Official Thread for Denial of GreenHouse Effect and Radiative Physics.

[jc456]

Where?

Where your moron buddy said P = zero.

Zero radiated yep again it’s radiating nothing yep. What we both say

View attachment 273102

Where did you see zero radiated in SB?

BTW, I see zero when T = Tc.

Great, where did you see that in SB?

if T = Tc. the answer will be zero. no matter how many times you do the math.

 

[jc456]

Nothing about net

Because it's only talking about radiating, silly.

So you'll be posting your evidence that SB is flawed any time now?

How did I say it was wrong?

None of your whining on this thread was you claiming the SB was flawed?

That's a relief.

I said cold objects don’t radiate when next to warmer objects. You said they do. I said nothing more. You think SB shows otherwise, fill in the formula and prove the equation will show the cold object radiates. Go!

I said cold objects don’t radiate when next to warmer objects.

So you are disagreeing with SB. You should post your data. Maybe some sources that agree with you?

Unless you're out there all alone with your buddy?

You said they do.

Obviously, SB.

You think SB shows otherwise, fill in the formula and prove the equation will show the cold object radiates.



E=eA(5.670374419 × 10−8 watt per metre^2/K^4) * (273.15)^4

still waiting on you to complete the formula for P, when T = Tc

 

[jc456]

Photons that come from the Sun are the result of fusion.

Absolutely!

the source of the photons from the surface that radiate to the hotter corona is fusion.

You bet your ass.

is that what you're telling us?

That's what I'm telling you.

you wrote it, right?

Sure did.

Did you find out where fusion occurs?

Or will your ignorance on this topic remain unreduced?

The plethora of posts about fusion on the surface of the sun was a hilarious dialog. Too bad it ended. Teasing the hapless idiot like that was better than the famous Abbot and Costello, "Who's on first".

Also the ice cream "tutorial video" was hilarious. And SSDD coming back with his fake physics is hilarious. He never learns from the fact that he disagrees with himself in the most fundamental aspects of thermodynamics.This thread should be moved to the Humor forum.

.

He's not very bright.
Perfect sycophant.

says the guy that thinks cold objects warm up warm objects. I'd say the sycophant is you.

 

[jc456]

Right? I gave you the definition

BTW, I’m still waiting on that observed heat off an ice cube near a hot object? Another thing when an object radiates it gets colder right? Why does the ice melt when near a hot object if it’s releasing heat as you say?

Right? I gave you the definition

Right, I saw your confusion.

BTW, I’m still waiting on that observed heat off an ice cube near a hot object?

You could use one of these cameras. FLIR T660...….

View attachment 273113

Another thing when an object radiates it gets colder right?

Depends.

Why does the ice melt when near a hot object if it’s releasing heat as you say?

Why wouldn't it?

Is your confusion caused by your weak math skills?

So you’re saying that when an object radiates it' gets warmer? Hmm you got a new one to get your Nobel prize with. Magic photons dimmer switches? Hahaha hahaha

So you’re saying that when an object radiates it' gets warmer?

Does it?

Hmm you got a new one to get your Nobel prize with.

You first with your "The 2nd Law conflicts with SB" Nobel.

still waiting for your explanation, does an object cool or warm up as it radiates? you now have dodged yet another question. you're the dodge ball king I see.

does an object cool or warm up as it radiates?

Did you miss my answer? Or did you forget already?

It depends.

you now have dodged yet another question.

I keep answering, your Alzheimer's keeps getting in your way.

'depends' isn't an answer so I'm still asking.

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

Where your moron buddy said P = zero.

Zero radiated yep again it’s radiating nothing yep. What we both say

View attachment 273102

Where did you see zero radiated in SB?

BTW, I see zero when T = Tc.

Great, where did you see that in SB?

if T = Tc. the answer will be zero. no matter how many times you do the math.

Unless A=0 or T=0, it emits.

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

Because it's only talking about radiating, silly.

So you'll be posting your evidence that SB is flawed any time now?

How did I say it was wrong?

None of your whining on this thread was you claiming the SB was flawed?

That's a relief.

I said cold objects don’t radiate when next to warmer objects. You said they do. I said nothing more. You think SB shows otherwise, fill in the formula and prove the equation will show the cold object radiates. Go!

I said cold objects don’t radiate when next to warmer objects.

So you are disagreeing with SB. You should post your data. Maybe some sources that agree with you?

Unless you're out there all alone with your buddy?

You said they do.

Obviously, SB.

You think SB shows otherwise, fill in the formula and prove the equation will show the cold object radiates.



E=eA(5.670374419 × 10−8 watt per metre^2/K^4) * (273.15)^4

still waiting on you to complete the formula for P, when T = Tc

Net is zero, durr.

Email Dr. Raeder yet? LOL!

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

Right? I gave you the definition

Right, I saw your confusion.

BTW, I’m still waiting on that observed heat off an ice cube near a hot object?

You could use one of these cameras. FLIR T660...….

View attachment 273113

Another thing when an object radiates it gets colder right?

Depends.

Why does the ice melt when near a hot object if it’s releasing heat as you say?

Why wouldn't it?

Is your confusion caused by your weak math skills?

So you’re saying that when an object radiates it' gets warmer? Hmm you got a new one to get your Nobel prize with. Magic photons dimmer switches? Hahaha hahaha

So you’re saying that when an object radiates it' gets warmer?

Does it?

Hmm you got a new one to get your Nobel prize with.

You first with your "The 2nd Law conflicts with SB" Nobel.

still waiting for your explanation, does an object cool or warm up as it radiates? you now have dodged yet another question. you're the dodge ball king I see.

does an object cool or warm up as it radiates?

Did you miss my answer? Or did you forget already?

It depends.

you now have dodged yet another question.

I keep answering, your Alzheimer's keeps getting in your way.

'depends' isn't an answer so I'm still asking.

Since you haven't posted your data, depends is all you'll get.

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

Photons that come from the Sun are the result of fusion.

Absolutely!

the source of the photons from the surface that radiate to the hotter corona is fusion.

You bet your ass.

is that what you're telling us?

That's what I'm telling you.

you wrote it, right?

Sure did.

Did you find out where fusion occurs?

Or will your ignorance on this topic remain unreduced?

The plethora of posts about fusion on the surface of the sun was a hilarious dialog. Too bad it ended. Teasing the hapless idiot like that was better than the famous Abbot and Costello, "Who's on first".

Also the ice cream "tutorial video" was hilarious. And SSDD coming back with his fake physics is hilarious. He never learns from the fact that he disagrees with himself in the most fundamental aspects of thermodynamics.This thread should be moved to the Humor forum.

.

He's not very bright.
Perfect sycophant.

says the guy that thinks cold objects warm up warm objects. I'd say the sycophant is you.

You're lying. And stupid.

 

[jc456]

Zero radiated yep again it’s radiating nothing yep. What we both say

View attachment 273102

Where did you see zero radiated in SB?

BTW, I see zero when T = Tc.

Great, where did you see that in SB?

if T = Tc. the answer will be zero. no matter how many times you do the math.

Unless A=0 or T=0, it emits.

0 times anything is zero. sorry. seems you got another one you should right an article on. no zero times a number isn't zero for you. Wow.

 

[jc456]

Photons that come from the Sun are the result of fusion.

Absolutely!

the source of the photons from the surface that radiate to the hotter corona is fusion.

You bet your ass.

is that what you're telling us?

That's what I'm telling you.

you wrote it, right?

Sure did.

Did you find out where fusion occurs?

Or will your ignorance on this topic remain unreduced?

The plethora of posts about fusion on the surface of the sun was a hilarious dialog. Too bad it ended. Teasing the hapless idiot like that was better than the famous Abbot and Costello, "Who's on first".

Also the ice cream "tutorial video" was hilarious. And SSDD coming back with his fake physics is hilarious. He never learns from the fact that he disagrees with himself in the most fundamental aspects of thermodynamics.This thread should be moved to the Humor forum.

.

He's not very bright.
Perfect sycophant.

says the guy that thinks cold objects warm up warm objects. I'd say the sycophant is you.

You're lying. And stupid.

naw, never lie, but smarter than you.

 

[jc456]

How did I say it was wrong?

None of your whining on this thread was you claiming the SB was flawed?

That's a relief.

I said cold objects don’t radiate when next to warmer objects. You said they do. I said nothing more. You think SB shows otherwise, fill in the formula and prove the equation will show the cold object radiates. Go!

I said cold objects don’t radiate when next to warmer objects.

So you are disagreeing with SB. You should post your data. Maybe some sources that agree with you?

Unless you're out there all alone with your buddy?

You said they do.

Obviously, SB.

You think SB shows otherwise, fill in the formula and prove the equation will show the cold object radiates.



E=eA(5.670374419 × 10−8 watt per metre^2/K^4) * (273.15)^4

still waiting on you to complete the formula for P, when T = Tc

Net is zero, durr.

Email Dr. Raeder yet? LOL!

why? he's your friend, you should talk

 

[Wuwei]

I doubt that he can handle even math that basic...and even if he could do it, he couldn't bring himself to admit that P=0 when T and Tc are set to the same number..wuwei avoided answering that question for pages and pages and pages..simply couldn't admit that the actual equations from the SB law say that he is wrong...it was simply beyond is ability to accept so he dodged and weaved and weaseled rather than simply state that P = 0...

Total liar. You had pages and pages of lies.

Read the last paragraph 10 times or until it sinks in.

 

[jc456]

How did I say it was wrong?

None of your whining on this thread was you claiming the SB was flawed?

That's a relief.

I said cold objects don’t radiate when next to warmer objects. You said they do. I said nothing more. You think SB shows otherwise, fill in the formula and prove the equation will show the cold object radiates. Go!

I said cold objects don’t radiate when next to warmer objects.

So you are disagreeing with SB. You should post your data. Maybe some sources that agree with you?

Unless you're out there all alone with your buddy?

You said they do.

Obviously, SB.

You think SB shows otherwise, fill in the formula and prove the equation will show the cold object radiates.



E=eA(5.670374419 × 10−8 watt per metre^2/K^4) * (273.15)^4

still waiting on you to complete the formula for P, when T = Tc

Net is zero, durr.

Email Dr. Raeder yet? LOL!

radiates zero!!! thanks, P = zero. that is the answer right? P=0. unless of course your math zero times something is not zero. go for it Power =0. Say it with me, P=Zero!!!!

BTW, that answer means that SB backs the cold object radiates nothing, zero = nadda in the event you didn't know.

 

[jc456]

I doubt that he can handle even math that basic...and even if he could do it, he couldn't bring himself to admit that P=0 when T and Tc are set to the same number..wuwei avoided answering that question for pages and pages and pages..simply couldn't admit that the actual equations from the SB law say that he is wrong...it was simply beyond is ability to accept so he dodged and weaved and weaseled rather than simply state that P = 0...

Total liar. You had pages and pages of lies.

Read the last paragraph 10 times or until it sinks in.

t=tc means there is zero radiated in equilibrium. you just can't make yourself say it even though what you just posted does. too fking funny.

I quote "the body is absorbing and emitting at the same rate and it is in equilibrium with the enclosure" t=tc P therefore =zero.

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

View attachment 273102

Where did you see zero radiated in SB?

BTW, I see zero when T = Tc.

Great, where did you see that in SB?

if T = Tc. the answer will be zero. no matter how many times you do the math.

Unless A=0 or T=0, it emits.

0 times anything is zero. sorry. seems you got another one you should right an article on. no zero times a number isn't zero for you. Wow.

0 times anything is zero.

Who is this and how did you hack JC's account?

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

Photons that come from the Sun are the result of fusion.

Absolutely!

the source of the photons from the surface that radiate to the hotter corona is fusion.

You bet your ass.

is that what you're telling us?

That's what I'm telling you.

you wrote it, right?

Sure did.

Did you find out where fusion occurs?

Or will your ignorance on this topic remain unreduced?

The plethora of posts about fusion on the surface of the sun was a hilarious dialog. Too bad it ended. Teasing the hapless idiot like that was better than the famous Abbot and Costello, "Who's on first".

Also the ice cream "tutorial video" was hilarious. And SSDD coming back with his fake physics is hilarious. He never learns from the fact that he disagrees with himself in the most fundamental aspects of thermodynamics.This thread should be moved to the Humor forum.

.

He's not very bright.
Perfect sycophant.

says the guy that thinks cold objects warm up warm objects. I'd say the sycophant is you.

You're lying. And stupid.

naw, never lie, but smarter than you.

Then you should be about to show the post where I said what you claimed. Liar.

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

None of your whining on this thread was you claiming the SB was flawed?

That's a relief.

I said cold objects don’t radiate when next to warmer objects. You said they do. I said nothing more. You think SB shows otherwise, fill in the formula and prove the equation will show the cold object radiates. Go!

I said cold objects don’t radiate when next to warmer objects.

So you are disagreeing with SB. You should post your data. Maybe some sources that agree with you?

Unless you're out there all alone with your buddy?

You said they do.

Obviously, SB.

You think SB shows otherwise, fill in the formula and prove the equation will show the cold object radiates.



E=eA(5.670374419 × 10−8 watt per metre^2/K^4) * (273.15)^4

still waiting on you to complete the formula for P, when T = Tc

Net is zero, durr.

Email Dr. Raeder yet? LOL!

why? he's your friend, you should talk

My friend? Is that why SSDD used him as a source? LOL!

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

None of your whining on this thread was you claiming the SB was flawed?

That's a relief.

I said cold objects don’t radiate when next to warmer objects. You said they do. I said nothing more. You think SB shows otherwise, fill in the formula and prove the equation will show the cold object radiates. Go!

I said cold objects don’t radiate when next to warmer objects.

So you are disagreeing with SB. You should post your data. Maybe some sources that agree with you?

Unless you're out there all alone with your buddy?

You said they do.

Obviously, SB.

You think SB shows otherwise, fill in the formula and prove the equation will show the cold object radiates.



E=eA(5.670374419 × 10−8 watt per metre^2/K^4) * (273.15)^4

still waiting on you to complete the formula for P, when T = Tc

Net is zero, durr.

Email Dr. Raeder yet? LOL!

radiates zero!!! thanks, P = zero. that is the answer right? P=0. unless of course your math zero times something is not zero. go for it Power =0. Say it with me, P=Zero!!!!

BTW, that answer means that SB backs the cold object radiates nothing, zero = nadda in the event you didn't know.

radiates zero!!!

No!!!

that is the answer right? P=0.

Net equals zero.

BTW, that answer means that SB backs the cold object radiates nothing,

SB says matter above 0K radiates. No matter the surrounding conditions.

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

I doubt that he can handle even math that basic...and even if he could do it, he couldn't bring himself to admit that P=0 when T and Tc are set to the same number..wuwei avoided answering that question for pages and pages and pages..simply couldn't admit that the actual equations from the SB law say that he is wrong...it was simply beyond is ability to accept so he dodged and weaved and weaseled rather than simply state that P = 0...

Total liar. You had pages and pages of lies.

Read the last paragraph 10 times or until it sinks in.

t=tc means there is zero radiated in equilibrium. you just can't make yourself say it even though what you just posted does. too fking funny.

I quote "the body is absorbing and emitting at the same rate and it is in equilibrium with the enclosure" t=tc P therefore =zero.

t=tc means there is zero radiated in equilibrium.

Between you and SSDD, still no backup for that claim? Weird.

Maybe you should check out the definition of a blackbody?

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

I doubt that he can handle even math that basic...and even if he could do it, he couldn't bring himself to admit that P=0 when T and Tc are set to the same number..wuwei avoided answering that question for pages and pages and pages..simply couldn't admit that the actual equations from the SB law say that he is wrong...it was simply beyond is ability to accept so he dodged and weaved and weaseled rather than simply state that P = 0...

Total liar. You had pages and pages of lies.

Read the last paragraph 10 times or until it sinks in.

t=tc means there is zero radiated in equilibrium. you just can't make yourself say it even though what you just posted does. too fking funny.

I quote "the body is absorbing and emitting at the same rate and it is in equilibrium with the enclosure" t=tc P therefore =zero.

I quote "the body is absorbing and emitting at the same rate and it is in equilibrium with the enclosure"

DURR>>>>>>>>>t=tc means there is zero radiated in equilibrium.

I wish I could make money off your stupidity.