Questions.....RE: The Greenhouse Effect

[SSDD]

True some devices now use CCD’s that are specially designed to increase their sensitivity to light in the infrared spectrum, it still remains though that almost all CCD’s are capable of capturing images in what for all practical purposes amounts to total darkness using infrared."

It is hard to believe that SSDD put up this quote as a rebuttal to me for saying a CCD would respond to an ice cube.

In your typical dishonest fashion, you leave out the pertinent information...that being that the camera is equipped with an IR light that is within the range of the CCD to sense...that means, you idiot, that the light the CCD is picking up off the ice cube is from a power source that is warmer than the ice cube.....the ice cube is not emitting into a space that is warmer than itself....the camera is picking up IR that it provided itself.

 

[SSDD]

Put that ice cube on a table in a dark room and point your CCD or CMOS at it and see how many photons you collect...my bet is that it will be a grand total of zero...since if the ice cube is cooler than its surroundings, it is absorbing energy...not emitting it.

Here is a video of a girl eating ice cream filmed with a room temperature FLIR camera. You should notice that the false color level of blue has gradations meaning the that the ice cream has gradations in cold intensity. Especially notice the 40 sec. point where some of the ice cream was slightly warmed by her mouth. In short it is not a "grand total of zero."

Did you notice how his nostrils turned blue when he exhaled?

To bad you don't have a clue as to what is being measured, or how...You simply filter what you see through your magical belief and convince yourself that you have some idea of what is being measured, or how...or how the image is produced.

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

Here is a video of a girl eating ice cream filmed with a room temperature FLIR camera. You should notice that the false color level of blue has gradations meaning the that the ice cream has gradations in cold intensity. Especially notice the 40 sec. point where some of the ice cream was slightly warmed by her mouth. In short it is not a "grand total of zero."

Yet another doofus being fooled by instrumentation. Here...from The Handbook of Modern Sensors: Physics, Designs, and Applications:

If the object is warmer than the sensor, the flux (phi), is positive. If the object is cooler, the flux becomes negative, meaning it changes its direction: the heat goes from the sensor to the object. This may happen when a person walks into a warm room from the cold outside. Surface of her clothing will be cooler than the sensor and thus the flux becomes negative. In the following discussion, we will consider that the object is warmer than the sensor and the flux is positive

The passage above is on page 307, section 7.8...the page is visible through google books

Since you clearly don't know what that means let me tell you. It means that the camera is recording how much heat the sensor is losing to the ice cream...the sensor is cooling off because the heat flux is negative...that is the heat is leaving the sensor and going to the cooler object. The ice cream isn't radiating cold to a warmer object....the only thing an ice cube can radiate to is something colder than itself.

As to the 40 second mark where the ice cream is warmed up a bit...the color changes because since the ice cream has warmed up a bit, the sensor is losing a bit less heat to it...the electronics recognize this reduced heat loss and translate that into a warmer color gradation. It is no wonder that you believe the shit you believe....you don't have any idea what the instrumentation is doing, or what it is measuring...like ian, you look at the data and filter it through your magical beliefs and then talk about it as if you had a clue.

If the object is cooler, the flux becomes negative, meaning it changes its direction: the heat goes from the sensor to the object.

Of course!!!
The camera detects photons moving away from the camera.

It's so obvious now........shesh.

 

[jc456]

Put that ice cube on a table in a dark room and point your CCD or CMOS at it and see how many photons you collect...my bet is that it will be a grand total of zero...since if the ice cube is cooler than its surroundings, it is absorbing energy...not emitting it.

Here is a video of a girl eating ice cream filmed with a room temperature FLIR camera. You should notice that the false color level of blue has gradations meaning the that the ice cream has gradations in cold intensity. Especially notice the 40 sec. point where some of the ice cream was slightly warmed by her mouth. In short it is not a "grand total of zero."

Did you notice how his nostrils turned blue when he exhaled?

why don't you see blue coming out of her mouth as she eats the ice cream. you should be able to see her breath if that were truly measuring temperature. her exhaling while laughing should have resulted in a color change. It didn't. I see that as a big fail.

you should be able to see her breath if that were truly measuring temperature.

It's not measuring temperature? What is it measuring?

I see that as a big fail.

Photons moving from cooler matter to warmer matter is a fail? LOL!

What is it measuring?
it isn't measuring anything. if it was, you'd see her breath

Photons moving from cooler matter to warmer matter is a fail?

just show us.

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

Put that ice cube on a table in a dark room and point your CCD or CMOS at it and see how many photons you collect...my bet is that it will be a grand total of zero...since if the ice cube is cooler than its surroundings, it is absorbing energy...not emitting it.

Here is a video of a girl eating ice cream filmed with a room temperature FLIR camera. You should notice that the false color level of blue has gradations meaning the that the ice cream has gradations in cold intensity. Especially notice the 40 sec. point where some of the ice cream was slightly warmed by her mouth. In short it is not a "grand total of zero."

Did you notice how his nostrils turned blue when he exhaled?

why don't you see blue coming out of her mouth as she eats the ice cream. you should be able to see her breath if that were truly measuring temperature. her exhaling while laughing should have resulted in a color change. It didn't. I see that as a big fail.

you should be able to see her breath if that were truly measuring temperature.

It's not measuring temperature? What is it measuring?

I see that as a big fail.

Photons moving from cooler matter to warmer matter is a fail? LOL!

What is it measuring?
it isn't measuring anything. if it was, you'd see her breath

Photons moving from cooler matter to warmer matter is a fail?

just show us.

it isn't measuring anything.

How do you explain the different colors?

just show us.

See the darker color of the ice cream? That's the show.

 

[jc456]

Here is a video of a girl eating ice cream filmed with a room temperature FLIR camera. You should notice that the false color level of blue has gradations meaning the that the ice cream has gradations in cold intensity. Especially notice the 40 sec. point where some of the ice cream was slightly warmed by her mouth. In short it is not a "grand total of zero."

Did you notice how his nostrils turned blue when he exhaled?

why don't you see blue coming out of her mouth as she eats the ice cream. you should be able to see her breath if that were truly measuring temperature. her exhaling while laughing should have resulted in a color change. It didn't. I see that as a big fail.

you should be able to see her breath if that were truly measuring temperature.

It's not measuring temperature? What is it measuring?

I see that as a big fail.

Photons moving from cooler matter to warmer matter is a fail? LOL!

What is it measuring?
it isn't measuring anything. if it was, you'd see her breath

Photons moving from cooler matter to warmer matter is a fail?

just show us.

it isn't measuring anything.

How do you explain the different colors?

just show us.

See the darker color of the ice cream? That's the show.

if it was measuring IR, you'd see her breath right?

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

Did you notice how his nostrils turned blue when he exhaled?

why don't you see blue coming out of her mouth as she eats the ice cream. you should be able to see her breath if that were truly measuring temperature. her exhaling while laughing should have resulted in a color change. It didn't. I see that as a big fail.

you should be able to see her breath if that were truly measuring temperature.

It's not measuring temperature? What is it measuring?

I see that as a big fail.

Photons moving from cooler matter to warmer matter is a fail? LOL!

What is it measuring?
it isn't measuring anything. if it was, you'd see her breath

Photons moving from cooler matter to warmer matter is a fail?

just show us.

it isn't measuring anything.

How do you explain the different colors?

just show us.

See the darker color of the ice cream? That's the show.

if it was measuring IR, you'd see her breath right?

What is it measuring?

 

[jc456]

why don't you see blue coming out of her mouth as she eats the ice cream. you should be able to see her breath if that were truly measuring temperature. her exhaling while laughing should have resulted in a color change. It didn't. I see that as a big fail.

you should be able to see her breath if that were truly measuring temperature.

It's not measuring temperature? What is it measuring?

I see that as a big fail.

Photons moving from cooler matter to warmer matter is a fail? LOL!

What is it measuring?
it isn't measuring anything. if it was, you'd see her breath

Photons moving from cooler matter to warmer matter is a fail?

just show us.

it isn't measuring anything.

How do you explain the different colors?

just show us.

See the darker color of the ice cream? That's the show.

if it was measuring IR, you'd see her breath right?

What is it measuring?

can't answer my question eh? funny!!! gotcha!

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

you should be able to see her breath if that were truly measuring temperature.

It's not measuring temperature? What is it measuring?

I see that as a big fail.

Photons moving from cooler matter to warmer matter is a fail? LOL!

What is it measuring?
it isn't measuring anything. if it was, you'd see her breath

Photons moving from cooler matter to warmer matter is a fail?

just show us.

it isn't measuring anything.

How do you explain the different colors?

just show us.

See the darker color of the ice cream? That's the show.

if it was measuring IR, you'd see her breath right?

What is it measuring?

can't answer my question eh? funny!!! gotcha!

It has to be measuring something. I think it's measuring temperature.
See how it shows a different color for skin than for ice cream?
It's almost as though the photons coming off of each have different energy levels.

Funny!

 

[jc456]

True some devices now use CCD’s that are specially designed to increase their sensitivity to light in the infrared spectrum, it still remains though that almost all CCD’s are capable of capturing images in what for all practical purposes amounts to total darkness using infrared."

It is hard to believe that SSDD put up this quote as a rebuttal to me for saying a CCD would respond to an ice cube.

My diagram showed that the range of wavelengths emitted in IR is almost identical for two objects differing by 20C. Only the amount of radiation per wavelength changes.

As long as the temperature of the object is warm enough to emit some radiation in the threshold wavelength of 10 microns or lower, then you will get a response in the CCD.

so take the ice cube to a dark room and read its IR. Will it?

 

[SSDD]

why don't you see blue coming out of her mouth as she eats the ice cream. you should be able to see her breath if that were truly measuring temperature. her exhaling while laughing should have resulted in a color change. It didn't. I see that as a big fail.

They don't have any idea of what is being measured, or how it is being measured. They believe that because they can see the ice cream on the image, that the ice cream is radiating cold to the camera. They couldn't possibly be more wrong. I already provided an explanation to them about how the camera works and how it is able to record images of objects that are colder than the sensor itself. Here is a brief explanation from The Handbook of Modern Sensors: Physics, Designs, and Applications:

If the object is warmer than the sensor, the flux (phi), is positive. If the object is cooler, the flux becomes negative, meaning it changes its direction: the heat goes from the sensor to the object. This may happen when a person walks into a warm room from the cold outside. Surface of her clothing will be cooler than the sensor and thus the flux becomes negative. In the following discussion, we will consider that the object is warmer than the sensor and the flux is positive

The passage above is on page 307, section 7.8...the page is visible through google books

What that means is that the sensor array in the camera reacts to energy radiating into the camera from objects that are warmer than the camera, and in addition, it also measures energy the warmer camera sensor array loses to objects cooler than itself. The text explains what is happening in no uncertain terms but they don't seem to be able to grasp the facts because they don't mesh with their magical beliefs. If the object is warmer than the sensor, the flux (phi), is positive. If the object is warmer, then the sensor is recording energy coming into the camera. If the object is cooler, the flux becomes negative, meaning it changes its direction: the heat goes from the sensor to the object. If the object is cooler, the camera is measuring how much, and how fast the sensor is losing energy to the cooler object. HEAT GOES FROM THE SENSOR TO THE OBJECT....I don't know how what is happening inside the camera could be stated in more simple terms...heat goes from the sensor to the object....how difficult is that to understand?

The high end thermal cameras have internal coolers that keep the sensor very cold...they produce a more accurate image if they are receiving energy from the outside than they do if they are losing energy to cooler objects. If you cool the sensor enough, then practically everything you point it at will be warmer than the sensor and therefore radiating energy to the cooler sensor.

 

[SSDD]

True some devices now use CCD’s that are specially designed to increase their sensitivity to light in the infrared spectrum, it still remains though that almost all CCD’s are capable of capturing images in what for all practical purposes amounts to total darkness using infrared."

It is hard to believe that SSDD put up this quote as a rebuttal to me for saying a CCD would respond to an ice cube.

My diagram showed that the range of wavelengths emitted in IR is almost identical for two objects differing by 20C. Only the amount of radiation per wavelength changes.

As long as the temperature of the object is warm enough to emit some radiation in the threshold wavelength of 10 microns or lower, then you will get a response in the CCD.

so take the ice cube to a dark room and read its IR. Will it?

Of course it won't...if the room is warmer than the ice cube then the ice cube is absorbing energy, not radiating out into warmer surroundings...You couldn't measure energy coming off that ice cube with even the most sensitive instrument because no energy is coming off the ice cube....

 

[jc456]

why don't you see blue coming out of her mouth as she eats the ice cream. you should be able to see her breath if that were truly measuring temperature. her exhaling while laughing should have resulted in a color change. It didn't. I see that as a big fail.

They don't have any idea of what is being measured, or how it is being measured. They believe that because they can see the ice cream on the image, that the ice cream is radiating cold to the camera. They couldn't possibly be more wrong. I already provided an explanation to them about how the camera works and how it is able to record images of objects that are colder than the sensor itself. Here is a brief explanation from The Handbook of Modern Sensors: Physics, Designs, and Applications:

If the object is warmer than the sensor, the flux (phi), is positive. If the object is cooler, the flux becomes negative, meaning it changes its direction: the heat goes from the sensor to the object. This may happen when a person walks into a warm room from the cold outside. Surface of her clothing will be cooler than the sensor and thus the flux becomes negative. In the following discussion, we will consider that the object is warmer than the sensor and the flux is positive

The passage above is on page 307, section 7.8...the page is visible through google books

What that means is that the sensor array in the camera reacts to energy radiating into the camera from objects that are warmer than the camera, and in addition, it also measures energy the warmer camera sensor array loses to objects cooler than itself. The text explains what is happening in no uncertain terms but they don't seem to be able to grasp the facts because they don't mesh with their magical beliefs. If the object is warmer than the sensor, the flux (phi), is positive. If the object is warmer, then the sensor is recording energy coming into the camera. If the object is cooler, the flux becomes negative, meaning it changes its direction: the heat goes from the sensor to the object. If the object is cooler, the camera is measuring how much, and how fast the sensor is losing energy to the cooler object. HEAT GOES FROM THE SENSOR TO THE OBJECT....I don't know how what is happening inside the camera could be stated in more simple terms...heat goes from the sensor to the object....how difficult is that to understand?

The high end thermal cameras have internal coolers that keep the sensor very cold...they produce a more accurate image if they are receiving energy from the outside than they do if they are losing energy to cooler objects. If you cool the sensor enough, then practically everything you point it at will be warmer than the sensor and therefore radiating energy to the cooler sensor.

well they know that it isn't measuring IR because if it were, they'd see the girl's breath. Her exhale would be colder than the surrounding air. yet it doesn't capture that at all. It isn't solid.

 

[jc456]

True some devices now use CCD’s that are specially designed to increase their sensitivity to light in the infrared spectrum, it still remains though that almost all CCD’s are capable of capturing images in what for all practical purposes amounts to total darkness using infrared."

It is hard to believe that SSDD put up this quote as a rebuttal to me for saying a CCD would respond to an ice cube.

My diagram showed that the range of wavelengths emitted in IR is almost identical for two objects differing by 20C. Only the amount of radiation per wavelength changes.

As long as the temperature of the object is warm enough to emit some radiation in the threshold wavelength of 10 microns or lower, then you will get a response in the CCD.

so take the ice cube to a dark room and read its IR. Will it?

Of course it won't...if the room is warmer than the ice cube then the ice cube is absorbing energy, not radiating out into warmer surroundings...You couldn't measure energy coming off that ice cube with even the most sensitive instrument because no energy is coming off the ice cube....

that's all one needs to know to show it isn't reading IR.

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

why don't you see blue coming out of her mouth as she eats the ice cream. you should be able to see her breath if that were truly measuring temperature. her exhaling while laughing should have resulted in a color change. It didn't. I see that as a big fail.

They don't have any idea of what is being measured, or how it is being measured. They believe that because they can see the ice cream on the image, that the ice cream is radiating cold to the camera. They couldn't possibly be more wrong. I already provided an explanation to them about how the camera works and how it is able to record images of objects that are colder than the sensor itself. Here is a brief explanation from The Handbook of Modern Sensors: Physics, Designs, and Applications:

If the object is warmer than the sensor, the flux (phi), is positive. If the object is cooler, the flux becomes negative, meaning it changes its direction: the heat goes from the sensor to the object. This may happen when a person walks into a warm room from the cold outside. Surface of her clothing will be cooler than the sensor and thus the flux becomes negative. In the following discussion, we will consider that the object is warmer than the sensor and the flux is positive

The passage above is on page 307, section 7.8...the page is visible through google books

What that means is that the sensor array in the camera reacts to energy radiating into the camera from objects that are warmer than the camera, and in addition, it also measures energy the warmer camera sensor array loses to objects cooler than itself. The text explains what is happening in no uncertain terms but they don't seem to be able to grasp the facts because they don't mesh with their magical beliefs. If the object is warmer than the sensor, the flux (phi), is positive. If the object is warmer, then the sensor is recording energy coming into the camera. If the object is cooler, the flux becomes negative, meaning it changes its direction: the heat goes from the sensor to the object. If the object is cooler, the camera is measuring how much, and how fast the sensor is losing energy to the cooler object. HEAT GOES FROM THE SENSOR TO THE OBJECT....I don't know how what is happening inside the camera could be stated in more simple terms...heat goes from the sensor to the object....how difficult is that to understand?

The high end thermal cameras have internal coolers that keep the sensor very cold...they produce a more accurate image if they are receiving energy from the outside than they do if they are losing energy to cooler objects. If you cool the sensor enough, then practically everything you point it at will be warmer than the sensor and therefore radiating energy to the cooler sensor.

They believe that because they can see the ice cream on the image, that the ice cream is radiating cold to the camera.

"Radiating cold" isn't a thing.
The IR photons from the ice cream are lower energy than the photons from the skin.
The different energy levels can tell you the temperature of the emitting object.

 

[jc456]

why don't you see blue coming out of her mouth as she eats the ice cream. you should be able to see her breath if that were truly measuring temperature. her exhaling while laughing should have resulted in a color change. It didn't. I see that as a big fail.

They don't have any idea of what is being measured, or how it is being measured. They believe that because they can see the ice cream on the image, that the ice cream is radiating cold to the camera. They couldn't possibly be more wrong. I already provided an explanation to them about how the camera works and how it is able to record images of objects that are colder than the sensor itself. Here is a brief explanation from The Handbook of Modern Sensors: Physics, Designs, and Applications:

If the object is warmer than the sensor, the flux (phi), is positive. If the object is cooler, the flux becomes negative, meaning it changes its direction: the heat goes from the sensor to the object. This may happen when a person walks into a warm room from the cold outside. Surface of her clothing will be cooler than the sensor and thus the flux becomes negative. In the following discussion, we will consider that the object is warmer than the sensor and the flux is positive

The passage above is on page 307, section 7.8...the page is visible through google books

What that means is that the sensor array in the camera reacts to energy radiating into the camera from objects that are warmer than the camera, and in addition, it also measures energy the warmer camera sensor array loses to objects cooler than itself. The text explains what is happening in no uncertain terms but they don't seem to be able to grasp the facts because they don't mesh with their magical beliefs. If the object is warmer than the sensor, the flux (phi), is positive. If the object is warmer, then the sensor is recording energy coming into the camera. If the object is cooler, the flux becomes negative, meaning it changes its direction: the heat goes from the sensor to the object. If the object is cooler, the camera is measuring how much, and how fast the sensor is losing energy to the cooler object. HEAT GOES FROM THE SENSOR TO THE OBJECT....I don't know how what is happening inside the camera could be stated in more simple terms...heat goes from the sensor to the object....how difficult is that to understand?

The high end thermal cameras have internal coolers that keep the sensor very cold...they produce a more accurate image if they are receiving energy from the outside than they do if they are losing energy to cooler objects. If you cool the sensor enough, then practically everything you point it at will be warmer than the sensor and therefore radiating energy to the cooler sensor.

They believe that because they can see the ice cream on the image, that the ice cream is radiating cold to the camera.

"Radiating cold" isn't a thing.
The IR photons from the ice cream are lower energy than the photons from the skin.
The different energy levels can tell you the temperature of the emitting object.

so why don't you see her breath?

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

why don't you see blue coming out of her mouth as she eats the ice cream. you should be able to see her breath if that were truly measuring temperature. her exhaling while laughing should have resulted in a color change. It didn't. I see that as a big fail.

They don't have any idea of what is being measured, or how it is being measured. They believe that because they can see the ice cream on the image, that the ice cream is radiating cold to the camera. They couldn't possibly be more wrong. I already provided an explanation to them about how the camera works and how it is able to record images of objects that are colder than the sensor itself. Here is a brief explanation from The Handbook of Modern Sensors: Physics, Designs, and Applications:

If the object is warmer than the sensor, the flux (phi), is positive. If the object is cooler, the flux becomes negative, meaning it changes its direction: the heat goes from the sensor to the object. This may happen when a person walks into a warm room from the cold outside. Surface of her clothing will be cooler than the sensor and thus the flux becomes negative. In the following discussion, we will consider that the object is warmer than the sensor and the flux is positive

The passage above is on page 307, section 7.8...the page is visible through google books

What that means is that the sensor array in the camera reacts to energy radiating into the camera from objects that are warmer than the camera, and in addition, it also measures energy the warmer camera sensor array loses to objects cooler than itself. The text explains what is happening in no uncertain terms but they don't seem to be able to grasp the facts because they don't mesh with their magical beliefs. If the object is warmer than the sensor, the flux (phi), is positive. If the object is warmer, then the sensor is recording energy coming into the camera. If the object is cooler, the flux becomes negative, meaning it changes its direction: the heat goes from the sensor to the object. If the object is cooler, the camera is measuring how much, and how fast the sensor is losing energy to the cooler object. HEAT GOES FROM THE SENSOR TO THE OBJECT....I don't know how what is happening inside the camera could be stated in more simple terms...heat goes from the sensor to the object....how difficult is that to understand?

The high end thermal cameras have internal coolers that keep the sensor very cold...they produce a more accurate image if they are receiving energy from the outside than they do if they are losing energy to cooler objects. If you cool the sensor enough, then practically everything you point it at will be warmer than the sensor and therefore radiating energy to the cooler sensor.

well they know that it isn't measuring IR because if it were, they'd see the girl's breath. Her exhale would be colder than the surrounding air. yet it doesn't capture that at all. It isn't solid.

Air is a poor absorber/poor emitter.

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

True some devices now use CCD’s that are specially designed to increase their sensitivity to light in the infrared spectrum, it still remains though that almost all CCD’s are capable of capturing images in what for all practical purposes amounts to total darkness using infrared."

It is hard to believe that SSDD put up this quote as a rebuttal to me for saying a CCD would respond to an ice cube.

My diagram showed that the range of wavelengths emitted in IR is almost identical for two objects differing by 20C. Only the amount of radiation per wavelength changes.

As long as the temperature of the object is warm enough to emit some radiation in the threshold wavelength of 10 microns or lower, then you will get a response in the CCD.

so take the ice cube to a dark room and read its IR. Will it?

Of course it won't...if the room is warmer than the ice cube then the ice cube is absorbing energy, not radiating out into warmer surroundings...You couldn't measure energy coming off that ice cube with even the most sensitive instrument because no energy is coming off the ice cube....

that's all one needs to know to show it isn't reading IR.

What is it reading if not IR?

 

[jc456]

why don't you see blue coming out of her mouth as she eats the ice cream. you should be able to see her breath if that were truly measuring temperature. her exhaling while laughing should have resulted in a color change. It didn't. I see that as a big fail.

They don't have any idea of what is being measured, or how it is being measured. They believe that because they can see the ice cream on the image, that the ice cream is radiating cold to the camera. They couldn't possibly be more wrong. I already provided an explanation to them about how the camera works and how it is able to record images of objects that are colder than the sensor itself. Here is a brief explanation from The Handbook of Modern Sensors: Physics, Designs, and Applications:

If the object is warmer than the sensor, the flux (phi), is positive. If the object is cooler, the flux becomes negative, meaning it changes its direction: the heat goes from the sensor to the object. This may happen when a person walks into a warm room from the cold outside. Surface of her clothing will be cooler than the sensor and thus the flux becomes negative. In the following discussion, we will consider that the object is warmer than the sensor and the flux is positive

The passage above is on page 307, section 7.8...the page is visible through google books

What that means is that the sensor array in the camera reacts to energy radiating into the camera from objects that are warmer than the camera, and in addition, it also measures energy the warmer camera sensor array loses to objects cooler than itself. The text explains what is happening in no uncertain terms but they don't seem to be able to grasp the facts because they don't mesh with their magical beliefs. If the object is warmer than the sensor, the flux (phi), is positive. If the object is warmer, then the sensor is recording energy coming into the camera. If the object is cooler, the flux becomes negative, meaning it changes its direction: the heat goes from the sensor to the object. If the object is cooler, the camera is measuring how much, and how fast the sensor is losing energy to the cooler object. HEAT GOES FROM THE SENSOR TO THE OBJECT....I don't know how what is happening inside the camera could be stated in more simple terms...heat goes from the sensor to the object....how difficult is that to understand?

The high end thermal cameras have internal coolers that keep the sensor very cold...they produce a more accurate image if they are receiving energy from the outside than they do if they are losing energy to cooler objects. If you cool the sensor enough, then practically everything you point it at will be warmer than the sensor and therefore radiating energy to the cooler sensor.

well they know that it isn't measuring IR because if it were, they'd see the girl's breath. Her exhale would be colder than the surrounding air. yet it doesn't capture that at all. It isn't solid.

Air is a poor absorber/poor emitter.

It's CO2

oh and also water.

exhale on a mirror.

 

[SSDD]

Photons moving from cooler matter to warmer matter is a fail? LOL!

As the text from The Handbook of Modern Sensors says...it isn't measuring photons moving from cool to warm...what is being measured is how much, and how fast the sensor is losing energy to the colder object...the image is the result of energy leaving the camera, not coming into it. Sorry this is all so far over your head. The more you talk, the more apparent it becomes why you only talk in one liners...if you were to speak more than a single sentence at once, your abject ignorance would flare forth like a spotlight.