Cosmic Catastrophe

[freebeard]

Geodesic domes in spaaaceee....

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EFPbHRTIyvc

[Xist]

I am not sure this is the most appropriate place to share this, I just do not know where would be more relevant. While I am home sick I am on a Joe Scott binge. I do not have any idea what he is saying, but the images are pretty. However, Hrag Najarian commented:

Hey Joe, A common misconception in our field of Meteorology is that, if we have more moisture in the atmosphere from global warming, we will get more rain. This is another "truthy" statement. Moisture increases with warming, that is true, but precipitation does not increase at the same rate as temperature increases, nowhere close to it actually. This is because Precipitation is dependent on moisture and temperature. Temperature rising from climate change will allow the atmosphere to hold more moisture, but the rate at which moisture is being added to the atmosphere from evaporation is not keeping up with the rate at which the capacity is increasing. I would suggest you read up on this Joe since it's a lot to follow in just a paragraph. It's an interesting effect that once again, seems "truthy" but it isn't fully correct. Here's a good reference: Held and Soden 2006: Robust Responses of the Hydrological Cycle to Global Warming, Journal of Climate.

I actually have not watched the video yet.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jdhnhknaJOg

I read years ago that the only exhaust from hydrogen cars was water vapor, but someone pointed out that is a greenhouse gas. I believe that I have mentioned it from time to time, but it really seems that if I want to convince someone, I need to argue for the other side.

People just do not want to believe me.

Anyway, the comments indicate that the greenhouse gas in question is water vapor, but in the words of The Troggs, "I wanna know for sure."

So, can someone watch the video and report back? My schedule is full of naps!

[oil pan 4]

Water vapor is most definitely a green house gas.

[freebeard]

I'd just awaken from a nap so I stepped up.

Molecular bonds flex when they're hit with photons.

Sulfur hexafluoride is all on us, it doesn't occur naturally. Increasing CO2 accommodates increased water vapor.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hcu8pjWNEgg

Originally Posted by commenter

John Snow: wildling! you make my heart sing! you pull your bow string, and shoot me! wildling!

[oil pan 4]

Arc discharge

https://www.fox4news.com/news/lightn...th-parking-lot

[freebeard]

That was back in October.

Can anyone find the post in the Climate Change thread that had a picture of the Grand Canyon from space? ]s]Everyo-[/s]Many agreed it is obviously a Lichtenberg Figure. Advanced Search doesn't find it and I need naps more than searching page-by-page.

[oil pan 4]

Originally Posted by freebeard

That was back in October.

Can anyone find the post in the Climate Change thread that had a picture of the Grand Canyon from space? ]s]Everyo-[/s]Many agreed it is obviously a Lichtenberg Figure. Advanced Search doesn't find it and I need naps more than searching page-by-page.

Im pretty sure it wasn't in the climate change thread.

[redneck]

freebeard

Can anyone find the post in the Climate Change thread that had a picture of the Grand Canyon from space? ]s]Everyo-[/s]Many agreed it is obviously a Lichtenberg Figure. Advanced Search doesn't find it and I need naps more than searching page-by-page.
Today 05:53 AM

Is this what your looking for ?


Pictures from space of the Grand Canyon.



https://www.thunderbolts.info/tpod/2...randcanyon.htm

Satellite images, as well as pictures taken by astronauts in orbit, seem to indicate that the Grand Canyon is an enormous Lichtenberg figure, in other words, a gigantic lightning scar.

https://www.thunderbolts.info/wp/201...missing-delta/

In the Electric Universe hypothesis, there is an answer to the dichotomy, as well as to the problem posed at the beginning of this article: where did the Grand Canyon’s rock strata go? Even today, the question of the Grand Canyon’s origin confounds geologists. What caused the Colorado River to make several right-angle turns in its journey to the sea? If water erosion alone is considered, then it was also necessary for the river to flow uphill at one point, while punching through a stoney mountain range.

Along with the river’s desert wandering, another conundrum facing geophysicists and hydrologists is the lack of a delta. Why is there no accumulation of sediments in the Sea of Cortez? If the Colorado River has been eroding the Grand Canyon for such a long time, what happened to the mud and sand that is supposed to have washed downstream?

https://www.airspacemag.com/daily-pl...nyon-19860200/


picture uploader


More here...


https://www.google.com/search?q=gran...H8xFRclMhU8XiM




>

[freebeard]

redneck— off by one minute!

Ah well, I wanted to find it mainly for the 'it's obvious when you look' responses.


https://i.pinimg.com/originals/cb/e3...5a62f3d274.jpg



https://itaintholywater.blogspot.com...on-theory.html

thunderbolts.info/tpod/The Grand Canyon: Part One (Sep 29, 2008)

A few basic facts are necessary to gain a perspective. The Grand Canyon is surrounded by an elevated landscape with the canyon running through it from east to west. The underlying rock strata in the region rises and falls over an area known as the Kaibab Upwarp, while the river descends through an elevation differential of 2100 meters. Water does not flow up over a mountain range nor does it run sideways along sloping terrain, so all theoretical models that insist on water erosion propose that the entire area was slowly uplifted at the same rate as the river eroded the canyon. This process is said to have taken place in a time span of between four million and 400 million years.

The geological models also incorporate natural dams across the river channel that caused reversals in the river flow and were then subsequently breached, allowing the river to resume its previous course. However, a pertinent objection to that theory is that there is no evidence water flowed back into the ends of the giant side channels that join the chasm with the river. Perhaps the most significant challenge to the prevailing theories is the disappearance of almost 1300 cubic kilometers of material that is supposed to have been washed downstream—there is no large delta at the mouth of the Colorado River containing the debris.

Satellite images, as well as pictures taken by astronauts in orbit, seem to indicate that the Grand Canyon is an enormous Lichtenberg figure, in other words, a gigantic lightning scar. As the Electric Universe hypothesis suggests, electric discharge machining (EDM) might account for the Canyon's appearance: steep walls, thousands of layers, brachiated side canyons at practically every scale, and periodic, hemispherical "nips" cut into each rim.

[oil pan 4]

So it wasn't in climate change?