|
Post by icefisher on Sept 29, 2015 20:17:05 GMT
you do have a history of saying what is not so and claiming that the deadbody blanket change from warming of the body to warming the surface of the body was not a change in goal posts when clearly it was, unless of course you wish to go back and argue once again that placing a blanket over a dead body will heat that dead body. Newsflash for you. Two years ago, in response to your relentless infantile stupidity I proved, using text included in other peoples commments, that I never said what you two clowns claimed I said. >>Now you want to slither into this argument like a greasy dog and try to claim the essence of it. If that doesn't make you a liar it makes you totally out of touch with reality. You make things far too complicated. The simple truth is I think you are scientifically illiterate and when you tell me to get a better thermometer and i repeatedly tell you of course water can heat colder objects and you keep telling me I am wrong I am bound to assume you have no f**king idea about latent heat. Do you understand latent heat? To this day i have no f**king idea. Talking about lies Andrew! I never said water could not heat colder objects. Thats total manufactured BS lying on your part. Worse you are trying to use that lie to cover up the fact you can't even spell out what your complaint was about latent heat contributing to the heat spikes in the Arctic. Everything else is meaningless as its all related to that initial complaint. If it does contribute to the heat spikes in the Arctic then what the heck were you complaining about. . . .your gout? You have endlessly harped on the fact that 4c water warms the atmosphere faster than freezing water. But you failed to comprehend that does not matter a hoot. The water is going to freeze as fast as necessary. In fact Andrew when strong very cold winds are blowing across unfrozen water there is another latent heat process going on whether the water is 4C, 0C, or frozen into ice. That is the evaporation of water that is going to accelerate cooling a freezing of the water via putting huge amounts of latent heat into the air. This latent heat at some point will warm the air when that water vapor condenses out. One gram of water vapor carries 720 calories of latent heat above freezing compared the 4 extra calories of sensible heat in water 4C above freezing. Your complaint remains nonsense, always was nonsense, always will be nonsense and you are too stupid and ignorant to realize it and you are proving that with every post you make right now denying it and will do so as long as you continue to post unless of course you astound us with some brilliant piece of information, that probably doesn't exist, about what was wrong with the idea that latent heat contributes to the heat spikes seen in the winter arctic.
|
|
|
Post by icefisher on Sept 29, 2015 20:22:12 GMT
Newsflash for you. Two years ago, in response to your relentless infantile stupidity I proved, using text included in other peoples commments, that I never said what you two clowns claimed I said. that was after you erased about 70 posts Andrew. And your whole thing was taking Magellan to task for saying that you can't warm a dead body by throwing a blanket under it. After a long excrutiating discussion your point was that the heat gradient between the core of the body and its skin would reduce causing the surface to warm while the core cooled. However, the body would not be warmer Andrew, the skin might be the body would be cooler. There you erased what you said about it, you continue to complain about it. Was Magellan wrong or was he right? So who is the clown?
|
|
|
Post by Andrew on Sept 29, 2015 20:30:19 GMT
Newsflash for you. Two years ago, in response to your relentless infantile stupidity I proved, using text included in other peoples commments, that I never said what you two clowns claimed I said. that was after you erased about 70 posts Andrew. And your whole thing was taking Magellan to task for saying that you can't warm a dead body by throwing a blanket under it. After a long excrutiating discussion your point was that the heat gradient between the core of the body and its skin would reduce causing the surface to warm while the core cooled. However, the body would not be warmer Andrew, the skin might be the body would be cooler. There you erased what you said about it, you continue to complain about it. Was Magellan wrong or was he right? So who is the clown? I just told you that two years ago I proved using the comments included in other peoples posts I never said what you two clowns claimed I said. Yes I had to endure about 70 pages of your relentless stupidity. Famously Magellan was too arrogant to read the instructions needed to understand what he was supposed to test for and he declared in advance it was impossible, when all he was about to demonstrate was school boy physics. this is the time of year when you start seeing heat spikes in the atmosphere from the release of water heat energy as the water freezes. The ice can only freeze either by radiating energy to a colder air layer or space or by warming the very cold air that blows across the water ice mixture. So yes the ice is releasing energy to the atmosphere and the ice is a source of heat which can warm the atmosphere, but the unfrozen water is also a source of heat that can warm the atmosphere and is actually a greater source of heat because it has a higher temperature. It is called the latent heat of fusion of water for a good reason. You cannot observe the release of heat because it is hidden. What the f**k are you talking about??? The conversation started because you said words to the effect of 'this was the time of year when air temperatures rise in the arctic as water freezes' You are mistaken. My comments regarding the Arctic was that the heat spikes seen in the cold months might be the result of the unusual high amount of freezing going during the winter. Oh really? this is the time of year when you start seeing heat spikes in the atmosphere from the release of water heat energy as the water freezes. Come on lad. Spell it out. What the f**k are you talking about?? >>Talking about lies Andrew! I never said water could not heat colder objects. Thats total manufactured BS lying on your part. FFS. I told you at the start of this saga that of course cold water could heat colder air. And you told me I was wrong to say that no heat was otherwise released. I said there was more heating before the freezing began and you continually told me this was wrong. No matter what I said you baited and mocked me and yet quite clearly I was properly describing latent heat. What is the explanation?? Why would you continually say i was wrong? For years you have been claiming I had said that latent heat could not be used to heat the colder air. Obviously that is not true. This time around you have also repeatedly made this rediculous accusation. It is pulled out of your arse. The ice can only freeze either by radiating energy to a colder air layer or space or by warming the very cold air that blows across the water ice mixture. So yes the ice is releasing energy to the atmosphere and the ice is a source of heat which can warm the atmosphere, but the unfrozen water is also a source of heat that can warm the atmosphere and is actually a greater source of heat because it has a higher temperature. It is called the latent heat of fusion of water for a good reason. You cannot observe the release of heat because it is hidden. What drove you to make this comment as the DMI data spiked up around the freezing point of sea water in August 2013? Yes, fine, I can definitely see no cooling. this is the time of year when you start seeing heat spikes in the atmosphere from the release of water heat energy as the water freezes. Why would you quote a muddled up NSIDC article and then spent months claiming it was not muddled up. Why did you spent so much time talking about supercooling Why did you get into farmers use of water? Why would you spend years claiming I was saying something I obviously never said?There are so many questions and no answers from you whatsoever.
|
|
|
Post by icefisher on Sept 29, 2015 22:55:23 GMT
that was after you erased about 70 posts Andrew. And your whole thing was taking Magellan to task for saying that you can't warm a dead body by throwing a blanket under it. After a long excrutiating discussion your point was that the heat gradient between the core of the body and its skin would reduce causing the surface to warm while the core cooled. However, the body would not be warmer Andrew, the skin might be the body would be cooler. There you erased what you said about it, you continue to complain about it. Was Magellan wrong or was he right? So who is the clown? I just told you that two years ago I proved using the comments included in other peoples posts I never said what you two clowns claimed I said. Yes I had to endure about 70 pages of your relentless stupidity. Famously Magellan was too arrogant to read the instructions needed to understand what he was supposed to test for and he declared in advance it was impossible, when all he was about to demonstrate was school boy physics. Whatever Andrew! The only thing you had to endure you could do anything about was your own posts so you erased them and left everything else. this is the time of year when you start seeing heat spikes in the atmosphere from the release of water heat energy as the water freezes. The ice can only freeze either by radiating energy to a colder air layer or space or by warming the very cold air that blows across the water ice mixture. So yes the ice is releasing energy to the atmosphere and the ice is a source of heat which can warm the atmosphere, but the unfrozen water is also a source of heat that can warm the atmosphere and is actually a greater source of heat because it has a higher temperature. It is called the latent heat of fusion of water for a good reason. You cannot observe the release of heat because it is hidden. What the f**k are you talking about??? The conversation started because you said words to the effect of 'this was the time of year when air temperatures rise in the arctic as water freezes' Oh really? this is the time of year when you start seeing heat spikes in the atmosphere from the release of water heat energy as the water freezes. Come on lad. Spell it out. What the f**k are you talking about?? Sure I was talking about the DMI average arctic temperature and even provided you pictures of the charts. See the spikes? >>Talking about lies Andrew! I never said water could not heat colder objects. Thats total manufactured BS lying on your part. FFS. I told you at the start of this saga that of course cold water could heat colder air. And you told me I was wrong to say that no heat was otherwise released. I said there was more heating before the freezing began and you continually told me this was wrong. No matter what I said you baited and mocked me and yet quite clearly I was properly describing latent heat. What is the explanation?? Why would you continually say i was wrong????For years you have been claiming I had said that latent heat could not be used to heat the colder air. Obviously that is not true. This time around you have also repeatedly made this rediculous accusation. It is pulled out of your arse. I recall that exchange and noted at the time you were inconsistent. I noted that it was Numeruno that made the explicit claim and that you supported him but did not repeat his claim. So what does that prove? It proves you didn't care about the argument but were only interested in attacking me, apparently out of your frustration of me nailing your probable sock puppet Steve. The ice can only freeze either by radiating energy to a colder air layer or space or by warming the very cold air that blows across the water ice mixture. So yes the ice is releasing energy to the atmosphere and the ice is a source of heat which can warm the atmosphere, but the unfrozen water is also a source of heat that can warm the atmosphere and is actually a greater source of heat because it has a higher temperature. It is called the latent heat of fusion of water for a good reason. You cannot observe the release of heat because it is hidden. What drove you to make this comment as the DMI data spiked up around the freezing point of sea water in August 2013? this is the time of year when you start seeing heat spikes in the atmosphere from the release of water heat energy as the water freezes. Why would you quote a muddled up NSIDC article and then spent months claiming it was not muddled up. Why did you spent so much time talking about supercooling Why did you get into farmers use of water? Why would you spend years claiming I was saying something I obviously never said?There are so many questions and no answers from you whatsoever. First, the release of latent heat is not hidden. It can be measured on a thermometer as the sensible heat (sensible get it?) that the latent heat becomes. Second, I have never seen "the DMI data spiked up around the freezing point of sea water in August" much less in 2013. Heat spikes are generally absent from June to August. So I have no idea what you are talking about. Third, the only muddled about the NSIDC article is your understanding of it.
|
|
|
Post by Andrew on Sept 30, 2015 5:19:51 GMT
I was talking about the DMI average arctic temperature Come on lad you are not fooling anyone. You were responding to Numerounos chart. The Arctic looks to be at a tipping point about 3 weeks early .. The DMI Arctic temp is currently exactly at the average value, so the cooling has been cancelled. The DMI Arctic temp is currently exactly at the average value, so the cooling has been cancelled. You forgot to "mann it up" - allow me: Yes, fine, I can definitely see no cooling. Yes, fine, I can definitely see no cooling. this is the time of year when you start seeing heat spikes in the atmosphere from the release of water heat energy as the water freezes. There is no release of water heat energy as the water freezesWhat you have said is a very strange sentence because as the water freezes less heat energy is released. A few days ago you said more BTU's were released per second as water freezes and therefore Sigurdur was right. Do you or do you not understand what latent heat is by now?? What are you talking about??
|
|
|
Post by icefisher on Sept 30, 2015 6:15:50 GMT
So what is your explanation for why the spikes get smaller as the temperature rises towards 0 deg C and virtually disappear above zero C?
As to what Sigurdur said I have no opinion and said so in my previous post but since you can't read you missed that and no doubt will also miss this.
|
|
|
Post by Andrew on Sept 30, 2015 6:23:58 GMT
So what is your explanation for why the spikes get smaller as the temperature rises towards 0 deg C and virtually disappear above zero C? As to what Sigurdur said I have no opinion and said so in my previous post but since you can't read you missed that and no doubt will also miss this. The explanation for the heat spikes will be whatever it is. One thing is for certain when water cools to the freezing point it cannot create heat spikes due to 'the release of water heat energy as water freezes' As to what Sigurdur said I have no opinion and said so in my previous post but since you can't read you missed that and no doubt will also miss this. Come on lad. I showed a chart a few days ago and you said it supported Sigurdurs claim freezing produced more BTU's per second. How about we spend some useful time here and try to work out what Sigurdur is talking about?
|
|
|
Post by icefisher on Sept 30, 2015 14:31:27 GMT
So what is your explanation for why the spikes get smaller as the temperature rises towards 0 deg C and virtually disappear above zero C? As to what Sigurdur said I have no opinion and said so in my previous post but since you can't read you missed that and no doubt will also miss this. The explanation for the heat spikes will be whatever it is. One thing is for certain when water cools to the freezing point it cannot create heat spikes due to 'the release of water heat energy as water freezes' If it were for certain, there would be a lot of scientific papers stating that fact. But all we seem to have is the bellowing of a blowhard trying to play childish games. As to what Sigurdur said I have no opinion and said so in my previous post but since you can't read you missed that and no doubt will also miss this. Come on lad. I showed a chart a few days ago and you said it supported Sigurdurs claim freezing produced more BTU's per second. How about we spend some useful time here and try to work out what Sigurdur is talking about? Do you mean the grey chart that shows the "solidifying (freezing)" black line releasing more BTUs per second than the "expected curve without phase change" (non-freezing) red line chart?
|
|
|
Post by Andrew on Sept 30, 2015 14:38:49 GMT
The explanation for the heat spikes will be whatever it is. One thing is for certain when water cools to the freezing point it cannot create heat spikes due to 'the release of water heat energy as water freezes' If it were for certain, there would be a lot of scientific papers stating that fact. But all we seem to have is the bellowing of a blowhard trying to play childish games. Come on lad. I showed a chart a few days ago and you said it supported Sigurdurs claim freezing produced more BTU's per second. How about we spend some useful time here and try to work out what Sigurdur is talking about? Do you mean the grey chart that shows the "solidifying (freezing)" black line releasing more BTUs per second than the "expected curve without phase change" (non-freezing) red line chart? So to this day you are still claiming freezing water regularly causes heat spikes in the Arctic even when Walt Maier embarrassingly told his former boss his article was technically incorrect, and you are still relying on articles on the internet mostly written by climate scientists who very often have no background in the physical sciences and are known to have strange ideas about warmth and cold. And in further breaking news, water has been freezing on earth for at least 4 billion years. When water freezes it cannot release more BTU'¨s per second than the warmer water can do.
|
|
|
Post by icefisher on Sept 30, 2015 19:05:13 GMT
If it were for certain, there would be a lot of scientific papers stating that fact. But all we seem to have is the bellowing of a blowhard trying to play childish games. Do you mean the grey chart that shows the "solidifying (freezing)" black line releasing more BTUs per second than the "expected curve without phase change" (non-freezing) red line chart? So to this day you are still claiming freezing water regularly causes heat spikes in the Arctic even when Walt Maier embarrassingly told his former boss his article was technically incorrect, and you are still relying on articles on the internet mostly written by climate scientists who very often have no background in the physical sciences and are known to have strange ideas about warmth and cold. And in further breaking news, water has been freezing on earth for at least 4 billion years. When water freezes it cannot release more BTU'¨s per second than the warmer water can do. Can't you stay on a single topic for more than one post? Technically incorrect? I where is your evidence of this? Certainly you can not expect us to take your word on this. No doubt if anything similar was said you were embellishing it. See below. So to get back on topic. Did Sigurdur say that freezing water releases more BTUs than "warmer" water? I didn't see the word "warmer" in Sigurdur's remarks you quoted. As such obviously, any comment on my part about Sigurdur's comment had absolutely zero to do with "warmer" water. Unlike you I make real attempts at "NOT" imagining between the lines. Sigurdur can comment himself as to whether he meant as compared to warmer water or volcanos or whatever else he did not state. It appears to me to be just another example of your BS and goal post changing. As far as I know you inserted the word "warmer" sometime afterwards. Its the exact parallel to your changing of the goal posts on the blanket warming a dead body changed to blanket warming the surface of a dead body via the migration and loss of heat by the body at least after erasing some 70 of your personal posts. Now if you could show me otherwise then I will address it. In this thread his comment was towards the chart that shows the freezing water releasing more BTUs than expected from its temperature at the time of freezing. The chart does not show any warming hump at all Andrew. Sigurdur as far as I know did not criticize or say the chart was wrong. Sigurdur did not say the word "warmer", "volcano", or any other "hot" word. You seem to have completely manufactured that. What is it? Do you think a change of goal posts of that magnitude might not be noticed by the peons around here who are mental midgets in comparison to you? LOL! The big question in my mind is are you smart enough to notice what you are doing? The only half way related discussion I ever engaged in (2 years ago) was that while non-supercooled water freezes in accordance with the chart you produced and produces exactly the amount of BTUs more than expected by cooling water in the exact time frame indicated; super cooled water follows a different path. Supercooled water freezes with a hump in temperatures. But that hump as far as temperature is concerned would also be limited to 0C so this does not amount to a claim that it releases more energy per se than warmer water. Regarding BTUs, that is a topic not on the chart. BTUs can be released via vaporization. Temperature is only solidly tied to radiation and conduction by the laws of physics. Evaporation that transfers about double the amount of BTUs per gram of water is not strictly controlled by temperature. Humidity enters the equation. And airs moving across solid surfaces tend to be dryer and colder than over water. This is a wild card as far as BTUs are concerned. However, its important to note that "warmer" water was never part of the discussion either there or here. I know that evaporation of warmer water is generally faster than cooler water. But quite honestly I have no knowledge of how or how not evaporation might be stimulated by the release of the heat of fusion. Its an interesting topic but was never in mind 2 years ago nor was a comparison to warmer water that may or may be more available to the surface to a degree to wipe out the superior availability (per gram of water) of latent heat. I don't expect that this means that more heat will be transferred by freezing water but I also have not seen anything that says it does not. The excitation of freezing molecules of water from latent heat that does weird things when it doesn't have a route of acceleration through conduction and radiation may well have a route through evaporation to heat the air in time to save a crop or create a warming spike. I make no claims on that nor ever suggested such an event was necessary or superior. Its only in your imagination I did. All I said was there is more latent heat available to do some of this stuff than sensible heat for the water surrounding the edges of the ice. For crop protection latent heat is a necessity for several reasons. 1) the price of water; 2) limited resources of water; 3) limited means of delivery of water; 4) a general necessity for the protection of the crops to minimize the use of water (prevent excess flooding and waterlogging of soil from using vastly greater amounts of water to make up for the BTUs of latent heat available in a given volume of water). Your ignorance of those issues no doubt is why you claim the farmers are being deceived. For creating heat spikes in the Arctic, I never said it was even a necessity. I just simply offered it as a possibility related to the low ice conditions. Here latent heat might be important because of its abundance compared to the additional 2 or 3 calories from sensible heat in the waters surrounding the ice. The reason it may be a factor is that it may not take a lot of wind to freeze a lot of ice in the winter arctic when the ambient temperature in the arctic is averaging 20 to 30 degrees C below zero. Sure I can acknowledge that if the water did not freeze the spikes might even be higher but thats a point irrelevant to the actual source of heat that creates the spikes. You just imagined that I was saying something else.
|
|
|
Post by Andrew on Sept 30, 2015 20:34:04 GMT
your changing of the goal posts on the blanket warming a dead body changed to blanket warming the surface of a dead body I have proven I never said those things about the dead body. Come on lad just stop it. There is no need for a Chemistry graduate like me to lie and cheat to explain simple school boy science based on established thinking from at least 150 years ago.
|
|
|
Post by icefisher on Sept 30, 2015 23:50:42 GMT
your changing of the goal posts on the blanket warming a dead body changed to blanket warming the surface of a dead body I have proven I never said those things about the dead body. I have no need to change goal posts to provide education about simple scientific ideas such as the greenhouse effect or latent heat or any other thing I discuss. Nobody ever suggested you had a need to change goal posts Andrew. Actually I think all of us have felt in fact you don't have a need to. We merely have asked what your dispute was with the notions you have intitiated posts opposing for instance Magellan's comment. Its well recognized here that you do learn and your posts improve over time. But its really interesting how doggedly you effectively claim to have learned nothing from this site. I learn a great deal here. So now that we are settled on this. What is your beef with what Sigurdur said?
|
|
|
Post by Andrew on Oct 1, 2015 0:54:17 GMT
I have proven I never said those things about the dead body. I have no need to change goal posts to provide education about simple scientific ideas such as the greenhouse effect or latent heat or any other thing I discuss. Nobody ever suggested you had a need to change goal posts Andrew. Actually I think all of us have felt in fact you don't have a need to. We merely have asked what your dispute was with the notions you have intitiated posts opposing for instance Magellan's comment. Its well recognized here that you do learn and your posts improve over time. But its really interesting how doggedly you effectively claim to have learned nothing from this site. I learn a great deal here. So now that we are settled on this. What is your beef with what Sigurdur said? Come on lad just stop it. Your behaviour is totally transparent. You must have told me about 100 times I change goal posts I have never changed any goal posts and I totally have no reason to do so when the subject matter is so simple. I never believed a dead body would be warmed if a blanket was thrown over it but you have stupidly claimed for years I did. Surely you can think of better things to do with your life than making up stupid stories about me?
|
|
zaphod
Level 3 Rank
Posts: 210
|
Post by zaphod on Nov 8, 2015 13:38:17 GMT
|
|
|
Post by missouriboy on Nov 23, 2015 4:35:13 GMT
|
|