Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
http://www.climatedialogue.org/wp-c...ded-summary-the-missing-tropical-hot-spot.pdf
that covers most of the debating points, by some of those involved.
personally I think Santer preferring 'reanalyzed' data and wind shear over balloons and satellites is a little suspicious.
The skeptical cause is hurt by those who deny CO2 can have influence what so ever. That said, it is past time for another thread on the failures to show the 'hotspot'. Interested?
Radiative gasses enhance the atmosphere's ability to radiatively cool itself ....they don't inhibit it. Greenhouse gasses are cooling agents, not warming agents.
And that's why nobody wastes any time on you.
The skeptical cause is hurt by those who deny CO2 can have influence what so ever. That said, it is past time for another thread on the failures to show the 'hotspot'. Interested?
Radiative gasses enhance the atmosphere's ability to radiatively cool itself ....they don't inhibit it. Greenhouse gasses are cooling agents, not warming agents.
explain in your own words how CO2 is a cooling agent.
http://www.climatedialogue.org/wp-c...ded-summary-the-missing-tropical-hot-spot.pdf
that covers most of the debating points, by some of those involved.
personally I think Santer preferring 'reanalyzed' data and wind shear over balloons and satellites is a little suspicious.
A milllion radiosondes can't find a hot spot but a few hours "analyzing" the data finds one? Classic climate science. If the actual data don't support your claim just make some shit up.
The skeptical cause is hurt by those who deny CO2 can have influence what so ever. That said, it is past time for another thread on the failures to show the 'hotspot'. Interested?
Radiative gasses enhance the atmosphere's ability to radiatively cool itself ....they don't inhibit it. Greenhouse gasses are cooling agents, not warming agents.
explain in your own words how CO2 is a cooling agent.
Been done before Ian....I am through explaining to you only to have you "interpret" what I say into something I didn't say and then watch you argue against your interpretation rather than what I said.
The skeptical cause is hurt by those who deny CO2 can have influence what so ever. That said, it is past time for another thread on the failures to show the 'hotspot'. Interested?
Radiative gasses enhance the atmosphere's ability to radiatively cool itself ....they don't inhibit it. Greenhouse gasses are cooling agents, not warming agents.
explain in your own words how CO2 is a cooling agent.
And once again, the hairball couldn't possibly be more wrong... take a look at the stats hairball...Billybob has almost 500 trophy points to your nearly 200....clearly your analysis is about as good as climate science expects.
The skeptical cause is hurt by those who deny CO2 can have influence what so ever. That said, it is past time for another thread on the failures to show the 'hotspot'. Interested?
Radiative gasses enhance the atmosphere's ability to radiatively cool itself ....they don't inhibit it. Greenhouse gasses are cooling agents, not warming agents.
explain in your own words how CO2 is a cooling agent.
Been done before Ian....I am through explaining to you only to have you "interpret" what I say into something I didn't say and then watch you argue against your interpretation rather than what I said.
;-)
Quantum Entanglement appears to be an FTL 'transfer' of information.
SSDD has some rigid opinions, and some not-so-rigid opinions. the most important Rigid opinion is that not one iota of energy can go from cool to warm. eventually he declared photons (on a day where he believed in photons) have no time or distance in their event horizon, so they 'know' where they are going. I tend to agree with him somewhat because the virtual photons that make up electrical and magnetic fields simply disappear if they cannot find a partner to transfer energy to. that said, I am pretty sure that no information can be passed faster than the speed of light.
both the warm and cool objects radiate the almost exactly identical range of photons, with the warmer object producing more photons and at a slightly higher avg energy. if the cool object STOPS radiating then the warm object has to stop radiating the same amount of energy, and at exactly the same wavelengths. where does this information come from? and how does it control the molecular collisions that form the blackbody radiation?
I see no mechanisms for this, so I will simply go back to normal physics that say every body radiates according to its temperature, and that energy transfer is the net of radiation out minus radiation in. no magical stopping of radiation in both the warm and cool bodies, in exactly the right proportions. individual events are not controlled by average conditions. average conditions are controlled by individual events.
;-)
Quantum Entanglement appears to be an FTL 'transfer' of information.
You're aware, I assume, that the thread to which you link is from someone on your side of the argument.
BTW, math-wise, you might want to re-examine some of his basic assumptions.
SB would not tell us to look at (292/291)^4, which equals 1.0138 (not the 1.38 your author got), but (292-291)^4 which equals 1.000. Neither takes us from 5 W to 7.
EDIT: My bad. SB would use (292-291)/291 for the increased power required. That gives an increased power requirement factor of 1.0034.
Your author's treatment of the atmosphere, assuming the CO2 effect is saturated and the atmosphere static and passive, was refuted by Hulbert in the 1930s and Plass in the 1950s.