Re: the convection model is meaningless pseudoscience

Path	csiph.com!eternal-september.org!feeder.eternal-september.org!mx02.eternal-september.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail
From	jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com
Newsgroups	sci.physics
Subject	Re: the convection model is meaningless pseudoscience
Date	Fri, 26 Feb 2016 23:06:57 -0000
Organization	A noiseless patient Spider
Lines	22
Sender	Jim Pennino <jimp@mail.specsol.com>
Message-ID	<hd27qc-qka.ln1@mail.specsol.com> (permalink)
References	<8ea32550-e566-4b09-8c23-a9efe1df5c0d@googlegroups.com> <naog11$1oo5$1@gioia.aioe.org> <6eea65ae-c8b6-403f-a9c7-a64a5c59bf47@googlegroups.com>
Injection-Info	mx02.eternal-september.org; posting-host="db4120ef82bbc153014637d4cd15a795"; logging-data="7848"; mail-complaints-to="abuse@eternal-september.org"; posting-account="U2FsdGVkX1/gANOIChJeSJX4XdnYQ01F"
User-Agent	tin/2.2.1-20140504 ("Tober an Righ") (UNIX) (SunOS/5.10 (i86pc))
Cancel-Lock	sha1:f0GMipxNCo2QbazNd8UxBx0Swm0=
Xref	csiph.com sci.physics:557068

Show key headers only | View raw

James McGinn <jimmcginn9@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Thursday, February 25, 2016 at 7:15:50 PM UTC-8, Sergio wrote:
>> On 2/25/2016 8:16 PM, James McGinn wrote:
> 
>> > The convection model is vague.  The observation that warm,
>> > moist air stays along the surface and does not constantly rush up
>> > through the cool, dry air above IS evidence.
>> 
>> that is a lie.
> 
> Where is your argument, shirt boy?
> 
> This simple observation refutes the convection model.

What simple observation?

Do you mean the one with Schlieren imaging where one can see convection
in real time showing warm air goes up and cold air goes down?


-- 
Jim Pennino

Thread

the convection model is meaningless pseudoscience James McGinn <jimmcginn9@gmail.com> - 2016-02-25 18:16 -0800
  Re: the convection model is meaningless pseudoscience Sam Wormley <swormley1@gmail.com> - 2016-02-25 20:33 -0600
    Re: the convection model is meaningless pseudoscience James McGinn <jimmcginn9@gmail.com> - 2016-02-25 23:53 -0800
      Re: the convection model is meaningless pseudoscience Sam Wormley <swormley1@gmail.com> - 2016-02-26 08:29 -0600
        Re: the convection model is meaningless pseudoscience James McGinn <jimmcginn9@gmail.com> - 2016-02-26 09:50 -0800
          Re: the convection model is meaningless pseudoscience Sam Wormley <swormley1@gmail.com> - 2016-02-26 12:44 -0600
            Re: the convection model is meaningless pseudoscience James McGinn <jimmcginn9@gmail.com> - 2016-02-26 11:01 -0800
              Re: the convection model is meaningless pseudoscience Sergio <invalid@invalid.com> - 2016-02-26 13:07 -0600
              Re: the convection model is meaningless pseudoscience Sam Wormley <swormley1@gmail.com> - 2016-02-26 13:11 -0600
                Re: the convection model is meaningless pseudoscience James McGinn <jimmcginn9@gmail.com> - 2016-02-26 11:15 -0800
                Re: the convection model is meaningless pseudoscience Sam Wormley <swormley1@gmail.com> - 2016-02-26 13:25 -0600
                Re: the convection model is meaningless pseudoscience jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2016-02-26 19:33 +0000
                Re: the convection model is meaningless pseudoscience James McGinn <jimmcginn9@gmail.com> - 2016-02-26 11:48 -0800
                Re: the convection model is meaningless pseudoscience Sam Wormley <swormley1@gmail.com> - 2016-02-26 14:03 -0600
                Re: the convection model is meaningless pseudoscience jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2016-02-26 20:39 +0000
                Re: the convection model is meaningless pseudoscience Sergio <invalid@invalid.com> - 2016-02-26 18:27 -0600
      Re: the convection model is meaningless pseudoscience HVAC <mr.hvac@gmail.com> - 2016-02-26 06:45 -0800
        Re: the convection model is meaningless pseudoscience benj <nobody@gmail.com> - 2016-02-26 13:57 -0500
    Re: the convection model is meaningless pseudoscience HVAC <mr.hvac@gmail.com> - 2016-02-26 06:43 -0800
      Re: the convection model is meaningless pseudoscience Sergio <invalid@invalid.com> - 2016-02-26 12:52 -0600
  Re: the convection model is meaningless pseudoscience Sergio <invalid@invalid.com> - 2016-02-25 21:15 -0600
    Re: the convection model is meaningless pseudoscience James McGinn <jimmcginn9@gmail.com> - 2016-02-26 14:59 -0800
      Re: the convection model is meaningless pseudoscience Sam Wormley <swormley1@gmail.com> - 2016-02-26 17:04 -0600
      Re: the convection model is meaningless pseudoscience jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2016-02-26 23:06 +0000
        Re: the convection model is meaningless pseudoscience James McGinn <jimmcginn9@gmail.com> - 2016-02-26 15:27 -0800
          Re: the convection model is meaningless pseudoscience jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2016-02-26 23:40 +0000
  Re: the convection model is meaningless pseudoscience jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2016-02-26 03:13 +0000
    Re: the convection model is meaningless pseudoscience noTthaTguY <abu.kuanysh05@gmail.com> - 2016-02-26 12:09 -0800

csiph-web