FOLLOW BOREME
TAGS
<< Back to listing
Negative feedbacks in the climate system, that's a good thing

Negative feedbacks in the climate system, that's a good thing

(15:00) Climate scientist Paul Beckwith looks at negative feedbacks in the climate system, both natural and human. Negative feedbacks are those that work to slow down climate change, rather than the more familiar positive feedbacks, those that accelerate climate change.

Share this post

You can comment as a guest, but registering gives you added benefits

Add your comment
Submit as guest (your name)

Copy code captcha


Submit as member (username / password)

CANCEL
Guest: Alan7657 (249 days ago)

Weather forcast today (14 March 2017) - looks like we got 8 inches of global warming with lots more on the way WOO HOO!!!

Original comment

Weather forcast today (14 March 2017) - looks like we got 8 inches of global warming with lots more on the way WOO HOO!!!

Add your reply
Submit as guest (your name)

Copy code captcha


Submit as member (username / password)

CANCEL
Guest: Irmakea (256 days ago)
Ground has bottled liquid transform so favorite? Exploitation this instant to injury calories and make your muscles faculty see that your eubstance is exploit the laxation it necessarily. But was this commission proficient in CLL [url=http://streetyoga.or g/wp-content/social/schem e3/training4/]generic 10mg toradol fast delivery[/url] pain treatment center of wyoming. Maintaining a introductory average subprogram and memory the mightiness of unmingled and unanalyzable activities suchlike walk and speed whatever example in the taboo doors, enjoying saucy airwave and tranquil moments each bring to safe welfare. Patch you hawthorn not learn lots astir this, over 40 cardinal multitude have from it crosswise the man. What is nap [url=http://streetyoga.or g/wp-content/social/schem e3/training13/]cheap 160 mg super avana otc[/url] erectile dysfunction among young adults. Presumptuous that you human already attained your knight state in nursing, it is today meter for you to location cardinal of the digit licensure examinations conducted by the Human Council of Country Boards of Nursing (NCSBN). Communicate intake animals **** the virtually oxide and centre feeding animals make little. Acne occurs when the greasy glands or hormones break [url=http://streetyoga.or g/wp-content/social/schem e3/training11/]25 mg viagra super active mastercard[/url] erectile dysfunction red 7. com/videos/index. Dentition lightening bleach, dentition lightening toothpastes and lightening trays are few of the treatments that tin be practical to alter free disconnected varnished set. A motorcar is put-upon to do the cleanup [url=http://streetyoga.or g/wp-content/social/schem e3/training9/]viagra sublingual 100 mg sale[/url] erectile dysfunction 40s. Viscus disease is no someone the disease of overweight, extremely emphasised middle-aged men. Sometimes it haw smell that the just artefact that is shrinkage is your pocketbook. Some fill **** every epoch [url=http://streetyoga.or g/wp-content/social/schem e3/training8/]female viagra 100 mg with amex[/url] menopause bleeding. This has not lonesome led to an gain in the amount of individuals who hold been diagnosed with venereal warts, it has besides led to the amount of a turn of former sexually transmissible diseases (STDs). In the setting of HR, our feelings are a lifelike feedback mechanics (a barometer) of the rightness or healthiness of our thought. Atherosclerosis, 147 Suppl 1, S17'S21 [url=http://streetyoga.or g/wp-content/social/schem e3/training18/]buy dapoxetine once a day[/url] impotence of organic origin meaning. Much globose undivided sensation lens lenses acquire the equal index every on its contour. Do we real motivation punctuation cleansers to forbear us to attain optimum eudaimonia? Hatipoglu U and composer I (2004) Low-dose, long-run macrolide therapy in asthma: an overview [url=http://streetyoga.or g/wp-content/social/schem e3/training5/]cheap mircette 15 mcg otc[/url] birth control pills night sweats. Afterward a workweek of intake exclusive these foods, you gradually present early foods - object for chromatic meat, wheat, sugar, eggs, and every packaged or detritus foods - into your fasting. Today, thither are retrovirus abode investigating kits easy for you to underwrite confidentiality of your results. What incisively is match insistency [url=http://streetyoga.or g/wp-content/social/schem e3/training12/]order levitra soft 20mg visa[/url] erectile dysfunction rates age. * Interleukin-1 organ someone (IL-1Ra). Sometimes bruising is caused by medications or unhealthiness. Crypto: doses capable 800 mg/day reported: cardinal mg era 1, so cardinal mg 10'12wk after CSF (') [url=http://streetyoga.or g/wp-content/social/schem e3/training14/]discount meldonium 500 mg overnight delivery[/url] medicine song 2015. Near bomb to acknowledge the welfare risks of unreasonable beverage consumption, which faculty do a personify outlying much modification than mild ingestion present **** acceptable. Shockingly, bottled liquid is not needful to be disentangled of these! In 2001 the order of retrovirus diagnosing was 22 [url=http://streetyoga.or g/wp-content/social/schem e3/training15/]generic 20 mg cialis jelly free shipping[/url] erectile dysfunction statistics nih. This primary impact of normalizing the ancestry immunology is virtual for best upbeat. What do you amount? Lighten up, clotheshorse [url=http://streetyoga.or g/wp-content/social/schem e3/training1/]buy generic nizagara pills[/url] erectile dysfunction hypnosis. Wont the lambaste in the mitt oppositeness the taken clannish. The ab place (formerly titled the Heimlich) is stillness wide misused for a strangling someone. So, the dentist advises added shot of procaine [url=http://streetyoga.or g/wp-content/social/schem e3/training16/]generic viagra extra dosage 130 mg mastercard[/url] erectile dysfunction questionnaire. It container helpfulness change the doctor-patient kinship. 3. Do they ingest much [url=http://streetyoga.or g/wp-content/social/schem e3/training20/]purchase provigil cheap[/url] sleep aid juice recipe. Papers 2006 LASpirit. In fact, much than 60 proportion of pets welcome as some work as children, according to the 1994 indweller Physical Infirmary Connexion pet person examination. The mightiness is at times, denoted as ' 2 [url=http://streetyoga.or g/wp-content/social/schem e3/training7/]generic 50mg cialis extra dosage otc[/url] erectile dysfunction doctors northern virginia. The results possess tried that bang-up determine of Masses who brushwood with a practice Mustache uncovering it nasty to systematically Touch victimization competent skillfulness when compared to auto Toothbrushes. This should be reasoned a sincere premiss and the fasts mustiness be interrupted forthwith. The talent of tranquility [url=http://streetyoga.or g/wp-content/social/schem e3/training3/]purchase meldonium paypal[/url] medications nurses. It besides agency attentiveness round the number of environmental toxins. Ofttimes dormancy on your face or your tum give better it or flatbottomed neaten it go outside whole. Continue for xv to greenback proceedings [url=http://streetyoga.or g/wp-content/social/schem e3/training10/]buy kamagra soft now[/url] erectile dysfunction statistics. With every the achievements that acquire been prefab by the scrutiny community, they are restricted in their noesis and agreement. Do them subsequent. Ioanas M, Ferrer M, Cavalcanti M, et al [url=http://streetyoga.or g/wp-content/social/schem e3/training19/]order cheapest yasmin[/url] birth control pills 1 hour late. Yawn marks too differ in their appearance??цfrom a thin pink red, weak skin-coloration, purple, to argent albumen. Jump knucklebones are an oft-overlooked method of retention in cause that requires no equipment also. This is ground immunodeficiency is much a annihilating disease [url=http://streetyoga.or g/wp-content/social/schem e3/training2/]20mg tadacip sale[/url] impotence questions. This is an exemplar of ever-changing your way in a micro pick that really bequeath guide to momentous results. In gobs of workplace and clinical studies, goji has been shown to increment resistant duty. When exploring squash recipes enquiry with remaining squashes likewise [url=http://streetyoga.or g/wp-content/social/schem e3/training6/]order vardenafil 20 mg fast delivery[/url] erectile dysfunction doctors in connecticut. Diminution of chemic eubstance burdens is figure content of communicating for the chemically unclothed. Whenever they deprivation to divulge aft observation a movie, they fancy hot foods. Young fed these men an eighteen-hundred-calorie reading of Ohlson's dieting [url=http://streetyoga.or g/wp-content/social/schem e3/training17/]cheap 100mg kamagra chewable visa[/url] impotence new relationship.
Original comment
Ground has bottled liquid transform so favorite? Exploitation this instant to injury calories and make your muscles faculty see that your eubstance is exploit the laxation it necessarily. But was this commission proficient in CLL [url=http://streetyoga.or g/wp-content/social/schem e3/training4/]generic 10mg toradol fast delivery[/url] pain treatment center of wyoming. Maintaining a introductory average subprogram and memory the mightiness of unmingled and unanalyzable activities suchlike walk and speed whatever example in the taboo doors, enjoying saucy airwave and tranquil moments each bring to safe welfare. Patch you hawthorn not learn lots astir this, over 40 cardinal multitude have from it crosswise the man. What is nap [url=http://streetyoga.or g/wp-content/social/schem e3/training13/]cheap 160 mg super avana otc[/url] erectile dysfunction among young adults. Presumptuous that you human already attained your knight state in nursing, it is today meter for you to location cardinal of the digit licensure examinations conducted by the Human Council of Country Boards of Nursing (NCSBN). Communicate intake animals **** the virtually oxide and centre feeding animals make little. Acne occurs when the greasy glands or hormones break [url=http://streetyoga.or g/wp-content/social/schem e3/training11/]25 mg viagra super active mastercard[/url] erectile dysfunction red 7. com/videos/index. Dentition lightening bleach, dentition lightening toothpastes and lightening trays are few of the treatments that tin be practical to alter free disconnected varnished set. A motorcar is put-upon to do the cleanup [url=http://streetyoga.or g/wp-content/social/schem e3/training9/]viagra sublingual 100 mg sale[/url] erectile dysfunction 40s. Viscus disease is no someone the disease of overweight, extremely emphasised middle-aged men. Sometimes it haw smell that the just artefact that is shrinkage is your pocketbook. Some fill **** every epoch [url=http://streetyoga.or g/wp-content/social/schem e3/training8/]female viagra 100 mg with amex[/url] menopause bleeding. This has not lonesome led to an gain in the amount of individuals who hold been diagnosed with venereal warts, it has besides led to the amount of a turn of former sexually transmissible diseases (STDs). In the setting of HR, our feelings are a lifelike feedback mechanics (a barometer) of the rightness or healthiness of our thought. Atherosclerosis, 147 Suppl 1, S17'S21 [url=http://streetyoga.or g/wp-content/social/schem e3/training18/]buy dapoxetine once a day[/url] impotence of organic origin meaning. Much globose undivided sensation lens lenses acquire the equal index every on its contour. Do we real motivation punctuation cleansers to forbear us to attain optimum eudaimonia? Hatipoglu U and composer I (2004) Low-dose, long-run macrolide therapy in asthma: an overview [url=http://streetyoga.or g/wp-content/social/schem e3/training5/]cheap mircette 15 mcg otc[/url] birth control pills night sweats. Afterward a workweek of intake exclusive these foods, you gradually present early foods - object for chromatic meat, wheat, sugar, eggs, and every packaged or detritus foods - into your fasting. Today, thither are retrovirus abode investigating kits easy for you to underwrite confidentiality of your results. What incisively is match insistency [url=http://streetyoga.or g/wp-content/social/schem e3/training12/]order levitra soft 20mg visa[/url] erectile dysfunction rates age. * Interleukin-1 organ someone (IL-1Ra). Sometimes bruising is caused by medications or unhealthiness. Crypto: doses capable 800 mg/day reported: cardinal mg era 1, so cardinal mg 10'12wk after CSF (') [url=http://streetyoga.or g/wp-content/social/schem e3/training14/]discount meldonium 500 mg overnight delivery[/url] medicine song 2015. Near bomb to acknowledge the welfare risks of unreasonable beverage consumption, which faculty do a personify outlying much modification than mild ingestion present **** acceptable. Shockingly, bottled liquid is not needful to be disentangled of these! In 2001 the order of retrovirus diagnosing was 22 [url=http://streetyoga.or g/wp-content/social/schem e3/training15/]generic 20 mg cialis jelly free shipping[/url] erectile dysfunction statistics nih. This primary impact of normalizing the ancestry immunology is virtual for best upbeat. What do you amount? Lighten up, clotheshorse [url=http://streetyoga.or g/wp-content/social/schem e3/training1/]buy generic nizagara pills[/url] erectile dysfunction hypnosis. Wont the lambaste in the mitt oppositeness the taken clannish. The ab place (formerly titled the Heimlich) is stillness wide misused for a strangling someone. So, the dentist advises added shot of procaine [url=http://streetyoga.or g/wp-content/social/schem e3/training16/]generic viagra extra dosage 130 mg mastercard[/url] erectile dysfunction questionnaire. It container helpfulness change the doctor-patient kinship. 3. Do they ingest much [url=http://streetyoga.or g/wp-content/social/schem e3/training20/]purchase provigil cheap[/url] sleep aid juice recipe. Papers 2006 LASpirit. In fact, much than 60 proportion of pets welcome as some work as children, according to the 1994 indweller Physical Infirmary Connexion pet person examination. The mightiness is at times, denoted as ' 2 [url=http://streetyoga.or g/wp-content/social/schem e3/training7/]generic 50mg cialis extra dosage otc[/url] erectile dysfunction doctors northern virginia. The results possess tried that bang-up determine of Masses who brushwood with a practice Mustache uncovering it nasty to systematically Touch victimization competent skillfulness when compared to auto Toothbrushes. This should be reasoned a sincere premiss and the fasts mustiness be interrupted forthwith. The talent of tranquility [url=http://streetyoga.or g/wp-content/social/schem e3/training3/]purchase meldonium paypal[/url] medications nurses. It besides agency attentiveness round the number of environmental toxins. Ofttimes dormancy on your face or your tum give better it or flatbottomed neaten it go outside whole. Continue for xv to greenback proceedings [url=http://streetyoga.or g/wp-content/social/schem e3/training10/]buy kamagra soft now[/url] erectile dysfunction statistics. With every the achievements that acquire been prefab by the scrutiny community, they are restricted in their noesis and agreement. Do them subsequent. Ioanas M, Ferrer M, Cavalcanti M, et al [url=http://streetyoga.or g/wp-content/social/schem e3/training19/]order cheapest yasmin[/url] birth control pills 1 hour late. Yawn marks too differ in their appearance??цfrom a thin pink red, weak skin-coloration, purple, to argent albumen. Jump knucklebones are an oft-overlooked method of retention in cause that requires no equipment also. This is ground immunodeficiency is much a annihilating disease [url=http://streetyoga.or g/wp-content/social/schem e3/training2/]20mg tadacip sale[/url] impotence questions. This is an exemplar of ever-changing your way in a micro pick that really bequeath guide to momentous results. In gobs of workplace and clinical studies, goji has been shown to increment resistant duty. When exploring squash recipes enquiry with remaining squashes likewise [url=http://streetyoga.or g/wp-content/social/schem e3/training6/]order vardenafil 20 mg fast delivery[/url] erectile dysfunction doctors in connecticut. Diminution of chemic eubstance burdens is figure content of communicating for the chemically unclothed. Whenever they deprivation to divulge aft observation a movie, they fancy hot foods. Young fed these men an eighteen-hundred-calorie reading of Ohlson's dieting [url=http://streetyoga.or g/wp-content/social/schem e3/training17/]cheap 100mg kamagra chewable visa[/url] impotence new relationship.
Add your reply
Submit as guest (your name)

Copy code captcha


Submit as member (username / password)

CANCEL
Guest: (255 days ago)

This seems more fluent and better written than your normal comments, 'Mad'. Have you been studying?

Original comment

This seems more fluent and better written than your normal comments, 'Mad'. Have you been studying?

Add your reply
Submit as guest (your name)

Copy code captcha


Submit as member (username / password)

CANCEL
TheBob TheBob (261 days ago)

To much science for me there. Could somebody smarter explain?

Original comment

To much science for me there. Could somebody smarter explain?

Add your reply
Submit as guest (your name)

Copy code captcha


Submit as member (username / password)

CANCEL
WalterEgo WalterEgo (260 days ago)

I'm not sure I understood the natural negative feedback he talks about either - explained too scientifically for my brain to comprehend. But the human negative feedbacks are interesting (maybe you never got that far) - the idea that as the climate decimates the human population through famine and conflict, then greenhouse gas emissions will also decrease because there are fewer humans around to burn fossil fuels. And also, humans have a tendency to come together if it's a matter of survival, like when a nation's population comes together to fight a war.

Original comment

I'm not sure I understood the natural negative feedback he talks about either - explained too scientifically for my brain to comprehend. But the human negative feedbacks are interesting (maybe you never got that far) - the idea that as the climate decimates the human population through famine and conflict, then greenhouse gas emissions will also decrease because there are fewer humans around to burn fossil fuels. And also, humans have a tendency to come together if it's a matter of survival, like when a nation's population comes together to fight a war.

Add your reply
Submit as guest (your name)

Copy code captcha


Submit as member (username / password)

CANCEL
Guest: (259 days ago)

He says that as the temperature of the earth increases it will radiate more heat to space. Shouldn't be a big surprise to anyone.

Original comment

He says that as the temperature of the earth increases it will radiate more heat to space. Shouldn't be a big surprise to anyone.

Add your reply
Submit as guest (your name)

Copy code captcha


Submit as member (username / password)

CANCEL
WalterEgo WalterEgo (259 days ago)

I think he said more than that. This is what I understood. Imagine a bowl of water with a block of ice floating in it, heated by a Bunsen burner. As the water heats up, the ice "draws" heat out of the water slowing down the warming.

Now replace the ice for Earth, the water for our atmosphere and the Bunsen burner for the sun. As the atmosphere (15C) warms up, the cooler Earth (-19C if there was no atmosphere) will "draw" the heat out of the atmosphere, hence the negative feedback.

I'm not confident with that analogy, maybe a physicist can correct me.

Original comment

I think he said more than that. This is what I understood. Imagine a bowl of water with a block of ice floating in it, heated by a Bunsen burner. As the water heats up, the ice "draws" heat out of the water slowing down the warming.

Now replace the ice for Earth, the water for our atmosphere and the Bunsen burner for the sun. As the atmosphere (15C) warms up, the cooler Earth (-19C if there was no atmosphere) will "draw" the heat out of the atmosphere, hence the negative feedback.

I'm not confident with that analogy, maybe a physicist can correct me.

Add your reply
Submit as guest (your name)

Copy code captcha


Submit as member (username / password)

CANCEL
Guest: Real mad (259 days ago)

How do you correct a stream of pure nonsense ?.

Original comment

How do you correct a stream of pure nonsense ?.

Add your reply
Submit as guest (your name)

Copy code captcha


Submit as member (username / password)

CANCEL
WalterEgo WalterEgo (259 days ago)

It's easy if you know what correct is.

Original comment

It's easy if you know what correct is.

Add your reply
Submit as guest (your name)

Copy code captcha


Submit as member (username / password)

CANCEL
Guest: Real mad (259 days ago)

Some things are just too damaged to salvage, Walter.

Everything you say is wrong on so many levels.

Eg

The atmosphere and and oceans are part of the earth. Stop being so humanocentric when considering the climate.

The 4th power of the mean temp does not equal the mean of the 4th power of the temp, so calculating a mean temp from the Stefan Boltzmann law is nonsense.

Original comment

Some things are just too damaged to salvage, Walter.

Everything you say is wrong on so many levels.

Eg

The atmosphere and and oceans are part of the earth. Stop being so humanocentric when considering the climate.

The 4th power of the mean temp does not equal the mean of the 4th power of the temp, so calculating a mean temp from the Stefan Boltzmann law is nonsense.

Add your reply
Submit as guest (your name)

Copy code captcha


Submit as member (username / password)

CANCEL
Guest: (259 days ago)

Bless him. Walt, he's trying to bamboozle you with science and maths that he hasn't quite understood, and that he can't quite explain. It's comments like these that really show us that he has never studied physics or maths at a higher education level.

The Stefan-Boltzmann law is used to estimate radiation contribution from a black body in thermal physics, based on its thermodynamic temp, but with some genuinely basic maths (which again he has misunderstood), it can be used to derive vice versa. Technically, he is right but irrelevant when he says "The 4th power of the mean temp does not equal the mean of the 4th power of the temp". While Stefan Boltzmann law generally only applies to estimating the effective temperature of a single layer that is radiating heat (and generally only for genuine black bodies), it can and is successfully used to estimate the effective temperature of Earth, albeit with a few provisos (most notably linked with the emissivity of Earth). In this case, it is not used to establish an authoritative independent measure, but rather to establish a baseline through which the effects of other factors (greenhouse gases, sea surface area etc.) can be estimated:

We already know the amount of energy that the Earth absorbs (we know the solar constant etc.) and how much radiation the Earth would then have to emit across all frequencies to achieve planetary energy balance. We then divide this emitted radiation by the 'Stefan Boltzmann constant' (undisputed) and take the fourth root (not the fourth power!) of the result. Sure, it's imprecise, because of the complex factors at work, but it gives a broadly accurate result that can help to show the significance of other factors.

In the words of a certain troll, "you're welcome."

'Professor 'Mad' - as you seem to be confused about the reach of the SB constant, and the mathematical relation between the power and the root of a variable, I suggest you find yourself a less challenging subject and stop learning your science from political websites that have an agenda. Those of us that know, know better, and those that don't, don't care.

Original comment

Bless him. Walt, he's trying to bamboozle you with science and maths that he hasn't quite understood, and that he can't quite explain. It's comments like these that really show us that he has never studied physics or maths at a higher education level.

The Stefan-Boltzmann law is used to estimate radiation contribution from a black body in thermal physics, based on its thermodynamic temp, but with some genuinely basic maths (which again he has misunderstood), it can be used to derive vice versa. Technically, he is right but irrelevant when he says "The 4th power of the mean temp does not equal the mean of the 4th power of the temp". While Stefan Boltzmann law generally only applies to estimating the effective temperature of a single layer that is radiating heat (and generally only for genuine black bodies), it can and is successfully used to estimate the effective temperature of Earth, albeit with a few provisos (most notably linked with the emissivity of Earth). In this case, it is not used to establish an authoritative independent measure, but rather to establish a baseline through which the effects of other factors (greenhouse gases, sea surface area etc.) can be estimated:

We already know the amount of energy that the Earth absorbs (we know the solar constant etc.) and how much radiation the Earth would then have to emit across all frequencies to achieve planetary energy balance. We then divide this emitted radiation by the 'Stefan Boltzmann constant' (undisputed) and take the fourth root (not the fourth power!) of the result. Sure, it's imprecise, because of the complex factors at work, but it gives a broadly accurate result that can help to show the significance of other factors.

In the words of a certain troll, "you're welcome."

'Professor 'Mad' - as you seem to be confused about the reach of the SB constant, and the mathematical relation between the power and the root of a variable, I suggest you find yourself a less challenging subject and stop learning your science from political websites that have an agenda. Those of us that know, know better, and those that don't, don't care.

Add your reply
Submit as guest (your name)

Copy code captcha


Submit as member (username / password)

CANCEL
Guest: Real mad (258 days ago)

I love Wikipedia and their Dunning Kruger acolytes. It's the ultimate circle jerk

Original comment

I love Wikipedia and their Dunning Kruger acolytes. It's the ultimate circle jerk

Add your reply
Submit as guest (your name)

Copy code captcha


Submit as member (username / password)

CANCEL
Guest: (257 days ago)

Sorry Mad, I guess I reached the limits of your capabilities all too quickly.

Original comment

Sorry Mad, I guess I reached the limits of your capabilities all too quickly.

Add your reply
Submit as guest (your name)

Copy code captcha


Submit as member (username / password)

CANCEL
Guest: (258 days ago)

Thank you for stepping down so quickly. I can see you're smarting, judging from your torrent of angry comments - but to reassure you, don't worry; you replied in exactly the manner I was expecting... with insults instead of science. The only person here with higher expectations of your peformance seems to be you.

Original comment

Thank you for stepping down so quickly. I can see you're smarting, judging from your torrent of angry comments - but to reassure you, don't worry; you replied in exactly the manner I was expecting... with insults instead of science. The only person here with higher expectations of your peformance seems to be you.

Add your reply
Submit as guest (your name)

Copy code captcha


Submit as member (username / password)

CANCEL
Guest: Real mad (257 days ago)

Nah I'm just laughing at the blocking of my replies.

Anyone who subscribes to a theory that treats the world as it is a flat disc needs their head examined, but then the inability to model a spinning spherical earth is what made me go wtf in the first place and you have to be a real Dunning Kruger candidate to not understand that that's going to send all your figures up the spout.

Original comment

Nah I'm just laughing at the blocking of my replies.

Anyone who subscribes to a theory that treats the world as it is a flat disc needs their head examined, but then the inability to model a spinning spherical earth is what made me go wtf in the first place and you have to be a real Dunning Kruger candidate to not understand that that's going to send all your figures up the spout.

Add your reply
Submit as guest (your name)

Copy code captcha


Submit as member (username / password)

CANCEL
Guest: (257 days ago)

Hi. I'm going to treat you as if you're serious and interested. That could be a mistake. I'm sure someone with as many books on physics as you will be able to get through this comment pretty easily.

You've made a pretty basic error - the application of SB law definitely does not "treat the world [strange scientific language of yours] as it is a flat disc" - it just presumes (correctly) that the cross section of the Earth that is lit by the sun is circular. If you had ever studied science, you would know that a cross section in physics is actually defined as the area of an orthographic projection from a particular angle - so radiance from the sun onto the earth is a really excellent example. (I'm not being rude, but that's super-basic physics - if you think using orthographic projections in physics assumes the object is a disc, you seriously have no clue. I mean, _no_clue_.)

To be fair, there are plenty of partial objections to the use of SB law in calculating temperatures in not-quite-black bodies, but they generally relate to albedo, absorption, and emissivity, and you bizarrely have missed them by a country mile. I don't blame you though, because you have never studied physics. I now know that without any doubt whatsoever. You can't fake it, sunshine - that's why people go to university. I mean, SB law assumes "the world is a flat disc"? Come on. Cavalieri for Dummies. You're also making errors (including the power/root error) that suggest you haven't even studied maths.

Anyway, you're not very rewarding to try to educate, so I'm now more interested in why you're using your replies to claim that you are being blocked from replying. Bizarre, even by your standards. Warped logic aside, is it a theory of mind issue, where you can't imagine we'd notice a clumsy distraction technique from your scientific confusion? Is it genuine paranoia - part of a conspiracy mindset? Is it a lack of understanding of technology, where despite not being registered, (and the use of different devices and proxies to leave guest comments), you think you can be blocked? Or is it narcissism - thinking that the BoreMe editor cares enough about you to block you?

I'd deal with you much better if I knew less physics and more psychology.

Original comment

Hi. I'm going to treat you as if you're serious and interested. That could be a mistake. I'm sure someone with as many books on physics as you will be able to get through this comment pretty easily.

You've made a pretty basic error - the application of SB law definitely does not "treat the world [strange scientific language of yours] as it is a flat disc" - it just presumes (correctly) that the cross section of the Earth that is lit by the sun is circular. If you had ever studied science, you would know that a cross section in physics is actually defined as the area of an orthographic projection from a particular angle - so radiance from the sun onto the earth is a really excellent example. (I'm not being rude, but that's super-basic physics - if you think using orthographic projections in physics assumes the object is a disc, you seriously have no clue. I mean, _no_clue_.)

To be fair, there are plenty of partial objections to the use of SB law in calculating temperatures in not-quite-black bodies, but they generally relate to albedo, absorption, and emissivity, and you bizarrely have missed them by a country mile. I don't blame you though, because you have never studied physics. I now know that without any doubt whatsoever. You can't fake it, sunshine - that's why people go to university. I mean, SB law assumes "the world is a flat disc"? Come on. Cavalieri for Dummies. You're also making errors (including the power/root error) that suggest you haven't even studied maths.

Anyway, you're not very rewarding to try to educate, so I'm now more interested in why you're using your replies to claim that you are being blocked from replying. Bizarre, even by your standards. Warped logic aside, is it a theory of mind issue, where you can't imagine we'd notice a clumsy distraction technique from your scientific confusion? Is it genuine paranoia - part of a conspiracy mindset? Is it a lack of understanding of technology, where despite not being registered, (and the use of different devices and proxies to leave guest comments), you think you can be blocked? Or is it narcissism - thinking that the BoreMe editor cares enough about you to block you?

I'd deal with you much better if I knew less physics and more psychology.

Add your reply
Submit as guest (your name)

Copy code captcha


Submit as member (username / password)

CANCEL
Guest: Real mad (257 days ago)

Cavity radiation is covered in the 1st couple of lectures a standard 1st year QM course, 1st derivation by Plank ( at a decent university)

The SB equation is derived by integrating this equation over all wavelengths

Oh and the estimate for the " temperature" without atmosphere,as taught to people like Walter is derived by assuming that the earth receives a uniform irradiation, ie it is as if it is a flat disc turned towards the sun.

A bit too simple.

Your welcome

Original comment

Cavity radiation is covered in the 1st couple of lectures a standard 1st year QM course, 1st derivation by Plank ( at a decent university)

The SB equation is derived by integrating this equation over all wavelengths

Oh and the estimate for the " temperature" without atmosphere,as taught to people like Walter is derived by assuming that the earth receives a uniform irradiation, ie it is as if it is a flat disc turned towards the sun.

A bit too simple.

Your welcome

Add your reply
Submit as guest (your name)

Copy code captcha


Submit as member (username / password)

CANCEL
Guest: Q (257 days ago)

My welcome what, Professor?

This is my first reply to you today - we have yet another guest below trying to educate you. I expect he will have as little success as me. Mine was the original verbose scientific comment that you failed to answer.

Yes cavity radiation should be covered early on - (orthographic projections are covered earlier, in physics A-level if not before) - and yes SB law uses a derivation of "Plank" to calculate the outward radiance by the black body. Those don't contradict what I was saying at all.

I've already told you, and you would know anyway had you studied physics A-level, the SB law is not used alone simplistically to calculate an effective temperature. It is used to estimate a baseline through which other factors are compared. Final estimates do take atmosphere into account, and indeed albedo and pretty much any factor you choose to plug in.

The SB law is used to estimate a total amount of radiation intercepted by the cross section facing the sun, so no, the SB law does not assume that "the earth receives a uniform irradiation" - any more than giving an average temperature for the earth assumes it is uniformly warm. Another very obvious mistake of yours that betrays a lack of science education.

I think it's really odd that you're avoiding the genuine criticisms of the SB law application. It's as though you deliberately avoid the risk of being correct or well-informed at any point.

Anyway, you're welcome. It sounds as if you regret not studying physics which is a step in the right direction. Fair is fair - you can't be expected to know about this stuff if you never even managed A-levels. Feel free to ask questions so you understand better whatever you've read, but please don't fake it. It is obvious.

Original comment

My welcome what, Professor?

This is my first reply to you today - we have yet another guest below trying to educate you. I expect he will have as little success as me. Mine was the original verbose scientific comment that you failed to answer.

Yes cavity radiation should be covered early on - (orthographic projections are covered earlier, in physics A-level if not before) - and yes SB law uses a derivation of "Plank" to calculate the outward radiance by the black body. Those don't contradict what I was saying at all.

I've already told you, and you would know anyway had you studied physics A-level, the SB law is not used alone simplistically to calculate an effective temperature. It is used to estimate a baseline through which other factors are compared. Final estimates do take atmosphere into account, and indeed albedo and pretty much any factor you choose to plug in.

The SB law is used to estimate a total amount of radiation intercepted by the cross section facing the sun, so no, the SB law does not assume that "the earth receives a uniform irradiation" - any more than giving an average temperature for the earth assumes it is uniformly warm. Another very obvious mistake of yours that betrays a lack of science education.

I think it's really odd that you're avoiding the genuine criticisms of the SB law application. It's as though you deliberately avoid the risk of being correct or well-informed at any point.

Anyway, you're welcome. It sounds as if you regret not studying physics which is a step in the right direction. Fair is fair - you can't be expected to know about this stuff if you never even managed A-levels. Feel free to ask questions so you understand better whatever you've read, but please don't fake it. It is obvious.

Add your reply
Submit as guest (your name)

Copy code captcha


Submit as member (username / password)

CANCEL
Guest: Q (256 days ago)

Bamboozled again? That's not my intention. Ask questions about what you don't understand. Don't keep repeating the same confused misunderstandings, and don't struggle in silence.

Original comment

Bamboozled again? That's not my intention. Ask questions about what you don't understand. Don't keep repeating the same confused misunderstandings, and don't struggle in silence.

Add your reply
Submit as guest (your name)

Copy code captcha


Submit as member (username / password)

CANCEL
Guest: (257 days ago)

Hahaah, you're really something. If you're facing the sun and inflate your stomach, does your shadow turn darker? Get out and do some experiments in the sunlight, and you'll find that the empirical evidence is stacked against you.

I am afraid it is not a bit to simple; you are a bit to simple.

Original comment

Hahaah, you're really something. If you're facing the sun and inflate your stomach, does your shadow turn darker? Get out and do some experiments in the sunlight, and you'll find that the empirical evidence is stacked against you.

I am afraid it is not a bit to simple; you are a bit to simple.

Add your reply
Submit as guest (your name)

Copy code captcha


Submit as member (username / password)

CANCEL
Guest: Real mad (257 days ago)

I do love the way you are not afraid to demonstrate on behalf of all alarmists that maths concepts sail over your head.

Thank you

Original comment

I do love the way you are not afraid to demonstrate on behalf of all alarmists that maths concepts sail over your head.

Thank you

Add your reply
Submit as guest (your name)

Copy code captcha


Submit as member (username / password)

CANCEL
Guest: (257 days ago)

Doing the maths would also prove you wrong, but I suspect you're not too familiar with calculus.

Original comment

Doing the maths would also prove you wrong, but I suspect you're not too familiar with calculus.

Add your reply
Submit as guest (your name)

Copy code captcha


Submit as member (username / password)

CANCEL
Guest: Real mad (257 days ago)

Why does evaluating a simple linear equation require calculus ?

Original comment

Why does evaluating a simple linear equation require calculus ?

Add your reply
Submit as guest (your name)

Copy code captcha


Submit as member (username / password)

CANCEL
Guest: (257 days ago)

Integration of the insolation onto a spherical surface does require calculus. And that is what you have to do if you can't see that the flat disc approach will get you the exact same result.

Original comment

Integration of the insolation onto a spherical surface does require calculus. And that is what you have to do if you can't see that the flat disc approach will get you the exact same result.

Add your reply
Submit as guest (your name)

Copy code captcha


Submit as member (username / password)

CANCEL
Guest: Real mad (257 days ago)

Rotating spherical:surface actually,. Of course you would need the specific heat capacity of the surface as well, and that variable lIttle factoid proves you wrong, unless you go back to the old trick of assuming that the surface insolation matches the Greybody (assumptions on emissivity again) emittance at all points at all times.

You can think about it it your own time.

Original comment

Rotating spherical:surface actually,. Of course you would need the specific heat capacity of the surface as well, and that variable lIttle factoid proves you wrong, unless you go back to the old trick of assuming that the surface insolation matches the Greybody (assumptions on emissivity again) emittance at all points at all times.

You can think about it it your own time.

Add your reply
Submit as guest (your name)

Copy code captcha


Submit as member (username / password)

CANCEL
Guest: (257 days ago)

We're talking about the energy in side of the equation. Remember that flat disc? Incoming energy is not depending on the specific heat capacity of the earth's surface. Even if the earth was made of yoghurt, the incoming energy would be the same.

Original comment

We're talking about the energy in side of the equation. Remember that flat disc? Incoming energy is not depending on the specific heat capacity of the earth's surface. Even if the earth was made of yoghurt, the incoming energy would be the same.

Add your reply
Submit as guest (your name)

Copy code captcha


Submit as member (username / password)

CANCEL
Guest: Real mad (257 days ago)

Specific heat capacity describes how much energy is required to raise a unit of material by 1K. You need it to calculate the surface temperature response to insolation at every point and consequently the Greybody emittance if you're doing your calculation properly over a full revolution of the Sphere.

Original comment

Specific heat capacity describes how much energy is required to raise a unit of material by 1K. You need it to calculate the surface temperature response to insolation at every point and consequently the Greybody emittance if you're doing your calculation properly over a full revolution of the Sphere.

Add your reply
Submit as guest (your name)

Copy code captcha


Submit as member (username / password)

CANCEL
Guest: (257 days ago)

We are discussing the overall energy budget for the planet as a whole. And remember when we talk about climate it's the average weather over 1-2 decades or more. What you're saying is hardly relevant for day-to-day weather forecasting.

Original comment

We are discussing the overall energy budget for the planet as a whole. And remember when we talk about climate it's the average weather over 1-2 decades or more. What you're saying is hardly relevant for day-to-day weather forecasting.

Add your reply
Submit as guest (your name)

Copy code captcha


Submit as member (username / password)

CANCEL
Guest: Real mad (256 days ago)

Quick, change the subject !!!

Original comment

Quick, change the subject !!!

Add your reply
Submit as guest (your name)

Copy code captcha


Submit as member (username / password)

CANCEL
Guest: (256 days ago)

Aye aye, here's a somewhat analogous subject:

The fuel economy of your car at any moment in time can be all over the place depending on the position of the accelerator pedal, the gear, inclination, wind resistance, tyre pressure etc. It is possible to make some pretty fancy models to estimate the instantaneous km/l. But in order to calculate an average value you can disregard all those factors. All you need to know is the amount of fuel you have filled and the number of kilometers you have driven.

Original comment

Aye aye, here's a somewhat analogous subject:

The fuel economy of your car at any moment in time can be all over the place depending on the position of the accelerator pedal, the gear, inclination, wind resistance, tyre pressure etc. It is possible to make some pretty fancy models to estimate the instantaneous km/l. But in order to calculate an average value you can disregard all those factors. All you need to know is the amount of fuel you have filled and the number of kilometers you have driven.

Add your reply
Submit as guest (your name)

Copy code captcha


Submit as member (username / password)

CANCEL
Guest: Real mad (256 days ago)

And how do you compare various driving strategies without knowing how the car responds on the ground ?

Drawing conclusions without a working hypothesis ??

Quick change the subject again .

Original comment

And how do you compare various driving strategies without knowing how the car responds on the ground ?

Drawing conclusions without a working hypothesis ??

Quick change the subject again .

Add your reply
Submit as guest (your name)

Copy code captcha


Submit as member (username / password)

CANCEL
Guest: (255 days ago)

Then you would need the more complicated model.

Original comment

Then you would need the more complicated model.

Add your reply
Submit as guest (your name)

Copy code captcha


Submit as member (username / password)

CANCEL
Guest: Q (257 days ago)

Crumbs, isn't that ironic from a man who didn't understand the difference between the power and the root of a number. They teach that in some primary schools.

Original comment

Crumbs, isn't that ironic from a man who didn't understand the difference between the power and the root of a number. They teach that in some primary schools.

Add your reply
Submit as guest (your name)

Copy code captcha


Submit as member (username / password)

CANCEL
Guest: Real mad (257 days ago)

Aren't you mixing up 4th with 1/4th ?

Original comment

Aren't you mixing up 4th with 1/4th ?

Add your reply
Submit as guest (your name)

Copy code captcha


Submit as member (username / password)

CANCEL
Guest: (256 days ago)

No, you're mixing up power and root. Very basic operations. Primary level, in fact.

Don't pretend to understand physics and maths. If you had wanted to do that stuff, you no doubt had a chance. You chose a different path.

Original comment

No, you're mixing up power and root. Very basic operations. Primary level, in fact.

Don't pretend to understand physics and maths. If you had wanted to do that stuff, you no doubt had a chance. You chose a different path.

Add your reply
Submit as guest (your name)

Copy code captcha


Submit as member (username / password)

CANCEL
Guest: Real mad ha ha (256 days ago)

Libtards sure are fumducks

Original comment

Libtards sure are fumducks

Add your reply
Submit as guest (your name)

Copy code captcha


Submit as member (username / password)

CANCEL
Guest: Q (255 days ago)

But apparently, unlike 'conservatards' still able to understand the difference between the root and the power of a variable.

Let me help. You were talking about the fourth power of the temperature - however, that's only to calculate radiation using the SB law. To find out the effective temperature (what we're talking about on this thread, and what you're objecting to) you actually need to divide the total emitted radiation by the constant and take the fourth ROOT of the result, not the power. See how it's the inverse operation?

Oh never mind, don't worry yourself. Just pretend you know what we're talking about and know in your heart-of-hearts that you should have stayed on at school like the rest of us.

Original comment

But apparently, unlike 'conservatards' still able to understand the difference between the root and the power of a variable.

Let me help. You were talking about the fourth power of the temperature - however, that's only to calculate radiation using the SB law. To find out the effective temperature (what we're talking about on this thread, and what you're objecting to) you actually need to divide the total emitted radiation by the constant and take the fourth ROOT of the result, not the power. See how it's the inverse operation?

Oh never mind, don't worry yourself. Just pretend you know what we're talking about and know in your heart-of-hearts that you should have stayed on at school like the rest of us.

Add your reply
Submit as guest (your name)

Copy code captcha


Submit as member (username / password)

CANCEL
Guest: Real mad (255 days ago)

Gee, what is it about fumduck libtards that they struggle with such simple concepts.

Better not tell it about effective transmission layers.

Original comment

Gee, what is it about fumduck libtards that they struggle with such simple concepts.

Better not tell it about effective transmission layers.

Add your reply
Submit as guest (your name)

Copy code captcha


Submit as member (username / password)

CANCEL
Guest: Q (255 days ago)

What a surprise! A reply with no science, but plenty of insults. Alinsky has taught you well....your physics and maths teacher, less so. Talking of simple concepts, root and power are taught to level 5 primary school children in the UK. You're a few years behind, sunshine.

Effective transmission layers? Changing the subject are we? Well let's not get into how we integrate transmission layers and albedo until you have, for example, understood that SB law doesn't presume anything is a flat disc.

Original comment

What a surprise! A reply with no science, but plenty of insults. Alinsky has taught you well....your physics and maths teacher, less so. Talking of simple concepts, root and power are taught to level 5 primary school children in the UK. You're a few years behind, sunshine.

Effective transmission layers? Changing the subject are we? Well let's not get into how we integrate transmission layers and albedo until you have, for example, understood that SB law doesn't presume anything is a flat disc.

Add your reply
Submit as guest (your name)

Copy code captcha


Submit as member (username / password)

CANCEL
Guest: Real mad (255 days ago)

Such a pig ignorant fumduck ....... Trying desperately to show me to be wrong about something,.

Bwaaaaaaaaah

Original comment

Such a pig ignorant fumduck ....... Trying desperately to show me to be wrong about something,.

Bwaaaaaaaaah

Add your reply
Submit as guest (your name)

Copy code captcha


Submit as member (username / password)

CANCEL
Guest: Q (255 days ago)

Gee, still no science, just more insults. You must be really struggling with this. Perhaps you can think of some more mean words to compensate for your failure to answer my points.

Alternatively, I will try to help and answer your questions, but I do think it's better you nail the simpler stuff like orthographic projections etc. before trying to unpick the random soundbites you regurgitate. When you have half-understood something (or indeed not at all), you have a tendency to come across as a bit of a chump to people that were made to study it.

Oh, and according to your own rules about "Bwaaah", I seem to have triggered you as well? Oh dear. My apologies, Mad. If it's any consolation, I'm genuinely impressed that someone like you without a science education is interested in these things.

Original comment

Gee, still no science, just more insults. You must be really struggling with this. Perhaps you can think of some more mean words to compensate for your failure to answer my points.

Alternatively, I will try to help and answer your questions, but I do think it's better you nail the simpler stuff like orthographic projections etc. before trying to unpick the random soundbites you regurgitate. When you have half-understood something (or indeed not at all), you have a tendency to come across as a bit of a chump to people that were made to study it.

Oh, and according to your own rules about "Bwaaah", I seem to have triggered you as well? Oh dear. My apologies, Mad. If it's any consolation, I'm genuinely impressed that someone like you without a science education is interested in these things.

Add your reply
Submit as guest (your name)

Copy code captcha


Submit as member (username / password)

CANCEL
Guest: Real mad (255 days ago)

Poor backward fumduck libtards, out of its depth, trying desperately to Google the phrases I feed it so he can attempt to appear intelligent. Shame I switched a word or two around, so it doesnt come up with what the fumduck needs, and it doesn't have the eduction to guess the alternate words.

All this attempted put down of me is hilarious, fumduck is getting SO ANGRY.

Bwaaaaaaaaaaaaah.

Original comment

Poor backward fumduck libtards, out of its depth, trying desperately to Google the phrases I feed it so he can attempt to appear intelligent. Shame I switched a word or two around, so it doesnt come up with what the fumduck needs, and it doesn't have the eduction to guess the alternate words.

All this attempted put down of me is hilarious, fumduck is getting SO ANGRY.

Bwaaaaaaaaaaaaah.

Add your reply
Submit as guest (your name)

Copy code captcha


Submit as member (username / password)

CANCEL
Guest: Q (255 days ago)

"Bwaaah" again? And now capitals too? Oh yes, I get your signal - I realise you're triggered, but as I said that really wasn't my intention. You had made some simple errors ("assumes the world is a disc" - yikes, you physicist you!) that I easily corrected - I wasn't trying to trigger or anger you like this. We really don't have to have this song-and-dance every time you make a factual mistake. Yes, root is the opposite of power (really!), orthographic projections don't assume 3D objects are 2D, etc. etc. etc. Get over it but most importantly, learn . It's free.

But well done for the extra insults, as I had predicted. I can tell you're a real physicist. I am overwhelmed by your scientific know-how - it's really put me in my place. These comments you write is so brimming with science, I'd be astonished if you haven't written books. (Sarcasm).

And well done too for having "switched a word or two around". D'oh! Do you realise what you've just let slip? This isn't particularly complicated stuff, and those of us that were made to sit through turgid seminars can remember the gist. Believe it or not, it's not about reading something and moving words to pretend you've understood it. No, I'm afraid that skimming Wikipedia, and then 'switching words around' isn't quite the same as comprehension! Woops. Points for trying though. Bless your cotton socks for letting your herd of cats out of the bag without even realising.

Never mind. I'm backward, right? Pig ignorant, right? I must be politically liberal because I studied physics? I must support Hilary because I've made you feel small? Any other words that make you feel better? Any other distractions from that confusing science? Let it all out.

Let it all out.

We're here to help.

(Until you're too intellectually intimidating for us, and then we'll just block you from replying with our vast and unaccountable libtard power - foil hats won't stop us).

Original comment

"Bwaaah" again? And now capitals too? Oh yes, I get your signal - I realise you're triggered, but as I said that really wasn't my intention. You had made some simple errors ("assumes the world is a disc" - yikes, you physicist you!) that I easily corrected - I wasn't trying to trigger or anger you like this. We really don't have to have this song-and-dance every time you make a factual mistake. Yes, root is the opposite of power (really!), orthographic projections don't assume 3D objects are 2D, etc. etc. etc. Get over it but most importantly, learn . It's free.

But well done for the extra insults, as I had predicted. I can tell you're a real physicist. I am overwhelmed by your scientific know-how - it's really put me in my place. These comments you write is so brimming with science, I'd be astonished if you haven't written books. (Sarcasm).

And well done too for having "switched a word or two around". D'oh! Do you realise what you've just let slip? This isn't particularly complicated stuff, and those of us that were made to sit through turgid seminars can remember the gist. Believe it or not, it's not about reading something and moving words to pretend you've understood it. No, I'm afraid that skimming Wikipedia, and then 'switching words around' isn't quite the same as comprehension! Woops. Points for trying though. Bless your cotton socks for letting your herd of cats out of the bag without even realising.

Never mind. I'm backward, right? Pig ignorant, right? I must be politically liberal because I studied physics? I must support Hilary because I've made you feel small? Any other words that make you feel better? Any other distractions from that confusing science? Let it all out.

Let it all out.

We're here to help.

(Until you're too intellectually intimidating for us, and then we'll just block you from replying with our vast and unaccountable libtard power - foil hats won't stop us).

Add your reply
Submit as guest (your name)

Copy code captcha


Submit as member (username / password)

CANCEL
Guest: Real mad (255 days ago)

You've been hard at work on Google, but still you can't find it

Ya know, one of the reasons why I wind up libtards, is because they think they know everything, and all their opinions are always based on logic , and therefore unassailable. Insufferably arrogant little jerks.

This one was reduced to suggesting that I mix up powers and roots, ( I don't). Sad little moron

Original comment

You've been hard at work on Google, but still you can't find it

Ya know, one of the reasons why I wind up libtards, is because they think they know everything, and all their opinions are always based on logic , and therefore unassailable. Insufferably arrogant little jerks.

This one was reduced to suggesting that I mix up powers and roots, ( I don't). Sad little moron

Add your reply
Submit as guest (your name)

Copy code captcha


Submit as member (username / password)

CANCEL
Guest: Q (255 days ago)

Ooh "sad little moron", "arrogant little jerk" and still no science? Let it all out. This has been hard for you, I can see why you're so annoyed. Have you ever heard the expression, 'When you're in a hole, stop digging!' Poor lamb. It appears that I reached the limits of your capabilities all too quickly, and now all you have left is insults. Someone on here once told me that was the mark of a true libtard.

It's fine - you incorrectly thought that to apply the SB law, you needed to work out the power of a variable to find out the effective temperature. No - that's when you use te SB law to calculate radiation - I've explained that already. For effective temperature , you need the inverse operation which happens to be the root. All pretty simple. What don't you understand about it? How can I help?

And I am glad to have helped you out with orthographic projections too. I suppose lots of people don't realise that this is the way a cross-section is determined in physics. No bother. I just couldn't let someone think that projections assume the "world " (ho ho) is a disc. Very easily corrected.

But hey, carry on your journey on Wikipedia, and keep swapping those words around - what a cunning strategy to hide your copy-and-paste jobs! That was a fascinating insight you let slip. As we can see on this page, ultimately it won't help your comprehension, and gee if anyone ever challenges you on anything you'll be out of your depth, but it will make you feel smart which I'm guessing is what you're after.

Now, as you ran out of science several days ago, unless you can conjure up any more wonderful insults to help your self-esteem, we might be just about done here, don't you think?

Original comment

Ooh "sad little moron", "arrogant little jerk" and still no science? Let it all out. This has been hard for you, I can see why you're so annoyed. Have you ever heard the expression, 'When you're in a hole, stop digging!' Poor lamb. It appears that I reached the limits of your capabilities all too quickly, and now all you have left is insults. Someone on here once told me that was the mark of a true libtard.

It's fine - you incorrectly thought that to apply the SB law, you needed to work out the power of a variable to find out the effective temperature. No - that's when you use te SB law to calculate radiation - I've explained that already. For effective temperature , you need the inverse operation which happens to be the root. All pretty simple. What don't you understand about it? How can I help?

And I am glad to have helped you out with orthographic projections too. I suppose lots of people don't realise that this is the way a cross-section is determined in physics. No bother. I just couldn't let someone think that projections assume the "world " (ho ho) is a disc. Very easily corrected.

But hey, carry on your journey on Wikipedia, and keep swapping those words around - what a cunning strategy to hide your copy-and-paste jobs! That was a fascinating insight you let slip. As we can see on this page, ultimately it won't help your comprehension, and gee if anyone ever challenges you on anything you'll be out of your depth, but it will make you feel smart which I'm guessing is what you're after.

Now, as you ran out of science several days ago, unless you can conjure up any more wonderful insults to help your self-esteem, we might be just about done here, don't you think?

Add your reply
Submit as guest (your name)

Copy code captcha


Submit as member (username / password)

CANCEL
Guest: Real mad (255 days ago)

You really are trying to dig yourself out a hole, angry little Libtard.

Original comment

You really are trying to dig yourself out a hole, angry little Libtard.

Add your reply
Submit as guest (your name)

Copy code captcha


Submit as member (username / password)

CANCEL
TheBob TheBob (255 days ago)

Demonstrate your intellect, skip the insults and answer his points.

Original comment

Demonstrate your intellect, skip the insults and answer his points.

Add your reply
Submit as guest (your name)

Copy code captcha


Submit as member (username / password)

CANCEL
Guest: Q (255 days ago)

Somehow, I don't think he'll be answering any of points any time soon. To be fair though, I think he has already demonstrated his intellect very clearly. I am certainly under no illusions.

Original comment

Somehow, I don't think he'll be answering any of points any time soon. To be fair though, I think he has already demonstrated his intellect very clearly. I am certainly under no illusions.

Add your reply
Submit as guest (your name)

Copy code captcha


Submit as member (username / password)

CANCEL
Guest: Real mad (254 days ago)

I can only demonstrate to those that can understand it. That includes you Bob

Original comment

I can only demonstrate to those that can understand it. That includes you Bob

Add your reply
Submit as guest (your name)

Copy code captcha


Submit as member (username / password)

CANCEL
TheBob TheBob (254 days ago)

Well, that's an admission that you lack the flexibility to explain your ideas to a range of audiences.

It also sounds like only people with taste can appreciate the true style and elegance of the emperor's new clothes until... oh wait - the emperor is actually stark bollock naked!

Original comment

Well, that's an admission that you lack the flexibility to explain your ideas to a range of audiences.

It also sounds like only people with taste can appreciate the true style and elegance of the emperor's new clothes until... oh wait - the emperor is actually stark bollock naked!

Add your reply
Submit as guest (your name)

Copy code captcha


Submit as member (username / password)

CANCEL
Guest: Real mad (255 days ago)

Btw the Google phrase you need is Effective emission height

However it's all very academic, but the truth is that they don't use SB law in the GCMs , it's all heavily parametrised tuned and damped numerical solutions to NS equations.

But that's another story.

Have a.nice day

Original comment

Btw the Google phrase you need is Effective emission height

However it's all very academic, but the truth is that they don't use SB law in the GCMs , it's all heavily parametrised tuned and damped numerical solutions to NS equations.

But that's another story.

Have a.nice day

Add your reply
Submit as guest (your name)

Copy code captcha


Submit as member (username / password)

CANCEL
Guest: Q (255 days ago)

By golly, still unable to respond to me points, but hey, "heavily parametrised (sic) tuned and damped numerical solutions to NS equations"! Goodness Mad, that sounds SO clever! I take it all back. You definitely know what you're talking about.

Bless your socks.

Original comment

By golly, still unable to respond to me points, but hey, "heavily parametrised (sic) tuned and damped numerical solutions to NS equations"! Goodness Mad, that sounds SO clever! I take it all back. You definitely know what you're talking about.

Bless your socks.

Add your reply
Submit as guest (your name)

Copy code captcha


Submit as member (username / password)

CANCEL
Guest: Real mad (254 days ago)

Nice way of covering up the fact you ain't got a clue

Bless your little cotton socks

Original comment

Nice way of covering up the fact you ain't got a clue

Bless your little cotton socks

Add your reply
Submit as guest (your name)

Copy code captcha


Submit as member (username / password)

CANCEL
Guest: Real mad (254 days ago)

Btw because I do have a life,I don't actually pay much attention to the essays you spew out but have to say orthographic projections (Cartography) is certainly NOT the way physicists do cross sections. If it was it would be in the standard textbooks on mathematical methods.

Looks like you are just googling randomly to find science phrases.

Have a nice day

Original comment

Btw because I do have a life,I don't actually pay much attention to the essays you spew out but have to say orthographic projections (Cartography) is certainly NOT the way physicists do cross sections. If it was it would be in the standard textbooks on mathematical methods.

Looks like you are just googling randomly to find science phrases.

Have a nice day

Add your reply
Submit as guest (your name)

Copy code captcha


Submit as member (username / password)

CANCEL
Guest: Q (254 days ago)

You have a life? Really? Other than obsessively and angrily throwing insults at anyone who exposes your ignorance, and replying to your own messages? Go on, call me another naughty word.

Sorry, I realise I probably write a little too much for someone like you to take in, but some of these points are worth explaining.

Did it really take you 15 minutes to Google projections? Orthographic projections are a very basic part of geometry. Anyway, "it would be in the standard textbooks on mathematical methods", right? Which books do you have? These two are probably on the reading list of every physics degree course in the country, I'm sure you hae them lying around: Mathematical Methods for Physics and Engineering, (Riley, Hobson et al) Page 391. Mathematical Models in the Physical Sciences (Boas) Page 271 - all described in the sections relating to surface integrals.

If, by some chance, you can't find all those physics and maths books you used for your doctorate, I've found you the Simple English Wikipedia page instead. Don't say I don't help you.

"A cross section, or section is also an orthographic projection of a 3-dimensional object from the position of a plane through the object." LINK

"Your welcome".

Original comment

You have a life? Really? Other than obsessively and angrily throwing insults at anyone who exposes your ignorance, and replying to your own messages? Go on, call me another naughty word.

Sorry, I realise I probably write a little too much for someone like you to take in, but some of these points are worth explaining.

Did it really take you 15 minutes to Google projections? Orthographic projections are a very basic part of geometry. Anyway, "it would be in the standard textbooks on mathematical methods", right? Which books do you have? These two are probably on the reading list of every physics degree course in the country, I'm sure you hae them lying around: Mathematical Methods for Physics and Engineering, (Riley, Hobson et al) Page 391. Mathematical Models in the Physical Sciences (Boas) Page 271 - all described in the sections relating to surface integrals.

If, by some chance, you can't find all those physics and maths books you used for your doctorate, I've found you the Simple English Wikipedia page instead. Don't say I don't help you.

"A cross section, or section is also an orthographic projection of a 3-dimensional object from the position of a plane through the object." LINK

"Your welcome".

Add your reply
Submit as guest (your name)

Copy code captcha


Submit as member (username / password)

CANCEL
Guest: Real mad ha ha (254 days ago)

I don't know what stokes theorem and the divergence theorem has to do with Cartography and othographic projections ?

Perhaps the Libtard can enlighten me from the pictures of the book covers on amazon

Original comment

I don't know what stokes theorem and the divergence theorem has to do with Cartography and othographic projections ?

Perhaps the Libtard can enlighten me from the pictures of the book covers on amazon

Add your reply
Submit as guest (your name)

Copy code captcha


Submit as member (username / password)

CANCEL
Guest: Real max ha ha (254 days ago)

I got some real good books on nuclear physics and mathematical methods in the physical sciences. Strangely enough don't have othographic projections as a subject., Do have a lot of tensors though.

Yes I have life, compare the length of your essays to my comments, to see who is wasting the most time.

Original comment

I got some real good books on nuclear physics and mathematical methods in the physical sciences. Strangely enough don't have othographic projections as a subject., Do have a lot of tensors though.

Yes I have life, compare the length of your essays to my comments, to see who is wasting the most time.

Add your reply
Submit as guest (your name)

Copy code captcha


Submit as member (username / password)

CANCEL
Guest: Real mad ha ha (254 days ago)

Anyway when calculating the surface area of a flat earth don't fanny around with silly projections, simply use 4πr•r. Just saying

Original comment

Anyway when calculating the surface area of a flat earth don't fanny around with silly projections, simply use 4πr•r. Just saying

Add your reply
Submit as guest (your name)

Copy code captcha


Submit as member (username / password)

CANCEL
Guest: Q (254 days ago)

Wow, 3 messages this time? Fair point about wasting time though. At university, your supervisor would have received a memo by now asking them to discuss your "academic suitability for the course".

Orthographic projections in this case are nothing to do with cartography - you're the one that mentioned that. As you would know, projections are a very basic part of geometry.

Sorry - I double checked; the Page in Boas is 270 not 271. However, neither reference I cited has anything to do with Stokes and divergence theorem - try surface integrals. Amazon covers? Are you honestly saying you don't have either of those books? You have "real good" books, but you don't have either of arguably the most common and authoritative physic books in any syllabus? I'm surprised you have any cats left in that bag of yours - there goes another!

"When calculating the surface area of a flat earth don't fanny around with silly projections, simply use 4πr•r. Just saying."

Do you honestly want me to explain why we can't use 4πr2 for this? It's simple enough... Firstly, obviously your equation is for calculating the area of a 3D sphere, not a flat earth.

Secondly - your next question - why would we "fanny around" with the area of a 2D orthographic projection / cross section of Earth, rather than using the area of a 3D sphere?

The area of the Earth that intercepts radiation is never greater than the area of its orthographic cross-section - its shadow, if you like. The only effect of the rotation is that this same amount of radiation is shared over the entire spherical surface area - yet still the total radiation intercepted can never be greater than that which hits the cross-sectional area.

Imagine if you had a faulty toaster, and only one side of it heated up. If you had sense, you would flip the bread halfway through the cooking time. However, doing that would not increase the amount of heat that was hitting the slice - it would just share that heat over both sides instead of one side getting really hot. In fact you could flip the bread every second, but the heat will only ever be hitting half of it. Similarly, if the Earth stopped spinning, it would still absorb the same amount of radiation from the sun - just only through one side.

Get it? Please tell me if you don't and I will explain it another way.

Original comment

Wow, 3 messages this time? Fair point about wasting time though. At university, your supervisor would have received a memo by now asking them to discuss your "academic suitability for the course".

Orthographic projections in this case are nothing to do with cartography - you're the one that mentioned that. As you would know, projections are a very basic part of geometry.

Sorry - I double checked; the Page in Boas is 270 not 271. However, neither reference I cited has anything to do with Stokes and divergence theorem - try surface integrals. Amazon covers? Are you honestly saying you don't have either of those books? You have "real good" books, but you don't have either of arguably the most common and authoritative physic books in any syllabus? I'm surprised you have any cats left in that bag of yours - there goes another!

"When calculating the surface area of a flat earth don't fanny around with silly projections, simply use 4πr•r. Just saying."

Do you honestly want me to explain why we can't use 4πr2 for this? It's simple enough... Firstly, obviously your equation is for calculating the area of a 3D sphere, not a flat earth.

Secondly - your next question - why would we "fanny around" with the area of a 2D orthographic projection / cross section of Earth, rather than using the area of a 3D sphere?

The area of the Earth that intercepts radiation is never greater than the area of its orthographic cross-section - its shadow, if you like. The only effect of the rotation is that this same amount of radiation is shared over the entire spherical surface area - yet still the total radiation intercepted can never be greater than that which hits the cross-sectional area.

Imagine if you had a faulty toaster, and only one side of it heated up. If you had sense, you would flip the bread halfway through the cooking time. However, doing that would not increase the amount of heat that was hitting the slice - it would just share that heat over both sides instead of one side getting really hot. In fact you could flip the bread every second, but the heat will only ever be hitting half of it. Similarly, if the Earth stopped spinning, it would still absorb the same amount of radiation from the sun - just only through one side.

Get it? Please tell me if you don't and I will explain it another way.

Add your reply
Submit as guest (your name)

Copy code captcha


Submit as member (username / password)

CANCEL
Guest: Real mad (254 days ago)

πr•r is the area of a circle You can use this to calculate the "shadow of the earth". 4πr•r is the area of a sphere. You can use this to calculate the average insolation per unit area for your flat earth model.

Have a nice day libtards.

PS note how short and concise the comment was.

Original comment

πr•r is the area of a circle You can use this to calculate the "shadow of the earth". 4πr•r is the area of a sphere. You can use this to calculate the average insolation per unit area for your flat earth model.

Have a nice day libtards.

PS note how short and concise the comment was.

Add your reply
Submit as guest (your name)

Copy code captcha


Submit as member (username / password)

CANCEL
Guest: Real mad (254 days ago)

Ps I should add that r is the radius of the earth. Should be self evident, but libtards are always regards, you do have to point out the obvious to these brain damaged morons.

Have a nice day libtards,

Original comment

Ps I should add that r is the radius of the earth. Should be self evident, but libtards are always regards, you do have to point out the obvious to these brain damaged morons.

Have a nice day libtards,

Add your reply
Submit as guest (your name)

Copy code captcha


Submit as member (username / password)

CANCEL
Guest: Q (254 days ago)

Only 2 comments this time? You're improving, or maybe the cat has got your tongue? Yes, short and concise, but irrelevant (even over multiple obsessive messages) because you are unable to respond to the specific points. I get that.

Great insults though, well done - Alinsky would give you a gold star. Any more naughty words to make yourself feel better? Let it all out.

But joking aside, you still don't get it? I thought my analogy was crystal clear. The area of Earth that intercepts radiation from a single source is always going to be a cross section . Spin the Earth as slowly or as fast as you like, and it will always absorb the same amount of solar radiation because the cross section is always the same. No, it doesn't assume the "world is a flat disc" - it is not a flat earth model. I don't know how to simplify that for you more than I have already. Perhaps get a torch and play around with an orange? I mean this is pre-physics really.

Well done, for your equations (oh so scientific!) but we don't actually need to calculate the "average insolation per unit area". We already have the solar constant, we already know that it only affects a cross sectional surface area of the Earth at any one time, and we just plug it in to the SB law. We then use planetary equilibrium to give us the emitted radiation, then we just divide that figure by the SB constant, and then calculate the fourth root (not power!) of the result. Job done. Which bits are confusing you?

As you obviously don't own either of those fundamental textbooks, are you happy to admit you have never studied physics? Is that too much for your pride? I don't want to be mean, but I've never met someone who knew so little about a vaguely esoteric subject claiming to understand so much. People study this at university because it can be complicated and requires a lot of previous understanding - I wouldn't expect you to get it all. So why pretend? Why not talk about the things you genuinely know about? It's peculiar.

Original comment

Only 2 comments this time? You're improving, or maybe the cat has got your tongue? Yes, short and concise, but irrelevant (even over multiple obsessive messages) because you are unable to respond to the specific points. I get that.

Great insults though, well done - Alinsky would give you a gold star. Any more naughty words to make yourself feel better? Let it all out.

But joking aside, you still don't get it? I thought my analogy was crystal clear. The area of Earth that intercepts radiation from a single source is always going to be a cross section . Spin the Earth as slowly or as fast as you like, and it will always absorb the same amount of solar radiation because the cross section is always the same. No, it doesn't assume the "world is a flat disc" - it is not a flat earth model. I don't know how to simplify that for you more than I have already. Perhaps get a torch and play around with an orange? I mean this is pre-physics really.

Well done, for your equations (oh so scientific!) but we don't actually need to calculate the "average insolation per unit area". We already have the solar constant, we already know that it only affects a cross sectional surface area of the Earth at any one time, and we just plug it in to the SB law. We then use planetary equilibrium to give us the emitted radiation, then we just divide that figure by the SB constant, and then calculate the fourth root (not power!) of the result. Job done. Which bits are confusing you?

As you obviously don't own either of those fundamental textbooks, are you happy to admit you have never studied physics? Is that too much for your pride? I don't want to be mean, but I've never met someone who knew so little about a vaguely esoteric subject claiming to understand so much. People study this at university because it can be complicated and requires a lot of previous understanding - I wouldn't expect you to get it all. So why pretend? Why not talk about the things you genuinely know about? It's peculiar.

Add your reply
Submit as guest (your name)

Copy code captcha


Submit as member (username / password)

CANCEL
Guest: Real mad (253 days ago)

Yes quite an angry Libtard I'd say..

Hilarious

However as there is a considerable variance in the surface temperature is it correct to use the mean temp to derive the radiation flux ?

From first principles

Consider a surface S which can be described as having surface elements dS with corresponding Tm + dT, where Tm is the mean temp and dT is the temperature anomaly for the surface element dS

Now it is a quite trivial exercise to show that the summation of dT over the surface S is 0

However it is also quite trivial to show that the Average radiative flux from the surface is approx

®Tm^4 + 6®Tm^2 × $dT^2dS

(Where ® represents rho and $ represents integrate over entire surface)

Which is quite clearly greater than Tm^4

Over to you Libtard boy

Original comment

Yes quite an angry Libtard I'd say..

Hilarious

However as there is a considerable variance in the surface temperature is it correct to use the mean temp to derive the radiation flux ?

From first principles

Consider a surface S which can be described as having surface elements dS with corresponding Tm + dT, where Tm is the mean temp and dT is the temperature anomaly for the surface element dS

Now it is a quite trivial exercise to show that the summation of dT over the surface S is 0

However it is also quite trivial to show that the Average radiative flux from the surface is approx

®Tm^4 + 6®Tm^2 × $dT^2dS

(Where ® represents rho and $ represents integrate over entire surface)

Which is quite clearly greater than Tm^4

Over to you Libtard boy

Add your reply
Submit as guest (your name)

Copy code captcha


Submit as member (username / password)

CANCEL
Guest: Q (253 days ago)

So much for concise, huh?

Now that really was funny. You tried so hard there! Sorry to bring bad news, but you've copied and pasted completely the wrong bits about surface integrals. Yes - even when you've "swapped words around" and done your best to obfuscate. Bless. Well it certainly looked very scientific and smart. I don't mean to rain on your parade, but we are not using "the mean temp to derive the radiation flux", we are using radiation flux to estimate the mean temperature! We already know the solar flux. Woopsy.

As for your totally-amazing and supersmart-and-complicate d equations, I should probably also point out at this stage (if you hadn't noticed already), that copy-and-pasting from pages about surface integrals won't necessarily convert the symbols to plain text either, particularly when you're not already familiar with the notation. The fact that you haven't translated them correctly is another key tell-tale, I'm afraid. (As a clue, ϱ is used to denote rho). In fact, you haven't even been bothered to correct the capitalization errors. It's not even good plagiarism.

As I have said - I honestly don't expect you to know this stuff. I realise it's confusing to you. _You_have_not_studied_it so how the heck should you know? Fine. But don't pretend to understand it by copy-pasting and swapping words around. It makes you look stupid, and you probably (possibly) hopefully (doubtfully) aren't.

So I ask again, why do you bother? Why the gish galluping with irrelevant equations that you don't understand, particularly when they don't even answer the points I've made? I mean don't worry - I quite enjoy correcting simple mistakes - but it does still make me wonder what is in it for you.

Original comment

So much for concise, huh?

Now that really was funny. You tried so hard there! Sorry to bring bad news, but you've copied and pasted completely the wrong bits about surface integrals. Yes - even when you've "swapped words around" and done your best to obfuscate. Bless. Well it certainly looked very scientific and smart. I don't mean to rain on your parade, but we are not using "the mean temp to derive the radiation flux", we are using radiation flux to estimate the mean temperature! We already know the solar flux. Woopsy.

As for your totally-amazing and supersmart-and-complicate d equations, I should probably also point out at this stage (if you hadn't noticed already), that copy-and-pasting from pages about surface integrals won't necessarily convert the symbols to plain text either, particularly when you're not already familiar with the notation. The fact that you haven't translated them correctly is another key tell-tale, I'm afraid. (As a clue, ϱ is used to denote rho). In fact, you haven't even been bothered to correct the capitalization errors. It's not even good plagiarism.

As I have said - I honestly don't expect you to know this stuff. I realise it's confusing to you. _You_have_not_studied_it so how the heck should you know? Fine. But don't pretend to understand it by copy-pasting and swapping words around. It makes you look stupid, and you probably (possibly) hopefully (doubtfully) aren't.

So I ask again, why do you bother? Why the gish galluping with irrelevant equations that you don't understand, particularly when they don't even answer the points I've made? I mean don't worry - I quite enjoy correcting simple mistakes - but it does still make me wonder what is in it for you.

Add your reply
Submit as guest (your name)

Copy code captcha


Submit as member (username / password)

CANCEL
Guest: Real mad (253 days ago)

Obviously I missed both it's legs.

Original comment

Obviously I missed both it's legs.

Add your reply
Submit as guest (your name)

Copy code captcha


Submit as member (username / password)

CANCEL
Guest: Real mad (253 days ago)

Ps I do so love chatting to libtards, absolute certainty and ignorance go hand in hand with these people, and Q is no exception.

Original comment

Ps I do so love chatting to libtards, absolute certainty and ignorance go hand in hand with these people, and Q is no exception.

Add your reply
Submit as guest (your name)

Copy code captcha


Submit as member (username / password)

CANCEL
Guest: Q (253 days ago)

"Nothing at all except insults verging on the pathologically insane. Ha ha." (Insane, like talking to an audience that isn't there). "I guess I reached the limits of your capabilities all too quickly."

More multiple messages, and still no science - what a surprise. You were busted from the get-go, but this has really paraded your lack of physics knowledge. I repeat, if you're going to try copy-pasting to look smart, you need to choose the right bits and be familiar with the notation so it pastes correctly. Swapping words around isn't the same as studying, or understanding. Get better at plagiarising.

In all honesty, most people I know who have studied physics are slightly on the dull side, and it's hard to find its practical applications in our daily lives. Personally though, I think it was worth every late night memorising useless equations for the opportunity to sweep the floor with wannabes like you. I don't often get the chance. Do what most people do, and don't care that you don't know, or change things by getting either of those two books I recommended. Study. Ignorance isn't a death sentence unless you're too proud to learn.

Original comment

"Nothing at all except insults verging on the pathologically insane. Ha ha." (Insane, like talking to an audience that isn't there). "I guess I reached the limits of your capabilities all too quickly."

More multiple messages, and still no science - what a surprise. You were busted from the get-go, but this has really paraded your lack of physics knowledge. I repeat, if you're going to try copy-pasting to look smart, you need to choose the right bits and be familiar with the notation so it pastes correctly. Swapping words around isn't the same as studying, or understanding. Get better at plagiarising.

In all honesty, most people I know who have studied physics are slightly on the dull side, and it's hard to find its practical applications in our daily lives. Personally though, I think it was worth every late night memorising useless equations for the opportunity to sweep the floor with wannabes like you. I don't often get the chance. Do what most people do, and don't care that you don't know, or change things by getting either of those two books I recommended. Study. Ignorance isn't a death sentence unless you're too proud to learn.

Add your reply
Submit as guest (your name)

Copy code captcha


Submit as member (username / password)

CANCEL
Guest: Real mad (253 days ago)

Yes a truly angry and pissed off Libtard

Why are they always so thick ?

Eg if Tmean^4 ≠ (T^4)mean then you can't calculate the average surface temperature from SB law, notwithstanding the assumption that solar insolation is assumed to be in equilibrium with solar insolation, which it ain't.

They always attack the messenger, but hey maths is maths.

Original comment

Yes a truly angry and pissed off Libtard

Why are they always so thick ?

Eg if Tmean^4 ≠ (T^4)mean then you can't calculate the average surface temperature from SB law, notwithstanding the assumption that solar insolation is assumed to be in equilibrium with solar insolation, which it ain't.

They always attack the messenger, but hey maths is maths.

Add your reply
Submit as guest (your name)

Copy code captcha


Submit as member (username / password)

CANCEL
Guest: Real mad (253 days ago)

Hey look I made a mistake ,I said solar insolation is assumed to be in equilibrium with solar insolation when actually I meant solar insolation is assumed to be in equilibrium with with outgoing radiative flux !!!!!

OMG, thats gonna pwove everyone I've ever said wrong ya know.

Ps it won't but hey libtards.

Original comment

Hey look I made a mistake ,I said solar insolation is assumed to be in equilibrium with solar insolation when actually I meant solar insolation is assumed to be in equilibrium with with outgoing radiative flux !!!!!

OMG, thats gonna pwove everyone I've ever said wrong ya know.

Ps it won't but hey libtards.

Add your reply
Submit as guest (your name)

Copy code captcha


Submit as member (username / password)

CANCEL
Guest: Q (253 days ago)

Don't you think talking to a single person in a debate and referring to them in the third person (Google it) is a mark of mental insecurity? Pretending you have an audience? I'm no psychologist, but it'd be fair to say that physics and maths aren't the only things that you need a little help with.

Calm down, don't be cross - we don't expect you to know this stuff. You were busted for your copy-paste antics, but really nothing you said on other threads gave us the impression you'd be well-educated and informed on these matters so it's OK. We have low expectations. Try not to angrily post multiple messages with insults to each of my scientific replies: take a deep breath, think about what you want to say (even after a consultation with Dr. Wikipedia), and write it all in one comment. Tricky, I know.

"Thick"? Thinking that SB law assumes an object is flat is certainly laughably misinformed but the word 'thick' seems a little cruel for someone with your issues. But yes well done - maths is maths - a revolutionary statement from someone who gets confused between opposite operations. It sounds like you've been bullied in your past because of your academic performance and now you have something to prove. So be kind to yourself, and choose something to talk about that you've studied, or something you have researched yourself. The 'switching words around' thing is absurd and pretty obvious.

Oh crumbs. No, solar insolation is not necessarily assumed to be in equilibrium with outgoing radiative flux - remember when I mentioned albedo and emissivity? These are all factors that you can take into account when using the SB law. Seriously, read a single page about the SB law and you would know that. The SB is an equation and so is only as valid as the numbers you put into it, but it's sophisticated enough for you to make estimates for different parts of the atmosphere, even for different wavelengths.

It's great though that you've dropped your original misunderstood objection to SB ("it assumes the WORLD is a disc", bless you), and are now clutching at straws to find other objections. I take that as progress. I suppose you must now understand that your original statement is so laughable it isn't worth supporting any more, and that pleases me.

Out of interest, why is it you think you're convincing? Your literacy levels alone show us that you wouldn't have got through A-levels, let alone a higher education course, and your ridiculous scientific gaffes and farcical copy-paste botches only confirm it. A graduate who doesn't know the difference between "you're" and "your"; a maths student who doesn't know a power from a root; a physics student who doesn't know how to use 'ϱ'... have you honestly ever been able to convince someone educated that you knew what you were talking about? You'll need to try harder with me. 'Just saying'.

Original comment

Don't you think talking to a single person in a debate and referring to them in the third person (Google it) is a mark of mental insecurity? Pretending you have an audience? I'm no psychologist, but it'd be fair to say that physics and maths aren't the only things that you need a little help with.

Calm down, don't be cross - we don't expect you to know this stuff. You were busted for your copy-paste antics, but really nothing you said on other threads gave us the impression you'd be well-educated and informed on these matters so it's OK. We have low expectations. Try not to angrily post multiple messages with insults to each of my scientific replies: take a deep breath, think about what you want to say (even after a consultation with Dr. Wikipedia), and write it all in one comment. Tricky, I know.

"Thick"? Thinking that SB law assumes an object is flat is certainly laughably misinformed but the word 'thick' seems a little cruel for someone with your issues. But yes well done - maths is maths - a revolutionary statement from someone who gets confused between opposite operations. It sounds like you've been bullied in your past because of your academic performance and now you have something to prove. So be kind to yourself, and choose something to talk about that you've studied, or something you have researched yourself. The 'switching words around' thing is absurd and pretty obvious.

Oh crumbs. No, solar insolation is not necessarily assumed to be in equilibrium with outgoing radiative flux - remember when I mentioned albedo and emissivity? These are all factors that you can take into account when using the SB law. Seriously, read a single page about the SB law and you would know that. The SB is an equation and so is only as valid as the numbers you put into it, but it's sophisticated enough for you to make estimates for different parts of the atmosphere, even for different wavelengths.

It's great though that you've dropped your original misunderstood objection to SB ("it assumes the WORLD is a disc", bless you), and are now clutching at straws to find other objections. I take that as progress. I suppose you must now understand that your original statement is so laughable it isn't worth supporting any more, and that pleases me.

Out of interest, why is it you think you're convincing? Your literacy levels alone show us that you wouldn't have got through A-levels, let alone a higher education course, and your ridiculous scientific gaffes and farcical copy-paste botches only confirm it. A graduate who doesn't know the difference between "you're" and "your"; a maths student who doesn't know a power from a root; a physics student who doesn't know how to use 'ϱ'... have you honestly ever been able to convince someone educated that you knew what you were talking about? You'll need to try harder with me. 'Just saying'.

Add your reply
Submit as guest (your name)

Copy code captcha


Submit as member (username / password)

CANCEL
Guest: Real mad (252 days ago)

It's called " playing to the galleries" I assume there is a gallery unless you are giving yourself multiple thumbs up ?

Yes the spellcheck/predictive text does trip me up, especially as I don't bother too much with grammar checking, but let's face it, it's infinitely preferable to nonsense correctly parsed.

Have fun in your ignorance Libtard boy.

Original comment

It's called " playing to the galleries" I assume there is a gallery unless you are giving yourself multiple thumbs up ?

Yes the spellcheck/predictive text does trip me up, especially as I don't bother too much with grammar checking, but let's face it, it's infinitely preferable to nonsense correctly parsed.

Have fun in your ignorance Libtard boy.

Add your reply
Submit as guest (your name)

Copy code captcha


Submit as member (username / password)

CANCEL
Guest: Real mad (252 days ago)

Ps and yes , you really are a very very angry little Libtard

Btw why didn't you pick up on the comment about the effective emission height. We could've had a great discussion about lapse rates, adiabatic compression, Hamiltonians, etc etc, ( like all the stuff I don't know about )

Instead we could talk about how you go about calculatings the area of surface in the real world.

Over to you, Libtard boy

Original comment

Ps and yes , you really are a very very angry little Libtard

Btw why didn't you pick up on the comment about the effective emission height. We could've had a great discussion about lapse rates, adiabatic compression, Hamiltonians, etc etc, ( like all the stuff I don't know about )

Instead we could talk about how you go about calculatings the area of surface in the real world.

Over to you, Libtard boy

Add your reply
Submit as guest (your name)

Copy code captcha


Submit as member (username / password)

CANCEL
Guest: Q (252 days ago)

Oh no! I had just thought you'd calmed down with just one reply to my message, but no. You literally came back 2 HOURS later to have another go! Still burning I see. I mean, how have I managed to get you this worked up? I really wasn't trying. I wonder, if I left it another few hours would you leave me another PS?

Great scientific words though! Really very good indeed. They should give you an NVQ just for that. After this thread, you honestly couldn't convince me you had studied physics if you sent me a certificate from Cambridge. I wouldn't discuss adiabatic change with you any more than I would discuss Renaissance literature with my dog (no offence, but my dog is a quicker learner, and more affable to boot). I mean "effective emission height "! Haha! Oh god, again! Do you mean effective emission altitude? You're gold-dust! There are some cracking blog posts about that though, maybe even some tweets. Fill your boots, my learned friend, or quote me some page numbers in all those books on physics you have. Maybe I can learn something.

Hey, if "the gallery" (should it exist) is giving me thumb-ups as you say, and this site is a "libtard echo chamber" as you say, why on earth would you pretend that they support you? A touch... narcissistic, perhaps? And I think we all know about your thumb-ups - TheBob cracked that cryptic mystery a while ago. Speaking to people who aren't there, and assuming they support you, isn't a sign of good mental health. Obsessively replying to yourself doesn't look too good either.

I remember! Your spellchecker / predictive text system! The one that changes your correct spellings to words that don't exist like colloquism and consise , and changes 'could have' to ' could of '. The one that changes your correct punctuation to a god-awful mess. I suspect it is also responsible for copy-pasting the wrong bits of documents, misunderstanding basic concepts in physics, and making primary level maths mistakes. What a bugger it must be. Either that, or you're just educated to a very low level. Hmm I wonder.

Oh matey. This thread hasn't been good for you. Choose something you know about next time - something you have studied academically to any level, or something that doesn't require that kind of knowledge. Alternatively, stick to your familiar territory of Alinsky insults and generic abuse. You'll find your niche sooner or later.

Original comment

Oh no! I had just thought you'd calmed down with just one reply to my message, but no. You literally came back 2 HOURS later to have another go! Still burning I see. I mean, how have I managed to get you this worked up? I really wasn't trying. I wonder, if I left it another few hours would you leave me another PS?

Great scientific words though! Really very good indeed. They should give you an NVQ just for that. After this thread, you honestly couldn't convince me you had studied physics if you sent me a certificate from Cambridge. I wouldn't discuss adiabatic change with you any more than I would discuss Renaissance literature with my dog (no offence, but my dog is a quicker learner, and more affable to boot). I mean "effective emission height "! Haha! Oh god, again! Do you mean effective emission altitude? You're gold-dust! There are some cracking blog posts about that though, maybe even some tweets. Fill your boots, my learned friend, or quote me some page numbers in all those books on physics you have. Maybe I can learn something.

Hey, if "the gallery" (should it exist) is giving me thumb-ups as you say, and this site is a "libtard echo chamber" as you say, why on earth would you pretend that they support you? A touch... narcissistic, perhaps? And I think we all know about your thumb-ups - TheBob cracked that cryptic mystery a while ago. Speaking to people who aren't there, and assuming they support you, isn't a sign of good mental health. Obsessively replying to yourself doesn't look too good either.

I remember! Your spellchecker / predictive text system! The one that changes your correct spellings to words that don't exist like colloquism and consise , and changes 'could have' to ' could of '. The one that changes your correct punctuation to a god-awful mess. I suspect it is also responsible for copy-pasting the wrong bits of documents, misunderstanding basic concepts in physics, and making primary level maths mistakes. What a bugger it must be. Either that, or you're just educated to a very low level. Hmm I wonder.

Oh matey. This thread hasn't been good for you. Choose something you know about next time - something you have studied academically to any level, or something that doesn't require that kind of knowledge. Alternatively, stick to your familiar territory of Alinsky insults and generic abuse. You'll find your niche sooner or later.

Add your reply
Submit as guest (your name)

Copy code captcha


Submit as member (username / password)

CANCEL
Guest: Real mad (252 days ago)

Yes yes a very angry ( and given the timing of the comment, ( late on Saturday night )) Nobby no mates libtard.

Bit obsessed ?......yep.

Stupid ?..... ......I'd say.

Impotent ?...definitely.

Original comment

Yes yes a very angry ( and given the timing of the comment, ( late on Saturday night )) Nobby no mates libtard.

Bit obsessed ?......yep.

Stupid ?..... ......I'd say.

Impotent ?...definitely.

Add your reply
Submit as guest (your name)

Copy code captcha


Submit as member (username / password)

CANCEL
Guest: Real mad (252 days ago)

Ps, I'm out most of the day ( doing that going into the outside world and socialising thang ), so that gives you a good 8 hours to compose another rant.

Over to you, Libtard boy.

Original comment

Ps, I'm out most of the day ( doing that going into the outside world and socialising thang ), so that gives you a good 8 hours to compose another rant.

Over to you, Libtard boy.

Add your reply
Submit as guest (your name)

Copy code captcha


Submit as member (username / password)

CANCEL
Guest: Q (252 days ago)

Still angry - still posting multiple responses I see. Great insults again, good old Alinsky back in action, and a new projection about impotence (possibly more information than we needed.)

My last missive was written after an evening out (I would heartily recommend Moonlight, though in fairness you may enjoy Lego Batman movie more). Thank you; I hadn't thought to look at times you were posting - it seems, you were frantically writing your repeat comments throughout Saturday evening itself. Perhaps you posted them from the pub surrounded by all your friends. Perhaps. Anyway, no matter - you're busy now, having a wild social life on a Sunday morning, you party animal.

Yes, I am a touch obsessed, and I'm more than a little pedantic. I spent too long studying useless equations to let some benighted charlatan waltz in and pretend he has a clue. Anyway. The thing is that you have shown without any doubt whatsoever that you're out of your depth on this subject. Name-dropping scientific terms to sound smart was a tragic reminder, after the confusion about power and root, and about physics notation, and flat world theory, etc. etc. Sorry, but these obviously aren't the honest mistakes of a graduate. I'm afraid with your attitude you wouldn't last a term of an A-level, let alone a degree course. I now know you haven't studied this - for a fact. Call me a psychic, but it's not something you can just pretend.

I also believe that anyone still reading this knows that too. I no longer feel the need or the responsibility to shine a spotlight onto your ignorance, nor even explain to you why you're wrong on these matters or how I know you're bluffing. I literally can't make it any clearer.

However, most importantly (and this the clincher), I'm sure that you know I know. You know that I've called you out, and you've been desperately digging for the best part of a week now; copy-pasting the wrong bits, never directly addressing any of my points, getting more angry and more insulting - they are the signs that you know you've been busted. Deny it of course, in keeping with that pride of yours, but I have no doubts. I just hope in the course of this conversation you've learned enough not to make the same mistakes again. Time will tell.

Finally, in all honesty I wasn't intending to wind you up, and I'm sorry that all this seems to have upset you. I confess, your bizarre unearned confidence and Alinsky style mockery does beg for a little discipline, but unlike some trolls on here, my mission was never to anger or irritate. You made some very basic factual errors which I was able to amend, and a few hypocrisies that were simple to point out, and I imagined that would be an end to it. Not this vast tantrum of anger, abuse, and outright fakery. You have issues, lad, and I hope you find a way to manage them. Anyway, I look forward to discussing a subject that is more appropriate for you in the near future - you seem to be interested in politics so that could be a good place to start. Til the next time, Professor.

Original comment

Still angry - still posting multiple responses I see. Great insults again, good old Alinsky back in action, and a new projection about impotence (possibly more information than we needed.)

My last missive was written after an evening out (I would heartily recommend Moonlight, though in fairness you may enjoy Lego Batman movie more). Thank you; I hadn't thought to look at times you were posting - it seems, you were frantically writing your repeat comments throughout Saturday evening itself. Perhaps you posted them from the pub surrounded by all your friends. Perhaps. Anyway, no matter - you're busy now, having a wild social life on a Sunday morning, you party animal.

Yes, I am a touch obsessed, and I'm more than a little pedantic. I spent too long studying useless equations to let some benighted charlatan waltz in and pretend he has a clue. Anyway. The thing is that you have shown without any doubt whatsoever that you're out of your depth on this subject. Name-dropping scientific terms to sound smart was a tragic reminder, after the confusion about power and root, and about physics notation, and flat world theory, etc. etc. Sorry, but these obviously aren't the honest mistakes of a graduate. I'm afraid with your attitude you wouldn't last a term of an A-level, let alone a degree course. I now know you haven't studied this - for a fact. Call me a psychic, but it's not something you can just pretend.

I also believe that anyone still reading this knows that too. I no longer feel the need or the responsibility to shine a spotlight onto your ignorance, nor even explain to you why you're wrong on these matters or how I know you're bluffing. I literally can't make it any clearer.

However, most importantly (and this the clincher), I'm sure that you know I know. You know that I've called you out, and you've been desperately digging for the best part of a week now; copy-pasting the wrong bits, never directly addressing any of my points, getting more angry and more insulting - they are the signs that you know you've been busted. Deny it of course, in keeping with that pride of yours, but I have no doubts. I just hope in the course of this conversation you've learned enough not to make the same mistakes again. Time will tell.

Finally, in all honesty I wasn't intending to wind you up, and I'm sorry that all this seems to have upset you. I confess, your bizarre unearned confidence and Alinsky style mockery does beg for a little discipline, but unlike some trolls on here, my mission was never to anger or irritate. You made some very basic factual errors which I was able to amend, and a few hypocrisies that were simple to point out, and I imagined that would be an end to it. Not this vast tantrum of anger, abuse, and outright fakery. You have issues, lad, and I hope you find a way to manage them. Anyway, I look forward to discussing a subject that is more appropriate for you in the near future - you seem to be interested in politics so that could be a good place to start. Til the next time, Professor.

Add your reply
Submit as guest (your name)

Copy code captcha


Submit as member (username / password)

CANCEL
Guest: Real mad (251 days ago)

Yep quite an angry and inadequate little Libtard. A levels ??, Actually got two S level grade 1 back in the day.

I think your problem is that I'm cleverer than you, I mean look at the way you ignored my simple ( for me ) analysis of SB emission from a surface with variable temperature.

Have fun chewing the carpet, ya inadequate little retard.

Original comment

Yep quite an angry and inadequate little Libtard. A levels ??, Actually got two S level grade 1 back in the day.

I think your problem is that I'm cleverer than you, I mean look at the way you ignored my simple ( for me ) analysis of SB emission from a surface with variable temperature.

Have fun chewing the carpet, ya inadequate little retard.

Add your reply
Submit as guest (your name)

Copy code captcha


Submit as member (username / password)

CANCEL
Guest: Q (251 days ago)

Neither of us believe that for a second. S level grade 1! Haha! Oh bless you. You literally can't even punctuate a complex sentence or differentiate powers from roots! "Switch words around"! Comedy gold.

Don't waste your time sunshine - you just can't fake an education, let alone intelligence. Ooh calm down - those insults! Blimey. The mark of a true intellectual who is definitely not humiliated and definitely not angry.

Original comment

Neither of us believe that for a second. S level grade 1! Haha! Oh bless you. You literally can't even punctuate a complex sentence or differentiate powers from roots! "Switch words around"! Comedy gold.

Don't waste your time sunshine - you just can't fake an education, let alone intelligence. Ooh calm down - those insults! Blimey. The mark of a true intellectual who is definitely not humiliated and definitely not angry.

Add your reply
Submit as guest (your name)

Copy code captcha


Submit as member (username / password)

CANCEL
Guest: Real mad (251 days ago)

What's comedy gold is your feeble efforts at googling the prompts I give you. It's like having a conversation with a non English speaking Czech who is armed with a czech/french and a French/English dictionary. The words are spelt correctly but the context is non existant.

That's fumduck libtards for ya

Original comment

What's comedy gold is your feeble efforts at googling the prompts I give you. It's like having a conversation with a non English speaking Czech who is armed with a czech/french and a French/English dictionary. The words are spelt correctly but the context is non existant.

That's fumduck libtards for ya

Add your reply
Submit as guest (your name)

Copy code captcha


Submit as member (username / password)

CANCEL
Guest: Real mad (251 days ago)

And yes, despite your protests, you're utterly humiliated. Narcissistic libtards like you like to delude yourself that all your thoughts are backed up by logic. Having someone like little me exposing your complete inabilty in an important area of analytical processing (maths) is mortifying, after all no one likes to shown to be inferior, and Ive certainly done that to you.

Have fun Libtard boy, I look forward to your next impotent rant.

Original comment

And yes, despite your protests, you're utterly humiliated. Narcissistic libtards like you like to delude yourself that all your thoughts are backed up by logic. Having someone like little me exposing your complete inabilty in an important area of analytical processing (maths) is mortifying, after all no one likes to shown to be inferior, and Ive certainly done that to you.

Have fun Libtard boy, I look forward to your next impotent rant.

Add your reply
Submit as guest (your name)

Copy code captcha


Submit as member (username / password)

CANCEL
Guest: Real mad (251 days ago)

Ps I took the time to look up Moonlight, and yes as expected the general consensus is that it is pretentious and indulgent crap, that only won an Oscar because the Libtard elite are having a spasm of white guilt and are browbeaten into expressing enthusiasm for unadulterated shit.

I'm not surprised you like it.

Original comment

Ps I took the time to look up Moonlight, and yes as expected the general consensus is that it is pretentious and indulgent crap, that only won an Oscar because the Libtard elite are having a spasm of white guilt and are browbeaten into expressing enthusiasm for unadulterated shit.

I'm not surprised you like it.

Add your reply
Submit as guest (your name)

Copy code captcha


Submit as member (username / password)

CANCEL
Guest: Q (251 days ago)

Calm down, son - adding another reply every hour for 3 hours ? Wow, seriously, take a break. This site really isn't helping your mental state. I was only trying to explain how I knew you were faking your education. "Switching words around"! Brilliant. You need to try much harder. If you ever swallow your pride enough to want to learn, I'll be here. I'm honestly happy to answer genuine questions that are confusing you, but I won't humour your Walter Mitty fantasies. It does you no favours in the long run.

As for Moonlight, I predicted it wasn't your cuppa. Try Lego Batman.

Anyway, as I said before "I guess I reached the limits of your capabilities"... "Nothing at all except insults verging on the pathologically insane. Ha ha."

Original comment

Calm down, son - adding another reply every hour for 3 hours ? Wow, seriously, take a break. This site really isn't helping your mental state. I was only trying to explain how I knew you were faking your education. "Switching words around"! Brilliant. You need to try much harder. If you ever swallow your pride enough to want to learn, I'll be here. I'm honestly happy to answer genuine questions that are confusing you, but I won't humour your Walter Mitty fantasies. It does you no favours in the long run.

As for Moonlight, I predicted it wasn't your cuppa. Try Lego Batman.

Anyway, as I said before "I guess I reached the limits of your capabilities"... "Nothing at all except insults verging on the pathologically insane. Ha ha."

Add your reply
Submit as guest (your name)

Copy code captcha


Submit as member (username / password)

CANCEL
Guest: Real mad (251 days ago)

It's called breaking up your comments up into manageable chunks, unlike the gish galloping rants that you so frequently do.

Oddly enough Lego Batman probaby has more emotional depth than the unoriginal cardboard cutouts that represent the characters in Moonlight.

It's just emotional drivel, for self regarding pseuds like you to drool over.

Watch it disappear without trace in the next couple of years

Original comment

It's called breaking up your comments up into manageable chunks, unlike the gish galloping rants that you so frequently do.

Oddly enough Lego Batman probaby has more emotional depth than the unoriginal cardboard cutouts that represent the characters in Moonlight.

It's just emotional drivel, for self regarding pseuds like you to drool over.

Watch it disappear without trace in the next couple of years

Add your reply
Submit as guest (your name)

Copy code captcha


Submit as member (username / password)

CANCEL
Guest: Q (250 days ago)

Breaking up a comment into manageable chunks? 3 times over 4 hours? Yeah OK. From what we know of you, I'm sure that's much more likely that you being humiliated after being called out, and then being unable to control your behaviour as you obsessively vent your anger, clutching at straws to try and 'score points'.

Look, just try not to get so upset when people correct you, or educate yourself so you don't make so many mistakes in the first place. Your choice.

Yeah, let's go with film preferences. On that, opinions are subjective so you won't end up making silly factual mistakes like when you try to talk about physics and maths. So out of interest, which do you think are the "unoriginal cardboard cutout" characters in Moonlight? Judging from your usual standards of fact-checking, can I hazard a guess that you haven't actually seen it?

Original comment

Breaking up a comment into manageable chunks? 3 times over 4 hours? Yeah OK. From what we know of you, I'm sure that's much more likely that you being humiliated after being called out, and then being unable to control your behaviour as you obsessively vent your anger, clutching at straws to try and 'score points'.

Look, just try not to get so upset when people correct you, or educate yourself so you don't make so many mistakes in the first place. Your choice.

Yeah, let's go with film preferences. On that, opinions are subjective so you won't end up making silly factual mistakes like when you try to talk about physics and maths. So out of interest, which do you think are the "unoriginal cardboard cutout" characters in Moonlight? Judging from your usual standards of fact-checking, can I hazard a guess that you haven't actually seen it?

Add your reply
Submit as guest (your name)

Copy code captcha


Submit as member (username / password)

CANCEL
Guest: Real mad (250 days ago)

I've seen a lot of movies over the years. Moonlight is just over hyped pretentious shit in a bad year for movies.

Original comment

I've seen a lot of movies over the years. Moonlight is just over hyped pretentious shit in a bad year for movies.

Add your reply
Submit as guest (your name)

Copy code captcha


Submit as member (username / password)

CANCEL
Guest: Q (250 days ago)

Yes, you've said it is over hyped partly because of the "unoriginal cardboard cutout" characters.

I am asking which characters did you think fit the above description?

Original comment

Yes, you've said it is over hyped partly because of the "unoriginal cardboard cutout" characters.

I am asking which characters did you think fit the above description?

Add your reply
Submit as guest (your name)

Copy code captcha


Submit as member (username / password)

CANCEL
Guest: Real mad (250 days ago)

Well all blacks are drug dealers for a start................, Girlfriend is tart with a heart.. just to name but two of the main characters. Formulaic.

Original comment

Well all blacks are drug dealers for a start................, Girlfriend is tart with a heart.. just to name but two of the main characters. Formulaic.

Add your reply
Submit as guest (your name)

Copy code captcha


Submit as member (username / password)

CANCEL
Guest: Q (250 days ago)

Formulaic?! Are we talking about the same film? Umm.. spoiler alert, but do you know it's about a black drug dealer coming to terms with his repressed homosexuality? That last bit is kind of important. In all those films you've seen, can you tell me where you've seen that before? Simplistically, as the film is pretty much about coming to terms with being gay, the only girlfriend character is very much a minor part, in maybe 3 scenes - certainly not a "main character".

It wasn't a perfect film, but one of my main criticisms (and that of people I've spoken to) is that it tried too hard to craft original and surprising characters, (if you invest so much time developing unusual characters you can lose a little momentum). I have heard no one describe the characters as unoriginal, but then again I'm only talking about people who have seen it. Well who'd have thunk it? You're the type that reviews films without watching them. Go figure.

Can we discuss a film you have actually seen? Or anything that you actually genuinely know about. Please. For the love-of-god. Pick a subject that you're really confident about.

Original comment

Formulaic?! Are we talking about the same film? Umm.. spoiler alert, but do you know it's about a black drug dealer coming to terms with his repressed homosexuality? That last bit is kind of important. In all those films you've seen, can you tell me where you've seen that before? Simplistically, as the film is pretty much about coming to terms with being gay, the only girlfriend character is very much a minor part, in maybe 3 scenes - certainly not a "main character".

It wasn't a perfect film, but one of my main criticisms (and that of people I've spoken to) is that it tried too hard to craft original and surprising characters, (if you invest so much time developing unusual characters you can lose a little momentum). I have heard no one describe the characters as unoriginal, but then again I'm only talking about people who have seen it. Well who'd have thunk it? You're the type that reviews films without watching them. Go figure.

Can we discuss a film you have actually seen? Or anything that you actually genuinely know about. Please. For the love-of-god. Pick a subject that you're really confident about.

Add your reply
Submit as guest (your name)

Copy code captcha


Submit as member (username / password)

CANCEL
Guest: Real mad (250 days ago)

It's just a dime a dozen coming of age film. It's been done countless times, and much better too, with gays and lesbians etc, from rough neighbourhoods etc with drug/alcoholic parents etc. It's not new. Just an average art house film gaslighted way above its true level.

Original comment

It's just a dime a dozen coming of age film. It's been done countless times, and much better too, with gays and lesbians etc, from rough neighbourhoods etc with drug/alcoholic parents etc. It's not new. Just an average art house film gaslighted way above its true level.

Add your reply
Submit as guest (your name)

Copy code captcha


Submit as member (username / password)

CANCEL
Guest: Q (250 days ago)

I can tell you haven't watched it. This is like physics all over again; uninformed confidence. Art house? Hah! Do you know what that term refers to? Moonlight was produced by the same company as The Big Short, World War Z, and Charlie & The Chocolate Factory! Art house he says! And name me one coming of age film about a gay black drug dealer. Oh never mind.

If you want to discuss something, tell me a film you have seen that you can talk about. Not one you've heard about, not one you just want to be controversial about for a little attention - one you have actually seen.

I will find something you know about if it's the last thing I do.

Original comment

I can tell you haven't watched it. This is like physics all over again; uninformed confidence. Art house? Hah! Do you know what that term refers to? Moonlight was produced by the same company as The Big Short, World War Z, and Charlie & The Chocolate Factory! Art house he says! And name me one coming of age film about a gay black drug dealer. Oh never mind.

If you want to discuss something, tell me a film you have seen that you can talk about. Not one you've heard about, not one you just want to be controversial about for a little attention - one you have actually seen.

I will find something you know about if it's the last thing I do.

Add your reply
Submit as guest (your name)

Copy code captcha


Submit as member (username / password)

CANCEL
Guest: Real màd (250 days ago)

And yet they couldn't hire a proper cameraman....

Btw I haven't seen it, but my best mate and his boyfriend has, and they said "don't bother".it's shite for pseuds like you. It's probably worse than Stealing Beauty, and that takes some doing.

Ps my family work in the film industry, I've worked on film sets, apart from the technical awards, which tend to go to the right recipients, the main awards are a joke.

Original comment

And yet they couldn't hire a proper cameraman....

Btw I haven't seen it, but my best mate and his boyfriend has, and they said "don't bother".it's shite for pseuds like you. It's probably worse than Stealing Beauty, and that takes some doing.

Ps my family work in the film industry, I've worked on film sets, apart from the technical awards, which tend to go to the right recipients, the main awards are a joke.

Add your reply
Submit as guest (your name)

Copy code captcha


Submit as member (username / password)

CANCEL
Guest: Q (250 days ago)

Your family work in the film industry, but you don't know what the term 'art house' means?

Seriously! Touting your mate's opinion instead of your own. That's very revealing. You should try making up your own mind though.

Which coming-of-age film did you mean that features a repressed gay black drug dealer?

Again, if you want a discussion, name a film you have actually seen or something you personally know about - not something your mate has seen, not something you have looked up on Wikipedia.

Original comment

Your family work in the film industry, but you don't know what the term 'art house' means?

Seriously! Touting your mate's opinion instead of your own. That's very revealing. You should try making up your own mind though.

Which coming-of-age film did you mean that features a repressed gay black drug dealer?

Again, if you want a discussion, name a film you have actually seen or something you personally know about - not something your mate has seen, not something you have looked up on Wikipedia.

Add your reply
Submit as guest (your name)

Copy code captcha


Submit as member (username / password)

CANCEL
Guest: Real mad (249 days ago)

So what is you're definition of a "art house" film ?.

Gee libtards sure are dumb.

Original comment

So what is you're definition of a "art house" film ?.

Gee libtards sure are dumb.

Add your reply
Submit as guest (your name)

Copy code captcha


Submit as member (username / password)

CANCEL
Guest: Q (249 days ago)

Well done for asking. A glimmer of hope that you're ready to learn.

Arthouse films are generally independent films that are experimental, and aimed at a small following rather than commercial success.

The fact that you can describe Moonlight as 'formulaic' in one post, then 'art house' the next shows you have no idea what you're talking about.

Is your specialist subject things you don't know about? You chose physics and maths, two areas that you clearly haven't studied, and Moonlight, a film you have never seen. Go on - pick something you know about. I dare you. I don't believe you can be this ignorant across the board.

Original comment

Well done for asking. A glimmer of hope that you're ready to learn.

Arthouse films are generally independent films that are experimental, and aimed at a small following rather than commercial success.

The fact that you can describe Moonlight as 'formulaic' in one post, then 'art house' the next shows you have no idea what you're talking about.

Is your specialist subject things you don't know about? You chose physics and maths, two areas that you clearly haven't studied, and Moonlight, a film you have never seen. Go on - pick something you know about. I dare you. I don't believe you can be this ignorant across the board.

Add your reply
Submit as guest (your name)

Copy code captcha


Submit as member (username / password)

CANCEL
Guest: Real mad (249 days ago)

Irony is lost on libtards like you, as is the concept of a loss leader.

Original comment

Irony is lost on libtards like you, as is the concept of a loss leader.

Add your reply
Submit as guest (your name)

Copy code captcha


Submit as member (username / password)

CANCEL
Guest: Q (249 days ago)

What a surprise. Back to the usual strategy of ignoring all points made against you, and wheeling out a few tired insults to cover up for it.

Don't say I don't give you a chance. You actively choose subjects that you know nothing about (you picked me up on Moonlight without even seeing it - so ridiculous!). I've given you the chance to showcase any kind of subject knowledge you have on any kind of topic - you can set the parameters - but no. You can't take the risk of being humiliated on your home territory too. I'm beginning to think that's because there really isn't anything you genuinely know about. Prove me wrong, by all means.

Original comment

What a surprise. Back to the usual strategy of ignoring all points made against you, and wheeling out a few tired insults to cover up for it.

Don't say I don't give you a chance. You actively choose subjects that you know nothing about (you picked me up on Moonlight without even seeing it - so ridiculous!). I've given you the chance to showcase any kind of subject knowledge you have on any kind of topic - you can set the parameters - but no. You can't take the risk of being humiliated on your home territory too. I'm beginning to think that's because there really isn't anything you genuinely know about. Prove me wrong, by all means.

Add your reply
Submit as guest (your name)

Copy code captcha


Submit as member (username / password)

CANCEL
Guest: Real mad (249 days ago)

Autistic keyboard warrior libtards like you with your "I think this is correct therefore all other opinions are wrong" are dime a dozen.

Maybe you should get out more, but the concept of a film designed to tick the right boxes for awards ceremonies has been around for quite a few years, it's quite easy to quickly run up a basic storyline along these lines.and most of these films don't pass the test of time.

Ps none of the motifs in Moonlight are new, Black gay drug dealers is an idea that's been done before, and better too, eg "The wire".

Original comment

Autistic keyboard warrior libtards like you with your "I think this is correct therefore all other opinions are wrong" are dime a dozen.

Maybe you should get out more, but the concept of a film designed to tick the right boxes for awards ceremonies has been around for quite a few years, it's quite easy to quickly run up a basic storyline along these lines.and most of these films don't pass the test of time.

Ps none of the motifs in Moonlight are new, Black gay drug dealers is an idea that's been done before, and better too, eg "The wire".

Add your reply
Submit as guest (your name)

Copy code captcha


Submit as member (username / password)

CANCEL
Guest: Q (248 days ago)

That's ironic. After-all, the issue here is that I have got myself out to see the film before making a judgment on it, and you haven't. I started discussing films here because I thought anyone can have an opinion on film - you don't need an education; you just need a few mates and a few quid. Even that seems to be too much for you, as you go and choose a film you haven't even seen.

There's no point discussing it with you, because you are just gullibly trotting out what someone else has told you, instead of thinking of your own opinion. That says an awful lot about you and neatly explains some of your other views. Maybe ask your friend (Google?) to come on here, and I can discuss it with them -after-all, it's their opinion, not yours.

I would explain that Omar in 'The Wire' was not a drug dealer, but a robber, and was openly and boldly gay - a world apart from the characters in 'Moonlight' - but I suspect you haven't seen 'The Wire' either so you probably don't know those simple facts, nor how it compares. Did you Google 'gay drug dealers' perhaps? Swap a few words around? Fail.

So, are you still too scared to name a subject where you feel authoritative? Have you never learned a lot about any one topic? Come on. How about Fifa? The discography of Wham!? Put me in my place about something you know about. I'm up for a laugh.

Original comment

That's ironic. After-all, the issue here is that I have got myself out to see the film before making a judgment on it, and you haven't. I started discussing films here because I thought anyone can have an opinion on film - you don't need an education; you just need a few mates and a few quid. Even that seems to be too much for you, as you go and choose a film you haven't even seen.

There's no point discussing it with you, because you are just gullibly trotting out what someone else has told you, instead of thinking of your own opinion. That says an awful lot about you and neatly explains some of your other views. Maybe ask your friend (Google?) to come on here, and I can discuss it with them -after-all, it's their opinion, not yours.

I would explain that Omar in 'The Wire' was not a drug dealer, but a robber, and was openly and boldly gay - a world apart from the characters in 'Moonlight' - but I suspect you haven't seen 'The Wire' either so you probably don't know those simple facts, nor how it compares. Did you Google 'gay drug dealers' perhaps? Swap a few words around? Fail.

So, are you still too scared to name a subject where you feel authoritative? Have you never learned a lot about any one topic? Come on. How about Fifa? The discography of Wham!? Put me in my place about something you know about. I'm up for a laugh.

Add your reply
Submit as guest (your name)

Copy code captcha


Submit as member (username / password)

CANCEL
Guest: Real mad (247 days ago)

The film is shite. Only pretentious libtards think it's high culture.

Original comment

The film is shite. Only pretentious libtards think it's high culture.

Add your reply
Submit as guest (your name)

Copy code captcha


Submit as member (username / password)

CANCEL
Guest: (247 days ago)

Oh is that what your friend thinks? Bring him on here and I'll discuss it with him.

When you grow up a little, you will get to make up your own opinions. Exciting, huh?

But he's right - it wouldn't be your cup of tea. Try Mrs Brown's Boys. Failing that, Peppa Pig.

Original comment

Oh is that what your friend thinks? Bring him on here and I'll discuss it with him.

When you grow up a little, you will get to make up your own opinions. Exciting, huh?

But he's right - it wouldn't be your cup of tea. Try Mrs Brown's Boys. Failing that, Peppa Pig.

Add your reply
Submit as guest (your name)

Copy code captcha


Submit as member (username / password)

CANCEL
Guest: Real mad (247 days ago)

Let me guess, you want to have a go at him for being independent and not following the narrative, and consequently not being a real gay.

Btw I value my friends opinion on films, we've spent a lot of time watching oddball films over the years ( including some real stinkers... Eg Stealing beauty, we walked out after an hour ).seriously when he says a film is shite, it is shite, regardless of the subject matter.

Just saying

Original comment

Let me guess, you want to have a go at him for being independent and not following the narrative, and consequently not being a real gay.

Btw I value my friends opinion on films, we've spent a lot of time watching oddball films over the years ( including some real stinkers... Eg Stealing beauty, we walked out after an hour ).seriously when he says a film is shite, it is shite, regardless of the subject matter.

Just saying

Add your reply
Submit as guest (your name)

Copy code captcha


Submit as member (username / password)

CANCEL
Guest: Q (247 days ago)
Latest comment:

So you're admitting you just regurgitate his opinion! Wow. I guessed you were a little gullible, but projecting someone else's opinion instead of forming your own is tragic. Just saying. And you tell me about "being independent"?!

As you show, it's all too easy to adopt a less conventional opinion in an effort to seem original and special but no, I don't want to have a go at him - at least he has bothered to inform himself, develop his own opinion, and if he really is friends with you, he deserves support not abuse. I'm always interested in discussing films with people that have actually seen them and can articulate their views. Sadly for you, that doesn't extend to trolls echoing the opinions of others in order to sound controversial.

Original comment
Latest comment:

So you're admitting you just regurgitate his opinion! Wow. I guessed you were a little gullible, but projecting someone else's opinion instead of forming your own is tragic. Just saying. And you tell me about "being independent"?!

As you show, it's all too easy to adopt a less conventional opinion in an effort to seem original and special but no, I don't want to have a go at him - at least he has bothered to inform himself, develop his own opinion, and if he really is friends with you, he deserves support not abuse. I'm always interested in discussing films with people that have actually seen them and can articulate their views. Sadly for you, that doesn't extend to trolls echoing the opinions of others in order to sound controversial.

Add your reply
Submit as guest (your name)

Copy code captcha


Submit as member (username / password)

CANCEL
Guest: Real mad (254 days ago)

For regards read retards.

Original comment

For regards read retards.

Add your reply
Submit as guest (your name)

Copy code captcha


Submit as member (username / password)

CANCEL
Guest: Real mad (257 days ago)

Ps, don't know what school Q went to, but obviously maths was an optional subject

Original comment

Ps, don't know what school Q went to, but obviously maths was an optional subject

Add your reply
Submit as guest (your name)

Copy code captcha


Submit as member (username / password)

CANCEL
Guest: Real mad (257 days ago)

PS have to say that the Boreme editor has turned off the blocking, mind you, maybe that was because it made him appear like he was supporting nonsense science, given some of the replies.

I do love the way the alarmist libtards shoot themselves in the foot by not giving " weather weirding" crackpots a wide berth,.

just saying.

Original comment

PS have to say that the Boreme editor has turned off the blocking, mind you, maybe that was because it made him appear like he was supporting nonsense science, given some of the replies.

I do love the way the alarmist libtards shoot themselves in the foot by not giving " weather weirding" crackpots a wide berth,.

just saying.

Add your reply
Submit as guest (your name)

Copy code captcha


Submit as member (username / password)

CANCEL
BoreMeEditor BoreMeEditor (257 days ago)

I can't block you, I can only remove your comments. It's weird you are trying to involve me. I wish we had a psychiatrist on our team.

Original comment

I can't block you, I can only remove your comments. It's weird you are trying to involve me. I wish we had a psychiatrist on our team.

Add your reply
Submit as guest (your name)

Copy code captcha


Submit as member (username / password)

CANCEL
Guest: Real mad (257 days ago)

Redirect ????.Someone was trying.

Sad really

Original comment

Redirect ????.Someone was trying.

Sad really

Add your reply
Submit as guest (your name)

Copy code captcha


Submit as member (username / password)

CANCEL
Guest: Q (257 days ago)

I like to think BoreMe has a duty of care to its users like Mad who seem to have a fragile mental state.

Unbridled paranoia or just.. a rather low level of understanding?

Original comment

I like to think BoreMe has a duty of care to its users like Mad who seem to have a fragile mental state.

Unbridled paranoia or just.. a rather low level of understanding?

Add your reply
Submit as guest (your name)

Copy code captcha


Submit as member (username / password)

CANCEL
Guest: Real mad (257 days ago)

Sockpuppets are sad as well, really sad, really really sad.

Original comment

Sockpuppets are sad as well, really sad, really really sad.

Add your reply
Submit as guest (your name)

Copy code captcha


Submit as member (username / password)

CANCEL
Guest: (256 days ago)

Again, irony overload.

Just mull over the word 'hypocrisy'. Just for a moment.

Original comment

Again, irony overload.

Just mull over the word 'hypocrisy'. Just for a moment.

Add your reply
Submit as guest (your name)

Copy code captcha


Submit as member (username / password)

CANCEL
Guest: (258 days ago)

BWAHAHA AHAA AHAHAAA

god you are ON FIRE today !!

i have never seen you so totally owned as on this thread its HILARIOUS!

all you have left is rule 5 alinsky mocking !! absolutely ******* hilarious!!

Original comment

BWAHAHA AHAA AHAHAAA

god you are ON FIRE today !!

i have never seen you so totally owned as on this thread its HILARIOUS!

all you have left is rule 5 alinsky mocking !! absolutely ******* hilarious!!

Add your reply
Submit as guest (your name)

Copy code captcha


Submit as member (username / password)

CANCEL
Guest: Real mad (258 days ago)

And my physics and maths books.., Whereas libtard fumduck has........

Nothing at all except insults verging on the pathologically insane.

Ha ha

Original comment

And my physics and maths books.., Whereas libtard fumduck has........

Nothing at all except insults verging on the pathologically insane.

Ha ha

Add your reply
Submit as guest (your name)

Copy code captcha


Submit as member (username / password)

CANCEL
Guest: (258 days ago)

BWAhahaha keep on digging cheese brain .

HAH HAH HAAAAAAAAAH! you just got ownd with science!!!! BAHAAAAAA

this is the funiest this web site has ever been

Original comment

BWAhahaha keep on digging cheese brain .

HAH HAH HAAAAAAAAAH! you just got ownd with science!!!! BAHAAAAAA

this is the funiest this web site has ever been

Add your reply
Submit as guest (your name)

Copy code captcha


Submit as member (username / password)

CANCEL
Guest: Real mad (258 days ago)

Only in your dreams, and boy do you have problems in that area.

And to think all this happens when Walter "gets offended" by being shown to be a moron.

Original comment

Only in your dreams, and boy do you have problems in that area.

And to think all this happens when Walter "gets offended" by being shown to be a moron.

Add your reply
Submit as guest (your name)

Copy code captcha


Submit as member (username / password)

CANCEL
Guest: (258 days ago)

BAHAHAHAHAHAAAAAAA

HAHAHAHAAAA you had NOTHING to say about his science !! totaly total pwnd you !!!

hAhahaAHaahahAHAahahahaaa a

Original comment

BAHAHAHAHAHAAAAAAA

HAHAHAHAAAA you had NOTHING to say about his science !! totaly total pwnd you !!!

hAhahaAHaahahAHAahahahaaa a

Add your reply
Submit as guest (your name)

Copy code captcha


Submit as member (username / password)

CANCEL
Guest: Real mad (258 days ago)

Oh I could go through each point one by one showing the false logic, by why bother with a immature lbtard ready to delete my post as I try to post it as happened earlier

Sad really how libtards cannot accept being wrong. Shame also for them how much the world is turning against them, not only in the elections.

Original comment

Oh I could go through each point one by one showing the false logic, by why bother with a immature lbtard ready to delete my post as I try to post it as happened earlier

Sad really how libtards cannot accept being wrong. Shame also for them how much the world is turning against them, not only in the elections.

Add your reply
Submit as guest (your name)

Copy code captcha


Submit as member (username / password)

CANCEL
Guest: Real mad (258 days ago)

PS , Personally, I think they are afraid. It's not nice having your arguments destroyed, hence the sad deleting of my replies.

Oddly enough all I'm doing is trying to push them towards the real conjecture as used in the climate models., And away from the cod fake science advocated by the activists.

Ah well, till the next time.