|
Post by Andrew on Feb 2, 2014 18:54:32 GMT
And this is the last time I post on this subject. You have one heck of a case of SS Syndrome.......One heck of a case. Time will cure it tho.....as reality always does at some point. So once again you refuse to explain how impossible events can happen on earth and we simply have to take your word for it "my cooling tators get hotter when water freezes on em! Ooh arrrrrrr. It's them joules boy. Ooh arrrrrrrr
|
|
|
Post by Andrew on Feb 2, 2014 19:35:20 GMT
Andrew: YOUR version of the "correct scientific explanation". Your version doesn't seem to match up with the literature/observations. I will take mine any day over yours at this time as you have NOT demonstrated one shred of evidence in support of "Your version". Wrong again. Not one single farming writer is claiming observations violate the laws of physics. The writers all want to invoke the laws of physics to justify their voodoo conclusions. You though want us to believe the farmers observations trump science!!! Something does not add up. Ooh aaaaaaar them tators are mighty mysterious.
|
|
|
Post by icefisher on Feb 2, 2014 21:04:34 GMT
Andrew: YOUR version of the "correct scientific explanation". Your version doesn't seem to match up with the literature/observations. I will take mine any day over yours at this time as you have NOT demonstrated one shred of evidence in support of "Your version". Wrong again. Not one single farming writer is claiming observations violate the laws of physics. The writers all want to invoke the laws of physics to justify their voodoo conclusions. You though want us to believe the farmers observations trump science!!! Something does not add up. Ooh aaaaaaar them tators are mighty mysterious. You are confused by the explanation. Its not beyond understanding. I think if you take some words too literally you can get to the idea that a law of physics is being violated, assuming of course the water has been spraying in an orchard long enough to reach its maximum effect. If the air in orchard is still cooling then it would be violation of the law of physics for freezing to reverse the cooling and cause the orchard to warm. One can be further confused by the example where the wind in an orchard is calm. In various areas of discussion calm can mean winds of 3 to 5 knots an hour or less. True calm never occurs as air is constantly moving. Thus what really happens is the night airs are cooling the ground and the atmosphere and cooling them faster than in the orchard where water is being sprayed in expectation of a freezing night. As the cold air drifts downwind into the orchard the air is warmed by the water and the ice using a transfer of energy via sensible and latent heat of the water through conduction, convection, radiation, and evaporation and/or condensation. Andrew your only problem is you are trying to read it as a thermometer in the orchard where all the variables have been steady in one direction to for enough time to reach a quasi-equilibrium; then when more freezing occurs there will be no warming noticed by this particular thermometer. But thats such a rigid number of conditions that are never seen in nature. In the case of a 3 knot wind -10C entering the north end of the orchard by the time it exits the southend it might be a few degrees warmer. To further confound the issue calm winds of 3 knots are usually variable in direction blowing in one direction for short while then changing direction. . . .meaning thermometers in such an orchard will be both going up and going down. Further we once had an argument where an object was both being heated and cooled at the same time. I was on the other side of the argument then saying such an object is truly either cooling or warming as a net figure but you and others maintained the heating and cooling could be simultaneous. So one has to be careful when words heating a cooling is used or when "calm air" is used in describing observations and not draw too many conclusions on the basis a strict definition of the words. Its clear to me that the opening of a polynya is required to create a heat spike in the polar regions, some change. The same is true for orchards where the heating of the canopy can be accompanied simultaneously by cooling of the canopy by virtue of the canopy in the orchard being warmer than the air up wind at the same elevation outside of the orchard. Oft times a little bit of knowledge can be dangerous and I can see agreement on most of what has been said except I am still having problems with what Numerouno meant and your defense of Numerouno when he said latent heat is never released externally and is fully deployed in expanding ice and chipping rocks. Quite simply I cannot reconcile that.
|
|
|
Post by Andrew on Feb 3, 2014 5:59:27 GMT
The uni article and other extension service articles are clearly mainly referring to radiation frosts rather than advection events although both are considered. Either way it is clear that the temperatures begin warmer and then cool to the freezing point and beyond. The fact of the matter it is totally clear that Sig is saying temperatures rise at the freezing point because water rapidly freezes and it releases all of them joules, whereas in fact it is perfectly obvious the advantage of water is that it does not rapidly freeze due to the enormous energy releases required before that can happen. ------------------------ >>I am still having problems with what Numerouno meant and your defense of Numerouno when he said latent heat is never released externally and is fully deployed in expanding ice and chipping rocks. Quite simply I cannot reconcile that. It is easy to see how these guys are getting so muddled up. What he said in that text is sort of correct but misses the obvious bigger point. Ie 1. When warm water is being cooled by a colder environment the temperature of the environment warms up! 2. When cold water is being cooled by a colder environment the temperature of the environment warms up! 3. When ice cold water is being cooled by a colder environment the temperature of the environment warms up! 4. When ice is being cooled by a colder environment the temperature of the environment warms up! Nothing prevents the ice from getting colder??? they are spraying warm water on the ice. Where the latent heat of fusion provides hidden BTUs that must be consumed before the water can be cooled to be below 0C
|
|
|
Post by icefisher on Feb 3, 2014 12:19:17 GMT
The uni article and other extension service articles are clearly mainly referring to radiation frosts rather than advection events although both are considered. Either way it is clear that the temperatures begin warmer and then cool to the freezing point and beyond. The fact of the matter it is totally clear that Sig is saying temperatures rise at the freezing point because water rapidly freezes and it releases all of them joules, whereas in fact it is perfectly obvious the advantage of water is that it does not rapidly freeze due to the enormous energy releases required before that can happen. A lot of stuff is clear to you that you are confused about Andrew. Your own home heating system confuses you. You were confused about a cooling dead body warming up because the surface temperature of the dead body warmed when cooling was slowed. You claimed the dead body warmed up. You claimed that the energy of latent heat is not released externally, then you said it was, then again you said it wasn't. You are constantly confused making stuff up as you go. I have not heard Sigurdur claim that 0deg ice can warm anything to more than zero degrees. You are just confused and think he did.
|
|
|
Post by Andrew on Feb 3, 2014 12:32:53 GMT
The uni article and other extension service articles are clearly mainly referring to radiation frosts rather than advection events although both are considered. Either way it is clear that the temperatures begin warmer and then cool to the freezing point and beyond. The fact of the matter it is totally clear that Sig is saying temperatures rise at the freezing point because water rapidly freezes and it releases all of them joules, whereas in fact it is perfectly obvious the advantage of water is that it does not rapidly freeze due to the enormous energy releases required before that can happen. A lot of stuff is clear to you that you are confused about Andrew. Your own home heating system confuses you. You were confused about a cooling dead body warming up because the surface temperature of the dead body warmed when cooling was slowed. You claimed the dead body warmed up. You claimed that the energy of latent heat is not released externally, then you said it was, then again you said it wasn't. You are constantly confused making stuff up as you go. I have not heard Sigurdur claim that 0deg ice can warm anything to more than zero degrees. You are just confused and think he did. For gods sake. Sigurdur keeps saying i am wrong when i say it is against the laws of physics for freezing to warm cooling air temperatures. You are just a disgusting lying bastard about the dead body claim you and the other f**ker threw at me. You two morons could not even work out why the surface of a boiled egg reheats!!! The text that you claim is so obvious to you is obviously talking about cooling temperatures prior to the freezing point How on earth did you ever get to be such a disgusting creep???
|
|
|
Post by icefisher on Feb 3, 2014 12:53:09 GMT
A lot of stuff is clear to you that you are confused about Andrew. Your own home heating system confuses you. You were confused about a cooling dead body warming up because the surface temperature of the dead body warmed when cooling was slowed. You claimed the dead body warmed up. You claimed that the energy of latent heat is not released externally, then you said it was, then again you said it wasn't. You are constantly confused making stuff up as you go. I have not heard Sigurdur claim that 0deg ice can warm anything to more than zero degrees. You are just confused and think he did. For gods sake. Sigurdur keeps saying i am wrong when i say it is against the laws of physics for freezing to warm cooling air temperatures. You are just a disgusting lying bastard about the dead body claim you and the other f**ker threw at me. You two morons could not even work out why the surface of a boiled egg reheats!!! The text that you claim is so obvious to you is obviously talking about cooling temperatures prior to the freezing point How on earth did you ever get to be such a disgusting creep??? You are just confused Andrew. You say: "it is against the laws of physics for freezing to warm cooling air temperatures." You need to say which law this violates. Freezing may or may not be able to warm cooling air temperatures it is incorrect to say it is a violation of the laws of physics for freezing to warm cooling air temperatures. The freezing of supercooled water is a perfect example of why there could be no such law.
|
|
|
Post by Andrew on Feb 3, 2014 13:11:24 GMT
For gods sake. Sigurdur keeps saying i am wrong when i say it is against the laws of physics for freezing to warm cooling air temperatures. You are just a disgusting lying bastard about the dead body claim you and the other f**ker threw at me. You two morons could not even work out why the surface of a boiled egg reheats!!! The text that you claim is so obvious to you is obviously talking about cooling temperatures prior to the freezing point How on earth did you ever get to be such a disgusting creep??? You are just confused Andrew. You say: "it is against the laws of physics for freezing to warm cooling air temperatures." You need to say which law this violates. Freezing may or may not be able to warm cooling air temperatures it is incorrect to say it is a violation of the laws of physics for freezing to warm cooling air temperatures. The freezing of supercooled water is a perfect example of why there could be no such law. If the air in orchard is still cooling then it would be violation of the law of physics for freezing to reverse the cooling and cause the orchard to warm. Quite obviously you only here to play silly games. Only somebody with very serious mental problems behaves as you behave. Enuf!
|
|
|
Post by icefisher on Feb 3, 2014 14:03:08 GMT
You are just confused Andrew. You say: "it is against the laws of physics for freezing to warm cooling air temperatures." You need to say which law this violates. Freezing may or may not be able to warm cooling air temperatures it is incorrect to say it is a violation of the laws of physics for freezing to warm cooling air temperatures. The freezing of supercooled water is a perfect example of why there could be no such law. If the air in orchard is still cooling then it would be violation of the law of physics for freezing to reverse the cooling and cause the orchard to warm. Quite obviously you only here to play silly games. Only somebody with very serious mental problems behaves as you behave. Enuf! You are just stupid as you took the above statement out of a paragraph with a number of additional conditions, conditions that are rare in nature. I very clearly say that freezing may or may not warm cooling air temperatures. The warming when it occurs will be in accordance with the laws of physics and when it does not it will also be in accordance with the laws of physics. You have a major mental problem. You are obviously not stupid but you act stupid meaning you have a moron switch in your brain that prevents you from seeing the obvious. I think its an egotistical streak where you can never admit to being wrong and the laws of physics be damned, being right is more important to you. . . .but it sure makes you look stupid! And stupid you must be if you can't even see that!
|
|
|
Post by Andrew on Feb 3, 2014 14:07:17 GMT
Quite obviously you only here to play silly games. Only somebody with very serious mental problems behaves as you behave. Enuf! You are just stupid as you took the above statement out of a paragraph with a number of additional conditions, conditions that are rare in nature. I very clearly say that freezing may or may not warm cooling air temperatures. The warming when it occurs will be in accordance with the laws of physics and when it does not it will also be in accordance with the laws of physics. You have a major mental problem. You are obviously not stupid but you act stupid meaning you have a moron switch in your brain that prevents you from seeing the obvious. I think its an egotistical streak where you can never admit to being wrong and the laws of physics be damned, being right is more important to you. . . .but it sure makes you look stupid! And stupid you must be if you can't even see that! I have no problem whatsoever admitting I am wrong. You spent 7 months failing to agree with me. The clock is still running The topic was simple, my words were mostly very clear and you have failed to agree with me for 7 months. The NSIDC article was confused but you blamed my confusion. Even when the director himself wrote to me you blamed me for being confused. The farming articles are confusing but you Blame me. Sig is confused but you blame me. You are still refusing to admit I was correct about the simplicity of ghe theory. Still continuing with the stupidity of dead body misrepresentations You behave in a disgusting manner towards people who are in a position to educate you. And there is no way are you ever going to apologise to Steve or myself.
|
|
|
Post by icefisher on Feb 3, 2014 14:59:02 GMT
You are just stupid as you took the above statement out of a paragraph with a number of additional conditions, conditions that are rare in nature. I very clearly say that freezing may or may not warm cooling air temperatures. The warming when it occurs will be in accordance with the laws of physics and when it does not it will also be in accordance with the laws of physics. You have a major mental problem. You are obviously not stupid but you act stupid meaning you have a moron switch in your brain that prevents you from seeing the obvious. I think its an egotistical streak where you can never admit to being wrong and the laws of physics be damned, being right is more important to you. . . .but it sure makes you look stupid! And stupid you must be if you can't even see that! I have no problem whatsoever admitting I am wrong. You spent 7 months failing to agree with me. The clock is still running The topic was simple, my words were mostly very clear and you have failed to agree with me for 7 months. Your reply above fits perfectly with my analysis. Its obvious that under the right circumstances the freezing of ice can warm what was a cooling atmosphere. Under other circumstances it cannot. You took my conditional statement out of context and treated it like an absolute. Thats not intelligent at all. You are clearly book learned but lack real world experience as to the nuances nature offers. So are you satisfied with your reference to the law of physics Sigurdur's idea allegedly breaks? Namely, my statement taken out of context? Is that all you have?
|
|
|
Post by Andrew on Feb 3, 2014 15:01:01 GMT
I have no problem whatsoever admitting I am wrong. You spent 7 months failing to agree with me. The clock is still running The topic was simple, my words were mostly very clear and you have failed to agree with me for 7 months. Your reply above fits perfectly with my analysis. Its obvious that under the right circumstances the freezing of ice can warm what was a cooling atmosphere. Under other circumstances it cannot. You took my conditional statement out of context and treated it like an absolute. Thats not intelligent at all. You are clearly book learned but lack real world experience as to the nuances nature offers. So are you satisfied with your reference to the law of physics Sigurdur's idea allegedly breaks? Namely, my statement taken out of context? Is that all you have? You need to look at the guy in the mirror. In the real world you invented months of reasons why cooling bricks could not be warmer between their closest faces ,then months of reasons why it taught you nothing, and months of reasons you were a superior being. According to you the use of two bricks is too complicated to teach you Of course I am satisfied the farmers are confused. Nobody is going to spend 7 freeking months arguing about the physics of freezing unless they are majorly muddled up. Your analysis??? You are the f**ktard who could not understand how an eggs surface reheats!!!!!
|
|
|
Post by icefisher on Feb 3, 2014 16:04:29 GMT
Your reply above fits perfectly with my analysis. Its obvious that under the right circumstances the freezing of ice can warm what was a cooling atmosphere. Under other circumstances it cannot. You took my conditional statement out of context and treated it like an absolute. Thats not intelligent at all. You are clearly book learned but lack real world experience as to the nuances nature offers. So are you satisfied with your reference to the law of physics Sigurdur's idea allegedly breaks? Namely, my statement taken out of context? Is that all you have? You need to look at the guy in the mirror. In the real world you invented months of reasons why cooling bricks could not be warmer between their closest faces ,then months of reasons why it taught you nothing, and months of reasons you were a superior being. According to you the use of two bricks is too complicated to teach you Of course I am satisfied the farmers are confused. Nobody is going to spend 7 freeking months arguing about the physics of freezing unless they are majorly muddled up. Your analysis??? You are the f**ktard who could not understand how an eggs surface reheats!!!!! A real scientist can back up his claims. You apparently cannot even name the law of physics you allege Sigurdur's idea violates.
|
|
|
Post by Andrew on Feb 3, 2014 16:39:38 GMT
You need to look at the guy in the mirror. In the real world you invented months of reasons why cooling bricks could not be warmer between their closest faces ,then months of reasons why it taught you nothing, and months of reasons you were a superior being. According to you the use of two bricks is too complicated to teach you Of course I am satisfied the farmers are confused. Nobody is going to spend 7 freeking months arguing about the physics of freezing unless they are majorly muddled up. Your analysis??? You are the f**ktard who could not understand how an eggs surface reheats!!!!! A real scientist can back up his claims. You apparently cannot even name the law of physics you allege Sigurdur's idea violates. You are a very strange person. As far as i can see you started off first about the laws of physics, and for shorthand i just copied that text from memory since it seemed to satisfy you and my version would have involved thinking by me and more text. Your text was fine for you, but you objected to mine for no good reason at all. Perhaps you can tell me the laws of physics which were broken in your own text since it was written first, since it is obvious we were both considering exactly the same subject when we wrote the words 'laws of physics'. But are you just strange or is your use of words done deliberately to frustrate and annoy for no purpose at all other than to frustrate and annoy? Are you just a troll? consciously wasting time or something more complicated and devious, or are just just totally mad? I have spent months of my life trying to work out what is wrong with you but just cannot figure it out. One theory is that you took too many drugs or you had a car accident. Why else would an auditor have such a hard time learning simple things? What kind of an auditor can possibly have any objection to the use of mathematical netting?? Evidently you are unreal or phoney or ill or devious or something less than clear and honest.
|
|
|
Post by icefisher on Feb 3, 2014 18:57:14 GMT
You are a very strange person. As far as i can see you started off first about the laws of physics, and for shorthand i just copied that text from memory since it seemed to satisfy you and my version would have involved thinking by me and more text. Your text was fine for you, but you objected to mine for no good reason at all. Perhaps you can tell me the laws of physics which were broken in your own text since it was written first, since it is obvious we were both considering exactly the same subject when we wrote the words 'laws of physics'. But are you just strange or is your use of words done deliberately to frustrate and annoy for no purpose at all other than to frustrate and annoy? Are you just a troll? consciously wasting time or something more complicated and devious, or are just just totally mad? I have spent months of my life trying to work out what is wrong with you but just cannot figure it out. One theory is that you took too many drugs or you had a car accident. Why else would an auditor have such a hard time learning simple things? What kind of an auditor can possibly have any objection to the use of mathematical netting?? Evidently you are unreal or phoney or ill or devious or something less than clear and honest. To you a strange person is obviously anybody who does not agree 100% with you. What I did was agree with you that ice heating a cooling atmosphere would be a violation of the laws of physics under certain conditions.If you took that to mean under any conditions and parroted it, I really can't help you much.
|
|