What would the world be like if the atmosphere is 25% O2 and 75% N2?

Into the Night wrote:

Ceist wrote:
The US Airforce would have to be idiots too and their heat seeking missiles couldn't possibly work. And millions of scientists over the past 60 years or so would have to have been idiots too. Or.....2 anonymous laypeople called ITN and IB with no qualifications or background in science who rant on the internet are idiots. Tough choice eh

What left field did that come from??? Heat seeking missiles are NOT looking for carbon dioxide!

I'll ignore your usual wild claims of scientists this time. It's just your usual garbage.

It's also you usual garbage to say we have no qualifications or background. You have no idea who we are or what our qualifications or backgrounds are.

It's also your usual fallacy to depend on such things.

spot wrote:
My argument is; "Changing the amount of CO2 in a quantity of air has mesurable effects" is not against the laws of physics, your assertion that it does is a strawman. Skiming this forum I see people have tried to go through this with you before in detail, they just get abuse for their trouble.

As for the pressure differnece your wrong of course but anyone who is in doubt could test it for themselves.


Do you really think people like Joseph Fourier, John Tyndall, Svante Arrhenius and everyone who followed since are imbeciles?

spot wrote:
https://archive.org/details/contributionsto01tyndgoog I suggest you familiarize yourself with the work of John tyndall.

Ceist wrote:
"The planetary warming resulting from the greenhouse effect is consistent with the second law of thermodynamics because a planet is not a closed system.

Ceist wrote: The greenhouse effect shifts the planet's surface temperature toward the photospheric temperature by reducing the rate at which the planet loses energy at a given surface temperature.

Ceist wrote: The way that works is really no different from the way adding fiberglass insulation or low-emissivity windows to your home ...

Ceist wrote: As Fourier already understood,

Ceist wrote: Carbon dioxide is just planetary insulation.

Ceist wrote: Though the first calculation of the warming of Earth due to CO2 increase was carried out by Arrhenius in 1896,

IBdaMann wrote:

spot wrote:
https://archive.org/details/contributionsto01tyndgoog I suggest you familiarize yourself with the work of John tyndall.

I recommend you become familiar with Tyndall's work. He did some good work and he also got some stuff wrong (which has been dropped from the body of science).

Science is constantly evolving and those models and concepts that are found to be false are either corrected or dropped.

I recommend you review your beliefs to ensure they are not based on concepts that have been shown to be false, albeit forever documented.


.

Ceist wrote:

spot wrote:
My argument is; "Changing the amount of CO2 in a quantity of air has mesurable effects" is not against the laws of physics, your assertion that it does is a strawman. Skiming this forum I see people have tried to go through this with you before in detail, they just get abuse for their trouble.

As for the pressure differnece your wrong of course but anyone who is in doubt could test it for themselves.


Do you really think people like Joseph Fourier, John Tyndall, Svante Arrhenius and everyone who followed since are imbeciles?

If you do a search for IB daMann and Into the Night on the internet, you'll find forums where people have 'tried to go through this' with them for years, but they still can't get it.

Their super-inflated egos, the Dunning-Kruger effect, and their Teflon-coated shields of science denial, protect them from learning any science that contradicts their ideological/religious beliefs.

spot wrote: But tell me do you really think a man like that would have spent so much time effort and expense on something that obviously violates the laws of physics?

spot wrote: Don't be so hard on them I've learnt a bit participating on this forum, albeit more about psychology then atmospheric physics.

IBdaMann wrote:

spot wrote: But tell me do you really think a man like that would have spent so much time effort and expense on something that obviously violates the laws of physics?

Are you asking me if he spent a lot of time on something that didn't pan out? ...like many before him and many after?


.

spot wrote: what developments overturned it?

spot wrote: Can you can provide a name or a reference or am I just going to get abuse?

Ceist wrote:

Into the Night wrote:

Ceist wrote:
The US Airforce would have to be idiots too and their heat seeking missiles couldn't possibly work. And millions of scientists over the past 60 years or so would have to have been idiots too. Or.....2 anonymous laypeople called ITN and IB with no qualifications or background in science who rant on the internet are idiots. Tough choice eh

What left field did that come from??? Heat seeking missiles are NOT looking for carbon dioxide!

I'll ignore your usual wild claims of scientists this time. It's just your usual garbage.

It's also you usual garbage to say we have no qualifications or background. You have no idea who we are or what our qualifications or backgrounds are.

It's also your usual fallacy to depend on such things.

The US Air Force comment wasn't 'out of left field' at all. In fact it blows ITN's and IB's nutty anti-science beliefs out of the water. I've mentioned the US Air Force about half a dozen times on this forum- guess they missed the comments. For people who try to present themselves as 'experts' who supposedly know more than all the atmospheric physicists in the world

, Into the Dark's and IBdaMann's complete ignorance of the history of research of the earth's atmosphere is appalling.

The US Air Force started conducting atmospheric research during the Cold War to understand the physics of the atmosphere to make their heat-seeking missiles more accurate. The research included heat transfer and a detailed knowledge of the infrared properties of 'greenhouse' gases in the atmosphere.

That's when the HITRAN (high resolution transmission molecular absorption) line database was first started in the 1960's -from the US Air Force Cambridge Research Laboratories.

https://books.google.com.au/books?id=GnJ0LJFLNbMC&pg=PA117&lpg=PA117&dq=HITRAN+US+Air+Force&source=bl&ots=4OT71SLhcJ&sig=gTo4yyUFfE75y8GsFvMmDE22NZw&hl=en&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwiQmIL3wNjKAhUC0WMKHYVMA4EQ6AEIODAF#v=onepage&q=HITRAN%20US%20Air%20Force&f=false

Here's a little video for scientifically illiterate Ostriches like Into the Night and IBDaMned who bury their heads in the sand:

How to Talk to an Ostrich: "Who says CO2 heats things up?"


I'm not 'guessing' that Into The Dark and IBdaMned have no qualifications or background in science- it's damned obvious from their ridiculous scientifically illiterate posts.

Ceist wrote:

spot wrote:
My argument is; "Changing the amount of CO2 in a quantity of air has mesurable effects" is not against the laws of physics, your assertion that it does is a strawman. Skiming this forum I see people have tried to go through this with you before in detail, they just get abuse for their trouble.

As for the pressure differnece your wrong of course but anyone who is in doubt could test it for themselves.


Do you really think people like Joseph Fourier, John Tyndall, Svante Arrhenius and everyone who followed since are imbeciles?

If you do a search for IB daMann and Into the Night on the internet, you'll find forums where people have 'tried to go through this' with them for years, but they still can't get it.

Their super-inflated egos, the Dunning-Kruger effect, and their Teflon-coated shields of science denial, protect them from learning any science that contradicts their ideological/religious beliefs.

Surface Detail wrote:

Surface Detail wrote:

Into the Night wrote:

Surface Detail wrote:

Into the Night wrote:

Surface Detail wrote:

Into the Night wrote:
Government estimates that man's sources have contributed as little as 0.000062% of the atmosphere since then

Liar.

Tell that to the Dept of Energy. They did the estimate. Personally, I question their methods anyway.

You're simply lying. Prove you aren't by linking to wherever you got that figure from. Or show how you calculated it.

I didn't calculate it. I told you where I got the estimate from. Go look it up yourself.

Liar.

Well, I looked on the DOE website and didn't find the figure you quoted. You're lying, aren't you? Tell me, why do you feel the need to lie about this?

Surface Detail wrote:

Surface Detail wrote:

Surface Detail wrote:

Into the Night wrote:

Surface Detail wrote:

Into the Night wrote:

Surface Detail wrote:

Into the Night wrote:
Government estimates that man's sources have contributed as little as 0.000062% of the atmosphere since then

Liar.

Tell that to the Dept of Energy. They did the estimate. Personally, I question their methods anyway.

You're simply lying. Prove you aren't by linking to wherever you got that figure from. Or show how you calculated it.

I didn't calculate it. I told you where I got the estimate from. Go look it up yourself.

Liar.

Well, I looked on the DOE website and didn't find the figure you quoted. You're lying, aren't you? Tell me, why do you feel the need to lie about this?

Into the Night, I'm still waiting for you to explain why you were lying.

Into the Night wrote:Since you've decided to take the position that I'm lying, I have no inclination to help you. You're done. Your inability to find it is entirely your problem now.

Into the Night wrote:
If you do a search for Ceist right here, you will find he is often lying about what people say, spends most of his time insulting people, throwing out a ton of links and misquoting them, spams threads with the same insult so much I've decided to create an acronym for it (CSIEA), and is the first to judge for people instead of letting them judge for themselves.

Ceist, you're a jerk, pure and simple. You have no understanding of science at all. Everything you say and do lately is driven by a hatred against two people. You Religion has put you in a position of not simply disagreeing with people, but actually hating them for disagreeing with you. You have become a Religious bigot.

Richard Feynman
You should, in science, believe logic and arguments, carefully drawn, and not authorities.

Into the Night wrote:

Ceist wrote:

Into the Night wrote:

Ceist wrote:
The US Airforce would have to be idiots too and their heat seeking missiles couldn't possibly work. And millions of scientists over the past 60 years or so would have to have been idiots too. Or.....2 anonymous laypeople called ITN and IB with no qualifications or background in science who rant on the internet are idiots. Tough choice eh

What left field did that come from??? Heat seeking missiles are NOT looking for carbon dioxide!

I'll ignore your usual wild claims of scientists this time. It's just your usual garbage.

It's also you usual garbage to say we have no qualifications or background. You have no idea who we are or what our qualifications or backgrounds are.

It's also your usual fallacy to depend on such things.

The US Air Force comment wasn't 'out of left field' at all. In fact it blows ITN's and IB's nutty anti-science beliefs out of the water. I've mentioned the US Air Force about half a dozen times on this forum- guess they missed the comments. For people who try to present themselves as 'experts' who supposedly know more than all the atmospheric physicists in the world

, Into the Dark's and IBdaMann's complete ignorance of the history of research of the earth's atmosphere is appalling.

The US Air Force started conducting atmospheric research during the Cold War to understand the physics of the atmosphere to make their heat-seeking missiles more accurate. The research included heat transfer and a detailed knowledge of the infrared properties of 'greenhouse' gases in the atmosphere.

That's when the HITRAN (high resolution transmission molecular absorption) line database was first started in the 1960's -from the US Air Force Cambridge Research Laboratories.

https://books.google.com.au/books?id=GnJ0LJFLNbMC&pg=PA117&lpg=PA117&dq=HITRAN+US+Air+Force&source=bl&ots=4OT71SLhcJ&sig=gTo4yyUFfE75y8GsFvMmDE22NZw&hl=en&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwiQmIL3wNjKAhUC0WMKHYVMA4EQ6AEIODAF#v=onepage&q=HITRAN%20US%20Air%20Force&f=false

Here's a little video for scientifically illiterate Ostriches like Into the Night and IBDaMned who bury their heads in the sand:

How to Talk to an Ostrich: "Who says CO2 heats things up?"


I'm not 'guessing' that Into The Dark and IBdaMned have no qualifications or background in science- it's damned obvious from their ridiculous scientifically illiterate posts.

You are actually going to drag this up again???

Heat seeking missiles automatically adjust for background as they fly. The study you mention is to help make them more accurate against smaller targets. CO2 does not heat things up. It masks the signature of smaller targets. That's it. Sheesh.

John Niclasen wrote:

Richard Feynman
You should, in science, believe logic and arguments, carefully drawn, and not authorities.

Richard Feynman wrote: The inexperienced, the crackpots, and people like that, make guesses that are simple, but you can immediately see that they are wrong

John Niclasen wrote:
I didn't read all the posts, but I searched them. None of you mention the Dry Adiabatic Lapse Rate, so I will do that.

The dry adiabatic lapse rate is around 9.8 K/km on Earth. As it is dependent only on local gravity and heat capacity, it will be about the same in an atmosphere with about the same heat capacity.

If we assume 1) the dry adiabatic lapse rate still will be there in the troposphere and 2) the Earth had so much atmosphere, that the tropopause was raised to 30 km altitude, then:

the temperature in 30 km altitude would be 30 * 9.8 = 294 Kelvin lower than at the surface. If the surface would have a temperature of 254 Kelvin (which is the black-body temperature of Earth), then the temperature at 30 km altitude would be:

254 K - 294 K = -40 K

Ok, this is not valid physics, as you can't go below zero Kelvin.
Conclusion: something is wrong in the above.

Richard Feynman wrote: The inexperienced, the crackpots, and people like that, make guesses that are simple, but you can immediately see that they are wrong

Into the Night wrote:

Surface Detail wrote:

Surface Detail wrote:

Surface Detail wrote:

Into the Night wrote:

Surface Detail wrote:

Into the Night wrote:

Surface Detail wrote:

Into the Night wrote:
Government estimates that man's sources have contributed as little as 0.000062% of the atmosphere since then

Liar.

Tell that to the Dept of Energy. They did the estimate. Personally, I question their methods anyway.

You're simply lying. Prove you aren't by linking to wherever you got that figure from. Or show how you calculated it.

I didn't calculate it. I told you where I got the estimate from. Go look it up yourself.

Liar.

Well, I looked on the DOE website and didn't find the figure you quoted. You're lying, aren't you? Tell me, why do you feel the need to lie about this?

Into the Night, I'm still waiting for you to explain why you were lying.

Since you've decided to take the position that I'm lying, I have no inclination to help you. You're done. Your inability to find it is entirely your problem now.

spot wrote:

IBdaMann wrote:

spot wrote:
https://archive.org/details/contributionsto01tyndgoog I suggest you familiarize yourself with the work of John tyndall.

I recommend you become familiar with Tyndall's work. He did some good work and he also got some stuff wrong (which has been dropped from the body of science).

Science is constantly evolving and those models and concepts that are found to be false are either corrected or dropped.

I recommend you review your beliefs to ensure they are not based on concepts that have been shown to be false, albeit forever documented.


.

Of course you are well versed in the works of all 19 century physicists, chemists and philosophers. Anyway he was right about some things he might well have been wrong about others, who amongst us is right about everything?

But tell me do you really think a man like that would have spent so much time effort and expense on something that obviously violates the laws of physics?

Ceist wrote:

Into the Night wrote:

Ceist wrote:

Into the Night wrote:

Ceist wrote:
The US Airforce would have to be idiots too and their heat seeking missiles couldn't possibly work. And millions of scientists over the past 60 years or so would have to have been idiots too. Or.....2 anonymous laypeople called ITN and IB with no qualifications or background in science who rant on the internet are idiots. Tough choice eh

What left field did that come from??? Heat seeking missiles are NOT looking for carbon dioxide!

I'll ignore your usual wild claims of scientists this time. It's just your usual garbage.

It's also you usual garbage to say we have no qualifications or background. You have no idea who we are or what our qualifications or backgrounds are.

It's also your usual fallacy to depend on such things.

The US Air Force comment wasn't 'out of left field' at all. In fact it blows ITN's and IB's nutty anti-science beliefs out of the water. I've mentioned the US Air Force about half a dozen times on this forum- guess they missed the comments. For people who try to present themselves as 'experts' who supposedly know more than all the atmospheric physicists in the world

, Into the Dark's and IBdaMann's complete ignorance of the history of research of the earth's atmosphere is appalling.

The US Air Force started conducting atmospheric research during the Cold War to understand the physics of the atmosphere to make their heat-seeking missiles more accurate. The research included heat transfer and a detailed knowledge of the infrared properties of 'greenhouse' gases in the atmosphere.

That's when the HITRAN (high resolution transmission molecular absorption) line database was first started in the 1960's -from the US Air Force Cambridge Research Laboratories.

https://books.google.com.au/books?id=GnJ0LJFLNbMC&pg=PA117&lpg=PA117&dq=HITRAN+US+Air+Force&source=bl&ots=4OT71SLhcJ&sig=gTo4yyUFfE75y8GsFvMmDE22NZw&hl=en&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwiQmIL3wNjKAhUC0WMKHYVMA4EQ6AEIODAF#v=onepage&q=HITRAN%20US%20Air%20Force&f=false

Here's a little video for scientifically illiterate Ostriches like Into the Night and IBDaMned who bury their heads in the sand:

How to Talk to an Ostrich: "Who says CO2 heats things up?"


I'm not 'guessing' that Into The Dark and IBdaMned have no qualifications or background in science- it's damned obvious from their ridiculous scientifically illiterate posts.

You are actually going to drag this up again???

Heat seeking missiles automatically adjust for background as they fly. The study you mention is to help make them more accurate against smaller targets. CO2 does not heat things up. It masks the signature of smaller targets. That's it. Sheesh.

Yes yes, I know Into the Night doesn't like me bringing up science and facts which blow his scientifically illiterate claims out of the water and exposes him as a nutter.

He seriously knows nothing about the major atmospheric research and experiments the US Air Force was involved in after WWII that added greatly to the knowledge of the physics of the atmosphere, including greenhouse gases, yet claims to understand the physics of the atmosphere more than all the atmospheric scientists in the world, including those who worked for the US Air Force and created the original HITRAN database. It's the standard for calculating atmospheric molecular transmission and radiance of the electromagnetic spectrum and used in industry all over the world.

But in ITN's alternate reality, none of this exists.