After all, they were written down by men, and they are revised periodically.

Obtained from internet:
“Radioactive decay, also known as nuclear decay or radioactivity, is the process by which the nucleus of an unstable atom loses energy by emitting radiation, including alpha particles, beta particles, gamma rays and conversion electrons. A material that spontaneously emits such radiation is considered radioactive.”

Unstable atoms lose energy by emitting alpha particles, beta particles, gamma rays and electrons, since energy cannot be destroyed, the energy that is carried away by the speeding particles and rays, can interfere with the surrounding nonradioactive atoms, then those nonradioactive atoms have gained energy. Gained energy makes the atom or molecules move or vibrate faster; faster motion of molecules equals heat. If the gain of energy is sufficient the affected atoms may become radioactive, thereby spreading or perpetuating the radioactive process. (See breeder reactors)

If my explanation is not precise enough, could you please make it precise according to the laws of physics.

In your “back of the envelope” calculations; did you take into consideration the natural radioactivity, the radiation from the sun, the cosmic radiation, and the created radioactive elements that occur in all enhanced nuclear reactions?

My claim is very simple: If the Earth’s atmosphere becomes less dense due to this atomic or molecular escape method or some other known or unknown method, then various natural phenomenon will become more destructive.

If my hypothesis is correct, then no matter how much carbon is taken out of the atmosphere, it will make little no difference to the climate change.
We will see what happens eventually.

“It IS possible for molecules to escape the Earth’s gravitational field.”

I NEVER ONCE said it wasn’t

“Nuclear energy is kinetic energy, in other words, ALL nuclear particles and photons that are emitted by splitting atoms can create extra motion in atoms that the fast moving particles and photons interact with.”

Not terribly relevant, and not precisely correct- but has no bearing on your claims…

“Obviously you have not noticed that there have been more powerful hurricanes and more earthquakes lately. “

An increase in Hurricanes is not trivial to show, since our ability to detect and measure them has grown sharply since the use of weather satellites- an increase in more powerful hurricanes is certainly to be expected with warming temperatures.

And increase in earthquakes? Earthquakes of what magnitude? for instance, if you look at earthquake magnitudes greater than 2.5 Oklahoma has experience a sharp increase starting around 2009- in fact Oklahoma is more seismically active than california under that criteria- and it is no mystery why, they are a result of fracking and wastewater disposal…

Have you removed fracking associated earthquakes from your dataset?

Have you taken into account the changing sensitivities of our detection methods?

Does your dataset break the occurrence rate down by magnitude?

Do you even HAVE a data set?

NONE of this matters, Johannes, since we have shown conclusively that the cause and effect you suggest is just not possible. You ignore our careful calculations and keep coming here to regurgitate the same nonsense- presumably when you are on the manic phase of your disease.

Science is hard Johannes, but it is absolutely impossible when you presuppose the answer and ignore the facts presented that refute your claims.

And that “postulate” (or more accurately delusional musing rooted in ignorance and bizarre religious interpretations) is, and always has been embarrassing garbage.