New Posters beware!

Robert Wagner wrote:

IBdaMann wrote:

Robert Wagner wrote:

Ceist wrote:
New posters beware!

This forum is almost completely neglected by it's owner and is virtually unmoderated, so it has become the last refuge of a small handful of hardcore science deniers and conspiracy theorists who exhibit strong signs of mental illness - including personality disorders, autism spectrum disorders, narcissistic irrational and delusional thinking, emotional dis-regulation, paranoia, pathological lying, and abusive sociopathic manipulative behavior.

They have probably been banned from other forums for their poor behavior just as much as for their trolling of utterly irrational scientifically illiterate crackpot ideas.

Post at your own risk.

He wasn' far off.

We have already established that you are the primary troll on the Danish site (KlimaDebat.dk). Are you trying to be the commensurate troll and cover all your bases?

Just trolling trolls, as I said.

James_ wrote:

Robert Wagner wrote:

IBdaMann wrote:

Robert Wagner wrote:

Ceist wrote:
New posters beware!

This forum is almost completely neglected by it's owner and is virtually unmoderated, so it has become the last refuge of a small handful of hardcore science deniers and conspiracy theorists who exhibit strong signs of mental illness - including personality disorders, autism spectrum disorders, narcissistic irrational and delusional thinking, emotional dis-regulation, paranoia, pathological lying, and abusive sociopathic manipulative behavior.

They have probably been banned from other forums for their poor behavior just as much as for their trolling of utterly irrational scientifically illiterate crackpot ideas.

Post at your own risk.

He wasn' far off.

We have already established that you are the primary troll on the Danish site (KlimaDebat.dk). Are you trying to be the commensurate troll and cover all your bases?

Just trolling trolls, as I said.

This is my website.http://climate-cycling.com/
What is not on my website is the height of the tropopause is rising. I think
ozone and a slowing thermohaline circulation is responsible for some of the warming. With the tropopause altitude rising, that might be because of denser gasses being pumped into the atmosphere. That can also cause warming.
A question I asked and answered on quora.com; https://qr.ae/pvWC0f
Why atmospheric air pressures all being relative to the Sun's gravitational field, why natural atmospheres are what they are. Adding heavier elements (gasses) to an atmosphere will be adding kinetic energy to it.

Robert Wagner wrote:

James_ wrote:

Robert Wagner wrote:

IBdaMann wrote:

Robert Wagner wrote:

Ceist wrote:
New posters beware!

This forum is almost completely neglected by it's owner and is virtually unmoderated, so it has become the last refuge of a small handful of hardcore science deniers and conspiracy theorists who exhibit strong signs of mental illness - including personality disorders, autism spectrum disorders, narcissistic irrational and delusional thinking, emotional dis-regulation, paranoia, pathological lying, and abusive sociopathic manipulative behavior.

They have probably been banned from other forums for their poor behavior just as much as for their trolling of utterly irrational scientifically illiterate crackpot ideas.

Post at your own risk.

He wasn' far off.

We have already established that you are the primary troll on the Danish site (KlimaDebat.dk). Are you trying to be the commensurate troll and cover all your bases?

Just trolling trolls, as I said.

This is my website.http://climate-cycling.com/
What is not on my website is the height of the tropopause is rising. I think
ozone and a slowing thermohaline circulation is responsible for some of the warming. With the tropopause altitude rising, that might be because of denser gasses being pumped into the atmosphere. That can also cause warming.
A question I asked and answered on quora.com; https://qr.ae/pvWC0f
Why atmospheric air pressures all being relative to the Sun's gravitational field, why natural atmospheres are what they are. Adding heavier elements (gasses) to an atmosphere will be adding kinetic energy to it.

You might think adding energy from human activity is relevant to the temperature of the earth atmosphere.

But the amount og energy received from the sun in about 1½ hours is about equal to the amount of energy the entire human population is utilizing in one 1 year.

James_ wrote:

Robert Wagner wrote:

James_ wrote:

Robert Wagner wrote:

IBdaMann wrote:

Robert Wagner wrote:

Ceist wrote:
New posters beware!

This forum is almost completely neglected by it's owner and is virtually unmoderated, so it has become the last refuge of a small handful of hardcore science deniers and conspiracy theorists who exhibit strong signs of mental illness - including personality disorders, autism spectrum disorders, narcissistic irrational and delusional thinking, emotional dis-regulation, paranoia, pathological lying, and abusive sociopathic manipulative behavior.

They have probably been banned from other forums for their poor behavior just as much as for their trolling of utterly irrational scientifically illiterate crackpot ideas.

Post at your own risk.

He wasn' far off.

We have already established that you are the primary troll on the Danish site (KlimaDebat.dk). Are you trying to be the commensurate troll and cover all your bases?

Just trolling trolls, as I said.

This is my website.http://climate-cycling.com/
What is not on my website is the height of the tropopause is rising. I think
ozone and a slowing thermohaline circulation is responsible for some of the warming. With the tropopause altitude rising, that might be because of denser gasses being pumped into the atmosphere. That can also cause warming.
A question I asked and answered on quora.com; https://qr.ae/pvWC0f
Why atmospheric air pressures all being relative to the Sun's gravitational field, why natural atmospheres are what they are. Adding heavier elements (gasses) to an atmosphere will be adding kinetic energy to it.

You might think adding energy from human activity is relevant to the temperature of the earth atmosphere.

But the amount og energy received from the sun in about 1½ hours is about equal to the amount of energy the entire human population is utilizing in one 1 year.

The gasses being added to the atmosphere increase the amount of kinetic energy
in the atmosphere. And as long as those gasses are in the atmosphere they'll help to warm it.

James_ wrote:

Robert Wagner wrote:

IBdaMann wrote:

Robert Wagner wrote:

Ceist wrote:
New posters beware!

This forum is almost completely neglected by it's owner and is virtually unmoderated, so it has become the last refuge of a small handful of hardcore science deniers and conspiracy theorists who exhibit strong signs of mental illness - including personality disorders, autism spectrum disorders, narcissistic irrational and delusional thinking, emotional dis-regulation, paranoia, pathological lying, and abusive sociopathic manipulative behavior.

They have probably been banned from other forums for their poor behavior just as much as for their trolling of utterly irrational scientifically illiterate crackpot ideas.

Post at your own risk.

He wasn' far off.

We have already established that you are the primary troll on the Danish site (KlimaDebat.dk). Are you trying to be the commensurate troll and cover all your bases?

Just trolling trolls, as I said.

This is my website.http://climate-cycling.com/
What is not on my website is the height of the tropopause is rising. I think
ozone and a slowing thermohaline circulation is responsible for some of the warming. With the tropopause altitude rising, that might be because of denser gasses being pumped into the atmosphere. That can also cause warming.

A question I asked and answered on quora.com; https://qr.ae/pvWC0f
Why atmospheric air pressures all being relative to the Sun's gravitational field, why natural atmospheres are what they are. Adding heavier elements (gasses) to an atmosphere will be adding kinetic energy to it.

Robert Wagner wrote:

James_ wrote:

Robert Wagner wrote:

IBdaMann wrote:

Robert Wagner wrote:

Ceist wrote:
New posters beware!

This forum is almost completely neglected by it's owner and is virtually unmoderated, so it has become the last refuge of a small handful of hardcore science deniers and conspiracy theorists who exhibit strong signs of mental illness - including personality disorders, autism spectrum disorders, narcissistic irrational and delusional thinking, emotional dis-regulation, paranoia, pathological lying, and abusive sociopathic manipulative behavior.

They have probably been banned from other forums for their poor behavior just as much as for their trolling of utterly irrational scientifically illiterate crackpot ideas.

Post at your own risk.

He wasn' far off.

We have already established that you are the primary troll on the Danish site (KlimaDebat.dk). Are you trying to be the commensurate troll and cover all your bases?

Just trolling trolls, as I said.

This is my website.http://climate-cycling.com/
What is not on my website is the height of the tropopause is rising. I think
ozone and a slowing thermohaline circulation is responsible for some of the warming. With the tropopause altitude rising, that might be because of denser gasses being pumped into the atmosphere. That can also cause warming.
A question I asked and answered on quora.com; https://qr.ae/pvWC0f
Why atmospheric air pressures all being relative to the Sun's gravitational field, why natural atmospheres are what they are. Adding heavier elements (gasses) to an atmosphere will be adding kinetic energy to it.

You might think adding energy from human activity is relevant to the temperature of the earth atmosphere.

But the amount og energy received from the sun in about 1½ hours is about equal to the amount of energy the entire human population is utilizing in one 1 year.

James_ wrote:

Robert Wagner wrote:

James_ wrote:

Robert Wagner wrote:

IBdaMann wrote:

Robert Wagner wrote:

Ceist wrote:
New posters beware!

This forum is almost completely neglected by it's owner and is virtually unmoderated, so it has become the last refuge of a small handful of hardcore science deniers and conspiracy theorists who exhibit strong signs of mental illness - including personality disorders, autism spectrum disorders, narcissistic irrational and delusional thinking, emotional dis-regulation, paranoia, pathological lying, and abusive sociopathic manipulative behavior.

They have probably been banned from other forums for their poor behavior just as much as for their trolling of utterly irrational scientifically illiterate crackpot ideas.

Post at your own risk.

He wasn' far off.

We have already established that you are the primary troll on the Danish site (KlimaDebat.dk). Are you trying to be the commensurate troll and cover all your bases?

Just trolling trolls, as I said.

This is my website.http://climate-cycling.com/
What is not on my website is the height of the tropopause is rising. I think
ozone and a slowing thermohaline circulation is responsible for some of the warming. With the tropopause altitude rising, that might be because of denser gasses being pumped into the atmosphere. That can also cause warming.
A question I asked and answered on quora.com; https://qr.ae/pvWC0f
Why atmospheric air pressures all being relative to the Sun's gravitational field, why natural atmospheres are what they are. Adding heavier elements (gasses) to an atmosphere will be adding kinetic energy to it.

You might think adding energy from human activity is relevant to the temperature of the earth atmosphere.

But the amount og energy received from the sun in about 1½ hours is about equal to the amount of energy the entire human population is utilizing in one 1 year.

The gasses being added to the atmosphere increase the amount of kinetic energy
in the atmosphere. And as long as those gasses are in the atmosphere they'll help to warm it.

Robert Wagner wrote:

James_ wrote:

Robert Wagner wrote:

James_ wrote:

Robert Wagner wrote:

IBdaMann wrote:

Robert Wagner wrote:

Ceist wrote:
New posters beware!

This forum is almost completely neglected by it's owner and is virtually unmoderated, so it has become the last refuge of a small handful of hardcore science deniers and conspiracy theorists who exhibit strong signs of mental illness - including personality disorders, autism spectrum disorders, narcissistic irrational and delusional thinking, emotional dis-regulation, paranoia, pathological lying, and abusive sociopathic manipulative behavior.

They have probably been banned from other forums for their poor behavior just as much as for their trolling of utterly irrational scientifically illiterate crackpot ideas.

Post at your own risk.

He wasn' far off.

We have already established that you are the primary troll on the Danish site (KlimaDebat.dk). Are you trying to be the commensurate troll and cover all your bases?

Just trolling trolls, as I said.

This is my website.http://climate-cycling.com/
What is not on my website is the height of the tropopause is rising. I think
ozone and a slowing thermohaline circulation is responsible for some of the warming. With the tropopause altitude rising, that might be because of denser gasses being pumped into the atmosphere. That can also cause warming.
A question I asked and answered on quora.com; https://qr.ae/pvWC0f
Why atmospheric air pressures all being relative to the Sun's gravitational field, why natural atmospheres are what they are. Adding heavier elements (gasses) to an atmosphere will be adding kinetic energy to it.

You might think adding energy from human activity is relevant to the temperature of the earth atmosphere.

But the amount og energy received from the sun in about 1½ hours is about equal to the amount of energy the entire human population is utilizing in one 1 year.

The gasses being added to the atmosphere increase the amount of kinetic energy
in the atmosphere. And as long as those gasses are in the atmosphere they'll help to warm it.

Correct, but you utilize energy to add these gases, so the amount of energy added, cannot be greater than the amount utilized and the amount of energy utilized by huminaty is about 1½ hours worth of energy added by the sun.

Into the Night wrote:

Robert Wagner wrote:

James_ wrote:

Robert Wagner wrote:

James_ wrote:

Robert Wagner wrote:

IBdaMann wrote:

Robert Wagner wrote:

Ceist wrote:
New posters beware!

This forum is almost completely neglected by it's owner and is virtually unmoderated, so it has become the last refuge of a small handful of hardcore science deniers and conspiracy theorists who exhibit strong signs of mental illness - including personality disorders, autism spectrum disorders, narcissistic irrational and delusional thinking, emotional dis-regulation, paranoia, pathological lying, and abusive sociopathic manipulative behavior.

They have probably been banned from other forums for their poor behavior just as much as for their trolling of utterly irrational scientifically illiterate crackpot ideas.

Post at your own risk.

He wasn' far off.

We have already established that you are the primary troll on the Danish site (KlimaDebat.dk). Are you trying to be the commensurate troll and cover all your bases?

Just trolling trolls, as I said.

This is my website.http://climate-cycling.com/
What is not on my website is the height of the tropopause is rising. I think
ozone and a slowing thermohaline circulation is responsible for some of the warming. With the tropopause altitude rising, that might be because of denser gasses being pumped into the atmosphere. That can also cause warming.
A question I asked and answered on quora.com; https://qr.ae/pvWC0f
Why atmospheric air pressures all being relative to the Sun's gravitational field, why natural atmospheres are what they are. Adding heavier elements (gasses) to an atmosphere will be adding kinetic energy to it.

You might think adding energy from human activity is relevant to the temperature of the earth atmosphere.

But the amount og energy received from the sun in about 1½ hours is about equal to the amount of energy the entire human population is utilizing in one 1 year.

The gasses being added to the atmosphere increase the amount of kinetic energy
in the atmosphere. And as long as those gasses are in the atmosphere they'll help to warm it.

Correct, but you utilize energy to add these gases, so the amount of energy added, cannot be greater than the amount utilized and the amount of energy utilized by huminaty is about 1½ hours worth of energy added by the sun.

No. You cannot create energy out of nothing. You are ignoring the 1st law of thermodynamics again.

Robert Wagner wrote:

Into the Night wrote:

Robert Wagner wrote:

James_ wrote:

Robert Wagner wrote:

James_ wrote:

Robert Wagner wrote:

IBdaMann wrote:

Robert Wagner wrote:

Ceist wrote:
New posters beware!

This forum is almost completely neglected by it's owner and is virtually unmoderated, so it has become the last refuge of a small handful of hardcore science deniers and conspiracy theorists who exhibit strong signs of mental illness - including personality disorders, autism spectrum disorders, narcissistic irrational and delusional thinking, emotional dis-regulation, paranoia, pathological lying, and abusive sociopathic manipulative behavior.

They have probably been banned from other forums for their poor behavior just as much as for their trolling of utterly irrational scientifically illiterate crackpot ideas.

Post at your own risk.

He wasn' far off.

We have already established that you are the primary troll on the Danish site (KlimaDebat.dk). Are you trying to be the commensurate troll and cover all your bases?

Just trolling trolls, as I said.

This is my website.http://climate-cycling.com/
What is not on my website is the height of the tropopause is rising. I think
ozone and a slowing thermohaline circulation is responsible for some of the warming. With the tropopause altitude rising, that might be because of denser gasses being pumped into the atmosphere. That can also cause warming.
A question I asked and answered on quora.com; https://qr.ae/pvWC0f
Why atmospheric air pressures all being relative to the Sun's gravitational field, why natural atmospheres are what they are. Adding heavier elements (gasses) to an atmosphere will be adding kinetic energy to it.

You might think adding energy from human activity is relevant to the temperature of the earth atmosphere.

But the amount og energy received from the sun in about 1½ hours is about equal to the amount of energy the entire human population is utilizing in one 1 year.

The gasses being added to the atmosphere increase the amount of kinetic energy
in the atmosphere. And as long as those gasses are in the atmosphere they'll help to warm it.

Correct, but you utilize energy to add these gases, so the amount of energy added, cannot be greater than the amount utilized and the amount of energy utilized by huminaty is about 1½ hours worth of energy added by the sun.

No. You cannot create energy out of nothing. You are ignoring the 1st law of thermodynamics again.

Nope.
Where did I say anything on creating energy? I stated utilizing energy.

Into the Night wrote:

Robert Wagner wrote:

Into the Night wrote:

Robert Wagner wrote:

James_ wrote:

Robert Wagner wrote:

James_ wrote:

Robert Wagner wrote:

IBdaMann wrote:

Robert Wagner wrote:

Ceist wrote:
New posters beware!

This forum is almost completely neglected by it's owner and is virtually unmoderated, so it has become the last refuge of a small handful of hardcore science deniers and conspiracy theorists who exhibit strong signs of mental illness - including personality disorders, autism spectrum disorders, narcissistic irrational and delusional thinking, emotional dis-regulation, paranoia, pathological lying, and abusive sociopathic manipulative behavior.

They have probably been banned from other forums for their poor behavior just as much as for their trolling of utterly irrational scientifically illiterate crackpot ideas.

Post at your own risk.

He wasn' far off.

We have already established that you are the primary troll on the Danish site (KlimaDebat.dk). Are you trying to be the commensurate troll and cover all your bases?

Just trolling trolls, as I said.

This is my website.http://climate-cycling.com/
What is not on my website is the height of the tropopause is rising. I think
ozone and a slowing thermohaline circulation is responsible for some of the warming. With the tropopause altitude rising, that might be because of denser gasses being pumped into the atmosphere. That can also cause warming.
A question I asked and answered on quora.com; https://qr.ae/pvWC0f
Why atmospheric air pressures all being relative to the Sun's gravitational field, why natural atmospheres are what they are. Adding heavier elements (gasses) to an atmosphere will be adding kinetic energy to it.

You might think adding energy from human activity is relevant to the temperature of the earth atmosphere.

But the amount og energy received from the sun in about 1½ hours is about equal to the amount of energy the entire human population is utilizing in one 1 year.

The gasses being added to the atmosphere increase the amount of kinetic energy
in the atmosphere. And as long as those gasses are in the atmosphere they'll help to warm it.

Correct, but you utilize energy to add these gases, so the amount of energy added, cannot be greater than the amount utilized and the amount of energy utilized by huminaty is about 1½ hours worth of energy added by the sun.

No. You cannot create energy out of nothing. You are ignoring the 1st law of thermodynamics again.

Nope.
Where did I say anything on creating energy? I stated utilizing energy.

but you utilize energy to add these gases, so the amount of energy added,

Are you really so stupid as to try to deny your own arguments?????????!?

Semantics fallacy. Denial of self argument fallacy (paradox). Discard of the 1st law of thermodynamics. No gas or vapor is capable of creating energy out of nothing. No gas or vapor has the capability to warm the Earth.

Robert Wagner wrote:Rofl. At least I understand the meaning of the words I use, you apparently don't. Since you can't even master language, how could you ever master science.

IBdaMann wrote:

Robert Wagner wrote:Rofl. At least I understand the meaning of the words I use, you apparently don't. Since you can't even master language, how could you ever master science.

You still have not made any sort of value-added contribution.

Robert Wagner wrote:

Into the Night wrote:

Robert Wagner wrote:

Into the Night wrote:

Robert Wagner wrote:

Correct, but you utilize energy to add these gases, so the amount of energy added, cannot be greater than the amount utilized and the amount of energy utilized by huminaty is about 1½ hours worth of energy added by the sun.

No. You cannot create energy out of nothing. You are ignoring the 1st law of thermodynamics again.

Nope.
Where did I say anything on creating energy? I stated utilizing energy.

but you utilize energy to add these gases, so the amount of energy added,

Are you really so stupid as to try to deny your own arguments?????????!?

Semantics fallacy. Denial of self argument fallacy (paradox). Discard of the 1st law of thermodynamics. No gas or vapor is capable of creating energy out of nothing. No gas or vapor has the capability to warm the Earth.

Rofl.

At least I understand the meaning of the words I use,

Robert Wagner wrote:
you apparently don't.

Robert Wagner wrote:
Since you can't even master language,

Robert Wagner wrote:
how could you ever master science.

IBdaMann wrote:

Robert Wagner wrote:Rofl. At least I understand the meaning of the words I use, you apparently don't. Since you can't even master language, how could you ever master science.

You still have not made any sort of value-added contribution.

Into the Night wrote:

Robert Wagner wrote:

Into the Night wrote:

Robert Wagner wrote:

Into the Night wrote:

Robert Wagner wrote:

Correct, but you utilize energy to add these gases, so the amount of energy added, cannot be greater than the amount utilized and the amount of energy utilized by huminaty is about 1½ hours worth of energy added by the sun.

No. You cannot create energy out of nothing. You are ignoring the 1st law of thermodynamics again.

Nope.
Where did I say anything on creating energy? I stated utilizing energy.

but you utilize energy to add these gases, so the amount of energy added,

Are you really so stupid as to try to deny your own arguments?????????!?

Semantics fallacy. Denial of self argument fallacy (paradox). Discard of the 1st law of thermodynamics. No gas or vapor is capable of creating energy out of nothing. No gas or vapor has the capability to warm the Earth.

Rofl.

At least I understand the meaning of the words I use,

Apparently not. Baldfaced lie.

Robert Wagner wrote:
you apparently don't.

No, you can't discard your paradox that way! You must clear your paradox. The only way to do this is to utterly discard one of the conflicting arguments. Denying your paradox does not make it go away.

Robert Wagner wrote:
Since you can't even master language,

Inversion fallacy. You are describing yourself.

Robert Wagner wrote:
how could you ever master science.

No, you cannot get away with ignoring the 1st and 2nd laws of thermodynamics that way! They are NOT going to go away. You have to deal with them!

Robert Wagner wrote:

IBdaMann wrote:

Robert Wagner wrote:Rofl. At least I understand the meaning of the words I use, you apparently don't. Since you can't even master language, how could you ever master science.

You still have not made any sort of value-added contribution.

Yes I did. But being the little marxist you are, you wouldn't understand.

Into the Night wrote:

IBdaMann wrote:

Robert Wagner wrote:Rofl. At least I understand the meaning of the words I use, you apparently don't. Since you can't even master language, how could you ever master science.

You still have not made any sort of value-added contribution.

Agreed. He seems to be mostly trolling, and at times preaching his religion. He has already openly discarded the 1st and 2nd laws of thermodynamics. He seems to favor (from what I've seen so far) semantics fallacies and inversion fallacies. He already has denied and discarded logic as well.

IBdaMann wrote:

Into the Night wrote:

IBdaMann wrote:

Robert Wagner wrote:Rofl. At least I understand the meaning of the words I use, you apparently don't. Since you can't even master language, how could you ever master science.

You still have not made any sort of value-added contribution.

Agreed. He seems to be mostly trolling, and at times preaching his religion. He has already openly discarded the 1st and 2nd laws of thermodynamics. He seems to favor (from what I've seen so far) semantics fallacies and inversion fallacies. He already has denied and discarded logic as well.

Robert Wagner views himself as a "brown shirt" for Marxism. He is a totally dishonest Marxist who, naturally, denies that he is a Marxist. He is as uneducated as any Marxist. He is desperate to be perceived as "important" and "relevant", and his approach is to aggressively heckle those promulgating views he finds threatening and different views in general.

Into the Night wrote:

Robert Wagner wrote:

IBdaMann wrote:

Robert Wagner wrote:Rofl. At least I understand the meaning of the words I use, you apparently don't. Since you can't even master language, how could you ever master science.

You still have not made any sort of value-added contribution.

Yes I did. But being the little marxist you are, you wouldn't understand.

Okay. I'll have to add hallucinations and inversion fallacies to your list of problems.

Illiteracy: proper nouns must be capitalized.

Marx preached communism and fascism as the answer to the world's problems. It was through his teachings that the dictatorships of Mussolini, Hitler, Stalin, Hirohito, and FDR arose, resulting in WW2.

Both communism and fascism are forms of socialism.

Capitalism is not socialism. IBDaMann is primarily a capitalist.

The Church of Global Warming, which YOU preach, on the other hand, stems from the Church of Green, which in turn stems from the Church of Karl Marx.

It is YOU preaching communism and fascism. It is YOU preaching Marx.

Inversion fallacy. Trolling.

Robert Wagner wrote:

Into the Night wrote:

Robert Wagner wrote:

IBdaMann wrote:

Robert Wagner wrote:Rofl. At least I understand the meaning of the words I use, you apparently don't. Since you can't even master language, how could you ever master science.

You still have not made any sort of value-added contribution.

Yes I did. But being the little marxist you are, you wouldn't understand.

Okay. I'll have to add hallucinations and inversion fallacies to your list of problems.

Illiteracy: proper nouns must be capitalized.

Marx preached communism and fascism as the answer to the world's problems. It was through his teachings that the dictatorships of Mussolini, Hitler, Stalin, Hirohito, and FDR arose, resulting in WW2.

Both communism and fascism are forms of socialism.

Capitalism is not socialism. IBDaMann is primarily a capitalist.

The Church of Global Warming, which YOU preach, on the other hand, stems from the Church of Green, which in turn stems from the Church of Karl Marx.

It is YOU preaching communism and fascism. It is YOU preaching Marx.

Inversion fallacy. Trolling.

And even more troll bs.

I applied IBDaLoosers own definition on himself.

What has climate science to do with Communism and Marx?

I'm preaching physics and science, something you only seem to have a faint idea about.

Into the Night wrote:

Robert Wagner wrote:

Into the Night wrote:

Robert Wagner wrote:

IBdaMann wrote:

Robert Wagner wrote:Rofl. At least I understand the meaning of the words I use, you apparently don't. Since you can't even master language, how could you ever master science.

You still have not made any sort of value-added contribution.

Yes I did. But being the little marxist you are, you wouldn't understand.

Okay. I'll have to add hallucinations and inversion fallacies to your list of problems.

Illiteracy: proper nouns must be capitalized.

Marx preached communism and fascism as the answer to the world's problems. It was through his teachings that the dictatorships of Mussolini, Hitler, Stalin, Hirohito, and FDR arose, resulting in WW2.

Both communism and fascism are forms of socialism.

Capitalism is not socialism. IBDaMann is primarily a capitalist.

The Church of Global Warming, which YOU preach, on the other hand, stems from the Church of Green, which in turn stems from the Church of Karl Marx.

It is YOU preaching communism and fascism. It is YOU preaching Marx.

Inversion fallacy. Trolling.

And even more troll bs.

I applied IBDaLoosers own definition on himself.

What has climate science to do with Communism and Marx?

I'm preaching physics and science, something you only seem to have a faint idea about.

Inversion fallacy. Insult fallacy. Hallucination. Word stuffing. RQAA (Repetitive Question Already Answered)(chanting).

You are discarding science and physics, including the 1st and 2nd laws of thermodynamics.

The 1st law of thermodynamics: E(t+1) = E(t) - U where 'E' is energy, 't' is time, and 'U' is work. You cannot create energy out of nothing. The presence of any gas or vapor isn't work. 'U' is zero here.

The 2nd law of thermodynamics: e(t+1) >= e(t) where 'e' is entropy, and 't' is time. This law defines 'heat' and the direction heat flows (from hot to cold). You can never reduce entropy...ever. You can never heat a warmer surface using a colder gas...ever.

You have already set aside both of these laws. You cannot just discard them. They are laws of physics based on theories of science.

* You cannot trap heat.
* You cannot reduce entropy.
* No gas or vapor has the capability to warm the Earth.

Continuing inversion fallacies and semantics fallacies isn't helping you. A fallacy is an error in logic. Logic is a closed functional system, just like mathematics.

It is YOU discarding logic.
It is YOU discarding theories of science.
It is YOU discarding the writings of Marx.

No, you cannot blame YOUR problems on anybody else!

Robert Wagner wrote:

Into the Night wrote:

Robert Wagner wrote:

Into the Night wrote:

Robert Wagner wrote:

IBdaMann wrote:

Robert Wagner wrote:Rofl. At least I understand the meaning of the words I use, you apparently don't. Since you can't even master language, how could you ever master science.

You still have not made any sort of value-added contribution.

Yes I did. But being the little marxist you are, you wouldn't understand.

Okay. I'll have to add hallucinations and inversion fallacies to your list of problems.

Illiteracy: proper nouns must be capitalized.

Marx preached communism and fascism as the answer to the world's problems. It was through his teachings that the dictatorships of Mussolini, Hitler, Stalin, Hirohito, and FDR arose, resulting in WW2.

Both communism and fascism are forms of socialism.

Capitalism is not socialism. IBDaMann is primarily a capitalist.

The Church of Global Warming, which YOU preach, on the other hand, stems from the Church of Green, which in turn stems from the Church of Karl Marx.

It is YOU preaching communism and fascism. It is YOU preaching Marx.

Inversion fallacy. Trolling.

And even more troll bs.

I applied IBDaLoosers own definition on himself.

What has climate science to do with Communism and Marx?

I'm preaching physics and science, something you only seem to have a faint idea about.

Inversion fallacy. Insult fallacy. Hallucination. Word stuffing. RQAA (Repetitive Question Already Answered)(chanting).

You are discarding science and physics, including the 1st and 2nd laws of thermodynamics.

The 1st law of thermodynamics: E(t+1) = E(t) - U where 'E' is energy, 't' is time, and 'U' is work. You cannot create energy out of nothing. The presence of any gas or vapor isn't work. 'U' is zero here.

The 2nd law of thermodynamics: e(t+1) >= e(t) where 'e' is entropy, and 't' is time. This law defines 'heat' and the direction heat flows (from hot to cold). You can never reduce entropy...ever. You can never heat a warmer surface using a colder gas...ever.

You have already set aside both of these laws. You cannot just discard them. They are laws of physics based on theories of science.

* You cannot trap heat.
* You cannot reduce entropy.
* No gas or vapor has the capability to warm the Earth.

Continuing inversion fallacies and semantics fallacies isn't helping you. A fallacy is an error in logic. Logic is a closed functional system, just like mathematics.

It is YOU discarding logic.
It is YOU discarding theories of science.
It is YOU discarding the writings of Marx.

No, you cannot blame YOUR problems on anybody else!

I don't have a problem, but you clearly seem to have.

Looks like you're getting aggravated there, that's bad for your health.

I did not discard the laws of thermodynamics, you can try twist my words all you want, that doesn't make me wrong, only confirmes you being a troll, troll.

Into the Night wrote:

Robert Wagner wrote:

Into the Night wrote:

Robert Wagner wrote:

Into the Night wrote:

Robert Wagner wrote:

IBdaMann wrote:

Robert Wagner wrote:Rofl. At least I understand the meaning of the words I use, you apparently don't. Since you can't even master language, how could you ever master science.

You still have not made any sort of value-added contribution.

Yes I did. But being the little marxist you are, you wouldn't understand.

Okay. I'll have to add hallucinations and inversion fallacies to your list of problems.

Illiteracy: proper nouns must be capitalized.

Marx preached communism and fascism as the answer to the world's problems. It was through his teachings that the dictatorships of Mussolini, Hitler, Stalin, Hirohito, and FDR arose, resulting in WW2.

Both communism and fascism are forms of socialism.

Capitalism is not socialism. IBDaMann is primarily a capitalist.

The Church of Global Warming, which YOU preach, on the other hand, stems from the Church of Green, which in turn stems from the Church of Karl Marx.

It is YOU preaching communism and fascism. It is YOU preaching Marx.

Inversion fallacy. Trolling.

And even more troll bs.

I applied IBDaLoosers own definition on himself.

What has climate science to do with Communism and Marx?

I'm preaching physics and science, something you only seem to have a faint idea about.

Inversion fallacy. Insult fallacy. Hallucination. Word stuffing. RQAA (Repetitive Question Already Answered)(chanting).

You are discarding science and physics, including the 1st and 2nd laws of thermodynamics.

The 1st law of thermodynamics: E(t+1) = E(t) - U where 'E' is energy, 't' is time, and 'U' is work. You cannot create energy out of nothing. The presence of any gas or vapor isn't work. 'U' is zero here.

The 2nd law of thermodynamics: e(t+1) >= e(t) where 'e' is entropy, and 't' is time. This law defines 'heat' and the direction heat flows (from hot to cold). You can never reduce entropy...ever. You can never heat a warmer surface using a colder gas...ever.

You have already set aside both of these laws. You cannot just discard them. They are laws of physics based on theories of science.

* You cannot trap heat.
* You cannot reduce entropy.
* No gas or vapor has the capability to warm the Earth.

Continuing inversion fallacies and semantics fallacies isn't helping you. A fallacy is an error in logic. Logic is a closed functional system, just like mathematics.

It is YOU discarding logic.
It is YOU discarding theories of science.
It is YOU discarding the writings of Marx.

No, you cannot blame YOUR problems on anybody else!

I don't have a problem, but you clearly seem to have.

Looks like you're getting aggravated there, that's bad for your health.

I did not discard the laws of thermodynamics, you can try twist my words all you want, that doesn't make me wrong, only confirmes you being a troll, troll.

Lying won't help you either.

Robert Wagner wrote:What has climate science to do with Communism and Marx?

Robert Wagner wrote:I'm preaching physics and science,

IBdaMann wrote:

Robert Wagner wrote:What has climate science to do with Communism and Marx?

The correct word is Marxism. I did not use the term "communism" and I did not refer to Karl Marx. This is just another example of your intentional misinformation to derail another conversation, i.e. to troll.

Marxism is any (mistaken) mindset/reasoning described by Karl Marx in either The Communist Manifesto or Das Kapital. I can support any claim of Marxism that I make from text of those works.

Global Warming and Climate Change are dogmas of a Marxist religion that demonizes economic principles, denies human nature, and ultimately seeks a Utopian Earth through the destruction of "capitalism". Greenhouse Effect is a sacred, miraculous, wondrous, and science-defying doctrine of this religion. One of this religion's major demons is the energy industry which drives the success of the economies of the world. This religion's congregation stands in solidarity against the world having cheap/plentiful energy because the congregation is comprised of humanity-hating trolls, such as yourself, who simply want everyone to be equally broke and penniless ... because then everything will be FAIR.

Robert Wagner wrote:I'm preaching physics and science,

You don't know any science to preach. Science is not preached, it can only be taught. Physics is science, moron.

I feel sorry for anyone who believes you actually know anything other than being a troll.

Robert Wagner wrote:

Into the Night wrote:

Robert Wagner wrote:

Into the Night wrote:

Robert Wagner wrote:

Into the Night wrote:

Robert Wagner wrote:

IBdaMann wrote:

Robert Wagner wrote:Rofl. At least I understand the meaning of the words I use, you apparently don't. Since you can't even master language, how could you ever master science.

You still have not made any sort of value-added contribution.

Yes I did. But being the little marxist you are, you wouldn't understand.

Okay. I'll have to add hallucinations and inversion fallacies to your list of problems.

Illiteracy: proper nouns must be capitalized.

Marx preached communism and fascism as the answer to the world's problems. It was through his teachings that the dictatorships of Mussolini, Hitler, Stalin, Hirohito, and FDR arose, resulting in WW2.

Both communism and fascism are forms of socialism.

Capitalism is not socialism. IBDaMann is primarily a capitalist.

The Church of Global Warming, which YOU preach, on the other hand, stems from the Church of Green, which in turn stems from the Church of Karl Marx.

It is YOU preaching communism and fascism. It is YOU preaching Marx.

Inversion fallacy. Trolling.

And even more troll bs.

I applied IBDaLoosers own definition on himself.

What has climate science to do with Communism and Marx?

I'm preaching physics and science, something you only seem to have a faint idea about.

Inversion fallacy. Insult fallacy. Hallucination. Word stuffing. RQAA (Repetitive Question Already Answered)(chanting).

You are discarding science and physics, including the 1st and 2nd laws of thermodynamics.

The 1st law of thermodynamics: E(t+1) = E(t) - U where 'E' is energy, 't' is time, and 'U' is work. You cannot create energy out of nothing. The presence of any gas or vapor isn't work. 'U' is zero here.

The 2nd law of thermodynamics: e(t+1) >= e(t) where 'e' is entropy, and 't' is time. This law defines 'heat' and the direction heat flows (from hot to cold). You can never reduce entropy...ever. You can never heat a warmer surface using a colder gas...ever.

You have already set aside both of these laws. You cannot just discard them. They are laws of physics based on theories of science.

* You cannot trap heat.
* You cannot reduce entropy.
* No gas or vapor has the capability to warm the Earth.

Continuing inversion fallacies and semantics fallacies isn't helping you. A fallacy is an error in logic. Logic is a closed functional system, just like mathematics.

It is YOU discarding logic.
It is YOU discarding theories of science.
It is YOU discarding the writings of Marx.

No, you cannot blame YOUR problems on anybody else!

I don't have a problem, but you clearly seem to have.

Looks like you're getting aggravated there, that's bad for your health.

I did not discard the laws of thermodynamics, you can try twist my words all you want, that doesn't make me wrong, only confirmes you being a troll, troll.

Lying won't help you either.

I'm not lying either, troll, you are.

Robert Wagner wrote:

IBdaMann wrote:

Robert Wagner wrote:What has climate science to do with Communism and Marx?

The correct word is Marxism. I did not use the term "communism" and I did not refer to Karl Marx. This is just another example of your intentional misinformation to derail another conversation, i.e. to troll.

Marxism is any (mistaken) mindset/reasoning described by Karl Marx in either The Communist Manifesto or Das Kapital. I can support any claim of Marxism that I make from text of those works.

Global Warming and Climate Change are dogmas of a Marxist religion that demonizes economic principles, denies human nature, and ultimately seeks a Utopian Earth through the destruction of "capitalism". Greenhouse Effect is a sacred, miraculous, wondrous, and science-defying doctrine of this religion. One of this religion's major demons is the energy industry which drives the success of the economies of the world. This religion's congregation stands in solidarity against the world having cheap/plentiful energy because the congregation is comprised of humanity-hating trolls, such as yourself, who simply want everyone to be equally broke and penniless ... because then everything will be FAIR.

Robert Wagner wrote:I'm preaching physics and science,

You don't know any science to preach. Science is not preached, it can only be taught. Physics is science, moron.

I feel sorry for anyone who believes you actually know anything other than being a troll.

Just trolling the trolls, troll.

LCOE of PV is now lower than marginal cost of coal power in many places of the world.

What is 'LCOE'? What is 'PV'?

Robert Wagner wrote:

What is 'LCOE'? What is 'PV'?

Levelised Cost Of Electricity, PhotoVoltaic.

Into the Night wrote:

Robert Wagner wrote:

IBdaMann wrote:

Robert Wagner wrote:What has climate science to do with Communism and Marx?

The correct word is Marxism. I did not use the term "communism" and I did not refer to Karl Marx. This is just another example of your intentional misinformation to derail another conversation, i.e. to troll.

Marxism is any (mistaken) mindset/reasoning described by Karl Marx in either The Communist Manifesto or Das Kapital. I can support any claim of Marxism that I make from text of those works.

Global Warming and Climate Change are dogmas of a Marxist religion that demonizes economic principles, denies human nature, and ultimately seeks a Utopian Earth through the destruction of "capitalism". Greenhouse Effect is a sacred, miraculous, wondrous, and science-defying doctrine of this religion. One of this religion's major demons is the energy industry which drives the success of the economies of the world. This religion's congregation stands in solidarity against the world having cheap/plentiful energy because the congregation is comprised of humanity-hating trolls, such as yourself, who simply want everyone to be equally broke and penniless ... because then everything will be FAIR.

Robert Wagner wrote:I'm preaching physics and science,

You don't know any science to preach. Science is not preached, it can only be taught. Physics is science, moron.

I feel sorry for anyone who believes you actually know anything other than being a troll.

Just trolling the trolls, troll.

LCOE of PV is now lower than marginal cost of coal power in many places of the world.

What is 'LCOE'? What is 'PV'?

Swan wrote:

Into the Night wrote:

Robert Wagner wrote:

IBdaMann wrote:

Robert Wagner wrote:What has climate science to do with Communism and Marx?

The correct word is Marxism. I did not use the term "communism" and I did not refer to Karl Marx. This is just another example of your intentional misinformation to derail another conversation, i.e. to troll.

Marxism is any (mistaken) mindset/reasoning described by Karl Marx in either The Communist Manifesto or Das Kapital. I can support any claim of Marxism that I make from text of those works.

Global Warming and Climate Change are dogmas of a Marxist religion that demonizes economic principles, denies human nature, and ultimately seeks a Utopian Earth through the destruction of "capitalism". Greenhouse Effect is a sacred, miraculous, wondrous, and science-defying doctrine of this religion. One of this religion's major demons is the energy industry which drives the success of the economies of the world. This religion's congregation stands in solidarity against the world having cheap/plentiful energy because the congregation is comprised of humanity-hating trolls, such as yourself, who simply want everyone to be equally broke and penniless ... because then everything will be FAIR.

Robert Wagner wrote:I'm preaching physics and science,

You don't know any science to preach. Science is not preached, it can only be taught. Physics is science, moron.

I feel sorry for anyone who believes you actually know anything other than being a troll.

Just trolling the trolls, troll.

LCOE of PV is now lower than marginal cost of coal power in many places of the world.

What is 'LCOE'? What is 'PV'?

One cannot graduate first grade today without knowing that PV is photovoltaic. So back to first grade you go kiddy

Into the Night wrote:

Robert Wagner wrote:

What is 'LCOE'? What is 'PV'?

Levelised Cost Of Electricity, PhotoVoltaic.

Oh. So...buzzwords. Meaningless.

Into the Night wrote:

Swan wrote:

Into the Night wrote:

Robert Wagner wrote:

IBdaMann wrote:

Robert Wagner wrote:What has climate science to do with Communism and Marx?

The correct word is Marxism. I did not use the term "communism" and I did not refer to Karl Marx. This is just another example of your intentional misinformation to derail another conversation, i.e. to troll.

Marxism is any (mistaken) mindset/reasoning described by Karl Marx in either The Communist Manifesto or Das Kapital. I can support any claim of Marxism that I make from text of those works.

Global Warming and Climate Change are dogmas of a Marxist religion that demonizes economic principles, denies human nature, and ultimately seeks a Utopian Earth through the destruction of "capitalism". Greenhouse Effect is a sacred, miraculous, wondrous, and science-defying doctrine of this religion. One of this religion's major demons is the energy industry which drives the success of the economies of the world. This religion's congregation stands in solidarity against the world having cheap/plentiful energy because the congregation is comprised of humanity-hating trolls, such as yourself, who simply want everyone to be equally broke and penniless ... because then everything will be FAIR.

Robert Wagner wrote:I'm preaching physics and science,

You don't know any science to preach. Science is not preached, it can only be taught. Physics is science, moron.

I feel sorry for anyone who believes you actually know anything other than being a troll.

Just trolling the trolls, troll.

LCOE of PV is now lower than marginal cost of coal power in many places of the world.

What is 'LCOE'? What is 'PV'?

One cannot graduate first grade today without knowing that PV is photovoltaic. So back to first grade you go kiddy

Just like you. Join in on the buzzword fest.

Robert Wagner wrote:

Into the Night wrote:

Robert Wagner wrote:

What is 'LCOE'? What is 'PV'?

Levelised Cost Of Electricity, PhotoVoltaic.

Oh. So...buzzwords. Meaningless.

I can certainly believe your head starts buzzing, when you try to understand the meaning.

Swan wrote:

Into the Night wrote:

Swan wrote:

Into the Night wrote:

Robert Wagner wrote:

IBdaMann wrote:

Robert Wagner wrote:What has climate science to do with Communism and Marx?

The correct word is Marxism. I did not use the term "communism" and I did not refer to Karl Marx. This is just another example of your intentional misinformation to derail another conversation, i.e. to troll.

Marxism is any (mistaken) mindset/reasoning described by Karl Marx in either The Communist Manifesto or Das Kapital. I can support any claim of Marxism that I make from text of those works.

Global Warming and Climate Change are dogmas of a Marxist religion that demonizes economic principles, denies human nature, and ultimately seeks a Utopian Earth through the destruction of "capitalism". Greenhouse Effect is a sacred, miraculous, wondrous, and science-defying doctrine of this religion. One of this religion's major demons is the energy industry which drives the success of the economies of the world. This religion's congregation stands in solidarity against the world having cheap/plentiful energy because the congregation is comprised of humanity-hating trolls, such as yourself, who simply want everyone to be equally broke and penniless ... because then everything will be FAIR.

Robert Wagner wrote:I'm preaching physics and science,

You don't know any science to preach. Science is not preached, it can only be taught. Physics is science, moron.

I feel sorry for anyone who believes you actually know anything other than being a troll.

Just trolling the trolls, troll.

LCOE of PV is now lower than marginal cost of coal power in many places of the world.

What is 'LCOE'? What is 'PV'?

One cannot graduate first grade today without knowing that PV is photovoltaic. So back to first grade you go kiddy

Just like you. Join in on the buzzword fest.

You provided zero information, other than your usual rants where you attempt to sound intelligent.

Into the Night wrote:

Swan wrote:

Into the Night wrote:

Swan wrote:

Into the Night wrote:

Robert Wagner wrote:

IBdaMann wrote:

Robert Wagner wrote:What has climate science to do with Communism and Marx?

The correct word is Marxism. I did not use the term "communism" and I did not refer to Karl Marx. This is just another example of your intentional misinformation to derail another conversation, i.e. to troll.

Marxism is any (mistaken) mindset/reasoning described by Karl Marx in either The Communist Manifesto or Das Kapital. I can support any claim of Marxism that I make from text of those works.

Global Warming and Climate Change are dogmas of a Marxist religion that demonizes economic principles, denies human nature, and ultimately seeks a Utopian Earth through the destruction of "capitalism". Greenhouse Effect is a sacred, miraculous, wondrous, and science-defying doctrine of this religion. One of this religion's major demons is the energy industry which drives the success of the economies of the world. This religion's congregation stands in solidarity against the world having cheap/plentiful energy because the congregation is comprised of humanity-hating trolls, such as yourself, who simply want everyone to be equally broke and penniless ... because then everything will be FAIR.

Robert Wagner wrote:I'm preaching physics and science,

You don't know any science to preach. Science is not preached, it can only be taught. Physics is science, moron.

I feel sorry for anyone who believes you actually know anything other than being a troll.

Just trolling the trolls, troll.

LCOE of PV is now lower than marginal cost of coal power in many places of the world.

What is 'LCOE'? What is 'PV'?

One cannot graduate first grade today without knowing that PV is photovoltaic. So back to first grade you go kiddy

Just like you. Join in on the buzzword fest.

You provided zero information, other than your usual rants where you attempt to sound intelligent.

You are describing yourself again.

Robert Wagner wrote:

Correct, but you utilize energy to add these gases, so the amount of energy added, cannot be greater than the amount utilized and the amount of energy utilized by huminaty is about 1½ hours worth of energy added by the sun.

James_ wrote:

Robert Wagner wrote:

Correct, but you utilize energy to add these gases, so the amount of energy added, cannot be greater than the amount utilized and the amount of energy utilized by huminaty is about 1½ hours worth of energy added by the sun.

With research I am pursuing, I'll probably mention what Fourier said. He believed that the Earth was too far from the Sun for the Sun to be the reason why the Earth has a warm atmosphere. And since I can explain why the troposphere is a greenhouse, it might question what is actually heating the Earth's atmosphere.
That is the basis of a greenhouse, a limited amount of external heat is trapped inside the barrier.

Robert Wagner wrote:Greenhouse gases are ua distributed 'barrier' for heat radiation.