The key to understanding our predicament

With leftists, it's not about what they say it is about. Let's look at AGW again...



The man says that carbon dioxide increased even though human production of carbon decreased. Nature regulates the amount of carbon dioxide, not humans. The decrease of human activity that leads to carbon dioxide production will not affect the amount of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere. We can't change it even if we wanted to.

There have been arguments against AGW forever, it seems. But the issue doesn't go away. It doesn't go away because the issue isn't about what is supposed to be about. There was something on American Thinker that discusses this.

Do leftists believe what they claim to believe?

Basically it boils down to leftism itself. It is about societal warfare. As Sun Tsu said about war, warfare is all about deception. In other words, they are lying in order to further their conquest. Yet, their opponents continually make the mistake of thinking they are engaging in a legitimate debate. There isn't one. It's about their revolution.

This doesn't just apply to AGW. It applies across the board. Thus, the leftists go after Trump, but it isn't about "rule of law", nor "Democracy". It is about their revolution.

People may think it odd that I oppose the left, but bash the GOP. Well, the GOP doesn't recognize, nor appears to be willing to recognize, that it is engaged in a war, and they are being targeted for destruction. If someone wants to destroy you, it would seem wise to recognize that, and fight back. But they don't, and that's why we keep sinking further and further into despotism.

Sun Tsu said also about war that if you don't know your enemy, you have at best a 50-50 chance of winning. If you don't know yourself nor your enemy, you are hopeless. It begins to appear that way with way too many people on the so-called "right". At best, we have a 50-50 chance, but even that is way too optimistic. The GOP needs to smarten up, or it is about to become extinct.

Starship 27 cut in half? Why?

7-25-23: Update to post of Jul 24, 2023

The flyover reveals that the dome caved in on S27. Perhaps that is the reason why it is being scrapped.

the original post:

 

Ship 27 was never fitted with heat shield tiles. It may not have undergone any other testing either. It has been suggested that it was intended as a test article for the lunar lander. If so, then why cut it up? Is it intended for other purposes, or is it intended to be scrapped?

It may be jumping to conclusions, unless those who say this have a reliable source, who says that it will be scrapped.

If it isn't being scrapped, then it is intriguing to speculate about the decision to cut it in half. Presumably, the bottom half is where the tanks and the engines are located. The upper half would contain the crew and cargo sections.

A tantalizing thought would have them outfitting the halves so as to be able to detach them from each other once in lunar orbit. It makes a lot of sense to not carry all the excess cargo all the way down to the surface. The extra weight will serve no purpose, and will require extra fuel to get it landed and back into lunar orbit.

SpaceX may not care about that. It is kinda of an inelegant solution, though. Furthermore, a ship that can detach like that would have a lot more capability. With the fuel savings, it could propel itself from lunar orbit back to Earth orbit, or so it would seem. That means a single Starship could be reusable. Now that would be elegant.

Maybe they will make no changes at all. But it is fun to speculate on what SpaceX will do with it now.

AGW is a Big Lie

 

Definition of "temperature". Source is from a search engine.

Temperature describes the average kinetic energy of molecules within a material or system and is measured in Celsius (°C), Kelvin (K) and Fahrenheit (°F). Concluding, we can say that heat is a transfer of thermal energy caused by a difference in temperature between molecules.

Do you know where I am going with this? Or, shall I explain further? Kinetic energy is that type of energy that is from movement of matter. It would have a velocity. Consequently, if you walk down the street, the motion of your body is kinetic energy. The faster you go, the more kinetic energy you have. If you were like Superman, and you were faster than a speeding bullet, then you'd have a lot of kinetic energy. If Superman ran into a building in Metropolis, there'd be a big crash.

Temperature involves a lot of molecules or atoms, and their motion within whatever it is. If it is a bar of gold, and it isn't melting, but at room temperature, then it is pretty solid. If you hold an ice cube in your hand, it will melt. What's holding it together then? Well, "something" is. In a particular "system" like an ice cube, the material is held together by some sort of bond. When it warms up, it melts. When it melts, it is no longer an ice cube, but a puddle of water in your hand, or on whatever it is on.

It is probably fair to say that the melting ice has more kinetic energy in it than when it came out of the freezer. Referring back to the definition, its average kinetic energy has gone up.

What happens to a gas, then? In Elon Musk's rocket engines, two very cold liquids are burned, which produces a lot of gas. It is directed out of a nozzle at high speed, which produces thrust that moves the rocket off the ground and into orbit. Lots of kinetic energy is produced, which gets the rocket to orbit. That rocket's exhaust must be moving pretty fast, huh? Yup, and it is very hot. It will blast a hole in the ground, like it did at Starbase back in April.

What happened to the gases from that rocket exhaust? They kicked up a lot of material and made a "rock tornado". While it was doing that, it cooled down, now didn't it? It lost all that kinetic energy, and its temperature went down.

So here's the question. How does a gas in the atmosphere hold kinetic energy? It can't. A gas is free to go wherever. There's nothing to bind it together like it was when it was a liquid. It will go off in any direction unless it is somehow contained. If it is in the atmosphere, it will rise up high in the air, like the rocket exhaust from Elon Musk's rockets. When it is doing that, it will lose kinetic energy and cool down.

Global warmists want you to believe that it will act like a solid, and keep its shape. But a gas has no shape, and therefore the higher kinetic energy will go wherever it wants unless it is somehow constrained. In the atmosphere of a planet like Earth, gravitation pull will keep it from leaving the Earth and going out into space. But it WILL rise until it cannot rise further due to its lack of kinetic energy. While doing so, it gets cold.

Gases will expand into a system, thereby creating higher pressure according to the gas laws. But there's no lid on Earth, so if a gas gets hot enough, it will leave the atmosphere entirely. But that doesn't happen, because there's not enough energy being applied to it.

In other words, the idea that carbon dioxide will increase the average kinetic energy of the atmosphere is ridiculous on its face. If you cannot see that, then I don't know what else I could tell you.

How to stop the next vaccine mandates

Karen Kingston substack

More COVID news:

Nate Silver calls for Fauci COVID origins paper to be RETRACTED after new chat messages suggest scientists “engaged in gross misconduct”

Note: The following link requires registration in order to read it, so I didn't

Epoch Times Link: CDC knew that the jabs weren't working, so they stealth edited the definition of "breakthrough case" to pretend that they were rare



GOP Capitulation to COVID caveats



3rd World countries had a better COVID death record than America

Democrat Party was the party of insurrection and slavery

The history of the Democrat Party is being hidden.

Archaeologist David Keys reveals that a volcano is to blame for the Dark Ages of famine and plague

Archaeologist David Keys reveals that a volcano is to blame for the Dark Ages of famine and plague

The volcano is suspected to be Krakatoa, which is the same volcano that erupted in the late nineteenth century. That eruption is also blamed for the drop in temperatures that occurred afterwards.

In my opinion, it is not the gases that came from the volcano, but the solid material that affected the climate. This makes sense, although a reflective cloud may also have an effect. If the sun doesn't reach the surface, then the ground cannot heat up. The surface is where most life exists, so when it gets cold, it harms life.

Also, it once again shows that natural forces have far more impact on the Earth than humans do. People would be as helpless today as they were then. If the Yellowstone supervolcano erupts, what can anybody do about it? That one has devasted the North American continent many times in the past, and will do so again at some point.

Humans can prepared for these real events, and thus help ourselves. The AGW crowd doesn't help things any by fostering untrue beliefs, such as anthropogenic climate change. Indeed, their work should be viewed as the work of an enemy who seeks to cause harm.

The eruption changed history. Why not learn from it?

with that, here's the video...

More on the subject:

Underwater volcano injects water into stratosphere, which could cause WARMING

Crybabies threaten to leave GOP

 

Threats to leave GOP are not serious.

Leaving the party won't get them re-elected. For those who have done this, the track record is clear.

It echoes the threat to leave the country if a GOP nominee wins. The lefties don't do it , and if they did, they'd be back.

Also, the Wisconsin Supreme Court election shows what happens when GOP'ers run against their base. Nope, what these guys do is to pretend that they are conservative, then govern as liberals. So if they left, it wouldn't matter to the GOP, and the left wouldn't take them in, anyway.

The left prefers REAL commies, not fakes. If you're a fake, better run as a Republican. They'll vote for fakes in the GOP. Nearly all of them are fakes, to varying degrees.