"Manmade Climate Change" Takes A Hit From NASA
Oct 10, 2014 14:11:03 #
Pulfnick wrote:
Please, please try to get informed before continui... (show quote)
Anthropogenic Global Warming is settled science. Settled science is scientific theory not hypotheses. You can blindly do anything you want, Even post lies on OPPP if you like.
Oct 10, 2014 14:39:58 #
Pulfnick wrote:
Please attempt to get informed. Gravity is a theory. Newton's Law of Gravity has long been promoted to a "Law". There is a difference between the concept (theory) of gravity and the Newton's Law of Gravity.
And yet it never quite describes the ballistic motions of objects. At low velocities, rotation rates, object masses and densities the discrepancies are very tiny but they're there.
Even in the case of satellites orbiting the Earth, discrepancies can be detected, and in the case of the GPS satellite system have to be accounted for. In the case of very massive, dense and rapidly moving and rotating systems, like black holes, neutron stars, etc. they break down very badly. Close binary pulsars, for instance, don't even come close to obeying Newton's law.
Oct 10, 2014 14:41:03 #
Nickolai wrote:
Anthropogenic Global Warming is settled science. Settled science is scientific theory not hypotheses. You can blindly do anything you want, Even post lies on OPPP if you like.
The 'settlers' shouldn't get too comfortable. . .
Oct 10, 2014 17:29:37 #
nwtk2007 wrote:
Its interesting what you said.
To me, knowing full well that those with money actually control all, the ones who protect the very rich the most seem to be the republicans. They seem to be ok with the very rich dictating their actions. Of course, I know both dems and repugs are controlled by the very rich. I just found your comment interesting in light of that perception.
To me, knowing full well that those with money actually control all, the ones who protect the very rich the most seem to be the republicans. They seem to be ok with the very rich dictating their actions. Of course, I know both dems and repugs are controlled by the very rich. I just found your comment interesting in light of that perception.
I find it interesting that there are more Democratic millionaires in Congress than Republicans. The last election, corporate donors gave more to Democrats than Republicans, Unions gave almost all their money to Democrats, and the Obama campaign received more Wall St. money than any presidential campaign it this country's history.
While Harry Reid is limited on who he can directly associate himself with, he is influential in orchestrating more donations for Democratic candidates than the Koch Brothers are for Republicans. Democrats talk so much about the amount that organizations "associated" with the evil personified Koch Brothers donate to Republicans, but are strangely blind to the amounts funneled to Democrats.
Michelle Obama once commented that she didn't understand how people of means could "live with themselves when surrounded by those less fortunate. She said this at a $10,000 per plate dinner in Aspen, CO, on a taxpayer funded ski vacation. (One of several ). Her husband just recently commented on the evil rich Republicans shortly before attending a gala fundraiser sponsored by an apparently saintly rich Democrat.
The hypocrisy on both sides is astounding; among the Democrats, it is also appalling.
If you want to reply, then register here. Registration is free and your account is created instantly, so you can post right away.