Remember me
▼ Content

Venus is hotter than Mercury?!?



Page 4 of 28<<<23456>>>
19-07-2019 23:03
tmiddlesProfile picture★★★★★
(3374)
HarveyH55 wrote:
But, did Venus ever support life, or could it,


There is some theory that it was once habitable:
Life on Venus?

If conditions were not so extreme in the distant past and as the article says:
"And life didn't necessarily have to arise on Venus to thrive there, Grinspoon added: The planet has gobbled up many tons of Earth rocks that were blasted into space by violent impacts over the past 4.5 billion years, "

Interesting idea
19-07-2019 23:23
IBdaMannProfile picture★★★★★
(7463)
tmiddles wrote:There is some theory that it was once habitable:
Life on Venus?

An article for the gullible based on a computer program that was programmed to say Venus was once habitable.

If a human says "In my opinion, Venus was habitable!" then he gets mocked so instead he codes a program to have a computer say it and suddenly the gullible, such as tmiddles, think "Wow, the computer said so. It must be true! ... because I read about it on the internet, therefore it must be true! Let me share the good news with Climate-Debate so others may rejoice as well!"


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
20-07-2019 04:35
HarveyH55
★★★★★
(2399)
tmiddles wrote:
HarveyH55 wrote:
But, did Venus ever support life, or could it,


There is some theory that it was once habitable:
Life on Venus?

If conditions were not so extreme in the distant past and as the article says:
"And life didn't necessarily have to arise on Venus to thrive there, Grinspoon added: The planet has gobbled up many tons of Earth rocks that were blasted into space by violent impacts over the past 4.5 billion years, "

Interesting idea


It's still just a fantasy, we weren't even a species that far back, from the consensus of other peoples dreams. Good news, it didn't have anything to do with man-made CO2, or another kind of CO2. Also, CO2 isn't going to destroy this planet, just space rocks. But we do know, that removing a lot of CO2 from the atmosphere will hurt plant growth, reduce the amount of available food, and starve much of the life on this planet. Fortunately though, the species that robbed the planet of an essential component will die off quickly, CO2 will recover, life goes on, for many of the other critters that survived.
20-07-2019 06:36
tmiddlesProfile picture★★★★★
(3374)
HarveyH55 wrote:
It's still just a fantasy, we weren't even a species that far back, ...man-made CO2,...the species that robbed the planet of an essential component will die off quickly, CO2 will recover, life goes on, for many of the other critters that survived.


Do you mean that we might succeed in removing CO2 from the atmosphere and kill off plants? That would be ironic.

We still don't know what caused previous mass extinctions aside from knowing a Prius wasn't the answer. There's a great Robot Chicken sketch where dinasours try to build a space ship to intercept the meteor that will kill them. It's made of leaves and rocks but manages to take off before exploding.

That Venus was at one point able to sustain life and possibly did might be something there is evidence off yet to be found. Maybe a future Venus lander will be able to travel and dig.
20-07-2019 09:29
HarveyH55
★★★★★
(2399)
tmiddles wrote:
HarveyH55 wrote:
It's still just a fantasy, we weren't even a species that far back, ...man-made CO2,...the species that robbed the planet of an essential component will die off quickly, CO2 will recover, life goes on, for many of the other critters that survived.


Do you mean that we might succeed in removing CO2 from the atmosphere and kill off plants? That would be ironic.

We still don't know what caused previous mass extinctions aside from knowing a Prius wasn't the answer. There's a great Robot Chicken sketch where dinasours try to build a space ship to intercept the meteor that will kill them. It's made of leaves and rocks but manages to take off before exploding.

That Venus was at one point able to sustain life and possibly did might be something there is evidence off yet to be found. Maybe a future Venus lander will be able to travel and dig.


If you've ever read any of the IPCC assessment reports, there are parts that deal with reducing and eliminating CO2 production, there is on section devoted to removing CO2 that's already in the atmosphere, and what to do with it, such as storage, or converting it. The have an 'artificial' leaf that looks promising... Plants do much better with a lot more CO2, than is currently available. The IPCC is calling for reducing what we had a year or so ago, to less than half. So, yeah, I think plants will suffer, so will everything else, for lack of food. The CO2 graphs they provide, are manipulated, so it's hard to really see something, that should show up every year. After food crops are planted, and start growing well, they ought to be sucking a lot of CO2, and there should be natural dip in readings every year. After the harvest, there should be a sharp rise, since dead plants aren't pulling CO2 out anymore. Harvest time comes about the same time of year, every year, for which ever crop, regardless of location. Hundreds, of thousands of acres, stripped, daily during the harvest. But then again, the CO2 monitoring stations are mostly in industrial areas, on near volcanoes, to better monitor CO2 production, not reduction...
20-07-2019 10:41
tmiddlesProfile picture★★★★★
(3374)
HarveyH55 wrote: After food crops are planted, and start growing well, they ought to be sucking a lot of CO2, and there should be natural dip in readings every year.


Wow this is really interesting! I had no idea
co2-is-making-earth-greener

In the last 35 year's "The greening represents an increase in leaves on plants and trees equivalent in area to two times the continental United States."
Natural feedback loop.

I don't think food crops are most plants though.
Edited on 20-07-2019 10:42
20-07-2019 17:05
HarveyH55
★★★★★
(2399)
Yeah, there is natural, seasonal greening, after winter passes. But farming should make some very abrupt and noticeable changes in the measured CO2 levels. Farms fertilize and irrigate, those plants do considerably better, than wild plants. Some farms can squeeze out more than one crop, in the same field, during the year, so they rush things best they can. Wild plants have a great range of tolerance to cold, some hang on to their leaves, until a hard freeze. Some only need a light frost, or start to go dormant for the winter before then. Food crops are selected to tolerate as much cold as they can, early freeze can ruin a crop.

Anyway, just seemed like something we should see in the data, since there is less CO2 being pulled out, and likely more CO2 produced during winter months. Summer heat can be uncomfortable, AC is a nice thing, but in the winter, cold is deadly. There is little to know option to creating heat, to beat the could. Electricity, gas, or wood, all create more CO2 to produce the needed heating in homes, but there is much less plant activity, to pull much CO2 out. There should be some normal and expected, large spikes and dips on the graphs every year. I know that home CO2 monitors don't stay very stable, unless programmed with long intervals between readings, very bouncy. The graphs I've seen from the IPCC are smooth, and don't show a lot of variation. Sort of why I suspect something ain't quite right. When you look for raw data, or a list of monitoring stations, to hopefully find some raw data, it's tough. Mostly, you get the one station on Mauna Loa, a volcano.
20-07-2019 19:36
Into the NightProfile picture★★★★★
(13292)
tmiddles wrote:
HarveyH55 wrote:
It's still just a fantasy, we weren't even a species that far back, ...man-made CO2,...the species that robbed the planet of an essential component will die off quickly, CO2 will recover, life goes on, for many of the other critters that survived.


Do you mean that we might succeed in removing CO2 from the atmosphere and kill off plants? That would be ironic.

We still don't know what caused previous mass extinctions aside from knowing a Prius wasn't the answer. There's a great Robot Chicken sketch where dinasours try to build a space ship to intercept the meteor that will kill them. It's made of leaves and rocks but manages to take off before exploding.

That Venus was at one point able to sustain life and possibly did might be something there is evidence off yet to be found. Maybe a future Venus lander will be able to travel and dig.


Not possible. There is insufficient hydrogen on Venus to have ever been anything like Earth. It has never been able to support life.

...unless you can show that someone sucked most of the hydrogen out of the atmosphere?

Oh, and don't forget it's damn hot there and always has been.


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 20-07-2019 19:38
20-07-2019 19:40
Into the NightProfile picture★★★★★
(13292)
tmiddles wrote:
HarveyH55 wrote: After food crops are planted, and start growing well, they ought to be sucking a lot of CO2, and there should be natural dip in readings every year.


Wow this is really interesting! I had no idea
co2-is-making-earth-greener

In the last 35 year's "The greening represents an increase in leaves on plants and trees equivalent in area to two times the continental United States."
Natural feedback loop.

I don't think food crops are most plants though.


HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!

You just discarded a NASA report!

Is NASA your God or is it not?


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 20-07-2019 19:41
20-07-2019 23:03
IBdaMannProfile picture★★★★★
(7463)
Into the Night wrote:Is NASA your God or is it not?

Nope, NASA (pbuh) is merely a prophet to be obeyed, nothing more.


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
20-07-2019 23:26
tmiddlesProfile picture★★★★★
(3374)
HarveyH55 wrote: There should be some normal and expected, large spikes and dips on the graphs every year.


The atmosphere being so massive I'd think it would take some time for changes to show up. Could be the cycles within a year are just blended together because it takes over a year for a change to fully mix in.

But my assumption seems to be wrong as there is this small change in CO2 ppm, a swing of 3:
"During the spring, when plants begin growing again, concentrations drop. It is as if the Earth is breathing."
nada-carbon-cycle


I'm guessing it's that the northern hemisphere has more land sO that spring dominates. But it's just a few ppm.
21-07-2019 00:46
James___
★★★★★
(3169)
Into the Night wrote:
tmiddles wrote:
HarveyH55 wrote: After food crops are planted, and start growing well, they ought to be sucking a lot of CO2, and there should be natural dip in readings every year.


Wow this is really interesting! I had no idea
co2-is-making-earth-greener

In the last 35 year's "The greening represents an increase in leaves on plants and trees equivalent in area to two times the continental United States."
Natural feedback loop.

I don't think food crops are most plants though.


HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!

You just discarded a NASA report!

Is NASA your God or is it not?


Your problem is that you believe in nothing, ie., Into the Night is into the void.
21-07-2019 04:46
tmiddlesProfile picture★★★★★
(3374)
James___ wrote:


James Harvey brought ups some very interesting stuff let's talk about that.

The earth is breathing!

No wait:

OUR MOTHER EARTH IS BREATHING

ha ha

it is cool though. I'm going to go watch Ferngully again.
21-07-2019 05:30
IBdaMannProfile picture★★★★★
(7463)
tmiddles wrote:
James___ wrote:
The earth is breathing!

No wait: OUR MOTHER EARTH IS BREATHING


I thought that wind was just the Climate goddess breathing.


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
21-07-2019 05:43
James___
★★★★★
(3169)
IBdaMann wrote:
tmiddles wrote:
James___ wrote:
The earth is breathing!

No wait: OUR MOTHER EARTH IS BREATHING


I thought that wind was just the Climate goddess breathing.



You guys don't get it. I think Gaia might be the proper term.
Just not sure how to explain it to you that our lives are dependent on Gaia. It's a symbiotic relationship.
21-07-2019 06:34
IBdaMannProfile picture★★★★★
(7463)
James___ wrote: You guys don't get it. I think Gaia might be the proper term.
Just not sure how to explain it to you that our lives are dependent on Gaia. It's a symbiotic relationship.


James__, thanks to you The MANUAL has been updated as follows in order to ensure its complete accuracy:

Climate: proper noun
The heroine of the Global Warming mythology, Climate is the Democratic People's Goddess. Born out of the Scientific Consensus, She oversees the central planning and administration of all weather, ecosystems, and local climates across the globe, as well as all interactions thereof. Climate is responsible for the care and well-being of all life on earth. In other faiths She is called Gaia, Durga, Mother Nature, et. al.


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
21-07-2019 06:47
James___
★★★★★
(3169)
IBdaMann wrote:
James___ wrote: You guys don't get it. I think Gaia might be the proper term.
Just not sure how to explain it to you that our lives are dependent on Gaia. It's a symbiotic relationship.


James__, thanks to you The MANUAL has been updated as follows in order to ensure its complete accuracy:

Climate: proper noun
The heroine of the Global Warming mythology, Climate is the Democratic People's Goddess. Born out of the Scientific Consensus, She oversees the central planning and administration of all weather, ecosystems, and local climates across the globe, as well as all interactions thereof. Climate is responsible for the care and well-being of all life on earth. In other faiths She is called Gaia, Durga, Mother Nature, et. al.


Yet you are nothing. You seem to oppose life in any form. By your own definition you are death.
21-07-2019 10:30
tmiddlesProfile picture★★★★★
(3374)
James___ wrote:.


Feeding trolls just helps to maintain the derailed status of this board. Come on James talk to me instead
21-07-2019 15:20
IBdaMannProfile picture★★★★★
(7463)
tmiddles wrote:
James___ wrote:.


Feeding trolls just helps to maintain the derailed status of this board. Come on James talk to me instead

Question: What's sadder than a self-loathing troll who projects his self-hatred toward everyone with a differing opinion?

Answer: Not much.

Question: What's sadder than a self-loathing troll who projects his self-hatred toward all who don't share his WACKY religious beliefs in Global Warming?

Answer: Not much.


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
21-07-2019 20:48
Into the NightProfile picture★★★★★
(13292)
IBdaMann wrote:
Into the Night wrote:Is NASA your God or is it not?

Nope, NASA (pbuh) is merely a prophet to be obeyed, nothing more.


Hmmm a definition for NASA for The Manual?


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
21-07-2019 20:58
Into the NightProfile picture★★★★★
(13292)
tmiddles wrote:
HarveyH55 wrote: There should be some normal and expected, large spikes and dips on the graphs every year.


The atmosphere being so massive I'd think it would take some time for changes to show up.

Really? Then why is there a regular period in the data that varies with the seasons? Got news for you, dumbass. It's not possible to measure the global atmospheric CO2 content. The Mauna Loa station, which you worship as a Holy Oracle, has been cooking their data. It's useless.
tmiddles wrote:
Could be the cycles within a year are just blended together because it takes over a year for a change to fully mix in.

What change? From where? That volcano that erupted right next to Mauna Loa?
tmiddles wrote:
But my assumption seems to be wrong as there is this small change in CO2 ppm, a swing of 3:
"During the spring, when plants begin growing again, concentrations drop. It is as if the Earth is breathing."

Your assumptions are wrong. It is not possible to measure the global atmospheric content of CO2. CO2 has absolutely no capability to warm the Earth.
tmiddles wrote:
I'm guessing it's that the northern hemisphere has more land sO that spring dominates. But it's just a few ppm.

The Northern hemisphere does not get to claim Spring from the Southern one. They BOTH have same Spring, just on different days.They see the equinox, just as we do.


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
21-07-2019 20:59
Into the NightProfile picture★★★★★
(13292)
James___ wrote:
Into the Night wrote:
tmiddles wrote:
HarveyH55 wrote: After food crops are planted, and start growing well, they ought to be sucking a lot of CO2, and there should be natural dip in readings every year.


Wow this is really interesting! I had no idea
co2-is-making-earth-greener

In the last 35 year's "The greening represents an increase in leaves on plants and trees equivalent in area to two times the continental United States."
Natural feedback loop.

I don't think food crops are most plants though.


HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!

You just discarded a NASA report!

Is NASA your God or is it not?


Your problem is that you believe in nothing, ie., Into the Night is into the void.

YALIF, and a lie.


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
21-07-2019 21:00
Into the NightProfile picture★★★★★
(13292)
tmiddles wrote:
James___ wrote:.


Feeding trolls just helps to maintain the derailed status of this board. Come on James talk to me instead


Feeling left out, snowflake?


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
22-07-2019 05:57
tmiddlesProfile picture★★★★★
(3374)
HarveyH55 wrote:
Anyway, just seemed like something we should see in the data, since there is less CO2 being pulled out,


I saw some have plans to terraform Venus. I think it would be very interesting. Plenty of CO2 for plants if we could figure out the rest. It has such a heavy atmosphere you could float a city higher on the atmosphere,
22-07-2019 06:54
IBdaMannProfile picture★★★★★
(7463)
tmiddles wrote: I saw some have plans to terraform Venus.

Shouldn't the term be "venusaforming"? Anyway I bet those plans were missing some pretty key components.

tmiddles wrote: Plenty of CO2 for plants if we could figure out the rest.

I'm guessing that's one of the key components that's been overlooked.

tmiddles wrote: It has such a heavy atmosphere you could float a city higher on the atmosphere,

How exactly do you venusaform cities that were built to float "higher in the atmosphere"? I hope the plans you read didn't intend to have much of the construction based on wood framing; they don't sound all that well thought-out.

What parts of the plans exactly did you find interesting?


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
22-07-2019 12:23
Into the NightProfile picture★★★★★
(13292)
tmiddles wrote:
HarveyH55 wrote:
Anyway, just seemed like something we should see in the data, since there is less CO2 being pulled out,


I saw some have plans to terraform Venus.

It's not possible to terraform a planet. You've been watching too many scifi shows.


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
22-07-2019 19:12
HarveyH55
★★★★★
(2399)
We do a poor job keeping our own ecosystem healthy, which would likely do better, if we quit meddling. It's a delicate balance, everything has a purpose, theirs redundancy, and population controls. It takes lifetimes to find that balance, where it becomes self-sustaining. You can just dump everything on the planet, and wait for the magic to happen. You have to do a little at a time, let each species get established, and prepare for the next batch. You need bugs and bacteria to prepare the soil for plants.

Think about the fail biosphere experiments. They just barely reach the goal last time, it wasn't self sustaining, they just barely stretch their resources out, likely cheated as well.
22-07-2019 20:34
Into the NightProfile picture★★★★★
(13292)
HarveyH55 wrote:
We do a poor job keeping our own ecosystem healthy, which would likely do better, if we quit meddling. It's a delicate balance, everything has a purpose, theirs redundancy, and population controls. It takes lifetimes to find that balance, where it becomes self-sustaining. You can just dump everything on the planet, and wait for the magic to happen. You have to do a little at a time, let each species get established, and prepare for the next batch. You need bugs and bacteria to prepare the soil for plants.

Think about the fail biosphere experiments. They just barely reach the goal last time, it wasn't self sustaining, they just barely stretch their resources out, likely cheated as well.


You also need to add a tremendous amount of mass of one gas and remove a tremendous amount of another gas.

There is almost no hydrogen on Venus. There is way too much CO2. You will also have to REMOVE 90% of the atmosphere to bring pressures down to tolerable level. You will have to either create a LOT of water from the hydrogen and oxygen (a violent reaction), or provide a LOT of water in some other way.

Where are you going to get all that hydrogen?
Where are you going to put all that CO2?

You have to add and subtract masses on a planet wide scale. That means overcoming a tremendous amount of gravity to do it.

Then of course, you are going to have to do something about all that intense sunlight.

And that's the simplified version.


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 22-07-2019 20:37
22-07-2019 22:21
tmiddlesProfile picture★★★★★
(3374)
HarveyH55 wrote:
Think about the fail biosphere experiments. .


Yes that's actually a very good reference to keep in mind here. Human overconfidence and thinking we have it figured out does a lot of damage.
22-07-2019 22:36
James___
★★★★★
(3169)
tmiddles wrote:
HarveyH55 wrote:
Think about the fail biosphere experiments. .


Yes that's actually a very good reference to keep in mind here. Human overconfidence and thinking we have it figured out does a lot of damage.


Ever wonder why atmospheric pressure on Earth is 14.7 psi with a gravity of 9.80 m/s while on Venus it's atmospheric pressure is about 1,334 psi with a gravity of 8.87 m/s?
You'd think that gravity would influence atmospheric pressure. They say that's why Mars has very little atmosphere. Kind of why comparisons to Venus don't matter. Science has just been falsified. There is an "out" but doubt anyone will figure it out.
It actually suggests something like cause and effect.
22-07-2019 22:39
keepit
★★★★☆
(1684)
I haven't read all the posts on this thread. I'm just dropping into the middle of it but as i understand it the temperature at a given altitude on venus is pretty uniform due to the extreme abundance of CO2 in its atmosphere.
22-07-2019 22:54
tmiddlesProfile picture★★★★★
(3374)
keepit wrote:the temperature at a given altitude on venus is pretty uniform


The temperature in every atmosphere drops as you move up through the atmosphere, pressure drops, and you move further from the hot surface toward the cold of space.

Venus is feaky though! It actually has an outer atmosphere far colder than our own with CO2 ice forming. The study by Hoffman I linked to in the initial post shows his conclusion that the temp of Venus at an altitude that matches the air pressure on the surface of earth is comparable to what you'd expect to find given the distance from the sun not factoring in CO2. Hoffman is saying there is no CO2 cause on VENUS just pressure.

it's a very interesting planet!

You would be correct to say the surface temp at any given location is about the same. Hot enough to melt lead and with air pressure that is 93 times that of earth.
22-07-2019 22:55
tmiddlesProfile picture★★★★★
(3374)
James___ wrote:Science has just been falsified.


What???

Are you saying that there is a grand conspiracy to falsify what? and why?
Edited on 22-07-2019 23:03
22-07-2019 23:12
IBdaMannProfile picture★★★★★
(7463)
James___ wrote: Ever wonder why atmospheric pressure on Earth is 14.7 psi with a gravity of 9.80 m/s while on Venus it's atmospheric pressure is about 1,334 psi with a gravity of 8.87 m/s?

I never wondered for even a second once I learned that Venus' atmosphere has about 90 times the mass of earth's atmopshere.

By the way, 14.7 psi x 90 = 1,323 psi. Try the math.

James___ wrote: You'd think that gravity would influence atmospheric pressure.

... because it does.

James___ wrote: They say that's why Mars has very little atmosphere.

Nope. It's the other way around. Mars has little atmopshere ergo Mars yhas very little atmospheric mass ergo Mars has very little atmopsheric pressure.

James___ wrote: Kind of why comparisons to Venus don't matter. Science has just been falsified.

Sure.


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
23-07-2019 00:14
keepit
★★★★☆
(1684)
Mars lost so much of its atmosphere because it cooled and lost its magnetosphere and then it became vulnerable to the solar wind which blew away its atmosphere.
As i understand it, venus' atmosphere interacts with the sun to create a magnetosphere in venus' atmosphere preventing the solar wind from blowing away its atmosphere.
Edited on 23-07-2019 00:25
23-07-2019 01:18
Into the NightProfile picture★★★★★
(13292)
tmiddles wrote:
HarveyH55 wrote:
Think about the fail biosphere experiments. .


Yes that's actually a very good reference to keep in mind here. Human overconfidence and thinking we have it figured out does a lot of damage.


Yet this is exactly what you want to do.



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
23-07-2019 01:19
Into the NightProfile picture★★★★★
(13292)
James___ wrote:
tmiddles wrote:
HarveyH55 wrote:
Think about the fail biosphere experiments. .


Yes that's actually a very good reference to keep in mind here. Human overconfidence and thinking we have it figured out does a lot of damage.


Ever wonder why atmospheric pressure on Earth is 14.7 psi with a gravity of 9.80 m/s while on Venus it's atmospheric pressure is about 1,334 psi with a gravity of 8.87 m/s?
You'd think that gravity would influence atmospheric pressure. They say that's why Mars has very little atmosphere. Kind of why comparisons to Venus don't matter. Science has just been falsified. There is an "out" but doubt anyone will figure it out.
It actually suggests something like cause and effect.



Science does not falsify, James.


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
23-07-2019 01:20
Into the NightProfile picture★★★★★
(13292)
keepit wrote:
I haven't read all the posts on this thread. I'm just dropping into the middle of it but as i understand it the temperature at a given altitude on venus is pretty uniform due to the extreme abundance of CO2 in its atmosphere.


No, due to the extremely thick air. It conducts heat well around the planet.


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
23-07-2019 01:23
Into the NightProfile picture★★★★★
(13292)
keepit wrote:
Mars lost so much of its atmosphere because it cooled and lost its magnetosphere and then it became vulnerable to the solar wind which blew away its atmosphere.
As i understand it, venus' atmosphere interacts with the sun to create a magnetosphere in venus' atmosphere preventing the solar wind from blowing away its atmosphere.


Mars has very little atmosphere because it's a very small planet. It never had much atmosphere.


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
23-07-2019 02:05
keepit
★★★★☆
(1684)
There's a lot of evidence Mars had a lot of water. That being the case, it must have had a lot of atmosphere or it couldn't have had the water for a length of time.

Often wrong, never in doubt!
Edited on 23-07-2019 02:05
Page 4 of 28<<<23456>>>





Join the debate Venus is hotter than Mercury?!?:

Remember me

Related content
ThreadsRepliesLast post
Why can't you say Venus is hotter than Mercury because Venus got CO2?12919-12-2019 17:10
I don't believe CO2 makes air hotter because I don't see any experimental proof509-10-2019 03:15
The only straw the Church of AGW can grasp is Venus8826-09-2019 05:49
The only straw the Church of AGW can grasp is Venus and Mercury418-09-2019 22:37
There is no evidence water vapor makes things hotter018-09-2019 21:34
▲ 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