Why Should Anyone Believe in Global Warming?

[IBDaMann]

You can find many videos of the same experiment, done by different people, under different conditions.

Nope. It's always indoors, curtains drawn.

I've seen it done both ways.

No you haven't. Guess why you didn't post a video of this being performed outdoors on a clear day using the sun as the sun. It's the same reason you have never seen such a video.

Again, you're asking questions that you would know the answer to if you'd made any attempt to understand the science side of the topic.

I'm asking rhetorical questions because I thoroughly understand the science of the matter, i.e. the science that you fear more than death.

Again, questions you would know the answer to if you'd done any kind of research.

Again, I'm asking rhetorical questions because I thoroughly understand the science of the matter, i.e. the science that you fear more than death.

The suns light leaves the surface of the earth differently than it enters it. The infrared light leaving the earth's surface is what interacts with CO2 to cause warming.

Your one and only job is to point to the specific interaction that creates additional energy. The temperature increase you are claiming cannot happen without additional energy. You have never gotten around to doing this. Please make that the next thing you post on the matter.

 

[ZenMode]

A climate 'sCiEnCtIsT' is not a scientist. They deny science.

I didn't say climate scientist. An understanding of molecules, light, etc exists on its own.

You cannot hold (or trap) heat.

Molecules can absorb specific types of light and then radiate heat.... as I've said over and over and over and over....

Light is not heat.

Right. They're both forms of energy, but in different forms.

The atmosphere is part of the planet.

I don't even know what that means.

Attempted proof by contrivance.

All gases absorb infrared light.

Wrong. NItrogen and Oxygen do not.

For example, oxygen and nitrogen absorb energy that has tightly packed wavelengths of around 200 nanometers or less, whereas infrared energy travels at wider and lazier wavelengths of 700 to 1,000,000 nanometers. Those ranges don’t overlap, so to oxygen and nitrogen, it’s as if the infrared waves don’t even exist; they let the waves (and heat) pass freely through the atmosphere..

They don't exist. There is no Holy Gas..

So,again, greenhouse gases are defined by specific characteristics. Are you saying those characteristics, like being able to absorb infrared light, don't exist or are you saying that no gases have those characteristics?.

No gas or vapor has the capability to warm the Earth..

Link?

It does, just as all substances do. Obviously, you refuse to pay attention.

Wrong. As already mentioned, nitrogen and oxygen molecules don't.

 

[ZenMode]

No. The same conditions.

I see you like to be fooled by magic tricks.

There is no science here. Just a magic trick that you obviously completely fell for.

Sunlight is not emitted by the Earth. It is emitted by the Sun.

You cannot heat a warmer surface using a colder gas. You are still ignoring the 2nd law of thermodynamics and the Stefan-Boltzmann law.
Sunlight is mostly infrared, and you are actually saying that CO2 is somehow 'smart' or 'intelligent' in picking to absorb infrared from one source and not the other. Humunculus fallacy.

It's ironic that you say it's just a trick. There's no science here and then proceed to show your ignorance on the topic.

Sunlight is not emitted by the Earth. It is emitted by the Sun.

Correct. Some amount of sun light is absorbed by the earth and then reradiated as infrared light.

Sunlight is mostly infrared, About 50% actually. 42% is visible light and 8% is ultraviolet.

and you are actually saying that CO2 is somehow 'smart' or 'intelligent' in picking to absorb infrared from one source and not the other.

I'm not saying CO2 has any kind of intelligence. Sunlight is absorbed by the earth. Put your hand over an asphalt street on a hot day and you'll feel it. The infrared light that is radiated from the earth, from asphalt as an example, is the right wavelength to interact with CO2, which causes the CO2 molecules to radiate heat into space and some back to earth.

Again, all things you would know IF you bothered to educate yourself.

 

[ZenMode]

Nope. It's always indoors, curtains drawn.

Nope. I've seen them done by kids, adults in well lit rooms. No curtains!

No you haven't. Guess why you didn't post a video of this being performed outdoors on a clear day using the sun as the sun. It's the same reason you have never seen such a video.

I didn't post a video using the sun because the infrared light from the sun isn't the issue. Something that has quite literally been mentioned no less than a handful of times. Its the infrared light that radiates from surfaces on the earth.

I'm asking rhetorical questions because I thoroughly understand the science of the matter, i.e. the science that you fear more than death.


Again, I'm asking rhetorical questions because I thoroughly understand the science of the matter, i.e. the science that you fear more than death.

your questions and comments prove, unequivocally, that you do not understand the science of the matter.

Your one and only job is to point to the specific interaction that creates additional energy. The temperature increase you are claiming cannot happen without additional energy. You have never gotten around to doing this. Please make that the next thing you post on the matter.

There doesn't need to be additional energy. There just needs to be a scenario where the existing energy is being handled differently. That's what CO2 does. It absorbs the infrared light, which become heat. Again, if you spent even 10 minutes educating yourself, you'd know that. Most of the earth's atmosphere does not interact with infrared light, so the infrared light, that radiates from the earth, escapes into space. As the amount of CO2 in the earth's atmosphere increases, less and less of the infrared light escapes.

 

[Into the Night]

I didn't say climate scientist.

Yes you did, liar.

An understanding of molecules, light, etc exists on its own.

And you don't understand it.

Molecules can absorb specific types of light and then radiate heat....

Light is not heat. Infrared light is not a 'type'. It is a frequency band.

as I've said over and over and over and over....

And you are still wrong and still denying the 1st and 2nd laws of thermodynamics and the Stefan-Boltzmann law and quantum mechanics.

Right. They're both forms of energy, but in different forms.

Heat is not energy.

I don't even know what that means.

Pretty simple. You are attempting a proof by contrivance. I guess you flunked English as well.

Wrong. NItrogen and Oxygen do not.

All gases absorb infrared light, including nitrogen and oxygen.

For example, oxygen and nitrogen absorb energy that has tightly packed wavelengths of around 200 nanometers or less, whereas infrared energy travels at wider and lazier wavelengths of 700 to 1,000,000 nanometers. Those ranges don’t overlap, so to oxygen and nitrogen, it’s as if the infrared waves don’t even exist; they let the waves (and heat) pass freely through the atmosphere..

Wrong. See the absorption spectrum of nitrogen, and again for oxygen.

So,again, greenhouse gases are defined by specific characteristics. Are you saying those characteristics, like being able to absorb infrared light, don't exist or are you saying that no gases have those characteristics?. Link?

RQAA.

Wrong. As already mentioned, nitrogen and oxygen molecules don't.

They do. ALL substances absorb infrared light.

 

[Into the Night]

It's ironic that you say it's just a trick.

No irony. It's just a parlor trick (magic trick).

There's no science here and then proceed to show your ignorance on the topic.

There is no science here. I have already posted you the 1st and 2nd laws of thermodynamics and the Stefan-Boltzmann law twice now. You just want to ignore them.

Sunlight is not emitted by the Earth. It is emitted by the Sun.

Correct. Some amount of sun light is absorbed by the earth and then reradiated as infrared light.

It is not 'reradiated' at all. An absorbed photon is DESTROYED. It no longer exists. It can't be 'reradiated'.
You are still locked in this paradox. Is it infrared light that heats the Earth, but you say it is blocked by CO2 and cannot reach the Earth. You are back to argument 1) of your paradox.

Sunlight is mostly infrared, About 50% actually. 42% is visible light and 8% is ultraviolet.

Incorrect. The Sun emits frequencies that range from X-rays down through radio waves. Most of it is infrared light. Apparently you don't know calculus either.

and you are actually saying that CO2 is somehow 'smart' or 'intelligent' in picking to absorb infrared from one source and not the other.

I'm not saying CO2 has any kind of intelligence.

Yes you are. You are literally saying that CO2 is somehow 'smart' or 'intelligent' in picking to absorb infrared light from one source and not the other.

Sunlight is absorbed by the earth.

But only infrared light from the Sun converts to thermal energy upon absorption.

Put your hand over an asphalt street on a hot day and you'll feel it.

This is Seattle. We don't get many hot days. I can walk barefoot on asphalt (and have) even during our 'hottest' days.
Asphalt is warmed by absorbing infrared light from the Sun, just like CO2.

The infrared light that is radiated from the earth, from asphalt as an example, is the right wavelength to interact with CO2, which causes the CO2 molecules to radiate heat into space and some back to earth.

You can't heat a warmer surface using a colder gas, dude. You are STILL ignoring the 2nd law of thermodynamics and the Stefan-Boltzmann law.

Again, all things you would know IF you bothered to educate yourself.

You are describing yourself again. It is YOU denying these theories of science.

 

[Into the Night]

Nope. I've seen them done by kids, adults in well lit rooms.

No curtains! I didn't post a video using the sun because the infrared light from the sun isn't the issue.[/QUOTE]
I realize you've been utterly fooled by this magic trick. You don't need to emphasize it. Now you say the sun cannot warm the Earth at all!

Something that has quite literally been mentioned no less than a handful of times.

RAAA. Repeating yourself does not make the magic come true.

Its the infrared light that radiates from surfaces on the earth. your questions and comments prove, unequivocally, that you do not understand the science of the matter.

Religion is not science.

There doesn't need to be additional energy.

You need additional energy to make something warmer. You are ignoring the 1st law of thermodynamics again.

There just needs to be a scenario where the existing energy is being handled differently.

Energy is not 'handled'.

That's what CO2 does. It absorbs the infrared light, which become heat.

Heat is not energy. Light is not heat.

Again, if you spent even 10 minutes educating yourself, you'd know that.

I don't need to educate myself about your inanity. Heat is not energy. Light is not heat.

Most of the earth's atmosphere does not interact with infrared light,

ALL gases and vapors absorb infrared light.

so the infrared light, that radiates from the earth, escapes into space.

This is true. ALL of it.

As the amount of CO2 in the earth's atmosphere increases, less and less of the infrared light escapes.

You cannot trap light. You are ignoring the 2nd law of thermodynamics and the Stefan-Boltzmann law again.

 

[ZenMode]

Yes you did, liar.

And you don't understand it.

Light is not heat. Infrared light is not a 'type'. It is a frequency band.

And you are still wrong and still denying the 1st and 2nd laws of thermodynamics and the Stefan-Boltzmann law and quantum mechanics.

Heat is not energy.

Pretty simple. You are attempting a proof by contrivance. I guess you flunked English as well.

All gases absorb infrared light, including nitrogen and oxygen.

Wrong. See the absorption spectrum of nitrogen, and again for oxygen.

RQAA.

They do. ALL substances absorb infrared light.

Heat is not energy?

Thermal energy, or heat, is the energy that comes from the movement of atoms and molecules in a substance. Heat increases when these particles move faster. Geothermal energy is the thermal energy in the earth.

You are a typical science denier. You are wrong on so many things and so painfully uninformed, but you seem to believe that repeating falcities somehow changes reality.

I'm a pretty patient person but, when presented with realities, you just say "nope", which makes trying to have a legitimate discussion impossible. You have no interest in reality.

 

[Into the Night]

Heat is not energy?

Correct. Heat is not energy.

Thermal energy, or heat,

Heat is not thermal energy.

is the energy that comes from the movement of atoms and molecules in a substance.

So if you throw a baseball, the atoms and molecules are moving. Does that mean the baseball gets hot?

Heat increases when these particles move faster.

Heat is not thermal energy.

Geothermal energy is the thermal energy in the earth.

So?

You are a typical science denier.

You are describing yourself. It is YOU denying the 1st and 2nd laws of thermodynamics and the Stefan-Boltzmann law.

You are wrong on so many things and so painfully uninformed, but you seem to believe that repeating falcities somehow changes reality.
I'm a pretty patient person but, when presented with realities, you just say "nope", which makes trying to have a legitimate discussion impossible. You have no interest in reality.

Buzzword fallacy. You don't even know what 'reality' or 'real' even means, or how it's defined. Your religion is not science. You are discarding the 1st and 2nd laws of thermodynamics and the Stefan-Boltzmann law over and over.

 

[IBDaMann]

Nope. I've seen them done by kids, adults in well lit rooms. No curtains!

Exactly, in well lit rooms, ... indoors ... not using the sun to act as the sun.

This is where you and other leftists stupidly allow other people to totally manipulate you, e.g. bend you over furniture and ream you up the azz repeatedly. All one must do to get you to believe that pencils write with ink, is to concoct a demonstration in which a pen is used to represent "the pencil." After writing with the pen for a minute, a simple pointing to the page full of ink and you are convinced that pencils write with ink. After all, it was demonstrated right before your very eyes with the pencil fully represented by a pen. You'll then rush to post the video of the demonstration on internet fora. Similarly, to get you to believe that the atmosphere behaves as though it receives only a narrow frequency band from the sun (and not the full spectrum of EM) is to use a heat lamp to "represent" the sun. It is breathtakingly hilarious the way you fall for the cheesiest crap. Y O U - A C T U A L L Y - F E L L - F O R - I T ! Like I said, it is a parlor trick designed to fool stupid people ... and you are the target audience.

I didn't post a video using the sun because ...

... you don't have one.

Its the infrared light that radiates from surfaces on the earth.

The issue is that you don't know what constitutes the surface of the earth. What you believe is the "surface" is just a part of the earth, and you are not considering the rest. You have to consider all of the earth when you are discussing earth as a black body.

Oh, so you are totally mistaken. This is part of the reason for your extreme confusion.

your questions and comments prove, unequivocally, that you do not understand the science of the matter.

Give it up. You don't get to declare what I don't know. You have to show that I have made an error, and you haven't shown any errors on my part because 1. I haven't made any, and 2. you are scientifically illiterate and wouldn't know how to even discern any errors. All the people who tell you what to believe lie to you. You're in a rough predicament, and I pity you.

There doesn't need to be additional energy.

Yes, there absolutely must be additional energy. No body of matter, anywhere, ever spontaneously increases in temperature without additional energy. Yes, additional energy is required.

There just needs to be a scenario where the existing energy is being handled differently.

Incorrect. If you are claiming an increase in temperature, you absolutely must account for the additional energy that is causing that increase in temperature. I know, I know, science makes it simply impossible for you to violate physics. Science is an ashsole that way.

That's what CO2 does.

Nope. CO2 is an inert compound that doesn't do anything. CO2 does not have any of the magical superpowers that you church ascribes to it. I hate to burst your bubble but your religion's dogma is nothing but malicious disinformation.

It absorbs the infrared light, which become heat.

Nope. Don't be surprised that you arguments aren't getting any better. You still don't know what heat is. Are you as thoroughly embarrassed as you should be? As long as you get it wrong, you'll be getting it all wrong. You have no hope until you learn what heat is. My recommendation is to write everything that you want to say avoiding the word "heat." It's not needed anyway. However, as long as you are using that term incorrectly, your entire argument is rendered null and void.

I do feel sorry for you. Really.

Most of the earth's atmosphere does not interact with infrared light,

All substances absorb IR. You are a science denier, and that is putting your arguments on a seriously downward trend.

so the infrared light, that radiates from the earth, escapes into space. As the amount of CO2 in the earth's atmosphere increases, less and less of the infrared light escapes.

Nope. The earth is in equilibrium. Whatever quantity of solar energy is absorbed by the earth, exactly that quantity is radiated into space.

A huge violation of physics is the notion that the earth will somehow radiate differently with the same quantity of energy from the sun.

 

[ZenMode]

Correct. Heat is not energy.

Heat is not thermal energy.

So if you throw a baseball, the atoms and molecules are moving. Does that mean the baseball gets hot?

Heat is not thermal energy.

So?

You are describing yourself. It is YOU denying the 1st and 2nd laws of thermodynamics and the Stefan-Boltzmann law.

Buzzword fallacy. You don't even know what 'reality' or 'real' even means, or how it's defined. Your religion is not science. You are discarding the 1st and 2nd laws of thermodynamics and the Stefan-Boltzmann law over and over.

So, you resist the scientific reality that heat is energy, not once but twice. There are two options here. One is that you are a highly skilled troll. Two, you have been brainwashed by some Alex Jones-type of entity. These days, with it being so common for people to get their so-called news from internet memes and websites that were created within the last 20 minutes, it's impossible for me to determine which of those two is true. Either way, I honestly hope you get the help you need to change your views.

 

[IBDaMann]

It's when that light leaves the earth, in the form of infrared light, that it is absorbed by certain gas molecules.

The atmosphere is part of the earth. Any IR that is absorbed by the atmosphere never left the earth.

[CO2 and other greenhouse gases] have characteristics that makes them behave differently than other gases.

You believe that these "characteristics" are, in fact, magical thermodynamics-defying superpowers.

You still haven't gotten anything right on this topic. Aren't you overdue for another declaration of something that I don't know? Just out of curiosity, how many people do you figure you've fooled into thinking that you are a thienth geniuth?

 

[IBDaMann]

So, you resist the scientific reality

Wrong wording. Better wording: So you reject my WACKY religious dogma.

that heat is energy,

Heat is not energy. First semester freshmen know this. You still don't know what heat is and you are flailing, saying the stupidest crap.

Question: How can any rational adult quickly verify that heat is not energy?
Question: Why have you not verified that heat is not energy? [perhaps you are not a rational adult?]
Question: Why have you not learned what heat is? [perhaps you are too stupid to learn?]

There are two options here. One is that you are a highly skilled troll. Two, you have been indoctrinated by some Marxist. These days, with it being so common for people to get their so-called news by being a Quora-raider, Wikipedia-ranger or Google-surfer, it's seems pretty clear that you are a combination of both. Either way, I honestly hope you get the help you need to learn what heat, science and surface are.

 

[IBDaMann]

Heat is not energy?

Heat is not energy.

Thermal energy, or heat,

Nope. Thermal energy is not heat. The two are related, but you need to learn that relationship. Heat is not energy and you should be able to easily verify this.

... is the energy that comes from the movement of atoms and molecules in a substance.

Incorrect. It's the other way around. You reversed the cause and the effect. The vibrational energy of atoms and molecules is caused by the associated thermal energy.

Heat increases when these particles move faster.

Nope. There is more vibrational energy when there is more associated thermal energy. There is no heat in this scenario yet.

You are a typical science denier. You are wrong on so many things and so painfully uninformed, but you seem to believe that repeating falcities, or even misspelling the word, somehow changes reality.

I'm a pretty patient person ...

Nope. You are a religious zealot, engaged in a death-struggle to preserve your faith.

... which makes trying to have a legitimate discussion impossible.

You are the one who refuses to be rational. You chant your religion and you fail to learn anything that you are taught. You leave only mockery and derision as appropriate responses. You have no interest in reality.

 

[ZenMode]

Wrong wording. Better wording: So you reject my WACKY religious dogma.


Heat is not energy. First semester freshmen know this. You still don't know what heat is and you are flailing, saying the stupidest crap.

Question: How can any rational adult quickly verify that heat is not energy?
Question: Why have you not verified that heat is not energy? [perhaps you are not a rational adult?]
Question: Why have you not learned what heat is? [perhaps you are too stupid to learn?]

There are two options here. One is that you are a highly skilled troll. Two, you have been indoctrinated by some Marxist. These days, with it being so common for people to get their so-called news by being a Quora-raider, Wikipedia-ranger or Google-surfer, it's seems pretty clear that you are a combination of both. Either way, I honestly hope you get the help you need to learn what heat, science and surface are.

'Heat is not energy.'

When you start in a position of absolute ignorance, there really is no where to go.

 

[T. A. Gardner]

Heat is not energy.

Heat is a measure of energy, not energy itself.

Nope. Thermal energy is not heat. The two are related, but you need to learn that relationship. Heat is not energy and you should be able to easily verify this.

This is drivel. Heat is a measure of energy regardless of how it's created.

Incorrect. It's the other way around. You reversed the cause and the effect. The vibrational energy of atoms and molecules is caused by the associated thermal energy.

The primary source of energy in, well everything, starts with nuclear reactions and decay. Whether an atom is unstable and decays releasing energy, or atoms interact through fission or fusion and release energy, that's where things start.

Nope. There is more vibrational energy when there is more associated thermal energy. There is no heat in this scenario yet.

This is more drivel. As atoms gain energy, their electrons move to higher orbits and give off that energy to return to a stable orbit.

So, the two things that create energy are gravity that brings particles together so they can interact, and the nuclear force that turns mass into energy. From there, that energy can be redistributed to other forms. Heat (aka temperature) is a measure of how much energy is present.

 

[IBDaMann]

When you start in a position of absolute ignorance, there really is no where to go.

Like not knowing what heat is, or what science is, or that heat is not energy, or that matter cannot spontaneously increase without additional energy ... yeah, you're right. You can't even get out of the starting gate.

I'll consider your king tipped. Let me know if you ever wish to discuss science. Your religion is very boring.

 

[IBDaMann]

Heat is a measure of energy, not energy itself.

Nope. Heat is not a measure of energy any more than any liquid is measured in distance.

This is drivel. Heat is a measure of energy regardless of how it's created.

Look, I'm not particularly interested in getting into it with you, but if you really want to steer the discussion towards how scientifically illiterate you are, we can do that.

Instead of being a moron, do a little research. What are the units of measure for energy? What are the units of measure for heat? If they are not the same units of measure, they can't be the same thing.

Just let me know how much you want me to rake you over the coals.

The primary source of energy in, well everything, starts with nuclear reactions and decay.

Nope. The source of energy is the energy itself. Energy can neither be created nor destroyed, it can only change form. There is nothing that can be a source of energy in the context that you are describing, i.e. creating it.

Whether an atom is unstable and decays releasing energy, or atoms interact through fission or fusion and release energy, that's where things start.

Nope. There's also combustion, and electrical energy, and kinetic energy, ... and many other energy form-changes that you have not covered, such as ozone and the Chapman cycle, for example.

This is more drivel. As atoms gain energy, their electrons move to higher orbits and give off that energy to return to a stable orbit.

Are you saying that this emission somehow does not adhere to Stefan-Boltzmann? Are you saying that increasing the temperature of matter somehow makes it unstable? Other than apparent errors, you haven't said anything that contradicts what I wrote.

So, the two things that create energy are gravity that brings particles together so they can interact, and the nuclear force that turns mass into energy.

This is entirely wrong. No offense but it's stupid-wrong. No force is energy. Nothing can create energy out of nothing, i.e. no force creates energy, although a force can change the form of energy, e.g. gravity can convert potential energy into kinetic energy. The nuclear force is what holds matter together and does not change matter into energy.

From there, that energy can be redistributed to other forms.

There is no "starting point." Energy already exists and is changing form. No force creates energy.

Heat (aka temperature) is a measure of how much energy is present.

Ooooh, a triple error. Heat is not Temperature is not Energy. Hopefully you now know the units of measure for heat and for energy. What are the units of measure for temperature? Are they either of those two? Of course not. This is Into the Night's pet peeve (well one of them) so expect him to chime in as well.

I highly recommend learning what heat is. Until then, you will be relegated to confusion.

 

[T. A. Gardner]

I doubt you understand what a Joule is so it's pointless to discuss this with you.

 

[Into the Night]

So, you resist the scientific reality

You deny and discard science. You continue to discard the 1st and 2nd laws of thermodynamics and the Stefan-Boltzmann law. Those are theories of science. You don't know what 'reality' means. Stop using that buzzword.

that heat is energy, not once but twice.

Heat is not energy.

There are two options here. One is that you are a highly skilled troll. Two, you have been brainwashed by some Alex Jones-type of entity.

Hilarious. Now you call theories of science 'brainwashing'!

These days, with it being so common for people to get their so-called news from internet memes and websites that were created within the last 20 minutes, it's impossible for me to determine which of those two is true.

Even funnier! Now you call theories of science 'news' and 'internet memes'.

Either way, I honestly hope you get the help you need to change your views.

Mantra 1d. Insults will not get you around the science you deny or the mathematics you deny.