seven stats on climate change

[ReinyDays]

Ah ... didn't mean to interrupt ...

 

[Wuwei]

All of physics beyond Newton's laws is in error....

Science is the questioning of everything.... Why do you hate people doing real science?

So you believe Gary Novak? He said,

Simple and unquestionable mathematical proof shows energy has been misdefined in physics.

The representation of kinetic energy being used is mass times velocity squared (½mv²), when it should be mass times velocity unsquared (mv), momentum.

The consequence is that everything in physics which involves energy is in error, which includes at least 90% of physics.
​

You believe that 90% of physics is in error because they should have defined energy as mass times velocity? You believe Newton is right and Relativity is wrong? That is what you are implying.

.​

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

Ah ... didn't mean to interrupt ...

It's impossible to interrupt Billy's idiocy.

 

[SSDD]

Since physics has become a "science" of models, how would anyone ever catch the error in reality? They look at models as if they were real, and publish articles describing the fiction they derive from models as if it were real. There is a reason that the field of physics is in crisis.....whether you choose to believe it or not.

 

[SSDD]

All of physics beyond Newton's laws is in error....

Science is the questioning of everything.... Why do you hate people doing real science?

They are operating from a position of faith...there isn't much place for questioning faith...if you ask for actual empirical evidence in support of faith, you are a filthy heretic worthy of imprisonment...or worse.....and asking for what they can't provide makes them feel bad...

 

[SSDD]

Here't the problem in a nutshell.

You tell me a catastrophe is coming.

What has to come next is, "If you do X, Y, and Z, the catastrophe can be averted." You are giving me A thru Z, much of which is painful and expensive... and telling us we must do this.

But unless everybody else on the planet does the same thing, it won't work, and we KNOW that the biggest emitters on the planet are not on board (India and China), except on paper, and even the most enthusiastic countries (Japan & Germany) are moving in the wrong direction due to their idiotic decisions to abandon NUCLEAR POWER. So the fact is that, even if we do A thru Z, the effect will be negligible. If the U.S. does everything conceivable while everyone else does what they are obviously doing, the effect of our efforts on global temperatures as of 2100 will be about a quarter of one degree C. B.F.D.

And you refuse to acknowledge the BENEFITS of warming, which I am enjoying at this very moment. My gas bills are down, I played golf last week, I've ridden my motorcycle 8-10 times since the time when I would normally have covered it for WInter. I haven't run my snow blower since February (except to confirm that it's running properly). I am personally fine with global warming, no matter what you call it.

The human race will develop engineering solutions to the problems that warming brings that cannot be resolved by simpler means. I hope we can profit by bringing those engineering solutions to the rest of the world.

Take your global warming hysteria and the teenaged twit who delivers it, and shove it where the sun don't shine.

I have been asking for decades exactly what the ideal temperature is for life on this planet....they never answer. You can bet that it isn't the relatively cool temperatures the earth is experiencing now. We haven't even warmed completely out of the little ice age yet. I would suppose that the catastrophic 2 degrees they are predicting would put us two degrees closer to the ideal temperature for life on planet earth.

 

[JoeB131]

Now this is funny.........I live in a place that used to have mile high glaciers.....now we don't. This happened long before man knew what a car was.......

You secular religious fanatics would be funny if you weren't so prone to murdering 10s of millions of people ....

secular religious? Really?

YOu do realize it took thousands of years to end the last ice age... as oppose to the damage we are doing now that is happening in decades.

Stick to your Gun Fetish, Dick Tiny.

 

[JoeB131]

They are operating from a position of faith...there isn't much place for questioning faith...if you ask for actual empirical evidence in support of faith, you are a filthy heretic worthy of imprisonment...or worse.....and asking for what they can't provide makes them feel bad...

Oh, look, hte Koch-Sucker is back, repeating Koch Brother lies.

David Koch in Hell... "Is it hot in here?"

 

[ReinyDays]

They are operating from a position of faith...there isn't much place for questioning faith...if you ask for actual empirical evidence in support of faith, you are a filthy heretic worthy of imprisonment...or worse.....and asking for what they can't provide makes them feel bad...

We were discussing the Ideal Gas Law ... what is the volume of Earth's atmosphere? ...

 

[Wuwei]

Since physics has become a "science" of models, how would anyone ever catch the error in reality? They look at models as if they were real, and publish articles describing the fiction they derive from models as if it were real. There is a reason that the field of physics is in crisis.....whether you choose to believe it or not.

Physics has not become a science of models. Classical and modern physics were always a science of models. The “reality” of nature falls under metaphysics not physics.

The models of basic physics are accurate to 1 part per billion or trillion and accurately describe the mechanics of nature in a functional way. But to design a global positioning system, a Large Hadron Collider, a gravitational wave detector, or micro-electronics, “reality” is not needed. Basic physics should not be confused with metaphysics.

Physics is not in crisis. Only the people that deny physics are in crisis, whether they know it or not.

 

[Wuwei]

All of physics beyond Newton's laws is in error....

Science is the questioning of everything.... Why do you hate people doing real science?

They are operating from a position of faith...there isn't much place for questioning faith...if you ask for actual empirical evidence in support of faith, you are a filthy heretic worthy of imprisonment...or worse.....and asking for what they can't provide makes them feel bad...

Science is evidenced belief. Faith is belief without evidence. The difference between the two should not be confusing. Your point about heresy no longer applies. It hasn't for hundreds of years.

.​

 

[Billy_Bob]

All of physics beyond Newton's laws is in error....

Science is the questioning of everything.... Why do you hate people doing real science?

So you believe Gary Novak? He said,

Simple and unquestionable mathematical proof shows energy has been misdefined in physics.

The representation of kinetic energy being used is mass times velocity squared (½mv²), when it should be mass times velocity unsquared (mv), momentum.

The consequence is that everything in physics which involves energy is in error, which includes at least 90% of physics.
​

You believe that 90% of physics is in error because they should have defined energy as mass times velocity? You believe Newton is right and Relativity is wrong? That is what you are implying.

.​

I believe that we have but 10% of the knowledge we need to make any claim. Science is the questioning of all hypothesis. Had we stopped asking questions the earth would still be flat and the sun would still revolve around the earth.

So is a photon a particle or a wave? Theories, modeled, confirm both possibilities, which one is correct?

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

All of physics beyond Newton's laws is in error....

Science is the questioning of everything.... Why do you hate people doing real science?

So you believe Gary Novak? He said,

Simple and unquestionable mathematical proof shows energy has been misdefined in physics.

The representation of kinetic energy being used is mass times velocity squared (½mv²), when it should be mass times velocity unsquared (mv), momentum.

The consequence is that everything in physics which involves energy is in error, which includes at least 90% of physics.
​

You believe that 90% of physics is in error because they should have defined energy as mass times velocity? You believe Newton is right and Relativity is wrong? That is what you are implying.

.​

I believe that we have but 10% of the knowledge we need to make any claim. Science is the questioning of all hypothesis. Had we stopped asking questions the earth would still be flat and the sun would still revolve around the earth.

So is a photon a particle or a wave? Theories, modeled, confirm both possibilities, which one is correct?

So is a photon a particle or a wave?

What is its mass and charge?

 

[Wuwei]

I believe that we have but 10% of the knowledge we need to make any claim. Science is the questioning of all hypothesis. Had we stopped asking questions the earth would still be flat and the sun would still revolve around the earth.

OK so you think 90% of physics is in error, but you haven't answered this:

The representation of kinetic energy being used is mass times velocity squared (½mv²), when it should be mass times velocity unsquared (mv), momentum.​

So is a photon a particle or a wave? Theories, modeled, confirm both possibilities, which one is correct?

That is supposed to be an embarrassing question asked by beginning students of physics. You asked that many times. The question itself is wrong because it assumes the nature of what EM energy is, while asking what is it.

Quantum field theory gives the correct mathematical picture. EM radiation is a field. It has the property of waves while in space, and a discrete nature while interacting with matter. The discrete amount can be calculated for simple systems such as in interaction with an atom, but the discrete nature must be handled statistically in complex systems as discovered by Planck in black body radiation. That discrete amount of interaction energy defines what is meant by a photon.

Thinking of a photon whizzing through space and hitting something gives a usable model for some cases, but that picture does not capture the essence of the deeper nature of EM energy.

.​

 

[Sunsettommy]

All of physics beyond Newton's laws is in error....

Science is the questioning of everything.... Why do you hate people doing real science?

So you believe Gary Novak? He said,

Simple and unquestionable mathematical proof shows energy has been misdefined in physics.

The representation of kinetic energy being used is mass times velocity squared (½mv²), when it should be mass times velocity unsquared (mv), momentum.

The consequence is that everything in physics which involves energy is in error, which includes at least 90% of physics.
​

You believe that 90% of physics is in error because they should have defined energy as mass times velocity? You believe Newton is right and Relativity is wrong? That is what you are implying.

.​

I believe that we have but 10% of the knowledge we need to make any claim. Science is the questioning of all hypothesis. Had we stopped asking questions the earth would still be flat and the sun would still revolve around the earth.

So is a photon a particle or a wave? Theories, modeled, confirm both possibilities, which one is correct?

So is a photon a particle or a wave?

What is its mass and charge?

I gave you the answers straight from the NASA website, you never accepted it and went on asking the same questions over and over......., it is time to stop this charade you are running on.

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

All of physics beyond Newton's laws is in error....

Science is the questioning of everything.... Why do you hate people doing real science?

So you believe Gary Novak? He said,

Simple and unquestionable mathematical proof shows energy has been misdefined in physics.

The representation of kinetic energy being used is mass times velocity squared (½mv²), when it should be mass times velocity unsquared (mv), momentum.

The consequence is that everything in physics which involves energy is in error, which includes at least 90% of physics.
​

You believe that 90% of physics is in error because they should have defined energy as mass times velocity? You believe Newton is right and Relativity is wrong? That is what you are implying.

.​

I believe that we have but 10% of the knowledge we need to make any claim. Science is the questioning of all hypothesis. Had we stopped asking questions the earth would still be flat and the sun would still revolve around the earth.

So is a photon a particle or a wave? Theories, modeled, confirm both possibilities, which one is correct?

So is a photon a particle or a wave?

What is its mass and charge?

I gave you the answers straight from the NASA website, you never accepted it and went on asking the same questions over and over......., it is time to stop this charade you are running on.

I gave you the answers straight from the NASA website,

There is no NASA website that shows a photon has a charge or a mass.

 

[ReinyDays]

I did some poking around ... the mass of a 1.25µm photon is 1.2 x 10^-19 joules ... [raises eyebrows] ... no, haven't the foggiest idea what that means ... but it's from a ,gov website so it's gotta be true ...

 

[SSDD]

I did some poking around ... the mass of a 1.25µm photon is 1.2 x 10^-19 joules ... [raises eyebrows] ... no, haven't the foggiest idea what that means ... but it's from a ,gov website so it's gotta be true ...

Unsure why you wouldn't believe it....you certainly believe sideshow hucksterism which strains credulity more than a statement about a theoretical particle...photons are theoretical particles you know...or did you think the story about them being used as a place holder till such time as we can actually explain the properties of light was real?

I couldn't find your bright primary color graph, but you presented one like this as what was observed and recorded insofar as the earth's absorption spectra.. Of course, this isn't was observed, and recorded...it is the heavily manipulated version of what was observed and recorded and used to fool those who are more than willing to be fooled.

Here is the same graph...unmanipulated...in this one we will only look at CO2...but you can apply the same principles to any of the so called greenhouse gasses, they were manipulated across the board for your enjoyment and deception..

As you can see the peak emission is around 10 microns. The CO2 spectra is around 15 microns. That is much further down from the peak than your fake graph which was, after all, designed to fool you.

The first clue is that the 15 micron wave band is peaked around 190K and not the 294K which your fake graph depicts.

Why? Deliberately deceptive manipulation of the data....nothing more....nothing less

Note they are using wave numbers, not wavelengths. A wave number is the inverse of a wavelength. They tipped the data upside down ( a common practice in climate pseudoscience) to create the misinformation they wish to create. For 1 micron, you do 1/(1000000*100) ti get the 10,000 wave number. This number represents the number to times a 1 micron wavelength can fit into one centimeter as you see on the y axis. See where this might be going?

So if you use actual wavelengths rather than wave numbers and manipulated data, here is what your graph should look like for CO2.. You could add a couple of more equally unimpressive lines for CO2 if you like, but you probably get the idea...The graph below is what was actually observed, and measured from the top of the atmosphere in the peak radiation frequency of CO2...not nearly as impressive if you want to support a false narrative so they provide you with the other graph so that you an be a good little bot, and go forth and post the misinformation in as many places as possible.

 

[ReinyDays]

...photons are theoretical particles you know ...

Bosons are supersymmetric ... that's not normally taught in Middle School ...

Please ... back to our 8th grade math ... what is the volume of the atmosphere that we should use in the Ideal Gas Law ... you made a claim, you need to back it up ...

 

[SSDD]

...photons are theoretical particles you know ...

Bosons are supersymmetric ... that's not normally taught in Middle School ...

Please ... back to our 8th grade math ... what is the volume of the atmosphere that we should use in the Ideal Gas Law ... you made a claim, you need to back it up ...

It is calculated to be 4,200,000,000 cubic kilometers. Very interesting that you were unable to find that for yourself...or know that since the US standard atmosphere is based on the ideal gas laws, that the volume of the atmosphere could be gathered from the formula alone. It is, after all, according to you 8th grade stuff.

Considering some of the things you seem to believe, maybe you should go back a bit further than 8th grade.