Groups > sci.physics > #563639 > unrolled thread

Why did the weather fanbois Wormley and McGinn choose sci.physics?

Started by	Wally W. <ww84wa@aim.com>
First post	2016-03-19 11:14 -0400
Last post	2016-03-19 18:18 -0700
Articles	16 on this page of 36 — 11 participants

Back to article view | Back to sci.physics

Page 2 of 2 — ← Prev page 1 [2]

#563899

From	moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney)
Date	2016-03-20 19:06 +0000
Message-ID	<ncmsat$r74$2@pcls7.std.com>
In reply to	#563877

James McGinn <jimmcginn9@gmail.com> writes:

>On Sunday, March 20, 2016 at 10:53:14 AM UTC-7, Michael Moroney wrote:
>> James McGinn <jimmcginn9@gmail.com> writes:

>> I don't know meteorology specifically, but I do know the chemistry and
>> physics behind it, such as the gas laws.

>Why don't you address somenthing in that regard then.

>Using gas laws what is difference in weight between moist air and dry air.

Simple.  Moist air is lighter because H2O molecules (MW=18) displace
air molecules (avg. MW=~29). The rules of partial pressures.

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

#563903

From	James McGinn <jimmcginn9@gmail.com>
Date	2016-03-20 12:18 -0700
Message-ID	<89faae87-aa53-4c02-a298-898a1ac0f90d@googlegroups.com>
In reply to	#563899

On Sunday, March 20, 2016 at 12:06:29 PM UTC-7, Michael Moroney wrote:
> James McGinn <jimmcginn9@gmail.com> writes:
> 
> >On Sunday, March 20, 2016 at 10:53:14 AM UTC-7, Michael Moroney wrote:
> >> James McGinn <jimmcginn9@gmail.com> writes:
> 
> >> I don't know meteorology specifically, but I do know the chemistry and
> >> physics behind it, such as the gas laws.
> 
> >Why don't you address somenthing in that regard then.
> 
> >Using gas laws what is difference in weight between moist air and dry air.
> 
> Simple.  Moist air is lighter because H2O molecules (MW=18) displace
> air molecules (avg. MW=~29). The rules of partial pressures.

Vague.  How much lighter.  Do the math.

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

#563965

From	moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney)
Date	2016-03-20 21:22 +0000
Message-ID	<ncn49p$40l$2@pcls7.std.com>
In reply to	#563903

James McGinn <jimmcginn9@gmail.com> writes:

>> >Using gas laws what is difference in weight between moist air and dry air.
>> 
>> Simple.  Moist air is lighter because H2O molecules (MW=18) displace
>> air molecules (avg. MW=~29). The rules of partial pressures.

>Vague.  How much lighter.  Do the math.

I am not Google. You can find what you need on Google, on weather or
piloting sites.

Or you can do the math.  It is pretty much lighter by
((29-18)/29) * (percent of air that is water vapor)/100.

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

#563969

From	James McGinn <jimmcginn9@gmail.com>
Date	2016-03-20 14:40 -0700
Message-ID	<80b2db1b-d40b-4915-8bfc-ecc88049f698@googlegroups.com>
In reply to	#563965

On Sunday, March 20, 2016 at 2:22:25 PM UTC-7, Michael Moroney wrote:
> James McGinn <jimmcginn9@gmail.com> writes:
> 
> >> >Using gas laws what is difference in weight between moist air and dry air.
> >> 
> >> Simple.  Moist air is lighter because H2O molecules (MW=18) displace
> >> air molecules (avg. MW=~29). The rules of partial pressures.
> 
> >Vague.  How much lighter.  Do the math.
> 
> I am not Google. You can find what you need on Google, on weather or
> piloting sites.
> 
> Or you can do the math.  It is pretty much lighter by
> ((29-18)/29) * (percent of air that is water vapor)/100.

So, you really don't have a point.  Do you?

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

#563993

From	jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com
Date	2016-03-20 23:20 +0000
Message-ID	<5qn3sc-64g.ln1@mail.specsol.com>
In reply to	#563969

James McGinn <jimmcginn9@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Sunday, March 20, 2016 at 2:22:25 PM UTC-7, Michael Moroney wrote:
>> James McGinn <jimmcginn9@gmail.com> writes:
>> 
>> >> >Using gas laws what is difference in weight between moist air and dry air.
>> >> 
>> >> Simple.  Moist air is lighter because H2O molecules (MW=18) displace
>> >> air molecules (avg. MW=~29). The rules of partial pressures.
>> 
>> >Vague.  How much lighter.  Do the math.
>> 
>> I am not Google. You can find what you need on Google, on weather or
>> piloting sites.
>> 
>> Or you can do the math.  It is pretty much lighter by
>> ((29-18)/29) * (percent of air that is water vapor)/100.
> 
> So, you really don't have a point.  Do you?

You mean other than you are quite insane and utterly blind to reality?


-- 
Jim Pennino

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

#564018

From	moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney)
Date	2016-03-21 01:22 +0000
Message-ID	<ncnic9$s70$2@pcls7.std.com>
In reply to	#563969

James McGinn <jimmcginn9@gmail.com> writes:

>So, you really don't have a point.  Do you?

My ultimate point is that you are a classic case of a sci.physics ko0k.
A textbook example, in fact.  I've been kookwatching here for a long time.

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

#564019

From	James McGinn <jimmcginn9@gmail.com>
Date	2016-03-20 18:26 -0700
Message-ID	<4851ca16-89d1-4783-815f-4b5e9059737e@googlegroups.com>
In reply to	#564018

On Sunday, March 20, 2016 at 6:22:41 PM UTC-7, Michael Moroney wrote:
> James McGinn <jimmcginn9@gmail.com> writes:
> 
> >So, you really don't have a point.  Do you?
> 
> My ultimate point is that you are a classic case of a sci.physics ko0k.
> A textbook example, in fact.  I've been kookwatching here for a long time.

LOL. If you weren't interested in discussing the issue then why did you bring it up?

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

#564023

From	moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney)
Date	2016-03-21 01:56 +0000
Message-ID	<ncnkcu$6a5$1@pcls7.std.com>
In reply to	#564019

James McGinn <jimmcginn9@gmail.com> writes:

>On Sunday, March 20, 2016 at 6:22:41 PM UTC-7, Michael Moroney wrote:
>> 
>> My ultimate point is that you are a classic case of a sci.physics ko0k.
>> A textbook example, in fact.  I've been kookwatching here for a long time.

>LOL. If you weren't interested in discussing the issue then why did you 
>bring it up?  

Because sometimes I poke kooks with sharp pointy sticks to see how they
react.  Kookwatching doesn't have to be strictly watching, like watching 
television.

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

#564025

From	HVAC <mr.hvac@gmail.com>
Date	2016-03-20 19:06 -0700
Message-ID	<f11041ca-c48d-45eb-b5fa-d314e356dda2@googlegroups.com>
In reply to	#564023

Michael Moroney said
Because sometimes I poke kooks with sharp pointy sticks to see how they 
react.  Kookwatching doesn't have to be strictly watching, like watching 
television. 
-------------

Exactly. A kook is like a piece of dogshit. If you want to make a stink, stir that shit up

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

#564075

From	benj <none@gmail.com>
Date	2016-03-21 02:23 -0400
Message-ID	<mrMHy.75741$LP.25201@fx16.iad>
In reply to	#564025

On 03/20/2016 10:06 PM, HVAC wrote:
> Michael Moroney said
> Because sometimes I poke kooks with sharp pointy sticks to see how they
> react.  Kookwatching doesn't have to be strictly watching, like watching
> television.
> -------------
>
> Exactly. A kook is like a piece of dogshit. If you want to make a stink, stir that shit up
>
I noticed. That's why I poke you.
Dance kooker dance!

Your dog shit smell is better than treeb shitting in my (and your) 
mouth. You love Hanson, don't you?

-- 

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

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

#564026

From	James McGinn <jimmcginn9@gmail.com>
Date	2016-03-20 19:18 -0700
Message-ID	<276952b8-6e92-49c9-ab54-24de548cd897@googlegroups.com>
In reply to	#564023

On Sunday, March 20, 2016 at 6:57:10 PM UTC-7, Michael Moroney wrote:
> James McGinn <jimmcginn9@gmail.com> writes:
> 
> >On Sunday, March 20, 2016 at 6:22:41 PM UTC-7, Michael Moroney wrote:
> >> 
> >> My ultimate point is that you are a classic case of a sci.physics ko0k.
> >> A textbook example, in fact.  I've been kookwatching here for a long time.
> 
> >LOL. If you weren't interested in discussing the issue then why did you 
> >bring it up?  
> 
> Because sometimes I poke kooks with sharp pointy sticks to see how they
> react.  Kookwatching doesn't have to be strictly watching, like watching 
> television.

Well, it looks like HVAC took the bait.  So I will leave you to it.

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

#563983

From	HVAC <mr.hvac@gmail.com>
Date	2016-03-20 16:01 -0700
Message-ID	<46715dbb-ea8d-45cf-9195-bc11bb0ebfd4@googlegroups.com>
In reply to	#563874

Michael Moroney said
I don't know meteorology specifically, but I do know the chemistry and 
physics behind it, such as the gas laws. 

A few days ago, they started predicting a snowstorm for us from a storm 
that hadn't even formed yet. The storm formed when and where predicted 
and will hit us tonight, as predicted.  They do have issues with the exact 
track, as the forecast for where I am has varied between a coating to 6-12 
inches, depending on the exact path.  (I haven't seen the forecast for 
today yet) 
-----------------

I'll guess you live in.... Weymouth?

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

#564016

From	moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney)
Date	2016-03-21 01:19 +0000
Message-ID	<ncni6n$s70$1@pcls7.std.com>
In reply to	#563983

HVAC <mr.hvac@gmail.com> writes:

>I'll guess you live in.... Weymouth?

No.

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

#563750

From	Sergio <invalid@invalid.com>
Date	2016-03-19 18:46 -0500
Message-ID	<nckoe9$11nf$1@gioia.aioe.org>
In reply to	#563639

On 3/19/2016 10:14 AM, Wally W. wrote:
> Why did the weather fanbois Wormley and McGinn choose sci.physics?
>
> Why don't they post instead to groups where weather is on topic?
>
>

only a few Usenet groups are active anymore, most are DOA.

Wormley is OK, he finds about 80% good stuff.

McGinn, besides needing professional care, could be a Cult leader if he 
took intensive charisma lessons and got off that medical meth.

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

#563768

From	noTthaTguY <abu.kuanysh05@gmail.com>
Date	2016-03-19 18:17 -0700
Message-ID	<138ac325-cc44-41d7-96c4-68b4d4b5f333@googlegroups.com>
In reply to	#563750

On Saturday, March 19, 2016 at 4:47:27 PM UTC-7, Sergio wrote:
> On 3/19/2016 10:14 AM, Wally W. wrote:
> > Why did the weather fanbois Wormley and McGinn choose sci.physics?
> >
> > Why don't they post instead to groups where weather is on topic?
> >
> >
> 
> only a few Usenet groups are active anymore, most are DOA.
> 
> Wormley is OK, he finds about 80% good stuff.
> 
> McGinn, besides needing professional care, could be a Cult leader if he 
> took intensive charisma lessons and got off that medical meth.

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

#563769 — OCO is heavier than air, but HOH

From	noTthaTguY <abu.kuanysh05@gmail.com>
Date	2016-03-19 18:18 -0700
Subject	OCO is heavier than air, but HOH
Message-ID	<5c22a362-2eeb-4ade-9829-c96dea9155eb@googlegroups.com>
In reply to	#563768

shows mainly that he doesn't read his own ****,
but I do not practice clicking oh u.r.l's,
for the most part

> > Wormley is OK, he finds about 80% good stuff.
> > 
> > McGinn, besides needing professional care, could be a Cult leader if he 
> > took intensive charisma lessons and got off that medical meth.

[toc] | [prev] | [standalone]

Page 2 of 2 — ← Prev page 1 [2]

csiph-web

Why did the weather fanbois Wormley and McGinn choose sci.physics?

Contents

#563899

#563903

#563965

#563969

#563993

#564018

#564019

#564023

#564025

#564075

#564026

#563983

#564016

#563750

#563768

#563769 — OCO is heavier than air, but HOH