West Antarctic Ice Sheet (WAIS) Could Disintegrate Within Decades

[SSDD]

Of course you interpret. Your claim is completely specious. That would be intentional because

YOU ARE A TROLL

Poor skidmark.....reduced to nothing more than bitter name calling...you brought this on yourself...incessantly making claims that you can't support...and no...I don't interpret....that is what you guys do when you don't like what the statement of the physical law, or the definition says....stupid...but it is what you do and if it is all you have, then what are you going to do?

 

[Wuwei]

Again...I don't interpret anything...that is your method of operation...I simply take the definitions as they are written...they mean what they mean...the fact that they demonstrate your thinking is wrong is your problem...not mine. I don't need to interpret them...I tend to agree with them.

You are not correct.
Here is the physics definition of spontaneous emission:
Spontaneous emission - Wikipedia

Spontaneous emission is the process in which a quantum mechanical system (such as an atom, molecule or subatomic particle) transitions from an excited energy state to a lower energy state (e.g., its ground state) and emits a quantised amount of energy in the form of a photon.

Sometimes molecules have a metastable level and continue to fluoresce long after the exciting radiation is turned off; this is called phosphorescence. Figurines that glow in the dark are phosphorescent. ​

If you don't abide by the physics definition of spontaneous then you have a fallacious interpretation of the physics.

You can see a cold phosphorescent figurine with your warmer eyes. That is an example of energy spontaneously emitted from a cold object to a warmer object. However the 2nd law involving entropy still holds.

.

 

[SSDD]

[

Spontaneous emission is the process in which a quantum mechanical system (such as an atom, molecule or subatomic particle) transitions from an excited energy state to a lower energy state (e.g., its ground state) and emits a quantised amount of energy in the form of a photon.​

You never vail to amuse.....your definition is for spontaneous emission, not a spontaneous process...it is spontaneous processes that we are talking about...A spontaneous emission of a photon says noting about energy transfer from warm to cool or cool to warm....and doesn't describe under what conditions a spontaneous emission may occur. All of the examples you came up with...mushrooms, light sticks...LED's, bioluminescence, etc etc ad nausueum were topics covered under the umbrella of spontaneous/non spontaneous processes...not emissions...little wonder you don't have a clue..you don't even know what we were talking about...you just go out and grab the first thing that looks like it agrees with you and don't bother to even see if it is what we were talking about...

I am quite sure this has been covered before but apparently it didn't sink in...I won't cover it with you again...

​

 

[Wuwei]

I am quite sure this has been covered before but apparently it didn't sink in...I won't cover it with you again...

You still don't understand the physics definition of spontaneous. Phosphorescence falls under the physics definition of spontaneous emission. Atoms can radiate light spontaneously after the excitation energy has completely stopped.

Light sticks spontaneously (physics definition) emit radiation after chemical energy has been created and stored.

The emitted light can come from a colder object to a hotter object.

I don't blame you for not wanting to cover it again because you are trying to twist the physics definition of spontaneous and fail.

.

 

[SSDD]

You have my pity wuwei....to be so uninformed in the information age....to need to interpret every single thing that comes along in order to try and make it agree with you....to not know the difference between spontaneous emission and spontaneous process...to be a dupe....

 

[Crick]

To so OBVIOUSLY be a fucking TROLL edited, don't use red

The WAIS has already begun to disintegrate. The retreat of the grounding line and the depressed isostatic basin means its disintegration is unavoidable. The only question is how quickly.

 

[jc456]

To so OBVIOUSLY be a fucking TROLL

The WAIS has already begun to disintegrate. The retreat of the grounding line and the depressed isostatic basin means its disintegration is unavoidable. The only question is how quickly.

Dude way to lose control. It’s a fking message board . Wow

 

[IanC]

To so OBVIOUSLY be a fucking TROLL

The WAIS has already begun to disintegrate. The retreat of the grounding line and the depressed isostatic basin means its disintegration is unavoidable. The only question is how quickly.

I feel sorry for you Abraham. You obviously ferverently believe these predictions of doom.

I think you need to take a chill pill and try to put things into perspective.

Is the WAIS on a course to destruction? Maybe. When did it start down this possible pathway? 10000 years ago when the last ice age ended. Did the WAIS collapse during ant of the other interglacials? I bet that it was headed for disaster then just like it is now. But ice ages kept coming to the rescue.

If we had today's technology 5000 years ago the same conditions would have been present, and depending on the attitude of the time, the same exaggerated forecasts of doom could have been made.

I think you should actually use some scientific estimates to check the cause and effects of all the things being blamed on CAGW. It doesn't add up.

 

[Wuwei]

You have my pity wuwei....to be so uninformed in the information age....to need to interpret every single thing that comes along in order to try and make it agree with you....to not know the difference between spontaneous emission and spontaneous process...to be a dupe....

It seems when you are cornered you always resort to obnoxious blather.
We are talking about spontaneous emission of a phosphorescent material.

You can see a cold phosphorescent object with your warmer eyes. That is an example of energy spontaneously emitted from a cold object to a warmer object. However the 2nd law involving entropy still holds.

 

[jc456]

To so OBVIOUSLY be a fucking TROLL

The WAIS has already begun to disintegrate. The retreat of the grounding line and the depressed isostatic basin means its disintegration is unavoidable. The only question is how quickly.

 

[SSDD]

You have my pity wuwei....to be so uninformed in the information age....to need to interpret every single thing that comes along in order to try and make it agree with you....to not know the difference between spontaneous emission and spontaneous process...to be a dupe....

It seems when you are cornered you always resort to obnoxious blather.
We are talking about spontaneous emission of a phosphorescent material.

You can see a cold phosphorescent object with your warmer eyes. That is an example of energy spontaneously emitted from a cold object to a warmer object. However the 2nd law involving entropy still holds.

Cornered? What a laugh.....go learn the difference between spontaneous emission and a spontaneous process...

 

[Wuwei]

Cornered? What a laugh.....go learn the difference between spontaneous emission and a spontaneous process...

That is a non-sequitur. Spontaneous process is a more general term. Spontaneous emission of radiation is a specific example.

Phosphorescence is an example of energy spontaneously emitted from a cold object to a warmer object. However the 2nd law involving entropy still holds as it should in all spontaneous processes.

 

[SSDD]

Not going over this material again...look up the word tedious...you already lost this discussion twice...if you must relive your failure to support your claim... it is all there in the history...

 

[Crick]

He hasn't lost shit. You've never won an argument on any facet of science with anyone. Your interpretations regarding the SLoT violate the conservation of energy and special relativity. Your ideas regarding infrared and CO2 are demonstrably false and outright idiotic. Your contention that water has no gaseous phase is a stupid as stupid can get. On spontaneous emission you have contradicted yourself repeatedly.

The reason this is the case is that you intentionally push shit you know to be false just so you can laugh at the fools that waste their time arguing with you and the even bigger fools who believe you actually know what you're talking about. That behavior is what makes you a

FUCKING TROLL

 

[Wuwei]

Not going over this material again...look up the word tedious...you already lost this discussion twice...if you must relive your failure to support your claim... it is all there in the history...

Yes, I realize why physics is tedious for you. You don't believe physics. So you make up your own definition of spontaneous and result in a miserable failure. Your theory leads to the erroneous conclusion that nothing on earth is spontaneous, because it was man made or because there was prior work done. You probably don't know that everything that gives off energy of any sort has had a prior input of energy at some point.

So back-radiation of GHGs is allowed to happen because, as you said the sun does prior work. And so, in your world, objects can radiate to hotter objects because nothing is a spontaneous process. Of course that is already in the physics books, but not for the asinine reasons you believe.

.

 

[SSDD]

He hasn't lost shit. You've never won an argument on any facet of science with anyone. Your interpretations regarding the SLoT violate the conservation of energy and special relativity. Your ideas regarding infrared and CO2 are demonstrably false and outright idiotic. Your contention that water has no gaseous phase is a stupid as stupid can get. On spontaneous emission you have contradicted yourself repeatedly.

The reason this is the case is that you intentionally push shit you know to be false just so you can laugh at the fools that waste their time arguing with you and the even bigger fools who believe you actually know what you're talking about. That behavior is what makes you a

FUCKING TROLL

And yet, you can't seem to mange to find the first piece of observed, measured evidence which demonstrates that I am wrong...how sad for you skidmark...

 

[SSDD]

Not going over this material again...look up the word tedious...you already lost this discussion twice...if you must relive your failure to support your claim... it is all there in the history...

Yes, I realize why physics is tedious for you. You don't believe physics. So you make up your own definition of spontaneous and result in a miserable failure. Your theory leads to the erroneous conclusion that nothing on earth is spontaneous, because it was man made or because there was prior work done. You probably don't know that everything that gives off energy of any sort has had a prior input of energy at some point.

So back-radiation of GHGs is allowed to happen because, as you said the sun does prior work. And so, in your world, objects can radiate to hotter objects because nothing is a spontaneous process. Of course that is already in the physics books, but not for the asinine reasons you believe.

.

No...phyisics is fun...you are tedious...again..refer to every other time you lost this discussion...I won't be revisiting it again.

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

Not going over this material again...look up the word tedious...you already lost this discussion twice...if you must relive your failure to support your claim... it is all there in the history...

Yes, I realize why physics is tedious for you. You don't believe physics. So you make up your own definition of spontaneous and result in a miserable failure. Your theory leads to the erroneous conclusion that nothing on earth is spontaneous, because it was man made or because there was prior work done. You probably don't know that everything that gives off energy of any sort has had a prior input of energy at some point.

So back-radiation of GHGs is allowed to happen because, as you said the sun does prior work. And so, in your world, objects can radiate to hotter objects because nothing is a spontaneous process. Of course that is already in the physics books, but not for the asinine reasons you believe.

.

No...phyisics is fun...you are tedious...again..refer to every other time you lost this discussion...I won't be revisiting it again.

There goes Brave Sir Robin.....all by himself.

 

[skookerasbil]

All you climate crusader dummies who keep talking perpetually about the science and how your side is right? Where has it gotten you?

How many decades is it going to take that lobbing these hysterical bombs is ghey........has zero effect on the public because the bombs have gotten st00pider and st00pider. Time to pivot to Plan B s0ns because your side is getting its clock cleaned with this hysterical stuff.

 

[jc456]

He hasn't lost shit. You've never won an argument on any facet of science with anyone. Your interpretations regarding the SLoT violate the conservation of energy and special relativity. Your ideas regarding infrared and CO2 are demonstrably false and outright idiotic. Your contention that water has no gaseous phase is a stupid as stupid can get. On spontaneous emission you have contradicted yourself repeatedly.

The reason this is the case is that you intentionally push shit you know to be false just so you can laugh at the fools that waste their time arguing with you and the even bigger fools who believe you actually know what you're talking about. That behavior is what makes you a

FUCKING TROLL

champ, you've been the chump. just saying, still no observable measured evidence. still waiting. seems you are the one trolling.