LWIR FAILS to Warm the Atmosphere by Empirical Experiment.

Discussion in 'Environment' started by Billy_Bob, Nov 25, 2018.

  1. Billy_Bob
    Offline

    Billy_Bob Platinum Member

    Joined:
    Sep 4, 2014
    Messages:
    14,937
    Thanks Received:
    3,133
    Trophy Points:
    1,010
    Location:
    Top Of The Great Divide
    Ratings:
    +14,362
    LWIR FAILS to Warm the Atmosphere by Empirical Experiment.

    I wrote about this experiment about 2 years ago here and now that we have done the experiment 10 times and obtained the same results each time, its time to write about it. A technical paper is in process but here are the basics...

    A 30 meter long tube was filled with atmospheric value gases. The tube was constructed such that the tube itself was not reactive to LWIR and was insulated to stop energy loss to the room. The ends were opaque and thermo-couplers (accurate to 0.001 Deg C +/-0.003) were positioned throught the length of the tube.They were shielded from LWIR to make sure there were no erroneous readings obtained.

    We started with just 396W/m^2 narrow band LWIR (6um-75um) introduction at one end of the tube and measured the opposing end with a receptor. The tube was set for <10% humidity and the temperature and output monitored. After 24 hours the tube had not warmed at all proving that the atmosphere is incapable of warming without another catalyst. We increased water vapor in 10% increments and repeated the test. Only after we reached 50% humidity did the tube warm and then only by 0.013 Deg C over 24 hours.

    When you consider the earths average humidity level is just 35-38% you can see that the majority of the planet is incapable of warming due to LWIR. To add to this, when the Humidity was low it passed 100% of its energy. When we introduced higher levels of CO2 (2000ppm) to the tube at 50% humidity, the energy pass increased and warming decreased. The exact opposite of what is expected in the AGW models...

    I expect there will be a whole lot of people who do not understand why what we saw was in line with physics and properties of the gases and I really could care less. 2 years of experiments and reproducing it over and over again speaks for itself...

    Increasing emissitivty of the atmosphere allows bandpass. The exact opposite of the AGW hypothesis.. Warming was only seen in high humidity, which is not present in over 80% of the globe.. We even tried to over power the gases by increasing the power of the LWIR to that of total sun output of 1356W/m^2 (@TOA) and found no warming over 24 hours @ <10% humidity.

    This experiment raises other questions as well which strike right at the heart of the AGW deception..
     
    • Winner Winner x 4
    • Funny Funny x 2
    • Thank You! Thank You! x 1
  2. CrusaderFrank
    Offline

    CrusaderFrank Diamond Member

    Joined:
    May 20, 2009
    Messages:
    99,621
    Thanks Received:
    18,288
    Trophy Points:
    2,220
    Location:
    NYC
    Ratings:
    +64,699
    Finally! Real science testing AGW
     
    • Thank You! Thank You! x 2
    • Agree Agree x 1
    • Funny Funny x 1
  3. Toddsterpatriot
    Offline

    Toddsterpatriot Diamond Member

    Joined:
    May 3, 2011
    Messages:
    44,322
    Thanks Received:
    5,646
    Trophy Points:
    1,830
    Location:
    Chicago
    Ratings:
    +23,306
    You pumped in energy, the tube was perfectly insulated and it didn't warm?
    Can't wait for this one to be replicated.
     
    • Funny Funny x 1
  4. SSDD
    Offline

    SSDD Gold Member

    Joined:
    Nov 6, 2012
    Messages:
    12,486
    Thanks Received:
    1,255
    Trophy Points:
    280
    Ratings:
    +6,034
    How many times have I said that the climate sensitivity to CO2was zero OR LESS?And i have pointed out to the local cultists over and over that adding CO2 to the atmosphere increases its emissivity...increasing an object's emissivity increases its ability to radiatively cool itself. Some how they believe that increasing emissivity leads to warming...
     
    • Agree Agree x 1
    • Funny Funny x 1
    • Winner Winner x 1
  5. CrusaderFrank
    Offline

    CrusaderFrank Diamond Member

    Joined:
    May 20, 2009
    Messages:
    99,621
    Thanks Received:
    18,288
    Trophy Points:
    2,220
    Location:
    NYC
    Ratings:
    +64,699
    Well, er, the planet Venus or something
     
    • Funny and Agree!! Funny and Agree!! x 2
    • Funny Funny x 1
  6. Toddsterpatriot
    Offline

    Toddsterpatriot Diamond Member

    Joined:
    May 3, 2011
    Messages:
    44,322
    Thanks Received:
    5,646
    Trophy Points:
    1,830
    Location:
    Chicago
    Ratings:
    +23,306
    adding CO2 to the atmosphere increases its emissivity...increasing an object's emissivity increases its ability to radiatively cool itself.

    Of course it does, emissivity equals absorptivity. DURR!

    Kirchhoff's law states, in simpler language:

    For an arbitrary body emitting and absorbing thermal radiation in thermodynamic equilibrium, the emissivity is equal to the absorptivity.

    Kirchhoff's law of thermal radiation - Wikipedia
     
    • Funny Funny x 1
  7. IanC
    Offline

    IanC Gold Member

    Joined:
    Sep 22, 2009
    Messages:
    10,658
    Thanks Received:
    1,250
    Trophy Points:
    245
    Ratings:
    +3,122
    More bullshit and bafflegab from our resident Cliff Clavin.
     
    • Agree Agree x 1
  8. Billy_Bob
    Offline

    Billy_Bob Platinum Member

    Joined:
    Sep 4, 2014
    Messages:
    14,937
    Thanks Received:
    3,133
    Trophy Points:
    1,010
    Location:
    Top Of The Great Divide
    Ratings:
    +14,362
    There was lot more that we did in this testing and we found that CO2 levels really had very little to do with anything absent a secondary molecule to warm it. Many of the things we found stunned us. Now to see how others respond to the technical paper over the next few months after it is finished and submitted. This is the part that I for one dread the most... But it is science and we don't learn if we don't allow others to inspect it.
     
  9. Billy_Bob
    Offline

    Billy_Bob Platinum Member

    Joined:
    Sep 4, 2014
    Messages:
    14,937
    Thanks Received:
    3,133
    Trophy Points:
    1,010
    Location:
    Top Of The Great Divide
    Ratings:
    +14,362
    Directed and focused energy.. Its really not that hard to do this..

    One of the interesting things we found was less than 1% is reflected or redirected towards the emitter... Why?
     
    Last edited: Nov 25, 2018
  10. miketx
    Offline

    miketx Diamond Member

    Joined:
    Dec 25, 2015
    Messages:
    54,731
    Thanks Received:
    6,166
    Trophy Points:
    1,870
    Ratings:
    +62,765
    As stated many times, stains are incapable of accepting that which proves them wrong.
     
    • Funny Funny x 1

Share This Page