Remember me
▼ Content

Trump's UN nominee Kelly Craft says she believes 'both sides' of climate change science


Trump's UN nominee Kelly Craft says she believes 'both sides' of climate change science23-02-2019 23:19
Tai Hai Chen
★★★★☆
(1085)
Wife of a billionaire coal magnate ignores consensus among scientists to suggest those who deny man-made global warming have equal credibility

https://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/us-politics/kelly-craft-donald-trump-un-nominee-ambassador-canada-climate-change-both-sides-a8793491.html
24-02-2019 00:33
James___
★★★★★
(2987)
Tai Hai Chen wrote:
Wife of a billionaire coal magnate ignores consensus among scientists to suggest those who deny man-made global warming have equal credibility

https://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/us-politics/kelly-craft-donald-trump-un-nominee-ambassador-canada-climate-change-both-sides-a8793491.html


Carbon dioxide (CO2), nitrous oxide (N2O), and methane (CH4) are each important to climate forcing and to the levels of stratospheric ozone (see Chapter 2). In terms of the globally averaged ozone column, additional N2O leads to lower ozone levels, whereas additional CO2 and CH4 lead to higher ozone levels. Ozone depletion to date would have been greater if not for the historical increases in CO2 and CH4.

https://www.esrl.noaa.gov/csd/assessments/ozone/2014/summary/ch5.html

Ozone is a gas in the atmosphere that protects everything living on the Earth from harmful ultraviolet (UV) rays from the Sun. Without the layer of ozone in the atmosphere, it would be very difficult for anything to survive on the surface. (Think of a very bad sunburn, only much worse!) Plants cannot live and grow in heavy ultraviolet radiation, nor can the plankton that serve as food for most of the ocean life. The ozone layer acts as a shield to absorb the UV rays, and keep them from doing damage at the Earth's surface.

http://earth.rice.edu/mtpe/atmo/atmosphere/topics/ozone/o3.html

edited to add; @Wake, ozone depletion is a real time effect. That means that if we lost ozone today, more ultraviolet radiation would get in today. There is no discussion. CO2 if it's causing warming as believed will take decades to have an effect. Ozone depletion happens immediately.
If we accept for now what scientists say, which is worse, crop failure today or rising sea levels 100 years from now?
This of course is my own opinion. You won't find this mentioned anywhere but here. And myself, I think there is more we need to learn. That's where I'm an outlier.
Edited on 24-02-2019 00:46
24-02-2019 22:12
Spongy Iris
★☆☆☆☆
(62)
I was recently looking at some videos about how to make a home made ozone generator.

The key device you need to do this is a transformer: a device for changing the voltage of an alternating current.

How does ozone get created in the stratosphere?
24-02-2019 23:13
Into the NightProfile picture★★★★★
(13005)
Spongy Iris wrote:
I was recently looking at some videos about how to make a home made ozone generator.

The key device you need to do this is a transformer: a device for changing the voltage of an alternating current.

How does ozone get created in the stratosphere?


Creating ozone is easy. All you have to do is take oxygen, and shove energy into it. Electricity, fires (including the fire in an internal combustion engine), UV sunlight, lightning, anything. Ozone is the 'fresh rain' smell you get from an approaching thunderstorm.

The ozone in the ozone layer is produced by the action of UV-B light on oxygen. It is destroyed again by the action of UV-C light on the ozone. That takes place higher up in the atmosphere. This ozone creation/destruction cycle is called the Chapman cycle. It is what causes a temperature inversion in the stratosphere.

Ozone naturally decomposes. It is not a stable molecule. It will decompose back into oxygen. This takes a few hours. That's good enough to freshen a home.

A UV-B lamp will make ozone. Some ozone generators work this way. The lamp is dangerous. it can cause sunburns and blindness. Another way is to simply blow air past a high voltage wire allowing a small leakage current from that wire to a nearby ground through that air. This is how most home generators work. The voltage used is around 3000 volts, but some systems use up to 50,000 volts.

The project you are proposing uses potentially lethal voltages that can jump considerably large gaps through the air. Be VERY careful what you are doing. This is not a project for a beginner.

I recommend simply going out and purchasing a commercially made unit. You can find them in hardware stores, gadget stores, and many department stores.

Also, be aware, that ozone in somewhat higher concentrations than these appliances produce is VERY toxic. See the materials safety data sheet on ozone (O3). In the low concentrations you are talking about it is safe.


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
Edited on 24-02-2019 23:20
25-02-2019 02:38
Spongy Iris
★☆☆☆☆
(62)
Into the Night wrote:
Spongy Iris wrote:
I was recently looking at some videos about how to make a home made ozone generator.

The key device you need to do this is a transformer: a device for changing the voltage of an alternating current.

How does ozone get created in the stratosphere?


Creating ozone is easy. All you have to do is take oxygen, and shove energy into it. Electricity, fires (including the fire in an internal combustion engine), UV sunlight, lightning, anything. Ozone is the 'fresh rain' smell you get from an approaching thunderstorm.

The ozone in the ozone layer is produced by the action of UV-B light on oxygen. It is destroyed again by the action of UV-C light on the ozone. That takes place higher up in the atmosphere. This ozone creation/destruction cycle is called the Chapman cycle. It is what causes a temperature inversion in the stratosphere.

Ozone naturally decomposes. It is not a stable molecule. It will decompose back into oxygen. This takes a few hours. That's good enough to freshen a home.

A UV-B lamp will make ozone. Some ozone generators work this way. The lamp is dangerous. it can cause sunburns and blindness. Another way is to simply blow air past a high voltage wire allowing a small leakage current from that wire to a nearby ground through that air. This is how most home generators work. The voltage used is around 3000 volts, but some systems use up to 50,000 volts.

The project you are proposing uses potentially lethal voltages that can jump considerably large gaps through the air. Be VERY careful what you are doing. This is not a project for a beginner.

I recommend simply going out and purchasing a commercially made unit. You can find them in hardware stores, gadget stores, and many department stores.

Also, be aware, that ozone in somewhat higher concentrations than these appliances produce is VERY toxic. See the materials safety data sheet on ozone (O3). In the low concentrations you are talking about it is safe.


Why does the UV-B radiation only produce ozone in the specific altitudes of stratosphere?

And at what altitudes does UV-C destroy ozone?
25-02-2019 04:48
HarveyH55
★★★★★
(2189)
I use to create a lot of ozone, back in the early 90s, with a 250 kV Tesla coil. It's basically safe to play with, there is little current coming off the secondary, and it's at a very high frequency. I hate getting any kind of electric shock, but got too close many times. Wasn't so much a shock, more like a creepy, insects crawling up your arm feeling. Bummer was, it was rough on electronics, like computers. Never proven, but I stopped using it indoors, and I had fewer issues.
25-02-2019 07:24
Into the NightProfile picture★★★★★
(13005)
Spongy Iris wrote:
Into the Night wrote:
Spongy Iris wrote:
I was recently looking at some videos about how to make a home made ozone generator.

The key device you need to do this is a transformer: a device for changing the voltage of an alternating current.

How does ozone get created in the stratosphere?


Creating ozone is easy. All you have to do is take oxygen, and shove energy into it. Electricity, fires (including the fire in an internal combustion engine), UV sunlight, lightning, anything. Ozone is the 'fresh rain' smell you get from an approaching thunderstorm.

The ozone in the ozone layer is produced by the action of UV-B light on oxygen. It is destroyed again by the action of UV-C light on the ozone. That takes place higher up in the atmosphere. This ozone creation/destruction cycle is called the Chapman cycle. It is what causes a temperature inversion in the stratosphere.

Ozone naturally decomposes. It is not a stable molecule. It will decompose back into oxygen. This takes a few hours. That's good enough to freshen a home.

A UV-B lamp will make ozone. Some ozone generators work this way. The lamp is dangerous. it can cause sunburns and blindness. Another way is to simply blow air past a high voltage wire allowing a small leakage current from that wire to a nearby ground through that air. This is how most home generators work. The voltage used is around 3000 volts, but some systems use up to 50,000 volts.

The project you are proposing uses potentially lethal voltages that can jump considerably large gaps through the air. Be VERY careful what you are doing. This is not a project for a beginner.

I recommend simply going out and purchasing a commercially made unit. You can find them in hardware stores, gadget stores, and many department stores.

Also, be aware, that ozone in somewhat higher concentrations than these appliances produce is VERY toxic. See the materials safety data sheet on ozone (O3). In the low concentrations you are talking about it is safe.


Why does the UV-B radiation only produce ozone in the specific altitudes of stratosphere?

And at what altitudes does UV-C destroy ozone?


As UV light enters the atmosphere, it starts to become filtered out, first by ozone at altitude, and then at decreasing altitudes denser ozone. As ozone absorbs UV-C light, it becomes less and less intense. None of it reaches the surface (fortunately! UV-C light is extremely dangerous to us!).

UV-B light is not absorbed by ozone, but by the ever increasing density of oxygen as air density increases. It gets lower down, into the tropopause, where most of the ozone is made by UV-B. A little of it does manage to reach the ground.

UV-A light is not particularly absorbed by either oxygen or ozone, but it is absorbed somewhat by the nitrogen in the air. A lot of it manages to reach the ground.

Ozone is primarily created at the tropopause. That's the point where the air is thick enough and the UV-B is strong enough to make the most ozone. This is an endothermic reaction, so the formation of ozone takes thermal energy from the air around it. This is why the tropopause is the coldest part of the atmosphere.

Ozone is primarily destroyed near the top of the stratosphere (the stratopause). This is an exothermic reaction, and is why this part of the stratosphere is considerably warmer than below.

These altitudes are 'chosen' because they happen to be the right combination of the absorbing gas and the density of air. Higher frequencies tend to get absorbed first as energy enters the atmosphere of Earth. X-ray frequencies don't even make it much past the thermosphere.

In general, the lower the frequency of light, the easier it is to penetrate the atmosphere (with a few notable notches at various frequencies for one substance or another, the most famous of which these days are the notches for CO2 absorption.

Different frequencies of light behave differently in the atmosphere. Some radio frequencies, for example, are quickly absorbed after a short distance. Others reach very long distances, bouncing of the ionosphere to get clear around the world. Others travel better through the ground than the air, such as the AM broadcast band.

This is why you see FM broadcast and TV broadcast antennas on as high a mountain as you can get them, while AM broadcast antennas tend to be located in swampy or moist areas.

Radio propagation (the path a radio wave takes to get to a receiver), and light propagation with it, vary with the frequency.

There is a fairly narrow band of frequencies that are almost completely transparent to air, the ionosphere, everything. These bands are reserved for communicating with spacecraft. Above or below those frequencies, no go.


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
25-02-2019 07:28
Into the NightProfile picture★★★★★
(13005)
HarveyH55 wrote:
I use to create a lot of ozone, back in the early 90s, with a 250 kV Tesla coil. It's basically safe to play with, there is little current coming off the secondary, and it's at a very high frequency. I hate getting any kind of electric shock, but got too close many times. Wasn't so much a shock, more like a creepy, insects crawling up your arm feeling. Bummer was, it was rough on electronics, like computers. Never proven, but I stopped using it indoors, and I had fewer issues.


Heh. Not surprising your computers had trouble with that! It's like a high frequency EM wave to the poor thing.

Depending on how the coil and oscillator is constructed, you CAN receive a lethal shock from one. It sounds like the oscillator you used was too weak to cope with the load when you got too close and essentially collapsed until the load was removed. This is good. Nice safety feature.

Yes, a Tesla coil will produce ozone.


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
Edited on 25-02-2019 07:29
26-02-2019 06:59
Spongy Iris
★☆☆☆☆
(62)
Hi Parrot Killer,

It doesn't seem like ozone is what first filters radiation.

From about 55 to 95 miles altitude day time temperatures might drop on average from 1500 degrees Celsius to -90 degrees Celsius.

This area is where there appears to be a great cooling process first filtering out the most deadly of radiation.

But the greatest concentration of ozone is well below this.

Close to 55 miles altitude is where the atmospere is coldest, not where the cloud cover is. Cold enough to make dry ice.
The cloud cover, around 5 to 6 miles probably won't drop past -75 degrees, not quite cold enough to make dry ice from CO2.

The area where ozone concentration is highest, from around 6 to 30 miles, is a warming process, (the temperature inversion you mentioned ) and day time temperatures might get up to 20 degrees on average.

Above the ozone layer, the air is conductive to electricity, where you can move radio waves.

Seems like that conductive air quality continues all the way up to 35000 miles through the Van Allen radiation belt where daytime temperatures might get to 2500 degrees Celsius on average.

It seems like the voltage in the air must decrease just above the ozone layer; the voltage transformation process is what protects us from harmful, or still deadly, electrical radiation, not ozone. Ozone is created as voltage is changed from high to low. The voltage transformation causes the warming, or temperature inversion.

Ozone prevents mold and mildew build up: is for pushing back clouds from reaching the frigid band around 55 to 95 miles, until they become saturated and fall down as rain, snow, or hail.

Good night,
Spongy Iris
Edited on 26-02-2019 07:00
26-02-2019 12:16
Into the NightProfile picture★★★★★
(13005)
Spongy Iris wrote:
Hi Parrot Killer,

It doesn't seem like ozone is what first filters radiation.

Never said it was. It does, however, filter out UV-C and most UV-B light.
Spongy Iris wrote:
From about 55 to 95 miles altitude day time temperatures might drop on average from 1500 degrees Celsius to -90 degrees Celsius.

There is no atmosphere at 95 miles. No part of the atmosphere reaches 1500 degC. The mesosphere can drop to -90 deg C though.
Spongy Iris wrote:
This area is where there appears to be a great cooling process first filtering out the most deadly of radiation.
You are referring to the thermosphere, which filters out X-rays and some of the effects of the solar wind (the remainder of that is deflected away by Earth's magnetic field.
Spongy Iris wrote:
But the greatest concentration of ozone is well below this.
Yes. Ozone is in the atmosphere.
Spongy Iris wrote:
Close to 55 miles altitude is where the atmospere is coldest, not where the cloud cover is. Cold enough to make dry ice.
The cloud cover, around 5 to 6 miles probably won't drop past -75 degrees, not quite cold enough to make dry ice from CO2.
You are correct, comparing the mesopause to the tropopause. There is barely an atmosphere there at all however, at the mesopause.
Spongy Iris wrote:
The area where ozone concentration is highest, from around 6 to 30 miles, is a warming process, (the temperature inversion you mentioned ) and day time temperatures might get up to 20 degrees on average.
More like 0 degC, at the stratopause.
Spongy Iris wrote:
Above the ozone layer, the air is conductive to electricity, where you can move radio waves.

WRONG! Radio waves are light. They do not require conductive anything. The only difference between radio and what we normally call light is frequency. Radio is light.
Spongy Iris wrote:
Seems like that conductive air quality continues all the way up to 35000 miles through the Van Allen radiation belt where daytime temperatures might get to 2500 degrees Celsius on average.
There is no atmosphere at 35000 miles. There is no appreciable mass at 35000 miles, other than spacecraft. No spacecraft experiences 2500 deg C on their daytime side.That would destroy the spacecraft!
Spongy Iris wrote:
It seems like the voltage in the air must decrease just above the ozone layer;
There is no 'voltage in the air'. The air is neutral.
Spongy Iris wrote:
the voltage transformation process is what protects us from harmful, or still deadly, electrical radiation, not ozone.
There is no such thing as 'electrical radiation'. There is no 'voltage transformation process'.
Spongy Iris wrote:
Ozone is created as voltage is changed from high to low.
WRONG! Ozone is created in the atmosphere by the action of UV-B light on oxygen.
Spongy Iris wrote:
The voltage transformation causes the warming, or temperature inversion.
There is no such thing as a 'voltage transformation' in the atmosphere.
Spongy Iris wrote:
Ozone prevents mold and mildew build up:
That it does. That's not what it does in the atmosphere at the ozone layer though. Molds and mildews are not a problem at that altitude.
Spongy Iris wrote:
is for pushing back clouds
WRONG! Ozone does not push on clouds.
Spongy Iris wrote:
from reaching the frigid band around 55 to 95 miles,
WRONG! There are no clouds in the thermosphere. There is no atmosphere at all at 95 miles. Clouds enter the stratosphere from the troposphere, or may even form in the stratosphere. Ozone doesn't push on clouds at all.
Spongy Iris wrote:
until they become saturated and fall down as rain, snow, or hail.

A cloud is not squeezed by ozone either. Not all clouds produce any precipitation 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
RE: Good Evening Parrot Killer27-02-2019 10:39
Spongy Iris
★☆☆☆☆
(62)
I'll be pooping over your party promptly.

UV is a form of electro magnetic radiation.

As you can search in Wikipedia...

"The thermosphere begins at 50 miles above sea level. Thermospheric temperatures increase with altitude due to... highly energetic solar radiation.

Temperatures are highly dependent on solar activity and can rise to 1700 degrees C or more.

Beginning 375 miles above sea level... can reach 2500 degrees C"

Even a NASA apologist will acknowledge radiation causes these high temperatures. But a NASA apologist will assert, because there is so few N and O molecules at these heights, no heat can reach an object like a NASA satellite in orbit.

It is the age old question for freshmen astrophysics students. If there's no molecules to feel the heat, is it even hot???

I don't like that light is defined as electro magnetic radiation.

You can make a magnetic field by passing an electric current through a wire wrapped around an iron object. Perhaps you are correct the magnetic field around our iron planet deflects the x rays (or other ultra high frequency radiation) that doesn't all get filtered at the bottom of the thermosphere. Although there may not be voltage in the air, it doesn't seem it's possible to create a magnetic field around earth, without wrapping earth in wires.

Makes you wonder if UV radiation actually starts from the wires around Earth... Although the heat feels exactly lined up with the Sun.

It sounds like UV-B is in the middle altitude, UV-C above, and UV-A below.

The reason I don't like to say things like X rays are light, is because it seems obvious, the sun doesn't make x rays, x rays make the sun... Your light bulb doesn't power your electricity, electricity powers your light bulb.

Finally, ozone is a great oxidizer, and this increases mass. Therefore it's role in increasing cloud mass to make rain is essential to the water cycle. Plus it purifies the water.

We haven't really debated yet what the cooling mechanisms are at the bottom of the thermosphere, around 50 to100 miles, or 60 to 90 miles. Any thoughts?
27-02-2019 20:22
Into the NightProfile picture★★★★★
(13005)
Spongy Iris wrote:
I'll be pooping over your party promptly.

Is this your goal in life?
Spongy Iris wrote:
UV is a form of electro magnetic radiation.
Not a form of. It IS electromagnetic radiation.

Spongy Iris wrote:
As you can search in Wikipedia...

"The thermosphere begins at 50 miles above sea level. Thermospheric temperatures increase with altitude due to... highly energetic solar radiation.

Wikipedia is not a valid source, but this is correct.
Spongy Iris wrote:
Temperatures are highly dependent on solar activity and can rise to 1700 degrees C or more.

Nope. No part of the atmosphere is as hot as 1700 deg C.
Spongy Iris wrote:
Beginning 375 miles above sea level... can reach 2500 degrees C"

There is no atmosphere at 375 miles up.
Spongy Iris wrote:
Even a NASA apologist will acknowledge radiation causes these high temperatures.

NASA is no longer a valid source these days either. They make too much stuff up.
Spongy Iris wrote:
But a NASA apologist will assert, because there is so few N and O molecules at these heights, no heat can reach an object like a NASA satellite in orbit.

He is wrong. Satellites in orbit are heated by the Sun, same as Earth. Sunlit portions of a typical satellite skin temperature reaches 250 deg F (about 120 deg C).
Spongy Iris wrote:
It is the age old question for freshmen astrophysics students. If there's no molecules to feel the heat, is it even hot???

Heat isn't something you feel. Satellites have molecules. They are made of something. Yes, they get hot (and cold).
Spongy Iris wrote:
I don't like that light is defined as electro magnetic radiation.

Too bad. It is.
Spongy Iris wrote:
You can make a magnetic field by passing an electric current through a wire wrapped around an iron object.

A magnetic field is not electromagnetic radiation. They are different things. Also, you don't need wires to make a magnet. Natural magnets are found everywhere. They are called lodestones. We can also make permanent magnets. They are often sold as toys.
Spongy Iris wrote:
Perhaps you are correct the magnetic field around our iron planet deflects the x rays (or other ultra high frequency radiation) that doesn't all get filtered at the bottom of the thermosphere.

I am.
Spongy Iris wrote:
Although there may not be voltage in the air, it doesn't seem it's possible to create a magnetic field around earth, without wrapping earth in wires.

Earth is like a permanent magnet. It needs no wires. Magnetic fields do not require wires. Earth has a magnetic field because of convection activity in it's molten core.
Spongy Iris wrote:
Makes you wonder if UV radiation actually starts from the wires around Earth...

No. It comes from the Sun.
Spongy Iris wrote:
Although the heat feels exactly lined up with the Sun.

UV is not heat. It does not cause anything to warm directly.
Spongy Iris wrote:
It sounds like UV-B is in the middle altitude, UV-C above, and UV-A below.

No. All three bands of UV enter the atmosphere. Higher frequency stuff gets progressively filtered out as it descends through the thickening atmosphere. Ozone gets rid of all the UV-C, and oxygen gets rid of most of the UV-B. UV-A and some UV-B make it all the way to the surface.
Spongy Iris wrote:
The reason I don't like to say things like X rays are light, is because it seems obvious, the sun doesn't make x rays, x rays make the sun...

WRONG! X rays are light (electromagnetic radiation) just like any other color light. They are a very high frequency, higher than UV light.
Spongy Iris wrote:
Your light bulb doesn't power your electricity, electricity powers your light bulb.

The Sun isn't a light bulb. It's a fusion reactor.
Spongy Iris wrote:
Finally, ozone is a great oxidizer, and this increases mass.

There is no 'best' oxidizer. Oxidizers do not increase mass.
Spongy Iris wrote:
Therefore it's role in increasing cloud mass

It doesn't increase the mass of clouds. It doesn't even cause clouds. It does not cause a cloud to rain. Water and temperature differences do that.
Spongy Iris wrote:
to make rain is essential to the water cycle.

Snow or rain is part of the water cycle, yes.
Spongy Iris wrote:
Plus it purifies the water.

WRONG! Evaporation purifies the water, not the rain from a cloud. Clouds form from the water vapor in the air. Clouds are all fresh water.
Spongy Iris wrote:
We haven't really debated yet what the cooling mechanisms are at the bottom of the thermosphere, around 50 to100 miles, or 60 to 90 miles. Any thoughts?

Reduction of energy with altitude, just like the troposphere. Air becomes thinner with altitude. The stratosphere has a temperature inversion, but the energy density is still going down. Same with the temperature inversion in the thermosphere.


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
28-02-2019 09:27
Spongy Iris
★☆☆☆☆
(62)
Hey into the night, Tsk tsk.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ISinAkvXZgc&app=desktop

There are an abundance of sources, who cite temperatures can go from -90 C to 1700 C, from 50 to 100 miles above sea level, and can get to 2500 C by 375 miles above sea level.

Are they all lying? Or colluding?

"If you can get charges to oscillate back and forth, you've got a very predictable acceleration that repeats itself after a set period of time. This produces radiation that repeats itself too, giving it a characteristic frequency.

Certain circuit components when put together will cause currents to 'ring' at a characteristic frequency, much like a bell when struck. An LC circuit, for example, consisting of an inductor (a glorified coil of wire) and a capacitor (a glorified pair of separated metal plates) can produce oscillating currents at a fixed frequency.

So all you've got to do is put together a capacitor with an inductor, place a potential difference across the circuit, and you've got your oscillating currents or charges. Pump the current into an antenna, which is basically a conductor of currents that has been designed to get as much radiation as possible from the oscillating charges, and you've got your electromagnetic waves of a certain frequency. If you want to change the frequency, all you've got to do in principle is to change the capacitance or inductance of your capacitor and inductor respectively."

Please note the need for stringing together metallic components to create this electromagnetic radiation.

This electromagnetic radiation can last as long there are circuits and charge.

An electro magnetic pulse from a nuclear explosion is brief. The idea that a nuclear explosion could last for billions of years, creating oscillating electromagnetic pulses alongside this everlasting explosion, is a supernatural theory. Are you asserting this supernatural theory as a fact?

Futhermore, if your source of electromagnetic radiation is the ball of the Sun, why does its angle of incidence make for such an extreme difference in temperatures? Like the equator versus the north pole. Will you assert that the MINOR difference in the amount of atmosphere that the electromagnetic radiation must pass through is enough to account for the MAJOR difference in temperature between the equator and the north pole?

Would you consider the EMR is oscillating more frequently at points on earth where the sun is closer to a right angle and less frequently at points on earth where the sun is further from a right angle? You can certainly feel less heat from the sun at 8:00 a.m. and more heat from the sun at 12:00 p.m.

Finally, back to ozone, an example of an oxidation reaction that results in a gain of mass is a rusting nail Isn't water mixing with ozone an oxidation reaction too?
28-02-2019 19:42
Into the NightProfile picture★★★★★
(13005)
Spongy Iris wrote:
Hey into the night, Tsk tsk.

There are an abundance of sources, who cite temperatures can go from -90 C to 1700 C, from 50 to 100 miles above sea level, and can get to 2500 C by 375 miles above sea level.

So what? Nowhere in the atmosphere doesn't get anywhere near that hot, and it doesn't go up to 100 miles, much less 375 miles.
Spongy Iris wrote:
Are they all lying? Or colluding?
I don't know what you are using for sources, but I would say, offhand, yes.
Spongy Iris wrote:
"If you can get charges to oscillate back and forth, you've got a very predictable acceleration that repeats itself after a set period of time.
Nope. You've got light. Oscillation is not acceleration, but you have to use a force to get a mass to change direction. For pendulums, that force is gravity. For springs and LC circuits, that force is electrical (either electrostatic or magnetic). You can't start or maintain an oscillation without putting continuous energy into it (at the right time!).
Spongy Iris wrote:
This produces radiation that repeats itself too, giving it a characteristic frequency.

Oscillation by itself is not a frequency. The frequency of an oscillation is set by the material or components.
Spongy Iris wrote:
Certain circuit components when put together will cause currents to 'ring' at a characteristic frequency, much like a bell when struck.
BUT you have to 'strike' it, like any 'bell'. This is what the transistor is for, to be the hammer.
Spongy Iris wrote:
An LC circuit, for example, consisting of an inductor (a glorified coil of wire) and a capacitor (a glorified pair of separated metal plates)
You glorify coils of wire and metal plates??
Spongy Iris wrote:
can produce oscillating currents at a fixed frequency.
Not by themselves. They need energy to start and maintain an oscillation.
Spongy Iris wrote:
So all you've got to do is put together a capacitor with an inductor, place a potential difference across the circuit, and you've got your oscillating currents or charges.
Pump the current into an antenna, which is basically a conductor of currents that has been designed to get as much radiation as possible from the oscillating charges, and you've got your electromagnetic waves of a certain frequency. If you want to change the frequency, all you've got to do in principle is to change the capacitance or inductance of your capacitor and inductor respectively."

Yes, I know how to build a radio. I've built quite a few of them, after all.
Spongy Iris wrote:
Please note the need for stringing together metallic components to create this electromagnetic radiation.

You don't need a radio or electronics at all to get light. Indeed, everything that has a temperature above absolute zero emits light. Think of piece of wood that is red hot. It is an ember glowing in a fire. There is no electronics there! There isn't even any metal! The fire itself puts out light. No metal or electronics necessary.
Spongy Iris wrote:
An electro magnetic pulse from a nuclear explosion is brief.
True.
Spongy Iris wrote:
The idea that a nuclear explosion could last for billions of years, creating oscillating electromagnetic pulses alongside this everlasting explosion, is a supernatural theory.

The Sun isn't exploding. It's just a fusion reactor. There is nothing supernatural about it.
Spongy Iris wrote:
Are you asserting this supernatural theory as a fact?
Learn what 'fact' means. A 'fact' is not a Universal Truth. I am asserting that the Sun is not exploding, it produces light, and that there is nothing supernatural about it.
Spongy Iris wrote:
Futhermore, if your source of electromagnetic radiation is the ball of the Sun, why does its angle of incidence make for such an extreme difference in temperatures?
Like the equator versus the north pole.

Light is also particles as well as waves. If you angle anything to a stream of particles (or waves), less energy per square foot will strike that anything. That's why it easier for a boat to go through the water endwise instead of sideways. Light is no different than the water for this example.
Spongy Iris wrote:
Will you assert that the MINOR difference in the amount of atmosphere that the electromagnetic radiation must pass through is enough to account for the MAJOR difference in temperature between the equator and the north pole?

That is also a factor, but the major one is simply the angle of incidence itself.
Spongy Iris wrote:
Would you consider the EMR is oscillating more frequently at points on earth where the sun is closer to a right angle and less frequently at points on earth where the sun is further from a right angle?
You can certainly feel less heat from the sun at 8:00 a.m. and more heat from the sun at 12:00 p.m.
Frequency doesn't change. The intensity does, though.
Spongy Iris wrote:
Finally, back to ozone, an example of an oxidation reaction that results in a gain of mass is a rusting nail
The mass gained is simply the weight of oxygen combining with the weight of the iron in the nail.
Spongy Iris wrote:
Isn't water mixing with ozone an oxidation reaction too?
Water is not required nor part of an ozone reaction. Ozone has more mass than oxygen.


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
03-03-2019 19:48
Spongy Iris
★☆☆☆☆
(62)
Into the Night,

You said NOWHERE in the atmosphere DOESN'T get anywhere near that hot. That literally means somewhere in the atmosphere does get near that hot.

Let's say close to 60 to 90 miles above sea level. There is atmosphere there, yes? All oxygen. And there, sources like NASA and Wikipedia say temperatures can change from -90 C to 1700 C.

You said there's no atmosphere at 375 miles, but so what? I was talking about temperature at an altitude caused by radiation.

It seems you are denying or deflecting these certain facts because they open a can of worms for you.

For example, how can just a thin layer of oxygen decrease temperatures from 1700 C to -90 C from 90 to 60 miles altitude? Is the oxygen up there different than the oxygen down here? If so, how so?

In fact, it seems this 60 to 90 mile region, the cooling band, is what causes hot air to rise, because hot air is attracted to this cold band.

It gets colder and colder as air rises from 0 to 60 miles, except where ozone is produced. Around 30 miles it gets briefly warmer.

If the energy from sunlight is emanating solely from from the ball of the Sun, this doesn't explain the temperature inversion around the ozone layer.

So we need a new theory. At 40 miles altitude there becomes more EMR. So there must be a charge, creating a unique oscillation, that is carried by components that are somehow suspended in that region, and not a charge emanating from the ball of the Sun 93000000 miles away.

Building on this electric Universe theory, whatever these components are, suspended in Space, appear to exist all through the Van Allen radiation belts, up to 35000 miles altitude; these are the conduits to carry the charge that lights the Sun and Moon.

The cause of the Universal charge, I think is Gravity: winds show gravity. There is greater force from above, causing the winds from west to east. There is lesser force from below causing the winds from east to west. Gravity I think is crunched together centrifugal forces.

You could not create light from a fire in Space, because, as you have mentioned many times, there is no atmosphere in Space!

You can see such in this video of a rocket launched. After it gets to an altitude where the atmosphere is thin, it stops making flames, but still keeps rocketing upward. It eventually stops rocketing upward very abruptly.

https://rocketry.wordpress.com/2014/08/18/amateur-rocket-team-launches-rocket-to-73-1-miles/amp/

You can clearly see the light of camp fire from 100 yards away. But it's heat will not reach that far in the least.

Would the heat from nuclear fusion reactor, that is the size of a camp fire, be able to reach you, if you are standing 100 yards away from it?

I have no idea, because nuclear fusion is just theoretical. Perhaps it would obliterate you.

The future of energy! And it always will be!

Finally, I have theorized that when ozone meets clouds, the clouds gain mass. How else would you explain why clouds can't rise past the ozone layer?

Also evaporation purifies the water and air on the ground. If you follow the AQI, it's great right after a rain storm, because the evaporation lifts away the pollutants. But what happens to the pollutants that get lifted up? Have you ever heard of ozone purified water?
03-03-2019 23:09
Into the NightProfile picture★★★★★
(13005)
Spongy Iris wrote:
Into the Night,

You said NOWHERE in the atmosphere DOESN'T get anywhere near that hot. That literally means somewhere in the atmosphere does get near that hot.

No, I said nowhere in the atmosphere gets that hot.
Spongy Iris wrote:
Let's say close to 60 to 90 miles above sea level.

Okay.
Spongy Iris wrote:
There is atmosphere there, yes?

Part of it.
Spongy Iris wrote:
All oxygen.

No. It's a mix of gases, just like at the surface.
Spongy Iris wrote:
And there, sources like NASA and Wikipedia say temperatures can change from -90 C to 1700 C.

Nowhere in the atmosphere gets anywhere near that hot.
Spongy Iris wrote:
You said there's no atmosphere at 375 miles, but so what? I was talking about temperature at an altitude caused by radiation.

Temperature requires mass, dude. Radiation is not temperature.
Spongy Iris wrote:
It seems you are denying or deflecting these certain facts because they open a can of worms for you.

No, because you don't seem to know ANY physics.
Spongy Iris wrote:
For example, how can just a thin layer of oxygen decrease temperatures from 1700 C to -90 C from 90 to 60 miles altitude?

It doesn't.
Spongy Iris wrote:
Is the oxygen up there different than the oxygen down here? If so, how so?

No.
Spongy Iris wrote:
In fact, it seems this 60 to 90 mile region, the cooling band, is what causes hot air to rise, because hot air is attracted to this cold band.

WRONG. Hot air rises because it has less molecules per cubic foot then cold air does. It weighs less per cubic foot.
Spongy Iris wrote:
It gets colder and colder as air rises from 0 to 60 miles,

WRONG. The tropopause is around 6-7 miles up. Air becomes warmer with altitude starting there. Rising air in the troposphere generally stops somewhat above this point.
Spongy Iris wrote:
except where ozone is produced. Around 30 miles it gets briefly warmer.

6-7 miles, dude.
Spongy Iris wrote:
If the energy from sunlight is emanating solely from from the ball of the Sun,

That's why they call it 'sunlight'.
Spongy Iris wrote:
this doesn't explain the temperature inversion around the ozone layer.

No, it doesn't. The Chapman cycle does, though. Go read up on it.
Spongy Iris wrote:
So we need a new theory.

We have one. The Chapman cycle. It has not yet been falsified.
Spongy Iris wrote:
At 40 miles altitude there becomes more EMR. So there must be a charge,

Electromagnetic radiation is not electricity. There is no 'charge' in light.
Spongy Iris wrote:
creating a unique oscillation,

There is no resonance in light itself either.
Spongy Iris wrote:
that is carried by components that are somehow suspended in that region,

There are no components. There is nothing. Electromagnetic energy requires no medium of any kind. See the Michelson-Morley experiment.
Spongy Iris wrote:
and not a charge emanating from the ball of the Sun 93000000 miles away.

Electromagnetic energy is not electricity. There is no charge.
Spongy Iris wrote:
Building on this electric Universe theory, whatever these components are, suspended in Space, appear to exist all through the Van Allen radiation belts, up to 35000 miles altitude; these are the conduits to carry the charge that lights the Sun and Moon.

No conduits. Nothing. None are needed.
Spongy Iris wrote:
The cause of the Universal charge, I think is Gravity:

WRONG. Electromagnetic energy has nothing to do with gravity.
Spongy Iris wrote:
winds show gravity.

No, they don't.
Spongy Iris wrote:
There is greater force from above, causing the winds from west to east.

Winds blow in all directions at altitude.
Spongy Iris wrote:
There is lesser force from below causing the winds from east to west.

Winds blow in all directions at the surface.
Spongy Iris wrote:
Gravity I think is crunched together centrifugal forces.

WRONG. Gravity has nothing to do with centrifugal force. See Newton's laws of motion.
Spongy Iris wrote:
You could not create light from a fire in Space,

Yes you can!
Spongy Iris wrote:
because, as you have mentioned many times, there is no atmosphere in Space!

Don't need one! All you need is a fuel, a high enough temperature, and an oxidizer. That oxidizer doesn't have to be gaseous oxygen. It can be something like potassium nitrate or ammonium perchlorate.
Spongy Iris wrote:
You can see such in this video of a rocket launched. After it gets to an altitude where the atmosphere is thin, it stops making flames, but still keeps rocketing upward.
It eventually stops rocketing upward very abruptly.
https://rocketry.wordpress.com/2014/08/18/amateur-rocket-team-launches-rocket-to-73-1-miles/amp/

The rocket stopped making flames because it ran out of fuel. It is coasting upward. It is not abrupt. See Newton's laws of motion.
Spongy Iris wrote:
You can clearly see the light of camp fire from 100 yards away. But it's heat will not reach that far in the least.

Yes it does. Small it is, it is heat. It actually does increase the temperature of an object even 100 yards away. Insignificantly, perhaps, but it's still greater than zero. See the Kepler Inverse Square law for light.

Light by itself is not heat. It is only heat if it causes a temperature increase due to its absorption.
Spongy Iris wrote:
Would the heat from nuclear fusion reactor, that is the size of a camp fire, be able to reach you, if you are standing 100 yards away from it?

Yes.
Spongy Iris wrote:
I have no idea, because nuclear fusion is just theoretical.

WRONG. It is real. Every star is a nuclear fusion reactor. So is the Sun.
Spongy Iris wrote:
Perhaps it would obliterate you.

Obviously not.
Spongy Iris wrote:
The future of energy! And it always will be!

Okay. Build one.
Spongy Iris wrote:
Finally, I have theorized that when ozone meets clouds, the clouds gain mass.

WRONG. Clouds are not affected by ozone.
Spongy Iris wrote:
How else would you explain why clouds can't rise past the ozone layer?

They do. They rise past the tropopause where ozone begins to form from natural sunlight. They even form there.
Spongy Iris wrote:
Also evaporation purifies the water and air on the ground.

Air doesn't evaporate. It's already gaseous.
Spongy Iris wrote:
If you follow the AQI, it's great right after a rain storm, because the evaporation lifts away the pollutants.

WRONG. The rain has washed stuff out of the air. The dust is returned to the ground from whence it came.
Spongy Iris wrote:
But what happens to the pollutants that get lifted up?

They weren't lifted up. They're on the ground.
Spongy Iris wrote:
Have you ever heard of ozone purified water?

Sure. I purify my hot tub water with ozone. Ozone is great at killing bacteria. Ozone won't desalinate water though. You are making a compositional error fallacy.

You need to study physics. In this post alone, you denied Newton's laws of motion, Newton's law of gravitational attraction, Kepler's inverse square law for light (and any other point source), the Michelson-Morley experiment, most of Faraday's work, most of Gilbert's work, made quite a few fallacies, and most of chemistry (especially pyrochemistry); just in this post alone.


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
Edited on 03-03-2019 23:13




Join the debate Trump's UN nominee Kelly Craft says she believes 'both sides' of climate change science:

Remember me

Related content
ThreadsRepliesLast post
There is still no Global Warming science.34122-07-2020 19:51
Etymology of Science5908-02-2020 12:09
Western Science - is it declining?1124-12-2019 12:43
About the damage that Obama did to science.18417-12-2019 05:36
Argument against AGW science314-08-2019 20:51
▲ 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