Dr Kynes
Well-Known Member
thats a pretty sexy toaster.{sexual grunting noises}
you should take a shower with it.
Satellite data proves Earth has not been warming the past 18 years - it's stable
- Thread starter sheskunk
- Start date
you should take a shower with it.
Padawanbater2
Well-Known Member
"Most scientists identify as Democrats (55%), while 32% identify as independents and just 6% say they are Republicans. When the leanings of independents are considered, fully 81% identify as Democrats or lean to the Democratic Party, compared with 12% who either identify as Republicans or lean toward the GOP. Among the public, there are far fewer self-described Democrats (35%) and far more Republicans (23%). Overall, 52% of the public identifies as Democratic or leans Democratic, while 35% identifies as Republican or leans Republican.
Majorities of scientists working in academia (60%), for non-profits (55%) and in government (52%) call themselves Democrats, as do nearly half of those working in private industry (47%)."
http://www.people-press.org/2009/07/09/section-4-scientists-politics-and-religion/
http://www.people-press.org/files/legacy-questionnaires/528.pdf
https://www.rollitup.org/t/elliot-rodgers-had-aspergers-syndrome-should-we-not-allow-people-with-aspergers-to-own-guns.831182/page-9
UncleBuck
Well-Known Member
kynes is a denialist of scientific polling as well.
https://www.rollitup.org/t/obama-at-91-4-to-win.579313/
so don't even bother.
UncleBuck
Well-Known Member
Ceepea
Well-Known Member
The High Concentration PhotoVoltaic Thermal (HCPVT) system can convert 80% of the incoming solar radiation into useful energy.
Not my words. So, for you to say 'they didn't' doesn't really mean much to me.
Your word vs theirs.
Dr Kynes
Well-Known Member
yes. opinion polls are as meaningful and important as wikipedia entries when dealing with actual science.
and yes, though i have dismissed this OPINION POLL before, here you are again, posting it AGAIN, like it's the fresh New Hotness
and yes, you still cant do math.
if you could do math you would accept that water vapour, (being 100x more abundant than Co2) has more power to control climate than Co2
further, even if they were EQUAL in distribution and concentration (which they aint) water is ~ 5x more successful, mole for mole at trapping heat.
you couldnt even find the two errors i made and later corrected (but did not edit out, cuz i aint that kind of asshole) despite their being quite obvious.
i made a THIRD citation error in this thread too.
lets see if you and bucky can spot it.
Ill wait.
Dr Kynes
Well-Known Member
i am skeptical but hopeful on this assertion.
80% is pretty damned badass returns. but even if it's only 55-60% it's still a huge jump over the old, obsolete, broke-dick, shabby, poop-breath photovoltaic systems that struggle to rack up 30% efficiency.
Padawanbater2
Well-Known Member
So how would you suggest we scientifically figure out what political affiliation scientists in any given field hold?
Red1966
Well-Known Member
Actually, I was quoting their words, so its THEIR word against YOURS. But I don't expect you to understand.
Dr Kynes
Well-Known Member
it shouldnt matter if a scientist is conservative, liberal, communist, monarchist, christian, moslem, buddhist, atheist, or even FRENCH. if their science is valid it stands on their own.
if you cant dispute their findings with SCIENCE then you cant dispute their findings at all.
i have cited chinese researchers (despite their socialist proclivities) moslem scientists (despite their being of Terrorist Decent), lefty scientists, righty scientists, decline to state scientists, gay scientists, canadian scientists, etc, because their findings are good, no matter how they conduct their personal and political lives
if a guy puts out a bucket, catches some rain, accurately measures the depth and records the time the storm began and ended, do his calculations of the rainfall become invalidated if it turns out he watches Jersey Shore on occasion?
if a guy spots a new exo-planet, does the planet become imaginary if the original discoverer likes to be spanked?
can a guy studying historical weather observations invalidate the data he is examining if it turns out he voted for Booo00o0ooosh back in 2000?
are the mathematical calculations of a physicist invalidated if it happens that the scientist is a woman?
ok, bad example...
There is no geology in the atmosphere.
I imagine it depends on what's the cause of loss.
The moon could never hold much atmosphere, not enough mass.
Mars is between the earth and moon in size, and had an atmosphere, but lost it.
Since we didn't observe it, we can't say for sure.
Perhaps a large impact stripped it away.
Perhaps the volcanic activity died down, reducing temperature, water vapor froze out and the other gasses dissipated.
Mars could use an injection of co2. Get that water vapor going to get it warmer.
Perhaps we need to fire microwaves into the core to fire it up again.
Dr Kynes
Well-Known Member
mars has lotsa co2 (more than 95% Co2) but co2 (as has already been established) sucks at greenhousing
mars also has very little water, and very little H and O with which to make some
mars would need shittonnes of nitrogen and water, fuckloads of O2 and a big boost in heat to get it's greenhouse cycle started.
Arthur C Clarke (inventor of the communication satellite) established the hypothetical parameters back in the 70's, and the recent discovery of small amounts of water on mars doesnt change his figures at all.
mars doesnt have enough water to make a respectable lake, much less an ocean capable of regulating temps and running a hydrological cycle
You're right. The Martian atmosphere is almost exclusively co2.
For some reason though I was thinking it had none... brain fart.
Mars is not close enough to support liquid water without a lot of help.
Red1966
Well-Known Member
Hey, I'm not the one who dragged geology into it, you did.
I wasn't trying to be that big of a smart ass.
I was speaking of volcanic activity, geologic is the proper term.
It just looked funny you using it talking about the atmosphere.
sheskunk
Well-Known Member
lol
That poll was taken in 2009.
At that time Democrats were super cool and Republicans were ashamed to be Republican.
No doubt in my mind that the majority of those saying independent lean right.
UncleBuck
Well-Known Member
it's actually a SCIENTIFIC POLL which measures opinion.
but it sounds so much better when you try to dishonestly diminish it with you sleight of tongue.
you lie and deceive way too often to have anything valid worth saying.
UncleBuck
Well-Known Member
the damn BLS got me.
i went shopping today and bought two loaves of bread ($0.99 a piece, $0.39 lower each than the BLS states), 2 dozen eggs ($2.09 a dozen, beating BLS by $0.03 a piece), two frozen OJ cans which i usually never buy ($1.59 a piece, beating BLS by about $0.60 each), a few other items (none of which were on the BLS) and some good ol' fashioned beer and cigarettes.
hey kynes, you want a picture of the receipt? or would you just deny that too?
i went shopping today and bought two loaves of bread ($0.99 a piece, $0.39 lower each than the BLS states), 2 dozen eggs ($2.09 a dozen, beating BLS by $0.03 a piece), two frozen OJ cans which i usually never buy ($1.59 a piece, beating BLS by about $0.60 each), a few other items (none of which were on the BLS) and some good ol' fashioned beer and cigarettes.
hey kynes, you want a picture of the receipt? or would you just deny that too?