U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 08-18-2019, 09:39 PM
 
7,687 posts, read 2,744,917 times
Reputation: 3028

Advertisements

I think this thread should be renamed evidence that AGW exists. I mean considering the OP read the report completely as* backwards.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 08-18-2019, 10:11 PM
 
Location: Loleta, CA
1,158 posts, read 979,834 times
Reputation: 1676
Imbecile
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-18-2019, 10:18 PM
 
7,687 posts, read 2,744,917 times
Reputation: 3028
The only thing this thread proves is that a patient should always get a second opinion. This thread should prove that many doctors are capable of egregious errors. This is kind of like the story where surgeons write on an arm "Do Not Cut". The fact is that the linked paper does more to confirm AGW. The OP was completely off base.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-19-2019, 02:01 AM
 
1,323 posts, read 820,562 times
Reputation: 788
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dr. Funkenstien View Post
BTW what is "naturalized science"? Never heard of that.
I missed this question in the comment above.

Naturalized science is science operating within the boundaries of ontological naturalism. The reason we specify this is because science sometimes (unwittingly) strays into metaphysics, such as the multiverse hypothesis or the simulation hypothesis.

The reason for this is that the boundaries of science are defined by Popper's falsifiability criterion, which is pretty useless in delineating science from metaphysics. This is why scholars can never seem to agree on a consensus definition of metaphysics.

We'll probably see science and metaphysics redefined at some point, as knowledge theory matures over the next generation.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-19-2019, 04:58 AM
 
1,671 posts, read 439,498 times
Reputation: 2093
Quote:
Originally Posted by ncguy50 View Post
This is a BS apples to oranges comparison. You don't compare temps/pressures in different locales, you compare the relative changes in the same locale over time. Today in Anchorage, it is 12C and the pressure is 1020. It appears the pressure has gone down with the temperature from your reading. But any single measurement is anecdotal and I'm willing to wager long term trends will reinforce Boyle's Law. If a variable value increases on one side of the equation, a value has to increase on the other side or it's simply not an equation.

Your flawed application of temp/pressure readings across different geographic regions does nothing to support your arguments or disprove Boyle's law. But it's instructive that you think it does.
Yes that’s right. My example was to show that Boyle’s law is not relevant to meteorological observations. Neither in the short or long term observation.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-19-2019, 05:18 AM
 
19,824 posts, read 12,461,452 times
Reputation: 10965
Quote:
Originally Posted by TomC23 View Post
Yes that’s right. My example was to show that Boyle’s law is not relevant to meteorological observations. Neither in the short or long term observation.
That is incorrect. Boyle's Law is relevant and directly applicable to the earth's atmosphere. There are MANY examples of its direct application in our environment.

If Boyle's Law could not be applied to earth's atmosphere, barometers wouldn't work! What do we use to measure air pressure? Barometers.

It is an act of desperation on the part of the AGW cult to now deny established physics as being wrong in order to defend a theory based on "manipulated" and inaccurate data. This clearly shows that AGW is a cult, not science, as there is now a denial of established, scientific fact in defending the cult.


For those of you who never took physics, or deny that Boyle's Law cannot be applied to earth's atmosphere, read a little and educate yourself. It is the first step in being de-programmed from the AGW cult.


http://galileo.phys.virginia.edu/cla...ng02/Boyle.htm

Last edited by hawkeye2009; 08-19-2019 at 05:37 AM..
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-27-2019, 02:50 AM
 
Location: New York Area
16,335 posts, read 6,451,189 times
Reputation: 12587
Quote:
Originally Posted by Joe the Photog View Post
Congratulations. You figued it out all by yourself! Well, you and that link. I trust scientists on this. I was never that good in Science anyway. I don't believe the world is ending in 20 years, but I am also not silly enough to think that humans have had no adverse effect on the earth either.
Do you really think that a tax and transfer scheme will fix the "adverse effect"?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-27-2019, 05:32 AM
 
19,824 posts, read 12,461,452 times
Reputation: 10965
Quote:
Originally Posted by Joe the Photog View Post
Congratulations. You figued it out all by yourself! Well, you and that link. I trust scientists on this. I was never that good in Science anyway. I don't believe the world is ending in 20 years, but I am also not silly enough to think that humans have had no adverse effect on the earth either.
Typical AGW cult member. All you can do is vilify someone or call them a "denier" when met with absolute facts which cannot be refuted.


The laws of physics on planet earth have not been changed or refuted. When a hypothesis is not supported by additional information, usually the hypothesis is recognized as being invalid and discarded or altered. In a cult, however, the members double down and entrench themselves in more "doomsday" lunacy.


It is a simple fact of physics: PV = nRT


So tell us, AGW cult members, why there is not an increase in average barometric pressure if there really is an increase in temp? Has physics been suspended on earth and we now just discard mathematics and rational science and believe the rantings of a cult?


Why is Boyle's Law no longer true?


It is true- as it has been always- what is not true is an irrational, politically driven hoax which continues to be refuted by additional evidence and inquiry.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-27-2019, 05:44 AM
 
19,633 posts, read 17,672,604 times
Reputation: 10717
There has been evidence that the very upper levels of the atmosphere have been cooler than normal as of late. I just threw that in, we've been having some very colorful skies from ice crystals as well as increased hailstorms and size of hail.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-27-2019, 11:07 AM
 
Location: Avery Co., NC
1,000 posts, read 853,880 times
Reputation: 671
See: http://www.geoengineeringwatch.org - then click on patents top of page... google "Weather as a Force multiplier-owning the weather by 2025".
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Reply

Quick Reply
Message:


Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies
Follow City-Data.com founder on our Forum or

All times are GMT -6.

© 2005-2019, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35 - Top