Warmest March on record according to the Japanese Meteorological Agency

[IanC]

Interesting statement. If there were no GHGs would IR simply leave at the speed of light?

That's what I said to SSDD above. Do you have any reason to believe otherwise? It seems that if all the oceans turned to ice, even more SWIR would be reflected out.There may be other forcings that would change that but I haven't thought of any. However I definitely disagree with him that the earth would be warmer.
Opps. Dumb comment. See below.

You're a newbie here. I say all of this stuff every six months or so. And in new variations on the theme. It seldom sinks in to those who didn't already know it, and the few that seem to change their minds usually backslide soon after.

 

[Wuwei]

You're a newbie here. I say all of this stuff every six months or so. And in new variations on the theme. It seldom sinks in to those who didn't already know it, and the few that seem to change their minds usually backslide soon after.

Are you saying it sunk in to me? If so, do I take that as a complement? If so, Thank you. There seems to be a lot of conditionals in my reply.

 

[IanC]

You're a newbie here. I say all of this stuff every six months or so. And in new variations on the theme. It seldom sinks in to those who didn't already know it, and the few that seem to change their minds usually backslide soon after.

Are you saying it sunk in to me? If so, do I take that as a complement? If so, Thank you. There seems to be a lot of conditionals in my reply.

Nope, I think you came to the table with most of the pieces.

It's hard to put it down straight the first few times but it is worth the effort to try. You may not convince anyone else but you will be better for it. I'm glad to have you here.

 

[SSDD]

Exactly. That is what amplifiers are for. My point is that the cold CMB must strike the warmer MASER for there to be an amplification in the first place. That illustrates that energy from a cold source (CMB) can hit a warmer source (MASER).

Not sure why you are having a hard time with this...the resonance frequency is not CMB...CMB is not being captured by the radio telescope...a weak resonance frequency is being captured and interpolated into CMB which could not be captured by the radio telescope.

Radiation from a cold source at 2.725 deg K must hit the much warmer parabolic dish of the telescope at 15 deg C

.

I am not having trouble with this...I understand that the 2.75K radiation is not hitting the dish....a resonance signal is hitting the dish and being amplified into a signal that can then be interpolated into the 2.75K signal.

That is a clear example of thermal radiation from a colder source striking a warmer object. That is a contradiction of your understanding that energy cannot go from a cold source to a hotter source.

It is a clear example of getting a signal that can not be received by the telescope...a resonance signal that can be picked up being amplified and vi a mathematical model interpreted into the signal (artificially) that is to weak to be actually received.

 

[SSDD]

Temperature and pressure gradients are very efficient at accomplishing said work.

So you admit that there is no such thing as back radiation?

Straw man.

If work is being done to move energy from the atmosphere back to the surface of the earth, then there is no back radiation. Which is it? Back radiation, or energy being moved via work produced via pressure in the atmosphere? If it is work being done via atmospheric pressure, where does that leave the greenhouse hypothesis?

 

[SSDD]

Thanks, I'll take as a vote of confidence in my belief in science moving towards the truth.

It will move more quickly once the AGW hoax is dead....and I am sure that you will adapt to life without a greenhouse effect as described by climate science.

 

[SSDD]

That statement makes no physical sense. Energy doesn't "know" or "say" anything! You have to be a lot more scientifically precise. You have to explicitly define the concept you are talking about and not switch it midstream.

Of course it doesn't....I was just pretending to be toddster and ian et al for a minute....saying stupid stuff like smart energy, and smart waves, and smart photons didn't make me feel any better about myself....wonder why they do it. Energy moves in the only direction it has available to it...just like a dropped stone, or an electron down a copper wire. It doesn't move up hill...more entropy always...no back radiation. The only way energy goes to a state of less entropy is if work is done to make it happen.

Back conduction doesn't happen...energy can't move from a cool body to a warm body that is in physical contact with it....acknowledging that there is zero distance (from the photon's point of view) and a body that is warmer than the body it originated from, why would someone argue that the energy that the photon represents attempt to move up hill to a state of less entropy? Energy only goes where it can....movement to a warmer body is a place it can't go...why even attempt whether you are energy in the form of a photon or energy conducting from one place to another?

 

[SSDD]

All I was pointing out is that CO2 retains energy as thermal energy consistent with the temperature of the surrounding atmosphere. Not that it retains all the energy it absorbs.

It doesn't retain any of the energy it absorbs....that is why I say that so called greenhouse gas molecules are like holes in the blanket covering earth...If we only had oxygen and nitrogen and depended entirely on convection and conduction to move IR to the upper atmosphere, the earth would be a warmer place. It is just silly to suggest that the presence of a radiative gas would hinder the atmosphere's ability to radiatively cool itself.

Interesting statement. If there were no GHGs would IR simply leave at the speed of light?

Via radiation? How would it radiate if there were no radiative gasses to facilitate the movement? Radiation is the smallest part of energy transport from the surface to the upper atmosphere...GHG's are what facilitate that small percentage of the total movement of heat out into space...take away the GHG's and you are left with nothing but conduction and convection.

 

[Crick]

Where do you get the idea that the primary CMB frequency is not being detected?

Where also do you get the idea that its harmonics would have any warmer a source than the primary?

 

[SSDD]

What are you talking about??? IR doesn't move by convection nor conduction; only matter can move that way!

My error...I should have just said energy. If we didn't have radiative gasses in the atmosphere, we would be dependent entirely on conduction and convection to move energy into the upper atmosphere...and the earth would be a warmer place as a result.

To you it's silly because you don't understand the physics behind radiation phenomena.

If you believe that the cooler atmosphere can radiate energy to the warmer surface of the earth and cause warming, I am afraid that it is you who is being silly.

 

[Crick]

Do you actually believe that "radiative gasses" are the only sorts of matter that emit IR?

Did Stefan and Boltzmann tell us at some point that their work only applies to radiative gasses?

You cannot deny you are a fooking troll.

 

[orogenicman]

Temperature and pressure gradients are very efficient at accomplishing said work.

So you admit that there is no such thing as back radiation?

Straw man.

If work is being done to move energy from the atmosphere back to the surface of the earth, then there is no back radiation. Which is it? Back radiation, or energy being moved via work produced via pressure in the atmosphere? If it is work being done via atmospheric pressure, where does that leave the greenhouse hypothesis?

Crick and others have explained this to you and others half a dozen times, bubba. That you willfully ignore the explanation, that's on you. Get over it.

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

Exactly. That is what amplifiers are for. My point is that the cold CMB must strike the warmer MASER for there to be an amplification in the first place. That illustrates that energy from a cold source (CMB) can hit a warmer source (MASER).

Not sure why you are having a hard time with this...the resonance frequency is not CMB...CMB is not being captured by the radio telescope...a weak resonance frequency is being captured and interpolated into CMB which could not be captured by the radio telescope.

Radiation from a cold source at 2.725 deg K must hit the much warmer parabolic dish of the telescope at 15 deg C

.

I am not having trouble with this...I understand that the 2.75K radiation is not hitting the dish....a resonance signal is hitting the dish and being amplified into a signal that can then be interpolated into the 2.75K signal.

That is a clear example of thermal radiation from a colder source striking a warmer object. That is a contradiction of your understanding that energy cannot go from a cold source to a hotter source.

It is a clear example of getting a signal that can not be received by the telescope...a resonance signal that can be picked up being amplified and vi a mathematical model interpreted into the signal (artificially) that is to weak to be actually received.

It is a clear example of getting a signal that can not be received by the telescope...a resonance signal that can be picked up

I'm not clear on what you're claiming here.
What's the difference between the real signal received by the dish, actual radiation emitted by matter at about 2.75K and this resonance signal, something you made up to support your silly claims?
How does this radiation cause this resonance? Where does your magical transition occur?

 

[jc456]

Like water pressure in a hose, when I put a spray gun on the end of a hose set in the off position, why doesn't water come out? The water can't flow because it is restricted. So IR goes up right? So if it can't go up it lingers until it can holding the warmth at the surface because the IR can't get out. The IR wants to get out, it can't when clouds are there. AGain, in a desert as soon as that sun disappears, the IR says sianara and rushes out to space.

The clouds fill up with IR and don't allow more IR to leave ground level?

It restricts it, like the hose if I squeeze the trigger of the spray gun and let some water out it all doesn't come out, it is limited and why the hose stays firm. The clouds allow limited IR through as it releases IR upward to the atmosphere. Eventually the temps will get a little cooler as time goes by. It could be that it holds the heat until the next sunrise and it starts all over.

It restricts it,

But the cloud is cooler than the ground. How can it restrict anything?

because it is formed due to water vapor and as such absorbs IR waves.

Yes, water vapor both absorbs and emits IR.
Never seen the claim that it restricts other things from emitting IR.
You have a link?

hahahahahahahahahahaha I've never seen evidence that back radiation exists either. what's your point?

 

[jc456]

Temperature and pressure gradients are very efficient at accomplishing said work.

So you admit that there is no such thing as back radiation?

Straw man.

If work is being done to move energy from the atmosphere back to the surface of the earth, then there is no back radiation. Which is it? Back radiation, or energy being moved via work produced via pressure in the atmosphere? If it is work being done via atmospheric pressure, where does that leave the greenhouse hypothesis?

Crick and others have explained this to you and others half a dozen times, bubba. That you willfully ignore the explanation, that's on you. Get over it.

hahahahahaahhaa bothers the bajesus out of you? funny shit s0n. Don't disturb the pedals on that flower now.

 

[jc456]

Like water pressure in a hose, when I put a spray gun on the end of a hose set in the off position, why doesn't water come out? The water can't flow because it is restricted. So IR goes up right? So if it can't go up it lingers until it can holding the warmth at the surface because the IR can't get out. The IR wants to get out, it can't when clouds are there. AGain, in a desert as soon as that sun disappears, the IR says sianara and rushes out to space.

The clouds fill up with IR and don't allow more IR to leave ground level?

It restricts it, like the hose if I squeeze the trigger of the spray gun and let some water out it all doesn't come out, it is limited and why the hose stays firm. The clouds allow limited IR through as it releases IR upward to the atmosphere. Eventually the temps will get a little cooler as time goes by. It could be that it holds the heat until the next sunrise and it starts all over.

It restricts it,

But the cloud is cooler than the ground. How can it restrict anything?

because it is formed due to water vapor and as such absorbs IR waves.

Yes, water vapor both absorbs and emits IR.
Never seen the claim that it restricts other things from emitting IR.
You have a link?

BTW, how fast does it absorb? is it like a paper towel? Bounty comes to mind, or Charmin soft on my ass. I have a link btw, a missing link and you resemble that missing link.

 

[jc456]

Exactly. That is what amplifiers are for. My point is that the cold CMB must strike the warmer MASER for there to be an amplification in the first place. That illustrates that energy from a cold source (CMB) can hit a warmer source (MASER).

Not sure why you are having a hard time with this...the resonance frequency is not CMB...CMB is not being captured by the radio telescope...a weak resonance frequency is being captured and interpolated into CMB which could not be captured by the radio telescope.

Radiation from a cold source at 2.725 deg K must hit the much warmer parabolic dish of the telescope at 15 deg C

.

I am not having trouble with this...I understand that the 2.75K radiation is not hitting the dish....a resonance signal is hitting the dish and being amplified into a signal that can then be interpolated into the 2.75K signal.

That is a clear example of thermal radiation from a colder source striking a warmer object. That is a contradiction of your understanding that energy cannot go from a cold source to a hotter source.

It is a clear example of getting a signal that can not be received by the telescope...a resonance signal that can be picked up being amplified and vi a mathematical model interpreted into the signal (artificially) that is to weak to be actually received.

It is a clear example of getting a signal that can not be received by the telescope...a resonance signal that can be picked up

I'm not clear on what you're claiming here.
What's the difference between the real signal received by the dish, actual radiation emitted by matter at about 2.75K and this resonance signal, something you made up to support your silly claims?
How does this radiation cause this resonance? Where does your magical transition occur?

you wouldn't know what clear is, foggy is more in line with you.

 

[jc456]

Temperature and pressure gradients are very efficient at accomplishing said work.

So you admit that there is no such thing as back radiation?

Straw man.

If work is being done to move energy from the atmosphere back to the surface of the earth, then there is no back radiation. Which is it? Back radiation, or energy being moved via work produced via pressure in the atmosphere? If it is work being done via atmospheric pressure, where does that leave the greenhouse hypothesis?

Crick and others have explained this to you and others half a dozen times, bubba. That you willfully ignore the explanation, that's on you. Get over it.

crick's a dk, damn there's that Dr. Seuss experience again.

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

The clouds fill up with IR and don't allow more IR to leave ground level?

It restricts it, like the hose if I squeeze the trigger of the spray gun and let some water out it all doesn't come out, it is limited and why the hose stays firm. The clouds allow limited IR through as it releases IR upward to the atmosphere. Eventually the temps will get a little cooler as time goes by. It could be that it holds the heat until the next sunrise and it starts all over.

It restricts it,

But the cloud is cooler than the ground. How can it restrict anything?

because it is formed due to water vapor and as such absorbs IR waves.

Yes, water vapor both absorbs and emits IR.
Never seen the claim that it restricts other things from emitting IR.
You have a link?

hahahahahahahahahahaha I've never seen evidence that back radiation exists either. what's your point?

You have no proof of your so called restriction.
You're making it up.
That's my point.

I've never seen evidence that back radiation exists either.

You have, you admitted it upthread.

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

The clouds fill up with IR and don't allow more IR to leave ground level?

It restricts it, like the hose if I squeeze the trigger of the spray gun and let some water out it all doesn't come out, it is limited and why the hose stays firm. The clouds allow limited IR through as it releases IR upward to the atmosphere. Eventually the temps will get a little cooler as time goes by. It could be that it holds the heat until the next sunrise and it starts all over.

It restricts it,

But the cloud is cooler than the ground. How can it restrict anything?

because it is formed due to water vapor and as such absorbs IR waves.

Yes, water vapor both absorbs and emits IR.
Never seen the claim that it restricts other things from emitting IR.
You have a link?

BTW, how fast does it absorb? is it like a paper towel? Bounty comes to mind, or Charmin soft on my ass. I have a link btw, a missing link and you resemble that missing link.

Morning drinker.....aren't you?