Astounding Institutionalized Stupidity of Meteorologists
Conversation with Jay Charney of NOAA
Jay Charney: In this video, water boils in a vacuum at room temperature. To me, this is a clear demonstration that water vapor can exist at temperatures below 100 C. Do you disagree with this conclusion?
Jim McGinn: Are you saying clouds effectuate a vacuum? If not then how is your Youtube video relevant?
Jay Charney: You state that this is impossible because water does not become a gas below 100 C due to the “hydrogen bond.” However, to me this demonstration clearly shows water vapor being formed in an environment that is considerably cooler than 100 C. Is your assertion that water is multi-molecular at temperatures below 100 C consistent with these demonstrations? If so, could you explain how?
Jim McGinn: I knew you would evade my questions, because they exposes your deception. Answer the question I asked: Are you saying clouds effectuate a vacuum? If not then how is your Youtube video relevant? Address he issue I brought up and don’t quote me out of context. I state that water does not become/stay a gas at temperatures below boiling point of H2O (which is different at different atmospheric pressures). Do you dispute this known fact?
Jay Charney: <no response> (When science-based groupies are outed they immediately stop responding to questions. Just like criminals who realize their story doesn’t fly.)
Jim McGinn: I have an experiment that needs to be done that would be relevant. It involves directly measuring the weight of moist air and comparing it to the weight of dry air (controlling all other factors). The only technical challenge involves access to a scale that has a high degree of precision (0.00001). Might you be interested?
Jay Charney: No thanks. I do not agree that it is relevant to meteorology to perform such an experiment. I am convinced by the wealth of experimental evidence supporting the concept that phase changes occur at ambient temperatures, and that it is the heat release associated with those phase changes that drives atmospheric convection. All of the theory, data, and experimentation with which I am familiar suggests that differences in buoyancy (in convective storms) due to the weight of moist and dry air in the atmosphere are insignificant compared to the differences associated with latent heat release due to phase changes of water. If and when you (or anyone else) can convincingly argue that these phase changes do not occur at ambient temperatures and therefore a different mechanism must be found, an experiment such as the one you envision would be worthwhile to pursue. Until then, I would classify it as a waste of time, energy, and resources that are better spent continuing to refine models that are consistent with existing observations, that already explain the vast majority of the observable features of convective storms, and that have contributed to a vast improvement over the last 50-100 years in our ability to anticipate the onset of dangerous storms and warn the public of that impending danger.
Jim McGinn: This perfectly exemplifies the kind of brain-dead, cult-based reasoning that all meteorologists subscribe. You will not find even one of them that will break ranks. Think about the absurdity of what this turd-brain is saying: “I do not agree that it is relevant to meteorology to perform such an experiment.” Think about that. Here he was suggesting an experiment on this same issue and then when I show him an experiment that directly addresses the issue, suddenly this pinhead declares the experiment unnecessary!!! Yes, folks, this is the kind of cult-based stupidity that is accepted by ALL members of the cult of meteorology. Then this simpleton blathers on to tell us–get this–until there is evidence there is no reason for the experiment!!!! Can you frickin believe that? The purpose of the experiment is to reveal evidence–to reveal truth. And this simpleton is saying that until the truth is evident the experiment should be avoided!!!
Should the safety of our children be in the hands of such cult-based stupidity? Is there no leadership in this discipline? Or have they all been bought off by Al Gore?