What the science says

[jc456]

Like this:

A concise description of the greenhouse effect is given in the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change Fourth Assessment Report, "What is the Greenhouse Effect?" FAQ 1.3 - AR4 WGI Chapter 1: Historical Overview of Climate Change Science, IIPCC Fourth Assessment Report, Chapter 1, page 115: "To balance the absorbed incoming [solar] energy, the Earth must, on average, radiate the same amount of energy back to space. Because the Earth is much colder than the Sun, it radiates at much longer wavelengths, primarily in the infrared part of the spectrum (see Figure 1). Much of this thermal radiation emitted by the land and ocean is absorbed by the atmosphere, including clouds, and reradiated back to Earth. This is called the greenhouse effect."

Stephen H. Schneider, in Geosphere-biosphere Interactions and Climate, Lennart O. Bengtsson and Claus U. Hammer, eds., Cambridge University Press, 2001, ISBN 0-521-78238-4, pp. 90-91.

E. Claussen, V. A. Cochran, and D. P. Davis, Climate Change: Science, Strategies, & Solutions, University of Michigan, 2001. p. 373.

A. Allaby and M. Allaby, A Dictionary of Earth Sciences, Oxford University Press, 1999, ISBN 0-19-280079-5, p. 244.

Vaclav Smil (2003). The Earth's Biosphere: Evolution, Dynamics, and Change. MIT Press. p. 107. ISBN 978-0-262-69298-4.

IPCC AR4 WG1 (2007), Solomon, S.; Qin, D.; Manning, M.; Chen, Z.; Marquis, M.; Averyt, K.B.; Tignor, M.; Miller, H.L., eds., Climate Change 2007: The Physical Science Basis, Contribution of Working Group I to the Fourth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, Cambridge University Press, ISBN 978-0-521-88009-1 (pb: 978-0-521-70596-7)

Schroeder, Daniel V. (2000). An introduction to thermal physics. San Francisco, California: Addison-Wesley. pp. 305–7. ISBN 0-321-27779-1. ... this mechanism is called the greenhouse effect, even though most greenhouses depend primarily on a different mechanism (namely, limiting convective cooling).

And so forth

Material above from the References section of Wikipedia's article on "The Greenhouse Effect"

Clear enough......even for idiots like jc and ssdd.

except it's never been tested as such.

Just post one of those experiments.

except it's never been tested as such.

Absorption and emission spectrums of CO2 have never been measured? Are you sure?

what were the temperature readings?

 

[jc456]

Of course it does...which leads me to wonder why, when the plethora of predictions that climate science has made over the decades failed to materialize, the hypothesis which was the basis of those claims and predictions was not scrapped and a new hypothesis with better predictive capacity was not put forward.

You haven't been following your own posts as well as the science. You posted the science first backed theories of colling and later the climate science put forth revised claims (scrapped the old ones) of warming. As the science has changed, you evidently have not.

Your argument is not with the 'cooling' or 'warming' claims, it is with the science. Why? Regulation and financial costs, as you have noted

I was unaware the science made 'predictions.' I always thought the science claimed possible scenarios into the future if nothing was done to address the issues. Now if YOU are talking about individuals who made predictions...you are not arguing about the science, are you?

his and my science is about actual science. the kind that is tested in a lab and results collected and distributed for review. Do you have those? See, that is what has been consistent since cooling (not colling) and warmers have been changing their minds. They sir follow the money.

I and SSDD follow the science and would like to see the empirical evidence. post it if it's soo available that you post in here about it. What has you convinced? show us.

his and my science is about actual science

Any examples proving the actual science of "smart photons"?

nope, you all have never posted up your experiment with observed empirical evidence. He and I have been waiting.

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

Like this:

A concise description of the greenhouse effect is given in the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change Fourth Assessment Report, "What is the Greenhouse Effect?" FAQ 1.3 - AR4 WGI Chapter 1: Historical Overview of Climate Change Science, IIPCC Fourth Assessment Report, Chapter 1, page 115: "To balance the absorbed incoming [solar] energy, the Earth must, on average, radiate the same amount of energy back to space. Because the Earth is much colder than the Sun, it radiates at much longer wavelengths, primarily in the infrared part of the spectrum (see Figure 1). Much of this thermal radiation emitted by the land and ocean is absorbed by the atmosphere, including clouds, and reradiated back to Earth. This is called the greenhouse effect."

Stephen H. Schneider, in Geosphere-biosphere Interactions and Climate, Lennart O. Bengtsson and Claus U. Hammer, eds., Cambridge University Press, 2001, ISBN 0-521-78238-4, pp. 90-91.

E. Claussen, V. A. Cochran, and D. P. Davis, Climate Change: Science, Strategies, & Solutions, University of Michigan, 2001. p. 373.

A. Allaby and M. Allaby, A Dictionary of Earth Sciences, Oxford University Press, 1999, ISBN 0-19-280079-5, p. 244.

Vaclav Smil (2003). The Earth's Biosphere: Evolution, Dynamics, and Change. MIT Press. p. 107. ISBN 978-0-262-69298-4.

IPCC AR4 WG1 (2007), Solomon, S.; Qin, D.; Manning, M.; Chen, Z.; Marquis, M.; Averyt, K.B.; Tignor, M.; Miller, H.L., eds., Climate Change 2007: The Physical Science Basis, Contribution of Working Group I to the Fourth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, Cambridge University Press, ISBN 978-0-521-88009-1 (pb: 978-0-521-70596-7)

Schroeder, Daniel V. (2000). An introduction to thermal physics. San Francisco, California: Addison-Wesley. pp. 305–7. ISBN 0-321-27779-1. ... this mechanism is called the greenhouse effect, even though most greenhouses depend primarily on a different mechanism (namely, limiting convective cooling).

And so forth

Material above from the References section of Wikipedia's article on "The Greenhouse Effect"

Clear enough......even for idiots like jc and ssdd.

except it's never been tested as such.

Just post one of those experiments.

except it's never been tested as such.

Absorption and emission spectrums of CO2 have never been measured? Are you sure?

what were the temperature readings?

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

Of course it does...which leads me to wonder why, when the plethora of predictions that climate science has made over the decades failed to materialize, the hypothesis which was the basis of those claims and predictions was not scrapped and a new hypothesis with better predictive capacity was not put forward.

You haven't been following your own posts as well as the science. You posted the science first backed theories of colling and later the climate science put forth revised claims (scrapped the old ones) of warming. As the science has changed, you evidently have not.

Your argument is not with the 'cooling' or 'warming' claims, it is with the science. Why? Regulation and financial costs, as you have noted

I was unaware the science made 'predictions.' I always thought the science claimed possible scenarios into the future if nothing was done to address the issues. Now if YOU are talking about individuals who made predictions...you are not arguing about the science, are you?

his and my science is about actual science. the kind that is tested in a lab and results collected and distributed for review. Do you have those? See, that is what has been consistent since cooling (not colling) and warmers have been changing their minds. They sir follow the money.

I and SSDD follow the science and would like to see the empirical evidence. post it if it's soo available that you post in here about it. What has you convinced? show us.

his and my science is about actual science

Any examples proving the actual science of "smart photons"?

nope, you all have never posted up your experiment with observed empirical evidence. He and I have been waiting.

You have observed empirical evidence of "smart photons"? Sweet.

 

[jc456]

Of course it does...which leads me to wonder why, when the plethora of predictions that climate science has made over the decades failed to materialize, the hypothesis which was the basis of those claims and predictions was not scrapped and a new hypothesis with better predictive capacity was not put forward.

You haven't been following your own posts as well as the science. You posted the science first backed theories of colling and later the climate science put forth revised claims (scrapped the old ones) of warming. As the science has changed, you evidently have not.

Your argument is not with the 'cooling' or 'warming' claims, it is with the science. Why? Regulation and financial costs, as you have noted

I was unaware the science made 'predictions.' I always thought the science claimed possible scenarios into the future if nothing was done to address the issues. Now if YOU are talking about individuals who made predictions...you are not arguing about the science, are you?

his and my science is about actual science. the kind that is tested in a lab and results collected and distributed for review. Do you have those? See, that is what has been consistent since cooling (not colling) and warmers have been changing their minds. They sir follow the money.

I and SSDD follow the science and would like to see the empirical evidence. post it if it's soo available that you post in here about it. What has you convinced? show us.

his and my science is about actual science

Any examples proving the actual science of "smart photons"?

nope, you all have never posted up your experiment with observed empirical evidence. He and I have been waiting.

You have observed empirical evidence of "smart photons"? Sweet.

I have? As I stated in that previous post you and yours haven't submitted the evidence yet. So I'm still waiting.

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

You haven't been following your own posts as well as the science. You posted the science first backed theories of colling and later the climate science put forth revised claims (scrapped the old ones) of warming. As the science has changed, you evidently have not.

Your argument is not with the 'cooling' or 'warming' claims, it is with the science. Why? Regulation and financial costs, as you have noted

I was unaware the science made 'predictions.' I always thought the science claimed possible scenarios into the future if nothing was done to address the issues. Now if YOU are talking about individuals who made predictions...you are not arguing about the science, are you?

his and my science is about actual science. the kind that is tested in a lab and results collected and distributed for review. Do you have those? See, that is what has been consistent since cooling (not colling) and warmers have been changing their minds. They sir follow the money.

I and SSDD follow the science and would like to see the empirical evidence. post it if it's soo available that you post in here about it. What has you convinced? show us.

his and my science is about actual science

Any examples proving the actual science of "smart photons"?

nope, you all have never posted up your experiment with observed empirical evidence. He and I have been waiting.

You have observed empirical evidence of "smart photons"? Sweet.

I have? As I stated in that previous post you and yours haven't submitted the evidence yet. So I'm still waiting.

I have?

You don't? Maybe because SSDD's moronic claim is ......moronic.

 

[jc456]

his and my science is about actual science. the kind that is tested in a lab and results collected and distributed for review. Do you have those? See, that is what has been consistent since cooling (not colling) and warmers have been changing their minds. They sir follow the money.

I and SSDD follow the science and would like to see the empirical evidence. post it if it's soo available that you post in here about it. What has you convinced? show us.

his and my science is about actual science

Any examples proving the actual science of "smart photons"?

nope, you all have never posted up your experiment with observed empirical evidence. He and I have been waiting.

You have observed empirical evidence of "smart photons"? Sweet.

I have? As I stated in that previous post you and yours haven't submitted the evidence yet. So I'm still waiting.

I have?

You don't? Maybe because SSDD's moronic claim is ......moronic.

I haven't. still waiting on your evidence of it.

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

his and my science is about actual science

Any examples proving the actual science of "smart photons"?

nope, you all have never posted up your experiment with observed empirical evidence. He and I have been waiting.

You have observed empirical evidence of "smart photons"? Sweet.

I have? As I stated in that previous post you and yours haven't submitted the evidence yet. So I'm still waiting.

I have?

You don't? Maybe because SSDD's moronic claim is ......moronic.

I haven't. still waiting on your evidence of it.

I haven't.

Don't tell SSDD, you'll make his smart photons cry.

 

[jc456]

nope, you all have never posted up your experiment with observed empirical evidence. He and I have been waiting.

You have observed empirical evidence of "smart photons"? Sweet.

I have? As I stated in that previous post you and yours haven't submitted the evidence yet. So I'm still waiting.

I have?

You don't? Maybe because SSDD's moronic claim is ......moronic.

I haven't. still waiting on your evidence of it.

I haven't.

Don't tell SSDD, you'll make his smart photons cry.

I'm not worried about SSDDs photons, I'm curious to yours. the ones that heat up the surface. where is your evidence? If this were jeopardy, you'd have lost.

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

You have observed empirical evidence of "smart photons"? Sweet.

I have? As I stated in that previous post you and yours haven't submitted the evidence yet. So I'm still waiting.

I have?

You don't? Maybe because SSDD's moronic claim is ......moronic.

I haven't. still waiting on your evidence of it.

I haven't.

Don't tell SSDD, you'll make his smart photons cry.

I'm not worried about SSDDs photons, I'm curious to yours. the ones that heat up the surface. where is your evidence? If this were jeopardy, you'd have lost.

I'm not worried about SSDDs photons, I'm curious to yours.

I don't believe in smart photons. I believe in actual science.

where is your evidence?

You want evidence that photons heat things up?
When you get thru 6th grade science, get back to me. I'll use small words.

 

[jc456]

I have? As I stated in that previous post you and yours haven't submitted the evidence yet. So I'm still waiting.

I have?

You don't? Maybe because SSDD's moronic claim is ......moronic.

I haven't. still waiting on your evidence of it.

I haven't.

Don't tell SSDD, you'll make his smart photons cry.

I'm not worried about SSDDs photons, I'm curious to yours. the ones that heat up the surface. where is your evidence? If this were jeopardy, you'd have lost.

I'm not worried about SSDDs photons, I'm curious to yours.

I don't believe in smart photons. I believe in actual science.

where is your evidence?

You want evidence that photons heat things up?
When you get thru 6th grade science, get back to me. I'll use small words.

You want evidence that photons heat things up?

why isn't there any information on the internet for such a thing? I mean, the internet does have information on many many things, but that CO2 gets warmer than it's surrounding ain't one. Nor that it can make an object around it warmer than the surrounding. So you're the one with magic photon's. So post up that there internet 6th grade document your convinced exists.

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

I have?

You don't? Maybe because SSDD's moronic claim is ......moronic.

I haven't. still waiting on your evidence of it.

I haven't.

Don't tell SSDD, you'll make his smart photons cry.

I'm not worried about SSDDs photons, I'm curious to yours. the ones that heat up the surface. where is your evidence? If this were jeopardy, you'd have lost.

I'm not worried about SSDDs photons, I'm curious to yours.

I don't believe in smart photons. I believe in actual science.

where is your evidence?

You want evidence that photons heat things up?
When you get thru 6th grade science, get back to me. I'll use small words.

You want evidence that photons heat things up?

why isn't there any information on the internet for such a thing? I mean, the internet does have information on many many things, but that CO2 gets warmer than it's surrounding ain't one. Nor that it can make an object around it warmer than the surrounding. So you're the one with magic photon's. So post up that there internet 6th grade document your convinced exists.

You want evidence that photons heat things up?

why isn't there any information on the internet for such a thing?

There is. Try this......

How exactly does light transform into heat

Tom Zepf of the physics department at Creighton University in Omaha, Neb., notes that "Sunlight heats a material such as water or a brick primarily because the long wavelength, or infrared, portion of the sun's radiation resonates well with molecules in the material, thereby setting them into motion. So the energy transfer that causes the temperature of the substance to rise takes place at the molecular rather than the electronic level."

http://www.scientificamerican.com/article/how-exactly-does-light-tr/

 

[jc456]

I haven't. still waiting on your evidence of it.

I haven't.

Don't tell SSDD, you'll make his smart photons cry.

I'm not worried about SSDDs photons, I'm curious to yours. the ones that heat up the surface. where is your evidence? If this were jeopardy, you'd have lost.

I'm not worried about SSDDs photons, I'm curious to yours.

I don't believe in smart photons. I believe in actual science.

where is your evidence?

You want evidence that photons heat things up?
When you get thru 6th grade science, get back to me. I'll use small words.

You want evidence that photons heat things up?

why isn't there any information on the internet for such a thing? I mean, the internet does have information on many many things, but that CO2 gets warmer than it's surrounding ain't one. Nor that it can make an object around it warmer than the surrounding. So you're the one with magic photon's. So post up that there internet 6th grade document your convinced exists.

why isn't there any information on the internet for such a thing?

There is. Try this......

How exactly does light transform into heat

Tom Zepf of the physics department at Creighton University in Omaha, Neb., notes that "Sunlight heats a material such as water or a brick primarily because the long wavelength, or infrared, portion of the sun's radiation resonates well with molecules in the material, thereby setting them into motion. So the energy transfer that causes the temperature of the substance to rise takes place at the molecular rather than the electronic level."

How exactly does light transform into heat--for instance, when sunlight warms up a brick wall? I understand that electrons in the atoms in the wall absorb the light, but how does that absorbed sunlight turn into thermal energy?

now show me one with CO2. Good job.

BTW, different materials like water and whatever, steel, asphalt, sand, they heat differently

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

I haven't.

Don't tell SSDD, you'll make his smart photons cry.

I'm not worried about SSDDs photons, I'm curious to yours. the ones that heat up the surface. where is your evidence? If this were jeopardy, you'd have lost.

I'm not worried about SSDDs photons, I'm curious to yours.

I don't believe in smart photons. I believe in actual science.

where is your evidence?

You want evidence that photons heat things up?
When you get thru 6th grade science, get back to me. I'll use small words.

You want evidence that photons heat things up?

why isn't there any information on the internet for such a thing? I mean, the internet does have information on many many things, but that CO2 gets warmer than it's surrounding ain't one. Nor that it can make an object around it warmer than the surrounding. So you're the one with magic photon's. So post up that there internet 6th grade document your convinced exists.

now show me one with CO2. Good job.
You want evidence that photons heat things up?

why isn't there any information on the internet for such a thing?

There is. Try this......

How exactly does light transform into heat

Tom Zepf of the physics department at Creighton University in Omaha, Neb., notes that "Sunlight heats a material such as water or a brick primarily because the long wavelength, or infrared, portion of the sun's radiation resonates well with molecules in the material, thereby setting them into motion. So the energy transfer that causes the temperature of the substance to rise takes place at the molecular rather than the electronic level."

How exactly does light transform into heat--for instance, when sunlight warms up a brick wall? I understand that electrons in the atoms in the wall absorb the light, but how does that absorbed sunlight turn into thermal energy?

now show me one with CO2. Good job.

IR from CO2 is somehow different? How exactly?

 

[jc456]

I'm not worried about SSDDs photons, I'm curious to yours. the ones that heat up the surface. where is your evidence? If this were jeopardy, you'd have lost.

I'm not worried about SSDDs photons, I'm curious to yours.

I don't believe in smart photons. I believe in actual science.

where is your evidence?

You want evidence that photons heat things up?
When you get thru 6th grade science, get back to me. I'll use small words.

You want evidence that photons heat things up?

why isn't there any information on the internet for such a thing? I mean, the internet does have information on many many things, but that CO2 gets warmer than it's surrounding ain't one. Nor that it can make an object around it warmer than the surrounding. So you're the one with magic photon's. So post up that there internet 6th grade document your convinced exists.

now show me one with CO2. Good job.
You want evidence that photons heat things up?

why isn't there any information on the internet for such a thing?

There is. Try this......

How exactly does light transform into heat

Tom Zepf of the physics department at Creighton University in Omaha, Neb., notes that "Sunlight heats a material such as water or a brick primarily because the long wavelength, or infrared, portion of the sun's radiation resonates well with molecules in the material, thereby setting them into motion. So the energy transfer that causes the temperature of the substance to rise takes place at the molecular rather than the electronic level."

How exactly does light transform into heat--for instance, when sunlight warms up a brick wall? I understand that electrons in the atoms in the wall absorb the light, but how does that absorbed sunlight turn into thermal energy?

now show me one with CO2. Good job.

IR from CO2 is somehow different? How exactly?

exactly, so if other materials heat at different temperatures from IR so to will CO2.

 

[Sun Devil 92]

Those damned cave men! Just as soon as they hit the scene they melted the ice age away. Killing all sorts of mega fauna, and changing the climate! Those sons of birches are just waaaay to powerful and influential. They can literally change the climate of an entire planet!

Did you have some actual point to make or are you simply going to reject all of mainstream science because your mind is incapable of dealing with the scales required.

His point is rather clear.

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

I'm not worried about SSDDs photons, I'm curious to yours.

I don't believe in smart photons. I believe in actual science.

where is your evidence?

You want evidence that photons heat things up?
When you get thru 6th grade science, get back to me. I'll use small words.

You want evidence that photons heat things up?

why isn't there any information on the internet for such a thing? I mean, the internet does have information on many many things, but that CO2 gets warmer than it's surrounding ain't one. Nor that it can make an object around it warmer than the surrounding. So you're the one with magic photon's. So post up that there internet 6th grade document your convinced exists.

now show me one with CO2. Good job.
You want evidence that photons heat things up?

why isn't there any information on the internet for such a thing?

There is. Try this......

How exactly does light transform into heat

Tom Zepf of the physics department at Creighton University in Omaha, Neb., notes that "Sunlight heats a material such as water or a brick primarily because the long wavelength, or infrared, portion of the sun's radiation resonates well with molecules in the material, thereby setting them into motion. So the energy transfer that causes the temperature of the substance to rise takes place at the molecular rather than the electronic level."

How exactly does light transform into heat--for instance, when sunlight warms up a brick wall? I understand that electrons in the atoms in the wall absorb the light, but how does that absorbed sunlight turn into thermal energy?

now show me one with CO2. Good job.

IR from CO2 is somehow different? How exactly?

exactly, so if other materials heat at different temperatures from IR so to will CO2.

so if other materials heat at different temperatures from IR so to will CO2

Different materials absorb and heat up differently.
Photons heat materials that absorb them.
Photons are not smart.

Congrats, you now understand much more than SSDD.

 

[jc456]

You want evidence that photons heat things up?

why isn't there any information on the internet for such a thing? I mean, the internet does have information on many many things, but that CO2 gets warmer than it's surrounding ain't one. Nor that it can make an object around it warmer than the surrounding. So you're the one with magic photon's. So post up that there internet 6th grade document your convinced exists.

now show me one with CO2. Good job.
You want evidence that photons heat things up?

why isn't there any information on the internet for such a thing?

There is. Try this......

How exactly does light transform into heat

Tom Zepf of the physics department at Creighton University in Omaha, Neb., notes that "Sunlight heats a material such as water or a brick primarily because the long wavelength, or infrared, portion of the sun's radiation resonates well with molecules in the material, thereby setting them into motion. So the energy transfer that causes the temperature of the substance to rise takes place at the molecular rather than the electronic level."

How exactly does light transform into heat--for instance, when sunlight warms up a brick wall? I understand that electrons in the atoms in the wall absorb the light, but how does that absorbed sunlight turn into thermal energy?

now show me one with CO2. Good job.

IR from CO2 is somehow different? How exactly?

exactly, so if other materials heat at different temperatures from IR so to will CO2.

so if other materials heat at different temperatures from IR so to will CO2

Different materials absorb and heat up differently.
Photons heat materials that absorb them.
Photons are not smart.

Congrats, you now understand much more than SSDD.

I trust he has this knowledge and like me wonders if CO2 has the heating capability of asphalt or bricks. What we are so amazed about, is not one scientist has tested the actual temperature of CO2 absorbed. Why? people have tested other materials. So how warm is one PPM of CO2 when it absorbs IR?

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

now show me one with CO2. Good job.
You want evidence that photons heat things up?

why isn't there any information on the internet for such a thing?

There is. Try this......

How exactly does light transform into heat

Tom Zepf of the physics department at Creighton University in Omaha, Neb., notes that "Sunlight heats a material such as water or a brick primarily because the long wavelength, or infrared, portion of the sun's radiation resonates well with molecules in the material, thereby setting them into motion. So the energy transfer that causes the temperature of the substance to rise takes place at the molecular rather than the electronic level."

How exactly does light transform into heat--for instance, when sunlight warms up a brick wall? I understand that electrons in the atoms in the wall absorb the light, but how does that absorbed sunlight turn into thermal energy?

now show me one with CO2. Good job.

IR from CO2 is somehow different? How exactly?

exactly, so if other materials heat at different temperatures from IR so to will CO2.

so if other materials heat at different temperatures from IR so to will CO2

Different materials absorb and heat up differently.
Photons heat materials that absorb them.
Photons are not smart.

Congrats, you now understand much more than SSDD.

I trust he has this knowledge and like me wonders if CO2 has the heating capability of asphalt or bricks. What we are so amazed about, is not one scientist has tested the actual temperature of CO2 absorbed. Why? people have tested other materials. So how warm is one PPM of CO2 when it absorbs IR?

I trust he has this knowledge

Based on his posting history, he does not.

and like me wonders if CO2 has the heating capability of asphalt or bricks

The capability to heat asphalt or bricks? Or does it emit exactly like asphalt or bricks?

What we are so amazed about, is not one scientist has tested the actual temperature of CO2 absorbed.

Unclear what you're saying here.

So how warm is one PPM of CO2 when it absorbs IR?

Nonsensical question.

 

[jc456]

now show me one with CO2. Good job.

IR from CO2 is somehow different? How exactly?

exactly, so if other materials heat at different temperatures from IR so to will CO2.

so if other materials heat at different temperatures from IR so to will CO2

Different materials absorb and heat up differently.
Photons heat materials that absorb them.
Photons are not smart.

Congrats, you now understand much more than SSDD.

I trust he has this knowledge and like me wonders if CO2 has the heating capability of asphalt or bricks. What we are so amazed about, is not one scientist has tested the actual temperature of CO2 absorbed. Why? people have tested other materials. So how warm is one PPM of CO2 when it absorbs IR?

I trust he has this knowledge

Based on his posting history, he does not.

and like me wonders if CO2 has the heating capability of asphalt or bricks

The capability to heat asphalt or bricks? Or does it emit exactly like asphalt or bricks?

What we are so amazed about, is not one scientist has tested the actual temperature of CO2 absorbed.

Unclear what you're saying here.

So how warm is one PPM of CO2 when it absorbs IR?

Nonsensical question.

So how warm is one PPM of CO2 when it absorbs IR?

Nonsensical question

And there you have it. No knowledge of how warmer CO2 can make its surrounding.

The capability to heat asphalt or bricks? Or does it emit exactly like asphalt or bricks?
does its absorption capabilities equal asphalt or bricks.
exactly, does it?