them at their leisure without having to go back through to your post.

Wake wrote:
Your remarkable ignorance of the Stefan-Boltzmann Law and what it means is pretty funny as well. "Stefan-Boltzmann law, statement that the total radiant heat energy emitted from a surface is proportional to the fourth power of its absolute temperature."

Going to try to rewrite this law again, eh?

Wake wrote:
That "radiant heat energy" is the color of the light being radiated from any surface and you don't need to know the "radiance" of any surface whatsoever.

You have denied the Stefan-Boltzmann law by attempting to rewrite it.

There is no frequency component in the Stefan-Boltzmann law. It is color blind. ALL light of all frequencies is considered. Radiance is total radiance, an intensity, not a color.

You also dropped the term for the emissivity constant again. You can't just change the equation and still call it the Stefan-Boltzmann law.

Wake wrote:
Give us some more of your increasingly panic stricken stupidly. Tell us how the Central Valley of California is a desert where they ship in water to grow nut trees and then tell us you never said that.

A fair amount of it IS a desert.

Wake wrote:
Then tell us that the Central Valley which averages 20" of rainfall in the northern end and 5" in the far south into the Imperial Valley gets 67" of rain.
...deleted mantra 2...2...1...

WRONG. The Imperial valley averages only about 3 inches of rain per year. The northern valley averages about 39 inches per year.

The hollowman strikes again. After proclaiming "It is YOU that denies the 2nd law of thermodynamics." you are now telling us that it isn't a law at all.

Wake wrote:
Smooth move. You go into rather several paragraphs telling us that it isn't a law now.

Wake wrote:
...deleted Mantra 2...6...1...
Why are you now trying to change the subject about your claim of 67" of rain in the Central Valley?
...deleted lies...

Wake wrote:
Like your clown act that you explained the difference between "statistical math" and any other math. ...deleted Mantra 1...

Into the Night wrote:
Correlating matter essentially makes them the same matter in quantum physics. Entropy was not decreased, because there are no longer two regions.

Wake wrote:
http://www.askamathematician.com/2013/03/q-why-doesnt-life-and-evolution-violate-the-second-law-of-thermodynamics-dont-living-things-reverse-entropy/

You really should read the papers you quote. It explains why your false equivalence you are trying to make is wrong.

Wake wrote:
Since it contradicts your ignorance of the world around you you can delete it at your convenience.

Normally I delete Holy Links, but I will leave them up this time for people to read them at their leisure without having to go back through to your post.

Wake wrote:
Your remarkable ignorance of the Stefan-Boltzmann Law and what it means is pretty funny as well. "Stefan-Boltzmann law, statement that the total radiant heat energy emitted from a surface is proportional to the fourth power of its absolute temperature."

Going to try to rewrite this law again, eh?

Wake wrote:
That "radiant heat energy" is the color of the light being radiated from any surface and you don't need to know the "radiance" of any surface whatsoever.

You have denied the Stefan-Boltzmann law by attempting to rewrite it.

There is no frequency component in the Stefan-Boltzmann law. It is color blind. ALL light of all frequencies is considered. Radiance is total radiance, an intensity, not a color.

You also dropped the term for the emissivity constant again. You can't just change the equation and still call it the Stefan-Boltzmann law.

Wake wrote:
Give us some more of your increasingly panic stricken stupidly. Tell us how the Central Valley of California is a desert where they ship in water to grow nut trees and then tell us you never said that.

A fair amount of it IS a desert.

Wake wrote:
Then tell us that the Central Valley which averages 20" of rainfall in the northern end and 5" in the far south into the Imperial Valley gets 67" of rain.
...deleted mantra 2...2...1...

WRONG. The Imperial valley averages only about 3 inches of rain per year. The northern valley averages about 39 inches per year.

Wake wrote:
Smooth move. You go into rather several paragraphs telling us that it isn't a law now.

Wake wrote:
...deleted Mantra 2...6...1...
Why are you now trying to change the subject about your claim of 67" of rain in the Central Valley?
...deleted lies...

Wake wrote:
Like your clown act that you explained the difference between "statistical math" and any other math. ...deleted Mantra 1...

Wake wrote:
Correlation is not entanglement. Please cease your ignorant praddle.

Wake wrote:
You are the one declaring that the 2nd Law of Thermodynamics can't be broken.

Wake wrote:
You're the traffic cop here. Now don't try to back out of it with your cowardly ways.

Wake wrote:
As I noted - you don't need emissivity when you are using spectrometry.

Wake wrote:
Or don't you remember screaming that ALL of the incoming energy leaves the Earth? That means that it has emissivity of 1.

Wake wrote:
Now you're changing your mind and telling us that the Central Valley doesn't get 67" of rain?
...deleted Holy Quote...

Wake wrote:

Into the Night wrote:
I have explained statistical math multiple times to you.

...deleted Mantra 5...2...non-sequitur...6...

litesong wrote:

James_ wrote: The Ghost of AGW Future is gonna getcha!

You do know how to turn a phrase!

Into the Night wrote:

James_ wrote:
The Aral Sea is a good example of how industrialization and increased agricultural production can effect the climate/environment.

The disaster of the Aral Sea was not because of industrialization, it was because the government of the USSR decided it wanted fisherman to become farmers.