Mythbusters CO2 Scam Busted!!

[Old Rocks]

I've asked you over and over to show your numbers, and you've always found excuses not to do so. You don't seem to have the guts to face me.

If you'd like to demonstrate you're not the intellectual lightweight you appear to be, explain exactly how the experiment shows the "Ideal Gas Laws". With detailed calculations. You know, like I did, twice, to demonstrate it showed no such thing.

Also tell us what the "Ideal Gas Laws" are. You keep using that as a plural, so it's not a typo. I thought there was just one Ideal Gas Law, pV=nRT, but it looks like we've got a true Einstein here in Westwall, as he knows of other ideal gas laws previously unknown to man.

Also, give us a specific "yes" or "no" answer to another pertinent question you keep dodging, "Does a compressed gas keep generating heat after being compressed?".

Ol' Walleyes keeps claiming to be a Phd in geology, to be a member of the AGU as well as the Royal Society. And to have proof that the AGW theory is wrong. The AGU has a big meeting in San Francisco every year. Yet Walleyes has yet to present his winning falsification of AGW there. What might be the problem

I posted my invite to present at the AGU conference a couple of years ago. Where's yours?

They have videos of all the presentations there, so show us which one you presented and on what subject.

 

[CrusaderFrank]

73,480/120=612

They had to use 612 times as much CO2 as the 120PPM they claim will destroy all life on Earth just to get a 1 degree uptick and that's likely from the Ideal Gas Law and not the Majikal Heat trapping properties of the modern CO2

Maybe they used old CO2 molecules, you know, the ones BEFORE the modern ones that can drive the climate?

 

[Crick]

73,480/120=612

They had to use 612 times as much CO2 as the 120PPM they claim will destroy all life on Earth just to get a 1 degree uptick and that's likely from the Ideal Gas Law and not the Majikal Heat trapping properties of the modern CO2

Maybe they used old CO2 molecules, you know, the ones BEFORE the modern ones that can drive the climate?

I spent a fair chunk of time in my college days learning how to scale models. Ever see photos of folks putting little pint-sized copies of jet fighters and rockets into wind tunnels? I bet you have, cause not everyone has a wind tunnel big enough to hold a full sized bomber or a Delta rocket. And not every wind tunnel can produce air speeds as fast as would be required to test these things one-to-one. So, guess how they do it?

Before you condemn the mythbuster's experiment, you'd better demonstrate to us that you understand what they were demonstrating and how. If you think anyone here or there ever suggested that their neat little wood and plastic boxes were physical matches for the Earth, then you need to repeat the second grade and ask them to talk slow for you.

 

[CrusaderFrank]

73,480/120=612

They had to use 612 times as much CO2 as the 120PPM they claim will destroy all life on Earth just to get a 1 degree uptick and that's likely from the Ideal Gas Law and not the Majikal Heat trapping properties of the modern CO2

Maybe they used old CO2 molecules, you know, the ones BEFORE the modern ones that can drive the climate?

I spent a fair chunk of time in my college days learning how to scale models. Ever see photos of folks putting little pint-sized copies of jet fighters and rockets into wind tunnels? I bet you have, cause not everyone has a wind tunnel big enough to hold a full sized bomber or a Delta rocket. And not every wind tunnel can produce air speeds as fast as would be required to test these things one-to-one. So, guess how they do it?

Before you condemn the mythbuster's experiment, you'd better demonstrate to us that you understand what they were demonstrating and how. If you think anyone here or there ever suggested that their neat little wood and plastic boxes were physical matches for the Earth, then you need to repeat the second grade and ask them to talk slow for you.

They were doing a sleight of hand to convince the gullible and simple minded that a wisp of CO2 will raise temperature.

That's why they never actually say how much CO2 is in the tanks, they had to use 73,400PPM to get a 1 Degree increase

"Fraud is a deception deliberately practiced in order to secure unfair or unlawful gain (adjectival form fraudulent; to defraud is the verb).[1] As a legal construct, fraud is both a civil wrong (i.e., a fraud victim may sue the fraud perpetrator to avoid the fraud and/or recover monetary compensation) and a criminal wrong (i.e., a fraud perpetrator may be prosecuted and imprisoned by governmental authorities). Defrauding people or organizations of money or valuables is the usual purpose of fraud, but it sometimes instead involves obtaining benefits without actually depriving anyone of money or valuables, such as obtaining a drivers license by way of false statements made in an application for the same.[2]"

Fraud - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

 

[SSDD]

73,480/120=612

They had to use 612 times as much CO2 as the 120PPM they claim will destroy all life on Earth just to get a 1 degree uptick and that's likely from the Ideal Gas Law and not the Majikal Heat trapping properties of the modern CO2

Maybe they used old CO2 molecules, you know, the ones BEFORE the modern ones that can drive the climate?

I spent a fair chunk of time in my college days learning how to scale models. Ever see photos of folks putting little pint-sized copies of jet fighters and rockets into wind tunnels? I bet you have, cause not everyone has a wind tunnel big enough to hold a full sized bomber or a Delta rocket. And not every wind tunnel can produce air speeds as fast as would be required to test these things one-to-one. So, guess how they do it?

Before you condemn the mythbuster's experiment, you'd better demonstrate to us that you understand what they were demonstrating and how. If you think anyone here or there ever suggested that their neat little wood and plastic boxes were physical matches for the Earth, then you need to repeat the second grade and ask them to talk slow for you.

So now we are back to warmers claiming that your hypothesis can't be tested unless we have an experiment the size of the earth.

 

[CrusaderFrank]

73,480/120=612

They had to use 612 times as much CO2 as the 120PPM they claim will destroy all life on Earth just to get a 1 degree uptick and that's likely from the Ideal Gas Law and not the Majikal Heat trapping properties of the modern CO2

Maybe they used old CO2 molecules, you know, the ones BEFORE the modern ones that can drive the climate?

I spent a fair chunk of time in my college days learning how to scale models. Ever see photos of folks putting little pint-sized copies of jet fighters and rockets into wind tunnels? I bet you have, cause not everyone has a wind tunnel big enough to hold a full sized bomber or a Delta rocket. And not every wind tunnel can produce air speeds as fast as would be required to test these things one-to-one. So, guess how they do it?

Before you condemn the mythbuster's experiment, you'd better demonstrate to us that you understand what they were demonstrating and how. If you think anyone here or there ever suggested that their neat little wood and plastic boxes were physical matches for the Earth, then you need to repeat the second grade and ask them to talk slow for you.

All I know for certain is that the AGWCult has never once produce an experiment that shows how a 120PPM Increase in CO2 will raise temperature.

Not one single time

 

[CrusaderFrank]

73,480/120=612

They had to use 612 times as much CO2 as the 120PPM they claim will destroy all life on Earth just to get a 1 degree uptick and that's likely from the Ideal Gas Law and not the Majikal Heat trapping properties of the modern CO2

Maybe they used old CO2 molecules, you know, the ones BEFORE the modern ones that can drive the climate?

I spent a fair chunk of time in my college days learning how to scale models. Ever see photos of folks putting little pint-sized copies of jet fighters and rockets into wind tunnels? I bet you have, cause not everyone has a wind tunnel big enough to hold a full sized bomber or a Delta rocket. And not every wind tunnel can produce air speeds as fast as would be required to test these things one-to-one. So, guess how they do it?

Before you condemn the mythbuster's experiment, you'd better demonstrate to us that you understand what they were demonstrating and how. If you think anyone here or there ever suggested that their neat little wood and plastic boxes were physical matches for the Earth, then you need to repeat the second grade and ask them to talk slow for you.

So now we are back to warmers claiming that your hypothesis can't be tested unless we have an experiment the size of the earth.

Actually, the size of the solar system

 

[sealybobo]

Go to 1:37 in the video

CO2 = 7.348%!!!!

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pPRd5GT0v0I

Oops

73,480 PPM!

not 400

And they got 1 degree from it

Now you know why the AGWCult can never show an experiment that shows "warming" from a 120PPM increase

Nobody knows or cares what you are talking about. The fact is, between the Indian, Chinese, Russian, Arab, African, Europena & people in the America's a lot more people are driving.

Were you against the catalytic converter when they first came out? A catalytic converter is a vehicle emissions control device that converts toxic pollutants in exhaust gas to less toxic pollutants. Of course you are not against them today, right?

So now add up all our cars, motorcycles, cows methane and don't forget the big one, CORPORATE pollution/carbon/c02 pollution. All the factories polluting. We know why they don't want to go green because it will cost them. Newt admitted it. He was running for president and he wanted to show how he was not like all the other republican candidates because eventually there will be no more denying man made global warming is dooming this planet and we have to go green to preserve this planet. We know why the corporations don't want to go green. What is your problem?

We are finally putting more gas into the air than all the volcanoes. Use to be they did more than us but we finally passed them, and you can't find that information very easily on the net or in the media for some reason. GW should not be debatable anymore. But that' won't stop the corporations from doing it as long as they can because clearly not enough people realize we are destroying this planet.

 

[Crick]

Once again, for the learning impaired....no, it didn't. It demonstrated the Ideal Gas Laws and nothing else. For a supposed "nucular (sic) watch officer" you sure don't know jack about science.

I've asked you over and over to show your numbers, and you've always found excuses not to do so. You don't seem to have the guts to face me.

If you'd like to demonstrate you're not the intellectual lightweight you appear to be, explain exactly how the experiment shows the "Ideal Gas Laws". With detailed calculations. You know, like I did, twice, to demonstrate it showed no such thing.

Also tell us what the "Ideal Gas Laws" are. You keep using that as a plural, so it's not a typo. I thought there was just one Ideal Gas Law, PV=nRT, but it looks like we've got a true Einstein here in Westwall, as he knows of other ideal gas laws previously unknown to man.

Also, give us a specific "yes" or "no" answer to another pertinent question you keep dodging, "Does a compressed gas keep generating heat after being compressed?".

I would also like to hear how the ideal gas laws explain the results obtained in any of these experiments. However, I thought it was SSDD that had actually claimed (perhaps without knowing he had done so) that compressed gases radiate heat forever. I realize that poster Westwall's mention of the Ideal Gas Law in this context puts him in the same boat, but I'm not sure he realizes it.

So, Mr Westwall. SSDD's contention, that the temperature increases seen in these greenhouse effect demonstrations are all due to compression requires that compression somehow generate heat continuously and, apparently, forever. SSDD has not explained to us how this happens or why we should believe such a ridiculous violation of fundamental physics. Will you? Or will you concede that the heating observed in these demonstrations is NOT due to compression but to the absorption of infrared radiation by the greenhouse gases?

 

[CrusaderFrank]

Go to 1:37 in the video

CO2 = 7.348%!!!!

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pPRd5GT0v0I

Oops

73,480 PPM!

not 400

And they got 1 degree from it

Now you know why the AGWCult can never show an experiment that shows "warming" from a 120PPM increase

Nobody knows or cares what you are talking about. The fact is, between the Indian, Chinese, Russian, Arab, African, Europena & people in the America's a lot more people are driving.

Were you against the catalytic converter when they first came out? A catalytic converter is a vehicle emissions control device that converts toxic pollutants in exhaust gas to less toxic pollutants. Of course you are not against them today, right?

So now add up all our cars, motorcycles, cows methane and don't forget the big one, CORPORATE pollution/carbon/c02 pollution. All the factories polluting. We know why they don't want to go green because it will cost them. Newt admitted it. He was running for president and he wanted to show how he was not like all the other republican candidates because eventually there will be no more denying man made global warming is dooming this planet and we have to go green to preserve this planet. We know why the corporations don't want to go green. What is your problem?

We are finally putting more gas into the air than all the volcanoes. Use to be they did more than us but we finally passed them, and you can't find that information very easily on the net or in the media for some reason. GW should not be debatable anymore. But that' won't stop the corporations from doing it as long as they can because clearly not enough people realize we are destroying this planet.

Translation: you caught me so blah blah blah blah blah Blah Blah BLAH BLAH add irrelevant stuff on a whole other imaginary issue

 

[CrusaderFrank]

Sulfur dioxide (SO2) - Air quality fact sheet

Topic: Never been an experiment that shows how a 120PPM add of CO2 raises temperature

You: Out in Lalaland

See the problem?

 

[westwall]

Ol' Walleyes keeps claiming to be a Phd in geology, to be a member of the AGU as well as the Royal Society. And to have proof that the AGW theory is wrong. The AGU has a big meeting in San Francisco every year. Yet Walleyes has yet to present his winning falsification of AGW there. What might be the problem

I posted my invite to present at the AGU conference a couple of years ago. Where's yours?

They have videos of all the presentations there, so show us which one you presented and on what subject.

Proving yet again that you have no idea of the scientific and academic world, they send you an invitation to present. You send them your paper they then review it and if they like it you get to present. If they don't, you don't.

Amazingly enough (well not really) any paper that doesn't adhere to the CAGW meme is not invited. They get tons, but they never allow them in.

I wonder why? Could it be that way they can claim there are none? Naaaahhh, it couldn't be that simple or political at all....now could it...

 

[westwall]

73,480/120=612

They had to use 612 times as much CO2 as the 120PPM they claim will destroy all life on Earth just to get a 1 degree uptick and that's likely from the Ideal Gas Law and not the Majikal Heat trapping properties of the modern CO2

Maybe they used old CO2 molecules, you know, the ones BEFORE the modern ones that can drive the climate?

I spent a fair chunk of time in my college days learning how to scale models. Ever see photos of folks putting little pint-sized copies of jet fighters and rockets into wind tunnels? I bet you have, cause not everyone has a wind tunnel big enough to hold a full sized bomber or a Delta rocket. And not every wind tunnel can produce air speeds as fast as would be required to test these things one-to-one. So, guess how they do it?

Before you condemn the mythbuster's experiment, you'd better demonstrate to us that you understand what they were demonstrating and how. If you think anyone here or there ever suggested that their neat little wood and plastic boxes were physical matches for the Earth, then you need to repeat the second grade and ask them to talk slow for you.

That....is the lamest fucking excuse for the misinterpretation and misunderstanding of a experiment I have ever heard.

 

[CrusaderFrank]

73,480/120=612

They had to use 612 times as much CO2 as the 120PPM they claim will destroy all life on Earth just to get a 1 degree uptick and that's likely from the Ideal Gas Law and not the Majikal Heat trapping properties of the modern CO2

Maybe they used old CO2 molecules, you know, the ones BEFORE the modern ones that can drive the climate?

I spent a fair chunk of time in my college days learning how to scale models. Ever see photos of folks putting little pint-sized copies of jet fighters and rockets into wind tunnels? I bet you have, cause not everyone has a wind tunnel big enough to hold a full sized bomber or a Delta rocket. And not every wind tunnel can produce air speeds as fast as would be required to test these things one-to-one. So, guess how they do it?

Before you condemn the mythbuster's experiment, you'd better demonstrate to us that you understand what they were demonstrating and how. If you think anyone here or there ever suggested that their neat little wood and plastic boxes were physical matches for the Earth, then you need to repeat the second grade and ask them to talk slow for you.

 

[CrusaderFrank]

AGWCult responds:

The only way to properly demonstrate how a 120PPM increase will both raise temperature and decrease ocean pH, is by having a control container the size of the Solar system.

 

[skookerasbil]

Go to 1:37 in the video

CO2 = 7.348%!!!!

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pPRd5GT0v0I

Oops

73,480 PPM!

not 400

And they got 1 degree from it

Now you know why the AGWCult can never show an experiment that shows "warming" from a 120PPM increase

Nobody knows or cares what you are talking about. The fact is, between the Indian, Chinese, Russian, Arab, African, Europena & people in the America's a lot more people are driving.

Were you against the catalytic converter when they first came out? A catalytic converter is a vehicle emissions control device that converts toxic pollutants in exhaust gas to less toxic pollutants. Of course you are not against them today, right?

So now add up all our cars, motorcycles, cows methane and don't forget the big one, CORPORATE pollution/carbon/c02 pollution. All the factories polluting. We know why they don't want to go green because it will cost them. Newt admitted it. He was running for president and he wanted to show how he was not like all the other republican candidates because eventually there will be no more denying man made global warming is dooming this planet and we have to go green to preserve this planet. We know why the corporations don't want to go green. What is your problem?

We are finally putting more gas into the air than all the volcanoes. Use to be they did more than us but we finally passed them, and you can't find that information very easily on the net or in the media for some reason. GW should not be debatable anymore. But that' won't stop the corporations from doing it as long as they can because clearly not enough people realize we are destroying this planet.

Im laughing.........how ironic? An AGW k00k making my point exactly =

Nobody cares about CO2 or the science of it. Its an internet hobby in 2014.

 

[CrusaderFrank]

Go to 1:37 in the video

CO2 = 7.348%!!!!

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pPRd5GT0v0I

Oops

73,480 PPM!

not 400

And they got 1 degree from it

Now you know why the AGWCult can never show an experiment that shows "warming" from a 120PPM increase

Nobody knows or cares what you are talking about. The fact is, between the Indian, Chinese, Russian, Arab, African, Europena & people in the America's a lot more people are driving.

Were you against the catalytic converter when they first came out? A catalytic converter is a vehicle emissions control device that converts toxic pollutants in exhaust gas to less toxic pollutants. Of course you are not against them today, right?

So now add up all our cars, motorcycles, cows methane and don't forget the big one, CORPORATE pollution/carbon/c02 pollution. All the factories polluting. We know why they don't want to go green because it will cost them. Newt admitted it. He was running for president and he wanted to show how he was not like all the other republican candidates because eventually there will be no more denying man made global warming is dooming this planet and we have to go green to preserve this planet. We know why the corporations don't want to go green. What is your problem?

We are finally putting more gas into the air than all the volcanoes. Use to be they did more than us but we finally passed them, and you can't find that information very easily on the net or in the media for some reason. GW should not be debatable anymore. But that' won't stop the corporations from doing it as long as they can because clearly not enough people realize we are destroying this planet.

Im laughing.........how ironic? An AGW k00k making my point exactly =

Nobody cares about CO2 or the science of it. Its an internet hobby in 2014.

 

[Crick]

That....is the lamest fucking excuse for the misinterpretation and misunderstanding of a experiment I have ever heard.

Why? Identify what you believe to be my misinterpretations and misunderstandings.

 

[IanC]

73,480/120=612

They had to use 612 times as much CO2 as the 120PPM they claim will destroy all life on Earth just to get a 1 degree uptick and that's likely from the Ideal Gas Law and not the Majikal Heat trapping properties of the modern CO2

Maybe they used old CO2 molecules, you know, the ones BEFORE the modern ones that can drive the climate?

I spent a fair chunk of time in my college days learning how to scale models. Ever see photos of folks putting little pint-sized copies of jet fighters and rockets into wind tunnels? I bet you have, cause not everyone has a wind tunnel big enough to hold a full sized bomber or a Delta rocket. And not every wind tunnel can produce air speeds as fast as would be required to test these things one-to-one. So, guess how they do it?

Before you condemn the mythbuster's experiment, you'd better demonstrate to us that you understand what they were demonstrating and how. If you think anyone here or there ever suggested that their neat little wood and plastic boxes were physical matches for the Earth, then you need to repeat the second grade and ask them to talk slow for you.

the Mythbuster's experiment could easily have graphed both the temperature and CO2 levels of the controls andthe CO2 box. even better would have been several different levels of CO2, so that comparisons could be made about linearity etc. it would also be interesting to know how fast the different boxes heated up when the light source was turned on and how fast the boxes cooled down when the lights went out. or what wavelengths of light made it through the plastic walls.

the actual mythbuster;s experiment is practically devoid of any useable information except that if you use enough methane or CO2 then you get a temperature increase. we all knew that beforehand.

you brought up using scaled-down models earlier. one of the problems with that is 'economies of scale'. a three foot child does not weigh half as much as a six foot adult. using CO2 levels that are orders of magnitude different than the range that we are interested in may easily give confusing results. repeating the mythbuster's experiment with 100, 200, 400, 800, 1600 ppm CO2 would give us a general idea about the size of the effect and the type of relationship as it increases. taking one reading at 70,000 ppm tells us nothing.

 

[Politico]

Everything on Mythbusters is busted. Just because a couple guys on a tv show for profit cannot recreate something does not mean it can or cannot happen. Please let's move on.