So, you mental retards believe that measuring water vapor proves it is gaseous?

68 views
Skip to first unread message

Solving Tornadoes

unread,
Jan 15, 2022, 3:32:45 PMJan 15
to
On Saturday, January 15, 2022 at 12:16:09 PM UTC-8, Jim Pennino wrote:
> James McGinn <jimmc...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > On Friday, January 14, 2022 at 10:04:37 AM UTC-8, Michael Moroney wrote:
> >> On 1/14/2022 12:44 PM, Claudius Denk wrote:
> >> > On Friday, January 14, 2022 at 9:16:11 AM UTC-8, Jim Pennino wrote:
> >>
> >> >> People have been measuring water vapor for about 4,000 years and the
> >> >> only thing that has changed in 4,000 years is the ease of making
> >> >> water vapor measurements and the device accuracy.
> >> >>> James McGinn / Claudius Denk / Still delusional
> >> >
> >> > You got nothing, you deceptive piece of shit.
> >> He has 4000 years of measuring water vapor, James.
> >> >
> >> > James McGinn / Tard
> >>
> >> You mixed up your socks again, McTard.
> > Relevance?
> Yet more proof that you are insane.

So, you mental retards believe that measuring water vapor proves it is gaseous?

Really?

James McGinn / Genius

Jim Pennino

unread,
Jan 15, 2022, 4:31:09 PMJan 15
to
> James McGinn / Claudius Denk / Delusional Mental patient

The answer doesn't change no matter how many time you repost this.

Once again, the answer in full.

Measurement of water vapor.

First some definitions.

"water vapor" means gaseous H2O.
"water aerosol" means nanodroplets of liquid H2O.
"ice" means the solid form of H2O.
"hygrometer" means a device for measuring water vapor.

In the 21st century the most common techniques for making a
hygrometer are spectroscopic (there are several different methods)
and capacitive measurements. THESE TECHNIQUES CAN TELL THE DIFFERENCE
BETWEEN ICE, WATER AEROSOL AND WATER VAPOR AND CAN MEASURE ALL
THREE SIMULTANEOUSLY.

THESE TECHNIQUES CAN TELL THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN ICE, WATER AEROSOL
AND WATER VAPOR AND CAN MEASURE ALL THREE SIMULTANEOUSLY.

THESE TECHNIQUES CAN TELL THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN ICE, WATER AEROSOL
AND WATER VAPOR AND CAN MEASURE ALL THREE SIMULTANEOUSLY.

THESE TECHNIQUES CAN TELL THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN ICE, WATER AEROSOL
AND WATER VAPOR AND CAN MEASURE ALL THREE SIMULTANEOUSLY.

THESE TECHNIQUES CAN TELL THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN ICE, WATER AEROSOL
AND WATER VAPOR AND CAN MEASURE ALL THREE SIMULTANEOUSLY.

THESE TECHNIQUES CAN TELL THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN ICE, WATER AEROSOL
AND WATER VAPOR AND CAN MEASURE ALL THREE SIMULTANEOUSLY.

The above is repeated multiple times as you seem to ignore this every
time I post this.

Modern measurements agree with Chinese measurements from the
2nd century BC and later, but now very old, techniques such
as metal-paper hygrometers, hair tension hygrometers, psychrometers,
chilled mirror dew point hygrometers, resistive hygrometers and thermal
conductivity hygrometers.

In other words, all the hygrometers invented in the last 4,000 years
will read essentially the same, i.e. to the limits of the intrinsic
accuracy of the device under a given set of conditions.

James McGinn

unread,
Jan 15, 2022, 4:38:29 PMJan 15
to
So, you morons believe that measuring water vapor proves it is gaseous?

James McGinn / Genius

Jim Pennino

unread,
Jan 15, 2022, 5:01:09 PMJan 15
to
If you actually knew anything about science in general and the
properties of water and spectroscopic analysis in particular you would
not be asking such a blazingly insane question.

But just to play along and show once again how insane you are...

Point a spectroscopic analyzer at a block of ice at -50 C. You get one
set of readings which indicate ice.

Point a spectroscopic analyzer at a source of steam at 200 C. You get
another set of readings that indicate gaseous H2O.

Point a spectroscopic analyzer at water at 25 C. You get yet another
set of readings that indicate liquid water.

Point a spectroscopic analyzer at a container of air with water in it at
-50C. You get readings which indicate ice.

Heat the container to 25 C. You get readings which indicate water and
gaseous H2O.

Heat the container to above 100 C. You get readings which indicate
gaseous H2O.

QED

> James McGinn / Claudius Denk / Delusional mental patient

Claudius Denk

unread,
Jan 15, 2022, 5:28:29 PMJan 15
to
Answer the question, asshole. Do you or do you not believe that measuring water vapor proves it is gaseous?

You got nothing, you fucking dullwitted science groupie.

Jim Pennino

unread,
Jan 15, 2022, 6:01:09 PMJan 15
to
The question was answered in detail above.

Here it is again, with some expansion.

Point a spectroscopic analyzer at a block of ice at -50 C. You get one
set of readings which indicate ice. Ice is the only form of water that
can exist at -50 C.

Point a spectroscopic analyzer at a source of steam at 200 C. You get
another set of readings that indicate gaseous H2O. Gaseous H2O is the
only form of water that can exist at at 200 C.

Point a spectroscopic analyzer at water at 25 C. You get yet another
set of readings that indicate liquid water. Water is obviously water.

Point a spectroscopic analyzer at a container of air with water in it at
-50C. You get readings which indicate ice. Ice is the only form of water that
can exist at -50 C.

Heat the container to 25 C. You get readings which indicate water and
gaseous H2O. At 25 C you can have both gaseous H2O and liquid water and
the fact the analyzer indicates the presense of both proves this to be
true.

Heat the container to above 100 C. You get readings which indicate
gaseous H2O. Gaeous H2O is the only form of water that can exist at
above 100 C.

QED

> You got nothing, you fucking dullwitted science groupie.

And yet once again, when your delusions are threatend by facts, you lash
out in rage and attempt to insult.


Michael Moroney

unread,
Jan 15, 2022, 6:44:12 PMJan 15
to
On 1/15/2022 4:38 PM, James McGinn wrote:

> So, you morons believe that measuring water vapor proves it is gaseous?
>
Measuring water vapor using something to detect *gaseous* water and
getting a nonzero reading from humid air at 25C proves it is gaseous.

> James McGinn / Tard

Claudius Denk

unread,
Jan 15, 2022, 7:11:53 PMJan 15
to
Like you have a fucking clue.

Michael Moroney

unread,
Jan 15, 2022, 7:34:35 PMJan 15
to
More so than you do, McTard!

Jim Pennino

unread,
Jan 15, 2022, 8:16:15 PMJan 15
to
Typical delusional response that completely rejects an obvious fact
with rage and attempts to insult.


Paul Alsing

unread,
Jan 16, 2022, 1:01:16 AMJan 16
to
On Saturday, January 15, 2022 at 1:38:29 PM UTC-8, James McGinn wrote:

> So, you morons believe that measuring water vapor proves it is gaseous?

No need to measure water vapor to prove it is gaseous... just look up the definition of water vapor!

You don't seem to understand that *you* do not get to change the definition of terms widely accepted by the scientific community, Jimbo, and neither does anyone else.

Your 'nanodroplets' also have their very own definition...

https://www.nature.com/articles/s41467-018-04816-2

https://www.pnas.org/content/112/30/9253

... and these articles for some obscure reason don't agree with *your* definition of nanodroplets, imagine that! What YOU call nanodroplets is actually called aerosols... but since to are totally uneducated in these matters, well, how would you possibly know? You don't, of course.

It seems you just cannot avoid being labeled a complete dumbfuck since you just cannot understand the words as used in science!

Get a clue.

"It takes considerable knowledge just to realize the extent of your own ignorance."
- Thomas Sowell

James McGinn

unread,
Jan 16, 2022, 4:05:54 AMJan 16
to
On Saturday, January 15, 2022 at 10:01:16 PM UTC-8, pnal...@gmail.com wrote:

> You don't seem to understand that *you* do not get to change the definition of terms widely accepted by the scientific community, Jimbo, and neither does anyone else.

It's just one moron argument after another with you trolls.

James McGinn / Genius

Paul Alsing

unread,
Jan 16, 2022, 10:27:31 AMJan 16
to
> James McGinn / Dumbfuck

This is just another non-response from Jimbo, who cannot defend his position in the real world. In his fantasy world he gets to do and say whatever he likes and all is well, and pink fairies abound.

Jim Pennino

unread,
Jan 16, 2022, 10:46:09 AMJan 16
to
It's just the typical response of someone who is delusional when his
delusions are threatened.

> James McGinn / Claudius Denk / Mental patient

James McGinn

unread,
Jan 16, 2022, 11:28:36 AMJan 16
to
None of you is smart enough to be embarrassed by your stupidity.

If I define a pig as an airplane will it fly?

James McGinn / Genius

James McGinn

unread,
Jan 16, 2022, 11:37:01 AMJan 16
to
On Saturday, January 15, 2022 at 10:01:16 PM UTC-8, pnal...@gmail.com wrote:
> On Saturday, January 15, 2022 at 1:38:29 PM UTC-8, James McGinn wrote:
>
> > So, you morons believe that measuring water vapor proves it is gaseous?
> No need to measure water vapor to prove it is gaseous... just look up the definition of water vapor!
>
> You don't seem to understand that *you* do not get to change the definition of terms widely accepted by the scientific community, Jimbo, and neither does anyone else.

So, no experiment necessary. We just pole scientist.

This is how retards do science.

Michael Moroney

unread,
Jan 16, 2022, 11:45:39 AMJan 16
to
Definitions don't involve experiments, tardboy.
There is a definition for 'unicorn' and 'Bigfoot'.

Experiments can demonstrate whether the thing defined exists or not.
And guess what? Experiments have demonstrated that water vapor, as
defined (gaseous H2O) really does exist below 100C.
>
> This is how retards do science.

No, James, you don't do science.
>

James McGinn

unread,
Jan 16, 2022, 11:57:50 AMJan 16
to
On Sunday, January 16, 2022 at 8:45:39 AM UTC-8, Michael Moroney wrote:

> Experiments have demonstrated that water vapor, as
> defined (gaseous H2O) really does exist below 100C.

Provide date, location, author of this experiment or admit you are lying.

Put up or shup up, moron.

James McGinn / Genius

Jim Pennino

unread,
Jan 16, 2022, 12:31:09 PMJan 16
to
James McGinn <jimmc...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Sunday, January 16, 2022 at 7:46:09 AM UTC-8, Jim Pennino wrote:
>> James McGinn <jimmc...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> > On Saturday, January 15, 2022 at 10:01:16 PM UTC-8, pnal...@gmail.com wrote:
>> >
>> >> You don't seem to understand that *you* do not get to change the definition of terms widely accepted by the scientific community, Jimbo, and neither does anyone else.
>> >
>> > It's just one moron argument after another with you trolls.
>> It's just the typical response of someone who is delusional when his
>> delusions are threatened.
>>
>> > James McGinn / Claudius Denk / Mental patient
>
> None of you is smart enough to be embarrassed by your stupidity.
>
> If I define a pig as an airplane will it fly?

Delusional, angry, babbling nonsense.

One more try...

In the following the phrase "water vapor" means gaseous H2O.

Take a transparent container with air and water in it and heat it to
above 100 C. At this temperature, all the water in the container is
guaranteed to be water vapor.

Point a spectroscopic analyzer at the container and the analyzer
indicates the unique spectrum of water vapor and nothing but water
vapor.

Slowly cool the container while monitoring the spectroscopic analyzer.

As the container cools below 100 C the analyzer starts to indicate the
unique spectrum of liquid water in small amounts and the amount of water
vapor decreases.

This continues to just above 0 C and at this point the analyzer
indicates very little water vapor and a lot of liquid water.

When the temperature drops below 0 C the analyzer indicates there is no
water vapor and there is no liquid water but now indicates the unique
spectrum of ice as being the only form of H2O in the container.

Note that what happens is that the readings of an instruement change and
such do not depend on what words one uses to describe solid, liquid, or
gaseous H2O.

The instruement indicates the amount of three different things in the
container.

QED

> James McGinn / Claudius Denk / Delusional


Jim Pennino

unread,
Jan 16, 2022, 12:31:10 PMJan 16
to
Non sequitur as are most of your replies.

> This is how retards do science.

This is how delusional people react when their delusions are threatened
with facts, they lash out in anger and attempt to insult.

Jim Pennino

unread,
Jan 16, 2022, 12:46:13 PMJan 16
to
James McGinn <jimmc...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Sunday, January 16, 2022 at 8:45:39 AM UTC-8, Michael Moroney wrote:
>
>> Experiments have demonstrated that water vapor, as
>> defined (gaseous H2O) really does exist below 100C.
>
> Provide date, location, author of this experiment or admit you are lying.

Doing so for a delusional person such as you would accomplish nothing as
you would just claim it is a lie.

As spectroscopic analyzers are a commercial product anyone can buy, go
get one and do the experiment yourself.

I only see two problems with your doing that.

The first is that since you apparently can not afford to see a dentist,
you likely can not afford to buy any equipment of any kind.

The second problem is that if you did do the experiment, you would say
that Denk did it, was lying about the results and had been brought to
the dark side by the Internet.

> Put up or shup up, moron.

You shup up.

James McGinn

unread,
Jan 16, 2022, 9:03:52 PMJan 16
to
On Sunday, January 16, 2022 at 9:46:13 AM UTC-8, Jim Pennino wrote:

> As spectroscopic analyzers are a commercial product anyone can buy,

Only liquid H2O has an IR signature. So . . . what do you think this indicates?

I'll tell you. YOU GOT NOTHING!!!

James McGinn / Genius

Jim Pennino

unread,
Jan 16, 2022, 11:01:11 PMJan 16
to
James McGinn <jimmc...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Sunday, January 16, 2022 at 9:46:13 AM UTC-8, Jim Pennino wrote:
>
>> As spectroscopic analyzers are a commercial product anyone can buy,
>
> Only liquid H2O has an IR signature. So . . . what do you think
> this indicates?

It indicates that liquid H2O has a unique signature in the IR region.

Good start and if you continue you will discover that ice and gaseous
H2O both have unique signatures in other regions.

> I'll tell you. YOU GOT NOTHING!!!

On the contrary, you just started to prove what I have been saying all
along.

Michael Moroney

unread,
Jan 16, 2022, 11:22:59 PMJan 16
to
On 1/16/2022 9:03 PM, James McGinn wrote:
> On Sunday, January 16, 2022 at 9:46:13 AM UTC-8, Jim Pennino wrote:
>
>> As spectroscopic analyzers are a commercial product anyone can buy,
>
> Only liquid H2O has an IR signature. So . . . what do you think this indicates?

It indicates that you're wrong, McTard. Gaseous H2O also has a unique IR
signature. Also, solid H2O has a different unique IR signature.
>
> I'll tell you. YOU GOT NOTHING!!!

Nope. Jim has all those 192 references he gave you to read.
>
> James McGinn / Tard

James McGinn

unread,
Jan 16, 2022, 11:30:32 PMJan 16
to
On Sunday, January 16, 2022 at 8:22:59 PM UTC-8, Michael Moroney wrote:
> On 1/16/2022 9:03 PM, James McGinn wrote:
> > On Sunday, January 16, 2022 at 9:46:13 AM UTC-8, Jim Pennino wrote:
> >
> >> As spectroscopic analyzers are a commercial product anyone can buy,
> >
> > Only liquid H2O has an IR signature. So . . . what do you think this indicates?
> It indicates that you're wrong, McTard.

Like you have a fucking clue, you worthless troll.

> Gaseous H2O also has a unique IR
> signature.

This is not even remotely possible. You have no fucking clue. The IR signature of H2O is a (or, at least, can be characterized as) consequence of the elasticity of the hydrogen bonds that exists BETWEEN the molecules in liquid H2O. And THERE ARE NO FUCKING HYDROGEN BONDS BETWEEN MOLECULES IN GASEOUS H2O. But of course, you are so fucking clueless that manages to once again reveal your Dunning Kruger delusions.

James McGinn / Genius

Paul Alsing

unread,
Jan 16, 2022, 11:42:38 PMJan 16
to
On Sunday, January 16, 2022 at 8:30:32 PM UTC-8, James McGinn wrote:

> This is not even remotely possible. You have no fucking clue. The IR signature of H2O is a (or, at least, can be characterized as) consequence of the elasticity of the hydrogen bonds that exists BETWEEN the molecules in liquid H2O. And THERE ARE NO FUCKING HYDROGEN BONDS BETWEEN MOLECULES IN GASEOUS H2O. But of course, you are so fucking clueless that manages to once again reveal your Dunning Kruger delusions.

More projection from Jimbo...

“Condemnation without investigation is the height of ignorance.”
— Albert Einstein

James McGinn

unread,
Jan 16, 2022, 11:54:30 PMJan 16
to
On Sunday, January 16, 2022 at 8:42:38 PM UTC-8, pnal...@gmail.com wrote:
> On Sunday, January 16, 2022 at 8:30:32 PM UTC-8, James McGinn wrote:
>
> > This is not even remotely possible. You have no fucking clue. The IR signature of H2O is a (or, at least, can be characterized as) consequence of the elasticity of the hydrogen bonds that exists BETWEEN the molecules in liquid H2O. And THERE ARE NO FUCKING HYDROGEN BONDS BETWEEN MOLECULES IN GASEOUS H2O. But of course, you are so fucking clueless that manages to once again reveal your Dunning Kruger delusions.

> “Condemnation without investigation is the height of ignorance.”
> — Albert Einstein

What the fuck!!! I've investigated hydrogen bonding between water. Other than the inside of your nose with your finger, what have you investigated?

How about you, you fucking nose picker?

James McGinn / Genius

Paul Alsing

unread,
Jan 16, 2022, 11:59:28 PMJan 16
to
No, Jimbo, this is an outright lie. You have done no such thing, and everyone knows this. You don't even understand the phase diagram for water and you don't understand Dalton's gas laws...

> How about you, you fucking nose picker?

You can pick your nose and you can pick your friends... but you cannot pick your friend's nose...

Jim Pennino

unread,
Jan 17, 2022, 12:01:09 AMJan 17
to
James McGinn <jimmc...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Sunday, January 16, 2022 at 8:22:59 PM UTC-8, Michael Moroney wrote:
>> On 1/16/2022 9:03 PM, James McGinn wrote:
>> > On Sunday, January 16, 2022 at 9:46:13 AM UTC-8, Jim Pennino wrote:
>> >
>> >> As spectroscopic analyzers are a commercial product anyone can buy,
>> >
>> > Only liquid H2O has an IR signature. So . . . what do you think this indicates?
>> It indicates that you're wrong, McTard.
>
> Like you have a fucking clue, you worthless troll.

Moroney understands FAR more than you do.

>> Gaseous H2O also has a unique IR
>> signature.
>
> This is not even remotely possible. You have no fucking clue.
> The IR signature of H2O is

No one but you brought up IR signatures.

Spectroscopic techniques are valid from low microwave frequencies up to
gamma ray frequencies.

The various forms of H2O have unique signatures not just in the IR range
and not just in the visible light range but at many frequencies from
microwave to gamma rays just like many other substances.

<snip remaining ravings>

> James McGinn / Delusional fuck wit


Solving Tornadoes

unread,
Jan 17, 2022, 12:15:35 AMJan 17
to
On Sunday, January 16, 2022 at 9:01:09 PM UTC-8, Jim Pennino wrote:
> James McGinn <jimmc...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > On Sunday, January 16, 2022 at 8:22:59 PM UTC-8, Michael Moroney wrote:
> >> On 1/16/2022 9:03 PM, James McGinn wrote:
> >> > On Sunday, January 16, 2022 at 9:46:13 AM UTC-8, Jim Pennino wrote:
> >> >
> >> >> As spectroscopic analyzers are a commercial product anyone can buy,
> >> >
> >> > Only liquid H2O has an IR signature. So . . . what do you think this indicates?
> >> It indicates that you're wrong, McTard.
> >
> > Like you have a fucking clue, you worthless troll.
> Moroney understands FAR more than you do.
> >> Gaseous H2O also has a unique IR
> >> signature.
> >
> > This is not even remotely possible. You have no fucking clue.
> > The IR signature of H2O is
> No one but you brought up IR signatures.

IR is what spectroscopy measures. You are clueless.

James McGinn / Genius

Jim Pennino

unread,
Jan 17, 2022, 10:01:18 AMJan 17
to
It is you that are cluesless.

The "spect" in spectroscopy refers to spectra, which means a band or
range of wavelengths and in the modern world means low microwave to
gamma rays.

> James McGinn / Delusional


Claudius Denk

unread,
Jan 17, 2022, 11:25:57 AMJan 17
to
Trivia. McGinn is right. You are just a confused troll.

Jim Pennino

unread,
Jan 17, 2022, 11:46:09 AMJan 17
to
Reposting the same delusional nonsense does not change the answer.

You ARE McGinn and spectroscopy is NOT limited to the IR range.

Here is a nice graph of the absorption spectrum of ice, water, and water
vapor from low infrared to high ultraviolet.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Water_infrared_absorption_coefficient_large.gif

Note that the curve for water vapor is vastly different than liquid
water and ice over the entire range.


James McGinn

unread,
Jan 17, 2022, 12:38:26 PMJan 17
to
On Monday, January 17, 2022 at 8:46:09 AM UTC-8, Jim Pennino wrote:
> Claudius Denk <claudi...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > On Monday, January 17, 2022 at 7:01:18 AM UTC-8, Jim Pennino wrote:

> >> The "spect" in spectroscopy refers to spectra, which means a band or
> >> range of wavelengths and in the modern world means low microwave to
> >> gamma rays.
> >
> > Trivia. McGinn is right. You are just a confused troll.

> Here is a nice graph of the absorption spectrum of ice, water, and water
> vapor from low infrared to high ultraviolet.
>
> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Water_infrared_absorption_coefficient_large.gif
>
> Note that the curve for water vapor is vastly different than liquid
> water and ice over the entire range.

Everybody knows this, moron. The question/issue is (and has been for over fifty years now) why? Now, because of me, we have the/a answer.

The answer, as I explain in my videos, is the electromagnetic elasticity that is itself a consequence of the inverse relationship of comprehensiveness of connectedness to strength of connectedness that is unique characteristic of hydrogen bonding between water molecules. Incidentally--again, as explained in my videos--this is the reason why H2O has such a high heat capacity--energy is captured and conserved in the constant movement afforded by this electromagnetic elasticity.

Watch this video:
https://youtu.be/4TGGFo0QsGM

James McGinn / Genius

Jim Pennino

unread,
Jan 17, 2022, 1:16:10 PMJan 17
to
James McGinn <jimmc...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Monday, January 17, 2022 at 8:46:09 AM UTC-8, Jim Pennino wrote:
>> Claudius Denk <claudi...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> > On Monday, January 17, 2022 at 7:01:18 AM UTC-8, Jim Pennino wrote:
>
>> >> The "spect" in spectroscopy refers to spectra, which means a band or
>> >> range of wavelengths and in the modern world means low microwave to
>> >> gamma rays.
>> >
>> > Trivia. McGinn is right. You are just a confused troll.
>
>> Here is a nice graph of the absorption spectrum of ice, water, and water
>> vapor from low infrared to high ultraviolet.
>>
>> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Water_infrared_absorption_coefficient_large.gif
>>
>> Note that the curve for water vapor is vastly different than liquid
>> water and ice over the entire range.
>
> Everybody knows this, moron. The question/issue is (and has been
> for over fifty years now) why? Now, because of me, we have the/a answer.

Utter, delusional nonsense.

You do not even admit to the existence of gaseous H2O at ambient
temperature and pressure.

<snip delusional babbling>

> James McGinn / Genius

James McGinn

unread,
Jan 17, 2022, 1:19:06 PMJan 17
to
Pennino is a convoluted moron.

Jim Pennino

unread,
Jan 17, 2022, 2:16:10 PMJan 17
to
Are you saying you DO admit to the existence of gaseous H2O at ambient
temperature and pressure?


Claudius Denk

unread,
Jan 17, 2022, 5:21:47 PMJan 17
to
Wow, you are so desperate. Surreal.

sergio

unread,
Jan 17, 2022, 6:11:10 PMJan 17
to
yup, Denk is the dumbest one, McGinn is just stupid, and Solving Pornadoes is a Scam Company that has been reported for tax evasion.

Jim Pennino

unread,
Jan 17, 2022, 6:16:12 PMJan 17
to
Can't answer the question, can you?


Solving Tornadoes

unread,
Jan 29, 2022, 4:21:54 AMJan 29
to
On Saturday, January 15, 2022 at 12:32:45 PM UTC-8, Solving Tornadoes wrote:
> On Saturday, January 15, 2022 at 12:16:09 PM UTC-8, Jim Pennino wrote:
> > James McGinn <jimmc...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > On Friday, January 14, 2022 at 10:04:37 AM UTC-8, Michael Moroney wrote:
> > >> On 1/14/2022 12:44 PM, Claudius Denk wrote:
> > >> > On Friday, January 14, 2022 at 9:16:11 AM UTC-8, Jim Pennino wrote:
> > >>
> > >> >> People have been measuring water vapor for about 4,000 years and the
> > >> >> only thing that has changed in 4,000 years is the ease of making
> > >> >> water vapor measurements and the device accuracy.
> > >> >>> James McGinn / Claudius Denk / Still delusional
> > >> >
> > >> > You got nothing, you deceptive piece of shit.
> > >> He has 4000 years of measuring water vapor, James.
> > >> >
> > >> > James McGinn / Tard
> > >>
> > >> You mixed up your socks again, McTard.
> > > Relevance?
> > Yet more proof that you are insane.
>
> So, you mental retards believe that measuring water vapor proves it is gaseous?
>
> Really?
>
> James McGinn / Genius

Jim Pennino

unread,
Jan 29, 2022, 10:01:09 AMJan 29
to
Gaseous H2O in the atmosphere is measured 24/7/365 by spectroscopic
techniques that can unequivocally and simultaneously measure all three
phases of H2O and people around the planet have been doing this for
many decades.

That you are unable to understand the physics of spectroscopic
analysis, or any other method of constructing a hygrometer to
measure humidity, does not invalidate such measurements.

No matter how many times you stamp your feet, deny this fact,
call others liars, claim you are the only person in history to
have come to the conclusion that gaseous H2O does not exist in
the atmosphere, misread steam tables and phase diagrams, insult
others, claim the entire world is confused, call people groupies
and morons, rant about church ladies, attempt to project your
anger for your delusions being challenged, rant on and on about
the boiling point of water or declare "you got nothing", the
fact of gaseous H2O in the atmosphere and it's continuous
measurement still exists.

In the 21st century all sorts of devices are readily available
that would have been amazing and wondrous in the 15th century.

One can buy telescopes and microscopes at toy stores so even
children can see the craters on the moon, the rings of Saturn,
bacteria and flagellates.

One can also buy hygrometers for as little as $1.



James McGinn

unread,
Mar 6, 2022, 12:26:07 AMMar 6
to

Jim Pennino

unread,
Mar 6, 2022, 10:46:19 AMMar 6
to
James McGinn <jimmc...@gmail.com> wrote:

<snip>

>> So, you mental retards believe that measuring water vapor proves it is gaseous?
>>
>> Really?

Obviously.

>>
>> James McGinn / Insane crackpot


Reply all
Reply to author
Forward
0 new messages