Meteorologists Don't Debate For a Reason -- (just like climate scientists)

[Claudius Denk]

On Tuesday, January 17, 2017 at 6:20:48 PM UTC-8, James McGinn wrote:

Interesting finding: it’s freezing inside a Tornado
https://wattsupwiththat.com/2017/01/17/interesting-finding-its-freezing-inside-a-tornado/

James McGinn:
This is not an interesting finding. Its a mundane, obvious finding. Watt's in
a meteorologists and he finds this obvious fact interesting. That demonstrates
how poorly meteorology understands the true mechanics of the atmosphere. Watt's
is a frickin idiot--all meteorologists are. Obviously tornadoes deliver low
pressure. An interesting question--which I have already solved--is where does
the low pressure come from and how is it delivered to the lower altitudes. What
they found here is only interesting if you are completely clueless from the
outset.

CD:
What's interesting is how this evidence starkly contradicts the vague
convection model of storm theory. If meteorology was a real science rather
than a vague belief system, what McGinn calls *marketing*, an observation like
this would be a crisis. Vigorous debate would ensue.

The reality is that meteorologists don't debate/discuss theory. It's strictly
a taboo subject.

So it is just a passing curiosity to somebody like Anthony Watts who is so
thoroughly ensconced in the overwhelming vagueness of dimwitted convection
model of storm theory. You know, the theory that tell us that cold, windy
storms are caused by warm air that magically rises through drier air above
despite the fact is is laden with moisture that make it heavier, as McGinn has
proven.

CD

[Jos Bergervoet]

On 1/21/2017 7:41 PM, Claudius Denk wrote:
> On Tuesday, January 17, 2017 at 6:20:48 PM UTC-8, James McGinn wrote:
>
> Interesting finding: it’s freezing inside a Tornado
> https://wattsupwiththat.com/2017/01/17/interesting-finding-its-freezing-inside-a-tornado/
>
> James McGinn:
> This is not an interesting finding. Its a mundane, obvious finding.

It's a junk article. 20 percent pressure reduction
does *not* correspond with 8000m altitude (at that
height you have 65% reduction).

--
Jos

[James McGinn]

I noticed that was off also. But actually the basic information is not junk. Vortices lower air pressure. When you lower air pressure you lower the temperature. Its a fundamental observation to anybody that knows gas laws.

[pnal...@gmail.com]

On Sunday, January 22, 2017 at 9:35:18 AM UTC-8, James McGinn wrote:

> ... When you lower air pressure you lower the temperature. Its a fundamental observation to anybody that knows gas laws.

How can you possibly know gas laws? You don't even recognize the fact that water vapor is a gas, which is a fundamental and well-established fact!

[Claudius Denk]

Believers never stop believing.

[James McGinn]

On Sunday, January 22, 2017 at 2:46:58 PM UTC-8, pnal...@gmail.com wrote:

You don't even recognize the fact that water vapor is a gas, which is a fundamental and well-established fact!

It's a group delusion.

You are a frickin pinhead.

[Yuri Kretin]

McFly knows as much about the gas law (*which is nada*) as he does about;
steam table,
Water Vapor
Water Gas
tornadoes
writing non fiction
learning
reading a sciency like book
discussing any kind of science

[benj]

Uh Oh! Jos has entered the "cold steam" debate. They are all doomed now.

[James McGinn]

I think HVAC misses you already, BJ.

[Claudius Denk]

[Claudius Denk]

On Sunday, January 22, 2017 at 2:46:58 PM UTC-8, pnal...@gmail.com wrote:

A vapor and a gas are two different things. Gas is monomolecular. Vapor is liquid.

This is common knowledge

[pnal...@gmail.com]

On Saturday, July 8, 2017 at 11:43:30 AM UTC-7, Claudius Denk wrote:

> A vapor and a gas are two different things. Gas is monomolecular. Vapor is liquid.

Not according to any definitions from reliable sources. 'Monomolecular' is not even a word, you incredible dumbfuck.

"In physics a vapor (American) or vapour (British) is a substance in the gas phase at a temperature lower than its critical temperature, which means that the vapor can be condensed to a liquid by increasing the pressure on it without reducing the temperature. A vapor is different from an aerosol."

[Claudius Denk]

On Saturday, July 8, 2017 at 12:46:34 PM UTC-7, pnal...@gmail.com wrote:
> On Saturday, July 8, 2017 at 11:43:30 AM UTC-7, Claudius Denk wrote:
>
> > A vapor and a gas are two different things. Gas is monomolecular. Vapor is liquid.
>
> Not according to any definitions from reliable sources.

Perfect! LOL. So, a reliable source told you there is no difference between a vapor and a gas?

Does this reliable source have a name or did this reliable source contact you in your dreams?

Do you think your reliable source is intellectually capable of making a distinction between a gas and a liquid vapor (droplets suspended in air)?

I mean, allow me to be direct, how can you provide us any assurance that your reliable source is not just another vague, evasive, gullible, dimwit like yourself?

Can you explain to us how you are so sure you are right about something for which you have zero evidence?

What is boiling temperature of H2O at 1 ATM?

What is temperature at surface (1 ATM) on earth?

Only idiots believe that clear moist air contains gaseous H2O and/or that gas and vapor are one and the same.

Obviously you barely understand any of this. Obviously you won't answer any of these questions so that you can continue the desperate pretense that you understand what you actually do not understand.

Leave science to scientists, you mental midget.

James McGinn

[David (Kronos Prime) Fuller]

Claudius Denk James McGinn excreted
<snip Scatted Scat>

You are your split personality are really damaging to your credibility.

Just Imbecilic Imbecilities from an imbecile & CriminalOuthouse Vandal

[James McGinn]

On Saturday, July 8, 2017 at 12:46:34 PM UTC-7, pnal...@gmail.com wrote:

> 'Monomolecular' is not even a word

You are like a child. Why so desperate?

> "In physics a vapor (American) or vapour (British) is a substance in the gas phase at a temperature lower than its critical temperature, which means that the vapor can be condensed to a liquid by increasing the pressure on it without reducing the temperature. A vapor is different from an aerosol."

Common usage is ambiguous, you fucking moron.

If you are too dullwitted to figure out how to make a scientific argument you need to go find another hobby.

[Sегg io]

Vapor is not liquid.

Water Vapor is a gas.

Monomolecular is a term used to describe films, and fictional Sci-Fi
wire.

Claude the Dink is James McGinn they both wrote the same TROLL
BOOK.


TROLL BOOK REVIEW

Top customer reviews

1.0 out of 5 stars

insane rambling

ByK. Parkeron July 3, 2014

Format: Kindle Edition|Verified Purchase

The author believes that elementary concepts, which have been taught to
and understood by first year Chemistry and Physics students for many
decades, are some kind of meteorological conspiracy. The author also
does not understand the very basic physics that drive convective
updrafts (the positive buoyancy due to warm temperature anomalies that
result from latent heat release). Instead, apparently based largely on
reading websites, he proposes a mechanism that makes no physical sense
and is totally unobserved and unobservable. This text violates even
basic tenets of logic. Totally without merit.

1.0 out of 5 stars

Waste of time, a non-funny joke

Byhunteron July 16, 2014

Format: Kindle Edition

This book misleads the reader on basic physical concepts like density,
the basics of weather dynamics, and offers a silly idea that confuses
metaphors about how the jet stream operates with reality. It solves
nothing but does offer a way to waste time and money buying and reading
it. This book is an example of the risks posed in the age of inexpensive
self publishing.

[James McGinn]

LOL. Note the hit and run cowardice of this common troll, Sergio. First, he just asserts what he want to believe. He is careful not to provide any details. then runs without ever issuing a real challenge.

He does without impunity because most of the rest of the the participants in this NG are also brain dead trolls.

Trolls always keep their thinking vague so as not to expose their greater incompetence.

Sergio, you fool. Why do you think it is we don't have engines that run on the power of evaporation?

The answer, you moron, is because steam and evaporate are very different things.

You are just too stupid for science.

Leave science to scientists.

James McGinn / Solving Tornadoes

[Claudius Denk]

Dumbass can't follow the topic.

[Claudius Denk]

On Saturday, July 8, 2017 at 2:44:40 PM UTC-7, Sегg io wrote:

> On 7/8/2017 2:46 PM, pnal...@gmail.com wrote:
> > On Saturday, July 8, 2017 at 11:43:30 AM UTC-7, Claudius Denk wrote:
> >
> >> A vapor and a gas are two different things. Gas is monomolecular. Vapor is liquid.
> >
> > Not according to any definitions from reliable sources. 'Monomolecular' is not even a word, you incredible dumbfuck.
> >
> > "In physics a vapor (American) or vapour (British) is a substance in the gas phase at a temperature lower than its critical temperature, which means that the vapor can be condensed to a liquid by increasing the pressure on it without reducing the temperature. A vapor is different from an aerosol."
> >
> >
> >
> >
>
>
>
> Vapor is not liquid.

You don't have an argument, you complete and utterly brain dead troll.

>
> Water Vapor is a gas.

Water doesn't turn to gas at ambient temperatures, you fucking mental retard.

>
> Monomolecular is a term used to describe films, and fictional Sci-Fi
> wire.

Gases are monomolecular you idiot.

This forum is troll invested.

[Claudius Denk]

On Saturday, July 8, 2017 at 12:46:34 PM UTC-7, pnal...@gmail.com wrote:

Dumbass troll brings semantic disputes to a scientific forum.

Leave science to scieintists, you fucking mental retard.

[Solving Tornadoes]

On Saturday, July 8, 2017 at 12:46:34 PM UTC-7, pnal...@gmail.com wrote:

> On Saturday, July 8, 2017 at 11:43:30 AM UTC-7, Claudius Denk wrote:
>
> > A vapor and a gas are two different things. Gas is monomolecular. Vapor is liquid.
>
> Not according to any definitions from reliable sources.

Gee golly, we sure want to make sure our definitions are from a reliable source--duhr.

[Solving Tornadoes]

On Saturday, July 8, 2017 at 1:28:22 PM UTC-7, David (Kronos Prime) Fuller wrote:

> Claudius Denk James McGinn excreted
> <snip Scatted Scat>
>
> You are your split personality are really damaging to your credibility.

LOL. It would be impossible for you to damage your credibility.

Duhr.

[Solving Tornadoes]

On Saturday, July 8, 2017 at 2:44:40 PM UTC-7, Sегg io wrote:

Desperate fool.

[Edward Prochak]

On Saturday, July 8, 2017 at 6:17:08 PM UTC-4, James McGinn wrote:
[]

> You are just too stupid for science.
>
> Leave science to scientists.
>
> James McGinn / Solving Tornadoes

If only you would take your own advice, JM.

Your friendly gadfly,
ed

[Edward Prochak]

On Sunday, July 9, 2017 at 1:59:23 AM UTC-4, Claudius Denk wrote:
> On Saturday, July 8, 2017 at 2:44:40 PM UTC-7, Sегg io wrote:

[]> >

> > Vapor is not liquid.
>
> You don't have an argument, you complete and utterly brain dead troll.
>
>
> >
> > Water Vapor is a gas.
>
> Water doesn't turn to gas at ambient temperatures, you fucking mental retard.

Just repeating it doesn't make it true, Jm.
[]

> This forum is troll invested.

JM, you actually got something right for a change!
ed

[Sегg io]

On 7/10/2017 9:42 AM, Edward Prochak wrote:
> On Sunday, July 9, 2017 at 1:59:23 AM UTC-4, Claudius Denk wrote:
>> On Saturday, July 8, 2017 at 2:44:40 PM UTC-7, Sегg io wrote:
> []> >
>>> Vapor is not liquid.
>>

>> You don't have an argument, I'm complete and utterly brain dead troll.


Claudius, I don't need an argument at all.

Vapor is not liquid. This is fact.

the Oceans are not filled with Vapor. Your toilet does not use Vapor.


You, McGinn, are the ONLY ONE in the world that says,
"Vapor is liquid."


https://wiki.kidzsearch.com/wiki/Water_vapor

Even Claudius thinks you are an obnoxious little twit now! (twit = an
insignificant, silly, or bothersome person).

>>
>>
>>>
>>> Water Vapor is a gas.
>>
>> Water doesn't turn to gas at ambient temperatures, you fucking mental retard.

so how does your shirt dry on a clothes line ?

does it get "the Plasmas" ?

your use of profanity concedes your loss of argument.

James;
http://www.wikihow.com/Increase-Your-IQ

Is Your Mind Playing Weak? ;
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hX_XcMbdBWQ

>
> Just repeating it doesn't make it true, Jm.
> []
>
>> This forum is troll invested.
>
> JM, you actually got something right for a change!
> ed
>

McGinn is simply projecting again, he is troll invested this forum.

[Solving Tornadoes]

On Monday, July 10, 2017 at 8:22:05 AM UTC-7, Sегg io wrote:
> On 7/10/2017 9:42 AM, Edward Prochak wrote:
> > On Sunday, July 9, 2017 at 1:59:23 AM UTC-4, Claudius Denk wrote:
> >> On Saturday, July 8, 2017 at 2:44:40 PM UTC-7, Sегg io wrote:
> > []> >
> >>> Vapor is not liquid.
> >>
> >> You don't have an argument, I'm complete and utterly brain dead troll.
>
>
> Claudius, I don't need an argument at all.

You do if you don't want me to consider you a brain-dead troll.

[Solving Tornadoes]

On Monday, July 10, 2017 at 7:42:42 AM UTC-7, Edward Prochak wrote:
> On Sunday, July 9, 2017 at 1:59:23 AM UTC-4, Claudius Denk wrote:
> > On Saturday, July 8, 2017 at 2:44:40 PM UTC-7, Sегg io wrote:
> []> >
> > > Vapor is not liquid.
> >
> > You don't have an argument, you complete and utterly brain dead troll.
> >
> >
> > >
> > > Water Vapor is a gas.
> >
> > Water doesn't turn to gas at ambient temperatures, you fucking mental retard.
>
> Just repeating it doesn't make it true, Jm.

Evading it doesn't make it false.

[Claudius Denk]

On Monday, July 10, 2017 at 7:42:42 AM UTC-7, Edward Prochak wrote:

Tell us why you beleive what you can't explain, you fucking troll.

[pnal...@gmail.com]

On Monday, July 10, 2017 at 12:30:34 PM UTC-7, Claudius Denk wrote:

> Tell us why you beleive what you can't explain, you fucking troll.

OOPS, "I" before "E", except after "C", and I don't 'believe' I see any "C"... spell much?

[Mushnik]

McGinn always projects, (physological projection) reword his sentance
thusly ; (switch out you for I, I for you etc reverse direction)


"Tell you why I beleive what I can't explain, I fucking troll."


see? perfecto!

[James McGinn]

Leave science to scientists, you worthless troll.

[James McGinn]

On Sunday, January 22, 2017 at 2:46:58 PM UTC-8, pnal...@gmail.com wrote:
> On Sunday, January 22, 2017 at 9:35:18 AM UTC-8, James McGinn wrote:
>
> > ... When you lower air pressure you lower the temperature. Its a fundamental observation to anybody that knows gas laws.
>
> How can you possibly know gas laws? You don't even recognize the fact that water vapor is a gas, which is a fundamental and well-established fact!

Water vapor is a vapor. It is not a gas. Look at a steam table, you frickin retard.

[pnal...@gmail.com]

No, water vapor is a gas, which is a fundamental and well-established fact! Do you remain just too stupid to verify this for yourself? Apparently so...

[Claudius Denk]

[James McGinn]

LOL. Like a moron, you declare that your own interpretation is the standard.

You are just a moron. Nobody listens to morons.

[James McGinn]

Pnal
Water vapor is a gas, which is a fundamental and well-established fact! Do you remain just too stupid to verify this for yourself? Apparently so...

JM
You are a desperate liar.

[pnal...@gmail.com]

No, I am not a desperate liar. I have the entire scientific community of the entire world, both dead and alive over a couple of centuries, that agree with me (rather, I agree with them!), and you have only you very own alter-egos who agree with you!

In other words, you started out with nothing, and you have all of it left!

Dumber that a mud fence and proud of it, are you? Sheesh!

[Claudius Denk]

On Tuesday, September 19, 2017 at 6:34:36 PM UTC-7, pnal...@gmail.com wrote:

> No, I am not a desperate liar. I have the entire scientific community of the entire world, both dead and alive over a couple of centuries, that agree with me (rather, I agree with them!), and you have only you very own alter-egos who agree with you!

And you are so delusional that you don't recognize that your argument is a consensus argument. Surreal.

>
> In other words, you started out with nothing, and you have all of it left!
>
> Dumber that a mud fence and proud of it, are you? Sheesh!

So, let me get this straight. A bunch of people without names and who you couldn't quote agree with you. And this is not a consensus argument, because . .
uh, because you say it's not. And the fact that you can't find any experimental evidence to support this supposition is not important because of the large numbers of people who believe what you believe but who you cannot quote or name. Did I get it right? Is this your moronic argument?

Oh, and I am dumb for not accepting this "evidence" as proof that H2O magically defies the properties indicated in the steam tables and can persist in the ambient temperatures of our planet's atmosphere.

The belief that aspects of physical reality can take on new properties when not in a laboratory is a superstition not unlike that associated with ghosts or spirits. Once people start believing in these magical notions it is very difficult to get them to stop.

The reason you will never find evidence of gaseous H2O at abient temperatures is because it is physically impossible. it's that simple.

Moreover, the fact that a bunch of people believe in something for which there is no empirical evidence is both not unusual and not interesting.

Consensus based thinkers like yourself should go join a church or a social club and leave science to people who are smart enough to know better than to present a consensus argument, you fucking moron.

[James McGinn]

On Tuesday, September 19, 2017 at 6:34:36 PM UTC-7, pnal...@gmail.com wrote:

So, as long as you think people agree with you that is valid science.

Scientific methods were developed to counter belief-based dolts like yourself.

Find a new hobby. You are not a scientist.

[James McGinn]

On Tuesday, September 19, 2017 at 6:34:36 PM UTC-7, pnal...@gmail.com wrote:

Many of the various model in many scientific disciplines have been dumbed down to appeal to lying, intellectually challenged nitwits like yourself--the lowest common denominator of science consumers. And the reasons for this is because there are a lot more of you nitwits than there are rational people and nitwits like you actually get to vote.

[Claudius Denk]

On Saturday, January 21, 2017 at 10:41:52 AM UTC-8, Claudius Denk wrote:
> On Tuesday, January 17, 2017 at 6:20:48 PM UTC-8, James McGinn wrote:
>
> Interesting finding: it’s freezing inside a Tornado
> https://wattsupwiththat.com/2017/01/17/interesting-finding-its-freezing-inside-a-tornado/
>
> James McGinn:
> This is not an interesting finding. Its a mundane, obvious finding. Watt's in
> a meteorologists and he finds this obvious fact interesting. That demonstrates
> how poorly meteorology understands the true mechanics of the atmosphere. Watt's
> is a frickin idiot--all meteorologists are. Obviously tornadoes deliver low
> pressure. An interesting question--which I have already solved--is where does
> the low pressure come from and how is it delivered to the lower altitudes. What
> they found here is only interesting if you are completely clueless from the
> outset.
>
> CD:
> What's interesting is how this evidence starkly contradicts the vague
> convection model of storm theory. If meteorology was a real science rather
> than a vague belief system, what McGinn calls *marketing*, an observation like
> this would be a crisis. Vigorous debate would ensue.
>
> The reality is that meteorologists don't debate/discuss theory. It's strictly
> a taboo subject.
>
> So it is just a passing curiosity to somebody like Anthony Watts who is so
> thoroughly ensconced in the overwhelming vagueness of dimwitted convection
> model of storm theory. You know, the theory that tell us that cold, windy
> storms are caused by warm air that magically rises through drier air above
> despite the fact is is laden with moisture that make it heavier, as McGinn has
> proven.
>
> CD

[James McGinn]

[James McGinn]

[James McGinn]

Uh, err?

Do these people have names?

Why the secrecy?

[James McGinn]

Uh?

[James McGinn]

On Tuesday, September 19, 2017 at 6:34:36 PM UTC-7, pnal...@gmail.com wrote:

Wrong. You are desperate to believe. All any of you church lady retards do is pretend to understand. None of you idiots can answer any questions.