More Proof the skeptics are WINNING!!

[Toddsterpatriot]

Well we finally thawed out here in Manitoba.
So I went outside to see if it was the sun that did it or all that "back radiation".

I used a laser thermometer which converts IR watts radiated to degrees C.
The sun had warmed the ground I stood on to +37 C which is a lot more than the +16C average used in Trenberth`s "energy budget" which zaps us with 333 watts/m^2 "back radiation"
Pointing the gun straight up at the clear sky it should have registered +3.8 C if there were 333 watts coming back down, but all I got was a bone chilling -18 C which corresponds to 237 watts.
So even with all that CO2 up there it`s still 100 watts/m^2 short of a climax scientist`s orgasm.

Conduction at ground level where air meets the warmer ground...(your registering ground temp) convection from water vapor in the air once warmed (your IR beam is bouncing off water vapor in the air)... and no measurement of what LWIR is doing (down welling) because your hand held device cant measure it.

Fooling yourself with equipment is easy to do.. However you have identified two elements in the atmospheres temperature. The question is, do you think that BBR (Black Body Radiation- LWIR) returning to the earths surface after being emitted from the surface (caused by CO2 or other gases) is capable of making up 170Wm^2 in the energy budget of the earth?

An infrared thermometer is a thermometer which infers temperature from a portion of the thermal radiation sometimes called blackbody radiation emitted by the object being measured. They are sometimes called laser thermometers if a laser is used to help aim the thermometer, or non-contact thermometers or temperature guns, to describe the device's ability to measure temperature from a distance. By knowing the amount of infrared energy emitted by the object and its emissivity, the object's temperature can often be determined. Infrared thermometers are a subset of devices known as "thermal radiation thermometers".

Sometimes, especially near ambient temperatures, readings may be subject to error due to the reflection of radiation from a hotter body—even the person holding the instrument[citation needed]—rather than radiated by the object being measured, and to an incorrect assumed emissivity.

The design essentially consists of a lens to focus the infrared thermal radiation on to a detector, which converts the radiant power to an electrical signal that can be displayed in units of temperature after being compensated for ambient temperature. This permits temperature measurement from a distance without contact with the object to be measured. A non-contact infrared thermometer is useful for measuring temperature under circumstances where thermocouples or other probe-type sensors cannot be used or do not produce accurate data for a variety of reasons.

Infrared thermometer - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

 

[Billy_Bob]

Well we finally thawed out here in Manitoba.
So I went outside to see if it was the sun that did it or all that "back radiation".

I used a laser thermometer which converts IR watts radiated to degrees C.
The sun had warmed the ground I stood on to +37 C which is a lot more than the +16C average used in Trenberth`s "energy budget" which zaps us with 333 watts/m^2 "back radiation"
Pointing the gun straight up at the clear sky it should have registered +3.8 C if there were 333 watts coming back down, but all I got was a bone chilling -18 C which corresponds to 237 watts.
So even with all that CO2 up there it`s still 100 watts/m^2 short of a climax scientist`s orgasm.

Conduction at ground level where air meets the warmer ground...(your registering ground temp) convection from water vapor in the air once warmed (your IR beam is bouncing off water vapor in the air)... and no measurement of what LWIR is doing (down welling) because your hand held device cant measure it.

Fooling yourself with equipment is easy to do.. However you have identified two elements in the atmospheres temperature. The question is, do you think that BBR (Black Body Radiation- LWIR) returning to the earths surface after being emitted from the surface (caused by CO2 or other gases) is capable of making up 170Wm^2 in the energy budget of the earth?

convection from water vapor in the air once warmed (your IR beam is bouncing off water vapor in the air)... and no measurement of what LWIR is doing (down welling)

IR beam? You think that device shoots a beam?
It captures photons. The energy of the photons gives a temperature reading.
It's measuring back radiation when pointed at the sky.

The device emits an IR beam it then determines temperature by the reflected LWIR which hits the sensor. The band width of the beam is the determining factor and the sensor is narrow band. It can not read broad spectrum DWLWIR by its design.

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

Well we finally thawed out here in Manitoba.
So I went outside to see if it was the sun that did it or all that "back radiation".

I used a laser thermometer which converts IR watts radiated to degrees C.
The sun had warmed the ground I stood on to +37 C which is a lot more than the +16C average used in Trenberth`s "energy budget" which zaps us with 333 watts/m^2 "back radiation"
Pointing the gun straight up at the clear sky it should have registered +3.8 C if there were 333 watts coming back down, but all I got was a bone chilling -18 C which corresponds to 237 watts.
So even with all that CO2 up there it`s still 100 watts/m^2 short of a climax scientist`s orgasm.

Conduction at ground level where air meets the warmer ground...(your registering ground temp) convection from water vapor in the air once warmed (your IR beam is bouncing off water vapor in the air)... and no measurement of what LWIR is doing (down welling) because your hand held device cant measure it.

Fooling yourself with equipment is easy to do.. However you have identified two elements in the atmospheres temperature. The question is, do you think that BBR (Black Body Radiation- LWIR) returning to the earths surface after being emitted from the surface (caused by CO2 or other gases) is capable of making up 170Wm^2 in the energy budget of the earth?

convection from water vapor in the air once warmed (your IR beam is bouncing off water vapor in the air)... and no measurement of what LWIR is doing (down welling)

IR beam? You think that device shoots a beam?
It captures photons. The energy of the photons gives a temperature reading.
It's measuring back radiation when pointed at the sky.

The device emits an IR beam it then determines temperature by the reflected LWIR which hits the sensor. The band width of the beam is the determining factor and the sensor is narrow band. It can not read broad spectrum DWLWIR by its design.

The device emits an IR beam

No it doesn't.

it then determines temperature by the reflected LWIR which hits the sensor.

How would a reflected beam tell you the temperature?

The band width of the beam is the determining factor

You're hurting our cause, you should probably stop.

 

[mamooth]

So even with all that CO2 up there it`s still 100 watts/m^2 short of a climax scientist`s orgasm.

The Trenberth diagram represents a global average.

Do you think your far northern location represents a global average? No. Your measurements of backradiation seem quite reasonable for your location.

 

[polarbear]

So even with all that CO2 up there it`s still 100 watts/m^2 short of a climax scientist`s orgasm.

The Trenberth diagram represents a global average.

Do you think your far northern location represents a global average? No. Your measurements of backradiation seem quite reasonable for your location.

No of course not. My point was that there were only 238 Watts per m^2 when the surface was at +37 C.
The Trenberth model has the surface at +16 C and computes from that a 396 watts/m^2 "global mean surface radiation".....which is correct for +16. The part that does not make sense is the 333 W/m^2 back radiation when the surface is at only +16C.
To get that we would need to "see" almost +4C (3.82C) when pointing the IR eye into the sky.
The only time I have seen that much is when I point the sensor at low altitude (<1000 ft AGL) cumulus clouds during the summer.
But then again that 100 W/m^2 increase in back radiation from the low altitude CB`s which are laden with water vapor is hardly a surprise and dwarfs whatever portion is attributed to the CO2
So let me ask you this:
Does AGW need an increase of cloud cover due to an increase in CO2 in order for their computer models being able to reflect reality?

 

[skookerasbil]

Polar Bear is BACK to dominate!!

What else do you have for us?

 

[skookerasbil]

Well we finally thawed out here in Manitoba.
So I went outside to see if it was the sun that did it or all that "back radiation".

I used a laser thermometer which converts IR watts radiated to degrees C.
The sun had warmed the ground I stood on to +37 C which is a lot more than the +16C average used in Trenberth`s "energy budget" which zaps us with 333 watts/m^2 "back radiation"
Pointing the gun straight up at the clear sky it should have registered +3.8 C if there were 333 watts coming back down, but all I got was a bone chilling -18 C which corresponds to 237 watts.
So even with all that CO2 up there it`s still 100 watts/m^2 short of a climax scientist`s orgasm.

OMG.........minus 18C.

And we have 3 or 4 boobs in this forum ready to throw themselves over a cliff because the temps have gone up 1 degree C in a few places

 

[mamooth]

The Trenberth model has the surface at +16 C and computes from that a 396 watts/m^2 "global mean surface radiation".....which is correct for +16. The part that does not make sense is the 333 W/m^2 back radiation when the surface is at only +16C.

It's not a model. It's a diagram of an imaginary steady-state condition averaged over the whole earth. It's never going to match actual conditions anywhere.

Does AGW need an increase of cloud cover due to an increase in CO2 in order for their computer models being able to reflect reality?

No. And the Trenberth diagram is not a model.

 

[jc456]

Well we finally thawed out here in Manitoba.
So I went outside to see if it was the sun that did it or all that "back radiation".

I used a laser thermometer which converts IR watts radiated to degrees C.
The sun had warmed the ground I stood on to +37 C which is a lot more than the +16C average used in Trenberth`s "energy budget" which zaps us with 333 watts/m^2 "back radiation"
Pointing the gun straight up at the clear sky it should have registered +3.8 C if there were 333 watts coming back down, but all I got was a bone chilling -18 C which corresponds to 237 watts.
So even with all that CO2 up there it`s still 100 watts/m^2 short of a climax scientist`s orgasm.

Conduction at ground level where air meets the warmer ground...(your registering ground temp) convection from water vapor in the air once warmed (your IR beam is bouncing off water vapor in the air)... and no measurement of what LWIR is doing (down welling) because your hand held device cant measure it.

Fooling yourself with equipment is easy to do.. However you have identified two elements in the atmospheres temperature. The question is, do you think that BBR (Black Body Radiation- LWIR) returning to the earths surface after being emitted from the surface (caused by CO2 or other gases) is capable of making up 170Wm^2 in the energy budget of the earth?

convection from water vapor in the air once warmed (your IR beam is bouncing off water vapor in the air)... and no measurement of what LWIR is doing (down welling)

IR beam? You think that device shoots a beam?
It captures photons. The energy of the photons gives a temperature reading.
It's measuring back radiation when pointed at the sky.

wait, I thought IR didn't have a temperature, so why is the device giving a temperature?

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

Well we finally thawed out here in Manitoba.
So I went outside to see if it was the sun that did it or all that "back radiation".

I used a laser thermometer which converts IR watts radiated to degrees C.
The sun had warmed the ground I stood on to +37 C which is a lot more than the +16C average used in Trenberth`s "energy budget" which zaps us with 333 watts/m^2 "back radiation"
Pointing the gun straight up at the clear sky it should have registered +3.8 C if there were 333 watts coming back down, but all I got was a bone chilling -18 C which corresponds to 237 watts.
So even with all that CO2 up there it`s still 100 watts/m^2 short of a climax scientist`s orgasm.

Conduction at ground level where air meets the warmer ground...(your registering ground temp) convection from water vapor in the air once warmed (your IR beam is bouncing off water vapor in the air)... and no measurement of what LWIR is doing (down welling) because your hand held device cant measure it.

Fooling yourself with equipment is easy to do.. However you have identified two elements in the atmospheres temperature. The question is, do you think that BBR (Black Body Radiation- LWIR) returning to the earths surface after being emitted from the surface (caused by CO2 or other gases) is capable of making up 170Wm^2 in the energy budget of the earth?

convection from water vapor in the air once warmed (your IR beam is bouncing off water vapor in the air)... and no measurement of what LWIR is doing (down welling)

IR beam? You think that device shoots a beam?
It captures photons. The energy of the photons gives a temperature reading.
It's measuring back radiation when pointed at the sky.

wait, I thought IR didn't have a temperature, so why is the device giving a temperature?

Do understand photons have differing energy levels?

 

[jc456]

Well we finally thawed out here in Manitoba.
So I went outside to see if it was the sun that did it or all that "back radiation".

I used a laser thermometer which converts IR watts radiated to degrees C.
The sun had warmed the ground I stood on to +37 C which is a lot more than the +16C average used in Trenberth`s "energy budget" which zaps us with 333 watts/m^2 "back radiation"
Pointing the gun straight up at the clear sky it should have registered +3.8 C if there were 333 watts coming back down, but all I got was a bone chilling -18 C which corresponds to 237 watts.
So even with all that CO2 up there it`s still 100 watts/m^2 short of a climax scientist`s orgasm.

OMG.........minus 18C.

And we have 3 or 4 boobs in this forum ready to throw themselves over a cliff because the temps have gone up 1 degree C in a few places

skooks, the earth is like an oven and the convection system moves the earth's heat and/or cold around. Does it everyday, if the jet stream increases from the south temperatures in the north go up and when the polar vortex moves south, the temps get colder south. There is no way for anyone, and I mean anyone to state what an actual temperature is anywhere on the planet except for perhaps the Antarctic and that is the only place.

 

[jc456]

Well we finally thawed out here in Manitoba.
So I went outside to see if it was the sun that did it or all that "back radiation".

I used a laser thermometer which converts IR watts radiated to degrees C.
The sun had warmed the ground I stood on to +37 C which is a lot more than the +16C average used in Trenberth`s "energy budget" which zaps us with 333 watts/m^2 "back radiation"
Pointing the gun straight up at the clear sky it should have registered +3.8 C if there were 333 watts coming back down, but all I got was a bone chilling -18 C which corresponds to 237 watts.
So even with all that CO2 up there it`s still 100 watts/m^2 short of a climax scientist`s orgasm.

Conduction at ground level where air meets the warmer ground...(your registering ground temp) convection from water vapor in the air once warmed (your IR beam is bouncing off water vapor in the air)... and no measurement of what LWIR is doing (down welling) because your hand held device cant measure it.

Fooling yourself with equipment is easy to do.. However you have identified two elements in the atmospheres temperature. The question is, do you think that BBR (Black Body Radiation- LWIR) returning to the earths surface after being emitted from the surface (caused by CO2 or other gases) is capable of making up 170Wm^2 in the energy budget of the earth?

convection from water vapor in the air once warmed (your IR beam is bouncing off water vapor in the air)... and no measurement of what LWIR is doing (down welling)

IR beam? You think that device shoots a beam?
It captures photons. The energy of the photons gives a temperature reading.
It's measuring back radiation when pointed at the sky.

wait, I thought IR didn't have a temperature, so why is the device giving a temperature?

Do understand photons have differing energy levels?

no no no, I stated many months back that cold can't move to heat and you stated that the IR photons do not have a temperature so that becomes irrelevant. Did you not?

 

[jc456]

Well we finally thawed out here in Manitoba.
So I went outside to see if it was the sun that did it or all that "back radiation".

I used a laser thermometer which converts IR watts radiated to degrees C.
The sun had warmed the ground I stood on to +37 C which is a lot more than the +16C average used in Trenberth`s "energy budget" which zaps us with 333 watts/m^2 "back radiation"
Pointing the gun straight up at the clear sky it should have registered +3.8 C if there were 333 watts coming back down, but all I got was a bone chilling -18 C which corresponds to 237 watts.
So even with all that CO2 up there it`s still 100 watts/m^2 short of a climax scientist`s orgasm.

Conduction at ground level where air meets the warmer ground...(your registering ground temp) convection from water vapor in the air once warmed (your IR beam is bouncing off water vapor in the air)... and no measurement of what LWIR is doing (down welling) because your hand held device cant measure it.

Fooling yourself with equipment is easy to do.. However you have identified two elements in the atmospheres temperature. The question is, do you think that BBR (Black Body Radiation- LWIR) returning to the earths surface after being emitted from the surface (caused by CO2 or other gases) is capable of making up 170Wm^2 in the energy budget of the earth?

convection from water vapor in the air once warmed (your IR beam is bouncing off water vapor in the air)... and no measurement of what LWIR is doing (down welling)

IR beam? You think that device shoots a beam?
It captures photons. The energy of the photons gives a temperature reading.
It's measuring back radiation when pointed at the sky.

The device emits an IR beam it then determines temperature by the reflected LWIR which hits the sensor. The band width of the beam is the determining factor and the sensor is narrow band. It can not read broad spectrum DWLWIR by its design.

The device emits an IR beam

No it doesn't.

it then determines temperature by the reflected LWIR which hits the sensor.

How would a reflected beam tell you the temperature?

The band width of the beam is the determining factor

You're hurting our cause, you should probably stop.

No it doesn't.

sure it does.

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

Well we finally thawed out here in Manitoba.
So I went outside to see if it was the sun that did it or all that "back radiation".

I used a laser thermometer which converts IR watts radiated to degrees C.
The sun had warmed the ground I stood on to +37 C which is a lot more than the +16C average used in Trenberth`s "energy budget" which zaps us with 333 watts/m^2 "back radiation"
Pointing the gun straight up at the clear sky it should have registered +3.8 C if there were 333 watts coming back down, but all I got was a bone chilling -18 C which corresponds to 237 watts.
So even with all that CO2 up there it`s still 100 watts/m^2 short of a climax scientist`s orgasm.

Conduction at ground level where air meets the warmer ground...(your registering ground temp) convection from water vapor in the air once warmed (your IR beam is bouncing off water vapor in the air)... and no measurement of what LWIR is doing (down welling) because your hand held device cant measure it.

Fooling yourself with equipment is easy to do.. However you have identified two elements in the atmospheres temperature. The question is, do you think that BBR (Black Body Radiation- LWIR) returning to the earths surface after being emitted from the surface (caused by CO2 or other gases) is capable of making up 170Wm^2 in the energy budget of the earth?

convection from water vapor in the air once warmed (your IR beam is bouncing off water vapor in the air)... and no measurement of what LWIR is doing (down welling)

IR beam? You think that device shoots a beam?
It captures photons. The energy of the photons gives a temperature reading.
It's measuring back radiation when pointed at the sky.

wait, I thought IR didn't have a temperature, so why is the device giving a temperature?

Do understand photons have differing energy levels?

no no no, I stated many months back that cold can't move to heat and you stated that the IR photons do not have a temperature so that becomes irrelevant. Did you not?

I stated many months back that cold can't move to heat

Why not? What does that have to do with photons?
Do you think photons measure the temperature of the objects nearby?
What about objects thousands of light years away?

and you stated that the IR photons do not have a temperature

They don't have a temperature. They have energy.

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

Well we finally thawed out here in Manitoba.
So I went outside to see if it was the sun that did it or all that "back radiation".

I used a laser thermometer which converts IR watts radiated to degrees C.
The sun had warmed the ground I stood on to +37 C which is a lot more than the +16C average used in Trenberth`s "energy budget" which zaps us with 333 watts/m^2 "back radiation"
Pointing the gun straight up at the clear sky it should have registered +3.8 C if there were 333 watts coming back down, but all I got was a bone chilling -18 C which corresponds to 237 watts.
So even with all that CO2 up there it`s still 100 watts/m^2 short of a climax scientist`s orgasm.

Conduction at ground level where air meets the warmer ground...(your registering ground temp) convection from water vapor in the air once warmed (your IR beam is bouncing off water vapor in the air)... and no measurement of what LWIR is doing (down welling) because your hand held device cant measure it.

Fooling yourself with equipment is easy to do.. However you have identified two elements in the atmospheres temperature. The question is, do you think that BBR (Black Body Radiation- LWIR) returning to the earths surface after being emitted from the surface (caused by CO2 or other gases) is capable of making up 170Wm^2 in the energy budget of the earth?

convection from water vapor in the air once warmed (your IR beam is bouncing off water vapor in the air)... and no measurement of what LWIR is doing (down welling)

IR beam? You think that device shoots a beam?
It captures photons. The energy of the photons gives a temperature reading.
It's measuring back radiation when pointed at the sky.

The device emits an IR beam it then determines temperature by the reflected LWIR which hits the sensor. The band width of the beam is the determining factor and the sensor is narrow band. It can not read broad spectrum DWLWIR by its design.

The device emits an IR beam

No it doesn't.

it then determines temperature by the reflected LWIR which hits the sensor.

How would a reflected beam tell you the temperature?

The band width of the beam is the determining factor

You're hurting our cause, you should probably stop.

No it doesn't.

sure it does.

sure it does.

Nothing posted said that. Prove your claim.

 

[jc456]

Conduction at ground level where air meets the warmer ground...(your registering ground temp) convection from water vapor in the air once warmed (your IR beam is bouncing off water vapor in the air)... and no measurement of what LWIR is doing (down welling) because your hand held device cant measure it.

Fooling yourself with equipment is easy to do.. However you have identified two elements in the atmospheres temperature. The question is, do you think that BBR (Black Body Radiation- LWIR) returning to the earths surface after being emitted from the surface (caused by CO2 or other gases) is capable of making up 170Wm^2 in the energy budget of the earth?

convection from water vapor in the air once warmed (your IR beam is bouncing off water vapor in the air)... and no measurement of what LWIR is doing (down welling)

IR beam? You think that device shoots a beam?
It captures photons. The energy of the photons gives a temperature reading.
It's measuring back radiation when pointed at the sky.

wait, I thought IR didn't have a temperature, so why is the device giving a temperature?

Do understand photons have differing energy levels?

no no no, I stated many months back that cold can't move to heat and you stated that the IR photons do not have a temperature so that becomes irrelevant. Did you not?

I stated many months back that cold can't move to heat

Why not? What does that have to do with photons?
Do you think photons measure the temperature of the objects nearby?
What about objects thousands of light years away?

and you stated that the IR photons do not have a temperature

They don't have a temperature. They have energy.

Why not? What does that have to do with photons?

Because it's never been proven. Post it up here a warm object getting warmer by a cold photon. I'll be waiting patiently for that one.

 

[jc456]

Conduction at ground level where air meets the warmer ground...(your registering ground temp) convection from water vapor in the air once warmed (your IR beam is bouncing off water vapor in the air)... and no measurement of what LWIR is doing (down welling) because your hand held device cant measure it.

Fooling yourself with equipment is easy to do.. However you have identified two elements in the atmospheres temperature. The question is, do you think that BBR (Black Body Radiation- LWIR) returning to the earths surface after being emitted from the surface (caused by CO2 or other gases) is capable of making up 170Wm^2 in the energy budget of the earth?

convection from water vapor in the air once warmed (your IR beam is bouncing off water vapor in the air)... and no measurement of what LWIR is doing (down welling)

IR beam? You think that device shoots a beam?
It captures photons. The energy of the photons gives a temperature reading.
It's measuring back radiation when pointed at the sky.

The device emits an IR beam it then determines temperature by the reflected LWIR which hits the sensor. The band width of the beam is the determining factor and the sensor is narrow band. It can not read broad spectrum DWLWIR by its design.

The device emits an IR beam

No it doesn't.

it then determines temperature by the reflected LWIR which hits the sensor.

How would a reflected beam tell you the temperature?

The band width of the beam is the determining factor

You're hurting our cause, you should probably stop.

No it doesn't.

sure it does.

sure it does.

Nothing posted said that. Prove your claim.

naw, you prove yours.

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

convection from water vapor in the air once warmed (your IR beam is bouncing off water vapor in the air)... and no measurement of what LWIR is doing (down welling)

IR beam? You think that device shoots a beam?
It captures photons. The energy of the photons gives a temperature reading.
It's measuring back radiation when pointed at the sky.

wait, I thought IR didn't have a temperature, so why is the device giving a temperature?

Do understand photons have differing energy levels?

no no no, I stated many months back that cold can't move to heat and you stated that the IR photons do not have a temperature so that becomes irrelevant. Did you not?

I stated many months back that cold can't move to heat

Why not? What does that have to do with photons?
Do you think photons measure the temperature of the objects nearby?
What about objects thousands of light years away?

and you stated that the IR photons do not have a temperature

They don't have a temperature. They have energy.

Why not? What does that have to do with photons?

Because it's never been proven. Post it up here a warm object getting warmer by a cold photon. I'll be waiting patiently for that one.

Post it up here a warm object getting warmer by a cold photon.

No such thing as a cold photon.

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

convection from water vapor in the air once warmed (your IR beam is bouncing off water vapor in the air)... and no measurement of what LWIR is doing (down welling)

IR beam? You think that device shoots a beam?
It captures photons. The energy of the photons gives a temperature reading.
It's measuring back radiation when pointed at the sky.

The device emits an IR beam it then determines temperature by the reflected LWIR which hits the sensor. The band width of the beam is the determining factor and the sensor is narrow band. It can not read broad spectrum DWLWIR by its design.

The device emits an IR beam

No it doesn't.

it then determines temperature by the reflected LWIR which hits the sensor.

How would a reflected beam tell you the temperature?

The band width of the beam is the determining factor

You're hurting our cause, you should probably stop.

No it doesn't.

sure it does.

sure it does.

Nothing posted said that. Prove your claim.

naw, you prove yours.

Infrared thermometer - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

I'm always glad to educate you.

 

[jc456]

wait, I thought IR didn't have a temperature, so why is the device giving a temperature?

Do understand photons have differing energy levels?

no no no, I stated many months back that cold can't move to heat and you stated that the IR photons do not have a temperature so that becomes irrelevant. Did you not?

I stated many months back that cold can't move to heat

Why not? What does that have to do with photons?
Do you think photons measure the temperature of the objects nearby?
What about objects thousands of light years away?

and you stated that the IR photons do not have a temperature

They don't have a temperature. They have energy.

Why not? What does that have to do with photons?

Because it's never been proven. Post it up here a warm object getting warmer by a cold photon. I'll be waiting patiently for that one.

Post it up here a warm object getting warmer by a cold photon.

No such thing as a cold photon.

well if there are hot ones there must be cold ones. your own words cause how else does that IR thermo-doodle work?