Remember me
▼ Content

Is CO2 much of a Greenhouse gas at all?



Page 2 of 3<123>
04-09-2019 09:43
tmiddlesProfile picture★★★★☆
(1399)
IBdaMann wrote:
I have nonetheless answered that question dozens of times on this forum.


Nope. I searched. Not there. You never said that experiment was legit. Not once.
04-09-2019 16:17
IBdaMannProfile picture★★★★★
(5026)
tmiddles wrote:
IBdaMann wrote:
I have nonetheless answered that question dozens of times on this forum.


Nope. I searched. Not there. You never said that experiment was legit. Not once.

I just checked. It's there, dozens of times. That means you didn't search.


.


Global Warming: The preferred religion of the scientifically illiterate.

Printing dollars to pay debt doesn't increase the number of dollars. - keepit

When the alt-physics birds sing about "indivisible bodies," we've got pure BS. - VernerHornung

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
05-09-2019 02:31
tmiddlesProfile picture★★★★☆
(1399)
IBdaMann wrote:
tmiddles wrote:
IBdaMann wrote:
I have nonetheless answered that question dozens of times on this forum.

Nope. I searched. Not there. You never said that experiment was legit. Not once.

I just checked. It's there, dozens of times. That means you didn't search.


It's the first time that experiment was ever mentioned on the forum.
05-09-2019 02:43
Into the NightProfile picture★★★★★
(9878)
tmiddles wrote:
IBdaMann wrote:
I have nonetheless answered that question dozens of times on this forum.


Nope. I searched. Not there. You never said that experiment was legit. Not once.

Lie.


The Parrot Killer
05-09-2019 05:13
tmiddlesProfile picture★★★★☆
(1399)
Into the Night wrote:
tmiddles wrote:
IBdaMann wrote:
I have nonetheless answered that question dozens of times on this forum.


Nope. I searched. Not there. You never said that experiment was legit. Not once.

Lie.


So where then?
05-09-2019 05:46
IBdaMannProfile picture★★★★★
(5026)
tmiddles wrote:So where then?

That's the benefit of research ... The finding out where.


.


Global Warming: The preferred religion of the scientifically illiterate.

Printing dollars to pay debt doesn't increase the number of dollars. - keepit

When the alt-physics birds sing about "indivisible bodies," we've got pure BS. - VernerHornung

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
05-09-2019 06:13
Into the NightProfile picture★★★★★
(9878)
tmiddles wrote:
Into the Night wrote:
tmiddles wrote:
IBdaMann wrote:
I have nonetheless answered that question dozens of times on this forum.


Nope. I searched. Not there. You never said that experiment was legit. Not once.

Lie.


So where then?


You have lost context completely now. Comtextomy fallacy.


The Parrot Killer
05-09-2019 06:20
tmiddlesProfile picture★★★★☆
(1399)
Into the Night wrote:Comtextomy fallacy.

N not M

According to Engel (1994:106-107), contextomy is a logical fallacy and refers to the selective excerpting of words from their original linguistic context in a way that distorts the source's initially intended meaning, a practice commonly referred to as "quoting out of con- text".

So what was I quoting out of context?

IBD is playing his usual Hide the Ball claiming he posted something (I'm not actually sure what). To which I say, dance monkey dance

So what could the context be I'm quoting out of?
05-09-2019 06:25
Into the NightProfile picture★★★★★
(9878)
tmiddles wrote:
Into the Night wrote:Comtextomy fallacy.

N not M

According to Engel (1994:106-107), contextomy is a logical fallacy and refers to the selective excerpting of words from their original linguistic context in a way that distorts the source's initially intended meaning, a practice commonly referred to as "quoting out of con- text".

So what was I quoting out of context?

If you have to ask, you have lost context completely. Done here.
tmiddles wrote:
IBD is playing his usual Hide the Ball claiming he posted something (I'm not actually sure what). To which I say, dance monkey dance

So what could the context be I'm quoting out of?

If you have to ask, you have lost context completely. Done here as well.


The Parrot Killer
05-09-2019 06:30
IBdaMannProfile picture★★★★★
(5026)
tmiddles wrote: IBD is playing his usual Hide the Ball claiming he posted something (I'm not actually sure what).

Don't I have to be actively hiding something in order to hide it?

... or are you just trying to blame me for you abject laziness? After all, I can't hide anything that I have posted, so dance monkey dance, and then sit on this and spin around.

tmiddles wrote: So what could the context be I'm quoting out of?

Proper grammar, for one.


.


Global Warming: The preferred religion of the scientifically illiterate.

Printing dollars to pay debt doesn't increase the number of dollars. - keepit

When the alt-physics birds sing about "indivisible bodies," we've got pure BS. - VernerHornung

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
05-09-2019 06:48
tmiddlesProfile picture★★★★☆
(1399)
IBdaMann wrote:
tmiddles wrote: IBD is playing his usual Hide the Ball claiming he posted something (I'm not actually sure what).
So what could the context be I'm quoting out of?

Always questions and never answers.

The fact remains that in 5 years on this board you have never once identified any research, experiment, demonstration or data as being valid/reliable/use-able.

You have one trick and it's to deny that things pass muster.

You guys would be completely useless if we had to rebuild civilization. You couldn't get anything done it all, too many unknowns you see.
05-09-2019 06:50
IBdaMannProfile picture★★★★★
(5026)
tmiddles wrote:
IBdaMann wrote:
tmiddles wrote: IBD is playing his usual Hide the Ball claiming he posted something (I'm not actually sure what).
So what could the context be I'm quoting out of?

Always questions and never answers.

You need a do-over.

That was your question that you misattributed to me.

One do-over granted.


.


Global Warming: The preferred religion of the scientifically illiterate.

Printing dollars to pay debt doesn't increase the number of dollars. - keepit

When the alt-physics birds sing about "indivisible bodies," we've got pure BS. - VernerHornung

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
05-09-2019 07:09
tmiddlesProfile picture★★★★☆
(1399)
IBdaMann wrote:
tmiddles wrote:
Always questions and never answers.

You need a do-over.
That was your question that you misattributed to me.
One do-over granted.


What's one experiment or bit of research you consider to be an example of a well executed and use-able reference?
05-09-2019 08:23
Into the NightProfile picture★★★★★
(9878)
tmiddles wrote:
IBdaMann wrote:
tmiddles wrote:
Always questions and never answers.

You need a do-over.
That was your question that you misattributed to me.
One do-over granted.


What's one experiment or bit of research you consider to be an example of a well executed and use-able reference?

None. Science does not use supporting evidence. It only uses conflicting evidence.

No amount of supporting evidence will ever prove any theory.


The Parrot Killer
Edited on 05-09-2019 08:24
05-09-2019 08:48
tmiddlesProfile picture★★★★☆
(1399)
Into the Night wrote:
tmiddles wrote:
What's one experiment or bit of research you consider to be an example of a well executed and use-able reference?

None. Science does not use supporting evidence. It only uses conflicting evidence.

Yes as I've disproven your nutty theory that warmer bodies cannot absorb the radiance or cooler ones.

But there is A LOT more to the useful application and development of knowledge than your personal definition of science.

I said reference! Something that is useable! I didn't say "ITN's definition of Science".
Edited on 05-09-2019 09:09
05-09-2019 10:27
Into the NightProfile picture★★★★★
(9878)
tmiddles wrote:
Into the Night wrote:
tmiddles wrote:
What's one experiment or bit of research you consider to be an example of a well executed and use-able reference?

None. Science does not use supporting evidence. It only uses conflicting evidence.

Yes as I've disproven your nutty theory that warmer bodies cannot absorb the radiance or cooler ones.
Not my theory, dumbass. It is the 2nd law of thermodynamics, which you simply deny. You have not falsified it.
tmiddles wrote:
But there is A LOT more to the useful application and development of knowledge

What is knowledge? How do you know what you know?
tmiddles wrote:
than your personal definition of science.
Define 'science', since you disagree.
tmiddles wrote:
I said reference! Something that is useable! I didn't say "ITN's definition of Science".

There is no reference that you accept. Define 'science'. Define 'religion'.

Let's hear YOUR definition of 'science' and 'religion'.


The Parrot Killer
05-09-2019 11:00
tmiddlesProfile picture★★★★☆
(1399)
Into the Night wrote:
tmiddles wrote:...that warmer bodies cannot absorb the radiance or cooler ones.
Not my theory, dumbass.

If you didn't make that up then where did you get it from? Find that anywhere: that a warmer body cannot absorb radiance of cooler bodies. IBD's lab work in his oral tradition of physics, after some guy told him about it? Where?

Into the Night wrote:Define 'science'. Define 'religion'.

Science is the branch, the field, the whole enchilada of METHOD (MOST! of all), accumulated knowledge, theory, application, experimentation, research, education, and development of knowledge about the physical world.

Religion is the belief a person has about the nature of existence and the world around them. It can be organized or not, deist, atheist, but all of it full of assumption, best guesses and faith.
05-09-2019 17:13
IBdaMannProfile picture★★★★★
(5026)
tmiddles wrote: IBD's lab work in his oral tradition of physics, after some guy told him about it? Where?

While we're on this point, what's wrong with explaining science to someone? Isn't that how Einstein taught people?

Why would you tell Einstein (were he alive today) that what he is discussing using a chalkboard must be chit because you read something different in an online warmizombie textbook?

tmiddles wrote: Science is the branch, the field, the whole enchilada of METHOD (MOST! of all), accumulated knowledge, theory, application, experimentation, research, education, and development of knowledge about the physical world.

I know. You think that if you put on a lab coat then you've got science, i.e. anything that comes out of your mouth at that point. I get it.

Let me know when I can start mocking. You haven't the vaguest clue what science is but you are desperate for it to be whatever your warmizombie church leaders say.

tmiddles wrote:Religion is the belief a person has about the nature of existence and the world around them.

Like "Climate" is being threatened by "Global Warming" kind of belief? Like the one where "Global Warming" draws its power from "Greenhouse Effect"?

I know that one! I read about it in The MANUAL (in which you have not found any inaccuracies).

tmiddles wrote: It can be organized or not, deist, atheist, but all of it full of assumption, best guesses and faith.

No, there is no atheism theism. Contradiction in terms. You should have paid attention when you were taught Greek roots of words.


.


Global Warming: The preferred religion of the scientifically illiterate.

Printing dollars to pay debt doesn't increase the number of dollars. - keepit

When the alt-physics birds sing about "indivisible bodies," we've got pure BS. - VernerHornung

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
06-09-2019 07:37
tmiddlesProfile picture★★★★☆
(1399)
IBdaMann wrote:
tmiddles wrote: IBD's ...after some guy told him about it?...

...what's wrong with explaining science to someone?...

Nothing in fact it's a superior way to learn for most. You are aware I'm pointing out that you and ITN go to great lengths never to include a text or source of any kind which may be used against you.

IBdaMann wrote:
tmiddles wrote:Religion is the belief a person has
Like "Climate" is being threatened by "Global Warming"

Or that all of life is an illusion (Christian Science) or specific things like a belief their soul will got to heaven when they die, or a belief in Karma . Some beliefs are motivated by one's politics. Like the fervent belief some liberals have that everyone is actually equal, not that they should have equal protection or an equal chance, but that they all have the same ability and a lack of success must be due to interference with this equality in action. In your and ITN's case you have attached yourselves to the very very rare belief that radiant energy from a cooler object cannot be absorbed by a warmer one, because you view it as a key position to defend which makes the entire "Climate-Debate.com" suddenly moot. Like filing a motion with the court to dismiss the case.

IBdaMann wrote:
No, there is no atheism theism. Contradiction in terms.

Funny you had to switch words from "Religion" to "Theism" ha ha. Yes you're right "Theism" is:
noun
belief in the existence of a god or gods,

Religion on the other hand:religion
noun
a set of beliefs concerning the cause, nature, and purpose of the universe,

But use whatever word you want.

Those who believe THEY are the supreme being in the universe (as many Atheists do) certainly qualify as very religious in my book.
06-09-2019 10:35
Into the NightProfile picture★★★★★
(9878)
tmiddles wrote:
IBdaMann wrote:
tmiddles wrote: IBD's ...after some guy told him about it?...

...what's wrong with explaining science to someone?...

Nothing in fact it's a superior way to learn for most. You are aware I'm pointing out that you and ITN go to great lengths never to include a text or source of any kind which may be used against you.
No, you are just pointing out that you don't understand the physics texts you claim to have read.
tmiddles wrote:
IBdaMann wrote:[quote]tmiddles wrote:Religion is the belief a person has
Like "Climate" is being threatened by "Global Warming"

Or that all of life is an illusion (Christian Science) or specific things like a belief their soul will got to heaven when they die, or a belief in Karma . Some beliefs are motivated by one's politics. Like the fervent belief some liberals have that everyone is actually equal, not that they should have equal protection or an equal chance, but that they all have the same ability and a lack of success must be due to interference with this equality in action. In your and ITN's case you have attached yourselves to the very very rare belief that radiant energy from a cooler object cannot be absorbed by a warmer one, because you view it as a key position to defend which makes the entire "Climate-Debate.com" suddenly moot. Like filing a motion with the court to dismiss the case.

You cannot make heat flow from cold to hot.


The Parrot Killer
06-09-2019 10:51
tmiddlesProfile picture★★★★☆
(1399)
Into the Night wrote:
You cannot make heat flow from cold to hot.


Does radiance "flow"?
Is radiance "cold" or "hot"?
What is your definition of "heat"?

Radiance leaving a body a body at a lower temperature and reaching a body at a higher temperature will only behave in the following ways:
Reflection, Absorption, Transmission

Describe what happens?

What happens at equilibrium when two bodys have the same temperature?
06-09-2019 15:09
IBdaMannProfile picture★★★★★
(5026)
tmiddles wrote:What happens at equilibrium when two bodys have the same temperature?

No thermal energy is exchanged. The 0th law of thermodynamics sort of establishes that.


.


Global Warming: The preferred religion of the scientifically illiterate.

Printing dollars to pay debt doesn't increase the number of dollars. - keepit

When the alt-physics birds sing about "indivisible bodies," we've got pure BS. - VernerHornung

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
06-09-2019 19:03
Into the NightProfile picture★★★★★
(9878)
tmiddles wrote:
Into the Night wrote:
You cannot make heat flow from cold to hot.


Does radiance "flow"?
Is radiance "cold" or "hot"?
What is your definition of "heat"?

Read your physics textbook. Already answered this question.
tmiddles wrote:
Radiance leaving a body a body at a lower temperature and reaching a body at a higher temperature will only behave in the following ways:
Reflection, Absorption, Transmission

Describe what happens?

Already did.
tmiddles wrote:
What happens at equilibrium when two bodys have the same temperature?

Already answered this question.

Why do you keep asking the same thing over and over and ignoring any answer given to you?


The Parrot Killer
07-09-2019 11:58
tmiddlesProfile picture★★★★☆
(1399)
Into the Night wrote:
tmiddles wrote:
Does radiance "flow"?

Read your physics textbook. Already answered this question.

Which book would you recommend?

You've gone to great lengths to describe why Wikipedia and other sources are just no good. How about a recommendation? Any book you trust ITN?

And why don't you have your own answers?

Into the Night wrote:
tmiddles wrote:
Radiance ...will only behave in the following ways:
Reflection, Absorption, Transmission
Describe what happens?....
What happens at equilibrium when two bodys have the same temperature?

Already did.

And you think it's plausible that you just don't have time now? You never did. You are a liar.
07-09-2019 18:45
IBdaMannProfile picture★★★★★
(5026)
tmiddles wrote:You've gone to great lengths to describe why Wikipedia and other sources are just no good. How about a recommendation? Any book you trust ITN?

The one you have is fine. When you'd like to discuss please let me know. I'm not interested in your one-way preaching.


.


Global Warming: The preferred religion of the scientifically illiterate.

Printing dollars to pay debt doesn't increase the number of dollars. - keepit

When the alt-physics birds sing about "indivisible bodies," we've got pure BS. - VernerHornung

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
07-09-2019 20:04
Into the NightProfile picture★★★★★
(9878)
tmiddles wrote:
Into the Night wrote:
tmiddles wrote:
Does radiance "flow"?

Read your physics textbook. Already answered this question.

Which book would you recommend?

You've gone to great lengths to describe why Wikipedia and other sources are just no good. How about a recommendation? Any book you trust ITN?

And why don't you have your own answers?

Into the Night wrote:
tmiddles wrote:
Radiance ...will only behave in the following ways:
Reflection, Absorption, Transmission
Describe what happens?....
What happens at equilibrium when two bodys have the same temperature?

Already did.

And you think it's plausible that you just don't have time now? You never did. You are a liar.

Repetitious questions that have already been answered.


The Parrot Killer
07-09-2019 23:46
tmiddlesProfile picture★★★★☆
(1399)
IBdaMann wrote:
tmiddles wrote:Any book you trust ITN?
The one you have is fine.

I've present several college text books:
1 -Body Physics: Motion to Metabolism
Author: Lawrence Davis:NET THERMAL RADIATION RATE

2 -University Physics Volume 2: Net Heat Transfer of a Person
3 -Radiation Heat Transfer - The Finite Element Method in Engineering (Fifth Edition) by Singiresu S.Rao
4 -MCB3033-HEAT TRANSFER Heat Transfer Mechanism
Dr. Aklilu Tesfamichael aklilu.baheta@utp.edu.my
5 -HEAT AND MASS TRANSFER(link)
FUNDAMENTALS & APPLICATIONS ISBN 978-0-07-339818-1 Page 29
All have P(net)=σeA(T2^4−T1^4)

And ITN, how about responding with a less bloated quote?:
Into the Night wrote:
tmiddles wrote:
You never did.....

Repetitious questions that have already been answered.

Edited on 07-09-2019 23:48
08-09-2019 08:09
IBdaMannProfile picture★★★★★
(5026)
tmiddles wrote:
IBdaMann wrote:
tmiddles wrote:Any book you trust ITN?
The one you have is fine.

I've present several college text books:

Now all you have to do is engage in a conversation. If all you're here to do is to preach then obviously you won't be interested. You insist people answer your questions but you ignore the questions of others.

You do what you gotta do.

.


Global Warming: The preferred religion of the scientifically illiterate.

Printing dollars to pay debt doesn't increase the number of dollars. - keepit

When the alt-physics birds sing about "indivisible bodies," we've got pure BS. - VernerHornung

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
08-09-2019 09:56
Into the NightProfile picture★★★★★
(9878)
tmiddles wrote:
IBdaMann wrote:
tmiddles wrote:Any book you trust ITN?
The one you have is fine.

I've present several college text books:
1 -Body Physics: Motion to Metabolism
Author: Lawrence Davis:NET THERMAL RADIATION RATE

2 -University Physics Volume 2: Net Heat Transfer of a Person
3 -Radiation Heat Transfer - The Finite Element Method in Engineering (Fifth Edition) by Singiresu S.Rao
4 -MCB3033-HEAT TRANSFER Heat Transfer Mechanism
Dr. Aklilu Tesfamichael aklilu.baheta@utp.edu.my
5 -HEAT AND MASS TRANSFER(link)
FUNDAMENTALS & APPLICATIONS ISBN 978-0-07-339818-1 Page 29
All have P(net)=σeA(T2^4−T1^4)

And ITN, how about responding with a less bloated quote?:
Into the Night wrote:
tmiddles wrote:
You never did.....

Repetitious questions that have already been answered.

Repetitious condescending request.


The Parrot Killer
09-09-2019 10:52
tmiddlesProfile picture★★★★☆
(1399)
IBdaMann wrote:
tmiddles wrote:
I've present several college text books:

Now all you have to do is engage in a conversation.

OK(this is conversing by the way) do you find that any of those textbooks teach thermodynamics correctly?

And yes credibility is very on topic for you on this board. You've spent real time in explaining how wikipedia is a sham and so on. So I'm asking about the credibility of the 5 textbooks I listed. I'm asking for your response.

Into the Night wrote:
Repetitious questions that have already been answered.

And no neither of you ever answered that question.
09-09-2019 19:22
Into the NightProfile picture★★★★★
(9878)
tmiddles wrote:
IBdaMann wrote:
tmiddles wrote:
I've present several college text books:

Now all you have to do is engage in a conversation.

OK(this is conversing by the way)
No, it isn't. You have not yet answered his question. This is evasion.
tmiddles wrote:
do you find that any of those textbooks teach thermodynamics correctly?

Did you know they teach the 2nd law of thermodynamics, which you are denying?
tmiddles wrote:
And yes credibility is very on topic for you on this board.

You don't get to speak for this board or for anyone else. You only get to speak for you.
tmiddles wrote:
You've spent real time in explaining how wikipedia is a sham and so on.

It is.
tmiddles wrote:
So I'm asking about the credibility of the 5 textbooks I listed. I'm asking for your response.

Repetition question that has already been answered.
tmiddles wrote:
Into the Night wrote:
Repetitious questions that have already been answered.

And no neither of you ever answered that question.

Repetitious lie.


The Parrot Killer
09-09-2019 22:17
tmiddlesProfile picture★★★★☆
(1399)
Into the Night wrote:
...You have not yet answered his question. ...
tmiddles wrote:
do you find that any of those textbooks teach thermodynamics correctly?

Did you know they teach the 2nd law of thermodynamics, which you are denying?


He didn't ask a question are you?

And are you going to answer if any of those 5 textbooks got the 2nd LTD right ITN?
09-09-2019 22:24
Into the NightProfile picture★★★★★
(9878)
tmiddles wrote:
Into the Night wrote:
...You have not yet answered his question. ...
tmiddles wrote:
do you find that any of those textbooks teach thermodynamics correctly?

Did you know they teach the 2nd law of thermodynamics, which you are denying?

He didn't ask a question are you?

Apparently you don't know what a question mark is. Try English. It works better.
tmiddles wrote:
And are you going to answer if any of those 5 textbooks got the 2nd LTD right ITN?

Repetitious question already answered.


The Parrot Killer
09-09-2019 22:51
tmiddlesProfile picture★★★★☆
(1399)
Into the Night wrote:
Apparently you don't know what a question mark is....

There are no "?" marks here:
IBdaMann wrote:
Now all you have to do is engage in a conversation. If all you're here to do is to preach then obviously you won't be interested. You insist people answer your questions but you ignore the questions of others.
You do what you gotta do.
10-09-2019 02:08
Into the NightProfile picture★★★★★
(9878)
tmiddles wrote:
Into the Night wrote:
Apparently you don't know what a question mark is....

There are no "?" marks here:

Lie.


The Parrot Killer
10-09-2019 02:12
tmiddlesProfile picture★★★★☆
(1399)
Into the Night wrote:
tmiddles wrote:
There are no "?" marks here:
Lie.
Now see that's where you go full crazy. There are literally and factually no question marks in the post by IBD I responded to.
10-09-2019 02:51
Into the NightProfile picture★★★★★
(9878)
tmiddles wrote:
Into the Night wrote:
tmiddles wrote:
There are no "?" marks here:
Lie.
Now see that's where you go full crazy. There are literally and factually no question marks in the post by IBD I responded to.


Contextomy fallacy. You have lost all context now. Done here.


The Parrot Killer
10-09-2019 03:53
tmiddlesProfile picture★★★★☆
(1399)
Into the Night wrote:
You have lost all context now. Done here.


People who bother to quote respectfully and with context in mind, as I have, provide the context they are referencing.

There are no question marks here either kiddo.
10-09-2019 18:07
gfm7175
★★☆☆☆
(196)
tmiddles:

If you would stop acting like a whiny bitchy perpetual victim, and be willing to discuss topics rather than shout at the people who are trying to discuss topics with you, then those people might be more inclined to teach you about that which you do not know.
10-09-2019 18:40
HarveyH55
★★★★☆
(1482)
gfm7175 wrote:
tmiddles:

If you would stop acting like a whiny bitchy perpetual victim, and be willing to discuss topics rather than shout at the people who are trying to discuss topics with you, then those people might be more inclined to teach you about that which you do not know.


It's difficult to break the faith-based beliefs, and start opening up to learning. It's tough, and most people feel some pain, as they do start learn that all they were lead to believe to be true, isn't quite accurate, or even true. It's a long hard fight, takes time and patience, but the truth will eventually win. Faith is easy, you just have to accept what you are told. Learning is hard work, lot of mistakes, lot of pain. Some people aren't strong enough, or motivated to do the work. Other people do the work, to spread the faith...
Page 2 of 3<123>





Join the debate Is CO2 much of a Greenhouse gas at all?:

Remember me

Related content
ThreadsRepliesLast post
There is no scientific theory or evidence that suggest CO2 traps heat better than O2 or N24020-11-2019 11:11
So what if the Chinese fossil fuel industry pays me to spread lies about greenhouse gas?7515-11-2019 04:47
Poulation controll revisited - CO2 compensation through population control814-11-2019 23:28
Greenhouse Gases Do NOT Violate The Stefan-Boltzmann Law74208-11-2019 19:42
Is it not true that brains shrink due to increase in CO2 displacing O2?208-11-2019 18:45
▲ Top of page
Public Poll
Who is leading the renewable energy race?

US

EU

China

Japan

India

Brazil

Other

Don't know


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