Northern nations warming faster than global average

[Toddsterpatriot]

The atmosphere. Duh.
You said photons are absorbed by CO2, never to be re-emitted.

Not by CO2. If the energy moves, how does CO2 reemit?

The Equipartition Theorum states that a volume of gas under the same conditions will both emit and absorb the same amount of radiation that it is capable of producing. In all directions and in an amount proportional to its temperature.

Any thin slice of the atmosphere is doing this except for near the surface, and near the emission escape height. The atmosphere is warming near the surface due to excess radiation from a warmer source. High up the atmosphere is cooling by sending radiation to space. Both are happening, ypu can't have just one or the other.

The amount of energy being returned to the surface by various pathways must equal the difference between what comes in from the 15C surface and what goes out from the -50C top of the atmosphere.

Where’s that IR coming from towards the surface? CO2 collides and hands off what it absorbed 99% of the time. So, which gas sends it back to the surface?

CO2 collides and hands off what it absorbed 99% of the time.

Is CO2 only allowed to lose energy when it collides?
Does CO2 ever gain energy when it collides?

Of course it does...but then that energy is immediately lost via collision and the conduction of the energy through the troposphere continues..there is no radiative greenhouse effect as described by climate science.....a radiative greenhouse effect is not possible in a troposphere so completely dominated by pressure and convection.

Of course it does...but then that energy is immediately lost via collision and the conduction of the energy through the troposphere continues.

So you agree with jc456, CO2 absorbs IR and never ever emits IR.

a radiative greenhouse effect is not possible in a troposphere so completely dominated by pressure and convection.

A greenhouse prevents energy from escaping, just as you and jc456 claimed CO2 does.

 

[SSDD]

science is working on the explanation for why the corona is warmer than the surface..

Nobody gives a shit.
It is funny that your claim is so easily disproven.

Funny that you think the corona disproves my claim...Funny that you seem to be the only one who thinks that energy is moving spontaneously from cool too warm..

you seem to be the only one who thinks that energy is moving spontaneously from the cooler surface to the warmer corona...

You're free to explain why it isn't.

Refer to the second law of thermodynamics...My bold on the applicable phrase don't seem to be able to determine which one applies.

Second Law of Thermodynamics: It is not possible for heat to flow from a colder body to a warmer body without any work having been done to accomplish this flow. Energy will not flow spontaneously from a low temperature object to a higher temperature object.

 

[SSDD]

Of course it does...but then that energy is immediately lost via collision and the conduction of the energy through the troposphere continues.

So you agree with jc456, CO2 absorbs IR and never ever emits IR.

About 1 in a billion CO2 molecules that have absorbed IR actually get to emit it because the time between collisions of molecules is so much shorter than the time it takes a molecule to actually emit a photon.

a radiative greenhouse effect is not possible in a troposphere so completely dominated by pressure and convection.

A greenhouse prevents energy from escaping, just as you and jc456 claimed CO2 does.

So you think there is a huge glass pane up in the sky now? And what sort of mental gyrations and gymnastics do you have to do in order to misunderstand so badly that you think I have claimed that CO2 prevents energy from escaping? The fact is that what small amount of energy CO2 actually radiates moves out of the atmosphere at the speed of light...CO2 that actually holds on to energy long enough to emit it via radiation moves energy out of the atmosphere far more efficiently than the process of conduction.

Are you just another bald faced liar...or are your reading and comprehension skills really that bad?

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

science is working on the explanation for why the corona is warmer than the surface..

Nobody gives a shit.
It is funny that your claim is so easily disproven.

Funny that you think the corona disproves my claim...Funny that you seem to be the only one who thinks that energy is moving spontaneously from cool too warm..

you seem to be the only one who thinks that energy is moving spontaneously from the cooler surface to the warmer corona...

You're free to explain why it isn't.

Refer to the second law of thermodynamics...My bold on the applicable phrase don't seem to be able to determine which one applies.

Second Law of Thermodynamics: It is not possible for heat to flow from a colder body to a warmer body without any work having been done to accomplish this flow. Energy will not flow spontaneously from a low temperature object to a higher temperature object.

Funny that you seem to be the only one who thinks that energy is moving spontaneously from cool too warm..

Funny that you can't explain why it's not.

Refer to the second law of thermodynamics...

Refer to the Sun's corona.

It is not possible for heat to flow from a colder body to a warmer body without any work having been done to accomplish this flow.

And? Don't stop there.

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

Of course it does...but then that energy is immediately lost via collision and the conduction of the energy through the troposphere continues.

So you agree with jc456, CO2 absorbs IR and never ever emits IR.

About 1 in a billion CO2 molecules that have absorbed IR actually get to emit it because the time between collisions of molecules is so much shorter than the time it takes a molecule to actually emit a photon.

a radiative greenhouse effect is not possible in a troposphere so completely dominated by pressure and convection.

A greenhouse prevents energy from escaping, just as you and jc456 claimed CO2 does.

So you think there is a huge glass pane up in the sky now? And what sort of mental gyrations and gymnastics do you have to do in order to misunderstand so badly that you think I have claimed that CO2 prevents energy from escaping? The fact is that what small amount of energy CO2 actually radiates moves out of the atmosphere at the speed of light...CO2 that actually holds on to energy long enough to emit it via radiation moves energy out of the atmosphere far more efficiently than the process of conduction.

Are you just another bald faced liar...or are your reading and comprehension skills really that bad?

About 1 in a billion CO2 molecules that have absorbed IR actually get to emit it because the time between collisions of molecules is so much shorter than the time it takes a molecule to actually emit a photon.

And how many can emit.....later, when they gain energy from a collision?

So you think there is a huge glass pane up in the sky now?

Nope. I think there is CO2 up in the sky that you, and jc, think absorbs and never, ever emits.

And what sort of mental gyrations and gymnastics do you have to do in order to misunderstand so badly that you think I have claimed that CO2 prevents energy from escaping?

I'm willing to listen to your explanation of how CO2 can conduct energy out into space.

The fact is that what small amount of energy CO2 actually radiates moves out of the atmosphere at the speed of light..

Right. 1 in a billion. Unless that one also gets absorbed by a GHG molecule before leaving the atmosphere.

CO2 that actually holds on to energy long enough to emit it via radiation ​

Absorbs at the surface.....waits until it reaches TOA to emit? Sounds like another smart emitter fantasy.
Why doesn't it emit at 10 meters? At 100 meters? At 1000 meters?​

​

moves energy out of the atmosphere far more efficiently than the process of conduction.​

Well, shit. It couldn't move energy out of the atmosphere less efficiently than conduction, eh?
Since conduction moves exactly ZERO energy out into space.​

 

[jc456]

Where?

The atmosphere. Duh.
You said photons are absorbed by CO2, never to be re-emitted.

Not by CO2. If the energy moves, how does CO2 reemit?

Not by CO2. If the energy moves, how does CO2 reemit?

Exactly! That energy can never leave the atmosphere....ever.

You've discovered the secret!

You didn’t answer. Gotcha huh? Never a counter point dick

Answer what? You said CO2 can't re-emit.

Were you wrong? Were you lying?

nope, never said that. you're a liar. wash, rinse, repeat.

 

[jc456]

Where?

The atmosphere. Duh.
You said photons are absorbed by CO2, never to be re-emitted.

Not by CO2. If the energy moves, how does CO2 reemit?

The Equipartition Theorum states that a volume of gas under the same conditions will both emit and absorb the same amount of radiation that it is capable of producing. In all directions and in an amount proportional to its temperature.

Any thin slice of the atmosphere is doing this except for near the surface, and near the emission escape height. The atmosphere is warming near the surface due to excess radiation from a warmer source. High up the atmosphere is cooling by sending radiation to space. Both are happening, ypu can't have just one or the other.

The amount of energy being returned to the surface by various pathways must equal the difference between what comes in from the 15C surface and what goes out from the -50C top of the atmosphere.

Where’s that IR coming from towards the surface? CO2 collides and hands off what it absorbed 99% of the time. So, which gas sends it back to the surface?

CO2 collides and hands off what it absorbed 99% of the time.

Is CO2 only allowed to lose energy when it collides?
Does CO2 ever gain energy when it collides?

If it has already absorbed, yes, it will only lose the energy it absorbed at collision.
No, CO2 does not gain energy during collision if already vibrating when colliding with other gas molecules, it hands off what it absorbed.

 

[jc456]

The atmosphere. Duh.
You said photons are absorbed by CO2, never to be re-emitted.

Not by CO2. If the energy moves, how does CO2 reemit?

The Equipartition Theorum states that a volume of gas under the same conditions will both emit and absorb the same amount of radiation that it is capable of producing. In all directions and in an amount proportional to its temperature.

Any thin slice of the atmosphere is doing this except for near the surface, and near the emission escape height. The atmosphere is warming near the surface due to excess radiation from a warmer source. High up the atmosphere is cooling by sending radiation to space. Both are happening, ypu can't have just one or the other.

The amount of energy being returned to the surface by various pathways must equal the difference between what comes in from the 15C surface and what goes out from the -50C top of the atmosphere.

Where’s that IR coming from towards the surface? CO2 collides and hands off what it absorbed 99% of the time. So, which gas sends it back to the surface?

CO2 collides and hands off what it absorbed 99% of the time.

Is CO2 only allowed to lose energy when it collides?
Does CO2 ever gain energy when it collides?

Exactly. SSDD somehow believes one side of the coin exists but the other side does not.

jc is too stupid to understand their is a coin.

I'm so much smarter than you. you believe CO2 can warm the planet more than the sun. yeah ok poindexter.

 

[jc456]

correct. it's absorbed and handed over through collision. It is not IR.

That would mean that energy never leaves the atmosphere.
Perhaps you's like to rethink your claim?

no thanks,

That must explain the runaway greenhouse effect we're experiencing.
Thanks for clearing that up.

Where?

The atmosphere. Duh.
You said photons are absorbed by CO2, never to be re-emitted.

never said that liar. it's all you got. weak ass shit from wash, rinse, repeat.

 

[jc456]

It isn't as if it matters...in either event, it rules out the possibility of a radiative greenhouse effect as described by climate science in the troposphere...

Absorption of CO2 at very low altitudes does not rule out the radiative greenhouse effect.

The amount of energy lost via collision and resulting conduction to the top of the troposphere does...the amount of radiation happening in the troposphere isn't enough to produce any sort of radiative greenhouse effect...as observations clearly prove.

Been through this all before..if you want to see why you lost the first time, refer to any of the previous incarnations of this exact discussion.

The amount of energy lost via collision

Energy isn't lost via collision.

Sure it is. What do you think it is? It’s kinetic energy derp

Sure it is.

You're not real clear on conservation of energy.

you're free to prove me wrong. post up the experiment that says I'm wrong.

 

[jc456]

You won't get a straight answer from him.

Energy stored in the atmosphere has only two directions in which to escape. Outwards to space. Or inwards back to the surface.

There is only one direction energy may travel...and that is to cooler pastures. Energy can't move spontaneously from cool to warm.

There is only one direction energy may travel...and that is to cooler pastures.

Which is why the Sun's surface can't radiate toward the corona and why the Earth's
surface can't radiate toward the thermosphere. DURR.

do you know if there is any work in relationship with the corona and the surface? It is my experience, that our scientists haven't answered that very scenario. So you think, perhaps that message board posters will? Derp!!!!

 

[jc456]

no thanks,

That must explain the runaway greenhouse effect we're experiencing.
Thanks for clearing that up.

Where?

The atmosphere. Duh.
You said photons are absorbed by CO2, never to be re-emitted.

Not by CO2. If the energy moves, how does CO2 reemit?

The Equipartition Theorum states that a volume of gas under the same conditions will both emit and absorb the same amount of radiation that it is capable of producing. In all directions and in an amount proportional to its temperature.

Any thin slice of the atmosphere is doing this except for near the surface, and near the emission escape height. The atmosphere is warming near the surface due to excess radiation from a warmer source. High up the atmosphere is cooling by sending radiation to space. Both are happening, ypu can't have just one or the other.

The amount of energy being returned to the surface by various pathways must equal the difference between what comes in from the 15C surface and what goes out from the -50C top of the atmosphere.

yeah, yeah, yeah, it's always what you have. now post up some observed empirical data that confirms all your modeling what ifs!!

 

[jc456]

Which is why the Sun's surface can't radiate toward the corona and why the Earth's
surface can't radiate toward the thermosphere. DURR.

As has been pointed out numerous times to you....science is working on the explanation for why the corona is warmer than the surface...they don't think it is because energy is spontaneously moving from cool to warm though...you seem to be the only one who thinks that energy is moving spontaneously from the cooler surface to the warmer corona...

And I guess you didn't know that you would freeze to death in seconds in the thermosphere...while the individual gas molecules may be very hot, they are so far apart that you would probably never even encounter one.

science is working on the explanation for why the corona is warmer than the surface..

Nobody gives a shit.
It is funny that your claim is so easily disproven.

you seem to be the only one who thinks that energy is moving spontaneously from the cooler surface to the warmer corona...

You're free to explain why it isn't.

You're free to explain why it isn't.

he did. you chose to ignore it and do your spectacular wash, rinse, repeat act. never ever do you offer a counter point.

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

The atmosphere. Duh.
You said photons are absorbed by CO2, never to be re-emitted.

Not by CO2. If the energy moves, how does CO2 reemit?

Not by CO2. If the energy moves, how does CO2 reemit?

Exactly! That energy can never leave the atmosphere....ever.

You've discovered the secret!

You didn’t answer. Gotcha huh? Never a counter point dick

Answer what? You said CO2 can't re-emit.

Were you wrong? Were you lying?

nope, never said that. you're a liar. wash, rinse, repeat.

Northern nations warming faster than global average


After IR is absorbed by CO2, can CO2 ever emit IR?

 

[jc456]

Not by CO2. If the energy moves, how does CO2 reemit?

Not by CO2. If the energy moves, how does CO2 reemit?

Exactly! That energy can never leave the atmosphere....ever.

You've discovered the secret!

You didn’t answer. Gotcha huh? Never a counter point dick

Answer what? You said CO2 can't re-emit.

Were you wrong? Were you lying?

nope, never said that. you're a liar. wash, rinse, repeat.

View attachment 258469

View attachment 258470
Northern nations warming faster than global average


After IR is absorbed by CO2, can CO2 ever emit IR?

sure, as long as it isn't colliding with other molecules. And when it does, it emits to space the colder area off of the surface.

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

Not by CO2. If the energy moves, how does CO2 reemit?

Exactly! That energy can never leave the atmosphere....ever.

You've discovered the secret!

You didn’t answer. Gotcha huh? Never a counter point dick

Answer what? You said CO2 can't re-emit.

Were you wrong? Were you lying?

nope, never said that. you're a liar. wash, rinse, repeat.

View attachment 258469

View attachment 258470
Northern nations warming faster than global average


After IR is absorbed by CO2, can CO2 ever emit IR?

sure, as long as it isn't colliding with other molecules. And when it does, it emits to space the colder area off of the surface.

sure, as long as it isn't colliding with other molecules.

Only CO2 that doesn't collide is allowed to emit? Link?

 

[jc456]

You didn’t answer. Gotcha huh? Never a counter point dick

Answer what? You said CO2 can't re-emit.

Were you wrong? Were you lying?

nope, never said that. you're a liar. wash, rinse, repeat.

View attachment 258469

View attachment 258470
Northern nations warming faster than global average


After IR is absorbed by CO2, can CO2 ever emit IR?

sure, as long as it isn't colliding with other molecules. And when it does, it emits to space the colder area off of the surface.

sure, as long as it isn't colliding with other molecules.

Only CO2 that doesn't collide is allowed to emit? Link?

A CO2 molecule vibrating is only allowed to emit.

Carbon Dioxide Absorbs and Re-emits Infrared Radiation | UCAR Center for Science Education

"The energy from the photon causes the CO2 molecule to vibrate. Some time later, the molecule gives up this extra energy by emitting another infrared photon. Once the extra energy has been removed by the emitted photon, the carbon dioxide molecule stops vibrating."

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

Answer what? You said CO2 can't re-emit.

Were you wrong? Were you lying?

nope, never said that. you're a liar. wash, rinse, repeat.

View attachment 258469

View attachment 258470
Northern nations warming faster than global average


After IR is absorbed by CO2, can CO2 ever emit IR?

sure, as long as it isn't colliding with other molecules. And when it does, it emits to space the colder area off of the surface.

sure, as long as it isn't colliding with other molecules.

Only CO2 that doesn't collide is allowed to emit? Link?

A CO2 molecule vibrating is only allowed to emit.

Carbon Dioxide Absorbs and Re-emits Infrared Radiation | UCAR Center for Science Education

"The energy from the photon causes the CO2 molecule to vibrate. Some time later, the molecule gives up this extra energy by emitting another infrared photon. Once the extra energy has been removed by the emitted photon, the carbon dioxide molecule stops vibrating."

You're contradicting your previous claims. First you said they never emit again, now you say they do.
Were you wrong at first or are you wrong now?

 

[IanC]

a radiative greenhouse effect is not possible in a troposphere so completely dominated by pressure and convection

This is one of your talking points that you never get around to explaining, even after pointed questioning.

How does convection or conduction stop CO2 from absorbing surface produced 15 micron radiation?

Without CO2 that radiation would totally ignore the atmosphere and escape at the speed of light. Yet you are arguing that convection and conduction are superior even though they cannot even move the energy to space.

CO2 absorbs near the surface and emits to space high above. In between it equally absorbs and emits according to its temperature, regardless of molecular collisions.

 

[IanC]

nope, never said that. you're a liar. wash, rinse, repeat.

View attachment 258469

View attachment 258470
Northern nations warming faster than global average


After IR is absorbed by CO2, can CO2 ever emit IR?

sure, as long as it isn't colliding with other molecules. And when it does, it emits to space the colder area off of the surface.

sure, as long as it isn't colliding with other molecules.

Only CO2 that doesn't collide is allowed to emit? Link?

A CO2 molecule vibrating is only allowed to emit.

Carbon Dioxide Absorbs and Re-emits Infrared Radiation | UCAR Center for Science Education

"The energy from the photon causes the CO2 molecule to vibrate. Some time later, the molecule gives up this extra energy by emitting another infrared photon. Once the extra energy has been removed by the emitted photon, the carbon dioxide molecule stops vibrating."

You're contradicting your previous claims. First you said they never emit again, now you say they do.
Were you wrong at first or are you wrong now?

To paraphrase Heisenberg, jc is not even smart enough to be wrong.