Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
The problem is the longwave IR can't warm water. No water warming, no warming of the oceans, no warming of the oceans, no warming of the planet thanks to IR.
Why can't longwave add it's energy to liquid water when they collide? ... we can spitball with 1.2 / 15 µm = 80 milli-electron-volts per photon ... even at molar values we're barely above a joule ... how would we measure this? ... but more important, where would the energy go if not into the water? ...
How can the ground get hotter if co2 is the same temperature as the ground?that's "re-radiated" from CO2. And if the atmospheric CO2 level goes up, the ground will get even hotter, because more IR energy will get "re-radiated
It doesn't. The atmosphere is not even the same temperature as the ground, it's cooler. The only way it could be the same is if it didn't radiate any heat at all, it would reach a thermal equilibrium.How can the ground get hotter if co2 is the same temperature as the ground?
Last fall I insulated my attic to R-49. I noticed the difference immediately.Mind your wallet ... simple as that ... if you have a way to save money on energy bills ... do it ... excellent bet it's good for the environment ...
Exchange presents on Martin Luther King Jr Day instead ... 50% savings on the energy bill ... 50% less pollution ...
I think they measure the Co2 level several miles up don't they?but you think it causes an increase in air temperature on the surface right?
Exactly. Now how does the ground get warmer exactly?It doesn't. The atmosphere is not even the same temperature as the ground, it's cooler. The only way it could be the same is if it didn't radiate any heat at all, it would reach a thermal equilibrium.
But it doesn't happen, natural equilibrium states don't exist.
Does it matter? Will they absorb a different temperature?I think they measure the Co2 level several miles up don't they?
I believe that you and others are overthinking this thing. Using Occams Razor as a guide,Does it matter? Will they absorb a different temperature?
Still didn’t answer why you think it gets hotter?I believe that you and others are overthinking this thing. Using Occams Razor as a guide,
The sun's rays warm the earth.
The composition of the atmosphere either helps or hinders the re-radiation of heat back into space. Water vapor, methane, and Co2 hinder the return thus causing the greenhouse effect, and global warming.
Some the IR energy is absorbed by water vapor and other "greenhouse gases", and that raises the average temperature of the atmosphere and keeps us from freezing to death.
Cool. I live rent-free in Frank's little cult head. What a loser. He's even pout-stalking me now. I own that bitch, and rent him out for gangbangs.
And, Frank? Fuck off, you sad little troll.
And yes, I have told him before. 280 to 400 is, logarithmically, half a doubling. That eventually gives 1.5C warming, since climate sensitivity is about 3.0C per doubling. It's a trivial question, so he looks really stupid when he acts like it's some sort of gotcha.
Also, given that the isotope ratios prove the CO2 increase comes from burning fossil fuels, you have to be some special type of stupid to claim it doesn't. Frank and his fanbois here all are that type of stupid.
So, what are the images showing? That CO2 is absorbed during the growing season. But June isn't early enough. Not much has grown. In the northern hemisphere, the winter's accumulation of CO2 starts reversing in July, and reaches a minimum in September.
Cool. I live rent-free in Frank's little cult head. What a loser. He's even pout-stalking me now. I own that bitch, and rent him out for gangbangs.
And, Frank? Fuck off, you sad little troll.
And yes, I have told him before. 280 to 400 is, logarithmically, half a doubling. That eventually gives 1.5C warming, since climate sensitivity is about 3.0C per doubling. It's a trivial question, so he looks really stupid when he acts like it's some sort of gotcha.
Also, given that the isotope ratios prove the CO2 increase comes from burning fossil fuels, you have to be some special type of stupid to claim it doesn't. Frank and his fanbois here all are that type of stupid.
So, what are the images showing? That CO2 is absorbed during the growing season. But June isn't early enough. Not much has grown. In the northern hemisphere, the winter's accumulation of CO2 starts reversing in July, and reaches a minimum in September.
No, on the earth it would do that.So in the lab if we control for CO2 from 250 to 1,000PPM would the temperature increase 6C?
So your imaginary “3C increase for every CO2 doubling” only applies to planets other than Earth? Have you considered just not saying anything else?No, on the earth it would do that.
Was their any particular butthurt that drove you to resurrect this stupid thread?
No, on the earth it would do that.
Was their any particular butthurt that drove you to resurrect this stupid thread?
It only does that on Earth -- but not in a lab???
Funny stuff, I know what Frank was trying to say, but it read rather funny. Good ole Frank!!!1The lab's not on Earth? ... ha ha ... but even with a log base of 2, CO2 warming goes away after a degree or two ... unnoticible ...
The stupidity here is we use natural logs in natural sciences ... log base e ... Euler's number ≈ 2.71 ...
Worse ... the "3ºC increase for every CO2 doubling" doesn't work ... from the ice core data ... 180 ppm gave us 9ºC below 20th Century average ... doubling to 360 ppm should have given us 6ºC below 20th Century average ... we need to be at 1440 ppm to get to this average ... and 2880 ppm to be at today's temperatures ...
Math is hard ... especially for liberals ...
The things you say seem to have no relation at all to the conversation.So your imaginary “3C increase for every CO2 doubling” only applies to planets other than Earth? Have you considered just not saying anything else?
this is still the best video for experiment for failed experiments start at 1:30 of the video, hilarious...The lab's not on Earth? ... ha ha ... but even with a log base of 2, CO2 warming goes away after a degree or two ... unnoticible ...
The stupidity here is we use natural logs in natural sciences ... log base e ... Euler's number ≈ 2.71 ...
Worse ... the "3ºC increase for every CO2 doubling" doesn't work ... from the ice core data ... 180 ppm gave us 9ºC below 20th Century average ... doubling to 360 ppm should have given us 6ºC below 20th Century average ... we need to be at 1440 ppm to get to this average ... and 2880 ppm to be at today's temperatures ...
Math is hard ... especially for liberals ...
