Who still takes global warming seriously?

Despite the recent discovery of the e-mails that resulted in "Climate Gate" and the fact this has been one of the coldest and harshest winters in many years, Gov. Full Story
PHD

Overton, TX

#31196 Jan 25, 2013
You are so correct about the above sux. All babble and no brain.

“dening those who deny nature. ”

Since: Jun 07

Norfolk va

#31197 Jan 25, 2013
Joe Bob Attacks wrote:
<quoted text>
First of all, I'm not in D.C. That's you'r first inaccurate assumption. There are cherry blossoms in other locations...in the South.
Secondly I'm not a RINO. There are plenty of republican environmentalist and it's a growing movement in the party. In fact, I'm a human being and a Christian before I'm a republican. I'm a republican who also cares about the environment, as I believe God has called us to be good stewards of the earth and not mess it up for the next generation. That is a GOOD THING! I have traditional republican values, with responsible gun ownership, states rights, pro-life, etc. Being an environmentalist does not make me a RINO.
You see, assumptions do no one any good. I could assume that you're an idiot. But again, that would be an assumption and not fair, as I'm sure you're more than just words on a message board.
And no an average joe working at Lowes reading the Drudge Report and watching Fox News is not the same as a PhD who has studied climate change for decades. Sorry, but the two aren't equivalent. I don't know why you think that someone can receive "university-level" training without actually having a degree? That's an oxymoron if I've ever heard one.
Yet a Phd can be wrong. History has scores of such examples. While I have watched Fox and read the Drudge report it is not my only sources. I also watch and read other sources to see competing views and question all that all say.

As for education, history is also full of those who have educated themselves. After all, who was going to teach the Wright Brothers how to fly a plane or Fulton to operate a steam boat. Who was going to teach Henry Ford how to make an assembly line a sucess.

At some point they had to educate themselves and they are not the only ones. Others have educated themselves about any number of subjects from auto mechanices to quatuum mechanics. Thanks to the internet it is now possible to not only do so but to the same level as that PhD on any number of subjects. Courses from places like Harvard, Yale, MIT. One reason why those schools would offer such for free is that once one has taken all those courses they are going to want a degree and will pay for it. If they have already done the course work then the school can just charge them a nominal fee for each course and test them to certify that they know the material.
PHD

Overton, TX

#31198 Jan 25, 2013
So you do support scientific science fiction they report.

Since: Jan 13

Fairfax, VA

#31199 Jan 25, 2013
tina anne wrote:
<quoted text>
Yet a Phd can be wrong. History has scores of such examples. While I have watched Fox and read the Drudge report it is not my only sources. I also watch and read other sources to see competing views and question all that all say.
Why yes, like even more extreme right wing sites like Climate Depot, run by Marc Moreno - the former Inhofe staffer who was behind the Swift Boat Veterans for Truth attacks on Kerry.

What an open minded person. LOL.
PHD

Overton, TX

#31200 Jan 26, 2013
Better to be open minded than to have one closed to scientific science fiction cut and paste answers. Do show your entire peer reviewed published work.
ObamaSUX

Calgary, Canada

#31201 Jan 26, 2013
HomoSapiensLaptopicus wrote:
<quoted text>
Cuckoo! Cuckoo! Cuckoo!
This quote is from a CalTech website. You think they know anything about science?
"The motion of atoms and molecules creates a form of energy called heat or thermal energy which is present in all matter..."
http://coolcosmos.ipac.caltech.edu/cosmic_cla...
It is NOT the same as electromagnetic radiation. It is most assuredly NOT "...propagating electromagnertic fields which carry energy from one place to another..." (capitals corrected) like you claim. You are very, very confused about science.
HAHAHA...HAHAHA....in case you don't know, your "CalTech" website link is FOR GRADE SCHOOL KIDS (Kindergarten to Grade 12), you IDIOT.

HERE is the Physics Link I posted previously and a portion of my prevous post along and MORE PHYSICS LINKS that PROVE YOU A LYING AGW IDIOT that has NO CLUE about ESTABLISHED SCIENCE.

Heat
"Heat may be defined as ENERGY IN TRANSIT from a high temperature object to a lower temperature object. An object does not possess "heat"; the appropriate term for the microscopic energy in an object is internal energy. The INTERNAL ENERGY may be increased by transferring energy to the object from a higher temperature (hotter) object - this is properly called HEATING."
http://hyperphysics.phy-astr.gsu.edu/hbase/th...

"Points:
- Heat is ENERGY IN TRANSIT (ie. Propagating Electromagnertic Fields which CARRY energy from one place to another), NOT "MOLECULAR MOTION"
- Heat is NOT EVEN DEFINED for movement from COLD to HOT, it is only "from a high temperature object to a lower temperature object."
- Once the Heat ENERGY IN TRANSIT is absorbed by a COLDER Object it increases the Objects INTERNAL ENERGY (Internal energy is defined as the energy associated with the random, disordered motion of molecules) to produce HEATING.

What a HOOT!....but Typical for the AGW CULT that has NO CLUE ABOUT ESTABLISHED SCIENCE."
http://www.topix.com/forum/news/global-warmin...
--------

Heat
"In physics and chemistry, HEAT IS ENERGY TRANSFERRED from one body to another by thermal interactions.[1][2] The transfer of energy can occur in a variety of ways, among them conduction,[3] radiation,[4] and convection. Heat is not a property of a system or body, but instead is always associated with a process of some kind, and is synonymous with heat flow and heat transfer.

Heat flow from hotter to colder systems occurs spontaneously, and is always accompanied by an increase in entropy. In a heat engine, internal energy of bodies is harnessed to provide useful work. The SECOND LAW OF THERMODYNAMICS PROHIBITS heat flow directly from COLD to HOT systems, but with the aid of a heat pump external work can be used to transport internal energy indirectly from a cold to a hot body."

"When energy is transferred to a body purely as heat, its INTERNAL ENERGY increases. This additional energy is stored as kinetic and potential energy of the atoms and molecules in the body.[12] HEAT itself is NOT STORED within a body. Like work, it exists only as ENERGY IN TRANSIT from one body to another or between a body and its surroundings."
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Heat

continued...
ObamaSUX

Calgary, Canada

#31202 Jan 26, 2013
continuation...
-------
Electromagnetic radiation
"Electromagnetic radiation is a particular form of the more general electromagnetic field (EM field), which is produced by moving charges. Electromagnetic radiation is associated with EM fields that are far enough away from the moving charges that produced them, that absorption of the EM radiation no longer affects the behavior of these moving charges. These two types or behaviors of EM field are sometimes referred to as the near and far field. In this language, EMR is merely another name for the FAR-FIELD.

EMR CARRIES ENERGY—sometimes called radiant energy—through space continuously away from the source (this is not true of the near-field part of the EM field).

EMR is classified according to the frequency of its wave. The electromagnetic spectrum, in order of increasing frequency and decreasing wavelength, consists of radio waves, microwaves, infrared radiation, visible light, ultraviolet radiation, X-rays and gamma rays."
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Electromagnetic_...
----------
Heat Radiation

"RADIATION is HEAT TRANSFER by the emission of ELECTROMAGNETIC WAVES which CARRY ENERGY away from the emitting object."

P = e*BC*A(T^4 - Tc^4)

Where P = net radiated power (Watts), e = emissivity, BC = Stefan's constant, A = area, T = temperature of radiator and Tc =
temperature of the surroundings or another body.

..when rearranged gives

P/A = e*BC*T^4 - e*BC*Tc^4 (Watts/m^2)

http://hyperphysics.phy-astr.gsu.edu/hbase/th...

This is a VECTOR subtraction of two Electromagnetic Fields.

P/A (watts/m^2) is the Magnitude of the Resultant EM field Vector and the direction of propagation is from the Hot Body to the Cold Body, ALWAYS!

There is ZERO watts/m^2 that can even propagate from the Cold Body to the Hot Body as the Heat Transfer Equation shows, the 2nd Law shows and ALL MEASUREMENTS CONFIRM.
----------
Also, did you notice that the link above stated:

"The SECOND LAW OF THERMODYNAMICS PROHIBITS heat flow directly from COLD to HOT systems, but with the aid of a heat pump external work can be used to transport internal energy indirectly from a cold to a hot body."

That's why you CAN'T POST:

- EVEN "ONE" MEASUREMENT, EVER DONE DONE, IN THE HISTORY OF MANKIND WHERE ANY COLD OBJECT HAS EVER "HEATED-UP" A WARMER OBJECT
- EVEN "ONE" MEASUREMENT WHERE THE COLDER ATMOSPHERE HAS "HEATED-UP" A WARMER EARTH

Because THEY DO NOT EXIST.

And that includes your OBVIOUS LIE (AGAIN!) about the "Vinnikov's paper":
HomoSapiensLaptopicus wrote:
<quoted text>
Of course, Vinnikov's paper is FULL of temperature measurements. That's what the paper is ABOUT.
"All they are Measuring is the UPWELLING EARTH RADIATION (Heat Flow from the WARM EARTH to the COLDER ATMOPHERE)

"Between calibration periods, the MSU views the
Earth and measures the upwelling thermal radiation, or
brightness temperature, at four frequencies within the oxygen
band."

And then they compare those MEASUREMENTS to Measurements of the COLD ATMOSPHERE, YOU IDIOT!"
http://www.topix.com/forum/news/global-warmin...
--------

You are once again shown to be a CLUELESS AGW IDIOT and a PATHOLOGICAL LIAR.

Since: Mar 09

Wichita, KS

#31203 Jan 26, 2013
PHD wrote:
Better to be open minded than to have one closed to scientific science fiction cut and paste answers. Do show your entire peer reviewed published work.
More science friction. Whack. Whaxckxx.
PHD

Overton, TX

#31204 Jan 26, 2013
More scientific science fiction from the commander racist.
PHD

Overton, TX

#31205 Jan 26, 2013
Patriot AKA Bozo wrote:
<quoted text>
More science friction. Whack. Whaxckxx.
So you got whacked, whacked again.
ObamaSUX

Calgary, Canada

#31206 Jan 26, 2013
HomoSapiensLaptopicus wrote:
<quoted text>
As to Wien's Law, it applies to black body radiation. In case you didn't know, the sun is not a black body. Wien's Law doesn't predict absorption lines in the spectra of various substances, it predicts the frequency of EMR emitted from a black body at a given temperature.
I never said that Wien's Law predicts absorption lines in the spectra of various substances....IDIOT.

What I did say was:

"If a body, like the Sun, Radiates at a peak amplitude then the WAVELENGTH of the peak will reveal it's TEMPERATURE which can be determined from Wiens's Displacement Law.

In fact, I discussed this in a Post where I PROVED that the AGW CULT "scientists" have FALSELY LOWERED THE TEMPERATURE of the SUN to 5778K.

The Sun's Surface Temperature can be determined from Wiens's Displacement Law to be 6273K (which agrees with Other Text-Book sources)"
------
As you can see from the link below the "AGW'ers" have ALSO used Wien's Displacement Law and treat the Sun as a BLACK BODY to get their FALSE Sun Temperature of 5778 K, YOU IDIOT!

Wien's Displacement Law
"Light from the Sun: The effective temperature of the Sun is 5778 K. Using Wien's law, it is often concluded that this corresponds to a peak emission at a wavelength of 2.90 million nm K/ 5778 K = 502 nm. This is the wavelength of green light, and it is near the peak sensitivity of the human eye."

The AGW FRAUD is that they use the WRONG WAVELENGTH of 502 nm for the peak emission to FRAUDULENTLY LOWER THE SUN TEMPERATURE to 5778 K!!!

The PROOF and Calculations are HERE:

"Where is the AGW "science"?
E) How Does The Sun's Energy (the ONLY ENERGY SOURCE) raise the Earths Surface temperature to +15 deg C?
http://www.topix.com/forum/news/global-warmin...
------
Here is a portion of what I posted in the link above:

File:EffectiveTemperature 300dpi e.png
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:EffectiveTe...

If you look closely at the Effective Temperature graph above you will see that the Green Light real peak is at about 462 nm and using Wein's
Displacement Law will produce a Sun temperature of 6273 K (thats 6000 deg C) and agrees with the link I quoted above!

The sources that AGREE with my calculation are HERE and they are ALL FROM TEXT-BOOKS, BOOKS or PUBLICATIONS.
There are five sources for the surface temp of the Sun (6000,5500,5700,6000 and 5600 deg C).
The average is 5800 deg C or 6073 K and a max of 6000 deg C or 6273 K.
http://hypertextbook.com/facts/1997/GlyniseFi...
--
Further, I have seen a number of AGW'er papers and other sources that correctly state that the actual Sun temperature is much higher than 5778 K.

Here is one example:

HEATING THE EARTH

"3. If the Sun were a blackbody, this emissivity would correspond to a surface temperature of 5798°K. However, the wavelength of maximum
intensity is at 0.475 microns (green light). By Wien’s Law, this is the maximum that would be produced by a blackbody at a temperature of 6101°
K."
http://www.climates.com/SPECIAL%20TOPICS/GW/h...
---
Continued...
ObamaSUX

Calgary, Canada

#31207 Jan 26, 2013
Continuation...

The RESULTS of using the these Sun temperature for a Albedo = 0, Black Body Earth WITHOUT AN ATMOSPHERE are:

TS = 5778 K (Trenberth's FRAUDULENT "lowered" Sun Temperature)
TE = 278.68 Kelvin
TE = 5.53 Celsius

Note: This is very close to the value obtained in this link that I have quoted in earlier posts:
"If an ideal thermally conductive blackbody was the same distance from the Sun as the Earth, it would have an expected blackbody temperature of
5.3 °C.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Greenhouse_effec...

TS = 6073 K (average Sun temperature)
TE = 292.91 Kelvin
TE = 19.76 Celsius

TS = 6101 K (as per the AGW'er Heating The Earth link above)
TE = 294.26 Kelvin
TE = 21.11 Celsius

TS = 6273 K (max Sun temperature)
TE = 302.55 Kelvin
TE = 29.40 Celsius

All the Sun temperatures (except Trenberth's FRAUDULENT Sun temperature) produce Earth temperatures that exceed the Earth's average temp of +15 deg C.

*** This means that the ADDITION OF AN ATMOSPHERE AND ALL OTHER FACTORS ACTUALLY COOLED THE EARTH DOWN TO +15 deg C ***

The AGW "scientists" HAD to fraudulently LOWER the Sun's temperature so that they could use the fraudulent "Greenhouse Effect" that CREATES
ENERGY to overcome the lowered Sun temperature.
----------
"The SECOND LAW OF THERMODYNAMICS PROHIBITS heat flow directly from COLD to HOT systems, but with the aid of a heat pump external work can be used to transport internal energy indirectly from a cold to a hot body."
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Heat

That's why you CAN'T POST:

- EVEN "ONE" MEASUREMENT, EVER DONE DONE, IN THE HISTORY OF MANKIND WHERE ANY COLD OBJECT HAS EVER "HEATED-UP" A WARMER OBJECT
- EVEN "ONE" MEASUREMENT WHERE THE COLDER ATMOSPHERE HAS "HEATED-UP" A WARMER EARTH

Because THEY DO NOT EXIST.

And THAT'S WHY the Fantasy "Greenhouse Effect" does NOT EXIST and THAT'S WHY the AGW "scientists" HAD to fraudulently LOWER the Sun's temperature.

AGW is a PROVEN FRAUD.
ObamaSUX

Calgary, Canada

#31208 Jan 26, 2013
HomoSapiensLaptopicus wrote:
<quoted text>
You didn't answer my question: why does spectroscopy work on the earth & the sun, at wildly different temperatures? Why are the low energy absorption lines in the spectra of hydrogen & helium at EXACTLY THE SAME FREQUENCIES at ~300º K & ~6000º K?
I DID ANSWER IT, you IDIOT!

"All "spectroscopy" does is look at the Radiated Energy of an element, gas or object once it has Absorbed Energy.

Spectroscopy typically looks at the wavelength of Radiated Energy of an Object to determine what elements are contained in the Object.

Different elements have different characteristic Radiated wavelength signatures."
http://www.topix.com/forum/news/global-warmin...

For your CLUELESS MIND....that means THE ELEMENTS "characteristic Radiated WAVELENGTH signatures" ARE THE SAME EVERYWHERE....DUH!
HomoSapiensLaptopicus wrote:
<quoted text>
I'll tell you: because the transitions of electrons from one "orbit" to another are not dependent on temperature. The transitions of greenhouse gases which absorb & re-emit IR EMR are not temperature-dependent either.
What a HOOT!

Hell, even your previous link to the "CalTech" Grade School website shows that you are WRONG AGAIN.

RADIATION:
Both conduction and convection require matter to transfer heat. Radiation is a method of heat transfer that does not rely upon any contact between the heat source and the heated object. For example, we feel heat from the sun even though we are not touching it. Heat can be transmitted though empty space by thermal radiation. Thermal radiation (often called infrared radiation) is a type electromagnetic radiation (or light). Radiation is a form of energy transport consisting of electromagnetic waves traveling at the speed of light. No mass is exchanged and no medium is required.

Objects emit radiation when high energy electrons in a higher atomic level fall down to lower energy levels. The energy lost is emitted as light or electromagnetic radiation. Energy that is absorbed by an atom causes its electrons to "jump" up to higher energy levels. All objects absorb and emit radiation.( Here is a java applet showing how an atom absorbs and emits radiation) When the absorption of energy balances the emission of energy, the temperature of an object stays constant. If the absorption of energy is greater than the emission of energy, the temperature of an object rises. If the absorption of energy is less than the emission of energy, the temperature of an object falls.
http://coolcosmos.ipac.caltech.edu/cosmic_cla...

By the way did you notice that the above also says:

"Radiation is a form of energy transport consisting of electromagnetic waves traveling at the speed of light"??

And what did YOU SAY?
HomoSapiensLaptopicus wrote:
<quoted text>
"The motion of atoms and molecules creates a form of energy called heat or thermal energy which is present in all matter..."
http://coolcosmos.ipac.caltech.edu/cosmic_cla...
It is NOT the same as electromagnetic radiation.
HAHAHA....HAHAHA...
----------
NOW ANSWER THIS QUESTION, that I have asked you about a DOZEN TIMES:

WHY CAN'T YOU POST:

- EVEN "ONE" MEASUREMENT, EVER DONE DONE, IN THE HISTORY OF MANKIND WHERE ANY COLD OBJECT HAS EVER "HEATED-UP" A WARMER OBJECT
- EVEN "ONE" MEASUREMENT WHERE THE COLDER ATMOSPHERE HAS "HEATED-UP" A WARMER EARTH

Come on, ANSWER the SIMPLE QUESTION.
----------
"Needless to say, I PREDICT that this AGW IDIOT will continue to POST more AGW BABBLE with NO MEASUREMENTS....AGAIN.

The AGW CULT rules of behaviour embedded his "brainwashed" CULT MIND is SO PREDICTABLE.

Watch and LEARN.
PHD

Overton, TX

#31209 Jan 26, 2013
A continuation of scientific science fiction useless cut and paste babble.

Since: Mar 09

Wichita, KS

#31210 Jan 26, 2013
PHD wrote:
A continuation of scientific science fiction useless cut and paste babble.
More science friction. Whax. Whaxckxx.
PHD

Overton, TX

#31211 Jan 26, 2013
Patriot AKA Bozo wrote:
<quoted text>More science friction. Whax. Whaxckxx.
So are you going to wear head gear next time?
ObamaSUX

Calgary, Canada

#31212 Jan 26, 2013
gcaveman1 wrote:
<quoted text>
If his science is so much different from the "consensus", and if it were right, he'd be more suited for a few Nobel's rather than just changing entries in Wikipedia.
If he so damn sure he's right, he should go for the $1M rewards, instead of trolling Topix boards.
Oh that's so FUNNY!

Everybody in their "right mind" knows that Cold Objects DO NOT HEAT-UP Warm Objects.

"The SECOND LAW OF THERMODYNAMICS PROHIBITS heat flow directly from COLD to HOT systems, but with the aid of a heat pump external work can be used to transport internal energy indirectly from a
cold to a hot body."
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Heat
----
“Second Law of Thermodynamics: It is NOT POSSIBLE for heat to flow from a colder body to a warmer body without any work having been done to accomplish this flow. Energy will not flow spontaneously from a low temperature object to a higher temperature object.”
http://hyperphysics.phy-astr.gsu.edu/hbase/th...
------
Heat Radiation

"RADIATION is HEAT TRANSFER by the emission of ELECTROMAGNETIC WAVES which CARRY ENERGY away from the emitting object."

P = e*BC*A(T^4 - Tc^4)

Where P = net radiated power (Watts), e = emissivity, BC = Stefan's constant, A = area, T = temperature of radiator and Tc =
temperature of the surroundings or another body.

..when rearranged gives

P/A = e*BC*T^4 - e*BC*Tc^4 (Watts/m^2)

http://hyperphysics.phy-astr.gsu.edu/hbase/th...

This is a VECTOR subtraction of two Electromagnetic Fields.

P/A (watts/m^2) is the Magnitude of the Resultant EM field Vector and the direction of propagation is from the Hot Body to the Cold Body, ALWAYS!

There is ZERO watts/m^2 that can even propagate from the Cold Body to the Hot Body as the Heat Transfer Equation shows, the 2nd Law shows and ALL MEASUREMENTS CONFIRM.
----------
Why DON'T YOU POST a LAW OF SCIENCE or a REAL PHYSICS LINK that says Cold Objects CAN HEAT-UP Warm Objects?

And WHY CAN'T YOU POST:

- EVEN "ONE" MEASUREMENT, EVER DONE DONE, IN THE HISTORY OF MANKIND WHERE ANY COLD OBJECT HAS EVER "HEATED-UP" A WARMER OBJECT?
- EVEN "ONE" MEASUREMENT WHERE THE COLDER ATMOSPHERE HAS "HEATED-UP" A WARMER EARTH?

Come on, ANSWER the SIMPLE QUESTION.
----------
"Needless to say, I PREDICT that this AGW IDIOT will continue to POST more AGW BABBLE with NO MEASUREMENTS....AGAIN.

The AGW CULT rules of behaviour embedded his "brainwashed" CULT MIND is SO PREDICTABLE.

Watch and LEARN.
PHD

Overton, TX

#31213 Jan 26, 2013
More cut and paste scientific science fiction useless babble.
ObamaSUX

Calgary, Canada

#31214 Jan 26, 2013
factologist wrote:
<quoted text>
What a hoot. Look at Stupo's 3 points.
1st point:
Stupo says, "Heat is ENERGY IN TRANSIT, NOT "MOLECULAR MOTION".
Of course, you idiot.Everyone here knows that. The thing that matters, is how "heat" takes place.
*Conduction- Heat conduction occurs as rapidly moving or vibrating atoms and molecules interact with neighboring atoms and molecules, transferring some of their thermal energy (Kinetic Energy) to these neighboring particles.
*Convection- Convection is the transfer of thermal energy from one place to another by the movement of fluids or gases.
*Radiation-Thermal radiation is electromagnetic radiation generated by the thermal motion of charged particles in matter.
**Electromagnetic radiation is a form of energy emitted and absorbed by charged particles, which exhibits wave-like behavior as it travels through space. If this energy is absorbed by another charged particle,it can be transformed to other forms of energy, for example, to thermal energy.The opposite occurs if this energy is emitted.
**Absorption of electromagnetic radiation is the way in which the energy of a photon is taken up by matter, typically the electrons of an atom.
Key points here:
-All particles above absolute zero emit electromagnetic radiation.
-This occurs because some of the particles' K.E. is used to create an EM energy wave called a photon. The propagation of this photon reduces the K.E.(temperature) of the object.
(Recognize however, a photon is not really "thermal energy", it's thermal energy that has been converted to EM energy. The 2nd law is safe.)
The reverse happens when a photon is absorbed. The photon causes an increase in the object's K.E.(temperature).
2nd point:
Stupo says,"Heat is NOT EVEN DEFINED for movement from COLD to HOT, it is only from a high temperature object to a lower temperature object."
A misunderstanding by Stupo, perhaps.
One must recognize heat is a process, not a state. That process is the spontaneous transfer of thermal energy from a warmer body to a colder body. Period, no substitutes.
3rd point:
Stupo says,"Once the Heat ENERGY IN TRANSIT is absorbed by a COLDER Object it increases the Objects INTERNAL ENERGY to produce
HEATING."
Tripe covered in bullshit.
His sentence displays a complete misunderstanding of terms.
The sentence should read " Once heat occurs between a hotter object and a colder object, the internal energy of the colder body increases." Duh!
Stupo goes on to say"(Internal energy is defined as the energy associated with the random, disordered motion of molecules)"
Bullshit!
Internal energy is defined as the total energy contained by a thermodynamic system. It is the energy needed to create the system, but excludes the energy to displace the blah blah
You must be a AGW Science Denier.....oh wait, ALL the AGW CULT MEMBERS are Science Deniers.

That's why I can POST Laws of Science and Physics Links to prove that AGW is a FRAUD and what can you POST?

- No Laws of Science
- No Physics Links
- No Measurements
- All YOU can Post is AGW BABBLING.

HAHAHA....HAHAHA....What a HOOT!
-----
Like All the AGW Cult, "factologist" shares these common Traits:

1. A room temperature IQ
2. Has a "Green Brain"....a symptom of a severe infection.
3. Always loses battles of wits because they are unarmed.
4. What they lack in intelligence, they more than make up for in stupidity.
5. Have nothing to say, but delight in saying it.
6. Have a speech impediment ... their foot.
7. Would still be a virgin except for what nature did to their mind.
8. They are not complete idiots -- some parts are missing.
9. When confronted with the Truth they use their only skill....LYING.
10. When they are confronted with their Lying...they will continue to LIE

Factologist has now reached Step #10 and will continue his Lying FOREVER.

How Pathetic but not surprising for AGW Human Garbage.
PHD

Overton, TX

#31215 Jan 26, 2013
More scientific science fiction cut and paste useless babble. Will it ever end?

Tell me when this thread is updated:

Subscribe Now Add to my Tracker

Add your comments below

Characters left: 4000

Please note by submitting this form you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite. Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.

2012 Presidential Election Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
Barack Obama, our next President (Nov '08) 7 min DBWriter 1,110,515
BARACK OBAMA BIRTH CERTIFICATE: Suit contesting... (Jan '09) 1 hr Rogue Scholar 05 178,188
Global warming 'undeniable,' scientists say (Jul '10) 4 hr Brian_G 32,676
'Fox News Sunday' to Host Kentucky Senate Debate (Oct '10) 7 hr Cornelius Scudmister 154,006
Who is the worst president since WWII ? 9 hr mjjcpa 506
Michele Bachmann: Obama Won Because He's Black ... (Feb '14) 13 hr Go Blue Forever 333
Race in America: Why are blacks being seen as r... (Jul '13) 15 hr Sangelia 9,936
•••

2012 Presidential Election People Search

Addresses and phone numbers for FREE

•••