Skip to main content
Log In | Register

TR Memescape


Topic: The 'Missing Link' of Meteorology's Theory of Storms (Read 1302 times) previous topic - next topic

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.
  • MikeB
  • Full Member
  • 162

  • 29

Re: The 'Missing Link' of Meteorology's Theory of Storms
Reply #25
I think most of us know that water molecules are lighter than nitrogen and oxygen molecules.  That's why humid air (a parcel of air in which water molecules have displaced some nitrogen and oxygen molecules) rises through surrounding drier air of the same temperature.  This is true regardless of altitude.

In addition to this, as humid air rises, its pressure does work by expanding the volume of air.  This work comes at the expense of the temperature of the air parcel.  As temperature is reduced to the dew point, an amazing thing happens!  Water begins to condense and release its latent heat of fusion.  Cloud suck!  The air parcel maintains its temperature as it rises, compared to the cooler drier air, accelerating upward and leaving falling water drops in its wake.

That's all there is to it.

  • 383

  • 3

Re: The 'Missing Link' of Meteorology's Theory of Storms
Reply #26
I think most of us know that water molecules are lighter than nitrogen and oxygen molecules.  That's why humid air (a parcel of air in which water molecules have displaced some nitrogen and oxygen molecules) rises through surrounding drier air of the same temperature.  This is true regardless of altitude.

Once again, a beautiful theory is destroyed by and ugly fact:
The boiling temperature of H2O is too high to exist as gas in our atmosphere.  Therefore moist air is alway heavier than dry air.  Convection is refuted. 

Sorry, but this is the way science works.

Check this out:
http://www.thunderbolts.info/forum/phpBB3/viewtopic.php?f=10&t=16596

In addition to this, as humid air rises, its pressure does work by expanding the volume of air.  This work comes at the expense of the temperature of the air parcel.  As temperature is reduced to the dew point, an amazing thing happens!  Water begins to condense and release its latent heat of fusion.  Cloud suck!  The air parcel maintains its temperature as it rises, compared to the cooler drier air, accelerating upward and leaving falling water drops in its wake.

That's all there is to it.

I wonder why nobody has ever been able to detect your alleged "latent heat."

Jim McGinn / Solving Tornadoes

  • 3,531

  • 919

Re: The 'Missing Link' of Meteorology's Theory of Storms
Reply #27
I moved this topic from Science.

  • osmanthus
  • Administrator
  • Fingerer of piglets
  • 4,410

  • 918

Re: The 'Missing Link' of Meteorology's Theory of Storms
Reply #28
 :stopper:
Truth is out of style

  • 240

  • 68

Re: The 'Missing Link' of Meteorology's Theory of Storms
Reply #29
I think most of us know that water molecules are lighter than nitrogen and oxygen molecules.  That's why humid air (a parcel of air in which water molecules have displaced some nitrogen and oxygen molecules) rises through surrounding drier air of the same temperature.  This is true regardless of altitude.

Once again, a beautiful theory is destroyed by and ugly fact:
The boiling temperature of H2O is too high to exist as gas in our atmosphere.  Therefore moist air is alway heavier than dry air.  Convection is refuted. 

Sorry, but this is the way science works.

Check this out:
http://www.thunderbolts.info/forum/phpBB3/viewtopic.php?f=10&t=16596

In addition to this, as humid air rises, its pressure does work by expanding the volume of air.  This work comes at the expense of the temperature of the air parcel.  As temperature is reduced to the dew point, an amazing thing happens!  Water begins to condense and release its latent heat of fusion.  Cloud suck!  The air parcel maintains its temperature as it rises, compared to the cooler drier air, accelerating upward and leaving falling water drops in its wake.

That's all there is to it.

I wonder why nobody has ever been able to detect your alleged "latent heat."

Jim McGinn / Solving Tornadoes


I could measure it with my DSC.  What are you on about?

And where does rain come from?

  • MikeB
  • Full Member
  • 162

  • 29

Re: The 'Missing Link' of Meteorology's Theory of Storms
Reply #30
I think most of us know that water molecules are lighter than nitrogen and oxygen molecules.  That's why humid air (a parcel of air in which water molecules have displaced some nitrogen and oxygen molecules) rises through surrounding drier air of the same temperature.  This is true regardless of altitude.

Once again, a beautiful theory is destroyed by and ugly fact:
The boiling temperature of H2O is too high to exist as gas in our atmosphere.  Therefore moist air is alway heavier than dry air.  Convection is refuted. 

Sorry, but this is the way science works.

Check this out:
http://www.thunderbolts.info/forum/phpBB3/viewtopic.php?f=10&t=16596

In addition to this, as humid air rises, its pressure does work by expanding the volume of air.  This work comes at the expense of the temperature of the air parcel.  As temperature is reduced to the dew point, an amazing thing happens!  Water begins to condense and release its latent heat of fusion.  Cloud suck!  The air parcel maintains its temperature as it rises, compared to the cooler drier air, accelerating upward and leaving falling water drops in its wake.

That's all there is to it.

I wonder why nobody has ever been able to detect your alleged "latent heat."

Jim McGinn / Solving Tornadoes

WTF?  This is simply the latent heat of phase change.  Freezing / melting and vaporizing / condensing energy per unit mass are well quantified properties of water and many other substances.

This stuff is taught in junior high school.

Nobody ever detected this?  Then what are all of these measured values of this property?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Enthalpy_of_vaporization

  • 383

  • 3

Re: The 'Missing Link' of Meteorology's Theory of Storms
Reply #31
I think most of us know that water molecules are lighter than nitrogen and oxygen molecules.  That's why humid air (a parcel of air in which water molecules have displaced some nitrogen and oxygen molecules) rises through surrounding drier air of the same temperature.  This is true regardless of altitude.

Once again, a beautiful theory is destroyed by and ugly fact:
The boiling temperature of H2O is too high to exist as gas in our atmosphere.  Therefore moist air is alway heavier than dry air.  Convection is refuted. 

Sorry, but this is the way science works.

Check this out:
http://www.thunderbolts.info/forum/phpBB3/viewtopic.php?f=10&t=16596

In addition to this, as humid air rises, its pressure does work by expanding the volume of air.  This work comes at the expense of the temperature of the air parcel.  As temperature is reduced to the dew point, an amazing thing happens!  Water begins to condense and release its latent heat of fusion.  Cloud suck!  The air parcel maintains its temperature as it rises, compared to the cooler drier air, accelerating upward and leaving falling water drops in its wake.

That's all there is to it.

I wonder why nobody has ever been able to detect your alleged "latent heat."

Jim McGinn / Solving Tornadoes

WTF?  This is simply the latent heat of phase change.  Freezing / melting and vaporizing / condensing energy per unit mass are well quantified properties of water and many other substances.

This stuff is taught in junior high school.
So is catechism.

Nobody ever detected this?  Then what are all of these measured values of this property?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Enthalpy_of_vaporization

  • 8,464

  • 1331

Re: The 'Missing Link' of Meteorology's Theory of Storms
Reply #32
I love the idea of water vapor being a plasma. you go away mike.

Read this then:
http://www.thunderbolts.info/forum/phpBB3/viewtopic.php?f=10&t=16582#p117060

Are you the kind of person that suspects an underlying complexity to our reality that nobody quite understands so everybody just pretends to understand and tacitly agrees to not call attention to each others pretenses? Are you the kind of person that suspects that different academic factions have colluded to sow confusion so that their collective failure to understand this underlying complexity of our reality is not revealed to the public? Are you the kind of person that believes the public can so easily be led astray by pretentious, sciencey sounding rhetoric that diverts attention away from the wider revelation of this poorly understood underlying complexity of our reality? Me neither. So I was just as perplexed as anybody would be when I first encountered the the zeroing out of polarity with with fully coordinated (symmetric) hydrogen bonding between H2O molecules (as in liquid water).
I am a weird bunch of guys. I am the kind of person who sees explanations as utilitarian features of schematics which are the intrinsic method we use to understand. I am the kind of guy who sees schematics as based on observation but limited to the definitions we make as we go along. I am the kind of guy who sees definitions as inherently fuzzy in the real world. I am the kind of guy who assumes that the use of identity in logic is only ever approximated with identities in the real world and so I am the kind of guy who assumes that models are purely utilitarian things and that there is no 'right' model, only 'better' or 'worse' models for specific purposes. And I am also the kind of guy who would like to know what physical experiments you carried out to determine that the polarity of water zeroes out with fully coordinated (symmetric) hydrogen bonding between H2O molecules.
Love is like a magic penny
 if you hold it tight you won't have any
if you give it away you'll have so many
they'll be rolling all over the floor

  • 8,464

  • 1331

Re: The 'Missing Link' of Meteorology's Theory of Storms
Reply #33
I think most of us know that water molecules are lighter than nitrogen and oxygen molecules.  That's why humid air (a parcel of air in which water molecules have displaced some nitrogen and oxygen molecules) rises through surrounding drier air of the same temperature.  This is true regardless of altitude.

Once again, a beautiful theory is destroyed by and ugly fact:
The boiling temperature of H2O is too high to exist as gas in our atmosphere.  Therefore moist air is alway heavier than dry air.  Convection is refuted. 

Sorry, but this is the way science works.

Check this out:
http://www.thunderbolts.info/forum/phpBB3/viewtopic.php?f=10&t=16596

In addition to this, as humid air rises, its pressure does work by expanding the volume of air.  This work comes at the expense of the temperature of the air parcel.  As temperature is reduced to the dew point, an amazing thing happens!  Water begins to condense and release its latent heat of fusion.  Cloud suck!  The air parcel maintains its temperature as it rises, compared to the cooler drier air, accelerating upward and leaving falling water drops in its wake.

That's all there is to it.

I wonder why nobody has ever been able to detect your alleged "latent heat."

Jim McGinn / Solving Tornadoes

WTF?  This is simply the latent heat of phase change.  Freezing / melting and vaporizing / condensing energy per unit mass are well quantified properties of water and many other substances.

This stuff is taught in junior high school.

Nobody ever detected this?  Then what are all of these measured values of this property?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Enthalpy_of_vaporization
It is worth checking out the book I linked upthread. There are some peculiarities which we do tend to ignore.
Love is like a magic penny
 if you hold it tight you won't have any
if you give it away you'll have so many
they'll be rolling all over the floor

  • Photon
  • Needs a Life
  • I interfere with myself
  • 1,048

  • 340

Re: The 'Missing Link' of Meteorology's Theory of Storms
Reply #34
Once again, a beautiful theory is destroyed by and ugly fact:
The boiling temperature of H2O is too high to exist as gas in our atmosphere.  Therefore moist air is alway heavier than dry air.  Convection is refuted. 

LOL.

You are under the impression that since the boiling temperature of water is 100 °C, that if the air temperature is say 20 °C that no vapour could exist?  You are completely wrong.  The molecules in and on the surface of the liquid in equilibrium with air temperature have on average the kinetic energy equivalent to the 20 °C scale, but individual molecules near the surface are not bound by liquid on one side, and can and do break free as vapour all the time.  Did you never study statistical distributions in whatever you thought was "science"?  The molecules leaving the fluid and entering the air as vapour will do so until equilibrium is reached with the equilibrium vapour pressure in the air.

Your three sentences after your colon are false, and non-sequiturs to boot.


  • 383

  • 3

Re: The 'Missing Link' of Meteorology's Theory of Storms
Reply #35
Once again, a beautiful theory is destroyed by and ugly fact:
The boiling temperature of H2O is too high to exist as gas in our atmosphere.  Therefore moist air is alway heavier than dry air.  Convection is refuted. 

LOL.

You are under the impression that since the boiling temperature of water is 100 °C, that if the air temperature is say 20 °C that no vapour could exist?

Vapor is liquid H2O, not gas. 


  You are completely wrong.  The molecules in and on the surface of the liquid in equilibrium with air temperature have on average the kinetic energy equivalent to the 20 °C scale

Absurd.  You are clueless.  Show us your evidence.


, but individual molecules near the surface are not bound by liquid on one side, and can and do break free as vapour all the time.  Did you never study statistical distributions in whatever you thought was "science"?  The molecules leaving the fluid and entering the air as vapour will do so until equilibrium is reached with the equilibrium vapour pressure in the air.

Your three sentences after your colon are false, and non-sequiturs to boot.

Idiot.

  • Brother Daniel
  • Global Moderator
  • predisposed to antagonism
  • 645

  • 186

Re: The 'Missing Link' of Meteorology's Theory of Storms
Reply #36
Jim, many of your own responses currently appear as if they are part of what you are quoting someone else as saying.  Please try to learn to use the quote function properly.

  • 240

  • 68

Re: The 'Missing Link' of Meteorology's Theory of Storms
Reply #37
Once again, a beautiful theory is destroyed by and ugly fact:
The boiling temperature of H2O is too high to exist as gas in our atmosphere.  Therefore moist air is alway heavier than dry air.  Convection is refuted. 

LOL.

You are under the impression that since the boiling temperature of water is 100 °C, that if the air temperature is say 20 °C that no vapour could exist?

Vapor is liquid H2O, not gas. 


  You are completely wrong.  The molecules in and on the surface of the liquid in equilibrium with air temperature have on average the kinetic energy equivalent to the 20 °C scale

Absurd.  You are clueless.  Show us your evidence.


, but individual molecules near the surface are not bound by liquid on one side, and can and do break free as vapour all the time.  Did you never study statistical distributions in whatever you thought was "science"?  The molecules leaving the fluid and entering the air as vapour will do so until equilibrium is reached with the equilibrium vapour pressure in the air.

Your three sentences after your colon are false, and non-sequiturs to boot.

Idiot.

Is is idiotic to directly measure latent heat of fusion using DSC?

And where does rain come from?

  • 383

  • 3

Re: The 'Missing Link' of Meteorology's Theory of Storms
Reply #38
I think most of us know that water molecules are lighter than nitrogen and oxygen molecules.  That's why humid air (a parcel of air in which water molecules have displaced some nitrogen and oxygen molecules) rises through surrounding drier air of the same temperature.  This is true regardless of altitude.

Once again, a beautiful theory is destroyed by and ugly fact:
The boiling temperature of H2O is too high to exist as gas in our atmosphere.  Therefore moist air is alway heavier than dry air.  Convection is refuted. 

Sorry, but this is the way science works.

Check this out:
http://www.thunderbolts.info/forum/phpBB3/viewtopic.php?f=10&t=16596

In addition to this, as humid air rises, its pressure does work by expanding the volume of air.  This work comes at the expense of the temperature of the air parcel.  As temperature is reduced to the dew point, an amazing thing happens!  Water begins to condense and release its latent heat of fusion.  Cloud suck!  The air parcel maintains its temperature as it rises, compared to the cooler drier air, accelerating upward and leaving falling water drops in its wake.

That's all there is to it.

I wonder why nobody has ever been able to detect your alleged "latent heat."

Jim McGinn / Solving Tornadoes

WTF?  This is simply the latent heat of phase change.  Freezing / melting and vaporizing / condensing energy per unit mass are well quantified properties of water and many other substances.

Your imagination isn't evidence

  • 383

  • 3

Re: The 'Missing Link' of Meteorology's Theory of Storms
Reply #39
Jim, many of your own responses currently


How did that happen?

appear as if they are part of what you are quoting someone else as saying.  Please try to learn to use the quote function properly.

  • 383

  • 3

Re: The 'Missing Link' of Meteorology's Theory of Storms
Reply #40
I think most of us know that water molecules are lighter than nitrogen and oxygen molecules.  That's why humid air (a parcel of air in which water molecules have displaced some nitrogen and oxygen molecules) rises through surrounding drier air of the same temperature.  This is true regardless of altitude.

Once again, a beautiful theory is destroyed by and ugly fact:
The boiling temperature of H2O is too high to exist as gas in our atmosphere.  Therefore moist air is alway heavier than dry air.  Convection is refuted. 

Sorry, but this is the way science works.

Check this out:
http://www.thunderbolts.info/forum/phpBB3/viewtopic.php?f=10&t=16596

In addition to this, as humid air rises, its pressure does work by expanding the volume of air.  This work comes at the expense of the temperature of the air parcel.  As temperature is reduced to the dew point, an amazing thing happens!  Water begins to condense and release its latent heat of fusion.  Cloud suck!  The air parcel maintains its temperature as it rises, compared to the cooler drier air, accelerating upward and leaving falling water drops in its wake.

That's all there is to it.

I wonder why nobody has ever been able to detect your alleged "latent heat."

Jim McGinn / Solving Tornadoes

WTF?  This is simply the latent heat of phase change.  Freezing / melting and vaporizing / condensing energy per unit mass are well quantified properties of water and many other substances.

Your imagination isn't evidence

  • 383

  • 3

Re: The 'Missing Link' of Meteorology's Theory of Storms
Reply #41

  • Brother Daniel
  • Global Moderator
  • predisposed to antagonism
  • 645

  • 186

Re: The 'Missing Link' of Meteorology's Theory of Storms
Reply #42
Jim, many of your own responses currently


How did that happen?

appear as if they are part of what you are quoting someone else as saying.  Please try to learn to use the quote function properly.

Yes, there's another example of your inability to use the quote function properly.

We're talking about kindergarten-level forum participation techniques.  Please take the time to learn them.

  • 383

  • 3

Re: The 'Missing Link' of Meteorology's Theory of Storms
Reply #43
Once again, a beautiful theory is destroyed by and ugly fact:
The boiling temperature of H2O is too high to exist as gas in our atmosphere.  Therefore moist air is alway heavier than dry air.  Convection is refuted. 

LOL.

You are under the impression that since the boiling temperature of water is 100 °C, that if the air temperature is say 20 °C that no vapour could exist?

No, dumbass.  Vapor is not gaseous.  Its liquid suspended in air by electrostatic forces. 

There is not steam in the atmosphere, you simpleton.




  You are completely wrong.  The molecules in and on the surface of the liquid in equilibrium with air temperature have on average the kinetic energy equivalent to the 20 °C scale, but individual molecules near the surface are not bound by liquid on one side, and can and do break free as vapour all the time.  Did you never study statistical distributions in whatever you thought was "science"?  The molecules leaving the fluid and entering the air as vapour will do so until equilibrium is reached with the equilibrium vapour pressure in the air.

Your three sentences after your colon are false, and non-sequiturs to boot.

  • 8,464

  • 1331

Re: The 'Missing Link' of Meteorology's Theory of Storms
Reply #44
Once again, a beautiful theory is destroyed by and ugly fact:
The boiling temperature of H2O is too high to exist as gas in our atmosphere.  Therefore moist air is alway heavier than dry air.  Convection is refuted. 

LOL.

You are under the impression that since the boiling temperature of water is 100 °C, that if the air temperature is say 20 °C that no vapour could exist?

Vapor is liquid H2O, not gas. 


  You are completely wrong.  The molecules in and on the surface of the liquid in equilibrium with air temperature have on average the kinetic energy equivalent to the 20 °C scale

Absurd.  You are clueless.  Show us your evidence.


, but individual molecules near the surface are not bound by liquid on one side, and can and do break free as vapour all the time.  Did you never study statistical distributions in whatever you thought was "science"?  The molecules leaving the fluid and entering the air as vapour will do so until equilibrium is reached with the equilibrium vapour pressure in the air.

Your three sentences after your colon are false, and non-sequiturs to boot.

Idiot.

Is is idiotic to directly measure latent heat of fusion using DSC?

And where does rain come from?
You would like Pollack's book too.
Love is like a magic penny
 if you hold it tight you won't have any
if you give it away you'll have so many
they'll be rolling all over the floor

  • 240

  • 68

Re: The 'Missing Link' of Meteorology's Theory of Storms
Reply #45
Once again, a beautiful theory is destroyed by and ugly fact:
The boiling temperature of H2O is too high to exist as gas in our atmosphere.  Therefore moist air is alway heavier than dry air.  Convection is refuted. 

LOL.

You are under the impression that since the boiling temperature of water is 100 °C, that if the air temperature is say 20 °C that no vapour could exist?

Vapor is liquid H2O, not gas. 


  You are completely wrong.  The molecules in and on the surface of the liquid in equilibrium with air temperature have on average the kinetic energy equivalent to the 20 °C scale

Absurd.  You are clueless.  Show us your evidence.


, but individual molecules near the surface are not bound by liquid on one side, and can and do break free as vapour all the time.  Did you never study statistical distributions in whatever you thought was "science"?  The molecules leaving the fluid and entering the air as vapour will do so until equilibrium is reached with the equilibrium vapour pressure in the air.

Your three sentences after your colon are false, and non-sequiturs to boot.

Idiot.

Is is idiotic to directly measure latent heat of fusion using DSC?

And where does rain come from?
You would like Pollack's book too.

I'm going to look for copy.

  • fredbear
  • Needs a Life
  • Militantly Confused
  • 701

  • 129

Re: The 'Missing Link' of Meteorology's Theory of Storms
Reply #46
Once again, a beautiful theory is destroyed by and ugly fact:
The boiling temperature of H2O is too high to exist as gas in our atmosphere.  Therefore moist air is alway heavier than dry air.  Convection is refuted. 

LOL.

You are under the impression that since the boiling temperature of water is 100 °C, that if the air temperature is say 20 °C that no vapour could exist?

No, dumbass.  Vapor is not gaseous.  Its liquid suspended in air by electrostatic forces. 

There is not steam in the atmosphere, you simpleton.




  You are completely wrong.  The molecules in and on the surface of the liquid in equilibrium with air temperature have on average the kinetic energy equivalent to the 20 °C scale, but individual molecules near the surface are not bound by liquid on one side, and can and do break free as vapour all the time.  Did you never study statistical distributions in whatever you thought was "science"?  The molecules leaving the fluid and entering the air as vapour will do so until equilibrium is reached with the equilibrium vapour pressure in the air.

Your three sentences after your colon are false, and non-sequiturs to boot.

It's fairly hilarious that this individual has the temerity to call other people 'idiots' and 'fuckwits' but can't muster the intellectual ability to properly use the quote function, something my 7-year old was able to master within 2 minutes. How many ways can it be fucked up?  We may be on the brink of finding out.
"...without considering any evidence at all - that my views are more likely - on average - to be correct.  Because the mainstream is almost always wrong" - Dave Hawkins

  • osmanthus
  • Administrator
  • Fingerer of piglets
  • 4,410

  • 918

Re: The 'Missing Link' of Meteorology's Theory of Storms
Reply #47
It's fairly hilarious that this individual has the temerity to call other

ikr

 people 'idiots' and 'fuckwits' but can't muster the intellectual ability to properly use the quote function, something my

fn idiot

7-year old was able to master within 2 minutes. How many ways can it be fucked up?  We may be on the brink of finding out.
Truth is out of style

  • 534

  • 113

Re: The 'Missing Link' of Meteorology's Theory of Storms
Reply #48
I think I get this.

Jim thinks water vapor in the atmosphere does not exist as h2o molecules.
Instead he thinks it is a plasma

I think we should take his idea seriously, and turn off all electrically powered devices on humid days. I also wouldn't stand under power lines. :D
"That which can be asserted with evidence can also be dismissed without evidence." (Dave Hawkins)

  • osmanthus
  • Administrator
  • Fingerer of piglets
  • 4,410

  • 918

Re: The 'Missing Link' of Meteorology's Theory of Storms
Reply #49
I think I get this.

Jim thinks water vapor in the atmosphere does not exist as h2o molecules.
Instead he thinks it is a plasma
Jesus. :rofl:
Truth is out of style