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

Groups > sci.physics > #710453 > unrolled thread

Water Vapor puts out Globall Warming.

Back to article view | Back to sci.physics

Contents

  Water Vapor puts out Globall Warming. Sergio <invalid@invalid.com> - 2018-10-30 19:52 -0500
    Re:Water Vapor puts out Globall Warming. Libor Striz <poutnik4REMOVEnntp@CAPITALSgmail.com> - 2018-10-31 04:40 +0100
      Re: Water Vapor puts out Globall Warming. James McGinn <jimmcginn9@gmail.com> - 2018-11-04 08:54 -0800
        Re: Water Vapor puts out Globall Warming. Libor Striz <poutnik4REMOVEnntp@CAPITALSgmail.com> - 2018-11-04 18:40 +0100
          Re: Water Vapor puts out Globall Warming. James McGinn <jimmcginn9@gmail.com> - 2018-11-04 10:27 -0800
          Re: Water Vapor puts out Globall Warming. Sergio <invalid@invalid.com> - 2018-11-04 20:03 -0600
            Re: Water Vapor puts out Globall Warming. benj <benj.fake@gmail.com> - 2018-11-04 23:18 -0500
              Re: Water Vapor puts out Globall Warming. Sergio <invalid@invalid.com> - 2018-11-04 22:51 -0600
    Water Vapor puts out Globall Warming. James McGinn <jimmcginn9@gmail.com> - 2018-11-03 21:39 -0700
      Re: Water Vapor puts out Globall Warming. Edward Prochak <edprochak@gmail.com> - 2018-11-05 09:21 -0800
        Re: Water Vapor puts out Globall Warming. benj <benj.fake@gmail.com> - 2018-11-05 14:48 -0500
          Re: Water Vapor puts out Globall Warming. Sergio <invalid@invalid.com> - 2018-11-05 14:00 -0600
        Re: Water Vapor puts out Globall Warming. Claudius Denk <claudiusdenk@gmail.com> - 2018-11-05 12:45 -0800
    Re: Water Vapor puts out Globall Warming. "reber G=emc^2" <herbertglazier0@gmail.com> - 2018-11-09 18:01 -0800
      Re: Water Vapor puts out Globall Warming. Sergio <invalid@invalid.com> - 2018-11-09 22:08 -0600
        Re: Water Vapor puts out Globall Warming. "reber G=emc^2" <herbertglazier0@gmail.com> - 2018-11-10 10:09 -0800
        Re: Water Vapor puts out Globall Warming. James McGinn <jimmcginn9@gmail.com> - 2018-11-10 11:26 -0800
      Re: Water Vapor puts out Globall Warming. benj <benj.fake@gmail.com> - 2018-11-10 20:44 -0500

#710453 — Water Vapor puts out Globall Warming.

as air expands with heat, more room is made for water vapor molecules,
so the air becomes more humid, bringing more rain to dry areas.

google Psychrometric Chart

air at 50 degrees 50% humidity holds 0.004 pounds water per pound of
air.  (find dry bulb temp at bottom, 50 degrees, go up to 50% relative
humidity line, read on right axis)

air at 80 degrees 50% humidity holds 0.012 pounds of water per pound of air.

so 30 degrees hotter, has 3 times the amount of water vapor !

an increase in water vapor by 300% !

so globall worming will not raise the oceans, as it is moderated by
water vapor in the air.

[toc] | [next] | [standalone]

#710473

Sergio <invalid@invalid.com> Wrote in message:
> 
> 
> as air expands with heat, more room is made for water vapor molecules,
> so the air becomes more humid, bringing more rain to dry areas.

In fact, it has nothing to do with air capacity for water vapour,
 but the  space capacity.  Air need not to be present at
 all.

It is about equilibrium between water molecules leaving from and 
 coming to the liquid phase.
The rule of thumb is, near ambient temperature, space can contain
 about twice as much vapour at temperature increase by 10 deg
 C.

> 
> so globall worming will not raise the oceans, as it is moderated by
> water vapor in the air.
> 
The water increase in atmosphere would be negligible compared to
 ice melting and water thermal dilatation. Plus, water is major
 greenhouse effect  agent, so it will increase the GH effect,
 creating positive feedback.

-- 
Libor Striz aka Poutnik ( a pilgrim/wanderer/wayfarer)

"Humour is the only effective weapon against stupidity."
Miloš Forman


----Android NewsGroup Reader----
http://usenet.sinaapp.com/

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

#711463

On Tuesday, October 30, 2018 at 8:40:56 PM UTC-7, Libor Striz wrote:
> Sergio <invalid@invalid.com> Wrote in message:
> > 
> > 
> > as air expands with heat, more room is made for water vapor molecules,
> > so the air becomes more humid, bringing more rain to dry areas.
> 
> In fact, it has nothing to do with air capacity for water vapour,
>  but the  space capacity.  Air need not to be present at
>  all.
> 
> It is about equilibrium between water molecules leaving from and 
>  coming to the liquid phase.


There is no gaseous phase in the atmosphere you fucking retard.


> The rule of thumb is, near ambient temperature, space can contain
>  about twice as much vapour at temperature increase by 10 deg
>  C.
> 
> > 
> > so globall worming will not raise the oceans, as it is moderated by
> > water vapor in the air.
> > 
> The water increase in atmosphere would be negligible compared to
>  ice melting and water thermal dilatation. Plus, water is major
>  greenhouse effect  agent, so it will increase the GH effect,
>  creating positive feedback.

You retards still can grasp the simple notion that the phases of water are dictated by temperature.  The clarity of clear moist air isn't evidence that it is gaseous.  Fucking retards.


> 
> -- 
> Libor Striz aka Poutnik ( a pilgrim/wanderer/wayfarer)
> 
> "Humour is the only effective weapon against stupidity."
> Miloš Forman
> 
> 
> ----Android NewsGroup Reader----
> http://usenet.sinaapp.com/

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

#711470

James McGinn <jimmcginn9@gmail.com> Wrote in message:
>> There is no gaseous phase in the atmosphere you fucking retard.

This can be written only by such kind of a person you say I am.

You vocabulary and manners convince you from being a self-claimed
 scientist
not to be taken seriously.

Every liquid forms a true gaseous phase at any temperature, so
 does its solid phase. It us only question of the vapour tension,
 regarding volatility.

Nanodroplets would create very low vapour tension what is not
 observed, including many more evidences against them.

>
-- 
Libor Striz aka Poutnik ( a pilgrim/wanderer/wayfarer)

"Humour is the only effective weapon against stupidity."
Miloš Forman


----Android NewsGroup Reader----
http://usenet.sinaapp.com/

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

#711477

On Sunday, November 4, 2018 at 9:40:31 AM UTC-8, Libor Striz wrote:
> James McGinn <jimmcginn9@gmail.com> Wrote in message:
> >> There is no gaseous phase in the atmosphere you fucking retard.
> 
> This can be written only by such kind of a person you say I am.
> 
> You vocabulary and manners convince you from being a self-claimed
>  scientist
> not to be taken seriously.
> 
> Every liquid forms a true gaseous phase at any temperature,

Bullshit.  You are a retard that makes up facts to fit you anecdotal impression.  Find a new hobby.  Science isn't for you.

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

#711560

On 11/4/2018 11:40 AM, Libor Striz wrote:
> James McGinn <jimmcginn9@gmail.com> Wrote in message:
>>> There is no gaseous phase in the atmosphere you fucking retard.
> 
> This can be written only by such kind of a person you say I am.
> 
> You vocabulary and manners convince you from being a self-claimed
>  scientist
> not to be taken seriously.
> 
> Every liquid forms a true gaseous phase at any temperature, so
>  does its solid phase. It us only question of the vapour tension,
>  regarding volatility.
> 
> Nanodroplets would create very low vapour tension what is not
>  observed, including many more evidences against them.
> 
>>


ha!

Is James McGinn a "Water Vapor Retard"  ?

      Is James McGinn also  "Physics and Chemistry Retard" ?

               Is McFly a Science Retart (SR) ?


    Yes.   His statements are self-proving.

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

#711586

On 11/4/2018 9:03 PM, Sergio wrote:
> On 11/4/2018 11:40 AM, Libor Striz wrote:
>> James McGinn <jimmcginn9@gmail.com> Wrote in message:
>>>> There is no gaseous phase in the atmosphere you fucking retard.
>>
>> This can be written only by such kind of a person you say I am.
>>
>> You vocabulary and manners convince you from being a self-claimed
>>   scientist
>> not to be taken seriously.
>>
>> Every liquid forms a true gaseous phase at any temperature, so
>>   does its solid phase. It us only question of the vapour tension,
>>   regarding volatility.
>>
>> Nanodroplets would create very low vapour tension what is not
>>   observed, including many more evidences against them.
>>
>>>
> 
> 
> ha!
> 
> Is James McGinn a "Water Vapor Retard"  ?
> 
>        Is James McGinn also  "Physics and Chemistry Retard" ?
> 
>                 Is McFly a Science Retart (SR) ?
> 
> 
>      Yes.   His statements are self-proving.
> 
WOO HOO! McFly is back! It was getting rather dull around here!

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

#711590

On 11/4/2018 10:18 PM, benj wrote:
> On 11/4/2018 9:03 PM, Sergio wrote:
>> On 11/4/2018 11:40 AM, Libor Striz wrote:
>>> James McGinn <jimmcginn9@gmail.com> Wrote in message:
>>>>> There is no gaseous phase in the atmosphere you fucking retard.
>>>
>>> This can be written only by such kind of a person you say I am.
>>>
>>> You vocabulary and manners convince you from being a self-claimed
>>>   scientist
>>> not to be taken seriously.
>>>
>>> Every liquid forms a true gaseous phase at any temperature, so
>>>   does its solid phase. It us only question of the vapour tension,
>>>   regarding volatility.
>>>
>>> Nanodroplets would create very low vapour tension what is not
>>>   observed, including many more evidences against them.
>>>
>>>>
>>
>>
>> ha!
>>
>> Is James McGinn a "Water Vapor Retard"  ?
>>
>>        Is James McGinn also  "Physics and Chemistry Retard" ?
>>
>>                 Is McFly a Science Retart (SR) ?
>>
>>
>>      Yes.   His statements are self-proving.
>>
> WOO HOO! McFly is back! It was getting rather dull around here!


yea, James Mcginn is far more Science that kensi pupa + Nads

In science,
   James Mcginn >> (kensi pupa + Nads)

at least McGinn knows that water is in States...

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

#711407

No Sergio, 

You dont understand it. You don't understand any of this. 

Increase in air temperature is often the result of increase in pressure. So, often increase in temp involves less space between air molecules. But there is mire energy to keep nanodroplets divided and suspended. 

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

#711645

On Sunday, November 4, 2018 at 12:39:18 AM UTC-4, James McGinn wrote:
> No Sergio, 
> 
> You dont understand it. You don't understand any of this. 
> 
> Increase in air temperature is often the result of increase in pressure. So, often increase in temp involves less space between air molecules. But there is mire energy to keep nanodroplets divided and suspended.

Ah your fictitious nanodroplets!
You forgot already how we showed your theory doesn't match
the data? (Many times over!)

Amusing, JM.

And the skeptics forum your tried to peddle your ideas
spanked you also.

Give it up JM. Find another scam to run.

Ed

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

#711678

On 11/5/2018 12:21 PM, Edward Prochak wrote:
> On Sunday, November 4, 2018 at 12:39:18 AM UTC-4, James McGinn wrote:
>> No Sergio,
>>
>> You dont understand it. You don't understand any of this.
>>
>> Increase in air temperature is often the result of increase in pressure. So, often increase in temp involves less space between air molecules. But there is mire energy to keep nanodroplets divided and suspended.
> 
> Ah your fictitious nanodroplets!
> You forgot already how we showed your theory doesn't match
> the data? (Many times over!)
> 
> Amusing, JM.
> 
> And the skeptics forum your tried to peddle your ideas
> spanked you also.
> 
> Give it up JM. Find another scam to run.
> 
> Ed
> 
Ed you need to learn Bert's theory of "heavy Air"! It fits right along 
with your imperial thinking on global warming (now called climate change).

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

#711684

On 11/5/2018 1:48 PM, benj wrote:
> On 11/5/2018 12:21 PM, Edward Prochak wrote:
>> On Sunday, November 4, 2018 at 12:39:18 AM UTC-4, James McGinn wrote:
>>> No Sergio,
>>>
>>> You dont understand it. You don't understand any of this.
>>>
>>> Increase in air temperature is often the result of increase in
>>> pressure. So, often increase in temp involves less space between air
>>> molecules. But there is mire energy to keep nanodroplets divided and
>>> suspended.
>>
>> Ah your fictitious nanodroplets!
>> You forgot already how we showed your theory doesn't match
>> the data? (Many times over!)
>>
>> Amusing, JM.
>>
>> And the skeptics forum your tried to peddle your ideas
>> spanked you also.
>>
>> Give it up JM. Find another scam to run.
>>
>> Ed
>>
> Ed you need to learn Bert's theory of "heavy Air"! It fits right along
> with your imperial thinking on global warming (now called climate change).

"Heavy Air Theory" is cool, Bert came up with it too alright.

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

#711691

On Monday, November 5, 2018 at 9:21:45 AM UTC-8, Edward Prochak wrote:
> On Sunday, November 4, 2018 at 12:39:18 AM UTC-4, James McGinn wrote:
> > No Sergio, 
> > 
> > You dont understand it. You don't understand any of this. 
> > 
> > Increase in air temperature is often the result of increase in pressure. So, often increase in temp involves less space between air molecules. But there is mire energy to keep nanodroplets divided and suspended.
> 
> Ah your fictitious nanodroplets!
> You forgot already how we showed your theory doesn't match
> the data? (Many times over!)

Name one.

You got nothing!!!

James McGinn / Solving Tornadoes
International Skeptics Fail to Dispute "Paulings Omission" 
https://www.thunderbolts.info/forum/phpBB3/viewtopic.php?f=10&t=17185

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

#712243

On Tuesday, October 30, 2018 at 5:52:27 PM UTC-7, Sergio wrote:
> as air expands with heat, more room is made for water vapor molecules,
> so the air becomes more humid, bringing more rain to dry areas.
> 
> google Psychrometric Chart
> 
> air at 50 degrees 50% humidity holds 0.004 pounds water per pound of
> air.  (find dry bulb temp at bottom, 50 degrees, go up to 50% relative
> humidity line, read on right axis)
> 
> air at 80 degrees 50% humidity holds 0.012 pounds of water per pound of air.
> 
> so 30 degrees hotter, has 3 times the amount of water vapor !
> 
> an increase in water vapor by 300% !
> 
> so globall worming will not raise the oceans, as it is moderated by
> water vapor in the air.

Evaporating water absorbs heat.Keeps warm air cooler. No water in Calif.So warm air is in.True today,and true tomorrow Bert

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

#712248

On 11/9/2018 8:01 PM, reber G=emc^2 wrote:
> On Tuesday, October 30, 2018 at 5:52:27 PM UTC-7, Sergio wrote:
>> as air expands with heat, more room is made for water vapor molecules,
>> so the air becomes more humid, bringing more rain to dry areas.
>>
>> google Psychrometric Chart
>>
>> air at 50 degrees 50% humidity holds 0.004 pounds water per pound of
>> air.  (find dry bulb temp at bottom, 50 degrees, go up to 50% relative
>> humidity line, read on right axis)
>>
>> air at 80 degrees 50% humidity holds 0.012 pounds of water per pound of air.
>>
>> so 30 degrees hotter, has 3 times the amount of water vapor !
>>
>> an increase in water vapor by 300% !
>>
>> so globall worming will not raise the oceans, as it is moderated by
>> water vapor in the air.
> 
> Evaporating water absorbs heat.Keeps warm air cooler. No water in Calif.So warm air is in.True today,and true tomorrow Bert
> 

humidity was 7% in northern California yesterday !!

it is near impossible to get that low, in most places.

        Even using a de-humidifier, they can get to perhaps 25%, not 15%
not 7% !!

area around the fire had humidity 15% or less for months...

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

#712290

On Friday, November 9, 2018 at 8:08:30 PM UTC-8, Sergio wrote:
> On 11/9/2018 8:01 PM, reber G=emc^2 wrote:
> > On Tuesday, October 30, 2018 at 5:52:27 PM UTC-7, Sergio wrote:
> >> as air expands with heat, more room is made for water vapor molecules,
> >> so the air becomes more humid, bringing more rain to dry areas.
> >>
> >> google Psychrometric Chart
> >>
> >> air at 50 degrees 50% humidity holds 0.004 pounds water per pound of
> >> air.  (find dry bulb temp at bottom, 50 degrees, go up to 50% relative
> >> humidity line, read on right axis)
> >>
> >> air at 80 degrees 50% humidity holds 0.012 pounds of water per pound of air.
> >>
> >> so 30 degrees hotter, has 3 times the amount of water vapor !
> >>
> >> an increase in water vapor by 300% !
> >>
> >> so globall worming will not raise the oceans, as it is moderated by
> >> water vapor in the air.
> > 
> > Evaporating water absorbs heat.Keeps warm air cooler. No water in Calif.So warm air is in.True today,and true tomorrow Bert
> > 
> 
> humidity was 7% in northern California yesterday !!
> 
> it is near impossible to get that low, in most places.
> 
>         Even using a de-humidifier, they can get to perhaps 25%, not 15%
> not 7% !!
> 
> area around the fire had humidity 15% or less for months...

It has become a very dry desert.Bright low sun has been causing driving problems.My van has dark windows so that helps a little.Bert

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

#712304

On Friday, November 9, 2018 at 8:08:30 PM UTC-8, Sergio wrote:
> On 11/9/2018 8:01 PM, reber G=emc^2 wrote:
> > On Tuesday, October 30, 2018 at 5:52:27 PM UTC-7, Sergio wrote:
> >> as air expands with heat, more room is made for water vapor molecules,
> >> so the air becomes more humid, bringing more rain to dry areas.
> >>
> >> google Psychrometric Chart
> >>
> >> air at 50 degrees 50% humidity holds 0.004 pounds water per pound of
> >> air.  (find dry bulb temp at bottom, 50 degrees, go up to 50% relative
> >> humidity line, read on right axis)
> >>
> >> air at 80 degrees 50% humidity holds 0.012 pounds of water per pound of air.
> >>
> >> so 30 degrees hotter, has 3 times the amount of water vapor !
> >>
> >> an increase in water vapor by 300% !
> >>
> >> so globall worming will not raise the oceans, as it is moderated by
> >> water vapor in the air.
> > 
> > Evaporating water absorbs heat.Keeps warm air cooler. No water in Calif.So warm air is in.True today,and true tomorrow Bert
> > 
> 
> humidity was 7% in northern California yesterday !!
> 
> it is near impossible to get that low, in most places.
> 
>         Even using a de-humidifier, they can get to perhaps 25%, not 15%
> not 7% !!
> 
> area around the fire had humidity 15% or less for months...

That's relative humidity, you retard.  That is meteorological term.  It doesn't mean what you think it means.  It doesn't mean 7 percent of the atmosphere is H2O.  It has to do with the dewpoint.  The "relative" refers to the amount that would be necessary to result in rain/dew.

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

#712367

On 11/9/2018 9:01 PM, reber G=emc^2 wrote:
> On Tuesday, October 30, 2018 at 5:52:27 PM UTC-7, Sergio wrote:
>> as air expands with heat, more room is made for water vapor molecules,
>> so the air becomes more humid, bringing more rain to dry areas.
>>
>> google Psychrometric Chart
>>
>> air at 50 degrees 50% humidity holds 0.004 pounds water per pound of
>> air.  (find dry bulb temp at bottom, 50 degrees, go up to 50% relative
>> humidity line, read on right axis)
>>
>> air at 80 degrees 50% humidity holds 0.012 pounds of water per pound of air.
>>
>> so 30 degrees hotter, has 3 times the amount of water vapor !
>>
>> an increase in water vapor by 300% !
>>
>> so globall worming will not raise the oceans, as it is moderated by
>> water vapor in the air.
> 
> Evaporating water absorbs heat.Keeps warm air cooler. No water in Calif.So warm air is in.True today,and true tomorrow Bert
> 
WAter vapor will save the planet form climate change by warming it up. 
The is imperial thinking. It fits.

[toc] | [prev] | [standalone]

Back to top | Article view | sci.physics

csiph-web