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 15th November 2018, 06:49 PM   #161
JamesMcGinn
Banned
 
Join Date: Nov 2018
Posts: 48
Originally Posted by Dr.Sid View Post
Wait, now I remember .. I already called you troll few pages back .. you can't mean this seriously ..
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, 06:51 PM   #162
Reality Check
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: New Zealand
Posts: 23,128
Originally Posted by JamesMcGinn View Post
Now just apply Avogadro's law and you get the right answer.
Now just learn what Avogadro's law is, JamesMcGinn.
Quote:
Avogadro's law states that, "equal volumes of all gases, at the same temperature and pressure, have the same number of molecules."[1]
That is why moist air is lighter than dry air. Part of that "same number of molecules" is N2 and O2 replaced by H2O molecules .

Avogadro's law is a foundation for the ideal gas law. Does PV=nRT look familiar to you?
An ideal gas obeys the ideal gas law PV=nRT and real gases are close to ideal.
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, 06:51 PM   #163
JamesMcGinn
Banned
 
Join Date: Nov 2018
Posts: 48
Originally Posted by Reality Check View Post
A lie and then gibberish, JamesMcGinn. Meteorologists use working physics and test their arguments against real weather.
LOL. 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, 06:54 PM   #164
JamesMcGinn
Banned
 
Join Date: Nov 2018
Posts: 48
Originally Posted by Reality Check View Post
Things get worse for the credibility of "James McGinn / Solving Tornadoes" with this ignorant page

A scientist is someone who has studied science and publishes about science in peer-reviewed journals. That is not him.
Climate change is an observed fact.
Climate scientists do debate. He is unaware that scientific journals exist, can be read and that climate scientists have been debating the causes of the current global warming for decades (since the 1970's?) in those journals. It is the evidence that has formed the current ~97% consensus that we are the main cause of global warming.
There is zero reproducible experimental evidence that CO2 causes the atmosphere to warm. The whole thing is rather obvious pseudoscience.
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, 06:56 PM   #165
Reality Check
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: New Zealand
Posts: 23,128
Originally Posted by JamesMcGinn View Post
Now do you get it?
Read
Thunderbolts are a bunch of rather deluded followers of Immanuel Velikovsky. 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.

Now do you get how bad linking to their forum makes your ideas look, JamesMcGinn?

You are suggesting that you cannot recognize a cult with whose "prophets" have a track record of ignorance, lies and delusions. Or that your ideas are so bad that you cannot post them elsewhere. You are even linking to a forum section for "New Insights and Mad Ideas", not validated science !

Last edited by Reality Check; 15th November 2018 at 06:57 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, 06:59 PM   #166
dudalb
Penultimate Amazing
 
dudalb's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Sacramento
Posts: 41,835
Originally Posted by JamesMcGinn View Post
You got nothing!!!
Your opponents in this thread have nothing except facts, science, reason and logic on their side........
__________________
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 15th November 2018, 07:10 PM   #167
JamesMcGinn
Banned
 
Join Date: Nov 2018
Posts: 48
The Biggest Problem in Science

The biggest problem in science

Humans have a deep-seated emotional need to believe they understand their world and there is a lot of money to be made fulfilling that need. And since most science consumers don't have the time or the education to put much effort into it, the most money can be made giving these educated science consumers excuses for why they don't actually have to literally understand it. *And so--for reasons of fiscal necessity--many sciences have dumbed down their models to go with the flow of what people want to believe. The thinking goes as such. Everybody has sat in their car, windows closed, on a hot day. Therefore everybody will find it easy to believe that CO2 traps heat, hence the greenhouse effect. Everybody has seen a pot boiling on a stove produce a mushroom cloud of vapor, like a thunderstorm. *Therefore everybody will find it easy to believe the water in the atmosphere acts the same way, hence the convection model of storm theory.

One consequence of this is that certain assumptions that are associated with the models have to be concealed, ignored, or effectively dismissed by the people that maintain them. *And it is for this reason that there are certain concepts in every discipline that are sacred. Their validity is beyond dispute and cannot be contradicted without the person being shunned by the larger discipline. Or, more simply put, certain subjects are taboo. You won't find a meteorologist willing to field questions about or participating in a discussion about the implications of the fact that the boiling temperature of H2O is much higher than that in the ambient environment. They are members of a discipline that is fundamentally obsessed with maintaining its public image. *Likewise, you won't find a climatologists willing to discuss the known fact that the overall thermal effect of CO2 on the atmosphere is miniscule compared to H2O.

And so, by appealing to the emotional need of science consumers to believe they understand what they actually don't, the discipline of meteorology (for purposes of its own survival) effectively panders to the lowest common denominator of the science consuming public with dumbed down models that gives some of the more ambitious but equally gullible members of the populace all the ammunition they need to shout down and drown out anybody that points out the parts of their models that are cartoonish nonsense. (Like the surreal belief (superstition) that H2O magically becomes gaseous at temperatures/pressures far below its boiling temperature/pressure.)

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, 07:12 PM   #168
JamesMcGinn
Banned
 
Join Date: Nov 2018
Posts: 48
Originally Posted by dudalb View Post
Your opponents in this thread have nothing except facts, science, reason and logic on their side........
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, 07:13 PM   #169
Reality Check
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: New Zealand
Posts: 23,128
Originally Posted by JamesMcGinn View Post
There is zero reproducible experimental evidence that CO2 causes the atmosphere to warm. The whole thing is rather obvious pseudoscience.
An irelvant lie about well known physics, JamesMcGinn with a rather obvious "rather obvious pseudoscience" lie.

Greenhouse effect
Quote:
The existence of the greenhouse effect was argued for by Joseph Fourier in 1824. The argument and the evidence were further strengthened by Claude Pouillet in 1827 and 1838 and reasoned from experimental observations by John Tyndall in 1859, who measured the radiative properties of specific greenhouse gases.[7] The effect was more fully quantified by Svante Arrhenius in 1896, who made the first quantitative prediction of global warming due to a hypothetical doubling of atmospheric carbon dioxide.[8]
We have had reproducible experimental evidence that CO2 causes atmospheres to warm for 159 years. Note that it is extremely impractical to run reproducible experiments on entire planets! But we are running an experiment on the Earth's atmosphere by recording CO2 and global temperature. The record shows that as CO2 increases, global temperature increases.
We can also measure past CO2 and temperature levels and see the same.
Global warming

My post was: Things get worse for the credibility of "James McGinn / Solving Tornadoes" with this ignorant page (ignorance about what a scientist is, lies about climate change and climate science)

Last edited by Reality Check; 15th November 2018 at 07:16 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, 07:14 PM   #170
JamesMcGinn
Banned
 
Join Date: Nov 2018
Posts: 48
Originally Posted by Reality Check View Post
Read
Thunderbolts are a bunch of rather deluded followers of Immanuel Velikovsky. 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.

Now do you get how bad linking to their forum makes your ideas look, JamesMcGinn?

You are suggesting that you cannot recognize a cult with whose "prophets" have a track record of ignorance, lies and delusions. Or that your ideas are so bad that you cannot post them elsewhere. You are even linking to a forum section for "New Insights and Mad Ideas", not validated science !
LOL. You are so desperate.
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, 07:26 PM   #171
Reality Check
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: New Zealand
Posts: 23,128
Originally Posted by JamesMcGinn View Post
LOL. You are so desperate.
Posting at the obviously deluded Thunderbolts cult besmirches your idea by associating their delusions.

Irrelevant insults just emphasizes that you do not have any science or evidence to support your idea. Otherwise you would write that instead.

The Thunderbolts being a ignorant, deluded and lying cult is not desperate. It is a documented fact.
Ignorant: Astronomy 101 and how stars are stable.
Deluded: Planets whizzing around the Solar System because they cherry pick some old myths.
Lying: 11 years of a "confirmed" Deep Impact prediction of a flash before impact and a flash after impact when what happened was 2 flashes after impact!
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, 07:28 PM   #172
jrhowell
Muse
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Posts: 526
Isn’t there already a thread to discuss this in the conspiracy theories section?

Last edited by jrhowell; 15th November 2018 at 07:43 PM.
jrhowell 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, 07:35 PM   #173
William Parcher
Show me the monkey!
 
William Parcher's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Posts: 21,059
Quote:
The biggest problem in science
How is that bigger than conquering the belief in Creationism?
__________________
Bigfoot believers and Bigfoot skeptics are both plumb crazy. Each spends more than one minute per year thinking about Bigfoot.
William Parcher 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, 07:49 PM   #174
JamesMcGinn
Banned
 
Join Date: Nov 2018
Posts: 48
Originally Posted by Reality Check View Post
Posting at the obviously deluded Thunderbolts cult besmirches your idea by associating their delusions.

Irrelevant insults just emphasizes that you do not have any science or evidence to support your idea. Otherwise you would write that instead.

The Thunderbolts being a ignorant, deluded and lying cult is not desperate. It is a documented fact.
Ignorant: Astronomy 101 and how stars are stable.
Deluded: Planets whizzing around the Solar System because they cherry pick some old myths.
Lying: 11 years of a "confirmed" Deep Impact prediction of a flash before impact and a flash after impact when what happened was 2 flashes after impact!
You are what I call a church lady.

In the past the main obstacle to scientific progress was that many found
the narrative associated with religion/bible to be convincing. Now the
"church ladies" use science itself as the narrative that justifies their
deliberate refusal to apply the scientific method. *

None of you "skeptics" are genuine skeptics. You are believers. You are
church ladies. A church lady is somebody who defends scripture but doesn't
really understand it. None of you pretenders has an argument or even
bothers to think about any of this. Anybody can pretend to understand.
It takes no skill, no intelligence, and it involves no work.

One of the myths of human evolution is that the process produced a rational
end product. This is not true. Humans are not rational but can best be
described as hyper-pseudo-rational. This means that humans believe they are
rational but are oriented to intellectually create their own pseudo-reality.
(And the prevailing pseodo-reality can often become incorporated into a
culture's social contract.) This is the reason intelligent people
unavoidably find ourselves at odds with science-based fantasy. Human hyper-
pseudo-rationalism is the result of millions of years of communal selection.
It's here to stay.

Church ladies wrap themselves in their self-righteous belief that they
know the truth and, therefore, they don't have to consider contradictory
evidence. They perceive their own cognitive dissonance as evidence that
their opponents argument is wrong and then desperately start looking for
anything that will re-establish their delicate sense of certainty.

There is an inexhaustible supply of brain-dead church ladies, eager to
pretend to understand all things conventional. *

Meteorology's storm theory is a hold-over from the nineteenth century when
people were generally ignorant and believed plainly stupid things, like
the notion that a pot on a stove was a good analogy for storms. And/or
they believed the plainly dumb notion that H2O magically turned gaseous
(in the atmosphere) making moist air lighter than dry air. And/or they
believed that dry air above had magical structural abilities that produced
a downward force that trapped convection (this involves meteorology's
dishonest argument to explain why convection doesn't always happen).
And/or they believed H2O's latent heat magically caused the gusty winds
of storms. Church ladies are so gullible and so eager to believe that it
was not even necessary for meteorologists to conceal the blatant dishonesty
of these suppositions.

Much of science has been dumbed down to appeal to the lowest common
denominator. Unscrupulous, pretend scientists employ the technigues of
consensus (politics, propaganda) to dominate scientific discourse. *It's
easy to pretend like you have a deep scientific understanding of a
scientific subject if you just go along with what everybody else believes.
It takes no talent to agree. It takes no intelligence to pretend to
understand. And it takes no effort to lie and obfuscate in order to
appeal to what people already want to believe.

With science it is really easy to be seduced into believing you understand
when actually you just believe. *For example, you believe that cold steam
is in earth's atmosphere.*You believe this despite the fact that nobody
has ever detected it.*And so, you have no empirical reason to believe it
exists.*You believe it, therefore, because a lot of other people believe
it. This is the twisted logic of group think.*And the multitude of
brain-dead believers, like yourselves, are the reason it works.

In other words, much of science lies about water because all of science
appeals to the lowest common denominator of science consumer--and
everybody "knows" water is simple. Well, water isn't simple.*And pretending
it is simple is a major obstacle to progress in many disciplines, like
meteorology.

Exposing this pretense is a theme in the first chapter of my next book. *

Here is the first paragraph:

Bill -- Chapter One: Air Brakes (Plasma [1 of 5])
ht(remove this)tp://www.thunderbolts.info/forum/phpBB3/viewtopic.php?f=10&t=16582#p117060

Are you the kind of person that suspects an underlying complexity to our
reality that nobody quite understands so everybody just pretends to
understand and tacitly agrees to not call attention to each others
pretenses? Are you the kind of person that suspects that different academic
factions have colluded to sow confusion so that their collective failure to
understand this underlying complexity of our reality is not revealed to the
public? Are you the kind of person that believes the public can so easily be
led astray by pretentious, sciencey sounding rhetoric that diverts attention
away from the wider revelation of this poorly understood underlying
complexity of our reality? Me neither. So I was just as perplexed as anybody
would be when I first encountered the the zeroing out of polarity with with
fully coordinated (symmetric) hydrogen bonding between H2O molecules (as in
liquid water).

As you can imagine, I have no interests in discussing any of this here. Trying
to explain anything about the details of H2O to someone who refuses to
understand basic concepts like the boiling temperature of H2O is as pointless
as trying to teach evolution to a dog.
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, 07:59 PM   #175
RecoveringYuppy
Philosopher
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Posts: 7,883
Tornadoes are dead stars?
__________________
REJ (Robert E Jones) posting anonymously under my real name for 30 years.

Make a fire for a man and you keep him warm for a day. Set him on fire and you keep him warm for the rest of his life.
RecoveringYuppy 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, 08:29 PM   #176
Reality Check
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: New Zealand
Posts: 23,128
Originally Posted by JamesMcGinn View Post
You are what I call a church lady. ...
A screed of irrelevant, ignorant and sometimes lying text, JamesMcGinn.

Posting at the obviously deluded Thunderbolts cult besmirches your idea by associating their delusions. is still correct.

Irrelevant insults just emphasizes that you do not have any science or evidence to support your idea. is still correct.

A "all of science appeals to the lowest common denominator of science consumer" lie. That may apply to science reporting where the science is made as simple as appropriate for the reader. The main "science consumers:" are scientists . Scientists write scientific papers to be published in scientific papers to inform scientists in their field about their work. Scientists get together at scientific conferences to report on scientific progress. Scientists write scientific textbooks to educate science students at levels from general high school science to advanced post-graduate studies.

"everybody "knows" water is simple" is a lie because everyone who learns about water such as meteorologists learn that water is complex. This is water and the properties of water.

Last edited by Reality Check; 15th November 2018 at 08:39 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, 08:33 PM   #177
Reality Check
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: New Zealand
Posts: 23,128
Originally Posted by JamesMcGinn View Post
LOL. You are retarded. Where is this evidence?
An insult and lying "Where is this evidence?" question when An irrelevant lie about well known physics with a rather obvious "rather obvious pseudoscience" lie cites and quotes the evidence.
"John Tyndall in 1859, who measured the radiative properties of specific greenhouse gases" and reference 7 is "John Tyndall, Heat considered as a Mode of Motion (500 pages; year 1863, 1873)"

Sceince progresses and from memory (so I may be wrong), the definitive modern experiments were done in the 1950's.

Last edited by Reality Check; 15th November 2018 at 08:37 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, 08:45 PM   #178
Reality Check
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: New Zealand
Posts: 23,128
Originally Posted by JamesMcGinn View Post
Meteorologists and climatologists don't do experiments.
Repeating this invalid assertion (experiments are done) is implying a fantasy that we can do experiments on actual weather and actual climate, JamesMcGinn!

Do you really think that climatologists can do an experiment where they double the amount of CO2 in Earth's atmosphere, JamesMcGinn?

Do you really think that meteorologists can do an experiment where they control the movement of wind over say the Himalayas, JamesMcGinn?

Do you really think that meteorologists can do an experiment that varies the path of a jet stream, JamesMcGinn?

Do you really think that meteorologists can do an experiment that creates a full-scale tropical storm, JamesMcGinn?

Do you really think that meteorologists can do an experiment that creates a full-scale tornado, JamesMcGinn?
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, 08:53 PM   #179
Myriad
Hyperthetical
 
Myriad's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: A pocket paradise between the sewage treatment plant and the railroad
Posts: 14,261
Originally Posted by JamesMcGinn View Post
You won't find a meteorologist willing to field questions about or participating in a discussion about the implications of the fact that the boiling temperature of H2O is much higher than that in the ambient environment.

Yeah, and just try to find a chemist who doesn't insist sodium chloride can turn into liquid by dissolving in water at room temperature despite knowing full well that sodium chloride's melting point is over 800°C. Stupid sexy Flanders!
__________________
A zømbie once bit my sister...
Myriad 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, 09:32 PM   #180
Mycroft
High Priest of Ed
 
Mycroft's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Posts: 19,298
Originally Posted by JamesMcGinn View Post
Hans, moist air is heavier than dry air. Always!!!
Why always? If the moist air were also warmer and less dense than dry cool air, couldn't it be lighter?


Originally Posted by JamesMcGinn View Post
I agree moist air rises. I do not agree that moist air rising means that the process causing it to rise is convection.
If not convection, what?

Originally Posted by JamesMcGinn View Post
And I do not agree that the fact it is rising means that it is lighter than dry air.
That goes along with convection, but if it doesn't rise because it's lighter, then why does it rise?

Originally Posted by JamesMcGinn View Post
This is your chance to see how a real scientist thinks.
What are your scientific credentials?

Originally Posted by JamesMcGinn View Post
The myth is that it becomes gaseous. This is impossible.
If the water doesn't become gaseous, then where does it go?
Mycroft 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, 09:39 PM   #181
Norman Alexander
Illuminator
 
Norman Alexander's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2014
Posts: 3,513
So far I haven't seen any actual science problem described at all, let alone "the biggest problem".
__________________
...our governments are just trying to protect us from terror. In the same way that someone banging a hornets’ nest with a stick is trying to protect us from hornets. Frankie Boyle, Guardian, July 2015
Norman Alexander 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, 10:31 PM   #182
JamesMcGinn
Banned
 
Join Date: Nov 2018
Posts: 48
Originally Posted by Reality Check View Post
A screed of irrelevant, ignorant and sometimes lying text, JamesMcGinn.

Posting at the obviously deluded Thunderbolts cult besmirches your idea by associating their delusions. is still correct.

Irrelevant insults just emphasizes that you do not have any science or evidence to support your idea. is still correct.

A "all of science appeals to the lowest common denominator of science consumer" lie. That may apply to science reporting where the science is made as simple as appropriate for the reader. The main "science consumers:" are scientists . Scientists write scientific papers to be published in scientific papers to inform scientists in their field about their work. Scientists get together at scientific conferences to report on scientific progress. Scientists write scientific textbooks to educate science students at levels from general high school science to advanced post-graduate studies.

"everybody "knows" water is simple" is a lie because everyone who learns about water such as meteorologists learn that water is complex. This is water and the properties of water.
Humans like simple models. So, meteorologists and climatologists give us what we want. H2O doesn't magically become gaseous in the atmosphere <snip>. It was just that this notion fit so perfectly with their simpleminded model that they couldn't abandon the notion. I guess you/we can chalk it up to politics. Regardless, without this lie their silly theory about convection causing all movement in the atmosphere (including jet streams) was maybe too implausible even for the extremely gullible public.


Edited by Loss Leader:  Edited for rules 0/12

Last edited by Loss Leader; 17th November 2018 at 10:57 PM.
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, 10:34 PM   #183
Lukraak_Sisser
Illuminator
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Posts: 3,231
You're exactly right. And because humans are unwilling to put in the effort AND believe that nature should somehow be 'logical' and have 'common sense' you get all sorts of weird cranks trying to apply that.
Combine that with the deep seated feeling that everything can be solved by a lone wolf hero going against 'the faceless masses' enemies rather than the massive collaborative effort real science is and you get lone internet people either trying to convince or scam people.
For instance, there is the cold fusion cranks, the hydrino cranks, the electric universe cranks and there is this guy that seems to think that every single meteorologist is wrong and that hot air somehow does not rise, despite the massive amounts of practical machines based upon that fact.
Good thing you warned us not to believe lone internet shouters.
Lukraak_Sisser 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, 10:42 PM   #184
JamesMcGinn
Banned
 
Join Date: Nov 2018
Posts: 48
RealityCheeks:
An insult and lying "Where is this evidence?"

James McGinn:
You got nothing!!!

RealityCheeks:
"John Tyndall in 1859, who measured the radiative properties of specific greenhouse gases"

James McGinn:
I'm an expert on Tyndall's work. What part of it can I help you understand?

RealityCheeks:
Science progresses and from memory (so I may be wrong), the definitive modern experiments were done in the 1950's.

James McGinn:
You got nothing!!!

Vortices are the Pressure Relief Valves of the Atmosphere
https://www.thunderbolts.info/forum/...p?f=10&t=17125
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, 10:46 PM   #185
JamesMcGinn
Banned
 
Join Date: Nov 2018
Posts: 48
Originally Posted by Mycroft View Post
Why always? If the moist air were also warmer and less dense than dry cool air, couldn't it be lighter?




If not convection, what?



That goes along with convection, but if it doesn't rise because it's lighter, then why does it rise?



What are your scientific credentials?



If the water doesn't become gaseous, then where does it go?
Instead of becoming upset why not just ask me if I will allow you to make a retraction.
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, 10:56 PM   #186
JamesMcGinn
Banned
 
Join Date: Nov 2018
Posts: 48
Why always? If the moist air were also warmer and less dense than dry cool air, couldn't it be lighter?

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

If not convection, what?

https://www.thunderbolts.info/forum/...p?f=10&t=17125

That goes along with convection, but if it doesn't rise because it's lighter, then why does it rise?

Because vortices are introducing low pressure above.

What are your scientific credentials?

I'm a genius.

If the water doesn't become gaseous, then where does it go?

How can you ask such a dumb question? Seriously. You know where the water goes.
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, 11:00 PM   #187
JamesMcGinn
Banned
 
Join Date: Nov 2018
Posts: 48
Originally Posted by Reality Check View Post
Now just learn what Avogadro's law is, JamesMcGinn.

That is why moist air is lighter than dry air. Part of that "same number of molecules" is N2 and O2 replaced by H2O molecules .

Avogadro's law is a foundation for the ideal gas law. Does PV=nRT look familiar to you?
An ideal gas obeys the ideal gas law PV=nRT and real gases are close to ideal.
You exemplify why amateurs should avoid science. Avogadro's law proves me right. Read this:
Isaac Newton was a human being
https://www.thunderbolts.info/forum/...hp?f=8&t=16306
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, 11:04 PM   #188
JamesMcGinn
Banned
 
Join Date: Nov 2018
Posts: 48
An irelvant lie about well known physics, JamesMcGinn with a rather obvious "rather obvious pseudoscience" lie.

Greenhouse effect

We have had reproducible experimental evidence that CO2 causes atmospheres to warm for 159 years.

Would you buy a car that was designed 159 years ago?

Do you nitwits think about anything you say. It's as if you are just parroting back things you've heard. None of you retards actually understands any of this. You all are too dumb to call yourselves skeptics. You are all brain-dead church ladys.
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, 11:08 PM   #189
Mojo
Mostly harmless
 
Mojo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Posts: 30,613
Originally Posted by JamesMcGinn View Post
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.

What makes it rise?
__________________
"You got to use your brain." - McKinley Morganfield

"The poor mystic homeopaths feel like petted house-cats thrown at high flood on the breaking ice." - Leon Trotsky
Mojo is online now   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, 11:14 PM   #190
Mojo
Mostly harmless
 
Mojo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Posts: 30,613
Originally Posted by JamesMcGinn View Post
Why always? If the moist air were also warmer and less dense than dry cool air, couldn't it be lighter?

What makes it warmer?

Quote:
I'm a genius.

If the water doesn't become gaseous, then where does it go?

How can you ask such a dumb question? Seriously. You know where the water goes.

Do you know?
__________________
"You got to use your brain." - McKinley Morganfield

"The poor mystic homeopaths feel like petted house-cats thrown at high flood on the breaking ice." - Leon Trotsky

Last edited by Mojo; 15th November 2018 at 11:21 PM.
Mojo is online now   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, 11:18 PM   #191
JamesMcGinn
Banned
 
Join Date: Nov 2018
Posts: 48
Originally Posted by Mojo View Post
What makes it warmer?




Do you know?
I'm not running a hand holding service here. Take a guess. Go ahead. Be brave.
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, 11:19 PM   #192
Mojo
Mostly harmless
 
Mojo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Posts: 30,613
Originally Posted by JamesMcGinn View Post
I'm not running a hand holding service here. Take a guess. Go ahead. Be brave.

“You got nothing.”
__________________
"You got to use your brain." - McKinley Morganfield

"The poor mystic homeopaths feel like petted house-cats thrown at high flood on the breaking ice." - Leon Trotsky
Mojo is online now   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, 11:32 PM   #193
JamesMcGinn
Banned
 
Join Date: Nov 2018
Posts: 48
[quote=Reality Check;12504164]
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

James McGinn:
Here is where Pauling screwed up:
Are You Confused About Hydrogen Bonding In Water?
https://youtu.be/RfNuWJDJvRw
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, 11:35 PM   #194
JamesMcGinn
Banned
 
Join Date: Nov 2018
Posts: 48
Originally Posted by Mojo View Post
“You got nothing.”
LOL. You simple fools can't figure out anything.

This is the reason so much of science is so bad.
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, 11:41 PM   #195
Mojo
Mostly harmless
 
Mojo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Posts: 30,613
Originally Posted by JamesMcGinn View Post
Why always? If the moist air were also warmer and less dense than dry cool air, couldn't it be lighter?

Just to clarify: are you suggesting that this is what makes it rise?
__________________
"You got to use your brain." - McKinley Morganfield

"The poor mystic homeopaths feel like petted house-cats thrown at high flood on the breaking ice." - Leon Trotsky
Mojo is online now   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, 11:48 PM   #196
JamesMcGinn
Banned
 
Join Date: Nov 2018
Posts: 48
Originally Posted by Mojo View Post
Just to clarify: are you suggesting that this is what makes it rise?
Surreal. No!!! Read upthread where I answered this exact 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, 11:57 PM   #197
NewtonTrino
Illuminator
 
NewtonTrino's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Posts: 4,315
Originally Posted by Lukraak_Sisser View Post
You're exactly right. And because humans are unwilling to put in the effort AND believe that nature should somehow be 'logical' and have 'common sense' you get all sorts of weird cranks trying to apply that.
Combine that with the deep seated feeling that everything can be solved by a lone wolf hero going against 'the faceless masses' enemies rather than the massive collaborative effort real science is and you get lone internet people either trying to convince or scam people.
For instance, there is the cold fusion cranks, the hydrino cranks, the electric universe cranks and there is this guy that seems to think that every single meteorologist is wrong and that hot air somehow does not rise, despite the massive amounts of practical machines based upon that fact.
Good thing you warned us not to believe lone internet shouters.
There's nothing really else to say.

Honestly still don't understand what the original thing is about.
NewtonTrino 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 16th November 2018, 12:05 AM   #198
Mojo
Mostly harmless
 
Mojo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Posts: 30,613
Originally Posted by JamesMcGinn View Post
Surreal. No!!! Read upthread where I answered this exact question.

Link to the post where you did it. I’m not going to read through a lot of incoherent and poorly formatted posts in the hope of spotting the relevant one.
__________________
"You got to use your brain." - McKinley Morganfield

"The poor mystic homeopaths feel like petted house-cats thrown at high flood on the breaking ice." - Leon Trotsky
Mojo is online now   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 16th November 2018, 12:22 AM   #199
Mojo
Mostly harmless
 
Mojo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Posts: 30,613
Originally Posted by JamesMcGinn View Post
LOL. No. Read upthread you ignorant fool.

You can’t link to it, can you?
__________________
"You got to use your brain." - McKinley Morganfield

"The poor mystic homeopaths feel like petted house-cats thrown at high flood on the breaking ice." - Leon Trotsky
Mojo is online now   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 16th November 2018, 12:32 AM   #200
JamesMcGinn
Banned
 
Join Date: Nov 2018
Posts: 48
Originally Posted by Mojo View Post
You can’t link to it, can you?
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
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 06:30 AM.
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.