.... otherwise, it might be *really* bloody cold ! d;~)

Arfa

On 18/01/13 01:37, Arfa Daily wrote:
... otherwise, it might be *really* bloody cold ! d;~)

Arfa
Oh no. Global warming causes cold weather! The science is settled!



--
Ineptocracy

(in-ep-toc-ra-cy) €“ a system of government where the least capable to
lead are elected by the least capable of producing, and where the
members of society least likely to sustain themselves or succeed, are
rewarded with goods and services paid for by the confiscated wealth of a
diminishing number of producers.

"The Natural Philosopher" wrote in message
...
On 18/01/13 01:37, Arfa Daily wrote:
... otherwise, it might be *really* bloody cold ! d;~)

Arfa
Oh no. Global warming causes cold weather! The science is settled!



Well yes, of course. Global warming causes anything that commentators choose
to say it does. And as for the science being settled, it has been ever since
the BBC started telling us that it was ...

Arfa

So -13.6 degrees is not bloody cold then. This was the temp yesterday in
Lincolnshire.

Brian

--
From the Sofa of Brian Gaff Reply address is active
"Arfa Daily" wrote in message
...
... otherwise, it might be *really* bloody cold ! d;~)

Arfa

On 18/01/2013 01:37, Arfa Daily wrote:
.... otherwise, it might be *really* bloody cold ! d;~)

Arfa

Lovely and warm here.

Largely because I have been out snow sweeping and came back into house
five minutes ago. So much easier before people have driven over, or even
walked over, the white stuff.

OK - so I will have to go out again in a while. :-(

--
Rod

On 18/01/13 10:14, Jethro_uk wrote:
On Fri, 18 Jan 2013 01:37:31 +0000, Arfa Daily wrote:

... otherwise, it might be *really* bloody cold ! d;~)

Arfa

It hasn't been called "global warming" for years now. Since the loony
tunes realised it committed them to only one course of events.

It's "climate change" now, because that way, hot or cold, they can find
something to blame it on.

The new name is of course 'Climate of Fear'


--
Ineptocracy

(in-ep-toc-ra-cy) €“ a system of government where the least capable to
lead are elected by the least capable of producing, and where the
members of society least likely to sustain themselves or succeed, are
rewarded with goods and services paid for by the confiscated wealth of a
diminishing number of producers.

The Natural Philosopher wrote:

It's "climate change" now, because that way, hot or cold, they can find
something to blame it on.

The new name is of course 'Climate of Fear'

Christine Stewart, former Canadian Environment Minister for the Liberal
Party of Canada, was quoted in the Calgary Herald in 1998 as saying "No
matter if the science is all phoney, there are collateral environmental
benefits."

Politicians will use and abuse any information to achieve their aims. On
the day of the helicopter crash at Vauxhall I listened to Kate Hoey MP
for Vauxhall dispensing untruths when she claimed that helicopter
movements over London have increased and then listened to her putting
down an interviewer who stated the facts (30% decrease over two years).

Why let fact get in the way of a political argument when distortion,
fear, uncertainty and doubt are much better weapons?

--
Burn Hollywood burn, burn down to the ground

In message , The Natural Philosopher
writes
On 18/01/13 01:37, Arfa Daily wrote:
... otherwise, it might be *really* bloody cold ! d;~)

Arfa
Oh no. Global warming causes cold weather! The science is settled!



And hot weather and rain and drought.
--
bert

My attitude is I don't care if it's man-made or not, the climate will
change one way or another whether we want it to or not; and I don't
care if the climate is changing or not, the energy efficiency measures
to cope with climate change make it cheaper for me to stay alive
anyway.

What I get annoyed at is high-ups demanding people cut down on this,
that and the other. Some eejit yesterday insisted food should be made
more expensive to stop people throwing it away. I ALREADY don't throw
away any food[1], so, yet again, people who do the right thing will be
punished for the actions of people doing the wrong thing. This is what
our elders are teaching us. Kill people and steal things, it doesn't
matter that it's wrong, because doing the right thing is the wrong
thing to do.

[1]ok, the stump from the end of a cabbage, and last November I threw
away three moldy slices of bread.

JGH

On 18/01/13 14:05, bert wrote:
In message , The Natural Philosopher
writes
On 18/01/13 01:37, Arfa Daily wrote:
... otherwise, it might be *really* bloody cold ! d;~)

Arfa
Oh no. Global warming causes cold weather! The science is settled!



And hot weather and rain and drought.

Global warming causes everything bad. Which is why It Must Be Stopped.



--
Ineptocracy

(in-ep-toc-ra-cy) €“ a system of government where the least capable to
lead are elected by the least capable of producing, and where the
members of society least likely to sustain themselves or succeed, are
rewarded with goods and services paid for by the confiscated wealth of a
diminishing number of producers.

"Brian Gaff" wrote in message
...
So -13.6 degrees is not bloody cold then. This was the temp yesterday in
Lincolnshire.

Brian

Nah ! *Really* bloody cold is what the Ice Road Truckers drive in, or Joe's
pilots at Buffalo fly in, or the gold miners work in in Alaska, or the
Deadliest Catch boys brave ... :-)

Talking of Ice Road Truckers, I was out and about this afternoon, and just
about everybody was driving like a total wazzock. Apart from at least 30%
having no lights on, they were driving at wholly inappropriate speeds. I was
stuck on a main road for about 5 miles into town, behind someone doing 20
mph. The road was not icy or covered in snow, just wet. There was a few
flakes of fine snow falling from the sky. Later, I dropped down onto my
local dual carriageway - a very major road between towns - and it was at a
standstill. I finally managed to climb on, and got into the offside lane, as
this was moving at 2 mph. It carried on like this for a half hour, before it
finally got moving again, after all the town junctions had finished leaving
and joining. There was nothing causing this other than people's inability to
apply sensible caution to basic driving skills. OK, it was snowing a bit
harder by now, and there was a degree of settling on the road, but this is a
dirty great dual carriageway, not a country lane. All I can say is that it's
a good job that we don't get properly severe weather in this country ...

Arfa

"Jethro_uk" wrote in message
...
On Fri, 18 Jan 2013 01:37:31 +0000, Arfa Daily wrote:

... otherwise, it might be *really* bloody cold ! d;~)

Arfa

It hasn't been called "global warming" for years now. Since the loony
tunes realised it committed them to only one course of events.

It's "climate change" now, because that way, hot or cold, they can find
something to blame it on.


Anthropogenic climate change, even. Giving it this very 'official' sounding
status, adds to the pseudo-scientific mystique surrounding the whole
religion ...

Arfa

Arfa Daily wrote:
... otherwise, it might be *really* bloody cold ! d;~)

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-asia-21072347



--
Adam

On 18/01/2013 16:03, Arfa Daily wrote:
Nah ! *Really* bloody cold is what the Ice Road Truckers drive in, or
Joe's pilots at Buffalo fly in, or the gold miners work in in Alaska, or
the Deadliest Catch boys brave ... :-)

Talking of Ice Road Truckers, I was out and about this afternoon, and
just about everybody was driving like a total wazzock. Apart from at
least 30% having no lights on, they were driving at wholly inappropriate
speeds. I was stuck on a main road for about 5 miles into town, behind
someone doing 20 mph. The road was not icy or covered in snow, just wet.
There was a few flakes of fine snow falling from the sky. Later, I
dropped down onto my local dual carriageway - a very major road between
towns - and it was at a standstill. I finally managed to climb on, and
got into the offside lane, as this was moving at 2 mph. It carried on
like this for a half hour, before it finally got moving again, after all
the town junctions had finished leaving and joining. There was nothing
causing this other than people's inability to apply sensible caution to
basic driving skills. OK, it was snowing a bit harder by now, and there
was a degree of settling on the road, but this is a dirty great dual
carriageway, not a country lane. All I can say is that it's a good job
that we don't get properly severe weather in this country ...

Somewhere out there is a guy with a 4x4 thinking I'm one of those
wazzocks. Or perhaps just laughing...

This lunchtime I was overtaken on a long hill by a pickup. I was doing
about 30MPH on a road that ... err... it has a 40 limit for no apparent
reason, so I usually do exactly 39.9.

I suspect he couldn't tell that I was trying to get the maximum throttle
that I could without the front wheels spinning. I'm really not used to
doing that in SWAMBO's car, with its 55BHP peak output...

Andy

On 18/01/13 21:36, Andy Champ wrote:
On 18/01/2013 16:03, Arfa Daily wrote:
Nah ! *Really* bloody cold is what the Ice Road Truckers drive in, or
Joe's pilots at Buffalo fly in, or the gold miners work in in Alaska, or
the Deadliest Catch boys brave ... :-)

Talking of Ice Road Truckers, I was out and about this afternoon, and
just about everybody was driving like a total wazzock. Apart from at
least 30% having no lights on, they were driving at wholly inappropriate
speeds. I was stuck on a main road for about 5 miles into town, behind
someone doing 20 mph. The road was not icy or covered in snow, just wet.
There was a few flakes of fine snow falling from the sky. Later, I
dropped down onto my local dual carriageway - a very major road between
towns - and it was at a standstill. I finally managed to climb on, and
got into the offside lane, as this was moving at 2 mph. It carried on
like this for a half hour, before it finally got moving again, after all
the town junctions had finished leaving and joining. There was nothing
causing this other than people's inability to apply sensible caution to
basic driving skills. OK, it was snowing a bit harder by now, and there
was a degree of settling on the road, but this is a dirty great dual
carriageway, not a country lane. All I can say is that it's a good job
that we don't get properly severe weather in this country ...

Somewhere out there is a guy with a 4x4 thinking I'm one of those
wazzocks. Or perhaps just laughing...

This lunchtime I was overtaken on a long hill by a pickup. I was doing
about 30MPH on a road that ... err... it has a 40 limit for no apparent
reason, so I usually do exactly 39.9.

I suspect he couldn't tell that I was trying to get the maximum throttle
that I could without the front wheels spinning. I'm really not used to
doing that in SWAMBO's car, with its 55BHP peak output...


Rear wheel drive. I took the 3 ton camper on the snow a year or two
back. Totally impossible. Simply no traction off its FWD at all.


Andy


--
Ineptocracy

(in-ep-toc-ra-cy) €“ a system of government where the least capable to
lead are elected by the least capable of producing, and where the
members of society least likely to sustain themselves or succeed, are
rewarded with goods and services paid for by the confiscated wealth of a
diminishing number of producers.

Arfa Daily wrote:

Talking of Ice Road Truckers, I was out and about this afternoon, and just
about everybody was driving like a total wazzock.

Coming home on the M1 this evening, lanes 1 and 2 were pretty clear,
where there was a 4th lane then lane 3 was also pretty clear ... but a
foreign HGV decided it didn't want to use lane 1, so moved into lane 2
(lane 1 was fine) not many people fancied using lane 3 to get past him
though, and traffic built up behind him in lane 2. After about 10 miles
he decided he'd use lane 3 (in a stretch without a 4th lane) and
continued there for a few miles, overtaking the lane 2 cars.

Now, I suppose having an HGV running in lane 3 might have helped clear
it a bit for following traffic, but I wonder whether he did it because
he thought it would help, or just because he was some sort of nutter?

On Friday, January 18, 2013 1:37:31 AM UTC, Arfa Daily wrote:
... otherwise, it might be *really* bloody cold ! d;~)



Arfa

It has snowed in winter, that really disproves global warming.

On 18/01/2013 10:14, Jethro_uk wrote:
On Fri, 18 Jan 2013 01:37:31 +0000, Arfa Daily wrote:

... otherwise, it might be *really* bloody cold ! d;~)

Arfa

It hasn't been called "global warming" for years now. Since the loony
tunes realised it committed them to only one course of events.

It's "climate change" now, because that way, hot or cold, they can find
something to blame it on.


What happened to that hole in the ozone layer that was going to kill us all?

--
Dave - The Medway Handyman www.medwayhandyman.co.uk

"The Medway Handyman" wrote in message
...
On 18/01/2013 10:14, Jethro_uk wrote:
On Fri, 18 Jan 2013 01:37:31 +0000, Arfa Daily wrote:

... otherwise, it might be *really* bloody cold ! d;~)

Arfa

It hasn't been called "global warming" for years now. Since the loony
tunes realised it committed them to only one course of events.

It's "climate change" now, because that way, hot or cold, they can find
something to blame it on.


What happened to that hole in the ozone layer that was going to kill us
all?

--
Dave - The Medway Handyman www.medwayhandyman.co.uk


ISTR that we were told at the time that if we stopped letting CFCs into the
atmosphere, it would heal in very short order. When this didn't happen, I
think that the 'facts' were altered to say that it was going to take at
least 40 years for the healing to even start. Long enough for everyone to
have forgotten the hysteria that surrounded this one, as well. What I never
did see explained was if the ozone destruction was as a result of man's
activities, why was the biggest 'hole' over the Antarctic, when all of the
population concentration - and hence release of CFCs - is in the northern
hemisphere ? As far as I am aware, atmospheric circulation systems do not
have northern hemisphere air migrating into the southern hemisphere, or vice
versa. I do, however, have a dim recollection of reading about some huge
volcano in the southern hemisphere, that belched much larger quantities of
ozone-destroying chemicals into the atmosphere, continuously, than the total
combined efforts of man.

One thing that I do know for sure, is that aerosol cans stopped working
properly, when the propellant was changed from a CFC gas to propane or
butane or whatever it is that they use now. As a matter of interest, aren't
these hydrocarbon gasses now considered to be a major contributor to this
global warming religion ? If it was thought that the release of CFCs from
aerosol cans was sufficient to **** the ozone layer, then surely the same
quantities of hydrocarbon gasses that must now be being released, have to
contribute to climate change if you believe all the dubious science that the
IPCC models are based on? Just a thought, but what is the science behind
using these 'active' gasses as aerosol propellants ? Why would cheap inerts
like nitrogen not work ?

Arfa

On Fri, 18 Jan 2013 16:03:32 +0000, Arfa Daily wrote:

"Brian Gaff" wrote in message
...
So -13.6 degrees is not bloody cold then. This was the temp yesterday
in Lincolnshire.

Brian

Nah ! *Really* bloody cold is what the Ice Road Truckers drive in, or
Joe's pilots at Buffalo fly in, or the gold miners work in in Alaska, or
the Deadliest Catch boys brave ... :-)

They're saying windchills of -57F (-49C) here on Sunday, although the
base temp's only going to be a relatively-toasty -20F (-29C) :-)

cheers

Jules

"Jules Richardson" wrote in message
...
On Fri, 18 Jan 2013 16:03:32 +0000, Arfa Daily wrote:

"Brian Gaff" wrote in message
...
So -13.6 degrees is not bloody cold then. This was the temp yesterday
in Lincolnshire.

Brian

Nah ! *Really* bloody cold is what the Ice Road Truckers drive in, or
Joe's pilots at Buffalo fly in, or the gold miners work in in Alaska, or
the Deadliest Catch boys brave ... :-)

They're saying windchills of -57F (-49C) here on Sunday, although the
base temp's only going to be a relatively-toasty -20F (-29C) :-)

cheers

Jules


There ya go, you see ! Without the global warming, might have been *much*
worse ... :-)

Arfa

On 19/01/2013 14:46, Arfa Daily wrote:
Just a thought, but what is the science behind using these 'active'
gasses as aerosol propellants ? Why would cheap inerts like nitrogen not
work

I might be wrong, but I think you want something that will liquefy at
normal temperature and reasonable pressure. It can then boil off to keep
the pressure up.

Ammonia ought to do nicely... oh. Non-toxic is good too. As is
non-flammable...

Andy

On Sat, 19 Jan 2013 14:46:58 -0000, "Arfa Daily"
wrote:

ISTR that we were told at the time that if we stopped letting CFCs into the
atmosphere, it would heal in very short order. When this didn't happen, I
think that the 'facts' were altered to say that it was going to take at
least 40 years for the healing to even start.

Nonsense, the atmospheric lifetime of CFCs was known to be over 70
years in the 1980s.

Long enough for everyone to
have forgotten the hysteria that surrounded this one, as well. What I never
did see explained was if the ozone destruction was as a result of man's
activities, why was the biggest 'hole' over the Antarctic, when all of the
population concentration - and hence release of CFCs - is in the northern
hemisphere ?

The South Pole is over a cold continent which allows a stable polar
vortex to bulid in the winter, providing the conditions for the
release of chlorine in the spring. There aren't the same conditions in
the northern hemisphere.

As far as I am aware, atmospheric circulation systems do not
have northern hemisphere air migrating into the southern hemisphere, or vice
versa. I do, however, have a dim recollection of reading about some huge
volcano in the southern hemisphere, that belched much larger quantities of
ozone-destroying chemicals into the atmosphere, continuously, than the total
combined efforts of man.

There isn't a wall at the equator, air can pass back and forth,
especially if you have 70 years to do it. The 1815 eruption of Tambora
in the southern hemisphere lead to major food shortages across the
Northern Hemisphere in1816. I'm not sure which volcano you mean but
they have no effect on the stratosphere unless they have a major
eruption and we would notice if one was doing that continuously.

One thing that I do know for sure, is that aerosol cans stopped working
properly, when the propellant was changed from a CFC gas to propane or
butane or whatever it is that they use now.

Mine work, I'm not sure what you are doing with them.

As a matter of interest, aren't
these hydrocarbon gasses now considered to be a major contributor to this
global warming religion ?

Perhaps to the religion of denialism. Non-methane hydrocarbons are way
down the list and aerosol cans are a minor source of them. The
remaining CFCs & HCFCs in the atmosphere have much more effect.

If it was thought that the release of CFCs from
aerosol cans was sufficient to **** the ozone layer, then surely the same
quantities of hydrocarbon gasses that must now be being released, have to
contribute to climate change if you believe all the dubious science that the
IPCC models are based on?

It's entirely different mechanisms, one is a chemical reaction, the
other the absorption of infrared light.

Just a thought, but what is the science behind
using these 'active' gasses as aerosol propellants ? Why would cheap inerts
like nitrogen not work ?

You need a gas that will liquify under moderate pressure to avoid
having excessively thick and heavy metal cans and to get an even spray
over the lifetime of the can.

On 19/01/2013 12:54, The Medway Handyman wrote:
On 18/01/2013 10:14, Jethro_uk wrote:
On Fri, 18 Jan 2013 01:37:31 +0000, Arfa Daily wrote:

... otherwise, it might be *really* bloody cold ! d;~)

Arfa

It hasn't been called "global warming" for years now. Since the loony
tunes realised it committed them to only one course of events.

It's "climate change" now, because that way, hot or cold, they can find
something to blame it on.


What happened to that hole in the ozone layer that was going to kill us
all?

It is helping to keep Antarctica cool.

Colin Bignell

On Sat, 19 Jan 2013 18:07:16 +0000, Tim Streater
wrote:

In article ,
Andy Champ wrote:

On 19/01/2013 14:46, Arfa Daily wrote:
Just a thought, but what is the science behind using these 'active'
gasses as aerosol propellants ? Why would cheap inerts like nitrogen not
work

I might be wrong, but I think you want something that will liquefy at
normal temperature and reasonable pressure. It can then boil off to keep
the pressure up.

But does it actually need to be liquified (whatever gas is used, I mean)?

Yes, with a gas the pressure would drop as you used it. With a
liquified gas you get the same gas pressure above it as long as there
is liquid present. Plus you can get away with much flimsier cans.

"Arfa Daily" wrote in message
...


"The Medway Handyman" wrote in message
...
On 18/01/2013 10:14, Jethro_uk wrote:
On Fri, 18 Jan 2013 01:37:31 +0000, Arfa Daily wrote:

... otherwise, it might be *really* bloody cold ! d;~)

Arfa

It hasn't been called "global warming" for years now. Since the loony
tunes realised it committed them to only one course of events.

It's "climate change" now, because that way, hot or cold, they can find
something to blame it on.


What happened to that hole in the ozone layer that was going to kill us
all?

--
Dave - The Medway Handyman www.medwayhandyman.co.uk


ISTR that we were told at the time that if we stopped letting CFCs into
the atmosphere, it would heal in very short order. When this didn't
happen, I think that the 'facts' were altered to say that it was going to
take at least 40 years for the healing to even start. Long enough for
everyone to have forgotten the hysteria that surrounded this one, as well.
What I never did see explained was if the ozone destruction was as a
result of man's activities, why was the biggest 'hole' over the Antarctic,
when all of the population concentration - and hence release of CFCs - is
in the northern hemisphere ? As far as I am aware, atmospheric circulation
systems do not have northern hemisphere air migrating into the southern
hemisphere, or vice versa. I do, however, have a dim recollection of
reading about some huge volcano in the southern hemisphere, that belched
much larger quantities of ozone-destroying chemicals into the atmosphere,
continuously, than the total combined efforts of man.

One thing that I do know for sure, is that aerosol cans stopped working
properly, when the propellant was changed from a CFC gas to propane or
butane or whatever it is that they use now. As a matter of interest,
aren't these hydrocarbon gasses now considered to be a major contributor
to this global warming religion ? If it was thought that the release of
CFCs from aerosol cans was sufficient to **** the ozone layer, then surely
the same quantities of hydrocarbon gasses that must now be being released,
have to contribute to climate change if you believe all the dubious
science that the IPCC models are based on? Just a thought, but what is the
science behind using these 'active' gasses as aerosol propellants ?

Why would cheap inerts like nitrogen not work ?

Not viable in the very light weight tin cans used for that sort of thing.

What is used as a propellant has to be a liquid at the sort of pressure
that those very light weight tin cans can hold, and nitrogen isnt.

"Andy Champ" wrote in message
. uk...
On 19/01/2013 14:46, Arfa Daily wrote:
Just a thought, but what is the science behind using these 'active'
gasses as aerosol propellants ? Why would cheap inerts like nitrogen not
work

I might be wrong,

No you aren't.

but I think you want something that will liquefy at normal temperature and
reasonable pressure.

That can be viable in the very light weight tin cans used.

It can then boil off to keep the pressure up.

Yep.

Ammonia ought to do nicely... oh. Non-toxic is good too. As is
non-flammable...

"Tim Streater" wrote in message
...
In article ,
Andy Champ wrote:

On 19/01/2013 14:46, Arfa Daily wrote:
Just a thought, but what is the science behind using these 'active'
gasses as aerosol propellants ? Why would cheap inerts like nitrogen
not
work

I might be wrong, but I think you want something that will liquefy at
normal temperature and reasonable pressure. It can then boil off to keep
the pressure up.

But does it actually need to be liquified (whatever gas is used, I mean)?

Yep, because otherwise the can will run out of puff
too quickly with the very light weight cans used.

In article , Jules Richardson jules.richard
scribeth thus
On Fri, 18 Jan 2013 16:03:32 +0000, Arfa Daily wrote:

"Brian Gaff" wrote in message
...
So -13.6 degrees is not bloody cold then. This was the temp yesterday
in Lincolnshire.

Brian

Nah ! *Really* bloody cold is what the Ice Road Truckers drive in, or
Joe's pilots at Buffalo fly in, or the gold miners work in in Alaska, or
the Deadliest Catch boys brave ... :-)

They're saying windchills of -57F (-49C) here on Sunday, although the
base temp's only going to be a relatively-toasty -20F (-29C) :-)

cheers

Jules

I went to a place where they farm Alpaca sheep yesterday. Whilst there I
saw a rather attractive tall blond haired lady who was just clad in a
Tee shirt and body warmer and trousers in case someone might think the
wrong things..

Sez I, aren't you cold dressed like that ?, Oh this weather is quite
warm, I'm from Latvia ;!.....


--
Tony Sayer

Not that I am blonde or attractive or anything; but I am STILL going
out in shorts (proper above the knee ones) and a T shirt. I'm only
from Manchester.
--

Cheers

DrT
______________________________
We may not be able to prevent the stormy times in
our lives; but we can always choose whether or not
to dance in the puddles (Jewish proverb).

On Sat, 19 Jan 2013 19:14:08 +0000, just as I was about to take a
herb, mcp disturbed my reverie and wrote:

With a
liquified gas you get the same gas pressure above it as long as there
is liquid present.

Not exactly - that is only true if the temperature of the cylinder
remains constant. When using NO2 in an operating theatre, the cylinder
gets a layer of ice and the temperature drops due to the latent heat
of vapourisation. The taps have to be adjusted to compensate.
--

Cheers

DrT
______________________________
We may not be able to prevent the stormy times in
our lives; but we can always choose whether or not
to dance in the puddles (Jewish proverb).

On Sat, 19 Jan 2013 18:41:01 +0000, just as I was about to take a
herb, Nightjar disturbed my reverie
and wrote:

It is helping to keep Antarctica cool.

Lack of ozone does not affect the temperature, it just lets for UV
light in.
--

Cheers

DrT
______________________________
We may not be able to prevent the stormy times in
our lives; but we can always choose whether or not
to dance in the puddles (Jewish proverb).

On 19/01/2013 20:55, DrTeeth wrote:
On Sat, 19 Jan 2013 18:41:01 +0000, just as I was about to take a
herb, Nightjar disturbed my reverie
and wrote:

It is helping to keep Antarctica cool.

Lack of ozone does not affect the temperature, it just lets for UV
light in.

Why not?
Its UV light and has energy.
The energy is absorbed at the surface, converted to heat, and
re-radiated as IR just as the other solar energy.

On 19/01/13 22:32, dennis@home wrote:
On 19/01/2013 20:55, DrTeeth wrote:
On Sat, 19 Jan 2013 18:41:01 +0000, just as I was about to take a
herb, Nightjar disturbed my reverie
and wrote:

It is helping to keep Antarctica cool.

Lack of ozone does not affect the temperature, it just lets for UV
light in.

Why not?
Its UV light and has energy.
The energy is absorbed at the surface, converted to heat, and
re-radiated as IR just as the other solar energy.


actually most of it is absorbed in the atmosphere.

Otherwise what you say holds. BUT the sun surface temperature is low
enough to put the peak spectrum in - unsurprisingly - the visible band.


--
Ineptocracy

(in-ep-toc-ra-cy) €“ a system of government where the least capable to
lead are elected by the least capable of producing, and where the
members of society least likely to sustain themselves or succeed, are
rewarded with goods and services paid for by the confiscated wealth of a
diminishing number of producers.

On Sat, 19 Jan 2013 20:53:02 +0000, DrTeeth
wrote:

On Sat, 19 Jan 2013 19:14:08 +0000, just as I was about to take a
herb, mcp disturbed my reverie and wrote:

With a
liquified gas you get the same gas pressure above it as long as there
is liquid present.

Not exactly - that is only true if the temperature of the cylinder
remains constant. When using NO2 in an operating theatre, the cylinder
gets a layer of ice and the temperature drops due to the latent heat
of vapourisation. The taps have to be adjusted to compensate.

I've done that accidentally with a cylinder of ammonia (fortunately it
was in a fume cupboard). Doesn't usually happen with aerosol cans, you
don't usually use them enough. It does happen with air duster cans but
I don't think they use the usual propellant.

In message , Huge
writes
On 2013-01-19, DrTeeth wrote:
Not that I am blonde or attractive or anything; but I am STILL going
out in shorts (proper above the knee ones) and a T shirt. I'm only
from Manchester.

I went out in my PJs this morning to break the ice on the pond for the birds.

PJs, you wear PJs?

I've just been out in the garden to check on the fish in the pond etc

.... naked

Snow's actually quite warm on the feet


--
geoff

In message , ARW
writes
Arfa Daily wrote:
... otherwise, it might be *really* bloody cold ! d;~)

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-asia-21072347

Always bloody moaning the australians

a bit too hot, a bit too wet

no satisfying them


--
geoff

On Sun, 20 Jan 2013 01:17:41 +0000, geoff wrote:

In message , ARW
writes
Arfa Daily wrote:
... otherwise, it might be *really* bloody cold ! d;~)

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-asia-21072347

Always bloody moaning the australians

a bit too hot, a bit too wet

no satisfying them

A bit like farmers across here.... :-)

--
Frank Erskine

One thing that I do know for sure, is that aerosol cans stopped working
properly, when the propellant was changed from a CFC gas to propane or
butane or whatever it is that they use now.

Mine work, I'm not sure what you are doing with them.


It's not that they don't work, they just don't work as *well* as they used
to. I find most of the chemicals that I use daily in my workshop - such as
switch cleaner, defluxer, freezer, aerosol oil and so on, are much less
controllable than they were when CFCs were used as propellants. I have also
found that cans of aerosol paint are much less controllable than they were.

Arfa

In message , Frank Erskine
writes
On Sun, 20 Jan 2013 01:17:41 +0000, geoff wrote:

In message , ARW
writes
Arfa Daily wrote:
... otherwise, it might be *really* bloody cold ! d;~)

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-asia-21072347

Always bloody moaning the australians

a bit too hot, a bit too wet

no satisfying them

A bit like farmers across here.... :-)

But we don't sound as whiney as they do


--
geoff