Solid Physical Evidence of AGW.... Where is it?

[jc456]

The greenhouse effect warms the planet by slowing the release of IR, not trapping it forever. As you have noted, as the Earth's temperature has gone up, its OLR has increased. You seem to have missed the critical sup-phrase: "...as the Earth's temperature has gone up"

Actually it doesn't slow the release of IR because if it did, the predicted hot spot would be the inevitable result...there is no hot spot...and slowed cooling does not equal warming...it is not possible for a body to warm itself with its own radiation..if you believe it can, then show me the physical law that says as much.

Actually it doesn't slow the release of IR because if it did,

Every photon of IR that is absorbed by a GHG molecule, instead of instantly escaping into space, is slowed.

and slowed cooling does not equal warming

DERP!

it is not possible for a body to warm itself with its own radiation..

https://ladygeekgirl.files.wordpress.com/2015/02/startrekspockfascinating1.jpg

The greenhouse effect warms the planet by slowing the release of IR, not trapping it forever. As you have noted, as the Earth's temperature has gone up, its OLR has increased. You seem to have missed the critical sup-phrase: "...as the Earth's temperature has gone up"

Actually it doesn't slow the release of IR because if it did, the predicted hot spot would be the inevitable result...there is no hot spot...and slowed cooling does not equal warming...it is not possible for a body to warm itself with its own radiation..if you believe it can, then show me the physical law that says as much.

Actually it doesn't slow the release of IR because if it did,

Every photon of IR that is absorbed by a GHG molecule, instead of instantly escaping into space, is slowed.

and slowed cooling does not equal warming

DERP!

it is not possible for a body to warm itself with its own radiation..

. It's not warming "with its own radiation", it's warming because the solar radiation escapes more slowly. .

Come on Todd, anything that emits from CO2 is a neutral or COOLING process, then you say this confusion:

"it's warming because the solar radiation escapes more slowly. "

Not it means cooling down more slowly, there is no actual increase in warming at all since molecules don't generate any heat by itself. With an increase in CO2 molecules in the atmosphere is an increase in emission rate back to outer space.

I posted HERE that any increase in the postulated warm forcing of CO2 is more than countered by the system energy OUTFLOW from the planet. CO2 increase in the air isn't stopping the increased outflow of energy as clearly shown by Satellites.

Come on Todd, anything that emits from CO2 is a neutral or COOLING process,

You don't think that the CO2 in the atmosphere speeds the escape of IR from the surface, do you?

you still can't prove your position. fail!!!!

 

[Billy_Bob]

The Environmental Wackos can't prove AGW so they fabricate data and almost always get caught at it.

They aren't that bright.

AGW is supported by mountains of evidence. The contentions of deniers are not. When was the last time you posted a link to a published scientific study supporting your position?

I again just shredded what you believe is evidence... LOL keep that head firmly impacted...

 

[Flash]

The Environmental Wackos can't prove AGW so they fabricate data and almost always get caught at it.

They aren't that bright.

AGW is supported by mountains of evidence. The contentions of deniers are not. When was the last time you posted a link to a published scientific study supporting your position?

No its not. You are confused. It is only supported by fabricated data. Go read the Climategate revelations where the principle scientist admit to fabricating the data. Go look at how under the filthy corrupt Obama administration NASA and NOAA were corrupted to produce fabricated data. The same with the UN Climate Commission.

The Environmental Wackos have lost all credibility on this subject. They have nothing of substance. It is a scam and it is despicable. If it wasn't a scam then there would be no need to fabricate data.

 

[jc456]

Liberal leftists can't win an argument because when facts are used, it destroys their position. so facts again are not friends to leftists.

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

how does it increase the temperature? that is and has been my question. you just claimed that when it returns to the surface it increases temperature? how can it be any hotter than when it left?

Why do you keep asking the same question when you have failed to comprehend the answer every time in the past?

It is solar isolation that actually delivers energy to the surface. CO2 'warms' the surface by retarding energy loss to space.

Speaking of retarded...

no, something can't get warmer because you slow the release. It may stay warm longer over time, but it doesn't get warmer, it is cooling off. it is emitting. and if you agree emitting is cooling, then you can't make the statement you just made. sorry Ian, you can't prove it gets warmer.

It may stay warm longer over time

Hehe.

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

The greenhouse effect warms the planet by slowing the release of IR, not trapping it forever. As you have noted, as the Earth's temperature has gone up, its OLR has increased. You seem to have missed the critical sup-phrase: "...as the Earth's temperature has gone up"

Actually it doesn't slow the release of IR because if it did, the predicted hot spot would be the inevitable result...there is no hot spot...and slowed cooling does not equal warming...it is not possible for a body to warm itself with its own radiation..if you believe it can, then show me the physical law that says as much.

Actually it doesn't slow the release of IR because if it did,

Every photon of IR that is absorbed by a GHG molecule, instead of instantly escaping into space, is slowed.

and slowed cooling does not equal warming

DERP!

it is not possible for a body to warm itself with its own radiation..

https://ladygeekgirl.files.wordpress.com/2015/02/startrekspockfascinating1.jpg

The greenhouse effect warms the planet by slowing the release of IR, not trapping it forever. As you have noted, as the Earth's temperature has gone up, its OLR has increased. You seem to have missed the critical sup-phrase: "...as the Earth's temperature has gone up"

Actually it doesn't slow the release of IR because if it did, the predicted hot spot would be the inevitable result...there is no hot spot...and slowed cooling does not equal warming...it is not possible for a body to warm itself with its own radiation..if you believe it can, then show me the physical law that says as much.

Actually it doesn't slow the release of IR because if it did,

Every photon of IR that is absorbed by a GHG molecule, instead of instantly escaping into space, is slowed.

and slowed cooling does not equal warming

DERP!

it is not possible for a body to warm itself with its own radiation..

. It's not warming "with its own radiation", it's warming because the solar radiation escapes more slowly. .

Come on Todd, anything that emits from CO2 is a neutral or COOLING process, then you say this confusion:

"it's warming because the solar radiation escapes more slowly. "

Not it means cooling down more slowly, there is no actual increase in warming at all since molecules don't generate any heat by itself. With an increase in CO2 molecules in the atmosphere is an increase in emission rate back to outer space.

I posted HERE that any increase in the postulated warm forcing of CO2 is more than countered by the system energy OUTFLOW from the planet. CO2 increase in the air isn't stopping the increased outflow of energy as clearly shown by Satellites.

Come on Todd, anything that emits from CO2 is a neutral or COOLING process,

You don't think that the CO2 in the atmosphere speeds the escape of IR from the surface, do you?

you still can't prove your position. fail!!!!

Which of my positions do you feel I need to prove?
Be specific. With links if you can.

 

[jc456]

how does it increase the temperature? that is and has been my question. you just claimed that when it returns to the surface it increases temperature? how can it be any hotter than when it left?

Why do you keep asking the same question when you have failed to comprehend the answer every time in the past?

It is solar isolation that actually delivers energy to the surface. CO2 'warms' the surface by retarding energy loss to space.

Speaking of retarded...

no, something can't get warmer because you slow the release. It may stay warm longer over time, but it doesn't get warmer, it is cooling off. it is emitting. and if you agree emitting is cooling, then you can't make the statement you just made. sorry Ian, you can't prove it gets warmer.

It may stay warm longer over time

Hehe.

let me know when you have proof of the atmosphere heating the surface. I'm still waiting. fail again.

 

[jc456]

Actually it doesn't slow the release of IR because if it did, the predicted hot spot would be the inevitable result...there is no hot spot...and slowed cooling does not equal warming...it is not possible for a body to warm itself with its own radiation..if you believe it can, then show me the physical law that says as much.

Actually it doesn't slow the release of IR because if it did,

Every photon of IR that is absorbed by a GHG molecule, instead of instantly escaping into space, is slowed.

and slowed cooling does not equal warming

DERP!

it is not possible for a body to warm itself with its own radiation..

https://ladygeekgirl.files.wordpress.com/2015/02/startrekspockfascinating1.jpg

Actually it doesn't slow the release of IR because if it did, the predicted hot spot would be the inevitable result...there is no hot spot...and slowed cooling does not equal warming...it is not possible for a body to warm itself with its own radiation..if you believe it can, then show me the physical law that says as much.

Actually it doesn't slow the release of IR because if it did,

Every photon of IR that is absorbed by a GHG molecule, instead of instantly escaping into space, is slowed.

and slowed cooling does not equal warming

DERP!

it is not possible for a body to warm itself with its own radiation..

. It's not warming "with its own radiation", it's warming because the solar radiation escapes more slowly. .

Come on Todd, anything that emits from CO2 is a neutral or COOLING process, then you say this confusion:

"it's warming because the solar radiation escapes more slowly. "

Not it means cooling down more slowly, there is no actual increase in warming at all since molecules don't generate any heat by itself. With an increase in CO2 molecules in the atmosphere is an increase in emission rate back to outer space.

I posted HERE that any increase in the postulated warm forcing of CO2 is more than countered by the system energy OUTFLOW from the planet. CO2 increase in the air isn't stopping the increased outflow of energy as clearly shown by Satellites.

Come on Todd, anything that emits from CO2 is a neutral or COOLING process,

You don't think that the CO2 in the atmosphere speeds the escape of IR from the surface, do you?

you still can't prove your position. fail!!!!

Which of my positions do you feel I need to prove?
Be specific. With links if you can.

CO2 warms, I've been waiting. still no proof.

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

how does it increase the temperature? that is and has been my question. you just claimed that when it returns to the surface it increases temperature? how can it be any hotter than when it left?

Why do you keep asking the same question when you have failed to comprehend the answer every time in the past?

It is solar isolation that actually delivers energy to the surface. CO2 'warms' the surface by retarding energy loss to space.

Speaking of retarded...

no, something can't get warmer because you slow the release. It may stay warm longer over time, but it doesn't get warmer, it is cooling off. it is emitting. and if you agree emitting is cooling, then you can't make the statement you just made. sorry Ian, you can't prove it gets warmer.

It may stay warm longer over time

Hehe.

let me know when you have proof of the atmosphere heating the surface. I'm still waiting. fail again.

let me know when you have proof of the atmosphere heating the surface.

If the atmosphere is cooler than the surface, it wouldn't. Duh.

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

Actually it doesn't slow the release of IR because if it did,

Every photon of IR that is absorbed by a GHG molecule, instead of instantly escaping into space, is slowed.

and slowed cooling does not equal warming

DERP!

it is not possible for a body to warm itself with its own radiation..

https://ladygeekgirl.files.wordpress.com/2015/02/startrekspockfascinating1.jpg

Actually it doesn't slow the release of IR because if it did,

Every photon of IR that is absorbed by a GHG molecule, instead of instantly escaping into space, is slowed.

and slowed cooling does not equal warming

DERP!

it is not possible for a body to warm itself with its own radiation..

. It's not warming "with its own radiation", it's warming because the solar radiation escapes more slowly. .

Come on Todd, anything that emits from CO2 is a neutral or COOLING process, then you say this confusion:

"it's warming because the solar radiation escapes more slowly. "

Not it means cooling down more slowly, there is no actual increase in warming at all since molecules don't generate any heat by itself. With an increase in CO2 molecules in the atmosphere is an increase in emission rate back to outer space.

I posted HERE that any increase in the postulated warm forcing of CO2 is more than countered by the system energy OUTFLOW from the planet. CO2 increase in the air isn't stopping the increased outflow of energy as clearly shown by Satellites.

Come on Todd, anything that emits from CO2 is a neutral or COOLING process,

You don't think that the CO2 in the atmosphere speeds the escape of IR from the surface, do you?

you still can't prove your position. fail!!!!

Which of my positions do you feel I need to prove?
Be specific. With links if you can.

CO2 warms, I've been waiting. still no proof.

You really need a link.
Your babbling is not a starting point for a debate.

 

[Flash]

The Environmental Wackos can't prove AGW so they fabricate data and almost always get caught at it.

They aren't that bright.

AGW is supported by mountains of evidence. The contentions of deniers are not. When was the last time you posted a link to a published scientific study supporting your position?

I again just shredded what you believe is evidence... LOL keep that head firmly impacted...

The base documents for anything that these stupid Moon Bats believe is evidence will have been created with false data.

The scientists even admit it. They had to use fudge factors or else the data would not show what they wanted it to show. Great scam and theses Moon Bats fell for it.

 

[jc456]

how does it increase the temperature? that is and has been my question. you just claimed that when it returns to the surface it increases temperature? how can it be any hotter than when it left?

Why do you keep asking the same question when you have failed to comprehend the answer every time in the past?

It is solar isolation that actually delivers energy to the surface. CO2 'warms' the surface by retarding energy loss to space.

Speaking of retarded...

no, something can't get warmer because you slow the release. It may stay warm longer over time, but it doesn't get warmer, it is cooling off. it is emitting. and if you agree emitting is cooling, then you can't make the statement you just made. sorry Ian, you can't prove it gets warmer.

It may stay warm longer over time

Hehe.

let me know when you have proof of the atmosphere heating the surface. I'm still waiting. fail again.

let me know when you have proof of the atmosphere heating the surface.

If the atmosphere is cooler than the surface, it wouldn't. Duh.

and why the surface cools.

 

[jc456]

Come on Todd, anything that emits from CO2 is a neutral or COOLING process, then you say this confusion:

"it's warming because the solar radiation escapes more slowly. "

Not it means cooling down more slowly, there is no actual increase in warming at all since molecules don't generate any heat by itself. With an increase in CO2 molecules in the atmosphere is an increase in emission rate back to outer space.

I posted HERE that any increase in the postulated warm forcing of CO2 is more than countered by the system energy OUTFLOW from the planet. CO2 increase in the air isn't stopping the increased outflow of energy as clearly shown by Satellites.

Come on Todd, anything that emits from CO2 is a neutral or COOLING process,

You don't think that the CO2 in the atmosphere speeds the escape of IR from the surface, do you?

you still can't prove your position. fail!!!!

Which of my positions do you feel I need to prove?
Be specific. With links if you can.

CO2 warms, I've been waiting. still no proof.

You really need a link.
Your babbling is not a starting point for a debate.

I never said CO2 warmed anything, so I don't need a link you need one. any day now.

 

[Crick]

The Environmental Wackos can't prove AGW so they fabricate data and almost always get caught at it.

They aren't that bright.

It's only my opinion but I think the odds of you being brighter than just about anyone on Earth with a PhD is extraordinarily slim. I suspect that you were unable to get through college for academic reasons. Thus your opinion as to who is and is not "bright" aren't of much value.

AGW is supported by mountains of evidence. The contentions of deniers are not. When was the last time you posted a link to a published scientific study supporting your position?

No its not.

Yes it is. Read "The Physical Science Basis" at www.ipcc.ch

You are confused. It is only supported by fabricated data. Go read the Climategate revelations where the principle scientist admit to fabricating the data. Go look at how under the filthy corrupt Obama administration NASA and NOAA were corrupted to produce fabricated data. The same with the UN Climate Commission.

I am not confused. You are ignorant. The conclusions of the IPCC are supported by an enormous amount of valid and verified data. There were no Climategate revelations - have you not noticed that the rest of your AGW denier buddies stopped making that particular argument a couple years back? There have been no admissions by any principal scientist of data fabrication. The Obama administration ran for 8 years without a single scandal; no one in his administration was ever charged much less convicted of any crimes. If you want to lay a charge of "filly corrupt" on someone, have an honest gander at the Trump Administration. Neither NASA nor NOAA were corrupted under the Obama administration and neither fabricated data. The same is true of the IPCC.

The Environmental Wackos have lost all credibility on this subject. They have nothing of substance. It is a scam and it is despicable. If it wasn't a scam then there would be no need to fabricate data.

The IPCC has lost no credibility at all. The Trump Administration has acted with inconceivable irresponsibility and the president has demonstrated himself to be an ignorant ass. No one has fabricated data. The only folks pulling major scams around here are the Trump Administration, elected with the assistance and cooperation of a hostile foreign power. I personally believe the president is guilty of treason.

NOW THEN FLASH, LET'S SEE ONE FUCKING LINK TO EVIDENCE SUPPORTING YOUR CHARGE THAT ALL THESE DATA ARE FABRICATED.

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

Come on Todd, anything that emits from CO2 is a neutral or COOLING process,

You don't think that the CO2 in the atmosphere speeds the escape of IR from the surface, do you?

you still can't prove your position. fail!!!!

Which of my positions do you feel I need to prove?
Be specific. With links if you can.

CO2 warms, I've been waiting. still no proof.

You really need a link.
Your babbling is not a starting point for a debate.

I never said CO2 warmed anything, so I don't need a link you need one. any day now.

Post a link to me making whatever claim you think I made that you feel proof is lacking.

 

[Flash]

 

[Crick]

Waiting for FLASH to provide a link showing the IPCC's conclusions are based entirely on data fabricated by NASA, NOAA and other organizations.

 

[SSDD]

As is your constant practice, you have no problem claiming behavior in violation of fundamental physics. CO2 absorbs energy radiated from the surface. That energy increases the temperature of the gas. That energy gets passed to other molecules of the air, the ocean and back to the land surface, increasing their temperatures.

You do not deny the planet is warming. Give us a reason why.

Sorry skidmark...just not so. But if you have any observed measured evidence that establishes a coherent link between the absorption of IR by a gas and warming in the atmosphere, by all means...lets see it.

Is there any alarmist huckster trick that doesn't fool you? Or do you post that sort of garbage just hoping that it might fool someone?

He is pumping compressed CO2 into the tube.....it is expanding and cooling and having a pretty profound effect on the temperature stability...You would get the same effect with N2, O2, or practically any other bottled gas you care to inject into the tube...

There is also the fact that CO2 only absorbs in narrow bands...those narrow bands...the candle is emitting IR in a very broad spectrum...those 3 narrow bands aren't going to mask all the rest of the wavelengths the candle is emitting in...can you say FAKE?...

Then there is the fact that it didn't show any warming at all...he merely showed that CO2 absorbs infrared...who is arguing that it doesn't,...you think that bit of side show bullshit establishes a coherent relationship between the absorption of IR by a gas and warming in the atmosphere? Good enough to fool you...right?

 

[SSDD]

CO2 being warmed by infrared

http://www.physics.upenn.edu/~pcn/Ms/18PhysTeacher.pdf

Tell me Crick, what band of IR was he using? What was the radiative power being used? What was the CO2 concentration level?

The claim is that CO2 cannot be warmed by infrared radiation. You are clearly attempting to weasel out of that claim.

A gas can only "trap" heat if the gas itself is trapped...little wonder that you are a dupe...

 

[SSDD]

The Environmental Wackos can't prove AGW so they fabricate data and almost always get caught at it.

They aren't that bright.

AGW is supported by mountains of evidence. The contentions of deniers are not. When was the last time you posted a link to a published scientific study supporting your position?

Not at all skidmark...AGW is supported by a mountain of assumptions based on flawed use of data...you wouldn't recognize evidence if it bit you on the ass as demonstrated by how thoroughly you were fooled by that idiot video you posted...