Arctic Ice

[CrusaderFrank]

Sorry hairball...but you are wrong...as usual.

How about you explain why, instead of just crying at me?

Have already explained to you hairball...sorry you didn't like it and won't accept the facts since they shoot down your craziness...but for those who are as uninformed as you but actually interested in the truth, I will explain again.

The FLIR detects thermal energy and via a mathematical model, converts it to an image....if the emitter is warmer than the camera's detector, the thermal energy detected by the sensor shows up as an image....The relatively inexpensive uncooled FLIR devices incorporate a microbolometer..it is an array of temperature sensors....point them at something and they detect the amount, and rate of change of temperature...they are not receiving IR...they are detecting the rate and amount of temperature change...high tech thermopiles...and they create an image based on that information....if you point it at an object or region that is cooler than the camera, the detectors start cooling off...if the area or object that you are pointing it at is cooler than the camera, but not a uniform temperature, the detectors cool off at different rates and an image is created from that data...but the image is of very poor quality since it is nothing more than the output of a mathematical model creating a picture from the amount and rate of temperature changes of a bunch of very small, very sensitive thermopiles.

In the cooled cameras, the arrays are cooled to a very low temperature and as such are actually detecting incoming radiation as opposed to the uncooled cameras which, when pointed at a cooler object are measuring the amount and rate of cooling of an array of very small, very sensitive thermopiles...this accounts for the vast difference in image quality...

Here is an image made with a cooled camera of hand print on a wall

Here is the same handprint made with an uncooled camera.

The image made with the cooled camera is actually recording incoming radiation and as a result is quite sharp...the image made with the uncooled camera is measuring the amount and rate of cooling of an array of temperature sensors and is mathematically fabricating the image from that data and as a result, the quality of the image is not even approaching the quality of the cooled camera.

My god SSDD you are one hell of a liar. You tried to sneak one past us without a link to your source.
Yes, your top photo is a cooled camera image of a hand print on a wall.
However your second photo is also a cooled camera image of the same hand print 2 minutes later.

Here is the photo of an uncooled camera that should be compared to the top photo. It is very sharp but noisier, as would be expected.

No wonder you didn't give a link. It would not have supported your lie. Here is the link.
High-Speed Thermal Imaging for Automation Applications | 2015-05-05 | Quality Magazine
Click the thumbnails and read the captions.

You are now stooping to unconscionable lies to support your fantasy.

SSDD just grabbed the wrong image, the next image is of the uncooled camera.

 

[CrusaderFrank]

Sorry hairball...but you are wrong...as usual.

How about you explain why, instead of just crying at me?

Have already explained to you hairball...sorry you didn't like it and won't accept the facts since they shoot down your craziness...but for those who are as uninformed as you but actually interested in the truth, I will explain again.

The FLIR detects thermal energy and via a mathematical model, converts it to an image....if the emitter is warmer than the camera's detector, the thermal energy detected by the sensor shows up as an image....The relatively inexpensive uncooled FLIR devices incorporate a microbolometer..it is an array of temperature sensors....point them at something and they detect the amount, and rate of change of temperature...they are not receiving IR...they are detecting the rate and amount of temperature change...high tech thermopiles...and they create an image based on that information....if you point it at an object or region that is cooler than the camera, the detectors start cooling off...if the area or object that you are pointing it at is cooler than the camera, but not a uniform temperature, the detectors cool off at different rates and an image is created from that data...but the image is of very poor quality since it is nothing more than the output of a mathematical model creating a picture from the amount and rate of temperature changes of a bunch of very small, very sensitive thermopiles.

In the cooled cameras, the arrays are cooled to a very low temperature and as such are actually detecting incoming radiation as opposed to the uncooled cameras which, when pointed at a cooler object are measuring the amount and rate of cooling of an array of very small, very sensitive thermopiles...this accounts for the vast difference in image quality...

Here is an image made with a cooled camera of hand print on a wall

Here is the same handprint made with an uncooled camera.

The image made with the cooled camera is actually recording incoming radiation and as a result is quite sharp...the image made with the uncooled camera is measuring the amount and rate of cooling of an array of temperature sensors and is mathematically fabricating the image from that data and as a result, the quality of the image is not even approaching the quality of the cooled camera.

My god SSDD you are one hell of a liar. You tried to sneak one past us without a link to your source.
Yes, your top photo is a cooled camera image of a hand print on a wall.
However your second photo is also a cooled camera image of the same hand print 2 minutes later.

Here is the photo of an uncooled camera that should be compared to the top photo. It is very sharp but noisier, as would be expected.

No wonder you didn't give a link. It would not have supported your lie. Here is the link.
High-Speed Thermal Imaging for Automation Applications | 2015-05-05 | Quality Magazine
Click the thumbnails and read the captions.

You are now stooping to unconscionable lies to support your fantasy.

Hmmm, you seem very familiar

 

[SSDD]

The FLIR detects thermal energy and via a mathematical model, converts it to an image...

Bullshit. The new cameras contain no thermopiles. You lying and saying they do doesn't change that fact. It just confirms that you lie about everything.

They have an array of microbolometers which are nothing more than very small very sensitive thermopiles...sorry hairball...you have been wrong about this topic every time you bring it up.

The new cameras use CCD's or related technology. Those don't care what the temperature is. They work by quantum effects, when a photon sets off a cascade.

I know you wish that were true, but it isn't...if the instrument is cooled, then it receives any IR that is warmer than the array...cheaper instruments that are not cooled create an image based on the amount and rate of change of the array of microbolometers...ie thermopiles.

Your idiot theory says that "cool" photons can't hit the CCD's, so such CCD-based cameras can't possibly work.

They only receive IR that is warmer than the array...like it or not, that is how it is..once again warmer wackos are fooled by instrumentation

 

[SSDD]

Sorry hairball...but you are wrong...as usual.

How about you explain why, instead of just crying at me?

Have already explained to you hairball...sorry you didn't like it and won't accept the facts since they shoot down your craziness...but for those who are as uninformed as you but actually interested in the truth, I will explain again.

The FLIR detects thermal energy and via a mathematical model, converts it to an image....if the emitter is warmer than the camera's detector, the thermal energy detected by the sensor shows up as an image....The relatively inexpensive uncooled FLIR devices incorporate a microbolometer..it is an array of temperature sensors....point them at something and they detect the amount, and rate of change of temperature...they are not receiving IR...they are detecting the rate and amount of temperature change...high tech thermopiles...and they create an image based on that information....if you point it at an object or region that is cooler than the camera, the detectors start cooling off...if the area or object that you are pointing it at is cooler than the camera, but not a uniform temperature, the detectors cool off at different rates and an image is created from that data...but the image is of very poor quality since it is nothing more than the output of a mathematical model creating a picture from the amount and rate of temperature changes of a bunch of very small, very sensitive thermopiles.

In the cooled cameras, the arrays are cooled to a very low temperature and as such are actually detecting incoming radiation as opposed to the uncooled cameras which, when pointed at a cooler object are measuring the amount and rate of cooling of an array of very small, very sensitive thermopiles...this accounts for the vast difference in image quality...

Here is an image made with a cooled camera of hand print on a wall

Here is the same handprint made with an uncooled camera.

The image made with the cooled camera is actually recording incoming radiation and as a result is quite sharp...the image made with the uncooled camera is measuring the amount and rate of cooling of an array of temperature sensors and is mathematically fabricating the image from that data and as a result, the quality of the image is not even approaching the quality of the cooled camera.

My god SSDD you are one hell of a liar. You tried to sneak one past us without a link to your source.
Yes, your top photo is a cooled camera image of a hand print on a wall.
However your second photo is also a cooled camera image of the same hand print 2 minutes later.

Here is the photo of an uncooled camera that should be compared to the top photo. It is very sharp but noisier, as would be expected.

No wonder you didn't give a link. It would not have supported your lie. Here is the link.
High-Speed Thermal Imaging for Automation Applications | 2015-05-05 | Quality Magazine
Click the thumbnails and read the captions.

You are now stooping to unconscionable lies to support your fantasy.

SSDD just grabbed the wrong image, the next image is of the uncooled camera.

Lucky I didn't misplace a comma or a semicolon...they would have had the glassy eyed chanting police coming to visit me...

 

[Crick]

Why is the background of the image from the cooled camera devoid of image data?

 

[RollingThunder]

The scientific data about the loss of sea ice from the Arctic and Antarctica, from the National Snow and Ice Data Center, that makes nonsense out of the denier cultists' deranged anti-science, reality-challenged, fact-free rants....

Arctic sea ice extent for February 2017 averaged 14.28 million square kilometers (5.51 million square miles), the lowest February extent in the 38-year satellite record. This is 40,000 square kilometers (15,400 square miles) below February 2016, the previous lowest extent for the month, and 1.18 million square kilometers (455,600 square miles) below the February 1981 to 2010 long term average.

Monthly February ice extent for 1979 to 2017 shows a decline of 3 percent per decade. - Credit: National Snow and Ice Data Center

The graph above shows Antarctic sea ice extent as of March 5, 2017, along with daily ice extent data for four previous years. 2016 to 2017 is shown in blue, 2015 to 2016 in green, 2014 to 2015 in orange, 2013 to 2014 in brown, and 2012 to 2013 in purple. The 1981 to 2010 median is in dark gray. The gray areas around the median line show the interquartile and interdecile ranges of the data. Sea Ice Index data. - Credit: National Snow and Ice Data Center

Antarctic sea ice is nearing its annual minimum extent and continues to track at record low levels for this time of year. On February 13, Antarctic sea ice extent dropped to 2.29 million square kilometers (884,000 square miles), setting a record lowest extent in the satellite era. By the end of February, extent had dropped even further to 2.13 million square kilometers (822,400 square miles). Sea ice extent was particularly low in the Amundsen Sea, which remained nearly ice-free throughout February. Typically, sea ice in February extends at least a couple hundred kilometers along the entire coastline of the Amundsen.

 

[SSDD]

Your link is to a denier cult wesite that has some idiot denier claiming a lot of unsupported BS about IR thermometers. Meaningless garbage only suitable for deceiving retards like you. That IS NOT what the manufacturer says.....or what all of the scientists say.

Yeah, why would a thermometer manufacturer construe instruments, with the purpose of measuring the temperature of some object, that avoid wavelengths at which the main GHGs are emitting? Of course, GHG emissions would contaminate the measurement. So, this fact confirms the GHE, and the stupid troll fell for another Denialingdong ruse.

Oh, BTW: One ought not feed trolls.

Typical of warmers...when one myth is destroyed...create an alternate myth...You apparently assume that only downward IR would interfere with the measurement of an object through the atmosphere...while there is no downward radiation, there is plenty of upward radiation leaving the surface that would interfere with accurate measurement of an object through the atmosphere...

They say that if you are a hammer, everything looks like a nail...it appears that if you are a member of the glassy eyed chanting cult, everything...and I mean EVERYTHING looks like AGW...or the cause of AGW.

And yet once again...warmers demonstrate how easily they are fooled by instrumentation...is it genuine ignorance, or are you just that willing to be fooled?

 

[SSDD]

Why is the background of the image from the cooled camera devoid of image data?

Is this really that far over your head? If it is a uniform temperature, neither a cooled nor uncooled instrument would be able to create an image....if the background is devoid of temperature variation, then the thermopile array would also be devoid of temperature variation...and the only image the processor could create from that is none...

 

[mamooth]

They have an array of microbolometers

Most of them don't use such technology.

Thermographic camera - Wikipedia
---
Uncooled detectors are mostly based on pyroelectric and ferroelectric materials or microbolometer technology.
---

See the word "or" there? That means IR cameras exist that use pyroelectric and ferroelecric materials, which do not use temperature.

Therefore, your theory is demonstrably crap.

 

[CrusaderFrank]

They have an array of microbolometers

Most of them don't use such technology.

Thermographic camera - Wikipedia
---
Uncooled detectors are mostly based on pyroelectric and ferroelectric materials or microbolometer technology.
---

See the word "or" there? That means IR cameras exist that use pyroelectric and ferroelecric materials, which do not use temperature.

Therefore, your theory is demonstrably crap.

The theory is crap because its backed up by Wikipedia?

 

[RollingThunder]

The scientific data about the loss of sea ice from the Arctic and Antarctica, from the National Snow and Ice Data Center, that makes nonsense out of the denier cultists' deranged anti-science, reality-challenged, fact-free rants....

Arctic sea ice extent for February 2017 averaged 14.28 million square kilometers (5.51 million square miles), the lowest February extent in the 38-year satellite record. This is 40,000 square kilometers (15,400 square miles) below February 2016, the previous lowest extent for the month, and 1.18 million square kilometers (455,600 square miles) below the February 1981 to 2010 long term average.

Monthly February ice extent for 1979 to 2017 shows a decline of 3 percent per decade. - Credit: National Snow and Ice Data Center

The graph above shows Antarctic sea ice extent as of March 5, 2017, along with daily ice extent data for four previous years. 2016 to 2017 is shown in blue, 2015 to 2016 in green, 2014 to 2015 in orange, 2013 to 2014 in brown, and 2012 to 2013 in purple. The 1981 to 2010 median is in dark gray. The gray areas around the median line show the interquartile and interdecile ranges of the data. Sea Ice Index data. - Credit: National Snow and Ice Data Center

Antarctic sea ice is nearing its annual minimum extent and continues to track at record low levels for this time of year. On February 13, Antarctic sea ice extent dropped to 2.29 million square kilometers (884,000 square miles), setting a record lowest extent in the satellite era. By the end of February, extent had dropped even further to 2.13 million square kilometers (822,400 square miles). Sea ice extent was particularly low in the Amundsen Sea, which remained nearly ice-free throughout February. Typically, sea ice in February extends at least a couple hundred kilometers along the entire coastline of the Amundsen.

The denier cultusts' myths about polar ice were thoroughly debunked....but they are too brainwashed and delusional to recognize that fact. 'So sad'.

 

[SSDD]

They have an array of microbolometers

Most of them don't use such technology.

Thermographic camera - Wikipedia
---
Uncooled detectors are mostly based on pyroelectric and ferroelectric materials or microbolometer technology.
---

See the word "or" there? That means IR cameras exist that use pyroelectric and ferroelecric materials, which do not use temperature.

Therefore, your theory is demonstrably crap.

You are beyond stupid hairball...do you know that?

Here, from your thermographic camera link at wiki..

Uncooled thermal cameras use a sensor operating at ambient temperature, or a sensor stabilized at a temperature close to ambient using small temperature control elements. Modern uncooled detectors all use sensors that work by the change of resistance, voltage or current when heated by infrared radiation. These changes are then measured and compared to the values at the operating temperature of the sensor.

Are you not able to read even easy words and grasp what they mean? It says right there...using small TEMPERATURE CONTROL ELEMENTS" i.e. thermopiles...modern uncooled detectors WORK BY THE CHANGE OF RESISTANCE, VOLTAGE, OR CURRENT, when heated by infrared radiation...that also means that when they are cooling due to the fact that the source is cooler than the camera itself...The thermopiles change temperature, and the rate and amount of change is then converted into voltage which is then interpreted into a picture via software...

Here is a pyroelectric sensor...it is a thermopile...it operates based on temperature changes, both positive and negative...

Here, from the Handbook of Modern Sensors: Physics, Designs, and Applications; Jacob Fraden.... The passage below is on page 307, section 7.8...the page is visible through google books.

Note that infrared flux which is focused by the lens on the surface of the sensing element is inversely proportional to the squared distance (L) from the object and direction proportional to the areas of the lens and object. For a multifaceted lens, the lens area a relates only to a single facet and not to the total lens area.

If the object is warmer than the sensor, the flux (phi), is positive. If the object is cooler, the flux becomes negative, meaning it changes its direction: the heat goes from the sensor to the object. This may happen when a person walks into a warm room from the cold outside. Surface of her clothing will be cooler than the sensor and thus the flux becomes negative. In the following discussion, we will consider that the object is warmer than the sensor and the flux is positive

Ferroelectric sensors work on the same principle but may be incorporated into a film which effectively increases the number of sensors in the array....the operation is still the same..postive flux when the source is warmer than the film...negative flux when the source is cooler...that is to say...once again...when the object is warmer, the energy is moving from the object to the sensor...when the object is cooler, the energy moves from the sensor to the object. The fact that there can be more sensors in the array due to them being in the form of a film, a more resolved image is possible.

So once again hairball, you are dead wrong...energy does not move from cool to warm and uncooled IR cameras register the cooling of the sensor and produce an image when they are pointed at objects that are cooler than the camera...as I have been telling you for quite some time now...

One can only wonder how long before you forget that you have been given proof that you are wrong in the form of a respected text on the topic and repeat the same old lie again and again, that the sensors are receiving energy from the cooler object..

 

[SSDD]

They have an array of microbolometers

Most of them don't use such technology.

Thermographic camera - Wikipedia
---
Uncooled detectors are mostly based on pyroelectric and ferroelectric materials or microbolometer technology.
---

See the word "or" there? That means IR cameras exist that use pyroelectric and ferroelecric materials, which do not use temperature.

Therefore, your theory is demonstrably crap.

You need better coordination with your Wuwei doppelganger

It amazes me that the hairball just doesn't seem to get it...she is so convinced that energy moves from cool to warm that she refuses to accept the fact that she is wrong...I provided her with a quote from a text Handbook of modern sensors: Physics, designs, and applications which state explicitly that when the object is cooler than the camera, the IR flux is negative..that the energy is moving from the sensor array in the camera to the cooler object..and that the image is made by measuring the speed and amount of heat loss from the sensor array when the object is colder than the camera.

Now watch and see how long before she again makes the claim that IR cameras are proof that energy is moving from cooler objects to the warmer camera

 

[Old Rocks]

LOL Smart photons by any other name still smell the same. LOL

 

[CrusaderFrank]

LOL Smart photons by any other name still smell the same. LOL

How does follow the rules of the road make them "smart" Is a bowling ball "smart because it falls to the ground when releases rather than float off into space?

 

[SSDD]

LOL Smart photons by any other name still smell the same. LOL

Not surprised that that simple explanation was over your head rocks...the crayon version is that if the object is warmer than the camera, the sensor warms up and an image is created by the amount and rate of the sensor in the camera....if the object is cooler, then the sensor starts cooling off...that is because it is losing energy to the cooler object and the image is created using the amount and rate of cooling of the sensor.

and again...smart photons are all yours...because you seem to believe that they must be intelligent in order to obey the laws of physics...just one more logical fallacy on your part while the actual science of how the IR camera works, supports my position...

 

[SSDD]

LOL Smart photons by any other name still smell the same. LOL

How does follow the rules of the road make them "smart" Is a bowling ball "smart because it falls to the ground when releases rather than float off into space?

According to rocks any particle or matter must be smart enough to know the physical law and intimidated enough to actually obey...except for CO2...it doesn't give a rat's ass about the laws of thermodynamics and radiates wherever it damned well pleases and if it violates the laws of thermodynamics...too damned bad for the laws of thermodynamics.

 

[Old Rocks]

Now SSo DDumb, your betters have repeatedly tried to educate you in the basics of radiative physics, all too no avail. I do not even intend to try.

 

[SSDD]

Now SSo DDumb, your betters have repeatedly tried to educate you in the basics of radiative physics, all too no avail. I do not even intend to try.

Poor old dumb as a bag of rocks.....you would be funny if you weren't so sad...

Here, from The Handbook of Modern Sensors: Physics, Designs, and Applications read this passage and see if you can tell me what it means...my bet is that you can't, and it is pointless to provide it for you...but never let it be said that I didn't try to help an idiot better himself...

If the object is warmer than the sensor, the flux (phi), is positive. If the object is cooler, the flux becomes negative, meaning it changes its direction: the heat goes from the sensor to the object. This may happen when a person walks into a warm room from the cold outside. Surface of her clothing will be cooler than the sensor and thus the flux becomes negative. In the following discussion, we will consider that the object is warmer than the sensor and the flux is positive

The passage above is on page 307, section 7.8...the page is visible through google books


OK...so what does it say? And as you can see..or maybe not if you are as stupid as I think you are, it agrees with me and supports my position. As always, us skeptics operate from a position of science while you glassy eyed chanters operate from a position of stupid belief.

 

[CrusaderFrank]

Now SSo DDumb, your betters have repeatedly tried to educate you in the basics of radiative physics, all too no avail. I do not even intend to try.

"your betters"? I had no idea you had a sense of humor