Delano

This article is part of the NASA Knows! (Grades 5-8) series. The climate of a region or city is its typical or average weather. For example, the climate of Hawaii is sunny and warm. But the climate of Antarctica is freezing cold. Earth's climate is the average of all the world's regional climates. Climate change, therefore, is a change in the typical or average weather of a region or city. This could be a change in a region's average annual rainfall, for example. Or it could be a change in a city's average temperature for a given month or season. Climate change is also a change in Earth's overall climate. This could be a change in Earth's average temperature, for example. Or it could be a change in Earth's typical precipitation patterns.

Rocket Science in 120: Newton's Laws - YouTube https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=X6lD3mnRVNAProxy Highlight 18 Jun 2016 ... Sir Isaac Newton: Physicist. Mathematician. Astronomer. Rocket scientist? Learn how Newton's work shapes how we launch rockets to space. (Someone is going to point out this isn't strictly true because the precession of Mercury is about 500 arc-seconds/century, however only 43 arc-seconds of this are due to relativistic corrections. The rest is due to perturbations from other planets accurately predicted by Newton's laws.)

No Troy they weren't as precise. Precision and accuracy are different. You are saying the aren't accurate. @Troy Read this and then admit you are wrong. Not impecise but inaccurate. Let me skip to your third paragraph, because this highlights a very important point not commonly appreciated by non-scientists. In Physics a "theory" is a mathematical model based on various assumptions and valid for a limited range of physical conditions. Newton's laws are a mathematical model that is limited to non-relativistic speeds and low gravitational fields, and within those limits it is exceedingly accurate. There is no sense in which Newton was proved wrong by Einstein. What relativity did is expand the range of physical conditions over which the theory applied. Special relativity extended the range to include high speeds, and general relativity extended it again to include high gravitational fields. Even GR is not applicable everywhere because it fails at singularities like the centre of black holes. We expect that some future theory (string theory?) will extend GR to describe places that are singular in GR. Anyhow, rant over, and on to your real question. The classic difference is the precession of Mercury. This is probably the biggest effect and it's certainly the most easily observed. Because the orbit of Mercury is an ellipse it has a long axis that points in a particular direction. In Newtonian gravity the direction of this axis doesn't change, but GR predicts it changes by 43 arc-seconds per century. This is a tiny tiny amount. The angular resolution of the unaided human eye is about 1 arc-minute, so you would have to watch Mercury for 140 years before the change in the axis would be perceptible. You are smarter than rocket scientist who use Newtonian physics. https://spaceflightsystems.grc.nasa.gov/education/rocket/newton.html

Maybe people have the need to dominate and be dominated. This may be because of self interest. Perhaps people want more and are less interested in eradicating hunger. Rap used to be the voice for the voiceless. Rappers wanted sex, fame, money and cars and a few wanted to educate. In the Furious Five first album Melle does the message. Which is social commentary . in the Funky 4+1 Sharock raps about astrology . So you have a minority rapping about social issues or education. What sells it what people want. Although you could argue that the supply creates the demand. i would say more people aspire to be successful like Trump. Than be a social activist like Sanders.

Yes unless he is Earl Graves in disguise.

https://www.theguardian.com/news/2015/nov/04/relativity-quantum-mechanics-universe-physicists Now for the problem: relativity and quantum mechanics are fundamentally different theories that have different formulations. It is not just a matter of scientific terminology; it is a clash of genuinely incompatible descriptions of reality. Have a read. The text below the link is from the article. https://futurism.com/newtonian-physics-vs-special-realtivity/ http://www.physlink.com/education/askexperts/ae392.cfm Newtonian Mechanics turns out to be a private case of Quantum Mechanics. In some situations, the behavior of the sub-atomic particles can be described well enough by Newton's Laws, but the more general theory is the Quantum Mechanics.

https://www.vox.com/energy-and-environment/2017/10/25/16504488/hurricane-season-2017-what-the-hell

Pioneer last paragraph makes his point. He is being cautious.

I don't know. Perhaps you are right Pioneer. We may ve our worst enemy. Then I think about the creation of the KKK and the internment camps during WWII.

There is a difference between me saying you are wrong and saying I am right. Asking a personto give an example to back up a statement is an effective tactic in argument. Most people can't which then weakens the rest of the argument. This is the second time. After some thought I changed my mind and realised Cynique was correct. Years back i was wrong and you were right about sampling. The climate is changing. It may also be due to fossil fuels. But the models and the predictions are misleading. The two not for profits are making misleading statements. I have recently been very critical about Troy's usage of words. I am not defending Pioneer in order to get back at Troy. I find intelectual bullying distasteful. Elitism Racism Sexism are all ways to diminish and or dominate the target. Troy's attempts to use science and mathematics to silence the opposition. That is distasteful. Pioneer mentioned that he didn't go to university a while back. That moved me. Whether it was said with humility I don't know. What i have noticed with Troy recently is a need to attempt to use his pedigree to win arguments. Troy you are clearly a focused driven guy with multiple degrees. If the conversation is about engineering and mathematics, your opinions are informed. Being an expert in one field doesn't make you an expert in others. You telling me to Stfu doesn't warrant more of a response. The climate change data is not transparent. The undelying numbers have been altered. Go to Princeton University's site. They geometerological department says they have questuins about climate change that they can't answer. I don't expect that Troy will look at the opinion from credible scientist. You have made up your mind. We have a change in the climate. I am uncertain of the cause.

The peevish bit I get but you think it was rude. No I have very little illusion about my fellow posters. I loved growing up in New York. However i saw the city i love disappear. Perhaps will see how things develop

Pioneer I just want to acknowledge that your style and methodology follow a logic that is internally consistent. I appreciate a well presented and thought out argument. That is neither argumentative nor emotional. I am also striving to present arguments that have less typos and are easier to understand. I was wondering if you have consciously changed your style? I am less inclined to blindly follow experts. Since even amongst experts you have dissenting opinions. The discussion pf those differences rationally is what propels discourse both personal and scientific.

Troy this is a discussion. So unless you want to censor me or delete my post. I will point out why and where you are mistaken. You ability to think critically or to even withstand criticism is appaling . If you want to be seen and respected as an expert. Your delivery and content of your arguments need to be sharper. or maybe just learn yo argue using rhetoric. Or I can just stop posting. or engaging with you. I'll close my mouth when you start opening your mind. Having knowledge in engineering doesn't make youan expert in any other field.

This is where reading comprehension is important. It's is not 97% of scientist its 97% of climate scientists. And that number is overstated I know because I checked. Think for a second how would you take a global average temperature.

Maybe check their sources. As to how they computed that number. A lot of people mention ut without knowing anything about it. Because people are happy not thinking. Anyone using that 97% hasn't read how they figured that number. Don't take my word go check. Also go see if you can find temperature data.

https://climate.nasa.gov/scientific-consensus/

https://www.forbes.com/sites/alexepstein/2015/01/06/97-of-climate-scientists-agree-is-100-wrong/ https://climate.nasa.gov/scientific-consensus/ There's one from both sides.

Ok @Troy

Well said Cynique. That's why i say there aren't any facts.

My favorite Feynman books Surely you're joking, Mr Feynman! and What do you care what other people think.

The answer should be obvious.

Al Gore has a colossal carbon footprint. BTW I have already looked at Trump. He literally has hundreds of businesses. Most of which are licenses of his name. Troy it won't be long before Al Gore and Climatologist are seen for being frauds. A lot foundations are ways to pay yourself and your cronies. The Trump's Clinton's Obama's Bush's Reagan's all have foundations. Al Gore has a not for profit it raised about $26 mil $18 is for programs. Which is another way of saying salary.

Domination is more about aggression than intelligence.

search Al Gore Income.

Do a search on Al Gore Income. OR Will Al Gore be the first Climate Change Billionaire. Figures don't lie but every liar can figure.