/sci/ - Science & Math

>>15304006
>I will never understand
How many of your friends got paid to sit at home and do nothing during Covid?
How much did the contract tracers with do nothing phone call jobs get paid during covid (protip a fuckton)
How much did businesses get paid by the government for doing nothing?
How much did you get paid to do nothing?
How sad were all the kids you know when they heard that they don't have to go to school for a year?

>>15245149
>this no thing
No

>>15098008
>Probability
You're saying luck and chance are actually something real and that 100 years of physics has been coin flipping and not science. No, tell me what is actually "waving" if you wouldn't mind?

>>15012552
>"Parts of GPS that are classified"

>>14949314
>>14949452
You know what those places also don't have? Excessive immigration.
>Inb4, "hurr illegalaliens are medically vetted/social distance"

They aren't. If they were, polio wouldn't have come back to America.

>>14846059
>Chinese industrialization started in the 50s.
And now that they have more self driving cars than us they surely are on the accelerated path to reducing that coal consumption soon right?

>You're the only one arguing
You're the only one saying I'm arguing. I'm accurately describing. They had the tech, it existed. They didn't fucking use it and they still don't, dipshit.

>You need water to create steam.
So no water, no trains. Dipshit.

>The water isn't the fuel fire the train.
And yet without it it's not going anywhere.

>Neither is the wind energy used to move it
It's pumping the water used to move the train lol. Now it's powered by an electric pump. Is that more energy efficient?

>>14714058
COAM has no basis in reality which means that COAM is false
Wonderful. So really it is you who argued over nothing then.

>There is nothing to argue about
So stop talking then.

>>14708392
>volume of vacuum
>a copper wire in vacuum
>(I know not as good as space vacuum I think)
>electron beam firing guns into vacuum space

So how is it a "vacuum" when you negate it being a vacuum by doing all these things IN it (the place where nothing is).

>>14695573
>climate change deniers
FTFY you professional accurate describer you.

>now framing climate change as 'woke' culture wars
>They somehow have the money to finance propaganda to do this despite the fact they aren't the ones getting billions in subsidies.

I'm sorry, whose "framing" that war again?

>>14695598
>guys, we need to emit less CO2
Why? Oh no one can figure that out still, lol.

>>14695874
Corporations are the ones who hire and promote this climate activism in the first place (because all the other people are too poor to afford the agenda because they have to work for a living). Every oil company has its hands in "Green energy", just like the plastic companies had their hands in creating the concept of recycling plastic so that you could continue buying their indestructible to-be-destroyed-perpetually products.

>>14644355
>it was also proposed that if this field could be expanded,
Where does a field terminate?

>>14564966
>Try reading the thread
How about an explanation from the source of the data? Why would I believe basket cases in basket weaving lobby?
>Yes, except
Oh so it's a dualism got it. So they really don't have a clue.
>Causes heat to what?
Why exactly. It's unchanged, it does nothing. By it being unchanged, the heat cannot change it as rapidly as a gas that has less insulative properties.
>It keeps your drink cool by keeping the area around your drink hot
>vacuum does something
No. Never.
>You can't even do that either.
"Rising temperatures cause CO2 to rise". This is an accurate description based on all the graphs with a lack of explanation behind them.
>To do what?
Exactly, to remain unchanged means to do something. Because it's described as such.
>Due to adiabatic cooling at the edges of its massive Hadley cells. Sort of like a giant refrigerator.
So the gasses do in fact cool and heat. So what's the issue with earth and the ice melting? We'll have more ice then you'll ever need, especially because it will take the alkalinity of it down and allow it to form easier.
>When did it ever?
Since the carbon cycle was know to exist and before, but since it's no longer relevant due to accurate descriptions we can ignore that process completely. The ocean doesn't absorb CO2 anymore because accurate descriptions deem it not to of course.
>Doesn't follow.
Clearly it follows since we're now ignoring it and replacing it with climate change accurate description rhetoric regarding Co2 causing heat.
>It proves the argument.
So where is the actual argument? Because as far as I'm concerned it proves rising temperature causes CO2. Also it doesn't prove the argument, it would be like claiming a shadow is real because you used a tape measure to measure it.