Chemistry Expert: Carbon Dioxide can’t cause Global Warming

[AnCap'n_Murica]

Game over, warmer moonbats.


The ocean contains a colossal 1,500,000,000,000,000,000,000 litres of water! To heat it, even by a small amount, takes a staggering amount of energy. To heat it by a mere 1˚C, for example, an astonishing 6,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000 joules of energy are required.


Let’s put this amount of energy in perspective. If we all turned off all our appliances and went and lived in caves, and then devoted every coal, nuclear, gas, hydro, wind and solar power plant to just heating the ocean, it would take a breathtaking 32,000 years to heat the ocean by just this 1˚C!


In short, our influence on our climate, even if we really tried, is miniscule!


So it makes sense to ask the question – if the ocean were to be heated by ‘greenhouse warming’ of the atmosphere, how hot would the air have to get? If the entire ocean is heated by 1˚C, how much would the air have to be heated by to contain enough heat to do the job?

Chemistry Expert: Carbon Dioxide can’t cause Global Warming

 

[william the wie]

Game over, warmer moonbats.


The ocean contains a colossal 1,500,000,000,000,000,000,000 litres of water! To heat it, even by a small amount, takes a staggering amount of energy. To heat it by a mere 1˚C, for example, an astonishing 6,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000 joules of energy are required.


Let’s put this amount of energy in perspective. If we all turned off all our appliances and went and lived in caves, and then devoted every coal, nuclear, gas, hydro, wind and solar power plant to just heating the ocean, it would take a breathtaking 32,000 years to heat the ocean by just this 1˚C!


In short, our influence on our climate, even if we really tried, is miniscule!


So it makes sense to ask the question – if the ocean were to be heated by ‘greenhouse warming’ of the atmosphere, how hot would the air have to get? If the entire ocean is heated by 1˚C, how much would the air have to be heated by to contain enough heat to do the job?

Chemistry Expert: Carbon Dioxide can’t cause Global Warming

AGW cultists absolutely reject data, models and all other evidence that contradicts their religion.

 

[Old Rocks]

A pair of dumb fucks.

Warmer Oceans | A Student's Guide to Global Climate Change | US EPA

Ocean Warming

Since 1955, over 90% of the excess heat trapped by greenhouse gases has been stored in the oceans (Figure from IPCC 5thAssessment Report). The remainder of this energy goes into melting sea ice, ice caps, and glaciers, and warming the continents's land mass. Only the smallest fraction of this thermal energy goes into warming the atmosphere. Humans thus, living at the interface of the land, ocean and atmosphere, only feel a sliver of the true warming cost of fossil fuel emissions.

This 90% of extra heat taken up by the ocean is mostly in the upper 700 meters (m) layer (about 60% of total excess heat), while 30% is stored in layers deeper than 700 m (IPCC 5th Assessment Report). The ocean absorbs most of this "anthropogenic heat" because:

1. Water has a high heat capacity: It takes much more heat to warm 1 liter of water than it does to warm the same volume of air (or most other substances).
2. The ocean is deep: The world's oceans cover 71% of the earth surface and are about 4 km deep on average. This represents a tremendous reservoir of heat.
3. The ocean is dynamic: Heat, carbon, oxygen and various other quantities exchanged with the atmosphere are mixed throughout the ocean through currents, internal waves, eddies, and various other circulation mechanisms.

The largest changes in ocean temperatures were observed in the upper 75 m, due to closer proximity to the atmosphere and the large mixing within this layer (IPCC 5th Assessment Report). As we trap more energy in the earth climate system, heat penetrates further into the ocean. Two important geographic areas where the atmosphere "communicates" with deeper layers of the ocean are the North Atlantic and the Southern Ocean. Because of their distinct atmospheric conditions and geographic settings, surface waters near the poles can be buried into deeper layers, bringing along their heat signatures, thus warming the interior of the ocean.

 

[Billy_Bob]

A pair of dumb fucks.

Warmer Oceans | A Student's Guide to Global Climate Change | US EPA

Ocean Warming

Since 1955, over 90% of the excess heat trapped by greenhouse gases has been stored in the oceans (Figure from IPCC 5thAssessment Report). The remainder of this energy goes into melting sea ice, ice caps, and glaciers, and warming the continents's land mass. Only the smallest fraction of this thermal energy goes into warming the atmosphere. Humans thus, living at the interface of the land, ocean and atmosphere, only feel a sliver of the true warming cost of fossil fuel emissions.

This 90% of extra heat taken up by the ocean is mostly in the upper 700 meters (m) layer (about 60% of total excess heat), while 30% is stored in layers deeper than 700 m (IPCC 5th Assessment Report). The ocean absorbs most of this "anthropogenic heat" because:

1. Water has a high heat capacity: It takes much more heat to warm 1 liter of water than it does to warm the same volume of air (or most other substances).
2. The ocean is deep: The world's oceans cover 71% of the earth surface and are about 4 km deep on average. This represents a tremendous reservoir of heat.
3. The ocean is dynamic: Heat, carbon, oxygen and various other quantities exchanged with the atmosphere are mixed throughout the ocean through currents, internal waves, eddies, and various other circulation mechanisms.

The largest changes in ocean temperatures were observed in the upper 75 m, due to closer proximity to the atmosphere and the large mixing within this layer (IPCC 5th Assessment Report). As we trap more energy in the earth climate system, heat penetrates further into the ocean. Two important geographic areas where the atmosphere "communicates" with deeper layers of the ocean are the North Atlantic and the Southern Ocean. Because of their distinct atmospheric conditions and geographic settings, surface waters near the poles can be buried into deeper layers, bringing along their heat signatures, thus warming the interior of the ocean.

AR5 IS BULLSHIT!

Stokes and the “somehow” theory of ocean heat


The thermal mixing that AR5 claims has been shown to be totally BS by real science.

 

[Billy_Bob]

Game over, warmer moonbats.


The ocean contains a colossal 1,500,000,000,000,000,000,000 litres of water! To heat it, even by a small amount, takes a staggering amount of energy. To heat it by a mere 1˚C, for example, an astonishing 6,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000 joules of energy are required.


Let’s put this amount of energy in perspective. If we all turned off all our appliances and went and lived in caves, and then devoted every coal, nuclear, gas, hydro, wind and solar power plant to just heating the ocean, it would take a breathtaking 32,000 years to heat the ocean by just this 1˚C!


In short, our influence on our climate, even if we really tried, is miniscule!


So it makes sense to ask the question – if the ocean were to be heated by ‘greenhouse warming’ of the atmosphere, how hot would the air have to get? If the entire ocean is heated by 1˚C, how much would the air have to be heated by to contain enough heat to do the job?

Chemistry Expert: Carbon Dioxide can’t cause Global Warming

CO2 in the Earth’s atmosphere only absorbs IRR at around 15um. Wavelength is directly proportional to temperature and 15um occurs at -80C. CO2 can only emit IRR at the same 15um so it radiates very low energy photons at -80C.

Now some simple quantum physics. Electrons orbiting a molecule can only do so at specific orbital heights. The higher the orbit, the higher the energy and the “warmer” (temperature is a measure of the kinetic energy of a substance) the molecule. When a photon hits a molecule, if it has too much energy, enough is absorbed to boost an electron to the next higher orbit and the rest is immediately radiated away. Magnetic resonance of the field holding the electrons in orbit will determine if a photon will be absorbed or re-emitted.

If there isn’t enough energy to boost an electron to the next available slot in a higher orbit, the photon’s energy is immediately re-radiated leaving the molecule with the same kinetic energy (temperature) as before.

Radiation from a molecule at -80C therefore cannot provide enough energy in the form of photons, to warm molecules (by boosting electrons into higher, more energetic orbits) at -4C or above (seawater temperatures).

CO2 is incapable of warming sea water as its thermal layer (skin) can not be penetrated by a photon at -80C wave length. A colder object can not warm a warmer object.

Simple physics calls AGW, as it is described today, bull shit of the highest order.

 

[CrusaderFrank]

A pair of dumb fucks.

Warmer Oceans | A Student's Guide to Global Climate Change | US EPA

Ocean Warming

Since 1955, over 90% of the excess heat trapped by greenhouse gases has been stored in the oceans (Figure from IPCC 5thAssessment Report). The remainder of this energy goes into melting sea ice, ice caps, and glaciers, and warming the continents's land mass. Only the smallest fraction of this thermal energy goes into warming the atmosphere. Humans thus, living at the interface of the land, ocean and atmosphere, only feel a sliver of the true warming cost of fossil fuel emissions.

This 90% of extra heat taken up by the ocean is mostly in the upper 700 meters (m) layer (about 60% of total excess heat), while 30% is stored in layers deeper than 700 m (IPCC 5th Assessment Report). The ocean absorbs most of this "anthropogenic heat" because:

1. Water has a high heat capacity: It takes much more heat to warm 1 liter of water than it does to warm the same volume of air (or most other substances).
2. The ocean is deep: The world's oceans cover 71% of the earth surface and are about 4 km deep on average. This represents a tremendous reservoir of heat.
3. The ocean is dynamic: Heat, carbon, oxygen and various other quantities exchanged with the atmosphere are mixed throughout the ocean through currents, internal waves, eddies, and various other circulation mechanisms.

The largest changes in ocean temperatures were observed in the upper 75 m, due to closer proximity to the atmosphere and the large mixing within this layer (IPCC 5th Assessment Report). As we trap more energy in the earth climate system, heat penetrates further into the ocean. Two important geographic areas where the atmosphere "communicates" with deeper layers of the ocean are the North Atlantic and the Southern Ocean. Because of their distinct atmospheric conditions and geographic settings, surface waters near the poles can be buried into deeper layers, bringing along their heat signatures, thus warming the interior of the ocean.

What a joke!

Excess heat is a phony crackpot concept just to see how gullible you are and you pinned the needle

 

[william the wie]

Game over, warmer moonbats.


The ocean contains a colossal 1,500,000,000,000,000,000,000 litres of water! To heat it, even by a small amount, takes a staggering amount of energy. To heat it by a mere 1˚C, for example, an astonishing 6,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000 joules of energy are required.


Let’s put this amount of energy in perspective. If we all turned off all our appliances and went and lived in caves, and then devoted every coal, nuclear, gas, hydro, wind and solar power plant to just heating the ocean, it would take a breathtaking 32,000 years to heat the ocean by just this 1˚C!


In short, our influence on our climate, even if we really tried, is miniscule!


So it makes sense to ask the question – if the ocean were to be heated by ‘greenhouse warming’ of the atmosphere, how hot would the air have to get? If the entire ocean is heated by 1˚C, how much would the air have to be heated by to contain enough heat to do the job?

Chemistry Expert: Carbon Dioxide can’t cause Global Warming

CO2 in the Earth’s atmosphere only absorbs IRR at around 15um. Wavelength is directly proportional to temperature and 15um occurs at -80C. CO2 can only emit IRR at the same 15um so it radiates very low energy photons at -80C.

Now some simple quantum physics. Electrons orbiting a molecule can only do so at specific orbital heights. The higher the orbit, the higher the energy and the “warmer” (temperature is a measure of the kinetic energy of a substance) the molecule. When a photon hits a molecule, if it has too much energy, enough is absorbed to boost an electron to the next higher orbit and the rest is immediately radiated away. Magnetic resonance of the field holding the electrons in orbit will determine if a photon will be absorbed or re-emitted.

If there isn’t enough energy to boost an electron to the next available slot in a higher orbit, the photon’s energy is immediately re-radiated leaving the molecule with the same kinetic energy (temperature) as before.

Radiation from a molecule at -80C therefore cannot provide enough energy in the form of photons, to warm molecules (by boosting electrons into higher, more energetic orbits) at -4C or above (seawater temperatures).

CO2 is incapable of warming sea water as its thermal layer (skin) can not be penetrated by a photon at -80C wave length. A colder object can not warm a warmer object.

Simple physics calls AGW, as it is described today, bull shit of the highest order.

Given that I find number theory easier to understand than the calculi I was surprised how well you explained that so that even I could understand it. Another barrier to the truth of AGW is that no horizon of prediction based on rounding error of measurement is ever mentioned by advocates of AGW. Therefore AGW is false. While climate is deterministic the assumption of infinite predictability is always to some degree false.

 

[mamooth]

Game over, warmer moonbats.

What a complete 'tard essay. You'd have to be totally drunk on the cult piss that had been trickled down on you to fall for something that stupid. Naturally, AnCap'nCuck and all the other denier cucks here fell for it hard.

That 'tard essay failed hilariously on two counts.

It assumed that oceans warm due to air heating the oceans, when no, that's not the case. It works the other way around. The oceans heat the atmosphere.

It also assumed that direct heat from fossil fuel burning heated the atmosphere. Again, no. Direct heat of burning creates an insignificant amount of heat, in comparison to the greenhouse effect of CO2.

So, as far as denier stupidity goes, this was definitely a sterling example.

And no, I'm not sorry if pointing how stupid the deniers are triggered them. Those cultists need to be dragged kicking and screaming into the real world, heedless of whether it makes them cry.

 

[mamooth]

CO2 is incapable of warming sea water as its thermal layer (skin) can not be penetrated by a photon at -80C wave length. A colder object can not warm a warmer object.

Oh look. Billy the "doctoral student" is denying conservation of energy again. And that's on top of his hilariously stupid quantum mechanics failure.

Simple physics calls AGW, as it is described today, bull shit of the highest order.

Simple physics says you're a raving loon. Energy can't simply vanish, no matter how loudly you and the other cult screamers declare that it can. The Law of Conservation of Energy can't be violated. You and your crew constantly violate it, therefore you're screaming retards.

So, how's the Ph.D. going?

 

[Billy_Bob]

CO2 is incapable of warming sea water as its thermal layer (skin) can not be penetrated by a photon at -80C wave length. A colder object can not warm a warmer object.

Oh look. Billy the "doctoral student" is denying conservation of energy again. And that's on top of his hilariously stupid quantum mechanics failure.

Simple physics calls AGW, as it is described today, bull shit of the highest order.

Simple physics says you're a raving loon. Energy can't simply vanish, no matter how loudly you and the other cult screamers declare that it can. The Law of Conservation of Energy can't be violated. You and your crew constantly violate it, therefore you're screaming retards.

So, how's the Ph.D. going?

Oh look..

The deranged cat lady throws out adhom attacks and exposes its shear ignorance of science.

Rant on fool, rant on...

 

[CrusaderFrank]

Game over, warmer moonbats.

What a complete 'tard essay. You'd have to be totally drunk on the cult piss that had been trickled down on you to fall for something that stupid. Naturally, AnCap'nCuck and all the other denier cucks here fell for it hard.

That 'tard essay failed hilariously on two counts.

It assumed that oceans warm due to air heating the oceans, when no, that's not the case. It works the other way around. The oceans heat the atmosphere.

It also assumed that direct heat from fossil fuel burning heated the atmosphere. Again, no. Direct heat of burning creates an insignificant amount of heat, in comparison to the greenhouse effect of CO2.

So, as far as denier stupidity goes, this was definitely a sterling example.

And no, I'm not sorry if pointing how stupid the deniers were here triggered them. Those cultists need to be dragged kicking and screaming into the real world, heedless of whether it makes them cry.

Please explain the brand new AR5 concept of "Excess heat"

 

[mamooth]

Rant on fool, rant on...

You didn't answer, little cuck.

How's the Ph.D. going? It's clear that question really bothers you. Why? You were so proud to brag about it before, even though you wouldn't tell us what school you were attending, or how you got into a doctoral program with zero science background. What happened?

And why do you think energy striking the ocean can magically vanish into a mystery dimension? What new data has allowed you to conclude that conservation of energy only holds when you feel like it should hold? What other physical laws do you think hold only when you feel they should hold?

And why do you think everyone shouldn't laugh long and hard at you?

 

[Billy_Bob]

Rant on fool, rant on...

You didn't answer, little cuck.

How's the Ph.D. going? It's clear that question really bothers you. Why? You were so proud to brag about it before, even though you wouldn't tell us what school you were attending, or how you got into a doctoral program with zero science background. What happened?

And why do you think energy striking the ocean can magically vanish into a mystery dimension? What new data has allowed you to conclude that conservation of energy only holds when you feel like it should hold? What other physical laws do you think hold only when you feel they should hold?

And why do you think everyone shouldn't laugh long and hard at you?

I have shown that LWIR can not penetrate the oceans.. I am laughing at the moron who thinks an object radiating at -80 deg C can warm something radiating at -4 deg C..

 

[AnCap'n_Murica]

BTW, "cuck" is sooo last April.

The overbearing, cat piss swilling, assclown can't even have up to date insults.

 

[mamooth]

I have shown that LWIR can not penetrate the oceans.

Cuckoo, cuckoo, cuckoo, cuckoo, cuckoo, cuckoo, ...

By the same 'tard logic you're using, sunlight can't warm a rock, because it can't "penetrate" the rock.

Since sunlight will warm a rock, your "science" is obviously contradicted by observed reality, and therefore is hilariously stupid.

I am laughing at the moron who thinks an object radiating at -80 deg C can warm something radiating at -4 deg C..

Your "smart photon" theory actually gets funnier every time you try it, as does the fact that you've got a bark of cult kooks here who also fall for it. Flat earthers look like rocket scientists compared to the denier rubes here.

Oh, I'm assuming you're no longer a "doctoral student in climate science", since you no longer want to talk about it. What made you finally give up that lie?

 

[CrusaderFrank]

Lemme see, we can make a mini black hole and metal hydrogen in a lab, but the AGW kooks still can't show us lab work on CO2 warming because it's too darn hard.

 

[Sun Devil 92]

Strange that even data is political.

No wonder we can't get anywhere.

 

[mamooth]

Lemme see, we can make a mini black hole and metal hydrogen in a lab, but the AGW kooks still can't show us lab work on CO2 warming because it's too darn hard.

We've shown it to you over and over. And in response, you lie about it. All the deniers lie about it. It's what they do. It's all they do.

Go pound sound, cult liar. Nobody cares that you're mewling the same lies for the thousandth time.

 

[CrusaderFrank]

Lemme see, we can make a mini black hole and metal hydrogen in a lab, but the AGW kooks still can't show us lab work on CO2 warming because it's too darn hard.

We've shown it to you over and over. And in response, you lie about it. All the deniers lie about it. It's what they do. It's all they do.

Go pound sound, cult liar. Nobody cares that you're mewling the same lies for the thousandth time.

How many times must we warn you that snorting stereo and posting are a bad mix.

You meant to say that you imagined that you posted the lab work.

 

[Crick]

No, Frank, we mean you are a liar.