The definitive guide to the "Global Warming" scam

[SSDD]

Your fellow posters SSDD, Billy Bob, JC456 and Crusader Frank have all claimed that for a small assortment of reasons, the greenhouse effect is not real. Without a greenhouse effect, we certainly do not have any warming from human GHG emissions. That would falsify AGW. SSDD and his sock puppets believe that to be the case. The trouble is, he's convinced no one outside his group of his primary supposition: that there is no greenhouse effect. And, as you likely know, very close to every scientist on the planet would disagree with him.

Dude...who are you talking to?!? Can you ask an adult to show you how to use this website? There is a reply button. Start using it so that this thread is actually coherent. Man alive, you lefties are so damn dumb I can’t take it anymore. No wonder the left finds it so easy to dupe you people.

They don't call them useful idiots for nothing...

 

[SSDD]

So that would be a no...you can't describe the greenhouse hypothesis in terms of convection...or conduction because it assumes that nearly all of the energy moves through the troposphere via radiation...you know this isn't true, and yet, you still defend that failed hypothesis...

You are wrong. I never assume all the IR from the warm earth moves via radiation. Only the IR that is not absorbed by a GHG can radiate to space. I do assume the GHGs absorb some of the earth's IR and is turned to heat. Otherwise the conservation of energy would be violated.

So it is your claim that energy absorbed by O2, N2, etc molecules via collision can not be radiated into space? Don't you guys say that everything radiates all the time? Are non GHG molecules the exception?

 

[Wuwei]

So it is your claim that energy absorbed by O2, N2, etc molecules via collision can not be radiated into space? Don't you guys say that everything radiates all the time? Are non GHG molecules the exception?

GHG molecules radiate LWIR when in a vibrational excited state. Diatomic molecules don't.


.

 

[SSDD]

So it is your claim that energy absorbed by O2, N2, etc molecules via collision can not be radiated into space? Don't you guys say that everything radiates all the time? Are non GHG molecules the exception?

GHG molecules radiate LWIR when in a vibrational excited state. Diatomic molecules don't.


.

That spectrum is just for molecular nitrogen...N2 It doesn't include the other species of N one might find in the atmosphere...nor the various NxO species.

 

[Wuwei]

So it is your claim that energy absorbed by O2, N2, etc molecules via collision can not be radiated into space? Don't you guys say that everything radiates all the time? Are non GHG molecules the exception?

GHG molecules radiate LWIR when in a vibrational excited state. Diatomic molecules don't.


.

That spectrum is just for molecular nitrogen...N2 It doesn't include the other species of N one might find in the atmosphere...nor the various NxO species.

The greenhouse effect is operative around 15 microns ± a few microns. The x axis of your graph is unclear in that area.


.

 

[SSDD]

So it is your claim that energy absorbed by O2, N2, etc molecules via collision can not be radiated into space? Don't you guys say that everything radiates all the time? Are non GHG molecules the exception?

GHG molecules radiate LWIR when in a vibrational excited state. Diatomic molecules don't.


.

That spectrum is just for molecular nitrogen...N2 It doesn't include the other species of N one might find in the atmosphere...nor the various NxO species.

The greenhouse effect is operative around 15 microns ± a few microns. The x axis of your graph is unclear in that area.


.

Wrong..the peak radiation band of CO2 is around 15 microns..the other so called greenhouse gasses radiate in various other frequencies...if there were an infrared driven radiative greenhouse effect, then it would be operative in the entire infrared spectrum...Are you saying that only CO2 is included ncluded in your restricted version of the greenhouse effect because it alone radiates primarily at 15 microns? What about water vapor? Methane? Ozone? etc.

Tell me, in your version of the greenhouse hypothesis, how does CO2 manage to negate all the other IR bands in which all the other so called greenhouse gasses radiate in? Or do they know that they are in the magical CO2 greenhouse effect world and simply don't radiate in order to not cause trouble for themselves?

 

[Flash]

If it wasn't a scam then then the climate "scientists" wouldn't have to create false data to support the AGW claim and their predictions would come true every once in awhile.

There is absolutely no proof that man made levels of CO2 emission have altered the climate of the earth. Only a very weak correlation that CO2 emissions have increased since the industrial age. There is not even any reliable data that the earth's temperature has increased since the start of the industrial revolution. That is where the environmental wackos have been fudging data. That asshole Obama even got NASA and NOAA to fabricate false data.

Historically the earth has been cooler with higher atmospheric CO2 levels. The earth has also been warmer with lower CO2 levels. There is even credible data that says historically CO2 levels lags changes in temperature.

Just a scam by the Moon Bats. Nothing to see here folks.

 

[Wuwei]

Wrong..the peak radiation band of CO2 is around 15 microns.

Of course. The peak radiation from the earth is roughly the same. By " ± a few microns" I was referring to the Wien displacement law which includes the other bands.


.

 

[P@triot]

So it is your claim that energy absorbed by O2, N2, etc molecules via collision can not be radiated into space? Don't you guys say that everything radiates all the time? Are non GHG molecules the exception?

GHG molecules radiate LWIR when in a vibrational excited state. Diatomic molecules don't.

That spectrum is just for molecular nitrogen...N2 It doesn't include the other species of N one might find in the atmosphere...nor the various NxO species.

The greenhouse effect is operative around 15 microns ± a few microns. The x axis of your graph is unclear in that area.

Wrong..the peak radiation band of CO2 is around 15 microns..the other so called greenhouse gasses radiate in various other frequencies...if there were an infrared driven radiative greenhouse effect, then it would be operative in the entire infrared spectrum...Are you saying that only CO2 is included ncluded in your restricted version of the greenhouse effect because it alone radiates primarily at 15 microns? What about water vapor? Methane? Ozone? etc.

Tell me, in your version of the greenhouse hypothesis, how does CO2 manage to negate all the other IR bands in which all the other so called greenhouse gasses radiate in? Or do they know that they are in the magical CO2 greenhouse effect world and simply don't radiate in order to not cause trouble for themselves?

I would say that SSD is unquestionably the leading authority on USMB for "Global Warming".

 

[mamooth]

I would say that SSD is unquestionably the leading authority on USMB for "Global Warming".

For the record, do you agree with arch-retard SSDD that a cooler object can't radiate towards a warmer object? Yes or no.

I just want to see how far you'll take your ass sucking, and if you're willing to proudly jump up on that retard wagon with SSDD and say that most of the physics of the past century is wrong. Even the other deniers here laugh at SSDD, that's how much of a retard he is.

Go on and scream your pouty insults as your usual way of deflecting. When you're done, I'll still be here, asking you the same question.

 

[P@triot]

When you're done, I'll still be here, asking you the same question.

Really? Will you? That certainly wasn’t your position in post #547.

Bye-bye. You're worth nobody's time. If you want to understand why everyone just ignores you now, reference "The Boy Who Cried Wolf".

I love when you get all “internet tough guy”. I’ve made you my bitch on USMB. I’ve allowed you to paint yourself into a corner with your lies and the propaganda you swallow. And then I expose it. When that happens, you cry and run. Every time.

 

[mamooth]

I love when you get all “internet tough guy”.

Tough guy? I was just asking you a simple question. The fact that you get triggered when anyone asks you a basic question doesn't make the asker a "tough guy". It just makes you a big pussy.

You said SSDD is totally brilliant at science.

Do you think his retarded theory of radiation is correct? Yes or no?

Your brought up the topic of his brilliance. So discuss it. Or just whimper at me more, in front of everyone, and demonstrate how terrified of debate you are.

 

[P@triot]

I was just asking you a simple question.

No. You were making a statement.

When you're done, I'll still be here, asking you the same question.

That’s not a question. That’s a statement. Thanks for playing.

 

[Kyle Connor]

I laughed so hard today when i saw one of these leftist climate change believers went off with this meme again on facebook. You guys have to take a look.

This is part of the complete propaganda, full with air pollution and deforestation. Even little children are made to be part of this trap so much so that a teenager is now contesting for nobel peace prize. Something that used to be a mark of honor. completely reduced

 

[SSDD]

. Even little children are made to be part of this trap so much so that a teenager is now contesting for nobel peace prize. Something that used to be a mark of honor. completely reduced

The Nobel committee, and their prize lost all credibility when they handed one of their medals and a check to Al Gore.

 

[P@triot]

 

[P@triot]

More indisputable proof that "Global Warming" is a scam...

Early Earth Marred by Acid Rain

 

[mamooth]

More indisputable proof that "Global Warming" is a scam...

Early Earth Marred by Acid Rain

Explain it to us. How does acid rain 4 billion years ago disprove global warming?

I just bring it up because, to a normal person, the two topics are completely unrelated.

Are you aware of the obvious ongoing decline of your mental faculties?

 

[gfm7175]

More indisputable proof that "Global Warming" is a scam...

Early Earth Marred by Acid Rain

Explain it to us. How does acid rain 4 billion years ago disprove global warming?

I just bring it up because, to a normal person, the two topics are completely unrelated.

Are you aware of the obvious ongoing decline of your mental faculties?

Logic stands in the way of AGW... So does Science and Mathematics.

 

[mamooth]

Logic stands in the way of AGW... So does Science and Mathematics.

Since you felt a need to jump in, my sweet little butthurt stalker, why don't you explain it for everyone.

How does acid rain 4 billion years ago disprove global warming?