LWIR FAILS to Warm the Atmosphere by Empirical Experiment.

[Toddsterpatriot]

It doesn't matter what form the energy was when it was absorbed...when it is lost via collision, it is not IR.

That is exactly right. The absorbed energy is internal and no longer IR. When it is lost by collision the internal energy is transfered to kinetic energy of the molecule it hit. Since that is random the original IR heats the atmosphere via those collisions. That disproves the title of this thread. Don't tell Billy that you abandoned him.

Since you want to follow the energy back to where it came from..why cherry pick and stop at a point where it was IR...why not follow it back to its original source and simply admit that it is the sun that warms the atmosphere...and CO2 is irrelevant?

That's a totally irrelevant distraction. The current relevancy is the fact that CO2 can absorb certain LW IR and gain internal energy which can be passed to the atmosphere by collision. You said that yourself. Now you seem to be trying to back-pedal or digress.

he did make that statement, and it is a correct one. what do you think happens after the collisions?

After? The atmosphere is warmer than before and the CO2 can absorb more IR.

 

[jc456]

It doesn't matter what form the energy was when it was absorbed...when it is lost via collision, it is not IR.

That is exactly right. The absorbed energy is internal and no longer IR. When it is lost by collision the internal energy is transfered to kinetic energy of the molecule it hit. Since that is random the original IR heats the atmosphere via those collisions. That disproves the title of this thread. Don't tell Billy that you abandoned him.

Since you want to follow the energy back to where it came from..why cherry pick and stop at a point where it was IR...why not follow it back to its original source and simply admit that it is the sun that warms the atmosphere...and CO2 is irrelevant?

That's a totally irrelevant distraction. The current relevancy is the fact that CO2 can absorb certain LW IR and gain internal energy which can be passed to the atmosphere by collision. You said that yourself. Now you seem to be trying to back-pedal or digress.

he did make that statement, and it is a correct one. what do you think happens after the collisions?

After? The atmosphere is warmer than before and the CO2 can absorb more IR.

where's the hot spot then?

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

That is exactly right. The absorbed energy is internal and no longer IR. When it is lost by collision the internal energy is transfered to kinetic energy of the molecule it hit. Since that is random the original IR heats the atmosphere via those collisions. That disproves the title of this thread. Don't tell Billy that you abandoned him.

Since you want to follow the energy back to where it came from..why cherry pick and stop at a point where it was IR...why not follow it back to its original source and simply admit that it is the sun that warms the atmosphere...and CO2 is irrelevant?

That's a totally irrelevant distraction. The current relevancy is the fact that CO2 can absorb certain LW IR and gain internal energy which can be passed to the atmosphere by collision. You said that yourself. Now you seem to be trying to back-pedal or digress.

he did make that statement, and it is a correct one. what do you think happens after the collisions?

After? The atmosphere is warmer than before and the CO2 can absorb more IR.

where's the hot spot then?

In the empty space between your ears.

 

[jc456]

Since you want to follow the energy back to where it came from..why cherry pick and stop at a point where it was IR...why not follow it back to its original source and simply admit that it is the sun that warms the atmosphere...and CO2 is irrelevant?

That's a totally irrelevant distraction. The current relevancy is the fact that CO2 can absorb certain LW IR and gain internal energy which can be passed to the atmosphere by collision. You said that yourself. Now you seem to be trying to back-pedal or digress.

he did make that statement, and it is a correct one. what do you think happens after the collisions?

After? The atmosphere is warmer than before and the CO2 can absorb more IR.

where's the hot spot then?

In the empty space between your ears.

ahh, looky here, so you got nothing as usual.

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

That's a totally irrelevant distraction. The current relevancy is the fact that CO2 can absorb certain LW IR and gain internal energy which can be passed to the atmosphere by collision. You said that yourself. Now you seem to be trying to back-pedal or digress.

he did make that statement, and it is a correct one. what do you think happens after the collisions?

After? The atmosphere is warmer than before and the CO2 can absorb more IR.

where's the hot spot then?

In the empty space between your ears.

ahh, looky here, so you got nothing as usual.

Liar says what?

 

[jc456]

he did make that statement, and it is a correct one. what do you think happens after the collisions?

After? The atmosphere is warmer than before and the CO2 can absorb more IR.

where's the hot spot then?

In the empty space between your ears.

ahh, looky here, so you got nothing as usual.

Liar says what?

yes you do.

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

After? The atmosphere is warmer than before and the CO2 can absorb more IR.

where's the hot spot then?

In the empty space between your ears.

ahh, looky here, so you got nothing as usual.

Liar says what?

yes you do.

Can't post your proof?
Or none exists?

 

[cnm]

You "think" it does? When you "think", or believe a thing, with no observed, measured evidence to support that belief, you are expressing faith...faith is different from hard science.

Well, I see you will continue to deny observed measured data from NASA. Thanks for the entertainment.

 

[cnm]

Now I have to wonder if you are even able to see these words on paper...is your subconscious even allowing you to read them?

I scroll past the bullshit to get to the entertainment.

 

[cnm]

so post up a link to observed empirical evidence from one of your scientists. just one. I'll wait.

Atmospheric gases only absorb some wavelengths of energy but are transparent to others. The absorption patterns of water vapor (blue peaks) and carbon dioxide (pink peaks) overlap in some wavelengths. Carbon dioxide is not as strong a greenhouse gas as water vapor, but it absorbs energy in longer wavelengths (12–15 micrometers) that water vapor does not, partially closing the "window" through which heat radiated by the surface would normally escape to space. (Illustration NASA, Robert Rohde)[19]
Greenhouse effect - Wikipedia

 

[jc456]

where's the hot spot then?

In the empty space between your ears.

ahh, looky here, so you got nothing as usual.

Liar says what?

yes you do.

Can't post your proof?
Or none exists?

ahhh gonna play spinorama. 2nd law is my proof. until you prove otherwise. I'm still waiting. I guess it's ding dong your witch is dead.

 

[jc456]

so post up a link to observed empirical evidence from one of your scientists. just one. I'll wait.

Atmospheric gases only absorb some wavelengths of energy but are transparent to others. The absorption patterns of water vapor (blue peaks) and carbon dioxide (pink peaks) overlap in some wavelengths. Carbon dioxide is not as strong a greenhouse gas as water vapor, but it absorbs energy in longer wavelengths (12–15 micrometers) that water vapor does not, partially closing the "window" through which heat radiated by the surface would normally escape to space. (Illustration NASA, Robert Rohde)[19]
Greenhouse effect - Wikipedia

what's the proof in that? that's some model. I asked for proof observed measured evidence. not a model. come now child, listen.

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

In the empty space between your ears.

ahh, looky here, so you got nothing as usual.

Liar says what?

yes you do.

Can't post your proof?
Or none exists?

ahhh gonna play spinorama. 2nd law is my proof. until you prove otherwise. I'm still waiting. I guess it's ding dong your witch is dead.

2nd law is my proof.

Right, I remember your lie.

The Second Law of Thermodynamics states that the state of entropy of the entire universe, as an isolated system, will always increase over time. The second law also states that the changes in the entropy in the universe can never be negative.

 

[cnm]

I asked for proof observed measured evidence. not a model. come now child, listen.

Hilarity.

INFRARED ABSORPTION BY CH4 , H2 0 AND CO2

David A. Gryvnak
Darrell E. Burch
Robert L. Alt
-Dorianne K: Zgonc

SECTION 5

ABSORPTION BY C02 BETWEEN 500 AND 850 cmut

SAMPLING

The temperatures and total -pressures of the samples studied were varied
over wide ranges representative of the -earth's atmosphere. Samples varied-in
pressure from I atm=-to less than 0.03 atm and were maintained near -one of
three different temperatures: 310 K, 274 K, and 245 K. The highest temperature
corresponds approximately to the-maximum atmospheric temperature in the
tropics. The lowest temperature, 245-K, approximately-represents stratospheric
temperatures. Ideally, somewhat lower temperatures should be employed to cover
the full temperature range of the atmosphere; however, the experimental diffi-
culties associated with operating at lower temperatures -would greatly increase
the time involved in obtaining the data and would also -reduce the accuracy:. As
a compromise, the lower temperature of 245 K was chosen. An intermediate
temperature near 274 K was also employed in order to -provide additional data
on the temperature dependence of the absorption.

https://apps.dtic.mil/dtic/tr/fulltext/u2/a039380.pdf​

 

[cnm]

Obtuse denial. It must be a gift.

 

[jc456]

I asked for proof observed measured evidence. not a model. come now child, listen.

Hilarity.

INFRARED ABSORPTION BY CH4 , H2 0 AND CO2

David A. Gryvnak
Darrell E. Burch
Robert L. Alt
-Dorianne K: Zgonc

SECTION 5

ABSORPTION BY C02 BETWEEN 500 AND 850 cmut

SAMPLING

The temperatures and total -pressures of the samples studied were varied
over wide ranges representative of the -earth's atmosphere. Samples varied-in
pressure from I atm=-to less than 0.03 atm and were maintained near -one of
three different temperatures: 310 K, 274 K, and 245 K. The highest temperature
corresponds approximately to the-maximum atmospheric temperature in the
tropics. The lowest temperature, 245-K, approximately-represents stratospheric
temperatures. Ideally, somewhat lower temperatures should be employed to cover
the full temperature range of the atmosphere; however, the experimental diffi-
culties associated with operating at lower temperatures -would greatly increase
the time involved in obtaining the data and would also -reduce the accuracy:. As
a compromise, the lower temperature of 245 K was chosen. An intermediate
temperature near 274 K was also employed in order to -provide additional data
on the temperature dependence of the absorption.

https://apps.dtic.mil/dtic/tr/fulltext/u2/a039380.pdf​

and this proves what?

 

[jc456]

Obtuse denial. It must be a gift.

 

[jc456]

ahh, looky here, so you got nothing as usual.

Liar says what?

yes you do.

Can't post your proof?
Or none exists?

ahhh gonna play spinorama. 2nd law is my proof. until you prove otherwise. I'm still waiting. I guess it's ding dong your witch is dead.

2nd law is my proof.

Right, I remember your lie.

The Second Law of Thermodynamics states that the state of entropy of the entire universe, as an isolated system, will always increase over time. The second law also states that the changes in the entropy in the universe can never be negative.

and you still show nothing observed or measured. LOL. same old same old.

BTW, why didn't you answer why instruments are cooled to read IR?

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

Liar says what?

yes you do.

Can't post your proof?
Or none exists?

ahhh gonna play spinorama. 2nd law is my proof. until you prove otherwise. I'm still waiting. I guess it's ding dong your witch is dead.

2nd law is my proof.

Right, I remember your lie.

The Second Law of Thermodynamics states that the state of entropy of the entire universe, as an isolated system, will always increase over time. The second law also states that the changes in the entropy in the universe can never be negative.

and you still show nothing observed or measured. LOL. same old same old.

BTW, why didn't you answer why instruments are cooled to read IR?

Right, except for all the observations.

Why do you think instruments are cooled?

 

[jc456]

yes you do.

Can't post your proof?
Or none exists?

ahhh gonna play spinorama. 2nd law is my proof. until you prove otherwise. I'm still waiting. I guess it's ding dong your witch is dead.

2nd law is my proof.

Right, I remember your lie.

The Second Law of Thermodynamics states that the state of entropy of the entire universe, as an isolated system, will always increase over time. The second law also states that the changes in the entropy in the universe can never be negative.

and you still show nothing observed or measured. LOL. same old same old.

BTW, why didn't you answer why instruments are cooled to read IR?

Right, except for all the observations.

Why do you think instruments are cooled?

I have no idea, it's why I asked you.