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)
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 07-06-2021, 09:57 AM
 
8,943 posts, read 2,968,029 times
Reputation: 5168

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by Freak80 View Post
Give me the temperature that Earth "should" be.

Thank you.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 07-06-2021, 10:52 AM
 
10,513 posts, read 5,170,583 times
Reputation: 14056
Quote:
Originally Posted by paracord View Post
Give me the temperature that Earth "should" be.
Thank you.
Remove the excess CO2 caused by human fossil fuel burning and drop it from 418 ppm today back to the natural 280 ppm where it was at the start of the Industrial Revolution. The Earth will rebalance the temperatures on her own, naturally.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-06-2021, 06:13 PM
 
Location: Ohio
24,621 posts, read 19,177,123 times
Reputation: 21743
Quote:
Originally Posted by Freak80 View Post
I congratulate you for proving what we already knew, which is that you don't understand even basic high school science.

Who can spot the Göbbels-style propaganda and disinformation in this disingenuous video?

First, the bottles are sealed, meaning a closed system. There is no cap around Earth and it is an open system.

So, this Göbbels-style experiment proves nothing.

Second, she lied by omission by not telling us the energy bandwidth produced by the "lamps." If those lamps do not produce bandwidths identical to the Sun then she not only lied, she committed fraud.

She said she can't bring the Sun into the laboratory, yet she could take the bottles outside where they would be exposed to the Sun.

Why do you think she refused to do that? Because she's a fraud.

Third, she lied by omission when she said "... the Carbon Dioxide molecule is particularly susceptible..." to the radiation emitted by Earth.

It is not. CO2 is only "susceptible" at bandwidths of 2.7 microns, 4.3 microns and 15 microns.

The Earth does not emit black body radiation at the 2.7 micron bandwidth.

Wien's Law T (Temperature) = b / wavelength in micrometers, where "b" is a constant equal to 2,900 um-K.

T = 2,900 um-K / 15 um = 193°K = -112°F

T = 2,900 um-K / 4.3 um = 673.9°K = 753°F

What we can infer from that irrefutable science is that 4.3 microns has far greater energy than 15 microns, however the amount of Black Body Radiation Earth emits at 4.3 microns is minuscule, as this link proves:

https://eesc.columbia.edu/courses/ee...absorption.gif

She perpetrates another fraud by down-playing the impact of Water Vapor.

Water vapor absorbs at 5.9, 6.5, 6.9, 7.2, 7.6, 8.2 and 9.6 microns.

Wien's Law:

T = 2,900 um-K / 5.9 um = 491°K = 424°F
T = 2,900 um-K / 6.5 um = 446°K = 343°F
T = 2,900 um-K / 6.9 um = 420°K = 296°F
T = 2,900 um-K / 7.2 um = 402°K = 263°F
T = 2,900 um-K / 7.6 um = 381°K = 226°F
T = 2,900 um-K / 8.2 um = 353°K = 175°F
T = 2,900 um-K / 9.6 um = 302°K = 83°F

As you can see from the irrefutable scientific data using Wien's Law, Water Vapor is far more powerful than CO2 could ever hope to be and generates far more energy than CO2 ever will.

Finally, her Göbbels-style propaganda video doesn't prove global warming, but it does prove Charles' Law.

Did you guy do this very same experiment in your high school physics class?

We did.

When you heat any gas -- it doesn't matter what it is -- in a confined container -- and Earth is not a confined container, then you cause the all of the gas molecules to move faster.

As the gas molecules move faster, they are colliding with other molecules as well as the walls of the container and as the temperature rises, they collide more frequently and with increasingly higher force.

In a rigid container --plastics and metals are rigid but balloons are not -- these powerful collisions occurring at at more frequent rates results in higher pressure, which increases temperature.

How many of you use canned air to clean your computer or bug spray (for bugs not your computer)?

Notice how every time you spray the can cools?

It cools because you're decreasing pressure. The inverse is also true: it warms up when you increase pressure.

Some other flaws in her fatal "experiment."

She never weighed the containers.

Who on this forum would like to know why a Göbbelist would never wanna weigh the containers?

Let's start small.

Does the mouth of the container have the same surface area as the bottom of the container?

Nope.

The mouth of the container is about 2 cm in diameter and you do the Pir^2 stuff if you want, but the mouth of the container is way, way smaller than the bottom of the container.

Why is that important?

In an open system, pouring a heavier gas onto a lighter gas will displace the lighter gas.

But not in a closed system with a narrow mouth/opening.

There's no place for the lighter gas to go. It is trapped and gets compressed, meaning its volume decreases.

If she told us the quantities of bicarbonate soda and vinegar she used, we could calculate the amount of CO2 created by that reaction.

In a real bona fide experiment, you would pump more air into the first container so that they had the same weights/volumes.

Notice she lied by omission by not mentioning humidity, but then why would she, since she down-played the role of Water Vapor.

That's all the Left's got is trickery and the veneer of science which is pseudo-science masquerading as science.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-06-2021, 06:24 PM
 
4,023 posts, read 1,443,868 times
Reputation: 3543
Quote:
Originally Posted by Elliott_CA View Post
37% and rising. Climate change isn't just an abstract scientific concept, it's starting to kill people. The giveaway that it is manmade climate change is that the increasing rate of heat death is occurring independently across all continents, in parallel with the increasing rate of extreme weather events all across the globe.

Climate change deniers, by spreading disinformation, are complicit in a small way in these deaths.

The burden of heat-related mortality attributable to recent human-induced climate change
The climate is changing but it cannot be proven it is man made. Earth’s climate has gone through several heat and cool cycles. Just because we are measuring it going up now when man is here does not mean it is man made. Correlation is not causation. We likely have litter control over global weather (local environmental conditions we certainly do).
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-06-2021, 06:36 PM
 
Location: USA
18,501 posts, read 9,170,177 times
Reputation: 8531
Mircea,

I am impressed by your facts and figures.

Publish your findings in a major peer-reviewed scientific journal, and you should win a Nobel Prize. Refuting human-cause climate change is the scientific accomplishment of the century.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-06-2021, 06:40 PM
 
Location: USA
18,501 posts, read 9,170,177 times
Reputation: 8531
Quote:
Originally Posted by paracord View Post
give me the temperature that earth "should" be.

Thank you.
255 Kelvin.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-06-2021, 06:42 PM
 
19,573 posts, read 8,526,696 times
Reputation: 10096
Quote:
Originally Posted by Freak80 View Post
Mircea,

I am impressed by your facts and figures.

Publish your findings in a major peer-reviewed scientific journal, and you should win a Nobel Prize. Refuting human-cause climate change is the scientific accomplishment of the century.
Those publications have become so corrupt and untrustworthy that they refuse to publish papers that do not conform to the extremely lucrative AGW alarmism narrative.

As you surely know very well.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-06-2021, 06:46 PM
 
Location: USA
18,501 posts, read 9,170,177 times
Reputation: 8531
Quote:
Originally Posted by Spartacus713 View Post
Those publications have become so corrupt and untrustworthy that they refuse to publish papers that do not conform to the extremely lucrative AGW alarmism narrative.

As you surely know very well.
Ok. Are physics publications also corrupted when they say CO2 absorbs infrared radiation?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-06-2021, 06:56 PM
 
19,573 posts, read 8,526,696 times
Reputation: 10096
Quote:
Originally Posted by Freak80 View Post
Ok. Are physics publications also corrupted when they say CO2 absorbs infrared radiation?
Those same publications also agree that plants absorb CO2, yes?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-06-2021, 06:57 PM
 
Location: Austin
2,953 posts, read 994,032 times
Reputation: 2790
Quote:
Originally Posted by Elliott_CA View Post
Climate change deniers, by spreading disinformation, are complicit in a small way in these deaths.

Torquemada is this you? Congratulations, Elliott (btw racist white name) ... you've made science a religion and you're using it exactly the way the Catholic Church used religion to accuse 'deniers' of heresy. Galileo would be so proud of our leftist stooges. The faithful being no more able to discern the truth of their new religion than the feverishly devout Spanish inquisitors of the 15th century were able to understand the truth behind theirs. You just follow, mouth and use denial of your dogma as grounds for culpability in something completely unprovable.

This is you, Elliott -

"Heresy in the Catholic Church denotes the formal denial or doubt of a core doctrine of the Roman Catholic Church. Heresy has a very specific meaning in the Catholic Church and there are four elements which constitute formal heresy; a valid Christian baptism; a profession of still being a Christian; outright denial or positive doubt regarding a truth that the Catholic Church regards as revealed by God; and lastly, the disbelief must be morally culpable, that is, there must be a refusal to accept what is known to be a doctrinal imperative."
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
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.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:


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 01:37 PM.

© 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