The best arguments atheists and religionists have been able to muster

Band religion? No way. Religion is already on the decline in the US and, I believe, as we become more educated it will continue to decrease.
You mean organized religion! Not to be confused with a personal relationship with YHWH ,through the Holy Spirit
 
You mean organized religion! Not to be confused with a personal relationship with YHWH ,through the Holy Spirit
It really doesn't matter. The only real difference between organized religion and what you practice is that you don't go to a separate building on Sundays.

Either way, the only evidence for your God is the same evidence that there is for Santa Claus and all of the Greek gods, which is to say a book written by men.
 
It really doesn't matter. The only real difference between organized religion and what you practice is that you don't go to a separate building on Sundays.

Either way, the only evidence for your God is the same evidence that there is for Santa Claus and all of the Greek gods, which is to say a book written by men.
I was trained by the Holy Spirit not a "book"!
 
Again....you are showing your ignorance.
Nice try. I don't think you are fooling anyone. You are the scientifically illiterate one in this discussion.

Our atmosphere is THE reason that temperatures are maintained
What a stupid thing to say. The sun obviously maintains all temperatures. Why am I the first person to teach you something so obvious?

in a range that allows for life to exist.
There is no such thing as the "life temperature band."

This happens because the atmosphere allows in X amount of energy and slows how quickly energy leaves the atmosphere.
Nope. Stefan-Boltzmann determines RADIANCE, and that is a function solely of temperature, not of atmosphere or anything else.

By the way, to "how quickly" energy leaves earth ... it's "instantaneous."

Temps don't get too high or too low. This is enhanced on cloudy nights.
Nope. All of this is likewise gibberish.

All that needs to happen for climate change to be true is for the atmosphere to slow, even further, the rate of energy leaving.
Nope. One preliminary requirement for Climate Change to be true is for there to exist an unambiguous definition of Climate Change that doesn't violate science, math or logic. You don't have that. Climate Change has therefore not been shown to be true.
 
Nice try. I don't think you are fooling anyone. You are the scientifically illiterate one in this discussion.


What a stupid thing to say. The sun obviously maintains all temperatures. Why am I the first person to teach you something so obvious?


There is no such thing as the "life temperature band."


Nope. Stefan-Boltzmann determines RADIANCE, and that is a function solely of temperature, not of atmosphere or anything else.

By the way, to "how quickly" energy leaves earth ... it's "instantaneous."


Nope. All of this is likewise gibberish.


Nope. One preliminary requirement for Climate Change to be true is for there to exist an unambiguous definition of Climate Change that doesn't violate science, math or logic. You don't have that. Climate Change has therefore not been shown to be true.
"The sun obviously maintains all temperatures"

To clarify, you are saying that, without the atmosphere, the high and low temperatures on Earth would be identical to what they are now?
 
Band religion? No way. Religion is already on the decline in the US and, I believe, as we become more educated it will continue to decrease.
That will take awhile since Islam is the fastest growing religion and, like most religions, is predominant among the poor.

income.gif
 
"The sun obviously maintains all temperatures"

To clarify, you are saying that, without the atmosphere, the high and low temperatures on Earth would be identical to what they are now?
To clarify, you STILL don't know what the "average global equilibrium temperature" means, right?
 
No, you weren't. You were trained by your imagination.
Wow! I never read the Bible ,but somehow "my imagination" was an expert on Passover! That I knew nothing about!
Plus "my imagination" ,knew everything about Melchizedek is Michael ,that's in Dead Sea scrolls 11 Q 13 ,which I never read or heard of! Imagine that!
 
To clarify, you STILL don't know what the "average global equilibrium temperature" means, right?
I'm not talking about average. I'm talking about high and low.

So.....

To clarify, you are saying that, without the atmosphere, the high and low temperatures on Earth would be identical to what they are now?
 
Publishing has nothing to do with it. It's "odd" that I, a non-omniscient, non-all-powerful being, could write a better book of common sense than the book inspired by the creator of the universe.
Paradox. Irrational. You cannot argue both sides of a paradox.
 
I don't believe, definitively, in climate change and never have. The question was whether or not there is reason to believe in climate change. A belief, based on the science, isn't a religion. It's the opposite of religion. Religion is based on fairytales and faith... "faith" is another way of saying you believe something on bad/no evidence.
Science isn't religion, Void.
 
"All of your beliefs are based on violations of physics."

This is why I stopped discussing the topic with you and Into the Night.
Because your religion compels you to deny physics.
IF you had any understanding of how climate change is believed to work, you wouldn't be making these claims.
Climate cannot change.
Since you have no interest in understanding how climate change is believed to work, you continue to repeat falsehoods.
Climate cannot change.
It's the equivalent of me trying to have a scientific discussion about the earth with someone who believes the earth is flat and refuses to even look at the facts about the earth that shows it's not flat. You're basically doubling down on ignorance.
The Earth is a spheroid. Mantra 1a. Lame.
You are denying theories of science. You are NOT having a scientific discussion. You are having a religious one.
 
I'm not talking about average. I'm talking about high and low.

So.....

To clarify, you are saying that, without the atmosphere, the high and low temperatures on Earth would be identical to what they are now?
Paradox. Irrational. You cannot argue both sides of a paradox.

Now you are ignoring the 0th law of thermodynamics.
 
Nice try.
He's accurate.
Anyone who has an understanding of how climate is believed to work would not
Climate is not work.
...could not....claim a violation of the first law of thermodynamics, yet you repeatedly made the claim.
You cannot create energy out of nothing, Void.
All that is needed for global temps to increase is for LESS energy to escape.
Not possible. Now you are ignoring the 2nd law of thermodynamics.
There is no need for additional energy.
Higher temperatures mean additional energy, Void. You cannot create energy out of nothing. You are ignoring the 1st law of thermodynamics again.
Again anyone who had a basic understanding of climate change would know that.
Climate cannot change.
 
Again....you are showing your ignorance. Our atmosphere is THE reason that temperatures are maintained in a range that allows for life to exist. This happens because the atmosphere allows in X amount of energy and slows how quickly energy leaves the atmosphere.
No gas or vapor has the capability to slow heat. Heat has no speed. You are also ignoring the Stefan-Boltzmann law again.
Temps don't get too high or too low. This is enhanced on cloudy nights.
Argument from randU fallacy. Attempted proof by contrivance.
All that needs to happen for climate change to be true is for the atmosphere to slow, even further, the rate of energy leaving.
Climate cannot change.
You cannot trap or slow heat.
You cannot trap light.
You cannot create energy out of nothing.
You cannot heat a warmer object with a colder one.

You are still ignoring the 2nd law of thermodynamics and the Stefan-Boltzmann law.
 
Band religion? No way. Religion is already on the decline in the US and, I believe, as we become more educated it will continue to decrease.
Religion is not illiteracy. Redefinition fallacy.
You are very religious, yet you say religion is on the decline in the US.
 
Back
Top