The Sound of Settled Science

[JoeB131]

Or MAYBE we're not interested in having total POLITICAL prescriptions written for ailments that are not ENTIRELY quantified... For instance, what's the LATEST PREDICTION for the temperature anomaly gonna BE in the year 2100? Go tell what it is and how it's formulated..... Don't sit here and spew....

Oh, I agree, there is a lot of alarmism that comes out of the AGW side, mostly because the Right Wing is too stupid to conceptualize the year 2100.

"Well, I'll done der be dead by then, and Jesus will have probably come back."

But at least you admit that your big fear is more government and not based on any real science.

 

[Wuwei]

Of course...I provided you with a couple...you want to lie now and say that I didn't...that would be your typical MO.

And I gave you the answer to the venus question as well...sorry you didn't like the answer...

As to black body radiation, refer to the second law of thermodynamics...

As far spontaneous processes you know of no process that doesn't violate your own definition.
Nope. You never answered the Venus question. You deflected several times.
I am referring to the second law of thermodynamics. Your version violates Quantum Mechanics and the law of black body radiation.


.

 

[SSDD]

Give it up man.. Those statements are only about the INCREASED efficiency of infra red on DIRECT radiation to objects OTHER then air.. Never blatantly says the "air can NOT be warned" by IR.. Only that the heat capacity of the AIR is much less than the heat capacity of a steakburger or a human body..

The air can be heated by energy...just not in the form of infrared....as if it really mattered since radiation is barely a bit player in the movement of energy through the troposphere. Conduction is the primary mode of energy movement through the troposphere...climate models, war mists, and luke warmers assume wrongly that radiation is the primary means of energy transport through the troposphere which is why the climate models fail so miserably.

If you have some experimental evidence that establishes a coherent link between the absorption of IR by a trace gas and warming in the atmosphere, I would like to see it. My bet, however, is that no such evidence will be forthcoming.

 

[Wuwei]

...says the Klimate Kultist.

Climate Change is based on science. You increase the amount of CO2, more heat is trapped and the temperature goes up.

Got a single piece of observed, measured evidence which establishes a coherent relationship between the absorption of infrared radiation by a gas and warming in the atmosphere? No...you do not. You have an unobservable, unmeasurable, untestable mathematical model...and nothing more.

The infrared heating industry has about a million hours of testing, experiment, observation, measurement, and field installations in both residential and commercial applications that demonstrate conclusively that infrared radiation can not heat the air.

Ionmax Ray Far Infrared Heater warms you up, not the air

"Featuring the latest Far Infrared (FIR) heating technology, the Ionmax Ray is able to heat your body directly, not the air, promising more efficient and targeted heating and energy cost savings"

Infrared Heaters - Intek Corp

" Because far infrared technology does not heat the air of the room directly, it is important to maximize the exposure of available surfaces which then re-emit the warmth to provide an even all round ambient warmth."

Far infrared, by the way, is the sort of infrared that CO2 absorbs...the infrared heating industry can show you plenty of evidence that infrared radiation does not and can not warm the air...can you show a single experiment that shows that it does? Didn't think so.

JoeB is correct.

First, the absorption of radiation by a gas must heat the air. Otherwise where does the energy go? Your statement violates the law of conservation of energy.

Second, rather than quoting the heating industry sales pitches, why don't you quote science sites. Foote's experiments clearly demonstrated that the sun heats CO2.


.

 

[Wuwei]

Give it up man.. Those statements are only about the INCREASED efficiency of infra red on DIRECT radiation to objects OTHER then air.. Never blatantly says the "air can NOT be warned" by IR.. Only that the heat capacity of the AIR is much less than the heat capacity of a steakburger or a human body..

The air can be heated by energy...just not in the form of infrared....as if it really mattered since radiation is barely a bit player in the movement of energy through the troposphere. Conduction is the primary mode of energy movement through the troposphere...climate models, war mists, and luke warmers assume wrongly that radiation is the primary means of energy transport through the troposphere which is why the climate models fail so miserably.

If you have some experimental evidence that establishes a coherent link between the absorption of IR by a trace gas and warming in the atmosphere, I would like to see it. My bet, however, is that no such evidence will be forthcoming.

Flacalten is correct. Experiments to show IR heats CO2 has been shown in science fair type experiments, not to mention Foote's controlled experiment.


.

 

[SSDD]

Well, when you find a universe where CO2 doesn't trap heat, let us know.

And the wait continues for some experimental evidence which establishes a coherent link between the absorption of IR by a trace gas and warming in the atmosphere...or a description of the mechanism by which CO2 "traps" heat.

We all know that you won't be providing anything more than your statements of faith.

Hey, you know what else is settled science. YOu need oxygen to breath... but my guess is that you've been deprived of oxygen to the brain.

And there is abundant observed, measured evidence to support that conclusion....there is not a single piece of observed measured evidence which supports the AGW hypothesis over natural variability...

again, guy, the problem with arguing with conspiracy nuts and "skeptics" is that no matter how many times you prove it's a weather balloon, they will INSIST it's a flying saucer.

It is hilarious to watch you attempt to deflect. Which conspiracy have I suggested? I am asking for observed, measured evidence...I am trying to discuss the science with you but you can't do it can you? You operate on faith... You don't have any sort of actual knowledge...and you have no informed opinion. You have an opinion that was given to you.

when you get 95% of the people who know the subject to agree with you, THEN you have evidence.

If 95% actually believe that mankind is driving the climate, there must be a substantial body of observed, measured evidence that brought them to that conclusion. Can you perhaps bring a single piece of it here? I would greatly like to see it. If there is no observed, measured evidence to support the belief, then one must wonder if the 95% claim is true.

 

[SSDD]

Which science? Science is all about observation, measurement, experiment, and trying to disprove the current hypothesis...got any example of any of those things happening in climate science?

You mean other than the thousands of studies... that you want to pretend you don't exist because your greatest fear in life is the Government might force you to buy a compact instead of an SUV?

Thousands of studies and you haven't read the first one have you? So you have no idea of what is in them. Your argument is based on what someone whom you don't know told you they said. Again...faith...not any sort of actual knowledge.

 

[SSDD]

...says the Klimate Kultist.

Climate Change is based on science. You increase the amount of CO2, more heat is trapped and the temperature goes up.

Got a single piece of observed, measured evidence which establishes a coherent relationship between the absorption of infrared radiation by a gas and warming in the atmosphere? No...you do not. You have an unobservable, unmeasurable, untestable mathematical model...and nothing more.

The infrared heating industry has about a million hours of testing, experiment, observation, measurement, and field installations in both residential and commercial applications that demonstrate conclusively that infrared radiation can not heat the air.

Ionmax Ray Far Infrared Heater warms you up, not the air

"Featuring the latest Far Infrared (FIR) heating technology, the Ionmax Ray is able to heat your body directly, not the air, promising more efficient and targeted heating and energy cost savings"

Infrared Heaters - Intek Corp

" Because far infrared technology does not heat the air of the room directly, it is important to maximize the exposure of available surfaces which then re-emit the warmth to provide an even all round ambient warmth."

Far infrared, by the way, is the sort of infrared that CO2 absorbs...the infrared heating industry can show you plenty of evidence that infrared radiation does not and can not warm the air...can you show a single experiment that shows that it does? Didn't think so.

JoeB is correct.

First, the absorption of radiation by a gas must heat the air. Otherwise where does the energy go? Your statement violates the law of conservation of energy.

Second, rather than quoting the heating industry sales pitches, why don't you quote science sites. Foote's experiments clearly demonstrated that the sun heats CO2.


.

JoeB, like you, doesn't have a clue. Infrared radiation does not warm the air..and the primary mode of energy movement through the troposphere is conduction...

And foote's experiment demonstrated that water vapor could be warmed by IR...and that energy conducts off of metal tubes...and that you are easily fooled by anything that seems to agree with your belief...

 

[SSDD]

Give it up man.. Those statements are only about the INCREASED efficiency of infra red on DIRECT radiation to objects OTHER then air.. Never blatantly says the "air can NOT be warned" by IR.. Only that the heat capacity of the AIR is much less than the heat capacity of a steakburger or a human body..

The air can be heated by energy...just not in the form of infrared....as if it really mattered since radiation is barely a bit player in the movement of energy through the troposphere. Conduction is the primary mode of energy movement through the troposphere...climate models, war mists, and luke warmers assume wrongly that radiation is the primary means of energy transport through the troposphere which is why the climate models fail so miserably.

If you have some experimental evidence that establishes a coherent link between the absorption of IR by a trace gas and warming in the atmosphere, I would like to see it. My bet, however, is that no such evidence will be forthcoming.

Flacalten is correct. Experiments to show IR heats CO2 has been shown in science fair type experiments, not to mention Foote's controlled experiment.


.

Flacalten is not correct...and you are easily fooled...all foote showed was that IR can warm water vapor and that energy can conduct to air from heated metal tubes.. What I find funny is that you wack jobs have to go back to quaint 17th, 18th, and 19th century hobbyist experiments in an effort to find something that seems to agree with you.

 

[JoeB131]

And the wait continues for some experimental evidence which establishes a coherent link between the absorption of IR by a trace gas and warming in the atmosphere...or a description of the mechanism by which CO2 "traps" heat.

We all know that you won't be providing anything more than your statements of faith.

Again, when you show me your degree in Climatology, I'll take you seriously.. Otherwise I don't bother with links.

You know why?

Because the response of the nut is to either

1) Scream "Fake News"

or

2) Pretend they didn't see it.

 

[westwall]

Good, we are tired of anti science, religious nutjobs, like you, relying on scripture for your arguments.

Science is never "settled", anyone who makes that claim parked their brain at the door a long, long time ago.

Well, when you find a universe where CO2 doesn't trap heat, let us know.

Hey, you know what else is settled science. YOu need oxygen to breath... but my guess is that you've been deprived of oxygen to the brain.

Yes...really. If you had a clue, you would either slap us down with evidence, or more likely you would be a skeptic...

again, guy, the problem with arguing with conspiracy nuts and "skeptics" is that no matter how many times you prove it's a weather balloon, they will INSIST it's a flying saucer.

when you get 95% of the people who know the subject to agree with you, THEN you have evidence.

Never said it didn't. You show me a universe where long wave infrared can penetrate water

 

[Wuwei]

JoeB, like you, doesn't have a clue. Infrared radiation does not warm the air..and the primary mode of energy movement through the troposphere is conduction...

And foote's experiment demonstrated that water vapor could be warmed by IR...and that energy conducts off of metal tubes...and that you are easily fooled by anything that seems to agree with your belief...

JoeB knows IR warms the air. You don't. Theory and experiment shows we are correct.
Your ad hominem only proves you have no point. We went over Foote's experiment many times and you could not disprove it. It has nothing to do with energy conducting off metal.


.

 

[Wuwei]

You show me a universe where long wave infrared can penetrate water

What does that have to do with CO2 warming the atmosphere?

.

 

[SSDD]

And the wait continues for some experimental evidence which establishes a coherent link between the absorption of IR by a trace gas and warming in the atmosphere...or a description of the mechanism by which CO2 "traps" heat.

We all know that you won't be providing anything more than your statements of faith.

Again, when you show me your degree in Climatology, I'll take you seriously.. Otherwise I don't bother with links.

You know why?

Because the response of the nut is to either

1) Scream "Fake News"

or

2) Pretend they didn't see it.

One doesn't need a degree in the soft science of climatology to know that there isn't the first piece of observed, measured evidence that supports the AGW hypothesis over natural variability....all that is needed is some critical thinking skills and the will to actually read the literature...

I have both in spades which is why I can state categorically that there is not the first piece of observed measured evidence which supports the AGW hypothesis over natural variability anywhere, in any company with perfect confidence that no one is ever going to embarrass me by actually producing any such evidence...

I get the same response from all the warmers...just like you...excuse after excuse for not producing any such evidence...and name calling, and talk about the consensus.

Do you have any idea how stupid holding up consensus as if it were evidence is? Can you name any other branch of science in which "consensus" is offered up as evidence that the prevailing hypothesis is correct? Didn't think so. In any other branch of science in which observation of the subject is possible, if you question the prevailing hypothesis, you get bombarded with observed, measured evidence from every direction...more evidence than you would ever care to look at...but not so with climate science. You get talk of consensus..and you get called names...what you don't get is actual evidence that supports the hypothesis... Do you possess enough critical thinking skills to even wonder why?

 

[SSDD]

You show me a universe where long wave infrared can penetrate water

What does that have to do with CO2 warming the atmosphere?

.

the claim is that IR back radiation warms the oceans...and not just at the surface, but hundreds of meters deep....keep up...

 

[Wuwei]

the claim is that IR back radiation warms the oceans...and not just at the surface, but hundreds of meters deep....keep up...

You are misreading what is claimed. The claim is that shortwave energy such as the visible region of light warms the ocean. It can penetrate the ocean down to a couple hundred meters and warm it .

Greenhouse gases significantly prevent the ocean from losing too much heat.

If anyone claims differently they are wrong.


.

 

[Wuwei]

....all that is needed is some critical thinking skills and the will to actually read the literature...

I have both in spades

"I have both in spades"

I totally disagree. You certainly have bluster, but that's all it is.


.

 

[SSDD]

JoeB, like you, doesn't have a clue. Infrared radiation does not warm the air..and the primary mode of energy movement through the troposphere is conduction...

And foote's experiment demonstrated that water vapor could be warmed by IR...and that energy conducts off of metal tubes...and that you are easily fooled by anything that seems to agree with your belief...

JoeB knows IR warms the air. You don't. Theory and experiment shows we are correct.
Your ad hominem only proves you have no point. We went over Foote's experiment many times and you could not disprove it. It has nothing to do with energy conducting off metal.


.

What a dupe...is there any bit of hobbyist science that won't fool you? Here...from Foote's paper...

The cylinders were actually glass...not metal..and she exposed them to direct sunlight..

Tell me genius....how much IR flux in the far IR bands are in the solar spectrum? And like I said...the cylinders were glass. We know that glass can not transmit IR beyond about 4 microns and the solar spectrum is considerably weakened at 2 microns..

She didn't observe any absorption of IR in her experiment...and the temperature differences she noted were due to the higher partial pressure in the CO2 cylinder...but hey...it is good enough to fool you...and what a low bar it is. What a dupe...You never fail to provide a chuckle...

 

[SSDD]

....all that is needed is some critical thinking skills and the will to actually read the literature...

I have both in spades

"I have both in spades"

I totally disagree. You certainly have bluster, but that's all it is.


.

Since you are a dupe and an idiot, excuse me if I don't put much creedence in your opinion...

 

[westwall]

You show me a universe where long wave infrared can penetrate water

What does that have to do with CO2 warming the atmosphere?

.

Fuck dude, do you know anything at all?