

 |
| The evidence against anthropogenic global warming (Page 585/600) |
|
jmclemore
|
JAN 01, 11:57 PM
|
|
| quote | Originally posted by ray b:
the stuff does not boil instead it sublimates it goes from solid dry ice form directly to a gas at normal real world temp and pressure
|
|
It transform from solid directly to gas and some how that means there is no boiling point.
| quote | that has nothing to do with how the gas behaves or how it absorbs and emits heat that makes it a greenhouse gas and is a ''look a squirrel '' attempt to misdirect
|
|
(1) Yet you just said it transitions from solid to gas with out a liquid state, You recognize that fact but can't see how it would presents a challenge to AGW....
| quote | that has nothing to do with how the gas behaves or how it absorbs and emits heat that makes it a greenhouse gas and is a ''look a squirrel '' attempt to misdirect
|
|
(2) If how it absorbs and emits heat is irrelevant what properties make it a greenhouse gas. If it can not perform as claimed then it's contribution to the global greenhouse is "zero".
But nice squirrel but I'm more of a steak and lobster guy myself.....
|
|
|
fireboss
|
JAN 02, 12:51 AM
|
|
|
|
rinselberg
|
JAN 02, 03:16 AM
|
|
February 25, 2015
Greenhouse effect of CO2 molecules measured directly for the first time ever, using laboratory instruments that measured the amount of heat energy that was being reflected back to the earth's surface from CO2 molecules in the atmosphere.
The significance of this experiment is that it provided direct, empirical confirmation of the greenhouse effect of CO2, in a completely natural setting, to confirm what had already long ago been demonstrated in any number of laboratory experiments that were conducted with small samples of CO2-enriched air, confined in flasks or test tubes.
As reported by Becky Oskin, for LiveScience online: http://www.livescience.com/...ect-measured-us.html
The same results were also reported online, with just a little more detail, by the Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory.
First Direct Observation of Carbon Dioxide’s Increasing Greenhouse Effect at the Earth’s Surface
Berkeley Lab researchers link rising CO2 levels from fossil fuels to an upward trend in radiative forcing at two locations
http://newscenter.lbl.gov/2...use-effect-increase/
Here's a nine-minute video presentation on the evidence FOR anthropogenic (man-made) global warming. It's drawn from the most recent edition of the IPCC's periodic updates that describe the consensus among climate researchers, working all around the globe.
For anyone who would dismiss this brief video presentation as "sketchy" or "unsupported", here's the link that takes us behind the scenes, and puts us face-to-face with the very sizable technical report that is "Climate Change 2013: The Physical Science Basis", from the IPCC: http://www.ipcc.ch/report/ar5/wg1/
Here's a couple of the more readable explanations of the Greenhouse Effect that are online:
BEACO2N, The Berkeley Atmospheric CO2 Observation Network, "The Greenhouse Effect" http://beacon.berkeley.edu/...reenhouseEffect.aspx
NASA Goddard Institute for Space Studies, "Taking the Measure of the Greenhouse Effect" http://www.giss.nasa.gov/re...h/briefs/schmidt_05/[This message has been edited by rinselberg (edited 01-02-2017).]
|
|
|
ray b
|
JAN 02, 08:38 AM
|
|
| quote | Originally posted by Hudini:
That is theory. Show me the PROOF. Show me the study that PROVES the theory. Show me the independent verification of the original study. I'll give you a hint. It doesn't exist.
Then show me how a tax on industrial countries will fix it. Maybe if we give all our money to the UN so we cannot afford anything other than walking then everything will be ok? |
|
proof is easy to see in real time if you are not blind from fear or greed
the sun is currently in a low spot reduced output cycle in the past a dip in spot numbers had led to a drop in temperature look up the maulder minimum
but in the current cycle temps are up not just the air but ocean and land also and the sea-ice at the poles is dropping in area people who can see the problem realize the CO2 increase is why and the solution is to limit the CO2 output ------------------ Question wonder and be wierd are you kind?
|
|
|
jmclemore
|
JAN 02, 04:33 PM
|
|
Ray/Rinse
post a link to a video demonstrating the claim instead articles and videos of people merely "restating" the claim. Even if their claim is based on experiments they (claim to) have witnessed, I would imagine those experiments would have to be so compelling that upon viewing - we would get it.
Does co2 absorb and emit heat deflect and reflect heat or is it passive All of the above?
If co2 as it applies to AGW has only 2 points of disagreement.
1) Is the human contribution of co2 causing a rise in global temperature. 2) Is co2 (as a greenhouse gas) capable of producing a global rise in temperature.
The answer to both of those have to be yes for our current efforts to affect global temperatures to even make sense. If either of those are NO, then curbing Human emission is not an effective answer or response.
|
|
|
ray b
|
JAN 02, 10:41 PM
|
|
Venus is the classic runway green house example http://arctic-news.blogspot.com/ several video's there------------------ Question wonder and be wierd are you kind?
|
|
|
jmclemore
|
JAN 03, 12:40 AM
|
|
You guys say that co2 has a cause and effect relation between IR and atmospheric/oceanic temperatures.
Not once has anyone posted proof of how co2 performs this cause and effect. No, what gets posted are articles and videos of people presenting information, measurements, etc AS IF the co2 cause and effect are undeniably true. To which I have irrationally requested - show me the co2 performing as claimed.
A very simple experiment would settle it .... Yet there is no video from either side of the argument.
2 jars 1 with co2 1 with plain old room quality air Drop in a thermometer in both jars Cap both of them off Sit them out side Watch the temperature Track it from sun up - sun down Track it again Sun down - sun up
The average temperature should remain higher in the co2 jar, after you adjust for internal psi, at every reading with no further influence beyond the sun, earth and wind...
This would be a simple and cheap experiment I can not believe no one has done it and the video is not already available.
|
|
|
rinselberg
|
JAN 03, 03:54 AM
|
|
Re: jmclemore
I posted a YouTube video of exactly such an experiment for you before. Possibly on this thread, or maybe some other thread.
I may look for what I posted, later.
It was quite a few months back. Maybe early in 2016, or towards the end of 2015.
Always with a  [This message has been edited by rinselberg (edited 01-03-2017).]
|
|
|
newf
|
JAN 03, 06:50 AM
|
|
| quote | Originally posted by jmclemore:
You guys say that co2 has a cause and effect relation between IR and atmospheric/oceanic temperatures.
Not once has anyone posted proof of how co2 performs this cause and effect. No, what gets posted are articles and videos of people presenting information, measurements, etc AS IF the co2 cause and effect are undeniably true. To which I have irrationally requested - show me the co2 performing as claimed.
A very simple experiment would settle it .... Yet there is no video from either side of the argument.
2 jars 1 with co2 1 with plain old room quality air Drop in a thermometer in both jars Cap both of them off Sit them out side Watch the temperature Track it from sun up - sun down Track it again Sun down - sun up
The average temperature should remain higher in the co2 jar, after you adjust for internal psi, at every reading with no further influence beyond the sun, earth and wind...
This would be a simple and cheap experiment I can not believe no one has done it and the video is not already available. |
|
Sounds like it's so simple you can disprove the relationship. Have at it and prove the science wrong!! You'll be a hero of the deniers.
I agree Rinse posted a vid a while back and I think I may have as well. Anyways there are lots of papers written about it, peer reviewed by scientists but you seem to know more, have at it.[This message has been edited by newf (edited 01-03-2017).]
|
|
|
jmclemore
|
JAN 03, 12:30 PM
|
|
There was 1 video that I came across on youtube. It featured 2 drinking cups. 1 with air and the other co2. But it did not demonstrate heat absorption or emission. It did show how placing c02 gas between an ir heat source and an ir camera reduces the visibility of the ir heat source.
The video presented the following problems for me
1. did not show co2 causing a temperature increase
2. to see the difference in ir visibility the camera had to be move so that the line of sight was through the top and bottom of the cup. the view through the sides of the cups were exactly the same and both blocked ir from the camera.
Had he simply left it on the desk and measured the temperature inside the cups, I would have accepted that. I'll post a link to the video when I located it again. Oddly it was among the first search return using my phone but no where when is searched from my pc.
Added : video found
[This message has been edited by jmclemore (edited 01-03-2017).]
|
|

 |
|