Climate change is pure bullshit!!

[moon]

. Light has no temperature.

Shove a laser up your jaxie.


Haw, haw...................................haw.

 

[moon]

These are ' Into the Nightsoil's 'statements

"Sweden is not to the east of the UK "
" There is no such science as paleoclimatology "

Dumbass or troll ?
Both.

 

[Poor Richard Saunders]

It is not possible to transfer heat.

I never said thermal energy doesn't dissipate by conduction.

You cannot trap light. Not even for a minute. Not even for a second. You cannot set aside any law of physics for ANY length of time.

You cannot trap light.

Not possible. You cannot trap light.

You cannot trap light.

I never said the Earth doesn't absorb light and convert some of it to thermal energy. Stop making shit up.

Would you look at that. You just said light is captured and turned into thermal energy.
At this point you are just arguing stupid semantics by claiming light is absorbed but not trapped.

 

[IBDaMann]

Let's examine your claim and see why it is false.

Let's examine Into the Night's statement and confirm its veracity.

Grab a flashlight and turn it on. Notice the light flowing forth from it. Now grab a container in which to store the light flowing from the flashlight. Fill the container halfway full of light from the flashlight and then seal the container. Store the container in a dark, cool closet for 15 minutes. Open the container and retrieve the light that you had previously stored. How much is still there?

Did you answer "none"? Really? None? What happened to the light that you stored? Did it evaporate?

Question: Does a photon ever travel at less than the speed of light?

You have now on more than one occasions [tried to teach me] that light can't be trapped.

... but you aren't smart enough to learn?

Light is simply electromagnetic radiation. If electromagnetic radiation can never be captured then it must reflect every time it hits another surface.

Nope. What's the other option that you neglected to mention, i.e. the one that happens to be the correct answer?

You haven't stated your support for your claim yet.

 

[IBDaMann]

Would you look at that. You just said light is captured and turned into thermal energy.

He did not write "captured" because light cannot be captured.

At this point you are just arguing stupid semantics by claiming light is absorbed but not trapped.

You really should learn some science. The light is destroyed when it is absorbed. You're hopeless. You are scientifically illiterate, claiming to be a science genius. You can't be bothered to learn the science that you claim is important to you, and you force others to endure the sheer torture of your gibberish.

 

[Poor Richard Saunders]

Let's examine Into the Night's statement and confirm its veracity.

Grab a flashlight and turn it on. Notice the light flowing forth from it. Now grab a container in which to store the light flowing from the flashlight. Fill the container halfway full of light from the flashlight and then seal the container. Store the container in a dark, cool closet for 15 minutes. Open the container and retrieve the light that you had previously stored. How much is still there?

Did you answer "none"? Really? None? What happened to the light that you stored? Did it evaporate?

Question: Does a photon ever travel at less than the speed of light?


... but you aren't smart enough to learn?


Nope. What's the other option that you neglected to mention, i.e. the one that happens to be the correct answer?

You haven't stated your support for your claim yet.

Let's play stupid games.

I conducted your experiment by using an Infrared light source and when I opened the container 15 minutes later the inside of the box emitted electromagnetic radiation in the infrared range. The correct answer is NOT "none" according to the experiment you set up. Did I just prove that you and Into the Night are wrong. Or did I just prove that you are making silly semantic arguments because you can't argue the science?

 

[Into the Night]

Would you look at that. You just said light is captured and turned into thermal energy.
At this point you are just arguing stupid semantics by claiming light is absorbed but not trapped.

Semantics fallacy. Inversion fallacy. You cannot trap light. Absorption is not trapping light.

 

[Into the Night]

Let's play stupid games.

I conducted your experiment by using an Infrared light source and when I opened the container 15 minutes later the inside of the box emitted electromagnetic radiation in the infrared range. The correct answer is NOT "none" according to the experiment you set up. Did I just prove that you and Into the Night are wrong. Or did I just prove that you are making silly semantic arguments because you can't argue the science?

Semantics fallacy. False equivalence fallacy.

You cannot see infrared light. You cannot trap light. Comparing two different sources of light as the same is a false equivalence fallacy.

 

[Poor Richard Saunders]

Semantics fallacy. False equivalence fallacy.

You cannot see infrared light. You cannot trap light. Comparing two different sources of light as the same is a false equivalence fallacy.

ROFLMAO.
So now light only consists of visible light?
You are really digging yourself a hole and pulling it in on top of you.

 

[Into the Night]

ROFLMAO.
So now light only consists of visible light?

As given by the question posed by IBDaMann, yes.

You are really digging yourself a hole and pulling it in on top of you.

Assumption of victory fallacy.

 

[IBDaMann]

Let's play stupid games.

After all, you did get the ball rolling.

I conducted your experiment by using an Infrared light source

Infrared is an "band" and not a wavelength.

and when I opened the container 15 minutes later the inside of the box emitted electromagnetic radiation in the infrared range.

It is not the light from the light source. The light from the light source was not trapped or contained or held or sequestered or imprisoned ... i.e. it was not stored.

Let's stick with the experiment as scientists do ...

Grab a flashlight, turn it on and store it's light in a container as you insist can be done, and throw it in Into the Night's face.

So, how does one get a photon to stop traveling at the speed of light and to instead stop so that it can be trapped or stored or contained ... and thereafter kick it back up to light speed upon being taken out of storage/prison/containment?

 

[Poor Richard Saunders]

After all, you did get the ball rolling.


Infrared is an "band" and not a wavelength.

Light now travels in bands? Who plays lead guitar?
If you want to make shit up, it should at least have some semblance to reality. It seems now you are correcting things I never said. I wonder if you have dementia.

It is not the light from the light source. The light from the light source was not trapped or contained or held or sequestered or imprisoned ... i.e. it was not stored.

Oh.. now that your experiment failed you are not going to correct your statement but make excuses for why it failed. How sciencey of you. Or maybe I should say, how Into the Night of you. It's almost like you two are the same person.

Let's stick with the experiment as scientists do ...

Grab a flashlight, turn it on and store it's light in a container as you insist can be done, and throw it in Into the Night's face.

I already did this. I grabbed my infrared flashlight and your experiment failed. What you claimed would happen didn't. You claimed that no light would be emitted from the container.

So, how does one get a photon to stop traveling at the speed of light and to instead stop so that it can be trapped or stored or contained ... and thereafter kick it back up to light speed upon being taken out of storage/prison/containment?

This is your experiment that failed to produce the results you claimed would occur. That doesn't mean I said a container will store light.
When did I say that the light was stored in a container? It seems you think you can just make shit up and then claim I said it.
I think you need to explain why your experiment failed. I see no reason to explain it since it has absolutely nothing to do with anything I have said.

 

[Poor Richard Saunders]

As given by the question posed by IBDaMann, yes.

Assumption of victory fallacy.

IR Illuminators, Flashlights & More for Night Vision Scopes

Shop our selection of powerful IR illuminators online at Night Vision Guys! These quality illuminators are designed for various night-time activities.

nightvisionguys.com

Would you care to tell me where in this IBDaMann said I had to use visible light?

Grab a flashlight and turn it on. Notice the light flowing forth from it. Now grab a container in which to store the light flowing from the flashlight. Fill the container halfway full of light from the flashlight and then seal the container. Store the container in a dark, cool closet for 15 minutes. Open the container and retrieve the light that you had previously stored. How much is still there?

Can you tell us where he said I had to see anything? It seems it is you that is making shit up about the parameters of his experiment that failed.
Thanks for showing us you have no integrity when it comes to your position and are willing to lie to try to win. But then we all knew you were a dishonest idiot so we haven't learned anything at this point.

 

[Into the Night]

Light now travels in bands? Who plays lead guitar?

You don't know about frequency bands? You really ARE illiterate!

If you want to make shit up, it should at least have some semblance to reality.

Go talk to the FCC and others about frequency bands. It is not made up. Buzzword fallacy. You don't know what 'reality' means or how it's defined.

It seems now you are correcting things I never said. I wonder if you have dementia.

Denying your own posts doesn't work, Void.

Oh.. now that your experiment failed you are not going to correct your statement but make excuses for why it failed.

Be sure to use at least a quart sized container for your light.

How sciencey of you. Or maybe I should say, how Into the Night of you. It's almost like you two are the same person.

You are obviously confused. You can't even tell the difference between two different people.

I already did this. I grabbed my infrared flashlight and your experiment failed. What you claimed would happen didn't. You claimed that no light would be emitted from the container.

He never made any such claim. Stop word stuffing.

This is your experiment that failed to produce the results you claimed would occur.

Be sure to use at least a quart sized container for your light.

That doesn't mean I said a container will store light.

You said EXACTLY THAT. Stop trying to deny your own posts!

When did I say that the light was stored in a container?

Denying your own posts doesn't work, Void.

It seems you think you can just make shit up and then claim I said it.

Denying your own posts doesn't work, Void.

I think you need to explain why your experiment failed.

It didn't, Void.

I see no reason to explain it since it has absolutely nothing to do with anything I have said.

You can't deny your own posts, Void.

 

[Into the Night]

IR Illuminators, Flashlights & More for Night Vision Scopes

Shop our selection of powerful IR illuminators online at Night Vision Guys! These quality illuminators are designed for various night-time activities.

nightvisionguys.com

Would you care to tell me where in this IBDaMann said I had to use visible light?

RQAA

Can you tell us where he said I had to see anything?

RQAA

It seems it is you that is making shit up about the parameters of his experiment that failed.

Blatant lie.

Thanks for showing us you have no integrity when it comes to your position and are willing to lie to try to win.

Blatant lie. Inversion fallacy.

But then we all knew you were a dishonest idiot so we haven't learned anything at this point.

Inversion fallacy.

You cannot blame YOUR problems on anybody else, Void.

You cannot trap light.

 

[IBDaMann]

Light now travels in bands? Who plays lead guitar?

Shall we consider your king tipped?

If you want to make shit up, it should at least have some semblance to reality.

If you really have no concept of frequency bands, you don't belong in this conversation.

Oh.. now that your experiment failed

OK, your king is tipped. You obviously have no plans to provide any rational basis for believing in your "temperature increase" dogma.

I already did this. I grabbed my infrared flashlight and your experiment failed.

Nope. You erroneously declared all light within an arbitrary band to be the same light, and none of it was the light from the source.

You're not very good at this.

Look, you have a religion that is WACKY and that calls itself "settled science." You bought into all that mess thinking it would turn you into a gifted scientist ... and the fact that you still don't even know what science is should have told you that something about your religion is really hosed, but you are simply clinging too tightly to apply any sort of critical reasoning.

Let me know if you convert anyone. Please.

 

[IBDaMann]

Would you care to tell me where in this IBDaMann said I had to use visible light?

I wouldn't expect you to understand the scientific method, so you get a pass this time.

The way scientists operate is they try to develop science that corresponds to all observations ... but the "observations" must be entirely repeatable. You can't have people claiming to have falsified some theory of science because it didn't correspond to their claims of non-repeatable "visions" and "perceived occurrences." Hence, experiments are simplified and specified to create a repeatable, standardized event.

I specified a flashlight (visible light). My claim is that if you can capture the visible light of a flashlight, that would certainly falsify my claim that "light cannot be trapped/contained."

You have not offered any repeatable experiment that demonstrates the ability to capture any light. More importantly, you have, on more than one occasion, EVADED the main question of photons traveling at less that the speed of light, signaling your complete awareness that we are now treading on territory that thoroughly threatens your religious faith.

 

[Poor Richard Saunders]

Shall we consider your king tipped?


If you really have no concept of frequency bands, you don't belong in this conversation.

Where did I say anything about bands or frequencies or even wavelengths before you accused me of not knowing what they were?
I will bet you can't point to a single post of mine where that occurred. You have decided you can just accuse me of whatever you want to fantasize about.

It's funny how both you and Into the Night have identical ignorance when it comes to sarcasm. It's almost like you are the same person and not just members of the same band.

OK, your king is tipped. You obviously have no plans to provide any rational basis for believing in your "temperature increase" dogma.

Your experiment failed and now you are trying to run away from it.
When I opened my container there was clearly electromagnetic radiation coming from it when you claimed there would be "none."
Tip that king all you want. You were wrong and can't admit it. I'm sure Into the Night will be along to spout about how you are "declaring victory."
(Probably not since his integrity is even less than yours.)

Nope. You erroneously declared all light within an arbitrary band to be the same light, and none of it was the light from the source.

Moving the goal posts doesn't change the fact that you claimed there would be "none" and you were wrong.

You're not very good at this.


Look, you have a religion that is WACKY and that calls itself "settled science." You bought into all that mess thinking it would turn you into a gifted scientist ... and the fact that you still don't even know what science is should have told you that something about your religion is really hosed, but you are simply clinging too tightly to apply any sort of critical reasoning.

Let me know if you convert anyone. Please.

Let me know when you stop having to use yourself to provide support for your position.
Let me know when you admit that you were wrong about the result of your experiment.

 

[Crepitus]

The dam is finally cracking."

Award-winning journalist Alex Newman breaks down how the "man-made global warming" narrative is finally crumbling.

"Three new peer-reviewed papers, published in major prestigious scientific journals... completely undermine the alleged scientific consensus on man-made global warming."

https://twitter.com/x/status/1808827322448900193

Awesome!

I'm sure all those folks in the Caribbean (not to mention texass) will be glad to hear that.

Do you suppose that means the damage from the record setting hurricane will just disappear, like magic?

 

[Poor Richard Saunders]

I wouldn't expect you to understand the scientific method, so you get a pass this time.

The way scientists operate is they try to develop science that corresponds to all observations ... but the "observations" must be entirely repeatable. You can't have people claiming to have falsified some theory of science because it didn't correspond to their claims of non-repeatable "visions" and "perceived occurrences." Hence, experiments are simplified and specified to create a repeatable, standardized event.

I specified a flashlight (visible light). My claim is that if you can capture the visible light of a flashlight, that would certainly falsify my claim that "light cannot be trapped/contained."

You have not offered any repeatable experiment that demonstrates the ability to capture any light. More importantly, you have, on more than one occasion, EVADED the main question of photons traveling at less that the speed of light, signaling your complete awareness that we are now treading on territory that thoroughly threatens your religious faith.

The funny thing is, I repeated the experiment with a container and infrared flashlight and surprise, surprise, every time I repeat it the result is not "none."

You did NOT specify a flashlight with visible light. Now you have resorted to lying.
This is what you said.

Grab a flashlight and turn it on. Notice the light flowing forth from it. Now grab a container in which to store the light flowing from the flashlight. Fill the container halfway full of light from the flashlight and then seal the container. Store the container in a dark, cool closet for 15 minutes. Open the container and retrieve the light that you had previously stored. How much is still there?

Where did you use the word visible? Infrared flashlights exist and are easy to grab and turn on.

Your claim about capturing light in a container has absolutely nothing to do with anything I said. It seems your modus operandi is to lie about what others say and then claim they are wrong. That would be a rather obvious example of a straw man fallacy.
Congratulations. You couldn't even beat up the straw man you constructed.

And then you turn around and lie about what you said.

Let's start to count your lies.
1 You pretended I said light could be trapped in a container when I have never said anything to that effect.
2. You claimed I don't know the difference between band and wavelength when I have never said anything about them.
3. You claimed you used the word "visible" in your stupid experiment when it clearly does not exist there.
How long will it take to get to 10 lies by you? I suppose it depends on whether we can include Into the Night's lies.