Official Thread for Denial of GreenHouse Effect and Radiative Physics.

[Toddsterpatriot]

so the sun is the actual source based on fusion

Yes, the source of the photons from the surface that radiate toward the hotter corona is fusion.

so why is the corona hotter?

Don't care. Why doesn't the hotter corona prevent the surface from radiating?

Could it be that SSDD's idiotic claim is wrong? LOL!

Don't care? hmmmm did the Corona put the fusion reactor out? isn't fusion work energy?

Don't care?

Couldn't care less.

hmmmm did the Corona put the fusion reactor out?

Nope.

isn't fusion work energy?

There is zero fusion going on at the surface.

then why did you make this comment if fusion doesn't happen at the surface?

Yes, the source of the photons from the surface that radiate toward the hotter corona is fusion. post #567

then why did you make this comment if fusion doesn't happen at the surface?

Because it's true.

Fusion doesn't happen at the surface. Not even a little.

Where do you think it occurs?

but you said it in post #567. are you lying again?

This post doesn't say fusion occurs at the surface.

Did you figure out where fusion occurs?

 

[jc456]

you said there was zero fusion at the surface, then where is it happening? cause you must have some really good magic that is happening at the sun that there isn't fusion at the surface.

or do you think the sun's surface is like earth's surface? hahaahahahahahahahahahaha

you said there was zero fusion at the surface

Because there is zero fusion at the surface.

then where is it happening?

Where do you think it is happening?

cause you must have some really good magic that is happening at the sun that there isn't fusion at the surface.

Your scientific ignorance is both wide I deep. I can understand why you fall for SSDD's idiocy.
​

and you think the corona can stop the sun's fusion. wow.

and you think the corona can stop the sun's fusion.

Nope. Not even a little bit.

so you agree The fusion engine isn't stopped just because the corona is hotter than it? why would you think anyone would think that?

The fusion engine isn't stopped just because the corona is hotter than it?

Fusion doesn't occur at the surface.
The fusion that doesn't occur at the surface isn't stopped by the temperature of the corona.

why would you think anyone would think that?

SSDD's epicycles are very complex.

then why did you say fusion was at the surface in post #567?

 

[jc456]

Don't care? hmmmm did the Corona put the fusion reactor out? isn't fusion work energy?

Don't care?

Couldn't care less.

hmmmm did the Corona put the fusion reactor out?

Nope.

isn't fusion work energy?

There is zero fusion going on at the surface.

then why did you make this comment if fusion doesn't happen at the surface?

Yes, the source of the photons from the surface that radiate toward the hotter corona is fusion. post #567

then why did you make this comment if fusion doesn't happen at the surface?

Because it's true.

Fusion doesn't happen at the surface. Not even a little.

Where do you think it occurs?

but you said it in post #567. are you lying again?

View attachment 272968

This post doesn't say fusion occurs at the surface.

Did you figure out where fusion occurs?

dude, it says in post #567;

the source of the photons from the surface that radiate to the hotter corona is fusion.

your words dude.

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

you said there was zero fusion at the surface

Because there is zero fusion at the surface.

then where is it happening?

Where do you think it is happening?

cause you must have some really good magic that is happening at the sun that there isn't fusion at the surface.

Your scientific ignorance is both wide I deep. I can understand why you fall for SSDD's idiocy.
​

and you think the corona can stop the sun's fusion. wow.

and you think the corona can stop the sun's fusion.

Nope. Not even a little bit.

so you agree The fusion engine isn't stopped just because the corona is hotter than it? why would you think anyone would think that?

The fusion engine isn't stopped just because the corona is hotter than it?

Fusion doesn't occur at the surface.
The fusion that doesn't occur at the surface isn't stopped by the temperature of the corona.

why would you think anyone would think that?

SSDD's epicycles are very complex.

then why did you say fusion was at the surface in post #567?

That's not what I said.
Is English your second language?

Find out where fusion occurs, your idiocy will be slightly reduced.

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

Don't care?

Couldn't care less.

hmmmm did the Corona put the fusion reactor out?

Nope.

isn't fusion work energy?

There is zero fusion going on at the surface.

then why did you make this comment if fusion doesn't happen at the surface?

Yes, the source of the photons from the surface that radiate toward the hotter corona is fusion. post #567

then why did you make this comment if fusion doesn't happen at the surface?

Because it's true.

Fusion doesn't happen at the surface. Not even a little.

Where do you think it occurs?

but you said it in post #567. are you lying again?

View attachment 272968

This post doesn't say fusion occurs at the surface.

Did you figure out where fusion occurs?

dude, it says in post #567;

the source of the photons from the surface that radiate to the hotter corona is fusion.

your words dude.

Yup. Photons that come from the Sun are the result of fusion.
There is no fusion at the surface.

There is no conflict between these statements.

 

[jc456]

then why did you make this comment if fusion doesn't happen at the surface?

Yes, the source of the photons from the surface that radiate toward the hotter corona is fusion. post #567

then why did you make this comment if fusion doesn't happen at the surface?

Because it's true.

Fusion doesn't happen at the surface. Not even a little.

Where do you think it occurs?

but you said it in post #567. are you lying again?

View attachment 272968

This post doesn't say fusion occurs at the surface.

Did you figure out where fusion occurs?

dude, it says in post #567;

the source of the photons from the surface that radiate to the hotter corona is fusion.

your words dude.

Yup. Photons that come from the Sun are the result of fusion.
There is no fusion at the surface.

There is no conflict between these statements.

that's not what you said, not at all.
Photons that come from the Sun are the result of fusion.
you wrote:
the source of the photons from the surface that radiate to the hotter corona is fusion.


you wrote it, english isn't your first language? is that what you're telling us? you wrote it, right?

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

then why did you make this comment if fusion doesn't happen at the surface?

Because it's true.

Fusion doesn't happen at the surface. Not even a little.

Where do you think it occurs?

but you said it in post #567. are you lying again?

View attachment 272968

This post doesn't say fusion occurs at the surface.

Did you figure out where fusion occurs?

dude, it says in post #567;

the source of the photons from the surface that radiate to the hotter corona is fusion.

your words dude.

Yup. Photons that come from the Sun are the result of fusion.
There is no fusion at the surface.

There is no conflict between these statements.

that's not what you said, not at all.
Photons that come from the Sun are the result of fusion.
you wrote:
the source of the photons from the surface that radiate to the hotter corona is fusion.


you wrote it, english isn't your first language? is that what you're telling us? you wrote it, right?

Photons that come from the Sun are the result of fusion.

Absolutely!

the source of the photons from the surface that radiate to the hotter corona is fusion.

You bet your ass.

is that what you're telling us?

That's what I'm telling you.

you wrote it, right?

Sure did.

Did you find out where fusion occurs?

Or will your ignorance on this topic remain unreduced?

 

[jc456]

but you said it in post #567. are you lying again?

View attachment 272968

This post doesn't say fusion occurs at the surface.

Did you figure out where fusion occurs?

dude, it says in post #567;

the source of the photons from the surface that radiate to the hotter corona is fusion.

your words dude.

Yup. Photons that come from the Sun are the result of fusion.
There is no fusion at the surface.

There is no conflict between these statements.

that's not what you said, not at all.
Photons that come from the Sun are the result of fusion.
you wrote:
the source of the photons from the surface that radiate to the hotter corona is fusion.


you wrote it, english isn't your first language? is that what you're telling us? you wrote it, right?

Photons that come from the Sun are the result of fusion.

Absolutely!

the source of the photons from the surface that radiate to the hotter corona is fusion.

You bet your ass.

is that what you're telling us?

That's what I'm telling you.

you wrote it, right?

Sure did.

Did you find out where fusion occurs?

Or will your ignorance on this topic remain unreduced?

I'm still wondering if you do? you don't think fusion is done at the sun, and think the sun's surface is like the earth's surface.

you said the photon comes from fusion, and the photon comes from the surface

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

View attachment 272968

This post doesn't say fusion occurs at the surface.

Did you figure out where fusion occurs?

dude, it says in post #567;

the source of the photons from the surface that radiate to the hotter corona is fusion.

your words dude.

Yup. Photons that come from the Sun are the result of fusion.
There is no fusion at the surface.

There is no conflict between these statements.

that's not what you said, not at all.
Photons that come from the Sun are the result of fusion.
you wrote:
the source of the photons from the surface that radiate to the hotter corona is fusion.


you wrote it, english isn't your first language? is that what you're telling us? you wrote it, right?

Photons that come from the Sun are the result of fusion.

Absolutely!

the source of the photons from the surface that radiate to the hotter corona is fusion.

You bet your ass.

is that what you're telling us?

That's what I'm telling you.

you wrote it, right?

Sure did.

Did you find out where fusion occurs?

Or will your ignorance on this topic remain unreduced?

I'm still wondering if you do? you don't think fusion is done at the sun, and think the sun's surface is like the earth's surface.

Well, good luck with your fusion research.

 

[jc456]

dude, it says in post #567;

the source of the photons from the surface that radiate to the hotter corona is fusion.

your words dude.

Yup. Photons that come from the Sun are the result of fusion.
There is no fusion at the surface.

There is no conflict between these statements.

that's not what you said, not at all.
Photons that come from the Sun are the result of fusion.
you wrote:
the source of the photons from the surface that radiate to the hotter corona is fusion.


you wrote it, english isn't your first language? is that what you're telling us? you wrote it, right?

Photons that come from the Sun are the result of fusion.

Absolutely!

the source of the photons from the surface that radiate to the hotter corona is fusion.

You bet your ass.

is that what you're telling us?

That's what I'm telling you.

you wrote it, right?

Sure did.

Did you find out where fusion occurs?

Or will your ignorance on this topic remain unreduced?

I'm still wondering if you do? you don't think fusion is done at the sun, and think the sun's surface is like the earth's surface.

Well, good luck with your fusion research.

well you're obviously confused, cause you think SSDD thinks the sun doesn't produce the photons that warm the earth. I've never seen that statement from him.

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

Yup. Photons that come from the Sun are the result of fusion.
There is no fusion at the surface.

There is no conflict between these statements.

that's not what you said, not at all.
Photons that come from the Sun are the result of fusion.
you wrote:
the source of the photons from the surface that radiate to the hotter corona is fusion.


you wrote it, english isn't your first language? is that what you're telling us? you wrote it, right?

Photons that come from the Sun are the result of fusion.

Absolutely!

the source of the photons from the surface that radiate to the hotter corona is fusion.

You bet your ass.

is that what you're telling us?

That's what I'm telling you.

you wrote it, right?

Sure did.

Did you find out where fusion occurs?

Or will your ignorance on this topic remain unreduced?

I'm still wondering if you do? you don't think fusion is done at the sun, and think the sun's surface is like the earth's surface.

Well, good luck with your fusion research.

well you're obviously confused, cause you think SSDD thinks the sun doesn't produce the photons that warm the earth. I've never seen that statement from him.

You're lying....again.

 

[SSDD]

Projecting your sessions! I don’t believe cold objects radiate to warmer objects like the 2nd law states, and if you feel they do post the radiating cold object at the warmer object, it must be simple to prove since you’re adamant about it

I don’t believe cold objects radiate to warmer objects

I know, you think Stefan-Boltzmann is wrong. Good for you!!

The fundamental assumption of the SB law is that the radiator is radiating into a cooler background...anyone who believes that the SB law deals with two way energy transfer is kidding themselves...the equations simply do not say any such thing.

Still no backup for your "objects at equilibrium cease all radiating"?
Or for your dimmer switch theory?
Weird.

Maybe you should contact Dr. Raeder again?

Still no evidence they emit, funny, you keep striking out

Still no evidence disproving Stefan-Boltzmann? DURR......

The SB equation describes one way energy flow from a radiator to a cooler background...it says nothing about two way energy flow....the onus is upon you guys to prove it wrong...Set T to the same temperature as TC and P=zero...I have no problem with that...you on the other hand believe that it is wrong...so prove it with some actual evidence.

 

[SSDD]

Still no evidence they emit, funny, you keep striking out

Still no evidence disproving Stefan-Boltzmann? DURR......

I’m waiting loser still posting nothing

Can't remember my many examples? Is it dementia? Sorry.

Yep nothing observed, still waiting

I always liked this one.

The sensor array in the camera is made of multiple thermopiles...some are warming...some are cooling..the amount and rate of warming is indicated by warm colors...the amount and rate of cooling is indicated by cool colors...cold radiation is not being beamed into the camera from the ice cream...

 

[flacaltenn]

So you have your own personal greenhouse hypothesis as well? One that doesn't claim that there is direct heating of the surface. Interesting, because the IPCC, the mouthpiece of climate science says otherwise...

IPCC FAQ 1.3 What is a greenhouse effect?

"Because the Earth is much colder than the Sun, it radiates at much longer wavelengths, pri- marily in the infrared part of the spectrum (see Figure 1). Much of this thermal radiation emitted by the land and ocean is ab- sorbed by the atmosphere, including clouds, and reradiated back to Earth. This is called the greenhouse effect."

Can't help it if you're so confused that when you see "reradiated back to Earth" you think that NET HEAT went to surface.. It never does.. It's a photon (light) gunfight and the surface always loses heat.. It just LOSES IT a very slightly slower rate... Photons themselves are not heat. Don't behave like heat. And they don't CHOOSE their paths..

Just like when a cloud deck comes over during the evening.. The surface loses heat at a slightly lower rate, but it's STILL "losing heat"... NOT heating up...

If you don't get this -- it's because you've brainwashed yourself to the point where not only do reject textbooks as "dogma" -- but you're rejecting spending any calories on critical thinking about what folks are trying to tell you...

 

[flacaltenn]

thermopile, I'm used to thermocouplers from my past experiences. same difference, and you should be ashamed you don't know how the device actually converts for temperature readings.

Nope... Thermopiles are ancient, inefficient and noisy... And since the electronics revolution, there are cheaper better ways to collect IR photons...

I do know what I'm doing. Or I wouldnt have been on the "go-to" team for photon counting applications and products...

 

[SSDD]

I don’t believe cold objects radiate to warmer objects

I know, you think Stefan-Boltzmann is wrong. Good for you!!

The fundamental assumption of the SB law is that the radiator is radiating into a cooler background...anyone who believes that the SB law deals with two way energy transfer is kidding themselves...the equations simply do not say any such thing.

Still no backup for your "objects at equilibrium cease all radiating"?
Or for your dimmer switch theory?
Weird.

Maybe you should contact Dr. Raeder again?

Still no evidence they emit, funny, you keep striking out

Yep...they will show you book after book after book and model after model and tell you what "everyone" believes...what they won't show you is actual evidence...that used to be what physics was all about...before the post modern age that is...now it is about protecting the dogma, and inventing particles and mechanics to explain away everything that contradicts the dogma..

Yep...they will show you book after book after book and model after model and tell you what "everyone" believes...

And then there is you, telling us what no one believes.

what they won't show you is actual evidence...

Did you ever find that evidence for "objects at equilibrium cease emissions"? No? Weird.

Sure...there is all sorts of evidence...the fact that you can't measure energy moving from a cooler object to a warmer object...or even energy moving spontaneously between two objects at equilibrium is evidence...if the energy were moving, then you could measuring it happening...it isn't, and you can't....that is evidence..

 

[SSDD]

Much of this thermal radiation emitted by the land and ocean is ab- sorbed by the atmosphere, including clouds, and reradiated back to Earth. This is called the greenhouse effect."

Can't help it if you're so confused that when you see "reradiated back to Earth" you think that NET HEAT went to surface.. It never does.. It's a photon (light) gunfight and the surface always loses heat.. It just LOSES IT a very slightly slower rate... Photons themselves are not heat. Don't behave like heat. And they don't CHOOSE their paths..

That is a pretty straight forward statement...reradiated back to the surface...no ambiguity there...does your belief in dogma keep you from being able to understand unambiguous statements as well?

Here is more from the IPCC regarding what climate science says is happening..from the same link as above...

Clip: (although locally one can feel the warming effect: cloudy nights tend to remain warmer than clear nights because the clouds radiate longwave energy back down to the surface).

Radiate long wave energy back down to the surface...not much wiggle room there and not what you claim at all...again..your own version which is different from that of climate science...

Clip: Analogously, but through a different physical process, the Earth’s greenhouse effect warms the surface of the planet.

Warms the surface of the planet...again...no wiggle room there and entirely different from what your version of the greenhouse effect claims...

And again....if energy is escaping more slowly...where is the upper tropospheric hot spot...which would be the inevitable result of the greenhouse effect slowing the escape of energy?

 

[SSDD]

thermopile, I'm used to thermocouplers from my past experiences. same difference, and you should be ashamed you don't know how the device actually converts for temperature readings.

Nope... Thermopiles are ancient, inefficient and noisy... And since the electronics revolution, there are cheaper better ways to collect IR photons...

I do know what I'm doing. Or I wouldnt have been on the "go-to" team for photon counting applications and products...

You don't even know how a home depot IR thermometer works..whether you "know what you are doing" is called into question by that fact...even my grandkids know how a home depot IR thermometer works...and they know cold energy isn't beaming into it...

And it never stops being funny that you believe you are counting theoretical particles....if you were actually counting them, they wouldn't still be theoretical now...would they?

No doubt you are counting something...and also no doubt that you are being fooled by your instruments if you believe you are counting theoretical particles...

 

[flacaltenn]

That is a pretty straight forward statement...reradiated back to the surface...no ambiguity there...does your belief in dogma keep you from being able to understand unambiguous statements as well?

If I'm standing a couple feet from a SNOW DRIFT -- that is "reradiating" some of my body heat back to me.

Who wins that exchange? Do I GET WARMED by the snow drift you freaking moron??

 

[SSDD]

That is a pretty straight forward statement...reradiated back to the surface...no ambiguity there...does your belief in dogma keep you from being able to understand unambiguous statements as well?

If I'm standing a couple feet from a SNOW DRIFT -- that is "reradiating" some of my body heat back to me.

In a model perhaps...not in the real world...but feel free to show me a measurement of a discrete wavelength of radiation with an instrument that isn't cooled to a temperature lower than that of the snow drift...

Who wins that exchange? Do I GET WARMED by the snow drift you freaking moron??

Funny..you calling me a moron when you don't even know how your Home Depot IR thermometer works...