Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature currently requires accessing the site using the built-in Safari browser.
Sure, some guy with less than a third grade education in science, and no math classes above simple addition is going to teach us about physics. LOL Here is where you can see the real math concerning CO2 and global warming;The Warmers have a theory that an additional wisp of CO2 is: Heating the atmosphere, heating the oceans down to 700m, altering the chemistry of the oceans and doing many other dastardly things in the process.
Let's start with the basics: how much heat, if any, if generated by adding 120PPM of CO2 to Earth atmosphere? We have been asking this question literally for decades and have never been shown the repeatable scientific experiment that shows any consistent result.
Recently, I think IPCC 4, added the concept that atmospheric CO2 is - somehow - heating the deep oceans, and this newly added data set heat now squares away the missing "warming". In the course of investigating the mechanics by which atmospheric CO2 can "heat" the oceans, I came across the follow formula. This solves for the amount of energy required to raise the temperature of 1kg of water by 1C. Basically, it takes 4.19 KJ of additional heat to create the temperature increase.
Q = cp m dT
where
Q = amount of heat (kJ)
cp = specific heat (kJ/kgK)
m = mass (kg)
dT = temperature difference between hot and cold side (K)
Example Heating Water
Consider the energy required to heat 1.0 kg of water from 0 oC to 1 oC when the specific heat of water is 4.19 kJ/kgoC:
Q = (4.19 kJ/kgoC) (1.0 kg) ((1 oC) - (0 oC))
= 4.19 (kJ)
Heat, Work and Energy
I'm not getting into the heat required to heat to water down to 700M, that's a whole other area.
Do any scientific studies exist showing 120PPM of CO2 creating the additional 4.19KJ of heat necessary to raise the temperature of 1kg of water by 1C?
The ocean surface covers 510 million square kilometers, so it's easy enough to solve for the total heat required.
It's math and science, if the science is there and it can be shown that 120PPM of CO2 is capable of generating the additional heat, well, Bravo, you're on your way. If the additional heat is not shown in a lab, then the theory fails.
Real science, real math.
I guess you are, since you believe that IR is back radiated to warm the surface.I should have said the molecules handed off at conduction and convected above the surface are held in the atmosphere by pressure and gravity.Excellent. Don't tell SSDD you caught his error.The 2nd Law causes CO2 to radiate toward space?
Or does the 2nd Law cause the gasses warmed by conduction to radiate?
IR absorbed by CO2 doesn't warm the atmosphere?
sure it warms, through conduction.
Excellent. Don't tell SSDD you caught his error.
he has told you that already. you missed it obviously. but go figure.
Or does the 2nd Law cause the gasses warmed by conduction to radiate
anywhere there is heat is the 2nd law. but conduction and convection molecules above the surface are held in the atmosphere by pressure and gravity.
he has told you that already.
He admitted his error? Where?
but conduction and convection molecules above the surface are held in the atmosphere by pressure and gravity.
What is a conduction molecule?
What is a convection molecule?
Are you just discovering that gravity keeps the air from flying into space?
Now, back to your claim that the 2nd Law causes gasses to radiate.
Not done.
I did? hmmm. It absorbs and it emits. isn't emit radiate?I guess you are, since you believe that IR is back radiated to warm the surface.I should have said the molecules handed off at conduction and convected above the surface are held in the atmosphere by pressure and gravity.Excellent. Don't tell SSDD you caught his error.
he has told you that already. you missed it obviously. but go figure.
Or does the 2nd Law cause the gasses warmed by conduction to radiate
anywhere there is heat is the 2nd law. but conduction and convection molecules above the surface are held in the atmosphere by pressure and gravity.
he has told you that already.
He admitted his error? Where?
but conduction and convection molecules above the surface are held in the atmosphere by pressure and gravity.
What is a conduction molecule?
What is a convection molecule?
Are you just discovering that gravity keeps the air from flying into space?
Now, back to your claim that the 2nd Law causes gasses to radiate.
Not done.
I guess you are, since you believe that IR is back radiated to warm the surface.
You said CO2 never radiates. If that's so, how does IR ever leave the atmosphere?
Perhaps I should remove the basketball from my garage. According to jc, frank and SSDD, the pressurized air inside is constantly generating heat, meaning it's going to burst into flame any second now.
The good news is how they've revealed a perpetual free energy source to everyone. If I rig up my white-hot basketball to provide heat to the input of a Stirling heat engine, it will output free energy forever.
I think I read that basketballs cause half of all home fires in the US.
was the thought wrong?well I thought that 99% of CO2 absorption is handed off through collisions and is converted to conduction and convection?
well I thought
You're lying.
Hey, BTW, if 99% is lost through collision, how does the IR from the CO2 get radiated toward the surface?
It absorbs and it emits. isn't emit radiate?I did? hmmm. It absorbs and it emits. isn't emit radiate?I guess you are, since you believe that IR is back radiated to warm the surface.I should have said the molecules handed off at conduction and convected above the surface are held in the atmosphere by pressure and gravity.he has told you that already.
He admitted his error? Where?
but conduction and convection molecules above the surface are held in the atmosphere by pressure and gravity.
What is a conduction molecule?
What is a convection molecule?
Are you just discovering that gravity keeps the air from flying into space?
Now, back to your claim that the 2nd Law causes gasses to radiate.
Not done.
I guess you are, since you believe that IR is back radiated to warm the surface.
You said CO2 never radiates. If that's so, how does IR ever leave the atmosphere?
And any IR not absorbed I supposed escapes out to space after being radiated off of the surface.
The Warmers have a theory that an additional wisp of CO2 is: Heating the atmosphere, heating the oceans down to 700m, altering the chemistry of the oceans and doing many other dastardly things in the process.
Let's start with the basics: how much heat, if any, if generated by adding 120PPM of CO2 to Earth atmosphere? We have been asking this question literally for decades and have never been shown the repeatable scientific experiment that shows any consistent result.
Recently, I think IPCC 4, added the concept that atmospheric CO2 is - somehow - heating the deep oceans, and this newly added data set heat now squares away the missing "warming". In the course of investigating the mechanics by which atmospheric CO2 can "heat" the oceans, I came across the follow formula. This solves for the amount of energy required to raise the temperature of 1kg of water by 1C. Basically, it takes 4.19 KJ of additional heat to create the temperature increase.
Q = cp m dT
where
Q = amount of heat (kJ)
cp = specific heat (kJ/kgK)
m = mass (kg)
dT = temperature difference between hot and cold side (K)
Example Heating Water
Consider the energy required to heat 1.0 kg of water from 0 oC to 1 oC when the specific heat of water is 4.19 kJ/kgoC:
Q = (4.19 kJ/kgoC) (1.0 kg) ((1 oC) - (0 oC))
= 4.19 (kJ)
Heat, Work and Energy
I'm not getting into the heat required to heat to water down to 700M, that's a whole other area.
Do any scientific studies exist showing 120PPM of CO2 creating the additional 4.19KJ of heat necessary to raise the temperature of 1kg of water by 1C?
The ocean surface covers 510 million square kilometers, so it's easy enough to solve for the total heat required.
It's math and science, if the science is there and it can be shown that 120PPM of CO2 is capable of generating the additional heat, well, Bravo, you're on your way. If the additional heat is not shown in a lab, then the theory fails.
Real science, real math.
but we know that 99% of the radiation absorbed by CO2 is lost through collision changed to conduction and convected. so where is the back radiation coming from? Wuweii confirmed that for me.The Warmers have a theory that an additional wisp of CO2 is: Heating the atmosphere, heating the oceans down to 700m, altering the chemistry of the oceans and doing many other dastardly things in the process.
Let's start with the basics: how much heat, if any, if generated by adding 120PPM of CO2 to Earth atmosphere? We have been asking this question literally for decades and have never been shown the repeatable scientific experiment that shows any consistent result.
Recently, I think IPCC 4, added the concept that atmospheric CO2 is - somehow - heating the deep oceans, and this newly added data set heat now squares away the missing "warming". In the course of investigating the mechanics by which atmospheric CO2 can "heat" the oceans, I came across the follow formula. This solves for the amount of energy required to raise the temperature of 1kg of water by 1C. Basically, it takes 4.19 KJ of additional heat to create the temperature increase.
Q = cp m dT
where
Q = amount of heat (kJ)
cp = specific heat (kJ/kgK)
m = mass (kg)
dT = temperature difference between hot and cold side (K)
Example Heating Water
Consider the energy required to heat 1.0 kg of water from 0 oC to 1 oC when the specific heat of water is 4.19 kJ/kgoC:
Q = (4.19 kJ/kgoC) (1.0 kg) ((1 oC) - (0 oC))
= 4.19 (kJ)
Heat, Work and Energy
I'm not getting into the heat required to heat to water down to 700M, that's a whole other area.
Do any scientific studies exist showing 120PPM of CO2 creating the additional 4.19KJ of heat necessary to raise the temperature of 1kg of water by 1C?
The ocean surface covers 510 million square kilometers, so it's easy enough to solve for the total heat required.
It's math and science, if the science is there and it can be shown that 120PPM of CO2 is capable of generating the additional heat, well, Bravo, you're on your way. If the additional heat is not shown in a lab, then the theory fails.
Real science, real math.
Sorry man -- but those equations dont' cut it.. THey describe CONDUCTED heat.. NOT radiated heat.. And they ONLY work in a closed system with no turbulence or kinetic currents and mixing...
So the radiative heat portion from the sun and the back radiation from the GHouse (blanket) are the 1st part of "heating the oceans"... And you'll find the Infra Red back radiation part is not really capable of penetrating more than a millimeter or so of the surface.. While the UV part has a much deeper heating effect...
Then comes the thermal CONDUCTION part for which those equations are marginally useful because of the turbulence and mixing and currents present in the system.. There are DEEP DEEP mixing currents that stabilize the climate.. Running pole to pole and ocean to ocean.. So "the math" has never fully been modeled.
But most of all, the small amount of ocean heating is likely influence more by the temperature of the fresh water run-off INTO the oceans which warms as the LAND warm...
At any rate, the curves they've derived for ocean heating start showing a linear trend back in the 50s and 60s and since the "heat capacity" of the ocean is the INTEGRAL (accumulated value) --- this tends to support that the amount of "heat" per year or decade has been a CONSTANT all along and DOES NOT FOLLOW the temperature curve of "global warming" anyways...
Anyone interested or HASN'T seen the "Oceans have Eaten My Global Warming" curves -- I'd be glad to repost this and point out WHY the shape of ocean heat content DOES NOT track the increases in measured temperature warming..
Sorry man -- but those equations dont' cut it.. THey describe CONDUCTED heat.. NOT radiated heat.. And they ONLY work in a closed system with no turbulence or kinetic currents and mixing...
Sure, some guy with less than a third grade education in science, and no math classes above simple addition is going to teach us about physics. LOL Here is where you can see the real math concerning CO2 and global warming;The Warmers have a theory that an additional wisp of CO2 is: Heating the atmosphere, heating the oceans down to 700m, altering the chemistry of the oceans and doing many other dastardly things in the process.
Let's start with the basics: how much heat, if any, if generated by adding 120PPM of CO2 to Earth atmosphere? We have been asking this question literally for decades and have never been shown the repeatable scientific experiment that shows any consistent result.
Recently, I think IPCC 4, added the concept that atmospheric CO2 is - somehow - heating the deep oceans, and this newly added data set heat now squares away the missing "warming". In the course of investigating the mechanics by which atmospheric CO2 can "heat" the oceans, I came across the follow formula. This solves for the amount of energy required to raise the temperature of 1kg of water by 1C. Basically, it takes 4.19 KJ of additional heat to create the temperature increase.
Q = cp m dT
where
Q = amount of heat (kJ)
cp = specific heat (kJ/kgK)
m = mass (kg)
dT = temperature difference between hot and cold side (K)
Example Heating Water
Consider the energy required to heat 1.0 kg of water from 0 oC to 1 oC when the specific heat of water is 4.19 kJ/kgoC:
Q = (4.19 kJ/kgoC) (1.0 kg) ((1 oC) - (0 oC))
= 4.19 (kJ)
Heat, Work and Energy
I'm not getting into the heat required to heat to water down to 700M, that's a whole other area.
Do any scientific studies exist showing 120PPM of CO2 creating the additional 4.19KJ of heat necessary to raise the temperature of 1kg of water by 1C?
The ocean surface covers 510 million square kilometers, so it's easy enough to solve for the total heat required.
It's math and science, if the science is there and it can be shown that 120PPM of CO2 is capable of generating the additional heat, well, Bravo, you're on your way. If the additional heat is not shown in a lab, then the theory fails.
Real science, real math.
https://pubs.giss.nasa.gov/docs/1981/1981_Hansen_ha04600x.pdf
How much "heat trapped in the ocean" is caused by atmospheric CO2?
