In summary...

[IanC]

do you know how much the oceans have warmed? The temps differ around the globe. they can cause el ninos if the warmth goes to a specific spot. so what is it you think you know here?

When the arctic ice melts in the summer, does it make the oceans cooler or warmer?

You're a fucking retard. Do you even know why I asked you if the oceans have warmed?

I really don't care why you asked me why the oceans warmed. I'm an individual and as such don't need to play your games. you think you're this smart goody too shoe climate dude and you're just a hack that believes CO2 warms something and you have absolutely no evidence to support that. tricks won't work here bubba. I know the oceans warm due to the sun and that's it. temperatures vary around the globe currents carry warm water. and on and on. have fun with your game, but I don't play. by the way, you still haven't actually stated why conduction and radiation are different. anytime though if you think you have something in another toy box.

the temperature of the oceans is important because CO2 comes out of solution and is released when seawater warms. a warming ocean adds to the CO2 concentration in the atmosphere.

my statements are typically curt and idea dense, with the basic idea implied by context. I am sorry that you cannot keep up.

Well again, why do I care how much CO2 comes out of the ocean. again, CO2 doesn't warm anything. So, yeah CO2 is released from oceans when the water is warm. yep. Still unclear why you think conduction and radiation are different, you swam around that buoy and came up with this idiotic ocean warms thingy for some reason to try and make a point. That point is CO2 is released from warm oceans. Congrats you wrote an actual fact. Now, explain why conduction and radiation are different.

Did you even read my post pointing out the differences between radiation and conduction? I even used a quote from your link.

I think you guys get off on asking the same question over and over again. And then pretend it hasn't been answered multiple times, in multiple ways.

Go for it. Sand box rules for sand box intellects. Suits you to a 'T'.

JC- I have been trying to figure out a simple scenario to show you the difference between radiation and conduction that even your childish intellect can understand. Here goes...

It's a Lego Land war. One army surrounds the other with a moat between them. 'Winning' is when one side has less Lego blocks than the other. So far the army inside the moat is losing big time and they have most of the Lego blocks. Because they are behind the moat the only way to get rid of the blocks is to throw them over. Because they have so many it is easy to find one to throw. The army on the outside cannot easily find a block but when they do, they throw it back.

As time goes on it becomes harder for the insiders to find a block because so many have already been thrown. The outsiders find them easier for the same reason. After a while they are both sending the same amount over the moat as the other side. Equilibrium. A draw.

If there was no moat then the insiders can build logs of legos and push them out, a much more efficient way of moving the legos. The logs go out until the outside army has enough handholds to slow and stop the logs progress. Equilibrium. A draw.

 

[jc456]

You're a fucking retard. Do you even know why I asked you if the oceans have warmed?

I really don't care why you asked me why the oceans warmed. I'm an individual and as such don't need to play your games. you think you're this smart goody too shoe climate dude and you're just a hack that believes CO2 warms something and you have absolutely no evidence to support that. tricks won't work here bubba. I know the oceans warm due to the sun and that's it. temperatures vary around the globe currents carry warm water. and on and on. have fun with your game, but I don't play. by the way, you still haven't actually stated why conduction and radiation are different. anytime though if you think you have something in another toy box.

the temperature of the oceans is important because CO2 comes out of solution and is released when seawater warms. a warming ocean adds to the CO2 concentration in the atmosphere.

my statements are typically curt and idea dense, with the basic idea implied by context. I am sorry that you cannot keep up.

Well again, why do I care how much CO2 comes out of the ocean. again, CO2 doesn't warm anything. So, yeah CO2 is released from oceans when the water is warm. yep. Still unclear why you think conduction and radiation are different, you swam around that buoy and came up with this idiotic ocean warms thingy for some reason to try and make a point. That point is CO2 is released from warm oceans. Congrats you wrote an actual fact. Now, explain why conduction and radiation are different.

Did you even read my post pointing out the differences between radiation and conduction? I even used a quote from your link.

I think you guys get off on asking the same question over and over again. And then pretend it hasn't been answered multiple times, in multiple ways.

Go for it. Sand box rules for sand box intellects. Suits you to a 'T'.

JC- I have been trying to figure out a simple scenario to show you the difference between radiation and conduction that even your childish intellect can understand. Here goes...

It's a Lego Land war. One army surrounds the other with a moat between them. 'Winning' is when one side has less Lego blocks than the other. So far the army inside the moat is losing big time and they have most of the Lego blocks. Because they are behind the moat the only way to get rid of the blocks is to throw them over. Because they have so many it is easy to find one to throw. The army on the outside cannot easily find a block but when they do, they throw it back.

As time goes on it becomes harder for the insiders to find a block because so many have already been thrown. The outsiders find them easier for the same reason. After a while they are both sending the same amount over the moat as the other side. Equilibrium. A draw.

If there was no moat then the insiders can build logs of legos and push them out, a much more efficient way of moving the legos. The logs go out until the outside army has enough handholds to slow and stop the logs progress. Equilibrium. A draw.

sorry Ian, doesn't work for you.thermal energy is thermal energy. both armies still have the same energy.

 

[Crick]

One uses EM radiation, one doesn't.

 

[IanC]

I really don't care why you asked me why the oceans warmed. I'm an individual and as such don't need to play your games. you think you're this smart goody too shoe climate dude and you're just a hack that believes CO2 warms something and you have absolutely no evidence to support that. tricks won't work here bubba. I know the oceans warm due to the sun and that's it. temperatures vary around the globe currents carry warm water. and on and on. have fun with your game, but I don't play. by the way, you still haven't actually stated why conduction and radiation are different. anytime though if you think you have something in another toy box.

the temperature of the oceans is important because CO2 comes out of solution and is released when seawater warms. a warming ocean adds to the CO2 concentration in the atmosphere.

my statements are typically curt and idea dense, with the basic idea implied by context. I am sorry that you cannot keep up.

Well again, why do I care how much CO2 comes out of the ocean. again, CO2 doesn't warm anything. So, yeah CO2 is released from oceans when the water is warm. yep. Still unclear why you think conduction and radiation are different, you swam around that buoy and came up with this idiotic ocean warms thingy for some reason to try and make a point. That point is CO2 is released from warm oceans. Congrats you wrote an actual fact. Now, explain why conduction and radiation are different.

Did you even read my post pointing out the differences between radiation and conduction? I even used a quote from your link.

I think you guys get off on asking the same question over and over again. And then pretend it hasn't been answered multiple times, in multiple ways.

Go for it. Sand box rules for sand box intellects. Suits you to a 'T'.

JC- I have been trying to figure out a simple scenario to show you the difference between radiation and conduction that even your childish intellect can understand. Here goes...

It's a Lego Land war. One army surrounds the other with a moat between them. 'Winning' is when one side has less Lego blocks than the other. So far the army inside the moat is losing big time and they have most of the Lego blocks. Because they are behind the moat the only way to get rid of the blocks is to throw them over. Because they have so many it is easy to find one to throw. The army on the outside cannot easily find a block but when they do, they throw it back.

As time goes on it becomes harder for the insiders to find a block because so many have already been thrown. The outsiders find them easier for the same reason. After a while they are both sending the same amount over the moat as the other side. Equilibrium. A draw.

If there was no moat then the insiders can build logs of legos and push them out, a much more efficient way of moving the legos. The logs go out until the outside army has enough handholds to slow and stop the logs progress. Equilibrium. A draw.

sorry Ian, doesn't work for you.thermal energy is thermal energy. both armies still have the same energy.

The armies are mass. The legos are energy. The inside mass originally had more energy but fighting the war left them both with the same amount. Radiation with small amounts constantly being exchanged in both directions. Conduction moving large amounts only in the direction of the greater manpower.

 

[jc456]

the temperature of the oceans is important because CO2 comes out of solution and is released when seawater warms. a warming ocean adds to the CO2 concentration in the atmosphere.

my statements are typically curt and idea dense, with the basic idea implied by context. I am sorry that you cannot keep up.

Well again, why do I care how much CO2 comes out of the ocean. again, CO2 doesn't warm anything. So, yeah CO2 is released from oceans when the water is warm. yep. Still unclear why you think conduction and radiation are different, you swam around that buoy and came up with this idiotic ocean warms thingy for some reason to try and make a point. That point is CO2 is released from warm oceans. Congrats you wrote an actual fact. Now, explain why conduction and radiation are different.

Did you even read my post pointing out the differences between radiation and conduction? I even used a quote from your link.

I think you guys get off on asking the same question over and over again. And then pretend it hasn't been answered multiple times, in multiple ways.

Go for it. Sand box rules for sand box intellects. Suits you to a 'T'.

JC- I have been trying to figure out a simple scenario to show you the difference between radiation and conduction that even your childish intellect can understand. Here goes...

It's a Lego Land war. One army surrounds the other with a moat between them. 'Winning' is when one side has less Lego blocks than the other. So far the army inside the moat is losing big time and they have most of the Lego blocks. Because they are behind the moat the only way to get rid of the blocks is to throw them over. Because they have so many it is easy to find one to throw. The army on the outside cannot easily find a block but when they do, they throw it back.

As time goes on it becomes harder for the insiders to find a block because so many have already been thrown. The outsiders find them easier for the same reason. After a while they are both sending the same amount over the moat as the other side. Equilibrium. A draw.

If there was no moat then the insiders can build logs of legos and push them out, a much more efficient way of moving the legos. The logs go out until the outside army has enough handholds to slow and stop the logs progress. Equilibrium. A draw.

sorry Ian, doesn't work for you.thermal energy is thermal energy. both armies still have the same energy.

The armies are mass. The legos are energy. The inside mass originally had more energy but fighting the war left them both with the same amount. Radiation with small amounts constantly being exchanged in both directions. Conduction moving large amounts only in the direction of the greater manpower.

well dude, as I've been stating, radiation does not get emitted back at the surface. so I can't agree with your analogy at all.I'd prefer just seeing an experiment that actually shows the radiation both directions. got that?

 

[IanC]

Well again, why do I care how much CO2 comes out of the ocean. again, CO2 doesn't warm anything. So, yeah CO2 is released from oceans when the water is warm. yep. Still unclear why you think conduction and radiation are different, you swam around that buoy and came up with this idiotic ocean warms thingy for some reason to try and make a point. That point is CO2 is released from warm oceans. Congrats you wrote an actual fact. Now, explain why conduction and radiation are different.

Did you even read my post pointing out the differences between radiation and conduction? I even used a quote from your link.

I think you guys get off on asking the same question over and over again. And then pretend it hasn't been answered multiple times, in multiple ways.

Go for it. Sand box rules for sand box intellects. Suits you to a 'T'.

JC- I have been trying to figure out a simple scenario to show you the difference between radiation and conduction that even your childish intellect can understand. Here goes...

It's a Lego Land war. One army surrounds the other with a moat between them. 'Winning' is when one side has less Lego blocks than the other. So far the army inside the moat is losing big time and they have most of the Lego blocks. Because they are behind the moat the only way to get rid of the blocks is to throw them over. Because they have so many it is easy to find one to throw. The army on the outside cannot easily find a block but when they do, they throw it back.

As time goes on it becomes harder for the insiders to find a block because so many have already been thrown. The outsiders find them easier for the same reason. After a while they are both sending the same amount over the moat as the other side. Equilibrium. A draw.

If there was no moat then the insiders can build logs of legos and push them out, a much more efficient way of moving the legos. The logs go out until the outside army has enough handholds to slow and stop the logs progress. Equilibrium. A draw.

sorry Ian, doesn't work for you.thermal energy is thermal energy. both armies still have the same energy.

The armies are mass. The legos are energy. The inside mass originally had more energy but fighting the war left them both with the same amount. Radiation with small amounts constantly being exchanged in both directions. Conduction moving large amounts only in the direction of the greater manpower.

well dude, as I've been stating, radiation does not get emitted back at the surface. so I can't agree with your analogy at all.I'd prefer just seeing an experiment that actually shows the radiation both directions. got that?

Me and others have shown you results of measured downward radiation. I have even shown you pictures of the installations and equipment because I know written words are not your strong suit. You ignore it and continue to chant your soothing mantra ' show me the experiment ', no matter how often you are answered. Foolishly, I keep expecting you to finally wake up but you never do.

 

[jc456]

Did you even read my post pointing out the differences between radiation and conduction? I even used a quote from your link.

I think you guys get off on asking the same question over and over again. And then pretend it hasn't been answered multiple times, in multiple ways.

Go for it. Sand box rules for sand box intellects. Suits you to a 'T'.

JC- I have been trying to figure out a simple scenario to show you the difference between radiation and conduction that even your childish intellect can understand. Here goes...

It's a Lego Land war. One army surrounds the other with a moat between them. 'Winning' is when one side has less Lego blocks than the other. So far the army inside the moat is losing big time and they have most of the Lego blocks. Because they are behind the moat the only way to get rid of the blocks is to throw them over. Because they have so many it is easy to find one to throw. The army on the outside cannot easily find a block but when they do, they throw it back.

As time goes on it becomes harder for the insiders to find a block because so many have already been thrown. The outsiders find them easier for the same reason. After a while they are both sending the same amount over the moat as the other side. Equilibrium. A draw.

If there was no moat then the insiders can build logs of legos and push them out, a much more efficient way of moving the legos. The logs go out until the outside army has enough handholds to slow and stop the logs progress. Equilibrium. A draw.

sorry Ian, doesn't work for you.thermal energy is thermal energy. both armies still have the same energy.

The armies are mass. The legos are energy. The inside mass originally had more energy but fighting the war left them both with the same amount. Radiation with small amounts constantly being exchanged in both directions. Conduction moving large amounts only in the direction of the greater manpower.

well dude, as I've been stating, radiation does not get emitted back at the surface. so I can't agree with your analogy at all.I'd prefer just seeing an experiment that actually shows the radiation both directions. got that?

Me and others have shown you results of measured downward radiation. I have even shown you pictures of the installations and equipment because I know written words are not your strong suit. You ignore it and continue to chant your soothing mantra ' show me the experiment ', no matter how often you are answered. Foolishly, I keep expecting you to finally wake up but you never do.

what you posted is not evidence of radiation coming in from CO2 or from anywhere accept the sun. so no, you haven't.

 

[Crick]

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

 

[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.

 

[SSDD]

Me and others have shown you results of measured downward radiation. I have even shown you pictures of the installations and equipment because I know written words are not your strong suit. You ignore it and continue to chant your soothing mantra ' show me the experiment ', no matter how often you are answered. Foolishly, I keep expecting you to finally wake up but you never do.

No you haven't ian...you have shown measurements taken with instruments cooled to a temperature lower than that of the atmosphere....That being the case, you are looking at energy moving from the warmer atmosphere to the cooler instrument...set an instrument at ambient temperature next to the cooled one pointed to the same point in the atmosphere and you will not be measuring the so called back radiation...all you have is evidence that climate science idiots are easily fooled by their own instrumentation.

 

[SSDD]

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

With a cooled instrument...it was only measuring energy moving from the warmer atmosphere to the cooler instrument...not back radiation....it is called being fooled by instrumentation.

 

[SSDD]

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.

It was in all likelihood from the atmosphere...the instruments were cooled to a temperature of about -80 degrees...so what they were measuring was energy moving from the warmer atmosphere to the cooler instrument....just what the second law of thermodynamics predicts...set a non cooled instrument right next to the cooled one, pointed at the same place in the atmosphere and you won't get the so called back radiation because energy won't move from the cooler atmosphere to the warmer instrument. ...the idiots who thought they were measuring back radiation were just being fooled by their own instruments....not surprising for a soft science whose practitioners take very few hard science courses in college.

 

[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.

It was in all likelihood from the atmosphere...the instruments were cooled to a temperature of about -80 degrees...so what they were measuring was energy moving from the warmer atmosphere to the cooler instrument....just what the second law of thermodynamics predicts...set a non cooled instrument right next to the cooled one, pointed at the same place in the atmosphere and you won't get the so called back radiation because energy won't move from the cooler atmosphere to the warmer instrument. ...the idiots who thought they were measuring back radiation were just being fooled by their own instruments....not surprising for a soft science whose practitioners take very few hard science courses in college.

Well I'm sure they measured something for sure, what it was they have no idea. clear night could have been from the moon. how do you, I or they say what it was they measured. it's a random reading with no point of origin.

The fact they had to cool the probe, only means they knew already the answer with it at ambient temps. It's why they cooled it.

 

[SSDD]

Well I'm sure they measured something for sure, what it was they have no idea. clear night could have been from the moon. how do you, I or they say what it was they measured. it's a random reading with no point of origin.

No they don't...they have been fooled by their instruments... The frequency of the radiation would give them a pretty good indication of where the radiation came from...radiation at 15 microns probably came from CO2...but the only way to get the measurement is to cool the instrument to a temperature colder than the CO2 in the atmosphere...otherwise the energy won't move towards the instrument.

The fact they had to cool the probe, only means they knew already the answer with it at ambient temps. It's why they cooled it.

the funny thing is that they then tell themselves that they must cool the instrument in order to overcome interference...what a hoot...they don't need cool instruments in order to measure incoming radiation from the sun...certainly no interference there but they claim that they need to filter out interference to measure back radiation when according to them the amount of back radiation is twice the amount of energy coming from the sun....if what they said were true, they would have to cool their instruments to take measurements of incoming radiation from the sun in order to filter out the interference form all the back radiation.

 

[Crick]

If I cover your camera lens with a wash of photoluminescent material, do you think it might affect your photos?

And this: "but the only way to get the measurement is to cool the instrument to a temperature colder than the CO2 in the atmosphere...otherwise the energy won't move towards the instrument." simply marks you as an ignorant fool.

 

[SSDD]

If I cover your camera lens with a wash of photoluminescent material, do you think it might affect your photos?

It wouldn't cause energy to move from cool to warm...no matter how much you wish it would. And are you claiming that CO2 is photoluminescent?

 

[jc456]

If I cover your camera lens with a wash of photoluminescent material, do you think it might affect your photos?

And this: "but the only way to get the measurement is to cool the instrument to a temperature colder than the CO2 in the atmosphere...otherwise the energy won't move towards the instrument." simply marks you as an ignorant fool.

so dude, did they have to cool the probe or not to take the reading?

 

[IanC]

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.

 

[jc456]

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.

 

[IanC]

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.