Engineers

HarveyH55 wrote:
So, if you put a gravity wheel device in the direct path of the Norwegian Jet Stream, it will spin perpetually? The acceleration of the gravity wheel, is dependent on how much of the ozone layer is depleted. The bigger the ozone hole, the faster it goes?

James___ wrote: As for the ozone layer, I would say that it is depleted because of ODSs and hydrocarbons.

IBdaMann wrote:

James___ wrote: As for the ozone layer, I would say that it is depleted because of ODSs and hydrocarbons.

At the same time, you would have to admit that the ozone layer is not depleted.

James___ wrote: The ozone layer is recovering.

James___ wrote: My initial interest was in understanding this process so a sustainable solution could be pursued.

James___ wrote:I think that's what the focus should be on but it isn't.

James___ wrote: And if things work out for me, then I might be able to change that.

IBdaMann wrote:

James___ wrote: The ozone layer is recovering.

The ozone cannot "recover" if it was never depleted in the first place.

James___ wrote: My initial interest was in understanding this process so a sustainable solution could be pursued.

Let me aid your understanding.

The sun is a hugely successful ozone creator.

The sun is, for all intents and purposes, a sustainable source.

James__, I have great news! We already have a sustainable source for earth's ozone! We can start celebrating today!

James___ wrote:I think that's what the focus should be on but it isn't.

Naturally we shouldn't focus on finding a solution that we already have, especially when that solution is already hooked up and operational.

James___ wrote: And if things work out for me, then I might be able to change that.

You don't have to wait. You can already abandon your focus for the sustainable solution that we already have. Consider this your lucky day.

James___ wrote: Any chance that you're a "born again" Christian like gfm?

James___ wrote:I think this is why I was not comfortable going to church.

James___ wrote:The church doesn't really care for people to have other interests.

James___ wrote: ... Jesus did say Matthew 5:15; Neither do people light a lamp and put it under a bowl. Instead they put it on its stand, and it gives light to everyone in the house.

James___ wrote: This is where many Christians like yourself and gfm say that a person needs live according to the scripture as their church says even when the scripture says that the church should be a guiding light.

James___ wrote: I think this is where Christians like yourself cause me problems. I don't belong to your church.

duncan61 wrote:
James your obsession with the Ozone in the atmosphere was a proven hoax 30 years ago.You are making it up

duncan61 wrote:...One mechanical engineer ...was inspiring...it is too complicated to prove....For some reason I found this compelling...

James___ wrote:
And this is where he went on a rant. With the what I was asking about, it was about a specific relationship between gravity and something else. And as he mentioned, he went to university while I didn't. So I can't ask if a certain mathematical relationship has been observed. By his reaction, it hadn't.
From my perspective, they were defending their territory much like a "real" American would. And if my experiment and the other observations I made are found to be correct, then I'd be suggesting that astrophysics plays a role in atmospheric chemistry and physics. Kind of why I'd like to work with actual scientists on this.
Basically this is PhD level work. If I'm right, then the work I am pursuing will be important to better understanding GeoSciences.

p.s., I hear in Australia they need people who are willing to adopt koalas. Since I'm not a scientist that might be worth my looking into.

Some know I have asked Southern Cross University in East Linsmore to perform a basic atmospheric chemistry experiment. Friends of the Koala is an easy walk through a park to their campus. And if I don't make it to Australia, those who like koalas will know I support what they're doing.

p.s.s., as for me, a lot of what I've worked on is because of my medical situation.
There is no one in the US who can help me. And by being successful, accountability might be considered. As for scientists, I represent a dilemma. If you had a PhD, would you want someone who isn't a scientist showing you what you missed?
In astronomy, amateur astronomers are accepted. After that there are no amateur scientists. Why there's a dilemma.

As for the image, he deleted my post. This is where if someone made an accurate timeline for work that is related to atmospheric chemistry, they're reconsider a few things. And it is my interest in the ozone layer that made me aware of what was in the IPCC's 2013 report. This gave me a process to "verify" just as someone would do in trigonometric identities. Basically try and figure out how the more complicated side can equal the less complicated side.

HarveyH55 wrote:

James___ wrote:
And this is where he went on a rant. With the what I was asking about, it was about a specific relationship between gravity and something else. And as he mentioned, he went to university while I didn't. So I can't ask if a certain mathematical relationship has been observed. By his reaction, it hadn't.
From my perspective, they were defending their territory much like a "real" American would. And if my experiment and the other observations I made are found to be correct, then I'd be suggesting that astrophysics plays a role in atmospheric chemistry and physics. Kind of why I'd like to work with actual scientists on this.
Basically this is PhD level work. If I'm right, then the work I am pursuing will be important to better understanding GeoSciences.

p.s., I hear in Australia they need people who are willing to adopt koalas. Since I'm not a scientist that might be worth my looking into.

Some know I have asked Southern Cross University in East Linsmore to perform a basic atmospheric chemistry experiment. Friends of the Koala is an easy walk through a park to their campus. And if I don't make it to Australia, those who like koalas will know I support what they're doing.

p.s.s., as for me, a lot of what I've worked on is because of my medical situation.
There is no one in the US who can help me. And by being successful, accountability might be considered. As for scientists, I represent a dilemma. If you had a PhD, would you want someone who isn't a scientist showing you what you missed?
In astronomy, amateur astronomers are accepted. After that there are no amateur scientists. Why there's a dilemma.

As for the image, he deleted my post. This is where if someone made an accurate timeline for work that is related to atmospheric chemistry, they're reconsider a few things. And it is my interest in the ozone layer that made me aware of what was in the IPCC's 2013 report. This gave me a process to "verify" just as someone would do in trigonometric identities. Basically try and figure out how the more complicated side can equal the less complicated side.

You posted your perpetual motion device on a physics forum, and got banned?

tmiddles wrote:

duncan61 wrote:...One mechanical engineer ...was inspiring...it is too complicated to prove....For some reason I found this compelling...

You found what you wanted to hear compelling.

Duncan you do realize this is that very definition of confirmation bias right?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Confirmation_bias

You are looking for what you want to find and then find your opinion confirmed when you find it.

Watch Behind the Curve https://www.netflix.com/title/81015076 and you'll see a Mechanical Engineer who believes the Earth is flat.

Something he has in common with Steven Brandenburg, the Wisconsin pharmacist who destroyed COVID-19 vaccines.

Here is the real question:
What is your methodology for determining what is true?

It is certainly not the Scientific Method so far.

"Good tests kill flawed theories; we remain alive to guess again." - Karl Popper
ITN/IBD Fraud exposed:  The 2nd LTD add on claiming radiance from cooler bodies can't be absorbed Max Planck debunks, they can't explain:net-thermal-radiation-you-in-a-room-as-a-reference & Proof: no data is valid for IBD or ITN

James___ wrote:

HarveyH55 wrote:

James___ wrote:
And this is where he went on a rant. With the what I was asking about, it was about a specific relationship between gravity and something else. And as he mentioned, he went to university while I didn't. So I can't ask if a certain mathematical relationship has been observed. By his reaction, it hadn't.
From my perspective, they were defending their territory much like a "real" American would. And if my experiment and the other observations I made are found to be correct, then I'd be suggesting that astrophysics plays a role in atmospheric chemistry and physics. Kind of why I'd like to work with actual scientists on this.
Basically this is PhD level work. If I'm right, then the work I am pursuing will be important to better understanding GeoSciences.

p.s., I hear in Australia they need people who are willing to adopt koalas. Since I'm not a scientist that might be worth my looking into.

Some know I have asked Southern Cross University in East Linsmore to perform a basic atmospheric chemistry experiment. Friends of the Koala is an easy walk through a park to their campus. And if I don't make it to Australia, those who like koalas will know I support what they're doing.

p.s.s., as for me, a lot of what I've worked on is because of my medical situation.
There is no one in the US who can help me. And by being successful, accountability might be considered. As for scientists, I represent a dilemma. If you had a PhD, would you want someone who isn't a scientist showing you what you missed?
In astronomy, amateur astronomers are accepted. After that there are no amateur scientists. Why there's a dilemma.

As for the image, he deleted my post. This is where if someone made an accurate timeline for work that is related to atmospheric chemistry, they're reconsider a few things. And it is my interest in the ozone layer that made me aware of what was in the IPCC's 2013 report. This gave me a process to "verify" just as someone would do in trigonometric identities. Basically try and figure out how the more complicated side can equal the less complicated side.

You posted your perpetual motion device on a physics forum, and got banned?

Nope. I asked a question about physics and got banned. The mentor said I am an "American". That means that he is like you, an Amazon employee. You win.

HarveyH55 wrote:

James___ wrote:

HarveyH55 wrote:

James___ wrote:
And this is where he went on a rant. With the what I was asking about, it was about a specific relationship between gravity and something else. And as he mentioned, he went to university while I didn't. So I can't ask if a certain mathematical relationship has been observed. By his reaction, it hadn't.
From my perspective, they were defending their territory much like a "real" American would. And if my experiment and the other observations I made are found to be correct, then I'd be suggesting that astrophysics plays a role in atmospheric chemistry and physics. Kind of why I'd like to work with actual scientists on this.
Basically this is PhD level work. If I'm right, then the work I am pursuing will be important to better understanding GeoSciences.

p.s., I hear in Australia they need people who are willing to adopt koalas. Since I'm not a scientist that might be worth my looking into.

Some know I have asked Southern Cross University in East Linsmore to perform a basic atmospheric chemistry experiment. Friends of the Koala is an easy walk through a park to their campus. And if I don't make it to Australia, those who like koalas will know I support what they're doing.

p.s.s., as for me, a lot of what I've worked on is because of my medical situation.
There is no one in the US who can help me. And by being successful, accountability might be considered. As for scientists, I represent a dilemma. If you had a PhD, would you want someone who isn't a scientist showing you what you missed?
In astronomy, amateur astronomers are accepted. After that there are no amateur scientists. Why there's a dilemma.

As for the image, he deleted my post. This is where if someone made an accurate timeline for work that is related to atmospheric chemistry, they're reconsider a few things. And it is my interest in the ozone layer that made me aware of what was in the IPCC's 2013 report. This gave me a process to "verify" just as someone would do in trigonometric identities. Basically try and figure out how the more complicated side can equal the less complicated side.

You posted your perpetual motion device on a physics forum, and got banned?

Nope. I asked a question about physics and got banned. The mentor said I am an "American". That means that he is like you, an Amazon employee. You win.

Physics is very large field. Are you sure you were asking at the right forum? There is actual science, and there is an alternative, more 'progressive', liberal science. Which is always agenda driven. If your question doesn't support the agenda, it's dismissed as nonsense. If it something that undermines the agenda, you get banned...

However, a detailed investigation including meteorological effects such as precipitation scavenging and convection reveals an uncertainty in state-of- the-art model predictions for CH2O in the MBL that is too large for a meaningful test of the current understanding of CH4 photo-oxidation.

James___ wrote:

HarveyH55 wrote:
So, if you put a gravity wheel device in the direct path of the Norwegian Jet Stream, it will spin perpetually? The acceleration of the gravity wheel, is dependent on how much of the ozone layer is depleted. The bigger the ozone hole, the faster it goes?

As for the ozone layer, I would say that it is depleted because of ODSs and hydrocarbons.

James___ wrote:
The ozone layer is recovering.

James___ wrote:
My initial interest was in understanding this process so a sustainable solution could be pursued.

James___ wrote:
I think that's what the focus should be on but it isn't.

James___ wrote:
Any chance that you're a "born again" Christian like gfm?

James___ wrote:

duncan61 wrote:
James your obsession with the Ozone in the atmosphere was a proven hoax 30 years ago.You are making it up

With ODSs reducing the amount of oxygen in the Chapman cycle, there wasn't much of a debate over it like there is with CO2 causing global warming. Scientists were pretty much in agreement.

tmiddles wrote:
Here is the real question:
What is your methodology for determining what is true?

It is certainly not the Scientific Method so far.

James___ wrote:

HarveyH55 wrote:

James___ wrote:

HarveyH55 wrote:

James___ wrote:
And this is where he went on a rant. With the what I was asking about, it was about a specific relationship between gravity and something else. And as he mentioned, he went to university while I didn't. So I can't ask if a certain mathematical relationship has been observed. By his reaction, it hadn't.
From my perspective, they were defending their territory much like a "real" American would. And if my experiment and the other observations I made are found to be correct, then I'd be suggesting that astrophysics plays a role in atmospheric chemistry and physics. Kind of why I'd like to work with actual scientists on this.
Basically this is PhD level work. If I'm right, then the work I am pursuing will be important to better understanding GeoSciences.

p.s., I hear in Australia they need people who are willing to adopt koalas. Since I'm not a scientist that might be worth my looking into.

Some know I have asked Southern Cross University in East Linsmore to perform a basic atmospheric chemistry experiment. Friends of the Koala is an easy walk through a park to their campus. And if I don't make it to Australia, those who like koalas will know I support what they're doing.

p.s.s., as for me, a lot of what I've worked on is because of my medical situation.
There is no one in the US who can help me. And by being successful, accountability might be considered. As for scientists, I represent a dilemma. If you had a PhD, would you want someone who isn't a scientist showing you what you missed?
In astronomy, amateur astronomers are accepted. After that there are no amateur scientists. Why there's a dilemma.

As for the image, he deleted my post. This is where if someone made an accurate timeline for work that is related to atmospheric chemistry, they're reconsider a few things. And it is my interest in the ozone layer that made me aware of what was in the IPCC's 2013 report. This gave me a process to "verify" just as someone would do in trigonometric identities. Basically try and figure out how the more complicated side can equal the less complicated side.

You posted your perpetual motion device on a physics forum, and got banned?

Nope. I asked a question about physics and got banned. The mentor said I am an "American". That means that he is like you, an Amazon employee. You win.

Physics is very large field. Are you sure you were asking at the right forum? There is actual science, and there is an alternative, more 'progressive', liberal science. Which is always agenda driven. If your question doesn't support the agenda, it's dismissed as nonsense. If it something that undermines the agenda, you get banned...

I think the moderator got upset because it's entirely possible that I made a new discovery. He told me that I could not post new theories and I told him that I was asking if what I realized had been observed before.
He also told me that if my work were published in a journal which is peer reviewed then I could discuss it in that forum. I told him I could submit a paper to a journal but he was to busy attacking me.
At the same time, he went to university so I couldn't know something that he doesn't. At the same time, that is also how work is stolen. I do have my work posted online and a Professor of Atmospheric Chemistry and Physics in Germany knows about it. This gets into CO2 + H2O > CH2O and O2.
Then 2CH2O > CH4 and CO2. There are a few reports that say (MBL means Marine Boundary Layer) and oxidation simply means that oxygen is the catalyst that causes a reaction to happen.

However, a detailed investigation including meteorological effects such as precipitation scavenging and convection reveals an uncertainty in state-of- the-art model predictions for CH2O in the MBL that is too large for a meaningful test of the current understanding of CH4 photo-oxidation.

I did request the full report from its authors. I did let them know that I am pursuing my own theory. With my theory, conservation of energy or momentum is what allows for the process to work. And my process goes from CH2O to CH4.
In the physics forum, I noticed a mathematical relationship in astrophysics and atmospheric pressure. And that kind of goes with my work in atmospheric chemistry. It is odd to think about it but if doctors didn't screw me over then I wouldn't be pursuing stuff like this. At the same time, if my work proves out then I'll be rewriting a few things in physics.
Basically, if I am right about 2CH2O which is the same as CH2O + CH2O > CH4 and CO2, then the process might be named after me. And Harvey, I do understand this stuff. My hearing loss gave me a lot of time to read, learn and consider things.

James___ wrote:
Any chance that you're a "born again" Christian like gfm?

James___ wrote:
I think this is why I was not comfortable going to church. The church doesn't really care for people to have other interests.

James___ wrote:
I think that like with you, they don't understand that Jesus ministry has grown. With that said Jesus did say Matthew 5:15; Neither do people light a lamp and put it under a bowl. Instead they put it on its stand, and it gives light to everyone in the house.

James___ wrote:
This is where many Christians like yourself and gfm say that a person needs live according to the scripture as their church says even when the scripture says that the church should be a guiding light.

James___ wrote:
I think this is where Christians like yourself cause me problems. I don't belong to your church.

gfm7175 wrote:IBD says that he is an atheist. Last I checked, that is not a "born again" Christian (as I am).

James___ wrote:Churches, as far as I am aware, are fine with people having various interests besides attending church, giving an offering, and reading The Bible.

James___ wrote:Yes, Christians have a mission to share the gospel to the world, and they are to "let their light shine" (bring light into the darkness) so that those living in darkness might be saved.

James___ wrote:I agree with IBD that you owe me a double apology.

gfm7175 wrote:

James___ wrote:
Any chance that you're a "born again" Christian like gfm?

IBD says that he is an atheist. Last I checked, that is not a "born again" Christian (as I am).

IBdaMann wrote:

gfm7175 wrote:IBD says that he is an atheist. Last I checked, that is not a "born again" Christian (as I am).

Hold on ... are you saying that they are not the same? Now I'm confused. I thought that both Born-Again Christians and Atheists hold that air and freedom are good, that one should return to Caesar what is Caesar's, and that he who is without sin gets to throw out the first pitch.

IBdaMann wrote:

gfm7175 wrote:Churches, as far as I am aware, are fine with people having various interests besides attending church, giving an offering, and reading The Bible.

... but the Catholic Church would prefer you first get their permission in writing, which comes with a nominal paperwork fee.

IBdaMann wrote:

gfm7175 wrote:Yes, Christians have a mission to share the gospel to the world, and they are to "let their light shine" (bring light into the darkness) so that those living in darkness might be saved.

Are you sure it's not because God is concerned about us reading with proper lighting?

IBdaMann wrote:

gfm7175 wrote:I agree with IBD that you owe me a double apology.

By now it would be more like a 2.087x apology (with interest).

James___ wrote:

gfm7175 wrote:

James___ wrote:
Any chance that you're a "born again" Christian like gfm?

IBD says that he is an atheist. Last I checked, that is not a "born again" Christian (as I am).

It's just that the 2 of you are like 2 peas in a pod. Just difficult to tell you apart.

gfm7175 wrote:

James___ wrote:

gfm7175 wrote:

James___ wrote:
Any chance that you're a "born again" Christian like gfm?

IBD says that he is an atheist. Last I checked, that is not a "born again" Christian (as I am).

It's just that the 2 of you are like 2 peas in a pod. Just difficult to tell you apart.

... ??? Really??

I think it's pretty easy to tell us apart... Oh well.

Two days prior to the building collapse, a pool contractor noted deep standing water in a similar location as one of the largest puddles visible in the 2020 video. The contractor also documented significant corrosion to a beam around the pool, although the damage he photographed was not in the area of the building that collapsed.

The 2020 video also shows a large crack in the concrete floor of the basement-level garage but experts said that was likely not something that should be a major cause for concern. The crack was unlikely to have contributed to the progressive collapse of the whole north side of the structure, which began after what experts described as slab failure in the garage ceiling visible in a video taken moments before the building collapsed.

"This slab is laying on top of the dirt," Batista explained. "So an engineer, walking through [the basement garage], is more concerned with any cracks or spalling that are at the floor level and above, not really anything that is at the floor level and below."

James___ wrote:
With water pooling up on the floor of the garage, did it come from the Biscayne aquifer under south Florida? If so, then that could change the ground density under the building. It did seem to start it's collapse from the center. And if any has lived in the Seattle area they know about liquification of the ground.

Into the Night wrote:

James___ wrote:
With water pooling up on the floor of the garage, did it come from the Biscayne aquifer under south Florida? If so, then that could change the ground density under the building. It did seem to start it's collapse from the center. And if any has lived in the Seattle area they know about liquification of the ground.

Oddly enough, they don't. Neither do you.

James___ wrote:

Into the Night wrote:

James___ wrote:
With water pooling up on the floor of the garage, did it come from the Biscayne aquifer under south Florida? If so, then that could change the ground density under the building. It did seem to start it's collapse from the center. And if any has lived in the Seattle area they know about liquification of the ground.

Oddly enough, they don't. Neither do you.

That's just sad ITN.

duncan61 wrote:
Back to the young Engineer who stated "The global warming theory is a social exersize"I have just downloaded an app from recfishwest on Freshwater angling in W.A.We are very limited here with few streams that flow all year and I recall from the 70s to now how everyone keeps claiming there is less and less rainfall.Recfishwest state on the app that due to climate change its going to be harder and harder to stock the rivers.Friday it rained so hard all the streets flooded and people were stranded on the freeway.I saw it coming and heard the warnings on the radio plus the room I was working in became to dark to see.I had a choice set up lighting or pack my gear and go home.I went home and just made it before the deluge.There is no way it could of been the cold front coming from Antartica and colliding with warm moist air from the North.It was CO2 and proof we have to turn off the power or you guessed it.We are all going to die