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.
[
Actually....definitely debunked! The backradiation from CO2 to the Earth's surface is a scientific fact that even denialist scientists like Dr. Roy Spenser have to acknowledge.
And you poor anti-science retards have no evidence at all to support your lies and fraudulent claims.
Sorry thunder....roy was debunked post haste on that little experiment...the manufacturer of the infrared thermometer he was using contacted him and told him point blank that the thermometer was not measuring back radiation..like so many climate change believers, he is apparently easily fooled by instrumentation.
the thermometer was not measuring back radiation..
It was measuring temperature. How did it manage to do that?
To affirm Latour’s victory colleagues at Principia Scientific International (PSI) contacted the world’s leading manufacturer of hand held IR thermometers, Mikron Instrument Company Inc., for confirmation of Spencer’s misunderstandings that IRT’s prove CO2 and GHE warming. Sure enough Mikron affirmed that IRT’s are set “to evade atmospheric moisture over long path measurements.” This, they say, is necessary to “avoid interference from CO2 and H2O.” [1] Sadly for Roy, these thermometers therefore aren’t even measuring the gases he claims they are!
Thus, from the “horse’s mouth” the hand held thermometer gambit is well and truly busted. Professor Claes Johnson thereafter also persuaded Dr. Curry to abandon “back radiation.” But unlike Curry, Spencer did not renounce his “back radiation adds more heat” claims.
the instrument assuming an emissivity of 0.9 for everything it is pointed at.
And even with the wrong emissivity, it still manages to measure "colder photons", back-radiation.
[
Actually....definitely debunked! The backradiation from CO2 to the Earth's surface is a scientific fact that even denialist scientists like Dr. Roy Spenser have to acknowledge.
And you poor anti-science retards have no evidence at all to support your lies and fraudulent claims.
Sorry thunder....roy was debunked post haste on that little experiment...the manufacturer of the infrared thermometer he was using contacted him and told him point blank that the thermometer was not measuring back radiation..like so many climate change believers, he is apparently easily fooled by instrumentation.
the thermometer was not measuring back radiation..
It was measuring temperature. How did it manage to do that?
Been through it all with you before...but like all warmers and luke warmers, you so quickly forget anything that doesn't support your beliefs..
To affirm Latour’s victory colleagues at Principia Scientific International (PSI) contacted the world’s leading manufacturer of hand held IR thermometers, Mikron Instrument Company Inc., for confirmation of Spencer’s misunderstandings that IRT’s prove CO2 and GHE warming. Sure enough Mikron affirmed that IRT’s are set “to evade atmospheric moisture over long path measurements.” This, they say, is necessary to “avoid interference from CO2 and H2O.” [1] Sadly for Roy, these thermometers therefore aren’t even measuring the gases he claims they are!
Thus, from the “horse’s mouth” the hand held thermometer gambit is well and truly busted. Professor Claes Johnson thereafter also persuaded Dr. Curry to abandon “back radiation.” But unlike Curry, Spencer did not renounce his “back radiation adds more heat” claims.
Just one more instance of a warmer...or luke warmer being fooled by his instrumentation.
the instrument assuming an emissivity of 0.9 for everything it is pointed at.
And even with the wrong emissivity, it still manages to measure "colder photons", back-radiation.
Actually it is measuring warm air moving upwards...why would you assume that it is measuring "back" anything? Do you think an IR thermometer can only measure energy moving towards it?
Been through it all with you before...but like all warmers and luke warmers, you so quickly forget anything that doesn't support your beliefs..
I'm an anti-warmer. Just tired of idiocy on my side of the debate.
They don't show downward LWIR?Why would they...except in the rare case of temperature inversions where the ground is colder than the atmosphere...there is none. And it is interesting to note that you completely ignore the information from the instrument designer stating that the instrument avoids detection of wavelengths from CO2 and H2O.....according to climate science, only greenhouse gasses are sending radiation back to the surface...if the instrument doesn't detect radiation from them....which other radiation do you think it would be detecting?
Claes is funny. A funny idiot.
And yet, his arguments prevailed with Judith Curry...You can call him what you will, but he is a well published scientist who knows mathematics backwards and forwards...and historically, anyone who is in opposition to the "consensus" in a relatively new branch of science is far more likely to be correct than anyone who goes along with the consensus.
Actually it is measuring warm air moving upwards...
Excellent! How does it measure the air....from a distance?
dDo you think an IR thermometer can measure energy moving away from it?
Been through this with you as well...like rocks, the hairball, crick, and all other believers, you just can't seem to keep information that calls your belief into question in your mind..
If the object is cooler than the thermopile, then the thermopile starts losing heat.
Actually it is measuring warm air moving upwards...
Excellent! How does it measure the air....from a distance?
Been through this with you as well...like rocks, the hairball, crick, and all other believers, you just can't seem to keep information that calls your belief into question in your mind..
An IR thermometer works based on the rate and amount of temperature change of an internal thermopile....look at the front of an IR thermometer...see the lens?...it is focused on a thermopile. When you point it at some object, the lens focuses the object on the thermopile. If the object is warmer than the instrument, the thermopile starts to heat up. The thermopile emits an electrical signal based on the amount of, and rate of its temperature change...that signal is modeled and is converted into a temperature.
If the object is cooler than the thermopile, then the thermopile starts losing heat. Again, an electrical signal is emitted, based on the amount of, and rate of temperature change...in this case cooling. The emitted signal is modeled and is converted to a temperature.
This isn't rocket science...information on how IR thermometers, and IR cameras and all sorts of equipment that regularly fool climate crazies is available on the internet..and it is easy enough to email a manufacturer...an engineer will almost always email you back explaining whatever isn't being explained on the internet.
Why would people use instrumentation in scientific pursuits that when they don't fully understand what it is that the instrument is measuring...
dDo you think an IR thermometer can measure energy moving away from it?
Of course...as I have pointed out to you in the past...and provided documentation from manufacturers...the instrument works by focusing an object, via a lens on an internal thermopile. If the object is warmer then the thermopile heats up and the electrical signal based on the amount of heating, and the rate of heating is converted by a model into a temperature...
If the object is cooler, then the thermopile starts losing energy to the object...an electrical signal indicating the rate of cooling and the amount of cooling is then converted to a temperature.
If the thermopile didn't register heat loss, then it would only be able to measure objects that are hotter than the instrument...
So let me guess...you didn't think that an IR thermometer could measure energy moving away from it...because of your belief that everything is radiating energy to the instrument itself. You believe this even though no measurement of energy from a cool object has ever been made with an instrument that is warmer than the cooler object...You never even considered the actual operation of such an instrument.. you simply assume it works in some fashion based on your belief.
The concept of a thermopile losing heat to a cooler object in accordance with the second law of thermodynamics never occurred to you. That would be because you are a warmer.. you believe in the magic as fully as any other warmer.
Been through it all with you before...but like all warmers and luke warmers, you so quickly forget anything that doesn't support your beliefs..
I'm an anti-warmer. Just tired of idiocy on my side of the debate.
No...you are a warmer..you believe in the magic just as much as rocks, the hairball, and crick..you just don't believe the magic is as powerful as they do.
They don't show downward LWIR?Why would they...except in the rare case of temperature inversions where the ground is colder than the atmosphere...there is none. And it is interesting to note that you completely ignore the information from the instrument designer stating that the instrument avoids detection of wavelengths from CO2 and H2O.....according to climate science, only greenhouse gasses are sending radiation back to the surface...if the instrument doesn't detect radiation from them....which other radiation do you think it would be detecting?
Claes is funny. A funny idiot.
And yet, his arguments prevailed with Judith Curry...You can call him what you will, but he is a well published scientist who knows mathematics backwards and forwards...and historically, anyone who is in opposition to the "consensus" in a relatively new branch of science is far more likely to be correct than anyone who goes along with the consensus.
If the object is cooler than the thermopile, then the thermopile starts losing heat.
That's where your 'tard theory craters.
According to your 'tard theory, the thermopile loses the same amount of heat no matter which way you point it, so long it's pointed at something cooler.
Note that infrared flux which is focused by the lens on the surface of the sensing element is inversely proportional to the squared distance (L) from the object and direction proportional to the areas of the lens and object. For a multifaceted lens, the lens area a relates only to a single facet and not to the total lens area.
If the object is warmer than the sensor, the flux (phi), is positive. If the object is cooler, the flux becomes negative, meaning it changes its direction: the heat goes from the sensor to the object. This may happen when a person walks into a warm room from the cold outside. Surface of her clothing will be cooler than the sensor and thus the flux becomes negative. In the following discussion, we will consider that the object is warmer than the sensor and the flux is positive
That is, point it at a cool cloud or cooler sky, it loses the same amount of heat.
Yet these cameras clearly show the termperature difference between cold clouds and cold sky.
Hence, your 'tard theory is clearly nonsense.
You've never even attempted to fix that gaping hole in your theory, the way that reality says it's a big steaming pile. Each time we point it out, you piss yourself and run, leaving a trail of piddle behind you. And you're going to do it again now. Please proceed.
Seriously, you're an 'effin retard. You fail at instrumentation, physics, chemistry, statistics, logic ... you're the most well-rounded 'tard I've ever met. No matter what the topic is, you fail at it completely.
I blame the education system,
If the object is cooler, then the thermopile starts losing energy to the object...
The thermopile knows to emit toward a cooler object but not toward a warmer object? How's that work?
Sorry, your muddled thinking sounded like "measure photons traveling from the target in a direction other than toward the thermometer"
But of course reality occurred to me, that's why I mock your one-way, smart photon fantasy.
SSDD says no radiation is ever produced that goes from cool to warm but this cannot explain the difference between something 1C cooler or 100C cooler. It necessitates a smart emitter or receptor that controls radiation by an unknown mechanism which defies the entropy laws.
SSDD says no radiation is ever produced that goes from cool to warm but this cannot explain the difference between something 1C cooler or 100C cooler. It necessitates a smart emitter or receptor that controls radiation by an unknown mechanism which defies the entropy laws.
And yet another one who doesn't have the slightest idea of how or why the instruments work...applying your terribly flawed understanding of thermodynamics to the instruments and in doing so, fooling yourself completely with said instrumentation.
Here, AGAIN...from The Handbook of Modern Sensors...Physics, Design, and Applications:
If the object is warmer than the sensor, the flux (phi), is positive. If the object is cooler, the flux becomes negative, meaning it changes its direction: the heat goes from the sensor to the object. This may happen when a person walks into a warm room from the cold outside. Surface of her clothing will be cooler than the sensor and thus the flux becomes negative. In the following discussion, we will consider that the object is warmer than the sensor and the flux is positive
The instrument works precisely on the very principles of thermodynamics that I have been arguing against fantasy believers like you and the rest of the wacko cadre of warmers and luke warmers. The do not operate on principles even slightly resembling the terribly flawed understanding of thermodynamics to which you and the rest of the wackos have fallen victim to....they operate on the principle of energy moving from warm to coo ONLY... When the device is pointed at a cooler object, the thermopile starts cooling off because it is loosing heat to the cooler object...the rate and amount of cooling is converted to a numerical temperature...if the device is pointed at a warmer object...the thermopile starts warming...because the object is losing heat to the thermopile...the rate and amount of warming is converted to a numerical temperature.
actually, I continue to get a kick out of the wackiness you all respond with. SSDD has torn you all new ones continuously. And the funny thing that attracts me to this discussion. back radiation.Been through this with you as well...like rocks, the hairball, crick, and all other believers, you just can't seem to keep information that calls your belief into question in your mind..
And we've all gotten bored with making you cry and run, just to see you come back and tell the same debunked lies again. Is that your strategy, to wear everyone out through sheer repetition of your lies?
If the object is cooler than the thermopile, then the thermopile starts losing heat.
That's where your 'tard theory craters.
According to your 'tard theory, the thermopile loses the same amount of heat no matter which way you point it, so long it's pointed at something cooler.
That is, point it at a cool cloud or cooler sky, it loses the same amount of heat.
Yet these cameras clearly show the termperature difference between cold clouds and cold sky.
Hence, your 'tard theory is clearly nonsense.
You've never even attempted to fix that gaping hole in your theory, the way that reality says it's a big steaming pile. Each time we point it out, you piss yourself and run, leaving a trail of piddle behind you. And you're going to do it again now. Please proceed.
Seriously, you're an 'effin retard. You fail at instrumentation, physics, chemistry, statistics, logic ... you're the most well-rounded 'tard I've ever met. No matter what the topic is, you fail at it completely.
I blame the education system, which no doubt always told you how you were a special unique little snowflake, no matter how badly you screwed up. No one was ever willing to tell you the truth about what a total dumbshit you were.
If the object is cooler, then the thermopile starts losing energy to the object...
The thermopile knows to emit toward a cooler object but not toward a warmer object? How's that work?
Not necessary any more than a rock must know to fall. Perhaps you should refer to the Handbook of Modern Sensors..Physics, Designs, and Applications which I just provided for the hairball...seems that neither one of you have the slightest idea of how the instruments we are talking about actually work...You simply assume that they work on your flawed understanding of thermodynamic principles and never bothered to actually check.. Well guess what...you are wrong and have been all along. Here...from the Handbook of Modern Sensors...Physics, Designs, and Applications..
Note that infrared flux which is focused by the lens on the surface of the sensing element is inversely proportional to the squared distance (L) from the object and direction proportional to the areas of the lens and object. For a multifaceted lens, the lens area a relates only to a single facet and not to the total lens area.
If the object is warmer than the sensor, the flux (phi), is positive. If the object is cooler, the flux becomes negative, meaning it changes its direction: the heat goes from the sensor to the object. This may happen when a person walks into a warm room from the cold outside. Surface of her clothing will be cooler than the sensor and thus the flux becomes negative. In the following discussion, we will consider that the object is warmer than the sensor and the flux is positive
Sorry, your muddled thinking sounded like "measure photons traveling from the target in a direction other than toward the thermometer"
Sorry roadster...you have to join the hairball in the dunce corner...you have a terribly flawed understanding of thermodynamics...and oddly enough, the instruments at discussion seem to be working based on my understanding of thermodynamics....energy moves from warm to cool...not the other way around...point the lens at a cool object and the thermopile starts losing energy to that cooler object just as the 2nd law describes...the instrument then measures how much energy is being lost to the cooler object to determine the temperature....or are you not able to understand what the sentence: IF THE OBJECT IS COOLER, THE FLUX BECOMES NEGATIVE, MEANING THAT IT CHANGES ITS DIRECTION: THE HEAT GOES FROM THE SENSOR TO THE OBJECT.
It is a simple sentence...easy to understand and describes a device operating on the thermodynamic principles I have been describing all along...those being the direction of energy movement described in the second law of thermodynamics.
But of course reality occurred to me, that's why I mock your one-way, smart photon fantasy.
Apparently not...because the instruments don't work based on your understanding of thermondyacmis...they work based on my understanding...I stated clearly: The concept of a thermopile losing heat to a cooler object in accordance with the second law of thermodynamics never occurred to you...to which you suggested that such operation was not reality when in fact, it is reality and your understanding of thermodynamic exchange is not reality at all. You mock my understanding of thermodynamics
which turns out to be the basis upon which these instruments work...from your position of fantasy, you mock reality and perceive yourself as smart when in realty you are as stupid and uniformed as the hairball.
actually, I continue to get a kick out of the wackiness you all respond with. SSDD has torn you all new ones continuously. And the funny thing that attracts me to this discussion. back radiation.Been through this with you as well...like rocks, the hairball, crick, and all other believers, you just can't seem to keep information that calls your belief into question in your mind..
And we've all gotten bored with making you cry and run, just to see you come back and tell the same debunked lies again. Is that your strategy, to wear everyone out through sheer repetition of your lies?
If the object is cooler than the thermopile, then the thermopile starts losing heat.
That's where your 'tard theory craters.
According to your 'tard theory, the thermopile loses the same amount of heat no matter which way you point it, so long it's pointed at something cooler.
That is, point it at a cool cloud or cooler sky, it loses the same amount of heat.
Yet these cameras clearly show the termperature difference between cold clouds and cold sky.
Hence, your 'tard theory is clearly nonsense.
You've never even attempted to fix that gaping hole in your theory, the way that reality says it's a big steaming pile. Each time we point it out, you piss yourself and run, leaving a trail of piddle behind you. And you're going to do it again now. Please proceed.
Seriously, you're an 'effin retard. You fail at instrumentation, physics, chemistry, statistics, logic ... you're the most well-rounded 'tard I've ever met. No matter what the topic is, you fail at it completely.
I blame the education system, which no doubt always told you how you were a special unique little snowflake, no matter how badly you screwed up. No one was ever willing to tell you the truth about what a total dumbshit you were.
well of course the atmosphere radiates. who ever said it doesn't? The argument has always been the direction of the radiation. Do you think the temperature is always the same in an area? heat flows toward cold always. the radiation is also always that direction.actually, I continue to get a kick out of the wackiness you all respond with. SSDD has torn you all new ones continuously. And the funny thing that attracts me to this discussion. back radiation.Been through this with you as well...like rocks, the hairball, crick, and all other believers, you just can't seem to keep information that calls your belief into question in your mind..
And we've all gotten bored with making you cry and run, just to see you come back and tell the same debunked lies again. Is that your strategy, to wear everyone out through sheer repetition of your lies?
If the object is cooler than the thermopile, then the thermopile starts losing heat.
That's where your 'tard theory craters.
According to your 'tard theory, the thermopile loses the same amount of heat no matter which way you point it, so long it's pointed at something cooler.
That is, point it at a cool cloud or cooler sky, it loses the same amount of heat.
Yet these cameras clearly show the termperature difference between cold clouds and cold sky.
Hence, your 'tard theory is clearly nonsense.
You've never even attempted to fix that gaping hole in your theory, the way that reality says it's a big steaming pile. Each time we point it out, you piss yourself and run, leaving a trail of piddle behind you. And you're going to do it again now. Please proceed.
Seriously, you're an 'effin retard. You fail at instrumentation, physics, chemistry, statistics, logic ... you're the most well-rounded 'tard I've ever met. No matter what the topic is, you fail at it completely.
I blame the education system, which no doubt always told you how you were a special unique little snowflake, no matter how badly you screwed up. No one was ever willing to tell you the truth about what a total dumbshit you were.
The simple question you have to ask yourself is 'does the atmosphere radiate?'.
The obvious answer is yes.
The IR gun does not read minus 273C even at night. If you point the gun parellel to the surface it gives the ambient temperature, even at night. The radiation exists, it can be further described as back radiation because most of the energy stored in the atmosphere comes from the surface.
well of course the atmosphere radiates. who ever said it doesn't? The argument has always been the direction of the radiation. Do you think the temperature is always the same in an area? heat flows toward cold always. the radiation is also always that direction.actually, I continue to get a kick out of the wackiness you all respond with. SSDD has torn you all new ones continuously. And the funny thing that attracts me to this discussion. back radiation.Been through this with you as well...like rocks, the hairball, crick, and all other believers, you just can't seem to keep information that calls your belief into question in your mind..
And we've all gotten bored with making you cry and run, just to see you come back and tell the same debunked lies again. Is that your strategy, to wear everyone out through sheer repetition of your lies?
If the object is cooler than the thermopile, then the thermopile starts losing heat.
That's where your 'tard theory craters.
According to your 'tard theory, the thermopile loses the same amount of heat no matter which way you point it, so long it's pointed at something cooler.
That is, point it at a cool cloud or cooler sky, it loses the same amount of heat.
Yet these cameras clearly show the termperature difference between cold clouds and cold sky.
Hence, your 'tard theory is clearly nonsense.
You've never even attempted to fix that gaping hole in your theory, the way that reality says it's a big steaming pile. Each time we point it out, you piss yourself and run, leaving a trail of piddle behind you. And you're going to do it again now. Please proceed.
Seriously, you're an 'effin retard. You fail at instrumentation, physics, chemistry, statistics, logic ... you're the most well-rounded 'tard I've ever met. No matter what the topic is, you fail at it completely.
I blame the education system, which no doubt always told you how you were a special unique little snowflake, no matter how badly you screwed up. No one was ever willing to tell you the truth about what a total dumbshit you were.
The simple question you have to ask yourself is 'does the atmosphere radiate?'.
The obvious answer is yes.
The IR gun does not read minus 273C even at night. If you point the gun parellel to the surface it gives the ambient temperature, even at night. The radiation exists, it can be further described as back radiation because most of the energy stored in the atmosphere comes from the surface.
I believe the manufacture information SSDD posted.
well of course the atmosphere radiates. who ever said it doesn't? The argument has always been the direction of the radiation. Do you think the temperature is always the same in an area? heat flows toward cold always. the radiation is also always that direction.actually, I continue to get a kick out of the wackiness you all respond with. SSDD has torn you all new ones continuously. And the funny thing that attracts me to this discussion. back radiation.Been through this with you as well...like rocks, the hairball, crick, and all other believers, you just can't seem to keep information that calls your belief into question in your mind..
And we've all gotten bored with making you cry and run, just to see you come back and tell the same debunked lies again. Is that your strategy, to wear everyone out through sheer repetition of your lies?
If the object is cooler than the thermopile, then the thermopile starts losing heat.
That's where your 'tard theory craters.
According to your 'tard theory, the thermopile loses the same amount of heat no matter which way you point it, so long it's pointed at something cooler.
That is, point it at a cool cloud or cooler sky, it loses the same amount of heat.
Yet these cameras clearly show the termperature difference between cold clouds and cold sky.
Hence, your 'tard theory is clearly nonsense.
You've never even attempted to fix that gaping hole in your theory, the way that reality says it's a big steaming pile. Each time we point it out, you piss yourself and run, leaving a trail of piddle behind you. And you're going to do it again now. Please proceed.
Seriously, you're an 'effin retard. You fail at instrumentation, physics, chemistry, statistics, logic ... you're the most well-rounded 'tard I've ever met. No matter what the topic is, you fail at it completely.
I blame the education system, which no doubt always told you how you were a special unique little snowflake, no matter how badly you screwed up. No one was ever willing to tell you the truth about what a total dumbshit you were.
The simple question you have to ask yourself is 'does the atmosphere radiate?'.
The obvious answer is yes.
The IR gun does not read minus 273C even at night. If you point the gun parellel to the surface it gives the ambient temperature, even at night. The radiation exists, it can be further described as back radiation because most of the energy stored in the atmosphere comes from the surface.
I believe the manufacture information SSDD posted.
