From: Alan <nuh-uh@nope.com>
Newsgroups: alt.global-warming,alt.fan.rush-limbaugh,can.politics,alt.politics.liberalism,alt.politics.democrats,alt.politics.usa.republican
Subject: Re: Why? CO2 Doesn't Cause Warming
Date: Thu, 25 Apr 2024 15:49:10 -0700
Organization: A noiseless patient Spider
On 2024-04-25 15:47, Little@man.Ball wrote:
> On Thu, 25 Apr 2024 13:55:21 -0700
> Alan <nuh-uh@nope.com> wrote:
>
>> On 2024-04-25 13:01, Little@man.Ball wrote:
>>> On Thu, 25 Apr 2024 08:41:41 -0700
>>> Alan <nuh-uh@nope.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>> The guy who wrote that knows nothing:
>>>>
>>>> 'Energy does not migrate on and on. Kinetic energy (motion) is
>>>> continuously destroyed in a gravitational field.'
>>>>
>>>> That statement is completely false.
>>>>
>>>> Energy is NEVER destroyed.
>>>
>>> Yes, in some cases.
>>
>> Nope. In no cases as all.
>>
>>> We can convert kinetic energy to potential anergy
>>> thus âdestroyingâ all of the kinetic energy.
>>
>> So NOT destroying.
>>
>>> One simple example is to
>>> throw a ball on the moon straight up. Lacking air resistance, when
>>> the ball reach its peak height it has zero kinetic energy.
>>
>> But it has additional potential energy in precisely the same amount.
>
> Nope.
>
> Not in space.
>
> It is nulled.
No. It is not.
>
>>
>>> A more difficult
>>> experiment is on earth o send a moving object uphill with zero
>>> friction and set the slope such that it becomes level at the top
>>> and the object reaches a complete halt.
>>
>> And it makes not difference.
>>
>> The energy in either scenario is not destroyed, but rather converted
>> from one form to another.
>>
> Or nulled = destroyed.
>
> cope.
Nope.
<https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Conservation_of_energy>