LWIR FAILS to Warm the Atmosphere by Empirical Experiment.

[SSDD]

I love the way you think YOU are the first person to do science. And did I miss your explanation as to where the energy DID go? Your claim that you pumped energy into a closed system without raising its energy content tells us that you are either lying or utterly incompetent or both.

Is that what he said he did? Or is that just you being unable to read words and understand what is being said?

 

[IanC]

The amount of energy emitted to space by CO2 molecules is only a fraction of the energy absorbed from the surface in the first few metres of atmosphere.

There is insufficient CO2 to interact with the energy load. So are you giving your CO2 molecules a stop sign to keep the LWIR from emitting to or through other molecules and space?

One of the main reasons we did this experiment was the earths deserts. The only places on earth that can have 110-120 degree F swings in 24 hours. The only thing that is lacking in these regions from most of the planet is water vapor. During the day there is little to block the energy from the earth, at night there is very little to keep it warm.

We are not talking about the whole energy load. We are talking about discrete frequencies where CO2 has an emissivity close to one rather than the usual emissivity of zero.

CO2 has three wavelengths where there is total absorbance, 3 5 and 15 microns. 3 and 5 are not particularly relevant because neither the Sun nor the surface supply much of them. On the other hand, 15 microns is in the maximum area for surface thermal IR emission. Roughly 8% of all surface radiation interacts strongly with atmospheric CO2. The rest doesn't interact at all. The graph shows that zero percent of the surface CO2 reactive radiation gets through to space. Any that does escape to space was produced in the upper atmosphere, where the air is cold and thin.

We know from the S-B equations that cold things radiate less than warm things. There is more 15 micron radiation produced at the warm surface and intercepted by CO2 than is later emitted to space at a higher altitude.

 

[IanC]

"energy saturated"? Is that another example of your bafflegab?

CO2 absorbs all surface generated radiation in the CO2 reactive bands. None escapes to space.

The CO2 reactive radiation that does escape to space is emitted by CO2 in the atmosphere, at a rate determined by the temperature of the air when it was created.

There is supporting evidence for this every time a satellite measures outgoing radiation from the top of the atmosphere. The bands of radiation that are not absorbed by air show a brightness that reflects the temperature of the surface, the bands that are absorbed reflect the temperature at which the air is thin enough to allow the radiation to escape rather than be reabsorbed again.

Do I really have to repost a graph yet again that shows surface radiation escaping freely in the atmospheric window with various 'chunks' missing because of absorption due to greenhouse gases?

Convection is the primary mover of energy in the troposphere by a wide margin over radiation...radiation is a bit player in the troposphere and all your radiative greenhouse effect pseudoscience is nothing more than a steaming pile.

How much energy does the earth/atmosphere lose by convection and conduction? Zero, zilch, nada.

Are you under the impression that non greenhouse gasses can't radiate energy they have acquired via collision? If so, get yourself another impression. Aren't you always saying that everything radiates? Does that not include non greenhouse gasses? Let me guess...you are so wrapped up in your radiative greenhouse effect and magic gasses that you never even considered the fact that N2, O2, H etc also radiate energy.

Oxygen and Nitrogen are very poor absorbers and emitters of thermal IR. The absorption of near IR, visible and UV radiation does not lead to re-emission because the atmosphere is too cold to provide the necessary energy.

And, yet, they move the vast bulk of energy through the troposphere...radiation is a bit player at best in the troposphere.

You can move energy around all you want, but the only way to get rid of it is to radiate it to space.

 

[IanC]

If the atmosphere was totally made up of only nitrogen then the only significant way of adding or subtracting energy would be conduction across the surface/air boundary.

In the daytime solar energy would warm the surface, but to a lesser temperature because some energy would be directed to the atmosphere which would store the energy as both temperature (kinetic energy) and height (potential energy).

At night the reverse would happen. The atmosphere would cool and shrink as it gives up energy that slows the cooling of the surface.

Remember, the surface is always shedding energy by thermal radiation because it is a blackbody radiator at those frequencies and temperature. The non-GHG atmosphere has no wavelengths to lose energy so it returns the energy to the surface by conduction only.

 

[Crick]

I love the way you think YOU are the first person to do science. And did I miss your explanation as to where the energy DID go? Your claim that you pumped energy into a closed system without raising its energy content tells us that you are either lying or utterly incompetent or both.

Is that what he said he did? Or is that just you being unable to read words and understand what is being said?

Here is precisely what he said.

"I wrote about this experiment about 2 years ago here and now that we have done the experiment 10 times and obtained the same results each time, its time to write about it. A technical paper is in process but here are the basics...

A 30 meter long tube was filled with atmospheric value gases. The tube was constructed such that the tube itself was not reactive to LWIR and was insulated to stop energy loss to the room. The ends were opaque and thermo-couplers (accurate to 0.001 Deg C +/-0.003) were positioned throught the length of the tube.They were shielded from LWIR to make sure there were no erroneous readings obtained.

We started with just 396W/m^2 narrow band LWIR (6um-75um) introduction at one end of the tube and measured the opposing end with a receptor. The tube was set for <10% humidity and the temperature and output monitored. After 24 hours the tube had not warmed at all proving that the atmosphere is incapable of warming without another catalyst."

And, so, the question remains. Where did 24 hours worth of 396W/m^2 GO?

This is right up there with your contention that the Earth tilts more for one pole than it does for the other.

 

[Billy_Bob]

LOL

We just finished 2 years of empirically observed experiments and I don't give a shit about your political, bull shit, model derived, fiction positions.. When we are finished with the technical paper I'm sure you will all have your hay-day and voo-doo dances...

The experiment was designed to determine if the gases in our atmosphere were capable of warming, without a secondary catalyst, with the introduction of LWIR. We proved it does not. Without water vapor our atmosphere passed all LWIR and we did not see warming until we were over 44 - 48% humidity.

The design of the structure, to do testing, was such that LWIR did not warm it. This was by design to stop convective and conductive interference allowing us to see exactly how the atmosphere reacts. Pressures were reduced to see how it changed at altitude as well.

Until you all do the science and disprove what was found you have nothing! Of course nothing is what you all have had all along.. What we found challenges the holy book of AGW.

I love the way you think YOU are the first person to do science. And did I miss your explanation as to where the energy DID go? Your claim that you pumped energy into a closed system without raising its energy content tells us that you are either lying or utterly incompetent or both.

Tell me moron, Will the energy in the electrical system in your home burn it down without a catalyst which is capable of enabling/using the energy?

 

[Billy_Bob]

And, so, the question remains. Where did 24 hours worth of 396W/m^2 GO?

It exited the tube without causing warming.. We measured the output of the tube to determine how much was being passed through the coulomb. essentially its like putting a spotlight at one end of a tunnel, then watching the light exit the tunnel onto a wall (receptor pad) at the other end..

Its a basic physics thing..

 

[Billy_Bob]

We know from the S-B equations that cold things radiate less than warm things. There is more 15 micron radiation produced at the warm surface and intercepted by CO2 than is later emitted to space at a higher altitude.

Would you like to know why?

Its actually very simple. CO2 is not the major player. Water vapor is. Water cools as it rises therefore the energy it emits at altitude will be at a much longer wave length.

The energy at the surface is more than the CO2 in our atmosphere can deal with. Water vapor is abundant at that level and is where the majority of all energy is absorbed and thus the mover of energy in this region. Convection and Conduction are the major players, PERIOD!

Our experiment proved that the energy will pass without warming the atmosphere until water vapor is introduced.

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

And, so, the question remains. Where did 24 hours worth of 396W/m^2 GO?

It exited the tube without causing warming.. We measured the output of the tube to determine how much was being passed through the coulomb. essentially its like putting a spotlight at one end of a tunnel, then watching the light exit the tunnel onto a wall (receptor pad) at the other end..

Its a basic physics thing..

It exited the tube without causing warming.

You said, "The ends were opaque" and "the tube itself was not reactive to LWIR and was insulated to stop energy loss to the room"

How does LWIR leave an opaque, insulated tube?

 

[Billy_Bob]

And, so, the question remains. Where did 24 hours worth of 396W/m^2 GO?

It exited the tube without causing warming.. We measured the output of the tube to determine how much was being passed through the coulomb. essentially its like putting a spotlight at one end of a tunnel, then watching the light exit the tunnel onto a wall (receptor pad) at the other end..

Its a basic physics thing..

It exited the tube without causing warming.

You said, "The ends were opaque" and "the tube itself was not reactive to LWIR and was insulated to stop energy loss to the room"

How does LWIR leave an opaque, insulated tube?

Opaque to LWIR.... Meaning; not reactive or obstructive.

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

And, so, the question remains. Where did 24 hours worth of 396W/m^2 GO?

It exited the tube without causing warming.. We measured the output of the tube to determine how much was being passed through the coulomb. essentially its like putting a spotlight at one end of a tunnel, then watching the light exit the tunnel onto a wall (receptor pad) at the other end..

Its a basic physics thing..

It exited the tube without causing warming.

You said, "The ends were opaque" and "the tube itself was not reactive to LWIR and was insulated to stop energy loss to the room"

How does LWIR leave an opaque, insulated tube?

Opaque to LWIR.... Meaning; not reactive or obstructive.

It exited the tube without causing warming.​

How does LWIR leave an opaque, insulated tube?

Meaning; not reactive or obstructive.

Opaque isn't obstructive?

not transparent or translucent; impenetrable to light; not allowing light to pass through.

the definition of opaque

 

[Crick]

Tell me moron, Will the energy in the electrical system in your home burn it down without a catalyst which is capable of enabling/using the energy?

Are you really that stupid? Cut one of the two hot wires on your 120V power and see how well your lights work. You claim to be pushing energy into a system from which it cannot escape. Where the fuck did it go fool?

 

[Billy_Bob]

Tell me moron, Will the energy in the electrical system in your home burn it down without a catalyst which is capable of enabling/using the energy?

Are you really that stupid? Cut one of the two hot wires on your 120V power and see how well your lights work. You claim to be pushing energy into a system from which it cannot escape. Where the fuck did it go fool?

You don't have a clue.. Fool!


You idiots think that just because there is energy present it must cause warming... IT DOESN'T! Energy can pass through a system and make no changes. Something in the system must be able to enable/react the energy in order for it to make changes, if it is not present it can not change anything.

 

[Crick]

Its actually very simple. CO2 is not the major player. Water vapor is. Water cools as it rises therefore the energy it emits at altitude will be at a much longer wave length.

View attachment 231479

The energy at the surface is more than the CO2 in our atmosphere can deal with. Water vapor is abundant at that level and is where the majority of all energy is absorbed and thus the mover of energy in this region. Convection and Conduction are the major players, PERIOD!

Our experiment proved that the energy will pass without warming the atmosphere until water vapor is introduced.

I hate to burst your bubble, but the gas mixture at the top of the Earth's atmosphere, from which all radiation is emitted, is almost entirely devoid of water vapor.

It's one of those basic physics things.

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

Tell me moron, Will the energy in the electrical system in your home burn it down without a catalyst which is capable of enabling/using the energy?

Are you really that stupid? Cut one of the two hot wires on your 120V power and see how well your lights work. You claim to be pushing energy into a system from which it cannot escape. Where the fuck did it go fool?

You don't have a clue.. Fool!


You idiots think that just because there is energy present it must cause warming... IT DOESN'T! Energy can pass through a system and make no changes. Something in the system must be able to enable/react the energy in order for it to make changes, if it is not present it can not change anything.

Energy can pass through a system and make no changes.

You said the tube was opaque and insulated. That means energy can't pass through.
Were you lying?

 

[Crick]

I'm with Todd here. Here is everything I could find you saying about this tube.

A 30 meter long tube was filled with atmospheric value gases. The tube was constructed such that the tube itself was not reactive to LWIR and was insulated to stop energy loss to the room. The ends were opaque and thermo-couplers (accurate to 0.001 Deg C +/-0.003) were positioned throught the length of the tube.They were shielded from LWIR to make sure there were no erroneous readings obtained.

As for the tube, it was made of ceramics which was non-LWIR reactive. So it did not warm with the amount of LWIR we were directing through it. IT was our attempt at keeping the only thing which could warm was the atmosphere in the tube. Ceramics, when warmed, take very little convective energy to warm or cool so they will not adversely affect the outcome of the experiments. Insulating was made much easier as well.

The design of the structure, to do testing, was such that LWIR did not warm it. This was by design to stop convective and conductive interference allowing us to see exactly how the atmosphere reacts.

It exited the tube without causing warming.. We measured the output of the tube to determine how much was being passed through the coulomb. essentially its like putting a spotlight at one end of a tunnel, then watching the light exit the tunnel onto a wall (receptor pad) at the other end.

I know of no transparent or even translucent ceramics. Detectors, by design, would be completely opaque. Where did the energy go?

Tell us something. Could you show us the relationship between CO2 levels and the amount of LWIR received at the end of the tube? For example, with CO2 at 10%, what were the received levels at the far end of the tube from the moment your energized your LW source till you considered the run complete.

 

[Billy_Bob]

Tell me moron, Will the energy in the electrical system in your home burn it down without a catalyst which is capable of enabling/using the energy?

Are you really that stupid? Cut one of the two hot wires on your 120V power and see how well your lights work. You claim to be pushing energy into a system from which it cannot escape. Where the fuck did it go fool?

You don't have a clue.. Fool!


You idiots think that just because there is energy present it must cause warming... IT DOESN'T! Energy can pass through a system and make no changes. Something in the system must be able to enable/react the energy in order for it to make changes, if it is not present it can not change anything.

Energy can pass through a system and make no changes.

You said the tube was opaque and insulated. That means energy can't pass through.
Were you lying?

Again you have no concept of the experiment. It was precisely designed to look at the atmosphere and identify how it reacts. The Tube was designed to remove other outside influences such as convection and conduction against the tube wall...
Its amazing how reading comprehension problems affect alarmists..

 

[Billy_Bob]

I'm with Todd here. Here is everything I could find you saying about this tube.

A 30 meter long tube was filled with atmospheric value gases. The tube was constructed such that the tube itself was not reactive to LWIR and was insulated to stop energy loss to the room. The ends were opaque and thermo-couplers (accurate to 0.001 Deg C +/-0.003) were positioned throught the length of the tube.They were shielded from LWIR to make sure there were no erroneous readings obtained.

As for the tube, it was made of ceramics which was non-LWIR reactive. So it did not warm with the amount of LWIR we were directing through it. IT was our attempt at keeping the only thing which could warm was the atmosphere in the tube. Ceramics, when warmed, take very little convective energy to warm or cool so they will not adversely affect the outcome of the experiments. Insulating was made much easier as well.

The design of the structure, to do testing, was such that LWIR did not warm it. This was by design to stop convective and conductive interference allowing us to see exactly how the atmosphere reacts.

It exited the tube without causing warming.. We measured the output of the tube to determine how much was being passed through the coulomb. essentially its like putting a spotlight at one end of a tunnel, then watching the light exit the tunnel onto a wall (receptor pad) at the other end.

I know of no transparent or even translucent ceramics. Detectors, by design, would be completely opaque. Where did the energy go?

Tell us something. Could you show us the relationship between CO2 levels and the amount of LWIR received at the end of the tube? For example, with CO2 at 10%, what were the received levels at the far end of the tube from the moment your energized your LW source till you considered the run complete.

Why don't you talk to NASA they developed the ceramics for use on space craft.

 

[Crick]

I am familiar with the ceramics used on the shuttle. Is that what your tube was made of?

You still haven't answered the very basic question: where did 24 hours worth of 396W/m^2 GO TO? That you can't or won't answer this very basic question doesn't bode well for your efforts to become a scientist.

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

Tell me moron, Will the energy in the electrical system in your home burn it down without a catalyst which is capable of enabling/using the energy?

Are you really that stupid? Cut one of the two hot wires on your 120V power and see how well your lights work. You claim to be pushing energy into a system from which it cannot escape. Where the fuck did it go fool?

You don't have a clue.. Fool!


You idiots think that just because there is energy present it must cause warming... IT DOESN'T! Energy can pass through a system and make no changes. Something in the system must be able to enable/react the energy in order for it to make changes, if it is not present it can not change anything.

Energy can pass through a system and make no changes.

You said the tube was opaque and insulated. That means energy can't pass through.
Were you lying?

Again you have no concept of the experiment. It was precisely designed to look at the atmosphere and identify how it reacts. The Tube was designed to remove other outside influences such as convection and conduction against the tube wall...
Its amazing how reading comprehension problems affect alarmists..

Again you have no concept of the experiment.

Again, I'm just going by what you said,
Light can't escape the ends, right?
Energy can't escape the tube, it's insulated.
So where did it go?

Its amazing how reading comprehension problems affect alarmists..

Its amazing how idiocy affects idiots..