The Heartbreak of Leaving the Paris Agreement...

[SSDD]

Re posted from Roy Spencer's Blog.... Roy Spencer, PhD

 

[mamooth]

As I keep pointing out, conservatives shouldn't try satire, as it only makes them look butthurt and stupid, like that piece did.

To be funny, satire has to relate to reality. Conservatives live in a snowflake dimension that isn't attached to the real world, so their "satire" always faceplants. Normal people definitely understand conservative "humor", in the same way they understand the humor of a 4-year-old boy making toilet jokes. The other conservatives think it's a knee-slapper, but the normal people are astonished and saddened at how supposed grownups think it's smart or funny.

 

[Iceweasel]

As I keep pointing out, conservatives shouldn't try satire, as it only makes them look butthurt and stupid, like that piece did.

To be funny, satire has to relate to reality. Conservatives live in a snowflake dimension that isn't attached to the real world, so their "satire" always faceplants. Normal people definitely understand conservative "humor", in the same way they understand the humor of a 4-year-old boy making toilet jokes. The other conservatives think it's a knee-slapper, but the normal people are astonished and saddened at how supposed grownups think it's smart or funny.

Aw, baby Moot shat herself again.

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

Re posted from Roy Spencer's Blog.... Roy Spencer, PhD

You made a funny!

You're still an idiot.

 

[SSDD]

As I keep pointing out, conservatives shouldn't try satire, as it only makes them look butthurt and stupid, like that piece did.

To be funny, satire has to relate to reality. Conservatives live in a snowflake dimension that isn't attached to the real world, so their "satire" always faceplants. Normal people definitely understand conservative "humor", in the same way they understand the humor of a 4-year-old boy making toilet jokes. The other conservatives think it's a knee-slapper, but the normal people are astonished and saddened at how supposed grownups think it's smart or funny.

Got right under your skin did it? That is why I posted it...You are so damed predictable hairball, that you should be embarrassed.

Your real problem hairball..is thinking that you are normal...you aren't. You are an angry bitter old dried up woman who is angry at the world because her life didn't turn out as she dreamed it would as a teenager.

 

[SSDD]

Re posted from Roy Spencer's Blog.... Roy Spencer, PhD

You made a funny!

You're still an idiot.

Perhaps...but my claims are backed up by observed, measured, quantified evidence while yours remain entirely within the realm of unobservable, unmeasurable, untestable mathematical models...a thinking person would question which of us is actually the idiot.....one who's views are supported by observation and measurement...or one who's views aren't.

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

Re posted from Roy Spencer's Blog.... Roy Spencer, PhD

You made a funny!

You're still an idiot.

Perhaps...but my claims are backed up by observed, measured, quantified evidence while yours remain entirely within the realm of unobservable, unmeasurable, untestable mathematical models...a thinking person would question which of us is actually the idiot.....one who's views are supported by observation and measurement...or one who's views aren't.

Perhaps...but my claims are backed up by observed, measured, quantified evidence

When you find some of that "quantified evidence" that shows that matter above 0K stops emitting simply because it is near warmer matter, you be sure to post that.

Absent that, we'll still be pointing and laughing at your lone stance.

 

[SSDD]

When you find some of that "quantified evidence" that shows that matter above 0K stops emitting simply because it is near warmer matter, you be sure to post that.

Absent that, we'll still be pointing and laughing at your lone stance.

I have the evidence of every measurement ever made...there are no measurements of energy moving from cool to warm because it can't happen...every observation ever made supports my position...I am afraid, toddster, that the onus is upon you to show some measurement of energy moving from cool to warm...you claim it happens...lets see some measurement of it...I claim it doesn't...and there have never been a measurement of such energy movement to prove me wrong... I am afraid that the only one of us that the observations and measurements support is me. Sorry guy. Post modern science where models carry more weight than observation is a passing fad...I am afraid that you will find that you chose the wrong side future generations will put you in the same category as those who believed in the aether... phrenology....feng-shuei...scientology...and CO2 induced global warming.

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

When you find some of that "quantified evidence" that shows that matter above 0K stops emitting simply because it is near warmer matter, you be sure to post that.

Absent that, we'll still be pointing and laughing at your lone stance.

I have the evidence of every measurement ever made...there are no measurements of energy moving from cool to warm because it can't happen...every observation ever made supports my position...I am afraid, toddster, that the onus is upon you to show some measurement of energy moving from cool to warm...you claim it happens...lets see some measurement of it...I claim it doesn't...and there have never been a measurement of such energy movement to prove me wrong... I am afraid that the only one of us that the observations and measurements support is me. Sorry guy. Post modern science where models carry more weight than observation is a passing fad...I am afraid that you will find that you chose the wrong side future generations will put you in the same category as those who believed in the aether... phrenology....feng-shuei...scientology...and CO2 induced global warming.

I have the evidence of every measurement ever made...

Clearly you don't.

there are no measurements of energy moving from cool to warm because it can't happen...

It happens all the time, because all matter above 0K emits all the time. In all directions.

the onus is upon you to show some measurement of energy moving from cool to warm...

Energy moves from the cooler surface of the Sun toward the hotter corona.
I've never seen you refute that.

 

[IanC]

Re posted from Roy Spencer's Blog.... Roy Spencer, PhD

You made a funny!

You're still an idiot.

Perhaps...but my claims are backed up by observed, measured, quantified evidence while yours remain entirely within the realm of unobservable, unmeasurable, untestable mathematical models...a thinking person would question which of us is actually the idiot.....one who's views are supported by observation and measurement...or one who's views aren't.

I've presented Planck graphs, which show the range of possible types of radiation and their probabilities, for objects at specific temperatures.

If you restrict the volume of the matter and reduce the time to very short intervals then you would get individual photons emitted in a random but predictable fashion.

If you put two of these objects at the same temperature close together you would have iterations of photons being emitted. Some of the iterations would have the higher energy photon going one direction, others would be in the opposite direction. On average the energy moving from one object to the other would equal out.

The SLoT does not controlthese individual events, it is based on the statistics of unbelievably large numbers of these individual events.

 

[SSDD]

I've presented Planck graphs, which show the range of possible types of radiation and their probabilities, for objects at specific temperatures.

Yep...you have presented all the models....what you haven't presented is any actual observed, measured data....and why?...because none exists outside of unobservable, unmeasurable, untestable models.

And your Planck graphs just go to show that not only are you easily fooled by instrumentation, you are fooled by misused algebra as well..

If you restrict the volume of the matter and reduce the time to very short intervals then you would get individual photons emitted in a random but predictable fashion.

According to the unobservable, unmeasurable, untestable mathematical model...but not according to actual measurement. Interesting..don't you think?

If you put two of these objects at the same temperature close together you would have iterations of photons being emitted. Some of the iterations would have the higher energy photon going one direction, others would be in the opposite direction. On average the energy moving from one object to the other would equal out.

Again..according to the unobservable, unmeasurable, untestable mathematical model...instrtumentation however tells a different story...it isn't possible to measure energy moving from cool to warm because it doesn't happen out here in the land of the real.

The SLoT does not controlthese individual events, it is based on the statistics of unbelievably large numbers of these individual events.

Your crazy interpretation of the second law...the actual law says that energy can't move spontaneously from cool to warm..

 

[Theowl32]

As I keep pointing out, conservatives shouldn't try satire, as it only makes them look butthurt and stupid, like that piece did.

To be funny, satire has to relate to reality. Conservatives live in a snowflake dimension that isn't attached to the real world, so their "satire" always faceplants. Normal people definitely understand conservative "humor", in the same way they understand the humor of a 4-year-old boy making toilet jokes. The other conservatives think it's a knee-slapper, but the normal people are astonished and saddened at how supposed grownups think it's smart or funny.

I will bet it is hairy and smells.

 

[yiostheoy]

BH Obama's agreement was unconstitutional.

It did not get ratified by the Senate.

He should have been impeached for this.

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

I've presented Planck graphs, which show the range of possible types of radiation and their probabilities, for objects at specific temperatures.

Yep...you have presented all the models....what you haven't presented is any actual observed, measured data....and why?...because none exists outside of unobservable, unmeasurable, untestable models.

And your Planck graphs just go to show that not only are you easily fooled by instrumentation, you are fooled by misused algebra as well..

If you restrict the volume of the matter and reduce the time to very short intervals then you would get individual photons emitted in a random but predictable fashion.

According to the unobservable, unmeasurable, untestable mathematical model...but not according to actual measurement. Interesting..don't you think?

If you put two of these objects at the same temperature close together you would have iterations of photons being emitted. Some of the iterations would have the higher energy photon going one direction, others would be in the opposite direction. On average the energy moving from one object to the other would equal out.

Again..according to the unobservable, unmeasurable, untestable mathematical model...instrtumentation however tells a different story...it isn't possible to measure energy moving from cool to warm because it doesn't happen out here in the land of the real.

The SLoT does not controlthese individual events, it is based on the statistics of unbelievably large numbers of these individual events.

Your crazy interpretation of the second law...the actual law says that energy can't move spontaneously from cool to warm..

the actual law says that energy can't move spontaneously from cool to warm..

The actual law doesn't actually say that.

 

[IanC]

I've presented Planck graphs, which show the range of possible types of radiation and their probabilities, for objects at specific temperatures.

Yep...you have presented all the models....what you haven't presented is any actual observed, measured data....and why?...because none exists outside of unobservable, unmeasurable, untestable models.

And your Planck graphs just go to show that not only are you easily fooled by instrumentation, you are fooled by misused algebra as well..

If you restrict the volume of the matter and reduce the time to very short intervals then you would get individual photons emitted in a random but predictable fashion.

According to the unobservable, unmeasurable, untestable mathematical model...but not according to actual measurement. Interesting..don't you think?

If you put two of these objects at the same temperature close together you would have iterations of photons being emitted. Some of the iterations would have the higher energy photon going one direction, others would be in the opposite direction. On average the energy moving from one object to the other would equal out.

Again..according to the unobservable, unmeasurable, untestable mathematical model...instrtumentation however tells a different story...it isn't possible to measure energy moving from cool to warm because it doesn't happen out here in the land of the real.

The SLoT does not controlthese individual events, it is based on the statistics of unbelievably large numbers of these individual events.

Your crazy interpretation of the second law...the actual law says that energy can't move spontaneously from cool to warm..

the actual law says that energy can't move spontaneously from cool to warm..

The actual law doesn't actually say that.

Yes. SSDD uses the ambiguity of word definition to claim something that was not intended.

 

[IanC]

And your Planck graphs just go to show that not only are you easily fooled by instrumentation, you are fooled by misused algebra as well..

????

What physical process is this supposed to be representing?

I can understand the area q, Planck(warm) minus Planck(cool) as the available energy flowing from warm to cool but your graph seems to be nonsense.

 

[SSDD]

????

What physical process is this supposed to be representing?

I can understand the area q, Planck(warm) minus Planck(cool) as the available energy flowing from warm to cool but your graph seems to be nonsense.

It is outside the realm of the holy dogma of the magical believers...didn't really expect you to make any sense of it...it goes back to the terribly flawed physics upon which climate models are based....

 

[IanC]

????

What physical process is this supposed to be representing?

I can understand the area q, Planck(warm) minus Planck(cool) as the available energy flowing from warm to cool but your graph seems to be nonsense.

It is outside the realm of the holy dogma of the magical believers...didn't really expect you to make any sense of it...it goes back to the terribly flawed physics upon which climate models are based....

In other words, you don't have a clue as to what it is.

Why does it say summing two identical Planck curves when they are not identical? Why would you sum them in the first place?

 

[SSDD]

In other words, you don't have a clue as to what it is.

No ian...it is you who doesn't have a clue...you demonstrated that fact beyond any doubt when you had not the slightest idea of what mechanism was actually supposed to cause the hot spot and why increased CO2 was a key player.

Why does it say summing two identical Planck curves when they are not identical? Why would you sum them in the first place?

Well ian, that goes back to the idea that X amount of radiation absorbed and emitted by the surface of the earth gets added to the amount of radiation that CO2 supposedly back radiates, or scatters in all directions. It is part of the magic multiplier by which CO2 is supposed to cause any warming at all.

Why they both represent the same amount of energy but are not identical is part of the terribly flawed understanding of physics that has resulted in the failure of both the AGW hypothesis and the greenhouse hypothesis.

Am I going to bother to try and explain any of it to you?..not no but HELL NO...I may as well try to explain it to my desk clock.

 

[Crick]

At any instant in time, both the CO2 in the atmosphere and the Earth's surface are radiating IR.

Shit, you don't seem to realize that diagrams like Trenberth's are instantaneous rates.