Who gets the honour of being identified as the world’s most braindead!? It’s not the outright Flat Earther’s, no, not at all! Rather, it is the people who pretend to stand for modern science and who believe that they have presented to the world science’s greatest accomplishment and relevance to the modern world! It is the people who truly, seriously, fundamentally believe, while having (at least claiming) actual credentials in science and physics, that they have presented the world with science’s most important work in relevance to mankind, while having based all of their work on literal flat Earth physics and claiming that it reflects actual reality.
Stupid, uneducated people can simply be dismissed and even forgiven for believing in flat Earth science. Trolls can be ignored while they post links in Youtube comments and various internet places to flat Earth pseudoscience.
However, you must be a very special and particularly acute brand of braindead to truly and seriously present yourself as a scientist with degrees in various scientific fields, professing science’s greatest relevance to mankind in modern times, and have based that proselytizing on flat Earth physics! This is what every climate alarmist and climate alarm skeptic is guilty of who believes in the radiative greenhouse effect at the sole fundamental basis of climate alarm and the field of climate science. Here is that basis, from Harvard University no less(!):
That’s a flat Earth, you braindead retards! No offence to people who are actually developmentally retarded due to factors beyond their control. The people who believe in the radiative greenhouse effect at the basis of climate alarm are willfully braindead retarded. Here’s flat Earth physics published in an actual science journal(!):
That’s a flat disk, you braindead retards! DUUUUHHHHH!!! So they have the flat Earth, and then look what numbers come out of it: sun provides 161 W/m^2 of energy to the Earth surface, and Earth’s atmosphere provides…wait for it…333 W/m^2 of energy to the surface, a full two-hundred-and-seven percent (207% !) more energy than the Sun!
We have actual, real scientists (claimed to be, anyway) who start with a flat Earth, and that’s one thing. But then they actually go ahead and work out the numbers as if the Earth were actually truly physically flat, find that Earth’s atmosphere must therefore provide 207% more energy than the Sun, and then…wait for it…publish it in a science journal!
One simply has to take a step back from this and marvel at the monumental stupidity of it. The profound absurdity of it. One really needs to step back and ask what it means. What it means about man? What it means about humanity? What is says about science? What it says about the forces behind it? What it means about man’s place in the universe? What it means differentially about the folks who do and who do not believe in climate alarm and its radiative greenhouse effect? About the difference between those who can’t question it, and those who are capable of doing so?
I went into astrophysics because I found planets, solar systems, galaxies, space, time, existence, etc., profound beyond comprehension. This situation with the flat Earther science deniers with degrees in science claiming to be scientists is still more profound but in a quite disturbing way.
Here we will collate a list of nominations for the world’s greatest science deniers: those who apparently believe in flat Earth physics by believing in climate alarm and its radiative greenhouse effect, and who have performed some of the world’s greatest efforts at proselytizing it to the public. Drum-roll…The nominations for the list are:
The Flat-Earther Science Denier List
- Kevin Trenberth
- Michael Mann
- Christopher Monckton
- Anthony Watts
- Gavin Schmidt
- Roy Spencer
- JoAnne Nova
- David Evans
- Everyone at “Skeptical”Science
- Robert Brown
- Al Gore
- Leonardo DiCaprio
- Richard Branson
- David Attenborough
- Richard Lindzen
- Fred Singer
- David Whitehouse
- Benny Peiser
- Mark Mosher
- Nick Stokes
- Willis Eschenbach
- Neil DeGrass Tyson
- Bill Nye
- Bjorn Lomborg
- more soon to come!
Please suggest names in the comments section and I will add them to the list!
Great article Joe, thanks for once again highlighting the utterly brain-dead “physics” of Earth’s interaction with the Sun as proclaimed by even so-called skeptics. We are heading straight into a new Dark Ages.
Click to access Dark_Ages.pdf
I think that “brain dead” here does NOT mean lack of intelligence or lack of education. Rather, it means developing blind spots to critical details of the thinking process that get bypassed when one’s intellectual habits are geared more towards a mechanical cranking out of results, as opposed to a deep analysis of what those results might mean.
Mathematicians and physicists apparently can do what they do and not really know WHAT they are doing, because the way they learned what they think they know is largely by mimicking — going through the motions of getting the results of calculations, without being careful to observe consistency and meaning throughout their analyses. That’s my suspicion, anyway, based on a few years of seeing my fellow math students in college seemingly crank out mathematical solutions, as I sat baffled, trying to figure out slowly why each step should unfold as it does, making sure all levels of the logic were consistent with where they originated. I apparently lack this important genetic trait of cranking out, and so I am doomed to the slow drudgery of trying to understand what I am doing.
Case in point, we can note Roy Spencer PhD’s apparent failure to do dimensional analysis on his defense of the “steel greenhouse” thought experiment, leading him to an equation that was not even an equation, according to one very detailed analysis. Brain dead? Well, not in the way we might think. But more like partially brain dead in a very specific region of the brain. “Selective brain death”, we might call it.
Similarly, with Stephen Hawking. Now today he might really be degenerating mentally, of course, but before this, even with all his faculties in tact, he professed climate alarm, and so even he seemed selectively brain dead, by virtue of the fact that his critical thinking process about climate change was numbed by the authority of other scientists in whom he apparently placed his complete trust on matters of climate change. He failed to confirm the physics behind their claims of doom. Being such a high profile figure, he (in my judgment) was irresponsible for doing this. Before proclaiming doom of other scientists, one should confirm the reasoning to see that their understanding of physics is consistent with one’s own. Especially with the high, … high level of physics knowledge Hawking possessed, you would have thought that he, at least, checked their math, before joining the doom band wagon.
And now I am amazed at how my lowly self, with not an inkling of the training that some of these PhD’s have, see clarity in details to which their supposedly superior minds seem brain dead. How is this possible? My answer is that this surely confirms that there are different kinds of intelligence, … different dimensions of intelligence, and some people must be brain dead in one or more of these dimensions, while being fully alive in other of these dimensions.
That’s an excellent summary of the situation Robert. As from the other post about the meaning and answer to existence, what a person is able to understand is truly dependent upon their personality type. Their Myers-Briggs type. BTW, do you know yours? I am INTP/J.
Most scientists and mathematicians are sensing-oriented, mechanically minded and on the autistic spectrum. It is absolutely correct that they are going through the steps, without considering the meaning of the steps. They learned the basic algorithm for conducting such steps in their schooling and learned the general method for applying the algorithm to other specific cases, but they never learned that the particular examples they learned from may have had lifetimes of reasoning and logical analysis behind them to get to those final simplified examples they learned from.
They have been turned into functionaries and apparatchiks. And they have been taught that logic and philosophy and meaning isn’t important, and don’t even really exist as things in reality; it is only important to get a result that looks something like reality. Add fudge factors from there to get closer. So when they create the flat Earth model with 240 W/m^2 from the Sun, they justify this as an average and what’s wrong with averages? Average force applied over distance for example can be used to get the total work: W = <F>*d. We ALL learn that in physics. And so they apply that reasoning elsewhere without thinking about it in any finer detail for other situations. They never consider that a flat surface facing the Sun which receives 240 W/m^2 must actually be at two astronomical units distance from the Sun, twice the distance that the Earth actually is. It’s a paradox. A paradox indicates something wrong. But they don’t know that, because they really don’t know why a paradox is logically important in reality. They probably don’t even know what a paradox is, because they literally have zero knowledge about logic and what it means to be rational. Indeed they’ve been taught that existence is irrational and meaningless and so who cares if there’s a physical paradox embedded in the model? If the model gets reasonable answers with reasonable fudge factors then it must be correct, right!? The fudge factors here, in this case, is that the atmosphere must provide 208% more energy than the Sun does as heat to the surface. Thermodynamics? That’s only important for nuclear plants, and wasn’t an interesting course anyway.
Maybe people don’t know this, but the “fudge factor” thing is a real concept in physics. It goes way back. It is why Einstein felt that he could simply add another term to his general relativity equations in order for those equations to result in a type of universe that he simply presumed should exist. My friends in undergrad and I actually had a running joke about a constant we called “M”. The constant “M” could be added to any equation in order to make the equation give the correct answer! We thought we were hilarious. “M” stood for the “magic constant”. We were exposed to this idea of adding fudge factors to equations “which seem reasonable” so often that we made a joke about it, while accepting that under certain conditions it might be valid if you have a reason to suspect that the equations you derived might be incomplete because they left something out…like friction for example. Einstein did it 100 years ago and later called it his biggest blunder. But that was after the fact – he did it originally for reasons which not only him but everyone else accepted because they presumed that they knew what type of universe we lived in. It was only 20-30 years later with Hubble and the discovery of the expanding universe that everyone realized Einstein’s “fudge factor” was incorrect.
So yes, there is a structural problem with science and it has existed for quite some time. It has a solution and the solution is trivial: All scientists need to become educated in logic and related philosophy. They need to understand what they’re doing on a deeper level rather than simply being educated to crank out a general algorithm.
This is basically a good article also explaining how people can become so solidified in such otherwise obvious untruths:
Pingback: The Walking Braindead: Flat Earther Science Denier List | Principia Scientific International
I remember, once, twenty or more years ago, a student in one of my dance exercise classes that I taught was very eager to apply the Myers-Briggs questionnaire to me. I said, “okay”, and the next time I saw her, she said that my answers revealed that I was a personality type making up 1% or less of the population, which, I think, was the INFJ type, according to the rationale of that questionnaire.
Maybe this tool is useful for assessing the type of brain death that we are all subject to. (^_^)
… The Myers-Briggs brain-death inventory …
Anyhow, I was just looking at the original post by Willis Eschenbach at WUWT about the “steel greenhouse”, and was noticing some lately realized things:
WE: “As a result, for a blackbody, we can measure the temperature in units of radiation, which are watts per square metre (W/m2).”
(1) CAN we measure temperature in units of RADIATION ? — I thought that temperature determined radiation, rather than radiation determining temperature, let alone standing for temperature as its measure.
(2) IS a unit of RADIATION designated in W/m2 ? — I thought W/m2 was a unit of radiation energy FLUX DENSITY, where the “W” is the unit of energy POWER and the “m2” is a specific area over which this energy power radiates.
[JP: Yes it is a stupid statement. Confusing and stupid. We’ll see a contradiction later, but first… A unit of radiation would be a JOULE. A Joule spent in some time over some area is energy flux density, having units of W/m^2. So…his statement simply makes no sense at all. He knows the words, and knows some little things about what they kind of sort of mean…and then he sweeps himself into grand fallacies because he actually has no idea what he is talking about. This is their best material too. They don’t know what in the fuck they’re talking about, don’t know what physical units are, don’t know about any difference between temperature, energy, and energy flux density…and then they come up with their “best” (lol) material. Amazing idiots. The only thing that is true which could be pulled out, is that indeed for a blackbody its temperature and its radiant output have an equation which directly connects them…but they’re not the same units!]
WE: “The advantage is that while temperature (degrees) is not conserved, energy (W/m2) is conserved.”
If “m2” can change with respect to where the W radiates, then how can “W/m2” be conserved ? — It cannot, and so “W/m2” is NOT a correct statement of the “energy”, and a NOT-correct statement of energy cannot be a correct statement about energy conservation.
[JP: And here’s the contradiction I mentioned. He said that temperature could be measured in units of radiation which he said were W/m^2. Although he goes back to referencing “degrees” here, he did just say that “we can measure the temperature in units of radiation, which are watts per square metre (W/m2)”. Thus, if W/m^2 are conserved, and these stand in for temperature, then temperature should be conserved too. But because he doesn’t know w.i.t.f. he’s doing or even talking about, this allows for the convenience of simply making up any old BS and sophistry you want until you think it sounds like you’ve arrived at the conclusion you wanted. And this is their best material! You are correct in your assessment…W/m^2 is NOT a conserved quantity. Here we have logical consistency because just as temperature is not a conserved unit, W/m^2 are not either.]
WE: “The planet is in interstellar space, with no atmosphere and no nearby stars. The equilibrium surface temperature of this planet is, of course, 235 W/m2.”
[JP: Makes no direct sense. The temperature is not in units of W/m^2.]
This statement really causes me dissonance, because simply claiming a temperature in terms of W/m2 seems wrong. A given “W” radiating over a given “m2” could be assigned a temperature, yes, but the temperature is NOT that particular “W/m2”, is it ? We only know the particular temperature, if we know the particular “W” and the particular “m2”. The particular “W/m2” does not exist alone without the particular, associated “m2” (an actual reference SURFACE AREA) to DEFINE the combination of “W” and “m2” as a “temperature”, right ?
[JP: Indeed. All right.]
Hence, I find statements about W/m2 radiating to space to be nonsensical. Space is NOT a surface area over which any W could radiate to result in any power going to “space”. Space surrounding a W/m2 flux is indeterminate or infinite. So, what are those watts doing? In other words, WattTF ?
[JP: Right. It’s a certain W/m^2 originating at the surface, then going to space but by going to space the W/m^2 value changes and decreases. It doesn’t stay the same W/m^2.]
Robert I embedded my reply to your comment above since it was easier to do it that way.
Great piece, JP.
Great art, Kernodle.
JP, I recently reread your piece
“Why are there no patents which exploit the underlying physical principle of the GHE?”
I’m afraid you were completely wrong about the patent office. They really are that stupid (or don’t care):
Oh man reading that is so painfully stupid. Given the names on the patent, must have been a family project with this kids for science fair or something…lol.
It’s so sad. They tried to capture heat in the 1800’s people…they couldn’t! Hence modern thermodynamics.
US Patent 4993403
“Concentric transparent shells surround the enclosure and permit the passage of solar radiation therethrough, creating a greenhouse effect for elevating the temperature within the shells. Heat energy present at the exterior surface of the enclosure is then absorbed and trapped therein.”
Eschenbach is not even an original imbecile. He’s ~25 years late!
The family has Downs Syndrome, so they can be forgiven. This patent would make a good joke. Just send it to your “The Flat-Earther Science Denier List”. Claim that there’s big money in this, and that they should fund you to build this device.
That’s a real patent ? Seriously ?!
I tracked down a couple of articles that might relate to your recent interest in CO2 absorption bands and CO2’s overall capability of heating Earth’s atmosphere. These articles were written by a person whose name I think I finally figured out is C. B. Thorington, located at a website where the claim is that the author is a retired physicist.
I found this person’s name by associating an avatar picture to a response made to one of the comments at the website, and then I tried Googling this name to see whether I could find any background information.
Doing this, I came across a list of about eight abstracts of some pretty high-caliber physics articles in apparently peer-reviewed journals with this name listed as one of the authors. This person’s words seem to make sense, and I’m not finding any grave inconsistencies yet between them and JP’s words.
Anyhow, here are the URLs to the two articles:
Basically, the idea is: It is physically impossible for atmospheric CO2 to hold enough thermal energy to cause a detectable change in ocean water temperature, let alone a change large enough to cause additional evaporation to add more water vapor to the atmosphere as the amplifier of Co2’s thermal effect. Without the ability to heat the ocean to cause evaporation to cause more water vapor to cause more heating, CO2 is impotent, which means Catastrophic Human-Caused Climate Change is (ironically) f***ed.
I think context and personality will shape our innner dialogue. I love this song, I think it FEELS what it means …. ” Look back in”
Sorry I meant this track by Moby.. Look Back in:
Back in my dance/choreography days [yep, you read right — I was a dancer too] — I was a big Moby fan.
So, we have male, straight, dancer, visual artist, math/science wanna be, climate alarm skeptic. What planet is this guy from ?
Lol, Robert, Ive no idea? I just like some of his music. I maybe was consciously interpreting his sound with a deep inner memory code. It felt nice. It made me feel good. Sometimes away from the raw scientific false world is a world of senses that we aslo use erroneously to be reality. Im an INTJ , my interptetation will be different from yours maybe, but it doesnt mean either interpretation is wrong. You seem to have a grasp of the right brain creative side obviously with your dance skills and visual artistry which you you realise and know that a lot a people dont have. Balancing both heispheres gives you a multitude of advantages as you know. My concept here is how we realte to the whole climate alarm thing. How does it make you feel, or how does it rationally bother you. Two answers to the same question are dependent on your personality profile. As Shakespeare said:
“Why then ’tis none for you; for there is nothing either good or bad, but thinking makes it so.”
I don’t wish to denigrate but I was absolutely gob smacked at the number of people I previously admired as “sceptics” and published articles on their own sites, one even being falsely investigated by the police, who wholeheartedly supported the “steel greenhouse” bullshit.
Sad, really !
I wish to nominate Tim Flannery of Australia’s Climate Council fame. He is so concerned about climate change that he purchased waterfront properties in a secluded exclusive area north of Sydney that will most definitely go under with another few feet of sea level rise. There are no roads to this enclave.
This highlights one of the reasons these people promote this BS – celebrity leads to financial opportunities and cushy well paid Government consulting jobs and other gravy train benefits the like of which most similarly qualified individuals employed in Academia can only dream of.
But I can never understand how BS like Trenberth et al’s Energy Budget has any credibility when it is obvious nonsense.
I have some solar panels with an area of ~1.3 square metres. They are rated as 200 W. Their maximum efficiency is 15.6%.
With 161 W/m2 solar insolation these panels could produce at most 161 x 1.3 x 0.156 = ~33 W making the solar panel industry the biggest scam on Earth.
At 1000 W/m2 solar insolation the 200 W rating is real.
Surely this is obvious to anyone who thinks about it – no pixie dust needed if you think rationally.
I like this, it takes the Myers-Briggs type to another level:
Ponerization (from ancient Greek poneros – evil), is a ponerological term coined by Dr. Andrzej M. Łobaczewski. Ponerization is the influence of pathological people on individuals and groups whereby they develop acceptance of pathological reasoning and values.
@Robert Kernodle says:
2017/09/14 at 7:01 AM
I disagree with your premise on two counts. One, most of those people profess to be “experts” in scientific fields of study for which they have no knowledge, disingenuously and willfully so. Second, they care more about their “belief” systems and the “means” to purely support those “beliefs”. These are not intelligent people! … quite to the contrary. An intelligent person accepts reality and truth. These people accept neither. They dismiss both. Is “belief” a measure of intelligence? .. Not in my world.
No, Joseph has it correct. These people are full blown idiots and zealots. They care not for science and the truth. They only care about themselves, their beliefs and their agendas. The facts of this have been laid before you for decades and has become as clear as could be.
Thanks for bringing up the “steel greenhouse” thing … you guys gonna come over and clean the coffee off of my monitor now? … I just can’t help but laugh hysterically at the mere thought of that stupid “thought experiment” .. reminds me of the old advertisements on the back of 80’s Popular Mechanics magazines, promising free energy (perpetuum mobile) machines. Just cracks me up every time… 🙂
2017/09/15 at 6:11 AM
If there is true mental deficiency here, then it is at a higher level than current psychologists seem to be aware. Hence, that’s why the word, “idiot”, these days tends to be a descriptive, pejorative term only, reserved for people we think are senseless and foolish, as opposed to a word describing a measurable mental deficiency.
In this respect, I stand by what I wrote earlier.
Take Michael Mann, for example. I think this is a case where somebody really didn’t study his physics thoroughly enough to understand the subject deeply. He managed to get his PhD by successfully going through the motions required to get it, without really grasping all the implications of what he supposedly learned to get it.
Then, lots of funding became available for research in this new area of study at the time, centered around human causes of global warming. Mann maybe could not hack it in the field of physics at the professional level, and so he jumped on this new funding boat to apply (he thought) his “understanding” of physics to this new, popular area of research.
He subsequently made erroneous conclusions that were too concealed in technicality for most people to detect. His plain-language words based on his publicly-undetectable errors became gospel, and the chain of his errors got extended and encased in other errors that formed the basis of more false doctrines that got publicized, aggrandized, politicized further, which all made him into an iconic hero. And here we are today, grasping for the real truth in his shadow.
This is all my speculation, of course, but rather than simply call someone an “idiot”, I’d like to probe a little deeper to figure out just what KIND of an idiot they might be. This is a very sophisticated form of idiocy, … not your ordinary idiocy. Maybe we need a new word for it — maybe “academidiocy”. This word reflects the possibility that our educational institutions are failing in a way that produces such “academidiots”.
That ends this session of idiot analysis (IA, for short). (^_^)
That’s a good one – academidiocy. And I agree that this condition needs to be recognized and studied and understood.
“academidiocy” — a social disorder ? … a behavioral disorder ? … NOT a medical or true, physical, functional disorder.
Hey, if alarmists can label deniers, then deniers can label academidiots and climate faith healers for what they appear to be.
The climate faith healers have no interest in the science, as squidly might agree. The climate faith healers just follow the preaching of the academidiots. One, therefore, does not dare question Pope Gore or Cardinal Mann — one accepts The Word as preached by them, while trying to save others.
So, beware of that intrusive knock on your front door, some sunny warm summer day, when a pleasant fellow dressed in black pants, white shirt, and a tie smiles at you, asking, “Did you know that Al loves you?” [Allah Gore]
Thanks Robert for the links. I had previously only considered the heat capacity of co2 in relation to other gases in the atmosphere. Taking the heat capacity of all ocean and land absorbing solar energy, makes co2 look like an ant attempting to lift the empire state building.
This is a good tune. Only hip hop song to use the words “mathematics”, “atmosphere”, “scientifical power”.
“I explained why a small miinority of scientists might dissent despite their scientific training, in my above post. I shouldn’t have to do it again.
I diddn’t write anything that confused heat, energy and temperature.
Radiation is a flux of energy. Energy cannot be created or destroyed in any processes that we are familiar with. I am not confused about the meaning of these terms. Heat energy is lost as a result of radiation outflow. Temperature is the measurement of the average energy per degree of freedom in a system according to statistical mechanics.
You are just trying to confuse the issue with BS, to justify holding an opinion that is based on political bias and ignorance of the subject.”
Joe, that is a reply I received from Eric Adler on Daily Caller. He claims to hold a PHD from Columbia in Physics. I don’t doubt that but I wish I had your expertise to give him a cogent rebuttal.
@George – Well in reading that quotation it appears that he didn’t rebut anything at all. Just claims and accusations. You must have just trounced him…lol.
Anyone posing or functioning as “Editor of the Flavious Maximus website” is almst CERTAINLY an authority worshipper
and magic gas barking K o o K.
Mark Mosher, serial deceiver,
Nick Stokes, statistical fraud worshipper and serial deceiver
both fraud barking science destroyers with connections to the other frauds on Joseph’s list, particularly Watts, Eschenbach, et al.
Almost everyone who belongs to the West’s liberal political parties in any official capacity
has concluded that “magic insulation mixed in a bath
conduction chilling a light-warmed rock,
makes thermal sensors detect and depict more light arriving and warming the rock
as the insulation makes less light arrive and warm it.”
Neil DeGrass Tyson is one.
Bill Nye Thuh Magic Gais Barking Fly
is yet another of the professional class science molesters.
Obviously the list goes on – Prince Charles, legendary bafflegabber, is one of the political innumeratti/ignoratti whose job of authority worship ruined his potential for intellectual capacity to properly answer “What happens to the temperatures of light-warmed rocks, 20% less light warms?”
His answer to that would be
“An interesting question I myself have wondered, I think this is a matter climatastrophologists have written on extensively, and it’s a question of whether the magical gassiness is making the light not arrive… it seems from what I’ve read and understand if the magical gassiness stopped the light from reaching and warming the rock or rocks, then of course their temperatures will go up, each time the green house gases cause less warming light to warm them. If that wasn’t the case, we wouldn’t have need of the field of Climatastrophology would we?”
Sky Dragon Rap-sody
by moi (yours truly)
There’s a rumor goin’ ’round’
that the climate is precarious
a dark proposition
made of lies
by men nefarious
spit out in cyber gibberish
so twisted, skewed
and fiddled with
conclusions are ridiculous
NASA, GISS, N-O-A-A
you workin’ words sophistically
controlling minds like wizards
instead of empir-i-cally
the world is doomed to suffer hell
this you say is certain
hoping all pay no attention
to that man behind the curtain
climate change, climate change
a catastrophic vision
it’s all our fault
its’ all our fault
its’ all our fault for livin’
I just noticed something interestingly disturbing about a couple of video lectures online by George Mason University Atmospheric, Oceanic and Earth Sciences — fairly long videos (one about 20 minutes, the other about 16 minutes).
The instructor, I thought did a great job explaining, in great detail, the technicalities of CO2 band broadening, and energy relationships. His pacing was good. His graphics seemed good. His whole presentation seemed very educational. Surely, I thought, in Part II, the second video of the lecture duo, the instructor will relate all that he has detailed to a thermal capacity figure for Earth’s CO2, .. but no.
It is as though he just stopped, after all that detailed explanation to merely assert some positive feeling that “we think we know what is causing it” [the heating of the globe?]. He put on this whole song a dance to show all this detailed technical knowledge, and then he showed absolutely NO causal relationship between everythig that he just talked about and the position he was supporting. … as if viewers were supposed to be so impressed by a display of technical knowledge that they would just take his word for it.
Think of somebody presenting you with a detailed molecular breakdown of hamburger meat, only to conclude his exposition by saying, “We know that Jesus loves you.”
But how do the molecular intricacies of hamburger meat cause Jesus to love me?
How does CO2 band broadening translate into a real atmospheric heat capacity and heating potential? Come on ! Go all the way with it ! Apply it ! Connect it causally to a mechanism !
Brain death by avoidance or by proclamation without causation.
Hey Robert , Hehe.. love it … your a poet and you dont know it lol o lol
That’s the spirit! I like your tone, Joe.
When you talk about the small percentage of CO2 in the air, alarmists say that size does not matter, and then they proceed to present a plethora of seemingly well-constructed paragraphs to justify this claim.
Well, I did the following graphic:
Is this picture worth a thousand of their words?
If not, then tell me how one molecule of CO2 can vibrate, translate, and rotate enough to cause 100 molecules of H2O to vibrate, translate, and rotate with enough energy to translate to 2400 other molecules of air.
Further, tell me how the greater forces that move these other 2400 molecules fluid dynamically at a collective molecular level are slaves to this one molecule that dictates to a hundred molecules radiatively at a collective atomic level.
Maybe I’m the one who is brain dead, because I just cant’ see it.
A few updates to the list!
RK: “He put on this whole song a dance to show all this detailed technical knowledge, and then he showed absolutely NO causal relationship between everythig that he just talked about and the position he was supporting. … as if viewers were supposed to be so impressed by a display of technical knowledge that they would just take his word for it.”
That’s the CON! We all know how to do this to greater and lesser extents but in my experience it is something that everyone can do to some level of confidence. The conmen we actually call conmen are simply the best at it. Some are so good at it that most people don’t even recognize the con, like money printing for example (cough Federal Reserve).
Scientists have become good at it in today’s academic world. You’ll note that this behaviour is endemic in the alarmist side of the debate. “Higher temperature and higher CO2 are correlated!” Yes, but the direction of causality in that correlation is that higher temperature caused the higher CO2. “You don’t know that!” Umm…yes that’s what the graph says. “The increasing CO2 made the temperature higher still.” Etc. Fraud. It’s ALL FRAUD. And now almost every scientist and high school teacher is a conman, using very basic techniques of the con as you described so well.
A lot of the people on the list argue skeptically within the bounds of the greenhouse theory, which helps a little to deconstruct this theory from within. At the same time, it helps a little to keep the theory viable.
I think a number of people on the list have helped the case, and by adding a name, I do not wish to totally dismiss a person’s useful contribution. I that spirit, I nominate a person whose perspectives I have valued, but who still seems to hold to the fundamental theory that I think is fundamentally wrong. This person I am nominating is Bjorn Lomborg. Sorry, Bjorn. Again, I don’t think of this list so much as a sh** list as a list of people who are almost there, except for Neil DeGrass Tyson and Bill Nye — they probably would fit better on another list, along with Stephen Hawking.
Fake, or at least nicely boxed in and thus controlled opposition, has always been one of the most favorite con techniques.
Speaking of “nicely boxed in”, I’ve been looking at this paper again:
I find the paper enlightening, although annoying.
One statement that particularly annoys me is that skeptics should stop saying, “CO2 is a trace gas”, because this is “irrelevant”. So what if CO2t absorbs 1/3 to 1/4 of longwave radiation absorbed by the WHOLE atmosphere? That’s only 0.04% of the WHOLE atmosphere exhibiting this behavior. I would call this a “trace effect”. Only 1 in 2400 other molecules is exhibiting this behavior, among, at most, 100 other molecules exhibiting this same behavior among 2400 OTHER molecules exhibiting OTHER overpowering behaviors like convection, evaporation and such.
I would say, then, that an entity that causes a trace effect qualifies for a label as a “trace entity”.
Come on ! … Dethrone it ! … You can do it, Dr. Rancourt.
The elites project their personality onto co2. If they can whip a mob into a frenzy, then so can co2 drive the other 2499 molecules of air. Oh oh oh it’s magic, you know, never believe it’s not so.
Hey, AP, now that inspires me to make up another false analogy with misapplied physics to convince you that the main false analogy with misapplied physics is true.
It would involve elites, a mob, and “backrecitation” of the elites’ ideas. A good alarmist must be well equipped with an arsenal of false analogies, you know, in case the first one does not have the desired effect.
If I understand correctly, Rancourt outright rejects the application of the Stefan-Boltzmann Law to determine Earth’s planetary temperature from outer space. Further, he outright rejects the estimated temperature of Earth without an atmosphere, suggesting the figure, -4 C., instead of the traditional -18C.
Yet, he speaks of the global average temperature of AIR near the surface as if it were the same domain of measurable quantities as the NO-air surface for which he calculated that revised -4 C. How do you equate the domains of temperature-with-NO-air and temperature-OF-air. All you are doing is saying that the temperature of air is this, and the temperature of no air is that. There’s no comparison, as if they represent the same quantity. One is air. The other NO air. Two different measurements.
I still don’t see how you can just combine them like that to say that a difference of the two is an addition to the one by some unexplained, yet asserted, mechanism. At most, you might say that air has a different temperature than no air, but the temperature of air does NOT measure the temperature of the space that it now occupies without it. It’s BECAUSE the air now occupies the space that it is no longer the same space. It’s air space instead of “space” space. What caused the air to heat? Well, that’s what we are trying to figure out. Don’t go through all this calculation to get at a temperature difference between space and air, only to assert that CO2 somehow heats the air that now occupies the once airless space
Rancourt seems to do precisely this when he says, A planet’s surface (and atmosphere) heats up without any greenhouse gas present but it heats up faster and reaches higher temperatures with greenhouse gases. I am NOT seeing where this statement of his about CO2 is supported in anything else he presents in his paper. HOW, in all his physics wisdom, does CO2 do this?
Yep, indeed. As Carl has pointed out often, they’re comparing temperatures which don’t even make sense to compare in the first place, and then coming up with some scheme to justify the difference as some physical phenomenon which they call a greenhouse effect but by which a real greenhouse doesn’t actually function. Stupid!
Earth is not a greenhouse, and yet it is. Earth is not a black body, and yet it is.
It’s pathological ambivalence. Contradiction and confusion, creatively juxtaposed.
If it’s not these things, then STOP calling them these names.
That’s not an order, and yet it is.
Yah exactly…just make up new ideas in exchange for existing ideas using the same names which but now mean different things.
“Pathological ambivalence, contradiction and confusion, creatively juxtaposed.”
Rancourt’s calculation doesn’t make any sense. If we magically remove the atmosphere, the oceans will evaporate a new atmosphere.
Robert, yes sophists desperately need analogies. CO2 is like a virus to them, spreading its warmth wherever it goes, for centuries. That’s what they effectively claim.
It’s just a coincidence that Earth’s effective temperature matches SB equations with no atmosphere. This Te (-18C) matches the temp of middle of troposphere. This really fooled the psyentists. Venus has a Te of -41C. That should not be the case according to their paradigm.
While I tend to agree with some of our host’s list of brain dead, he is deluded when he says the main issue is that the Earth is round rather than flat.
Some “Flat Earth” models agree with observations with astonishing accuracy. For example Vasavada’s one dimensional model for the Moon:
My attempt to replicate Vasavada’s work was successful even though my model is also one dimensional (aka “Flat Earth). At least three other workers replicated Vasavada’s work using different methods:
More recently I have calculated the effect of changing the rate of lunar rotation and am gratified that Scott Denning is in close agreement:
As an amateur climate scientist I don’t expect to get much respect. However it is gratifying when one’s predictions match observations. You can call me names but it does not sting as long as my predictions match reality!
Airless bodies are relatively easy to model but there is a one dimensional model that has some success with bodies with significant atmospheres:
* It is derived from first principles with only one “Fudge Factor”.
* It works in the troposphere, tropopause and stratosphere.
* It works on all seven bodies in our solar system with significant atmospheres.
* The model predictions agree closely with observations.
* The model is replicable.
In this model the troposphere is characterized by collision broadening that renders the lower atmosphere opaque to outgoing Infra-Red radiation because absorption is proportional to the square of pressure.
In the stratosphere the absorption of radiation is proportional to pressure which means radiation is the dominant energy transfer process.
The tropopause is the transition region between linear and square law radiative absorption.
Titan is a moon of Saturn that has a surface atmospheric pressure higher than Earth’s. Like Earth it has oceans which means that latent heat has a significant effect on temperature gradients in the atmosphere.
Here is what happened when I tried to replicate Robinson & Catling’s model of Titan:
@gallopingcamel – call me deluded again.
Oh man…here it comes now. You dumb bastard…
Let me quote:
The link you provide to support your assertion that I am deluded because some flat Earth models agree with observations….wait for it…is not about a flat Earth model. It is a 1-D model of a depth of lunar regolith using REAL-TIME hence spherical actual geometry and actual input of solar energy! Your link proves everything about what I have said is wrong with flat Earth models! The link you provide is not about flat Earth modelling but REAL-TIME modelling with spherical geometry in a 1-D depth of lunar regolith!
Your next two links of your own work are also NOT flat Earth physics but use solar input as a function of spherical and even rotating geometry. This has NOTHING TO DO with “flat Earth” modelling or the flat Earth models which create the RGHE which I subsequently debunk.
You say you are an amateur climate scientist. Are you an amateur physicist? An amateur mathematician? Because you quite expose yourself here as not knowing what in the hell you are talking about.
GC: “You can call me names but it does not sting as long as my predictions match reality!”
It is your thoughts that don’t match reality. As given by the contradictions and misunderstandings in your very own statements and links to support your statements. *Let that sting for a bit.* And this argument is ridiculous on the face of it in any case, for goodness’ sake. The RGHE flat Earth model is said to match reality too, but it is actual reality? No, it is not sufficient to have numbers that you think matches reality. That is exactly, precisely 100% the problem with science and climate alarm and the entire damned effort here is to get science and scientists to appreciate that!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Good god man. You’re going on the moderation list. Sorry. Say stupid shit again and it won’t be posted.
While I tend to agree with some of our host’s list of brain dead, he is deluded when he says the main issue is that the Earth is round rather than flat.
I will be interested to see “our host’s” response to this.
Up, … he beat me to the post.
I noticed this paragraph in one of your links [bold mine]:
Tim adds:- The conceptual overview of how we are treating an illuminated sphere will help. Imaging a small square patch of the Moon directly under the sun. Day will last 27 earth days. Unlike most physics maths models we are doing dynamic modelling (it moves in time) so here we rotate the moon for day and night except we can’t so we reverse reality and gradually turn the sun off to night then back on again, same effect. In addition the moon is a sphere so if modelling a whole body is wanted this can be approximated by further sun modulation to take into account the double curvature, and sum. This was done with the SPICE model. The DiVINER satellite orbit facilitates slowly scanning the entire surface as the moon rotates. Work has also been done on eclipse results.
I’ll have to read it all more carefully, but I have to ask, “Where’s the flat?” … “Where’s the delusion in our host?” Hopefully, you might see how these very words, “sphere” and “moon is a sphere” might elicit the outrage that has befallen you, as they say NOTHING about flat and nothing about any delusion concerning flat’s being the major problem.
Again, where’s the flat that points to the delusion? The phrase, “one dimensional” does not automatically refer to flat geometry, but rather it might refer to (or possibly even contradict) something else being claimed. I sense a confusion of reference frames and possibly a confusion of meanings here.
He’s confusing 1-D model of DEPTH of lunar regolith on a spherical moon in real-time with 1-D model of a static averaged flat Earth.
These things are nowhere in the same ballpark, configuration, mathematical approach, physics involved, etc., and it is amazing that someone could confuse them. How are the differences here not major, extreme, entirely different reference frames, entirely different concepts, etc.? I don’t understand how someone would ever even begin to equate what’s happening with these.
“Hopefully, you might see how these very words, “sphere” and “moon is a sphere” might elicit the outrage”
Yeah, modeling in one dimension refers to how you handle the DATA, right?
It does not refer to the geometry of the entity from which the data is collected. I am so inept at even knowing the basics of this, but just twenty minutes of research leads me to think that data modeling and geometry use the same terms for entirely different ideas.
QUESTION for JP: I gather you don’t like “blockquote” formatting and “bold” formatting. I’ll stop using it, if this is the case, since my original post had them, and my moderated post did not. No biggie, … I just want to be clear about your preferences or how it might get lost in moderation.
All I did was approve the post. Not sure why it went to moderation. I didn’t touch anything inside it.
Yes of course…terms have a context and can change them to mean entirely different things. Obviously different.
1-D model of temperature vs. depth of surface regolith is entirely different from 1-D flat Earth model, for example.
In my quest to analyze inconsistencies in certain arguments, I tried looking at the Rancourt paper again … https://archive.org/details/RadiationPhysicsConstraintsOnGlobalWarmingCo2IncreaseHasLittleEffect
… thinking that I would really, really understand it all.
Here is my imaginary exchange with Rancourt, where I introduce a passage from the paper, and then follow it with my own comment in reaction to it:
RANCOURT: Rather than deal with the latter complexity of non-uniform irradiation, instead, as is commonly done, we take the entire planet’s surface to be uniformly irradiated with an intensity equal to the corresponding average solar constant. The correct average solar constant is = (1/4)Is = 341.5 W/m2, as is well known and easy to calculate.
ME: “… as is commonly done…”? Well no, that’s flat earth physics.
RANCOURT: Using the latter assumption for and (for now, wrongly) assuming that the Earth’s mean albedo is the same with and without its atmosphere ( = 0.30) eq.3 gives To = 254.8 K or minus (–) 18.3oC. Compared to the accepted actual mean global surface temperature of 14.0oC this would imply a total global atmosphere (greenhouse) effect warming on Earth of 32.3oC – corresponding to the repeatedly stated textbook nominal value of 33oC of greenhouse effect warming.
ME: Even the RATIONALE for carrying out this comparison is highly suspect, and so to accept this rationale, only to modify the approach to the input into this rationale is to insert information into a garbage compacter that performs a function on garbage to produce garbage that is now merely modified garbage. It’s still garbage.
Ie = ε σ T4 (eq.1)
RANCOURT: Many authors have stated that this thus calculated nominal –19oC temperature is “the Earth’s temperature as seen from outer space”. The latter statement is incorrect because although the actual present integrated emission intensity would, via eq.1, give this temperature, the actual longwave emission spectrum of Earth is not a black-body emission spectrum (i.e., does not follow Planck’s Law, due to significant atmospheric absorption) and only a black-body-radiation spectrum can be interpreted as corresponding to an emitter’s “temperature”.
ME: So, are you or are you not using this equation yourself ? Your statements are confusing.
To = [ (1 – ) / σ ]1/4 . (eq.3)
RANCOUT: With no atmosphere we should use the albedo of the Earth’s present solid surface, in its present state. The latter shortwave albedo has been measured by satellite and is 23/(23+161) = 0.125. This gives (eq.3) the significantly higher no-atmosphere mean surface temperature of To = 269.4 K (or –3.7oC), for a total atmosphere warming effect without changing anything else on the present Earth of +18oC, not +33oC. The correct predicted surface temperature of an Earth with no atmosphere but otherwise unchanged is –4oC.
ME: But didn’t you just use an equation derived for a black body on a body that you just said is NOT a black body? Again, confusing.
RANCOURT: Of course without an atmosphere there would be no vegetation, etc., and significantly more snow and ice cover, thereby increasing the surface albedo.
ME: What?! Is there any “significantly more ice or snow” on the moon? Now you’re just making shit up. You reject an SB-law interpretation of an Earth temperature, you then use the SB-law to make your point about Earth temperature, you reject the with-atmosphere albedo of traditional calculations, and yet you accept the water on a no-atmosphere planet, thinking it would freeze, when I’m pretty sure it would all boil away — how the hell did it get there, to begin with, with no atmosphere to accompany it?
Okay, I was going to go through your whole paper like this, but the previous passage just wrapped it up for me. You’re just tweaking your own ideas about a reality that could never exist in order to modify what you think is a new understanding of one feature of a reality that you are confusing with the non-reality you are using to clarify it. If that confuses you, then welcome to my world of trying to take your paper seriously.
Not sure why that red font change is happening above [sort of cool, but NOT intended]. I think it has something to do with Rancourt’s symbolism, my copy/pasting, and how it resembles some HTML tags, which is probably “confusing” the dialogue box here.
Now if I could just get little clown figures to dance around some of those words. (^_^)
Add this to the brain-dead file:
The radiative flux (energy per unit area) emitted by the planet is thus 4 times smaller than the amount of solar flux it absorbs.
Yes, these words are in BOLD on that website.
Unlike Alarmist echo chambers, Joe Postma allows posts that challenge his views. That puts him a cut above folks like Gavin Schmidt, Joe Romm, Tim Lambert and Michael Mann.
Unfortunately JP can’t handle a serious discussion of the issues so his immediate response is juvenile as here:
“Oh man…here it comes now. You dumb bastard…”
That is why real scientists shun you.
You dumb bastard. You called me deluded, then linked some things claiming that they supported you when they actually support me, and which demonstrated that you have literally no clue, not the faintest inkling, of what you’re talking about. That’s TOPS for getting the Slayer treatment right there. We will destroy you for that shit. You didn’t challenge me and you didn’t present a serious discussion – you presented that you had no clue that you were posting shit that supports me while claiming that it demonstrated my “delusions”. That’s the kind of shit that unsheathes the Slayer Sword of Righteousness. RAGE!RAGE!RAGE!RAGE!RAGE!RAGE!RAGE!RAGE!RAGE!RAGE!RAGE!RAGE!RAGE!RAGE!RAGE!RAGE!RAGE!RAGE!RAGE!RAGE!RAGE!RAGE!RAGE!RAGE!RAGE!RAGE!RAGE!RAGE!RAGE!RAGE!RAGE!RAGE!RAGE!RAGE!RAGE!RAGE!RAGE!RAGE!RAGE!RAGE!RAGE!RAGE! and FUCK YOU!
Umm, I work with real scientists every day from around the world while we fly the world’s most advanced astronomical detection systems ever designed by man in outer space, where I am in a position directly in-line between outer space and the scientist facilitating the very function of the instrument. I helped design it, test it, calibrate it, test it again in orbit, wrote the data reduction pipeline for it, and reduce never-before seen astrophysical data for it. We all know damned well not to say or do anything retarded around each other since 100’s of millions of dollars, let alone brand new science, depends on us not. And they all know damned well not to say stupid shit about the climate.
Internet loser amateur scientists don’t “shun” me, they’re afraid of me. And they should be afraid, “real” or amateur or not, because I can tell them exactly what is wrong with them. I have slain them just as you have now been slain.
You are now going to the auto-trash list. See ya!
Robert I’ll reply to your recent comments soon. Some points to follow-on about them…
Unfortunately JP can’t handle a serious discussion of the issues so his immediate response is juvenile as here:
“Oh man…here it comes now. You dumb bastard…”
That is why real scientists shun you.
I’d say that he handled the discussion pretty seriously, and it might be you who cannot handle how seriously he DID handle it. He defies the niceties of generally accepted decorum expected of scientists, yeah, and I’d say that this does not win him any points with critics like you, and, yeah, it probably deters others too from lending an ear. But that’s his choice to take this risk, given how much crap he has seen and how much he seems to know. This bolg here is his creation, and when you come into it, you subject yourself to his style. If you know this trait of his, then you should know that you are subject to it, like me, or anybody else.
People who do not see JP’s non-raging analyses might be a bit too quick to judge on the basis of only his scathing remarks, which are IN ADDITION TO, not in place of, his very insightful analyses and calmer responses that I have read in several other places online. Sometimes, a person just gets tired of being nice. It’s the same thing Donald Trump might get accused of with that North Korean rocket dude — when somebody is developing nuclear missiles to point at you, it’s time to stop being nice. You pointed a nuclear missile, by calling somebody “deluded”.
Before I called somebody “deluded”, I’d be pretty darn sure what I was talking about. You realize that this one word was the offending word that launched his reaction. “Deluded”, I think, can be an even more damning word than “bastard”. You may as well have called him a “dumb bastard”, to have said what you said, without thinking through it in a thread with the phrase, “brain dead”, in it. I’ll leave it to you to take the hint from my last comment. (^_^)
I actually think that you might have something constructive to add, but you messed that up with what I am seeing as your unjustified confidence.
… just another perspective for you.
Well yah exactly. Responding with “dumb bastard” is precisely equivalent to charging someone as “deluded”. How are these not the same!?
Do you see the disgusting duplicity of these sick freak goblins?! I responded IN KIND. But GC deserved the actual insult given that he didn’t actually know what in the heck he was doing or saying.
He duplicitously called me deluded when what he was doing and saying was *actually* deluded, and then he complains that no one can talk to me because I call people deluded back to them. lol
These damned bastards. This is what they do, from day one. They call you a name, try to debunk what you’re saying, then you show them how they were wrong and what they said/posted actually supports you thus proving that they’re the deluded one, and then they cry foul and claim that your scientific merit and arguments must not hold water since you have to resort to ad-hom…when they started with unjustified ad-hom and you subsequently prove that their ad-hom actually applies to them.
Dalenda est sophisto.
Yerp … when will they learn…..oh dear oh dear
Where will it end!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Day of the Lords By Joy Division
This is the room, the start of it all,
No portrait so fine, only sheets on the wall,
I’ve seen the nights, filled with bloodsport and pain,
And the bodies obtained, the bodies obtained.
Where will it end? Where will it end?
Where will it end? Where will it end?
These are your friends from childhood, through youth,
Who goaded you on, demanded more proof,
Withdrawal pain is hard, it can do you right in,
So distorted and thin, distorted and thin.
Where will it end? Where will it end?
Where will it end? Where will it end?
This is the car at the edge of the road,
There’s nothing disturbed, all the windows are closed,
I guess you were right, when we talked in the heat,
There’s no room for the weak, no room for the weak,
… not one of mine, but I think it’s hilarious:
You should’ve just admitted you were mistaken and acted like a fool. Repent, and Jah may forgive you.
Yeah he should have asked if Joseph could see any beauty in them as flat earth models, and would have had his misconception pointed out quite reasonably,
Joe displays what is currently described as ”toxic masculinity”, and to your average post modern feminised Lefty that marks him out as a ‘white alpha male” the worst kind of human that exists.
To other ”toxic’s” the out-burst’s, are quite amusing, as the beta’s scramble for the moral high, whilst assuming victim status, so feminised have grown men become.
You can take the boy away from the farm, but by doing so, you will not take the farm out of the boy……………..farm boys play rough.
Yeah he should have asked if Joseph could see any beauty in them as flat earth models, and would have had his misconception pointed out quite reasonably.
Joe displays what is currently described as ”toxic masculinity”, and to your average post modern feminised Lefty that marks him out as a ‘white alpha male” the worst kind of human that exists.
To other ”toxic’s” the out-burst’s are quite amusing, as the beta’s scramble for the moral high, whilst assuming victim status, so feminised have grown men become.
You can take the boy away from the farm, but by doing so, you will not take the farm out of the boy……………..farm boys play rough.
I guess that I am a “toxically masculine white alpha male”, then, because I found the honesty “quite amusing”.
… ever notice how people who do the really front-line, hard work of the world seem to curse a lot? — professional carpenters, painters, mechanics, equipment service guys, farmers, and so forth? I guess a REAL scientist tends to be like these guys. (^_^)
You’ve got the kind of “pros” who have the latest stylish tools, who measure everything with neat, spiffy, perfectly clean scales and levels, … who can explain clearly what they do, are clean cut, showered, smell good, nice neat cloths — you know, the TV-show types. Then you’ve got the guys who have paint-stained, torn cloths, pony tails, beards, … who use paint stained levels and tools, thrown into a rickety truck, … who can sight, without tools, what the other type has to use tools for, and who can build better and faster (in their sleep) than the clean-cut type could do fully awake on their best days.
And they fucking growl… Grrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrr
The really funny thing is that power expressed in W/m2 is Joules/sec.m2.
Anyone who thinks fluxes do not change over time is stupid.
All of the “climate “science” justifications” for a “back radiative greenhouse effect” claim time is irrelevant.
And THAT is stupid.
I have many more names to suggest for the ongoing list …
… namely, everybody involved in the following lawsuit:
Click to access YouthAmendedComplaintAgainstUS.pdf
“Twenty-five years later, today’s best science confirms that 350 ppm is the maximum safe level of atmospheric CO2 required to restore a stable climate system.”
What freaking unadulterated bullshit!!!!!
I Was reading some EU health and safety at work stuff the other day, direct from some EU site.
700ppm max in office environment, 650/700ppm outside, if you are on the ground on not halfway up an active volcano taking measurements.
That added extra when they say ”400ppm” …. then throw in ‘in a well mixed atmosphere’.
well in a well mixed bottle of water and dirt, the heaviest grains end up quickly at the bottom, i’m not sure where i read co2 being the heaviest molecule, but it has always made sense because its purpose to exist is on the surface…….and thats where most of it is going to be isnt it ?.
It also gave figures on respiration, 40/45,000ppm each exhale just by walking about, thats why the front room fills upto 1500ppm,, and old dears think talking to their frontroom plants makes the plants grow bigger than the ones in the kitchen, in half the co2 concentration.
Does co2 mix pretty uni-formally, will it be 600ppm+ at ground level ?.
What freaking unadulterated bullshit!!!!!
That about sums it up.
Here’s an update on that climate lawsuit against the United States government, filed in 2015, and scheduled to go to trial in 2018:
Check out that almost gangstah pose in the pic with one of the lead attorneys for the plaintiff up front.
In sum, What freaking unadulterated bullshit!!!!!
They have no moral’s, no shame, using children as a politicised weapon, all in a days work for those bastards.
Theres several cases Robert, all will end in the supreme court eventually, California’s case against the oil companies the lot.
They will need to prove their case, scientifically i mean, different ball now, even more different in 4/5yrs when the cases get to the SC………
That’s assuming the sierra club etc keep funding them.
Oh, and the kids — they’re not really brain dead, but rather brainwashed, … well, I guess that’s a FORM of brain death … by washing. Anyhow, it’s a testament to the marvelous work that our educational institutions are doing at all levels.
NASA, NOAA, and National Geographic Society, to name a few, get top marks for programs specifically conceived to [clear throat] “educate” today’s youth about climate change.
Why can’t we form some sort of class action law suit looking for psychological damage reparations for climate alarm teaching flat Earth physics and wreaking modern knowledge of thermodynamics.
Is that where this has to go? Since scientists are so braindead or the system at least has become so bureaucratically stagnant, that we need a court to decide? Could you imagine if I could ever get to testify about this stuff? I would f***ing destroy them so badly!
If I’m understanding correctly, this case is still scheduled for trial, even though a temporary stay has been ordered. … not sure what this means.
It’s sooooooooooooooo ridiculous, … so ridiculous, in fact, that I have to try to keep up with it. I should thank all involved for the entertainment. The claims in the case are just so preposterous.
What a waste of time and resources. If ever you want to see the full manifesto of climate alarmism in full swing, just try to read the case — 100 pages of pure unadulterated crap. … hard to believe that there are lawyers who do this sort of thing.
It’s blatantly transparent desperation — using children as hitching posts to impose fatally impractical idealism, driven by a gross misunderstanding of reality.
I think that there should be a counter-suit by all the poor people who would be immediately harmed by any attempted massive exodus from fossil-fuel powered civilized infrastructures. I could envision wording like … willfully knowing the immediate impacts of deriving underprivileged people of reliable energy sources, in order to favor financially privileged people, thereby fostering a toxic form of class bias heretofore unknown in history, causing grave physical and mental damages to those less privileged masses.
Oh, I could crank out some good stuff along those lines.
“deriving” = “depriving”
Obviously, I’d do a better job of spell checking in a serious attempt. (^_^)
Robert Kernodle vs. The United States of America
Dihydrogen Monoxide (H2O) is a known causative agent in many thousands of deaths, and it is a major contributor to billions of dollars in property damage and environmental damage, each year. The destructive effects of dihydrogen monoxide have been know for thousands of years. From a long list, we note the following:
* Death due to accidental inhalation, even in small quantities.
* Severe tissue damage after prolonged exposure to its solid form.
* Excessive sweating and vomiting.
* Severe burns in its gaseous state.
* Primary contributor to soil erosion and property destruction.
* Major accelerant of corrosion and oxidation for many metals.
* Contaminant of electrical systems, often causing short-circuits.
* Destroyer of effective automobile brakes.
* Component in biopsies of pre-cancerous tumors and lesions.
* Primary agent of catastrophic weather events.
* Major ingredient in many home-brewed bombs.
* Popular solvent used in abortion clinics.
* Primary substance used in cult rituals, such as baptism.
* Performance enhancer for pedophiles, pornographers, and others in the sex trades.
* Preferred substance of torture in modern-day applications using a tilted board.
Given these and many other proven, deleterious effects of H2O, the United States of America has failed to take steps to transition effectively away from an H20-based economy, thereby putting future generations of our children and our children’s children in grave peril. The United States of America has had more than enough time to study, analyze and apply this long-standing knowledge to corrective, climate-stabilizing efforts, and yet it has done far too little to act as a responsible steward. Such gross negligence on the part of the sovereign protector of life, liberty, and property in this land threatens great physical and psychological damage, recovery of whose costs the current complainant applies.
If one simply must be afraid of atmospheric gases I nominate Oxygen.
Oxygen ultimately destroys everything in either rapid conflagration or slow decay.
I vote seagull’s, their back-eliminations, can ruin a suit.
Rosco, yes, Oxygen — that’s another potential lawsuit, due to well known dangers associated with:
* Rust that destroys civilized infrastructure.
* Wild fires that consume our businesses and dwellings.
* Free radical damage that leads to death by aging.
A responsible society would impose a tax on oxygen to help offset this sort of damage.
But let’s not forget about nitrogen either. This major constituent of atmospheric gases is well known for its role in air born disease vectors, effectively carrying spores, viruses, and untold other threats into the lungs, eyes, noses, and throats of innocent children and puppies.
2017/09/25 at 8:23 AM
I disagree … they actually do have an understanding of reality. They don’t care. This is not about reality! .. this is about Marxism .. this is about political and social ideology .. has absolutely nothing to do with science or reality. They are hijacking science and reality to achieve their communist goals … period. …. full stop.
The metastasis of the Marxist cancer, through all the Institutions government and influence, scum anti-humanist’s posing as humanist’s.
The fall of the Berlin wall setting them on their march of ruination, post their craved for domination of our societies.
The bastards have set their Muslim malitias on us, loosing all their dark aged savagery.
They so nearly got their complete control.
But enough people are ”aware” of them now, they won a war very few knew they were waging on them, the theatre of that war was the internet, and the army of idiot drones they created.
Now they are losing their grip on the west they want to censor the fight back with censorship of the net, the most power propaganda tool the world has ever known.
So fucking depressing, i needed to use profanity.
This is us, this is my Identity, the oldest continuous government [tynwald] in the world, that’s who we are, the fucking Manx.
I dont know what this kind of music is called, but i am coming to love this dead south type stuff.
Full screen HD enjoy.
We have 2 national flags, the red one with the 3 legs symbol,…………….and the chequered flag.
This is my identity, crash hat’s not bhurka’s.
The vid is about my home, it is not a particularly special vid, it just has 2 great tracks on it.
One you listen to, and one you watch.
37+ miles per lap
6 laps per race
Average speed per lap 130/135 mph.
Average deaths per meeting about 3.
Size of testicles required to compete, size Astronaut.
Why do they keep coming back and dying ? because they are human, and humans are amazing, There can be only one king of THE mountain [snaefell], the fastest man ALIVE on 2 wheels around the worlds deadliest race-track, thats why they keep coming back……..it scares them, when nothing else in their lives does, its a drug, the I.O.M. T.T.
1600+ bends and corners on the UK’s bumpiest main roads.
Heres the full experience on-board during practice.
We do this 3 times a year, for a fortnight a time.
Squidly and Gary,
If I may disagree with you both: I think that you might be giving these folks too much credit. I don’t think that they are smart enough to know reality and then systematically misrepresent it in order to further a conspiracy to rule anybody. Rather, i just think that they are not that bright on some level.
I await proof to the contrary.
This has always been the question and it serves as a great protection shield for the entire thing: Is it malice or stupidity?
That is the question.
It is malice, or stupidity?
It’s the same thing in the end. Because if by their stupidity they do indeed plan to do and have done quite malicious things indiscriminately. And because if by their maliciousness they are using quite stupid things to justify it.
Delenda est sophisto.
It is both Joe.
The malice does not originate in the west, it simply used the stupidity of the western elite, when it was set free in the west, when the wall came down, and the long march of the water melons began, single issue fanaticism [SIF’s] never sated, a victory begetting another righteous cause.
I remember reading this 10 years ago Robert.
It was based in the previous 20/30 yrs, all of which i was fully aware of, it happened all around me, live.
I dont think many of the identi-kit lefties have even heard of marxism or have the slightest clue they live in a pseudo-reality, every information source they seek is for confirmation bias, anything that says different is alt-right bs,
When you have lived it, watched it, you understand what has been lost Robert, when you have witnessed the manifest-ion of todays society as to what it has become, people are not the same ”normal” they were 30 yrs ago.
30Yrs of Pavlovian conditioning have seen to that.
I have the perspective of having been a climate alarmist, ten or so years ago, and from this perspective, as I remember, I just didn’t know any better. I wasn’t stupid. I just wasn’t privy to other information. I was swept up in the dominant wave of perception. I thought that I was correct in my views. I had no malice, and, again, I don’t think that I was stupid.
What I did have, I guess, was the ability to question my beliefs. I started seeing the inconsistencies. I started digging outside the popular arguments.
I was brainwashed by the media and by select outlets of information tied to the good ol’ boys network that is climate “science”. Once the dominoes of new awareness started to fall, new insights kicked in, and I slowly evolved, so gradually that I don’t remember a spontaneous awakening — it wasn’t like that.
It was nothing personal Robert.
You are a rarity, imo.
Nothing personal taken, Gary. And even it was, I could take it. (^_^)
… just trying to clarify my evolution of thought on this, thinking that there are probably others like me who just haven’t come around yet.
The climate alarm scenario and its agents are a metaphor for the greater picture of pernicious manipulations and insidious globalism plans. If climate alarm was just accidental by say stupid scientists, then they should be made to pay, and punished as in law. i.e they should be removed from their livelihood and made to pay for their wrongs. e.g sacking.
If Climate alarm is purposely driven, then they should be punished with more severe punishments, e.g fines and possible imprisonment.
Now if you think this is severe then lets consider the Rule of Law:
Well the rule of law in democratically run countries states that “ignorance of the law” is no defence.
So if someone commits a malicious or negligent act and when arrested tries to plead ignorance as a defence, then that will be cast aside.
So we have to consider if these people are ignorant, or purposeful law-breakers.
The stupid ones, will be charged and punished.
The purposeful law breakers will be charged and punished.
But here’s the rub: there is a third party who believe they are above the law.
For example, I little man may be jailed for a petty tax fraud , but a multi-millionaire banker will be slapped on the wrist and given a golden handshake for a far more serious and expensive fraud that affects millions of people.
The time will come when the Rule of Law will no longer hold up, and the “Consent to be Governed” will cast aside. When that time comes the shit will hit the wall.
That time is fast approaching.
Oh yes, Gary well said, that deserves a tune:
Heart and Soul By Joy Division…..just think of Joseph the Dark Lord of Anti-Sophistry ……..
Hey Gary, I replied to your post above, yet I apperared before you in the list! . Now that is the power of forethought. All I need to do now is figure out how I did it and then do the lottery ..
Not to waste a post, i have liked this one for 40yrs, its the lyric’s, the story.
But i wont clog loes blog with pic’s so i have split the link, a powerful ballad..
And i have a question to which i know there will be an equation
Gary your comments do something bizarre with the commenting system here. Please try just using your name with no links to website etc.
Gary that song reminds me of an 80’s film, the soundtrack to the film “Black Rain” with Andy Garcia and Michael Douglas. Tune by Greg Allman and Hans Zimmer. I split it as you did to save Joes bandwidth?
Yerp its fucking haunting…….. I’ll be holding on ………………….. great 80’s sound.
Gary, Robert, Mark, Joseph,
I would just remind, it was Maurice Strong that started the current AGW push and started the UNIPCC canard. Maurice Strong was a Marxist and an extremely strong advocate for Communism in general. Others that have taken up the cause (on the top end) behind Maurice (Al Gore, etc) are not necessarily doing this for Communism sake, as much as profitability. But in the end, Communism really has but one means and one outcome, profitability for the top, suffrage for everyone else. There are many leaders now and throughout history that have not viewed Communism as a successful social construct, but as a successful self enrichment. I believe that is exactly today’s Marxist for those who are in positions of power. The rest (little guys) of the Communist supporters are merely “useful idiots”, a tactic that has worked well for centuries.
But at the end of the day, it’s still all just Communism.
Indeed. At the end of the day it is simply psychopaths who want absolute power. I know, there is supposed to be some ideal behind it. But empirically, because of the fact that sociopaths and psychopaths exist, the power of control of the state attracts them as an infinite force and it reduces to them using it to murder millions for the sake of their power.
“Joseph E Postma says:
2017/09/28 at 1:53 PM
Indeed. At the end of the day it is simply psychopaths who want absolute power. I know, there is supposed to be some ideal behind it. But empirically, because of the fact that sociopaths and psychopaths exist, the power of control of the state attracts them as an infinite force and it reduces to them using it to murder millions for the sake of their power.”
Yes, indeed Joseph, and therein lies the rub, as it were.
Well – in other news, I was over at Magic Gas Watts’ place and there was this fella, somebody I never saw there before, who was trying to post.
His posts wouldn’t go up, and he wrote something like
” Does anyone else have posts not publish here? It happens to me here pretty often but not at other WordPress sites.”
Little bit later appears a message on the screen in bold: “It was in the trash, now restored.” Signed, M0D.
So another guy comes in and complains. Says his disappear all the time and when he mentions it the Moderators at Magic Gas’s place talk to him like he’s dirt, really smartassed.
A few hours later, one of the most dedicated and persistent of the sorta Skeptical Movement cheerleaders among the posters over there, some chick/people named Amber, post’s up ”I agree, a lot of filters on this site.”
Few hours later,
big bold message in gray letters appears across bottom of every page at Magic Gas’s place:
” Leave a Reply – if your comment doesn’t appear right away, it may have been intercepted by the SPAM filter. Please have patience while our moderation team examines it. ”
Not on that page but on every page on the site.
That’s outright admission they’ve been culling massively when a whole TEAM of moderators has to put up OUTSIZE GRAY LETTERS over the POSTING BOX saying ” WAIT – WE’RE PORING OVER EVERY WORD YOU SAY
SO IT FITS OUR BOSS,
THE COLLEGE DROPOUT ‘ ‘REPUBLICAN’ ‘ POLITICAL ACTIVIST
WHO SELLS ELECTRIC CARS ON EBAY’S
about the COLD BATH being ”a GIANT MAGIC HEATER,”
not just the surface, but the cold bath too,
is ” the
GIANT MAGIC SKY HEATER. ”
LoLoL can you imagine the psycho-sociopathy in a pseudo-scientific fraud’s head,
to strut the planet’s media outlets and claim to help lead a ‘science’ movement
while systematically using 25 years of POLITICAL media employment,
to DESTROY the REPUTATION of EVERYONE who POINTS OUT how OBVIOUSLY FRAUDULENT
what he’s CLAIMING,
GIANT GRAY LETTERS: BE PATIENT, WE’RE SCRUBBING and CENSORING SO MUCH,
WE HAVE to PUT YOU ON NOTICE WE’RE CENSORING like MAD to stop the word from getting out that
oL MAGIC GAIS TONY, has been one of the MAIN PLAYERS in the ”POLITICIANS working in MASS JOURNALISM DESTROY SCIENCE” game. .
Hilarity elsewhere, this is at Signts uh Doome.
About an hour after I started posting the QUACK-0-DYNAMICS BARKER who OWNS the place had placed everything I said into Moderation so his QUACK-HEADS couldn’t see me mocking them to their faces any more.
I wrote him another note saying
Your comment is awaiting moderation.
Oh, and – FraudBiLLieS : I linked to others so they can watch you all gargle thermodynamic sewer through your ignorant FRAUD BARKING NOSTRILS
and we can enjoy ridiculing the SH** out of your
INVERSION FRAUD BARKING, THERM-0-BILLY @$$3$!
Bon Appetit you insipid HiCKS BWaH HaH HaH Ha Ha Hah HaH ! !! !!
And I’m SHOWING em SCREENSHOTS of IT, TOO LoooooLoLoLoLoL!”
So it should be HILARIOUS watching them try to explain how a cold nitrogen bath is a big giant heater,
and the light blocking phase change refrigerant is the magic core of the … magic heater. LoL!
Happy Holidays, Fraud Slayers!!!
Sheiss for brains took me back off auto-mod after i wrote him that I was showing my friends what
weak, gas physics illiterate, drivel barking losers they are,
that they have to hide.
The owner at “Signts uh DooMe” told me he never saw the post belowI put up answering his two questions.
Many people have this question – whether energy can migrate upward into a concentration gradient, because people use the term ‘absorbed’ for lower-frequency energy, striking a higher-frequency emitter.
. Of course it can’t. In physics education one of the first things you’re supposed to learn, is the characteristic traits of energy.
One of them, is that Electromagnetic Energy will not travel into a rising concentration gradient. In other words, it moves,
but always DOWN the concentration gradient.
The reason many texts refer to energy from a lower energy entity being ‘absorbed’
is because due to Conservation of Energy the value of the energy whose emission is inhibited, from the higher frequency emitter,
the value of the energy striking the higher frequency emiitter
arriving from the lower frequency emitter.
This is basics in radiant transfer, and he’s unable to be told. It’s one of the first test questions in a freshman physics course, as far as I know, and he’s unable to grasp how it can be true that energy doesn’t migrate into a more concentrated-energy region.
Your comment is awaiting moderation.
Site owner my chance to shine was when I got my Bachelor’s Degree
and went to work the first year after I graduated,
and ultimately discarding,
About 12 years after I graduated college, The transfer equations
are what I made my daily living by
for many years.
You got your hands on some matter energy texts and took some classes, and thought since you saw someone say some energy ‘was absorbed’
it might mean the immutable law of Electromagnetic Energy
only flowing down gradient,
is – what? Up for discussion?
Ok, Energy doesn’t flow up gradient,
Discussion’s all but over.
You’re supposed to know electromagnetic energy’s defining characteristic is that it doesn’t flow
into higher concentration gradients due to it’s self repulsing nature – which is also the reason it flies away from itself at the speed of light.
The reason the men say that
is because the calculated caloric load, the working heat load,
is definitionally, in accordance with Conservation of Energy principles,
*Identical to the energy stream striking facets exposed to the incoming field of light.*
You have to learn that there are just some questions you’re not supposed to be caught asking. They mark you as not really very knowledgeable about energy and energy movement.
They draw people
who aren’t going to waste time discussing math with someone
who’s forgotten which way energy flows.
You know what I’m saying?
It’s like.. here we go, more __blanking__ magic gassers.
Don’t be telling people you thought energy flowed against gradient ok? LoL.
That’s not the right answer.
The proper answer on your freshman test, is ”Owing to principles related to
Conservation of Energy,
the emissions inhibited which must be accounted, and glowed off elsewhere,
will match incoming energy stream levels identically,”
”thus in calculating heat loads
these energy streams are spoken of as ‘being absorbed.’ ‘
”They are not truly physically absorbed
because electromagnetic energy,
will not migrate into an already equally concentrated region: flow stops.”
LoL – I shouldn’t laugh at you but – that’s kind of funny. I can see why neither you nor anybody here would know that. As a radiation engineer, you deal with this a lot: radiated energy loads transferring energy to something else.
Is it absorbed? Well, technically, the energy value is.
Do those photons enter that material?
No: that’s a violation of fundamentals in Electromagnetic Energy.”
The “Signts Uh Doome” guy claims he’s trying, but he’s really not.
He’s maneuvered so he can escape facing the basic characteristic Electromagnetic Energy has,
that it will not – due to it’s own repulsion of like-charge energy – itself –
migrate into a higher concentration field.
It’s the pressure to migrate away
down into a lower concentration, that gives electromagnetic energy the impetus to move away from the surfaces it’s emitted from at the speed of light.
He can’t figure out how in the world electromagnetic energy isn’t migrating into higher
energy-concentration regions. That’s unforgivable matter-energy science error.
The inhibition of energy loss from anything
is a perfect match with the power of the energy stream bathing it’s surface.
It’s this conservation-of-energy related fact of energy that have people like Signts Uh Doome over there asking everyone to explain to him again,
that one of the most fundamental qualities possessed by Electromagnetic Energy is that it won’t migrate into an already higher energy-concentration region.
He is just another amateur, who hasn’t managed to get committed to memory, the invariable nature of this aspect of Electromagnetic Energy.
You guys can see where I explained to him that conservation of energy demands the power of the energy emissions inhibited by the incoming stream of light, is identical to the power of the light striking the object at question.
You guys, – this is a “Foundations Of Energy” class freshman’s radiant transfer test question.
Q: what determines the energy value of radiant emissions inhibited in their leaving a volume of matter due to incident radiation from another energy stream striking the surface of the matter?
A: the power in Joules, of the energy stream causing the inhibition of emissions
determines the energy value of emissions suppressed.
The very next question, is always
Q: ”What is the thermodynamic principle governing this 1:1 relationship
between incident irradiation of surfaces
and emissions suppression?
A: Conservation of Energy is the principle governing inhibition or suppression
of otherwise spontaneous radiant emissions,
due to an object being subject to irradiation by another energy stream.
It’s not a crime that he doesn’t know wtF he’s talking about from one moment to the next.
He’s an amateur,
pretending to be an intellect of sufficient caliber that he can process standard radiant transfer,
yet he’s started a discussion that’s been going, since NOVEMBER the FIFTH,
yet he’s still – over a MONTH later, unable to have anyone, anywhere, remind him one of the immutable characteristics of Electromagnetic flow, is that it will NOT,
spontaneously migrate toward an already greater concentration of itself.
When classes first open up on ”Fundamentals in Matter And Energy” in high school or even middle school,
One of the v.e.r.y. first t.h.i.n.g.s. you’re told to list,
are the unchanging characteristics of energy-class entities,
the unchanging characteristics of matter-class entities.
A MONTH ago, Signts Uh Doome-Doome, started that thread, and no one has been able to force him to acknowledge that in the college class which – I guess it’s pretty obvious by now, he never TOOK,
one of the immutable principles noted in electromagnetic energy mechanics,
is that it will NOT migrate into a higher energy-concentration region, on it’s own.
In fact guys, this is a whole SERIES of test questions characteristic of any early ”Foundations of Matter/Energy” class:
the NEXT test question arising
Q What famous artifact of electromagnetic energy’s repulsion of itself, resulting ultimately in observations that it can’t and won’t migrate into higher energy concentration gradients, instead deflecting and rebounding as per the self repulsion of
is a part of general physics of matter and energy?
A: Electromagnetic Energy’s repulsion/deflection effect creates it’s movement at the invariable speed of light.
Signts uh Doome is pulling another Willis Eschenbach: claiming to be one of the smartest
uneducated amateurs in the conversation,
when in fact, he’s built an ENTIRE THREAD: going around, and around, for a month,
and continuing in it as though NOT A SOUL ON EARTH CAN MAKE HIM REMEMBER,
conservation of energy,
and fundamental characteristics of energy.
It’s a fundamental, and non-negotiable characteristic of Electromagnetic Energy that it won’t migrate into
already-higher concentration regions, ever –
he’s forgotten this and started yet another ”Willis Eschenbach Goes Two SkooL To Be A Masseuse” class violation-of-thermodynamics thread.
I had someone notify Doome-Doome that – his wished for dodge didn’t happen, I’d answered his questions but he was so busy CENSORING any PHYSICS he COULDN’T UNDERSTAND that..
it never made it up.
Whenever you find a Willis/Doome-Doome class thermodynamic law-violator, you’re always going to notice them and their friends scrubbing the dialogue so they can pretend to be savants.
We tend to declare people to be ”idiot savants.”
without the savant.
Nathaniel on December 5, 2017 at 11:01 pm
“Allen’s most recent comment wasn’t actually posted.
He posted one where he answered your question whether the laws of radiant transfer work, saying of course they do,
and that the math of emissions inhibition and absorption are functionally identical
due to the principles that cause cause Conservation of Energy in all electromagnetic energy transactions.”
Doome-Doome is another Willis Eschenbach class thermodynamics violater.
Here’s the wrap-up where I told Steve Carson he’s a fraud barking. lying piece of sh**.
Nathaniel on December 6, 2017 at 2:31 pm
on December 6, 2017 at 2:31 pm
I’ve met you one time, and I’ve already caught you lying twice in one day.
The first time was when I caught you claiming Allen Eltor wasn’t answering you regarding your questions.
But Eltor had already seen you coming,
posted his answers up at Climatofsophistry,
and told everyone you were already dodging debate,
refusing to let him answer you,
and he said that shortly
you’d be claiming he wouldn’t answer you.
So he posted his answers to your questions there.
Sure enough a couple of hours later, there you were, lying:
claiming he hadn’t answered you, when in fact, you knew he had.
Here we are just a few hours later, you’re lying, trying to claim
that I didn’t answer you.
You were answered, you’re simply dodging any debate.
How many places does one go on the internet, and get lied to twice in one day, by the same character?
Well, that depends on how many magic gas frauds’ websites one visits, I suppose.
When you grow a pair, and can debate your questions without resorting to
lying every time the truth gets inconvenient to you,
you won’t be another lying, dodging, internet poser who can’t defend your
You’ve got a herd of nerds who can’t between all of you,
even name the law of physics governing gas and atmospheric temperatures.
You, as their Magic Gas barking Nerd Herd leader,
can’t even manage to keep from
when you know people are watching you.
Knowing Allen Eltor’s style of dealing with magic gassers, I knew you weren’t going to debate him.
Having him predict to everyone at ClimateofSophistry that you were immediately going to start dodging,
trying to keep him from posting,
then lying about it,
I knew the chance of your actually having the guts to defend your “Energy runs backwards!” claims were less than zero.
I did everything a person could be expected to do,
speaking objectively, giving you every chance
to go ahead and bear strong testimony of your Church,
and your teaching that Electromagnetic Energy flows backward,
into higher concentration gradients from lower ones.
I met you once, and caught you lying twice in the same day.
I guess once you’re a dyed in the wool fraud, it becomes so addictive it’s an
actual thrill to be caught lying.”
Its an interesting list, but please tell me why Lindzen and Spencer are on it. I’m confused.
Hey – somebody’s jacking up Magic Gais Watts over at his place. He vanished some posts from a guy named ”Harold Holden” when he was talking to a person named ”Dave Fair.”
Then all of his posts vanished.
One of the readers came in and told Watts that he must be a magic gasser if he’s systematically censoring speech about something as mundane as the effects of the atmosphere on the planet.
December 18, 2017 at 7:44 pm
Mr. Watts is acting like ”shadowy operators” are stalking him, sending ”infected blog posts.”
This is the classical behavior of a green house gas believer.
Therefore Mr Watts believes in green house gas warming.
I can tell that without even asking him. His censorship of completely sensible speech while referring to ”shape shifters” is all we need to see, it’s straight out of political speech disguised as a scientific opinion.
Well that sort of explains why the Skeptical movement never takes off, one of the main so-called ‘Skeptics’ is censoring peoples’ discussion of weather,
because it doesn’t fit Mr Watts’ crackpot outlook
regarding the behavior of the atmosphere.
Which I agree is not a heater as Mr Holden said. The atmosphere is a cold nitrogen bath, actually a cold nitrogen and oxygen bath, I agree with that as well.
As a matter of fact everything Mr Holden said made sense.
”Shape-shifting” – that sounds directly out of the play book of the science destroying Hillary Clinton.”
Magic Gais Tony didn’t have a good afternoon. I also went over where Willis was explaining about magical gas, not interacting with incoming sunlight, but rather, only with the infrared glowed off by the Earth.
Oh – and GUESS who ELSE was over there talking like a f***ng drunk at Church?
the therm-0-billy I lit up and destroyed over at Backerdistical Energy Steve Carson’s place.
Brad was over here trying to convince you guys that magical gassiness makes a cold bath a heater,
then – apparently he migrated over to Magic Gais Tony’s to help Willis explain all about the
you awl noez
what dun made a cold bath a heater.
I chewed his stupid ass out, too for making WACKTARD claims about the amount of infrared coming from the sun – it’s actually nearly HALF of sunlight that’s infrared,
and for making the other ridiculous claims he made.
They vanished the posts within fifteen minutes and now there’s nothing there where I chewed both those stupid b**tards out for being innumerati, illiterati hicks.
Watts is being dragged back and forth over the coals by the guy named Donald, are you guys checking it out?
December 19, 2017 at 3:48 am
What claims are you saying he has made for years that are junk? From what I understood, it is green house gas theory that is actually junk. Does he support that then?
I thought he was pointing out that there is no way that the atmosphere can warm the planet if it is colder than the planet.
I also saw him say when more insulation is put between a fire and something it is warming, less energy from the fire must be what thermometers show reaching them. This seems true, obviously.
That is why I said that you must believe in green house gas theory. You are telling everyone now what he said was wrong. What part of what he said is wrong?
It seems like if what he said was wrong, it would be easy for you to explain. But you just took it down.
How can something be ‘junk’ if it’s just talking about whether something makes something else, colder or warmer?
Do you believe in green house gas theory Mr Watts? Are you a scientist? If you do or do not believe in it, can you tell me why?
Because what you did seems suspiciously like other people who argue climate. If someone does not believe the way they do, they simply do not allow them to talk about it.
This is always one of the signs that one side is dishonest, when they won’t debate the other side, and won’t let anyone discuss why.
Thank you for answering my questions. I’m sorry for saying you believe in green house gas warming if you don’t. But I can not see any other answer to why you would be so angry to have someone claim it doesn’t make sense.”
”Anthony Watts December 18, 2017 at 11:09 pm
Yep same guy, he’s been pushing this junk for years under dozens if not hundreds of fake personas. That’s why he gets the title of “shapeshifter” I know who he is, located in Marysville, CA
Magic Gais Tony
the college dropout,
is feeling the burn of having been outed as a fraud and pseudo-science barking FAKE.
Sorry for the spam Joseph. I’m to this without further comment if that’s okay, it’s hilarious.
The guy AndyG55 isn’t me, or anyone I know. He’s I guess, one of the locals over at Magic-Gas Tony’s. He is working that dude over like Robert ”Bobby Knuckles” Whittaker.
He’s definitely got that dude’s number, he just needed a reason to bring all that sh** up.
I’m not gonna tell him over there but every time I see his name I’m gonna think of him as
Andy (The Reaper) G55.
He’s on that dude like a pit bull dragging a kid down at a bus stop.
Merry christmas Joe.
All the best lads.
For sure, Joseph I forget my manners all the time; Merry Christmas to you, I hope you have the kind of New Year that see’s a buncha Ameri-French climatologists
get frostbite somewhere.
Peace on ya !
Because they believe in the greenhouse effect, which comes from flat Earth physics.
I saw this quote from Josephs comment earlier in the thread that made me laugh HARD!
“Twenty-five years later, today’s best science confirms that 350 ppm is the maximum safe level of atmospheric CO2 required to restore a stable climate system.”
The moron fails to realize that Climate system is never stable, NEVER!
There have been awesome severe weather events during the LIA time frame which was around 500 years long that make todays storms seem minor in comparison, all during the time CO2 levels were said to be around the 280 ppm level.
The infatuation over a trace molecule with a tiny absorbing bandwidth has been given superman status, indicative of inbred illogic training. How can anyone think CO2 with a nearly non existent presence in the atmosphere can seriously dominate weather climate processes……, especially when there is a gob of water vapor in the air.
Now I watch the INCREASING inflow of many new science papers showing a rapidly shrinking CO2 effect by shifting to the Solar and Ocean effect as driving the climate system of the planet, leaving CO2 out in the cold.
CO2 “science” paradigm is slowly dying…….. as more and more scientists no longer attribute bogus superman powers to the CO2 molecule at all.
The whole CO2 circus are being defended by a smaller and smaller group as some like me have slowly abandoned the CO2 idea that it has a role in the warming. I now think it has an irrelevant role in climate since it doesn’t promote any measurable warming at all.
AndyG55 is from Australia and a scientist. He gets carried away at times, with personal stuff, but effective debater on temperature trends and Polar ice levels.
He post at NTZ, Tony Heller’s blog, and WUWT quite often.
Pingback: UN IPCC: To Be Trusted or Questioned? | Principia Scientific International
and as you go back in the pages,
I am ‘ununionized,’ as ‘guest’
This is the world’s largest pot site. They have forums where the hillbillies gather and deride science, pervert history, and pretend the honest people of the world are the devil: and they aim to terrorize and intimidate those people into accepting their ludicrous, ”29% less light in makes more than 100% of otherwise available energy come back out” story.
The hilarity just goes on and on here but be aware – they completely remove everything said that disagrees with their politics every once in awhile going on grand censorship passes.
They DESPISE you if you don’t believe in the ”Magical Gaissiness, what dun made uh coal’d bath uh HeeDuR YaW!”
You don’t need a membership and you don’t really need to worry about going there, the website’s in like… maybe the Netherlands, and it’s been up more than a dozen years. The owner of it just got out of jail where he was kidnapped in the phillipines by having his documents frozen while they tried for three years to extradite him to the state of Maine for selling pot seeds through the mail.
He’s out now and more than half the states have some kind of legal pot today, when the internet was first invented, I was sorta the Allen Eltor of arguing about pot but a LOT less crazy than the Allen Eltor character.
I never used all caps or when I did, I was very judicious about it there used to be a form of writing like that referred to as some niche in Advertising where you had to generate ads but didn’t have sophisticated equipment.
So anyway it’s completely safe to go there, it’s a place full of slacker hippies but they’re filled with the most EVIL intentions toward ANYTHING that doesn’t smack of liberal mental illness.
I just closed three threads in a row beating all their asses in climate and politics.
I closed one just a couple of hours ago that was 143 pages long because I started beating the living screaming debate f*** out of every old and new hippie hick on the world’s largest Cannabis site.
They’re about to close this one, go read with – hopefully, a sense of the hilarious in mind.
note how they have the moderators coming in and insulting me.
The guy named Gypsy Nirvana is site owner when I burn the one account, start another one and say ”Now. Talk about that magical gaissiness, what dun made a cold light blocking Nitrogen bath a HeeDuR, Therm-0-Billies, or I’m gonna talk about it for ya” or some other patented Allen Eltor saying.
Peace freedom fighters never admit a magical gassiness dun made 29% less light in, equal more than 100% available energy back out.
Also I introduced an important type of hydroponic growing to the world after another man before me tried and failed. I don’t want to go into it with you because that doesn’t concern you but I guarantee you that one of your close friends or relatives has had to get on opioids because in 1937 the same Democrat ”Purgressifs” made pot illegal with FDR announcing ”Thay awl nead two git on thim summa thim modurn new opioids thay got down to the purgressive hosptuls laik thay dun got in Yurup. YaW.”
So that’s where I kinda cut my teeth f***n with no good a#$holes on the internet and doin’ our damndest to be playin for keeps.
Hey… go find the thread they just closed, called ” the trator within”
and read from the last page back.
They announced they closed that one to remove when I kicked their stupid asses till their hands got too sweaty to put over a keyboard, cause they were afraid they were gonna short it out.
Haha nice. Sick freaks.
Holy crickey man you really found the nest three. Great mucking it up lol. Good data point too.
The traitor within…. That’s the last page where he announces he’s closing the thread to clear out where I beat their asses like the lying humanity hating science blighting maggots they are.
LoL As a wise man once said, ”Hooah!”
I’ve been thinking about it and here’s my conclusion. https://i.imgur.com/stCO3Va.png
I’m still playin em along over there, the next ones I’m gonna put up are gonna be something like these:
And then here’s one I thought is funny that I made,
The moderator over there was f**n with me on the Yamaha FG-840 account,
so I told everyone that ”Magic Gassers are Harrassing my account.”
And left him this one.
I’ve been over there where I linked to earlier kicking their asses. I put up about 20 little meme images with stuff on them, corrected the one above where i left out the T.
One of them keeps trying to complain that the planet’s warm.
He picked out like 20 pictures of reducing glaciers, and I put up this:
Several more in no particular order:
This one is particularly useful when you’ve just plain got the balls to tell the truth about what the pot war is. Another chemistry scam already raging around the world and brought to the United States by FDR and the Democrat Senate and House, in 1937. In this instance I’m on a site where people are on the run globally from the law, and they’re mocking the idea government employees would generate a massive global science and chemistry scam. Not pertinent to here, but it is rather funny within the context.
General purpose funny:
More ribald humor with the Cosby thing,
The one with the little boy, fixed.
And then as you guys can fairly well see – I hammered another little nest of them into sullen, furious humiliation they’ve been made to see how loathesome their entire fraud is,
you know they’re all hippies over there, – I’m about to post this one.
Remember those are the tie-dyed in the dreadlocked wool rebels, who in part, populate Antifa.
If they don’t make it up it’s no big deal, I just wanted you to be able to watch the motherf*****rs be hilariously argued into the ground right there in the very website where a lot of those Antifa people hang out.
I’m thinking here might be a place to show you guys these, I made these up as I’ve been systematically shutting down the Magical Gaissiness Bruh’gade over at the world’s largest pot site,
and home to serious, SERIOUS Antifa types.
One of them was making a last-gasp effort to justify less energy in meaning more comes out, every time less goes in, by saying about me to another of them, ”Dunning Kruger.”
Here’s what I made for them to get the proper perspective from the standpoint of a rationalist and scientist who says 29% less in better mean 29% less out or there’ll be hell on earth till they hide:
Then I went on a little expedition of explaining to them that there’s an actual climate effect, and that I discovered it. Did you guys know that?
Yeah, it’s called the ”Dunning-Kruger Condensation point, and the Dunning Kruger Saturation point.
Here’s a graph of how it works. All of them I discuss Climate with me learn about these important ”local climate” events.
I didn’t think they were getting the ”picture” so to speak so I tried to make it a little more ”black & white” for them with this explanation of the phenomenon.
I don’t think you guys have seen this one, everybody likes pets.
I don’t think you guys have seen this one. One of the therm-0-billy hicks
was telling a guy to “consider about how the glaciers were receeding”
and I showed him the one I linked you guys to earlier.
Later on he came back and told the guy ”Yew gotta admit thim Mammoths comin out from under the ground have something to say about warming, and I made a post saying he didn’t realize that in telling us melting Ice uncovers ice everywhere, he’s just proving HE’S wrong, and that WE’RE right by saying warmth is good for life and life diversity: and that there ARE no ”climate optimums”
low ice. It defines what optimums are, largely. The less ice the more ocean heat distributed in farther northerly areas by the water being able to keep leaving the tropics.
So … he’s tried that sh** several times so after a little while I put this one up:
he didn’t realize that in telling us melting Ice uncovers *life everywhere,
Hey – Joe & others – are you guys checking out the Magical Gassiness dun Made Uh Coald Bathuh HeeDuR maulings over there?
I showed em on their own website’s ”NASA Earth Energy Budget/Features/EnergyBalance” page:
they openly admit halfway down the cooling ghgs with some other dust and particles and minor gases, stop 29% of energy from ever joining Earth’s systems. Observe halfway down the page:
“About 29 percent of the solar energy that arrives at the top of the atmosphere is reflected back to space by clouds, atmospheric particles, or bright ground surfaces like sea ice and snow. This energy plays no role in Earth’s climate system. About 23 percent of incoming solar energy is absorbed in the atmosphere by water vapor, dust, and ozone, and 48 percent passes through the atmosphere and is absorbed by the surface. Thus, about 71 percent of the total incoming solar energy is absorbed by the Earth system…The atmosphere and the surface of the Earth together absorb 71 percent of incoming solar radiation, so together, they must radiate that much energy back to space for the planet’s average temperature to remain stable. ”
Go down to this section: “Effect on S. Temp” – same web page, and observe the words, following the above: go down a bit, to about 3/4ths down. Look:
“Effect on Surface Temperature”
“The natural greenhouse effect raises the Earth’s surface temperature to about 15 degrees Celsius on average—more than 30 degrees warmer than it would be if it didn’t have an atmosphere.”
Now I want you to watch me waving and wiggling my fingers over the surface of the magical truth and light chingus these Christianic Industrialists have invented just by luck,
and you parse every single syllable that flows therefrom: Thay has dun tol’tchew, a magical gaissiness,
has dunmade more energy come back out of a rock,
every time it’s made less go into it,
till making 29% less energy in,
causes more than 100% of available energy to come back out;
to the point the planet surface
and, the entire cold Nitrogen bath,
are 33 degrees hotter
than if there were no cold light blocking atmospheric bath,
making 29% less go in.
Making 29% less go in | Makes more than 100% come out | by making the 29% less go in.
That’s their claim and it’s on that website like it’s on all of them.
And those hippies and Antifa people, are GOBSMACKED they’re teaching it to each other and their own kids.
They are so furious they’ve been caught,
several have done nothing but simply scream, squeal, slobber and swear: for DAYS.
Hey – for W.E.E.K.S.
Several of them have hardly uttered a single word but “I HATE’CHeW! I HATE’CHeW! I HATE’CHeW!!” Adult human beings in their 30s, 40s, 50s, & 60s, caught and FLOORED beyond being able to even make their hand move and SAY ”I think it’s real yaW!” – others simply going FULL unhinged,
“Pot’s like Heroin so I murdered him!!” authority worshiper class, in.f***ng.sane.
You guys really should go look. It’s a textbook example of how to put them – all of them completely in rout to the point they’re beside themselves with the frenzy of what they’re discovering about their own teachings.
The Atmosphere is a cold, light blocking Nitrogen bath, directly responsible for immediate cooling of the planet 29% as the very first step in resolution of global surface temperature.
be found that one PHOTON’S energy
comes back out of the planet,
more than that 29% less going in
establishes limits for.
Not one photon more than 29% less will come out
if 29% less goes in,
and it doesn’t make a rat’s @#$ if God herself said so,
when she told you one photon more than 29% less
came out of something,
after ANYTHING made 29% less energy go into it,
her science blighting maggot @#$, was LYING,
25 Venera flights financed, something like 25% of those, didn’t really get anything or much accomplished, we have THIRTEEN CRAFT LANDED on VENUS, IN THAT GROUP ALONE,
and the PIONEER instrument clusters, 3 different instrument banks dropped gently on surface one survived the crash – and after ALL these craft landing instruments
to check the story about ”hundreds of degrees warmer due to the magical gaissiness”
not ONE single word from 13 or whatever, JOINT LANDINGS by RUSSIA and the US together.
Or else the RUSSIANS and AMERICANS have SWIPED the STUNNING NEWS about the magical gassiness, that makes more light come out of rocks it lets less light go into,
To hide the news about the green house effect and it’s making Venus’ temperature there HUNDREDS of times WARMER than Standard Gas Calculations say it should be.
If my link doesn’t post up search Wikipedia Venera 2.Scientific Findings, go to that Wikipedia page and read aLLLL about,
of the magicalness
of the gassiness.
With the Russians and Americans earlier, about to have a heart attack to see whose grandiose interplanetary ambitions would reveal the greatest and most stunning discoveries,
later we’re working together
and not one single SYLLABLE about the signts.
Of the magicalness.
Of the gassiness.
How many times, have you had a science blighting maggot tell you about “The magical gassiness making the planet Venus hundreds of times warmer than it would be?”
I wonder why nobody associated with the Pioneer I & II probes landing on Venus, said anything except ”YaY, it’s working on the surface! All our instruments are working perfectly, and everything’s normal!”
From the video below: “This is the official NASA Ames Research Center documentary film on the Pioneer Venus Project. It was recently recovered from 16mm film.”
Hey – the intro to this thing is friggin creepy
it’s one of NASA’s very first films where they attempted to make the science,
as strange and wild as sci fi movies of the time. Wait and let it settle in at about – 5, 6 minutes.
Analyze the film you’re watching, the details, the concerns, everyone being so into it.
I wonder why nobody blurts out all about thim magical gaisses,
making everything “hundreds of times hotter than the standard gas *LAWS they used to get there, that predicted so perfectly, they could gently float down, craft not really designed, for landing? Watch what they say.
Note repeated mention of milliseconds/microseconds-long retro-rocket bursts, to match spacecraft to orbital conditions yet simultaneously observe how not one single syllable about “special gas law discoveries//suspicions//fears” regarding temperature hence density calculations at ANY altitude, being potentially off, is ever uttered: by the scientists analyzing the atmosphere or the narrator.
Why no shouts of ”GawLie YaW it really is a whole bunch hotter, gas laws ain’t evun tha same ovur thair but wea diddit!”
Ask your local magic gasser that without apology and tell HIM to explain to YOU.
Show him this film and the Venera page, and ask him: Why not, Mr ‘More comes out every time the magical gassiness lets less come in?
Why not one single scintilla of evidence,
of ANY suspicions
of anomalous temperature readings?
Also the initial chemical composition readings were off. I think what happened is they had tested the thing on Earth and had put gas samples in front of the spectrometer, and this left Earth atmosphere spectra plus
the individual gas data from the samples in the buffers of their upload gear –
and they had to manually purge the buffers by radio I think, and I think it died before they figured out what was up and were able to purge the buffers.
This film was a huge propaganda piece at the time, and the reason they put in the information about the erroneous readings was because the film was all captured and published as soon as possible so the surprise would be as large as possible and the psychological effect on the Russians be as large as it could be: and the Russians had already reported from Venera what seemed to be very strange composition readings of CO2 and sulfuric acid and a couple of other trace species.
So the Americans were very happy to be contradicting what they thought could be erroneous data from the Russians’ Venera findings.
Lastly, which one of you guys swiped the news about the magical gassiness, making everything 90 times hotter than the laws of physics the Russians used to fly to Venus,
off Wikipedia? Which one of you smooth oil company operators,
SWIPED the GROUND BREAKING NEWS about the magicalness of the gassiness,
from the “scientific discoveries” section of those 25 total craft and just replaced it with ”We discovered a whole buncha stuff! There were some grooves on the rocks” ..?
Ya ever wonder why the magicalness of the gassiness fraud foundation isn’t spitting f**ng mad about all the data being systematically purged from not just all the American space programs involving Venus, but all the Russian ones? As well as the many hybrid US/Russian collaborations within the Venera series?
When I show science darkening maggots these VENERA craft missions all over the internet, and show them these films,
here’s what I post up regarding their maggotry: science blighting, math molesting, physics fraud:
LoL this goes up there at the top in case you don’t already know about the page:
Here’s the graphic you’re looking for around the quoted text:
See that “29% less energy in”?
Yeah – THAT 29% less in,
that makes more than 100% come back out,
by not letting the 29%, ever go in.
Rather “by not ever going in.” So that’s all. Go over and check those Antifas losing their minds as everything they say’s easily and casually shown to be falsehood – often by just talking casually, you don’t even need links once you paralyze them with the truth about it the first time. Obviously the shock wears off a LITTLE and you have to refresh their memories why they’re terrified of you once in awhile.
Ok so I lied I started beatin em down with link after link.
I also just by chance had the circle of panicked evasion, roll RIGHT past two different things you Joseph and PSI were involved with, the fact Antarctica contains 90% of Earth’s ice, and is currently bristling at record/near record levels,
and the flat Earther thing. I hope to Gaia I didn’t come over here and say this already and I think you guys already talked about it one time.
Some guy from the Flat Earth Society has issued a open challenge to ‘Mainstream Science’ – that’s those of us who have gumption to know the cold light blocking atmosphere isn’t a magical heater – to come ”debunk our FLAT-EARTH MODELS” –
and they’re using NASA’S Flat-Earth Climate Models.
https://goo.gl/GEhVvu <===<<< five seconds in
"New NASA Flat Earth Climate Change Model from youtube channel NASA Goddard"
Almost certainly you guys are all hip to this and have been going around beating down magic gassers with it but it's eluded me.
I was referencing Joe's Flat Earth article from 2011 and found the youtube link because I searched ''Flat Earth Climate Models"
There's a formal challenge from the guy known as Mark Sargent.
"This is my personal declaration of war from Flat Earth against mainstream science.
I, Mark Sargent, hereby put forth a challenge to any university, foreign or domestic,
to debate or discuss the Flat Earth reality."
That was me in the post that said “I went over and put Kek’s boot in their ass,”