a) the water in the cup with the fork probably bubbled throughout the microwaving process.

b) metal in the microwave is for when the microwave is actively in use, afterwards is fine.

c) i suppose both. or place something in the glass with surface imperfections, such as a plastic fork.

d) superheating water can be dangerous, as it appears as though the water is not of boiling temperature. i'm sure you can still see water vapor, but it can be misleading, and putting your finger in the glass would be akin to placing your hand in violently boiling water. the container will also be very hot. also, most classic glassware and crystal can explode under those kind of temperatures.

Sorry I haven't responded to your latest message. I have read it a few times over and am processing...

In reply to this comment by jwray:
In reply to this comment by quantumushroom
NO, but curiously "by law", public tv is supposed to be "balanced." It is not, but that's government. I don't mind liberal viewpoints on PBS or anywhere else, but there's no debate if there's no one speaking for the other side.

Yes, but should it be balanced between creationism and evolution, or balanced between flat-earth theory and round-earth theory? Should it be balanced between astrology and astronomy?

I don't see evangelicals as having the kind of impact or posing the kind of threat liberals credit them with being. The so-called Religious Right has no legislation out there that's getting anywhere

These are some things the Religious Right has helped do lately:

1. Abstinence-only sex education that wastes billions of federal dollars while preserving ignorance about sex.
2. The creation of the OFBCI for the sole purpose of funneling federal dollars into Evangelical Christian organizations.
3. Meddling in the Schaivo family.
4. Many successful ballot initiatives in states, prohibiting gay marriage.
5. Electing a few boards of education that want to teach creationism instead of evolution
6. Keeping anti-sodomy laws on the books, including seldom-enforced laws against oral sex.



Both sides accuse the others' scientists of being paid shills. 'Denial of global warming' implies there's solid proof of anthropogenic global warming. So far that's not the case; there is only a consensus among a portion of scientists. The thing I'm not keen on is the GW proponents, after suggesting the price tage for a "cleanup" of water vapor would be 45 trillion worldwide, also admit the positive effects of a Kyoto would be minimal at best.

Which "GW proponent" suggested removing water vapor from the atmosphere to combat global warming? That's daft. Do you at least agree that the rapid increase in atmospheric CO2 since 1800 is anthropogenic?
graph

The ice core records show that CO2 levels never exceeded 305ppm during the ice age cycles of the previous million years.

I suspect that if you actually put it to referendum, most of the public would not support kicking Bill Moyers out of PBS.

I don't know if enough people would care either way. That's not a dig on Moyers, it's just the way things are.

PBS is not required to stay silent on politics, especially now that most important facts about the world are in some way politicized.

NO, but curiously "by law", public tv is supposed to be "balanced." It is not, but that's government. I don't mind liberal viewpoints on PBS or anywhere else, but there's no debate if there's no one speaking for the other side.

Biology is politicized (creation vs. evolution), meteorology is politicized (denial of global warming), geology is politicized (young-earth evangelical right-wingers vs. scientists), medicine is politicized (why are certain diseases thousands of times more common in developed countries than in wilderness -- pollution and industry, or lifestyle?), math is politicized (Bush disdains the study of math beyond calculus, as he implied in the 2000 debate). It's virtually impossible to do any kind of reporting without tainting it with your own knowledge of the world, which could be perceived by anybody who disagrees as political bias.

Well, it is said everything is political. I don't see evangelicals as having the kind of impact or posing the kind of threat liberals credit them with being. The so-called Religious Right has no legislation out there that's getting anywhere, while on the other side of the aisle the legislating is nonstop, and when that flops, activist judges simply change the laws to suit their needs. Six of the judges that "legalized" gay marriage in CA were supposedly R's.

Both sides accuse the others' scientists of being paid shills. 'Denial of global warming' implies there's solid proof of anthropogenic global warming. So far that's not the case; there is only a consensus among a portion of scientists. The thing I'm not keen on is the GW proponents, after suggesting the price tage for a "cleanup" of water vapor would be 45 trillion worldwide, also admit the positive effects of a Kyoto would be minimal at best.

In reply to this comment by jwray:
I suspect that if you actually put it to referendum, most of the public would not support kicking Bill Moyers out of PBS....

Water vapor = pollution?

No.

they're definitely walking around on the ground, looking through infrared goggles, which collect and display ambient light of higher wavelengths than our eyes can collect. Some of the lights do seem to be associate with areas of ground light (city areas).


brainstorming a few ideas
-spotlights and high altitude water vapor/ice? hell of a lot of them; soldiers have never seen them before
-aurora-like sun-related phenomenon? pretty far south
-rockets/contrails? they all appear to be vertical
-lens flair/optical noise? seem to stay vertical while the scope turns; soldiers have never seen them
-mystery military weapon? doesn't seem to be doing anything

@sineral, its theatrical fog from fog machines, maybe water vapor/ethylene glycol.

you're breathing out CO2 right now; if your breath looks like that you should turn up your thermostat, or maybe go to the hospital, because your insides are on fire.

1: The Great Global Warming Swindle was on tv, so not really a "lolol only pro global warming on tv lolol"
2: Seems you're not just a global warming denialist, but also a greenhouse gas denialist: CO2 is a greenhouse gas. It, in addition to water vapor and other gasses (others which only amount for 8% of the greenhouse effect), holds infrared radiation in the atmosphere which in effect heats the surface of the earth. It's why we have a climate and there is any life on this planet in the first place. You increase the concentration of it and you hold in more radiation, causing temperatures to go up. This was all taught in any middle school science class across the country. Now that we have that little misconception cleared up, please continue.

3: and another thing: The Great Global Warming Swindle was made in the UK, shown on UK, and debunked in UK. It got debunked so hard Mr Durkin admitted that his graphics team had extended the time axis along the bottom of the graph to the year 2000. 'There was a fluff there,' he said. If Mr Durkin had gone directly to the NASA website he could have got the most up-to-date data. This would have demonstrated that the amount of global warming since 1975, as monitored by terrestrial weather stations around the world, has been greater than that between 1900 and 1940—although that would have undermined his argument. 'The original NASA data was very wiggly-lined and we wanted the simplest line we could find,' Mr Durkin said: The original, and corrected versions of Temperature data from TGGWS, along with NASA GISS data
http://img80.imageshack.us/img80/341/86488206qk5.jpg

Info about the satellite from my previous post's link; http://www.ghcc.msfc.nasa.gov/AMSR/

"In support of the Earth Science Enterprise's goals, NASA's Earth Observing System (EOS) Aqua Satellite was launched from Vandenberg AFB, California on May 4, 2002 at 02:54:58 a.m. Pacific Daylight Time. The primary goal of Aqua, as the name implies, is to gather information about water in the Earth's system. Equipped with six state-of-the-art instruments, Aqua will collect data on global precipitation, evaporation, and the cycling of water. This information will help scientists all over the world to better understand the Earth's water cycle and determine if the water cycle is accelerating as a result of climate change.

The Advanced Microwave Scanning Radiometer - EOS (AMSR-E) is a one of the six sensors aboard Aqua. AMSR-E is passive microwave radiometer, modified from the Advanced Earth Observing Satellite-II (ADEOS-II) AMSR, designed and provided by JAXA (contractor: Mitsubishi Electric Corporation). It observes atmospheric, land, oceanic, and cryospheric parameters, including precipitation, sea surface temperatures, ice concentrations, snow water equivalent, surface wetness, wind speed, atmospheric cloud water, and water vapor."

also... everyone loves wikipedia...
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Microwave_radiometer

For those that may not know, the subatomic particles being emitted by the radioactive sample (most likely alpha particles) streak through the air at a high enough speed to quickly compress the air in front of it. After it passes, the air decompresses rapidly and water vapor is formed. This leaves a visible trail of water vapor, much like the trail left behind a jet as it flies at high speeds.

Free as in low cost fuel really is what I mean... not free as in something from nothing. I just meant that as a keyword in the posting (tags) because I figured it might show up in a search engine. I changed the title to Hydrogen instead of water. Maybe it should be Hydrogen/Electric but it would make the title really long.

The vehicle emits water vapors, I know it's not being powered by the carrier (storage mechanism).... it's an electric car that is powered by a process utilizing *hydrogen. I agree with dghandi on the process.. I was incorrect before about water being part of the process.

As far as global warming, who was burning fossil fuels 100,000 years ago to cause that warming?

How about 18,000 years ago at the end of the Pleistocene? Lots of fossil fuel burning going on then?

Climate is a described by coupled sets of non-linear relationships whose actual variables haven't even been convincingly identified.

Those pointing to computer models are either frauds or incompetent; as the models are worthless. Every single line of that code needs to be held up to the light of day; the fudge factors, approximated physics, poor math, and then the whole sections where they have no idea but just wing it.

Global warming is just a tool to empower bureaucrats and unaccountable international organizations who want to control you. With communism and socialism disreputable, it's the new vehicle.

Known causes of climate change:

(1) Astronomical Causes

11 year and 206 year cycles: Cycles of solar variability ( sunspot activity )
21,000 year cycle: Earth's combined tilt and elliptical orbit around the Sun ( precession of the equinoxes )
41,000 year cycle: Cycle of the +/- 1.5° wobble in Earth's orbit ( tilt )
100,000 year cycle: Variations in the shape of Earth's elliptical orbit ( cycle of eccentricity )


(2) Atmospheric Causes

Heat retention: Due to atmospheric gases, mostly gaseous water vapor (not droplets), also carbon dioxide, methane, and a few other miscellaneous gases-- the "greenhouse effect"
Solar reflectivity: Due to white clouds, volcanic dust, polar ice caps


(3) Tectonic Causes

Landmass distribution: Shifting continents (continental drift) causing changes in circulatory patterns of ocean currents. It seems that whenever there is a large land mass at one of the Earth's poles, either the north pole or south pole, there are ice ages.

Undersea ridge activity: "Sea floor spreading" (associated with continental drift) causing variations in ocean displacement.

Scientific fact doesn't support the man-made global warming THEORY, which exists only on flawed, unprovable computer models and in the mind of the Goracle, here making a final stand to create a meaningful legacy.

The global warming hoax is a power grab by socialists and Big Government-loving serfs. They deserve credit for telling one of the biggest, most ridiculous lies in history--that "excess" water vapor is killing the earth--and then announcing 'the debate is over' and threatening anyone who dares disagree.

This is straight-up fascism from envirofanatics, appealing to the guilt of the trendy and ignorant.

At least admitted communists and socialists (same thing) don't shy away from the labels. They're dead wrong, but at least they're honest. Not so these miscreants.

Hey, there's money backing both sides, that's nothing new. Al Gore recently admitted he "exaggerated" many theories in his recent crockumentary to scare people. Now why would he have to do that if the 'evidence' is so compelling?

A lot of folks around here can rail all day against religion, God or both, but let some weenie in a white labcoat tell you with a straight face that water vapor is destroying the earth, and you can't hand over your freedoms and money fast enough.

I mean, seriously, if you're so confident in the claims of socialists (who SURELY have NO interest in money and power) this sift would've had a fairer shot.

And theo: 1/3rd of American federal regulations are environmental, so let's not pretend there's no government monies behind the Greenscare movement. See ya round, old pal.