Remember me
▼ Content

Greenhouse Effect and the 1909 Wood's Experiment



Page 2 of 4<1234>
17-08-2017 23:18
Into the NightProfile picture★★★★★
(10191)
Wake wrote:
GreenMan wrote:
Follow Me Into the Darkness wrote:
GreenMan wrote:
That's because the surface of the earth his quite cold, compared to the air just above it.

Wrong. The surface of the Earth is warmer than the air just above it. Not a lot, but just a bit. The reason is because the surface is heating the air just above it by conduction.


Nope, you can't heat the air with a surface that is cooler than the air. Try this little experiment. Stick a thermometer into the ground. Sunny or shaded spot. Read the temperature of the ground. Now pull the thermometer out of the dirt, and let it read the air temperature.

The ground should read close to 15C. The air should read whatever the temperature is for that day, and it will likely be higher, unless it is winter.


Earth is a very good insulator simply via large mass. But it absorbs almost the entire spectrum of energy from the Sun. So the top quarter inch or so is warmed normally higher than the air above it and heats that air.


Exactly. That's why people build stone or adobe houses. Before there was air conditioning, these dwellings worked pretty well (they still do).


The Parrot Killer
Edited on 17-08-2017 23:21
18-08-2017 10:16
GreenMan
★★★☆☆
(661)
Into the Night wrote:
Wake wrote:
GreenMan wrote:
Follow Me Into the Darkness wrote:
GreenMan wrote:
That's because the surface of the earth his quite cold, compared to the air just above it.

Wrong. The surface of the Earth is warmer than the air just above it. Not a lot, but just a bit. The reason is because the surface is heating the air just above it by conduction.


Nope, you can't heat the air with a surface that is cooler than the air. Try this little experiment. Stick a thermometer into the ground. Sunny or shaded spot. Read the temperature of the ground. Now pull the thermometer out of the dirt, and let it read the air temperature.

The ground should read close to 15C. The air should read whatever the temperature is for that day, and it will likely be higher, unless it is winter.


Earth is a very good insulator simply via large mass. But it absorbs almost the entire spectrum of energy from the Sun. So the top quarter inch or so is warmed normally higher than the air above it and heats that air.


Exactly. That's why people build stone or adobe houses. Before there was air conditioning, these dwellings worked pretty well (they still do).


That's because they are cool in the summer [cooler than the air, naturally], and easy to warm in the winter [warmer than the air, naturally].

The ground is cooler than the air. Why do you think dogs lay on the ground? Because it's cooler than if they climbed a tree.

But don't take my word for it. Take your barbecue thermometer to the yard. Stick it in the ground a few inches. Read the temperature. Then pull it out of the ground, read the temperature. Or, if you can read the top quarter inch or so, without reading the air temperature, then do that. It's close to the same an inch or two below the surface, due to conduction.


~*~ GreenMan ~*~

https://www.tapatalk.com/groups/leftbehind/index.php
18-08-2017 10:18
GreenMan
★★★☆☆
(661)
Into the Night wrote:
GreenMan wrote:
Follow Me Into the Darkness wrote:
GreenMan wrote:
That's because the surface of the earth his quite cold, compared to the air just above it.

Wrong. The surface of the Earth is warmer than the air just above it. Not a lot, but just a bit. The reason is because the surface is heating the air just above it by conduction.


Nope, you can't heat the air with a surface that is cooler than the air. Try this little experiment. Stick a thermometer into the ground. Sunny or shaded spot. Read the temperature of the ground. Now pull the thermometer out of the dirt, and let it read the air temperature.

The ground should read close to 15C. The air should read whatever the temperature is for that day, and it will likely be higher, unless it is winter.


Useless experiment. You are measuring underground.


Ok, use an infrared thermometer, and read the surface. Then use a regular thermometer to read the air temperature.


~*~ GreenMan ~*~

https://www.tapatalk.com/groups/leftbehind/index.php
18-08-2017 17:09
Wake
★★★★★
(4031)
GreenMan wrote:
Into the Night wrote:
Wake wrote:
GreenMan wrote:
Follow Me Into the Darkness wrote:
GreenMan wrote:
That's because the surface of the earth his quite cold, compared to the air just above it.

Wrong. The surface of the Earth is warmer than the air just above it. Not a lot, but just a bit. The reason is because the surface is heating the air just above it by conduction.


Nope, you can't heat the air with a surface that is cooler than the air. Try this little experiment. Stick a thermometer into the ground. Sunny or shaded spot. Read the temperature of the ground. Now pull the thermometer out of the dirt, and let it read the air temperature.

The ground should read close to 15C. The air should read whatever the temperature is for that day, and it will likely be higher, unless it is winter.


Earth is a very good insulator simply via large mass. But it absorbs almost the entire spectrum of energy from the Sun. So the top quarter inch or so is warmed normally higher than the air above it and heats that air.


Exactly. That's why people build stone or adobe houses. Before there was air conditioning, these dwellings worked pretty well (they still do).


That's because they are cool in the summer [cooler than the air, naturally], and easy to warm in the winter [warmer than the air, naturally].

The ground is cooler than the air. Why do you think dogs lay on the ground? Because it's cooler than if they climbed a tree.

But don't take my word for it. Take your barbecue thermometer to the yard. Stick it in the ground a few inches. Read the temperature. Then pull it out of the ground, read the temperature. Or, if you can read the top quarter inch or so, without reading the air temperature, then do that. It's close to the same an inch or two below the surface, due to conduction.


You cannot keep yourself from showing ignorance every time you write. Dog lay on the ground to cool themselves? Usually they will do this in shadow. Secondly, their bodies then prevent sunshine from heating the ground beneath them. Thirdly, they do not lay on the ground in sunshine on a hot day.

Why do you tell us your BBQ thermometer experiment when such a thermometer cannot yield accurate results at surface temperatures?

Anyone with high school physics can tell you that the AIR absorbs only a small portion of the Sun's emissions and the ground absorbs almost all of them. It become much hotter than the air so that the temperature differential is high enough for active conduction to work.

If you do not understand the world around you please don't pretend to know it and display your ignorance.
18-08-2017 20:49
Into the NightProfile picture★★★★★
(10191)
GreenMan wrote:
Into the Night wrote:
Wake wrote:
GreenMan wrote:
Follow Me Into the Darkness wrote:
GreenMan wrote:
That's because the surface of the earth his quite cold, compared to the air just above it.

Wrong. The surface of the Earth is warmer than the air just above it. Not a lot, but just a bit. The reason is because the surface is heating the air just above it by conduction.


Nope, you can't heat the air with a surface that is cooler than the air. Try this little experiment. Stick a thermometer into the ground. Sunny or shaded spot. Read the temperature of the ground. Now pull the thermometer out of the dirt, and let it read the air temperature.

The ground should read close to 15C. The air should read whatever the temperature is for that day, and it will likely be higher, unless it is winter.


Earth is a very good insulator simply via large mass. But it absorbs almost the entire spectrum of energy from the Sun. So the top quarter inch or so is warmed normally higher than the air above it and heats that air.


Exactly. That's why people build stone or adobe houses. Before there was air conditioning, these dwellings worked pretty well (they still do).


That's because they are cool in the summer [cooler than the air, naturally], and easy to warm in the winter [warmer than the air, naturally].

The ground is cooler than the air.

Only if warmer air happens to move in. In general the air is cooler than the surface.
GreenMan wrote:
Why do you think dogs lay on the ground?

Because they want to be near their master and they are tired of standing all the time.

If they can find a cold piece of ground in a shade of some kind, they will flatten their bellies to help cool off. Apparently a dog knows more about conductive heating than you do.
GreenMan wrote:
Because it's cooler than if they climbed a tree.

Trees are actually cooler. You don't have to be far away from the ground to see a remarkable drop in temperature in places like the desert. Most desert critters used buried homes for the same reason as we use stone or adobe for our homes. Some do find it just fine in the trees (what few there are) though.
GreenMan wrote:
But don't take my word for it. Take your barbecue thermometer to the yard. Stick it in the ground a few inches. Read the temperature. Then pull it out of the ground, read the temperature.

BBQ thermometers don't read that range of temperatures.
GreenMan wrote:
Or, if you can read the top quarter inch or so, without reading the air temperature, then do that. It's close to the same an inch or two below the surface, due to conduction.

Not the same, not even an inch down. Any desert rat knows that.


The Parrot Killer
18-08-2017 20:52
Into the NightProfile picture★★★★★
(10191)
GreenMan wrote:
Into the Night wrote:
GreenMan wrote:
Follow Me Into the Darkness wrote:
GreenMan wrote:
That's because the surface of the earth his quite cold, compared to the air just above it.

Wrong. The surface of the Earth is warmer than the air just above it. Not a lot, but just a bit. The reason is because the surface is heating the air just above it by conduction.


Nope, you can't heat the air with a surface that is cooler than the air. Try this little experiment. Stick a thermometer into the ground. Sunny or shaded spot. Read the temperature of the ground. Now pull the thermometer out of the dirt, and let it read the air temperature.

The ground should read close to 15C. The air should read whatever the temperature is for that day, and it will likely be higher, unless it is winter.


Useless experiment. You are measuring underground.


Ok, use an infrared thermometer, and read the surface. Then use a regular thermometer to read the air temperature.


Infrared thermometers don't read the absolute temperature of the surface accurately. The emissivity of that surface is unknown.

These devices are ONLY accurate if they are measuring something that has the same emissivity they were calibrated against.

They are mostly useful for looking at relative temperature differences, such as insulation leaks in homes or dead cylinders on cars.


The Parrot Killer
18-08-2017 21:00
Into the NightProfile picture★★★★★
(10191)
Wake wrote:
GreenMan wrote:
Into the Night wrote:
Wake wrote:
GreenMan wrote:
Follow Me Into the Darkness wrote:
GreenMan wrote:
That's because the surface of the earth his quite cold, compared to the air just above it.

Wrong. The surface of the Earth is warmer than the air just above it. Not a lot, but just a bit. The reason is because the surface is heating the air just above it by conduction.


Nope, you can't heat the air with a surface that is cooler than the air. Try this little experiment. Stick a thermometer into the ground. Sunny or shaded spot. Read the temperature of the ground. Now pull the thermometer out of the dirt, and let it read the air temperature.

The ground should read close to 15C. The air should read whatever the temperature is for that day, and it will likely be higher, unless it is winter.


Earth is a very good insulator simply via large mass. But it absorbs almost the entire spectrum of energy from the Sun. So the top quarter inch or so is warmed normally higher than the air above it and heats that air.


Exactly. That's why people build stone or adobe houses. Before there was air conditioning, these dwellings worked pretty well (they still do).


That's because they are cool in the summer [cooler than the air, naturally], and easy to warm in the winter [warmer than the air, naturally].

The ground is cooler than the air. Why do you think dogs lay on the ground? Because it's cooler than if they climbed a tree.

But don't take my word for it. Take your barbecue thermometer to the yard. Stick it in the ground a few inches. Read the temperature. Then pull it out of the ground, read the temperature. Or, if you can read the top quarter inch or so, without reading the air temperature, then do that. It's close to the same an inch or two below the surface, due to conduction.


You cannot keep yourself from showing ignorance every time you write. Dog lay on the ground to cool themselves? Usually they will do this in shadow.

If they do this, they are smart enough to find a shaded bit of ground or indoor stone to cool themselves on. Apparently a dog is smarter than Greenman.
Wake wrote:
Secondly, their bodies then prevent sunshine from heating the ground beneath them. Thirdly, they do not lay on the ground in sunshine on a hot day.

Not in a sunny spot, no. Not to cool down. They are smart enough to find a shade.
If they do lay in the sunshine, it is because they are laying down to be near their master. They will soon overheat and go find some shade, unlike their idiot master.

Wake wrote:
Why do you tell us your BBQ thermometer experiment when such a thermometer cannot yield accurate results at surface temperatures?

Maybe he's hungry.
Wake wrote:
Anyone with high school physics can tell you that the AIR absorbs only a small portion of the Sun's emissions and the ground absorbs almost all of them.

While correct, I doubt that high school physics students are taught this stuff properly anymore. They study 'global warming' and 'ecological balance' now. It's pretty disgusting what you see in high school textbooks these days.
Wake wrote:
It become much hotter than the air so that the temperature differential is high enough for active conduction to work.

There is no threshold where conduction begins to work. As long as there is a temperature difference at all and some form of coupling (such as material contact), heat will flow.
Wake wrote:
If you do not understand the world around you please don't pretend to know it and display your ignorance.

Maybe he's the product of high school physics, as it it taught today.


The Parrot Killer
18-08-2017 21:12
Wake
★★★★★
(4031)
Into the Night wrote:

Infrared thermometers don't read the absolute temperature of the surface accurately. The emissivity of that surface is unknown.

These devices are ONLY accurate if they are measuring something that has the same emissivity they were calibrated against.

They are mostly useful for looking at relative temperature differences, such as insulation leaks in homes or dead cylinders on cars.


You're off and running again I see. IF you can measure the actual temperature with thermometer you HAVE the irradiance using the Stefan-Boltzmann equation. We continue to return to this. First you use it as a club then you deny it's effectiveness.
18-08-2017 21:57
Into the NightProfile picture★★★★★
(10191)
Wake wrote:
Into the Night wrote:

Infrared thermometers don't read the absolute temperature of the surface accurately. The emissivity of that surface is unknown.

These devices are ONLY accurate if they are measuring something that has the same emissivity they were calibrated against.

They are mostly useful for looking at relative temperature differences, such as insulation leaks in homes or dead cylinders on cars.


You're off and running again I see. IF you can measure the actual temperature with thermometer you HAVE the irradiance using the Stefan-Boltzmann equation. We continue to return to this. First you use it as a club then you deny it's effectiveness.


True. But in that case, what do you need the infrared thermometer for?


The Parrot Killer
18-08-2017 22:27
LifeIsThermal
☆☆☆☆☆
(39)
GreenMan wrote:
Solar energy and Greenhouse effect
Solar radiant energy entering a room through the glass is absorbed by interior objects and surfaces, which then retransmit the energy as thermal radiation, mainly in the far infra-red band (above 5 µm).
Even ordinary float glass is practically opaque to radiation with a wavelength higher than 5 µm.
This means that solar energy entering through the glass is trapped in the room, which then tends to heat up and is referred to as the "greenhouse effect".

Not the same thing as the Greenhouse Effect that causes Global Warming.


The 1909 Woods Experiment, that supposedly proved that CO2 was not responsible for the warming affect of a real Greenhouse, didn't really prove anything. The reason it proved nothing is that blocking infrared radiation with glass is like closing the gate after the cows got out. The longwave infrared radiation that is being emitted by whatever the shortwave solar radiation is striking would be warming both greenhouses, regardless of whether or not the other greenhouse is blocking longwave radiation. That's because the longwave radiation is heating the greenhouse gases in the greenhouse before it is either blocked by glass or not.

The only way to really prove whether or not greenhouse gases inside a greenhouse aid in warming the greenhouse, would be to remove all the gas from a greenhouse [pull a vacuum on it] and see if it still gets as warm as the other greenhouse.


First of all, when it comes to heat transfer you can drop "infrared" and "shortwave". Heat (transfer) doesn´t include them, it uses only temperature of emitter and absorber.

Second, you preach the greenhouse. In your theory the addition of a heat absorbing gas cause an increase in temperature (emissive power) of the heat source that heats the gas. Can you give a reference for the experiments and observations of how one can increase the emissive power of a heat source by adding a heat absorber that absorbs what the heat source emits?

Of course, you understand that it has to be a reference to physics outside the greenhouse theory.
18-08-2017 22:43
LifeIsThermal
☆☆☆☆☆
(39)
GreenMan wrote:
It's not really magick, since it is understood by those with a little more intelligence than you seem to possess. The carbon molecules absorb radiation from earth,


You know the difference between absorption and emission, right?

Do you know that absorption isn´t cause of emission?

The fact that carbon molecules absorb radiation simply says that they are at the receiving end of transfer. The more they absorb, the colder they are. Because transfer-rate depends on difference in temperature.

that is in the longer bandwidth frequency.


Bandwidth doesn´t apply to heat and temperature.

Because they absorb it, they radiate it back out as thermal energy [heat].


That is only in your fantasy. Absorption is not cause of emission. They are relative through the temperature of the emitter. Emission depends on the internal state, the temperature, only. Absorption rate is the rate of transfer, which depends on the emissive power of the absorber, or the temperature of the absorber. So both emission and absorption depends on temperature of the emitter. The temperature does not depend on absorption. Basic, fundamental thermodynamics. 100% consensus.

If the atmosphere rise in temperature, it absorbs less heat. If it drops in temperature, it absorbs more. If Earth rise in temperature, it absorbs less heat from the sun, if it drops in temperature, it absorbs more solar radiation.

That is what the Stefan-Boltzmann law says. 100% consensus physics. The only way earth can heat up, is from increased internal generation. And only when that generation rise above what the sun provides, 1360.8W/m^2, earth will become warmer that it´s mean temperature. So, it will never happen.



I'm glad you mentioned that, because I was thinking the same thing. But I'm not sure how it is a relevant fact in this discussion. Did someone say we were trying to do that? The only conclusion I can come to is that you think the surface of the planet is warmer than the air above it. Is that what you think?


And only higher temperature can transfer energy to lower temperatures.

Why not?


Because emission depends only on temperature of the emitter. The emission depends on the internal state only. That is what Prevost said. It is not questioned. The atmosphere is the external state.

Some of what would have just went flying off into space gets to interact with greenhouse gases, and produce heat, warming the air.


Your assumptions blind you. The only observed effect is increased absorption. That is not equal to heating, it is equal to the opposite. If the heat source is at constant temperature and absorption of the emitted heat increases, that means that the absorber has dropped in temperature. Basic thermodynamics.

Please provide references for your claims that increased absorption of heat from a heat source, will increase the emissive power of the heat source.
Edited on 18-08-2017 22:48
18-08-2017 22:44
litesong
★★★★★
(2297)
"old sick silly sleepy sleazy slimy steenkin' filthy vile reprobate rooting (& rotting) racist pukey proud pig AGW denier liar badnight" bluffed: Useless experiment. You are measuring underground.

Underground temperatures are a fair estimate of average yearly temperature.
18-08-2017 22:53
LifeIsThermal
☆☆☆☆☆
(39)
GreenMan wrote:
If it weren't for greenhouse gases, we would be quite cold. That's because the surface of the earth his quite cold, compared to the air just above it. The air is warmer, usually. All you have to do is stick a thermometer in the ground, and compare that to one that is in air. And the reason it is warmer is because of greenhouse gases.


So, even though the greenhouse religion says that the atmosphere is only heated by terrestial emission, the air is the heat source of terrestial emission?

Do you realize that the earth is a glowing ball and the surface is just a very small part of the mass? Do you really think that a cold fluid can heat a glowing ball?
18-08-2017 23:22
Wake
★★★★★
(4031)
Into the Night wrote:
Wake wrote:
Into the Night wrote:

Infrared thermometers don't read the absolute temperature of the surface accurately. The emissivity of that surface is unknown.

These devices are ONLY accurate if they are measuring something that has the same emissivity they were calibrated against.

They are mostly useful for looking at relative temperature differences, such as insulation leaks in homes or dead cylinders on cars.


You're off and running again I see. IF you can measure the actual temperature with thermometer you HAVE the irradiance using the Stefan-Boltzmann equation. We continue to return to this. First you use it as a club then you deny it's effectiveness.


True. But in that case, what do you need the infrared thermometer for?


You are the one claiming that you cannot us the IR temperature satellites because you can't know the irradiance. But after actually measuring it now you're saying that it isn't necessary.
19-08-2017 08:07
GreenMan
★★★☆☆
(661)
Wake wrote:
GreenMan wrote:
Into the Night wrote:
Wake wrote:
GreenMan wrote:
Follow Me Into the Darkness wrote:
GreenMan wrote:
That's because the surface of the earth his quite cold, compared to the air just above it.

Wrong. The surface of the Earth is warmer than the air just above it. Not a lot, but just a bit. The reason is because the surface is heating the air just above it by conduction.


Nope, you can't heat the air with a surface that is cooler than the air. Try this little experiment. Stick a thermometer into the ground. Sunny or shaded spot. Read the temperature of the ground. Now pull the thermometer out of the dirt, and let it read the air temperature.

The ground should read close to 15C. The air should read whatever the temperature is for that day, and it will likely be higher, unless it is winter.


Earth is a very good insulator simply via large mass. But it absorbs almost the entire spectrum of energy from the Sun. So the top quarter inch or so is warmed normally higher than the air above it and heats that air.


Exactly. That's why people build stone or adobe houses. Before there was air conditioning, these dwellings worked pretty well (they still do).


That's because they are cool in the summer [cooler than the air, naturally], and easy to warm in the winter [warmer than the air, naturally].

The ground is cooler than the air. Why do you think dogs lay on the ground? Because it's cooler than if they climbed a tree.

But don't take my word for it. Take your barbecue thermometer to the yard. Stick it in the ground a few inches. Read the temperature. Then pull it out of the ground, read the temperature. Or, if you can read the top quarter inch or so, without reading the air temperature, then do that. It's close to the same an inch or two below the surface, due to conduction.


You cannot keep yourself from showing ignorance every time you write. Dog lay on the ground to cool themselves? Usually they will do this in shadow. Secondly, their bodies then prevent sunshine from heating the ground beneath them. Thirdly, they do not lay on the ground in sunshine on a hot day.

Why do you tell us your BBQ thermometer experiment when such a thermometer cannot yield accurate results at surface temperatures?

Anyone with high school physics can tell you that the AIR absorbs only a small portion of the Sun's emissions and the ground absorbs almost all of them. It become much hotter than the air so that the temperature differential is high enough for active conduction to work.

If you do not understand the world around you please don't pretend to know it and display your ignorance.


True, barbecue thermometers won't work. Was thinking of them because they have a probe. But that doesn't mean the ground is warmer than the air during the day. Just means you have another excuse to ignore an argument.

Put your hand on the ground, and see if it doesn't feel cooler than the air.


~*~ GreenMan ~*~

https://www.tapatalk.com/groups/leftbehind/index.php
19-08-2017 08:09
GreenMan
★★★☆☆
(661)
Into the Night wrote:
GreenMan wrote:
Into the Night wrote:
Wake wrote:
GreenMan wrote:
Follow Me Into the Darkness wrote:
GreenMan wrote:
That's because the surface of the earth his quite cold, compared to the air just above it.

Wrong. The surface of the Earth is warmer than the air just above it. Not a lot, but just a bit. The reason is because the surface is heating the air just above it by conduction.


Nope, you can't heat the air with a surface that is cooler than the air. Try this little experiment. Stick a thermometer into the ground. Sunny or shaded spot. Read the temperature of the ground. Now pull the thermometer out of the dirt, and let it read the air temperature.

The ground should read close to 15C. The air should read whatever the temperature is for that day, and it will likely be higher, unless it is winter.


Earth is a very good insulator simply via large mass. But it absorbs almost the entire spectrum of energy from the Sun. So the top quarter inch or so is warmed normally higher than the air above it and heats that air.


Exactly. That's why people build stone or adobe houses. Before there was air conditioning, these dwellings worked pretty well (they still do).


That's because they are cool in the summer [cooler than the air, naturally], and easy to warm in the winter [warmer than the air, naturally].

The ground is cooler than the air.

Only if warmer air happens to move in. In general the air is cooler than the surface.
GreenMan wrote:
Why do you think dogs lay on the ground?

Because they want to be near their master and they are tired of standing all the time.

If they can find a cold piece of ground in a shade of some kind, they will flatten their bellies to help cool off. Apparently a dog knows more about conductive heating than you do.
GreenMan wrote:
Because it's cooler than if they climbed a tree.

Trees are actually cooler. You don't have to be far away from the ground to see a remarkable drop in temperature in places like the desert. Most desert critters used buried homes for the same reason as we use stone or adobe for our homes. Some do find it just fine in the trees (what few there are) though.
GreenMan wrote:
But don't take my word for it. Take your barbecue thermometer to the yard. Stick it in the ground a few inches. Read the temperature. Then pull it out of the ground, read the temperature.

BBQ thermometers don't read that range of temperatures.
GreenMan wrote:
Or, if you can read the top quarter inch or so, without reading the air temperature, then do that. It's close to the same an inch or two below the surface, due to conduction.

Not the same, not even an inch down. Any desert rat knows that.


So you are saying that on a 100F day, the ground is hotter than 100F? You are totally loony tunes.


~*~ GreenMan ~*~

https://www.tapatalk.com/groups/leftbehind/index.php
19-08-2017 08:14
GreenMan
★★★☆☆
(661)
Into the Night wrote:
GreenMan wrote:
Into the Night wrote:
GreenMan wrote:
Follow Me Into the Darkness wrote:
GreenMan wrote:
That's because the surface of the earth his quite cold, compared to the air just above it.

Wrong. The surface of the Earth is warmer than the air just above it. Not a lot, but just a bit. The reason is because the surface is heating the air just above it by conduction.


Nope, you can't heat the air with a surface that is cooler than the air. Try this little experiment. Stick a thermometer into the ground. Sunny or shaded spot. Read the temperature of the ground. Now pull the thermometer out of the dirt, and let it read the air temperature.

The ground should read close to 15C. The air should read whatever the temperature is for that day, and it will likely be higher, unless it is winter.


Useless experiment. You are measuring underground.


Ok, use an infrared thermometer, and read the surface. Then use a regular thermometer to read the air temperature.


Infrared thermometers don't read the absolute temperature of the surface accurately. The emissivity of that surface is unknown.

These devices are ONLY accurate if they are measuring something that has the same emissivity they were calibrated against.

They are mostly useful for looking at relative temperature differences, such as insulation leaks in homes or dead cylinders on cars.


Very convenient for your argument that there is nothing that can read the surface temperature of the earth. So how do you know it is warmer than the air? Is that because in your view of reality that it has to be?


~*~ GreenMan ~*~

https://www.tapatalk.com/groups/leftbehind/index.php
19-08-2017 08:20
GreenMan
★★★☆☆
(661)
LifeIsThermal wrote:
GreenMan wrote:
Solar energy and Greenhouse effect
Solar radiant energy entering a room through the glass is absorbed by interior objects and surfaces, which then retransmit the energy as thermal radiation, mainly in the far infra-red band (above 5 µm).
Even ordinary float glass is practically opaque to radiation with a wavelength higher than 5 µm.
This means that solar energy entering through the glass is trapped in the room, which then tends to heat up and is referred to as the "greenhouse effect".

Not the same thing as the Greenhouse Effect that causes Global Warming.


The 1909 Woods Experiment, that supposedly proved that CO2 was not responsible for the warming affect of a real Greenhouse, didn't really prove anything. The reason it proved nothing is that blocking infrared radiation with glass is like closing the gate after the cows got out. The longwave infrared radiation that is being emitted by whatever the shortwave solar radiation is striking would be warming both greenhouses, regardless of whether or not the other greenhouse is blocking longwave radiation. That's because the longwave radiation is heating the greenhouse gases in the greenhouse before it is either blocked by glass or not.

The only way to really prove whether or not greenhouse gases inside a greenhouse aid in warming the greenhouse, would be to remove all the gas from a greenhouse [pull a vacuum on it] and see if it still gets as warm as the other greenhouse.


First of all, when it comes to heat transfer you can drop "infrared" and "shortwave". Heat (transfer) doesn´t include them, it uses only temperature of emitter and absorber.

Second, you preach the greenhouse. In your theory the addition of a heat absorbing gas cause an increase in temperature (emissive power) of the heat source that heats the gas. Can you give a reference for the experiments and observations of how one can increase the emissive power of a heat source by adding a heat absorber that absorbs what the heat source emits?

Of course, you understand that it has to be a reference to physics outside the greenhouse theory.


Yet another proud AGW Denier enters the fray, lol. You need to just go argue with the evil scientists that figured out that greenhouse gases absorb long wave infrared radiation, and warm up, emitting heat. So far, you just sound like another idiotic AGW Denier, coming up with yet another scientific sounding reason why greenhouses don't heat anything.


~*~ GreenMan ~*~

https://www.tapatalk.com/groups/leftbehind/index.php
19-08-2017 08:23
GreenMan
★★★☆☆
(661)
LifeIsThermal wrote:
GreenMan wrote:
It's not really magick, since it is understood by those with a little more intelligence than you seem to possess. The carbon molecules absorb radiation from earth,


You know the difference between absorption and emission, right?

Do you know that absorption isn´t cause of emission?

The fact that carbon molecules absorb radiation simply says that they are at the receiving end of transfer. The more they absorb, the colder they are. Because transfer-rate depends on difference in temperature.

that is in the longer bandwidth frequency.


Bandwidth doesn´t apply to heat and temperature.

Because they absorb it, they radiate it back out as thermal energy [heat].


That is only in your fantasy. Absorption is not cause of emission. They are relative through the temperature of the emitter. Emission depends on the internal state, the temperature, only. Absorption rate is the rate of transfer, which depends on the emissive power of the absorber, or the temperature of the absorber. So both emission and absorption depends on temperature of the emitter. The temperature does not depend on absorption. Basic, fundamental thermodynamics. 100% consensus.

If the atmosphere rise in temperature, it absorbs less heat. If it drops in temperature, it absorbs more. If Earth rise in temperature, it absorbs less heat from the sun, if it drops in temperature, it absorbs more solar radiation.

That is what the Stefan-Boltzmann law says. 100% consensus physics. The only way earth can heat up, is from increased internal generation. And only when that generation rise above what the sun provides, 1360.8W/m^2, earth will become warmer that it´s mean temperature. So, it will never happen.



I'm glad you mentioned that, because I was thinking the same thing. But I'm not sure how it is a relevant fact in this discussion. Did someone say we were trying to do that? The only conclusion I can come to is that you think the surface of the planet is warmer than the air above it. Is that what you think?


And only higher temperature can transfer energy to lower temperatures.

Why not?


Because emission depends only on temperature of the emitter. The emission depends on the internal state only. That is what Prevost said. It is not questioned. The atmosphere is the external state.

Some of what would have just went flying off into space gets to interact with greenhouse gases, and produce heat, warming the air.


Your assumptions blind you. The only observed effect is increased absorption. That is not equal to heating, it is equal to the opposite. If the heat source is at constant temperature and absorption of the emitted heat increases, that means that the absorber has dropped in temperature. Basic thermodynamics.

Please provide references for your claims that increased absorption of heat from a heat source, will increase the emissive power of the heat source.


It's apparent that you don't understand how a molecule can absorb energy and warm because of that absorption, unless it was thermal energy that was absorbed.


~*~ GreenMan ~*~

https://www.tapatalk.com/groups/leftbehind/index.php
19-08-2017 08:30
GreenMan
★★★☆☆
(661)
LifeIsThermal wrote:
GreenMan wrote:
If it weren't for greenhouse gases, we would be quite cold. That's because the surface of the earth his quite cold, compared to the air just above it. The air is warmer, usually. All you have to do is stick a thermometer in the ground, and compare that to one that is in air. And the reason it is warmer is because of greenhouse gases.


So, even though the greenhouse religion says that the atmosphere is only heated by terrestial emission, the air is the heat source of terrestial emission?


Some but not much. The sun is the primary heat source of terrestrial emission. Greenhouse gases just add a little to what the sun does.

LifeIsThermal wrote:
Do you realize that the earth is a glowing ball and the surface is just a very small part of the mass? Do you really think that a cold fluid can heat a glowing ball?


No, I didn't know the earth is a glowing ball, if you mean like glowing hot. It glows blue, because of the atmosphere.
No, I don't think that a cold fluid can heat a glowing ball. But a warmer fluid can.

You goofy AGW Deniers need to come up with something other than there is no such thing as greenhouse gases, when the majority of climate scientists swear by them.

Do you republicans really think Climate Scientists are all [at least 97%] conspiring against you?


~*~ GreenMan ~*~

https://www.tapatalk.com/groups/leftbehind/index.php
19-08-2017 10:47
Into the NightProfile picture★★★★★
(10191)
litesong wrote:
"old sick silly sleepy sleazy slimy steenkin' filthy vile reprobate rooting (& rotting) racist pukey proud pig AGW denier liar badnight" bluffed: Useless experiment. You are measuring underground.

Underground temperatures are a fair estimate of average yearly temperature.

Nope.


The Parrot Killer
19-08-2017 10:48
Into the NightProfile picture★★★★★
(10191)
Wake wrote:
Into the Night wrote:
Wake wrote:
Into the Night wrote:

Infrared thermometers don't read the absolute temperature of the surface accurately. The emissivity of that surface is unknown.

These devices are ONLY accurate if they are measuring something that has the same emissivity they were calibrated against.

They are mostly useful for looking at relative temperature differences, such as insulation leaks in homes or dead cylinders on cars.


You're off and running again I see. IF you can measure the actual temperature with thermometer you HAVE the irradiance using the Stefan-Boltzmann equation. We continue to return to this. First you use it as a club then you deny it's effectiveness.


True. But in that case, what do you need the infrared thermometer for?


You are the one claiming that you cannot us the IR temperature satellites because you can't know the irradiance. But after actually measuring it now you're saying that it isn't necessary.

Other than using the wrong word (I said emissivity, not radiance), that is EXACTLY what I am saying.

The ONLY way to determine emissivity is to accurately measure the temperature of the surface. You don't know the temperature of the Earth. We have no way to determine to any useful degree of accuracy. Infrared satellites are incapable of measuring the temperature of the Earth (or the absolute temperature of anything).


The Parrot Killer
Edited on 19-08-2017 10:51
19-08-2017 10:53
Into the NightProfile picture★★★★★
(10191)
GreenMan wrote:
Wake wrote:
GreenMan wrote:
Into the Night wrote:
Wake wrote:
GreenMan wrote:
Follow Me Into the Darkness wrote:
GreenMan wrote:
That's because the surface of the earth his quite cold, compared to the air just above it.

Wrong. The surface of the Earth is warmer than the air just above it. Not a lot, but just a bit. The reason is because the surface is heating the air just above it by conduction.


Nope, you can't heat the air with a surface that is cooler than the air. Try this little experiment. Stick a thermometer into the ground. Sunny or shaded spot. Read the temperature of the ground. Now pull the thermometer out of the dirt, and let it read the air temperature.

The ground should read close to 15C. The air should read whatever the temperature is for that day, and it will likely be higher, unless it is winter.


Earth is a very good insulator simply via large mass. But it absorbs almost the entire spectrum of energy from the Sun. So the top quarter inch or so is warmed normally higher than the air above it and heats that air.


Exactly. That's why people build stone or adobe houses. Before there was air conditioning, these dwellings worked pretty well (they still do).


That's because they are cool in the summer [cooler than the air, naturally], and easy to warm in the winter [warmer than the air, naturally].

The ground is cooler than the air. Why do you think dogs lay on the ground? Because it's cooler than if they climbed a tree.

But don't take my word for it. Take your barbecue thermometer to the yard. Stick it in the ground a few inches. Read the temperature. Then pull it out of the ground, read the temperature. Or, if you can read the top quarter inch or so, without reading the air temperature, then do that. It's close to the same an inch or two below the surface, due to conduction.


You cannot keep yourself from showing ignorance every time you write. Dog lay on the ground to cool themselves? Usually they will do this in shadow. Secondly, their bodies then prevent sunshine from heating the ground beneath them. Thirdly, they do not lay on the ground in sunshine on a hot day.

Why do you tell us your BBQ thermometer experiment when such a thermometer cannot yield accurate results at surface temperatures?

Anyone with high school physics can tell you that the AIR absorbs only a small portion of the Sun's emissions and the ground absorbs almost all of them. It become much hotter than the air so that the temperature differential is high enough for active conduction to work.

If you do not understand the world around you please don't pretend to know it and display your ignorance.


True, barbecue thermometers won't work. Was thinking of them because they have a probe. But that doesn't mean the ground is warmer than the air during the day. Just means you have another excuse to ignore an argument.

Put your hand on the ground, and see if it doesn't feel cooler than the air.


Okay. ... ... ... ... It doesn't.


The Parrot Killer
19-08-2017 10:56
Into the NightProfile picture★★★★★
(10191)
GreenMan wrote:
Into the Night wrote:
GreenMan wrote:
Into the Night wrote:
Wake wrote:
GreenMan wrote:
Follow Me Into the Darkness wrote:
GreenMan wrote:
That's because the surface of the earth his quite cold, compared to the air just above it.

Wrong. The surface of the Earth is warmer than the air just above it. Not a lot, but just a bit. The reason is because the surface is heating the air just above it by conduction.


Nope, you can't heat the air with a surface that is cooler than the air. Try this little experiment. Stick a thermometer into the ground. Sunny or shaded spot. Read the temperature of the ground. Now pull the thermometer out of the dirt, and let it read the air temperature.

The ground should read close to 15C. The air should read whatever the temperature is for that day, and it will likely be higher, unless it is winter.


Earth is a very good insulator simply via large mass. But it absorbs almost the entire spectrum of energy from the Sun. So the top quarter inch or so is warmed normally higher than the air above it and heats that air.


Exactly. That's why people build stone or adobe houses. Before there was air conditioning, these dwellings worked pretty well (they still do).


That's because they are cool in the summer [cooler than the air, naturally], and easy to warm in the winter [warmer than the air, naturally].

The ground is cooler than the air.

Only if warmer air happens to move in. In general the air is cooler than the surface.
GreenMan wrote:
Why do you think dogs lay on the ground?

Because they want to be near their master and they are tired of standing all the time.

If they can find a cold piece of ground in a shade of some kind, they will flatten their bellies to help cool off. Apparently a dog knows more about conductive heating than you do.
GreenMan wrote:
Because it's cooler than if they climbed a tree.

Trees are actually cooler. You don't have to be far away from the ground to see a remarkable drop in temperature in places like the desert. Most desert critters used buried homes for the same reason as we use stone or adobe for our homes. Some do find it just fine in the trees (what few there are) though.
GreenMan wrote:
But don't take my word for it. Take your barbecue thermometer to the yard. Stick it in the ground a few inches. Read the temperature. Then pull it out of the ground, read the temperature.

BBQ thermometers don't read that range of temperatures.
GreenMan wrote:
Or, if you can read the top quarter inch or so, without reading the air temperature, then do that. It's close to the same an inch or two below the surface, due to conduction.

Not the same, not even an inch down. Any desert rat knows that.


So you are saying that on a 100F day, the ground is hotter than 100F? You are totally loony tunes.

Yes. That is what I am saying. Since you think the 2nd law of thermodynamics is loony tunes, it seems your Religion has full control of you.


The Parrot Killer
19-08-2017 10:59
Into the NightProfile picture★★★★★
(10191)
GreenMan wrote:
Into the Night wrote:
GreenMan wrote:
Into the Night wrote:
GreenMan wrote:
Follow Me Into the Darkness wrote:
GreenMan wrote:
That's because the surface of the earth his quite cold, compared to the air just above it.

Wrong. The surface of the Earth is warmer than the air just above it. Not a lot, but just a bit. The reason is because the surface is heating the air just above it by conduction.


Nope, you can't heat the air with a surface that is cooler than the air. Try this little experiment. Stick a thermometer into the ground. Sunny or shaded spot. Read the temperature of the ground. Now pull the thermometer out of the dirt, and let it read the air temperature.

The ground should read close to 15C. The air should read whatever the temperature is for that day, and it will likely be higher, unless it is winter.


Useless experiment. You are measuring underground.


Ok, use an infrared thermometer, and read the surface. Then use a regular thermometer to read the air temperature.


Infrared thermometers don't read the absolute temperature of the surface accurately. The emissivity of that surface is unknown.

These devices are ONLY accurate if they are measuring something that has the same emissivity they were calibrated against.

They are mostly useful for looking at relative temperature differences, such as insulation leaks in homes or dead cylinders on cars.


Very convenient for your argument that there is nothing that can read the surface temperature of the earth. So how do you know it is warmer than the air? Is that because in your view of reality that it has to be?


It is easily determined by using a contact thermometer and a bulb thermometer.

It is also easily observable by anyone in the deserts. Critters will go up or down to get away from the surface temperatures.


The Parrot Killer
Edited on 19-08-2017 11:00
19-08-2017 11:05
Into the NightProfile picture★★★★★
(10191)
GreenMan wrote:
LifeIsThermal wrote:
GreenMan wrote:
Solar energy and Greenhouse effect
Solar radiant energy entering a room through the glass is absorbed by interior objects and surfaces, which then retransmit the energy as thermal radiation, mainly in the far infra-red band (above 5 µm).
Even ordinary float glass is practically opaque to radiation with a wavelength higher than 5 µm.
This means that solar energy entering through the glass is trapped in the room, which then tends to heat up and is referred to as the "greenhouse effect".

Not the same thing as the Greenhouse Effect that causes Global Warming.


The 1909 Woods Experiment, that supposedly proved that CO2 was not responsible for the warming affect of a real Greenhouse, didn't really prove anything. The reason it proved nothing is that blocking infrared radiation with glass is like closing the gate after the cows got out. The longwave infrared radiation that is being emitted by whatever the shortwave solar radiation is striking would be warming both greenhouses, regardless of whether or not the other greenhouse is blocking longwave radiation. That's because the longwave radiation is heating the greenhouse gases in the greenhouse before it is either blocked by glass or not.

The only way to really prove whether or not greenhouse gases inside a greenhouse aid in warming the greenhouse, would be to remove all the gas from a greenhouse [pull a vacuum on it] and see if it still gets as warm as the other greenhouse.


First of all, when it comes to heat transfer you can drop "infrared" and "shortwave". Heat (transfer) doesn´t include them, it uses only temperature of emitter and absorber.

Second, you preach the greenhouse. In your theory the addition of a heat absorbing gas cause an increase in temperature (emissive power) of the heat source that heats the gas. Can you give a reference for the experiments and observations of how one can increase the emissive power of a heat source by adding a heat absorber that absorbs what the heat source emits?

Of course, you understand that it has to be a reference to physics outside the greenhouse theory.


Yet another proud AGW Denier enters the fray, lol. You need to just go argue with the evil scientists that figured out that greenhouse gases

There are no such thing.
GreenMan wrote:
absorb long wave infrared radiation, and warm up, emitting heat.

Carbon dioxide and a few other gases do absorb infrared light and slightly warm up as a result. This is nothing more than just another way for the surface to cool itself by heating the air.

The heated air rises due to convective heat, further dissipating it.

ALL mass radiates infrared light. The surface, the air, the carbon dioxide, the water vapor, etc. ALL of it radiates that light into space.
GreenMan wrote:
So far, you just sound like another idiotic AGW Denier, coming up with yet another scientific sounding reason why greenhouses don't heat anything.

They don't. Greenhouses work by reducing heat.


The Parrot Killer
19-08-2017 11:07
Into the NightProfile picture★★★★★
(10191)
GreenMan wrote:
LifeIsThermal wrote:
GreenMan wrote:
It's not really magick, since it is understood by those with a little more intelligence than you seem to possess. The carbon molecules absorb radiation from earth,


You know the difference between absorption and emission, right?

Do you know that absorption isn´t cause of emission?

The fact that carbon molecules absorb radiation simply says that they are at the receiving end of transfer. The more they absorb, the colder they are. Because transfer-rate depends on difference in temperature.

that is in the longer bandwidth frequency.


Bandwidth doesn´t apply to heat and temperature.

Because they absorb it, they radiate it back out as thermal energy [heat].


That is only in your fantasy. Absorption is not cause of emission. They are relative through the temperature of the emitter. Emission depends on the internal state, the temperature, only. Absorption rate is the rate of transfer, which depends on the emissive power of the absorber, or the temperature of the absorber. So both emission and absorption depends on temperature of the emitter. The temperature does not depend on absorption. Basic, fundamental thermodynamics. 100% consensus.

If the atmosphere rise in temperature, it absorbs less heat. If it drops in temperature, it absorbs more. If Earth rise in temperature, it absorbs less heat from the sun, if it drops in temperature, it absorbs more solar radiation.

That is what the Stefan-Boltzmann law says. 100% consensus physics. The only way earth can heat up, is from increased internal generation. And only when that generation rise above what the sun provides, 1360.8W/m^2, earth will become warmer that it´s mean temperature. So, it will never happen.



I'm glad you mentioned that, because I was thinking the same thing. But I'm not sure how it is a relevant fact in this discussion. Did someone say we were trying to do that? The only conclusion I can come to is that you think the surface of the planet is warmer than the air above it. Is that what you think?


And only higher temperature can transfer energy to lower temperatures.

Why not?


Because emission depends only on temperature of the emitter. The emission depends on the internal state only. That is what Prevost said. It is not questioned. The atmosphere is the external state.

Some of what would have just went flying off into space gets to interact with greenhouse gases, and produce heat, warming the air.


Your assumptions blind you. The only observed effect is increased absorption. That is not equal to heating, it is equal to the opposite. If the heat source is at constant temperature and absorption of the emitted heat increases, that means that the absorber has dropped in temperature. Basic thermodynamics.

Please provide references for your claims that increased absorption of heat from a heat source, will increase the emissive power of the heat source.


It's apparent that you don't understand how a molecule can absorb energy and warm because of that absorption, unless it was thermal energy that was absorbed.


Electromagnetic energy is not thermal energy. Neither is thermal energy electromagnetic energy. You can convert between the two (through absorption and radiation), but they are DIFFERENT forms of energy.


The Parrot Killer
19-08-2017 11:14
Into the NightProfile picture★★★★★
(10191)
GreenMan wrote:
LifeIsThermal wrote:
GreenMan wrote:
If it weren't for greenhouse gases, we would be quite cold. That's because the surface of the earth his quite cold, compared to the air just above it. The air is warmer, usually. All you have to do is stick a thermometer in the ground, and compare that to one that is in air. And the reason it is warmer is because of greenhouse gases.


So, even though the greenhouse religion says that the atmosphere is only heated by terrestial emission, the air is the heat source of terrestial emission?


Some but not much. The sun is the primary heat source of terrestrial emission. Greenhouse gases just add a little to what the sun does.

Carbon dioxide is not an energy source. It can't add to the energy of the Earth.
Water vapor is not an energy source. It can't add to the energy of the Earth.
Methane is not an energy source (unless you burn it!). It does not add energy to the Earth.

GreenMan wrote:
LifeIsThermal wrote:
Do you realize that the earth is a glowing ball and the surface is just a very small part of the mass? Do you really think that a cold fluid can heat a glowing ball?


No, I didn't know the earth is a glowing ball, if you mean like glowing hot.

Please study the Stefan-Boltzmann law and Wien's law. It will show you the Earth does indeed glow because it's a certain temperature. We just don't know what that temperature is.
GreenMan wrote:
It glows blue, because of the atmosphere.

WRONG. It appears blue, because you are looking at ocean water. Infrared light is not visible to you.
GreenMan wrote:
No, I don't think that a cold fluid can heat a glowing ball. But a warmer fluid can.

Air is generally colder than the surface. See the temperature profile (and the energy profile) of the atmosphere.
GreenMan wrote:
You goofy AGW Deniers need to come up with something other than there is no such thing as greenhouse gases, when the majority of climate scientists swear by them.

Consensus is not used in science. Climate 'scientists' do not use or create any science.
GreenMan wrote:
Do you republicans really think Climate Scientists are all [at least 97%] conspiring against you?

Argument from randU, and yes.


The Parrot Killer
19-08-2017 23:30
Wake
★★★★★
(4031)
What is obvious is that there is hardly the slightest knowledge of anything being shown here. I haven't spent so much time working in science to read absolute buffoonery. So I will bow out of this thread and allow the ignorance and stupidity to prevail. Greenman - high school students are not taught science and you definitely show that in spades.
20-08-2017 03:46
Into the NightProfile picture★★★★★
(10191)
Wake wrote:
What is obvious is that there is hardly the slightest knowledge of anything being shown here. I haven't spent so much time working in science to read absolute buffoonery. So I will bow out of this thread and allow the ignorance and stupidity to prevail. Greenman - high school students are not taught science and you definitely show that in spades.


'Bye. Have fun sulking.


The Parrot Killer
20-08-2017 06:50
GreenMan
★★★☆☆
(661)
Into the Night wrote:
litesong wrote:
"old sick silly sleepy sleazy slimy steenkin' filthy vile reprobate rooting (& rotting) racist pukey proud pig AGW denier liar badnight" bluffed: Useless experiment. You are measuring underground.

Underground temperatures are a fair estimate of average yearly temperature.

Nope.


Actually, the correct answer is yup, not nope. That is why you can bury pipes to keep them from freezing up. You just have to go deeper for colder climates. But after you get a few feet down, the dirt temperature is constant at the average temperature of the region it is in.
I thought that was pretty much common knowledge. But in here common knowledge takes a back seat to whatever the Professor Parrot Face is trying to prove.


~*~ GreenMan ~*~

https://www.tapatalk.com/groups/leftbehind/index.php
20-08-2017 07:23
GreenMan
★★★☆☆
(661)
Into the Night wrote:
GreenMan wrote:
LifeIsThermal wrote:
GreenMan wrote:
It's not really magick, since it is understood by those with a little more intelligence than you seem to possess. The carbon molecules absorb radiation from earth,


You know the difference between absorption and emission, right?

Do you know that absorption isn´t cause of emission?

The fact that carbon molecules absorb radiation simply says that they are at the receiving end of transfer. The more they absorb, the colder they are. Because transfer-rate depends on difference in temperature.

that is in the longer bandwidth frequency.


Bandwidth doesn´t apply to heat and temperature.

Because they absorb it, they radiate it back out as thermal energy [heat].


That is only in your fantasy. Absorption is not cause of emission. They are relative through the temperature of the emitter. Emission depends on the internal state, the temperature, only. Absorption rate is the rate of transfer, which depends on the emissive power of the absorber, or the temperature of the absorber. So both emission and absorption depends on temperature of the emitter. The temperature does not depend on absorption. Basic, fundamental thermodynamics. 100% consensus.

If the atmosphere rise in temperature, it absorbs less heat. If it drops in temperature, it absorbs more. If Earth rise in temperature, it absorbs less heat from the sun, if it drops in temperature, it absorbs more solar radiation.

That is what the Stefan-Boltzmann law says. 100% consensus physics. The only way earth can heat up, is from increased internal generation. And only when that generation rise above what the sun provides, 1360.8W/m^2, earth will become warmer that it´s mean temperature. So, it will never happen.



I'm glad you mentioned that, because I was thinking the same thing. But I'm not sure how it is a relevant fact in this discussion. Did someone say we were trying to do that? The only conclusion I can come to is that you think the surface of the planet is warmer than the air above it. Is that what you think?


And only higher temperature can transfer energy to lower temperatures.

Why not?


Because emission depends only on temperature of the emitter. The emission depends on the internal state only. That is what Prevost said. It is not questioned. The atmosphere is the external state.

Some of what would have just went flying off into space gets to interact with greenhouse gases, and produce heat, warming the air.


Your assumptions blind you. The only observed effect is increased absorption. That is not equal to heating, it is equal to the opposite. If the heat source is at constant temperature and absorption of the emitted heat increases, that means that the absorber has dropped in temperature. Basic thermodynamics.

Please provide references for your claims that increased absorption of heat from a heat source, will increase the emissive power of the heat source.


It's apparent that you don't understand how a molecule can absorb energy and warm because of that absorption, unless it was thermal energy that was absorbed.


Electromagnetic energy is not thermal energy. Neither is thermal energy electromagnetic energy. You can convert between the two (through absorption and radiation), but they are DIFFERENT forms of energy.


Indeed they are different forms of energy. A greenhouse gas [yes, I know, you don't believe in them. You probably don't believe in Santa Clause either] molecule absorbs electromagnetic energy and and emits thermal energy.


~*~ GreenMan ~*~

https://www.tapatalk.com/groups/leftbehind/index.php
20-08-2017 07:38
GreenMan
★★★☆☆
(661)
Into the Night wrote:
GreenMan wrote:
Into the Night wrote:
GreenMan wrote:
Into the Night wrote:
GreenMan wrote:
Follow Me Into the Darkness wrote:
GreenMan wrote:
That's because the surface of the earth his quite cold, compared to the air just above it.

Wrong. The surface of the Earth is warmer than the air just above it. Not a lot, but just a bit. The reason is because the surface is heating the air just above it by conduction.


Nope, you can't heat the air with a surface that is cooler than the air. Try this little experiment. Stick a thermometer into the ground. Sunny or shaded spot. Read the temperature of the ground. Now pull the thermometer out of the dirt, and let it read the air temperature.

The ground should read close to 15C. The air should read whatever the temperature is for that day, and it will likely be higher, unless it is winter.


Useless experiment. You are measuring underground.


Ok, use an infrared thermometer, and read the surface. Then use a regular thermometer to read the air temperature.


Infrared thermometers don't read the absolute temperature of the surface accurately. The emissivity of that surface is unknown.

These devices are ONLY accurate if they are measuring something that has the same emissivity they were calibrated against.

They are mostly useful for looking at relative temperature differences, such as insulation leaks in homes or dead cylinders on cars.


Very convenient for your argument that there is nothing that can read the surface temperature of the earth. So how do you know it is warmer than the air? Is that because in your view of reality that it has to be?


It is easily determined by using a contact thermometer and a bulb thermometer.

It is also easily observable by anyone in the deserts. Critters will go up or down to get away from the surface temperatures.


Then take your silly ass outside and measure it with your thermometer. Pick the hottest part of the day, around 2 pm, on a sunny day. Measure the ground temperature. Then just compare that to the air temperature. And stop arguing about it until you do.


~*~ GreenMan ~*~

https://www.tapatalk.com/groups/leftbehind/index.php
20-08-2017 07:42
GreenMan
★★★☆☆
(661)
Wake wrote:
GreenMan wrote:
Into the Night wrote:
Wake wrote:
GreenMan wrote:
Follow Me Into the Darkness wrote:
GreenMan wrote:
That's because the surface of the earth his quite cold, compared to the air just above it.

Wrong. The surface of the Earth is warmer than the air just above it. Not a lot, but just a bit. The reason is because the surface is heating the air just above it by conduction.


Nope, you can't heat the air with a surface that is cooler than the air. Try this little experiment. Stick a thermometer into the ground. Sunny or shaded spot. Read the temperature of the ground. Now pull the thermometer out of the dirt, and let it read the air temperature.

The ground should read close to 15C. The air should read whatever the temperature is for that day, and it will likely be higher, unless it is winter.


Earth is a very good insulator simply via large mass. But it absorbs almost the entire spectrum of energy from the Sun. So the top quarter inch or so is warmed normally higher than the air above it and heats that air.


Exactly. That's why people build stone or adobe houses. Before there was air conditioning, these dwellings worked pretty well (they still do).


That's because they are cool in the summer [cooler than the air, naturally], and easy to warm in the winter [warmer than the air, naturally].

The ground is cooler than the air. Why do you think dogs lay on the ground? Because it's cooler than if they climbed a tree.

But don't take my word for it. Take your barbecue thermometer to the yard. Stick it in the ground a few inches. Read the temperature. Then pull it out of the ground, read the temperature. Or, if you can read the top quarter inch or so, without reading the air temperature, then do that. It's close to the same an inch or two below the surface, due to conduction.


You cannot keep yourself from showing ignorance every time you write. Dog lay on the ground to cool themselves? Usually they will do this in shadow. Secondly, their bodies then prevent sunshine from heating the ground beneath them. Thirdly, they do not lay on the ground in sunshine on a hot day.

Why do you tell us your BBQ thermometer experiment when such a thermometer cannot yield accurate results at surface temperatures?

Anyone with high school physics can tell you that the AIR absorbs only a small portion of the Sun's emissions and the ground absorbs almost all of them. It become much hotter than the air so that the temperature differential is high enough for active conduction to work.

If you do not understand the world around you please don't pretend to know it and display your ignorance.


According to the guys who study such as this, the air absorbs very little of the sun's radiation. It's the earth's radiation that the air is being warmed from. And not just through conduction and convection. Also through conversion of longwave earth ir into thermal energy.


~*~ GreenMan ~*~

https://www.tapatalk.com/groups/leftbehind/index.php
20-08-2017 10:45
GreenMan
★★★☆☆
(661)
Into the Night wrote:
GreenMan wrote:
Into the Night wrote:
Wake wrote:
GreenMan wrote:
Follow Me Into the Darkness wrote:
GreenMan wrote:
That's because the surface of the earth his quite cold, compared to the air just above it.

Wrong. The surface of the Earth is warmer than the air just above it. Not a lot, but just a bit. The reason is because the surface is heating the air just above it by conduction.


Nope, you can't heat the air with a surface that is cooler than the air. Try this little experiment. Stick a thermometer into the ground. Sunny or shaded spot. Read the temperature of the ground. Now pull the thermometer out of the dirt, and let it read the air temperature.

The ground should read close to 15C. The air should read whatever the temperature is for that day, and it will likely be higher, unless it is winter.


Earth is a very good insulator simply via large mass. But it absorbs almost the entire spectrum of energy from the Sun. So the top quarter inch or so is warmed normally higher than the air above it and heats that air.


Exactly. That's why people build stone or adobe houses. Before there was air conditioning, these dwellings worked pretty well (they still do).


That's because they are cool in the summer [cooler than the air, naturally], and easy to warm in the winter [warmer than the air, naturally].

The ground is cooler than the air.

Only if warmer air happens to move in. In general the air is cooler than the surface.
GreenMan wrote:
Why do you think dogs lay on the ground?

Because they want to be near their master and they are tired of standing all the time.

If they can find a cold piece of ground in a shade of some kind, they will flatten their bellies to help cool off. Apparently a dog knows more about conductive heating than you do.
GreenMan wrote:
Because it's cooler than if they climbed a tree.

Trees are actually cooler. You don't have to be far away from the ground to see a remarkable drop in temperature in places like the desert. Most desert critters used buried homes for the same reason as we use stone or adobe for our homes. Some do find it just fine in the trees (what few there are) though.
GreenMan wrote:
But don't take my word for it. Take your barbecue thermometer to the yard. Stick it in the ground a few inches. Read the temperature. Then pull it out of the ground, read the temperature.

BBQ thermometers don't read that range of temperatures.
GreenMan wrote:
Or, if you can read the top quarter inch or so, without reading the air temperature, then do that. It's close to the same an inch or two below the surface, due to conduction.

Not the same, not even an inch down. Any desert rat knows that.


Here you go, Professor Parrot Face.

"The ground is cooler in summer and warmer in winter than the air above it."

https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/the-temperature-of-the-earths-inter/

That is a quote from Scientific American, from an article talking about ground temperature. I suggest you go read it before you make a fool out of your brainiac self somewhere else. Of course, you can also claim conspiracy if you want, and say that all the scientists on the planet are working against you, lol.


~*~ GreenMan ~*~

https://www.tapatalk.com/groups/leftbehind/index.php
20-08-2017 10:47
GreenMan
★★★☆☆
(661)
Wake wrote:
What is obvious is that there is hardly the slightest knowledge of anything being shown here. I haven't spent so much time working in science to read absolute buffoonery. So I will bow out of this thread and allow the ignorance and stupidity to prevail. Greenman - high school students are not taught science and you definitely show that in spades.


[Picks Wake Me Up up and drops kicks him on out the door]
See ya, wouldn't want to be ya.


~*~ GreenMan ~*~

https://www.tapatalk.com/groups/leftbehind/index.php
22-08-2017 18:40
Into the NightProfile picture★★★★★
(10191)
GreenMan wrote:
Into the Night wrote:
litesong wrote:
"old sick silly sleepy sleazy slimy steenkin' filthy vile reprobate rooting (& rotting) racist pukey proud pig AGW denier liar badnight" bluffed: Useless experiment. You are measuring underground.

Underground temperatures are a fair estimate of average yearly temperature.

Nope.


Actually, the correct answer is yup, not nope. That is why you can bury pipes to keep them from freezing up. You just have to go deeper for colder climates. But after you get a few feet down, the dirt temperature is constant at the average temperature of the region it is in.
I thought that was pretty much common knowledge. But in here common knowledge takes a back seat to whatever the Professor Parrot Face is trying to prove.


Temperatures underground are constant, yes...what does that show? The temperature underground comes from several factors, including surface temperatures.


The Parrot Killer
22-08-2017 18:41
Into the NightProfile picture★★★★★
(10191)
GreenMan wrote:
Into the Night wrote:
GreenMan wrote:
LifeIsThermal wrote:
GreenMan wrote:
It's not really magick, since it is understood by those with a little more intelligence than you seem to possess. The carbon molecules absorb radiation from earth,


You know the difference between absorption and emission, right?

Do you know that absorption isn´t cause of emission?

The fact that carbon molecules absorb radiation simply says that they are at the receiving end of transfer. The more they absorb, the colder they are. Because transfer-rate depends on difference in temperature.

that is in the longer bandwidth frequency.


Bandwidth doesn´t apply to heat and temperature.

Because they absorb it, they radiate it back out as thermal energy [heat].


That is only in your fantasy. Absorption is not cause of emission. They are relative through the temperature of the emitter. Emission depends on the internal state, the temperature, only. Absorption rate is the rate of transfer, which depends on the emissive power of the absorber, or the temperature of the absorber. So both emission and absorption depends on temperature of the emitter. The temperature does not depend on absorption. Basic, fundamental thermodynamics. 100% consensus.

If the atmosphere rise in temperature, it absorbs less heat. If it drops in temperature, it absorbs more. If Earth rise in temperature, it absorbs less heat from the sun, if it drops in temperature, it absorbs more solar radiation.

That is what the Stefan-Boltzmann law says. 100% consensus physics. The only way earth can heat up, is from increased internal generation. And only when that generation rise above what the sun provides, 1360.8W/m^2, earth will become warmer that it´s mean temperature. So, it will never happen.



I'm glad you mentioned that, because I was thinking the same thing. But I'm not sure how it is a relevant fact in this discussion. Did someone say we were trying to do that? The only conclusion I can come to is that you think the surface of the planet is warmer than the air above it. Is that what you think?


And only higher temperature can transfer energy to lower temperatures.

Why not?


Because emission depends only on temperature of the emitter. The emission depends on the internal state only. That is what Prevost said. It is not questioned. The atmosphere is the external state.

Some of what would have just went flying off into space gets to interact with greenhouse gases, and produce heat, warming the air.


Your assumptions blind you. The only observed effect is increased absorption. That is not equal to heating, it is equal to the opposite. If the heat source is at constant temperature and absorption of the emitted heat increases, that means that the absorber has dropped in temperature. Basic thermodynamics.

Please provide references for your claims that increased absorption of heat from a heat source, will increase the emissive power of the heat source.


It's apparent that you don't understand how a molecule can absorb energy and warm because of that absorption, unless it was thermal energy that was absorbed.


Electromagnetic energy is not thermal energy. Neither is thermal energy electromagnetic energy. You can convert between the two (through absorption and radiation), but they are DIFFERENT forms of energy.


Indeed they are different forms of energy. A greenhouse gas [yes, I know, you don't believe in them. You probably don't believe in Santa Clause either] molecule absorbs electromagnetic energy and and emits thermal energy.


Thermal energy is not emitted. It may be disbursed by conduction, or it may be disbursed by convection to higher altitude (and less pressure).


The Parrot Killer
22-08-2017 18:42
Into the NightProfile picture★★★★★
(10191)
GreenMan wrote:
Into the Night wrote:
GreenMan wrote:
Into the Night wrote:
GreenMan wrote:
Into the Night wrote:
GreenMan wrote:
Follow Me Into the Darkness wrote:
GreenMan wrote:
That's because the surface of the earth his quite cold, compared to the air just above it.

Wrong. The surface of the Earth is warmer than the air just above it. Not a lot, but just a bit. The reason is because the surface is heating the air just above it by conduction.


Nope, you can't heat the air with a surface that is cooler than the air. Try this little experiment. Stick a thermometer into the ground. Sunny or shaded spot. Read the temperature of the ground. Now pull the thermometer out of the dirt, and let it read the air temperature.

The ground should read close to 15C. The air should read whatever the temperature is for that day, and it will likely be higher, unless it is winter.


Useless experiment. You are measuring underground.


Ok, use an infrared thermometer, and read the surface. Then use a regular thermometer to read the air temperature.


Infrared thermometers don't read the absolute temperature of the surface accurately. The emissivity of that surface is unknown.

These devices are ONLY accurate if they are measuring something that has the same emissivity they were calibrated against.

They are mostly useful for looking at relative temperature differences, such as insulation leaks in homes or dead cylinders on cars.


Very convenient for your argument that there is nothing that can read the surface temperature of the earth. So how do you know it is warmer than the air? Is that because in your view of reality that it has to be?


It is easily determined by using a contact thermometer and a bulb thermometer.

It is also easily observable by anyone in the deserts. Critters will go up or down to get away from the surface temperatures.


Then take your silly ass outside and measure it with your thermometer. Pick the hottest part of the day, around 2 pm, on a sunny day. Measure the ground temperature. Then just compare that to the air temperature. And stop arguing about it until you do.


Done. The air is cooler.


The Parrot Killer
22-08-2017 18:44
Into the NightProfile picture★★★★★
(10191)
GreenMan wrote:
Wake wrote:
GreenMan wrote:
Into the Night wrote:
Wake wrote:
GreenMan wrote:
Follow Me Into the Darkness wrote:
GreenMan wrote:
That's because the surface of the earth his quite cold, compared to the air just above it.

Wrong. The surface of the Earth is warmer than the air just above it. Not a lot, but just a bit. The reason is because the surface is heating the air just above it by conduction.


Nope, you can't heat the air with a surface that is cooler than the air. Try this little experiment. Stick a thermometer into the ground. Sunny or shaded spot. Read the temperature of the ground. Now pull the thermometer out of the dirt, and let it read the air temperature.

The ground should read close to 15C. The air should read whatever the temperature is for that day, and it will likely be higher, unless it is winter.


Earth is a very good insulator simply via large mass. But it absorbs almost the entire spectrum of energy from the Sun. So the top quarter inch or so is warmed normally higher than the air above it and heats that air.


Exactly. That's why people build stone or adobe houses. Before there was air conditioning, these dwellings worked pretty well (they still do).


That's because they are cool in the summer [cooler than the air, naturally], and easy to warm in the winter [warmer than the air, naturally].

The ground is cooler than the air. Why do you think dogs lay on the ground? Because it's cooler than if they climbed a tree.

But don't take my word for it. Take your barbecue thermometer to the yard. Stick it in the ground a few inches. Read the temperature. Then pull it out of the ground, read the temperature. Or, if you can read the top quarter inch or so, without reading the air temperature, then do that. It's close to the same an inch or two below the surface, due to conduction.


You cannot keep yourself from showing ignorance every time you write. Dog lay on the ground to cool themselves? Usually they will do this in shadow. Secondly, their bodies then prevent sunshine from heating the ground beneath them. Thirdly, they do not lay on the ground in sunshine on a hot day.

Why do you tell us your BBQ thermometer experiment when such a thermometer cannot yield accurate results at surface temperatures?

Anyone with high school physics can tell you that the AIR absorbs only a small portion of the Sun's emissions and the ground absorbs almost all of them. It become much hotter than the air so that the temperature differential is high enough for active conduction to work.

If you do not understand the world around you please don't pretend to know it and display your ignorance.


According to the guys who study such as this, the air absorbs very little of the sun's radiation. It's the earth's radiation that the air is being warmed from. And not just through conduction and convection. Also through conversion of longwave earth ir into thermal energy.


Although you apparently are now arguing against yourself, you have it right in this last statement of yours.


The Parrot Killer
Page 2 of 4<1234>





Join the debate Greenhouse Effect and the 1909 Wood's Experiment:

Remember me

Related content
ThreadsRepliesLast post
Greenhouse Gases Do NOT Violate The Stefan-Boltzmann Law74322-11-2019 04:54
So what if the Chinese fossil fuel industry pays me to spread lies about greenhouse gas?7515-11-2019 04:47
Revealing the 160 year systematic error behind greenhouse theory with Raman Spectroscopy2422-09-2019 22:20
Bill Nye greenhouse gas experiment fail.1616-09-2019 15:51
Is CO2 much of a Greenhouse gas at all?10813-09-2019 05:54
▲ 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 © 2009-2019 Climate-Debate.com | About | Contact