Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
Groups > sci.physics.relativity > #597999 > unrolled thread
| Started by | carl eto <ccarleto4157990662@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| First post | 2022-12-21 14:19 -0800 |
| Last post | 2023-01-13 16:12 -0800 |
| Articles | 20 on this page of 290 — 24 participants |
Back to article view | Back to sci.physics.relativity
climate change carl eto <ccarleto4157990662@gmail.com> - 2022-12-21 14:19 -0800
Re: climate change Michelle Africano <nccr@amenica.he> - 2022-12-21 22:45 +0000
Re: climate change Michelle Africano <nccr@amenica.he> - 2022-12-21 22:54 +0000
Re: climate change carl eto <ccarleto4157990662@gmail.com> - 2022-12-22 09:49 -0800
Re: climate change carl eto <ccarleto4157990662@gmail.com> - 2022-12-22 10:07 -0800
Re: climate change carl eto <ccarleto4157990662@gmail.com> - 2022-12-22 11:08 -0800
Re: climate change The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2022-12-22 12:59 -0800
Re: climate change carl eto <ccarleto4157990662@gmail.com> - 2022-12-22 13:05 -0800
Re: climate change Rico Amato <toaa@araocco.rt> - 2022-12-22 22:04 +0000
Re: climate change Rico Amato <toaa@araocco.rt> - 2022-12-22 22:14 +0000
Re: climate change The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2022-12-22 14:26 -0800
Re: climate change Paul Alsing <pnalsing@gmail.com> - 2022-12-22 18:38 -0800
Re: climate change The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2022-12-22 19:03 -0800
Re: climate change The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2022-12-23 11:10 -0800
Re: climate change Paul Alsing <pnalsing@gmail.com> - 2022-12-23 13:48 -0800
Re: climate change The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2022-12-23 15:30 -0800
Re: climate change Paul Alsing <pnalsing@gmail.com> - 2022-12-23 20:25 -0800
Re: climate change The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2022-12-27 12:12 -0800
Re: climate change thor stoneman <consequently7990662@gmail.com> - 2022-12-27 15:41 -0800
Re: climate change thor stoneman <consequently7990662@gmail.com> - 2022-12-27 16:40 -0800
Re: climate change whodat <whodaat@void.nowgre.com> - 2022-12-27 21:10 -0600
Re: climate change The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2022-12-28 12:24 -0800
Re: climate change Thomas Heger <ttt_heg@web.de> - 2022-12-31 09:33 +0100
Re: climate change Maciej Wozniak <maluwozniak@gmail.com> - 2022-12-31 00:44 -0800
Re: climate change Thomas Heger <ttt_heg@web.de> - 2023-01-01 10:00 +0100
Re: climate change Thomas Heger <ttt_heg@web.de> - 2022-12-28 07:56 +0100
Re: climate change Thomas Heger <ttt_heg@web.de> - 2022-12-29 09:01 +0100
Re: climate change thor stoneman <consequently7990662@gmail.com> - 2022-12-29 16:38 -0800
Re: climate change thor stoneman <consequently7990662@gmail.com> - 2022-12-29 16:40 -0800
Re: climate change whodat <whodaat@void.nowgre.com> - 2022-12-29 18:54 -0600
Re: climate change Thomas Heger <ttt_heg@web.de> - 2022-12-30 11:14 +0100
Re: climate change whodat <whodaat@void.nowgre.com> - 2022-12-30 10:57 -0600
Re: climate change thor stoneman <consequently7990662@gmail.com> - 2022-12-30 10:48 -0800
Re: climate change thor stoneman <consequently7990662@gmail.com> - 2022-12-30 11:01 -0800
Re: climate change thor stoneman <consequently7990662@gmail.com> - 2022-12-30 11:15 -0800
Re: climate change thor stoneman <consequently7990662@gmail.com> - 2022-12-30 11:57 -0800
Re: climate change thor stoneman <consequently7990662@gmail.com> - 2022-12-30 13:03 -0800
Re: climate change thor stoneman <consequently7990662@gmail.com> - 2022-12-30 14:40 -0800
Re: climate change thor stoneman <consequently7990662@gmail.com> - 2022-12-30 15:25 -0800
Re: climate change whodat <whodaat@void.nowgre.com> - 2022-12-30 19:02 -0600
Re: climate change whodat <whodaat@void.nowgre.com> - 2022-12-30 18:58 -0600
Re: climate change Thomas Heger <ttt_heg@web.de> - 2022-12-31 09:09 +0100
Re: climate change Thomas Heger <ttt_heg@web.de> - 2022-12-31 09:22 +0100
Re: climate change whodat <whodaat@void.nowgre.com> - 2022-12-31 15:42 -0600
Re: climate change thor stoneman <consequently7990662@gmail.com> - 2022-12-31 14:26 -0800
Re: climate change thor stoneman <consequently7990662@gmail.com> - 2022-12-31 14:43 -0800
Re: climate change thor stoneman <consequently7990662@gmail.com> - 2022-12-31 15:42 -0800
Re: climate change Thomas Heger <ttt_heg@web.de> - 2023-01-01 09:43 +0100
Re: climate change The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2023-01-01 16:49 -0800
Re: climate change Thomas Heger <ttt_heg@web.de> - 2023-01-01 09:28 +0100
Re: climate change Doodnath Sarti <ttha@dnhnahan.nh> - 2023-01-01 08:49 +0000
Re: climate change whodat <whodaat@void.nowgre.com> - 2023-01-01 06:21 -0600
Re: climate change thor stoneman <consequently7990662@gmail.com> - 2023-01-01 15:56 -0800
Re: climate change thor stoneman <consequently7990662@gmail.com> - 2023-01-01 16:02 -0800
Re: climate change thor stoneman <consequently7990662@gmail.com> - 2023-01-01 16:19 -0800
Re: climate change Paul Alsing <pnalsing@gmail.com> - 2023-01-01 17:10 -0800
Re: climate change thor stoneman <consequently7990662@gmail.com> - 2023-01-01 17:56 -0800
Re: climate change Volney <volney@invalid.invalid> - 2023-01-02 03:36 -0500
Re: climate change Thomas Heger <ttt_heg@web.de> - 2023-01-03 07:36 +0100
Re: climate change carl eto <ccarleto4157990662@gmail.com> - 2023-01-03 12:24 -0800
Re: climate change carl eto <ccarleto4157990662@gmail.com> - 2023-01-03 12:27 -0800
Re: climate change carl eto <ccarleto4157990662@gmail.com> - 2023-01-03 13:30 -0800
Re: climate change carl eto <ccarleto4157990662@gmail.com> - 2023-01-03 13:46 -0800
Re: climate change carl eto <ccarleto4157990662@gmail.com> - 2023-01-03 13:48 -0800
Re: climate change carl eto <ccarleto4157990662@gmail.com> - 2023-01-03 17:14 -0800
Re: climate change carl eto <ccarleto4157990662@gmail.com> - 2023-01-03 17:29 -0800
Re: climate change Paul Alsing <pnalsing@gmail.com> - 2023-01-03 18:13 -0800
Re: climate change Thomas Heger <ttt_heg@web.de> - 2023-01-04 10:12 +0100
Re: climate change Volney <volney@invalid.invalid> - 2023-01-04 12:59 -0500
Re: climate change Thomas Heger <ttt_heg@web.de> - 2023-01-05 07:40 +0100
Re: climate change The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2023-01-04 11:17 -0800
Re: climate change carl eto <ccarleto4157990662@gmail.com> - 2023-01-04 11:49 -0800
Re: climate change carl eto <ccarleto4157990662@gmail.com> - 2023-01-04 14:40 -0800
Re: climate change The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2023-01-05 14:40 -0800
Re: climate change Volney <volney@invalid.invalid> - 2023-01-04 12:51 -0500
Re: climate change Tom Roberts <tjoberts137@sbcglobal.net> - 2023-01-04 23:06 -0600
Re: climate change whodat <whodaat@void.nowgre.com> - 2023-01-05 00:13 -0600
Re: climate change Thomas Heger <ttt_heg@web.de> - 2023-01-05 08:01 +0100
Re: climate change Tom Roberts <tjoberts137@sbcglobal.net> - 2023-01-05 11:47 -0600
Re: climate change Maciej Wozniak <maluwozniak@gmail.com> - 2023-01-05 10:17 -0800
Re: climate change whodat <whodaat@void.nowgre.com> - 2023-01-05 16:33 -0600
Re: climate change Thomas Heger <ttt_heg@web.de> - 2023-01-07 09:42 +0100
Re: climate change carl eto <ccarleto4157990662@gmail.com> - 2023-01-07 15:21 -0800
Re: climate change carl eto <ccarleto4157990662@gmail.com> - 2023-01-07 15:47 -0800
Re: climate change carl eto <ccarleto4157990662@gmail.com> - 2023-01-07 15:58 -0800
Re: climate change carl eto <ccarleto4157990662@gmail.com> - 2023-01-07 16:04 -0800
Re: climate change The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2023-01-07 18:31 -0800
Re: climate change Luigi Tumicelli <llei@cumiicli.lu> - 2023-01-08 13:47 +0000
Re: climate change carl eto <ccarleto4157990662@gmail.com> - 2023-01-08 15:16 -0800
Re: climate change carl eto <ccarleto4157990662@gmail.com> - 2023-01-08 16:49 -0800
Re: climate change carl eto <ccarleto4157990662@gmail.com> - 2023-01-08 17:09 -0800
Re: climate change Thomas Heger <ttt_heg@web.de> - 2023-01-09 08:53 +0100
Re: climate change Luigi Tumicelli <llei@cumiicli.lu> - 2023-01-09 08:30 +0000
Re: climate change carl eto <ccarleto4157990662@gmail.com> - 2023-01-09 10:11 -0800
Re: climate change Luigi Tumicelli <llei@cumiicli.lu> - 2023-01-09 18:58 +0000
Re: climate change carl eto <ccarleto4157990662@gmail.com> - 2023-01-09 12:47 -0800
Re: climate change The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2023-01-09 22:18 -0800
Re: climate change nospam@de-ster.demon.nl (J. J. Lodder) - 2023-01-10 15:49 +0100
Re: climate change carl eto <ccarleto4157990662@gmail.com> - 2023-01-10 10:58 -0800
Re: climate change nospam@de-ster.demon.nl (J. J. Lodder) - 2023-01-10 21:45 +0100
Re: climate change carl eto <ccarleto4157990662@gmail.com> - 2023-01-10 12:58 -0800
Re: climate change nospam@de-ster.demon.nl (J. J. Lodder) - 2023-01-10 22:12 +0100
Re: climate change carl eto <ccarleto4157990662@gmail.com> - 2023-01-10 14:26 -0800
Re: climate change Maciej Wozniak <maluwozniak@gmail.com> - 2023-01-10 21:56 -0800
Re: climate change The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2023-01-10 22:17 -0800
Re: climate change The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2023-01-10 22:32 -0800
Re: climate change Volney <volney@invalid.invalid> - 2023-01-11 01:34 -0500
Re: climate change Maciej Wozniak <maluwozniak@gmail.com> - 2023-01-10 22:49 -0800
Re: climate change Volney <volney@invalid.invalid> - 2023-01-11 12:44 -0500
Re: climate change carl eto <ccarleto4157990662@gmail.com> - 2023-01-11 10:53 -0800
Re: climate change Maciej Wozniak <maluwozniak@gmail.com> - 2023-01-11 11:54 -0800
Re: climate change carl eto <ccarleto4157990662@gmail.com> - 2023-01-11 12:03 -0800
Re: climate change Maciej Wozniak <maluwozniak@gmail.com> - 2023-01-11 12:39 -0800
Re: climate change carl eto <ccarleto4157990662@gmail.com> - 2023-01-11 14:21 -0800
Re: climate change nospam@de-ster.demon.nl (J. J. Lodder) - 2023-01-11 22:06 +0100
Re: climate change carl eto <ccarleto4157990662@gmail.com> - 2023-01-11 14:20 -0800
Re: climate change carl eto <ccarleto4157990662@gmail.com> - 2023-01-11 14:23 -0800
Re: climate change nospam@de-ster.demon.nl (J. J. Lodder) - 2023-01-12 10:23 +0100
Re: climate change Volney <volney@invalid.invalid> - 2023-01-12 03:46 -0500
Re: climate change Maciej Wozniak <maluwozniak@gmail.com> - 2023-01-12 00:58 -0800
Re: climate change carl eto <ccarleto4157990662@gmail.com> - 2023-01-12 16:53 -0800
Re: climate change carl eto <ccarleto4157990662@gmail.com> - 2023-01-12 17:07 -0800
Re: climate change carl eto <ccarleto4157990662@gmail.com> - 2023-01-12 15:02 -0800
Re: climate change carl eto <ccarleto4157990662@gmail.com> - 2023-01-12 15:09 -0800
Re: climate change whodat <whodaat@void.nowgre.com> - 2023-01-12 17:57 -0600
Re: climate change carl eto <ccarleto4157990662@gmail.com> - 2023-01-12 16:26 -0800
Re: climate change whodat <whodaat@void.nowgre.com> - 2023-01-12 18:32 -0600
Re: climate change carl eto <ccarleto4157990662@gmail.com> - 2023-01-12 17:23 -0800
Re: climate change carl eto <ccarleto4157990662@gmail.com> - 2023-01-12 17:31 -0800
Re: climate change carl eto <ccarleto4157990662@gmail.com> - 2023-01-12 18:06 -0800
Re: climate change carl eto <ccarleto4157990662@gmail.com> - 2023-01-12 18:12 -0800
Re: climate change Paul Alsing <pnalsing@gmail.com> - 2023-01-12 19:20 -0800
Re: climate change Volney <volney@invalid.invalid> - 2023-01-13 11:39 -0500
Re: climate change whodat <whodaat@void.nowgre.com> - 2023-01-12 20:44 -0600
Re: climate change carl eto <ccarleto4157990662@gmail.com> - 2023-01-12 18:52 -0800
Re: climate change Volney <volney@invalid.invalid> - 2023-01-13 04:06 -0500
Re: climate change Maciej Wozniak <maluwozniak@gmail.com> - 2023-01-13 01:20 -0800
Re: climate change Volney <volney@invalid.invalid> - 2023-01-13 12:04 -0500
Re: climate change Maciej Wozniak <maluwozniak@gmail.com> - 2023-01-13 10:20 -0800
Re: climate change carl eto <ccarleto4157990662@gmail.com> - 2023-01-13 12:11 -0800
Re: climate change carl eto <ccarleto4157990662@gmail.com> - 2023-01-13 12:23 -0800
Re: climate change carl eto <ccarleto4157990662@gmail.com> - 2023-01-13 12:27 -0800
Re: climate change Kobie Locatelli <be@cliietik.oo> - 2023-01-15 11:38 +0000
Re: climate change Kobie Locatelli <be@cliietik.oo> - 2023-01-15 13:23 +0000
Re: climate change whodat <whodaat@void.nowgre.com> - 2023-01-15 13:14 -0600
Re: climate change carl eto <ccarleto4157990662@gmail.com> - 2023-01-15 13:10 -0800
Re: climate change carl eto <ccarleto4157990662@gmail.com> - 2023-01-15 13:14 -0800
Re: climate change Paul Alsing <pnalsing@gmail.com> - 2023-01-15 14:48 -0800
Re: climate change carl eto <ccarleto4157990662@gmail.com> - 2023-01-15 16:44 -0800
Re: climate change nospam@de-ster.demon.nl (J. J. Lodder) - 2023-01-16 17:44 +0100
Re: climate change Maciej Wozniak <maluwozniak@gmail.com> - 2023-01-16 12:36 -0800
Re: climate change carl eto <ccarleto4157990662@gmail.com> - 2023-01-16 13:31 -0800
Re: climate change carl eto <ccarleto4157990662@gmail.com> - 2023-01-16 13:39 -0800
Re: climate change carl eto <ccarleto4157990662@gmail.com> - 2023-01-16 14:19 -0800
Re: climate change Volney <volney@invalid.invalid> - 2023-01-17 00:55 -0500
Re: climate change Maciej Wozniak <maluwozniak@gmail.com> - 2023-01-16 22:24 -0800
Re: climate change carl eto <ccarleto4157990662@gmail.com> - 2023-01-17 09:58 -0800
Re: climate change Volney <volney@invalid.invalid> - 2023-01-17 13:16 -0500
Re: climate change Maciej Wozniak <maluwozniak@gmail.com> - 2023-01-17 10:58 -0800
Re: climate change Volney <volney@invalid.invalid> - 2023-01-18 16:55 -0500
Re: climate change carl eto <ccarleto4157990662@gmail.com> - 2023-01-19 12:07 -0800
Re: climate change carl eto <ccarleto4157990662@gmail.com> - 2023-01-19 12:11 -0800
Re: climate change carl eto <ccarleto4157990662@gmail.com> - 2023-01-19 12:18 -0800
Re: climate change whodat <whodaat@void.nowgre.com> - 2023-01-19 15:18 -0600
Re: climate change carl eto <ccarleto4157990662@gmail.com> - 2023-01-19 13:51 -0800
Re: climate change carl eto <ccarleto4157990662@gmail.com> - 2023-01-19 13:52 -0800
Re: climate change whodat <whodaat@void.nowgre.com> - 2023-01-19 18:47 -0600
Re: climate change carl eto <ccarleto4157990662@gmail.com> - 2023-01-20 10:23 -0800
Re: climate change Volney <volney@invalid.invalid> - 2023-01-20 14:47 -0500
Re: climate change Maciej Wozniak <maluwozniak@gmail.com> - 2023-01-20 21:36 -0800
Re: climate change whodat <whodaat@void.nowgre.com> - 2023-01-20 14:14 -0600
Re: climate change carl eto <ccarleto4157990662@gmail.com> - 2023-01-20 12:22 -0800
Re: climate change whodat <whodaat@void.nowgre.com> - 2023-01-20 19:40 -0600
Re: climate change Volney <volney@invalid.invalid> - 2023-01-21 01:54 -0500
Re: climate change nospam@de-ster.demon.nl (J. J. Lodder) - 2023-01-21 20:35 +0100
Re: climate change carl eto <ccarleto4157990662@gmail.com> - 2023-01-21 15:26 -0800
Re: climate change whodat <whodaat@void.nowgre.com> - 2023-01-21 21:46 -0600
Re: climate change nospam@de-ster.demon.nl (J. J. Lodder) - 2023-01-22 12:08 +0100
Re: climate change carl eto <ccarleto4157990662@gmail.com> - 2023-01-23 13:37 -0800
Re: climate change carl eto <ccarleto4157990662@gmail.com> - 2023-01-23 13:39 -0800
Re: climate change carl eto <ccarleto4157990662@gmail.com> - 2023-01-23 13:39 -0800
Re: climate change nospam@de-ster.demon.nl (J. J. Lodder) - 2023-01-23 23:10 +0100
Re: climate change carl eto <ccarleto4157990662@gmail.com> - 2023-01-23 13:45 -0800
Re: climate change carl eto <ccarleto4157990662@gmail.com> - 2023-01-23 13:50 -0800
Re: climate change carl eto <ccarleto4157990662@gmail.com> - 2023-01-23 13:52 -0800
Re: climate change Volney <volney@invalid.invalid> - 2023-01-23 17:24 -0500
Re: climate change carl eto <ccarleto4157990662@gmail.com> - 2023-01-23 14:35 -0800
Re: climate change carl eto <ccarleto4157990662@gmail.com> - 2023-01-23 14:37 -0800
Re: climate change Thomas Heger <ttt_heg@web.de> - 2023-01-24 08:48 +0100
Re: climate change Faustino Biondo <uinn@bfotboia.nt> - 2023-01-25 19:40 +0000
Re: climate change carl eto <ccarleto4157990662@gmail.com> - 2023-01-26 16:40 -0800
Re: climate change Thomas Heger <ttt_heg@web.de> - 2023-01-27 08:17 +0100
Re: climate change Volney <volney@invalid.invalid> - 2023-01-27 14:31 -0500
Re: climate change nospam@de-ster.demon.nl (J. J. Lodder) - 2023-01-28 14:08 +0100
Re: climate change Thomas Heger <ttt_heg@web.de> - 2023-01-30 07:35 +0100
Re: climate change Tom Roberts <tjoberts137@sbcglobal.net> - 2023-01-30 07:38 -0600
Re: climate change Thomas Heger <ttt_heg@web.de> - 2023-01-31 09:34 +0100
Re: climate change nospam@de-ster.demon.nl (J. J. Lodder) - 2023-01-31 13:19 +0100
Re: climate change carl eto <ccarleto4157990662@gmail.com> - 2023-02-03 11:13 -0800
Re: climate change Thomas Heger <ttt_heg@web.de> - 2023-02-03 21:49 +0100
Re: climate change Paul Alsing <pnalsing@gmail.com> - 2023-02-03 19:23 -0800
Re: climate change Thomas Heger <ttt_heg@web.de> - 2023-02-04 21:10 +0100
Re: climate change carl eto <ccarleto4157990662@gmail.com> - 2023-02-05 12:06 -0800
Re: climate change Paul Alsing <pnalsing@gmail.com> - 2023-02-05 22:06 -0800
Re: climate change whodat <whodaat@void.nowgre.com> - 2023-01-23 16:55 -0600
Re: climate change Paul Alsing <pnalsing@gmail.com> - 2023-01-23 16:52 -0800
Re: climate change carl eto <carleto4157990662@gmail.com> - 2023-01-23 17:36 -0800
Re: climate change Paul Alsing <pnalsing@gmail.com> - 2023-01-23 18:39 -0800
Re: climate change nospam@de-ster.demon.nl (J. J. Lodder) - 2023-01-23 23:10 +0100
Re: climate change carl eto <ccarleto4157990662@gmail.com> - 2023-01-17 09:57 -0800
Re: climate change carl eto <ccarleto4157990662@gmail.com> - 2023-01-17 10:28 -0800
Re: climate change Volney <volney@invalid.invalid> - 2023-01-17 16:20 -0500
Re: climate change Maciej Wozniak <maluwozniak@gmail.com> - 2023-01-18 00:10 -0800
Re: climate change Volney <volney@invalid.invalid> - 2023-01-18 16:57 -0500
Re: climate change carl eto <ccarleto4157990662@gmail.com> - 2023-01-19 11:57 -0800
Re: climate change nospam@de-ster.demon.nl (J. J. Lodder) - 2023-01-16 23:25 +0100
Re: climate change carl eto <ccarleto4157990662@gmail.com> - 2023-01-16 15:40 -0800
Re: climate change Edurardo De felice <eduu@eiudece.co> - 2023-01-17 13:49 +0000
Re: climate change nospam@de-ster.demon.nl (J. J. Lodder) - 2023-01-11 10:36 +0100
Re: climate change Maciej Wozniak <maluwozniak@gmail.com> - 2023-01-11 02:09 -0800
Re: climate change nospam@de-ster.demon.nl (J. J. Lodder) - 2023-01-11 10:36 +0100
Re: climate change Maciej Wozniak <maluwozniak@gmail.com> - 2023-01-11 02:06 -0800
Re: climate change Thomas Heger <ttt_heg@web.de> - 2023-01-11 11:29 +0100
Re: climate change Volney <volney@invalid.invalid> - 2023-01-11 13:00 -0500
Re: climate change carl eto <ccarleto4157990662@gmail.com> - 2023-01-11 10:44 -0800
Re: climate change The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2023-01-11 11:17 -0800
Re: climate change carl eto <ccarleto4157990662@gmail.com> - 2023-01-11 10:51 -0800
Re: climate change whodat <whodaat@void.nowgre.com> - 2023-01-11 14:36 -0600
Re: climate change Thomas Heger <ttt_heg@web.de> - 2023-01-12 08:09 +0100
Re: climate change Volney <volney@invalid.invalid> - 2023-01-12 03:55 -0500
Re: climate change Thomas Heger <ttt_heg@web.de> - 2023-01-13 08:11 +0100
Re: climate change nospam@de-ster.demon.nl (J. J. Lodder) - 2023-01-13 13:12 +0100
Re: climate change Maciej Wozniak <maluwozniak@gmail.com> - 2023-01-13 04:41 -0800
Re: climate change nospam@de-ster.demon.nl (J. J. Lodder) - 2023-01-13 16:11 +0100
Re: climate change Maciej Wozniak <maluwozniak@gmail.com> - 2023-01-13 08:54 -0800
Re: climate change nospam@de-ster.demon.nl (J. J. Lodder) - 2023-01-13 21:52 +0100
Re: climate change Volney <volney@invalid.invalid> - 2023-01-13 11:21 -0500
Re: climate change Thomas Heger <ttt_heg@web.de> - 2023-01-14 09:54 +0100
Re: climate change Athel Cornish-Bowden <acornish@imm.cnrs.fr> - 2023-01-14 10:07 +0100
Re: climate change Paul Alsing <pnalsing@gmail.com> - 2023-01-14 12:03 -0800
Re: climate change carl eto <ccarleto4157990662@gmail.com> - 2023-01-14 12:24 -0800
Re: climate change carl eto <ccarleto4157990662@gmail.com> - 2023-01-14 12:26 -0800
Re: climate change Thomas Heger <ttt_heg@web.de> - 2023-01-15 08:11 +0100
Re: climate change Thomas Heger <ttt_heg@web.de> - 2023-01-10 07:18 +0100
Re: climate change Thomas Heger <ttt_heg@web.de> - 2023-01-02 08:06 +0100
Re: climate change Tom Roberts <tjoberts137@sbcglobal.net> - 2023-01-02 10:22 -0600
Re: climate change Thomas Heger <ttt_heg@web.de> - 2023-01-03 07:27 +0100
Re: climate change Tom Roberts <tjoberts137@sbcglobal.net> - 2023-01-02 10:43 -0600
Re: climate change carl eto <ccarleto4157990662@gmail.com> - 2023-01-02 14:54 -0800
Re: climate change carl eto <ccarleto4157990662@gmail.com> - 2023-01-02 14:57 -0800
Re: climate change carl eto <ccarleto4157990662@gmail.com> - 2023-01-02 15:03 -0800
Re: climate change carl eto <ccarleto4157990662@gmail.com> - 2023-01-02 15:10 -0800
Re: climate change carl eto <ccarleto4157990662@gmail.com> - 2023-01-02 17:29 -0800
Re: climate change thor stoneman <consequently7990662@gmail.com> - 2023-01-01 16:20 -0800
Re: climate change Tom Roberts <tjoberts137@sbcglobal.net> - 2023-01-01 20:24 -0600
Re: climate change whodat <whodaat@void.nowgre.com> - 2023-01-01 19:27 -0600
Re: climate change thor stoneman <consequently7990662@gmail.com> - 2023-01-01 18:02 -0800
Re: climate change thor stoneman <consequently7990662@gmail.com> - 2023-01-01 18:20 -0800
Re: climate change Tom Roberts <tjoberts137@sbcglobal.net> - 2023-01-01 20:48 -0600
Re: climate change Tom Roberts <tjoberts137@sbcglobal.net> - 2023-01-01 21:29 -0600
Re: climate change Thomas Heger <ttt_heg@web.de> - 2023-01-02 08:28 +0100
Re: climate change Tom Roberts <tjoberts137@sbcglobal.net> - 2023-01-01 20:29 -0600
Re: climate change whodat <whodaat@void.nowgre.com> - 2023-01-01 19:26 -0600
Re: climate change whodat <whodaat@void.nowgre.com> - 2023-01-01 06:16 -0600
Re: climate change "kellehe...@gmail.com" <kelleher.gerald@gmail.com> - 2022-12-23 01:59 -0800
Re: climate change Thomas Heger <ttt_heg@web.de> - 2022-12-28 08:10 +0100
Re: climate change thor stoneman <consequently7990662@gmail.com> - 2022-12-28 11:34 -0800
Re: climate change Thomas Heger <ttt_heg@web.de> - 2022-12-29 08:45 +0100
Re: climate change thor stoneman <consequently7990662@gmail.com> - 2022-12-28 11:47 -0800
Re: climate change thor stoneman <consequently7990662@gmail.com> - 2022-12-28 12:18 -0800
Re: climate change The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2022-12-28 12:34 -0800
Re: climate change thor stoneman <consequently7990662@gmail.com> - 2022-12-28 13:06 -0800
Re: climate change thor stoneman <consequently7990662@gmail.com> - 2022-12-28 15:29 -0800
Re: climate change Santos Anselmetti <ttln@niitstsm.sa> - 2022-12-28 23:33 +0000
Re: climate change Sylvia Else <sylvia@email.invalid> - 2023-01-05 20:08 +1100
Re: climate change carl eto <ccarleto4157990662@gmail.com> - 2023-01-05 16:17 -0800
Re: climate change Thomas Heger <ttt_heg@web.de> - 2023-01-06 08:11 +0100
Re: climate change carl eto <ccarleto4157990662@gmail.com> - 2023-01-06 11:29 -0800
Re: climate change The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2023-01-06 11:30 -0800
Re: climate change The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2023-01-06 13:21 -0800
Re: climate change carl eto <ccarleto4157990662@gmail.com> - 2023-01-06 14:20 -0800
Re: climate change carl eto <ccarleto4157990662@gmail.com> - 2023-01-06 14:09 -0800
Re: climate change carl eto <ccarleto4157990662@gmail.com> - 2023-01-06 14:29 -0800
Re: climate change George Hammond <ghammond928@gmail.com> - 2023-01-12 23:45 -0800
Re: climate change Otto Fiscella <tfit@tiselelc.it> - 2023-01-13 16:06 +0000
Re: climate change The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2023-01-13 12:03 -0800
Re: climate change carl eto <ccarleto4157990662@gmail.com> - 2023-01-13 12:08 -0800
Re: climate change Otto Fiscella <tfit@tiselelc.it> - 2023-01-13 21:10 +0000
Re: climate change carl eto <ccarleto4157990662@gmail.com> - 2023-01-13 16:12 -0800
Re: climate change carl eto <ccarleto4157990662@gmail.com> - 2023-01-13 16:12 -0800
Page 14 of 15 — ← Prev page 1 … 12 13 [14] 15 Next page →
| From | Thomas Heger <ttt_heg@web.de> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2023-01-02 08:28 +0100 |
| Message-ID | <k1ffc3Fh14pU1@mid.individual.net> |
| In reply to | #598846 |
Am 02.01.2023 um 04:29 schrieb Tom Roberts: > On 1/1/23 8:48 PM, Tom Roberts wrote: >> CO2 does not significantly absorb visible light and shorter >> wavelengths, but it does absorb infrared (IR) light. Since the solar >> spectrum peaks in the visible, most solar energy gets to the ground >> where much of it is absorbed -- that heats the ground and causes the >> radiation of IR. The solar radiation that is reflected by the ground >> mostly goes up through the atmosphere and is radiated into space, so >> it does not heat the earth. But the IR radiated by the ground is >> largely absorbed by the CO2 in the atmosphere, which heats the upper >> atmosphere, which re-radiates more IR [#]. That re-radiated IR bounces >> around in the upper atmosphere; some is radiated out into space (not >> heating the earth), but much of it is radiated down to >> the ground where the process repeats. The net result is that with >> more CO2 in the atmosphere, less IR is radiated into space, so the >> atmosphere and planet are heated more (compared to less CO2). >> >> [#] This re-radiation is essentially isotropic -- the portion going up >> can be absorbed by CO2 and the cycle repeats, or it can escape into >> space. >> >> Note that the glass used in a greenhouse has a similar absorption >> spectrum -- most solar energy comes in, but much of it is absorbed >> inside the greenhouse and in the glass. The result is that the >> greenhouse warms up due to the energy balance of the solar radiation >> that hits it. That is why CO2 is called a "greenhouse gas"; other >> important ones are water vapor and methane. Most of the greenhouses worldwide are made from plastic, which is almost entirely transparent for IR. Therefore, it is very questionable, if the effect called 'greenhouse effect' does actually occur in real greenhouses. But a gas cannot immitate glas, anyhow, because glas has a feature, which no gas can have: glas maintains its form. CO2 on the other hand cannot possibly stop convection (what means: transport of thermal energy by transport of the heated medium). In real green-houses the main effect is not what you wrote, but the prevention of convection by a stable but transparent membrane. It is not particularily important, from which material this shield is made, as long as it is transparent. That's why millions of greenhouses worldwide are made from plastic foils, which is much cheaper than glas. >> The overall energy balance of earth is the difference between two >> truly ENORMOUS amounts of energy: solar energy incoming, and >> radiated energy going into space. Small differences in this balance >> can have large effects on the temperature of the atmosphere and >> planet, and that is what we are seeing over the past half-century or >> so. > > I forgot to mention that as the planet's temperature increases, more > energy is radiated into space for two reasons: a) the total amount of > radiation is increased, and b) the mean wavelength of the radiation > decreases, putting more of it into a transparent band of the atmosphere. Wouldn't increased emission of IR reduce the temperature on the surface of planet Earth? > The incoming solar energy is essentially fixed (on the short term, > <1,000 years). So for any amount of greenhouse gasses in the atmosphere > there will be an equilibrium temperature, but that temperature will > increase when there are more greenhouse gasses present. The temperatur on the surface is not controlled by the composition of the atmosphere, but mainly by sunshine and clouds in the sky. Clouds are in reallity the main entity, which influences the climate, while rare gases may have a little influence at best. But clouds are entirely ignored by 'climate science'. Instead of clouds and their formation, we have longish discussions about a substance, which has no influence on cloud-creation at all. I would therefore suggest, to drop the topic of CO2 entirely and concentrate on the way more important topic'water'. Water is THE main substance in relation to climate and weather and inconceivable more important than CO2. Water is also very abundant on Earth. The water cycle is actually just enormous and has a volume of about 1 km³ per minute. This enormous amount of water is actually, what makes the weather on Earth, while CO2 has almost negliable influence. ... TH
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Tom Roberts <tjoberts137@sbcglobal.net> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2023-01-01 20:29 -0600 |
| Message-ID | <Q4idnSJ9pMXn3C_-nZ2dnZfqlJz9fwAA@giganews.com> |
| In reply to | #598835 |
On 1/1/23 8:02 PM, thor stoneman wrote: > On Sunday, January 1, 2023 at 5:10:09 PM UTC-8, Paul Alsing wrote: > "Radio waves and microwaves; infrared and ultraviolet light; X-rays > and gamma rays: All of these are light, and all of them are made up > of photons." (A joint Fermilab/SLAC publication). > https://www.symmetrymagazine.org/articl ... ound%20you > > This statement does not make any sense since radio waves, microwaves, > X-rays and gamma rays are not emitting light (the stuff that you can > see in the dark). While those EM radiations are not VISIBLE light, they are still modeled using photons, which are the gauge boson of the electromagnetic field. You really should learn something about the subject before attempting to write about it. Tom Roberts
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | whodat <whodaat@void.nowgre.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2023-01-01 19:26 -0600 |
| Message-ID | <k1eq6lFdu4aU1@mid.individual.net> |
| In reply to | #598804 |
On 1/1/2023 5:56 PM, thor stoneman wrote: > On Sunday, January 1, 2023 at 4:21:07 AM UTC-8, whodat wrote: > > Saying radio waves do not expand is patently incorrect. Also, you say that you do not understand the question regarding Faraday's law. I will simplify the question by asking: "is Faraday's induction effect emitting light?" Plus, Einstein's GR (gravity) is based on Maxwell's equations. No attributions or context yields no reply. I do not recall having made such statements directly. Furthermore none of the above sounds like anything I would say. You are playing with yourself in every context possible.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | whodat <whodaat@void.nowgre.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2023-01-01 06:16 -0600 |
| Message-ID | <k1dbtkF72o7U1@mid.individual.net> |
| In reply to | #598753 |
Having read your entire offering I find there is only one appropriate response. BURP! Goodbye. On 1/1/2023 2:28 AM, Thomas Heger wrote: > Am 31.12.2022 um 22:42 schrieb whodat: > >> >> You think???? Am I allowed to draw any conclusions at all, or is that >> reserved for you alone? I conclude you exhibit raging confusion above. >> Several ways, in fact. I am not required to quantify further. > > > > You are responsible for your own activities alone and have to bare the > consequences, if something is illegal. But that is simply not my concern. > >> >> > In that case it would be polite, if you would say, why you think, >> that my statement is wrong and in which aspect. >> >> >> >> If politeness actually worked I would be using it. Even clear insult >> in the reductio ad absurdum genre barely puts a dent into your >> misapprehensions. >> > Politeness is not based on politness on the other side. You are either > polite or you are not. > > I personally could also reply with insults, in case I wanted to do that, > but actually I don't. > > But the UseNet is a tough place and I received thousands of really nasty > replies, which were full of hate and insults. > > So, what shall one do? > > Actually it is a good idea to stay calm, polite and on the topic. > >> >> >>>> Actually we know (as the human race) what sunshine looks like in >> space. >> >> >> >> This I wrote and stand by. Why did you edit out what I was answering? >> > >> > I can quote whatever I want to quote. >> >> > Your statement is still present in the article, which you have >> written. >> >> > But this article is mine and here I can decide, what I like to write >> about. >> >> >> >> And as such I have every right to criticize it as I wish. I did that and >> here you are whining about it. > > Do what you think you should. Your activities are yours and you are > responsible for them, not me. > > But for my activities I'm responsible and you are not. >> >> >> >>> Our usual experience is restricted to the lower atmosphere. >> >> >> Nitpicking. The CDC reports that only 144 out of 100000 die of >> cancer. >> >> Does that make cancer unworthy of consideration? Do you have to >> >> experience cancer to understand it? Or is it sufficient that those >> who >> >> have experienced cancer have reported what that's like? >> > >> > >> > This statement has no obvious connection to the fact, that we humans >> usually do not see sunshine in outer space. >> >> >> Why didn't you say that instead of making the incorrect case that you >> did? This discussion would have taken a different tone had you been >> clear from the beginning. I hasten to add that you are still wrong. > > > I personally think, that sunshine in space is a different type of wave, > which are called 'scalar waves', and that these waves are only converted > into sunshine inside the atmosphere. > > We humans usually do not leave the atmosphere, hence cannot check, > whether or not my claim is correct (or not). > > The picture is therefore: the sun emmits something, that causes sunshine > here on Earth, but isn't sunshine in space. Inbetween Sun and Earth > energy has other forms than what we see here on planet Earth. >> >> >> >> Your real problem appears to be that we have lots of information >> about >> >> how the earth is heated but we don't understand it well enough as >> yet. >> >> >> > Tell this to the IPCC. >> >> >> If this were a legal proceeding my correct response at this point would >> be, "argues facts not in evidence." Are we to guess precisely what that >> comment means because it sure isn't clear as stated. And you do this >> sort of thing all the time. I suspect that you don't know any better, >> and that makes you someone best not to enter into a discussion with. >> > I personally think, that IPCC is the 'head of the snake' and produces > questionable theories, which were created to support something called > 'New World Order' by extracting money from the general public for > 'protection' (against climate change). > > These theories include something commonly called 'andropogenic climate > change by CO2'. > > I regard this theory as propaganda of a self-proclaimed 'elite', which > mocks the general public, while attempting to extract money for 'CO2 > trade'. > > I meant, that CO2 is the wrong stuff and 'CO2 protection' is like > 'barking up the wrong tree'. > > (The real stuff to worry about is water). > > TH > > >
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | "kellehe...@gmail.com" <kelleher.gerald@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2022-12-23 01:59 -0800 |
| Message-ID | <fc6b0133-c9de-41d4-8a54-ce442e7c0a36n@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #598066 |
On Friday, December 23, 2022 at 2:38:21 AM UTC, Paul Alsing wrote: > On Thursday, December 22, 2022 at 2:26:02 PM UTC-8, The Starmaker wrote > > > In California, they'll have warm weather tomorrow... gang wars, and some very overpriced real estate. > > Real estate is only worth what someone is willing to pay for it. There is no such thing as overpriced real estate... He is quoting from Groundhogs Day
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Thomas Heger <ttt_heg@web.de> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2022-12-28 08:10 +0100 |
| Message-ID | <k128g0Fg288U1@mid.individual.net> |
| In reply to | #598066 |
Am 23.12.2022 um 03:38 schrieb Paul Alsing: > On Thursday, December 22, 2022 at 2:26:02 PM UTC-8, The Starmaker wrote > >> In California, they'll have warm weather tomorrow... gang wars, and some very overpriced real estate. > > Real estate is only worth what someone is willing to pay for it. There is no such thing as overpriced real estate... > Well, not quite... In an ideal market you would be right. But real estate markets are dominated by sellers and high demands upon limitted supply. The supply is so limitted, because only a very small portion of the population own most of the land. These wealthy people also control politics. If this would not be the case, then entire new cities could be build somewhere, where there is enough space, to house all the people, who cannot affort San Francisco, for instance. But land owners usually like rising prices, hence do not like expansion of the supply side. This influences the markets by a shortage of living space, which people actually need to survive. Now also the demand side is influenced from the political side, which increase the population by funneling new people into the markets. Another influence is by withdrawing of actually avalible living space from the market, to create shortage on the supply side. The prizes could also be manipulated by selling and buying real estate at very high prizes among the land owners, to create a certain 'prize climate', which the general public could take for real. Therefore, the real estate market is not a real market. TH
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | thor stoneman <consequently7990662@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2022-12-28 11:34 -0800 |
| Message-ID | <1108c881-59a0-49cd-8c10-4645682ae563n@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #598425 |
"Why do you ( carleto4157990662 ) say heat does not escape the earth? Everyday the earth is bathed in sunshine which heats it up." This is why I say that theoretical scientists (physicists) are idiots since what you are spouting comes from their collective decrepit minds. Now, I will give you an example, a snake can catch a small naïve bird by charming them with their beautiful eyes which is want physicists are doing to people like you by charming them into thinking what is wrong is right since they have an underlining bias in that experimental theoretical physics experiments are funded by nuclear energy. Now do not think that you are less smarter than a professor of physics a Harvard, MIT or Princeton since like I said previously they are idiots and since you are responding to this post you are smarter then they are since you have some balls whereas they have none, like playing tennis without tennis balls. You say "Everyday the earth is bathed in sunshine which heats it up." What part of the earth are you talking about? The ocean, the land or the air, it does make a difference which you are not investigating or thinking of since idiots are controlling your thought processes so that they can keep deceiving people and steal your money because if you thought of it more carefully you would realize that the idiots have been playing you as a fool. Do you not always here people say that the general public is stupid but if that were the case then that would mean the elites of this world are also stupid since it goes both ways. Now, you have to understand that making mistakes is the foundation of physics. Everything and I mean everything was discovered by mistake and not by theory. To understand global warming you must understand what is causing heat? Your statement: "Why do you ( carleto4157990662 ) say heat does not escape the earth? Everyday the earth is bathed in sunshine which heats it up." Your statement implies that you do not understand what is causing heat in the atmosphere. ______________________________________________________________________________________________ Secondly, your statement: "Finally the claim that the small quantity of CO2 of approximately .04% in the atmosphere is insufficient to cause the effect claimed for it is just plain wrong." Having a PhD from Harvard, Princeton, MIT or Berkeley does not allow a person to justify a statement by saying it is "plain wrong" since you have to give some reason, old chap. Why would such a small amount of CO2 matter and what about the heat capacity of air. If the earth's atmosphere was trapping excessive heat the heat capacity of the atmosphere would substantial increase. Thank you for post your opinions since I have learn a lot from you.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Thomas Heger <ttt_heg@web.de> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2022-12-29 08:45 +0100 |
| Message-ID | <k14uskFsom3U1@mid.individual.net> |
| In reply to | #598452 |
Am 28.12.2022 um 20:34 schrieb thor stoneman: > "Why do you ( carleto4157990662 ) say heat does not escape the earth? Everyday the earth is bathed in sunshine which heats it up." > > This is why I say that theoretical scientists (physicists) are idiots since what you are spouting comes from their collective decrepit minds. Now, I will give you an example, a snake can catch a small naïve bird by charming them with their beautiful eyes which is want physicists are doing to people like you by charming them into thinking what is wrong is right since they have an underlining bias in that experimental theoretical physics experiments are funded by nuclear energy. > > Now do not think that you are less smarter than a professor of physics a Harvard, MIT or Princeton since like I said previously they are idiots and since you are responding to this post you are smarter then they are since you have some balls whereas they have none, like playing tennis without tennis balls. You say "Everyday the earth is bathed in sunshine which heats it up." What part of the earth are you talking about? The ocean, the land or the air, it does make a difference which you are not investigating or thinking of since idiots are controlling your thought processes so that they can keep deceiving people and steal your money because if you thought of it more carefully you would realize that the idiots have been playing you as a fool. Do you not always here people say that the general public is stupid but if that were the case then that would mean the elites of this world are also stupid since it goes both ways. Now, you have to understand that making mistakes is the found ation of physics. Everything and I mean everything was discovered by mistake and not by theory. > > To understand global warming you must understand what is causing heat? Well, we have sunshine and that is warming up the earth. But the 'mechanics' of sunshine are not well understood, because we ownly know, how sunshine looks like within the atmosphere. How the sun transports energy from the own position to ours, that is a different story. But we could safely exclude, that it would look like sunshine, if seen from a position in space far away from our home planet. I have heard, that sun emmits actually so called scalar waves. And they convert into light and heat in the upper atmosphere. We have also a electro-magnetic connections, which work, as if magnetic circulation would be 'frozen in' into the solar wind. This causes enormous currents around the globe, known as Birkeland currents. And then we have the solar wind, which consists of fast and tiny particles. And last but not least we have also normal light and usual IR-radiation (plus all sorts of other frequencies from the em-spectrum). All this interacts with the atmosphere and the planet itself and by this transports heat from Sun to Earth. TH
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | thor stoneman <consequently7990662@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2022-12-28 11:47 -0800 |
| Message-ID | <36841214-ec88-4a7a-9284-9e0f3aff4077n@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #598425 |
"Climate change has existed since the formation of the earth. Humanity is probably skewing the consequences that find roots in natural events." (whodat https://groups.google.com/g/sci.physics ... Zyx-BOEAFQ) Brilliant think tank deduction Dr Watson, MD...but why are people so scared and concerned? It's like being overweight, a smoker, diabetic and with high blood pressure and your doctor says you are going to die if you do not change your habits and you response by saying that death is a natural event.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | thor stoneman <consequently7990662@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2022-12-28 12:18 -0800 |
| Message-ID | <d2d08f9d-9f4d-422a-808b-6c26d99ae3b8n@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #598453 |
At 12,000 would bitcoin be dead and it will be interesting to see what the corporate exposure to cypto is in the January earning reports.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2022-12-28 12:34 -0800 |
| Message-ID | <63ACA86D.56C4@ix.netcom.com> |
| In reply to | #598425 |
Thomas Heger wrote: > > Am 23.12.2022 um 03:38 schrieb Paul Alsing: > > On Thursday, December 22, 2022 at 2:26:02 PM UTC-8, The Starmaker wrote > > > >> In California, they'll have warm weather tomorrow... gang wars, and some very overpriced real estate. > > > > Real estate is only worth what someone is willing to pay for it. There is no such thing as overpriced real estate... > > > Well, not quite... > > In an ideal market you would be right. But real estate markets are > dominated by sellers and high demands upon limitted supply. > > The supply is so limitted, because only a very small portion of the > population own most of the land. These wealthy people also control politics. > > If this would not be the case, then entire new cities could be build > somewhere, where there is enough space, to house all the people, who > cannot affort San Francisco, for instance. > > But land owners usually like rising prices, hence do not like expansion > of the supply side. > > This influences the markets by a shortage of living space, which people > actually need to survive. > > Now also the demand side is influenced from the political side, which > increase the population by funneling new people into the markets. > > Another influence is by withdrawing of actually avalible living space > from the market, to create shortage on the supply side. > > The prizes could also be manipulated by selling and buying real estate > at very high prizes among the land owners, to create a certain 'prize > climate', which the general public could take for real. > > Therefore, the real estate market is not a real market. > > TH The plan is.. to remove ALL houses from the market in the United States... and in place they plan to build apartment buildings in it's place. In other words, to get rid of all surburban neighborhoods. Then you can add a billion to the population of the United States. Or ten billion.... -- The Starmaker -- To question the unquestionable, ask the unaskable, to think the unthinkable, mention the unmentionable, say the unsayable, and challenge the unchallengeable.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | thor stoneman <consequently7990662@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2022-12-28 13:06 -0800 |
| Message-ID | <948834eb-c3c4-49db-859e-902c75e659b0n@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #598457 |
The dow always falls at the end of the year.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | thor stoneman <consequently7990662@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2022-12-28 15:29 -0800 |
| Message-ID | <3d5aeba8-4004-4106-9029-ed84e6a3f23an@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #598463 |
On Wednesday, December 28, 2022 at 1:06:46 PM UTC-8, thor stoneman wrote: > The dow always falls at the end of the year. Argo Blockchain PLC - ADR went from 12$ to 73 cents.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Santos Anselmetti <ttln@niitstsm.sa> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2022-12-28 23:33 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <toijp5$3654$1@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #598425 |
Thomas Heger wrote: > Am 23.12.2022 um 03:38 schrieb Paul Alsing: >> Real estate is only worth what someone is willing to pay for it. There >> is no such thing as overpriced real estate... >> > Well, not quite... > In an ideal market you would be right. But real estate markets are > dominated by sellers and high demands upon limitted supply. absolutely. Here we go, with some other new proofs. Elon Musk Ousts Fauci: “Gain-of-Function Is Just Another Way of Saying Bioweapon” https://%6e%65%77%73%70%75%6e%63%68.com/elon-musk-ousts-fauci-gain-of-function-is-just-another-way-of-saying-bioweapon/ Zelenskyy Hires Globalist BlackRock CEO Larry Fink To Oversee Ukraine’s Money Laundering Scam https://%6e%65%77%73%70%75%6e%63%68.com/zelenskyy-hires-globalist-blackrock-ceo-larry-fink-to-oversee-ukraines-money-laundering-scam/ Hunting for Russians: How a Ukrainian law firm runs a campaign targeting ordinary people in Western Europe https://%72%74.com/%72%75%73%73%69%61/568508-ukrainian-law-firm-russians/ liars *_english_pigs_* madrafakars,THEY LIED ABOUT EVERYTHING STONEHENGE HOAX HISTORY IS A LIE! https://%62%69%74%63%68%75%74%65.com/%76%69%64%65%6f/Ltg8E5Vxz1Yg cacamerica kills humans premeditated, Big Pharma profits as White House controls COVID narrative https://%62%69%74%63%68%75%74%65.com/%76%69%64%65%6f/xDKRUPdmYb6q Ukrainian Soldiers Execute Prisoners Of War – Admits U.S. Mercenary 12-28-22 The Jimmy Dore Show https://%62%69%74%63%68%75%74%65.com/%76%69%64%65%6f/Q7NyWiFpgGvN
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Sylvia Else <sylvia@email.invalid> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2023-01-05 20:08 +1100 |
| Message-ID | <k1nictF9fioU2@mid.individual.net> |
| In reply to | #597999 |
On 22-Dec-22 9:19 am, carl eto wrote: > > > Climate Change . . The effect of nuclear power on climate change is > analyzed. The fuel of a nuclear plant is uranium that is melted into > cylindrical pellets (1 cm x 1 cm) which are inserted into a 12 ft > hollow steel tube where 226 tubes filled with uranium pellets are > stacked to form a uranium fuel rod (750 lb); 200 uranium fuel rods > (75 tons) are used in a reactor core that fission reaction causes the > fuel rods to radiate heat (400°F) which produces the power of a > nuclear power plants. Every six years the fuel rods are replaced > during the refueling. The used depleted uranium fuel rods are cooled > using cooling pools. The world’s 440 nuclear power plants have an > estimated average of three reactors at each site; consequently, there > are a total of approximately 1,320 nuclear reactors worldwide where > roughly 910 reactors use a once-through cooling system that > discharges thermodynamics pollution directly into the water source. > . “IAEA figures show 45% of nuclear plants use the sea for > once-through cooling, 15% use lakes, 14% rivers, and 26% use cooling > towers.” > https://world-nuclear.org/information-library/current-and-future-generation/cooling-power-plants.aspx > > . > Global warming is said to be caused by the greenhouse effect of CO2 > but the heat capacity of air has not significantly increased in the > last 100 years, and only .04% of the Earth’s atmosphere is composed > of CO2. Climate change is caused by the nuclear power plants' > thermodynamic pollution that is discharged into the rivers, lakes and > oceans since the heat capacity of water is six times greater than the > heat capacity of the Earth's atmosphere (air). Water retains heat six > times longer than the Earth’s atmosphere. In addition, climate change > is exacerbated by the 1.2 million tons of depleted uranium fuel rods > that cooling pools (120°F) are cooling the depleted uranium fuel rods > that heated water is discharged into the water source. A single > active nuclear reactor core contains 75 tons of uranium fuel rods > that are heated to the temperature of 400o F where the depleted > uranium fuel rods are radiating heat at 30% capacity (120°F) in > cooling pools. In the last 50 years, the world’s 1,320 reactors have > produced 1.2 tons of depleted uranium fuel rods > (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Depleted_uranium) which is equivalent > to . . (1.2 x 10^6 tons) x (.3) / 75 tons = 4,800 once-through cooled > nuclear reactors (1) . . operating at 100% capacity > discharging thermodynamic pollution into the rivers, lakes and oceans > which is causing climate change. It is argued that the depleted > uranium fuel rods are stored without using cooling pools in a dry > cask storage system where 37 depleted uranium rods (14 tons) are > stack together and encased in concrete and steel but the uranium fuel > rods were removed from the reactors that were functioning at 40% > capacity just before the refueling; consequently, the 37 depleted > uranium rods within a steel cask would meltdown without a cooling > pool. . “Water circulates through the pool, helping keep the rods > cool and the pool temperature at around 49°C (120°F)……..Without > water, the spent fuel rods would jump in temperature, reaching > 1,000°C, according to NRC and DOE laboratory studies” (J. Johnson). > . Johnson, Jeff. Nuclear Regulatory Commission to reexamine how to > safely store a mountain of radioactive waste for decades to come. > c&en chemical and engineering news. Vol 91, Issue 44. 2013. The incident solar radiation on Earth is about 128 million gigawatts. The total power released by all of Human activity is a minute fraction of that. Raising the temperature of the Earth noticeably by direct heating, including waste heat from nuclear reactors, and from their waste fuel, is beyond human ability. But increasing the amount of incident solar radiation that is trapped by increasing CO2 is clearly not beyond human ability. The idea that nuclear power stations are responsible for global warming is absurd. Sylvia.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | carl eto <ccarleto4157990662@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2023-01-05 16:17 -0800 |
| Message-ID | <b6c33750-92c9-4928-ad89-8f6cde8f74d1n@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #599101 |
> > The idea that nuclear power stations are responsible for global warming > is absurd. > > Sylvia. How much energy is absorbed by Earth's surface? ~50% of the incoming energy is absorbed by the earth's surface i.e. the land and oceans. ~30% is directly reflected back to space by clouds, the earth's surface and different gases and particles in the atmosphere (the earth's albedo is 0.3 on average). ~20% is absorbed by the atmosphere and clouds. -------10% of the sun's energy is absorbed by the atm. which is composed of .05% CO2 and 40% is absorbed by the oceans which has a heat capacity six time that of the atm which is equivalent to 240% of the Sun's energy is absorbed by the oceans. Add the heated water of the once-through cooled nuclear reactors and depleted uranium cooling pools to the ocean temperature equilibrium and walla you get climate change.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Thomas Heger <ttt_heg@web.de> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2023-01-06 08:11 +0100 |
| Message-ID | <k1pvtqFl0ocU1@mid.individual.net> |
| In reply to | #599141 |
Am 06.01.2023 um 01:17 schrieb carl eto: > >> >> The idea that nuclear power stations are responsible for global warming >> is absurd. >> >> Sylvia. > > > How much energy is absorbed by Earth's surface? > > ~50% of the incoming energy is absorbed by the earth's surface i.e. the land and oceans. ~30% is directly reflected back to space by clouds, the earth's surface and different gases and particles in the atmosphere (the earth's albedo is 0.3 on average). ~20% is absorbed by the atmosphere and clouds. > > -------10% of the sun's energy is absorbed by the atm. which is composed of .05% CO2 and 40% is absorbed by the oceans which has a heat capacity six time that of the atm which is equivalent to 240% of the Sun's energy is absorbed by the oceans. Add the heated water of the once-through cooled nuclear reactors and depleted uranium cooling pools to the ocean temperature equilibrium and walla you get climate change. > This goes into the right direction. But you still treate waste heat as a pollutant. But heat distributes and cools down. That is always so, hence should also be the case with waste heat from power plants. Important would be, to figuere out all the complicated mechanisms on Earth and in the atmosphere in detail. This should finally leed to numerical values. The heat from the sun shines upont the Earth, which is mainly covered with oceans. These oceans evaporate this heat again with water vapour. This water-gas is the rising upwards, because vapour is a very light gas. Rising to the dow-point-hight would make water condensate again, what creates clouds. These clouds have now a very large impact on the weather and are the main agent, which controlls the climate. The gases of the atmosphere in transparent phase have much less influence (compared to dust, aerosols and clouds), because they are actually (mostly) transparent. Whether or not rare gases like CO2 have an impact on the climate at all, that would an interesting topic, if that could be proven. But I would concentrate on water primarily and ignore rare gases in the first stage. TH
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | carl eto <ccarleto4157990662@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2023-01-06 11:29 -0800 |
| Message-ID | <03c324c8-e03d-4bc0-a3a8-925f6fcc6237n@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #599161 |
On Thursday, January 5, 2023 at 11:11:59 PM UTC-8, Thomas Heger wrote: In addition, the velocity of light (V) used in Lorentz's transformation (equ 14 - 24) cannot be physically measured. Roemer is accredited as the first to measure the velocity of light but Roemer's calculation of the velocity of light uses the Earth's yearly velocity (equ 1) that cannot be measured from the Earth. Bradley's stellar aberration is used to calculate the velocity of light but Bradley's measurements are within the measurement uncertainty of a pendulum clock that is used in forming Bradley's measurements. Fizeau (1849) measures the velocity of light using a rotating cogwheel but Fizeau's cogwheel is producing a series of light pulses yet to measure the velocity of light requires the time a single light pulse propagates a specific distance that cannot be measured using a rotating cogwheel or Foucault's (1850) rotating mirrors. The wave equation (λf = c) is used to determine the velocity of light but the wave equations is based on an ether that does not exist (vacuum). An oscilloscope is used to measure the velocity of light but the electrons of an oscilloscope are propagating at the velocity of 106 m/s which is two orders less than the velocity of light (108 m/s); consequently, an oscilloscope's electrical circuit cannot be used to determine the velocity of light (V) that is used in Lorentz's transformation.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2023-01-06 11:30 -0800 |
| Message-ID | <63B876D7.215C@ix.netcom.com> |
| In reply to | #599161 |
Thomas Heger wrote: > > Am 06.01.2023 um 01:17 schrieb carl eto: > > > >> > >> The idea that nuclear power stations are responsible for global warming > >> is absurd. > >> > >> Sylvia. > > > > > > How much energy is absorbed by Earth's surface? > > > > ~50% of the incoming energy is absorbed by the earth's surface i.e. the land and oceans. ~30% is directly reflected back to space by clouds, the earth's surface and different gases and particles in the atmosphere (the earth's albedo is 0.3 on average). ~20% is absorbed by the atmosphere and clouds. > > > > -------10% of the sun's energy is absorbed by the atm. which is composed of .05% CO2 and 40% is absorbed by the oceans which has a heat capacity six time that of the atm which is equivalent to 240% of the Sun's energy is absorbed by the oceans. Add the heated water of the once-through cooled nuclear reactors and depleted uranium cooling pools to the ocean temperature equilibrium and walla you get climate change. > > > > This goes into the right direction. But you still treate waste heat as a > pollutant. But heat distributes and cools down. That is always so, hence > should also be the case with waste heat from power plants. > > Important would be, to figuere out all the complicated mechanisms on > Earth and in the atmosphere in detail. This should finally leed to > numerical values. > > The heat from the sun shines upont the Earth, which is mainly covered > with oceans. These oceans evaporate this heat again with water vapour. > > This water-gas is the rising upwards, because vapour is a very light gas. > > Rising to the dow-point-hight would make water condensate again, what > creates clouds. > > These clouds have now a very large impact on the weather and are the > main agent, which controlls the climate. > > The gases of the atmosphere in transparent phase have much less > influence (compared to dust, aerosols and clouds), because they are > actually (mostly) transparent. > > Whether or not rare gases like CO2 have an impact on the climate at all, > that would an interesting topic, if that could be proven. > > But I would concentrate on water primarily and ignore rare gases in the > first stage. > > TH I know dis is beyond the level of most people here (if not all) but there is also electrical air in the clouds that manufacture things like...lightning bolts (towards the ground), trees (a tree delivery system towards the ground), people from the sky and all living creatures. The system is a little complex...you need an IQ of over 10,000 to begin to understand. But the rest of yous can go ahead and believe your ancestors eat bananas in a tree. Oops, i just felt like i fell off a tree! i nodded off for a second. -- The Starmaker -- To question the unquestionable, ask the unaskable, to think the unthinkable, mention the unmentionable, say the unsayable, and challenge the unchallengeable.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2023-01-06 13:21 -0800 |
| Message-ID | <63B890E8.1150@ix.netcom.com> |
| In reply to | #599179 |
The Starmaker wrote: > > Thomas Heger wrote: > > > > Am 06.01.2023 um 01:17 schrieb carl eto: > > > > > >> > > >> The idea that nuclear power stations are responsible for global warming > > >> is absurd. > > >> > > >> Sylvia. > > > > > > > > > How much energy is absorbed by Earth's surface? > > > > > > ~50% of the incoming energy is absorbed by the earth's surface i.e. the land and oceans. ~30% is directly reflected back to space by clouds, the earth's surface and different gases and particles in the atmosphere (the earth's albedo is 0.3 on average). ~20% is absorbed by the atmosphere and clouds. > > > > > > -------10% of the sun's energy is absorbed by the atm. which is composed of .05% CO2 and 40% is absorbed by the oceans which has a heat capacity six time that of the atm which is equivalent to 240% of the Sun's energy is absorbed by the oceans. Add the heated water of the once-through cooled nuclear reactors and depleted uranium cooling pools to the ocean temperature equilibrium and walla you get climate change. > > > > > > > This goes into the right direction. But you still treate waste heat as a > > pollutant. But heat distributes and cools down. That is always so, hence > > should also be the case with waste heat from power plants. > > > > Important would be, to figuere out all the complicated mechanisms on > > Earth and in the atmosphere in detail. This should finally leed to > > numerical values. > > > > The heat from the sun shines upont the Earth, which is mainly covered > > with oceans. These oceans evaporate this heat again with water vapour. > > > > This water-gas is the rising upwards, because vapour is a very light gas. > > > > Rising to the dow-point-hight would make water condensate again, what > > creates clouds. > > > > These clouds have now a very large impact on the weather and are the > > main agent, which controlls the climate. > > > > The gases of the atmosphere in transparent phase have much less > > influence (compared to dust, aerosols and clouds), because they are > > actually (mostly) transparent. > > > > Whether or not rare gases like CO2 have an impact on the climate at all, > > that would an interesting topic, if that could be proven. > > > > But I would concentrate on water primarily and ignore rare gases in the > > first stage. > > > > TH > > I know dis is beyond the level of most people here (if not all) but > there is also electrical air > in the clouds that manufacture things like...lightning bolts (towards > the ground), trees (a tree delivery system towards the ground), > people from the sky and all living creatures. > I mean, *everybody* knows 'trees' don't come from the ground, ...trees come from the air. It's the 'other things' that come from the air dat no one understands...like people. People come from the air under the same system used to deliver trees to the ground. -- The Starmaker -- To question the unquestionable, ask the unaskable, to think the unthinkable, mention the unmentionable, say the unsayable, and challenge the unchallengeable.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
Page 14 of 15 — ← Prev page 1 … 12 13 [14] 15 Next page →
Back to top | Article view | sci.physics.relativity
csiph-web