Why would the atmosphere not trap heat when ocean traps heat?
| Why would the atmosphere not trap heat when ocean traps heat?15-09-2016 00:52 | |
| Tai Hai Chen★★★★☆ (1085) |
Compare Norway with Quebec. Norway has small land big ocean. Quebec has big land small ocean. Water traps heat much better than land. So Norway is 20 C warmer than Quebec in winter time. Now ask yourself, why wouldn't atmosphere trap heat without having CO2? |
| 15-09-2016 01:04 | |
| jwoodward48★★★★☆ (1537) |
It does. The atmosphere traps heat. CO2 does it better. (Of course, I'm still trying to figure that out myself; my response is thus unfortunately a parrot. Still, maybe it'll help clarify the greenhouse-asserters' opinion.) |
| 15-09-2016 01:50 | |
IBdaMann ★★★★★(14389) |
jwoodward48 wrote: No substance traps thermal energy. No substance can prevent Stefan-Boltzmann from ocurring. . I don't think i can [define it]. I just kind of get a feel for the phrase. - keepit 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 |
| 15-09-2016 04:00 | |
| jwoodward48★★★★☆ (1537) |
No substance traps thermal energy. I do not get it. Thermal energy only exists insofar as it is contained within an object. Since thermal energy remains within objects for sustained periods, it can be said to be "trapped." So what do you mean? Also, if I stick a hot iron rod into a mirrored, insulated box (like a thermos), where will the energy go? It will spend some time as light, and some time as heat within the rod. The rod will cool slightly, but assuming a perfect thermos, it will stay at its final temperature until the thermos is broken. S-B is still occurring - the light it describes is being redirected. Just because the Sun is glowing doesn't mean I can always see it. Just because the Earth is radiating heat doesn't mean it will escape the atmosphere. |
| 15-09-2016 05:15 | |
| IBdaMann★★★★★ (14389) |
jwoodward48 wrote: I do not get it. Thermal energy only exists insofar as it is contained within an object. The problem lies in the wording. Warmizombies and climate lemmings are not the sharpest tacks in the box and they are gullible. They buy into the words "trap," ccontain," "store," etc... Me: Oh yes, the spaghetti strainer "traps" water. Warmizombie: Wait, doesn't water just pour out of it? Me: No, not at all. The strainer "contains" the water. Warmizombie: Oh yes, it all makes sense now. Me: If I breathe CO2 on it, it "stores" even more! Warmizombie: Of course, the "full bladder" effect! Thermal energy pours out of all substances, and the "pouring out" is governed by Stefan-Boltzmann. Period. End of story. jwoodward48 wrote: Also, if I stick a hot iron rod into a mirrored, insulated box (like a thermos), where will the energy go? So, no external energy source? This example differs from the sun/earth model. In the thermos example, convection and conduction come into play. . I don't think i can [define it]. I just kind of get a feel for the phrase. - keepit 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 |
| 15-09-2016 06:23 | |
| jwoodward48★★★★☆ (1537) |
IBdaMann wrote:jwoodward48 wrote: I do not get it. Thermal energy only exists insofar as it is contained within an object. IB. Stop it. That helps nothing. Thermal energy pours out of all substances, and the "pouring out" is governed by Stefan-Boltzmann. Period. End of story. Can't thermal energy be "blocked" or absorbed by atmospheric gases? Are you claiming that nothing in the world is capable of obstructing The Little Photon That Could? "There's no way I can get through that lead sheet without being absorbed!" "Just tell yourself you can!" "I think I can, I think I can..." Yeah, two can play at this game. If I stick something absorbent in the atmosphere, it will absorb some radiation and radiate the energy in a random direction. That direction will sometimes be down. The energy is still on Earth. jwoodward48 wrote: Also, if I stick a hot iron rod into a mirrored, insulated box (like a thermos), where will the energy go? What? Let's just say that we have a complete vacuum within the box. Now there can be no convection or conduction. (The rod is held up via magnets.) You know what? Actually, no. That was not supposed to represent the Sun-Earth system, it was a refutation of your interpretation of S-B. S-B doesn't care what happens after radiation. Any sort of weird stuff can happen before the radiation leaves the surface and hits the eye of an observer on the Moon. That observation doesn't have to follow any of the laws you've quoted, because things can interfere with radiation. Just because the Sun is shining doesn't mean I necessarily have to see it. I could be looking straight at it and see a pile of dirt. (At night.) Things block light. Edited on 15-09-2016 07:17 |
| 15-09-2016 13:48 | |
| IBdaMann★★★★★ (14389) |
jwoodward48 wrote: IB. Stop it. That helps nothing. Are you referring to this: IBdaMann wrote:Me: Oh yes, the spaghetti strainer "traps" water. This is what happened to you, isn't it? e.g. ... Warmizombie : Oh yes, greenhouse gas "traps" heat! jwoodward48: Wait, doesn't heat just pour out of it? Warmizombie : No, not at all. The greenhouse gas "contains" the heat. jwoodward48: Oh yes, it all makes sense now. Warmizombie: If you increase the amount of "greenhouse gas", it "stores" even more! jwoodward48: Of course, the "greenhouse effect." [/quote] jwoodward48 wrote: Can't thermal energy be "blocked" or absorbed by atmospheric gases? Are you asking if it can change form (e.g. be absorbed) again after freely pouring out of a substance? If so, the answer is "yes." . I don't think i can [define it]. I just kind of get a feel for the phrase. - keepit 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 Edited on 15-09-2016 14:38 |
| 15-09-2016 14:23 | |
| Tai Hai Chen★★★★☆ (1085) |
jwoodward48 wrote:Can't thermal energy be "blocked" or absorbed by atmospheric gases? The only way molecules in the air block heat is by kinetic energy. Heat powers motion. Without heat, there is no motion. When temperature is at absolute 0 -273 C, nothing moves. Any temperature above that, there is movement. The more heat there is, the faster the movement. The faster something moves, the more heat we feel. We can only feel heat through movement, not through anything else. All air molecules move very fast, not only CO2 but also O2 and N2. If O2 and N2 move just as fast as CO2, then there is no reason to believe they do not trap heat just as well as CO2. If you think about why water traps heat much better than land does, it's because water molecules move much faster than land molecules do. If you think about why air traps heat much better than water does, it's because air molecules move much faster than water molecules do. Gas moves the fastest. Liquid moves slower than gas. Land moves slower than water. In fact, land moves only vibrate a bit and not really move, water slides around each other, air zips around very fast. Edited on 15-09-2016 14:27 |
| 15-09-2016 17:15 | |
| jwoodward48★★★★☆ (1537) |
No. Thermal radiation as per SB. Also, zero point energy is a thing - helium cannot be frozen. |
| 15-09-2016 20:38 | |
Into the Night ★★★★★(21586) |
jwoodward48 wrote: It sure as hell can. All you have to do is increase the pressure (a LOT). We have not container that withstand that pressure. It gets easier near absolute zero, but the containers typically can't take that kind of pressure. It is not that helium cannot freeze. It can. It is that we can't do it with our current technology. The Parrot Killer Debunked in my sig. - tmiddles Google keeps track of paranoid talk and i'm not on their list. I've been evaluated and certified. - keepit nuclear powered ships do not require nuclear fuel. - Swan While it is true that fossils do not burn it is also true that fossil fuels burn very well - Swan |
| 15-09-2016 20:43 | |
| jwoodward48★★★★☆ (1537) |
Oops, you're right. Helium cannot be frozen at normal pressures, contrary to "classical" (read: slightly older science) heat models. |
| 16-09-2016 07:33 | |
| jwoodward48★★★★☆ (1537) |
Missed a post from IB. Dude. Seriously. I was not convinced of gw by some idiot with no knowledge of science. As it so happens, I won't be convinced that gw isn't a thing by such person, either. Energy freely flows out of everything, and also the Earth happens to receive energy from the Sub. Greenhouse gases (or so the argument goes) only trap the heat insofar as they slow down its release. Like plugging half the holes in the strainer, sort of. |
| 16-09-2016 20:42 | |
| Into the Night★★★★★ (21586) |
jwoodward48 wrote: This is still not taking into account the differing energy in photons, and the effect of conversion to thermal energy and back again. The Parrot Killer Debunked in my sig. - tmiddles Google keeps track of paranoid talk and i'm not on their list. I've been evaluated and certified. - keepit nuclear powered ships do not require nuclear fuel. - Swan While it is true that fossils do not burn it is also true that fossil fuels burn very well - Swan |
| 16-09-2016 21:08 | |
| jwoodward48★★★★☆ (1537) |
I was noting that even if gw is a hoax, it is a bit more sophisticated than IB is saying it is. Hoaxes are convincing. Either that or he's the one sane man surrounded by idiots. (Is that actually what you think, IB?) How exactly do individual photonic energies and energy conversions counteract what I claim is happening? I just don't see how they change the overall, macroscopic energy flows. |
Join the debate Why would the atmosphere not trap heat when ocean traps heat?:
Related content
| Threads | Replies | Last post |
| Geoengineering to Neutralize Ocean Acidification | 325 | 20-04-2024 00:23 |
| Layers of the Atmosphere as Viewed in Blue | 22 | 27-01-2024 23:16 |
| Restoring Alkalinity to the Ocean | 405 | 20-12-2023 09:14 |
| Some can take the heat, and | 2 | 14-10-2023 13:26 |
| upper atmosphere temp | 212 | 07-10-2023 19:02 |