|What makes IPCC thinks N2, O2, O3 are not as good at capturing and retaining heat than CO2 can?18-04-2019 17:36|
|Tai Hai Chen★★★★☆
|These have higher specific heat than CO2 so they hold more heat than CO2 does. They capture shortwave radiation which is far more powerful than longwave radiation. That means they capture heat at day and dissipate heat at night. So they should be better at capturing and retaining heat than CO2 can.
Edited on 18-04-2019 17:40
|Into the Night★★★★★
Tai Hai Chen wrote:
Duplicate thread. Ignored.
The Parrot Killer
Tai Hai Chen wrote: These have higher specific heat than CO2
So they aren't in a dead heat? Who's going to take the heat for this one? Whoever it is, he'd better be pack'n heat. Maybe even the heat will arrive and give everyone the cold shoulder.
Tai Hai Chen wrote: so they hold more heat than CO2 does.
Tai Hai Chen ... how does one substance "hold" more "heat" than any other? Are there substances that have lower "heat capacities" or lower "heat limits" than others? How does that work?
Tai Hai Chen wrote: They capture shortwave radiation which is far more powerful than longwave radiation.
Tai Hai Chen ... does wavelength determine power, i.e. energy / time ? I thought it was energy / time that determines power? Am I mistaken?
Tai Hai Chen wrote: That means they capture heat at day and dissipate heat at night.
How do they know when night time has arrived so that they stop capturing and start dissipating? I thought it was all based on temperature.
Tai Hai Chen wrote: So they should be better at capturing and retaining heat than CO2 can.How is "heat" retained, exactly? I thought that thermal radiation pours out of all matter per Stefan-Boltzmann and that no matter can do anything to hinder that in any way.
Global Warming: The preferred religion of the scientifically illiterate.
Ceist - I couldn't agree with you more. But when money and religion are involved, and there are people who value them above all else, then the lies begin. - trafn
You are completely misunderstanding their use of the word "accumulation"! - Climate Scientist.
The Stefan-Boltzman equation doesn't come up with the correct temperature if greenhouse gases are not considered - Hank
:*sigh* Not the "raw data" crap. - Leafsdude
IB STILL hasn't explained what Planck's Law means. Just more hand waving that it applies to everything and more asserting that the greenhouse effect 'violates' it.- Ceist
Edited on 18-04-2019 21:00
|The IPCC in 2013||74||21-05-2019 23:15|
|First, it's CO2. Now it's wind turbines and batteries. Humans are the problem.||3||17-05-2019 20:06|
|This makes no sense...||12||17-05-2019 13:46|
|So what if Democrats spend 600 trillion USD putting a bit CO2 into underground?||0||05-05-2019 13:56|
|Why do they take out H2O from air when they measure CO2 concentration?||3||30-04-2019 23:21|