Remember me
▼ Content

soda stream



Page 3 of 4<1234>
RE: Make America Great Again14-10-2024 00:50
Im a BM
★★★★☆
(1808)
"You can thank Pres. Jackson for that one!" - Into the Night

Make America Great Again!

America was great once. But it stopped being great at some time in the past.

When was America at its greatest?

That is the time we should seek to emulate as we restore her to greatness.

President Jackson, in the 1930s, presided over a truly GREAT America.

It was a time when everybody knew their place.

At the top, the white male who owned property. In the 1830s, there were still plenty of places where they were the ONLY eligible voters in the US.

If that white male property owner also owned slaves, 3/5 of each of them could be counted for more political power.

Those were the days!

The Constitutional Monarchies and budding liberal democracies of Europe were already abolishing slavery. America wasn't going to budge. Not without a fight.

No silliness of WOMEN having any power in the system. No votes. Not even the right to own property in their own name.

No uppity non-whites expecting a place at the table.

Certainly no gays or lesbians or tran-Q-bi whatevers thinking they had any right to exist.

And in those days they knew EXACTLY what to do about those pesky native savages who were getting in the way of being able to use all the good land.

Let us make America great again. At LEAST as great as it was in those wonderful days of the Jackson presidency. When everybody knew their place. And stayed there without whining about it.
14-10-2024 01:38
Into the NightProfile picture★★★★★
(22922)
Im a BM wrote:
"You can thank Pres. Jackson for that one!" - Into the Night

Make America Great Again!

America was great once. But it stopped being great at some time in the past.

It basically still is.
Im a BM wrote:
When was America at its greatest?

When the government followed the Constitution.
Im a BM wrote:
That is the time we should seek to emulate as we restore her to greatness.

Fine. Get the government to follow the Constitution.
Im a BM wrote:
President Jackson, in the 1930s, presided over a truly GREAT America.

Pres. Jackson violated the Constitution. He, like other Democrats support slavery.
Im a BM wrote:
It was a time when everybody knew their place.

Bullshit.
Im a BM wrote:
At the top, the white male who owned property. In the 1830s, there were still plenty of places where they were the ONLY eligible voters in the US.

Bullshit. Go stuff your racism up your butt.
Im a BM wrote:
If that white male property owner also owned slaves, 3/5 of each of them could be counted for more political power.

Slaves couldn't vote, Robert.
Im a BM wrote:
The Constitutional Monarchies and budding liberal democracies of Europe were already abolishing slavery.

There is no such thing as a 'constitutional monarchy', Robert. There were no democracies in Europe at the time.
Im a BM wrote:
America wasn't going to budge. Not without a fight.

Which Pres. Jackson helped to cause.
Im a BM wrote:
No silliness of WOMEN having any power in the system. No votes. Not even the right to own property in their own name.

Women could own property, Robert.
Im a BM wrote:
No uppity non-whites expecting a place at the table.

Certainly no gays or lesbians or tran-Q-bi whatevers thinking they had any right to exist.

You obviously learned your 'history' from a lousy K-12 system. It's not history, Robert.
Im a BM wrote:
And in those days they knew EXACTLY what to do about those pesky native savages who were getting in the way of being able to use all the good land.

What savages??
Im a BM wrote:
Let us make America great again. At LEAST as great as it was in those wonderful days of the Jackson presidency. When everybody knew their place. And stayed there without whining about it.

No, Robert. I will not vote for Kamala and go back to that.


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
14-10-2024 03:12
Im a BM
★★★★☆
(1808)
In anticipation of Columbus Day!

There is a vicious rumor going around the Internet that Cristobol Colon, Christopher Columbus, or whatever his REAL name actually was in Italian....

They are accusing him of having been a JEW!

I don't pretend to know anything about his ethnicity.

Not everyone agrees that his role in history was heroic.

Perhaps he deserves credit for bringing the light of civilization and Christianity to the "New World".

Perhaps those native populations should have been more grateful that someone finally "discovered" them.

What I know from personal experience about Cristobal is that he got himself into a whole lot of trouble with the powers that be.

I got to see up close the tiny prison cell in the dungeon where Columbus rotted for a very long time in Santo Domingo.

He pissed off the wrong people.

I don't think that it was because they found out he was Jewish.

But the Spanish Inquisition was still pretty fresh in memory at that point.

Failure to confess to Jewish ethnicity and convert to Catholicism DID carry a death penalty for many in the decades just before Columbus set sail.

Hero or zero, tomorrow is HIS special day.

What if we find out that he wasn't even really ITALIAN?

As far as you injuns go, just be grateful that someone DISCOVERED you!
14-10-2024 21:11
Into the NightProfile picture★★★★★
(22922)
Im a BM wrote:
In anticipation of Columbus Day!

There is a vicious rumor going around the Internet that Cristobol Colon, Christopher Columbus, or whatever his REAL name actually was in Italian....

They are accusing him of having been a JEW!

I don't pretend to know anything about his ethnicity.
...deleted remaining...

Stop making shit up, Robert.


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
14-10-2024 22:01
Im a BM
★★★★☆
(1808)
Into the Night wrote:
Im a BM wrote:
In anticipation of Columbus Day!

There is a vicious rumor going around the Internet that Cristobol Colon, Christopher Columbus, or whatever his REAL name actually was in Italian....

They are accusing him of having been a JEW!

I don't pretend to know anything about his ethnicity.
...deleted remaining...

Stop making shit up, Robert.


jns.org/experts-advise-caution-about-report-christopher-columbus-was-jewish/

bbc.com/news/articles/ckg2049ezpko

theguardian.com/world/2024/oct/13/christopher-columbus-was-spanish-and-jewish-documentary-reveals

I just make shit up and the whole world responds!

Crawl out from under that rock or get up off that basement couch and see what is happening out there in the real world.

According to genetic analysis of his remains, he was a Spanish Jew from Valencia, Spain.

Much controversy. I'll believe it when I see convincing evidence in a peer-reviewed scientific journal article. That may never happen.

As many as 300,000 Jews lived in Spain when they launched the Inquisition.

If Columbus were one of them, he would surely have been under heavy pressure to renounce or disguise it and become an active member of the Catholic Church.

And they ARE saying that he wasn't even ITALIAN!
14-10-2024 23:01
Into the NightProfile picture★★★★★
(22922)
Im a BM wrote:
Into the Night wrote:
Im a BM wrote:
In anticipation of Columbus Day!

There is a vicious rumor going around the Internet that Cristobol Colon, Christopher Columbus, or whatever his REAL name actually was in Italian....

They are accusing him of having been a JEW!

I don't pretend to know anything about his ethnicity.
...deleted remaining...

Stop making shit up, Robert.


jns.org/experts-advise-caution-about-report-christopher-columbus-was-jewish/

bbc.com/news/articles/ckg2049ezpko

theguardian.com/world/2024/oct/13/christopher-columbus-was-spanish-and-jewish-documentary-reveals

I just make shit up and the whole world responds!

Stop making shit up, Robert.


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
14-10-2024 23:14
Im a BM
★★★★☆
(1808)
Into the Night wrote:
Im a BM wrote:
Into the Night wrote:
Im a BM wrote:
In anticipation of Columbus Day!

There is a vicious rumor going around the Internet that Cristobol Colon, Christopher Columbus, or whatever his REAL name actually was in Italian....

They are accusing him of having been a JEW!

I don't pretend to know anything about his ethnicity.
...deleted remaining...

Stop making shit up, Robert.


jns.org/experts-advise-caution-about-report-christopher-columbus-was-jewish/

bbc.com/news/articles/ckg2049ezpko

theguardian.com/world/2024/oct/13/christopher-columbus-was-spanish-and-jewish-documentary-reveals

I just make shit up and the whole world responds!

Stop making shit up, Robert.


As far as the FAKE NEWS media goes, FOX NEWS is the most prominent source of LIES disguised as news.

foxnews.com/world/columbus-remains-verified-500-years-show-he-jewish-documentary

I am SO powerful! I make shit up and even FOX NEWS runs with it.

I better be careful with my newly discovered power.

I better stop making shit up, or it might actually happen.
14-10-2024 23:23
Into the NightProfile picture★★★★★
(22922)
Im a BM wrote:
Into the Night wrote:
Im a BM wrote:
Into the Night wrote:
Im a BM wrote:
In anticipation of Columbus Day!

There is a vicious rumor going around the Internet that Cristobol Colon, Christopher Columbus, or whatever his REAL name actually was in Italian....

They are accusing him of having been a JEW!

I don't pretend to know anything about his ethnicity.
...deleted remaining...

Stop making shit up, Robert.


jns.org/experts-advise-caution-about-report-christopher-columbus-was-jewish/

bbc.com/news/articles/ckg2049ezpko

theguardian.com/world/2024/oct/13/christopher-columbus-was-spanish-and-jewish-documentary-reveals

I just make shit up and the whole world responds!

Stop making shit up, Robert.


As far as the FAKE NEWS media goes, FOX NEWS is the most prominent source of LIES disguised as news.

foxnews.com/world/columbus-remains-verified-500-years-show-he-jewish-documentary

I am SO powerful! I make shit up and even FOX NEWS runs with it.

I better be careful with my newly discovered power.

I better stop making shit up, or it might actually happen.

Stop making up shit, Robert.


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
15-10-2024 00:23
Im a BM
★★★★☆
(1808)
Into the Night wrote:
Im a BM wrote:
Into the Night wrote:
Im a BM wrote:
Into the Night wrote:
Im a BM wrote:
In anticipation of Columbus Day!

There is a vicious rumor going around the Internet that Cristobol Colon, Christopher Columbus, or whatever his REAL name actually was in Italian....

They are accusing him of having been a JEW!

I don't pretend to know anything about his ethnicity.
...deleted remaining...

Stop making shit up, Robert.


jns.org/experts-advise-caution-about-report-christopher-columbus-was-jewish/

bbc.com/news/articles/ckg2049ezpko

theguardian.com/world/2024/oct/13/christopher-columbus-was-spanish-and-jewish-documentary-reveals

I just make shit up and the whole world responds!

Stop making shit up, Robert.


As far as the FAKE NEWS media goes, FOX NEWS is the most prominent source of LIES disguised as news.

foxnews.com/world/columbus-remains-verified-500-years-show-he-jewish-documentary

I am SO powerful! I make shit up and even FOX NEWS runs with it.

I better be careful with my newly discovered power.

I better stop making shit up, or it might actually happen.

Stop making up shit, Robert.


Now that I understand the profound reach of my made up shit, all the way into FOX NEWS!, I will certainly be much more careful about what kind of shit I make up from now on.

I am horrified as I realize the harm I may have done.

As the Jewish News Syndicate story reveals, jns.org/experts-advise-caution-about-report-christopher-columbus-was-jewish/ The shit that I made up may cause a terrible backlash against innocent Jews.

I grieve as I realize I may have already set something in motion that I cannot stop. My made up shit could be exploited by the enemies of Israel. They will claim false equivalency of a JEW being the one man solely responsible for all the harm that befell the Native Americans to the suffering of the Palestinians.

I wish there were some way I could take my made up shit and put it back where it came from before it hurts somebody.

I must use my power only for good, and never for evil.

I hope that the force is still with me for this next made up shit.

CLIMATE CANNOT CHANGE

If THAT made up shit works as well as my made up shit about Columbus, I'll never have to make up shit again.
Edited on 15-10-2024 00:52
16-10-2024 00:51
Into the NightProfile picture★★★★★
(22922)
Im a BM wrote:
Now that I understand the profound reach of my made up shit, all the way into FOX NEWS!, I will certainly be much more careful about what kind of shit I make up from now on.

Stop making shit up, Robert.


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
12-11-2024 02:13
Im a BM
★★★★☆
(1808)
Making up stories about yourself won't help you, dumbass.

You have no professional qualifications whatsoever to call yourself a "chemist".

You don't even know what chemistry is.

All you know is ONE of the multiple definitions for the term "chemical".



Into the Night wrote:
Im a BM wrote:
Fact-checking the personal information posted by Into the Night

Missing colon. Go learn English.
Im a BM wrote:
What Into the Night alleges to be accurate personal information includes the following.
He lives near Seattle, Washington.

But not in Seattle, WA. I use the city since that is a well known location to many people.
Im a BM wrote:
He works at a paper mill.

Never did. It sell to them though.
Im a BM wrote:
He passed some kind of State and Federal exam to get a "license" that qualifies him to characterize himself as a professional chemist.

No license needed to be a professional chemist. There IS both a federal and State license for the type of chemistry I conduct, though.
Im a BM wrote:
When I get bored, I'll see if I can find out what kind of "State and federal exams" (both Washington the State and Washington, DC) exist that can qualify one for a "license" to pretend to be a professional chemist.

Have fun.

I'll add some more I've already mentioned:
* I am a licensed pilot.
* I am a licensed aircraft mechanic.
* I fly, break, design, build, and repair aircraft.
* I specialize in avionics, wood and composite structures, electrical, hydraulics, and tube and fabric structures in aircraft.
* I own three aircraft.
* I am a licensed radio operator.
* I own several internal gas combustion engines, including cars, trucks, a tractor, lawnmower, etc.
* I am licensed as a CDL in Washington (valid in all States).
* I have a large property, over 9 acres.
* I own a successful company selling instrumentation to pulp mills, wastewater and freshwater treatment plants, other industrial processes, aerospace (including spacecraft), entertainment, and automotive applications. I sell my products all over the world.
* I am a Native American.
* I have visited all 50 States.
* I have seen both solar total eclipses and the auroras.
* I manufacture bombs for entertainment purposes.
* I do all the maintenance on all my vehicles.
* I am a licensed casino dealer, specializing in poker, craps, and roulette, and train other dealers.
* I have fingerprints on file with the FBI and the local police, as required for various licenses I hold.
* I carry a concealed weapons permit, and usually carry.
* I routinely drive cross country, crossing several States on such a trip.
* I built my own house, including doing the electrical and plumbing work, and landscaped my own property including access, fencing, and electrical and plumbing work.
* I enjoy video games, including the Assassin's Creed series, Red Dead series, and Hogwarts Legacy, and the Zelda series.
* I have designed two computer processors, build numerous PC style computers, written two operating systems (both tightly coupled timesharing systems), written several assemblers, condensers, and interpreters.
* I have my own linux distribution.
* I raise chickens and rabbits. My nearest neighbor in one direction owns two horses and an ass, the other is a retired machinist, and has a son living with him that is a talented man with wood.

So...go knock yourself out.
12-11-2024 19:20
Into the NightProfile picture★★★★★
(22922)
Im a BM wrote:
Making up stories about yourself won't help you, dumbass.

You're losing it again, Robert.
Im a BM wrote:
You have no professional qualifications whatsoever to call yourself a "chemist".

Chemistry is not 'professional qualifications'.
Im a BM wrote:
You don't even know what chemistry is.

I do. Unfortunately, you don't. You think chemistry is some sort of 'professional qualifications'.
Im a BM wrote:
All you know is ONE of the multiple definitions for the term "chemical".

I know them both, Robert. I also know where the term comes from. It is YOU that apparently has no idea what the word means.

Hint: It is not a degree, title, book, 'professional qualification', government agency, university, college, class, website, paper, or pamphlet.


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
27-11-2024 23:15
Im a BM
★★★★☆
(1808)
"So, Mr. Chemistry genius, the correct answer is.." - IBdaMann

As the post below makes clear:

Some of the carbon dioxide that dissolves in water becomes CARBOLIC ACID.

Scary stuff. Also known as phenolic acid, benzenol, or phenol, it is toxic.

But don't worry because WATER ITSELF IS A BUFFER FOR ACID.

All that poisonous CARBOLIC ACID gets buffered away by water itself.

So, the ocean acidification hoax is easily debunked with a few simple points from the local chemistry genius.

Water is a POWERFUL buffer, in fact. So powerful it makes the CARBOLIC ACID disappear to undetectable concentration in sea water.

Google how much carbolic acid can be found in sea water!


Into the Night wrote:
[quote]duncan61 wrote:
I have noticed that with the soda stream if I use tap water at 18.C it will not hold a charge of CO2 it fizzes off immediately.I have to chill the water to 4.C then it takes a charge and I can mix the flavouring and in the morning the bottle still has fiz in it.Could this mean ocean waters over a certain temperature can not hold CO2


The saturation of CO2 in water is dependent on temperature. You can look up this chart from various engineering sources.

The amount of CO2 in the oceans is nowhere near saturation.

Your soda dispenser is trying to oversaturate the CO2 in water. That's what the fizz is. CO2 venting from the water to re-establish equilibrium.

Warm water holds less CO2 than cold water. Thus, for soda, CO2 will stay dissolved in the soda longer (it won't fizz as fast, but it will still fizz).

Oceans, of course, have nowhere near that much CO2 in them. They don't fizz like soda does. The concentration of CO2 in any part of the ocean is about the same as the air above it.

Like air, CO2 is not uniformly distributed in ocean water. CO2 also does nothing to ocean water. It does not make the ocean water less alkaline.

A very small amount of CO2 in water (around 1%) will form carbolic acid. This is reaction goes both ways. Carbolic acid in water will also turn into CO2.

Water itself is a buffer for acid. This means the pH of the ocean water isn't going to change any detectable degree even with the carbolic acid in it. It has the entire ocean itself acting as a buffer.

Acid-base chemistry is completely denied by the Church of Global Warming in just the same way they deny the 1st and 2nd laws of thermodynamics and the Stefan-Boltzmann law.

These idiots aren't chemists. I am...among other things.
28-11-2024 01:16
Im a BM
★★★★☆
(1808)
Reality check and sarcasm warning:

Pure water is so poorly buffered against pH change that just being in contact with AIR (atmosphere) brings its pH down to about 5.6

This is because some dissolved carbon dioxide (CO2) becomes CARBONIC ACID (H2CO3).

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------

"So, Mr. Chemistry genius, the correct answer is.." - IBdaMann

As the post below makes clear:

Some of the carbon dioxide that dissolves in water becomes CARBOLIC ACID.

Scary stuff. Also known as phenolic acid, benzenol, or phenol, it is toxic.

But don't worry because WATER ITSELF IS A BUFFER FOR ACID.

All that poisonous CARBOLIC ACID gets buffered away by water itself.

So, the ocean acidification hoax is easily debunked with a few simple points from the local chemistry genius.

Water is a POWERFUL buffer, in fact. So powerful it makes the CARBOLIC ACID disappear to undetectable concentration in sea water.

Google how much carbolic acid can be found in sea water!


Into the Night wrote:
duncan61 wrote:
I have noticed that with the soda stream if I use tap water at 18.C it will not hold a charge of CO2 it fizzes off immediately.I have to chill the water to 4.C then it takes a charge and I can mix the flavouring and in the morning the bottle still has fiz in it.Could this mean ocean waters over a certain temperature can not hold CO2


The saturation of CO2 in water is dependent on temperature. You can look up this chart from various engineering sources.

The amount of CO2 in the oceans is nowhere near saturation.

Your soda dispenser is trying to oversaturate the CO2 in water. That's what the fizz is. CO2 venting from the water to re-establish equilibrium.

Warm water holds less CO2 than cold water. Thus, for soda, CO2 will stay dissolved in the soda longer (it won't fizz as fast, but it will still fizz).

Oceans, of course, have nowhere near that much CO2 in them. They don't fizz like soda does. The concentration of CO2 in any part of the ocean is about the same as the air above it.

Like air, CO2 is not uniformly distributed in ocean water. CO2 also does nothing to ocean water. It does not make the ocean water less alkaline.

A very small amount of CO2 in water (around 1%) will form carbolic acid. This is reaction goes both ways. Carbolic acid in water will also turn into CO2.

Water itself is a buffer for acid. This means the pH of the ocean water isn't going to change any detectable degree even with the carbolic acid in it. It has the entire ocean itself acting as a buffer.

Acid-base chemistry is completely denied by the Church of Global Warming in just the same way they deny the 1st and 2nd laws of thermodynamics and the Stefan-Boltzmann law.

These idiots aren't chemists. I am...among other things.
28-11-2024 06:40
IBdaMannProfile picture★★★★★
(14945)
Im a BM wrote:These idiots aren't chemists. I am...among other things.

So, what other things are chemists?
28-11-2024 17:08
Im a BM
★★★★☆
(1808)
Reality check and sarcasm warning:

Pure water is so poorly buffered against pH change that just being in contact with AIR (atmosphere) brings its pH down from 7 to about 5.6

This is because some dissolved carbon dioxide (CO2) becomes CARBONIC ACID (H2CO3).

Carbonic acid is a very weak acid. But water is such a weak buffer that 420 ppm CO2 in the atmosphere is enough to acidify natural rainfall to pH 5.6

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------

"So, Mr. Chemistry genius, the correct answer is.." - IBdaMann

As the post below makes clear:

Some of the carbon dioxide that dissolves in water becomes CARBOLIC ACID.

Scary stuff. Also known as phenolic acid, benzenol, or phenol, it is toxic.

But don't worry because WATER ITSELF IS A BUFFER FOR ACID.

All that poisonous CARBOLIC ACID gets buffered away by water itself.

So, the ocean acidification hoax is easily debunked with a few simple points from the local chemistry genius.

Water is a POWERFUL buffer, in fact. So powerful it makes the CARBOLIC ACID disappear to undetectable concentration in sea water.

Google how much carbolic acid can be found in sea water!


Into the Night wrote:
duncan61 wrote:
I have noticed that with the soda stream if I use tap water at 18.C it will not hold a charge of CO2 it fizzes off immediately.I have to chill the water to 4.C then it takes a charge and I can mix the flavouring and in the morning the bottle still has fiz in it.Could this mean ocean waters over a certain temperature can not hold CO2


The saturation of CO2 in water is dependent on temperature. You can look up this chart from various engineering sources.

The amount of CO2 in the oceans is nowhere near saturation.

Your soda dispenser is trying to oversaturate the CO2 in water. That's what the fizz is. CO2 venting from the water to re-establish equilibrium.

Warm water holds less CO2 than cold water. Thus, for soda, CO2 will stay dissolved in the soda longer (it won't fizz as fast, but it will still fizz).

Oceans, of course, have nowhere near that much CO2 in them. They don't fizz like soda does. The concentration of CO2 in any part of the ocean is about the same as the air above it.

Like air, CO2 is not uniformly distributed in ocean water. CO2 also does nothing to ocean water. It does not make the ocean water less alkaline.

A very small amount of CO2 in water (around 1%) will form carbolic acid. This is reaction goes both ways. Carbolic acid in water will also turn into CO2.

Water itself is a buffer for acid. This means the pH of the ocean water isn't going to change any detectable degree even with the carbolic acid in it. It has the entire ocean itself acting as a buffer.

Acid-base chemistry is completely denied by the Church of Global Warming in just the same way they deny the 1st and 2nd laws of thermodynamics and the Stefan-Boltzmann law.

These idiots aren't chemists. I am...among other things.



"These idiots aren't chemists. I am...among other things."
This LIE is a quote from Into the Night. He is NOT a chemist. Not even close.
He doesn't even know what a chemical is.
28-11-2024 22:45
Into the NightProfile picture★★★★★
(22922)
Im a BM wrote:
"So, Mr. Chemistry genius, the correct answer is.." - IBdaMann

As the post below makes clear:

Some of the carbon dioxide that dissolves in water becomes CARBOLIC ACID.

Nope. Carbonic acid. It IS possible to synthesize carbolic acid from carbon dioxide, though.
[b]Im a BM wrote:
Scary stuff. Also known as phenolic acid, benzenol, or phenol, it is toxic.

Water is toxic too. It kills quite a few people every year.
Im a BM wrote:
But don't worry because WATER ITSELF IS A BUFFER FOR ACID.

Yes it is.
Im a BM wrote:
All that poisonous CARBOLIC ACID gets buffered away by water itself.

What carbolic acid?
Im a BM wrote:
So, the ocean acidification hoax is easily debunked with a few simple points from the local chemistry genius.

You can't acidify an alkaline.
Im a BM wrote:
Water is a POWERFUL buffer, in fact.

It is.
Im a BM wrote:
So powerful it makes the CARBOLIC ACID disappear to undetectable concentration in sea water.

What carbolic acid?
Im a BM wrote:
Google how much carbolic acid can be found in sea water!
[/b]

Why?


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
28-11-2024 22:49
Into the NightProfile picture★★★★★
(22922)
Im a BM wrote:
Reality check and sarcasm warning:

Pure water is so poorly buffered against pH change that just being in contact with AIR (atmosphere) brings its pH down to about 5.6

Air does not change pH.
Argument from randU fallacy.

The ocean and most rivers are alkaline.
[b]Im a BM wrote:
This is because some dissolved carbon dioxide (CO2) becomes CARBONIC ACID (H2CO3).
[/b]

Not much. Mostly it's just dissolved carbon dioxide. Meh.
You can't acidify an alkaline.


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
28-11-2024 22:52
Into the NightProfile picture★★★★★
(22922)
Im a BM wrote:
...deleted spam...
"These idiots aren't chemists. I am...among other things."
This LIE is a quote from Into the Night. He is NOT a chemist. Not even close.
He doesn't even know what a chemical is.


Sorry to disappoint you, Robert. I am a chemist, a scientist, an engineer, and many other things that you can't do.

DON'T TRY TO BLAME YOUR PROBLEM ON ME OR ANYBODY ELSE, ROBERT!


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
28-11-2024 23:14
Spongy IrisProfile picture★★★★☆
(1991)
I'm no chemist, but I think plastic is the best buffer against acid. I learned that from watching Breaking Bad.

They needed to dissolve a body in acid, but unless they put it in a plastic tub, the acid would eat through pretty much anything else, including rocks.

I think this is also the general reason why petroleum jelly is the best guard against a spreading rash.

If there is a better buffer against acid than plastic, than hopefully sea lover can let me know...


28-11-2024 23:32
Im a BM
★★★★☆
(1808)
Spongy Iris wrote:
I'm no chemist, but I think plastic is the best buffer against acid. I learned that from watching Breaking Bad.

They needed to dissolve a body in acid, but unless they put it in a plastic tub, the acid would eat through pretty much anything else, including rocks.

I think this is also the general reason why petroleum jelly is the best guard against a spreading rash.

If there is a better buffer against acid than plastic, than hopefully sea lover can let me know...


You don't have to be a chemist to know that if you add baking soda to water, the sodium bicarbonate acts as a pH buffer. Water itself has virtually no buffering capacity, although slightly greater than zero.

Vinegar can be buffered by baking soda to maintain near neutral pH, when the acetic acid (vinegar) is added. Water alone can't do that.

The fizzing when vinegar and baking soda mix is carbon dioxide being released.

Bicarbonate, HCO3-, can neutralize a proton (H+) to become CARBONIC ACID, H2CO3. Carbonic acid splits into water and carbon dioxide.
H2CO3 = H2O + CO2 (Carbolic acid is way different)

So, plastic is NOT a buffer. It does not neutralize acid. But it does not react with the acid either.

In Breaking Bad, they were using hydrofluoric acid, HF or hydrogen fluoride. If they had used sulfuric acid or nitric acid, a ceramic bathtub would have been fine to contain it. But hydrofluoric acid dissolves silicates. It etches glass too.

Plastic resists corrosion by acid, but it does not BUFFER it. Neither does water.

The bicarbonate ion, HCO3- IS a buffer for either acid or base.

HCO3- + OH- = H2O + CO3(2-) base is neutralized to form carbonate ion.
HCO3- + H+ = H2CO3 acid is neutralized to form carbonic acid.

In either case, bicarbonate ions buffer against pH change.
Edited on 28-11-2024 23:44
28-11-2024 23:51
Into the NightProfile picture★★★★★
(22922)
Spongy Iris wrote:
I'm no chemist, but I think plastic is the best buffer against acid. I learned that from watching Breaking Bad.

Plastic is not a buffer.
Spongy Iris wrote:
They needed to dissolve a body in acid, but unless they put it in a plastic tub, the acid would eat through pretty much anything else, including rocks.

A container is not a buffer.
Spongy Iris wrote:
I think this is also the general reason why petroleum jelly is the best guard against a spreading rash.

Depends on the rash. Nothing to do with acids.
Spongy Iris wrote:
If there is a better buffer against acid than plastic, than hopefully sea lover can let me know...

One of the best is just plain old water.


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
28-11-2024 23:57
Im a BM
★★★★☆
(1808)
Spongy Iris wrote:
I'm no chemist, but I think plastic is the best buffer against acid. I learned that from watching Breaking Bad.

They needed to dissolve a body in acid, but unless they put it in a plastic tub, the acid would eat through pretty much anything else, including rocks.

I think this is also the general reason why petroleum jelly is the best guard against a spreading rash.

If there is a better buffer against acid than plastic, than hopefully sea lover can let me know...


You don't have to be a chemist to know how baking soda reacts with vinegar. If you add baking soda to water, the sodium bicarbonate acts as a pH buffer. Water itself has virtually no buffering capacity, although slightly greater than zero.

Vinegar can be buffered by baking soda to maintain near neutral pH, when the acetic acid (vinegar) is added. Water alone can't do that.

The fizzing when vinegar and baking soda mix is carbon dioxide being released.

Bicarbonate, HCO3-, can neutralize a proton (H+) to become CARBONIC ACID, H2CO3. Carbonic acid splits into water and carbon dioxide.
H2CO3 = H2O + CO2 (Carbolic acid is way different)

So, plastic is NOT a buffer. It does not neutralize acid. But it does not react with the acid either.

In Breaking Bad, they were using hydrofluoric acid, HF or hydrogen fluoride. If they had used sulfuric acid (H2SO4), nitric acid (HNO3), or hydrochloric acid (HCl), a ceramic bathtub would have been fine to contain it while they dissolved the corpse. But hydrofluoric acid also dissolves silicates. It etches glass too.

Plastic resists corrosion by acid, but it does not BUFFER it. Neither does water.

The bicarbonate ion, HCO3- IS a buffer for either acid or base.

HCO3- + OH- = H2O + CO3(2-) base is neutralized to form carbonate ion.
HCO3- + H+ = H2CO3 acid is neutralized to form carbonic acid.

In either case, bicarbonate ions buffer against pH change.

Bicarbonate ions in the sea are the main source of pH buffering[/quote]
28-11-2024 23:58
Spongy IrisProfile picture★★★★☆
(1991)
Im a BM wrote:
Spongy Iris wrote:
I'm no chemist, but I think plastic is the best buffer against acid. I learned that from watching Breaking Bad.

They needed to dissolve a body in acid, but unless they put it in a plastic tub, the acid would eat through pretty much anything else, including rocks.

I think this is also the general reason why petroleum jelly is the best guard against a spreading rash.

If there is a better buffer against acid than plastic, than hopefully sea lover can let me know...


You don't have to be a chemist to know that if you add baking soda to water, the sodium bicarbonate acts as a pH buffer. Water itself has virtually no buffering capacity, although slightly greater than zero.

Vinegar can be buffered by baking soda to maintain near neutral pH, when the acetic acid (vinegar) is added. Water alone can't do that.

The fizzing when vinegar and baking soda mix is carbon dioxide being released.

Bicarbonate, HCO3-, can neutralize a proton (H+) to become CARBONIC ACID, H2CO3. Carbonic acid splits into water and carbon dioxide.
H2CO3 = H2O + CO2 (Carbolic acid is way different)

So, plastic is NOT a buffer. It does not neutralize acid. But it does not react with the acid either.

In Breaking Bad, they were using hydrofluoric acid, HF or hydrogen fluoride. If they had used sulfuric acid or nitric acid, a ceramic bathtub would have been fine to contain it. But hydrofluoric acid dissolves silicates. It etches glass too.

Plastic resists corrosion by acid, but it does not BUFFER it. Neither does water.

The bicarbonate ion, HCO3- IS a buffer for either acid or base.

HCO3- + OH- = H2O + CO3(2-) base is neutralized to form carbonate ion.
HCO3- + H+ = H2CO3 acid is neutralized to form carbonic acid.

In either case, bicarbonate ions buffer against pH change.



Ah resists corrosion. Ok. I guess a chemists definition of a buffer is not just something that resists corrosion.


28-11-2024 23:59
Into the NightProfile picture★★★★★
(22922)
Im a BM wrote:
You don't have to be a chemist to know that if you add baking soda to water, the sodium bicarbonate acts as a pH buffer.

Nope. It makes the water alkaline.
Im a BM wrote:
Water itself has virtually no buffering capacity, although slightly greater than zero.

Water is an excellent buffer.
Im a BM wrote:
Vinegar can be buffered by baking soda to maintain near neutral pH, when the acetic acid (vinegar) is added.

Nope. You are making a salt and generating carbon dioxide(g).
Im a BM wrote:
Water alone can't do that.

Water is not a salt.
Im a BM wrote:
Bicarbonate, HCO3-, can neutralize a proton (H+) to become CARBONIC ACID, H2CO3.

Bicarbonate is not a chemical.
Im a BM wrote:
Carbonic acid splits into water and carbon dioxide.

Water and carbon dioxide also forms carbonic acid.
Im a BM wrote:
H2CO3 = H2O + CO2 (Carbolic acid is way different)

Strawman fallacy.
Im a BM wrote:
So, plastic is NOT a buffer.

Correct.
Im a BM wrote:
It does not neutralize acid. But it does not react with the acid either.

Depends on the plastic and the acid.
Im a BM wrote:
In Breaking Bad, they were using hydrofluoric acid, HF or hydrogen fluoride. If they had used sulfuric acid or nitric acid, a ceramic bathtub would have been fine to contain it. But hydrofluoric acid dissolves silicates. It etches glass too.

Plastic resists corrosion by acid, but it does not BUFFER it. Neither does water.

Water is an excellent buffer.
Im a BM wrote:
The bicarbonate ion, HCO3- IS a buffer for either acid or base.

Bicarbonate is not a chemical.
Im a BM wrote:
In either case, bicarbonate ions buffer against pH change.

Bicarbonate is not a chemical.


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
29-11-2024 00:12
Im a BM
★★★★☆
(1808)
A buffer enables an aqueous solution to resist pH change upon addition of acid or base.

Oxyanions of WEAK acids are the negatively charged ions that provide buffering capacity.

Hydroxide, bicarbonate, carbonate, phosphate, silicate, etc.

Sulfate and nitrate don't work as buffers, because they are the oxyanions of STRONG acids.

Carbonic acid is a weak acid whose oxyanions make excellent buffers.

Spongy Iris wrote:
I'm no chemist, but I think plastic is the best buffer against acid. I learned that from watching Breaking Bad.

They needed to dissolve a body in acid, but unless they put it in a plastic tub, the acid would eat through pretty much anything else, including rocks.

I think this is also the general reason why petroleum jelly is the best guard against a spreading rash.

If there is a better buffer against acid than plastic, than hopefully sea lover can let me know...


You don't have to be a chemist to know how baking soda reacts with vinegar. If you add baking soda to water, the sodium bicarbonate acts as a pH buffer. Water itself has virtually no buffering capacity, although slightly greater than zero.

Vinegar can be buffered by baking soda to maintain near neutral pH, when the acetic acid (vinegar) is added. Water alone can't do that.

The fizzing when vinegar and baking soda mix is carbon dioxide being released.

Bicarbonate, HCO3-, can neutralize a proton (H+) to become CARBONIC ACID, H2CO3. Carbonic acid splits into water and carbon dioxide.
H2CO3 = H2O + CO2 (Carbolic acid is way different)

So, plastic is NOT a buffer. It does not neutralize acid. But it does not react with the acid either.

In Breaking Bad, they were using hydrofluoric acid, HF or hydrogen fluoride. If they had used sulfuric acid (H2SO4), nitric acid (HNO3), or hydrochloric acid (HCl), a ceramic bathtub would have been fine to contain it while they dissolved the corpse. But hydrofluoric acid also dissolves silicates. It etches glass too.

Plastic resists corrosion by acid, but it does not BUFFER it. Neither does water.

The bicarbonate ion, HCO3- IS a buffer for either acid or base.

HCO3- + OH- = H2O + CO3(2-) base is neutralized to form carbonate ion.
HCO3- + H+ = H2CO3 acid is neutralized to form carbonic acid.

In either case, bicarbonate ions buffer against pH change.

Bicarbonate ions in the sea are the main source of pH buffering

If a scientifically illiterate moron tries to convince you that water can do anything much more than DILUTE an acid.. Water does NOT buffer against pH change by what chemists call "buffering".
29-11-2024 05:50
Im a BM
★★★★☆
(1808)
Short version:

1. Water is NOT a buffer of any significance.

2. A buffer transforms a strong acid into a weak acid, or a strong base into a weak base. This keeps the pH MUCH CLOSER to neutral.

3. Bicarbonate ion is the world's most important buffer

Hydrochloric acid + sodium bicarbonate = sodium chloride + carbonic acid
HCl + NaHCO3 = NaCl + H2CO3 strong acid changed to weak acid

Sodium hydroxide + sodium bicarbonate = water + sodium carbonate
NaOH + NaHCO3 = H2O + Na2CO3 strong base changed to weak base

The pH change is small, thanks to the bicarbonate ion buffer

---------------------------------------------------

A buffer enables an aqueous solution to resist pH change upon addition of acid or base.

Oxyanions of WEAK acids are the negatively charged ions that provide buffering capacity.

Hydroxide, bicarbonate, carbonate, phosphate, silicate, etc.

Sulfate and nitrate don't work as buffers, because they are the oxyanions of STRONG acids.

Carbonic acid is a weak acid whose oxyanions make excellent buffers.

Spongy Iris wrote:
I'm no chemist, but I think plastic is the best buffer against acid. I learned that from watching Breaking Bad.

They needed to dissolve a body in acid, but unless they put it in a plastic tub, the acid would eat through pretty much anything else, including rocks.

I think this is also the general reason why petroleum jelly is the best guard against a spreading rash.

If there is a better buffer against acid than plastic, than hopefully sea lover can let me know...


You don't have to be a chemist to know how baking soda reacts with vinegar. If you add baking soda to water, the sodium bicarbonate acts as a pH buffer. Water itself has virtually no buffering capacity, although slightly greater than zero.

Vinegar can be buffered by baking soda to maintain near neutral pH, when the acetic acid (vinegar) is added. Water alone can't do that.

The fizzing when vinegar and baking soda mix is carbon dioxide being released.

Bicarbonate, HCO3-, can neutralize a proton (H+) to become CARBONIC ACID, H2CO3. Carbonic acid splits into water and carbon dioxide.
H2CO3 = H2O + CO2 (Carbolic acid is way different)

So, plastic is NOT a buffer. It does not neutralize acid. But it does not react with the acid either.

In Breaking Bad, they were using hydrofluoric acid, HF or hydrogen fluoride. If they had used sulfuric acid (H2SO4), nitric acid (HNO3), or hydrochloric acid (HCl), a ceramic bathtub would have been fine to contain it while they dissolved the corpse. But hydrofluoric acid also dissolves silicates. It etches glass too.

Plastic resists corrosion by acid, but it does not BUFFER it. Neither does water.

The bicarbonate ion, HCO3- IS a buffer for either acid or base.

HCO3- + OH- = H2O + CO3(2-) base is neutralized to form carbonate ion.
HCO3- + H+ = H2CO3 acid is neutralized to form carbonic acid.

In either case, bicarbonate ions buffer against pH change.

Bicarbonate ions in the sea are the main source of pH buffering

If a scientifically illiterate moron tries to convince you that water can do anything much more than DILUTE an acid.. Water does NOT buffer against pH change by what chemists call "buffering".
30-11-2024 01:16
Im a BM
★★★★☆
(1808)
Short version:

1. Water is NOT a buffer of any significance.

2. A buffer transforms a strong acid into a weak acid, or a strong base into a weak base. This keeps the pH MUCH CLOSER to neutral.

3. Bicarbonate ion is the world's most important buffer against pH change.

Hydrochloric acid + sodium bicarbonate = sodium chloride + carbonic acid
HCl + NaHCO3 = NaCl + H2CO3 strong acid changed to weak acid

Sodium hydroxide + sodium bicarbonate = water + sodium carbonate
NaOH + NaHCO3 = H2O + Na2CO3 strong base changed to weak base

The pH change is small, thanks to the bicarbonate ion buffer

---------------------------------------------------

A buffer enables an aqueous solution to resist pH change upon addition of acid or base.

Oxyanions of WEAK acids are the negatively charged ions that provide buffering capacity.

Hydroxide, bicarbonate, carbonate, phosphate, silicate, etc.

Sulfate and nitrate don't work as buffers, because they are the oxyanions of STRONG acids.

Carbonic acid is a weak acid whose oxyanions make excellent buffers.

Spongy Iris wrote:
I'm no chemist, but I think plastic is the best buffer against acid. I learned that from watching Breaking Bad.

They needed to dissolve a body in acid, but unless they put it in a plastic tub, the acid would eat through pretty much anything else, including rocks.

I think this is also the general reason why petroleum jelly is the best guard against a spreading rash.

If there is a better buffer against acid than plastic, than hopefully sea lover can let me know...


You don't have to be a chemist to know how baking soda reacts with vinegar. If you add baking soda to water, the sodium bicarbonate acts as a pH buffer. Water itself has virtually no buffering capacity, although slightly greater than zero.

Vinegar can be buffered by baking soda to maintain near neutral pH, when the (weak) acetic acid (vinegar) is transformed to the even WEAKER carbonic acid.

CH3COOH + NaHCO3 = CH3COONa + H2CO3
acetic acid + sodium bicarbonate = sodium acetate + carbonic acid

Compared to strong mineral acids (sulfuric acid, hydrochloric acid, nitric acid..) organic acids such as acetic acid (vinegar) are WEAK acids.

The oxyanions of weak organic acids make good buffers (acetate, citrate, tartrate, etc.). The carboxylic group of these organic acids (R-COOH) weakly dissociates into hydrogen cation (H+) and carboxylate anion (R-COO-).

But carbonic acid is even WEAKER than the carboxylic organic acids.

Carbonate and bicarbonate oxyanions can buffer the acidity from organic acids by forming the even WEAKER acid, carbonic acid.

Organic acid anions have their maximum buffering capacity in the mildly
acidic pH range between 5-6. Carbonate/bicarbonate anions have their maximum buffering capacity in the mildly alkaline pH range between 8-9.

The fizzing when vinegar and baking soda mix is carbon dioxide being released.

Bicarbonate, HCO3-, can neutralize a proton (H+) to become CARBONIC ACID, H2CO3. Carbonic acid splits into water and carbon dioxide.
H2CO3 = H2O + CO2

So, plastic is NOT a buffer. It does not neutralize acid. But it does not react with the acid either.

In Breaking Bad, they were using hydrofluoric acid, HF or hydrogen fluoride. If they had used sulfuric acid (H2SO4), nitric acid (HNO3), or hydrochloric acid (HCl), a ceramic bathtub would have been fine to contain it while they dissolved the corpse. But hydrofluoric acid also dissolves silicates. It etches glass too.

Plastic resists corrosion by acid, but it does not BUFFER it. Neither does water.

The bicarbonate ion, HCO3- IS a buffer for either acid or base.

HCO3- + OH- = H2O + CO3(2-) base is neutralized to form carbonate ion.
HCO3- + H+ = H2CO3 acid is neutralized to form carbonic acid.

In either case, bicarbonate ions buffer against pH change.

Bicarbonate ions in the sea are the main source of pH buffering

If a scientifically illiterate moron tries to convince you that water can do anything much more than DILUTE an acid.. Water does NOT buffer against pH change by what chemists call "buffering". Bicarbonate may not be a chemical, but the bicarbonate ion makes a heck of a good pH buffer.
30-11-2024 02:47
Into the NightProfile picture★★★★★
(22922)
Im a BM wrote:
A buffer enables an aqueous solution to resist pH change upon addition of acid or base.
Water is not a solution.
[quote]Im a BM wrote:
Oxyanions of WEAK acids are the negatively charged ions that provide buffering capacity.

Oxyanion is not a chemical.
Im a BM wrote:
Hydroxide, bicarbonate, carbonate, phosphate, silicate, etc.

Hydroxide is not a chemical.
Bicarbonate is not a chemical.
Carbonate is not a chemical.
Phosphate is not a chemical.
Silicate is not a chemical.
Im a BM wrote:
Sulfate and nitrate don't work as buffers, because they are the oxyanions of STRONG acids.

Sulfate is not a chemical.
Nitrate is not a chemical.
oxyanions is not a chemical.
Im a BM wrote:
Carbonic acid is a weak acid whose oxyanions make excellent buffers.

Oxyanions is not a chemical.
Im a BM wrote:
In either case, bicarbonate ions buffer against pH change.
Bicarbonate ions in the sea are the main source of pH buffering

Bicarbonate is not a chemical.
Water itself is a buffer.
Im a BM wrote:
If a scientifically illiterate moron tries to convince you that water can do anything much more than DILUTE an acid.. Water does NOT buffer against pH change by what chemists call "buffering".

Dilution is buffering, moron.


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
30-11-2024 02:51
Into the NightProfile picture★★★★★
(22922)
Im a BM wrote:
Short version:

Repetition fallacy.
Im a BM wrote:
1. Water is NOT a buffer of any significance.

Yes it is.
Im a BM wrote:
2. A buffer transforms a strong acid into a weak acid, or a strong base into a weak base. This keeps the pH MUCH CLOSER to neutral.

Neutralization is not buffering.
Im a BM wrote:
3. Bicarbonate ion is the world's most important buffer

Bicarbonate is not a chemical.
Im a BM wrote:
Hydrochloric acid + sodium bicarbonate = sodium chloride + carbonic acid
HCl + NaHCO3 = NaCl + H2CO3 strong acid changed to weak acid

Neutralization is not buffering.
Im a BM wrote:
Sodium hydroxide + sodium bicarbonate = water + sodium carbonate
NaOH + NaHCO3 = H2O + Na2CO3 strong base changed to weak base

Neutralization is not buffering.
Im a BM wrote:
The pH change is small, thanks to the bicarbonate ion buffer

Paradox. Irrational. You cannot argue both sides of a paradox. Bicarbonate is not a chemical.


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
30-11-2024 05:38
Im a BM
★★★★☆
(1808)
Into the Night wrote:
Im a BM wrote:
Short version:

Repetition fallacy.
Im a BM wrote:
1. Water is NOT a buffer of any significance.

Yes it is.
Im a BM wrote:
2. A buffer transforms a strong acid into a weak acid, or a strong base into a weak base. This keeps the pH MUCH CLOSER to neutral.

Neutralization is not buffering.
Im a BM wrote:
3. Bicarbonate ion is the world's most important buffer

Bicarbonate is not a chemical.
Im a BM wrote:
Hydrochloric acid + sodium bicarbonate = sodium chloride + carbonic acid
HCl + NaHCO3 = NaCl + H2CO3 strong acid changed to weak acid

Neutralization is not buffering.
Im a BM wrote:
Sodium hydroxide + sodium bicarbonate = water + sodium carbonate
NaOH + NaHCO3 = H2O + Na2CO3 strong base changed to weak base

Neutralization is not buffering.
Im a BM wrote:
The pH change is small, thanks to the bicarbonate ion buffer

Paradox. Irrational. You cannot argue both sides of a paradox. Bicarbonate is not a chemical.



One, two, three...

Oh, this crazy thing pretends that it's a "chemist"

It doesn't even know that it's a TROLL

Psychotically, it LIES and LIES, relentless

I'd pity it, but it doesn't have a soul


It says that "water itself" is a "powerful buffer"

It claims that you cannot acidify the sea

Debunking "lies" of those it claims aren't really chemists

Proclaiming laws of anti science by infallible decree


It does not know the definition of "organic"

Has not a clue where it could go to look it up

Insists that there is no such thing, when it gets manic

Declares the buzzwords to be meaningless and the scientists all corrupt...
30-11-2024 07:35
IBdaMannProfile picture★★★★★
(14945)
Im a BM wrote:One, two, three...

Oh, this crazy thing pretends that it's a "chemist"
It doesn't even know that it's a TROLL
Psychotically, it LIES and LIES, relentless
I'd pity it, but it doesn't have a soul

It says that "water itself" is a "powerful buffer"
It claims that you cannot acidify the sea
Debunking "lies" of those it claims aren't really chemists
Proclaiming laws of anti science by infallible decree

It does not know the definition of "organic"
Has not a clue where it could go to look it up
Insists that there is no such thing, when it gets manic
Declares the buzzwords to be meaningless and the scientists all corrupt...


Content aside, I really like the poetic touch. It doesn't quite qualify as fine poetry but I like it nonetheless.
30-11-2024 13:19
SwanProfile picture★★★★★
(6122)
IBdaMann wrote:
Im a BM wrote:One, two, three...

Oh, this crazy thing pretends that it's a "chemist"
It doesn't even know that it's a TROLL
Psychotically, it LIES and LIES, relentless
I'd pity it, but it doesn't have a soul

It says that "water itself" is a "powerful buffer"
It claims that you cannot acidify the sea
Debunking "lies" of those it claims aren't really chemists
Proclaiming laws of anti science by infallible decree

It does not know the definition of "organic"
Has not a clue where it could go to look it up
Insists that there is no such thing, when it gets manic
Declares the buzzwords to be meaningless and the scientists all corrupt...


Content aside, I really like the poetic touch. It doesn't quite qualify as fine poetry but I like it nonetheless.


You like it, but what do you love


IBdaMann claims that Gold is a molecule, and that the last ice age never happened because I was not there to see it. The only conclusion that can be drawn from this is that IBdaMann is clearly not using enough LSD.

According to CDC/Government info, people who were vaccinated are now DYING at a higher rate than non-vaccinated people, which exposes the covid vaccines as the poison that they are, this is now fully confirmed by the terrorist CDC

This place is quieter than the FBI commenting on the chink bank account information on Hunter Xiden's laptop

I LOVE TRUMP BECAUSE HE PISSES OFF ALL THE PEOPLE THAT I CAN'T STAND.

ULTRA MAGA

"Being unwanted, unloved, uncared for, forgotten by everybody, I think that is a much greater hunger, a much greater poverty than the person who has nothing to eat." MOTHER THERESA OF CALCUTTA

So why is helping to hide the murder of an American president patriotic?


Sonia makes me so proud to be a dumb white boy


Now be honest, was I correct or was I correct? LOL
30-11-2024 22:28
Into the NightProfile picture★★★★★
(22922)
Im a BM wrote:
One, two, three...

Oh, this crazy thing pretends that it's a "chemist"

It doesn't even know that it's a TROLL

Psychotically, it LIES and LIES, relentless

I'd pity it, but it doesn't have a soul

I see you are trying to ignore English again.
Im a BM wrote:
It says that "water itself" is a "powerful buffer"

It is.
Im a BM wrote:
It claims that you cannot acidify the sea

You cannot acidify an alkaline.
Im a BM wrote:
Debunking "lies" of those it claims aren't really chemists

You can't make yourself a chemist by denying English.
Im a BM wrote:
Proclaiming laws of anti science by infallible decree

Theories of science are not 'anti-science'.
Im a BM wrote:
It does not know the definition of "organic"

You are describing yourself again.
Im a BM wrote:
Has not a clue where it could go to look it up

You are describing yourself again.
Im a BM wrote:
Insists that there is no such thing, when it gets manic

Never did. Mantra 30a. Lame.
Im a BM wrote:
Declares the buzzwords to be meaningless

Buzzwords have no meaning.
Im a BM wrote:
and the scientists all corrupt...

Never did. Mantra 30a. Lame.

Your discard of English and your word games won't work, Robert.


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
02-12-2024 03:03
Im a BM
★★★★☆
(1808)
Into the Night wrote:
Im a BM wrote:
A buffer enables an aqueous solution to resist pH change upon addition of acid or base.
Water is not a solution.
[quote]Im a BM wrote:
Oxyanions of WEAK acids are the negatively charged ions that provide buffering capacity.

Oxyanion is not a chemical.
Im a BM wrote:
Hydroxide, bicarbonate, carbonate, phosphate, silicate, etc.

Hydroxide is not a chemical.
Bicarbonate is not a chemical.
Carbonate is not a chemical.
Phosphate is not a chemical.
Silicate is not a chemical.
Im a BM wrote:
Sulfate and nitrate don't work as buffers, because they are the oxyanions of STRONG acids.

Sulfate is not a chemical.
Nitrate is not a chemical.
oxyanions is not a chemical.
Im a BM wrote:
Carbonic acid is a weak acid whose oxyanions make excellent buffers.

Oxyanions is not a chemical.
Im a BM wrote:
In either case, bicarbonate ions buffer against pH change.
Bicarbonate ions in the sea are the main source of pH buffering

Bicarbonate is not a chemical.
Water itself is a buffer.
Im a BM wrote:
If a scientifically illiterate moron tries to convince you that water can do anything much more than DILUTE an acid.. Water does NOT buffer against pH change by what chemists call "buffering".

Dilution is buffering, moron.



"Dilution is buffering, moron." - Into the Night

Nothing that Into the Night has posted indicates that he has ANY IDEA what a buffer is. The claim that water itself is an excellent pH buffer is ABSURD.

Nor does has Into the Night posted anything that indicates he has the slightest understanding about what pH is.

Refuses to acknowledge that pH can be zero or less than zero, and insists that "there is no such thing as pOH"

The vast majority of his "argument" is to identify everything that is "not a chemical"

Of the thirteen sentences in his post, eleven of them are "(name of oxyanion) is not a chemical" As if that means something of any significance. The oxyanions are important because they are BUFFERS, not because anyone is suggesting that they are referenced as the complete name of a chemical. Bicarbonates are a CLASS of chemicals, but that isn't relevant either. The chemical behavior of the bicarbonate ion acting as a BUFFER is what is relevant.

The chemical behavior of bicarbonate ion acting as a buffer seems to be beyond the grasp of Into the Night's expertise in chemistry.

The other two sentences, out of 13, are hardly any more enlightening.

"Water itself is a buffer" "Dilution is buffering, moron"

And calls himself some kind of "chemist"?

Does anybody, anywhere fall for his INEPT "chemist" charade?
Edited on 02-12-2024 03:22
02-12-2024 05:23
Into the NightProfile picture★★★★★
(22922)
Im a BM wrote:
"Dilution is buffering, moron." - Into the Night

Nothing that Into the Night has posted indicates that he has ANY IDEA what a buffer is.

DON'T TRY TO BLAME YOUR PROBLEM ON ME OR ANYONE ELSE!
Im a BM wrote:
The claim that water itself is an excellent pH buffer is ABSURD.
No, it isn't.
[quote]Im a BM wrote:
Nor does has Into the Night posted anything that indicates he has the slightest understanding about what pH is.

DON'T TRY TO BLAME YOUR PROBLEM ON ME OR ANYONE ELSE!
Im a BM wrote:
Refuses to acknowledge that pH can be zero or less than zero, and insists that "there is no such thing as pOH"

I already know you are illiterate in chemistry. You don't have to keep proving it.
Im a BM wrote:
The vast majority of his "argument" is to identify everything that is "not a chemical"

Nah. Just the wacky buzzwords you use as if they were 'chemicals'.
Im a BM wrote:
Of the thirteen sentences in his post, eleven of them are "(name of oxyanion) is not a chemical"

It's not.
Im a BM wrote:
As if that means something of any significance.

It does, but you ignore it, since you are illiterate.
Im a BM wrote:
The oxyanions

Not a chemical.
Im a BM wrote:
are important because they are BUFFERS,

Buzzwords are not buffers.
Im a BM wrote:
not because anyone is suggesting that they are referenced as the complete name of a chemical.

YOU DID. DON'T TRY TO DENY YOUR OWN POSTS!
Im a BM wrote:
Bicarbonates are a CLASS of chemicals, but that isn't relevant either.

Bicarbonate is not a chemical.
Im a BM wrote:
The chemical behavior of the bicarbonate ion acting as a BUFFER is what is relevant.

Buzzwords are not a buffer.
Im a BM wrote:
The chemical behavior of bicarbonate ion

Bicarbonate is not a chemical.
Im a BM wrote:
acting as a buffer seems to be beyond the grasp of Into the Night's expertise in chemistry.

Buzzwords are not buffers.
Im a BM wrote:
The other two sentences, out of 13, are hardly any more enlightening.

"Water itself is a buffer" "Dilution is buffering, moron"

And calls himself some kind of "chemist"?

Yup.
Im a BM wrote:
Does anybody, anywhere fall for his INEPT "chemist" charade?

I don't fall for your charade.


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
02-12-2024 17:15
Im a BM
★★★★☆
(1808)
You know, it might not be enough to simply insist that pH CANNOT be zero or less than zero.

Royal decree might not be enough to prove the chemistry behind the claim.

So, what are the chemical principles that prove it is impossible for pH to be zero or less than zero?

Just invoke the old thermodynamics!

Insist that it would violate the laws of thermodynamics for pH to be zero.

You don't even have to say which law or how.

That way you don't just have the unsupported contrarian assertion that pH CANNOT be zero.

You will have proven scientifically the chemical basis that makes it impossible for pH to be zero, because it violates the laws of thermodynamics.

Into the Night wrote:
Im a BM wrote:
A buffer enables an aqueous solution to resist pH change upon addition of acid or base.
Water is not a solution.
Im a BM wrote:
Oxyanions of WEAK acids are the negatively charged ions that provide buffering capacity.

Oxyanion is not a chemical.
Im a BM wrote:
Hydroxide, bicarbonate, carbonate, phosphate, silicate, etc.

Hydroxide is not a chemical.
Bicarbonate is not a chemical.
Carbonate is not a chemical.
Phosphate is not a chemical.
Silicate is not a chemical.
Im a BM wrote:
Sulfate and nitrate don't work as buffers, because they are the oxyanions of STRONG acids.

Sulfate is not a chemical.
Nitrate is not a chemical.
oxyanions is not a chemical.
Im a BM wrote:
Carbonic acid is a weak acid whose oxyanions make excellent buffers.

Oxyanions is not a chemical.
Im a BM wrote:
In either case, bicarbonate ions buffer against pH change.
Bicarbonate ions in the sea are the main source of pH buffering

Bicarbonate is not a chemical.
Water itself is a buffer.
Im a BM wrote:
If a scientifically illiterate moron tries to convince you that water can do anything much more than DILUTE an acid.. Water does NOT buffer against pH change by what chemists call "buffering".

Dilution is buffering, moron.



"Dilution is buffering, moron." - Into the Night

Nothing that Into the Night has posted indicates that he has ANY IDEA what a buffer is. The claim that water itself is an excellent pH buffer is ABSURD.

Nor does has Into the Night posted anything that indicates he has the slightest understanding about what pH is.

Refuses to acknowledge that pH can be zero or less than zero, and insists that "there is no such thing as pOH"

The vast majority of his "argument" is to identify everything that is "not a chemical"

Of the thirteen sentences in his post, eleven of them are "(name of oxyanion) is not a chemical" As if that means something of any significance. The oxyanions are important because they are BUFFERS, not because anyone is suggesting that they are referenced as the complete name of a chemical. Bicarbonates are a CLASS of chemicals, but that isn't relevant either. The chemical behavior of the bicarbonate ion acting as a BUFFER is what is relevant.

The chemical behavior of bicarbonate ion acting as a buffer seems to be beyond the grasp of Into the Night's expertise in chemistry.

The other two sentences, out of 13, are hardly any more enlightening.

"Water itself is a buffer" "Dilution is buffering, moron"

And calls himself some kind of "chemist"?

Does anybody, anywhere fall for his INEPT "chemist" charade?
02-12-2024 21:44
Into the NightProfile picture★★★★★
(22922)
Im a BM wrote:
You know, it might not be enough to simply insist that pH CANNOT be zero or less than zero.

It is YOUR problem that you want to deny chemistry and math.
Im a BM wrote:
Royal decree might not be enough to prove the chemistry behind the claim.

Mathematics is not a 'royal decree'. Mathematics has no politics.
Im a BM wrote:
So, what are the chemical principles that prove it is impossible for pH to be zero or less than zero?

RQAA
Im a BM wrote:
Just invoke the old thermodynamics!

Trivialization 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
02-12-2024 23:15
Im a BM
★★★★☆
(1808)
-ln1.5 = -0.41 - TRUE OR FALSE?

CORRECTING THE MATH ERROR TO CALCULATE pH of 1.5 N Nitric Acid

Apparently, a math error is responsible for giving the false result that a solution of 1.5 N nitric acid, HNO3, has a pH = -0.41

Let's see if we can find the error.

Let's leave the chemistry out of it and look strictly at the math.

What is the negative logarithm of 1.5?

Apparently, only a math error would yield the result of -0.41

Putting the chemistry back into it.

Apparently, only a math error would yield the result that the negative logarithm of the hydrogen ion concentration (= 1.5 in 1.5 N HNO3) = -0.41

So, what OTHER value is the "correct" answer for the negative logarithm of the number 1.5?



Into the Night wrote:
Im a BM wrote:
A buffer enables an aqueous solution to resist pH change upon addition of acid or base.
Water is not a solution.
[quote]Im a BM wrote:
Oxyanions of WEAK acids are the negatively charged ions that provide buffering capacity.

Oxyanion is not a chemical.
Im a BM wrote:
Hydroxide, bicarbonate, carbonate, phosphate, silicate, etc.

Hydroxide is not a chemical.
Bicarbonate is not a chemical.
Carbonate is not a chemical.
Phosphate is not a chemical.
Silicate is not a chemical.
Im a BM wrote:
Sulfate and nitrate don't work as buffers, because they are the oxyanions of STRONG acids.

Sulfate is not a chemical.
Nitrate is not a chemical.
oxyanions is not a chemical.
Im a BM wrote:
Carbonic acid is a weak acid whose oxyanions make excellent buffers.

Oxyanions is not a chemical.
Im a BM wrote:
In either case, bicarbonate ions buffer against pH change.
Bicarbonate ions in the sea are the main source of pH buffering

Bicarbonate is not a chemical.
Water itself is a buffer.
Im a BM wrote:
If a scientifically illiterate moron tries to convince you that water can do anything much more than DILUTE an acid.. Water does NOT buffer against pH change by what chemists call "buffering".

Dilution is buffering, moron.



"Dilution is buffering, moron." - Into the Night

Nothing that Into the Night has posted indicates that he has ANY IDEA what a buffer is. The claim that water itself is an excellent pH buffer is ABSURD.

Nor does has Into the Night posted anything that indicates he has the slightest understanding about what pH is.

Refuses to acknowledge that pH can be zero or less than zero, and insists that "there is no such thing as pOH"

The vast majority of his "argument" is to identify everything that is "not a chemical"

Of the thirteen sentences in his post, eleven of them are "(name of oxyanion) is not a chemical" As if that means something of any significance. The oxyanions are important because they are BUFFERS, not because anyone is suggesting that they are referenced as the complete name of a chemical. Bicarbonates are a CLASS of chemicals, but that isn't relevant either. The chemical behavior of the bicarbonate ion acting as a BUFFER is what is relevant.

The chemical behavior of bicarbonate ion acting as a buffer seems to be beyond the grasp of Into the Night's expertise in chemistry.

The other two sentences, out of 13, are hardly any more enlightening.

"Water itself is a buffer" "Dilution is buffering, moron"

And calls himself some kind of "chemist"?

Does anybody, anywhere fall for his INEPT "chemist" charade?
Edited on 02-12-2024 23:48
03-12-2024 00:19
Im a BM
★★★★☆
(1808)
-log1.5 = -0.41 - TRUE OR FALSE?

CORRECTING THE MATH ERROR TO CALCULATE pH of 1.5 N Nitric Acid

Apparently, a math error is responsible for giving the false result that a solution of 1.5 N nitric acid, HNO3, has a pH = -0.41

Let's see if we can find the error.

Let's leave the chemistry out of it and look strictly at the math.

What is the negative logarithm of 1.5? -log1.5 = ?

Apparently, only a math error would yield the result of -0.41

Putting the chemistry back into it.

Apparently, only a math error would yield the result that the negative logarithm of the hydrogen ion concentration (= 1.5 in 1.5 N HNO3) = -0.41

So, what OTHER value is the "correct" answer for the negative logarithm of the number 1.5?



Into the Night wrote:
Im a BM wrote:
A buffer enables an aqueous solution to resist pH change upon addition of acid or base.
Water is not a solution.
Im a BM wrote:
Oxyanions of WEAK acids are the negatively charged ions that provide buffering capacity.

Oxyanion is not a chemical.
Im a BM wrote:
Hydroxide, bicarbonate, carbonate, phosphate, silicate, etc.

Hydroxide is not a chemical.
Bicarbonate is not a chemical.
Carbonate is not a chemical.
Phosphate is not a chemical.
Silicate is not a chemical.
Im a BM wrote:
Sulfate and nitrate don't work as buffers, because they are the oxyanions of STRONG acids.

Sulfate is not a chemical.
Nitrate is not a chemical.
oxyanions is not a chemical.
Im a BM wrote:
Carbonic acid is a weak acid whose oxyanions make excellent buffers.

Oxyanions is not a chemical.
Im a BM wrote:
In either case, bicarbonate ions buffer against pH change.
Bicarbonate ions in the sea are the main source of pH buffering

Bicarbonate is not a chemical.
Water itself is a buffer.
Im a BM wrote:
If a scientifically illiterate moron tries to convince you that water can do anything much more than DILUTE an acid.. Water does NOT buffer against pH change by what chemists call "buffering".

Dilution is buffering, moron.



"Dilution is buffering, moron." - Into the Night

Nothing that Into the Night has posted indicates that he has ANY IDEA what a buffer is. The claim that water itself is an excellent pH buffer is ABSURD.

Nor does has Into the Night posted anything that indicates he has the slightest understanding about what pH is.

Refuses to acknowledge that pH can be zero or less than zero, and insists that "there is no such thing as pOH"

The vast majority of his "argument" is to identify everything that is "not a chemical"

Of the thirteen sentences in his post, eleven of them are "(name of oxyanion) is not a chemical" As if that means something of any significance. The oxyanions are important because they are BUFFERS, not because anyone is suggesting that they are referenced as the complete name of a chemical. Bicarbonates are a CLASS of chemicals, but that isn't relevant either. The chemical behavior of the bicarbonate ion acting as a BUFFER is what is relevant.

The chemical behavior of bicarbonate ion acting as a buffer seems to be beyond the grasp of Into the Night's expertise in chemistry.

The other two sentences, out of 13, are hardly any more enlightening.

"Water itself is a buffer" "Dilution is buffering, moron"

And calls himself some kind of "chemist"?

Does anybody, anywhere fall for his INEPT "chemist" charade?
Page 3 of 4<1234>





Join the debate soda stream:

Remember me

Related content
ThreadsRepliesLast post
Gargantuan sluice gate in Gulf Stream to warm Europe, lower nat gas need2926-04-2022 18:14
Relaxing Music with a Nice View of the Earth (Live Stream)3301-01-2022 03:57
How the Jet Stream Influences the Weather4322-11-2020 01:31
The Norwegian Gulf Stream404-03-2020 01:14
Cold can of soda?1008-06-2019 00:25
▲ Top of page
Public Poll
Who is leading the renewable energy race?

US

EU

China

Japan

India

Brazil

Other

Don't know


Thanks for supporting Climate-Debate.com.
Copyright © 2009-2020 Climate-Debate.com | About | Contact