Islands Disappear As Ocean Levels Rise

[Toddsterpatriot]

View attachment 76966

so where's energy in that formula. That formula is based off temperature and temperature is heat, and heat does not flow from cold to hot. hmmmm, seems you have a dilemma.

so where's energy in that formula. That formula is based off temperature and temperature is heat, and heat does not flow from cold to hot. hmmmm, seems you have a dilemma

Who claimed heat flows from cold to hot? Where?
We're talking about radiation. Radiation which is moving energy around.

Regardless, we all know that while energy may transfer from a cold body to a warmer one, HEAT cannot, unless some external work is put into the system somehow.

“Greenhouse Effect” is Real, According to Blog

That's from the source you provided yesterday.
It seems you have a dilemma.

why do I have a dilemma, I don't have any transfer issues. heat leaves the surface out to space. Takes a ride on gases as it leaves. so?

To be clear, the link wasn't mine, mine was a different title, the input the same, but, just so the record is correct. Your link.

Plus, I posted the excerpt from the link. So I still don't get where I have a dilemma. I don't claim AGW, I don't claim feedback. I claim natural processes heat and cool the earth as a result of sunlight and the makeup of the planet.

why do I have a dilemma,

Because your source from yesterday admits that energy can travel from a cold body to a warmer one.
The opposite of what you've claimed.

heat leaves the surface out to space.

Obviously.

Takes a ride on gases as it leaves. so?

GHGs slow its exit. And?

To be clear, the link wasn't mine

To be clear, the author is the same.

I claim natural processes heat and cool the earth as a result of sunlight and the makeup of the planet

Yes, the Greenhouse effect is a natural process.

To be clear, the author is the same.

To be clear it wasn't mine. I give two shits the article was the guy. I didn't post it. And please be careful stating I posted it.

The author was right when he agreed with your confusion but wrong when he refutes your confusion? Derp!

 

[CrusaderFrank]

Homer said it best, D"OH!!!"

List of new islands - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Below is a list of new islands created since the beginning of the 20th century whether by means of volcanism, erosion, glacial retreat, or other mechanisms. One of the most famous new volcanic islands is the small island of Surtsey, located in the Atlantic Oceansouth of Iceland. It first emerged from the ocean surface in 1963. In 1965, it was declared a nature reserve for the study of ecological succession; plants, insects, birds, seals, and other forms of life have since established themselves on the island.

Another noted new island is Anak Krakatau (the so-called "child of Krakatoa", which formed in the flooded caldera of that notorious volcano in Indonesia), which emerged only in 1930. Ample rainforests have grown there, but they are often destroyed by frequenteruptions. A population of many wild animals, including insects, birds, humanborne rats, and even monitor lizards, have also settled there.

Uunartoq Qeqertoq is an island off the east coast of Greenland that appeared to have split from the mainland because of glacial retreat between 2002 and 2005; however, it is believed to have been a true island, with or without glacial covering, for many thousands of years.

In February and March 2009, a vigorous eruption created a new island[1] near Hunga Ha'apai in the Tongan Islands of the southwest Pacific. By the end of the activity, however, the new land mass was connected to Hunga Ha'apai.[2] Similar activity occurred again in December 2014 and January 2015.

On September 24, 2013 a new island emerged off the coast of Gwadar, as a result of a strong earthquake that hit south and southwest Pakistan measuring 7.8 on the Richter scale.[3]

On November 21, 2013 an unnamed islet emerged off the coast of Nishinoshima, a small, uninhabited island in the Ogasawara chain, which is also known as the Bonin Islands. Less than four days after the new islet's emergence, it was about 200 metres (660 ft) in diameter.[4]"

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

View attachment 76966

funny, I found this too:

http://jonova.s3.amazonaws.com/guest/cao-jinan/jcao_common-errors-stefan-boltzman_aug2012.pdf

"Common errors in the use of the Stefan-Boltzmann equation
Jinan Cao
ABSTRACT
This paper identifies technical errors in the use of the Stefan-Boltzmann equation in current climate research. Analysis was carried out for several statements (conclusions) that were derived from the Stefan-Boltzmann equation to demonstrate how these technical errors can affect our understanding and interpretation of the earth climate system."
.

Thanks. Nothing there helps your claim that CO2 magically only emits toward space.

I merely represented the mistake you make using the equation. I don't have to agree with all of it, I can agree that they know that the equation doesn't get you what you think it gets you. I'm ok with that.

I merely represented the mistake you make using the equation.

I made no mistake using the equation.

I don't have to agree with all of it, I can agree that they know that the equation doesn't get you what you think it gets you.

You think the equation somehow only allows radiation to travel upward.

You think the equation somehow only allows radiation to travel upward
yep. the only thing you've produced is a potential on the surface. That's it.

You think the equation somehow only allows radiation to travel upward

yep.

Thanks for playing. LOL!

 

[jc456]

so where's energy in that formula. That formula is based off temperature and temperature is heat, and heat does not flow from cold to hot. hmmmm, seems you have a dilemma.

so where's energy in that formula. That formula is based off temperature and temperature is heat, and heat does not flow from cold to hot. hmmmm, seems you have a dilemma

Who claimed heat flows from cold to hot? Where?
We're talking about radiation. Radiation which is moving energy around.

Regardless, we all know that while energy may transfer from a cold body to a warmer one, HEAT cannot, unless some external work is put into the system somehow.

“Greenhouse Effect” is Real, According to Blog

That's from the source you provided yesterday.
It seems you have a dilemma.

why do I have a dilemma, I don't have any transfer issues. heat leaves the surface out to space. Takes a ride on gases as it leaves. so?

To be clear, the link wasn't mine, mine was a different title, the input the same, but, just so the record is correct. Your link.

Plus, I posted the excerpt from the link. So I still don't get where I have a dilemma. I don't claim AGW, I don't claim feedback. I claim natural processes heat and cool the earth as a result of sunlight and the makeup of the planet.

why do I have a dilemma,

Because your source from yesterday admits that energy can travel from a cold body to a warmer one.
The opposite of what you've claimed.

heat leaves the surface out to space.

Obviously.

Takes a ride on gases as it leaves. so?

GHGs slow its exit. And?

To be clear, the link wasn't mine

To be clear, the author is the same.

I claim natural processes heat and cool the earth as a result of sunlight and the makeup of the planet

Yes, the Greenhouse effect is a natural process.

To be clear, the author is the same.

To be clear it wasn't mine. I give two shits the article was the guy. I didn't post it. And please be careful stating I posted it.

The author was right when he agreed with your confusion but wrong when he refutes your confusion? Derp!

No, the author stated your use of the equation as wrong. He states why as well. It was a really good paper.

 

[jc456]

funny, I found this too:

http://jonova.s3.amazonaws.com/guest/cao-jinan/jcao_common-errors-stefan-boltzman_aug2012.pdf

"Common errors in the use of the Stefan-Boltzmann equation
Jinan Cao
ABSTRACT
This paper identifies technical errors in the use of the Stefan-Boltzmann equation in current climate research. Analysis was carried out for several statements (conclusions) that were derived from the Stefan-Boltzmann equation to demonstrate how these technical errors can affect our understanding and interpretation of the earth climate system."
.

Thanks. Nothing there helps your claim that CO2 magically only emits toward space.

I merely represented the mistake you make using the equation. I don't have to agree with all of it, I can agree that they know that the equation doesn't get you what you think it gets you. I'm ok with that.

I merely represented the mistake you make using the equation.

I made no mistake using the equation.

I don't have to agree with all of it, I can agree that they know that the equation doesn't get you what you think it gets you.

You think the equation somehow only allows radiation to travel upward.

You think the equation somehow only allows radiation to travel upward
yep. the only thing you've produced is a potential on the surface. That's it.

You think the equation somehow only allows radiation to travel upward

yep.

Thanks for playing. LOL!

no problem. Maybe you can figure out how the equation might be used in climate and update your version.

Your equation doesn't take into account the atmosphere. How big is that by the way?

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

so where's energy in that formula. That formula is based off temperature and temperature is heat, and heat does not flow from cold to hot. hmmmm, seems you have a dilemma

Who claimed heat flows from cold to hot? Where?
We're talking about radiation. Radiation which is moving energy around.

Regardless, we all know that while energy may transfer from a cold body to a warmer one, HEAT cannot, unless some external work is put into the system somehow.

“Greenhouse Effect” is Real, According to Blog

That's from the source you provided yesterday.
It seems you have a dilemma.

why do I have a dilemma, I don't have any transfer issues. heat leaves the surface out to space. Takes a ride on gases as it leaves. so?

To be clear, the link wasn't mine, mine was a different title, the input the same, but, just so the record is correct. Your link.

Plus, I posted the excerpt from the link. So I still don't get where I have a dilemma. I don't claim AGW, I don't claim feedback. I claim natural processes heat and cool the earth as a result of sunlight and the makeup of the planet.

why do I have a dilemma,

Because your source from yesterday admits that energy can travel from a cold body to a warmer one.
The opposite of what you've claimed.

heat leaves the surface out to space.

Obviously.

Takes a ride on gases as it leaves. so?

GHGs slow its exit. And?

To be clear, the link wasn't mine

To be clear, the author is the same.

I claim natural processes heat and cool the earth as a result of sunlight and the makeup of the planet

Yes, the Greenhouse effect is a natural process.

To be clear, the author is the same.

To be clear it wasn't mine. I give two shits the article was the guy. I didn't post it. And please be careful stating I posted it.

The author was right when he agreed with your confusion but wrong when he refutes your confusion? Derp!

No, the author stated your use of the equation as wrong. He states why as well. It was a really good paper.

No, the author stated your use of the equation as wrong.

No, your author admitted "energy may transfer from a cold body to a warmer one".

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

Thanks. Nothing there helps your claim that CO2 magically only emits toward space.

I merely represented the mistake you make using the equation. I don't have to agree with all of it, I can agree that they know that the equation doesn't get you what you think it gets you. I'm ok with that.

I merely represented the mistake you make using the equation.

I made no mistake using the equation.

I don't have to agree with all of it, I can agree that they know that the equation doesn't get you what you think it gets you.

You think the equation somehow only allows radiation to travel upward.

You think the equation somehow only allows radiation to travel upward
yep. the only thing you've produced is a potential on the surface. That's it.

You think the equation somehow only allows radiation to travel upward

yep.

Thanks for playing. LOL!

no problem. Maybe you can figure out how the equation might be used in climate and update your version.

Your equation doesn't take into account the atmosphere. How big is that by the way?

I don't need to update my version of anything.

Unless you can find proof that radiation only travels upward.

Let me know when you do.

Your equation doesn't take into account the atmosphere.

The equation takes into account all matter above 0K.

 

[jc456]

I merely represented the mistake you make using the equation. I don't have to agree with all of it, I can agree that they know that the equation doesn't get you what you think it gets you. I'm ok with that.

I merely represented the mistake you make using the equation.

I made no mistake using the equation.

I don't have to agree with all of it, I can agree that they know that the equation doesn't get you what you think it gets you.

You think the equation somehow only allows radiation to travel upward.

You think the equation somehow only allows radiation to travel upward
yep. the only thing you've produced is a potential on the surface. That's it.

You think the equation somehow only allows radiation to travel upward

yep.

Thanks for playing. LOL!

no problem. Maybe you can figure out how the equation might be used in climate and update your version.

Your equation doesn't take into account the atmosphere. How big is that by the way?

I don't need to update my version of anything.

Unless you can find proof that radiation only travels upward.

Let me know when you do.

Your equation doesn't take into account the atmosphere.

The equation takes into account all matter above 0K.

sure it does. sure

 

[jc456]

Homer said it best, D"OH!!!"

List of new islands - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Below is a list of new islands created since the beginning of the 20th century whether by means of volcanism, erosion, glacial retreat, or other mechanisms. One of the most famous new volcanic islands is the small island of Surtsey, located in the Atlantic Oceansouth of Iceland. It first emerged from the ocean surface in 1963. In 1965, it was declared a nature reserve for the study of ecological succession; plants, insects, birds, seals, and other forms of life have since established themselves on the island.

Another noted new island is Anak Krakatau (the so-called "child of Krakatoa", which formed in the flooded caldera of that notorious volcano in Indonesia), which emerged only in 1930. Ample rainforests have grown there, but they are often destroyed by frequenteruptions. A population of many wild animals, including insects, birds, humanborne rats, and even monitor lizards, have also settled there.

Uunartoq Qeqertoq is an island off the east coast of Greenland that appeared to have split from the mainland because of glacial retreat between 2002 and 2005; however, it is believed to have been a true island, with or without glacial covering, for many thousands of years.

In February and March 2009, a vigorous eruption created a new island[1] near Hunga Ha'apai in the Tongan Islands of the southwest Pacific. By the end of the activity, however, the new land mass was connected to Hunga Ha'apai.[2] Similar activity occurred again in December 2014 and January 2015.

On September 24, 2013 a new island emerged off the coast of Gwadar, as a result of a strong earthquake that hit south and southwest Pakistan measuring 7.8 on the Richter scale.[3]

On November 21, 2013 an unnamed islet emerged off the coast of Nishinoshima, a small, uninhabited island in the Ogasawara chain, which is also known as the Bonin Islands. Less than four days after the new islet's emergence, it was about 200 metres (660 ft) in diameter.[4]"

Hey Frank, wouldn't those land masses displace the water and cause what to happen? A rise in ocean levels?

 

[CrusaderFrank]

Homer said it best, D"OH!!!"

List of new islands - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Below is a list of new islands created since the beginning of the 20th century whether by means of volcanism, erosion, glacial retreat, or other mechanisms. One of the most famous new volcanic islands is the small island of Surtsey, located in the Atlantic Oceansouth of Iceland. It first emerged from the ocean surface in 1963. In 1965, it was declared a nature reserve for the study of ecological succession; plants, insects, birds, seals, and other forms of life have since established themselves on the island.

Another noted new island is Anak Krakatau (the so-called "child of Krakatoa", which formed in the flooded caldera of that notorious volcano in Indonesia), which emerged only in 1930. Ample rainforests have grown there, but they are often destroyed by frequenteruptions. A population of many wild animals, including insects, birds, humanborne rats, and even monitor lizards, have also settled there.

Uunartoq Qeqertoq is an island off the east coast of Greenland that appeared to have split from the mainland because of glacial retreat between 2002 and 2005; however, it is believed to have been a true island, with or without glacial covering, for many thousands of years.

In February and March 2009, a vigorous eruption created a new island[1] near Hunga Ha'apai in the Tongan Islands of the southwest Pacific. By the end of the activity, however, the new land mass was connected to Hunga Ha'apai.[2] Similar activity occurred again in December 2014 and January 2015.

On September 24, 2013 a new island emerged off the coast of Gwadar, as a result of a strong earthquake that hit south and southwest Pakistan measuring 7.8 on the Richter scale.[3]

On November 21, 2013 an unnamed islet emerged off the coast of Nishinoshima, a small, uninhabited island in the Ogasawara chain, which is also known as the Bonin Islands. Less than four days after the new islet's emergence, it was about 200 metres (660 ft) in diameter.[4]"

Hey Frank, wouldn't those land masses displace the water and cause what to happen? A rise in ocean levels?

yes, because of global warming too...

 

[Ernie S.]

If you'd care to complete the quote, he says that it "could rise 20 feet in the near future" He never specifies what "the near future" might be. The collapse of the WAIS, rapid melting and glacial acceleration in East Antarctic and the melting of Greenland's ice sheet on top of the sea's continued thermal expansion as temperatures rise, could easily exceed 20 feet of sea level rise within a century.

Denier fools... how I detest them.

So it was all bullshit intended to scare sheeple into making him rich from his carbon credit scheme? OK, gotcha. Thanks. Now I know what you are.

 

[frigidweirdo]

Nobodies business??? What?

dude that's hilarious. you post it and don't know what it means either. Funny.,

No, read. I wrote "nobody's business", you wrote "nobodies business", see the difference? One is possessive, the other is plural of nobody. I don't understand what you wrote because it makes no sense.

neither does yours.

Actually mine is grammatically correct. But I guess now you're into safe territory, where you can just talk nonsense instead of actual debate.

what does it mean? I asked and you still haven't answered. How does one measure Nobody's business? grammatically correct to appease the punk.

Of course I haven't answered, I don't understand what you said.

 

[RollingThunder]

dude that's hilarious. you post it and don't know what it means either. Funny.,

No, read. I wrote "nobody's business", you wrote "nobodies business", see the difference? One is possessive, the other is plural of nobody. I don't understand what you wrote because it makes no sense.

neither does yours.

Actually mine is grammatically correct. But I guess now you're into safe territory, where you can just talk nonsense instead of actual debate.

what does it mean? I asked and you still haven't answered. How does one measure Nobody's business? grammatically correct to appease the punk.

Of course I haven't answered, I don't understand what you said.

Don't feel bad. Nobody can understand JustCrazy's deranged gobbledigook.....which really doesn't matter, since it is meaningless moronic nonsense anyway. He is a retarded rightwingnut troll, stooging for the Koch brothers. Fun to mock sometimes....but don't waste too much time on him.

 

[defcon4]

You idiots know that that has been happening throughout the many milennia? No? Learn something.

Why are they freaking out? China builds new ones faster than the ones disappearing. (maybe water displacement causes some older ones to disappear)

 

[Crick]

Water displaced by melting continental ice sheets and rapidly flowing glaciers. Yes.

 

[Ernie S.]

But dumping dirt and rock into the sea to build islands doesn't? OK. Now I know what you are too.

 

[Crick]

I never said Chinese island building wouldn't raise sea level. And I am opposed to the Chinese actions both for political and ecological reasons. But the amount they are putting in the water is a microscopic fraction of the mass Greenland and Antarctica are dumping into the seas.

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

I never said Chinese island building wouldn't raise sea level. And I am opposed to the Chinese actions both for political and ecological reasons. But the amount they are putting in the water is a microscopic fraction of the mass Greenland and Antarctica are dumping into the seas.

AFAIK, they're dredging sand from the area and piling it onto existing islands to build them up.

That would drop the sea level.

 

[Crick]

That's right. I was thinking sand and gravel were being brought from shore.

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

That's right. I was thinking sand and gravel were being brought from shore.

They're dredging to bring larger ships into the area.