weather

keepit wrote: Doesn't the weather seem a LITTLE bit extreme nowadays?

keepit wrote:
ibd,
When i went to college i learned the you had to have certain qualifications to take certain courses. It's evident that you aren't qualified to discuss the aforementioned subject matter because you don't understand the phrase
"extreme weather".

sealover wrote:

keepit wrote:
ibd,
When i went to college i learned the you had to have certain qualifications to take certain courses. It's evident that you aren't qualified to discuss the aforementioned subject matter because you don't understand the phrase
"extreme weather".

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

The concept of "extreme weather" is self evident and requires no definition.

Fortunately, more and more people finally get it.

Especially after all the extreme weather that occurred just in the past year.

While the "skeptics" still seek some scapegoat other than human activity to account for it, very few of them are still in denial about the reality of its occurrence.

What I hoped Branner would be willing to do is make rational discussion of this subject possible on his website.

Rational discussion is still not an option here, and probably never will be.

Sigh...

keepit wrote:ibd,... It's evident that you aren't qualified to discuss the aforementioned subject matter because you don't understand the phrase
"extreme weather".

sealover wrote: The concept of "extreme weather" is self evident and requires no definition.

sealover wrote: Especially after all the extreme weather that occurred just in the past year.

IBdaMann wrote:

sealover wrote: The concept of "extreme weather" is self evident and requires no definition.

When you wonder how it is that everyone knows that you are a scientifically illiterate loser begging for attention, wonder no further. You never really have any intention of discussing anything rationally, which begs the question as to why you are drawn to this site like a moth to light. Before playing Scrabble, players first select an authoritative source (usually a particular dictionary) should there arise any disputes over words. In any discussion, terms are defined to prevent the discussion from coming to a halt at the first instance of someone like you hurling undefined buzzwords because he doesn't have a clue what he's talking about. Science defines everything because ambiguity is not permitted in that namespace.

You, never wish to discuss anything; you only wish to preach your Global Warming religion. As such, you refuse to define anything, so as to give yourself as many avenues to flee in cowardice as possible.

sealover wrote: Especially after all the extreme weather that occurred just in the past year.

There hasn't been any.

While the Robups of the world still seek the scapegoat of "human activity" to blame for the lack of attention they receive, they remain in denial about the reality of their extreme shortcomings. When keepit is in your camp, you know theirs a glitch in your thinking.

I think we can all appreciate how Branner has made this a site of rational discussion for all subjects for all people.

sealover wrote:
The concept of "extreme weather" is self evident and requires no definition.

sealover wrote:
Fortunately, more and more people finally get it.

sealover wrote:
Especially after all the extreme weather that occurred just in the past year.

sealover wrote:
While the "skeptics" still seek some scapegoat other than human activity to account for it, very few of them are still in denial about the reality of its occurrence.

sealover wrote:
What I hoped Branner would be willing to do is make rational discussion of this subject possible on his website.

sealover wrote:
Rational discussion is still not an option here, and probably never will be.

GasGuzzler wrote:

sealover wrote:
The concept of "extreme weather" is self evident and requires no definition.

The concept of climate religion is self evident and requires no definition.

sealover wrote:
Fortunately, more and more people finally get it.

Fortunately, more and more people are losing faith in your religion.

sealover wrote:
Especially after all the extreme weather that occurred just in the past year.

How much did we have? How do we know if there was more than in 1934? Is there a measurable value to extreme weather?

sealover wrote:
While the "skeptics" still seek some scapegoat other than human activity to account for it, very few of them are still in denial about the reality of its occurrence.

I am reminded of the extremely strong thunderstorm than ravaged my state of Iowa on August 10th 2020. It was truly a once in a lifetime event. Some nut job, much like yourself, tried to blame global warming.

Conversation went like this....

Moron: It was global warming.
Me: Nope.
Moron: But it was hotter than hell that day!
Me: It was 82, exactly the average for the last 100 years.
Moron: But all the heat was trapped at the surface giving the storm it's "fuel".
Me: No, a storm like that requires warm air rising into cold dry air, and fast...violently fast. It took an vast amount of COLD air to sustain the strength of that storm.
Moron: Well then wasn't global warming, it was climate change.
Me: Yes, that's correct. You are a moron.

sealover wrote:
What I hoped Branner would be willing to do is make rational discussion of this subject possible on his website.

What you hoped Branner would do is ban everyone who disagrees with you. Tell me I'm wrong.

sealover wrote:
Rational discussion is still not an option here, and probably never will be.

Rational discussions happen all the time right here. You choose to not participate. You find it somehow thrilling to hop on here every once in a while, preach a squirt of your piss religion, and then run like the little chicken shit you are for 7-10 days pretending no one asked you any questions or challenged you in any way. Rinse and repeat. You're a spineless fuk.

It's is YOU who is not engaging in ANY discussion. Are you capable?

GasGuzzler wrote: Some nut job, much like yourself, tried to blame global warming.

James_ wrote:

IBdaMann wrote:

sealover wrote: The concept of "extreme weather" is self evident and requires no definition.

When you wonder how it is that everyone knows that you are a scientifically illiterate loser begging for attention, wonder no further. You never really have any intention of discussing anything rationally, which begs the question as to why you are drawn to this site like a moth to light. Before playing Scrabble, players first select an authoritative source (usually a particular dictionary) should there arise any disputes over words. In any discussion, terms are defined to prevent the discussion from coming to a halt at the first instance of someone like you hurling undefined buzzwords because he doesn't have a clue what he's talking about. Science defines everything because ambiguity is not permitted in that namespace.

You, never wish to discuss anything; you only wish to preach your Global Warming religion. As such, you refuse to define anything, so as to give yourself as many avenues to flee in cowardice as possible.

sealover wrote: Especially after all the extreme weather that occurred just in the past year.

There hasn't been any.

While the Robups of the world still seek the scapegoat of "human activity" to blame for the lack of attention they receive, they remain in denial about the reality of their extreme shortcomings. When keepit is in your camp, you know theirs a glitch in your thinking.

I think we can all appreciate how Branner has made this a site of rational discussion for all subjects for all people.

This thread is an extreme whether event. It's like January 2023 in February 2024.
I might "see" if I can find what the ozone layer and jet stream were doing before and during a "strong" change in the weather. Some might say roid rage but I don't think ODSs are classified as steroids..........,yet.

https://www.noaa.gov/news/us-struck-with-historic-number-of-billion-dollar-disasters-in-2023

And yes, seal over did make an excellent point, most but not all sentences end with a.. "end with a period." sealover thinks this should be changed. What are you going to do about it

sealover wrote:

GasGuzzler wrote:

sealover wrote:
The concept of "extreme weather" is self evident and requires no definition.

The concept of climate religion is self evident and requires no definition.

sealover wrote:
Fortunately, more and more people finally get it.

Fortunately, more and more people are losing faith in your religion.

sealover wrote:
Especially after all the extreme weather that occurred just in the past year.

How much did we have? How do we know if there was more than in 1934? Is there a measurable value to extreme weather?

sealover wrote:
While the "skeptics" still seek some scapegoat other than human activity to account for it, very few of them are still in denial about the reality of its occurrence.

I am reminded of the extremely strong thunderstorm than ravaged my state of Iowa on August 10th 2020. It was truly a once in a lifetime event. Some nut job, much like yourself, tried to blame global warming.

Conversation went like this....

Moron: It was global warming.
Me: Nope.
Moron: But it was hotter than hell that day!
Me: It was 82, exactly the average for the last 100 years.
Moron: But all the heat was trapped at the surface giving the storm it's "fuel".
Me: No, a storm like that requires warm air rising into cold dry air, and fast...violently fast. It took an vast amount of COLD air to sustain the strength of that storm.
Moron: Well then wasn't global warming, it was climate change.
Me: Yes, that's correct. You are a moron.

sealover wrote:
What I hoped Branner would be willing to do is make rational discussion of this subject possible on his website.

What you hoped Branner would do is ban everyone who disagrees with you. Tell me I'm wrong.

sealover wrote:
Rational discussion is still not an option here, and probably never will be.

Rational discussions happen all the time right here. You choose to not participate. You find it somehow thrilling to hop on here every once in a while, preach a squirt of your piss religion, and then run like the little chicken shit you are for 7-10 days pretending no one asked you any questions or challenged you in any way. Rinse and repeat. You're a spineless fuk.

It's is YOU who is not engaging in ANY discussion. Are you capable?

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

There are 1700 other members besides myself from whom you could be seeking attention.

Why get so obsessed with ME?

I really don't want YOUR attention.

Into the Night wrote:

sealover wrote:

GasGuzzler wrote:

sealover wrote:
The concept of "extreme weather" is self evident and requires no definition.

The concept of climate religion is self evident and requires no definition.

sealover wrote:
Fortunately, more and more people finally get it.

Fortunately, more and more people are losing faith in your religion.

sealover wrote:
Especially after all the extreme weather that occurred just in the past year.

How much did we have? How do we know if there was more than in 1934? Is there a measurable value to extreme weather?

sealover wrote:
While the "skeptics" still seek some scapegoat other than human activity to account for it, very few of them are still in denial about the reality of its occurrence.

I am reminded of the extremely strong thunderstorm than ravaged my state of Iowa on August 10th 2020. It was truly a once in a lifetime event. Some nut job, much like yourself, tried to blame global warming.

Conversation went like this....

Moron: It was global warming.
Me: Nope.
Moron: But it was hotter than hell that day!
Me: It was 82, exactly the average for the last 100 years.
Moron: But all the heat was trapped at the surface giving the storm it's "fuel".
Me: No, a storm like that requires warm air rising into cold dry air, and fast...violently fast. It took an vast amount of COLD air to sustain the strength of that storm.
Moron: Well then wasn't global warming, it was climate change.
Me: Yes, that's correct. You are a moron.

sealover wrote:
What I hoped Branner would be willing to do is make rational discussion of this subject possible on his website.

What you hoped Branner would do is ban everyone who disagrees with you. Tell me I'm wrong.

sealover wrote:
Rational discussion is still not an option here, and probably never will be.

Rational discussions happen all the time right here. You choose to not participate. You find it somehow thrilling to hop on here every once in a while, preach a squirt of your piss religion, and then run like the little chicken shit you are for 7-10 days pretending no one asked you any questions or challenged you in any way. Rinse and repeat. You're a spineless fuk.

It's is YOU who is not engaging in ANY discussion. Are you capable?

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

There are 1700 other members besides myself from whom you could be seeking attention.

Why get so obsessed with ME?

I really don't want YOUR attention.

Inversion fallacy. It is YOU that craves attention. You cannot handle someone ignoring you.
There are not 1700 posters active.

Into the Night wrote:

The ozone layer is not weather and is not controlled by weather. It is also not being depleted.

keepit wrote:
Doesn't the weather seem a LITTLE bit extreme nowadays?

keepit wrote:
ibd,
When i went to college i learned the you had to have certain qualifications to take certain courses. It's evident that you aren't qualified to discuss the aforementioned subject matter because you don't understand the phrase
"extreme weather".

James_ wrote:

Into the Night wrote:

The ozone layer is not weather and is not controlled by weather. It is also not being depleted.

https://youtu.be/vG90NtdsL6E

Illegal goal post moving. The weather is not the issue. Can you define "weather"? When a day comes along when it does not rain in Seattle is called "Climate Change".

We are not talking about weather someone's brain is water logged or not.
The weather is what happens in the MBL (Marine Boundary Layer) and influences the flora and fauna which are habitats and ecosystems. And it seems that ODSs (Ozone Depleting Substances) and deforestation might be the 2 things that most affect the weather.

Into the Night wrote:

Ozone is not weather and is not being depleted.

James_ wrote:

Into the Night wrote:

Ozone is not weather and is not being depleted.

If I told you it's depleted, it's depleted.

James_ wrote:
What part of "debate" do you not understand?

James_ wrote:
Did the Pineapple Express in California drop a coconut on your
head in Florida?

James_ wrote:
Still, you might be right. If ozone is not allowed to occur then it is not being depleted.

James_ wrote:
It can only be depleted from the level it was.

James_ wrote:
The ozone layer has been depleted would be using proper grammar in the English language
that you so love and cherish.

James_ wrote: If I told you it's depleted, it's depleted.

James_ wrote: Still, you might be right.

IBdaMann wrote:

James_ wrote: If I told you it's depleted, it's depleted.

The earth is now officially climate-depleted and, as Swan can tell you, it is moraine-infested. The earth had hardly any moraines until the Industrial Revolution forced all the exploited proletariat to abandon their moraines for cheaper proxy measures ... and all I wanted was to have a life free from Christians telling me that I couldn't have a life, but then Swan keeps telling me that I can't have a life until I get a life.

James_ wrote: Still, you might be right.

Moving, there is no chance.

James_ wrote: What Swan will hate is when he finds out everything that comes with or involves Bessler's Wheel.

James_ wrote: I might be able to build a variation using my (?) invention that would use 3 different methods of adding energy to the wheel.

James_ wrote: 2 of those methods have been called "failed" builds by him and his associates. That is what he and his friends think of my efforts because I'm not an American like him.

James_ wrote: He wants people to know this is what makes America the Greatest country in the world.

James_ wrote: He is ultra-MAGAt (maggot) after all.

James_ wrote: Johann Bessler's Wheel is going to be way cooler than anything I ever thought.

IBdaMann wrote:

James_ wrote: What Swan will hate is when he finds out everything that comes with or involves Bessler's Wheel.

I know! What's he thinking?

James_ wrote: I might be able to build a variation using my (?) invention that would use 3 different methods of adding energy to the wheel.

I have no idea why Swan denies that three different methods can't create energy to provide to the wheel. He'll probably just shout something along the lines of "you can't violate the 1st law of thermodynamics."

I totally get where you're coming from.

James_ wrote: 2 of those methods have been called "failed" builds by him and his associates. That is what he and his friends think of my efforts because I'm not an American like him.

Swan will rue the day of your triumph because he doesn't want to acknowledge that you can have a life without Christians and the first law of thermodynamics.

James_ wrote: He wants people to know this is what makes America the Greatest country in the world.

He thinks that the "rule of law" means adherence to the laws of physics. We the People determine if we are going to adhere to physcs, not some ozone-depleted jet stream.

James_ wrote: He is ultra-MAGAt (maggot) after all.

Swan probably HATES tyranny. What is he thinking?

James_ wrote: Johann Bessler's Wheel is going to be way cooler than anything I ever thought.

I'm waiting for the tactical military power supply.

IBdaMann wrote:

James_ wrote: What Swan will hate is when he finds out everything that comes with or involves Bessler's Wheel.

I know! What's he thinking?

James_ wrote: 2 of those methods have been called "failed" builds by him and his associates. That is what he and his friends think of my efforts because I'm not an American like him.

IBdaMann wrote:
Swan will rue the day of your triumph because he doesn't want to acknowledge that you can have a life without Christians and the first law of thermodynamics.

keepit wrote:
Doesn't the weather seem a LITTLE bit extreme nowadays?

James_ wrote:

IBdaMann wrote:

James_ wrote: What Swan will hate is when he finds out everything that comes with or involves Bessler's Wheel.

I know! What's he thinking?

James_ wrote: I might be able to build a variation using my (?) invention that would use 3 different methods of adding energy to the wheel.

I have no idea why Swan denies that three different methods can't create energy to provide to the wheel. He'll probably just shout something along the lines of "you can't violate the 1st law of thermodynamics."

I totally get where you're coming from.

James_ wrote: 2 of those methods have been called "failed" builds by him and his associates. That is what he and his friends think of my efforts because I'm not an American like him.

Swan will rue the day of your triumph because he doesn't want to acknowledge that you can have a life without Christians and the first law of thermodynamics.

James_ wrote: He wants people to know this is what makes America the Greatest country in the world.

He thinks that the "rule of law" means adherence to the laws of physics. We the People determine if we are going to adhere to physcs, not some ozone-depleted jet stream.

James_ wrote: He is ultra-MAGAt (maggot) after all.

Swan probably HATES tyranny. What is he thinking?

James_ wrote: Johann Bessler's Wheel is going to be way cooler than anything I ever thought.

I'm waiting for the tactical military power supply.

I won't be surprised if it's used for off grid and emergency power. With anything like a field unit then it'd need to be moved like heavy equipment and then assembled on site. It might be used for power where Ukraine has had its electrical grid damaged by war.

IBdaMann wrote:

James_ wrote: What Swan will hate is when he finds out everything that comes with or involves Bessler's Wheel.

I know! What's he thinking?

He'll need to remember, he saw no reason to work with me.

James_ wrote: 2 of those methods have been called "failed" builds by him and his associates. That is what he and his friends think of my efforts because I'm not an American like him.

IBdaMann wrote:
Swan will rue the day of your triumph because he doesn't want to acknowledge that you can have a life without Christians and the first law of thermodynamics.

I prefer to consider KE = mv = momentum. That tells us that momentum can dictate thermodynamics because mv = 3/2kT. And momentum = 1/2mv^2. It's
all relative as they like to say.

Swan wrote:

LOL sre you still begging Alan to butt bop you again

James_ wrote:

Swan wrote:

LOL sre you still begging Alan to butt bop you again

And this from a guy who said "when I raped you, I did so much damage they had to remove your rectum".

What happens when a white supremacist is ignored. Ask guys what happens in prison because Swan knows.

I get it now Alan. You're not attacking me like it's Jan. 6th because you're defending your country. You're fighting to protect America from terrorists like me.
I'm a threat to your way of life.
Isn't this like when the CSA (Confederate States of America) came into existence?

p.s., Alan, What you're overlooking is that you need to be careful what you post.
Also, with the work I do, it requires mental discipline on my part.