quote:

ORIGINAL: HunterCA

quote:

ORIGINAL: DomKen

quote:

ORIGINAL: HunterCA

quote:


You only need to look back at the Republican presidential debates to lose a lot of sleep. For the most part the Republicans were anti science or afraid to let their electors know they had some knowledge of science.

This is so laughable. The funniest thing is that you actually believe it and use it to justify your hate. You drip hate with every breath. You make people into groups and deem them either good or bad according to what your masters tell you to believe now.

So when a question is asked at the debate and every single candidate denies the existence of climate change what is that?

I don't think you understand what they said. Which is typical of a leftist. You only understand what you're told to understand. Now it's become politically correct dogma that nutsackers are anti-science. When actually, what they are asking is for science to stand up and produce one model that can be verified by an outside source that will show they understand enough about the systems they are dealing with to be considered worth reorganizing total world wide society on the proof shown in that model. Which they can't do. As a matter of fact....yes fact....if you take all of the computer models that were projecting climate change and plot them alongside the actual climate as it existed it becomes very clear that the climate change models don't know enough to find their ass with two hands. But, I'm laying odds in your infinite science wisdom you've never seen those superimposed graphs and that you're just talking out of your ass as most Kool Aid drinking liberals do.


Let me give you this science. As I read it in a scientific journal some dozen years ago I'll have to paraphrase and not be able to give you a link. The computer industry makes chips by adding chemicals into a drum like container and the putting a specific heat and a specific pressure on the specific chemical brew. Doing all of that in a closed system they only succeed in the process 75% of the time. Now, you expect that the "Scientists" looking at global climate change can determine in an open system, as opposed to a closed system, of global proportions, as oppressed to a container in a room, with random chemical variants, as opposed to a specific chemical stew, with uncertain temperature and pressure what is going to happen with the climate 100 years from now. And, I gotta tell you, you're an idiot and you've probably never taken a thermodynamics class on a graduate level in your life. So please, don't tell me who doesn't understand science.

quote:

ORIGINAL: HunterCA

quote:

ORIGINAL: DomKen

quote:

ORIGINAL: HunterCA

quote:


You only need to look back at the Republican presidential debates to lose a lot of sleep. For the most part the Republicans were anti science or afraid to let their electors know they had some knowledge of science.

This is so laughable. The funniest thing is that you actually believe it and use it to justify your hate. You drip hate with every breath. You make people into groups and deem them either good or bad according to what your masters tell you to believe now.

So when a question is asked at the debate and every single candidate denies the existence of climate change what is that?

Oh and Ken, I don't know why I'm spending so much time with a pimple on my ass, but you seem to have pissed me off with your ignorance.

I remember one environmental science class I sat through. The final exam had one question for which we had two hours. Most of the class did not finish the problem so the curve was low, thank god for me.

The question was to write the equation from the sun through the sewer treatment plant. You know....oh maybe you don't...the sun shines on the earth, the plants take sunlight and soil and make carbohydrates, the cow takes the carbohydrates and makes protein, the human takes the protein, lives and excretes which goes to the treatment plant and the treatment plant then turns all the icky stuff back into basically soil, air and energy as existed when the sun shined on the land before the plants began to organize the chemicals.


I tell you what Ken, at the end of two hours I had ten pages of math, physics, chemistry, biology and other what not and I wasn't even close to being done. Again, thank god for the curve. So, Ken, in your intimate science wisdom, you provide me one page of those calculations and I'll accept you're not a complete science illiterate drone of the Kool Aid drinking crowd and admit it in public here. Now, understand Ken, that test was 30 years ago and the science has grown a whole heck of a lot since then. I'll not ask you to be up on current science, merely 30 years ago science. If you can do that out of your own head without googling something I'll apologize to you here. If you can't you'll admit you're nothing but a ass licking suck up in the Kool Aid drinking ignorance crowd.

Or I'll give you a second outlet. Currently my sewer treatment plant discharge is being affected by new regulations from the EPA regarding ammonia and muscles. You give me the biology of ammonia and muscles, along with PH considerations for the chemistry in the aquatic environment. You do it from the top of your head without recourse to google and we have the same deal.


Deal?

quote:

ORIGINAL: Musicmystery

quote:

ORIGINAL: vincentML

No, it suggests that the Muslim religious culture has halted the scientific activity for 900 years.

Nonsense. Without the Persian Muslims, the middle ages would have completed its destruction of classical knowledge.

quote:

ORIGINAL: DomKen

quote:

ORIGINAL: HunterCA

quote:

ORIGINAL: DomKen

quote:

ORIGINAL: HunterCA

quote:


You only need to look back at the Republican presidential debates to lose a lot of sleep. For the most part the Republicans were anti science or afraid to let their electors know they had some knowledge of science.

This is so laughable. The funniest thing is that you actually believe it and use it to justify your hate. You drip hate with every breath. You make people into groups and deem them either good or bad according to what your masters tell you to believe now.

So when a question is asked at the debate and every single candidate denies the existence of climate change what is that?

I don't think you understand what they said. Which is typical of a leftist. You only understand what you're told to understand. Now it's become politically correct dogma that nutsackers are anti-science. When actually, what they are asking is for science to stand up and produce one model that can be verified by an outside source that will show they understand enough about the systems they are dealing with to be considered worth reorganizing total world wide society on the proof shown in that model. Which they can't do. As a matter of fact....yes fact....if you take all of the computer models that were projecting climate change and plot them alongside the actual climate as it existed it becomes very clear that the climate change models don't know enough to find their ass with two hands. But, I'm laying odds in your infinite science wisdom you've never seen those superimposed graphs and that you're just talking out of your ass as most Kool Aid drinking liberals do.


Let me give you this science. As I read it in a scientific journal some dozen years ago I'll have to paraphrase and not be able to give you a link. The computer industry makes chips by adding chemicals into a drum like container and the putting a specific heat and a specific pressure on the specific chemical brew. Doing all of that in a closed system they only succeed in the process 75% of the time. Now, you expect that the "Scientists" looking at global climate change can determine in an open system, as opposed to a closed system, of global proportions, as oppressed to a container in a room, with random chemical variants, as opposed to a specific chemical stew, with uncertain temperature and pressure what is going to happen with the climate 100 years from now. And, I gotta tell you, you're an idiot and you've probably never taken a thermodynamics class on a graduate level in your life. So please, don't tell me who doesn't understand science.

So you don't understand crystal growth and from there you bash science. Laughable.

Tell you what. learn what the fuck you are going on about and then maybe people will stop laughing at you.

quote:

ORIGINAL: DomKen

quote:

ORIGINAL: HunterCA

quote:

ORIGINAL: DomKen

quote:

ORIGINAL: HunterCA

quote:


You only need to look back at the Republican presidential debates to lose a lot of sleep. For the most part the Republicans were anti science or afraid to let their electors know they had some knowledge of science.

This is so laughable. The funniest thing is that you actually believe it and use it to justify your hate. You drip hate with every breath. You make people into groups and deem them either good or bad according to what your masters tell you to believe now.

So when a question is asked at the debate and every single candidate denies the existence of climate change what is that?

Oh and Ken, I don't know why I'm spending so much time with a pimple on my ass, but you seem to have pissed me off with your ignorance.

I remember one environmental science class I sat through. The final exam had one question for which we had two hours. Most of the class did not finish the problem so the curve was low, thank god for me.

The question was to write the equation from the sun through the sewer treatment plant. You know....oh maybe you don't...the sun shines on the earth, the plants take sunlight and soil and make carbohydrates, the cow takes the carbohydrates and makes protein, the human takes the protein, lives and excretes which goes to the treatment plant and the treatment plant then turns all the icky stuff back into basically soil, air and energy as existed when the sun shined on the land before the plants began to organize the chemicals.


I tell you what Ken, at the end of two hours I had ten pages of math, physics, chemistry, biology and other what not and I wasn't even close to being done. Again, thank god for the curve. So, Ken, in your intimate science wisdom, you provide me one page of those calculations and I'll accept you're not a complete science illiterate drone of the Kool Aid drinking crowd and admit it in public here. Now, understand Ken, that test was 30 years ago and the science has grown a whole heck of a lot since then. I'll not ask you to be up on current science, merely 30 years ago science. If you can do that out of your own head without googling something I'll apologize to you here. If you can't you'll admit you're nothing but a ass licking suck up in the Kool Aid drinking ignorance crowd.

Or I'll give you a second outlet. Currently my sewer treatment plant discharge is being affected by new regulations from the EPA regarding ammonia and muscles. You give me the biology of ammonia and muscles, along with PH considerations for the chemistry in the aquatic environment. You do it from the top of your head without recourse to google and we have the same deal.


Deal?

Ok shit head
sunlight + 2H2O + 2NADP(+) + 3ADP -> O2 + 2NADPH + 3ATP
Why would it take pages?

quote:

ORIGINAL: DomKen

quote:

ORIGINAL: HunterCA

quote:

ORIGINAL: DomKen

quote:

ORIGINAL: HunterCA

quote:


You only need to look back at the Republican presidential debates to lose a lot of sleep. For the most part the Republicans were anti science or afraid to let their electors know they had some knowledge of science.

This is so laughable. The funniest thing is that you actually believe it and use it to justify your hate. You drip hate with every breath. You make people into groups and deem them either good or bad according to what your masters tell you to believe now.

So when a question is asked at the debate and every single candidate denies the existence of climate change what is that?

I don't think you understand what they said. Which is typical of a leftist. You only understand what you're told to understand. Now it's become politically correct dogma that nutsackers are anti-science. When actually, what they are asking is for science to stand up and produce one model that can be verified by an outside source that will show they understand enough about the systems they are dealing with to be considered worth reorganizing total world wide society on the proof shown in that model. Which they can't do. As a matter of fact....yes fact....if you take all of the computer models that were projecting climate change and plot them alongside the actual climate as it existed it becomes very clear that the climate change models don't know enough to find their ass with two hands. But, I'm laying odds in your infinite science wisdom you've never seen those superimposed graphs and that you're just talking out of your ass as most Kool Aid drinking liberals do.


Let me give you this science. As I read it in a scientific journal some dozen years ago I'll have to paraphrase and not be able to give you a link. The computer industry makes chips by adding chemicals into a drum like container and the putting a specific heat and a specific pressure on the specific chemical brew. Doing all of that in a closed system they only succeed in the process 75% of the time. Now, you expect that the "Scientists" looking at global climate change can determine in an open system, as opposed to a closed system, of global proportions, as oppressed to a container in a room, with random chemical variants, as opposed to a specific chemical stew, with uncertain temperature and pressure what is going to happen with the climate 100 years from now. And, I gotta tell you, you're an idiot and you've probably never taken a thermodynamics class on a graduate level in your life. So please, don't tell me who doesn't understand science.

So you don't understand crystal growth and from there you bash science. Laughable.

Tell you what. learn what the fuck you are going on about and then maybe people will stop laughing at you.

quote:

ORIGINAL: HunterCA

quote:

ORIGINAL: DomKen

quote:

ORIGINAL: HunterCA

quote:

ORIGINAL: DomKen

quote:

ORIGINAL: HunterCA

quote:


You only need to look back at the Republican presidential debates to lose a lot of sleep. For the most part the Republicans were anti science or afraid to let their electors know they had some knowledge of science.

This is so laughable. The funniest thing is that you actually believe it and use it to justify your hate. You drip hate with every breath. You make people into groups and deem them either good or bad according to what your masters tell you to believe now.

So when a question is asked at the debate and every single candidate denies the existence of climate change what is that?

Oh and Ken, I don't know why I'm spending so much time with a pimple on my ass, but you seem to have pissed me off with your ignorance.

I remember one environmental science class I sat through. The final exam had one question for which we had two hours. Most of the class did not finish the problem so the curve was low, thank god for me.

The question was to write the equation from the sun through the sewer treatment plant. You know....oh maybe you don't...the sun shines on the earth, the plants take sunlight and soil and make carbohydrates, the cow takes the carbohydrates and makes protein, the human takes the protein, lives and excretes which goes to the treatment plant and the treatment plant then turns all the icky stuff back into basically soil, air and energy as existed when the sun shined on the land before the plants began to organize the chemicals.


I tell you what Ken, at the end of two hours I had ten pages of math, physics, chemistry, biology and other what not and I wasn't even close to being done. Again, thank god for the curve. So, Ken, in your intimate science wisdom, you provide me one page of those calculations and I'll accept you're not a complete science illiterate drone of the Kool Aid drinking crowd and admit it in public here. Now, understand Ken, that test was 30 years ago and the science has grown a whole heck of a lot since then. I'll not ask you to be up on current science, merely 30 years ago science. If you can do that out of your own head without googling something I'll apologize to you here. If you can't you'll admit you're nothing but a ass licking suck up in the Kool Aid drinking ignorance crowd.

Or I'll give you a second outlet. Currently my sewer treatment plant discharge is being affected by new regulations from the EPA regarding ammonia and muscles. You give me the biology of ammonia and muscles, along with PH considerations for the chemistry in the aquatic environment. You do it from the top of your head without recourse to google and we have the same deal.


Deal?

Ok shit head
sunlight + 2H2O + 2NADP(+) + 3ADP -> O2 + 2NADPH + 3ATP
Why would it take pages?

And yet in the real world it does and you are a pimple on my ass because you don't understand. So fess up you Kool Aid drinking parasite.

quote:

ORIGINAL: HunterCA

quote:

ORIGINAL: Musicmystery

quote:

ORIGINAL: vincentML

No, it suggests that the Muslim religious culture has halted the scientific activity for 900 years.

Nonsense. Without the Persian Muslims, the middle ages would have completed its destruction of classical knowledge.

BS to you. The Middle Ages were the product of political decimation....sort of like the socialist want with the U.S. now....the church maintained what records they could. Many priests then, as now, became the educated scientists.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Musicmystery

quote:

ORIGINAL: HunterCA

quote:

ORIGINAL: Musicmystery

quote:

ORIGINAL: vincentML

No, it suggests that the Muslim religious culture has halted the scientific activity for 900 years.

Nonsense. Without the Persian Muslims, the middle ages would have completed its destruction of classical knowledge.

BS to you. The Middle Ages were the product of political decimation....sort of like the socialist want with the U.S. now....the church maintained what records they could. Many priests then, as now, became the educated scientists.

Learn some world history.

In virtually every field of endeavor —in astronomy, alchemy, mathematics, medicine, optics and so forth— Arab scientists of the Abbasid Caliphate were in the forefront of scientific advance until the Mongol conquest of Baghdad in 1258.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abbasid_Caliphate#Islamic_Golden_Age

quote:

ORIGINAL: DomKen

quote:

ORIGINAL: HunterCA

quote:

ORIGINAL: DomKen

quote:

ORIGINAL: HunterCA

quote:


You only need to look back at the Republican presidential debates to lose a lot of sleep. For the most part the Republicans were anti science or afraid to let their electors know they had some knowledge of science.

This is so laughable. The funniest thing is that you actually believe it and use it to justify your hate. You drip hate with every breath. You make people into groups and deem them either good or bad according to what your masters tell you to believe now.

So when a question is asked at the debate and every single candidate denies the existence of climate change what is that?

Oh and Ken, I don't know why I'm spending so much time with a pimple on my ass, but you seem to have pissed me off with your ignorance.

I remember one environmental science class I sat through. The final exam had one question for which we had two hours. Most of the class did not finish the problem so the curve was low, thank god for me.

The question was to write the equation from the sun through the sewer treatment plant. You know....oh maybe you don't...the sun shines on the earth, the plants take sunlight and soil and make carbohydrates, the cow takes the carbohydrates and makes protein, the human takes the protein, lives and excretes which goes to the treatment plant and the treatment plant then turns all the icky stuff back into basically soil, air and energy as existed when the sun shined on the land before the plants began to organize the chemicals.


I tell you what Ken, at the end of two hours I had ten pages of math, physics, chemistry, biology and other what not and I wasn't even close to being done. Again, thank god for the curve. So, Ken, in your intimate science wisdom, you provide me one page of those calculations and I'll accept you're not a complete science illiterate drone of the Kool Aid drinking crowd and admit it in public here. Now, understand Ken, that test was 30 years ago and the science has grown a whole heck of a lot since then. I'll not ask you to be up on current science, merely 30 years ago science. If you can do that out of your own head without googling something I'll apologize to you here. If you can't you'll admit you're nothing but a ass licking suck up in the Kool Aid drinking ignorance crowd.

Or I'll give you a second outlet. Currently my sewer treatment plant discharge is being affected by new regulations from the EPA regarding ammonia and muscles. You give me the biology of ammonia and muscles, along with PH considerations for the chemistry in the aquatic environment. You do it from the top of your head without recourse to google and we have the same deal.


Deal?

Ok shit head
sunlight + 2H2O + 2NADP(+) + 3ADP -> O2 + 2NADPH + 3ATP
Why would it take pages?

quote:

ORIGINAL: DomKen

Notice how this fool has to respond to the same post over and over again but can't actually point out anything wrong with it?

quote:

ORIGINAL: DomKen

Notice how this fool has to respond to the same post over and over again but can't actually point out anything wrong with it?

quote:

ORIGINAL: DomKen

Notice how this fool has to respond to the same post over and over again but can't actually point out anything wrong with it?

quote:

ORIGINAL: DomKen

Notice how this fool has to respond to the same post over and over again but can't actually point out anything wrong with it?