The climate always changes

T. A. Gardner said:
Q = m(∆T) So, I'm not ignoring the 1st law of thermodynamics. Energy can be transferred between masses. Gas and vapor has mass. Both the Sun and Earth have energy produced from nuclear reactions.
Click to expand...
Not the 1st law of thermodynamics. Conductive heating is not available in space.
T. A. Gardner said:
There may or may not be, but pursuing solutions on the basis of politics rather than science and engineering is a bad thing.

The impending one from their green agenda being fulfilled.
Click to expand...
There is no problem. No 'solution' is needed.
 
Kafka said:
Actually that's not true.
Click to expand...
It is true. Theories of science are basically pretty straightforward. You just want to ignore them.
Kafka said:
I spent a year as an oceanographic chemical technician and I can say that oceanography is not really simple.
Click to expand...
I don't believe you. You have already denied too much science to claim anything like chemistry or oceanography.
Kafka said:
One of the things we were working on was tracking deep ocean currents.
Click to expand...
Stop making shit up and pretending.
 
Kafka said:
Hmmmm, well I wasn't actually trained as an oceanographer so I was mainly there to run the gas chromatograph. But the topics I think I found most confusing were things like the Revelle Factor. I mean, I can sort of understand its application, but its derivation and what it actually is doing is still a bit of a struggle for me. I also found that the complexity of various relationships between density, temperature, salinity to kind of be overwhelming since they are quite complex and ultimately drive a lot of the currents in the ocean.

I never fully understood what the guy doing the 4He stuff was doing.

One project I was on was using a tracer to assess gas exchange in an estuary. I was responsible for collecting the samples and running the GC again to test for the tracers we were looking at which was pretty straightforward....but the modeling the grad student who was running the project did was waaay out of my comfort zone.

Don't get me wrong: I learned a LOT during that year but really oceanography is NOT simple. Especially for people like you and I who are not oceanographers.
Click to expand...
Stop making shit up, Pretender.
 
Into the Night said:
It's not even possible to measure the global sea level. There is no valid reference point.
Remember the land moves just as the water does.

But you do make a valid point:

* Oil rigs are still there and they still operate.
* Runways built on little more than sand bars during WW2 are still there.
* Elliot Bay in Seattle is still the same as it has been for decades.
* Miami is still there, and the cruise ships still use the same ports.
Click to expand...
True, that many land masses rose, and are still rising, as the massive weight of the ice was removed. But not all land mass was covered in ice; only about 1/3 with about 1/10 still covered today.

Yes, those are good examples showing any modern rise is insignificant.
 
Last edited:
Bigdog said:
I know the truth. I know why you are unable to prove me wrong. Now, go away, little one.

I know you need the time to google it.
Click to expand...

I can't help but notice so far in this conversation that I'm the ONLY ONE to actually mention ANYTHING EVEN REMOTELY TECHNICAL related to oceanography.

You have yet to say one single thing that indicates you know even a modicum of the topic.

I'll let you do the googling.
 
Bigdog said:
True, that many land masses rose, and are still rising, as the massive weight of the ice was removed. But not all land mass was covered in ice; only about 1/3 with about 1/10 still covered today.

Yes, those are good examples showing any modern rise is insignificant.
Click to expand...
Not possible to measure.
Land has tides, for example, just like the ocean does.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top