DC Tom Posted March 1, 2017 Posted March 1, 2017 Nye also needs to clarify one of his points. He stated that as the oceans warm, they expand. That is not true. Water expands as it cools and contracts as it warms. The only thing he could have been referring to is the melting of polar or glacial ice, but he should make that distinction if he is going to argue from the scientific perspective. Water contracts as you warm it...until it hits 39 degrees farenheit. Then it starts expanding. Water is a very weird material. That was a real show?! Good grief, I thought Captain Kangaroo was bad. Hey, Zoom was an awesome show! When I was three.
Azalin Posted March 1, 2017 Posted March 1, 2017 Water contracts as you warm it...until it hits 39 degrees farenheit. Then it starts expanding. Water is a very weird material. So water expands at and above 39 degrees, and also at and below 32 degrees, but contracts from 33 to 38 degrees?
IDBillzFan Posted March 1, 2017 Posted March 1, 2017 Hey, Zoom was an awesome show! When I was three. So was Bill Nye the Science Guy. That was a real show?! Good grief, I thought Captain Kangaroo was bad. Zoom was actually a pretty good educational show. Sesame Street for pre-teens. I used to watch it in 5th grade. I mean, it wasn't quite HR Puff-n-Stuff, but for an educational show it was groovy in a happenin' kind of way.
B-Man Posted March 1, 2017 Posted March 1, 2017 BILL NYE’S EMBARRASSING FACE-OFF WITH TUCKER CARLSON ON CLIMATE CHANGE — It didn’t end well for the ‘Science Guy:’ Now usually when these charges are made by someone who purports to possess expertise in climate science (Nye has a degree in mechanical engineering), the interviewer acquiesces, immediately surrendering the debate to the climate activist. But Carlson wouldn’t back down: “To what degree is climate change caused by human activity? . . . Is it 100 percent, is it 74.3 percent? If it’s settled science, please tell us to what degree human activity is responsible.” * * * * * * * * * While it’s easy to dismiss Nye’s interview as a kooky one-off appearance from an unprepared celebrity scientist, he sa dly represents the lack of integrity by most climate-change pushers. They move goalposts, manufacture facts, resist honest debate, and resort to smear tactics when confronted with specific questions they cannot answer. As Carlson said to Nye, “You really don’t know, and you bully people who ask questions.” Good thing Carlson is there to bully back for once. Read the whole thing; video of the segment online here.
Tiberius Posted March 1, 2017 Posted March 1, 2017 Insurance companies are on board with climate change, because they have to be http://fortune.com/2016/08/23/munich-re-disaster-insurance/
Azalin Posted March 1, 2017 Posted March 1, 2017 Zoom was actually a pretty good educational show. Sesame Street for pre-teens. I used to watch it in 5th grade. I mean, it wasn't quite HR Puff-n-Stuff, but for an educational show it was groovy in a happenin' kind of way. I can't think of any educational children's shows from back when I was little. Sesame street didn't debut until I was almost twelve years old. The only thing that comes to mind is Otto the Auto:
Magox Posted March 1, 2017 Posted March 1, 2017 DC TOM, I Know you've given your reasons and explanations to this before, but could you please provide it again as to why it is nearly impossible to consider these climate science studies to be infallible? I believe you had alluded to scientific methodology?
DC Tom Posted March 1, 2017 Posted March 1, 2017 So water expands at and above 39 degrees, and also at and below 32 degrees, but contracts from 33 to 38 degrees? As water cools, at standard pressure: It contracts until you hit 39 degrees. At that point, it's at it's highest density (1g/cc). Below 39 degrees, it expands. At 32 degrees, it freezes. Ice is, of course, less dense than water. Below 32 degrees, ice contracts. See chart. The maximum density of water is at 39 degrees (about 4C).
boyst Posted March 1, 2017 Posted March 1, 2017 As water cools, at standard pressure: It contracts until you hit 39 degrees. At that point, it's at it's highest density (1g/cc). Below 39 degrees, it expands. At 32 degrees, it freezes. Ice is, of course, less dense than water. Below 32 degrees, ice contracts. See chart. The maximum density of water is at 39 degrees (about 4C). what's the density for meathead?
Azalin Posted March 1, 2017 Posted March 1, 2017 As water cools, at standard pressure: It contracts until you hit 39 degrees. At that point, it's at it's highest density (1g/cc). Below 39 degrees, it expands. At 32 degrees, it freezes. Ice is, of course, less dense than water. Below 32 degrees, ice contracts. See chart. The maximum density of water is at 39 degrees (about 4C). That's fascinating. Honestly - I had no idea that water had those characteristics. I knew that it expanded as it froze, and assumed therefore that as it warmed, it contracted.
DC Tom Posted March 1, 2017 Posted March 1, 2017 That's fascinating. Honestly - I had no idea that water had those characteristics. I knew that it expanded as it froze, and assumed therefore that as it warmed, it contracted. Half a semester of graduate statistical mechanics is dedicated to studying water's phases. It's a wacky material. Seriously, there's an instant Nobel Prize waiting for anyone who can explain how water freezes - it's one of the least understood phase changes in all of physics. We actually understand liquid helium better than we do water...and liquid helium flows up and out of dewars.
B-Man Posted March 1, 2017 Posted March 1, 2017 Half a semester of graduate statistical mechanics is dedicated to studying water's phases. It's a wacky material. Seriously, there's an instant Nobel Prize waiting for anyone who can explain how water freezes - it's one of the least understood phase changes in all of physics. We actually understand liquid helium better than we do water...and liquid helium flows up and out of dewars. oh wait.............A cryogenic storage dewar is a specialised type of vacuum flask used for storing cryogens (such as liquid nitrogen or liquid helium), Nevermind.
Gary M Posted March 1, 2017 Posted March 1, 2017 Insurance companies are on board with climate change, because they have to be http://fortune.com/2016/08/23/munich-re-disaster-insurance/ Does not mean that they think man is to blame. I believe in climate change but not that man is making it happen. As soon as you and Bill Nye can tell me how much of the change is man made I will believe it.
Greg F Posted March 1, 2017 Posted March 1, 2017 As water cools, at standard pressure: It contracts until you hit 39 degrees. At that point, it's at it's highest density (1g/cc). Below 39 degrees, it expands. At 32 degrees, it freezes. Ice is, of course, less dense than water. Below 32 degrees, ice contracts. See chart. The maximum density of water is at 39 degrees (about 4C). That is for fresh water. This is for sea water.
DC Tom Posted March 1, 2017 Posted March 1, 2017 That is for fresh water. This is for sea water. Yes, the ocean's not an ideal system. Therefore, according to physics, oceanographers can !@#$ right off. DC TOM, I Know you've given your reasons and explanations to this before, but could you please provide it again as to why it is nearly impossible to consider these climate science studies to be infallible? I believe you had alluded to scientific methodology? Here's some previous posts: http://forums.twobillsdrive.com/topic/173384-global-warming-err-climate-change-hoax/?p=3489542 http://forums.twobillsdrive.com/topic/173384-global-warming-err-climate-change-hoax/?p=3594194- note that while I criticize a feature of science reporting there, it's also attributable to much of the science. http://forums.twobillsdrive.com/topic/173384-global-warming-err-climate-change-hoax/?p=3599642- a common scientific practice of accepting without verifying. I can think of a multitude of examples of this, including one in the first link above (the Millikan experiment). http://forums.twobillsdrive.com/topic/173384-global-warming-err-climate-change-hoax/?p=3605165- the confluence of activism and science corrupting science. http://forums.twobillsdrive.com/topic/173384-global-warming-err-climate-change-hoax/?p=3651791- lack of falsifiability http://forums.twobillsdrive.com/topic/173384-global-warming-err-climate-change-hoax/?p=3898707- inconsistent methodology. I know I've got more. Hell if I'm going to hunt for them now.
unbillievable Posted March 2, 2017 Posted March 2, 2017 Remember when the GI Joe plan was to shoot missiles into the glacier above, so the icebergs will sink down and destroy the Cobra base?
Azalin Posted March 2, 2017 Posted March 2, 2017 Remember when the GI Joe plan was to shoot missiles into the glacier above, so the icebergs will sink down and destroy the Cobra base? Which was just plain ridiculous - who ever heard of cobras nesting beneath a glacier, anyway?
Magox Posted March 2, 2017 Posted March 2, 2017 Yes, the ocean's not an ideal system. Therefore, according to physics, oceanographers can !@#$ right off. Here's some previous posts: http://forums.twobillsdrive.com/topic/173384-global-warming-err-climate-change-hoax/?p=3489542 http://forums.twobillsdrive.com/topic/173384-global-warming-err-climate-change-hoax/?p=3594194- note that while I criticize a feature of science reporting there, it's also attributable to much of the science. http://forums.twobillsdrive.com/topic/173384-global-warming-err-climate-change-hoax/?p=3599642- a common scientific practice of accepting without verifying. I can think of a multitude of examples of this, including one in the first link above (the Millikan experiment). http://forums.twobillsdrive.com/topic/173384-global-warming-err-climate-change-hoax/?p=3605165- the confluence of activism and science corrupting science. http://forums.twobillsdrive.com/topic/173384-global-warming-err-climate-change-hoax/?p=3651791- lack of falsifiability http://forums.twobillsdrive.com/topic/173384-global-warming-err-climate-change-hoax/?p=3898707- inconsistent methodology. I know I've got more. Hell if I'm going to hunt for them now. Great, thanks
Deranged Rhino Posted March 2, 2017 Posted March 2, 2017 Which was just plain ridiculous - who ever heard of cobras nesting beneath a glacier, anyway?
B-Man Posted March 7, 2017 Posted March 7, 2017 ENVIRONMENTALISTS USE PHOTOSHOP AND FRAUD TO DECEIVE Watts Up With That has a funny instance of warmist deception. {snip} Now we get to the really fun part: the photo that accompanied the alarmist MSN article: It is fun to trace the provenance of the photoshopped penguins. Before that photo was on MSN, it was published by the Christian Science Monitor in June 2016. But it originated with Reuters. On Google Images, we find that it was published by Reuters on January 1, 2010, so it had nothing to do with any alleged warm spell at Base Esperanza in 2017. The caption says: Two Adelie penguins stand atop a block of melting ice on a rocky shoreline at Cape Denison, Commonwealth Bay, in East Antarctica January 1, 2010. That is not, as noted, a “block of melting ice.” And Cape Denison is over by Australia, thousands of miles from the site of the allegedly alarming global warming at Camp Esperanza. The photoshopping apparently dates back to the original Reuters photo, something that the folks at Reuters should look into. Global warming “science” is a joke. It isn’t science, it is pure politics. And photoshopping is, sadly, the least of the alarmists’ sins.
Recommended Posts