Over 30,000 scientists say 'Catastrophic Man-Made Global Warming' is a complete hoax and science lie

Let’s guess: the 30,000 fucktards are all alumni of Trump university?? How many of them were also microbiologists trying to find Trump’s dick when they were not busy postulating their no global warming theories?

So big fonts with denier talking points "trumps" blue fonts and links to the EPA?
The only advice I can give you is your lack of real answers confirms you have none to give. You might want to avoid that.

You sound like iffy with a new avatar.

Come back when you can actually refute something I posted with links to reliable sources.
In the meantime, your hot air isn't helping.

I don't take advice from lawtard amateur meteorologists who have NO clue what they are blabbering about even if they write in blue... you gonna tell me. LOLing@menmuncher

The Next Great Extinction Event Will Not Be Global Warming – It Will Be Global Cooling
Guest Blogger / 11 hours ago September 1, 2019
By Allan M. R. MacRae, B.A.Sc., M.Eng., August 2019
https://wattsupwiththat.com/2019/09/...lobal-cooling/

CATASTROPHIC GLOBAL WARMING IS A FALSE CRISIS – THE NEXT GREAT EXTINCTION WILL BE GLOBAL COOLING


Originally Posted by Redhot1960

So big fonts with denier talking points "trumps" blue fonts and links to the EPA?
The only advice I can give you is your lack of real answers confirms you have none to give. You might want to avoid that.

You sound like iffy with a new avatar.

Come back when you can actually refute something I posted with links to reliable sources.
In the meantime, your hot air isn't helping.

Originally Posted by Munchmasterman

We got plenty of time to play. You see, this thread ain't going away. I personally will keep it alive from now till the end of my time. I will make you the laughing stock of eccie... FUCKFACE

So big fonts with denier talking points "trumps" blue fonts and links to the EPA?
The only advice I can give you is your lack of real answers confirms you have none to give. You might want to avoid that.

You sound like iffy with a new avatar.

Come back when you can actually refute something I posted with links to reliable sources.
In the meantime, your hot air isn't helping.

Originally Posted by Munchmasterman

FUCKFACE you can start with this. Just know it won't end with this.

Hey FUCKFACE...

When any man is more stupidly vain and outrageously egotistic than his fellows, he will hide his hideousness in humanitarianism. –George Moore

Did I just hear a foot stomp?
Let me know if you ever actually refute me. Or learn to read since I don't watch cartoon videos.

In the meantime, are you going to big font me into submission?

Go back to your basement to plot your revenge little snowflake.

You ARE iffy.

Welcome back cocksucker.
(On a side note, when was the last time you sucked a bigger dick than mine? Other than trump's?)

We got plenty of time to play. You see, this thread ain't going away. I personally will keep it alive from now till the end of my time. I will make you the laughing stock of eccie... FUCKFACE

Originally Posted by Redhot1960

This is where your "hypothesis" is flawed like you MUNCHY...and I know you know more than these people. YOU FUCKING DON'T.
It was the reflective glass (mirror glass if you ever knew) that was the best insulator...not the vacuum.
A narcissist like you can't admit they don't know SHIT. You are one condescending egotistical know nothing.

Your quote:
Thermal radiation is not listed. Because much like your head, outer space consists mostly of vacuum. And "THERMAL RADIATION CAN'T TRAVEL IN A VACUUM " . Anybody who uses a thermos container should know there is usually a stainless steel vacuum bottle inside. They used to be made out of glass. And when you dropped it, and your thermos of coffee got hot on the outside, you knew you broke the glass


Down goes MUNCHY...down goes MUNCHY...down goes MUNCHY.


If heat can travel through a vacuum (radiation), then how is heat conserved in a thermal flask where the vacuum blocks the heat?

10 Answers





Robert Nolan
Answered Dec 28, 2017 · Author has 274 answers and 64k answer views

As others have touched on, a thermal flask with a vacuum layer mostly eliminates two forms of heat transfer - conduction (transfer via direct contact) and convection (transfer via a moving fluid such as a liquid or gas). It leaves radiation, sometimes mitigated to some degree by a reflective layer in the outer shell, but even without that reflective layer a key element of what makes this system effective is that radiation is itself much less effective in transferring heat than conduction and convection.
To highlight, consider three scenarios involving a hot stove (don't actually try the last one, please, and take care if you try the second) -

1. Place your hand to the side of the burner. The burner is now radiating heat to your hand.
2. Place your hand directly over the burner at the same distance. Since hot air rises, the air provides minor convection to transfer heat to your hand. For a more profound difference, throw a pot of water on the stove and put your hand over it in the steam once the water is boiling, or stir it with your hand as it heats up.
3. Place your hand directly on the burner. Heat is now conducted directly into your hand.

I'm sure you can satisfactorily imagine which one transfers heat into your hand most effectively and which transfers least effectively.


265 views ·




Brian Turner
Answered Dec 28, 2017 · Author has 181 answers and 119.7k answer views

Because at the temperatures we use flasks, radiation is a really slow way for heat to move. Flasks also use another trick. They are made of shiny material. Shiny material has low Emissivity - Wikipedia. That means it does not radiate heat well. It also tends to not absorb heat well. The small amount of heat that does radiate bounces around in that vacuum and has a 50/50 chance of absorbing back on the inside.
If you tried to use a flask at the temperature of a light bulb filament the heat would get out quickly.
Flasks are not perfect at keeping heat in or out, just really good at it.


291 views · View 3 Upvoters




Bill Otto, studied Physics & Chemistry at The University of Alabama in Huntsville (1976)
Answered Dec 28, 2017 · Author has 3.6k answers and 8.4m answer views

If you define thermal radiation as heat (I don’t) then it can travel through a vacuum. If you define heat this way then all electromagnetic radiation from VLF radio waves to gamma rays are heat. It just is not useful to call all EM radiation “heat.”
A thermal flask, known as a Dewar in the UK and a Thermos in the US, is coated with a polished low emissivity material like silver so that very little thermal radiation can be emitted. If it were black (high emissivity) then the amount of radiation would be much higher and the heat would escape (or get in as the case may be) in the form of radiation much faster.
Less expensive vacuum bottles are coated with aluminum instead of silver. They do not hold heat in as well as those coated with silver or gold.


609 views · View 5 Upvoters





James Cibulka, Physics Teacher
Answered Dec 28, 2017 · Author has 233 answers and 49.3k answer views

Thermal energy can travel through conduction (touching) convection (moving air or fluid) or radiation. Since the gap is vacuum sealed, the first two are greatly reduced (still touches at the top!) . . . . Leaving radiation. . . . Which is how it travels in space. . . . . They mirror the inside to reflect it back into the thermos, but nothing is perfect. . . . Some radiation still gets out.
Does this make sense to you?




Pradeep Saminathan, ASIC designer, INFP, Dreamer, Non-Theist, Creative, Destructive, Liar
Answered Dec 28, 2017

Even though radiation can travel through vacuum, the inner layer of a thermos flask is typically made reflective (Silver coated in case of traditional glass flask; Polished steel in case of a metal flask) . The reflective nature of the inner wall ensures that any radiation from the hot contents get bounced back in to the content.
Now there is a small amount of radiation that may escape through the top lid and tiny gaps between the neck and lid. But the non reflective surface area is typically much less than the total area the the hot content is in contact with. Narrower the neck , lesser the loss through radiation .
Conduction heat loss is minimized by using poor conductors in the lid and body.
Convection heat loss is minimized by the partial vacuum. Less air molecules, less convection.


229 views · View 1 Upvoter

This is where your "hypothesis" is flawed like you MUNCHY...and I know you know more than these people. YOU FUCKING DON'T.
It was the reflective glass (mirror glass if you ever knew) that was the best insulator...not the vacuum.
A narcissist like you can't admit they don't know SHIT. You are one condescending egotistical know nothing.

Your quote:
Thermal radiation is not listed. Because much like your head, outer space consists mostly of vacuum. And "THERMAL RADIATION CAN'T TRAVEL IN A VACUUM " . Anybody who uses a thermos container should know there is usually a stainless steel vacuum bottle inside. They used to be made out of glass. And when you dropped it, and your thermos of coffee got hot on the outside, you knew you broke the glass


Down goes MUNCHY...down goes MUNCHY...down goes MUNCHY.
Originally Posted by bb1961

Yeah, he must have missed the 3rd grade science class on how the earth heats and cools.

Maybe a refresher is in order.

https://www.sciencedirect.com/topics...rmal-radiation

14.3.5 Thermal Radiation

Thermal radiation is electromagnetic radiation emitted from a material that is due to the heat of the material, the characteristics of which depend on its temperature. An example of thermal radiation is the infrared radiation emitted by a common household radiator or electric heater. A person near a raging bonfire will feel the radiated heat of the fire, even if the surrounding air is very cold. Thermal radiation is generated when heat from the movement of charges in the material (electrons and protons in common forms of matter) is converted to electromagnetic radiation. Sunshine, or solar radiation, is thermal radiation from the extremely hot gasses of the sun, and this radiation heats the earth. The earth also emits thermal radiation but at a much lower intensity because it is cooler. The balance between heating by incoming solar thermal radiation and cooling by the earth's outgoing thermal radiation is the primary process that determines the earth's overall temperature. As such, radiation is the only form of heat transfer that does not require a material to transmit the heat. Radiative heat is transferred from surface to surface, with little heat absorbed between surfaces. However, the surfaces, once heated, can release the heat via conduction or convection to the surroundings.

Having your no accurate equipment argument shot down still butt-hurts you, doesn't it?
Every time you have nothing but one of your douche-bag statements or your fake calls for debate shows your lack of facts. I'm always open to debate. If you have provable facts.
No panic here. No facts there.






Little examples for little minds. You asked, "What method does the use of Fossil Fuels by man warm the surface of the earth to facilitate Global Warming or affect Climate?"



A quick checklist.
I explained burning coal produces greenhouse gasses.
I explained why greenhouse gasses are called greenhouse gasses.
I explained the effect that greenhouse gasses have on our atmosphere.
I explained how a greenhouse works.
I explained that solar radiation that normally reflects off the surface of the planet is trapped by.....? Greenhouse gasses.

That explains how burning fossil fuels facilitates the warming of the planet. And it shows I know how to explain it because I did explain it.
What I can't explain is why you don't understand the principal involved. What is obvious is that you're too lazy to look up your own information so you would have a handle on the basics.

You are a level 1 denier. You have no fucking clue how the process works. You don't understand 7th-grade science.
A level 2 denier understands how the process works but thinks it can't have an effect on the "whole entire world".
The next level isn't a denier. It is someone you can have a discussion with about how much change is the result of human activity.

It doesn't matter if you can't understand this. You can't refute any of the science so you play wiseass instead of playing dumdass.
Your choice.

Originally Posted by Munchmasterman

FUCKFACE IS A Thermageddonite
https://wattsupwiththat.com/2019/09/...e-very-afraid/

what part of money making climate change SCAM is difficult for people to understand

Ain't finding greenhouse gases on the elements chart. But you are aware of cold air inversion. Right? Go sit on a mountain in Colorado and look over Denver to see how it works. Wonder what impacts solar minimums and solar maximums play? Guess we are not allowed to ponder the Nina twins - La Nina and El Nino.



Remember how they flubbed the math calculating the effects of water temperatures and were off by a factor of 10,000? That was awesome...

I guess you you've missed all the references to greenhouse gasses. Originally Posted by Munchmasterman

what part of money making climate change SCAM is difficult for people to understand Originally Posted by rexdutchman

The bullshit conspiracy part of it, budda.

Official DPST hat - with apologies to George Orwell.
a "Non-Triggering Blue"!!!!

Orwell thinks you’re a jerk.

DPST's - along with filling in ballots for other people, also speak for and cast ballots for the dead.
What a talented group!!!!