A vast collection of true scientific facts that are actually wrong

robinson · Post by **robinson** » Wed Jul 07, 2021 5:29 am

For some reason when I read a "scientific" article, educational site, or whatever the source, especially a big government official science page, and it is wrong, it bugs me. It bugs me like it bothered Cecilia Payne when she knew that the sun was mainly hydrogen and helium, but the official smart experts all knew the sun was made mostly of iron.
https://www.britannica.com/biography/Ce ... Gaposchkin
https://now.northropgrumman.com/cecilia ... e-made-of/

Unlike Payne, I won't suffer any professional damage for pointing out the experts, the mainstream, the highly paid government scientists are wrong.

:mrgreen:

Oh sure you might be thinking, but lets face it, I don't give a fuck what you are thinking at the moment

What triggered this thread was a new science error I just saw, which can be found here
https://www.climate.gov/news-features/u ... %E2%80%99t

Because the ozone layer normally blocks ultraviolet (UV) light, an ozone hole allows more UV light than usual to reach the surface. However, the additional energy added to the Earth system from the ozone hole is so small that it couldn’t be responsible for the warming trend that’s been occurring.

How small? Well, the vast majority of sunlight is the light we can see—visible light with wavelengths of 400-700 nanometers. UV light is only about 8 percent of all sunlight to begin with, and the ozone layer and oxygen (both of which absorb UV) only permit a fraction of that to reach the surface. The additional amount of UV that the Antarctic ozone hole allows to reach the surface for a month or so each year is a small fraction of an already small amount of sunlight—too small to explain global warming.

Rather than speak of the multitude of errors contained in that, let's just point out the glaring stupid one. "the vast majority of sunlight is the light we can see"

That's wrong, and not slightly wrong, hugely wrong. Remember, the author is trying to convince you UV can't affect climate, but they use a false claim. The majority of sunlight is IR. Visible light is %37 percent of the energy coming from the sun. Even if you use bandwidth (which they are not) it's still wrong. IR is 55% of sunlight hitting the upper atmosphere.

And in the same browsing time period I cam across this one

The amount of water vapour in the air is, as a first order approximation, related to temperature - every degree of temperature rise gives us 7% more water vapour.

https://earthscience.stackexchange.com/ ... in-the-air

Now that isn't an expert opinion, but I've read it from many experts elsewhere, no doubt where the armchair expert got it from.

The thing is, it's not true. (Unlike the more obvious wrongs, that one would require qualifications and explanations, all of which is like work.)

Ben Trovado · Post by **Ben Trovado** » Wed Jul 07, 2021 5:33 am

Jesus. The sun could not possibly have an effect on . . . . . The SUN?

And this is semi-official?!

robinson · Post by **robinson** » Wed Jul 07, 2021 5:37 am

Here's the really obvious and annoying ones.

All of the following is just not true.

There are two tides a day, because there is a bulge on the other side of the earth from the bulge under the moon.

Friction with air is why meteors and spaceships heat up entering the atmosphere.

CO2 controls the global climate of the earth

The sky is dark because of the expansion of the Universe

All natural systems degenerate when left to themselves

I'm from the government and I am here to help you

(OK that one isn't scientific, but it was funny)

You can't go directly down wind faster than the wind, using only the wind

The facts speak for themselves

The cause of some cancers is unknown

Global warming leads to more extreme weather

robinson · Post by **robinson** » Wed Jul 07, 2021 5:43 am

If we expand to claims of a scientific nature, the list becomes enormous.

If we look into the past, almost every scientific fact that is now true, was once considered wrong

It's hard not to seem political when pointing out the huge blunders made using science

Here's some more facts that are simply not true

Nuclear energy is safe and cheap

The space shuttle is safe (out of date now of course)

A rock from Mars found in Antarctica showed signs of life on Mars

Blowing a big asteroid apart wouldn't save us from it

Replacing lead with methyl tertiary butyl ether will make gasoline safer

Spent nuclear fuel isn't that dangerous

Ulcers are caused by stress

robinson · Post by **robinson** » Wed Jul 07, 2021 5:52 am

In regards to humans

None of the following is true

Early humans walked and spread across the globe (no, they used boats)

Neanderthals were stupid

Humans evolved from apes

Milk is good for your bones

Science doesn't know why childhood leukemia exploded onto the scene in 1947

HIV infections started in Africa

Sunlight causes cancer

robinson · Post by **robinson** » Wed Jul 07, 2021 5:57 am

Satellites that measure global temperature were funded because of global warming

Drinking alcohol kills brain cells

Diamonds come from coal

The moon has a dark side

Nothing can exceed the speed of light

robinson · Post by **robinson** » Wed Jul 07, 2021 6:02 am

Chocolate gives you acne

Margarine is good for you

Meth is a great weight loss drug

Pesticides and herbicides in your food are not a problem

The earth goes around the sun

Sugar is addictive as heroin

robinson · Post by **robinson** » Wed Jul 07, 2021 6:10 am

More facts that are not true

Warming causes more water vapor which causes more warming

The sun can't influence the climate of the earth

Ice ages are caused by changes in CO2 levels

It snows more because of global warming

Pyrrho · Post by **Pyrrho** » Wed Jul 07, 2021 11:43 am

"Nothing is real
And there's nothing to get hung about"

ed · Post by ed » Wed Jul 07, 2021 11:56 am

OK, I'll bite. I will admit that I believe these two. What are the "correct" answers?

There are two tides a day, because there is a bulge on the other side of the earth from the bulge under the moon.

Friction with air is why meteors and spaceships heat up entering the atmosphere.

xouper · Post by **xouper** » Wed Jul 07, 2021 12:36 pm

Bernoulli's principle explains why airplanes can fly.

Even NASA keeps promoting that falsehood on their website. :roll:

robinson · Post by **robinson** » Wed Jul 07, 2021 12:59 pm

ed wrote: ↑Wed Jul 07, 2021 11:56 am OK, I'll bite. I will admit that I believe these two. What are the "correct" answers?
There are two tides a day, because there is a bulge on the other side of the earth from the bulge under the moon.

Friction with air is why meteors and spaceships heat up entering the atmosphere.

If those are the only ones you didn't already know, you are really really smart, and I commend you, and because of this I will explain. But only briefly. Because you are smart, and also because you can Google this shit, but that's where it gets interesting. Both Google and Wikipedia might not give you the correct answers.

robinson · Post by **robinson** » Wed Jul 07, 2021 1:16 pm

No less than Newton came up with the two tidal bulges following the moon around the world, because where he lived there are two high and low tides a day. He was wrong, and people who study tides and create global tide models, and especially people who measure sea level and tides with satellites know this.

Ocean tides are actually amphidromic systems, and there has ever been twin tidal bulges following the moon.

Air is frictionless, the heating of objects comes from the atmosphere being compressed in front of a fast moving object. So much compression heating occurs the air actually becomes plasma, which is where the bright light comes from.

Side note. This actually allows spacecraft to make it back in one piece, since there is no heat actually created by the air moving over the spacecraft surfaces. If that were the case it would be impossible to design a craft that could survive the-entry

robinson · Post by **robinson** » Wed Jul 07, 2021 1:17 pm

There exist a very small number of web pages that explain both these matters in detail. The vast majority however, are wrong.

xouper wrote: ↑Wed Jul 07, 2021 12:36 pm Bernoulli's principle explains why airplanes can fly.

Even NASA keeps promoting that falsehood on their website. :roll:

Exactly. Over time I have just accepted the stupid, knowing there is little to be done about it.

But every time I find a wrong I have to either go offline or blog about it

xouper · Post by **xouper** » Wed Jul 07, 2021 2:03 pm

robinson wrote: ↑Wed Jul 07, 2021 1:16 pm Air is frictionless, . . .

May I ask if you would explain in more detail what you mean by that?

More specifically, I would be interested in your explanation how a skydiver's parachute interacts with the air as it descends, or why (subsonic) falling objects have a terminal velocity, such as a watermelon?

robinson · Post by **robinson** » Wed Jul 07, 2021 3:01 pm

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Drag_(physics)

Like water, air acts by drag, which is not the same as surface friction

ed · Post by ed » Wed Jul 07, 2021 4:00 pm

robinson wrote: ↑Wed Jul 07, 2021 1:16 pm No less than Newton came up with the two tidal bulges following the moon around the world, because where he lived there are two high and low tides a day. He was wrong, and people who study tides and create global tide models, and especially people who measure sea level and tides with satellites know this.

Ocean tides are actually amphidromic systems, and there has ever been twin tidal bulges following the moon.

Air is frictionless, the heating of objects comes from the atmosphere being compressed in front of a fast moving object. So much compression heating occurs the air actually becomes plasma, which is where the bright light comes from.

Side note. This actually allows spacecraft to make it back in one piece, since there is no heat actually created by the air moving over the spacecraft surfaces. If that were the case it would be impossible to design a craft that could survive the-entry

Why, then, you fatuous gnome dwarf, do heat shields ablate?

Answer promptly and unambiguously or I WILL hunt you down, murder you and hide your body pieces in Biological waste bags (Thank you to my dear daughter for that superb idea... she says they are not checked as to contents. An idea to conjure with).

xouper · Post by **xouper** » Wed Jul 07, 2021 4:25 pm

robinson wrote: ↑Wed Jul 07, 2021 3:01 pm https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Drag_(physics)

Like water, air acts by drag, which is not the same as surface friction

The source you cited seems to directly contradict your assertion.

wikipedia wrote:In fluid dynamics, drag (sometimes called air resistance, a type of friction, . . .

Aerodynamic drag (such as encountered by airplanes) is indeed caused by "surface friction".

Perhaps it would help if you clarified your use of the jargon.

In case it helps to know your audience in choosing how best to explain, I've studied aerodynamics at the university level, I have a pilot license, and I'm an experienced skydiver. I have a lot of direct first-hand experience with aerodynamic drag. I only mention all that so you will have a better idea what level of explanation I am looking for, in your clarifcation of your original statement. In other words, it will be unnecessary to frame your response as if you were talking to someone who is clueless in this matter.

Remember, in science and technology, jargon matters. That's why we have such jargon, to help eliminate popular ambiguities.

ed · Post by ed » Wed Jul 07, 2021 5:07 pm

He is on the run. He knows that I'm after him.

http://www.trademarkpolythene.co.uk/wp- ... ground.jpg

ed · Post by ed » Wed Jul 07, 2021 5:11 pm

n.b. Robinson has ceased posting. He is trying to get a head start.

Wanker.

robinson · Post by **robinson** » Wed Jul 07, 2021 7:26 pm

Can’t post while working numb nuts

robinson · Post by **robinson** » Wed Jul 07, 2021 7:27 pm

Let me guess, your lazy fat ass couldn’t be bothered to look anything up

ed · Post by ed » Wed Jul 07, 2021 7:31 pm

I did. "Ablative Heat Shields" came up first. Under it it said "Robinson is a wanker, a greater wanker than TA". That made me sit up, I can tell you. Anyway, I laboriously transferred the word "ablative" onto this forum ... you with me here? This bit gets complicated ... After I did, I waited 45 seconds and when there was no response I figured you ran off.

So ... got an answer yet?

ETA ... Whoa !!!! You work? Like someone pays you?

robinson · Post by **robinson** » Wed Jul 07, 2021 7:34 pm

Dude, I work everyday

And I am the boss

robinson · Post by **robinson** » Wed Jul 07, 2021 7:35 pm

Even though my wife thinks she is the boss

ed · Post by ed » Wed Jul 07, 2021 7:38 pm

Don't tell her, you will be happier.

What do you do?

I'm a bum.

robinson · Post by **robinson** » Wed Jul 07, 2021 7:49 pm

I'm a transporter

ed · Post by ed » Wed Jul 07, 2021 7:52 pm

Being a bum is better.

ed · Post by ed » Wed Jul 07, 2021 7:53 pm

I win

ed · Post by ed » Wed Jul 07, 2021 7:53 pm

Again

robinson · Post by **robinson** » Wed Jul 07, 2021 8:03 pm

xouper wrote: ↑Wed Jul 07, 2021 4:25 pm Aerodynamic drag (such as encountered by airplanes) is indeed caused by "surface friction".

Which is not the same thing as dry friction, or what most people consider friction. Unlike dry friction, drag depends on velocity.

As anyone with experience with air knows, at low velocity there is zero friction. The resistance completely depends on velocity.

http://hyperphysics.phy-astr.gsu.edu/hb ... t.html#fri

At low velocity there is no heating, and no friction. At high velocities, enough to cause heating, it is due to adiabatic heating, not friction from two objects rubbing against each other. There is a very small amount of that, but it's not what causes air to become hot enough to turn into plasma.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Adiabatic ... nd_cooling

As for shielding of spacecraft for re-entry, the shape and engineering is such that the shield (or tiles) don't actually even touch the super heated air, all the heating is done by radiative energy. The bow shock created keeps the plasma from actually touching the material.

robinson · Post by **robinson** » Wed Jul 07, 2021 8:04 pm

ed wrote: ↑Wed Jul 07, 2021 7:53 pmI win

That's not what your wife said

robinson · Post by **robinson** » Mon Jul 12, 2021 10:10 pm

Too soon?

ed · Post by ed » Mon Jul 12, 2021 11:14 pm

You can run but you can't hide

xouper · Post by **xouper** » Tue Jul 13, 2021 12:30 am

robinson wrote: ↑Wed Jul 07, 2021 1:16 pm Air is frictionless, . . .

xouper wrote: ↑Wed Jul 07, 2021 2:03 pm May I ask if you would explain in more detail what you mean by that?

More specifically, I would be interested in your explanation how a skydiver's parachute interacts with the air as it descends, or why (subsonic) falling objects have a terminal velocity, such as a watermelon?

robinson wrote: ↑Wed Jul 07, 2021 3:01 pm https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Drag_(physics)

Like water, air acts by drag, which is not the same as surface friction

xouper wrote: ↑Wed Jul 07, 2021 4:25 pm The source you cited seems to directly contradict your assertion.

wikipedia wrote:In fluid dynamics, drag (sometimes called air resistance, a type of friction, . . .
Aerodynamic drag (such as encountered by airplanes) is indeed caused by "surface friction".

Perhaps it would help if you clarified your use of the jargon. . . .

robinson wrote: ↑Wed Jul 07, 2021 8:03 pm Which is not the same thing as dry friction, or what most people consider friction. Unlike dry friction, drag depends on velocity.

As anyone with experience with air knows, at low velocity there is zero friction. The resistance completely depends on velocity.

Those last two statements seem to contradict each other.

If you had said, at low velocity there is low friction, I would have been fine with that.

As someone who has had direct experience with air and going through it at low velocities (less than 200 mph), I can indeed affirm that resistance depends on velocity in that range. Air is not frictionless. Air resistance is zero only when the velocity is also zero.

Are we on the same page now? It seems to me you have sufficiently qualified your original remark (quoted above).

robinson · Post by **robinson** » Tue Jul 13, 2021 5:02 am

ed wrote: ↑Wed Jul 07, 2021 4:00 pm Answer promptly and unambiguously or I WILL hunt you down, murder you and hide your body pieces in Biological waste bags (Thank you to my dear daughter for that superb idea... she says they are not checked as to contents. An idea to conjure with).

I don't think you understand something. I know where you live.

ed · Post by ed » Tue Jul 13, 2021 10:03 am

That just makes it easier

robinson · Post by **robinson** » Tue Jul 13, 2021 11:59 am

That’s what your wife said

:D

DJ · Post by DJ » Tue Jul 13, 2021 3:29 pm

robinson wrote: ↑Tue Jul 13, 2021 11:59 am That’s what your wife said

:D

You’re a dead man... :lol:

ed · Post by ed » Tue Jul 13, 2021 3:39 pm

Want to hunt him down with me? We'll release him in the Great Swamp off of Lake Ed. We'll let him flounder for a might then turn him over to the freed slave colony that has been there for 150 years. I tell them that the South won and that they better keep their heads down. They have gotten a bit cannabalistic, if you know what I mean.