This should clear up any confusion about climate

Im a BM wrote:

GasGuzzler wrote:

Im a BM wrote:
GasGuzzler, we almost never hear from you these days!

Around mid December 2025, I made a terrible error that could have been catastrophic. Instead it was only a major garage fire that did significant smoke damage throughout my home. Could have cost me my life.

The past 5 months have forced me to take a hard look at my life and question what I'm doing with it. It is clear to me I wasted too much time at Climate Debate, arguing with miserable fools who refuse to learn science but claim that the earth is magically warming.

1) learn what heat is
2) learn what energy is
3) learn what pollution is
4) define climate change

Until then, there really is no discussion to be had.....unless of course you can falsify the 1st, 2nd, 3rd laws of thermodynamics and the Stefan Boltzman law. Otherwise, it's a waste of the one life I have to live. Chasing the wife around the acreage is a lot more fun anyway LOL.

So, it wasn't MY trolling and spam that drove you away, specifically.

I can see how you reevaluate your life now and question the value of the time and energy you invested at climate-debate.com

Well, any scientist, anywhere in the world can now look up your well-informed and informative posts and learn from them.

Funny thing started happening here about a year ago.

As fewer members than ever actually posted anything, there was an exponential increase in the number of "views" that those spam-infested, biogeochemistry-related threads started getting.

Scientifically illiterate trolls with chips on their shoulders were never the "target audience" for my threads.

Im a BM wrote:
That target audience would be people with enough scientific literacy to go out of their way to open up threads not even displayed on the home page.

Im a BM wrote:
Threads with titles that included meaningless buzzwords like "biogeochemistry", "carbon sequestration", and "alkalinity". They rack up new "views" by the thousands now. But the software limits the highest possible "views" count to 65,535. It is not possible to assess how many additional new
"views" the threads get once they max out at 65,535.

Im a BM wrote:
THIS thread of yours, for example, has racked up more than 5,000 "views" in just three and a half years. Now that it is "bumped" to the top of the home page, we can see how many new "views" it attracts. Your fan club may be just waiting for you to post again, so they can learn all about "thermodynamics"!

Into the Night wrote:

GasGuzzler wrote:

Im a BM wrote:
GasGuzzler, we almost never hear from you these days!

Around mid December 2025, I made a terrible error that could have been catastrophic. Instead it was only a major garage fire that did significant smoke damage throughout my home. Could have cost me my life.

The past 5 months have forced me to take a hard look at my life and question what I'm doing with it. It is clear to me I wasted too much time at Climate Debate, arguing with miserable fools who refuse to learn science but claim that the earth is magically warming.

1) learn what heat is
2) learn what energy is
3) learn what pollution is
4) define climate change

Until then, there really is no discussion to be had.....unless of course you can falsify the 1st, 2nd, 3rd laws of thermodynamics and the Stefan Boltzman law. Otherwise, it's a waste of the one life I have to live. Chasing the wife around the acreage is a lot more fun anyway LOL.

Hope you catch her...or she catches you!

GasGuzzler wrote:I was in such a hurry to get the heater going I filled the tank, left the cap off, and left the can of 4 remaining gallons of fuel right beside the heater. Here's the kicker, I accidentally grabbed gasoline instead of diesel. When I hit the switch the fireball was quite real and by the time I got the hose on it, it was too late.

GasGuzzler wrote:

Im a BM wrote:
GasGuzzler, we almost never hear from you these days!

Around mid December 2025, I made a terrible error that could have been catastrophic. Instead it was only a major garage fire that did significant smoke damage throughout my home. Could have cost me my life.

The past 5 months have forced me to take a hard look at my life and question what I'm doing with it. It is clear to me I wasted too much time at Climate Debate, arguing with miserable fools who refuse to learn science but claim that the earth is magically warming.

1) learn what heat is
2) learn what energy is
3) learn what pollution is
4) define climate change

Until then, there really is no discussion to be had.....unless of course you can falsify the 1st, 2nd, 3rd laws of thermodynamics and the Stefan Boltzman law. Otherwise, it's a waste of the one life I have to live. Chasing the wife around the acreage is a lot more fun anyway LOL.

IBdaMann wrote:

GasGuzzler wrote:I was in such a hurry to get the heater going I filled the tank, left the cap off, and left the can of 4 remaining gallons of fuel right beside the heater. Here's the kicker, I accidentally grabbed gasoline instead of diesel. When I hit the switch the fireball was quite real and by the time I got the hose on it, it was too late.

THE MORAL OF THE STORY: Don't ever be in a hurry to set the garage ablaze; always take your time doing so.

Im a BM wrote:
The miserable fools here claim that the earth is magically spewing up petroleum from very deep beneath the surface.

Im a BM wrote:
It is a fool's errand to attempt to teach them any science about how fossil fuels actually formed from the remnants of dead photosynthetic organisms.

Into the Night wrote:

Im a BM wrote:
The miserable fools here claim that the earth is magically spewing up petroleum from very deep beneath the surface.

There is nothing magic about petroleum.
There is nothing magic about the Earth.

Im a BM wrote:
It is a fool's errand to attempt to teach them any science about how fossil fuels actually formed from the remnants of dead photosynthetic organisms.

Fossils aren't used as fuel.

GasGuzzler wrote:

IBdaMann wrote:

GasGuzzler wrote:I was in such a hurry to get the heater going I filled the tank, left the cap off, and left the can of 4 remaining gallons of fuel right beside the heater. Here's the kicker, I accidentally grabbed gasoline instead of diesel. When I hit the switch the fireball was quite real and by the time I got the hose on it, it was too late.

THE MORAL OF THE STORY: Don't ever be in a hurry to set the garage ablaze; always take your time doing so.

The moral of the story: After all this time IBdaMann STILL can't ANYTHING right.

Look dude, fossil fuel was burned. The temperature in the garage became much warmer than it otherwise would have been, to the tipping point of runaway warming. Heat was trapped in the garage and it melted the ice cap off my roof. To top it off, the Stephan Boltzman law remains satisfied because temperature and radiance moved in the same direction. Climate change on a macro level is confirmed by way of my micro climate garage project working out for me. Nothing has been overlooked. LOL yawn.

Im a BM wrote:
Hey, GasGuzzler!

I notice that you use the term "fossil fuel" as though it were more than just a meaningless "buzzword".

That's okay!

Im a BM wrote:
That just means you are among the 99.9% who understand what the term refers to - organic carbon mined from beneath the Earth's surface for fuel.

Did you ever buy into that magic petroleum fairy tale?

Im a BM wrote:
If you did NOT place your blind faith in "Fischer-Tropsch" somehow occurring beneath the Earth's surface, and DISBELIEVE all the geologists about dead photosynthetic organisms from many million years ago being the source of fossil fuel...

Im a BM wrote:
That's okay!

That just means you are among the 99.9% not disconnected from reality.

Im a BM wrote:
But my personal question to you, although you virtually NEVER answer MY questions, is about MY role in "driving you away" from posting here.

Was it MY trolling and spamming that ruined this place?

Im a BM wrote:
Of course, you may be among the <1% who think that "troll" means noticing that a dead website appears to be "dead", and noticing that there appears to be no moderator enforcing any standards of basic common decency in discussion.

Im a BM wrote:
I'm still curious as hell if your son continues to get admonished by authorities for continuing to "debate" with fools who believe in climate change, as happened to him in high school. Is he still on the same team with you guys about the "thermodynamics" and shit?

Im a BM wrote:
...deleted whining...

Im a BM wrote:

Hey, GasGuzzler!

I notice that you use the term "fossil fuel" as though it were more than just a meaningless "buzzword".

That's okay!

That just means you are among the 99.9% who understand what the term refers to - organic carbon mined from beneath the Earth's surface for fuel.

Did you ever buy into that magic petroleum fairy tale?

If you did NOT place your blind faith in "Fischer-Tropsch" somehow occurring beneath the Earth's surface, and DISBELIEVE all the geologists about dead photosynthetic organisms from many million years ago being the source of fossil fuel...

Spongy Iris wrote:

Im a BM wrote:

Hey, GasGuzzler!

I notice that you use the term "fossil fuel" as though it were more than just a meaningless "buzzword".

That's okay!

That just means you are among the 99.9% who understand what the term refers to - organic carbon mined from beneath the Earth's surface for fuel.

Did you ever buy into that magic petroleum fairy tale?

If you did NOT place your blind faith in "Fischer-Tropsch" somehow occurring beneath the Earth's surface, and DISBELIEVE all the geologists about dead photosynthetic organisms from many million years ago being the source of fossil fuel...

It appears to make sense, dead organisms cannot sink through the Earth's surface deep enough, past all the layers of rock, to form wells of oil.

It also appears to make sense, oil cannot spontaneously form from deep within the Earth's crust from nothing but dead rocks.

Gee, do we need a new theory to reconcile the paradox?

Here again is my picture to paint 1000 words.

SKYNET.



These power lines can transport tiny oil deposits all over the Universe, even down to the center of the Universe, Hell, where the mole people can do their magic tricks and make those oil deposits. The oil refined to gas fueling people's cars probably came from the very same people who are driving the cars, sucked up by SKYNET. So indeed, oil is a renewable resource.

sealover wrote:

Spongy Iris wrote:

Im a BM wrote:

Hey, GasGuzzler!

I notice that you use the term "fossil fuel" as though it were more than just a meaningless "buzzword".

That's okay!

That just means you are among the 99.9% who understand what the term refers to - organic carbon mined from beneath the Earth's surface for fuel.

Did you ever buy into that magic petroleum fairy tale?

If you did NOT place your blind faith in "Fischer-Tropsch" somehow occurring beneath the Earth's surface, and DISBELIEVE all the geologists about dead photosynthetic organisms from many million years ago being the source of fossil fuel...

It appears to make sense, dead organisms cannot sink through the Earth's surface deep enough, past all the layers of rock, to form wells of oil.

It also appears to make sense, oil cannot spontaneously form from deep within the Earth's crust from nothing but dead rocks.

Gee, do we need a new theory to reconcile the paradox?

Here again is my picture to paint 1000 words.

SKYNET.



These power lines can transport tiny oil deposits all over the Universe, even down to the center of the Universe, Hell, where the mole people can do their magic tricks and make those oil deposits. The oil refined to gas fueling people's cars probably came from the very same people who are driving the cars, sucked up by SKYNET. So indeed, oil is a renewable resource.

FYI, fossil fuel deposits don't have to sink down into deeper rock. Sediments piled up on top of them many millions of years ago.

Coal and petroleum deposits are always overlain by sedimentary rock. Some exceptions include the occasional "capping" by a basalt flow, mud flow, or ash shower from a nearby volcano, but that volcanic rock layer always has sedimentary rock layers above and below it.

No need to invoke "sinking" into deeper rock layers to explain their position.

The ancient coal swamps kept piling up peat layers on top of older peat layers, with occasional sediment layers in the mix from large erosion events.

The ancient oil fields of the shallow sea on the continental shelf kept piling up dead microorganisms, with occasional sediment layers in the mix from large erosion events.

Look at the Himalayas for proof that continents, and the marine sea shells they contain in layers that used to be coastal sea floor, keep getting pushed to higher elevation above sea level, as erosion washes down sediment from them to pile up in the pre-coal fields of the Ganges delta. Perhaps the intelligent descendants of the cockroaches will mine what used to be the Ganges delta for coal, 50-100 million years from now. Many thousand meters of sediment will have piled on top of them by then.

No, we don't need ANOTHER magic petroleum hypothesis.

Spongy Iris wrote:

sealover wrote:

Spongy Iris wrote:

Im a BM wrote:

Hey, GasGuzzler!

I notice that you use the term "fossil fuel" as though it were more than just a meaningless "buzzword".

That's okay!

That just means you are among the 99.9% who understand what the term refers to - organic carbon mined from beneath the Earth's surface for fuel.

Did you ever buy into that magic petroleum fairy tale?

If you did NOT place your blind faith in "Fischer-Tropsch" somehow occurring beneath the Earth's surface, and DISBELIEVE all the geologists about dead photosynthetic organisms from many million years ago being the source of fossil fuel...

It appears to make sense, dead organisms cannot sink through the Earth's surface deep enough, past all the layers of rock, to form wells of oil.

It also appears to make sense, oil cannot spontaneously form from deep within the Earth's crust from nothing but dead rocks.

Gee, do we need a new theory to reconcile the paradox?

Here again is my picture to paint 1000 words.

SKYNET.



These power lines can transport tiny oil deposits all over the Universe, even down to the center of the Universe, Hell, where the mole people can do their magic tricks and make those oil deposits. The oil refined to gas fueling people's cars probably came from the very same people who are driving the cars, sucked up by SKYNET. So indeed, oil is a renewable resource.

FYI, fossil fuel deposits don't have to sink down into deeper rock. Sediments piled up on top of them many millions of years ago.

Coal and petroleum deposits are always overlain by sedimentary rock. Some exceptions include the occasional "capping" by a basalt flow, mud flow, or ash shower from a nearby volcano, but that volcanic rock layer always has sedimentary rock layers above and below it.

No need to invoke "sinking" into deeper rock layers to explain their position.

The ancient coal swamps kept piling up peat layers on top of older peat layers, with occasional sediment layers in the mix from large erosion events.

The ancient oil fields of the shallow sea on the continental shelf kept piling up dead microorganisms, with occasional sediment layers in the mix from large erosion events.

Look at the Himalayas for proof that continents, and the marine sea shells they contain in layers that used to be coastal sea floor, keep getting pushed to higher elevation above sea level, as erosion washes down sediment from them to pile up in the pre-coal fields of the Ganges delta. Perhaps the intelligent descendants of the cockroaches will mine what used to be the Ganges delta for coal, 50-100 million years from now. Many thousand meters of sediment will have piled on top of them by then.

No, we don't need ANOTHER magic petroleum hypothesis.

Your hypothesis relies on millions of years, where winds blew rocks over dead organisms, and Pangea shifted into 7 continents, none of which has ever happened, at least not anytime even remotely close to the point after Life sprang forth on Earth.

sealover wrote:

Spongy Iris wrote:

sealover wrote:

Spongy Iris wrote:

Im a BM wrote:

Hey, GasGuzzler!

I notice that you use the term "fossil fuel" as though it were more than just a meaningless "buzzword".

That's okay!

That just means you are among the 99.9% who understand what the term refers to - organic carbon mined from beneath the Earth's surface for fuel.

Did you ever buy into that magic petroleum fairy tale?

If you did NOT place your blind faith in "Fischer-Tropsch" somehow occurring beneath the Earth's surface, and DISBELIEVE all the geologists about dead photosynthetic organisms from many million years ago being the source of fossil fuel...

It appears to make sense, dead organisms cannot sink through the Earth's surface deep enough, past all the layers of rock, to form wells of oil.

It also appears to make sense, oil cannot spontaneously form from deep within the Earth's crust from nothing but dead rocks.

Gee, do we need a new theory to reconcile the paradox?

Here again is my picture to paint 1000 words.

SKYNET.



These power lines can transport tiny oil deposits all over the Universe, even down to the center of the Universe, Hell, where the mole people can do their magic tricks and make those oil deposits. The oil refined to gas fueling people's cars probably came from the very same people who are driving the cars, sucked up by SKYNET. So indeed, oil is a renewable resource.

FYI, fossil fuel deposits don't have to sink down into deeper rock. Sediments piled up on top of them many millions of years ago.

Coal and petroleum deposits are always overlain by sedimentary rock. Some exceptions include the occasional "capping" by a basalt flow, mud flow, or ash shower from a nearby volcano, but that volcanic rock layer always has sedimentary rock layers above and below it.

No need to invoke "sinking" into deeper rock layers to explain their position.

The ancient coal swamps kept piling up peat layers on top of older peat layers, with occasional sediment layers in the mix from large erosion events.

The ancient oil fields of the shallow sea on the continental shelf kept piling up dead microorganisms, with occasional sediment layers in the mix from large erosion events.

Look at the Himalayas for proof that continents, and the marine sea shells they contain in layers that used to be coastal sea floor, keep getting pushed to higher elevation above sea level, as erosion washes down sediment from them to pile up in the pre-coal fields of the Ganges delta. Perhaps the intelligent descendants of the cockroaches will mine what used to be the Ganges delta for coal, 50-100 million years from now. Many thousand meters of sediment will have piled on top of them by then.

No, we don't need ANOTHER magic petroleum hypothesis.

Your hypothesis relies on millions of years, where winds blew rocks over dead organisms, and Pangea shifted into 7 continents, none of which has ever happened, at least not anytime even remotely close to the point after Life sprang forth on Earth.

"My" hypothesis relies on HUNDREDS of millions of years.

However, it invokes no wind-blown boulders. It invokes mostly sand and silt size particles carried by water, falling down out of solution in the swamp or on the shallow sea floor.

My understanding of when "the point after Life sprang forth on Earth " occurred is that it was most likely just shy of 4200 million years ago.

But I don't take it personally if you don't buy it.

I DO have my own unique scientific hypothesis about a thing or two, but I defer to the petrologists, geochemists, and paleontologists about the fossil fuel story. It's not "mine" to defend or take any pride or shame in.

Spongy Iris wrote:

sealover wrote:

Spongy Iris wrote:

sealover wrote:

Spongy Iris wrote:

Im a BM wrote:

Hey, GasGuzzler!

I notice that you use the term "fossil fuel" as though it were more than just a meaningless "buzzword".

That's okay!

That just means you are among the 99.9% who understand what the term refers to - organic carbon mined from beneath the Earth's surface for fuel.

Did you ever buy into that magic petroleum fairy tale?

If you did NOT place your blind faith in "Fischer-Tropsch" somehow occurring beneath the Earth's surface, and DISBELIEVE all the geologists about dead photosynthetic organisms from many million years ago being the source of fossil fuel...

It appears to make sense, dead organisms cannot sink through the Earth's surface deep enough, past all the layers of rock, to form wells of oil.

It also appears to make sense, oil cannot spontaneously form from deep within the Earth's crust from nothing but dead rocks.

Gee, do we need a new theory to reconcile the paradox?

Here again is my picture to paint 1000 words.

SKYNET.



These power lines can transport tiny oil deposits all over the Universe, even down to the center of the Universe, Hell, where the mole people can do their magic tricks and make those oil deposits. The oil refined to gas fueling people's cars probably came from the very same people who are driving the cars, sucked up by SKYNET. So indeed, oil is a renewable resource.

FYI, fossil fuel deposits don't have to sink down into deeper rock. Sediments piled up on top of them many millions of years ago.

Coal and petroleum deposits are always overlain by sedimentary rock. Some exceptions include the occasional "capping" by a basalt flow, mud flow, or ash shower from a nearby volcano, but that volcanic rock layer always has sedimentary rock layers above and below it.

No need to invoke "sinking" into deeper rock layers to explain their position.

The ancient coal swamps kept piling up peat layers on top of older peat layers, with occasional sediment layers in the mix from large erosion events.

The ancient oil fields of the shallow sea on the continental shelf kept piling up dead microorganisms, with occasional sediment layers in the mix from large erosion events.

Look at the Himalayas for proof that continents, and the marine sea shells they contain in layers that used to be coastal sea floor, keep getting pushed to higher elevation above sea level, as erosion washes down sediment from them to pile up in the pre-coal fields of the Ganges delta. Perhaps the intelligent descendants of the cockroaches will mine what used to be the Ganges delta for coal, 50-100 million years from now. Many thousand meters of sediment will have piled on top of them by then.

No, we don't need ANOTHER magic petroleum hypothesis.

Your hypothesis relies on millions of years, where winds blew rocks over dead organisms, and Pangea shifted into 7 continents, none of which has ever happened, at least not anytime even remotely close to the point after Life sprang forth on Earth.

"My" hypothesis relies on HUNDREDS of millions of years.

However, it invokes no wind-blown boulders. It invokes mostly sand and silt size particles carried by water, falling down out of solution in the swamp or on the shallow sea floor.

My understanding of when "the point after Life sprang forth on Earth " occurred is that it was most likely just shy of 4200 million years ago.

But I don't take it personally if you don't buy it.

I DO have my own unique scientific hypothesis about a thing or two, but I defer to the petrologists, geochemists, and paleontologists about the fossil fuel story. It's not "mine" to defend or take any pride or shame in.

Ok, I stick with the Genesis creation riddle, interpreting day 2 as about 4,000 years after God began construction, putting the "young" Earth pretty gosh darn close to 26,000 years old.

4400+1600+20000=26,000

As we have discussed in other threads, my position on the Flood, is it caused such a massive burst of radiation in a short time, which later resulted in permanently increased wind and radiation in Earth's atmosphere, that most assumptions of radiometrically dating the age of Earth's rocks should be thrown out of the proverbial window.

Perhaps there once was a Pangea that split into 7 continents. But I think that had to have happened before the grass started growing on day 3.

sealover wrote:

"Pangea" happened more than once. More than once, there was a single "supercontinent". More than once that supercontinent broke up into smaller, separate continents.

.

sealover wrote:

The part of the Genesis story I believe is the part that corresponds well to Earth's actual history. Four rivers DID join in a single delta in the Garden of Eden. Most of it is under water now, and the two southern rivers dried up. The northern rivers are still there, with much lower water flows than in the past. "Thorns and thistles" are what took over the productive delta farms when the climate got drier.

Spongy Iris wrote:

sealover wrote:

"Pangea" happened more than once. More than once, there was a single "supercontinent". More than once that supercontinent broke up into smaller, separate continents.

.

A cynical POV could be, the world is absolutely destroyed every 26,000 years, the continents get smushed back together, then it's better luck next time.

Im a BM wrote:
But you have plate tectonics moving orders of magnitude faster than the slow moving convection currents of viscous mantle can drag the plates along and make them split up or crash into each other and join together.

It's a long series of relatively SMALL cataclysmic events. A lot of earthquakes, tsunamis, volcanic eruptions and such, but no single ONE of them being a destructive event of Biblical proportions.

Im a BM wrote:
Big asteroids, on the other hand, can do things on a scale that plate tectonics cannot. The last few MASS EXTINCTION events in the last half billion years were all asteroid induced.

Im a BM wrote:
Hey, if you think it's wild that the Earth could be more than 4600 million years old, try projecting the trends out into the future, 1000-2000 million years from NOW.

Im a BM wrote:
The sun will continue to grow more luminous every year.

Smaller and smaller atmospheric concentrations of greenhouse gases will be enough to overheat the planet.

Long after all life on Earth is baked to death, the atmosphere gets hot enough that even water molecules have enough kinetic energy to escape to space.

But then, another 1000-2000 million years later, the sun swells up into a red giant and basically vaporizes the whole planet.

Im a BM wrote:
So, count your blessings!

26,000 years is the blink of an eye in geologic time.

Im a BM wrote:
But those REALLY big asteroids used to hit more than 2000 million years ago.

Im a BM wrote:
The kind that were big enough to see the craters they left on the moon with the naked eye, from Earth.

Im a BM wrote:
THOSE massive asteroids used to trigger global plate tectonic chain reactions.

Im a BM wrote:
And they mark the bottom (pure chert) layer of every banded iron formation layer sequence in the last 3000 million years or so.

Im a BM wrote:
Evolution is so much fun to know about.

Im a BM wrote:
I saw a river otter this morning. He climbed on to a log in the water to eat a fish he just caught. He looked a lot like a seal in that position.

I was thinking how cool it was that the pinnipeds (seals, seal lions, walrus and such) moved off the land and started living in the sea about 20 million years ago. And how cool is was that the cetaceans (whales, dolphins, etc.) moved off land and started living in the sea more than forty million years ago.

Im a BM wrote:
It is a far more beautiful story than any HUMAN could write for the Bible.

Im a BM wrote:
I give the Old Testament humans credit for an accurate description of the history they were actually witness to, such as the drying of the climate around the Garden of Eden.

Im a BM wrote:
But they were only making wild ass guesses, and very ignorant ones at that, regarding anything that happened before humans were there to witness it.

Im a BM wrote:
Are you familiar with the "Inherit the Wind" story?

The "expert" witness in the Scope's "monkey trial" was asked about the Genesis version of creation.

Exactly how LONG was the FIRST DAY of creation?

Was it a 24-hour day? Based on what? No rotating Earth for reference.

Was it a 26,000-YEAR day?

Was it a more than 13,000-million-year day?

That was only the most RECENT "big bang" in the cycle!

Im a BM wrote:

Spongy Iris wrote:

sealover wrote:

"Pangea" happened more than once. More than once, there was a single "supercontinent". More than once that supercontinent broke up into smaller, separate continents.

.

A cynical POV could be, the world is absolutely destroyed every 26,000 years, the continents get smushed back together, then it's better luck next time.

Oh, so cynical!

But you have plate tectonics moving orders of magnitude faster than the slow moving convection currents of viscous mantle can drag the plates along and make them split up or crash into each other and join together.

It's a long series of relatively SMALL cataclysmic events. A lot of earthquakes, tsunamis, volcanic eruptions and such, but no single ONE of them being a destructive event of Biblical proportions.

Big asteroids, on the other hand, can do things on a scale that plate tectonics cannot. The last few MASS EXTINCTION events in the last half billion years were all asteroid induced.

Hey, if you think it's wild that the Earth could be more than 4600 million years old, try projecting the trends out into the future, 1000-2000 million years from NOW.

The sun will continue to grow more luminous every year.

Smaller and smaller atmospheric concentrations of greenhouse gases will be enough to overheat the planet.

Long after all life on Earth is baked to death, the atmosphere gets hot enough that even water molecules have enough kinetic energy to escape to space.

But then, another 1000-2000 million years later, the sun swells up into a red giant and basically vaporizes the whole planet.

So, count your blessings!

26,000 years is the blink of an eye in geologic time.

But those REALLY big asteroids used to hit more than 2000 million years ago.

The kind that were big enough to see the craters they left on the moon with the naked eye, from Earth.

THOSE massive asteroids used to trigger global plate tectonic chain reactions.

And they mark the bottom (pure chert) layer of every banded iron formation layer sequence in the last 3000 million years or so.

Evolution is so much fun to know about.

I saw a river otter this morning. He climbed on to a log in the water to eat a fish he just caught. He looked a lot like a seal in that position.

I was thinking how cool it was that the pinnipeds (seals, seal lions, walrus and such) moved off the land and started living in the sea about 20 million years ago. And how cool is was that the cetaceans (whales, dolphins, etc.) moved off land and started living in the sea more than forty million years ago.

It is a far more beautiful story than any HUMAN could write for the Bible.

I give the Old Testament humans credit for an accurate description of the history they were actually witness to, such as the drying of the climate around the Garden of Eden.

But they were only making wild ass guesses, and very ignorant ones at that, regarding anything that happened before humans were there to witness it.

Are you familiar with the "Inherit the Wind" story?

The "expert" witness in the Scope's "monkey trial" was asked about the Genesis version of creation.

Exactly how LONG was the FIRST DAY of creation?

Was it a 24-hour day? Based on what? No rotating Earth for reference.

Was it a 26,000-YEAR day?

Was it a more than 13,000-million-year day?

That was only the most RECENT "big bang" in the cycle!

Im a BM wrote:

GasGuzzler wrote:

IBdaMann wrote:

GasGuzzler wrote:I was in such a hurry to get the heater going I filled the tank, left the cap off, and left the can of 4 remaining gallons of fuel right beside the heater. Here's the kicker, I accidentally grabbed gasoline instead of diesel. When I hit the switch the fireball was quite real and by the time I got the hose on it, it was too late.

THE MORAL OF THE STORY: Don't ever be in a hurry to set the garage ablaze; always take your time doing so.

The moral of the story: After all this time IBdaMann STILL can't ANYTHING right.

Look dude, fossil fuel was burned. The temperature in the garage became much warmer than it otherwise would have been, to the tipping point of runaway warming. Heat was trapped in the garage and it melted the ice cap off my roof. To top it off, the Stephan Boltzman law remains satisfied because temperature and radiance moved in the same direction. Climate change on a macro level is confirmed by way of my micro climate garage project working out for me. Nothing has been overlooked. LOL yawn.

Hey, GasGuzzler!

I notice that you use the term "fossil fuel" as though it were more than just a meaningless "buzzword".

Im a BM wrote:
If you did NOT place your blind faith in "Fischer-Tropsch" somehow occurring beneath the Earth's surface, and DISBELIEVE all the geologists about dead photosynthetic organisms from many million years ago being the source of fossil fuel...

Im a BM wrote:
Do you ever wish you had spent more time interacting with your son while he lived at home, instead of joining the "Define your terms!" chorus and spending your time on the Internet at climate-debate.com?

GasGuzzler wrote:

Im a BM wrote:

GasGuzzler wrote:

IBdaMann wrote:

GasGuzzler wrote:I was in such a hurry to get the heater going I filled the tank, left the cap off, and left the can of 4 remaining gallons of fuel right beside the heater. Here's the kicker, I accidentally grabbed gasoline instead of diesel. When I hit the switch the fireball was quite real and by the time I got the hose on it, it was too late.

THE MORAL OF THE STORY: Don't ever be in a hurry to set the garage ablaze; always take your time doing so.

The moral of the story: After all this time IBdaMann STILL can't ANYTHING right.

Look dude, fossil fuel was burned. The temperature in the garage became much warmer than it otherwise would have been, to the tipping point of runaway warming. Heat was trapped in the garage and it melted the ice cap off my roof. To top it off, the Stephan Boltzman law remains satisfied because temperature and radiance moved in the same direction. Climate change on a macro level is confirmed by way of my micro climate garage project working out for me. Nothing has been overlooked. LOL yawn.

Hey, GasGuzzler!

I notice that you use the term "fossil fuel" as though it were more than just a meaningless "buzzword".

It IS nothing more than a meaningless buzzword. It was aimed squarely at you and you still let it sail.

Im a BM wrote:
If you did NOT place your blind faith in "Fischer-Tropsch" somehow occurring beneath the Earth's surface, and DISBELIEVE all the geologists about dead photosynthetic organisms from many million years ago being the source of fossil fuel...

Conditions exist beneath the surface similar to the conditions we use to make synthetic oil. That's called observation. Have you observed a dinosaur pissing out a barrel of oil?

Im a BM wrote:
Do you ever wish you had spent more time interacting with your son while he lived at home, instead of joining the "Define your terms!" chorus and spending your time on the Internet at climate-debate.com?

I spent plenty of time with my son teaching him what I learned here about heat. He would have no trouble reading your drivel and calling bullshit.

Im a BM wrote:
Tell each other how you understand "thermodynamics" so much better than all those FRAUD "scientists".

They don't even know what "science" IS!

And they sure as hell don't know what "heat" is, do they?

Teach the world the TRUTH about "thermodynamics".

WOO HOO!

Party time!

GasGuzzler has come home to join in an anti science troll circle jerk!

Im a BM wrote: Tell each other how you understand "thermodynamics" so much better than all those FRAUD "scientists".

Im a BM wrote: They don't even know what "science" IS!

Im a BM wrote: And they sure as hell don't know what "heat" is, do they?

Im a BM wrote: Teach the world the TRUTH about "thermodynamics".

Im a BM wrote:GasGuzzler has come home to join in an anti science troll circle jerk!

IBdaMann wrote:

Im a BM wrote: Tell each other how you understand "thermodynamics" so much better than all those FRAUD "scientists".

Gladly. All I need is for you to identify all the scientifically illiterate political hacks that you are calling "all those scientists" and bring them here to Climate-Debate so I can mock the shit out of them.

Oh wait, you can't even get anyone to merely check out your non-existent library, which, now that I think about it, might explain why you can't get anyone to check it out.

Im a BM wrote: They don't even know what "science" IS!

Awesome! Someone explained to you what "scientifically illiterate" means!

Im a BM wrote: And they sure as hell don't know what "heat" is, do they?

I think you're starting to get it. This is promising.

Im a BM wrote: Teach the world the TRUTH about "thermodynamics".

I will, eventually.

Im a BM wrote:GasGuzzler has come home to join in an anti science troll circle jerk!

Erroneous wording. GasGuzzler has opted to not recognize your WACKY anti-science religion, that you call "The Thettled Thienth".

Spongy Iris wrote:

Im a BM wrote:

Spongy Iris wrote:

sealover wrote:

"Pangea" happened more than once. More than once, there was a single "supercontinent". More than once that supercontinent broke up into smaller, separate continents.

.

A cynical POV could be, the world is absolutely destroyed every 26,000 years, the continents get smushed back together, then it's better luck next time.

Oh, so cynical!

But you have plate tectonics moving orders of magnitude faster than the slow moving convection currents of viscous mantle can drag the plates along and make them split up or crash into each other and join together.

It's a long series of relatively SMALL cataclysmic events. A lot of earthquakes, tsunamis, volcanic eruptions and such, but no single ONE of them being a destructive event of Biblical proportions.

Big asteroids, on the other hand, can do things on a scale that plate tectonics cannot. The last few MASS EXTINCTION events in the last half billion years were all asteroid induced.

Hey, if you think it's wild that the Earth could be more than 4600 million years old, try projecting the trends out into the future, 1000-2000 million years from NOW.

The sun will continue to grow more luminous every year.

Smaller and smaller atmospheric concentrations of greenhouse gases will be enough to overheat the planet.

Long after all life on Earth is baked to death, the atmosphere gets hot enough that even water molecules have enough kinetic energy to escape to space.

But then, another 1000-2000 million years later, the sun swells up into a red giant and basically vaporizes the whole planet.

So, count your blessings!

26,000 years is the blink of an eye in geologic time.

But those REALLY big asteroids used to hit more than 2000 million years ago.

The kind that were big enough to see the craters they left on the moon with the naked eye, from Earth.

THOSE massive asteroids used to trigger global plate tectonic chain reactions.

And they mark the bottom (pure chert) layer of every banded iron formation layer sequence in the last 3000 million years or so.

Evolution is so much fun to know about.

I saw a river otter this morning. He climbed on to a log in the water to eat a fish he just caught. He looked a lot like a seal in that position.

I was thinking how cool it was that the pinnipeds (seals, seal lions, walrus and such) moved off the land and started living in the sea about 20 million years ago. And how cool is was that the cetaceans (whales, dolphins, etc.) moved off land and started living in the sea more than forty million years ago.

It is a far more beautiful story than any HUMAN could write for the Bible.

I give the Old Testament humans credit for an accurate description of the history they were actually witness to, such as the drying of the climate around the Garden of Eden.

But they were only making wild ass guesses, and very ignorant ones at that, regarding anything that happened before humans were there to witness it.

Are you familiar with the "Inherit the Wind" story?

The "expert" witness in the Scope's "monkey trial" was asked about the Genesis version of creation.

Exactly how LONG was the FIRST DAY of creation?

Was it a 24-hour day? Based on what? No rotating Earth for reference.

Was it a 26,000-YEAR day?

Was it a more than 13,000-million-year day?

That was only the most RECENT "big bang" in the cycle!

Earth Sciences should be a complement to the Bible, not a replacement IMO.

See, all I did now is just revise my interpretation of the very first verse, In the beginning.

The idea of the current Heaven and Earth being reformed 26,000 years ago still stands.

But I had already gotten asked what was meant, by a Bible troll more than a decade ago, in a chat online, when was, In the beginning. I never forgot that question, tho I didn't have a good answer back then. I have never been especially overzealous about the Young Earth Creationist idea, the way I am about Heaven's Glass and Immortality. I always imagined the Bible troll asking it in a most snide tone, perhaps not unlike a tone I take when feeling cynical, which I do more often than not.

Oh sure, you wanna form Pangea again, first step, after fooling all the people all the time, is shatter Heaven with a bunch of asteroids. Cosmic radiation would vaporize all life in a flash flood of light. No need to wait millions of years.

This 26,000 year cycle is not something new in spiritual circles. They call it The Precession of The Equinoxes. I remember first hearing about it a bit before 2012, from the now deceased David Wilcock, who committed suicide just 2 months ago, on 4/20/26.

Promoting this 26,000 year cycle as something good seems quite malicious IMO. Hopefully 2026 can be the year we break The Chains of The Evil Precession.

Interesting coincidence, yesterday I ran a GoogleAI search on David Wilcock, curious if any new information had been revealed about his suicide. Three times did GoogleAI hallucinate, telling me he was still alive. It hallucinated once, I said, Huh? then it apologized. Then I shut the browser and searched again in a new browser. It hallucinated again, I said, Huh? It hallucinated again. I said the hallucination is strong with you today. Then it apologized, saying it was looking at an old timeline.

Spongy Iris wrote:

Spongy Iris wrote:

Im a BM wrote:

Spongy Iris wrote:

sealover wrote:

"Pangea" happened more than once. More than once, there was a single "supercontinent". More than once that supercontinent broke up into smaller, separate continents.

.

A cynical POV could be, the world is absolutely destroyed every 26,000 years, the continents get smushed back together, then it's better luck next time.

Oh, so cynical!

But you have plate tectonics moving orders of magnitude faster than the slow moving convection currents of viscous mantle can drag the plates along and make them split up or crash into each other and join together.

It's a long series of relatively SMALL cataclysmic events. A lot of earthquakes, tsunamis, volcanic eruptions and such, but no single ONE of them being a destructive event of Biblical proportions.

Big asteroids, on the other hand, can do things on a scale that plate tectonics cannot. The last few MASS EXTINCTION events in the last half billion years were all asteroid induced.

Hey, if you think it's wild that the Earth could be more than 4600 million years old, try projecting the trends out into the future, 1000-2000 million years from NOW.

The sun will continue to grow more luminous every year.

Smaller and smaller atmospheric concentrations of greenhouse gases will be enough to overheat the planet.

Long after all life on Earth is baked to death, the atmosphere gets hot enough that even water molecules have enough kinetic energy to escape to space.

But then, another 1000-2000 million years later, the sun swells up into a red giant and basically vaporizes the whole planet.

So, count your blessings!

26,000 years is the blink of an eye in geologic time.

But those REALLY big asteroids used to hit more than 2000 million years ago.

The kind that were big enough to see the craters they left on the moon with the naked eye, from Earth.

THOSE massive asteroids used to trigger global plate tectonic chain reactions.

And they mark the bottom (pure chert) layer of every banded iron formation layer sequence in the last 3000 million years or so.

Evolution is so much fun to know about.

I saw a river otter this morning. He climbed on to a log in the water to eat a fish he just caught. He looked a lot like a seal in that position.

I was thinking how cool it was that the pinnipeds (seals, seal lions, walrus and such) moved off the land and started living in the sea about 20 million years ago. And how cool is was that the cetaceans (whales, dolphins, etc.) moved off land and started living in the sea more than forty million years ago.

It is a far more beautiful story than any HUMAN could write for the Bible.

I give the Old Testament humans credit for an accurate description of the history they were actually witness to, such as the drying of the climate around the Garden of Eden.

But they were only making wild ass guesses, and very ignorant ones at that, regarding anything that happened before humans were there to witness it.

Are you familiar with the "Inherit the Wind" story?

The "expert" witness in the Scope's "monkey trial" was asked about the Genesis version of creation.

Exactly how LONG was the FIRST DAY of creation?

Was it a 24-hour day? Based on what? No rotating Earth for reference.

Was it a 26,000-YEAR day?

Was it a more than 13,000-million-year day?

That was only the most RECENT "big bang" in the cycle!

Earth Sciences should be a complement to the Bible, not a replacement IMO.

See, all I did now is just revise my interpretation of the very first verse, In the beginning.

The idea of the current Heaven and Earth being reformed 26,000 years ago still stands.

But I had already gotten asked what was meant, by a Bible troll more than a decade ago, in a chat online, when was, In the beginning. I never forgot that question, tho I didn't have a good answer back then. I have never been especially overzealous about the Young Earth Creationist idea, the way I am about Heaven's Glass and Immortality. I always imagined the Bible troll asking it in a most snide tone, perhaps not unlike a tone I take when feeling cynical, which I do more often than not.

Oh sure, you wanna form Pangea again, first step, after fooling all the people all the time, is shatter Heaven with a bunch of asteroids. Cosmic radiation would vaporize all life in a flash flood of light. No need to wait millions of years.

This 26,000 year cycle is not something new in spiritual circles. They call it The Precession of The Equinoxes. I remember first hearing about it a bit before 2012, from the now deceased David Wilcock, who committed suicide just 2 months ago, on 4/20/26.

Promoting this 26,000 year cycle as something good seems quite malicious IMO. Hopefully 2026 can be the year we break The Chains of The Evil Precession.

Interesting coincidence, yesterday I ran a GoogleAI search on David Wilcock, curious if any new information had been revealed about his suicide. Three times did GoogleAI hallucinate, telling me he was still alive. It hallucinated once, I said, Huh? then it apologized. Then I shut the browser and searched again in a new browser. It hallucinated again, I said, Huh? It hallucinated again. I said the hallucination is strong with you today. Then it apologized, saying it was looking at an old timeline.

For a rather jaded mockery of The Precession of The Equinoxes, check out the film Bugonia. Available on Netflix.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bd_5HcTujfc

Bugonia is a remake of the Korean film, Save The Green Planet. Available on AppleTV.

https://youtu.be/NhM2PSNvArg?si=lO6PF7841u5MwBGb

Im a BM wrote:The last few MASS EXTINCTION events in the last half billion years were all asteroid induced.

Im a BM wrote:Smaller and smaller atmospheric concentrations of greenhouse gases will be enough to overheat the planet.

Im a BM wrote:Long after all life on Earth is baked to death, the atmosphere gets hot enough that even water molecules have enough kinetic energy to escape to space.

Im a BM wrote:Evolution is so much fun to know about.

Im a BM wrote: He looked a lot like a seal in that position.

Im a BM wrote:It is a far more beautiful story than any HUMAN could write for the Bible.

IBdaMann wrote:

Im a BM wrote:The last few MASS EXTINCTION events in the last half billion years were all asteroid induced.

Did your omniscience tell you this?

Im a BM wrote:Smaller and smaller atmospheric concentrations of greenhouse gases will be enough to overheat the planet.

How do you figure? When will physics violations begin working?

Im a BM wrote:Long after all life on Earth is baked to death, the atmosphere gets hot enough that even water molecules have enough kinetic energy to escape to space.

This doesn't make any sense, except for the part where you assert that thermal energy is kinetic energy, which is simply science illiteracy at its finest.

Im a BM wrote:Evolution is so much fun to know about.

Do you know anything about it?

Im a BM wrote: He looked a lot like a seal in that position.

I bet he looked with his eyes like all animals, regardless of their position.

Im a BM wrote:It is a far more beautiful story than any HUMAN could write for the Bible.

Your fellow Climate lemmings would disagree; they believe that the story of the Climate goddess is more beautiful than any other product of human activity.

Im a BM wrote:Your wife, kids, and future grandkids can be proud of that.

Im a BM wrote:
Earth science has its own set of multiple lines of evidence that all support the same conclusion regarding age of the Earth, or how long ago some particular sediment layer was deposited.

Im a BM wrote:
Biology has a huge constraint on a less than 26,000 year time frame.

Im a BM wrote:
Whales have bodies that work very well in the sea, but are a deadly liability on land, or even shallow water.

Whale ancestors had bodies that worked very well on land, but only could survive in very shallow water close to shore.

Im a BM wrote:
I cannot fathom how you get enough generations within a time frame less than 26,000 years for the mutations and natural selection to get you from landlubber, shallow sea dabbler, to whale.

Im a BM wrote:
If you invoke intelligent design, you imply a very intelligent designer.

Im a BM wrote:
Natural processes such as plate tectonics are very slow, barely centimeters per year of movement. 26,000 years is barely time to get one kilometer further.

Im a BM wrote:
You can see how well South America and Africa fit together as puzzle pieces, divided along a mid atlantic spreading sea floor.

To me, the actual natural history of the Earth and the life it supports is a far more interesting and beautiful story than anything in our mythology.

Into the Night wrote:

Im a BM wrote:
Earth science has its own set of multiple lines of evidence that all support the same conclusion regarding age of the Earth, or how long ago some particular sediment layer was deposited.

Earth is not science.
The age of the Earth is unknown.
Void reference fallacy.

Im a BM wrote:
Biology has a huge constraint on a less than 26,000 year time frame.

Argument from randU fallacy.
Biology has no 'constraint' of a given year or years.

Im a BM wrote:
Whales have bodies that work very well in the sea, but are a deadly liability on land, or even shallow water.

Whale ancestors had bodies that worked very well on land, but only could survive in very shallow water close to shore.

Is there a point to this?

Im a BM wrote:
I cannot fathom how you get enough generations within a time frame less than 26,000 years for the mutations and natural selection to get you from landlubber, shallow sea dabbler, to whale.

What 'mutations'? What 'natural selection'?

Im a BM wrote:
If you invoke intelligent design, you imply a very intelligent designer.

Why do you claim to know the level of intelligence of a designer? Omniscience fallacy.
The Theory of Evolution is not a theory of science. It is a fundamentalist style religion.
There is no 'Theory of Natural Selection'.

Im a BM wrote:
Natural processes such as plate tectonics are very slow, barely centimeters per year of movement. 26,000 years is barely time to get one kilometer further.

The Pacific plate is currently moving northwest at a rate of 1km every 9090 years.
In 26,000 years the Pacific plate will have moved 2.86km (assuming it does change direction or speed in that time).

Im a BM wrote:
You can see how well South America and Africa fit together as puzzle pieces, divided along a mid atlantic spreading sea floor.

To me, the actual natural history of the Earth and the life it supports is a far more interesting and beautiful story than anything in our mythology.

What about plate tectonics precludes any mythology, or any god or gods?

Into the Night wrote:

Im a BM wrote:
Earth science has its own set of multiple lines of evidence that all support the same conclusion regarding age of the Earth, or how long ago some particular sediment layer was deposited.

Earth is not science.
The age of the Earth is unknown.
Void reference fallacy.

Im a BM wrote:
Biology has a huge constraint on a less than 26,000 year time frame.

Argument from randU fallacy.
Biology has no 'constraint' of a given year or years.

Im a BM wrote:
Whales have bodies that work very well in the sea, but are a deadly liability on land, or even shallow water.

Whale ancestors had bodies that worked very well on land, but only could survive in very shallow water close to shore.

Is there a point to this?

Im a BM wrote:
I cannot fathom how you get enough generations within a time frame less than 26,000 years for the mutations and natural selection to get you from landlubber, shallow sea dabbler, to whale.

What 'mutations'? What 'natural selection'?

Im a BM wrote:
If you invoke intelligent design, you imply a very intelligent designer.

Why do you claim to know the level of intelligence of a designer? Omniscience fallacy.
The Theory of Evolution is not a theory of science. It is a fundamentalist style religion.
There is no 'Theory of Natural Selection'.

Im a BM wrote:
Natural processes such as plate tectonics are very slow, barely centimeters per year of movement. 26,000 years is barely time to get one kilometer further.

The Pacific plate is currently moving northwest at a rate of 1km every 9090 years.
In 26,000 years the Pacific plate will have moved 2.86km (assuming it does change direction or speed in that time).

Im a BM wrote:
You can see how well South America and Africa fit together as puzzle pieces, divided along a mid atlantic spreading sea floor.

To me, the actual natural history of the Earth and the life it supports is a far more interesting and beautiful story than anything in our mythology.

What about plate tectonics precludes any mythology, or any god or gods?

Im a BM wrote:
Into the Night, you pretend to be a "chemist".

Im a BM wrote:
Here is your chance to show off your chemistry knowledge.

Im a BM wrote:
Hydrogen peroxide, H2O2... The stuff you see the guys lined up along the edge of the reflecting pool pouring directly from the concentrated reagent bottles a few inches from the edge where that new blue plastic liner is held by epoxy, etc...

Im a BM wrote:
As a "chemist", what kind of reactions could H2O2 be doing right where it was at its highest concentration in the water?

Im a BM wrote:
What kind of "chemical" is hydrogen peroxide?

Im a BM wrote:
Is there any possibility that H2O2 reacted chemically in some way with that new plastic liner and the glue holding it down?

Im a BM wrote:
Is it just coincidence that the liner separates the most at the places closest to the edge? Or is that just solid proof that vandals attacked from the edge?

Im a BM wrote:
Why isn't the liner separating at all under the huge green rectangle that remains in the middle, outlined by a slightly larger blue rectangle?

Im a BM wrote:
Proof that the vandals couldn't go far enough out from the edge to mess with it!

Im a BM wrote:
No chemistry involved.. Just TDS afflicted lunatics with some kind of knife.