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

Groups > alt.usenet.kooks > #653588

Re: Jim's backpedaling and lying...

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:59cc0ed7-5f1d-4973-b30a-c4a271ab411f@googlegroups.com> did
thusly jump head first into the wood chipper again:

> On Saturday, March 19, 2016 at 10:46:29 PM UTC-7,
> Friendly Neighborhood Vote Wrangler Emeritus wrote:

>>> Maybe Nilsson will vouch for you.

>> Neither I nor the scientific knowledge gained over the past 250+ years
>> via carefully controlled experimentation require "vouching", James. We
>> are right. We have been proven right, time and again, by that rigorous
>> scientific experimentation and knowledge.
>> 
>> You are the moronic halfwit blathering wholly impossible fairy tales.
>> You are wrong. You have been proven wrong, time and again, by that
>> same rigorous scientific experimentation and knowledge.
>> 
>> And you've found yourself utterly unable to defend your imbecilic
>> dullardry, because you are the pea-brained uneducated batshit crazy
>> moron James Bernard McGinn, Jr. of Antioch, CA... the laughingstock of
>> the entire world and a scientific fraud.
>> 
>> As proof of what I write above, you'll yet again run away from
>> defending your unhinged paranoid conspiracy theory, by way of running
>> away from addressing the many gaping logical contradictions in your
>> "theory", as outlined in my .sig.

> If

And we see that what I wrote above was true. You've run away from
defending your unhinged paranoid conspiracy theory, by way of running
away from substantively addressing the many gaping logical
contradictions in your "theory", as outlined in my .sig, James.

> you had any substantive support for these assertions you wouldn't
> have to make the same tired claims over and over again.

They're not "tired claims", James. They're reality. Backed up with
scientific proof.

Now, I've caught you in a fatal logical flaw as regards the energy to
power your plasma coming from the wind, and the energy to move the
wind coming from the plasma, which means with no wind and no plasma,
you have nothing, James. That's a circulus in probando causality
dilemma, which utterly destroys your retarded "theory", James.

I've caught you desperately backpedaling and trying to claim that your
moronic tiny droplets in the atmosphere have a higher surface tension
so they act like ice and that explains the spectra Anders Nilsson
measured... except if it was ice as you claim, it'd have a *lower*
photon energy, not a higher photon energy than liquid water.

You've denied the Standard Model, which means you deny the
electromagnetic force and strong and weak nuclear forces; you've
denied molar volume and molar mass, which means you deny the Periodic
Table of the Elements; you've denied latent heat which means you deny
that water can enter gaseous phase; you've denied convection which
means you believe that gravity doesn't exist and that fire behaves as
it does in zero gravity... the air spreads out radially and the fire
goes out from lack of oxygen; your denying convection, molar volume
and molar mass also means you deny that hot air balloons can work.

You've attempted to paint yourself as smarter than every scientist in
the past 250 years, likening yourself to Einstein and Archimedes, yet
you demonstrate that you're so fucking clueless and stupid you should
by all rights go straight back to elementary school.

You've claimed you're a physicist, yet your scientific educational
background consists of the sum total of a single elective class in
Basic Meteorology.

You've provided not proof of your moronic claims, you've admitted
you're relying upon a hypothetical "plasma not-a-plasma" that cannot
exist in the troposphere because if the energy source existed to
plasmize water, the water would dissociate into hydrogen and oxygen
first, and that energy source would dissociate all water on the
planet, and that energy source cannot exist in the troposphere because
that much energy would ionize the air and be absorbed far above the
troposphere.

You've professed your belief in a "sentient sky tornado" with tendrils
stretching "hundreds and even thousands" of miles across the sky. Why
have they never been detected or experienced, Jim? You claim they're
made of and powered by your kooky "water plasma not-a-plasma", and we
can detect both gaseous-phase and liquid-phase water in the atmosphere
by the radiation it absorbs and emits, as is evidenced by looking at
any weather website's maps, so why can't we detect your sky monster's
tendrils, James?

You've claimed there exists a "sentient jet stream / giant vortex
monster in the sky" shooting its noodly appendages throughout the
troposphere, at all altitudes, to touch them down at the exact
locations that correspond to the rear portion of only cumulonimbus
clouds, avoiding all other clouds, avoiding aircraft, avoiding
creating tornadoes out of a clear blue sky, and somehow knowing that
it shouldn't create a tornado if the ground or water below is cooler
than the air above... so you admit you believe in a Flying Spaghetti
Monster in the sky, Jim... you have no evidence of it, you just made
it up, but you're just insane enough to believe in it.

You've proven via your running away from performing that simple
experiment to prove the existence of latent heat, in so doing ducking
the onus put upon you to prove your claim that it doesn't exist, that
you're running scared from proving yourself wrong and causing your
kooky little smoke-and-mirrors delusion to come crashing down.

You've failed at getting your insane moronic theory through the peer
review process, and have the sum total of *zero* corroborating
scientific studies to back up your retarded blather.

You are universally laughed at as a moronic brain-fried halfwit,
James. You're a scientific fraud and a laughingstock.

That is a reality which will haunt you to your grave, James. Deal with
it.

You've lost, Jim. Your dimwitted little fairy tale "theory" is dead.

Now, do get right on entertaining the sane folk with more of your
retarded blathering fairy tales, James... it's all you're good for.

-- 

Here, James, at the very least, try to address those tough questions
which spotlight the logical inconsistencies and contradictions
inherent in your "theory":

============================================================
Anders Nilsson measured (https://youtu.be/7hGqlEpvODw?t=2156) a
spectral peak that was not solid-phase nor liquid-phase water, James.
You claim that water remains liquid-phase upon evaporation. What was
Anders Nilsson measuring, James? Oh, that's right... gaseous phase
water, thereby proving that evaporation entails a phase change,
thereby proving latent heat of evaporation exists, thereby
*dis*proving a gigantic chunk of your theory, James.

You make a supposition that a "plasma not-a-plasma" is created from
water due to wind shear, which transports energy throughout the
atmosphere via wind driven by that plasma. Where does the energy come
from to create your "wind shear" to create your "plasma not-a-plasma"
if the "plasma not-a-plasma" cannot exist and thereby "transport
energy" by driving that wind to create the "wind shear" which creates
your "plasma not-a-plasma", unless there is "wind shear" to begin
with, James? Your logic is so twisted you're going in circles. You've
created a circulus in probando causality dilemma, which utterly
destroys your theory, James.

If, as you claim, the jet stream is a vortex, why is the ride while
inside the jet stream so smooth, James? Have you never ridden in an
airplane inside a jet stream, James?

Do you not understand that once the air going upward through the
tornadic funnel reaches the cumulonimbus cloud base above the
mesocyclone, it spreads out, thus the tornado is strictly a phenomenon
which happens from cloud base to ground? It does *not* go from the
ground all the way up through the cloud to the tropopause as you
claim, James, and it most certainly does not continue for potentially
hundreds of miles in the upper troposphere to join the jet stream,
which would make air travel deadly.

Explain why the jets run easterly, whereas the dry line runs N-S, if
the jets are powering the creation of tornadoes. How is a tornado
being created hundreds of miles from the edge of the jets, James?

How do your "jet stream vortices" travel potentially hundreds of miles
away from your "jet stream / giant tornado in the sky", without
detection by satellite *or* Doppler radar, and know where and when to
touch down so they always hit clouds, rather than tornadoes randomly
appearing out of the clear blue sky, James? Is your "jet stream /
giant tornado in the sky" sentient, James?

Which direction does air flow from a flame, Jim? Up, does it not?
That's convection due to temperature-induced density differential, is
it not? Which direction does air flow from a flame in zero gravity,
James? Radially in all directions, thereby snuffing out the flame due
to lack of oxygen. So your claiming that convection doesn't exist
means you're further claiming that gravity does not exist, and fire
cannot burn for very long before it is smothered due to lack of
oxygen. Or were you not aware that convection is a gravity-induced
phenomenon due to density differential, James?

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

Do you not know what the definition of "plasma" is, James?

How is your "plasma not-a-plasma" (which you have admitted is a
hypothetical construct in a failed attempt to lend your claims even a
semblance of plausibility) forming if the nuclear binding energy and
dissociation energy of water are identical, and thus the water will
preferentially dissociate into hydrogen and oxygen unless hit with an
extremely energetic laser, Jim?

Where is the energy (equivalent to photons of 103.32 nm wavelength,
extremely strong ultraviolet, just 3.32 nm away from x-rays... except
photons with shorter wavelength than 121 nm are absorbed high above
the troposphere because they ionize air so well) coming from in the
troposphere to form your "plasma not-a-plasma", Jim?

How is the energy to plasmize your "plasma not-a-plasma" not
dissociating all water on the planet and killing all life on the
planet given that the energy *must* be in the troposphere where nearly
all the water is, and where all life is, Jim?

Now that it's been proven that water molecule polarity doesn't change
upon H bonding (which would have side effects such as random changes
in the solvent properties of water... and we know those properties do
not randomly change, Jim), and in fact the two spin isomers of water
molecules account for the different H bonding strengths which account
for evaporation and condensation, do you still contend that your
implausible claims are workable, Jim?
============================================================

Why can't you answer those questions, Jim?

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

Thread

Jim's backpedaling and lying... Friendly Neighborhood Vote Wrangler Emeritus <FNVWe@altusenetkooks.xxx> - 2016-03-19 18:19 +0100
  Re: Jim's backpedaling and lying... Friendly Neighborhood Vote Wrangler Emeritus <FNVWe@altusenetkooks.xxx> - 2016-03-19 20:59 +0100
    Re: Jim's backpedaling and lying... Friendly Neighborhood Vote Wrangler Emeritus <FNVWe@altusenetkooks.xxx> - 2016-03-20 06:36 +0100
      Re: Jim's backpedaling and lying... Friendly Neighborhood Vote Wrangler Emeritus <FNVWe@altusenetkooks.xxx> - 2016-03-20 19:49 +0100
        Re: Jim's backpedaling and lying... Skeeter <skeet@invalid.invalid> - 2016-03-20 14:45 -0600
          Re: Jim's backpedaling and lying... snipeco.2@gmail.com (Sn!pe) - 2016-03-20 21:06 +0000
  Re: Jim's backpedaling and lying... Friendly Neighborhood Vote Wrangler Emeritus <FNVWe@altusenetkooks.xxx> - 2016-03-24 18:25 +0100
    Re: Jim's backpedaling and lying... Friendly Neighborhood Vote Wrangler Emeritus <FNVWe@altusenetkooks.xxx> - 2016-03-25 07:07 +0100

csiph-web