How LWIR warms the atmosphere

[skookerasbil]

It's crazy...the infrared heating industry has proved pretty convincingly that long wave infrared simply does not warm the air

You're back to this again, after earlier admitting IR warms the greenhouse gas components of air, while the majority of air is transparent to IR. If gases absorb IR they must be warmed.

Here is a link to the empirical evidence greenhouse gases absorb IR

https://www.researchgate.net/publication/235210289_Infrared_Absorption_by_CH4_H2O_and_CO2

Geez s0n.....the progressive radicals have been standing in front of that billboard for two decades taking bows. Nobody is caring......still!

People have been aware of the whole greenhouse crap forever yet.....

Banner gazing is ghey

 

[Wuwei]

Tell me, what is the area of the gas in the atmosphere?

Can you tell us what the area of the atmosphere is?

Can't provide an area for the atmosphere when the S-B law clearly requires the area of the emitter? Didn't know that? Didn't care?

The black body emission is from the earth. The area in the SB equation does not refer to the atmosphere it refers to the earth. Power divided by the area on earth is the power density from the earth. The atmosphere is the surrounding temperature. The surround does not have an area in the SB equation.

 

[Wuwei]

The fact that you can't measure two way energy flow between objects at different temperatures or even between objects at the same temperarure, but you can measure energy movment between an object that is warm and an object that is cool should clue you in..but it doesn't...What does that tell you about your ability to think critically?

You accept unobservable, unmeasurable, untestable models over reality...

As always you are wrong you were given many examples of two way energy flow.

 

[SSDD]

The black body emission is from the earth. The area in the SB equation does not refer to the atmosphere it refers to the earth. Power divided by the area on earth is the power density from the earth. The atmosphere is the surrounding temperature. The surround does not have an area in the SB equation.

The earth is not a black body...and climate models attempt to apply the SB law to the atmosphere...Sorry guy...you just can't stop being wrong...it must suck, but then if you didn't feel like you need to interpret every damned thing to suit your beliefs, you might actually learn something...of course then you would have to become a skeptic...

 

[Wuwei]

You're back to this again, after earlier admitting IR warms the greenhouse gas components of air,

So you are a liar also...not surprising...IR does not warm air...nor does it warm so called greenhouse gasses with the exception of water vapor...

while the majority of air is transparent to IR. If gases absorb IR they must be warmed.

Flawed assumption...but feel free to show some observed, measured evidence that supports the claim that absorption and emission equals warming.

whileHere is a link to the empirical evidence greenhouse gases absorb IR

https://www.researchgate.net/publication/235210289_Infrared_Absorption_by_CH4_H2O_and_CO2

Guess you are easily fooled...nothing there establishes a coherent link between the absorption of IR by a gas and warming in the atmosphere...absorption and emission don't equal warming...and the time between collisions of so called greenhouse gas molecules and N2 or O2, or some other component of "air" is so small, generally speaking, the so called greenhouse gas molecule loses its absorbed energy via collision before it even has time to emit said radiation...

Still waiting for you to tell me how many predictive failures a hypothesis gets in real science before it is scrapped and work begins on a hypothesis that can more accurately reflect reality. Any idea?

Cot in the air warms it. Remember this experiment?

The American Journal o f Science and Arts Vol XXII Nov 1856, Pgs 382 - 383

The American Journal of Science and Arts

A two page report in 1856 by Eunice Newton Foote demonstrated that CO2 absorbs heat. She measured the temperatures in two glass 4x30 inch cylinders with internal thermometers. She exposed them to sunlight, one filled with air and one with CO2. Foote speculated that if there had been a period when the atmosphere held more of the gas, the planet would have been warmer.

She noted the temperature rises in various gases under the same conditions:

On comparing the sun's heat in different gases, I found it to be in hydrogen gas, 104° ; in common air, 106°; in oxygen gas 108°; and in carbonic acid gas, 125°.​

 

[Wuwei]

The earth is not a black body...and climate models attempt to apply the SB law to the atmosphere...Sorry guy...you just can't stop being wrong...it must suck, but then if you didn't feel like you need to interpret every damned thing to suit your beliefs, you might actually learn something...of course then you would have to become a skeptic...

The average emissivity of the earth is .96, and is taken into account in the SB equation. The atmosphere is the surround of the earth and has a temperature. The earth has an area.
You are wrong.

.

 

[SSDD]

The earth is not a black body...and climate models attempt to apply the SB law to the atmosphere...Sorry guy...you just can't stop being wrong...it must suck, but then if you didn't feel like you need to interpret every damned thing to suit your beliefs, you might actually learn something...of course then you would have to become a skeptic...

The average emissivity of the earth is .96, and is taken into account in the SB equation. The atmosphere is the surround of the earth and has a temperature. The earth has an area.
You are wrong.

.

Any hypothesis that applies the S-B law to a gas....is flawed at its foundations...

 

[Wuwei]

Any hypothesis that applies the S-B law to a gas....is flawed at its foundations...

I am not applying the SB law to a gas. The emitter follows the SB law. It's the surround that is the gas and it has a temperature.

.

 

[cnm]

Geez s0n.....the progressive radicals have been standing in front of that billboard for two decades taking bows. Nobody is caring......still!

It has been demonstrated to you that people do care. That you are as delusional as SSDD allows you to forget the govt. of NZ has refused to issue exploration or survey permits to the fossil fuel industry. Your assertion has been falsified yet you still make it. Again, one can lead a denier to data but one cannot make it think.

 

[Weatherman2020]

Odd that someone with a masters degree in atmospheric physics would not know what I find in freshman level study guide.

Thought Questions for METR 104: Our Dynamic Weather

How much must we lower CO2 to stop climate change from ever happening again?

I should think you could figure this out on your own Frank. 280 ppm would be nice. What do you think?

Think?
So you admit the entire Gorebal Warming agenda is a guessing game.

Science is hard data. Scientists don’t play darts when telling society to restructure the entire economy.

 

[CrusaderFrank]

Odd that someone with a masters degree in atmospheric physics would not know what I find in freshman level study guide.

Thought Questions for METR 104: Our Dynamic Weather

How much must we lower CO2 to stop climate change from ever happening again?

I should think you could figure this out on your own Frank. 280 ppm would be nice. What do you think?

We didn't have any climate change at 280PPM?

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

Another they thread started by an alarmist that started out real slow and will soon fizzle out altogether and be buried 10 pages deep in a couple of months. It's like progressive radio.....ePiC exercise in fAiL.

It's crazy...the infrared heating industry has proved pretty convincingly that long wave infrared simply does not warm the air...it has been known for a very long time..there is a wealth of observation, and experimental evidence that prove it...and yet, they believe that it does, because they are told that the must believe...they are idiots...one and all.

the infrared heating industry has proved pretty convincingly that long wave infrared simply does not warm the air...

Really? How long is the wave that doesn't warm the air? Link?

 

[CrusaderFrank]

Would a hypothetical planet with no atmospheric CO2 ever experience climate change?

 

[SSDD]

Any hypothesis that applies the S-B law to a gas....is flawed at its foundations...

I am not applying the SB law to a gas. The emitter follows the SB law. It's the surround that is the gas and it has a temperature.

.

Maybe you should check with climate science...they certainly are.

 

[SSDD]

You're back to this again, after earlier admitting IR warms the greenhouse gas components of air,

So you are a liar also...not surprising...IR does not warm air...nor does it warm so called greenhouse gasses with the exception of water vapor...

while the majority of air is transparent to IR. If gases absorb IR they must be warmed.

Flawed assumption...but feel free to show some observed, measured evidence that supports the claim that absorption and emission equals warming.

whileHere is a link to the empirical evidence greenhouse gases absorb IR

https://www.researchgate.net/publication/235210289_Infrared_Absorption_by_CH4_H2O_and_CO2

Guess you are easily fooled...nothing there establishes a coherent link between the absorption of IR by a gas and warming in the atmosphere...absorption and emission don't equal warming...and the time between collisions of so called greenhouse gas molecules and N2 or O2, or some other component of "air" is so small, generally speaking, the so called greenhouse gas molecule loses its absorbed energy via collision before it even has time to emit said radiation...

Still waiting for you to tell me how many predictive failures a hypothesis gets in real science before it is scrapped and work begins on a hypothesis that can more accurately reflect reality. Any idea?

Cot in the air warms it. Remember this experiment?

The American Journal o f Science and Arts Vol XXII Nov 1856, Pgs 382 - 383

The American Journal of Science and Arts

A two page report in 1856 by Eunice Newton Foote demonstrated that CO2 absorbs heat. She measured the temperatures in two glass 4x30 inch cylinders with internal thermometers. She exposed them to sunlight, one filled with air and one with CO2. Foote speculated that if there had been a period when the atmosphere held more of the gas, the planet would have been warmer.

She noted the temperature rises in various gases under the same conditions:

On comparing the sun's heat in different gases, I found it to be in hydrogen gas, 104° ; in common air, 106°; in oxygen gas 108°; and in carbonic acid gas, 125°.​

Got yourself another example of the heat of compression...third paragraph....she states that the action increases with the density of the air...heat of compression...you are so easily fooled that it is just laughable...what a dupe...

What is funny...really funny is that you have to keep going back to that quaint 19th century science to find anything that supports your claims...it is hilarious to watch you thrash about looking for something....anything that seems to support your beliefs...

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

You're back to this again, after earlier admitting IR warms the greenhouse gas components of air,

So you are a liar also...not surprising...IR does not warm air...nor does it warm so called greenhouse gasses with the exception of water vapor...

while the majority of air is transparent to IR. If gases absorb IR they must be warmed.

Flawed assumption...but feel free to show some observed, measured evidence that supports the claim that absorption and emission equals warming.

whileHere is a link to the empirical evidence greenhouse gases absorb IR

https://www.researchgate.net/publication/235210289_Infrared_Absorption_by_CH4_H2O_and_CO2

Guess you are easily fooled...nothing there establishes a coherent link between the absorption of IR by a gas and warming in the atmosphere...absorption and emission don't equal warming...and the time between collisions of so called greenhouse gas molecules and N2 or O2, or some other component of "air" is so small, generally speaking, the so called greenhouse gas molecule loses its absorbed energy via collision before it even has time to emit said radiation...

Still waiting for you to tell me how many predictive failures a hypothesis gets in real science before it is scrapped and work begins on a hypothesis that can more accurately reflect reality. Any idea?

Cot in the air warms it. Remember this experiment?

The American Journal o f Science and Arts Vol XXII Nov 1856, Pgs 382 - 383

The American Journal of Science and Arts

A two page report in 1856 by Eunice Newton Foote demonstrated that CO2 absorbs heat. She measured the temperatures in two glass 4x30 inch cylinders with internal thermometers. She exposed them to sunlight, one filled with air and one with CO2. Foote speculated that if there had been a period when the atmosphere held more of the gas, the planet would have been warmer.

She noted the temperature rises in various gases under the same conditions:

On comparing the sun's heat in different gases, I found it to be in hydrogen gas, 104° ; in common air, 106°; in oxygen gas 108°; and in carbonic acid gas, 125°.​

Got yourself another example of the heat of compression...third paragraph....she states that the action increases with the density of the air...heat of compression...you are so easily fooled that it is just laughable...what a dupe...

What is funny...really funny is that you have to keep going back to that quaint 19th century science to find anything that supports your claims...it is hilarious to watch you thrash about looking for something....anything that seems to support your beliefs...

What is funny...really funny is that you have to keep going back to that quaint 19th century science to find anything that supports your claims..

What's funny is you can't find anything from a more recent century to support your claims.

What is funny...really funny is that you have to keep going back to that quaint 19th century science to find anything that supports your claims..


For an arbitrary body emitting and absorbing thermal radiation in thermodynamic equilibrium, the emissivity is equal to the absorptivity.

Kirchhoff's law of thermal radiation - Wikipedia

 

[Wuwei]

You're back to this again, after earlier admitting IR warms the greenhouse gas components of air,

So you are a liar also...not surprising...IR does not warm air...nor does it warm so called greenhouse gasses with the exception of water vapor...

while the majority of air is transparent to IR. If gases absorb IR they must be warmed.

Flawed assumption...but feel free to show some observed, measured evidence that supports the claim that absorption and emission equals warming.

whileHere is a link to the empirical evidence greenhouse gases absorb IR

https://www.researchgate.net/publication/235210289_Infrared_Absorption_by_CH4_H2O_and_CO2

Guess you are easily fooled...nothing there establishes a coherent link between the absorption of IR by a gas and warming in the atmosphere...absorption and emission don't equal warming...and the time between collisions of so called greenhouse gas molecules and N2 or O2, or some other component of "air" is so small, generally speaking, the so called greenhouse gas molecule loses its absorbed energy via collision before it even has time to emit said radiation...

Still waiting for you to tell me how many predictive failures a hypothesis gets in real science before it is scrapped and work begins on a hypothesis that can more accurately reflect reality. Any idea?

Cot in the air warms it. Remember this experiment?

The American Journal o f Science and Arts Vol XXII Nov 1856, Pgs 382 - 383

The American Journal of Science and Arts

A two page report in 1856 by Eunice Newton Foote demonstrated that CO2 absorbs heat. She measured the temperatures in two glass 4x30 inch cylinders with internal thermometers. She exposed them to sunlight, one filled with air and one with CO2. Foote speculated that if there had been a period when the atmosphere held more of the gas, the planet would have been warmer.

She noted the temperature rises in various gases under the same conditions:

On comparing the sun's heat in different gases, I found it to be in hydrogen gas, 104° ; in common air, 106°; in oxygen gas 108°; and in carbonic acid gas, 125°.​

Got yourself another example of the heat of compression...third paragraph....she states that the action increases with the density of the air...heat of compression...you are so easily fooled that it is just laughable...what a dupe...

What is funny...really funny is that you have to keep going back to that quaint 19th century science to find anything that supports your claims...it is hilarious to watch you thrash about looking for something....anything that seems to support your beliefs...

Heat of compression? How do you get heat of compression without heat? It is the heat that creates compression. In short the cylinder of CO2 absorbs heat. The cylinder with air doesn't absorb as much heat even though it also has heat of compression.

.

 

[SSDD]

You're back to this again, after earlier admitting IR warms the greenhouse gas components of air,

So you are a liar also...not surprising...IR does not warm air...nor does it warm so called greenhouse gasses with the exception of water vapor...

while the majority of air is transparent to IR. If gases absorb IR they must be warmed.

Flawed assumption...but feel free to show some observed, measured evidence that supports the claim that absorption and emission equals warming.

whileHere is a link to the empirical evidence greenhouse gases absorb IR

https://www.researchgate.net/publication/235210289_Infrared_Absorption_by_CH4_H2O_and_CO2

Guess you are easily fooled...nothing there establishes a coherent link between the absorption of IR by a gas and warming in the atmosphere...absorption and emission don't equal warming...and the time between collisions of so called greenhouse gas molecules and N2 or O2, or some other component of "air" is so small, generally speaking, the so called greenhouse gas molecule loses its absorbed energy via collision before it even has time to emit said radiation...

Still waiting for you to tell me how many predictive failures a hypothesis gets in real science before it is scrapped and work begins on a hypothesis that can more accurately reflect reality. Any idea?

Cot in the air warms it. Remember this experiment?

The American Journal o f Science and Arts Vol XXII Nov 1856, Pgs 382 - 383

The American Journal of Science and Arts

A two page report in 1856 by Eunice Newton Foote demonstrated that CO2 absorbs heat. She measured the temperatures in two glass 4x30 inch cylinders with internal thermometers. She exposed them to sunlight, one filled with air and one with CO2. Foote speculated that if there had been a period when the atmosphere held more of the gas, the planet would have been warmer.

She noted the temperature rises in various gases under the same conditions:

On comparing the sun's heat in different gases, I found it to be in hydrogen gas, 104° ; in common air, 106°; in oxygen gas 108°; and in carbonic acid gas, 125°.​

Got yourself another example of the heat of compression...third paragraph....she states that the action increases with the density of the air...heat of compression...you are so easily fooled that it is just laughable...what a dupe...

What is funny...really funny is that you have to keep going back to that quaint 19th century science to find anything that supports your claims...it is hilarious to watch you thrash about looking for something....anything that seems to support your beliefs...

Heat of compression? How do you get heat of compression without heat? It is the heat that creates compression. In short the cylinder of CO2 absorbs heat. The cylinder with air doesn't absorb as much heat even though it also has heat of compression.

.

The walls are warmed by radiation...that energy is then conducted into the gas...sorry guy...if you have a closed container holding the gas, then the heat is due to the heat of compression...IR can't warm the gas inside...

Refer back to the first greenhouse in a bottle experiment you provided...the container with plain air heated up by 30 percent when it was sealed...it heated by exactly the same amount as the container filled with CO2 when the container was vented so that there would be no heat of compression...

Try it your self at home goober...take a soda bottle...put a thermometer inside and screw the cap back on...then take another just like it...put a thermometer in side and put a cap with a hole in it back on the bottle...set it into the sun...both will warm, but the one with the unvented cap will warm more...and a hell of a lot more than the 1% you claimed represented the heat of compression...It isn't as if this stuff is rocket science..you can see the heat of compression at work in a bottle on your deck any day you care to prove yourself wrong...

 

[jc456]

Stefan-Boltzmann Law
E = sigma T^4 Where sigma = 5.670367 × 10^−8 watt per meter^2 per K^4

This law lets us calculate how much thermal energy ANY object is radiating. Notice that the temperature or nature or configuration of the object's surroundings DO NOT APPEAR.

hotter to colder. period.

 

[CrusaderFrank]

You're back to this again, after earlier admitting IR warms the greenhouse gas components of air,

So you are a liar also...not surprising...IR does not warm air...nor does it warm so called greenhouse gasses with the exception of water vapor...

while the majority of air is transparent to IR. If gases absorb IR they must be warmed.

Flawed assumption...but feel free to show some observed, measured evidence that supports the claim that absorption and emission equals warming.

whileHere is a link to the empirical evidence greenhouse gases absorb IR

https://www.researchgate.net/publication/235210289_Infrared_Absorption_by_CH4_H2O_and_CO2

Guess you are easily fooled...nothing there establishes a coherent link between the absorption of IR by a gas and warming in the atmosphere...absorption and emission don't equal warming...and the time between collisions of so called greenhouse gas molecules and N2 or O2, or some other component of "air" is so small, generally speaking, the so called greenhouse gas molecule loses its absorbed energy via collision before it even has time to emit said radiation...

Still waiting for you to tell me how many predictive failures a hypothesis gets in real science before it is scrapped and work begins on a hypothesis that can more accurately reflect reality. Any idea?

Cot in the air warms it. Remember this experiment?

The American Journal o f Science and Arts Vol XXII Nov 1856, Pgs 382 - 383

The American Journal of Science and Arts

A two page report in 1856 by Eunice Newton Foote demonstrated that CO2 absorbs heat. She measured the temperatures in two glass 4x30 inch cylinders with internal thermometers. She exposed them to sunlight, one filled with air and one with CO2. Foote speculated that if there had been a period when the atmosphere held more of the gas, the planet would have been warmer.

She noted the temperature rises in various gases under the same conditions:

On comparing the sun's heat in different gases, I found it to be in hydrogen gas, 104° ; in common air, 106°; in oxygen gas 108°; and in carbonic acid gas, 125°.​

Got yourself another example of the heat of compression...third paragraph....she states that the action increases with the density of the air...heat of compression...you are so easily fooled that it is just laughable...what a dupe...

What is funny...really funny is that you have to keep going back to that quaint 19th century science to find anything that supports your claims...it is hilarious to watch you thrash about looking for something....anything that seems to support your beliefs...

Heat of compression? How do you get heat of compression without heat? It is the heat that creates compression. In short the cylinder of CO2 absorbs heat. The cylinder with air doesn't absorb as much heat even though it also has heat of compression.

.

Heat creates compression?

Are you sure?