AGW: atmospheric physics

[numan]

'
Living in a Thin Film of Air

I think many people have trouble stretching their minds to comprehend things on a large scale. We human beings are physically very small, so small that we are like bacteria crawling across the face of the earth. The earth and the atmosphere seem inconceivably vast to most of us, and we think that little old us and our small actions cannot possibly change the face of nature. This is an illusion.

For one thing, There are more than six billion of us. How much is a billion? Well, a billion seconds add up to more than thirty-one years. Think of all your obvious and not so obvious consumptions of resources and the pollutions you are responsible for: think of that as one second; then repeat that over and over, non-stop, for more than thirty-one years. Then do the same thing more than six times. Then you may get some idea of what we are doing.

The atmosphere seems so vast to us. After all, we say, "The sky's the limit!" But, in reality, the atmosphere is very, very thin. In relation to the size of the earth, it is far thinner than the insubstantial membrane which you find inside the shell of an egg is to the size of the egg. Most of the earth's air lies below the heigth of five miles. Think of driving five miles in your car to a store. It is a very short distance. Anyone who has flown in an airplane has probably been impressed by seeing vast plumes of smoke rising from factories in the remotest areas, and has seen the smoke spread a smog over a large area. But this is only one installation, and only the most obvious. In reality, the equivalent has been spewing forth all over the globe, decade after decade. It is not hard to see how quickly we might fill this five-mile high thin film of air with our waste. And such is the case. It has been well measured and documented that the percentage of carbon dioxide in our atmosphere has risen dramatically over the past few decades.

It is really necessary that we stretch our minds and think, if we are to avoid the disasters which will soon fall upon us unless we start to take serious thought about the consequences of our actions.
.

 

[westwall]

'
Living in a Thin Film of Air

I think many people have trouble stretching their minds to comprehend things on a large scale. We human beings are physically very small, so small that we are like bacteria crawling across the face of the earth. The earth and the atmosphere seem inconceivably vast to most of us, and we think that little old us and our small actions cannot possibly change the face of nature. This is an illusion.

For one thing, There are more than six billion of us. How much is a billion? Well, a billion seconds add up to more than thirty-one years. Think of all your obvious and not so obvious consumptions of resources and the pollutions you are responsible for: think of that as one second; then repeat that over and over, non-stop, for more than thirty-one years. Then do the same thing more than six times. Then you may get some idea of what we are doing.

The atmosphere seems so vast to us. After all, we say, "The sky's the limit!" But, in reality, the atmosphere is very, very thin. In relation to the size of the earth, it is far thinner than the insubstantial membrane which you find inside the shell of an egg is to the size of the egg. Most of the earth's air lies below the heigth of five miles. Think of driving five miles in your car to a store. It is a very short distance. Anyone who has flown in an airplane has probably been impressed by seeing vast plumes of smoke rising from factories in the remotest areas, and has seen the smoke spread a smog over a large area. But this is only one installation, and only the most obvious. In reality, the equivalent has been spewing forth all over the globe, decade after decade. It is not hard to see how quickly we might fill this five-mile high thin film of air with our waste. And such is the case. It has been well measured and documented that the percentage of carbon dioxide in our atmosphere has risen dramatically over the past few decades.

It is really necessary that we stretch our minds and think, if we are to avoid the disasters which will soon fall upon us unless we start to take serious thought about the consequences of our actions.
.

Who cares. CO2 is the essential constituent of the atmosphere for life on this planet. Get the concentration down to 200ppm and nothing grows....which means that all sentient life would end.

There have been times in the past when the atmospheric CO2 levels were 20 times what they are today and the planet was a veritable paradise. I suggest you do a little more research before you throw the baby out with the bathwater.

 

[jon_berzerk]

'
Living in a Thin Film of Air

I think many people have trouble stretching their minds to comprehend things on a large scale. We human beings are physically very small, so small that we are like bacteria crawling across the face of the earth. The earth and the atmosphere seem inconceivably vast to most of us, and we think that little old us and our small actions cannot possibly change the face of nature. This is an illusion.

For one thing, There are more than six billion of us. How much is a billion? Well, a billion seconds add up to more than thirty-one years. Think of all your obvious and not so obvious consumptions of resources and the pollutions you are responsible for: think of that as one second; then repeat that over and over, non-stop, for more than thirty-one years. Then do the same thing more than six times. Then you may get some idea of what we are doing.

The atmosphere seems so vast to us. After all, we say, "The sky's the limit!" But, in reality, the atmosphere is very, very thin. In relation to the size of the earth, it is far thinner than the insubstantial membrane which you find inside the shell of an egg is to the size of the egg. Most of the earth's air lies below the heigth of five miles. Think of driving five miles in your car to a store. It is a very short distance. Anyone who has flown in an airplane has probably been impressed by seeing vast plumes of smoke rising from factories in the remotest areas, and has seen the smoke spread a smog over a large area. But this is only one installation, and only the most obvious. In reality, the equivalent has been spewing forth all over the globe, decade after decade. It is not hard to see how quickly we might fill this five-mile high thin film of air with our waste. And such is the case. It has been well measured and documented that the percentage of carbon dioxide in our atmosphere has risen dramatically over the past few decades.

It is really necessary that we stretch our minds and think, if we are to avoid the disasters which will soon fall upon us unless we start to take serious thought about the consequences of our actions.
.

Who cares. CO2 is the essential constituent of the atmosphere for life on this planet. Get the concentration down to 200ppm and nothing grows....which means that all sentient life would end.

There have been times in the past when the atmospheric CO2 levels were 20 times what they are today and the planet was a veritable paradise. I suggest you do a little more research before you throw the baby out with the bathwater.

as the planet goes though its cooling cycle

the C02 levels drop

several years after the fact


as for a warmer or colder earth

ii prefer a warmer one

if we could alter it

the uk is saying this is the longest winter yet

and has caused 5000 deaths

 

[SSDD]

'
It is really necessary that we stretch our minds and think, if we are to avoid the disasters which will soon fall upon us unless we start to take serious thought about the consequences of our actions.
.

Minds aren't what is being stretched in climate science. The truth is what is being stretched. My mind requires nothing more than repeatable, observed data to convince me that we are altering the global climate. After billions of dollars spent on the issue, you would think that there would actually be some. There isn't.

To date, there isn't even a mathematical model of the claimed greenhouse effect, much less any direct measurement of it. The entire climate crisis is the result of computer model output.

Stop stretching reality and try telling the truth...and consider the consequences of your own actions. Consider that the cost of buying into the hoax is paid by the people least able to afford it. Consider how many people have already died as the result of environmental policy...how many more are you willing to accept in the name of this hoax?

 

[SSDD]

as the planet goes though its cooling cycle

the C02 levels drop

several years after the fact

And as the planet goes through its warming cycle, CO2 levels rise...sometimes a thousand years after the fact. Rising CO2 levels are a product of warmer temperatures, not a cause. Stretch your mind enough to see reality here...every ice core ever done tells us that rising CO2 is a result, not a cause and yet, you guys still believe CO2 is some sort of control knob without the first bit of observed evidence to support the claim.

 

[bripat9643]

Ian C -

I have met and interviewed the man responsible for Finnish climate data and was extremely impressed by his integrity and openness. He has an impeccable CV and a background that is hard to fault.

The idea that people like him are faking data is a non-starter.

Appeal to authority.

You were "impressed?" Well, that should certainly be enough to convince even the most hardened skeptics.

It was enough to convince me that he knew more about science than you do.

I have not named him here and am not suggesting anyone else trust him or use him as a source - but one of the best ways to understand these topics is to go and talk to genuine experts, so when I found I had some questions about climate change I tracked down the most qualified physisicst I could find and spent an hour talking with him.

Rather than argung over and over and over again against information, you might benefit from exposure to some learning yourself.

What you do is track down another drone who advertises himself as an authority. Unlike journalists, I have a background in science. I don't need an "expert" to tell me which theories are credible and which aren't. I can make that determination on my own. I also have no problems detecting logical fallacies and bullshit. Almost all the propaganda I see coming from the AGW cult consists of logical fallacies.

 

[bripat9643]

as the planet goes though its cooling cycle

the C02 levels drop

several years after the fact

And as the planet goes through its warming cycle, CO2 levels rise...sometimes a thousand years after the fact. Rising CO2 levels are a product of warmer temperatures, not a cause. Stretch your mind enough to see reality here...every ice core ever done tells us that rising CO2 is a result, not a cause and yet, you guys still believe CO2 is some sort of control knob without the first bit of observed evidence to support the claim.

The fallacy that the ignorant masses are the most susceptible to is the "post hoc, ergo propter hoc" fallacy. If the witch doctor shakes his rattle and the patient gets better, every ignorant savage will attribute the cure to the efforts of the witch doctor. The bulk of people living in modern technical societies are little more sophisticated than the savages that inhabit the jungles of Africa and South America. They swallow all the Voo-doo dispensed by the AGW witch doctors.

 

[polarbear]

'
Living in a Thin Film of Air

I think many people have trouble stretching their minds to comprehend things on a large scale. We human beings are physically very small, so small that we are like bacteria crawling across the face of the earth. The earth and the atmosphere seem inconceivably vast to most of us, and we think that little old us and our small actions cannot possibly change the face of nature. This is an illusion.

For one thing, There are more than six billion of us. How much is a billion? Well, a billion seconds add up to more than thirty-one years. Think of all your obvious and not so obvious consumptions of resources and the pollutions you are responsible for: think of that as one second; then repeat that over and over, non-stop, for more than thirty-one years. Then do the same thing more than six times. Then you may get some idea of what we are doing.

The atmosphere seems so vast to us. After all, we say, "The sky's the limit!" But, in reality, the atmosphere is very, very thin. In relation to the size of the earth, it is far thinner than the insubstantial membrane which you find inside the shell of an egg is to the size of the egg. Most of the earth's air lies below the heigth of five miles. Think of driving five miles in your car to a store. It is a very short distance. Anyone who has flown in an airplane has probably been impressed by seeing vast plumes of smoke rising from factories in the remotest areas, and has seen the smoke spread a smog over a large area. But this is only one installation, and only the most obvious. In reality, the equivalent has been spewing forth all over the globe, decade after decade. It is not hard to see how quickly we might fill this five-mile high thin film of air with our waste. And such is the case. It has been well measured and documented that the percentage of carbon dioxide in our atmosphere has risen dramatically over the past few decades.

It is really necessary that we stretch our minds and think, if we are to avoid the disasters which will soon fall upon us unless we start to take serious thought about the consequences of our actions.
.

You have a bit of a problem to comprehend things on a large scale as well as comprehending the substance.
vast plumes of smoke rising from factories...
For your information you can`t see CO2 gas these "vast plumes of smoke" you did see that`s water vapor condensate..
The "plumes of smoke" coming out of my car`s exhaust system or any chimney where they are burning fossil fuel are over 50% water vapor condensate.
CO2 combined with water vapor is plant food

These "vast plumes" you are talking about are not anywhere near the size of the average overcast on any given day...

the percentage of carbon dioxide in our atmosphere has risen dramatically over the past few decades.

CO2 is at 0.038 %


the atmosphere is very, very thin. it is far thinner than the insubstantial membrane which you find inside the shell of an egg
It is not hard to see how quickly we might fill this five-mile high thin film of air with our waste.

To "fill" this "five-mile thin film" with CO2 we would need 2631 times 6 billion people not just the 6 billion we have, doing what we are doing.

Think of driving five miles in your car to a store. It is a very short distance.
Did You ever walk 5 miles ?
Let`s see how "short" of a distance you think it is if I were to dangle you off the open hatch in a Herc C-130 at only half that height...and your shirt-tail which I grabbed starts tearing.

Your "mind stretching" maybe works with little kids that don`t know any better. First comparing the atmosphere layer thickness to the earth diameter...then equating it to a fragile egg membrane which 6 billion people are about to burst with CO2.

We know from neutron stars that our sun`s massive sphere would in reality have a diameter of only 3.6 miles instead of 865 000 miles if the sun`s matter would occupy all the voids between particle matter as we understand it.

According to that you are in reality no more than just 99.999....(+11 more decimal places of 9`s)75 % empty space...and so was your post.

disasters which will soon fall upon us
Mostly verbal wall paper in a Halloween house of horrors designed to scare little kids with childish methods.

 

[polarbear]

'
It is really necessary that we stretch our minds and think, if we are to avoid the disasters which will soon fall upon us unless we start to take serious thought about the consequences of our actions.
.

Minds aren't what is being stretched in climate science. The truth is what is being stretched. My mind requires nothing more than repeatable, observed data to convince me that we are altering the global climate. After billions of dollars spent on the issue, you would think that there would actually be some. There isn't.

To date, there isn't even a mathematical model of the claimed greenhouse effect, much less any direct measurement of it. The entire climate crisis is the result of computer model output.

Stop stretching reality and try telling the truth...and consider the consequences of your own actions. Consider that the cost of buying into the hoax is paid by the people least able to afford it. Consider how many people have already died as the result of environmental policy...how many more are you willing to accept in the name of this hoax?

You can`t expect simple minded linear liberal minds to grasp the concepts of the non-linear real world.
Besides the earth`s atmosphere is 300 miles thick and 80% of the air is inside a 10 mile, not inside a 5 mile radius as he got from some wika worshiping bible.
The volume grows with the third power of the radius...
so that "egg membrane" which he compared with our atmosphere is in fact 1 quarter of the planet sphere volume or almost 200 times the volume of our oceans....

 

[SSDD]

You can`t expect simple minded linear liberal minds to grasp the concepts of the non-linear real world.
Besides the earth`s atmosphere is 300 miles thick and 80% of the air is inside a 10 mile, not inside a 5 mile radius as he got from some wika worshiping bible.
The volume grows with the third power of the radius...
so that "egg membrane" which he compared with our atmosphere is in fact 1 quarter of the planet sphere volume or almost 200 times the volume of our oceans....

Wonder if he can "stretch" his mind far enough to understand that he is just another believer who has no grasp whatsoever of the science?

 

[whitehall]

Notice the qualifying word, "may". Global warming is a theory but it is more than that to the true believers. They won't even argue about it. It's a religion and you have to have faith. They lash out with words like "unbeliever" and "heretic" and "denier" when they are faced with logic. It is freaking cold, record cold, and the warmers say to have faith in spite of what we see and feel. The gods (scientists) have determined that cold is warm and you better suffer in silence while the gods enjoy the new found wealth.

 

[SSDD]

Notice the qualifying word, "may". Global warming is a theory but it is more than that to the true believers. They won't even argue about it. It's a religion and you have to have faith. They lash out with words like "unbeliever" and "heretic" and "denier" when they are faced with logic. It is freaking cold, record cold, and the warmers say to have faith in spite of what we see and feel. The gods (scientists) have determined that cold is warm and you better suffer in silence while the gods enjoy the new found wealth.

It isn't even a theory. In fact, it hardly rises to the status of hypothesis.

 

[mamooth]

Denialism is now restricted to a small right-wing fringe, and that only in areas dominated by a corporate conservative English-speaking mass media. Right-wing extremism is the actual cult, while denialism is just one of the many beliefs the cult requires from the cultists.

Such cult beliefs can flip very quickly. For example, the cult leaders recently told the cultists that the previously good drone strikes were now totally bad, thus almost all of the cultists instantly flipped positions on the topic. And most of them will now swear, in proper "We've always been at war with Eastasia" fashion, that they have always believed drones were bad.

In direct contrast, mainstream AGW science is global, and accepted across the entire political spectrum.

The denialists will now proceed to bleat in unison about how the 99% of the planet outside of their herd just doesn't know the RealTruth. That's another sign of cult behavior, the certainty that your little group is endowed with superior knowledge that the rest of humanity lacks. And their near-unanimous demands that those with opposing scientific beliefs be jailed (much like the Soviet Lysenkoists did to mainstream scientists of their day) is a huge red flag that further identifies them as political cultists.

 

[SSDD]

The denialists will now proceed to bleat in unison about how the 99% of the planet outside of their herd just doesn't know the RealTruth. That's another sign of cult behavior, the certainty that your little group is endowed with superior knowledge that the rest of humanity lacks. And their near-unanimous demands that those with opposing scientific beliefs be jailed (much like the Soviet Lysenkoists did to mainstream scientists of their day) is a huge red flag that further identifies them as political cultists.

So lets see some actual observed evidence of the greenhouse effect. Show us some actual measurements of it. It claims that more than twice as much energy is being absorbed by the surface of the earth from the atmosphere than is coming in from the sun. We can measure the energy coming in from the sun at ambient temperature...why then, can't we measure twice as much that is supposed to be coming from the atmosphere at ambient temperature?

 

[numan]

So lets see some actual observed evidence of the greenhouse effect. Show us some actual measurements of it. It claims that more than twice as much energy is being absorbed by the surface of the earth from the atmosphere than is coming in from the sun. We can measure the energy coming in from the sun at ambient temperature...why then, can't we measure twice as much that is supposed to be coming from the atmosphere at ambient temperature?

No one who is not insane has ever made such a claim. It doesn't even make any sense.

I don't know where you are getting such clap-trap, but it is from somewhere out in the ozone. · ·
.

 

[IlarMeilyr]

So lets see some actual observed evidence of the greenhouse effect. Show us some actual measurements of it. It claims that more than twice as much energy is being absorbed by the surface of the earth from the atmosphere than is coming in from the sun. We can measure the energy coming in from the sun at ambient temperature...why then, can't we measure twice as much that is supposed to be coming from the atmosphere at ambient temperature?

No one who is not insane has ever made such a claim. It doesn't even make any sense.

I don't know where you are getting such clap-trap, but it is from somewhere out in the ozone. · ·
.

You haven't seen the claim. Maybe.

But that does not mean that lots of shithead AGW Faithers have not MADE the claim, you dope.

,

 

[numan]

'
About 5.5 parts per million are added to the Earth's atmosphere every year because of human activity. In the 19th century, the total carbon dioxide concentration in the atmosphere was about 280 parts per million. Today the figure is 400 ppm.

Of course, the amount added in the 19th century and early part of the 20th century was much less than it is today, and not all of it remains in the atmosphere. A considerable part is, every year, dissolved into the oceans, taken up by the weathering of stone, or absorbed by the metabolism of plants. These are the figures which careful scientific researchers have determined.

Due to a lack of knowledge of the subject, and careless thinking, some people apparently think that the addition of 120 parts per million to the atmosphere is not "significant." However, I assure you that they are wrong.

Many decades ago (indeed, even in the 19th century), long before this subject became a bone of bogus political contention, careful researchers had calculated that if the atmosphere did not contain any carbon dioxide, and there were no greenhouse effect, then the average temperature of the Earth would be at about the freezing level, and the Earth's oceans would be one gigantic block of ice frozen all the way through.

So, yes, the addition of 120 parts per million to the atmosphere may seem, to the ignorant, a very small amount, but, in fact, it is a very significant change.
.

 

[SSDD]

No one who is not insane has ever made such a claim. It doesn't even make any sense.

Of course t doesn't make any sense....and of course only someone who is insane would make such a claim...and yet, it is the basis for the AGW hoax.

I don't know where you are getting such clap-trap, but it is from somewhere out in the ozone. · ·
.

Not the ozone...the crowned prince of AGW. Kevin Trenberth himself. His model is the basis for the AGW hoax and the resulting model of a flat earth, that doesn't rotate, and is bathed in a weak twilight 24 hours a day is the earth that all climate models today portray.

Look at the energy budget below, upon which the AGW hoax is based. See the yellow bar reaching the surface? That 161 represents the amount of energy from the sun being absorbed by the surface in watts per square meter.

Now look at the first of the tan colums. It represents radiation from the surface of the earth in watts per square meter. Note that it says that 396 watts per square meter of energy is being radiated from the surface of the earth plus 80 as evapotranspiration and 17 as thermals making a total outgoing radiation from the surface of the earth of 493 watts per square meter. But wait, you might ask. How can the surface of the earth be radiating 493 watts per square meter when it is only absorbing 161 watts per square meter from its only energy source....the sun? Doesn't that leave a deficit of 332 watts per square meter?

Good question. Note the second tan column at the far right clearly labeled at the bottom "absorbed by surface". It says that that 333 watts per square meter are radiating back to the surface of the earth from so called greenhouse gasses. Imagine, more than twice as much energy being absorbed by the surface of the earth in the form of backradiation from greenhouse gasses as is coming in from the only energy source available....that big glowing yellow ball in the sky.

Of course it is insane to make such claims....and only the most pathetic sort of idiot would believe a claim based on such a moronic energy budget...but here we are. You believe right along with a whole bunch of equally pathetic srt of idiots. The only pertinent question is why do you believe?

 

[SSDD]

About 5.5 parts per million are added to the Earth's atmosphere every year because of human activity. In the 19th century, the total carbon dioxide concentration in the atmosphere was about 280 parts per million. Today the figure is 400 ppm.

So what. In comparison to most of earth's history, the atmosphere is postively starved for CO2. Atmospheric CO2 has been as high as 5000 parts per million with no runaway global warming. It was nearly 1000 parts per million when the earth began to enter the ice age that it is still climbing out of. What exactly frightens you about 400 parts per million when we know that it has been well over 2000 parts per million for most of earth's history with no runaway global warming.

Due to a lack of knowledge of the subject, and careless thinking, some people apparently think that the addition of 120 parts per million to the atmosphere is not "significant." However, I assure you that they are wrong.

It isn't signifigant. In spite of your hysterical claims, CO2 remains a trace gas in the atmosphere. When it was 5000 parts per million, it was still a trace gas in the atmosphere and then, as now completely unable to cause global warming.

Many decades ago (indeed, even in the 19th century), long before this subject became a bone of bogus political contention, careful researchers had calculated that if the atmosphere did not contain any carbon dioxide, and there were no greenhouse effect, then the average temperature of the Earth would be at about the freezing level, and the Earth's oceans would be one gigantic block of ice frozen all the way through.

There is no greenouse effect. There is an atmospheric thermal effect that is much greater than the claimed greenhouse effect, but the atmospheric thermal effect isn't dependent upon the composition of the atmosphere beyond the atomic weights of the gasses found in the atmosphere. In short, it isn't profitable so it is ignored in spite of the fact that if that atmospheric thermal effect is applied to any planet in the solar system with an atmosphere it produces an accurate temperature of that planet while if the physics of the greenhouse effect are applied to any planet within the solar system with an atmosphere it doesn't even come close.

So, yes, the addition of 120 parts per million to the atmosphere may seem, to the ignorant, a very small amount, but, in fact, it is a very significant change.
.

120 parts per million only seems significant to the ignorant...It seems signifigant to those who don't grasp the science and can be easily tricked. It only seems signifigant to those who claim to be able to see the emperor's clothes.

 

[numan]

'
It would be nice, SSDD, if you could demonstrate that you know what the Greenhouse Effect is.

---As Rolling Thunder did with his link to Physics of the Greenhouse Effect -- Part I
.