Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
Groups > sci.physics > #590575 > unrolled thread
| Started by | osbornfg@gmail.com |
|---|---|
| First post | 2016-07-24 07:19 -0700 |
| Last post | 2016-08-01 15:45 -0700 |
| Articles | 20 on this page of 276 — 21 participants |
Back to article view | Back to sci.physics
This discussion starts older than the indexed window; earlier articles aren't shown. The article labeled Started by
below is the oldest one visible, not the original post.
Re: Amazon deletes James McGinn's Troll Book after bad complaints osbornfg@gmail.com - 2016-07-24 07:19 -0700
Re: Amazon deletes James McGinn's Troll Book after bad complaints Sergio <invalid@invalid.com> - 2016-07-24 12:37 -0500
Re: Amazon deletes James McGinn's Troll Book after bad complaints osbornfg@gmail.com - 2016-07-24 14:36 -0700
Re: Amazon deletes James McGinn's Troll Book after bad complaints James McGinn <jimmcginn9@gmail.com> - 2016-07-24 17:20 -0700
amazin noTthaTguY <abu.kuanysh05@gmail.com> - 2016-07-25 11:29 -0700
Re: Amazon deletes James McGinn's Troll Book after bad complaints osbornfg@gmail.com - 2016-07-25 21:36 -0700
Re: Amazon deletes James McGinn's Troll Book after bad complaints James McGinn <jimmcginn9@gmail.com> - 2016-07-26 17:26 -0700
Re: Amazon deletes James McGinn's Troll Book after bad complaints osbornfg@gmail.com - 2016-07-29 17:38 -0700
Re: Amazon deletes James McGinn's Troll Book after bad complaints James McGinn <jimmcginn9@gmail.com> - 2016-07-29 23:48 -0700
Re: Amazon deletes James McGinn's Troll Book after bad complaints osbornfg@gmail.com - 2016-07-30 08:17 -0700
Re: Amazon deletes James McGinn's Troll Book after bad complaints James McGinn <jimmcginn9@gmail.com> - 2016-07-30 09:15 -0700
Re: Amazon deletes James McGinn's Troll Book after bad complaints frank osborn <osbornfg@gmail.com> - 2016-08-06 08:51 -0700
Re: Amazon deletes James McGinn's Troll Book after bad complaints Wally W. <ww84wa@aim.com> - 2016-08-06 12:34 -0400
Re: Amazon deletes James McGinn's Troll Book after bad complaints Solving Tornadoes <solvingtornadoes@gmail.com> - 2016-08-06 10:00 -0700
Re: Amazon deletes James McGinn's Troll Book after bad complaints James McGinn <jimmcginn9@gmail.com> - 2016-08-06 22:14 -0700
Re: Amazon deletes James McGinn's Troll Book after bad complaints Sergio <invalid@invalid.com> - 2016-08-06 13:46 -0500
Re: Amazon deletes James McGinn's Troll Book after bad complaints Claudius Denk <claudiusdenk@gmail.com> - 2016-08-06 13:43 -0700
Re: Amazon deletes James McGinn's Troll Book after bad complaints Sergio <invalid@invalid.com> - 2016-08-06 17:03 -0500
Re: Amazon deletes James McGinn's Troll Book after bad complaints frank osborn <osbornfg@gmail.com> - 2016-08-07 08:21 -0700
Re: Amazon deletes James McGinn's Troll Book after bad complaints James McGinn <jimmcginn9@gmail.com> - 2016-08-07 08:33 -0700
Re: Amazon deletes James McGinn's Troll Book after bad complaints frank osborn <osbornfg@gmail.com> - 2016-08-07 08:56 -0700
Re: Amazon deletes James McGinn's Troll Book after bad complaints pnalsing@gmail.com - 2016-08-07 09:09 -0700
Re: Amazon deletes James McGinn's Troll Book after bad complaints James McGinn <jimmcginn9@gmail.com> - 2016-08-07 09:24 -0700
Re: Amazon deletes James McGinn's Troll Book after bad complaints James McGinn <jimmcginn9@gmail.com> - 2016-08-07 09:39 -0700
Re: Amazon deletes James McGinn's Troll Book after bad complaints frank osborn <osbornfg@gmail.com> - 2016-08-07 09:48 -0700
Re: Amazon deletes James McGinn's Troll Book after bad complaints James McGinn <jimmcginn9@gmail.com> - 2016-08-07 10:08 -0700
Re: Amazon deletes James McGinn's Troll Book after bad complaints Sergio <invalid@invalid.com> - 2016-08-15 14:11 -0500
Re: Amazon deletes James McGinn's Troll Book after bad complaints Claudius Denk <claudiusdenk@gmail.com> - 2016-08-15 20:53 -0700
Re: Amazon deletes James McGinn's Troll Book after bad complaints Sergio <invalid@invalid.com> - 2016-08-16 07:45 -0500
Re: Amazon deletes James McGinn's Troll Book after bad complaints Claudius Denk <claudiusdenk@gmail.com> - 2016-08-16 20:50 -0700
Re: Amazon deletes James McGinn's Troll Book after bad complaints Sergio <invalid@invalid.com> - 2016-08-17 15:31 -0500
Re: Amazon deletes James McGinn's Troll Book after bad complaints Sergio <invalid@invalid.com> - 2016-08-07 12:40 -0500
Re: Amazon deletes James McGinn's Troll Book after bad complaints James McGinn <jimmcginn9@gmail.com> - 2016-08-07 11:47 -0700
Re: Amazon deletes James McGinn's Troll Book after bad complaints Sergio <invalid@invalid.com> - 2016-08-15 20:59 -0500
Re: Amazon deletes James McGinn's Troll Book after bad complaints Solving Tornadoes <solvingtornadoes@gmail.com> - 2016-08-23 16:54 -0700
Re: Amazon deletes James McGinn's Troll Book after bad complaints James McGinn <jimmcginn9@gmail.com> - 2016-07-30 10:06 -0700
Re: Amazon deletes James McGinn's Troll Book after bad complaints Sergio <invalid@invalid.com> - 2016-07-30 21:14 -0500
Re: Amazon deletes James McGinn's Troll Book after bad complaints Sergio <invalid@invalid.com> - 2016-07-31 14:51 -0500
Re: Amazon deletes James McGinn's Troll Book after bad complaints Sergio <invalid@invalid.com> - 2016-07-24 19:25 -0500
Re: Amazon deletes James McGinn's Troll Book after bad complaints James McGinn <jimmcginn9@gmail.com> - 2016-07-24 17:42 -0700
Re: Amazon deletes James McGinn's Troll Book after bad complaints jmcginn@womply.com - 2016-07-28 11:34 -0700
Re: Amazon deletes James McGinn's Troll Book after bad complaints Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-07-28 14:16 -0500
Re: Amazon deletes James McGinn's Troll Book after bad complaints James McGinn <jimmcginn9@gmail.com> - 2016-07-28 16:16 -0700
Re: Amazon deletes James McGinn's Troll Book after bad complaints Sergio <invalid@invalid.com> - 2016-07-28 18:14 -0500
Re: Amazon deletes James McGinn's Troll Book after bad complaints B Gates <nobodyxx@gmail> - 2016-07-28 19:23 -0400
Re: Amazon deletes James McGinn's Troll Book after bad complaints edprochak@gmail.com - 2016-08-01 05:52 -0700
Re: Amazon deletes James McGinn's Troll Book after bad complaints James McGinn <jimmcginn9@gmail.com> - 2016-07-28 19:48 -0700
Re: Amazon deletes James McGinn's Troll Book after bad complaints edprochak@gmail.com - 2016-08-01 05:58 -0700
Re: Amazon deletes James McGinn's Troll Book after bad complaints Sergio <invalid@invalid.com> - 2016-08-01 08:08 -0500
Re: Amazon deletes James McGinn's Troll Book after bad complaints noTthaTguY <abu.kuanysh05@gmail.com> - 2016-08-29 18:18 -0700
Re: Amazon deletes James McGinn's Troll Book after bad complaints Claudius Denk <claudiusdenk@gmail.com> - 2016-08-17 21:52 -0700
Re: Amazon deletes James McGinn's Troll Book after bad complaints Sergio <invalid@invalid.com> - 2016-07-25 08:04 -0500
Re: Amazon deletes James McGinn's Troll Book after bad complaints Sergio <invalid@invalid.com> - 2016-07-25 16:59 -0500
hence, dUh noTthaTguY <abu.kuanysh05@gmail.com> - 2016-07-25 19:08 -0700
Re: Amazon deletes James McGinn's Troll Book after bad complaints Claudius Denk <claudiusdenk@gmail.com> - 2016-08-17 21:56 -0700
Re: Amazon deletes James McGinn's Troll Book after bad complaints osbornfg@gmail.com - 2016-07-25 21:58 -0700
Re: Amazon deletes James McGinn's Troll Book after bad complaints Sergio <invalid@invalid.com> - 2016-07-26 10:17 -0500
Re: Amazon deletes James McGinn's Troll Book after bad complaints noTthaTguY <abu.kuanysh05@gmail.com> - 2016-07-27 12:03 -0700
Re: Amazon deletes James McGinn's Troll Book after bad complaints osbornfg@gmail.com - 2016-07-28 16:27 -0700
Re: Amazon deletes James McGinn's Troll Book after bad complaints B Gates <nobodyxx@gmail> - 2016-07-28 21:38 -0400
Re: Amazon deletes James McGinn's Troll Book after bad complaints edprochak@gmail.com - 2016-08-01 05:54 -0700
Re: Amazon deletes James McGinn's Troll Book after bad complaints frank osborn <osbornfg@gmail.com> - 2016-08-14 11:28 -0700
Re: Amazon deletes James McGinn's Troll Book after bad complaints Sergio <invalid@invalid.com> - 2016-08-14 13:52 -0500
Re: Amazon deletes James McGinn's Troll Book after bad complaints James McGinn <jimmcginn9@gmail.com> - 2016-08-14 12:40 -0700
Re: Amazon deletes James McGinn's Troll Book after bad complaints jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2016-08-15 12:58 +0000
Re: Amazon deletes James McGinn's Troll Book after bad complaints James McGinn <jimmcginn9@gmail.com> - 2016-08-14 12:12 -0700
Re: Amazon deletes James McGinn's Troll Book after bad complaints Claudius Denk <claudiusdenk@gmail.com> - 2016-08-16 21:25 -0700
Re: Amazon deletes James McGinn's Troll Book after bad complaints Paco <osbornfg@gmail.com> - 2016-08-17 09:55 -0700
Re: Amazon deletes James McGinn's Troll Book after bad complaints James McGinn <jimmcginn9@gmail.com> - 2016-08-17 16:25 -0700
Re: Amazon deletes James McGinn's Troll Book after bad complaints James McGinn <jimmcginn9@gmail.com> - 2016-08-18 11:36 -0700
Re: Amazon deletes James McGinn's Troll Book after bad complaints Paco <osbornfg@gmail.com> - 2016-08-19 04:30 -0700
Re: Amazon deletes James McGinn's Troll Book after bad complaints James McGinn <jimmcginn9@gmail.com> - 2016-08-19 15:31 -0700
Re: Amazon deletes James McGinn's Troll Book after bad complaints James McGinn <jimmcginn9@gmail.com> - 2016-08-19 19:19 -0700
Re: Amazon deletes James McGinn's Troll Book after bad complaints Paco <osbornfg@gmail.com> - 2016-08-19 20:21 -0700
Re: Amazon deletes James McGinn's Troll Book after bad complaints Sergio <invalid@invalid.com> - 2016-08-19 23:09 -0500
Re: Amazon deletes James McGinn's Troll Book after bad complaints James McGinn <jimmcginn9@gmail.com> - 2016-08-19 22:33 -0700
Re: Amazon deletes James McGinn's Troll Book after bad complaints James McGinn <jimmcginn9@gmail.com> - 2016-08-19 22:32 -0700
Re: Amazon deletes James McGinn's Troll Book after bad complaints James McGinn <jimmcginn9@gmail.com> - 2016-08-19 22:48 -0700
Re: Amazon deletes James McGinn's Troll Book after bad complaints Paco <osbornfg@gmail.com> - 2016-08-20 05:19 -0700
Re: Amazon deletes James McGinn's Troll Book after bad complaints James McGinn <jimmcginn9@gmail.com> - 2016-08-20 10:45 -0700
Re: Amazon deletes James McGinn's Troll Book after bad complaints Sergoi <invalid@invalid.com> - 2016-09-13 09:16 -0500
Re: Amazon deletes James McGinn's Troll Book after bad complaints Paco <osbornfg@gmail.com> - 2016-08-20 05:28 -0700
Re: Amazon deletes James McGinn's Troll Book after bad complaints Claudius Denk <claudiusdenk@gmail.com> - 2016-08-29 21:50 -0700
Re: Amazon deletes James McGinn's Troll Book after bad complaints Paco <osbornfg@gmail.com> - 2016-08-20 06:54 -0700
Re: Amazon deletes James McGinn's Troll Book after bad complaints Paco <osbornfg@gmail.com> - 2016-08-19 08:04 -0700
Re: Amazon deletes James McGinn's Troll Book after bad complaints Sergio <invalid@invalid.com> - 2016-08-20 12:13 -0500
Re: Amazon deletes James McGinn's Troll Book after bad complaints James McGinn <jimmcginn9@gmail.com> - 2016-08-20 11:30 -0700
Re: Amazon deletes James McGinn's Troll Book after bad complaints Sergoi <invalid@invalid.com> - 2016-09-13 13:53 -0500
Re: Amazon deletes James McGinn's Troll Book after bad complaints osbornfg@gmail.com - 2016-07-29 18:30 -0700
Re: Amazon deletes James McGinn's Troll Book after bad complaints James McGinn <jimmcginn9@gmail.com> - 2016-07-29 19:07 -0700
Re: Amazon deletes James McGinn's Troll Book after bad complaints Sergio <invalid@invalid.com> - 2016-07-29 22:52 -0500
Re: Amazon deletes James McGinn's Troll Book after bad complaints James McGinn <jimmcginn9@gmail.com> - 2016-07-29 22:47 -0700
Re: Amazon deletes James McGinn's Troll Book after bad complaints "reber g=emc^2" <herbertglazier0@gmail.com> - 2016-07-27 10:18 -0700
Re: Amazon deletes James McGinn's Troll Book after bad complaints osbornfg@gmail.com - 2016-07-28 16:43 -0700
Re: Amazon deletes James McGinn's Troll Book after bad complaints osbornfg@gmail.com - 2016-07-28 17:11 -0700
bOOk, like, written with adverbs & so on noTthaTguY <abu.kuanysh05@gmail.com> - 2016-07-28 19:02 -0700
Re: Amazon deletes James McGinn's Troll Book after bad complaints James McGinn <jimmcginn9@gmail.com> - 2016-07-29 09:04 -0700
Re: Amazon deletes James McGinn's Troll Book after bad complaints noTthaTguY <abu.kuanysh05@gmail.com> - 2016-07-29 09:32 -0700
Re: Amazon deletes James McGinn's Troll Book after bad complaints brandonahenley9@gmail.com - 2016-07-29 12:36 -0700
Re: Amazon deletes James McGinn's Troll Book after bad complaints Sergio <invalid@invalid.com> - 2016-07-29 22:55 -0500
Re: Amazon deletes James McGinn's Troll Book after bad complaints osbornfg@gmail.com - 2016-07-30 08:47 -0700
Re: Amazon deletes James McGinn's Troll Book after bad complaints James McGinn <jimmcginn9@gmail.com> - 2016-07-30 11:54 -0700
Re: Amazon deletes James McGinn's Troll Book after bad complaints osbornfg@gmail.com - 2016-07-30 13:03 -0700
Re: Amazon deletes James McGinn's Troll Book after bad complaints Sergio <invalid@invalid.com> - 2016-07-30 17:37 -0500
Re: Amazon deletes James McGinn's Troll Book after bad complaints James McGinn <jimmcginn9@gmail.com> - 2016-07-30 15:47 -0700
Re: Amazon deletes James McGinn's Troll Book after bad complaints osbornfg@gmail.com - 2016-07-30 17:03 -0700
Re: Amazon deletes James McGinn's Troll Book after bad complaints Sergio <invalid@invalid.com> - 2016-07-30 22:22 -0500
Re: Amazon deletes James McGinn's Troll Book after bad complaints osbornfg@gmail.com - 2016-07-31 10:33 -0700
Re: Amazon deletes James McGinn's Troll Book after bad complaints Sergio <invalid@invalid.com> - 2016-07-31 13:31 -0500
Re: Amazon deletes James McGinn's Troll Book after bad complaints osbornfg@gmail.com - 2016-08-01 00:37 -0700
Re: Amazon deletes James McGinn's Troll Book after bad complaints Sergio <invalid@invalid.com> - 2016-08-01 08:18 -0500
Re: Amazon deletes James McGinn's Troll Book after bad complaints Sergio <invalid@invalid.com> - 2016-08-01 08:30 -0500
Re: Amazon deletes James McGinn's Troll Book after bad complaints James McGinn <jimmcginn9@gmail.com> - 2016-07-31 10:30 -0700
Re: Amazon deletes James McGinn's Troll Book after bad complaints osbornfg@gmail.com - 2016-07-31 10:39 -0700
Re: Amazon deletes James McGinn's Troll Book after bad complaints osbornfg@gmail.com - 2016-07-31 11:11 -0700
Re: Amazon deletes James McGinn's Troll Book after bad complaints Sergio <invalid@invalid.com> - 2016-07-31 13:33 -0500
Re: Amazon deletes James McGinn's Troll Book after bad complaints osbornfg@gmail.com - 2016-08-01 01:00 -0700
Re: Amazon deletes James McGinn's Troll Book after bad complaints Sergio <invalid@invalid.com> - 2016-08-01 08:20 -0500
Re: Amazon deletes James McGinn's Troll Book after bad complaints Sergio <invalid@invalid.com> - 2016-08-01 11:02 -0500
Re: Amazon deletes James McGinn's Troll Book after bad complaints osbornfg@gmail.com - 2016-08-01 10:06 -0700
Re: Amazon deletes James McGinn's Troll Book after bad complaints Sergio <invalid@invalid.com> - 2016-08-01 20:02 -0500
Re: Amazon deletes James McGinn's Troll Book after bad complaints Sergio <invalid@invalid.com> - 2016-08-01 22:49 -0500
Re: Amazon deletes James McGinn's Troll Book after bad complaints James McGinn <jimmcginn9@gmail.com> - 2016-08-01 21:25 -0700
Re: Amazon deletes James McGinn's Troll Book after bad complaints osbornfg@gmail.com - 2016-08-02 07:37 -0700
Re: Amazon deletes James McGinn's Troll Book after bad complaints Sergio <invalid@invalid.com> - 2016-08-02 10:55 -0500
Re: Amazon deletes James McGinn's Troll Book after bad complaints Sergio <invalid@invalid.com> - 2016-08-02 13:44 -0500
Re: Amazon deletes James McGinn's Troll Book after bad complaints James McGinn <jimmcginn9@gmail.com> - 2016-08-02 16:00 -0700
Re: Amazon deletes James McGinn's Troll Book after bad complaints James McGinn <jimmcginn9@gmail.com> - 2016-08-06 22:19 -0700
Re: Amazon deletes James McGinn's Troll Book after bad complaints James McGinn <jimmcginn9@gmail.com> - 2016-08-02 22:28 -0700
Re: Amazon deletes James McGinn's Troll Book after bad complaints osbornfg@gmail.com - 2016-08-04 06:16 -0700
Re: Amazon deletes James McGinn's Troll Book after bad complaints Sergio <invalid@invalid.com> - 2016-08-04 09:25 -0500
Re: Amazon deletes James McGinn's Troll Book after bad complaints James McGinn <jimmcginn9@gmail.com> - 2016-08-06 22:06 -0700
Re: Amazon deletes James McGinn's Troll Book after bad complaints James McGinn <jimmcginn9@gmail.com> - 2016-08-01 19:34 -0700
Re: Amazon deletes James McGinn's Troll Book after bad complaints osbornfg@gmail.com - 2016-08-02 08:08 -0700
Re: Amazon deletes James McGinn's Troll Book after bad complaints osbornfg@gmail.com - 2016-08-02 13:08 -0700
Re: Amazon deletes James McGinn's Troll Book after bad complaints Sergio <invalid@invalid.com> - 2016-08-04 09:26 -0500
Re: Amazon deletes James McGinn's Troll Book after bad complaints osbornfg@gmail.com - 2016-08-04 08:11 -0700
Re: Amazon deletes James McGinn's Troll Book after bad complaints osbornfg@gmail.com - 2016-08-04 08:49 -0700
Re: Amazon deletes James McGinn's Troll Book after bad complaints Sergio <invalid@invalid.com> - 2016-08-04 11:02 -0500
Re: Amazon deletes James McGinn's Troll Book after bad complaints osbornfg@gmail.com - 2016-08-04 10:00 -0700
Re: Amazon deletes James McGinn's Troll Book after bad complaints edprochak@gmail.com - 2016-08-04 11:40 -0700
Re: Amazon deletes James McGinn's Troll Book after bad complaints Sergio <invalid@invalid.com> - 2016-08-04 15:37 -0500
Re: Amazon deletes James McGinn's Troll Book after bad complaints osbornfg@gmail.com - 2016-08-04 08:53 -0700
Re: Amazon deletes James McGinn's Troll Book after bad complaints James McGinn <jimmcginn9@gmail.com> - 2016-08-04 20:33 -0700
Re: Amazon deletes James McGinn's Troll Book after bad complaints frank osborn <osbornfg@gmail.com> - 2016-08-05 19:01 -0700
Re: Amazon deletes James McGinn's Troll Book after bad complaints James McGinn <jimmcginn9@gmail.com> - 2016-08-22 21:42 -0700
Re: Amazon deletes James McGinn's Troll Book after bad complaints osbornfg@gmail.com - 2016-08-02 13:15 -0700
Re: Amazon deletes James McGinn's Troll Book after bad complaints Sergio <invalid@invalid.com> - 2016-08-29 13:09 -0500
Re: Amazon deletes James McGinn's Troll Book after bad complaints James McGinn <jimmcginn9@gmail.com> - 2016-08-29 12:59 -0700
Re: Amazon deletes James McGinn's Troll Book after bad complaints James McGinn <jimmcginn9@gmail.com> - 2016-08-02 15:53 -0700
Re: Amazon deletes James McGinn's Troll Book after bad complaints James McGinn <jimmcginn9@gmail.com> - 2016-08-07 08:24 -0700
Re: Amazon deletes James McGinn's Troll Book after bad complaints frank osborn <osbornfg@gmail.com> - 2016-08-07 08:31 -0700
Re: Amazon deletes James McGinn's Troll Book after bad complaints Sergio <invalid@invalid.com> - 2016-08-07 15:22 -0500
Re: Amazon deletes James McGinn's Troll Book after bad complaints frank osborn <osbornfg@gmail.com> - 2016-08-08 09:13 -0700
Re: Amazon deletes James McGinn's Troll Book after bad complaints Sergio <invalid@invalid.com> - 2016-08-08 12:06 -0500
Re: Amazon deletes James McGinn's Troll Book after bad complaints frank osborn <osbornfg@gmail.com> - 2016-08-08 11:36 -0700
Re: Amazon deletes James McGinn's Troll Book after bad complaints Sergio <invalid@invalid.com> - 2016-08-08 16:32 -0500
Re: Amazon deletes James McGinn's Troll Book after bad complaints frank osborn <osbornfg@gmail.com> - 2016-08-08 19:24 -0700
Re: Amazon deletes James McGinn's Troll Book after bad complaints frank osborn <osbornfg@gmail.com> - 2016-08-08 19:30 -0700
Re: Amazon deletes James McGinn's Troll Book after bad complaints Sergio <invalid@invalid.com> - 2016-08-08 22:05 -0500
Re: Amazon deletes James McGinn's Troll Book after bad complaints frank osborn <osbornfg@gmail.com> - 2016-08-09 11:51 -0700
Re: Amazon deletes James McGinn's Troll Book after bad complaints Sergio <invalid@invalid.com> - 2016-08-15 20:59 -0500
Re: Amazon deletes James McGinn's Troll Book after bad complaints James McGinn <jimmcginn9@gmail.com> - 2016-08-15 19:54 -0700
Re: Amazon deletes James McGinn's Troll Book after bad complaints James McGinn <jimmcginn9@gmail.com> - 2016-08-15 19:55 -0700
Re: Amazon deletes James McGinn's Troll Book after bad complaints Claudius Denk <claudiusdenk@gmail.com> - 2016-08-29 21:37 -0700
Re: Amazon deletes James McGinn's Troll Book after bad complaints pnalsing@gmail.com - 2016-08-29 21:43 -0700
Re: Amazon deletes James McGinn's Troll Book after bad complaints frank osborn <osbornfg@gmail.com> - 2016-08-09 12:08 -0700
Re: Amazon deletes James McGinn's Troll Book after bad complaints James McGinn <jimmcginn9@gmail.com> - 2016-08-10 20:25 -0700
Re: Amazon deletes James McGinn's Troll Book after bad complaints frank osborn <osbornfg@gmail.com> - 2016-08-11 09:39 -0700
Re: Amazon deletes James McGinn's Troll Book after bad complaints Sergio <invalid@invalid.com> - 2016-08-11 21:50 -0500
Re: Amazon deletes James McGinn's Troll Book after bad complaints Solving Tornadoes <solvingtornadoes@gmail.com> - 2016-08-23 17:05 -0700
Re: Amazon deletes James McGinn's Troll Book after bad complaints James McGinn <jimmcginn9@gmail.com> - 2016-08-11 21:51 -0700
Re: Amazon deletes James McGinn's Troll Book after bad complaints Sergio <invalid@invalid.com> - 2016-08-08 21:56 -0500
Re: Amazon deletes James McGinn's Troll Book after bad complaints Claudius Denk <claudiusdenk@gmail.com> - 2016-08-13 13:02 -0700
Re: Amazon deletes James McGinn's Troll Book after bad complaints Sergio <invalid@invalid.com> - 2016-08-13 23:39 -0500
Re: Amazon deletes James McGinn's Troll Book after bad complaints Gamma <invalid@invalid.com> - 2016-08-16 11:49 -0500
Re: Amazon deletes James McGinn's Troll Book after bad complaints Sergio <invalid@invalid.com> - 2016-08-18 09:07 -0500
Re: Amazon deletes James McGinn's Troll Book after bad complaints Solving Tornadoes <solvingtornadoes@gmail.com> - 2016-08-23 17:04 -0700
Re: Amazon deletes James McGinn's Troll Book after bad complaints Claudius Denk <claudiusdenk@gmail.com> - 2016-08-09 11:05 -0700
Re: Amazon deletes James McGinn's Troll Book after bad complaints Sergio <invalid@invalid.com> - 2016-08-09 16:29 -0500
Re: Amazon deletes James McGinn's Troll Book after bad complaints frank osborn <osbornfg@gmail.com> - 2016-08-09 14:48 -0700
Re: Amazon deletes James McGinn's Troll Book after bad complaints frank osborn <osbornfg@gmail.com> - 2016-08-09 14:49 -0700
Re: Amazon deletes James McGinn's Troll Book after bad complaints Claudius Denk <claudiusdenk@gmail.com> - 2016-08-13 13:00 -0700
Re: Amazon deletes James McGinn's Troll Book after bad complaints frank osborn <osbornfg@gmail.com> - 2016-08-13 16:59 -0700
Re: Amazon deletes James McGinn's Troll Book after bad complaints James McGinn <jimmcginn9@gmail.com> - 2016-08-13 17:36 -0700
Re: Amazon deletes James McGinn's Troll Book after bad complaints frank osborn <osbornfg@gmail.com> - 2016-08-13 20:40 -0700
Re: Amazon deletes James McGinn's Troll Book after bad complaints Sergio <invalid@invalid.com> - 2016-08-13 23:54 -0500
Re: Amazon deletes James McGinn's Troll Book after bad complaints Hanna <invalid@invalid.com> - 2016-08-15 16:09 -0500
Re: Amazon deletes James McGinn's Troll Book after bad complaints osbornfg@gmail.com - 2016-08-15 16:41 -0700
Re: Amazon deletes James McGinn's Troll Book after bad complaints Sergio <invalid@invalid.com> - 2016-08-15 19:05 -0500
Re: Amazon deletes James McGinn's Troll Book after bad complaints Solving Tornadoes <solvingtornadoes@gmail.com> - 2016-08-23 17:16 -0700
Re: Amazon deletes James McGinn's Troll Book after bad complaints James McGinn <jimmcginn9@gmail.com> - 2016-08-24 19:28 -0700
Re: Amazon deletes James McGinn's Troll Book after bad complaints Paco <osbornfg@gmail.com> - 2016-08-25 08:51 -0700
Re: Amazon deletes James McGinn's Troll Book after bad complaints Sergio <invalid@invalid.com> - 2016-08-25 11:29 -0500
Re: Amazon deletes James McGinn's Troll Book after bad complaints Solving Tornadoes <solvingtornadoes@gmail.com> - 2016-08-25 11:34 -0700
Re: Amazon deletes James McGinn's Troll Book after bad complaints James McGinn <jimmcginn9@gmail.com> - 2016-08-28 06:02 -0700
Re: Amazon deletes James McGinn's Troll Book after bad complaints Paco <osbornfg@gmail.com> - 2016-08-29 16:39 -0700
Re: Amazon deletes James McGinn's Troll Book after bad complaints James McGinn <jimmcginn9@gmail.com> - 2016-08-29 17:19 -0700
Re: Amazon deletes James McGinn's Troll Book after bad complaints Paco <osbornfg@gmail.com> - 2016-08-29 17:39 -0700
Re: Amazon deletes James McGinn's Troll Book after bad complaints James McGinn <jimmcginn9@gmail.com> - 2016-08-29 21:13 -0700
Re: Amazon deletes James McGinn's Troll Book after bad complaints pnalsing@gmail.com - 2016-08-29 21:18 -0700
Re: Amazon deletes James McGinn's Troll Book after bad complaints James McGinn <jimmcginn9@gmail.com> - 2016-08-29 21:30 -0700
Re: Amazon deletes James McGinn's Troll Book after bad complaints pnalsing@gmail.com - 2016-08-29 21:42 -0700
Re: Amazon deletes James McGinn's Troll Book after bad complaints Claudius Denk <claudiusdenk@gmail.com> - 2016-08-29 21:53 -0700
Re: Amazon deletes James McGinn's Troll Book after bad complaints pnalsing@gmail.com - 2016-08-29 21:01 -0700
Re: Amazon deletes James McGinn's Troll Book after bad complaints James McGinn <jimmcginn9@gmail.com> - 2016-08-29 17:21 -0700
Re: Amazon deletes James McGinn's Troll Book after bad complaints Sergio <invalid@invalid.com> - 2016-08-29 20:39 -0500
Re: Amazon deletes James McGinn's Troll Book after bad complaints James McGinn <jimmcginn9@gmail.com> - 2016-08-30 00:27 -0700
Re: Amazon deletes James McGinn's Troll Book after bad complaints Paco <osbornfg@gmail.com> - 2016-08-15 17:51 -0700
Re: Amazon deletes James McGinn's Troll Book after bad complaints James McGinn <jimmcginn9@gmail.com> - 2016-08-15 19:53 -0700
Re: Amazon deletes James McGinn's Troll Book after bad complaints Paco <osbornfg@gmail.com> - 2016-08-15 20:53 -0700
Re: Amazon deletes James McGinn's Troll Book after bad complaints Claudius Denk <claudiusdenk@gmail.com> - 2016-08-15 20:58 -0700
Re: Amazon deletes James McGinn's Troll Book after bad complaints Paco <osbornfg@gmail.com> - 2016-08-15 21:15 -0700
Re: Amazon deletes James McGinn's Troll Book after bad complaints Paco <osbornfg@gmail.com> - 2016-08-15 21:26 -0700
Re: Amazon deletes James McGinn's Troll Book after bad complaints Sergio <invalid@invalid.com> - 2016-08-16 05:53 -0500
Re: Amazon deletes James McGinn's Troll Book after bad complaints Sergio <invalid@invalid.com> - 2016-08-27 12:47 -0500
Re: Amazon deletes James McGinn's Troll Book after bad complaints Sergio <invalid@invalid.com> - 2016-08-29 11:26 -0500
Re: Amazon deletes James McGinn's Troll Book after bad complaints Claudius Denk <claudiusdenk@gmail.com> - 2016-08-29 21:49 -0700
Re: Amazon deletes James McGinn's Troll Book after bad complaints James McGinn <jimmcginn9@gmail.com> - 2016-08-16 18:02 -0700
Re: Amazon deletes James McGinn's Troll Book after bad complaints Claudius Denk <claudiusdenk@gmail.com> - 2016-08-16 20:59 -0700
Re: Amazon deletes James McGinn's Troll Book after bad complaints James McGinn <jimmcginn9@gmail.com> - 2016-09-11 21:00 -0700
Re: Amazon deletes James McGinn's Troll Book after bad complaints Paco <osbornfg@gmail.com> - 2016-09-12 20:03 -0700
Re: Amazon deletes James McGinn's Troll Book after bad complaints pnalsing@gmail.com - 2016-09-12 20:15 -0700
Re: Amazon deletes James McGinn's Troll Book after bad complaints Paco <osbornfg@gmail.com> - 2016-09-13 05:03 -0700
Re: Amazon deletes James McGinn's Troll Book after bad complaints James McGinn <jimmcginn9@gmail.com> - 2016-09-12 22:12 -0700
Re: Amazon deletes James McGinn's Troll Book after bad complaints Sergoi <invalid@invalid.com> - 2016-09-13 08:36 -0500
Re: Amazon deletes James McGinn's Troll Book after bad complaints Paco <osbornfg@gmail.com> - 2016-09-16 22:26 -0700
Re: Amazon deletes James McGinn's Troll Book after bad complaints Serigo <invalid@invalid.com> - 2016-09-17 10:00 -0500
Re: Amazon deletes James McGinn's Troll Book after bad complaints Paco <osbornfg@gmail.com> - 2016-09-17 16:17 -0700
Re: Amazon deletes James McGinn's Troll Book after bad complaints Serigo <invalid@invalid.com> - 2016-09-17 23:59 -0500
Re: Amazon deletes James McGinn's Troll Book after bad complaints James McGinn <jimmcginn9@gmail.com> - 2016-08-28 06:05 -0700
Re: Amazon deletes James McGinn's Troll Book after bad complaints Claudius Denk <claudiusdenk@gmail.com> - 2016-08-15 20:55 -0700
Re: Amazon deletes James McGinn's Troll Book after bad complaints Sergio <invalid@invalid.com> - 2016-08-16 05:54 -0500
Re: Amazon deletes James McGinn's Troll Book after bad complaints Sergio <invalid@invalid.com> - 2016-08-31 12:44 -0500
Re: Amazon deletes James McGinn's Troll Book after bad complaints Claudius Denk <claudiusdenk@gmail.com> - 2016-08-16 20:49 -0700
Re: Amazon deletes James McGinn's Troll Book after bad complaints James McGinn <jimmcginn9@gmail.com> - 2016-08-22 21:40 -0700
Re: Amazon deletes James McGinn's Troll Book after bad complaints Solving Tornadoes <solvingtornadoes@gmail.com> - 2016-08-23 17:13 -0700
Re: Amazon deletes James McGinn's Troll Book after bad complaints James McGinn <jimmcginn9@gmail.com> - 2016-08-14 08:52 -0700
Re: Amazon deletes James McGinn's Troll Book after bad complaints frank osborn <osbornfg@gmail.com> - 2016-08-14 09:59 -0700
Re: Amazon deletes James McGinn's Troll Book after bad complaints James McGinn <jimmcginn9@gmail.com> - 2016-08-14 11:38 -0700
Re: Amazon deletes James McGinn's Troll Book after bad complaints Claudius Denk <claudiusdenk@gmail.com> - 2016-08-14 13:53 -0700
Re: Amazon deletes James McGinn's Troll Book after bad complaints Sergio <invalid@invalid.com> - 2016-08-15 08:24 -0500
Re: Amazon deletes James McGinn's Troll Book after bad complaints Claudius Denk <claudiusdenk@gmail.com> - 2016-08-15 20:52 -0700
Re: Amazon deletes James McGinn's Troll Book after bad complaints Sergio <invalid@invalid.com> - 2016-08-16 07:40 -0500
Re: Amazon deletes James McGinn's Troll Book after bad complaints Claudius Denk <claudiusdenk@gmail.com> - 2016-08-16 20:46 -0700
Re: Amazon deletes James McGinn's Troll Book after bad complaints Claudius Denk <claudiusdenk@gmail.com> - 2016-08-29 21:48 -0700
Re: Amazon deletes James McGinn's Troll Book after bad complaints noTthaTguY <abu.kuanysh05@gmail.com> - 2016-08-30 13:42 -0700
Re: Amazon deletes James McGinn's Troll Book after bad complaints Sergio <invalid@invalid.com> - 2016-08-31 11:50 -0500
Re: Amazon deletes James McGinn's Troll Book after bad complaints Sergio <invalid@invalid.com> - 2016-08-15 12:37 -0500
Re: Amazon deletes James McGinn's Troll Book after bad complaints Claudius Denk <claudiusdenk@gmail.com> - 2016-08-16 21:27 -0700
Re: Amazon deletes James McGinn's Troll Book after bad complaints Claudius Denk <claudiusdenk@gmail.com> - 2016-08-14 13:21 -0700
Re: Amazon deletes James McGinn's Troll Book after bad complaints Sergio <invalid@invalid.com> - 2016-08-15 09:47 -0500
Re: Amazon deletes James McGinn's Troll Book after bad complaints Solving Tornadoes <solvingtornadoes@gmail.com> - 2016-08-23 17:11 -0700
Re: Amazon deletes James McGinn's Troll Book after bad complaints Claudius Denk <claudiusdenk@gmail.com> - 2016-08-14 13:15 -0700
Re: Amazon deletes James McGinn's Troll Book after bad complaints Sergio <invalid@invalid.com> - 2016-08-15 08:25 -0500
Re: Amazon deletes James McGinn's Troll Book after bad complaints Sergio <invalid@invalid.com> - 2016-08-15 21:00 -0500
Re: Amazon deletes James McGinn's Troll Book after bad complaints Paco <osbornfg@gmail.com> - 2016-08-15 19:08 -0700
Re: Amazon deletes James McGinn's Troll Book after bad complaints Sergio <invalid@invalid.com> - 2016-08-15 21:18 -0500
Re: Amazon deletes James McGinn's Troll Book after bad complaints Sergio <invalid@invalid.com> - 2016-08-13 23:43 -0500
Re: Amazon deletes James McGinn's Troll Book after bad complaints Claudius Denk <claudiusdenk@gmail.com> - 2016-08-14 13:13 -0700
Re: Amazon deletes James McGinn's Troll Book after bad complaints Sergio <invalid@invalid.com> - 2016-08-15 14:16 -0500
Re: Amazon deletes James McGinn's Troll Book after bad complaints Solving Tornadoes <solvingtornadoes@gmail.com> - 2016-08-23 17:09 -0700
Re: Amazon deletes James McGinn's Troll Book after bad complaints Sergio <invalid@invalid.com> - 2016-08-13 23:40 -0500
Re: Amazon deletes James McGinn's Troll Book after bad complaints Solving Tornadoes <solvingtornadoes@gmail.com> - 2016-08-23 17:06 -0700
Re: Amazon deletes James McGinn's Troll Book after bad complaints James McGinn <jimmcginn9@gmail.com> - 2016-08-28 08:09 -0700
Re: Amazon deletes James McGinn's Troll Book after bad complaints Sergio <invalid@invalid.com> - 2016-08-15 14:07 -0500
Re: Amazon deletes James McGinn's Troll Book after bad complaints James McGinn <jimmcginn9@gmail.com> - 2016-08-09 22:50 -0700
Re: Amazon deletes James McGinn's Troll Book after bad complaints Solving Tornadoes <solvingtornadoes@gmail.com> - 2016-08-23 17:01 -0700
Re: Amazon deletes James McGinn's Troll Book after bad complaints osbornfg@gmail.com - 2016-08-01 01:10 -0700
Re: Amazon deletes James McGinn's Troll Book after bad complaints Sergio <invalid@invalid.com> - 2016-08-01 09:57 -0500
Re: Amazon deletes James McGinn's Troll Book after bad complaints noTthaTguY <abu.kuanysh05@gmail.com> - 2016-08-01 15:34 -0700
Re: Amazon deletes James McGinn's Troll Book after bad complaints Sergio <invalid@invalid.com> - 2016-08-01 20:04 -0500
Re: Amazon deletes James McGinn's Troll Book after bad complaints James McGinn <jimmcginn9@gmail.com> - 2016-08-06 22:00 -0700
Re: Amazon deletes James McGinn's Troll Book after bad complaints James McGinn <jimmcginn9@gmail.com> - 2016-07-31 14:51 -0700
Re: Amazon deletes James McGinn's Troll Book after bad complaints James McGinn <jimmcginn9@gmail.com> - 2016-07-29 23:06 -0700
after bad noTthaTguY <abu.kuanysh05@gmail.com> - 2016-08-01 15:45 -0700
Page 1 of 14 [1] 2 3 … 14 Next page →
| From | osbornfg@gmail.com |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-07-24 07:19 -0700 |
| Subject | Re: Amazon deletes James McGinn's Troll Book after bad complaints |
| Message-ID | <b7513e31-6d70-4d18-b4b1-c622a083f63c@googlegroups.com> |
they didn't delete it. I purchased both his books.
[toc] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Sergio <invalid@invalid.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-07-24 12:37 -0500 |
| Message-ID | <nn2ud5$1klt$1@gioia.aioe.org> |
| In reply to | #590575 |
On 7/24/2016 9:19 AM, osbornfg@gmail.com wrote: > they didn't delete it. I purchased both his books. > Hi MSD! there has only been 2 sales, one by K. Parker, on sale for $1.23 and here is her review; Top Customer Reviews 1.0 out of 5 stars *insane rambling* By K. Parker on July 3, 2014 Format: Kindle Edition Verified Purchase The author believes that elementary concepts, which have been taught to and understood by first year Chemistry and Physics students for many decades, are some kind of meteorological conspiracy. The author also does not understand the very basic physics that drive convective updrafts (the positive buoyancy due to warm temperature anomalies that result from latent heat release). Instead, apparently based largely on reading websites, he proposes a mechanism that makes no physical sense and is totally unobserved and unobservable. This text violates even basic tenets of logic. Totally without merit. The other person to download the book for free, hunter, during a special wrote; 1.0 out of 5 stars *Waste of time, a non-funny joke* By hunter on July 16, 2014 Format: Kindle Edition This book misleads the reader on basic physical concepts like density, the basics of weather dynamics, and offers a silly idea that confuses metaphors about how the jet stream operates with reality. It solves nothing but does offer a way to waste time and money buying and reading it. This book is an example of the risks posed in the age of inexpensive self publishing. MSD also bought the book, and rest of the reviews are by MSD who is Cladius Dink, who is James Mcginn. .........and they did delete it.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | osbornfg@gmail.com |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-07-24 14:36 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <fcb92204-811c-486a-9bf6-0a1ce24ed395@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #590583 |
>Sergio > .........and they did delete it. Appreciate the reply. I did check again today when I made the claim. It still was listed. The MSD user is my girl friend's account, that we share. I'm am a different user. I saw Jame's post about his book on the Thunderbots dot info forum. One thing about reading his theory, is another theorist I like to read; Charles Chandler, wrote me once, saying he like to read other theory's even ones he doesn't agree with, because there are usually specific facts that get explained differently than he had previously considered. So between his (James) books and these discussions, I am getting a greater exposure to all the controversy than I have ever considered prior. Thanks Frank O.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | James McGinn <jimmcginn9@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-07-24 17:20 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <e21b0c35-9885-451a-a29f-c4415fb45c2b@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #590614 |
On Sunday, July 24, 2016 at 2:36:20 PM UTC-7, osbo...@gmail.com wrote: > >Sergio > > .........and they did delete it. > > Appreciate the reply. I did check again today when I made the claim. It still was listed. The MSD user is my girl friend's account, that we share. I'm am a different user. I saw Jame's post about his book on the Thunderbots dot info forum. One thing about reading his theory, is another theorist I like to read; Charles Chandler, wrote me once, saying he like to read other theory's even ones he doesn't agree with, because there are usually specific facts that get explained differently than he had previously considered. So between his (James) books and these discussions, I am getting a greater exposure to all the controversy than I have ever considered prior. > > Thanks > Frank O. I like his website. Chandler seems committed to the notion that electricity plays a central role in vortices/storms/tornadoes/hurricanes/etc. I think his belief is so deep that it blinds him to the fact that his theory is, in actuality, just a notion. In contrast my own theory involves plasma, which also involves a relatively greater role for electricity in that electrons are instrumental as a component of earth's atmospheric gases/plasmas. (And they are constantly inflowing through the solar wind.) My thinking also incorporates fluid dynamics, which is important if we want to actually explain phenomena like tornadoes. Chandler seems to not grasp this. Fluid dynamic aspects of tornadoes are difficult to discuss/explain. Moreover, in this subject the complexity of properly incorporating fluid dynamics is further complicated by the fact that we are dealing with H2O. Most all of science is confused about H2O, so explaining anything in this discipline involves first untangling a lot of well entrenched misthinking, most all of which pivots off some kind of plainly ludicrous assumption about H2O. For example, as I recall Chandler believes in convection and latent heat (of H2O) and the general "heat engine" or "hot tower" notions of standard meteorology. If he had a proper understanding of H2O he would not fallen for these plainly erroneous notions. It's great though that Chandler seems to at least have no trouble realizing what complete dufi are meteorologists on any of this. Too bad he doesn't speak up more, because I think he's got a lot to offer. And I recommend to everybody to go to his website and spend hour or two going through the whole thing: Try doing a search on Charles Chandler Website Tornado Water's role in storms is as an essential component of the conduit--vortices-- that delivers the low pressure energy of storms from a jet stream. And this capability has to do with water's surface tension properties being maximized under conditions that maximize surface area, as occurs on wind shear boundaries (this part is complicated [*], I apologize for the brevity here). Water's role in storms has nothing at all to do with either convection or latent heat. These notions are but superstition. It is H2O's plasmodic qualities (surface tension) that explain its role in storms. (BTW, low pressure energy of storms travels upstream, exactly the opposite of the direction of air flow.) ([*] If you were to take a microscopic snapshot of the wall of an atmospheric vortice you would see billions of polymers of H2O, like threads of ice, spinning rapidly end over end.) James McGinn Solving Tornadoes
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | noTthaTguY <abu.kuanysh05@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-07-25 11:29 -0700 |
| Subject | amazin |
| Message-ID | <c97a88e1-eb60-48df-bd87-39da48517568@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #590628 |
it does not maximize the area of the surface, unless you are referring to a fractal property of HOH; the surface is minimized under differential constraints, wind e.g > capability has to do with water's surface tension properties being maximized > under conditions that maximize surface area, as occurs on wind shear boundaries > (this part is complicated [*], I apologize for the brevity here). Water's role > in storms has nothing at all to do with either convection or latent heat. > These notions are but superstition. It is H2O's plasmodic qualities (surface > tension) that explain its role in storms. > > (BTW, low pressure energy of storms travels upstream, exactly the opposite of > the direction of air flow.) > > ([*] If you were to take a microscopic snapshot of the wall of an atmospheric > vortice you would see billions of polymers of H2O, like threads of ice, > spinning rapidly end over end.) > > James McGinn > Solving Tornadoes
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | osbornfg@gmail.com |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-07-25 21:36 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <11822ba9-9462-4c33-a2b0-02973cce1ec8@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #590628 |
>>James >> >>(BTW, low pressure energy of storms >>travels upstream, exactly the >>opposite of >>the direction of air flow.) In Charles C's Tornadoe abstract he uses a picture of a water spout to show this, I think.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | James McGinn <jimmcginn9@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-07-26 17:26 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <f62a2913-c668-494a-8eab-d9ef78be510d@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #590781 |
Great pic, ain't it? Lots of great pics on his site. I don't know about CC's thinking other than his Website.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | osbornfg@gmail.com |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-07-29 17:38 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <b76e57c7-366c-4225-86b2-b93a03945f8f@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #590878 |
On Tuesday, July 26, 2016 at 7:26:19 PM UTC-5, James McGinn wrote: > Great pic, ain't it? Lots of great pics on his site. > I do appreciate Charles's conservative approach to his science, even as he stretches the limits of accepted science. In some other post in this group, there was wishful expressions that an abstract have graphs, pictures, math, to be a format people are use to seeing. It was exciting they gave me a new notion of what good science is about. I think it has to have a good presentation format, that everybody agrees on. So Charles's paper struck me as meeting those criteria of a polished format. He is a software integrator, I believe. I wanted to see what you thought about his thoughts on the failure of super-cell simulations using the standard concepts; His last update was aug. 2015... Current research focuses on the thermodynamic factors. The most thorough attempts at modeling the dynamics of thunderstorms have taken the following factors into account: differences in air temperature, pressure, and humidity at various altitudes in the troposphere before the storm begins, heat sources and sinks, including the Sun heating the surface of the Earth, as well as heat exchanges due to the evaporation and condensation of water molecules, the motion of parcels of air due to changes in density, given the force of gravity, and given the density of neighboring parcels, where and when the water molecules will change state within the cloud, the effect of gravity on liquid and solid water particles, and the aerodynamic effect that liquid and solid water particles will have on the parcels of air through which they fall. Unfortunately, physics simulations incorporating just these factors fail to resolve into supercells. And while probabilistic modeling based on thermodynamics can predict the emergence of supercells far better than chance, researchers are baffled by the cases in which all of the known factors were present, and yet no supercell formed. http://charles-chandler.org/Geophysics/Tornadoes.php?text=full&images=true&units=imperial Thanks Frank
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | James McGinn <jimmcginn9@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-07-29 23:48 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <fc81b2a2-22b2-4271-8df2-10d9917cafbe@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #591232 |
On Friday, July 29, 2016 at 5:38:07 PM UTC-7, osbo...@gmail.com wrote: > On Tuesday, July 26, 2016 at 7:26:19 PM UTC-5, James McGinn wrote: > > Great pic, ain't it? Lots of great pics on his site. > > > I do appreciate Charles's conservative approach to his science, even as he stretches the limits of accepted science. > In some other post in this group, there was wishful expressions that an abstract have graphs, pictures, math, to be a format people are use to seeing. It was exciting they gave me a new notion of what good science is about. I think it has to have a good presentation format, that everybody agrees on. > So Charles's paper struck me as meeting those criteria of a polished format. He is a software integrator, I believe. > I wanted to see what you thought about his thoughts on the failure of super-cell simulations using the standard concepts; > His last update was aug. 2015... Charles and I are working in two completely different paradigms. He holds some fundamental truths (about convection and latent heat) that I consider to be plainly silly. (And he lacks the breakthroughs in water than I made.) > > Current research focuses on the thermodynamic factors. Get the fluid dynamics right before you worry too much about the thermodynamics. The most thorough attempts at modeling the dynamics of thunderstorms have taken the following factors into account: > differences in air temperature, pressure, and humidity at various altitudes in the troposphere before the storm begins, > heat sources and sinks, including the Sun heating the surface of the Earth, as well as heat exchanges due to the evaporation and condensation of water molecules, > > the motion of parcels of air due to changes in density, given the force of gravity, and given the density of neighboring parcels, > > where and when the water molecules will change state within the cloud, Change state? Surely you realize steam (monomolecular H2O) is impossible. Right? So what "state" change are you talking about? > the effect of gravity on liquid and solid water particles, > > and the aerodynamic effect that liquid and solid water particles will have on the parcels of air through which they fall. It's the aerodynamic effect of plasma that is more important. Fluid dynamics, chaos theory, complexity theory -- missing. > > Unfortunately, physics simulations incorporating just these factors fail to resolve into supercells. And while probabilistic modeling based on thermodynamics can predict the emergence of supercells far better than chance, researchers are baffled by the cases in which all of the known factors were present, and yet no supercell formed. When you have the origin of the energy backasswards its no surprise the model doesn't resolve. Keep in mind, meteorologists are birdbrains that can't even get their fundamendtals straight. > > http://charles-chandler.org/Geophysics/Tornadoes.php?text=full&images=true&units=imperial If your fundamental assumptions are wrong/mistaken that would explain how the models of supercells are irresolvable. Get the fundamentals right first. You at least have to know where the energy comes from and how it is delivered. If you can't get the small (simple) stuff straight don't be surprised when the model won't resolve. The energy of storms starts out as differential pressure. Jet streams extract and store this energy in the form of fast moving air. Storms--by way of vortices, sometimes stretching thousands of miles, deliver this energy (in the form of low pressure, suction) at certain locations. Unless you understand the dynamics of how this occurs and, most importantly, unless you possess an accurate understanding of H2O's role therein you are just wasting your time--spinning wheels. And, unfortunately, that is what I see happening with Chandler.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | osbornfg@gmail.com |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-07-30 08:17 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <c27fe3d1-1829-43bf-837c-8194c84b744b@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #591256 |
What appears to be cloud-free air (virtually) always contains sub microscopic drops, but as evaporation exceeds condensation, the drops do not survive long after an initial chance clumping of molecules. http://www.ems.psu.edu/~fraser/Bad/BadClouds.html I am wondering of the form of water we are considering. Which sounds like the form of water your working with, sub microscopic drops or chance clumping of molecules? thanks...
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | James McGinn <jimmcginn9@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-07-30 09:15 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <9ba42a64-2747-404b-a491-14b8078ce467@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #591269 |
On Saturday, July 30, 2016 at 8:17:07 AM UTC-7, osbo...@gmail.com wrote: > What appears to be cloud-free air (virtually) always contains sub microscopic drops, but as evaporation exceeds condensation, the drops do not survive long after an initial chance clumping of molecules. > http://www.ems.psu.edu/~fraser/Bad/BadClouds.html > > I am wondering of the form of water we are considering. Which sounds like the form of water your working with, sub microscopic drops or chance clumping of molecules?But > > thanks... Excellent website. It's good to see there are some genuine college professors addressing some of the popularistic myths of meteorology. But I don't think this professor has quite broken free from these myths. And that is a problem because unless you break free from all of these myths you will most likely be drawn back in to the seduction of the other myths. So, what is going on? Water molecules are constantly coursing back and forth between phases (another word for the three states: vapor, liquid, and solid). This is mistaken. Vapor is not a phase change. Vapor is liquid suspended in air. Electrostatic charges are the force that suspends heavier microdroplets. If more molecules are leaving a liquid surface than arriving, there is a net evaporation; if more arrive than leave, a net condensation. It is these relative flows of molecules which determine whether a cloud forms or evaporates, not some imaginary holding capacity that nitrogen or oxygen have for water vapor. The rate at which vapor molecules arrive at a surface of liquid (cloud drop) or solid (ice crystal) depends upon the vapor pressure. The rate at which vapor molecules leave the surface depends upon the characteristics of the surface. The number escaping varies with: the phases involved --- molecules can escape from liquid more readily than from the solid (ice); the shape of the boundary --- molecules escape more readily from highly curved (small) drops or ice crystals (convex); the purity of the boundary --- foreign substances dissolved in the liquid or ice diminish the number of water molecules which can escape; the temperature of the boundary --- at higher temperatures the molecules have more energy and can more readily escape. And therein lies the origin of the myth. The temperature of a cloud droplet or ice crystal will be (nearly) the same as that of the air, so people imagine that somehow the air was to blame. But, if the (other gases of the) air were removed, leaving everything else the same, condensation and evaporation would proceed as before (the air was irrelevant to the behavior). To assign the behavior of water to an invented holding capacity of the air is like assigning your life's fortunes to an invented influence of the constellations (and as we all know, nobody does that anymore). I'm not sure if I agree or disagree. Electrostatic charges cause microdroplets (which are heavier than air molecules) to be pulled up between the N2 and O2 of the atmosphere (this results in that parcel of air being heavier [not lighter]). So, what do you tell your students? What appears to be cloud-free air (virtually) always contains sub microscopic drops, Yes. This is correct. (Except actually it's always, not virtually always.) but as evaporation exceeds condensation, the drops do not survive long after an initial chance clumping of molecules. Not true. The droplets always persist. There is no gaseous H2O (steam) in earth's atmosphere. Invisibility of vapor is not evidence that it contains gaseous H2O. That is a bullshit assumption that this professor has fallen for. H2O is only gaseous at temperatures above it's boiling point. Anybody who suggests otherwise is a dumbass that should be deliberately ignored. Invisibility of moist air is not evidence that it contains gaseous H2O. Don't be gullible like this professor. As air is cooled, the evaporation rate decreases more rapidly than does the condensation rate with the result that there comes a temperature (the dew point temperature) where the evaporation is less than the condensation and a droplet can grow into a cloud drop. Kinda true, accept that there is never any truly gaseous (monomolecular) H2O in earth's atmosphere. Never. It's impossible. So condensation involve smaller (often invisibly smaller) microdroplets combining to form larger (often visibly larger--due to having a diameter longer than a photon) microdroplets. Condensation, therefore, never, ever, ever, ever involves a phase change. Evaporation increases with temperature, not because the holding capacity of the air changes, but because the more energetic molecules can evaporate more readily (with, of course, the caveat that evaporation is also influenced by things other than temperature, as described above). Temperature is an influence, pressure is an influence, electric charge is an influence, turbulence is an influence etc. If that explanation is not simple enough for your students, just present the facts: when the temperature drops below the dew-point temperature, there is a net condensation and a cloud forms. What does this prove though? But don't ever teach nonsense by claiming that the air has a temperature-dependent holding capacity for water vapor. I disagree. Air does have a holding capaity. And it is partly dependent on temperature and so there are other factors also. The fact is droplets of H2O that are considerably heavier than either N2 or O2 particles do/does stay suspended. Something is holding it there and preventing it from falling due to gravity. IMO, it is obvious that electrostatic charges are involved. And I suspect the high surface tension of H2O is a factor. A little history The idea that it is the air which determines the amount of water vapor which can be present through some sort of holding capacity is an eighteenth century idea which was shown to be false both empirically and theoretically about two hundred years ago! I think this author is oversimplifying something that is actually more complex than he suggests. What exactly is he talking about here? I can't figure it out. The fact that it is still taught in our schools and defended by teachers and (gulp) professors, is a testimony to the mindless persistence of myth. A discussion of some of the history of this bankrupt idea is offered by Steven M. Babin . Bad Clouds FAQ Before writing me with a question about this page, please check the Bad Clouds FAQ to see if the issue has already been addressed satisfactorily. I will look when I get a chance.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | frank osborn <osbornfg@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-08-06 08:51 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <ac42bb88-121d-4870-9d2b-94aa95f387d0@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #591273 |
On Saturday, July 30, 2016 at 11:15:50 AM UTC-5, James McGinn wrote: > Kinda true, accept that there is never any truly gaseous (monomolecular) H2O in earth's atmosphere. Never. It's impossible. > This is what I'm pondering. The idea of how to produce a volume of pure H2O gas, Can it be done at room temperature? And I guess not. With out other non attractive gases creating insulation between the water molecules, they will bump into each other at low energies and condense. But I don't see how we can say evaporation into a gas in air can't happen. But the question to me, what is the behavior of gaseous water in a parcel of air mass. Yes its less dense, but for the less dense gaseous water to do work of lifting the local heavier air mass, there would have to be a resilient structure to work ageist? other wise they are sneaky selfish little bastards and lift only themselves to the upper troposphere? But simple cold air, warm air convection (applied to parcels of air) seems workable, if normal air can have a form of viscosity as knuckles of water turbulence. So maybe with Newtons law of bodies in motion, this works. So my conclusion is similar to yours but different. Water vapor density has little to do with air parcel convection, unless weak plasma's or static electricity producing double layers and therefor resilient structures as lifting containers, form what I understand of Charles Chandler's explanation and your concepts of resilient structure in the use of conservation of energy.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Wally W. <ww84wa@aim.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-08-06 12:34 -0400 |
| Message-ID | <q64cqb1en6dcrapeeicbk3c5va7fgmmi5p@4ax.com> |
| In reply to | #592077 |
On Sat, 6 Aug 2016 08:51:49 -0700 (PDT), frank osborn wrote: >On Saturday, July 30, 2016 at 11:15:50 AM UTC-5, James McGinn wrote: > >> Kinda true, accept that there is never any truly gaseous (monomolecular) H2O in earth's atmosphere. Never. It's impossible. >> > >This is what I'm pondering. The idea of how to produce a volume of pure H2O gas, Can it be done at room temperature? And I guess not. You guess wrong. You can make H2O gas at room temperature with a straw longer than about 34 feet: https://www.quora.com/What-is-the-limiting-factor-in-how-long-straws-can-be
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Solving Tornadoes <solvingtornadoes@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-08-06 10:00 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <3042ae46-135e-479c-9a8d-5458482ab87b@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #592078 |
On Saturday, August 6, 2016 at 9:34:50 AM UTC-7, Wally W. wrote: > On Sat, 6 Aug 2016 08:51:49 -0700 (PDT), frank osborn wrote: > > >On Saturday, July 30, 2016 at 11:15:50 AM UTC-5, James McGinn wrote: > > > >> Kinda true, accept that there is never any truly gaseous (monomolecular) H2O in earth's atmosphere. Never. It's impossible. > >> > > > >This is what I'm pondering. The idea of how to produce a volume of pure H2O gas, Can it be done at room temperature? And I guess not. Right. It's impossible.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | James McGinn <jimmcginn9@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-08-06 22:14 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <4b057bd0-2200-4c38-87c3-e7667e00db7d@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #592078 |
On Saturday, August 6, 2016 at 9:34:50 AM UTC-7, Wally W. wrote: > On Sat, 6 Aug 2016 08:51:49 -0700 (PDT), frank osborn wrote: > > >On Saturday, July 30, 2016 at 11:15:50 AM UTC-5, James McGinn wrote: > > > >> Kinda true, accept that there is never any truly gaseous (monomolecular) H2O in earth's atmosphere. Never. It's impossible. > >> > > > >This is what I'm pondering. The idea of how to produce a volume of pure H2O gas, Can it be done at room temperature? And I guess not. > > You guess wrong. > > You can make H2O gas at room temperature with a straw longer than > about 34 feet: > > https://www.quora.com/What-is-the-limiting-factor-in-how-long-straws-can-be That will make vopor, not gas. Vapor contains liquid H2O.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Sergio <invalid@invalid.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-08-06 13:46 -0500 |
| Message-ID | <no5bah$sd2$3@gioia.aioe.org> |
| In reply to | #592077 |
On 8/6/2016 10:51 AM, frank osborn wrote: > On Saturday, July 30, 2016 at 11:15:50 AM UTC-5, James McGoon wrote: > >> Kinda true, > > This is what I'm pondering. The idea of how to produce a volume of > pure H2O gas, Can it be done at room temperature? And I guess not. <snip crap> Wrong. simple, boil water from tea kettle into a balloon, watch balloon expand.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Claudius Denk <claudiusdenk@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-08-06 13:43 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <51cfd8d0-36ac-4402-a5eb-c29b2f63cf00@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #592099 |
On Saturday, August 6, 2016 at 11:46:45 AM UTC-7, Sergio wrote: > On 8/6/2016 10:51 AM, frank osborn wrote: > > On Saturday, July 30, 2016 at 11:15:50 AM UTC-5, James McGoon wrote: > > > >> Kinda true, > > > > This is what I'm pondering. The idea of how to produce a volume of > > pure H2O gas, Can it be done at room temperature? And I guess not. > > <snip crap> > > Wrong. > > > simple, boil water from tea kettle into a balloon, watch balloon expand. Go ahead, dumbass, show us. What are you waiting for?
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Sergio <invalid@invalid.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-08-06 17:03 -0500 |
| Message-ID | <no5msc$1f0a$1@gioia.aioe.org> |
| In reply to | #592119 |
On 8/6/2016 3:43 PM, Claudius Denk wrote: > On Saturday, August 6, 2016 at 11:46:45 AM UTC-7, Sergio wrote: >> On 8/6/2016 10:51 AM, frank osborn wrote: >>> On Saturday, July 30, 2016 at 11:15:50 AM UTC-5, James McGoon wrote: >>> >>>> Kinda true, >>> >>> This is what I'm pondering. The idea of how to produce a volume of >>> pure H2O gas, Can it be done at room temperature? And I guess not. >> >> <snip crap> >> >> Wrong. >> >> >> simple, boil water from tea kettle into a balloon, watch balloon expand. > > Go ahead, dumbass, show us. What are you waiting for? > Did you know that you can do that at home! Ask your mommie to put her big fat kettle on the stove and make it hot, then stick a balloon on it, and watch it get bigger. but of course, we dont expect you, Claud, to be any smarter than poor McGinn.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | frank osborn <osbornfg@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-08-07 08:21 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <6e67b918-780e-4112-82a6-970a81614755@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #592130 |
On Saturday, August 6, 2016 at 5:04:01 PM UTC-5, Sergio wrote: > Ask your mommie to put her big fat kettle on the stove and make it hot, > then stick a balloon on it, and watch it get bigger. LOL.. what this reminds me of is 'Chris Farley and David Spade in the movie Tommy Boy. Sounds like a line David Spade would use.. But levity aside, it all helps me get my head around how difficult it is for water vapor to singularly exist in the gaseous state at sea level ( even the straw 34'straw... 1"X34' PVC pipe, a poor man's vacuum pump, yes!). It's so difficult that its considered in a constant phase change? which for me makes it for practical purposes vary difficult to confirm. But I will continue to struggle with the entry level concepts. Also I am looking for articles on the size and properties of water droplets at sea level.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | James McGinn <jimmcginn9@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-08-07 08:33 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <20e8a938-d2bf-46ce-9ca7-a62f708fbf6b@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #592197 |
On Sunday, August 7, 2016 at 8:21:43 AM UTC-7, frank osborn wrote: > On Saturday, August 6, 2016 at 5:04:01 PM UTC-5, Sergio wrote: > > > Ask your mommie to put her big fat kettle on the stove and make it hot, > > then stick a balloon on it, and watch it get bigger. > > LOL.. what this reminds me of is 'Chris Farley and David Spade in the movie Tommy Boy. Sounds like a line David Spade would use.. > > But levity aside, it all helps me get my head around how difficult it is for water vapor to singularly exist in the gaseous state at sea level ( even the straw 34'straw... 1"X34' PVC pipe, a poor man's vacuum pump, yes!). > It's so difficult that its considered in a constant phase change? which for me makes it for practical purposes vary difficult to confirm. But I will continue to struggle with the entry level concepts. Also I am looking for articles on the size and properties of water droplets at sea level. You will find nothing. The belief in gaseous H2O at ambient temps is just a group delusion. People who believe it exist will constantly claim to have found evidence but when you look to where they are pointing there is nothing there.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
Page 1 of 14 [1] 2 3 … 14 Next page →
Back to top | Article view | sci.physics
csiph-web