Zoe Phin
-
Content
131 -
Joined
-
Last visited
-
Feedback
N/A -
Country
United States
Everything posted by Zoe Phin
-
Despite the fact that I posted a peer-reviewed article demonstrating that outgoing longwave radiation has been INCREASING, people here still believe it is decreasing, because their religion demands it. https://psl.noaa.gov/cgi-bin/data/timeseries/timeseries.pl?ntype=1&var=OLR&level=2000&lat1=-90&lat2=90&lon1=0&lon2=360&iseas=0&mon1=0&mon2=1&iarea=1&typeout=2&Submit=Create+Timeseries
-
But the sun-warmed surface emitting IR to CO2 does...
-
"Put it in orbit on the shadowed side of the Earth (to avoid solar heating.) Turn it on. Observe its temperature." Maybe we should wait till we reach the center of the galaxy? "It will be warmer." You claim. "Here's a simple one." This experiment doesn't show IR lamp getting hotter. They are not demonstrating the greenhouse effect. They also don't show you that a bottle with Argon (non-GHG) would get hotter. A bottle with Krypton (non-GHG) would get even hotter.
-
olof, You're the one that believes the sun-warmed surface radiates IR to CO2 and then this somehow makes the Earth warmer. And yet there is not a single lab experiment to prove it... You also seem to think objects of similar size and mass currently residing close to one another MUST have the same thermal history.
-
What is wrong with you people? All you have to do is shine some IR from some source onto CO2, Water Vapor, Metal, Wood, whatever, and then demonstrate a rise in temperature at the source.
-
Billvon, I can cut into an aluminum can with a frozen knife. I don't need to raise its temperature to cut. Do you imagine carbon dioxide as an externally powered laser? Or as a passive object only heated by its environment?
-
"Wow, this is really the stupidest thing I've heard so far." Why do you think science is stupid? "That's not a reason. Why would they have different internal heat? They're both rocky planets with similar silicate composition. They're also very close in size and mass." They have a different history. Size and mass can never tell you when they were made and with what energy.
-
olof, You ask stupid questions. Venus and Earth are different. They have different internal heat.
-
"Backradiation is the same as radiation. The object radiating does not know or care which direction it is radiating in." No it's not. Radiative heat transfer equation says different. Energy travels ONLY from hot to cold. We call it heat. There's literally not a single experiment that shows what you need to prove. None. Going back to the 1860s. None. "We would all be dead if Earth could not warm from the re-radiation of IR." No we would not. What happens when you add sun to 0 Celcius? "A tank full of CO2 will absorb longwave IR at 4500nm far, far better than a solid white surface will." Wrong. White albedo is only for visible spectrum, i.e. ~400 to ~800 nm. White absorbs just fine at infrared. Now do the math (not physics) of why you should feel the burn.
-
Backradiation heating is not part of science. Earth's surface doesn't warm from heating IR-active gases. I suggest you buy an electric cooler. Suspend it over your head on a clear night. Feel the burn? Why not? Solids absorb IR way better than gases. Do the climate psyence math, you should feel the burn.
-
"You think that heating due to radiation is not part of science?" It is, but that's not what you need to prove. "When they are reflected." Why would they reflect? What condition would cause reflection?
-
"How can you argue with that gem?" You can't. Backradiation heating rhetoric is not thermodynamics.
-
"They are sometimes absorbed. Often this results in their energy being CONVERTED to heat." Sometime. Often. So now you agree. "No, it's actually a very important part of science." The backradiation heating rhetoric you uncritically repeat is not part of science. When are photons NOT absorbed and act as heat? You're getting close, but your programming may kick in to halt you. "How much? Give percentages, even rough estimates. 80/20? 70/30?" Enough to cover the so-called greenhouse effect.
-
Mostly sun, but yes, "due to internal heat too"
-
"Is the earth's temperature due to internal heat too?" Mostly sun, but yes. Geothermal provides a base for the sun to add to.
-
"For some reason, Venus’ surface temperature seems to be relatively uniform all around. It’s gotta be the retrograde rotation, right?" It's internal. http://phzoe.com/2019/12/25/why-is-venus-so-hot/ That's why it's so uniform.
-
Sorry brent, but at least you found out these people are dumb scum.
-
It has hardly any methane to warrant ANY scientist from claiming there's a greenhouse effect making Uranus so hot underneath. As I've shown, CO2 doesn't warm Earth's surface. Multiply 0 by 5000. Multiply that again by 2.5? for extra absorption. And the temperature of Uranus at 1 bar atmo pressure is the same as on Earth, discounted by distance to the sun. Again proving that IR gases mean nothing. If you radiate 3 glass jars filled with: CO2, Water Vapor, and Argon. Which jar will get the hottest?
-
Look at that methane just decide to flare up like that! I guess a whole big load just decided to bundle up there, and that's why that hot spot is 18x hotter than the rest (sun induced). Yeah that's it. It bundled up. Wait, but that's supposed to reduce outgoing radiation. Oh whatever. Man-made climate change! Save the Earth, ppl. Believe!
-
"2.3% is actually a lot - earth has 0.04% CO2, and since methane has stronger IR absorption bands it's the equivalent of around 5000 times the greenhouse effect. " So what? Uranus base atmosphere is sitting on a "hot stove" Same as Venus, which has over 200,000 times the CO2. At the same atmo pressure, Venus has the same temperature (discounted by distance to the sun) as Earth. And what causes ... http://hockeyschtick.blogspot.com/2014/11/how-can-uranus-have-storms-hot-enough.html
-
Yeah OK. You can confirm my findings in scientific papers, but you won't find it anywhere on NASA's site. They'll tell you the wrong thing. I'm just so insecure about telling people the facts of reality. Or maybe they're too insecure to say "thanks, good points, i'll think about it some more".
-
"Good thing I run very strong adblockers" Never gonna find ads on my site. Do google "average moon temperature". I'm ahead of NASA's site on this one. I come up 2nd, AFAI can tell here. NASA will tell you a theoretical blackbody temperature that corresponds NIL with reality. And you're telling me I can't calculate? lol, ok.
-
olof, Since you didn't sleep through science class, you should have no problem answering: Skydiver Wendy jumped out of a plane. Her body is 37C. The Earth's surface is 15C. Emissivity is close to 1, so let's say it's one. The Earth is blocking Wendy's radiation from reaching the space behind Earth. How much should she warm up? Clearly, her final temperature must be above 37C using standard greenhouse pseudophysics. In fact it should be at least 49C. Wendy, have you observed your skin at 49C when you're falling? Don't even get me started on airplane engine temperatures! olof, 2.3% methane for Uranus, is too small to explain base tropospheric temperatures and pressure. So no self-respecting scientist claims a GH effect on Uranus.
-
olof, I love being called a crackpot by geothermal deniers. The irony is too rich. How'd you get so confident with zero evidence? Remember, post-hoc fallacy and affirming-the-consequent fallacy is not evidence.
-
Hi Wendy, Marxists also claim I don't understand economics. The greenhouse effect is in many ways like the labor theory of value. Stupid. No evidence. But it gives the pretense to have something to complain about.