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

Groups > sci.physics > #719198

Re: Sergio, your post has confessional implications

Show all headers | View raw

On Tuesday, December 18, 2018 at 8:59:53 AM UTC-8, Sergio wrote:
> On 12/18/2018 12:43 AM, pnalsing@gmail.com wrote:
> > On Monday, December 17, 2018 at 9:25:12 AM UTC-8, James McGinn wrote:
> >> On Saturday, December 15, 2018 at 6:52:01 AM UTC-8, Sergio wrote:
> >>
> >>> water is well known;
> >>>
> >>> http://www1.lsbu.ac.uk/water/water_structure_science.html
> >>>
> >>> denial of water vapor, is denial of basic science.
> >>>
> >>> invention of McGinn's magic 'plasma' that somehow causes evaporation,
> >>> has no evidence, just a fog dream
> >>
> >> Sergio,
> >>
> >> The link you present here has confessional implications.  Firstly, it confesses to the fact that H2O is not well understood (exactly the opposite of your claim) in that it explores the scientific anomalies of H2O.  (Note: something is "anomalous" when current theory fails to predict it or even contradicts its observance.) Secondly, it confesses to your own dimwittedness in that you present it as evidence that water is well understood, which is exactly the opposite of what the web page itself is attempting to convey.
> >>
> >> Did you realize any of this? 
> > 
> > However, your self-named 'nanodroplets' are, in fact, addressed in Sergio's link, where you can read...
> > 
> > "Water dimer
> > Much effort has been expended on the structure of small isolated water clusters. The smallest cluster is the dimer. Typically, in the ambient atmosphere, there is over one water dimer for every thousand free water molecules rising to about one in twenty in steam."
> > 
> > So, your 'nanodroplet' is more correctly called a 'water dimer', and it really does exist in the atmosphere... but it is 1000 less populous than free water molecules in the ambient atmosphere! Thanks for the link, Sergio...
> > 
> > Back to the drawing board for you, Jim, yet another hitch in your giddyup.
> > 
> 
> poor Church Lady McGinn in his Confessional admits he fails to
> understand the word *anomalie*, and provides an out of context google
> search for it.
> .
>        Water anomalies are well understood and characterized.
> 
> from the link;
> "The anomalous properties of water are those where the behavior of
> liquid water is entirely different from what is found with other liquids."
> 
> which sinks all of James McGinn's "notions", "anomalies" are not
> "mystery",  they are just different from other liquids

Semantics.

Back to sci.physics | Previous | Next — Previous in thread | Find similar | Unroll thread

Thread

Sergio, your post has confessional implications James McGinn <jimmcginn9@gmail.com> - 2018-12-17 09:25 -0800
  Sergio, your post has confessional implications James McGinn <jimmcginn9@gmail.com> - 2018-12-17 17:07 -0800
    Sergio, your post has confessional implications James McGinn <jimmcginn9@gmail.com> - 2018-12-17 22:24 -0800
  Re: Sergio, your post has confessional implications pnalsing@gmail.com - 2018-12-17 22:43 -0800
    Re: Sergio, your post has confessional implications James McGinn <jimmcginn9@gmail.com> - 2018-12-17 23:28 -0800
      Re: Sergio, your post has confessional implications pnalsing@gmail.com - 2018-12-18 19:45 -0800
        Re: Sergio, your post has confessional implications Sergio <invalid@invalid.com> - 2018-12-18 23:32 -0600
    Re: Sergio, your post has confessional implications Sergio <invalid@invalid.com> - 2018-12-18 10:59 -0600
      Re: Sergio, your post has confessional implications James McGinn <jimmcginn9@gmail.com> - 2018-12-18 09:31 -0800

csiph-web