Posted on 12/11/2014 3:24:14 PM PST by 2ndDivisionVet
There’s been a tremendous buzz about the future of graphene.
I hope people understand that if we start emitting h2o in large quantities THAT will be a big greenhouse gas issue!
“Sounds too good to be true, but what if it’s not?”
The biggest problem for this is that there is very very little hydrogen in the atmosphere.
Nitrogen — N2 — 78.084%
Oxygen — O2 — 20.9476%
Argon — Ar — 0.934%
Carbon Dioxide — CO2 — 0.0314%
Neon — Ne — 0.001818%
Methane — CH4 — 0.0002%
Helium — He — 0.000524%
Krypton — Kr — 0.000114%
Hydrogen — H2 — 0.00005%
Xenon — Xe — 0.0000087%
It will be bought and kept out of the market by the oil companies (car companies, Saudis, conspiracy group of the day) like the carburetor that allows car to get 100 MPG.
/tin-foil hat off
What about sea water?
Or the car that runs on tap water?
And all the great stuff left in Tesla’s notes that the government took after his death.
That’s not a “conspiracy theory” that’s a fact. Lord knows what was in there. We need another guy like that, or Leonardo da Vinci or even Ben Franklin.
/johnny
Global Warming is not due to human contribution of Carbon Dioxide - Global Warming: The Cold, Hard Facts? By Timothy Ball
No Smoking Hot Spot (The Australian)
Those two articles take Greenhouse Theory at face value and by the criterion set up in the theory itself finds no evidence of warming on the basis of greenhouse effect.
Sky-high hole blown in AGW theory?
"Forbes reports on a peer-reviewed study that uses NASA data to show that the effects of carbon-based warming have been significantly exaggerated. In fact, much of the heat goes out into space rather than stay trapped in the atmosphere, an outcome that started long before AGW alarmists predicted:"
That article explains why no Hot Spot has been found.
The Hidden Flaw in Greenhouse Theory
Falsification Of The Atmospheric CO2 Greenhouse Effects Within The Frame Of Physics
Harvard astrophysicist dismisses AGW theory, challenges peers to 'take back climate science'
It Is Impossible For A 100 ppm Increase In Atmospheric CO2 Concentration To Cause Global Warming
Simple Chemistry and the Real Greenhouse Effect.
Those five articles each show that Greenhouse Theory has no basis in reality due to a direct conflict with the known laws of physics. No wonder the smoking gun "hotspot" can't be found.
Because if it is produced by humans to power environment destroying SUVs it will never ever condense and fall from the sky.
Gotcha.
We better get ManBearPig on this one before the planet is melted.
Lozada-Hidalgo added “the achieved flow of hydrogen is of course tiny so far”
Albert Einstein, was at one time, but a gleam in his father’s eye.
Rab.
Cow farts are the half-way point that’ll get us there.
It is hard to say what was in there. From what I read, Tesla always straddled the “genius|crackpot” line pretty closely. There could be great stuff in there, but it could also have been the ravings of a madman.
If he was a madman, we need 1,000 more stat.
Of course the water molecule it’s self is burnt hydrogen, but if your talking about dissolved hydrogen, it’s something like 1.5 X to to the minus fifth.
And I didn’t say it was. But H2O from a physics standpoint IS a real greenhouse gas while CO2 isn’t.
Insane in the.....
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.