Remember me
▼ Content

working and spending



Page 1 of 3123>
working and spending17-08-2019 21:41
keepit
★★★☆☆
(713)
Here is a rhetoric question but still useful - would you rather work less and spend less or work more and spend more?
Personally i've enjoyed working less and spending less more than working more and spending more.
17-08-2019 23:04
GasGuzzler
★★★★☆
(1477)
I vote work less and spend more.
17-08-2019 23:10
keepit
★★★☆☆
(713)
I don't think your vote will work out.
Working less and spending less is more enjoyable, IMHO, and produces less CO2 and therefore less global warming.
17-08-2019 23:42
GasGuzzler
★★★★☆
(1477)
takeit wrote:
I don't think your vote will work out.

It will work just find so long as you stay out of my pocketbook.

takeit wrote:Working less and spending less is more enjoyable,

your opinion, you are entitled to it. Don't try to force me into it.

takeit wrote:produces less CO2 and therefore less global warming.

You still have yet to explain this phenomenon. You said something about CO2 slowing thermal energy, but heat can't be trapped, stored, or slowed. What now?


spot-
Into the Night is also has delusions of comptance
17-08-2019 23:48
keepit
★★★☆☆
(713)
Gas,
Thermal energy transfer can definitely be slowed.
I don't see how you can deny that.
18-08-2019 00:02
IBdaMannProfile picture★★★★★
(5026)
keepit wrote:
Here is a rhetoric question but still useful - would you rather work less and spend less or work more and spend more?
Personally i've enjoyed working less and spending less more than working more and spending more.

Having kids is EXPENSIVE!

Having the greatest kids in the world is something I wouldn't exchange for anything.

I won't skimp on my kids; that ALWAYS means spending more ... which necessarily means working more.


.


Global Warming: The preferred religion of the scientifically illiterate.

Printing dollars to pay debt doesn't increase the number of dollars. - keepit

When the alt-physics birds sing about "indivisible bodies," we've got pure BS. - VernerHornung

Ah the "Valid Data" myth of ITN/IBD. - tmiddles

Ceist - I couldn't agree with you more. But when money and religion are involved, and there are people who value them above all else, then the lies begin. - trafn

You are completely misunderstanding their use of the word "accumulation"! - Climate Scientist.

The Stefan-Boltzman equation doesn't come up with the correct temperature if greenhouse gases are not considered - Hank

:*sigh* Not the "raw data" crap. - Leafsdude

IB STILL hasn't explained what Planck's Law means. Just more hand waving that it applies to everything and more asserting that the greenhouse effect 'violates' it.- Ceist
18-08-2019 00:45
keepit
★★★☆☆
(713)
I have the same weakness IBD, not that it is really a weakness.
I didn't enjoy it when my kids would spend money on things i wouldn't be able to spend money on, and then say Dad, i'm out of money, could you help a little.
Not that they abused it too much but it was annoying. When my daughter went to paris two times in one month and then asked for money, i drew the line. I still like joking about that incident.
Edited on 18-08-2019 00:49
18-08-2019 01:43
IBdaMannProfile picture★★★★★
(5026)
keepit wrote:
I have the same weakness IBD, not that it is really a weakness.
I didn't enjoy it when my kids would spend money on things i wouldn't be able to spend money on, and then say Dad, i'm out of money, could you help a little.
Not that they abused it too much but it was annoying. When my daughter went to paris two times in one month and then asked for money, i drew the line. I still like joking about that incident.

My kids were early teens when they were in Paris. I knew they would not appreciate the Louvre but I had to take them. They took their selfies with the Mona Lisa, they found the general concept of paintings and sculptures to be moderately neat, and after a little over an hour they were asking me if we could leave.

The same with the Eiffel tower. They thought it was cool going up and peering out over Paris for ten minutes. I think they would have been more likely to want to stay if there had been a 7-11 at the top.

They get to pay their own way the next time they want to go.


.


Global Warming: The preferred religion of the scientifically illiterate.

Printing dollars to pay debt doesn't increase the number of dollars. - keepit

When the alt-physics birds sing about "indivisible bodies," we've got pure BS. - VernerHornung

Ah the "Valid Data" myth of ITN/IBD. - tmiddles

Ceist - I couldn't agree with you more. But when money and religion are involved, and there are people who value them above all else, then the lies begin. - trafn

You are completely misunderstanding their use of the word "accumulation"! - Climate Scientist.

The Stefan-Boltzman equation doesn't come up with the correct temperature if greenhouse gases are not considered - Hank

:*sigh* Not the "raw data" crap. - Leafsdude

IB STILL hasn't explained what Planck's Law means. Just more hand waving that it applies to everything and more asserting that the greenhouse effect 'violates' it.- Ceist
18-08-2019 02:33
GasGuzzler
★★★★☆
(1477)
IBdaMann wrote:
Having the greatest kids in the world is something I wouldn't exchange for anything.


"Haven't met GasGuzzler's kids" fallacy.



spot-
Into the Night is also has delusions of comptance
18-08-2019 02:54
HarveyH55
★★★★☆
(1482)
keepit wrote:
Gas,
Thermal energy transfer can definitely be slowed.
I don't see how you can deny that.


'Slowed' is kind of vague... A few seconds wouldn't really make such a huge difference. I don't see it as significant, long as can lose all that thermal energy before sunrise the next day, when a fresh batch of energy is delivered, weather permitting...

Seems to me, if thermal energy is carried over, from one day to the next, we would have burned up centuries ago. Think it would be a difficult think to test in a laboratory, since only half the sample would be receiving energy, the other half reducing. It's not trapped in a test tube either, the air moves around, the greenhouse gasses not evenly distributed. Clouds play an important role, probably land and water too. There's a lot going on, Global Warming, only focuses on the warming part of it, and nothing else.
18-08-2019 03:04
keepit
★★★☆☆
(713)
Slowed here means long term slowing.
18-08-2019 03:20
IBdaMannProfile picture★★★★★
(5026)
GasGuzzler wrote:
IBdaMann wrote:
Having the greatest kids in the world is something I wouldn't exchange for anything.


"Haven't met GasGuzzler's kids" fallacy.


Good one. I had to catch my breath.


Global Warming: The preferred religion of the scientifically illiterate.

Printing dollars to pay debt doesn't increase the number of dollars. - keepit

When the alt-physics birds sing about "indivisible bodies," we've got pure BS. - VernerHornung

Ah the "Valid Data" myth of ITN/IBD. - tmiddles

Ceist - I couldn't agree with you more. But when money and religion are involved, and there are people who value them above all else, then the lies begin. - trafn

You are completely misunderstanding their use of the word "accumulation"! - Climate Scientist.

The Stefan-Boltzman equation doesn't come up with the correct temperature if greenhouse gases are not considered - Hank

:*sigh* Not the "raw data" crap. - Leafsdude

IB STILL hasn't explained what Planck's Law means. Just more hand waving that it applies to everything and more asserting that the greenhouse effect 'violates' it.- Ceist
18-08-2019 03:22
tmiddlesProfile picture★★★★☆
(1394)
keepit wrote:
Gas,
Thermal energy transfer can definitely be slowed.
I don't see how you can deny that.


The "heat" can be reduced meaning the movement of thermal energy from A to B can be reduced. Heat is the flow of energy from a warm object to a cooler object. There is no need to talk about how fast it moves just that there is less.

If a pizza is put into a padded carrier it reduces the heat of thermal energy leaving the pizza.

The concept of the "Greenhouse effect" as it's currently used (most of the time, when someone isn't talking about an actual greenhouse) is that high frequency light, like white light 5000K, passes right through greenhouse gases, and hits the ground. The ground absorbs it and re-emitts it as infra red which the gasses absorb.

The name is because this happens in an actual greenhouse with the glass.
18-08-2019 03:28
IBdaMannProfile picture★★★★★
(5026)
keepit wrote: Slowed here means long term slowing.

keepit, you are working hard to gain a concession, i.e. that the flow of thermal energy can be "slowed."

Let's move the discussion forward, shall we? Your premise is granted.

In fact, we have technology to control the flow of thermal energy. We have air conditioning and refrigeration. We have space heaters. If there is thermal energy at point A and we want that thermal energy at point B, we can not only move the thermal energy from A to B but we can make it take as long as we want.

So what now?


Global Warming: The preferred religion of the scientifically illiterate.

Printing dollars to pay debt doesn't increase the number of dollars. - keepit

When the alt-physics birds sing about "indivisible bodies," we've got pure BS. - VernerHornung

Ah the "Valid Data" myth of ITN/IBD. - tmiddles

Ceist - I couldn't agree with you more. But when money and religion are involved, and there are people who value them above all else, then the lies begin. - trafn

You are completely misunderstanding their use of the word "accumulation"! - Climate Scientist.

The Stefan-Boltzman equation doesn't come up with the correct temperature if greenhouse gases are not considered - Hank

:*sigh* Not the "raw data" crap. - Leafsdude

IB STILL hasn't explained what Planck's Law means. Just more hand waving that it applies to everything and more asserting that the greenhouse effect 'violates' it.- Ceist
18-08-2019 03:33
keepit
★★★☆☆
(713)
As i see it, the long term slowing of thermal energy transfer to outer space results in an accumulation of thermal energy in the atmosphere and on earth and in oceans and ice.
Help, i'm melting - just kidding.
18-08-2019 04:00
IBdaMannProfile picture★★★★★
(5026)
keepit wrote:As i see it, the long term slowing of thermal energy transfer to outer space results in an accumulation of thermal energy in the atmosphere and on earth and in oceans and ice.

[quibble extent=minor]
Thermal energy is not transferred to outer space.

Thermal radiation is emitted into space. Thermal energy is transferred when that radiation is absorbed by something.

The earth cools when thermal energy is converted to thermal radiation and is emitted into space.
[/quibble]

keepit, are you aware that your theory as stated above, violates the Stefan-Boltzmann law?

The correct terminology for "slowing of thermal energy transfer to outer space" is "earth's Radiance decreases."

The only way for this to happen is if earth's average Temperature decreases.

Radiance and Temperature move in the same direction because Temperature drives Radiance.

If you are arguing that earth's Radiance is decreasing, you are arguing that earth's temperature is decreasing.

I just wanted you to have the benfit of what physics has to say on the matter.

Enjoy!


.


Global Warming: The preferred religion of the scientifically illiterate.

Printing dollars to pay debt doesn't increase the number of dollars. - keepit

When the alt-physics birds sing about "indivisible bodies," we've got pure BS. - VernerHornung

Ah the "Valid Data" myth of ITN/IBD. - tmiddles

Ceist - I couldn't agree with you more. But when money and religion are involved, and there are people who value them above all else, then the lies begin. - trafn

You are completely misunderstanding their use of the word "accumulation"! - Climate Scientist.

The Stefan-Boltzman equation doesn't come up with the correct temperature if greenhouse gases are not considered - Hank

:*sigh* Not the "raw data" crap. - Leafsdude

IB STILL hasn't explained what Planck's Law means. Just more hand waving that it applies to everything and more asserting that the greenhouse effect 'violates' it.- Ceist
18-08-2019 04:17
tmiddlesProfile picture★★★★☆
(1394)
IBdaMann wrote:
If you are arguing that earth's Radiance is decreasing, you are arguing that earth's temperature is decreasing.


"earth's temperature is decreasing." is very indefinite.

Also notably missing from your analysis so far is your understanding for the temperature on the ground level of Venus (where the probes have touched down and where a human would try to walk around or dig a ditch to plant something).

You have not been clear in noting that it's the "surface" temperature for the Stefan-Boltzmann law, and that this "surface" is not of a temperature that is necessarily evenly distributed and does not represent the thermal energy per mass for the entire object.

"Surface" including the gas of the atmosphere.
Edited on 18-08-2019 04:18
18-08-2019 04:37
HarveyH55
★★★★☆
(1482)
keepit wrote:
Slowed here means long term slowing.


Thanks, really cleared that up...

One more quick question, How long, is long term?

I'm just seeing that if there is thermal energy still trapped from the day before, when the sun rises, it's going to just add to the warming. It's going to trap just as much, one day to the next. Would every day be a little warmer, than the previous, and we could always expect tomorrow to be warmer than today?

If we are trapping heat, why does it get cooler? The sun just set about an hour ago, the current temperature is about 14 F lower than the daytime high. We did have some clouds, and a very brief, light shower. Didn't even stop working out in my yard, wanted to finish, just in case we actually got some rain, never happened though. Wait, aren't clouds a greenhouse gas, shouldn't have continued to be warm for a while. Maybe long term, is only a few minutes...
18-08-2019 04:41
keepit
★★★☆☆
(713)
One thing i learned was not to confuse weather with climate.
Long term would be long enough for the temp to heat up for a long time. I would say that would be centuries.
Edited on 18-08-2019 04:43
18-08-2019 04:44
keepit
★★★☆☆
(713)
Wiki is clear about greenhouse gases affect the ideal stephan boltzman equation.
18-08-2019 04:53
IBdaMannProfile picture★★★★★
(5026)
tmiddles wrote:"earth's temperature is decreasing." is very indefinite.

I have been completely consistent for many years. Earth's temperature = earth's average temperature = earth's average global temperature, i.e. a single temperature for the earth that includes the volume of the hydrosphere and the volume of the atmosphere along with the solid surface temperature (whether it has hydrosphere or atmosphere atop). Whether or not it can be measured to within any usable accuracy is another matter completely ... I have defined it unambiguously. My definition delineates everything in the universe as to whether it is a component of the earth's average temperature and what is not.

tmiddles wrote: Also notably missing from your analysis so far is your understanding for the temperature on the ground level of Venus (where the probes have touched down and where a human would try to walk around or dig a ditch to plant something).

Correct. Venus is missing from my analysis because Venus does not affect earth's average global temperature in any substantive way. Venus is irrelevant.

tmiddles wrote: You have not been clear in noting that it's the "surface" temperature for the Stefan-Boltzmann law, and that this "surface" is not of a temperature that is necessarily evenly distributed and does not represent the thermal energy per mass for the entire object.

Are you clear on it now?

tmiddles wrote:"Surface" including the gas of the atmosphere.

... and the volume of the hydrosphere. Average temperature.


.


Global Warming: The preferred religion of the scientifically illiterate.

Printing dollars to pay debt doesn't increase the number of dollars. - keepit

When the alt-physics birds sing about "indivisible bodies," we've got pure BS. - VernerHornung

Ah the "Valid Data" myth of ITN/IBD. - tmiddles

Ceist - I couldn't agree with you more. But when money and religion are involved, and there are people who value them above all else, then the lies begin. - trafn

You are completely misunderstanding their use of the word "accumulation"! - Climate Scientist.

The Stefan-Boltzman equation doesn't come up with the correct temperature if greenhouse gases are not considered - Hank

:*sigh* Not the "raw data" crap. - Leafsdude

IB STILL hasn't explained what Planck's Law means. Just more hand waving that it applies to everything and more asserting that the greenhouse effect 'violates' it.- Ceist
18-08-2019 05:01
tmiddlesProfile picture★★★★☆
(1394)
HarveyH55 wrote:It's going to trap just as much, one day to the next.


The temperature reaches an equilibrium.

If you froze the earth solid right now to 0 Kelvin and then let the sun do it's thing there would be an extended period of thermal energy soaking into the planet, with each day being a little warmer, but eventually there would be an equilibrium.

That's not by the way "thermal energy being trapped" that's thermal energy moving from hot to cold as it always does. In the case above it would be moving from the hot surface towards the cold mass in the middle of earth, and also out into the colder atmosphere.
19-08-2019 07:19
Into the NightProfile picture★★★★★
(9878)
keepit wrote:
I don't think your vote will work out.
Working less and spending less is more enjoyable, IMHO, and produces less CO2 and therefore less global warming.


CO2 is incapable of warming the Earth.


The Parrot Killer
19-08-2019 07:21
Into the NightProfile picture★★★★★
(9878)
keepit wrote:
Gas,
Thermal energy transfer can definitely be slowed.
I don't see how you can deny that.


It is not possible to trap or slow heat.
It is not possible to trap thermal energy. There is always heat.


The Parrot Killer
19-08-2019 07:22
Into the NightProfile picture★★★★★
(9878)
keepit wrote:
Slowed here means long term slowing.


* It is not possible to slow or trap heat (2nd law of thermodynamics
* It is not possible to trap thermal energy. There is always heat. (1st and 2nd laws of thermodynamics).


The Parrot Killer
19-08-2019 07:24
Into the NightProfile picture★★★★★
(9878)
keepit wrote:
As i see it, the long term slowing of thermal energy transfer to outer space results in an accumulation of thermal energy in the atmosphere and on earth and in oceans and ice.
Help, i'm melting - just kidding.


* It is not possible to trap light.
* It is not possible to reduce the radiance of Earth and increase its temperature at the same time.


The Parrot Killer
19-08-2019 07:26
Into the NightProfile picture★★★★★
(9878)
keepit wrote:
One thing i learned was not to confuse weather with climate.
Long term would be long enough for the temp to heat up for a long time. I would say that would be centuries.


* It is not possible to trap or slow heat.
* It is not possible to trap thermal energy. There is always heat.
* It is not possible to trap light.
* It is not possible to reduce the radiance of Earth and increase its temperature at the same time.


The Parrot Killer
19-08-2019 07:27
Into the NightProfile picture★★★★★
(9878)
keepit wrote:
Wiki is clear about greenhouse gases affect the ideal stephan boltzman equation.


Of course. It denies the Stefan-Boltzmann law.


The Parrot Killer
19-08-2019 09:22
tmiddlesProfile picture★★★★☆
(1394)
Into the Night wrote:
keepit wrote:
Gas,
Thermal energy transfer can definitely be slowed.
I don't see how you can deny that.


It is not possible to trap or slow heat.


When a blanket is put onto a hot object the heat can be reduced, not slowed right?

I think for a lot of people they would mix and match "reduced" and "slowed" but it is fair to say a blanket reduces heat sometimes correct?

Into the Night wrote:
* It is not possible to reduce the radiance of Earth and increase its temperature at the same time.
'

Would it be fair to clarify with?:
It is not possible to reduce the radiance of Earth and increase its average surface temperature at the same time. (and no "surface" doesn't just mean the ground where your shoes touch).
19-08-2019 09:57
Into the NightProfile picture★★★★★
(9878)
tmiddles wrote:
Into the Night wrote:
keepit wrote:
Gas,
Thermal energy transfer can definitely be slowed.
I don't see how you can deny that.


It is not possible to trap or slow heat.


When a blanket is put onto a hot object the heat can be reduced, not slowed right?

Correct. That is its design and purpose.
tmiddles wrote:
I think for a lot of people they would mix and match "reduced" and "slowed" but it is fair to say a blanket reduces heat sometimes correct?

The only time when a blanket does not reduce heat is when heat is already zero.
tmiddles wrote:
Into the Night wrote:
* It is not possible to reduce the radiance of Earth and increase its temperature at the same time.
'

Would it be fair to clarify with?:
It is not possible to reduce the radiance of Earth and increase its average surface temperature at the same time. (and no "surface" doesn't just mean the ground where your shoes touch).

Even where your shoes touch. Even for your shoes.


The Parrot Killer
19-08-2019 16:02
IBdaMannProfile picture★★★★★
(5026)
tmiddles wrote:When a blanket is put onto a hot object the heat can be reduced, not slowed right?

Just remember, at no point does the hot object's temperature ever increase because of the blanket.

As you work towards showing a rational basis for Global Warming, you will need to show a mechanism for temperature increasing ... not just of heat being altered.

You will need to address how Stefan-Boltzmann indicates that claims of reduced radiance (from greenhouse gases) imply reduced temperatures, not increased temperatures.

You will need to address the underlying thermodynamics that temperature cannot increase without additional energy. You will need to account for that additional energy.

It's a worthy endeavor. If you succeed in the above then you will be the first. Fame and wealth will be yours, along with the Nobel Prize.

I'm pulling for you.


.


Global Warming: The preferred religion of the scientifically illiterate.

Printing dollars to pay debt doesn't increase the number of dollars. - keepit

When the alt-physics birds sing about "indivisible bodies," we've got pure BS. - VernerHornung

Ah the "Valid Data" myth of ITN/IBD. - tmiddles

Ceist - I couldn't agree with you more. But when money and religion are involved, and there are people who value them above all else, then the lies begin. - trafn

You are completely misunderstanding their use of the word "accumulation"! - Climate Scientist.

The Stefan-Boltzman equation doesn't come up with the correct temperature if greenhouse gases are not considered - Hank

:*sigh* Not the "raw data" crap. - Leafsdude

IB STILL hasn't explained what Planck's Law means. Just more hand waving that it applies to everything and more asserting that the greenhouse effect 'violates' it.- Ceist
19-08-2019 16:57
HarveyH55
★★★★☆
(1482)
I think the blanket analogy is sort of silly, has nothing to do with warming. A blanket just doesn't transfer thermal energy well. We are warm-blooded, burn calories, generate heat and CO2 all the time. If you wrap a warm brick in blanket, it's still going to cool, on a cold winter night. A live body will stay warm in the same blanket, until the alarm clock goes off, and you reluctantly drag yourself out your warm of bed. Blankets don't trap heat, just poor conductors.

Wonder if you could make a blanket, with a lot of that CO2 trapped in the inner lining, sort of a super-blanket. Instead of some people needing layers of thick blankets, they would only need a thin, lightweight sheet... Hmmm... Sounds like a potential 'As Seen On TV' product. The IPCC has been doing decades of free advertising for it. A CO2 powered blanket. Good think I'm basically an honest man...
19-08-2019 17:49
IBdaMannProfile picture★★★★★
(5026)
HarveyH55 wrote:Wonder if you could make a blanket, with a lot of that CO2 trapped in the inner lining, sort of a super-blanket. Instead of some people needing layers of thick blankets, they would only need a thin, lightweight sheet... Hmmm... Sounds like a potential 'As Seen On TV' product. The IPCC has been doing decades of free advertising for it. A CO2 powered blanket. Good think I'm basically an honest man...

How about "Cooking with CO2!"? I'm imagining an infomercial for a CO2 rotisserie. Put the chicken on the spit and let the "Carbonator" spray CO2 on it while it turns. It should come out golden brown, cooked to perfection. Just don't leave it on while you go to sleep or you might cause extreme weather in your neighborhood or cause a flood of climate refugees to appear. It also runs the potential of acidifying your tap water and bleaching the coral in your fish bowl, which can all be offset with a local carbon tax on any food that has the potential to be cooked.


.


Global Warming: The preferred religion of the scientifically illiterate.

Printing dollars to pay debt doesn't increase the number of dollars. - keepit

When the alt-physics birds sing about "indivisible bodies," we've got pure BS. - VernerHornung

Ah the "Valid Data" myth of ITN/IBD. - tmiddles

Ceist - I couldn't agree with you more. But when money and religion are involved, and there are people who value them above all else, then the lies begin. - trafn

You are completely misunderstanding their use of the word "accumulation"! - Climate Scientist.

The Stefan-Boltzman equation doesn't come up with the correct temperature if greenhouse gases are not considered - Hank

:*sigh* Not the "raw data" crap. - Leafsdude

IB STILL hasn't explained what Planck's Law means. Just more hand waving that it applies to everything and more asserting that the greenhouse effect 'violates' it.- Ceist
19-08-2019 17:55
keepit
★★★☆☆
(713)
Prove that dark energy is the result of hidden dimensions moving in and out of our dimensions depending on the amount of gravity present.
Think, between galaxies, where there is relatively less gravity, the amount of space increases (expanding, accelerating universe).
Prove that and you can have a Nobel prize.
19-08-2019 18:29
IBdaMannProfile picture★★★★★
(5026)
keepit wrote: Prove that dark energy is the result of ...

Wrong wording. One does not "prove" anything in science. That is done in math and logic.

In science, nothing is ever shown to be true and nothing is ever "confirmed." Things are only shown to be false. Science is a set of models that have not yet been shown to be false (for their applications).

keepit wrote:Think, between galaxies, where there is relatively less gravity, the amount of space increases (expanding, accelerating universe).
Prove that and you can have a Nobel prize.

We already have a model for the expanding universe. Steve Hawking claimed his laurels for his model describing the
Properties of an Expanding Universe.

.


Global Warming: The preferred religion of the scientifically illiterate.

Printing dollars to pay debt doesn't increase the number of dollars. - keepit

When the alt-physics birds sing about "indivisible bodies," we've got pure BS. - VernerHornung

Ah the "Valid Data" myth of ITN/IBD. - tmiddles

Ceist - I couldn't agree with you more. But when money and religion are involved, and there are people who value them above all else, then the lies begin. - trafn

You are completely misunderstanding their use of the word "accumulation"! - Climate Scientist.

The Stefan-Boltzman equation doesn't come up with the correct temperature if greenhouse gases are not considered - Hank

:*sigh* Not the "raw data" crap. - Leafsdude

IB STILL hasn't explained what Planck's Law means. Just more hand waving that it applies to everything and more asserting that the greenhouse effect 'violates' it.- Ceist
19-08-2019 18:38
HarveyH55
★★★★☆
(1482)
keepit wrote:
Here is a rhetoric question but still useful - would you rather work less and spend less or work more and spend more?
Personally i've enjoyed working less and spending less more than working more and spending more.


https://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/article/2019/aug/12/andrew-yangs-universal-basic-income-proposal-expla/

One of the democratic hopefuls has a plan, just give every American $1,000/month, for life. I'm pretty sure that's not a replacement for welfare, since everyone gets it, whether they need it or not, even Trump (pocket change?). I don't think a thousand a month buys a whole lot in New York, or California, were some places, it's living high, literally in many cases...

Just a good example of reckless money management. What does our government do with 'free money'? Pretty much the same thing most of the people will do with their thousand a month. They never earned it, so there is no time/labor value, nor any reason to save it, or use it responsibly, since you get a thousand more next month. They burn through to quick, they get more in a few weeks, and should have a problem getting by on the generosity of others until then. For drug addicts and alcoholics, it would certainly be a death sentence for many, and not just the addicts either. That's a lot of substance abuse, free. Most are kept alive, because they don't have a steady income.

I'm not sure where all that free money would come from. Congress can't cough up a few billion to build a border wall, where do they figure on getting trillions, to just hand out? They already give that much away. The current socialism programs aren't going away, even with a thousand a month, people are still going to starve. Taxing the rich, will simple raise the prices on everything. Thousand dollars won't by as much as some think.
19-08-2019 18:54
Into the NightProfile picture★★★★★
(9878)
HarveyH55 wrote:
I think the blanket analogy is sort of silly, has nothing to do with warming. A blanket just doesn't transfer thermal energy well. We are warm-blooded, burn calories, generate heat and CO2 all the time. If you wrap a warm brick in blanket, it's still going to cool, on a cold winter night. A live body will stay warm in the same blanket, until the alarm clock goes off, and you reluctantly drag yourself out your warm of bed. Blankets don't trap heat, just poor conductors.

Wonder if you could make a blanket, with a lot of that CO2 trapped in the inner lining, sort of a super-blanket. Instead of some people needing layers of thick blankets, they would only need a thin, lightweight sheet... Hmmm... Sounds like a potential 'As Seen On TV' product. The IPCC has been doing decades of free advertising for it. A CO2 powered blanket. Good think I'm basically an honest man...

It would make a lousy blanket. CO2 actually conducts thermal energy better than most any other gas in the atmosphere.

Use air pockets, not CO2 pockets, for a blanket.

If you want a very effective blanket in a thin sheet, they are already on the market. They are called 'space blankets'. They are a mylar sheet that's been aluminized. They are very effective at reducing radiant heat. You can positively get too hot under one of those!

Of course, it won't warm a brick either.


The Parrot Killer
Edited on 19-08-2019 18:57
19-08-2019 18:59
Into the NightProfile picture★★★★★
(9878)
IBdaMann wrote:
HarveyH55 wrote:Wonder if you could make a blanket, with a lot of that CO2 trapped in the inner lining, sort of a super-blanket. Instead of some people needing layers of thick blankets, they would only need a thin, lightweight sheet... Hmmm... Sounds like a potential 'As Seen On TV' product. The IPCC has been doing decades of free advertising for it. A CO2 powered blanket. Good think I'm basically an honest man...

How about "Cooking with CO2!"? I'm imagining an infomercial for a CO2 rotisserie. Put the chicken on the spit and let the "Carbonator" spray CO2 on it while it turns. It should come out golden brown, cooked to perfection. Just don't leave it on while you go to sleep or you might cause extreme weather in your neighborhood or cause a flood of climate refugees to appear. It also runs the potential of acidifying your tap water and bleaching the coral in your fish bowl, which can all be offset with a local carbon tax on any food that has the potential to be cooked.


.


Just don't get your CO2 on the fire. It will put it out!


The Parrot Killer
19-08-2019 19:08
IBdaMannProfile picture★★★★★
(5026)
Into the Night wrote:Just don't get your CO2 on the fire. It will put it out!

Who said anything about fire? When you have CO2, you don't need any fire. CO2 simply increases the temperature as needed through processes called "thermal feedbacks" and "radiative forcings." It locks in meat's natural juices and comes with a two-for-one offer if you act now.

.


Global Warming: The preferred religion of the scientifically illiterate.

Printing dollars to pay debt doesn't increase the number of dollars. - keepit

When the alt-physics birds sing about "indivisible bodies," we've got pure BS. - VernerHornung

Ah the "Valid Data" myth of ITN/IBD. - tmiddles

Ceist - I couldn't agree with you more. But when money and religion are involved, and there are people who value them above all else, then the lies begin. - trafn

You are completely misunderstanding their use of the word "accumulation"! - Climate Scientist.

The Stefan-Boltzman equation doesn't come up with the correct temperature if greenhouse gases are not considered - Hank

:*sigh* Not the "raw data" crap. - Leafsdude

IB STILL hasn't explained what Planck's Law means. Just more hand waving that it applies to everything and more asserting that the greenhouse effect 'violates' it.- Ceist
19-08-2019 20:51
keepit
★★★☆☆
(713)
IBDM,
I just read the abstract of Hawking's thesis and i've read his popular books previously. To my knowledge they deal with an expanding universe, not an accelerating universe. You don't take his thesis as the final word, do you?

Study the Friedmann equation and you might see my point - at least if i have a valid point!
Page 1 of 3123>





Join the debate working and spending:

Remember me

Related content
ThreadsRepliesLast post
Spending12112-06-2019 22:24
What the USA Government has been working on to mitigate the problem821-02-2013 12:52
▲ 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 © 2009-2019 Climate-Debate.com | About | Contact