how much warming from adding carbon dioxide to the atmosphere is what we

[gslack]

It's optics 101 that all materials can only reflect, absorb, or transmit EM radiation. The prortions of the three possibilities vary with wavelength.

If they absorb, the energy raises their temperature, causing them to become a radiation source.

Oh hush now socko, anyone who took "optics 101" would know that reflection and absorption are opposites... Please...

Are you actually saying, numbnuts, that materials don't transmit light? My windows refute that. I can see right through them. They don't absorb more than a little, but they do reflect more or less dependent on incident angle and wavelength.

Are you saying that my windows and my glasses and my telescopes and my binoculars and my magnifying lenses and my microscopes don't work????

No, What I said was right there we can read it.. You seem to be desperately trying to cover your screw up by trying to make a claim for me...

Nice try silly socko, but no what I said is right there, and moreover I supplied evidence to support my claim. You on the other hand have done nothing but alter your claims and try to make up mine for me..

Come now, we both know why you haven't supplied any links or evidence to back your claims. Because there is no such evidence and no reputable reference would support your garbage...

So please continue your foot-stomping and temper tantrum junior. It won't change the fact you showed how truly ignorant you are of this..

I got an idea.. Why not ACTUALLY READ SOMETHING YOU KEEP TRYING TO SHORTCUT THROUGH!! Again, you can't fake understanding socko..

 

[gslack]

That's down right sad.

All you've done is demonstrate you have some knowledge but don't fully understand what you're talking about.

You don't know the quantum mechanics of transmision. *You can't distinguish between macroscopic measures and microscopic effects. You don't grasp that absorption at one wavelength can be accompanied by either a change in the attomic/molecular state or by re-emission. If the energy is not re-emited the macroscopic measure of the effectnis callee absorption. If the energy is re-emitted it is called scattering, transmission, or reflection. If it passes through, it's transmission. *If it gets licked back, it's reflection. If the angle is all over the place, it's scattering.

You can post all the links you want but if you don't fully understandnthe material, you a) don't have all the links and b) all the material isn't on the internet for free. *It's still market economy.

Yes, yes socko and you haven't provided one bit of evidence and yet I supplied a good deal of it...

Frankly, you're just trifling because you got caught being wrong and can't handle it.. I'm sorry man, but that's life. Sometimes you're a successful internet fake scientist in a web forum, and sometimes your shown for being full of it... And trust me when I tell you, no matter what persona you take, if you are too lazy to actually read some of the things you're going to claim some brilliance at, you will get outed every time. You can fake intelligence and knowledge with clever google searches, but you can't fake understanding..

You can go forward believing what you want. Hope it works for you.

Not my job to prove it to you. You want proof, go pay for it. *Take some courses in material sciences, quantum mechanics, and field theory.

Or, just go on stroking your ego. *I did my job, for anyonr reading your bs that can figure it for themselves.

LOL, you didn't do anything but alter your arguments and try to BS your way out of looking a complete fool.*

Nah, I don't need courses, you on the other hand... Well, maybe internet scientist isn't your thing.

Your having*difficulty differentiating between individuals. Can't tell the difference between what one individual presents and what another presents.

No silly socko, the posts were both to you.. See your name up there in the quote brackets? Yes both quoted posts are yours. You are ifitzme...ROFL.. Of course its you socko. Every time we get a new "scientist" it's one of you isn't it. You're another iteration of the usual internet scientist we have had plaguing this board lately. Whatever your name is this time, it's the same MO.

 

[gslack]

Agreed.. Save one thing...

A photon, or our conception and understanding of the quanta (or discrete bundle) of EM radiation displays characteristics of both a wave and a particle. Meaning as longwave IR photons are coming up from the surface, the force of those photons would interfere with those of the down welling long wave IR photons coming down and the greater force of course would come from the warmer source, and the weaker or cooler forces would be overwhelmed by the warmer forces.*

Now this is where people like Roy Spencer go nuts and claim the energy has to go somewhere and go off on a long winded and thoroughly silly thought experiment on his blog. *

Sure it does, but we don't know where it goes or what happens to it, and we can't just assume it "must" create additional warming in the directions it's heading. but they do..

So what happens to energy when we use it? We know some is used to do the work, some is lost due things like friction, gravity, so on and so forth. ut when we say "used up" is it destroyed? Well no because energy cannot be created nor destroyed, so what happens to energy we used to do the work?

We don't know, they don't know, nobody knows. But I would rather not proclaim the sky is falling and frighten people needlessly or commit to hypotheticals and theories that are only considered because it seems to fit into the situation somewhat.. Nor would I take drastic measures that will lead to untold deaths or unnecessary poverty in places which cannot afford fashionable, yet hardly viable alternatives.

Don't worry.. Be Happy.. That 1st paragraph actually states a similiar idea to Total Net Energy flow. But instead of worrying about the collisions of a 12 gauge shot with a 410 load shot -- consider the effect if 90% of them miss in the air and land on their targets.*

Yes -- there is some cancellation due to Ians "phase" observation. I know this from my optical computing background. A diffraction pattern from laser light is formed by phase cancellation. But as private pilots say -- the sky is a big place and you're not likely to collide if you're 40 miles from an airport or VOR complex.

There is a winner of the your "forces" and a loser --- at the materials exchanging the fire. And that's what still validates the Thermo rules..*

Here's what that cancellation looks like with laser light after a lens works on the phases. That optical computing stuff is amazing. You are looking at the spatial frequencies of some crystal lattice illuminated by a flat field of laser light and then focused with a lens.. At the focal point you can measure all of the vital geometry of that crystal.. The spatial distances between molecules in any direction. Working in that field gave me an unfair advantage in thinking between frequency domains and time or space domains. And the BEAUTY of this simple method was amazing.. ((That''s all a FOUR BEER topic))

Not so much happens if you use INcoherent light (like this Surface IR radiation) because of the non-uniform phase front and frequencies.. Makes those cancellations rarer if you will...

That's pretty amazing seeing as "*the wavelength of visible light (about 4000 to 7000 ångström) is three orders of magnitude longer than the length of typical atomic bonds and atoms themselves (about 1 to 2 Å). Therefore, obtaining information about the spatial arrangement of atoms requires the use of radiation with shorter wavelengths, such as X-ray or neutron"

It must be some new, never before seen technique.

Got a link to the research paper that overthrows decades of fundamental science?

And it just gets better and better.. Proclaiming reflection is absorption wasn't enough you had to deny a genuine up and coming field... WOW...

Optical computing - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

That was the first one in a google search...

Oh and look what I found...

This Laser Trick's a Quantum Leap

This Laser Trick's a Quantum Leap
JoHn Hudson 10.04.05

Physicists in Australia have slowed a speeding laser pulse and captured it in a crystal, a feat that could be instrumental in creating quantum computers.
The scientists slowed the laser light pulse from 300,000 kilometers per second to just several hundred meters per second, allowing them to capture the pulse for about a second.
The accomplishment marks a new world record, but the scientists are more thrilled that they were able to store and recall light, an important step toward quantum computing.
"What we've done here is create a quantum memory," said Dr. Matthew Sellars of the Laser Physics Centre at the Australian National University in Canberra, Australia.

Sounds very similar to what falc was talking about doesn't it.. Notice the date? 05' .. Yeah what have they done since then???

Yes again you show your ignorance. You can't fake it moron..

 

[itfitzme]

Don't worry.. Be Happy.. That 1st paragraph actually states a similiar idea to Total Net Energy flow. But instead of worrying about the collisions of a 12 gauge shot with a 410 load shot -- consider the effect if 90% of them miss in the air and land on their targets.*

Yes -- there is some cancellation due to Ians "phase" observation. I know this from my optical computing background. A diffraction pattern from laser light is formed by phase cancellation. But as private pilots say -- the sky is a big place and you're not likely to collide if you're 40 miles from an airport or VOR complex.

There is a winner of the your "forces" and a loser --- at the materials exchanging the fire. And that's what still validates the Thermo rules..*

Here's what that cancellation looks like with laser light after a lens works on the phases. That optical computing stuff is amazing. You are looking at the spatial frequencies of some crystal lattice illuminated by a flat field of laser light and then focused with a lens.. At the focal point you can measure all of the vital geometry of that crystal.. The spatial distances between molecules in any direction. Working in that field gave me an unfair advantage in thinking between frequency domains and time or space domains. And the BEAUTY of this simple method was amazing.. ((That''s all a FOUR BEER topic))

Not so much happens if you use INcoherent light (like this Surface IR radiation) because of the non-uniform phase front and frequencies.. Makes those cancellations rarer if you will...

That's pretty amazing seeing as "*the wavelength of visible light (about 4000 to 7000 ångström) is three orders of magnitude longer than the length of typical atomic bonds and atoms themselves (about 1 to 2 Å). Therefore, obtaining information about the spatial arrangement of atoms requires the use of radiation with shorter wavelengths, such as X-ray or neutron"

It must be some new, never before seen technique.

Got a link to the research paper that overthrows decades of fundamental science?

And it just gets better and better.. Proclaiming reflection is absorption wasn't enough you had to deny a genuine up and coming field... WOW...

Optical computing - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

That was the first one in a google search...

Oh and look what I found...

This Laser Trick's a Quantum Leap

This Laser Trick's a Quantum Leap
JoHn Hudson * 10.04.05

Physicists in Australia have slowed a speeding laser pulse and captured it in a crystal, a feat that could be instrumental in creating quantum computers.
The scientists slowed the laser light pulse from 300,000 kilometers per second to just several hundred meters per second, allowing them to capture the pulse for about a second.
The accomplishment marks a new world record, but the scientists are more thrilled that they were able to store and recall light, an important step toward quantum computing.
"What we've done here is create a quantum memory," said Dr. Matthew Sellars of the Laser Physics Centre at the Australian National University in Canberra, Australia.

Sounds very similar to what falc was talking about doesn't it.. Notice the date? 05' .. Yeah what have they done since then???

Yes again you show your ignorance. You can't fake it moron..

Your all over the place.*You on meth?

 

[gslack]

Yes, yes socko and you haven't provided one bit of evidence and yet I supplied a good deal of it...

Frankly, you're just trifling because you got caught being wrong and can't handle it.. I'm sorry man, but that's life. Sometimes you're a successful internet fake scientist in a web forum, and sometimes your shown for being full of it... And trust me when I tell you, no matter what persona you take, if you are too lazy to actually read some of the things you're going to claim some brilliance at, you will get outed every time. You can fake intelligence and knowledge with clever google searches, but you can't fake understanding..

You can go forward believing what you want. Hope it works for you.

Not my job to prove it to you. You want proof, go pay for it. *Take some courses in material sciences, quantum mechanics, and field theory.

Or, just go on stroking your ego. *I did my job, for anyonr reading your bs that can figure it for themselves.

Believing what they want is a profound observation. That's what it boils down to. Believing what they want. The ultimate ego trip.

Let's just be thankful that we're not all like that or we'd still be living in caves.

Oh stop talking to yourself socko.. Or is it someone else this time? Whatever it's the same shtick anyway.. You or one of the other "you" make an ignorant, bold claim and then try to cover it up by double talk and misused vernacular and terms you grab off the net, or call yourself some sort of higher educated something or other and then start foot-stomping and grandstanding. Soon after that we get the other you jumping in and blatantly boot-licking the other...

I don't care if you're one person or a set of clones grown from some idiots nail clippings. The fact is the near identical manner and behavior and the constant claims and pretense of some higher knowledge that you obviously do not possess, is not only getting tiresome but completely lame now...

 

[gslack]

That's pretty amazing seeing as "*the wavelength of visible light (about 4000 to 7000 ångström) is three orders of magnitude longer than the length of typical atomic bonds and atoms themselves (about 1 to 2 Å). Therefore, obtaining information about the spatial arrangement of atoms requires the use of radiation with shorter wavelengths, such as X-ray or neutron"

It must be some new, never before seen technique.

Got a link to the research paper that overthrows decades of fundamental science?

And it just gets better and better.. Proclaiming reflection is absorption wasn't enough you had to deny a genuine up and coming field... WOW...

Optical computing - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

That was the first one in a google search...

Oh and look what I found...

This Laser Trick's a Quantum Leap

This Laser Trick's a Quantum Leap
JoHn Hudson * 10.04.05

Physicists in Australia have slowed a speeding laser pulse and captured it in a crystal, a feat that could be instrumental in creating quantum computers.
The scientists slowed the laser light pulse from 300,000 kilometers per second to just several hundred meters per second, allowing them to capture the pulse for about a second.
The accomplishment marks a new world record, but the scientists are more thrilled that they were able to store and recall light, an important step toward quantum computing.
"What we've done here is create a quantum memory," said Dr. Matthew Sellars of the Laser Physics Centre at the Australian National University in Canberra, Australia.

Sounds very similar to what falc was talking about doesn't it.. Notice the date? 05' .. Yeah what have they done since then???

Yes again you show your ignorance. You can't fake it moron..

Your all over the place.*You on meth?

Nice try socko... Another case of you making a claim and not backing it up.. Nice.. Now please take this failed "scientist" back with the others.

 

[Foxfyre]

At risk of derailing the food fight, I wonder if we might refocus on the OP for a bit. IanC has presented the questions that I think all honest scientists and we amateur science buffs have been asking throughout the whole debate and controversies of anthropogenic global warmng. And the one single question we should all be asking separate from ideology, political prejudices, and dogma is what is normal and natural and what is not.

Some of us have the capacity to observe the issue objectively. Some of us apparently do not.

This week I have been reading on how indigenous people in the arctic circle have been studying conditions there for a very long time and adapting their hunting and fishing according to changing conditions that have been an inevitable fact of life for them long before the industrial revolution. There are studies of changing conditions on the MacKenzie River that are of concern to some; routine to others. It is curious how Alaska has experienced warmer conditions over the last 30 years or so while parts of Canada have been significantly cooler.

These things and many others present the same old questions to the curious and yet unconvinced:

1. Do human generated greenhouse gasses introduced into the atmosphere have a significant affect on the climate?

2. If they do not, and global warming is occurring through uncontrollable forces, would not our efforts be better spent studying how to adapt productively to inevitable climate change?

3. If they do, are we certain whether that is a good or bad thing? Would a few degrees warming, even if it does result in some flooding of coastal areas, make it possible to better utilize large tracts of land that are currently mostly unusable? Many scientists agree that in the past, warmer has provided a better life for many species on Earth, including ours, than have periods of below normal cold.

The arctic ice coverage is retreating more slowly this year than it has for awhile. The 'warmers' say that isn't important because the ice 'isn't as thick as it is supposed to be.' But is that true? We have had capability to study the whole of actic ice behavior for such a short time. How do we know what is 'normal' and what is not?

All this is what I would like to discuss. I wonder if that is possible on a message board?

 

[SSDD]

And the one single question we should all be asking separate from ideology, political prejudices, and dogma is what is normal and natural and what is not.

Since there is nothing, and I mean NOTHING happening within the climate that is unprecedented, or outside the bounds, or even approaching the bounds of natural variability, I believe mother nature has answered the question in terms that all but the most stupid, or dishonest can understand.

 

[Foxfyre]

And the one single question we should all be asking separate from ideology, political prejudices, and dogma is what is normal and natural and what is not.

Since there is nothing, and I mean NOTHING happening within the climate that is unprecedented, or outside the bounds, or even approaching the bounds of natural variability, I believe mother nature has answered the question in terms that all but the most stupid, or dishonest can understand.

You are probably right, but in my opinion, we don't know for certain that nothing happening now is unprecedented any more than I believe scientists know for certain that significant AGW is happening. And that is why I have no problem with science and technology studying the phenomena of the present and past toward the end of better understanding what is actually happening.

But what I do have a problem with is allowing the agenda and/or the facts be set by those who have strong motives to mislead us about what they are certain about, and then take away our freedoms, options, choices, and opportunities in order to conform to an agenda that they set for self-serving purposes.

And I think we have established enough evidence of that kind of dishonesty to proceed with great caution.

 

[flacaltenn]

And it just gets better and better.. Proclaiming reflection is absorption wasn't enough you had to deny a genuine up and coming field... WOW...

Optical computing - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

That was the first one in a google search...

Oh and look what I found...

This Laser Trick's a Quantum Leap


Sounds very similar to what falc was talking about doesn't it.. Notice the date? 05' .. Yeah what have they done since then???

Yes again you show your ignorance. You can't fake it moron..

Your all over the place.*You on meth?

Nice try socko... Another case of you making a claim and not backing it up.. Nice.. Now please take this failed "scientist" back with the others.

Evidently ItFitzme has a problem with the diff between atoms and molecules.. And metrology in general...

Would ItFitzMe PLEASE read the quote in my footer?? Do you need an explanation?? Wonder why after 10 years of board pounding --- I chose THAT particular quote?? Ponder....

Just look up crystallography "optical transforms".. Maybe you'll find more pretty pictures to look at.. I'm not wasting any more time being a suspect and getting interrogated.. I've got my govt to that...

 

[itfitzme]

*And the one single question we should all be asking separate from ideology, political prejudices, and dogma is what is normal and natural and what is not.

Since there is nothing, and I mean NOTHING happening within the climate that is unprecedented, or outside the bounds, or even approaching the bounds of natural variability, I believe mother nature has answered the question in terms that all but the most stupid, or dishonest can understand.

...


And I think we have established enough evidence of that kind of dishonesty to proceed with great caution.

It's a global conspiracy. How deep does it go?

IPCC*IPCC - Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change

World Bank*Climate Change Home

WHO*WHO | Climate change

UN*http://www.un.org/wcm/content/site/climatechange/gateway/*

EEA Climate change ?

AU*Tackling the challenge of Climate Change | climatechange.gov.au

AU DAFF*Climate Change Home - Department of Agriculture, Fisheries and Forestry

NZ*New Zealand climate change information

Canada*Canada's Action on Climate Change - Climate Change

Kiribati*Climate Change | Republic of Kiribati

Nasa Climate Change: Vital Signs of the Planet

NOAA*Science & Services for Society | NOAA Climate.gov

EPA *Home | Climate Change | US EPA

USAID*USAID's Strategy | U.S. Agency for International Development

USDA*USDA | Office of the Chief Economist | Climate Change Program Office

USGS*USGS: Science Topics: climate change

NIH Climate Change: MedlinePlus

UNEP*UNEP - Climate Change - Home

NSF*NSF Climate Change Special Report

USFS*US Forest Service - Office of the Climate Change Advisor

CDC*CDC - Climate and Health Program - Homepage

API*Climate Change

Oregon*Oregon DEQ: Climate Change

Alaska*State of Alaska - Climate Change in Alaska

Calif -*OPR
Office of Planning and Research - Climate Change: Just the Facts

Vermont*Vermont Climate Change Initiative

Maryland*Maryland Department of Natural Resources - Climate Change

Wash State*Climate Change in Washington State | Washington State Department of Ecology | global warming, greenhouse gas emissions

Mass*Massachusetts Climate Change Adaptation Report

Iowa*Climate Change

NYC*PlaNYC 2030 - The Plan - Climate Change

Starbucks*Tackling Climate Change | Starbucks Coffee Company

Christian Aid UK*Our work on climate change - Christian Aid

ExxonMobile*Managing climate change risks | ExxonMobil

BP*Climate change

Holly cow! World organization, nations and national agencies, states, christian organization, private industry, even oil companies. Surely, this cannot be right.

 

[flacaltenn]

I don't see the words Anthropogenic Global Warming is most of those titles.. Did y'all abandon that hysteria??

"Climate Change" is something that happens all the freaking time --- like gravity.. How come the PR adjustment? Do you KNOW the diff between science and PR?

 

[Foxfyre]

Your all over the place.*You on meth?

Nice try socko... Another case of you making a claim and not backing it up.. Nice.. Now please take this failed "scientist" back with the others.

Evidently ItFitzme has a problem with the diff between atoms and molecules.. And metrology in general...

Would ItFitzMe PLEASE read the quote in my footer?? Do you need an explanation?? Wonder why after 10 years of board pounding --- I chose THAT particular quote?? Ponder....

Just look up crystallography "optical transforms".. Maybe you'll find more pretty pictures to look at.. I'm not wasting any more time being a suspect and getting interrogated.. I've got my govt to that...

He also seems to have a problem differentiating the choices people make for themselves and those who make policy that controls our freedoms, choices, options, and opportunities for the rest of us.

I wonder if he removed all those who have no power to make policy for the rest of us, and all those who receive personal benefits/wealth from policies/programs related to AGW, what that list would look like?

 

[itfitzme]

I don't see the words *Anthropogenic Global Warming is most of those titles.. *Did y'all abandon that hysteria??*

"Climate Change" is something that happens all the freaking time --- like gravity.. How come the PR adjustment? Do you KNOW the diff between science and PR?

Yeah, that's it. *They use "AWG", "global warming", and "climate change" to mean different things.

It's like "absorption/re-readiation" is different from "reflection".*

What they surely mean by "climate change" is the cyclical variations of warm and cool periods. It is part of the global conspiracy betweem China apparel manufacturers and Coppertone to sell parkas and sumscreen. *Yeah, that's it. *They don't even mean "global climate change". They mean the change in climate in bathrooms when the shower is on. *That's it..

You have real difficulty with the thought process of context, or something.

You could actually read the websites that the govt/agencies/companies maintain. Then you'de have your answer.

Or, you can just go with your ""Climate Change" is something that happens all the freaking time" and pretend that is what BP and Exxon are all about. *Yeah, that's it, BP and Exxon put up a websitw to discuss natural variability. *In fact, everyone is so concerned about it and the difficulty with doing nothing about it that they decided to focus attention on nothingness. *Yeah, that's it.

Probably just all ghost links created by Al Gore. *That's it!! Al Gore, Jimmy Carter, and Bill Clinton, in collusion with China and Coppertone, created a bunch of web pages masquerading as legit gov't/agency/business pages. *

 

[Foxfyre]

Hear that loud whistling sound? It is the point flying right over itfitzme's head.

 

[itfitzme]

*I'm not wasting any more time
*being a suspect and getting interrogated.. I've got my govt to that...

Really, you feel like your being "interrogated"? *What are you, like 14?

Really, you have problems with the CIA, FBI or local sherriff interigating you all the time?

Wow, must really suck to be constantly interrogated by the gov't. You should check for non-descript white vans, with "ACME" on the side, parked outsode your house. Also watch for black SUVs.

They are everywhere!!

 

[itfitzme]

And it just gets better and better.. Proclaiming reflection is absorption wasn't enough you had to deny a genuine up and coming field... WOW...

Optical computing - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

That was the first one in a google search...

Oh and look what I found...

This Laser Trick's a Quantum Leap



Sounds very similar to what falc was talking about doesn't it.. Notice the date? 05' .. Yeah what have they done since then???

Yes again you show your ignorance. You can't fake it moron..

Your all over the place.*You on meth?

Nice try socko... Another case of you making a claim and not backing it up.. Nice.. Now please take this failed "scientist" back with the others.

Yeah, cuz backing up optical computing with a link "proves" that photons bounce off of a CO2 molecule without interaction exactly like person bounces off a door.

Nothing like a link to "prove" that.

 

[itfitzme]

Evidently ItFitzme has a problem with the diff between atoms and molecules..*

*You are aware that molecules are made up of atom? *That the atoms which make upnthe molecules are combined as they share electrons on the upper valence band? *That the interaction between molecules is between the outer electons? *That the interaction between atoms, molecules, and light is between the photon and the electrons in the upper energy band?

You do understand this, right?

 

[gslack]

ifistssocks, you already killed the scientist nonsense. No one's buying anymore.

 

[itfitzme]

ifistssocks, you already killed the scientist nonsense. No one's buying anymore.

So that would be no you don't. Because it really doesn't take scientist to know it, just a grade school chem course