Remember me
▼ Content

Thwarting the Warmizombies' Rush to Wikipedia



Page 2 of 2<12
28-07-2021 18:38
Into the NightProfile picture★★★★★
(16050)
Harry C wrote:
I don't want to gloss over this point.

CO2 converts certain electromagnetic frequencies to thermal energy ... and this increases the temperature of the CO2.


So before going any further, is the simulated atmospheric presentation a side show to the real issue? In other words, and please forgive my misuse of a term as I assure you it is not intentional, the thermal energy created by CO2 in the atmosphere is simply diverted rather than amplified? Warmazombies require an amplification effect for their doomsday mechanism to be true, otherwise there is no pending apocalypse.


It is not possible to create energy out of nothing. CO2 has NO ability to do this either.


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
28-07-2021 18:54
Into the NightProfile picture★★★★★
(16050)
Harry C wrote:
Thank you for the generous explanation. I'm not afraid to admit that I had the correct side of the issue, but for the wrong reason. I sincerely didn't understand the 'amplification' issue the way that you confirmed.

So, yes I have a couple of follow up questions.
1. If I understand correctly, the effect of CO2 could keep less heat from making it's way to the earth's surface.

Not possible. Heat is not something you can block or store.
Harry C wrote:
2. If CO2 had the property attributed to it, logic would dictate that we could use CO2 as an energy source and have a "CO2 powered engine" with sunlight. Hell solar panels then ought to be "charged" with CO2. Just writing that made me feel absurd.

It should. You are describing a perpetual motion machine of the 2nd order.
Harry C wrote:
3. I was thinking about the reason that the ubiquitous 'they' shifted away from "Global Warming" and to "Climate Change". I've always thought it was ludicrous to believe man has the ability to effect his own climate. If that were true, we'd have an awesome secret weapon. So I have to ask, does increased concentrations of CO2 in the atmosphere in a specific area of the globe cause any kind of observable shift to weather patterns (ie. It used to be colder/wetter, windier, etc. here than it is now.)?

This is known as a four term fallacy. It is trying to produce a conclusion from unrelated predicates.
Harry C wrote:
4. Since the sun is constantly providing heat to the earth, what mechanism regulates how much heat stays in the atmosphere? I know there is a 'cooling effect' when the earth's surface is turned away from the sun. Looking for the governing factor. Again, I hope I haven't used an improper term and hope you can see if for what I intended.

Heat doesn't stay anywhere. Heat is the movement of thermal energy. You cannot store thermal energy. There is always heat.

All things convert thermal energy to electromagnetic energy (light) according to the Stefan-Boltzmann law. All energy leaving Earth is in the form of light.

This law states:

r = C * e * t^4
where: 'r' is the light radiated per square unit (usually meters)
'C' is a natural constant (converts the relation to our units of measurement).
'e' is a measured constant known as 'emissivity, or the ability of the radiating surface to emit light (as opposed to reflecting light) expressed as a percentage of a perfectly absorbing surface (the so-called ideal black body).
and 't' is temperature in deg K.

There is no frequency term. Warmazombies insist on trying to add one.
There is no term to describe the radiating material. Warmazombies insist on trying to add one.

Harry C wrote:
I don't like to quote the whole message to get to specific points. I'm sorry if I step out of bounds in so doing.

You don't need to. You are fine.

The answers to your questions come down to a few simple laws of physics.

You cannot create energy out of nothing (1st law of thermodynamics and the conversation of energy law).
You cannot store or trap heat (2nd law of thermodynamics, which specifies that you cannot reduce entropy for any reason).
Temperature is not total thermal energy (0th law of thermodynamics), which also specifies what 'temperature' means. Temperature is average thermal energy.
You cannot trap light or heat (Stefan-Boltzmann law and the 2nd law of thermodynamics).
You cannot trap thermal energy. There is always heat. The warmer something gets, the more is radiated away as light.


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
28-07-2021 22:37
IBdaMannProfile picture★★★★★
(9934)


Into the Night wrote:
Harry C wrote:
Thank you for the generous explanation. I'm not afraid to admit that I had the correct side of the issue, but for the wrong reason. I sincerely didn't understand the 'amplification' issue the way that you confirmed.

So, yes I have a couple of follow up questions.
1. If I understand correctly, the effect of CO2 could keep less heat from making it's way to the earth's surface.

Not possible. Heat is not something you can block or store.
Harry C wrote:
2. If CO2 had the property attributed to it, logic would dictate that we could use CO2 as an energy source and have a "CO2 powered engine" with sunlight. Hell solar panels then ought to be "charged" with CO2. Just writing that made me feel absurd.

It should. You are describing a perpetual motion machine of the 2nd order.
Harry C wrote:
3. I was thinking about the reason that the ubiquitous 'they' shifted away from "Global Warming" and to "Climate Change". I've always thought it was ludicrous to believe man has the ability to effect his own climate. If that were true, we'd have an awesome secret weapon. So I have to ask, does increased concentrations of CO2 in the atmosphere in a specific area of the globe cause any kind of observable shift to weather patterns (ie. It used to be colder/wetter, windier, etc. here than it is now.)?

This is known as a four term fallacy. It is trying to produce a conclusion from unrelated predicates.
Harry C wrote:
4. Since the sun is constantly providing heat to the earth, what mechanism regulates how much heat stays in the atmosphere? I know there is a 'cooling effect' when the earth's surface is turned away from the sun. Looking for the governing factor. Again, I hope I haven't used an improper term and hope you can see if for what I intended.

Heat doesn't stay anywhere. Heat is the movement of thermal energy. You cannot store thermal energy. There is always heat.

All things convert thermal energy to electromagnetic energy (light) according to the Stefan-Boltzmann law. All energy leaving Earth is in the form of light.

This law states:

r = C * e * t^4
where: 'r' is the light radiated per square unit (usually meters)
'C' is a natural constant (converts the relation to our units of measurement).
'e' is a measured constant known as 'emissivity, or the ability of the radiating surface to emit light (as opposed to reflecting light) expressed as a percentage of a perfectly absorbing surface (the so-called ideal black body).
and 't' is temperature in deg K.

There is no frequency term. Warmazombies insist on trying to add one.
There is no term to describe the radiating material. Warmazombies insist on trying to add one.

Harry C wrote:
I don't like to quote the whole message to get to specific points. I'm sorry if I step out of bounds in so doing.

You don't need to. You are fine.

The answers to your questions come down to a few simple laws of physics.

You cannot create energy out of nothing (1st law of thermodynamics and the conversation of energy law).
You cannot store or trap heat (2nd law of thermodynamics, which specifies that you cannot reduce entropy for any reason).
Temperature is not total thermal energy (0th law of thermodynamics), which also specifies what 'temperature' means. Temperature is average thermal energy.
You cannot trap light or heat (Stefan-Boltzmann law and the 2nd law of thermodynamics).
You cannot trap thermal energy. There is always heat. The warmer something gets, the more is radiated away as light.


Excellent response.

29-07-2021 03:23
duncan61
★★★★☆
(1350)
Into the Night wrote:
duncan61 wrote:
I am a selfish prick and only care for me so what reason would I have to convert any one else.This excersize is all for me

If so, then why are you posting about it??

This is a climate debate forum


duncan61
29-07-2021 03:37
IBdaMannProfile picture★★★★★
(9934)
duncan61 wrote:This is a climate debate forum

So what do greenhouses have to do with Climate?




A Spaghetti strainer with the faucet running, retains water- tmiddles

Clouds don't trap heat. Clouds block cold. - Spongy Iris

Printing dollars to pay debt doesn't increase the number of dollars. - keepit

If Venus were a black body it would have a much much lower temperature than what we found there.- tmiddles

Ah the "Valid Data" myth of ITN/IBD. - tmiddles

Ceist - I couldn't agree with you more. But when money and religion are involved, and there are people who value them above all else, then the lies begin. - trafn

You are completely misunderstanding their use of the word "accumulation"! - Climate Scientist.

The Stefan-Boltzman equation doesn't come up with the correct temperature if greenhouse gases are not considered - Hank

:*sigh* Not the "raw data" crap. - Leafsdude

IB STILL hasn't explained what Planck's Law means. Just more hand waving that it applies to everything and more asserting that the greenhouse effect 'violates' it.- Ceist
29-07-2021 04:19
Harry CProfile picture★★☆☆☆
(157)
Ok, well sorry about the use of "heat" and thanks for the education on thermal energy.

A couple more questions based upon your quotes.

Let me guess, you want to insist that of course there are weather patterns, right?

No, nothing like that. if I had a weather logging station in one spot for 20 years, I would expect that the atmospheric conditions would be predictable within a relative margin, based upon the time of day and day of the year at that spot. Outside of that range, you would expect that it would take an extraordinary influence to cause it to be unpredictable. So I was wondering if the variation of CO2 concentration would be an influencer. I'm not trying to trap you but I've got this thought about the zero sum nature of thermal energy and it's effect on differing locations. For example one spot may become warmer and another cooler.

My public school education taught and first hand experience has been that when the sun goes down the temperature drops. That would lead me to believe that the part of the globe that's not facing the sun suffers from a diminished flow of thermal energy which results in a reduced temperature in that area.

Heat is a flow of thermal energy therefore there is no heat that stays in the atmosphere.

If the thermal energy heading for the earth is removed, is there any latent heat? Is it in contained in the atmosphere or radiated from matter on the surface of the earth?

The Warmazombies are lapping up the dogma. There must be something that can be done to change public perception. I just hate the Marxism that's being exhibited by the climate, race, sexual election and pandemic groups.
29-07-2021 06:31
duncan61
★★★★☆
(1350)
IBdaMann wrote:
duncan61 wrote:This is a climate debate forum

So what do greenhouses have to do with Climate?


Absolutely everything.They alter a cold climate to a tropical climate.


duncan61
29-07-2021 06:40
IBdaMannProfile picture★★★★★
(9934)
Harry C wrote:Ok, well sorry about the use of "heat" and thanks for the education on thermal energy.

We'll be coming back to this. You nonetheless decided to use the word "heat" and made me roll my eyes so hard they got whiplash.

Harry C wrote: If I had a weather logging station in one spot for 20 years, I would expect that the atmospheric conditions would be predictable within a relative margin,

Really? I'm sure the airport where you live has more than 20 years of precise historical weather data so what are you predicting will be the weather on Friday, 3 September?

Essentially I am calling boolsch't on your claim of predictability and on your implied insistence that there are, in fact, weather patterns. There is no such thing as a weather "pattern" and you do not know what the weather will be next week, next month, next year, next anything.

Harry C wrote: So I was wondering if the variation of CO2 concentration would be an influencer.

"Influence"? What are you pretending to mean by that? Could you possibly say any less? On the one hand we have science that predicts nature unambiguously. On the other hand, we have you making a concerted effort to not say anything specific and definite. Maybe CO2 "influences" your mood, I don't know.

Harry C wrote: I'm not trying to trap you but I've got this thought about the zero sum nature of thermal energy and it's effect on differing locations.

Your post should have detailed all the specifics of your theory with the question "What do you think?" Post your theory and I perform a quick, preliminary scientific method on it and let you know what you have.

Harry C wrote: For example one spot may become warmer and another cooler.

Isn't that what happens normally, every day, all across planet earth?



I'm surprised you didn't ask if one spot of the planet might be sunny while another part is cloudy ... or if it might be raining in one region while being very arid in another region.

Are you wondering if this is due to atmospheric CO2? Really, are you thinking this?

Harry C wrote:My public school education taught and first hand experience has been that when the sun goes down the temperature drops. That would lead me to believe that the part of the globe that's not facing the sun suffers from a diminished flow of thermal energy which results in a reduced temperature in that area.

So your theory is that it cools at night? OK, I'm with you ... but the rest of your statement doesn't make any sense. Why did you use the word "suffer" and what makes you think that a "reduced" flow of energy is an issue meriting discussion, especially when the situation will be reversed in twelve hours?

Harry C wrote:If the thermal energy heading for the earth is removed, is there any latent heat?

(major eye roll) ... thermal energy flows to the earth, it doesn't "head" to the earth. Just trust me on this ... or else we need to bring you up to speed on the quantum mechanics before we can discuss this topic effectively (which I don't mind doing but we really would need to do that first).

But I need to ask, what do you believe you mean by "latent heat"?

While I'm waiting for you to answer, I'd like to explain why that is a rather stupid question (so don't take it personally).

Electical current is the FLOW of electrons from a negative source to a positive one.

Water current is the FLOW of water through pipes from a higher elevation to a lower elevation.

Heat is the FLOW of thermal energy from a higher temperature body of matter to a lower temperature body of matter.

Let's see ... if the electrons flowing over the wire are removed, is there any latent electricity?

Let's see ... if the water flowing through the pipes is removed, is there any latent current?

Let's see ... if the thermal energy is removed, is there any latent heat?

Harry C wrote:Is it in contained in the atmosphere or radiated from matter on the surface of the earth?

Thermal energy is simply in matter. It is not "contained" ... nor is it trapped, captured, held, locked, stored, imprisoned or any other word that implies the thermal energy is somehow restrained in any way, shape or form from pouring out freely, exactly per the Stefan-Boltzmann law (i.e. at a rate proportional to the absolute temperature to the fourth power).

Look at my signature. Notice tmiddles' comment that a spaghetti strainer "retains" water. A spaghetti strainer! Warmizombies are locked into using wording that implies cetain matter (e.g. greenhouse gas, CO2, etc..) can somehow latch onto thermal energy and "trap" it. Everything about Global Warming is based on this mental imagery ... and it is simply false. The analogy of the spaghetti strainer was simply to explain how matter has thermal energy. If you place a spaghetti strainer under a running faucet there will be water in the strainer ... but the strainer can do nothing to latch onto the water and keep it "contained" or to prevent the water from flowing out freely. There is no "retaining" or "storing" or any other such word. Regarding thermal energy, all matter converts its associated thermal energy into electromagnetic energy per the Stefan-Boltzmann law (which is based on temperature) which then radiates away.

Harry C wrote: There must be something that can be done to change public perception.

Buy a media outlet.

Harry C wrote: I just hate the Marxism that's being exhibited by the climate, race, sexual election and pandemic groups.


How do you think the Marxists can be convinced that their religion is evil?




A Spaghetti strainer with the faucet running, retains water- tmiddles

Clouds don't trap heat. Clouds block cold. - Spongy Iris

Printing dollars to pay debt doesn't increase the number of dollars. - keepit

If Venus were a black body it would have a much much lower temperature than what we found there.- tmiddles

Ah the "Valid Data" myth of ITN/IBD. - tmiddles

Ceist - I couldn't agree with you more. But when money and religion are involved, and there are people who value them above all else, then the lies begin. - trafn

You are completely misunderstanding their use of the word "accumulation"! - Climate Scientist.

The Stefan-Boltzman equation doesn't come up with the correct temperature if greenhouse gases are not considered - Hank

:*sigh* Not the "raw data" crap. - Leafsdude

IB STILL hasn't explained what Planck's Law means. Just more hand waving that it applies to everything and more asserting that the greenhouse effect 'violates' it.- Ceist
29-07-2021 21:07
Into the NightProfile picture★★★★★
(16050)
Harry C wrote:
Ok, well sorry about the use of "heat" and thanks for the education on thermal energy.

You are getting better, but this following post still shows you don't understand it yet.
Harry C wrote:
A couple more questions based upon your quotes.

Let me guess, you want to insist that of course there are weather patterns, right?

No, nothing like that.

Then why did you bring it up??
Harry C wrote:
if I had a weather logging station in one spot for 20 years, I would expect that the atmospheric conditions would be predictable within a relative margin, based upon the time of day and day of the year at that spot.

Observations are not predictions.
Harry C wrote:
Outside of that range, you would expect that it would take an extraordinary influence to cause it to be unpredictable. So I was wondering if the variation of CO2 concentration would be an influencer.

No.

You can't create energy out of nothing.
You can't reduce entropy.
You can't heat a warmer surface using a colder gas.
You can't trap heat.
You can't trap thermal energy. There is always heat.

No matter how you couch it, you are going to have to deal with the 1st and 2nd laws of thermodynamics and the Stefan-Boltzmann law. You are doing to have to deal with the rules of statistical mathematics.

Harry C wrote:
I'm not trying to trap you but I've got this thought about the zero sum nature of thermal energy and it's effect on differing locations. For example one spot may become warmer and another cooler.

Nope. You cannot reduce entropy. Ever. See the 2nd law of thermodynamics.
You cannot compare two systems as the same system. False equivalence fallacy. You cannot compare 3 systems as the overall system. Four term fallacy.
Harry C wrote:
My public school education taught and first hand experience has been that when the sun goes down the temperature drops. That would lead me to believe that the part of the globe that's not facing the sun suffers from a diminished flow of thermal energy which results in a reduced temperature in that area.

Thermal energy is not flow. Heat is the flow of thermal energy. Thermal energy is NOT temperature. See the 0th law of thermodynamics.
Harry C wrote:
Heat is a flow of thermal energy therefore there is no heat that stays in the atmosphere.

If the thermal energy heading for the earth is removed, is there any latent heat?

It does not stay in the atmosphere.
Harry C wrote:
Is it in contained in the atmosphere or radiated from matter on the surface of the earth?

It is not contained or trapped. You cannot trap thermal energy. There is always heat.
Harry C wrote:
The Warmazombies are lapping up the dogma. There must be something that can be done to change public perception.

You might try learning physics, probability math, random number math, and statistical math.
Harry C wrote:
I just hate the Marxism that's being exhibited by the climate, race, sexual election and pandemic groups.

The Church of Global Warming, the Church of Covid, the Church of Green; all stem from the Church of Karl Marx.

The Church of Self Mutilation stems from the Democrats, and Satan.


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
29-07-2021 21:08
Into the NightProfile picture★★★★★
(16050)
duncan61 wrote:
IBdaMann wrote:
duncan61 wrote:This is a climate debate forum

So what do greenhouses have to do with Climate?


Absolutely everything.They alter a cold climate to a tropical climate.


Greenhouses do not alter a climate. Climate has no values. What is changing?


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
29-07-2021 21:43
IBdaMannProfile picture★★★★★
(9934)
duncan61 wrote:
IBdaMann wrote:
duncan61 wrote:This is a climate debate forum
So what do greenhouses have to do with Climate?
Absolutely everything.They alter a cold climate to a tropical climate.

You still haven't defined "climate."

At the moment your position seems to be that I can convert the climate of Thule, Greenland to a tropical one by erecting a greenhouse. That's a pretty stupid position.




A Spaghetti strainer with the faucet running, retains water- tmiddles

Clouds don't trap heat. Clouds block cold. - Spongy Iris

Printing dollars to pay debt doesn't increase the number of dollars. - keepit

If Venus were a black body it would have a much much lower temperature than what we found there.- tmiddles

Ah the "Valid Data" myth of ITN/IBD. - tmiddles

Ceist - I couldn't agree with you more. But when money and religion are involved, and there are people who value them above all else, then the lies begin. - trafn

You are completely misunderstanding their use of the word "accumulation"! - Climate Scientist.

The Stefan-Boltzman equation doesn't come up with the correct temperature if greenhouse gases are not considered - Hank

:*sigh* Not the "raw data" crap. - Leafsdude

IB STILL hasn't explained what Planck's Law means. Just more hand waving that it applies to everything and more asserting that the greenhouse effect 'violates' it.- Ceist
29-07-2021 22:45
duncan61
★★★★☆
(1350)
I have been to many parts of England and was amazed at how many small outdoor greenhouses there are in peoples yards.You can also apply for an allotment from the shire and grow stuff all year round.The greenhouses I am going to get maybe this afternoon are 6 foot tall and about 2 foot square and they come with a connection for a misting kit inside.My car is facing North and painted matt black when I open the door in the morning I get a blast of warm air even though it is only 8 degrees outside in the mornings.If I was a complete dick like you I would infer you are claiming greenhouses do not do anything and are part of the warmazombies parlour tricks.I live in a temperate climate and it is the middle of winter.It will be interesting to see how warm the greenhouses get
29-07-2021 23:32
IBdaMannProfile picture★★★★★
(9934)
duncan61 wrote:I have been to many parts of England and was amazed at how many small outdoor greenhouses there are in peoples yards.

Yet England does not have a tropical climate. When are the greenhouses going to change England's climate to a tropical one?

duncan61 wrote:If I was a complete dick like you ...

If I were a complete dick like you ...



I don't know what language is spoken over in Australia but whatever it is it might explain why you decided to get some English language immersion in the UK.

duncan61 wrote: ... I would infer you are claiming greenhouses do not do anything and are part of the warmazombies parlour tricks.

You would infer that because you have not yet mastered reading English for comprehension.

Greenhouses are also inanimate objects and don't "do" anything. They block convection so that the warmed air does not "rise" and float away. I take it that Australia doesn't have cars that you can observe getting hot inside on hot summer days when the windows are rolled up? I don't know what to tell you.

duncan61 wrote:I live in a temperate climate and it is the middle of winter.

You still haven't answered my question. What do greenhouses have to do with your temperate climate?

duncan61 wrote:It will be interesting to see how warm the greenhouses get

We were talking about climate. You were going to explain how greenhouses affect climates. Are you still trying to figure out how to express your thoughts in English?



[*find-grammar_judge]


A Spaghetti strainer with the faucet running, retains water- tmiddles

Clouds don't trap heat. Clouds block cold. - Spongy Iris

Printing dollars to pay debt doesn't increase the number of dollars. - keepit

If Venus were a black body it would have a much much lower temperature than what we found there.- tmiddles

Ah the "Valid Data" myth of ITN/IBD. - tmiddles

Ceist - I couldn't agree with you more. But when money and religion are involved, and there are people who value them above all else, then the lies begin. - trafn

You are completely misunderstanding their use of the word "accumulation"! - Climate Scientist.

The Stefan-Boltzman equation doesn't come up with the correct temperature if greenhouse gases are not considered - Hank

:*sigh* Not the "raw data" crap. - Leafsdude

IB STILL hasn't explained what Planck's Law means. Just more hand waving that it applies to everything and more asserting that the greenhouse effect 'violates' it.- Ceist
01-08-2021 00:41
duncan61
★★★★☆
(1350)
Into the Night wrote:
duncan61 wrote:
IBdaMann wrote:
duncan61 wrote:This is a climate debate forum

So what do greenhouses have to do with Climate?


Absolutely everything.They alter a cold climate to a tropical climate.


Greenhouses do not alter a climate. Climate has no values. What is changing?

I am still setting up my experiment but have a high confidence conditions inside the green house will be different from external.Warmer and higher humidity


duncan61
01-08-2021 01:42
duncan61
★★★★☆
(1350)
Many European countries experience frost regularly and the greenhouses help stop the plants from dying.Another thing I noticed in more affluent areas of England was where the front door is was often glassed in like we have patios here.Even in winter people can sit reading a book in this enclosure.
01-08-2021 06:34
IBdaMannProfile picture★★★★★
(9934)
duncan61 wrote:Many European countries experience frost regularly and the greenhouses help stop the plants from dying.

Did Pete Rogers convince you that greenhouses somehow stop the frost or did he convince you that greenhouses increase the earth's gravity on the atmosphere?

You still haven't explained your stupid assertion that greenhouses have everything to do with changing the UK's climate.

duncan61 wrote:Another thing I noticed in more affluent areas of England was where the front door is was often glassed in like we have patios here.Even in winter people can sit reading a book in this enclosure.

Does the glass enclosure stop the winter from happening? How does it have everything to do with changing the UK's climate?

.


A Spaghetti strainer with the faucet running, retains water- tmiddles

Clouds don't trap heat. Clouds block cold. - Spongy Iris

Printing dollars to pay debt doesn't increase the number of dollars. - keepit

If Venus were a black body it would have a much much lower temperature than what we found there.- tmiddles

Ah the "Valid Data" myth of ITN/IBD. - tmiddles

Ceist - I couldn't agree with you more. But when money and religion are involved, and there are people who value them above all else, then the lies begin. - trafn

You are completely misunderstanding their use of the word "accumulation"! - Climate Scientist.

The Stefan-Boltzman equation doesn't come up with the correct temperature if greenhouse gases are not considered - Hank

:*sigh* Not the "raw data" crap. - Leafsdude

IB STILL hasn't explained what Planck's Law means. Just more hand waving that it applies to everything and more asserting that the greenhouse effect 'violates' it.- Ceist
01-08-2021 08:13
duncan61
★★★★☆
(1350)
Seriously.You are just being obtuse.The enviroment is different on the inside.How can you be inferring that building greenhouses changes anything on the outside.Strange man!!
01-08-2021 10:38
IBdaMannProfile picture★★★★★
(9934)
duncan61 wrote:Seriously.You are just being obtuse.

I don't think you even know what the word "obtuse" means. I don't think you know many words, period.

duncan61 wrote:The enviroment is different on the inside.

Wrong word. You were discussing the global climate, i.e. the subject of this forum, not any indoor environment. You insisted that greenhouses change "a cold climate" to a tropical one.

Despite repeated attempts to get you to explain how this can, you have maintained your adroit evasiveness and are now attempting to blame me for your dishonesty.

At the moment, everything you've written up to this point is gibber-crap.

duncan61 wrote:How can you be inferring that building greenhouses changes anything on the outside.

I didn't infer anything. You explicitly stated the gibber-crap. The problem is entirely on your end and your inability to say what you mean and to mean what you say.

So we're right back to the question "What do greenhouses have to do with the global climate that is the subject of this forum?

.


A Spaghetti strainer with the faucet running, retains water- tmiddles

Clouds don't trap heat. Clouds block cold. - Spongy Iris

Printing dollars to pay debt doesn't increase the number of dollars. - keepit

If Venus were a black body it would have a much much lower temperature than what we found there.- tmiddles

Ah the "Valid Data" myth of ITN/IBD. - tmiddles

Ceist - I couldn't agree with you more. But when money and religion are involved, and there are people who value them above all else, then the lies begin. - trafn

You are completely misunderstanding their use of the word "accumulation"! - Climate Scientist.

The Stefan-Boltzman equation doesn't come up with the correct temperature if greenhouse gases are not considered - Hank

:*sigh* Not the "raw data" crap. - Leafsdude

IB STILL hasn't explained what Planck's Law means. Just more hand waving that it applies to everything and more asserting that the greenhouse effect 'violates' it.- Ceist
01-08-2021 11:24
duncan61
★★★★☆
(1350)
WTF does trading crypto currency have to do with this forum but you have made pages of it.You seem to be concerned that I am going to add CO2 to a greenhouse outside and record a temperature difference?
OBTUSE
annoyingly insensitive or slow to understand.
01-08-2021 17:39
IBdaMannProfile picture★★★★★
(9934)


duncan61 wrote:WTF does trading crypto currency have to do with this forum but you have made pages of it.You seem to be concerned that I am going to add CO2 to a greenhouse outside and record a temperature difference?
OBTUSE
annoyingly insensitive or slow to understand.

You still apparently cannot read for comprehension and yet blame others for your never having learned English properly.. Let's try yet again.

For the sixth time, what do greenhouses have to do with the climate of, say, the UK? You insist that greenhouses turn a cold climate into a tropical one. You insist this, not anyone else. This is your claim. This is your position. Please explain your belief that greenhouses change a climate ... or acknowledge that you misspoke and that it is no one else's fault but yours.

Current Safemoon Price: $0.000002398

02-08-2021 00:50
Into the NightProfile picture★★★★★
(16050)
duncan61 wrote:
Into the Night wrote:
duncan61 wrote:
IBdaMann wrote:
duncan61 wrote:This is a climate debate forum

So what do greenhouses have to do with Climate?


Absolutely everything.They alter a cold climate to a tropical climate.


Greenhouses do not alter a climate. Climate has no values. What is changing?

I am still setting up my experiment but have a high confidence conditions inside the green house will be different from external.Warmer and higher humidity

So?


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
02-08-2021 00:51
Into the NightProfile picture★★★★★
(16050)
duncan61 wrote:
Seriously.You are just being obtuse.The enviroment is different on the inside.How can you be inferring that building greenhouses changes anything on the outside.Strange man!!


He isn't inferring that. YOU are.


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
06-08-2021 04:13
duncan61
★★★★☆
(1350)
Not sure how any rational person can get that building a plastic box changes the external weather.I cheaped out and bought a pair of greenhouses for just under $30 AUD each and I am liking them.The only CO2 containers were industrial ones for a heap of loot I will score the cheap cans when I find them locally.I have considered running a 2 stroke engine in to the test box to raise CO2 levels or will that be too artificial
06-08-2021 14:07
IBdaMannProfile picture★★★★★
(9934)


duncan61 wrote:Not sure how any rational person can get that building a plastic box changes the external weather.

If that is not what you meant then you shouldn't have written it. Either you are stupid for having written it or you can't write what you mean. Either way, the problem is on your end.

.


A Spaghetti strainer with the faucet running, retains water- tmiddles

Clouds don't trap heat. Clouds block cold. - Spongy Iris

Printing dollars to pay debt doesn't increase the number of dollars. - keepit

If Venus were a black body it would have a much much lower temperature than what we found there.- tmiddles

Ah the "Valid Data" myth of ITN/IBD. - tmiddles

Ceist - I couldn't agree with you more. But when money and religion are involved, and there are people who value them above all else, then the lies begin. - trafn

You are completely misunderstanding their use of the word "accumulation"! - Climate Scientist.

The Stefan-Boltzman equation doesn't come up with the correct temperature if greenhouse gases are not considered - Hank

:*sigh* Not the "raw data" crap. - Leafsdude

IB STILL hasn't explained what Planck's Law means. Just more hand waving that it applies to everything and more asserting that the greenhouse effect 'violates' it.- Ceist
08-08-2021 05:10
duncan61
★★★★☆
(1350)
What problem.I have both greenhouses set up and am enjoying playing about.I may start potting some of the herbs we have grown to seedlings as they have stopped growing at the moment
Page 2 of 2<12





Join the debate Thwarting the Warmizombies' Rush to Wikipedia:

Remember me

Related content
ThreadsRepliesLast post
Wikipedia is Locked Down by Marxists3228-04-2020 03:37
wikipedia accuracy9605-02-2020 05:56
▲ 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