Why are Canadian fires turning the Texas sky orange?

Tutte le discussioni > Discussioni di Steam > Off Topic > Dettagli della discussione

Fosty 8 giu 2023, ore 12:28

L'autore della discussione ha indicato un messaggio come risposta alla propria domanda.
Clicca qui per visualizzare il messaggio.

Messaggio originale di ❤ Sly Succubus ❤:

The sky is largely blue because the vast majority of earths surface is ocean waters which are by most accounts blue, if smog covers far to much of the sky, then it looses its blue tint and becomes usually redder as a result of elements within the smog or smoke itself. This can be seen in many situations where a fire is raging due to the fire and smoke being largely orange, yellow and red, while yes to us Smoke is only black, grey and sometimes white, those 3 colors either completely absorb or reflect ALL light thus only the hues of embers and fire (or other elements such as dust) get reflected back to project their hues.

As a matter of fact this is why during some tornados the sky is green, because the tornado has discarded large amounts of plant life or earth into the sky thus blanketing a local area with hues of green, in hurricanes you'll see largely white because hurricane clouds are for the most part, white storm clouds, even if your not inside the hurricanes formation or cloud over.

Volcanos can actually make the sky a burning red as a result of ash and soot in the sky, hence why when to much volcanic smoke is in the sky, you wont see hues as its mostly black smoke, which absorbs all light save for burning earth which quickly tends to cool if not near the peak of eruption.

< >

Visualizzazione di 76-90 commenti su 104

Fajita Jim 8 giu 2023, ore 15:34

Messaggio originale di a geezer:
Can't believe people in this thread have given up on answering the topic question

Messaggio originale di Something Different:
Because of the smoke and all that other ♥♥♥♥ that gets thrown into the atmosphere from burning things

No it's Bob Ross.

https://youtu.be/wCsO56kWwTc

#76

Titus 8 giu 2023, ore 15:35

Messaggio originale di Neurotic Panda:
Messaggio originale di Titus:
Well it is a good thing this Stephen Schneider published a review 3 years later that he was wrong and instead estimated that there would be a 0.5 degree warming by 2000, because boy, that would have made science look bad.

its also funny that being alive during that time it was thing and a fact it was thought OMG we are going to cause an ice age. do some digging. it was indeed a thing being 'taught'.

its all a farce.

Believe what you will. Idc personally.

all i know Is when the people telling me the oceans are rising and they then proceed to build and live in mansion on the ocean.. haha. yea i'm good, not buying it.. OR.. omg climate change. you must give up your cars/freedom.. ride bikes, go electric, etc.. Dont eat meat its killing the world, give up your guns they are evil... etc etc.. they say all of this while they are jet setting on their personal planes with private chefs eating steak dinners protected by armed guards...

no ty.

but hey, 'you' do 'you'. your over lords love 'you' for it comrade. Like i said before. keep on drinking their 'kool-aid'. Apparently it must taste better than it looks...

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=T75DAoUN3JU

:GHSleep:

It is cool if you want to believe in logical fallacies, a lot of people do these days...

#77

pants 8 giu 2023, ore 15:35

I can't believe things being on fire could do this to us

#78

76561199508915480 8 giu 2023, ore 15:37

The day of the rake uno reverse card cometh.

Too long have you Americans ignored my excessively long monologues detailing my intricate plans. Soon I will

#79

pants 8 giu 2023, ore 15:38

Messaggio originale di Naru-sama v2.0:
The day of the rake uno reverse card cometh.

Too long have you Americans ignored my excessively long monologues detailing my intricate plans. Soon I will

Great the giant fire is Naru, FML

#80

Titus 8 giu 2023, ore 15:39

Messaggio originale di a geezer:
Can't believe people in this thread have given up on answering the topic question

I think it is because of the jet stream moving over Texas; here is a resource for monitoring smoke in (most of) North America: https://firesmoke.ca/forecasts/current/

#81

Fajita Jim 8 giu 2023, ore 15:42

https://youtu.be/eFTLKWw542g
https://youtu.be/lCALGlGuVUA
https://youtu.be/qavSfl1jATU
https://youtu.be/XchwE9zVdnw

#82

76561199508915480 8 giu 2023, ore 15:46

Messaggio originale di Doctor Dankenstein:
The rapture is upon us, eh!

Hahaha haha ehhhhh

Better bring out your biggest and best hoser eh, hoser?

#83

MistuhG 8 giu 2023, ore 15:48

Messaggio originale di Titus:
Man, if only there was a way for people to verify research results. Like some kind of peer review system. Or using probability and statistics to determine if numbers were faked or impossible. If we had those kinds of things it would be so much harder for them to fake research!

Grifters policing grifters? Not a terribly bright idea, but pretty much what i would expect.

Seems strange for you to defend a system that is wrong again and again. Doesn't seem to be doing a terribly good job at weeding out the garbage and junk science. Truth is, there are plenty of scientists that have called out and exposed scams like climate change, covid vaccines, etc. But your so called 'peer review' only seems to apply when the peer agrees with a certain narrative. If it doesn't agree, then those with money at stake in the game find a reason to make that contrary evidence invalid. The property and bank accounts of those involved make it clear how the system works, and its not in the direction of truth.

That's a cult, not science. But I can see why someone without any intellectual honesty might want to keep such a corrupt system going.

Messaggio originale di Fajita Jim:
Citation or GTFO.

Nah I'm good Chiquito. You're welcome to take a hike though.

Ultima modifica da MistuhG; 8 giu 2023, ore 15:57

#84

Electric Cupcake 8 giu 2023, ore 15:52

Messaggio originale di Fajita Jim:
https://youtu.be/eFTLKWw542g
https://youtu.be/lCALGlGuVUA
https://youtu.be/qavSfl1jATU
https://youtu.be/XchwE9zVdnw

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1WaV2x8GXj0

And for the folks in Florida.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pyZD7eoHZT8

#85

Out Of Bubblegum 8 giu 2023, ore 15:54

Messaggio originale di MistuhG:
That's a cult, not science.

Yes correct. You really are part of a cult of anti-science. I think your real reason is that you hate the idea of being told what you can and can't do. You thought growing up would free you from all rules. So you "rebel".

#86

Titus 8 giu 2023, ore 16:10

Messaggio originale di MistuhG:
Seems strange for you to defend a system that is wrong again and again. Doesn't seem to be doing a terribly good job at weeding out the garbage and junk science. Truth is, there are plenty of scientists that have called out and exposed scams like climate change, covid vaccines, etc. But your so called 'peer review' only seems to apply when the peer agrees with a certain narrative. If it doesn't agree, then those with money at stake in the game find a reason to make that contrary evidence invalid.

I do think this is inherently a strawman argument, because I never talked about there existing a "system," or of "those with money at stake in the game", or something akin to a conspiracy theory. I only talked about scientific methods on a granular, per study scale.

Anyone with a PhD or even just knowledge on research topics can always point out biases of published research.

I have an issue with your last sentence, as someone cannot edit another person's research paper, so how would they make the contrary evidence invalid? It can only be invalid if it was published invalid in the first place. Perhaps if it can be found to be invalid, it is the "garbage and junk science" you talk about in your second sentence?

Although, it is okay for research to be later deemed incorrect due to invalid evidence or biases in the interpretation. All that means is that it should not continue to be parroted. You know, like the research that had been published in The Lancet that suggests MMR vaccines are linked to autism. If I were to see someone reference that research as a reason to not get the MMR vaccine, I would expliticly tell them how it was a flawed study and later rescinded.

#87