Remember me
▼ Content

Wow!



Page 1 of 4123>>>
Wow!13-03-2021 23:50
keepit
★★★★★
(2235)
Jeremy Grantham. My new economics hero, was just on bloomberg tv talking about econ for quite a while. I'd heard of him but i thought he was just another internet rambler.
14-03-2021 00:26
SwanProfile picture★★★☆☆
(565)
keepit wrote:
Jeremy Grantham. My new economics hero, was just on bloomberg tv talking about econ for quite a while. I'd heard of him but i thought he was just another internet rambler.


Buy small caps now.......................

LOL you were just on the internet with me
14-03-2021 01:20
James___
★★★★★
(4480)
keepit wrote:
Jeremy Grantham. My new economics hero, was just on bloomberg tv talking about econ for quite a while. I'd heard of him but i thought he was just another internet rambler.



I just watched a speech by President Biden and he mentioned where the economy needs to trickle up and expand in the middle. Then everybody will be better off.
That's what Americans need to understand if we want a more unified America.
14-03-2021 01:24
keepit
★★★★★
(2235)
James,
Agreed. If the money is sent to the lowest earners it is guaranteed to be spent and then the rich ones will make a profit and end up with the money anyway. Sending that big tax cut a couple of years ago to the big corporations was mindless. The lowest earners didn't benefit. We didn't want to lose the airlines and the auto manufacturers though. Shouldn't send the money to the banks and brokerages.
14-03-2021 01:46
IBdaMannProfile picture★★★★★
(9089)
keepit wrote: If the money is sent to the lowest earners

Money is not "sent.". Money is not "distributed"

Money is earned by adding value.

If you punish the successful by confiscating the rewards for adding value, everyone will stop adding value. Everyone will instead stop working and simply line up for the free government distribution check ... until the government has no more money to redistribute.


I notice that every economic-related idea of yours is an economy killer.

.


A Spaghetti strainer with the faucet running, retains water- tmiddles

Clouds don't trap heat. Clouds block cold. - Spongy Iris

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

If Venus were a black body it would have a much much lower temperature than what we found there.- tmiddles

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
14-03-2021 02:21
James___
★★★★★
(4480)
IBdaMann wrote:
keepit wrote: If the money is sent to the lowest earners

Money is not "sent.". Money is not "distributed"

Money is earned by adding value.

If you punish the successful by confiscating the rewards for adding value, everyone will stop adding value. Everyone will instead stop working and simply line up for the free government distribution check ... until the government has no more money to redistribute.


I notice that every economic-related idea of yours is an economy killer.

.



Okay Trumpster wannabe, what's being discussed is a fair and equitable system. Over population and technology tend to devalue people. This is good for people like yourself but not for most people.
14-03-2021 02:34
duncan61
★★★★☆
(1124)
I chose to be a trades person of my own free will.I grew up with people who did not care or try.Why should we all get the same deal.My son made me proud recently as he has been buying and subdividing land and the tax department tried to charge him 10% goods and services tax and at the end of the call he just told them he would stop doing it and that was not something they expected.Some industries get over regulated and do not consider that the company trying to do it will just quit.My favorite example was live animal export.The greens claimed it was cruel so the solo business exporting live water buffalo from Darwin to Indonesia was told he had to pay for a government vet to travel with the animals then pay to have him flown back.He just did not do it.It is seasonal they are rounded up at the end of the dry season and some are butchered locally and the rest sent back to where they come from as the are not native and do a lot of destruction.Major panic from the government as the population is exploding and they tried to tell him he had to do it.He responded with get your own ship A holes.He exported with no vet
14-03-2021 03:08
keepit
★★★★★
(2235)
ibd,
Do you get paid according to the amount of false claims you make.
You claimed that money is not sent. Does that mean that i won't get my stimulus check?
14-03-2021 17:38
HarveyH55Profile picture★★★★★
(3369)
keepit wrote:
ibd,
Do you get paid according to the amount of false claims you make.
You claimed that money is not sent. Does that mean that i won't get my stimulus check?


Why do you need a stimulus check? You are a non-productive part of society, probably get covid, before you spend it anyway. You haven't worked in years, so your income was unaffected.

Most of the stimulus money getting sent out, goes straight to the banks and creditors, and won't actually do a whole lot to grow the economy. That $1,400 check, is like 2 weeks pay, for me anyway. Not really a lot, for those carrying debt, or behind on bills. A lot of the $1.9 trillion goes straight to banks, creditors, and government, not into the economy. It'll help people pay their rent, utilities, and put food on the table. Free babysitters (public schools). Mostly, people who weren't working before the pandemic, are really doing good now, most of their bills being paid by the government, lack of income is no longer a barrier. It'll be rioting, looting, and burning season again pretty soon, and many just itching for free stuff, and mayhem.
14-03-2021 17:48
keepit
★★★★★
(2235)
Harvey,
You really ought to write fiction. You have a talent for it. Seriously.
14-03-2021 17:57
IBdaMannProfile picture★★★★★
(9089)
keepit wrote:ibd, Do you get paid according to the amount of false claims you make.

I was just going to ask you the same thing. As it turns out, only people spewing your politically-motivated garbage get paid to spew such politically-motivated garbage. Nobody gets paid for advocating my positions, i.e. that principles of science, math, logic and economics be forthwith adhered.

At a certain point, your dishonesty becomes obvious and the stupidity of your statements are clearly deliberate, almost as if you are being paid. Whatever your going rate, your idiocy is just too stupid to be believed.

keepit wrote: You claimed that money is not sent.

OK, I could have been clearer for the dullards who aren't too adept at following along. Outside of market interference, money is not distributed. It is not good for anyone for an economy to tank. It is not good for any economy for the government to tank it. Government redistribution of wealth is market interference that is never good for an economy and that has the potential to kill
the economy outright.

Your desire to damage the economy just so you can get the government to throw you a bone and to pat you on the head shows that you are by no means a credible source of commentary on economics.

.


A Spaghetti strainer with the faucet running, retains water- tmiddles

Clouds don't trap heat. Clouds block cold. - Spongy Iris

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

If Venus were a black body it would have a much much lower temperature than what we found there.- tmiddles

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
14-03-2021 18:06
keepit
★★★★★
(2235)
ibd,
I don't have political motivations or anything of the like.
I just take things issue by issue.
14-03-2021 19:28
James___
★★★★★
(4480)
keepit wrote:
Harvey,
You really ought to write fiction. You have a talent for it. Seriously.




He does have a talent. While the stimulus checks are nice, they might help me to become a productive member of society again. The attached image is interesting.
I think though that US has larger problems coming. With how badly I've been screwed for being half Norwegian or a disabled Veteran, things like that can hurt the US. When I worked for Boeing, I was removed from a productivity circle because some white supremacists didn't like me. And for the idea that I originated, a "pure" American got credit for it. And since Boeing pays money for money saving ideas, I got nothing.
The point I'm making is that when people are unhappy with someone, that person they don't like is the problem. People don't have to be tolerant because whiners are pacified. And with what I'm doing, I think Australians would like me. And at the same time I might be able to create some jobs there. And if not, if my science is liked, then their scientists might like having me around so they could ask me to consider something for them. That'd be like the FBI having analysts and field agents. The field agents give the analysts information to consider.
And with me, I'd have time to do the "field work" and then they could consider if they can use it to build a "case" which would be to support their research.
And with minimum wage being what it is, it does need to be raised slowly. And if we have a few people not as rich, then being an American might mean something besides just "it's about me".

And with Harvey,when he retires in a couple of years, he'll need to say no to SSI and Medicare. No reason why a person can't work. There's always a work around.
Attached image:


Edited on 14-03-2021 20:01
14-03-2021 20:46
IBdaMannProfile picture★★★★★
(9089)
keepit wrote:ibd, I don't have political motivations or anything of the like.
I just take things issue by issue.

You wouldn't bother with any issues if you didn't have political motivations. You certainly aren't trying to adhere to science, math, logic or economics.


.


A Spaghetti strainer with the faucet running, retains water- tmiddles

Clouds don't trap heat. Clouds block cold. - Spongy Iris

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

If Venus were a black body it would have a much much lower temperature than what we found there.- tmiddles

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
14-03-2021 21:08
HarveyH55Profile picture★★★★★
(3369)
keepit wrote:
Harvey,
You really ought to write fiction. You have a talent for it. Seriously.


Actually, I have quite a few talents. What you choose to believe to be fiction, is actually a little more. Your reading comprehension skills, night not be quite up to the task, but it'll come to you, eventually. The truth, and reality, can be a little harsh, for some, and they need a little 'sugar' coating, to get it past the initial denial. Everything makes better sense, when you have to figure it out for yourself. My 'fiction', is meant to get you to think about things, you generally deny, and refuse to listen.
14-03-2021 21:54
keepit
★★★★★
(2235)
ibd,
I've never seen you demonstrate any knowledge of science. Sure, you know a few words such as math, physics, sb law, laws of thermodynamics but all you do is throw those words up as if you have a working knowledge. I've never seen it though.
14-03-2021 22:38
IBdaMannProfile picture★★★★★
(9089)
keepit wrote: ibd, I've never seen you demonstrate any knowledge of science.

I have long since realized that you can't be bothered to actually read my posts. That would explain it.

.


A Spaghetti strainer with the faucet running, retains water- tmiddles

Clouds don't trap heat. Clouds block cold. - Spongy Iris

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

If Venus were a black body it would have a much much lower temperature than what we found there.- tmiddles

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
14-03-2021 22:38
keepit
★★★★★
(2235)
Harvey,
That sounds like a lame excuse for making errors in your posts.
It's like this - when you get an education, you become afraid of making inaccurate statements because professors constantly correct you and your peers don't like hear your mistakes either. You don't seem to care if you're right or wrong.
On the other hand, it is true that education stifles creativity to a small extent. That is why i think you are a good fit for writing fiction. In fiction accuracy doesn't matter. Neither does truth.
14-03-2021 23:04
keepit
★★★★★
(2235)
ibd,
Just for laughs i went back and read every one of your posts on this thread. There's nothing there, just rude talk and fluff. Go ahead, read your posts.
14-03-2021 23:08
Into the NightProfile picture★★★★★
(15506)
keepit wrote:
ibd,
I've never seen you demonstrate any knowledge of science. Sure, you know a few words such as math, physics, sb law, laws of thermodynamics but all you do is throw those words up as if you have a working knowledge. I've never seen it though.


He has clear explained each of them. So have I. RQAA.


The Parrot Killer

Debunked in my sig. - tmiddles

Google keeps track of paranoid talk and i'm not on their list. I've been evaluated and certified. - keepit

nuclear powered ships do not require nuclear fuel. - Swan
14-03-2021 23:08
Into the NightProfile picture★★★★★
(15506)
keepit wrote:
ibd,
Just for laughs i went back and read every one of your posts on this thread. There's nothing there, just rude talk and fluff. Go ahead, read your posts.

RQAA


The Parrot Killer

Debunked in my sig. - tmiddles

Google keeps track of paranoid talk and i'm not on their list. I've been evaluated and certified. - keepit

nuclear powered ships do not require nuclear fuel. - Swan
14-03-2021 23:10
keepit
★★★★★
(2235)
RQAA doesn't demonstrate anything.
14-03-2021 23:34
HarveyH55Profile picture★★★★★
(3369)
keepit wrote:
Harvey,
That sounds like a lame excuse for making errors in your posts.
It's like this - when you get an education, you become afraid of making inaccurate statements because professors constantly correct you and your peers don't like hear your mistakes either. You don't seem to care if you're right or wrong.
On the other hand, it is true that education stifles creativity to a small extent. That is why i think you are a good fit for writing fiction. In fiction accuracy doesn't matter. Neither does truth.


How much college is required, to acquire an education? I only managed a two year degree, with credits to spare (abandon my major, and took what I could salvage). Just how do required, BS classes, help, other than enrich the college, and waste a lot of my time? I didn't have liberal parents, had to pay for my own education, with little government help, do to affirmative action, that was very popular at the time. Took less than two years of education, to realize I was wasting time and money. The career options, would be mostly working out the details, of other people's designs. I wanted to do the creative work. The math, and everything else wasn't real hard, just not all that interesting.

So, I learn just what I want and need, and can build anything I want, if I can find/buy the parts and material.

Never claimed to be perfect, in every way...
14-03-2021 23:38
keepit
★★★★★
(2235)
I'm not perfect either but i just don't buy into much of the cynical stuff you say.
14-03-2021 23:46
IBdaMannProfile picture★★★★★
(9089)
keepit wrote: I'm not perfect

You're starting at the wrong end of the spectrum.

.


A Spaghetti strainer with the faucet running, retains water- tmiddles

Clouds don't trap heat. Clouds block cold. - Spongy Iris

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

If Venus were a black body it would have a much much lower temperature than what we found there.- tmiddles

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
15-03-2021 04:36
Into the NightProfile picture★★★★★
(15506)
keepit wrote:
RQAA doesn't demonstrate anything.

You don't need demonstrating of anything. Your question has already been answered multiple times. Stop asking the same question over and over.


The Parrot Killer

Debunked in my sig. - tmiddles

Google keeps track of paranoid talk and i'm not on their list. I've been evaluated and certified. - keepit

nuclear powered ships do not require nuclear fuel. - Swan
15-03-2021 20:55
gfm7175Profile picture★★★★★
(2052)
keepit wrote:
Jeremy Grantham. My new economics hero, was just on bloomberg tv talking about econ for quite a while. I'd heard of him but i thought he was just another internet rambler.

I've never even heard of the guy.
15-03-2021 21:01
gfm7175Profile picture★★★★★
(2052)
James___ wrote:
keepit wrote:
Jeremy Grantham. My new economics hero, was just on bloomberg tv talking about econ for quite a while. I'd heard of him but i thought he was just another internet rambler.



I just watched a speech by President Biden and he mentioned where the economy needs to trickle up and expand in the middle. Then everybody will be better off.
That's what Americans need to understand if we want a more unified America.

Biden just repeats (to the best of his ability, which is not very good nowadays) whatever he is told to say by his puppet masters, and the illiterate, irrational, and/or hoodwinked members of the general populace gobble it up like it's their favorite flavor of ice cream.
15-03-2021 21:14
gfm7175Profile picture★★★★★
(2052)
IBdaMann wrote:
keepit wrote: If the money is sent to the lowest earners

Money is not "sent.". Money is not "distributed"

Money is earned by adding value.

If you punish the successful by confiscating the rewards for adding value, everyone will stop adding value. Everyone will instead stop working and simply line up for the free government distribution check ... until the government has no more money to redistribute.


I notice that every economic-related idea of yours is an economy killer.

.

It's almost as if he WANTS to kill the economy...
17-03-2021 00:16
duncan61
★★★★☆
(1124)
Into the Night wrote:
[quote]keepit wrote:
RQAA doesn't demonstrate anything.

You don't need demonstrating of anything. Your question has already been answered multiple times. Stop asking the same question over and over.

I have been on this forum over a year and have not seen anyone post any of the laws that are claimed.I have researched them myself but as google and the dictionary are wrong where do I go from here


duncan61
17-03-2021 02:38
IBdaMannProfile picture★★★★★
(9089)
duncan61 wrote: I have been on this forum over a year and have not seen anyone post any of the laws that are claimed.

To which laws have you intentionally turned a blind-eye?

On 21 February Into the Night responded directly to Pet Rogers:
There is no global atmospheric compression. Gravity is not energy. Your statement is not the 1st law of thermodynamics. The 1st law of thermodynamics is E(t+1) = E(t)-U where 'E' is energy, 't' is time, and 'U' is work. Gravity is neither energy nor work.

On January 3, 2021 Into the Night responded to Duncan directly:
There is no 'net radiation'. There is only radiance. The equation is:
r = C*e*t^4 where r is radiance in watts per square area, C is a natural constant (which converts the relation to our units of measurement), 'e' is emissivity a measured constant describing how well a surface radiates, and 't' is temperature in Kelvin.

The equation is before you. Other equations also apply:
1st law of thermodynamics: E(t+1) = E(t) - U where E is energy, 't' is time, and 'U' is work (or force applied over distance). You cannot create energy out of nothing.

2nd law of thermodynamics: e(t+1) >= e(t) where 'e' is entropy and 't' is time. In other words, you cannot decrease entropy...ever.

On 17 November 202 Into the Night responded directly to Regis:
No gas or vapor has the magick capability to warm the Earth. You can't create energy out of nothing. See the 1st law of thermodynamics.

E(t+1) = E(t)-U where 'E' is energy, 't' is time, and 'U' is work.

No gas or vapor has the magick capability to reduce entropy. You can't trap heat. You can't trap light. You can't trap thermal energy. There is always heat. See the 2nd law of thermodynamics and the Stefan-Boltzmann law.

e(t+1) >= e(t) where 'e' is entropy, and 't' is time. Entropy never decreases.

r = C*e*t^4 where 'r' is radiance in watts, 'C' is a natural constant, 'e' is the emissivity constant (a measured constant), and 't' is temperature in deg K.

On 3 October 2020 Into the Night responded directly to Spongy Iris:
Not the 2nd law of thermodynamics. The 2nd of thermodynamics is e(t+1) >= e(t) where 'e' is entropy, and 't' is time. The system must be consistent and definable. In other words, closed. It does not need to be isolated. CO2 is not a source of energy and cannot override the 2nd law of thermodynamics. You are now also denying the 1st law of thermodynamics. You can't create energy out of nothing.

On 8 September 2020 Into the Night responded directly to Pete Rogers:
There is no 2nd law requirement for equality of temperature. The 2nd law states: e(t+1) >= e(t), where 'e' is entropy, and 't' is time.

On 10 July 2020 Into the Night responded directly to Duncan:
Into the Night wrote:[quote]duncan61 wrote:Can I have your definition of heat ITN so I can use it correctly in future


Not my definition.

The 2nd law of thermodynamics states: e(t+1) >= e(t), where 'e' is entropy and 't' is time. In other words, entropy must increase or stay the same in any given system.

On 9 June Into the Night responded directly to tmiddles:
tmiddles wrote:
I understand the 1st LTD as a zero sum equation,

No it is not. It is e(t+1)=e(t)+w.

On 20 May 2020 Into the Night responded directly to JackFou:
The 2nd law of thermodynamics is: e(t+1)>=e(t) where 'e' is entropy and 't' is time. Giving a direction for heat and energy flow, energy will always dissipate if it dissipates at all. It will NEVER gather together. The system must be closed (defined consistently). The Universe that we observe is a closed system. The 2nd law of thermodynamics has never been falsified. You are just choosing to ignore it. Mantra 20a2.

On 19 May Into the Night responded directly to Evald:
Science is not an agency. It is not a government, university, credential, degree, or license. It is not any society, academy, or institution. It is not any political organization at all. It is not scientists. It is not people at all.

Science is just a set of falsifiable theories.

Examples are Newton's law of motion: F=mA, or Gauss's law, describing electrostatic force: F=C*(r1+r2)/r^2, of the Stefan-Boltzmann law, describing the amount of light emitted by substance according to its temperature: r=C*e*t^4.

None of these have anything to do with any organization, government, university, or even the scientist(s) that created these theories (other than historical purposes). Each of these theories of science stand on or fall on their own, independent of any scientist or person.

Magical machines to 'purify' CO2 or any other gas is marketing hype. You fell for it completely. CO2 is already pure CO2. There is nothing impure about CO2.

It is also not possible to warm the Earth with any gas or vapor. No gas or vapor has such a capability. You can't create energy out of nothing. See the 1st law of thermodynamics: E(t)=E(t+1)-W. You need not worry about CO2, methane, or any other gas or vapor in the atmosphere.

On 6 May 2020 Into the Night responded directly to JackFou:
JackFou wrote:
I just disagree with you about what they actually say.

Newton's law of motion: F=mA
1st law of thermodynamics: E(t+1)=E(t)-W
2nd law of thermodynamics: e(t+1)>=e(t)
That is what they say. You are trying to change these equations. You are trying to deny them.

On 6 May Into the Night responded directly to JackFou:
Define 'global warming'.
1st law of thermodynamics: E(t+1)=E(t)-W
Where E is energy, 't' is time, and 'W' is work.
2nd law of thermodtynamics: e(t+1)>=e(t)
Where 'e' is entropy, 't' is time.

* You can't create energy out of nothing.
* You can't make heat flow from cold to hot.
* You cannot trap heat.
* You cannot trap light.
* You cannot trap thermal energy. There is always heat.

On 15 November 2020 IBDaMann responded directly to Duncan:
duncan61 wrote:I agree with Svante August Arrhenius and Freeman dyson.

This is unfortunate because all of their work on the matter was shown to be wrong, their conclusions shown to be false, and their models pertaining to what you are referencing discarded from the body of science.

There is no Arrhenius law or any Dyson equation in physics that relates to this subject. This, and because they are deceased and cannot be questioned, is why only scientifically illiterate warmizombies herald Arrheius and Dyson as champions of their religion and as prophets of their faith. Scientists rarely have any reason to ever reference them.

This is the problem you run into when you are forced to point to people (clergy) and not to actual science. Science is not people. Science is not subjective and is not based on anyone's opinion. Nobody owns science.

If you are allowing others to do your thinking for you because you are too lazy to independently learn the subject matter in question then you deserve to be manipulated as you are being right now by whomever told you to worship Arrhenius and Dyson as prophets of Greenhouse Effect.

In physics, CO2 does not have the magical superpowers to violate physics as you seem to believe. No body of matter anywhere in the universe under any conditions (and this includes the earth) can spontaneously increase in temperature without additional energy. You learned this when you were a child. You instinctively know that things don't just get hotter without some new energy entering the picture. Yet somehow you allowed others to convince you that your thinking is wrong and to let them do your thinking for you properly.

You committed an error when you allowed that to happen.

duncan61 wrote: By some freak of nature he got it right back then.CO2 does reflect long wave radiation.

Let's review the 1st law of thermodynamics. Energy can change form all day, all night, all week, all year ... but you can never create any more of it and you can never destroy any of it, i.e. you always have the same amount of energy.

So then some warmizombies come along and tell you that long wave radiation changes form in the upper stratosphere, and then changes form in the lower troposphere, and then it changes form again, and again, and again and suddenly you have more energy than when you started and temperature increases. And you bought it. You never called bullshit. That was your next error.

duncan61 wrote: Without an Atmosphere our weather would be different.

We wouldn't have any weather if we had no atmosphere.

duncan61 wrote: We would cook in the sunlight and freeze at night like the moon

Yes, the daytime oceans would boil away. Yes. All without any CO2. Go on.

duncan61 wrote:The small amount of trace gas has little to no effect

Actually, it just has no effect. There is no "little" effect that it can have (re: 1st law of thermodynamics).


On 3 March 2020 IBDaMann responded directly to James__:
The 1st LoT actually doesn't mention work. Equations that involve work are simply derivatives from the 1st LoT.

Energy cannot be created or destroyed so a given quantity remains constant, i.e. Total_Energy(t) = Total_Energy(t+1)

However, we humans like to break things out and represent all elements in our systems. We particularly like to point to work performed and say that we are concerned with that particular energy. Since we must adhere to the 1st LoT, we derive our constraints:

Total_Energy(t) = Work(t) + Nonwork(t) (or however we want to divide it up)

... or ...

Initial_Energy = Final_Energy + Work_Performed

The number of equations is infinite; it just depends on how you represent your experiment such that it adheres to Total_Energy(t) = Total_Energy(t+1)


This will be enough for now.

For additional reference you can always find this information on Politiplex. Avail yourself.

Blackbody Science
Stefan-Boltzmann
1st Law of Thermodynamics
2nd Law of Thermodynamics
Electrical Reference
If you need a quick Periodic Table of the Elements
Understand Schroedinger's Cat

In summary, Duncan, you are a liar who no longer cares how absurd his lies have become. Tell us again how you have been on this site for a year and have never seen any of the above. Detail for us how you couldn't possibly have looked up any of these quotes and references listed.

Whenever any counterargument destroys your religious dogma you simply deny that the point was ever raised. You have made self-delusion your top priority in saving your religion ... even to the extent that whenever the required lie is so outrageous that you cannot sufficiently delude yourself into believing it, you simply bend over furniture for Pete Rogers so that he can aid you by doing your thinking for you. Until Pete does that for you, you dishonestly EVADE all substantive questions posed to you.


A Spaghetti strainer with the faucet running, retains water- tmiddles

Clouds don't trap heat. Clouds block cold. - Spongy Iris

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

If Venus were a black body it would have a much much lower temperature than what we found there.- tmiddles

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
17-03-2021 04:10
Into the NightProfile picture★★★★★
(15506)
duncan61 wrote:
Into the Night wrote:
[quote]keepit wrote:
RQAA doesn't demonstrate anything.

You don't need demonstrating of anything. Your question has already been answered multiple times. Stop asking the same question over and over.

I have been on this forum over a year and have not seen anyone post any of the laws that are claimed.I have researched them myself but as google and the dictionary are wrong where do I go from here


1st law of thermodynamics:
E(t+1)=E(t)-U where 'E' is energy, 't' is time, and 'U' is work.

2nd law of thermodynamics:
e(t+1) >= e(t) where 'e' is entropy, and 't' is time.

Stefan-Boltzmann law:
r = C*e*t^4 where 'r' is radiance in square units, 'C' is a natural constant that converts the relation to our units of measure, 'e' is emissivity, a measured constant on how well a surface emits, and 't' is temperature in deg K.

Ideal gas law:
PV=nRT where 'P' is absolute pressure, 'V' is volume, 'n' is the moles of gas, 'R' is a constant known as the universal gas constant, 'T' is temperature in deg K.

Newton's Law of motion:
F=mA where 'F' is force, 'm' is mass, and 'A' is acceleration.

You know you can look this stuff up. A copy is also on https://politiplex.freeforums.net/


The Parrot Killer

Debunked in my sig. - tmiddles

Google keeps track of paranoid talk and i'm not on their list. I've been evaluated and certified. - keepit

nuclear powered ships do not require nuclear fuel. - Swan
17-03-2021 04:14
Into the NightProfile picture★★★★★
(15506)
IBdaMann wrote:
duncan61 wrote: I have been on this forum over a year and have not seen anyone post any of the laws that are claimed.

To which laws have you intentionally turned a blind-eye?

On 21 February Into the Night responded directly to Pet Rogers:
There is no global atmospheric compression. Gravity is not energy. Your statement is not the 1st law of thermodynamics. The 1st law of thermodynamics is E(t+1) = E(t)-U where 'E' is energy, 't' is time, and 'U' is work. Gravity is neither energy nor work.

On January 3, 2021 Into the Night responded to Duncan directly:
There is no 'net radiation'. There is only radiance. The equation is:
r = C*e*t^4 where r is radiance in watts per square area, C is a natural constant (which converts the relation to our units of measurement), 'e' is emissivity a measured constant describing how well a surface radiates, and 't' is temperature in Kelvin.

The equation is before you. Other equations also apply:
1st law of thermodynamics: E(t+1) = E(t) - U where E is energy, 't' is time, and 'U' is work (or force applied over distance). You cannot create energy out of nothing.

2nd law of thermodynamics: e(t+1) >= e(t) where 'e' is entropy and 't' is time. In other words, you cannot decrease entropy...ever.

On 17 November 202 Into the Night responded directly to Regis:
No gas or vapor has the magick capability to warm the Earth. You can't create energy out of nothing. See the 1st law of thermodynamics.

E(t+1) = E(t)-U where 'E' is energy, 't' is time, and 'U' is work.

No gas or vapor has the magick capability to reduce entropy. You can't trap heat. You can't trap light. You can't trap thermal energy. There is always heat. See the 2nd law of thermodynamics and the Stefan-Boltzmann law.

e(t+1) >= e(t) where 'e' is entropy, and 't' is time. Entropy never decreases.

r = C*e*t^4 where 'r' is radiance in watts, 'C' is a natural constant, 'e' is the emissivity constant (a measured constant), and 't' is temperature in deg K.

On 3 October 2020 Into the Night responded directly to Spongy Iris:
Not the 2nd law of thermodynamics. The 2nd of thermodynamics is e(t+1) >= e(t) where 'e' is entropy, and 't' is time. The system must be consistent and definable. In other words, closed. It does not need to be isolated. CO2 is not a source of energy and cannot override the 2nd law of thermodynamics. You are now also denying the 1st law of thermodynamics. You can't create energy out of nothing.

On 8 September 2020 Into the Night responded directly to Pete Rogers:
There is no 2nd law requirement for equality of temperature. The 2nd law states: e(t+1) >= e(t), where 'e' is entropy, and 't' is time.

On 10 July 2020 Into the Night responded directly to Duncan:
Into the Night wrote:[quote]duncan61 wrote:Can I have your definition of heat ITN so I can use it correctly in future


Not my definition.

The 2nd law of thermodynamics states: e(t+1) >= e(t), where 'e' is entropy and 't' is time. In other words, entropy must increase or stay the same in any given system.

On 9 June Into the Night responded directly to tmiddles:
tmiddles wrote:
I understand the 1st LTD as a zero sum equation,

No it is not. It is e(t+1)=e(t)+w.

On 20 May 2020 Into the Night responded directly to JackFou:
The 2nd law of thermodynamics is: e(t+1)>=e(t) where 'e' is entropy and 't' is time. Giving a direction for heat and energy flow, energy will always dissipate if it dissipates at all. It will NEVER gather together. The system must be closed (defined consistently). The Universe that we observe is a closed system. The 2nd law of thermodynamics has never been falsified. You are just choosing to ignore it. Mantra 20a2.

On 19 May Into the Night responded directly to Evald:
Science is not an agency. It is not a government, university, credential, degree, or license. It is not any society, academy, or institution. It is not any political organization at all. It is not scientists. It is not people at all.

Science is just a set of falsifiable theories.

Examples are Newton's law of motion: F=mA, or Gauss's law, describing electrostatic force: F=C*(r1+r2)/r^2, of the Stefan-Boltzmann law, describing the amount of light emitted by substance according to its temperature: r=C*e*t^4.

None of these have anything to do with any organization, government, university, or even the scientist(s) that created these theories (other than historical purposes). Each of these theories of science stand on or fall on their own, independent of any scientist or person.

Magical machines to 'purify' CO2 or any other gas is marketing hype. You fell for it completely. CO2 is already pure CO2. There is nothing impure about CO2.

It is also not possible to warm the Earth with any gas or vapor. No gas or vapor has such a capability. You can't create energy out of nothing. See the 1st law of thermodynamics: E(t)=E(t+1)-W. You need not worry about CO2, methane, or any other gas or vapor in the atmosphere.

On 6 May 2020 Into the Night responded directly to JackFou:
JackFou wrote:
I just disagree with you about what they actually say.

Newton's law of motion: F=mA
1st law of thermodynamics: E(t+1)=E(t)-W
2nd law of thermodynamics: e(t+1)>=e(t)
That is what they say. You are trying to change these equations. You are trying to deny them.

On 6 May Into the Night responded directly to JackFou:
Define 'global warming'.
1st law of thermodynamics: E(t+1)=E(t)-W
Where E is energy, 't' is time, and 'W' is work.
2nd law of thermodtynamics: e(t+1)>=e(t)
Where 'e' is entropy, 't' is time.

* You can't create energy out of nothing.
* You can't make heat flow from cold to hot.
* You cannot trap heat.
* You cannot trap light.
* You cannot trap thermal energy. There is always heat.

On 15 November 2020 IBDaMann responded directly to Duncan:
duncan61 wrote:I agree with Svante August Arrhenius and Freeman dyson.

This is unfortunate because all of their work on the matter was shown to be wrong, their conclusions shown to be false, and their models pertaining to what you are referencing discarded from the body of science.

There is no Arrhenius law or any Dyson equation in physics that relates to this subject. This, and because they are deceased and cannot be questioned, is why only scientifically illiterate warmizombies herald Arrheius and Dyson as champions of their religion and as prophets of their faith. Scientists rarely have any reason to ever reference them.

This is the problem you run into when you are forced to point to people (clergy) and not to actual science. Science is not people. Science is not subjective and is not based on anyone's opinion. Nobody owns science.

If you are allowing others to do your thinking for you because you are too lazy to independently learn the subject matter in question then you deserve to be manipulated as you are being right now by whomever told you to worship Arrhenius and Dyson as prophets of Greenhouse Effect.

In physics, CO2 does not have the magical superpowers to violate physics as you seem to believe. No body of matter anywhere in the universe under any conditions (and this includes the earth) can spontaneously increase in temperature without additional energy. You learned this when you were a child. You instinctively know that things don't just get hotter without some new energy entering the picture. Yet somehow you allowed others to convince you that your thinking is wrong and to let them do your thinking for you properly.

You committed an error when you allowed that to happen.

duncan61 wrote: By some freak of nature he got it right back then.CO2 does reflect long wave radiation.

Let's review the 1st law of thermodynamics. Energy can change form all day, all night, all week, all year ... but you can never create any more of it and you can never destroy any of it, i.e. you always have the same amount of energy.

So then some warmizombies come along and tell you that long wave radiation changes form in the upper stratosphere, and then changes form in the lower troposphere, and then it changes form again, and again, and again and suddenly you have more energy than when you started and temperature increases. And you bought it. You never called bullshit. That was your next error.

duncan61 wrote: Without an Atmosphere our weather would be different.

We wouldn't have any weather if we had no atmosphere.

duncan61 wrote: We would cook in the sunlight and freeze at night like the moon

Yes, the daytime oceans would boil away. Yes. All without any CO2. Go on.

duncan61 wrote:The small amount of trace gas has little to no effect

Actually, it just has no effect. There is no "little" effect that it can have (re: 1st law of thermodynamics).


On 3 March 2020 IBDaMann responded directly to James__:
The 1st LoT actually doesn't mention work. Equations that involve work are simply derivatives from the 1st LoT.

Energy cannot be created or destroyed so a given quantity remains constant, i.e. Total_Energy(t) = Total_Energy(t+1)

However, we humans like to break things out and represent all elements in our systems. We particularly like to point to work performed and say that we are concerned with that particular energy. Since we must adhere to the 1st LoT, we derive our constraints:

Total_Energy(t) = Work(t) + Nonwork(t) (or however we want to divide it up)

... or ...

Initial_Energy = Final_Energy + Work_Performed

The number of equations is infinite; it just depends on how you represent your experiment such that it adheres to Total_Energy(t) = Total_Energy(t+1)


This will be enough for now.

For additional reference you can always find this information on Politiplex. Avail yourself.

Blackbody Science
Stefan-Boltzmann
1st Law of Thermodynamics
2nd Law of Thermodynamics
Electrical Reference
If you need a quick Periodic Table of the Elements
Understand Schroedinger's Cat

In summary, Duncan, you are a liar who no longer cares how absurd his lies have become. Tell us again how you have been on this site for a year and have never seen any of the above. Detail for us how you couldn't possibly have looked up any of these quotes and references listed.

Whenever any counterargument destroys your religious dogma you simply deny that the point was ever raised. You have made self-delusion your top priority in saving your religion ... even to the extent that whenever the required lie is so outrageous that you cannot sufficiently delude yourself into believing it, you simply bend over furniture for Pete Rogers so that he can aid you by doing your thinking for you. Until Pete does that for you, you dishonestly EVADE all substantive questions posed to you.


Thank you. I also did it again in a direct response to Duncan (again) just now as of 21.03.17.r.0212Z


The Parrot Killer

Debunked in my sig. - tmiddles

Google keeps track of paranoid talk and i'm not on their list. I've been evaluated and certified. - keepit

nuclear powered ships do not require nuclear fuel. - Swan
Edited on 17-03-2021 04:15
17-03-2021 15:24
gfm7175Profile picture★★★★★
(2052)
duncan61 wrote:
Into the Night wrote:
[quote]keepit wrote:
RQAA doesn't demonstrate anything.

You don't need demonstrating of anything. Your question has already been answered multiple times. Stop asking the same question over and over.

I have been on this forum over a year and have not seen anyone post any of the laws that are claimed.I have researched them myself but as google and the dictionary are wrong where do I go from here

The laws have been posted in multiple threads on this forum over the years (and have even been included for you again within this very thread). They have even been included in direct quotes to you in the past (and again within this very thread).

It's almost as if you are intentionally ignoring the postings of them in order to claim that they haven't been posted before.
17-03-2021 22:05
keepit
★★★★★
(2235)
gfm,
There have been postings of the names of the laws but i've never seen the actual laws AND the correct interpretation of them.
17-03-2021 22:22
IBdaMannProfile picture★★★★★
(9089)
keepit wrote:gfm, There have been postings

Well, there you go! Read them.

keepit wrote: ... but i've never seen the actual laws

Yes you have. The laws are in those posts/postings. Read them.

keepit wrote: AND the correct interpretation of them.

There is no such thing as "interpretation." They are science. The models say exactly what they say in a completely falsifiable manner. Nobody gets to "interpret" them.

.


A Spaghetti strainer with the faucet running, retains water- tmiddles

Clouds don't trap heat. Clouds block cold. - Spongy Iris

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

If Venus were a black body it would have a much much lower temperature than what we found there.- tmiddles

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
17-03-2021 23:37
gfm7175Profile picture★★★★★
(2052)
keepit wrote:
gfm,
There have been postings of the names of the laws but i've never seen the actual laws AND the correct interpretation of them.

The mathematical equations (the "actual laws") have been posted along with the names of those laws. There is no "correct interpretation" of those laws. They say precisely what they say, and are falsifiable if you're up for the challenge.
Edited on 17-03-2021 23:38
18-03-2021 01:09
keepit
★★★★★
(2235)
First off, almost everything is an interpretation.
Secondly, a very high percentage of the things i say on this website are misinterpreted. That being the case, it isn't reasonable to think that the "interpreters" are any good at interpreting and applying laws of physics.
18-03-2021 03:12
Into the NightProfile picture★★★★★
(15506)
keepit wrote:
gfm,
There have been postings of the names of the laws but i've never seen the actual laws AND the correct interpretation of them.

Then you are willingly being blind. There is no 'interpretation' of them. They are equations. You just deny them.


The Parrot Killer

Debunked in my sig. - tmiddles

Google keeps track of paranoid talk and i'm not on their list. I've been evaluated and certified. - keepit

nuclear powered ships do not require nuclear fuel. - Swan
18-03-2021 03:16
Into the NightProfile picture★★★★★
(15506)
keepit wrote:
First off, almost everything is an interpretation.

Math is not an 'interpretation', dumbass. Are you from Oregon? Have you traveled through there recently and picked up the Stupid Disease there? I know it's contagious. I thought it was only in Oregon that they try to 'interpret' 2+2=4 in a non-racist way.
keepit wrote:
Secondly, a very high percentage of the things i say on this website are misinterpreted.

Not at all. You are simply lying. Most of what you say is to try to deny these laws of physics.
keepit wrote:
That being the case, it isn't reasonable to think that the "interpreters" are any good at interpreting and applying laws of physics.

There is no 'interpretation' in applying the laws of physics.



Semantics fallacies.


The Parrot Killer

Debunked in my sig. - tmiddles

Google keeps track of paranoid talk and i'm not on their list. I've been evaluated and certified. - keepit

nuclear powered ships do not require nuclear fuel. - Swan
Edited on 18-03-2021 03:17
Page 1 of 4123>>>





Join the debate Wow!:

Remember me

▲ Top of page
Public Poll
Who is leading the renewable energy race?

US

EU

China

Japan

India

Brazil

Other

Don't know


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