Question for Alsing, Penino, and Moroney So, uh . . . if the evidence is so clear and unambiguous . . .

[Solving Tornadoes]

So, uh . . . if the evidence fot the existence of gaseous H2O at STP is so clear and unambiguous why not just present it?

Uh . . I mean, uh, . . . er, uh

Uh?

James McGinn / Genius

[Sergio]

On 8/2/2021 11:30 AM, Solving Tornadoes wrote:
> So, uh . . . if the evidence fot the existence of gaseous H2O at STP is so clear and unambiguous why not just present it?
>

> dUh . . I mean, duh, . . . er, duh
>
> dUh?
>
> James McGinn / Genius
>


why did you say

" duh . . I mean, duh, . . . er, duh

duh?"

are you retard, Pretend Science Guy ?

[Solving Tornadoes]

Uh.

[Jim Pennino]

It has been by many, many, many people many, many, many times but your
delusions prevent you from looking at any of it or even acknowledging
its existence.

[Solving Tornadoes]

Pretend that I'm not here. Now, go ahead and show us the evidence for everybody else in the world.

[Jim Pennino]

The rest of the world is sane and has already seen and acknowledged the
evidence.

[Solving Tornadoes]

On Monday, August 2, 2021 at 1:01:14 PM UTC-7, Jim Pennino wrote:
> Solving Tornadoes <solvingt...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > On Monday, August 2, 2021 at 12:31:09 PM UTC-7, Jim Pennino wrote:
> >> Solving Tornadoes <solvingt...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >> > So, uh . . . if the evidence fot the existence of gaseous H2O at STP is so clear and unambiguous why not just present it?
> >> >
> >> > Uh . . I mean, uh, . . . er, uh
> >> >
> >> > Uh?
> >> >
> >> > James McGinn / Genius
> >> It has been by many, many, many people many, many, many times but your
> >> delusions prevent you from looking at any of it or even acknowledging
> >> its existence.
> >
> > Pretend that I'm not here. Now, go ahead and show us the evidence for everybody else in the world.
> The rest of the world is sane and has already seen and acknowledged the
> evidence.

Why don't you go suck Sergio's d**k, Pennino?

[Solving Tornadoes]

On Monday, August 2, 2021 at 1:01:14 PM UTC-7, Jim Pennino wrote:
> Solving Tornadoes <solvingt...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > On Monday, August 2, 2021 at 12:31:09 PM UTC-7, Jim Pennino wrote:
> >> Solving Tornadoes <solvingt...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >> > So, uh . . . if the evidence fot the existence of gaseous H2O at STP is so clear and unambiguous why not just present it?
> >> >
> >> > Uh . . I mean, uh, . . . er, uh
> >> >
> >> > Uh?
> >> >
> >> > James McGinn / Genius
> >> It has been by many, many, many people many, many, many times but your
> >> delusions prevent you from looking at any of it or even acknowledging
> >> its existence.
> >
> > Pretend that I'm not here. Now, go ahead and show us the evidence for everybody else in the world.
> The rest of the world is sane and has already seen and acknowledged the
> evidence.

https://youtu.be/iSVy1b-RyVM?t=81

[Jim Pennino]

Why don't you go get some professional help with your delusions?

Doing so mignt prevent you from being locked up, again.

[James McGinn]

So, Pennino, have you stopped beating your wife?

[Jim Pennino]

Have you ever heard this old saying:

Sticks and stones may break my bones, but whips and chains excite me.

[James McGinn]

Maybe you have come to the wrong forum.

[James McGinn]

Uh

[Solving Tornadoes]

On Monday, August 2, 2021 at 1:01:14 PM UTC-7, Jim Pennino wrote:
> Solving Tornadoes <solvingt...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > On Monday, August 2, 2021 at 12:31:09 PM UTC-7, Jim Pennino wrote:
> >> Solving Tornadoes <solvingt...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >> > So, uh . . . if the evidence fot the existence of gaseous H2O at STP is so clear and unambiguous why not just present it?
> >> >
> >> > Uh . . I mean, uh, . . . er, uh
> >> >
> >> > Uh?
> >> >
> >> > James McGinn / Genius
> >> It has been by many, many, many people many, many, many times but your
> >> delusions prevent you from looking at any of it or even acknowledging
> >> its existence.
> >
> > Pretend that I'm not here. Now, go ahead and show us the evidence for everybody else in the world.
> The rest of the world is sane and has already seen and acknowledged the
> evidence.

Did the "rest of the world" authorize you as their spokesperson?

[Sergio]

typical response of a Delusionalist.

[Solving Tornadoes]

On Monday, August 2, 2021 at 9:30:34 AM UTC-7, Solving Tornadoes wrote:
> So, uh . . . if the evidence fot the existence of gaseous H2O at STP is so clear and unambiguous why not just present it?
>
> Uh . . I mean, uh, . . . er, uh
>
> Uh?

Uh?

[Michael Moroney]

There you go. The three most intelligent phrases emitted by Tardnado
this year.

[whodat]

He has so impressed himself that already he's repeating subsets of them.

[Solving Tornadoes]

On Monday, August 2, 2021 at 9:30:34 AM UTC-7, Solving Tornadoes wrote:

Er.

[Solving Tornadoes]

Uh?

[Michael Moroney]

And here is more of James "Tardnado" McGinn's "genius".

[James McGinn]

On Monday, August 2, 2021 at 1:01:14 PM UTC-7, Jim Pennino wrote:
> Solving Tornadoes <solvingt...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > On Monday, August 2, 2021 at 12:31:09 PM UTC-7, Jim Pennino wrote:
> >> Solving Tornadoes <solvingt...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >> > So, uh . . . if the evidence fot the existence of gaseous H2O at STP is so clear and unambiguous why not just present it?
> >> >
> >> > Uh . . I mean, uh, . . . er, uh
> >> >
> >> > Uh?
> >> >
> >> > James McGinn / Genius
> >> It has been by many, many, many people many, many, many times but your
> >> delusions prevent you from looking at any of it or even acknowledging
> >> its existence.
> >
> > Pretend that I'm not here. Now, go ahead and show us the evidence for everybody else in the world.
> The rest of the world is sane and has already seen and acknowledged the
> evidence.

So, evidence that everybody knows but nobody can find. Kinda like ghosts.

So, you are speaking for everybody on this planet. And I'm insane?

[whodat]

One of the earliest signals of insanity is the inability to comprehend
the differences between the terms "about" and "for."

[Michael Moroney]

No he said:
>>>>> It has been [presented] by many, many, many people many, many, many times but your

>>>>> delusions prevent you from looking at any of it or even acknowledging
>>>>> its existence.

The fact you ignored it doesn't mean nobody found it.

>
> And I'm insane?

Yes. You will need to see a proper doctor for the correct diagnosis
(and hopefully, useful meds), however.

[James McGinn]

Ignored what?

You got nothing!!!

James McGinn / Genius

[Michael Moroney]

The evidence you were presented with, which you ignored so thoroughly
you even ignored the fact you ignored it.
>
> You got nothing!!!
>
I declare victory. I got a "You got nothing!!!" rant from James.

[James McGinn]

You got nothing!!!

[Michael Moroney]

Awesome! I got two "You got nothing!!!" outbursts from James, and both
of them have a 3 exclamation point cluster!! I need to paint some
symbols on my computer, like how WW2 fighter planes had a German iron
cross or Japanese rising sun symbol painted on them to signify each
shootdown. What symbol should I use? A cloud of cold steam?

[James McGinn]

You got Sergio!!!

[Jim Pennino]

Alfred E. Neuman with a black eye.

[Paul Alsing]

On Friday, August 13, 2021 at 4:01:09 PM UTC-7, Jim Pennino wrote:

> Alfred E. Neuman with a black eye.

What, me worry?

https://www.madcoversite.com/auction2018/Session%20One%20April%202018_htm_b8fdd9a421c2a8cc.jpg

[Solving Tornadoes]

[Jim Pennino]

Solving Tornadoes <solvingt...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Monday, August 2, 2021 at 9:30:34 AM UTC-7, Solving Tornadoes wrote:
>> So, uh . . . if the evidence fot the existence of gaseous H2O at STP is so clear and unambiguous why not just present it?

Since you seem to have forgotten that this was answered 6 months ago,
here you go again.

Here are links to 6 articles on the properties of water along with
links to 192 books and papers that according to you do not exist
and no one can find that show the sources of information on the
articles.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Properties_of_water#References

footnote references: 102
Bibliography: 15 books and papers

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Water_(data_page)#References

footnote references: 25
Bibliography: 4 books and papers

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Steam#References

references: 12

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Evaporation#References

references: 6

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sublimation_(phase_transition)#References

references: 17

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Boiling_point#References

references: 11

Here is a link to an article on what a vortex is along with
supporting links to 13 books and papers specifically about vortices.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vortex#References

Here are links to projects that actually have studied tornadoes and
26 books and papers about research on tornadoes.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/VORTEX_projects#References

Here are links to 2 articles about what a plasma actually is along
with 87 links to books and papers on the subject.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Plasma_(physics)#References

84 books and papers

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_important_publications_in_physics#Plasma_physics

3 books containing collected papers on plasma

Here is a link to a graph of the electromagnetic absorption spectrum
of ice, liquid water and gaseous water from low infrared to high
ultraviolet clearly showing that each phase of water has a unique
spectrum making it trivial to decern one from the other.

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

[James McGinn]

[James McGinn]

[Jim Pennino]

James McGinn <jimmc...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Monday, August 2, 2021 at 9:30:34 AM UTC-7, solvingt...@gmail.com wrote:
>> So, uh . . . if the evidence fot the existence of gaseous H2O at STP is so clear and unambiguous why not just present it?

Here you go, an experiment you can do in your kitchen:

How to show room temperature gaseous H2O.

Obtain the following items:

A common quart canning jar with lid.
A small hygrometer.
A pressure gauge capable of reading pressure and vacuum down to 1 psi.
A half dozen or so of small silica gel desiccant packs.

Attach the pressure gauge to the lid of the canning jar.

Put the hygrometer in the jar along with about 1/8 teaspoon of water
and close the lid.

Note that the pressure reads zero, note the hygrometer reading and set
the jar somewhere undisturbed for a day.

Note that the water has gone away, the hygrometer reading has gone up,
and the pressure has gone up.

Carefully open the lid and slip in the silica gel desiccant packs and
close the lid.

Note that the pressure reads zero, note the hygrometer reading and set
the jar somewhere undisturbed for a day.

Note that the hygrometer reading has gone down close to zero and the
pressure has gone down.

Analysis:

According to conventional theory, the water in the jar evaporated
into gaseous H2O, raising the humidity and the total pressure in the
jar due to the partial pressure of the added gaseous H2O.

According to McGinn theory, hygrometers don't exist yet there it is
and it showed increased humidity after the water evaporated.

According to McGinn theory the water did not become gaseous, but
became nanodroplets of liquid water.

As everyone knows: PV=nRT and that only applies to gases.

Assuming you held the temperature constant in this experiment, the
only value in the equation that could change is n, i.e. the amount
of gas.

Dividing the water into smaller "pieces" of water does not change
their total volume.

According to conventional theory, when the desiccant was added, all
the gaseous H2O condensed into liquid water and gets trapped in the
structure of the silica gel. Since there is now no gaseous H2O, the
hygrometer accordingly reads close to zero, and there is no partial
pressure from the removed gaseous H2O so the pressure has gone down.

If one were to accurately measure the volume of the jar, the
amount of water in the jar and the temperature and then apply the
various gas laws, one would find that the experiment agrees with
the mathematical theories of partial pressure, gas laws, dew point
and humidity.

According to McGinn theory none of this happens though anyone can
show that it does.

>> James McGinn / Insane crackpot

[James McGinn]

On Monday, August 2, 2021 at 9:30:34 AM UTC-7, solvingt...@gmail.com wrote:
> So, uh . . . if the evidence fot the existence of gaseous H2O at STP is so clear and unambiguous why not just present it?
>