Carbon dioxide hysteria (Page 30/170)
rinselberg MAR 14, 10:03 AM
The Go To place for this is YouTube. Look for brief videos about the "Greenhouse Effect". Or just Google (etc.) for this kind of basic, explanatory information or tutorials. You could even just search for Images and you would find diagrams and viewgraph-style presentations.

I don't need to remember how the Greenhouse Effect works, exactly, as long as I can look it up from time to time and refresh my memory.
Raydar MAR 14, 12:15 PM

quote
Originally posted by rinselberg:

The Go To place for this is YouTube...



Yes. Such a well-known bastion of impartiality.


quote

I don't need to remember how the Greenhouse Effect works, exactly, as long as I can look it up from time to time and refresh my memory.



Next, you might try Wikipedia. Probably equally impartial.

[This message has been edited by Raydar (edited 03-14-2023).]

rinselberg MAR 14, 03:35 PM
In this moment, I am talking about the Greenhouse Effect itself, and not its implications in terms of climate change and global warming... just the physics involving greenhouse gas molecules in the atmosphere and how that interacts with sunlight.

Even the scientifically educated people who don't align themselves with the urgency of reducing greenhouse gas emissions do not quarrel with the physics of the Greenhouse Effect.

I'm talking this way in the moment, because cliffw is clearly not "read in" on the physics of the Greenhouse Effect.

It's simple enough to be presented with a single diagram or viewgraph, and there are many such diagrams and viewgraphs conveniently available online.

[This message has been edited by rinselberg (edited 03-14-2023).]

rinselberg MAR 15, 06:28 AM


The Greenhouse Effect "by the numbers" ... 1, 2, 3 and 4.

Energy from the sun (1) in the form of visible and UV light penetrates the atmosphere and reaches the surface of lands and oceans as daylight, where much of this solar energy is absorbed. This warms the land and ocean surfaces. When night follows day, the lands and oceans shed some of this heat (2) by radiating it upwards and into the atmosphere as longer wavelength (and invisible) infrared light or "IR".

Some of the IR passes all the way upwards through the atmosphere and escapes into outer space (3), but some is trapped (4) in the atmosphere by greenhouse gases. This completes the greenhouse effect, and the trapped energy nudges up the temperature of the lower atmosphere and the lands and oceans.

The key to understanding this is to realize that greenhouse gases in the atmosphere do not absorb the visible and UV light energy that is received during daylight from the sun, but they do absorb the longer wave IR energy that is radiated from sun-warmed land and ocean surfaces during the night.

Credit Teleskola.mt, which is an initiative by the island nation of Malta's Ministry for Education and Employment.
https://teleskola.mt/about/

"Impacts of Energy Demand: Global Warming"
https://teleskola.mt/global-warming/


This (hopefully) reaches "cliffw" and answers this question for him:

quote
Originally posted by cliffw:
Why does CO2 prevent the effects of the sun only one way? Why does it not protect the sun's effect on the earth's temperature?

[This message has been edited by rinselberg (edited 03-15-2023).]

cliffw MAR 15, 08:07 AM

quote
Originally posted by rinselberg:
But if you're thinking that the world can simply "plant' or "green" away the planet-warming effects of greenhouse gas emissions from human sources, you are indulging in wishful (but unrealistic) thinking.

I don't think there are many people in this country (or around the world, for that matter) who think about this like you do.



You think wrong. I am not surprised. For one, I never thought we could plant/green away all CO2. For two, it is settled science that plants devour CO2. Unfortunately, there are too many people who think like you do. They seem to think that zero CO2 will save all mankind, animal kind, and plant kind, and save the planet. They are after cows, want to capture farts, and other crazy stuff. It would not surprise me to see that they go after plants next. Because they emit CO2, which they do.

Those with excellent critical thinking skills would wonder what people like you think is the right concentration of the various so called "greenhouse" emissions. Just like the same people think that the rich ought to pay more taxes. Their fair share. Without defining fair share. Govt set up the tax code.


quote
Originally posted by rinselberg:
... and the other EPA-designated greenhouse gases ...



Ah yes, . The EPA.
The EPA is from the government. We can trust them,

The EPA which works for the President, who is perpetuating this fraud. The same idiots who decided to burn the toxic chemicals which spilled in the East Palestine train derailment. Creating a larger environmental threat from a small one.


quote
Originally posted by rinselberg:
I don't need to remember how the Greenhouse Effect works, exactly, as long as I can look it up from time to time and refresh my memory.




quote
Originally posted by rinselberg:
In this moment, I am talking about the Greenhouse Effect itself, and not its implications in terms of climate change and global warming... just the physics involving greenhouse gas molecules in the atmosphere and how that interacts with sunlight.

Even the scientifically educated people who don't align themselves with the urgency of reducing greenhouse gas emissions do not quarrel with the physics of the Greenhouse Effect.

I'm talking this way in the moment, because cliffw is clearly not "read in" on the physics of the Greenhouse Effect.

It's simple enough to be presented with a single diagram or viewgraph, and there are many such diagrams and viewgraphs conveniently available online.



Oh my. You give me too much credit, . Physics is not my strong suit nor do I need to read into the physics of greenhouse gasses. Logic is my strong suit. I don't even need to take the time to search for some partisan diagram/picture graph.

For you see, as a kid, my Mom had actual greenhouses. Many of them. We even had a commercial nursery.

For you see, I have heard of the horror stories of pets or children being left in cars with the windows closed on hot sunny days. Even when getting into my vehicle during cold winter days.

I think I can sum up the physics in one word. Blanket.

If you are truly interested in man made Global Warming, you should use the same amount of time researching the "other opinion".

Start here ...

50 to one project

I can not believe your kind is so scared that the Earth's temperature will increase one degree in 100 years.

You are displaying sheepism.
rinselberg MAR 15, 10:27 AM

quote
Originally posted by cliffw:
Those with excellent critical thinking skills would wonder what people like you think is the right concentration of the various so called "greenhouse" emissions.


Target: 350 ppm atmospheric concentration of CO2
Down from current 450 ppm.

Methane, Nitrous Oxide and Fluorinated gases, all as close to zero ppm as possible.
cliffw MAR 15, 11:07 AM
Water vapor ?

What did you allude to, state. Let me check.
cliffw MAR 15, 11:11 AM

quote
Originally posted by rinselberg:
Atmospheric water vapor or humidity (H2O) is the most abundant greenhouse gas, by far. It's also far and away the most significant in terms of the greenhouse effect that warms the planet. But it's a constant, because Mother Nature limits its concentration in the atmosphere for us, as part of the hydrologic cycle that removes water from the atmosphere as rain, snow and other precipitation. In the scientific deconstruction or cause-effect analysis of climate change, water is a moot point.



You did not mention water vapor.
cliffw MAR 15, 11:22 AM

quote
Originally posted by rinselberg:
Atmospheric water vapor or humidity (H2O) is the most abundant greenhouse gas, by far. It's also far and away the most significant in terms of the greenhouse effect that warms the planet. But it's a constant, because Mother Nature limits its concentration in the atmosphere for us, as part of the hydrologic cycle that removes water from the atmosphere as rain, snow and other precipitation. In the scientific deconstruction or cause-effect analysis of climate change, water is a moot point.



Are you ready for some critical thinking ? How does one measure water vapor or humidity ?

I will walk you through this.
cliffw MAR 15, 11:27 AM

quote
Originally posted by rinselberg:
Target: 350 ppm atmospheric concentration of CO2
Down from current 450 ppm.

Methane, Nitrous Oxide and Fluorinated gases, all as close to zero ppm as possible.



Is the ideal atmospheric concentration of all greenhouse gasses including CO2 supposed to be as close to zero as possible ?

Rate the various gasses in terms of creating your greenhouse effect ?