But pulling away from the thrust of the conversation, when the total of my words clearly meant this, if someone doesnt get it the first time, maybe the fourth or so similar description/reference to it would bring them up to speed
Occupying more space as well as increasing density, as theres limitations from gases to solids, or atmospheres to earth, in this case
This year, globally, had the warmest January to August in the last 131 years – 0.67C above the 20th Century average. This year seems likely to be one of the warmest on record. http://www.ncdc.noaa.gov/sotc/?report=global
Theyve left out and changed their approach, something other datasticians being paid by other governments have done as well.
If we dont count the oceans, change the rules in the middle of the game. Place an onus on things we didnt have in the past, and leavce the pasts findings bare, or non inclusive, or reduced weight of those findings compared to todays newer tech etc etc
Yea, they did, and look whos heading up nasa now
No, density increases, in same volume, increasing volume is meaningless to what Im saying
More mass in same volume is what Im saying here
Now, counting a certain density within a certain volume, as you add more mass, at some point, volume has to increase, and I went along with your increasing volumes.
Which is whats happening, at certain pressures, temps etc, it has to increase in volume
I give up, everyone misunderstands what Im trying to say, and heads in the opposite direction
‘As a photon travels further towards the earth, the masses os gases are increased due to their relative distance from the gravitational center, or earths core. ‘
I may have to call this debate over for me until you can show some scientific literacy - mass does not increase with gravitational field strength, for the umpteenth time.
I’m out, I have to concentrate on my studies.
Good luck with your denialism in this warming world.