AGW: atmospheric physics

[OohPooPahDoo]

Assuming we are talking about a 1 G planet this Nitrogen atm would have a temperature gradient (lapse rate) due to convection and should according to the "back radiation" hypothesis act accordingly, no different than any other gas, CO2 included.

CO2 is opaque to most infrared, N2 is not.

You are the dimwit that claimed to be a physicist and kept spelling it "physisist". So you better stay out of it, seeing the best you can do is"CO2 is opaque to most infrared" while you were looking at a IR band 2µ "wide" :

First we have to establish that you can read. After that I`ll let you have 54 milli -watts of power which is about the power rating of a jumbo IR LED on your TV remote.
Point that IR remote at a square meter of black dirt and tell me how much the dirt warmed up. If that don`t work you can stick it right into the dirt so that there is no albedo effect in case "black dirt" is something that is politically incorrect since Obama became President.
After you`re done stick that remote up your ass and check if your eyes bugged out like the frog`s eyes you used to pop in your microwave oven...as you said you did last last year when you said that you were a "physisist"...

You're a strange person.

 

[westwall]

Westwall -

I notice you are very quiet on exactly why you don't think I'm in Finland! Is it a secret?

After all, you have repeated this claim a dozen times now - why not post the damning proof?!

btw. The weather channel probably uses data from out by H-V airport, where it is quite windy.

You don't speak like a Finn, nor do you seem to be on the same schedual as a Finn, especially given your so called work. I gave you the initials of three extremely well known Finnish sportsmen, that EVERY Finn knows, and you couldn't come up with their names. Plus the fact that you have to google everything you ever say about Finland leads one to believe that you ain't a Finn.

 

[westwall]

I don't even get how this is being debated so far.

Do the deniers in this thread even understand the greenhouse effect? Its really simple - infrared radiation coming from Earth's surface is scattered rather than streaming into space. That's really it.

Yeah, except that's not really what happens is it. Especially when all you can give is a "thought experiment" to describe the concept. there is zero empirical data to support your "theory". You would think that someone with a PhD in physics would understand that....sadly it seems to have escaped your teachers...

The opacity of Co2 to infrared radiation is experimentally verified.

To a point. Nobody has done anything with those numbers since the late 1800's. I wonder if our new and more accurate instruments might change things? The climatologists have been very conspicuous by their unwillingness to accurately calculate the actual greenhose effect.

Of course it is mostly moot anyway as the Earth doesn't have a glass roof.

 

[westwall]

First we have to establish that you can read. After that I`ll let you have 54 milli -watts of power which is about the power rating of a jumbo IR LED on your TV remote.

What are you babbling about?

That's why no one responds to you. You're not dazzling anyone with brilliance. You're baffling everyone with bullshit. It's like you're speaking some authentic frontier gibberish, to steal a quote from Blazing Saddles.

This is why we can tell you've never been trained as a scientist or engineer. You stink at communicating. Good scientists and engineers can explain a topic clearly. You can't. You toss up your pictures and numbers, but no one can figure out why you tossed them up.

He is speaking about things far above your intellectual abilities there admiral....best you crawl back under your rock..

 

[westwall]

CO2 is opaque to most infrared, N2 is not.

You are the dimwit that claimed to be a physicist and kept spelling it "physisist". So you better stay out of it, seeing the best you can do is"CO2 is opaque to most infrared" while you were looking at a IR band 2µ "wide" :

First we have to establish that you can read. After that I`ll let you have 54 milli -watts of power which is about the power rating of a jumbo IR LED on your TV remote.
Point that IR remote at a square meter of black dirt and tell me how much the dirt warmed up. If that don`t work you can stick it right into the dirt so that there is no albedo effect in case "black dirt" is something that is politically incorrect since Obama became President.
After you`re done stick that remote up your ass and check if your eyes bugged out like the frog`s eyes you used to pop in your microwave oven...as you said you did last last year when you said that you were a "physisist"...

You're a strange person.

Yes, he is...and far better educated than you'll ever be.

 

[RollingThunder]

First we have to establish that you can read. After that I`ll let you have 54 milli -watts of power which is about the power rating of a jumbo IR LED on your TV remote.

What are you babbling about?

That's why no one responds to you. You're not dazzling anyone with brilliance. You're baffling everyone with bullshit. It's like you're speaking some authentic frontier gibberish, to steal a quote from Blazing Saddles.

This is why we can tell you've never been trained as a scientist or engineer. You stink at communicating. Good scientists and engineers can explain a topic clearly. You can't. You toss up your pictures and numbers, but no one can figure out why you tossed them up.

He is speaking about things far above your intellectual abilities there admiral....best you crawl back under your rock..

LOLOLOLOL.....one retard affirms another retard's confused drivel......when both of them are out of their depth standing on wet pavement...too funny....

 

[gslack]

What are you babbling about?

That's why no one responds to you. You're not dazzling anyone with brilliance. You're baffling everyone with bullshit. It's like you're speaking some authentic frontier gibberish, to steal a quote from Blazing Saddles.

This is why we can tell you've never been trained as a scientist or engineer. You stink at communicating. Good scientists and engineers can explain a topic clearly. You can't. You toss up your pictures and numbers, but no one can figure out why you tossed them up.

He is speaking about things far above your intellectual abilities there admiral....best you crawl back under your rock..

LOLOLOLOL.....one retard affirms another retard's confused drivel......when both of them are out of their depth standing on wet pavement...too funny....

So you're calling mamooth a retard.. Good glad to see you coming around..

 

[gslack]

After you`re done stick that remote up your ass and check if your eyes bugged out like the frog`s eyes you used to pop in your microwave oven...as you said you did last last year when you said that you were a "physisist"...

You're a strange person.

Bear Brain is a Denialist who lives on the defrosting Canadian tundra.

He probably suffers from cabin fever -- apart from his other mental disabilities.
.

Hey numan what happened to your rep meter dude? LOL, looks like you got nailed for something...ROFL, so what was it? Socking, trolling, what?

Another edit for trolling blunder what is it number 6 now? And 15 hours later..

 

[RollingThunder]

First we have to establish that you can read. After that I`ll let you have 54 milli -watts of power which is about the power rating of a jumbo IR LED on your TV remote.

What are you babbling about?

That's why no one responds to you. You're not dazzling anyone with brilliance. You're baffling everyone with bullshit. It's like you're speaking some authentic frontier gibberish, to steal a quote from Blazing Saddles.

This is why we can tell you've never been trained as a scientist or engineer. You stink at communicating. Good scientists and engineers can explain a topic clearly. You can't. You toss up your pictures and numbers, but no one can figure out why you tossed them up.

He is speaking about things far above your intellectual abilities there admiral....best you crawl back under your rock..

LOLOLOLOL.....one retard affirms another retard's confused drivel......when both of them are out of their depth standing on wet pavement...too funny....

So you're calling mamooth a retard.. Good glad to see you coming around..

LOLOLOLOL....and the retarded troll shows that he is far too stupid to understand what he reads...once again...

 

[mamooth]

He is speaking about things far above your intellectual abilities there admiral....best you crawl back under your rock..

Westwall, please summarize polarbear's argument for us ... in your own words. But be detailed. I mean, since you've proclaimed it's so brilliant, you obviously must understand it completely. So demonstrate for us your self-proclaimed deep understanding of the issues here. After all, you wouldn't want everyone to think that you simply knee-jerked out some support for a fellow 'tard, and that like everyone else, you actually had no idea of what he was babbling about either.

Gslack, don't you be shy either. Explain exactly, with all the mathematics, what polarbear was speaking of. Again, only use your own words. After all, you wouldn't want people to think you had no freakin' clue either, and were just jumping on the 'tard vendetta bandwagon, right? I mean, they already think that, but score big here, and you can get them to think otherwise!

 

[polarbear]

He is speaking about things far above your intellectual abilities there admiral....best you crawl back under your rock..

Westwall, please summarize polarbear's argument for us ... in your own words. But be detailed. I mean, since you've proclaimed it's so brilliant, you obviously must understand it completely. So demonstrate for us your self-proclaimed deep understanding of the issues here. After all, you wouldn't want everyone to think that you simply knee-jerked out some support for a fellow 'tard, and that like everyone else, you actually had no idea of what he was babbling about either.

Gslack, don't you be shy either. Explain exactly, with all the mathematics, what polarbear was speaking of. Again, only use your own words. After all, you wouldn't want people to think you had no freakin' clue either, and were just jumping on the 'tard vendetta bandwagon, right? I mean, they already think that, but score big here, and you can get them to think otherwise!

You,...who took a course in "locker repair" and did not even know why radiators are painted black, just to mention one example what an "expert" you are want to give Westwall a science exam ?
He is a geologist and graduated from a University, not a "locker repairman" course and claimed he "used to run nuclear reactors".
Let`s review how your "water chemistry" exam turned out:

Here was the question:
http://www.usmessageboard.com/envir...the-atmosphere-is-what-we-11.html#post7241522

Dipshit, you haven`t got the vaguest idea how to measure a pH accurately even if I`ld let you have a pH meter.
Suppose I gave you this one and you had to measure the pH of a sample what`s the first thing you would have to do?

Which of the 2 probes you see is the pH probe and which one is the reference probe?
What is in those 2 beakers?
The yellow one is pH what ?
The red one is pH what?
And what color code is used for the pH 7 calibration buffer ?
Happy Googling !...it`ll keep you busy for a while

And here is the "water chemistry expert"...(+nuclear expert) answer...if you can call it an answer:
http://www.usmessageboard.com/envir...the-atmosphere-is-what-we-12.html#post7241807

That's why I'd read the instructions for the particular model.

So, we see one of your usual sad attempts at a deflection, but it won't work. You _still_ fail at water chemistry.

You found nothing with Google.
That`s a run of the mill pH meter with a pH and a KCl reference probe.
They all work the same.
The calibration buffers use also all the same color coding WORLD WIDE...
You had no idea which one in that picture was the pH 4 and which one was the pH 10 calibration buffer and meowed:

That's why I'd read the instructions for the particular model.

So, we see one of your usual sad attempts at a deflection

So who is deflecting?
And you are trying to give me an exam in "water chemistry"...?
What the **** is that ?
I took Math, Physics, Phys Chem, Organic Chem, Inorganic Chem, Organic synthesis Chem,...Lab, Pilot plant & Industrial Scale (Chem eng.)+
Radio Chemistry, Trace Analysis,...such as Atomic Absorption Spectroscopy, Infrared and UV spectroscopy, HPLC, GLC etc etc..but I never heard of "water chemistry"...then again I did not study at "skeptical science.org" like you do

I won`t grade you...let`s have a jury decide.
But as I recall, their last verdict was as damning as this one is likely to be
I bet you even Gslack`s kid could think circles around you...and did...that`s why you had him banned !

 

[mamooth]

But as I recall, their last verdict was as damning as this one is likely to be

The jury concluded that you had disgraced yourself beyond any possible redemption by spitting on a veteran in the name of a personal vendetta. You make the glaring logical mistake of assuming that your butt-buddies are a jury. It's part of that hilarious lack of common sense and logical ability that defines you. No one outside of your tiny retard clique doubts my credentials, but at least you succeeded in making everyone think you're obsessed and delusional.

(Cue polarbear's butt-buddies ... now.)

Anyways, as I prefer to talk about the science, let's get back to the latest thing you were running from. Let me check what it was. It's hard to keep track, given how often you piss yourself and run when I address your wacky claims.

Oh yes, you ran when I laughed at the senselessness of your meaningless picture and your babble about 54 milliwatts. Care to try again at explaining just what that was supposed to mean?

You know, if you didn't suck so badly as a scientist and engineer, you'd be able to explain things clearly and briefly, like I can do. Everyone thinks you suck. Why do you even keep trying?

 

[polarbear]

But as I recall, their last verdict was as damning as this one is likely to be

The jury concluded that you had disgraced yourself beyond any possible redemption by spitting on a veteran in the name of a personal vendetta. You make the glaring logical mistake of assuming that your butt-buddies are a jury. It's part of that hilarious lack of common sense and logical ability that defines you. No one outside of your tiny retard clique doubts my credentials, but at least you succeeded in making everyone think you're obsessed and delusional.

(Cue polarbear's butt-buddies ... now.)

Anyways, as I prefer to talk about the science, let's get back to the latest thing you were running from. Let me check what it was. It's hard to keep track, given how often you piss yourself and run when I address your wacky claims.

Oh yes, you ran when I laughed at the senselessness of your meaningless picture and your babble about 54 milliwatts. Care to try again at explaining just what that was supposed to mean?

You know, if you didn't suck so badly as a scientist and engineer, you'd be able to explain things clearly and briefly, like I can do. Everyone thinks you suck. Why do you even keep trying?

Damn right, I`m spitting on assholes that impersonate officers, not on bona fide veterans .
Nuclear Officer,

"I used to run nuclear reactors"...2 turbines can`t run in sync...I know what every knob does..

And when I uploaded some of my vintage stuff manuals you had absolutely no idea what that was either:

How about your water chemistry exam ?

Meow, that`s why I read the instructions

That was a run of the mill pH meter...

your answer was as revealing what a fake you are, as these bar room pilots who can`t point out what`s what in a Cessna because they used to run nuclear reactors an fly Pipers. Of course the 54 milliwatts per m^2 would be as meaningless to a white room photon multiplication expert like you who has no idea what Heinz Hug measured with his IR Spectroscope at 14 to 16 µm. But you claim you know about Spectroscopy..let`s see how much you know about it then. Here is a run of the mill Absorption Spectrophotometer...anybody who has seen one would know which of the knobs I blanked out is used to tune the desired wavelength:

Oh what`s this?

Happy Googling Mr.Nuclear Engineer Oh I just found another one of your price less Google insights, after you could not find with Google how "water chemistry" color codes calibration buffers

True, because I didn't look, because I don't give a shit. The mechanics of a specific pH meter aren't relevant to anything. You only want to bring them up as one of your patented cowardly evasions. Then why do you suck so badly at water chemistry? A topic, by the way, which the ACA seems to think exists. Odd you never heard of something that mainstream. You know, the chemistry of dissolving stuff in water.

You don`t think that chemistry covers dissolving"stuff in water"? **** what kind of school did you attend?...or did you drop out already at Kindergarten?
But that`s exactly the dimwits they pick to work in a climatology lab "analyzing CO2 in ice cores"

He had no clue either and this is what he did best:

 

[gslack]

But as I recall, their last verdict was as damning as this one is likely to be

The jury concluded that you had disgraced yourself beyond any possible redemption by spitting on a veteran in the name of a personal vendetta. You make the glaring logical mistake of assuming that your butt-buddies are a jury. It's part of that hilarious lack of common sense and logical ability that defines you. No one outside of your tiny retard clique doubts my credentials, but at least you succeeded in making everyone think you're obsessed and delusional.

(Cue polarbear's butt-buddies ... now.)

Anyways, as I prefer to talk about the science, let's get back to the latest thing you were running from. Let me check what it was. It's hard to keep track, given how often you piss yourself and run when I address your wacky claims.

Oh yes, you ran when I laughed at the senselessness of your meaningless picture and your babble about 54 milliwatts. Care to try again at explaining just what that was supposed to mean?

You know, if you didn't suck so badly as a scientist and engineer, you'd be able to explain things clearly and briefly, like I can do. Everyone thinks you suck. Why do you even keep trying?

And there it is again... Total disconnect from reality.. ROFL, you are the forum joke admiral.

You get nailed being ignorant and you pretend it didn't happen.. Too silly for words..

Edited for trolling blunder, edit number 6 and 8 hours later...

 

[polarbear]

But as I recall, their last verdict was as damning as this one is likely to be

The jury concluded that you had disgraced yourself beyond any possible redemption by spitting on a veteran in the name of a personal vendetta. You make the glaring logical mistake of assuming that your butt-buddies are a jury. It's part of that hilarious lack of common sense and logical ability that defines you. No one outside of your tiny retard clique doubts my credentials, but at least you succeeded in making everyone think you're obsessed and delusional.

(Cue polarbear's butt-buddies ... now.)

Anyways, as I prefer to talk about the science, let's get back to the latest thing you were running from. Let me check what it was. It's hard to keep track, given how often you piss yourself and run when I address your wacky claims.

Oh yes, you ran when I laughed at the senselessness of your meaningless picture and your babble about 54 milliwatts. Care to try again at explaining just what that was supposed to mean?

You know, if you didn't suck so badly as a scientist and engineer, you'd be able to explain things clearly and briefly, like I can do. Everyone thinks you suck. Why do you even keep trying?

And there it is again... Total disconnect from reality.. ROFL, you are the forum joke admiral.

You get nailed being ignorant and you pretend it didn't happen.. Too silly for words..

The "Admiral" is on a roll,...lecturing me on "water chemistry" ...a highly specialized branch of chemistry which involves dissolving "stuff in water"...like the "ink molecules" he was meowing about yesterday.
See, I did not know that if you slurry up black carbon soot and shellac in water that the Carbon turns into "ink molecules"
You should print out a hard copy of that "mamooth science" post and have your kid take it to school so that his science class can have a good laugh
http://www.usmessageboard.com/envir...to-the-atmosphere-is-what-we.html#post7223459

If I put a drop of India Ink in a glass of water, the water turns opaque black. Even though the concentration of ink molecules is just a tiny trace...

Had to come back here and add this because it fits the "I used to run nuclear reactors" profile:

http://www.usmessageboard.com/environment/293923-so-much-for-the-consensus-myth.html#post7240015

I've had a hub motor for 10 years now. Get with the times. It was fairly easy to hook into my mountain bike.

Nice thing is, it's invisible and silent. So I can pretend to pedal while actually kicking in the motor, and nonchalantly cruise by the young guys on their racing bikes.

Normal people go mountain biking for the exercise, but not "mamooth"

So I can pretend to pedal while...
I nonchalantly cruise by the young guys on their racing bikes.

When my wife gained some weight and I did not want to hurt her feelings, so I had our washing machine shrink all her clothes.
The only reason I got caught that I switched over the hot & cold water hoses was because I could not quit laughing.
Some day, maybe one of these "the young guys on their racing bikes" will reverse the battery terminals and wait for:
"So I can pretend to pedal while actually kicking in the motor," flying over the handle bar....OOw ******* meow

 

[RollingThunder]

The denier cult retards blindly and ignorantly deny the greenhouse effect even though it is well established scientific phenomenon completely accepted by the world scientific community for over a century. Typical of braindead reality deniers arguing their politics rather than the actually science..

Here's an article from a dozen years ago highlighting some of primary evidence that effectively proves the existence of the greenhouse effect.

UK scientists see greenhouse evidence
BBC News
16 March, 2001
By BBC News environment correspondent Alex Kirby
A team of UK-based scientists have published evidence which they say proves unequivocally that global warming is real. Comparing data obtained from two satellites which orbited the Earth 27 years apart, they found that significantly less radiation is now escaping into space than was previously the case. The team analysed data in the form of spectra of Earth's outgoing longwave radiation, which measures the escape of heat to space and bears the imprint of the gases believed to be causing global warming. They compared two sets of data. The more recent was collected over a nine-month period from October 1996 by the Interferometric Monitor of Greenhouse Gases instrument on the Japanese ADEOS satellite. The earlier data set were collected by Nasa's Infrared Interferometric Spectrometer on the Nimbus 4 spacecraft from April 1970 to January 1971.

The researchers say they found differences which showed a statistically significant increase in the characteristic spectral bands of carbon dioxide (CO2), methane, ozone, and two chlorofluorocarbons, refrigerants blamed for ozone depletion. Their findings, reported in the journal Nature, show that less radiation was escaping from Earth to space in 1997 than in 1970. It means the gases are being kept in the atmosphere, and are trapping the Sun's heat. The team leader, Dr John Harries, said...he is in no doubt that global warming is real. He said: "The results presented here provide to our knowledge the first experimental observation of changes in the Earth's outgoing longwave radiation spectrum, and therefore the greenhouse effect. We're absolutely sure, there's no ambiguity. What we are seeing can only be due to the increase in the gases." Dr Harries was president of the UK's Royal Meteorological Society from 1996 to 1997, and is a former director of projects and technology at the British National Space Centre.

 

[numan]

'
Thanks for the heads-up, Rolling Thunder. I will try to find the scientific papers themselves.

But those damned popular media reporters!! They always get the science wrong!!

Its impossible that "significantly less radiation is escaping into space than was previously the case" !!!

It must be that the spectral characteristics of the radiation prove that greenhouse-gas global heating is occurring.

Not that it was in doubt by sensible people, but one must pile Ossa upon Pelion for the education of the Denialist fools.
.

 

[gslack]

The denier cult retards blindly and ignorantly deny the greenhouse effect even though it is well established scientific phenomenon completely accepted by the world scientific community for over a century. Typical of braindead reality deniers arguing their politics rather than the actually science..

Here's an article from a dozen years ago highlighting some of primary evidence that effectively proves the existence of the greenhouse effect.

UK scientists see greenhouse evidence
BBC News
16 March, 2001
By BBC News environment correspondent Alex Kirby
A team of UK-based scientists have published evidence which they say proves unequivocally that global warming is real. Comparing data obtained from two satellites which orbited the Earth 27 years apart, they found that significantly less radiation is now escaping into space than was previously the case. The team analysed data in the form of spectra of Earth's outgoing longwave radiation, which measures the escape of heat to space and bears the imprint of the gases believed to be causing global warming. They compared two sets of data. The more recent was collected over a nine-month period from October 1996 by the Interferometric Monitor of Greenhouse Gases instrument on the Japanese ADEOS satellite. The earlier data set were collected by Nasa's Infrared Interferometric Spectrometer on the Nimbus 4 spacecraft from April 1970 to January 1971.

The researchers say they found differences which showed a statistically significant increase in the characteristic spectral bands of carbon dioxide (CO2), methane, ozone, and two chlorofluorocarbons, refrigerants blamed for ozone depletion. Their findings, reported in the journal Nature, show that less radiation was escaping from Earth to space in 1997 than in 1970. It means the gases are being kept in the atmosphere, and are trapping the Sun's heat. The team leader, Dr John Harries, said...he is in no doubt that global warming is real. He said: "The results presented here provide to our knowledge the first experimental observation of changes in the Earth's outgoing longwave radiation spectrum, and therefore the greenhouse effect. We're absolutely sure, there's no ambiguity. What we are seeing can only be due to the increase in the gases." Dr Harries was president of the UK's Royal Meteorological Society from 1996 to 1997, and is a former director of projects and technology at the British National Space Centre.

Your link is messed up again, sends us to a Time Warner search page again... Better egt into the habit of updating your news aggregator software troll. Either that or your method of using it is flawed...

BTW, your posts may seem less like the work of a green-party automaton if YOU actually did the work to put them together yourself, rather than relying automation so much. Might stop this kind of silliness as well. How many times has this happened now? I know of two within the last couple weeks...LOL

UPDATE***

Did your job for you and googled the headline of your post.. Found this from 2001...

LOL the big font was for you...

Friday, 16 March, 2001, 14:17 GMT
UK scientists see greenhouse evidence

A team of UK-based scientists have published evidence which they say proves unequivocally that global warming is real.

Comparing data obtained from two satellites which orbited the Earth 27 years apart, they found that significantly less radiation is now escaping into space than was previously the case.

ROFL, yes in 2001 they made that claims and since then? Well they disappeared and their paper went the way of the Dodo bird...

Okay troll... You are once again busted peddling propaganda. Your links half the time go nowhere, and your only response to anybody debate wise is abuse... The mods should do something about your waste of space ass now. I think your trolling days should be up, I for one am tired of it..

And the fact numan loves you shows how little he is worth as well...

Edit for trolling blunder. Edit 5 and 6 hours ago..

 

[gslack]

'
Thanks for the heads-up, Rolling Thunder. I will try to find the scientific papers themselves.

But those damned popular media reporters!! They always get the science wrong!!

Its impossible that "significantly less radiation is escaping into space than was previously the case" !!!

It must be that the spectral characteristics of the radiation prove that greenhouse-gas global heating is occurring.

Not that it was in doubt by sensible people, but one must pile Ossa upon Pelion for the education of the Denialist fools.
.

Yes a 2001 story posted by a green party automaton... And you...LOL, jumping right on his side. How telling.. Did you follow the link? No you couldn't have because it's busted. Did you google the story and check it? No because you would have seen it's a 12 year old story..

Numan your ignorance has bit you again. I suppose you support other old and incorrect theories as well. Btw, the earth is round..

Your continued use of the word denialist over denier shows through your false intellect and claimed education. Just because you repeat stupidity,and get equally stupid people to repeat it, doesn't make it true or even witty, just stupid...Not surprising seeing that you just came out in support of a 12 year old story as if it were a new study...

And what's up with your rep meter? You get busted socking?

Edited for trolling blunder.. Thats edit number 4 and a post 6 hours old...

 

[westwall]

He is speaking about things far above your intellectual abilities there admiral....best you crawl back under your rock..

Westwall, please summarize polarbear's argument for us ... in your own words. But be detailed. I mean, since you've proclaimed it's so brilliant, you obviously must understand it completely. So demonstrate for us your self-proclaimed deep understanding of the issues here. After all, you wouldn't want everyone to think that you simply knee-jerked out some support for a fellow 'tard, and that like everyone else, you actually had no idea of what he was babbling about either.

Gslack, don't you be shy either. Explain exactly, with all the mathematics, what polarbear was speaking of. Again, only use your own words. After all, you wouldn't want people to think you had no freakin' clue either, and were just jumping on the 'tard vendetta bandwagon, right? I mean, they already think that, but score big here, and you can get them to think otherwise!

You,...who took a course in "locker repair" and did not even know why radiators are painted black, just to mention one example what an "expert" you are want to give Westwall a science exam ?
He is a geologist and graduated from a University, not a "locker repairman" course and claimed he "used to run nuclear reactors".
Let`s review how your "water chemistry" exam turned out:

Here was the question:
http://www.usmessageboard.com/envir...the-atmosphere-is-what-we-11.html#post7241522
And here is the "water chemistry expert"...(+nuclear expert) answer...if you can call it an answer:
http://www.usmessageboard.com/envir...the-atmosphere-is-what-we-12.html#post7241807

That's why I'd read the instructions for the particular model.

So, we see one of your usual sad attempts at a deflection, but it won't work. You _still_ fail at water chemistry.

You found nothing with Google.
That`s a run of the mill pH meter with a pH and a KCl reference probe.
They all work the same.
The calibration buffers use also all the same color coding WORLD WIDE...
You had no idea which one in that picture was the pH 4 and which one was the pH 10 calibration buffer and meowed:

That's why I'd read the instructions for the particular model.

So, we see one of your usual sad attempts at a deflection

So who is deflecting?
And you are trying to give me an exam in "water chemistry"...?
What the **** is that ?
I took Math, Physics, Phys Chem, Organic Chem, Inorganic Chem, Organic synthesis Chem,...Lab, Pilot plant & Industrial Scale (Chem eng.)+
Radio Chemistry, Trace Analysis,...such as Atomic Absorption Spectroscopy, Infrared and UV spectroscopy, HPLC, GLC etc etc..but I never heard of "water chemistry"...then again I did not study at "skeptical science.org" like you do

I won`t grade you...let`s have a jury decide.
But as I recall, their last verdict was as damning as this one is likely to be
I bet you even Gslack`s kid could think circles around you...and did...that`s why you had him banned !

Yeah, I've never heard of a water chem class either. Organic and inorganic chem yes, but hydrology is more broad based, and deals with water contaminants and how to model water flow etc.