I don't see any preaching.
You are preaching. Don't try to deny your own posts.
I see repeating and rewording things
No, you are asking the same question over and over and over and over...mindlessly.
because, honestly, it's been incredibly difficult to establish agreements on things that should be very simple.
I am not going to join your religion, so forget it.
For example, the claim that additional energy is being created as part the warming seen from climate change. How you and others continue to claim this is baffling.
RQAA.
The other "talking past" example is related to the energy coming FROM the sun vs energy leaving the surface of the Earth and how the interaction with different atmospheric gases works.
Homunculus fallacy.
The entire premise for how temperatures would rise has everything to do with energy leaving the earths surface and the energy interacting with greenhouse gases.
You cannot heat a warmer surface using a colder gas. You cannot create energy out of nothing. You cannot trap light. You are STILL ignoring the 1st and 2nd laws of thermodynamics and the Stefan-Boltzmann law. No gas or vapor has the capability to warm the Earth.
That is quite literally the ONLY transaction that in involved,
Don't try to deny your own posts. You are trying to use a Magick Holy Gas to warm the Earth. You are ignoring the 1st law of thermodynamics. You are trying to heat a warmer surface using a colder gas. You are ignoring the 2nd law of thermodynamics. You are trying to trap light. You are ignoring the Stefan-Boltzmann law. You are attempting to give a gas 'intelligence' on where it absorbs light from. That's a homunculus fallacy. You are attempting to redefine words to escape what you are doing. You are bringing straw man up after straw man to distract what you are doing.
Then you try to blame YOUR problems on others. Inversion fallacy.
yet there's continual references to energy FROM the sun and oxygen/nitrogen interacting with energy FROM the sun.
Don't forget the rest of it, dumbass.
An odd thing, to say the least, to spend two paragraphs focusing on.
Inversion fallacy. YOU are focusing on it, even to the point of inanity!
There have been a few such oddities in the entirety of the conversation with you and others where attention and energy is wasted on things that have no relevance in the conversation.
Inversion fallacy. That problem is also YOU. it is YOU wasting that attention and energy. You cannot blame YOUR problems on anybody else.
I mean, tightly packed means close together.
All frequencies of light travel at the same speed. Nothing is 'packed'.
If you're talking about a wave cycle or wave length it seems clear that one end of the spectrum could be described as "tightly packed" when compared to the other end of the spectrum.
Higher frequency does not mean 'packed'. Redefinition fallacy.
Why put so much time and effort into debating something to trivial?
YOU are trying to blame YOUR problems on others again. Inversion fallacy.
