Deleted

Astro_man92 · #22 Postby **Astro_man92** » Mon Aug 01, 2005 5:01 pm

Frederic1979 wrote:
beachbum_al wrote::lol: about methane balls in a hot car in Wal-Mart from kids. And yes lets bring a giant iceberg and put it in the Gulf so it will cool down temps. Maybe I can talk dh and some of his fishing buddies to help.

Its on man, lets go get a chunk of ice!

Tampa Bay Hurricane · #23 Postby **Tampa Bay Hurricane** » Mon Aug 01, 2005 5:04 pm

Guest · #24 Postby **Guest** » Mon Aug 01, 2005 5:06 pm

Tampa Bay Hurricane wrote:WHOA! THE GOM TEMP. MAP really looks like it's ON FIRE!!!!

Yes Dr. Evil the GOM does look very .... Sorry I donta speaka freaky deeky dutch

GOM ON FIRE!

I demand that the NHC pay me 100 billion gillion dollars or I'll release megatons of methane into the gulf! Down Mini Me Down!

Tampa Bay Hurricane · #25 Postby **Tampa Bay Hurricane** » Mon Aug 01, 2005 5:07 pm

kevin · #26 Postby **kevin** » Mon Aug 01, 2005 5:08 pm

Tampa Bay Hurricane wrote:"Gimme a break"
Astroman_92- With all the methane, you won't be getting many breaks from tracking storms haha

TRY TO REFUTE IT. Hit me with your best shot. Try to refute it.

Dude. For one, chill. Secondly, here's my best shot :

You are misjudging science and should learn that no negative can be proven. I can never prove that something does not exist. The burden lies on YOU to prove it.

Prove it! I want to see you in SCI-AM or Nature. Until then, leave science alone.

Guest · #27 Postby **Guest** » Mon Aug 01, 2005 5:09 pm

Tampa Bay Hurricane wrote:Methane is an alkane, a highly saturated molecule loaded with releasable energy that's exergonically transferred when methane breaks down in the atmosphere.

Ok like your starting to freak me out dude, are you sure you havent been in a methane accident at walmart?

kevin · #28 Postby **kevin** » Mon Aug 01, 2005 5:10 pm

Also he's 12, and science doesn't work on the failure of argument, but the failure of data. You can have a completely consistent and logical arguement, but your facts are wrong. Positive correlation does not imply causation. And so on.

What is your group's agenda? Are you one person, Methane Mike, or are you his cousin?

Guest · #29 Postby **Guest** » Mon Aug 01, 2005 5:11 pm

kevin wrote:
Tampa Bay Hurricane wrote:"Gimme a break"
Astroman_92- With all the methane, you won't be getting many breaks from tracking storms haha

TRY TO REFUTE IT. Hit me with your best shot. Try to refute it.

Dude. For one, chill. Secondly, here's my best shot :

You are misjudging science and should learn that no negative can be proven. I can never prove that something does not exist. The burden lies on YOU to prove it.

Prove it! I want to see you in SCI-AM or Nature. Until then, leave science alone.

What in blessed name of Dukes of Hazard is going on here? Did I miss something? Everyone take five steps back from their computer drink beer and release methane!

Tampa Bay Hurricane · #30 Postby **Tampa Bay Hurricane** » Mon Aug 01, 2005 5:13 pm

"You are misjudging science and should learn that no negative can be proven. I can never prove that something does not exist. The burden lies on YOU to prove it.

Prove it! I want to see you in SCI-AM or Nature. Until then, leave science alone."

Did you read my hypothesis and the entire essay?

-YOU CAN NOT SUPPRESS SCIENTIFIC INFORMATION. I have no reason to leave science alone. My theory is INHERENTLY SCIENTIFIC when read carefully.

-Politically polarized individuals (no names in particular) are likely to oppose this scientific information.

kevin · #31 Postby **kevin** » Mon Aug 01, 2005 5:14 pm

Let them think people are interested in their 'ideas' and they'll repeat the same earth iris stuff again and again, and talk about those frozen methane deposits in the oceans. Then they will talk about abiogenesis and the SOI and dams in Africa.

Basically this theory is a mish mash of absurdity. It drives me nuts, and evidently some people are driven so insane they become followers of the spewer of Methanology. It must be stopped. :larrow:

kevin · #32 Postby **kevin** » Mon Aug 01, 2005 5:14 pm

Conspiratorial defense. Its wonderful.

Science is peer reviewed. Who are your peers, and where have they reviewed your paper?

Tampa Bay Hurricane · #33 Postby **Tampa Bay Hurricane** » Mon Aug 01, 2005 5:15 pm

This correlation could imply causation. Hotter SSTs = Intense Hurricanes.
More methane= hotter temps = hotter ssts.

It is causation.

READ MY DISCLAIMER. IT SAYS THAT THIS IS NOT SCI. PROOF, BUT ITS A GOOD EXPLANATION OF CAUSATIVE ELEMENTS INVOLVED.

Tampa Bay Hurricane · #34 Postby **Tampa Bay Hurricane** » Mon Aug 01, 2005 5:17 pm

I am not conspiring with anyone. I do, however, have great respect for Methane Mike and his methods.

Guest · #35 Postby **Guest** » Mon Aug 01, 2005 5:17 pm

thats it, I gotta stop playing with the airplane glue before getting on this forum, please somone from the real world help me get out this methane fog. The room is starting to spin....

Tampa Bay Hurricane · #36 Postby **Tampa Bay Hurricane** » Mon Aug 01, 2005 5:18 pm

I love this debating it is so much fun!!! Whether it's Lincoln Douglass or Policy Debate or Weather or Philosophy I just LOVE IT!!!

Guest · #37 Postby **Guest** » Mon Aug 01, 2005 5:21 pm

From all this methan release I hope my pearly whites dont stain.

Tampa Bay Hurricane · #38 Postby **Tampa Bay Hurricane** » Mon Aug 01, 2005 5:22 pm

Everything is good Frederick. No worries. We were just having some good debate.

YEEEE-HAWWWW!!!

beachbum_al · #39 Postby **beachbum_al** » Mon Aug 01, 2005 5:23 pm

Frederic1979 wrote:thats it, I gotta stop playing with the airplane glue before getting on this forum, please somone from the real world help me get out this methane fog. The room is starting to spin....

Just step out side away from your computer and stop sniffing that methane gases. Opps that might not happen since we live close to the GOM. Think that might be what is wrong with all of us.

Tampa Bay Hurricane · #40 Postby **Tampa Bay Hurricane** » Mon Aug 01, 2005 5:24 pm

Deleted

Who is online