Forums before death by AOL, social media and spammers... "We can't have nice things"
|    sci.skeptic    |    Skeptics discussing pseudo-science    |    95,770 messages    |
[   << oldest   |   < older   |   list   |   newer >   |   newest >>   ]
|    Message 95,601 of 95,770    |
|    Dawn Flood to Paul Aubrin    |
|    Re: If predictions fail your hypothesis     |
|    31 Jan 26 19:56:58    |
      XPost: alt.global-warming, alt.atheism       From: Dawn.Belle.Flood@gmail.com              On 1/31/2026 3:00 PM, Paul Aubrin wrote:       > Le 31/01/2026 à 20:20, Dawn Flood a écrit :       >> On 1/31/2026 11:42 AM, Paul Aubrin wrote:       >>> Le 31/01/2026 à 16:59, Dawn Flood a écrit :       >>>>> NB : "Natural" systems are more or less stable over extended time       >>>>> periods, thus they cannot have have "positive feedbacks".       >>>>       >>>> What, then, ended the last ice age?       >>>       >>> Noone really knows, but astronomical parameters are probably the main       >>> cause. Feedbacks follow a cause, temperatures variations precede CO2       >>> variations. Natural systems must have a large stability margin around       >>> their current state. Systems with positive feedbacks are inherently       >>> instable or at the brink of instability (which is visible).       >>       >> And, so, you acknowledge climate feed backs just so long as humans are       >> not involved?       >       > CO2 variations, follow temperature variations.              Do you understand the Conservation of Mass? Go to your local gas       station, buy a gallon of gasoline for your lawnmower (if you have one,       and if not, this example is, for you, completely hypothetical, as       gasoline is an incredibly dangerous substance!), and when you get home,       weigh it. (Weigh your gas can, while empty, and then, when containing       gasoline and do the subtraction.) Now, use it in your mower over the       course of the next year (or, longer, if your yard is as small as mine!)       The weight of the liquid gasoline, via combustion, will be virtually       equal to the weight of the gaseous molecules that result from that       combustion. Once again, the reactants of this reaction go on the left       side, the products on the right; the Conservation of Mass says that the       weight (which, of course, is a unit of force, not mass, but if you take       your measurements in the same spot on Earth, such does not matter) will       be the same before and after the reaction. In other words, weight of       reactants == weight of products.              Ergo, virtually all of the increases in atmospheric CO2 concentrations       has been the result of burning fossil fuels. The increase in global       temperatures is only releasing, at this point in time, a tiny fraction       of CO2 from non-fossil fuel sources.              Dawn              --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05        * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)    |
[   << oldest   |   < older   |   list   |   newer >   |   newest >>   ]
(c) 1994, bbs@darkrealms.ca