Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]


Groups > sci.physics > #546306 > unrolled thread

Why Meteorologists Won't Talk About "Cold Steam"

Started byJames McGinn <jimmcginn9@gmail.com>
First post2016-01-18 12:45 -0800
Last post2016-01-26 10:44 -0600
Articles 20 on this page of 130 — 17 participants

Back to article view | Back to sci.physics


Contents

  Why Meteorologists Won't Talk About "Cold Steam" James McGinn <jimmcginn9@gmail.com> - 2016-01-18 12:45 -0800
    Re: Why Meteorologists Won't Talk About "Cold Steam" Sergio <invalid@invalid.com> - 2016-01-18 16:38 -0600
      Re: Why Meteorologists Won't Talk About "Cold Steam" Poutnik <Poutnik4NNTP@gmail.com> - 2016-01-19 10:31 +0100
    Re: Why Meteorologists Won't Talk About "Cold Steam" jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2016-01-18 23:01 +0000
      Re: Why Meteorologists Won't Talk About "Cold Steam" "Ross A. Finlayson" <ross.finlayson@gmail.com> - 2016-01-21 19:48 -0800
        Re: Why Meteorologists Won't Talk About "Cold Steam" James McGinn <jimmcginn9@gmail.com> - 2016-01-21 23:01 -0800
          Re: Why Meteorologists Won't Talk About "Cold Steam" Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-01-22 07:08 -0600
            Re: Why Meteorologists Won't Talk About "Cold Steam" HVAC <mr.hvac@gmail.com> - 2016-01-22 05:42 -0800
              Re: Why Meteorologists Won't Talk About "Cold Steam" Sergio <invalid@invalid.com> - 2016-01-22 08:23 -0600
                Re: Why Meteorologists Won't Talk About "Cold Steam" James McGinn <jimmcginn9@gmail.com> - 2016-01-22 08:18 -0800
                  Re: Why Meteorologists Won't Talk About "Cold Steam" Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-01-22 10:23 -0600
                    Re: Why Meteorologists Won't Talk About "Cold Steam" James McGinn <jimmcginn9@gmail.com> - 2016-01-22 08:30 -0800
                      Re: Why Meteorologists Won't Talk About "Cold Steam" Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-01-22 10:37 -0600
                        Re: Why Meteorologists Won't Talk About "Cold Steam" James McGinn <jimmcginn9@gmail.com> - 2016-01-22 08:53 -0800
                          Re: Why Meteorologists Won't Talk About "Cold Steam" Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-01-22 11:07 -0600
                            Re: Why Meteorologists Won't Talk About "Cold Steam" James McGinn <jimmcginn9@gmail.com> - 2016-01-22 10:05 -0800
                              Re: Why Meteorologists Won't Talk About "Cold Steam" Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-01-22 12:29 -0600
                                Re: Why Meteorologists Won't Talk About "Cold Steam" James McGinn <jimmcginn9@gmail.com> - 2016-01-22 10:41 -0800
                                  Re: Why Meteorologists Won't Talk About "Cold Steam" Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-01-23 12:02 -0600
                                    Re: Why Meteorologists Won't Talk About "Cold Steam" Solving Tornadoes <solvingtornadoes@gmail.com> - 2016-01-23 10:36 -0800
                                      Re: Why Meteorologists Won't Talk About "Cold Steam" Sergio <invalid@invalid.com> - 2016-01-23 13:42 -0600
                                      Re: Why Meteorologists Won't Talk About "Cold Steam" Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-01-25 09:11 -0600
                                        Re: Why Meteorologists Won't Talk About "Cold Steam" claudiusdenk@gmail.com - 2016-01-25 11:50 -0800
                                          Re: Why Meteorologists Won't Talk About "Cold Steam" Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-01-25 16:37 -0600
                                            Re: Why Meteorologists Won't Talk About "Cold Steam" James McGinn <jimmcginn9@gmail.com> - 2016-01-25 15:16 -0800
                                              Re: Why Meteorologists Won't Talk About "Cold Steam" HVAC <mr.hvac@gmail.com> - 2016-01-26 06:24 -0800
                                                Re: Why Meteorologists Won't Talk About "Cold Steam" Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-01-26 08:36 -0600
                                                Re: Why Meteorologists Won't Talk About "Cold Steam" benj <none@gmail.com> - 2016-01-26 14:20 -0500
                                    Re: Why Meteorologists Won't Talk About "Cold Steam" James McGinn <jimmcginn9@gmail.com> - 2016-01-23 13:35 -0800
                                      Re: Why Meteorologists Won't Talk About "Cold Steam" Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-01-25 09:51 -0600
                                        Re: Why Meteorologists Won't Talk About "Cold Steam" claudiusdenk@gmail.com - 2016-01-25 11:55 -0800
                                          Re: Why Meteorologists Won't Talk About "Cold Steam" Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-01-25 16:39 -0600
                                            Re: Why Meteorologists Won't Talk About "Cold Steam" James McGinn <jimmcginn9@gmail.com> - 2016-01-25 15:18 -0800
                                              Re: Why Meteorologists Won't Talk About "Cold Steam" Sergio <invalid@invalid.com> - 2016-01-26 10:40 -0600
                    Re: Why Meteorologists Won't Talk About "Cold Steam" James McGinn <jimmcginn9@gmail.com> - 2016-01-22 08:46 -0800
                      Re: Why Meteorologists Won't Talk About "Cold Steam" Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-01-22 11:05 -0600
                        Re: Why Meteorologists Won't Talk About "Cold Steam" James McGinn <jimmcginn9@gmail.com> - 2016-01-22 10:03 -0800
                          Re: Why Meteorologists Won't Talk About "Cold Steam" Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-01-22 12:04 -0600
                            Re: Why Meteorologists Won't Talk About "Cold Steam" James McGinn <jimmcginn9@gmail.com> - 2016-01-22 10:15 -0800
                              Re: Why Meteorologists Won't Talk About "Cold Steam" Poutnik <poutnik4nntp@gmail.com> - 2016-01-24 17:31 +0100
                              Re: Why Meteorologists Won't Talk About "Cold Steam" Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-01-25 08:52 -0600
                                Re: Why Meteorologists Won't Talk About "Cold Steam" James McGinn <jimmcginn9@gmail.com> - 2016-01-25 11:33 -0800
                                  Re: Why Meteorologists Won't Talk About "Cold Steam" Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-01-25 13:39 -0600
                                    Re: Why Meteorologists Won't Talk About "Cold Steam" claudiusdenk@gmail.com - 2016-01-25 12:04 -0800
                                      Re: Why Meteorologists Won't Talk About "Cold Steam" Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-01-25 16:43 -0600
                                        Re: Why Meteorologists Won't Talk About "Cold Steam" James McGinn <jimmcginn9@gmail.com> - 2016-01-25 15:31 -0800
                                          Re: Why Meteorologists Won't Talk About "Cold Steam" Sergio <invalid@invalid.com> - 2016-01-26 10:42 -0600
                                    Re: Why Meteorologists Won't Talk About "Cold Steam" James McGinn <jimmcginn9@gmail.com> - 2016-01-25 13:28 -0800
                                      Re: Why Meteorologists Won't Talk About "Cold Steam" Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-01-25 16:46 -0600
                                        Re: Why Meteorologists Won't Talk About "Cold Steam" James McGinn <jimmcginn9@gmail.com> - 2016-01-25 15:33 -0800
                          Re: Why Meteorologists Won't Talk About "Cold Steam" Sylvia Else <sylvia@not.at.this.address> - 2016-01-24 20:00 +1100
                            Re: Why Meteorologists Won't Talk About "Cold Steam" James McGinn <jimmcginn9@gmail.com> - 2016-01-24 01:08 -0800
                              Re: Why Meteorologists Won't Talk About "Cold Steam" Poutnik <poutnik4nntp@gmail.com> - 2016-01-24 17:22 +0100
                                Re: Why Meteorologists Won't Talk About "Cold Steam" James McGinn <jimmcginn9@gmail.com> - 2016-01-24 11:14 -0800
                                  Re: Why Meteorologists Won't Talk About "Cold Steam" Sergio <invalid@invalid.com> - 2016-01-25 10:45 -0600
                                  Re: Why Meteorologists Won't Talk About "Cold Steam" Sylvia Else <sylvia@not.at.this.address> - 2016-01-26 11:40 +1100
                                    Re: Why Meteorologists Won't Talk About "Cold Steam" James McGinn <jimmcginn9@gmail.com> - 2016-01-25 17:34 -0800
                                      Re: Why Meteorologists Won't Talk About "Cold Steam" Sylvia Else <sylvia@not.at.this.address> - 2016-01-26 13:03 +1100
                                        Re: Why Meteorologists Won't Talk About "Cold Steam" James McGinn <jimmcginn9@gmail.com> - 2016-01-25 18:18 -0800
                                          Re: Why Meteorologists Won't Talk About "Cold Steam" Sylvia Else <sylvia@not.at.this.address> - 2016-01-26 14:28 +1100
                                          Re: Why Meteorologists Won't Talk About "Cold Steam" Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-01-26 07:28 -0600
                                            Re: Why Meteorologists Won't Talk About "Cold Steam" James McGinn <jimmcginn9@gmail.com> - 2016-01-26 09:32 -0800
                                              Re: Why Meteorologists Won't Talk About "Cold Steam" Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-01-26 12:07 -0600
                                                Re: Why Meteorologists Won't Talk About "Cold Steam" James McGinn <jimmcginn9@gmail.com> - 2016-01-26 10:18 -0800
                                                  Re: Why Meteorologists Won't Talk About "Cold Steam" Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-01-26 12:55 -0600
                                                    Re: Why Meteorologists Won't Talk About "Cold Steam" Solving Tornadoes <solvingtornadoes@gmail.com> - 2016-01-26 11:29 -0800
                                                  Re: Why Meteorologists Won't Talk About "Cold Steam" James McGinn <jimmcginn9@gmail.com> - 2016-02-01 07:01 -0800
                                                Re: Why Meteorologists Won't Talk About "Cold Steam" Solving Tornadoes <solvingtornadoes@gmail.com> - 2016-01-28 10:02 -0800
                    Re: Why Meteorologists Won't Talk About "Cold Steam" Poutnik <poutnik4nntp@gmail.com> - 2016-01-24 17:05 +0100
                      Re: Why Meteorologists Won't Talk About "Cold Steam" James McGinn <jimmcginn9@gmail.com> - 2016-01-24 11:16 -0800
                        Re: Why Meteorologists Won't Talk About "Cold Steam" Sergio <invalid@invalid.com> - 2016-01-25 10:48 -0600
                      Re: Why Meteorologists Won't Talk About "Cold Steam" Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-01-25 10:39 -0600
                        Re: Why Meteorologists Won't Talk About "Cold Steam" claudiusdenk@gmail.com - 2016-01-25 12:00 -0800
                          Re: Why Meteorologists Won't Talk About "Cold Steam" Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-01-25 16:40 -0600
                            Re: Why Meteorologists Won't Talk About "Cold Steam" James McGinn <jimmcginn9@gmail.com> - 2016-01-25 15:22 -0800
                              Re: Why Meteorologists Won't Talk About "Cold Steam" Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-01-26 07:10 -0600
                                Re: Why Meteorologists Won't Talk About "Cold Steam" James McGinn <jimmcginn9@gmail.com> - 2016-01-26 09:31 -0800
                                  Re: Why Meteorologists Won't Talk About "Cold Steam" Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-01-26 12:00 -0600
                                    Re: Why Meteorologists Won't Talk About "Cold Steam" James McGinn <jimmcginn9@gmail.com> - 2016-01-26 10:10 -0800
                                      Re: Why Meteorologists Won't Talk About "Cold Steam" Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-01-26 12:11 -0600
                                        Re: Why Meteorologists Won't Talk About "Cold Steam" James McGinn <jimmcginn9@gmail.com> - 2016-01-26 10:24 -0800
                            Re: Why Meteorologists Won't Talk About "Cold Steam" James McGinn <jimmcginn9@gmail.com> - 2016-01-25 16:22 -0800
                              Re: Why Meteorologists Won't Talk About "Cold Steam" Sylvia Else <sylvia@not.at.this.address> - 2016-01-26 13:05 +1100
                                Re: Why Meteorologists Won't Talk About "Cold Steam" James McGinn <jimmcginn9@gmail.com> - 2016-01-25 18:20 -0800
                                  Re: Why Meteorologists Won't Talk About "Cold Steam" Sergio <invalid@invalid.com> - 2016-01-26 10:42 -0600
                              Re: Why Meteorologists Won't Talk About "Cold Steam" Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-01-26 07:26 -0600
                        Re: Why Meteorologists Won't Talk About "Cold Steam" James McGinn <jimmcginn9@gmail.com> - 2016-01-25 13:31 -0800
                  Re: Why Meteorologists Won't Talk About "Cold Steam" Sergio <invalid@invalid.com> - 2016-01-22 12:42 -0600
                    Re: Why Meteorologists Won't Talk About "Cold Steam" James McGinn <jimmcginn9@gmail.com> - 2016-01-22 10:52 -0800
                      Re: Why Meteorologists Won't Talk About "Cold Steam" Lawrence Senreich <lawest@galaxyredeems.org> - 2016-01-22 18:59 +0000
                        Re: Why Meteorologists Won't Talk About "Cold Steam" James McGinn <jimmcginn9@gmail.com> - 2016-01-22 11:08 -0800
                          Re: Why Meteorologists Won't Talk About "Cold Steam" Sergio <invalid@invalid.com> - 2016-01-22 14:35 -0600
                        Re: Why Meteorologists Won't Talk About "Cold Steam" Poutnik <poutnik4nntp@gmail.com> - 2016-01-22 20:54 +0100
                          Re: Why Meteorologists Won't Talk About "Cold Steam" Lawrence Senreich <lawest@galaxyredeems.org> - 2016-01-23 13:28 +0000
                            Re: Why Meteorologists Won't Talk About "Cold Steam" Poutnik <poutnik4nntp@gmail.com> - 2016-01-24 08:33 +0100
                              Re: Why Meteorologists Won't Talk About "Cold Steam" James McGinn <jimmcginn9@gmail.com> - 2016-01-24 00:18 -0800
                            Re: Why Meteorologists Won't Talk About "Cold Steam" Poutnik <poutnik4nntp@gmail.com> - 2016-01-24 08:48 +0100
                              Re: Why Meteorologists Won't Talk About "Cold Steam" James McGinn <jimmcginn9@gmail.com> - 2016-01-24 00:27 -0800
                                Re: Why Meteorologists Won't Talk About "Cold Steam" Sergio <invalid@invalid.com> - 2016-01-25 10:49 -0600
                              Re: Why Meteorologists Won't Talk About "Cold Steam" Rebecca Ochsenknecht <rebeoch@stritzelhassel.net> - 2016-01-24 12:27 +0000
                                Re: Why Meteorologists Won't Talk About "Cold Steam" Poutnik <poutnik4nntp@gmail.com> - 2016-01-24 16:29 +0100
                                  Re: Why Meteorologists Won't Talk About "Cold Steam" Rebecca Ochsenknecht <rebeoch@stritzelhassel.net> - 2016-01-24 15:54 +0000
                                Re: Why Meteorologists Won't Talk About "Cold Steam" "Paul B. Andersen" <relativity@paulba.no> - 2016-01-25 20:12 +0100
                      Re: Why Meteorologists Won't Talk About "Cold Steam" Sergio <invalid@invalid.com> - 2016-01-22 13:03 -0600
                        Re: Why Meteorologists Won't Talk About "Cold Steam" James McGinn <jimmcginn9@gmail.com> - 2016-01-22 11:09 -0800
                          Re: Why Meteorologists Won't Talk About "Cold Steam" Sergio <invalid@invalid.com> - 2016-01-22 14:33 -0600
                            Re: Why Meteorologists Won't Talk About "Cold Steam" James McGinn <jimmcginn9@gmail.com> - 2016-01-22 12:54 -0800
                  Re: Why Meteorologists Won't Talk About "Cold Steam" James McGinn <jimmcginn9@gmail.com> - 2016-01-22 18:29 -0800
              Re: Why Meteorologists Won't Talk About "Cold Steam" benj <none@gmail.com> - 2016-01-22 13:42 -0500
          Re: Why Meteorologists Won't Talk About "Cold Steam" Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-01-22 08:11 -0600
        Re: Why Meteorologists Won't Talk About "Cold Steam" Poutnik <poutnik4nntp@gmail.com> - 2016-01-22 09:13 +0100
          Re: Why Meteorologists Won't Talk About "Cold Steam" James McGinn <jimmcginn9@gmail.com> - 2016-01-22 00:35 -0800
            Re: Why Meteorologists Won't Talk About "Cold Steam" Sergio <invalid@invalid.com> - 2016-01-22 07:38 -0600
    Why Meteorologists Won't Talk About "Cold Steam" HVAC <mr.hvac@gmail.com> - 2016-01-19 04:18 -0800
      Re: Why Meteorologists Won't Talk About "Cold Steam" benj <none@gmail.com> - 2016-01-19 18:09 -0500
        Re: Why Meteorologists Won't Talk About "Cold Steam" "hanson" <hanson@quick.net> - 2016-01-19 16:44 -0800
          Re: Why Meteorologists Won't Talk About "Cold Steam" Solving Tornadoes <solvingtornadoes@gmail.com> - 2016-01-21 19:26 -0800
            Re: Why Meteorologists Won't Talk About "Cold Steam" Sergio <invalid@invalid.com> - 2016-01-22 07:41 -0600
    Re: Why Meteorologists Won't Talk About "Cold Steam" Sylvia Else <sylvia@not.at.this.address> - 2016-01-23 13:41 +1100
      Re: Why Meteorologists Won't Talk About "Cold Steam" James McGinn <jimmcginn9@gmail.com> - 2016-01-22 19:34 -0800
        Re: Why Meteorologists Won't Talk About "Cold Steam" Sylvia Else <sylvia@not.at.this.address> - 2016-01-23 16:33 +1100
          Re: Why Meteorologists Won't Talk About "Cold Steam" James McGinn <jimmcginn9@gmail.com> - 2016-01-22 21:36 -0800
            Re: Why Meteorologists Won't Talk About "Cold Steam" HVAC <mr.hvac@gmail.com> - 2016-01-23 04:12 -0800
              Re: Why Meteorologists Won't Talk About "Cold Steam" benj <none@gmail.com> - 2016-01-23 10:25 -0500
    Re: Why Meteorologists Won't Talk About "Cold Steam" Sylvia Else <sylvia@not.at.this.address> - 2016-01-26 14:31 +1100
      Re: Why Meteorologists Won't Talk About "Cold Steam" R Kym Horsell <kym@kymhorsell.com> - 2016-01-26 04:46 +0000
        Re: Why Meteorologists Won't Talk About "Cold Steam" James McGinn <jimmcginn9@gmail.com> - 2016-01-25 21:53 -0800
          Re: Why Meteorologists Won't Talk About "Cold Steam" Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-01-26 07:31 -0600
      Re: Why Meteorologists Won't Talk About "Cold Steam" James McGinn <jimmcginn9@gmail.com> - 2016-01-25 21:05 -0800
        Re: Why Meteorologists Won't Talk About "Cold Steam" Sergio <invalid@invalid.com> - 2016-01-26 10:44 -0600

Page 6 of 7 — ← Prev page 1 2 3 4 5 [6] 7  Next page →


#547785

FromPoutnik <poutnik4nntp@gmail.com>
Date2016-01-24 16:29 +0100
Message-ID<n82qg6$79c$1@dont-email.me>
In reply to#547760
Dne 24/01/2016 v 13:27 Rebecca Ochsenknecht napsal(a):
> Poutnik wrote:
> 
>>>>> Does not matter the temperature and pressure, but the saturation of
>>>>> the surrounding environment, say air. If the humidity is 100% then no
>>>>> evaporations takes place. Otherwise always.
>>>>>
>>>> It is not related to environment saturation.
>>>> It is not attribute of air, but of water itself.
>>>
>>> So you mean that humidity can go above those 100%.
>>
>> If there is maintained equilibrium between liquid and gaseous phase,
>> the relative humidity does not go above 100%.
> 
> Otherwise it will? I can see you are not afraid of being called stupid. Go 
> back and do research in sci.physics.research, a place where nobody ever 
> will call you stupid.
> 

Otherwise it can and it does so,
as used routinely if fog chambers of particle physics.

Being stupid stays with you,
along with your name shifting.

-- 
Poutnik ( the Czech word for a wanderer )

Knowledge makes great men humble, but small men arrogant.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]


#547789

FromRebecca Ochsenknecht <rebeoch@stritzelhassel.net>
Date2016-01-24 15:54 +0000
Message-ID<n82s2q$1jjj$1@gioia.aioe.org>
In reply to#547785
Poutnik wrote:

>> Otherwise it will? I can see you are not afraid of being called stupid.
>> Go back and do research in sci.physics.research, a place where nobody
>> ever will call you stupid.
> 
> Otherwise it can and it does so, as used routinely if fog chambers of
> particle physics.

Will your wet clothes still by drying in 100% humidity? Yes?

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]


#548051

From"Paul B. Andersen" <relativity@paulba.no>
Date2016-01-25 20:12 +0100
Message-ID<n85s37$4vf$3@news.albasani.net>
In reply to#547760
On 24.01.2016 13:27, Rebecca Ochsenknecht wrote:
 > []

It doesn't help to change your name,
the trolling idiot is recognized anyway.

plonk


-- 
Paul

https://paulba.no/

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]


#547271

FromSergio <invalid@invalid.com>
Date2016-01-22 13:03 -0600
Message-ID<n7tugv$1erl$1@gioia.aioe.org>
In reply to#547254
On 1/22/2016 12:52 PM, James McGinn wrote:
> On Friday, January 22, 2016 at 10:43:38 AM UTC-8, Sergio wrote:
>>> At what temperature does water turn to gas?
>>
>> at what pressure?
>
> I'll leave that up to you.
>

I understand you do not believe in "pressure", it is obvious in what you 
post.   You missed out on "density" as well.

With these two fundamental metrics missing from your background, and 
from your posts/blogs, no wonder your theories are simple, and 
self-disproving. Any scientist knows "density" and "pressure".

wiki "pressure cooker"

tires have "pressure" in them.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]


#547276

FromJames McGinn <jimmcginn9@gmail.com>
Date2016-01-22 11:09 -0800
Message-ID<a7036131-38e0-444c-b830-95efc8e8b86c@googlegroups.com>
In reply to#547271
On Friday, January 22, 2016 at 11:05:09 AM UTC-8, Sergio wrote:

> I understand you do not believe in "pressure", 

I do.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]


#547295

FromSergio <invalid@invalid.com>
Date2016-01-22 14:33 -0600
Message-ID<n7u3p8$1u2n$1@gioia.aioe.org>
In reply to#547276
On 1/22/2016 1:09 PM, James McGinn wrote:
> On Friday, January 22, 2016 at 11:05:09 AM UTC-8, Sergio wrote:
>
>> I understand you do not believe in "pressure",
>
> I do.
>

you have never mentioned "pressure" before in your posts or writing.
is that a parameter in you theories ?

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]


#547299

FromJames McGinn <jimmcginn9@gmail.com>
Date2016-01-22 12:54 -0800
Message-ID<0c973c5c-64e0-4fc9-b9ea-810d63db214b@googlegroups.com>
In reply to#547295
On Friday, January 22, 2016 at 12:34:56 PM UTC-8, Sergio wrote:
> On 1/22/2016 1:09 PM, James McGinn wrote:
> > On Friday, January 22, 2016 at 11:05:09 AM UTC-8, Sergio wrote:
> >
> >> I understand you do not believe in "pressure",
> >
> > I do.
> >
> 
> you have never mentioned "pressure" before in your posts or writing.
> is that a parameter in you theories ?

implicity, yes.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]


#547380

FromJames McGinn <jimmcginn9@gmail.com>
Date2016-01-22 18:29 -0800
Message-ID<14e7fdaa-1b2e-40cd-903d-3654c2fd76f5@googlegroups.com>
In reply to#547203
On Friday, January 22, 2016 at 8:18:52 AM UTC-8, James McGinn wrote:

> What do you think the term, "gaseous phase," means?
> 
> At what temperature does water turn to gas?
> 
> At what temperature does evaporation generally take place?

Okay.  Here are the answers:

Gaseous means the individual water molecules are not bonded to each other.  Each molecule of H2O in gaseous H2O is independent.  

Water only becomes a gas above boiling temperature/pressure of H2O, 100C 212F at 1 ATM, as clearly indicated in steam tables. There is no place in Earth's atmosphere where the temperature is hot enough or the pressure is low enough to produce gaseous H2O.  Consequently there is zero gaseous H2O in earth's atmosphere, it is all evaporate (vapor). One common misconception is that moist air that is clear is gaseous.  This isn't true.  Again, there is no gaseous H2O in earth's atmosphere, it is all evaporate (vapor).  The reason it is often invisible is because H2O's unusually high surface tension allow it to form into droplet/clusters that are so small they are invisible.


Evaporation (and/or sublimation).  Can take place anywhere from 99 degrees Celsius all the way down to its triple point temperature, which is very low.  But evaporation does not produce gaseous H2O, as described above it produces evaporate (vapor).

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]


#547242

Frombenj <none@gmail.com>
Date2016-01-22 13:42 -0500
Message-ID<7Kuoy.187377$8V1.167901@fx28.iad>
In reply to#547173
On 01/22/2016 08:42 AM, HVAC wrote:
> I think professor Wormley should post an article on the difference between evaporation and boiling.
>
> There is obviously much confusion on this subject.
>
> I would do it myself except for 2 reasons.
>
> 1) I am a poor instructor and often resort to threats of violence
>
> 2) I am lazy as fuck

Forgot 3) I am dumb as box of hammers and haven't a clue about science.



-- 

       ___           ___           ___            ___
      /\  \         /\  \         /\__\          /\  \
     /::\  \       /::\  \       /::|  |         \:\  \
    /:/\:\  \     /:/\:\  \     /:|:|  |     ___ /::\__\
   /::\~\:\__\   /::\~\:\  \   /:/|:|  |__  /\  /:/\/__/
  /:/\:\ \:|__| /:/\:\ \:\__\ /:/ |:| /\__\ \:\/:/  /
  \:\~\:\/:/  / \:\~\:\ \/__/ \/__|:|/:/  /  \::/  /
   \:\ \::/  /   \:\ \:\__\       |:/:/  /    \/__/
    \:\/:/  /     \:\ \/__/       |::/  /
     \::/__/       \:\__\         /:/  /
      ~~            \/__/         \/__/

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]


#547183

FromOdd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com>
Date2016-01-22 08:11 -0600
Message-ID<n7tdbb$1u64$1@gioia.aioe.org>
In reply to#547141
On 1/22/2016 1:01 AM, James McGinn wrote:
> Water is a subject in which almost everybody (accept me) is, in one way or anotehr,
> deeply confused. The vast majority of people are confused into thinking it is a lot
> simpler than it really is.

Jim, I know you don't like it when people stop talking about your ideas 
and start talking about you. You are lonely and want engagement, which 
would give you some feelings of validation that your ideas are worth 
attention. Some people politely give you a little of that. But the real 
problem is not your ideas, which are easily dismantled with basic facts, 
but instead is you and a few key personality issues.

The good news is that you have control over your personality issues and 
can fix that. When that happens, then your steadfast clinging to broken 
ideas will also likely resolve itself. Change is hard, but I know you 
can do it.


-- 
Odd Bodkin --- maker of fine toys, tools, tables

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]


#547147

FromPoutnik <poutnik4nntp@gmail.com>
Date2016-01-22 09:13 +0100
Message-ID<n7so6h$sje$1@dont-email.me>
In reply to#547115
Dne 22/01/2016 v 04:48 Ross A. Finlayson napsal(a):
> 
> Cold steam?
> 
When one is breathing the cold air,
the steam being created
from moist and warm aire leaving the mouth
is quite cold.

Clouds but the ones in upper troposhere
are cold steam based.

But for cold steam to appear,
first saturated pressure of water vapours
must be reached ( can appear earlier
in salt condensation core presence ).

-- 
Poutnik ( the Czech word for a wanderer )

Knowledge makes great men humble, but small men arrogant.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]


#547148

FromJames McGinn <jimmcginn9@gmail.com>
Date2016-01-22 00:35 -0800
Message-ID<87a335eb-9878-49ea-a959-d5cbbbf6840d@googlegroups.com>
In reply to#547147
On Friday, January 22, 2016 at 12:13:47 AM UTC-8, Poutnik wrote:
> Dne 22/01/2016 v 04:48 Ross A. Finlayson napsal(a):
> > 
> > Cold steam?
> > 
> When one is breathing the cold air,
> the steam being created
> from moist and warm aire leaving the mouth
> is quite cold.
> 
> Clouds but the ones in upper troposhere
> are cold steam based.
> 
> But for cold steam to appear,
> first saturated pressure of water vapours
> must be reached ( can appear earlier
> in salt condensation core presence ).

What is steam to you?  What is vapor to you?  What criteria do you use to distinguish between them?

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]


#547172

FromSergio <invalid@invalid.com>
Date2016-01-22 07:38 -0600
Message-ID<n7tbfc$1qkn$1@gioia.aioe.org>
In reply to#547148
On 1/22/2016 2:35 AM, James McGinn wrote:
> On Friday, January 22, 2016 at 12:13:47 AM UTC-8, Poutnik wrote:
>> Dne 22/01/2016 v 04:48 Ross A. Finlayson napsal(a):
>>>
>>> Cold steam?
>>>
>> When one is breathing the cold air, the steam being created from
>> moist and warm aire leaving the mouth is quite cold.

>> Clouds but the ones in upper troposhere are cold steam based.
>>
>> But for cold steam to appear, first saturated pressure of water
>> vapours must be reached ( can appear earlier in salt condensation
>> core presence ).
>
> What is steam to you?  What is vapor to you?  What criteria do you
> use to distinguish between them?
>

Cold steam is fog.

hot steam is used for railroad engines, vapor is used in global worming.

steam is used for cooking vegatables, and vapors is what women got in 
the 19th century.

steam is hot then cold, unless it is fog, then it is cold, and vapor 
warm then cold, unless it is cold, then it can turn wormer

Fog is cold steam,  vapor is mostly invisable to human eyes

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]


#546454

FromHVAC <mr.hvac@gmail.com>
Date2016-01-19 04:18 -0800
Message-ID<71f1020f-df51-43c7-95c7-d4b22d13aa33@googlegroups.com>
In reply to#546306
Why Meteorologists Won't Talk About "Cold Steam" 
-------------

Cold steam = Water

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]


#546575

Frombenj <none@gmail.com>
Date2016-01-19 18:09 -0500
Message-ID<Cmzny.178840$xz4.148493@fx12.iad>
In reply to#546454
On 01/19/2016 07:18 AM, HVAC wrote:
> Why Meteorologists Won't Talk About "Cold Steam"
> -------------
>
> Cold steam = Water
>
water = "heavy air"

-- 

       ___           ___           ___            ___
      /\  \         /\  \         /\__\          /\  \
     /::\  \       /::\  \       /::|  |         \:\  \
    /:/\:\  \     /:/\:\  \     /:|:|  |     ___ /::\__\
   /::\~\:\__\   /::\~\:\  \   /:/|:|  |__  /\  /:/\/__/
  /:/\:\ \:|__| /:/\:\ \:\__\ /:/ |:| /\__\ \:\/:/  /
  \:\~\:\/:/  / \:\~\:\ \/__/ \/__|:|/:/  /  \::/  /
   \:\ \::/  /   \:\ \:\__\       |:/:/  /    \/__/
    \:\/:/  /     \:\ \/__/       |::/  /
     \::/__/       \:\__\         /:/  /
      ~~            \/__/         \/__/

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]


#546615

From"hanson" <hanson@quick.net>
Date2016-01-19 16:44 -0800
Message-ID<n7ml5g$qbn$1@dont-email.me>
In reply to#546575
"benj" <none@gmail.com> wrote:
> 
A Doppelganger of Swine Glazier, the Cretin, wrote:
>> Why Meteorologists Won't Talk About "Cold Steam"
>>
hanson wrote:
His 1-liner doesn't define neither "Cold" nor "Steam"
>>
Harlow Campbell HVAC wrote:
>> Cold steam = Water
>>
hanson wrote:
Harlow, if you must then better go with "Fog" or "Clouds".
>
"benj" wrote:
> water = "heavy air"
>
hamson wrote:
Ben, it is painful to see that ever since Full-Swine Glazier 
did shit into your "Kisser", Swine Glazier's excrements
have affected your brain, ....  deleteriously.... Pity!
Pity, but thanks for the laughs... ahahahahahahanson 
>
>
PS:
Ben, for your benefit and recuperation, see below how your
damaged from his Glazierola occurred. It can be seen really 
from the moment on when <herbertglazier0@gmail.com> 
"reber g=emc^2" :B::ert Glazier, the hate-mongering Full-Swine, 
introduces himself as/with
>
:B:: "I am a proud Jew with a Superiority complex &
:B:: an IQ of 122", & "I do know how everything works,.."
:B:: "My Grandfathers had tails". -- Trebert
:B:: "Being Jewish I know this is so very true" -- Bert.
:B:: "I'm a non-bible(torra) Jew. I'm the only Jew that
:B:: got 2 form letters from two Popes". Bert
:B:: __** "Why am I not loved by all?" --- Bert **__.
 >
:B:: "I'll be sitting on Benj's, Saul Levi's & HVAC's face
:B:: to take a shit & say: "Open your mouth wide".
:B:: "Hanson, I will piss on your grave. And laugh".
:B:: __** "Why am I not loved by all?" --- Bert **__.
>
:B:: "I'm M&M's Clueless Fuck-faced turd".Bert.
:B:: I'm "Siegman Fraud", "Bert, the Bowel Movement".
:B:: "I gave G=EMC^2 (wrong & stolen) to the world"
:B:: "Israel will drop its first H-bomb 'David' ". TreBert
:B:: __"I'm glad when war breaks out"__ Bert
:B:: __** "Why am I not loved by all?" --- Bert **__.
 >
:B:: "Even the FBI has me as a trouble maker and
:B:: the FBI blocks my phone from calling them. "....
:B:: cuz "I was mixing sulfur, carbon & iron together
:B:: to make gun powder" ... & "while I was in custody
:B:: of Osceola Sheriff Bob Hansel, for thieving, his
:B:: deputies beat the shit out of me. So I bought a
:B:: 357 magnum for death threats by Sheriff Bob.
:B:: __** "Why am I not loved by all?" --- Bert **__.
 >
about which ....
Moderator General "HVAC" <Mr.HVAC@gmail.com> aka
"Richard A." aka Harlow Campbell wrote:
>
"Bert, Seriously. You are the stupidest cocksucking
moron who ever came down the Mass Pike.
"Bert, you really are a pathetic excuse for a human
fucking being". "Bert is a racist. (And he's stupid too)"
"TreBert, you are one stupid cocksucker".
"Bert, does your stupidity know no bounds?"
"Bert, are the stupidest cocksucker on the planet."
"Spin THIS, Glazier, you fucking idiot." "Bert get
some spelling lessons, you feeble-minded fuck".
"Bert, your opinion doesn't count"
"Bert you are an idiot."
"Bert, you are a clueless cocksucker .... and "Bert
you are senile, dazed & confused. Fucked in the head.
"a trained cockroach is smarter than Bert"
"Bert, you should be arrested"
"Bert, I will call the police and tell them that your
van seems to be a center for drug activity in the
Wal-Mart parking lot".... .... about which....
 >
Glazier's ex-tutor Sam Wormley <swormley1@gmail.com> wrote:
Glazier, your brain is entangles with a used garbage can.
Glazier, "Its a shame" that your science is far worse
than the man's on the street.
Glazier, your postings are old man's garbage.
reber, take your you know it all thinking to your grave .
reber, your horseshit gets old.Say hi to Allah for me.
reber, you don't believe in science.
Glazier, do not post in a science newsgroup.
Glazier, quit posting __ your Gutter Science__.
Glazier, exit USENET. -- IOW Glazier, beat it!..
 >
Jim Pennino jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com wrote:
Glazier, you are a spamming piece of shit...
You are drunk again. Give up and kill yourself.
 >
Astrophysicist "Saul Levy" <saullevy1@cox.net> wrote:
GLAZIER YOU ARE A LAMEbrain PIECE OF SHIT!
Saul Levy
 >
Rocket Scientist Virdy "Mahipal" <mahipal7638@gmail.com> wrote:
Glazier, you are babbling desperately. Is it sympathy
or pity you're grasping for? Stop it, either way.
 >
benj" <nobody@gmail.com> wrote:
One only has to read Glazier's posts to see when Bert was lobotomized.
But Herb found poster "Double-A" who likes to be like Glazier,
but "Alkie-Alkie" is another kook who is as dumb as Bert is!
Now they party and frolic!...still waiting "to be loved by all"...
 >
hanson wrote:
So Glazier, given your Jewish Superiority complex and
your IQ of 122 and you knowing how how everything works,
... how come ended up shitting into a bucket in a 25 year
old van that you use as your residence on Wal-Mart's
Parking Lot? ..... .... What went wrong, Glazier?
 >
Now, Glazier consider "what will the say when Glazier dies?
Are they gonna say he was a kind man? He was a wise man?
He had plans? He has wisdom? .... BULLSHIT, MAN!"...
<https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4TAixFYnDh4> [D]
BULLSHIT,... because Swine Glazier DOES have plans
which Glazier, the Swine, announced and posted at the
ripe age of eighty (80) when Glazier became a criminal
Graveyard Vandal who wrote:
 >
(1)
On 25Mar2008 Swine Glazier wrote in:
https://groups.google.com/group/sci.physics/msg/3ffe7b2257cf8a9a
https://groups.google.com/forum/#!msg/sci.physics/uYtpFTRnW4k/morPVyJ7_j8J
Hanson, I will piss on your grave. And have a good laugh
when it seeps down on your face. -- Bert.
 >
Glazier's geriatric decay worsened, along with Glazier's chronic
alcoholism and Glazier, the Olde Kacker, became a Coprophile
IOW Glazier became a filthy Face Shitter at his age of 86, which
Glazier proudly announced & posted...
 >
(2)
On 06Dec2014, when the Christian-Hater, Jew-Swine Glazier
said to "benj" <nobody@gmail.com>:
Reality is you always post under me for you are an ass kisser.
For Christmas I'll shit on your kisser.
Benj, you can thank me in advance. - TreBert. ... after which...
 >
Glazier, the Criminal Graveyard Vandal & Face Shitter got even
worse over the next year and at Glazier's age of 87, Glazier
widened his piggish Face-shitting habit, as seen when Glazier
threatened...
 >
(3)
On 07Feb 2015 & on 08Feb2015, as Swine Glazier wrote:
Harlow HVAC, Mr.HVAC@gmail.com, Saul Levy <saullevy1@cox.net
& Jacoby Benj, <nobody@gmail.com>: "I'll be sitting on your face
to take a shit & say: "Open wide". Trebert.
 >
(4)
The Criminal Swine Glazier refused to stop his practices & rejected
to be taken down, because Glazier at his age of 87+, Swine Glazier
labeled himself as "Siegman Fraud" which is synonym with "Bowel-
movement, actually saying that __ "Glazier is a piece of shit"__.
who, to boot, also announced that Glazier is a Transvestite who dons
female dresses and a Sarah Palin mask, saying that he has "nice
legs"...
 >
hanson wrote:
So, Glazier you Transie-Swine, do know that as soon as you
have been "put away and under" Google will remove ALL YOUR
posts from the USENET and the only thing that will remain and
show your legacy, is because:
 >
Glazier the Swine fortunately posted:
.... "hanson made me famous"....
 >
hanson wrote
So, Glazier you swine you should be grateful to me & not wish
me ill like you did above, in your sick hate mongering, since
it is only because of hanson that Web searches show for:
>
--- Swine Glazier G=EMC^2 Cretin ----            27'833 hits & rising
--- reber g=emc^2 Face-shitter & Vandal ----   27'953 hits & rising
>
cuz of hanson's caring and loving administering badly needed
<http://tinyurl.com/G-EMC2-Recall-Therapy> to the mental
cripple aka <http://tinyurl.com/Swine-Glazier>. ... Shalom!


 

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]


#547111

FromSolving Tornadoes <solvingtornadoes@gmail.com>
Date2016-01-21 19:26 -0800
Message-ID<5cc7e1e5-a477-425f-8b04-11580cd91c87@googlegroups.com>
In reply to#546615
On Tuesday, January 19, 2016 at 4:45:14 PM UTC-8, hanson wrote:
> "benj" <none@gmail.com> wrote:
> > 
> A Doppelganger of Swine Glazier, the Cretin, wrote:
> >> Why Meteorologists Won't Talk About "Cold Steam"
> >>
> hanson wrote:
> His 1-liner doesn't define neither "Cold" nor "Steam"
> >>
> Harlow Campbell HVAC wrote:
> >> Cold steam = Water
> >>
> hanson wrote:
> Harlow, if you must then better go with "Fog" or "Clouds".
> >
> "benj" wrote:
> > water = "heavy air"
> >
> hamson wrote:
> Ben, it is painful to see that ever since Full-Swine Glazier 
> did shit into your "Kisser", Swine Glazier's excrements
> have affected your brain, ....  deleteriously.... Pity!
> Pity, but thanks for the laughs... ahahahahahahanson 
> >
> >
> PS:
> Ben, for your benefit and recuperation, see below how your
> damaged from his Glazierola occurred. It can be seen really 
> from the moment on when <herbertglazier0@gmail.com> 
> "reber g=emc^2" :B::ert Glazier, the hate-mongering Full-Swine, 
> introduces himself as/with
> >
> :B:: "I am a proud Jew with a Superiority complex &
> :B:: an IQ of 122", & "I do know how everything works,.."
> :B:: "My Grandfathers had tails". -- Trebert
> :B:: "Being Jewish I know this is so very true" -- Bert.
> :B:: "I'm a non-bible(torra) Jew. I'm the only Jew that
> :B:: got 2 form letters from two Popes". Bert
> :B:: __** "Why am I not loved by all?" --- Bert **__.
>  >
> :B:: "I'll be sitting on Benj's, Saul Levi's & HVAC's face
> :B:: to take a shit & say: "Open your mouth wide".
> :B:: "Hanson, I will piss on your grave. And laugh".
> :B:: __** "Why am I not loved by all?" --- Bert **__.
> >
> :B:: "I'm M&M's Clueless Fuck-faced turd".Bert.
> :B:: I'm "Siegman Fraud", "Bert, the Bowel Movement".
> :B:: "I gave G=EMC^2 (wrong & stolen) to the world"
> :B:: "Israel will drop its first H-bomb 'David' ". TreBert
> :B:: __"I'm glad when war breaks out"__ Bert
> :B:: __** "Why am I not loved by all?" --- Bert **__.
>  >
> :B:: "Even the FBI has me as a trouble maker and
> :B:: the FBI blocks my phone from calling them. "....
> :B:: cuz "I was mixing sulfur, carbon & iron together
> :B:: to make gun powder" ... & "while I was in custody
> :B:: of Osceola Sheriff Bob Hansel, for thieving, his
> :B:: deputies beat the shit out of me. So I bought a
> :B:: 357 magnum for death threats by Sheriff Bob.
> :B:: __** "Why am I not loved by all?" --- Bert **__.
>  >
> about which ....
> Moderator General "HVAC" <Mr.HVAC@gmail.com> aka
> "Richard A." aka Harlow Campbell wrote:
> >
> "Bert, Seriously. You are the stupidest cocksucking
> moron who ever came down the Mass Pike.
> "Bert, you really are a pathetic excuse for a human
> fucking being". "Bert is a racist. (And he's stupid too)"
> "TreBert, you are one stupid cocksucker".
> "Bert, does your stupidity know no bounds?"
> "Bert, are the stupidest cocksucker on the planet."
> "Spin THIS, Glazier, you fucking idiot." "Bert get
> some spelling lessons, you feeble-minded fuck".
> "Bert, your opinion doesn't count"
> "Bert you are an idiot."
> "Bert, you are a clueless cocksucker .... and "Bert
> you are senile, dazed & confused. Fucked in the head.
> "a trained cockroach is smarter than Bert"
> "Bert, you should be arrested"
> "Bert, I will call the police and tell them that your
> van seems to be a center for drug activity in the
> Wal-Mart parking lot".... .... about which....
>  >
> Glazier's ex-tutor Sam Wormley <swormley1@gmail.com> wrote:
> Glazier, your brain is entangles with a used garbage can.
> Glazier, "Its a shame" that your science is far worse
> than the man's on the street.
> Glazier, your postings are old man's garbage.
> reber, take your you know it all thinking to your grave .
> reber, your horseshit gets old.Say hi to Allah for me.
> reber, you don't believe in science.
> Glazier, do not post in a science newsgroup.
> Glazier, quit posting __ your Gutter Science__.
> Glazier, exit USENET. -- IOW Glazier, beat it!..
>  >
> Jim Pennino jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com wrote:
> Glazier, you are a spamming piece of shit...
> You are drunk again. Give up and kill yourself.
>  >
> Astrophysicist "Saul Levy" <saullevy1@cox.net> wrote:
> GLAZIER YOU ARE A LAMEbrain PIECE OF SHIT!
> Saul Levy
>  >
> Rocket Scientist Virdy "Mahipal" <mahipal7638@gmail.com> wrote:
> Glazier, you are babbling desperately. Is it sympathy
> or pity you're grasping for? Stop it, either way.
>  >
> benj" <nobody@gmail.com> wrote:
> One only has to read Glazier's posts to see when Bert was lobotomized.
> But Herb found poster "Double-A" who likes to be like Glazier,
> but "Alkie-Alkie" is another kook who is as dumb as Bert is!
> Now they party and frolic!...still waiting "to be loved by all"...
>  >
> hanson wrote:
> So Glazier, given your Jewish Superiority complex and
> your IQ of 122 and you knowing how how everything works,
> ... how come ended up shitting into a bucket in a 25 year
> old van that you use as your residence on Wal-Mart's
> Parking Lot? ..... .... What went wrong, Glazier?
>  >
> Now, Glazier consider "what will the say when Glazier dies?
> Are they gonna say he was a kind man? He was a wise man?
> He had plans? He has wisdom? .... BULLSHIT, MAN!"...
> <https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4TAixFYnDh4> [D]
> BULLSHIT,... because Swine Glazier DOES have plans
> which Glazier, the Swine, announced and posted at the
> ripe age of eighty (80) when Glazier became a criminal
> Graveyard Vandal who wrote:
>  >
> (1)
> On 25Mar2008 Swine Glazier wrote in:
> https://groups.google.com/group/sci.physics/msg/3ffe7b2257cf8a9a
> https://groups.google.com/forum/#!msg/sci.physics/uYtpFTRnW4k/morPVyJ7_j8J
> Hanson, I will piss on your grave. And have a good laugh
> when it seeps down on your face. -- Bert.
>  >
> Glazier's geriatric decay worsened, along with Glazier's chronic
> alcoholism and Glazier, the Olde Kacker, became a Coprophile
> IOW Glazier became a filthy Face Shitter at his age of 86, which
> Glazier proudly announced & posted...
>  >
> (2)
> On 06Dec2014, when the Christian-Hater, Jew-Swine Glazier
> said to "benj" <nobody@gmail.com>:
> Reality is you always post under me for you are an ass kisser.
> For Christmas I'll shit on your kisser.
> Benj, you can thank me in advance. - TreBert. ... after which...
>  >
> Glazier, the Criminal Graveyard Vandal & Face Shitter got even
> worse over the next year and at Glazier's age of 87, Glazier
> widened his piggish Face-shitting habit, as seen when Glazier
> threatened...
>  >
> (3)
> On 07Feb 2015 & on 08Feb2015, as Swine Glazier wrote:
> Harlow HVAC, Mr.HVAC@gmail.com, Saul Levy <saullevy1@cox.net
> & Jacoby Benj, <nobody@gmail.com>: "I'll be sitting on your face
> to take a shit & say: "Open wide". Trebert.
>  >
> (4)
> The Criminal Swine Glazier refused to stop his practices & rejected
> to be taken down, because Glazier at his age of 87+, Swine Glazier
> labeled himself as "Siegman Fraud" which is synonym with "Bowel-
> movement, actually saying that __ "Glazier is a piece of shit"__.
> who, to boot, also announced that Glazier is a Transvestite who dons
> female dresses and a Sarah Palin mask, saying that he has "nice
> legs"...
>  >
> hanson wrote:
> So, Glazier you Transie-Swine, do know that as soon as you
> have been "put away and under" Google will remove ALL YOUR
> posts from the USENET and the only thing that will remain and
> show your legacy, is because:
>  >
> Glazier the Swine fortunately posted:
> .... "hanson made me famous"....
>  >
> hanson wrote
> So, Glazier you swine you should be grateful to me & not wish
> me ill like you did above, in your sick hate mongering, since
> it is only because of hanson that Web searches show for:
> >
> --- Swine Glazier G=EMC^2 Cretin ----            27'833 hits & rising
> --- reber g=emc^2 Face-shitter & Vandal ----   27'953 hits & rising
> >
> cuz of hanson's caring and loving administering badly needed
> <http://tinyurl.com/G-EMC2-Recall-Therapy> to the mental
> cripple aka <http://tinyurl.com/Swine-Glazier>. ... Shalom!

Oki doki

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]


#547174

FromSergio <invalid@invalid.com>
Date2016-01-22 07:41 -0600
Message-ID<n7tbkv$1qkn$3@gioia.aioe.org>
In reply to#547111
On 1/21/2016 9:26 PM, Solving Tornadoes wrote:
> On Tuesday, January 19, 2016 at 4:45:14 PM UTC-8, hanson wrote:
>> "benj" <none@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>
>> A Doppelganger of Swine Glazier, the Cretin, wrote:
>>>> Why Meteorologists Won't Talk About "Cold Steam"

>> hanson wrote:
>> His 1-liner doesn't define neither "Cold" nor "Steam"
>>>>
>> Harlow Campbell HVAC wrote:
>>>> Cold steam = Water
>>>>
>> hanson wrote:
>> Harlow, if you must then better go with "Fog" or "Clouds".
>>>
>> "benj" wrote:
>>> water = "heavy air"

>> hanson wrote
>> So, Glazier you swine you should be grateful to me & not wish
>> me ill like you did above, in your sick hate mongering, since
>> it is only because of hanson that Web searches show for:
>>>
>> --- Swine Glazier G=EMC^2 Cretin ----            27'833 hits & rising
>> --- reber g=emc^2 Face-shitter & Vandal ----   27'953 hits & rising

>> cuz of hanson's caring and loving administering badly needed
>> <http://tinyurl.com/G-EMC2-Recall-Therapy> to the mental
>> cripple aka <http://tinyurl.com/Swine-Glazier>. ... Shalom!
>
> Oki doki
>

trying to keep your troll OP at the top of the heap, Soilient Tomatoes ?

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]


#547386

FromSylvia Else <sylvia@not.at.this.address>
Date2016-01-23 13:41 +1100
Message-ID<dgg7j5Fc6kdU1@mid.individual.net>
In reply to#546306
On 19/01/2016 7:45 AM, James McGinn wrote:
>
> Why Meteorologists Won't Talk About "Cold Steam"

What is this? Some kind of idée fixe?

It's all about a dynamic equilibrium between liquid water and its 
vapour. I suspect it was you who managed to post to the moderated group 
sci.physics.research, and had this explained to you.

So drop it. You're wrong. That's all.

Sylvia.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]


#547391

FromJames McGinn <jimmcginn9@gmail.com>
Date2016-01-22 19:34 -0800
Message-ID<446f06d2-af6c-4b3e-bbcc-60cf7f01248f@googlegroups.com>
In reply to#547386
On Friday, January 22, 2016 at 6:41:46 PM UTC-8, Sylvia Else wrote:

> It's all about a dynamic equilibrium between liquid water and its 
> vapour. 

Uh, . . . er . . . uh . . . dynamic . . . uh . . . equi . . . 

I suspect it was you who managed to post to the moderated group 
> sci.physics.research, and had this explained to you.

Yer like, one of dem smart peeples that noes dem big words.  Dang golly I wiss I wuz more smarter lyke yiew.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]


Page 6 of 7 — ← Prev page 1 2 3 4 5 [6] 7  Next page →

Back to top | Article view | sci.physics


csiph-web