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.
You seem to have your facts backwards. It's a well-known scientific fact that CO2 and other gases absorb energy in the infra-red range. How would extra retained energy result in lower temps? That seems to violate CofE. What you claim as "SCIENTIFIC FACT" is no more than the opinion of some, with even less actual scientific backing than the theory you're trying to discredit. Nice try, but mere declarations don't cut it. You've proven nothing. At least try to answer a simple question, "where does the energy go, if not to heat the earth?"
Ohh I don't know, perhaps that ICE COLD void that SURROUNDS the Earth?
God, you are that ignorant! That void has neither heat nor cold. That is a property that requires matter.
The real issue is that you have no knowledge of what you speak. You ignore the result of hundreds of years of scientific thought and philosophical thinking that has been done to derive the scientific method. No one has denied that CO2 is a GHG. We know it is. The question is does it have a measurable effect. All evidence we have shows it is not. There is not one single piece of empirical data that supports your contention. Not one. There are many that support ours. There is a well documented paleoclimate history which supports our contentions.
That is not true for the alarmists side. The alarmists on the other hand must distort the historical temperature record to support their ideas. That is fraud. That is the alarmists legacy...fraud.
Oh come on, Walleyes, the real scientists all disagree with you. Here, again, is the American Institute of Phyics with real scientists explaining the history of the investigations of GHGs, and what we currently know. And none of it agrees with your lies.
The Carbon Dioxide Greenhouse Effect
Well document paleo-climate can be found here, with a real scientist explaining the current knowledge.
A23A
Now you claim to be a geologist and a member of the AGU, so why aren't you up there, stating why this is not true? Because, if you tried it, you would be laughed off of the stage by the membership of the AGU.
Uhh because the meeting isn't till December you doofus! And I will. And your silly links have allready been disproven on numerous counts. Try again with some real science.
Ohh I don't know, perhaps that ICE COLD void that SURROUNDS the Earth?
God, you are that ignorant! That void has neither heat nor cold. That is a property that requires matter.
Apparently you are unaware that space is not empty, and that it does have temperature as a result.
Eddington's Temperature of Space
If you want to prove me wrong we can put you in a life support module aboard a shuttle, supply you with all the food, water, and air you need, and see how long you survive without heat.
You seem to have your facts backwards. It's a well-known scientific fact that CO2 and other gases absorb energy in the infra-red range. How would extra retained energy result in lower temps? That seems to violate CofE. What you claim as "SCIENTIFIC FACT" is no more than the opinion of some, with even less actual scientific backing than the theory you're trying to discredit. Nice try, but mere declarations don't cut it. You've proven nothing. At least try to answer a simple question, "where does the energy go, if not to heat the earth?"
Ohh I don't know, perhaps that ICE COLD void that SURROUNDS the Earth?
God, you are that ignorant! That void has neither heat nor cold. That is a property that requires matter.
God, you are that ignorant! That void has neither heat nor cold. That is a property that requires matter.
I suggest you actually uhhh do a little research before you make an ass of yourself yet again there olfraud. The temperature of outer space is around 2.725 Kelvin just a tad above Absolute Zero where all atomic movement ceases. This is the Cosmic Background Radiation. Closer to our planets the tmperature rises to around 40 Kelvin, but that is still awful damned cold. So yet again you are wrong.
Fucking dumb, Walleyes, fucking dumb.
How does one determine the temperature of a vacuum?
Question
If temperature is 'The average kinetic energy of particles' (i.e. if you measure the temperature of a cup of water it is the average of all the water molecules in the cup), then how does one determine the temperature of a vacuum? (Division by zero error)
Asked by: Jeff Retty
Answer
One doesn't determine the temperature of a vacuum. Just as 'nothingness' has no color, taste, smell, etc. it also has no temperature. That is because, as you point out in your question, there are no particles whose kinetic energy can be measured or averaged.
Only objects within a vacuum can have a temperature, and that temperature will depend on the balance of incoming and outgoing radiation. Electromagnetic radiation can travel through a vacuum, so objects in space of any temperature above the near absolute zero (0 Kelvin = about -273 deg C.) temperature of cosmic background radiation (which is about 3 Kelvin) will radiate energy into space. Without another source of energy replacing that loss (a nearby Sun, for example) the object's temperature will decrease. That is why you read about 'the coldness of outer space'.
Once again, you ignore what real scientists state.
God, you are that ignorant! That void has neither heat nor cold. That is a property that requires matter.
Apparently you are unaware that space is not empty, and that it does have temperature as a result.
Eddington's Temperature of Space
If you want to prove me wrong we can put you in a life support module aboard a shuttle, supply you with all the food, water, and air you need, and see how long you survive without heat.
If the outer skin of the shuttle is perfectly insulative, you will soon have to find a way of shedding heat, as you convert the energy in the food into heat.
And Eddington's temperatures are for the energy that matter in space would recieve from the light of the stars in space. Space, vacuum, has no temperature. The light, energy, passes through without affecting it.
God, you are that ignorant! That void has neither heat nor cold. That is a property that requires matter.
Apparently you are unaware that space is not empty, and that it does have temperature as a result.
Eddington's Temperature of Space
If you want to prove me wrong we can put you in a life support module aboard a shuttle, supply you with all the food, water, and air you need, and see how long you survive without heat.
If the outer skin of the shuttle is perfectly insulative, you will soon have to find a way of shedding heat, as you convert the energy in the food into heat.
And Eddington's temperatures are for the energy that matter in space would recieve from the light of the stars in space. Space, vacuum, has no temperature. The light, energy, passes through without affecting it.
For both of you dingbats, the question was what was the temperature of space. Matter within space has a temperture, but space does not. It is neither hot nor cold. Those are properties of matter. The thermometer is matter, the particles mentioned are matter. Space is not matter, it cannot be either hot or cold.
So the answer really depends on what you mean by vacuum. If you mean whats left when all the atoms etc. are pumped out, yes it still has a temperature of electromagnetic radiation. If you want, though, you could choose to only call that a vacuum if the temperature is zero. By the way, the third law of thermodynamics says nothing can ever get to zero temperature, so by that definition there wouldnt be any vacuums.
For both of you dingbats, the question was what was the temperature of space. Matter within space has a temperture, but space does not. It is neither hot nor cold. Those are properties of matter. The thermometer is matter, the particles mentioned are matter. Space is not matter, it cannot be either hot or cold.
Nice try.
So the answer really depends on what you mean by vacuum. If you mean whats left when all the atoms etc. are pumped out, yes it still has a temperature of electromagnetic radiation. If you want, though, you could choose to only call that a vacuum if the temperature is zero. By the way, the third law of thermodynamics says nothing can ever get to zero temperature, so by that definition there wouldnt be any vacuums.
Ask the Van - Illinois Dept. of Physics
As I said before, the only way to get a real vacuum is go outside the universe, because the laws of this universe make it impossible to achieve.
For both of you dingbats, the question was what was the temperature of space. Matter within space has a temperture, but space does not. It is neither hot nor cold. Those are properties of matter. The thermometer is matter, the particles mentioned are matter. Space is not matter, it cannot be either hot or cold.
Nice try.
So the answer really depends on what you mean by vacuum. If you mean whats left when all the atoms etc. are pumped out, yes it still has a temperature of electromagnetic radiation. If you want, though, you could choose to only call that a vacuum if the temperature is zero. By the way, the third law of thermodynamics says nothing can ever get to zero temperature, so by that definition there wouldnt be any vacuums.
Ask the Van - Illinois Dept. of Physics
As I said before, the only way to get a real vacuum is go outside the universe, because the laws of this universe make it impossible to achieve.
Being that the Universe is growing because of the big bang, but my question is what is the temperature of the area outside of the Universe? Any science or theory's on that?
For both of you dingbats, the question was what was the temperature of space. Matter within space has a temperture, but space does not. It is neither hot nor cold. Those are properties of matter. The thermometer is matter, the particles mentioned are matter. Space is not matter, it cannot be either hot or cold.
Nice try.
Ask the Van - Illinois Dept. of PhysicsSo the answer really depends on what you mean by vacuum. If you mean whats left when all the atoms etc. are pumped out, yes it still has a temperature of electromagnetic radiation. If you want, though, you could choose to only call that a vacuum if the temperature is zero. By the way, the third law of thermodynamics says nothing can ever get to zero temperature, so by that definition there wouldnt be any vacuums.
As I said before, the only way to get a real vacuum is go outside the universe, because the laws of this universe make it impossible to achieve.
Being that the Universe is growing because of the big bang, but my question is what is the temperature of the area outside of the Universe? Any science or theory's on that?
If it walks like a duck....let's face it, if one wants to believe anything at all, there is no convincing argument. Why not take care of our 'Mother' and not argue over personal beliefs that exist inside heads.
"We challenged two leading British scientists to try to prove the science of global warming to a group of people whose views very loosely reflect national opinions.
And, as if that wasn't tough enough we asked them to do it in my kitchen.
Can they do it? Well, you can see for yourself."
BBC - Ethical Man blog: In praise of scepticism
IPCC - Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change
400,000 year view global warming
James Balog: Time-lapse proof of extreme ice loss | Video on TED.com
If it walks like a duck....let's face it, if one wants to believe anything at all, there is no convincing argument. Why not take care of our 'Mother' and not argue over personal beliefs that exist inside heads.
"We challenged two leading British scientists to try to prove the science of global warming to a group of people whose views very loosely reflect national opinions.
And, as if that wasn't tough enough we asked them to do it in my kitchen.
Can they do it? Well, you can see for yourself."
BBC - Ethical Man blog: In praise of scepticism
IPCC - Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change
400,000 year view global warming
James Balog: Time-lapse proof of extreme ice loss | Video on TED.com
Did they try to win the reward in the OP?
