Engineers

Climate-Debate.com > Discussion Forum > Climate debate in general > Engineers > Page 3

Page 3 of 4

11-07-2021 16:31
James___ ★★★★★ (5513)	duncan61 wrote: What will happen then?? We'll have to wait and see, righto? If enough rain in the winter then bush fires might be worse in the summer. And in November might bring the next El Nino maximum. It will be something to watch for. This is because it could influence both the Southern Oscillation and the southern polar jet stream. I think this is when atmospheric chemistry becomes interesting. After all, with the ozone hole decreasing at the same time, how do these things affect the weather in W.A.? p.s., the good people who like koalas and other Australian wildlife know I wouldn't mind living in Australia and volunteering at a wildlife park or 2. Meet Miss Eleanor; https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Dx5Uta4pNaY
11-07-2021 21:16
James___ ★★★★★ (5513)	From the New York Times via yahoo.com. No mention though of checking to ensure the foundation of the garage (its floor) is still level. With ground penetrating radar they might be able to see if the density of the ground under the garage floor varies. Especially since some similar structures have pools of water on the garage floor. If it's coming through the floor then that's an obvious problem. https://www.yahoo.com/news/lord-hear-residents-florida-condos-153824900.html
11-07-2021 23:01
Into the Night★★★★★ (21582)	More of James babbling to himself.
12-07-2021 00:53
duncan61 ★★★★★ (2021)	I have been to Darwin where it is tropical and has a wet and a dry season.Albany is South and facing Antartica and has snow and ice.I may be going to Kalgoorlie soon which is on a similar latitude to Perth but is a bit warmer with much less rain so its a desert.Lot of different climates
12-07-2021 01:19
James___ ★★★★★ (5513)	duncan61 wrote: I have been to Darwin where it is tropical and has a wet and a dry season.Albany is South and facing Antartica and has snow and ice.I may be going to Kalgoorlie soon which is on a similar latitude to Perth but is a bit warmer with much less rain so its a desert.Lot of different climates I checked a map to find out where Kalgoorlie and Albany are. Is there much of an elevation difference between the 2? It's possible you might've just explained why your early settlers chose Perth for a port.

12-07-2021 10:39
duncan61 ★★★★★ (2021)	Perth was chosen as it has the Swan river that went up to a natural landing.There are freshwater springs in the area and Aborigionals thrived before we shot them in the face
12-07-2021 15:36
James___ ★★★★★ (5513)	duncan61 wrote: Perth was chosen as it has the Swan river that went up to a natural landing.There are freshwater springs in the area and Aborigionals thrived before we shot them in the face In the US, we would call the Swan River a lake. Seattle, Wa has Lake Washington among other lakes. https://www.google.com/maps/place/Seattle,+WA/@47.6129432,-122.4821463,11z/data=!3m1!4b1!4m5!3m4!1s0x5490102c93e83355:0x102565466944d59a!8m2!3d47.6062095!4d-122.3320708
20-08-2021 07:41
duncan61 ★★★★★ (2021)	I have just switched out a hotplate for an elderly gentleman who had an interest in this debate.He is actualy a scientist who works in the petroleum industry.He freely admits for years he was skeptical about climate change but has considered it may be possible.He works in statistical probability.From what I have learned I could bounce some theories around about temperatures sea level and satellites.It was a pleasant time!
20-08-2021 17:39
IBdaMann★★★★★ (14389)	duncan61 wrote:He is actualy a scientist ... Not likely ... see below. duncan61 wrote: ... who works in the petroleum industry. There's a difference between a scientist and a truck driver who delivers gasoline to stations. duncan61 wrote: He freely admits for years he was skeptical about climate change ... and you can't wait to tell us his unambiguous definition of Climate Change, can you? Go ahead, lay it on us. duncan61 wrote: ... but has considered it may be possible. Of course, under his unambiguous definition of Climate Change that you are going to share with the rest of us, right? duncan61 wrote: He works in statistical probability. Not likely. Let's see, he tells you that he is a scientist ... who works in statistical probability (mathematician) ... for the petroleum industry (engineer) who needs you to swap out his hot plate for him. Did you call boolsch't on any of it? Nevermind, just telling us his unambiguous definition of Climate Change would be helpful. duncan61 wrote:From what I have learned I could bounce some theories around about temperatures sea level and satellites.It was a pleasant time! It's a good thing that you didn't make any claims about planning to learn anything from his responses. It really sounds like, yes, you'd be able to bounce any kind of wacky theory off this guy, even ATE, and he just might nod his head and tell you that gravity melted his glacial moraines because Watts is energy. It sounds like you have a real winner there. I don't think i can [define it]. I just kind of get a feel for the phrase. - keepit A Spaghetti strainer with the faucet running, retains water- tmiddles Clouds don't trap heat. Clouds block cold. - Spongy Iris Printing dollars to pay debt doesn't increase the number of dollars. - keepit If Venus were a black body it would have a much much lower temperature than what we found there.- tmiddles Ah the "Valid Data" myth of ITN/IBD. - tmiddles Ceist - I couldn't agree with you more. But when money and religion are involved, and there are people who value them above all else, then the lies begin. - trafn You are completely misunderstanding their use of the word "accumulation"! - Climate Scientist. The Stefan-Boltzman equation doesn't come up with the correct temperature if greenhouse gases are not considered - Hank :sigh* Not the "raw data" crap.* - Leafsdude IB STILL hasn't explained what Planck's Law means. Just more hand waving that it applies to everything and more asserting that the greenhouse effect 'violates' it.- Ceist
20-08-2021 18:40
Into the Night★★★★★ (21582)	James___ wrote: duncan61 wrote: Perth was chosen as it has the Swan river that went up to a natural landing.There are freshwater springs in the area and Aborigionals thrived before we shot them in the face In the US, we would call the Swan River a lake. Seattle, Wa has Lake Washington among other lakes. https://www.google.com/maps/place/Seattle,+WA/@47.6129432,-122.4821463,11z/data=!3m1!4b1!4m5!3m4!1s0x5490102c93e83355:0x102565466944d59a!8m2!3d47.6062095!4d-122.3320708 A river is not a lake, James. Lake Washington is not a river. Swan river is a river, not a lake. Like many rivers draining across relatively flat land where they enter the ocean, it's wide from time to time. See the Mississippi river, around Winona, MN, (which also has lakes, so you can compare the two). 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
20-08-2021 18:47
Into the Night★★★★★ (21582)	duncan61 wrote: I have just switched out a hotplate for an elderly gentleman who had an interest in this debate.He is actualy a scientist who works in the petroleum industry.He freely admits for years he was skeptical about climate change but has considered it may be possible.He works in statistical probability.From what I have learned I could bounce some theories around about temperatures sea level and satellites.It was a pleasant time! There is no such thing as 'statistical probability'. There is statistical math, and probability math, but no 'statistical probability' math. So the man denies mathematics. If this scientist believes that 'climate change' is possible, even though it's never been defined, he is denying science. If he believes that CO2 is somehow able to create energy or reduce entropy, he is denying science. If he believes that it's somehow possible to trap heat or thermal energy, he is denying science. If he believes that it's possible to measure an absolute temperature using a satellite, he is denying science AND engineering. Science isn't scientists. It isn't any scientist or group of scientists. It isn't even people at all. Science is a set of falsifiable theories. You can't measure the temperature of the Earth. You can't measure the global sea level. There is no valid reference point. Satellites are incapable of measuring an absolute temperature of any region. All they can measure is light. You don't know if it's emitted via Stefan-Boltzmann, reflected, or refracted and how much of each the satellite sees. The emissivity of Earth is unknown and also cannot be measured. 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 20-08-2021 18:50
20-08-2021 18:49
Into the Night★★★★★ (21582)	IBdaMann wrote: duncan61 wrote:He is actualy a scientist ... Not likely ... see below. duncan61 wrote: ... who works in the petroleum industry. There's a difference between a scientist and a truck driver who delivers gasoline to stations. duncan61 wrote: He freely admits for years he was skeptical about climate change ... and you can't wait to tell us his unambiguous definition of Climate Change, can you? Go ahead, lay it on us. duncan61 wrote: ... but has considered it may be possible. Of course, under his unambiguous definition of Climate Change that you are going to share with the rest of us, right? duncan61 wrote: He works in statistical probability. Not likely. Let's see, he tells you that he is a scientist ... who works in statistical probability (mathematician) ... for the petroleum industry (engineer) who needs you to swap out his hot plate for him. Did you call boolsch't on any of it? Nevermind, just telling us his unambiguous definition of Climate Change would be helpful. duncan61 wrote:From what I have learned I could bounce some theories around about temperatures sea level and satellites.It was a pleasant time! It's a good thing that you didn't make any claims about planning to learn anything from his responses. It really sounds like, yes, you'd be able to bounce any kind of wacky theory off this guy, even ATE, and he just might nod his head and tell you that gravity melted his glacial moraines because Watts is energy. It sounds like you have a real winner there. Heh. I've known scientists that can't figure out how to plug their hotplate IN. Scientists, of course, isn't science. 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
20-08-2021 21:42
IBdaMann★★★★★ (14389)	Into the Night wrote:Heh. I've known scientists that can't figure out how to plug their hotplate IN. I totally get it ... but this guy in question was an engineer-scientist-mathematician supporting Big Oil so obviously he was brilliant in every way. Into the Night wrote:Scientists, of course, isn't science. ... and professional statistical probabilityists aren't science. Did you happen to see an unambiguous definition for Climate Change lying around there anywhere? I looked but I didn't see any.
21-08-2021 01:51
duncan61 ★★★★★ (2021)	Exactly the responses I was expecting.The hot plate was a fixed gas installation and you have to have a permit to install new appliances.The electric plug operates the igniter system.He is a scientist there are more than one type.He has spent most of his career finding oil deposits not driving a truck.The probability as he explained it was you can have a level of confidence there is oil after all your seismic testing and stuff and give a probability there is going to be oil but its called gamblers ruin.If a smaller company spends $3 million drilling and comes up empty handed it could break them.The reason I enjoyed the moment is because I am having a hard time finding anyone to discuss this topic which is my thing at the moment.We very calmly as I installed his appliance shared ideas and he stated that as so many people are banging on about climate change there is a probability there is something to it and the end result could be disastrous and gave the rainfall patterns in Perth as an example of changing climate to which I responded 1.We have just had the wettest june ever 2.I have been in the plumbing industry since the 70s and the water corp needs to stop telling everyone not to use water and get some which happened when the desalanation plant was built and pipes potable water to Canning dam which supplies Perth Regards Sea levels I know that levels have not increased in the Southern Hemisphere as we have tidal records going back over 100 years and I can see it.He responded with land movement and apparently Scandinavia is growing and other places sinking.I know that currents and wind can change sea levels but not to an apocalyptic level.I tuned him in with how Satellites can take pictures and some do GPS thats about it measuring light does not give accurate temperatures.Many of these things he had not considered before.Both of us agreed at the end that there is nothing to worry about and left it at that however oil is a finite resource and its getting harder to find and more expensive to get to so we are going to transition to other means anyway just lets not try to do it tomorrow.The hydrogen theory falls down as a byproduct is water vapour .Germany proved solar panels do not work reliably and wind farms are just F$%ked Edited on 21-08-2021 02:15
21-08-2021 02:35
duncan61 ★★★★★ (2021)	I started looking in to the AGW/CC myth when the hippie chick stated CO2 is like a blanket warming the Earth and I had no response.Yesterday was good as I heard the man out and had credible responses most of which I have got from this site.This was always my ambition.To have some opinion on this subject.The way that you pair ITN and IBDM have just responded proves to me you are trollers of the highest order.The internet has a dark side and you 2 are it.You have declared theories about someone you do not know to someone else you dont know based on what.Have a good look at yourselves.

21-08-2021 06:38
IBdaMann★★★★★ (14389)	duncan61 wrote:He is a scientist You don't know what a scientist is. You think everybody is a scientist. All anyone has to do is claim to be a scientist and that's good enough for you. duncan61 wrote:He has spent most of his career finding oil deposits Is he a researcher or an investigator? You still haven't explained how he is a scientist other than he told you he was. duncan61 wrote:The probability as he explained it was you can have a level of confidence there is oil after all your seismic testing and stuff and give a probability there is going to be oil That's not probability. That's rationale for speculation. He is missing something crucial for it to be probability. You could look it up to find out what that is. duncan61 wrote: but its called gamblers ruin. Gambler's Ruin has nothing to do with what you were describing, except that this guy threw that term at you knowing that you would never look it up ... and he was right ... you simply believed him. duncan61 wrote: If a smaller company spends $3 million drilling and comes up empty handed it could break them. If any company bets the farm on a project and comes up empty, that could be all she wrote. Go on ... duncan61 wrote: The reason I enjoyed the moment is because I am having a hard time finding anyone to discuss this topic which is my thing at the moment. Incorrect. You have no shortage of people with whom to discuss the topic. Your problem is finding like-minded gullibles who will totally disregard science in order to embrace your bizarre, scientifically illiterate position. This is why you virtually OBEY people like Pete Rogers. You don't often find his level of science denial combined with English malpractice. You have to milk it before it disappears forever. Also, your other problem is that you are the one who refuses to stop preaching your ZANY crap long enough to start discussing the matter. You refuse to answer questions posed to you. You are locked into "preaching" mode and you won't listen to others. duncan61 wrote:We very calmly as I installed his appliance shared ideas and he stated that as so many people are banging on about climate change there is a probability there is something to it ... and this is a totally false statement to which you cling for some reason. You are also willing to allow yourself to be bamboozled into believing crap like "the earth has an atmosphere and it has gravity therefore the earth's temperature is higher than it otherwise should be." You know that's a totally stupid position to have but at the same time, you can't shake it. There is no reasoning with you on this matter. There is no amount of physics, math, logic, observation or common sense that will get you to be rational. Perhaps this is the root of your problem discussing this topic. duncan61 wrote: Regards Sea levels I know that levels have not increased in the Southern Hemisphere Duncan, sea water is liquid. I don't know if you know how liquids work but if the ocean isn't rising in the southern hemisphere, it can't somehow be rising in the Northern hemisphere. Liquids. Pour some onto a table and try to find spots that rise higher than others. If you don't find any ... think about why that is. duncan61 wrote:... apparently Scandinavia is growing and other places sinking. ... and you promptly asked him how sinking land somehow relates to a rising ocean, right? What was his answer? duncan61 wrote: I know that currents and wind can change sea levels No, you don't know that because they don't. They can cause waves ... which don't raise the sea level. duncan61 wrote:... however oil is a finite resource No, the earth will keep making more, and on a massive scale at that. duncan61 wrote: ... and its getting harder to find Nope. Is remains just as difficult as always. There is no way to know where the earth is making more or where the earth's next batch will be. There is no way to avoid looking if you want to find more hydrocarbons. duncan61 wrote: ... and more expensive to get to The only reason it is getting more expensive is due to inflation ... and because today, more sophisticated equipment is used to more efficiently extract more hydrocarbons. Otherwise getting to any well involves drilling deep and through impermeable rock. It hasn't changed. duncan61 wrote: ... so we are going to transition to other means anyway Really? Why has that not happened yet? Why has the oil supply not been long-since exhausted? Why do we have more today than ever before? Why do previously drained oil wells refill when they have been capped?
21-08-2021 07:09
Into the Night★★★★★ (21582)	duncan61 wrote: Exactly the responses I was expecting.The hot plate was a fixed gas installation and you have to have a permit to install new appliances.The electric plug operates the igniter system. Makes no difference. I still know of scientists that can't seem to plug the thing in. duncan61 wrote: He is a scientist there are more than one type.He has spent most of his career finding oil deposits not driving a truck. Finding oil deposits is not science. duncan61 wrote: The probability as he explained it was you can have a level of confidence there is oil after all your seismic testing and stuff and give a probability there is going to be oil but its called gamblers ruin.If a smaller company spends $3 million drilling and comes up empty handed it could break them. That's what gambling will do to ya. duncan61 wrote: The reason I enjoyed the moment is because I am having a hard time finding anyone to discuss this topic which is my thing at the moment.We very calmly as I installed his appliance shared ideas and he stated that as so many people are banging on about climate change Define 'climate change'. duncan61 wrote: there is a probability there is something to it Ya gotta define it first. Define 'climate change'. duncan61 wrote: and the end result could be disastrous Ya gotta define it first. Define 'climate change'. duncan61 wrote: and gave the rainfall patterns in Perth Rainfall is not climate. duncan61 wrote: as an example of changing climate Define 'climate change'. duncan61 wrote: to which I responded 1.We have just had the wettest june ever 2.I have been in the plumbing industry since the 70s and the water corp needs to stop telling everyone not to use water and get some which happened when the desalanation plant was built and pipes potable water to Canning dam which supplies Perth Regards Sea levels I know that levels have not increased in the Southern Hemisphere as we have tidal records going back over 100 years and I can see it. Tidal stations do not measure sea level. duncan61 wrote: He responded with land movement and apparently Scandinavia is growing and other places sinking.I know that currents and wind can change sea levels but not to an apocalyptic level.I tuned him in with how Satellites can take pictures and some do GPS thats about it measuring light does not give accurate temperatures.Many of these things he had not considered before.Both of us agreed at the end that there is nothing to worry about and left it at that Fine. duncan61 wrote: however oil is a finite resource WRONG. Oil is a renewable resource. duncan61 wrote: and its getting harder to find WRONG. It is anywhere you care to drill, if you are willing to go deep enough. duncan61 wrote: and more expensive to get to It costs money per foot to drill. Oil is closest to the surface near tectonic plate edges, particularly where shearing or spreading action is taking place. duncan61 wrote: so we are going to transition to other means anyway just lets not try to do it tomorrow. Who is 'we'? You only get to speak for yourself. duncan61 wrote: The hydrogen theory falls down as a byproduct is water vapour. What is 'hydrogen theory'? duncan61 wrote: Germany proved solar panels do not work reliably They are just the most expensive method to produce power, watt for watt. duncan61 wrote: and wind farms are just F$%ked They are the 2nd most expensive method to produce power, watt for watt. 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
21-08-2021 07:20
Into the Night★★★★★ (21582)	duncan61 wrote: I started looking in to the AGW/CC myth when the hippie chick stated CO2 is like a blanket warming the Earth and I had no response. It's simple. CO2 is not an insulator, and it can't reduce entropy. duncan61 wrote: Yesterday was good as I heard the man out and had credible responses most of which I have got from this site. You never defined 'climate change'. A meaningless buzzword is not a credible response. duncan61 wrote: This was always my ambition.To have some opinion on this subject.The way that you pair ITN and IBDM have just responded proves to me you are trollers of the highest order. Theories of science and describing mathematics is not trolling. duncan61 wrote: The internet has a dark side and you 2 are it.You have declared theories about someone you do not know to someone else you dont know based on what.Have a good look at yourselves. Theories of science are not about people. They are describe nature. They are theories. The 1st and 2nd laws of thermodynamics and the Stefan-Boltzmann law are routinely discarded by the Church of Global Warming. 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
21-08-2021 07:26
Into the Night★★★★★ (21582)	IBdaMann wrote: Duncan, sea water is liquid. I don't know if you know how liquids work but if the ocean isn't rising in the southern hemisphere, it can't somehow be rising in the Northern hemisphere. Liquids. Pour some onto a table and try to find spots that rise higher than others. If you don't find any ... think about why that is. Oceans do have 'hills' and 'valleys'. They are quite a bit larger than water spilled on a tabletop. Remember there are tides, storm surges, etc. Tides are caused by the center of gravity between the Earth-Moon system to be offset from the center of the Earth. They are also caused by the center of gravity between the Earth-Sun system to be offset from the center of the Earth. None of it affects the global sea level, of course. 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
21-08-2021 07:52
duncan61 ★★★★★ (2021)	IBdaMann wrote: [quote]duncan61 wrote:He is actualy a scientist ... Not likely ... see below. duncan61 wrote: ... who works in the petroleum industry. There's a difference between a scientist and a truck driver who delivers gasoline to stations. duncan61 wrote: He freely admits for years he was skeptical about climate change ... and you can't wait to tell us his unambiguous definition of Climate Change, can you? Go ahead, lay it on us. duncan61 wrote: ... but has considered it may be possible. Of course, under his unambiguous definition of Climate Change that you are going to share with the rest of us, right? duncan61 wrote: He works in statistical probability. Not likely. Let's see, he tells you that he is a scientist ... who works in statistical probability (mathematician) ... for the petroleum industry (engineer) who needs you to swap out his hot plate for him. Did you call boolsch't on any of it? Nevermind, just telling us his unambiguous definition of Climate Change would be helpful. duncan61 wrote:From what I have learned I could bounce some theories around about temperatures sea level and satellites.It was a pleasant time! It's a good thing that you didn't make any claims about planning to learn anything from his responses. It really sounds like, yes, you'd be able to bounce any kind of wacky theory off this guy, even ATE, and he just might nod his head and tell you that gravity melted his glacial moraines because Watts is energy. It sounds like you have a real winner there. I have read this a few times and can not find anything worthy of responding to its just your opinion of an exchange that took place where you were not present duncan61
21-08-2021 08:13
duncan61 ★★★★★ (2021)	duncan61 wrote:He is a scientist You don't know what a scientist is. You think everybody is a scientist. All anyone has to do is claim to be a scientist and that's good enough for you. .Yes this is true.If someone tells me they are an electrician I do not instantly ask to see their permit.I have been seeking people to discuss AGW/CC with and found this chap interesting.I have no reason to doubt he has/was/is employed in the oil industry.The young man I worked for today is a woodside employee that is an oil gas company.I had no reason to doubt him
21-08-2021 09:56
IBdaMann★★★★★ (14389)	duncan61 wrote:Yes this is true.If someone tells me they are an electrician I do not instantly ask to see their permit. ... but I presume you ask to see a permit before hiring that person for an important job ... or do you just gullibly hire anyone who claimes to be an electrician? duncan61 wrote:I have been seeking people to discuss AGW/CC with Nope. Not at all. You seek people to whom to preach your WACKY religion. I take it your English proficiency is as poor as Pete Rogers' and you don't understand the semantic distinction between the two. If you were interested in discussing then you would answer the questions posed to you. Since you are a preacher, however, you don't provide answers because you demand others OBEY you and believe as directed without question. Once again, without question ... because you will not answer questions. duncan61 wrote: ... and found this chap interesting. "Interesting" is your euphemism for "agreeable to any WACKY idea" ... but he's a scientist who doubts and questions everything because that's what scientists do ... except he's willing to believe your physics violations ... despite being a scientist who scrutinizes every idea for conformance to science ... except he doesn't demand anything be unambiguously defined ... despite being a scientist who, by definition, follows the scientific method ... Do you see my problem here with your story? You can take that as I'm just not buying any of what you're selling. duncan61 wrote:I have no reason to doubt ... because doubting is what scientists do ... and you don't want anything to do with science. You are fighting tooth and nail to convince me that you see no reason to question anything that you are told by complete strangers. OK. I believe you. You aren't a scientist. I accept your premise. So why do you reject science? duncan61 wrote:.. he has/was/is employed in the oil industry. You are trying to convince me that a scientist employed by Big Oil somehow doesn't know that the earth makes hydrocarbons and that his understanding of petroleum is as poor as yours ... but he is a scientist employed in the petroleum industry? You've got to be insane if you think you make any sense. duncan61 wrote:I had no reason to doubt him I get it. You don't doubt anyone, you don't question anyone, you don't scrutinize anything that strangers say, instead you simply regurgitate whatever you are told to believe ... and Pete Rogers took swift advantage of that apparently. So why don't you instead take to regurgitating science? You can't go wrong if you do that. I can tell you that your regurgitating the WACKY dogmas of complete strangers is not working out well for you.
21-08-2021 12:30
duncan61 ★★★★★ (2021)	Interesting rant.If gas plumbing or electrical work is done in my state a notice is completed and submitted to energy safety as a compliance notice.I had a nice morning with an educated elderly gentleman and some how this has become my preaching a wacky religion for some reason.Fascinating skill set you have
21-08-2021 15:37
HarveyH55★★★★★ (5196)	duncan61 wrote: Interesting rant.If gas plumbing or electrical work is done in my state a notice is completed and submitted to energy safety as a compliance notice.I had a nice morning with an educated elderly gentleman and some how this has become my preaching a wacky religion for some reason.Fascinating skill set you have You need the paper, to sell your services, and satisfy the local building codes. You don't need a degree hanging on the wall to do anything. I do most all my own repairs, in many fields, without any sort of certification. Of course, I don't pull permits, or as the city to inspect my work either... I do have quite a bit of electronics experience/education. So, when my AC system stop blowing cold air a few days ago, it was too tough to figure out the problem, find the parts, do the repairs. Costs about $70, just to get a technician to take a look, and give an estimate. I found the run capacitor swollen (bad), $15 to replace. The compressor started, but no fan. The fan motor cost me $181. Wasn't a fun repair, hot outside, hot inside the house. Spent about 2 hours on the fan motor, but had to take several breaks. I saved a load of money, and likely avoided being sold a whole new system, were less than $200 was sufficient. My system was installed 1996... I've kept it running a whole lot longer than the life expectancy on modern systems being sold as replacements. Do to energy efficiency regulations, pretty much no 'professional' will do more than minor repairs, if I'm lucky. So little choice, unless I want a full replacement. I'm only concerned about function, and safety. The rest usually is just profit for somebody else. Arguing semantics here, is a waste of time. It's just a debate-game tactic, to put you on the defensive, and deflect from the topic. It's manipulative, which tends to aggravate and frustrate as well. I never really got into debate, or arguing in general. But, I do learn things quickly.
21-08-2021 16:41
duncan61 ★★★★★ (2021)	Harvey wrote I'm only concerned about function, and safety. The rest usually is just profit for somebody else. Arguing semantics here, is a waste of time. It's just a debate-game tactic, to put you on the defensive, and deflect from the topic. It's manipulative, which tends to aggravate and frustrate as well. I never really got into debate, or arguing in general. But, I do learn things quickly. You missed your thumb and hit the nail.That is a very good description.I have been looking at the latest IPCC garbage and there is a link to facebook that I have following.The chat is mostly from full on alarmists but there seems to be a few posters that are calling the IPCC out on stuff.I might go hang around there for a bit
21-08-2021 16:59
Into the Night★★★★★ (21582)	...fixing formatting... duncan61 wrote: duncan61 wrote:He is a scientist IBdaMann wrote: You don't know what a scientist is. You think everybody is a scientist. All anyone has to do is claim to be a scientist and that's good enough for you. Yes this is true.If someone tells me they are an electrician I do not instantly ask to see their permit. Science isn't a permit, license, certification, degree, university, government agency, or any other sanctification. Science is a set of falsifiable theories. Electricians do not require a permit to be an electrician. Governments will tend to require electricians that sell their services to get a license for that. duncan61 wrote: I have been seeking people to discuss AGW/CC with and found this chap interesting.I have no reason to doubt he has/was/is employed in the oil industry.The young man I worked for today is a woodside employee that is an oil gas company.I had no reason to doubt him The oil industry is not a scientist. Pivot fallacy. 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
21-08-2021 17:00
Into the Night★★★★★ (21582)	duncan61 wrote: Interesting rant.If gas plumbing or electrical work is done in my state a notice is completed and submitted to energy safety as a compliance notice.I had a nice morning with an educated elderly gentleman and some how this has become my preaching a wacky religion for some reason.Fascinating skill set you have Pivot fallacy. The discussion isn't about who you talked to. It's about your wacky belief in the Church of Global Warming. 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
21-08-2021 17:02
Into the Night★★★★★ (21582)	HarveyH55 wrote: duncan61 wrote: Interesting rant.If gas plumbing or electrical work is done in my state a notice is completed and submitted to energy safety as a compliance notice.I had a nice morning with an educated elderly gentleman and some how this has become my preaching a wacky religion for some reason.Fascinating skill set you have You need the paper, to sell your services, and satisfy the local building codes. You don't need a degree hanging on the wall to do anything. I do most all my own repairs, in many fields, without any sort of certification. Of course, I don't pull permits, or as the city to inspect my work either... I do have quite a bit of electronics experience/education. So, when my AC system stop blowing cold air a few days ago, it was too tough to figure out the problem, find the parts, do the repairs. Costs about $70, just to get a technician to take a look, and give an estimate. I found the run capacitor swollen (bad), $15 to replace. The compressor started, but no fan. The fan motor cost me $181. Wasn't a fun repair, hot outside, hot inside the house. Spent about 2 hours on the fan motor, but had to take several breaks. I saved a load of money, and likely avoided being sold a whole new system, were less than $200 was sufficient. My system was installed 1996... I've kept it running a whole lot longer than the life expectancy on modern systems being sold as replacements. Do to energy efficiency regulations, pretty much no 'professional' will do more than minor repairs, if I'm lucky. So little choice, unless I want a full replacement. I'm only concerned about function, and safety. The rest usually is just profit for somebody else. Arguing semantics here, is a waste of time. It's just a debate-game tactic, to put you on the defensive, and deflect from the topic. It's manipulative, which tends to aggravate and frustrate as well. I never really got into debate, or arguing in general. But, I do learn things quickly. Good for you! I also do all my own repairs and install my own electrical systems. So long as the system passes code, the electrical inspector doesn't care who worked on it. 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
21-08-2021 17:03
Into the Night★★★★★ (21582)	duncan61 wrote: Harvey wrote I'm only concerned about function, and safety. The rest usually is just profit for somebody else. Arguing semantics here, is a waste of time. It's just a debate-game tactic, to put you on the defensive, and deflect from the topic. It's manipulative, which tends to aggravate and frustrate as well. I never really got into debate, or arguing in general. But, I do learn things quickly. You missed your thumb and hit the nail.That is a very good description.I have been looking at the latest IPCC garbage and there is a link to facebook that I have following.The chat is mostly from full on alarmists but there seems to be a few posters that are calling the IPCC out on stuff.I might go hang around there for a bit Semantics fallacy. Inversion fallacy. You are describing yourself. 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
21-08-2021 20:04
duncan61 ★★★★★ (2021)	Into the Night wrote: duncan61 wrote: Interesting rant.If gas plumbing or electrical work is done in my state a notice is completed and submitted to energy safety as a compliance notice.I had a nice morning with an educated elderly gentleman and some how this has become my preaching a wacky religion for some reason.Fascinating skill set you have Pivot fallacy. The discussion isn't about who you talked to. It's about your wacky belief in the Church of Global Warming. I do not believe the planet is warming.I agree with you it is not possible to get a global average temperature reading at any time.For some reason I find the topic interesting.This site has mostly directed me to seek the truth.If you and IBDm know everything about everything why do you even visit this site?Would it to be to dump on anyone who tries to share a thought.That is called trolling and most sites block posters that do it.I have seen it happen on my gun forum often enough at one point if you wrote Greta your account was suspended instantly duncan61

21-08-2021 20:07
duncan61 ★★★★★ (2021)	Into the Night wrote: HarveyH55 wrote: duncan61 wrote: Interesting rant.If gas plumbing or electrical work is done in my state a notice is completed and submitted to energy safety as a compliance notice.I had a nice morning with an educated elderly gentleman and some how this has become my preaching a wacky religion for some reason.Fascinating skill set you have You need the paper, to sell your services, and satisfy the local building codes. You don't need a degree hanging on the wall to do anything. I do most all my own repairs, in many fields, without any sort of certification. Of course, I don't pull permits, or as the city to inspect my work either... I do have quite a bit of electronics experience/education. So, when my AC system stop blowing cold air a few days ago, it was too tough to figure out the problem, find the parts, do the repairs. Costs about $70, just to get a technician to take a look, and give an estimate. I found the run capacitor swollen (bad), $15 to replace. The compressor started, but no fan. The fan motor cost me $181. Wasn't a fun repair, hot outside, hot inside the house. Spent about 2 hours on the fan motor, but had to take several breaks. I saved a load of money, and likely avoided being sold a whole new system, were less than $200 was sufficient. My system was installed 1996... I've kept it running a whole lot longer than the life expectancy on modern systems being sold as replacements. Do to energy efficiency regulations, pretty much no 'professional' will do more than minor repairs, if I'm lucky. So little choice, unless I want a full replacement. I'm only concerned about function, and safety. The rest usually is just profit for somebody else. Arguing semantics here, is a waste of time. It's just a debate-game tactic, to put you on the defensive, and deflect from the topic. It's manipulative, which tends to aggravate and frustrate as well. I never really got into debate, or arguing in general. But, I do learn things quickly. Good for you! I also do all my own repairs and install my own electrical systems. So long as the system passes code, the electrical inspector doesn't care who worked on it. England is like that.Here you can not buy the electrical gear unless you are licenced contractor.Bunnings do a bit of stuff for the handyman duncan61
21-08-2021 22:00
IBdaMann★★★★★ (14389)	duncan61 wrote:I do not believe the planet is warming. You do not believe that the planet is warming because you are absolutely certain of it. You just don't believe the planet is warming anywhere near enough to be of concern. You specifically believe that the earth is warming by some non-zero amount when physics says that the amount is zero. When asked to explain how the earth is warming at all you refuse to answer questions. You purchased a CO2 detector just to add a dog and pony to your preaching that the extent to which the earth is warming isn't anywhere near what the warmizombies claim ... but that the warming is still there and is non-zero. Still no answers from you as to any of my previous science-based questions. None. Execllent debate tactic you have there. Then you began parrotting Pete Rogers, and continued to double down on his stupid despite knowing that all of his arguments are based on physics violations. And of course, you refused to address any questions posed to you because you're nothing but a totally dishonest preacher of a WACKY religion. ... and all the while you try to blame me for your obviously fúkked-up point of view. duncan61 wrote:I agree with you it is not possible to get a global average temperature reading at any time. Why won't you therefore answer the question as to how you know that this unknown temperature can be increased by anything other than additional energy? Why won't you explain how you are so certain that everybody else is wrong in pointing out to you that gravity cannot increase temperature? Why do you think that saying "All I know is ..." is a sufficient answer to any question? Great debate tactic you have there. duncan61 wrote:For some reason I find the topic interesting. We've been over this. Yes, you like to preach stupidity. You find it relaxing I guess, or you are desperate for attention or something. duncan61 wrote: This site has mostly directed me to seek the truth. Actually, the bulk of the recommendations to you on this site have been for you to discount those things that are false. Instead, you opt to raise them to a premium. You are stupid in that way. duncan61 wrote: If you and IBDm know everything about everything ... Aaaahhh, pulling a tmiddles are you? This is how I know you are a totally dishonest ashsole moron. It is you who knows absolutely nothing. You are a moron. To you, any person who isn't a moron must appear to know everything about everything. That's a great debate tactic you have there. Since you can't tolerate anyone pushing back on your WACKY religious dogma, why do you even visit this site? Would it to be to dump on anyone who tries to introduce science to you, or to ask you to think for yourself? That is called trolling and most sites block posters that do it. I have seen it happen on virtually all leftist sites. You are lucky this isn't a leftist-moderated site. As long as you are going to be an ashsole moron troll I'm going to call you on it. As long as you are going to double-down on scientifically illiterate idiocy I will call you on it. Every time you try to blame me for your shortcomings I will throw it back in your face. That's a great debate tactic you have there, moron. Try answering questions for a change, idiot. I don't think i can [define it]. I just kind of get a feel for the phrase. - keepit A Spaghetti strainer with the faucet running, retains water- tmiddles Clouds don't trap heat. Clouds block cold. - Spongy Iris Printing dollars to pay debt doesn't increase the number of dollars. - keepit If Venus were a black body it would have a much much lower temperature than what we found there.- tmiddles Ah the "Valid Data" myth of ITN/IBD. - tmiddles Ceist - I couldn't agree with you more. But when money and religion are involved, and there are people who value them above all else, then the lies begin. - trafn You are completely misunderstanding their use of the word "accumulation"! - Climate Scientist. The Stefan-Boltzman equation doesn't come up with the correct temperature if greenhouse gases are not considered - Hank :sigh* Not the "raw data" crap.* - Leafsdude IB STILL hasn't explained what Planck's Law means. Just more hand waving that it applies to everything and more asserting that the greenhouse effect 'violates' it.- Ceist
22-08-2021 02:07
HarveyH55★★★★★ (5196)	duncan61 wrote: Into the Night wrote: HarveyH55 wrote: duncan61 wrote: Interesting rant.If gas plumbing or electrical work is done in my state a notice is completed and submitted to energy safety as a compliance notice.I had a nice morning with an educated elderly gentleman and some how this has become my preaching a wacky religion for some reason.Fascinating skill set you have You need the paper, to sell your services, and satisfy the local building codes. You don't need a degree hanging on the wall to do anything. I do most all my own repairs, in many fields, without any sort of certification. Of course, I don't pull permits, or as the city to inspect my work either... I do have quite a bit of electronics experience/education. So, when my AC system stop blowing cold air a few days ago, it was too tough to figure out the problem, find the parts, do the repairs. Costs about $70, just to get a technician to take a look, and give an estimate. I found the run capacitor swollen (bad), $15 to replace. The compressor started, but no fan. The fan motor cost me $181. Wasn't a fun repair, hot outside, hot inside the house. Spent about 2 hours on the fan motor, but had to take several breaks. I saved a load of money, and likely avoided being sold a whole new system, were less than $200 was sufficient. My system was installed 1996... I've kept it running a whole lot longer than the life expectancy on modern systems being sold as replacements. Do to energy efficiency regulations, pretty much no 'professional' will do more than minor repairs, if I'm lucky. So little choice, unless I want a full replacement. I'm only concerned about function, and safety. The rest usually is just profit for somebody else. Arguing semantics here, is a waste of time. It's just a debate-game tactic, to put you on the defensive, and deflect from the topic. It's manipulative, which tends to aggravate and frustrate as well. I never really got into debate, or arguing in general. But, I do learn things quickly. Good for you! I also do all my own repairs and install my own electrical systems. So long as the system passes code, the electrical inspector doesn't care who worked on it. England is like that.Here you can not buy the electrical gear unless you are licenced contractor.Bunnings do a bit of stuff for the handyman I was a little surprised myself. I got the motor and a contractor's supply warehouse. I found the part on their website, wrote down the part number. Drove over there, walked up to the window. Told the lady what I needed, and handed her the part number. Didn't take 10 minutes, before she returned with the motor. She didn't say anything about my naked face either (forgot). Wasn't sure they would sell to me, guess they didn't really care, or I got lucky. It's a small town.
22-08-2021 05:17
James___ ★★★★★ (5513)	HarveyH55 wrote: [quote]I got the motor Are you sure it's not a vibrator and you're watching your neighbors? Again! https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pHaiAIyBCS0 Edited on 22-08-2021 05:47
22-08-2021 07:39
duncan61 ★★★★★ (2021)	IBDM That was pure insulting with no basis at all.This is a climate debate forum.I will list where I am at 1.Our limited ability to take ground and sea temperature measurements showed a trend to have a tiny increase in the mid eighties to late 90s.Rising CO2 from emissions was the obvious thing to blameThis is not my position but the clear position of the alarmists.Even though the same devices showed a pause and then the temperature decreasing the train has left the station and has to keep going. 2. The IPCC was formed to investigate this anomoly in 1988 and get out of jail by declaring they do not do scientific research but compile the data from other groups. 3.I took an interest when a complete stranger told me CO2 was warming the planet and its all bad 4.climate research is now the biggest industry on planet Earth 5.In the time I have been looking at this I have seen other NGO Develop to question the AGW/CC claim If this makes me a moron then so be it but I am ridiculously happy right now the sun is shining on a cool day.My son and I are going to go to a local lake and give the Carp a beating and I have just won a contract to renovate a laundry You are an interesting charactor IBDM fortunately for me my sons are computer savvy and the whole internet has people like you just looking for a fight.I have watched plenty get booted from enough gun.If you need to be a leftist to promote polite debate than I will move from just right of centre to just left of centre.Regards Duncan
22-08-2021 19:42
Into the Night★★★★★ (21582)	duncan61 wrote: Into the Night wrote: duncan61 wrote: Interesting rant.If gas plumbing or electrical work is done in my state a notice is completed and submitted to energy safety as a compliance notice.I had a nice morning with an educated elderly gentleman and some how this has become my preaching a wacky religion for some reason.Fascinating skill set you have Pivot fallacy. The discussion isn't about who you talked to. It's about your wacky belief in the Church of Global Warming. I do not believe the planet is warming. Yet you have argued that it is, and you continue to do so. Which is it, dude? If you truly do not believe the planet is warming, why are bringing up arguments that it is? duncan61 wrote: I agree with you it is not possible to get a global average temperature reading at any time. Yet you have declared the temperature of Earth from time to time. Which is it, dude? duncan61 wrote: For some reason I find the topic interesting. Fine. For the record, I sincerely hope you do find that the whole 'global warming' argument is all hooey. duncan61 wrote: This site has mostly directed me to seek the truth. Then seek the truth. Science is your friend, not wacky religious types. duncan61 wrote: If you and IBDm know everything about everything why do you even visit this site? To enlighten. To show the science involved and how the Church of Global Warming denies it. To show the math involved and how the Church of Global Warming denies it. It is to reveal and educate as many about science and mathematics as are willing to listen at all. You have at least done that. You are beginning to discover the truth of it. duncan61 wrote: Would it to be to dump on anyone who tries to share a thought. This is a lie. I do not dump on anyone that tries to share a thought. I will call out the use of fallacies (errors in logic) including the use of buzzwords as the subject of an argument, math errors, errors in science, and errors in history. duncan61 wrote: That is called trolling and most sites block posters that do it. I have seen it happen on my gun forum often enough at one point if you wrote Greta your account was suspended instantly Science is not trolling. Math is not trolling. Logic is not trolling. Philosophy is not trolling. Redefinition fallacy. I think you had better take a serious navel gazing session before you decide what 'trolling' is. 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
22-08-2021 19:46
Into the Night★★★★★ (21582)	duncan61 wrote: Into the Night wrote: HarveyH55 wrote: duncan61 wrote: Interesting rant.If gas plumbing or electrical work is done in my state a notice is completed and submitted to energy safety as a compliance notice.I had a nice morning with an educated elderly gentleman and some how this has become my preaching a wacky religion for some reason.Fascinating skill set you have You need the paper, to sell your services, and satisfy the local building codes. You don't need a degree hanging on the wall to do anything. I do most all my own repairs, in many fields, without any sort of certification. Of course, I don't pull permits, or as the city to inspect my work either... I do have quite a bit of electronics experience/education. So, when my AC system stop blowing cold air a few days ago, it was too tough to figure out the problem, find the parts, do the repairs. Costs about $70, just to get a technician to take a look, and give an estimate. I found the run capacitor swollen (bad), $15 to replace. The compressor started, but no fan. The fan motor cost me $181. Wasn't a fun repair, hot outside, hot inside the house. Spent about 2 hours on the fan motor, but had to take several breaks. I saved a load of money, and likely avoided being sold a whole new system, were less than $200 was sufficient. My system was installed 1996... I've kept it running a whole lot longer than the life expectancy on modern systems being sold as replacements. Do to energy efficiency regulations, pretty much no 'professional' will do more than minor repairs, if I'm lucky. So little choice, unless I want a full replacement. I'm only concerned about function, and safety. The rest usually is just profit for somebody else. Arguing semantics here, is a waste of time. It's just a debate-game tactic, to put you on the defensive, and deflect from the topic. It's manipulative, which tends to aggravate and frustrate as well. I never really got into debate, or arguing in general. But, I do learn things quickly. Good for you! I also do all my own repairs and install my own electrical systems. So long as the system passes code, the electrical inspector doesn't care who worked on it. England is like that.Here you can not buy the electrical gear unless you are licenced contractor.Bunnings do a bit of stuff for the handyman How oppressive. Here in the U.S. you can buy all the electrical gear you want. Meters, wire, cable, tools, conduit, electrical boxes, fixtures, fuse and breaker panels, anything. Plumbing is just the same. Lumber and building materials is just the same. The test SHOULD be if it meets code, not if you are 'blessed' by a government to even work on it. 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
22-08-2021 20:34
Into the Night★★★★★ (21582)	duncan61 wrote: IBDM That was pure insulting with no basis at all.This is a climate debate forum.I will list where I am at You are insulted? That's in the eye of the beholder, I'm afraid. duncan61 wrote: 1.Our limited ability to take ground and sea temperature measurements showed a trend to have a tiny increase in the mid eighties to late 90s. Rising CO2 from emissions was the obvious thing to blame This is not my position but the clear position of the alarmists.Even though the same devices showed a pause and then the temperature decreasing the train has left the station and has to keep going. It is not possible to measure the temperature of the Earth. You already agreed to this, and now you go against your own statement. Which is it, dude? It is not possible to measure the global CO2 concentration. You already agreed to this too, and now you go against your own statement. Which is it, dude? duncan61 wrote: 2. The IPCC was formed to investigate this anomoly in 1988 and get out of jail by declaring they do not do scientific research but compile the data from other groups. What 'anomaly'? It is not possible to measure the temperature of the Earth. There is no data. No thermometer measures the temperature of the Earth. No single CO2 monitoring station measures the global CO2 content of the atmosphere. duncan61 wrote: 3.I took an interest when a complete stranger told me CO2 was warming the planet and its all bad Fine. Apparently you believe it. You still do. Yet you try to deny it. You're going to have to choose. Arguing both sides of a paradox is irrational. duncan61 wrote: 4.climate research is now the biggest industry on planet Earth Another blanket statement. Climate isn't a 'research'. The biggest industry on the planet is farming and ranching. duncan61 wrote: 5.In the time I have been looking at this I have seen other NGO Develop to question the AGW/CC claim They should. It completely denies physics and mathematics. It is a fundamentalist style religion. It stems from the Church of Karl Marx. It has the same ultimate goals of 'paradise', which is hell on Earth. duncan61 wrote: If this makes me a moron then so be it but I am ridiculously happy right now the sun is shining on a cool day. Unfortunately, arguing both sides of a paradox as you are doing is irrational. duncan61 wrote: My son and I are going to go to a local lake and give the Carp a beating and I have just won a contract to renovate a laundry Woe to the carp! Good fishing! Always nice to have work to do too! duncan61 wrote: You are an interesting charactor IBDM fortunately for me my sons are computer savvy and the whole internet has people like you just looking for a fight. Sorry dude. It is YOU looking for a fight. The Church of Global Warming is looking for a fight. Looking for a fight is not 'trolling' either. duncan61 wrote: I have watched plenty get booted from enough gun. I assume you mean gun control forums. I really don't care what you call 'trolling'. You obviously have some kind of weird definition for it, and it's wrong. I am strongly conservative. I support the Constitution of the United States. That alone gets me booted off of plenty of forums. The people that boot conservatives like that are themselves ignoring the right to free speech. They are trying to build a kiddie pool for themselves. Such forums eventually fail due to lack of users. They soon find that talking to themselves is boring. duncan61 wrote: If you need to be a leftist to promote polite debate than I will move from just right of centre to just left of centre.Regards Duncan There is no 'left' or 'right'. There are conservatives, there are liberals, and there are the undecided and confused. Most are undecided and confused. Most have never read the Constitution of the United States, never learned any history (except what the indoctrination centers called 'schools' taught them), never learn much about any theory of science, never learn philosophy at all, and are woefully illiterate in math and logic. It's really no wonder they are undecided and confused. I suggest you read some of the works of Ayn Rand such as 'The Fountainhead' or 'Atlas Shrugged'. You might find them particularly appropriate for today. I also suggest you study the meaning of these laws of physics: 1st law of thermodynamics: E(t+1)=E(t)-U where 'E' is energy, 't' is time, and 'U' is work. In other words, you cannot create energy out of nothing. 2nd law of thermodynamics: e(t+1) >= e(t) where 'e' is entropy, and 't' is time. In other words, you cannot decrease entropy in any system at any time. Stefan-Boltzmann law: r = Cet^4 where 'r' is radiance in watts per square area, 'C' is a natural constant, 'e' is emissivity (a measured constant), and 't' is temperature in deg Kelvin. In other words, if something is warmer, it will radiate MORE, not less. If something is radiating less, it is COLDER, not warmer. The upshot of all of these: You cannot trap heat. Heat is the flow of thermal energy, not thermal energy itself. You cannot trap light. You cannot trap thermal energy. There is always heat. No magick substance, such as CO2 or water vapor, can change any of these laws nor any part of physics. These are theories of science. You cannot just ignore them. Not at any time. Not for any purpose. The ONLY way to discard a theory of science is to falsify it. CO2 has NO capability to warm the Earth. None. Zip. Nada. Zero. Nan. CO2 is completely irrelevant in terms of warming the Earth. There is no reason to even attempt to measure it for this purpose. There is no reason to construct one parlor trick experiment after another to try to show it violates these theories of science. CO2 is absolutely necessary for plant life. Without it there is no life. It is produced by us, and by the burning of carbon based fuels such as wood, coal, oil, natural gas, etc. It has NO capability to warm the Earth, and it feeds plant life. This symbiosis is ESSENTIAL to life on Earth. There is NOTHING wrong with CO2. Demonizing it is ridiculous to the extreme. It is literally nothing more than liberals trying to demonize industry, since they abhor capitalism. They want socialism. That comes in several forms: slavery, fascism, communism among them. Socialism can only be implemented by oligarchies and dictatorships. It is theft of wealth. Ayn Rand called such people 'looters' for a reason. That is exactly what they are. You live in an oligarchy. The UK is also an oligarchy. There is no constitution in either nation. Oppression already exists in both nations. Both try to tell you what to think, how to act, what is 'civilized'. It's bullshit. Democracy is government by popular vote. There are no representatives and there is no constitution. This unstable form of government is to be despised. It quickly dissolves into oligarchies and dictatorships. A republic is government by constitution. It is government not by men, but by law. It is the ONLY form of government I support. Defending it is not a war of guns, it's a war of words and of minds. Guns and other weapons can certainly get involved, but the basic war is one of words and minds. I will do what I can to enlighten those that do not understand this. If they are insulted, I really don't care. Defending these ideals is not 'trolling'. Get that lame bulverism out of your head right now. Bulverism is itself a fallacy. 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 22-08-2021 20:38
23-08-2021 00:41
HarveyH55★★★★★ (5196)	James___ wrote: HarveyH55 wrote: [quote]I got the motor Are you sure it's not a vibrator and you're watching your neighbors? Again! https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pHaiAIyBCS0 You really liked that video don't you... Should probably check out my YouTube channel. Over 50 videos. There is one of a woman, who squatted, and peed on the side of the building/sidewalk next to my house, two days in a row... Crappy video though, cameras were lower resolution, DVR was kind of crappy too. Nothing explicit, but no question what she did. Got one of a hawk, that swooped down, and killed a duck in my driveway. There's dog fighting in my backyard, pitbull vs. a black lab. Huge variety of stuff. I even starred in a few of them. https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCvTPkmk586mv0UXwBjHp9eQ Not sure if that link works for others, but it's what I use to upload and manage. I'm HarveyH44 on YouTube. Never visited anybody else's channel, so not real sure how that works.
23-08-2021 00:54
HarveyH55★★★★★ (5196)	duncan61 wrote: IBDM That was pure insulting with no basis at all.This is a climate debate forum.I will list where I am at 1.Our limited ability to take ground and sea temperature measurements showed a trend to have a tiny increase in the mid eighties to late 90s.Rising CO2 from emissions was the obvious thing to blameThis is not my position but the clear position of the alarmists.Even though the same devices showed a pause and then the temperature decreasing the train has left the station and has to keep going. 2. The IPCC was formed to investigate this anomoly in 1988 and get out of jail by declaring they do not do scientific research but compile the data from other groups. 3.I took an interest when a complete stranger told me CO2 was warming the planet and its all bad 4.climate research is now the biggest industry on planet Earth 5.In the time I have been looking at this I have seen other NGO Develop to question the AGW/CC claim If this makes me a moron then so be it but I am ridiculously happy right now the sun is shining on a cool day.My son and I are going to go to a local lake and give the Carp a beating and I have just won a contract to renovate a laundry You are an interesting charactor IBDM fortunately for me my sons are computer savvy and the whole internet has people like you just looking for a fight.I have watched plenty get booted from enough gun.If you need to be a leftist to promote polite debate than I will move from just right of centre to just left of centre.Regards Duncan When it gets silly, or repetitive, I just move on. Debate game is the goal here, and I refuse to play. I didn't take an interest, until they started talking carbon tax, which would have a huge impact on my wallet, and employment. Up until then, it was just activist nonsense, not likely to go anywhere. It's still nonsense, and doesn't look like America is going in for the carbon tax scheme.

Page 3 of 4

Join the debate Engineers: