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

Groups > sci.physics > #558971 > unrolled thread

Meteorology Needs a New Theory

Started byJames McGinn <jimmcginn9@gmail.com>
First post2016-03-03 11:40 -0800
Last post2016-03-04 06:14 -0800
Articles 16 on this page of 36 — 7 participants

Back to article view | Back to sci.physics

Contents

  Meteorology Needs a New Theory James McGinn <jimmcginn9@gmail.com> - 2016-03-03 11:40 -0800
    Re: Meteorology Needs a New Theory jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2016-03-03 20:08 +0000
      Re: Meteorology Needs a New Theory James McGinn <jimmcginn9@gmail.com> - 2016-03-03 16:15 -0800
        Re: Meteorology Needs a New Theory jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2016-03-04 00:46 +0000
          Re: Meteorology Needs a New Theory James McGinn <jimmcginn9@gmail.com> - 2016-03-03 17:35 -0800
            Re: Meteorology Needs a New Theory jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2016-03-04 02:42 +0000
              Re: Meteorology Needs a New Theory Solving Tornadoes <solvingtornadoes@gmail.com> - 2016-03-03 18:57 -0800
                Re: Meteorology Needs a New Theory jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2016-03-04 04:10 +0000
                  Re: Meteorology Needs a New Theory James McGinn <jimmcginn9@gmail.com> - 2016-03-04 21:08 -0800
                    Re: Meteorology Needs a New Theory jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2016-03-05 06:55 +0000
                      Re: Meteorology Needs a New Theory James McGinn <jimmcginn9@gmail.com> - 2016-03-05 06:22 -0800
                        Re: Meteorology Needs a New Theory jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2016-03-05 19:00 +0000
                          Re: Meteorology Needs a New Theory James McGinn <jimmcginn9@gmail.com> - 2016-03-05 11:09 -0800
                            Re: Meteorology Needs a New Theory jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2016-03-05 19:24 +0000
                              Re: Meteorology Needs a New Theory James McGinn <jimmcginn9@gmail.com> - 2016-03-05 11:40 -0800
                                Re: Meteorology Needs a New Theory jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2016-03-05 22:10 +0000
                                  Re: Meteorology Needs a New Theory Solving Tornadoes <solvingtornadoes@gmail.com> - 2016-03-05 14:41 -0800
                                    Re: Meteorology Needs a New Theory jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2016-03-05 23:03 +0000
          Re: Meteorology Needs a New Theory moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2016-03-04 02:18 +0000
            Re: Meteorology Needs a New Theory Solving Tornadoes <solvingtornadoes@gmail.com> - 2016-03-03 18:30 -0800
              Re: Meteorology Needs a New Theory moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2016-03-04 02:32 +0000
                Re: Meteorology Needs a New Theory Solving Tornadoes <solvingtornadoes@gmail.com> - 2016-03-03 18:53 -0800
                  Re: Meteorology Needs a New Theory jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2016-03-04 04:11 +0000
                    Re: Meteorology Needs a New Theory moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2016-03-04 06:58 +0000
                      Re: Meteorology Needs a New Theory Sergio <invalid@invalid.com> - 2016-03-04 07:27 -0600
              Re: Meteorology Needs a New Theory jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2016-03-04 02:45 +0000
                Re: Meteorology Needs a New Theory Solving Tornadoes <solvingtornadoes@gmail.com> - 2016-03-03 18:58 -0800
                  Re: Meteorology Needs a New Theory jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2016-03-04 04:12 +0000
            Re: Meteorology Needs a New Theory jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2016-03-04 02:44 +0000
      Re: Meteorology Needs a New Theory Sergio <invalid@invalid.com> - 2016-03-03 21:59 -0600
    Re: Meteorology Needs a New Theory Sam Wormley <swormley1@gmail.com> - 2016-03-03 16:52 -0600
    Re: Meteorology Needs a New Theory Sam Wormley <swormley1@gmail.com> - 2016-03-03 20:39 -0600
      Re: Meteorology Needs a New Theory Solving Tornadoes <solvingtornadoes@gmail.com> - 2016-03-03 18:55 -0800
      Re: Meteorology Needs a New Theory HVAC <mr.hvac@gmail.com> - 2016-03-04 05:35 -0800
        Re: Meteorology Needs a New Theory Sergio <invalid@invalid.com> - 2016-03-04 08:03 -0600
          Re: Meteorology Needs a New Theory HVAC <mr.hvac@gmail.com> - 2016-03-04 06:14 -0800

Page 2 of 2 — ← Prev page 1 [2]

#559099

Frommoroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney)
Date2016-03-04 02:32 +0000
Message-ID<nbas3l$hft$1@pcls7.std.com>
In reply to#559098
Solving Tornadoes <solvingtornadoes@gmail.com> writes:

>On Thursday, March 3, 2016 at 6:18:44 PM UTC-8, Michael Moroney wrote:

>> What you're seeing, jimp, is "projection" where the delusional attributes
>> to others his own reactions/emotions/etc.  Very common.

>Do you think you'd be less frustrated if you actually had a genuine dispute?

And you did it again.

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

#559112

FromSolving Tornadoes <solvingtornadoes@gmail.com>
Date2016-03-03 18:53 -0800
Message-ID<a336e312-1f0c-4c27-9bc3-c756a1ca5885@googlegroups.com>
In reply to#559099
On Thursday, March 3, 2016 at 6:32:42 PM UTC-8, Michael Moroney wrote:
> Solving Tornadoes <solvingtornadoes@gmail.com> writes:
> 
> >On Thursday, March 3, 2016 at 6:18:44 PM UTC-8, Michael Moroney wrote:
> 
> >> What you're seeing, jimp, is "projection" where the delusional attributes
> >> to others his own reactions/emotions/etc.  Very common.
> 
> >Do you think you'd be less frustrated if you actually had a genuine dispute?
> 
> And you did it again.

Why do you think you are getting so emotional about this?

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

#559143

Fromjimp@specsol.spam.sux.com
Date2016-03-04 04:11 +0000
Message-ID<jgenqc-9a6.ln1@mail.specsol.com>
In reply to#559112
Solving Tornadoes <solvingtornadoes@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Thursday, March 3, 2016 at 6:32:42 PM UTC-8, Michael Moroney wrote:
>> Solving Tornadoes <solvingtornadoes@gmail.com> writes:
>> 
>> >On Thursday, March 3, 2016 at 6:18:44 PM UTC-8, Michael Moroney wrote:
>> 
>> >> What you're seeing, jimp, is "projection" where the delusional attributes
>> >> to others his own reactions/emotions/etc.  Very common.
>> 
>> >Do you think you'd be less frustrated if you actually had a genuine dispute?
>> 
>> And you did it again.
> 
> Why do you think you are getting so emotional about this?

Again, the only one I see getting emotional is you.



-- 
Jim Pennino

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

#559156

Frommoroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney)
Date2016-03-04 06:58 +0000
Message-ID<nbbbm1$bv1$1@pcls7.std.com>
In reply to#559143
jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com writes:

>Solving Tornadoes <solvingtornadoes@gmail.com> wrote:
>> On Thursday, March 3, 2016 at 6:32:42 PM UTC-8, Michael Moroney wrote:
>>> Solving Tornadoes <solvingtornadoes@gmail.com> writes:
>>> 
>>> >On Thursday, March 3, 2016 at 6:18:44 PM UTC-8, Michael Moroney wrote:
>>> 
>>> >> What you're seeing, jimp, is "projection" where the delusional attributes
>>> >> to others his own reactions/emotions/etc.  Very common.
>>> 
>>> >Do you think you'd be less frustrated if you actually had a genuine dispute?
>>> 
>>> And you did it again.
>> 
>> Why do you think you are getting so emotional about this?

>Again, the only one I see getting emotional is you.

I find it fascinating that he continues his projection even when he's been
told he's projecting.

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

#559173

FromSergio <invalid@invalid.com>
Date2016-03-04 07:27 -0600
Message-ID<nbc2hu$148d$1@gioia.aioe.org>
In reply to#559156
On 3/4/2016 12:58 AM, Michael Moroney wrote:
> jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com writes:
>
>> Solving Tornadoes <solvingtornadoes@gmail.com> wrote:
>>> On Thursday, March 3, 2016 at 6:32:42 PM UTC-8, Michael Moroney wrote:
>>>> Solving Tornadoes <solvingtornadoes@gmail.com> writes:
>>>>
>>>>> On Thursday, March 3, 2016 at 6:18:44 PM UTC-8, Michael Moroney wrote:
>>>>
>>>>>> What you're seeing, jimp, is "projection" where the delusional attributes
>>>>>> to others his own reactions/emotions/etc.  Very common.
>>>>
>>>>> Do you think you'd be less frustrated if you actually had a genuine dispute?
>>>>
>>>> And you did it again.
>>>
>>> Why do you think you are getting so emotional about this?
>
>> Again, the only one I see getting emotional is you.
>
> I find it fascinating that he continues his projection even when he's been
> told he's projecting.
>



An easy way to illustrate this is to take  some of his sentences and 
switch out I for you, me for them, etc...
for example from above;


 >>> Why do I think I'm  getting so emotional about this?

 >>>>> Do I think I'd be less frustrated if I actually had a genuine 
dispute?

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

#559109

Fromjimp@specsol.spam.sux.com
Date2016-03-04 02:45 +0000
Message-ID<2f9nqc-hq5.ln1@mail.specsol.com>
In reply to#559098
Solving Tornadoes <solvingtornadoes@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Thursday, March 3, 2016 at 6:18:44 PM UTC-8, Michael Moroney wrote:
>> jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com writes:
>> 
>> >James McGinn <jimmcginn9@gmail.com> wrote:
>> 
>> >> So, What do you think it indicates that you get so emotional about this?
>> 
>> >The only one getting emotional is you as is typical of the delusional
>> >when their delusions are challenged.
>> 
>> What you're seeing, jimp, is "projection" where the delusional attributes
>> to others his own reactions/emotions/etc.  Very common.
> 
> Do you think you'd be less frustrated if you actually had a genuine dispute?

I don't sense frustration from anyone but you and Sam Wormley.


-- 
Jim Pennino

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

#559117

FromSolving Tornadoes <solvingtornadoes@gmail.com>
Date2016-03-03 18:58 -0800
Message-ID<aee791c7-3b1a-48d4-aeb8-c9e6a945c4a9@googlegroups.com>
In reply to#559109
On Thursday, March 3, 2016 at 6:46:09 PM UTC-8, ji...@specsol.spam.sux.com wrote:
> Solving Tornadoes <solvingtornadoes@gmail.com> wrote:
> > On Thursday, March 3, 2016 at 6:18:44 PM UTC-8, Michael Moroney wrote:
> >> jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com writes:
> >> 
> >> >James McGinn <jimmcginn9@gmail.com> wrote:
> >> 
> >> >> So, What do you think it indicates that you get so emotional about this?
> >> 
> >> >The only one getting emotional is you as is typical of the delusional
> >> >when their delusions are challenged.
> >> 
> >> What you're seeing, jimp, is "projection" where the delusional attributes
> >> to others his own reactions/emotions/etc.  Very common.
> > 
> > Do you think you'd be less frustrated if you actually had a genuine dispute?
> 
> I don't sense frustration from anyone but you and Sam Wormley.

Do you think you'd be less frustrated if the evidence confirmed you belief?

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

#559144

Fromjimp@specsol.spam.sux.com
Date2016-03-04 04:12 +0000
Message-ID<qienqc-9a6.ln1@mail.specsol.com>
In reply to#559117
Solving Tornadoes <solvingtornadoes@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Thursday, March 3, 2016 at 6:46:09 PM UTC-8, ji...@specsol.spam.sux.com wrote:
>> Solving Tornadoes <solvingtornadoes@gmail.com> wrote:
>> > On Thursday, March 3, 2016 at 6:18:44 PM UTC-8, Michael Moroney wrote:
>> >> jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com writes:
>> >> 
>> >> >James McGinn <jimmcginn9@gmail.com> wrote:
>> >> 
>> >> >> So, What do you think it indicates that you get so emotional about this?
>> >> 
>> >> >The only one getting emotional is you as is typical of the delusional
>> >> >when their delusions are challenged.
>> >> 
>> >> What you're seeing, jimp, is "projection" where the delusional attributes
>> >> to others his own reactions/emotions/etc.  Very common.
>> > 
>> > Do you think you'd be less frustrated if you actually had a genuine dispute?
>> 
>> I don't sense frustration from anyone but you and Sam Wormley.
> 
> Do you think you'd be less frustrated if the evidence confirmed you belief?

As I am not frustrated, you are just projecting again.

 

-- 
Jim Pennino

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

#559108

Fromjimp@specsol.spam.sux.com
Date2016-03-04 02:44 +0000
Message-ID<fd9nqc-hq5.ln1@mail.specsol.com>
In reply to#559091
Michael Moroney <moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com> wrote:
> jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com writes:
> 
>>James McGinn <jimmcginn9@gmail.com> wrote:
> 
>>> So, What do you think it indicates that you get so emotional about this?
> 
>>The only one getting emotional is you as is typical of the delusional
>>when their delusions are challenged.
> 
> What you're seeing, jimp, is "projection" where the delusional attributes
> to others his own reactions/emotions/etc.  Very common.

Yep.


-- 
Jim Pennino

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

#559133

FromSergio <invalid@invalid.com>
Date2016-03-03 21:59 -0600
Message-ID<nbb18r$1b8s$1@gioia.aioe.org>
In reply to#558980
On 3/3/2016 2:08 PM, jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com wrote:
> James McGinn <jimmcginn9@gmail.com> wrote:
>> We all grow up believing that the moisture in clear air is gaseous.
>
> Nope, we learn that in grade school science class from text books and
> doing simple experiments.
>
> Later on in high school both the texts and the experiments become more
> complex.
>
> By the time we get to the college level stuff it has been completely
> proven.
>
> Your theories, on the other hand, seem to come from a drug dream.
>
>

from his attack back in 2014, I thought it was Meth, his energy used, 
scattered thinking, and delusions, fits meth. Medical Meth of course.

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

#559034

FromSam Wormley <swormley1@gmail.com>
Date2016-03-03 16:52 -0600
Message-ID<SOidnfSxupaAXUXLnZ2dnUU7-QOdnZ2d@giganews.com>
In reply to#558971

   Translation: James McGinn needs a new hobby.

-- 

sci.physics is an unmoderated newsgroup dedicated
to the discussion of physics, news from the physics
community, and physics-related social issues.

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

#559104

FromSam Wormley <swormley1@gmail.com>
Date2016-03-03 20:39 -0600
Message-ID<SOidne6xupbCaEXLnZ2dnUU7-QMAAAAA@giganews.com>
In reply to#558971
On 3/3/16 1:40 PM, James McGinn wrote:
>
> There is no gaseous H2O in earth's atmosphere.

   Observations and hourly measurements contradict you, James.

>
> Moist air is heavier than dry air.

   Again observations and measurements contradict you, James.


>
> Moist air convection is impossible.


 > Water vapor, water vapour or aqueous vapor, is the *gaseous phase* of
 > water. It is one state of water within the hydrosphere. Water vapor
 > can be produced from the *evaporation or boiling of liquid water* or
 > from the *sublimation of ice* . Unlike other forms of water, water
 > vapor is invisible. Under typical atmospheric conditions, water vapor
 > is continuously generated by evaporation and removed by condensation.
 > It is *lighter than air* and *triggers convection currents* that can
 > lead to clouds.




-- 

sci.physics is an unmoderated newsgroup dedicated
to the discussion of physics, news from the physics
community, and physics-related social issues.

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

#559115

FromSolving Tornadoes <solvingtornadoes@gmail.com>
Date2016-03-03 18:55 -0800
Message-ID<0773a608-7dd3-4a2a-a98a-2693b308a543@googlegroups.com>
In reply to#559104
On Thursday, March 3, 2016 at 6:39:31 PM UTC-8, Sam Wormley wrote:
> On 3/3/16 1:40 PM, James McGinn wrote:
> >
> > There is no gaseous H2O in earth's atmosphere.
> 
>    Observations and hourly measurements contradict you, James.

I guess we'll have to agree to disagree.  Okay?

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

#559175

FromHVAC <mr.hvac@gmail.com>
Date2016-03-04 05:35 -0800
Message-ID<853293f1-3ec4-42bb-af7b-c2e2653ad9a7@googlegroups.com>
In reply to#559104
McFly days
> 
> Moist air is heavier than dry air. 
----------------

Obviously McFly has been studying with Bert and has now incorporated the Heavy Air Theory into his 'thinking'

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

#559178

FromSergio <invalid@invalid.com>
Date2016-03-04 08:03 -0600
Message-ID<nbc4lp$18u5$1@gioia.aioe.org>
In reply to#559175
On 3/4/2016 7:35 AM, HVAC wrote:
> McFly days
>>
>> Moist air is heavier than dry air.
> ----------------
>
> Obviously McFly has been studying with Bert and has now incorporated the Heavy Air Theory into his 'thinking'
>
>

Does McFly "think" like a box with some molecules in it ?  Bounding 
around all random directions, and off the walls ?

At most pressures and temperatures his Think Box goes critical, above 0 
C most likely, or above 0.001 PSI.

I think Berts famous "Heavy Air Theory" includes wet moisture.


But McFly's Think Box is totally dessicated, and relies upon that spooky 
"plasma" to transport molecules.

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

#559183

FromHVAC <mr.hvac@gmail.com>
Date2016-03-04 06:14 -0800
Message-ID<c0fcff8d-9d3e-4d86-831f-63e04d63dd32@googlegroups.com>
In reply to#559178
McFly is a very prolific kook/troll. But like all kooks, his entropy will run down and he will stop. Possibly he will return to Valhalla to slumber and feed, then return again after Ragnarok

[toc] | [prev] | [standalone]

Page 2 of 2 — ← Prev page 1 [2]

Back to top | Article view | sci.physics

csiph-web