-
ICMag with help from Landrace Warden and The Vault is running a NEW contest in November! You can check it here. Prizes are seeds & forum premium access. Come join in!
Have you looked at the North Pole lately?
- Thread starter igrowone
- Start date
fun times
you do have some rather different thoughts
warm = good
i'm with you so far
if you like warm, you'll love the future
Yamaha FG-840
Active member
You're showing people a nice bright eye catching graph from the people who told you the laws of physics don't work the way they do here on Earth, one planet over on Venus,
in spite of the fact the Americans and Russians launched 25 VENERA spacecraft to Venus together
and landed 13 on the surface of the planet, using the same laws that predicted what temperatures would be all over this one, AND,
that one.
The one you've been misled to believe is hundreds of times warmer than it should be. They're wrong about that because we sent craft over and landed them there, more than a dozen,
and the same gas laws predicting how to land safely there match temperatures, thus density, all the way to the surface.
Do you think the Russians and Americans are working together to suppress the stunning evidence that the laws of physics don't work the same on Venus as they do here?
No; the people telling you there are two temperatures for the planet are lying to you: there is one temperature for it, and there's also one for Venus, and Mars - they all operate under the same gas law.
Laws, but one unifying gas law bonded and replaced the four gas Laws preceeding it, each of them - the predecessor laws, were each
written to isolate and resolve matter-energy values for a particular feature in the gas law used to resolve the temperatures of gases:
P pressure,
V volume,
T temperature,
and R, an officially derived Energy Constant for gases,
the four predecessor laws being bonded, unified, into PV = nRT.
This gas law is accurate everywhere we've ever sent craft and it's also the one used to resolve the temperature of those Standards,
that are the actual climate of record of the planet.
The International Standard Atmosphere,
and the
American Standard Atmosphere,
are based on the very base climate values first compiled, verified - to the best of their ability at the time, in 1 8 6 4.
Those same values adopted by the world in 1952 as the International Standard Atmosphere and the American Standard Atmosphere later, in 1976, are republishings of these original values;
and till they change, the climate isn't officially changing.
Don't feel too bad though because Ernst Ruthorford of legendary fame, couldn't believe it was possible, either.
But millions upon millions upon MILLIONS of thermal readings between deep in the inner Earth to the farthest reaches of space prove we know what the real climate is, and we know what the real values are going to be or it boils down to the fact we couldn't have a global Aviation and Aerospace age.
in spite of the fact the Americans and Russians launched 25 VENERA spacecraft to Venus together
and landed 13 on the surface of the planet, using the same laws that predicted what temperatures would be all over this one, AND,
that one.
The one you've been misled to believe is hundreds of times warmer than it should be. They're wrong about that because we sent craft over and landed them there, more than a dozen,
and the same gas laws predicting how to land safely there match temperatures, thus density, all the way to the surface.
Do you think the Russians and Americans are working together to suppress the stunning evidence that the laws of physics don't work the same on Venus as they do here?
No; the people telling you there are two temperatures for the planet are lying to you: there is one temperature for it, and there's also one for Venus, and Mars - they all operate under the same gas law.
Laws, but one unifying gas law bonded and replaced the four gas Laws preceeding it, each of them - the predecessor laws, were each
written to isolate and resolve matter-energy values for a particular feature in the gas law used to resolve the temperatures of gases:
P pressure,
V volume,
T temperature,
and R, an officially derived Energy Constant for gases,
the four predecessor laws being bonded, unified, into PV = nRT.
This gas law is accurate everywhere we've ever sent craft and it's also the one used to resolve the temperature of those Standards,
that are the actual climate of record of the planet.
The International Standard Atmosphere,
and the
American Standard Atmosphere,
are based on the very base climate values first compiled, verified - to the best of their ability at the time, in 1 8 6 4.
Those same values adopted by the world in 1952 as the International Standard Atmosphere and the American Standard Atmosphere later, in 1976, are republishings of these original values;
and till they change, the climate isn't officially changing.
Don't feel too bad though because Ernst Ruthorford of legendary fame, couldn't believe it was possible, either.
But millions upon millions upon MILLIONS of thermal readings between deep in the inner Earth to the farthest reaches of space prove we know what the real climate is, and we know what the real values are going to be or it boils down to the fact we couldn't have a global Aviation and Aerospace age.
Yamaha FG-840
Active member
The Jointed One, the gas law used to assure we know what the temperatures of gases are is named the Ideal Gas Law. It comes in two parts,
Part I is the Equation.
Part II is the Chart of the law which is named the Chart of Specific Heats of Gases.
That second Chart is the foundations
of what are called the Gas Energy Constants. They are derivitives of the Specific Heats,
in differing conditions and are officially referred to as 'R'.
In that chart there is something else you are being systematically deceived about,
it specifically names both CO2 and Air: and assigns mathematically, by name,
CO2 a lower Energy Constant than Air.
That chart is also unable to be falsified by the people telling you the laws of physics don't work right on Venus either: since real sciences use it.
The chart is readily found all over the internet.
https://www.engineeringtoolbox.com/specific-heat-capacity-gases-d_159.html
As are charts of Sunlight Top-of-Atmosphere, vs @ the Surface. Since they are unable to be falsified by the people telling you less and less light reaching the planet,
makes more and more come out, every time it makes less go in.
https://is.gd/B5Hdcx
Water and Carbon Dioxide vastly predominate in creation of the 29% cooling that's the first step of resolving global average surface, and Atmospheric temperatures.
Water is the cooling green house gas responsible for the vast majority, of all THAT - with it's ppm level at 25,000 PPM average and CO2 being about 410ish PPM, CO2's cooling is dwarfed by water's but it is, second in cooling, as shown on the charts.
Part I is the Equation.
Part II is the Chart of the law which is named the Chart of Specific Heats of Gases.
That second Chart is the foundations
of what are called the Gas Energy Constants. They are derivitives of the Specific Heats,
in differing conditions and are officially referred to as 'R'.
In that chart there is something else you are being systematically deceived about,
it specifically names both CO2 and Air: and assigns mathematically, by name,
CO2 a lower Energy Constant than Air.
That chart is also unable to be falsified by the people telling you the laws of physics don't work right on Venus either: since real sciences use it.
The chart is readily found all over the internet.
https://www.engineeringtoolbox.com/specific-heat-capacity-gases-d_159.html
As are charts of Sunlight Top-of-Atmosphere, vs @ the Surface. Since they are unable to be falsified by the people telling you less and less light reaching the planet,
makes more and more come out, every time it makes less go in.
https://is.gd/B5Hdcx
Water and Carbon Dioxide vastly predominate in creation of the 29% cooling that's the first step of resolving global average surface, and Atmospheric temperatures.
Water is the cooling green house gas responsible for the vast majority, of all THAT - with it's ppm level at 25,000 PPM average and CO2 being about 410ish PPM, CO2's cooling is dwarfed by water's but it is, second in cooling, as shown on the charts.
Yamaha FG-840
Active member
Do you really think 97% of scientists, believe 29% less energy into a rock,
make more than 100% of available energy come out?
make more than 100% of available energy come out?
Yamaha FG-840
Active member
Whenever you find one, show me a graph explaining the part between when the guy in the .gif says,
''The first step, in calculating the temperature of Earth, is removing that energy the Atmosphere doesn't let warm it.
This roughly 29%, are seen to immediately take effect in cooling the planet's final temperature,''
and when they tell you, ''And that's how 29% less energy in,
makes more than 100% of the available light come out, when it made the 29% not go in.''
That would be so great to finally have someone explain what happens when
29% less light in,
becomes more than 100% out.
https://i.imgur.com/ZLJqPZH.png
''The first step, in calculating the temperature of Earth, is removing that energy the Atmosphere doesn't let warm it.
This roughly 29%, are seen to immediately take effect in cooling the planet's final temperature,''
and when they tell you, ''And that's how 29% less energy in,
makes more than 100% of the available light come out, when it made the 29% not go in.''
That would be so great to finally have someone explain what happens when
29% less light in,
becomes more than 100% out.
https://i.imgur.com/ZLJqPZH.png
Yamaha FG-840
Active member
I
Ignignokt
I believe it's more like 99+% now
What is the obsession with 29%??
Did I miss something besides methamphetamine?
Does it all hinge on 29%??
Perhaps peruse various other data??
Not get hung up on 29%??
Did I miss something besides methamphetamine?
Does it all hinge on 29%??
Perhaps peruse various other data??
Not get hung up on 29%??
Yamaha FG-840
Active member
https://i.imgur.com/Mv5E7IR.png
You also believe, a magical gassiness,
made a cold bath a heater.
That the cold light blocking
nitrogen-oxygen atmospheric bath,
has a magicalness,
to it's gassiness.
And that every time it makes less light leak into a rock,
the magicalness of the gassiness,
makes more leak back out.
Perhaps you can make up an enlightening .GIF representing your teachings, regarding
less and less energy going into something
making more and more of it come out.
It's fun.
You also believe, a magical gassiness,
made a cold bath a heater.
That the cold light blocking
nitrogen-oxygen atmospheric bath,
has a magicalness,
to it's gassiness.
And that every time it makes less light leak into a rock,
the magicalness of the gassiness,
makes more leak back out.
Perhaps you can make up an enlightening .GIF representing your teachings, regarding
less and less energy going into something
making more and more of it come out.
It's fun.
If I had to disagree with 99% of professionals on something I would request some education too.
Good move.
It certainly beats acting like vast numbers of people who know what they are talking about are wrong.
Good move.
It certainly beats acting like vast numbers of people who know what they are talking about are wrong.
Yamaha FG-840
Active member
You can't prove 99% of professionals agree less light into a rock makes more come out.
Just a bunch of government employees. The very ones who gave your grandpa some education when they told him pot was like heroin.
Just a bunch of government employees. The very ones who gave your grandpa some education when they told him pot was like heroin.
