Post the Experiment

[jc456]

Ok all of you lefty wanna-bee's let's see the experiment that shows adding 120 PPM of CO2 actually increases temperatures. I have Herr Koch 1901 as my experiment that hasn't seen a challenge yet. Over one hundred years and still no challenge. I think that means he wins!!!!

"The arguments do sound good, so good that in fact they helped to suppress research on the greenhouse effect for half a century. In 1900, shortly after Svante Arrhenius published his pathbreaking argument that our use of fossil fuels will eventually warm the planet, another scientist, Knut Ångström, asked an assistant, Herr J. Koch, to do a simple experiment. He sent infrared radiation through a tube filled with carbon dioxide, containing somewhat less gas in total then would be found in a column of air reaching to the top of the atmosphere. That’s not much, since the concentration in air is only a few hundred parts per million. Herr Koch did his experiments in a 30cm long tube, though 250cm would have been closer to the right length to use to represent the amount of CO2 in the atmosphere. Herr Koch reported that when he cut the amount of gas in the tube by one-third, the amount of radiation that got through scarcely changed."

Anything other than an experiment and it is off topic

 

[mamooth]

jc, see the dozens of times the data has already been given to you, and the many times it's been pointed out that you're lying-by-cherrypicking about Koch.

That is, stop spamming nonsense that's been debunked many times.

 

[jc456]

jc, see the dozens of times the data has already been given to you, and the many times it's been pointed out that you're lying-by-cherrypicking about Koch.

That is, stop spamming nonsense that's been debunked many times.

And yet no experiment. I created this thread for one reason, to prove you have not one experiment. And the lack of an experiment will mean you admit defeat!!!!!!

 

[Old Rocks]

The experiment was done in 1858, by John Tyndall. And has been supported by every similiar experiment since then. That you are a silly liar is self evident.

 

[jc456]

The experiment was done in 1858, by John Tyndall. And has been supported by every similiar experiment since then. That you are a silly liar is self evident.

I will look it over tomorrow. thanks, I'm intrigued to read it.

 

[Billy_Bob]

"Tyndall's experiments also showed that molecules of water vapor, carbon dioxide, and ozone are the best absorbers of heat radiation, and that even in small quantities, these gases absorb much more strongly than the atmosphere itself. He concluded that among the constituents of the atmosphere, water vapor is the strongest absorber of radiant heat and is therefore the most important gas controlling Earth's surface temperature. He said, without water vapor, the Earth's surface would be "held fast in the iron grip of frost." He later speculated on how fluctuations in water vapor and carbon dioxide could be related to climate change."

Tyndall's 1885 experiment in no way invalidated Herr Koch's experiment. Tyndall himself stated he was speculating on the potential ramifications as "the activities of specific gases and their interactions with each other can not be determined". Even Tyndall knew that water vapor was the 800 pound gorilla in the room and yet today's scientists ignore water vapor.

Old Crock is picking and choosing words which seem to validate his stance on Anthropogenic Global Warming while ignoring the points which lay it waste.. Tyndall was measuring the warming of the gas while Herr Koch was measuring the warming of the surfaces below and evaluating the bandpass and reflection. This is akin to comparing apples and oranges....

Source

 

[jc456]

The experiment was done in 1858, by John Tyndall. And has been supported by every similiar experiment since then. That you are a silly liar is self evident.

Old Rocks, sorry, I've been a busy guy today. I did some research, but unclear which experiment exactly you were referring to . I found this one and read this one today JSTOR An Error Occurred Setting Your User Cookie

I'm not sure what conclusions to draw from this though, seemed he was building up a way to perform the experiment but was still unclear his work was relevant.

let me know if you can or can't get the link. I'm having an issue with it on my side, but i clicked it and it worked.

 

[Old Rocks]

That is the experiment. What it did was establish that CO2, CH4, NOx, and water vapor are GHGs. They absorb energy from long wave infrared, and that energy heats the atmosphere. The question answered at that time was why the Earth's oceans were not frozen down to the equator. Because of the albedo of the earth, and the amount of radiation the earth emits, the energy balance worked out in the 1820's by Fourier and other scientists of the time, it should be much colder.

Since then, with much better equipment, the absorption spectrum of the GHGs has been refined.This site from the American Institute of Physics, and gives the history of the research into this subject.

The Carbon Dioxide Greenhouse Effect

 

[jc456]

That is the experiment. What it did was establish that CO2, CH4, NOx, and water vapor are GHGs. They absorb energy from long wave infrared, and that energy heats the atmosphere. The question answered at that time was why the Earth's oceans were not frozen down to the equator. Because of the albedo of the earth, and the amount of radiation the earth emits, the energy balance worked out in the 1820's by Fourier and other scientists of the time, it should be much colder.

Since then, with much better equipment, the absorption spectrum of the GHGs has been refined.This site from the American Institute of Physics, and gives the history of the research into this subject.

The Carbon Dioxide Greenhouse Effect

I agree with that assessment, the problem with it is it doesn't go into how much each gas could absorb. I believe reading it, he was attempting to figure that out but results were confusing him. (my interpretation of his comments). I believe he expected further generations to build on his efforts. The closest one I can find is Herr Koch's 1901 experiment, and as of today, still haven't seen another on the internet. Your new link is the one that actually shows Herr Koch's. The problem I have with the findings after in that article, is no one ever does another making the supposed corrections complained about. Therefore, I deduce they couldn't produce any different result. And that, and only that, gives me confidence there is no rebuttal experiment around. Otherwise, someone would be pasting that all over this forum with as many times that it has been requested.

 

[jc456]

Another day and another day without an experiment that shows that 120 PPM of CO2 does anything to temperature.

 

[mamooth]

jc, watching you spam your religious cult's crazy mythology is rather boring. Nobody but you and fellow cult fruitloops Frank and Billy care about it a bit. So what's the point of it?

We get it already. Your strange primitive cult claims the last century of physics is all wrong. Well, good luck with that. You and Frank and Billy should get together, write a paper and claim your Nobel prize. Or, you can just keep howling conspiracy theories on message boards. Either way, you're just comic relief.

 

[jc456]

jc, watching you spam your religious cult's crazy mythology is rather boring. Nobody but you and fellow cult fruitloops Frank and Billy care about it a bit. So what's the point of it?

We get it already. Your strange primitive cult claims the last century of physics is all wrong. Well, good luck with that. You and Frank and Billy should get together, write a paper and claim your Nobel prize. Or, you can just keep howling conspiracy theories on message boards. Either way, you're just comic relief.

The point of it is to prove the lies you present are just that, lies. Not so much you, you never provide much except for mumbo jumbo. And I just love stating the mumbo jumbo aspect of your posts. You act like you know all this science stuff and you know nothing. You know less than me.

 

[elektra]

The experiment was done in 1858, by John Tyndall. And has been supported by every similiar experiment since then. That you are a silly liar is self evident.

Tyndall? Tyndall rode in a carriage drawn by a horse, this is the 21st century old crock.

Tydall's conclusions were also based on the, "ether". I think it was Einstein who kind of ended the idea of an"ether"

 

[elektra]

jc, watching you spam your religious cult's crazy mythology is rather boring. Nobody but you and fellow cult fruitloops Frank and Billy care about it a bit. So what's the point of it?

We get it already. Your strange primitive cult claims the last century of physics is all wrong. Well, good luck with that. You and Frank and Billy should get together, write a paper and claim your Nobel prize. Or, you can just keep howling conspiracy theories on message boards. Either way, you're just comic relief.

Primitive as in Tyndall and the Ether.

 

[jc456]

Not quite a week, but still no posted experiment other than Tyndall 1885, which is explained here. Still waiting.

 

[IanC]

It would be a lot easier for the skeptical side to post up the dozens of fake/ or faulty video experiments that serve only as propaganda for CAGW. Eg Mythbusters or the ludicrously fake Gore/Bye fiasco.

 

[Old Rocks]

First direct observation of carbon dioxide s increasing greenhouse effect at Earth s surface -- ScienceDaily

Well, here is the latest modern experiment, and it validates everything the scientists have said.

 

[Billy_Bob]

First direct observation of carbon dioxide s increasing greenhouse effect at Earth s surface -- ScienceDaily

Well, here is the latest modern experiment, and it validates everything the scientists have said.

Nope! this one is a hope and poke by Berkly Earth Sciences...

The paper shows a mere 0.2W/M^2 of solar retention in the DWLWIR spectrum per decade. Given the error bars this is clearly within the Margin of Error and statistically insignificant.

It is the equivalent of 2W/M^2 in over 100 years or 0.23 deg C in rise. A far cry from the original predictions of 3.7 deg C per 100 years that the IPCC first propagandized and far below even the most recent levels of warming expected by all modeling... The Correlation is extremely weak and omits other causes of the rise...

The more I study this paper the more I see it was merely window dressing for the upcoming IPCC conference. BEST is going to be very unhappy if they are forced to retract this paper as major flaws are apparent.

 

[Old Rocks]

Yah sure, Wilson, you study that paper. Like you even have the least ability to understand it.,

 

[Old Rocks]

So you are predicting a retraction? Going to remind you of that in the coming months.