Total Posts:44|Showing Posts:1-30|Last Page
Jump to topic:

Testing the true scientist

Peternosaint
Posts: 1,166
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/8/2016 9:28:36 AM
Posted: 7 months ago
Many here are supporters of the sciences, they seem to think that science is the be all and end all of man's future. I do not know how many of you are true scientists or just hopeful folk that are prepared to state your life on the sciences of man.

To test the knowledge let me give you a test:

Take notice of the IF.

If the earth was surrounded by a large cloud of water what would the weather conditions be like?

1. Would it be like it is today? 2. Would it be like a hot house all over the earth?

3. Would it sustain tropical growth in all areas of the earth?

If any of these questions do not suit your scientific mind, give similar questions and answers.

I must now await the answers from the world of science, as it is known on this forum.
DanneJeRusse
Posts: 12,633
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/8/2016 3:08:33 PM
Posted: 7 months ago
At 5/8/2016 9:28:36 AM, Peternosaint wrote:
Many here are supporters of the sciences, they seem to think that science is the be all and end all of man's future. I do not know how many of you are true scientists or just hopeful folk that are prepared to state your life on the sciences of man.

To test the knowledge let me give you a test:

Take notice of the IF.

If the earth was surrounded by a large cloud of water what would the weather conditions be like?

Gravity would warp the geodesics of the space surrounding the cloud towards the center of the Earth and all the water would follow the geodesic path.

1. Would it be like it is today? 2. Would it be like a hot house all over the earth?

3. Would it sustain tropical growth in all areas of the earth?

If any of these questions do not suit your scientific mind, give similar questions and answers.

I must now await the answers from the world of science, as it is known on this forum.
Marrying a 6 year old and waiting until she reaches puberty and maturity before having consensual sex is better than walking up to
a stranger in a bar and proceeding to have relations with no valid proof of the intent of the person. Muhammad wins. ~ Fatihah
If they don't want to be killed then they have to subdue to the Islamic laws. - Uncung
Without God, you are lower than sh!t. ~ SpiritandTruth
RuvDraba
Posts: 6,033
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/8/2016 4:53:05 PM
Posted: 7 months ago
At 5/8/2016 9:28:36 AM, Peternosaint wrote:
To test the knowledge let me give you a test:
Peter, you haven't the knowledge, the scholarship, nor the research ethics to test anyone here about the sciences. I'm afraid I have to reject the premise that you are competent to do so.

But have you an area of scientific ignorance you want help with?

(That's a rhetorical question, except for the part about you wanting help.)

At 5/8/2016 3:08:33 PM, DanneJeRusse wrote:
Gravity would warp the geodesics of the space surrounding the cloud towards the center of the Earth and all the water would follow the geodesic path.
For example, here Danne is saying that according to General Relativity, the water would all fall down.

He's right, but I'm a bit concerned about what's keeping some of it from boiling off into space too. Is it cooled by the Earth's rapid passage through luminiferous aether? Or perhaps it's condensation on the underside of a celestial sphere?

More detail required please.
distraff
Posts: 1,005
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/8/2016 8:12:46 PM
Posted: 7 months ago
At 5/8/2016 9:28:36 AM, Peternosaint wrote:
Many here are supporters of the sciences, they seem to think that science is the be all and end all of man's future. I do not know how many of you are true scientists or just hopeful folk that are prepared to state your life on the sciences of man.

To test the knowledge let me give you a test:

Take notice of the IF.

If the earth was surrounded by a large cloud of water what would the weather conditions be like?

1. Would it be like it is today? 2. Would it be like a hot house all over the earth?

3. Would it sustain tropical growth in all areas of the earth?

If any of these questions do not suit your scientific mind, give similar questions and answers.

I must now await the answers from the world of science, as it is known on this forum.

It would be far more wet and tropical. If this cloud was massive enough to flood the earth and was as heavy as an ocean then it would be so massive that it would block out all light, and would be so heavy that it would crush all life just like it we go too deep in the ocean.
Daedal
Posts: 157
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/8/2016 9:06:39 PM
Posted: 7 months ago
I think there would be a flood and some bearded guy would build a boat and get all the animals on it and .....

Oh, someone already did that.
Aran55633
Posts: 110
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/8/2016 10:19:56 PM
Posted: 7 months ago
At 5/8/2016 9:06:39 PM, Daedal wrote:
I think there would be a flood and some bearded guy would build a boat and get all the animals on it and .....

Oh, someone already did that.

+1
Peternosaint
Posts: 1,166
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/8/2016 11:15:15 PM
Posted: 7 months ago
At 5/8/2016 4:53:05 PM, RuvDraba wrote:
At 5/8/2016 9:28:36 AM, Peternosaint wrote:
To test the knowledge let me give you a test:
Peter, you haven't the knowledge, the scholarship, nor the research ethics to test anyone here about the sciences. I'm afraid I have to reject the premise that you are competent to do so.

But have you an area of scientific ignorance you want help with?

(That's a rhetorical question, except for the part about you wanting help.)

At 5/8/2016 3:08:33 PM, DanneJeRusse wrote:
Gravity would warp the geodesics of the space surrounding the cloud towards the center of the Earth and all the water would follow the geodesic path.
For example, here Danne is saying that according to General Relativity, the water would all fall down.

He's right, but I'm a bit concerned about what's keeping some of it from boiling off into space too. Is it cooled by the Earth's rapid passage through luminiferous aether? Or perhaps it's condensation on the underside of a celestial sphere?

More detail required please.

ME: A true scientist, which you are not even the back end of, does not need clarification for a problem, they use their own ability and intelligence (Do you know what that is) to solve the problem as presented.

Now that we have exchanged the usual insults, stay out, you will really get stuck on the next questions.
Peternosaint
Posts: 1,166
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/8/2016 11:17:10 PM
Posted: 7 months ago
At 5/8/2016 3:08:33 PM, DanneJeRusse wrote:
At 5/8/2016 9:28:36 AM, Peternosaint wrote:
Many here are supporters of the sciences, they seem to think that science is the be all and end all of man's future. I do not know how many of you are true scientists or just hopeful folk that are prepared to state your life on the sciences of man.

To test the knowledge let me give you a test:

Take notice of the IF.

If the earth was surrounded by a large cloud of water what would the weather conditions be like?

Gravity would warp the geodesics of the space surrounding the cloud towards the center of the Earth and all the water would follow the geodesic path.

1. Would it be like it is today? 2. Would it be like a hot house all over the earth?

3. Would it sustain tropical growth in all areas of the earth?

If any of these questions do not suit your scientific mind, give similar questions and answers.

I must now await the answers from the world of science, as it is known on this forum.

ME: Yes, the water would eventually fall to the earth under normal circumstances.

Are you going to attempt the other questions?
Peternosaint
Posts: 1,166
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/8/2016 11:19:25 PM
Posted: 7 months ago
At 5/8/2016 8:12:46 PM, distraff wrote:
At 5/8/2016 9:28:36 AM, Peternosaint wrote:
Many here are supporters of the sciences, they seem to think that science is the be all and end all of man's future. I do not know how many of you are true scientists or just hopeful folk that are prepared to state your life on the sciences of man.

To test the knowledge let me give you a test:

Take notice of the IF.

If the earth was surrounded by a large cloud of water what would the weather conditions be like?

1. Would it be like it is today? 2. Would it be like a hot house all over the earth?

3. Would it sustain tropical growth in all areas of the earth?

If any of these questions do not suit your scientific mind, give similar questions and answers.

I must now await the answers from the world of science, as it is known on this forum.

It would be far more wet and tropical. If this cloud was massive enough to flood the earth and was as heavy as an ocean then it would be so massive that it would block out all light, and would be so heavy that it would crush all life just like it we go too deep in the ocean.

ME: I have not mentioned any consistency of the band of water. But I would agree it would create a tropical condition all over the earth, such as a hot house condition...How can this be proven?
Axonly
Posts: 1,802
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/8/2016 11:28:05 PM
Posted: 7 months ago
At 5/8/2016 9:28:36 AM, Peternosaint wrote:
Many here are supporters of the sciences, they seem to think that science is the be all and end all of man's future. I do not know how many of you are true scientists or just hopeful folk that are prepared to state your life on the sciences of man.

To test the knowledge let me give you a test:

Take notice of the IF.

If the earth was surrounded by a large cloud of water what would the weather conditions be like?

1. Would it be like it is today? 2. Would it be like a hot house all over the earth?

3. Would it sustain tropical growth in all areas of the earth?

If any of these questions do not suit your scientific mind, give similar questions and answers.

I must now await the answers from the world of science, as it is known on this forum.

That's too vague, what sort of distance away would the cloud be? Is it actually a cloud?

Not to mention the question is specific more to climate scientists (And perhaps physicists too).
Meh!
Peternosaint
Posts: 1,166
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/8/2016 11:28:47 PM
Posted: 7 months ago
At 5/8/2016 10:19:56 PM, Aran55633 wrote:
At 5/8/2016 9:06:39 PM, Daedal wrote:
I think there would be a flood and some bearded guy would build a boat and get all the animals on it and .....

Oh, someone already did that.

+1

ME: Okay, we have one person that has a scientific mind, one ratbag that needs the answer before he can give an answer to a question, and then we have the dorks that just want to hijack the post...And this is a science debate??????

There is proof that the earth was in a tropical condition with the 'swaddling band' of water, keeping direct sunlight from reaching the earth surface. The earth still had its day and night or plant life would not succeed in growing, such is the case when plants are deprived of light and are kept in total darkness.

The water did not fall, at first and the earth, like tropical areas, produced a mist that watered all that needed water. Not being a horticulturist, I can't suggest if morning or evening misting would be most suitable, can you?

I do hope we can get some sense in this. Testing the "scientific minds of the posters' will show just how much of a SCIENCE debate this is in reality.
DanneJeRusse
Posts: 12,633
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/8/2016 11:31:50 PM
Posted: 7 months ago
At 5/8/2016 11:17:10 PM, Peternosaint wrote:
At 5/8/2016 3:08:33 PM, DanneJeRusse wrote:
At 5/8/2016 9:28:36 AM, Peternosaint wrote:
Many here are supporters of the sciences, they seem to think that science is the be all and end all of man's future. I do not know how many of you are true scientists or just hopeful folk that are prepared to state your life on the sciences of man.

To test the knowledge let me give you a test:

Take notice of the IF.

If the earth was surrounded by a large cloud of water what would the weather conditions be like?

Gravity would warp the geodesics of the space surrounding the cloud towards the center of the Earth and all the water would follow the geodesic path.

1. Would it be like it is today? 2. Would it be like a hot house all over the earth?

3. Would it sustain tropical growth in all areas of the earth?

If any of these questions do not suit your scientific mind, give similar questions and answers.

I must now await the answers from the world of science, as it is known on this forum.

ME: Yes, the water would eventually fall to the earth under normal circumstances.

Actually, it would be almost immediately.

Are you going to attempt the other questions?
Marrying a 6 year old and waiting until she reaches puberty and maturity before having consensual sex is better than walking up to
a stranger in a bar and proceeding to have relations with no valid proof of the intent of the person. Muhammad wins. ~ Fatihah
If they don't want to be killed then they have to subdue to the Islamic laws. - Uncung
Without God, you are lower than sh!t. ~ SpiritandTruth
RuvDraba
Posts: 6,033
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/9/2016 12:28:05 AM
Posted: 7 months ago
At 5/8/2016 11:15:15 PM, Peternosaint wrote:
At 5/8/2016 4:53:05 PM, RuvDraba wrote:
At 5/8/2016 9:28:36 AM, Peternosaint wrote:
To test the knowledge let me give you a test:
More detail required please.

ME: A true scientist, which you are not even the back end of, does not need clarification for a problem, they use their own ability and intelligence (Do you know what that is) to solve the problem as presented.
Oh? Citation please!

Peter, scientists are very careful about the formulation of problems, because poor formulations can contain false assumptions leading to false conclusions, or be outright invalid and admitting no valid answer at all. That's why if you ask a vague question like 'how far is the moon', they give you careful, qualified answers, like the mean semi-major axis of the geocentric lunar orbit (about 384,400km) compared to the variance (between 356,500 and 406,700km.)

Science is a naturally pedantic discipline, and the empirical examination of a problem's formulation prior to trying to solve it is part of what differentiates science from philosophy. It's why counting angels dancing on the head of a pin can be a philosophical question, but not a scientific one.

So let's talk about your 'cloud of water' 'surrounding' the Earth, shall we?

Let's start with how much water, surrounding the Earth at what distance from the surface, and what's keeping it there, and neither falling to Earth, or boiling off into space.

If you can't quantify those things, then you haven't asked a scientific question; just a philosophical one.

And since I suspect your question is a question about the legitimacy of water vapour as a greenhouse gas, why don't you ask the question you really want answered (e.g. why doesn't more stratospheric water vapour cool the planet off), instead of asking a silly question you can't even formulate scientifically?
distraff
Posts: 1,005
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/9/2016 12:46:01 AM
Posted: 7 months ago
At 5/8/2016 11:19:25 PM, Peternosaint wrote:
At 5/8/2016 8:12:46 PM, distraff wrote:
At 5/8/2016 9:28:36 AM, Peternosaint wrote:
Many here are supporters of the sciences, they seem to think that science is the be all and end all of man's future. I do not know how many of you are true scientists or just hopeful folk that are prepared to state your life on the sciences of man.

To test the knowledge let me give you a test:

Take notice of the IF.

If the earth was surrounded by a large cloud of water what would the weather conditions be like?

1. Would it be like it is today? 2. Would it be like a hot house all over the earth?

3. Would it sustain tropical growth in all areas of the earth?

If any of these questions do not suit your scientific mind, give similar questions and answers.

I must now await the answers from the world of science, as it is known on this forum.

It would be far more wet and tropical. If this cloud was massive enough to flood the earth and was as heavy as an ocean then it would be so massive that it would block out all light, and would be so heavy that it would crush all life just like it we go too deep in the ocean.

ME: I have not mentioned any consistency of the band of water. But I would agree it would create a tropical condition all over the earth, such as a hot house condition...How can this be proven?

A band of water would fall back to the earth immediately because of gravity. It would have to be gas.

Warm air can hold more water than old air can so when the air cools the air can no longer hold as much moisture than they could before and it would turn into rain. If there were massive clouds in the sky this would mean that there would be far more rainfall and flooding.

Clouds are also water in the air on top of our shoulders so they slightly increase the atmospheric pressure. There will be more humidity from clouds.

You need special conditions to create a lot of clouds. Clouds are created when water turns into gas. A lot of clouds would be created under very high temperatures and lots of water.

Clouds tend to cool the planet because they block out heat and light from the sun. You would see cooler conditions like in England not hot conditions. In fact earth's current cloud cover effect of 9 F. If there are too many clouds then it will cool the earth to the point that there will be less heat creating the clouds, and the water in the colds will turn into rain. Eventually the environment will all balance out.

I do not think it is possible to have a giant cloud over the entire earth because if it was ten times the amount it would decrease the temperature by 81 F which would put average global temperatures at -25 F which is freezing.
Peternosaint
Posts: 1,166
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/9/2016 1:52:01 AM
Posted: 7 months ago
At 5/8/2016 11:28:05 PM, Axonly wrote:
At 5/8/2016 9:28:36 AM, Peternosaint wrote:
Many here are supporters of the sciences, they seem to think that science is the be all and end all of man's future. I do not know how many of you are true scientists or just hopeful folk that are prepared to state your life on the sciences of man.

To test the knowledge let me give you a test:

Take notice of the IF.

If the earth was surrounded by a large cloud of water what would the weather conditions be like?

1. Would it be like it is today? 2. Would it be like a hot house all over the earth?

3. Would it sustain tropical growth in all areas of the earth?

If any of these questions do not suit your scientific mind, give similar questions and answers.

I must now await the answers from the world of science, as it is known on this forum.

That's too vague, what sort of distance away would the cloud be? Is it actually a cloud?

Not to mention the question is specific more to climate scientists (And perhaps physicists too).

ME: Did I limit the scientist qualifications? And yes it is a cloud, a "swaddling Band" around the entire earth. or was long ago.
Peternosaint
Posts: 1,166
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/9/2016 1:56:26 AM
Posted: 7 months ago
At 5/8/2016 11:31:50 PM, DanneJeRusse wrote:
At 5/8/2016 11:17:10 PM, Peternosaint wrote:
At 5/8/2016 3:08:33 PM, DanneJeRusse wrote:
At 5/8/2016 9:28:36 AM, Peternosaint wrote:
Many here are supporters of the sciences, they seem to think that science is the be all and end all of man's future. I do not know how many of you are true scientists or just hopeful folk that are prepared to state your life on the sciences of man.

To test the knowledge let me give you a test:

Take notice of the IF.

If the earth was surrounded by a large cloud of water what would the weather conditions be like?

Gravity would warp the geodesics of the space surrounding the cloud towards the center of the Earth and all the water would follow the geodesic path.

1. Would it be like it is today? 2. Would it be like a hot house all over the earth?

3. Would it sustain tropical growth in all areas of the earth?

If any of these questions do not suit your scientific mind, give similar questions and answers.

I must now await the answers from the world of science, as it is known on this forum.

ME: Yes, the water would eventually fall to the earth under normal circumstances.

Actually, it would be almost immediately.

ME: We have an atmosphere around the earth, why doesn't that fall or blow away. Clouds do not just blow away they dissipate by dropping their moisture on the earth as rain. Right? But say that the clouds just form and don't rain. IF this cloud formation was all around the earth, would it cause a hot house condition?

I am leading you on to further admissions, but you are very cunning or cautious, aren't you?

Are you going to attempt the other questions?
Axonly
Posts: 1,802
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/9/2016 5:37:21 AM
Posted: 7 months ago
At 5/9/2016 1:52:01 AM, Peternosaint wrote:
At 5/8/2016 11:28:05 PM, Axonly wrote:
At 5/8/2016 9:28:36 AM, Peternosaint wrote:
Many here are supporters of the sciences, they seem to think that science is the be all and end all of man's future. I do not know how many of you are true scientists or just hopeful folk that are prepared to state your life on the sciences of man.

To test the knowledge let me give you a test:

Take notice of the IF.

If the earth was surrounded by a large cloud of water what would the weather conditions be like?

1. Would it be like it is today? 2. Would it be like a hot house all over the earth?

3. Would it sustain tropical growth in all areas of the earth?

If any of these questions do not suit your scientific mind, give similar questions and answers.

I must now await the answers from the world of science, as it is known on this forum.

That's too vague, what sort of distance away would the cloud be? Is it actually a cloud?

Not to mention the question is specific more to climate scientists (And perhaps physicists too).

ME: Did I limit the scientist qualifications? And yes it is a cloud, a "swaddling Band" around the entire earth. or was long ago.

Whats its distance from sea level? This is still something a climate scientist would be best suited to answering.
Meh!
Peternosaint
Posts: 1,166
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/9/2016 7:37:13 AM
Posted: 7 months ago
At 5/9/2016 5:37:21 AM, Axonly wrote:
At 5/9/2016 1:52:01 AM, Peternosaint wrote:
At 5/8/2016 11:28:05 PM, Axonly wrote:
At 5/8/2016 9:28:36 AM, Peternosaint wrote:
Many here are supporters of the sciences, they seem to think that science is the be all and end all of man's future. I do not know how many of you are true scientists or just hopeful folk that are prepared to state your life on the sciences of man.

To test the knowledge let me give you a test:

Take notice of the IF.

If the earth was surrounded by a large cloud of water what would the weather conditions be like?

1. Would it be like it is today? 2. Would it be like a hot house all over the earth?

3. Would it sustain tropical growth in all areas of the earth?

If any of these questions do not suit your scientific mind, give similar questions and answers.

I must now await the answers from the world of science, as it is known on this forum.

That's too vague, what sort of distance away would the cloud be? Is it actually a cloud?

Not to mention the question is specific more to climate scientists (And perhaps physicists too).

ME: Did I limit the scientist qualifications? And yes it is a cloud, a "swaddling Band" around the entire earth. or was long ago.

Whats its distance from sea level? This is still something a climate scientist would be best suited to answering.

ME: That is something for the scientists to conjecture upon. I, not being a scientist of any kind, other than a few unimportant discoveries about the ways of mankind, I doubt that the water would be at the normal cloud level which, to my understanding can be at ground level or up to 10,000 feet where the air thins out.

I do not think that any specific height form the earth would add to the answer capabilities of the "Scientists" in the forum.

So, lets ask the second question, if thee was a hot house condition all around the earth, one would expect to see tropical plant evidence in the arctic regions, Correct?

Now IF the cloud burst suddenly it would cause sudden freezing at the polar regions and heated areas in the direct line of the sunlight. Right?

Before you ask for detail and for me to give you the answers so you can scoff, just keep in your mind I have said IF all through this questioning.
Peternosaint
Posts: 1,166
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/9/2016 7:45:33 AM
Posted: 7 months ago
At 5/9/2016 12:28:05 AM, RuvDraba wrote:
At 5/8/2016 11:15:15 PM, Peternosaint wrote:
At 5/8/2016 4:53:05 PM, RuvDraba wrote:
At 5/8/2016 9:28:36 AM, Peternosaint wrote:
To test the knowledge let me give you a test:
More detail required please.

ME: A true scientist, which you are not even the back end of, does not need clarification for a problem, they use their own ability and intelligence (Do you know what that is) to solve the problem as presented.
Oh? Citation please!

Peter, scientists are very careful about the formulation of problems, because poor formulations can contain false assumptions leading to false conclusions, or be outright invalid and admitting no valid answer at all. That's why if you ask a vague question like 'how far is the moon', they give you careful, qualified answers, like the mean semi-major axis of the geocentric lunar orbit (about 384,400km) compared to the variance (between 356,500 and 406,700km.)

Science is a naturally pedantic discipline, and the empirical examination of a problem's formulation prior to trying to solve it is part of what differentiates science from philosophy. It's why counting angels dancing on the head of a pin can be a philosophical question, but not a scientific one.

So let's talk about your 'cloud of water' 'surrounding' the Earth, shall we?

Let's start with how much water, surrounding the Earth at what distance from the surface, and what's keeping it there, and neither falling to Earth, or boiling off into space.

If you can't quantify those things, then you haven't asked a scientific question; just a philosophical one.

And since I suspect your question is a question about the legitimacy of water vapour as a greenhouse gas, why don't you ask the question you really want answered (e.g. why doesn't more stratospheric water vapour cool the planet off), instead of asking a silly question you can't even formulate scientifically?

I am trying to think of you and your class of misguided students. If a pupil asks you a question do you keep asking that student to qualify the question so that you have whittled it down to a month long debate on content rather than a quest for an answer?

MY thoughts Student "May I go to the toilet please?"
Prof Drabo. "what toilet in particular?"
St. "None in particular, just any."
Prof Drabo "Do you have a particular reason for choosing just any toilet?"
ST, "It is urgent now".
Prof Drabo "So, it wasn't urgent before, is that what you are saying?"
St. It is not urgent now, it seems."
Prof Drabo "And why is it not urgent now?"
St. I just pi..ed myself."
RuvDraba
Posts: 6,033
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/9/2016 8:10:25 AM
Posted: 7 months ago
At 5/9/2016 7:45:33 AM, Peternosaint wrote:
At 5/9/2016 12:28:05 AM, RuvDraba wrote:
At 5/8/2016 11:15:15 PM, Peternosaint wrote:
At 5/8/2016 4:53:05 PM, RuvDraba wrote:
At 5/8/2016 9:28:36 AM, Peternosaint wrote:
To test the knowledge let me give you a test:
More detail required please.
If a pupil asks you a question do you keep asking that student to qualify the question so that you have whittled it down to a month long debate on content rather than a quest for an answer?
No, because that's a false dichotomy. You can clarify a question and seek an answer once it's clarified -- unless the question is nonsense.

My thoughts Student "May I go to the toilet please?"
Prof Draba. "what toilet in particular?"
[...]
St. I just pi..ed myself."

Peter, thank you for the primary school scatalogical humour. I hate to see members waste their education, so it's nice to see you using the full extent of yours.

The issue you haven't addressed though, is that it's not just me having trouble with 'cloud of water' in your question.

Were you perhaps trying to say 'permanently overcast'? I.e, ordinary clouds, but covering the sky, and doing so permanently? If so, you chose a rather silly way of saying it.

But if not, you really need to explain what the heck you mean and how it works. Your vague and disorganised thinking is nobody's problem but your own.
Axonly
Posts: 1,802
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/9/2016 8:23:22 AM
Posted: 7 months ago
At 5/9/2016 7:37:13 AM, Peternosaint wrote:
At 5/9/2016 5:37:21 AM, Axonly wrote:
At 5/9/2016 1:52:01 AM, Peternosaint wrote:
At 5/8/2016 11:28:05 PM, Axonly wrote:
At 5/8/2016 9:28:36 AM, Peternosaint wrote:
Many here are supporters of the sciences, they seem to think that science is the be all and end all of man's future. I do not know how many of you are true scientists or just hopeful folk that are prepared to state your life on the sciences of man.

To test the knowledge let me give you a test:

Take notice of the IF.

If the earth was surrounded by a large cloud of water what would the weather conditions be like?

1. Would it be like it is today? 2. Would it be like a hot house all over the earth?

3. Would it sustain tropical growth in all areas of the earth?

If any of these questions do not suit your scientific mind, give similar questions and answers.

I must now await the answers from the world of science, as it is known on this forum.

That's too vague, what sort of distance away would the cloud be? Is it actually a cloud?

Not to mention the question is specific more to climate scientists (And perhaps physicists too).

ME: Did I limit the scientist qualifications? And yes it is a cloud, a "swaddling Band" around the entire earth. or was long ago.

Whats its distance from sea level? This is still something a climate scientist would be best suited to answering.

ME: That is something for the scientists to conjecture upon. I, not being a scientist of any kind, other than a few unimportant discoveries about the ways of mankind, I doubt that the water would be at the normal cloud level which, to my understanding can be at ground level or up to 10,000 feet where the air thins out.

You said cloud so I am assuming its a gas, how thick are the clouds in this scenario? It is quite important how far away from Earth it is :/
Meh!
Axonly
Posts: 1,802
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/9/2016 8:28:38 AM
Posted: 7 months ago
I, not being a scientist of any kind, other than a few unimportant discoveries about the ways of mankind

http://media.boingboing.net...
Meh!
Peternosaint
Posts: 1,166
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/9/2016 9:03:39 AM
Posted: 7 months ago
At 5/9/2016 8:10:25 AM, RuvDraba wrote:
At 5/9/2016 7:45:33 AM, Peternosaint wrote:
At 5/9/2016 12:28:05 AM, RuvDraba wrote:
At 5/8/2016 11:15:15 PM, Peternosaint wrote:
At 5/8/2016 4:53:05 PM, RuvDraba wrote:
At 5/8/2016 9:28:36 AM, Peternosaint wrote:
To test the knowledge let me give you a test:
More detail required please.
If a pupil asks you a question do you keep asking that student to qualify the question so that you have whittled it down to a month long debate on content rather than a quest for an answer?
No, because that's a false dichotomy. You can clarify a question and seek an answer once it's clarified -- unless the question is nonsense.

My thoughts Student "May I go to the toilet please?"
Prof Draba. "what toilet in particular?"
[...]
St. I just pi..ed myself."

Peter, thank you for the primary school scatalogical humour. I hate to see members waste their education, so it's nice to see you using the full extent of yours.

The issue you haven't addressed though, is that it's not just me having trouble with 'cloud of water' in your question.

Were you perhaps trying to say 'permanently overcast'? I.e, ordinary clouds, but covering the sky, and doing so permanently? If so, you chose a rather silly way of saying it.

But if not, you really need to explain what the heck you mean and how it works. Your vague and disorganised thinking is nobody's problem but your own.

ME: Are you sure your missus doesn't know about your boyfriend?

All right Prof, you have got me dead to rights, or summit. I am referring to he swaddling band of the Bible, and unfortunately, as it may have been too much for those folk of that time to understand the scientific principles involved, it wasn't explained..It seems that it still isn't easily understood, so we do what folks do when they don't' know, they keep asking for the answer so that they can give an answer.

Go on to my next question about the tropical plants in the arctic regions.

AS far as testing the scientist so far...All should look to the dunce hat.
Peternosaint
Posts: 1,166
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/9/2016 9:07:26 AM
Posted: 7 months ago
A dichotomy is a partition of a whole (or a set) into two parts (subsets). In other words, this couple of parts must be. jointly exhaustive: everything must belong to one part or the other, and. mutually exclusive: nothing can belong simultaneously to both parts.

I love it when you talk dirty Prof. Drabo

If the above is correct then the first part of the second part must not part from the first part of the whole part as it will exhaust the parts that will be forced to part in a partition of parts that do not relate, because nothing matters anymore.
DanneJeRusse
Posts: 12,633
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/9/2016 12:52:55 PM
Posted: 7 months ago
At 5/9/2016 1:56:26 AM, Peternosaint wrote:
At 5/8/2016 11:31:50 PM, DanneJeRusse wrote:
At 5/8/2016 11:17:10 PM, Peternosaint wrote:
At 5/8/2016 3:08:33 PM, DanneJeRusse wrote:
At 5/8/2016 9:28:36 AM, Peternosaint wrote:
Many here are supporters of the sciences, they seem to think that science is the be all and end all of man's future. I do not know how many of you are true scientists or just hopeful folk that are prepared to state your life on the sciences of man.

To test the knowledge let me give you a test:

Take notice of the IF.

If the earth was surrounded by a large cloud of water what would the weather conditions be like?

Gravity would warp the geodesics of the space surrounding the cloud towards the center of the Earth and all the water would follow the geodesic path.

1. Would it be like it is today? 2. Would it be like a hot house all over the earth?

3. Would it sustain tropical growth in all areas of the earth?

If any of these questions do not suit your scientific mind, give similar questions and answers.

I must now await the answers from the world of science, as it is known on this forum.

ME: Yes, the water would eventually fall to the earth under normal circumstances.

Actually, it would be almost immediately.

ME: We have an atmosphere around the earth, why doesn't that fall or blow away.

It won't blow away because it is constantly falling, that's the reason the pressure is highest at sea level.

Clouds do not just blow away they dissipate by dropping their moisture on the earth as rain. Right? But say that the clouds just form and don't rain.

In other words, there was no such thing as gravity? Then, the clouds would dissipate off into space.

IF this cloud formation was all around the earth, would it cause a hot house condition?

There's a lot to consider here, the type of water, for instance, sea water, fresh or distilled will make a difference. Then, there is the absorption factor which depends on how much water is in the cloud. There is also the issue of reflection and scattering, depending on the surface of the cloud. By and large, though, most sunlight would pass right through the cloud, especially the UVB rays that would cause a hot house effect.

I am leading you on to further admissions, but you are very cunning or cautious, aren't you?

Are you going to attempt the other questions?
Marrying a 6 year old and waiting until she reaches puberty and maturity before having consensual sex is better than walking up to
a stranger in a bar and proceeding to have relations with no valid proof of the intent of the person. Muhammad wins. ~ Fatihah
If they don't want to be killed then they have to subdue to the Islamic laws. - Uncung
Without God, you are lower than sh!t. ~ SpiritandTruth
dee-em
Posts: 6,476
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/9/2016 1:49:10 PM
Posted: 7 months ago
People, he's referring to this (the "waters above the firmament" in Genesis and elsewhere):

https://en.wikipedia.org...

This has no place in the science forum. Ignore him. He's a troll.
RuvDraba
Posts: 6,033
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/9/2016 6:53:18 PM
Posted: 7 months ago
At 5/9/2016 9:03:39 AM, Peternosaint wrote:
At 5/9/2016 8:10:25 AM, RuvDraba wrote:
Were you perhaps trying to say 'permanently overcast'? I.e, ordinary clouds, but covering the sky, and doing so permanently? If so, you chose a rather silly way of saying it.

But if not, you really need to explain what the heck you mean and how it works. Your vague and disorganised thinking is nobody's problem but your own.

Are you sure your missus doesn't know about your boyfriend?
Peter, do you spend a lot of time with people for whom a gay relationship is embarrassing?

I don't. I have gay friends who've been together for decades, much like Mrs D and me. We're all avid cyclists, and they're good friends who write to us when they're traveling, and who'd look out for us if we got in trouble. So to me what you're saying isn't even insulting. It's just false, silly and vaguely bigoted, and discredits you while being irrelevant to me.

So you can continue making those jokes if you want, and I'll just continue making you feel stupid and impotent for doing so.

I am referring to the swaddling band of the Bible
Okay, are you mean Job 38? [http://biblehub.com...]

Where were you when I laid the foundation of the earth?
Tell Me, if you have understanding,

Who set its measurements? Since you know.
Or who stretched the line on it?

"On what were its bases sunk?
Or who laid its cornerstone,

When the morning stars sang together
And all the sons of God shouted for joy?

"Or who enclosed the sea with doors
When, bursting forth, it went out from the womb;

When I made a cloud its garment
And thick darkness its swaddling band,

You realise that this is inspirational poetry, right, Peter? Do you believe it's also history? And are you trying to explore the potential biological and geological consequences of that, to see if it might have occurred?

The poor historical accuracy of the OT aside, if you'd asked that outright, members might've been able to help you better, or at least been clearer on what you needed.

However, I suspect there isn't enough information here to say much, Peter. If you were looking for geological evidence of prolonged cloud and darkness, you'd probably have to stipulate when and how long it had occurred. If you believe in a young, created Earth (as do most JWs I've met), that's not consistent with the geological, biological and climatographic data we have, so the assumption won't get us far. On the other hand, if you accept a 4.5 billion year-old Earth, you've already accepted Biblical inaccuracy, so I'm not sure why you'd be treating inspirational poetry as history.

And finally, something science does, which theology seldom does, is work both sides of a conjecture diligently. It's perfectly legitimate to look for evidence of a dark, wet Earth; but one has to look for evidence that the assumptions are false too.

I don't think we're lacking the latter evidence here.
Peternosaint
Posts: 1,166
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/9/2016 11:23:40 PM
Posted: 7 months ago
At 5/9/2016 6:53:18 PM, RuvDraba wrote:
At 5/9/2016 9:03:39 AM, Peternosaint wrote:
At 5/9/2016 8:10:25 AM, RuvDraba wrote:
Were you perhaps trying to say 'permanently overcast'? I.e, ordinary clouds, but covering the sky, and doing so permanently? If so, you chose a rather silly way of saying it.

But if not, you really need to explain what the heck you mean and how it works. Your vague and disorganised thinking is nobody's problem but your own.

ME: It is interesting, the comments here on the cloud around the earth, as it had taken up the entire replies, but I would have thought that the Pseudo-scientists here would at least look at the question. The question was not about the "Swaddling Band" it was about IF that cloud cover would create a hot house condition on the earth. Just goes to show how inattentive you folk are

I am allowing you conjecture by asking IF on my questions, I can't be fairer than that.

Are you sure your missus doesn't know about your boyfriend?
Peter, do you spend a lot of time with people for whom a gay relationship is embarrassing?

ME: I don't feel embarrassed, I feel disgust.

I don't. I have gay friends who've been together for decades, much like Mrs D and me. We're all avid cyclists, and they're good friends who write to us when they're traveling, and who'd look out for us if we got in trouble. So to me what you're saying isn't even insulting. It's just false, silly and vaguely bigoted, and discredits you while being irrelevant to me.

So you can continue making those jokes if you want, and I'll just continue making you feel stupid and impotent for doing so.

I am referring to the swaddling band of the Bible
Okay, are you mean Job 38? [http://biblehub.com...]

Where were you when I laid the foundation of the earth?
Tell Me, if you have understanding,

ME: Be careful with this line of questioning as I could ask you the same thing. IE: How did evolution make up the perfect conditions for life's exstance?

Who set its measurements? Since you know.
Or who stretched the line on it?

"On what were its bases sunk?
Or who laid its cornerstone,

When the morning stars sang together
And all the sons of God shouted for joy?

"Or who enclosed the sea with doors
When, bursting forth, it went out from the womb;

When I made a cloud its garment
And thick darkness its swaddling band,

You realise that this is inspirational poetry, right, Peter? Do you believe it's also history? And are you trying to explore the potential biological and geological consequences of that, to see if it might have occurred?

ME: get off this line, get back to the questions on a scientific bases. Why do you change the questions? IS it too hard for you Prof.

The poor historical accuracy of the OT aside, if you'd asked that outright, members might've been able to help you better, or at least been clearer on what you needed.

ME: Again you persist on this line that has nothing to do with the post.

However, I suspect there isn't enough information here to say much, Peter. If you were looking for geological evidence of prolonged cloud and darkness, you'd probably have to stipulate when and how long it had occurred. If you believe in a young, created Earth (as do most JWs I've met), that's not consistent with the geological, biological and climatographic data we have, so the assumption won't get us far. On the other hand, if you accept a 4.5 billion year-old Earth, you've already accepted Biblical inaccuracy, so I'm not sure why you'd be treating inspirational poetry as history.

ME: I don't want to know what you think about the accuracy of the Bible, meet me in a religious post and I will discuss it with you. "Let the kid go to the toilet...Prof, I am almost weeing in my pants"

ME: Maybe the beginning of creation was further back than 4.5 billion years. You don't know and neither do any of your cohorts. I would believe that the creative day is a "period of time" Like, for example in Moses's time only a lot longer.

It is not logical to think that all things we see around us, in regards to the earth and the universe, was created in any rush. Like in a Big Bang.

I would like to keep this on the line of questioning and not get into a religious debate with you, as this is a science forum.

And finally, something science does, which theology seldom does, is work both sides of a conjecture diligently. It's perfectly legitimate to look for evidence of a dark, wet Earth; but one has to look for evidence that the assumptions are false too.

I don't think we're lacking the latter evidence here.

Get back to the question, please. Would the cloud cover make the earth's atmosphere like a hot house.
Peternosaint
Posts: 1,166
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/9/2016 11:31:38 PM
Posted: 7 months ago
At 5/9/2016 12:52:55 PM, DanneJeRusse wrote:
At 5/9/2016 1:56:26 AM, Peternosaint wrote:
At 5/8/2016 11:31:50 PM, DanneJeRusse wrote:
At 5/8/2016 11:17:10 PM, Peternosaint wrote:
At 5/8/2016 3:08:33 PM, DanneJeRusse wrote:
At 5/8/2016 9:28:36 AM, Peternosaint wrote:
Many here are supporters of the sciences, they seem to think that science is the be all and end all of man's future. I do not know how many of you are true scientists or just hopeful folk that are prepared to state your life on the sciences of man.

To test the knowledge let me give you a test:

Take notice of the IF.

If the earth was surrounded by a large cloud of water what would the weather conditions be like?

Gravity would warp the geodesics of the space surrounding the cloud towards the center of the Earth and all the water would follow the geodesic path.

1. Would it be like it is today? 2. Would it be like a hot house all over the earth?

3. Would it sustain tropical growth in all areas of the earth?

If any of these questions do not suit your scientific mind, give similar questions and answers.

I must now await the answers from the world of science, as it is known on this forum.

ME: Yes, the water would eventually fall to the earth under normal circumstances.

Actually, it would be almost immediately.

ME: We have an atmosphere around the earth, why doesn't that fall or blow away.

It won't blow away because it is constantly falling, that's the reason the pressure is highest at sea level.

Clouds do not just blow away they dissipate by dropping their moisture on the earth as rain. Right? But say that the clouds just form and don't rain.

In other words, there was no such thing as gravity? Then, the clouds would dissipate off into space.

IF this cloud formation was all around the earth, would it cause a hot house condition?

There's a lot to consider here, the type of water, for instance, sea water, fresh or distilled will make a difference. Then, there is the absorption factor which depends on how much water is in the cloud. There is also the issue of reflection and scattering, depending on the surface of the cloud. By and large, though, most sunlight would pass right through the cloud, especially the UVB rays that would cause a hot house effect.

ME: Thank you, Sir. At least you answer without a heap of antagonistic sarcasm. I do mention in a later post that the question was not about the cloud itself, but about the effect that the cloud would have on the earth, and you answered s imply. Prof Drabo is not so accommodating and keeps on trying to direct the post and the questions into another field.

I am leading you on to further admissions, but you are very cunning or cautious, aren't you?

Are you going to attempt the other questions?

Me: Next question....Would the sudden breakup of the cloud cause sudden freezing at the polar regions on the earth and a hotter section in the direct line of the sun's rays...and, is there evidence that this happened?