ISF Logo   IS Forum
Forum Index Register Members List Events Mark Forums Read Help

Go Back   International Skeptics Forum » General Topics » Conspiracies and Conspiracy Theories
 


Welcome to the International Skeptics Forum, where we discuss skepticism, critical thinking, the paranormal and science in a friendly but lively way. You are currently viewing the forum as a guest, which means you are missing out on discussing matters that are of interest to you. Please consider registering so you can gain full use of the forum features and interact with other Members. Registration is simple, fast and free! Click here to register today.
Tags Convection , meteorology , storms

Reply
Old 8th November 2018, 10:20 AM   #121
zooterkin
Nitpicking dilettante
Deputy Admin
 
zooterkin's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Berkshire, mostly
Posts: 41,506
Originally Posted by Mojo View Post
Never mind that, how about “why the sea is boiling hot?”
Next, you'll be asking about Pigasus!
__________________
The whole problem with the world is that fools and fanatics are always so certain of themselves, and wiser people so full of doubts.Bertrand Russell
Zooterkin is correct Darat
Nerd! Hokulele
Join the JREF Folders ! Team 13232
Ezekiel 23:20
zooterkin is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 8th November 2018, 05:14 PM   #122
dudalb
Penultimate Amazing
 
dudalb's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Sacramento
Posts: 41,849
Originally Posted by Mojo View Post
Never mind that, how about “why the sea is boiling hot?”
So are the Cabbages and Kings in on it?
__________________
Pacifism is a shifty doctrine under which a man accepts the benefits of the social group without being willing to pay - and claims a halo for his dishonesty.

Robert Heinlein.
dudalb is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 8th November 2018, 05:54 PM   #123
Whip
Graduate Poster
 
Join Date: Feb 2015
Posts: 1,078
Originally Posted by zooterkin View Post
Next, you'll be asking about Pigasus!


?
Whip is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 15th November 2018, 04:13 PM   #124
JamesMcGinn
Banned
 
Join Date: Nov 2018
Posts: 48
Cool

Originally Posted by Lurch View Post
On the off chance that someone might not understand why moist air at given temperature is less dense than drier air at the same temperature...
Lurch,
Moist air is always heavier than dry air. Always!
Originally Posted by Lurch View Post
The vast bulk of air comprises N2 (two N) and O2 (two O) molecules. The water molecule is H2O (two lightweight H and one O), which is hardly more than 1/2 the mass of O2. A given volume of gas at a given temperature and pressure contains the same number of particles (be they molecules, atoms or a combination.) The lighter water molecules therefore effectively displace the same number of the heavier molecules, thereby decreasing the density.
You are mistaken. H2O is heavier than the N2 and O2 (at ambient temperatures) in that it consists of nanodroplets, not individual molecules. The thing you forgot to consider is the boiling temperature of H2O.

Many are fooled by the clarity of moist air. They mistakenly assume that if it is clear that the moisture must be gaseous. This is wrong. H2O is liquid in the atmosphere.

Sorry to burst your bubble.

For more details try doing a google search using the following
James McGinn Isaac Newton was a human being
JamesMcGinn is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 15th November 2018, 04:25 PM   #125
JamesMcGinn
Banned
 
Join Date: Nov 2018
Posts: 48
Originally Posted by Squeegee Beckenheim View Post
Let's assume that I'm convinced by the scientific arguments put forth in this thready by Jim.

Jim, my two questions are: 1) why have meteorologists been lying about this all this time? 2) what are you proposing should be done about it?
I think they are confused and don't want to public to know they are confused.
JamesMcGinn is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 15th November 2018, 04:28 PM   #126
JamesMcGinn
Banned
 
Join Date: Nov 2018
Posts: 48
Originally Posted by MikeG View Post
Great. So you accept that warm air rises in some circumstances. Can you enlighten us as to what changes, and when, to prevent this happening at a large scale, given that you accept it happens on a small scale?
Yes, air rises. Moist air (which is always heavier than surrounding drier air) rises too.

I do not assume that they only thing that can cause air to rise is convection.
JamesMcGinn is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 15th November 2018, 04:29 PM   #127
JamesMcGinn
Banned
 
Join Date: Nov 2018
Posts: 48
Originally Posted by Myriad View Post
You didn't answer his question. Where did the water go?
What was the question?
JamesMcGinn is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 15th November 2018, 04:30 PM   #128
JamesMcGinn
Banned
 
Join Date: Nov 2018
Posts: 48
Originally Posted by Myriad View Post
He made no such claim, or leap of faith. You asked, specifically:




He was addressing that question. If you want to assess claims about evidence for what powers storms, then try asking questions about evidence for what powers storms.
You got nothing!!!
JamesMcGinn is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 15th November 2018, 04:32 PM   #129
JamesMcGinn
Banned
 
Join Date: Nov 2018
Posts: 48
Originally Posted by MikeG View Post
You're reversing the burden of proof again. Dabop isn't the one making claims around here. That's you. You can start explaining them just a soon as you like.
What, specifically?
JamesMcGinn is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 15th November 2018, 04:34 PM   #130
JamesMcGinn
Banned
 
Join Date: Nov 2018
Posts: 48
Originally Posted by MikeG View Post
To answer your question. If you don't want answers, don't ask questions. Particularly, if you don't want answers you don't like, don't ask gormless questions.
I would like answers to the questions I asked. I am not interested when people put words in my mouth and suggest I have to answer questions that they imagine I asked.

Quote me directly and it shouldn't be an issue.
JamesMcGinn is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 15th November 2018, 04:36 PM   #131
JamesMcGinn
Banned
 
Join Date: Nov 2018
Posts: 48
Originally Posted by Lurch View Post
James,
You mention "vortex activity, usually near the top of the troposphere."

OK. Give us a precis of vorticity and vorticity advection.
Lurch,

I'm not sure what you are looking for. Can you provide us a precis of the convection model of storms?
JamesMcGinn is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 15th November 2018, 04:38 PM   #132
Reality Check
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: New Zealand
Posts: 23,128
Originally Posted by JamesMcGinn View Post
Lurch,...
Odd that a "jimmcginn" started the thread and now we have a new poster called JamesMcGinn repeating the same mistakes as that jimmcginn.

JamesMcGinn, add water to a volume of dry air and the resulting volume of moist air is obviously heavier.
That is not what Lurch wrote about in
On the off chance that someone might not understand why moist air at given temperature is less dense than drier air at the same temperature...

An ideal gas obeys the ideal gas law PV=nRT and real gases are close to ideal.
Let V be constant. Let T be constant. Let P be constant. The number of particles n must thus be constant. Thus "A given volume of gas at a given temperature and pressure contains the same number of particles".

For n to be constant, we have to replace O2 and N2 molecules in dry air with roughly the same number of H2O molecules to get moist air. H2O is about half the mass of O2 or N2. The mass of the moist air has decreased relative to the dry air for the same volume V, pressure P and temperature T. Density = mass/V. V is constant. Therefore, moist air has a lower density than dry air.
Reality Check is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 15th November 2018, 04:41 PM   #133
JamesMcGinn
Banned
 
Join Date: Nov 2018
Posts: 48
Originally Posted by MikeG View Post
Oh good. After all the posturing, the sneering, and the self-aggrandisement, finally we get to some actual claims. Great. I mean, it's a giggle to think that some guy on the internet has spotted multiple "anomalies of water" that scientists aren't aware of
LOL. So, you amateurs aren't aware of the anomalies of H2O?

Surreal.

I'm not running a hand holding service, here. You should have known to look up the topic before you put your foot in your mouth.
JamesMcGinn is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 15th November 2018, 04:43 PM   #134
JamesMcGinn
Banned
 
Join Date: Nov 2018
Posts: 48
Originally Posted by Pixel42 View Post
Thanks for this Lurch, for me it was a useful refresher. I doubt it will help educate an OP who is apparently under the impression that the accepted model requires water "magically turning to steam at ambient temperatures", though.
Or maybe you can explain. Does your method of turning liquid H2O into gaseous H2O far below its known boiling temperature/pressure in any way involve pixie dust?
JamesMcGinn is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 15th November 2018, 04:48 PM   #135
JamesMcGinn
Banned
 
Join Date: Nov 2018
Posts: 48
Originally Posted by abaddon View Post
Well yes. Anyone can by the simple test of boiling a pot of water and simply watching. I take it that you have never cooked for yourself.

Still, your claim means that my extractor is simply a hoax perpetrated by the global steam extractor scam foundation.

Do we have a troll fail smiley in the locker?
LOL. Leave science to scientists.
JamesMcGinn is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 15th November 2018, 04:50 PM   #136
JamesMcGinn
Banned
 
Join Date: Nov 2018
Posts: 48
Originally Posted by MikeG View Post
There are multiple other ways of showing this effect without the boiling water which seems to stir Jim's blood so much. Here's a simple one: in a warm room indoors open a new clean plastic bag with one of those zip strip seals along the top and leave it for a while for all the temperature differences to even out. Seal it up fully without squeezing out the air. Place it in a fridge overnight, and observe the water inside in the morning.

Or, if you don't have the patience, put it in the freezer and observe the ice an hour or two later. If you doubt the presence of water vapour in the air without boiling water as a source, explain your observations of the contents of those plastic bags.

Or of course you could just leave a saucer of water out for a few days then explain where it has gone.
This proves their is water in air, which I don't dispute.

None of you can even follow the discussion here.
JamesMcGinn is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 15th November 2018, 04:50 PM   #137
Reality Check
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: New Zealand
Posts: 23,128
Originally Posted by JamesMcGinn View Post
You are mistaken. H2O is heavier than the N2 and O2 (at ambient temperatures) in that it consists of nanodroplets,...
You are mistaken, JamesMcGinn.
This is air
Quote:
The atmosphere of Earth is the layer of gases, commonly known as air, that surrounds the planet Earth and is retained by Earth's gravity. The atmosphere of Earth protects life on Earth by creating pressure allowing for liquid water to exist on the Earth's surface, absorbing ultraviolet solar radiation, warming the surface through heat retention (greenhouse effect), and reducing temperature extremes between day and night (the diurnal temperature variation).

By volume, dry air contains 78.09% nitrogen, 20.95% oxygen,[2] 0.93% argon, 0.04% carbon dioxide, and small amounts of other gases. Air also contains a variable amount of water vapor, on average around 1% at sea level, and 0.4% over the entire atmosphere. Air content and atmospheric pressure vary at different layers, and air suitable for use in photosynthesis by terrestrial plants and breathing of terrestrial animals is found only in Earth's troposphere and in artificial atmospheres.
This is water vapor
Quote:
Water vapor, water vapour or aqueous vapor is the gaseous phase of water. It is one state of water within the hydrosphere.
Moist air is H2O + N2 + O2 + other trace gases.

Clouds and fogs are air containing droplets of water and if those droplets are tiny then they are water nanodroplets.
Reality Check is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 15th November 2018, 04:54 PM   #138
JamesMcGinn
Banned
 
Join Date: Nov 2018
Posts: 48
Originally Posted by MikeG View Post
Yes. Evaporation without passing boiling point seems to be an alien concept for our Jim.
How so?
JamesMcGinn is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 15th November 2018, 05:06 PM   #139
JamesMcGinn
Banned
 
Join Date: Nov 2018
Posts: 48
Originally Posted by MRC_Hans View Post
Well, to be charitable, there's the butterfly effect: A storm has to start somehow, so a vortice somewhere? Well, let's leave it at that.

Now explain, please:

1) How does a local vortice evolve into a storm? Whee does the energy come from?
Vortices can evolve into a storm. The energy comes from the jet streams and it is in the form of low pressure.

[quote=MRC_Hans;12489547]




2) Practical observation shows that a rising column of warm, moist air can form a convection cell that evolves into a thunderstorm.


You can conjecture that a cell is caused by convection. But nobody has every tested it empirically. So it is just a conjecture.

This is something you can watch many times every summer in large parts of the world. How does this fit with your thesis?

My thesis explains this as a consequence of vortices and not a consequence of convectionl


3) If, as you claim, most storms start as vortices in the very upper atmosphere, why can't we observe them evolving downward from up there?

We can and do.

Instead they always appear to spread upwards. And as a corollary, why do storms NEVER exist only in the higher parts of the atmosphere, but always from the surface up?

They often exist only in the upper part of the atmosphere. in fact, for vortices to come down from above is actually rather rare.
JamesMcGinn is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 15th November 2018, 05:08 PM   #140
JamesMcGinn
Banned
 
Join Date: Nov 2018
Posts: 48
Originally Posted by BStrong View Post
U.S.?
The prize is no longer available. Nobody claimed it.

Of course, I knew nobody would/could.
JamesMcGinn is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 15th November 2018, 05:12 PM   #141
JamesMcGinn
Banned
 
Join Date: Nov 2018
Posts: 48
Originally Posted by steenkh View Post
Just my words. In the absence of the good old-fashioned woo-woos, we have got the science kooks, and there is a lot to learn from the real scientists and engineers that reply to their theories.
Good luck getting a meteorologists to address any of this. Its a taboo subject for them. Keeping the public mildly confused is job security for them.

Convection model of storms is just marketing for the meteorology lobby. It's not like there are robust models that they use on a daily basis.
JamesMcGinn is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 15th November 2018, 05:14 PM   #142
JamesMcGinn
Banned
 
Join Date: Nov 2018
Posts: 48
Originally Posted by MRC_Hans View Post
Well, till he makes a falsifiable claim, his money is safe.

Hans
I have made a falsifiable claim. I stated that moist air (all other factors being the same) is heavier than dry air.

Prove me wrong. You can't!!!!

You got nothing!!!
JamesMcGinn is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 15th November 2018, 05:16 PM   #143
JamesMcGinn
Banned
 
Join Date: Nov 2018
Posts: 48
Wink

Originally Posted by MRC_Hans View Post
Well, you might want to cut down in the snide remarks, at least till you know what you are talking about.

First of all, as Lurch has so nicely explained, moist air is less dense than dry air, simply because water vapor is less dense than air. However, the main difference comes because when air gets hot, it will of course expand, becoming less dense. Therefore, regardless of humidity, warm air will rise if surrounded by colder air.

And here you have the first stage in the formation of everything from summer clouds to hurricanes. .... Would you like me to explain the rest of the process?

Hans
Hans, moist air is heavier than dry air. Always!!!

Science involves facts. Not your imagination.
JamesMcGinn is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 15th November 2018, 05:18 PM   #144
JamesMcGinn
Banned
 
Join Date: Nov 2018
Posts: 48
Originally Posted by Reality Check View Post
No. The reason being that this is well tested physics
]
In the first post on this thread I stated the three untested conjectures that form the basis of convection theory.

Untested means untested. Now do you get it?
JamesMcGinn is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 15th November 2018, 05:22 PM   #145
JamesMcGinn
Banned
 
Join Date: Nov 2018
Posts: 48
Originally Posted by Reality Check View Post
Real world science is not restricted to eyesight, jimmcginn.
Moist air from a evaporating pot of water is in general invisible to eyesight. A bit of common sense says that this is happening. The pot of water is evaporating. By definition that is water going from a liquid phase to a gas phase. There is air above the pot. Air + water as a gas = moist air.
I agree moist air rises. I do not agree that moist air rising means that the process causing it to rise is convection. And I do not agree that the fact it is rising means that it is lighter than dry air.

Take not of the logic being explained here. This is your chance to see how a real scientist thinks.
JamesMcGinn is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 15th November 2018, 05:28 PM   #146
JamesMcGinn
Banned
 
Join Date: Nov 2018
Posts: 48
Originally Posted by Reality Check View Post
We get that unsupported assertions and accusations says nothing about weather and is not any kind of science, jimmcginn.
That is my point. Meteorologists refuse to support or test their argument.
Originally Posted by Reality Check View Post
We understand that YouTube is full of crank videos and are skeptical about citations to it. The obvious exception are the mainstream science video channels.
You got nothing!!!
Originally Posted by Reality Check View Post
ETA: A 40 minute video with the title "Pauling's Omission: The Original Sin of the Natural Sciences" and no description does not inspire confidence that it contains valid science.
Maybe it is over your head.
Originally Posted by Reality Check View Post
Presumably that is Linus Pauling who was an eminent biochemist and Noble Prize winner. Biochemistry and his specialist field of quantum chemistry is not meteorology. The ADS Database has 359 abstracts for him, 3 for 'Linus Pauling surface', and none for 'Linus Pauling tension'.
You got nothing.
Originally Posted by Reality Check View Post


The video up to where things get really wrong.
  • The video starts with a fantasy that the surface tension of water has something to do with tornadoes - tornadoes are not made of liquid water!
  • Ignorance of "we just do not understand H2O".
    We understand a lot about water, e.g. hydrogen bonding, the origin of surface tension.
  • Mostly ignores the scientific literature and textbooks and cherry picks a journalist, Philip Ball, who is a prominent science writer with 9 selected articles on water.
  • Plays a YouTube video abut water with textbook physics and states it has absurd claims. If he bothered to actually learn abut water from textbooks, he would know about why it has high heat capacity, high boiling point and surface tension (essentially the hydrogen bonds mentioned in that video!).
  • Incredibility about "70 anomalies", i.e. properties of water, that are not found in other common molecules.
  • Asymmetry of the H and O atoms due to H2O being a polar dipole.
    Simplistic "electric gradient" and "stretching of electron clouds" stuff.
  • Symmetry of O2, methane.
  • 10:20 may be the introduction of a fantasy of turning H2O into a non-polar molecule.
  • 10:45 and we get to hydrogen bonding and his "Pauling omission" error.
    "Linus Pauling credits T. S. Moore and T. F. Winmill with the first mention of the hydrogen bond, in 1912"
    Scientists not knowing about his imagined things in videos and books is not an omission.
  • An imaginary "incidental symmetry" is introduced with cartoons about its results (magically removes the asymmetry that makes H2O polar).
    For example he thinks that a cartoon of 2 HF molecules side by side removes "electrical gradients".
    Hydrogen fluoride is a normally gas, not a solid ! Its molecules do not line up to allow imaginary calculation of electrical gradients. Solid HF fomes a zigzag structure due to hydrogen bonding!
So we have no physics. Just cartoons that do whatever he imagines things do which the physics says does not happen.

There is no "taboo" about discussing models. Meteorologists want to discuss their models. There is the scientific literature where meteorologists discuss their models. There are web sits where meteorologists discuss their models. There are TV documentaries where meteorologists discuss their models.
.

[/quote]

[quote=Reality Check;12490824]

You got nothing!!!
JamesMcGinn is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 15th November 2018, 05:31 PM   #147
JamesMcGinn
Banned
 
Join Date: Nov 2018
Posts: 48
Originally Posted by Myriad View Post
I wasn't really interested in his claims about tornadoes. Just way too far-fetched and groundless to be interesting, even from a "what bad intuition led to this strange model?" standpoint. (When I posted my first reply, I decided not to snark instead, but I did compose the appropriately snarky post in my mind: basically, "your tornado model is incomplete because you've left out air elementals, phlogiston, and Thor.")

But I do wish he'd tried to answer the simple question about where the water goes when water or something wet dries at room temperature.
The myth is that it becomes gaseous. This is impossible.
JamesMcGinn is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 15th November 2018, 05:35 PM   #148
JamesMcGinn
Banned
 
Join Date: Nov 2018
Posts: 48
Originally Posted by Giordano View Post
It is interesting to me that these kinds of thread can continue so long, launched by an absolutely absurd premise in the OP. At one level I would have thought that one rebuttal post would have been enough to just establish the truth for any readers and leave it at that. And let's face it, typically no number of rebuttals, references to facts, links to information sources, etc. will convince the "alternative science/science conspiracy" believers that they are wrong - look at the other threads in this Forum of this nature.

But I will acknowledge that I understand the need to want to fully rebut even absurdities, and the many rebuttals often provide interesting information for the readers, such as myself. So carry on, even though I would say that the premise in the OP has been well and truly slaughtered many times down thread of it.
You all lack skill as skeptics. None of you noticed the shortcomings of storm theory before I pointed it out in the OP.
JamesMcGinn is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 15th November 2018, 05:37 PM   #149
JamesMcGinn
Banned
 
Join Date: Nov 2018
Posts: 48
Originally Posted by Kid Eager View Post
After reading his claims elsewhere (and having a bit of fun with posts that are now AAH), I was left with one question: "Just how much current physics and chemistry has to be wrong for him to be right?"
Nothing that has been proven needs to be changes. Much of what was believed by the public must be changed. For example, the public generally assumes H2O is simple and well understood.

Now we know differently.
JamesMcGinn is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 15th November 2018, 05:45 PM   #150
JamesMcGinn
Banned
 
Join Date: Nov 2018
Posts: 48
Originally Posted by threadworm View Post
How about you cut to the chase, drop the JAQ-ing off act and tell us what you claim is responsible. Are diving down some rabbit hole involving 'them' that meterologists are all in on? Pity no-one let me in on the act when I was teaching it.

Warm moist air rises. You can watch it happen when you fill a bath, or boil a kettle.
Right. Air rises. The question is what are the physics of air rising. Is it so simple as convection? Can you prove that air rising is always because of convection? No, you cannot.

Originally Posted by threadworm View Post
We may not have a perfect model of the weather, but I'll wager it's a lot better than yours.
None of you has a real argument. None of you understands any of this.

Look up the H2O phase diagram. H2O is never, ever gaseous in earth's atmosphere.

Even you simple souls can make this determination.
JamesMcGinn is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 15th November 2018, 05:50 PM   #151
JamesMcGinn
Banned
 
Join Date: Nov 2018
Posts: 48
Originally Posted by Reality Check View Post
Odd that a "jimmcginn" started the thread and now we have a new poster called JamesMcGinn repeating the same mistakes as that jimmcginn.

JamesMcGinn, add water to a volume of dry air and the resulting volume of moist air is obviously heavier.
That is not what Lurch wrote about in
On the off chance that someone might not understand why moist air at given temperature is less dense than drier air at the same temperature...

An ideal gas obeys the ideal gas law PV=nRT and real gases are close to ideal.
Let V be constant. Let T be constant. Let P be constant. The number of particles n must thus be constant. Thus "A given volume of gas at a given temperature and pressure contains the same number of particles".

For n to be constant, we have to replace O2 and N2 molecules in dry air with roughly the same number of H2O molecules to get moist air. H2O is about half the mass of O2 or N2. The mass of the moist air has decreased relative to the dry air for the same volume V, pressure P and temperature T. Density = mass/V. V is constant. Therefore, moist air has a lower density than dry air.
Your argument contains a fatal error:

H2O is a liquid at ambient temperatures.
https://www.thunderbolts.info/forum/...hp?f=8&t=16306

James McGinn / Solving Tornadoes
JamesMcGinn is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 15th November 2018, 05:53 PM   #152
JamesMcGinn
Banned
 
Join Date: Nov 2018
Posts: 48
Originally Posted by Reality Check View Post
You are mistaken, JamesMcGinn.
This is air

This is water vapor


Moist air is H2O + N2 + O2 + other trace gases.

Clouds and fogs are air containing droplets of water and if those droplets are tiny then they are water nanodroplets.
Right. Now just apply Avogadro's law and you get the right answer. Moist air is heavier (not lighter) than dry air.

https://www.thunderbolts.info/forum/...hp?f=8&t=16306

Now do you get it?

James McGinn / Solving Tornadoes
JamesMcGinn is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 15th November 2018, 05:57 PM   #153
Dr.Sid
Graduate Poster
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: Olomouc, Czech Republic
Posts: 1,674
H20 can be snf commonly is in gas form even under freezing temperatures. You've got nothing.
Dr.Sid is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 15th November 2018, 06:01 PM   #154
Reality Check
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: New Zealand
Posts: 23,128
Originally Posted by JamesMcGinn View Post
Your argument contains a fatal error:
Your post has a fatal error - linking to the forum at the deluded Thunderbolts cult.

ETA: Thunderbolts are a bunch of rather deluded followers of Immanuel Velikovsky. If anyone is interested in just how deeply deluded they are:
18 November 2010: The lies, failures and successes of Thunderbolts Deep Impact predictions by Wal Thornhill
10th April 2015: The ignorance, delusions and lies in the Thunderbolts web site, videos, etc.
13 April 2018: A couple of the delusions in Scott's Birkeland current paper.

Try linking to real science, e.g. Properties of water.
H2O is a liquid and vapor at ambient temperatures. A glass of water at ambient temperatures evaporates by becoming water vapor. Dry air on top of water does not absorb water drops, it absorbs water vapor.

Last edited by Reality Check; 15th November 2018 at 06:09 PM.
Reality Check is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 15th November 2018, 06:08 PM   #155
JamesMcGinn
Banned
 
Join Date: Nov 2018
Posts: 48
Originally Posted by Dr.Sid View Post
H20 can be snf commonly is in gas form even under freezing temperatures. You've got nothing.
Impossible. H2O does not magically turn gaseous. The invisibility fools people. People are gullible and assume that since gaseous H2O is invisible that therefore the invisibility of moist air proves it is gaseous. This is just dumb reasoning.
JamesMcGinn is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 15th November 2018, 06:15 PM   #156
JamesMcGinn
Banned
 
Join Date: Nov 2018
Posts: 48
Talking

Originally Posted by Reality Check View Post
Your post has a fatal error - linking to the forum at the rather deluded Thunderbolts cult.
LOL. You are so desperate. You don't have a clear argument so you rag on othe forum.
Originally Posted by Reality Check View Post
Try linking to real science, e.g. Properties of water.

H2O is a liquid and vapor at ambient temperatures.

LOL. Your imagination is not evidence. You have zero reproducibile experimental evidence. All you have is conjecture and more conjecture from you fellow fools.
[quote=Reality Check;12504127]

A glass of water at ambient temperatures evaporates by becoming water vapor.

[quote=Reality Check;12504127]
Right. Vapor. Not gas. (Vapor/evaporate contains liquid H2O.)

You really should leave science to somebody that understand it.

James McGinn / Solving Tornadoes
JamesMcGinn is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 15th November 2018, 06:20 PM   #157
JamesMcGinn
Banned
 
Join Date: Nov 2018
Posts: 48
Originally Posted by threadworm View Post
How about you cut to the chase, drop the JAQ-ing off act and tell us what you claim is responsible. Are diving down some rabbit hole involving 'them' that meterologists are all in on? Pity no-one let me in on the act when I was teaching it.

Warm moist air rises. You can watch it happen when you fill a bath, or boil a kettle.

We may not have a perfect model of the weather, but I'll wager it's a lot better than yours.
Slow down. Undoubtedly you haven't put much thought into this. See if you can dispute anything here:

https://www.thunderbolts.info/forum/...?f=10&start=30

This post gets over 200 views a day. So the cat is out of the bag on all of this. You got nothing!!!
JamesMcGinn is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 15th November 2018, 06:21 PM   #158
Dr.Sid
Graduate Poster
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: Olomouc, Czech Republic
Posts: 1,674
Originally Posted by JamesMcGinn View Post
Impossible. H2O does not magically turn gaseous. The invisibility fools people. People are gullible and assume that since gaseous H2O is invisible that therefore the invisibility of moist air proves it is gaseous. This is just dumb reasoning.
Wait, now I remember .. I already called you troll few pages back .. you can't mean this seriously ..
Dr.Sid is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 15th November 2018, 06:30 PM   #159
Reality Check
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: New Zealand
Posts: 23,128
Originally Posted by JamesMcGinn View Post
That is my point. Meteorologists refuse to support or test their argument.
...
A lie and then gibberish, JamesMcGinn. Meteorologists use working physics and test their arguments against real weather.

My post to which you replied started We get that unsupported assertions and accusations says nothing about weather and is not any kind of science. That is about your still unsupported assertions and accusations.

A list of obvious fantasies and errors in your "Pauling's Omission" video is something.

It is a historical fact that Linus Pauling was 11 years old when the hydrogen bond concept was first raised in 1912 !

It is a historical fact that Linus Pauling was 20 years old when Latimer and Rodebush published their paper on hydrogen bonding in water.

It is a fact that Linus Pauling published a paper on hydrogen bonding in ice in 1935.
Linus Pauling, “The Structure and Entropy of Ice and of Other Crystals with Some Randomness of Atomic Arrangement,” Journal of the American Chemical Society 57, no. 12 (1935): 2,680–84.
What Pauling contributed to the hydrogen bond was firstly experimental evidence that the bond was not electrostatic with Lawrence Brockway and then an argument that the structure of hexagonal ice is linked to the asymmetry of the bond.
Reality Check is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 15th November 2018, 06:45 PM   #160
Reality Check
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: New Zealand
Posts: 23,128
Originally Posted by JamesMcGinn View Post
...This post gets over 200 views a day.
It is not a surprise that a rather crazy "New Insights and Mad Ideas" section in a forum run by the deluded Thunderbolts cult has people looking at it. Todays total includes me!

You have a link to the mad ideas section, not a link to a mad idea post.
Reality Check is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Reply

International Skeptics Forum » General Topics » Conspiracies and Conspiracy Theories

Bookmarks

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump


All times are GMT -7. The time now is 07:14 PM.
Powered by vBulletin. Copyright ©2000 - 2018, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.

This forum began as part of the James Randi Education Foundation (JREF). However, the forum now exists as
an independent entity with no affiliation with or endorsement by the JREF, including the section in reference to "JREF" topics.

Disclaimer: Messages posted in the Forum are solely the opinion of their authors.