Research Discussion: 1909 / Guth

1909 / Guth
Posts: 18

Report Abuse

Use this form to report abuse or request takedown.
The requests are usually processed within 48 hours.

Page: 1 2   Next  (First | Last)

BradGuth
2009-12-08 20:09:00 EST
It seems HVAC doesn't want me in his precious 1909 topic. (bet you
didn't think that could be arranged)

Within the last 64 years has been 6400% inflation of fossil energy
cost (namely diesel and gasoline). Other than that, it hasn't been
all bad unless you happen to live in any number of underdeveloped or
otherwise dysfunctional nations where you’re lucky just to be alive
(much less with energy to burn, so to speak).

In the next hundred years, if all goes according to the Sean
Rothschild NWO plan, by 2110 we'll get to pay $300/gallon for most any
sort of liquid fossil/bio fuel, and milk might have become a serious
bargain at $200/gallon.

By 2110 the national average minimum wage may have reached $10/hr,
although a fast-food happy meal will cost you at least $50.

~ BG


BradGuth
2009-12-08 20:10:27 EST
On Dec 8, 5:09 pm, BradGuth <bradg...@gmail.com> wrote:
> It seems HVAC doesn't want me in his precious 1909 topic. (bet you
> didn't think that could be arranged)
>
> Within the last 64 years has been 6400% inflation of fossil energy
> cost (namely diesel and gasoline).  Other than that, it hasn't been
> all bad unless you happen to live in any number of underdeveloped or
> otherwise dysfunctional nations where you’re lucky just to be alive
> (much less with energy to burn, so to speak).
>
> In the next hundred years, if all goes according to the Sean
> Rothschild NWO plan, by 2110 we'll get to pay $300/gallon for most any
> sort of liquid fossil/bio fuel, and milk might have become a serious
> bargain at $200/gallon.
>
> By 2110 the national average minimum wage may have reached $10/hr,
> although a fast-food happy meal will cost you at least $50.
>
>  ~ BG

http://groups.google.com/group/alt.astronomy/browse_frm/thread/50d4c2ebcbae3a8e?hl=en#

BDK
2009-12-09 02:29:10 EST
In article <d8331418-d5fb-467e-9745-5e0100f0ff21
@h40g2000prf.googlegroups.com>, bradguth@gmail.com says...
> It seems HVAC doesn't want me in his precious 1909 topic. (bet you
> didn't think that could be arranged)
>
> Within the last 64 years has been 6400% inflation of fossil energy
> cost (namely diesel and gasoline). Other than that, it hasn't been
> all bad unless you happen to live in any number of underdeveloped or
> otherwise dysfunctional nations where you=3Fre lucky just to be alive
> (much less with energy to burn, so to speak).
>
> In the next hundred years, if all goes according to the Sean
> Rothschild NWO plan, by 2110 we'll get to pay $300/gallon for most any
> sort of liquid fossil/bio fuel, and milk might have become a serious
> bargain at $200/gallon.
>
> By 2110 the national average minimum wage may have reached $10/hr,
> although a fast-food happy meal will cost you at least $50.
>
> ~ BG
>
>


LOL, where did you find this latest Guthballery, Brad?
--

BDK..
Leader of the nonexistent paid shills.
Non Jew Jew Club founding member.
Former number one Kook Magnet, title passed to Iarnrod.

BradGuth
2009-12-09 09:57:46 EST
On Dec 8, 11:29 pm, BDK <TopSh...@sanity.com> wrote:
> In article <d8331418-d5fb-467e-9745-5e0100f0ff21
> @h40g2000prf.googlegroups.com>, bradg...@gmail.com says...
>
>
>
> > It seems HVAC doesn't want me in his precious 1909 topic. (bet you
> > didn't think that could be arranged)
>
> > Within the last 64 years has been 6400% inflation of fossil energy
> > cost (namely diesel and gasoline).  Other than that, it hasn't been
> > all bad unless you happen to live in any number of underdeveloped or
> > otherwise dysfunctional nations where you=3Fre lucky just to be alive
> > (much less with energy to burn, so to speak).
>
> > In the next hundred years, if all goes according to the Sean
> > Rothschild NWO plan, by 2110 we'll get to pay $300/gallon for most any
> > sort of liquid fossil/bio fuel, and milk might have become a serious
> > bargain at $200/gallon.
>
> > By 2110 the national average minimum wage may have reached $10/hr,
> > although a fast-food happy meal will cost you at least $50.
>
> >  ~ BG
>
> LOL, where did you find this latest Guthballery, Brad?
> --
>
> BDK..
> Leader of the nonexistent paid shills.
> Non Jew Jew Club founding member.
> Former number one Kook Magnet, title passed to Iarnrod.

>From HVAC / In 1909:

http://groups.google.com/group/alt.astronomy/browse_frm/thread/50d4c2ebcbae3a8e?hl=en#

Try to imagine what it may be like in another 100 years.

Hagar
2009-12-09 09:59:18 EST

"BDK" <TopShill@sanity.com> wrote in message
news:MPG.25891bcdf8363e9d98bb61@news.buckeye-express.com...
> In article <d8331418-d5fb-467e-9745-5e0100f0ff21
> @h40g2000prf.googlegroups.com>, bradguth@gmail.com says...
>> It seems HVAC doesn't want me in his precious 1909 topic. (bet you
>> didn't think that could be arranged)
>>
>> Within the last 64 years has been 6400% inflation of fossil energy
>> cost (namely diesel and gasoline). Other than that, it hasn't been
>> all bad unless you happen to live in any number of underdeveloped or
>> otherwise dysfunctional nations where you=3Fre lucky just to be alive
>> (much less with energy to burn, so to speak).
>>
>> In the next hundred years, if all goes according to the Sean
>> Rothschild NWO plan, by 2110 we'll get to pay $300/gallon for most any
>> sort of liquid fossil/bio fuel, and milk might have become a serious
>> bargain at $200/gallon.
>>
>> By 2110 the national average minimum wage may have reached $10/hr,
>> although a fast-food happy meal will cost you at least $50.
>>
>> ~ BG
>>
>>
>
>
> LOL, where did you find this latest Guthballery, Brad?
> --

It's a direct result of irreversible brain rot. It causes its victims
to think in multiples of irrational numbers.



BradGuth
2009-12-09 10:28:36 EST
On Dec 9, 6:59 am, "Hagar" <ha...@sahm.name> wrote:
> "BDK" <TopSh...@sanity.com> wrote in message
>
> news:MPG.25891bcdf8363e9d98bb61@news.buckeye-express.com...
>
>
>
> > In article <d8331418-d5fb-467e-9745-5e0100f0ff21
> > @h40g2000prf.googlegroups.com>, bradg...@gmail.com says...
> >> It seems HVAC doesn't want me in his precious 1909 topic. (bet you
> >> didn't think that could be arranged)
>
> >> Within the last 64 years has been 6400% inflation of fossil energy
> >> cost (namely diesel and gasoline).  Other than that, it hasn't been
> >> all bad unless you happen to live in any number of underdeveloped or
> >> otherwise dysfunctional nations where you=3Fre lucky just to be alive
> >> (much less with energy to burn, so to speak).
>
> >> In the next hundred years, if all goes according to the Sean
> >> Rothschild NWO plan, by 2110 we'll get to pay $300/gallon for most any
> >> sort of liquid fossil/bio fuel, and milk might have become a serious
> >> bargain at $200/gallon.
>
> >> By 2110 the national average minimum wage may have reached $10/hr,
> >> although a fast-food happy meal will cost you at least $50.
>
> >>  ~ BG
>
> > LOL, where did you find this latest Guthballery, Brad?
> > --
>
> It's a direct result of irreversible brain rot. It causes its victims
> to think in multiples of irrational numbers.

Basically, it takes raw energy in order to thaw ice, and considerably
more energy if it's 12+ meters thick and from something of Antarctic
or upper-west Greenland that's well below 0 C to begin with, as
eventually warmed up to the global ocean average of 17 C.

“These icebergs originate from the glaciers of western Greenland, and
may have an interior temperature of -15 to -20°C”

“As ice depth increases to 12 metres (40 feet) and beyond, the
temperature difference between icebergs and ice shelves is
negligible.”

93 TW.h + 38 TW.h = 131 TW.h/day in order to get each billion tonnes
of –16 C slow-ice thawed and up to 17 C. That’s suggesting an hourly
amount of <5.458 TW.h/hr, however that warm-up to 17 C should take
several days, so lets give this all-inclusive process a very
conservative 4.5 TW.h/hr (667 Watts for each person on Earth).

So, unless mother Earth is going thermonuclear postal on us, there has
to be an external cause and affect, or rather an accumulation of many
causes and affects (including those our human factors), as well as we
need to plan on yet an extra meter of ocean fill-up due to thermal
expansion, that’ll only make for additional up-tick in global dimming
and more thermal expansion.

Much cleaner/efficient fossil fuel and other energy usage plus large
scale wind, solar and geothermal farms should have been established as
of more than a decade ago, as well as a double capacity fortified
power grid, and I’d even bet Steven Chu 100% agrees with me. Instead
we managed to inflate the global economy, devalue our dollar, going
ass over teakettle into debt and provoking of others, increasing
disparity and causing further trauma to those that can least afford,
as well as causing civil unrest plus war(s) to happen as becoming
perpetual for-profit and government job-security w/benefits, as open-
ended situations of government expansion that show us no good end in
sight.

As Steven Chu might say; we can do a whole lot better insulation along
with more efficient motors, lighting, methods of energy storage,
integrated technology and insisting upon geothermal HVAC wherever
possible, and best of all is that none of it is even rocket-science
because it has already been invented.

A geoengineered solution seems perfectly doable, and perhaps our only
viable way out.

Otherwise, how do we reverse the 93 KW.h plus whatever thermal rise of
representing roughly another 38 kw.h, that it takes for getting each
tonne of -16C ice up to +17C (average ocean temp)?

That's <131 kw.h/tonne/day, whereas reversing that ongoing process of
thaw takes the exact same amount of energy for creating that tonne of
slow-ice from 17C water.

There simply is no terrestrial process (not even at 100% efficiency)
that’ll refreeze a tonne of 17C water down to –16C ice without that
artificial process creating the same or more heat than cold. At best,
all we can ever manage is creating fast-ice (as artificial snow, or
perhaps we can pump a billion gallons of ocean per hour into central
Antarctica and Greenland).

Brad Guth, Brad_Guth, Brad.Guth, BradGuth, BG / “Guth Usenet”

Nightcrawler
2009-12-09 19:04:40 EST

"BradGuth" <bradguth@gmail.com> wrote in message news:ad8d42ec-f1ab-4bb5-9653-ce57d412ca89@x5g2000prf.googlegroups.com...
.

Basically, it takes raw energy in order to thaw ice, and considerably
more energy if it's 12+ meters thick and from something of Antarctic
or upper-west Greenland that's well below 0 C to begin with, as
eventually warmed up to the global ocean average of 17 C.

\ufffdThese icebergs originate from the glaciers of western Greenland, and
may have an interior temperature of -15 to -20\ufffdC\ufffd

\ufffdAs ice depth increases to 12 metres (40 feet) and beyond, the
temperature difference between icebergs and ice shelves is
negligible.\ufffd

<blather snipped>

What does any of this have to do with today?

The ice in Greenland is not melting.

The ice in Antarctica is not melting.

Hell, there is a huge chunk of ice heading towards Australia. If it were melting then
it would not be heading to Australia in solid form.



BradGuth
2009-12-09 19:20:28 EST
On Dec 9, 4:04 pm, "Nightcrawler" <Dirtyde...@dirtcheap.net> wrote:
> "BradGuth" <bradg...@gmail.com> wrote in messagenews:ad8d42ec-f1ab-4bb5-9653-ce57d412ca89@x5g2000prf.googlegroups.com...
>
> .
>
> Basically, it takes raw energy in order to thaw ice, and considerably
> more energy if it's 12+ meters thick and from something of Antarctic
> or upper-west Greenland that's well below  0 C to begin with, as
> eventually warmed up to the global ocean average of 17 C.
>
> “These icebergs originate from the glaciers of western Greenland, and
> may have an interior temperature of -15 to -20°C”
>
> “As ice depth increases to 12 metres (40 feet) and beyond, the
> temperature difference between icebergs and ice shelves is
> negligible.”
>
> <blather snipped>
>
> What does any of this have to do with today?
>
> The ice in Greenland is not melting.
>
> The ice in Antarctica is not melting.
>
> Hell, there is a huge chunk of ice heading towards Australia.  If it were melting then
> it would not be heading to Australia in solid form.

If you and other Zionist Nazis (aka Rothschilds) say so. Where
exactly are you hiding all of that slow-ice that you insist is growing
in volume by more than whatever is thawing out?

Are mountains and their seasonal supply of fresh water to the
surrounding terrain better off w/o slow-ice?

~ BG

Nightcrawler
2009-12-09 21:37:53 EST
It's right there on the satellite images, Guthie. There is still zero evidence that the
ice was ever melting.

(No selective mentioning of specific glaciers. We are talking about the ice caps.)

"BradGuth" <bradguth@gmail.com> wrote in message news:61ed518c-6367-40f0-becf-04c6e9d7f00a@z35g2000prh.googlegroups.com...

If you and other Zionist Nazis (aka Rothschilds) say so. Where
exactly are you hiding all of that slow-ice that you insist is growing
in volume by more than whatever is thawing out?

Are mountains and their seasonal supply of fresh water to the
surrounding terrain better off w/o slow-ice?

~ BG



BradGuth
2009-12-09 22:44:08 EST
On Dec 9, 6:37 pm, "Nightcrawler" <Dirtyde...@dirtcheap.net> wrote:
> It's right there on the satellite images, Guthie.  There is still zero evidence that the
> ice was ever melting.
>
> (No selective mentioning of specific glaciers.  We are talking about the ice caps.)
>
> "BradGuth" <bradg...@gmail.com> wrote in messagenews:61ed518c-6367-40f0-becf-04c6e9d7f00a@z35g2000prh.googlegroups.com...
>
> If you and other Zionist Nazis (aka Rothschilds) say so.  Where
> exactly are you hiding all of that slow-ice that you insist is growing
> in volume by more than whatever is thawing out?
>
> Are mountains and their seasonal supply of fresh water to the
> surrounding terrain better off w/o slow-ice?
>
>  ~ BG

Right, ice caps the same exact size as always, that is if you were
blind, snookered and dumbfounded at the same time.

Don't look too close at Greenland, because the bedrock is also rising
due to the loss of ice load.

~ BG
Page: 1 2   Next  (First | Last)


2020 - UsenetArchives.com | Contact Us | Privacy | Stats | Site Search
Become our Patron