What explanation of the Greenhouse Effect do you use?

[toobfreak]

I'm still waiting for you tell us what science education YOU have. Any?

Why would you care about the education I claim to have? I certainly ignore your claim to be a trained physicist.

STILL won't answer a simple question. That pretty much sums up what I expected. Never mind I've talked physics a hundred times here in the past 2 years with Tards like you and everytime they ALWAYS do two things:

1. Deny you know anything without any basis for that belief.
2. Run from any kind of legitimate challenge.

I'm not running away from anything. I'm refusing to give personal information on a public message board. Post up some copies of your degrees and I may consider doing the same.

Right, right, right. Another Tard Bullshitter. I have a Masters in Physics and a Bachelors in Electronics. I spent a good portion of my life designing global telecom and practically my entire life studying astronomy and particle physics. But you can't give us any "personal" information. Just the other week I challenged another Tard here who claimed to have had "many" businesses including still having a consulting business, so I challenged him to show us some official papers, ANY of the myriad papers that go hand in hand in owning a business, personal info redacted of course. HE NEVER DID. So just to prove my point that at least I was on the up and up, I produced copies of my two old state tax licenses, certificates of registration that are on hand, that ONLY the owner of a business would have, along with personally identifiable objects in the photo to prove these were not taken off the web or something.

IN MY TWO FREEKING YEARS HERE I've run into more bullshitters than in my entire life; armchair experts in everything; at least a half dozen yahoos here that all claimed this or that, but if there is one thing I can smell is a liar. I know when someone KNOWS science and when they are just blowing smoke and you've already proven yourself a LIAR.

Your "science degree" comes from reading books and web articles and I have to go eat and rest now, but I'll be back later to see if you answer my other post. If not, I just might take you apart piece by piece. If there is one thing I know, it is optics, energy, solar processes, et al., and you've walked right into a trap on that one butthole. When I come back, I'm gonna TAKE YOU APART. I don't claim to be any sort of expert in weather, climate or atmospherics, but I know physics, I know optics, I know energy, and I know a great deal about the production of energy in a star, its aging, etc., and we're going to find out what you REALLY know.

 

[IanC]

I'm still waiting for you tell us what science education YOU have. Any?

Why would you care about the education I claim to have? I certainly ignore your claim to be a trained physicist.

STILL won't answer a simple question. That pretty much sums up what I expected. Never mind I've talked physics a hundred times here in the past 2 years with Tards like you and everytime they ALWAYS do two things:

1. Deny you know anything without any basis for that belief.
2. Run from any kind of legitimate challenge.

I'm not running away from anything. I'm refusing to give personal information on a public message board. Post up some copies of your degrees and I may consider doing the same.

Right, right, right. Another Tard Bullshitter. I have a Masters in Physics and a Bachelors in Electronics. I spent a good portion of my life designing global telecom and practically my entire life studying astronomy and particle physics. But you can't give us any "personal" information. Just the other week I challenged another Tard here who claimed to have had "many" businesses including still having a consulting business, so I challenged him to show us some official papers, ANY of the myriad papers that go hand in hand in owning a business, personal info redacted of course. HE NEVER DID. So just to prove my point that at least I was on the up and up, I produced copies of my two old state tax licenses, certificates of registration that are on hand, that ONLY the owner of a business would have, along with personally identifiable objects in the photo to prove these were not taken off the web or something.

IN MY TWO FREEKING YEARS HERE I've run into more bullshitters than in my entire life; armchair experts in everything; at least a half dozen yahoos here that all claimed this or that, but if there is one thing I can smell is a liar. I know when someone KNOWS science and when they are just blowing smoke and you've already proven yourself a LIAR.

Your "science degree" comes from reading books and web articles and I have to go eat and rest now, but I'll be back later to see if you answer my other post. If not, I just might take you apart piece by piece. If there is one thing I know, it is optics, energy, solar processes, et al., and you've walked right into a trap on that one butthole. When I come back, I'm gonna TAKE YOU APART. I don't claim to be any sort of expert in weather, climate or atmospherics, but I know physics, I know optics, I know energy, and I know a great deal about the production of energy in a star, its aging, etc., and we're going to find out what you REALLY know.

Looking forward to it.

 

[Wuwei]

Climate science says that the earth has WARMED 1.5 degrees since 1820. They use the word warmed...and no matter how you twist it, slower cooling does not equal warming.

That's right the earth has warmed. And yes slower cooling is not warming.

You are confusing the warming of the earth over the decades with the greenhouse action in the atmosphere over the microseconds.

Let me spell it out. The sun is pumping heat to the earth surface. The earth radiates that heat. If there were no GHG's the oceans would freeze because of the earth radiation. GHG's limit the upward escape of radiation. The oceans don't freeze. The earth is warmer than it would be if there were no GHGs.

I was purposefully a little sloppy in this explanation for succinctness.


.

 

[IanC]

The atmosphere serves as the MECHANISM by which the greenhouse takes effect. It first takes sunlight and converts it into IR radiation, then acts as an insulating layer to hold it in from escaping back out into space

The same guy who made this statement called me a 'tard.

And he wonders why people don't take him seriously.

 

[IanC]

Climate science says that the earth has WARMED 1.5 degrees since 1820. They use the word warmed...and no matter how you twist it, slower cooling does not equal warming.

That's right the earth has warmed. And yes slower cooling is not warming.

You are confusing the warming of the earth over the decades with the greenhouse action in the atmosphere over the microseconds.

Let me spell it out. The sun is pumping heat to the earth surface. The earth radiates that heat. If there were no GHG's the oceans would freeze because of the earth radiation. GHG's limit the upward escape of radiation. The oceans don't freeze. The earth is warmer than it would be if there were no GHGs.

I was purposefully a little sloppy in this explanation for succinctness.


.

We need better nomenclature to differentiate between 'direct warming' and 'causing conditions that lead to warming'.

 

[Wuwei]

As with SSDD the hubris is running rampant.


.

 

[Wuwei]

Climate science says that the earth has WARMED 1.5 degrees since 1820. They use the word warmed...and no matter how you twist it, slower cooling does not equal warming.

That's right the earth has warmed. And yes slower cooling is not warming.

You are confusing the warming of the earth over the decades with the greenhouse action in the atmosphere over the microseconds.

Let me spell it out. The sun is pumping heat to the earth surface. The earth radiates that heat. If there were no GHG's the oceans would freeze because of the earth radiation. GHG's limit the upward escape of radiation. The oceans don't freeze. The earth is warmer than it would be if there were no GHGs.

I was purposefully a little sloppy in this explanation for succinctness.


.

We need better nomenclature to differentiate between 'direct warming' and 'causing conditions that lead to warming'.

Yes we do. It has caused no end to the confusion of those less educated in science.

.

 

[Marion Morrison]

The one that involves God and not some intelligent Limey dude that's been indoctrinated by his country's education system. The theory of evolution is wrong!

 

[Marion Morrison]

I'm still waiting for you tell us what science education YOU have. Any?

Why would you care about the education I claim to have? I certainly ignore your claim to be a trained physicist.

STILL won't answer a simple question. That pretty much sums up what I expected. Never mind I've talked physics a hundred times here in the past 2 years with Tards like you and everytime they ALWAYS do two things:

1. Deny you know anything without any basis for that belief.
2. Run from any kind of legitimate challenge.

I'm not running away from anything. I'm refusing to give personal information on a public message board. Post up some copies of your degrees and I may consider doing the same.

I know you have a doctorate, and-?


Why are you here? You do have your own forum and stuff. I'm not trying to be a dick, and actually I like ya, but you have been heavily indoctrinated with your UK edumacation.

 

[sparky]

Maybe you folks should spent some time with nature
it's speaking volumes for those that hear

~S~

 

[Marion Morrison]

Maybe you folks should spent some time with nature
it's speaking volumes for those that hear

~S~

I'd love to, but I have to purchase several state licenses in order to do that. That's kind of against the laws of nature.

 

[IanC]

I'm still waiting for you tell us what science education YOU have. Any?

Why would you care about the education I claim to have? I certainly ignore your claim to be a trained physicist.

STILL won't answer a simple question. That pretty much sums up what I expected. Never mind I've talked physics a hundred times here in the past 2 years with Tards like you and everytime they ALWAYS do two things:

1. Deny you know anything without any basis for that belief.
2. Run from any kind of legitimate challenge.

I'm not running away from anything. I'm refusing to give personal information on a public message board. Post up some copies of your degrees and I may consider doing the same.

I know you have a doctorate, and-?


Why are you here? You do have your own forum and stuff. I'm not trying to be a dick, and actually I like ya, but you have been heavily indoctrinated with your UK edumacation.

Hahahahaha. It's hard to drop the British educational accent once you pick it up.

 

[Marion Morrison]

I'm still waiting for you tell us what science education YOU have. Any?

Why would you care about the education I claim to have? I certainly ignore your claim to be a trained physicist.

STILL won't answer a simple question. That pretty much sums up what I expected. Never mind I've talked physics a hundred times here in the past 2 years with Tards like you and everytime they ALWAYS do two things:

1. Deny you know anything without any basis for that belief.
2. Run from any kind of legitimate challenge.

I'm not running away from anything. I'm refusing to give personal information on a public message board. Post up some copies of your degrees and I may consider doing the same.

I know you have a doctorate, and-?


Why are you here? You do have your own forum and stuff. I'm not trying to be a dick, and actually I like ya, but you have been heavily indoctrinated with your UK edumacation.

Hahahahaha. It's hard to drop the British educational accent once you pick it up.

mmkk, utress

I don't doubt it is for ya.
Hey man, but what's up with that IPC tech though?

 

[cnm]

Never mind I've talked physics a hundred times here in the past 2 years with Tards like you

Do you always talk about inputs to and outputs from closed systems?

 

[cnm]

I'm still waiting for you tell us what science education YOU have. Any?

Why would you care about the education I claim to have? I certainly ignore your claim to be a trained physicist.

STILL won't answer a simple question. That pretty much sums up what I expected. Never mind I've talked physics a hundred times here in the past 2 years with Tards like you and everytime they ALWAYS do two things:

1. Deny you know anything without any basis for that belief.
2. Run from any kind of legitimate challenge.

I'm not running away from anything. I'm refusing to give personal information on a public message board. Post up some copies of your degrees and I may consider doing the same.

Right, right, right. Another Tard Bullshitter. I have a Masters in Physics and a Bachelors in Electronics. I spent a good portion of my life designing global telecom and practically my entire life studying astronomy and particle physics. But you can't give us any "personal" information. Just the other week I challenged another Tard here who claimed to have had "many" businesses including still having a consulting business, so I challenged him to show us some official papers, ANY of the myriad papers that go hand in hand in owning a business, personal info redacted of course. HE NEVER DID. So just to prove my point that at least I was on the up and up, I produced copies of my two old state tax licenses, certificates of registration that are on hand, that ONLY the owner of a business would have, along with personally identifiable objects in the photo to prove these were not taken off the web or something.

IN MY TWO FREEKING YEARS HERE I've run into more bullshitters than in my entire life; armchair experts in everything; at least a half dozen yahoos here that all claimed this or that, but if there is one thing I can smell is a liar. I know when someone KNOWS science and when they are just blowing smoke and you've already proven yourself a LIAR.

Your "science degree" comes from reading books and web articles and I have to go eat and rest now, but I'll be back later to see if you answer my other post. If not, I just might take you apart piece by piece. If there is one thing I know, it is optics, energy, solar processes, et al., and you've walked right into a trap on that one butthole. When I come back, I'm gonna TAKE YOU APART. I don't claim to be any sort of expert in weather, climate or atmospherics, but I know physics, I know optics, I know energy, and I know a great deal about the production of energy in a star, its aging, etc., and we're going to find out what you REALLY know.

Looking forward to it.

#Me too

 

[Olde Europe]

The atmosphere serves as the MECHANISM by which the greenhouse takes effect. It first takes sunlight and converts it into IR radiation, then acts as an insulating layer to hold it in from escaping back out into space

The same guy who made this statement called me a 'tard.

And he wonders why people don't take him seriously.

Serious question, Ian: Why on earth don't you help him to clean up that statement? That way we all might learn something about the issue, and arrive at something like a clearer depiction of what the GHE really is. For, as of now, all we learned was about your ability to heap contempt on others.

Yes, it isn't the atmosphere that "converts" sunlight into IR radiation. Simply put, it's the surface that absorbs sunlight, warms up, and emits IR radiation, which is then absorbed by the GHGs in the atmosphere.

 

[IanC]

Serious question, Ian: Why on earth don't you help him to clean up that statement? That way we all might learn something about the issue, and arrive at something like a clearer depiction of what the GHE really is. For, as of now, all we learned was about your ability to heap contempt on others.

I have talked about the greenhouse effect dozens of times. I started this thread because climate science and the media have done a piss poor job of presenting the explanation of it. I am not really interested in private individuals' personal descriptions. Although that is actually quite interesting.

I am sorry that you feel I am being contemptuous of others. Toobfreak was insulting to me so I showed the same amount of respect back to him.

Is there some specific questions that you have about the GHE that you wanted to discuss?

 

[Wuwei]

It seems the problem here is that some people treat this forum and this thread as a game. The object is to win the game and save face. A lesser important objective to understand the science behind GW.


.

 

[Olde Europe]

I have talked about the greenhouse effect dozens of times. I started this thread because climate science and the media have done a piss poor job of presenting the explanation of it. I am not really interested in private individuals' personal descriptions. Although that is actually quite interesting.

I am sorry that you feel I am being contemptuous of others. Toobfreak was insulting to me so I showed the same amount of respect back to him.

Is there some specific questions that you have about the GHE that you wanted to discuss?

ToobFREAK is a brawler; it's probably best ignore the bellowing. On the other hand, there is something to learn from his misconception, in the way how errors, discovered and corrected, advance and expand our knowledge. I'd say, given your interest in a valid, comprehensible layman's explanation of the GHE, there was a chance to advance your aim. Reacting in kind to the Freak meant you missed that chance. While politically on the pretty far right, at least the Freak isn't a brain-dead denialingdong guzzling at the denialingdong trough. That's welcome, no?

 

[SSDD]

That's right the earth has warmed. And yes slower cooling is not warming.

You are confusing the warming of the earth over the decades with the greenhouse action in the atmosphere over the microseconds.

I am not confusing anything...you on the other hand confuse and interpret everything...no amount of slower cooling will ever equal a temperature increase...and climate science says that the earth is warming due to the effects of CO2 and the effect that CO2 has, according to climate science is that it causes the earth to reabsorb its own radiation causing warming...

Your personal made up GH hypothesis is bullshit just as the mainstream GH hypothesis is bullshit...