In summary...

[SSDD]

There are dozens of types of instruments that measure IR, using dozens of methods. Some use cooling to remove contamination from other heat sources, some don't.

It is ridiculous to claim that IR radiation simply disappears if it would land on something warmer than the emitter.

No one is claiming that it simply disappears Ian..that is you fabricating a weak argument to rail against...it is a logical fallacy and you know it...but you do it anyway...why?....What is being said is that it simply doesn't go towards warmer regions at all...and those instruments you describe that aren't being cooled aren't measuring anything other than the temperature change of an internal thermocouple....again...it is called being fooled by one's instrumentation.

 

[SSDD]

There are dozens of types of instruments that measure IR, using dozens of methods. Some use cooling to remove contamination from other heat sources, some don't.

It is ridiculous to claim that IR radiation simply disappears if it would land on something warmer than the emitter.

so the answer is yes. thanks.

No, the answer is sometimes. Cooling is sometimes used to get rid of contamination from other heat sources, not to magically turn on radiation that is already there, cooling or no cooling.

The only ones that measure specific radiation bands are cooled Ian...you should know this...but perhaps you don't...all the others are simply measuring temperature changes of an internal thermocouple...there is no back radiation and it has never been measured at ambient temperature.

 

[mamooth]

E]
The only ones that measure specific radiation bands are cooled Ian...you should know this...but perhaps you don't...all the others are simply measuring temperature changes of an internal thermocouple...there is no back radiation and it has never been measured at ambient temperature.

That's totally wrong. Anyone can buy consumer-grade FLIR cameras, uncooled, that show clear images. They're thousand-dollar range items, but they're available. Clouds, open sky, and tree branches will all be easily distinguishable.

That is, capitalism and the free market have proven you wrong. Those uncooled cameras clearly measure a wide range of IR radiaton in a very detailed fashion.

 

[jc456]

E]
The only ones that measure specific radiation bands are cooled Ian...you should know this...but perhaps you don't...all the others are simply measuring temperature changes of an internal thermocouple...there is no back radiation and it has never been measured at ambient temperature.

That's totally wrong. Anyone can buy consumer-grade FLIR cameras, uncooled, that show clear images. They're thousand-dollar range items, but they're available. Clouds, open sky, and tree branches will all be easily distinguishable.

That is, capitalism and the free market have proven you wrong. Those uncooled cameras clearly measure a wide range of IR radiaton in a very detailed fashion.

you have photos of back radiation?

 

[SSDD]

E]
The only ones that measure specific radiation bands are cooled Ian...you should know this...but perhaps you don't...all the others are simply measuring temperature changes of an internal thermocouple...there is no back radiation and it has never been measured at ambient temperature.

That's totally wrong. Anyone can buy consumer-grade FLIR cameras, uncooled, that show clear images. They're thousand-dollar range items, but they're available. Clouds, open sky, and tree branches will all be easily distinguishable.

That is, capitalism and the free market have proven you wrong. Those uncooled cameras clearly measure a wide range of IR radiaton in a very detailed fashion.

Poor hairball...FLIR cameras are cooled as well...guess you never held one in your hand...and those pieces of crap that call themselves FLIR that aren't cooled, are once again, just measuring the temperature changes within a sensor that is analogous to a thermopile. Not surprised that someone like you would be fooled by instrumentation...and again, I pointed out that instruments that measure specific frequencies must be cooled...those that aren't have no idea what they are measuring...it has been shown that they will readily measure the changing temperature of globules of rising warm air...and infrared thermometers which roy spencer loves to point into the sky and claim back radiation are specifically engineered (according to the manufacturers) to not be influenced by frequencies radiated by greenhouse gasses...again...experts being fooled by instrumentation.

 

[SSDD]

E]
The only ones that measure specific radiation bands are cooled Ian...you should know this...but perhaps you don't...all the others are simply measuring temperature changes of an internal thermocouple...there is no back radiation and it has never been measured at ambient temperature.

That's totally wrong. Anyone can buy consumer-grade FLIR cameras, uncooled, that show clear images. They're thousand-dollar range items, but they're available. Clouds, open sky, and tree branches will all be easily distinguishable.

That is, capitalism and the free market have proven you wrong. Those uncooled cameras clearly measure a wide range of IR radiaton in a very detailed fashion.

you have photos of back radiation?

Just another warming wacko who is completely fooled by instrumentation...

You expect idiots like crick and the hairball and rocks to be fooled, but I am a bit surprised that someone like Ian has been so easily fooled...but then, he is just looking for something to validate his faith...and anything will do I guess.

 

[IanC]

instruments are designed to be sensitive for the thing they are measuring, using known physical characteristics of the materials used. they are also typically powered by outside sources to enhance the signal.

the radiation coming downwards from the atmosphere is present at all times, and can be measured both qualitatively and quantitatively.

 

[SSDD]

instruments are designed to be sensitive for the thing they are measuring, using known physical characteristics of the materials used. they are also typically powered by outside sources to enhance the signal.

the radiation coming downwards from the atmosphere is present at all times, and can be measured both qualitatively and quantitatively.

Sorry Ian...but radiation can only be measured coming down from the atmosphere by instruments cooled to temperatures lower than that of the atmosphere...or in the rare event of a temperature inversion...like it or not...that is how it is and if you believe otherwise, then you have been fooled.

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

instruments are designed to be sensitive for the thing they are measuring, using known physical characteristics of the materials used. they are also typically powered by outside sources to enhance the signal.

the radiation coming downwards from the atmosphere is present at all times, and can be measured both qualitatively and quantitatively.

Sorry Ian...but radiation can only be measured coming down from the atmosphere by instruments cooled to temperatures lower than that of the atmosphere...or in the rare event of a temperature inversion...like it or not...that is how it is and if you believe otherwise, then you have been fooled.

but radiation can only be measured coming down from the atmosphere by instruments cooled to temperatures lower than that of the atmosphere

Those smart photons, only traveling upward, until the instrument is cooled enough that it is safe for them to travel downward.

They're sneaky.

I have a question for you, at the moment that the instrument is cooled below the magic temperature, why isn't it melted when every single molecule in the sky decides to emit at it at the exact same instant?

Shouldn't it instantly get hit with enough energy to cause fusion?
Or at least destroy it like the Death Star just opened fire?

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

There are dozens of types of instruments that measure IR, using dozens of methods. Some use cooling to remove contamination from other heat sources, some don't.

It is ridiculous to claim that IR radiation simply disappears if it would land on something warmer than the emitter.

No one is claiming that it simply disappears Ian..that is you fabricating a weak argument to rail against...it is a logical fallacy and you know it...but you do it anyway...why?....What is being said is that it simply doesn't go towards warmer regions at all...and those instruments you describe that aren't being cooled aren't measuring anything other than the temperature change of an internal thermocouple....again...it is called being fooled by one's instrumentation.

No one is claiming that it simply disappears Ian..that is you fabricating a weak argument to rail against...it is a logical fallacy and you know it...but you do it anyway...why?....What is being said is that it simply doesn't go towards warmer regions at all...

Interesting!!!

So when they cool a receiver to measure cosmic microwave background radiation (CMBR), how does the radiation know that the receiver is safe to move towards, when it's under all this hotter atmosphere?

Do smart photons have some sort of x-ray thermometer? Can they measure the temperature of everything in the universe AND stuff on planet surfaces AND stuff at the bottom of the ocean?

Maybe the cores of stars and planets?

Is there anything these photons don't know?

 

[SSDD]

Those smart photons, only traveling upward, until the instrument is cooled enough that it is safe for them to travel downward.

It is what it is....you apparently believe that energy must be intelligent in order to obey the laws of thermodynamics....I think that the laws of physics tell us how energy behaves... Let me know when you get an actual measurement of back radiation at ambient temperature......without being fooled by the instrumentation.

I have a question for you, at the moment that the instrument is cooled below the magic temperature, why isn't it melted when every single molecule in the sky decides to emit at it at the exact same instant?

Because as we know, poor child, that only 1 in a billion molecules in the atmosphere actually emits any radiation at all....the overwhelmingly vast majority of energy movement in the atmosphere is moving by convection..

 

[Crick]

When obeying what you believe to be the laws of thermodynamics requires that they make observations that violate special relativity, that they make decisions based on those observations including predictions of future behavior and then that they control themselves with exquisitely fine detail - yes, YOUR fantasy requires very capable photons.

 

[Old Rocks]

poison: a substance with an inherent property that tends to destroy life or impair health.
www.dictionary.com

Carbon dioxide (CO2) is a toxic gas at high concentration, as well as an asphyxiant gas (due to reduction in oxygen). Irritation of the eyes, nose and throat occurs only at high concentrations. The concentration thresholds for health effects are outlined in the table.
Exposure limits
(% in air) - - - - - -Health Effects
2-3 - - - - - Unnoticed at rest, but on exertion there may be marked shortness of breath
3 - - - - - Breathing becomes noticeably deeper and more frequent at rest
3-5 - - - - - Breathing rhythm accelerates. Repeated exposure provokes headaches
5 - - - - - Breathing becomes extremely laboured, headaches, sweating and bounding pulse
7.5 - - - - - Rapid breathing, increased heart rate, headaches, sweating, dizziness, shortness of breath, muscular weakness, loss of mental abilities, drowsiness, and ringing in the ears
8-15 - - - - Headache, vertigo, vomiting, loss of consciousness and possibly death if the patient is not immediately given oxygen
10 - - - - - Respiratory distress develops rapidly with loss of consciousness in 10-15 minutes
15 - - - - - Lethal concentration, exposure to levels above this are intolerable
25+ - - - - - Convulsions occur and rapid loss of consciousness ensues after a few breaths. Death will occur if level is maintained.

Carbon Dioxide (CO2)

Okay... time for your math lesson. Let's take the lowest figure in your scale for CO2 to have ANY sort of physical impact on humans... 2%. This translates to 20,000 ppm. At 400 ppm, I think we're safe. Even OSHA regulations allow human exposure to as much as 6,000 ppm.

Also, when we compare the amount of CO2 man produces through burning of fossil fuels with natural sources of CO2, we find that nature produces about 97% to man's 3%. Of course, in fairness, that 97% does include man's natural emissions from breathing as well as other mammals. We can also look at other much more toxic gases, such as methane and carbon monoxide... Again, we find that those far outweigh the relatively small amount of CO2 produced by man's burning of fossil fuels. Cattle alone produce about 1,000% more methane than man produces CO2 through industrialization, and methane is far more dangerous.

But you are really stretching it to consider CO2 toxic. Indeed, anything is toxic to humans in pure concentration, even oxygen.

Of course, if we kept up the exchange long enough, Boss, like any other 'Conservative' would resort to lying, or demonstrating his vast ignorance. Since we started burning fossil fuels, the CO2 in the atmosphere has gone from 280 ppm to over 400 ppm. The highest level we saw from natural sources in the last million years or more was 300 ppm in the Eemian. And that addition of 20 ppm at that time resulted in sea levels about 20 feet higher than today. The sea level for our descendants is going to be far higher than that. In fact, we have not seen GHG levels as high as they are today for over 4 million years. And the world was a far different place then than today. The rate at which we are changing the climate will not give either the natural biosphere a chance to adjust, nor the agriculture we all depend on.

 

[Old Rocks]

Those measurements were made AT NIGHT. No sun. All darkie-poo. Get it?

and I have no idea what they were reading, but it wasn't radiation from the sky.

No matter how many times you lead this stupid horse to the water you cannot force him to drink. The willfully ignorant will remain so, no matter how good the teacher. Smart photons. LOL

 

[Old Rocks]

I keep waiting for our Phd geologist to chime in on the smart photons. Surely he is going to support his peer group?

 

[jc456]

Those measurements were made AT NIGHT. No sun. All darkie-poo. Get it?

and I have no idea what they were reading, but it wasn't radiation from the sky.

No matter how many times you lead this stupid horse to the water you cannot force him to drink. The willfully ignorant will remain so, no matter how good the teacher. Smart photons. LOL

Says the ignorant horse. You thirsty?

 

[jc456]

I keep waiting for our Phd geologist to chime in on the smart photons. Surely he is going to support his peer group?

Evidence. That information you haven't got. I know, you and others provided it. I say no, you say I ignore it, I say no, and on and on every time, everyday. The fact is you don't have it and the wash rinse repeat doesn't work. Please please prove us wrong post that evidence.

 

[Crick]

Please stop lying. Please stop choosing the side of abject ignorance.

 

[jc456]

Please stop lying. Please stop choosing the side of abject ignorance.

Are you looking in a mirror while you type? As I pointed out typical warmer wash rinse and repeat.

 

[IanC]

JC- why don't you present your explanation on how the solar energy enters the earth system, circulates, and leaves again?

Perhaps we are not as far apart as we seem.