Is Climate Change Possible Redux

[IBDaMann]

So does fixing a problem for which there is scant evidence. But here we are.

The 2020 election was stolen brazenly. It's a HUGE problem that needs to be fixed immediately.

If only it were that simple.

Oh look, it is that simple!

Voter ID on the face of it sounds like a no-brainer.

VoterID, upon closer examination, is a no-brainer.

Getting an ID is not something everyone can do easily.

Yes it is.

Some people lack all their paperwork, others don't have any means to get to the DMV which may be a couple counties over, still others can't get time off the 3 or 4 jobs they have to work to get to the DMV. And all of that stuff costs money.

All States have procedures for even the homeless and broke to get IDs.

So we KNOW with 100% certainty there will be Americans who can't vote.

... by their own choice.

But I also realize it will cost millions upon millions of dollars to do it.

Nope. Everyone can get an ID with exactly what's already in place.

So if you want to fix a problem that barely is even detectable

Nope. All those who wish to make America great again seem to want to fix this huge election-stealing problem that threw the US into "Venezuela status" in 2020. Let's fix it once and for all.

 

[ZenMode]

Tell me you don't know the difference between weather and climate without telling me you don't know the difference between weather and climate.

Cli·mate
/ˈklīmət/
noun
the weather conditions prevailing in an area in general or over a long period.

Weath·er
/ˈweT͟Hər/
noun
the state of the atmosphere at a place and time as regards heat, dryness, sunshine, wind, rain, etc

Ok, now you throw out something really retarded to invalidate widely recognized and accepted definitions of those two words.

@IBDaMann - "You also don't know that dictionaries don't get to define any words"

As predicted....

 

[IBDaMann]

As predicted....

All your "predictions" are always after-the-fact. So very keen.

 

[ZenMode]

All your "predictions" are always after-the-fact. So very keen.

No. I called it two pages ago

here

 

[Yakuda]

Again... I support voter ID, but it's FAR from the crisis that Republicans make it out to be. FAR....

There is no crisis. Other than "well, this could happen...." there's just nothing there.

It's irrelevant. The only reason to oppose voter ID is the intention to cheat.

So you don't have a problem with some cheating. Good to know. So when repubs cheat I better not hear you bitch like a teenage girl.

 

[T. A. Gardner]

CO2 has risen about .003% in the last century and now sits at about .042% of our atmosphere having risen from about .039% a century or so ago.

At the same time, water vapor in the form of clouds from contrails has risen from zero (0.0) in roughly 1940 to .40% today. Most of these contrails are concentrated in the Northern hemisphere and guess what? Most warming due to climate change is occurring in the Northern hemisphere...

Now, reducing contrails to near zero is a relatively easy and quick fix. Reducing CO2 is expensive and requires lots of government intervention.

 

[ZenMode]

It's irrelevant. The only reason to oppose voter ID is the intention to cheat.

So you don't have a problem with some cheating. Good to know. So when repubs cheat I better not hear you bitch like a teenage girl.

I assume you believe the only reason to support drop boxes and Mail-in voting is also due to a support of cheating?

 

[Yakuda]

I assume you believe the only reason to support drop boxes and Mail-in voting is also due to a support of cheating?

I think that's exactly what i said. If you can't get your ballot to a drop box you can get your ass to a polling place. As to mail in voting it's bullshit unless a person request the ballot and is checked of a valid voter roll.

 

[ZenMode]

The 2020 election was stolen brazenly. It's a HUGE problem that needs to be fixed immediately.


Oh look, it is that simple!


VoterID, upon closer examination, is a no-brainer.


Yes it is.


All States have procedures for even the homeless and broke to get IDs.


... by their own choice.


Nope. Everyone can get an ID with exactly what's already in place.


Nope. All those who wish to make America great again seem to want to fix this huge election-stealing problem that threw the US into "Venezuela status" in 2020. Let's fix it once and for all.

"The 2020 election was stolen brazenly. "


Really, how many fraudulent ballots have been found so far?

 

[IBDaMann]

"The 2020 election was stolen brazenly. "

True statement, to be followed by a lame pivot to the irrelevant ...

Really, how many fraudulent ballots have been found so far?

Box checked. Pivot meets minimum lameness requirements.

The DNC ran the same ballots through the machines multiple times. It was the counting that was fraudulent, not necessarily the ballots themselves.

 

[IBDaMann]

CO2 has risen about .003% in the last century

You don't know this. You are pretending to be omniscient. Nobody has validly measured the atmospheric CO2 content to any accuracy.

and now sits at about .042% of our atmosphere having risen from about .039% a century or so ago.

Assertion dismissed. Do you know why you have absolutely no valid data? Answer: because no one does. All people who claim figures and percentages as you have done are pulling them all out of their asses.

At the same time, water vapor in the form of clouds from contrails has risen from zero (0.0) in roughly 1940 to .40% today.

Now you have officially wandered into La-la land.

Most of these contrails are concentrated in the Northern hemisphere and guess what? Most warming due to climate change is occurring in the Northern hemisphere...

That is one WACKY religion you have there.

Now, reducing contrails to near zero is a relatively easy and quick fix. Reducing CO2 is expensive and requires lots of government intervention.

Doing nothing is the quickest, easiest and least expensive fix when there is no issue in the first place.

 

[T. A. Gardner]

You don't know this. You are pretending to be omniscient. Nobody has validly measured the atmospheric CO2 content to any accuracy.

Give me a break. Do you know how stupid that sounds? Anyone who's take even high school chemistry knows gasses disperse equally to all volume they are in. CO2 in the atmosphere can be measured with reasonable accuracy.

Assertion dismissed. Do you know why you have absolutely no valid data? Answer: because no one does. All people who claim figures and percentages as you have done are pulling them all out of their asses.

See the above. You are a fool to believe we can't measure the content of the atmosphere with reasonable accuracy.

Now you have officially wandered into La-la land.

The first aircraft capable of flying high enough to create a contrail came into existence in the 1930's. By the 1940's such aircraft were in use in abundance.

That is one WACKY religion you have there.

That's one idiotic answer you have there.

Doing nothing is the quickest, easiest and least expensive fix when there is no issue in the first place.

I assume there is a problem, whether one exists or not. The elimination of contrails is an easy fix.

 

[IBDaMann]

Give me a break. Do you know how stupid that sounds?

Look, you are a gullible scientifically illiterate who fell for Marxist propaganda without questioning a word of what you were told to believe. You suck at all the physics and all the math that would tell you just how stupid your regurgitations sound.

Learn Stefan-Boltzmann. Until you do, there's no point in trying to break down your babbling. No atmospheric gas can alter the earth's average global equilibrium temperature. There is no Global Warming. There is no Climate Change. There is no greenhouse effect. There is no Santa Claus. There is no Chupacabra.

How difficult was it to get you to believe there are?

Anyone who's take even high school chemistry knows gasses disperse equally to all volume they are in.

Not even in a small container. Anyone who's taken even high school chemistry knows that gases (only one "s"; the word "gasses" is a verb of what Hitler does to Jews) are constantly changing statistical distributions. At any given moment, the liklihood of any gas being evenly distributed throughout the atmosphere, while not exactly zero, is so close to zero that it is treated as zero in all cases.

CO2 in the atmosphere can be measured with reasonable accuracy.

Atmospheric CO2 cannot be measured to within any usable accuracy. That's why atmospheric CO2 has never even been attempted to be measured to within any usable accuracy. Statistical math explains why. Learn some math.

See the above. You are a fool to believe we can't measure the content of the atmosphere with reasonable accuracy.

See the above. You are a fool if you think anyone has ever undertaken a project to attempt measuring atmospheric CO2 to any usable accuracy. Nobody will fund such an effort because nobody wants to throw his money away.

The first aircraft capable of flying high enough to create a contrail came into existence in the 1930's. By the 1940's such aircraft were in use in abundance.

Irrelevant. Learn and understand Stefan-Boltzmann.

I recommend not pushing to waste time, money and effort.

 

[T. A. Gardner]

Look, you are a gullible scientifically illiterate who fell for Marxist propaganda without questioning a word of what you were told to believe. You suck at all the physics and all the math that would tell you just how stupid your regurgitations sound.

Learn Stefan-Boltzmann. Until you do, there's no point in trying to break down your babbling. No atmospheric gas can alter the earth's average global equilibrium temperature. There is no Global Warming. There is no Climate Change. There is no greenhouse effect. There is no Santa Claus. There is no Chupacabra.

How difficult was it to get you to believe there are?


Not even in a small container. Anyone who's taken even high school chemistry knows that gases (only one "s"; the word "gasses" is a verb of what Hitler does to Jews) are constantly changing statistical distributions. At any given moment, the liklihood of any gas being evenly distributed throughout the atmosphere, while not exactly zero, is so close to zero that it is treated as zero in all cases.


Atmospheric CO2 cannot be measured to within any usable accuracy. That's why atmospheric CO2 has never even been attempted to be measured to within any usable accuracy. Statistical math explains why. Learn some math.


See the above. You are a fool if you think anyone has ever undertaken a project to attempt measuring atmospheric CO2 to any usable accuracy. Nobody will fund such an effort because nobody wants to throw his money away.


Irrelevant. Learn and understand Stefan-Boltzmann.

I recommend not pushing to waste time, money and effort.

I've installed and calibrated a butt load of these over the years, and you are full of shit from top to bottom with that idiotic answer you gave.

 

[ZenMode]

True statement, to be followed by a lame pivot to the irrelevant ...


Box checked. Pivot meets minimum lameness requirements.

The DNC ran the same ballots through the machines multiple times. It was the counting that was fraudulent, not necessarily the ballots themselves.

Really? How many ballots did they run through twice (link)? Who ran them through and what was the consequence? Who got arrested?

 

[IBDaMann]

I've installed and calibrated a butt load of these over the years, and you are full of shit from top to bottom with that idiotic answer you gave.

So, you believe, because you have installed a bajillion of these, that they measure earth's atmospheric CO2 content? Do I have that right?

 

[IBDaMann]

Really? How many ballots did they run through twice (link)?

Not twice, but seven, eight times. Read the sworn affidavits.

 

[T. A. Gardner]

So, you believe, because you have installed a bajillion of these, that they measure earth's atmospheric CO2 content? Do I have that right?

You can measure a sample of gas and it WILL be a measure of a larger volume of gas because gases mix and fill all space they can fill.

1.7: The Maxwell Distribution Laws

chem.libretexts.org

Khan Academy

www.khanacademy.org

5.3: The Simple Gas Laws- Boyle’s Law, Charles’s Law and Avogadro’s Law

The volume of a gas is inversely proportional to its pressure and directly proportional to its temperature and the amount of gas. Boyle showed that the volume of a sample of a gas is inversely …

chem.libretexts.org

Stefan-Boltzmann has nothing to do with how gasses distribute themselves.

 

[T. A. Gardner]

Really? How many ballots did they run through twice (link)? Who ran them through and what was the consequence? Who got arrested?

WTF are you talking about?

 

[ZenMode]

Not twice, but seven, eight times. Read the sworn affidavits.

So, what somebody thinks they saw becomes reality?