Why Meteorology (Storm Theory) is a Cargo Cult Science

Beyond the boundaries of established science an avalanche of exotic ideas compete for our attention. Experts tell us that these ideas should not be permitted to take up the time of working scientists, and for the most part they are surely correct. But what about the gems in the rubble pile? By what ground-rules might we bring extraordinary new possibilities to light?

Moderators: MGmirkin, bboyer

Why Meteorology (Storm Theory) is a Cargo Cult Science

Unread postby jimmcginn » Wed Feb 15, 2017 10:38 am

https://groups.google.com/d/msg/sci.phy ... 2fMB8EBAAJ

James McGinn:
Whatever the case, your argument is contrived. You are mixing metaphors and being deceptive.

LipperF:
Like I said, this is the most direct example I can find of published data showing that moist air is less dense than dry air.

James McGinn:
There is zero data involving the direct measurement of the weight of moist air versus dry air. Yet meteorologists continue to maintain the BELIEF that moist air is lighter than dry air as THE MOST FUNDAMENTAL CONCEPT IN ALL OF METEOROLOGY'S STORM THEORY.

The fact that this fact is casually dismissed by you and by all meteorologists is all anybody needs to conclude that meteorology is not a real science like physics or chemistry.

LipperF:
Since air is a fluid, it really doesn't make sense to talk about its weight

James McGinn:
LOL. It's you meteorologists that assert that weight/buoyancy/convections is what powers all storms. So your words sound funny coming from the mouth of a meteorologist. It's like you don't know what you think from one minute to the next.

LipperF:
So if there are any publications that address your question directly (by reporting a weight rather than a mass or a density) they are not easy to locate:
http://www.imeko.org/publications/tc3-2 ... 02-038.pdf

James McGinn:
As you eluded, your reference is worthless. The details of meteorology's convection model of storm theory are IMPOSSIBLE to locate. Meteorologists don't discuss these details. It is strictly a taboo subject--literally.

You have as much chance to get a meteorologist to discuss the mathematical details of convection as you do getting a priest to discuss the details of the inquisition.

LipperF:
But since the weight of the sample is directly proportional to the density and the mass of the sample, both of which are reported in the reference(s) above, I find the publications to be thoroughly convincing.

James McGinn:
I find your claim that the sample is directly proportional to density to be absurd--plainly. And I find the fact that you find this convincing to be evidence that you are not a real scientists and, by association, meteorology is not a real science.

LipperF:
Nonsense. Meteorologists (as well as physicists, chemists, mathematicians, engineers, etc) spend a considerable amount of time and ink talking about how clouds, dust devils, thunderstorms, winter storms, supercell thunderstorms, monsoons, hurricanes, and tornadoes form. The conceptual and numerical models we use to analyze, simulate, and predict these systems are constantly analyzed for inconsistencies and improved when possible.

James McGinn:
As you just eluded, meteorology is a conversational science. It's not an empirical science. Listening to you is like listening to two clergy discussing a passage in the bible. Meteorologists make observations. They/you don't do experiments. The basic assumptions of their/your most fundamental models are mathematically absurd/inept. So they/you can't actually solve problems. It's all talk and phoney math used to create the illusion that they/you understand what they/you do not.

https://groups.google.com/d/msg/sci.phy ... 2fMB8EBAAJ

Jim McGinn / Solving Tornadoes
jimmcginn
 
Posts: 343
Joined: Sun May 01, 2016 6:43 pm

Re: Why Meteorology (Storm Theory) is a Cargo Cult Science

Unread postby Maol » Wed Feb 15, 2017 11:36 am

Whatever it is you think you are alluding to, you can't elude this:

If you drive a new car which has an engine management system incorporating a mass air flow sensor and oxygen sensor, the ECU in your car is performing calculations to control A/F in which it is extrapolating a direct measurement of air's weight every moment the engine is running.
Maol
 
Posts: 240
Joined: Fri Mar 11, 2011 1:40 pm

Re: Why Meteorology (Storm Theory) is a Cargo Cult Science

Unread postby MerLynn » Mon Mar 13, 2017 3:33 pm

Jim
Whatever it is you think you are alluding to, you can't elude this:

Storms exist because water exists

You cant prove what water is by ignoring recent quantum leaps in intelligent experiments and base your theories upon outdated experiments in which just 2 electrodes are placed in water when 3 or 4 or 5 or 6 or 7 or 8 or 9 electrodes plus neutral plates do not make H & O gases and/or make other gases raising SERIOUS questions as to what water is.

So until we get to the bottom of this electrode in water experiment you base ALL of your theories upon, your logic just doesn't hold water.

H2O is a Cargo Cult Science and all that follows is fake news

Lynn E
Australia
MerLynn
 
Posts: 180
Joined: Sat Dec 27, 2014 9:28 am
Location: Land of OZ


Return to New Insights and Mad Ideas

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 2 guests