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


Groups > sci.physics > #554299 > unrolled thread

Explanations That Everyone in the Scientific Community Accepts EXCEPT James McGinn

Started byJames McGinn <jimmcginn9@gmail.com>
First post2016-02-18 09:55 -0800
Last post2016-03-06 15:06 -0600
Articles 20 on this page of 59 — 9 participants

Back to article view | Back to sci.physics


Contents

  Explanations That Everyone in the Scientific Community Accepts EXCEPT James McGinn James McGinn <jimmcginn9@gmail.com> - 2016-02-18 09:55 -0800
    Re: Explanations That Everyone in the Scientific Community Accepts EXCEPT James McGinn dm <pippinese@gmail.com> - 2016-02-18 10:29 -0800
      Re: Explanations That Everyone in the Scientific Community Accepts EXCEPT James McGinn James McGinn <jimmcginn9@gmail.com> - 2016-02-18 10:39 -0800
      Re: Explanations That Everyone in the Scientific Community Accepts EXCEPT James McGinn Sergio <invalid@invalid.com> - 2016-02-18 12:47 -0600
        Re: Explanations That Everyone in the Scientific Community Accepts EXCEPT James McGinn James McGinn <jimmcginn9@gmail.com> - 2016-02-18 10:54 -0800
          Re: Explanations That Everyone in the Scientific Community Accepts EXCEPT James McGinn pippinese@gmail.com - 2016-02-18 11:04 -0800
            Re: Explanations That Everyone in the Scientific Community Accepts EXCEPT James McGinn James McGinn <jimmcginn9@gmail.com> - 2016-02-18 11:09 -0800
              Re: Explanations That Everyone in the Scientific Community Accepts EXCEPT James McGinn Sergio <invalid@invalid.com> - 2016-02-18 15:06 -0600
                Re: Explanations That Everyone in the Scientific Community Accepts EXCEPT James McGinn James McGinn <jimmcginn9@gmail.com> - 2016-02-18 13:12 -0800
                Re: Explanations That Everyone in the Scientific Community Accepts EXCEPT James McGinn James McGinn <jimmcginn9@gmail.com> - 2016-02-18 13:55 -0800
                  Re: Explanations That Everyone in the Scientific Community Accepts EXCEPT James McGinn Sergio <invalid@invalid.com> - 2016-02-18 17:01 -0600
            Re: Explanations That Everyone in the Scientific Community Accepts EXCEPT James McGinn James McGinn <jimmcginn9@gmail.com> - 2016-02-18 12:42 -0800
        Re: Explanations That Everyone in the Scientific Community Accepts EXCEPT James McGinn HVAC <mr.hvac@gmail.com> - 2016-02-19 09:07 -0800
          Re: Explanations That Everyone in the Scientific Community Accepts EXCEPT James McGinn James McGinn <jimmcginn9@gmail.com> - 2016-02-19 09:28 -0800
            Re: Explanations That Everyone in the Scientific Community Accepts EXCEPT James McGinn HVAC <mr.hvac@gmail.com> - 2016-02-19 09:37 -0800
              Re: Explanations That Everyone in the Scientific Community Accepts EXCEPT James McGinn jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2016-02-19 17:55 +0000
                Re: Explanations That Everyone in the Scientific Community Accepts EXCEPT James McGinn dm <pippinese@gmail.com> - 2016-02-19 10:14 -0800
                  Re: Explanations That Everyone in the Scientific Community Accepts EXCEPT James McGinn James McGinn <jimmcginn9@gmail.com> - 2016-02-19 10:41 -0800
                    Re: Explanations That Everyone in the Scientific Community Accepts EXCEPT James McGinn jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2016-02-19 19:57 +0000
                      Re: Explanations That Everyone in the Scientific Community Accepts EXCEPT James McGinn James McGinn <jimmcginn9@gmail.com> - 2016-02-19 13:17 -0800
                        Re: Explanations That Everyone in the Scientific Community Accepts EXCEPT James McGinn dm <pippinese@gmail.com> - 2016-02-19 13:33 -0800
                        Re: Explanations That Everyone in the Scientific Community Accepts EXCEPT James McGinn pnalsing@gmail.com - 2016-02-19 13:56 -0800
                          Re: Explanations That Everyone in the Scientific Community Accepts EXCEPT James McGinn Claudius Denk <claudiusdenk@gmail.com> - 2016-02-19 16:02 -0800
                        Re: Explanations That Everyone in the Scientific Community Accepts EXCEPT James McGinn jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2016-02-19 21:54 +0000
                          Re: Explanations That Everyone in the Scientific Community Accepts EXCEPT James McGinn James McGinn <jimmcginn9@gmail.com> - 2016-02-19 14:25 -0800
                            Re: Explanations That Everyone in the Scientific Community Accepts EXCEPT James McGinn Sergio <invalid@invalid.com> - 2016-02-19 17:11 -0600
                              Re: Explanations That Everyone in the Scientific Community Accepts EXCEPT James McGinn James McGinn <jimmcginn9@gmail.com> - 2016-02-19 15:16 -0800
                                Re: Explanations That Everyone in the Scientific Community Accepts EXCEPT James McGinn Sergio <invalid@invalid.com> - 2016-02-19 18:07 -0600
                                  Re: Explanations That Everyone in the Scientific Community Accepts EXCEPT James McGinn James McGinn <jimmcginn9@gmail.com> - 2016-02-19 16:13 -0800
                            Re: Explanations That Everyone in the Scientific Community Accepts EXCEPT James McGinn jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2016-02-20 00:49 +0000
                              Re: Explanations That Everyone in the Scientific Community Accepts EXCEPT James McGinn James McGinn <jimmcginn9@gmail.com> - 2016-02-19 17:17 -0800
                      Re: Explanations That Everyone in the Scientific Community Accepts EXCEPT James McGinn Claudius Denk <claudiusdenk@gmail.com> - 2016-02-19 16:03 -0800
                  Re: Explanations That Everyone in the Scientific Community Accepts EXCEPT James McGinn James McGinn <jimmcginn9@gmail.com> - 2016-02-19 14:31 -0800
              Re: Explanations That Everyone in the Scientific Community Accepts EXCEPT James McGinn James McGinn <jimmcginn9@gmail.com> - 2016-02-19 10:39 -0800
      Re: Explanations That Everyone in the Scientific Community Accepts EXCEPT James McGinn James McGinn <jimmcginn9@gmail.com> - 2016-02-18 11:59 -0800
      Re: Explanations That Everyone in the Scientific Community Accepts EXCEPT James McGinn James McGinn <jimmcginn9@gmail.com> - 2016-02-18 15:57 -0800
        Re: Explanations That Everyone in the Scientific Community Accepts EXCEPT James McGinn Sergio <invalid@invalid.com> - 2016-02-18 20:25 -0600
          Re: Explanations That Everyone in the Scientific Community Accepts EXCEPT James McGinn James McGinn <jimmcginn9@gmail.com> - 2016-02-18 19:02 -0800
            Re: Explanations That Everyone in the Scientific Community Accepts EXCEPT James McGinn Sergio <invalid@invalid.com> - 2016-02-18 21:51 -0600
              Re: Explanations That Everyone in the Scientific Community Accepts EXCEPT James McGinn James McGinn <jimmcginn9@gmail.com> - 2016-02-18 20:04 -0800
                Re: Explanations That Everyone in the Scientific Community Accepts EXCEPT James McGinn Sergio <invalid@invalid.com> - 2016-02-18 22:36 -0600
                  Re: Explanations That Everyone in the Scientific Community Accepts EXCEPT James McGinn James McGinn <jimmcginn9@gmail.com> - 2016-02-18 20:42 -0800
                  Re: Explanations That Everyone in the Scientific Community Accepts EXCEPT James McGinn James McGinn <jimmcginn9@gmail.com> - 2016-02-18 20:54 -0800
                    Re: Explanations That Everyone in the Scientific Community Accepts EXCEPT James McGinn Sergio <invalid@invalid.com> - 2016-02-19 10:20 -0600
              Re: Explanations That Everyone in the Scientific Community Accepts EXCEPT James McGinn James McGinn <jimmcginn9@gmail.com> - 2016-02-18 20:33 -0800
      Re: Explanations That Everyone in the Scientific Community Accepts EXCEPT James McGinn James McGinn <jimmcginn9@gmail.com> - 2016-02-19 10:43 -0800
        Re: Explanations That Everyone in the Scientific Community Accepts EXCEPT James McGinn Sergio <invalid@invalid.com> - 2016-02-19 13:13 -0600
      Re: Explanations That Everyone in the Scientific Community Accepts EXCEPT James McGinn James McGinn <jimmcginn9@gmail.com> - 2016-02-19 23:47 -0800
        Re: Explanations That Everyone in the Scientific Community Accepts EXCEPT James McGinn Sergio <invalid@invalid.com> - 2016-02-20 10:30 -0600
    Re: Explanations That Everyone in the Scientific Community Accepts EXCEPT James McGinn Solving Tornadoes <solvingtornadoes@gmail.com> - 2016-02-19 00:03 -0800
    Re: Explanations That Everyone in the Scientific Community Accepts EXCEPT James McGinn dm <pippinese@gmail.com> - 2016-02-19 08:08 -0800
    Re: Explanations That Everyone in the Scientific Community Accepts EXCEPT James McGinn Solving Tornadoes <solvingtornadoes@gmail.com> - 2016-02-20 13:22 -0800
      Re: Explanations That Everyone in the Scientific Community Accepts EXCEPT James McGinn Sergio <invalid@invalid.com> - 2016-02-20 17:08 -0600
    Re: Explanations That Everyone in the Scientific Community Accepts EXCEPT James McGinn Sergio <invalid@invalid.com> - 2016-02-20 18:27 -0600
      Re: Explanations That Everyone in the Scientific Community Accepts EXCEPT James McGinn James McGinn <jimmcginn9@gmail.com> - 2016-02-21 07:45 -0800
        Re: Explanations That Everyone in the Scientific Community Accepts EXCEPT James McGinn James McGinn <jimmcginn9@gmail.com> - 2016-03-06 09:38 -0800
          Re: Explanations That Everyone in the Scientific Community Accepts EXCEPT James McGinn Sergio <invalid@invalid.com> - 2016-03-06 11:50 -0600
            Re: Explanations That Everyone in the Scientific Community Accepts EXCEPT James McGinn James McGinn <jimmcginn9@gmail.com> - 2016-03-06 09:53 -0800
              Re: Explanations That Everyone in the Scientific Community Accepts EXCEPT James McGinn Sergio <invalid@invalid.com> - 2016-03-06 15:06 -0600

Page 2 of 3 — ← Prev page 1 [2] 3  Next page →


#554701

Fromdm <pippinese@gmail.com>
Date2016-02-19 13:33 -0800
Message-ID<b0ef8838-afcf-41b8-bca7-40807c4eb0a6@googlegroups.com>
In reply to#554698
I think Sergio is the real genius here. He was the first to realize that this thread would exceed my expectations in just about every way possible.

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


#554706

Frompnalsing@gmail.com
Date2016-02-19 13:56 -0800
Message-ID<bdb8f62d-8fb8-4f57-b4a9-cd67df294dae@googlegroups.com>
In reply to#554698
On Friday, February 19, 2016 at 1:17:53 PM UTC-8, James McGinn wrote:

> Any real scientist knows that truth isn't determined by consensus, it's determined by facts.

The real problem here, of course, is that you refuse to accept any and all facts that disagree with your own 'opinions', because that's all you have, opinions, and they are not facts!

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


#554736

FromClaudius Denk <claudiusdenk@gmail.com>
Date2016-02-19 16:02 -0800
Message-ID<bf45b7ce-928e-4307-8b45-e899a19ed44b@googlegroups.com>
In reply to#554706
On Friday, February 19, 2016 at 1:56:24 PM UTC-8, pnal...@gmail.com wrote:
> On Friday, February 19, 2016 at 1:17:53 PM UTC-8, James McGinn wrote:
> 
> > Any real scientist knows that truth isn't determined by consensus, it's determined by facts.
> 
> The real problem here, of course, is that you refuse to accept any and all facts that disagree with your own 'opinions', because that's all you have, opinions, and they are not facts!

LOL.  You retards aren't stating facts.  You are stating beliefs.  Do you not know the difference?

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


#554710

Fromjimp@specsol.spam.sux.com
Date2016-02-19 21:54 +0000
Message-ID<eifkpc-la7.ln1@mail.specsol.com>
In reply to#554698
James McGinn <jimmcginn9@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Friday, February 19, 2016 at 12:01:05 PM UTC-8, ji...@specsol.spam.sux.com wrote:
>> James McGinn <jimmcginn9@gmail.com> wrote:
>> > On Friday, February 19, 2016 at 10:14:10 AM UTC-8, dm wrote:
>> >> I was inclined to think troll until the recent appearance of his videos.  Now I'm leaning toward "a moderately intelligent person with a strange mental aberration, a strong tendency to believe in ridiculous conspiracies, and a well-developed persecution complex".  But "unusually energetic troll and a quite good actor" is still a distinct possibility.
>> >> 
>> >> I guess further discussion on this point belongs on sci.psychology.
>> > 
>> > Sheep can't reason.  They just type.
>> 
>> The insane claim to have discovered something that contradicts the work
>> of thousands of people over hundreds of years.
> 
> Yeah, I'm insane, like Galileo, Newton, Einstein, and Wegner.

More like Bozo the clown.

> It shows to go ya, if you are dumb enough to believe what everybody believes you have zero chance of making a discovery.

In your case it shows what happens when hundreds of years of data and
research are ignored.

> Any real scientist knows that truth isn't determined by consensus, it's determined by facts.

Which you repeatedly ignore as they contradict your kook theories.

> Obviously you haven't the slightest idea what I mean by this.

What you mean is that thousands of people have been wrong for hundreds
of years and only you have realized some sort of truth.

 

-- 
Jim Pennino

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


#554712

FromJames McGinn <jimmcginn9@gmail.com>
Date2016-02-19 14:25 -0800
Message-ID<cfae41fc-e060-4b61-8677-48f99dcb9c30@googlegroups.com>
In reply to#554710
On Friday, February 19, 2016 at 2:01:05 PM UTC-8, 

Well, I think the point is, sheep don't make discoveries.  If you don't have the intellectual guts to ignore what "everybody says is true" you never make progress.

Scientific methods don't work unless you apply them.  Most people barely understand what they believe--as you've demonstrated vividly.  They just believe.  

It especially telling that you birdbrain claim I'm stating something that is inconsistent with the facts. Yet your responses is all the obvious political banter we see from the believers of any religion or ideology.  

Believers whine when somebody refutes there beliefs.  You keep whining.  I'll keep making progress.

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


#554724

FromSergio <invalid@invalid.com>
Date2016-02-19 17:11 -0600
Message-ID<na87gn$1fne$1@gioia.aioe.org>
In reply to#554712
On 2/19/2016 4:25 PM, James McGinn wrote:
> On Friday, February 19, 2016 at 2:01:05 PM UTC-8,
>
> Well, I think the point is, sheep don't make discoveries.  If you
> don't have the intellectual guts to ignore what "everybody says is
> true" you never make progress.

guts don't make discoveries, brains do,
your brain checked out a few years ago.


>
> Scientific methods don't work unless you apply them.  Most people
> barely understand what they believe--as you've demonstrated vividly.
> They just believe.

that is the only thing you have is your belief.

You have not shown how your thoughts tie in with reality. Most use math 
to do this.


>
> It especially telling that you birdbrain claim I'm stating something
> that is inconsistent with the facts.

none of your ideas are factual.  You know this.
If you don't, ask a friend there with you to watch your  tube videos to 
see if your nuts.


> Yet your responses is all the
> obvious political banter we see from the believers of any religion or
> ideology.

your banter is only about what you think.


>
> Believers whine when somebody refutes there beliefs.  You keep
> whining.  I'll keep making progress.

so, how many books have you sold for real money ?

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


#554729

FromJames McGinn <jimmcginn9@gmail.com>
Date2016-02-19 15:16 -0800
Message-ID<d498b63e-18bb-4be0-89c1-cdbffd8960f7@googlegroups.com>
In reply to#554724
On Friday, February 19, 2016 at 3:12:29 PM UTC-8, Sergio wrote:

> guts don't make discoveries, brains do,

Hmm.  It would appear you haven't a dispute.  Hmm.  

I wonder what that indicates?

Hmm.

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


#554739

FromSergio <invalid@invalid.com>
Date2016-02-19 18:07 -0600
Message-ID<na8aos$1k2n$1@gioia.aioe.org>
In reply to#554729
On 2/19/2016 5:16 PM, James McGinn wrote:
> On Friday, February 19, 2016 at 3:12:29 PM UTC-8, Sergio wrote:
>
>> guts don't make discoveries, brains do,
>
> Hmm.  It would appear you haven't a dispute.  Hmm.
>
> I wonder what that indicates?
>
> Hmm.

so, how much money have you made on your book sales ?

you could make a movie like Al Gore, and make a ton of money!


your brain checked out a few years ago.


 >
 > Scientific methods don't work unless you apply them.  Most people
 > barely understand what they believe--as you've demonstrated vividly.
 > They just believe.

that is the only thing you have is your belief.

You have not shown how your thoughts tie in with reality. Most use math 
to do this.


 >
 > It especially telling that you birdbrain claim I'm stating something
 > that is inconsistent with the facts.

none of your ideas are factual.  You know this.
If you don't, ask a friend there with you to watch your  tube videos to 
see if your nuts.


 > Yet your responses is all the
 > obvious political banter we see from the believers of any religion or
 > ideology.

your banter is only about what you think.


 >
 > Believers whine when somebody refutes there beliefs.  You keep
 > whining.  I'll keep making progress.

so, how many books have you sold for real money ?

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


#554741

FromJames McGinn <jimmcginn9@gmail.com>
Date2016-02-19 16:13 -0800
Message-ID<accebfaf-447b-4699-a4c5-3a79da0ba4bf@googlegroups.com>
In reply to#554739
On Friday, February 19, 2016 at 4:08:02 PM UTC-8, Sergio wrote:
> On 2/19/2016 5:16 PM, James McGinn wrote:
> > On Friday, February 19, 2016 at 3:12:29 PM UTC-8, Sergio wrote:
> >
> >> guts don't make discoveries, brains do,
> >
> > Hmm.  It would appear you haven't a dispute.  Hmm.
> >
> > I wonder what that indicates?
> >
> > Hmm.
> 
> so, how much money have you made on your book sales ?
> 
> you could make a movie like Al Gore, and make a ton of money!

Why don't you enlist a meteorologists to help you make your case?  Surely. They know.  They are experts.  LOL.

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


#554759

Fromjimp@specsol.spam.sux.com
Date2016-02-20 00:49 +0000
Message-ID<nqpkpc-7f8.ln1@mail.specsol.com>
In reply to#554712
James McGinn <jimmcginn9@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Friday, February 19, 2016 at 2:01:05 PM UTC-8, 
> 
> Well, I think the point is, sheep don't make discoveries.  If you don't have the intellectual guts to ignore what "everybody says is true" you never make progress.
> 
> Scientific methods don't work unless you apply them.  Most people barely understand what they believe--as you've demonstrated vividly.  They just believe.  
> 
> It especially telling that you birdbrain claim I'm stating something that is inconsistent with the facts. Yet your responses is all the obvious political banter we see from the believers of any religion or ideology.  
> 
> Believers whine when somebody refutes there beliefs.  You keep whining.  I'll keep making progress.

You are the one whining and refusing to look at facts here.

Your claims are trivially shown to be false by simple experiments that
can be done in a kitchen and have been done over and over in classrooms.


-- 
Jim Pennino

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


#554767

FromJames McGinn <jimmcginn9@gmail.com>
Date2016-02-19 17:17 -0800
Message-ID<642f4bf9-3d36-4c9c-9555-267697ce2b93@googlegroups.com>
In reply to#554759
On Friday, February 19, 2016 at 5:01:04 PM UTC-8, ji...@specsol.spam.sux.com wrote:
> James McGinn <jimmcginn9@gmail.com> wrote:
> > On Friday, February 19, 2016 at 2:01:05 PM UTC-8, 
> > 
> > Well, I think the point is, sheep don't make discoveries.  If you don't have the intellectual guts to ignore what "everybody says is true" you never make progress.
> > 
> > Scientific methods don't work unless you apply them.  Most people barely understand what they believe--as you've demonstrated vividly.  They just believe.  
> > 
> > It especially telling that you birdbrain claim I'm stating something that is inconsistent with the facts. Yet your responses is all the obvious political banter we see from the believers of any religion or ideology.  
> > 
> > Believers whine when somebody refutes there beliefs.  You keep whining.  I'll keep making progress.
> 
> You are the one whining and refusing to look at facts here.
> 
> Your claims are trivially shown to be false by simple experiments that
> can be done in a kitchen and have been done over and over in classrooms.

Is it your own special secret?  

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


#554737

FromClaudius Denk <claudiusdenk@gmail.com>
Date2016-02-19 16:03 -0800
Message-ID<c6ff3baa-4df3-4105-bc62-105d1ddd8160@googlegroups.com>
In reply to#554675
On Friday, February 19, 2016 at 12:01:05 PM UTC-8, ji...@specsol.spam.sux.com wrote:
> James McGinn <jimmcginn9@gmail.com> wrote:
> > On Friday, February 19, 2016 at 10:14:10 AM UTC-8, dm wrote:
> >> I was inclined to think troll until the recent appearance of his videos.  Now I'm leaning toward "a moderately intelligent person with a strange mental aberration, a strong tendency to believe in ridiculous conspiracies, and a well-developed persecution complex".  But "unusually energetic troll and a quite good actor" is still a distinct possibility.
> >> 
> >> I guess further discussion on this point belongs on sci.psychology.
> > 
> > Sheep can't reason.  They just type.
> 
> The insane claim to have discovered something that contradicts the work
> of thousands of people over hundreds of years.

It would only take one to show I'm wrong.
Albert Einstein

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


#554714

FromJames McGinn <jimmcginn9@gmail.com>
Date2016-02-19 14:31 -0800
Message-ID<316ba3eb-526b-40c2-a2a8-be13c3e2a279@googlegroups.com>
In reply to#554651
On Friday, February 19, 2016 at 10:14:10 AM UTC-8, dm wrote:
> I was inclined to think troll until the recent appearance of his videos.  Now I'm leaning toward "a moderately intelligent person with a strange mental aberration, a strong tendency to believe in ridiculous conspiracies, and a well-developed persecution complex".  But "unusually energetic troll and a quite good actor" is still a distinct possibility.
> 
> I guess further discussion on this point belongs on sci.psychology.

LOL.  Stop whining. You are the one that started the discussion.  See the first post in this thread.  Where is your arugment.  Go ahead.  Go ahead, you fool.  Present your argument.  

Face it. You are just a braindead believer.  Until I mentioned this you never doubted any of this for even one second.  

Believiers believe. Scientists reason.  

Which are you?

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


#554660

FromJames McGinn <jimmcginn9@gmail.com>
Date2016-02-19 10:39 -0800
Message-ID<7b23581d-681d-416a-b7ef-cf3c446cf001@googlegroups.com>
In reply to#554643
On Friday, February 19, 2016 at 9:37:59 AM UTC-8, HVAC wrote:
> You dimwits couldn't even see the rather obvious weaknesses that are so plainly apparent in current meteorology.  Geez, how stupid do you have to be to not notice that water only boils above 212F.  I knew this in elementary school.  Not one of you dimwits noticed that. Deductive reasoning is well beyond any of you.  If not for google and wikipedia you birdbrains would be completely lost. 
> -------------
> 
> Again, mcguinn gives us nothing. He is too stupid to understand higher math, 

LOL.  You are a fool.  Any fool can claim to know math.  

Math is simple.  Theory is hard.

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


#554336

FromJames McGinn <jimmcginn9@gmail.com>
Date2016-02-18 11:59 -0800
Message-ID<e1a730b7-47f2-4212-9048-3c38ab081b66@googlegroups.com>
In reply to#554311
On Thursday, February 18, 2016 at 10:29:29 AM UTC-8, dm wrote:
> I had envisioned this as a means of establishing the breadth and depth of his ignorance about existing science and scientific methodologies. I should have anticipated that he would view this as a positive aspect of his "work." Oh well...

So, DM, where are your arguments?  Go ahead.  Make my day.  You have the internet at your fingertips.  You have a wealth of meteorological resources at your fingertips.  Go ahead.  This should be easy for you.  I mean, meteorology is and established science.  Right?  There should be hundreds of years worth of reproducible experimental evidence that disputes me.  I'm just one person.  There are thousands of meteorologists.  

Or is it possible that meteorology is really just a religion, like climatology and global warming?  

How else do we explain your inability to muster an argument?

Put up or shut up.

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


#554449

FromJames McGinn <jimmcginn9@gmail.com>
Date2016-02-18 15:57 -0800
Message-ID<7a181318-2e90-4bbb-b31c-37e060ce1b34@googlegroups.com>
In reply to#554311
On Thursday, February 18, 2016 at 10:29:29 AM UTC-8, dm wrote:
> I had envisioned this as a means of establishing the breadth and depth of his ignorance about existing science and scientific methodologies. I should have anticipated that he would view this as a positive aspect of his "work." Oh well...

So . . .  

Uh . . . 

So, where is your argument.  

DM, this is your opportunity.  Go ahead.

Show us all the evidence of Convection,Latent Heat, Thunderstorms, Hadley cells.  

This is your opportunity.  Go ahead.  

Where is your evidence?

WHERE IS YOUR EVIDENCE?

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


#554493

FromSergio <invalid@invalid.com>
Date2016-02-18 20:25 -0600
Message-ID<na5ufp$1pc7$4@gioia.aioe.org>
In reply to#554449
On 2/18/2016 5:57 PM, James McGinn wrote:
> On Thursday, February 18, 2016 at 10:29:29 AM UTC-8, dm wrote:
>> I had envisioned this as a means of establishing the breadth and
>> depth of his ignorance about existing science and scientific
>> methodologies. I should have anticipated that he would view this as
>> a positive aspect of his "work." Oh well...
>
> So . . .

> Uh . . .
>
> So, where is your argument.
>
> DM, this is your opportunity.  Go ahead.
>
> Show us all the evidence of Convection,Latent Heat, Thunderstorms,
> Hadley cells.

> This is your opportunity.  Go ahead.
>
> Where is your evidence?
>
> WHERE IS YOUR EVIDENCE?
>

use your eyes, go outside, see the clouds, how do they get there ?

how does you heavy moisture air, jump up and make clouds without anybody
seeing, must be invisible water ?

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


#554502

FromJames McGinn <jimmcginn9@gmail.com>
Date2016-02-18 19:02 -0800
Message-ID<aa4c0f55-b022-46ea-a603-5ac5130dc370@googlegroups.com>
In reply to#554493
On Thursday, February 18, 2016 at 6:26:06 PM UTC-8, Sergio wrote:

> use your eyes, go outside, see the clouds, how do they get there ?
> 
> how does you heavy moisture air, jump up and make clouds without anybody
> seeing, must be invisible water ?

Ask yourself a question, you simpleton.  Is convection the only thing that can possibly explain wind?  If so why?  If not what else can cause wind?  Can this be oriented vertically.

If you had a brain you would have already been asking these questions.  

You are too stupid for science.

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


#554515

FromSergio <invalid@invalid.com>
Date2016-02-18 21:51 -0600
Message-ID<na63ge$1vcj$1@gioia.aioe.org>
In reply to#554502
On 2/18/2016 9:02 PM, James McGinn wrote:
> On Thursday, February 18, 2016 at 6:26:06 PM UTC-8, Sergio wrote:
>
>> use your eyes, go outside, see the clouds, how do they get there ?
>>
>> how does you heavy moisture air, jump up and make clouds without
>> anybody seeing, must be invisible water ?
>
> Ask myself a question, me simpleton.  Is convection the only thing
> that can possibly explain wind?  If so why?  If not what else can
> cause wind?  Can this be oriented vertically.

subject is magic water make-um clouds, not wind, you blowhard.


> If I had a brain I would have already been asking these
> questions.

so, how does water vapor get up in the sky to make-um clouds using 
convection ?


>
> I are too stupid for science.
>

yep-um, you dumb-um.

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


#554524

FromJames McGinn <jimmcginn9@gmail.com>
Date2016-02-18 20:04 -0800
Message-ID<67dac626-4f1c-4a40-be44-415107aca3d8@googlegroups.com>
In reply to#554515
On Thursday, February 18, 2016 at 7:51:50 PM UTC-8, Sergio wrote:

> so, how does water vapor get up in the sky 

Convection Versus Plasma 
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LwSyalcoRAk 

Alternative to Spiritualistic Thinking in the Atmospheric Sciences 
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dexlOvP7mPw 

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


Page 2 of 3 — ← Prev page 1 [2] 3  Next page →

Back to top | Article view | sci.physics


csiph-web