Click images for more details



Recent comments
Recent posts
Currently discussing

A few sites I've stumbled across recently....

Powered by Squarespace

Discussion > The *Real* Cause of Global Warming - (Green House Gasses are not the cause)

"According to µwave, Spain were playing Italy actually inside the satellite, on a huge pitch with gravity inducers and a virtual crowds of holographic supporters. " TheBigYinJames

I did not say anything of the sort.

I am sorry if your lack of knowledge of phisycs results in your being embarrassed by what you have posted previously. Attributing things to me that I never said makes you look foolish and does not conceal your lack of understanding of the basic principles of em (electromagnetism aka Maxwell's equations).

Jul 1, 2013 at 11:49 AM | Unregistered Commenterµwave


your hide your own lack of knowledge about physics with bluster and insults. It also hides from you the fact that I was being humorous when I said you thought the game was played inside the satellite, although I note in your reply you still haven't actually said how the radio signals got to the satellite in the first place through your cloak of invisibility which insulates us from space.

Not only do I understand Maxwell's equations, I used to be able to derive them from first principles, as this was a subject I studied extensively as part of my first degree many years ago, and it was an exam requirement that you be able to derive the equation. Not sure I could remember al the steps to the proof these days, though.

Your other classic put-down to geronimo about Rayleigh scattering being proof that EM was trapped by the reflective boundary of the atmosphere made me laugh. "Some people call this scattering", the poor deluded eejits.

You really need to give up all this blustering - you are showing yourself up as clueless.

But to mangle Obi Wan Kenobi... who is the more foolish, the fool or the fool who argues with him?

Jul 1, 2013 at 12:00 PM | Unregistered CommenterTheBigYinJames

µwave, perhaps you could post your calculation of the critical angle for total internal reflection. The refractive index varies smoothly with altitude (via pressure and temperature), but let's simplify by considering an interface between sea level air and vacuum. Thr refractive index of vacuum is 1. Taking the refractive index of air as 1.0003 (erring a bit on the high side), the criticial angle comes to 88.6 degrees.

Jul 1, 2013 at 1:09 PM | Registered CommenterHaroldW

TBYJ: I do, feel foolish that is, how gauche of me. Must be all those microwaves going through my brain.

Although having said all that, I think old miuwave has a little more to do on the hypothesis, there seem to be a few loose ends in it to me.

Jul 1, 2013 at 4:16 PM | Unregistered Commentergeronimo

But over time, those loose ends combine in random ways and are responsible for all the warming.

Jul 1, 2013 at 4:22 PM | Unregistered CommenterTheBigYinJames

TheBigYinJames - "your hide your own lack of knowledge about physics with bluster and insults."

Did I insult anyone? I don't recall doing so.

Yet it was *you* who gratuitously insulted geromino for not fully grasping the technicalities depite his honest efforts to do so. You clearly leave no stone unturned in seraching for affronts whilst at the same time handing out insults gratuitously.

"Not sure I could remember all the steps to the proof these days, though."

Ah - how very unfortunate.

I knew someone who claimed to be a mathematician and that he could derive Fermat's last theorem quite readily. But when I asked him demonstrate how to do so, he suddenly found he could not quite remember how he did it. No doubt you knew what a partial differential equation was but are perhaps not so sure that you still remember.

Harold W - it is clear that you have a much better grasp of phisycs than some other posters here. If you can find the error in your calculation (it should become apparent if you check your working carefully - most likely you will find you have used a cosine where a sine is required ) then you will soon understand how radio waves are trapped by total internal reflection.

I regret that my ongoing research requires my full involvement, so regretfully I cannot afford to spend any more time helping commenters here understand aspects of phisycs that their education has failed to equip them to do. I ascribe their difficulties to the so-called "duming down" of the education system.

Jul 1, 2013 at 5:43 PM | Unregistered Commenterµwave

A final insult and then off he goes.

Jul 1, 2013 at 6:07 PM | Unregistered Commentergeronimo

Just a well really, it was like shooting fish in a barrel with that level of incompetence.

It always amazes me how people convince themselves of such drivel. The scary thing is that he has obviously read some physics, you don't just make up concepts like refraction. It's actually harder to come up with such an elaborate hypothesis based on a misunderstanding than simply reading and understanding reality.

If he thinks HaroldW made a mistake by switching cosine for sine, then that makes his calculation for critical angle at a hard air-vacuum boundary 1.4 degrees. No wonder he thinks nothing gets out, with that sort of astounding logic.

On a more philosophical note, I think it's every thinking sceptic's duty to call out these people, rather than having the rest of us characterised as like them. As science starts to head back in the direction of sanity,

Jul 1, 2013 at 7:53 PM | Unregistered CommenterTheBigYinJames

I just noticed he misspelled "dumbing down". Hilarious.

Jul 1, 2013 at 8:19 PM | Unregistered CommenterTheBigYinJames

µwave (Jul 1, 2013 at 5:43 PM) -
Curious that you should mention sin vs. cos, because I was guessing that you might have made that error. In Excel, the formula I used was "=degrees(asin(1/1.0003))" which comes out to 88.6, or near enough. That is, the only rays which would be totally internally reflected would be those more than 88.6 degrees from normal, or equivalently at a grazing angle of less than 1.4 degrees. Assuming isotropy, that's not a large fraction.

Jul 1, 2013 at 11:27 PM | Registered CommenterHaroldW

" phisycs " and "duming down", I think he's having a laugh. He's one of those people who refer to themselves as "wind up merchants", or his case "wine dup merchents".

I blame Martin A

Jul 2, 2013 at 8:26 AM | Unregistered Commentergeronimo

I actually think he was the author of the original page Martin referenced, come here to defend his good name. By insulting everyone.

Jul 2, 2013 at 8:59 AM | Unregistered CommenterTheBigYinJames

Trapped heat, trapped microwaves. Clap trap.

Jul 2, 2013 at 10:33 AM | Unregistered Commenterssat

I think wind up merchant is the correct description and also that you were dealing with an adolescent although very articulate and knowledgeable for his/her age.

Jul 11, 2013 at 11:56 PM | Registered CommenterDung

How did you know it was me, Grandad?

Jul 12, 2013 at 9:56 AM | Unregistered Commenterµwave