Remember me
▼ Content

"Global Dimming" - A Brand New "Buzzword"?



Page 3 of 3<123
28-06-2024 23:01
Into the NightProfile picture★★★★★
(22251)
GasGuzzler wrote:
Im a BM wrote:
GasGuzzler wrote:
sealover wrote:"Tiny particles from the combustion of coal, oil, and gas can reflect sunlight and spur the formation of clouds,


Wow. You really earned your Gullible Moron trophy this time. Good work.

@IBdaMann
It's been a while since we've seen any of your amazing graphics. If you could spare minute from your productive a profitable life, I think we need a Gullible Moron trophy.



The graphic can already be found at the top of this page.

Yes, the strongest scientific argument to counter evidence that aerosols influence cloud formation is to cite "Gullible Moron".

Gullible Moron is such a MORON! And so GULLIBLE!

Your entire post stands on this statement...

"Tiny particles from the combustion of coal, oil, and gas can reflect sunlight and spur the formation of clouds,


Clouds are formed by colder air which condenses water vapor from warmer air into liquid.

Quite right. Convection causes air to rise. Cooler air is above the surface. As air rises, the water vapor can no longer stay in suspension and it comes out of the air as liquid or ice (clouds). This is why clouds tend to be flat on the bottom, but often appear 'piled up' on top. The air continues to rise, taking part of the cloud with it. If the cloud is dense enough, precipitation will begin. If that convection is fast enough, you get thunderclouds and the precipitation may quite easily be hail.

Clouds can also form at the boundary of warm fronts (typical of Seattle clouds). As moist air climbs up and over the colder air below, a band of clouds forms as that moist air cools. These clouds are typically the stratus variety (sheet-like), with little lumpiness to them, even on top.

Precip from these, if it happens, is typically drizzle and usually little wind.

GasGuzzler wrote:
So, unless you like to explain how reflected sunlight creates clouds, you remain gullible...and a moron.

He's a moron. A reflection means no energy was absorbed. So...nothing was heated, and no convection takes place.


The Parrot Killer

Debunked in my sig. - tmiddles

Google keeps track of paranoid talk and i'm not on their list. I've been evaluated and certified. - keepit

nuclear powered ships do not require nuclear fuel. - Swan

While it is true that fossils do not burn it is also true that fossil fuels burn very well - Swan
28-06-2024 23:47
Into the NightProfile picture★★★★★
(22251)
Im a BM wrote:
GasGuzzler wrote:
Im a BM wrote:
GasGuzzler wrote:
sealover wrote:"Tiny particles from the combustion of coal, oil, and gas can reflect sunlight and spur the formation of clouds,


Wow. You really earned your Gullible Moron trophy this time. Good work.

@IBdaMann
It's been a while since we've seen any of your amazing graphics. If you could spare minute from your productive a profitable life, I think we need a Gullible Moron trophy.



The graphic can already be found at the top of this page.

Yes, the strongest scientific argument to counter evidence that aerosols influence cloud formation is to cite "Gullible Moron".

Gullible Moron is such a MORON! And so GULLIBLE!

Your entire post stands on this statement...

"Tiny particles from the combustion of coal, oil, and gas can reflect sunlight and spur the formation of clouds,


Clouds are formed by colder air which condenses water vapor from warmer air into liquid.

So, unless you like to explain how reflected sunlight creates clouds, you remain gullible...and a moron.



The statement is that the tiny particles reflect sunlight AND spur the formation of clouds.

Particles are not necessary to form a cloud. See the works of John Wilson.
Im a BM wrote:
The clouds most certainly are not CREATED by reflected sunlight.

But you said they are. Which is it, dude?
Im a BM wrote:
They are created by the aerosol particle acting as a nucleus for liquid water condensation and droplet formation.

Particles are not necessary for cloud formation.
Im a BM wrote:
In the absence of aerosols, clouds are formed of much larger water droplets, and are not so highly reflective.

Clouds are not reflective at infrared light. They are also not reflective at some frequencies of UV, and most radio frequencies. Clouds absorb infrared light, just like water anywhere.
Im a BM wrote:
With aerosols present, much more reflective clouds formed of smaller water droplets are created.

Particulates are not necessary for cloud formation.
Im a BM wrote:
Now, the aerosol particle alone can reflect sunlight, if that is what confused you.

Particulates absorb sunlight.
Im a BM wrote:
Maybe later today I'll pull up the article about how Alameda County was going to use salt for cloud seeding. Not to try to get more rain.

Paradox. Irrational.
Im a BM wrote:
To get more reflective clouds to form and cool things off.

Clouds reflect some frequencies, absorb others (such as infrared and some UV bands), and are transparent to most frequencies. You can't cloud see something that doesn't exist. You can't cloud see where there are no clouds.
Im a BM wrote:
They got spooked into holding off the testing.

Cost too much money?
Im a BM wrote:
Do you know how to present an argument without resorting to insults?

You are describing yourself again. You can't blame anybody else for your problem.


The Parrot Killer

Debunked in my sig. - tmiddles

Google keeps track of paranoid talk and i'm not on their list. I've been evaluated and certified. - keepit

nuclear powered ships do not require nuclear fuel. - Swan

While it is true that fossils do not burn it is also true that fossil fuels burn very well - Swan
28-06-2024 23:57
Into the NightProfile picture★★★★★
(22251)
sealover wrote:
GasGuzzler wrote:
Im a BM wrote:
GasGuzzler wrote:
Im a BM wrote:
GasGuzzler wrote:
sealover wrote:"Tiny particles from the combustion of coal, oil, and gas can reflect sunlight and spur the formation of clouds,


Wow. You really earned your Gullible Moron trophy this time. Good work.

@IBdaMann
It's been a while since we've seen any of your amazing graphics. If you could spare minute from your productive a profitable life, I think we need a Gullible Moron trophy.



The graphic can already be found at the top of this page.

Yes, the strongest scientific argument to counter evidence that aerosols influence cloud formation is to cite "Gullible Moron".

Gullible Moron is such a MORON! And so GULLIBLE!

Your entire post stands on this statement...

"Tiny particles from the combustion of coal, oil, and gas can reflect sunlight and spur the formation of clouds,


Clouds are formed by colder air which condenses water vapor from warmer air into liquid.

So, unless you like to explain how reflected sunlight creates clouds, you remain gullible...and a moron.



The statement is that the tiny particles reflect sunlight AND spur the formation of clouds.

The clouds most certainly are not CREATED by reflected sunlight.

They are created by the aerosol particle acting as a nucleus for liquid condensation and droplet formation.

So explain how the process of condensation differs so greatly between an aerosol and a particle of dust.



Does a gullible moron have to explain that a very small particle of dust IS an aerosol?

It comes in cans? What brand do you use?
sealover wrote:
Mineral dust is one of the most common aerosols in the atmosphere.

But only if there's competing brands.
sealover wrote:
"Clouds are formed by colder air which condenses water vapor from warmer air into liquid"

True. This is how you get large water droplets in clouds.

Just what is a 'large water droplet'? Buzzword fallacy.
sealover wrote:
But no mention of any kind of dust/aerosol playing any role to form the "mirror like" clouds referred to in the article.

What 'mirror like clouds'??? WTF???
sealover wrote:
Gullible moron?

Apology accepted!

Assumption of victory fallacy.


The Parrot Killer

Debunked in my sig. - tmiddles

Google keeps track of paranoid talk and i'm not on their list. I've been evaluated and certified. - keepit

nuclear powered ships do not require nuclear fuel. - Swan

While it is true that fossils do not burn it is also true that fossil fuels burn very well - Swan
28-06-2024 23:59
Into the NightProfile picture★★★★★
(22251)
Im a BM wrote:
GasGuzzler wrote:
sealover wrote:But no mention of any kind of dust/aerosol playing any role to form the "mirror like" clouds referred to in the article.

But no explanation of how the condensation process differs with various condensation nuclei. Can you explain it at all? I feel like you are asking me to just BELIEVE it.
sealover wrote:
Gullible moron?

Until you can explain it, yes.



Actually, the "debate" was about whether or not the process existed at all for ANY kind of aerosol.

The "gullible moron" award was for believing that ANY aerosol could do this.

Perhaps if you learn how to read, you can avoid digging yourself into positions you have to deny later.

Indeed, specific quotes were cited about SULFUR based aerosols.

Because not all aerosols are equal in their ability to catalyze droplet formation.

Some solid surfaces are more hydrophobic or hydrophilic than others.

But, it is pointless to keep "explaining" things to you.

Enjoy your award, you gullible moron...

But the biggest problem is you are basically ugly and obnoxious and unworthy of the kind of attention you demand.

Obviously you have never earned any degree in science or anything else.

Science isn't a degree, moron.

You use sulfur in your aerosols? Shall I call you Old Yellowstain?


The Parrot Killer

Debunked in my sig. - tmiddles

Google keeps track of paranoid talk and i'm not on their list. I've been evaluated and certified. - keepit

nuclear powered ships do not require nuclear fuel. - Swan

While it is true that fossils do not burn it is also true that fossil fuels burn very well - Swan
29-06-2024 00:02
Into the NightProfile picture★★★★★
(22251)
sealover wrote:
This article was published in the Washington Post on June 6, 2024.

So you are just mindlessly cutting and pasting from the Washington Composts. Meh. Stop spamming.
[b]sealover wrote:
Could spraying sea salt into the clouds cool the planet?
By Nicolas Rivero
[/b]

No. You cannot destroy energy into nothing. You are still ignoring the 1st law of thermodynamics.


The Parrot Killer

Debunked in my sig. - tmiddles

Google keeps track of paranoid talk and i'm not on their list. I've been evaluated and certified. - keepit

nuclear powered ships do not require nuclear fuel. - Swan

While it is true that fossils do not burn it is also true that fossil fuels burn very well - Swan
03-07-2024 11:08
IBdaMannProfile picture★★★★★
(14728)
I want to have the ten most recent posts. But, to make it official ...

Go CLIMATE!
Page 3 of 3<123





Join the debate "Global Dimming" - A Brand New "Buzzword"?:

Remember me

Related content
ThreadsRepliesLast post
The Rebirth Of Soviet Union Under A Better Version Brand Will Lead To World Peace524-01-2022 04:11
▲ Top of page
Public Poll
Who is leading the renewable energy race?

US

EU

China

Japan

India

Brazil

Other

Don't know


Thanks for supporting Climate-Debate.com.
Copyright © 2009-2020 Climate-Debate.com | About | Contact