Remember me
▼ Content

Energy source: evaporation - condensation (continuation)



Page 1 of 5123>>>
Energy source: evaporation - condensation (continuation)19-01-2022 22:01
BestChance
☆☆☆☆☆
(12)
Hello!

Humanity can make up for the lack of energy and at the same time maintain the ecological balance of the native planet. How to do it? The answer is offered on three pages. This is a real chance.

1 page attached here...
Attached image:

19-01-2022 22:05
BestChance
☆☆☆☆☆
(12)
2 page attached here...
Attached image:

RE: 3 page attached here19-01-2022 22:08
BestChance
☆☆☆☆☆
(12)
3 page attached here

Thank you for your attention.
Attached image:

20-01-2022 00:36
Into the NightProfile picture★★★★★
(18679)
BestChance wrote:
3 page attached here

Thank you for your attention.


This is a perpetual motion machine of the 2nd order (A->B->C). Losses will prevent it from functioning as you expect.


The Parrot Killer

Debunked in my sig. - tmiddles

Google keeps track of paranoid talk and i'm not on their list. I've been evaluated and certified. - keepit

nuclear powered ships do not require nuclear fuel. - Swan

While it is true that fossils do not burn it is also true that fossil fuels burn very well - Swan
Edited on 20-01-2022 00:40
20-01-2022 01:19
IBdaMannProfile picture★★★★★
(11965)
BestChance wrote:Hello!, Humanity can make up for the lack of energy and at the same time maintain the ecological balance of the native planet.

When you see the word "balance" you know the context is not science, but rather some meaningless warm-fuzzy-feely-good ideology wrapped in techno-gibber ... so I can hardly wait to read this.

BestChance wrote:This is a real chance.

Science is not your strong suit. Ask me how I know.

Did you notice, by any chance, the "liquid CO2 at ambient temperature" in the equation? Did that raise any red flags? In what state of matter is CO2 in any atmospheric temperature? Do you realize how much energy is required to perform the work of adequately pressurizing the CO2 so that it remains in liquid form?

Your system doesn't generate enough energy to keep the CO2 pressurized, much less generate any additional energy for "humanity."

Feel free to run your "ideas" by me before you endorse them publicly, and don't be afraid to come to me with the hard stuff.
20-01-2022 01:42
HarveyH55Profile picture★★★★★
(4259)
I think I'll stick with the Norwegian Gravity Wheel. It was invented 300 years ago, so must be a much more solid design. I get a little nervous around tanks of pressurized gasses... I know they are mostly safe, when used, and handled properly. But, they fail spectacularly, when somebody screws up.

People have been looking for a 'free-lunch' for thousands of years, and always go hungry. Like any job, the reward, is usually a disappointment, compared to the work performed. I know that when the 'liberal' are in office, and 'free-stuff' falls from the sky. We all tend to believe anything is possible. There is no 'free-lunch', no 'free-stuff'. no free rides. There is a price for everything. Free stuff, the price is just your soul (if you have one).
20-01-2022 01:52
James___
★★★★★
(5513)
BestChance wrote:
Hello!

Humanity can make up for the lack of energy and at the same time maintain the ecological balance of the native planet. How to do it? The answer is offered on three pages. This is a real chance.

1 page attached here...



Their might be gasses better suited for this. Consider how a gas reacts in a Joules-Thomson field. Some become more excited while others better conserve their heat content better like CO2 does.
At the same time the Atmos clock runs on a process similar to what you suggest but converts atmospheric heat content into work. Kind of why the clock runs.
https://www.jaeger-lecoultre.com/us/en/watches/story-of/story-of-atmos.html

For what you're suggesting, the baseline is how many homes can something power? That seems to be the most common definition used because it allows for the commercialization of a concept. Basically what return on the invested dollar can be expected?
Edited on 20-01-2022 01:52
20-01-2022 03:22
James___
★★★★★
(5513)
D@mn, there and not their. It's well known that when some gasses are cooled using the Joules-Thomson throttling process that they become more excited. More excited gasses emit more electromagnetic radiation.
I know there are at least 4 such gasses. I also know that Italian scientists have done such work. I just can't find their research anymore because they used a blue medium solution for such gasses to be in.
With what is on the internet today, it is much more difficult to find actual information with meaning. Time is money and a search for research just doesn't have the good results that it used to.

In today's world, a serious search of material online will cost money. This is because search parameters will be limited which will require exponentially more processing power. And with search engines, their results are in milliseconds.
Yep, I long for the old days of 2000 or even 2010.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=k85mRPqvMbE

And because ya'all are good Christians or Jews, heaven knows;
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rHBxJCq99jA

And because I am me and he is Renoir......please don't ban me....

p.s., who is the walrus?
Attached image:


Edited on 20-01-2022 04:03
20-01-2022 04:19
James___
★★★★★
(5513)
HarveyH55 wrote:
I think I'll stick with the Norwegian Gravity Wheel. It was invented 300 years ago, so must be a much more solid design. I get a little nervous around tanks of pressurized gasses... I know they are mostly safe, when used, and handled properly. But, they fail spectacularly, when somebody screws up.

People have been looking for a 'free-lunch' for thousands of years, and always go hungry. Like any job, the reward, is usually a disappointment, compared to the work performed. I know that when the 'liberal' are in office, and 'free-stuff' falls from the sky. We all tend to believe anything is possible. There is no 'free-lunch', no 'free-stuff'. no free rides. There is a price for everything. Free stuff, the price is just your soul (if you have one).



Are you still looking for the Fountain of Youth? This is sad. You need to try living for a change. Meet a gal and have some fun.
20-01-2022 05:18
IBdaMannProfile picture★★★★★
(11965)
James___ wrote:It's well known that when some gasses are cooled using the Joules-Thomson throttling process that they become more excited.

The gases don't become more excited because the temperature is decreasing; they become more excited because the pressure is increasing. This is the same principle at work in the Ideal Gas Law, except within this context, instead of the temperature increasing, the state of the CO2 changes from solid to liquid. This is what happens when melting ice. Once the ice reaches 32F, it simply changes state (to liquid water) rather than increase in temperature. Only after changing to liquid water will it then increase in temperature.

This is the little quirk needed to make liquid CO2, i.e. increase the pressure, otherwise CO2 sublimates (i.e. evaporates directly from solid dry ice to gaseous CO2) and will skip the liquid state entirely under regular atmospheric pressure. Increasing the pressure while the CO2 is in solid form will "excite" the molecules into changing into a liquid. Release the pressure and the liquid CO2 instantly changes back to a solid. It's pretty neat to watch.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=N_cHcOLcAvE&list=RDCMUCT7EuC-o1dMvz-hatkytk9w&start_radio=1&rv=N_cHcOLcAvE

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wwNuiCRes38

James___ wrote:More excited gasses emit more electromagnetic radiation.

Nope. Take another look at Stefan-Boltzmann. More excited molecules emit more thermal radiation only if they are of a higher temperature. If they are of the same temperature and merely of a different state of matter then they emit exactly the same amount of thermal radiation.

James___ wrote:And because I am me and he is Renoir......please don't ban me....

If your project works out, you'll be able to have a life without Christians banning Renoir over Ivanka.
20-01-2022 06:45
James___
★★★★★
(5513)
IBdaMann wrote:
James___ wrote:It's well known that when some gasses are cooled using the Joules-Thomson throttling process that they become more excited.

The gases don't become more excited because the temperature is decreasing; they become more excited because the pressure is increasing. This is the same principle at work in the Ideal Gas Law, except within this context, instead of the temperature increasing, the state of the CO2 changes from solid to liquid. This is what happens when melting ice. Once the ice reaches 32F, it simply changes state (to liquid water) rather than increase in temperature. Only after changing to liquid water will it then increase in temperature.

This is the little quirk needed to make liquid CO2, i.e. increase the pressure, otherwise CO2 sublimates (i.e. evaporates directly from solid dry ice to gaseous CO2) and will skip the liquid state entirely under regular atmospheric pressure. Increasing the pressure while the CO2 is in solid form will "excite" the molecules into changing into a liquid. Release the pressure and the liquid CO2 instantly changes back to a solid. It's pretty neat to watch.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=N_cHcOLcAvE&list=RDCMUCT7EuC-o1dMvz-hatkytk9w&start_radio=1&rv=N_cHcOLcAvE

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wwNuiCRes38

James___ wrote:More excited gasses emit more electromagnetic radiation.

Nope. Take another look at Stefan-Boltzmann. More excited molecules emit more thermal radiation only if they are of a higher temperature. If they are of the same temperature and merely of a different state of matter then they emit exactly the same amount of thermal radiation.

James___ wrote:And because I am me and he is Renoir......please don't ban me....

If your project works out, you'll be able to have a life without Christians banning Renoir over Ivanka.



OMG, how dare you. Ivanka over Renoir? We do live in the End Times my friend.
And how dare you discuss science.

With your quote of Stefan-Boltzmann, we're discussing a field or system that is in union with. With cooling CO2 so it becomes a liquid, we are discussing the Joules-Thomson throttling process. That was realized in 1852. Can't you keep up with the times son?
As for art, science is art. Still, it's not Renoir.
Edited on 20-01-2022 06:57
20-01-2022 09:53
Erik2022
☆☆☆☆☆
(7)
BestChance wrote:
Hello!

Humanity can make up for the lack of energy and at the same time maintain the ecological balance of the native planet. How to do it? The answer is offered on three pages. This is a real chance.

1 page attached here...

Attached image:

20-01-2022 16:20
IBdaMannProfile picture★★★★★
(11965)
Erik2022 wrote:
BestChance wrote:
Hello!

Humanity can make up for the lack of energy and at the same time maintain the ecological balance of the native planet. How to do it? The answer is offered on three pages. This is a real chance.

1 page attached here...

Is there a reason you reposted this post and attached the same attachment? Your post is bandwidth-wasting spam
20-01-2022 17:33
Erik2022
☆☆☆☆☆
(7)
IBdaMann wrote:
Erik2022 wrote:
BestChance wrote:
Hello!

Humanity can make up for the lack of energy and at the same time maintain the ecological balance of the native planet. How to do it? The answer is offered on three pages. This is a real chance.

1 page attached here...

Is there a reason you reposted this post and attached the same attachment? Your post is bandwidth-wasting spam


I was unable to edit the post and re-uploaded the edited file. Reservoirs are airtight in the new file, this is indicated. My apologies.
20-01-2022 18:46
Into the NightProfile picture★★★★★
(18679)
Erik2022 wrote:
IBdaMann wrote:
Erik2022 wrote:
BestChance wrote:
Hello!

Humanity can make up for the lack of energy and at the same time maintain the ecological balance of the native planet. How to do it? The answer is offered on three pages. This is a real chance.

1 page attached here...

Is there a reason you reposted this post and attached the same attachment? Your post is bandwidth-wasting spam


I was unable to edit the post and re-uploaded the edited file. Reservoirs are airtight in the new file, this is indicated. My apologies.

Makes no difference. The fault in the design is still the same. You cannot decrease entropy...ever.


The Parrot Killer

Debunked in my sig. - tmiddles

Google keeps track of paranoid talk and i'm not on their list. I've been evaluated and certified. - keepit

nuclear powered ships do not require nuclear fuel. - Swan

While it is true that fossils do not burn it is also true that fossil fuels burn very well - Swan
20-01-2022 19:21
Erik2022
☆☆☆☆☆
(7)
Makes no difference. The fault in the design is still the same. You cannot decrease entropy...ever.

I can, I want and I will.
20-01-2022 19:37
Into the NightProfile picture★★★★★
(18679)
Erik2022 wrote:
Makes no difference. The fault in the design is still the same. You cannot decrease entropy...ever.

I can, I want and I will.


So you discard science. Gotit.


The Parrot Killer

Debunked in my sig. - tmiddles

Google keeps track of paranoid talk and i'm not on their list. I've been evaluated and certified. - keepit

nuclear powered ships do not require nuclear fuel. - Swan

While it is true that fossils do not burn it is also true that fossil fuels burn very well - Swan
20-01-2022 21:55
Erik2022
☆☆☆☆☆
(7)
Into the Night: So you discard science. Gotit.

Let's see who's giving up what.
20-01-2022 22:06
Erik2022
☆☆☆☆☆
(7)
HarveyH55 wrote:
I think I'll stick with the Norwegian Gravity Wheel. It was invented 300 years ago, so must be a much more solid design. I get a little nervous around tanks of pressurized gasses... I know they are mostly safe, when used, and handled properly. But, they fail spectacularly, when somebody screws up.

People have been looking for a 'free-lunch' for thousands of years, and always go hungry. Like any job, the reward, is usually a disappointment, compared to the work performed. I know that when the 'liberal' are in office, and 'free-stuff' falls from the sky. We all tend to believe anything is possible. There is no 'free-lunch', no 'free-stuff'. no free rides. There is a price for everything. Free stuff, the price is just your soul (if you have one).


I'm not offering free lunches, just evaporation and condensation can heat your home just like firewood. In order for firewood to burn, it must be prepared. Also with evaporation and condensation, you need to assemble and maintain the installation.
20-01-2022 22:26
Into the NightProfile picture★★★★★
(18679)
Erik2022 wrote:
HarveyH55 wrote:
I think I'll stick with the Norwegian Gravity Wheel. It was invented 300 years ago, so must be a much more solid design. I get a little nervous around tanks of pressurized gasses... I know they are mostly safe, when used, and handled properly. But, they fail spectacularly, when somebody screws up.

People have been looking for a 'free-lunch' for thousands of years, and always go hungry. Like any job, the reward, is usually a disappointment, compared to the work performed. I know that when the 'liberal' are in office, and 'free-stuff' falls from the sky. We all tend to believe anything is possible. There is no 'free-lunch', no 'free-stuff'. no free rides. There is a price for everything. Free stuff, the price is just your soul (if you have one).


I'm not offering free lunches, just evaporation and condensation can heat your home just like firewood. In order for firewood to burn, it must be prepared. Also with evaporation and condensation, you need to assemble and maintain the installation.


Trying to change your argument now?

You were describing a method of developing electricity using a perpetual motion machine. Now you say it is used to heat your home,

Evaporating does not heat anything. It rather cools it. (Think aftershave or alcohol)
Condensation does not happen at the same temperature or at an increased temperature.

Your wacky piston idea cannot compress the gas again.


The Parrot Killer

Debunked in my sig. - tmiddles

Google keeps track of paranoid talk and i'm not on their list. I've been evaluated and certified. - keepit

nuclear powered ships do not require nuclear fuel. - Swan

While it is true that fossils do not burn it is also true that fossil fuels burn very well - Swan
20-01-2022 23:20
Erik2022
☆☆☆☆☆
(7)
Into the Night: Your wacky piston idea cannot compress the gas again.

It doesn't need to be compressed.
All real ideas were wacky in their time.
21-01-2022 00:12
IBdaMannProfile picture★★★★★
(11965)
Erik2022 wrote:It doesn't need to be compressed.

Check your design again. You need to expend more energy compressing the CO2 than you get from using the compressed CO2.

Erik2022 wrote:All real ideas were wacky in their time.

So were all the WACKY ideas that couldn't work.

If you want to make a difference, design a system that adheres to the laws of physics.

If you merely want to fantasize that you are a science genius who will "save the world" then yes, by all means, dwell on your contraption ... but keep it to yourself because as it is, you are wasting bandwidth in your attempts to impose your fantasy on others.
21-01-2022 02:50
HarveyH55Profile picture★★★★★
(4259)
Erik2022 wrote:
HarveyH55 wrote:
I think I'll stick with the Norwegian Gravity Wheel. It was invented 300 years ago, so must be a much more solid design. I get a little nervous around tanks of pressurized gasses... I know they are mostly safe, when used, and handled properly. But, they fail spectacularly, when somebody screws up.

People have been looking for a 'free-lunch' for thousands of years, and always go hungry. Like any job, the reward, is usually a disappointment, compared to the work performed. I know that when the 'liberal' are in office, and 'free-stuff' falls from the sky. We all tend to believe anything is possible. There is no 'free-lunch', no 'free-stuff'. no free rides. There is a price for everything. Free stuff, the price is just your soul (if you have one).


I'm not offering free lunches, just evaporation and condensation can heat your home just like firewood. In order for firewood to burn, it must be prepared. Also with evaporation and condensation, you need to assemble and maintain the installation.


We've been using condensed gas for refrigeration a long time. A lot of refinement has been applied to make those systems more cost-effective, and efficient. The still take a lot of energy to run. Most every home has a refrigerator/freezer. Air conditioners are fairly common in homes and vehicles... Some rednecks use evaporation cooling (wet towel and a fan).

If CO2 was an ideal gas for use as a refrigerant, it be more commonly used. Specially after the 1970s Ozone Hole Crisis. You expend energy to compress the CO2 into a liquid. The work you get out of your contraption will always be less, than what you put into it. We don't live in a perfect, ideal world. When we convert energy from one form to another, there is always some lost, the price we pay, to get work done.
21-01-2022 19:28
BestChance
☆☆☆☆☆
(12)
BestChance wrote:
Hello!

Humanity can make up for the lack of energy and at the same time maintain the ecological balance of the native planet. How to do it? The answer is offered on three pages. This is a real chance.

1 page attached here...


Page edited
Attached image:


Edited on 21-01-2022 19:29
21-01-2022 19:31
BestChance
☆☆☆☆☆
(12)
BestChance wrote:
3 page attached here

Thank you for your attention.


Page edited
Attached image:

21-01-2022 21:08
GasGuzzler
★★★★★
(2481)
Continually posting the same errors will not cause your project to spontaneously combust into free energy.

Just sayin.

Thank you for your attention.
Edited on 21-01-2022 21:11
21-01-2022 21:15
BestChance
☆☆☆☆☆
(12)
GasGuzzler wrote:
Continually posting the same errors will not cause your project to spontaneously combust into free energy.

Just sayin.

Thank you for your attention.


This will work.
21-01-2022 22:10
Into the NightProfile picture★★★★★
(18679)
BestChance wrote:
GasGuzzler wrote:
Continually posting the same errors will not cause your project to spontaneously combust into free energy.

Just sayin.

Thank you for your attention.


This will work.

Then build it. Make it work. It's your money and your time. Stop trying to sell vaporware (har!).


What a waste.


The Parrot Killer

Debunked in my sig. - tmiddles

Google keeps track of paranoid talk and i'm not on their list. I've been evaluated and certified. - keepit

nuclear powered ships do not require nuclear fuel. - Swan

While it is true that fossils do not burn it is also true that fossil fuels burn very well - Swan
Edited on 21-01-2022 22:10
21-01-2022 22:23
BestChance
☆☆☆☆☆
(12)
Into the Night wrote:
BestChance wrote:
GasGuzzler wrote:
Continually posting the same errors will not cause your project to spontaneously combust into free energy.

Just sayin.

Thank you for your attention.


This will work.

Then build it. Make it work. It's your money and your time. Stop trying to sell vaporware (har!).


What a waste.


I don't sell anything. It's just that people have the right to know that they have a choice. Do not forget about it.
21-01-2022 22:35
Into the NightProfile picture★★★★★
(18679)
BestChance wrote:
Into the Night wrote:
BestChance wrote:
GasGuzzler wrote:
Continually posting the same errors will not cause your project to spontaneously combust into free energy.

Just sayin.

Thank you for your attention.


This will work.

Then build it. Make it work. It's your money and your time. Stop trying to sell vaporware (har!).


What a waste.


I don't sell anything. It's just that people have the right to know that they have a choice. Do not forget about it.


Vaporware is not a choice.

You go waste your money and resources building this thing and demonstrate it to industry and to physicists. This is YOUR religion and there is no convincing you that your religion is false.


The Parrot Killer

Debunked in my sig. - tmiddles

Google keeps track of paranoid talk and i'm not on their list. I've been evaluated and certified. - keepit

nuclear powered ships do not require nuclear fuel. - Swan

While it is true that fossils do not burn it is also true that fossil fuels burn very well - Swan
21-01-2022 22:35
James___
★★★★★
(5513)
BestChance wrote:
Into the Night wrote:
BestChance wrote:
GasGuzzler wrote:
Continually posting the same errors will not cause your project to spontaneously combust into free energy.

Just sayin.

Thank you for your attention.


This will work.

Then build it. Make it work. It's your money and your time. Stop trying to sell vaporware (har!).


What a waste.


I don't sell anything. It's just that people have the right to know that they have a choice. Do not forget about it.



People don't have a choice. Religion took that away from people. I served in the military. Religious people are not as tolerant as someone with a gun in their hand.
21-01-2022 23:02
BestChance
☆☆☆☆☆
(12)
James___ wrote:
BestChance wrote:
Into the Night wrote:
BestChance wrote:
GasGuzzler wrote:
Continually posting the same errors will not cause your project to spontaneously combust into free energy.

Just sayin.

Thank you for your attention.


This will work.

Then build it. Make it work. It's your money and your time. Stop trying to sell vaporware (har!).


What a waste.


I don't sell anything. It's just that people have the right to know that they have a choice. Do not forget about it.



People don't have a choice. Religion took that away from people. I served in the military. Religious people are not as tolerant as someone with a gun in their hand.


The weapon implies responsibility. That is why an armed people is a peace-loving people. Unarmed people are more prone to conflict.
22-01-2022 01:00
IBdaMannProfile picture★★★★★
(11965)
GasGuzzler wrote:
Continually posting the same errors will not cause your project to spontaneously combust into free energy.

Just sayin.

Thank you for your attention.

Thank you, GasGuzzler. I was just about to post something to the same effect when I was called away. Your post says it better than mine would have ... except that instead of writing "will not cause your project to spontaneously combust into free energy" you should have written "will not cause your CO2 to spontaneously compress under pressure and liquefy."

Aaaww, forget it, writing "spontaneously combust" is fine in this case. All impossible projects are the same, I suppose. In fact, if my project works out, I won't have to pressurize CO2 to have a life with 5G-protected radar altimeters.
22-01-2022 03:40
Into the NightProfile picture★★★★★
(18679)
James___ wrote:
BestChance wrote:
Into the Night wrote:
BestChance wrote:
GasGuzzler wrote:
Continually posting the same errors will not cause your project to spontaneously combust into free energy.

Just sayin.

Thank you for your attention.


This will work.

Then build it. Make it work. It's your money and your time. Stop trying to sell vaporware (har!).


What a waste.


I don't sell anything. It's just that people have the right to know that they have a choice. Do not forget about it.



People don't have a choice.

Sure they do. You have the choice to continue to post random thoughts and phrases like you do. No one is making you. You choose to do so.
James___ wrote:
Religion took that away from people.

Religion is a choice too.
James___ wrote:
I served in the military.

So?
James___ wrote:
Religious people are not as tolerant as someone with a gun in their hand.

Religion isn't about tolerance.


The Parrot Killer

Debunked in my sig. - tmiddles

Google keeps track of paranoid talk and i'm not on their list. I've been evaluated and certified. - keepit

nuclear powered ships do not require nuclear fuel. - Swan

While it is true that fossils do not burn it is also true that fossil fuels burn very well - Swan
22-01-2022 03:51
GasGuzzler
★★★★★
(2481)
IBdaMann wrote:
GasGuzzler wrote:
Continually posting the same errors will not cause your project to spontaneously combust into free energy.

Just sayin.

Thank you for your attention.

Thank you, GasGuzzler. I was just about to post something to the same effect when I was called away. Your post says it better than mine would have ... except that instead of writing "will not cause your project to spontaneously combust into free energy" you should have written "will not cause your CO2 to spontaneously compress under pressure and liquefy."

Aaaww, forget it, writing "spontaneously combust" is fine in this case. All impossible projects are the same, I suppose. In fact, if my project works out, I won't have to pressurize CO2 to have a life with 5G-protected radar altimeters.


I'm still scratching my head over the silly diagram. I think the piston is being pushed up by expansion? Where do you get compression? Oh hell, who cares?

Maybe we could get Coby 1 to make it a V twin and mount a gearbox to that sucker and give it a go. This will work.

IBdaMann wrote:
I was just about to post something to the same effect when I was called away.

Hey, no worries, when nature calls, you gotta go. In fact, if my project works out for me Christians will be able to excrete excrement in the Earths core, where it has now cooled enough for tolerable white body tanning.


Studies show that if you force several tubs of peanut butter down the throats of newborns, in some cases it could potentially be toxic. In cities where infant-PB-stuffing is more common, infant deaths increased by over 47% with corresponding increases in dead-infant obesity.. -IBdaMann
Edited on 22-01-2022 04:27
22-01-2022 06:47
IBdaMannProfile picture★★★★★
(11965)
James___ wrote:People don't have a choice.

Then please tell me what the lone, single item is that is on the shelf.

James___ wrote:Religion took that away from people.

Are you saying religion eliminated the option for people of one particular religion to convert to another religion?

James___ wrote: I served in the military.

By choice.

James___ wrote:Religious people are not as tolerant as someone with a gun in their hand.

"Someone" is singular and requires the singular possessive pronoun, i.e. "his."

You might be thinking "IBDaMann sure isn't very tolerant" but I'm also not religious.

You might need to think through your position perhaps a little better than you have. But if your project works out, you will be able to have a life without IBDaMann intolerantly scrutinizing your grammar.

If your project works out, will the earth's core cool more rapidly or more slowly?
22-01-2022 10:13
Into the NightProfile picture★★★★★
(18679)
IBdaMann wrote:
James___ wrote:People don't have a choice.

Then please tell me what the lone, single item is that is on the shelf.

James___ wrote:Religion took that away from people.

Are you saying religion eliminated the option for people of one particular religion to convert to another religion?

James___ wrote: I served in the military.

By choice.

James___ wrote:Religious people are not as tolerant as someone with a gun in their hand.

"Someone" is singular and requires the singular possessive pronoun, i.e. "his."

You might be thinking "IBDaMann sure isn't very tolerant" but I'm also not religious.

You might need to think through your position perhaps a little better than you have. But if your project works out, you will be able to have a life without IBDaMann intolerantly scrutinizing your grammar.

If your project works out, will the earth's core cool more rapidly or more slowly?


Religion has nothing to do with tolerance.

Religions are just a circular argument, with other arguments extending from that.
It matters not if the initial circular argument is accepted by another or not. It is not possible to prove a circular argument either True or False.

Your view, of course, is to have NO circular argument. You do not try to claim any god or gods, and neither do you claim that none exist.

The circular argument is also known as the argument of faith. By itself it is not a fallacy.
Attempting to prove a circular argument either True or False is the circular argument fallacy. This is what a fundamentalist does. Such fundamentalists are locked into their 'proofs'. They are the ones least tolerant of any other view.


The Parrot Killer

Debunked in my sig. - tmiddles

Google keeps track of paranoid talk and i'm not on their list. I've been evaluated and certified. - keepit

nuclear powered ships do not require nuclear fuel. - Swan

While it is true that fossils do not burn it is also true that fossil fuels burn very well - Swan
22-01-2022 14:09
BestChance
☆☆☆☆☆
(12)
Google translator mistranslated "low temperature". I am reloading the pages. Sorry.

1 page
Attached image:

RE: 2 page22-01-2022 14:11
BestChance
☆☆☆☆☆
(12)
2 page
Attached image:

22-01-2022 14:12
BestChance
☆☆☆☆☆
(12)
3 page
Attached image:

Page 1 of 5123>>>





Join the debate Energy source: evaporation - condensation (continuation):

Remember me

Related content
ThreadsRepliesLast post
The Savior Last Gift: Will Reveal The Secret Of Life, The Source Of All Creation With Worthy Beings519-06-2021 02:49
The Ultimate Purpose Of Living Is Know Who You Are & The Source Of All Creation713-06-2021 09:55
Desalination and evaporation of sea water at both poles1019-11-2020 23:57
Ammonia As A Source Of Energy429-09-2020 05:47
The source of energy is evaporation-condensation8326-07-2018 22:01
▲ 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 © 2009-2020 Climate-Debate.com | About | Contact