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

Groups > alt.usenet.kooks > #652308

Re: Earth to Nutcase dude

Cross-posted to 2 groups.

Show all headers | View raw

Time to spin the kooks up again. Melt, kooks, melt. <snicker>

James McGinn, in
<news:5aea41f8-2f8f-4658-87d2-1530b977ddb3@googlegroups.com> did
thusly jump head first into the wood chipper again:

> On Thursday, March 10, 2016 at 11:39:33 PM UTC-8,
> Friendly Neighborhood Vote Wrangler Emeritus wrote:

>>> Only when some H bonds are attached, neutralizing some polarity, is it
>>> possible to pull H2O molecules off a surface, and that requires multiple
>>> H2O molecules.

>> Wrong. 

> I am right.  Read my paper.  

Wrong, Jim. Referring to your own blather is just your attempt at
bolstering your growing insanity, brought about because you refuse to
go back and examine the underlying premise upon which your kooky
conspiracy theory was built, for fear you'll discover you're wrong and
you've wasted a quarter century proving yourself to be a moron.

>> The energy required to pull a water molecule off the surface of
>> water is the hydrogen bond strength of 23 kJ/mol per H bond, Jim.

> Not measurable, dumbass.  Speculative.

James McGinn denies that electrostatic attraction occurs between the
negatively charged water surface and the positively charged
atmosphere, yet he's stoooopid enough to believe that a magical
fictitious energy source exists in the troposphere which can break
covalent *and* electrostatic bonds... which if it existed in the
troposphere would dissociate all water on the planet and kill all
life.

>> The energy required to break the covalent bond is 458.9 kJ/mol.
>> 
>> You're conflating to try to make your kooky conspiracy theory work,
>> Jim. But it doesn't work. At all. It's fantasy.
>> 
>> <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bond-dissociation_energy>
>> ========================================================
>> For example, an HO-H bond of a water molecule (H-O-H) has 493.4 kJ/mol 
>> of bond-dissociation energy, and 424.4 kJ/mol is needed to cleave the 
>> remaining O-H bond.

> So, you saw it on a website, and now your an expert.

Doesn't matter where the information came from, Jim. It still proves
you wrong, therefore your kooky conspiracy theory is wrong.

You're attempting to conflate the messenger with the message, Jim. And
given that I've utterly destroyed your kooky conspiracy theory via
more than a half dozen different avenues, that won't work for you.

>> The bond energy of the covalent O-H bonds in water is 458.9 kJ/mol, 
>> which is the average of the values.
>> 
>> Hydrogen bond-dissociation energy in water is about 23 kJ/mol.
>> ========================================================
>> 
>> 493.4 + 424.4 + 23 = 940.8 kJ/mol
>> 458.9 + 458.9 + 23 = 940.8 kJ/mol
>> 
>> Aww, Jim didn't know that the dissociation energy and nuclear binding 
>> energy of water is identical at 940.8 kJ/mol, thus water will 
>> preferentially dissociate into hydrogen and oxygen rather than ionize. 
>> That's one of the anomalous properties of water, Jim.

> Like you have a clue.  You saw this on a website, now you think you
> understand it.  Just like a global warming advocate.

Aww, look at James McGinn going all ad-hom because he knows he can't
refute that scientific reality which proves he's a kook and a moron
for believing that a magical energy source exists in the troposphere
which can magically plasmize atmospheric water (without dissociating
it), but it wouldn't do the same to all the water on the planet *and*
kill off all life.

How are your kooky "water droplets" forming if they're plasma, Jim?

How is your kooky "plasma not-a-plasma" forming if the nuclear binding
energy and dissociation energy of water are identical, and thus the
water is dissociating into hydrogen and oxygen, Jim?

Why can't you answer those questions, Jim?

>> How is your "water plasma" forming your purported "droplets" if it's 
>> plasma, Jim? And given that the dissociation energy and nuclear 
>> binding energy of water are identical at 940.8 kJ/mol, you're saying 
>> that your water has actually dissociated into hydrogen and oxygen... 
>> so how is this hydrogen and oxygen forming your purported "droplets", 
>> Jim?

> You lost me. 
> 
> I don't know what you are talking about.

Exactly, Jim. Therefore your kooky conspiracy theory is dead, Jim.

<snicker>

-- 

Shiny Tinfoil Brain (aka Bite My Shiny Metal Ass) didn't know:
=====================================
The Euler equation is a subset of equations known as the Euler-Fourier
Formulas, thus that a sinewave is a transformation of a circle (which
should have been intuitive, given that generators *rotate* to create
*sinusoids*);

That cross correlation is used with Fourier transforms;

That superposition is the same as wave interference;

That wave interference works the same for standing or traveling waves;

That RMS and peak-to-peak voltage are two different things;

That RMS isn't a DC voltage;

That 170 volt peak, 120.208 volt RMS L-N 3-phase service gives 208.207
volts RMS L-L;

That 4444525800 != 4400000000 != 1;

The difference between frequency and period of a sinewave;

That there's no difference between 'i' and 'j' in electrical
engineering, physics and control systems engineering;

What a positive or negative vector is;

That the vector sum of 3-phase AC constitutes a closed loop per
Kirchhoff's Voltage Law, thus that the three phases sum to zero;

That "mnemonic" is not spelled "mneumonic";

That his claim: "Water is tetrahedral. It actually has 4 poles, 2
positive and 2 negative." is nonsense from a blathering moron.

That water does not have negative poles. The oxygen has an
electronegativity of 8+, the hydrogens 1+.

That the term "electronegativity" denotes a *positive* nucleal charge.

What the definition of the word "equivalent" is.

That digital voltmeters do indeed take discrete instantaneous samples.

That the atmosphere (and the gaseous phase water within the
atmosphere) does indeed follow the Ideal Gas Law.

That the square of the instantaneous sample of peak-to-peak voltage of
a peak-voltage sinewave is an offset sinewave, thus its average does
*not* equal zero, as Shiny Tinfoil Brain k'lames.

That the Ideal Gas Law does not require an ideal gas because it takes
into account molar volume.

That "within 10% error" does not equal "10% error".

That water can be plasmized.

That atomic number does not equal effective nuclear charge.

That nuclear charge does not equal effective nuclear charge.

And the moron continues to demonstrate his inability to read a graph.
=====================================

SPNAK!

<snicker>

Back to alt.usenet.kooks | Previous | Next — Previous in thread | Next in thread | Find similar | Unroll thread

Thread

Re: Earth to Nutcase dude Friendly Neighborhood Vote Wrangler Emeritus <FNVWe@altusenetkooks.xxx> - 2016-03-08 06:40 +0100
  Re: Earth to Nutcase dude Friendly Neighborhood Vote Wrangler Emeritus <FNVWe@altusenetkooks.xxx> - 2016-03-08 08:58 +0100
  Re: Earth to Nutcase dude Friendly Neighborhood Vote Wrangler Emeritus <FNVWe@altusenetkooks.xxx> - 2016-03-11 08:29 +0100
    Re: Earth to Nutcase dude Friendly Neighborhood Vote Wrangler Emeritus <FNVWe@altusenetkooks.xxx> - 2016-03-13 07:00 +0100
      Re: Earth to Nutcase dude Friendly Neighborhood Vote Wrangler Emeritus <FNVWe@altusenetkooks.xxx> - 2016-03-13 08:52 +0100
        Re: Earth to Nutcase dude Friendly Neighborhood Vote Wrangler Emeritus <FNVWe@altusenetkooks.xxx> - 2016-03-14 05:17 +0100
          Re: Earth to Nutcase dude binky feel good <julianfwaldby@gmail.com> - 2016-03-13 21:32 -0700
          Re: Earth to Nutcase dude Friendly Neighborhood Vote Wrangler Emeritus <FNVWe@altusenetkooks.xxx> - 2016-03-14 06:21 +0100
            Re: Earth to Nutcase dude Friendly Neighborhood Vote Wrangler Emeritus <FNVWe@altusenetkooks.xxx> - 2016-03-14 07:07 +0100
              Re: Earth to Nutcase dude Friendly Neighborhood Vote Wrangler Emeritus <FNVWe@altusenetkooks.xxx> - 2016-03-14 17:32 +0100
                Re: Earth to Nutcase dude "\"Fakey's\" dogwhistle holder living at 5907 Stanton Ave., Pittsburgh, PA (aka Teh Mop  Jockey), socked up as 5907 Stanton Avenue, Pittsburgh, PA 15206-2117" <root@127.0.0.1> - 2016-03-14 12:44 -0400
                Re: Earth to Nutcase dude Friendly Neighborhood Vote Wrangler Emeritus <FNVWe@altusenetkooks.xxx> - 2016-03-15 05:54 +0100

csiph-web