Climate Change Deniers among our Elected Representatives

[Wuwei]

So all you have done is highlight the various times you have already lost these discussions

You lost track of the argument as usual.
In post #207 I said,
You have said countless times you don't believe the fundamental tenets of basic physics that are in all textbooks.

You replied in post #229,
but do feel free to provide such a quote if you like...Won't be happening...will it? Because it is a lie...the tedium never ends..

So in post #235 I gave quotes and references to where you revealed that don't believe basic physics. And what do you do? In post #248 you go through reference by reference and say you don't believe the basic physics. How stupid is that?

This discussion is not about you and me. It's about you and basic science. You have continually substituted inconsistent self-contradictory "science" idiocy to end up proving my assertion that you don't believe basic physics that is in all text books.


.

 

[RealDave]

No doctors, no hospitals, no antibiotics But you go ahead & breathe polluted air & drink polluted watet. Dumbass

 

[Leo123]

If humans are able to affect the Earth to such an extent that Earth's climate actually changes, then, since the Earth is located in a Galaxy, and the Galaxy exists in the Universe, I think we could be dealing with man-caused Universe Change. LOL

Wow, what a ridiculous argument. "Man is too puny to change anything on Earth"

If we listen tro dumbsasses like yopu & the abve gloibal temps rise another 4-6 degrees C, the effect is ion Earth. No where else.

If you don;t think man can affect anything on Earth,. lets detonate all the nukes in existence & see how we all survive?

I never said the quote you attributed to me. The rest of your post is nothing but your own regurigated cud.

 

[Leo123]

When it comes to humans vs. Earth's size and power, we are insignificant. Better to be concerned about our own survival than pompously thinking we can control anything on the planet.

The problem with global warming is not its effect on the planet or the atmosphere or the oceans. It is its effect the warming of those things will have on us and the infrastructure of human culture. We are perfectly capable of fucking ourselves over royally.

Warming has always been beneficial to life on Earth.

 

[skookerasbil]

No doctors, no hospitals, no antibiotics But you go ahead & breathe polluted air & drink polluted watet. Dumbass

Idk.....seems to me alot of people are not getting hysterical over pollution these days. In fact, the last time there was any consensus in the public on pollution concerns was 50 years ago.

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

No Evidence
#106 True, I don't believe quantum mechanics as a whole.
When you set the temperature of the two objects in question to the same temperature, the output of the primary radiation is zero.

Set T and TC to the same number...P=0...So safety the Stefan -Boltzman law. I rest my case.

The [S-B] equation describes a one way gross energy flow from warm to cool.

See the above equation...it is a description of a one way gross energy movement.

Equipartition theory doesn't work in the atmosphere.

Not going through all this again...see the previous times you lost this discussion because you could provide no actual observed evidence to support your models.

#118 Quantum mechanics is science’s equivalent of political polarization.

100+ years on, physics still can't even agree on what QM means.

No Evidence
#826 Since energy only moves in one direction T, according to the S-B law will always be the radiator and Tc will always be cooler than the radiator...that is a basic assumption of the S-B law...and for the equation in question

Sorry you don't know that....and even when you have been told multiple times, you refuse to believe it. Unfortunate, but that's just how it is when you are a dupe.

No Evidence
#888 the fact of one way radiation between objects is precisely what the physical laws predict.

Second Law of Thermodynamics: It is not possible for heat to flow from a colder body to a warmer body without any work having been done to accomplish this flow. Energy will not flow spontaneously from a low temperature object to a higher temperature object.

Which part of that statement do you think predicts spontaneous two way energy flow?

No Evidence
#1048 What you call "modern" physics is an unobservable, unmeasurable, untestable mathematical model...

Refer to all the previous times you lost this discussion because you could provide no observed, measured evidence to support your models.

The Heart of the AGW Premise Fails Empirical Review.
#754 So what if the 2nd law violates Quantum Mechanics.

QM is a theory...The second law of thermodynamics is a physical law. Let me know when they strike out the second law of thermodynamics and replace it with QM.

#755 There is no net energy exchange between objects radiating at different frequencies

Second Law of Thermodynamics: It is not possible for heat to flow from a colder body to a warmer body without any work having been done to accomplish this flow. Energy will not flow spontaneously from a low temperature object to a higher temperature object.

Nothing there suggests net energy exchange.

That equation describes a gross one way energy exchange.

#769 the frequency of gamma radiation makes it hotter than anything you might find in the infrared spectrum even though you could hold the emitter in your hand.

I attempted to explain the difference between frequency and temperature...sorry you didn't get it...sorry your argument is so weak that you have to lie about what I said in an attempt to sound rational. Unfortunate...but then you are a dupe..what do you expect?

#117 Radium is manufactured commercially by the electrolysis of their molten salts...what exactly do you think is spontaneous about that?
His response to my statement:You can't get more spontaneous than radioactivity.

The discussion was regarding radium paint on watch faces..your claim was that the light was spontaneous...turned out to not be true, because the radium only emits light when it has been exposed to light. Keep it in the dark and alas, it doesn't emit light. Again, sorry your argument is so weak that you have to lie about what I said in an attempt to sound rational. The fact that you must lie about what I said, and interpret everything should give you a clue as to the validity of your position...but then, you are a dupe, so what else can you do?

Grand Solar Minimum.... And Cooling....
Man made work means not spontaneous. #453
Energy previously absorbed – never spontaneous. #457
Does not believe cold molecules can strike a warm wall #457
Rock rolling downhill not spontaneous if carried up. #464

Spontaneous process = A spontaneous process is a process that occurs on its own without outside intervention

Sorry I don't make up the definitions...They are what they are and the words are pretty self explanatory.

And I never said that a cold molecule can't strike a warm wall. This is just one more, in a litany of examples of you misquoting me, reinterpreting what I said, or just plain old making shit up in an effort to sound rational.

In post 453 you suggested that molecules of a cold gas hitting a warmer wall was an example of spontaneous energy transfer from cool to warm...I pointed out that molecules were neither energy not radiation, and that observation and measurement shows the wall cooling down due to the fact that it is losing energy to the cooler gas via conduction.

You are becoming a bigger liar than the skidmark...does that make you proud?

Grand Solar Minimum.... And Cooling....
If I thought CMB BB radiation hit the antenna, I would say it..it didn't...that antenna picked up a resonant radio frequency...being a radio telescope and all..

Still sorry you don't grasp the concept of a resonant radio frequency...dupe and all...

BBC to reduce deniers coverage
#121 Has no idea of what stimulated emission means.
#125 Says luminescence is Stimulated emission...not spontaneous emission

Been though it all before...you lost refer to the past discussion if you must relive your defeats...are you this desperate for attention? Really? Very sad...

Paradoxical Earth.. Complex responses often misinterpreted...
#270 Increasing entropy flowing one way means thermal energy can only flow one way.
No man-made apparatus can exhibit spontaneous energy flow.

Spontaneous Process - spontaneous process is a process that occurs on its own without outside intervention.

#299 Energy will not flow spontaneously from a low temperature object to a higher temperature object

Second Law of Thermodynamics: It is not possible for heat to flow from a colder body to a warmer body without any work having been done to accomplish this flow. Energy will not flow spontaneously from a low temperature object to a higher temperature object.

It says it right there in the second law of thermodynamics...Sorry you don't believe the second law of thermodynamics...only your interpretation of it.

Paradoxical Earth.. Complex responses often misinterpreted...
#270 A single photon radiating at either frequency [0.2um or 10um]will be the same amount of energy....The EM fields however, will be very different.

quanta -The smallest amount of a physical quantity that can exist independently, especially a discretequantity of electromagnetic radiation.

Sorry you don't know what that means...we have been through it all before...

LWIR FAILS to Warm the Atmosphere by Empirical Experiment.
The energy absorbed by CO2 is lost in centimeters from the surface if not millimeters. #720
LWIR does not...and can not warm the atmosphere. #722

Been through it all before...discussed the overwhelming body of evidence gained through experiment, development, design and installation and observation that LWIR does not warm air.

The Heart of the AGW Premise Fails Empirical Review.
[scientists] believe a resonant radio frequency was detected on the surface...not actual CMB. #233

Still sorry you can't grasp the concept of resonant radio frequencies...sorry your desire to be right overrides your ability to actually learn something...been through it all before...if you must relive your defeat...refer to all past incarnations of this same discussion.

Science is falsifiable
“Heat of compression” is the same as “pressure due to heat.”

I note that you didn't put a post number on that statement...because I never said it...simply making up statements and claiming that I said them is frowned upon on this forum...you are nothing but a bald faced liar...and to top it off...you even put the statement in quotes...how much more dishonest could you be?

No Evidence
A black body emits whatever it absorbs...if it is absorbing a single wavelength then it is emitting a single wavelength..

An ideal black body emits whatever it absorbs...if it is absorbing a single frequency, by what mechanism does it change the frequency of what it absorbs?

So all you have done is highlight the various times you have already lost these discussions, gave me the opportunity do demonstrate that, and proven that you are becoming one of the worst liars on the board in your attempt to save some face..making up quotes, ascribing them to me and even going so far as to put them in quotation marks...very sad...very dishonest...in the future when you claim I said something, you provide the quote and a link to it...or I am simply going to point out what a liar you are and that you are prone to making up quotes and ascribing them to whoever you care to claim made the statement.

Second Law of Thermodynamics: It is not possible for heat to flow from a colder body to a warmer body without any work having been done to accomplish this flow. Energy will not flow spontaneously from a low temperature object to a higher temperature object.

Science 24 May 1963:
Vol. 140 no. 3569 pp. 870-877
DOI: 10.1126/science.140.3569.870

In a practical situation and room-temperature setting, humans lose considerable energy due to thermal radiation. However, the energy lost by emitting infrared light is partially regained by absorbing the heat flow due to conduction from surrounding objects, and the remainder resulting from generated heat through metabolism. Human skin has an emissivity of very close to 1.0 . Using the formulas below shows a human, having roughly 2 square meter in surface area, and a temperature of about 307 K, continuously radiates approximately 1000 watts. However, if people are indoors, surrounded by surfaces at 296 K, they receive back about 900 watts from the wall, ceiling, and other surroundings, so the net loss is only about 100 watts.

Then why did you lie and say the wall, ceiling, and other surroundings of a home are not allowed to radiate toward a warmer human body?

 

[Flopper]

If humans are able to affect the Earth to such an extent that Earth's climate actually changes, then, since the Earth is located in a Galaxy, and the Galaxy exists in the Universe, I think we could be dealing with man-caused Universe Change. LOL

Maybe we should start small.

 

[Flopper]

No doctors, no hospitals, no antibiotics But you go ahead & breathe polluted air & drink polluted watet. Dumbass

Idk.....seems to me alot of people are not getting hysterical over pollution these days. In fact, the last time there was any consensus in the public on pollution concerns was 50 years ago.

Google Pollution. You will get about 434 million hits.

 

[Crick]

If humans are able to affect the Earth to such an extent that Earth's climate actually changes, then, since the Earth is located in a Galaxy, and the Galaxy exists in the Universe, I think we could be dealing with man-caused Universe Change. LOL

Maybe we should start small.

And less stupid

 

[Leo123]

If humans are able to affect the Earth to such an extent that Earth's climate actually changes, then, since the Earth is located in a Galaxy, and the Galaxy exists in the Universe, I think we could be dealing with man-caused Universe Change. LOL

Maybe we should start small.

Meaningless post.

 

[Leo123]

Google Pollution. You will get about 434 million hits.

Pollution does not affect the Globe it affects the liberal-leftist bastions of over-populated cities where they defile and crap in their own backyards and blame the rest of US for affecting the 'climate.'

BTW no one denies that the climate changes however, intelligent folks do not accept YOUR hypothesis that humans can affect global climate to the extent that in 12 years there will be a climate crisis. That is insane so stop calling it 'Climate Change' which is intentionally misleading and vague.

 

[Crick]

Cleveland. Cuyahoga on fire
Chicago get an F in pollution in 2018
6 Georgia counties get an F in air pollution
Denver ranks 8th most polluted city in the nation

Yah. Only a coastal problem

 

[the other mike]

Pollution does not affect the Globe it affects the liberal-leftist bastions of over-populated mostly Coastal cities where they crap in their own backyards and blame the rest of US>

Get a clue.


All the Species That Went Extinct in 2018, and Ones on the Brink for 2019 | The Weather Channel

Rural America’s Own Private Flint: Polluted Water Too Dangerous to Drink

Freshwater 101: Pollution

 

[Leo123]

Cleveland. Cuyahoga on fire
Chicago get an F in pollution in 2018
6 Georgia counties get an F in air pollution
Denver ranks 8th most polluted city in the nation

Yah. Only a coastal problem

Sorry changed my post before you posted. I don't give a shit about pollution. Clean up your own backyards. Stop screwing with the rest of us because YOU can't keep your own populace from polluting themselves. Also, yes areas adjacent to these shit-holes will suffer as well.

 

[Leo123]

Pollution does not affect the Globe it affects the liberal-leftist bastions of over-populated mostly Coastal cities where they crap in their own backyards and blame the rest of US>

Get a clue.


All the Species That Went Extinct in 2018, and Ones on the Brink for 2019 | The Weather Channel

Rural America’s Own Private Flint: Polluted Water Too Dangerous to Drink

Freshwater 101: Pollution

The ones that scream the loudest are the biggest polluters. Clean yourself up.

 

[Sun Devil 92]

"What would you think if your government didn't believe in gravity? If your senator alleged that, because they couldn't see it, perhaps it didn't exist. To many, this might seem absurd—the science is enough to know that it's real."

The Climate Change Deniers in Congress

"Almost 30 years ago, a NASA scientist named James Hansen pleaded with Congress, under the Reagan Administration, to accept the evidence and do something about it. "It is already happening now," Hansen said before a Congressional committee in 1988."

"Fast-forward three decades, and the United States is facing one of its most anti-science Congresses in history. Many members of the Senate and House of Representatives have gone on-record to denounce climate change as a hoax. Others have proven through their votes that regulating greenhouse gas emissions is not a priority. And still, some state representatives claim to believe in human-made climate change, but consistently support policies that would erode initiatives to combat it."

The colors used here are no mistake. The alignment between a representatives position on AGW and his political party is almost perfect. And you can see many instances of the same reasoning you'll find here on this forum, in the halls of our Congress. The most common answer seen from our representatives is that the Earth's climate has always been dynamic and that the changes over the last century and a half are simply Mother Nature at work. Unsurprisingly, that reasoning is as easily refuted as all the rest. Of course the Earth's climate is dynamic, but through its very long history, that dynamicism has resulted in changes orders of magnitude slower than the changes we are witnessing now. And the various variable factors that naturally control our climate: ex solar irradiance and orbital mechanics, indicate that we should be cooling now. But, of course, we are not.

So, once again, would you vote for a representative that didn't believe in gravity? What if he thought we were all actually held down by magnetism or by wee demons trying to drag us to Hell? Would you vote for a senate candidate that believed the Earth was flat, that humans had never traveled to space, much less the moon? Would you vote for a presidential candidate who believed that modern medicine was an evil to be eliminated from modern society? The belief that the rate of warming we are currently experiencing is a natural climatic change (or a lie constructed by thousands of corrupt scientists) and that human GHG emissions have no involvement, is just as false and just as dangerous.

Gravity ==> Real
Gravity ==> Proven

AGW ==> Fairy Tale

 

[Sun Devil 92]

I don't believe any of the giant wealth redistribution plan....err globull warming aka climate change aka weather

But you appear to have no evidence with which to convince anyone else that they should join you.

All they need is you.

Morons like you.....

 

[the other mike]

Sorry changed my post before you posted. I don't give a shit about pollution. Clean up your own backyards. Stop screwing with the rest of us because YOU can't keep your own populace from polluting themselves. Also, yes areas adjacent to these shit-holes will suffer as well.

America was clean before Europe invaded.

 

[the other mike]

The ones that scream the loudest are the biggest polluters. Clean yourself up.

You're delusional Huckleberry. Lay off the shrooms.

 

[Wyatt earp]

No doctors, no hospitals, no antibiotics But you go ahead & breathe polluted air & drink polluted watet. Dumbass

Idk.....seems to me alot of people are not getting hysterical over pollution these days. In fact, the last time there was any consensus in the public on pollution concerns was 50 years ago.

Google Pollution. You will get about 434 million hits.

Pollution and climate change are not the same grasshopper, learn the difference if you want to debate the subject at hand intelligently.




.