I can't follow what a saiditor might be thinking.

submitted by ActuallyNot from self.AskSaidIt

sorted by:
top
newinsightfulfun
you are viewing a single comment's thread.

view the rest of the comments →

[–]NastyWetSmear 3 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 0 fun4 insightful - 1 fun -  (5 children)

Maybe it's a misunderstanding because you're using the strict, scientific term "Water Vapor" in the literal sense, while a lot of people tend to use such terms in a more colloquial, casual sense. Like condensation vs steam vs vapor and so on.

There's a lot of that kind of thing that happens. One person uses a term casually, expecting everyone to generally understand what they mean, while someone else, rightly, injects the correct definitions to help make sure there's no confusion, and as a result, two people who actually agree on the gist of something end up sounding like they are disagreeing.

What I can tell you is this... u/Questionable seems to have gone to bed and not been too bothered by any of it, while you're making a thread looking for people to agree with you. You're not wrong, but you've also got to let it go when someone else is.

[–]Questionable 1 insightful - 2 fun1 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 2 fun -  (4 children)

You have to understand that steam still contains water vapor, It's just that it has reached 100% humility, and water droplets have become visible. Water vapor doesn't disappear once 'a scientific term is used' or water droplets become visible within the water vapor. Nor will I pretend that clouds are simple that which can be seen, and not gaseous volume that is the entire cloud.

In fact, It's my belief that most scientific terms are born of obstinance, and not from practicality. "quantum foam" "blown out into space". These are things said by people wishing to redefine words to make themselves appear smart or backwards engineered their theories into the current zeitgeist or our world.

Am I arguing semantics? Am I the one using colloquial terms? Can't say, when we live in a world were the "settled science" is constantly updating and changing through grammatical trickery.

is he suggesting that I'm secretly a climate science denier

I'm asserting that, you (u/ActuallyNot) may not even know what you yourself are saying. As your talking points are being generated by others, and you are simply following doctrine, unaware of how absurd that makes your agenda appear. For example D.E.I clearly fosters racism, P.E.T.A Hurts animals and the Green Energy movent actually achieves it's goal by increasing carbon in the air by making things less efficient. Just as vaccines cause the disease they claim to prevent.

0EB10543EA50C1906A6C109AFC50B70292C5BCD8

[–]NastyWetSmear 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (2 children)

Never mind, u/ActuallyNot, turns out you're both still bothered by it. ;)

[–]Questionable 2 insightful - 2 fun2 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 2 fun -  (1 child)

Well, at least I'm not making whole threads that call people out by name, on this matter. Yes, I'm claiming the high ground based on integrity and etiquette.

Though I do seem to be the only person to have up voted this thread. As it's existence is hilarious.

No homo.

[–]NastyWetSmear 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

I didn't feel it was a healthy conversation, so I didn't upvote it.

[–]ActuallyNot[S] 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

Water vapor feedback is strongly positive because water vapor is a powerful greenhouse gas.

You were trying to cloud the issue by saying that water vapor includes clouds.

This doesn't work for two reasons.

1) Clouds aren't water vapor.

2) Cloud feedback is much smaller than water vapor feedback, and may not even be negative.