Tropospheric Hot Spot- Why it does not exist...

[Toddsterpatriot]

I need to learn the calculation you used to claim the Sun radiates at -18C? LOL!

Not my claim toddster...the claim of the climate scientists on whose ass you have your lips firmly planted... Unfortunate that you have no idea what the radiating temperature of an object radiating at 239.7wm2 is...even after you have been told half a dozen times...here is a hint...-18C....once again..not my claim...the claim of climate science and the basis of the mechanism for the greenhouse effect.

Unfortunate that you have no idea what the radiating temperature of an object radiating at 239.7wm2 is

Do you believe the Sun is radiating 239.7wm2?

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

Nobody knows for sure? I think we can limit that just a bit. You and Billy seem to be the only folks who don't know for sure. Magnets deflecting photons? You don't think that's ever been tested? No experiments? So, it must be true? Got it.

That Billy has the unmitigated gall to tell us he has a degree in physics is almost beyond belief.

You fucking moron.. Kindly tell me what a black hole (singularity) has that captures all photons. Even stars bend and capture light. You really are ignorant of science.

A magnet isn't a black hole, idiot.
Gravity isn't magnetism, moron.

 

[SSDD]

I need to learn the calculation you used to claim the Sun radiates at -18C? LOL!

Not my claim toddster...the claim of the climate scientists on whose ass you have your lips firmly planted... Unfortunate that you have no idea what the radiating temperature of an object radiating at 239.7wm2 is...even after you have been told half a dozen times...here is a hint...-18C....once again..not my claim...the claim of climate science and the basis of the mechanism for the greenhouse effect.

Unfortunate that you have no idea what the radiating temperature of an object radiating at 239.7wm2 is

Do you believe the Sun is radiating 239.7wm2?

No I don't...as I have said repeatedly....but that is what the model of the greenhouse effect says...clearly you have been unaware of what the model says all along..but agreed with it based on something than any knowledge of what it, or climate science claims...that was the point of this whole thing...to demonstrate how the model of the greenhouse effect isn't reflecting anything like reality...and if you start with a basic model that is not describing reality...and is based on a thermodynamic impossibility, then you can't possibly complicate the model enough to make it reflect reality...

 

[Crick]

What is your thermodynamic impossibility?

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

I need to learn the calculation you used to claim the Sun radiates at -18C? LOL!

Not my claim toddster...the claim of the climate scientists on whose ass you have your lips firmly planted... Unfortunate that you have no idea what the radiating temperature of an object radiating at 239.7wm2 is...even after you have been told half a dozen times...here is a hint...-18C....once again..not my claim...the claim of climate science and the basis of the mechanism for the greenhouse effect.

Unfortunate that you have no idea what the radiating temperature of an object radiating at 239.7wm2 is

Do you believe the Sun is radiating 239.7wm2?

No I don't...as I have said repeatedly....but that is what the model of the greenhouse effect says...clearly you have been unaware of what the model says all along..but agreed with it based on something than any knowledge of what it, or climate science claims...that was the point of this whole thing...to demonstrate how the model of the greenhouse effect isn't reflecting anything like reality...and if you start with a basic model that is not describing reality...and is based on a thermodynamic impossibility, then you can't possibly complicate the model enough to make it reflect reality...

No I don't...as I have said repeatedly....but that is what the model of the greenhouse effect says...

You've seen a model of the greenhouse effect that says the Sun is radiating 239.7 W/m2?
Show me.

 

[SSDD]

What is your thermodynamic impossibility?

That a radiator radiating upwards at -18 degrees, and a radiator radiating downwards at -18 degrees could ever produce enough radiation to raise the temperature even one degree higher than either...much less 48 degrees warmer than either...and yet, that is precisely what the model of the greenhouse effect claims...

 

[SSDD]

I need to learn the calculation you used to claim the Sun radiates at -18C? LOL!

Not my claim toddster...the claim of the climate scientists on whose ass you have your lips firmly planted... Unfortunate that you have no idea what the radiating temperature of an object radiating at 239.7wm2 is...even after you have been told half a dozen times...here is a hint...-18C....once again..not my claim...the claim of climate science and the basis of the mechanism for the greenhouse effect.

Unfortunate that you have no idea what the radiating temperature of an object radiating at 239.7wm2 is

Do you believe the Sun is radiating 239.7wm2?

No I don't...as I have said repeatedly....but that is what the model of the greenhouse effect says...clearly you have been unaware of what the model says all along..but agreed with it based on something than any knowledge of what it, or climate science claims...that was the point of this whole thing...to demonstrate how the model of the greenhouse effect isn't reflecting anything like reality...and if you start with a basic model that is not describing reality...and is based on a thermodynamic impossibility, then you can't possibly complicate the model enough to make it reflect reality...

No I don't...as I have said repeatedly....but that is what the model of the greenhouse effect says...

You've seen a model of the greenhouse effect that says the Sun is radiating 239.7 W/m2?
Show me.

I already did...multiple times, but clearly you are just too stupid to understand, even when it is explained to you at a 4th grade level...you must be so proud...

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

What is your thermodynamic impossibility?

That a radiator radiating upwards at -18 degrees, and a radiator radiating downwards at -18 degrees could ever produce enough radiation to raise the temperature even one degree higher than either...much less 48 degrees warmer than either...and yet, that is precisely what the model of the greenhouse effect claims...

and a radiator radiating downwards at -18 degrees could ever produce enough radiation to raise the temperature even one degree higher than either

The Sun is radiating down. The Sun is much warmer than -18C.

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

I need to learn the calculation you used to claim the Sun radiates at -18C? LOL!

Not my claim toddster...the claim of the climate scientists on whose ass you have your lips firmly planted... Unfortunate that you have no idea what the radiating temperature of an object radiating at 239.7wm2 is...even after you have been told half a dozen times...here is a hint...-18C....once again..not my claim...the claim of climate science and the basis of the mechanism for the greenhouse effect.

Unfortunate that you have no idea what the radiating temperature of an object radiating at 239.7wm2 is

Do you believe the Sun is radiating 239.7wm2?

No I don't...as I have said repeatedly....but that is what the model of the greenhouse effect says...clearly you have been unaware of what the model says all along..but agreed with it based on something than any knowledge of what it, or climate science claims...that was the point of this whole thing...to demonstrate how the model of the greenhouse effect isn't reflecting anything like reality...and if you start with a basic model that is not describing reality...and is based on a thermodynamic impossibility, then you can't possibly complicate the model enough to make it reflect reality...

No I don't...as I have said repeatedly....but that is what the model of the greenhouse effect says...

You've seen a model of the greenhouse effect that says the Sun is radiating 239.7 W/m2?
Show me.

I already did...multiple times, but clearly you are just too stupid to understand, even when it is explained to you at a 4th grade level...you must be so proud...

I already did...multiple times,

You think what you've shown is the Sun radiating 239.7 W/m2?
If you weren't so painfully stupid, you'd be funny.

but clearly you are just too stupid to understand

Says the moron who thinks the Sun is radiating at -18C. DERP!

 

[jc456]

What is your thermodynamic impossibility?

That a radiator radiating upwards at -18 degrees, and a radiator radiating downwards at -18 degrees could ever produce enough radiation to raise the temperature even one degree higher than either...much less 48 degrees warmer than either...and yet, that is precisely what the model of the greenhouse effect claims...

and a radiator radiating downwards at -18 degrees could ever produce enough radiation to raise the temperature even one degree higher than either

The Sun is radiating down. The Sun is much warmer than -18C.

no one disagrees as far as I know except the universities SSDD referenced.

 

[jc456]

What is your thermodynamic impossibility?

That a radiator radiating upwards at -18 degrees, and a radiator radiating downwards at -18 degrees could ever produce enough radiation to raise the temperature even one degree higher than either...much less 48 degrees warmer than either...and yet, that is precisely what the model of the greenhouse effect claims...

and a radiator radiating downwards at -18 degrees could ever produce enough radiation to raise the temperature even one degree higher than either

The Sun is radiating down. The Sun is much warmer than -18C.

rat hole.

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

What is your thermodynamic impossibility?

That a radiator radiating upwards at -18 degrees, and a radiator radiating downwards at -18 degrees could ever produce enough radiation to raise the temperature even one degree higher than either...much less 48 degrees warmer than either...and yet, that is precisely what the model of the greenhouse effect claims...

and a radiator radiating downwards at -18 degrees could ever produce enough radiation to raise the temperature even one degree higher than either

The Sun is radiating down. The Sun is much warmer than -18C.

no one disagrees as far as I know except the universities SSDD referenced.

SSDD is the only one who claimed the incoming energy means the radiator is -18C.

 

[SSDD]

What is your thermodynamic impossibility?

That a radiator radiating upwards at -18 degrees, and a radiator radiating downwards at -18 degrees could ever produce enough radiation to raise the temperature even one degree higher than either...much less 48 degrees warmer than either...and yet, that is precisely what the model of the greenhouse effect claims...

and a radiator radiating downwards at -18 degrees could ever produce enough radiation to raise the temperature even one degree higher than either

The Sun is radiating down. The Sun is much warmer than -18C.

rat hole.

I am sure that in is parent's basement...he is fist pumping over his perception of victory....doesn't take much to make an idiot smile....

 

[SSDD]

What is your thermodynamic impossibility?

That a radiator radiating upwards at -18 degrees, and a radiator radiating downwards at -18 degrees could ever produce enough radiation to raise the temperature even one degree higher than either...much less 48 degrees warmer than either...and yet, that is precisely what the model of the greenhouse effect claims...

and a radiator radiating downwards at -18 degrees could ever produce enough radiation to raise the temperature even one degree higher than either

The Sun is radiating down. The Sun is much warmer than -18C.

no one disagrees as far as I know except the universities SSDD referenced.

SSDD is the only one who claimed the incoming energy means the radiator is -18C.

Again...my apologies for thinking you were smart enough to know what I was talking about...everyone else did...no one except you thought I was talking about anything more than the energy reaching the surface of the earth....so in a group that included crick and old rocks...how does it feel to be the stupidest guy in the room?

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

What is your thermodynamic impossibility?

That a radiator radiating upwards at -18 degrees, and a radiator radiating downwards at -18 degrees could ever produce enough radiation to raise the temperature even one degree higher than either...much less 48 degrees warmer than either...and yet, that is precisely what the model of the greenhouse effect claims...

and a radiator radiating downwards at -18 degrees could ever produce enough radiation to raise the temperature even one degree higher than either

The Sun is radiating down. The Sun is much warmer than -18C.

no one disagrees as far as I know except the universities SSDD referenced.

SSDD is the only one who claimed the incoming energy means the radiator is -18C.

Again...my apologies for thinking you were smart enough to know what I was talking about...everyone else did...no one except you thought I was talking about anything more than the energy reaching the surface of the earth....so in a group that included crick and old rocks...how does it feel to be the stupidest guy in the room?

Look at the damned graph....or any graph of the greenhouse effect...see the incoming solar radiation..that's one of your radiators...239.7wm^2....please tell me that you are aware that 239.7 wm^2 equates to a radiating temperature of -18 degrees....you are aware of that...aren't you?....


Now see the energy radiating up from the surface?....239.7 from the sun...and 239.7 from the atmosphere....two radiators...both radiating ...239.7wm^2 equates to a radiating temperature of -18 degrees....so they combine the radiation from these two radiators which are radiating at -18 degrees and suddenly you have a temperature of 29.85 degrees...

I am starting to think that you can't read a simple equation either...and I am betting that since you seem to realize that the sun is hot...that the climate science claim of the surface of the earth radiating at -18 degrees is just one more bit of bullshit upon which the greenhouse effect is based...

Questions.....RE: The Greenhouse Effect

The sun and the atmosphere, both radiating at -18C. DERP!

And I thought you were smart enough to know what you were talking about.

 

[jc456]

That a radiator radiating upwards at -18 degrees, and a radiator radiating downwards at -18 degrees could ever produce enough radiation to raise the temperature even one degree higher than either...much less 48 degrees warmer than either...and yet, that is precisely what the model of the greenhouse effect claims...

and a radiator radiating downwards at -18 degrees could ever produce enough radiation to raise the temperature even one degree higher than either

The Sun is radiating down. The Sun is much warmer than -18C.

no one disagrees as far as I know except the universities SSDD referenced.

SSDD is the only one who claimed the incoming energy means the radiator is -18C.

Again...my apologies for thinking you were smart enough to know what I was talking about...everyone else did...no one except you thought I was talking about anything more than the energy reaching the surface of the earth....so in a group that included crick and old rocks...how does it feel to be the stupidest guy in the room?

Look at the damned graph....or any graph of the greenhouse effect...see the incoming solar radiation..that's one of your radiators...239.7wm^2....please tell me that you are aware that 239.7 wm^2 equates to a radiating temperature of -18 degrees....you are aware of that...aren't you?....


Now see the energy radiating up from the surface?....239.7 from the sun...and 239.7 from the atmosphere....two radiators...both radiating ...239.7wm^2 equates to a radiating temperature of -18 degrees....so they combine the radiation from these two radiators which are radiating at -18 degrees and suddenly you have a temperature of 29.85 degrees...

I am starting to think that you can't read a simple equation either...and I am betting that since you seem to realize that the sun is hot...that the climate science claim of the surface of the earth radiating at -18 degrees is just one more bit of bullshit upon which the greenhouse effect is based...

Questions.....RE: The Greenhouse Effect

The sun and the atmosphere, both radiating at -18C. DERP!

And I thought you were smart enough to know what you were talking about.

the source of the original post for your guidance.

SSDD is demonstrating with his basic misunderstanding of what the notes stated, the lack of comprehension he demonstrates in all basic physics.

All I have demonstrated is an interest in what the equations are stating....clearly, you can't state in your own words what they say...so again..if you can't contribute, why are you here?

Energy flux absorbed by the Earth = Radiation emitted by the Earth
239.7 W/m2 = constant x T4

To solve this equation, all we need to do is divide the emitted radiation (239.7 watts per square meter) by the constant (5.67 x 10-8) and take the fourth root of the result. Dividing we obtain 42.3 x 10-8. We'll take the fourth root on a calculator, but to check it's a good idea to estimate the result by taking the square root of 50, which should be just about 7 and taking the square root of 7 which should be around 2.5. The fourth root of 10 to the eighth power is 100. Hence, the answer should be a number around 2.5 x 100 or 250. The calculated result is 255. Remember that all results obtained from the Stefan_Boltzmann Law and other radiation laws are expressed in degrees Kelvin, so this is 255 K (-18 °C, 0 °F):

T = 255 K

The figure below illustrates how we derived this energy balance.

This effective temperature of 255 K is the temperature the Earth's Surface would have if it didn't have an atmosphere. It would be awfully cold! In reality, the Earth's surface temperature is closer to 288 K (15 °C, 59 °F). This difference of 33 K is the magnitude of the greenhouse effect. Before we go into more details about what this greenhouse effect is, let's look at Venus and Mars, our closest neighbours and calculate their effective temperatures.

ATM S 211 - Notes

There you go, anyone can go to the site and see what it says.

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

and a radiator radiating downwards at -18 degrees could ever produce enough radiation to raise the temperature even one degree higher than either

The Sun is radiating down. The Sun is much warmer than -18C.

no one disagrees as far as I know except the universities SSDD referenced.

SSDD is the only one who claimed the incoming energy means the radiator is -18C.

Again...my apologies for thinking you were smart enough to know what I was talking about...everyone else did...no one except you thought I was talking about anything more than the energy reaching the surface of the earth....so in a group that included crick and old rocks...how does it feel to be the stupidest guy in the room?

Look at the damned graph....or any graph of the greenhouse effect...see the incoming solar radiation..that's one of your radiators...239.7wm^2....please tell me that you are aware that 239.7 wm^2 equates to a radiating temperature of -18 degrees....you are aware of that...aren't you?....


Now see the energy radiating up from the surface?....239.7 from the sun...and 239.7 from the atmosphere....two radiators...both radiating ...239.7wm^2 equates to a radiating temperature of -18 degrees....so they combine the radiation from these two radiators which are radiating at -18 degrees and suddenly you have a temperature of 29.85 degrees...

I am starting to think that you can't read a simple equation either...and I am betting that since you seem to realize that the sun is hot...that the climate science claim of the surface of the earth radiating at -18 degrees is just one more bit of bullshit upon which the greenhouse effect is based...

Questions.....RE: The Greenhouse Effect

The sun and the atmosphere, both radiating at -18C. DERP!

And I thought you were smart enough to know what you were talking about.

the source of the original post for your guidance.

SSDD is demonstrating with his basic misunderstanding of what the notes stated, the lack of comprehension he demonstrates in all basic physics.

All I have demonstrated is an interest in what the equations are stating....clearly, you can't state in your own words what they say...so again..if you can't contribute, why are you here?

Energy flux absorbed by the Earth = Radiation emitted by the Earth
239.7 W/m2 = constant x T4

To solve this equation, all we need to do is divide the emitted radiation (239.7 watts per square meter) by the constant (5.67 x 10-8) and take the fourth root of the result. Dividing we obtain 42.3 x 10-8. We'll take the fourth root on a calculator, but to check it's a good idea to estimate the result by taking the square root of 50, which should be just about 7 and taking the square root of 7 which should be around 2.5. The fourth root of 10 to the eighth power is 100. Hence, the answer should be a number around 2.5 x 100 or 250. The calculated result is 255. Remember that all results obtained from the Stefan_Boltzmann Law and other radiation laws are expressed in degrees Kelvin, so this is 255 K (-18 °C, 0 °F):

T = 255 K

The figure below illustrates how we derived this energy balance.

This effective temperature of 255 K is the temperature the Earth's Surface would have if it didn't have an atmosphere. It would be awfully cold! In reality, the Earth's surface temperature is closer to 288 K (15 °C, 59 °F). This difference of 33 K is the magnitude of the greenhouse effect. Before we go into more details about what this greenhouse effect is, let's look at Venus and Mars, our closest neighbours and calculate their effective temperatures.

ATM S 211 - Notes

There you go, anyone can go to the site and see what it says.

Thanks!
Now where did that source, or Old Rocks, say that the Sun is radiating at -18C?
Or was that something SSDD said?

 

[jc456]

no one disagrees as far as I know except the universities SSDD referenced.

SSDD is the only one who claimed the incoming energy means the radiator is -18C.

Again...my apologies for thinking you were smart enough to know what I was talking about...everyone else did...no one except you thought I was talking about anything more than the energy reaching the surface of the earth....so in a group that included crick and old rocks...how does it feel to be the stupidest guy in the room?

Look at the damned graph....or any graph of the greenhouse effect...see the incoming solar radiation..that's one of your radiators...239.7wm^2....please tell me that you are aware that 239.7 wm^2 equates to a radiating temperature of -18 degrees....you are aware of that...aren't you?....


Now see the energy radiating up from the surface?....239.7 from the sun...and 239.7 from the atmosphere....two radiators...both radiating ...239.7wm^2 equates to a radiating temperature of -18 degrees....so they combine the radiation from these two radiators which are radiating at -18 degrees and suddenly you have a temperature of 29.85 degrees...

I am starting to think that you can't read a simple equation either...and I am betting that since you seem to realize that the sun is hot...that the climate science claim of the surface of the earth radiating at -18 degrees is just one more bit of bullshit upon which the greenhouse effect is based...

Questions.....RE: The Greenhouse Effect

The sun and the atmosphere, both radiating at -18C. DERP!

And I thought you were smart enough to know what you were talking about.

the source of the original post for your guidance.

SSDD is demonstrating with his basic misunderstanding of what the notes stated, the lack of comprehension he demonstrates in all basic physics.

All I have demonstrated is an interest in what the equations are stating....clearly, you can't state in your own words what they say...so again..if you can't contribute, why are you here?

Energy flux absorbed by the Earth = Radiation emitted by the Earth
239.7 W/m2 = constant x T4

To solve this equation, all we need to do is divide the emitted radiation (239.7 watts per square meter) by the constant (5.67 x 10-8) and take the fourth root of the result. Dividing we obtain 42.3 x 10-8. We'll take the fourth root on a calculator, but to check it's a good idea to estimate the result by taking the square root of 50, which should be just about 7 and taking the square root of 7 which should be around 2.5. The fourth root of 10 to the eighth power is 100. Hence, the answer should be a number around 2.5 x 100 or 250. The calculated result is 255. Remember that all results obtained from the Stefan_Boltzmann Law and other radiation laws are expressed in degrees Kelvin, so this is 255 K (-18 °C, 0 °F):

T = 255 K

The figure below illustrates how we derived this energy balance.

This effective temperature of 255 K is the temperature the Earth's Surface would have if it didn't have an atmosphere. It would be awfully cold! In reality, the Earth's surface temperature is closer to 288 K (15 °C, 59 °F). This difference of 33 K is the magnitude of the greenhouse effect. Before we go into more details about what this greenhouse effect is, let's look at Venus and Mars, our closest neighbours and calculate their effective temperatures.

ATM S 211 - Notes

There you go, anyone can go to the site and see what it says.

Thanks!
Now where did that source, or Old Rocks, say that the Sun is radiating at -18C?
Or was that something SSDD said?

well factually speaking, SSDD was using the information to see what you all thought about what old socks posted. It was a trap post.

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

SSDD is the only one who claimed the incoming energy means the radiator is -18C.

Again...my apologies for thinking you were smart enough to know what I was talking about...everyone else did...no one except you thought I was talking about anything more than the energy reaching the surface of the earth....so in a group that included crick and old rocks...how does it feel to be the stupidest guy in the room?

Look at the damned graph....or any graph of the greenhouse effect...see the incoming solar radiation..that's one of your radiators...239.7wm^2....please tell me that you are aware that 239.7 wm^2 equates to a radiating temperature of -18 degrees....you are aware of that...aren't you?....


Now see the energy radiating up from the surface?....239.7 from the sun...and 239.7 from the atmosphere....two radiators...both radiating ...239.7wm^2 equates to a radiating temperature of -18 degrees....so they combine the radiation from these two radiators which are radiating at -18 degrees and suddenly you have a temperature of 29.85 degrees...

I am starting to think that you can't read a simple equation either...and I am betting that since you seem to realize that the sun is hot...that the climate science claim of the surface of the earth radiating at -18 degrees is just one more bit of bullshit upon which the greenhouse effect is based...

Questions.....RE: The Greenhouse Effect

The sun and the atmosphere, both radiating at -18C. DERP!

And I thought you were smart enough to know what you were talking about.

the source of the original post for your guidance.

SSDD is demonstrating with his basic misunderstanding of what the notes stated, the lack of comprehension he demonstrates in all basic physics.

All I have demonstrated is an interest in what the equations are stating....clearly, you can't state in your own words what they say...so again..if you can't contribute, why are you here?

Energy flux absorbed by the Earth = Radiation emitted by the Earth
239.7 W/m2 = constant x T4

To solve this equation, all we need to do is divide the emitted radiation (239.7 watts per square meter) by the constant (5.67 x 10-8) and take the fourth root of the result. Dividing we obtain 42.3 x 10-8. We'll take the fourth root on a calculator, but to check it's a good idea to estimate the result by taking the square root of 50, which should be just about 7 and taking the square root of 7 which should be around 2.5. The fourth root of 10 to the eighth power is 100. Hence, the answer should be a number around 2.5 x 100 or 250. The calculated result is 255. Remember that all results obtained from the Stefan_Boltzmann Law and other radiation laws are expressed in degrees Kelvin, so this is 255 K (-18 °C, 0 °F):

T = 255 K

The figure below illustrates how we derived this energy balance.

This effective temperature of 255 K is the temperature the Earth's Surface would have if it didn't have an atmosphere. It would be awfully cold! In reality, the Earth's surface temperature is closer to 288 K (15 °C, 59 °F). This difference of 33 K is the magnitude of the greenhouse effect. Before we go into more details about what this greenhouse effect is, let's look at Venus and Mars, our closest neighbours and calculate their effective temperatures.

ATM S 211 - Notes

There you go, anyone can go to the site and see what it says.

Thanks!
Now where did that source, or Old Rocks, say that the Sun is radiating at -18C?
Or was that something SSDD said?

well factually speaking, SSDD was using the information to see what you all thought about what old socks posted. It was a trap post.

It was a trap post.

Yes. SSDD misinterpreted the info in the diagram and became trapped in his own errors.

 

[jc456]

Again...my apologies for thinking you were smart enough to know what I was talking about...everyone else did...no one except you thought I was talking about anything more than the energy reaching the surface of the earth....so in a group that included crick and old rocks...how does it feel to be the stupidest guy in the room?

Look at the damned graph....or any graph of the greenhouse effect...see the incoming solar radiation..that's one of your radiators...239.7wm^2....please tell me that you are aware that 239.7 wm^2 equates to a radiating temperature of -18 degrees....you are aware of that...aren't you?....


Now see the energy radiating up from the surface?....239.7 from the sun...and 239.7 from the atmosphere....two radiators...both radiating ...239.7wm^2 equates to a radiating temperature of -18 degrees....so they combine the radiation from these two radiators which are radiating at -18 degrees and suddenly you have a temperature of 29.85 degrees...

I am starting to think that you can't read a simple equation either...and I am betting that since you seem to realize that the sun is hot...that the climate science claim of the surface of the earth radiating at -18 degrees is just one more bit of bullshit upon which the greenhouse effect is based...

Questions.....RE: The Greenhouse Effect

The sun and the atmosphere, both radiating at -18C. DERP!

And I thought you were smart enough to know what you were talking about.

the source of the original post for your guidance.

All I have demonstrated is an interest in what the equations are stating....clearly, you can't state in your own words what they say...so again..if you can't contribute, why are you here?

Energy flux absorbed by the Earth = Radiation emitted by the Earth
239.7 W/m2 = constant x T4

To solve this equation, all we need to do is divide the emitted radiation (239.7 watts per square meter) by the constant (5.67 x 10-8) and take the fourth root of the result. Dividing we obtain 42.3 x 10-8. We'll take the fourth root on a calculator, but to check it's a good idea to estimate the result by taking the square root of 50, which should be just about 7 and taking the square root of 7 which should be around 2.5. The fourth root of 10 to the eighth power is 100. Hence, the answer should be a number around 2.5 x 100 or 250. The calculated result is 255. Remember that all results obtained from the Stefan_Boltzmann Law and other radiation laws are expressed in degrees Kelvin, so this is 255 K (-18 °C, 0 °F):

T = 255 K

The figure below illustrates how we derived this energy balance.

This effective temperature of 255 K is the temperature the Earth's Surface would have if it didn't have an atmosphere. It would be awfully cold! In reality, the Earth's surface temperature is closer to 288 K (15 °C, 59 °F). This difference of 33 K is the magnitude of the greenhouse effect. Before we go into more details about what this greenhouse effect is, let's look at Venus and Mars, our closest neighbours and calculate their effective temperatures.

ATM S 211 - Notes

There you go, anyone can go to the site and see what it says.

Thanks!
Now where did that source, or Old Rocks, say that the Sun is radiating at -18C?
Or was that something SSDD said?

well factually speaking, SSDD was using the information to see what you all thought about what old socks posted. It was a trap post.

It was a trap post.

Yes. SSDD misinterpreted the info in the diagram and became trapped in his own errors.

what errors were his? And, what did he misinterpret? he merely copy and pasted the material from the university.

It seems you all misinterpreted his original post.