Why Should Anyone Believe in Global Warming?

[gfm7175]

Nope. All energy is coming from the sun.

@IBDaMann
@IntotheNight

Annnnnnnnnnnnnnnd MoronMode has, yet AGAIN, gone full circle.

Continued QED.

 

[AProudLefty]

You're first in line to answer this question. You do nothing but EVADE questions. Sometimes you answer a question with a question, which you and I both know is showing that you are being EVASIVE.

So I would ask gfm7175 to not cut in line and let you answer first because you've waited in line much longer. Why do you refuse to answer even simple questions?

I asked the question first. Perhaps you'll answer it for gfm since he's stubborn.

 

[gfm7175]

Still refusing to answer the question.

Still pretending that answered questions are unanswered ones.

 

[gfm7175]

Correct. Nobody, including anyone in the science community, has ever said it does.

@IBDaMann
Continued QED

 

[AProudLefty]

Still pretending that answered questions are unanswered ones.

Waiting.

 

[ZenMode]

Ahhhhh, the ol' patented Hillary Clinton response... ("WHAT DIFFERENCE DOES IT MAKE?!?!?!?!!?!??!?!!?!?")

If you can't come up with a actual answer as to why it matters, just say so.

The CORRECT question is this: Why does "significantly hotter inside the car" matter when the average temperature of the entire car remains unchanged?

Because we are talking about the warming effects of greenhouse gases in the Earth's atmosphere.The fact that it is much colder in space isn't really relevant if there is warming in our atmosphere.

Why is "The CORRECT" question the correct question? Because you can't omit part of the car yet simultaneously pretend that you are consistently talking about the entire car. You can't omit Basket B of apples yet simultaneously pretend that you are consistently talking about both baskets of apples.


Completely unrelated question.


Completely unrelated exclamation.


The entire car's average temperature remains unchanged.
The entire table's average apples per basket remains unchanged.

The entire Earth's average temperature remains unchanged.

You are assuming that greenhouse gases don't retain energy like the closed windows of a car do. You don't know this for a fact.

The entire religion of "global warming" remains incredibly stupid.

Notice how ZenMode RUNS! and EVADES! from any pertinent questions that shred his precious religion into pieces?? Notice how ZenMode pivots to asking emotionally charged questions that are completely unrelated to the discussion at hand in hopes that he can distract me away from my winning position?

No idea what you are talking about, but have at it!

 

[ZenMode]

Waiting.

There's clear confusion regarding what it means to respond to a question vs answer a question.

 

[ZenMode]

@IBDaMann
@IntotheNight

Annnnnnnnnnnnnnnd MoronMode has, yet AGAIN, gone full circle.

Continued QED.

I don't really know how many times I need to address this. There is no additional energy needed, beyond what is already produced by the sun, to heat the inside of a car. There is also no additional energy needed, beyond what is produced by the sun, for the Earth's atmosphere to become warmer.

I'll have the same response each time you drag out this straw man.

 

[IBDaMann]

Well then improve me wrong...

Too funny.

If my objective is to determine the radius of a circle, and I use the Pythagorean theorem to accomplish that, I am applying the Pythagorean theorem, and perhaps other mathematical theorems, to the circle. Yes, there must be a right triangle involved to enable the computation, i.e. a calculation is performed on the triangle, but the Pythagorean theorem is applied to the circle. If you are at all familiar with geometry proofs, you will recognize that one of the steps in the proof will contain, for example, "r = 12; Pythagorean theorem"

 

[IBDaMann]

I asked the question first. Perhaps you'll answer it for gfm since he's stubborn.

Nope. You're first in line. The floor is yours. Until you answer questions, no one should feel obligated to answer any of your questions.

I'll start. I'm not answering your questions.

 

[IBDaMann]

You dodged a question that I asked you a few weeks ago.

... and I notice that you don't consider it relevant and important enough to refresh my memory of what it was. Perhaps next time you'll constrain yourself to asking relevant questions that even you find somewhat important.

 

[IBDaMann]

1. Do you agree that there is never an average temperature increase wherever the existing thermal energy is merely redistributed?

- if you're saying that, for example, ...

Nope, no additional conditions. Answer the question as stated, with a "yes" or a "no." If you deny science and answer "no" then you may add whatever commentary you wish thereafter.

2. Do you agree that wherever thermal energy is flowing, altering the redistribution of that thermal energy by altering and/or restricting that particular flow will cause the new end node of that flow to increase in temperature while lowering the temperature of the previous end node which is now no longer receiving that thermal energy?

Yes, and if there were no more energy being added, then #1 above is also true.

This answer is problematics as well. You are implying that there are conditions when #1 is somehow FALSE. Please explain such conditions.

However, there is always energy being added somewhere.

To what? Your comments are always vague, with the more tangible parts being ambiguous.

If you were to park your car half in the shade and half in sunlight, the temperature would continue to increase on the inside.

In such a case, one would still be modifying the flow of thermal energy, but in this case it a flow of roughly half the magnitude.

If you swapped the shaded/sunny parts, as happens between day and night on Earth, you're still adding energy, right?

Nope. The sun's output remains the same, i.e. no Wattage has been added. There is no additional energy provided by the sun from what had been provided all along.

 

[Into the Night]

I asked the question first. Perhaps you'll answer it for gfm since he's stubborn.

RQAA

 

[Into the Night]

If you can't come up with a actual answer as to why it matters, just say so.

RQAA.

Because we are talking about the warming effects of greenhouse gases in the Earth's atmosphere.

There is no 'warming effects'. There is no such thing as 'greenhouse gases' except as a religious artifact. No gas or vapor has the capability to warm the Earth. You cannot create energy out of nothing. You are STILL ignoring the 1st law of thermodynamics.

The fact that it is much colder in space isn't really relevant if there is warming in our atmosphere.

Now you are ignoring the Stefan-Boltzmann law.

You are assuming that greenhouse gases don't retain energy like the closed windows of a car do.

It is not possible to trap light.
It is not possible to trap thermal energy. There is always heat.

You don't know this for a fact.

Yes he does. He knows the same theories of science I do here. It is YOU ignoring the 1st and 2nd laws of thermodynamics and the Stefan-Boltzmann law.

No idea what you are talking about, but have at it!

Blatant lie.

 

[Into the Night]

There's clear confusion regarding what it means to respond to a question vs answer a question.

...annnnnnd now the word games again...

 

[Into the Night]

I don't really know how many times I need to address this. There is no additional energy needed, beyond what is already produced by the sun, to heat the inside of a car. There is also no additional energy needed, beyond what is produced by the sun, for the Earth's atmosphere to become warmer.

I'll have the same response each time you drag out this straw man.

RQAA.

 

[IBDaMann]

No. The angles of the triangle define find the points in question.

Nope, Mr. Mathematically Incompetent. The points define the angles, not the other way around. The circle defines the points and the points define the angles. You need a refresher in the basics.

Without the triangle within the circle, the Pythagorean theorem is absolutely useless.

You are repeating what I wrote. Now finish the rest of it.

If I'm wrong, then show me how the Pythagorean theorem is used on just a circle, with no other shapes involved.

When proving something geometrically, that's what one does, i.e. one creates many different shapes, ... with a compass, a protractor, a ruler, etc. If I start out with a circle, and I wish to determine the radius, I get to work drawing lots of lines and lots of shapes so that I can apply all the theorems that I need to apply.

Are you telling me that you have forgotten how this works? ... or are you telling me that you played hooky when this was being taught?

And, no, comprende is perfectly acceptable.

Nope.
1. you changed what was written; you previously had an accent mark over the final "e", i.e. "¿Comprendé?" ... and that is an error. Also, I misspoke. "¿Comprendí?" is "Did I understand?"
2. "Comprende" is ambiguous without the pronoun because it applies to he, she, you (formal) and it. You have to include the pronoun "Ud." if you are using "comprende" for "you" (formal).

The fact that I said comprende and not comprendes automatically implies usted vs tu.

"Comprendes" itself is unambiguous because it only applies the pronoun "tú" (with an accent mark). "Comprende" however, needs the disambiguation pronoun.

Don't be afraid to come to me with your Spanish questions.

 

[AProudLefty]

Nope. You're first in line. The floor is yours. Until you answer questions, no one should feel obligated to answer any of your questions.

I'll start. I'm not answering your questions.

Still waiting.

 

[IBDaMann]

Because we are talking about the warming effects of greenhouse gases in the Earth's atmosphere.

Could I effectively cook food by spraying greenhouse gas on it? Could I lower my utility bills by cooking my food only with spare CO2 that I have laying around? I'm talking about the warming effects of greenhouse gas being leveraged in my kitchen.

The fact that it is much colder in space isn't really relevant if there is warming in our atmosphere.

What temperature do you believe space has?

You are assuming that greenhouse gases don't retain energy like the closed windows of a car do.

Windows don't retain energy. Convince yourself: roll up the windows of your car, place the car in a garage and watch as the inside of the car magically cools, losing all the thermal energy that you thought was retained!

 

[IBDaMann]

Still waiting.

Hold your breath while you do.