4 Reasons Why 'Climate Change' Is a Flat-Out Hoax

[SSDD]

Your knowledge base is very shallow, and very sketchy....you are obviously easily fooled...none of those things represent the spontaneous movement of energy from a cool (low energy) object to a warm (higher energy) object...as much as you wish it, I am afraid that you are just wrong again...sorry.

Wish it? Everyone knows evidence was given that your idea of smart photons simply don't exist. Now your'e just being a troll and liar.

Smart photons are not my invention...you wack jobs invented them because you apparently believe that theoretical particles must be intelligent in order to obey the laws of physics...Yet another example of you simply making up arguments, ascribing them to someone else, and then railing against them.

The cooled, and uncooled spectrometers are observed, measured evidence that support my position...you have no empirical evidence....sorry,

You are so easily fooled that talking to you is nothing more than a tedious series of repetitive episodes explain how what you think you are seeing.....isn't. If I believed that anyone else would derive any benefit from seeing all your foolishness debunked, I might continue with it, but frankly, I don't think anyone else around here is obsessed with finding a way around the second law of thermodynamics in some misguided attempt to prove their crazy science knows all religion. So no...I am not going around on your crazy merry go round any more...if you feel the need to repeat the same thing over an over again, simply re read this gibberish the first 3 times you posted it.

 

[Wuwei]

Smart photons are not my invention...you wack jobs invented them because you apparently believe that theoretical particles must be intelligent in order to obey the laws of physics...Yet another example of you simply making up arguments, ascribing them to someone else, and then railing against them.

The cooled, and uncooled spectrometers are observed, measured evidence that support my position...you have no empirical evidence....sorry,

Nope. You made up the idea of smart photons that have the smarts to sense warmer areas and avoid them completely. Tod is the one who gave a convenient name for them.

So back to spectrometers? You already agreed that they detected the emission frequencies of greenhouse gases. That evidence supports the position of all scientists -- that greenhouse gases do cause radiation back to earth.

 

[SSDD]

Nope. You made up the idea of smart photons that have the smarts to sense warmer areas and avoid them completely. Tod is the one who gave a convenient name for them.

So you can provide the post where I supposedly came up with the idea of smart photons? You just claimed that I made up the idea so lets see the post...

What's that? There is no such post? So you lied. You are a liar and make shit up....yeah..that's what I have been saying.

So back to spectrometers? You already agreed that they detected the emission frequencies of greenhouse gases. That evidence supports the position of all scientists -- that greenhouse gases do cause radiation back to earth.

If you were only bright enough to grasp the ramifications of spectrometers only being able to measure discrete frequencies of radiation from objects that are warmer than them selves. If you want to measure radiation coming from the atmosphere, you must cool the spectrometer to a temperature lower than that of the atmosphere...put an uncooled spectrometer right next to it, pointed at the same open sky and you can measure no spectrum...it isn't rocket science...the uncooled spectrometer isn't measuring a spectrum because no energy from the cooler atmosphere is radiating to it...if it were, then it would measure a spectrum...it doesn't care what the nature of the radiation it is measuring is...it measures all of it indiscriminately...but it can't measure what isn't radiating towards it.

You are perfectly willing to ignore what the observed, measured evidence is telling you in favor of believing that something must be wrong with the spectrometer, or that it is interference (which would show up as a measurement at lest) or any number of other fantasy problems rather than admit to yourself that the models aren't jibing with reality.

There is no back radiation from the atmosphere to the earth as evidenced by the fact that it can't be detected till such time as you cool the instrument to a temperature lower than that of the atmosphere.

 

[Wuwei]

So you can provide the post where I supposedly came up with the idea of smart photons? You just claimed that I made up the idea so lets see the post...

Any post where you claimed one way radiation does the trick. Your photons are smart when they avoid radiating in some direction that depends on remote conditions.

Yes, cold detectors have a better SNR. When you take away the detector facing up, there is no reason for the GHG radiation to stop when you remove the detector, unless the photons are smart and eschew the earth. It's as simple as that.

 

[SSDD]

So you can provide the post where I supposedly came up with the idea of smart photons? You just claimed that I made up the idea so lets see the post...

Any post where you claimed one way radiation does the trick. Your photons are smart when they avoid radiating in some direction that depends on remote conditions.

Yes, cold detectors have a better SNR. When you take away the detector facing up, there is no reason for the GHG radiation to stop when you remove the detector, unless the photons are smart and eschew the earth. It's as simple as that.

So that would be a no...you can't provide any post where I suggested smart photons...you can provide posts where you and others apparently suggest that in order for theoretical particles to obey the laws of physics they must possess some form of intelligence....but you can't provide a post where I made up smart photons.

That's what I thought.

by the way, we aren't talking about uncooled spectroscopes pointed at open sky detecting a poor spectrum...or a degraded spectrum of infrared radiation from the so called greenhouse gasses...we are talking about an absence of them. Supposedly more than 300Wm2 is being radiated back towards the surface and no spectrum from so called greenhouse gasses is detected unless the instrument is cooled to a temperature lower than that of the so called greenhouse gasses...explain that in rational scientific terms, which you can then back up with observed, measured results.

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

So you can provide the post where I supposedly came up with the idea of smart photons? You just claimed that I made up the idea so lets see the post...

Any post where you claimed one way radiation does the trick. Your photons are smart when they avoid radiating in some direction that depends on remote conditions.

Yes, cold detectors have a better SNR. When you take away the detector facing up, there is no reason for the GHG radiation to stop when you remove the detector, unless the photons are smart and eschew the earth. It's as simple as that.

So that would be a no...you can't provide any post where I suggested smart photons...you can provide posts where you and others apparently suggest that in order for theoretical particles to obey the laws of physics they must possess some form of intelligence....but you can't provide a post where I made up smart photons.

That's what I thought.

by the way, we aren't talking about uncooled spectroscopes pointed at open sky detecting a poor spectrum...or a degraded spectrum of infrared radiation from the so called greenhouse gasses...we are talking about an absence of them. Supposedly more than 300Wm2 is being radiated back towards the surface and no spectrum from so called greenhouse gasses is detected unless the instrument is cooled to a temperature lower than that of the so called greenhouse gasses...explain that in rational scientific terms, which you can then back up with observed, measured results.

you and others apparently suggest that in order for theoretical particles to obey the laws of physics they must possess some form of intelligence....but you can't provide a post where I made up smart photons.


When your photon (or its emitter) has to know the location and temperature of matter billions of light years away, billions of years in the future, intelligence isn't what it needs, it's omniscience.

we aren't talking about uncooled spectroscopes pointed at open sky detecting a poor spectrum...or a degraded spectrum of infrared radiation from the so called greenhouse gasses...we are talking about an absence of them.

Right, because the gas in the atmosphere simply can't emit toward warmer matter.
And you're the only one who knows that.

Hilarious!

 

[Wuwei]

So that would be a no...you can't provide any post where I suggested smart photons...you can provide posts where you and others apparently suggest that in order for theoretical particles to obey the laws of physics they must possess some form of intelligence....but you can't provide a post where I made up smart photons.

We went through that many times. Todd's answer above is correct. "Smart photons" is simply a very succinct way of stating your flaw in thinking of one-way flow in the SB equation, etc.

by the way, we aren't talking about uncooled spectroscopes pointed at open sky detecting a poor spectrum...or a degraded spectrum of infrared radiation from the so called greenhouse gasses...we are talking about an absence of them. Supposedly more than 300Wm2 is being radiated back towards the surface and no spectrum from so called greenhouse gasses is detected unless the instrument is cooled to a temperature lower than that of the so called greenhouse gasses...explain that in rational scientific terms, which you can then back up with observed, measured results.

Your ideas about down-welling spectra can't be explained in rational terms because what we are saying is that there is nothing rational about your smart photons.

.

 

[danielpalos]

climate changes regardless of Man's input to the environment. we should require new technology regardless.

 

[SSDD]

We went through that many times. Todd's answer above is correct. "Smart photons" is simply a very succinct way of stating your flaw in thinking of one-way flow in the SB equation, etc.

So again...smart photons are the invention of you guys...not me.

Point your spectrometer at a radiator that is cooler than the instrument and you can not measure discrete wavelengths of energy moving from the radiator to the instrument...warm the radiator to any temperature above that of the instrument and you start measuring discrete frequencies of energy moving from the radiator to the instrument.

What does that mean to you? The instrument isn't broken...it isn't malfunctioning...it measures anything that it receives from a radiator...why then, does it measure no discrete frequency of radiation coming from a cooler body? How do you interpret that observed, measured evidence?

Your ideas about down-welling spectra can't be explained in rational terms because what we are saying is that there is nothing rational about your smart photons.

.

I don't have any particular ideas about downwelling spectra...I am saying that you can't measure any discrete frequency of radiation with an instrument that is warmer than the radiator. The instrument measures anything that comes in and has no requirements regarding temperature...why doesn't it detect discrete frequencies of radiation from objects that are cooler than itself? If radiation were entering the device, the device would measure it...that is what it does...if nothing is coming in then there is nothing to measure.

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

We went through that many times. Todd's answer above is correct. "Smart photons" is simply a very succinct way of stating your flaw in thinking of one-way flow in the SB equation, etc.

So again...smart photons are the invention of you guys...not me.

Point your spectrometer at a radiator that is cooler than the instrument and you can not measure discrete wavelengths of energy moving from the radiator to the instrument...warm the radiator to any temperature above that of the instrument and you start measuring discrete frequencies of energy moving from the radiator to the instrument.

What does that mean to you? The instrument isn't broken...it isn't malfunctioning...it measures anything that it receives from a radiator...why then, does it measure no discrete frequency of radiation coming from a cooler body? How do you interpret that observed, measured evidence?

Your ideas about down-welling spectra can't be explained in rational terms because what we are saying is that there is nothing rational about your smart photons.

.

I don't have any particular ideas about downwelling spectra...I am saying that you can't measure any discrete frequency of radiation with an instrument that is warmer than the radiator. The instrument measures anything that comes in and has no requirements regarding temperature...why doesn't it detect discrete frequencies of radiation from objects that are cooler than itself? If radiation were entering the device, the device would measure it...that is what it does...if nothing is coming in then there is nothing to measure.

So again...smart photons are the invention of you guys...not me.

Smart photons, smart emitters.
Two different flavors of your unique misinterpretation.

 

[SSDD]

We went through that many times. Todd's answer above is correct. "Smart photons" is simply a very succinct way of stating your flaw in thinking of one-way flow in the SB equation, etc.

So again...smart photons are the invention of you guys...not me.

Point your spectrometer at a radiator that is cooler than the instrument and you can not measure discrete wavelengths of energy moving from the radiator to the instrument...warm the radiator to any temperature above that of the instrument and you start measuring discrete frequencies of energy moving from the radiator to the instrument.

What does that mean to you? The instrument isn't broken...it isn't malfunctioning...it measures anything that it receives from a radiator...why then, does it measure no discrete frequency of radiation coming from a cooler body? How do you interpret that observed, measured evidence?

Your ideas about down-welling spectra can't be explained in rational terms because what we are saying is that there is nothing rational about your smart photons.

.

I don't have any particular ideas about downwelling spectra...I am saying that you can't measure any discrete frequency of radiation with an instrument that is warmer than the radiator. The instrument measures anything that comes in and has no requirements regarding temperature...why doesn't it detect discrete frequencies of radiation from objects that are cooler than itself? If radiation were entering the device, the device would measure it...that is what it does...if nothing is coming in then there is nothing to measure.

So again...smart photons are the invention of you guys...not me.

Smart photons, smart emitters.
Two different flavors of your unique misinterpretation.

Got a measurement of a discrete frequency of radiation from a radiator that is cooler than the instrument? Didn't think so. Interesting how your faith requires you to interpret the real world and what does and doesn't happen in it. But feel free to prove me wrong.

 

[danielpalos]

Man made climate change is no hoax; terraforming technologies is what we need to develop anyway.

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

We went through that many times. Todd's answer above is correct. "Smart photons" is simply a very succinct way of stating your flaw in thinking of one-way flow in the SB equation, etc.

So again...smart photons are the invention of you guys...not me.

Point your spectrometer at a radiator that is cooler than the instrument and you can not measure discrete wavelengths of energy moving from the radiator to the instrument...warm the radiator to any temperature above that of the instrument and you start measuring discrete frequencies of energy moving from the radiator to the instrument.

What does that mean to you? The instrument isn't broken...it isn't malfunctioning...it measures anything that it receives from a radiator...why then, does it measure no discrete frequency of radiation coming from a cooler body? How do you interpret that observed, measured evidence?

Your ideas about down-welling spectra can't be explained in rational terms because what we are saying is that there is nothing rational about your smart photons.

.

I don't have any particular ideas about downwelling spectra...I am saying that you can't measure any discrete frequency of radiation with an instrument that is warmer than the radiator. The instrument measures anything that comes in and has no requirements regarding temperature...why doesn't it detect discrete frequencies of radiation from objects that are cooler than itself? If radiation were entering the device, the device would measure it...that is what it does...if nothing is coming in then there is nothing to measure.

So again...smart photons are the invention of you guys...not me.

Smart photons, smart emitters.
Two different flavors of your unique misinterpretation.

Got a measurement of a discrete frequency of radiation from a radiator that is cooler than the instrument? Didn't think so. Interesting how your faith requires you to interpret the real world and what does and doesn't happen in it. But feel free to prove me wrong.

Got a measurement of a discrete frequency of radiation from a radiator that is cooler than the instrument?

Got proof that radiation that is below the sensitivity of an uncooled instrument doesn't exist?
That the radiation measured below hit only the cooled instrument and no other point in
all of Oklahoma?


The Amazing Case of “Back Radiation” – Part Two

The entire atmosphere, only radiating down to that tiny target, that's a magic emitter, eh?
But feel free to post a real source that proves your targeted emissions claim.

 

[Wuwei]

Point your spectrometer at a radiator that is cooler than the instrument and you can not measure discrete wavelengths of energy moving from the radiator to the instrument...warm the radiator to any temperature above that of the instrument and you start measuring discrete frequencies of energy moving from the radiator to the instrument.

Arno Penzias and Robert Wilson were successful at doing just that.

I don't have any particular ideas about downwelling spectra.

You said many times that back radiation doesn't happen. That is down-welling.

 

[SSDD]

Arno Penzias and Robert Wilson were successful at doing just that.

Really? What sort of spectrometer did they point at clear sky? And where is the spectrum they recorded. I was under the impression that they were using a radio telescope...and I know for a fact that they detected a resonant radio frequency...not actual CMB...sorry you don't grasp the concept.

It isn't as if the concept were that hard to grasp....Natural frequencies are frequencies that any system will vibrate at if it is disturbed.

Resonant frequencies happens when a system is systematically disturbed at the same period as one of its natural frequencies. Even very small perturbations will reinforce energy stored in the system and cause the amplitude of the disturbance to increase.

You said many times that back radiation doesn't happen. That is down-welling.

Right..and I don't have any particular ideas about leprechauns or unicorns either...what sort of serious ideas should one have regarding fictions..and there is no downwelling radiation...if there were, you could measure their spectrum without cooling the instrument to a temperature lower than that of the atmosphere.

 

[Wuwei]

Really? What sort of spectrometer did they point at clear sky? And where is the spectrum they recorded. I was under the impression that they were using a radio telescope...and I know for a fact that they detected a resonant radio frequency...not actual CMB...sorry you don't grasp the concept.

It isn't as if the concept were that hard to grasp....Natural frequencies are frequencies that any system will vibrate at if it is disturbed.

Resonant frequencies happens when a system is systematically disturbed at the same period as one of its natural frequencies. Even very small perturbations will reinforce energy stored in the system and cause the amplitude of the disturbance to increase.

I already told you. You are playing dumb.

Right..and I don't have any particular ideas about leprechauns or unicorns either...what sort of serious ideas should one have regarding fictions..and there is no downwelling radiation...if there were, you could measure their spectrum without cooling the instrument to a temperature lower than that of the atmosphere.

I really can't help you since you don't believe nor understand physic. It is called back radiation and the scientists that measured it knew what they were doing. But you don't.

 

[SSDD]

I already told you. You are playing dumb.

So you think a radio telescope is a spectrometer? Considering how little you seem to know about instrumentation, that doesn't surprise me.

I really can't help you since you don't believe nor understand physic. It is called back radiation and the scientists that measured it knew what they were doing. But you don't.

I understand the physics fine..which is why I can state with perfect certainty that you are not going to ever be able to provide a spectrum of discrete emission frequencies from so called greenhouse gasses made with an instrument that is not cooled to a temperature lower than that of the atmosphere...

 

[Wuwei]

So you think a radio telescope is a spectrometer? Considering how little you seem to know about instrumentation, that doesn't surprise me.

They used it as a spectrometer by sampling different frequencies to discover it followed the BB radiation curve.

I understand the physics fine

No you don't. You think it's fairy dust. You don't believe modern physics.

 

[SSDD]

They used it as a spectrometer by sampling different frequencies to discover it followed the BB radiation curve.

A cooled spectrometer?...and after the fact of receiving that resonant radio frequency?

 

[Old Rocks]

Well, SSoDDumb has hijacked another thread. However, one might ask the people of California about climate change being a hoax.