Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
Groups > sci.physics > #630134 > unrolled thread
| Started by | "James Wilkinson Sword" <imvalid@somewear.com> |
|---|---|
| First post | 2017-04-22 22:38 +0100 |
| Last post | 2017-05-03 10:03 -0700 |
| Articles | 12 on this page of 172 — 11 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: Smokers are smarter, I say. "James Wilkinson Sword" <imvalid@somewear.com> - 2017-04-22 22:38 +0100
Re: Smokers are smarter, I say. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2017-04-22 15:55 -0700
Re: Smokers are smarter, I say. Sprang <spring@sprung.invalid> - 2017-04-22 22:58 +0000
Re: Smokers are smarter, I say. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2017-04-22 16:20 -0700
Re: Smokers are smarter, I say. Sprang <spring@sprung.invalid> - 2017-04-23 00:01 +0000
Re: Smokers are smarter, I say. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2017-04-22 17:20 -0700
Re: Smokers are smarter, I say. Sprang <spring@sprung.invalid> - 2017-04-23 00:27 +0000
Re: Smokers are smarter, I say. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2017-04-22 17:44 -0700
Re: Smokers are smarter, I say. Sprang <spring@sprung.invalid> - 2017-04-23 00:48 +0000
Re: Smokers are smarter, I say. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2017-04-22 17:54 -0700
Re: Smokers are smarter, I say. Sprang <spring@sprung.invalid> - 2017-04-23 00:55 +0000
Re: Smokers are smarter, I say. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2017-04-22 18:13 -0700
Re: Smokers are smarter, I say. Sprang <spring@sprung.invalid> - 2017-04-23 01:20 +0000
Re: Smokers are smarter, I say. "James Wilkinson Sword" <imvalid@somewear.com> - 2017-05-03 14:35 +0100
Re: Smokers are smarter, I say. "James Wilkinson Sword" <imvalid@somewear.com> - 2017-05-03 14:32 +0100
Re: Smokers are smarter, I say. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2017-05-03 10:07 -0700
Re: Smokers are smarter, I say. Ken Blake <Ken@invalid.news.com> - 2017-04-23 08:15 -0700
Re: Smokers are smarter, I say. Sprang <spring@sprung.invalid> - 2017-04-23 15:17 +0000
Re: Smokers are smarter, I say. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2017-04-23 10:07 -0700
Re: Smokers are smarter, I say. Ken Blake <Ken@invalid.news.com> - 2017-04-23 12:05 -0700
Re: Smokers are smarter, I say. "James Wilkinson Sword" <imvalid@somewear.com> - 2017-04-30 18:06 +0100
Re: Smokers are smarter, I say. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2017-04-30 11:11 -0700
Re: Smokers are smarter, I say. Sprang <spring@sprung.invalid> - 2017-04-30 18:36 +0000
Re: Smokers are smarter, I say. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2017-04-30 11:48 -0700
Re: Smokers are smarter, I say. Sprang <spring@sprung.invalid> - 2017-04-30 18:54 +0000
Re: Smokers are smarter, I say. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2017-04-30 12:09 -0700
Re: Smokers are smarter, I say. Sprang <spring@sprung.invalid> - 2017-04-30 19:14 +0000
Re: Smokers are smarter, I say. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2017-04-30 12:25 -0700
Re: Smokers are smarter, I say. Wolf K <wolfmac@sympatico.ca> - 2017-04-30 19:39 -0400
Re: Smokers are smarter, I say. Sprang <spring@sprung.invalid> - 2017-04-30 23:50 +0000
Re: Smokers are smarter, I say. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2017-04-30 16:56 -0700
Re: Smokers are smarter, I say. Sprang <spring@sprung.invalid> - 2017-05-01 00:00 +0000
Re: Smokers are smarter, I say. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2017-04-30 17:09 -0700
Re: Smokers are smarter, I say. Wolf K <wolfmac@sympatico.ca> - 2017-04-30 20:23 -0400
Re: Smokers are smarter, I say. Wolf K <wolfmac@sympatico.ca> - 2017-04-30 20:24 -0400
Re: Smokers are smarter, I say. Sprang <spring@sprung.invalid> - 2017-05-01 00:26 +0000
Re: Smokers are smarter, I say. "James Wilkinson Sword" <imvalid@somewear.com> - 2017-05-10 21:42 +0100
Re: Smokers are smarter, I say. Sprang <spring@sprung.invalid> - 2017-05-10 23:11 +0000
Re: Smokers are smarter, I say. "James Wilkinson Sword" <imvalid@somewear.com> - 2017-05-11 15:23 +0100
Re: Smokers are smarter, I say. "James Wilkinson Sword" <imvalid@somewear.com> - 2017-05-06 14:32 +0100
Re: Smokers are smarter, I say. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2017-05-06 09:26 -0700
Re: Smokers are smarter, I say. Wolf K <wolfmac@sympatico.ca> - 2017-05-07 12:38 -0400
Re: Smokers are smarter, I say. Sprang <spring@sprung.invalid> - 2017-05-07 17:16 +0000
Re: Smokers are smarter, I say. Beezel Bub <nunya@bizz.invalid> - 2017-05-07 11:24 -0600
Re: Smokers are smarter, I say. Sprang <spring@sprung.invalid> - 2017-05-07 17:57 +0000
Re: Smokers are smarter, I say. Wolf K <wolfmac@sympatico.ca> - 2017-05-07 14:32 -0400
Re: Smokers are smarter, I say. Sprang <spring@sprung.invalid> - 2017-05-07 18:36 +0000
Re: Smokers are smarter, I say. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2017-05-07 12:53 -0700
Re: Smokers are smarter, I say. Sprang <spring@sprung.invalid> - 2017-05-07 21:51 +0000
Re: Smokers are smarter, I say. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2017-05-07 15:02 -0700
Re: Smokers are smarter, I say. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2017-05-07 11:59 -0700
Re: Smokers are smarter, I say. Wolf K <wolfmac@sympatico.ca> - 2017-05-07 14:18 -0400
Re: Smokers are smarter, I say. Sprang <spring@sprung.invalid> - 2017-05-07 18:24 +0000
Re: Smokers are smarter, I say. Wolf K <wolfmac@sympatico.ca> - 2017-05-07 15:18 -0400
Re: Smokers are smarter, I say. Sprang <spring@sprung.invalid> - 2017-05-07 19:35 +0000
Re: Smokers are smarter, I say. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2017-05-07 13:06 -0700
Re: Smokers are smarter, I say. Sprang <spring@sprung.invalid> - 2017-05-07 18:50 +0000
Re: Smokers are smarter, I say. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2017-05-07 12:12 -0700
Re: Smokers are smarter, I say. Sprang <spring@sprung.invalid> - 2017-05-07 19:48 +0000
Re: Smokers are smarter, I say. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2017-05-07 12:55 -0700
Re: Smokers are smarter, I say. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2017-05-07 11:56 -0700
Re: Smokers are smarter, I say. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2017-05-07 11:57 -0700
Re: Smokers are smarter, I say. "James Wilkinson Sword" <imvalid@somewear.com> - 2017-05-08 00:09 +0100
Re: Smokers are smarter, I say. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2017-05-07 16:24 -0700
Re: Smokers are smarter, I say. "James Wilkinson Sword" <imvalid@somewear.com> - 2017-05-06 14:34 +0100
Re: Smokers are smarter, I say. Sprang <spring@sprung.invalid> - 2017-05-06 13:48 +0000
Re: Smokers are smarter, I say. "James Wilkinson Sword" <imvalid@somewear.com> - 2017-05-06 15:16 +0100
Re: Smokers are smarter, I say. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2017-05-06 09:28 -0700
Re: Smokers are smarter, I say. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2017-05-06 09:55 -0700
Re: Smokers are smarter, I say. Marek Novotny <marek.novotny@marspolar.com> - 2017-05-06 10:40 -0500
Re: Smokers are smarter, I say. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2017-05-06 09:27 -0700
Re: Smokers are smarter, I say. "Jonathan N. Little" <lws4art@gmail.com> - 2017-04-30 14:56 -0400
Re: Smokers are smarter, I say. Sprang <spring@sprung.invalid> - 2017-04-30 19:04 +0000
Re: Smokers are smarter, I say. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2017-04-30 12:14 -0700
Re: Smokers are smarter, I say. Sprang <spring@sprung.invalid> - 2017-04-30 19:16 +0000
Re: Smokers are smarter, I say. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2017-04-30 12:24 -0700
Re: Smokers are smarter, I say. Sprang <spring@sprung.invalid> - 2017-04-30 19:25 +0000
Re: Smokers are smarter, I say. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2017-04-30 13:08 -0700
Re: Smokers are smarter, I say. Sprang <spring@sprung.invalid> - 2017-04-30 20:27 +0000
Re: Smokers are smarter, I say. Sprang <spring@sprung.invalid> - 2017-04-30 20:34 +0000
Re: Smokers are smarter, I say. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2017-04-30 13:56 -0700
Re: Smokers are smarter, I say. Sprang <spring@sprung.invalid> - 2017-04-30 21:34 +0000
Re: Smokers are smarter, I say. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2017-04-30 15:01 -0700
Re: Smokers are smarter, I say. Sprang <spring@sprung.invalid> - 2017-04-30 22:06 +0000
Re: Smokers are smarter, I say. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2017-04-30 15:13 -0700
Re: Smokers are smarter, I say. Sprang <spring@sprung.invalid> - 2017-04-30 22:20 +0000
Re: Smokers are smarter, I say. Sprang <spring@sprung.invalid> - 2017-04-30 22:23 +0000
Re: Smokers are smarter, I say. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2017-04-30 15:31 -0700
Re: Smokers are smarter, I say. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2017-04-30 15:31 -0700
Re: Smokers are smarter, I say. Sprang <spring@sprung.invalid> - 2017-04-30 22:34 +0000
Re: Smokers are smarter, I say. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2017-04-30 16:00 -0700
Re: Smokers are smarter, I say. Sprang <spring@sprung.invalid> - 2017-04-30 23:03 +0000
Re: Smokers are smarter, I say. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2017-04-30 16:18 -0700
Re: Smokers are smarter, I say. Sprang <spring@sprung.invalid> - 2017-04-30 23:17 +0000
Re: Smokers are smarter, I say. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2017-04-30 16:29 -0700
Re: Smokers are smarter, I say. "James Wilkinson Sword" <imvalid@somewear.com> - 2017-05-06 15:17 +0100
Re: Smokers are smarter, I say. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2017-05-06 09:38 -0700
Re: Smokers are smarter, I say. "Jonathan N. Little" <lws4art@gmail.com> - 2017-04-30 15:18 -0400
Re: Smokers are smarter, I say. Sprang <spring@sprung.invalid> - 2017-04-30 19:18 +0000
Re: Smokers are smarter, I say. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2017-04-30 12:23 -0700
Re: Smokers are smarter, I say. Sprang <spring@sprung.invalid> - 2017-04-30 19:21 +0000
Re: Smokers are smarter, I say. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2017-04-30 13:07 -0700
Re: Smokers are smarter, I say. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2017-04-30 12:24 -0700
Re: Smokers are smarter, I say. "Jonathan N. Little" <lws4art@gmail.com> - 2017-04-30 17:17 -0400
Re: Smokers are smarter, I say. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2017-04-30 14:19 -0700
Re: Smokers are smarter, I say. "Jonathan N. Little" <lws4art@gmail.com> - 2017-04-30 17:22 -0400
Re: Smokers are smarter, I say. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2017-04-30 14:28 -0700
Re: Smokers are smarter, I say. Sprang <spring@sprung.invalid> - 2017-04-30 21:22 +0000
Re: Smokers are smarter, I say. "Jonathan N. Little" <lws4art@gmail.com> - 2017-04-30 18:30 -0400
Re: Smokers are smarter, I say. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2017-04-30 15:34 -0700
Re: Smokers are smarter, I say. Ron C <r.capik@verizon.net> - 2017-04-30 18:49 -0400
Re: Smokers are smarter, I say. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2017-04-30 16:01 -0700
Re: Smokers are smarter, I say. Sprang <spring@sprung.invalid> - 2017-04-30 22:40 +0000
Re: Smokers are smarter, I say. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2017-04-30 16:16 -0700
Re: Smokers are smarter, I say. Sprang <spring@sprung.invalid> - 2017-04-30 23:15 +0000
Re: Smokers are smarter, I say. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2017-04-30 16:28 -0700
Re: Smokers are smarter, I say. Sprang <spring@sprung.invalid> - 2017-04-30 23:43 +0000
Re: Smokers are smarter, I say. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2017-04-30 16:48 -0700
Re: Smokers are smarter, I say. Sprang <spring@sprung.invalid> - 2017-04-30 23:51 +0000
Re: Smokers are smarter, I say. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2017-04-30 16:55 -0700
Re: Smokers are smarter, I say. Sprang <spring@sprung.invalid> - 2017-04-30 23:55 +0000
Re: Smokers are smarter, I say. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2017-04-30 17:08 -0700
Re: Smokers are smarter, I say. Sprang <spring@sprung.invalid> - 2017-05-01 00:17 +0000
Re: Smokers are smarter, I say. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2017-04-30 17:33 -0700
Re: Smokers are smarter, I say. Sprang <spring@sprung.invalid> - 2017-05-01 00:46 +0000
Re: Smokers are smarter, I say. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2017-04-30 17:52 -0700
Re: Smokers are smarter, I say. Sprang <spring@sprung.invalid> - 2017-05-01 01:02 +0000
Re: Smokers are smarter, I say. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2017-04-30 18:23 -0700
Re: Smokers are smarter, I say. Sprang <spring@sprung.invalid> - 2017-05-01 01:47 +0000
Re: Smokers are smarter, I say. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2017-04-30 19:18 -0700
Re: Smokers are smarter, I say. Sprang <spring@sprung.invalid> - 2017-05-06 08:53 +0000
Re: Smokers are smarter, I say. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2017-05-06 09:53 -0700
Re: Smokers are smarter, I say. Sprang <spring@sprung.invalid> - 2017-05-06 17:30 +0000
Re: Smokers are smarter, I say. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2017-05-06 10:44 -0700
Re: Smokers are smarter, I say. Sprang <spring@sprung.invalid> - 2017-05-06 17:54 +0000
Re: Smokers are smarter, I say. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2017-05-06 12:05 -0700
Re: Smokers are smarter, I say. Sprang <spring@sprung.invalid> - 2017-05-06 19:37 +0000
Re: Smokers are smarter, I say. Peter Köhlmann <peter-koehlmann@t-online.de> - 2017-05-06 22:09 +0200
Re: Smokers are smarter, I say. Charlie <pipedroner3@kismet45.org> - 2017-05-06 16:19 -0400
Re: Smokers are smarter, I say. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2017-05-06 13:55 -0700
Re: Smokers are smarter, I say. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2017-05-06 13:22 -0700
Re: Smokers are smarter, I say. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2017-05-06 13:20 -0700
Re: Smokers are smarter, I say. Sprang <spring@sprung.invalid> - 2017-05-06 20:28 +0000
Re: Smokers are smarter, I say. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2017-05-06 13:40 -0700
Re: Smokers are smarter, I say. Sprang <spring@sprung.invalid> - 2017-05-06 22:23 +0000
Re: Smokers are smarter, I say. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2017-05-06 15:48 -0700
Re: Smokers are smarter, I say. "James Wilkinson Sword" <imvalid@somewear.com> - 2017-05-21 22:02 +0100
Re: Smokers are smarter, I say. "James Wilkinson Sword" <imvalid@somewear.com> - 2017-05-21 22:02 +0100
Re: Smokers are smarter, I say. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2017-05-21 14:17 -0700
Re: Smokers are smarter, I say. Ron C <r.capik@verizon.net> - 2017-04-30 18:33 -0400
Re: Smokers are smarter, I say. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2017-04-30 15:36 -0700
Re: Smokers are smarter, I say. Ron C <r.capik@verizon.net> - 2017-04-30 18:43 -0400
Re: Smokers are smarter, I say. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2017-04-30 16:01 -0700
Re: Smokers are smarter, I say. Sprang <spring@sprung.invalid> - 2017-04-30 22:45 +0000
Re: Smokers are smarter, I say. Ron C <r.capik@verizon.net> - 2017-04-30 18:54 -0400
Re: Smokers are smarter, I say. Sprang <spring@sprung.invalid> - 2017-04-30 22:53 +0000
Re: Smokers are smarter, I say. Ron C <r.capik@verizon.net> - 2017-04-30 19:16 -0400
Re: Smokers are smarter, I say. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2017-04-30 16:17 -0700
Re: Smokers are smarter, I say. Wolf K <wolfmac@sympatico.ca> - 2017-04-30 20:13 -0400
Re: Smokers are smarter, I say. Sprang <spring@sprung.invalid> - 2017-05-01 00:23 +0000
Re: Smokers are smarter, I say. Wolf K <wolfmac@sympatico.ca> - 2017-04-30 20:42 -0400
Re: Smokers are smarter, I say. Sprang <spring@sprung.invalid> - 2017-05-01 00:57 +0000
Re: Smokers are smarter, I say. "James Wilkinson Sword" <imvalid@somewear.com> - 2017-04-23 00:48 +0100
Re: Smokers are smarter, I say. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2017-04-22 17:16 -0700
Re: Smokers are smarter, I say. Sprang <spring@sprung.invalid> - 2017-04-23 00:18 +0000
Re: Smokers are smarter, I say. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2017-04-22 17:22 -0700
Re: Smokers are smarter, I say. "James Wilkinson Sword" <imvalid@somewear.com> - 2017-05-02 22:07 +0100
Re: Smokers are smarter, I say. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2017-05-02 14:17 -0700
Re: Smokers are smarter, I say. "James Wilkinson Sword" <imvalid@somewear.com> - 2017-05-03 01:02 +0100
Re: Smokers are smarter, I say. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2017-05-02 18:55 -0700
Re: Smokers are smarter, I say. "James Wilkinson Sword" <imvalid@somewear.com> - 2017-05-03 15:17 +0100
Re: Smokers are smarter, I say. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2017-05-03 10:03 -0700
Page 9 of 9 — ← Prev page 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 [9]
| From | Wolf K <wolfmac@sympatico.ca> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2017-04-30 20:42 -0400 |
| Message-ID | <CvvNA.43271$3%2.19724@fx09.iad> |
| In reply to | #631502 |
On 2017-04-30 20:23, Sprang wrote: > On Sun, 30 Apr 2017 20:13:40 -0400, Wolf K, after 15 edits, wrote this: >> On 2017-04-30 18:45, Sprang wrote: >>> On Sun, 30 Apr 2017 18:33:39 -0400, Ron C, after 15 edits, wrote this: >> [...] >>>> Actually the ice melt/sea level rise argument is a bit of a red herring. >>>> Here's a hint: how does a thermometer work? >>>> >>> >>> Thermal expansion. >> >> I'm sure you have the skills to figure out the effect of thermal >> expansion on ocean levels. >> >> In case you don't have the formulas at your finger tips, here's how to >> calculate the cubic thermal expansion of the ocean: >> >> http://www.engineeringtoolbox.com/volumetric-temperature-expansion-d_315.html >> >> You also need to know the volume of the ocean, and its area: >> 1.35 billion cubic km >> 351 million square km >> >> You need to figure out: >> a) how much the ocean would rise with zero increase in surface area; >> that's simple geometry. >> b) how much of that rise would be absorbed by increased surface area via >> flooding of low-lying land; that's trickier, because you have to know >> the areas of land at, say, 1m intervals, so as to calculate the volume >> that the flooding ocean water would occupy, etc. I'm sure you can find >> the data. >> > > By golly, it will increase by 4 inches. > Thanks. :) > Now, all the ice needs to melt. It's doing so already. You obviously live someher where there are no galciers, or you would have notuiced that already. > How many thousand years do we have to prepar? About 0.01 kilo years. > Got a formula for that? Didn't you study how to calculate rates of ice melting in high school? You know, the part that dealt with heat? -- Best, Wolf K https://kirkwood40.blogspot.com "What good is it having lower taxes when you can’t drink the water?”
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Sprang <spring@sprung.invalid> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2017-05-01 00:57 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <oe6152$4cs$2@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #631505 |
On Sun, 30 Apr 2017 20:42:05 -0400, Wolf K, after 15 edits, wrote this: > On 2017-04-30 20:23, Sprang wrote: >> On Sun, 30 Apr 2017 20:13:40 -0400, Wolf K, after 15 edits, wrote this: >>> On 2017-04-30 18:45, Sprang wrote: >>>> On Sun, 30 Apr 2017 18:33:39 -0400, Ron C, after 15 edits, wrote this: >>> [...] >>>>> Actually the ice melt/sea level rise argument is a bit of a red herring. >>>>> Here's a hint: how does a thermometer work? >>>>> >>>> >>>> Thermal expansion. >>> >>> I'm sure you have the skills to figure out the effect of thermal >>> expansion on ocean levels. >>> >>> In case you don't have the formulas at your finger tips, here's how to >>> calculate the cubic thermal expansion of the ocean: >>> >>> http://www.engineeringtoolbox.com/volumetric-temperature-expansion-d_315.html >>> >>> You also need to know the volume of the ocean, and its area: >>> 1.35 billion cubic km >>> 351 million square km >>> >>> You need to figure out: >>> a) how much the ocean would rise with zero increase in surface area; >>> that's simple geometry. >>> b) how much of that rise would be absorbed by increased surface area via >>> flooding of low-lying land; that's trickier, because you have to know >>> the areas of land at, say, 1m intervals, so as to calculate the volume >>> that the flooding ocean water would occupy, etc. I'm sure you can find >>> the data. >>> >> >> By golly, it will increase by 4 inches. >> Thanks. :) >> Now, all the ice needs to melt. > > It's doing so already. You obviously live someher where there are no > galciers, or you would have notuiced that already. > And yet, the ocean stays in the ocean. >> How many thousand years do we have to prepar? > > About 0.01 kilo years. All the ice will melt in 10 years? Hahahaha. > >> Got a formula for that? > > Didn't you study how to calculate rates of ice melting in high school? > You know, the part that dealt with heat? > If you are assuming a steady rate of temp. increase, then sure. But, that's yet to be determined. The guess is 1.2 degrees more by 2050. -- SpringSprangSprung
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | "James Wilkinson Sword" <imvalid@somewear.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2017-04-23 00:48 +0100 |
| Message-ID | <op.yy4e2btwjs98qf@red.lan> |
| In reply to | #630153 |
On Sat, 22 Apr 2017 23:55:51 +0100, Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> wrote: > On 4/22/17, 2:38 PM, in article op.yy381xf2js98qf@red.lan, "James Wilkinson > Sword" <imvalid@somewear.com> wrote: > >> On Sat, 15 Apr 2017 23:15:01 +0100, Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> wrote: >> >>> On 4/15/17, 11:16 AM, in article octo21$n2s$1@dont-email.me, "Sprang" >>> <spring@sprung.invalid> wrote: >>> >>>>>> Snit is one of the dirt poor liberals that like to espouse the spending of >>>>>> other people's money. >>>>> >>>>> Quote? >>>> >>>> Well, unless you are privately funding all this shit you are for, then that >>>> is an entirely correct statement. >>>> Get a child to read for you in the future. >>> >>> So no quote to back your claims of my views. Got it. You are just trolling >>> for attention. >>> >>> Keep in mind I am the one who pushes for a STRONGER tie between hard work / >>> productivity and financial gain. >> >> That's called "capitalism". > > Capitalism, without checks, is the selling of human rights and the > environment to the highest bidder and directly works AGAINST those goals. > With that said, pure Socialism would be no better. Having a mix of the two > is not perfect but works far better than either, alone. Human rights gets in the way of progress. Bring back the slaves and let us prosper. By the way, are you an ethnic minority? Because you're sure acting like one. -- Gargoyle (n), olive-flavored mouthwash.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2017-04-22 17:16 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <D5214050.A0DCD%usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> |
| In reply to | #630164 |
On 4/22/17, 4:48 PM, in article op.yy4e2btwjs98qf@red.lan, "James Wilkinson Sword" <imvalid@somewear.com> wrote: > On Sat, 22 Apr 2017 23:55:51 +0100, Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> wrote: > >> On 4/22/17, 2:38 PM, in article op.yy381xf2js98qf@red.lan, "James Wilkinson >> Sword" <imvalid@somewear.com> wrote: >> >>> On Sat, 15 Apr 2017 23:15:01 +0100, Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> >>> wrote: >>> >>>> On 4/15/17, 11:16 AM, in article octo21$n2s$1@dont-email.me, "Sprang" >>>> <spring@sprung.invalid> wrote: >>>> >>>>>>> Snit is one of the dirt poor liberals that like to espouse the spending >>>>>>> of >>>>>>> other people's money. >>>>>> >>>>>> Quote? >>>>> >>>>> Well, unless you are privately funding all this shit you are for, then >>>>> that >>>>> is an entirely correct statement. >>>>> Get a child to read for you in the future. >>>> >>>> So no quote to back your claims of my views. Got it. You are just trolling >>>> for attention. >>>> >>>> Keep in mind I am the one who pushes for a STRONGER tie between hard work / >>>> productivity and financial gain. >>> >>> That's called "capitalism". >> >> Capitalism, without checks, is the selling of human rights and the >> environment to the highest bidder and directly works AGAINST those goals. >> With that said, pure Socialism would be no better. Having a mix of the two >> is not perfect but works far better than either, alone. > > Human rights gets in the way of progress. Bring back the slaves and let us > prosper. By the way, are you an ethnic minority? Because you're sure acting > like one. I am a human... and I will act like one. Not going to even ask you. -- Personal attacks from those who troll show their own insecurity. They cannot use reason to show the message to be wrong so they try to feel somehow superior by attacking the messenger. They cling to their attacks and ignore the message time and time again. <https://youtu.be/H4NW-Cqh308>
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Sprang <spring@sprung.invalid> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2017-04-23 00:18 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <odgrtb$a81$1@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #630171 |
On Sat, 22 Apr 2017 17:16:00 -0700, Snit, after 15 edits, wrote this: > On 4/22/17, 4:48 PM, in article op.yy4e2btwjs98qf@red.lan, "James Wilkinson > Sword" <imvalid@somewear.com> wrote: > >> On Sat, 22 Apr 2017 23:55:51 +0100, Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> wrote: >> >>> On 4/22/17, 2:38 PM, in article op.yy381xf2js98qf@red.lan, "James Wilkinson >>> Sword" <imvalid@somewear.com> wrote: >>> >>>> On Sat, 15 Apr 2017 23:15:01 +0100, Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> >>>> wrote: >>>> >>>>> On 4/15/17, 11:16 AM, in article octo21$n2s$1@dont-email.me, "Sprang" >>>>> <spring@sprung.invalid> wrote: >>>>> >>>>>>>> Snit is one of the dirt poor liberals that like to espouse the spending >>>>>>>> of >>>>>>>> other people's money. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Quote? >>>>>> >>>>>> Well, unless you are privately funding all this shit you are for, then >>>>>> that >>>>>> is an entirely correct statement. >>>>>> Get a child to read for you in the future. >>>>> >>>>> So no quote to back your claims of my views. Got it. You are just trolling >>>>> for attention. >>>>> >>>>> Keep in mind I am the one who pushes for a STRONGER tie between hard work / >>>>> productivity and financial gain. >>>> >>>> That's called "capitalism". >>> >>> Capitalism, without checks, is the selling of human rights and the >>> environment to the highest bidder and directly works AGAINST those goals. >>> With that said, pure Socialism would be no better. Having a mix of the two >>> is not perfect but works far better than either, alone. >> >> Human rights gets in the way of progress. Bring back the slaves and let us >> prosper. By the way, are you an ethnic minority? Because you're sure acting >> like one. > > I am a human... and I will act like one. Not going to even ask you. If he answers "rabbit", I'll be a monkey's uncle. -- SpringSprangSprung
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2017-04-22 17:22 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <D52141CD.A0DE2%usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> |
| In reply to | #630173 |
On 4/22/17, 5:18 PM, in article odgrtb$a81$1@dont-email.me, "Sprang" <spring@sprung.invalid> wrote: >>>>>> Keep in mind I am the one who pushes for a STRONGER tie between hard work >>>>>> / >>>>>> productivity and financial gain. >>>>> >>>>> That's called "capitalism". >>>> >>>> Capitalism, without checks, is the selling of human rights and the >>>> environment to the highest bidder and directly works AGAINST those goals. >>>> With that said, pure Socialism would be no better. Having a mix of the two >>>> is not perfect but works far better than either, alone. >>> >>> Human rights gets in the way of progress. Bring back the slaves and let us >>> prosper. By the way, are you an ethnic minority? Because you're sure >>> acting >>> like one. >> >> I am a human... and I will act like one. Not going to even ask you. > > If he answers "rabbit", I'll be a monkey's uncle. :) -- Personal attacks from those who troll show their own insecurity. They cannot use reason to show the message to be wrong so they try to feel somehow superior by attacking the messenger. They cling to their attacks and ignore the message time and time again. <https://youtu.be/H4NW-Cqh308>
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | "James Wilkinson Sword" <imvalid@somewear.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2017-05-02 22:07 +0100 |
| Message-ID | <op.yzmqban6js98qf@red.lan> |
| In reply to | #630171 |
On Sun, 23 Apr 2017 01:16:00 +0100, Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> wrote: > On 4/22/17, 4:48 PM, in article op.yy4e2btwjs98qf@red.lan, "James Wilkinson > Sword" <imvalid@somewear.com> wrote: > >> On Sat, 22 Apr 2017 23:55:51 +0100, Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> wrote: >> >>> On 4/22/17, 2:38 PM, in article op.yy381xf2js98qf@red.lan, "James Wilkinson >>> Sword" <imvalid@somewear.com> wrote: >>> >>>> On Sat, 15 Apr 2017 23:15:01 +0100, Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> >>>> wrote: >>>> >>>>> On 4/15/17, 11:16 AM, in article octo21$n2s$1@dont-email.me, "Sprang" >>>>> <spring@sprung.invalid> wrote: >>>>> >>>>>>>> Snit is one of the dirt poor liberals that like to espouse the spending >>>>>>>> of >>>>>>>> other people's money. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Quote? >>>>>> >>>>>> Well, unless you are privately funding all this shit you are for, then >>>>>> that >>>>>> is an entirely correct statement. >>>>>> Get a child to read for you in the future. >>>>> >>>>> So no quote to back your claims of my views. Got it. You are just trolling >>>>> for attention. >>>>> >>>>> Keep in mind I am the one who pushes for a STRONGER tie between hard work / >>>>> productivity and financial gain. >>>> >>>> That's called "capitalism". >>> >>> Capitalism, without checks, is the selling of human rights and the >>> environment to the highest bidder and directly works AGAINST those goals. >>> With that said, pure Socialism would be no better. Having a mix of the two >>> is not perfect but works far better than either, alone. >> >> Human rights gets in the way of progress. Bring back the slaves and let us >> prosper. By the way, are you an ethnic minority? Because you're sure acting >> like one. > > I am a human... and I will act like one. Not going to even ask you. If you're an ethnic minority, you THINK you're human. So you haven't answered my question. -- Seen in the back window of a car: In case of emergency screw driver on back seat.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2017-05-02 14:17 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <D52E4586.A3272%usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> |
| In reply to | #631739 |
On 5/2/17, 2:07 PM, in article op.yzmqban6js98qf@red.lan, "James Wilkinson Sword" <imvalid@somewear.com> wrote: >>>>>> So no quote to back your claims of my views. Got it. You are just >>>>>> trolling >>>>>> for attention. >>>>>> >>>>>> Keep in mind I am the one who pushes for a STRONGER tie between hard work >>>>>> / >>>>>> productivity and financial gain. >>>>> >>>>> That's called "capitalism". >>>> >>>> Capitalism, without checks, is the selling of human rights and the >>>> environment to the highest bidder and directly works AGAINST those goals. >>>> With that said, pure Socialism would be no better. Having a mix of the two >>>> is not perfect but works far better than either, alone. >>> >>> Human rights gets in the way of progress. Bring back the slaves and let us >>> prosper. By the way, are you an ethnic minority? Because you're sure >>> acting like one. >> >> I am a human... and I will act like one. Not going to even ask you. > > If you're an ethnic minority, you THINK you're human. So you haven't answered > my question. Do you think you are human? -- Personal attacks from those who troll show their own insecurity. They cannot use reason to show the message to be wrong so they try to feel somehow superior by attacking the messenger. They cling to their attacks and ignore the message time and time again. <https://youtu.be/H4NW-Cqh308>
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | "James Wilkinson Sword" <imvalid@somewear.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2017-05-03 01:02 +0100 |
| Message-ID | <op.yzmyd9esjs98qf@red.lan> |
| In reply to | #631741 |
On Tue, 02 May 2017 22:17:42 +0100, Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> wrote: > On 5/2/17, 2:07 PM, in article op.yzmqban6js98qf@red.lan, "James Wilkinson > Sword" <imvalid@somewear.com> wrote: > >>>>>>> So no quote to back your claims of my views. Got it. You are just >>>>>>> trolling >>>>>>> for attention. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Keep in mind I am the one who pushes for a STRONGER tie between hard work >>>>>>> / >>>>>>> productivity and financial gain. >>>>>> >>>>>> That's called "capitalism". >>>>> >>>>> Capitalism, without checks, is the selling of human rights and the >>>>> environment to the highest bidder and directly works AGAINST those goals. >>>>> With that said, pure Socialism would be no better. Having a mix of the two >>>>> is not perfect but works far better than either, alone. >>>> >>>> Human rights gets in the way of progress. Bring back the slaves and let us >>>> prosper. By the way, are you an ethnic minority? Because you're sure >>>> acting like one. >>> >>> I am a human... and I will act like one. Not going to even ask you. >> >> If you're an ethnic minority, you THINK you're human. So you haven't answered >> my question. > > Do you think you are human? I KNOW I'm human. -- If a person with multiple personalities threatens suicide, is that person considered a hostage situation?
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2017-05-02 18:55 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <D52E86A0.A335C%usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> |
| In reply to | #631774 |
On 5/2/17, 5:02 PM, in article op.yzmyd9esjs98qf@red.lan, "James Wilkinson Sword" <imvalid@somewear.com> wrote: ... >>>> I am a human... and I will act like one. Not going to even ask you. >>>> >>> If you're an ethnic minority, you THINK you're human. So you haven't >>> answered my question. >>> >> Do you think you are human? >> > I KNOW I'm human. > What evidence or criteria did you use to come to that conclusion? -- Personal attacks from those who troll show their own insecurity. They cannot use reason to show the message to be wrong so they try to feel somehow superior by attacking the messenger. They cling to their attacks and ignore the message time and time again. <https://youtu.be/H4NW-Cqh308>
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | "James Wilkinson Sword" <imvalid@somewear.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2017-05-03 15:17 +0100 |
| Message-ID | <op.yzn1y50qjs98qf@red.lan> |
| In reply to | #631783 |
On Wed, 03 May 2017 02:55:28 +0100, Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> wrote: > On 5/2/17, 5:02 PM, in article op.yzmyd9esjs98qf@red.lan, "James Wilkinson > Sword" <imvalid@somewear.com> wrote: > > ... >>>>> I am a human... and I will act like one. Not going to even ask you. >>>>> >>>> If you're an ethnic minority, you THINK you're human. So you haven't >>>> answered my question. >>>> >>> Do you think you are human? >>> >> I KNOW I'm human. >> > What evidence or criteria did you use to come to that conclusion? What a stupid question, You might aswell ask how I know a dog is a dog. -- Advice given to RAF pilots during WWII: "When a prang seems inevitable, endeavour to strike the softest, cheapest object in the vicinity as slowly and gently as possible."
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2017-05-03 10:03 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <D52F5B7B.A347A%usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> |
| In reply to | #631827 |
On 5/3/17, 7:17 AM, in article op.yzn1y50qjs98qf@red.lan, "James Wilkinson Sword" <imvalid@somewear.com> wrote: > On Wed, 03 May 2017 02:55:28 +0100, Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> wrote: > >> On 5/2/17, 5:02 PM, in article op.yzmyd9esjs98qf@red.lan, "James Wilkinson >> Sword" <imvalid@somewear.com> wrote: >> >> ... >>>>>> I am a human... and I will act like one. Not going to even ask you. >>>>>> >>>>> If you're an ethnic minority, you THINK you're human. So you haven't >>>>> answered my question. >>>>> >>>> Do you think you are human? >>>> >>> I KNOW I'm human. >>> >> What evidence or criteria did you use to come to that conclusion? > > What a stupid question, You might aswell ask how I know a dog is a dog. You are the one who decided some people are not, so what is your criteria? Seems it is what serves you best to give you special entitlements. -- Personal attacks from those who troll show their own insecurity. They cannot use reason to show the message to be wrong so they try to feel somehow superior by attacking the messenger. They cling to their attacks and ignore the message time and time again. <https://youtu.be/H4NW-Cqh308>
[toc] | [prev] | [standalone]
Page 9 of 9 — ← Prev page 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 [9]
Back to top | Article view | sci.physics
csiph-web