Troll Songs and Quote identification contest

Im a BM wrote:
Here is a great one I saw for the first time a couple of days ago.

"Global Warming and Climate Change are a WACKY religion based on HATRED and intolerance."

Im a BM wrote:

Swan wrote:

Im a BM wrote:
Here is a great one I saw for the first time a couple of days ago.

"Global Warming and Climate Change are a WACKY religion based on HATRED and intolerance."

That would be Islam

Actually, this was a quote from IBdaMann. Not Islam.

Im a BM wrote:
Okay, here is a set of quotes from the responses I got in the first few hours after my very first post. Before it escalated into accusations of Marxist conspiracies.

Im a BM wrote:
"You would do well to learn some chemistry and other basic science."

Im a BM wrote:
"You are ignoring a concept in chemistry called 'buffering'. You should probably spend more time learning the chemistry of acid base reactions."

Im a BM wrote:
"You are a liar. You came to this site to preach non science gibber babble."

Im a BM wrote:
"Chemistry is not your strength. You should give up pretending it is."

Im a BM wrote:
"Go and learn some chemistry. You are sounding like an idiot."

Im a BM wrote:
"You do not have a degree in chemistry. That much is painfully obvious."

Im a BM wrote:
"Science is not your strong suit."

Im a BM wrote:
"Your reality ignores chemistry and the laws of physics. It is obvious you don't even understand the concept of buffering".

Im a BM wrote:
All this within a few hours of my first post.

Im a BM wrote:
Yet, more than a year later, the same two trolls make it clear that they still don't understand that hydrogen ions are protons. (those quotes later)

Im a BM wrote:
Indeed, it turns out that troll buffering is the opposite of what chemists think. (those quotes later)

Im a BM wrote:
While never acknowledging that maybe I DO have a degree in chemistry, the desperate effort to discredit never ended.

Im a BM wrote:
"The idiots who cite your research aren't really scientists."

Im a BM wrote:
"So, Mr. Chemistry Genius, the correct answer is that if you were to get your hands on some magical acid whose pH is 0.0, and you were the add one single drop to one liter/litre of pure water (pH 7.0) and one single drop to one liter of sea water (pH 8.4), the impact of a drop of acid would be more pronounced on the sea water than on the pure water."

Im a BM wrote:

Swan wrote:

Im a BM wrote:
"So, Mr. Chemistry Genius, the correct answer is that if you were to get your hands on some magical acid whose pH is 0.0, and you were the add one single drop to one liter/litre of pure water (pH 7.0) and one single drop to one liter of sea water (pH 8.4), the impact of a drop of acid would be more pronounced on the sea water than on the pure water."

Do you have any magical acid?

I don't have any right now.

But it is very EASY to make a "magical acid whose pH is 0.0"

No special chants or animal sacrifices required.

Just use a strong acid (sulfuric, nitric, hydrochloric, etc.) and mix up a 1.0 N solution. For hydrochloric acid, this would be a 1.0 molar solution, as it has 1 proton per mole that can dissociate. For sulfuric acid, a 1.0 N solution would be 0.5 M (molar), because it has two protons per mole that can dissociate.

A 1.0 N solution of strong acid has 1 mole per liter hydrogen ion concentration.

Expressed as pH, 1.0 M = 10 to the ZERO power. Therefore, pH = 0.0.

A troll who never actually studied chemistry or math might think that this is magic.

Im a BM wrote:
Such a scientifically illiterate troll might also imagine that an impact most people would call "indiscernable" (a drop of acid in sea water) is actually "pronounced".

Im a BM wrote:
"You should learn the concept of buffering" said the very same troll.

GasGuzzler wrote:

Im a BM wrote:

Swan wrote:

Im a BM wrote:
"So, Mr. Chemistry Genius, the correct answer is that if you were to get your hands on some magical acid whose pH is 0.0, and you were the add one single drop to one liter/litre of pure water (pH 7.0) and one single drop to one liter of sea water (pH 8.4), the impact of a drop of acid would be more pronounced on the sea water than on the pure water."

Do you have any magical acid?

I don't have any right now.

But it is very EASY to make a "magical acid whose pH is 0.0"

No special chants or animal sacrifices required.

Just use a strong acid (sulfuric, nitric, hydrochloric, etc.) and mix up a 1.0 N solution. For hydrochloric acid, this would be a 1.0 molar solution, as it has 1 proton per mole that can dissociate. For sulfuric acid, a 1.0 N solution would be 0.5 M (molar), because it has two protons per mole that can dissociate.

A 1.0 N solution of strong acid has 1 mole per liter hydrogen ion concentration.

Expressed as pH, 1.0 M = 10 to the ZERO power. Therefore, pH = 0.0.

A troll who never actually studied chemistry or math might think that this is magic.

Such a scientifically illiterate troll might also imagine that an impact most people would call "indiscernable" (a drop of acid in sea water) is actually "pronounced".

"You should learn the concept of buffering" said the very same troll.

....and the troll claiming global warming by way of magic gas is pretending that he forgot we were engaged is a discussion about heat. I have not forgotten and as it stands right now, you have run away from this hot button issue and thought it more important to cry about someone having your name and address that you posted on line.

Do you not have the stomach to continue our discussion about heat?

Into the Night wrote:

Im a BM wrote:
"So, Mr. Chemistry Genius, the correct answer is that if you were to get your hands on some magical acid whose pH is 0.0, and you were the add one single drop to one liter/litre of pure water (pH 7.0) and one single drop to one liter of sea water (pH 8.4), the impact of a drop of acid would be more pronounced on the sea water than on the pure water."

Still don't get the idea of buffering, do you?

Im a BM wrote: "Alligators are amphibians" Because science is just a word game.

Im a BM wrote:

Into the Night wrote:

Im a BM wrote:
"So, Mr. Chemistry Genius, the correct answer is that if you were to get your hands on some magical acid whose pH is 0.0, and you were the add one single drop to one liter/litre of pure water (pH 7.0) and one single drop to one liter of sea water (pH 8.4), the impact of a drop of acid would be more pronounced on the sea water than on the pure water."

Still don't get the idea of buffering, do you?

Clearly, whoever wrote the quote at the top doesn't get the idea of buffering. In fact, this is the OPPOSITE of buffering.

I guess if we plugged in our "change to the acid" meter, we would get the numbers that show the pronounced impact a drop of acid has on one liter/litre of sea water. So much more pronounced than the "change to the acid" seen with a drop of acid acid added to one liter/litre of pure water.

The units used to measure "change to the acid" are exponential or logarithmic or something. Actually, they are "magical".

IBdaMann wrote:

Im a BM wrote: "Alligators are amphibians" Because science is just a word game.

"Alligators are not amphibians" because English doesn't apply when communicating in English.

Swan wrote: Alligators are reptiles.

Swan wrote: See I knew that you would see it my way eventually

IBdaMann wrote:

Swan wrote: Alligators are reptiles.

Yes, they are.

Swan wrote: See I knew that you would see it my way eventually

All you ever had to do to get me to see it your way was to see it my way.

Swan wrote:

IBdaMann wrote:

Swan wrote: Alligators are reptiles.

Yes, they are.

Swan wrote: See I knew that you would see it my way eventually

All you ever had to do to get me to see it your way was to see it my way.

See what happens when you take your Chlorpromazine on time

Im a BM wrote:
Troll Quote:

"Nitrous oxide has two molecules of nitrogen and one molecule of oxygen".


At least IdaBM would have come up with a ridiculous word game to insist that this statement is scientifically correct.

Lighting each other up with infrared, absorbing, reemitting, and keeping the heat close to the surface in the process. A little longer residence time for the heat

, which results in higher temperature.

Im a BM wrote:Troll Quote:

"Nitrous oxide has two molecules of nitrogen and one molecule of oxygen".


At least IdaBM would have come up with a ridiculous word game to insist that this statement is scientifically correct.

Im a BM wrote:

Swan wrote:

IBdaMann wrote:

Swan wrote: Alligators are reptiles.

Yes, they are.

Swan wrote: See I knew that you would see it my way eventually

All you ever had to do to get me to see it your way was to see it my way.

See what happens when you take your Chlorpromazine on time

Troll Quote:

"Nitrous oxide has two molecules of nitrogen and one molecule of oxygen".


At least IdaBM would have come up with a ridiculous word game to insist that this statement is scientifically correct.