Does the O-CO2 Satellite once and for all end the Manmade CO2 Hysteria?

[Woodznutz]

So if the energy “warming the deep ocean” is coming from atmospheric CO2 that must mean the air is at least 4 times warmer, right?

If the air is warmer than the ocean it will warm the ocean. If the ocean is warmer than the air it will warm the air.

 

[ReinyDays]

So if the energy “warming the deep ocean” is coming from atmospheric CO2 that must mean the air is at least 4 times warmer, right?

No ... silly ... 2nd Law commands us "equal temperatures" ... just means for every 5 joules input energy ... 4 is given to water and 1 is given to air for a 1ºC temperature increase ... assuming equal mass ... the oceans act as a gigantic heat sink on the atmosphere ... can't raise temps above without increasing temps below, and below temps take four times the energy ... and the CCC Hystericals still haven't answered SB's fourth root dilemma ...

Does it take a 256% CO2 atmosphere to raise temperatures 4ºC? ... that's what 112% of the world's scientists believe ...

Carbon dioxide absorbs IR radiation coming from Earth ... then re-radiates it in all directions, including back down to Earth ... you understand how the surface of the oceans get heated by the atmosphere ... why don't you believe energy can conduct down the water column? ... it's slow but steady ... there's math that'll tell you "how long" and "how much" ... easy to test in the lab ...

 

[ReinyDays]

The driving force is heat, which increases the size and speed of a storm.

er ... only torque can increase the size and speed of a storm ... heat is transferred in the process ... but ultimately it's the force of gravity driving all this via the buoyancy forces ... Meteorology 201 ...

 

[ReinyDays]

Co2 molecules hold more heat than the other gases. Increases in Co2 increases atmospheric heat.

Are you looking this stuff up before you post ... just curious ... if CO2 holds the energy, there is no greenhouse effect ... the CCC Hystericals need CO2 radiating this energy back to Earth's surface to get global warming ...

Air convects, it doesn't store ... and air convects extremely well ...

 

[Woodznutz]

Are you looking this stuff up before you post ... just curious ... if CO2 holds the energy, there is no greenhouse effect ... the CCC Hystericals need CO2 radiating this energy back to Earth's surface to get global warming ...

Air convects, it doesn't store ... and air convects extremely well ...

I'm always looking stuff up. Here's a good article on Co2.

How Exactly Does Carbon Dioxide Cause Global Warming?

CO2 molecules make up only a small percentage of the atmosphere, but their impact on our climate is huge. The reason comes down to physics and chemistry.

news.climate.columbia.edu

 

[CrusaderFrank]

No ... silly ... 2nd Law commands us "equal temperatures" ... just means for every 5 joules input energy ... 4 is given to water and 1 is given to air for a 1ºC temperature increase ... assuming equal mass ... the oceans act as a gigantic heat sink on the atmosphere ... can't raise temps above without increasing temps below, and below temps take four times the energy ... and the CCC Hystericals still haven't answered SB's fourth root dilemma ...

Does it take a 256% CO2 atmosphere to raise temperatures 4ºC? ... that's what 112% of the world's scientists believe ...

Carbon dioxide absorbs IR radiation coming from Earth ... then re-radiates it in all directions, including back down to Earth ... you understand how the surface of the oceans get heated by the atmosphere ... why don't you believe energy can conduct down the water column? ... it's slow but steady ... there's math that'll tell you "how long" and "how much" ... easy to test in the lab ...

I must be dense. When the Cult tells us the deep ocean and land has “warmed” by 1C that must mean that the land was 4c warmer, or did the Joules decide beforehand that for ever Joule left behind, 4 would simply transport themselves to the ocean, right?

 

[BackAgain]

Cool. I live rent-free in Frank's little cult head. What a loser. He's even pout-stalking me now. I own that bitch, and rent him out for gangbangs.

And, Frank? Fuck off, you sad little troll.

And yes, I have told him before. 280 to 400 is, logarithmically, half a doubling. That eventually gives 1.5C warming, since climate sensitivity is about 3.0C per doubling. It's a trivial question, so he looks really stupid when he acts like it's some sort of gotcha.

Also, given that the isotope ratios prove the CO2 increase comes from burning fossil fuels, you have to be some special type of stupid to claim it doesn't. Frank and his fanbois here all are that type of stupid.

So, what are the images showing? That CO2 is absorbed during the growing season. But June isn't early enough. Not much has grown. In the northern hemisphere, the winter's accumulation of CO2 starts reversing in July, and reaches a minimum in September.

Manboob cannot answer Crusader Frank. Obviously. And manboob’s failed efforts at ad hominem are tragically weak.

 

[jc456]

Co2 molecules hold more heat than the other gases. Increases in Co2 increases atmospheric heat.

How so? Are you saying that co2 can get hotter than the surface? How?

 

[para bellum]

Carbon dioxide absorbs IR radiation coming from Earth ... then re-radiates it in all directions, including back down to Earth ... you understand how the surface of the oceans get heated by the atmosphere

Thermodynamics says heat does not flow from cold to warm. The earth's surface is warmer than the atmosphere- the atmosphere cannot heat the earth.

It would be like placing a warm object next to a cool object on your counter, and expecting the warm one to get warmer. What happens is the opposite- the warm one loses heat, and the cool one gains some. The closer they are in proximity, the faster the rate of transfer.

IOW, the only effect that atmospheric temperatures can have on the ground is to the rate of heat transfer- if the atmosphere is warmer, the earth will cool more slowly at night (when it's not being heated by the sun) than if the atmosphere were cooler.

While individual photons can be absorbed if they are energetic enough, a net increase is not possible. The rate of transfer is just raised a tiny bit.

The heat is transferred mainly by conduction- the air that is in direct contact with the ground or ocean surface is warmed, and convection carries the warmer air upwards.

The planet is a black body radiator- all the energy that is absorbed from the sun has to be radiated away at the same rate, else we would have fried to a cinder long ago.

You can move the heat around- if the lower part of the atmosphere warms, the upper part has to cool. Everything else is a violation of Conservation of Energy.

Yes, the composition of the atmosphere affects how much IR is absorbed by it, and therefore it's temperature, but there is no reverse heat flow going on.

 

[jc456]

Co2 molecules hold more heat than the other gases. Increases in Co2 increases atmospheric heat.

How? They can’t make each other warmer, so how do they get hotter?

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

Thermodynamics says heat does not flow from cold to warm. The earth's surface is warmer than the atmosphere- the atmosphere cannot heat the earth.

It would be like placing a warm object next to a cool object on your counter, and expecting the warm one to get warmer. What happens is the opposite- the warm one loses heat, and the cool one gains some. The closer they are in proximity, the faster the rate of transfer.

IOW, the only effect that atmospheric temperatures can have on the ground is to the rate of heat transfer- if the atmosphere is warmer, the earth will cool more slowly at night (when it's not being heated by the sun) than if the atmosphere were cooler.

While individual photons can be absorbed if they are energetic enough, a net increase is not possible. The rate of transfer is just raised a tiny bit.

The heat is transferred mainly by conduction- the air that is in direct contact with the ground or ocean surface is warmed, and convection carries the warmer air upwards.

The planet is a black body radiator- all the energy that is absorbed from the sun has to be radiated away at the same rate, else we would have fried to a cinder long ago.

You can move the heat around- if the lower part of the atmosphere warms, the upper part has to cool. Everything else is a violation of Conservation of Energy.

Yes, the composition of the atmosphere affects how much IR is absorbed by it, and therefore it's temperature, but there is no reverse heat flow going on.

Thermodynamics says heat does not flow from cold to warm. The earth's surface is warmer than the atmosphere- the atmosphere cannot heat the earth.

What about photons?

 

[para bellum]

What about photons?

How about those photons? You think they'll take the pennant?

 

[jc456]

No ... silly ... 2nd Law commands us "equal temperatures" ... just means for every 5 joules input energy ... 4 is given to water and 1 is given to air for a 1ºC temperature increase ... assuming equal mass ... the oceans act as a gigantic heat sink on the atmosphere ... can't raise temps above without increasing temps below, and below temps take four times the energy ... and the CCC Hystericals still haven't answered SB's fourth root dilemma ...

Does it take a 256% CO2 atmosphere to raise temperatures 4ºC? ... that's what 112% of the world's scientists believe ...

Carbon dioxide absorbs IR radiation coming from Earth ... then re-radiates it in all directions, including back down to Earth ... you understand how the surface of the oceans get heated by the atmosphere ... why don't you believe energy can conduct down the water column? ... it's slow but steady ... there's math that'll tell you "how long" and "how much" ... easy to test in the lab ...

But how do co2 molecules get hotter than the surface to heat water hotter?

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

How about those photons? You think they'll take the pennant?

Can they flow from cold to warm?

 

[para bellum]

Can they flow from cold to warm?

Short answer no.

But it's not quite like that- I mean "flowing"- photons are the force carrying particles of EM. IR spectrum is photons at a certain wavelength. IR energy is thermal energy.

Heat can only transfer from hot to cold. You put a pot of water on the burner and turn it on, the burner gets hot and the pot heats up. Turn off the burner, the heat transfer reverses, the burner cools at a faster rate, and heat starts going from the pot to the burner. As the heat differential gets smaller, the rate of heat transfer slows. They equalize at some point and reach ambient together.

Take the pot off the burner- the burner cools off faster by itself. Place the pot on a cold surface, it cools off faster. Photons are what carries the heat transfer. The energy that went into the burner as electricity, goes into the atmosphere as heat (IR) and radiates away.

The surface of the earth also absorbs visible light, the atmosphere doesn't. The energy is radiated away as IR, so the surface is warmer than the atmosphere. The heat transfer is one way- into space. The atmosphere doesn't transfer heat to the surface of the earth., it's cooler than the surface.

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

Short answer no.

But it's not quite like that- I mean "flowing"- photons are the force carrying particles of EM. IR spectrum is photons at a certain wavelength. IR energy is thermal energy.

Heat can only transfer from hot to cold. You put a pot of water on the burner and turn it on, the burner gets hot and the pot heats up. Turn off the burner, the heat transfer reverses, the burner cools at a faster rate, and heat starts going from the pot to the burner. As the heat differential gets smaller, the rate of heat transfer slows. They equalize at some point and reach ambient together.

Take the pot off the burner- the burner cools off faster by itself. Place the pot on a cold surface, it cools off faster. Photons are what carries the heat transfer. The energy that went into the burner as electricity, goes into the atmosphere as heat (IR) and radiates away.

The surface of the earth also absorbs visible light, the atmosphere doesn't. The energy is radiated away as IR, so the surface is warmer than the atmosphere. The heat transfer is one way- into space. The atmosphere doesn't transfer heat to the surface of the earth., it's cooler than the surface.

Heat can only transfer from hot to cold.

Photons can go both ways.

 

[para bellum]

Heat can only transfer from hot to cold.

Photons can go both ways.

I don't want to wander into the quantum weeds, but photons are not little-bitty BB-like objects, flying around looking for molecules to interact with. They don't go "back and forth", or "both ways" or anything like that. They are just the the messengers of the electromagnetic force.

The energy propagates as a wave, like a wave in the ocean. The wave is the energy- the water carries the energy, but it doesn't travel with the wave. The photon is the carrier of electromagnetism, like the water carries the energy of the wave.

The exchange of information is dynamic, but there is no transfer of heat (energy) from cold to warm. That is fundamental- set in stone until we get some new laws of physics.

This whole "reabsorbing the IR radiation from CO2 that is radiated back down", and thereby heating the ground is mumbo-jumbo to thermodynamics. Show me any real-world example of a cold object heating a warmer one.

You can fiddle with the rate of transfer, but you can't make heat go from a cold object to a warm one.

God I hate these threads, lol.

 

[westwall]

I see a map showing the heaviest CO2 concentrations in the countries that are basically exempted from climate regulations.

The theory of AGW is an IQ test to show who the dumbest people are.
The crazier you are about climate change, the lower your IQ registers.
Keep virtue signaling morons

The CO2 concentration is also over the rainforest, NOT the industrial northern hemisphere!

 

[ReinyDays]

I'm always looking stuff up. Here's a good article on Co2.

How Exactly Does Carbon Dioxide Cause Global Warming?

CO2 molecules make up only a small percentage of the atmosphere, but their impact on our climate is huge. The reason comes down to physics and chemistry.

news.climate.columbia.edu

From your own goddam citation:

"As CO2 soaks up this infrared energy, it vibrates and re-emits the infrared energy back in all directions. About half of that energy goes out into space, and about half of it returns to Earth as heat, contributing to the ‘greenhouse effect.’"

Exactly what I said ... carbon dioxide doesn't trap energy ... it returns the energy back to the Earth's surface ... it's the Earth's surface that does all the trapping ... that's not a petty detail, that critical to the physics and chemistry behind the Greenhouse Effect ...

I also want to correct a mistake in the article ... a molecule can only absorb ONE photon per vibration ... for example, the 15µm bandwidth ... the vibration state must be in it's "0" quantum state, the 15 µm photon has the exact energy to increase this vibration to it's "1" quantum state ... and the molecule WILL NOT absorb anymore 15 µm photons until it re-radiates a 15 µm photon ... nor will it absorb any other non-15 µm photon for this particular vibration ...

Carbon dioxide has a multitude of vibrations ... each with their specific and exacting wavelength of photons that interacts with carbon dioxide ... we like using 15 µm because water vapor is tranparent and this wavelength is close to Earth's peak energy at 9.8 µm ... makes for a good bvandwidth to discuss carbon's roll in the Greenhouse Effect without water's contribution ... what the CCC Hystericals are peeing their pants about ...

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

I don't want to wander into the quantum weeds, but photons are not little-bitty BB-like objects, flying around looking for molecules to interact with. They don't go "back and forth", or "both ways" or anything like that. They are just the the messengers of the electromagnetic force.

The energy propagates as a wave, like a wave in the ocean. The wave is the energy- the water carries the energy, but it doesn't travel with the wave. The photon is the carrier of electromagnetism, like the water carries the energy of the wave.

The exchange of information is dynamic, but there is no transfer of heat (energy) from cold to warm. That is fundamental- set in stone until we get some new laws of physics.

This whole "reabsorbing the IR radiation from CO2 that is radiated back down", and thereby heating the ground is mumbo-jumbo to thermodynamics. Show me any real-world example of a cold object heating a warmer one.

You can fiddle with the rate of transfer, but you can't make heat go from a cold object to a warm one.

God I hate these threads, lol.

They don't go "back and forth", or "both ways" or anything like that.

Why not? All matter above absolute zero emits photons.

The exchange of information is dynamic, but there is no transfer of heat (energy) from cold to warm.

There is no net transfer of energy from cold to warm.

Show me any real-world example of a cold object heating a warmer one.

Are you saying photons emitted by my 70-degree walls cannot strike my 98-degree skin?

You can fiddle with the rate of transfer

How can you "fiddle"?