Re: Isaac Newton was a human being

Newsgroups	sci.physics
Date	2016-04-07 14:36 -0700
References	(8 earlier) <5dbae895-4e2f-4ebd-a99f-db3bf9465d3c@googlegroups.com> <ecb88712-6bc1-4eae-97ab-a3c6ee81b55d@googlegroups.com> <d8114974-0033-4386-b067-fcedcad79878@googlegroups.com> <1047afea-973d-4f80-ae7e-5bc51d911b13@googlegroups.com> <ce1ba831-185f-4e3e-83d1-5a5bb25a917f@googlegroups.com>
Message-ID	<77db4ee8-935e-4ca0-a74f-e57dcd5d0121@googlegroups.com> (permalink)
Subject	Re: Isaac Newton was a human being
From	James McGinn <jimmcginn9@gmail.com>

Show all headers | View raw

On Thursday, April 7, 2016 at 2:14:54 PM UTC-7, pnal...@gmail.com wrote:
> On Thursday, April 7, 2016 at 12:01:15 PM UTC-7, James McGinn wrote:
> > On Thursday, April 7, 2016 at 11:23:52 AM UTC-7, pnal...@gmail.com wrote:
> > > On Tuesday, April 5, 2016 at 9:42:48 PM UTC-7, pnal...@gmail.com wrote:
> > > > On Tuesday, April 5, 2016 at 9:37:11 PM UTC-7, James McGinn wrote:
> > > > > On Tuesday, April 5, 2016 at 9:32:15 PM UTC-7, pnal...@gmail.com wrote:
> > > > > > On Tuesday, April 5, 2016 at 8:13:20 PM UTC-7, James McGinn wrote:
> > > > > > > On Tuesday, April 5, 2016 at 7:25:11 PM UTC-7, pnal...@gmail.com wrote:
> > > > > > > > On Tuesday, April 5, 2016 at 11:09:28 AM UTC-7, James McGinn wrote:
> > > > > > > > > On Tuesday, April 5, 2016 at 10:46:21 AM UTC-7, pnal...@gmail.com wrote:
> > > > > > > > > > On Monday, April 4, 2016 at 11:21:42 PM UTC-7, James McGinn wrote:
> > > > > > > > > > > On Monday, April 4, 2016 at 11:00:38 PM UTC-7, pnal...@gmail.com wrote:
> > > > > > > > > > > > On Monday, April 4, 2016 at 10:55:07 PM UTC-7, James McGinn wrote:
> > > > > > > > > > > > 
> > > > > > > > > > > > > The real number that should be used here is not 18. It is 18 x X, X being the 
> > > > > > > > > > > > > number of H2O molecules in the microdroplet.  What is the correct number for X?   
> > > > > > > > > > > > > Well, the truth is we don't know.  It is, in my opinion, most likely never 
> > > > > > > > > > > > > smaller than 10...
> > > > > > > > > > > > 
> > > > > > > > > > > > Unfortunately, your opinion is not science, and is therefore worthless.
> > > > > > > > > > > > 
> > > > > > > > > > > > Show us your experiment that proves your position. Otherwise, you have nothing...
> > > > > > > > > > > > 
> > > > > > > > > > > > Don't  go claiming that the proff one way or the other is my chore, because clearly it is not. YOU are making the claim, so it is YOU who needs to provide the proof.
> > > > > > > > > > > > 
> > > > > > > > > > > > Good luck!
> > > > > > > > > > > 
> > > > > > > > > > > I agree.  My opinion isn't science.  In fact, no human being's opinion is 
> > > > > > > > > > > science, including that of Isaac Newton.
> > > > > > > > > > > 
> > > > > > > > > > > Now we know what we don't know. 
> > > > > > > > > > 
> > > > > > > > > > You absolutely don't know what you don't know, that is the entire problem!
> > > > > > > > > >  
> > > > > > > > > > > But, of course, there is the fact that all of the laboratory evidence clearly 
> > > > > > > > > > > indicates the boiling temperature/pressure of H2O. And it is a far cry from 
> > > > > > > > > > > that of ambient temperatures/pressures.  So, the burden of proof is on those 
> > > > > > > > > > > that would like to claim that H2O is gaseous at ambient temperature/pressures.
> > > > > > > > > > 
> > > > > > > > > > This is the main thing that you don't know. Water does not need to boil to be in a gaseous state. Ever hear of the dew point, for example? Let's hear your own special definition of this term... this should be illuminating...
> > > > > > > > > 
> > > > > > > > > You are pretty thick if you can't conceptualize the difference between 
> > > > > > > > > a liquid, in which he molecules are very close, touching, and a gas in 
> > > > > > > > > which they are bouncing around knocking off of each other randomly.  
> > > > > > > > > It's hard to believe anybody this dumb would spend much time in a 
> > > > > > > > > science forum.  What is it that draws you here?
> > > > > > > > 
> > > > > > > > So, you can't tell me the definition of Dew Point? I knew you couldn't or wouldn't... 
> > > > > > > > 
> > > > > > > > You are pretty thick if you can't comprehend that water vapor is a gas, common knowledge among chemists and physicists worldwide. 
> > > > > > > > 
> > > > > > > > Since you have zero talent for science in general and chemistry is particular, why are you here at all?
> > > > > > > 
> > > > > > > So . . uh, . . . you just come here to yell at people?
> > > > > > 
> > > > > > I only yell at the Complete Idiots, and you fall into that category nicely. 
> > > > > > 
> > > > > > So, about that Dew Point definition... waddaya got?
> > > > > 
> > > > > Maybe you should find a gentler hobby.
> > > > 
> > > > Dew point? Got anything?
> > > 
> > > Still thinking about the answer?
> > > 
> > > Or, are you just running away?
> > 
> > What was the question?
> 
> Don't be obtuse.
> 
> What is 'your' definition of 'dew point'?
> 
> It must be very different than the normally accepted definition, otherwise you wouldn't be making the claims you do.

Maybe quote me in context.

Thread

Isaac Newton was a human being James McGinn <jimmcginn9@gmail.com> - 2016-04-04 22:55 -0700
  Re: Isaac Newton was a human being pnalsing@gmail.com - 2016-04-04 23:00 -0700
    Re: Isaac Newton was a human being James McGinn <jimmcginn9@gmail.com> - 2016-04-04 23:21 -0700
      Re: Isaac Newton was a human being "Ross A. Finlayson" <ross.finlayson@gmail.com> - 2016-04-04 23:55 -0700
        Re: Isaac Newton was a human being James McGinn <jimmcginn9@gmail.com> - 2016-04-05 08:07 -0700
      Re: Isaac Newton was a human being pnalsing@gmail.com - 2016-04-05 10:46 -0700
        Re: Isaac Newton was a human being James McGinn <jimmcginn9@gmail.com> - 2016-04-05 11:09 -0700
          Re: Isaac Newton was a human being pnalsing@gmail.com - 2016-04-05 19:04 -0700
          Re: Isaac Newton was a human being pnalsing@gmail.com - 2016-04-05 19:25 -0700
            Re: Isaac Newton was a human being James McGinn <jimmcginn9@gmail.com> - 2016-04-05 20:13 -0700
              Re: Isaac Newton was a human being pnalsing@gmail.com - 2016-04-05 21:32 -0700
                Re: Isaac Newton was a human being James McGinn <jimmcginn9@gmail.com> - 2016-04-05 21:37 -0700
                Re: Isaac Newton was a human being pnalsing@gmail.com - 2016-04-05 21:42 -0700
                Re: Isaac Newton was a human being Sergio <invalid@invalid.com> - 2016-04-06 10:06 -0500
                Re: Isaac Newton was a human being pnalsing@gmail.com - 2016-04-07 11:23 -0700
                Re: Isaac Newton was a human being James McGinn <jimmcginn9@gmail.com> - 2016-04-07 12:01 -0700
                Re: Isaac Newton was a human being pnalsing@gmail.com - 2016-04-07 14:14 -0700
                Re: Isaac Newton was a human being James McGinn <jimmcginn9@gmail.com> - 2016-04-07 14:36 -0700
                Re: Isaac Newton was a human being pnalsing@gmail.com - 2016-04-07 15:03 -0700
                Re: Isaac Newton was a human being Solving Tornadoes <solvingtornadoes@gmail.com> - 2016-04-07 15:13 -0700
                Re: Isaac Newton was a human being pnalsing@gmail.com - 2016-04-07 15:34 -0700
                Re: Isaac Newton was a human being Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-04-07 17:51 -0500
                Re: Isaac Newton was a human being Solving Tornadoes <solvingtornadoes@gmail.com> - 2016-04-07 16:03 -0700
                Re: Isaac Newton was a human being pnalsing@gmail.com - 2016-04-07 20:01 -0700
                Re: Isaac Newton was a human being James McGinn <jimmcginn9@gmail.com> - 2016-04-07 20:15 -0700
                Re: Isaac Newton was a human being pnalsing@gmail.com - 2016-04-07 22:11 -0700
                Re: Isaac Newton was a human being James McGinn <jimmcginn9@gmail.com> - 2016-04-07 22:51 -0700
                Re: Isaac Newton was a human being Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-04-08 07:14 -0500
                Re: Isaac Newton was a human being James McGinn <jimmcginn9@gmail.com> - 2016-04-08 06:44 -0700
                Re: Isaac Newton was a human being noTthaTguY <abu.kuanysh05@gmail.com> - 2016-04-08 12:57 -0700
                Re: Isaac Newton was a human being Solving Tornadoes <solvingtornadoes@gmail.com> - 2016-04-07 15:52 -0700
                Re: Isaac Newton was a human being pnalsing@gmail.com - 2016-04-07 20:00 -0700
                Re: Isaac Newton was a human being James McGinn <jimmcginn9@gmail.com> - 2016-04-07 20:14 -0700
                Re: Isaac Newton was a human being pnalsing@gmail.com - 2016-04-07 22:45 -0700
                Re: Isaac Newton was a human being James McGinn <jimmcginn9@gmail.com> - 2016-04-07 22:54 -0700
                Re: Isaac Newton was a human being James McGinn <jimmcginn9@gmail.com> - 2016-04-08 08:07 -0700
                Re: Isaac Newton was a human being pnalsing@gmail.com - 2016-04-08 12:47 -0700
                Re: Isaac Newton was a human being Solving Tornadoes <solvingtornadoes@gmail.com> - 2016-04-08 12:57 -0700
                Re: Isaac Newton was a human being pnalsing@gmail.com - 2016-04-08 14:50 -0700
                Re: Isaac Newton was a human being James McGinn <jimmcginn9@gmail.com> - 2016-04-08 15:28 -0700
                Re: Isaac Newton was a human being pnalsing@gmail.com - 2016-04-08 16:57 -0700
                Re: Isaac Newton was a human being James McGinn <jimmcginn9@gmail.com> - 2016-04-08 17:55 -0700
                Re: Isaac Newton was a human being pnalsing@gmail.com - 2016-04-08 20:17 -0700
                Re: Isaac Newton was a human being James McGinn <jimmcginn9@gmail.com> - 2016-04-08 20:41 -0700
                Re: Isaac Newton was a human being pnalsing@gmail.com - 2016-04-08 22:26 -0700
                Re: Isaac Newton was a human being James McGinn <jimmcginn9@gmail.com> - 2016-04-08 23:57 -0700
                Re: Isaac Newton was a human being James McGinn <jimmcginn9@gmail.com> - 2016-04-09 09:10 -0700
                Re: Isaac Newton was a human being pnalsing@gmail.com - 2016-04-09 11:36 -0700
                Re: Isaac Newton was a human being James McGinn <jimmcginn9@gmail.com> - 2016-04-09 11:46 -0700
                Re: Isaac Newton was a human being pnalsing@gmail.com - 2016-04-09 14:23 -0700
                Re: Isaac Newton was a human being James McGinn <jimmcginn9@gmail.com> - 2016-04-09 17:14 -0700
                Re: Isaac Newton was a human being Friendly Neighborhood Vote Wrangler Emeritus <FNVWe@altusenetkooks.xxx> - 2016-04-10 07:03 +0200
                Re: Isaac Newton was a human being Friendly Neighborhood Vote Wrangler Emeritus <FNVWe@altusenetkooks.xxx> - 2016-04-10 17:51 +0200
                Re: Isaac Newton was a human being James McGinn <jimmcginn9@gmail.com> - 2016-04-09 23:30 -0700
                Re: Isaac Newton was a human being James McGinn <jimmcginn9@gmail.com> - 2016-04-10 16:28 -0700
                Re: Isaac Newton was a human being pnalsing@gmail.com - 2016-04-10 17:12 -0700
                Re: Isaac Newton was a human being James McGinn <jimmcginn9@gmail.com> - 2016-04-10 17:30 -0700
                Re: Isaac Newton was a human being pnalsing@gmail.com - 2016-04-10 17:46 -0700
                Re: Isaac Newton was a human being James McGinn <jimmcginn9@gmail.com> - 2016-04-10 18:26 -0700
                Re: Isaac Newton was a human being pnalsing@gmail.com - 2016-04-10 19:52 -0700
                Re: Isaac Newton was a human being Friendly Neighborhood Vote Wrangler Emeritus <FNVWe@altusenetkooks.xxx> - 2016-04-11 15:53 +0200
                Re: Isaac Newton was a human being "\"Fakey's\" dogwhistle holder living at 5907 Stanton Ave., Pittsburgh, PA (aka Teh Mop  Jockey), socked up as 5907 Stanton Avenue, Pittsburgh, PA 15206-2117" <root@127.0.0.1> - 2016-04-11 10:26 -0400
                Re: Isaac Newton was a human being James McGinn <jimmcginn9@gmail.com> - 2016-04-10 22:36 -0700
                fiG Newton had no theory of light noTthaTguY <abu.kuanysh05@gmail.com> - 2016-04-09 21:31 -0700
                newton had  a false theory of light noTthaTguY <abu.kuanysh05@gmail.com> - 2016-04-11 14:00 -0700
                no theory of light (corpuscular noTthaTguY <abu.kuanysh05@gmail.com> - 2016-04-06 07:56 -0700
  Re: Isaac Newton was a human being Lu Wei <luweitest@address.invalid> - 2016-04-05 15:41 +0800
    Re: Isaac Newton was a human being James McGinn <jimmcginn9@gmail.com> - 2016-04-05 02:38 -0700
    Re: Isaac Newton was a human being Sergio <invalid@invalid.com> - 2016-04-05 09:44 -0500
      Re: Isaac Newton was a human being James McGinn <jimmcginn9@gmail.com> - 2016-04-05 08:17 -0700
  Re: Isaac Newton was a human being James McGinn <jimmcginn9@gmail.com> - 2016-04-05 10:08 -0700
  Re: Isaac Newton was a human being noTthaTguY <abu.kuanysh05@gmail.com> - 2016-04-05 12:14 -0700

csiph-web