Northern nations warming faster than global average

[jc456]

Admit you lied

Where?

in your post, derp

Which post? derp

the one with the lie

If I lied, tell me the post....unless you're lying......

so you can't follow along with your own posts eh? sad!!!

 

[jc456]

The greenhouse effect does not heat anything. The sun heats the earth and penetrates the ocean.


.

So AGW is NOT heating the oceans. That's what we've been saying

GHGs alone are not a source of heat.
The sun heats the oceans and land.
GHGs keep the surface heat from escaping too rapidly from the oceans and land.
If there were no GHGs too much heat would escape and the oceans would freeze.
The GHGs keep the ocean from freezing; they don't heat the ocean.
That's what we've been saying.
You were told this many times by many people.

You must have seen the blanket analogy many times.
A blanket is not a source of heat.
Your body is.
The blanket retains your body heat.

It can't be made simpler than that.


.

dude remarkable. The blanket keeps the cold off my body. it's a physical barrier. how is it the heavier the blanket the warmer one gets? too special indeed.

And how does conduction warm the water exactly? Cause that's what you just implied. tell us how it penetrates the water.

The blanket keeps the cold off my body. it's a physical barrier.

The cold is a physical thing trying to get at you?

yep, it affects my skin. and wind chill is worse than temperature on my skin, but doesn't impact anything else. just my skin. hmmmmm. derp much?

 

[jc456]

I can only suppose that you believe saying incredibly stupid stuff is somehow cute...sorry, it's just incredibly stupid...

Tell you what sparky, how about you go out on the internet and bring back a description of the greenhouse effect that points out that conduction and convection are the primary means of energy movement through the troposphere....and how only one in a billion greenhouse gas molecules actually gets to emit a photon and the rest lose the energy they have absorbed via collisions with other molecules.

And do make sure they explain how the overwhelming dominance of conduction and convection in the troposphere equal a radiative greenhouse effect.

You might get wuwei to help you out since he seems to think that convection and conduction equal a radiative greenhouse effect as well.

I look forward to watching your abject failure...and just can't wait to see the excuses you put forward for not bringing any such description of the radiative greenhouse effect forward.

I can only suppose that you believe saying incredibly stupid stuff is somehow cute

Yes, I think mocking your stupidity is cute.

Now, tell me more about your claim that IR can't heat the atmosphere. LOL!

so you're now in that IR doesn't radiate back to the surface? instead note that it is absorbed and handed off as kinetic energy through collisions and that heats the atmosphere through conduction? yeah, I'm good.

so you're now in that IR doesn't radiate back to the surface?

You're lying.

instead note that it is absorbed and handed off as kinetic energy through collisions and that heats the atmosphere through conduction?

IR radiation warms GHGs and they conduct to non-GHGs thereby warming the atmosphere?
Are you sure? SSDD says IR doesn't lead to warming. IR "can't warm the atmosphere" he has claimed.

Now, back to your stance.

After CO2 absorbs IR and conducts energy away, can CO2 ever regain energy from Non-GHGs and radiate? Or does it never, ever radiate?

CO2 can radiate after it absorbs IR and hasn't collided to hand off the energy it has absorbed.

And IR doesn't heat anything in the atmosphere. IR is converted to kinetic energy in the CO2 molecule and then handed off 99% of the time.

CO2 can radiate after it absorbs IR and hasn't collided to hand off the energy it has absorbed.

What if it gets energy handed back? Can it emit then?

And IR doesn't heat anything in the atmosphere. IR is converted to kinetic energy in the CO2 molecule and then handed off 99% of the time.

Step one, absorb IR. Step two, handoff energy resulting in a heated atmosphere.
Am I missing one of your steps that causes the IR absorption to not heat the atmosphere?

What if it gets energy handed back? Can it emit then?

Sure it can. why couldn't it? but it won't emit until it is in a vibrating state and still can loose that energy on another collision.

Am I missing one of your steps that causes the IR absorption to not heat the atmosphere
Well sure you are...IR is converted to kinetic energy. no longer IR. It's handed to another gas molecule that isn't the same molecular structure as it is.

What is it you think happens? seems you always avoid letting the class know what you think happens.

 

[Wuwei]

You're flailing and failing and I'm not surprised. You tend to make up "facts" on the fly especially you've pwned yourself so effectively. Your "explanations" are nothing short of fucking moronic to boot. The funniest thing is that you think you're lecturing me! You completely contradict yourself in 2 consecutive posts and you think you're smart, not like everyone says, like dumb!

Where do you think I contradict myself? Where exactly do you think I failed? What facts do you think are made up? If you want to make a point you need to give more information. Otherwise it's just an empty ad hominem.


.

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

Where?

in your post, derp

Which post? derp

the one with the lie

If I lied, tell me the post....unless you're lying......

so you can't follow along with your own posts eh? sad!!!

I can't follow your imaginary claims about my actual posts.

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

I can only suppose that you believe saying incredibly stupid stuff is somehow cute

Yes, I think mocking your stupidity is cute.

Now, tell me more about your claim that IR can't heat the atmosphere. LOL!

so you're now in that IR doesn't radiate back to the surface? instead note that it is absorbed and handed off as kinetic energy through collisions and that heats the atmosphere through conduction? yeah, I'm good.

so you're now in that IR doesn't radiate back to the surface?

You're lying.

instead note that it is absorbed and handed off as kinetic energy through collisions and that heats the atmosphere through conduction?

IR radiation warms GHGs and they conduct to non-GHGs thereby warming the atmosphere?
Are you sure? SSDD says IR doesn't lead to warming. IR "can't warm the atmosphere" he has claimed.

Now, back to your stance.

After CO2 absorbs IR and conducts energy away, can CO2 ever regain energy from Non-GHGs and radiate? Or does it never, ever radiate?

CO2 can radiate after it absorbs IR and hasn't collided to hand off the energy it has absorbed.

And IR doesn't heat anything in the atmosphere. IR is converted to kinetic energy in the CO2 molecule and then handed off 99% of the time.

CO2 can radiate after it absorbs IR and hasn't collided to hand off the energy it has absorbed.

What if it gets energy handed back? Can it emit then?

And IR doesn't heat anything in the atmosphere. IR is converted to kinetic energy in the CO2 molecule and then handed off 99% of the time.

Step one, absorb IR. Step two, handoff energy resulting in a heated atmosphere.
Am I missing one of your steps that causes the IR absorption to not heat the atmosphere?

What if it gets energy handed back? Can it emit then?

Sure it can. why couldn't it? but it won't emit until it is in a vibrating state and still can loose that energy on another collision.

Am I missing one of your steps that causes the IR absorption to not heat the atmosphere
Well sure you are...IR is converted to kinetic energy. no longer IR. It's handed to another gas molecule that isn't the same molecular structure as it is.

What is it you think happens? seems you always avoid letting the class know what you think happens.

Sure it can. why couldn't it?

Excellent! And when it emits, it can send that photon in any direction, even toward the ground.

but it won't emit until it is in a vibrating state and still can loose that energy on another collision.

Yup. Sometimes it emits, sometimes it collides.

Well sure you are...IR is converted to kinetic energy. no longer IR.

Yes, the IR doesn't heat the atmosphere until it is absorbed.

It's handed to another gas molecule that isn't the same molecular structure as it is.

It's not restricted as far as the molecule it hits, but yes, that's how IR heats the atmosphere.

What is it you think happens?

The IR heats the atmosphere. SSDD was wrong. You too (And IR doesn't heat anything in the atmosphere)

 

[jc456]

in your post, derp

Which post? derp

the one with the lie

If I lied, tell me the post....unless you're lying......

so you can't follow along with your own posts eh? sad!!!

I can't follow your imaginary claims about my actual posts.

sucks to be you

 

[jc456]

so you're now in that IR doesn't radiate back to the surface? instead note that it is absorbed and handed off as kinetic energy through collisions and that heats the atmosphere through conduction? yeah, I'm good.

so you're now in that IR doesn't radiate back to the surface?

You're lying.

instead note that it is absorbed and handed off as kinetic energy through collisions and that heats the atmosphere through conduction?

IR radiation warms GHGs and they conduct to non-GHGs thereby warming the atmosphere?
Are you sure? SSDD says IR doesn't lead to warming. IR "can't warm the atmosphere" he has claimed.

Now, back to your stance.

After CO2 absorbs IR and conducts energy away, can CO2 ever regain energy from Non-GHGs and radiate? Or does it never, ever radiate?

CO2 can radiate after it absorbs IR and hasn't collided to hand off the energy it has absorbed.

And IR doesn't heat anything in the atmosphere. IR is converted to kinetic energy in the CO2 molecule and then handed off 99% of the time.

CO2 can radiate after it absorbs IR and hasn't collided to hand off the energy it has absorbed.

What if it gets energy handed back? Can it emit then?

And IR doesn't heat anything in the atmosphere. IR is converted to kinetic energy in the CO2 molecule and then handed off 99% of the time.

Step one, absorb IR. Step two, handoff energy resulting in a heated atmosphere.
Am I missing one of your steps that causes the IR absorption to not heat the atmosphere?

What if it gets energy handed back? Can it emit then?

Sure it can. why couldn't it? but it won't emit until it is in a vibrating state and still can loose that energy on another collision.

Am I missing one of your steps that causes the IR absorption to not heat the atmosphere
Well sure you are...IR is converted to kinetic energy. no longer IR. It's handed to another gas molecule that isn't the same molecular structure as it is.

What is it you think happens? seems you always avoid letting the class know what you think happens.

Sure it can. why couldn't it?

Excellent! And when it emits, it can send that photon in any direction, even toward the ground.

but it won't emit until it is in a vibrating state and still can loose that energy on another collision.

Yup. Sometimes it emits, sometimes it collides.

Well sure you are...IR is converted to kinetic energy. no longer IR.

Yes, the IR doesn't heat the atmosphere until it is absorbed.

It's handed to another gas molecule that isn't the same molecular structure as it is.

It's not restricted as far as the molecule it hits, but yes, that's how IR heats the atmosphere.

What is it you think happens?

The IR heats the atmosphere. SSDD was wrong. You too (And IR doesn't heat anything in the atmosphere)

Excellent! And when it emits, it can send that photon in any direction, even toward the ground.

If the surface is cooler than it sure? why not?

Yes, the IR doesn't heat the atmosphere until it is absorbed.
It's not restricted as far as the molecule it hits, but yes, that's how IR heats the atmosphere.
nope, it is no longer IR after it is absorbed.

The IR heats the atmosphere. SSDD was wrong. You too

Nope!! Kinetic Energy through conduction. If IR was what did it, there would be no need to specify conduction, now would there?

Conduction isn't emit, last I looked.

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

so you're now in that IR doesn't radiate back to the surface?

You're lying.

instead note that it is absorbed and handed off as kinetic energy through collisions and that heats the atmosphere through conduction?

IR radiation warms GHGs and they conduct to non-GHGs thereby warming the atmosphere?
Are you sure? SSDD says IR doesn't lead to warming. IR "can't warm the atmosphere" he has claimed.

Now, back to your stance.

After CO2 absorbs IR and conducts energy away, can CO2 ever regain energy from Non-GHGs and radiate? Or does it never, ever radiate?

CO2 can radiate after it absorbs IR and hasn't collided to hand off the energy it has absorbed.

And IR doesn't heat anything in the atmosphere. IR is converted to kinetic energy in the CO2 molecule and then handed off 99% of the time.

CO2 can radiate after it absorbs IR and hasn't collided to hand off the energy it has absorbed.

What if it gets energy handed back? Can it emit then?

And IR doesn't heat anything in the atmosphere. IR is converted to kinetic energy in the CO2 molecule and then handed off 99% of the time.

Step one, absorb IR. Step two, handoff energy resulting in a heated atmosphere.
Am I missing one of your steps that causes the IR absorption to not heat the atmosphere?

What if it gets energy handed back? Can it emit then?

Sure it can. why couldn't it? but it won't emit until it is in a vibrating state and still can loose that energy on another collision.

Am I missing one of your steps that causes the IR absorption to not heat the atmosphere
Well sure you are...IR is converted to kinetic energy. no longer IR. It's handed to another gas molecule that isn't the same molecular structure as it is.

What is it you think happens? seems you always avoid letting the class know what you think happens.

Sure it can. why couldn't it?

Excellent! And when it emits, it can send that photon in any direction, even toward the ground.

but it won't emit until it is in a vibrating state and still can loose that energy on another collision.

Yup. Sometimes it emits, sometimes it collides.

Well sure you are...IR is converted to kinetic energy. no longer IR.

Yes, the IR doesn't heat the atmosphere until it is absorbed.

It's handed to another gas molecule that isn't the same molecular structure as it is.

It's not restricted as far as the molecule it hits, but yes, that's how IR heats the atmosphere.

What is it you think happens?

The IR heats the atmosphere. SSDD was wrong. You too (And IR doesn't heat anything in the atmosphere)

Excellent! And when it emits, it can send that photon in any direction, even toward the ground.

If the surface is cooler than it sure? why not?

Yes, the IR doesn't heat the atmosphere until it is absorbed.
It's not restricted as far as the molecule it hits, but yes, that's how IR heats the atmosphere.
nope, it is no longer IR after it is absorbed.

The IR heats the atmosphere. SSDD was wrong. You too

Nope!! Kinetic Energy through conduction. If IR was what did it, there would be no need to specify conduction, now would there?

Conduction isn't emit, last I looked.

If the surface is cooler than it sure? why not?

Why does the surface have to be cooler?

nope, it is no longer IR after it is absorbed.

After it's absorbed, it's "heat".

​

Nope!! Kinetic Energy through conduction. ​

​

If it's heat after the CO2 conducts it, it's heat before CO2 conducts it.​

​

If IR was what did it, there would be no need to specify conduction, now would there?​

You've discovered the 2 step process. Don't tell SSDD.​

 

[SSDD]

And yet, you still believe that a radiative greenhouse effect exists in a troposphere completely dominated by convection and conduction. Maybe you can help toddster in his search for a description of the radiative greenhouse effect as described by climate science that explains how the vast bulk of energy moving through the troposphere via convection and conduction equals a radiative greenhouse effect.

As you know, the radiative greenhouse effect has it's largest influence near the surface. Much less so above a few dozen meters.


.

As I know, there is no radiative greenhouse effect as described by climate science

 

[SSDD]

You've discovered the mechanism of GHGs warming the atmosphere. Congrats!
Don't tell SSDD, he thinks it doesn't happen.

I can only suppose that you believe saying incredibly stupid stuff is somehow cute...sorry, it's just incredibly stupid...

Tell you what sparky, how about you go out on the internet and bring back a description of the greenhouse effect that points out that conduction and convection are the primary means of energy movement through the troposphere....and how only one in a billion greenhouse gas molecules actually gets to emit a photon and the rest lose the energy they have absorbed via collisions with other molecules.

And do make sure they explain how the overwhelming dominance of conduction and convection in the troposphere equal a radiative greenhouse effect.

You might get wuwei to help you out since he seems to think that convection and conduction equal a radiative greenhouse effect as well.

I look forward to watching your abject failure...and just can't wait to see the excuses you put forward for not bringing any such description of the radiative greenhouse effect forward.

I can only suppose that you believe saying incredibly stupid stuff is somehow cute

Yes, I think mocking your stupidity is cute.

Now, tell me more about your claim that IR can't heat the atmosphere. LOL!

So you can’t find any description of a radiative greenhouse effect that acknowledges that the dominant means of energy transport through the troposphere is conduction and convection?

Not surprising. Since there are none.

And if you believe than IR heats the atmosphere, feel free to provide some observed measured evidence that establishes a coherent link between the absorption of IR by a gas and warming in the atmosphere..

Or don’t and lose yet again...

 

[SSDD]

Why does the surface have to be cooler?

Refer to the second law of thermodynamics...energy doesn’t move spontaneously from cool to warm.

And feel free to provide a credible source that claims that energy is moving spontaneously from the surface of the sun to its corona...or don’t and lose yet again.

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

You've discovered the mechanism of GHGs warming the atmosphere. Congrats!
Don't tell SSDD, he thinks it doesn't happen.

I can only suppose that you believe saying incredibly stupid stuff is somehow cute...sorry, it's just incredibly stupid...

Tell you what sparky, how about you go out on the internet and bring back a description of the greenhouse effect that points out that conduction and convection are the primary means of energy movement through the troposphere....and how only one in a billion greenhouse gas molecules actually gets to emit a photon and the rest lose the energy they have absorbed via collisions with other molecules.

And do make sure they explain how the overwhelming dominance of conduction and convection in the troposphere equal a radiative greenhouse effect.

You might get wuwei to help you out since he seems to think that convection and conduction equal a radiative greenhouse effect as well.

I look forward to watching your abject failure...and just can't wait to see the excuses you put forward for not bringing any such description of the radiative greenhouse effect forward.

I can only suppose that you believe saying incredibly stupid stuff is somehow cute

Yes, I think mocking your stupidity is cute.

Now, tell me more about your claim that IR can't heat the atmosphere. LOL!

So you can’t find any description of a radiative greenhouse effect that acknowledges that the dominant means of energy transport through the troposphere is conduction and convection?

Not surprising. Since there are none.

And if you believe than IR heats the atmosphere, feel free to provide some observed measured evidence that establishes a coherent link between the absorption of IR by a gas and warming in the atmosphere..

Or don’t and lose yet again...

​

So you can’t find any description of a radiative greenhouse effect​

I don't need to defend any definition of greenhouse effect.

And if you believe than IR heats the atmosphere,

As you've said, IR is absorbed by GHGs which then transfer that energy via collision.
If that added energy doesn't "heat the atmosphere", what does it do?

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

Why does the surface have to be cooler?

Refer to the second law of thermodynamics...energy doesn’t move spontaneously from cool to warm.

And feel free to provide a credible source that claims that energy is moving spontaneously from the surface of the sun to its corona...or don’t and lose yet again.

Refer to the second law of thermodynamics...

What part of the 2nd Law dictates the direction of photons?
AFAIK, photons are never mentioned in any version of the 2nd Law.
If you found such a version, post a link.

And feel free to provide a credible source that claims that energy is moving spontaneously from the surface of the sun to its corona...

Does the corona somehow restrict the flow of photons from the Sun's surface?

 

[Wuwei]

And yet, you still believe that a radiative greenhouse effect exists in a troposphere completely dominated by convection and conduction. Maybe you can help toddster in his search for a description of the radiative greenhouse effect as described by climate science that explains how the vast bulk of energy moving through the troposphere via convection and conduction equals a radiative greenhouse effect.

As you know, the radiative greenhouse effect has it's largest influence near the surface. Much less so above a few dozen meters.

.

As I know, there is no radiative greenhouse effect as described by climate science

Then where does the 400 W/m² from the earth surface go?
and where does the 16,000 W/m² Venus surface radiation go?

You never answered that question. You only evade it.


.

 

[PredFan]

Canada is warming at twice the global rate, report says - CNN
and
Canada’s Changing Climate Report

• The observed warming of Canadian temperatures are due to "human influence."
• There has been more rain than snowfall in Canada since 1948, a trend that looks to continue over the 21st century.
• Temperature extremes have changed in Canada, meaning extreme warm temperatures are getting hotter and extreme cold is becoming less cold.
• Extreme hot temperatures will become more frequent and intense.
• Over the last 30 years, the amount of snow-covered land has decreased in Canada.
• Flooding is expected to increase in Canada because of sea-level rise.
• Freshwater shortages in the summer are expected because warmer summers will increase the evaporation of surface water.

We've known that the Arctic had been warmed more than the rest of the planet by a significant margin. It should come as no surprise, then, that countries on the Arctic margin should share in that elevated warming: Canada, Greenland, Iceland, Finland and Russia are all likely to experience accelerated warming particularly on their northern boundaries.

So what? The planet has been warming and cooling for millennia.

Actually the climate has been in a constant state of change since earth was a planet. It was change that created the climate to begin with. When it stops changing, then you can worry because we'll be in real trouble. However all you'll likely be able to do is worry about before it takes us all out. Maybe we'll have time to bend over and kiss our asses good by.

Maybe I should have said eons instead of millennia. But that's what I meant.

 

[jc456]

CO2 can radiate after it absorbs IR and hasn't collided to hand off the energy it has absorbed.

And IR doesn't heat anything in the atmosphere. IR is converted to kinetic energy in the CO2 molecule and then handed off 99% of the time.

CO2 can radiate after it absorbs IR and hasn't collided to hand off the energy it has absorbed.

What if it gets energy handed back? Can it emit then?

And IR doesn't heat anything in the atmosphere. IR is converted to kinetic energy in the CO2 molecule and then handed off 99% of the time.

Step one, absorb IR. Step two, handoff energy resulting in a heated atmosphere.
Am I missing one of your steps that causes the IR absorption to not heat the atmosphere?

What if it gets energy handed back? Can it emit then?

Sure it can. why couldn't it? but it won't emit until it is in a vibrating state and still can loose that energy on another collision.

Am I missing one of your steps that causes the IR absorption to not heat the atmosphere
Well sure you are...IR is converted to kinetic energy. no longer IR. It's handed to another gas molecule that isn't the same molecular structure as it is.

What is it you think happens? seems you always avoid letting the class know what you think happens.

Sure it can. why couldn't it?

Excellent! And when it emits, it can send that photon in any direction, even toward the ground.

but it won't emit until it is in a vibrating state and still can loose that energy on another collision.

Yup. Sometimes it emits, sometimes it collides.

Well sure you are...IR is converted to kinetic energy. no longer IR.

Yes, the IR doesn't heat the atmosphere until it is absorbed.

It's handed to another gas molecule that isn't the same molecular structure as it is.

It's not restricted as far as the molecule it hits, but yes, that's how IR heats the atmosphere.

What is it you think happens?

The IR heats the atmosphere. SSDD was wrong. You too (And IR doesn't heat anything in the atmosphere)

Excellent! And when it emits, it can send that photon in any direction, even toward the ground.

If the surface is cooler than it sure? why not?

Yes, the IR doesn't heat the atmosphere until it is absorbed.
It's not restricted as far as the molecule it hits, but yes, that's how IR heats the atmosphere.
nope, it is no longer IR after it is absorbed.

The IR heats the atmosphere. SSDD was wrong. You too

Nope!! Kinetic Energy through conduction. If IR was what did it, there would be no need to specify conduction, now would there?

Conduction isn't emit, last I looked.

If the surface is cooler than it sure? why not?

Why does the surface have to be cooler?

nope, it is no longer IR after it is absorbed.

After it's absorbed, it's "heat".

Nope!! Kinetic Energy through conduction.

If it's heat after the CO2 conducts it, it's heat before CO2 conducts it.

If IR was what did it, there would be no need to specify conduction, now would there?

You've discovered the 2 step process. Don't tell SSDD​

Why does the surface have to be cooler?

You missed that in physics


If it's heat after the CO2 conducts it, it's heat before CO2 conducts it.

It’s not IR.

You've discovered the 2 step process. Don't tell SSDD

What we’ve known is IR doesn’t warm shit

 

[jc456]

You've discovered the mechanism of GHGs warming the atmosphere. Congrats!
Don't tell SSDD, he thinks it doesn't happen.

I can only suppose that you believe saying incredibly stupid stuff is somehow cute...sorry, it's just incredibly stupid...

Tell you what sparky, how about you go out on the internet and bring back a description of the greenhouse effect that points out that conduction and convection are the primary means of energy movement through the troposphere....and how only one in a billion greenhouse gas molecules actually gets to emit a photon and the rest lose the energy they have absorbed via collisions with other molecules.

And do make sure they explain how the overwhelming dominance of conduction and convection in the troposphere equal a radiative greenhouse effect.

You might get wuwei to help you out since he seems to think that convection and conduction equal a radiative greenhouse effect as well.

I look forward to watching your abject failure...and just can't wait to see the excuses you put forward for not bringing any such description of the radiative greenhouse effect forward.

I can only suppose that you believe saying incredibly stupid stuff is somehow cute

Yes, I think mocking your stupidity is cute.

Now, tell me more about your claim that IR can't heat the atmosphere. LOL!

So you can’t find any description of a radiative greenhouse effect that acknowledges that the dominant means of energy transport through the troposphere is conduction and convection?

Not surprising. Since there are none.

And if you believe than IR heats the atmosphere, feel free to provide some observed measured evidence that establishes a coherent link between the absorption of IR by a gas and warming in the atmosphere..

Or don’t and lose yet again...

So you can’t find any description of a radiative greenhouse effect​

I don't need to defend any definition of greenhouse effect.

And if you believe than IR heats the atmosphere,

As you've said, IR is absorbed by GHGs which then transfer that energy via collision.
If that added energy doesn't "heat the atmosphere", what does it do?

don't need to defend any definition of greenhouse effect.

Nope not at all. Neither do I or anyone else have to take your crap on anything. Derp

 

[jc456]

And yet, you still believe that a radiative greenhouse effect exists in a troposphere completely dominated by convection and conduction. Maybe you can help toddster in his search for a description of the radiative greenhouse effect as described by climate science that explains how the vast bulk of energy moving through the troposphere via convection and conduction equals a radiative greenhouse effect.

As you know, the radiative greenhouse effect has it's largest influence near the surface. Much less so above a few dozen meters.

.

As I know, there is no radiative greenhouse effect as described by climate science

Then where does the 400 W/m² from the earth surface go?
and where does the 16,000 W/m² Venus surface radiation go?

You never answered that question. You only evade it.


.

He’s answered you every time you ignore his answer

 

[SSDD]

So you can’t find any description of a radiative greenhouse effect​

I don't need to defend any definition of greenhouse effect.

Spoken like someone who can't defend the definition with observations. Want to tell me about computer models. Don't sweat it...I didn't expect you to even try and you didn't disappoint. Since there is no radiative greenhouse effect...and the description of said fantasy effect put forward by climate science does't speak to the fact that convection and conduction are the dominant means of energy transport through the troposphere, there is little you can say....other than a mammoth type defense which is no defense of your position at all.

As you've said, IR is absorbed by GHGs which then transfer that energy via collision.
If that added energy doesn't "heat the atmosphere", what does it do?

Here is a newsflash for you...energy transfer via collision is not IR...and the means by which conduction, convection, and pressure warm the atmosphere is not the means described by the radiative greenhouse effect. Engage in all the mental masturbation you like...get a solid 10.0 for your mental gymnastics routine, but heating due to conduction and convection are not IR. So as I said....IR does not, and can not warm the air.