Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature currently requires accessing the site using the built-in Safari browser.
No.Interesting! So you're claiming that each percentage increase in CO2 will increase temperature by about 9F?
No you didn't understand the OP. I'm the guy that said most molecular collisions at earth temperatures are elastic and do not have enough energy to deposit internal vibration energy to CO2. But all collisions can exchange kinetic translational energy, and CO2 can absorb 15 micron radiation.Aren't you the guy that posted the CO2 laser article that said CO2 SUCKS at absorbing energy?
Well the Venetians were warned not to drive SUV's and not tax carbon emissions.Yeah, it could be like Venus with 96% CO2 and a surface over 860 degrees -- hot enough to melt lead and zinc. Lot's of green house gas there.The only question is: how much CO2 is on the atmosphere in each planet and how much has it increased recently?
.
I didn't say indirect science. I said indirect evidence such as radioactive dating, looking at the properties of deep ice cores, dates from tree rings etc.no such thing as indirect science,,,thats called guessing or just makin shit up,,,
real science is observation and study,,,look it up,,,
are you saying I should stop looking for the truth??That is so sad. Maybe you shouldn't visit this science & technology forum.so far there is nothing I can believe in,,my choices are creation based on faith and evolution based on lies and assumptions of what happened billions of yrs ago, which requires another form of faith not to mention there is a lot of evidence against evolution,,
.
now that would be sad
just so happens those 3 test you just listed are some of the biggest problems in evo,,and I would go as far to say they are some of the lies of evolution,,I didn't say indirect science. I said indirect evidence such as radioactive dating, looking at the properties of deep ice cores, dates from tree rings etc.no such thing as indirect science,,,thats called guessing or just makin shit up,,,
real science is observation and study,,,look it up,,,
Evolution has no problems as fiction can be anything.just so happens those 3 test you just listed are some of the biggest problems in evo,,and I would go as far to say they are some of the lies of evolution,,I didn't say indirect science. I said indirect evidence such as radioactive dating, looking at the properties of deep ice cores, dates from tree rings etc.no such thing as indirect science,,,thats called guessing or just makin shit up,,,
real science is observation and study,,,look it up,,,
all the isotope dating process are so flawed the people that do the testing openly admit it when pressed
as for ice rings and tree rings,, its all based on assumptions that say only one ring is formed per yr,,,sorry to tell you that is far from the case
rings in both trees and ice are based on moisture and temperature and many rings can form each yr in both
If you don't want to believe it, so be it.just so happens those 3 test you just listed are some of the biggest problems in evo,,and I would go as far to say they are some of the lies of evolution,,I didn't say indirect science. I said indirect evidence such as radioactive dating, looking at the properties of deep ice cores, dates from tree rings etc.no such thing as indirect science,,,thats called guessing or just makin shit up,,,
real science is observation and study,,,look it up,,,
all the isotope dating process are so flawed the people that do the testing openly admit it when pressed
as for ice rings and tree rings,, its all based on assumptions that say only one ring is formed per yr,,,sorry to tell you that is far from the case
rings in both trees and ice are based on moisture and temperature and many rings can form each yr in both
just so happens those 3 test you just listed are some of the biggest problems in evo,,and I would go as far to say they are some of the lies of evolution,,I didn't say indirect science. I said indirect evidence such as radioactive dating, looking at the properties of deep ice cores, dates from tree rings etc.no such thing as indirect science,,,thats called guessing or just makin shit up,,,
real science is observation and study,,,look it up,,,
all the isotope dating process are so flawed the people that do the testing openly admit it when pressed
as for ice rings and tree rings,, its all based on assumptions that say only one ring is formed per yr,,,sorry to tell you that is far from the case
rings in both trees and ice are based on moisture and temperature and many rings can form each yr in both
why would I believe it if it wasnt true???If you don't want to believe it, so be it.just so happens those 3 test you just listed are some of the biggest problems in evo,,and I would go as far to say they are some of the lies of evolution,,I didn't say indirect science. I said indirect evidence such as radioactive dating, looking at the properties of deep ice cores, dates from tree rings etc.no such thing as indirect science,,,thats called guessing or just makin shit up,,,
real science is observation and study,,,look it up,,,
all the isotope dating process are so flawed the people that do the testing openly admit it when pressed
as for ice rings and tree rings,, its all based on assumptions that say only one ring is formed per yr,,,sorry to tell you that is far from the case
rings in both trees and ice are based on moisture and temperature and many rings can form each yr in both
.
hahahahahahahahahahahahaahahahaThis, according to some estimate, give or take quite a few zeroes I'm sure. A deeper philosophical question which goes beyond theology, though it certainly entangles it.
So, this number again, 1000000000000000000000 planets! According to The Institute of Astronomy at University of Cambridge. How many solar systems are there? | Institute of Astronomy
Putting the exact estimation aside. We would have to take a massive leap of faith to think that not only is there NOT other life in the universe, but, also of such existences, that there aren't many far more advanced than us.
Imagine a planet the size of Jupiter, 100's of billions of citizens. Imagine them not having our reptilian instincts of rage and violence, or developing weapons of war to be used against each other. Consider if they had the average brain power 250x that of our smartest humans, and existed for much longer, maybe lived on average 10000 years.
What would be the end result? Is there any religion that makes any consideration for this possibility (outside, I think Scientology)? It really is a daunting concept. We could be the most advanced by far, we might be Gods great creation. It would hardly seem we could be alone though based on the odds and even plain randomness.
Perhaps the massive and lifeless nature of the rest of the universe is there to send up a message.
Off the top of my head, I think it should humble us just how small in size and scope we are to the rest of the universe. It should also humble us to know that life is seemingly precious in such a vast place. In fact, it is so precious the odds of something like that occurring on its own are infinitesimally impossible, at least, that is what we learn every time we discover a lifeless world.
I know that with each successive lifeless world atheist scientists discover, it bothers them there is no other life but us. It almost makes a mockery of the concept of a universe without divine planning.
..if there is not another habitable planet in all the universe that would not make sense
Strange alien world found to have water vapor and possibly rain clouds
My only question is: what is the atmospheric CO2 content of these "Habitable" planets? It's is settled science that a 120PPM increase in CO2 can end all life on these "habitable" planets in a mere 12 years
There is exactly one known habitable planet...…………….. If there are many more be sure that the closest one is 500,000 years away
How many planets are in the universe & solar system? (2019)..if there is not another habitable planet in all the universe that would not make sense
Those numbers are wrong because current estimates predicts 11,000,000 habitable planets in the Milky Way aloneHow many planets are in the universe & solar system? (2019)..if there is not another habitable planet in all the universe that would not make sense
It has been estimated that there are
21,600,000,000,000,000,000,000,000 planets.
If the probability that a planet gives rise to life is so small that it is one out of a million trillion there would be still be about
21,600,000 planets that can support life.
Yes, I would agree that it doesn't make sense if there were none.
Those numbers are wrong because current estimates predicts 11,000,000 habitable planets in the Milky Way aloneHow many planets are in the universe & solar system? (2019)..if there is not another habitable planet in all the universe that would not make sense
It has been estimated that there are
21,600,000,000,000,000,000,000,000 planets.
If the probability that a planet gives rise to life is so small that it is one out of a million trillion there would be still be about
21,600,000 planets that can support life.
Yes, I would agree that it doesn't make sense if there were none.
List of potentially habitable exoplanets - Wikipedia
If you want to call Alpha Centauri, their area code is 9456852348902457-555-5555.I find it odd that we know there are 1000000000000000 (whatever) planets in the galaxy, but we cant get a decent cell phone signal 20 miles outside of town....
Intergalactic rates apply.If you want to call Alpha Centauri, their area code is 9456852348902457-555-5555.I find it odd that we know there are 1000000000000000 (whatever) planets in the galaxy, but we cant get a decent cell phone signal 20 miles outside of town....
.
He could fly around the earth counterclockwise and turn back time
