The Answer to Global warming is trains,Wind and Solar farms.

Werbung:
Rokerijdude11 said:
yup just some guy on the internet
Click to expand...

And arguing that a piece of information is correct because so and so said it is one of the most beardless of the logical fallacies. Either you can argue the points that I have made or you can't. If you can't, mewling that I am just some guy on the internet in lieu of making a real argument only highlights the fact that you really don't belong in this debate.
 
sorry pal you were conclusivly proven wrong in this thread.
You made some hasty, half thought out, statements and were taken to task on them. In all instances, your pompus, know it all manner, was shown to be wrong .And even refuted by a reputable scientist, who works for NASA


I'm sorry that you are unable to see the fact that you have been proven wrong handily in this thread? There is no need to debate anything further? You claimed some things, i have shown where you erred in judgment

I have ALREADY beaten you in this debate, why would i feel the need to go into it any further?
 
Rokerijdude11 said:
I have ALREADY beaten you in this debate, why would i feel the need to go into it any further?
Click to expand...

Like I said, you don't understand the science that has been posted by either side. If you would like to extract some bit that you think has proven me wrong and bring it forward, I would be more than happy to rip it to shreds for you.

Running away and claiming that there is no need to go further is just your style. Congratulations on being very predictable.
 
you have been proven wrong.............no need to further humiliate you at this point? you said something could not be done Myself and others have proven you wrong Period......

you didnt "Rip It to shreds " the first time around?


why do you insist on trying to justify yourself its quite pathetic
 
Mammoths and temp change

palerider

You raise an interesting point with the Mammoth. Many of these big guys have been recovered almost intact, frozen where they stood. Genetic tests on their DNA demonstrates they are closely related to present day elephants. Elephants are strictly warm climate animals. They require huge quantities of food each day and their tusk are totally unsuitable for rooting out food in a frozen turf.

So how did they boys stay alive? The answer is that their range used to be far warmer and more tropical than today. We are talking about Siberia and Alaska looking more like India. And many of these Mammoths have been dated to about 4,000 years ago. So tropical Siberia was not all that long ago. This temp change happened rapidly.

Any temp change today is part of one of the hundreds of heating/cooling cycles that earth has gone through.

The global warming hysteria is all about a new worldwide tax and has zero to do with temp change.

Check out carbontax.org
 
invest07 said:
palerider

You raise an interesting point with the Mammoth. Many of these big guys have been recovered almost intact, frozen where they stood. Genetic tests on their DNA demonstrates they are closely related to present day elephants. Elephants are strictly warm climate animals. They require huge quantities of food each day and their tusk are totally unsuitable for rooting out food in a frozen turf.

So how did they boys stay alive? The answer is that their range used to be far warmer and more tropical than today. We are talking about Siberia and Alaska looking more like India. And many of these Mammoths have been dated to about 4,000 years ago. So tropical Siberia was not all that long ago. This temp change happened rapidly.

Any temp change today is part of one of the hundreds of heating/cooling cycles that earth has gone through.

The global warming hysteria is all about a new worldwide tax and has zero to do with temp change.

Check out carbontax.org
Click to expand...

It isn't just mammoths. Non fossilized crocodile (or alligator?) bones have been found as far north as England. Alligators are even more cold sensitive than the mammoths. The whole anthropogenic climate change hysteria is for the purpose of gaining power over people and business. The scientists who promote AGW today are, in essence, no different than the pagan priests of centuries past. Folks who knew when eclipses were coming, and had the seasonal changes worked out and they knew how to play ignorant peasants like musical instruments. They even had power over the rulers of the day.

Same today. Those who don't grasp the science are easily fooled. roker/abraxis is a good example. He doesn't understand the science and gloams onto one scientist (a government hack from nasa no less) as the object of his faith and when challenged, simply recites his mantra. So and so says this and that and so and so works for nasa so this and that must be true.

As to the carbon trading scheme, my financial guy suggested over a year ago that I start doing some research into companies that will be trading carbon credits. While it is a cappy business, buying stock in them, if you pick the right ones will be like buying microsoft at $3 dollars per share. You might look into it as well. The carbon trading scheme is going to be big business because there are just too many idiots out there that simply can't grasp the science that proves that we have nothing to do with global climate change.
 
Rokerijdude11 said:
you have been proven wrong.............no need to further humiliate you at this point? you said something could not be done Myself and others have proven you wrong Period......

you didnt "Rip It to shreds " the first time around?


why do you insist on trying to justify yourself its quite pathetic
Click to expand...

roker. You know and I know, and everyone else knows that if you had anything at all with which to slap me down, you would bring it forward and print it in red all caps. The fact that you haven't done so is proof positive that you are just talking through your hat.
 
palerider said:
roker. You know and I know, and everyone else knows that if you had anything at all with which to slap me down, you would bring it forward and print it in red all caps. The fact that you haven't done so is proof positive that you are just talking through your hat.
Click to expand...

anyone reading this thread in its entirety KNOWS that YOU Palerider told Stevox a few things about lasers and made fun of him ......

Roker, flat out proved your assumptions wrong, Provided corroboration, and references from a NASA scientist?
You had your azs ripped by the 10th post of this thread ? what are you talkin about skippy?........page one you were proven wrong !!!! and you have been crawdaddin for 5 more pages?

Funny how you seem to skip things all the time its all here in the thread oh pompus one
 
Abraxis Axis said:
anyone reading this thread in its entirety KNOWS that YOU Palerider told Stevox a few things about lasers and made fun of him ......

Roker, flat out proved your assumptions wrong, Provided corroboration, and references from a NASA scientist?
You had your azs ripped by the 10th post of this thread ? what are you talkin about skippy?........page one you were proven wrong !!!! and you have been crawdaddin for 5 more pages?

Funny how you seem to skip things all the time its all here in the thread oh pompus one
Click to expand...


As I pointed out, if you bounce light off of one mirror, or one million mirrors, the light continues to move at the speed of light. If photons were capable of transferring momentum to solid objects, they would lose speed in the process. Since they don't slow down, they are not transferring momentum and therefore can not move a solid object.

Now, if you would like to discuss how it is that you think photons could possibly transfer momentum to solid objects without trading speed (the only trade they could possibly make since they have no mass) in the equation, feel free to explain till your heart's content.

As I have pointed out numerous times, you do not address the basic physics, you just continue to make your beardless appeal to authority. Can you discuss the topic or not?
 
palerider said:
roker. You know and I know, and everyone else knows that if you had anything at all with which to slap me down, you would bring it forward and print it in red all caps.
Click to expand...

This is the first thing that I've ever read on a message board that made me laugh out loud.
 
Rokerijdude11 said:

apparently your not exactly right here are you ? what old data are you relying on? It appears that Project orion has in fact been experimenting with moving objects in space and debris retreval as well as "ASTEROID AVOIDANCE" using.................Lasers you might want to look at the last post as well

take a look here at this paper

http://www.au.af.mil/au/awc/awcgate/cst/csat20.pdf

here are some snippets from the pdf file
=============================

The Author

Jonathan W. Campbell, a Colonel in the United States Air Force
Reserve, is presently assigned as the Individual Mission Augmentee to the CADRE Commander at Air University. In civilian life, Dr. Campbell is a scientist and advanced projects manager in the Advanced Projects Office
of the National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) at the Marshall Space Flight Center in Alabama.

In that capacity he has worked for over 20 years in the space program a number of advanced research projects. He served as the project manager on Project ORION, which was a NASA study published in 1997 that explored the feasibility of using lasers to remove orbital debris. He has published more than fifty scientific
papers on various subjects, including laser orbital debris removal and laser asteroid, meteoroid, and comet deflection.

============================

Claude Phipps suggested the use of laser propulsion with a ground-based pulsed laser as a solution to the orbital debris problem in 1994 (Phipps 1994). The Orion Project, which was a study conducted by NASA
and the USAF in 1995-96, concluded that the concept of using ground-based lasers for removing orbital debris is feasible and cost effective relative to the cost of placing objects in orbit (Campbell 1996). This study
presents an analysis of the debris removal concept, and a plan for developing the technology for removing orbital debris with near-Earth lasers.

This study begins with an analysis of the cost of a laser orbital debris removal system as the first step toward establishing the cost-effectiveness of this concept. This study then investigates the requirements
for using laser propulsion for the diverse ensemble of debris particles in orbit. The following section demonstrates that the adaptive optics requirement for debris removal is within technological reach.

After demonstrating that laser systems can effectively remove debris from orbit with the proper engagement strategy, the study concludes with a proposal to develop the technology for debris removal and advance that technology for laser space propulsion.


===========================


III. Near Earth Asteroid Avoidance System


Coupling PALS with powerful telescopes, such as those being developed under the Next Generation Space Telescope (NGST) project, would provide long-term warning for implementation of an overall NEO
avoidance system. The feasibility of this system is discussed below.


The lasers that would he used in Project Orion have demonstrated sufficient capability for orbital debris removal for objects in the size range from 1-10 cm diameter. Ground based experimental data, using a 20 kW
pulsed laser, show that the impulse imparted to aluminum targets due to the ejected plasma cloud gives an average surface pressure p = 6.5 x 10-4 N/cm2, or equivalently, an acceleration, a = l.25x 10-6 m/s2 With present technology, a laser phased array can be aimed at the asteroid with sufficient power to ablate its surface. Assuming that a laser array can be
scaled up to operate on a 1 km diameter iron asteroid, this would require a 200 GW power grid.


Several alternate potential power sources are
available, including nuclear or electric generation and solar power arrays. Let us assume that the asteroid is at infinity moving toward the Earth with a velocity v0 and impact parameter R. The closest point of approach Re is given by ...

raed the rest in this interesting nasa related document
Click to expand...


yes Palerider is obviously right, and NASA is therefore Wrong
 
Abraxis Axis said:
...Ground based experimental data, using a 20 kW pulsed laser, show that the impulse imparted to aluminum targets due to the ejected plasma cloud gives an average surface pressure p = 6.5 x 10-4 N/cm2, or equivalently, an acceleration, a = l.25x 10-6 m/s2 With present technology, a laser phased array can be aimed at the asteroid with sufficient power to ablate its surface.
Click to expand...

Do you know what this means? I am going to give you a chance to demonstrate that you have some small understanding that this is not a description of a laser moving matter before I use it to demonstrate that you don't.
 
Werbung:
Well.... Since this whole thread started out about global warming, and there has been a great deal of information about heating/cooling events and discussion about whether the current warming trend is man-made, I thought I'd add this link: Fossil DNA Proves Greenland Once Had Lush Forests

Lots of information about ice core drillings, comparrisons, etc. Methodology applied. 450,000 year old insect DNA. (OLD bugs!)

Near the end of the article this quasi-summary paragraph:

"That signifies that there was ice there during the Eemian interglacial period 125,000 years ago. It means that although we are now confronted with global warming, the whole ice sheet will not melt and bring about the tremendous sea-level rises which have been the subject of so much discussion."

It's a BAAAADDDD day for Al Gore & company...
 

Similar threads

K
The "Global War on Terror" Fifty questions on 9/11 that still needs to be Answered
Replies
2
Views
1K
khothla
K
Back
Top