Modern Scrubbing Technology - Why fossil fuels are not extinct..

Cooler water doesn't "respond to back radiation"?
Why not?
The heat (energy) is lost in the evaporation layer. Even if we mix these two regions the mass of the cooler region is about 14 times the size of the warmer region. Do the math. mass versus mass. how much energy is required for this to warm up the lower mass?

I should have used more precise wording; the effect is so small that it is nearly impossible to detect.
 
Simple. That layer is where evaporation takes place and energy is expended. The amount of energy we are talking is very small. as it takes 4 times as much energy to heat water than it does air, it is insufficient to defeat the thermocline barrier just below the evaporation layer.

To defeat something all you must do is impede its progress. The energy is lost in the process of creating water vapor.

That layer is where evaporation takes place and energy is expended.

So when you said it won't respond to back radiation you meant it responds
by increased evaporation?

The amount of energy we are talking is very small.

The LWIR back radiation that hits 71% of surface is small? How small?

it is insufficient to defeat the thermocline barrier just below the evaporation layer.

You keep using the word defeat. How is energy defeated?

To defeat something all you must do is impede its progress.

The Earth's atmosphere "defeats" LWIR by impeding its escape to space?

How many times did you use that definition of "defeat" in your doctoral dissertation?
 
Simple. That layer is where evaporation takes place and energy is expended. The amount of energy we are talking is very small. as it takes 4 times as much energy to heat water than it does air, it is insufficient to defeat the thermocline barrier just below the evaporation layer.

To defeat something all you must do is impede its progress. The energy is lost in the process of creating water vapor.

The energy is lost in the process of creating water vapor.

Wow! I didn't know energy could be lost.

Is that a new Law of Thermodynamics you've come up with?
 
IT is reradiated to space.
Even our satellites prove this. Increases in DWSR is always matched by outgoing LWIR.

IT is reradiated to space.

The water absorbs the energy and reradiates it to space?
That's different than "does not respond".

DWSR?
 
That layer is where evaporation takes place and energy is expended.

So when you said it won't respond to back radiation you meant it responds
by increased evaporation?

The amount of energy we are talking is very small.

The LWIR back radiation that hits 71% of surface is small? How small?

it is insufficient to defeat the thermocline barrier just below the evaporation layer.

You keep using the word defeat. How is energy defeated?

To defeat something all you must do is impede its progress.

The Earth's atmosphere "defeats" LWIR by impeding its escape to space?

How many times did you use that definition of "defeat" in your doctoral dissertation?
When I am targeting a lower ability group, I try to use words that they understand.

To answer all of your questions, the response is; the energy is expended in processes, which do not allow it to be drawn into or mixed into the deep oceans. Its impact is "defeated" by these processes which either expend the energy or release it to space.
 
The energy is lost in the process of creating water vapor.

Wow! I didn't know energy could be lost.

Is that a new Law of Thermodynamics you've come up with?
Now your nit-picking Todd... I expect that from other Ph.D's Again trying to explain something to laymen in terms they understand. You know as well as I do that energy is never lost.
 
IT is reradiated to space.

The water absorbs the energy and reradiates it to space?
That's different than "does not respond".

DWSR?
Merry Christmas Todd.... Explaining things in terms most can grasp verses terms they cannot. You are hopeless.

Down-Welling Solar Radiation = DWSR
 
Last edited:
When I am targeting a lower ability group, I try to use words that they understand.

To answer all of your questions, the response is; the energy is expended in processes, which do not allow it to be drawn into or mixed into the deep oceans. Its impact is "defeated" by these processes which either expend the energy or release it to space.

When I am targeting a lower ability group, I try to use words that they understand.

You should use the correct words, instead of the wrong words. So they don't laugh at your errors.

the response is; the energy is expended in processes,

So you were lying when you said "it does not respond".
 
Now your nit-picking Todd... I expect that from other Ph.D's Again trying to explain something to laymen in terms they understand. You know as well as I do that energy is never lost.

Never lost. That's why you said it was lost.

Thanks for clearing that up.

You know as well as I do that energy is never lost.

Better than you do, apparently.

The energy is lost in the process of creating water vapor.

LOL!
 
When I am targeting a lower ability group, I try to use words that they understand.

You should use the correct words, instead of the wrong words. So they don't laugh at your errors.

the response is; the energy is expended in processes,

So you were lying when you said "it does not respond".
Todd, Get a life. How would you term something that is not responding as desired?
 
Merry Christmas Todd.... Explaining things in terms most can grasp verses terms they cannot. You are hopeless.

Down-Welling Solar Radiation = DWSR

So you meant to explain that "71-72% of our surface will not respond to "back radiation""
but really does respond?
 
Never lost. That's why you said it was lost.

Thanks for clearing that up.

You know as well as I do that energy is never lost.

Better than you do, apparently.

The energy is lost in the process of creating water vapor.

LOL!
How many people know the laws of thermodynamics Todd? How many can understand the laws of energy conservation?

How do you translate these processes so others can understand you?
 
How many people know the laws of thermodynamics Todd? How many can understand the laws of energy conservation?

How do you translate these processes so others can understand you?

How many people know the laws of thermodynamics Todd? How many can understand the laws of energy conservation?

Plenty. Were you trying to make it simpler for me to understand by getting it wrong?

How was your error helpful?
 
OMG! You're a warmer?

That's why your posts are so idiotic?
You do very well at trying to discredit people. But I really don't give a shit and will continue to post. Again, you attempt to discredit by personal attack and never address the science presented. you nit-pick minor issues while ignoring the primary issue. You are a hack. But then we all knew that.
 
You do very well at trying to discredit people. But I really don't give a shit and will continue to post. Again, you attempt to discredit by personal attack and never address the science presented. you nit-pick minor issues while ignoring the primary issue. You are a hack. But then we all knew that.

You do very well at trying to discredit people.

With your posts, you discredit yourself.

Again, you attempt to discredit by personal attack and never address the science presented.
Was this you "presenting science"?

I can show you why 71-72% of our surface will not respond to "back radiation"
Or this?

To defeat something all you must do is impede its progress. The energy is lost in the process of creating water vapor.
 

Forum List

Back
Top