Northern nations warming faster than global average

[jc456]

Meaurement made with an instrument cooled to approximately -80 degrees. All that is being measured is energy moving from the warmer atmosphere to the cooler instrument...place an identical instrument next to that one...don't cool it and you won't measure any back radiation at all. Funny for you to call anyone an idiot when you are so easily fooled by instrumentation.

Except the instrument used to take those readings wasn't cooled to -80C.

link!!

The graph is from a Science of Doom article. It also had a photograph of the instrument with model type. At the time I linked manufacturers documentation and a paper comparing it to other instruments like it, showing the response and accuracy.

You guys didnt listen then, why would you listen now? If you are so interested, just search the archives. I think it was about 3-6 years ago but I am not certain.

well, that may have been some time ago, I don't recall, but I went to science of doom saw all of the back radiation articles, but nothing about the measuring device. oh well.

Bullshit.

just provide the name of the instrument. hmmm, avoidance is curious.

 

[Wuwei]

Ask our resident deniers how the surface can remain hot enough to radiate at 390w with only 240w coming in from the Sun.

Are you joking? I have asked that question many times to the major denier and he would always run away or deflect. The question about where the 1600 watts from the surface of Venus goes is an even more embarrassing question.


.

 

[jc456]

Ask our resident deniers how the surface can remain hot enough to radiate at 390w with only 240w coming in from the Sun.

Are you joking? I have asked that question many times to the major denier and he would always run away or deflect. The question about where the 1600 watts from the surface of Venus goes is an even more embarrassing question.


.

 

[IanC]

Except the instrument used to take those readings wasn't cooled to -80C.

link!!

The graph is from a Science of Doom article. It also had a photograph of the instrument with model type. At the time I linked manufacturers documentation and a paper comparing it to other instruments like it, showing the response and accuracy.

You guys didnt listen then, why would you listen now? If you are so interested, just search the archives. I think it was about 3-6 years ago but I am not certain.

well, that may have been some time ago, I don't recall, but I went to science of doom saw all of the back radiation articles, but nothing about the measuring device. oh well.

Bullshit.

just provide the name of the instrument. hmmm, avoidance is curious.

Schulze-Dake radiometer. As you would have known if you had put in 30 seconds of looking. The article does a pretty good job of destroying SSDDs bizarroland version of the SLoT as well.

 

[jc456]

link!!

The graph is from a Science of Doom article. It also had a photograph of the instrument with model type. At the time I linked manufacturers documentation and a paper comparing it to other instruments like it, showing the response and accuracy.

You guys didnt listen then, why would you listen now? If you are so interested, just search the archives. I think it was about 3-6 years ago but I am not certain.

well, that may have been some time ago, I don't recall, but I went to science of doom saw all of the back radiation articles, but nothing about the measuring device. oh well.

Bullshit.

just provide the name of the instrument. hmmm, avoidance is curious.

Schulze-Dake radiometer. As you would have known if you had put in 30 seconds of looking. The article does a pretty good job of destroying SSDDs bizarroland version of the SLoT as well.

Solar and Terrestrial Radiation

All I could find online, and in it it states...Nitrogen used on the sensor head. hmmmmm that's cooling it.

 

[IanC]

a picture of instrumentation. I googled Schulze-Dake and found this paper on comparisons of the available machines circa 1992. http://journals.ametsoc.org/doi/pdf/10.1175/1520-0426(1992)009<0762:EINRCA>2.0.CO;2

the page numbered 765 gives details on this particular instrument, which appears to be superior. you should read the PDF to find out more about the design and performance of these radiometers. in particular you will note that none of them are cooled, and that the response at different temperatures is analyzed. as are many other factors and calibrations.

those interested in Backradiation, both the theory and the measured data, could do worse than checking out this three part article. The Amazing Case of “Back-Radiation” The Amazing Case of “Back Radiation” – Part Two The Amazing Case of “Back Radiation” – Part Three

Copied from a previous thread. Thanks go to Todd for looking it up.

 

[Wuwei]

those interested in Backradiation, both the theory and the measured data, could do worse than checking out this three part article. The Amazing Case of “Back-Radiation” The Amazing Case of “Back Radiation” – Part Two The Amazing Case of “Back Radiation” – Part Three

Copied from a previous thread. Thanks go to Todd for looking it up.

Thank you. I read the three articles. Very interesting; I didn't know there were so many measurements of the DLR. And despite what the science nihilists say, the DLR is very significant.

One interesting slant on the "smart photons" gimmick is in the third article: photons from colder objects simply reflect off a warmer surface rather than giving energy to it. Whereas the nihilists here say the smart photons simply shy away from the warmer surface.


.

 

[SSDD]

Ask our resident deniers how the surface can remain hot enough to radiate at 390w with only 240w coming in from the Sun.

Are you joking? I have asked that question many times to the major denier and he would always run away or deflect. The question about where the 1600 watts from the surface of Venus goes is an even more embarrassing question.


.

Playing with averages as if that were the truth on a planet whose average daily maximum and minimum temperatures span 200 degrees? Your belief in models has made you stupid...You actually believe that the earth receives a uniform 240w across its surface and emits a uniform 390w? You don't think that perhaps the oceans absorb and hold a great deal more radiation than the rocky surface?

You wack jobs are mistaken about everything because you believe in fatally flawed models more than you believe in reality.

 

[SSDD]

link!!

The graph is from a Science of Doom article. It also had a photograph of the instrument with model type. At the time I linked manufacturers documentation and a paper comparing it to other instruments like it, showing the response and accuracy.

You guys didnt listen then, why would you listen now? If you are so interested, just search the archives. I think it was about 3-6 years ago but I am not certain.

well, that may have been some time ago, I don't recall, but I went to science of doom saw all of the back radiation articles, but nothing about the measuring device. oh well.

Bullshit.

just provide the name of the instrument. hmmm, avoidance is curious.

Schulze-Dake radiometer. As you would have known if you had put in 30 seconds of looking. The article does a pretty good job of destroying SSDDs bizarroland version of the SLoT as well.

Tell me ian...which discrete frequencies of radiation does a Schulze-Drake radiometer measure? Do you have any idea what it measures? Sorry guy...this is just another example of you being fooled by instrumentation...take your time and learn what it actually does, before you believe what people tell you it is measuring.

Here is a clue..it is measuring the temperature changes of an internal thermopile...then applying those changes to an equation that assumes that back radiation is real...you could just as easily reconfigure it to use those temperature changes to tell you how much fairy dust is in the air...there is no back radiation...energy does not move spontaneously from cool to warm...your belief in models over reality makes you a dupe and willing to be fooled by instruments...

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

The graph is from a Science of Doom article. It also had a photograph of the instrument with model type. At the time I linked manufacturers documentation and a paper comparing it to other instruments like it, showing the response and accuracy.

You guys didnt listen then, why would you listen now? If you are so interested, just search the archives. I think it was about 3-6 years ago but I am not certain.

well, that may have been some time ago, I don't recall, but I went to science of doom saw all of the back radiation articles, but nothing about the measuring device. oh well.

Bullshit.

just provide the name of the instrument. hmmm, avoidance is curious.

Schulze-Dake radiometer. As you would have known if you had put in 30 seconds of looking. The article does a pretty good job of destroying SSDDs bizarroland version of the SLoT as well.

Tell me ian...which discrete frequencies of radiation does a Schulze-Drake radiometer measure? Do you have any idea what it measures? Sorry guy...this is just another example of you being fooled by instrumentation...take your time and learn what it actually does, before you believe what people tell you it is measuring.

Here is a clue..it is measuring the temperature changes of an internal thermopile...then applying those changes to an equation that assumes that back radiation is real...you could just as easily reconfigure it to use those temperature changes to tell you how much fairy dust is in the air...there is no back radiation...energy does not move spontaneously from cool to warm...your belief in models over reality makes you a dupe and willing to be fooled by instruments...

.it is measuring the temperature changes of an internal thermopile...then applying those changes to an equation that assumes that back radiation is real.

If only someone could prove back radiation is fake, they'd win a Nobel.....easy.
It must be hard being the only guy in the world who knows the truth.

there is no back radiation...energy does not move spontaneously from cool to warm...

That reminds me, energy moves from the atmosphere toward the surface, non-spontaneously (your definition), for precisely the same reason it can move non-spontaneously (your definition) from the Sun's surface toward the corona.

Love that non-spontaneous (your definition) back radiation.

 

[jc456]

well, that may have been some time ago, I don't recall, but I went to science of doom saw all of the back radiation articles, but nothing about the measuring device. oh well.

Bullshit.

just provide the name of the instrument. hmmm, avoidance is curious.

Schulze-Dake radiometer. As you would have known if you had put in 30 seconds of looking. The article does a pretty good job of destroying SSDDs bizarroland version of the SLoT as well.

Tell me ian...which discrete frequencies of radiation does a Schulze-Drake radiometer measure? Do you have any idea what it measures? Sorry guy...this is just another example of you being fooled by instrumentation...take your time and learn what it actually does, before you believe what people tell you it is measuring.

Here is a clue..it is measuring the temperature changes of an internal thermopile...then applying those changes to an equation that assumes that back radiation is real...you could just as easily reconfigure it to use those temperature changes to tell you how much fairy dust is in the air...there is no back radiation...energy does not move spontaneously from cool to warm...your belief in models over reality makes you a dupe and willing to be fooled by instruments...

.it is measuring the temperature changes of an internal thermopile...then applying those changes to an equation that assumes that back radiation is real.

If only someone could prove back radiation is fake, they'd win a Nobel.....easy.
It must be hard being the only guy in the world who knows the truth.

there is no back radiation...energy does not move spontaneously from cool to warm...

That reminds me, energy moves from the atmosphere toward the surface, non-spontaneously (your definition), for precisely the same reason it can move non-spontaneously (your definition) from the Sun's surface toward the corona.

Love that non-spontaneous (your definition) back radiation.

still with the corona eh? your statement, who cares about the corona? hahaha dude you're such a hypocrite. again, let's see the evidence that the energy between the corona and the surface is spontaneous. I know I've been waiting for your revelation that no other scientist has. Come mr. nobel man!!!!

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

Bullshit.

just provide the name of the instrument. hmmm, avoidance is curious.

Schulze-Dake radiometer. As you would have known if you had put in 30 seconds of looking. The article does a pretty good job of destroying SSDDs bizarroland version of the SLoT as well.

Tell me ian...which discrete frequencies of radiation does a Schulze-Drake radiometer measure? Do you have any idea what it measures? Sorry guy...this is just another example of you being fooled by instrumentation...take your time and learn what it actually does, before you believe what people tell you it is measuring.

Here is a clue..it is measuring the temperature changes of an internal thermopile...then applying those changes to an equation that assumes that back radiation is real...you could just as easily reconfigure it to use those temperature changes to tell you how much fairy dust is in the air...there is no back radiation...energy does not move spontaneously from cool to warm...your belief in models over reality makes you a dupe and willing to be fooled by instruments...

.it is measuring the temperature changes of an internal thermopile...then applying those changes to an equation that assumes that back radiation is real.

If only someone could prove back radiation is fake, they'd win a Nobel.....easy.
It must be hard being the only guy in the world who knows the truth.

there is no back radiation...energy does not move spontaneously from cool to warm...

That reminds me, energy moves from the atmosphere toward the surface, non-spontaneously (your definition), for precisely the same reason it can move non-spontaneously (your definition) from the Sun's surface toward the corona.

Love that non-spontaneous (your definition) back radiation.

still with the corona eh? your statement, who cares about the corona? hahaha dude you're such a hypocrite. again, let's see the evidence that the energy between the corona and the surface is spontaneous. I know I've been waiting for your revelation that no other scientist has. Come mr. nobel man!!!!

let's see the evidence that the energy between the corona and the surface is spontaneous.

It's non-spontaneous from the surface toward the corona. SSDD says so.

Is he wrong?

 

[jc456]

just provide the name of the instrument. hmmm, avoidance is curious.

Schulze-Dake radiometer. As you would have known if you had put in 30 seconds of looking. The article does a pretty good job of destroying SSDDs bizarroland version of the SLoT as well.

Tell me ian...which discrete frequencies of radiation does a Schulze-Drake radiometer measure? Do you have any idea what it measures? Sorry guy...this is just another example of you being fooled by instrumentation...take your time and learn what it actually does, before you believe what people tell you it is measuring.

Here is a clue..it is measuring the temperature changes of an internal thermopile...then applying those changes to an equation that assumes that back radiation is real...you could just as easily reconfigure it to use those temperature changes to tell you how much fairy dust is in the air...there is no back radiation...energy does not move spontaneously from cool to warm...your belief in models over reality makes you a dupe and willing to be fooled by instruments...

.it is measuring the temperature changes of an internal thermopile...then applying those changes to an equation that assumes that back radiation is real.

If only someone could prove back radiation is fake, they'd win a Nobel.....easy.
It must be hard being the only guy in the world who knows the truth.

there is no back radiation...energy does not move spontaneously from cool to warm...

That reminds me, energy moves from the atmosphere toward the surface, non-spontaneously (your definition), for precisely the same reason it can move non-spontaneously (your definition) from the Sun's surface toward the corona.

Love that non-spontaneous (your definition) back radiation.

still with the corona eh? your statement, who cares about the corona? hahaha dude you're such a hypocrite. again, let's see the evidence that the energy between the corona and the surface is spontaneous. I know I've been waiting for your revelation that no other scientist has. Come mr. nobel man!!!!

let's see the evidence that the energy between the corona and the surface is spontaneous.

It's non-spontaneous from the surface toward the corona. SSDD says so.

Is he wrong?

damn, wash, rinse, repeat, you sure like laundry eh? It is his belief! not sure what that has to do with my post?

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

Schulze-Dake radiometer. As you would have known if you had put in 30 seconds of looking. The article does a pretty good job of destroying SSDDs bizarroland version of the SLoT as well.

Tell me ian...which discrete frequencies of radiation does a Schulze-Drake radiometer measure? Do you have any idea what it measures? Sorry guy...this is just another example of you being fooled by instrumentation...take your time and learn what it actually does, before you believe what people tell you it is measuring.

Here is a clue..it is measuring the temperature changes of an internal thermopile...then applying those changes to an equation that assumes that back radiation is real...you could just as easily reconfigure it to use those temperature changes to tell you how much fairy dust is in the air...there is no back radiation...energy does not move spontaneously from cool to warm...your belief in models over reality makes you a dupe and willing to be fooled by instruments...

.it is measuring the temperature changes of an internal thermopile...then applying those changes to an equation that assumes that back radiation is real.

If only someone could prove back radiation is fake, they'd win a Nobel.....easy.
It must be hard being the only guy in the world who knows the truth.

there is no back radiation...energy does not move spontaneously from cool to warm...

That reminds me, energy moves from the atmosphere toward the surface, non-spontaneously (your definition), for precisely the same reason it can move non-spontaneously (your definition) from the Sun's surface toward the corona.

Love that non-spontaneous (your definition) back radiation.

still with the corona eh? your statement, who cares about the corona? hahaha dude you're such a hypocrite. again, let's see the evidence that the energy between the corona and the surface is spontaneous. I know I've been waiting for your revelation that no other scientist has. Come mr. nobel man!!!!

let's see the evidence that the energy between the corona and the surface is spontaneous.

It's non-spontaneous from the surface toward the corona. SSDD says so.

Is he wrong?

damn, wash, rinse, repeat, you sure like laundry eh? It is his belief! not sure what that has to do with my post?

It is his belief!

Yup. Is he right or wrong?

 

[jc456]

Tell me ian...which discrete frequencies of radiation does a Schulze-Drake radiometer measure? Do you have any idea what it measures? Sorry guy...this is just another example of you being fooled by instrumentation...take your time and learn what it actually does, before you believe what people tell you it is measuring.

Here is a clue..it is measuring the temperature changes of an internal thermopile...then applying those changes to an equation that assumes that back radiation is real...you could just as easily reconfigure it to use those temperature changes to tell you how much fairy dust is in the air...there is no back radiation...energy does not move spontaneously from cool to warm...your belief in models over reality makes you a dupe and willing to be fooled by instruments...

.it is measuring the temperature changes of an internal thermopile...then applying those changes to an equation that assumes that back radiation is real.

If only someone could prove back radiation is fake, they'd win a Nobel.....easy.
It must be hard being the only guy in the world who knows the truth.

there is no back radiation...energy does not move spontaneously from cool to warm...

That reminds me, energy moves from the atmosphere toward the surface, non-spontaneously (your definition), for precisely the same reason it can move non-spontaneously (your definition) from the Sun's surface toward the corona.

Love that non-spontaneous (your definition) back radiation.

still with the corona eh? your statement, who cares about the corona? hahaha dude you're such a hypocrite. again, let's see the evidence that the energy between the corona and the surface is spontaneous. I know I've been waiting for your revelation that no other scientist has. Come mr. nobel man!!!!

let's see the evidence that the energy between the corona and the surface is spontaneous.

It's non-spontaneous from the surface toward the corona. SSDD says so.

Is he wrong?

damn, wash, rinse, repeat, you sure like laundry eh? It is his belief! not sure what that has to do with my post?

It is his belief!

Yup. Is he right or wrong?

scientists haven't determined what causes the exchange. I'll wait until that is known. You? you know more than the scientists?

 

[Wuwei]

Ask our resident deniers how the surface can remain hot enough to radiate at 390w with only 240w coming in from the Sun.

Are you joking? I have asked that question many times to the major denier and he would always run away or deflect. The question about where the 1600 watts from the surface of Venus goes is an even more embarrassing question.


.

Playing with averages as if that were the truth on a planet whose average daily maximum and minimum temperatures span 200 degrees? Your belief in models has made you stupid...You actually believe that the earth receives a uniform 240w across its surface and emits a uniform 390w? You don't think that perhaps the oceans absorb and hold a great deal more radiation than the rocky surface?

You wack jobs are mistaken about everything because you believe in fatally flawed models more than you believe in reality.

I see you are ill-tempered and deflecting, as usual, when you have no response. Where has anyone ever said that atmospheric temperatures are always uniform or constant? You are reading things into my discussion that aren't there and then criticizing me for that - strawman. Let me rephrase the statement I made to satisfy what you call picking pepper out of fly shit:

The question about where the 9200 to 27500 W/m² from the surface of Venus goes is an even more embarrassing question.

I don't expect an answer.


.

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

.it is measuring the temperature changes of an internal thermopile...then applying those changes to an equation that assumes that back radiation is real.

If only someone could prove back radiation is fake, they'd win a Nobel.....easy.
It must be hard being the only guy in the world who knows the truth.

there is no back radiation...energy does not move spontaneously from cool to warm...

That reminds me, energy moves from the atmosphere toward the surface, non-spontaneously (your definition), for precisely the same reason it can move non-spontaneously (your definition) from the Sun's surface toward the corona.

Love that non-spontaneous (your definition) back radiation.

still with the corona eh? your statement, who cares about the corona? hahaha dude you're such a hypocrite. again, let's see the evidence that the energy between the corona and the surface is spontaneous. I know I've been waiting for your revelation that no other scientist has. Come mr. nobel man!!!!

let's see the evidence that the energy between the corona and the surface is spontaneous.

It's non-spontaneous from the surface toward the corona. SSDD says so.

Is he wrong?

damn, wash, rinse, repeat, you sure like laundry eh? It is his belief! not sure what that has to do with my post?

It is his belief!

Yup. Is he right or wrong?

scientists haven't determined what causes the exchange. I'll wait until that is known. You? you know more than the scientists?

scientists haven't determined what causes the exchange.

Scientists don't know why the Sun's surface emits photons?

Wow. You must only talk to the idiot scientists.

 

[Wuwei]

Wow. You must only talk to the idiot scientists.

Well, he is a mentor of SSDD.

Edit: oops I meant SSDD is his mentor. Or is it the other way around? Who knows.



.

 

[jc456]

still with the corona eh? your statement, who cares about the corona? hahaha dude you're such a hypocrite. again, let's see the evidence that the energy between the corona and the surface is spontaneous. I know I've been waiting for your revelation that no other scientist has. Come mr. nobel man!!!!

let's see the evidence that the energy between the corona and the surface is spontaneous.

It's non-spontaneous from the surface toward the corona. SSDD says so.

Is he wrong?

damn, wash, rinse, repeat, you sure like laundry eh? It is his belief! not sure what that has to do with my post?

It is his belief!

Yup. Is he right or wrong?

scientists haven't determined what causes the exchange. I'll wait until that is known. You? you know more than the scientists?

scientists haven't determined what causes the exchange.

Scientists don't know why the Sun's surface emits photons?

Wow. You must only talk to the idiot scientists.

exactly, if they did, they'd know why the corona is hotter than the surface. again, you write in for the nobel prize for knowing why?

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

let's see the evidence that the energy between the corona and the surface is spontaneous.

It's non-spontaneous from the surface toward the corona. SSDD says so.

Is he wrong?

damn, wash, rinse, repeat, you sure like laundry eh? It is his belief! not sure what that has to do with my post?

It is his belief!

Yup. Is he right or wrong?

scientists haven't determined what causes the exchange. I'll wait until that is known. You? you know more than the scientists?

scientists haven't determined what causes the exchange.

Scientists don't know why the Sun's surface emits photons?

Wow. You must only talk to the idiot scientists.

exactly, if they did, they'd know why the corona is hotter than the surface. again, you write in for the nobel prize for knowing why?

exactly, if they did, they'd know why the corona is hotter than the surface

Knowing why the Sun's surface emits photons has ****-all to do with the corona.

You should get that head injury looked at....you're getting dumber the longer you post.