Welcome to City-Data.com Forum!
U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Closed Thread Start New Thread
 
Old 05-24-2016, 12:03 PM
 
17,842 posts, read 14,382,736 times
Reputation: 4113

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by hawkeye2009 View Post
Oh....... it DOES trap heat...................... to a very, very small degree which is completely inconsequential. Here is the most basic primer I have found which explains the absorbtion spectra of CO2 and in very simple language demonstrates how energy transfer occurs in the atmosphere and why CO2 is a very small part of "warming".

This is about as basic as it gets. Read it (most won't) and it gives you an appreciation that CO2 is not like some "reflective mirror" which sends energy back to earth (as Al Gore would have you believe).

The salient issue is the 15 micron point in the spectra (related to CO2) and what percent of that contributes to actual atmospheric warming, independent of other gases.

CO2 Absorption Spectrum.
Do you need to be reminded yet again that your source is a freakin pseudoscience conspiracy blog by a 'mushroom physiologist' with no background in physics?

You really should stop trying to pretend you have a clue what you're talking about or that you have any credibility at all when posting crap like that.

I read it. It was hilarious. It's even more hilarious that you think it's credible.

Last edited by Ceist; 05-24-2016 at 12:16 PM..

 
Old 05-24-2016, 12:17 PM
 
1,111 posts, read 1,183,029 times
Reputation: 1320
So the schools aren't allowed to TEACH something, that at this point, would be categorically wrong / incorrect / not factual based? What's the issue?
 
Old 05-24-2016, 12:53 PM
 
17,842 posts, read 14,382,736 times
Reputation: 4113
Quote:
Originally Posted by Goodnight View Post
If you disagree that CO2 can trap heat there is probably no reason for further discussion. Maybe you have a source for that?



Climate Change: Vital Signs of the Planet: Evidence
Here's another article published in Science.

Atmospheric CO2: Principal Control Knob Governing Earths Temperature.

I apologise that it's a serious article published in a reputable science Journal and written by physicists, and not the more entertaining junk science conspiracy blog rubbish written by a 'mushroom physiologist' with no background in physics that 'Hawkeye the pseudoscience guy' provided.

Last edited by Ceist; 05-24-2016 at 01:18 PM..
 
Old 05-24-2016, 01:06 PM
 
Location: Londonderry, NH
41,479 posts, read 59,778,277 times
Reputation: 24863
I believe the warming is caused by all the energy used by the argument between the believers on each side.


I am not all that concerned with the mean temperatures but with the extremes in any location I happen to inhabit. 20 deg. below zero kills some of my decorative plants and bursts pipes that are expensive to fix. 100 Deg. and above place high stresses on my heart and has to be countered with costly air conditioning.


The rest is entertainment.
 
Old 05-24-2016, 01:06 PM
 
17,842 posts, read 14,382,736 times
Reputation: 4113
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jabronie View Post
So the schools aren't allowed to TEACH something, that at this point, would be categorically wrong / incorrect / not factual based? What's the issue?
Apparently some people want their children to have a decent, science-free education where they can learn about things like baby dinosaurs on Noah's Ark.

Portland Does the Right Thing. The Right Freaks Out.
 
Old 05-24-2016, 01:17 PM
 
22,923 posts, read 15,487,222 times
Reputation: 16962
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ceist View Post
Please find a current textbook that rejects anthropogenic climate change.
Ceist; I was addressing the topic and the O/P's assertion, not the basic premise of global warming or climate change.
 
Old 05-24-2016, 01:31 PM
 
17,842 posts, read 14,382,736 times
Reputation: 4113
Quote:
Originally Posted by BruSan View Post
Ceist; I was addressing the topic and the O/P's assertion, not the basic premise of global warming or climate change.
I'm wondering what current 'textbooks' even exist that reject AGW.
 
Old 05-24-2016, 03:45 PM
 
Location: Long Island
57,269 posts, read 26,199,434 times
Reputation: 15637
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jabronie View Post
So the schools aren't allowed to TEACH something, that at this point, would be categorically wrong / incorrect / not factual based? What's the issue?
Because it's not fact based, name the text books or facts that they wanted to teach.
 
Old 05-24-2016, 03:57 PM
 
30,063 posts, read 18,663,011 times
Reputation: 20880
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ceist View Post
There are 3 mechanisms for heat transfer: conduction, convection and radiation. 'Transduction' is NOT a term used in atmospheric heat transfer. Apparently it's you who is "simply too dense" to understand atmospheric thermodynamics and how convection and radiative heat transfer play a role. That's not surprising as you don't seem to know the difference between pseudoscience nonsense from a conspiracy blog and legitmate science from a credible source.

Perhaps this 2011 article published in Physics Today that I've posted a number of times in the past might help you understand better (rather than the ridiculous pseudoscience rubbish from the 'greenhouse' effect denying 'mushroom physiologist' conspiracy blogger you used as a 'source' )

Infrared radiation and planetary temperature.
https://geosci.uchicago.edu/~rtp1/papers/PhysTodayRT2011.pdf

Or this more recent Journal article:

Benestad, Rasmus E. "A mental picture of the greenhouse effect." Theoretical and Applied Climatology (2016): 1-10.

or this educational resource from the American Chemical Society:

How Atmospheric Warming Works - American Chemical Society

or read pretty much any textbook on Atmospheric Physics and Chemistry

It's really very amusing to see you delude yourself and mindlessly swallow and regurgitate non-science rubbish from your links to pseudoscience conspiracy blogs while narcissistically beating your chest and claiming everyone else is ignorant and no-one else other than you has any 'knowledge of science'. Who are you trying to fool? Yourself?

Do you understand what this shows?
https://ceistblog.files.wordpress.co...r-spectrum.jpg

You post garbage internet links and call them science. Given that you lack any scientific knowledge, degrees or training, you have only "Google" as your "expertise" and it is embarassing.

1. Please post your academic scientific degrees- I gave you mine and you chose to post personal information without my consent. You have NO DEGREES in ANY scientific field, yet suggest that you know physics! LOL! You have obviously revealed that you know nothing of physics, which is why you believe in the AGW cult.

2. You lack any understanding regarding aborbtion of "black body" radiation from the planet.

3. You do not understand the fact that CO2 absorbs IR radiation over the 15 micron range, which is only 8% of all IR radiation.

4. You fail to understand that IR radiation translates to "heat" through vibration of the CO2 molecule. This "heat" translated from the IR radiation is emitted in all directions, not jsut back to earth.

5. The level at which CO2 reaches saturation is at 10m. The AGW cult has presumed that the atmosphreric distribution of CO2 and the ability of CO2 to absorb IR radiation is uniform throughout the limits of the atmosphere, which is completely false.

6. You do not understand that the width of the absorbtion spectra for H20 vapor is 30X that of CO2 and this reflects the fact that water vapor is a far more "menacing" green house gas. To you, all molecules absorb and emit all spectra of IR radiation and the concentration of those molecules is irrelevant. This shows how very, very little you understand about thermodynamics.

7. You do not understand that radiation transmitted to a molecule can result in changes of electron states, which emits no radiation, and not all radiation transmitted to a molecule results in vibration.

Do you realize how ridiculous you appear by claiming this supreme knowledge of physics with no formal training and no degrees? It is simply hilarious! LOL!

Last edited by hawkeye2009; 05-24-2016 at 04:11 PM..
 
Old 05-24-2016, 04:49 PM
 
27,307 posts, read 16,220,557 times
Reputation: 12102
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ceist View Post
Apparently some people want their children to have a decent, science-free education where they can learn about things like baby dinosaurs on Noah's Ark.

Portland Does the Right Thing. The Right Freaks Out.
Thank goodness for parochial schools that resist left wing indoctrination.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Closed Thread


Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies

All times are GMT -6. The time now is 06:23 AM.

© 2005-2024, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Contact Us - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37 - Top