Sentences with phrase «of phlogiston»

CO2 science is a bit like explaining things in terms of phlogiston or humours, though with less pure invention.

it is our century's equivalent of phlogiston and the Marxist - fascists like Gore and the bankers have transformed it into a new Lysenkoism.

The philanthropic polymath's main contributions to chemistry are covered in intriguing detail, including his radical rebuttal of the phlogiston theory and his transformation of the language of chemistry.

Ptolemaic astronomy went on adding planetary epicycles to remove discrepancies; defenders of the phlogiston theory were driven to postulate negative chemical weights in order to maintain their paradigm.

Not exact matches

Adults argue with each other about the respective merits of relativity theory, evolutionary biology, and the phlogiston theory, although they possess only a very partial knowledge of each.

I swallowed a large dose of empty philosophy as a child and it has damaged my phlogiston.

Lavoisier thereby did away with the prevailing phlogiston theory and paved the way for the development of modern chemistry.

When 17th century chemists watched a piece of wood burst into flames, they believed they were watching the release of a mysterious substance they called phlogiston.

The theory explained why a heavy piece of wood was reduced to a light pile of ash: the substance had lost its phlogiston to the air.

There's no point keeping an open mind about phlogiston or vital force or the collision theory of planetary formation, either.

Knowing that there is no escape from THE FOUR LAWS WITHOUT WHICH NOTHING WHATSOEVER IN THE UNIVERSE THAT HAPPENS, HAPPENS — there simply is no change in temperature of anything without input of energy = work = quantity of heat, requiring accountancy in joule, and not that «phlogiston» of «feedback» without any energy dimension.

Of course there is negative heat — inverted caloric — just as phlogiston has negative weight.

Eventually this will change and «climate change» will join phlogiston, Lysenko's theories and the four humors of the body in the lexicon of «settled science» that turned out not to be true at all.

While phlogiston and Lysenkoism were early contenders they lack sharing many attributes with the current situation we skeptics face: scattered, unorganized, scarcely funded, diverse of thought, and oppressed by a dogmatic regime with near unlimited funds and the full weight and force of the state often projecting its own wrongs upon us.

But seriously, I look at your use of terms like «forcing», and «feedback», and «equilibrium climate sensitivity», and «CO2 control knob», and I feel sorta like a modern redox chemist watching a bunch of biologists trying to study the cell by measuring its «phlogiston» characteristics.

It is always possible to find specific issues in science where the majority of scientists have got it wrong, or had strong opinions, e.g. plate tectonics, continental drift, N - rays, the aether, phlogiston; that is no excuse for automatically elevating dissenting opinion to the level of well examined scientific evidence.

You could with equal justification ask me to explain where Ptolemy went wrong with his epicycle explanation of planetary motion, or Becher with his phlogiston theory of oxidation, or Newton, Maxwell, etc. who believed in an aether that carried light etc..

It belongs in the waste basket of history, right next to phlogiston, another failed theory of heat.

There is a spot for it in the waste basket of history, right next to phlogiston, another failed theory.

From a historical perspective, no system as complex as science was cracked by man in as little as 30 years, but it is not unusual that people try to declare that the debate is over (The phlogiston theory of combustion is settled science!)

Some of them took their belief in phlogiston to the grave decades later.

(Although he never abandoned phlogiston theory, which made him much less relevant from a theoretical perspective toward the end of his scientific career.)