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

[Toddsterpatriot]

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.

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.

what errors were his?

The part where the Sun is radiating at -18C.

 

[jc456]

the source of the original post for your guidance.

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.

what errors were his?

The part where the Sun is radiating at -18C.

he never said it did. he pointed to a bad university statement and image that showed that. You're too confused I understand.

 

[SSDD]

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

And I never said that the sun was radiating at -18....that is just more of your never ending dishonesty.. I said repeatedly that the graphic showed the INCOMING RADIATION from the sun at -18 degrees but always qualified the statement with incoming radiation...I made no claims regarding the radiating temperature of the sun...again you are wrong..and a liar...do you never tire of it?

 

[SSDD]

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

Nope...never misinterpreted anything...you, on the other hand have done nothing but lie, misinterpret, and misrepresent in your pitiful display of denial...

 

[SSDD]

the source of the original post for your guidance.

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.

what errors were his?

The part where the Sun is radiating at -18C.

I never said that the sun was radiating at -18...more lies on your part...I said the graphic showed the incoming radiation from the sun at -18 degrees....do you never tire of lying?...but do feel free to point out any post i made where I said that the sun itself was radiating at -18....

 

[SSDD]

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.

what errors were his?

The part where the Sun is radiating at -18C.

he never said it did. he pointed to a bad university statement and image that showed that. You're too confused I understand.

He is just playing his same old stupid game...he is a one trick pony and the trick isn't very interesting...anytime I mentioned the solar radiation shown in the graph...I qualified the statement by saying incoming solar radiation...or solar radiation absorbed by the surface of the earth...the only mention I made regarding the actual radiating temperature of the sun was in reference to old europe's claim that you could heat an object to a temperature higher than the surface of the sun by using a magnifying glass...I plugged the numbers into the SB equation which said that you could only heat up an object to about half the tmperaure of the sun with a magnifying glass...

Toddster is either a liar, or a poor unfortunate without the intelligence to read and comprehend what people say...I would lean more towards liar...stupid, but still a liar.

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

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.

what errors were his?

The part where the Sun is radiating at -18C.

I never said that the sun was radiating at -18...more lies on your part...I said the graphic showed the incoming radiation from the sun at -18 degrees....do you never tire of lying?...but do feel free to point out any post i made where I said that the sun itself was radiating at -18....

never said that the sun was radiating at -18...

You did. Post #135.


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


...I said the graphic showed the incoming radiation from the sun at -18 degrees

Wrong. The graphic doesn't mention the temperature of the Sun. Or the temperature of the radiation.
You took the info from the graphic and misinterpreted it to say the Sun was radiating at -18C.

That error is on you and you alone.


please tell me that you are aware that 239.7 wm^2 equates to a radiating temperature of -18 degrees...

Of the Earth's surface, not of the Sun.

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

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.

what errors were his?

The part where the Sun is radiating at -18C.

he never said it did. he pointed to a bad university statement and image that showed that. You're too confused I understand.

He is just playing his same old stupid game...he is a one trick pony and the trick isn't very interesting...anytime I mentioned the solar radiation shown in the graph...I qualified the statement by saying incoming solar radiation...or solar radiation absorbed by the surface of the earth...the only mention I made regarding the actual radiating temperature of the sun was in reference to old europe's claim that you could heat an object to a temperature higher than the surface of the sun by using a magnifying glass...I plugged the numbers into the SB equation which said that you could only heat up an object to about half the tmperaure of the sun with a magnifying glass...

Toddster is either a liar, or a poor unfortunate without the intelligence to read and comprehend what people say...I would lean more towards liar...stupid, but still a liar.

...he is a one trick pony

Yup. Highlighting your errors and watching you run away from your errors.

 

[SSDD]

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.

what errors were his?

The part where the Sun is radiating at -18C.

I never said that the sun was radiating at -18...more lies on your part...I said the graphic showed the incoming radiation from the sun at -18 degrees....do you never tire of lying?...but do feel free to point out any post i made where I said that the sun itself was radiating at -18....

never said that the sun was radiating at -18...

You did. Post #135.


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


...I said the graphic showed the incoming radiation from the sun at -18 degrees

Wrong. The graphic doesn't mention the temperature of the Sun. Or the temperature of the radiation.
You took the info from the graphic and misinterpreted it to say the Sun was radiating at -18C.

That error is on you and you alone.


please tell me that you are aware that 239.7 wm^2 equates to a radiating temperature of -18 degrees...

Of the Earth's surface, not of the Sun.

And the lies and misrepresentation just never stops with you does it? Look at the first paragraph I wrote...

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?....

Incoming solar radiation...I qualified whet we were talking about...did I then, anywhere change the topic to the sun and the radiation emitting from its surface?...of course I didn't...but honesty isn't your thing...is it...

 

[SSDD]

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.

what errors were his?

The part where the Sun is radiating at -18C.

he never said it did. he pointed to a bad university statement and image that showed that. You're too confused I understand.

He is just playing his same old stupid game...he is a one trick pony and the trick isn't very interesting...anytime I mentioned the solar radiation shown in the graph...I qualified the statement by saying incoming solar radiation...or solar radiation absorbed by the surface of the earth...the only mention I made regarding the actual radiating temperature of the sun was in reference to old europe's claim that you could heat an object to a temperature higher than the surface of the sun by using a magnifying glass...I plugged the numbers into the SB equation which said that you could only heat up an object to about half the tmperaure of the sun with a magnifying glass...

Toddster is either a liar, or a poor unfortunate without the intelligence to read and comprehend what people say...I would lean more towards liar...stupid, but still a liar.

...he is a one trick pony

Yup. Highlighting your errors and watching you run away from your errors.

Sorry toddster...all you have managed to highlight is how dishonest you are....

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

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.

what errors were his?

The part where the Sun is radiating at -18C.

I never said that the sun was radiating at -18...more lies on your part...I said the graphic showed the incoming radiation from the sun at -18 degrees....do you never tire of lying?...but do feel free to point out any post i made where I said that the sun itself was radiating at -18....

never said that the sun was radiating at -18...

You did. Post #135.


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


...I said the graphic showed the incoming radiation from the sun at -18 degrees

Wrong. The graphic doesn't mention the temperature of the Sun. Or the temperature of the radiation.
You took the info from the graphic and misinterpreted it to say the Sun was radiating at -18C.

That error is on you and you alone.


please tell me that you are aware that 239.7 wm^2 equates to a radiating temperature of -18 degrees...

Of the Earth's surface, not of the Sun.

And the lies and misrepresentation just never stops with you does it? Look at the first paragraph I wrote...

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?....

Incoming solar radiation...I qualified whet we were talking about...did I then, anywhere change the topic to the sun and the radiation emitting from its surface?...of course I didn't...but honesty isn't your thing...is it...

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?....

That incoming solar radiation doesn't tell you anything about the temperature of the Sun.

That's where you took the info from the image and went horribly wrong.

did I then, anywhere change the topic to the sun and the radiation emitting from its surface?...

You said the radiation equates to the temperature of the 2 radiators but you weren't talking about the Sun? LOL!

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

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.

what errors were his?

The part where the Sun is radiating at -18C.

he never said it did. he pointed to a bad university statement and image that showed that. You're too confused I understand.

He is just playing his same old stupid game...he is a one trick pony and the trick isn't very interesting...anytime I mentioned the solar radiation shown in the graph...I qualified the statement by saying incoming solar radiation...or solar radiation absorbed by the surface of the earth...the only mention I made regarding the actual radiating temperature of the sun was in reference to old europe's claim that you could heat an object to a temperature higher than the surface of the sun by using a magnifying glass...I plugged the numbers into the SB equation which said that you could only heat up an object to about half the tmperaure of the sun with a magnifying glass...

Toddster is either a liar, or a poor unfortunate without the intelligence to read and comprehend what people say...I would lean more towards liar...stupid, but still a liar.

...he is a one trick pony

Yup. Highlighting your errors and watching you run away from your errors.

Sorry toddster...all you have managed to highlight is how dishonest you are....

When it comes to your confusion and errors, I'm very honest.

 

[jc456]

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.

what errors were his?

The part where the Sun is radiating at -18C.

I never said that the sun was radiating at -18...more lies on your part...I said the graphic showed the incoming radiation from the sun at -18 degrees....do you never tire of lying?...but do feel free to point out any post i made where I said that the sun itself was radiating at -18....

never said that the sun was radiating at -18...

You did. Post #135.


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


...I said the graphic showed the incoming radiation from the sun at -18 degrees

Wrong. The graphic doesn't mention the temperature of the Sun. Or the temperature of the radiation.
You took the info from the graphic and misinterpreted it to say the Sun was radiating at -18C.

That error is on you and you alone.


please tell me that you are aware that 239.7 wm^2 equates to a radiating temperature of -18 degrees...

Of the Earth's surface, not of the Sun.

well does 239.7wm^2 equate to -18C? you've never actually commented. does it convert to the -18C?

And, just for my edification, didn't the image from the universities show that? So I'm still trying to understand how you're attempt to pin all of this bad information from the university on SSDD. perhaps you could explain it to him and me.

 

[jc456]

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.

what errors were his?

The part where the Sun is radiating at -18C.

I never said that the sun was radiating at -18...more lies on your part...I said the graphic showed the incoming radiation from the sun at -18 degrees....do you never tire of lying?...but do feel free to point out any post i made where I said that the sun itself was radiating at -18....

never said that the sun was radiating at -18...

You did. Post #135.


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


...I said the graphic showed the incoming radiation from the sun at -18 degrees

Wrong. The graphic doesn't mention the temperature of the Sun. Or the temperature of the radiation.
You took the info from the graphic and misinterpreted it to say the Sun was radiating at -18C.

That error is on you and you alone.


please tell me that you are aware that 239.7 wm^2 equates to a radiating temperature of -18 degrees...

Of the Earth's surface, not of the Sun.

And the lies and misrepresentation just never stops with you does it? Look at the first paragraph I wrote...

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?....

Incoming solar radiation...I qualified whet we were talking about...did I then, anywhere change the topic to the sun and the radiation emitting from its surface?...of course I didn't...but honesty isn't your thing...is it...

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?....

That incoming solar radiation doesn't tell you anything about the temperature of the Sun.

That's where you took the info from the image and went horribly wrong.

did I then, anywhere change the topic to the sun and the radiation emitting from its surface?...

You said the radiation equates to the temperature of the 2 radiators but you weren't talking about the Sun? LOL!

That incoming solar radiation doesn't tell you anything about the temperature of the Sun.

it comes from the sun though correct? the incoming radiation I mean.

 

[SSDD]

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.

what errors were his?

The part where the Sun is radiating at -18C.

I never said that the sun was radiating at -18...more lies on your part...I said the graphic showed the incoming radiation from the sun at -18 degrees....do you never tire of lying?...but do feel free to point out any post i made where I said that the sun itself was radiating at -18....

never said that the sun was radiating at -18...

You did. Post #135.


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


...I said the graphic showed the incoming radiation from the sun at -18 degrees

Wrong. The graphic doesn't mention the temperature of the Sun. Or the temperature of the radiation.
You took the info from the graphic and misinterpreted it to say the Sun was radiating at -18C.

That error is on you and you alone.


please tell me that you are aware that 239.7 wm^2 equates to a radiating temperature of -18 degrees...

Of the Earth's surface, not of the Sun.

well does 239.7wm^2 equate to -18C? you've never actually commented. does it convert to the -18C?

And, just for my edification, didn't the image from the universities show that? So I'm still trying to understand how you're attempt to pin all of this bad information from the university on SSDD. perhaps you could explain it to him and me.

they still don't know where the numbers are coming from....

 

[jc456]

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.

what errors were his?

The part where the Sun is radiating at -18C.

I never said that the sun was radiating at -18...more lies on your part...I said the graphic showed the incoming radiation from the sun at -18 degrees....do you never tire of lying?...but do feel free to point out any post i made where I said that the sun itself was radiating at -18....

never said that the sun was radiating at -18...

You did. Post #135.


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


...I said the graphic showed the incoming radiation from the sun at -18 degrees

Wrong. The graphic doesn't mention the temperature of the Sun. Or the temperature of the radiation.
You took the info from the graphic and misinterpreted it to say the Sun was radiating at -18C.

That error is on you and you alone.


please tell me that you are aware that 239.7 wm^2 equates to a radiating temperature of -18 degrees...

Of the Earth's surface, not of the Sun.

well does 239.7wm^2 equate to -18C? you've never actually commented. does it convert to the -18C?

And, just for my edification, didn't the image from the universities show that? So I'm still trying to understand how you're attempt to pin all of this bad information from the university on SSDD. perhaps you could explain it to him and me.

they still don't know where the numbers are coming from....

I know. It is amusing. I like all the flaming going on as well. they have no fking idea what they're even talking about. It's like they got an alternate post from you. I'm still not sure where they're coming from and neither do they.

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

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.

what errors were his?

The part where the Sun is radiating at -18C.

I never said that the sun was radiating at -18...more lies on your part...I said the graphic showed the incoming radiation from the sun at -18 degrees....do you never tire of lying?...but do feel free to point out any post i made where I said that the sun itself was radiating at -18....

never said that the sun was radiating at -18...

You did. Post #135.


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


...I said the graphic showed the incoming radiation from the sun at -18 degrees

Wrong. The graphic doesn't mention the temperature of the Sun. Or the temperature of the radiation.
You took the info from the graphic and misinterpreted it to say the Sun was radiating at -18C.

That error is on you and you alone.


please tell me that you are aware that 239.7 wm^2 equates to a radiating temperature of -18 degrees...

Of the Earth's surface, not of the Sun.

well does 239.7wm^2 equate to -18C? you've never actually commented. does it convert to the -18C?

And, just for my edification, didn't the image from the universities show that? So I'm still trying to understand how you're attempt to pin all of this bad information from the university on SSDD. perhaps you could explain it to him and me.

well does 239.7wm^2 equate to -18C?

No, the incoming solar radiation does not equate the source to -18C.

didn't the image from the universities show that?

No, the image did not show the incoming solar radiation equated the source to -18C.

So I'm still trying to understand how you're attempt to pin all of this bad information from the university on SSDD.

He's the only one who said the 2 incoming sources, the Sun and the atmosphere, somehow both had a temperature of -18C, or that their energy had a temperature of -18C.

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

what errors were his?

The part where the Sun is radiating at -18C.

I never said that the sun was radiating at -18...more lies on your part...I said the graphic showed the incoming radiation from the sun at -18 degrees....do you never tire of lying?...but do feel free to point out any post i made where I said that the sun itself was radiating at -18....

never said that the sun was radiating at -18...

You did. Post #135.


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


...I said the graphic showed the incoming radiation from the sun at -18 degrees

Wrong. The graphic doesn't mention the temperature of the Sun. Or the temperature of the radiation.
You took the info from the graphic and misinterpreted it to say the Sun was radiating at -18C.

That error is on you and you alone.


please tell me that you are aware that 239.7 wm^2 equates to a radiating temperature of -18 degrees...

Of the Earth's surface, not of the Sun.

And the lies and misrepresentation just never stops with you does it? Look at the first paragraph I wrote...

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?....

Incoming solar radiation...I qualified whet we were talking about...did I then, anywhere change the topic to the sun and the radiation emitting from its surface?...of course I didn't...but honesty isn't your thing...is it...

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?....

That incoming solar radiation doesn't tell you anything about the temperature of the Sun.

That's where you took the info from the image and went horribly wrong.

did I then, anywhere change the topic to the sun and the radiation emitting from its surface?...

You said the radiation equates to the temperature of the 2 radiators but you weren't talking about the Sun? LOL!

That incoming solar radiation doesn't tell you anything about the temperature of the Sun.

it comes from the sun though correct? the incoming radiation I mean.

Yes, the incoming radiation from the Sun comes from the Sun.

 

[jc456]

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.

what errors were his?

The part where the Sun is radiating at -18C.

I never said that the sun was radiating at -18...more lies on your part...I said the graphic showed the incoming radiation from the sun at -18 degrees....do you never tire of lying?...but do feel free to point out any post i made where I said that the sun itself was radiating at -18....

never said that the sun was radiating at -18...

You did. Post #135.


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


...I said the graphic showed the incoming radiation from the sun at -18 degrees

Wrong. The graphic doesn't mention the temperature of the Sun. Or the temperature of the radiation.
You took the info from the graphic and misinterpreted it to say the Sun was radiating at -18C.

That error is on you and you alone.


please tell me that you are aware that 239.7 wm^2 equates to a radiating temperature of -18 degrees...

Of the Earth's surface, not of the Sun.

well does 239.7wm^2 equate to -18C? you've never actually commented. does it convert to the -18C?

And, just for my edification, didn't the image from the universities show that? So I'm still trying to understand how you're attempt to pin all of this bad information from the university on SSDD. perhaps you could explain it to him and me.

well does 239.7wm^2 equate to -18C?

No, the incoming solar radiation does not equate the source to -18C.

didn't the image from the universities show that?

No, the image did not show the incoming solar radiation equated the source to -18C.

So I'm still trying to understand how you're attempt to pin all of this bad information from the university on SSDD.

He's the only one who said the 2 incoming sources, the Sun and the atmosphere, somehow both had a temperature of -18C, or that their energy had a temperature of -18C.

He's the only one who said the 2 incoming sources, the Sun and the atmosphere, somehow both had a temperature of -18C, or that their energy had a temperature of -18C

no he didn't.

No, the incoming solar radiation does not equate the source to -18C.

Are you saying there is no way to convert the w/m2 into temperatures? hmmmmmmmm

 

[jc456]

I never said that the sun was radiating at -18...more lies on your part...I said the graphic showed the incoming radiation from the sun at -18 degrees....do you never tire of lying?...but do feel free to point out any post i made where I said that the sun itself was radiating at -18....

never said that the sun was radiating at -18...

You did. Post #135.


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


...I said the graphic showed the incoming radiation from the sun at -18 degrees

Wrong. The graphic doesn't mention the temperature of the Sun. Or the temperature of the radiation.
You took the info from the graphic and misinterpreted it to say the Sun was radiating at -18C.

That error is on you and you alone.


please tell me that you are aware that 239.7 wm^2 equates to a radiating temperature of -18 degrees...

Of the Earth's surface, not of the Sun.

And the lies and misrepresentation just never stops with you does it? Look at the first paragraph I wrote...

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?....

Incoming solar radiation...I qualified whet we were talking about...did I then, anywhere change the topic to the sun and the radiation emitting from its surface?...of course I didn't...but honesty isn't your thing...is it...

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?....

That incoming solar radiation doesn't tell you anything about the temperature of the Sun.

That's where you took the info from the image and went horribly wrong.

did I then, anywhere change the topic to the sun and the radiation emitting from its surface?...

You said the radiation equates to the temperature of the 2 radiators but you weren't talking about the Sun? LOL!

That incoming solar radiation doesn't tell you anything about the temperature of the Sun.

it comes from the sun though correct? the incoming radiation I mean.

Yes, the incoming radiation from the Sun comes from the Sun.

well you said:
That incoming solar radiation doesn't tell you anything about the temperature of the Sun.

I'd like to know when SSDD mentioned anything about the temperature of the sun? Why'd you go down that rat hole there? hmmmmm seems you merely like to disrupt the message board. what a proud disrupt-er you are.